text:
# A Uniform Approximation for the Fidelity in Chaotic Systems

## 1 Introduction

In our contribution to this special issue on random matrix theory (RMT), we address the subject of wave field evolution governed by linear wave equations. In particular, our interest is in the sensitivity of evolution to perturbations. The treatment of this problem illustrates two well-known, important lessons arising in RMT studies. First, RMT and semiclassical theories, when used in tandem, give a much stronger theoretical approach to a problem than either was capable of on its own . Second, even though RMT is inherently unphysical in certain ways, nevertheless, careful application leads to physically meaningful predictions . For example, using RMT to mock up the evolution of a wave packet generates a dispersal into the entire Hilbert space simultaneously. Thus, it lacks a dynamical continuity property that a semiclassical theory would easily reveal as absurd. It turns out that for a wave mechanical system with a chaotic underlying ray dynamics, there is a logarithmic time scale dependence on the wave vector , and RMT does not “know” about this; i.e. its results cannot be trusted for wave propagation up to this time scale. Yet, beyond the so-called logtime (where the semiclassical dynamics increases in complexity exponentially ), RMT can be a powerful tool for understanding the statistical nature of the dynamics. In what follows, we take advantage of the RMT-semiclassical complementarity and avoid making inferences about pre-logtime dynamics.

The study of the sensitivity of wave field evolution to perturbation has recently attracted a great deal of interest  for several fundamental reasons, i.e. decoherence, reversibility, tomography… In the case in which the basic system is weakly coupled to an environment, the sensitivity relates to the manner in which the system decoheres . The recent focus on quantum computation has greatly increased the attention given to this issue . Another motivation has been the reversibility of wave field evolutions such as the spin polarization echoes in nuclear magnetic resonance . For a broad class of problems, propagating forward in time with two slightly different systems is mathematically equivalent to propagating forward with one system and reversing the dynamics with another for the same propagation time. Another application is to problems of waves propagating through random media (WPRM), the medium is likely partially characterized and often slowly evolving; twinkling of starlight passing through the atmosphere is an example. The interest is often in performing tomography or at least knowing what information can be deduced about the medium . Similar statements can be made regarding the study of disordered systems . Lastly, we mention that problems involving simple, chaotic systems or even strongly interacting, many-body systems usually require taking measurements as a function of some system parameter. For these systems, single measurements may almost seem like random number generation, whereas it turns out that important information can be extracted from the parameter variations of the measurements . The trick is to know what information therein exists. Our focus here will remain on the wave field evolution behavior without getting into specific physical applications.

Introduced nearly twenty years ago, a natural measure of the sensitivity of wave field evolution is the fidelity, which is defined as the squared overlap of some initial state propagated forward in time with two slightly different systems . For normalized wavefunctions, it begins at unity and typically decays to some small value. In the spin polarization experiments previously cited, it was observed that a change in the functional form of the fidelity’s decay occurred depending upon the dipolar interactions . The decay exhibited either Gaussian or exponential behaviors and in some instances both. This mirrors known behavior found in simple, quantized chaotic systems ; note that there also exists some work on integrable, near-integrable, and mixed phase space systems  which exhibit other behaviors. For extremely weak perturbation strengths, quantum perturbation theory along with some simplifying assumptions quickly lead to the prediction of a Gaussian decay . For larger perturbation strengths, this approach fails, and a Fermi Golden Rule regime emerges which implies an exponential decay behavior . Semiclassical theory gives this decay rate in terms of a classical action diffusion constant . If the perturbation strength is even larger, at some point the fidelity decay rate saturates because it is impossible to decay faster than the logtime ; this is known as the Lyapunov regime because the rate is independent of the perturbation strength, and often determined by the Lyapunov exponent.

Regardless of the strength of the perturbation or the nature of the dynamics, for very short times the fidelity is quadratic. This regime which can be derived by using time dependent perturbation theory may be extremely short in time and difficult to observe. Likewise, in the long time limit, the fidelity will saturate to the inverse of the effective number of states in the system. Both of these effects decrease in importance in the asymptotic limit, and are disregarded in what follows; the Lyapunov regime is also disregarded since that involves pre-logtime dynamics.

In this article we concentrate on developing a uniform approximation that encompasses both the Gaussian and exponential decays as well as the intermediate regime for simple chaotic systems; and we restrict our attention to the Schrödinger wave equation. The fidelity undergoes a crossover from exponential to Gaussian behavior as a function of time, and the value of the perturbation strength determines whether the crossover is visible. In fact, it turns out that the only information residing in the decay of the fidelity is the density of states and the transition parameter of RMT ; the spreading width could also substitute for the transition parameter. Alternatively, using semiclassical arguments, one could also say that the only information contained is the phase space volume and the classical action diffusion constant .

The paper is organized as follows. In the next section we review the Gaussian and exponential Fermi Golden Rule regimes found in simple quantized chaotic systems. In Sect. 3, a uniform approximation is derived using RMT and a degenerate perturbation theory. The theory is applied to the quantized standard map in Sect. 4. It is found to give an excellent approximation of the quantum results. We then conclude with some discussion and closing remarks.

## 2 The Fidelity

Consider an evolving quantum wave function $`|\alpha _\lambda (t)`$ where $`\lambda `$ defines the parameters of a Hamiltonian, $`H(\lambda )`$. The overlap of the same initial state, $`|\alpha `$, propagated via two different Hamiltonians specified by $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ is

$$A_\lambda (ϵ;t)=\alpha _{\lambda _1}(t)|\alpha _{\lambda _2}(t)=\alpha |\widehat{U}_{\lambda _1}^{}(t)\widehat{U}_{\lambda _2}(t)|\alpha $$
(1)
where $`\widehat{U}_\lambda (t)`$ is the unitary evolution operator, $`ϵ=\lambda _1\lambda _2`$, and $`\lambda =(\lambda _2+\lambda _1)/2`$. In the limit that the system is strongly chaotic, the statistical properties of the overlap are independent of $`\lambda `$, so we omit the $`\lambda `$ subscript from here on. The fidelity is just the absolute square overlap

$$𝒞(ϵ;t)=|A(ϵ;t)|^2$$
(2)
It is sufficient to work with the overlap itself in developing the theory since the operation of squaring only introduces cross-correlation effects higher order in $`ϵ`$ that can be ignored.

By inserting complete sets of states, the overlap can be rewritten in terms of the eigenenergies and eigenstates of the perturbed and unperturbed systems as

$`A(ϵ;t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\alpha (0)|n_{\lambda _1}n_{\lambda _1}|m_{\lambda _2}m_{\lambda _2}|\alpha (0)`$ (3)
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\{\mathrm{}[E_m(\lambda _2)E_n(\lambda _1)]t/\mathrm{}\}`$
The Bohigas-Giannoni-Schmit conjecture  and later works suggest that for a chaotic system, it is appropriate to apply RMT arguments to understand its statistical behavior. Here, as mentioned already, one has to add the caveat - as long as $`ϵ`$ is weak enough that $`𝒞(ϵ;t)`$ decays on a much longer time scale than the logtime. The first property we would like to invoke is the invariance of the ensemble over changes in bases. Thus, any rotation to a different initial state must generate the same decay behavior for the fidelity. It suffices to make an average over a complete set of initial wave functions $`|\alpha (0)`$ to obtain

$`\overline{A(ϵ;t)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}|n_{\lambda _1}|m_{\lambda _2}|^2\mathrm{exp}\{\mathrm{}[E_m(\lambda _2)E_n(\lambda _1)]t/\mathrm{}\}`$ (4)
where $`N`$ is the number of states in the complete set. RMT has been shown to be a strongly ergodic theory , which in this case implies that the fluctuations of the quantity $`\delta A=A(ϵ;t)\overline{A(ϵ;t)}`$ vanish with increasing matrix dimensionality as $`N^1`$.

The averaged overlap may be decomposed into a diagonal and off-diagonal part

$`\overline{A(ϵ;t)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}|n_{\lambda _1}|n_{\lambda _2}|^2\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Delta }E_nt/\mathrm{}]`$ (5)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{mn}{}}|n_{\lambda _1}|m_{\lambda _2}|^2\mathrm{exp}\{\mathrm{}[E_m(\lambda _2)E_n(\lambda _1)]t/\mathrm{}\}`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_n=E_n(\lambda _2)E_n(\lambda _1)`$ is the change in an eigenenergy due to the perturbation. For $`ϵ=0`$, the off-diagonal term exactly vanishes, the diagonal term equals unity, and the fidelity does not decay as must be case.

### The quantum perturbative regime

The diagonal term is defined by adiabatically following an eigenlevel as the system’s parameters are continuously varied. It may be further evaluated by ensemble averaging

$`\overline{A_{diag}(ϵ;t)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}|n_{\lambda _1}|n_{\lambda _2}|^2\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Delta }E_nt}{\mathrm{}}}\right]`$ (6)
It is most significant for extremely small perturbation strengths. From quantum perturbation theory, the lowest order shift of an eigenvalue depends on the diagonal element of the perturbation whereas the rotation of the eigenstates depends on off-diagonal elements and energy differences. Within RMT the perturbation matrix elements are uncorrelated and thus to lowest order in $`ϵ`$, the ensemble averaging of the amplitudes and phases can be separated. The average over the phases is over a Gaussian probability density for the diagonal matrix elements. Also, the ensemble average of the amplitude is independent of $`n`$. Thus,

$`\overline{A_{diag}(ϵ;t)}`$ $``$ $`|n_{\lambda _1}|n_{\lambda _2}|^2\mathrm{exp}(ϵ^2\sigma _v^2t^2/2\mathrm{}^2)`$ (7)
where $`\sigma _v^2`$ is the variance of the diagonal matrix elements of the perturbation $`V`$ defined by writing the Hamiltonian locally as $`H(\lambda )=H_0+ϵV`$. In the limit of a differential $`ϵ`$, $`\sigma _v^2`$ is equal to the variance of the level slopes by the Hellmann-Feynman theorem . If the perturbations are sufficiently small such that the eigenfunctions do not significantly vary, i.e. $`n_{\lambda _1}|m_{\lambda _2}\delta _{nm}`$, then the off-diagonal terms will be negligible and may be ignored. Hence, the fidelity has a Gaussian decay in time in the weak perturbation regime.

The diagonal matrix element (level slope) variance is not a free parameter, and can be given an elegant interpretation through a semiclassical approach . It is given by

$$\sigma _v^2\frac{2gK(E)}{\pi \mathrm{}\overline{d}\beta }$$
(8)
where $`2g/\beta `$ is the number of classical orbits with identical action and $`\overline{d}`$ is the total mean density of states. The index $`\beta =1`$ for time-reversal-invariant systems and $`\beta =2`$ for time-reversal-breaking systems. $`K(E)`$ is the classical action diffusion constant on the energy surface $`E`$ given by

$$K(E)=_0^{\mathrm{}}V(𝐩(0),𝐪(0);\lambda )V(𝐩(t),𝐪(t);\lambda )_{po}𝑑t$$
(9)
In this expression the averaging is defined over the primitive periodic orbits of long period. The physical picture is that the action difference of two long orbits continuously deformable into each other as a function of $`ϵ`$ is the result of a diffusive process. As the orbit explores the phase space “randomly”, sometimes its action increases relative to the other orbit, sometimes it decreases. The variance of that diffusion is proportional to the variance of the level slopes.

### Semiclassical analysis

The above analysis describes a very restricted range of perturbation $`ϵ`$ centered at zero. A semiclassical approach without the quantum perturbation limitations can be developed that is valid over a much broader range. The semiclassical construction of an evolving wave function begins with the propagator

$`𝐪|\widehat{U}|𝐪^{}`$ $``$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi \mathrm{}\mathrm{}}}\right)^{d/2}{\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}\left|det\left({\displaystyle \frac{^2W_j(𝐪,𝐪^{};t)}{𝐪𝐪^{}}}\right)\right|^{1/2}`$ (10)
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\left(\mathrm{}W_j(𝐪,𝐪^{};t)/\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\pi \nu _j}{2}}\right)`$
The phase is specified by the time integral of the Lagrangian $`W_j(𝐪,𝐪^{};t)`$ and and an index based on the properties of the conjugate points (like focal points), $`\nu _j`$.

The overlap decay in terms of the propagator is

$`A(ϵ;t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝐪𝐪^{}𝐪^{\prime \prime }\alpha |𝐪𝐪|\widehat{U}_{\lambda _1}^{}|𝐪^{}𝐪^{}|\widehat{U}_{\lambda _2}|𝐪^{\prime \prime }𝐪^{\prime \prime }|\alpha }`$ (11)
For the reasons given in the discussion surrounding equation (4), there can be no overlap decay dependence on the specific initial state for chaotic systems as long as the decay is on a time scale which is much longer than the logtime. Since we have explicitly excluded the Lyapunov regime from consideration in this paper, we are free to choose any form for the initial state. For convenience, we take Gaussian wave packets

$$𝐪|\alpha =(\pi \sigma ^2)^{d/4}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{(𝐪𝐪_\alpha )^2}{2\sigma ^2}+\frac{\mathrm{}𝐩_\alpha }{\mathrm{}}(𝐪𝐪_\alpha )\right]$$
(12)
The initial coordinate of the actions are expanded about the center of the wave packet

$`W_j(𝐪,𝐪^{};t)=W_j(𝐪,𝐪_\alpha ;t)`$ $``$ $`𝐩_\alpha (𝐪^{}𝐪_\alpha )+`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(𝐪^{}𝐪_\alpha )^T{\displaystyle \frac{W_j(𝐪,𝐪^{};t)}{𝐪^{}𝐪^{}}}|_{𝐪_\alpha }(𝐪^{}𝐪_\alpha )`$
Changes in the amplitudes are ignored, since the most important contribution to the overlap decay is each orbit’s action change due to its division by $`\mathrm{}`$. Applying stationary phase on the $`𝐪`$ and $`𝐪^{\prime \prime }`$ integrals, we obtain

$$A(ϵ;t)\underset{j}{}c_j\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\mathrm{}}{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Delta }W_j(𝐪,𝐪_\alpha ;t)\right]𝐪$$
(14)
where $`c_j`$ is a magnitude which disappears from the expressions ahead, but could be deduced using the equations in the appendix of . The $`\mathrm{\Delta }W_j(𝐪,𝐪_\alpha ;t)`$ are the action differences of two rays that begin at $`𝐪_\alpha `$ and end at position $`𝐪`$ in a time $`t`$ and are continuously deformable into each other; bifurcations are neglected. First order classical perturbation theory gives

$$\mathrm{\Delta }W_j(𝐪,𝐪_\alpha ;t)=ϵ_0^t\frac{L_j(𝐪,𝐪_\alpha ;t^{})}{\lambda }𝑑t^{}$$
(15)
The stability matrix elements and the Lagrangian are evaluated along the orbits of $`H(\lambda )`$. In general, stationary phase integration cannot be performed on the last integral because the action differences are less than $`\mathrm{}`$.

Again a statistical argument can be employed. The weighted phases will be nearly Gaussian distributed for the reason mentioned earlier that long orbit action changes are part of a diffusion process . The last integral and summation in equation (14) can be replaced by a Gaussian integral. Thus, we obtain

$$A(ϵ;t)\mathrm{exp}(\sigma _W^2/2\mathrm{}^2)$$
(16)
where $`\sigma _W^2`$ is the variance of the action differences and is given by

$$\sigma _W^2=2ϵ^2K(E)t=(2\pi \overline{d}\sigma _v^2)ϵ^2\mathrm{}\beta t/2g$$
(17)
with the same action diffusion constant as before. In contrast to the quantum perturbative argument giving a quadratic $`t`$-dependence in the exponential, here the argument is linear. The semiclassical argument does not contain the action correlations necessary for the theory to contain the quantization of the spectrum. It therefore misses the Gaussian contribution from the diagonal terms, and essentially evaluates the off-diagonal contribution in the regime of larger perturbations as though there is a continuum. The last form given in the equation exhibits the Fermi Golden Rule form expected for such circumstances. Note that the symmetry factors do not enter $`K(E)`$ (the symmetry dependences cancel in the final form) in contrast to the diagonal term.

## 3 A Uniform Approximation

A straightforward argument determines the value of $`ϵ`$ which separates the exponential and Gaussian regimes. We emphasize that this is not the cross-over to exponential dependence beginning from the quadratic time dependence derived using time-dependent perturbation theory, but rather the relative strength of contributions from diagonal versus off-diagonal contributions in equation (5). Note that either dependence dominates over the time range in which the other’s argument of the exponential takes on the lesser value. A cross-over between the two regimes occurs when their arguments are equal. Simple algebra gives the this time scale $`t^{}=h\overline{d}\beta /2g`$, which is the Heisenberg time, $`\tau _H`$, to within the symmetry factor. Exponential decay dominates if the decay is completed by $`\tau _H`$, and Gaussian decay dominates if little decay has occurred by $`\tau _H`$. In between it turns out that the decay has components of both behaviors. In terms of the parameters, the question is whether

$$ϵ^2\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\mathrm{?}}{>}}{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}}\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{K(E)t^{}}=\frac{\mathrm{}g}{\pi \overline{d}\beta K(E)}$$
(18)
It turns out using the results derived next that near the equality, the magnitude of the off-diagonal term is comparable to the diagonal term.

Returning to equation (7), it is an oversimplification to take the amplitude equal to unity. Instead, we define the fraction

$$f=|n_{\lambda _1}|n_{\lambda _2}|^2$$
(19)
and ahead give a theory for its value in the neighborhood of unity (small $`ϵ`$) using a degenerate perturbation theory and RMT. It is worth noting the broader significance of the quantity $`f`$. It and some closely related measures have previously been studied by several authors. In , the authors give the leading analytic correction from unity for the case of broken time reversal symmetry, and infer the asymptotic behavior for large $`ϵ`$, and in , a rough guess is given for the full range of behavior consistent with numerical simulations with random matrices. These measures’ interpretations as parametric correlators of eigenstates, eigenstate components, or widths were emphasized. Motivations for their introduction come from a broad variety of possibilities of parametric dependence on controllable external or uncontrollable variables such as electromagnetic fields, thermodynamics quantities, or shape/geometric properties. Physical realizations from nuclear fission to quantum dots to atomic and molecular spectroscopy are possible. It is interesting to note that the same quantity is entering into the theory of the fidelity, but only for transition values of $`ϵ`$ between the two domains giving exponential and Gaussian decay.

The argument giving a Gaussian behavior for the phase average remains valid to a regime where $`f`$ is quite small and the diagonal term negligible. It suffices to evaluate $`f`$ to complete a more broadly applicable expression for the diagonal term.

The off-diagonal term is more subtle. By normalization, the prefactor must be equal to $`1f`$, but the argument of the exponential needs to be determined. Recall that semiclassical dynamics is valid far beyond the logtime, but breaks down on algebraic scales before $`\tau _H`$ . In particular, this implies that in the limit of a very weak perturbation, the exponential scale as previously derived places the exponential behavior beyond $`\tau _H`$. The semiclassical expression turns out to require modification. Since it is valid on time scales shorter than $`\tau _H`$, we can expand the exponential to the linear time term. This implies that in this regime the argument of the exponential multiplied by $`1f`$ must be equal to the argument found in the previous subsection. Therefore, to a good approximation, the overlap can be written

$`\overline{A(ϵ;t)}`$ $``$ $`f\mathrm{exp}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^2\sigma _v^2t^2}{2\mathrm{}^2}}+(1f)\mathrm{exp}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^2\pi \beta \sigma _v^2\overline{d}t}{2\mathrm{}g(1f)}}`$ (20)
$``$ $`f\mathrm{exp}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^2gK(E)t^2}{\pi \beta \overline{d}\mathrm{}^3}}+(1f)\mathrm{exp}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^2K(E)t}{\mathrm{}^2(1f)}}`$
where the first form emphasizes the quantum information (matrix element variance or level slope variance), and the second form emphasizes the classical information (classical action diffusion constant). The transition between the two regimes, Gaussian and exponential, as the strength of the perturbation is increased, is given by the fraction $`f`$ remaining in the diagonal overlap factor. The exponential decay rate has been modified by the introduction of $`1f`$ in the denominator which is necessary to offset the reduced normalization. In the limit of large perturbations where $`f0`$ we recover the previous results for the exponential Fermi Golden Rule decay, and in the small perturbation limit, $`f1`$, the Gaussian decay.

### Degenerate perturbation theory within RMT

To derive the leading corrections to $`f`$ for both time-reversal-invariant and noninvariant cases, the most direct approach would be to use the second order perturbation theory expression

$$|n_{\lambda _1}|n_{\lambda _2}|^21ϵ^2\underset{mn}{}\frac{|V_{mn}|^2}{[E_n(\lambda _1)E_m(\lambda _1)]^2}+\mathrm{}$$
(21)
where $`V_{mn}=m_{\lambda _1}|V|n_{\lambda _1}`$. Within RMT, $`V`$ is a Gaussian random matrix with the correct symmetries, Gaussian orthogonal ensemble (GOE), unitary ensemble (GUE), etc… We only consider the time-reversal-invariant and time-reversal-noninvariant cases, GOE and GUE respectively.

Define an energy variable $`s`$ rescaled by the mean local spacing and a unit variance variable $`x`$ for the perturbation matrix elements. Then the above sum can be reexpressed as the following double integral

$$f12\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{x^2}{s^2}R_2(s^{})\rho (x;s^{})s^{}x$$
(22)
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=ϵ^2v^2\overline{d}_r^2`$ is the transition parameter and $`v^2`$ is the local variance of the off-diagonal matrix elements of $`V`$ . $`\overline{d}_r`$ and $`v^2`$ are defined for the irreducible representations of the system. If there are symmetries, then these quantity must be adjusted accordingly by dividing out these symmetries, eg. $`\overline{d}_r=\overline{d}/g`$ and $`v^2=\beta \sigma _v^2/2`$. The function $`R_2(s)`$ is a sequence of $`\delta `$-functions which determine the spacings, and is known as the two-point density correlation function. Similarly, the function $`\rho (x;s)`$ is a sequence of $`\delta `$-functions whose intensities determine the matrix elements. Crudely speaking, taking the ensemble average of the above expression is reduced to inserting the $`R_2(s)`$ function from the appropriate Gaussian ensemble, and taking $`\rho (x;s)`$ to be a zero-centered, unit variance, Gaussian probability density independent of $`s`$.

It was emphasized by French and co-workers that the transition parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ was quite general . Although it naturally emerged from perturbation theories, its relevance extended to entire symmetry breaking transitions and it is the only scale that can enter those problems; a similar statement applies to parametric statistics as well .

It is straightforward to understand that for $`s`$ near zero, the integral diverges for the GOE, and that this approach must fail to give proper results for $`f`$. The two-point correlation function is approximately linear, $`R_2(s)\pi ^2s/6`$, so the above integral will diverge logarithmically. However, we can apply a degenerate perturbation theory approach developed in ; the degenerate theory also gives an extra valid correction for the GUE. By diagonalizing a two by two matrix, the difference in eigenenergies is given by

$`\mathrm{\Delta }E_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\{\sqrt{[E_n(\lambda _1)E_m(\lambda _1)]^2+4ϵ^2|V_{mn}|^2}[E_n(\lambda _1)E_m(\lambda _1)]\}`$ (23)
$`\times \text{sign}(E_n(\lambda _1)E_m(\lambda _1))`$
Using this result, equation (22) can be reexpressed as

$$f1\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}_0^{\mathrm{}}\left(1\frac{s^{}}{\sqrt{s^2+4\mathrm{\Lambda }x^2}}\right)R_2(s^{})\mathrm{exp}(x^2/2)s^{}x$$

Away from very small $`s^{}`$, the degenerate perturbation result is unnecessary, but still gives the exact leading order results as a function of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. This integral is rather difficult to evaluate exactly, but the correct leading order results can be extracted by splitting the integral into two regions $`[0,s]`$ and $`[s,\mathrm{}]`$. First, the eigenstate overlap is written

$`1f`$ $`[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi }}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle _0^s}(1{\displaystyle \frac{s^{}}{\sqrt{s^2+4\mathrm{\Lambda }x^2}}})R_2(s^{})\mathrm{exp}(x^2/2)s^{}x`$ (24)
$`+{\displaystyle _s^{\mathrm{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{s^2}}R_2(s^{})s^{}]`$
where the power series for $`R_2(s)`$ is substituted in the first term, and the exact function is left in the second term. For our purposes, it is sufficient to replace $`R_2(s)`$ in the first region by $`\pi ^2s/6`$, which gives the GOE result, or by $`\pi ^2s^2/3`$, which gives the GUE result. The exact two-point correlation functions are

$$R_2(r)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1[s(r)]^2+Js(r)Ds(r)& \text{GOE}\\ 1[s(r)]^2& \text{GUE}\end{array}$$
(25)
where $`s(r)=\mathrm{sin}(\pi r)/\pi r`$, $`Ds(r)=s(r)/r`$ and $`Js(r)=_0^rs(t)t1/2`$. Next, the $`[0,s]`$ integrals are evaluated exactly, and their asymptotic expansions kept up to (not including) $`O(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)`$. The other integral is also exactly integrated, and its small-$`s`$ expansion is made. When properly formulated and the two evaluations summed, all the divergent terms less than $`O(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)`$ vanish; also the $`s`$-dependent terms coming from the $`[0,s]`$ integration vanish. The $`s`$-independent terms give the desired result. The remaining $`s`$-dependent terms arising from the $`[s,\mathrm{}]`$ integral vanish as higher order terms in the power series of $`R_2(s)`$ are included in the first integral. In this way, the final result does not depend on the value chosen for $`s`$. Carrying out this technique up to but not including $`O(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)`$, we obtain

$$f\{\begin{array}{cc}1\frac{\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{6}\left(1\gamma \mathrm{ln}\left|\frac{\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{4}\right|\right)& \text{GOE}\\ 1\frac{2\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}+\frac{32\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }}{9}\sqrt{2\pi \mathrm{\Lambda }}& \text{GUE}\end{array}$$
(26)
where $`\gamma `$ is the Euler constant. The GOE results and the correction term ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{3/2}`$) for the GUE are new, and the leading GUE term is consistent with reference , which also gives the asymptotic results

$$f\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}& \text{GOE}\\ \frac{1}{\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}& \text{GUE}\end{array}$$
(27)
The overlap ensemble average is expected to be universal and should apply to all systems chaotic enough to expect RMT behavior. Numerical studies and heuristic arguments suggest that the overlap between perturbed and unperturbed eigenstates is roughly a Lorentzian-like function of the perturbation strength . We look for a dependence of the form

$$f=\frac{1}{1+h(\mathrm{\Lambda })}$$
(28)
Note that in the previously discussed forms, the expression for $`f`$ was raised to the power $`\beta `$, $`h(\mathrm{\Lambda })a_\beta \mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and approximate values of the constants $`a_\beta `$ were given by a numerical fit. Using perturbation theory Wilkinson and Walker  gave an expression for the individual off-diagonal matrix elements which has a compatible form. Nevertheless, the $`O(\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and $`O(\mathrm{\Lambda }^{3/2})`$ corrections plus the asymptotic expressions indicate difficulties with their interpolation since it gets both limits of small and large $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ incorrectly. Equations (26-28) are, of course, insufficient to determine $`h(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$. However, we suggest the following as perhaps the simplest forms for somewhat improved interpolations that are at least analytically consistent with the limiting regimes of large and small $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$:

$$h(\mathrm{\Lambda })\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{6}\left(1\gamma \left(\frac{1+b_0\pi ^4\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}{1+b_1\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }+b_0\pi ^4\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}\right)\mathrm{ln}\left|\frac{\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{4+\mathrm{exp}(5+\gamma )\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}\right|\right)& \text{GOE}\\ \\ \frac{2\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{3}\left(\frac{1+\frac{3}{2}c_0\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}{1+\frac{16}{3}\sqrt{\frac{2}{\pi }\mathrm{\Lambda }}+c_0\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }}\right)& \text{GUE}\end{array}$$
(29)
The use of a quotient of two polynomials inserts a general function with some fitting parameters that we determined with GOE and GUE Monte Carlo simulations; see the appendix for the Monte Carlo details. Our best fits are: $`b_0=0.932`$, $`b_1=0.618`$, and $`c_0=1.89`$. Figure 1 shows the differences between the Monte Carlo results and the new interpolations along with the differences between the Monte Carlo results and those from references . Even though the new interpolations have the correct limiting forms, they still appear to have some small, detectable deviations from the exact RMT predictions. Perhaps, the main conclusion is that the previous interpolations do surprisingly well given that they fail to get any of the limiting cases correctly.

Again, semiclassical theory fixes the value of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ using the arguments presented in the previous section. Thus,

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{ϵ^2\beta \sigma _v^2\overline{d}^2}{2g^2}=\frac{ϵ^2\overline{d}K(E)}{\pi g\mathrm{}}$$
(30)
where the last form follows from equation (8). In some simple systems such as the standard map used in the next section, $`K(E)`$ can be calculated analytically. In fact, the criterium, equation (18), for observing either Gaussian or exponential behavior can be written in terms of the transition parameter

$$\pi ^2\mathrm{\Lambda }\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\mathrm{?}}{>}}{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{<}{}}\frac{1}{\beta }$$
(31)
It is remarkable that the same transition parameter that determines the effects of weak symmetry breaking in RMT, gives precisely the exponential-to-Gaussian cross-over for the fidelity.

Finally, the uniform approximation for the fidelity is the square of equation (20) with the results given in equations (28-30). It could have turned out that there were three parameters in the functional form of the decay, the relative amount of Gaussian to exponential component ($`f`$), and the scales in the arguments of the Gaussian and exponential functions. Interestingly, other than the density of states (or phase space volume), only one quantity determines all three potential parameters, that being the classical action diffusion constant. There is no other information contained in the decay of the fidelity for a strongly chaotic system.

## 4 Fidelity in the quantized standard map

We use the standard map, which is a paradigm for chaotic systems, to demonstrate our results for time-reversal-invariant systems. For a kicking strength $`\lambda `$ greater than 6 or so the standard map is fully chaotic. The classical map is defined by

$`p_{i+1}`$ $`=`$ $`p_i(\lambda /2\pi )\mathrm{sin}(2\pi q_i)\text{mod}(1)`$
$`q_{i+1}`$ $`=`$ $`q_i+p_{i+1}\text{mod}(1)`$ (32)
The quantized propagator with $`N`$ discrete levels is given by

$`n^{}|\widehat{U}|n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{\mathrm{}N}}}\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{}\pi (nn^{})^2/N]`$ (33)
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\left(\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{kN}{2\pi }}\mathrm{cos}[2\pi (n^{}+a)/N]\right)`$
where $`n,n^{}=0,\mathrm{},N1`$ and $`a`$ is a phase term which we set equal to zero. The effective Planck constant is $`h=1/N`$ and the average density of states is $`\overline{d}=N/2\pi `$.

From the considerations of Sect. 2, examples of nearly pure Gaussian or exponential decay can be found by selecting an appropriate value of $`ϵ`$ using equation (18). In figure 2, we see that for small $`\mathrm{}`$ (large $`N`$), even without initial state averaging, the theoretical curves for the Gaussian and exponential regimes respectively match the quantum results. The theory curves use the analytic form of the action diffusion constant, which for the standard map is

$$K(E)[1+2J_2(\lambda )]/4(2\pi )^4$$
(34)
Also, it turns out that the expressions for the perturbation matrix element variance or level slope variance is different for quantized maps than for continuous dynamical systems since the Floquet eigenangles are scaled differently than energy eigenvalues. Here, the variance of the eigenangle slopes is

$$\sigma _\varphi ^2=\sigma _v^2/\mathrm{}^2=g(4\pi )^2NK(E)\text{where}g=2\beta =1$$
(35)
In figure 3, we show an example of the behavior of $`f`$ as a function of the transition parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Ergodicity allows the ensemble averaging to be replaced by an average over eigenstates. For quantum maps, the transition parameter is defined in terms of the variance of the eigenphases as opposed to the eigenenergies as in continuous systems. Therefore, for the quantized standard map

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{ϵ^2\beta \sigma _\varphi ^2\overline{d}^2}{2g^2}=\frac{2ϵ^2N^3K(E)}{g}\frac{ϵ^2N^3}{8(2\pi )^4}[1+2J_2(\lambda )]$$
(36)
Using the GOE interpolation expression for $`f`$ in equation (29) gives excellent agreement with the quantum results.

Finally, we show an example in figure 4 where $`ϵ`$ has been chosen so that $`A(ϵ;t)`$ exhibits both exponential and Gaussian behaviors in different time regimes. The theoretical expression given in equation (20) with equation (34) and the interpolation approximation for $`f`$ of the previous section compares well over the full time dependence. It is possible to isolate both the exponential and Gaussian components of $`A(ϵ;t)`$, and these are shown in the lower panels. The intercepts of the curves at $`t=0`$ show the accuracy of the numerical fit to $`f`$, and the decay scales can be seen to be given properly as well.

## 5 Conclusions

The fidelity is extremely useful for studies of decoherence, reversibility, and tomography in several contexts, and has received a great deal of attention recently. It is to be expected that RMT theory would be helpful in understanding its behavior for strongly chaotic systems. Indeed, we applied RMT to develop a uniform approximation that covers both previously known regimes of Gaussian and exponential decay, and the theoretical predictions describe the behavior of the quantized standard map extremely well. Although not noted earlier in the text, the range of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ over which the bare degenerate perturbation theory is accurate, is disappointingly narrow. However, it helped to provide a schema for an improved interpolation formula. We further included the semiclassical analysis required to show that only one parameter (other than the density of states/phase space volume) determined the full behavior, the classical action diffusion constant. In quantum terms, the sole information is carried by the transition parameter or alternatively by the perturbation’s spreading width. As a function of this parameter, the uniform approximation gives a continuous family of universal decay curves for all strongly chaotic systems.

Our numerical tests of the time-reversal-invariant uniform approximation with the quantum kicked rotor relied on large dimensionality examples, i.e. $`N=1000`$, to show that although we averaged over initial states to generate the theory, the ergodic properties of RMT imply that the results apply individually to nearly any initial state of a strongly chaotic system. For smaller values of $`N`$, the fluctuations due to not making an initial state averaging increase and are readily visible. There averaging would be required to have the same high quality comparison between the theoretical prediction and the quantum results. We would expect a similar quality of results to apply for time-reversal-noninvariant chaotic systems.

The new interpolation formulae given in equation (29) for the overlap of a perturbed and an unperturbed eigenstate are improvements over the simple Lorentzian forms since they contain the correct limiting forms, and are more faithful to the Monte Carlo simulations. Nevertheless, the previous forms work surprisingly well; even where the slope at small perturbation goes to infinity in the GOE results, the previous form never goes too far astray. The overlap $`f`$ is important in other contexts as well. For example, in mesoscopic physics $`f`$ is related to the conductance of a quantum dot undergoing a parametric change. For reasons such as this, it would be interesting to know the full analytic transition with perturbation strength between unity and zero.

For integrable, near-integrable, and mixed phase space systems, the behavior of the fidelity is not universal and depends upon the initial state chosen. Similarly, chaotic systems in the Lyapunov regime (not studied in this paper) could also exhibit initial state dependent phenomena. Such systems are also of interest and contain a variety of different regimes; see the work in . We are currently pursuing several open questions in these dynamical systems.

We gratefully acknowledge important discussions with Ph. Jacquod and C. Lewenkopf, and generous support from ONR Grant N00014-98-1-0079 and NSF Grant PHY-0098027.

## Appendix A Monte Carlo simulations of $`f`$ for the GOE and GUE

We use the Hamiltonian

$$H=\mathrm{sin}(ϵ)H_0+\mathrm{cos}(ϵ)H_1$$
(37)
in the Monte Carlo simulations. $`H_0`$ and $`H_1`$ are random $`(300\times 300)`$ matrices in either the GOE or GUE symmetry. New random matrices are recalculated for each $`ϵ`$ to generate independent samples. An ensemble of 300 such matrices are used where the average density of states, $`\overline{d}`$, and variance of the level velocities, $`\sigma _E^2`$, are averaged over the entire ensemble. Only the middle third of the spectrum is used. The eigenfunctions of $`H_0`$ are overlapped with those $`H`$ and then the absolute value square is taken to obtain $`f`$. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\{\begin{array}{cc}ϵ^2\sigma _E^2\overline{d}^2/2& \text{GOE}\\ \\ ϵ^2\sigma _E^2\overline{d}^2& \text{GUE}\end{array}$$
(38)
## References

## Figure captions


format: text

text:
# The Witten top Chern class via 𝐾-theory

## 1. Introduction

### 1.1. Witten’s conjecture.

In \[Wit93\], Witten conjectures that the intersection numbers of certain cohomology classes on the moduli stacks of stable $`r`$-spin curves encode a solution of the Gelfand–Dikiĭ (also known as the higher KdV) hierarchy. (The conjecture is a generalization of the Kontsevich–Witten Theorem \[Wit91\], \[Kon92\].) Witten’s formulation of the conjecture lacks both a rigorous definition of the moduli stack $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ of stable $`r`$-spin curves and a construction of the crucial cohomology class on $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ which is usually referred to as the *Witten top Chern class*.

### 1.2. Definition of the moduli stack.

The moduli stack of stable $`r`$-spin curves was first defined by Jarvis \[Jar00\] and is the compactification of the stack $`𝒮_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ labeled by the integer and nonnegative indexes $`r,g,n,`$ and $`𝒌=(k_1,k_2,\mathrm{},k_n)`$ satisfying $`r2`$, $`2g2+n>0`$, and $`2g2_ik_ir`$. The stack $`𝒮_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ classifies smooth stable $`r`$-spin curves: $`n`$-pointed smooth stable curves $`(C;s_1,\mathrm{},s_n)`$ of genus $`g`$ equipped with a line bundle $`L`$ on $`C`$ and an isomorphism $`f:L^r\omega _C(_ik_i[s_i])`$. The compactified stack $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ classifies stable curves $`C`$ equipped with a torsion free sheaf of rank one $`L`$ and a nonzero homomorphism $`f`$ as above. (Using stack-theoretic curves, this solution is rephrased in \[AJ03\] and can be modified as shown in \[Chi\]; however, the problem of constructing the Witten top Chern class has equivalent solutions with all these compactifications, Remark 4.0.6.)

### 1.3. Witten’s definition of his class on an open substack.

In \[Wit93\], the Witten top Chern class is defined on the open substack $`𝒱`$ of $`𝒮_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ satisfying

(1.3.1) $`H^0(C_x,L_x)=0\text{for all}x:\mathrm{Spec}𝒱,`$
where $`((C_x;s_{1,x},\mathrm{},s_{n,x}),L_x,f_x)`$ is the $`r`$-spin curve represented by $`x`$. Over $`𝒱`$ there exists a vector bundle whose fibre on the point $`x`$ is the space $`H^1(C_x,L_x)`$. This is the higher direct image $`R^1\pi _{}`$, where $`\pi :𝒞𝒱`$ is the universal curve and $``$ on $`𝒱`$ is the universal line bundle. Then we take

(1.3.2)
$$c_{\mathrm{top}}(R^1\pi _{}).$$

If $`g=0`$, the condition (1.3.1) is satisfied over the whole moduli stack. In general, $`R^1\pi _{}`$ is not a vector bundle, so the usual definition of top Chern class does not apply. Witten sketches a generalization based on the index theory of elliptic operators. It is not clear, however, how to extend this approach to singular curves and to the whole stack $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$.

### 1.4. Polishchuk and Vaintrob’s construction.

In \[PV01\], Polishchuk and Vaintrob provide an algebraic construction of the Witten top Chern class on the whole stack $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$. They work with the universal torsion free sheaf of rank one $``$ on the universal family $`𝒞\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$, and they consider the pushforward $`R\pi _{}`$ in the derived category, which is used to construct a $`/2`$-graded spinor bundle $`S`$. By extending MacPherson’s graph construction to $`2`$-periodic complexes, Polishchuk and Vaintrob define the localized Chern character of $`S`$ in bivariant intersection theory. Passing to the Chow ring, they obtain a Chow cohomology class $`c_{PV}`$ (see Section 5.2). Let $`\chi `$ denote $`\chi (𝒞,)`$; we have $`c_{PV}A^\chi (X)_{}`$. Furthermore, such a class is compatible with Witten’s earlier definition and, by \[Pol04\], satisfies all the axioms of the cohomological field theory defined in \[JKV01\]—this is a preliminary condition to Witten’s conjecture \[Wit93\].

### 1.5. Our construction of the Witten top Chern class.

We start from the pushforward $`R\pi _{}`$ in the derived category, but follow a different path, which is more straightforward and closer to Witten’s original idea (1.3.2) (our approach is also alluded to in \[Pol04, §2, p.2, Remark\]). We obtain the class $`c_{PV}`$ by working only with classes in $`K`$-theory, short-circuiting the passage through $`/2`$-graded spinor bundles, bivariant intersection theory, and the use of MacPherson’s graph construction.

We define the *$`K`$-theory Euler class*, a generalization of the total lambda class evaluated at $`1`$, which by definition is

$`\lambda _1:\mathrm{Vect}(X)`$ $`K_0(X)`$
$`V`$ $`{\displaystyle _i}(1)^i[\mathrm{\Lambda }^iV].`$
The $`K`$-theory Euler class $`\mathrm{Ke}(F_{},a)`$ is defined for a pair $`(F_{},a)`$ where $`F_{}`$ is a bounded complex in degrees $`1`$ and $`0`$ of locally free coherent sheaves and $`a:𝒪\mathrm{Sym}^{r1}F_0F_1`$ is a closed and nondegenerate form (see Definition 3.1.1 and Definition 3.1.5).

Once $`\mathrm{Ke}(F_{},a)`$ is defined, then, the construction follows naturally. We apply it to a double complex $`F_{}`$ in degrees $`1`$ and $`0`$ representing $`(R\pi _{})^{}`$ in the derived category of $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$. Indeed, $`F_{}`$ is equipped with a closed and nondegenerate form $`a`$ defined using $`^r\omega `$ (Section 4).

For a vector bundle $`V`$, the total lambda class $`\lambda _1`$ is related to the top Chern class in the Chow ring by

(1.5.1)
$$c_{\mathrm{top}}(V)=\mathrm{ch}(\lambda _1(V^{}))\mathrm{td}(V).$$

In Definition 3.5.1 and Definition 4.0.4, we define a Chow cohomology class $`c_W`$ by

(1.5.2)
$$c_W=\mathrm{ch}(\mathrm{Ke}(F_{},a))\frac{\mathrm{td}(F_1^{})}{\mathrm{td}(F_0^{})}.$$

In Theorem 5.4.1, we prove the identity $`c_W=c_{PV}`$.

It is also worth mentioning that our construction produces a $`K`$-class $`K_W`$ that lifts $`c_W`$ to the $`K`$-theory ring, Definition 4.0.4. We hope that such a lifting can not only clarify the definition of the Witten top Chern class, but also improve our understanding of the conjecture.

### 1.6. Structure of the paper.

In Section 2, we introduce our notation. In Section 3, we define the $`K`$-theory Euler class. We provide our construction for the Witten top Chern class in Section 4 and prove the identity with the Polishchuk–Vaintrob class in Section 5. Finally, in Section 6, we give some explicit examples.

### 1.7. Acknowledgments.

I would like to thank Constantin Teleman, who was most generous to me; I had several illuminating discussions with him that put this project on the right track. I am also extremely grateful to my Ph.D. supervisor Alessio Corti for shaping my views on this problem and for putting a great deal of care in assisting in the preparation of this paper. At the Laboratoire Dieudonné in Nice I benefited from many discussions with the members of the Équipe Géométrie Algébrique. In particular I would like to thank Charles Walter for several explanations and for pointing out Lemma 5.3.4.

## 2. Notation

### 2.1. Schemes.

All schemes are of finite type over $``$.

### 2.2. Fibres.

Let $`p:EX`$ be a complex vector bundle on a scheme; for $`xX`$ we denote by $`E_x`$ the fibre $`p^1(x)`$ over $`xX`$. For a morphism of vector bundles $`f:EF`$, we denote by $`f_x:E_xF_x`$ the morphism induced on the fibre over $`xX`$. For coherent locally free sheaves $`K`$ on $`X`$ we denote by $`K_x`$ the fibre of the corresponding vector bundle.

### 2.3. $`K`$-theory.

We denote by $`\mathrm{Vect}(X)`$ the category of finite complex vector bundles on $`X`$. We denote by $`K_0(X)`$ and $`K_0^{}(X)`$ the Grothendieck groups generated by coherent locally free sheaves and coherent sheaves on $`X`$.

### 2.4. Symmetric and exterior product homomorphisms.

Let $`E`$ be a coherent locally free sheaf on a scheme $`X`$. For any nonnegative integers $`h`$ and $`k`$, the homomorphisms

(2.4.1)
$$\sigma _n:\mathrm{Sym}^hE\mathrm{Sym}^nE\mathrm{Sym}^{h+n}E\mathrm{and}\lambda _n:\mathrm{\Lambda }^hE\mathrm{\Lambda }^nE\mathrm{\Lambda }^{h+n}E$$

are the natural symmetric product and exterior product.

### 2.5. Symmetric and exterior powers of a complex.

In this paper we work with complexes in degree $`0`$ and $`1`$; in this case, the symmetric and the exterior power in the derived category can be realized by bounded cohomological and homological Koszul complexes. Following \[Gre89, §1\], we write the complexes explicitly.

First, for any coherent locally free sheaf $`E`$ on $`X`$ and for any nonnegative integer $`h`$, denote by

$$s:\mathrm{Sym}^hE\mathrm{Sym}^{h1}EE\text{and}l:\mathrm{\Lambda }^hE\mathrm{\Lambda }^{h1}EE,$$

the dual homomorphisms of the products $`\sigma _1`$ and $`\lambda _1`$ applied to $`E^{}`$. This allows us to define, for any $`d:V^0V^1`$, the homomorphisms

(2.5.1)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Sym}^hV^0\mathrm{\Lambda }^kV^1\mathrm{Sym}^{h1}V^0V^0\mathrm{\Lambda }^kV^1\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{Sym}^{h1}V^0V^1\mathrm{\Lambda }^kV^1\mathrm{Sym}^{h1}V^0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k+1}V^1,\end{array}$$

where the first homomorphism is $`s`$ tensored with the identity on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^kV^1`$, the second homomorphism is the identity on $`\mathrm{Sym}^{h1}V^0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^kV^1`$ tensored with $`d`$, and the third homomorphism is the identity on $`\mathrm{Sym}^{h1}V^0`$ tensored with the exterior product $`\lambda _1`$. In this way, for any complex of coherent locally free sheaves $`V^{}:0V^0V^10`$ we get the symmetric power complex $`\mathrm{Sym}^N(V^{})`$

(2.5.2)
$$\begin{array}{c}0\mathrm{Sym}^NV^0\mathrm{Sym}^{N1}V^0V^1\mathrm{Sym}^{N2}V^0\mathrm{\Lambda }^2V^1\mathrm{}\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{}\mathrm{Sym}^2V^0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{N2}V^1V^0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{N1}V^1\mathrm{\Lambda }^NV^10.\end{array}$$

Similarly, for any complex $`W_{}:0W_1\stackrel{}{}W_00`$ of coherent locally free sheaves on $`X`$. We can define

(2.5.3)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Sym}^hW_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^kW_1\mathrm{Sym}^hW_0W_1\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k1}W_1\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{Sym}^hW_0W_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k1}W_1\mathrm{Sym}^{h+1}W_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k1}W_1\end{array}$$

as the composite $`(\mathrm{id}l)(\mathrm{id}d\mathrm{id})(\sigma _1\mathrm{id})`$. The exterior power complex $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^N(W_{})`$ is the complex

(2.5.4)
$$\begin{array}{c}0\mathrm{\Lambda }^NW_1W_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{N1}W_1\mathrm{Sym}^2W_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{N2}W_1\mathrm{}\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{}\mathrm{Sym}^{N2}W_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^2W_1\mathrm{Sym}^{N1}W_0W_1\mathrm{Sym}^NW_00.\end{array}$$

In fact, in characteristic $`0`$, $`\mathrm{Sym}^N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^N`$ are well defined functors up to homotopy \[Del73\]. We denote by $`\mathrm{Sym}^N(f)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^N(f)`$ the homomorphism of complexes associated to a homomorphism $`f`$ of complexes in degrees $`1`$ and $`0`$.

###### 2.5.5 Proposition.

Let $`d:W_1W_0`$ be a homomorphism of complex vector spaces, and let $`H_1`$ and $`H_0`$ be its the kernel and its cokernel. The cohomology of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^N(W_{})`$ is given by $`\mathrm{Sym}^hH_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{Nh}H_1`$ for $`0hN`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`V`$ be the image of $`d`$. The complex $`W_{}`$ is the sum of $`H_1\stackrel{0}{}H_0`$ and $`V\stackrel{id}{}V`$. Therefore, we get

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }^N(W_{})=\underset{i=0}{\overset{N}{}}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{Ni}(H_{})\mathrm{\Lambda }^i(V\stackrel{id}{}V).$$

Note that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^i(V\stackrel{id}{}V)`$ is exact for $`i>0`$. The claim follows. ∎

## 3. The $`K`$-theory Euler class

The total lambda class evaluated at $`1`$ is defined over vector bundles up to isomorphism:

$`\lambda _1:\mathrm{Vect}(X)`$ $`K_0(X)`$
$`V`$ $`{\displaystyle _i}(1)^i[\mathrm{\Lambda }^iV].`$
We now extend its definition. We choose an integer

$$m1.$$

We work with complexes $`F_{}=(0F_1F_00)`$ of coherent locally free sheaves $`F_i`$ on the scheme $`X`$. Denote by $`H_{1,x}`$ and $`H_{0,x}`$ the kernel and the cokernel of $`(F_{})_x`$.

### 3.1. Closed and nondegenerate forms.

Consider a homomorphism

$$a:𝒪_X\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0F_1.$$

###### 3.1.1 Definition.

The form $`a`$ is closed if $`da=0`$ where $`d`$ is the natural map $`d:\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0F_1\mathrm{Sym}^{m+1}F_0`$.

###### 3.1.2 Remark.

Consider the complex $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{m+1}(F_{})`$

(3.1.3)
$$\begin{array}{c}0\stackrel{𝑑}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{m+1}F_1\stackrel{𝑑}{}F_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^mF_1\stackrel{𝑑}{}\mathrm{Sym}^2F_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{m1}F_1\stackrel{𝑑}{}\mathrm{}\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{}\stackrel{𝑑}{}\mathrm{Sym}^{m1}F_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^2F_1\stackrel{𝑑}{}\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0F_1\stackrel{𝑑}{}\mathrm{Sym}^{m+1}F_0\stackrel{𝑑}{}0,\end{array}$$

introduced in (2.5.4). Note that the form $`a`$ is closed if and only if $`d(a(1))`$ vanishes.

By Proposition 2.5.5, the cohomology of the complex $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{m+1}(F_{})_x`$ at $`(\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0F_1)_x`$ is $`\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x}H_{1,x}`$. For any $`xX`$, if $`a`$ is closed, $`a(1)`$ induces an element in $`\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x}H_{1,x}`$, which can be regarded as a linear system

(3.1.4)
$$S_x:H_{1,x}^{}\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x}=H^0(Y,𝒪_Y(m))$$

with $`Y=H_{0,x}^{}`$.

###### 3.1.5 Definition.

A closed form $`a`$ is nondegenerate if for any $`xX`$ the image of $`S_x`$ is a base point free linear system on $`H_{0,x}^{}`$.

###### 3.1.6 Remark.

Note that this condition implies $`\mathrm{rk}(H_{0,x})\mathrm{rk}(H_{1,x})`$ and, therefore, $`\mathrm{rk}(F_0)\mathrm{rk}(F_1)`$.

###### 3.1.7 Remark.

Note that a closed form $`a`$ is nondegenerate if and only if for any $`xX`$ the following condition is satisfied: an element $`vH_{0,x}^{}`$ is zero if

(3.1.8)
$$wH_{1,x}^{},S_x(w),v^m=0.$$

### 3.2. The double complex $`L^,`$.

From now on we always assume that $`a`$ is a closed and nondegenerate form. We write

(3.2.1)
$$L^{h,k}=\mathrm{Sym}^hF_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^kF_1.$$

We define homomorphisms

$$\stackrel{~}{d}:L^{h,k}L^{h+1,k1},$$

$$\stackrel{~}{a}:L^{h,k}L^{h+m,k+1}$$

of bidegrees $`(1,1)`$ and $`(m,1)`$. The homomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ is defined as the differential of the complex $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^N(F_{})`$ at (2.5.4) with $`N=h+k`$. Consider the natural homomorphisms described in (2.4.1)

$`\sigma _m:`$ $`\mathrm{Sym}^hF_0\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0\mathrm{Sym}^{h+m}F_0,`$ $`\lambda _1:`$ $`F_1\mathrm{\Lambda }^kF_1\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k+1}F_1.`$
The homomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ is the composite of $`\mathrm{id}a\mathrm{id}`$ and $`\sigma _m\lambda _1`$

(3.2.2)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Sym}^hF_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^kF_1\stackrel{\mathrm{id}a\mathrm{id}}{}\mathrm{Sym}^hF_0\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0F_1\mathrm{\Lambda }^kF_1\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{\sigma _m\lambda _1}{}\mathrm{Sym}^{h+m}F_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{h+1}F_1.\end{array}$$

###### 3.2.3 Lemma.

The bigraded sheaf $`L^,`$ is a double complex with differentials $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$.

###### Proof.

We show $`\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{d}=\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{a}=\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{a}+\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{d}=0`$. The homomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ is the differential of the exterior power of $`F_{}`$; therefore $`\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{d}=0`$. Furthermore, a local description of $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ at $`xX`$ shows $`\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{a}=0`$. We choose an open $`Ux`$ such that

$$a(1)=_{l=0}^NP_l\sigma _l\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0(U)F_1(U)$$

with $`P_l\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0(U)`$ and $`\sigma _lF_1(U).`$ Then, $`\stackrel{~}{a}_x:L_x^{h,k}L_x^{h+m,k+1}`$ can be written, for $`c_i(F_0)_x`$ and $`b_j(F_1)_x`$, as the homomorphism sending $`_{1ih}c_i_{1jk}b_jL_x^{h,k}`$ to

(3.2.4)
$$_{l=0}^N_{1ih}c_iP_l(x)\sigma _l(x)_{1jk}b_j.$$

Using $`\sigma _l\sigma _l^{}+\sigma _l^{}\sigma _l=0`$ we see that $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ is a differential.

Finally, we show $`\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{a}+\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{d}=0`$. We point out that $`\stackrel{~}{d}_x:L_x^{h,k}L_x^{h+1,k1}`$ sends $`_{1ih}c_i_{0jk}b_j`$ to

(3.2.5)
$$_{j_0=1}^k(1)^{j_0}\left(_ic_id_x\left(b_{j_0}\right)_{jj_0}b_j\right),$$

with $`d_x=(d_F_{})_x`$, $`c_i(F_0)_x`$, and $`b_j(F_1)_x`$. Indeed, as illustrated in Section 2.5, the homomorphism $`d_x`$ is the composite

(3.2.6)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Sym}^h(F_{0,x})\mathrm{\Lambda }^k(F_{1,x})\mathrm{Sym}^h(F_{0,x})F_{1,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k1}(F_{1,x})\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{Sym}^h(F_{0,x})F_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k1}(F_{1,x})\mathrm{Sym}^{h+1}(F_{0,x})\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k1}(F_{1,x}),\end{array}$$

where the first arrow denotes the identity homomorphism tensored by $`l_x:\mathrm{\Lambda }^k(F_{1,x})F_{1,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k1}(F_{1,x})`$, which we write as

$$_{0jk}b_j_{j_0=1}^k(1)^{j_0}\left(b_{j_0}_{jj_0}b_j\right).$$

Then the definition given in (2.5.3) implies (3.2.5). As a consequence of (3.2.5) and (3.2.4), the fact that $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ anticommute is just another way to say that $`a`$ is closed. ∎

### 3.3. The complexes $`K_i^,`$.

For each $`i=0,\mathrm{},m`$, set

$$K_i^{p,q}=\mathrm{Sym}^{p+mqi}F_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{p+q}F_1$$

with differentials of bidegrees $`(1,0)`$ and $`(0,1)`$

$`\stackrel{~}{d}:K_i^{p,q}K_i^{p+1,q}\text{and}\stackrel{~}{a}:K_i^{p,q}K_i^{p,q+1}.`$
This diagram illustrates $`K_0^,`$.

Fig. 1 illustrates that $`K_i^,`$ is nonzero only if $`0p+q\mathrm{rk}(F_1)`$ and $`p+mq0`$.

Note that the direct sum of the double complexes $`K_i^,`$ is equal to $`L^,`$.

$$\underset{i=0}{\overset{m}{}}K_i^,=L^,$$

For any $`i=0,\mathrm{},m`$, we denote by $`(K_i^{},D=\stackrel{~}{d}+\stackrel{~}{a})`$ the total complex.

###### 3.3.1 Theorem.

There exists an integer $`n_0`$ such that, for $`nn_0`$, the cohomology group $`H^n(K_i^{})`$ vanishes and the sheaf $`I=\mathrm{im}(K_i^{n1}K_i^n)`$ is locally free.

###### Proof.

We write $`K^,`$ and $`K^{}`$ omitting $`i`$. We define

(3.3.2)
$$n_0=(4m+2\mathrm{rk}(\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0))/(m+1)$$

and show the exactness of $`K^{n1}K^nK^{n+1}`$ for $`nn_0`$.

Since all the sheaves of $`K^{}`$ are coherent and locally free, it suffices to check the exactness after base change of $`K^{}`$ to $`x`$ for all closed points $`xX`$. The spectral sequence of complex vector spaces $`E_2^{p,q}H_{\stackrel{~}{a}}^q(H_{\stackrel{~}{d}}^p(K_x^,))`$ abuts to the cohomology of $`(K_x^{},D_x)`$. We show $`E_2^{p,q}=0`$ for $`p+qn_0`$.

Write $`F_{1,x}F_{0,x}`$ as the sum of $`H_{1,x}\stackrel{0}{}H_{0,x}`$ and $`V\stackrel{id}{}V`$. In this way, each term $`K_x^{p,q}`$ can be written as the sum of the complex vector spaces $`\mathrm{Sym}^rH_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^sH_{1,x}\mathrm{Sym}^{p+mqir}V\mathrm{\Lambda }^{p+qs}V`$ for $`r\{0,\mathrm{},p+mqi\}`$ and $`s\{0,\mathrm{},p+q\}`$. Denote by $`G^{p,q}`$ the summand corresponding to $`r=0`$ and $`s=0`$ and denote by $`Q^{p,q}`$ the sum of the remaining terms in $`K_x^{p,q}`$. In this way, each element $`\alpha K_x^{p,q}`$ is given by $`\alpha ^{}G^{p,q}`$ and $`\alpha ^{\prime \prime }Q^{p,q}`$. The morphism $`a_x:_x\mathrm{Sym}^mF_{0,x}F_{1,x}=K^{0,1}`$ splits as $`(a_x^{}G^{0,1},a_x^{\prime \prime }Q^{0,1})`$. The differentials $`\stackrel{~}{d}_x`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}_x`$ can be written as

(3.3.3) $`G^{p,q}Q^{p,q}G^{p+1,q}Q^{p+1,q}`$ $`\stackrel{~}{d}_x`$ $`=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& d^{\prime \prime }\end{array}\right),`$
(3.3.4) $`G^{p,q}Q^{p,q}G^{p,q+1}Q^{p,q+1}`$ $`\stackrel{~}{a}_x`$ $`=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\overline{a}^{}& 0\\ \overline{a}^{\prime \prime }& \widehat{a}\end{array}\right),`$
where, by construction, $`d^{\prime \prime }`$ is exact, and we have $`d^{\prime \prime }\widehat{a}+\widehat{a}d^{\prime \prime }=0`$ and $`d^{\prime \prime }\overline{a}^{\prime \prime }=0`$, as a consequence of $`\stackrel{~}{d}_x\stackrel{~}{a}_x+\stackrel{~}{a}_x\stackrel{~}{d}_x=0`$, (Lemma 3.2.3).

Now, note that $`H_{\stackrel{~}{d}}^p(K_x^{,q})=G^{p,q}`$, by the exactness of $`d^{\prime \prime }`$. Furthermore, the vertical cohomology $`H_{\stackrel{~}{a}}^q(H_{\stackrel{~}{d}}^p(K_x^,))`$ is the cohomology of the complex $`G^{p,}`$ where the differential $`a^{}`$ is induced by $`a_x^{}:_xG^{0,1}=\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x}H_{1,x}`$ as follows

(3.3.5)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Sym}^hH_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^kH_{1,x}\stackrel{\mathrm{id}a_x^{}\mathrm{id}}{}\mathrm{Sym}^hH_{0,x}G^{0,1}\mathrm{\Lambda }^kH_{1,x}\hfill \\ \hfill =\mathrm{Sym}^hH_{0,x}\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x}H_{1,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^kH_{1,x}\\ \hfill \stackrel{\sigma _m\lambda _1}{}\mathrm{Sym}^{h+m}H_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k+1}H_{1,x}.\end{array}$$

Indeed, by (3.3.4), we have $`\stackrel{~}{a}_x(\alpha ^{},\alpha ^{\prime \prime })=(\overline{a}^{}(\alpha ^{}),\overline{a}^{\prime \prime }(\alpha ^{})+\widehat{a}(\alpha ^{\prime \prime }))`$. By the exactness of $`d^{\prime \prime }`$, the passage to cohomology with respect to $`\stackrel{~}{d}_x`$ induces the homomorphism $`\overline{a}^{}`$ of (3.3.5) on the cohomology groups $`H_{\stackrel{~}{d}}^p(K_x^{,q})`$. So,

$$H_{\stackrel{~}{d}}^p(K_x^{,q1})H_{\stackrel{~}{d}}^p(K_x^{,q})H_{\stackrel{~}{d}}^p(K_x^{,q+1}),$$

is the cohomological Koszul complex associated to $`(H_{1,x})^{}\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x}`$:

(3.3.6)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Sym}^{hm}H_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k1}H_{1,x}\mathrm{Sym}^hH_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^kH_{1,x}\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{Sym}^{h+m}H_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{k+1}H_{1,x},\end{array}$$

for $`h=p+mqi`$ and $`k=p+q`$. After tensoring by $`det(H_{1,x})^{}`$, we obtain the homological Koszul differential

(3.3.7)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Sym}^{wm}H_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{v+1}H_{1,x}^{}\mathrm{Sym}^wH_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^vH_{1,x}^{}\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{Sym}^{w+m}H_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{v1}H_{1,x}^{},\end{array}$$

with $`v=\mathrm{rk}(H_{1,x})q+p`$ and $`w=p+mqi`$.

We illustrate that the homomorphism of (3.3.7) can be regarded as the homological Koszul complex associated to the linear system

(3.3.8)
$$S_x:H_{1,x}^{}\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x}=H^0(Y,𝒪_Y(m)),$$

where $`Y`$ is $`H_{0,x}^{}`$. Indeed, denote by $`J_x`$ the image of $`H_{1,x}^{}`$ via $`S_x`$; recall that $`J_x`$ is a base point free linear system because $`a`$ is nondegenerate. Write $`H_{1,x}^{}=N_xJ_x`$, where $`N_x`$ is the kernel of $`S_x`$. The composite homomorphism at (3.3.7) is the sum over $`t\{0,\mathrm{},v+1\}`$ of

(3.3.9)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Sym}^{wm}H_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{vt+1}J_x\mathrm{Sym}^wH_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{vt}J_x\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{Sym}^{w+m}H_{0,x}\mathrm{\Lambda }^{vt1}J_x\end{array}$$

tensored by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^tN_x`$.

In \[Gre88\], Green treats the case of the homological Koszul complexes induced by a base point free linear system. By \[Gre88, Thm. 2\], the sequence (3.3.9) is exact when $`J_x`$ is base point free and the condition

$$w(vt)+m+\mathrm{codim}(J_x)=vt+m+\mathrm{rk}(\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x})\mathrm{rk}(J_x)$$

is satisfied. The middle term of (3.3.9) is nonzero only if $`vt\mathrm{rk}(J_x)0`$. Therefore, (3.3.9) is exact for any $`t`$ if $`wm+\mathrm{rk}(\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x})`$.

Recall that $`K^{p,q}0`$ only if $`qp0`$; therefore, we restrict to the indexes $`(p,q)`$ satisfying $`qp0`$. In this way, we have $`(m1)(qp)0`$. Furthermore, we have $`(m+1)(p+q)(m+1)n_0`$, which follows from $`p+qn_0`$. Summing up, we get $`2p+2mq(m+1)n_0`$ and, by (3.3.2), $`2p+2mq4m+2\mathrm{rk}(\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0)`$, which implies

$$p+mqmm+\mathrm{rk}(\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0).$$

We obtain

$$w=p+mqip+mqmm+\mathrm{rk}(\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0)m+\mathrm{rk}(\mathrm{Sym}^mH_{0,x});$$

therefore, (3.3.9) is exact and $`E_2^{p,q}`$ vanishes.

Finally, since $`H^n((K_i^{})_x)`$ vanishes for every $`xX`$ and for $`nn_0`$, we have, for all $`nn_0`$,

$$\mathrm{ker}(D_n)_x=\mathrm{im}(D_{n1})_x,$$

where $`(D_n)_x`$ is the homomorphism induced by the total differential $`D_n:K^nK^{n+1}`$ on the fibre over $`x`$. In fact, the rank of $`\mathrm{ker}(D_n)_x`$ is equal to the rank of $`\mathrm{im}(D_{n1})_x`$ and is constant, because it is upper and lower semicontinuous. Therefore, the sheaf $`I=\mathrm{im}(K_i^{n1}K_i^n)`$ is locally free. ∎

### 3.4. The $`K`$-class.

By Theorem 3.3.1, the alternate sum of the cohomology sheaves of $`K_i^{}`$ is a well defined class in the $`K`$-theory group $`K_0^{}(X)`$. The fact that $`I=\mathrm{im}(K_i^{n1}K_i^n)`$ is locally free for $`nn_0`$ allows us to define the $`K`$-class

$$\mathrm{cl}(K_i^{})=\underset{n<n_0}{}(1)^n[K_i^n]+(1)^{n_0}[I]K_0(X).$$

which lifts the natural class $`_n(1)^n[H^n(K_i^{})]`$ in $`K_0^{}(X)`$.

###### 3.4.1 Definition.

Let $`F_{}`$ be a complex in degrees $`1`$ and $`0`$ with a closed and nondegenerate form $`a`$. Then, the $`K`$-theory Euler class of $`(F_{},a)`$ is

$$\mathrm{Ke}(F_{},a)=\underset{0im}{}\mathrm{cl}(K_i^{}).$$

###### 3.4.2 Proposition.

Let $`V`$ be a vector bundle of finite rank on $`X`$. Consider the complex $`V0`$ in degrees $`1`$ and $`0`$. A closed and nondegenerate form $`a`$ is necessarily the zero homomorphism $`𝒪0`$. The $`K`$-theory Euler class extends the total lambda class evaluated at $`1`$ in the sense that

(3.4.3)
$$\mathrm{Ke}(V0,a=0)=\lambda _1(V).$$

###### Proof.

By Definition 3.4.1, we have

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Ke}(V0,0)=\underset{0im}{}\mathrm{cl}(K_i^{})=\underset{0im}{}\underset{\begin{array}{c}p,q0\\ p+mq=i\end{array}}{}(1)^{qp}[\mathrm{\Lambda }^{qp}V]\hfill \\ \hfill =\underset{0im}{}\underset{\begin{array}{c}q1\end{array}}{}(1)^{(m+1)qi}[\mathrm{\Lambda }^{(m+1)qi}V]=\underset{\begin{array}{c}q0\end{array}}{}(1)^q[\mathrm{\Lambda }^qV].\end{array}$$

### 3.5. The cohomology class.

We define the cohomological realization of $`\mathrm{Ke}(F_{},a)`$ by analogy with (1.5.1).

###### 3.5.1 Definition.

Let $`E^0E^1`$ be a complex of coherent and locally free sheaves in degrees $`0`$ and $`1`$, and $`b:\mathrm{Sym}^mE^0E^1𝒪_X`$ a homomorphism such that $`b^{}`$ is a closed and nondegenerate form for $`(E^{})^{}`$. Then,

$$c_{\mathrm{top}}(E^{},b)=\mathrm{ch}(\mathrm{Ke}((E^{})^{},b^{}))\frac{\mathrm{td}(E^1)}{\mathrm{td}(E^0)}$$

is the top Chern class of $`(E^{},b)`$ in the rational Chow ring $`A^{}(X)_{}`$.

###### 3.5.2 Remark.

Clearly, by Proposition 3.4.2 and (1.5.1), we have

$$c_{\mathrm{top}}(0V,b=0)=c_{\mathrm{top}}(V).$$

### 3.6. Dependence on $`F_{}`$ and $`a`$.

We investigate how $`\mathrm{Ke}`$ depends on the complex $`F_{}`$ and on the form $`a`$.

###### 3.6.1 Theorem.

The class $`\mathrm{Ke}(F_{},a)`$ depends on $`F_{}`$ up to quasiisomorphism and on the form $`a`$ up to homotopy.

###### Proof.

We prove the claim in two lemmata.

###### 3.6.2 Lemma.

Let $`a`$ and $`a^{}`$ be two closed and nondegenerate forms $`𝒪_X\mathrm{Sym}^mF_0F_1`$ defining homotopic homomorphisms of complexes:

Then, for any $`i=0,\mathrm{},m`$, the total complex $`(K_i^{},D=\stackrel{~}{d}+\stackrel{~}{a})`$ and the total complex $`(K_i^{},D^{}=\stackrel{~}{d}+\stackrel{~}{a}^{})`$ are isomorphic. In particular, in $`K`$-theory, we have the identity $`\mathrm{Ke}(F_{},a)=\mathrm{Ke}(F_{},a^{})`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`h`$ be the homotopy $`𝒪_X\mathrm{Sym}^{m1}F_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^2F_1`$ making the diagram

commutative:

(3.6.3)
$$dh=aa^{}.$$

In fact, $`h`$ allows us to define a map $`\stackrel{~}{h}:K_i^{p,q}K_i^{p1,q+1}`$ as the natural composite homomorphism

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Sym}^{p+mqi}F_0𝒪_X\mathrm{\Lambda }^{qp}F_1\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{Sym}^{p+mqi}F_0\mathrm{Sym}^{m1}F_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^2F_1\mathrm{\Lambda }^{qp}F_1\\ \hfill \mathrm{Sym}^{p1+m(q+1)i}F_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{qp+2}F_1.\end{array}$$

More explicitly, if we write $`h`$ locally as $`_lH_l\sigma _l^+\sigma _l^{}`$, the homomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ sends $`_{1ih}c_i_{1jk}b_j`$ to

(3.6.4)
$$\underset{l}{}\underset{1ih}{}c_iH_l\sigma _l^+\sigma _l^{}\underset{1jk}{}b_j.$$

Now, by means of $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ we define an isomorphism between the two double complexes. First, we need to show two relations: (3.6.5) and (3.6.7).

By (3.6.3), we have immediately

(3.6.5)
$$\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{a}^{}=\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{d}.$$

Furthermore, we have

(3.6.6)
$$\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}=\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{d}+2\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}$$

as a straightforward consequence of $`\stackrel{~}{d}(\stackrel{~}{h}(h))=2\stackrel{~}{h}(\stackrel{~}{d}(h))`$, which we can verify by means of the local presentation of $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ given above. Indeed, apply $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ to

$$\stackrel{~}{d}(h)=\underset{l}{}H_ld(\sigma _l^+)\sigma _l^{}\underset{l}{}H_l\sigma _l^{}d(\sigma _l^+)$$

and compare with the image via $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ of

$$\stackrel{~}{h}(h)=2\underset{l,q}{}H_lH_q\sigma _l^+\sigma _l^{}\sigma _q^+\sigma _q^{}.$$

Using (3.6.6), we prove by induction the following equation for $`n0`$

(3.6.7)
$$n(\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^{n+1})=\stackrel{~}{h}^{n+1}\stackrel{~}{d}+(n+1)(\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^n),$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{h}^n`$ is the composition of $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ iterated $`n`$ times. First, applying the equation for $`n1`$, we see that the right hand side equals

$$\begin{array}{c}(\stackrel{~}{h}^{n+1}\stackrel{~}{d}+\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^n)+n(\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^{n1})\stackrel{~}{h}\hfill \\ \hfill =(\stackrel{~}{h}^{n+1}\stackrel{~}{d}+\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^n)+(\stackrel{~}{h}^n\stackrel{~}{d}+(n1)(\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^n))\stackrel{~}{h}.\end{array}$$

By (3.6.6), for all integers $`0in+1`$, we have $`\stackrel{~}{h}^i\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^{n+1i}+\stackrel{~}{h}^{i+1}\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^{ni}=\stackrel{~}{h}^{i+1}\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^{ni}+\stackrel{~}{h}^{i+2}\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}^{ni1}`$, which implies (3.6.7) by iterated application.

Now we introduce a homomorphism of total complexes:

$$e^{\stackrel{~}{h}}:=\underset{j0}{}(\stackrel{~}{h})^j/j!.$$

Since $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ respects the total grading, it is an endomorphism of $`K_i^n`$. It is well defined (in characteristic 0) because the summands above vanish as soon as $`j>(\mathrm{rk}F_1)/2`$ (this immediately follows from (3.6.4)). For all $`n`$, $`e^{\stackrel{~}{h}}`$ is in fact an automorphism of $`K_i^n`$, because $`e^{\stackrel{~}{h}}`$ is also well defined and is the inverse of $`e^{\stackrel{~}{h}}`$. Finally, putting together (3.6.5) and (3.6.7), we prove

$$e^{\stackrel{~}{h}}D=D^{}e^{\stackrel{~}{h}}.$$

Indeed, by (3.6.5), we have $`D^{}=\stackrel{~}{d}+\stackrel{~}{a}+\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{d}`$, and it is enough to show

$$e^{\stackrel{~}{h}}\stackrel{~}{d}=\stackrel{~}{d}e^{\stackrel{~}{h}}+\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{h}e^{\stackrel{~}{h}}+\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{d}e^{\stackrel{~}{h}},$$

because $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ clearly commute. Indeed, in the equation above, the terms of degree $`n`$ in $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ yield precisely the equation (3.6.7). ∎

###### 3.6.8 Lemma.

Let $`(F_{},a)`$ and $`(\mathrm{\Phi }_{},\alpha )`$ be two pairs formed by a complex and a closed and nondegenerate form. Let $`f:\mathrm{\Phi }_{}F_{}`$ be a quasiisomorphism with

(3.6.9)
$$a=\alpha \mathrm{\Lambda }^{m+1}(f).$$

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^,`$ and $`K_i^,`$ be the double complexes associated to $`(\mathrm{\Phi }_{},\alpha )`$ and $`(F_{},a)`$. Then, the total complexes $`K_i^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}`$ are quasiisomorphic. In particular, we have $`\mathrm{Ke}(F_{},a)=\mathrm{Ke}(\mathrm{\Phi }_{},\alpha ).`$

###### Proof.

We denote by $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ the differentials of $`K_i^{}`$ as in Section 3.3. We denote by $`\stackrel{~}{\delta }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ the analog differentials of bidegrees $`(1,0)`$ and $`(0,1)`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^,`$. Define $`\stackrel{~}{f}:\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^,K_i^,`$ by the equation

$$\stackrel{~}{f}=\mathrm{\Lambda }^{mq+qi}(f):\mathrm{Sym}^{p+mqi}\mathrm{\Phi }_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{p+q}\mathrm{\Phi }_1\mathrm{Sym}^{p+mqi}F_0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{p+q}F_1.$$

Note that $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ satisfies $`\stackrel{~}{f}\stackrel{~}{\delta }=\stackrel{~}{d}\stackrel{~}{f}`$ and, by (3.6.9), $`\stackrel{~}{f}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{f}`$; therefore, $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is a homomorphism of double complexes which respects the filtrations $`_{qt}K_i^{p,q}`$ and $`_{qt}\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{p,q}`$.

Note that $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ is a morphism of filtered differential graded modules and induces homomorphisms of bigraded modules $`\varphi _l:E_l^{p,q}(K^,)E_l^{p,q}(\mathrm{\Gamma }^,)`$ for $`l0`$. Note that $`\varphi _1`$ is an isomorphism, because $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^N(f):\mathrm{\Lambda }^N(\mathrm{\Phi }_{})\mathrm{\Lambda }^N(F_{})`$ is a quasiisomorphism. Then, by \[McC01, §3.1, Thm. 3.2\], $`\varphi _l`$ is an isomorphism for every $`l1`$. ∎

The theorem follows from Lemma 3.6.2 and Lemma 3.6.8. ∎

### 3.7. Passage to the derived category.

In the next section we consider a complex $`E^{}`$ in degrees $`0`$ and $`1`$ of coherent locally free sheaves on $`X`$ and a morphism in the derived category $`𝐃^b(X)`$

$$\tau :\mathrm{Sym}^{m+1}(E^{})𝒪_X[1]$$

inducing a base point free linear system $`S_x:H^1(E_x^{})\mathrm{Sym}^mH^0(E_x^{})^{}`$ for any $`xX`$. When $`X`$ is quasiprojective, Definition 3.4.1 and Definition 3.5.1 descend to the derived category in the same way as in \[PV01\].

Indeed, by \[PV01, Prop. 4.7\], for $`h`$ and $`k`$ sufficiently large, there exists a complex $`C^{}=(C^0𝒪_X(h)^k)`$ of coherent locally free sheaves on $`X`$, quasiisomorphic to $`E^{}`$, and satisfying

(3.7.1)
$$\mathrm{Hom}_{𝐊^b(X)}(\mathrm{Sym}^{m+1}(C^{}),𝒪_X[1])\mathrm{Hom}_{𝐃^b(X)}(\mathrm{Sym}^{m+1}(C^{}),𝒪_X[1]),$$

where $`𝐊^b(X)`$ is the homotopic category of bounded complexes of coherent sheaves on $`X`$. Therefore, the morphism $`\tau `$ in the derived category is lifted up to homotopy by the homomorphism of complexes $`\gamma _{}:\mathrm{Sym}^{m+1}(C^{})𝒪_X[1]`$.

Let $`c`$ be the homomorphism $`\gamma _1:\mathrm{Sym}^mC^0C^1𝒪_X`$. Note that $`c^{}`$ is a closed and nondegenerate form for $`(C^{})^{}`$; therefore, we define

(3.7.2) $`\mathrm{Ke}((E^{})^{},\tau ^{})=\mathrm{Ke}((C^{})^{},c^{}).`$
Furthermore, Definition 3.5.1 applies to $`C^{}`$ and $`c`$. We define

(3.7.3)
$$c_{\mathrm{top}}(E^{},\tau )=c_{\mathrm{top}}(C^{},c).$$

The definitions above do not depend on the choice of $`C^{}`$ and $`c`$. Indeed, by \[PV01, Lem. 4.8\], for any quasiisomorphisms $`C^{}E^{}`$ and $`D^{}E^{}`$ of complexes in degrees $`0`$ and $`1`$ and for any homomorphisms lifting $`\tau `$

$`c:`$ $`\mathrm{Sym}^mC^0C^1𝒪_X,`$ $`d:`$ $`\mathrm{Sym}^mD^0D^1𝒪_X,`$
there exists a complex $`\overline{E}^{}=(\overline{E}^0𝒪_X(h)^k)`$, and two quasiisomorphisms $`f:\overline{E}^{}C^{}`$, $`g:\overline{E}^{}D^{}`$. By \[PV01, Prop. 4.7\], for a sufficiently large $`h`$, we can choose $`\overline{E}^{}`$ in such a way that the isomorphism (3.7.1) holds. The homomorphisms $`\overline{c}=c\mathrm{Sym}^{m+1}(f)`$ and $`\overline{d}=d\mathrm{Sym}^{m+1}(g)`$ lift $`\tau `$. Therefore, by (3.7.1), they are homotopic. Then, by Lemma 3.6.8, we have $`\mathrm{Ke}((C^{})^{},c^{})=\mathrm{Ke}((\overline{E}^{})^{},\overline{c}^{})`$ and $`\mathrm{Ke}((D^{})^{},d^{})=\mathrm{Ke}((\overline{E}^{})^{},\overline{d}^{})`$, whereas, by Lemma 3.6.2, we have $`\mathrm{Ke}((\overline{E}^{})^{},\overline{c}^{})=\mathrm{Ke}((\overline{E}^{})^{},\overline{d}^{})`$.

###### 3.7.4 Remark.

The $`K`$-class $`\mathrm{Ke}(F^{},a)`$ of Definition 3.4.1 only depends on $`F_{}`$ and on the homomorphism $`\tau `$ induced by $`a`$ in the derived category. The $`K`$-class can only be defined when there exists a suitable homomorphism $`\tau `$. It would be interesting to determine more accurately how it depends on it.

## 4. The Witten top Chern class

We choose nonnegative integers $`r`$, $`g`$, $`n`$, and $`(k_1,\mathrm{},k_n)=𝒌`$ satisfying the conditions $`r2`$, $`2g2+n>0`$, and $`2g2k_ir`$. Let $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ be the moduli stack of stable $`r`$-spin curves. By \[Jar00\], an object of $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ is a set of data including:

1. a stable curve

where $`\pi `$ is proper, the sections $`s_i`$ have disjoint images in the smooth locus of $`\pi `$, and $`X`$ is a quasiprojective scheme,
2. a torsion free sheaf of rank one $`L`$ on $`C`$,
3. an injective homomorphism

$$f:L^r\omega _{C/X}\left(_ik_i[s_i(X)]\right).$$

The data $`(\pi :CX;L;f)`$ determine $`\tau :\mathrm{Sym}^r(R\pi _{}L)𝒪_X[1]`$ in the derived category $`𝐃^b(X)`$. Indeed, by \[PV01, Sect. 5\], the homomorphism $`\mathrm{Sym}^r(R\pi _{}L)𝒪_X[1]`$ is the composite of the trace homomorphism from Grothendieck duality $`R\pi _{}\omega _{C/X}𝒪_X[1]`$ and the homomorphism $`\mathrm{Sym}^r(E^{})R\pi _{}\omega _{C/X}`$ induced by

(4.0.1)
$$\gamma :L^r\stackrel{𝑓}{}\omega _{C/X}\left(_ik_i[s_i(X)]\right)\omega _{C/X}.$$

It is straightforward that the class $`R\pi _{}L`$ can be represented by a complex $`E^{}`$ in degrees $`0`$ and $`1`$. On the other hand, for every $`xX`$, the homomorphism $`\tau `$ induces

(4.0.2)
$$\mathrm{Sym}^{r1}H^0(E_x^{})H^1(E_x^{}),$$

where $`H^i(E_x^{})`$ is isomorphic to $`H^i(C_x,L_x)`$. The homomorphism (4.0.2) coincides with the composite homomorphism

(4.0.3)
$$\begin{array}{c}\tau _x:\mathrm{Sym}^{r1}H^0(E_x^{})H^0(C_x,L_x^{r1})H^0(C_x,\omega _{C_x}L_{x}^{}{}_{}{}^{})\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{}{}(H^1(E_x^{}))^{}.\end{array}$$

Note that an element $`vH^0(E_x^{})`$ is zero if for every $`wH^1(E_x^{})`$ we have $`\tau _x(v^{r1}),w=0`$ (the injectivity of the middle homomorphism in (4.0.3) is crucial and is guaranteed by $`k_i0`$). This means that $`\tau `$ induces a base point free linear system; therefore, choosing $`m=r1`$, we get a well defined $`K`$-class $`\mathrm{Ke}((E^{})^{},\tau ^{})K_0(X)`$.

For any object of $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)(X)`$, we define the classes $`\mathrm{Ke}((E^{})^{},\tau ^{})`$ and $`c_{\mathrm{top}}(E^{},\tau )`$ in $`K_0(X)`$ and $`A^{}(X)_{}`$. The constructions are compatible with morphism in the category $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ and naturally induce a $`K`$-theory class in $`K_0(\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌))`$ and a Chow cohomology class in $`A^{}(\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌))_{}`$.

###### 4.0.4 Definition.

We define the *Witten top Chern class in $`K`$-theory* as

$$K_W=\mathrm{Ke}((E^{})^{},\tau ^{})$$

and the *Witten top Chern class* as

(4.0.5)
$$c_W=c_{\mathrm{top}}(E^{},\tau ).$$

###### 4.0.6 Remark (Witten top Chern class using other compactifications).

In this paper we work with Jarvis’s compactification \[Jar00\]. In fact, one can give a different compactification of the stack of smooth $`r`$-spin curves $`𝒮_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ by means of (balanced) twisted curves in the sense of Abramovich and Vistoli. In this way, for instance, Abramovich and Jarvis rephrase the original construction of Jarvis, \[AJ03\]. A different approach exploits Olsson’s description of the category of twisted curves \[Ols\]: in \[Chi\], we consider the stack $`\stackrel{~}{𝒮}_g(r)`$ of $`r`$-spin structures over twisted curves, which is étale over Olsson’s stack of twisted curves $`\stackrel{~}{}_g`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒮}_g(r)\stackrel{~}{}_g$$

(in sketching the procedure, we are omitting the markings for simplicity). We proceed by classifying all the compactifications of $`_g`$ contained in $`\stackrel{~}{}_g`$. Then, base change leads to new compactifications.

Although the new compactifications are not isomorphic to the preexisting ones, the rational Chow rings are isomorphic and the construction can be applied without modifications and yields the same class in rational cohomology. This happens because, the pushforward homomorphism $`R(\pi _𝒞)_{}`$ of the $`r`$-spin structure $``$ on the twisted curve $`\pi _𝒞:𝒞X`$ in the derived category factors through the derived category of the coarse space $`C`$. Now, for stacks of Deligne–Mumford type, the pushforward homomorphism via $`𝒞C`$ is exact on coherent sheaves \[AV02, Lem. 2.3.4\]. Finally, this procedure yields the class $`c_W`$, because it carries $`r`$-spin structures on twisted curves to Jarvis’s $`r`$-spin structures on stable curves defined using relatively torsion-free sheaves (see \[AJ03, §3, §4.3\]).

## 5. Compatibility with the Polishchuk–Vaintrob class

### 5.1. Notation.

The key ingredient of the construction is a $`2`$-periodic complex.

###### 5.1.1 Definition.

A $`2`$-periodic complex of sheaves on a scheme $`Y`$ is a $`/2`$-graded sheaf $`W=W^+W^{}`$ on $`Y`$ equipped with $`d^+:W^+W^{}`$ and $`d^{}:W^{}W^+`$ with $`d^{}d^+=d^+d^{}=0`$. We say that $`W`$ is a complex of coherent (respectively quasicoherent) sheaves if $`W^+`$ and $`W^{}`$ are coherent (respectively quasicoherent). We say that $`W`$ is exact if

$$\mathrm{}\stackrel{d^{}}{}W^+\stackrel{d^+}{}W^{}\stackrel{d^{}}{}W^+\stackrel{d^+}{}W^{}\stackrel{d^{}}{}\mathrm{}$$

is exact.

We denote by $`𝔼=\mathrm{Spec}(\mathrm{Sym}^{}E^{})`$ the total space of a coherent locally free sheaf $`E`$ on a scheme $`X`$.

### 5.2. The construction of Polishchuk and Vaintrob.

We recall the construction from \[PV01\]. We choose an integer $`m1`$. Consider a complex $`E^{}`$ in degrees $`0`$ and $`1`$ of coherent locally free sheaves on $`X`$ and a homomorphism $`b:\mathrm{Sym}^mE^0E^1𝒪_X`$ such that $`b^{}`$ is a closed and nondegenerate form for $`(E^{})^{}`$.

Let $`𝔼^0`$ be the total space of $`E^0`$, $`p`$ the projection $`𝔼^0X`$, and $`i:X𝔼^0`$ the zero section. The pullback of $`E^0E^1`$ via $`p`$ corresponds to a section $`\delta :𝒪_{𝔼^0}p^{}E^1`$. Compose the natural homomorphism $`E^0\mathrm{Sym}^mE^0`$ with the homomorphism $`\mathrm{Sym}^mE^0(E^1)^{}`$ induced by $`b`$. The pullback via $`p`$ corresponds to a section $`\alpha :𝒪_{𝔼^0}p^{}(E^1)^{}`$.

Denote by $`S^h`$ the sheaf $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^hp^{}(E^1)^{}`$ on $`𝔼^0`$; then, $`\delta `$ and $`\alpha `$ allow us to define homomorphisms $`\stackrel{~}{\delta }:S^{h+1}S^h`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }:S^hS^{h+1}`$. The constructions of $`\stackrel{~}{\delta }`$ and of $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ are analogous to the ones of $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$. For example, to define $`\stackrel{~}{\delta }`$, we take the natural map $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{h+1}p^{}(E^1)^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^hp^{}(E^1)^{}p^{}(E^1)^{}`$, the obvious pairing $`p^{}(E^1)^{}p^{}(E^1)𝒪_{𝔼^0}`$, and the composite homomorphism

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\delta }:\mathrm{\Lambda }^{h+1}p^{}(E^1)^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^hp^{}(E^1)^{}p^{}(E^1)^{}𝒪_{𝔼^0}\hfill \\ \hfill \stackrel{\mathrm{id}\mathrm{id}\delta }{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^hp^{}(E^1)^{}p^{}(E^1)^{}p^{}E^1\mathrm{\Lambda }^hp^{}(E^1)^{}.\end{array}$$

Define $`d^+:S^+S^{}`$ and $`d^{}:S^{}S^+`$ by summing for $`h`$ even and $`h`$ odd the homomorphisms $`\stackrel{~}{\delta }:S^hS^{h1}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }:S^hS^{h+1}`$. It is shown in \[PV01\] that the homomorphisms $`d^+d^{}`$ and $`d^{}d^+`$ vanish. We denote by $`S=S^+S^{}`$ the $`2`$-periodic complex of coherent locally free sheaves on $`𝔼^0`$ with differential $`d=d^+d^{}`$. (In fact $`S`$ is the spinor bundle associated to the orthogonal bundle $`p^{}E^1p^{}(E^1)^{}`$ and the differential is naturally induced by the isotropic section $`\delta \alpha `$.)

The complex

(5.2.1)
$$\mathrm{}\stackrel{d^{}}{}S^+\stackrel{d^+}{}S^{}\stackrel{d^{}}{}S^+\stackrel{d^+}{}S^{}\stackrel{d^{}}{}S^+\stackrel{d^+}{}\mathrm{}$$

is exact on $`𝔼^0i(X)`$, \[PV01, §3.1\] (exactness is a consequence of a nondegeneracy condition \[PV01, §4.1, (4.2)\] on $`a`$, which is equivalent to Definition 3.1.5). In \[BFM75\], a localized Chern character $`\mathrm{ch}_X^Y`$ is defined in the rational bivariant Chow group $`A(XY)_{}`$ for a finite complex of coherent locally free sheaves on a scheme $`Y`$ exact outside a closed subscheme $`X`$. In \[PV01\], Section 2.2, this construction is adapted to $`2`$-periodic complexes and applied to $`S`$ to produce a character $`\mathrm{ch}_X^{𝔼^0}(S)A(X𝔼^0)_{}`$, which allows us to define

(5.2.2)
$$c_{PV}(E^{},b)=\mathrm{td}(E^1)\mathrm{ch}_X^{𝔼^0}(S)[p]A^{}(X)_{}.$$

By the same argument as in Section 3.7, this definition only depends on $`E^{}`$ and on the homomorphism in the derived category $`\mathrm{Sym}^{m+1}(E^{})𝒪_X[1]`$ induced by $`b`$. Therefore, for any object $`(\pi :CX;L;f)`$ of the stack $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$, we choose $`m=r1`$, and we apply $`c_{PV}`$ to a complex $`E^{}`$ representing $`R\pi _{}L`$ and a homomorphism $`b`$ representing $`\tau :\mathrm{Sym}^r(R\pi _{}L)𝒪_X[1]`$. We obtain the Polishchuk–Vaintrob class

(5.2.3)
$$c_{PV}A^{}(\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌))_{}.$$

We want to show $`c_{PV}=c_W`$ in $`A^{}(\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌))_{}`$. This amounts to showing $`c_{PV}(E^{},b)=c_{\mathrm{top}}(E^{},b)`$. First, we show that Polishchuk and Vaintrob’s localized Chern character descends to a homomorphism from a $`K`$-theory group to the rational bivariant Chow group.

### 5.3. Preliminaries on $`2`$-periodic complexes.

We need to introduce some notation.

###### 5.3.1 Definition.

Let $`Y`$ be a scheme and $`X`$ a closed subscheme. Write $`𝔄`$ and $`𝔉`$ for the categories of coherent sheaves and coherent locally free sheaves on $`Y`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄`$ and $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉`$ the category of $`2`$-periodic complexes $`W=W^+W^{}`$ of coherent sheaves and coherent locally free sheaves on $`Y`$. Write $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔄`$ and $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉`$ for the full subcategories of objects which are exact on $`YX`$.

We consider the Grothendieck groups $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄)_Y`$, $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉)_Y`$,$`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔄)_Y`$, and $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉)_Y`$ generated by the objects above modulo the following relations:

1. $`[W_1]=[W_2]`$ if there exists a quasiisomorphism $`W_1W_2`$;
2. $`[W]=[W_1]+[W_2]`$ if there is a sequence $`0W_1WW_20`$ which is exact in all degrees of $`/2`$.

###### 5.3.2 Remark.

Let $`Y`$ be a smooth scheme and $`X`$ a closed subscheme; then, Polishchuk and Vaintrob’s localized Chern character descends to an homomorphism on

(5.3.3)
$$\mathrm{ch}_X^Y:K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉)_YA(XY)_{}.$$

In order to define the homomorphism, we need to prove that $`\mathrm{ch}_X^Y`$ is defined on the objects of $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉`$, and is compatible with $`(i)`$ quasiisomorphisms and $`(ii)`$ exact sequences.

In \[PV01, §2.2\], a technical condition is required for the existence of $`\mathrm{ch}_X^Y(W)`$: on $`YX`$, the sheaves $`\mathrm{im}d^+`$ and $`\mathrm{im}d^{}`$ have to be subbundles of $`W^{}`$ and $`W^+`$. This condition is satisfied, because $`Y`$ is smooth. Indeed, for any object $`W`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉`$, we can write resolutions on $`YX`$ of $`\mathrm{im}d^+`$ (and of $`\mathrm{im}d^{}`$) of arbitrary length:

$$0\mathrm{im}d^+W_{YX}^{}W_{YX}^+\mathrm{}W_{YX}^+\mathrm{im}d^+0.$$

Take a sequence as above of length $`l>dim(Y)+2`$. By \[BS58, §4, Lem. 9\], for $`Y`$ smooth and $`W^+,W^{}𝔉`$ we have $`\mathrm{im}d^+𝔉`$.

Finally $`\mathrm{ch}_X^Y`$ is compatible with the relations of $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉)_Y`$ because we have the identity $`\mathrm{ch}_X^Y(W)=\mathrm{ch}_X^Y(W_1)+\mathrm{ch}_X^Y(W_2)`$ for any exact sequence $`0W_1WW_20`$ by \[PV01, Prop. 2.3,(iv)\]. Note that this is sufficient by the same argument of \[Ful84, Exa. 18.1.4\]: for any quasiisomorphism $`f:W_1W_2`$, we have the exact sequence $`0W_1\mathrm{Cone}(f)W_20`$, with $`\mathrm{ch}_X^Y(\mathrm{Cone}(f))=0`$ by the exactness of $`\mathrm{Cone}(f)`$ on $`Y`$.

The following lemma was pointed out to me by Charles Walter.

###### 5.3.4 Lemma.

We have an isomorphism $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄)_YK_0^{}(Y)`$ defined by $`[W][H^+(W)][H^{}(W)]`$. Furthermore, for $`Y`$ smooth and quasiprojective, we also have $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄)_YK_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉)_Y`$.

###### Proof.

The homomorphism $`K_0^{}(Y)K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄)_Y`$ is induced by the functor sending a sheaf $`F`$ to the $`2`$-periodic complex $`F0=(\mathrm{}F0F0\mathrm{})`$. Composing $`[W][H^+(W)][H^{}(W)]`$ after $`[F][F0]`$ we get the identity in $`K_0(𝔄)=K_0^{}(Y)`$. Conversely, reversing the order of the composition, we obtain the homomorphism $`[W][H^+(W)0][H^{}(W)0]`$. This functor descends to the identity in $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄)_Y`$, because the sequence in $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄`$

$$0\mathrm{ker}d^+\mathrm{ker}d^{}W\mathrm{im}d^+\mathrm{im}d^{}0,$$

is exact ($`\mathrm{ker}d^+\mathrm{ker}d^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{im}d^+\mathrm{im}d^{}`$ are $`/2`$-graded sheaves equipped with the zero differential).

If $`X`$ is smooth, the $`K`$-theory groups $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄)_Y`$ and $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉)_Y`$ are isomorphic, because the localization of $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄`$ and $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉`$ induces equivalent triangulated categories. This follows from the natural inclusion of $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉`$ into $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄`$ and the fact that for any object $`W\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄`$ there exists an exact sequence $`0L_nL_{n1}\mathrm{}L_0W0`$, where each $`L_i`$ is an object of $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉`$. This is a consequence of the following properties.

1. If $`0FL_pL_{p1}\mathrm{}L_0W0`$ is exact with $`F,W`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄`$ and $`L_i`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉`$; then, for $`pdim(X)1`$, $`F`$ belongs to $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉`$.
2. Any $`W`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄`$ is a quotient of an object $`L`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉`$.

Note that (1) follows immediately from \[BS58, Lem. 9\] and (2) can be shown using the natural functor

(5.3.5)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{Hom}_𝔄(P,W^+)\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄}((PP,\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \mathrm{id}\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right)),(W^+W^{},\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& d^{}\\ d^+& 0\end{array}\right))),\end{array}$$

given by $`\varphi \varphi (d_+\varphi )`$ and the functor $`\varphi (d_{}\varphi )\varphi `$ defined on $`\mathrm{Hom}_𝔄(P,W^{})`$. To see this, take an object $`W^+W^{}`$ in $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔄`$, and, using \[BS58, Lem. 10\], take two surjections $`(P^+W^+)\mathrm{Hom}_𝔄(P,W^+)`$ and $`(P^{}W^{})\mathrm{Hom}_𝔄(P,W^{})`$. Then, applying the functors above, we obtain two morphisms to $`W^+W^{}`$. By construction, the sum is surjective. ∎

For the rest of the section we consider a coherent locally free sheaf $`V`$ on a smooth scheme $`X`$, and we write $`𝕍`$ for the total space of $`V`$, $`p:𝕍X`$ for the projection, and $`i:X𝕍`$ for the zero section.

Note that, for any coherent $`2`$-periodic complex $`W`$ on $`𝕍`$ exact outside $`i(X)`$, the sheaves $`p_{}H^+(W)`$ and $`p_{}H^{}(W)`$ are coherent, because $`H^+(W)`$ and $`H^{}(W)`$ are supported on $`i(X)`$. The pushforward $`p_{}`$ induces an exact functor from $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔄`$ to the category of $`2`$-periodic complexes of coherent sheaves on $`X`$. Therefore, we can define a homomorphism

(5.3.6)
$$\phi :K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉)_𝕍K_0^{}(X)$$

mapping as $`[W][p_{}H^+(W)][p_{}H^{}(W)]`$.

###### 5.3.7 Lemma.

For any vector bundle $`𝕍`$ on a smooth scheme $`X`$, the homomorphism $`\phi `$ is a bijection.

###### Proof.

Note that $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉)_𝕍`$ is the kernel of the homomorphism

$$K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉)_𝕍K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉)_{𝕍i(X)}.$$

On the other hand the kernel of the homomorphism $`K_0^{}(𝕍)K_0^{}(𝕍i(X))`$ is identified (via $`p_{}`$) with $`K_0^{}(X)`$. Finally, note that $`\phi `$ is the restriction to $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉)_𝕍`$ of the isomorphism $`K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}𝔉)_𝕍K_0^{}(𝕍)`$ from Lemma 5.3.4. ∎

###### 5.3.8 Lemma.

Let $`V`$ be a coherent locally free sheaf on $`X`$. The diagram

is commutative.

###### Proof.

The Koszul complex induced by the tautological section $`𝕍p^{}V`$

$$0\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\mathrm{rk}(V)}(p^{}V)^{}\stackrel{d_{\mathrm{rk}(V)}}{}\mathrm{}\stackrel{d_3}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(p^{}V)^{}\stackrel{d_2}{}(p^{}V)^{}\stackrel{d_1}{}𝒪_𝕍0,$$

is exact off $`i(X)`$; this happens in general for a vector bundle with a nowhere vanishing section, see \[Ful84, B.3.4 and A.5\]. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(p^{}V)^{}`$ the $`2`$-periodic complex given by summing the exterior powers $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^i(p^{}V)^{}`$ and the homomorphisms $`d_i`$ for $`i`$ even and $`i`$ odd. For any coherent locally free sheaf $`A`$ on $`X`$, the $`2`$-periodic complex $`p^{}A\mathrm{\Lambda }(p^{}V)`$ is exact off $`X`$. We define $`\kappa :K_0(X)K_0(\mathrm{𝐂𝐡}_{/2}^X𝔉)_𝕍`$ as the homomorphism $`[A][p^{}A\mathrm{\Lambda }(p^{}V)^{}]`$. Note that $`\kappa `$ commutes with $`\phi `$ and $`K_0^{}(X)K_0(X)`$. Indeed, consider the complexes $`A\mathrm{Sym}^N(V\stackrel{id}{}V)`$, and denote by

$$T_N=(\mathrm{}T_N^+T_N^{}T_N^+T_N^{}\mathrm{})$$

the $`2`$-periodic complex given by summing over even and odd degrees. Then, note that, by the projection formula, we can decompose the complex $`p_{}(p^{}A\mathrm{\Lambda }(p^{}V)^{})`$ into the sum of the complexes $`T_N`$. The complex $`T_N`$ is exact if $`N>0`$, so we have

$$\phi (p^{}A\mathrm{\Lambda }p^{}V^{})=[H^+(p_{}(p^{}A\mathrm{\Lambda }p^{}V^{})][H^{}(p_{}(p^{}A\mathrm{\Lambda }p^{}V^{})]=[A].$$

Therefore $`\kappa `$ is an isomorphism.

By \[PV01, Prop. 2.3, (iv)\], we have

$$\mathrm{ch}_X^𝕍(p^{}A\mathrm{\Lambda }(p^{}V)^{})[p]\mathrm{td}(V)=\mathrm{ch}(A)$$

(indeed, the formula above can be rewritten in terms of the standard localized Chern character from \[Ful84\] and follows from \[BFM75, Prop. 3.4, Ch. 1\]). The diagram commutes, because we have

$$\mathrm{ch}_X^𝕍(\kappa [A])[p]\mathrm{td}(V)=\mathrm{ch}_X^𝕍(p^{}A\mathrm{\Lambda }(p^{}V)^{})[p]\mathrm{td}(V)=\mathrm{ch}(A).$$

### 5.4. The identity.

We show the identity between $`c_{PV}`$ and $`c_W`$. For any object $`(\pi :CX;L;f)`$ of the stack $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$, we have a complex $`E^{}`$ and a homomorphism $`b:\mathrm{Sym}^mE^0E^1𝒪_X`$, whose dual is closed and nondegenerate for $`(E^{})^{}`$. We recall that $`c_{PV}(F_{},a)=\mathrm{td}(E^1)\mathrm{ch}_X^{𝔼^0}(S)[p]`$, where $`S`$ is the $`2`$-periodic complex at (5.2.1).

###### 5.4.1 Theorem.

We have

(5.4.2) $`\phi [S]=\mathrm{Ke}((E^{})^{},b^{})`$ in $`K_0^{}(X)`$ and
(5.4.3) $`c_{PV}(E^{},b)=c_{\mathrm{top}}(E^{},b)`$ $`\text{in }A^{}(X)_{}.`$
Therefore $`c_{PV}=c_W`$ in $`A(\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝐤))_{}`$.

###### Proof.

Define $`L^+L^{}`$ and $`L^{}L^+`$ by summing, for $`k`$ even and $`k`$ odd, all the homomorphisms $`\stackrel{~}{d}:L^{h,k}L^{h+1,k1}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{a}:L^{h,k}L^{h+m,k+1}`$. Now, $`L=L^+L^{}`$ is a $`2`$-periodic complex of quasicoherent sheaves by Lemma 3.2.3. It is easy to see that the $`2`$-periodic complex $`p_{}S`$ is equal to $`L`$ (with $`p_{}\stackrel{~}{\delta }=\stackrel{~}{d}`$ and $`p_{}\stackrel{~}{\phi }=\stackrel{~}{a}`$). The functor $`p_{}`$ is exact on complexes which are exact off $`i(X)`$; therefore, since the complex $`S`$ in (5.2.1) is exact off $`i(X)`$ by \[PV01, S3.1\], we have $`p_{}\left(H^+(S)\right)=H^+(p_{}S)=H^+(L)`$ and $`p_{}\left(H^{}(S)\right)=H^+(p_{}S)=H^{}(L)`$. This implies (5.4.2). Finally, Lemma 5.3.8 implies (5.4.3):

$$\begin{array}{c}c_{PV}(E^{},b)=\mathrm{td}(E^1)\mathrm{ch}_X^{𝔼^0}(S)[p]=\mathrm{td}(E^1)\mathrm{td}(E^0)^1\mathrm{ch}(\phi [S])\hfill \\ \hfill =\frac{\mathrm{td}(E^1)}{\mathrm{td}(E^0)}\mathrm{ch}(\mathrm{Ke}((E^{})^{},b^{}))=c_{\mathrm{top}}(E^{},b).\end{array}$$

###### 5.4.4 Remark.

The identity of Theorem 5.4.1 guarantees that the class is concentrated in degree $`\chi (C,L)=n_1n_0`$. Furthermore, the axioms of cohomological field theory stated by Jarvis, Kimura, and Vaintrob in \[JKV01\] are proven by Polishchuk and Vaintrob in \[PV01\] and \[Pol04\]. The proofs are given on the level of $`K`$-theory of complexes on a vector bundle that are strictly exact off the zero section. Note that the equivalence of triangulated categories shown in Lemma 5.3.4 implies that working in the $`K`$-theory of the base scheme $`X`$ is equivalent to working in the $`K`$-theory of complexes on a vector bundle $`𝕍X`$ that are strictly exact off the zero section. This indicates that the arguments used by Polishchuk and Vaintrob can be restated in $`K_0(X)`$, without passing through $`𝕍`$. In the cases that we have checked, however, this passage to $`X`$ does not appear to simplify significantly the proofs of the cohomological field theory axioms.

## 6. Computations

### 6.1. Compatibility with Witten’s definition.

Assume that for every point $`xX`$ we have $`H^0(C_x,L_x)=0`$. Then, $`R^0\pi _{}L=0`$ and $`R^1\pi _{}L`$ is a bundle. By Definition 4.0.4, we have $`c_W=c_{\mathrm{top}}(R^{}\pi _{}L,0)`$. By Definition 3.5.1, we have

$$c_{\mathrm{top}}(R^{}\pi _{}L,0)=\mathrm{ch}(\mathrm{Ke}((R^{}\pi _{}L)^{},0))\mathrm{td}(R^1\pi _{}L).$$

So, by Proposition 3.4.2, we have

$$\mathrm{Ke}((R^{}\pi _{}L)^{},0)=\lambda _1((R^1\pi _{}L)^{}).$$

Finally, by (1.5.1), we have

$$c_W=c_{\mathrm{top}}(R^{}\pi _{}L,0)=\lambda _1((R^1\pi _{}L)^{})\mathrm{td}(R^1\pi _{}L)=c_{\mathrm{top}}(R^1\pi _{}L),$$

which agrees with Witten’s definition (1.3.2).

### 6.2. The case when $`R^0\pi _{}L`$ and $`R^1\pi _{}L`$ are vector bundles.

Let $`(\pi :CX;L;f)`$ be an object of $`\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$ over which $`R^ip_{}L`$ is a vector bundle of rank $`h^i=h^i(C,L)`$. Denote by $`a`$ the form induced by Serre duality

$$b:\mathrm{Sym}^{r1}(R^0p_{}L)(R^1p_{}L)𝒪_X.$$

By the same argument as in Section 4, the form $`b^{}`$ is closed and nondegenerate. By Theorem 3.3.1 we have, for $`t_0=r1+\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{h^11+r1}{r1}\right)`$,

$$\mathrm{Ke}(Rp_{}L^{},b^{})=\underset{h(r1)k+t_0}{}(1)^k[\mathrm{Sym}^h(R^0p_{}L)^{}][\mathrm{\Lambda }^k(R^1p_{}L)^{}].$$

Therefore, via Definition 3.5.1, we can compute explicitly the pullback of $`c_W`$ under the morphism $`X\overline{𝒮}_{g,n}(r,𝒌)`$.

### 6.3. The case $`r=2`$, theta characteristics.

For $`r=2`$ and $`𝒌=\mathrm{𝟎}`$, the class $`c_W`$ is a cycle of codimension $`0`$, Remark 5.4.4. So the class $`c_W`$ is determined by a number. We claim that this number is $`1`$ on the connected component compactifying even theta characteristics ($`h^0(C,L)`$ even) and $`1`$ on the component compactifying the odd ones ($`h^0(C,L)`$ odd). Indeed, since we only need to determine the multiplicity of $`c_W`$ we can consider $`LC\stackrel{𝜋}{}X`$ where $`X`$ is a point, $`C`$ is a smooth curve, and $`L`$ is a line bundle satisfying $`L^2\omega _C`$. The complex $`H^{}(C,L)`$ with zero differential represents $`R\pi _{}L`$. The nondegenerate form is the perfect pairing $`H^0(C,L)H^1(C,L)`$. We write $`H_i^{}=(H^i(C,L))^{}`$ and $`h^i=h^i(C,L)`$ and describe $`L^,`$ as follows.

Note that the differential $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ is zero and the differential $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ is always exact, except on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{h^1}H_1^{}`$. The Witten top Chern class in $`K`$-theory is equal to $`(1)^{h^1}[\mathrm{\Lambda }^{h^1}H_1^{}]=(1)^{h^1}[]`$. The cohomology class is $`c_W=(1)^{h^1}`$.

### 6.4. Genus one.

We consider the case $`g=1`$, $`n=1`$, and $`𝒌=(0)`$, the moduli stack compactifying elliptic $`r`$-spin curves. Indeed, again the class $`c_W`$ is a cycle of codimension $`0`$, Remark 5.4.4. We can consider $`LC\stackrel{𝜋}{}X`$ where $`X`$ is a point, $`C`$ is a smooth curve of genus $`1`$, and $`L`$ is a line bundle satisfying $`L^r\omega _C𝒪_C`$. The complex $`H^{}(C,L)`$ with zero differential represents $`R\pi _{}L`$. Note that, if $`L`$ is not trivial, we have $`H^i(C,L)=0`$ and, therefore, $`c_W=1_X`$.

We assume that $`L`$ is trivial; therefore, we have $`h^i(C,L)=1`$. We write $`H^i=H^i(C,L)`$ and $`H_i^{}=(H^i(C,L))^{}`$. The closed and nondegenerate form is given by the isomorphism $`\mathrm{Sym}^{r1}H^0=(H^0)^{r1}H^0(L^{r1})H_1^{}`$. We describe $`L^,`$ as follows.

The differential $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ is zero, and the differential

$$\stackrel{~}{a}:(H_0^{})^i(H_0^{})^{i+r1}H_1^{}$$

is always exact, except on $`H_1^{}`$, $`H_0^{}H_1^{}`$, …, and $`(H_0^{})^{r2}H_1^{}`$. Therefore, the Witten top Chern class in the $`K`$-theory of a closed point is equal to $`_{i=1}^{r2}[(H_0^{})^iH_1^{}]=(1)[^{r1}]`$. Finally, via Chern character, we get $`c_W=(r1)1_X`$. This is consistent with Witten’s predictions and can be deducted also from the cohomological field theory axioms \[JKV01\].