text:
# Projectivity criterion of Moishezon spaces and density of projective symplectic varieties

Abstract.

A Moishezon manifold is a projective manifold if and only if it is a Kähler manifold \[Mo 1\]. However, a singular Moishezon space is not generally projective even if it is a Kähler space \[Mo 2\]. Vuono \[V\] has given a projectivity criterion for Moishezon spaces with isolated singularities. In this paper we shall prove that a Moishezon space with 1-rational singularities is projective when it is a Kähler space (Theorem 6).

We shall use Theorem 6 to show the density of projective symplectic varieties in the Kuranishi family of a (singular) symplectic variety (Theorem 9), which is a generalization of the result by Fujiki \[Fu 1, Theorem 4.8\] to the singular case.

In the Appendix we give a supplement and a correction to the previous paper \[Na\] where singular symplectic varieties are dealt with.

Acknowledgement. The author would like to thank K. Oguiso, who asked him if Theorem 9 holds in the singular case.

1. Projectivity of a Kähler Moishezon variety

In this paper, a compact complex variety means a compact, irreducible and reduced complex space. We mean by a Moishezon variety $`X`$ a compact complex variety $`X`$ with $`n`$ algebraically independent meromorphic functions, where $`n=dimX`$, \[Mo 1\].

For a complex space $`X`$ we say that $`X`$ is Kähler if $`X`$ admits a Kähler metric (form) in the sense of \[Gr\], \[Mo 2\] (cf.\[B\]).

Definition 1. Let $`X`$ be a compact complex variety.

(1) An element $`bH_2(X,)`$ is an analytic homology class if $`b`$ is represented by a 2-cycle $`\mathrm{\Sigma }\alpha _jC_j`$ where $`C_j`$ are complex subvarieties of dimension $`1`$ and $`\alpha _j`$. Denote by $`A_2(X,)`$ the subspace of $`H_2(X,)`$ spanned by analytic homology classes. Define $`A_2(X,):=A_2(X,)_{}`$.

(2) For an element $`bA_2(X,)`$ and a line bundle $`L`$ of $`X`$, the intersection number $`(b,L)`$ is well-defined. Two elements $`b`$, $`b^{}`$ of $`A_2(X,)`$ are said to be numerically equivalent if $`(b,L)=(b^{},L)`$ for all line bundles $`L`$ on $`X`$. Denote by $`N_1(X)_{}`$ the quotient $``$-vector space of $`A_2(X,)`$ by this numerical equivalence. Define $`N_1(X)_{}:=N_1(X)_{}`$.

(3) Define $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)_{}:=\mathrm{Pic}(X)_{}`$ and $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)_{}:=\mathrm{Pic}(X)_{}`$. Two line bundles $`L`$ and $`L^{}`$ are numerically equivalent if $`(b,L)=(b,L^{})`$ for all $`bA_2(X,)`$. Let $`N^1(X)`$ be the abelian group of numerical classes of line bundles on $`X`$. Define $`N^1(X)_{}:=N^1(X)_{}`$ and $`N^1(X)_{}:=N^1(X)_{}`$.

Proposition 2(\[Ko-Mo, (12.1.5)\]) Let $`X`$ be a Moishezon variety with 1-rational singularities, that is, $`X`$ is normal and has a resolution $`\pi :YX`$ such that $`R^1\pi _{}𝒪_Y=0`$. Then an analytic homology class $`bA_2(X,)`$ is zero if it is numerically equivalent to $`0`$. In particular, $`A_2(X,)=N_1(X)_{}`$.

Sketch of proof: Let $`\pi :YX`$ be a resolution such that $`Y`$ is projective. Let $`N_1(Y/X)_{}`$ be the subspace of $`N_1(Y)_{}`$ generated by the classes of curves contained in a fiber of $`\pi `$. We have an exact sequence

$$0N_1(Y/X)_{}N_1(Y)_{}N_1(X)_{}0.$$

We use the condition $`R^1\pi _{}𝒪_Y=0`$ to prove the middle exactness of the sequence.

We may assume that $`b`$ is represented by a curve $`C`$ on $`X`$. By cutting out $`\pi ^1(C)`$ by general hyperplane sections of $`Y`$, we can find a curve $`C^{}`$ such that, as a cycle, $`\pi _{}(C^{})=mC`$ for a positive integer $`m`$. Define $`b^{}:=[(1/m)C^{}]N_1(Y)_{}`$. By the exact sequence, $`b^{}N_1(Y/X)_{}`$. Thus $`b^{}`$ is represented by a (Q)curve $`D`$ contained in some fibers of $`\pi `$. By definition, $`D`$ and $`(1/m)C^{}`$ are numerically equivalent. Since numerical equivalence and homological equivalence coincide on $`Y`$ (cf. \[Mo 1, page 83, Theorem 9\]), these are also homological equivalent. Therefore, $`\pi _{}(D)`$ and $`\pi _{}((1/m)C^{})`$ are homologically equivalent on $`X`$. Since $`[\pi _{}(D)]=0`$, $`b=[\pi _{}((1/m)C^{})]=0`$.

Lemma 3. Let $`X`$ be a Kähler, Moishezon variety with a Kähler form $`\omega `$. Assume that an element $`L\mathrm{Pic}(X)_{}`$ satisfies the following condition $`()`$.

(\**) For every curve $`CX`$,

$$_C\omega =(C.L).$$

Then, for any subvariety $`WX`$ of dimension $`k`$, $`(L^k)_W>0`$.

Proof. By the assumtion, $`L`$ is nef, hence $`(L^k)_W0`$ (cf. \[Kl\]). We shall derive a contradiction by assuming that $`(L^k)_W=0`$.

Put $`\omega ^{}:=\omega |_W`$. Then $`\omega ^{}`$ becomes a Kähler form of $`W`$, and $`W`$ is a Kähler Moishezon variety. Let $`pW`$ be a smooth point, and let $`h:\widehat{W}W`$ be the blowing up at $`p`$. Denote by $`E`$ the inverse image $`h^1(p)`$. $`E`$ is a Cartier divisor of $`\widehat{W}`$. By using a Hermitian metric on $`𝒪_{\widehat{W}}(E)`$, one can define a $`d`$-closed $`(1,1)`$-form $`\alpha _E`$ on $`\widehat{W}`$ in such a way that $`\omega _ϵ:=h^{}\omega ϵ\alpha _E`$ becomes a Kähler form on $`\widehat{W}`$ if $`ϵ>0`$ is sufficiently small.

Fix a sufficiently small rational number $`ϵ>0`$. Put $`L^{}:=L|_W`$ and $`F:=h^{}L^{}ϵE`$. By the condition $`()`$, for every curve $`C\widehat{W}`$, we have $`(C.F)=_C(h^{}\omega ^{}ϵ\alpha _E)`$.

In particular, $`F`$ is a nef Q-line bundle on $`\widehat{W}`$. Therefore, $`(F)^k0`$.

On the other hand, since $`(h^{}L^{})^i(E)^{ki}=0`$ for $`i0,k`$, we have $`(F)^k=(L^{})^k+ϵ^k(E)^k`$. By the assumption, $`(L^{})^k=0`$. By the definition of $`E`$, we have $`(E)^k<0`$. Hence $`(F)^k<0`$, a contradiction.

Theorem 4 (cf. \[Mo 1, page 77, Theorem 6\]) Let $`X`$ be a Moishezon variety. Assume that an element $`L\mathrm{Pic}(X)_{}`$ satisfies the inequality $`(L)_W^k>0`$ for every $`k`$ dimensional subvariety $`W`$ of $`X`$. Then $`L`$ is ample.

By Lemma 3 and Theorem 4 we have the following corollary.

Corollary 5. Let $`X`$ be a Kähler Moishezon variety with a Kähler form $`\omega `$. Assume that an element $`L\mathrm{Pic}(X)_{}`$ satisfies the equality for any curve $`CX`$:

$$(C.L)=_C\omega .$$

Then $`L`$ is ample.

Theorem 6. Let $`X`$ be a Moishezon variety with 1-rational singularities (cf. Proposition 2). If $`X`$ is Kähler, then $`X`$ is projective.

Proof.

Since the numerical equivalence and the homological equivalence coincide for (analytic) 1-cycle by Proposition 2, we have a natural map $`\alpha :N^1(X)_{}(A_2(X,))^{}`$ and $`\alpha `$ is an isomorphism.

Taking the tensor product with $``$, we have a map $`\alpha _{}:N^1(X)_{}(A_2(X,))^{}`$ and $`\alpha _{}`$ is an isomorphism. By the 2-nd cohomolgy class defined by the Kähler form $`\omega `$ (cf. \[B, (4.15)\]) one can regard the Kähler form as an element of $`(A_2(X,))^{}`$. Since $`\alpha _{}`$ is surjective, there is an element $`dN^1(X)_{}`$ such that $`(C.d)=_C\omega `$ for every curve $`CX`$.

Approximate $`dN^1(X)_{}`$ by a convergent sequence $`\{d_m\}`$ of rational elements $`d_mN^1(X)_{}`$.

Let us fix the basis $`b_1,\mathrm{},b_l`$ of the vector space $`N^1(X)_{}`$. Each $`b_i`$ is represented by an element $`B_i\mathrm{Pic}(X)`$. Now $`d`$ (resp. $`d_m`$) is represented by an element in $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)_{}`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)_{}`$) $`D:=\mathrm{\Sigma }x_iB_i`$ (resp. $`D_m:=\mathrm{\Sigma }x_i^{(m)}B_i`$) such that $`limx_i^{(m)}=x_i`$.

Put $`E_m:=D_mD`$. Then there are $`d`$ closed $`(1,1)`$-forms $`\alpha _m`$ corresponding to $`E_m`$ such that $`\{\alpha _m\}`$ uniformly converge to $`0`$.

If $`m`$ is chosen sufficiently large, then $`\omega _m:=\omega +\alpha _m`$ is a Kähler form. Since

$$(C.D_m)=_C\omega _m$$

for every curve $`CX`$, we see that $`D_m`$ is ample by Corollary 5.

Corollary 6’. Let $`X`$ be a Moishezon variety with rational singularities. If $`X`$ is Kähler, then $`X`$ is projective.

Remark. If we do not assume that $`X`$ has 1-rational singularities, Theorem 6 is no longer true (cf. \[Mo 2\]).

2. Application: Density of projective symplectic varieties

A symplectic variety is a compact normal Kähler space $`X`$ with the following properties: (1) The regular part $`U`$ of $`X`$ has an everywhere non-degenerate holomorphic 2-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, and (2) for a (any) resolution of singularities $`f:\stackrel{~}{X}X`$ such that $`f^1(U)U`$, the 2-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ extends to a holomorphic 2-form on $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$. Here the extended 2-form may possibly degenerate along the exceptional locus. By definition, $`X`$ has only canonical singularities, hence has only rational singularities.

If $`X`$ has a resolution $`f:\stackrel{~}{X}X`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ extends to an everywhere non-degenerate 2-form on $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$, then we say that $`X`$ has a symplectic resolution.

Symplectic varieties with no symplectic resolutions are constructed as symplectic V-manifolds in \[Fu 1\]. Recently, O’Grady \[O\] has constructed such varieties as the moduli spaces of semi-stable torsion free sheaves on a polarized K3 surface (cf. \[Na, Introduction\]). His examples are no more V-manifolds.

These examples satisfy the following condition:

(\*): The natural restriction map

$$H^2(X,)H^2(U,)$$

is an isomorphism.

In \[Na\] we have formulated the local Torelli problem for these symplectic varieties, and proved it. More precisely, we have proved it for a symplectic variety $`X`$ with the following properties.

(a): $`\mathrm{Codim}(\mathrm{\Sigma }X)4`$, where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }:=\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$,

(b): $`h^1(X,𝒪_X)=0`$, $`h^0(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2)=1`$, and

(c): (\*) is satisfied.111 Note that this condition is equivalent to the condition $`()`$ in \[Na, Remark (2)\] (cf. (b) in the proof of \[Na, Prop. 9\]).

Let $`X`$ be a symplectic variety satisfying (a), (b) and (c). Let $`0S`$ be the Kuranishi space of $`X`$ and $`\overline{\pi }:𝒳S`$ be the universal family such that $`\overline{\pi }^1(0)=X`$. Let $`𝒰`$ be the locus in $`𝒳`$ where $`\overline{\pi }`$ is a smooth map. We denote by $`\pi `$ the restriction $`\overline{\pi }`$ to $`𝒰`$. $`S`$ is nonsingular by the condition (a). Note that every fiber of $`\overline{\pi }`$ is a symplectic variety satisfying (a), (b) and (c) (cf. \[Na\]).

The cohomology $`H^2(U,)`$ admits a natural mixed Hodge structure because $`U`$ is a Zariski open subset of a compact Kähler space (cf. \[Fu 2\]). In our case, because of condition (a), it is pure of weight 2, and the Hodge decomposition is given by

$$H^2(U,)=H^0(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2)H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)H^2(U,𝒪_U).$$

For details of this, see the footnote of the e-print version of \[Na, p.21\]. Moreover, the tangent space $`T_{S,0}`$ at the origin is canonically isomorphic to $`H^1(U,\mathrm{\Theta }_U)`$. By a holomorphic symplectic 2-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`H^1(U,\mathrm{\Theta }_U)`$ is identified with $`H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)`$.

Let us fix a resolution $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ of $`X`$. For $`\alpha H^2(U,)`$, denote by $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }H^2(\stackrel{~}{X},)`$ the image of $`\alpha `$ by the map $`H^2(U,)H^2(X,)H^2(\stackrel{~}{X},)`$. The holomorphic symplectic 2-form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ defines a holomorphic 2-form on $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ by the definition of a symplectic variety. We denote by the same symbol $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ this holomorphic 2-form on $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$. Here we normalize $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ so that $`_{\stackrel{~}{X}}(\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }})^l=1`$.

One can define a quadratic form $`q`$ on $`H^2(U,)`$ by

$$q(\alpha ):=l/2_{\stackrel{~}{X}}(\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }})^{l1}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^2+(1l)_{\stackrel{~}{X}}\mathrm{\Omega }^l\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}^{l1}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{\stackrel{~}{X}}\mathrm{\Omega }^{l1}\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}^l\stackrel{~}{\alpha },$$

where $`dimX=2l`$. Note that $`q`$ is independent of the choice of the resolution $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$. The quadratic form $`q`$ is defined over $`H^2(U,)`$. By the same argument as \[Be, Théorème 5, (a), (c)\], we can write $`q(\alpha )=c_1(_{\stackrel{~}{X}}[f^{}\omega ]^{2l2}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^2)c_2(_{\stackrel{~}{X}}[f^{}\omega ]^{2l1}\stackrel{~}{\alpha })^2`$ by a Kähler form $`\omega `$ on $`X`$ and by suitable positive real constants $`c_1`$ and $`c_2`$. Let us define $`H_0^2(U,):=\{\alpha H^2(U,);_{\stackrel{~}{X}}[f^{}\omega ]^{2l1}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=0\}`$. Then we have a direct sum decomposition $`H^2(U,)=H_0^2(U,)[\omega ]`$, where $`H_0^2(U,)`$ and $`[\omega ]`$ are orthogonal with respect to $`q`$.

We shall prove that $`q([\omega ])>0.`$

It is easily checked that $`q([\omega ])=l/2_{\stackrel{~}{X}}(\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }})^{l1}[f^{}\omega ]^2`$. We assume that the resolution $`f:\stackrel{~}{X}X`$ is obtained by a succession of blowing ups with smooth centers contained in the singular locus. Let $`\{E_i\}`$ be the exceptional divisors of $`f`$. Then, for sufficiently small positive real numbers $`ϵ_i`$, $`[f^{}\omega ]\mathrm{\Sigma }ϵ_i[E_i]`$ is a Kähler class on $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$ (cf. \[Fu 3, Lemma 2\]). By \[W, Corollaire au Théorème 7, p.77\] we have $`l/2_{\stackrel{~}{X}}(\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }})^{l1}([f^{}\omega ]\mathrm{\Sigma }ϵ_i[E_i])^2>0`$. On the other hand, by \[Na, Remark (1), p. 24\] we have $`_{\stackrel{~}{X}}(\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }})^{l1}[f^{}\omega ][E_i]=_{\stackrel{~}{X}}(\mathrm{\Omega }\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }})^{l1}[E_i]^2=0`$; hence we have $`q([\omega ])>0`$.

Denote by $`Q:H^2(U,)\times H^2(U,)`$ the symmetric bilinear form defined by $`q`$. With respect to $`Q`$, $`H^0(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2)H^2(U,𝒪_U)`$ is orthogonal to $`H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)`$. Let us define $`N:=\{vH^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1);Q(v,x)=0`$ for any $`xH^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)\}.`$ Since $`q([\omega ])>0`$ for a Kähler form $`\omega `$ on $`X`$, $`N`$ does not coincide with $`H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)`$. By the identification of $`H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)`$ with $`T_{S,0}`$, we regard $`N`$ as a subspace of $`T_{S,0}`$.

Later we shall prove that the quadratic form $`q`$ is non-degenerate and, in fact, $`N=0`$. But, before doing this, we first prove the density of projective symplectic varieties in a rather imcomplete form (cf. Proposition 7 below). After that we will show that $`q`$ is non-degenerate by using Proposition 7. As a consequence, we will see that, in Proposition 7, the assumption for $`T_{S_1,0}`$ is not necessary; hence we can prove the density in a complete form (cf. Theorem 9).

Proposition 7. Notation and assumptions being the same as above, let $`0S_1S`$ be a positive dimensional non-singular subvariety of $`S`$ such that $`T_{S_1,0}`$ is not contained in $`N`$. Then, for any open neighborhood $`0VS`$, there is a point $`sVS_1`$ such that $`𝒳_s`$ is a projective symplectic variety.

Proof. We may assume that $`dimS_1=1`$. Denote by $`𝒳_1`$ the fiber product $`𝒳\times _SS_1`$ and denote by $`\overline{\pi }_1`$ the induced map from $`𝒳_1`$ to $`S_1`$. Take a resolution of singularities $`\nu :𝒴_1𝒳_1`$ in such a way that $`\nu `$ is an isomorphism over smooth locus of $`𝒳_1`$. We also assume that $`\nu `$ is obtained by the succession of blowing ups with smooth centers. So there exists a $`\nu `$-ample divisor of the form $`\mathrm{\Sigma }ϵ_i_i`$, where $`_i`$ are $`\nu `$-exceptional divisors and $`ϵ_i`$ are positive rational numbers.

Let $`S_1^0`$ be the set of points $`sS_1`$ where $`(\overline{\pi }_1\nu )^1(s)`$ are smooth. Then $`S_1^0`$ is a non-empty Zariski open subset of $`S_1`$.

We may assume that $`0S_1^0`$. In fact, if $`0S_1^0`$, then we take a point $`sS_1^0V`$. Then the family $`\overline{\pi }:𝒳S`$ can be regarded as the Kuranishi family of $`𝒳_s`$ near $`sS`$ because $`H^0(X,\mathrm{\Theta }_X)=0`$ by the condition (b). For this point $`sS`$, $`𝒳_s`$ satisfies all conditions (a), (b) and (c). So, if the theorem holds for $`𝒳_s`$, then we can find a point $`s^{}S_1^0V`$ where $`𝒳_s^{}`$ is projective.

In the remainder we shall assume that $`0S_1^0`$. Thus, if $`S`$ is chosen sufficiently small, then $`\nu :𝒴_1𝒳_1`$ is a simultaneous resolution of $`\{𝒳_{1,s}\}`$, $`sS_1`$.

Claim For any open neighborhood $`0VS`$, there is a point $`sVS_1`$ such that $`𝒴_{1,s}`$ is a projective variety.

If the claim is justified, then, for such a point $`s`$, $`𝒳_{1,s}`$ is a Moishezon variety. On the other hand, $`𝒳_{1,s}`$ is a symplectic variety satisfying (a), (b) and (c) (cf. \[Na\]). In particular, $`𝒳_{1,s}`$ is a Kähler Moishezon variety with rational singularities. By Theorem 6, we conclude that $`𝒳_{1,s}`$ is projective.

Proof of Claim.

(i): Put $`Y=𝒴_{1,0}`$. By definition of $`𝒳_1`$, $`𝒳_{1,0}=X`$. The bimeromorphic map $`\nu _0:YX`$ is a resolution of singularities. Put $`E_i:=_{i,0}`$ where $`_i`$ are $`\nu `$-exceptional divisors. By the construction of $`\nu `$, there are positive rational numbers $`ϵ_i`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }ϵ_iE_i`$ is $`\nu _0`$-ample.

(ii): We have a constant sheaf $`R^2\overline{\pi }_{}`$ on $`S`$. There is an isomorphism $`R^2\overline{\pi }_{}_{}𝒪_SR^2\pi _{}_{}𝒪_S`$. The right hand side is filtered as $`R^2\pi _{}_{}𝒪_S=^0^1^20`$ in such a way that $`Gr_{}^i=R^{2i}\pi _{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒰/S}^i.`$

Over each point $`sS`$, this filtration gives the Hodge decomposition of $`H^2(𝒳_s)`$. The natural mixed Hodge structure on $`H^2(𝒳_s)`$ is pure, and its $`(i,j)`$-component $`H^{i,j}(𝒳_s)`$ $`(i+j=2)`$ is given by $`H^j(𝒰_s,\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒰_s}^i)`$.

For $`aH^2(X,)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(S,R^2\overline{\pi }_{})`$, define $`S_a`$ to be the locus in $`S`$ where $`aH^{1,1}(𝒳_s)`$.

Let $`\omega `$ be a Kähler form on $`X`$ and denote by $`[\omega ]H^2(X,)(=H^2(U,))`$ its cohomology class (cf. \[B, (4.15)\]). Then the tangent space $`T_{S_{[\omega ]},0}`$ is isomorphic to $`\{vH^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1);Q(v,[\omega ])=0\}`$, where we identify $`T_{S,0}`$ with $`H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)`$ as explained above. Let $`v_1H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)`$ be a generator of 1-dimensional vector space $`T_{S_1,0}`$.

Define a linear map $`Q_{v_1}:H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)`$ by $`Q_{v_1}(x)=Q(v_1,x)`$. By the assumption, this map is surjective. By definition, $`\mathrm{Ker}(Q_{v_1})`$ is a complex hyperplane in $`H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)`$. Therefore, $`H^1(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^1)H^2(U,)`$ is not contained in $`\mathrm{Ker}(Q_{v_1})`$. Hence we can find an element $`a`$ in any small open neighborhood of $`[\omega ]H^{1,1}(X)H^2(X,)`$ in such a way that $`S_a`$ intersects $`S_1`$ in $`0`$ transversely.

(iii): Let $`\alpha _{E_i}`$ be a d-closed $`(1,1)`$ form on $`Y`$ corresponding to $`E_i`$. If necessary, by multiplying to $`\{ϵ_i\}`$ a sufficiently small positive rational number simultaneously, the d-closed (1,1) form

$$(\nu _0)^{}\omega \mathrm{\Sigma }ϵ_i\alpha _{E_i}$$

becomes a Kähler form on $`Y`$ (cf. \[Fu 3, Lemma 2\]).

Take $`aH^{1,1}(X)H^2(X,)`$ as in the final part of (ii). Then we can find a suitable d-closed $`(1,1)`$-form $`\omega ^{}`$ on $`Y`$ which represents $`(\nu _0)^{}aH^{1,1}(Y)H^2(Y,)`$ in such a way that

$$\gamma :=\omega ^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }ϵ_i\alpha _{E_i}$$

becomes a Kähler form on $`Y`$.

$`[E_i]`$ remains of $`(1,1)`$ type in $`H^2(𝒴_{1,s})`$ for arbitrary $`sS_1`$ because the Cartier divisor $`E_i`$ extends sideways in the family $`𝒴_1S_1`$. Hence, by the choice of $`a`$, $`(\nu _0)^{}a\mathrm{\Sigma }ϵ_i[E_i]`$ is no more of type $`(1,1)`$ for $`s0`$ sufficiently near $`0`$.

(iv): The last step is the same as the proof of \[Fu 1, Theorem 4.8, (2)\]. Approximate $`aH^{1,1}(X)H^2(X,)`$ by a sequence of rational classes $`\{a_m\}`$ ($`a_mH^2(X,)`$).

We put $`b:=(\nu _0)^{}a\mathrm{\Sigma }ϵ_i[E_i]`$ and $`b_m:=(\nu _0)^{}a_m\mathrm{\Sigma }ϵ_i[E_i]`$.

We take a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ family of Kähler forms $`\{\gamma _s\}`$ on $`\{𝒴_{1,s}\}`$ such that $`\gamma _0=\gamma `$. For each $`sS_1`$, the cohomolgy class $`b_m`$ is represented by a unique harmonic 2-form $`(\omega _m)(s)`$ on $`𝒴_{1,s}`$ with respect to $`\gamma _s`$. If $`m`$ is large, then $`(\omega _m)(s)`$ becomes a Kähler form on $`𝒴_{1,s}`$ for some point $`sVS_1`$. Since $`b_m`$ is a rational cohomolgy class, $`𝒴_{1,s}`$ is a projective manifold by \[Ko\] for this $`s`$.

Corollary 8. Let $`X`$ be a symplectic variety of dim $`n=2l`$ satisfying (a), (b) and (c). Let $`q`$ be the quadratic form on $`H^2(U,)`$ defined above. Then $`q`$ is non-degenerate and has signature $`(3,B3)`$ where $`B:=dimH^2(U,)`$.

Proof. We first prove this collorary when $`X`$ is projective. Let $`\omega `$ be a Kähler form that comes from a very ample line bundle $`L`$ on $`X`$. Take general global sections $`t_1`$, …, $`t_{n2}`$ of $`L`$. We put $`T_0=X`$ and, for $`1in2`$, define $`T_iX`$ to be the common zeros of $`t_1`$, …, $`t_i`$. Put $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_i=\mathrm{\Sigma }T_i`$, where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }:=\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$. By the condition (a), $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{n2}=\mathrm{}`$ and $`T_{n2}`$ is a nonsingular surface. For simplicity we put $`T:=T_{n2}`$. By \[H, Theorem 2\], the pair $`(T_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_i,T_{i+1}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{i+1})`$ is $`ni1`$-connected. In particular, the restriction maps $`H^2(T_i\mathrm{\Sigma }_i,)H^2(T_{i+1}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{i+1},)`$ are all injective. Hence $`H^2(U,)H^2(T,)`$ is an injection. Note that both sides have pure Hodge structures of weight 2 (cf. the footnote on p.21 of the e-print version of \[Na\]) and this injection is a morphism of Hodge structures. Define $`H_0^2(T,):=\{\alpha H^2(T,);(\omega |_T).\alpha =0\}`$. Then we have the restriction map $`H_0^2(U,)H_0^2(T,)`$, which is an injection. This restriction map induces an injection $`H_0^{1,1}(U)_{}H_0^{1,1}(T)_{}`$, where $`H_0^{1,1}(U)_{}:=H^{1,1}(U)H_0^2(U,)`$ and $`H_0^{1,1}(T)_{}:=H^{1,1}(T)H_0^2(T,)`$. Let $`q^{}`$ be the quadratic form on $`H_0^{1,1}(T)_{}`$ defined by the cup product. By the definition of $`H_0^2(U,)`$, $`q|_{H_0^{1,1}(U)_{}}=c_1q^{}|_{H_0^{1,1}(U)_{}}`$ for a suitable positive real constant $`c_1`$. Since $`q^{}|_{H_0^{1,1}(U)_{}}`$ is negative-definite, $`q|_{H_0^{1,1}(U)_{}}`$ is also negative-definite. We have a direct sum decomposition with respect to $`q`$:

$$H^2(U,)=[\omega ](H^{2,0}(U)H^{0,2}(U))_{}H_0^{1,1}(U)_{},$$

where $`(H^{2,0}(U)H^{0,2}(U))_{}:=(H^{2,0}(U)H^{0,2}(U))H^2(U,)`$.

Since $`q`$ is positive-definite on the first two factors, $`q`$ has signature $`(3,B3)`$. Therefore Corollary 8 has been proved when $`X`$ is projective.

When $`X`$ is non-projective, by Proposition 7, we can find a point $`s`$ in any small open neighborhood $`V`$ of $`0S:=\mathrm{Def}(X)`$ in such a way that $`𝒳_s`$ is a projective symplectic variety. Since, for each $`sS`$, $`𝒳_s`$ is a symplectic variety with $`h^0(𝒰_s,\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒰_s}^2)=1`$, we can find a symplectic form $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ on each $`𝒳_s`$ so that $`_{𝒰_s}(\mathrm{\Omega }_s\overline{\mathrm{\Omega }}_s)^l=1`$. Let $`q_s`$ be the quadratic form on $`H^2(𝒰_s,)`$ defined by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$. By using a natural flat structure in $`R^2\pi _{}_{}𝒪_S`$ (\[Na, Theorem 8,(1)\]), $`H^2(U,)`$ and $`H^2(𝒰_s,)`$ are identified. By the same argument as \[Be, Théorème 5\], we see that $`q`$ and $`q_s`$ are proportional (by a positive constant) under this identification. Because $`𝒳_s`$ is projective, $`q_s`$ has signature $`(3,B3)`$. Hence $`q`$ also has signature $`(3,B3)`$.

Theorem 9. Notation and assumptions being the same as above, let $`0S_1S`$ be a positive dimensional non-singular subvariety Then, for any open neighborhood $`0VS`$, there is a point $`sVS_1`$ such that $`𝒳_s`$ is a projective symplectic variety.

Proof. It suffices to prove that $`N=0`$ in Proposition 7. But this follows from Corollary 8.

Appendix: Supplement to \[Na\]

In this appendix, we shall claim that Theorem 4 of \[Na\] remains true under a weaker condition. The exact statement is the following.

Theorem A-4. Let $`X`$ be a Stein open subset of a complex algebraic variety. Assume that $`X`$ has only rational singularities. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be the singular locus of $`X`$ and let $`f:YX`$ be a resolution of singularities such that $`f|_{Yf^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })}:Yf^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })X\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Then $`f_{}\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^2i_{}\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2`$ where $`U:=X\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`i:UX`$ is a natural injection.

Theorem 4 in \[Na\] was stated under the condition that $`X`$ has rational Gorenstein singularities. We shall roughly sketch how to modify the original proof to drop the Gorenstein condition.

The first step is to drop the Gorenstein condition from Proposition 1 of \[Na\]:

Proposition A-1. Let $`X`$ be a Stein open subset of a complex algebraic variety. Assume that $`X`$ has only rational singularities. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be the singular locus of $`X`$ and let $`f:YX`$ be a resolution of singularities such that $`f|_{Yf^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })}:Yf^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })X\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`D:=f^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ is a simple normal crossing divisor. Then $`f_{}\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^2(\mathrm{log}D)i_{}\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2`$ where $`U:=X\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`i:UX`$ is a natural injection.

To prove Proposition 1, we have first taken an element $`\omega `$ from $`H^0(U,\mathrm{\Omega }_U^2)`$, and have shown that $`\omega `$ has at worst a log pole at each irreducible component $`F`$ of $`D`$. When $`X`$ has rational Gorenstein singularities, $`(X,p)(R.D.P)\times (^{n2},0)`$ for all singular points $`pX`$ outside certain codimension 3 (in $`X`$) locus $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Since the proposition holds around such points, we only had to consider the case $`f(F)\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$.

In our general case, we have to take all irreducible components $`F`$ of $`D`$ into consideration. So we put $`k:=dim\mathrm{\Sigma }dimf(F)`$, $`l:=\mathrm{Codim}(\mathrm{\Sigma }X)`$ and continue the same argument as \[Na, Proposition 1\]. Here we note that a general hyperplane section $`H`$ of $`X`$ has again rational singularities. In proving Claim of (a-2), we have used the following vanishing (the notation being the same as \[Na\]):

$`R^i\pi _{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{Y_t}^{l2}(\mathrm{log}D_t)(D_t)=R^i\pi _{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{Y_t}^{l1}(\mathrm{log}D_t)(D_t)=R^i\pi _{}\omega _{Y_t}=0`$ for $`il1`$ and for $`t\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

Except the following cases, these vanishings follow from \[St\]:

$`l=3`$: $`R^2\pi _{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{Y_t}^1(\mathrm{log}D_t)(D_t)`$,

$`l=2`$: $`R^1\pi _{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{Y_t}^1(\mathrm{log}D_t)(D_t)`$, $`R^2\pi _{}𝒪_{Y_t}(D_t)`$, $`R^1\pi _{}𝒪_{Y_t}(D_t)`$.

For theses exceptional cases, we can prove the vanishing by combining the method in the proof of \[Na-St, Theorem (1.1)\] and the fact that a rational singularity is Du Bois \[Kov\].

In proving Claim of (b-2) we also need similar vanishings; but they are already contained in the above cases.

Next we shall generalize Lemma 2 of \[Na\] as follows:

Lemma A-2. Let $`pX`$ be a Stein open neighborhood of a point $`p`$ of a complex algebraic variety. Assume that $`X`$ is a rational singularity of $`dimX2`$. Let $`f:YX`$ be a resolution of singularities of $`X`$ such that $`E:=f^1(p)`$ is a simple normal crossing divisor. Then $`H^0(Y,\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^i)H^0(Y,\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^i(\mathrm{log}E))`$ are isomorphisms for $`i=1,2`$.

Lemma 2 of \[Na\] was stated under the condition $`dimX3`$. In the proof of \[Na, Lemma 2\] we have first shown that $`H_E^3(Y,)H^3(Y,)`$ and $`H_E^2(Y,)H^2(Y,)`$ are both injective. Even when $`dimX=2`$, these are true. First note that when $`dimX=2`$, $`(X,p)`$ is an isolated singularity. By taking the dual of the first map, we get the map $`H_E^1(Y,)H^1(E,)`$. Since $`X`$ is a rational singularity, $`H^1(E,)=0`$; thus the dual map is surjective.

The injectivity of the second map follows from the next observation: $`H^2(Y,)H^1(Y,𝒪_Y^{})`$, and $`H_E^2(Y,)[E_i]`$ where $`E_i`$ are irreducible components of $`E`$.

The rest of the proof of Lemma A-2 is the same as \[Na, Lemma 2\].

The following remark is quite similar to \[Na, Remark below Lemma 2\]:

Remark A. In Lemma A-2, the map

$$H^0(E,\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^i/\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^i(\mathrm{log}E)(E))H^0(E,\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^i(\mathrm{log}E)/\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^i(\mathrm{log}E)(E))$$

is surjective for $`i=1,2`$

Finally we shall prove

Proposition A-3. Let $`X`$ be a Stein open subset of a complex algebraic variety. Assume that $`X`$ has only rational singularities. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be the singular locus of $`X`$ and let $`f:YX`$ be a resolution of singularities such that $`D:=f^1(\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ is a simple normal crossing divisor and such that $`f|_{YD}:YDX\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Then $`f_{}\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^2f_{}\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^2(\mathrm{log}D)`$.

This is a generalization of Proposition 3 of \[Na\], in which the same result was stated under the condition that $`X`$ has rational Gorenstein singularities.

To prove Proposition 3, we have first taken an element $`\omega `$ from $`H^0(X,f_{}\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^2(\mathrm{log}D))`$, and have shown that $`\omega `$ is regular along each irreducible component $`F`$ of $`D`$. When $`X`$ has rational Gorenstein singularities, $`(X,p)(R.D.P)\times (^{n2},0)`$ for all singular points $`pX`$ outside certain codimension 3 (in $`X`$) locus $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Since the proposition holds around such points, we only had to consider the case $`f(F)\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$.

In our general case, we have to take all irreducible components $`F`$ of $`D`$ into consideration. So we put $`k:=dim\mathrm{\Sigma }dimf(F)`$, $`l:=\mathrm{Codim}(\mathrm{\Sigma }X)`$ and continue the same argument as \[Na, Proposition 3\]. The rest of the argument is similar to \[Na, Proposition 3\]. In the original proof we have used \[Na, Remark below Lemma 2\], but now we shall use Remark A.

Correction to \[Na\]. In the introduction of \[Na\], a conjecture has been posed as a generalization of Bogomolov splitting theorem. This conjecture should be :

Let $`Y`$ be a smooth projective variety over C with Kodaira dimension 0. Then there is a finite cover $`\pi :Y^{}Y`$ such that (a) $`\pi `$ is etale outside the support of the pluri-canonical divisor of $`Y`$, and (b) $`Y^{}`$ is birationally equivalent to $`Y_1\times Y_2\times Y_3`$, where $`Y_1`$ is an Abelian variety, $`Y_2`$ is a symplectic variety, and $`Y_3`$ is a Calabi-Yau variety.

In the old version, $`\pi `$ was assumed to be a finite etale cover.

Department of Mathematics, Graduate school of science, Osaka University, Toyonaka, Osaka 560, Japan


format: text

text:
# Nonlinear evolution and saturation for heavy nuclei in DIS.

## 1 Introduction

In the two previous publications we solved the nonlinear evolution equation for high parton density QCD in the double logarithmic approximation and discussed its properties. We showed that at high energies there is a momentum scale $`Q_s^2(y,A)`$, where $`y=\mathrm{ln}(1/x_B)`$ is a rapidity, at which the parton evolution can no longer be described by linear evolution equation. This so-called saturation scale, has the following dependence on the energy and the number of nucleons (for DIS on a nucleus): $`Q_s^2(y,A)A^{\frac{2}{3}}e^{4\overline{\alpha }_sy}`$, which holds in the double logarithmic approximation. In Ref.  we derived this result assuming that initial parton density is not very large.

The $`A`$ dependence of the saturation scale can be also obtained using simple qualitative arguments. Indeed, as one increases energy and/or decreases virtuality of the photon, the density of partons inside the nucleus grows until they begin to overlap in the transverse plane. The scale at which this occurs is proportional to $`Q_s^2(y,A)`$ and can be estimated from the equation

$$\frac{A\pi \stackrel{}{x}^2x_BG(x_B,Q_s^2)}{\pi R_A^2}=1,$$
(1)
where $`\stackrel{}{x}`$ is a colour dipole, $`x_BG(x_B,Q_s^2)`$ is the proton structure function and $`R_A`$ is the nucleus radius. Since in the kinematical region intermediate between the linear and the saturation ones, the anomalous dimension of the gluon structure function $`\gamma \frac{1}{2}`$ and $`R_AA^{\frac{1}{3}}`$, one obtains that $`Q_s^2A^{\frac{2}{3}}`$.

It was shown in Ref.  that the initial condition for the nonlinear evolution equation is given by the Glauber–Mueller formula

$$N(\stackrel{}{x},y=y_0)=1e^{\frac{\alpha _s\pi ^2}{2N_c}\stackrel{}{x}^2x_BG(x_B,4/\stackrel{}{x}^2)S(b_t)},$$
(2)
where $`S(b_t)`$ is a nucleus profile function and $`b_t`$ is an impact parameter. If $`b_t<R_A`$, $`S=\frac{3A}{2\pi R_A^2}`$ (Woods-Saxon parameterization), which implies that initially the saturation scale $`Q_s^2`$ is proportional to $`A^{\frac{1}{3}}`$. So, the question arises how it becomes proportional to $`A^{\frac{2}{3}}`$ at large energy. There is an opinion that the only dimensionful scale in the high energy DIS is the scale set by initial condition. It would imply that the $`A`$ dependence of the saturation scale set by initial condition Eq. (2) remains the same during the evolution since the evolution equation is conformally invariant. This however is not the case since there is another dimensionful scale which comes through the Glauber–Mueller initial condition Eq. (2). Indeed, in our estimations we neglected for simplicity the logarithmic dependence of the gluon structure function $`x_BG`$ of the *nucleon* on $`\stackrel{}{x}^2`$. However, this dependence on $`\mathrm{ln}(\stackrel{}{x}^2\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)`$ introduces the second dimensionful parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ which is the soft QCD scale. In other words, the relevant scale for the evolution in the nucleon is $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$ while that in nucleus is $`A/R_A^2`$. The later one as we see is set by the nucleus size. The former one means that evolution can occur in a nucleon as well as in nucleus.

The goal of our paper is to derive the saturation scale in the semiclassical double logarithmic approximation and discuss its dependence on $`A`$ and energy. We consider the nonlinear evolution equation derived by Yu. Kovchegov in the framework of Mueller’s dipole model and solve it using semiclassical methods (on characteristics) in the double logarithmic approximation. We show that there exist a certain characteristic, which divides the whole kinematical region into two patches: one in which the evolution is linear and another in which the parton density saturates. The remarkable property of this characteristic is that the dipole number remains fixed along it. This characteristic coincides with the critical line in the double logarithmic approximation. Recall that the critical line is defined by $`r=\left(\mathrm{ln}Q_s^2(y,A)/4\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\right)`$, where $`r=\left(\mathrm{ln}Q^2/4\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\right)`$.

In this paper the same strategy as in Ref.  will be employed to solve the evolution equation. Namely, we will solve it in the two kinematical regions where: (i) $`\gamma `$ is small ($`Q^2>Q_s^2`$, $`Q^2\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$) and (ii) $`\gamma `$ is close to unity ($`Q^2Q_s^2`$). Then the two solutions will be matched in the intermediate region. It turns out that the solution inside the saturation region depends strongly on the initial parton density inside nucleus. In the Fig. 1 we show two possible situations. If the nucleus is light, then the Glauber initial condition is out of the saturation region. We argued in Ref.  (and will re-derive in this paper again) that the parton density is constant along the critical line. This condition sets the initial condition for the solution inside the saturation region. As the result, this solution is a function of only one variable. This case was studied in Ref.  and will be derived again using another approach in Sec. 3.

On the other hand, if the initial parton density is large (because the nucleus is very heavy), then one has to match solution inside the saturation region to both the condition on the critical line $`BC`$ ($`y>y_0`$), and Glauber initial condition $`AB`$ ($`y=y_0`$), see Fig. 1. This cannot be done with the scaling solution, so the scaling solution breaks down for very heavy nuclei. We will investigate both cases in Sec. 3.

As usually we use the nonlinear evolution equation derived in Ref.  in the framework of the dipole model. Since colour dipoles diagonalize the scattering matrix at high energies we consider this approach as the most clear from the physical point of view. The evolution equation for the dipole-nucleus forward scattering amplitude $`\stackrel{~}{N}(k,y)`$ in the momentum representation reads*** Eq. (3) depends on the impact parameter $`b_t`$ only parametrically via the initial condition Eq. (2). The question of $`b_t`$ dependence was discussed in details in Ref. . In this paper we address the case $`b_t=0`$ which is sufficient for our arguments.

$$\frac{\stackrel{~}{N}(k,y)}{y}=\overline{\alpha }_s\widehat{\chi }\left(\widehat{\gamma }(k)\right)\stackrel{~}{N}(k,y)\overline{\alpha }_s\stackrel{~}{N}^2(k,y),$$
(3)
where $`\widehat{\chi }\left(\widehat{\gamma }(k)\right)`$ is an operator such that

$$\widehat{\gamma }(k)=1+\frac{}{\mathrm{ln}k^2}$$
(4)
is an operator corresponding to the anomalous dimension of the gluon structure function and the operator $`\widehat{\chi }`$ corresponds to the following function

$$\chi \left(\gamma \right)=2\psi \left(1\right)\psi \left(1\gamma \right)\psi \left(\gamma \right)$$
(5)
which is an eigenvalue of the the BFKL equation. Eq. (3) is derived assuming that the typical transverse extent of the dipole amplitude is much smaller then the size of the target and the typical impact parameter $`xR_A,b_t`$.

The amplitude in the dipole configuration space is found by employing the Fourier transform

$`N(x,y)`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{x}^2{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑kkJ_0(kx)\stackrel{~}{N}(k,y)`$ (6)
$`\stackrel{~}{N}(k,y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dx}{x}}J_0(kx)N(x,y).`$ (7)
Initial condition for this equation in the dipole configuration space reads (see Eq. (2))

$$N(x,y=y_0)=1e^{\mathrm{exp}(r+r_A)},$$
(8)
where $`r_A=\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\overline{\alpha }_s\pi ^2x_BG(x_B,4/\stackrel{}{x}^2)S(0)}{2N_c\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\right)`$ and $`r=\mathrm{ln}(Q^2/4\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)`$ for $`Q^2>Q_s^2`$. In the double logarithmic approximation one can neglect the logarithmic dependence of $`x_BG(x_B,4/\stackrel{}{x}^2)`$ as well as $`\alpha _s`$ on the dipole size, and in addition $`Q^24/\stackrel{}{x}^2`$.

Eq. (8) can be Fourier transformed to the momentum space where it reads

$$\stackrel{~}{N}(k,y)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_0\left(\frac{k^2e^{r_A}}{4\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\right),$$
(9)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ is incomplete gamma function of zeroth order.

## 2 Solution at $`Q^2>Q_s^2(x_B)`$.

Function $`\chi (\gamma )`$ is singular at its end-points $`\gamma =0,1`$. The first one corresponds to the kinematical region $`Q^2>Q_s^2(y)`$, whereas the second to the kinematical region $`Q^2Q_s^2(y)`$. Expansion of $`\chi (\gamma )`$ near its end-points and taking the leading contribution corresponds to the double logarithmic approximation, i.e. to the summation of $`\alpha _s^n\mathrm{ln}^n(Q^2/\mathrm{\Lambda })\mathrm{ln}^n(1/x_B)`$ terms to the right of the critical line, and to the summation of $`\alpha _s^n\mathrm{ln}^n(Q_s^2/Q^2)\mathrm{ln}^n(1/x_B)`$ terms to the left of it.

In the right vicinity of the $`\gamma =0`$ one obtains using Eq. (4)

$$\chi =\frac{1}{\gamma }=\frac{1}{1+_r}.$$
(10)
Eq. (3) in this approximation reads

$$\stackrel{~}{N}_y(r,y)=\overline{\alpha }_s(1+_r)^1\stackrel{~}{N}(r,y)\stackrel{~}{N}(r,y)^2.$$
(11)
In this paper we will always denote the partial derivatives by subscripts. Note, that the following equation

$$(1+_r)\frac{1}{k^2}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}^{k^2}𝑑k^{}_{}{}^{}2\stackrel{~}{N}(k^{},y)=\stackrel{~}{N}(k,y)$$
(12)
identifies the operator inverse to $`1+_r`$. Introducing the new function $`G`$ by

$$G(k,y)=_{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}^{k^2}𝑑k^{}_{}{}^{}2\stackrel{~}{N}(k^{},y),$$
(13)
one gets for it the following equation:

$$G_{ry}(r,y)=\overline{\alpha }_sG(r,y)e^r(G_r(r,y))^2\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}.$$
(14)
The advantage of introducing the function $`G`$ is that we got the nonlinear evolution equation in which the nonlinear term has the simplest form.

Having in mind the success of the semiclassical approach to solution of the DGLAP evolution equation at low $`x_B`$, we look for the solution to the Eq. (14) in the form

$$G(r,y)=e^{S(r,y)}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2,$$
(15)
where the function $`S`$ is supposed to be such that $`|S_rS_y||S_{ry}|`$. Equation for $`S(r,y)`$ is

$$S_r(r,y)S_y(r,y)=\overline{\alpha }_se^{r+S(r,y)}S_r^2(r,y).$$
(16)
This is a partial differential equation of the first order and can be solved by characteristics method. Denote $`S_r=f`$ and $`S_y=\omega `$. Then, the characteristics of the Eq. (16) can be found by solving the system of ordinary differential equations

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dr}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`\omega +2fe^{r+S},`$ (17)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dy}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`f,`$ (18)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dS}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`2f\omega +2f^2e^{r+S},`$ (19)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{df}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`e^{r+S}f^2(1f),`$ (20)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\omega }{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`\omega e^{r+S}f^2,`$ (21)
where $`t`$ is the parameter along the characteristic. Using Eq. (16) in Eq. (19) one obtains

$$S=2\overline{\alpha }_st+S_0.$$
(22)
By subscript $`0`$ we distinguish the integration constants. It follows from Eq. (20) and Eq. (21) that

$$f1=\frac{f_01}{\omega _0}\omega C\omega .$$
(23)
Substituting Eq. (22) and Eq. (23) into Eq. (21) results in equation

$$\frac{d\omega }{dt}=(C\omega ^2+\omega \overline{\alpha }_s)\omega =C\omega (\omega \omega _+)(\omega \omega _{}),$$
(24)
where

$$\omega _{}=\frac{1\pm \sqrt{1+4C\overline{\alpha }_s}}{2C}.$$
(25)
Consider some characteristic at large values of $`r`$ (at $`t\mathrm{}`$). In that region nonlinear term is small and Eq. (21) implies $`\omega =\omega _0=\mathrm{const}.`$ Moreover, $`f_0`$ is small and thus $`\omega _0=\overline{\alpha }_s/f_0`$ is large. It is straightforward to calculate $`\omega _+`$ and $`\omega _{}`$ neglecting nonlinear terms

$$\omega _+=\omega _0\mathrm{and}\omega _{}=\frac{\overline{\alpha }_s\omega _0}{\omega _0\overline{\alpha }_s}.$$
(26)
This shows that in the kinematical region of large $`r`$, where nonlinear term is small, solution of the system Eqs. (17-21) can be obtained by setting $`\omega =\omega _0=\omega _+`$ which yields us with the usual double logarithmic approximation to the DGLAP and BFKL equations.

As $`t`$ decreases $`\omega `$ will no longer be equal to $`\omega _0`$. Corrections stem from the nonlinear term (but $`\omega _0=\omega _+`$ still holds as it gives correct asymptotic behaviour of solution). Let us address the question of what happens if the deviation from the linear behaviour is small (this is equivalent to checking the stability of the linear solution). In other words, assume that $`\omega =\omega _0+\delta \omega `$ where $`\delta \omega \omega _0`$. Inserting this into the Eq. (24) and integrating gives

$$\omega (t)=\omega _0\left(1+\beta e^{(\omega _02\overline{\alpha }_s)t}\right),$$
(27)
where $`\beta `$ is the integration constant, and by Eq. (23)

$$f(t)=\frac{\overline{\alpha }_s}{\omega _0}\left(1\frac{\omega _0\overline{\alpha }_s}{\overline{\alpha }_s}\beta e^{(\omega _02\overline{\alpha }_s)t}\right).$$
(28)
Finally, using Eq. (16),Eq. (27) and Eq. (28) in Eq. (17) and Eq. (18), the solution to the system Eqs. (17-21) at large $`t`$ reads

$`rr_0`$ $`=`$ $`\omega _0t{\displaystyle \frac{2\omega _03\overline{\alpha }_s}{(\omega _02\overline{\alpha }_s)\overline{\alpha }_s}}\beta \left(e^{(\omega _02\overline{\alpha }_s)t}1\right),`$ (29)
$`yy_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{\alpha }_s}{\omega _0}}t+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega \overline{\alpha }_s}{\omega _0(\omega _02\overline{\alpha }_s)}}\beta \left(e^{(\omega _02\overline{\alpha }_s)t}1\right).`$ (30)
It is readily seen that if $`\omega _0>2\overline{\alpha }_s`$ the solution for characteristic is stable, which means that all nonlinear effects which are introduced through the (Glauber) initial condition die out exponentially as $`t`$ increases. By contrast, at $`\omega _0<2\overline{\alpha }_s`$ the solution is not stable.

This discussion reveals a remarkable property of nonlinear evolution equation: there exist such characteristic, that divides the whole kinematical region into two patches. One in which all nonlinear effects are negligible, another in which saturation occurs. This line is given by condition $`\omega _0=2\overline{\alpha }_s`$. Using Eq. (29) and Eq. (30) we get the familiar equation for the critical line.

$$rr_0=4\overline{\alpha }_s(yy_0).$$
(31)
In the next sections we will denote this line as $`r_s(y)`$ or $`y_s(r)`$.

Excluding $`\omega _0`$ and $`t`$ (at $`r\mathrm{}`$) from Eq. (29), Eq. (30) and Eq. (22) we arrive at the general solution of Eq. (16) in this limit:

$$S(r,y)=2\sqrt{\overline{\alpha }_s(rr_0)(yy_0)}+S_0.$$
(32)
On the critical line $`S|_s=rr_0+S_0`$ (we denote by symbol $`|_s`$ all quantities calculated on the critical line). Therefore, by Eq. (13) and Eq. (15)

$$\stackrel{~}{N}(k,y)|_s=\frac{1}{k^2}G_r(k,y)|_s=e^{S_0r_0}=\mathrm{const}.$$
(33)
The dipole scattering amplitude is constant on the critical line. The value of this constant is given by Eq. (9):

$$\stackrel{~}{N}(y=y_0,r=r_A)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(1)0.1,$$
(34)
in accord with our expectations that the critical line is the boundary of the linear region.

## 3 Solution at $`Q^2<Q_s^2(x_B)`$.

In this section we solve the nonlinear evolution equation inside the saturation region. To this end expand $`\chi `$ in the left vicinity of the $`\gamma =1`$ using Eq. (5) and Eq. (4)

$$\chi =\frac{1}{1\gamma }=\frac{1}{_r}.$$
(35)
This results in the following equation (see Eq. (3))

$$\stackrel{~}{N}_{yr}(r,y)=\overline{\alpha }_s\stackrel{~}{N}(r,y)\left(1+2\stackrel{~}{N}_r(r,y)\right).$$
(36)
Following Ref.  we introduce the auxiliary function $`\phi `$ by

$$\stackrel{~}{N}(r,y)=\frac{1}{2}_r𝑑r^{}\left(1e^{\phi (r^{},y)}\right).$$
(37)
Note, that $`r=\mathrm{ln}(Q^2/Q_s^2)<0`$ is defined with respect to the $`Q_s^2`$ which is the largest scale in this kinematical region. For the function $`\phi `$ Eq. (36) takes especially simple form

$$\phi _{yr}=\overline{\alpha }_s\left(1e^{\phi (r,y)}\right).$$
(38)
The idea of the solution is to split this equation into two and then to find such solution of one of the equations that satisfy the other as well. We are looking for the solution in the form $`\phi =\phi (e^𝒮)`$, where $`𝒮`$ is assumed to be semiclassical, i.e. $`|𝒮_{ry}||𝒮_r𝒮_y|`$. In other words the function $`\phi `$ is a quickly varying function of a slowly varying one $`𝒮`$. The form of splitting is inspired by the solution of the previous section. Namely, we restrict solutions of Eq. (38) by the requirement that

$$𝒮_r(r,y)𝒮_y(r,y)=𝒞=\mathrm{const}.$$
(39)
In other words we assume that $`e^𝒮`$ satisfies the linearized equation (ı.e. $`\phi 0`$).

In the semiclassical approximation defined above, Eq. (38) can be rewritten as

$$\frac{d^2\phi (𝒮)}{d𝒮^2}=\frac{\overline{\alpha }_s}{𝒞}\left(1e^{\phi (𝒮)}\right).$$
(40)
To solve this equation we interchange the independent $`𝒮`$ and dependent $`\phi `$ variables. Denote

$$\zeta (\phi )=\frac{d\phi }{d𝒮}.$$
(41)
Then, Eq. (40) reads

$$\frac{d\zeta (\phi )}{d\phi }\zeta (\phi )=\frac{\overline{\alpha }_s}{𝒞}\left(1e^{\phi (𝒮)}\right),$$
(42)
and can be easily integrated for $`\zeta `$ and then for $`\phi `$. the final result is

$$𝒮=^{\phi (𝒮)}\frac{d\phi ^{}}{\sqrt{\frac{2\overline{\alpha }_s}{𝒞}(\phi ^{}+e^\phi ^{})+\frac{\zeta _0^2}{2}}}+\mathrm{const}.$$
(43)
Now we turn to Eq. (39). It is merely the DGLAP equation in the double logarithmic semiclassical approximation. Applying the method of characteristics one arrives at the following system of equations

$`r(t,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`\omega _0^{}(\tau )t+r_0^{}(\tau ),y(t,\tau )=f_0^{}(\tau )t+y_0(\tau ),𝒮(t,\tau )=2t𝒞+𝒮_0(\tau ),`$
$`f^{}(t,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`f_0^{}(\tau )=\mathrm{const}.,\omega ^{}(t,\tau )=\omega _0^{}(\tau )=\mathrm{const}.`$
where we introduced the prime notation to distinguish variables of this sections from those in the previous one. $`\tau `$ parameterizes the initial condition which we specify below. By analogy with Eq. (32), Eq. (LABEL:SS1) give the general solution

$$𝒮(r,y)=2\sqrt{𝒞}\sqrt{(rr_0^{})(yy_0)}+𝒮_0.$$
(45)
Let us now specify the initial conditions for Eq. (38). They depend on the initial parton density inside a nucleus. If the initial density is small (curve 1 in the Fig. 1) then the results of Sec. 2 imply that

$$\phi (y,r)|_s=\mathrm{const}.$$
(46)
The initial condition is different in the case of large initial parton density (curve 2). In this region the initial condition reads:

$`\phi (y,r)|_s`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{const}.,\mathrm{if}y_0<y=y_s(r),`$ (47)
$`\phi (y,r)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{ln}(1e^{\mathrm{exp}(rr_A)}),\mathrm{if}y=y_0.`$ (48)
Eq. (48) follows from its definition Eq. (37) and Eq. (9).

Generally, to satisfy initial conditions one has to find such a surface among those given by the solution Eq. (LABEL:SS1) which paths through the line specified by Eq. (46) or Eq. (47) and Eq. (48). To do this one should parameterize the initial condition using parameter $`\tau `$. Then calculate $`f_0^{}(\tau )`$ and $`\omega _0^{}(\tau )`$ using the following equations:

$$\frac{d𝒮_0}{d\tau }=f_0^{}\frac{dr_0^{}}{d\tau }+\omega _0^{}\frac{dy_0^{}}{d\tau },$$
(49)
and

$$f_0^{}\omega _0^{}=𝒞.$$
(50)
The desired solution of the Cauchy problem $`𝒮(y,r)`$ is then obtained by excluding $`t`$ and $`\tau `$ from Eq. (LABEL:SS1).

Eq. (49) and Eq. (50) can be easily solved numerically, but to give a transparent analytic treatment we notice that the nonlinear corrections in the kinematical region $`Q^2<Q_s^2`$ are so large that $`e^\phi 1`$. Indeed, by Eq. (47) and Eq. (48), the value of $`\phi `$ on the critical line $`r=r_s(y)`$ is

$$\phi _0=\mathrm{ln}\left(1e^1\right)0.5,$$
(51)
which follows from the requirement that the point $`(r_A,y_0)`$ lies on the saturation scale (see Fig. 1). Then Eq. (38) can be easily integrated

$$\phi (y,r)=\overline{\alpha }_syr+f_1(y)+f_2(r),$$
(52)
where $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ are arbitrary functions.

Consider two different initial conditions.

1. In the case of large initial parton density the initial condition Eqs. (47,48) read

$`\phi (r,y=y_0)`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\alpha }_sy_0r+f_1(y_0)+f_2(r)=\mathrm{ln}\left(1e^{\mathrm{exp}(rr_A)}\right),`$ (53)
$`\phi (r,y=y_s(r))`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\alpha }_sy_s(r)r+f_1(y_s(r))+f_2(r)=\phi _0,`$ (54)
and is satisfied by the following function

$`\phi (y,r)`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\alpha }_s(yy_0)r+\overline{\alpha }_s(yy_0)r_s(y)\mathrm{ln}\left(1e^{\mathrm{exp}(rr_A)}\right)+`$ (55)
$`\mathrm{ln}\left(1e^{\mathrm{exp}(r_s(y)r_A)}\right)+\phi _0.`$
2. If the initial parton density is small, then in addition to the initial condition Eq. (46) for the function $`\phi `$, we have to specify the initial condition for its derivative. Note, that to the right of the critical line $`\phi =2\sqrt{\overline{\alpha }_s(yy_0)r}r+\phi _0`$. Thus $`\phi _r|_s=\frac{1}{2}`$. This yields

$`\phi (r,y=y_s(r))`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\alpha }_sy_s(r)r+f_1(y_s(r))+f_2(r)=\phi _0,`$ (56)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{\alpha }_sy_s(r)+f_{2r}(r).`$ (57)
The solution is

$$\phi (r,y)=\frac{1}{8}(r4\overline{\alpha }_sy)^2\frac{1}{2}(r4\overline{\alpha }_sy)+\phi _0=\frac{1}{8}z^2\frac{1}{2}z+\phi _0.$$
(58)
It coincides with the asymptotic solution obtained in Ref. .

We see how the introduction of the auxiliary function $`\phi `$ simplifies the solution of Eq. (36). The main point is that while the value of the amplitude $`\stackrel{~}{N}`$ on the critical lineEq. (34) is intermediate between perturbative and saturation regions and thus all terms in Eq. (36) are of the same order, the value of $`\phi `$ on the same line Eq. (51) is such that Eq. (38) can be greatly simplified: all nonlinear corrections to $`\stackrel{~}{N}`$ are described with good approximation by just a constant in the equation for $`\phi `$.

## 4 Discussion

In Sec. 2 we found that in the kinematical region to the right of the critical line the nonlinear corrections are small in the double logarithmic approximation. This result is in agreement with Ref. . The evolution equation was solved in the semiclassical approach using the method of characteristics. The characteristics intersect the line $`y=y_0`$ with different angles, the tangents of which are given by the values of $`f_0`$. At low $`f_0`$ (large $`\omega _0`$) characteristics run in the linear kinematical region. As $`\omega _0`$ decreases characteristics approach the critical line and finally, at $`\omega =2\overline{\alpha }_s`$ there exists the characteristic which runs along the boundary of the saturation region. In the double logarithmic approximation the characteristic with $`\omega _0=2\overline{\alpha }_s`$ is merely the critical line. On this critical line the scattering amplitude was found to be constant (see Eq. (33)).

To find the $`A`$-dependence of the saturation scale we have to require that the critical line (which is the characteristic at large $`r`$) satisfy the following condition

$$r_s(y=y_0)=r_A,$$
(59)
which means that the Glauber initial condition Eq. (8) itself provides a saturation scale ($`r_A`$). However, when $`r_sr_A`$ the value of $`\omega _0`$ may differ from that at $`r\mathrm{}`$ (i.e. $`2\overline{\alpha }_s`$). This is because our approximation that $`|S_rS_y||S_{ry}|`$ which led to Eq. (16) breaks down at $`r_sr_A`$. The exact solution of the (linearized) evolution equation which satisfies the (linearized) initial condition (see Eq. (8)) is

$$\stackrel{~}{N}(r,y)=\frac{df}{(2\pi i)f}e^{r+r_A+\overline{\alpha }_s(yy_0)\frac{1}{f}+rf}\stackrel{\mathrm{DLA}}{}e^{2\sqrt{\overline{\alpha }_sr(yy_0)}+r_Ar}$$
(60)
(the integartion contour runs along the line parallel to the imaginary axes to the right of all singularities of the integrand). Assuming that the remarkable property $`\stackrel{~}{N}|_s=\mathrm{const}.`$ holds up to $`r=r_A`$ one gets (neglecting logarithmic contributions)

$$2\sqrt{\overline{\alpha }_sr(yy_0)}+r_Ar=\varphi =\mathrm{const}.$$
(61)
Thus,

$$\overline{\alpha }_s(y_s(r)y_0)=\frac{(rr_A)^2}{4r},$$
(62)
where $`\varphi =0`$ to satisfy $`r_s(y_0)=r_A`$. At $`rr_A`$ the $`A`$ dependance of the saturation scale is given by

$$r=4\overline{\alpha }_sy+2r_A,$$
(63)
in full correspondance with our previous work and esimations in the Introduction.

In Sec. 3 we showed that the initial parton density in the nucleus plays very important role in the saturation regeme dynamics. Namely, if $`A`$ is such that initial parton density is smaller then some critical value, then the solution inside the saturation region depends only on one variable $`Q^2/Q_s^2(x_B)`$. This scaling behaviour was predicted by many authors and observed in experimental data. It turns out that if the initial parton density is larger then the critical value, the scaling behaviour breaks down. Let us estimate at what $`A`$ the parton density reaches its critical value. It is seen in Fig. 1 that this occurs when $`r_A=r_0`$, where $`r_0`$ defines the initial point of evolution, i.e. it satisfies $`\alpha _s(r_0)1`$. Using definition of $`r_A`$ we get

$$\frac{1}{2}\sigma _{\mathrm{dipole}}S(0)=1,$$
(64)
where $`\sigma _{\mathrm{dipole}}`$ is a cross section for the small-dipole–nucleon interaction. Since at $`x_B=10^2`$ (i.e. $`y=y_0`$) $`\sigma _{\mathrm{dipole}}\frac{1}{2}\sigma _{\pi p}`$ and $`S(0)=2R_A\rho `$, where $`\rho `$ is a nuclear density, we have

$$\frac{1}{2}\sigma _{\pi p}\rho R_A=1,$$
(65)
Taking $`\sigma _{\pi p}=24`$ mb, $`\rho =0.17`$ fm-3 and $`R_A=1.1A^{1/3}`$ fm one gets $`A_{\mathrm{crit}.}70`$. The direct estimation using double logarithmic formulae are not reliable since they are valid up to some logarithmic corrections and perhaps a numerical factor, which are quite important since $`A`$ enters to the $`1/3`$ power.

Concluding this paper, we would like to emphasize that we found that the saturation scale for DIS on nuclei lighter then $`A70`$ scales like $`Q_s^2A^{2/3}`$ at all energies, whereas for DIS on nuclei heavier then $`A70`$ it scales like $`Q_s^2A^{1/3}`$ when the evolution starts and then reaches the same scaling behaviour as for light nuclei $`Q_s^2A^{2/3}`$ at very high energy.

Acknowledgements We wish to acknowledge the interesting and fruitful discussions with E. Gotsman, U. Maor and L. McLerran. Our special thanks go to Yu. Kovchegov for raising the questions discussed in this paper and for stimulating discussions. This research was supported in part by the Israel Academy of Science and Humanities and by BSF grant #98000276.