arXiv:0808.0887v2 [math.AG] 24 Dec 2009
Microsupport of tempered solutions of
D-modules
associated to smooth morphisms
Teresa Monteiro Fernandes
Abstract
Let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism of complex analytic mani-folds and let F be an R-constructible complex on Y . Let M be a coher-ent DX-module. We prove that the microsupport of the solution
com-plex of M in the tempered holomorphic functions tHom(f−1F, O X),
is contained in the 1-characteristic variety of M associated to f , and that the microsupport of the solution complex in the tempered micro-functions tµhom(f−1F, O
X) is contained in the 1-microcharacteristic
variety of the microlocalized of M along T∗Y ×
Y X. This applies in
particular to the complex of solutions of M in the sheaf of distributions holomorphic in the fibers of an arbitrary smooth morphism.
1
Introduction
Let X be a complex analytic manifold. Let OX denote the sheaf of
holomor-phic functions on X and let DX denote the sheaf of holomorphic differential
operators.
The research of the author was supported by Funda¸c˜ao para a Ci ˆe ncia e Tecnologia
and Programa Ciˆencia, Tecnologia e Inova¸c˜ao do Quadro Comunit´ario de Apoio.
Let DRb−c(CX) denote the full subcategory of the derived category Db(CX)
of the complexes with R-constructible cohomologies (we shall call such a complex an R-constructible sheaf for short) .
Let tHom(. , OX) denote the functor of moderate cohomology introduced
by M. Kashiwara in ([12] ) and studied by M. Kashiwara and P. Schapira in ([14]). This functor is defined on DRb−c(CX) and, in particular, when M is
a real manifold and X is a complexification of M , by taking as F the dual D′(CM) of the constant sheaf on M , we get tHom(F, OX) = DbM, the sheaf
of Schwartz distributions on M .
The notion of microsupport of an object G in Db(CX), SS(G), was
intro-duced by M. Kashiwara and P. Schapira ([13]), as a subset of the cotangent bundle π : T∗X → X, and it describes the directions of non propagation for
G.
Let M be a coherent DX-module. In other words, locally, M is a system
of partial differential equations on X. The estimation of the microsupport of the solutions of M in tHom(F, OX) is a challenging problem in Algebraic
Analysis, since the growth conditions require far beyond algebro-geometrical tools. One of this tools is the so called Levi-condition introduced in [7] for one operator and generalized by the notion of 1-microcharacteristic variety of a microdifferential system along an involutive submanifold of T∗X ( [23], [22], [19]).
Several particular cases have been settled such as the case of a microdif-ferential operator and the sheaf of tempered microfunctions (also introduced by [1]) in [8]. When M has real simple characteristics, the microsupport of the distribution solutions of M was studied in [6] and [2].
More recently, for a C-constructible object F , we proved in [21] that the microsupport of the solutions of M in tHom(F, OX) is controlled by the
1-microcharacteristic variety of the microlocalised of M along any smooth involutive manifold containing the microsupport of F . For that we used the crucial fact that, by [12] (see also[14]), tHom(F, OX) is an object of the
bounded derived category of regular holonomic DX-modules which has no
counterpart in the general case.
Also, in [15], assuming that M is regular along a sub-bundle V of T∗X in the sense of [16], for any F ∈ DRb−c(CX), we obtained
SS(RHomDX(M, tHom(F, OX))) ⊂ V ˆ+SS(F )
a
(here a denotes the antipodal map on T∗X and the operation ˆ+ was defined
in [13]).
In the case of an arbitrary R-constructible object F , one first difficulty is that F needs not, in general, to be concentrated in degree zero. However, this property is satisfied by F = CU, the constant sheaf supported by a
Stein subanalytic relatively compact open subset U (see [9] and [18]). The purpose of this paper is to study the propagation (i.e. microsupport) for the solutions of a coherent DX-module (or, more generally, of an object
of the derived category) in tHom(f−1F, OX) where f : X → Y is a smooth
morphism of complex manifolds and F ∈ Db
R−c(CY). For that, we shall use
the notion introduced in[19] of 1-characteristic variety of a coherent DX
-module with respect to a smooth morphism f : X → Y , where it is denoted by C1
f(M). It is a variant of the the notion of 1-microcharacteristic variety
for DX-modules and it is a conic closed involutive analytic subset of the
relative conormal bundle T∗(X|Y ).
More precisely, denoting by ˜f the canonical projection T∗X → T∗(X|Y ), in Theorem 2.10 we prove that, for any G ∈ DRb−c(CY), we have
SS(RHomDX(M, tHom(f
−1G, O
X))) ⊂ ˜f−1(Cf1(M)). (1)
Our main inspiration is the analysis developped in [7], which we partially adapted in order to obtain a Cauchy-Kowaleskaia theorem of precise type with data satisfying tempered growth conditions on a Stein subanalytic open subset of the form f−1Ω.
We then apply this estimate to the tempered microlocalization functor tµhom(f−1F, O
on X. Noting ˜M := EX ⊗π−1DX M, V the regular involutive submanifold
X ×
Y T
∗Y of T∗X, ρ
V : T (T∗X) → TV(T∗X) the canonical projection,
CV1·( ˜M) ⊂ TV(T∗X) the 1-microcharacteristic variety of ˜M along V·= V \
T∗
XX, and identifying T∗(T∗X) to T (T∗X) by the Hamiltonean morphism,
we obtain in Theorem 6.2,
SS(RHomEX( ˜M, tµhom(f
−1(F ), O
X))) ⊂ ρ−1V (CV1·( ˜M)).
The paper is organized as follows:
In the Section 2 we pass under review the construction of C1
f(M) and
stateTheorem 2.10.
In Section 3 we prove a variant of Grauert’s Theorem for subanalytic relatively compact open subsets of Rn.
In Section 4 we study the behaviour of the microsupport and of the 1-characteristic variety under realification.
In Section 5 we study the Cauchy problem and propagation to end with the proof of the main result. We start by treating the Cauchy problem for tHom(f−1CΩ, OX), for a given open subanalytic set Ω ∈ Y . More precisely, setting G = CΩ, we prove a Cauchy-Kowalevskaia-Kashiwara theorem
(The-orem 5.2) with data in tHom(f−1G, O
X)|H and tHom((f−1G)H, OH), where
H is a closed submanifold non 1-characteristic for a coherent DX-module
M with respect to f . This is performed by reduction of f to the case of a projection f : X = Z × Y → Y , and to M = DX/DXP for an operator P .
Then, given H a submanifold of X non 1-characteristic for P with re-spect to f , we obtain a precised Cauchy-Kowalevskaia theorem with data respectively in H0(tHom(f−1CU, OX)) and in H0(tHom((f−1CU)H, OH)) (cf. Proposition 5.1).
Together with a Zerner type theorem (cf Lemma 5.3), this entails esti-mate (1) in the case G = CΩ, Ω being a subanalytic Stein open set of Y ,
and hence (1) holds for G = CS, under the assumption that S is a
subana-lytic subset of Y complementary to a finite union of Stein subanasubana-lytic open subsets. The proof of Theorem 2.10 is then reduced, by the realification
procedure, to the case f−1CU, for an open subanalytic relatively compact subset U in a real manifold N complexified by Y .
As an example of application we obtain (cf Corollary 2.14):
Let X be a complex manifold, let Y be a d-dimensional manifold com-plexifying a real analytic submanifold N and let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism. Then tHom(D′(f−1CN), OX) is concentrated in degree d and Hd(tHom(D′(f−1C
N), OX)) can be understood as a sheaf of distributions
with holomorphic parameters which we shall denote, for the sake of simplic-ity, DbX|N. We then obtain:
SS(RHomDX(M, DbX|N)) ⊂ ˜f
−1(C1 f(M)).
Section 6 is dedicated to microlocalization. After reviewing the notion of 1-microcharacteristic variety and the tempered microlocalization functor, we state and prove Theorem 6.2.
It is a pleasure to thank M. Kashiwara, P. Schapira, G. Morando, L. Prelli, A.R. Martins, S. Guillermou, for their helpeful attention and, in particular, to D. Barlet whom I owe the essential idea to prove Theorem 3.2.
2
Review on tHom, the 1-characteristic variety
as-sociated to a smooth morphism and estimate for
tHom
We will mainly follow the notations in [13], [14] and the construction in 1.3 of [19].
Let X be a real analytic manifold. Let T X be the tangent bundle to X and T∗X the cotangent bundle, with the projection π : T∗X → X. We identify X with the zero section of T∗X. Given a smooth submanifold Y
of X, let TYX be the normal bundle to Y and let TY∗X be the conormal
For a submanifold Y of X and a subset S of X, we denote by CY(S) the
normal cone to S along Y , a closed R+-conic subset of T YX.
For a morphism f : X → Y of manifolds, we denote by fπ : X ×Y T∗Y → T∗Y and fd: X ×Y T∗Y → T∗X
the associated morphisms. Recall that when f is smooth, fd is an
embed-ding, and that when f is an embbeembed-ding, fπ is smooth.
Let us assume that f is smooth. Set V = X ×Y T∗Y . Then fπ is smooth
and, by fd, V is a sub-bundle of T∗X. Recall that the relative cotangent
bundle is defined by the exact sequence 0 → X × Y T ∗Y → fd T∗X → ˜ f T∗(X|Y ) → 0.
Remark 2.1. Let X, Y be real manifolds, and let p : X × Y → X, q : T∗(X × Y ) → T∗X be the projections. Identifying Y with the zero section
of T∗Y , we have T∗X × Y ⊂ T∗(X × Y ). Let A ⊂ T∗X × Y . Then pπp−1d (A) = q(A).
For a subset A of T∗X, we denote by Aathe image of A by the antipodal
map
a : (x, ξ) 7→ (x; −ξ).
The closure of A is denoted by A. Let γ ⊂ T X be a cone; the polar cone γ◦ to γ is the convex cone in T∗X defined by
γ◦ = {(x; ξ) ∈ T X; x ∈ π(γ) and Rehv, ξi ≥ 0 for any (x; v) ∈ γ}. Given A and B two closed R+-conic subsets of T∗X one associates a
closed R+-conic subset A ˆ+B of T∗X (cf. Definition 6.2.3 and Proposition 6.2.4 of [13]).
Let j : Y → X be an embedding of manifolds. The notion of j#, a correspondence introduced in [13] associating conic subsets of T∗Y to conic subsets of T∗X is characterized by the following result:
Proposition 2.2(cf.Remark 6.2.8 of [13]). Let Λ be a conic subset of T∗X. Let (x′, x′′) be a system of local coordinates on X such that Y = {x′ = 0}.
Let (x′, x′′; ξ′, ξ′′) be the associated coordinates on T∗X. Then
(x′′0; ξ0′′) ∈ j#(Λ) if and only if there exist a sequence {(x′n, x′′n; ξn′, ξn′′)}n
in Λ such that x′n−→ n 0, x ′′ n−→n x′′0, ξn′′−→n ξ0′′, |x′n||ξn′| −→ n 0. We denote by Db(C
X) the triangulated category of complexes of
C-vector spaces with bounded cohomologies and by DRb−c(CX) (respectively
Db
C−c(CX)) the triangulated category of complexes with bounded and
R-constructible cohomologies (respectively with C-R-constructible cohomologies). For F ∈ Db(CX) we set D′(F ) = RHom(F, CX).
For any F ∈ Db(CX), one associates its microsupport SS(F ), introduced
by Kashiwara and Schapira in [13], a closed R+-conic involutive subset of T∗X given by:
Definition 2.3. Let F ∈ Db(CX). Let p ∈ T∗X. Then p /∈ SS(F ) if and
only if there exists an open conic neighbourhood U of p such that for any x ∈ π(U ) and any R-valued Cα-function ϕ defined on a neighbourhood of x such that ϕ(x) = 0, dϕ(x) ∈ U , one has
H{ϕ≥0}j (F )x= 0 for any j.
We shall need need the following properties of SS(·) proved in [13]. Given (x0, ξ0) ∈ Rn× (Rn)∗ and ε ∈ R we set:
Hε(x0, ξ0) = {x ∈ Rn; hx − x0, ξ0i > −ε},
and if there is no risk of confusion we will write Hε instead of Hε(x0, ξ0).
Proposition 2.4([13]). Let Ω be a local chart in a neighbourhood of p such that Ω is identified to an open subset of Rn and p = (x0, ξ0). Then there
exist a proper closed convex cone γ ⊂ Rn, ε > 0 and an open neighbourhood W of x0 with ξ0∈ Int(γ◦) such that (W + γa) ∩ Hε⊂ X and
Hj(X; C(x+γa)∩H
ε ⊗ F ) = 0, for any j, x ∈ W.
Proposition 2.5. Given a distinguished triangle F′ → F → F′′ −−→
+1 , one
has
SS(F ) ⊂ SS(F′) ∪ SS(F′′),
(SS(F′)\SS(F′′)) ∪ (SS(F′′)\SS(F′)) ⊂ SS(F ).
Proposition 2.6. Let Y and X be real analytic manifolds and let f : Y → X be a smooth morphism. Let F ∈ Db(C
X). Then
SS(f−1F ) = fd(fπ−1(SS(F )). (2)
Given a morphism g : X → Y of real manifolds, we note orX|Y the
sheaf on X of relative orientations. We note DbX the sheaf of Schwartz
distributions on X.
On a complex manifold X, we consider the sheaf OX of holomorphic
functions and the sheaf DX of linear holomorphic differential operators of
finite order as well as its subsheaves DX(m) of operators of order at most m.
We denote by M od(DX) the abelian category of DX-modules and denote by
M odcoh(DX) the abelian category of coherent DX-modules.
Given a morphism f : Y → X of complex manifolds we shall consider the associated (derived) functors f−1 from Db(M od(D
X)) to Db(M od(DY))
and Rf∗, from Db(M od(D
Y)) to Db(M od(DX)).
The functor of moderate cohomology from DRb−c(CX) to Db(DX), tHom(·, OX),
was introduced in [12]. For a detailed study we refer to [14]. Recall that, when X is a complexification of a real analytic manifold M of dimension n and F = D′(C
M), we have tHom(F, OX) ≃ DbM. We shall use the following
properties:
(i) For an open subanalytic subset U of Cn, one has
H0tHom(CU, OX) = OXt−U
Γ(Ω; Ot−U) = {f ∈ Γ(Ω ∩ U ; OX); for any compact K ⊂ Ω there exist an
integer k ≥ 0 and a number CK ≥ 0 such that sup K∩U
|f (z)d(z, δU )k| ≤ CK}.
(ii)([18], [9]) Assume that U is Stein relatively compact. Then tHom(CU, OX)
is concentrated in degree 0 and, for any open Stein subset V , for any j ≥ 1, Hj(V ; tHom(CU, OX)) = 0. (3)
For M ∈ Dbcoh(DX), denote by Char(M) denote its characteristic
vari-ety.
Let us now consider a smooth morphism f : X → Y of complex mani-folds, let M ∈ M odcoh(DX) and let us recall the construction of Cf1(M) due
to Schapira in [19]. The ring of differential operators relative to f is DX|Y := {P ∈ DX; [P, f−1OY] = 0}
which is endowed with the filtration by the order induced by the order on DX. We note σ the associated principal symbol. The 1-characteristic variety
of M with respect to f is a closed conic analytic subset of T∗(X|Y ) which, assuming that M = DX/J for a coherent ideal of DX, is given by:
Cf1(M) = {θ ∈ T∗(X|Y ); σ(P )(θ) = 0, ∀P ∈ J ∩ DX|Y}.
Proposition 2.7. ([19]) If 0 → L → M → N → 0 is an exact sequence of coherent DX-modules, then
Cf1(M) = Cf1(L) ∪ Cf1(N ).
We can extend this construction to Dbcoh(DX), setting, for M ∈ Dbcoh(DX),
Cf1(M) := ∪jCf1(Hj(M)).
Lemma 2.8. Let X, Y, Z be complex manifolds, let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism, note f = f × idZ : X × Z → Y × Z, and note p : X × Z → X
and q : T∗(X × Z) → T∗X the projections. Then, for any M ∈ Dcohb (DX),
one has q−1f˜−1(Cf1(M)) = ˜f−1(C1
f(p
Proof. By classic tools, we may assume that M is concentrated in degree zero and is of the form M = DX/J , for a coherent ideal J of DX. Let us
conseder a system of local coordinates (x) on X, (z) on Z and (y) on Y . Then
˜ f−1(C1
f(p
−1M)) = {(θ, θ′) ∈ T∗X × T∗Z; σ(P )(θ, θ′) = 0}
where P varies in DX×Z|Y ×Z ∩ hDX×ZJ , DX×ZDzi and the result follows
by the equality DX×Z|Y ×Z∩ hDX×ZJ , DX×ZDzi = DX×Z|Y ×Z ∩ DX×ZJ .
q.e.d.
For a submanifold H ⊂ X, we shall say that H is non 1-characteristic for M with respect to f if TH∗X ∩ ˜f−1(Cf1(M)) ⊂ TH∗H.
Remark 2.9. Let EX denote the sheaf of microdifferential operators on X.
Denoting by V the sub-bundle X ×
Y T
∗Y of T∗X, C1
f(M) is the differential
version of the 1-microcharacteristic variety of the microdifferential system EX ⊗
π−1D X
π−1M along V \ T∗ XX.
We state now the main result of this work:
Theorem 2.10. Let X and Y be complex manifolds, let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism. Then, for any F ∈ DbR−c(CY) and any M ∈
M odcoh(DX), we have
SS(RHomDX(M, tHom(f
−1F, O
X))) ⊂ ˜f−1(Cf1(M)). (4)
We illustrate our result with simple examples: Example 2.11. Let X = C2 = C
z × Cy and let f : X → Cy be the
projection. Let P (z, Dz, y) ∈ DX|Y be the operator Dz − y. Consider the
DX-module M = DX/hP i. Then, in the canonical symplectic coordinates
(z, y; ξ, τ ) in T∗X, Cf1(M) = {ξ = 0} hence (0, 0; 1, 0) /∈ C1
f(M). Let
F = CU with U = {y; ℜy > 0} and let H+ = {(z, y); ℜz > 0}. We have
tHom(f−1C
Since e−yz(Dz− y)eyz = Dz, M is regular along V = {(z, y; ξ, τ ); ξ = 0}
in the sense of [16], hence this example is also an application of [15]. Let Bǫbe an open polydisc of X with center (0, 0) and radius 1 ≫ ǫ > 0. Let g ∈
Γ(Bǫ∩H+; tHom(f−1CU, OX)) (respectively g ∈ Γ(Bǫ; tHom(f−1CU, OX))).
Then, equation P u = g has a solution u in Γ(Bǫ ∩ H+∩ C × U ; OX)
(re-spectively in Γ(Bǫ∩ C × U ; OX)) since solving (Dz− y)f = g is equivalent
to solve Dz(e−zyf ) = e−zyg. In both cases it becomes clear that in fact u
defines a section of tHom(C × U, OX).
Suppose now that u ∈ Γ(Bǫ∩ H+; tHom(f−1CU, OX)) is such that P u
extends, for some ǫ′, to a section in Γ(Bǫ′; tHom(f−1CU, OX)). Since u
ex-tends in the z variable by classical Zerner’s Lemma, and the general solution of the homogeneous equation P u = 0 in tHom(f−1C
U, OX)) is of the form
C(y)eyz, with C(y) ∈ tHom(CU, OY), the extension of u defines a section
in Γ(Bǫ′; tHom(f−1CU, OX)).
Example 2.12. In the situation of 1. let Q(z, Dz, y) = z2Dz + y2 and
let N = DX/hQi. Let 0 < ǫ ≪ 1. Then Cf1(N ) = {z = 0} ∪ {ξ = 0}.
Therefore (0, 0; 1, 0) ∈ ˜f−1(C1
f(N )). Let U ⊂ Y be equal to {ℜy > 0}.
Con-sider a solution u = C(y)e−y2/z of the homogeneous equation, with C(y) ∈ Γ(Bǫ, tHom(CU, OY)). Clearly, u ∈ Γ({Rz > 0}×Bǫ(0), tHom(f−1CU, OX)).
However u does not extend to any open set containing points of the form (0, y).
Example 2.13. Let X = Cz1× Cz2× Cy, let P (z1, z2, y; Dz1, Dz2) = Dz1−
yDz2 ∈ DX|Y and let M = DX/hDz1 − yDz2i. Let f : X → Cy be the
projection and let U = {y; ℜy > 0} as in the previous examples. Then ˜
f−1(C1
f(M)) = {(z1, z2, y; ξ1, ξ2, τ ); ξ1 = yξ2}, hence (0, 1, 0; 1, 0, 0) is 1-non
characteristic for M with respect to f . Given 0 < ǫ ≪ 1, the solution of the Cauchy problem P u = 0, u|z1=0 = 1/ye
1/z2, for |z
1| < ǫ, ℜy > 0, |y| < ǫ and
|z2− 1| < ǫ is u = 1/ye
1
yz1+z2 which is a section of tHom(f−1U, O
X) since
e
1
yz1+z2 it is holomorphic for |z1| < ǫ, |y| < ǫ and |z2− 1| < ǫ .
dimY . Let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism with dimX = n. Then one easily checks that tHom(Cf−1(N ), OX) is concentrated in degree d. In
par-ticular, when f is a projection, we can describe Hd(tHom(Cf−1(N ), OX)) ⊗
orf−1(N )|X as a sheaf of distributions with holomorphic parameters which
we denote by DbX|N for short. We get the following estimate, which is to
relate with the results in [7].
Corollary 2.14. Let M ∈ M odcoh(DX). Then,
SS(RHomDX(M, DbX|N)) ⊂ ˜f
−1(C1 f(M)).
3
Grauert’s theorem and subanaytic open sets in
real anaytic manifolds
By open neighbourhood of an open subset Ω of Rn we mean an open subset Ω′of Cnsuch that Rn∩ Ω′= Ω. A well known result of H. Grauert
(Proposi-tion 7, [4]) implies that any open subset of Rnadmits a fundamental system of Stein open neighbourhoods in Cn.
We shall prove a similar however weaker result (Theorem 3.2 below), under the assumption that Ω is subanalytic relatively compact. For that purpose, we need the following essential tool due to H. Hironaka (cf [5], [3]). Recall that a subset Q of Rnis a quadrant if there is a partition of {1, ..., n} into disjoint subsets I0, I+, I− such that Q = {x = (x1, ..., xn) ∈ Rn : xi =
0 if i ∈ I0, xi > 0, if i ∈ I+, and xi < 0, if i ∈ I−}. By definition, a
quadrant is a semianalytic subset and is open when I0 is empty.
Theorem 3.1. Rectilinearization Theorem ([5])
Let S be a real analytic manifold of dimension n. Let K be a compact subset of S. Let X be a subanalytic subset of S. Then there exist finitely many mappings φi : Rn→ S such that:
(1) For each i, there is a compact subset Li of Rn such that Siφi(Li) is
(2) For each i, φ−1i (X) is a union of quadrants in Rn.
Theorem 3.2. Let Ω be a relatively compact subanalytic open set of a real analytic (paracompact) manifold S. Then, given a complexification S′ of S, there exists a finite family of subanalytic Stein open subsets of S′, Ui, such
that Ω = (∪Ui) ∩ S.
Proof. The proof of the case where Ω is semianalytic is due to D. Barlet in private communication and it inspired us the proof of the general case.
Let Ω be a relatively compact subanalytic open subset of S. Taking X = Ω in Theorem 3.1, we may cover Ω by a finite number of open subsets Ωi such that Ωi∩ Ω is a finite unionSjφi(Qij), where each Qij denotes an
open quadrant of Rn. It is sufficient to prove that each Ωi∩Ω satisfies our
as-sertion. Namely, we may assume that Ω is the image of single open quadrant Q by a suitable morphism φ. By the proof of Theorem 3.1, the restriction of φ to a suitable open polydisc of polyradius (R, ..., R), BR(0) ⊂ Rn, is
a proper modification with center in the boundary of Ω, hence φ|Q∩BR(0) :
Q∩BR(0) → Ω is an analytic isomorphism. Since the family of Stein
subana-lytic open subsets is closed under finite intersection, we may assume without loss of generality that Q = {x ∈ Rn, x1 > 0}. Let φC be a complexification
of φ defined in the complex polydisc BR(0) ⊂ Cn and let Ω′′ denote the
Stein open subset of Cngiven by BR(0) ∩ {z = (z1, ..., zn), ℜz1 > 0}. We get
Ω′′∩ Rn= Q ∩ BR(0). Moreover, φC|Ω′′ is an analytic isomorphism. Hence
Ω′ := φC
(Ω′′) is a Stein open subanalytic set of S′ satisfying Ω′∩ S = Ω.
q.e.d.
4
Realification for a smooth morphism,
microsup-port and 1-characteristic variety
Let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism of complex manifolds. Let us denote by Y the underlying topological space Y endowed with the complex conjugate structure and, identifying Y to the diagonal ∆ ⊂ Y × Y by the
canonical embedding l, let us regard Y × Y as a complexification of Y . Let us denote by j : X → X × Y the associated morphism and p : X × Y → X the associated projections.
Proposition 4.1. For any F ∈ Db
R−c(CY) and any M ∈ Dbcoh(DX) we have
a canonical isomorphism: Rp∗RHomDX×Y(p −1M, tHom((f × id Y)−1Rl∗F, OX×Y)[dimY ]) ≃ RHomDX(M, tHom(f −1F, O X)). (5)
Proof. We have pj = idX and j is proper so we may use the adjunction
formula (7.4) of Theorem 7.2 of [13] for j, f−1F and p−1M to obtain a natural isomorphism
RHomDX×Y(p−1M, tHom(Rj∗f−1F, OX×Y)[dimY ]) (6)
≃ Rj∗RHomDX(M, tHom(f
−1F, O X)).
On the other hand, the equality lf = (f × idY)j and Proposition 2.5.11 of [13] entail the existence of a natural isomorphism such that, for any F ∈ DRb−c(CY), Rj∗f−1F ≃ (f × idY)−1Rl∗F which, composed with (6),
gives (4.1).
q.e.d. Corollary 4.2. In the situation of Proposition 4.1, we have
SS(RHomDX(M, tHom(f
−1F, O X)))
⊂ pπpd(SS(RHomDX×Y(p−1M, tHom((f × idY)−1Rl∗F, OX×Y)))).
Proof. It is a consequence of the properness of p on the support of RHomDX×Y(p−1M, tHom((f × idY)−1Rl∗F, OX×Y)).
Proposition 4.3. Let f = f × idY. Then, for any M ∈ Db
coh(DX), we have
pπp−1d (˜f −1
(Cf1(p−1M))) = ˜f−1(Cf1(M)). Proof. Let q : T∗(X × Y ) → T∗X be the projection. Since C1
f(p
−1M)) ⊂
T∗(X|Y ) × Y , by Remark 2.1 we have pπp−1d (˜f −1 (Cf1(p−1M))) = q(˜f−1(Cf1(p−1M))). By Lemma 2.8 we have q(˜f−1(C1 f(p −1M))) = ˜f−1C1
f(M) which ends the
proof. q.e.d.
5
Cauchy-Kowalevskaia theorem and propagation
Let X ⊂ Cn× Cd be an open neighbourhood of 0 of the form X = Z × Y , with Z ⊂ Cn and Y ⊂ Cd. f will stand for the projection X → Y .
We shall consider a differential operator P ∈ DX|Y of the form P (z, y, Dz, Dy) = Dmz1 + X 0≤j<m aα(z, y)Dαz′Dzj 1, |α| ≤ m, (7) where α = (α2, ..., αn) ∈ Nn−1, Dzα′ = Dαz2 2...D αn
zn and where the coefficients
aα(z, y) are holomorphic in a neighbourhood Ω0 of 0 in X.
Let Ω be an open convex subset in Z and let h ∈ C. We note Hh and
H, respectively, the hyperplane in Z given by z1 = h and z1 = 0. Let δ be
a real positive number. Following J.M. Bony and P. Schapira in [8], Ω is δ − Hh− f lat if, whenever z ∈ Ω and ˜z ∈ Hh satisfy
|z1− h| ≥ δ|zj − ˜zj|j=2,...,n
then ˜z ∈ Ω.
Let now Ω be an open subset of X. We shall say that Ω is Y −δ−Hh−f lat
if, for any y ∈ Y , f−1(y) ∩ Ω is δ − Hh− f lat in Z.
Proposition 5.1. (Precised Cauchy Theorem) Let U be an open sub-analytic set of Y . Let P be an operator of the form (7). Then there exist an open neighbourhood Ω0 of 0 ∈ X and δ > 0 such that, for any h, for any
open subset Ω ⊂ Ω0 which is Y − δ − Hh− f lat, for any
f ∈ Γ(Ω; H0(tHom(CZ×U, OX)))
and for any
(g) = (gj)j=0,...,m−1∈ Γ(Ω ∩ Hh× Y ; H0(tHom(CHh×U, OHh×Y)))
m,
the Cauchy Problem
P u = f, γ(u) = (g), (8)
where γ(u) = (u|Hh×Y, ..., D
m
z1u|Hh×Y), admits a unique solution
u ∈ Γ(Ω; H0(tHom(CZ×U, OX))).
Proof. We shall adapt and follow step by step the proof of Theorem 2.4.3 of [7].
For an open set Ω and f ∈ Γ(Ω; H0(tHom(C
Z×U, OX))), for any compact
K ⊂ Ω and any k ∈ N, we set (i) |f |K,k = sup
K∩Z×U
|f (w)d(w, δ(Z × U ))k|.
Therefore, the Cauchy data f and (g) satisfy the following condition: for any compact K ⊂ Ω (respectively K′ ⊂ Ω ∩ Hh× Y ), there exists an
integer k ≥ 0 such that |f |K,k < +∞ (respectively, for each j = 0, ..., m − 1,
|gj|K′
,k < +∞).
Let K be a compact subset of Z × Y . For (z, y) = (z1, z′, y) ∈ K we set
(ii) dz′
,K(z, y) = inf{sup ||z′− ˜z′||; (z1, ˜z′, y) ∈ δK}.
The operator P may obviously be written in the form P (z, y, Dz, Dy) = Dmz1+ X 0≤j<m−1 Dzα′Dzj 1a ′ αj(z, y), |α| ≤ m, (9)
where the coefficients a′α(z, y) are holomorphic in a neighbourhood Ω0 of 0.
It is clear that, for any open subset Ω ⊂ Ω0and f ∈ Γ(Ω; H0(tHom(CZ×U, OX))),
there exists Cα ≥ 0 such that
|a′αf |K,k< Cα|f |K,k. (10)
We shall construct the solution u of (8) by successive approximation, defining recursively a sequence
uν ∈ Γ(Ω; H0(tHom(CZ×U, OX)))
by setting u0 = 0 and uν+1 being the solution of the Cauchy Problem
Dmz1uν+1 = f + X 0≤j≤m−1 Dαz′Dzj 1a ′ αuν, Djz1uν+1|H×Y = gj, j = 0, ..., m − 1. (11) Let us note vν = uν+1− uν. We get uν = P
i=0,...,ν−1 vi, Dzm1v0 = f, Dzj1v0|H×Y = gj, j = 0, ..., m − 1 (12) and Dzm1vν+1 = X 0≤j≤m−1 Dαz′Dj z1a ′ αjvν, Djz1vν+1|H×Y = 0, |α| ≤ m (13)
We may assume that h = 0. By the assumption, for any given compact subsets K ⊂ Ω, K′ ⊂ Ω ∩ H
h × Y , and a given k ∈ N, |f |K,k < ∞ and
|gj|K′
,k < ∞, for all j = 0, ..., m − 1.
Let us fix a given ν, let us assume that δ ≥ 0 is given such that Ω is Y − δ − H − f lat and that vν ∈ Γ(Ω; H0(tHom(CZ×U, OX))). We will prove
that there exists a constant C, depending only on P and Ω0, such that, for
K = K1× K2, with K1 ⊂ Z, K1 being the closure of a δ − H − f lat open
subset of Z, and K2⊂ Y , we have
|vν+1|K,k ≤ Cδ|vν|K,k. (14)
Let us note K′= (K
In view of (10), it is enough to prove that, if w ∈ Γ(Ω; H0(tHom(CZ×U, OX)))
satisfies |w|K,k < +∞ and v is the solution of the Cauchy Problem
Dmz1v = Dzα′Dzj 1w, D
j
z1v|H×Y = 0, |α| ≤ m, j < m (15)
then there exists a constant C, only depending on m and of Ω0, such that
|v|K,k ≤ Cδ|w|K,k < ∞. (16)
Remark that v is then the solution of the Cauchy Problem Dzm−j1 v = Dzα′w, |α| ≤ m − j, Dzj
1v|H×Y = 0, |α| ≤ (m − j), j < m. (17)
We have, for such K and k, |w|K,k = sup (z,y)∈K1×(K2∩U )
|w(z, y)|d(y, δU )k,
there-fore, for any (z, y) ∈ K1× (K2∩ ×U ) we have |w(z, y)| ≤ |w|K,kd(y, δU )−k.
Let z ∈ Int(K1) and let y ∈ K2∩ U . By Cauchy integral formula, we get
|Dzα′w(z, y)| ≤ |w|K,ke|α|(|α| + 1)!d(y, δU )−kdz′
,K(z, y)−|α|. (18)
Furthermore, we may assume δ < 1 and diameter of Ω0< 1. Hence
|Dα
z′w(z, y)| ≤ |w|K,ke|α|(|α| + 1)!d(y, δU )kdz′,K(z, y)−m+j. (19)
Since Int(K1) is δ − H − f lat, one easily checks that, for t ∈ [0, 1], pt :=
(tz1, z′, y) belongs to K ∩ Z × U and that
dz′,K(pt) ≥ dz′,K(z, y) + | (1 − t)z1 δ | hence, | Z 1 0 Dαz′w(pt)z1dt| ≤ |w|K,ke|α|(|α| + 1)!d(y, δU )−kδdz′,K(z, y)−m+j+1. (20) Iterating m − j times this integration, we get
and we can choose C = e|α|(|α| + 1)!. Therefore (16) is proved which entails (14).
Remark that v0 = G + P j=0,...,m−1
gj(z′, y)z1j/j! where G denotes the
mth-primitive of f , vanishing up to the order m on H × Y . By assumption, |f |K,k, |gj|K′
,k < +∞. Hence |v0|K,k < +∞. Noting C0 = |v0|K,k, arguing
by induction starting by (14), we get
|vν+1|K,k≤ C0(Cδ)ν+1. (21)
We may also assume that δ < 1/C. Therefore the series Pvν defines a
holomorphic function u in Ω ∩ Z × U satisfying the estimate |u|K,k ≤
C0P(Cδ)ν < +∞. Clearly, u satisfies P u = f . Furthermore, by (15) and
(16), if a holomorphic function u′ defined in Ω ∩ Z × U satisfies |u′|K,k< +∞
and P u′ = 0, γ(u′) = 0, then |u′|K,k ≤ Cδ|u′|K,k, with δ arbitrarily small,
hence u′|K = 0. Therefore u is the unique solution of (8). q.e.d.
From Proposition 5.1 one obtains the following tempered version of Cauchy-Kowalevskaia-Kashiwara Theorem (cf[11]):
Theorem 5.2. Let X and Y be complex manifolds, let X → Y be a smooth morphism and let M ∈ M odcoh(DX). Let F ∈ DbR−c(CY). Let H be a
smooth manifold of X non 1-characteristic for M with respect to f and let f′ denote f |
H. Then the natural morphism in Db(CH)
RHomDX(M, tHom(f −1F, O X))|H → RHomDH(MH, tHom(f ′−1F, O H)) (22) is an isomorphism.
Proof. First case:
Assume F = CU where U is a finite union of Stein open subanalytic
relatively compact subsets of Y . Since the family of Stein open subanalytic sets is stable under finite intersection, it is sufficient to assume that U is Stein.
We may assume the following situation in a neighbohood of x:
X = Z × Y , where Z is an open neigborhood of 0 ∈ Cn, Y is an open
neighbourhood of 0 ∈ Cd and f is the projection.
Considering the associated symplectic coordinates in T∗X, (z, y; ζ, τ ), with z = (z1, ..., zn), by a coordinate transformation in X we may assume
that H = {(z, y), z1 = 0}.
Moreover, by Remark 2.3, we may assume M = DX/DXP for a
differ-ential operator P of the form (7).
The result then follows immediatly from Proposition 5.1. Second case:
We assume that Y is the complexification of a real analytic manifold N and that F ∈ Db
R−c(CN). The assertion is locally checked so we may
assume that F has compact support. Then there exists a finite filtration N = N0 ⊃ N1 ⊃ ...Nl = ∅ such that FNj\Nj+1 is a constant sheaf. Since
Nj\ Nj+1 is a locally closed subanalytic set, which is always the difference
of two open subanalytic sets, it is enough to prove the result for F = CU
for an open subanalytic relatively compact subset of N . Moreover we may assume that N is Rd and Y = Cd. By Theorem 3.2, we can write U as a finite union U = SjΩj ∩ Rd, where each Ωj is Stein open subanalytic in
Cd. The assertion holds for S
jΩj by the first case. On the other hand,
Cd\ Rdis a finite union of Stein open subsets, therefore the assertion holds for (SjΩj) \ Rd and hence for U .
General case:
It easily follows by Proposition 4.1 and the second case. q.e.d. The following Lemma is an adaptation of Zerner’s Lemma:
Lemma 5.3. Let U be an open subanalytic set of Y . Let φ be a C∞
func-tion in a neighbourhood of 0 ∈ X such that φ(0) = 0 and dφ(0) = dz1.
Let Ω = {(z, y) ∈ X : φ(z, y) < 0}. Let u ∈ Γ(Ω; H0(tHom(CZ×U, OX)))
and assume that P u extends as a section of H0(tHom(C
neighbourhood of 0.Then u extends to a neighbourhood of 0 as a section of H0(tHom(C
Z×U, OX))).
Proof. In view of Proposition 5.1 the proof is similar to that of Lemma 2.7 in [21]. We may assume that φ is defined in Ω0 ⊂ Ω, with Ω0 as in
Proposition 5.1, and that P u extends to Ω0. By classical arguments, there
exists < ǫ ≪ 1 and R > 0 such that the open polydisc centered in (−ǫ, 0, 0) and radius max (R, δR) is contained in Ω0. Then,
Wǫ = {(z1, z′, y) : |z1+ ǫ| < δ(R − ||z′||), ||z′|| < R, ||y|| < R} ⊂ Ω0
is Y − δ − H−ǫ − f lat and is a neighbourhood of 0. Again by
Propo-sition 5.1 the solution of P uǫ = P u, γ(uǫ) = γ(u) defines a section of
H0(tHom(C
Z×U, OX))) on Wǫ.
q.e.d. The preceding Lemma has a global version adapting Lemma 3.1.5 of [19]: Lemma 5.4. Let ω and Ω be two convex subsets in X, with Ω open, ω locally closed and ω ⊂ Ω. Assume that any real hyperplane whose conormal belongs to the closure of {ξ; ∃x ∈ Ω, ˜f (x, ξ) ∈ Cf1(DX/DXP )} which intersects Ω
also intersects ω. Then, if u ∈ Γ(ω; H0(tHom(C
Z×U, OX))) is such that P u
extends to Ω, u extends to Ω.
As an easy consequence of the Analytic continuation principle for holo-morphic functions we obtain:
Lemma 5.5. (Analytic continuation principle) Let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism. Let Ω be a subanalytic open subset of X such that, for any y ∈ U , Ω ∩ f−1(y) is non empty and connected. Let ω ⊂ Ω be an open subset such that, for any y ∈ U , ω ∩ f−1(y) is non empty.
Lemma 5.6. (Propagation) Let X and Y complex manifolds and let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism. Let U be a finite union of Stein subanalytic relatively compact open subsets of Y . Then, for any M ∈ Dcohb (DX), we
have
SS(RHomDX(M, tHom(Cf−1U, OX))) ⊂ C
1
f(M)|X. (23)
Proof. We may assume U is Stein. Let p = (x, ξ) /∈ ˜f −1(C1
f(M)). As
above, we may assume that x = 0 ∈ Cn+d, X = Z × Y , where Z is an open neigborhood of 0 ∈ Cn, Y is an open neighbourhood of 0 ∈ Cd, f is the
projection and p = (0, 0; dz1, 0). Moreover, we may assume M is of the
form DX/DXP for a differential operator of the form
P (z, y, Dz, Dy) = Dmz1+ X 0≤j<m aα(z, y)Dαz′Djz 1, |α| ≤ m (24) where α = (α2, ..., αn) ∈ Nn−1, Dzα′ = Dαz2 2...D αn
zn and where the coefficients
aα(z, y) are holomorphic in a neighbourhood Ω0 of 0. Let H denote the
complex RHomDX(M, tHom(CZ×U, OX)). Let Ω0, δ be given by
Proposi-tion 5.1. We shall apply ProposiProposi-tion 2.4 and prove that, for 0 < ǫ ≪ 1 and 0 < R ≪ 1, denoting by ω the open polydisc of center (0, ..., 0) and radius R, BR(0), by Hε = {(z, y) ∈ X; ℜhz1i > −ε}, and by γ the proper closed
convex cone of Cn+d
γ = {(z1, z′, y), Rez1 ≤ −δ(||(z′, y)|| + |Imz1|)},
we have Hj(X; C((z,y)+γa)∩H ǫ⊗ H) = 0, for any j, (z, y) ∈ ω. By (3), it is enough to prove i) H0(X; C((z,y)+γa)∩H ǫ⊗ tHom(CZ×U, OX)) = 0
ii) P defines an isomorphism in H1(X; C((z,y)+γa)∩H
Let us prove i):
Let s ∈ Γ(X; C((z,y)+γ)∩Hǫ ⊗ tHom(CZ×U, OX)). Then there exists
(z′, y′) ∈ ω such that s extends as a section s′of Γ((z′, y′)+int(γ); tHom(CZ×U, OX))
with support in Hǫ. Let γ′ denote the closed convex cone of Cn defined by
γ′= {(z1, z′, ), Rez1≤ −δ(||z′|| + |Imz1|)}
Then, for any y′ ∈ U , the holomorphic function in the z variable s′(., y′) is
defined in z + Int(γ′) and has support in {z, Rez
1 ≥ −ǫ}, hence vanishes
which entails s = 0 by Lemma 5.5.
The proof of ii) follows from Lemma 5.4 and the stepwise adaptation of Proposition 5.1.5 of [13] by a classical argument (see [19], [21]).
q.e.d. Proposition 5.7. Let X and Y complex manifolds and let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism. Assume that Y is a complexification of a real manifold N . Let F belong to DbR−c(CN). Then (4) holds for f−1F .
Proof. The estimation (4) is locally checked so we may assume that F has compact support. Then there exists a finite filtration N = N0 ⊃ N1 ⊃
...Nl = ∅ such that FNj\Nj+1 is a constant sheaf. Since Nj\ Nj+1is a locally
closed subanalytic set, which is always the difference of two open subanalytic sets, it is enough to prove the result for F = CU for an open subanalytic
relatively compact subset of N . Moreover we may assume that N is Rdand Y = Cd. By Theorem 3.2, we can write U as a finite union U =S
jΩj∩ Rd,
where each Ωj is Stein open subanalytic in Cd. By Lemma 5.6, (4) holds for
S
jΩj. On the other hand, Cd\ Rd is a finite union of Stein open subsets,
hence (4) holds for (SjΩj) \ Rdwhich ends the proof.
q.e.d. Proof of Theorem 2.10
By Corollary 4.2 we have
SS(RHomDX(M, tHom(f
−1F, O X)))
⊂ pπpd(SS(RHomDX×Y(p−1M, tHom(f × idY)−1Rl∗F, OX×Y))).
where p : X × Y → X denotes the projection. The result is then an imme-diate consequence of Proposition 5.7 together with Corollary 4.3.
Proof of Theorem 2.14
It is an immediate consequence of Proposition 5.7.
In the case of a product, f being a projection, there is a particular class of D-modules for which estimate in Theorem 2.10 is easily improved. Corollary 5.8. Assume that X = Z × Y , note p : X → Y the first pro-jection, f : X → Y the second projection and q : T∗Z × T∗Y → T∗Z the projection. Let M ∈ Dbcoh(DZ). Then
SS(RHomDX(p
−1M, tHom(f−1F, O
X))) ⊂ q−1(Char(M)).
Proof. Reducing first to M in degree zero, and secondly to M ≃ DZ/J , for
a coherent ideal of DX, one easily checks the equality
˜
f−1(Cf1(p−1M)) = q−1(Char(M)).
q.e.d.
6
Microlocalization
6.1 1-microcharacteristic varieties
Let V be a smooth involutive subamanifold of T∗X \ TX∗X, let EX(m)m∈Z
denote the filtration of EX by the order, and let JV denote the subsheaf of
vanishes on V . Let IV ⊂ OT∗
X be the defining ideal of V . One denotes EV
the sub-sheaf of rings of EX generated by JV,
EV = ∪m≥0Jm.
For P ∈ EV ∩ EX(m), P /∈ EX(m − 1), one defines σV1(P ) as being the
image of σ(P ) in Im
V /IVm+1. Hence σ1V(P ) defines a holomorphic function on
TV(T∗X).
Let M be a coherent EX-module. By the constructions of [22] and [23],
one associates to M the 1-microcharacteristic variety along V , a conic ana-lytic subset of TV(T∗X), satisfying, for M = EX/J , J a coherent ideal of
EX ,
CV1(M) = {p ∈ TV(T∗X); σV1(P )(p) = 0, ∀P ∈ J ∩ EV}.
The definition extends naturally to Dcohb (EX). Recall that, by (5.5.10) of
[13], we get an embedding T∗X ֒→
H T
∗(T∗X) associated to the embedding
of X in the zero section of T∗X. Let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism and
set V = T∗Y ×Y X. Note by V·= V \ TX∗X. Then π−1DX|Y ⊂ EV·, more
precisely, it is equal to π−1D
X ∩ EV·.
Let now M ∈ Dbcoh(DX) and set ˜M = EX ⊗π−1D X π
−1M.
Lemma 6.1. H−1ρ−1
V (CV1·( ˜M)) = ˜f−1(C1
f(M)).
Proof. We may assume that M is concentrated in degree zero and M = DX/L for a coherent ideal L ⊂ DX, and assume that f : X = Z × Y → Y
is the projection. Taking local coordinates (z, y) in X and the associated canonical coordinates (z, y; ξ, η) on T∗X, we get V = {(z, y; ξ, η) ∈ T∗X, ξ = 0}. The result follows for, for P ∈ DX|Y, one has
σV1·(P )(z, y, 0, η; ˜ξ) = σ(P )(z, y, ˜ξ).
6.2 Estimate for tµhom
Let us recall the construction of the functor tµhom(·, OX) of tempered
mi-crolocalization of ([1]). Let ˜XC
be the complex normal deformation of X × X along the diago-nal ∆ which we identify with X by the first projection p1, which gives an
identification of T X with the normal bundle T∆(X × X). Let t : ˜XC → C
and p : ˜XC → X × X be the canonical maps, let ˜
Ω be t−1(C − {0}) and Ω = t−1(R+) ⊂ ˜Ω. Let p
2 : X × X → X be the second projection.
Consider the following diagram of morphisms: T X ≃ T∆(X × X)
i
֒→ ˜XC←֓ Ω = tj −1(R+) (25) Let ˜p : ˜Ω → X × X, be the restriction of p. Denote by p1 the composition p1◦ p and by p2 the composition p2◦ p.
Under these notations, tνhom(F, OX) is defined by
tνhom(F, OX) = i−1RHomDX˜C(DX˜C→ p1X
, tHom(p−12 F ⊗ CΩ, OX˜C)).
Let Db
R+(CT X) (resp. DRb+(CT∗X)) be the derived category of complexes
of sheaves on T X (resp. T∗X) with conic cohomologies. We denote by the symbol b the Fourier-Sato Transform from DbR+(CT X) to DRb+(CT∗X). Then
by definition, tµhom(F, OX) = tνhom(F, OX)b. Let us recall that under the
identification of T∗(T X) with T∗(T∗X) by the Hamiltonian isomorphism we have SS(F ) = SS(F )bfor any F ∈ Db
R+(CT X).
Remark that for any coherent DX-module M, one has
RHomπ−1D X(π −1M, tµhom(F, O X)) (26) ≃ RHomτ−1D X(τ −1M, tνhom(F, O X))b.
Theorem 6.2. Let M ∈ Dcohb (DX). Let f : X → Y be a smooth morphism
and let V = T∗Y ×Y X. Then
SS(RHomEX( ˜M, tµhom(f
−1(F ), O
Proof. By (26) it is suffitient to prove the analogue of (27) with tµhom(F, OX)
replaced by tνhom(F, OX). Moreover, the assertion being local, we may
as-sume that f : X = Z × Y → Y is the projection. We have
RHomτ−1D X(τ −1M, tνhom(F, O X)) ≃ i−1RHomDX˜C(p1(M), tHom(p −1 2 f−1F ⊗ CΩ, OX˜C))
By Proposition 6.6.2 of [13], we have an inclusion SS( i−1RHomDC ˜ X (p1(M), tHom(p−12 f−1F ⊗ CΩ, OX˜C))) (28) ⊂ i♯(SS(RHomDX˜C(p1(M), tHom(p −1 2 f−1F ⊗ CΩ, OX˜C)))).
Endow X × X with the system of local coordinates (x, x′), so that ∆ ⊂ X × X is defined by x = x′. Under the change of coordinates : x, y = x−x′, ∆ will be defined by y = 0. Using (x, y), ˜XC
is endowed with the coordinates (t, x, y), and
p(t, x, y) = (x, x − ty), p1(t, x, y) = x, and p2(t, x, y) = x − ty (29) We may assume that the local coordinate system x is of the form x = (z, u) such that f : X → Y is given by (z, u) 7→ u. Then V = X ×Y T∗Y is given
by V = {(z, u; ξ, η); ξ = 0}. Set y = (z′, u′). Let f
2 denote the smooth
morphism ˜XC→ Y × C given by
f2(t, x, y) = (f ◦ p2(t, x, y), t) = (u − tu′, t).
Let (t, z, u, z′, u′; τ, ξ, η, ξ′, η′) be the associated coordinates of T∗( ˜XC
). Since p−12 f−1F ⊗ CΩ= f2−1(F × CΩ), by Theorem 2.10 we have:
SS(RHomDX˜C(p1(M), tHom(p −1 2 f−1F ⊗ CΩ, OX˜C))) ⊂ ˜f2 −1 (Cf12(p1(M))). (30) By (28) and (30) we get SS(RHomτ−1D X(τ −1M, tνhom(f−1F, O X))) ⊂ i♯( ˜f2 −1 (Cf12(p1(M)))). (31)
Therefore it is enough to prove the inclusion i♯( ˜f2
−1
(Cf12(p1(M)))) ⊂ ρ−1V (CV1( ˜M)).
We may assume that M is concentrated in degree zero and is of the form M = DX/J for a coherent ideal J . We have
p1M ≃ DX˜C DX˜CJ + hDz′, Du′, Dti . Since hDz′, J ∩ D X|Yi ⊂ DX˜C |Y ×C we have ˜ f2 −1 (Cf12(p1(M))) ⊂ {(t, z, u, z′, u′; τ, ξ, η, ξ′, η′); ξ′ = 0, σ(P )(z, u; ξ) = 0, ∀P ∈ J ∩DX|Y}. Hence i♯( ˜f2 −1 (Cf12(p1(M)))) ⊂ {(z, u, z′, u′, ξ, η, 0, η′) ∈ T∗(T X); ∃(tn, zn, un, z′n, u′n; τn, ξn, ηn, 0, ηn′), tn→ 0, zn → z, un→ u, ξn→ ξ, ηn→ η, ηn′ → η′, |tnτn| → 0, σ(P )(zn, un; ξn) = 0, ∀P ∈ J ∩DX|Y} ⊂ {(z, u, z′, u′, ξ, η, 0, η′); σ(P )(z, u; ξ) = 0, ∀P ∈ J ∩ DX|Y}. Recall that the identification of T∗(T X) to T (T∗X) is described by:
T∗(T X) ∋ (z, u, z′, u′; ξ, η, ξ′, η′) ↔ (z, u, ξ′, η′; z′, u′, ξ, η) ∈ T (T∗X). Hence i♯( ˜f2 −1 (Cf12(p1(M)))) ⊂ {(z, u, 0, η′; z′, u′, ξ, η) ∈ T (T∗X); σ(P )(z, u; ξ) = 0} = {(z, u, 0, η′; z′, u′, ξ, η) ∈ T (T∗X); σV1·(P )(z, u, 0, η′; ξ) = 0, ∀P ∈ J ∩EV·} = ρ−1 V (CV1·(M)). q.e.d.
References
[1] E. Andronikof, Microlocalization temp´er´ee, Suppl´emment au Bull.Soc.Math.France, m´emoire 57, 122, 2, (1994).
[2] A. D’Agnolo and F.Tonin, Cauchy Problem for hyperbolic D-modules with regular singularities, Pacific J. Math. 184, 1-22 (1998).
[3] E. Bierstone and P. D. Milman, Semianalytic and subanalytic sets, Pub-lications Math´ematiques de l’IH´ES, 67, 5-42 , (1988).
[4] H. Grauert, On Levi’s Problem and the embedding of real analytic man-ifolds, Annals of Maths, 68, 2, 460-472 (1958).
[5] H. Hironaka, Subanalytic sets, Algebraic Geometry and Commutative Algebra, Tokyo, Kinokuniya, 453-493, (1963).
[6] H. Koshimizu and K. Takeuchi, Extension theorems for distribution solutions to D-modules with regular singularities, Proceedings of the AMS, 128, 6, 1685-1690 (2000).
[7] J.M. Bony, Propagation des singularit´es diff´erentiables pour une classe d’op´erateurs diff´erentiels ¸oeffitients analytiques, Ast´erisque, 34-35 43-92, (1976).
[8] J.M. Bony and P.Schapira, Propagation des singularit´es analytiques pour les solutions des ´equations aux d´eriv´ees partielles, Ann. Inst. Fourier, 26, 81-140, (1976)
[9] L. H¨ormander, An introduction to Complex Analysis in several vari-ables, North-Holland, 7, (1973).
[10] L. H¨ormander, The analysis of linear partial differential operators II, Grundlehren der Math. Wiss. 257, Springer Verlag, (1983).
[11] M. Kashiwara, D-Modules and Microlocal Calculus, Translations of Mathematical Monographs, 217, AMS (2003).
[12] M. Kashiwara, The Riemann-Hilbert problem for holonomic systems, Publ. R.I.M.S, Kyoto Univ, 20, 219-315 (1984).
[13] M. Kashiwara and P. Schapira, Sheaves on manifolds, Grundlehren der Math. Wiss.,292, Springer Verlag (1990).
[14] M. Kashiwara and P. Schapira, Moderate and formal cohomology asso-ciated with constructible sheaves, Bull.Soc. Math. france, M´emoire 94 (1996).
[15] M. Kashiwara, T. Monteiro Fernandes and P. Schapira, Micro-support and Cauchy problem for temperate solutions of regular D-modules, Por-tugaliae Mathematica, Vol 58, pp. 485-504 (2001).
[16] M. Kashiwara and T. Oshima, Systems of differential equations with regular singularities and their boundary values problem, Annals of Math.,106, 145-200 (1977).
[17] M. Sato, T. Kawai and M. Kashiwara, Hyperfunctions and pseudod-ifferential equations, Lecture Notes in Math., Springer 287, 265-529 (1973).
[18] O. Berni, A vanishing theorem for formal cohomology of perverse sheaves, Journal of Funct. Anal., 158, 2, 267-288, (1998).
[19] P. Shapira, Microdifferential systems in the complex domain, Grundlehren der Math. Wiss., Vol. 269, Springer-Verlag, (1985). [20] R. Narasimhan, A note on Stein Spaces and their normalizations,
An-nali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, Classe di Scienze, 3e s´erie, 16, 4, 327-333 (1962).
[21] T. Monteiro Fernandes, Propagation of the irregularity of a microdif-ferential system, Publ. RIMS, Kyoto Univ, 37, 2, 119-139, (2001) [22] T. Monteiro Fernandes Probl`eme de Cauchy pour les syst`emes
[23] Y. Laurent, Th´eorie de la deuxi`eme microlocalization, Progr. Math., Birkhauser,53 (1985).
Teresa Monteiro Fernandes
Centro de ´Algebra da Universidade de Lisboa, Departamento de Matem´atica, FCUL,
Edif´ıcio C6, piso 2, Campo Grande, 1749-16,Lisboa Portugal
