text:
# Contents

## 1 Introduction

If we fix a linear system $`|D|_l`$ on a smooth projective surface $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ over $`\mathrm{C}`$ and singularity types $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$ we denote by $`V^{irr}=V_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ the variety of irreducible curves in $`|D|_l`$ with precisely $`r`$ singular points of the given types. We would like to give numerical conditions, depending on the singularity types, the linear system and the surface, which ensure that the family $`V`$ is irreducible, once it is non-empty.

In order to keep the presentation as short as possible we refer the reader to \[Kei02\] for an introduction to the significance of the question and for most of the notation we are going to use. Moreover, we will apply many of the technical results shown there. The proof runs along the same lines as the original one by showing that some irreducible “regular” subscheme of $`V`$ is dense in $`V`$. We do this again by considering a morphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ on a certain subscheme of $`V`$ and comparing dimensions. However, the subscheme which we consider and the morphism are completely different.

We now introduce these new objects. In Section LABEL:sec:irred we then formulate the main results, and we prove them in Section LABEL:sec:technical-lemmata. Lemma LABEL:lem:irred-E-fix is the most important technical adjustment which leads to the improved coefficient.

### 1.1 The Deformation Determinacy

If $`𝒮`$ is a topological (respectively analytical) singularity type with representative $`(C,z)`$ then

$$\nu ^s(𝒮)=\nu ^s(C,z)=\mathrm{min}\left\{m0|𝔪_{\mathrm{\Sigma },z}^{m+1}I^s(C,z)\right\}$$

respectively

$$\nu ^a(𝒮)=\nu ^a(C,z)=\mathrm{min}\left\{m0|𝔪_{\mathrm{\Sigma },z}^{m+1}I^a(C,z)\right\},$$

where $`I^s(C,z)=𝒥_{X^s(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma },z}`$ is the singularity ideal of the topological singularity type $`(C,z)`$ and $`I^a(C,z)=𝒥_{X^a(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma },z}`$ is the analytical singularity ideal of $`(C,z)`$ respectively (cf. \[Kei02\] Section 1.3). These are invariants of the topological (respectively analytical) singularity type satisfying (cf. \[GLS00\] Section 1.2 and 1.3)

$$\nu ^s(𝒮)\tau ^{es}(𝒮)\text{ respectively }\nu ^a(𝒮)\tau (𝒮),$$

and they are called *topological deformation determinacy* (respectively *analytical deformation determinacy*)

### 1.2 Singularity Schemes

For a reduced curve $`C\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ we recall the definition of the zero-dimensional schemes $`X_{fix}^{es}(C)`$ and $`X_{fix}^{ea}(C)`$ from \[GLS00\] Section 1.1. They are defined by the ideal sheaves $`𝒥_{X_{fix}^{es}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ and $`𝒥_{X_{fix}^{ea}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$ respectively, given by the following stalks

* $`𝒥_{X_{fix}^{es}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma },z}=I_{fix}^{es}(C,z)=\{g𝒪_{\mathrm{\Sigma },z}|\begin{array}{c}f+\epsilon g\text{ is equisingular over }\mathrm{C}\left[\epsilon \right]/\left(\epsilon ^2\right)\\ \text{ along the trivial section}\end{array}\}`$, where $`f𝒪_{\mathrm{\Sigma },z}`$ is a local equation of $`C`$ at $`z`$.
* $`𝒥_{X_{fix}^{ea}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma },z}=I_{fix}^{ea}(C,z)=f+𝔪\frac{f}{x},\frac{f}{y}𝒪_{\mathrm{\Sigma },z}`$, where $`x,y`$ denote local coordinates of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ at $`z`$ and $`f𝒪_{\mathrm{\Sigma },z}`$ is a local equation of $`C`$.

So by definition we have

$$\mathrm{deg}(X_{fix}^{es}(C),z)=\tau ^{es}(C,z)+2\text{ and }\mathrm{deg}(X_{fix}^{ea}(C),z)=\tau (C,z)+2.$$

Throughout this article we will frequently treat topological and analytical singularities at the same time. Whenever we do so, we will write $`X_{fix}^{}(C)`$ for $`X_{fix}^{es}(C)`$ respectively for $`X_{fix}^{ea}(C)`$, we will write $`\nu ^{}(𝒮)`$ for $`\nu ^s(𝒮)`$ respectively $`\nu ^a(𝒮)`$, and we will write $`\tau ^{}(𝒮)`$ for $`\tau ^{es}(𝒮)`$ respectively $`\tau (𝒮)`$. For the schemes borrowed from \[Kei02\] we stick to the analogous convention made there.

### 1.3 Equisingular Families and Fibrations

Given a divisor $`D\mathrm{Div}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ and topological (respectively analytical) singularity types $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$.

We denote by $`V^{irr,fix}=V_{|D|}^{irr,fix}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ the open subscheme of $`V^{irr}`$ given as

$$V^{irr,fix}=\left\{CV_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)\right|h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))=0\}.$$

We define the fibration $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_D(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ by

sending a curve $`C`$ to the unordered tuple of its singular points.

Note that $`H^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)}(D))/H^0(𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ is the tangent space of the fibre $`\mathrm{\Phi }^1\left(\mathrm{\Phi }(C)\right)`$ has at $`CV^{irr}`$, so that

$$dim\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^1\left(\mathrm{\Phi }(C)\right)\right)h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)}(D))1.$$
(1.1)
Moreover, suppose that $`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))=0`$, then the germ of the fibration at $`C`$

$$(\mathrm{\Phi },C):(V,C)(\mathrm{Sym}^r(\mathrm{\Sigma }),\mathrm{Sing}(C))$$

is smooth of fibre dimension $`h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)}(D))1`$, i. e. locally at $`C`$ the morphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a projection of the product of the smooth base space with the smooth fibre. This implies in particular, that close to $`C`$ there is a curve having its singularities in very general position. (Cf. \[Los98\] Proposition 2.1 (e).)

## 2 The Main Results

In this section we give sufficient conditions for the irreducibility of equisingular families of curves on certain surfaces with Picard number one – including the projective plane, general surfaces in $`\mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^3`$ and general K3-surfaces –, on products of curves, and on a subclass of geometrically ruled surfaces.

### 2.1 Surfaces with Picard Number One

###### Theorem 2.1

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be a surface such that

* $`\mathrm{NS}(\mathrm{\Sigma })=L\mathrm{Z}`$ with $`L`$ ample, and
* $`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },C)=0`$, whenever $`C`$ is effective.

Let $`D\mathrm{Div}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$, let $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$ be topological (respectively analytical) singularity types.

Suppose that

* $`DK_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is big and nef,
* $`D+K_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is nef,
* $`\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)<\beta (DK_\mathrm{\Sigma })^2`$ for some $`0<\beta \frac{1}{4}`$, and
* $`\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2<\gamma (DK_\mathrm{\Sigma })^2`$,
where $`\gamma =\frac{\left(1+\sqrt{14\beta }\right)^2L^2}{4\chi (𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma })+\mathrm{max}\{0,2K_\mathrm{\Sigma }.L\}+6L^2}`$.

Then $`V_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is empty or irreducible of the expected dimension. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 2.2

If we set

$$\gamma =\frac{36\alpha }{(3\alpha +4)^2}\text{ with }\alpha =\frac{4\chi (𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma })+\mathrm{max}\{0,2K_\mathrm{\Sigma }.L\}+6L^2}{L^2},$$

then a simple calculation shows that (LABEL:eq:irred-p3:1) becomes redundant. For this we have to take into account that $`\tau ^{}(𝒮)1`$ for any singularity type $`𝒮`$. The claim then follows with $`\beta =\frac{1}{3}\gamma \frac{1}{4}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We now apply the result in several special cases, combining the above theorem with the existence results in \[KeT02\] and the T-smoothness results in \[GLS97\].

###### Corollary 2.3

Let $`d3`$, $`L\mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^2`$ be a line, and $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$ be topological or analytical singularity types.

Suppose that

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2<\frac{90}{289}(d+3)^2.$$

Then $`V_{|dL|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is non-empty, irreducible and T-smooth. $`\mathrm{}`$

The best general results in this case can still be found in \[GLS00\] (see also \[Los98\] Corollary 6.1), where the coefficient on the right hand side is $`\frac{9}{10}`$.

A smooth complete intersection surface with Picard number one satisfies the assumptions of Theorem LABEL:thm:irred-p3. Thus by the Theorem of Noether the result applies in particular to general surfaces in $`\mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^3`$.

###### Corollary 2.4

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^3`$ be a smooth hypersurface of degree $`n4`$, let $`H\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be a hyperplane section, and suppose that the Picard number of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is one. Let $`dn+6`$ and let $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$ be topological (respectively analytical) singularity types.

Suppose that

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2<\frac{6\left(n^33n^2+8n6\right)n^2}{\left(n^33n^2+10n6\right)^2}(d+4n)^2,$$

Then $`V_{|dH|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is non-empty and irreducible of the expected dimension.

###### Addendum:

If we, moreover, assume that $`dn\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+1\right)`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, then $`V_{|dH|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is also T-smooth. $`\mathrm{}`$

A general K3-surface has Picard number one and in this situation, by the Kodaira Vanishing Theorem $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ also satisfies the assumption (ii) in Theorem LABEL:thm:irred-p3.

###### Corollary 2.5

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be a smooth K3-surface with $`\mathrm{NS}(\mathrm{\Sigma })=L\mathrm{Z}`$ with $`L`$ ample and set $`n=L^2`$. Let $`d>0`$, $`D_adL`$ and let $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$ be topological (respectively analytical) singularity types.

Suppose that

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2<\frac{54n^2+72n}{(11n+12)^2}d^2n.$$

Then $`V_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is irreducible and T-smooth, once it is non-empty.

###### Addendum:

If $`d19`$, then certainly $`V_{|dH|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is non-empty. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 2.2 Products of Curves

If $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=C_1\times C_2`$ is the product of two smooth projective curves, then for a general choice of $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ the Néron–Severi group will be generated by two fibres of the canonical projections, by abuse of notation also denoted by $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$. If both curves are elliptic, then “general” just means that the two curves are non-isogenous.

###### Theorem 2.6

Let $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ be two smooth projective curves of genera $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$ respectively with $`g_1g_20`$, such that for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=C_1\times C_2`$ the Néron–Severi group is $`\mathrm{NS}(\mathrm{\Sigma })=C_1\mathrm{Z}C_2\mathrm{Z}`$.

Let $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$ be topological or analytical singularity types, and let $`D\mathrm{Div}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ such that $`D_aaC_1+bC_2`$ with

$$a\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{max}\{2,\nu ^{}(𝒮_i)|i=1,\mathrm{},r\},\hfill & \text{ if }g_2=0,\hfill \\ 2g_21,\hfill & \text{ else},\hfill \end{array}$$

and

$$b\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{max}\{2,\nu ^{}(𝒮_i)|i=1,\mathrm{},r\},\hfill & \text{ if }g_1=0,\hfill \\ 2g_11,\hfill & \text{ else}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Suppose that

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2<\gamma (DK_\mathrm{\Sigma })^2,$$
(2.5)
where $`\gamma `$ may be taken from the following table with $`\alpha =\frac{a2g_2+2}{b2g_1+2}>0`$.

Then $`V_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is empty or irreducible of the expected dimension. $`\mathrm{}`$

Only in the case $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^1\times \mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^1`$ we get a constant $`\gamma `$ which does not depend on the chosen divisor $`D`$, while in the remaining cases the ratio of $`a`$ and $`b`$ is involved in $`\gamma `$. This means that an asymptotical behaviour can only be examined if the ratio remains unchanged.

### 2.3 Geometrically Ruled Surfaces

Let $`\pi :\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{P}()C`$ be a geometrically ruled surface with normalised bundle $``$ (in the sense of \[Har77\] V.2.8.1). The Néron–Severi group of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is $`\mathrm{NS}(\mathrm{\Sigma })=C_0\mathrm{Z}F\mathrm{Z}`$ with intersection matrix $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}e& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)`$ where $`F\mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^1`$ is a fibre of $`\pi `$, $`C_0`$ a section of $`\pi `$ with $`𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma }(C_0)𝒪_{\mathrm{P}()}(1)`$, $`g=g(C)`$ the genus of $`C`$, $`𝔢=\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$ and $`e=\mathrm{deg}(𝔢)g`$. For the canonical divisor we have $`K_\mathrm{\Sigma }_a2C_0+(2g2e)F`$.

###### Theorem 2.7

Let $`\pi :\mathrm{\Sigma }C`$ be a geometrically ruled surface with $`e0`$. Let $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$ be topological or analytical singularity types, and let $`D\mathrm{Div}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ such that $`D_aaC_0+bF`$ with $`a\mathrm{max}\{2,\nu ^{}(𝒮_i)|i=1,\mathrm{},r\}`$, and,

$$b>\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{max}\{1,\nu ^{}(𝒮_i)1|i=1,\mathrm{},r\},\hfill & \text{ if }g=0,\hfill \\ 2g2+\frac{ae}{2},\hfill & \text{ if }g>0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Suppose that

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2<\gamma (DK_\mathrm{\Sigma })^2,$$
(2.6)
where $`\gamma `$ may be taken from the following table with $`\alpha =\frac{a+2}{b+22g{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{ae}{2}}}>0`$.

| $`g`$ | $`e`$ | $`\gamma `$ |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`0`$ | $`0`$ | $`\frac{1}{24}`$ |
| $`1`$ | $`0`$ | $`\frac{1}{\mathrm{max}\{24,2\alpha \}}`$ |
| $`1`$ | $`1`$ | $`\frac{1}{\mathrm{max}\{\mathrm{min}\{30+{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{16}{\alpha }}+4\alpha ,40+9\alpha \},{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{13}{2}}\alpha \}}`$ |
| $`2`$ | $`0`$ | $`\frac{1}{\mathrm{max}\{24+16g,4g\alpha \}}`$ |
| $`2`$ | $`<0`$ | $`\frac{1}{\mathrm{max}\{\mathrm{min}\{24+16g9e\alpha ,18+16g9e\alpha {\scriptscriptstyle \frac{16}{e\alpha }}\},4g\alpha 9e\alpha \}}`$ |

Then $`V_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is empty or irreducible of the expected dimension. $`\mathrm{}`$

Once more, only in the case $`g=0`$, i. e. when $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^1\times \mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^1`$, we are in the lucky situation that the constant $`\gamma `$ does not at all depend on the chosen divisor $`D`$, whereas in the case $`g1`$ the ratio of $`a`$ and $`b`$ is involved in $`\gamma `$. This means that an asymptotical behaviour can only be examined if the ratio remains unchanged.

If $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a product $`C\times \mathrm{P}_\mathrm{C}^1`$ the constant $`\gamma `$ here is the same as in Section LABEL:subsec:irreducibility:product-surfaces.

## 3 The Proofs

Our approach to the problem proceeds along the lines of an unpublished result of Greuel, Lossen and Shustin (cf. \[GLS98\]), which is based on ideas of Chiantini and Ciliberto (cf. \[ChC99\]). It is a slight modification of the proof given in \[Kei02\].

We tackle the problem in three steps:

###### Step 1:

By \[Kei02\] Theorem 3.1 we know that the open subvariety $`V^{irr,reg}`$ of curves in $`V^{irr}`$ with $`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))=0`$ is always irreducible, and hence so is its closure in $`V^{irr}`$.

###### Step 2:

We find conditions which ensure that the open subvariety $`V^{irr,fix}`$ of curves in $`V^{irr}`$ with $`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))=0`$ is dense in $`V^{irr}`$.

###### Step 3:

And finally, we combine these conditions with conditions which guarantee that $`V^{irr,reg}`$ is dense in $`V^{irr,fix}`$ by showing that they share some open dense subset $`V_U^{gen}`$ of curves with singularities in very general position.

More precisely, taking Lemma LABEL:lem:irred-F into account, we deduce from Lemma LABEL:lem:irred-G conditions which ensure that there exists a very general subset $`U\mathrm{\Sigma }^r`$ such that the family $`V_U^{gen}=V_{|D|,U}^{gen}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$, as defined there, satisfies

1. $`V_U^{gen}`$ is dense in $`V^{irr,fix}`$, and
2. $`V_U^{gen}V^{irr,reg}`$.

But then $`V^{irr,reg}`$ is dense in $`V^{irr}`$ and $`V^{irr}`$ is irreducible by Step 1. $`\mathrm{}`$

The difficult part is Step 2. For this one we consider the restriction of the morphism (cf. Subsection LABEL:subsec:families)

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:V^{irr}\mathrm{Sym}^r(\mathrm{\Sigma })=:$$

to an irreducible component $`V^{}`$ of $`V^{irr}`$ not contained in the closure $`\overline{V^{irr,fix}}`$ in $`V^{irr}`$. Knowing, that the dimension of $`V^{}`$ is at least the expected dimension $`dim\left(V^{irr,fix}\right)`$ we deduce that the codimension of $`\mathrm{\Phi }\left(V^{}\right)`$ in $``$ is at most $`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))`$, where $`CV^{}`$ (cf. Lemma LABEL:lem:irred-E-fix). It thus suffices to find conditions which contradict this inequality, that is, we have to get our hands on $`\mathrm{codim}_{}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }(V^{})\right)`$. This is achieved by applying the results of \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.1 to Lemma 4.6 to the zero-dimensional scheme $`X_0=X_{fix}^{}(C)`$.

These considerations lead to the following proofs.

* We may assume that $`V^{irr}=V_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is non-empty. As indicated above it suffices to show that:

###### Step 2:

$`V^{irr}=\overline{V^{irr,fix}}`$, where $`V^{irr,fix}=V_{|D|}^{irr,fix}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$, and

###### Step 3:

the conditions of Lemma LABEL:lem:irred-G are fulfilled.

For Step 3 we note that $`\nu ^{}(𝒮_i)\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)`$. Thus (LABEL:eq:irred-p3:2) implies that

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\nu ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2\gamma (DK_\mathrm{\Sigma })^2\frac{1}{2}(DK_\mathrm{\Sigma })^2,$$

which gives the first condition in Lemma LABEL:lem:irred-G. Since a surface with Picard number one has no curves of selfintersection zero, the second condition in Lemma LABEL:lem:irred-G is void, while the last condition is satisfied by (LABEL:eq:irred-p3:0).

It remains to show Step 2, i. e. $`V^{irr}=\overline{V^{irr,fix}}`$. Suppose the contrary, that is, there is an irreducible curve $`C_0V^{irr}\overline{V^{irr,fix}}`$, in particular $`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_0/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))>0`$ for $`X_0=X_{fix}^{}(C_0)`$. Since $`\mathrm{deg}(X_0)=_{i=1}^r\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)`$ and $`_{z\mathrm{\Sigma }}\left(\mathrm{deg}(X_{0,z})\right)^2=_{i=1}^r\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2`$ the assumptions (0)-(3) of \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.1 and (4) of \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.3 are fulfilled. Thus \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.3 implies that $`C_0`$ satisfies Condition (LABEL:eq:irred-E-fix:1) in Lemma LABEL:lem:irred-E-fix below, which it cannot satisfy by the same Lemma. Thus we have derived a contradiction. ∎

* The assumptions on $`a`$ and $`b`$ ensure that $`DK_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is big and nef and that $`D+K_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is nef. Thus, once we know that (LABEL:eq:irred-products-of-curves:1) implies Condition (3) in \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.1 we can do the same proof as in Theorem LABEL:thm:irred-p3, just replacing \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.3 by \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.4.

For Condition (3) we note that

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\mathrm{deg}\left(X_{fix}^{}(𝒮_i)\right)\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\left(\tau ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2\frac{1}{24}(DK_\mathrm{\Sigma })^2<\frac{1}{4}(DK_\mathrm{\Sigma })^2.$$

* The proof is identical to that of Theorem LABEL:thm:irred-products-of-curves, just replacing \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.4 by \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.6. ∎

### 3.1 Some Technical Lemmata

Can have applied \[Kei02\] Lemma 4.1 to Lemma 4.6 to the zero-dimensional scheme $`X_0=X_{fix}^{}(C)`$, for a curve $`CV^{irr}\overline{V^{irr,fix}}`$, in order to find with the aid of Bogomolov instability curves $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ and subschemes $`X_i^0X_i`$, where $`X_i=X_{i1}:\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$, such that for $`X_S=_{i=1}^mX_i^0`$

$$h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_0}(D))+\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}\left(h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma }(\mathrm{\Delta }_i))1\right)<\mathrm{\#}X_S.$$

And we are now going to show that this simply is not possible.

###### Lemma 3.1

Let $`D\mathrm{Div}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$, $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$ be pairwise distinct topological (respectively analytical) singularity types. Suppose that $`V_{|D|}^{irr,fix}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ is non-empty.

Then there exists no curve111For a subset $`UV`$ of a topological space $`V`$ we denote by $`\overline{U}`$ the closure of $`U`$ in $`V`$. $`CV_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)\overline{V_{|D|}^{irr,fix}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)}`$ such that for the zero-dimensional scheme $`X_0=X_{fix}^{}(C)`$ there exist curves $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_m\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and zero-dimensional locally complete intersections $`X_i^0X_{i1}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$, where $`X_i=X_{i1}:\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$ such that $`X_S=_{i=1}^mX_i^0`$ satisfies

$$h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_0}(D))+\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}\left(h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma }(\mathrm{\Delta }_i))1\right)<\mathrm{\#}X_S.$$
(3.1)
* Throughout the proof we use the notation $`V^{irr}=V_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$ and $`V^{irr,fix}=V_{|D|}^{irr,fix}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$.

Suppose there exists a curve $`CV^{irr}\overline{V^{irr,fix}}`$ satisfying the assumption of the Lemma, and let $`V^{}`$ be the irreducible component of $`V^{irr}`$ containing $`C`$. Moreover, let $`C_0V^{irr,fix}`$.

We consider in the following the morphism from Subsection LABEL:subsec:families

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_{|D|}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r):V_{|D|}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)\mathrm{Sym}^r(\mathrm{\Sigma })=:.$$

###### Step 1:

$`h^0\left(𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C_0)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D)\right)=h^0\left(𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D)\right)h^1\left(𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D)\right).`$

By the choice of $`C_0`$ we have

$$0=H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C_0)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma }(D))H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒪_{X_{fix}^{}(C_0)}(D))=0,$$

and thus $`D`$ is non-special, i. e. $`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma }(D))=0`$. But then

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C_0)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))& =& h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma }(D))\mathrm{deg}\left(X_{fix}^{}(C_0)\right)\hfill \\ & =& h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒪_\mathrm{\Sigma }(D))\mathrm{deg}\left(X_{fix}^{}(C)\right)\hfill \\ & =& h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D)).\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Step 2:

$`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)}(D))\mathrm{codim}_{}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\left(V^{}\right)\right)`$.

Suppose the contrary, that is $`dim\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\left(V^{}\right)\right)<dim()h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))`$. The vanishing of $`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C_0)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))`$ implies that $`V^{irr}`$ is smooth of the expected dimension $`dim\left(V^{irr,fix}\right)`$ at $`C_0`$. Therefore, and by Step 1 and Equation (LABEL:eq:psi-fix) we have

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill dim\left(V^{}\right)& & dim\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\left(V^{}\right)\right)+dim\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^1\left(\mathrm{\Phi }(C)\right)\right)\hfill \\ & <& dim()h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))+h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))1\hfill \\ & =& 2r+h^0(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C_0)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))1=dim\left(V^{irr,fix}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

However, any irreducible component of $`V^{irr}`$ has at least the expected dimension $`dim\left(V^{irr,fix}\right)`$, which gives a contradiction.

###### Step 3:

$`\mathrm{codim}_{}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\left(V^{}\right)\right)\mathrm{\#}X_S_{i=1}^mdim|\mathrm{\Delta }_i|_l`$.

The existence of the subschemes $`X_i^0X_{fix}^{}(C)\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ imposes at least $`\mathrm{\#}X_i^0dim|\mathrm{\Delta }_i|_l`$ conditions on $`X_{fix}^{}(C)`$ and increases thus the codimension of $`\mathrm{\Phi }\left(V^{}\right)`$ by the same number.

###### Step 4:

Derive a contradiction.

Collecting the results we derive the following contradiction:

$$\begin{array}{c}h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)}(D))_{_{_{\text{Step 2}}}}\mathrm{codim}_{}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }\left(V^{}\right)\right)\hfill \\ \hfill _{_{_{\text{Step 3}}}}\mathrm{\#}X_S_{i=1}^mdim|\mathrm{\Delta }_i|_l>_{_{_{\text{(}\text{LABEL:eq:irred-E-fix:1}\text{)}}}}h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X_{fix}^{}(C)}(D)).\end{array}$$

The next two lemmata provide conditions which ensure that $`V^{irr,reg}`$ and $`V^{irr,fix}`$ share some dense subset $`V_U^{gen}`$, and thus that $`V^{irr,reg}`$ is dense in $`V^{irr,fix}`$.

###### Lemma 3.2

Let $`𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r`$ be topological (respectively analytical) singularity types, let $`D\mathrm{Div}(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ and let $`V^{irr}=V_{|D|}^{irr}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$.

There exists a very general subset $`U\mathrm{\Sigma }^r`$ such that222Here $``$ means either topological equivalence $`_t`$ or contact equivalence $`_c`$. – By a very general subset of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^r`$ we mean the complement of at most countably many closed subvarieties. $`V_U^{gen}=V_{|D|,U}^{gen}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)=\left\{CV^{irr}\right|\underset{¯}{z}U,(C,z_i)S_i,i=1,\mathrm{},r\}`$ is dense in $`V_{|D|}^{irr,fix}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$.

* This follows from the remark in Subsection LABEL:subsec:families. ∎

###### Lemma 3.3

With the notation of Lemma LABEL:lem:irred-F we assume that

1. $`(DK_\mathrm{\Sigma })^22_{i=1}^k\left(\nu ^{}(𝒮_i)+2\right)^2`$,
2. $`(DK_\mathrm{\Sigma }).B>\mathrm{max}\{\nu ^{}(𝒮_i)+1|i=1,\mathrm{},r\}`$ for any irreducible curve $`B`$ with $`B^2=0`$ and $`dim|B|_a>0`$, and
3. $`DK_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is nef.

Then there exists a very general subset $`U\mathrm{\Sigma }^r`$ such that $`V_U^{gen}V_{|D|}^{irr,reg}(𝒮_1,\mathrm{},𝒮_r)`$.

* By \[KeT02\] Theorem 2.1 we know that there is a very general subset $`U\mathrm{\Sigma }^r`$ such that for $`\underset{¯}{z}U`$ and $`\underset{¯}{\nu }=(\nu ^{}(𝒮_1)+1,\mathrm{},\nu ^{}(𝒮_r)+1)`$ we have

$$h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X(\underset{¯}{\nu };\underset{¯}{z})/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))=0.$$

However, if $`CV^{irr}`$ and $`\underset{¯}{z}U`$ with $`(C,z_i)𝒮_i`$, then by the definition of $`\nu ^{}(𝒮_i)`$ we have

$$𝒥_{X(\underset{¯}{\nu };\underset{¯}{z})/\mathrm{\Sigma }}𝒥_{X(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }},$$

and hence the vanishing of $`H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X(\underset{¯}{\nu };\underset{¯}{z})/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))`$ implies $`h^1(\mathrm{\Sigma },𝒥_{X(C)/\mathrm{\Sigma }}(D))=0`$, i. e. $`CV^{irr,reg}`$. ∎

Thomas Keilen
Mathematics Institute
University of Warwick
Coventry CV4 7AL