text:
# CERN-TH/2000-203, UPR-894T, RU-00-5B Standard-model bundles

## 1 Introduction

In this paper we construct a particular class of bundles with constrained Chern classes on certain non-simply connected Calabi-Yau threefolds. These bundles are instrumental in deriving the Standard Model of particle physics in the context of the Heterotic M-theory \[DOPWb\]. Bundles of this type have been the subject of active research for quite some time \[TY87\], \[Kac95\], \[PR99\], \[ACK\], \[DOPWc\], \[Tho\]. In contrast with the classical constructions \[TY87\], \[Kac95\], \[PR99\], where the bundles obtained are associated with the tangent bundle of the Calabi-Yau manifold and tend to be rigid, our examples are independent of the geometry of the tangent bundle and vary in families. In particular we construct infinitely many positive dimensional families of bundles which are suitable for phenomenologically relevant compactifications of Heterotic M-theory. Our construction takes place entirely within the realm of algebraic geometry. The physical implications of our results are discussed in the companion paper \[DOPWb\], which also contains a summary of the construction written for physicists. In the remainder of this introduction we give a brief overview of the physical motivation for our work, followed by an outline of the actual geometric construction.

The search for exotic principal bundles on Calabi-Yau threefolds is motivated by string theory. To compactify the $`E_8\times E_8`$-Heterotic string to four dimensions one prescribes:

* a Calabi-Yau 3-fold $`Z`$;
* a Ricci flat Kähler metric on $`Z`$ with a Kähler form $`\omega `$;
* an $`\omega `$-instanton $`Z`$ with a structure group $`E_8\times E_8`$.

The Hermit-Einstein connection on $``$ is a vacuum of the Heterotic string theory. The moduli space of $``$’s is a subspace of of the moduli space of vacua for the Heterotic string. In view of the Uhlenbeck-Yau theorem \[UY86\] every such $``$ can be identified with an algebraic $`E_8\times E_8`$-bundle on $`Z`$ which is Mumford polystable with respect to the polarization $`\omega `$. In view of this theorem one can use algebraic geometry to study the moduli space of Heterotic vacua.

The type of bundles $``$ allowed in a Heterotic compactification is restricted in physics in three ways:

$``$ has to be Mumford polystable.

$`c_2()=c_2(Z)`$.

If the compactification of the Heterotic string has a group of symmetries $`GE_8\times E_8`$, then the structure group of $``$ can be reduced to the centralizer $`G^{}`$ of $`G`$ in $`E_8\times E_8`$. Furthermore the corresponding $`G^{}`$ bundle $`_G^{}Z`$ should also be supersymmetric and anomaly-free.

Using these three principles one can look for special compactifications of the Heterotic string that reproduce in their low energy limits well understood and experimentally confirmed quantum field theories. Of particular interest are compactifications that will lead to the Standard Model of particle physics. For such compactifications one imposes two additional requirements on the triple $`(Z,,\omega )`$:

The group $`G`$ of symmetries of $``$, i.e. the centralizer inside $`E_8\times E_8`$ of a minimal subgroup $`G^{}E_8\times E_8`$ to which the structure group of $``$ reduces, is $`G=U(1)\times SU(2)\times SU(3)`$.

$$\chi (\mathrm{ad}())=\frac{c_3(\mathrm{ad}())}{2}=3.$$

Triples $`(Z,\omega ,)`$ satisfying the five conditions above are hard to come by and tend to be rigid (see e.g. \[Kac95\]). However the recent advances in string theory prompted by the ground breaking work of Hořava-Witten \[HW96b, HW96a, Wit96\] on orbifold compactifications of M-theory, allow for a significant relaxation of the anomaly cancellation condition. This leads to two essential simplifications. First, it turns out that using the Hořava-Witten mechanisms one can suppress completely one copy of $`E_8`$ in the structure group of $``$. Secondly it was argued in \[DLOW99, DOW99, ACK\] that one can use M-theory 5-branes to relax the equality in the anomaly cancellation condition to an inequality. This leads to the following purely mathematical problem.

Main Problem. Find a smooth Calabi-Yau 3-fold $`(Z,\omega )`$ and a reductive subgroup $`G^{}E_8`$ so that

1. the centralizer $`G`$ of $`G^{}`$ in $`E_8`$ is a group isogenous to $`SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$;
2. there exists an $`\omega `$-stable $`G_{}^{}`$-bundle $`𝒱Z`$ so that

* $`c_1(𝒱)=0`$,
    * $`c_2(Z)c_2(𝒱)`$ is the class of an effective reduced curve on $`Z`$,
    * $`c_3(𝒱)=6`$.

Here the Chern classes of $`𝒱`$ are calculated in the adjoint representation of $`E_8`$ considered as a representation of $`G^{}`$. In fact for the physics applications it suffices for $`G`$ to contain a group isogenous to $`SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$ as a direct summand.

The groups $`G^{}E_8`$ whose centralizer contains $`SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$ as a direct summand can be classified. It turns out that there are no connected subgroups $`G^{}`$ with $`Z_{E_8}(G^{})=SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$. The stability assumption on $`𝒱`$ guarantees that the the structure group of $`𝒱`$ can not be reduced to a proper subgroup of $`G_{}^{}`$. Therefore the structure group of the associated $`\pi _0(G_{}^{})`$-bundle $`𝒱\times _G_{}^{}\pi _0(G_{}^{})`$ can not be reduced to a proper subgroup of $`\pi _0(G_{}^{})`$. Since $`𝒱\times _G_{}^{}\pi _0(G_{}^{})`$ is a Galois cover of $`Z`$ with Galois group $`\pi _0(G_{}^{})`$, this just means that there should be a surjective homomorphism $`\pi _1(Z)\pi _0(G_{}^{})`$ and so we are forced to work with a non-simply connected $`Z`$.

Some possible choices for $`G^{}`$ are: $`SU(3)\times (/6)`$, $`SU(4)\times (/3)`$ and $`SU(5)\times (/2)`$. The corresponding centralizers are isogenous to $`(SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1))\times U(1)\times U(1)`$, $`(SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1))\times U(1)`$ and $`SU(3)\times SU(2)\times U(1)`$. When $`G_0^{}`$, the connected component of the identity in $`G^{}`$, is a classical group, it turns out that the Chern classes of $`𝒱`$ in the fundamental representation of $`G_0^{}`$ coincide with the Chern classes of $`𝒱`$ in the adjoint representation of $`E_8`$.

In this paper we explain how to build a big family of solutions of the Main Problem above for $`G^{}=SU(5)\times (/2)`$.

For concreteness we look for $`Z`$’s with $`\pi _1(Z)=/2`$. Let $`𝒱`$ be an $`SL(5,)\times (/2)`$-bundle on such a $`Z`$. Then $`𝒱`$ splits as a product of a rank five vector bundle and the unique non-trivial local system on $`Z`$ with monodromy $`/2`$. Pulling back this vector bundle to the universal cover $`X`$ of $`Z`$ we get a rank five vector bundle on $`X`$ which is invariant under the action of $`\pi _1(Z)`$ on $`X`$. Conversely every $`\pi _1(Z)`$-equivariant vector bundle $`VX`$ descends to a vector bundle on $`Z`$. Thus, in order to solve the Main Problem, it suffices to construct a quadruple $`(X,\tau _X,H,V)`$ such that the following conditions hold:

* $`X`$ is a smooth Calabi-Yau 3-fold and $`\tau _X:XX`$ is a freely acting involution. $`H`$ is a fixed ample line bundle (Kähler structure) on $`X`$.
* $`V`$ is an $`H`$-stable vector bundle of rank five on $`X`$.
* $`V`$ is $`\tau _X`$-invariant.
* $`c_1(V)=0`$.
* $`c_2(X)c_2(V)`$ is effective.
* $`c_3(V)=12`$.

Since we need a mechanism for constructing bundles on $`X`$, we will choose $`X`$ to be elliptically fibered and use the so called spectral construction \[FMW97, FMW99, Don97, BJPS97\] to produce bundles on $`X`$. Note that the spectral construction applies only to elliptic fibrations, i.e. genus one fibrations with a section. This is the reason we build an equivariant $`V`$ on $`X`$ rather than obtaining directly $`𝒱`$ on $`Z`$. In general, there are two ways in which the spectral construction can be modified to work on genus one fibrations such as $`Z`$. One is to work with a spectral cover in the Jacobian fibration of $`Z`$ and an abelian gerbe on it. The other route (which is the one we chose) is to work with equivariant spectral data on the universal cover of $`Z`$. Note that there are higher algebraic structures involved in both approaches: the stackiness of the first approach is paralleled by complicated group actions on the derived category in the second.

More specifically we take $`X`$ to be a Calabi-Yau of Schoen type \[Sch88\], i.e. a fiber product of two rational elliptic surfaces $`B`$ and $`B^{}`$ over $`^1`$, both in the four dimensional family described in \[DOPWa\]. The rank five bundle $`V`$ is built as an extension of two vector bundles $`V_2`$ and $`V_3`$ of ranks two and three respectively. Each of these is manufactured by the spectral construction. Alternatively $`V`$ may be viewed as a bundle corresponding to spectral data with a reducible spectral cover. Our preliminary research of this problem (some of which is recorded in \[DOPWc\]) showed that bundles corresponding to smooth spectral covers are unlikely to satisfy all of the above conditions. In fact, for the Calabi-Yau’s we consider, one can show rigorously (see Remark 2.3) that $`V`$’s coming from smooth spectral covers can never satisfy (I), (C1) and (C3) at the same time.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 describes the construction of $`X`$ and lists the geometric constraints on the spectral data which will ensure the validity of (I). Section 3 deals with the actual construction. We describe $`V_2`$ and $`V_3`$ in terms of their spectral data. The data for each $`V_i`$ involves a spectral curve $`C_i`$ in the surface $`B`$, a line bundle $`𝒩_i`$ on $`C_i`$, another line bundle $`L_i`$ on the surface $`B^{}`$, and some optional parameters. The effect of taking these additional parameters to be non-zero is interpretted in section 3.2 as a series of Hecke transforms. The freedom to perform these Hecke transforms gives us at the end of the day infinitely many families of bundles. In section 4 we explain how the geometric information about the action of the spectral involution, obtained in \[DOPWa, Theorem 7.1\], takes care of condition (I). A delicate point here is that we need two genericity assumptions on $`C_i`$. The first one is that $`C_i`$ is finite over the base of the elliptic fibration on $`B`$. The second assumption is that $`\mathrm{im}[\mathrm{Pic}(B)\mathrm{Pic}(C_i)]`$ is Zariski dense in $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(C_i)`$. In sections 4.2 and 4.3 we check these two assumptions in the special case that is untimately utilized in the construction of $`V`$. In section 5 we translate the remaining conditions into a sequence of rather tight numerical inequalities. In Section 5.4 we show how the latter can be solved. In Section 6 we summarize the construction of $`(X,\tau _X,H,V)`$ and give an estimate on the dimension of the moduli space of such quadruples. Finally in Appendix 6.2 we have gathered some basic facts on Hecke transforms of vector bundles which are used in Section 3.

Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Ed Witten, Dima Orlov, and Richard Thomas for valuable conversations on the subject of this work.

R. Donagi is supported in part by an NSF grant DMS-9802456 as well as a UPenn Research Foundation Grant. B. A. Ovrut is supported in part by a Senior Alexander von Humboldt Award, by the DOE under contract No. DE-AC02-76-ER-03071 and by a University of Pennsylvania Research Foundation Grant. T. Pantev is supported in part by an NSF grant DMS-9800790 and by an Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship. D. Waldram would like to thank Enrico Fermi Institute at The University of Chicago and the Physics Department of The Rockefeller University for hospitality during the completion of this work.

## 2 Elliptic Calabi-Yau threefolds with free involutions

Our goal is to construct special $`SU(5)`$ bundles on smooth Calabi-Yau 3-folds with fundamental group $`/2`$. We construct our Calabi-Yau 3-fold $`Z`$ as the quotient of a smooth Calabi-Yau 3-fold $`X`$ by a freely acting involution $`\tau _X:XX`$. Our $`X`$ will be elliptic and the elliptic fibration will be preserved by $`\tau _X`$, so that $`Z`$ will still have a genus one fibration. This enables us to apply the spectral construction to produce bundles.

The manifold $`X`$ is constructed as the fiber product $`B\times _^1B^{}`$ of two rational elliptic surfaces $`B`$ and $`B^{}`$ which live in the four dimensional family described in \[DOPWa, Section 4\]. For the first surface $`B`$ we use the notation from \[DOPWa\]. In particular we have $`\beta :B^1`$, $`e,\zeta :^1B`$ and the involutions $`\alpha _B,\tau _B:BB`$ and $`\tau _^1:^1^1`$. We use the same symbols with primes for the corresponding objects on $`B^{}`$. Such constructions were first considered in \[Sch88\]. In fact, exactly the four dimensional subfamily of rational elliptic surfaces described in \[DOPWa, Section 4\] happened to appear, in a different context, as an example in \[Sch88, Section 9\].

We choose an isomorphism of $`^1`$ with $`_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{}`$ which identifies $`\tau _^1`$ with $`\tau __{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{}`$ and sends $`0^1`$ to $`\mathrm{}^{}_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{}^1`$ to $`0^{}_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{}`$. With this convention we will make no distinction between $`^1`$ and $`_{}^{1}{}_{}{}^{}`$ from now on.

Define $`X:=B\times _^1B^{}`$. For a generic choice of $`B`$ and $`B^{}`$ this $`X`$ will be smooth. It is an elliptic 3-fold in two ways: via its projections $`\pi :XB^{}`$ and $`\pi ^{}:XB`$. Since most of our analysis will involve the elliptic fibers we will work with the elliptic structure $`\pi :XB^{}`$ in order to avoid cumbersome notation. By construction the discriminant of $`\pi `$ is in the linear system $`\beta ^{{}_{}{}^{}}𝒪_^1(12)=12K_B^{}`$ and so $`X`$ is a Calabi-Yau 3-fold.

For the zero section of $`\pi `$ we take the section $`\sigma :B^{}X`$ corresponding to $`e:^1B`$. Let $`\alpha _X:=\alpha _B\times _^1\tau _B^{}`$ and let $`\tau _X:=\tau _B\times _^1\tau _B^{}`$. Since the fixed points of $`\tau _B`$ and $`\tau _B^{}`$ sit over $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`0`$ respectively, we conclude that $`\tau _X`$ acts freely on $`X`$. In particular the quotient $`Z:=X/\tau _X`$ is non-singular. We claim that $`Z`$ is in fact a Calabi-Yau. This is equivalent to saying that $`\tau _X`$ preserves the holomorphic 3-form on $`X`$. Indeed, $`\tau _X`$ acts on $`H^0(X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^3)`$ as multiplication by a number $`\lambda ^\times `$. Since the fiber $`f_0\times f_0^{}`$ of $`X^1`$ is stable under $`\tau _X`$ it suffices to compute the action of $`\tau _X`$ on $`H^0(f_0\times f_0^{},\mathrm{\Omega }_X^3)`$. But

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{X|f_0\times f_0^{}}^3=(K_{f_0}K_{f_0^{}})T_0^{}^1,$$

and $`\tau _X`$ acts as $`\tau _{B|f_0}`$ on $`K_{f_0}`$, $`\tau _{B^{}|f_0^{}}`$ on $`K_{f_0^{}}`$ and as $`\tau _^1`$ on $`T_0^{}^1`$. Since $`\tau _{B|f_0}`$ is a translation on $`f_0`$, it acts on $`H^0(f_0,K_{f_0})`$ as $`+1`$. Since $`\tau _{B^{}|f_0^{}}`$ and $`\tau _^1`$ each have a fixed point, they act as $`1`$ on $`H^0(f_0^{},K_{f_0^{}})`$ and $`T_0^{}^1`$ respectively. Hence $`\lambda =1(1)(1)=1`$.

The vector bundles on $`Z`$ can be interpreted as $`\tau _X`$-invariant vector bundles on $`X`$. To construct vector bundles on $`X`$ we will exploit the fact that $`X`$ is an elliptically fibered 3-fold and so we can manufacture bundles by using a relative Fourier-Mukai transform.

Concretely, let $`𝒫_XX\times _B^{}X`$ be the Poincare sheaf corresponding to the section $`\sigma `$. That is $`𝒫_X`$ is the rank one torsion-free sheaf given by

$$𝒫_X=𝒪_{X\times _B^{}X}(\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma \times _B^{}XX\times _B^{}\sigma m^{}c_1(B^{}))=p_{13}^{}𝒫_B,$$

where $`m:X\times _B^{}XB^{}`$ and $`p_{13}:X\times _B^{}X=B\times _^1B^{}\times _^1BB\times _^1B`$ are the natural projections. As in \[DOPWa, Section 6\], one argues that $`𝒫_X`$ defines an autoequivalence (see \[BM, Theorem 1.2\]) of $`D^b(X)`$:

If $`VX`$ is a vector bundle of rank $`r`$ which is semistable and of degree zero on each fiber of $`\pi :XB^{}`$, then its Fourier-Mukai transform $`𝑭𝑴_X(V)[1]`$ is a torsion sheaf of pure dimension two on $`X`$. The support of $`𝑭𝑴_X(V)[1]`$ is a surface $`i_\mathrm{\Sigma }:\mathrm{\Sigma }X`$ which is finite of degree $`r`$ over $`B^{}`$. Furthermore $`𝑭𝑴_X(V)`$ is of rank one on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. In fact, if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is smooth, then $`𝑭𝑴_X(V)[1]=i_\mathrm{\Sigma }L`$ is just the extension by zero of some line bundle $`L\mathrm{Pic}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$. Conversely if $`𝒩X`$ is a sheaf of pure dimension two which is flat over $`B^{}`$, then $`𝑭𝑴_X(𝒩)`$ is a vector bundle on $`X`$ of rank equal to the degree of $`\mathrm{supp}(𝒩)`$ over $`B^{}`$ and whose first Chern class is vertical (for the projection $`\pi :XB^{}`$). This correspondence between vector bundles on $`X`$ and sheaves on $`X`$ supported on finite covers of $`B^{}`$ is commonly known as the spectral construction and has been extensively studied in the context of Weierstrass elliptic fibrations \[FMW97, FMW99, Don97, BJPS97\]. The torsion sheaf $`𝒩`$ on $`X`$ is called spectral datum and the surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{supp}𝒩`$ is called a spectral cover.

Since our elliptic Calabi-Yau $`X`$ is not Weierstrass we briefly describe how the spectral construction works (at least for generic spectral data) on $`X`$ and how it interacts with the involution $`\tau _X`$. First we need to understand the action of $`𝑭𝑴_X`$ on line bundles on $`X`$. Note that since $`X=B\times _^1B^{}`$ is a fiber product we have $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)=(\mathrm{Pic}(B)\times \mathrm{Pic}(B^{}))/\mathrm{Pic}(^1)`$. In particular, every line bundle on $`X`$ can be written as $`LL^{}:=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}L\pi ^{}L^{}`$ for some $`LB`$ and $`L^{}B^{}`$.

###### Lemma 2.1

For every line bundle $`=LL^{}`$ on $`X`$, the actions of the Fourier-Mukai transform and of the spectral involution are given by:

* $`𝑭𝑴_X()=𝑭𝑴_X(LL^{})=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}𝑭𝑴_B(L)\pi ^{}L^{}=𝑭𝑴_B(L)L^{}`$.
* $`𝑻_X():=(𝑭𝑴_X^1\tau _X^{}𝑭𝑴_X)()=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}(𝑻_B(L))\pi ^{}(\tau _B^{}^{}L^{})=𝑻_B(L)\tau _B^{}^{}L^{}.`$

Proof. Part (b) is an obvious consequence of part (a). To prove part (a) we will use the identification $`X\times _B^{}X=B\times _^1B^{}\times _^1B`$. In terms of this identification we have:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝑭𝑴_X()& =Rp_{23}(p_{12}^{}𝒫_X)\hfill \\ & =Rp_{23}(p_{12}^{}(LL^{})p_{13}^{}𝒫_B)\hfill \\ & =Rp_{23}(\pi _1^{}L\pi _2^{}L^{}p_{13}^{}𝒫_B)\hfill \\ & =Rp_{23}(p_{13}^{}(p_1^{}L𝒫_B)p_{23}^{}(\pi ^{}L^{}))\hfill \\ & =Rp_{23}(p_{13}^{}(p_1^{}L𝒫_B))\pi ^{}L^{}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Here $`\pi _1`$, $`\pi _2`$ and $`\pi _3`$ are the natural projections of $`B\times _^1B^{}\times _^1B`$ onto $`B`$, $`B^{}`$ and $`B`$ respectively, $`p_i:B\times _^1BB`$ are the projections on the two factors, and in the last identity we have used the projection formula for $`p_{23}`$.

Now using the base change property for the fiber square

we get $`Rp_{23}p_{13}^{}=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}Rp_2`$ and so

$$𝑭𝑴_X()=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}(Rp_2(p_1^{}L𝒫_B))\pi ^{}L^{}=𝑭𝑴_B(L)L^{}.$$

The lemma is proven. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let now $`i_\mathrm{\Sigma }:\mathrm{\Sigma }X`$ be a surface which is finite and of degree $`r`$ over $`B^{}`$. Then for any line bundle $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)`$ the torsion sheaf $`𝒩:=i_\mathrm{\Sigma }i_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ has a resolution by global line bundles. Namely

$$0(\mathrm{\Sigma })𝒩0.$$

In particular $`𝒩`$ is quasi-isomorphic to the two-step complex of line bundles $`[(\mathrm{\Sigma })]`$ on $`X`$ and so the actions of $`𝑭𝑴_X`$ and $`𝑻_X`$ on $`𝒩`$ can be computed via the formulas in Lemma 2.1. Specifically we have:

###### Lemma 2.2

Let $`=LL^{}`$ be a global line bundle on $`X`$ and let $`i_\mathrm{\Sigma }:\mathrm{\Sigma }X`$ be a surface finite over $`B^{}`$. Let $`𝒩=i_\mathrm{\Sigma }i_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ be such that $`V=𝐅𝐌_X(𝒩)`$ is a rank $`r`$ vector bundle on $`X`$ with $`c_1(V)=0`$. Then $`\tau _X^{}VV`$ if and only if the following three conditions

* $`\alpha _X(\mathrm{\Sigma })=\mathrm{\Sigma }`$;
* $`\tau _B^{}^{}L^{}L^{}`$;
* $`𝑻_B^{}LL`$.

are satisfied.

###### Remark 2.3

Notice that the $`\tau _X`$ invariance of $`V`$ amounts to two separate conditions on the spectral data. The first is that the spectral surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ has to be invariant under the involution $`\alpha _X`$. This condition is relatively easy to satisfy. It just means that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is pulled back from the quotient $`X/\alpha _X`$. The second condition requires the $`\tau _B^{}`$ invariance of $`L^{}`$ and the $`𝑻_B`$ invariance of $`L`$.

In fact, the formulas in \[DOPWa, Table 3\] (written in terms of the basis of $`H^2(B,)`$ described in \[DOPWa, Section 4.2\]) show that $`L\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ will be $`𝑻_B`$-invariant if and only if $`L`$ is in the affine subspace

$$\frac{1}{2}e_1+\mathrm{Span}_{}(f,e_9,e_4e_5,e_4e_6,3\mathrm{}2(e_4+e_5+e_6)3e_7,\mathrm{}e_72e_8),$$

which does not intersect $`\mathrm{Pic}(B)\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$. This implies that $`V`$ can not be $`\tau _X`$-invariant if $`𝒩=i_\mathrm{\Sigma }i_\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ for some global $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)`$. For $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ smooth and very ample the Lefschetz hyperplane section theorem asserts that every $`𝒩`$ comes from a global $``$ and hence one is forced to work with singular or non-very ample surfaces $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

## 3 The construction

### 3.1 The basic construction

In this section we describe in detail our method of constructing $`\tau _X`$-invariant vector bundles on $`X`$.

In order to circumvent the difficulty pointed out in Remark 2.3 we build our rank five bundle $`V`$ on $`X`$ not directly by the spectral construction but as an extension

$$0V_2VV_30.$$

Here $`V_i`$, $`i=2,3`$ is a rank $`i`$ bundle on $`X`$ which is $`\tau _X`$-invariant and satisfies some strong numerical conditions which will be discussed in the next section. In addition, we will see that the stability condition on $`V`$ amounts to the extension being non split.

Each $`V_i`$ is produced by an application of the spectral construction on $`X`$ with a reducible spectral cover and a a line bundle on it which is not the restriction of a global line bundle on $`X`$. Define $`V_i`$ from its spectral data as follows:

* Let $`C_i`$ be a curve in the linear system $`|𝒪_B(ie+k_if)|`$ where $`k_i`$ is an integer. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i:=C_i\times _^1B^{}`$. Recall that $`\beta ^{}:B^{}^1`$ has two $`I_2`$ fibers $`f_1^{},f_2^{}`$. Let $`F_j,j=1,2`$ be the corresponding fibers of $`B`$; note that, because of the way we glued the $`^1`$ bases, these are not the reducible fibers $`f_j`$ of $`B`$. Let

$$\{p_{ijk}\}_{k=1}^i:=C_iF_j.$$

Then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_iC_i`$ is an elliptic surface having $`2i`$ fibers of type $`I_2`$: $`(n_j^{}o_j^{})\times \{p_{ijk}\}`$ where $`j=1,2`$ and $`k=1,\mathrm{},i`$.
* Define $`V_i`$ as

$$V_i=𝑭𝑴_X\left((\mathrm{\Sigma }_i,(\pi _{|\mathrm{\Sigma }_i}^{})^{}𝒩_i\pi ^{}L_i𝒪_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_i}\left(\{p_{ijk}\}\times (a_{ijk}n_j^{}+b_{ijk}o_j^{})\right))\right),$$

where $`L_i`$ is a line bundle on $`B^{}`$, $`𝒩_i`$ is a line bundle on the curve $`C_i`$ and the optional parameters $`a_{ijk},b_{ijk}`$ are integers.

Note that there is a redundancy in our choices, because $`n_j^{}+o_j^{}=f_j^{}`$ is a pullback from $`^1`$, and so can be absorbed in $`L_i`$. In particular, we can always arrange for all the coefficients $`a_{ijk},b_{ijk}`$ to be non-negative. Also, without a loss of generality we may assume that for any given $`j`$ we have $`a_{ijk}b_{ijk}=0`$ for all $`i,k`$. With this convention, we have an alternative description of $`V_i`$: Put

$$\stackrel{~}{W}_i:=V_i\pi ^{}L_i^1.$$

It turns out that the bundle $`\stackrel{~}{W}_i`$ can be constructed directly. Consider the vector bundle $`W_i`$ on $`B`$, built by the spectral construction as $`W_i:=𝑭𝑴_B(C_i,𝒩_i)`$. Then $`\stackrel{~}{W_i}`$ is obtained from the vector bundle $`\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}W_i`$ by $`a_{ijk}`$ successive Hecke transforms along the divisors $`\{p_{ijk}\}\times n_j^{}`$ and $`b_{ijk}`$ successive Hecke transforms along the divisors $`\{p_{ijk}\}\times o_j^{}`$. The center of each Hecke is a line bundle on the surface $`F_j\times n_j^{}`$ or $`F_j\times o_j^{}`$. (For the definition and basic properties of Hecke transforms see appendix 6.2).

In fact, $`V`$ itself could be built by applying the spectral construction on $`X`$ to the reducible spectral cover $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2\mathrm{\Sigma }_3`$ and an appropriately chosen sheaf on it. However the construction with extensions is technically easier because it allows us to avoid dealing with sheaves on singular surfaces. This approach is a variation on the method employed by Richard Thomas in \[Tho\].

###### Remark 3.1

Observe that in the definition of $`C_i`$ we could have taken the linear system more generally to be of the form $`|𝒪_B(ie+k_if+\eta _i)|`$ where $`k_i`$ is an integer and $`\eta _i\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ is a class perpendicular to $`e`$ and $`f`$. If we impose the condition $`c_1(W_i)=0`$, then the classes $`\eta _i`$ are forced to be zero by the Riemann-Roch formula. However the introduction of the $`L_i`$’s gives us the extra freedom of working with $`W_i`$’s that have arbitrary vertical $`c_1`$. We will not exploit this extra freedom but we expect that many examples exist which are similar to ours but have $`\eta _i0`$.

Since the Hecke interpretation of $`\stackrel{~}{W}_i`$ will be important in determining the invariance properties of $`V`$ and in implementing the numerical constraints, we proceed to spell it out explicitly.

### 3.2 Reinterpretation via Hecke transforms

Recall from section 2 that $`X=B\times _^1B^{}`$ fits into a commutative diagram of projections

(3.1)
Let $`CB`$ be a smooth connected curve in the linear system $`|𝒪_B(re+kf)|`$. Let $`𝒩\mathrm{Pic}^d(C)`$ and let $`W:=𝑭𝑴_B((C,𝒩))`$ be the corresponding rank $`r`$ vector bundle on $`B`$.

Consider $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\pi ^{}_{}{}^{}1(C)=C\times _^1B^{}`$ and the line bundle $`=(\pi _{|\mathrm{\Sigma }}^{})^{}𝒩=𝒩𝒪_B^{}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

Let $`f_j^{}=n_j^{}o_j^{}`$, $`F_j=\beta ^1(\beta ^{}(f_j^{}))`$, $`j=1,2`$ be as above. We assume that $`C`$ is general enough so that the intersections $`CF_j`$, $`j=1,2`$ are transversal.

Let $`pCF_j`$ and let $`a`$ be a non-negative integer. Define

$$W[a,p]:=𝑭𝑴_X((\mathrm{\Sigma },(a(\{p\}\times n_j^{})))).$$

Consider the divisor $`D=F_j\times n_j^{}X`$ and the line bundles

$$𝒪_{F_j}(pe)𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2a)\mathrm{Pic}(D),$$

where $`a`$ and by a abuse of notation $`e`$ denotes the point of intersection of the curves $`e,F_j`$ in $`B`$. With this notation we have

###### Lemma 3.2

Fix $`a0`$.

* There is a canonical surjective map $`W[a,p]_{|D}𝒪_{F_j}(pe)𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2a)`$ which fits in a short exact sequence of vector bundles on $`D`$

($`\psi _{a+1}`$)
$$0K_aW[a,p]_{|D}𝒪_{F_j}(pe)𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2a)0.$$
* For $`a=0`$ we have $`W[0,p]=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}W`$ and for $`a1`$

$$W[a,p]=𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\psi _a)}^{}𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\psi _{a1})}^{}\mathrm{}𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\psi _1)}^{}(\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}W).$$

Proof. We will prove the lemma by induction in $`a`$. By definition we have $`W[0,p]=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}W`$ which takes care of the base of the induction. Assume that $`W[i,p]=𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\psi _i)}^{}(W[i1,p])`$ for all $`0<i<a`$. Consider the short exact sequence of sheaves on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$:

(3.2)
$$0(a(\{p\}\times n_j^{}))((a1)(\{p\}\times n_j^{}))((a1)(\{p\}\times n_j^{}))_{|\{p\}\times n_j^{}}0.$$

We have $`_{|\{p\}\times n_j^{}}=((\pi _{|\mathrm{\Sigma }}^{})^{}𝒩)_{|\{p\}\times n_j^{}}=𝒪_{\{p\}\times n_j^{}}`$. Also $`\{p\}\times n_j^{}`$ is a component of an $`I_2`$ fiber of the elliptic surface $`\pi _{|\mathrm{\Sigma }}^{}:\mathrm{\Sigma }C`$ and so $`𝒪_{\{p\}\times n_j^{}}(\{p\}\times n_j^{})=𝒪_{\{p\}\times n_j^{}}(2)`$. Let $`i_\mathrm{\Sigma }:\mathrm{\Sigma }X`$ and $`\iota :n_j^{}=\{p\}\times n_j^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }X`$ denote the natural inclusions. Then if we extend each of the sheaves in the sequence (3.2) by zero we obtain a short exact sequence of sheaves on $`X`$:

(3.3)
$$0i_\mathrm{\Sigma }(a(\{p\}\times n_j^{}))i_\mathrm{\Sigma }((a1)(\{p\}\times n_j^{}))\iota _{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1))0.$$

Applying $`𝑭𝑴_X`$ to (3.3) we get

(3.4)
$$0W[a,p]W[a1,p]𝑭𝑴_X(\iota _{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1)))0.$$

By the definition of $`𝑭𝑴_X`$ we have

$$𝑭𝑴_X(\iota _{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1)))=Rp_2^{}(p_1^{}(\iota _{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1))\stackrel{L}{}𝒫_X),$$

where $`p_1,p_2:X\times _B^{}XX`$ are the natural projections.

If we use the identification $`X\times _B^{}XB\times _^1B\times _^1B^{}`$, then the projection $`p_i:X\times _B^{}XX`$ gets identified with the projection $`p_{i3}:B\times _^1B\times _^1B^{}B\times _^1B^{}`$ and $`𝒫_X=p_{12}^{}𝒫_B`$. In particular in terms of the identification $`X\times _B^{}XB\times _^1B\times _^1B^{}`$ we see that $`p_1^{}(\iota _{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1)))`$ is supported on the surface $`\{p\}\times F_j\times n_j^{}B\times _^1B\times _^1B^{}`$ is precisely

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{pr}_{n_j^{}}^{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1))𝒫_{X|\{p\}\times F_j\times n_j^{}}& =\mathrm{pr}_{n_j^{}}^{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1))\mathrm{pr}_{F_j}^{}𝒫_{B|\{p\}\times F_j}\hfill \\ & =\mathrm{pr}_{n_j^{}}^{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1))\mathrm{pr}_{F_j}^{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(pe).\hfill \end{array}$$

Also for the restricted map $`p_{2|\{p\}\times F_j\times n_j^{}}:\{p\}\times F_j\times n_j^{}X`$ we get

$$p_{2|\{p\}\times F_j\times n_j^{}}=p_{23|\{p\}\times F_j\times n_j^{}}=i_D,$$

and hence

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝑭𝑴_X(\iota _{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1)))& =R_{p_2}^{}(p_1^{}(\iota _{}𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1))\stackrel{L}{}𝒫_X)\hfill \\ & =i_D(𝒪_{F_j}(pe)𝒪_{n_j^{}}(2(a1))).\hfill \end{array}$$

which combined with (3.4) concludes the proof of the lemma. $`\mathrm{}`$

If now $`b0`$ is another integer we may consider also the vector bundle

$$W\{b,p\}=𝑭𝑴_X((\mathrm{\Sigma },(b(\{p\}\times o_j^{})))).$$

In exactly the same way we see that $`W\{0\}=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}W`$, that for every $`b1`$ there is a canonical exact sequence

($`\varphi _{b+1}`$)
$$0M_bW\{b,p\}_{|\{F_j\}\times o_j^{}}𝒪_{F_j}(pe)𝒪_{o_j^{}}(2b)0,$$

and that

$$W\{b,p\}=𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\varphi _a)}^{}𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\varphi _{a1})}^{}\mathrm{}𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\varphi _1)}^{}(\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}W).$$

For future reference we record

###### Corollary 3.3

The Chern classes of $`W[a,p]`$ and $`W\{b,p\}`$ are given by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ch(W[a,p])& =\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}ch(W)a\pi ^{}n_j^{}a^2(f\times \mathrm{pt});\hfill \\ \hfill ch(W\{b,p\})& =\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}ch(W)b\pi ^{}o_j^{}b^2(f\times \mathrm{pt})\hfill \end{array}$$

Proof. Clearly it suffices to prove the corollary for $`W[a,p]`$. By Lemma 3.2 we have short exact sequences

$$0W[n,p]W[n1,p]i_D\psi _n0$$

for all $`n1`$. Here we have slightly abused the notation by writing $`\psi _a`$ for the middle term of the short exact sequence $`(\psi _a)`$. Hence $`ch(W[n,p])=ch(W[n1,p])ch(i_D\psi _n)`$ and so

$$ch(W[a,p])=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}ch(W)\underset{n=1}{\overset{a}{}}ch(i_D\psi _n).$$

Using Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch we calculate

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ch(i_D\psi _n)& =i_D(ch(\psi _n)td(D))td(X)^1\hfill \\ & =i_D\left(\left(1+\psi _n+\frac{\psi _n^2}{2}\right)(1+F_j\times \mathrm{pt})\right)(1(f\times \mathrm{pt}+\mathrm{pt}\times f^{}))\hfill \\ & =i_D((1+2(n1)F_j\times \mathrm{pt})(1+F_j\times \mathrm{pt}))(1(f\times \mathrm{pt}+\mathrm{pt}\times f^{}))\hfill \\ & =i_D(1+(2n1)F_j\times \mathrm{pt})(1(f\times \mathrm{pt}+\mathrm{pt}\times f^{}))\hfill \\ & =D+(2n1)(f\times \mathrm{pt})=\pi ^{}n_j^{}+(2n1)(f\times \mathrm{pt}).\hfill \end{array}$$

Consequently

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ch(W[a,p])& =\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}ch(W)\underset{n=1}{\overset{a}{}}(\pi ^{}n_j^{}+(2n1)(f\times \mathrm{pt})\hfill \\ & =\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}ch(W)a\pi ^{}n_j^{}a^2(f\times \mathrm{pt}).\hfill \end{array}$$

The corollary is proven. $`\mathrm{}`$

Finally, we are ready to give the Hecke interpretation of $`\stackrel{~}{W}_i=V_i\pi ^{}L_i^1`$. Recall that

$$\stackrel{~}{W}_i=𝑭𝑴_X\left((\mathrm{\Sigma }_i,_i\left(\{p_{ijk}\}\times (a_{ijk}n_j^{}+b_{ijk}o_j^{})\right))\right)$$

where $`a_{ijk},b_{ijk}`$ are non-negative integers satisfying $`a_{ijk}b_{ijk}=0`$. Since Hecke transforms whose centers have disjoint supports obviously commute, we see from the above discussion that

(3.5)
$$\stackrel{~}{W}_i=W[a_{i11},p_{i11}]\{b_{i11},p_{i11}\}[a_{i12},p_{i12}]\{b_{i12},p_{i12}\}\mathrm{}[a_{i1i},p_{i1i}]\{b_{i1i},p_{i1i}\}.$$

## 4 Invariant spectral data

In this section we examine the conditions for $`V`$ to be $`\tau _X`$-invariant. It is easy to reduce this, first to invariance of the $`V_i`$, then to invariance of the $`W_i`$. Indeed, assume that the bundles $`V_i`$ are $`\tau _X`$-invariant, and choose liftings of the $`\tau _X`$ action to the $`V_i`$. The space $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(V_3,V_2)`$ parameterizing all extensions is a direct sum of its invariant and anti-invariant subspaces. So if $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(V_3,V_2)0`$ we also have an extension which is either invariant or anti-invariant. Finally, changing the lifted action of $`\tau _X`$ on one of the $`V_i`$ interchanges invariants with anti-invariants, so we are done.

Since $`V_i=\stackrel{~}{W}_i\pi ^{}L_i`$, we have

$$\tau _X^{}(V_i)=\tau _X^{}(\stackrel{~}{W}_i)\pi ^{}\tau _B^{}^{}L_i.$$

So it suffices to have a $`\stackrel{~}{W}_i`$ which is $`\tau _X`$-invariant and an $`L_i`$ which is $`\tau _B^{}`$-invariant. From \[DOPWa, Table 1\] we know that there is a $`6`$-dimensional lattice of $`\tau _B^{}`$-invariant classes on $`B^{}`$, so we have lots of possibilities for the $`L_i`$. Now $`\stackrel{~}{W}_i`$ is a Hecke transform of $`\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}(W_i)`$, so we want $`W_i`$ to be $`\tau _B`$-invariant and the center of the Hecke transform to be $`\tau _X`$-invariant. Above we took the support of this Hecke to be an arbitrary collection of components of the surfaces $`F_j\times f_j^{}`$ for $`j=1,2`$. It can be seen from \[DOPWa, Table 1\] together with the expression \[DOPWa, Formula (4.2)\] for the components of the $`I_2`$-fibers of $`B`$ in terms of our basis, that the action of $`\tau _B^{}`$ interchanges $`o_1`$ with $`n_2`$ and $`o_2`$ with $`n_1`$. Therefore the condition for $`\tau _X`$-invariance of the center of the Hecke transform becomes $`a_{i1k}=b_{i2k}`$ and $`a_{i2k}=b_{i1k}`$. Because of the redundancy in our choices we are free to take $`a_{i2k}=b_{i1k}=0`$ and $`a_{i1k}=b_{i2k}0`$.

Finally we have to find the conditions that will ensure the $`\tau _B`$-invariance of $`W_i`$.

### 4.1 The $`\tau _B`$-invariance of $`W_i`$

Throughout this subsection we work with a spectral curve $`C_i`$ in the linear system $`|ie+k_if|`$, $`i=2`$ or $`3`$, which is finite over $`^1`$, and a line bundle $`𝒩_i\mathrm{Pic}(C_i)`$. The $`\tau _B`$-invariance of $`W_i=𝑭𝑴_B((C_i,𝒩_i))`$ is equivalent to the $`T_B`$ invariance of $`i_{C_i}𝒩_i`$.

In \[DOPWa, Proposition 7.7\] we saw that for any curve $`CB`$ which is finite over $`^1`$ and for any line bundle $`𝒩`$ on $`B`$ the image $`𝑻_B(i_C𝒩)`$ is again a sheaf of the form $`i_{\alpha _B(C)}(\mathrm{?})`$ for some line bundle $`\mathrm{?}\mathrm{Pic}(\alpha _B(C))`$. Therefore $`𝑻_B`$ induces a well defined map $`𝑻_C:\mathrm{Pic}(C)\mathrm{Pic}(\alpha _B(C))`$. Due to this, the $`\tau _B`$-invariance of $`𝑭𝑴_B((C,𝒩))`$ is equivalent to the following two conditions:

(4.1) $`C`$ $`=\alpha _B(C)`$
(4.2) $`𝒩`$ $`=𝑻_C(𝒩).`$
###### Lemma 4.1

The linear system $`|re+kf|`$ contains smooth $`\alpha _B`$-invariant curves if $`r=3`$, $`k3`$ or if $`r=2`$ and $`k2`$ is even.

Proof. First of all, from the explicit equations of a spectral curve \[FMW97\] and Bertini’s theorem, it is easy to see that the general curve $`C`$ in the linear system $`|re+kf|`$ will be smooth as long as $`kr>1`$. The same kind of analysis allows one to understand the $`\alpha _B`$-invariant members of these linear systems as well. Indeed, recall (see e.g. \[FMW99\]) that for every $`a0`$ we have an isomorphism $`\beta _{}𝒪_B(ae)=𝒪_^1𝒪_^1(2)\mathrm{}𝒪_^1(a)`$. In particular, by the projection formula we get isomorphisms

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill H^0(B,𝒪_B(e))& =H^0(^1,𝒪_^1)\hfill \\ \hfill H^0(B,𝒪_B(2e+2f))& =H^0(^1,𝒪_^1(2))H^0(^1,𝒪_^1)\hfill \\ \hfill H^0(B,𝒪_B(3e+3f))& =H^0(^1,𝒪_^1(3))H^0(^1,𝒪_^1(1))H^0(^1,𝒪_^1).\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`XH^0(B,𝒪_B(2e+2f))`$, $`YH^0(B,𝒪_B(3e+3f))`$ and $`ZH^0(B,𝒪_B(e)`$ be the preferred sections corresponding to the generator of the piece $`H^0(^1,𝒪_^1)`$ under the above decompositions. Note that in terms of the sections $`xH^0(P,𝒪_P(1)p^{}𝒪_^1(2)`$, $`yH^0(P,𝒪_P(1)p^{}𝒪_^1(3)`$ and $`zH^0(P,𝒪_P(1)`$, which were used in \[DOPWa, Section 3.2\] to define the Weierstrass model of $`B`$, we have $`x_{|W_\beta }=XZ`$, $`y_{|W_\beta }=Y`$, $`z_{|W_\beta }=Z^3`$.

With this notation the isomorphism

$$H^0(𝒪_^1(k))H^0(𝒪_^1(k2)\mathrm{}H^0(𝒪_^1(kr)H^0(B,𝒪_B(re+kf))$$

is given explicitly by the formula

$$(a_k,a_{k2},\mathrm{},a_{kr})(\beta ^{}a_k)Z^r+(\beta ^{}a_{k2})XZ^{r2}+(\beta ^{}a_{k3})YZ^{r3}+\mathrm{}.$$

In particular the curves $`C_2`$ and $`C_3`$ can be identified with the zero loci of

(4.3)
$$(\beta ^{}a_{k_2})Z^2+(\beta ^{}a_{k_22})X\text{and}(\beta ^{}a_{k_3})Z^3+(\beta ^{}a_{k_32})XZ+(\beta ^{}a_{k_33})Y,$$

respectively.

Now recall, that in \[DOPWa, Section 3.2\] we identified $`\alpha _B`$ with the involution induced from $`\tau _{P|W_\beta }`$ and that $`\tau _P`$ acts trivially on the sections $`x`$, $`y`$, $`z`$. In view of the comparison formulas $`x_{|W_\beta }=XZ`$, $`y_{|W_\beta }=Y`$, $`z_{|W_\beta }=Z^3`$, this implies that $`\alpha _B^{}(X)=X`$, $`\alpha _B^{}(Y)=Y`$ and $`\alpha _B^{}(Z)=Z`$. Here the lifting of the action of $`\alpha _B`$ to an action on line bundles of the form $`𝒪_B(re+kf)`$ is chosen in the way described in \[DOPWa, Section 3.2\]. In particular $`\alpha _B^{}(\beta ^{}s)=\beta ^{}(\tau _^1^{}s)`$ for any section $`s𝒪_^1(k)`$.

Since $`\alpha _B^{}`$ acts linearly on the projective space $`|re+kf|`$ it follows that $`\alpha _B`$ will preserve a divisor $`C|re+kf|`$ if and only if

$$C(H^0(B,𝒪_B(re+kf))^+)(H^0(B,𝒪_B(re+kf))^{})|re+kf|,$$

where $`H^0(B,𝒪_B(re+kf))^\pm `$ denote the $`\pm 1`$ eigenspaces of $`\alpha _B^{}`$ acting on $`H^0(B,𝒪_B(re+kf))`$. Therefore we see that for each $`i`$ there are two families of $`\alpha _B`$-invariant $`C_i`$’s, each parameterized by a projective space. In particular we will have $`\alpha _B(C_i)=C_i`$ if and only if all the coefficients in the polynomial expressions (4.3) are simultaneously $`\tau _^1`$-invariant or simulatneously $`\tau _^1`$-anti-invariant. Now the Bertini theorem immediately implies that we can find a smooth $`C_3`$, which is preserved by $`\alpha _B`$ as long as $`k_33`$ and we can find a smooth $`C_2`$, which is preserved by $`\alpha _B`$ as long as $`k_22`$ and $`k_2`$ is even. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 4.2

Unfortunately, when $`k_2`$ is odd the linear systems $`|2e+k_2f|^\pm `$ will each have a fixed component and so all the $`\alpha _B`$-invariant curves $`C_2`$ will be reducible. In order to see this consider the homogeneous coordinates $`(t_0:t_1)`$ on $`^1`$ which were used in \[DOPWa, Section 3.2\] to define the standard action of $`\tau _^1`$. In other words $`(t_0:t_1)`$ are such that $`\tau _^1^{}(t_0)=t_0`$, $`\tau _^1^{}t_1=t_1`$ and $`0=(1:0)`$ and $`\mathrm{}=(0:1)`$. Now it is clear that if $`a`$ is a $`\tau _^1`$-invariant homogeneous polynomial in $`t_0`$ and $`t_1`$ of odd degree, then $`a`$ is divisible by $`t_0`$. Similarly if $`a`$ is a $`\tau _^1`$-anti-invariant polynomial of odd degree, then $`a`$ is divisible by $`t_1`$. In particular, since $`k_2`$ and $`k_22`$ have the same parity we see that for $`k_2`$ odd, the fiber $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the fixed component of the linear system $`|2e+k_2f|^+`$ and the fiber $`f_0`$ is the fixed component of the linear system $`|2e+k_2f|^{}`$.

###### Lemma 4.3

Let $`C`$ be an $`\alpha _B`$-invariant curve in $`|re+kf|`$ which is finite over $`^1`$, and assume that $`i_C^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ is dense in $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(C)`$. Then for every $`d`$ there exist line bundles $`𝒩\mathrm{Pic}^d(C)`$, s.t. $`𝐓_C(𝒩)=𝒩`$.

Proof. The morphism $`𝑻_C:\mathrm{Pic}(C)\mathrm{Pic}(C)`$ is given explicitly by the formula:

(4.4)
$$𝑻_C(𝒩)=\alpha _C^{}(𝒩)𝒪_C(e_9e_1+f),$$

where $`\alpha _C=\alpha _{B|C}`$.

Indeed, by part (b) of \[DOPWa, Proposition 7.7\] this formula holds for all line bundles $`𝒩\mathrm{Pic}(i_C^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B))`$. By the density assumption it holds for all $`𝒩\mathrm{Pic}^0(C)`$. But applying $`𝑻_C`$ to the short exact sequence

$$0𝒩(p)𝒩𝒪_p0$$

we find $`𝑻_C(𝒩(p))=𝑻_C(𝒩)(\alpha _C(p))`$, so the formula extends to all components of $`\mathrm{Pic}(C)`$.

Thus a point $`x\mathrm{Pic}^0(C)`$ will be fixed under $`𝑻_C`$ if and only if

(4.5)
$$x\alpha _C^{}(x)=𝒪_C(e_9e_1+f).$$

This equation is consistent exactly when

$$𝒪_C(e_9e_1+f)\mathrm{im}[\text{}].$$

Since $`\alpha _C`$ has fixed points on $`C`$, it follows \[Mum74\] that $`\mathrm{im}(\alpha _C^{}\mathrm{id})=\mathrm{ker}(\alpha _C^{}+\mathrm{id})`$. But from \[DOPWa, Table 1 and Formula (4.2)\] we see that

$$(\alpha _B^{}+\mathrm{id})(e_9e_1+f)=2e_9+2f+e_7\mathrm{}=o_1+o_2.$$

Since $`o_1`$ and $`o_2`$ do not intersect $`C`$, this implies that $`𝒪_C(e_9e_1+f)`$ is $`\alpha _C^{}`$-anti-invariant. Hence there is a translate of of $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(C/\alpha _C)`$ in $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(C)`$ consisting of solutions of (4.5).

Shifting by an arbitrary multiple of an $`\alpha _{C_i}`$-fixed point, we see that there are $`𝑻_{C_i}`$-fixed points in $`\mathrm{Pic}^d(C_i)`$ for every $`d`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

In view of this lemma it only remains to check the density of $`i_{C_i}^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ in $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(C_i)`$. We do this only in the cases $`(i=2,k_2=3)`$ and $`(i=3,k_3=6)`$, which are the cases needed in section 5. Unfortunately the statement of Lemma 4.3 does not directly apply to the first of these cases (see Remark 4.2), so we will treat it separately next.

### 4.2 Invariance for $`k_2=3`$

By Remark 4.2, the general $`\alpha _B`$-invariant curve $`C_2`$ in the linear system $`|2e+3f|`$ is of the form $`C_2=\overline{C}_2+F`$, where $`\overline{C}_2`$ is a smooth curve in the linear system $`|2e+2f|^+`$ and $`F`$ denotes one of the elliptic curves $`f_0`$, $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$. Assume that $`𝒩_2C_2`$ is a line bundle and let $`\overline{𝒩}_2=𝒩_2𝒪_{\overline{C}_2}`$ be its restriction to $`\overline{C}_2`$. We know that $`\overline{W}_2:=𝑭𝑴_B(i_{\overline{C}_2}\overline{𝒩}_2)`$ is a vector bundle. We want $`W_2:=𝑭𝑴_B(i_{C_2}𝒩_2)`$ to be a vector bundle too.

###### Lemma 4.4

$`W_2`$ is a vector bundle if and only if $`\mathrm{deg}(𝒩_{2|F})=1`$.

Proof. We have a short exact sequence of torsion sheaves on $`B`$

$$0i_F(𝒩_{2|F}(D))i_{C_2}𝒩_2i_{\overline{C}_2}\overline{𝒩}_20,$$

where $`DF`$ is the effective divisor $`D=\overline{C}_2F`$. Let $`G:=𝒩_{2|F}(D)`$. Since $`G`$ is a line bundle on the fiber $`F`$ we have $`𝑭𝑴_B(i_FG)=i_F(𝑭𝑴_F(G))`$, where $`𝑭𝑴_F:D^b(F)D^b(F)`$ is the Fourier-Mukai transform with respect to the Poincare bundle $`𝒫_{B|F\times F}`$. If we apply $`𝑭𝑴_B`$ to the above exact sequence, we will get the long exact sequence of cohomology sheaves

Since we want the line bundle $`𝒩_2C_2`$ to be chosen so that $`^1𝑭𝑴_B(i_{C_2}𝒩_2)=0`$ and $`W_2=^0𝑭𝑴_B(i_{C_2}𝒩_2)`$ is a rank two vector bundle on $`B`$, we must have $`^0(i_F𝑭𝑴_F(G))=0`$ and $`^1(i_F𝑭𝑴_F(G))`$ must be a line bundle on $`F`$ such that there exists a surjection $`\overline{W}_{2|f}^1(i_F𝑭𝑴_F(G))`$. This can only happen if $`G`$ has degree $`1`$ on $`F`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We note that in the situation of the lemma $`W_2`$ fits in a short exact sequence

$$0W_2\overline{W}_2i_F(G^{})0,$$

where $`G`$ is defined in the proof of the lemma. Indeed, the proof of Lemma 4.4gave us a short exact sequence

$$0W_2\overline{W}_2i_F(𝑭𝑴_F(G)[1])0.$$

But every line bundle of degree $`1`$ on an elliptic curve $`F`$ is of the form $`𝒪_F(p)`$ for some point $`pF`$. Applying $`𝑭𝑴_F`$ to the short exact sequence

$$0𝒪_F(p)𝒪_F𝒪_p0$$

we see that $`𝑭𝑴_F(G)=G^{}[1]`$ for any line bundle of degree $`1`$ on $`F`$.

Given $`(\overline{C}_2,\overline{𝒩}_2)`$ Lemma 4.4 produces a 2-parameter family of vector bundles $`W_2`$. Indeed, let $`GF`$ be any line bundle of degree $`1`$. Consider the semi-stable bundle $`\overline{W}_{2|F}`$ on $`F`$. Since generically $`\overline{C}_2`$ intersects $`F`$ at two distinct points we will have $`\overline{W}_{2|F}=AA^{}`$, where $`A`$ is a non-trivial line bundle of degree zero on $`F`$. Therefore $`h^0(F,A^{}G^{})=h^0(F,AG^{})=1`$ and so we have unique (up to scale) maps $`AG^{}`$ and $`A^{}G^{}`$. Also since the degree one line bundles $`A^{}G^{}`$ and $`AG^{}`$ are not isomorphic, it follows that their unique (up to a scale) sections vanish at different points on $`F`$. Hence we get a one parameter family of surjective maps of vector bundles $`AA^{}G^{}`$. The corresponding Hecke transform of $`\overline{W}_2`$:

$$W_2=\mathrm{ker}[\overline{W}_2i_F(AA^{})i_F(G^{})]$$

is a rank two vector bundle on $`B`$ which is the Fourier-Mukai image of a line bundle $`𝒩_2`$ on $`C_2=\overline{C}_2F`$. In particular $`W_2`$ is a deformation of a rank two vector bundle $`W`$ corresponding to a spectral datum $`(C,𝒩)`$ where $`C`$ is a smooth (but non-invariant) curve in the linear system $`|2e+3f|`$ and $`𝒩`$ is a line bundle on $`C`$. Even though this $`W`$ can not be $`\tau _B`$ invariant, this shows that as far as Chern classes are concerned the bundle $`W_2`$ behaves as a bundle corresponding to a smooth spectral cover.

We are now ready to analyze the $`\tau _B`$-invariance properties of $`W_2`$. First of all, since $`\overline{C}_2`$ is smooth Lemma 4.3 applies modulo the following density statement:

###### Lemma 4.5

$`i_{\overline{C}_2}^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ is Zariski dense in $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(\overline{C}_2)`$.

Proof. The curves $`\overline{C}_2`$ have genus $`2`$ and in the linear system $`|2e+2f|^+`$ we have a degenerate curve consisting of the zero section $`e`$ taken with multiplicity two and of two fibers of $`\beta `$ which are exchanged by $`\alpha _B`$. In particular the Jacobian of this degenerate curve is just the product of the two fibers. But the Mordell-Weil group of $`B`$ has rank $`6`$ and in particular we get elements of infinite order in the general fiber of $`\beta `$ which are restrictions of global line bundles. By continuity this implies that for a general $`\overline{C}_2|2e+2f|^+`$ we can find both $`\alpha _B`$-invariant and $`\alpha _B`$-anti-invariant line bundles on $`B`$ that restrict to elements of infinite order in $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(\overline{C}_2)`$. Finally $`\alpha _B`$ has two fixed points on a general $`\overline{C}_2`$ and so $`g(\overline{C}_2/\alpha _{\overline{C}_2})=1`$ and $`dim\mathrm{Prym}(\overline{C}_2,\alpha _{\overline{C}_2})=1`$. Hence $`i_{\overline{C}_2}^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ is dense in $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(\overline{C}_2)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We now reach the main point of this subsection:

###### Proposition 4.6

For every integer $`d`$ there exists a $`\tau _B`$-invariant vector bundle $`W_2`$ whose spectral data $`(C_2,𝒩_2\mathrm{Pic}(C_2))`$ deforms flatly to a smooth curve in $`B`$ and a line bundle of degree $`d`$ on it.

Proof. We have a two parameter family of $`\alpha _B`$-invariant curves $`\overline{C}_2`$. By Lemmas 4.3 and 4.5, there is a one parameter family of $`𝑻_{\overline{C}_2}`$-invariant line bundles $`\overline{𝒩}_2`$ on each. Althogether we get a three parameter family of $`\tau _B`$-invariant bundles $`\overline{W}_2`$. We have seen above that each of these gives rise to a two parameter family of bundles $`W_2`$. We will check now that in each such two parameter family there is a finite number (in fact, four) of $`\tau _B`$ invariant $`W_2`$.

Indeed for every such $`\overline{W}_2`$ we must look for a $`\tau _B`$-invariant Hecke transform $`W_2`$. For this we need to ensure that $`G^{}`$ is preserved by $`\tau _{B|F}`$ and that the map $`\overline{W}_2i_F(G^{})`$ is $`\tau _B`$-equivariant. We have two possibilities: $`F=f_0`$ or $`F=f_{\mathrm{}}`$. Recall that $`\tau _{B|f_0}=t_{\zeta (0)}`$ and $`\tau _{B|f_{\mathrm{}}}=t_{\zeta (\mathrm{})}(1)_f_{\mathrm{}}`$ and that $`\zeta (0)f_0`$ and $`\zeta (\mathrm{})f_{\mathrm{}}`$ are non-trivial points of order two. In particular $`\tau _{B|f_0}`$ does not fix any line bundle of degree one on $`f_0`$ and $`\tau _{B|f_{\mathrm{}}}`$ fixes precisely four such bundles, namely the four square roots of the degree two line bundle $`𝒪_f_{\mathrm{}}(e(\mathrm{})+\zeta (\mathrm{}))`$.

Choose now $`F=f_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`G^{}`$ to be one of the four square roots of $`𝒪_f_{\mathrm{}}(e(\mathrm{})+\zeta (\mathrm{}))`$. Choose a non-zero map $`s:AG^{}`$. Then $`\tau _{B|f_{\mathrm{}}}^{}s:A^{}G^{}`$ is also a non-zero map and so, as before, $`s\tau _{B|f_{\mathrm{}}}^{}s:AA^{}G^{}`$ is surjective. Using this map as the center of a Hecke transform, we get a $`\tau _B`$-invariant $`W_2`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 4.3 Invariance for $`k_3=6`$

Let $`W_3=𝑭𝑴_B(i_{C_3}𝒩_3)`$ for some curve in $`|3e+6f|`$. As we saw above, in this case, we can chose $`C_3`$ to be smooth and preserved by $`\alpha _B`$ and so in order to find $`\tau _B`$-invariant $`W_3`$’s we only need to show that for a general $`C_3|3e+6f|^\pm `$ the image $`i_{C_3}^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ will be Zariski dense in $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(C_3)`$.

The Zariski closure of the image $`i_{C_3}^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ varies lower-semi-continuously with $`C_3`$, so it suffices to exhibit one good $`C_3`$. Our $`C_3`$ will be reducible, consiting of a generic $`\alpha _B`$-invariant curve $`\overline{C}_2`$ in the linear system $`|2e+2f|`$, plus the zero section $`e`$, plus two generic fibers $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$, plus their images $`\varphi _3:=\alpha _B(\varphi _1)`$ and $`\varphi _4:=\alpha _B(\varphi _2)`$.

The arithmetic genus of $`C_3`$ is $`13`$. The $`13`$-dimensional $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(C_3)`$ is a $`(^\times )^7`$ extension of the six dimensional abelian variety $`𝒜:=\mathrm{Pic}^0(\overline{C}_2)\times _{i=1}^4\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _i)`$. So our density statement follows from the from the following two lemmas.

###### Lemma 4.7

For a generic choice of $`\overline{C}_2`$, $`\varphi _1`$, $`\varphi _2`$, the image of $`i_{C_3}\mathrm{Pic}^0(B)`$ in $`𝒜`$ is Zariski dense.

###### Lemma 4.8

For a generic choice of $`\overline{C}_2`$, $`\varphi _1`$, $`\varphi _2`$, no proper subgroup of $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(C_3)`$ surjects onto $`𝒜`$.

Proof of Lemma 4.7. Under the genericity assumption in the hypothesis of the lemma, it is clear that there are no isogenies among $`\varphi _1`$, $`\varphi _2`$, and the two elliptic curves $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(\overline{C}_2/\alpha _{\overline{C}_2})`$ and $`\mathrm{Prym}(\overline{C}_2,\alpha _{\overline{C}_2})`$. So it suffices to prove density separately in each of the two dimensional abelian varieties $`\varphi _1\times \varphi _3`$, $`\varphi _2\times \varphi _4`$ and $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(\overline{C}_2)`$. Density in $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(\overline{C}_2)`$ was already proved in Lemma 4.5 and density in say $`\varphi _1\times \varphi _3`$ was established during the proof of that result. The lemma is proven. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Lemma 4.8. Let $``$ be a $`^\times `$-extension of an abelian variety $`𝒜`$. Such a $``$ determines a line bundle $`[]\mathrm{Pic}^0(𝒜)`$. A proper subgroup of $``$ surjecting onto $`𝒜`$ will exist if and only if $`[]`$ is torsion.

Similarly, our $`(^\times )^7`$-extension $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(C_3)`$ will contain a proper subgroup surjecting onto $`𝒜`$ if and only there is a non-zero character $`\chi :(^\times )^7^\times `$ such that the associated line bundle $`L_\chi :=\mathrm{Pic}^0(C_3)\times _\chi `$ over $`𝒜`$ is torsion.

Therefore it suffices to find seven characters $`\chi _1,\mathrm{}\chi _7`$ of $`(^\times )^7`$ such that the associated line bundles are linearly independent over $``$. For this we will need an intrinsic description of the character lattice $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of $`(^\times )^7`$ in terms of the geometry of the curve $`C_3`$. The singular set of $`C_3`$ is $`S=\{s_{ij}|i=1,2,3,4\text{ and }j=1,2,3\}`$, where $`\varphi _i\overline{C}_2=\{s_{ij}\}_{j=1}^2`$, and $`s_{i3}=\varphi _ie`$. Here the singular points are labelled so that $`\alpha _B(s_{1j})=s_{3j}`$ and $`\alpha _B(s_{2j})=s_{4j}`$. Now the lattice $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is explicitly described as:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{ker}[^S\pi _0(C_3S)].$$

Here the map $`^S\pi _0(C_3S)`$ sends the characteristic function $`ϵ_{ij}`$ of $`s_{ij}`$ to the difference $`\varphi _i\overline{C}_2`$ for $`j=1,2`$ and to $`\varphi _ie`$ for $`j=3`$. Our seven characters $`\chi _k`$ are the following seven elements in $`^S`$:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \chi _1& =ϵ_{11}+ϵ_{31}ϵ_{12}ϵ_{32},\hfill \\ \hfill \chi _2& =ϵ_{21}+ϵ_{41}ϵ_{22}ϵ_{42},\hfill \\ \hfill \chi _3& =ϵ_{11}+ϵ_{33}ϵ_{13}ϵ_{31},\hfill \\ \hfill \chi _4& =ϵ_{21}+ϵ_{43}ϵ_{23}ϵ_{41},\hfill \\ \hfill \chi _5& =ϵ_{11}+ϵ_{32}ϵ_{12}ϵ_{31},\hfill \\ \hfill \chi _6& =ϵ_{21}+ϵ_{42}ϵ_{22}ϵ_{41},\hfill \\ \hfill \chi _7& =ϵ_{21}+ϵ_{41}ϵ_{11}ϵ_{31}+ϵ_{13}+ϵ_{33}ϵ_{23}ϵ_{43}.\hfill \end{array}$$

To prove the independence of the $`L_{\chi _k}`$ over $``$ it suffices to prove the independence of the restrictions $`\lambda _k:=L_{\chi _k|_{i=1}^4\varphi _i}`$. We represent a degree zero line bundle $`\lambda `$ on $`_{i=1}^4\varphi _i`$ by a four-tuple $`(\lambda ^i\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _i))_{i=1}^4`$. In this notation the $`\lambda _k`$’s become:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \lambda _1& =(a,0,a,0),\hfill \\ \hfill \lambda _2& =(0,b,0,b),\hfill \\ \hfill \lambda _3& =(c,0,c,0),\hfill \\ \hfill \lambda _4& =(0,d,0,d),\hfill \\ \hfill \lambda _5& =(a,0,a,0),\hfill \\ \hfill \lambda _6& =(0,b,0,b),\hfill \\ \hfill \lambda _7& =(c,d,c,d),\hfill \end{array}$$

where

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill a& =𝒪_{\varphi _1}(s_{11}s_{12})\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _1)\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _3),\hfill \\ \hfill b& =𝒪_{\varphi _2}(s_{21}s_{22})\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _2)\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _4),\hfill \\ \hfill c& =𝒪_{\varphi _1}(s_{11}s_{13})\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _1)\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _3),\hfill \\ \hfill d& =𝒪_{\varphi _2}(s_{21}s_{23})\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _2)\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _4).\hfill \end{array}$$

So we only need to show the linear independence over $``$ of $`a,c\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _1)`$ and similarly for $`b,d\mathrm{Pic}^0(\varphi _2)`$. This however is obvious from the fact that $`c,d`$ are univalued as functions on the base $`^1`$, whereas $`a,b`$ are two-valued. The lemma is proven. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 Numerical conditions

Our goal is to construct a stable rank five holomorphic vector bundle on the Calabi-Yau manifold $`Z:=X/\tau _X`$ which has a trivial determinant, three generations and an anomaly which can be absorbed into $`M5`$-branes. In terms of $`X`$ this amounts to finding a rank five vector bundle $`VX`$ so that:

* $`V`$ is a stable vector bundle.
* $`V`$ is $`\tau _X`$-invariant.
* $`c_1(V)=0`$.
* $`c_2(X)c_2(V)`$ is effective.
* $`c_3(V)=12`$.

We will construct a whole family of $`V`$’s satisfying these conditions. As explained in section 3, each $`V`$ will be constructed as an extension

(5.1)
$$0V_2VV_30,$$

where the $`V_i`$’s have special form. In fact, as we argued in section 3, in order to satisfy the condition (I) it is sufficient to take

$$V_i=𝑭𝑴_X(\mathrm{\Sigma }_i,(\pi _{|\mathrm{\Sigma }_i}^{})^{}𝒩_i\pi ^{}L_i𝒪_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_i}\left(\underset{k=1}{\overset{i}{}}a_{ik}(\{p_{i1k}\}\times n_1^{}+\{p_{i2k}\}\times o_2^{})\right))$$

with $`a_{ik}`$ being positive integers, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}C_i`$ for some smooth curve $`C_iB`$ satisfying (4.1) and $`𝒩_i\mathrm{Pic}^{d_i}(C_i)`$ satisfying (4.2). In fact, we do not need $`C_i`$ to be smooth; it is sufficient for the pair $`(C_i,𝒩_i)`$ to be deformable to a pair $`(C_i^{},𝒩_i^{})`$ with $`C_i^{}`$ being smooth but not necessarily $`\alpha _B`$-invariant. Furthermore, we showed in section 3, that such $`(C_i,𝒩_i)`$ do exist and move in positive dimensional families, at least for specific values of $`k_i`$. From now on we will assume that $`C_i`$ and $`𝒩_i`$ are chosen so that they are deformable to a smooth pair and that (4.1) and (4.2) hold.

Next we will rewrite the conditions (S) and (C1-3) as a sequence of numerical constraints on the numbers $`k_i`$, $`d_i`$ and on the line bundles $`L_i`$.

### 5.1 The Chern classes of $`V`$

There are several ways of calculating the Chern classes of the bundles $`V_i`$. One possibility is to use the cohomological Fourier-Mukai transform on $`X`$. To avoid long and cumbersome calculations of $`𝒇𝒎_X`$ we choose a slightly different approach which utilizes the details of the geometric structure of $`V`$.

Recall that in section 3 we gave an alternative description of the bundles $`V_i`$ as

$$V_i=\stackrel{~}{W}_i\pi ^{}L_i,$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{W_i}`$ is the result of $`a_{ik}`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{}i`$ Hecke transforms of the bundle $`\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}W_i`$, where $`W_i=𝑭𝑴_B((C_i,𝒩_i))`$. Due to Corollary 3.3 and the identity (3.5) we have

$$ch(\stackrel{~}{W}_i)=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}ch(W_i)\left(\underset{k=1}{\overset{i}{}}a_{ik}\right)\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}(n_1^{}+o_2^{})2\left(\underset{k=1}{\overset{i}{}}a_{ik}^2\right)(f\times \mathrm{pt}).$$

Next we need the following

###### Lemma 5.1

Let $`CB`$ be a smooth curve in the linear system $`|𝒪_B(re+mf)|`$ and let $`𝒩\mathrm{Pic}^d(C)`$. Let $`W=𝐅𝐌_B((C,𝒩))`$. Then

$$ch(W)=r+\left(d+\left(\begin{array}{c}r+1\\ 2\end{array}\right)rmr\right)fm\mathrm{pt}.$$

Proof. The bundle $`W`$ is defined as the Fourier-Mukai transform of the spectral datum $`(C,𝒩)`$ on $`B`$. Explicitly this means that $`W=𝑭𝑴_B(i_C𝒩)`$, where $`i_C:CB`$ is the inclusion map. In particular

$$ch(W)=𝒇𝒎_B(ch(i_C𝒩))$$

and so it suffices to calculate $`ch(i_C𝒩)`$.

By Groethendieck-Riemann-Roch theorem we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ch(i_C𝒩)& =(i_C(ch(𝒩)td(C)))td(B)^1\hfill \\ & =(i_C(1+(d+1g)\mathrm{pt}))\left(1+\frac{1}{2}f+\mathrm{pt}\right)^1\hfill \\ & =((re+mf)+(d+1g)\mathrm{pt}))(1\frac{1}{2}f\mathrm{pt})\hfill \\ & =(re+mf)+\left(d+1g\frac{r}{2}\right)\mathrm{pt}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Also by adjunction we have $`2g2=C(K_B+C)=2rmr^2r`$. Hence

$$ch(i_C𝒩)=(re+mf)+\left(d+\left(\begin{array}{c}r+1\\ 2\end{array}\right)rm\frac{r}{2}\right)\mathrm{pt}.$$

Finally using \[DOPWa, Table 2\] we get

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ch(W)& =𝒇𝒎_B(ch(i_C𝒩))\hfill \\ & =𝒇𝒎_B\left((re+mf)+\left(d+\left(\begin{array}{c}r+1\\ 2\end{array}\right)rm\frac{r}{2}\right)\mathrm{pt}\right)\hfill \\ & =r\left(1\frac{1}{2}f\right)+m(\mathrm{pt})+\left(d+\left(\begin{array}{c}r+1\\ 2\end{array}\right)rm\frac{r}{2}\right)f\hfill \\ & =r+\left(d+\left(\begin{array}{c}r+1\\ 2\end{array}\right)rmr\right)fm\mathrm{pt}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The lemma is proven. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 5.2

Since the Chern classes are topological invariants, the conclusion of the previous lemma still holds even if $`C`$ is singular, as long as the sheaf $`i_C𝒩`$ deforms flatly to a line bundle on some smooth spectral curve in the same linear system. In particular it will hold for the $`W_2`$ from section 4.2.

Going back to the calculation of $`ch(V)`$ let us write $`S_i^\alpha `$ for the Newton sums

$$S_i^\alpha =\underset{k=1}{\overset{i}{}}a_{ik}^\alpha .$$

In this notation we need to calculate the product

$$ch(V_i)=(\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}ch(W_i)S_i^1\pi ^{}(n_1^{}+o_2^{})2S_i^2(f\times \mathrm{pt}))ch(\pi ^{}L_i).$$

But

$$ch(\pi ^{}L_i)=\pi ^{}ch(L_i)=1+\pi ^{}L_i+\frac{L_i^2}{2}(f\times \mathrm{pt}),$$

and so

* $`\pi ^{}(n_1^{}+o_2^{})ch(\pi ^{}L_i)=\pi ^{}(n_1^{}+o_2^{})+(L_i(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))(f\times \mathrm{pt})`$;
* $`(f\times \mathrm{pt})ch(\pi ^{}L_i)=f\times \mathrm{pt}`$;
* Lemma 5.1 yields

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}& ch(W_i)ch(\pi ^{}L_i)=\hfill \\ & =\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}\left(i+\left(d_i+\left(\begin{array}{c}i+1\\ 2\end{array}\right)k_iii\right)fk_i\mathrm{pt}\right)\left(1+\pi ^{}L_i+\frac{L_i^2}{2}(f\times \mathrm{pt})\right)\hfill \\ & =i+\pi ^{}\left(iL_i+\left(d_i+\left(\begin{array}{c}i+1\\ 2\end{array}\right)k_iii\right)f^{}\right)+\hfill \\ & +\left[\left(\frac{i}{2}L_i^2+\left(d_i+\left(\begin{array}{c}i+1\\ 2\end{array}\right)k_iii\right)(L_if^{})\right)(f\times \mathrm{pt})k_i(\mathrm{pt}\times f^{})\right]\hfill \\ & k_i(L_if^{})\mathrm{pt}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Combining these formulas we get formulas for $`ch(V_2)`$ and $`ch(V_3)`$:

$$\overline{)\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ch(V_2)& =2+\pi ^{}(2L_2+(d_22k_2+1)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))\hfill \\ & +(L_2^2+(d_22k_2+1)(L_2f^{})S_2^1(L_2(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))2S_2^2)(f\times \mathrm{pt})\hfill \\ & k_2(\mathrm{pt}\times f^{})\hfill \\ & k_2(L_2f^{})\mathrm{pt}.\hfill \end{array}}$$

and similarly

$$\overline{)\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ch(V_3)& =3+\pi ^{}(3L_3+(d_33k_2+3)f^{}S_3^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))\hfill \\ & +\left(\frac{3}{2}L_3^2+(d_33k_3+3)(L_3f^{})S_3^1(L_3(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))2S_3^2\right)(f\times \mathrm{pt})\hfill \\ & k_3(\mathrm{pt}\times f^{})\hfill \\ & k_3(L_3f^{})\mathrm{pt}.\hfill \end{array}}$$

Together these formulas give

$$\overline{)\begin{array}{cc}\hfill ch(V)& =5+\hfill \\ & +\pi ^{}(2L_2+3L_3+(d_2+d_32k_23k_3+4)f^{}(S_2^1+S_3^1)(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))\hfill \\ & +[(L_2^2+(3/2)L_3^2+(d_22k_2+1)(L_2f^{})+(d_33k_3+3)(L_3f^{})\hfill \\ & (S_2^1L_2+S_3^1L_3)(n_1^{}+o_2^{})2(S_2^2+S_3^2))(f\times \mathrm{pt})\hfill \\ & (k_2+k_3)(\mathrm{pt}\times f^{})]\hfill \\ & ((k_2L_2+k_3L_3)f^{})\mathrm{pt}.\hfill \end{array}}$$

Therefore, taking into account that $`c_2(X)=12(f\times \mathrm{pt}+\mathrm{pt}\times f^{})`$ we see that the conditions (C1-3) translate into the following numerical constraints:

$`2L_2+3L_3=(S_2^1+S_3^1)(n_1^{}+o_2^{})(d_2+d_32k_23k_3+4)f^{}`$.

$`k_2+k_312`$.

$`L_2^2+(3/2)L_3^2+(d_22k_2+1)(L_2f^{})+(d_33k_3+3)(L_3f^{})(S_2^1L_2+S_3^1L_3)(n_1^{}+o_2^{})2(S_2^2+S_3^2)12`$.

$`k_2(L_2f^{})+k_3(L_3f^{})=6`$.

Our next task is to express the stability of $`V`$ in a numerical form.

### 5.2 Stability of $`V`$

We need to make sure that the bundle $`V`$ is Mumford stable with respect to some ample class $`HH^2(X,)`$. Recall (see e.g. \[FMW99, Section 7\]) that a polarization $`HH^2(X,)`$ is called suitable if up to an overall scale the components of the fibers of $`\pi :XB^{}`$ have sufficiently small volume. Starting with any polarization $`H_0H^2(X,)`$ we can construct a suitable polarization by fixing some polarization $`h^{}H^2(B^{},)`$ and taking

$$H:=H_0+n\pi ^{}h^{},$$

with $`n0`$. As explained in \[FMW99, Theorem 7.1\] for a suitable $`H`$ every vector bundle on $`X`$ which comes from a spectral cover will be $`H`$-stable on $`X`$. From now on we will always assume that $`H=H_0+n\pi ^{}h^{}`$ is chosen to be suitable. For a torsion free sheaf $``$ on $`X`$ denote by $`\mu _H()`$ the $`H`$-slope of $``$, i.e. $`\mu _H()=(c_1()H^2)/\mathrm{rk}()`$. By repeating the argument in the proof of \[FMW99, Theorem 7.1\] one gets the following lemma whose proof is left to the reader.

###### Lemma 5.3

The bundle $`V`$ constructed in the previous section is $`H`$-stable if and only if

* The extension

$$0V_2VV_30,$$

is non-split.
* $`\mu _H(V_2)<\mu _H(V)=0`$.

Next we express both these conditions into a numerical form. Note that an extension

$$0V_2VV_30$$

will be non-split if and only if it corresponds to a non-zero element in $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(V_3,V_2)=H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)`$. Thus we only need to ensure that $`H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)0`$. We have the following

###### Lemma 5.4

For $`V_2`$ and $`V_3`$ as above one has $`H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)0`$ if $`L_2f^{}>L_3f^{}`$.

Proof. We are assuming that the $`W_i`$’s deform to vector bundles on $`B`$ coming from smooth spectral covers. So by the upper-semi-continuity of $`H^1(X,V_2^{}V_3)`$ it is enough to prove the lemma for $`W_i`$’s arising from smooth spectral covers.

Let $`L=L_3^1L_2`$. Then

$$V_3^{}V_2=\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2\pi ^{}L.$$

To calculate $`H^1(X,\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2\pi ^{}L)`$ we use the Leray spectral sequence for the projection $`\pi :XB^{}`$. It yields an exact sequence of vector spaces

By construction $`\stackrel{~}{W}_2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{W}_3`$ are vector bundles on $`X`$ coming from the spectral construction applied to line bundles on smooth spectral covers, which are also finite over $`B^{}`$. In particular the restriction of $`\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2`$ to the general fiber of $`\pi `$ is regular and semistable of degree zero. Hence for general $`\stackrel{~}{W}_2`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{W}_3`$ we have

* $`\pi _{}(\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2)=0`$;
* $`R^1\pi _{}(\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2)`$ is supported on a curve in $`B^{}`$ and is a line bundle on its support.

Therefore

$$H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)=H^0(B^{},R^1\pi _{}(\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2)L).$$

To calculate the latter space notice that $`R^1\pi _{}(\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2)`$ is supported on the curve

$$\pi ((1)_X^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_3\mathrm{\Sigma }_2)B^{}.$$

Since $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}C_i`$, this implies

$$(1)_X^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }_3\mathrm{\Sigma }_2=\underset{t(1)_B^{}C_3C_2}{}\{t\}\times f^{}.$$

Without a loss of generality we may assume that all $`t(1)_B^{}C_3C_2`$ project to distinct points in $`^1`$ under the map $`\beta :B^1`$. Consequently

$$R^1\pi _{}(\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2)=_{t(1)_B^{}C_3C_2}\mathrm{\Phi }_t,$$

where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_t`$ is a line bundle on the curve $`\pi (\{t\}\times f^{})=f_{\beta (t)}^{}`$. The line bundle $`\mathrm{\Phi }_t`$ depends only on the the restriction of $`\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2`$ to the surface $`f_{\beta (t)}\times f_{\beta (t)}^{}`$. Let $`\mathrm{pr}_1:f_{\beta (t)}\times f_{\beta (t)}^{}f_{\beta (t)}`$ and $`\mathrm{pr}_2:f_{\beta (t)}\times f_{\beta (t)}^{}f_{\beta (t)}^{}`$ denote the natural projections. Then we have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Phi }_t& =R^1\mathrm{pr}_2((\stackrel{~}{W}_3^{}\stackrel{~}{W}_2)_{|f_{\beta (t)}\times f_{\beta (t)}^{}})=R^1\mathrm{pr}_2(\mathrm{pr}_1^{}(W_3^{}W_2))\hfill \\ & =R^1\mathrm{pr}_2(\mathrm{pr}_1^{}𝒪_{f_{\beta (t)}})=H^1(f_{\beta (t)},𝒪_{f_{\beta (t)}})𝒪_{f_{\beta (t)}^{}}.\hfill \end{array}$$

In other words $`H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)0`$ if and only if $`L_{|f_{\beta (t)}^{}}`$ is effective for some $`t(1)_B^{}C_3C_2`$. For this it suffices to have $`Lf^{}>0`$, and it is necessary to have $`Lf^{}0`$.

However we saw in the previous section that the condition (C1) implies $`2L_2f^{}+3L_3f^{}=0`$. If we assume that $`Lf^{}=0`$, then we will get $`L_2f^{}=L_3f^{}=0`$ which contradicts (C3). Thus $`H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)0`$ iff $`Lf^{}>0`$. The lemma is proven. $`\mathrm{}`$

Expressing the slope condition in numerical terms is completely straightforward. In the previous section we showed that

$$c_1(V_2)=\pi ^{}(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{})).$$

Hence $`\mu _H(V_2)<0`$ if and only if

$$\pi ^{}(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))H^2<0.$$

It is more convenient to rewrite this as a condition on the surface $`B^{}`$. Recall that we take $`H`$ to be of the form

$$H=H_0+n\pi ^{}h^{}$$

where $`h^{}H^2(B^{},)`$ is some polarization and $`n0`$. Since $`X=B\times _^1B^{}`$ we see that any polarization $`H_0`$ on $`X`$ can be written as

$$H_0=\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}h_0+\pi ^{}h_0^{}$$

for some polarizations $`h_0H^2(B,)`$ and $`h_0^{}H^2(B^{},)`$. In particular

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill H^2& =(\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}h_0+\pi ^{}h_0^{})^2+2n(\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}h_0+\pi ^{}h_0^{})\pi ^{}h^{}+n^2\pi ^{}(h^{}_{}{}^{}2)\hfill \\ & =(h_0^2)(\{\mathrm{pt}\}\times f^{})+2(\pi ^{}h_0^{}+n\pi ^{}h^{})\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}h_0+\pi ^{}((h_0^{}+nh^{})^2).\hfill \end{array}$$

By the projection formula we get

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mu _H(V_2)& =\pi ^{}(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))H^2\hfill \\ & =(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))\pi _{}(H^2)\hfill \\ & =(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))((h_0^2)f^{}+2(h_0^{}+nh^{})\pi _{}\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}h_0)\hfill \\ & =(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))((h_0^2)f^{}+2(h_0f)h_0^{})\hfill \\ & +2(h_0f)n(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))h^{}.\hfill \end{array}$$

To derive the last identity we used (3.1) to write

$$\pi _{}\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}h_0=\beta ^{{}_{}{}^{}}\beta _{}h_0=(h_0f)1+mf^{}H^{}(B^{},),$$

with $`m`$ being a positive integer. This implies that $`\alpha \pi _{}\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}h_0=(h_0f)(\alpha 1)+m(\alpha f^{})`$ for any cohomology class $`\alpha `$ on $`B^{}`$. In particular $`\mathrm{pt}\pi _{}\pi ^{{}_{}{}^{}}h_0=(h_0f)\mathrm{pt}`$ and hence the above formula.

In conclusion, we see that for $`n0`$ we have

$$\mu _H(V_2)<2(h_0f)n(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))h^{},$$

and so $`\mu _H(V_2)<0`$ provided that

$$(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))h^{}<0.$$

We are now ready to list all the conditions on $`V`$ in a numerical form.

### 5.3 The list of constraints

In the previous two sections we translated the conditions (S), (I), (C1-3) into a set of numerical conditions. Together those read:

$`L_2f^{}>L_3f^{}`$.

$`(2L_2+(d_2+12k_2)f^{}S_2^1(n_1^{}+o_2^{}))h^{}<0`$ for some ample class $`h^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B^{})`$.

$`\tau _B^{}L_i=L_i`$, for $`i=2,3`$.

$`2L_2+3L_3=(S_2^1+S_3^1)(n_1^{}+o_2^{})(d_2+d_32k_23k_3+4)f^{}`$.

$`k_2+k_312`$.

$`L_2^2+(3/2)L_3^2+(d_22k_2+1)(L_2f^{})+(d_33k_3+3)(L_3f^{})(S_2^1L_2+S_3^1L_3)(n_1^{}+o_2^{})2(S_2^2+S_3^2)12`$.

$`k_2(L_2f^{})+k_3(L_3f^{})=6`$.

Observe that these conditions already constrain severely the possible values of $`k_2`$, $`k_3`$, $`L_2f^{}`$ and $`L_3f^{}`$. Indeed, intersecting both sides of $`(\mathrm{\#}\text{C1})`$ with the curve $`f^{}B^{}`$ we see that $`2(L_2f^{})+3(L_3f^{})=0`$. Recall also that we showed in section 4 that for the existence of smooth curves $`C_2`$ and $`C_3`$ one needs to take $`k_22`$ and $`k_33`$. Thus the integers $`k_2`$, $`k_3`$, $`L_2f^{}`$ and $`L_3f^{}`$ should satisfy:

* $`L_2f^{}>L_3f^{}`$
* $`k_22`$ and $`k_33`$;
* $`k_2+k_312`$;
* $`2(L_2f^{})+3(L_3f^{})=0`$;
* $`k_2(L_2f^{})+k_3(L_3f^{})=6`$.

Solving these, we find the following finite list of values for $`k_2`$, $`k_3`$, $`L_2f^{}`$ and $`L_3f^{}`$.

### 5.4 Some solutions

In this section we show that the numerical constraints $`(\mathrm{\#})`$ can all be satisfied. In fact, we find infinitely many solutions of $`(\mathrm{\#})`$. These represent an infinite sequence of of moduli spaces (of arbitrarily large dimension) of all possible $`V`$’s.

Fix $`k_2`$ and $`k_3`$ from the values in Table 1. For such a choice the corresponding numbers $`L_2f^{}`$ and $`L_3f^{}`$ are the solutions to the linear system

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 3\\ k_2& k_3\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}L_2f^{}\\ L_3f^{}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ 6\end{array}\right).$$

Thus in terms of $`k_2`$ and $`k_3`$ we have

(5.2)
$$L_2f^{}=\frac{18}{2k_33k_2},L_3f^{}=\frac{12}{2k_33k_2}.$$

Put $`k=2k_33k_2`$. Express $`L_i`$, $`i=2,3`$ in terms of the standard classes on $`B^{}`$ as follows

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill L_2& =+\frac{9}{k}(e^{}+\zeta ^{})+x_2f^{}+y_2(n_1^{}+o_2^{})+3M\hfill \\ & \\ \hfill L_3& =\frac{6}{k}(e^{}+\zeta ^{})+x_3f^{}+y_3(n_1^{}+o_2^{})2M.\hfill \end{array}$$

The most general way to make the $`L_i`$’s satisfy $`(\mathrm{\#}\text{I})`$ together with (5.2) is to take $`M`$ to be $`\tau _B`$-invariant and perpendicular to $`e^{}+\zeta ^{}`$, $`f^{}`$ and $`n_1^{}+o_2^{}`$. This follows from the fact that the intersection form on $`H^2(B^{},)`$ is non-degenerate on the span of $`e^{}+\zeta ^{}`$, $`f^{}`$ and $`n_1^{}+o_2^{}`$. This is evident from Table 2

The condition $`(\mathrm{\#}\text{C1})`$ translates into

(5.3)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 2x_2+3x_3& =(d_2+d_32k_23k_3+4)\hfill \\ \hfill 2y_2+3y_3& =S_2^1+S_3^1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Using Table 2 we compute

$`L_2^2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{162}{k^2}}4y_2^2+9M^2+{\displaystyle \frac{36}{k}}(x_2+y_2)`$
$`L_3^2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{72}{k^2}}4y_3^2+4M^2{\displaystyle \frac{24}{k}}(x_3+y_3)`$
$`(n_1^{}+o_2^{})L_2`$ $`=+{\displaystyle \frac{18}{k}}4y_2`$
$`(n_1^{}+o_2^{})L_3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{12}{k}}4y_3.`$
So the condition $`(\mathrm{\#}\text{C2}f^{})`$ becomes

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \frac{270}{k^2}& 4y_2^26y_3^2+15M^2+\frac{36}{k}(x_2+y_2x_3y_3)+\frac{1}{k}(18d_212d_336k_2+36k_318)\hfill \\ & \\ & S_2^1\left(\frac{18}{k}4y_2\right)S_3^1\left(\frac{12}{k}4y_3\right)2(S_2^2+S_3^2)12.\hfill \end{array}$$

We eliminate $`d_3`$ using (5.3) and complete the squares involving $`y_2`$ and $`y_3`$, to find:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \frac{135}{k^2}4u_2^26u_3^2& +15M^2+((S_2^1)^22S_2^2)+\left(\frac{2}{3}(S_3^1)^22S_3^2\right)\hfill \\ & \\ & +\frac{30}{k}(2x_2+d_22k_2+1)12,\hfill \end{array}$$

where

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill u_2& =y_2\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{9}{k}+S_2^1\right)\hfill \\ & \\ \hfill u_3& =y_3\frac{1}{3}\left(\frac{9}{k}+S_3^1\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

Implementing the second condition in (5.3) we get $`2u_2+3u_3=0`$. Introduce new variables

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill u& :=2u_2=3u_3\hfill \\ \hfill x& :=2x_2+d_22k_2+1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Substituting back into the expressions for $`L_2`$ and $`L_3`$ we get

(5.4) $`L_2`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{9}{k}}\left(e^{}+\zeta ^{}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(xd_2+2k_21\right)f^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(u+{\displaystyle \frac{9}{k}}+S_2^1\right)\left(n_1^{}+o_2^{}\right)+3M`$
$`L_3`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{6}{k}}\left(e^{}+\zeta ^{}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(xd_3+3k_33\right)f^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(u{\displaystyle \frac{9}{k}}+S_3^1\right)\left(n_1^{}+o_2^{}\right)2M.`$
Similarly for the conditions $`(\mathrm{\#}\text{C2}f^{})`$ and $`(\mathrm{\#}\text{S}s)`$ we get

(5.5)
$$\frac{5}{3}u^215M^212\frac{135}{k^2}+\frac{30}{k}x+((S_2^1)^22S_2^2)+\left(\frac{2}{3}(S_3^1)^22S_3^2\right),$$

and

(5.6)
$$\left(\frac{18}{k}(e^{}+\zeta ^{})+xf^{}+\left(u+\frac{9}{k}\right)(n_1^{}+o_2^{})+6M\right)h^{}<0.$$

respectively.

We will use the flexibility we have in choosing $`M`$ to show that (5.5) and (5.6) have solutions that lead to integral coefficients in (5.4). The key observation here is that since $`\mathrm{span}(e^{}+\zeta ^{},f^{},n_1^{}+o_2^{})H^2(B^{},)`$ contains an ample class, the Hodge index theorem implies that $`M^20`$. Therefore, one expects that there will be non-effective admissible $`M`$’s which will make (5.6) easier to satisfy.

Note that the means inequality implies that $`(S_2^1)^22S_2^20`$ with equality if and only if all the $`a_{2k}`$’s are equal to each other. Similarly $`(2/3)(S_3^1)^22S_3^20`$ with equality if and only if all the $`a_{3k}`$’s are equal to each other. In particular, for any choice of numbers $`u`$, $`x`$, $`k_2`$, $`k_3`$, $`a_{ik}`$ which satisfies (5.5), the numbers $`u`$, $`x`$, $`k_2`$, $`k_3`$ will satisfy

(5.7)
$$\frac{5}{3}u^212+15M^2\frac{135}{k^2}+\frac{30}{k}x$$

as well.

But from Table 1 we see that $`k=2k_33k_2>0`$ for all admissible values of $`k_2`$ and $`k_3`$. Combined with the fact that $`e^{}+\zeta ^{}`$ is an effective curve this implies

$$\left(xf^{}+\left(u+\frac{9}{k}\right)(n_1^{}+o_2^{})+6M\right)h^{}<0.$$

On the other hand $`f^{}=n_j^{}+o_j^{}`$ for $`j=1,2`$ and so $`f^{}h^{}>n_1^{}h^{}`$ and $`f^{}h^{}>o_1^{}h^{}`$. Thus it suffices to check that

(5.8)
$$\left(\left(x+u+\frac{9}{k}\right)f^{}+6M\right)h^{}<0.$$

To make things more concrete recall that the only conditions that we need to impose on $`M`$ are that $`M`$ should be $`\tau _B^{}^{}`$-invariant and that $`M`$ should be perpendicular to $`\mathrm{span}(e^{}+\zeta ^{},f^{},n_1^{}+o_2^{})`$. From \[DOPWa, Table 1\] we see that the classes $`e_4^{}e_5^{},e_4^{}e_6^{},3\mathrm{}^{}2(e_4^{}+e_5^{}+e_6^{})3e_7^{}`$ constitute a rational basis of the space of such $`M`$’s. Let us choose for example $`M`$ to be of the form

$$M=z(e_4^{}e_5^{})$$

for some integer $`z`$. With this choice (5.7) and (5.8) become

(5.9)
$$\frac{5}{3}u^2+30z^2\frac{30}{k}x+\frac{135}{k^2}120,$$

and

(5.10)
$$\left(\left(x+u+\frac{9}{k}\right)f^{}+6z\left(e_4^{}e_5^{}\right)\right)h^{}<0$$

respectively.

Consider next the class $`\gamma :=(x+u+9/k)f^{}+6z(e_4^{}e_5^{})`$. Since the Kähler cone is dual to the Mori cone we know that an ample class $`h^{}`$ with $`\gamma h^{}<0`$ will exist as long as $`\gamma `$ is not effective. But $`\gamma `$ satisfies $`\gamma e_4^{}=x+u+9/k6z`$ and so if $`6z>x+u+9/k`$ we will have $`\gamma e_4^{}<0`$. Under this assumption we have two alternatives: either $`\gamma `$ is not effective or $`\gamma e_4^{}`$ is effective. However we have $`(\gamma e_4^{})f^{}=1`$ and $`f^{}`$ moves, so $`\gamma e_4^{}`$ and hence $`\gamma `$ can not be effective.

In other words, as a first check for the consistency of the inequalities (5.5) and (5.6) it suffices to make sure that in the 3-space with coordinates $`(x,u,z)`$ one can find points between the plane

$$6z=x+u+\frac{9}{k}$$

and the paraboloid

$$\frac{5}{3}u^2+30z^2\frac{30}{k}x+\frac{135}{k^2}12=0.$$

If we use the equation of the plane to eliminate $`x`$ and substitute the result in (5.9) we obtain the quadratic inequality

(5.11)
$$\frac{5}{3}\left(u+\frac{9}{k}\right)^2+30\left(z\frac{3}{k}\right)^2120,$$

which always has solutions regardless of the value of $`k`$.

To find an actual solution we will choose a particular value for $`k`$. By examining Table 1 we see that the possible values of $`k=2k_33k_2`$ are $`1,2,3`$ and $`6`$. Furthermore, since all the coefficients in (5.4) must be integers, $`k`$ has to divide $`\mathrm{gcd}(6,9)=3`$ i.e. we may have either $`k=1`$ (which corresponds to $`k_2=3`$ and $`k_3=5`$) or $`k=3`$ (which corresponds to $`k_2=3`$ and $`k_3=6`$. For concreteness we choose the second case, i.e.

$$k_2=3,k_3=6,k=3.$$

Note that the geometry of this case has already been carefully analyzed in sections 4.2 and 4.3. In particular we showed that for these values of $`k_i`$ there are spectral pairs $`(C_i,𝒩_i)`$ which are deformable to smooth pairs and which satisfy (4.1) and (4.2).

To minimize (5.11) we will take

$$u=3,z=1,x=5,$$

where the value of $`x`$ is chosen to satisfy (5.10).

We then have

(5.12) $`L_2`$ $`=3\left(e^{}+\zeta ^{}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(4d_2\right)f^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(6+S_2^1\right)\left(n_1^{}+o_2^{}\right)+3\left(e_4^{}e_5^{}\right)`$
$`L_3`$ $`=2\left(e^{}+\zeta ^{}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(16d_3\right)f^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(6+S_3^1\right)\left(n_1^{}+o_2^{}\right)2\left(e_4^{}e_5^{}\right).`$
We see that all the coefficients in (5.12) will be integral as long as: $`d_2`$ is even, $`d_31(mod3)`$, $`S_2^1`$ is even and $`S_3^1`$ is divisible by $`3`$.

The inequality (5.5) now reads

(5.13)
$$2\left((S_2^1)^22S_2^2\right)+\left(\frac{2}{3}(S_2^1)^22S_2^2\right)$$

and the inequality (5.6) reads

(5.14)
$$\left(6\left(e^{}+\zeta ^{}\right)+5f^{}+6\left(e_4^{}e_5^{}\right)\right)h^{}<0$$

Note that (5.14) does not involve the numbers $`a_{ik}`$ and so all the restrictions on the $`a_{ik}`$’s come from (5.13) and from the integrality of (5.12).

In view of the discussion about the means inequality above we see that (5.13) will be automatically satisfied if we take all $`a_{2k}`$’s to be equal to a fixed integer $`a_20`$ and all $`a_{3k}`$’s to be equal to another fixed integer $`a_30`$. Moreover with such a choice we clearly have $`S_2^1=2a_2`$ and $`S_3^1=3a_3`$ and so we have infinitely many possibilities for the numbers $`a_{ik}`$. Since $`d_2`$ and $`d_3`$ are unconstrained except for the conditions $`d_20(mod2)`$ and $`d_31(mod3)`$ we see that all the conditions (S), (I) and (C1-3) will be satisfied if we can prove the following:

###### Claim 5.5

There exists an ample class $`h^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B^{})`$ satisfying (5.14).

Proof. As explained above the existence of $`h^{}`$ is equivalent to showing that the class

$$6(e^{}+\zeta ^{})+5f^{}+6(e_4^{}e_5^{})=6(e_1^{}+e_9^{})+5f^{}+6(e_4^{}e_5^{})$$

is not in the Mori cone of $`B^{}`$. First consider the class $`\xi ^{}:=e_4^{}e_5^{}+e_9^{}+f^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B^{})`$. We have $`\xi ^{}_{}{}^{}2=1`$ and $`\xi f^{}=1`$. So $`\xi ^{}`$ is an exceptional class on $`B^{}`$. It is well known \[DPT80\] that on a general rational elliptic surface every exceptional class is effective and is a section. Since our $`B^{}`$ is not generic we can’t use this statement to conclude that $`\xi ^{}`$ is the class of a section. However we have

###### Lemma 5.6

The divisor $`\xi ^{}`$ satisfies

$$𝒪_B^{}(\xi ^{})=c_1([e_4^{}][e_5^{}]).$$

In particular $`\xi ^{}`$ is effective and is a section of $`\beta ^{}:B^{}^1`$.

Proof. Let $`\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}`$ be the section of $`B^{}`$ for which $`[\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}]=[e_4^{}][e_5^{}]`$, that is $`c_1([e_4^{}][e_5^{}])=𝒪_B^{}(\underset{¯}{\xi }^{})`$. Since the group law on the general fiber $`f_t^{}`$, $`t^1`$ is defined in terms of the Abel-Jacobi map and since we have taken $`e_9^{}(t)f_t^{}`$ to be the neutral element for the group law it follows that

$$𝒪_B^{}(\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}e_9^{})_{|f_t^{}}=(c_1([e_4^{}][e_5^{}])𝒪_B^{}(e_9^{}))_{|f_t^{}}=𝒪_B^{}(e_4^{}e_5^{})_{|f_t^{}}$$

for the general $`t^1`$. Therefore the line bundle $`𝒪_B^{}(\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}+e_5^{}e_4^{}e_9^{})`$ must be a combination of vertical divisors on $`B^{}`$, i.e. we can write

(5.15)
$$\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}=e_4^{}e_5^{}+e_9^{}+af^{}+bn_1+cn_2$$

for some integers $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$. By \[DOPWa, Formula (4.2)\] we have $`e_4^{}n_i^{}=e_5^{}n_i^{}=0`$ and $`e_9^{}n_i^{}=1`$ for $`i=1,2`$. Consider the $`I_2`$ fiber $`n_1^{}o_1^{}`$ of $`B^{}`$. The smooth part $`(n_1^{}o_1^{})^{\mathrm{}}:=(n_1^{}o_1^{})(n_1^{}o_1^{})`$ of this fiber is an abelian group isomorphic to $`/2\times ^\times `$ with $`n_1^{}(n_1^{}o_1^{})`$ being the connected component of the identity. By definition the section $`\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}`$ intersects $`n_1^{}o_1^{}`$ at a point which is the difference of the points $`e_4^{}(n_1^{}o_1^{})=e_4^{}o_1^{}`$ and $`e_5^{}(n_1^{}o_1^{})=e_5^{}o_1^{}`$ in the group law of $`(n_1^{}o_1^{})^{\mathrm{}}`$. Since these two points belong to the same component of $`(n_1^{}o_1^{})^{\mathrm{}}`$ and the group of connected components of $`(n_1^{}o_1^{})^{\mathrm{}}`$ is $`/2`$ it follows that $`\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}`$ intersects $`n_1^{}o_1^{}`$ at a point in $`n_1^{}`$, i.e. $`\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}n_1^{}=1`$. Similarly $`\delta ^{}n_2^{}=1`$. Therefore, intersecting both sides of (5.15) with $`n_1^{}`$ and $`n_2^{}`$ we get $`1=1+b`$ and $`1=1+c`$ respectively. Thus $`b=c=0`$. Finally from the fact that $`\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}_{}{}^{}2=1`$ we compute that $`a=1`$ and so $`\underset{¯}{\xi }^{}=\xi ^{}`$. The lemma is proven. $`\mathrm{}`$

In view of the previous lemma we have a section $`\xi ^{}`$ of $`\beta ^{}:B^{}^1`$ and we need to show that the class

$$\mu :=6e_1^{}+6\xi ^{}f^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B^{})$$

is not in the Mori cone of $`B^{}`$.

Assume that $`\mu `$ is in the Mori cone. Note that by the definition of $`\xi ^{}`$ we have $`e_1^{}f^{}=\xi ^{}f^{}=1`$, $`e_1^{}_{}{}^{}2=\xi ^{}_{}{}^{}2=1`$ and $`e_1^{}\xi ^{}=1`$. Then $`\mu \xi ^{}=1`$ and so $`\mu \xi ^{}=6e_1^{}+5\xi ^{}f^{}`$ will also have to be in the Mori cone. But now $`(\mu \xi ^{})e_1^{}=2`$ and so $`\mu 2e_1^{}\xi ^{}`$ will be in the Mori cone. Intersecting with $`\xi ^{}`$ again we get $`(\mu 2e_1^{}\xi ^{})\xi ^{}=2`$ and so continuing iteratively we conclude that $`\xi f`$ must be in the Mori cone which is obviously false. This shows that $`\mu `$ is not in the Mori cone of $`B^{}`$ and so $`h^{}`$ ought to exist.

For completeness we will identify an explicit ample class $`h^{}`$ on $`B^{}`$ with $`\mu h^{}<0`$. We will look for $`h^{}`$ of the form

$$h^{}=af^{}+be_1^{}+c\xi ^{}$$

and will try to adjust the coefficients $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ so that $`h^{}`$ is ample and $`\mu h^{}<0`$. First we have the following

###### Lemma 5.7

The divisor class $`h^{}=af^{}+be_1^{}+c\xi ^{}`$ is ample provided that $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ are positive and $`a>|bc|`$.

Proof. Assume that $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ are positive and $`a>|bc|`$. By the Nakai-Moishezon criterion for ampleness \[Har77, Theorem 1.10\], $`h^{}`$ will be ample if $`h^{}_{}{}^{}2>0`$ and if $`h^{}C>0`$ for every irreducible curve $`CB^{}`$.

Let $`CB^{}`$ be an irreducible curve. Then we have two possibilities: either $`C`$ is a component of a fiber of $`\beta ^{}:B^{}^1`$, or $`\beta ^{}:C^1`$ is a finite map. If $`\beta ^{}:C^1`$ is finite and $`C\xi ^{},e_1^{}`$, then $`Cf^{}>0`$, $`Ce_1^{}0`$ and $`C\xi ^{}0`$. In particular the fact that $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ are positive implies that $`Ch^{}>0`$. Hence $`h^{}`$ will be ample if we can show that the intersections $`h^{}_{}{}^{}2`$, $`h^{}f^{}`$, $`h^{}n_i^{}`$, $`h^{}o_i^{}`$, $`h^{}e_1^{}`$ and $`h^{}\xi ^{}`$ are all positive. For this we calculate

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill h^{}e_1^{}& =a+cb\hfill \\ \hfill h^{}\xi ^{}& =a+bc\hfill \\ \hfill h^{}f^{}& =b+c\hfill \\ \hfill h^{}n_1^{}& =h^{}n_2^{}=c\hfill \\ \hfill h^{}o_1^{}& =h^{}o_2^{}=b\hfill \\ \hfill h^{}_{}{}^{}2& =b^2c^2+2ab+2ac+2bc=b(a+cb)+c(a+bc)+ab+ac,\hfill \end{array}$$

which are manifestly positive provided that $`a>|bc|`$. The lemma is proven. $`\mathrm{}`$

Now we see that the condition $`\mu h^{}<0`$ translates into $`12a<b+c`$, i.e we may take $`h^{}=25f^{}+144e_1^{}+168\xi ^{}`$. This finishes the proof of the claim. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 6 Summary of the construction

In this section we recapitulate the main points of the construction. Recall that we want to build a quadruple $`(X,H,\tau _X,V)`$ satisfying:

* $`X`$ is a smooth Calabi-Yau 3-fold and $`\tau _X:XX`$ is a freely acting involution. $`H`$ is a fixed Kähler structure (ample line bundle) on $`X`$
* $`V`$ is an $`H`$-stable vector bundle of rank five on $`X`$.
* $`V`$ is $`\tau _X`$-invariant.
* $`c_1(V)=0`$.
* $`c_2(X)c_2(V)`$ is effective.
* $`c_3(V)=12`$.

The construction is carried out in several steps.

### 6.1 The construction of $`(X,\tau _X)`$

$`X`$ is built as the fiber product of two rational elliptic surfaces of special type.

6.1.1. Building special rational elliptic surfaces. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1^2`$ be a nodal cubic with a node $`A_8`$. Choose four generic points on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ and label them $`A_1,A_2,A_3,A_7`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^2`$ be the unique smooth cubic which passes trough $`A_1,A_2,A_3,A_7,A_8`$ and is tangent to the line $`A_7A_i`$ for $`i=1,2,3`$ and $`8`$. Consider the pencil of cubics spanned by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. All cubics in this pencil pass trough $`A_1,A_2,A_3,A_7,A_8`$ and are tangent to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ at $`A_8`$. Let $`A_4,A_5,A_6`$ be the remaining three base points, and let $`B`$ denote the blow-up of $`^2`$ at the points $`A_i`$, $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},8`$ and the point $`A_9`$ which is infinitesimally near $`A_8`$ and corresponds to the line $`A_7A_8`$.

The pencil becomes the anti-canonical map $`\beta :B^1`$ which is an elliptic fibration with a section. The map $`\beta `$ has two reducible fibers $`f_i=n_io_i`$, $`i=1,2`$ of type $`I_2`$. We denote by $`e_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},7`$ and $`e_9`$ the exceptional divisors corresponding to $`A_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},7`$ and $`A_9`$, and by $`e_8`$ the reducible divisor $`e_9+n_1`$. The divisors $`e_i`$ together with the pullback $`\mathrm{}`$ of a class of a line from $`^2`$ form a standard basis in $`H^2(B,)`$.

The surface $`B`$ has an involution $`\alpha _B`$ which is uniquely characterized by the properties: $`\alpha _B`$ commutes with $`\beta `$, $`\alpha _B`$ induces an involution on $`^1`$, and $`\alpha _B`$ fixes the proper transform of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ pointwise.

Choosing $`e_9`$ as the zero section of $`\beta `$, we can interpret any other section $`\xi `$ as an automorphism $`t_\xi :BB`$ which acts along the fibers of $`\beta `$. The automorphism $`\tau _B=t_{e_1}\alpha _B`$ is again an involution of $`B`$ which commutes with $`\beta `$, induces the same involution on $`^1`$ as $`\alpha _B`$ and has four isolated fixed points sitting on the same fiber of $`\beta `$.

The special rational elliptic surfaces form a four dimensional irreducible family. Their geometry was the subject of \[DOPWa\].

6.1.2. Building $`(X,\tau _X)`$. Choose two special rational elliptic surfaces $`\beta :B^1`$ and $`\beta ^{}:B^{}^1`$ so that the discriminant loci of $`\beta `$ and $`\beta ^{}`$ in $`^1`$ are disjoint, $`\alpha _B`$ and $`\alpha _B^{}`$ induce the same involution on $`^1`$ and the fix loci of $`\tau _B`$ and $`\tau _B^{}`$ sit over different points in $`^1`$. The fiber product $`X:=B\times _^1B^{}`$ is a smooth Calabi-Yau 3-fold which is elliptic and has a freely acting involution $`\tau _B\times \tau _B^{}`$ and another (non-free) involution $`\alpha _X:=\alpha _B\times \alpha _B^{}`$. For concreteness we fix the elliptic fibration of $`X`$ to be the projection $`\pi :XB^{}`$ to $`B^{}`$.

The Calabi-Yau’s form a nine dimensional irreducible family.

6.1.3. Building $`H`$. Choose any ample divisor $`H_0`$ on $`X`$ and take $`H=H_0+n\pi ^{}h^{}`$ for some positive integer $`n`$. Then the divisor $`H`$ will be ample as long as $`h^{}`$ is ample on $`B^{}`$ and $`n0`$.

Choose $`h^{}=25f^{}+144e_1^{}+168\xi ^{}`$ with $`\xi ^{}`$ being the unique section of $`\beta ^{}:^1B^{}`$ satisfying $`[e_4^{}][e_5]^{}=[\xi ^{}]`$. The divisor class $`h^{}\mathrm{Pic}(B^{})`$ is ample on $`B^{}`$ by Lemma 5.7.

### 6.2 The construction of $`V`$

The bundle $`V`$ is build as a non-split extension

$$0V_2VV_30$$

of two $`\tau _X`$-invariant stable vector bundles $`V_2`$ and $`V_3`$ of ranks $`2`$ and $`3`$ respectively.

Each $`V_i`$ is constructed via the spectral cover construction on $`X`$.

6.2.1. Building $`V_2`$ and $`V_3`$. Choose curves $`\overline{C}_2,C_3B`$, so that

* $`\overline{C}_2|𝒪_B(2e_9+2f)|`$ and $`C_3|𝒪_B(3e_9+6f)|`$.
* $`\overline{C}_2`$, $`C_3`$ are $`\alpha _B`$-invariant.
* $`\overline{C}_2`$ and $`C_3`$ are smooth and irreducible.

Set $`C_2:=\overline{C}_2+f_{\mathrm{}}`$ where $`f_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the smooth fiber of $`\beta `$ containing the fixed points of $`\tau _B`$.

The space of such $`\overline{C}_2`$’s is an open set (see section 4) in $`(H^0(B,𝒪_B(2e_9+2f))^+)`$ where $`H^0(B,𝒪_B(2e_9+2f))^\pm `$ denote the spaces of invariants/anti-invariants for the $`\alpha _B`$ action on $`H^0(B,𝒪_B(2e_9+2f)`$. Using the explicit equations (4.3) of the spectral curves we easily that all such $`C_2`$ form a $`2`$ dimensional irreducible family. The space of permissible $`C_3`$’s is an open subset in the disjoint union of the projective spaces $`(H^0(B,𝒪_B(3e_9+6f))^\pm )`$, which have dimensions $`8`$ and $`6`$.

Fix an even integer $`d_2`$ and an integer $`d_3`$ satisfying $`d_31(mod3)`$. Choose line bundles $`𝒩_2`$ and $`𝒩_3`$ on $`C_2`$ and $`C_3`$ respectively, which satisfy

* $`𝒩_i\mathrm{Pic}^{d_i}(C_i)`$ for $`i=1,2`$,
* $`𝒩_i=𝑻_{C_i}(𝒩_i):=\alpha _{B|C_i}^{}𝒩_i𝒪_{C_i}(e_1e_9+f)`$ for $`i=1,2`$.

As explained in sections 4.2 and 4.3, such $`𝒩_2`$’s and $`𝒩_3`$’s are parameterized by abelian subvarieties of $`\mathrm{Pic}^{d_21}(\overline{C}_2)`$ and $`\mathrm{Pic}^{d_3}(C_3)`$ of dimensions equal to the genera of the quotient curves $`\overline{C}_2/\alpha _{\overline{C}_2}`$ and $`C_3/\alpha _{C_3}`$ respectively. Thus there is a one dimensional space of $`𝒩_2`$’s and a six dimensional space of $`𝒩_3`$’s.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i=C_i\times _^1B^{}`$ for $`i=1,2`$. Recall that $`\beta ^{}:B^{}^1`$ has two $`I_2`$ fibers $`f_1^{}`$ and $`f_2^{}`$. Let $`F_1`$, $`F_2`$ be the corresponding (smooth) fibers of $`\beta :B^1`$. Let $`C_iF_j=\{p_{ijk}\}_{k=1}^i`$ for $`i=2,3`$, $`j=1,2`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_iC_i`$ is an elliptic surface having $`2i`$ fibers of type $`I_2`$: $`\{p_{ijk}\}\times f_j^{}`$. Also $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_iX`$ and the natural projection $`\pi _{|\mathrm{\Sigma }_i}:\mathrm{\Sigma }_iB^{}`$ is finite of degree $`i`$.

Fix non-negative integers $`a_2`$ and $`a_3`$. Define

$$V_i=𝑭𝑴_X\left((\mathrm{\Sigma }_i,(\pi _{|\mathrm{\Sigma }_i})^{}𝒩_i𝒪_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_i}\left(a_i\underset{k=1}{\overset{i}{}}(\{p_{i1k}\}\times n_1^{}+\{p_{i2k}\}\times o_2^{})\right))\right)\pi ^{}L_i,$$

where $`L_2`$ and $`L_3`$ are the line bundles

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill L_2& =3(e_1^{}+e_4^{}e_5^{}+e_9^{})+\frac{1}{4}(4d_2)f^{}+(3a_2)(n_1^{}+o_2^{})\hfill \\ \hfill L_3& =2(e_1^{}+e_4^{}e_5^{}+e_9^{})+\frac{1}{3}(16d_3)f^{}+(2+a_3)(n_1^{}+o_2^{}),\hfill \end{array}$$

on $`B^{}`$.

6.2.2. Building $`V`$. Take $`V`$ to be a non-split extension of $`V_2`$ by $`V_3`$ which is $`\tau _X`$-invariant. As explained in section 5.2, the space of all such extensions of $`V_2`$ by $`V_3`$ is the union of projective spaces $`(H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)^+)(H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)^{})`$ where $`H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)^\pm `$ denote the invariants/anti-invariants for the $`\tau _X`$ action on $`H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)`$.

Furthermore, it is shown in section 5.2 that

$$dimH^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)(((1)_B^{}C_3)C_2)(L_2^{}f^{}L_3^{}f^{})=150,$$

and from the explicit description of $`H^1(X,V_3^{}V_2)`$ we see that the $`\pm `$ decomposition breaks this as $`150=70+80`$, so the dimension of the admissible extensions of $`V_2`$ by $`V_3`$ is at least $`79`$.

In other words, for a fixed $`(X,\tau _X,H)`$ as above we find infinitely many components of the moduli space of $`V`$’s satisfying (S), (I) and (C1-3). Each component corresponds to a choice of the integers $`a_2,a_3,d_2`$ and $`d_3`$ and has dimension $`2+8+1+6+79=96`$.

Appendix A Hecke transforms

In this appendix we review the definition and some basic properties of the Hecke transforms (aka ‘elementary modifications’) of vector bundles along divisors. For more details the reader may wish to consult \[Mar82, Mar87\], \[Fri98\].

### A.1 Definition and basic properties

Let $`X`$ be a smooth complex projective variety. Let $`ı:DX`$ be a divisor with normal crossings.

Let $`EX`$ be a vector bundle and let $`(\xi )`$ be a short exact sequence of vector bundles on $`D`$ of the form

$$(\xi ):\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}FE_{|D}G0.$$

There are two Hecke transforms $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^\pm (E)`$ attached to the pair $`(E,(\xi ))`$.

###### Definition A.1

* The down-Hecke transform of $`E`$ along $`(\xi )`$ is the coherent sheaf $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^{}(E)`$ defined by the exact sequence

$$0𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^{}(E)Eı_{}G0.$$
* The up-Hecke transform of $`E`$ along $`(\xi )`$ is the coherent sheaf

$$𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)=(𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi ^{})}^{}(E^{}))^{}$$

The first properties of the Hecke transforms are given by the following two lemmas.

###### Lemma A.2

* The sheaves $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)`$ and $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^{}(E)`$ are locally free.
* The up-Hecke transform $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)`$ of $`E`$ along $`(\xi )`$ fits in the exact sequence

$$0E𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)ı_{}F𝒪_X(D)0.$$
* $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)_{|D}`$ and $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^{}(E)_{|D}`$ are furnished with natural exact sequences

$$(\xi ^{}):\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}G(D)𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^{}(E)_{|D}F0,$$

$$(\xi ^+):\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}G𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)_{|D}F(D)0.$$
* $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{()}^+()`$ and $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{()}^{}()`$ are mutually inverse in the sense that

$$𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi ^{})}^+(𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^{}(E))=E,𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi ^+)}^{}(𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E))=E.$$
* $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^{}(E)=𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)(D)`$.

Proof. The proof of (a) is straightforward. For the proof of (b) recall that by definition the dual bundle $`𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)^{}`$ fits in the short exact sequence of sheaves

$$0𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)^{}E^{}ı_{}(F^{})0.$$

Application of $`om_{𝒪_X}(,𝒪_X)`$ combined with the fact that $`ı_{}(F^{})`$ is torsion yields the long exact sequence

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}0\hfill & & om_{𝒪_X}(E^{},𝒪_X)\hfill & & om_{𝒪_X}(𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)^{},𝒪_X)\hfill & & \\ & & xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X)\hfill & & xt_{𝒪_X}^1(E^{},𝒪_X)\hfill & & \mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}$$

Furthermore $`E^{}`$ and $`𝒪_X`$ are both locally free and hence every extension of $`E^{}`$ by $`𝒪_X`$ splits locally yielding $`xt_{𝒪_X}^1(E^{},𝒪_X)=0`$. Thus we obtain the exact sequence

$$0E𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X)0.$$

To calculate $`xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X)`$ consider the ideal sequence of the divisor $`D`$:

$$0𝒪_X𝒪_X(D)𝒪_D(D)0.$$

After apllying $`om_{𝒪_X}(ı_{}(F^{}),)`$ and taking into account that $`𝒪_X`$ and $`𝒪_X(D)`$ are locally free sheaves, we get the exact sequence

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}0\hfill & & om_{𝒪_X}(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_DD)\hfill & & xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X)\hfill & & \\ & & xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X(D))\hfill & & \mathrm{}\hfill & & \end{array}$$

To understand the map

(A.1)
$$xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X)xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X(D)),$$

consider a point $`pDX`$. Let $`R:=𝒪_{X,p}`$ and let $`tR`$ be a local equation of $`D`$ around $`p`$. Let $`M`$ be the finitely generated $`R/tR`$ module whose sheafification gives $`F^{}D`$ in a neighborhood of $`p`$.

An element $`(\alpha )xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X)_p`$ of the stalk of $`xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X)`$ at $`p`$ is an extension of $`R`$-modules of the form

$$(\alpha ):\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}RAM0,$$

where $`M`$ is given its $`R`$-module structure via $`RR/tR`$.

The image $`(\beta )xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X(D))_p`$ of $`(\alpha )`$ under the map (A.1) is just the pushout of the extension $`(\alpha )`$ via the homomorphism

$$R\frac{1}{t}R.$$

That is, there is a commutative diagram

and $`B=(A\frac{1}{t}R)/R`$.

On the other hand, since $`tR`$ annihilates $`M`$ we have $`\pi (tx)=t\pi (x)=0`$, for all $`xA`$. In particular the map

$$\begin{array}{cccc}s:\hfill & A\frac{1}{t}R\hfill & & \frac{1}{t}R\hfill \\ & & & \\ & x\frac{f}{t}\hfill & & \frac{tx}{t}+\frac{f}{t},\hfill \end{array}$$

is well defined and descends to $`B`$ to a map splitting the exact sequence

$$0\frac{1}{t}RBM0.$$

Therefore the map

$$xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X)xt_{𝒪_X}^1(ı_{}(F^{}),𝒪_X(D))$$

is the zero map and we get an isomorphism

which concludes the proof of the lemma. $`\mathrm{}`$

There is a natural symmetry between the up and down Hecke transforms. If $`X`$, $`D`$, $`E`$ and $`(\xi )`$ are as above, then we can form the dual exact sequence

$$(\xi ^{}):\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}G^{}E_{|D}^{}F^{}0,$$

and the up and down Hecke transforms of $`E^{}`$ along $`(\xi ^{})`$. The relation with the Hecke transforms of $`E`$ is given by the following lemma.

###### Lemma A.3

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E)^{}\hfill & & 𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi ^{})}^{}(E^{})\hfill \\ & & \\ 𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^{}(E)^{}\hfill & & 𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi ^{})}^+(E^{})\hfill \end{array}$$

Proof. Clear. $`\mathrm{}`$

### A.2 Geometric interpretation - flips

Let $`(E,\xi )`$ be as in Section A.1 and let $`\tau (E)`$ be the relatively ample tautological line bundle. Denote by $`Y:=\mathrm{Bl}_{(F)}(E)`$ the blow-up of $`(E)`$ along $`(F)`$.

Let $`p:Y(E)`$ be the blow-up morphism and let $`Y`$ be the exceptional divisor. The image of $`Y`$ under the full linear system $`p^{}\tau 𝒪_Y()`$ is again a projective bundle $`(E^{})X`$. We have the following diagram

where $`\tau (E)`$ and $`\tau ^{}(E^{})`$ are relatively ample line bundles having the properties

$$\begin{array}{ccc}f_{}\tau \hfill & =& E^{}\hfill \\ & & \\ f_{}^{}\tau ^{}\hfill & =& E_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\hfill \\ & & \\ p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\tau ^{}\hfill & =& p^{}\tau 𝒪_Y()\hfill \end{array}$$

To identify $`E^{}`$ in terms of Hecke transforms consider the ideal sequence of $``$:

$$0𝒪_Y()𝒪_Y𝒪_{}0.$$

Tensoring by $`p^{}\tau `$ we get

(A.2)
$$0p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\tau ^{}p^{}\tau p^{}\tau 𝒪_{}0.$$

Let $`\pi :YX`$ be the composition $`\pi =fp=f^{}p^{}`$. Consider the $`\pi `$ direct image of (A.2):

$$0\pi _{}p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\tau ^{}\pi _{}p^{}\tau \pi _{}(p^{}\tau 𝒪_{})R^1\pi _{}p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\tau ^{}\mathrm{}$$

Observe first that every fiber of $`\pi `$ is either a projective space or has two irreducible components (meeting transversally) each of which is a projective space. Furthermore $`p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\tau ^{}`$ restricted on a component $`P`$ of the fiber is either $`𝒪_P(1)`$ or $`𝒪_P`$ and hence by Serre’s vanishing theorem doesn’t have higher cohomology. Thus by the base change and cohomology theorem $`R^1\pi _{}p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\tau ^{}=0`$. Next

$$\pi _{}p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\tau ^{}=f_{}^{}p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}p_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}\tau ^{}=f_{}^{}\tau ^{}=E_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}.$$

Here we used that $`p^{}:Y(E^{})`$ has connected fibers.

Similarly $`\pi _{}p^{}\tau =E^{}`$ and we get

$$0E_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}E^{}\pi _{}(p^{}\tau 𝒪_{})0.$$

But $`\pi _{}(p^{}\tau 𝒪_{})=ı_{}\overline{f}_{}(\tau _{|(F)})`$ where $`\overline{f}:(F)D`$ is the natural projection. Hence we get the short exact sequence

$$0E_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}E^{}ı_{}F^{}0$$

and thus

$$E^{}=𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(\xi )}^+(E).$$

### A.3 An example

Let $`X`$ and $`D`$ be as before. One has the short exact sequence:

We can form the up and down Hecke transforms of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$ along $`(D)`$.

###### Lemma A.4

Denote by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1(\mathrm{log}D)`$ the sheaf of one forms on $`X`$ with logarithmic poles along $`D`$. Then the up and down Hecke transforms of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$ along $`(D)`$ can be identified as follows

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(D)}^+(\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1)\hfill & =& \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1(\mathrm{log}D)\hfill \\ & & \\ 𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(D)}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1)\hfill & =& \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1(\mathrm{log}D)𝒪_X(D).\hfill \end{array}$$

Proof. To prove the first equality observe that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1(\mathrm{log}D)`$ fits in the residue sequence

$$0\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1(\mathrm{log}D)ı_{}𝒪_D0,$$

where the map $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1(\mathrm{log}D)ı_{}𝒪_D`$ is given by the residue along $`D`$. On the other hand, according to Lemma A.2 we have an exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1𝑯𝒆𝒄𝒌𝒆_{(D)}^+(\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1)ı_{}𝒪_D0$$

and it is easy to check that the two extension classes coincide. $`\mathrm{}`$