text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The physics of high-density QCD has become an increasingly active subject of research, both from experimental and theoretical points of view. In particular, the collider facilities such as the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC), and CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC) will be able to probe new regimes of dense quark matter at very small Bjorken $`x`$ or/and at large $`A`$, with rather different dynamical properties. Basically, new phenomena associated with an ultradense environment that may be created in the central collision region of these reactions are expected .

From the analysis of nucleus-nucleus collisions for RHIC energies and beyond, we have that the perturbative QCD processes should determine the initial conditions, with most of the entropy and transverse energy presumably produced already during very early times (within the first 2 $`fm`$ after the nuclear contact) by frequent, mostly inelastic, semihard gluonic collisions involving typical momentum transfers of only a few $`GeV`$ . In particular, at early times, $`\tau 1/p_T1/p_00.1fm`$ for $`p_02GeV`$, semihard production of minijets will set the stage for further evolution of the system. The calculation of this process is based on the jet cross section for $`p_T>p_0`$, with the parton densities evaluated at scale $`p_T`$, with $`x`$ values at central rapidities as low as $`x𝒪(10^4)`$ in $`Pb+Pb`$ collisions at LHC ($`5.5TeV/nucleon)`$. At the lower RHIC energies, $`x𝒪(10^2)`$ at central rapidities, and at higher rapidities the $`x`$ values probed can be even smaller. Thus the small $`x`$ behavior of the parton densities strongly influences the initial conditions of the minijet system.

While the deep inelastic scattering data from HERA continues to refine the parton densities at small $`x`$, uncertainties in the distributions still exist, mainly associated to the high parton density effects present in this kinematical region. Such effects would be present in nucleus-nucleus ($`AA`$) collisions at collider energies, modifying the perturbative QCD predictions for global observables, such as particle multiplicities and transverse energy production, as well as minijet production, heavy quarks, their bound states, and dilepton production . Consequently, the high density effects are one of the major theoretical issues in modeling the QCD processes in nuclear collisions.

In this paper we analyze the high density effects in the behavior of the nuclear gluon distribution $`xG_A`$ and nuclear structure function $`F_2^A`$ at small $`x`$ and a large perturbative scale $`Q^2`$. Our study is motivated by the perspective that in a near future an experimental investigation of these effects at small $`x`$ and $`Q^2>1GeV^2`$ using $`eA`$ scattering could occur in RHIC, as well as at DESY Hadron Electron Ring Accelerator (HERA). Furthermore, our goal is to improve the description proposed by Eskola, Kolhinen and Salgado (EKS) taking into account the high parton densities effects in the parton evolution at small $`x`$.

In recent years several experiments have been dedicated to high precision measurements of deep inelastic lepton scattering (DIS) off nuclei. Experiments at CERN and Fermilab focus especially on the region of small values of the Bjorken variable $`x=Q^2/2M\nu `$, where $`Q^2=q^2`$ is the squared four-momentum transfer, $`\nu `$ the energy transfer and $`M`$ the nucleon mass. The data , taken over a wide kinematic range, have shown that the proton and neutron structure functions are modified by a nuclear environment. The modifications depends on the parton momentum fraction: for momentum fractions $`x<0.1`$ and $`0.3<x<0.7`$, a depletion is observed in the nuclear structure functions. The low $`x`$ (shadowing region) and the larger $`x`$ (EMC region) are bridged by an enhancement known as antishadowing for $`0.1<x<0.3`$. We refer to the entire phenomena as the nuclear shadowing effect.

The theoretical understanding of $`F_2^A`$ in the full kinematic region has progressed in recent years, with several models which describe the experimental data with quite success . Here we will restrict ourselves to the descriptions which use the DGLAP evolution equations  to describe the behavior of the nuclear parton distributions. Recently, Eskola, Kolhinen and Salgado , following Ref. , have shown that the experimental results  presenting nuclear shadowing effects can be described using the DGLAP evolution equations  with adjusted initial parton distributions. The basic idea of this framework is the same as in the global analyzes of parton distributions in the free proton: they determine the nuclear parton densities at a wide range of $`x`$ and $`Q^2Q_0^2=2.25`$ GeV2 through their perturbative DGLAP evolution by using the available experimental data from $`lA`$ DIS and Drell-Yan (DY) measurements in $`pA`$ collisions as constraint. EKS have expressed the results in terms of the nuclear ratios $`R_f^A(x,Q^2)`$ for each parton flavor $`f`$ in a nucleus with $`A`$ nucleons ($`A>2`$), at $`10^6x1`$ and $`2.25GeV^2Q^210^4GeV^2`$. The results of EKS seems to show that, in the kinematic region of the present data, the high density dynamical effects are small enough to be described by the DGLAP evolution equation with a suitable set of nonperturbative initial conditions. The main shortcoming of use the EKS parameterizations in the calculations of $`eA`$, $`pA`$ or $`AA`$ processes is associated to the small $`x`$ predictions, where the solution of the DGLAP equations reduces to the well known limit of the double logarithm approximation (DLA). This limit is characterized by a strong growth of the gluon distribution, with a similar behavior for the $`F_2`$ structure function, which implies a high parton density in this kinematic region. However, when the density of gluons and quarks becomes very high the physical processes of interaction and recombination of partons, not considered in the DGLAP equations, become important in the parton cascade and these effects should be expressed in a new evolution equation. Therefore, the EKS description should be improved to include the high parton density effects when smaller values of $`x`$ are considered. This is the case, for instance, in the calculation of the minijet cross section at LHC.

At this moment, there are many approaches in the literature that propose distinct evolution equations for the description of the gluon distribution in high density limit  . In general these evolution equations resum powers of the function $`\kappa (x,Q^2)\frac{3\pi ^2\alpha _sA}{2Q^2}\frac{xg(x,Q^2)}{\pi R_A^2}`$, which represents the probability of gluon-gluon interaction inside the parton cascade. Moreover, these equations match (a) the DLA limit of the DGLAP evolution equation in the limit of low parton densities $`(\kappa 0)`$; (b) the GLR equation and the Glauber-Mueller formula as first terms of the high density effects. The main differences between these approaches are present in the limit of very large densities, where all powers of $`\kappa `$ should be resumed. Although the complete demonstration of the equivalence between these formulations in the region of large $`\kappa `$ is still an open question, some steps in this direction were given recently . Here we will consider the Glauber-Mueller approach for the high density effects, which is a common limit of the current high density approaches in the kinematic region which we are interested. Thus we intend to obtain no model dependent predictions.

The outline of this paper is the following. In next section we present a brief review of the Glauber-Mueller approach for the nuclear structure function (For details see ). In Sec. 3 we analyze the EKS parameterization and present a procedure to improve this paramerization for the small $`x`$ region, where the high density effects cannot be disregarded. Moreover, we present our results for the ratios $`xG_A/xG_N`$ and $`F_2^A/F_2^D`$ and verify that at small $`x`$ they are strongly modified in comparison with the EKS predictions. Finally, in Sec. 4 we discuss the implications of our results for the heavy ion collisions in RHIC and LHC and present our conclusions.

## 2 The High Density Effects in DIS

The deep inelastic scattering off a nucleus is usually interpreted in a frame where the nucleus is going very fast. In this case the nuclear shadowing is a result of an overlap in the longitudinal direction of the parton clouds originated from different bound nucleons . Thus low $`x`$ partons from different nucleons overlap spatially creating much larger parton densities than in the free nucleon case. This leads to a large amplification of the nonlinear effects expected in QCD at small $`x`$. In the target rest frame, the electron-nucleus scattering can be visualized in terms of the propagation of a small $`q\overline{q}`$ pair in high density gluon fields through much larger distances than it is possible with free nucleons. In terms of Fock states we then view the $`eA`$ scattering as follows : the electron emits a photon ($`|e>|e\gamma >`$) with $`E_\gamma =\nu `$ and $`p_{t\gamma }^2Q^2`$, after the photon splits into a $`q\overline{q}`$ ($`|e\gamma >|eq\overline{q}>`$) and typically travels a distance $`l_c1/m_Nx`$, referred as the ’coherence length’, before interacting in the nucleus. For small $`x`$ (large $`s`$, where $`\sqrt{s}`$ is the $`\gamma ^{}A`$ center-of-mass energy), the photon converts to a quark pair at a large distance before it interacts to the target. Consequently, the space-time picture of the DIS in the target rest frame can be viewed as the decay of the virtual photon at high energy (small $`x`$) into a quark-antiquark pair, which subsequently interacts with the target. In the small $`x`$ region, where $`x\frac{1}{2mR}`$, the $`q\overline{q}`$ pair crosses the target with fixed transverse distance $`r_t`$ between the quarks. Following Gribov , we may write a double dispersion relation for the forward $`\gamma ^{}A`$ elastic amplitude $`𝒜`$, related to the total cross section by the optical theorem \[$`Im𝒜=s\sigma (s,Q^2)`$\], and obtain for fixed $`s`$

$`\sigma (s,Q^2)={\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{dM^2}{M^2+Q^2}\frac{dM^2}{M^2+Q^2}\rho (s,M^2,M^2)\frac{1}{s}Im𝒜_{q\overline{q}+A}(s,M^2,M^2)},`$ (1)
where $`M`$ and $`M^{}`$ are the invariant masses of the incoming and outgoing $`q\overline{q}`$ pair. If we assume that forward $`q\overline{q}+A`$ scattering does not change the momentum of the quarks then $`𝒜_{q\overline{q}+A}`$ is proportional to $`\delta (M^2M^2)`$, and (1) becomes

$`\sigma (s,Q^2)={\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{dM^2}{(M^2+Q^2)^2}\rho (s,M^2)\sigma _{q\overline{q}+A}(s,M^2)},`$ (2)
where the spectral function $`\rho (s,M^2)`$ is the density of $`q\overline{q}`$ states, which may be expressed in terms of the $`\gamma ^{}q\overline{q}`$ matrix element . Using that $`M^2=(k_t^2+m_q^2)/[z(1z)]`$, where $`k_t`$ and $`z`$ are the transverse and longitudinal momentum components of the quark with mass $`m_q`$, we can express the integral over the mass $`M`$ of the $`q\overline{q}`$ in terms of a two-dimensional integral over $`z`$ and $`k_t`$. Instead of $`k_t`$ is useful to work with the transverse coordinate $`r_t`$ (impact parameter representation), which is the variable Fourier conjugate to $`k_t`$, resulting

$`F_2^A(x,Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{4\pi \alpha _{em}}}\sigma (s,Q^2)`$ (3)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{4\pi \alpha _{em}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑z\frac{d^2r_t}{\pi }|\mathrm{\Psi }(z,r_t)|^2\sigma _{q\overline{q}+A}(z,r_t)},`$
where

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }(z,r_t)|^2={\displaystyle \frac{6\alpha _{em}}{(2\pi )^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{f}{\overset{n_f}{}}}e_f^2\{[z^2+(1z)^2]ϵ^2K_1(ϵr_t)^2+m_i^2K_0(ϵr_t)^2\}.`$ (4)
The photon wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(z,r_t)`$ is simply the Fourier transform of the matrix element for the transition $`\gamma ^{}q\overline{q}`$. Moreover, $`\alpha _{em}`$ is the electromagnetic coupling constant, $`ϵ^2=z(1z)Q^2+m_i^2`$, $`m_i`$ is the quark mass, $`n_f`$ is the number of active flavors, $`e_f^2`$ is the square of the parton charge (in units of $`e`$), $`K_{0,1}`$ are the modified Bessel functions and $`z`$ is the fraction of the photon’s light-cone momentum carried by one of the quarks of the pair. In the leading log$`(1/x)`$ approximation we can neglect the change of $`z`$ during the interaction and describe the cross section $`\sigma ^{q\overline{q}}(z,4/r_t^2)`$ as a function of the variable $`x`$. To estimate the high density effects we consider the Glauber multiple scattering theory , which was derived in QCD . In this framework the nuclear collision is analyzed as a succession of independent collisions of the probe with individual nucleons within the nucleus, which implies that

$`F_2^A(x,Q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{Q^2}{4\pi \alpha _{em}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑z\frac{d^2\stackrel{}{r}_t}{\pi }|\mathrm{\Psi }(z,\stackrel{}{r}_t)|^2\frac{d^2\stackrel{}{b}_t}{\pi }\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}[1e^{\sigma ^{q\overline{q}+N}(z,\stackrel{}{r}_t)S(\stackrel{}{b}_t)}]},`$ (5)
where $`\stackrel{}{b}_t`$ is the impact parameter, $`S(\stackrel{}{b}_t)`$ is the profile function and $`\sigma ^{q\overline{q}+N}`$ is the dipole cross section off the nucleons inside the nucleus, which is proportional to the pair separation squared $`r_t^2`$ and the nucleon gluon distribution $`xg(x,1/r_t^2)`$. The expression (5) represents the Glauber-Mueller formula for the nuclear structure function (see  for details). The use of a Gaussian parameterization for the nucleon profile function $`S(b_t)=\frac{1}{\pi R_A^2}e^{\frac{b^2}{R_A^2}}`$, where $`R_A`$ is the mean nuclear radius, simplifies the calculations. We obtain that the $`F_2^A`$ structure function can be written as

$`F_2^A(x,Q^2)={\displaystyle \frac{R_A^2}{2\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{u,d,s}{}}ϵ_i^2{\displaystyle _{\frac{1}{Q^2}}^{\frac{1}{Q_0^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2r_t}{\pi r_t^4}}\{C+ln(\kappa _q(x,r_t^2))+E_1(\kappa _q(x,r_t^2))\},`$ (6)
where $`\kappa _q=(2\alpha _sA/3R^2)\pi r_t^2xG_N(x,\frac{1}{r_t^2})`$, $`C`$ is the Euler constant, $`E_1`$ is the exponential integral function and $`A`$ the number of nucleons in a nucleus. This equation allows to estimate the high density corrections to the structure function in the DLA limit. Expanding the equation (6) for small $`\kappa _q`$, the first term (Born term) will correspond to the usual DGLAP equation in the small $`x`$ region.

The Glauber - Mueller formula has been used in a comprehensive phenomenological analyzes of the behavior of distinct observables in $`ep`$ and $`eA`$ processes. The results of these studies agree with the current $`ep`$ HERA data  and allow us to make some predictions which will be investigated in the near future in $`eA`$ colliders . The main shortcoming in the studies of $`eA`$ processes is that the large $`x`$ effects (the antishadowing and the EMC effect) were disregarded, which implies predictions only for the asymptotic behavior (large $`s`$/small $`x`$) of the observables. In next section we propose a procedure to obtain more realistic predictions in the full kinematic region.

## 3 The improved EKS parton distributions

As discussed in Sec. 1 the EKS parameterization, although describes the current experimental fixed target data quite well, is not a good approximation for the small $`x`$ region in the perturbative regime, where the DGLAP equations predicts a strong growth of the parton distributions (the DLA limit). In this limit the nuclear gluon distribution is given by $`xG_A\mathrm{exp}\sqrt{\mathrm{ln}(1/x)\mathrm{ln}(Q^2/Q_0^2)}`$, which is almost independent of the initial nonperturbative input, i.e. of the adjusted parameters obtained in the EKS parameterization. To improve the EKS description we propose the substitution of DLA limit of the DGLAP evolution, present in the EKS framework, by the Glauber-Mueller evolution. This procedure implies to calculate the nuclear structure function using the following expression

$`F_2^A(x,Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`F_2^A(x,Q^2)[\text{EKS}](1/A)F_2^A(x,Q^2)[\text{DLA}]`$ (7)
$`+`$ $`(1/A)F_2^A(x,Q^2)[\text{eq. (}\text{6}\text{)}],`$
with $`F_2^A(x,Q^2)[\text{EKS}]=R_{F_2}^A\times F_2^N(x,Q^2)`$, where $`R_{F_2}^A`$ is obtained in terms of a combination of nuclear parton ratios $`R_f^A(x,Q^2)`$ . The nucleon structure function is given by $`F_2^N(x,Q^2)=_{u,d,s}ϵ_q^2[xq(x,Q^2)+x\overline{q}(x,Q^2)]+F_2^c(x,Q^2)`$, where the charm component of the nucleon structure function is calculated considering the charm production via boson-gluon fusion mechanism  and the nucleon parton distributions are given by the GRV parameterization . In this work we assume $`m_c=1.5GeV`$. Moreover, $`F_2^A(x,Q^2)[\text{DLA}]`$ is calculated using the parton distribution from DLA limit of DGLAP evolution. For practical purpose, this term is given by the Born term of Eq. (6).

The above procedure implies the inclusion of: (a) the full DGLAP evolution equation in all kinematic region; (b) the nonperturbative nuclear corrections in the nuclear parton distributions, that describes the experimental fixed target data, and (c) the high density effects present in the parton evolution at small $`x`$ in the perturbative regime. Therefore, with the Eq. (7) we are able to describe the parton evolution in all kinematic region.

A similar description can be used to estimate the nuclear gluon distribution $`xG_A`$. In this case we take

$`xG_A(x,Q^2)`$ $`=`$ $`xG_A(x,Q^2)[\text{EKS}](1/A)xG_A(x,Q^2)[\text{DLA}]+`$ (8)
$`+`$ $`(1/A)xG_A(x,Q^2)[\text{GM}]`$
where $`xG_A(x,Q^2)[\text{EKS}]=R_G^A\times xG_N(x,Q^2)`$ is the EKS prediction, $`xG_A(x,Q^2)[\text{DLA}]`$ is the DGLAP (DLA) prediction for the nuclear gluon distribution and GM represents the Glauber-Mueller nuclear gluon distribution given by

$`xG_A(x,Q^2)[\text{GM}]={\displaystyle \frac{2R_A^2}{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle _x^1}{\displaystyle \frac{dx^{}}{x^{}}}{\displaystyle _{\frac{1}{Q^2}}^{\frac{1}{Q_0^2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2r_t}{\pi r_t^4}}\{C+ln(\kappa _G(x^{},r_t^2))+E_1(\kappa _G(x^{},r_t^2))\},`$ (9)
where $`\kappa _G=(9/4)\kappa _q.`$ The main difference between the high density effects in the quark and gluon densities stems from the much larger cross section $`\sigma _N^{gg}=(9/4)\sigma _N^{q\overline{q}}`$, i. e. $`\kappa _G=(9/4)\kappa _q`$, which in turn leads to a much larger gluon shadowing. As before, the DLA limit is obtained from the Born term of the Glauber-Mueller evolution \[Eq. (9)\].

Using the above procedure we can calculate the ratios $`R^{F_2}=F_2^A/F_2^D`$ and $`R_G=xG_A/xG_N`$, where $`F_2^D`$ is the deuterium structure function. In order to include only perturbative contributions to the estimative of the high density effects, we take the initial scale at $`Q_0^2=1GeV^2`$ in the Glauber-Mueller expressions \[Eqs. (6) and (9)\] and calculate the ratios for $`A=208`$.

In Fig. 1 we present our predictions for the behavior of the ratio $`R^{F_2}=F_2^A/F_2^D`$ (denoted as EKS MOD) for two values of virtualities ($`Q^2=2.25`$ and $`15GeV^2`$). For comparison the EKS predictions are also shown. We verify that while for the region of large values of $`x`$ ($`10^2`$) our predictions are almost identical to the EKS results, at small $`x`$ the differences are large. A comment related to experimental data is in order. As $`xQ^2/s`$, where $`s`$ is the squared CM energy, the data in the region of small $`x`$ values are for small values of $`Q^2`$ ($`1GeV^2`$), where the use of the perturbative QCD cannot be justified and the shadowing corrections are dominated by soft contributions. Therefore, our perturbative predictions cannot be compared with the current experimental fixed target data. In the perturbative regime $`Q^21.0GeV^2`$, where the data are associated with $`x`$ values greater than $`10^2`$, our results are almost identical to the EKS predictions. Thus, the fixed target data does not allow us to discriminate between the predictions.

The results shown in Fig. 1 predicts a sizeable modification in the quark distribution at low $`x`$ ($`x10^3`$). Thus, we expect that the $`lA`$ cross section will present a strong reduction when compared to the $`lp`$ in this kinematic region. Also the Drell-Yan production in heavy ion collisions should be strongly modified when compared to the $`pp`$ one at LHC energy ($`x10^4`$). At RHIC kinematic region, the high density effects does not seem to be strong enough to modify the Drell-Yan cross section in respect to the EKS prediction. Nevertheless, this subject deserves a further more detailed study.

The high density effects are important already for the initial scale of the EKS parameterizations ($`Q^2=2.25GeV^2`$) and increases with the virtuality. The remarkable feature in the improved parton distributions is the nonsaturation of the ratio at small values $`x`$. In the EKS parameterization the saturation is included in the initial condition and this general behavior is not modified by the evolution. This is a consequence of the DGLAP evolution equations, which reduces to the DLA limit at small $`x`$ in the nuclear and nucleon case, keeping the ratio approximately constant. When the high density effects are considered the ratio is not constant since these effects increases at small values of $`x`$ and are larger in the nuclear case. Therefore, the nonsaturation of the ratio in the perturbative regime is a signature of the high density effects in the nuclear processes.

In Fig. 2 we present our predictions for the behavior of the ratio $`R_G(x,Q^2)=xG_A/xG_N`$ (denoted as EKS MOD) for two values of virtualities ($`Q^2=2.25`$ and $`15GeV^2`$). For comparison the EKS predictions are also shown. We verify that while for the region of large values of $`x`$ ($`10^2`$) our predictions are almost identical to the EKS results, at small $`x`$ the differences are large. We can see from the both figures that the EKS assumption that $`R_G=R^{F_2}`$ at small values of $`x`$ is strongly modified by the high density effects and its $`Q^2`$ evolution, since $`R_GR^{F_2}`$ for $`Q^2=15GeV^2`$. Therefore, we predict a large modification in the quarkonium production at LHC, as well as in its bound states (e.g. $`J/\mathrm{\Psi },\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{{\rm Y}},\mathrm{}`$). Furthermore, as the high density effects are important already to $`Q^22.25GeV^2`$, also the minijet production will be modified at LHC. At RHIC kinematical region the high density effects does not significantly modify the gluon distribution and we expect a similar prediction of the quarkonium production from both models. Anyway, the high density effects should be considered in detail before to use the quarkonium production, as well as its bound states, as probes of the deconfined state of matter. Also this subject deserves a further detailed study.

It is important to note that the EKS description use as a constraint the momentum sum rule. We verify that the improved distributions violates this sum rule at must in 5 $`\%`$ for the gluon distribution, which is small when compared with the experimental uncertainty on this distribution in the antishadowing region. Moreover, the violation is small since the main contribution to the sum rule comes from the large $`x`$ region, where the high density effects are negligible.

## 4 Conclusions

In this paper we have proposed an improvement of the EKS nuclear parton distributions in the small $`x`$ region by the inclusion of the perturbative high density effects. We predict the nonsaturation of the ratios $`R^{F_2}`$ and $`R_G`$ when these effects are considered and that $`R^{F_2}R_G`$ in the small $`x`$ limit. Such results could be tested in the future $`eA`$ colliders. Furthermore, our results demonstrate that the high density effects are very important mainly at the LHC kinematic region, where strong modifications in the Drell- Yan and quarkonium production are expected. As the small $`x`$ behavior of the parton densities strongly determines the initial conditions of the minijet system in nucleus-nucleus collisions, our results show that the high density effects cannot be disregarded in the calculations of the observables and signatures of a Quark-Gluon Plasma.

## Acknowledgments

This work was partially financed by FAPERGS and CNPq, BRAZIL.

## Figure Captions

Fig. 1: Comparison between the predictions of the original EKS and EKS modified (denoted EKS MOD. in plot) for the ratio $`R^{F_2}(x,Q^2)=F_2^A/F_2^D`$ as function of the variable $`x`$ at different values of $`Q^2`$. See text.

Fig. 2: Comparison between the predictions of the original EKS and EKS modified (denoted EKS MOD. in plot) for the ratio $`R_G(x,Q^2)=xG_A/xG_N`$ as function of the variable $`x`$ at different values of $`Q^2`$. See text.


format: text

text:
# Multiple-Size Divide-and-Conquer RecurrencesCopyright © 1997 by Ming-Yang Kao. A version of this work appeared in Proceedings of the International Conference on Algorithms, the 1996 International Computer Symposium, pages 159–161, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, Republic of China, 1996. Reprinted in SIGACT News, 28(2):67–69, June 1997.

## 1 Introduction

This note reports a tight asymptotic solution to the following recurrence on all positive integers $`n`$:

$`T(n)=cn^\alpha \mathrm{log}^\beta n+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}}a_iT(b_in)`$ for $`nn_0`$, (1)
$`0<T(n)d`$ for $`n<n_0`$, (2)
where

* $`\alpha 0,\beta 0,c>0,d>0`$,
* $`k`$ is a positive integer,
* $`a_i>0`$ and $`1>b_i>0`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},k`$,
* $`n_0\mathrm{max}_{i=1}^k\frac{1}{1b_i}`$.

Since $`n_0\mathrm{max}_{i=1}^k\frac{1}{1b_i}`$, $`b_inn1`$ for all $`b_i`$ and $`nn_0`$. Thus, the $`T(n)`$ term on the left-hand side of (1) is defined on $`T`$-terms with smaller $`n`$, and (2) properly specifies the initial values of $`T`$.

A special case of this recurrence, namely, $`k=1`$, is discussed in  and standard textbooks on algorithms and is used extensively to analyze divide-and-conquer strategies . A specific recurrence with $`k=2`$ is used to analyze a divide-and-conquer algorithm for selecting a key with a given rank .

Let $`g(x)=_{i=1}^ka_ib_i^x`$. The characteristic equation of the general recurrence is the equation $`g(x)=1`$. Our solution to the general recurrence is summarized in the following theorem.

###### Theorem 1

If $`r`$ is the solution to the characteristic equation of the general recurrence, then

$$T(n)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Theta }(n^r)\hfill & \text{if }r>\alpha \text{;}\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Theta }(n^\alpha \mathrm{log}^{1+\beta }n)\hfill & \text{if }r=\alpha \text{;}\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Theta }(n^\alpha \mathrm{log}^\beta n)\hfill & \text{if }r<\alpha \text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

The key ingredient of our proof for this theorem is the notion of a characteristic equation. With this new notion, our proof is essentially the same as that of the case with $`k=1`$ . This note concentrates on elaborating the characteristic equation’s role in our proof by detailing an upper bound proof for a certain case. Once this example is understood, it is straightforward to reconstruct a general proof for Theorem 1. Consequently, we omit the general proof for the sake of brevity and clarity.

## 2 An Example

This section discusses the general recurrence with $`k=3`$. To further focus our attention on the characteristic equation’s role, we assume that $`\beta =0`$, $`r`$ is a positive integer, and $`r>\alpha `$. Then, according to Theorem 1, $`T(n)=\mathrm{\Theta }(n^r)`$. We will only prove $`T(n)=O(n^r)`$. The lower bound proof is similar.

Let $`S(n)=f_1n^rf_2n^{r\frac{1}{2}}f_3n^\alpha `$. It suffices to show that there exist some positive constants $`f_1,f_2,f_3`$ such that $`T(n)=O(S(n))`$. These constants and some others are chosen as follows. Without loss of generality, we assume $`b_1<b_2<b_3`$.

$`f_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c}{g(\alpha )1}};`$
$`f_2`$ $`=`$ $`\text{any positive constant};`$
$`f_1`$ $`=`$ $`f_2+f_3+1;`$
$`m_0`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{max}\{n_0,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{b_1}},\left({\displaystyle \frac{f_12^r\frac{1}{b_1}}{f_2\left(g(r\frac{1}{2})1\right)}}\right)^2\};`$
$`M`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{n<m_0}{\mathrm{max}}\{1,T(n)\}.`$
Note that since $`0<b_i<1`$ for all $`b_i`$, $`g`$ is a decreasing function. Then since $`r>\alpha `$ and $`r>r\frac{1}{2}`$, $`g(\alpha )>1`$ and $`g(r\frac{1}{2})>1`$. Thus, the above constants are all positive. We next consider the following new recurrence:

$`R(n)=cn^\alpha +a_1R(b_1n)+a_2R(b_2n)+a_3R(b_3n)`$ for $`nm_0`$,
$`R(n)=1`$ for $`n<m_0`$,
It can be shown by induction that $`T(n)MR(n)`$ for all $`n`$. Thus, to prove $`T(n)=O(S(n))`$, it suffices to show $`R(n)S(n)`$ for all $`n`$.

Base Case: $`R(m)S(m)`$ for all $`m<m_0`$. This follows from the choice of $`f_1`$.

Given some $`nm_0`$, we need to show $`R(n)S(n)`$.

Induction Hypothesis: $`R(m)S(m)`$ for all integers $`m`$ where $`m_0m<n`$.

Induction Step:

$`R(n)`$ $``$ $`cn^\alpha +a_1S(b_1n)+a_2S(b_2n)+a_3S(b_3n)`$ (4)
$``$ $`cn^\alpha +f_1g(r)(n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{b_1}})^rf_2g(r{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})n^{r\frac{1}{2}}f_3g(\alpha )n^\alpha `$ (5)
$``$ $`cn^\alpha +f_1g(r)n^r+f_12^rn^{r1}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{b_1}}f_2g(r{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})n^{r\frac{1}{2}}f_3g(\alpha )n^\alpha `$ (6)
In this above derivation,

* (4) follows from (2), the inequality $`m_0n_0`$, the base step and the induction hypothesis;
* (5) follows from the fact that $`b_inb_i(n+\frac{1}{b_1})`$;
* (6) follows from the fact that $`(n+\frac{1}{b_1})^rn^r+2^rn^{r1}\frac{1}{b_1}`$ because $`r`$ is a positive integer and $`m_0\frac{1}{b_1}`$.

To finish the induction step, note that the right-hand side of (6) is at most $`S(n)`$ as desired for the following reasons.

* By the choice of $`f_3`$, $`cn^\alpha +f_3g(\alpha )n^\alpha f_3n^\alpha .`$
* Since $`m_0\left(\frac{f_12^r\frac{1}{b_1}}{f_2\left(g(r\frac{1}{2})1\right)}\right)^2`$, $`f_12^rn^{r1}\frac{1}{b_1}f_2g(r\frac{1}{2})n^{r\frac{1}{2}}f_2n^{r\frac{1}{2}}.`$

## Acknowledgments

The author found the result in this note in 1986 while teaching a course on algorithms. Since then, he has been teaching it in his classes. He wishes to thank Don Rose for helpful discussions.


text:
# Untitled Document

Projective Manifolds with splitting Tangent Bundle, I

Frédéric Campana and Thomas Peternell

Introduction

A fundamental theorem in differential geometry due to de Rham investigates complete Riemannian manifolds $`X`$ whose tangent bundles split into a direct sum of subbundles which all are invariant under the holonomy. Under these assumptions the universal cover of $`X`$ splits as a product of Riemannian manifolds and this splitting is compatible with the splitting of the tangent bundle of $`X.`$ The same holds in the complex case for Kähler manifolds.

In this paper we investigate the more general situation when $`X`$ is a complex projective manifold whose tangent bundle splits: $`T_X=E_i`$. However we do not make any assumption on holonomy or on integrability of the subbundles $`E_i.`$

Problem Does the universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ of $`X`$ split, i.e. is there a decomposition $`\stackrel{~}{X}=_{i=1}^kA_i`$ with complex manifolds $`A_i`$?

Note that we should not ask for a relation between the splitting of $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ and the splitting of $`T_X`$ because the $`E_i`$ might not be integrable. If however the $`E_i`$ are integrable, then we can ask additionally whether the decomposition of $`T_{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$ is induced by the decomposition of $`T_X.`$ In that case we speak of a diagonal splitting (with respect to the splitting on $`T_X).`$

Of course this problem makes sense also for compact Kähler manifolds but our results will mainly concern the projective case. Surprisingly, this very fundamental problem has not yet been studied much.

Beauville \[Be99\] proved that the problem has a positive solution if $`X`$ is Kähler-Einstein or if $`dimX=2`$ ($`X`$ Kähler). He also pointed out that in general, with $`X`$ just being a compact manifold, the problem will have a negative answer. Hopf manifolds provide the easiest examples.

Next, Druel \[Dr99\] investigated projective manifolds whose tangent bundles decompose into a direct sum of line bundles $`L_i`$. He gave a positive solution of the problem, even in the strong form, if either all subbundles formed by direct sums of the $`L_i`$ are integrable or if $`X`$ is minimal, i.e. $`K_X`$ is nef (e.g. $`X`$ has seminegative Ricci curvature).

The main results of this paper ar as follows.

Proposition Let $`X`$ be a smooth projective threefold with a splitting $`T_X=LV`$ where $`L`$ is a line bundle. Let $`\phi :XY`$ be a birational contraction in the sense of Mori theory, i.e. $`K_X`$ is $`\phi `$ample. Then $`Y`$ is smooth, $`\phi `$ is the blow-up along a smooth curve; $`L^{}=\phi _{}(L)`$ and $`V^{}=\phi _{}(V)^{}`$ are locally free with $`L=\phi ^{}(L^{})`$ such that

$$T_Y=L^{}V^{}.$$

Moreover if the universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ of $`Y`$ splits (diagonally with respect to $`T_Y=L^{}V^{}`$), then $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits (diagonally with respect to $`T_X=LV).`$

The content of this proposition is that (by Mori theory) either we are reduced to uniruled threefolds admitting a Mori contraction to a curve or a surface or that $`K_X`$ is nef. In the first case we have

Theorem Let $`X`$ be a smooth projective threefold with $`\kappa (X)=\mathrm{}.`$ Suppose $`T_X=LV.`$ Then $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits. The splitting is diagonal with respect to $`T_X=LV`$ unless the following holds: $`X`$ is the successive blow-up along smooth curves in a smooth projective threefold $`Y`$, the splitting $`T_X=LV`$ induces canonically a splitting $`T_Y=L^{}V^{}`$ and there is a $`𝐏_1`$bundle structure $`\psi :YZ`$ such that $`L^{}=T_{Y/Z}.`$

We also have general results on projective bundles in any dimension, see sect.2.

In case $`K_X`$ nef, the Beauville decomposition theorem takes care of the case $`c_1(X)=0.`$ Here we concentrate on the case $`dimX=3`$ and $`\kappa (X)=3,`$ so that $`K_X`$ is big and nef. The intermediate case $`\kappa (X)=1,2`$ will be treated in the second part to this paper. If now $`K_X`$ is ample, then $`X`$ admits a Kähler-Einstein metric, and Beauville’s result in \[Be99\] settles the problem. So suppose that $`K_X`$ is not ample; we then go to the canonical model and analyse this singular variety to obtain

Theorem Let $`X`$ be a smooth projective threefold with $`K_X`$ big and nef; let $`\varphi :XY`$ be the canonical model.

( 1) The universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ of $`Y`$ is of the form $`\stackrel{~}{Y}\mathrm{\Delta }\times S`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }𝐂`$ the unit disc and $`S`$ a surface with only rational double points as singularities.

( 2) If $`g:\widehat{S}S`$ denotes the minimal resolution, then the universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ of $`X`$ is of the form

$$\stackrel{~}{X}\mathrm{\Delta }\times \widehat{S}$$

and $`\varphi \mathrm{id}_\mathrm{\Delta }\times g.`$ This decomposition is compatible with the decomposition $`T_X=LV,`$ i.e. $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits diagonally with respect to $`T_X=LV.`$

In higher dimensions we study Fano manifolds. Since these are simply connected, we only need to study a decomposition $`T_X=E_1E_2`$ into 2 factors. Moreover it is easy to see that $`b_2(X)2,`$ so that Mori theory can be used again. We obtain:

Theorem Let $`X`$ be a Fano $`n`$fold. Assume that $`n5`$ or that every contraction of an extremal ray contracts a standard rational curve (see Def. 1.1). If $`T_X=E_1E_2,`$ then $`XZ_1\times Z_2`$ diagonally.

There is an interesting problem on rational curves which is the obstacle to extend this theorem to higher dimensions. We say that a rational curve $`f:𝐏_1X`$ is standard if

$$f^{}(T_X)=𝒪(2)𝒪(a_i)$$

with all $`a_i1`$ (but $`a_i`$ might be negative). It is well known that uniruled varieties always contain standard rational curves, even with all $`a_i0.`$ Now the problem reads:

Problem Let $`X`$ be a projective manifold, $`\phi :XY`$ an extremal contraction, i.e. $`K_X`$ is $`\phi `$ample. Is there a standard rational curve contracted by $`\phi \mathrm{?}`$

If $`dimY<dimX,`$ then the answer is yes by the last remark. The answer is also positive if $`\phi `$ is the blow-up of a submanifold, but in general the fibers of a birational contraction can be very bad, so that new arguments are needed. If this problem has a positive solution, then the last theorem holds in any dimension.

0. Notations and basic material

0.1 Notations

(1) The universal cover of a complex manifold $`X`$ will be always be denoted by $`h:\stackrel{~}{X}X.`$

(2) Given a complex manifold $`X`$ with a splitting $`T_X=_{i=1}^kE_i,`$ we let $`r_i`$ be the rank of the vector bundle $`E_i`$ and denote $`L_i=detE_i.`$

(3) A vector bundle $`E`$ on a projective manifold is almost nef, if there is a countable family $`(A_i)`$ of proper subvarieties $`A_iX`$, such that $`E|C`$ is nef for all curves $`C_iA_i.`$

0.2 Definition Let $`X`$ be a compact complex manifold.

(1) We say that $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits, if there is a decomposition $`\stackrel{~}{X}=_{i=1}^kA_i`$ with complex manifolds $`A_i`$.

(2) We say that $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ it splits diagonally, if there exists a decomposition $`\stackrel{~}{X}=A_i`$ and a decomposition $`T_X=E_i`$ such that $`h^{}(E_i)=p_i^{}(T_{A_i})`$, where $`p_i`$ is the projection onto $`A_i`$. We will often write $`T_{A_i}`$ instead of $`p_i^{}(T_{A_i}).`$

(3) Suppose that $`T_X=E_i.`$ We say that $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits diagonally with respect to $`T_X=E_i`$, if $`\stackrel{~}{X}=A_i`$ such that $`T_{A_i}=h^{}(E_i).`$

The following observation is trivial but important

0.3 Obvious Fact Suppose $`T_X=E_i`$. If $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits diagonally w.r.t the splitting of $`T_X,`$ then all bundles $`_{iI}E_i`$ are integrable ($`I\{1,\mathrm{},k\}).`$

Given a splitting $`T_X=_{i=1}^kE_i,`$ we obtain a direct sum decomposition

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_X^q=\underset{i_1+\mathrm{}+i_k=q}{}\stackrel{i_1}{}E_1^{}\mathrm{}\stackrel{i_k}{}E_k^{}.$$

Hence $`_kE_j^{}`$ is a subbundle of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^q.`$ Then we have

0.4 Lemma Let $`X`$ be a compact Kähler manifold with $`T_X=E_i.`$ Then

$$c_m(E_i)H^m(X,\stackrel{m}{}E_i^{})H^m(X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^m)$$

for all $`m`$ and all $`i`$.

For the Proof we essentially refer to \[Be99\], Lemma 3.1. The reason is that $`c_m(E_i)`$ can be computed from the Atiyah class $`at(E)`$ and that $`at(E)`$ is in $`H^1(X,E_i^{}\mathrm{End}(E_i)).`$

0.5 Theorem Let $`X`$ be a compact Kähler manifold, $`T_X=E_i`$ a splitting. Then $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits diagonally w.r.t. to the given splitting of $`T_X`$ if one of the following holds.

(1) (Beauville) $`X`$ is Kähler-Einstein;

( 2) (Beauville) $`dimX=2;`$

( 3) (Druel) $`X`$ is projective, all $`E_i`$ have rank 1 and one of the following holds: $`K_X`$ is nef or $`_{iI}E_i`$ is integrable for all $`I\{1,2,\mathrm{},k\}.`$

The proof are found in \[Be99\] and \[Dr99\].

0.6 Notation

(1) An orbifold (of dimension $`n`$) is a normal complex space $`X`$, such that every $`xX`$ has an open neighborhood $`U`$ and a biholomorphic map $`h_U:UV/G`$ where $`V𝐂^n`$ is an open set and $`GGl(n,𝐂))`$ is a finite group such $`U`$ is $`G`$stable.

(2) The tangent bundle (sheaf $`T_X`$ of $`X`$ is by definition the dual of the sheaf of Kähler differentials; actually we have $`T_X=i_{}(T_{X_{\mathrm{reg}}})`$ where $`i:X_{\mathrm{reg}}X`$ is the inclusion map.

(3) A Kähler orbifold metric on $`X`$ is a Kähler metric $`g`$ on $`X_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ with Kähler form $`\omega `$ such that $`h^{}(\omega )`$ extends to $`V`$ for all charts $`h`$ as in (1).

Then we have the following theorem of de Rham:

0.7 Theorem Let $`X`$ be a simply connected complete Kähler orbifold. Then

$$XX_i$$

where the $`X_i`$ are irreducible complete Kähler orbifolds, i.e. they have irreducible holonomy.

The proof is just a tedious translation of the arguments given in \[KN63\] to the orbifold case. We leave any details to the reader.

1. Birational contractions and standard rational curves

In this section we study projective manifolds with splitting tangent bundle which admit a birational Mori contraction. We fix the splitting

$$T_X=\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}E_i.$$

The following notion of standard rational curves will play an important role in our considerations.

1.1 Definition  A rational curve $`CX`$ with normalisation $`f:𝐏_1X`$ is standard if

$$f^{}(T_X)=𝒪(2)𝒪(a_i)$$

with all $`a_i1`$ (but $`a_i`$ might be negative).

1.2 Lemma Let $`X`$ be a smooth uniruled variety. Then there exists a standard rational curve $`CX`$ with $`T_X|C`$ nef.

Proof. Hwang-Mok \[HM98\] and Kollár \[Ko96,IV.2.10\].

One of the special features of standard rational curves in the context of splitting tangent bundles is given by

1.3 Lemma Suppose $`T_X=E_i.`$ Let $`CX`$ be a standard rational curve. After possible renumeration we may assume $`f^{}(E_j)=𝒪(a_i)`$ with all $`a_i1`$ for $`j2`$, hence $`T_CE_1|C.`$ Then $`L_jC=0,`$ $`(j<k)`$, where $`L_i=detE_i.`$ If $`T_X|C`$ is even nef, i.e. all $`a_i0,`$ then $`E_j|C=𝒪_C^{r_1}`$ for $`k>j2.`$

Here we started the abuse of notation to omit the normalisation $`f^{}.`$

Proof. Since all $`a_i1,`$ we have $`H^1(E_j^{}|C)=0,`$ hence $`c_1(E_j^{}|C)=0`$ by (0.4), i.e. $`L_jC=0`$ for $`j<k.`$ The rest is clear.

The following is an easy consequence of (1.2). Here we use the notion of an almost nef vector bundle in the sense of \[DPS00\]: $`E`$ is almost ample if there exists a countable union $`B`$ of proper subvarieties such that $`E|C`$ is nef for every curve $`C`$ not contained in $`B.`$

1.4 Proposition Let $`X`$ be a projective manifold, $`\phi :XY`$ the contraction of an extremal ray (or face). Suppose that $`\phi `$ has (ideal-theoretically) a non-trivial smooth fiber $`F`$ or set-theoretically a smooth fiber $`F`$ with almost nef normal bundle. Then there exists a standard rational curve $`CX`$ with $`dim\phi (C)=0.`$

Proof. Since $`K_X`$ is $`\phi `$ample, $`F`$ is Fano. Take a standard rational curve $`CF`$ with $`T_F|C`$ nef. Consider the exact sequence

$$0T_F|CT_X|CN_{F/X}|C0.$$
$`()`$
By our assumptions on $`F,`$ the conormal bundle $`N_F^{}|C`$ is either spanned by global sections or almost nef, hence $`N_{F/X}^{}|C`$ is nef so that (\*) splits and our claim follows (one can also argue with any extremal rational curve).

1.5 Corollary Let $`X`$ be a smooth projective threefold and $`\phi :XY`$ an extremal contraction. Then there exists a standard rational curve $`C`$ contracted by $`\phi .`$

Proof. The proof goes either by direct inspection of Mori’s classification of threefold contractions \[Mo82\] or by applying (1.4) and by observing that the only case where $`\phi `$ does not have set-theoretically a smooth fiber with the required normal bundle (for applying (1.4)) is when $`\phi `$ contracts a quadric cone. In this last case we can just take $`C`$ to be a line in the quadric cone.

1.6 Problem Let $`X`$ be a projective manifold, $`\phi :XY`$ an extremal contraction. Is there a standard rational curve contracted by $`\phi \mathrm{?}`$

(1.7) A possible approach to (1.6) is as follows. We need to find $`V\mathrm{Hom}(𝐏_1,X)`$ generically unsplit (in the sense of Kollár \[Ko96\]) such that the curves of the family $`(C_t)`$ defined by $`V`$ are contracted to points by $`\phi `$ and such that

$$dimV\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}a_i+dim\mathrm{Locus}(V).$$
$`()`$
Here the $`a_i`$ are just the positive (or non-negative) entries of $`f_t^{}(T_X),`$ where $`f_t`$ is the normalisation of $`C_t`$ and $`t`$ is general. Moreover $`\mathrm{Locus}(V)`$ denotes the subvariety filled up by the family $`(C_t).`$ Observe that if we take just some family satisfying (\*), then by \[Ko96,IV.2.4\] we can pass to a generically unsplit family, but then possibly (\*) is violated for this new family. Notice that if $`F`$ is smooth, this can be achieved just by taking a (generically) free family whose general member is standard (\[Ko96,IV.2.9\]). Now suppose that (\*) holds. First we observe that

$$dim\mathrm{Locus}(V,0,x)\mathrm{card}\{i|a_i1\}.$$
$`()`$
Here $`\mathrm{Locus}(V,0,x)`$ denotes the set of $`fV`$ with $`f(0)=xX.`$ Moreover by \[Ko96,IV.2.5\]:

$$dimV=dim\mathrm{Locus}(V)+dim\mathrm{Locus}(V,0,x)+1.$$
$`()`$
Then (\**) and (\***) yield

$$dimVdim\mathrm{Locus}(V)+\mathrm{card}\{i|a_i1\}+1,$$

hence (\*) gives

$$\mathrm{card}\{i|a_i1\}+1\underset{i=1}{\overset{k}{}}a_i.$$

This in turn implies say $`a_1=2`$ and $`a_i1`$ for $`i2.`$

1.8 Proposition Let $`X`$ be a projective manifold with $`T_X=E_i.`$ Let $`\phi :XY`$ be an extremal contraction.

(1) If $`L_j=\mathrm{det}E_j`$ is not $`\phi `$trivial, then $`dimFr_j=\mathrm{rk}E_j`$ for all fibers $`F`$ of $`\phi .`$

(2) $`dimF\mathrm{max}(r_1,\mathrm{},r_k).`$

(3) Suppose some fiber of $`\phi `$ contains a standard rational curve (e.g. $`dimY<dimX`$ or $`\phi `$ has a smooth non-trivial fiber). Then all but one of the $`L_i`$ are $`\phi `$trivial, and the remaining one is $`\phi `$ample.

Proof. (1) If $`dimF>r_j,`$ then, noticing that $`L_j|F`$ is either ample or its dual is ample, we obtain

$$c_1(L_j|F)^{r_j+1}0.$$

This contradicts (0.4). (2) This is clear: $`K_X=L_1\mathrm{}L_k,`$ on the other hand $`K_X`$ is $`\phi `$ample, so not all $`L_i`$ can be $`\phi `$trivial. (3) This is again clear by (1.3).

1.9 Corollary Let $`X`$ be a smooth projective threefold with a splitting $`T_X=LV.`$ Let $`\phi :XY`$ be a birational extremal contraction with exceptional divisor $`D.`$ Then $`dim\phi (D)=1,`$ so that $`Y`$ is smooth and $`\phi `$ is the blow-up along the smooth curve $`\phi (D).`$

Proof. Assume $`dim\phi (D)=0.`$ Then by (1.8), $`L`$ cannot be $`\phi `$trivial. Let $`l`$ be a standard rational curve contracted by $`\phi `$ (1.5). Then $`T_X|l=𝒪(2)𝒪(a)𝒪(b)`$ with $`a,b1.`$ Then $`L|l=T_l`$ by (0.4). Now $`D`$ is either $`𝐏_2`$, a smooth quadric or a quadric cone. In the first two cases we take $`l`$ to be a line or a ruling line and immediately get a contradiction (there are lines through one point, having different tangent directions). In the quadric cone case we take $`l`$ to be a line through the vertex and perform the same argument.

1.10 Proposition Let $`X`$ be a smooth projective threefold with a splitting $`T_X=LV.`$ Let $`\phi :XY`$ be a birational contraction. Then $`Y`$ is smooth, $`\phi `$ is the blow-up along a smooth curve; $`L^{}=\phi _{}(L)`$ and $`V^{}=\phi _{}(V)^{}`$ are locally free with $`L=\phi ^{}(L^{})`$ such that

$$T_Y=L^{}V^{}.$$

Moreover if the universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ of $`Y`$ splits (diagonally with respect to $`T_Y=L^{}V^{}`$), then $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits (diagonally with respect to $`T_X=LV).`$

Proof. (1) By (1.9) we know that $`Y`$ is smooth and that $`\phi `$ is the blow-up along the smooth curve $`\phi (D).`$ Let $`l`$ be a non-trivial fiber of $`\phi .`$ Then $`T_X|l=𝒪(2)𝒪𝒪(1)`$. Now (1.3) implies that $`L|l=𝒪`$ and $`T_CV|C.`$ In particular $`L=\phi ^{}(L^{})`$ with some line bundle $`L^{}`$ on $`Y`$ (necessarily $`L^{}=\phi _{}(L)`$). It is moreover clear that $`L^{}T_Y`$ is a subbundle ($`L`$ has no tangent direction on the fibers of $`\phi .`$) We also have

$$L^{}\phi _{}(V)=\phi _{}(L)\phi _{}(V)=\phi _{}(T_X)T_Y.$$

Thus

$$T_Y=(\phi _{}(T_X))^{}=L^{}(\phi _{}(V))^{}=L^{}V^{}.$$

In particular $`V^{}`$ is locally free. Now the splitting maps $`T_XL`$ and $`T_XV`$ yield maps $`T_YL^{}`$ and $`T_YV^{}`$ which give a splitting first on $`Y\phi (D),`$ hence everywhere. (2) It remains to prove the assertion on the universal cover. First we do the diagonal case. So assume $`\stackrel{~}{Y}=A^{}\times B^{}.`$ Since $`\pi _1(X)=\pi _1(Y),`$ we have $`\stackrel{~}{X}=X\times _Y\stackrel{~}{Y}.`$ Suppose $`\stackrel{~}{Y}=A^{}\times B^{}`$ and, letting $`g:\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ be the projection, we moreover have $`T_A^{}=g^{}(L^{})`$ and $`T_B^{}=g^{}(V^{}).`$ Let

$$\stackrel{~}{X}=X\times _Y\stackrel{~}{Y}$$

with projection $`f:\stackrel{~}{X}X`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ is the universal cover of $`X`$ and the induced map $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }:\stackrel{~}{X}\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ is the blow-up of $`Z=g^1(\phi (D)).`$ Then $`\phi ^1(A^{}\times \{b\})`$ and $`\phi ^1(\{a\}\times B^{})`$ are the leaves of $`f^{}(L)`$ resp. $`f^{}(V)`$. This gives clearly a decomposition $`\stackrel{~}{X}=A\times B`$ with $`A=A^{}`$ and with $`B=\{a\}\times B\{a\}\times B^{}=B^{}`$ the blow-up of $`Z\{a\}\times B^{}.`$ (3) Finally we have to do the case that the splitting $`\stackrel{~}{Y}=A^{}\times B^{}`$ is not diagonal, i.e. $`V`$ is not integrable. (to be done).

(1.11) As conclusion we have reduced the study of threefolds $`X`$ with $`T_X=LV`$ to the two following cases:

(a) $`K_X`$ is nef;

(b) $`X`$ admits a contraction $`\phi :XY`$ with $`dimY<dimX;`$ in particular $`X`$ is uniruled.

2. Projective bundles, conic bundles and del Pezzo fibrations

We consider again a smooth projective threefold $`X`$ with $`T_X=LV`$. We suppose moreover that there is a contraction $`\phi :XY`$ with $`dimY=2`$ or $`dimY=1,`$ i.e. we have a fiber space by conics or del Pezzo surfaces. We begin with the conic bundle case. We shall see that the contractions are all submersion, therefore we are lead to consider projective bundles. We shall start with these and will not need any dimension restriction here.

2.1 Definition A vector bundle $`E`$ of rank $`r`$ on the projective (or Kähler) manifold $`X`$ is called numerically flat, if the $`𝐐`$bundle $`E\frac{detE^{}}{r}`$ is nef, which is the same as to say that $`S^rEdetE^{}`$ is nef.

For details on numerically trivial vector bundles we refer to \[DPS94\], in particular for a proof of

2.2 Proposition Let $`X`$ be a projective or compact Kähler manifold. Let $`E`$ be a numerically flat vector bundle on $`X.`$ Then there exists a filtration

$$0=E_0E_1\mathrm{}E_p=E$$

by vector subbundles such that the graded pieces $`E_{i+1}/E_i`$ are unitary flat, i.e. defined by unitary representations of $`\pi _1(X).`$

Proposition 2.2 has the following consequence

2.3 Proposition Let $`E`$ be a numerically flat vector bundle on the compact Kähler manifold $`X.`$ Let $`h:\stackrel{~}{X}X`$ be the universal cover. Then $`h^{}(E)=𝒪_{\stackrel{~}{X}}^r.`$

Proof. (a) The case that $`E`$ is unitary flat is obvious. (b) Next we consider the case of an exact sequence

$$0FEG0$$
$`()`$
where both $`F`$ and $`G`$ are unitary flat. Then by (a) $`h^{}(F)`$ and $`h^{}(G)`$ are both trivial. Let $`\zeta H^1(X,FG^{})`$ be the extension class defining (\*). Then we must show that $`h^{}(\zeta )=0.`$ Since $`FG^{}`$ is unitary flat, this follows from the

2.4 Fact Let $`V_r`$ be a unitary flat bundle, $`\zeta H^1(X,V).`$ Then $`h^{}(\zeta )=0.`$ (Notice however that $`H^1(\stackrel{~}{X},𝒪_{\stackrel{~}{X}})`$ might not vanish).

Proof of the fact: $`V`$ is given by a local system $`𝐄`$. Hodge theory therefore yields an epimorphism

$$H^1(X,𝐄)H^1(X,E).$$

So we have an epimorphism

$$h^{}H^1(X,𝐄)h^{}H^1(X,E).$$

Since $`h^{}(𝐄)=\stackrel{~}{X}\times 𝐂^r`$, it follows

$$H^1(\stackrel{~}{X},h^{}(𝐄))=0,$$

hence $`h^{}(\zeta )=0`$ in $`H^1(\stackrel{~}{X},h^{}(E))=0,`$ too.

(c) Now we approach the general case in the proof of 2.3. We have an exact sequence

$$0E_iE_{i+1}E_{i+1}/E_i0,i1,$$

and by (b) and induction resp. our assumption, both $`h^{}(E_i)`$ and $`h^{}(E_{i+1}/E_i)`$ are trivial. Denoting

$$\zeta H^1(X,(E_{i+1}/E_i)^{}E_i)$$

the extension of the above exact sequence, we need to show that $`h^{}(\zeta )=0.`$ This is done by considering the induced sequence

$$0(E_{i+1}/E_i)^{}E_{i1}(E_{i+1}/E_i)^{}E_i(E_{i+1}/E_i)^{}E_i/E_{i1}0,$$

taking $`h^{}`$ and proceeding inductively using 2.4

Before we can treat projective bundles, we need some preparations. The first one is classical and due to Ehresmann:

2.5 Proposition Let $`\phi :XY`$ be a surjective fiber bundle of complex manifolds with typical fiber $`F`$ such that

$$0\phi ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^1)\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{\Omega }_{X/Y}^10$$

splits. This exhibits a vector bundle $`E\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$ which is mapped isomorphically onto $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{X/Y}^1.`$ We say that the splitting is integrable or that $`E`$ is integrable if

$$dEE\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1.$$

Equivalently, $`V=(\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1/E)^{}`$ is integrable in the usual sense, i.e. closed under the Lie bracket. In that case there is a representation $`\rho :\pi _1(Y)\mathrm{Aut}(F)`$ so that $`\pi _1(Y)`$ acts on $`F`$ via $`\rho .`$ Moreover $`X`$ is the fiber bundle over $`Y`$ with fiber $`F`$ given by $`(\stackrel{~}{Y}\times F)/\pi _1(Y).`$ Finally the splitting $`\stackrel{~}{X}=\stackrel{~}{Y}\times \stackrel{~}{F}`$ is diagonal with respect to the above splitting.

Proof. \[Eh50\], cp. \[Be99\].

2.6 Proposition Let $`C`$ be an irreducible reduced compact curve and $`E`$ a vector bundle of rank $`r+1`$ on $`C.`$ Let $`X=𝐏(E)`$ with projection $`p:XC.`$ Suppose that the sequence

$$0p^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_C^1)\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝐏(E)}^1\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝐏(E)/C}^10$$

splits. Then $`E^{}=E\frac{\mathrm{det}E}{r+1}`$ is numerically flat.

Proof. (a) In case $`C`$ is smooth, we notice that the splitting is automatically integrable so that (2.5) applies. Hence $`X`$ is defined by a representation

$$\pi _1(C)\mathrm{Aut}(𝐏_r)=𝐏Gl(r+1,𝐂),$$

i.e. $`E`$ is projectively flat. Using the exact sequence

$$0\mu _{r+1}Sl(r+1,𝐂)𝐏Gl(r+1,𝐂)0,$$

and tensoring $`E`$ suitably, we find an étale cover $`f:\widehat{C}C`$ of degree $`r`$ such that $`\widehat{E}=f^{}(E)`$ is given by the lifted representation

$$\widehat{\rho }:\pi _1(\widehat{C})Sl(r+1,𝐂).$$

Hence $`\widehat{E}`$ is flat, in particular $`E`$ is nef. Since also $`\mathrm{det}E`$ is flat, $`\widehat{E}`$ and $`E`$ are both numerically flat. (b) Now suppose $`C`$ singular and let $`\widehat{C}C`$ be the normalisation. Let $`\widehat{E}=h^{}(E)`$ and put $`\widehat{X}=𝐏(\widehat{E})`$ with projection $`\widehat{p}:\widehat{X}\widehat{C}.`$ It is sufficient to show that

$$0\widehat{p}^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_{\widehat{C}}^1)\mathrm{\Omega }_{\widehat{X}}^1\mathrm{\Omega }_{\widehat{X}/\widehat{C}}^10$$

splits; then by (a) $`\widehat{E}`$, hence $`E`$, is numerically flat after normalising to $`c_1=0.`$ This splitting now is obtained by an easy diagram chase from the lifted splitting on $`X.`$

Now we are able to treat general $`𝐏_r`$bundles.

2.7 Theorem Let $`X`$ be a projective manifold with $`𝐏_r`$bundle structure $`\phi :XY.`$ Suppose that

$$0T_{X/Y}T_X\phi ^{}(T_Y)0$$

resp.

$$0\phi ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^1)\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{\Omega }_{X/Y}^10$$
$`(S)`$
splits. Then (1) $`\stackrel{~}{X}=\stackrel{~}{Y}\times 𝐏_r.`$ (2) If the splitting (S) is integrable, then the splitting $`\stackrel{~}{X}=\stackrel{~}{Y}\times 𝐏_r`$ is diagonal with respect to (S), hence $`X=(\stackrel{~}{Y}\times 𝐏_r)/\pi _1(Y),`$ where $`\pi _1(Y)`$ acts on $`𝐏_r`$ via a representation $`\rho :\pi _1(Y)\mathrm{Aut}(𝐏_r)`$. (3) Suppose $`X=𝐏(V)`$ with a vector bundle $`V`$ of rank $`r.`$ Then the $`𝐐`$bundle $`V\frac{\mathrm{det}V^{}}{r+1}`$ is numerically flat.

Proof. (I) First we assume that $`X=𝐏(V).`$ Let $`V^{}=V\frac{\mathrm{det}V}{r+1}.`$ In order to prove (3), it is sufficient to show that the $`𝐐`$bundle $`V^{}`$ is nef. So let $`CX`$ be an irreducible curve. Let $`X_C=\phi ^1(C)=𝐏(V|C).`$ Then

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{X_C}^1\phi ^{}(\mathrm{\Omega }_C^1)\mathrm{\Omega }_{X_C/C}^1,$$

as one checks easily. So by (2.6), $`V^{}|C`$ is numerically flat, in particular nef. So $`V^{}`$ is nef. This proves (3). Now $`(r+1)\mathrm{det}V^{}`$ is a well-defined flat line bundle. Therefore we find a finite étale cover $`g:\stackrel{~}{Y}Y`$ such that $`g^{}(detV^{})`$ is Cartier, or, in other words, the determinant of $`g^{}(V)`$ is divisible in $`\mathrm{Pic}(Y)`$ by $`r+1.`$ So we may assume that $`detV`$ itself is divisible by $`r+1`$ in $`\mathrm{Pic}(Y).`$ Then $`h^{}(V^{})=𝒪_{\stackrel{~}{X}}`$ by (2.3), in particular $`\stackrel{~}{X}=\stackrel{~}{Y}\times 𝐏_r.`$ This proves (1). Finally (2) follows from (2.5), independently whether $`X`$ comes from a vector bundle or not. (II) It remains to prove (1) in the general case. Since $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ is simply connected, there exists a vector bundle $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ over $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{X}=𝐏_r(\stackrel{~}{V})`$ (the obstruction lies in

$$H^2(\stackrel{~}{Y},𝐙_{r+1})H_1(\stackrel{~}{Y},𝐙_{r+1})=0).$$

Now consider the vector bundle

$$E=\phi _{}(K_{X/Y}).$$

By 2.6 $`E|C`$ is numerically flat for every curve $`CY.`$ Hence $`E`$ itself is numerically flat. By 2.3, $`h_Y^{}(E)=𝒪_{\stackrel{~}{Y}}^N.`$ Now we conclude by Lemma 2.7.1.

2.7.1 Lemma Let $`Y`$ be a complex manifold and $`X`$ a $`𝐏_r`$bundle over $`Y`$ with projection $`\phi :XY.`$ Suppose that $`\phi _{}(K_{X/Y})=𝒪_Y^{N+1}.`$ Then $`XY\times 𝐏_r.`$

Proof. Let $`L=K_{X/Y}.`$ The canonical epimorphism

$$\phi ^{}(\phi _{}(L)=𝒪(k)$$

induces a map

$$X=𝐏(L)𝐏(\phi _{}(L))=𝐏(𝒪_Y^{N+1})=Y\times 𝐏_N.$$

Let $`f:X𝐏_N`$ be the induced map. Then $`f`$ is given by $`N+1`$ sections in $`L`$ whose images trivialise $`\phi _{}(L)=𝒪_Y^{N+1}.`$ Since $`c_1(L)^{r+1}=0,`$ we have $`dimf(X)r.`$ On the other hand, $`f|\phi ^1(y)`$ is an embedding for all $`yY,`$ so $`dimf(X)=r`$ and actually $`f(X)=𝐏_r.`$ Now the fibers of $`f`$ and $`\phi `$ meet transversally, so that the induced map

$$XY\times 𝐏_r$$

is an isomorphism.

We return to our original aim to investigate contractions $`\phi :XY`$ of a smooth projective threefold $`X`$ with $`T_X=LV.`$

2.8 Theorem Suppose $`dimY=2.`$ Then $`\phi `$ is a $`𝐏_1`$bundle and hence $`\stackrel{~}{X}=\stackrel{~}{Y}\times 𝐏_1.`$ Moreover either

(a) $`L=\phi ^{}(L^{})`$ with a line bundle $`L^{}`$ on $`Y`$ and $`T_Y=L^{}V^{}`$ with a line bundle $`V^{}`$. In this case $`V`$ is integrable and $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits diagonally with respect to $`T_X=LV.`$ Or

(b) $`L=T_{X/Y}.`$ In this case $`V`$ is not necessarily integrable.

Proof. Assume that $`\phi `$ is not a $`𝐏_1`$bundle. Then the general singular fiber is a reducible conic $`C_1+C_2`$ ($`C_1C_2.`$) We have $`T_X|C_i=𝒪(2)𝒪𝒪(1).`$ Then (1.3) implies $`T_{C_i}=L|C_i`$ contradicting the fact that $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ meet tranversally. So $`\phi `$ is a $`𝐏_1`$bundle (analytically). (a) Suppose that the canonical map $`\gamma :T_{X/Y}L`$ vanishes. Then $`T_{X/Y}V`$ and (1.3) implies that $`L_C=𝒪_C`$ for all fibers $`C`$ of $`\phi `$ and that $`V|C=𝒪_C(2)𝒪_C(2).`$ Hence $`L=\phi ^{}(L^{})`$ for some line bundle $`L^{}`$ on $`Y.`$ In other words, the tangent map

$$T\phi |L:LL^{}$$

is an isomorphism. Then the splitting $`T_XL`$ yields a splitting map $`T_YL^{}`$. Writing $`T_Y=L^{}Q^{}`$, it is clear that we have a sequence

$$0T_{X/Y}V\phi ^{}(Q^{})0.$$

By Beauville \[Be99\], the universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ splits as $`\stackrel{~}{Y}=A_1\times A_2`$ with projections $`p_i:A_iY`$ and such that $`T_{A_1}=p^{}(L^{})`$ and $`T_{A_2}=p^{}(Q^{}).`$ Then the local product structure of $`\stackrel{~}{X}=X\times _{\stackrel{~}{Y}}Y`$ (i.e. locally over $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$) yields the integrability of $`V`$ and therefore by (2.5) $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits diagonally with respect to $`T_X=LV.`$ (b) If $`\gamma 0,`$ then $`\gamma `$ is injective, and $`L_C=𝒪_C`$, $`V_C=𝒪𝒪(2)`$ for all fibers $`C`$ of $`\phi .`$ Hence $`T_{X/Y}V`$ vanishes and $`L=T_{X/Y}.`$ For a non-integrable example, see \[Dr99\].

2.9 Theorem Suppose $`dimY=1.`$ Then $`\phi `$ is a $`𝐏_2`$bundle, and $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits diagonally with respect to $`T_X=LV.`$

Proof. (a) First we show that $`\phi `$ is a $`𝐏_2`$ bundle. It is sufficient to know that the general fiber of $`\phi `$ is $`𝐏_2`$ \[Mo82\]. If not, then $`F`$ is $`P_1\times 𝐏_1`$ or some other del Pezzo surface, just called del Pezzo for simplicity. If $`F`$ is del Pezzo, choose a $`(1)`$curve $`lF.`$ Then

$$T_X|l=𝒪(2)𝒪𝒪(1).$$

Then (1.3) yields $`L|l=𝒪_l,`$ hence $`L`$ is $`\phi `$trivial. It follows that the canonical map $`\gamma :T_{X/Y}L`$ vanishes, hence $`T_{X/Y}V.`$ This however says that $`T_{X/Y}=V`$, and since all fibers of $`\phi `$ are reduced (\[Mo82\]), $`\phi `$ must be a submersion. Now apply the Leray spectral sequence to obtain

$$H^2(X,𝐙)=H^2(Y,𝐙)H^0(Y,R^2\phi _{}(𝐙)).$$

Hence $`b_2(X)=b_2(F)+b_2(Y)2+b_2(Y)`$ contradicting the fact that $`\phi `$ is the contraction of an extremal ray, which implies that $`b_2(X)=b_2(Y)+1.`$ So $`F`$ cannot be del Pezzo. The case that $`F=𝐏_1\times 𝐏_1`$ is ruled out in the same way by choosing $`l`$ to be a ruling line in such a way that $`T_lL_l.`$ (b) So $`\phi `$ is a $`𝐏_2`$bundle. Applying once again (1.3) we see that $`L|l=𝒪`$ and $`V|l=𝒪(2)𝒪(1)`$ for every line $`l`$ in a fiber of $`\phi .`$ Thus $`L=\phi ^{}(T_Y)`$ and $`V=T_{X/Y}`$ so that we can apply (2.5) and conclude.

In total we have proved

2.10 Theorem Let $`X`$ be a smooth projective threefold with $`\kappa (X)=\mathrm{}.`$ Suppose $`T_X=LV.`$ Then $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits. The splitting is diagonal with respect to $`T_X=LV`$ unless the following holds: $`X`$ is the successive blow-up along smooth curves in a smooth projective threefold $`Y`$, the splitting $`T_X=LV`$ induces canonically a splitting $`T_Y=L^{}V^{}`$ and there is a $`𝐏_1`$bundle structure $`\psi :YZ`$ such that $`L^{}=T_{Y/Z}.`$

In order to get results in higher dimensions one would have to consider contractions $`\phi :XY`$ of fiber type, assuming $`T_X=E_1E_2.`$ One expects that one of the $`E_i`$ is $`\phi `$trivial. We come back to this situation in the next section when we consider Fano manifolds.

3. Fano Manifolds

In this section we fix a Fano manifold $`X`$ of dimension $`n`$ with a splitting $`T_X=_{i=1}^kE_i.`$ Arguing inductively and having in mind that Fano manifolds are simply connected, we may assume $`k=2.`$ Let $`r_i=\mathrm{rk}E_i`$ and put $`L_i=\mathrm{det}E_i.`$

3.1 Proposition We have $`b_2(X)2.`$

Proof. Suppose $`b_2(X)=1`$ and write $`\mathrm{det}E_i=𝒪_X(m_i),`$ where $`𝒪_X(1)`$ is the ample generator of $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)=𝐙.`$ By (0.4) we have $`c_1(E_i)^t=0`$ for $`t>r_i,`$ therefore $`m_i=0`$ for all $`i.`$ On the other hand $`0<c_1(X)=m_i,`$ contradiction.

3.2 Remark The same proof shows that the tangent bundle of a projective manifold $`X`$ with $`K_X`$ ample and $`\rho (X)=1`$ cannot split. If $`K_X0,`$ the last remaining case if $`\rho (X)=1,`$ Beauville’s decomposition theorem applies and also easily yields a contradiction. Hence the tangent bundle of a projective manifold with $`\rho (X)=1`$ never splits.

The significance of (1.6) in our context is given by

3.3 Theorem Let $`X`$ be a Fano manifold with $`T_X=E_1E_2.`$ Suppose that (1.6) has a positive solution (e.g. every contraction of $`X`$ has a non-trivial smooth fiber). Then $`XZ_1\times Z_2`$ and $`T_{Z_i}=p_i^{}(E_i).`$

Proof. Let $`\phi :XY`$ be some contraction defined by the ray $`R=𝐑[l].`$ Then $`L_il=0`$ for some $`i`$, say $`i=1,`$ by (1.3) and our assumption. Since $`K_Xl>0`$ and since $`K_X=L_1L_2,`$ we conclude that $`L_2l>0.`$ It follows that $`L_il_j0`$ for all extremal curves $`l_j`$ and $`i=1,2.`$ Hence $`L_i`$ are both nef by the cone theorem. Now by (0.4) we obtain

$$(K_X)^n=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{r_1}\right)L_1^{r_1}L_2^{r_2}.$$

In particular

$$L_i^{r_i}0,L_i^{r_i+1}=0.$$
$`()`$
Since by the base point free theorem both $`L_i`$ are semi-ample and therefore define morphisms $`\psi _i:XZ_i`$ to normal projective varieties $`Z_i.`$ Both $`\psi `$ are contractions of extremal faces. By (\*) we have $`dimZ_i=r_i.`$ We claim that $`\psi :=\psi _1\times \psi _2:XZ_1\times Z_2`$ is an isomorphism. Since $`L_1C=0`$ implies $`L_2C>0`$ for every extremal rational curve and vice versa, this actually holds for every curve $`C`$, hence $`\psi _2|\psi _1^1(z)`$ is always finite and vice versa. Therefore $`\psi `$ is finite onto its image. Since $`dim(Z_1\times Z_2)=r_1+r_2=n,`$ $`\psi `$ is surjective and finite. Let $`F`$ be a general fiber of $`\psi _1,`$ then $`F`$ is Fano. Let $`CF`$ be a smooth rational curve with $`T_F|C`$ ample; then $`T_X|C`$ is nef. Since $`L_1|C=𝒪_C`$ and since $`E_1|C`$ is nef as quotient of $`T_X|C`$, it follows that $`E_1|C=𝒪_C^{r_1}.`$ Therefore the composed map

$$T_F|CT_X|CE_1|C$$

vanishes (remember $`T_F|C`$ ample) and hence, varying $`C`$, $`T_F`$ is a subbundle of $`E_2|F.`$ Since $`\mathrm{rk}T_F=\mathrm{rk}E_2`$, we conclude $`T_F=E_2|F.`$ Hence $`E_2`$ is generically integrable, hence integrable. All fiber of $`\phi _1`$ are clearly leaves of $`E_2.`$ By symmetry, $`E_1`$ is integrable, too, and all fibers of $`\phi _2`$ are leaves of $`E_1.`$ Thus $`\phi _1^1(x)`$ and $`\phi _2^1(y)`$ are smooth and transversal at every intersection point. In particular $`\phi _1|\phi _2^1(y)`$ is étale (and surjective) over $`Z_1.`$ But $`\phi _2^1`$ is Fano, hence simply connected and so $`\phi _1|\phi _2^1(y)`$ is an isomorphism. This same holds for $`\phi _2|\phi _1^1(x)`$ and thus $`\psi `$ is an isomorphism. The proof also shows that the splitting is diagonal.

We have used (1.6) only in order to make sure that the line bundles $`L_i`$ are $`\phi `$nef for all contractions $`\phi `$, i.e. that the $`L_i`$ are nef. Therefore we can state

3.4 Proposition If $`L_1`$ and $`L_2`$ are nef (in (3.3), then $`XZ_1\times Z_2`$ and the splitting is diagonal.

Of course the nefness of the $`L_i`$ is also necessary for the splitting. We next show that we have splitting (without assuming (1.6)) if the rank of say $`E_1`$ is small.

3.5 Theorem Let $`X`$ be Fano with $`T_X=E_1E_2`$ If $`\mathrm{rk}E_1=1,`$ then $`XZ_1\times Z_2`$ diagonally.

Proof. By (3.4) we only need to show that $`L_1`$ and $`L_2`$ are nef. Suppose that one $`L_i`$ is not $`\phi `$nef for some contraction $`\phi .`$ Since $`K_X=L_1+L_2,`$ it follows that $`L_1`$ is not $`\phi `$trivial. Hence $`dim\phi ^1(y)1`$ for all $`y`$ by (1.8)(1). Let $`F`$ be an irreducible (reduced) component of $`\phi ^1(y).`$ Then $`F𝐏_1`$ since $`R^1\phi _{}(𝒪_X)=0.`$ Moreover $`\phi ^1(y)=F,`$ see \[AW97,1.6\]. Hence we can apply (1.8)(3) and derive a contradiction.

3.6 Theorem Let $`X`$ be Fano with $`T_X=E_1E_2`$. If $`\mathrm{rk}E_1=2,`$ then $`XZ_1\times Z_2`$ diagonally.

Proof. We proceed as in (3.5) and assume that some $`L_i`$ is not $`\phi `$nef. So $`L_1`$ is not $`\phi `$trivial. Let $`F`$ be a non-trivial fiber (with reduced structure). Then $`dimF2`$ by (1.8). If $`F`$ contains a component of dimension 1, we conclude again by \[AW97,1.6\]. Hence $`F`$ is purely 2-dimensional. By \[AW97,1.19\], any irreducible component $`F_0`$ of $`F`$ is either a $`𝐏_2`$ or a Hirzebruch surface $`𝐏(𝒪𝒪(k)),`$ or a Hirzebruch surface ($`k2`$) with the exceptional section blown down. In the first two cases we conclude by (1.8). The last requires some more work. Let

$$\stackrel{~}{F}=𝐏(𝒪𝒪(k))F_0$$

be the minimal desingularisation. Let $`C_0\stackrel{~}{F}`$ be the exceptional section, $`\stackrel{~}{l}\stackrel{~}{F}`$ a ruling line and set $`l=\sigma (\stackrel{~}{l}).`$ We claim that $`l`$ is a standard rational curve; then we will be done again by (1.8). We consider the exact sequence

$$0(T_F|l)/\mathrm{tor}\stackrel{\alpha }{}T_X|lN_{F|X}|l.$$

Since $`N_{F/X}^{}|l`$ is generically spanned, we only have to investigate the inclusion $`V:=(T_F|l)/\mathrm{tor}T_X|l.`$ Observe that the epimorphism

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1|l\mathrm{\Omega }_F^1|l0$$

yields a vector bundle epimorphism

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1|l(\mathrm{\Omega }_F|l)/\mathrm{tor}0.$$

Therefore

$$V=(\mathrm{\Omega }_F^1|l)/\mathrm{tor})^{}$$

is a subbundle of $`T_X|l.`$ So we obtain a vector bundle sequence

$$0VT_X|l\mathrm{Coker}\alpha 0$$

with $`(\mathrm{Coker}\alpha )^{}`$ being nef. Hence things come down to prove

$$V|l=𝒪(2)𝒪(a)$$
$`()`$
with $`a1.`$ In order to verify (\*) we consider the analytic preimage $`\sigma ^1(l)=\stackrel{~}{l}+\mu (k)C_0.`$ Then we have an epimorphism

$$\sigma ^{}(N_{l/F}^{})N_{\sigma ^1(l)/\stackrel{~}{F}}^{}0;$$

hence

$$(\sigma ^{}(N_{l/F}^{}/\mathrm{tor})|\stackrel{~}{l}=N_{\sigma ^1(l)/\stackrel{~}{F}}^{}|\stackrel{~}{l}.$$

Now we use the exact sequence

$$0N_{\sigma ^1(l)/\stackrel{~}{F}}^{}|\stackrel{~}{l}N_{\stackrel{~}{l}/\stackrel{~}{F}}^{}N_{\stackrel{~}{l}/\sigma ^1(l)}^{}0,$$

and observe that $`N_{\stackrel{~}{l}/\stackrel{~}{F}}^{}=𝒪.`$ Since $`N_{\stackrel{~}{l}/\sigma ^1(l)}^{}`$ is supported at $`\stackrel{~}{l}C_0`$, which is just one point and since the stalk at that point has dimension 1, we conclude

$$N_{\sigma ^1(l)/\stackrel{~}{F}}^{}|\stackrel{~}{l}=𝒪(1).$$

Hence $`\sigma ^{}(N_{l/F}^{}/\mathrm{tor})=𝒪(1)`$ by (\*) and thus

$$N_{l/F}/\mathrm{tor}=𝒪(1).$$

From

$$0T_lT_F|lN_{l/F}$$

we obtain an exact sequence

$$0T_lV=(T_F|l)/\mathrm{tor}N_{l/F}/\mathrm{tor}=𝒪(1)$$

and thus $`V=𝒪(2)𝒪(a)`$ with $`a1,`$ proving (\*) and therefore the theorem.

3.7 Corollary Let $`X`$ be a Fano $`n`$fold, $`n5.`$ If $`T_X=E_1E_2,`$ then $`XZ_1\times Z_2`$ diagonally.

3.8 Remark Notice that the proof of (3.6) provides a positive answer to the problem 1.6 in case $`\phi `$ is birational with some non-trivial fiber of dimension at most 2. So in dimension 4 it only remains to treat the case that $`\phi `$ contracts a divisor to a point.

4. The Case $`\kappa (X)=3`$

In our study of threefolds $`X`$ with splitting tangent bundles the previous sections reduce us to $`K_X`$ nef. If $`\kappa (X)=0,`$ then $`mK_X=𝒪_X`$ for a suitable positive $`m`$. Then by the decomposition theorem \[Be83\], we obtain the diagonal splitting of $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ we are looking for. This holds in all dimensions. In this section we treat the case that $`\kappa (X)=dimX=3,`$ i.e. $`K_X`$ is big and nef in connection with our splitting $`T_X=LV.`$ The remaining cases $`\kappa (X)=1,2`$ will be treated in the second part of this paper. By \[Be99\] (see 0.5) we may assume that $`K_X`$ is not ample (if $`K_X`$ is ample, then $`X`$ is Kähler-Einstein), therefore we have a non-trivial morphism (with connected fibers) $`\varphi :XY`$ to the canonical model of $`X,`$ given by the base point free linear system $`|mK_X|`$ for suitable large $`m.`$ The threefold $`Y`$ has only canonical singularities and the $`𝐐`$divisor $`K_Y`$ is ample. We denote by $`BY`$ the exceptional locus of $`\varphi `$ in $`Y,`$ this is nothing than the singularity set of $`Y.`$ Furthermore let $`E=\varphi ^1(B).`$

Our aim is to prove

4.1 Theorem Let $`X`$ be a smooth projective threefold $`K_X`$ big and nef such that $`T_X=LV`$; let $`\varphi :XY`$ be the canonical model.

( 1) The universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ of $`Y`$ is of the form $`\stackrel{~}{Y}\mathrm{\Delta }\times S`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }𝐂`$ the unit disc and $`S`$ a surface with only rational double points as singularities.

( 2) If $`g:\widehat{S}S`$ denotes the minimal resolution, then the universal cover $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ of $`X`$ is of the form

$$\stackrel{~}{X}\mathrm{\Delta }\times \widehat{S}$$

and $`\varphi \mathrm{id}_\mathrm{\Delta }\times g.`$ This decomposition is compatible with the decomposition $`T_X=LV,`$ i.e. $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ splits diagonally with respect to $`T_X=LV.`$

So locally (in $`Y`$) we have a product structure $`Y\mathrm{\Delta }\times W`$ with a surface $`W`$ having only rational double points so that (semi-locally) $`XC\times \widehat{W}`$ with $`\widehat{W}W`$ the minimal resolution. In particular $`B=C\times \mathrm{Sing}W`$ with a smooth curve $`C,`$ i.e. $`B`$ consists of a disconnected union of smooth curves. Our strategy will be to first establish this local product structure in $`Y;`$ in particular this shows that $`Y`$ is an orbifold, i.e. $`Y`$ is locally of the form $`𝐂^3/G.`$ Then we will use the theory of orbifolds to conclude.

We start with an easy lemma which we will use frequently.

4.2 Lemma Let $`X`$ be a smooth complex threefold with $`mK_X=𝒪_X`$ for some positive integer $`m.`$ Let $`Y`$ be a normal Stein space and $`f:XY`$ be a proper surjective bimeromorphic map. Suppose that the fibers of $`f`$ have dimension at most $`1.`$ Suppose furthermore $`R^1f_{}(𝒪_X)=0.`$ Let $`Cf^1(y)`$ be an irreducible curve. Then $`C𝐏_1`$ with normal bundle $`N_{C|X}=𝒪(a)𝒪(b)`$ and $`(a,b)=(1,1),(0,2),(1,3).`$

Proof. We follow the arguments of Laufer \[La81\]. Let $``$ denote the ideal of $`CX.`$ Since $`Y`$ is Stein, our vanishing assumption immediately gives

$$H^1(X,𝒪_X)=H^1(Y,𝒪_Y)=0.$$

Therefore $`H^1(X,)=0`$ via

$$H^0(X,𝒪_X)H^0(C,𝒪_C)H^1(X,)0.$$

Moreover an easy Leray spectral sequence argument yields

$$H^2(X,^2)=0$$

(here we use the assumption that there are no 2-dimensional fibers). Thus the exact sequence

$$H^1(X,)H^1(C,/^2)H^2(X,^2)$$

proves

$$H^1(C,N_C^{})=0.$$
$`()`$
Let $`F`$ denote the reduced fiber $`f^1(y).`$ Then the vanishing $`R^1\varphi _{}(𝒪_X)=0`$ implies (via the theorem on formal functions and the vanishing $`H^2(F,^\mu /^{\mu +1})`$ for all $`\mu 1`$) that $`H^1(F,𝒪_F)=0`$ (having still in mind $`dimF=1.`$) Hence $`H^1(C,𝒪_C)=0`$ and $`C𝐏_1.`$ Since $`K_X|C=0`$ by our assumption on $`K_X`$, we have $`a+b=2.`$ Now (\*) implies the claim on the normal bundle.

4.3 Proposition $`L`$ and $`V`$ are integrable.

Proof. By \[En87\] $`T_X`$ is $`K_X`$semistable. Then it is immediately verified that

$$c_1(L)K_X^2=\frac{1}{2}c_1(V)K_X^2=\frac{1}{3}K_X^3.$$

Therefore by \[Su90,7.1\] every $`xXE`$ has a neighborhood $`U`$ of the form $`U=V\times V^{}`$ such that

$$T_U=p^{}(T_V)p^{}(T_V^{}).$$

Hence $`L`$ and $`V`$ are generically integrable, hence everywhere integrable (the integrability of $`L`$ is anyway clear by reasons of rank).

4.4 Corollary Every point $`xX`$ admits a neighborhood $`U=U_1\times U_2`$ such that (by abuse of notation) $`T_{U_1}=L`$ and $`T_{U_2}=V.`$

We now establish the local product structure in $`Y.`$

4.5 Proposition The exceptional locus $`BY`$ is smooth and for every $`bB`$ there are open neighborhoods $`U`$ of $`bY`$ and $`V`$ of $`bB`$ and there is a surface $`W`$ admitting a rational double point as only singular point such that $`UV\times W.`$ In particular $`Y`$ is an orbifold.

Proof. (4.5.1) In a first step we show that $`\varphi `$ does not contract divisors to points. So assume to the contrary the existence of an irreducible divisor $`E_0E`$ such that $`dim\varphi (E_0)=0.`$ First we claim that the canonical map

$$N_{E_0}^{}L_{E_0}^{}$$

obtained by composing $`N_{E_0}^{}\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1|E_0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1|E_0L_{E_0}^{}`$ vanishes. In order to verify this claim, notice that

$$H^0(N_{E_0}^k)0$$

for suitable large $`k`$ ($`E`$ is contained in a fiber!). It follows easily that any desingularisation of $`E_0`$ has negative Kodaira dimension; just observe that sections in $`(N_E^{})^{k_0}`$ must have zeroes. Now we choose a covering family $`(l_t)`$ of (generically irreducible) rational curves in $`E_0.`$ Then $`E_0L_t0.`$ If $`E_0l_t=0,`$ we see easily that - denoting $`f`$ the normalisation of $`l_t`$ \- $`f^{}(T_X)`$ is nef, hence the deformations of $`l_t`$ cover $`X`$ which is absurd. Hence

$$E_0l_t<0.$$
$`()`$
Next notice $`Ll_t0.`$ In fact, if $`Ll_t<0,`$ then for the normalisation $`f_t:𝐏_1l_t`$ we obtain

$$H^1(𝐏_1,f_t^{}(L_t^{}))=0.$$

This implies $`c_1(f_t^{}(L_t))=0,`$ contradiction. Combining $`L_{}l_t0`$ with (\*), we conclude that the map $`N_{E_0}^{}L_{E_0}^{}`$ vanishes. Hence $`L_{E_0}T_{E_0}.`$ This means that at least generically $`L_{E_0}`$ defines a foliation on $`E_0.`$ Now we apply (4.4) taking over all notations. It follows that $`\stackrel{~}{U}=E_0U`$ has a projection $`\stackrel{~}{U}C`$ to a possibly non-normal curve $`CU_2,`$ and moreover - possibly after shrinking - $`\stackrel{~}{U}=U_1\times C.`$ We observe that

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{E_0}^1=L_{E_0}^{}W^{},$$

where $`W^{}`$ is the image of $`V_{E_0}^{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{E_0}^1.`$ Locally of course, $`W^{}=\mathrm{\Omega }_C^1.`$

Now we study the normalisation $`h:\stackrel{~}{E}E_0`$ of $`E_0.`$ Then $`\stackrel{~}{E}`$ is smooth since locally $`\stackrel{~}{E}=U_1\times \stackrel{~}{C},`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ is the normalisation of $`C.`$ If we introduce $`\stackrel{~}{L}=h^{}(L_{E_0})`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ is an integrable subbundle of $`T_{\stackrel{~}{E}.}`$ This is clear from the local description of $`E.`$ Let $`Q`$ denote the quotient bundle. Then generically $`Q`$ is a subbundle of $`T_{\stackrel{~}{E}}.`$ Since every point $`x\stackrel{~}{E}`$ has a neighborhood of the form $`U_1\times \stackrel{~}{C}`$ (shrinking $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$, of course), such that $`T_{U_1}=\stackrel{~}{L},`$ we conclude that $`T_{\stackrel{~}{C}}=Q`$ and therefore $`Q`$ is a subbundle of $`T_{\stackrel{~}{E}}`$ everywhere, hence

$$T_{\stackrel{~}{E}}=\stackrel{~}{L}Q.$$

Since $`\kappa (\stackrel{~}{E})=\mathrm{},`$ we thus have a $`𝐏_1`$bundle structure $`\stackrel{~}{p}:\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{B}`$ over a smooth curve $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ and either $`L=T_{\stackrel{~}{B}}`$, $`Q=T_{\stackrel{~}{E}/\stackrel{~}{B}}`$ or vice versa \[Be99\]. Moreover we can write $`\stackrel{~}{E}=𝐏()`$ with a numerically flat rank 2 bundle $``$ on $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ (2.6). Let $`C_0\stackrel{~}{E}`$ be a section with $`C_0^2`$ minimal. Since $``$ is flat, we have $`C_0^2=0,`$ cp. \[Ha77,V.2\]. Let $`\stackrel{~}{F}`$ be a fiber of $`\stackrel{~}{p}.`$

(A) Suppose first that $`E`$ is smooth, hence $`\stackrel{~}{E}=E.`$ Using the canonical vector bundle sequence

$$0N_{E_0}^{}V^{}|E_0W^{}0$$

and

$$K_X|E_0=L^{}|E_0+detV^{}|E_0=0,$$

we obtain $`W^{}=K_{E_0/\stackrel{~}{B}}`$ in case $`L=T_{\stackrel{~}{B}}`$ and $`W^{}=p^{}K_{\stackrel{~}{B}}`$ in case $`Q=T_{\stackrel{~}{B}}.`$ In both cases we clearly have $`H^2(E_0,detV^{})=0`$ and since

$$c_2(V|E_0)H^2(E_0,detV^{}),$$

we conclude $`c_2(V|E_0)=0`$. On the other hand, $`c_2(V|E_0)`$ can be computed by the above exact sequence and we easily obtain $`g(\stackrel{~}{B})=1.`$

(B) Now we treat the case $`\stackrel{~}{L}=T_{\stackrel{~}{B}}.`$ Write

$$h^{}(K_{E_0})=aC_0+b\stackrel{~}{F}.$$

Since $`K_{E_0}=N_{E_0}`$ and since $`EF<0`$ for $`F=h(\stackrel{~}{F}),`$ we have $`a<0.`$ Let $`\stackrel{~}{N}\stackrel{~}{E}`$ be the preimage of the non-normal locus of $`E.`$ Write

$$\stackrel{~}{N}=cC_0+d\stackrel{~}{F}.$$

Then $`c0`$ and either $`\stackrel{~}{N}=\mathrm{}`$ or $`c2`$ (this is immediate by considering the subadjunction formula of a Gorenstein curve). Since $`K_{\stackrel{~}{E}}2C_0+(2g2)\stackrel{~}{F},`$ where $`g=g(\stackrel{~}{B}),`$ the subadjunction formula

$$K_{\stackrel{~}{E}}=h^{}(K_{E_0})\stackrel{~}{N}$$

yields $`c1,`$ hence $`c=0`$ and $`E`$ is normal, hence smooth. So $`\stackrel{~}{E}=E_0`$ with a map $`p:E_0\stackrel{~}{B}`$ to the elliptic curve $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ (by (A)). Now we contract $`X`$ along $`p:E_0\stackrel{~}{B}`$ and obtain a birational morphism

$$\psi :XX^{}$$

with $`\psi (E_0)=\stackrel{~}{B}.`$ Note that $`X^{}`$ has canonical singularities, that $`K_X^{}`$ is big and nef and that there is a birational map $`\tau :X^{}Y`$ such that $`\varphi =\tau \psi .`$ In particular

$$R^q\tau _{}(𝒪_X^{})=0$$
$`(+)`$
for $`q1.`$ We claim that, $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ being elliptic, $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$ cannot be an irreducible component of the fiber $`F^{}=\tau ^1(\stackrel{~}{B})=\tau ^1(y).`$ In fact, suppose the contrary. Let $`F_0`$ be the closure of $`F^{}\stackrel{~}{B}`$ in $`F^{}.`$ Let $`\widehat{F}^{}`$ denote completion of $`X^{}`$ along $`F^{},`$ analogously $`\widehat{B}`$ and $`\widehat{F}_0.`$ Let $`\widehat{}`$ be the ideal sheaf of $`\widehat{B}\widehat{F}`$ and $`\widehat{}_0`$ that one of $`\widehat{(BF_0)}\widehat{F}_0.`$ Then we immediately see that

$$H^2(\widehat{F},\widehat{})=H^2(\widehat{F}_0,\widehat{}_0)=H^2(\widehat{F}_0,𝒪_{\widehat{F}_0}).$$

The last group vanishes because $`R^2\tau _{}(𝒪_X^{})=0.`$ Via the sequence

$$H^1(\widehat{F},𝒪_{\widehat{F}})H^1(\widehat{B},𝒪_{\widehat{B}})H^2(\widehat{F},\widehat{})$$

and via the obvious epimorphism

$$H^1(\widehat{B},𝒪_{\widehat{B}})H^1(\stackrel{~}{B},𝒪_{\stackrel{~}{B}}),$$

we obtain $`H^1(\widehat{F},𝒪_{\widehat{F}})0,`$ contradicting (+). Thus we obtain an irreducible divisor $`E^{\prime \prime }F^{}`$ containing $`\stackrel{~}{B}.`$ Let $`E^{}X`$ be the strict transform in $`X.`$ Consider an irreducible curve $`CE_0E^{}.`$ Since we also have $`L|E^{}T_E^{},`$ the $`L`$leaf through any $`xC`$ is contained in $`E_0E^{}.`$ Therefore $`C`$ must be a leaf of $`L`$ and $`E_0E^{}`$ has to consist of disjoint sections of $`E_0\stackrel{~}{B}.`$ Moreover $`E^{}`$ has the same structure as $`E_0`$ and we have a map $`p^{}:E^{}\stackrel{~}{B}`$ with the $`C_i`$ also being section of $`p^{}.`$ We consider the map

$$q:E_0E^{}\stackrel{~}{B}.$$

It is easily verified that we can blow down $`X`$ along $`q`$ to obtain a new birational map $`\psi ^{}:XX^{\prime \prime }.`$ E.g. blow down $`X^{}`$ along $`E^{\prime \prime }\stackrel{~}{B}`$ and compose with $`\varphi .`$ Arguing with $`\psi ^{}`$ as with $`\psi `$ we deduce the existence of a third divisor in $`\varphi ^1(y).`$ This procedure must terminate, so that finally we find birational maps

$$\lambda :XZ,\sigma :ZY$$

with $`\sigma \lambda =\varphi `$ such that $`\sigma ^1(y)`$ contains an elliptic curve as irreducible component, which is a contradiction as before with $`\tau `$. This settles the case $`\stackrel{~}{L}=T_{\stackrel{~}{B}}.`$

(C) Now suppose $`Q=T_{\stackrel{~}{B}}.`$ Here $`\stackrel{~}{p}:\stackrel{~}{E}\stackrel{~}{B}`$ descends to a $`𝐏_1`$bundle $`p:E_0B_0`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{B}B_0`$ the normalisation and $`\stackrel{~}{E}=E\times _{B_0}\stackrel{~}{B}.`$ Let $`\psi :XX^{}`$ be the contraction along $`p.`$ Arguing as in (B) either $`B_0𝐏_1`$ or there exists a divisor $`E^{}\varphi ^y`$ (where $`y=\varphi (E_0)`$) with $`B_0=\psi (E_0)\psi (E^{}).`$ Then $`E_0E^{}`$ contains some multi-section $`C`$ of $`p.`$ Take $`xC`$ and consider $`F_x=p^1(x).`$ Then $`F_x`$ is the $`L`$leaf through $`x.`$ Again by $`L|E^{}T_E^{},`$ we must have $`F_xE^{}.`$ This is absurd for general $`x`$, hence $`B_0=𝐏_1.`$ In particular $`E`$ is smooth and we conclude by (A).

(4.5.2) Now we know that all non-trivial fibers of $`\varphi `$ are 1-dimensional. By (4.2), all components $`C`$ of these fibers are smooth rational curves. Moreover

$$T_X|C=𝒪(2)𝒪(a)𝒪(b)$$

with $`(a,b)=(1,1),(0,2),(1,3).`$ From (1.3), it follows that $`L_C=𝒪(2)`$ or $`L_C=𝒪_C.`$ The case $`L_C=𝒪_C(2),`$ however, is ruled out again by 1.3. Thus $`L_C=𝒪_C`$ (so $`a=0`$ and $`b=2`$) and $`T_CV_C`$, hence $`C`$ is contained in a leaf $`𝒱_0`$ of $`V.`$ Now apply (4.4): every $`xC`$ has an open neighborhood $`U(x)=U_1(x)\times U_2(x)`$ with $`T_{U_1}=L`$ and $`T_{U_2}=V.`$ By conpactness of $`C`$ we obtain $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_r`$ such that

$$C\underset{i}{}U(x_i)=:U.$$

Let $`U_2:=_iU_2(x_i)`$; then $`U`$ is an open neighborhood of $`C𝒱_0.`$ We obtain a projection

$$\pi :UU_2$$

by setting $`\pi (x):=_x𝒱_0`$, where $`_x`$ is the $`L`$leaf containing $`xU.`$ The fibers of $`\pi `$ are open parts of $`L`$leaves. Fixing a point $`x_0C,`$ we clearly may assume that every leaf $`𝒱`$ with $`𝒱U=\mathrm{\varnothing ̸}`$ meets $`_{x_0}.`$ Hence we find an open neighborhood $`W`$ of $`x_0`$ in $`_{x_0}`$ and a holomorphic map $`\tau :UW`$ by setting $`\tau (x)=𝒱_x_{x_0},`$ $`𝒱_x`$ denoting the $`V`$leaf through $`x_0.`$ After a coordinate change, $`\tau ^1(0)=𝒱_0U`$ and $`W=\mathrm{\Delta }_ϵ=\{z𝐂||z|<ϵ\}.`$ Since the fibers of $`\tau `$ and $`\pi `$ meet only tranversally (the leaves $`_x`$ and $`𝒱_y`$ meet only transversally), the map

$$\tau \times \pi :U\mathrm{\Delta }_ϵ\times \stackrel{~}{U}$$

is biholomorphic. Therefore $`C`$ obviously deforms to the leaves $`\tau ^1(t)`$. Hence $`E`$ cannot contain any 1-dimensional irreducible component, so $`\varphi `$ contracts only divisors to curves. If $`E_0E`$ is an irreducible component, then we deduce that $`E_0\varphi (E_0)`$ is a $`𝐏_1`$bundle and every fiber is a $`(2)`$curve some leaf $`𝒱.`$ To get the complete picture, consider the whole fiber $`\varphi ^1(y)`$ for $`yB.`$ Write

$$\varphi ^1(y)=C_1+\mathrm{}+C_r.$$

Then all arguments made above for a single $`C`$ also apply to $`C_1+\mathrm{}+C_r`$ as well. Identifying $`U`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{U}\times \mathrm{\Delta }_ϵ,`$ it follows that $`\varphi |U=\psi \times \mathrm{id},`$ where $`\psi `$ is the blow-down of $`C_1+\mathrm{}+C_r`$ in the leaf $`𝒱_0`$. This completes the proof of (4.5).

Proof of Theorem 4.1 By (4.4) $`Y`$ is an orbifold. Hence by Tian-Yau’s result \[TY87,\] Theorem 2.2, there exists a Kähler-Einstein-orbifold metric $`\omega `$ on $`Y;`$ so $`[\omega ]c_1(Y).`$ Let $`L^{}=\varphi _{}(L)^{}`$ and $`V^{}=\varphi _{}(V)^{}.`$ Then

$$T_Y=L^{}V^{}.$$

Now this decomposition is orthogonal with respect to $`\omega .`$ This is seen as in the case of an ordinary manifold, following the arguments e.g. in \[Ko87,p.178/179\] (proof of theorem V.8.3). The crucial vanishing result \[Ko87,III.1.9\] immediately generalises to the orbifold case. Finally the de Rham decomposition for orbifolds (0.7) applies and yields Part (1) of (4.1). Part (2) is then an obvious consequence of (1).

References

\[AW97\] Andreatta,M;Wisniewski,J.: A view on contractions of higher dimensional varieties. Proc. Symp. Pure Math. 62(pt.1), 153-183 (1997)

\[Be99\] Beauville,A.: Complex manifolds with split tangent bundles. Complex analysis and algebraic geometry, vol. in memory of M.Schneider, 61-70. de Gruyter 2000

\[DPS94\] Demailly,J.-P.; Peternell,Th.; Schneider,M.:Compact complex manifolds with numerically effective tangent bundles. J.Alg.Geom.3, 295–345 (1994)

item \[DPS00\] Demailly,J.-P.; Peternell,Th.; Schneider,M.: Pseudo-effective line bundles on compact K”ahler manifolds. math.AG/0006205 , to appear in Intl. J. Math.

\[Dr99\] Druel,S.: Variétés algébriques dont le fibtré tangent est totalement decomposé. J. reine u. angew. Mathematik 522 (2000)

\[Eh50\] Ehresmann,C.: Les connexions infinitésimales dans un espace fibré différentiable. Colloque de topologie, Bruxelles (1950). 29-55. G.Thone, Liege 1951

\[En87\] Enoki,I.: Stability and negativity for tangent bundles of minimal Kähler spaces. Lecture Notes in Math. vol. 1339, 118-127. Springer 1987

\[Ha77\] Hartshorne,R.: Algebraic Geometry. Springer 1977

\[HW98\] Hwang,J.M.;Mok,N.: Rigidity of irreducible hermitian symmetric spaces of the compact type under Kähler deformation. Inv. Math. 131, 393-418 (1998)

\[KN63\] Kobayashi,S.;Nomizu,K.: Foundations of differential geometry, vol.I,II. Wiley 1963

\[Ko87\] Kobayashi,S.: Differential geometry of complex vector bundles. Iwanami Shoten and Princeton Univ. Press, 1987

\[Ko96\] Kollar.J.: Rational curves on algebraic varieties. Springer 1996

\[La81\] Laufer, H.: On C$`𝐏_1`$ as an exceptional set. Recent developments in several complex variables, Proc. Conf., Princeton Univ. 1979, Ann. Math. Stud. 100, 261-275 (1981).

\[Mo82\] Mori,S.: Threefolds whose canonical bundles are not numerically effective. Ann. Math. 116, 133 - 176 (1982)

\[Su90\] Sugiyama,K.: Einstein-Kähler metrics on minimal varieties of general type and an inequality between Chern numbers. Recent topics in differential and analytic geometry, Adv. Stud. Pure Math. 18-I, 417-443 (1990)

\[TY87\] Tian,G.;Yau,S.T.: Existence of Kähler-Einstein metric on complete Kähler manifolds and their applications to algebraic geometry. Math. Aspects of String Theory, 574-628, World Scientific 1987

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\mathrm{Frededric}\mathrm{Campana}& & & & & \mathrm{Thomas}\mathrm{Peternell}\\ \mathrm{Departement}\mathrm{de}\mathrm{mathematiques}& & & & & \mathrm{Mathematisches}\mathrm{Institut}\\ \mathrm{Universite}\mathrm{de}\mathrm{Nancy}& & & & & \mathrm{Universitaet}\mathrm{Bayreuth}\\ \mathrm{BP239}& & & & & & \\ 54506\mathrm{Vandoeuvre}\mathrm{les}\mathrm{Nancy}& & & & & 95440\mathrm{Bayreuth}\\ \mathrm{France}& & & & & \mathrm{Germany}\end{array}$$