This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Fano foliations with small algebraic ranks

Jie Liu Jie Liu, Institute of Mathematics, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190, China [email protected] http://www.jliumath.com
Abstract.

In this paper we study the algebraic ranks of foliations on \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective varieties. We start by establishing a Kobayashi-Ochiai’s theorem for Fano foliations in terms of algebraic rank. We then investigate the local positivity of the anti-canonical divisors of foliations, obtaining a lower bound for the algebraic rank of a foliation in terms of Seshadri constant. We describe those foliations whose algebraic rank slightly exceeds this bound and classify Fano foliations on smooth projective varieties attaining this bound. Finally we construct several examples to illustrate the general situation, which in particular allow us to answer a question asked by Araujo and Druel on the generalised indices of foliations.

Key words and phrases:
Seshadri constant, holomorphic foliation, algebraic rank, Fano varieties
2020 Mathematics Subject Classification:
14J45,14E30,32M25,32S65

1. Introduction

A Fano variety is a normal projective variety XX such that KX-K_{X} is an ample \mathbb{Q}-Cartier divisor. The Fano index of XX is the largest positive rational number ιX\iota_{X} such that KXιXH-K_{X}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\iota_{X}H for a Cartier divisor HH on XX and it can be viewed as an invariant measuring the global positivity of the anti-canonical divisor KX-K_{X} of XX. When XX is an nn-dimensional smooth Fano variety, a classical theorem of Kobayashi and Ochiai [KO73] asserts that ιXn+1\iota_{X}\leq n+1 with equality if and only if XnX\cong\mathbb{P}^{n} and this result can also be generalised to singular Fano varieties, see [Fuj89, Mae90, AD14] and Theorem 2.4.

Similar ideas can be also applied to the context of foliations on normal projective varieties (with mild singularities). One of the central problem in the theory of foliations is to find conditions that guarantee the existence of algebraic leaves and the notion of algebraic rank was introduced to measure the algebraicity of leaves [AD19, Definition 2.4]. More precisely, the algebraic rank rar^{a} of a foliation FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} on a normal projective variety XX is the maximum dimension of an algebraic subvariety through a general point of XX that is tangent to F\scr{F}. Moreover, these maximal algebraic subvarieties tangent to F\scr{F} are actually the leaves of a subfoliation Fa\scr{F}^{a} of F\scr{F} which is called the algebraic part of F\scr{F}. We refer the reader to [LPT18, Lemma 2.4] and Definition 3.2 for more details.

Let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation on a normal projective variety XX. The canonical class of F\scr{F} is a Weil divisor KFK_{\scr{F}} such that OX(KF)det(F)\scr{O}_{X}(-K_{\scr{F}})\cong\det(\scr{F}). A Fano foliation FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} is a foliation such that KF-K_{\scr{F}} is an ample \mathbb{Q}-Cartier divisor. We have the following two notions which generalise the Fano index of Fano varieties.

Definition 1.1.

Let XX be a normal projective variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation such that KF-K_{\scr{F}} is a \mathbb{Q}-Cartier divisor.

  1. (1.1.1)

    If KF-K_{\scr{F}} is big, the generalised index ι^(F)\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F}) of F\scr{F} is defined as follows:

    ι^(F)sup{t|KFtH+P,\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})\coloneqq\sup\{t\in\mathbb{R}\,|\,-K_{\scr{F}}\equiv tH+P, where HH is an ample Cartier divisor and PP is a pseudoeffective \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor}\}.

  2. (1.1.2)

    If KF-K_{\scr{F}} is ample, the Fano index ι(F)\iota(\scr{F}) of F\scr{F} is defined as the largest rational number such that KFι(F)H-K_{\scr{F}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\iota(\scr{F})H for some ample Cartier divisor HH.

Kobayashi-Ochiai’s theorem was successfully generalised to Fano foliations in the last decade, see [ADK08, AD13, AD14, Hör14, AD19] and the references therein. Our first theorem slightly generalises these results, see also [AD19, Theorem 1.5].

Theorem 1.2.

Let XX be a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation on XX such that KF-K_{\scr{F}} is a big \mathbb{Q}-Cartier divisor. Then raι^(F)r^{a}\geq\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F}).

As an application, we obtain a Kobayashi-Ochiai theorem for foliations. See Example 4.4 for the notion of normal generalised cone and see also [ADK08, Theorem 1.1], [AD14, Theorem 1.2], [Hör14, Theorem 1.3] and [AD19, Corollary 1.6] for related results.

Theorem 1.3.

Let XX be a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a Fano foliation on XX. Then raι(F)r^{a}\geq\iota(\scr{F}) and the equality holds if and only if XX is a normal generalised cone over a polarised \mathbb{Q}-factorial variety (T,L)(T,\scr{L}) with vertex ra1\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}-1} and there exists a foliation G\scr{G} on TT with KG0K_{\scr{G}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}0 such that F\scr{F} is the pull-back of G\scr{G} under the natural rational map h:XTh:X\dashrightarrow T.

Next we study the local positivity of the anti-canonical divisor of a foliation. Recall that Demailly introduced in [Dem92] the notion of Seshadri constant to measure the local positivity of nef divisors on projective varieties at a smooth point.

Definition 1.4.

Let DD be a nef \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor on a normal projective variety XX and xXx\in X a smooth point. The Seshadri constant of DD at xx is defined as

ϵ(D,x)infDCmultxC,\epsilon(D,x)\coloneqq\inf\frac{D\cdot C}{\operatorname{mult}_{x}C},

where the infimum is taken over all irreducible curves CC passing through xx. We denote by ϵ(L)\epsilon(L) to be the supremum of ϵ(L,x)\epsilon(L,x) as xx varies over all smooth points of XX.

According to the lower semi-continuity of the function ϵ(D,)\epsilon(D,\cdot), the supremum ϵ(L)\epsilon(L) is attained at a very general point of XX (see [Laz04, Example 5.1.11] or Lemma 2.1). The Seshadri constant has many interesting properties. For example, we have the following theorem proved by Zhuang in [Zhu18], which can be regarded as the local analogue of Kobayashi-Ochiai’s theorem, see also [BS09] and [LZ18] for related results.

Theorem 1.5 ([Zhu18, Theorem 1.5 and Theorem 1.7]).

Let XX be an nn-dimensional normal projective variety such that KX-K_{X} is a nef and big \mathbb{Q}-Cartier divisor. Then

  1. (1.5.1)

    ϵ(KX)n+1\epsilon(-K_{X})\leq n+1, and

  2. (1.5.2)

    XnX\cong\mathbb{P}^{n} if ϵ(KX)>n\epsilon(-K_{X})>n, and

  3. (1.5.3)

    XX is rationally connected if ϵ(KX)>n1\epsilon(-K_{X})>n-1.

In the following we aim to generalise Theorem 1.5 to foliations and it can be viewed as the local counterpart of Kobayashi-Ochiai’s theorem for foliations, see [AD19, Theorem 1.5 and Corollary 1.6] for related results.

Theorem 1.6.

Let XX be a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation with KF-K_{\scr{F}} nef. Then raϵ(KF)r^{a}\geq\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}}).

We refer the reader to Theorem 4.6 for a more general statement. In the following theorem we address the rationally connectedness of general leaves of the algebraic part Fa\scr{F}^{a} of a Fano foliation F\scr{F} with Seshadri constant ϵ(KF)>ra1\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})>r^{a}-1, see [AD19, Theorem 1.8 and Corollary 1.9] and Section 6.3 for related results and further discussion.

Theorem 1.7.

Let XX be a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation with KF-K_{\scr{F}} nef and big. If ϵ(KF)>ra1\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})>r^{a}-1, then the closure of a general leaf of the algebraic part Fa\scr{F}^{a} of F\scr{F} is rationally connected.

We refer the reader to Theorem 4.8 for a more general statement. In the viewpoint of Kobayashi-Ochiai’s theorem for Fano foliations, it is natural to ask if it is possible to classify those Fano foliations such that the Seshadri constants of their anti-canonical divisors are equal to their algebraic ranks. In the following we give a full list for such foliations on smooth projective varieties, see [AD19, Corollary 1.6].

Theorem 1.8.

Let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a Fano foliation on an nn-dimensional projective manifold XX. Then ra=ϵ(KF)r^{a}=\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}}) if and only if XnX\cong\mathbb{P}^{n} and F\scr{F} is the linear pull-back of a purely transcendental foliation on nra\mathbb{P}^{n-r^{a}} with zero canonical class.

The sharpness of the results above will be discussed in Section 6. In particular, we will construct several examples to illustrate the possibilities of the values of ι^(F)\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F}), ι(F)\iota(\scr{F}) and ϵ(KF)\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}}) in general setting. The main result of Section 6 can be read as follows.

Proposition 1.9.

Let (r,n)(r,n) be a pair of integers such that 0<r<n0<r<n.

  1. (1.9.1)

    If n3n\geq 3, for any rational number 0<cr0<c\leq r, there exists an nn-dimensional projective manifold XX and a foliation FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} with algebraic rank ra=rr^{a}=r such that KF-K_{\scr{F}} is big and ι^(F)=c\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=c.

  2. (1.9.2)

    If n3n\geq 3, for any rational number 0<cmin{r,n2}0<c\leq\min\{r,n-2\}, there exists an nn-dimensional \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety XX with klt singularities and a Fano foliation FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} with algebraic rank ra=rr^{a}=r such that ι(F)=ι^(F)=c\iota(\scr{F})=\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=c.

  3. (1.9.3)

    If n2n\geq 2, for any rational number 0<cr0<c\leq r, there exists an nn-dimensional \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety XX with klt singularities and a Fano foliation FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} with algebraic rank ra=rr^{a}=r such that ϵ(KF)=c\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=c.

Our statement is actually a bit more general. For n=2n=2, we will construct some foliations F\scr{F} on surfaces in Example 6.6 to show that the rational numbers cc contained in the set {11/a|a1}\{1-1/a\,|\,a\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 1}\} can be realised as the generalised index of F\scr{F} as in (1.9.1). In particular, this allows us to give a positive answer to a question proposed by Araujo and Druel on the generalised indices of foliations on projective manifolds (see Example 6.6) and we refer the reader to [AD19, Question 4.4] or Question 6.3 for a precise statement. For r=n1r=n-1 and n2n\geq 2, we will construct some codimension one algebraically integrable foliations F\scr{F} in Example 6.12 to show that the rational numbers cc contained in the set {n2+1/a|a1}\{n-2+1/a\,|\,a\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 1}\} can be realised as the Fano index of F\scr{F} as in (1.9.2).

This paper is organised as follows. In Section 2 we collect some results concerning Seshadri constant and Fano varieties with large indices or large Seshadri constants. In Section 3 we introduce basic notions on foliations. In Section 4 we study the positivity of the anti-canonical divisors of foliations and then apply it to prove Theorem 1.2, Theorem 1.3, Theorem 1.6 and Theorem 1.7. In Section 5 we prove Theorem 1.8. In Section 6 we exhibit some examples and propose a few interesting questions. In particular we prove Proposition 1.9.

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Stéphane Druel and Andreas Höring for their helpful comments. This work is supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (No. 2021YFA1002300), the NSFC grants (No. 12001521 and No. 12288201) and the CAS Project for Young Scientists in Basic Research (No. YSBR-033). I would like to thank the anonymous referee for his/her very detailed report which helps me to correct numerous inaccuracies and also to improve the exposition of the paper.

2. Seshadri constant and Fano varieties

Throughout this paper we work over the field of complex numbers \mathbb{C}. We will frequently use the terminology and results of the minimal model program (MMP) as explained in [KM98]. We refer to Lazarsfeld’s book [Laz04] for notions of positivity of \mathbb{R}-divisors, in particular [Laz04, § 5] for a general discussion on Seshadri constant.

2.1. Basic properties of Seshadri constant

In this subsection we briefly recall some basic properties of Seshadri constant.

Lemma 2.1.

Suppose that DD is a nef \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor on a normal projective variety XX.

  1. (2.1.1)

    DD is big if and only if ϵ(D)>0\epsilon(D)>0.

  2. (2.1.2)

    For a very general point xXx\in X, we have ϵ(D)=ϵ(D,x)\epsilon(D)=\epsilon(D,x).

  3. (2.1.3)

    If π:YX\pi:Y\rightarrow X is a birational morphism and yYy\in Y is a smooth point such that π\pi is an isomorphism in a neighbourhood of yy, then we have

    ϵ(πD,y)=ϵ(D,π(y)).\epsilon(\pi^{*}D,y)=\epsilon(D,\pi(y)).
  4. (2.1.4)

    Let YXY\subset X be a closed subvariety and yYy\in Y be a smooth point of both YY and XX. Then we have

    ϵ(D,y)ϵ(D|Y,y).\epsilon(D,y)\leq\epsilon(D|_{Y},y).
Proof.

The statement (2.1.1) follows from [Laz04, Proposition 5.1.9] and the statement (2.1.2) follows from the lower semi-continuity of the Seshadri function ϵ(D,):X0\epsilon(D,\cdot):X\rightarrow\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}, see for instance [Laz04, Example 5.1.11]. The statements (2.1.3) and (2.1.4) are direct consequences of the definition. ∎

2.2. Negativity lemma

Let YZY\rightarrow Z be a projective morphism of varieties and DD a \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor on YY. We say that DD is nef on the very general curves of Y/ZY/Z if there is a countable union of proper closed subsets WW of YY such that DC0D\cdot C\geq 0 for any curve CC on YY contracted over ZZ satisfying CWC\not\subseteq W. We need the following general negativity lemma.

Lemma 2.2 (Negativity Lemma I, [Bir12, Lemma 3.3]).

Let f:YZf:Y\rightarrow Z be a birational contraction and let DD be a \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor on YY written as D=D+DD=D^{+}-D^{-} with D+D^{+}, D0D^{-}\geq 0 having no common components. Assume that DD^{-} is ff-exceptional and for each irreducible component SS of DD^{-}, the restriction D|S-D|_{S} is nef on the very general curves of S/ZS/Z. Then D=0D^{-}=0. In other words, the \mathbb{R}-divisor DD is effective.

Lemma 2.3 (Negativity Lemma II).

Let g:YZg:Y\rightarrow Z be a fibration between normal projective varieties and f:YXf:Y\rightarrow X a birational contraction to a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety XX. Let DD be a \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor on YY such that there exists an effective \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor NN such that NN does not dominate ZZ and DND-N is movable. Let E+E^{+} and EE^{-} be the ff-exceptional effective \mathbb{R}-divisors with no common components such that D+E+E=f(fD)D+E^{+}-E^{-}=f^{*}(f_{*}D). Then EE^{-} does not dominant ZZ.

Proof.

There exist ff-exceptional effective \mathbb{R}-divisors EN+E_{N}^{+} and ENE_{N}^{-} having no common components such that

N+EN+EN=f(fN).N+E_{N}^{+}-E_{N}^{-}=f^{*}(f_{*}N).

As NN does not dominate ZZ and f(fN)f^{*}(f_{*}N) is effective, the effective \mathbb{R}-divisor ENE_{N}^{-} does not dominate ZZ. On the other hand, as PDNP\coloneqq D-N is movable, for any ff-exceptional prime divisor SS, the restriction P|SP|_{S} is pseudoeffective and hence (Pf(fP))|S(P-f^{*}(f_{*}P))|_{S} is nef on the very general curves of S/XS/X. Thus, by Lemma 2.2, there exists an effective ff-exceptional \mathbb{R}-divisor EPE_{P} such that P+EP=f(fP)P+E_{P}=f^{*}(f_{*}P). As a consequence, we have

E+E=f(fD)D=f(fN)N+f(fP)P=EN+EN+EP.E^{+}-E^{-}=f^{*}(f_{*}D)-D=f^{*}(f_{*}N)-N+f^{*}(f_{*}P)-P=E_{N}^{+}-E_{N}^{-}+E_{P}.

This yields EENE^{-}\leq E_{N}^{-} and hence EE^{-} does not dominate ZZ. ∎

2.3. Weak log Fano varieties

Firstly let us recall the Kobayashi-Ochiai’s theorem in the singular setting which was proved by Araujo and Druel in [AD14]. Recall that a pair (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) consists of a normal projective variety XX and an effective \mathbb{R}-divisor Δ\Delta such that KX+ΔK_{X}+\Delta is \mathbb{R}-Cartier.

Theorem 2.4 ([AD14, Theorem 1.1]).

Let (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) be an nn-dimensional pair such that (KX+Δ)ιA-(K_{X}+\Delta)\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\iota A for an ample Cartier divisor AA on XX and ι\iota\in\mathbb{Q}.

  1. (2.4.1)

    If ι>n\iota>n, then n<ιn+1n<\iota\leq n+1, XnX\cong\mathbb{P}^{n} and deg(Δ)<n+1ι\deg(\Delta)<n+1-\iota.

  2. (2.4.2)

    If ι=n\iota=n, then either XnX\cong\mathbb{P}^{n} and deg(Δ)=1\deg(\Delta)=1, or Δ=0\Delta=0 and XX is isomorphic to a (possibly singular) quadric hypersurface in n+1\mathbb{P}^{n+1}.

In particular, if ιn\iota\geq n, then (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) is klt unless (X,Δ)(n,H)(X,\Delta)\cong(\mathbb{P}^{n},H), where HH is a hyperplane in n\mathbb{P}^{n}.

Proof.

Note that Δ\Delta is a \mathbb{Q}-divisor, according to [AD14, Theorem 1.1], it remains to prove the last statement. If XX is isomorphic to a normal quadric hypersurface, then it is well-known that XX is isomorphic to a cone over a smooth quadric and hence it has only klt singularities (cf. Example 4.4). On the other hand, if XnX\cong\mathbb{P}^{n}, by [AD14, Lemma 2.2], the pair (n,Δ)(\mathbb{P}^{n},\Delta) with deg(Δ)1\deg(\Delta)\leq 1 is klt unless Δ\Delta is a hyperplane in n\mathbb{P}^{n}. ∎

Next we collect some results from [Zhu18] on weak log Fano varieties (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) such that the anti-log canonical divisor (KX+Δ)-(K_{X}+\Delta) has large Seshadri constant. Recall that a birational map g:XZg:X\dashrightarrow Z is called a contraction if the inverse map g1:ZXg^{-1}:Z\dashrightarrow X does not contract any divisors in ZZ. We need the following simple observation.

Lemma 2.5.

Let h:XYh:X\rightarrow Y be a birational morphism between normal projective varieties. Assume that there exists a birational contraction g:XZg:X\dashrightarrow Z to a normal projective variety ZZ such that gA=hDg^{*}A=h^{*}D, where AA is an ample \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor on ZZ and DD is a nef \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor on YY. Then gg factors through hh, i.e., there exists a birational morphism f:YZf:Y\rightarrow Z such that g=fhg=f\circ h.

Proof.

Let μ:WX\mu:W\rightarrow X be a resolution of g:XZg:X\dashrightarrow Z and denote by νgμ:WZ\nu\coloneqq g\circ\mu:W\rightarrow Z the induced birational morphism. As gA=hDg^{*}A=h^{*}D, there exists a unique μ\mu-exceptional divisor EE such that

νA=μhD+E.\nu^{*}A=\mu^{*}h^{*}D+E.

As AA is ample and EE is (hμ)(h\circ\mu)-exceptional, by the negativity lemma (cf. Lemma 2.2), we get E0-E\geq 0. On the other hand, as DD is nef and EE is ν\nu-exceptional, it follows from the negativity lemma again that E0E\geq 0 and hence E=0E=0. In particular, as AA is ample and DD is nef, every curve contracted by hμ:WYh\circ\mu:W\rightarrow Y is contracted by ν:WZ\nu:W\rightarrow Z. Thus, by rigidity result [Deb01, Lemma 1.15], the morphism ν\nu factors through hμh\circ\mu, i.e. there exists a birational morphism f:YZf:Y\rightarrow Z such that fhμ=ν=gμf\circ h\circ\mu=\nu=g\circ\mu. ∎

Theorem 2.6 ([Zhu18, Theorem 1.5 and Lemma 5.6]).

Let (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) be an nn-dimensional pair such that A(KX+Δ)A\coloneqq-(K_{X}+\Delta) is nef.

  1. (2.6.1)

    If ϵ(A)>n1\epsilon(A)>n-1, then XX is rationally connected.

  2. (2.6.2)

    If ϵ(A)n\epsilon(A)\geq n and (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) is not klt, then ϵ(A)=n\epsilon(A)=n and there exists a birational morphism f:Xnf:X\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{n} with a hyperplane HH in n\mathbb{P}^{n} such that

    Δ=f1H\Delta=f_{*}^{-1}H and KX+Δ=f(Kn+H)K_{X}+\Delta=f^{*}(K_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}+H).

Proof.

The first statement follows from [Zhu18, Theorem 1.5]. Here we note that the boundary Δ\Delta is assumed to be an effective \mathbb{Q}-divisor in [Zhu18, Theorem 1.5], however the proof still works for Δ\Delta being an effective \mathbb{R}-divisor. To prove the second statement, note that it follows from [Zhu18, Lemma 5.6] that such a birational map f:Xnf:X\dashrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{n} exists as a rational map. We remark again that the proof given there also works for the boundary Δ\Delta being a \mathbb{R}-divisor. Since (Kn+H)-(K_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}+H) is ample, applying Lemma 2.5 to Id:XX\operatorname{Id}:X\rightarrow X and f:Xnf:X\dashrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{n} yields that ff is actually a morphism. ∎

3. Foliations

In this section we collect and recall basic facts concerning foliations.

3.1. Basic notions of foliations

Let F\scr{F} be a coherent sheaf over a normal variety XX. Then rank rr of F\scr{F} is defined to be its rank at a general point of XX. The dual sheaf Hom(F,OX)\scr{H}\negthinspace om(\scr{F},\scr{O}_{X}) will be denoted by F\scr{F}^{*}. The reflexive hull of F\scr{F} is defined as F\scr{F}^{**} and F\scr{F} is called reflexive if F=F\scr{F}=\scr{F}^{**}. Given a positive integer mm, we denote by [m]F\wedge^{[m]}\scr{F} the reflexive sheaf (mF)(\wedge^{m}\scr{F})^{**} and by [m]F\otimes^{[m]}\scr{F} the reflexive sheaf (mF)(\otimes^{m}\scr{F})^{**}. In particular, the determinant det(F)\det(\scr{F}) is defined as [r]F\wedge^{[r]}\scr{F}. If π:YX\pi:Y\rightarrow X is a morphism of varieties, then we write π[]F\pi^{[*]}\scr{F} for (πF)(\pi^{*}\scr{F})^{**}. If XBX\rightarrow B is a morphism, we denote by ΩX/B\Omega_{X/B} the relative Kähler differential and by TX/BT_{X/B} the dual sheaf ΩX/B\Omega_{X/B}^{*}. Moreover, for simplicity, we will write ΩX/Br\Omega^{r}_{X/B} (resp. ΩX/B[r]\Omega^{[r]}_{X/B}) instead of rΩX/B\wedge^{r}\Omega_{X/B} (resp. [r]ΩX/B\wedge^{[r]}\Omega_{X/B}).

Definition 3.1.

Let XX be a normal variety. A foliation on XX is a non-zero coherent subsheaf FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} satisfying

  1. (3.1.1)

    F\scr{F} is saturated in TXT_{X}, i.e. TX/FT_{X}/\scr{F} is torsion free, and

  2. (3.1.2)

    F\scr{F} is closed under the Lie bracket.

The canonical class KFK_{\scr{F}} of F\scr{F} is any Weil divisor on XX such that OX(KF)det(F)\scr{O}_{X}(-K_{\scr{F}})\cong\det(\scr{F}).

Let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation of rank rr on a normal variety XX. Then we have a natural morphism ΩXrdet(F)OX(KF)\Omega^{r}_{X}\rightarrow\det(\scr{F}^{*})\cong\scr{O}_{X}(K_{\scr{F}}), which induces a morphism

η:(ΩXrOX(KF))OX.\eta:(\Omega^{r}_{X}\otimes\scr{O}_{X}(-K_{\scr{F}}))^{**}\rightarrow\scr{O}_{X}.

The singular locus sing(F)\operatorname{sing}(\scr{F}) of F\scr{F} is defined to be the closed subscheme of XX whose ideal sheaf IS\scr{I}_{S} is the image of η\eta, see [AD14, Definitnion 3.4] for more details. In particular, if sing(F)=\operatorname{sing}(\scr{F})=\emptyset, then F\scr{F} is said to be regular.

Let φ:XY\varphi:X\dashrightarrow Y be a dominant rational map with connected fibres between normal varieties. Let XoXX^{o}\subset X and YoYY^{o}\subset Y be the smooth open subsets such that the restriction of φ\varphi to XoX^{o} induces a dominant morphism φ|Xo=φo:XoYo\varphi|_{X^{o}}=\varphi^{o}:X^{o}\rightarrow Y^{o}. Let G\scr{G} be a foliation on YY. The pull-back of G\scr{G} via φ\varphi is defined as the unique foliation F\scr{F} on XX such that F|Xo=(dφo)1(G|Yo)\scr{F}|_{X^{o}}=(d\varphi^{o})^{-1}(\scr{G}|_{Y^{o}}). In this case we write F=φ1G\scr{F}=\varphi^{-1}\scr{G}.

Definition 3.2 ([LPT18, Lemma 2.4] and [AD19, Definition 2.4]).

Let XX be a normal variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation on XX. Then there exists a normal variety YY, unique up to birational equivalence, a foliation G\scr{G} on YY and a dominant rational map φ:XY\varphi:X\dashrightarrow Y with connected fibres satisfying the following conditions:

  1. (3.2.1)

    the foliation G\scr{G} is purely transcendental, i.e., there is no algebraic subvariety with positive dimension through a general point of YY that is tangent to G\scr{G};

  2. (3.2.2)

    the foliation F\scr{F} is the pull-back of G\scr{G} via φ\varphi.

The foliation Fa\scr{F}^{a} on XX induced by the rational map φ:XY\varphi:X\dashrightarrow Y is called the algebraic part of F\scr{F}. The algebraic rank of F\scr{F} is defined as the rank of Fa\scr{F}^{a} and we will denote it by rar^{a}. Moreover, if ra=rr^{a}=r, then we say that the foliation F\scr{F} is algebraically integrable. The foliation G\scr{G} on YY is called the transcendental part of F\scr{F}.

Let XX be a normal projective variety and let F\scr{F} be an algebraically integrable foliation on XX of rank r>0r>0 such that KFK_{\scr{F}} is \mathbb{Q}-Cartier. Let i:FXi:F\rightarrow X be the normalisation of the closure of a general leaf of F\scr{F}. By [AD14, Definition 3.11], there is a canonically defined effective \mathbb{Q}-divisor ΔF\Delta_{F} on FF such that KF+ΔFiKFK_{F}+\Delta_{F}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}i^{*}K_{\scr{F}}. This pair (F,ΔF)(F,\Delta_{F}) is called a general log leaf of F\scr{F}. Let TT^{\prime} be the unique proper subvariety of the Chow variety of XX whose general point parametrises the closure of a general leaf of F\scr{F} (viewed as a reduced and irreducible cycle in XX). Let TT be the normalisation of TT^{\prime} and UT×XU\rightarrow T^{\prime}\times X the normalisation of the universal cycle, with induced morphisms:

U{U}X{X}T{T}ν\scriptstyle{\nu}π\scriptstyle{\pi} (3.2.1)

Then ν:UX\nu:U\rightarrow X is birational and, for a general point tTt\in T, the image ν(π1(t))X\nu(\pi^{-1}(t))\subsetneq X is the closure of a leaf of F\scr{F}. We shall call the diagram (3.2.1) the family of leaves of F\scr{F}, see [AD14, Lemma 3.9]. Let mm be the Cartier index of KFK_{\scr{F}}. Thanks to [AD14, Lemma 3.7 and Remark 3.12], the foliation F\scr{F} induces a natural generically surjective morphism

mΩU/TrνOX(mKF).\otimes^{m}\Omega_{U/T}^{r}\longrightarrow\nu^{*}\scr{O}_{X}(mK_{\scr{F}}). (3.2.2)

Let FU\scr{F}_{U} be the algebraically integrable foliation on UU induced by F\scr{F}, or equivalently by π\pi. Then we have a natural isomorphism

ΩU/T[r]OU(KFU).\Omega_{U/T}^{[r]}\longrightarrow\scr{O}_{U}(K_{\scr{F}_{U}}).

As νOX(mKF)\nu^{*}\scr{O}_{X}(mK_{\scr{F}}) is invertible, after taking reflexive hull of mΩU/Tr\otimes^{m}\Omega_{U/T}^{r}, the morphism (3.2.2) yields

mΩU/Tr[m]ΩU/Tr[m]ΩU/T[r]OU(mKFU)νOX(mKF).\otimes^{m}\Omega_{U/T}^{r}\rightarrow\otimes^{[m]}\Omega_{U/T}^{r}\rightarrow\otimes^{[m]}\Omega_{U/T}^{[r]}\xrightarrow{\cong}\scr{O}_{U}(mK_{\scr{F}_{U}})\rightarrow\nu^{*}\scr{O}_{X}(mK_{\scr{F}}). (3.2.3)

In particular, there exists a canonically defined effective Weil \mathbb{Q}-divisor Δ\Delta on UU such that

KFU+ΔνKF.K_{\scr{F}_{U}}+\Delta\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\nu^{*}K_{\scr{F}}.

Then Δ\Delta is ν\nu-exceptional as νKFU=KF\nu_{*}K_{\scr{F}_{U}}=K_{\scr{F}}. Moreover, for a general point tTt\in T, set Utπ1(t)U_{t}\coloneqq\pi^{-1}(t) and ΔtΔ|Ut\Delta_{t}\coloneqq\Delta|_{U_{t}}. Then (Ut,Δt)(U_{t},\Delta_{t}) coincides with the general log leaf (F,ΔF)(F,\Delta_{F}) defined above. Here we note that Δ\Delta is \mathbb{Q}-Cartier along codimension one points of UtU_{t} and thus the restriction Δ|Ut\Delta|_{U_{t}} is well-defined as \mathbb{Q}-divisor.

3.2. Log algebraic part of a general leaf

Let XX be a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation with algebraic rank ra>0r^{a}>0. Let π:UT\pi:U\rightarrow T be the family of leaves of Fa\scr{F}^{a}. Let μ:ZT\mu:Z\rightarrow T be a resolution. Since π:UT\pi:U\rightarrow T is equidimensional and TT is normal, by Chevalley’s criterion [Gro66, Corollaire 14.4.4], the morphism π\pi is actually universally open. In particular, since the general fibres of π\pi are irreducible, it follows that the fibre product U×TZU\times_{T}Z is again irreducible. Denote by YY the normalisation of U×TZU\times_{T}Z. Let ρ:YX\rho:Y\rightarrow X and q:YZq:Y\rightarrow Z be the induced morphisms. Then qq is also universally open and we have the following commutative diagram:

Y{Y}U{U}X{X}Z{Z}T{T}ρ\scriptstyle{\rho}q\scriptstyle{q}π\scriptstyle{\pi}ν\scriptstyle{\nu}μ\scriptstyle{\mu}

Let G\scr{G} be the unique foliation on ZZ such that q1G=ρ1Fq^{-1}\scr{G}=\rho^{-1}\scr{F}; that is, the foliation G\scr{G} is the transcendental part of ρ1F\rho^{-1}\scr{F}. Denote by Q\scr{Q} the reflexive hull of F/Fa\scr{F}/\scr{F}^{a}. Then clearly we have ρqKG=KQ\rho_{*}q^{*}K_{\scr{G}}=K_{\scr{Q}}, where KQK_{\scr{Q}} is a Weil divisor on XX such that OX(KQ)det(Q)\scr{O}_{X}(-K_{\scr{Q}})\cong\det(\scr{Q}). In particular, there exists a canonically defined ρ\rho-exceptional \mathbb{Q}-divisor EGE_{\scr{G}} on YY such that

qKG+EG=ρ(ρqKG)=ρKQ.q^{*}K_{\scr{G}}+E_{\scr{G}}=\rho^{*}(\rho_{*}q^{*}K_{\scr{G}})=\rho^{*}K_{\scr{Q}}.

Denote by H\scr{H} the pull-back foliation ρ1Fa\rho^{-1}\scr{F}^{a}, or equivalently the algebraically integrable foliation induced by qq. Let EFaE_{\scr{F}^{a}} be the canonically defined ρ\rho-exceptional effective \mathbb{Q}-divisor on YY such that

KH+EFaρKFa.K_{\scr{H}}+E_{\scr{F}^{a}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\rho^{*}K_{\scr{F}^{a}}.

Then we obtain

KH+EFa+EGρ(KFKQ)+EGρKFqKG.K_{\scr{H}}+E_{\scr{F}^{a}}+E_{\scr{G}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\rho^{*}(K_{\scr{F}}-K_{\scr{Q}})+E_{\scr{G}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\rho^{*}K_{\scr{F}}-q^{*}K_{\scr{G}}. (3.2.4)

We need the following remarkable result of Campana and Păun and we refer to [CP19, Theorem 1.1] and Theorem 5.3 for more details.

Theorem 3.3 ([CP19]).

Let XX be a normal projective variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a purely transcendental foliation such that KFK_{\scr{F}} is \mathbb{Q}-Cartier. Then KFK_{\scr{F}} is pseudoeffective.

Lemma 3.4.

Write EG=EG+EGE_{\scr{G}}=E_{\scr{G}}^{+}-E_{\scr{G}}^{-} such that EG+E_{\scr{G}}^{+}, EG0E_{\scr{G}}^{-}\geq 0 with no common components. Then EGE_{\scr{G}}^{-} does not dominate ZZ.

Proof.

Since G\scr{G} is purely transcendental, KGK_{\scr{G}} is pseudoeffective by Theorem 3.3. Let KG=N+PK_{\scr{G}}=N+P be the divisorial Zariski decomposition [Bou04, Nak04]. Since qq is equidimensional, the pull-back qPq^{*}P is movable. Then the result follows from Lemma 2.3. ∎

Let FF be a general fibre of qq. Set DF=(EFa+EG)|FD_{F}=(E_{\scr{F}^{a}}+E_{\scr{G}})|_{F} and ΔF=EFa|F\Delta_{F}=E_{\scr{F}^{a}}|_{F}. Then the pair (F,ΔF)(F,\Delta_{F}) is nothing but the general log leaf of Fa\scr{F}^{a} and Lemma 3.4 above says that DFD_{F} is an effective \mathbb{Q}-divisor such that DFΔFD_{F}\geq\Delta_{F} and

KF+DF(KH+EFa+EG)|FρKF|F.K_{F}+D_{F}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}(K_{\scr{H}}+E_{\scr{F}^{a}}+E_{\scr{G}})|_{F}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\rho^{*}K_{\scr{F}}|_{F}.

Moreover, one can easily see that DF=ΔFD_{F}=\Delta_{F} if and only if KQ|F0K_{\scr{Q}}|_{F}\equiv 0; that is, the \mathbb{Q}-Cartier divisor KQK_{\scr{Q}} is numerically trivial along the closure of general leaves of Fa\scr{F}^{a}. We will call the pair (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) the log algebraic part of a general leaf of F\scr{F}. Note that if F\scr{F} is algebraically integrable, then we have DF=ΔFD_{F}=\Delta_{F} and the pair (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) is exactly the log leaf of F\scr{F}.

4. Bounding the algebraic rank

In this section we will study the lower bounds of algebraic ranks of Fano foliations and the goal is to prove Theorem 1.2, Theorem 1.3, Theorem 1.6 and Theorem 1.7.

4.1. Positivity of anti-canonical divisors of foliations

We need the following theorem due to Araujo and Druel.

Theorem 4.1 ([AD13, Theorem 5.1]).

Let XX be a normal projective variety and let f:XCf:X\rightarrow C be a surjective morphism with connected fibres onto a smooth curve. Let Δ+\Delta^{+} and Δ\Delta^{-} be effective \mathbb{Q}-divisors on XX with no common components such that fOX(kΔ)=OCf_{*}\scr{O}_{X}(k\Delta^{-})=\scr{O}_{C} for every nonnegative integer kk. Set Δ=Δ+Δ\Delta=\Delta^{+}-\Delta^{-} and assume that KX+ΔK_{X}+\Delta is \mathbb{Q}-Cartier.

  1. (4.1.1)

    If (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) is klt over the generic point of CC, then (KX/C+Δ)-(K_{X/C}+\Delta) is not nef and big.

  2. (4.1.2)

    If (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) is lc over the generic point of CC, then (KX/C+Δ)-(K_{X/C}+\Delta) is not ample.

The following result is a variant of [AD14, Proposition 3.14] and the proof is essentially a combination of arguments and results due to Araujo and Druel from [AD13, AD14]. See also [AD13, Proposition 5.8], [Dru17, Proposition 2.12 and Proposition 4.6] and [Liu19, Theorem 4.1].

Proposition 4.2.

Let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation on a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety XX with algebraic rank ra>0r^{a}>0. Let i:Fi(F)Xi:F\rightarrow i(F)\subset X be the normalisation of the closure of a general leaf of Fa\scr{F}^{a}. Let PP be an effective \mathbb{Q}-divisor on XX and denote by DPD_{P} the pull-back iPi^{*}P.

  1. (4.2.1)

    If the pair (F,DF+DP)(F,D_{F}+D_{P}) is klt, then (KF+P)-(K_{\scr{F}}+P) is not nef and big.

  2. (4.2.2)

    If the pair (F,DF+DP)(F,D_{F}+D_{P}) is lc and (KF+P)-(K_{\scr{F}}+P) is ample, then there is a common point in the closure of general leaves of Fa\scr{F}^{a}.

Proof.

Throughout the proof we shall follow the notation in Section 3.2. In particular, we have the following commutative diagram

Y{Y}U{U}X{X}Z{Z}T{T}h\scriptstyle{h}ρ\scriptstyle{\rho}q\scriptstyle{q}π\scriptstyle{\pi}ν\scriptstyle{\nu}μ\scriptstyle{\mu}

such that ZZ is a smooth projective variety and the image of a general fibre of qq under ρ\rho is the closure of a general leaf of Fa\scr{F}^{a}. Denote by H\scr{H} the foliation defined by qq and let G\scr{G} be the transcendental part of ρ1F\rho^{-1}\scr{F}.

As explained in the beginning of Section 3.2, the morphism q:YZq:Y\rightarrow Z is universally open. Let CC be a general complete intersection curve in XX which is disjoint from the closed subset ρ(Exc(ρ))\rho(\operatorname{Exc}(\rho)). Then we can identify CC with ρ1(C)Y\rho^{-1}(C)\subset Y. Let us denote q(C)q(C) by BB. Let BB^{\prime} be the normalisation of BB and let YBY_{B^{\prime}} be the fibre product Y×ZBY\times_{Z}B^{\prime}. Then we may assume that natural projection YBBY_{B^{\prime}}\rightarrow B^{\prime} is open and its general fibres are connected and normal. In particular, the variety YBY_{B^{\prime}} is irreducible and hence (YB)redB(Y_{B^{\prime}})_{\operatorname{red}}\rightarrow B^{\prime} is flat. Thus, thanks to [BLR95, Theorem 2.1], there exists a finite morphism CBC^{\prime}\rightarrow B^{\prime} such that q:YCq^{\prime}:Y^{\prime}\rightarrow C^{\prime} is flat with reduced fibres, where YY^{\prime} is the normalisation of (YB)red×BC(Y_{B^{\prime}})_{\operatorname{red}}\times_{B^{\prime}}C^{\prime} and q:YCq^{\prime}:Y^{\prime}\rightarrow C^{\prime} is the morphism induced by the projection (YB)red×BCC(Y_{B^{\prime}})_{\operatorname{red}}\times_{B^{\prime}}C^{\prime}\rightarrow C^{\prime}.

Let H\scr{H}^{\prime} be the algebraically integrable foliation on YY^{\prime} induced by the natural projection q:YCq^{\prime}:Y^{\prime}\rightarrow C^{\prime}. Denote by g:YYg:Y^{\prime}\rightarrow Y the induced finite morphism. Let mm be the Cartier index of KFaK_{\scr{F}^{a}}. Thanks to [AD14, Remark 3.12], we have a generically surjective map

mΩY/CragρOX(mKFa).\otimes^{m}\Omega_{Y^{\prime}/C^{\prime}}^{r^{a}}\rightarrow g^{*}\rho^{*}\scr{O}_{X}(mK_{\scr{F}^{a}}).

This implies that there exists a canonically defined effective \mathbb{Q}-divisor Δ\Delta^{\prime} on YY^{\prime} such that KH+ΔgρKFaK_{\scr{H}^{\prime}}+\Delta^{\prime}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}g^{*}\rho^{*}K_{\scr{F}^{a}}. Moreover, let FF^{\prime} be a general fibre of q:YCq^{\prime}:Y^{\prime}\rightarrow C^{\prime}. Since both CC and FF are general, we may assume that g(F)=Fg(F^{\prime})=F and the pair (F,Δ|F)(F^{\prime},\Delta^{\prime}|_{F}) is isomorphic to the pair (F,ΔF)(F,\Delta_{F}), which is the general log leaf of Fa\scr{F}^{a}.

On the other hand, since KGK_{\scr{G}} is pseudoeffective, we can assume that KGB0K_{\scr{G}}\cdot B\geq 0 since CC is general. In particular, the pull-back gqKGg^{*}q^{*}K_{\scr{G}} is nef. Since the fibres of q:YCq^{\prime}:Y^{\prime}\rightarrow C^{\prime} are reduced, we have KH=KY/CK_{\scr{H}^{\prime}}=K_{Y^{\prime}/C^{\prime}} and

KY/C+Δ+gEG=KH+Δ+gEG\displaystyle K_{Y^{\prime}/C^{\prime}}+\Delta^{\prime}+g^{*}E_{\scr{G}}=K_{\scr{H}^{\prime}}+\Delta^{\prime}+g^{*}E_{\scr{G}} gρKFa+gEG\displaystyle\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}g^{*}\rho^{*}K_{\scr{F}^{a}}+g^{*}E_{\scr{G}}
gρKFgqKG.\displaystyle\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}g^{*}\rho^{*}K_{\scr{F}}-g^{*}q^{*}K_{\scr{G}}.

Let us denote by DD^{\prime} the \mathbb{Q}-divisor Δ+gEG\Delta^{\prime}+g^{*}E_{\scr{G}} and by DFD_{F^{\prime}} the restriction D|FD^{\prime}|_{F^{\prime}}. Then the pair (F,DF)(F^{\prime},D^{\prime}_{F}) is isomorphic to the pair (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) and the pair (F,DF+gρP|F)(F^{\prime},D_{F^{\prime}}+g^{*}\rho^{*}P|_{F^{\prime}}) is isomorphic to (F,DF+DP)(F,D_{F}+D_{P}).

We write D=D+DD^{\prime}=D^{\prime+}-D^{\prime-} with D+D^{\prime+}, D0D^{\prime-}\geq 0 having no common components. Then clearly g(supp(D))g(\operatorname{supp}(D^{\prime-})) is contained in supp(EG)\operatorname{supp}(E_{\scr{G}}^{-}), which is contained in Exc(ρ)\operatorname{Exc}(\rho). In particular, the curve CC is disjoint from g(supp(D))g(\operatorname{supp}(D^{\prime-})), which implies that there is no fibre of q:YCq^{\prime}:Y^{\prime}\rightarrow C^{\prime} contained in supp(D)\operatorname{supp}(D^{\prime-}). Thus, we have qOY(kD)=OCq^{\prime}_{*}\scr{O}_{Y^{\prime}}(kD^{\prime-})=\scr{O}_{C^{\prime}} for every non-negative integer kk.

Now we assume that (F,DF+DP)(F,D_{F}+D_{P}) is klt. Then the pair (Y,D+gρP)(Y^{\prime},D^{\prime}+g^{*}\rho^{*}P) has klt singularities over the generic point of CC^{\prime} by inversion of adjunction. Applying Theorem 4.1 yields that the \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor

(KY/C+D+gρP)=(KH+D+gρP)gρ(KF+P)+gqKG-(K_{Y^{\prime}/C^{\prime}}+D^{\prime}+g^{*}\rho^{*}P)=-(K_{\scr{H}^{\prime}}+D^{\prime}+g^{*}\rho^{*}P)\sim_{\mathbb{R}}-g^{*}\rho^{*}(K_{\scr{F}}+P)+g^{*}q^{*}K_{\scr{G}}

cannot be nef and big. As gqKGg^{*}q^{*}K_{\scr{G}} is nef, one see that (KF+P)-(K_{\scr{F}}+P) cannot be nef and big as CC is general and the first statement follows.

Finally we assume that (F,DF+DP)(F,D_{F}+D_{P}) is lc and (KF+P)-(K_{\scr{F}}+P) is ample. Then the pair (Y,D+gρP)(Y^{\prime},D^{\prime}+g^{*}\rho^{*}P) has lc singularities over the generic point of CC^{\prime} by inversion of adjunction. Suppose to the contrary that there is no common point in the closure of the general leaves of Fa\scr{F}^{a}. Following the same argument as in [AD13, Proposition 5.3], we can assume that the morphism Y(YB)redρ((YB)red)Y^{\prime}\rightarrow(Y_{B})_{\operatorname{red}}\rightarrow\rho((Y_{B})_{\operatorname{red}}) is finite and hence gρ(KF+P)-g^{*}\rho^{*}(K_{\scr{F}}+P) is ample. In particular, since gqKGg^{*}q^{*}K_{\scr{G}} is nef, the anti-log canonical divisor (KY/C+D+gρP)-(K_{Y^{\prime}/C^{\prime}}+D^{\prime}+g^{*}\rho^{*}P) is ample, which contradicts Theorem 4.1. ∎

4.2. Kobayashi-Ochiai’s theorem for foliations

In this subsection we apply Proposition 4.2 to prove a Kobayashi-Ochiai’s theorem for foliations. We start with the following example which will be frequently used in Section 6.

Example 4.3.

Let ZZ be normal projective variety and let OZ(1)\scr{O}_{Z}(1) be an ample line bundle on ZZ. Given positive integers rr^{\prime}, mm and non-negative integers b1br0b_{1}\geq\dots\geq b_{r^{\prime}}\geq 0, let us denote by E\scr{E} the vector bundle

OZ(m)i=1rOZ(bi).\scr{O}_{Z}(m)\oplus\bigoplus_{i=1}^{r^{\prime}}\scr{O}_{Z}(-b_{i}).

Set b=i=1rbib=\sum_{i=1}^{r^{\prime}}b_{i} and denote by XX the projective bundle (E)\mathbb{P}(\scr{E}) with π:XZ\pi:X\rightarrow Z the natural projection. Let Λ\Lambda be the tautological divisor of (E)\mathbb{P}(\scr{E}) and let AA be a Cartier divisor on ZZ such that OZ(A)OZ(1)\scr{O}_{Z}(A)\cong\scr{O}_{Z}(1). Denoter by (Q)=EX\mathbb{P}(\scr{Q})=E\subsetneq X the prime divisor associated to the quotient EOZ(bi)=Q\scr{E}\rightarrow\oplus\scr{O}_{Z}(-b_{i})=\scr{Q}. Then we have EΛmπAE\sim\Lambda-m\pi^{*}A.

Example 4.4 (Normal generalised cone).

In Example 4.3, set bi=0b_{i}=0 for every 1ir1\leq i\leq r^{\prime}. For an integer e1e\gg 1, the linear system |O(E)(e)||\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\scr{E})}(e)| induces a birational morphism μ:XY\mu:X\rightarrow Y onto a normal projective variety. The morphism μ\mu contracts the divisor E=(OZr)XE=\mathbb{P}(\scr{O}_{Z}^{\oplus r^{\prime}})\subsetneq X onto μ(E)=r1\mu(E)=\mathbb{P}^{r^{\prime}-1} and induces an isomorphism Yμ(E)XEY\setminus\mu(E)\cong X\setminus E. We will call XX the normal generalised cone over the base (Z,OZ(m))(Z,\scr{O}_{Z}(m)) with vertex μ(E)r1\mu(E)\cong\mathbb{P}^{r^{\prime}-1}.

By [AD14, Remark 4.2], if ZZ is \mathbb{Q}-factorial and ρ(Z)=1\rho(Z)=1, then so is YY. Moreover, by [Kol97, Example 3.8], if ZZ is klt and KZ-K_{Z} is ample, then YY has only klt singularities and if KZ0-K_{Z}\equiv 0 and ZZ is lc, then YY has only lc singularities.

We recall the following general definition, see [AD19, Lemma 4.1].

Definition 4.5.

Let XX be a normal projective variety and let DD be a big \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor on XX. We define

ι^(D)sup{t|DtA+P,\widehat{\iota}(D)\coloneqq\sup\{t\in\mathbb{R}\,|\,D\equiv tA+P, where AA is an ample Cartier divisor and PP is a pseudoeffective \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor}\}.

Note that we have ι^(D)<\widehat{\iota}(D)<\infty and there exists an ample Cartier divisor HH on XX and a pseudoeffective \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor PP such that Dι^(D)H+PD\equiv\widehat{\iota}(D)H+P, see [AD19, Lemma 4.1]. Let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation on a normal projective variety XX such that KF-K_{\scr{F}} is a big \mathbb{Q}-Cartier divisor. Then the generalised index ι^(F)\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F}) of F\scr{F} is defined as ι^(KF)\widehat{\iota}(-K_{\scr{F}}).

Proof of Theorem 1.2.

Let q:YZq:Y\rightarrow Z and ρ:YX\rho:Y\rightarrow X be the morphism defined as in Section 3.2. Arguing by contraction we suppose that ι^(F)>ra\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})>r^{a}. Let 0<ε10<\varepsilon\ll 1 be a sufficiently small positive real number such that ra<ι^(F)εr^{a}<\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})-\varepsilon\in\mathbb{Q}. Then by assumption the divisor KF(ι^(F)ε)H-K_{\scr{F}}-(\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})-\varepsilon)H is a big \mathbb{Q}-divisor, where HH is an ample Cartier divisor such that KFι^(F)H-K_{\scr{F}}-\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})H is pseudoeffective. In particular, there exists an effective \mathbb{Q}-divisor PP on XX such that

KF(ι^(F)ε)H+P.-K_{\scr{F}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}(\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})-\varepsilon)H+P.

Let i:FXi:F\rightarrow X be the normalisation of a general leaf of Fa\scr{F}^{a} and let (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) be the log algebraic part of a general leaf of F\scr{F}. Denote by DPD_{P} the pull-back iPi^{*}P. Then applying Theorem 2.4 to the pair (F,DF+DP)(F,D_{F}+D_{P}) shows that (F,DF+DP)(F,D_{F}+D_{P}) has only klt singularities and we get a contraction by Proposition 4.2. ∎

Proof of Theorem 1.3.

By definition, we have ι(F)ι^(F)\iota(\scr{F})\leq\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F}). Hence, we must have ι(F)ra\iota(\scr{F})\leq r^{a} by Theorem 1.2. Moreover, one can easily derive from Theorem 2.4 and the proof of Theorem 1.2 that if the equality ι(F)=ra\iota(\scr{F})=r^{a} holds, then the log algebraic part (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) of a general leaf of F\scr{F} is isomorphic to (ra,H)(\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}},H), where HH is a hyperplane in ra\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}}.

Let q:YZq:Y\rightarrow Z and ρ:YX\rho:Y\rightarrow X be the morphisms defined in Section 3.2. Then the images of the general fibres of qq under ρ\rho are the closure of the leaves of Fa\scr{F}^{a}. In particular, the general fibre FF of qq is isomorphic to ra\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}}. Let AA be an ample Cartier divisor on XX such that KFι(F)A-K_{\scr{F}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\iota(\scr{F})A. Then MρOX(A)\scr{M}\coloneqq\rho^{*}\scr{O}_{X}(A) is a qq-ample line bundle such that M|FOra(1)\scr{M}|_{F}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}}}(1). Thus the pair (Y,M)(Y,\scr{M}) is isomorphic to (Z(E),O(E)(1))(\mathbb{P}_{Z}(\scr{E}),\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\scr{E})}(1)) as varieties over ZZ by [AD14, Proposition 4.10], where EqM\scr{E}\coloneqq q_{*}\scr{M} is a nef vector bundle over ZZ with rank ra+1r^{a}+1.

On the other hand, note that there exists a purely transcendental foliation G\scr{G} on the smooth projective variety ZZ such that KGK_{\scr{G}} is pseudoeffective and ρ1F=q1G\rho^{-1}\scr{F}=q^{-1}\scr{G}. Moreover, by (3.2.4) there exists a canonically defined ρ\rho-exceptional \mathbb{Q}-divisor EE on YY such that

KH+EρKFqKG,K_{\scr{H}}+E\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\rho^{*}K_{\scr{F}}-q^{*}K_{\scr{G}},

where H\scr{H} is the foliation defined by qq and the restriction E|F=DFE|_{F}=D_{F} of EE to a general fibre FF of qq is a hyperplane in FraF\cong\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}}. In particular, there exists a unique qq-horizontal prime divisor EhE_{h} on YY such that EEhE-E_{h} is qq-vertical and hence there exists a \mathbb{Q}-divisor DD on ZZ such that qD=EEhq^{*}D=E-E_{h}. Let {Hi}1in1\{H_{i}\}_{1\leq i\leq n-1} be a collection of ample Cartier divisors on XX and let CC be a general complete intersection of general members of the linear systems |m1H1|,,|mn1Hn1||m_{1}H_{1}|,\dots,|m_{n-1}H_{n-1}| with mi1m_{i}\gg 1. Then the preimage ρ1(C)\rho^{-1}(C) is disjoint from supp(E)\operatorname{supp}(E) and as a consequence the curve Bq(ρ1C)B\coloneqq q(\rho^{-1}C) is disjoint from supp(D)\operatorname{supp}(D). Let n:BBn:B^{\prime}\rightarrow B be the normalisation of BB and let q:YBBq^{\prime}:Y_{B^{\prime}}\rightarrow B^{\prime} be the fibre product Y×ZB(nE)Y\times_{Z}B^{\prime}\cong\mathbb{P}(n^{*}\scr{E}). Let H\scr{H}^{\prime} be the foliation on YBY_{B^{\prime}} defined by qq^{\prime} and denote by g:YBYg:Y_{B^{\prime}}\rightarrow Y the natural morphism. Then we have

KH+gEh=gKH+gEg(ρKFqKG)raAgqKG,K_{\scr{H}^{\prime}}+g^{*}E_{h}=g^{*}K_{\scr{H}}+g^{*}E\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}g^{*}(\rho^{*}K_{\scr{F}}-q^{*}K_{\scr{G}})\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}-r^{a}A^{\prime}-g^{*}q^{*}K_{\scr{G}}, (4.5.1)

where AgρAA^{\prime}\coloneqq g^{*}\rho^{*}A. Set E=nE\scr{E}^{\prime}=n^{*}\scr{E}. Then we have

OYB(KH)OYB(KYB/B)OYB((ra+1)A)qdet(E).\scr{O}_{Y_{B^{\prime}}}(K_{\scr{H}^{\prime}})\cong\scr{O}_{Y_{B^{\prime}}}(K_{Y_{B^{\prime}}/B^{\prime}})\cong\scr{O}_{Y_{B^{\prime}}}(-(r^{a}+1)A^{\prime})\otimes q^{\prime*}\det(\scr{E}^{\prime}). (4.5.2)

Combining (4.5.1) and (4.5.2) yields that there exists a sufficiently divisible positive integer mm such that

OYB(mgEh)OYB(mA)qdet(E)mqOB(nKG)m.\scr{O}_{Y_{B^{\prime}}}(mg^{*}E_{h})\cong\scr{O}_{Y_{B^{\prime}}}(mA^{\prime})\otimes q^{\prime*}\det(\scr{E}^{\prime})^{\otimes-m}\otimes q^{\prime*}\scr{O}_{B^{\prime}}(n^{*}K_{\scr{G}})^{\otimes-m}. (4.5.3)

As OYB(A)O(E)(1)\scr{O}_{Y_{B^{\prime}}}(A^{\prime})\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\scr{E}^{\prime})}(1) and mgEhmg^{*}E_{h} is effective, the isomorphism (4.5.3) means

H0(B,SymmEdet(E)mOB(mnKG)1)0.H^{0}(B^{\prime},\operatorname{Sym}^{m}\scr{E}^{\prime}\otimes\det(\scr{E}^{\prime})^{\otimes-m}\otimes\scr{O}_{B^{\prime}}(mn^{*}K_{\scr{G}})^{\otimes-1})\not=0.

Then [AD14, Lemma 4.11] yields deg(nKG)0\deg(n^{*}K_{\scr{G}})\leq 0. As KGK_{\scr{G}} is pseudoeffective and CC is a general complete intersection, we must have KGB=0K_{\scr{G}}\cdot B^{\prime}=0. In particular, since ρ1(C)\rho^{-1}(C) is disjoint from supp(EG)supp(Exc(ρ))\operatorname{supp}(E_{\scr{G}})\subset\operatorname{supp}(\operatorname{Exc}(\rho)), we obtain

KQC=ρKQρ1(C)=(qKG+EG)ρ1(C)=qKGρ1(C)=0,K_{\scr{Q}}\cdot C=\rho^{*}K_{\scr{Q}}\cdot\rho^{-1}(C)=(q^{*}K_{\scr{G}}+E_{\scr{G}})\cdot\rho^{-1}(C)=q^{*}K_{\scr{G}}\cdot\rho^{-1}(C)=0,

where Q\scr{Q} is the reflexive hull of the quotient F/Fa\scr{F}/\scr{F}^{a} and KQK_{\scr{Q}} is a Weil divisor such that OX(KQ)det(Q)\scr{O}_{X}(-K_{\scr{Q}})\cong\det(\scr{Q}). Since KQK_{\scr{Q}} is pseudoeffective and CC is a general complete intersection, by [Pet94, Lemma 6.5] we obtain KQ0K_{\scr{Q}}\equiv 0. As a consequence, the algebraically integrable foliation Fa\scr{F}^{a} is a Fano foliation with KFaraA-K_{\scr{F}^{a}}\equiv r^{a}A and its general log leaf (F,ΔF)(F,\Delta_{F}) is isomorphic to the log algebraic part (F,DF)=(ra,H)(F,D_{F})=(\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}},H) of F\scr{F} as KQ|F0K_{\scr{Q}}|_{F}\equiv 0. Thus, applying [Hör14, Theorem 1.3] to (X,Fa)(X,\scr{F}^{a}) shows that the XX is a normal generalised cone over a \mathbb{Q}-factorial polarised variety (T,L)(T,\scr{L}) with vertex ra1\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}-1}. Here we remark that though [Hör14, Theorem 1.3] is stated for \mathbb{Q}-linear equivalence, the proof given there still works for numerical equivalence in our situation because the \mathbb{Q}-linear equivalence is only used to derive the description of the general log leaves by applying [AD14, Proposition 4.5], or equivalently Theorem 2.4, in Step 1 of its proof, see [Hör14, p.2476, Proof of Theorem 1.3] for details. However, this description holds automatically for (X,Fa)(X,\scr{F}^{a}) by the argument above.

Finally, by abuse of notation we may still denote by G\scr{G} the foliation on TT such that h1G=Fh^{-1}\scr{G}=\scr{F}, where h:XTh:X\dashrightarrow T is the natural rational map. Let π:U(LOTra)T\pi:U\coloneqq\mathbb{P}(\scr{L}\oplus\scr{O}_{T}^{\oplus r^{a}})\rightarrow T be corresponding projective bundle (cf. Example 4.4) and let EE be the exceptional divisor of μ:UX\mu:U\rightarrow X. Then it is clear that we have

μπKG=KQKFKFa0.\mu_{*}\pi^{*}K_{\scr{G}}=K_{\scr{Q}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}K_{\scr{F}}-K_{\scr{F}^{a}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}0.

On the other hand, we also have πKG+aEμKQ0\pi^{*}K_{\scr{G}}+aE\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\mu^{*}K_{\scr{Q}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}0 for some a0a\geq 0. Nevertheless, as the restriction E|FE|_{F} of EE to a general fibre FraF\cong\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}} of π\pi is a hyperplane, we must have a=0a=0 and hence KG0K_{\scr{G}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}0. ∎

4.3. Proof of Theorem 1.6 and Theorem 1.7

In this subsection we finish the proofs of Theorem 1.6 and Theorem 1.7 and the proofs are similar to that of Theorem 1.2 by applying Theorem 2.6. The following theorem is a slight generalisation of Theorem 1.6.

Theorem 4.6.

Let XX be a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation such that KFA+P-K_{\scr{F}}\equiv A+P, where AA is a nef \mathbb{R}-divisor and PP is a pseudoeffective \mathbb{R}-divisor. Then raϵ(A)r^{a}\geq\epsilon(A).

Proof.

If ra=0r^{a}=0, then F\scr{F} is purely transcendental and hence KFK_{\scr{F}} is pseudoeffective by Theorem 3.3. In particular, the pseudoeffective \mathbb{R}-divisor AKF+P-A\equiv K_{\scr{F}}+P is anti-nef by assumption and so A0A\equiv 0 and ϵ(A)=0\epsilon(A)=0.

Now suppose that ra>0r^{a}>0 and ϵ(A)>ra\epsilon(A)>r^{a}. Then the \mathbb{R}-divisor AA is nef and big. After replacing AA by (1ε)A(1-\varepsilon)A and PP by (1ε)A+P(1-\varepsilon)A+P for a sufficiently small number ε>0\varepsilon>0, we may assume that PP is actually a big \mathbb{R}-divisor. In particular, up to \mathbb{R}-linear equivalence, we may also assume that PP is an effective \mathbb{R}-divisor.

Let i:Fi(F)Xi:F\rightarrow i(F)\subset X be the normalisation of the closure of a general leaf of Fa\scr{F}^{a}. Denote by (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) the log algebraic part of a general leaf of F\scr{F}. As FF is general, we can assume that FF is not contained in the support of PP. In particular, the pull-back DPiPD_{P}\coloneqq i^{*}P is a well-defined effective \mathbb{R}-divisor and we have

KF+DF+DPiKF+iPiA.K_{F}+D_{F}+D_{P}\sim_{\mathbb{R}}i^{*}K_{\scr{F}}+i^{*}P\equiv-i^{*}A. (4.6.1)

By assumption, we have ϵ(iA)>ra=dim(F)\epsilon(i^{*}A)>r^{a}=\dim(F). Then Theorem 2.6 implies that the pair (F,DF+DP)(F,D_{F}+D_{P}) is klt, which contradicts Proposition 4.2. ∎

Corollary 4.7.

Let XX be a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety, and FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} a foliation with KF-K_{\scr{F}} ample. If ϵ(KF)ra\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})\geq r^{a}, then ϵ(KF)=ra\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=r^{a} and the log algebraic part (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) of a general leaf of F\scr{F} is isomorphic to (ra,H)(\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}},H), where HH is a hyperplane of ra\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}}. Moreover, there is a common point in the closure of a general leaf of Fa\scr{F}^{a}.

Proof.

The equality ϵ(KF)=ra\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=r^{a} follows from Theorem 4.6. On the other hand, by Theorem 3.3, we have ra>0r^{a}>0 as KF-K_{\scr{F}} is ample. Let (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) be the log algebraic part of a general leaf of F\scr{F}. Then we have

ϵ(KFDF)=ϵ(iKF)ϵ(KF)ra=dim(F).\epsilon(-K_{F}-D_{F})=\epsilon(-i^{*}K_{\scr{F}})\geq\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})\geq r^{a}=\dim(F). (4.7.1)

By Proposition 4.2, the pair (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) is not klt. Then Theorem 2.6 implies that there exists a birational morphism ν:Fra\nu:F\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}} such that there exits a hyperplane HH in ra\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}} satisfying ν1H=DF\nu^{-1}_{*}H=D_{F} and ν(Kra+H)=KF+DF\nu^{*}(K_{\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}}}+H)=K_{F}+D_{F}. As i:Fi(F)Xi:F\rightarrow i(F)\subset X is the normalisation and KF-K_{\scr{F}} is ample, the anti-log canonical divisor

(KF+DF)iKF-(K_{F}+D_{F})\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}-i^{*}K_{\scr{F}}

is ample. Moreover, as (Kra+H)-(K_{\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}}}+H) is ample, it follows that ν\nu is finite and hence ν\nu is an isomorphism. As a consequence, the pair (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) is lc and the result follows from Proposition 4.2. ∎

Proof of Theorem 1.6.

It follows from Theorem 4.6. ∎

The following theorem is a slight generalisation of Theorem 1.7.

Theorem 4.8.

Let XX be a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety and let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation such that KFA+P-K_{\scr{F}}\equiv A+P, where AA is a nef and big \mathbb{R}-divisor and PP is a pseudoeffective \mathbb{R}-divisor. If ϵ(A)>ra1\epsilon(A)>r^{a}-1, then the closure of a general leaf of the algebraic part Fa\scr{F}^{a} of F\scr{F} is rationally connected.

Proof.

Let 0<ε10<\varepsilon\ll 1 be a sufficiently small positive real number. After replacing AA by (1ε)A(1-\varepsilon)A and PP by (1ε)A+P(1-\varepsilon)A+P, we may assume that PP is an effective \mathbb{R}-divisor. Let i:Fi(F)Xi:F\rightarrow i(F)\subset X be the normalisation of the closure of a general leaf of the algebraic part of F\scr{F} and set DPiPD_{P}\coloneqq i^{*}P. Then we have

KF+DF+DPiKF+iPiA,K_{F}+D_{F}+D_{P}\sim_{\mathbb{R}}i^{*}K_{\scr{F}}+i^{*}P\equiv-i^{*}A,

where (F,DF)(F,D_{F}) is the log algebraic part of a general leaf of F\scr{F}. Since ε\varepsilon is a small positive real number and FF is general, by assumption we still have ϵ(iA)>ra1=dim(F)1\epsilon(i^{*}A)>r^{a}-1=\dim(F)-1 after replacing AA by (1ε)A(1-\varepsilon)A. Hence, it follows from Theorem 2.6 that FF is rationally connected. ∎

Proof of Theorem 1.7.

It follows from Theorem 4.8. ∎

5. Fano foliations with maximal Seshadri constants

In the section we study Fano foliations F\scr{F} on smooth projective varieties XX such that ϵ(KF)=ra\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=r^{a} and in particular we will prove Theorem 1.8.

5.1. Stability condition with respect to movable curve classes

In this subsection we briefly recall some basic facts about stability of coherent sheaves with respect to a movable curve class, see [GKP16]. Given a normal projective variety XX, we denote by N1(X)N_{1}(X)_{\mathbb{R}} the space of numerical curve classes. A curve class αN1(X)\alpha\in N_{1}(X)_{\mathbb{R}} is called movable if Dα0D\cdot\alpha\geq 0 for all effective Cartier divisors DD on XX.

Let XX be a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety and let αN1(X)\alpha\in N_{1}(X)_{\mathbb{R}} be a movable curve class. Similar to the classical case, given a torsion free coherent sheaf F\scr{F} with positive rank on XX, we can define the slope of F\scr{F} with respect to α\alpha to be the real number

μα(F)det(F)αrank(F).\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{F})\coloneqq\frac{\det(\scr{F})\cdot\alpha}{\operatorname{rank}(\scr{F})}.
Definition 5.1.

Let F\scr{F} be a non-zero torsion free coherent sheaf on a \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety XX and let αN1(X)\alpha\in N_{1}(X)_{\mathbb{R}} be a movable curve class. The sheaf F\scr{F} is α\alpha-semistable (resp. α\alpha-stable) if, for any subsheaf E\scr{E} of F\scr{F} such that 0<rank(E)<rank(F)0<\operatorname{rank}(\scr{E})<\operatorname{rank}(\scr{F}), one has

μα(E)μα(F)\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{E})\leq\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{F}) (resp. μα(E)<μα(F)\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{E})<\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{F})).

A number of known results from the classical case are extended to this setting. For example, the existences of maximally destabilising subsheaf and Harder-Narasimhan filtration are proved in [GKP16]. More precisely, recall that the maximal and minimal slopes of F\scr{F} with respect to α\alpha are defined as

μαmax(F)sup{μα(E)| 0EF\mu_{\alpha}^{\max}(\scr{F})\coloneqq\sup\{\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{E})\,|\,0\not=\scr{E}\subset\scr{F} is a coherent subsheaf }\}

and

μαmin(F)inf{μα(Q)|Q0\mu_{\alpha}^{\min}(\scr{F})\coloneqq\inf\{\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{Q})\,|\,\scr{Q}\not=0 is a torsion-free quotient of F}\scr{F}\}.

By [GKP16, Proposition 2.22 and Corollary 2.24], there exists a unique non-zero coherent subsheaf E\scr{E} of F\scr{F} such that μα(E)=μαmax(F)\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{E})=\mu_{\alpha}^{\max}(\scr{F}) and if EF\scr{E}^{\prime}\subset\scr{F} is any subsheaf with μα(E)=μαmax(F)\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{E}^{\prime})=\mu_{\alpha}^{\max}(\scr{F}), then EE\scr{E}^{\prime}\subset\scr{E}. We call this subsheaf E\scr{E} the maximal destablising subsheaf of F\scr{F} (with respect to α\alpha). Moreover, by [GKP16, Corollary 2.26], there exists a unique Harder-Narasimhan filtration of F\scr{F}; that is, a filtration

0=F0F1Fk=F,0=\scr{F}_{0}\subsetneq\scr{F}_{1}\subsetneq\dots\subsetneq\scr{F}_{k}=\scr{F},

where each quotient Qi=Fi/Fi1\scr{Q}_{i}=\scr{F}_{i}/\scr{F}_{i-1} is torsion free, α\alpha-semistable and where the sequence of slopes μα(Qi)\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{Q}_{i}) is strictly decreasing. In particular, the sheaf F1\scr{F}_{1} is exactly the maximal destabilizing subsheaf of F\scr{F}. Moreover, for each 1ik1\leq i\leq k, we have

μαmin(Fi)=μα(Qi)=μαmax(F/Fi1).\mu_{\alpha}^{\min}(\scr{F}_{i})=\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{Q}_{i})=\mu_{\alpha}^{\max}(\scr{F}/\scr{F}_{i-1}). (5.1.1)

Now we suppose that μαmax(F)>0\mu_{\alpha}^{\max}(\scr{F})>0 and set smax{1ik|μα(Qi)>0}s\coloneqq\max\{1\leq i\leq k\,|\,\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{Q}_{i})>0\}. Then we define the positive part of F\scr{F} with respect to α\alpha to be the sheaf Fα+Fs\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}\coloneqq\scr{F}_{s}.

Lemma 5.2 ([AD19, Corollary 2.18]).

Let F\scr{F} be a foliation on a normal \mathbb{Q}-factorial projective variety XX with μαmax(F)0\mu_{\alpha}^{\max}(\scr{F})\geq 0 for some movable class α\alpha. Then Fi\scr{F}_{i} is a foliation on XX whenever μα(Qi)0\mu_{\alpha}(\scr{Q}_{i})\geq 0.

Theorem 5.3 ([CP19, Theorem 1.1], compare it with Theorem 3.3).

Let F\scr{F} be a foliation on a normal \mathbb{Q}-factorial projective variety XX. If μαmin(F)>0\mu_{\alpha}^{\min}(\scr{F})>0 for some movable curve class α\alpha, then F\scr{F} is algebraically integrable and the closure of a general leaf is rationally connected.

We also need the following useful criterion for uniruledness.

Lemma 5.4 ([BDPP13, Theorem 2.7]).

Let XX be a projective manifold. If there exists a foliation FTX\scr{F}\subset T_{X} and a movable curve class α\alpha such that μαmax(F)>0\mu_{\alpha}^{\max}(\scr{F})>0, then XX is uniruled.

Proof.

Let F\scr{F}^{\prime} be the maximally destabilising subsheaf of F\scr{F} with respect to α\alpha. Then we have c1(F)α>0c_{1}(\scr{F}^{\prime})\cdot\alpha>0 and therefore det(F)\det(\scr{F}^{\prime*}) is not pseudoeffective. Applying [BDPP13, Theorem 2.7] yields that XX is uniruled. ∎

5.2. Minimal rational curves

Let XX be a uniruled projective manifold. Then there exists a covering family 𝒦\mathcal{K} of minimal rational curves; that is, an irreducible component of Ratcurvesn(X)\text{Ratcurves}^{n}(X) such that for a general point xXx\in X, the closed subset 𝒦x\mathcal{K}_{x} of 𝒦\mathcal{K} parametrising curves through xx is non-empty and propre, see [Kol96] for the details. Let CC be a general rational curve parametrised by 𝒦\mathcal{K}. Then CC is standard. In other words, there exists a non-negative integer dd such that

fTXO1(2)O1(1)dO1(nd1),f^{*}T_{X}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(2)\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1)^{\oplus d}\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}^{\oplus(n-d-1)},

where f:1Cf:\mathbb{P}^{1}\rightarrow C is the normalisation.

Given a covering family 𝒦\mathcal{K} of minimal rational curves on a uniruled projective manifold XX, let 𝒦¯\overline{\mathcal{K}} be the closure of 𝒦\mathcal{K} in Chow(X)\operatorname{Chow}(X). Two points xx, yXy\in X are said to be 𝒦\mathcal{K}-equivalent if they can be connected by a chain of 11-cycles from 𝒦¯\overline{\mathcal{K}}. This defines an equivalence relation on XX. By [Cam92] (see also [Kol96, IV, 4.16]), there exists a propre surjective equidimensional morphism π:XT\pi^{\circ}:X^{\circ}\rightarrow T^{\circ} from a dense open subset of XX onto a normal variety whose fibres are 𝒦\mathcal{K}-equivalence classes. We call this map the 𝒦\mathcal{K}-rationally connected quotient of XX.

Theorem 5.5 ([Ara06] and [ADK08, Proposition 2.7]).

Let XX be a uniruled projective manifold equipped with a covering family 𝒦\mathcal{K} of minimal rational curves. Let π:XT\pi^{\circ}:X^{\circ}\rightarrow T^{\circ} be the 𝒦\mathcal{K}-rationally connected quotient of XX. Assume that there exists a subsheaf FTX\scr{F}\subset T_{X} such that fFf^{*}\scr{F} is ample, where f:1Cf:\mathbb{P}^{1}\rightarrow C is the normalisation of a general curve parametrised by 𝒦\mathcal{K}. Then, after shrinking XX^{\circ} and TT^{\circ} if necessary, π\pi^{\circ} becomes a d+1\mathbb{P}^{d+1}-bundle, F|XTX/T\scr{F}|_{X^{\circ}}\subset T_{X^{\circ}/T^{\circ}} and every rational curve parametrised by 𝒦\mathcal{K} meeting XX^{\circ} is a line contained in the fibres of π\pi^{\circ}.

5.3. Proof of Theorem 1.8

From now on let XX be a projective manifold such that there exists a foliation FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} with KF-K_{\scr{F}} ample. Then XX is uniruled by Lemma 5.4. Fix a covering family 𝒦\mathcal{K} of minimal rational curves on XX. Let α=[C]\alpha=[C] be the numerical class of a general minimal rational curve CC parametrised by 𝒦\mathcal{K}. Denote by Fα+\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+} the positive part of F\scr{F} with respect to α\alpha. By Lemma 5.2, Theorem 5.3 and (5.1.1), the sheaf Fα+\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+} is an algebraically integrable foliation on XX and therefore Fα+Fa\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}\subset\scr{F}^{a}. In particular, we have r+rar^{+}\leq r^{a}, where r+r^{+} and rar^{a} are the ranks of Fα+\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+} and Fa\scr{F}^{a}, respectively. Denote by f:1Cf:\mathbb{P}^{1}\rightarrow C the normalisation of the standard rational curve CC and write

fTXO1(2)O1(1)dO1(nd1).f^{*}T_{X}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(2)\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1)^{\oplus d}\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}^{\oplus(n-d-1)}.

5.3.1. Step 1. Splitting type of Fα+\scr{F}^{+}_{\alpha}

We determine the possibilities of the splitting types of the positive part Fα+\scr{F}^{+}_{\alpha} along the general minimal rational curve CC.

Claim 5.6.

If ϵ(KF)=ra\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=r^{a}, then one of the following statements holds.

  1. (5.6.1)

    ra=r++1r^{a}=r^{+}+1 and fFα+O1(2)O1(1)(r+1)f^{*}\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(2)\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1)^{\oplus(r^{+}-1)}.

  2. (5.6.2)

    ra=r+r^{a}=r^{+} and fFα+O1(2)O1(1)(r+1)f^{*}\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(2)\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1)^{\oplus(r^{+}-1)}.

  3. (5.6.3)

    ra=r+r^{a}=r^{+} and fFα+O1(2)O1(1)(r+2)O1f^{*}\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(2)\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1)^{\oplus(r^{+}-2)}\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}, r+2r^{+}\geq 2.

  4. (5.6.4)

    ra=r+r^{a}=r^{+} and fFα+O1(1)r+f^{*}\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1)^{\oplus r^{+}}.

Proof of Claim 5.6.

Let Q\scr{Q} be the quotient F/Fα+\scr{F}/\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}. Let KQK_{\scr{Q}} be a Weil divisor on XX such that OX(KQ)det(Q)\scr{O}_{X}(-K_{\scr{Q}})\cong\det(\scr{Q}). Then we have KQα0K_{\scr{Q}}\cdot\alpha\geq 0 by the definition of Fα+\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+} and (5.1.1). In particular, we get

KFα+αKFα=KFCϵ(KF)=ra.-K_{\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}}\cdot\alpha\geq-K_{\scr{F}}\cdot\alpha=-K_{\scr{F}}\cdot C\geq\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=r^{a}.

On the other hand, as Fα+\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+} is saturated in TXT_{X} and CC is general, by [Kol96, II, Proposotion 3.7], we can assume that fFα+f^{*}\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+} is a subbundle of fTXf^{*}T_{X}. Write

fFα+O1(a1)O1(ar+)f^{*}\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(a_{1})\oplus\dots\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(a_{r^{+}})

with a1ar+a_{1}\geq\dots\geq a_{r^{+}}. Since CC is standard, we have a12a_{1}\leq 2, ai1a_{i}\leq 1 if 2id+12\leq i\leq d+1 and ai0a_{i}\leq 0 if id+2i\geq d+2, where d=KXC2d=-K_{X}\cdot C-2. In particular, one obtains

KFα+Cr++1-K_{\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}}\cdot C\leq r^{+}+1

with equality if and only if

fFα+O1(2)O1(1)(r+1).f^{*}\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(2)\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1)^{\oplus(r^{+}-1)}.

On the other hand, as r+rar^{+}\leq r^{a}, we get

ra+1r++1KFα+αra.r^{a}+1\geq r^{+}+1\geq-K_{\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}}\cdot\alpha\geq r^{a}.

If ra=r++1r^{a}=r^{+}+1, then we have KFα+C=r++1-K_{\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}}\cdot C=r^{+}+1 and we are in Case (5.6.1). On the other hand , if ra=r+r^{a}=r^{+}, then we have r++1KFα+Cr+r^{+}+1\geq-K_{\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}}\cdot C\geq r^{+} and the result follows from an easy computation. ∎

5.3.2. Step 2. General minimal rational curves are not tangent to Fα+\scr{F}^{+}_{\alpha}.

Claim 5.7.

Let CC be a general minimal rational curve parametrised by 𝒦\mathcal{K} with normalisation f:1Cf:\mathbb{P}^{1}\rightarrow C. Then T1T_{\mathbb{P}^{1}} is not contained in fFα+f^{*}\scr{F}_{\alpha}^{+}.

Proof of Claim 5.7.

Let π:UT\pi:U\rightarrow T be the family of leaves of Fa\scr{F}^{a} and ν:UX\nu:U\rightarrow X the evaluation morphism. By [Kol96, II, Proposition 3.7], we may assume that general minimal rational curves parametrised by 𝒦\mathcal{K} are disjoint from ν(Exc(ν))\nu(\operatorname{Exc}(\nu)).

Assume to the contrary that T1T_{\mathbb{P}^{1}} is contained in fFα+f^{*}\scr{F}^{+}_{\alpha}. Then we have T1fFaT_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}\subset f^{*}\scr{F}^{a}. In particular, there exists a general fibre FF of π\pi such that CC is contained in ν(F)\nu(F). Moreover, as CC is general, the preimage ν1(C)F\nu^{-1}(C)\subset F is disjoint from Exc(ν)F=supp(ΔF)\operatorname{Exc}(\nu)\cap F=\operatorname{supp}(\Delta_{F}) (see [AD19, Lemma 2.12]). Nevertheless, as FraF\cong\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}} has Picard number one and ΔF\Delta_{F} is a hyperplane in ra\mathbb{P}^{r^{a}} by Corollary 4.7, we get a contradiction. ∎

5.3.3. Step 3. End of proof.

We end the proof by showing that F\scr{F} is induced by a linear projection of n\mathbb{P}^{n} to nra\mathbb{P}^{n-r^{a}}. By Step 1 and Step 2, the splitting type fFα+f^{*}\scr{F}^{+}_{\alpha} must be of the form O1(1)r+\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1)^{\oplus r^{+}} and Fa=Fα+\scr{F}^{a}=\scr{F}^{+}_{\alpha}. Moreover, by Theorem 5.5, after shrinking TT^{\circ} if necessary, the 𝒦\mathcal{K}-rationally connected quotient π:XT\pi^{\circ}:X^{\circ}\rightarrow T^{\circ} is a d+1\mathbb{P}^{d+1}-bundle such that Fa|XTX/T\scr{F}^{a}|_{X^{\circ}}\subset T_{X^{\circ}/T^{\circ}}. On the other hand, according to Corollary 4.7, there is a common point in the closure of a general leaf of Fa\scr{F}^{a}. Hence, we must have dim(T)=0\dim(T)=0. As a consequence, we obtain XnX\cong\mathbb{P}^{n} and FaTn\scr{F}^{a}\subset T_{\mathbb{P}^{n}} is a foliation with rank rar^{a} and det(Fa)=On(ra)\det(\scr{F}^{a})=\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}(r^{a}). Moreover, as ϵ(On(1))=1\epsilon(\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}(1))=1 and ϵ(KF)=ra\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=r^{a}, we obtain

det(Fa)det(F)On(ra).\det(\scr{F}^{a})\cong\det(\scr{F})\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}(r^{a}).

Hence, by [AD19, Theorem 1.5 and Corollary 1.7], the foliation F\scr{F} is the linear pull-back of a purely transcendental foliation on nra\mathbb{P}^{n-r^{a}} with zero canonical class. This finishes the proof.

6. Examples and related questions

In this last section, we exhibit some examples concerning the sharpness of our main results and also propose a few interesting related questions. We start with the following simple observation.

Lemma 6.1.

In Example 4.3, if we assume furthermore that ZZ is smooth and Pic(Z)OZ(1)\operatorname{Pic}(Z)\cong\mathbb{Z}\scr{O}_{Z}(1), then we have

Nef(X)=Λ+b1πA,πA\operatorname{Nef}(X)=\langle\Lambda+b_{1}\pi^{*}A,\pi^{*}A\rangle and Pseff(X)=E,πA\operatorname{Pseff}(X)=\langle E,\pi^{*}A\rangle.

Proof.

The description of the nef cone of XX is obvious and we only need to deal with the pseudoeffective cone of XX. Let α\alpha be the unique real number such that ΛαπA\Lambda-\alpha\pi^{*}A generates an extremal ray of Pseff(X)\operatorname{Pseff}(X). As EΛmπAE\sim\Lambda-m\pi^{*}A is effective, we must have αm\alpha\geq m. In particular, the restriction (ΛαπA)|E(\Lambda-\alpha\pi^{*}A)|_{E} is not pseudoeffective. As a consequence, the divisor ΛαπA\Lambda-\alpha\pi^{*}A is not modified nef and hence there exists a unique prime effective divisor DD^{\prime} such that [D]>0(ΛαπA)[D^{\prime}]\in\mathbb{R}_{>0}(\Lambda-\alpha\pi^{*}A) by [HLS22, Lemma 2.5]. In particular, as D|ED^{\prime}|_{E} is not pseudoeffective, we obtain D=ED^{\prime}=E and α=m\alpha=m. ∎

Example 6.2.

Let (r,n)(r,n) be a pair of positive integers such that r<nr<n. Then for any integer drd\geq-r, there exists a foliation F\scr{F} on n\mathbb{P}^{n} with algebraic rank ra=rr^{a}=r and such that On(KF)On(d)\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}(K_{\scr{F}})\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}(d).

  1. (6.2.1)

    If rn2r\leq n-2, we may take π:nnr\pi:\mathbb{P}^{n}\dashrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{n-r} to be a linear projective and then take GTnr\scr{G}\subsetneq T_{\mathbb{P}^{n-r}} to be a purely transcendental rank one foliation on nr\mathbb{P}^{n-r} such that

    GOnr(dr)andd+r0.\scr{G}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n-r}}(-d-r)\quad\text{and}\quad d+r\geq 0.

    Then the pull-back F=π1G\scr{F}=\pi^{-1}\scr{G} is a foliation with algebraic rank ra=rr^{a}=r and such that det(F)On(d)\det(\scr{F})\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}(-d).

  2. (6.2.2)

    If r=n1r=n-1, we may take π:n1\pi:\mathbb{P}^{n}\dashrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1} to be a rational map defined by two general coprime homogeneous polynomials ff with degree dfd_{f} and gg with degree dgd_{g} such that d=df+dgn1d=d_{f}+d_{g}-n-1. Then the foliation F\scr{F} induced by π\pi has algebraic rank ra=n1r^{a}=n-1 and det(F)On(d)\det(\scr{F})\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}(-d).

6.1. Generalised index and Seshadri constant

In this subsection, we will discuss the sharpness of Theorem 1.2 and Theorem 4.6. Firstly let us recall the following question asked by Araujo and Druel in [AD19] on the generalised indices of foliations.

Question 6.3 ([AD19, Question 4.4]).

Is there a foliation F\scr{F} on a projective manifold XX with ι^(F)\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})\not\in\mathbb{N} and ι^(F)<ra<ι^(F)+1\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})<r^{a}<\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})+1?

We will give a positive answer to this question by constructing foliations on the projective bundles XX given in Example 4.3. We start with the following general result.

Lemma 6.4.

In Example 4.3, we assume furthermore that ZZ is smooth and Pic(Z)OZ(1)\operatorname{Pic}(Z)\cong\mathbb{Z}\scr{O}_{Z}(1). Let DβΛ+γπAD\equiv\beta\Lambda+\gamma\pi^{*}A be a \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor on XX. If DD is big but not ample, i.e., mβ<γb1β-m\beta<\gamma\leq b_{1}\beta, then we have

ι^(D)=βm+γm+b1+1.\widehat{\iota}(D)=\frac{\beta m+\gamma}{m+b_{1}+1}.
Proof.

Write Dι^(D)H+PD\equiv\widehat{\iota}(D)H+P for an ample Cartier divisor HH and a pseudoeffective \mathbb{R}-Cartier \mathbb{R}-divisor PP. Let aa and ee be the unique non-negative real numbers such that PeE+aπAP\equiv eE+a\pi^{*}A. If e=0e=0, then PaπAP\equiv a\pi^{*}A is nef. In particular, the divisor DD is ample, which is impossible by our assumption. Thus we must have e>0e>0. On the other hand, if a>0a>0, then PP is big and consequently there exists a positive real number tt such that PtHP-tH is pseudoeffective. In particular, we get

Dι^(D)H+P(ι^(D)+t)H+(PtH),D\equiv\widehat{\iota}(D)H+P\equiv(\widehat{\iota}(D)+t)H+(P-tH),

which is absurd. Hence, we have a=0a=0 and PeEP\equiv eE with e>0e>0.

Since HH is an ample Cartier divisor, by the description of Nef(X)\operatorname{Nef}(X), there exists two positive integers dd and c>b1dc>b_{1}d such that HdΛ+cπAH\equiv d\Lambda+c\pi^{*}A. By definition, we have

DPDeE\displaystyle D-P\equiv D-eE (βe)Λ+(em+γ)πA\displaystyle\equiv(\beta-e)\Lambda+(em+\gamma)\pi^{*}A
ι^(D)(dΛ+cπA).\displaystyle\equiv\widehat{\iota}(D)(d\Lambda+c\pi^{*}A).

Since Λ\Lambda and πA\pi^{*}A are linearly independent, this implies

ι^(D)=βed\widehat{\iota}(D)=\frac{\beta-e}{d} (6.4.1)

and

em+γ=ι^(D)cι^(D)(b1d+1).em+\gamma=\widehat{\iota}(D)c\geq\widehat{\iota}(D)(b_{1}d+1). (6.4.2)

Then combining (6.4.1) and (6.4.2) yields

(md+b1d+1)eβ(b1d+1)dγ.(md+b_{1}d+1)e\geq\beta(b_{1}d+1)-d\gamma. (6.4.3)

In particular, we obtain

eβ(db1+1)dγmd+b1d+1.e\geq\frac{\beta(db_{1}+1)-d\gamma}{md+b_{1}d+1}. (6.4.4)

Then combining (6.4.4) with (6.4.1) gives

ι^(D)β(md+b1d+1)β(b1d+1)+dγd(md+b1d+1)βm+γm+b1+1\widehat{\iota}(D)\leq\frac{\beta(md+b_{1}d+1)-\beta(b_{1}d+1)+d\gamma}{d(md+b_{1}d+1)}\leq\frac{\beta m+\gamma}{m+b_{1}+1} (6.4.5)

and the equality holds if and only if d=1d=1 and c=b1+1c=b_{1}+1. ∎

Proposition 6.5.

Let (r,n)(r,n) be a pair of positive integers such that r<nr<n and n3n\geq 3. Then for any positive rational number crc\leq r, there exists an nn-dimensional projective manifold XX and a foliation FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} with algebraic rank ra=rr^{a}=r such that KF-K_{\scr{F}} is big and

ι^(F)=ϵ(ι^(F)H)=c,\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=\epsilon(\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})H)=c,

where HH is an ample Cartier divisor HH such that PKFι^(F)HP\coloneqq-K_{\scr{F}}-\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})H is pseudoeffective.

Proof.

By Example 6.2, we may assume that cc\not\in\mathbb{Z}. In particular, there exist two positive integers pp and qq such that c=p/q<rc=p/q<r.
Case 1. r>c>1r>c>1, i.e. p>qp>q. Let ll be a large enough positive integer such that

l(pq)+(pqr)+1>0andpq(11ql)r+1ql.l(p-q)+(p-qr)+1>0\quad\text{and}\quad\frac{p}{q}\leq\left(1-\frac{1}{ql}\right)r+\frac{1}{ql}. (6.5.1)

Note that this is possible because q<p<qrq<p<qr. Let b1=lq1b_{1}=lq-1 and let bib_{i} (2ir)(2\leq i\leq r) be some non-negative integers such that

bb1=i=2rbi=l(pq)+(pqr)+1.b-b_{1}=\sum_{i=2}^{r}b_{i}=l(p-q)+(p-qr)+1. (6.5.2)

The existence of bib_{i}’s follows from the fact that by (6.5.1) we have bb1>0b-b_{1}>0 and

bb1=l(pq)+(pqr)+1l(pq)(lq1)(r1)=b1(r1).b-b_{1}=l(p-q)+(p-qr)+1\leq l(p-q)\leq(lq-1)(r-1)=b_{1}(r-1).

Let (Z,OZ(1))(Z,\scr{O}_{Z}(1)) be the pair (nr,Onr(1))(\mathbb{P}^{n-r},\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n-r}}(1)) and let π:XZ\pi:X\rightarrow Z be the projective bundle constructed in Example 4.3 with m=qm=q, r=rr^{\prime}=r and bib_{i}’s chosen as above. Let F\scr{F} be the algebraically integrable foliation induced by π\pi. Then we have

KF=KX/Z(r+1)Λ(qb)πA.-K_{\scr{F}}=-K_{X/Z}\sim(r+1)\Lambda-(q-b)\pi^{*}A.

In particular, KF-K_{\scr{F}} is big but not ample, and by Lemma 6.4 we have

ι^(F)=ι^(KF)=(r+1)q+bqq+lq=pq.\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=\widehat{\iota}(-K_{\scr{F}})=\frac{(r+1)q+b-q}{q+lq}=\frac{p}{q}. (6.5.3)

Case 2. 0<c<10<c<1, i.e. p<qp<q. Let (Z,OZ(1))(Z,\scr{O}_{Z}(1)) be the pair (n1,On1(1))(\mathbb{P}^{n-1},\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n-1}}(1)) and let XX be the nn-dimensional projective manifold constructed in Example 4.3 with mm and b=b1b=b_{1} to be determined. Let G\scr{G} be a foliation on ZZ with algebraic rank r1r-1 and OZ(KG)OZ(d)\scr{O}_{Z}(K_{\scr{G}})\cong\scr{O}_{Z}(d) with dr+1d\geq-r+1 to be determined. Denote by F\scr{F} the pull-back π1G\pi^{-1}\scr{G}. Then by [AD19, 2.6], we have

KF=KX/ZπKG=2Λ+(bmd)πA.-K_{\scr{F}}=-K_{X/Z}-\pi^{*}K_{\scr{G}}=2\Lambda+(b-m-d)\pi^{*}A. (6.5.4)

Note that KF-K_{\scr{F}} is big but not ample if and only if 2m<bmd2b-2m<b-m-d\leq 2b by Lemma 6.1. Moreover, if so, then Lemma 6.4 implies

ι^(F)=2m+bmdm+b+1=m+bdm+b+1.\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=\frac{2m+b-m-d}{m+b+1}=\frac{m+b-d}{m+b+1}. (6.5.5)

Set m=qm=q, b=q1b=q-1 and let d=2(qp)111rd=2(q-p)-1\geq 1\geq 1-r. Then the existence of (n1,G)(\mathbb{P}^{n-1},\scr{G}) follows from Example 6.2. Moreover, it is easy to see that 2m<bmd2b-2m<b-m-d\leq 2b and therefore by (6.5.5) a straightforward computation shows that

ι^(F)=q+q1(2(qp)1)q+q1+1=pq.\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=\frac{q+q-1-(2(q-p)-1)}{q+q-1+1}=\frac{p}{q}. (6.5.6)

Finally note that the line bundle O(E)(1)πOZ(b1+1)\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}(\scr{E})}(1)\otimes\pi^{*}\scr{O}_{Z}(b_{1}+1) is very ample in both cases and consequently we have ϵ(H)1\epsilon(H)\geq 1, where H=Λ+(b1+1)πAH=\Lambda+(b_{1}+1)\pi^{*}A. On the other hand, since the restriction of HH to fibres of π\pi is a hyperplane section, we obtain ϵ(H)=1\epsilon(H)=1. Moreover, by the proof of Lemma 6.4, in both cases we have KFι^(F)H+eE-K_{\scr{F}}\equiv\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})H+eE for some positive rational number e>0e>0. This finishes the proof. ∎

Example 6.6.

Let a2a\geq 2 be a positive integer and let π:X1\pi:X\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1} be the Hirzebruch surface (O1(a1)O1)\mathbb{P}(\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(a-1)\oplus\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}). Denote by F\scr{F} the foliation induced by π\pi. Then we have

KF2Λ(a1)πA,-K_{\scr{F}}\sim 2\Lambda-(a-1)\pi^{*}A,

where AA is a point on 1\mathbb{P}^{1}. Then KF-K_{\scr{F}} is big but not ample by Lemma 6.1 and by Lemma 6.4 we have

ι^(KF)=ϵ(ι^(F)H)=2(a1)(a1)a=11a,\widehat{\iota}(-K_{\scr{F}})=\epsilon(\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})H)=\frac{2(a-1)-(a-1)}{a}=1-\frac{1}{a},

where H=Λ+πAH=\Lambda+\pi^{*}A is an ample Cartier divisor such that KFι^(F)H-K_{\scr{F}}-\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})H is pseudoeffective. As a consequence, combining this example with Proposition 6.5 gives a positive answer to Question 6.3.

Question 6.7.

Given any positive rational number c<1c<1, does there exist a smooth projective surface XX and a foliation F\scr{F} on XX such that KF-K_{\scr{F}} is big and ι^(F)=c\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=c? By Example 6.6, the answer is positive if cc is contained in the standard multiplicities

Φ{11a|a>1}.\Phi\coloneqq\left\{1-\frac{1}{a}\,|\,a\in\mathbb{Z}_{>1}\right\}.

6.2. Fano index and Seshadri constant

In this subsection, we will discuss the sharpness of Theorem 1.3, Theorem 1.6 and Theorem 1.8. Let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a Fano foliation on a normal projective variety XX. By definition, it is clear that we have ι(F)ι^(F)\iota(\scr{F})\leq\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F}). The following example shows that this inequality may be strict in general case.

Example 6.8.

Let r2r\geq 2 be a fixed positive integer. In Example 4.3, let r=rr^{\prime}=r, m=1m=1 and bi=r2b_{i}=r-2 for any 1ir1\leq i\leq r^{\prime}. Moreover, by Example 6.2, we may choose a foliation G\scr{G} on nr\mathbb{P}^{n-r} such that det(G)On(r)\det(\scr{G})\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n}}(r) and 2r<n12r<n-1. Denote by F\scr{F} the pull-back π1G\pi^{-1}\scr{G}. Then we have

KF\displaystyle K_{\scr{F}} (r+1)Λπ(r(r2)1)A+πKG\displaystyle\sim-(r+1)\Lambda-\pi^{*}(r(r-2)-1)A+\pi^{*}K_{\scr{G}}
(r+1)Λ((r+1)(r2)+1)πA.\displaystyle\sim-(r+1)\Lambda-((r+1)(r-2)+1)\pi^{*}A.

In particular, by Lemma 6.1, KF-K_{\scr{F}} is ample. On the other hand, note that we have

KFErΛ+((r+1)(r2)+2))πA=r(Λ+(r1)πA)-K_{\scr{F}}-E\sim r\Lambda+((r+1)(r-2)+2))\pi^{*}A=r(\Lambda+(r-1)\pi^{*}A)

and therefore ι^(F)r\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})\geq r. On the other hand, let H=dΛ+cπAH=d\Lambda+c\pi^{*}A be an ample Cartier divisor such that dd and cc are two positive integers satisfying

cb1d+1=d(r2)+1c\geq b_{1}d+1=d(r-2)+1 and KFι(F)H-K_{\scr{F}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\iota(\scr{F})H.

Then we obtain

ι(F)d=r+1\iota(\scr{F})d=r+1 and ι(F)c=(r+1)(r2)+1\iota(\scr{F})c=(r+1)(r-2)+1.

This yields

(r+1)(r2)+1=ι(F)cι(F)(d(r2)+1)(r+1)(r2)+ι(F).(r+1)(r-2)+1=\iota(\scr{F})c\geq\iota(\scr{F})(d(r-2)+1)\geq(r+1)(r-2)+\iota(\scr{F}).

Thus we obtain ι(F)1\iota(\scr{F})\leq 1 and hence ι(F)=1<rι^(F)\iota(\scr{F})=1<r\leq\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F}).

Lemma 6.9.

In Example 4.4, we assume furthermore that ZZ is smooth and OZ(1)\scr{O}_{Z}(1) is globally generated. Let H\scr{H} be a foliation on ZZ with OZ(KH)OZ(d)\scr{O}_{Z}(K_{\scr{H}})\cong\scr{O}_{Z}(d) and let F\scr{F} be the foliation induced by H\scr{H} on the normal generalised cone YY over (Z,OZ(m))(Z,\scr{O}_{Z}(m)) with vertex r\mathbb{P}^{r^{\prime}}. If d<mrd<mr^{\prime}, then F\scr{F} is a Fano foliation on YY such that

ϵ(KF)=ι(F)=ι^(F)=rdm.\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=\iota(\scr{F})=\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=r^{\prime}-\frac{d}{m}.
Proof.

We follow the notations in Example 4.3 and Example 4.4. Let HH be the ample Cartier divisor on YY such that μH=Λ\mu^{*}H=\Lambda. As YY is covered by rational curves of HH-degree one and |Λ||\Lambda| is base-point free, we have ϵ(H)=ϵ(Λ)=1\epsilon(H)=\epsilon(\Lambda)=1. Let G\scr{G} be the pull-back foliation π1H\pi^{-1}\scr{H} on XX. By [AD19, 2.6], we have

KG=KX/Z+πKH(r+1)Λ+(m+d)πA.K_{\scr{G}}=K_{X/Z}+\pi^{*}K_{\scr{H}}\sim-(r^{\prime}+1)\Lambda+(m+d)\pi^{*}A. (6.9.1)

As mμπAHm\mu_{*}\pi^{*}A\sim H and μΛ=H\mu_{*}\Lambda=H, one gets

KF=μKG(r+1m+dm)H=(rdm)H.-K_{\scr{F}}=-\mu_{*}K_{\scr{G}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\left(r^{\prime}+1-\frac{m+d}{m}\right)H=\left(r^{\prime}-\frac{d}{m}\right)H. (6.9.2)

Hence, the \mathbb{Q}-Cartier divisor KF-K_{\scr{F}} is ample if and only if d<mrd<mr^{\prime}. Moreover, if so, then we have ι(F)=ϵ(KF)=ι^(F)=rd/m\iota(\scr{F})=\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=r^{\prime}-d/m since YY is covered by rational curves with HH-degree one. ∎

Proposition 6.10.

Let (r,n)(r,n) be a pair of positive integers such that r<nr<n. For any rational number cmin{r,n2}c\leq\min\{r,n-2\}, there exists an nn-dimensional \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective variety XX with klt singularities and a Fano foliation FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} with algebraic rank ra=rr^{a}=r such that

ι(F)=ι^(F)=ϵ(KF)=c.\iota(\scr{F})=\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=c.
Proof.

By Example 6.2, we may assume that cc\not\in\mathbb{Z}. Write cc=p/q<1\lceil c\rceil-c=p/q<1 for some positive integers pp and qq. Denote c\lceil c\rceil by rr^{\prime}. Then we have nr2n-r^{\prime}\geq 2. Let YY be the normal generalised cone over the base (nr,Onr(q))(\mathbb{P}^{n-r^{\prime}},\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n-r^{\prime}}}(q)) with vertex r1\mathbb{P}^{r^{\prime}-1}. Let H\scr{H} be a foliation on nr\mathbb{P}^{n-r^{\prime}} with algebraic rank rrr-r^{\prime} and such that Onr(KH)Onr(p)\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n-r^{\prime}}}(K_{\scr{H}})\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n-r^{\prime}}}(p) (cf. Example 6.2). Denote by F\scr{F} the foliation on YY induced by H\scr{H}. Then F\scr{F} has algebraic rank rr and by Lemma 6.9 we have

ϵ(KF)=ι(F)=ι^(F)=rpq=cpq=c.\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=\iota(\scr{F})=\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=r^{\prime}-\frac{p}{q}=\lceil c\rceil-\frac{p}{q}=c.

This finishes the proof. ∎

Remark 6.11.

In general the foliations constructed in Proposition 6.10 are very far from being log canonical in the sense of McQuillan ([AD13, 3.9]).

In the following we consider codimension one algebraically integrable foliations.

Example 6.12.

Let XX be the weighted projective space (1,a1,,an)\mathbb{P}(1,a_{1},\dots,a_{n}) where a1ana_{1}\leq\dots\leq a_{n} are positive positive integers satisfying gcd(a1,,an)=1\text{gcd}(a_{1},\dots,a_{n})=1. Then XX is \mathbb{Q}-factorial Fano variety of Picard number one and with klt singularities. Let F\scr{F} be the foliation induced by the rational map X1X\dashrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1} by sending [x0:x1::xn][x_{0}:x_{1}:\dots:x_{n}] to [x0a1:x1][x_{0}^{a_{1}}:x_{1}]. Then we have

KF(i=2nan)H,-K_{\scr{F}}\sim_{\mathbb{Q}}\left(\sum_{i=2}^{n}a_{n}\right)H,

where HH is the prime divisor on XX defined as {x0=0}\{x_{0}=0\}. Moreover, note that the Cartier index of HH is lcm(a1,,an)\text{lcm}(a_{1},\dots,a_{n}) and by [LZ18, Example 22] we have ϵ(H)=1/an\epsilon(H)=1/a_{n}.

  1. (6.12.1)

    Assume that n3n\geq 3. Set a1=a2=1a_{1}=a_{2}=1 and a3==an=ma_{3}=\dots=a_{n}=m. Then F\scr{F} is a Fano foliation satisfying

    ι^(F)=ι(F)=ε(KF)=n2+1m.\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=\iota(\scr{F})=\varepsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=n-2+\frac{1}{m}.

    We remark that here XX is nothing but the normal generalised cone over the base (2,O2(m))(\mathbb{P}^{2},\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{2}}(m)) with vertex n3\mathbb{P}^{n-3} and F\scr{F} is the obtained as the pull-back of the foliation by lines on 2\mathbb{P}^{2} induced by a linear projection 21\mathbb{P}^{2}\dashrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1}.

  2. (6.12.2)

    Assume that n3n\geq 3. Set a1==an1=ma_{1}=\dots=a_{n-1}=m^{\prime} and an=ma_{n}=m. Then F\scr{F} is a Fano foliation satisfying

    ι^(F)=ι(F)=(n2)m+mmmandϵ(KF)=1+(n2)mm.\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=\iota(\scr{F})=\frac{(n-2)m^{\prime}+m}{m^{\prime}m}\quad\text{and}\quad\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=1+\frac{(n-2)m^{\prime}}{m}.

    In particular, for any rational number n2<c<n1n-2<c<n-1, we may choose suitable coprime positive integers mm^{\prime} and mm such that m<mm^{\prime}<m and ϵ(KF)=c\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=c.

  3. (6.12.3)

    Assume that n=2n=2. Then F\scr{F} is a Fano foliation on the surface XX satisfying

    ι^(F)=ι(F)=1a1andϵ(KF)=1.\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=\iota(\scr{F})=\frac{1}{a_{1}}\quad\text{and}\quad\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=1.
  4. (6.12.4)

    Assume that n=2n=2 and let G\scr{G} be the foliation induced by the rational map X1X\dashrightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1} by sending [x0:x1:x2][x_{0}:x_{1}:x_{2}] to [x0a2:x2][x_{0}^{a_{2}}:x_{2}]. Then G\scr{G} is a Fano foliation such that KG=a1H-K_{\scr{G}}=a_{1}H. In particular, we have

    ι^(G)=ι(G)=1a2andϵ(KG)=a1a2.\widehat{\iota}(\scr{G})=\iota(\scr{G})=\frac{1}{a_{2}}\quad\text{and}\quad\epsilon(-K_{\scr{G}})=\frac{a_{1}}{a_{2}}.

    As a consequence, for any rational number 0<c<10<c<1, we may choose suitable coprime integers a1a_{1} and a2a_{2} such that a1<a2a_{1}<a_{2} and ϵ(KG)=c\epsilon(-K_{\scr{G}})=c.

Question 6.13.

According to Proposition 6.10 and Example 6.12, it is natural to ask the following question. Given a positive integer n2n\geq 2 and a rational number n2<c<n1n-2<c<n-1, does there exist Fano foliations F\scr{F} on an nn-dimensional projective variety XX such that ι^(F)=ι(F)=c\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=\iota(\scr{F})=c? Note that by Example 6.12 we have a positive answer if cc is contained in the following set

{n2+1a|a>0}.\{n-2+\frac{1}{a}\,|\,a\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0}\}.

Now we are in the position to finish the proof of Proposition 1.9.

Proof of Proposition 1.9.

It follows from Proposition 6.5, Proposition 6.10 and Example 6.12. ∎

6.3. Rationally connectedness and Seshadri constant

In this last subsection we discuss the sharpness ofTheorem 1.7 and Theorem 4.8. Let Xn+1X\subset\mathbb{P}^{n+1} be the cone over a plane curve of degree three. Then XX is a Fano variety with lc singularities such that ϵ(KX)=n1\epsilon(-K_{X})=n-1, but XX is not rationally connected. In particular, this shows that Theorem 2.6 (1) is sharp. On the other hand, it is shown by Araujo and Druel in [AD19, Theorem 1.8] that the general leaf of the algebraic part of a foliation FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} on a projective manifold XX is rationally connected if ι^(F)ra1\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})\geq r^{a}-1.

Example 6.14.

Let (r,n)(r,n) be a pair of positive integers such that 1<r<n1<r<n. Let YY be the normal generalised cone over (nr+1,Onr+1(m))(\mathbb{P}^{n-r+1},\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n-r+1}}(m)) for some positive integer mm. Let H\scr{H} be an algebraically integrable foliation by curves on nr+1\mathbb{P}^{n-r+1} such that HOnr+1(d)\scr{H}\cong\scr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{n-r+1}}(-d) for some d>0d>0 and the closure of the general leaf of H\scr{H} is a smooth curve of genus at least two. Let F\scr{F} be the foliation on YY induced by H\scr{H}. If d<m(r1)d<m(r-1), then F\scr{F} is an algebraically integrable Fano foliation with rank rr and by Lemma 6.9 we have

ϵ(KF)=ι(F)=ι^(F)=r1dm.\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=\iota(\scr{F})=\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=r-1-\frac{d}{m}.

In particular, if mm tends to infinity, then ϵ(KF)\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}}) tends to r1r-1 from left. Moreover, the closure of the general leaf of F\scr{F} is actually a normal generalised cone over a smooth curve with genus at least two and hence it is not rationally connected.

Example 6.15.

Let (r,n)(r,n) be a pair of positive integers such that 1<r<n1<r<n. Let WW be an (nr)(n-r)-dimensional projective manifold with KW0K_{W}\equiv 0 and let CC be an elliptic curve. Set Z=C×WZ=C\times W and denote by HOZ\scr{H}\cong\scr{O}_{Z} the foliation by curves on ZZ induced by the projection Z=C×WWZ=C\times W\rightarrow W. Let YY be the normal generalised cone over (Z,OZ(m))(Z,\scr{O}_{Z}(m)), where OZ(1)\scr{O}_{Z}(1) is a very ample line bundle over ZZ. Then YY has only lc singularities. Let F\scr{F} be the foliation on YY induced by H\scr{H}. Then F\scr{F} is an algebraically integrable foliation whose general leaves are not rationally connected. Moreover, by Lemma 6.9 we have

ϵ(KF)=ι(F)=ι^(F)=r1.\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=\iota(\scr{F})=\widehat{\iota}(\scr{F})=r-1.

The following question is communicated to me by the anonymous referee.

Question 6.16.

Let FTX\scr{F}\subsetneq T_{X} be a foliation with positive enough tangent sheaf on a projective variety XX with mild singularities. Does F\scr{F} have mild singularities? We refer the reader to [AD13, § 3] for the different definitions of singularities of foliations.

In Theorem 1.8, we have classified Fano foliations on smooth projective varieties with maximal Seshadri constant and the smoothness plays a key role in the proof. On the other hand, in the viewpoint of Kobayashi-Ochiai’s theorem for foliation (cf. Theorem 1.3), it is natural to ask the same question for singular varieties.

Question 6.17.

Classify those Fano foliations F\scr{F} on \mathbb{Q}-factorial normal projective varieties (with klt singularities) such that ϵ(KF)=ra\epsilon(-K_{\scr{F}})=r^{a}.

References

  • [AD13] Carolina Araujo and Stéphane Druel. On Fano foliations. Adv. Math., 238:70–118, 2013.
  • [AD14] Carolina Araujo and Stéphane Druel. On codimension 1 del Pezzo foliations on varieties with mild singularities. Math. Ann., 360(3-4):769–798, 2014.
  • [AD19] Carolina Araujo and Stéphane Druel. Characterization of generic projective space bundles and algebraicity of foliations. Comment. Math. Helv., 94(4):833–853, 2019.
  • [ADK08] Carolina Araujo, Stéphane Druel, and Sándor J. Kovács. Cohomological characterizations of projective spaces and hyperquadrics. Invent. Math., 174(2):233–253, 2008.
  • [Ara06] Carolina Araujo. Rational curves of minimal degree and characterizations of projective spaces. Math. Ann., 335(4):937–951, 2006.
  • [BDPP13] Sébastien Boucksom, Jean-Pierre Demailly, Mihai Păun, and Thomas Peternell. The pseudo-effective cone of a compact Kähler manifold and varieties of negative Kodaira dimension. J. Algebraic Geom., 22(2):201–248, 2013.
  • [Bir12] Caucher Birkar. Existence of log canonical flips and a special LMMP. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci., 115:325–368, 2012.
  • [BLR95] Siegfried Bosch, Werner Lütkebohmert, and Michel Raynaud. Formal and rigid geometry. IV. The reduced fibre theorem. Invent. Math., 119(2):361–398, 1995.
  • [Bou04] Sébastien Boucksom. Divisorial Zariski decompositions on compact complex manifolds. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4), 37(1):45–76, 2004.
  • [BS09] Thomas Bauer and Tomasz Szemberg. Seshadri constants and the generation of jets. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 213(11):2134–2140, 2009.
  • [Cam92] Frédéric Campana. Connexité rationnelle des variétés de Fano. Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4), 25(5):539–545, 1992.
  • [CP19] Frédéric Campana and Mihai Păun. Foliations with positive slopes and birational stability of orbifold cotangent bundles. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci., 129:1–49, 2019.
  • [Deb01] Olivier Debarre. Higher-dimensional algebraic geometry. Universitext. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2001.
  • [Dem92] Jean-Pierre Demailly. Singular Hermitian metrics on positive line bundles. In Complex algebraic varieties (Bayreuth, 1990), volume 1507 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages 87–104. Springer, Berlin, 1992.
  • [Dru17] Stéphane Druel. On foliations with nef anti-canonical bundle. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 369(11):7765–7787, 2017.
  • [Fuj89] Takao Fujita. Remarks on quasi-polarized varieties. Nagoya Math. J., 115:105–123, 1989.
  • [GKP16] Daniel Greb, Stefan Kebekus, and Thomas Peternell. Movable curves and semistable sheaves. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (2):536–570, 2016.
  • [Gro66] Alexander Grothendieck. Éléments de géométrie algébrique. IV. Étude locale des schémas et des morphismes de schémas. III. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (28):255, 1966.
  • [HLS22] Andreas Höring, Jie Liu, and Feng Shao. Examples of Fano manifolds with non-pseudoeffective tangent bundle. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2), 106(1):27–59, 2022.
  • [Hör14] Andreas Höring. Twisted cotangent sheaves and a Kobayashi-Ochiai theorem for foliations. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble), 64(6):2465–2480, 2014.
  • [KM98] János Kollár and Shigefumi Mori. Birational geometry of algebraic varieties, volume 134 of Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998.
  • [KO73] Shoshichi Kobayashi and Takushiro Ochiai. Characterizations of complex projective spaces and hyperquadrics. J. Math. Kyoto Univ., 13:31–47, 1973.
  • [Kol96] János Kollár. Rational curves on algebraic varieties, volume 32 of Ergeb. Math. Grenzgeb., 3. Folge. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1996.
  • [Kol97] János Kollár. Singularities of pairs. In Algebraic geometry—Santa Cruz 1995, volume 62 of Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., pages 221–287. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1997.
  • [Laz04] Robert Lazarsfeld. Positivity in algebraic geometry. I. Classical setting: line bundles and linear series, volume 48 of Ergeb. Math. Grenzgeb., 3. Folge. Berlin: Springer, 2004.
  • [Liu19] Jie Liu. Characterization of projective spaces and r\mathbb{P}^{r} -bundles as ample divisors. Nagoya Math. J., 233:155–169, 2019.
  • [LPT18] Frank Loray, Jorge Vitório Pereira, and Frédéric Touzet. Singular foliations with trivial canonical class. Invent. Math., 213(3):1327–1380, 2018.
  • [LZ18] Yuchen Liu and Ziquan Zhuang. Characterization of projective spaces by Seshadri constants. Math. Z., 289(1-2):25–38, 2018.
  • [Mae90] Hidetoshi Maeda. Ramification divisors for branched coverings of n\mathbb{P}^{n}. Math. Ann., 288(2):195–199, 1990.
  • [Mat89] Hideyuki Matsumura. Commutative ring theory, volume 8 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, second edition, 1989. Translated from the Japanese by M. Reid.
  • [Nak04] Noboru Nakayama. Zariski-decomposition and abundance, volume 14 of MSJ Memoirs. Mathematical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 2004.
  • [Pet94] Thomas Peternell. Minimal varieties with trivial canonical classes. I. Math. Z., 217(3):377–405, 1994.
  • [Zhu18] Ziquan Zhuang. Fano varieties with large Seshadri constants. Adv. Math., 340:883–913, 2018.