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

On birational boundedness of
some Calabi–Yau hypersurfaces

Taro Sano Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Kobe University, Kobe, 657-8501, Japan [email protected]
Abstract.

We show the birational boundedness of anti-canonical irreducible hypersurfaces which form 33-fold plt pairs. We also treat a collection of Du Val K3 surfaces which is birationally bounded but unbounded.

1. Introduction

In the classification of algebraic varieties, Calabi–Yau manifolds (CY manifolds for short) form an important class. It is not known whether nn-dimensional CY manifolds form a bounded family for a fixed n3n\geq 3.

On the other hand, in the 2-dimensional case, there are infinitely many projective families of K3 surfaces although they are analytically deformation equivalent. Reid observed that there are only 95 families of weighted K3 hypersurfaces ([Rei80, pp.300], [IF00, 13.3]). Inspired by this, we ask whether K3 surfaces in a 3-fold are bounded or not. We show the following statement in this note.

Theorem 1.1.

Let (X,D)(X,D) be a plt pair such that dimX=3\dim X=3, DD is irreducible and reduced, and KX+D0K_{X}+D\sim 0. Then DD forms a birational bounded family.

An interesting feature is that XX can be unbounded as in Example 2.11. In fact, we study the birational boundedness of a prime divisor DD for a 33-fold plt pair (X,D)(X,D) such that KX+D0K_{X}+D\equiv 0 in Theorem 2.12. It turns out that DD is birationally bounded unless XX is birational to a conic bundle over a Du Val surface SS with KS0K_{S}\sim 0. The divisor DD can be unbounded as in the exceptional case as in Example 2.15. The pair as above is called a plt CY pair in this note (Definition 2.1). CY pairs have been studied in several contexts of algebraic geometry (cf. [CK16], [KX16], [Bir19], etc).

The following example due to Oguiso forces us to use ‘birational boundedness’ rather than ‘boundedness’ in Theorem 1.1.

Theorem 1.2.

(=Example 3.2) Fix any positive integer dd. Then we have an unbounded collection of Du Val K3 surfaces which are birational contractions of smooth K3 surfaces of degree 2d2d.

When d=2d=2, the examples are birational contractions of some smooth quartic surfaces and infinitely many of them can be embedded into rational 3-folds (Remark 3.3). Thus the statement in Theorem 1.1 is optimal in a sense.

Classically, examples of CY 3-folds are constructed by taking weighted or toric hypersurfaces. In Section 4, we ask whether CY hypersurfaces in rationally connected varieties form a bounded family. We confirm that toric hypersurfaces form a bounded family in Corollary 4.6.

Throughout this paper, we work over the complex number field \mathbb{C}.

2. Finiteness of anticanonical Calabi–Yau surfaces in a 33-fold

We follow the notation in [KM98].

Definition 2.1.

We say that (X,D)(X,D) is a plt Calabi–Yau (CY) pair if (X,D)(X,D) is a plt pair such that KX+D0K_{X}+D\equiv 0. A plt CY pair (X,D)(X,D) is called a reduced plt CY pair if DD is a reduced divisor.

Note that XX can be non-\mathbb{Q}-Gorenstein, but the support of the round down D\lfloor D\rfloor of DD is normal (cf. [KM98, Proposion 5.51]). Note also that XX is \mathbb{Q}-factorial in codimension 2 (cf. [GKKP11, Proposition 9.1]) and KX+DK_{X}+D is torsion (cf. [Kaw13, Corollary 10], [Gon13, Theorem 1.2]).

When KX+D0K_{X}+D\sim 0 and DD is reduced, we have the following.

Proposition 2.2.

Let (X,D)(X,D) be a reduced plt CY pair such that KX+D0K_{X}+D\sim 0.

Then DD has only canonical singularities. If XX is \mathbb{Q}-Gorenstein, then XX has only canonical singularities.

Proof.

We can take a log resolution μ:X~X\mu\colon\tilde{X}\rightarrow X of (X,D)(X,D) such that

KX~+D~=μ(KX+D)+aiEiK_{\tilde{X}}+\tilde{D}=\mu^{*}(K_{X}+D)+\sum a_{i}E_{i}

for some integers ai0a_{i}\geq 0, where D~\tilde{D} is the strict transform of DD and EiE_{i} is the exceptional divisor. Note that ai0a_{i}\geq 0 since KX+DK_{X}+D is Cartier. This implies that XX has only canonical singularities in codimension 2 (outside the non-\mathbb{Q}-Gorenstein locus). In particular, we see that KXK_{X} is Cartier in codimension 2 and (KX+D)|D=KD(K_{X}+D)|_{D}=K_{D} is trivial. Thus, by restricting the equality to D~\tilde{D}, we see that DD has only canonical singularities. ∎

The plt CY property is preserved by steps of the KXK_{X}-MMP as follows.

Proposition 2.3.

Let (X,D)(X,D) be a reduced plt CY pair such that XX is projective and \mathbb{Q}-factorial. Let ϕ:XY\phi\colon X\dashrightarrow Y be a birational map which is a step of a KXK_{X}-MMP, that is, ϕ\phi is either a divisorial contraction or a flip. Let DY:=ϕDD_{Y}:=\phi_{*}D.

Then the pair (Y,DY)(Y,D_{Y}) is also a plt CY pair.

Remark 2.4.

We can not hope that (Y,DY)(Y,D_{Y}) is dlt when (X,D)(X,D) is so. Consider the pair (3,D)(\mathbb{P}^{3},D) for a quartic surface DD with a simple elliptic singularity pDp\in D and its blow-up X13X_{1}\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{3} at pp. Let D1X1D_{1}\subset X_{1} be the strict transform of DD and E1E_{1} be the exceptional divisor. Then (X1,D1+E1)(X_{1},D_{1}+E_{1}) is a dlt CY pair, X13X_{1}\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{3} is a KXK_{X}-negative divisorial contraction and (3,D)(\mathbb{P}^{3},D) is lc and not dlt.

Proof.

Since we have DY=ϕ(D)|KY|D_{Y}=\phi_{*}(D)\in|{-}K_{Y}|_{\mathbb{Q}}, it is enough to show that (Y,DY)(Y,D_{Y}) is plt. Let EE be an exceptional divisor over YY (hence over XX). If ϕ:XY\phi\colon X\rightarrow Y is a divisorial contraction and EE is the ϕ\phi-exceptional prime divisor, we see that ESuppDE\not\subset\operatorname{Supp}D by the negativity lemma (cf. [BCHM10, Lemma 3.6.2]) since DD is ϕ\phi-ample. Hence we have 1<a(E,X,D)=a(E,Y,DY)-1<a(E,X,D)=a(E,Y,D_{Y}) since both KX+DK_{X}+D and KY+DYK_{Y}+D_{Y} are trivial. Also when ϕ\phi is a flip, we have the same equality by the same reason. Hence we see that both discrepancies are greater than 1-1, thus (Y,DY)(Y,D_{Y}) is also plt. ∎

The following is based on the argument in the e-mail from Chen Jiang.

Proposition 2.5.

Let n>0n\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0} and I[1,0]I\subset[1,0]\cap\mathbb{Q} be a DCC set. Let (X,D)(X,D) be an nn-dimensional projective plt CY pair such that the coefficients of DD belong to II. Then we have the following.

  1. (i)

    (X,D)(X,D) is ϵ\epsilon-plt for some ϵ>0\epsilon>0 which only depends on nn and II, that is, for an exceptional divisor EE over XX, the discrepancy a(E;X,D)>1+ϵa(E;X,D)>-1+\epsilon.

  2. (ii)

    Assume that dimX=3\dim X=3 and DD is reduced.

    Then DD is bounded except when DD has only Du Val singularities and XX is smooth in codimension 22 around DD.

    We have (KX+D)|D=KD(K_{X}+D)|_{D}=K_{D} in the exceptional case.

Proof.

(i) This can be shown by the same argument as [CS, Corollary 2.9] (In fact, (i) follows from [Bir19, Lemma 2.48]). Suppose that there exists a plt CY pair (Xn,Dn)(X_{n},D_{n}) which is ϵn\epsilon_{n}-plt for some ϵn>0\epsilon_{n}>0 such that (ϵn)n(\epsilon_{n})_{n} is a decreasing sequence and limnϵn=0\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\epsilon_{n}=0. Then there is an extraction X~nXn\tilde{X}_{n}\rightarrow X_{n} of a divisor EnE_{n} with a(En;Xn,Dn)=1+ϵna(E_{n};X_{n},D_{n})=-1+\epsilon_{n} so that (X~n,D~n+(1ϵn)En)(\tilde{X}_{n},\tilde{D}_{n}+(1-\epsilon_{n})E_{n}) satisfies the assumption of the global ACC [HMX14, Theorem 1.5] since I{1ϵnn}I\cup\{1-\epsilon_{n}\mid n\in\mathbb{N}\} is a DCC set. Thus {1ϵnn}\{1-\epsilon_{n}\mid n\in\mathbb{N}\} is a finite set and this is a contradiction.

(ii) By the adjunction using the different, we have an equality

KX+D|D=KD+i=1lbiBiK_{X}+D|_{D}=K_{D}+\sum_{i=1}^{l}b_{i}B_{i}

as \mathbb{Q}-divisors for some prime divisors B1,,BlB_{1},\ldots,B_{l}. Note that bib_{i} belongs to some finite set I0I_{0} by the global ACC [HMX14, Theorem 1.5] since bib_{i} belongs to a DCC set {11nn}\{1-\frac{1}{n}\mid n\in\mathbb{N}\}. Suppose that bi0b_{i}\neq 0 for some ii. Then we see that (D,biBi)(D,\sum b_{i}B_{i}) is ϵ\epsilon-lc for some ϵ\epsilon independent of XX. By [Ale94, Theorem 6.9], we see that DD belongs to a bounded family.

Hence the problem is reduced to the case KX+D|D=KDK_{X}+D|_{D}=K_{D}. This implies that XX is smooth at all codimension 1 points of DD by the local computation of the different (cf. [Kol13, Proposition 4.5 (1)]). Thus we see that KD0K_{D}\equiv 0. Such surfaces are bounded except when DD has only Du Val singularities by [Ale94, Theorem 6.9]. ∎

If a plt CY pair (X,D)(X,D) admits a del Pezzo fibration XCX\rightarrow C over a curve, then DD belongs to a bounded family as follows. (Note that CC is either 1\mathbb{P}^{1} or an elliptic curve by the canonical bundle formula. )

Proposition 2.6.

Let (X,D)(X,D) be a projective \mathbb{Q}-Gorenstein 33-fold plt CY pair with a fiber space ϕ:XC\phi\colon X\rightarrow C over a smooth curve CC such that DD is irreducible, reduced and ϕ\phi-ample.

Then there exist a positive integer NN and an ample line bundle \mathcal{H} on DD such that NN is independent of XX and 2N\mathcal{H}^{2}\leq N, thus such DD’s form a bounded family.

Proof.

Note first that (X,D)(X,D) is ϵ\epsilon-plt by Proposition 2.5 (i) for some ϵ>0\epsilon>0 and the general fiber XpX_{p} over pCp\in C of ϕ\phi is an ϵ\epsilon-lc log del Pezzo surface. By Proposition 2.5(ii), it is enough to consider the case where DD has only Du Val singularities and XX is smooth in codimension 2 around DD. By this, the restriction KX|D-K_{X}|_{D} is determined as a Weil divisor.

Claim 2.7.

There exists a positive integer mm such that mm is independent of XX and mLmL is a Cartier divisor for all Weil divisor LL on DD.

Proof of Claim.

The claim follows since there are finitely many possibilities for the singularities on DD (cf. [ABR02, (4.8.1)]). Let νD:D~D\nu_{D}\colon\tilde{D}\rightarrow D be the minimal resolution. If DD is singular, then D~\tilde{D} is either a K3 surface or an Enriques surface. Then the number of the νD\nu_{D}-exceptional (2)(-2)-curves is less than ρ(D~)20\rho(\tilde{D})\leq 20 (or <10<10 if D~\tilde{D} is Enriques) since the exceptional curves are linearly independent in PicD~\operatorname{Pic}\tilde{D}. ∎

We shall find an ample divisor of the form m(KX+aF)|Dm(-K_{X}+aF)|_{D} for a fiber F:=ϕ1(p)F:=\phi^{-1}(p). The point is that aa can be unbounded as in Example 2.11, but the degree of the divisor is bounded.

Let ϕD:=ϕ|D:DC\phi_{D}:=\phi|_{D}\colon D\rightarrow C and FD:=ϕD1(p)F_{D}:=\phi_{D}^{-1}(p) be its fiber over pCp\in C. Then ϕD\phi_{D} is an elliptic fibration since, for a general pCp\in C, we have FD|KF|F_{D}\in|{-}K_{F}|_{\mathbb{Q}} for a log del Pezzo surface FF and we check h0(FD,𝒪FD)h^{0}(F_{D},\mathcal{O}_{F_{D}})\simeq\mathbb{C}.

Let D:=m(KX|D)\mathcal{L}_{D}:=m(-K_{X}|_{D}) be the restricted divisor which is ϕD\phi_{D}-ample. Let

α:=min{ah0(D,D+aFD)0}.\alpha:=\min\{a\in\mathbb{Z}\mid h^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{D}+aF_{D})\neq 0\}.

Then we have an exact sequence

0=H0(D,D+(α1)FD)H0(D,D+αFD)H0(FD,(D+αFD)|FD).0=H^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{D}+(\alpha-1)F_{D})\rightarrow H^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{D}+\alpha F_{D})\rightarrow H^{0}(F_{D},(\mathcal{L}_{D}+\alpha F_{D})|_{F_{D}}).

Note that (D+αFD)|FD=mKX|FD(\mathcal{L}_{D}+\alpha F_{D})|_{F_{D}}=-mK_{X}|_{F_{D}} and its degree is m(KF2)=:mdm(-K_{F}^{2})=:md, where FF is a general fiber of ϕ\phi which is an ϵ\epsilon-lc del Pezzo surface of degree dd. Indeed, we have

KXFD=KXDF=(KX)2F=(KF)2=d.-K_{X}\cdot F_{D}=-K_{X}\cdot D\cdot F=(-K_{X})^{2}\cdot F=(-K_{F})^{2}=d.

Note that dδd\leq\delta for some integer δ=δϵ\delta=\delta_{\epsilon} determined by ϵ\epsilon (the maximal integer degree of ϵ\epsilon-lc del Pezzo surfaces. See [Jia13] for the optimal bound. ). Since FDF_{D} is an elliptic curve, we have h0(FD,(D+αFD)|FD)=mdh^{0}(F_{D},(\mathcal{L}_{D}+\alpha F_{D})|_{F_{D}})=md. Thus, by the above exact sequence, we see that

(1) h0(D,D+αFD)md.h^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{D}+\alpha F_{D})\leq md.
Claim 2.8.

The Cartier divisor D+(k+α)FD\mathcal{L}_{D}+(k+\alpha)F_{D} is ample for k>2δmk>2\delta m.

Proof of Claim.

Let νD:D~D\nu_{D}\colon\tilde{D}\rightarrow D be the minimal resolution of DD and FD~:=νD(FD)F_{\tilde{D}}:=\nu_{D}^{*}(F_{D}) be the pull-back, and ϕD~:=νDϕD:D~C\phi_{\tilde{D}}:=\nu_{D}\circ\phi_{D}\colon\tilde{D}\rightarrow C be the composition.

Let νD(D+αFD)=M+E\nu_{D}^{*}(\mathcal{L}_{D}+\alpha F_{D})=M+E be the decomposition to the mobile part MM and fixed part EE. We can write E=i=1laiCiE=\sum_{i=1}^{l}a_{i}C_{i} for some ai0a_{i}\geq 0 and (2)(-2)-curves C1,,ClC_{1},\ldots,C_{l} so that C1,,ClC_{1},\ldots,C_{l^{\prime}} are ϕD~\phi_{\tilde{D}}-horizontal and Cl+1,,ClC_{l^{\prime}+1},\ldots,C_{l} are ϕD~\phi_{\tilde{D}}-vertical. Note that

md=νD(D+αFD)FD~EFD~=(i=1laiCi)FD~i=1laimd=\nu_{D}^{*}(\mathcal{L}_{D}+\alpha F_{D})\cdot F_{\tilde{D}}\geq E\cdot F_{\tilde{D}}=(\sum_{i=1}^{l}a_{i}C_{i})\cdot F_{\tilde{D}}\geq\sum_{i=1}^{l^{\prime}}a_{i}

since CiC_{i} is vertical for i>li>l^{\prime}. Hence we obtain

aiδm(i=1,,l).a_{i}\leq\delta m\ \ (i=1,\ldots,l^{\prime}).

In order to check D+(k+α)FD\mathcal{L}_{D}+(k+\alpha)F_{D} is nef, it is enough to check

νD(D+(α+k)FD)Ci0\nu_{D}^{*}(\mathcal{L}_{D}+(\alpha+k)F_{D})\cdot C_{i}\geq 0

for i=1,,li=1,\ldots,l^{\prime} since D\mathcal{L}_{D} is ϕD\phi_{D}-ample. For k2δmk\geq 2\delta m, we have

νD(D+(α+k)FD)Ci=(M+E+kFD~)Ci(aiCi+kFD~)Ci=2ai+k(FD~Ci)2δm+k(FD~Ci)0.\nu_{D}^{*}(\mathcal{L}_{D}+(\alpha+k)F_{D})\cdot C_{i}=(M+E+kF_{\tilde{D}})\cdot C_{i}\\ \geq(a_{i}C_{i}+kF_{\tilde{D}})\cdot C_{i}=-2a_{i}+k(F_{\tilde{D}}\cdot C_{i})\geq-2\delta m+k(F_{\tilde{D}}\cdot C_{i})\geq 0.

since CiC_{i} is horizontal and FD~Ci1F_{\tilde{D}}\cdot C_{i}\geq 1. Thus D+(α+k)FD\mathcal{L}_{D}+(\alpha+k)F_{D} is nef for k2δmk\geq 2\delta m, thus ample when k>2δmk>2\delta m. ∎

For a positive integer β\beta and a divisor β:=D+(α+β)FD\mathcal{L}_{\beta}:=\mathcal{L}_{D}+(\alpha+\beta)F_{D}, we have an exact sequence

0H0(D,β)H0(D,β+1)H0(FD,β+1|FD).0\rightarrow H^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{\beta})\rightarrow H^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{\beta+1})\rightarrow H^{0}(F_{D},\mathcal{L}_{\beta+1}|_{F_{D}}).

By h0(FD,β+1|FD)=h0(FD,D|FD)=mdh^{0}(F_{D},\mathcal{L}_{\beta+1}|_{F_{D}})=h^{0}(F_{D},\mathcal{L}_{D}|_{F_{D}})=md as before, we have

h0(D,β+1)h0(D,β)+md.h^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{\beta+1})\leq h^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{\beta})+md.

By this and (1), we obtain

h0(D,2δm+1)md+(2δm+1)md=2δm2d+2md2m2δ2+2mδ.h^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{2\delta m+1})\leq md+(2\delta m+1)md=2\delta m^{2}d+2md\leq 2m^{2}\delta^{2}+2m\delta.

Since 2δm+1\mathcal{L}_{2\delta m+1} is ample, we have hi(D,2δm+1)=0h^{i}(D,\mathcal{L}_{2\delta m+1})=0 for i=1,2i=1,2. Since 2δm+1\mathcal{L}_{2\delta m+1} is Cartier, we obtain

h0(D,2δm+1)=χ(D,2δm+1)=χD+(2δm+1)22,h^{0}(D,\mathcal{L}_{2\delta m+1})=\chi(D,\mathcal{L}_{2\delta m+1})=\chi_{D}+\frac{(\mathcal{L}_{2\delta m+1})^{2}}{2},

where χD:=χ(D,𝒪D)=0,1,2\chi_{D}:=\chi(D,\mathcal{O}_{D})=0,1,2 since DD is either a (Du Val) K3 surface, Enriques surface or abelian surface.

Thus we see that 2δm+12\mathcal{L}_{2\delta m+1}^{2} is bounded by the constant 2(2m2δ2+2mδχD)2(2m^{2}\delta^{2}+2m\delta-\chi_{D}) and :=2δm+1\mathcal{H}:=\mathcal{L}_{2\delta m+1} has the required property. By [Ale94, Lemma 3.7 (1)], we see that DD forms a bounded family.

Remark 2.9.

When DD is an abelian surface, we have the same statement as Claim 2.8 for k>0k>0 since an effective divisor on DD is nef.

Example 2.10.

There are infinitely many examples of conic bundles with smooth anticanonical members in [Kol17, Example 20]. Let :=(𝒪2𝒪2(3)𝒪2(c))\mathbb{P}:=\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{2}}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{2}}(3)\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{2}}(c)) for c3c\geq 3 and X:=Xc|𝒪(2)|X:=X_{c}\in|\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(2)| be a smooth member. Then ϕ:X2\phi\colon X\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{2} is a conic bundle and |KX||{-}K_{X}| contains a smooth member DD. Since DD is also an anticanonical member of (𝒪2𝒪2(3))\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{2}}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{2}}(3)), we see that DD is bounded with a polarization 𝒪(1)|D\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(1)|_{D} of degree 1818. We see that ρ(X)=2\rho(X)=2 by the Lefschetz type theorem [RS06, Theorem 2] and check that the collection {Xc}c=1,2,\{X_{c}\}_{c=1,2,\ldots} is unbounded. Indeed, a nef and big divisor on XX can be written as

Ha,b:=aKX+bF=a(KX+cF)+(bca)F,H_{a,b}:=-aK_{X}+bF=a(-K_{X}+cF)+(b-ca)F,

where a,b>0a,b\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0} satisfy bcab\geq ca and F:=ϕ𝒪2(1)F:=\phi^{*}\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{2}}(1). Thus we compute

Ha,b3(KX+cF)3=2(𝒪(1)4)=2(c2+3c+9)H_{a,b}^{3}\geq(-K_{X}+cF)^{3}=2(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(1)^{4})=2(c^{2}+3c+9)

by using H(H3f)(Hcf)=0H\cdot(H-3f)\cdot(H-cf)=0 for H:=𝒪(1)H:=\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(1) and f:=π𝒪2(1)f:=\pi^{*}\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{2}}(1) for π:2\pi\colon\mathbb{P}\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{2}. Indeed, since we have H3=(c+3)H2f3cHf2H^{3}=(c+3)H^{2}\cdot f-3cH\cdot f^{2} and H2f2=1H^{2}\cdot f^{2}=1, we obtain

H4=H(H3)=H((c+3)H2f3cHf2)=(c+3)H3f3c(H2f2)=(c+3)((c+3)H2f3cHf2)f3c1=(c+3)23c=c2+3c+9.H^{4}=H(H^{3})=H((c+3)H^{2}\cdot f-3cH\cdot f^{2})=(c+3)H^{3}\cdot f-3c(H^{2}f^{2})\\ =(c+3)((c+3)H^{2}\cdot f-3cH\cdot f^{2})\cdot f-3c\cdot 1=(c+3)^{2}-3c=c^{2}+3c+9.

Hence we see the unboundedness of XcX_{c}.

Moreover, we check that the collection {Xcc3}\{X_{c}\mid c\geq 3\} is birationally unbounded by the same argument as [Lin03]. Indeed, the discriminant curve Bc2B_{c}\subset\mathbb{P}^{2} of ϕc:Xc2\phi_{c}\colon X_{c}\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{2} has degree 2c+62c+6 as [Kol17, Example 20], thus 4K2+Bc4K_{\mathbb{P}^{2}}+B_{c} is effective when c3c\geq 3. Hence the conic bundle ϕc:Xc2\phi_{c}\colon X_{c}\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{2} is birationally rigid (cf. [Cor00, Theorem 4.2]). Then we can use the argument in [Lin03, Section 3] to show that {Xcc3}\{X_{c}\mid c\geq 3\} is birationally unbounded.

Example 2.11.

There also exist infinitely many examples of del Pezzo fibrations X1X\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1} such that XX is smooth and |KX||{-}K_{X}| contains a smooth member. Let

X:=Xn:=1(𝒪𝒪𝒪(2)𝒪(n))X:=X_{n}\subset\mathbb{P}:=\mathbb{P}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(\mathcal{O}\oplus\mathcal{O}\oplus\mathcal{O}(2)\oplus\mathcal{O}(n))

be a smooth member of |𝒪(3)||\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(3)|. Then the induced projection ϕ:X1\phi\colon X\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{1} is a del Pezzo fibration and |KX|=|𝒪(1)ϕ𝒪(n)||{-}K_{X}|=|\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(1)\otimes\phi^{*}\mathcal{O}(-n)| contains a smooth member SS. We see that SS is isomorphic to an anticanonical member of 1(𝒪𝒪𝒪(2))\mathbb{P}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(\mathcal{O}\oplus\mathcal{O}\oplus\mathcal{O}(2)) and has a polarization of the degree independent of nn. However, the collection {Xn}n\{X_{n}\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}} is not bounded. Indeed, we see that PicX=(KX)(F)\operatorname{Pic}X=\mathbb{Z}(-K_{X})\oplus\mathbb{Z}(F) for F:=ϕ𝒪1(1)F:=\phi^{*}\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{1}}(1) as above, and a nef and big line bundle

Ga,b:=a(KX)+bF=a(KX+nF)+(bna)FG_{a,b}:=a(-K_{X})+bF=a(-K_{X}+nF)+(b-na)F

should satisfy bnab\geq na. Thus we see the unboundedness of XnX_{n} by computing

Ga,b3(KX+nF)3=3n+6G_{a,b}^{3}\geq(-K_{X}+nF)^{3}=3n+6

since 0=H2(H2f)(Hnf)=H2(H2(n+2)Hf+2nf2)=H4(n+2)H3f=H4(n+2)0=H^{2}\cdot(H-2f)(H-nf)=H^{2}(H^{2}-(n+2)H\cdot f+2nf^{2})=H^{4}-(n+2)H^{3}\cdot f=H^{4}-(n+2), where H:=𝒪(1)H:=\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(1) and ff is the fiber class.

For an elliptic curve CC and a positive integer dd, consider C:=(𝒪C𝒪C𝒪C𝒪C(dP))\mathbb{P}_{C}:=\mathbb{P}(\mathcal{O}_{C}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{C}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{C}\oplus\mathcal{O}_{C}(dP)) and a smooth member Xd|𝒪C(3)|X_{d}\in|\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}_{C}}(3)|. Then XdCX_{d}\rightarrow C is a del Pezzo fibration and Sd|KXd|S_{d}\in|{-}K_{X_{d}}| is an abelian surface with a bounded polarization. We check the unboundedness of XdX_{d} by a similar calculation as above.

The following implies Theorem 1.1.

Theorem 2.12.

Let (X,D)(X,D) be a projective 33-fold plt CY pair such that DD is irreducible and reduced. Then DD is birationally bounded unless all of the following hold:

  1. (1)

    KX+D≁0K_{X}+D\not\sim 0, but 2(KX+D)02(K_{X}+D)\sim 0.

  2. (2)

    XX is birational to a conic bundle YSY\rightarrow S such that SS is either a Du Val K3 surface or an abelian surface.

  3. (3)

    For the strict transform DYYD_{Y}\subset Y of DD, the induced morphism DYSD_{Y}\rightarrow S is étale in codimension 1

In particular, Theorem 1.1 holds.

Proof.

By taking a small \mathbb{Q}-factorial modification (cf. [Kol13, Corollary 1.37]), we may assume that XX is \mathbb{Q}-factorial.

Let ϕ:XXm\phi\colon X\dashrightarrow X_{m} be a birational map induced by a KXK_{X}-MMP and ϕD:DDm\phi_{D}\colon D\dashrightarrow D_{m} be the birational map induced by ϕ\phi. We also have a Mori fiber space ϕm:XmS\phi_{m}\colon X_{m}\rightarrow S. Note that (Xm,Dm)(X_{m},D_{m}) is also a plt CY pair by Proposition 2.3. It is enough to consider the case where DmD_{m} has only Du Val singularities by Proposition 2.5(ii). The problem is to bound such DmD_{m}.

Consider the case dimS=0\dim S=0. Then XmX_{m} is a ϵ\epsilon-lc Fano 3-fold for some ϵ>0\epsilon>0 by Proposition 2.5, thus it is bounded by [Bir21, Theorem 1.1] and DmD_{m} is also bounded.

Next consider the case dimS=1\dim S=1. Then XmSX_{m}\rightarrow S is a del Pezzo fibration and DmD_{m} is bounded by Proposition 2.6.

Next consider the case where dimS=2\dim S=2 and the induced morphism DmSD_{m}\rightarrow S is of degree 22 and branched along a curve. Then (S,12R)(S,\frac{1}{2}R) is a 12\frac{1}{2}-lc CY pair (cf. [KM98, Proposition 5.20]), where R|2KS|R\in|{-}2K_{S}| is the branch divisor of the double cover πm:DmS\pi_{m}\colon D_{m}\rightarrow S (or its Stein factorization). Then (S,12R)(S,\frac{1}{2}R) is log bounded by [Ale94, Theorem 6.9]. Thus DmD_{m} is also bounded since it is a crepant modification of the double cover of SS branched along RR (For a polarization HH on SS with the bounded degree, πmH\pi_{m}^{*}H gives a quasi-polarization on DmD_{m} with the bounded degree).

Finally consider the case where dimS=2\dim S=2 and πm:DmS\pi_{m}\colon D_{m}\rightarrow S is étale in codimension 1. Then we see that KS0K_{S}\equiv 0. Thus SS and DmD_{m} are bounded unless SS has only Du Val singularities by [Ale94, Theorem 6.8]. Since we are interested in the birational boundedness of DD, it is enough to assume KS0K_{S}\sim 0, that is, SS is either a Du Val K3 surface or an abelian surface since Enriques surfaces and bielliptic surfaces are bounded. Hence the problem is reduced to the following claim.

Claim 2.13.

In the above setting, assume that SS is a Du Val K3 surface or an abelian surface. Then we have the following.

  1. (i)

    KXm+Dm≁0K_{X_{m}}+D_{m}\not\sim 0.

  2. (ii)

    2(KXm+Dm)02(K_{X_{m}}+D_{m})\sim 0.

Proof of Claim.

Let X:=XmX:=X_{m} and D:=DmD:=D_{m} with a conic bundle ϕ:XS\phi\colon X\rightarrow S. Note that ϕD:=ϕ|D\phi_{D}:=\phi|_{D} is étale in codimension 1 and, if SS is an abelian surface, then ϕD\phi_{D} is étale by the purity of the branch locus.

(i) Suppose that KX+D0K_{X}+D\sim 0 and we shall find a contradiction. Since we have the usual adjunction KX+D|D=KDK_{X}+D|_{D}=K_{D} and 𝒪X(KX)\mathcal{O}_{X}(K_{X}) is S2S_{2}, we obtain an exact sequence

0𝒪X(KX)𝒪X(KX+D)𝒪D(KD)0.0\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{X}(K_{X})\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{X}(K_{X}+D)\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{D}(K_{D})\rightarrow 0.

Since the restriction H0(X,KX+D)H0(D,KD)H^{0}(X,K_{X}+D)\rightarrow H^{0}(D,K_{D}) is surjective, we obtain the exact sequence

0H1(X,KX)H1(X,𝒪X)𝛼H1(D,𝒪D).0\rightarrow H^{1}(X,K_{X})\rightarrow H^{1}(X,\mathcal{O}_{X})\xrightarrow{\alpha}H^{1}(D,\mathcal{O}_{D}).

By the Serre duality and the Leray spectral sequence, we obtain

H1(X,KX)H2(X,𝒪X)H2(S,𝒪S)H^{1}(X,K_{X})\simeq H^{2}(X,\mathcal{O}_{X})^{*}\simeq H^{2}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S})^{*}\simeq\mathbb{C}

and H1(X,𝒪X)H1(S,𝒪S)H^{1}(X,\mathcal{O}_{X})\simeq H^{1}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S}). Note that Riϕ𝒪X=0R^{i}\phi_{*}\mathcal{O}_{X}=0 by the Kawamata-Viehweg vanishing since KX-K_{X} is ϕ\phi-ample. If SS is a Du Val K3 surface, then we have H1(S,𝒪S)=0H^{1}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S})=0 and this contradicts the above exact sequence. If SS is an abelian surface, then we check that α\alpha in the exact sequence is injective. Indeed, α\alpha can be regarded as ϕD:H1(S,𝒪S)H1(D,𝒪D)\phi_{D}^{*}\colon H^{1}(S,\mathcal{O}_{S})\rightarrow H^{1}(D,\mathcal{O}_{D}) and this is an isomorphism since ϕD\phi_{D} is étale. This again contradicts the above exact sequence. Thus we see that KX+DK_{X}+D is not trivial.

(ii) Let m>1m\in\mathbb{Z}_{>1} be a minimal integer such that m(KX+D)0m(K_{X}+D)\sim 0 and let Π:X:=Speci=0m1𝒪X(i(KX+D))X\Pi\colon X^{\prime}:=\operatorname{Spec}\bigoplus_{i=0}^{m-1}\mathcal{O}_{X}(i(K_{X}+D))\rightarrow X be the cyclic cover defined by an isomorphism 𝒪X(m(KX+D))𝒪X\mathcal{O}_{X}(m(K_{X}+D))\simeq\mathcal{O}_{X}. Then D:=Π1(D)D^{\prime}:=\Pi^{-1}(D) satisfies that DSpeci=0m1𝒪X(i(KX+D)|D)Speci=0m1𝒪X(iKD)D^{\prime}\simeq\operatorname{Spec}\bigoplus_{i=0}^{m-1}\mathcal{O}_{X}(i(K_{X}+D)|_{D})\simeq\operatorname{Spec}\bigoplus_{i=0}^{m-1}\mathcal{O}_{X}(iK_{D}). By KD0K_{D}\sim 0, we see that DD^{\prime} is a disjoint union of mm copies of DD. By KX+D0K_{X^{\prime}}+D^{\prime}\sim 0 and [Kol13, Proposition 4.37 (3)], we see that m=2m=2, that is, 2(KX+D)02(K_{X}+D)\sim 0. ∎

This finishes the proof of Theorem 2.12. ∎

The case where DmSD_{m}\rightarrow S is étale really occurs as follows. We also have examples where DmD_{m} can be any abelian surface, thus gives examples of birationally unbounded DD in Theorem 2.12 by Claim 2.17.

Example 2.14.

Let SS be an Enriques surface and X:=S(𝒪SωS)X:=\mathbb{P}_{S}(\mathcal{O}_{S}\oplus\omega_{S}). Then the linear system |KX|=|𝒪(2)||{-}K_{X}|=|\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(2)| is free. Indeed, it contains two members 2σ0,2σ2\sigma_{0},2\sigma_{\infty} with disjoint support, where σ0,σ\sigma_{0},\sigma_{\infty} are the sections corresponding to two surjections 𝒪ωS𝒪,𝒪ωSωS\mathcal{O}\oplus\omega_{S}\twoheadrightarrow\mathcal{O},\mathcal{O}\oplus\omega_{S}\twoheadrightarrow\omega_{S}. Then we see that a general member D|𝒪(2)|D\in|\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(2)| is irreducible since we have an exact sequence

H0(𝒪)H0(𝒪D)H1(𝒪(2))H^{0}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}})\rightarrow H^{0}(\mathcal{O}_{D})\rightarrow H^{1}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(-2))

and obtain H0(D,𝒪D)H^{0}(D,\mathcal{O}_{D})\simeq\mathbb{C} by

H1(𝒪(2))=H1(ω)H2(𝒪)H2(𝒪S)=0.H^{1}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(-2))=H^{1}(\omega_{\mathbb{P}})\simeq H^{2}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}})^{*}\simeq H^{2}(\mathcal{O}_{S})=0.

Then, since there is an étale double cover DSD\rightarrow S, we see that DD is a K3 surface. It is well-known that Enriques surface has a polarization HH such that H2=2H^{2}=2, thus Enriques surfaces form a bounded family.

We can construct a similar example from any abelian surface AA and its translation τAutA\tau\in\operatorname{Aut}A by a 2-torsion point on AA. Note that the quotient morphism q:AA/τq\colon A\rightarrow A/\tau is étale and A¯:=A/τ\bar{A}:=A/\tau is also an abelian surface. Let Y:=A¯(𝒪)Y:=\mathbb{P}_{\bar{A}}(\mathcal{O}\oplus\mathcal{L}), where q𝒪A𝒪A¯q_{*}\mathcal{O}_{A}\simeq\mathcal{O}_{\bar{A}}\oplus\mathcal{L}. Then |𝒪(2)||\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(2)| is free and contains a smooth member ΔA\Delta\simeq A as above. Note that KY=𝒪(2)π-K_{Y}=\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(2)\otimes\pi^{*}\mathcal{L}, thus KY𝒪(2)-K_{Y}\equiv\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(2) but KY≁𝒪(2)-K_{Y}\not\sim\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(2). Note also that AA forms a birationally unbounded family by Claim 2.17.

The following gives unbounded examples in the case where DmSD_{m}\rightarrow S is étale in codimension 11 and SS is singular.

Example 2.15.

Let DD be a smooth K3 surface with a Nikulin involution ιAutD\iota\in\operatorname{Aut}D, that is, ι\iota is a symplectic involution so that S:=D/ιS:=D/\iota is a Du Val K3 surface with 8 A1A_{1}-singularities p1,,p8p_{1},\ldots,p_{8}. There are infinitely many components of the moduli space which parametrize K3 surfaces with Nikulin involutions as in [vGS07, Proposition 2.3]. Let π:DS\pi\colon D\rightarrow S be the quotient morphism and S:=SSingSS^{\prime}:=S\setminus\operatorname{Sing}S be the smooth part. Note that π𝒪D𝒪S\pi_{*}\mathcal{O}_{D}\simeq\mathcal{O}_{S}\oplus\mathcal{L} for some reflexive sheaf \mathcal{L} of rank 1 such that [2]:=(2)𝒪S\mathcal{L}^{[2]}:=(\mathcal{L}^{\otimes 2})^{**}\simeq\mathcal{O}_{S}.

We can construct a \mathbb{Q}-conic bundle

:=S(j(Sym(𝒪S|S))S,\mathbb{P}:=\mathbb{P}_{S}(j_{*}(\operatorname{Sym}(\mathcal{O}_{S^{\prime}}\oplus\mathcal{L}|_{S^{\prime}}))\rightarrow S,

where j:SSj\colon S^{\prime}\rightarrow S is an open immersion and Sym\operatorname{Sym} is the symmetric algebra. We check that \mathbb{P} has at most 1/2(1,1,1)1/2(1,1,1)-singularities by local computation. We also check that |𝒪(2)||\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}}(2)| is a free linear system and contains a smooth irreducible member Δ\Delta as in Example 2.14. We see that Δ\Delta is a K3 surface which can be isomorphic to the original DD. Then the pair (,Δ)(\mathbb{P},\Delta) is a plt CY pair such that K+ΔK_{\mathbb{P}}+\Delta is 22-torsion. We expect that the set of DD with Nikulin involutions form a birationally unbounded family.

We can do the same construction starting from any abelian surface AA and its (1)(-1)-involution ιAutA\iota\in\operatorname{Aut}A. That is, we can construct a \mathbb{Q}-conic bundle XT:=A/ιX\rightarrow T:=A/\iota with ΔX\Delta\subset X so that (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) is plt, KX+Δ0K_{X}+\Delta\equiv 0 and ΔA\Delta\simeq A is an abelian surface.

Remark 2.16.

Without the assumption that DD is irreducible, the statement is false. For example, consider the product X=S×1X=S\times\mathbb{P}^{1} of a K3 surface (or an abelian surface) SS and 1\mathbb{P}^{1}. Note that families of K3 surfaces and abelian surfaces are algebraically unbounded although they are analytically bounded.

We can also show that the collection of projective K3 surfaces (or abelian surfaces) is birationally unbounded as follows. (This may be well-known, but we include the explanation for the possible convenience of the reader. )

Claim 2.17.

Let 𝒞:={Sdd>0}\mathcal{C}:=\{S_{d}\mid d\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0}\} be the collection of smooth projective K3 surfaces (or abelian surfaces), where SdS_{d} satisfies PicSd=Hd\operatorname{Pic}S_{d}=\mathbb{Z}\cdot H_{d} and HdH_{d} is an ample line bundle of degree Hd2=2dH_{d}^{2}=2d. Then 𝒞\mathcal{C} is birationally unbounded.

Proof of Claim.

The argument is similar as that of [Lin03, Section 3].

Suppose that 𝒞\mathcal{C} is birationally bounded. Then there exists a projective morphism of algebraic schemes ϕ:𝒮T\phi\colon\mathcal{S}\rightarrow T such that, for d>0d\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0}, there exist tdTt_{d}\in T and a birational map μd:𝒮tdSd\mu_{d}\colon\mathcal{S}_{t_{d}}\dashrightarrow S_{d} from the fiber 𝒮td:=ϕ1(td)\mathcal{S}_{t_{d}}:=\phi^{-1}(t_{d}). Let T:={tdd>0}TT^{\prime}:=\{t_{d}\mid d\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0}\}\subset T and Z:=T¯TZ:=\overline{T^{\prime}}\subset T be its closure. Then there exists an irreducible component ZiZZ_{i}\subset Z containing infinitely many tdt_{d}’s. By considering the base change to ZiZ_{i}, we may assume that TT is irreducible and that TTT^{\prime}\subset T is dense and contains infinitely many tdt_{d}’s.

Let ηT\eta\in T be the generic point and 𝒮η\mathcal{S}_{\eta} be the generic fiber of ϕ\phi. By taking a resolution of 𝒮η\mathcal{S}_{\eta} and replacing TT by an open subset, we may assume that ϕ:𝒮T\phi\colon\mathcal{S}\rightarrow T is a smooth family of projective surfaces with birational maps μd:𝒮tdSd\mu_{d}\colon\mathcal{S}_{t_{d}}\dashrightarrow S_{d} for infinitely many dd. By running a K𝒮K_{\mathcal{S}}-MMP over TT, we may assume that K𝒮/TK_{\mathcal{S}/T} is ϕ\phi-nef, thus μd\mu_{d} is an isomorphism for dd with tdTt_{d}\in T. Let \mathcal{H} be a ϕ\phi-ample line bundle on 𝒮\mathcal{S} and M:=(t)2>0M:=(\mathcal{H}_{t})^{2}>0 be its degree. We can take d0d\gg 0 such that 2d>M2d>M and tdTt_{d}\in T. Since PicSd=Hdtd\operatorname{Pic}S_{d}=\mathbb{Z}H_{d}\ni\mathcal{H}_{t_{d}} and Hd2=2d>td2=M>0H_{d}^{2}=2d>\mathcal{H}_{t_{d}}^{2}=M>0, this is a contradiction. Hence we see that 𝒞\mathcal{C} is birationally unbounded. ∎

Remark 2.18.

If we only assume that (X,D)(X,D) is a log canonical pair such that DD is irreducible and KX+D0K_{X}+D\sim 0, then such (X,D)(X,D) forms an unbounded family. For example, we can consider a polarized K3 surface (S,L)(S,L) of any degree and its projective cone X:=Cp(S,L)X:=C_{p}(S,L).

Remark 2.19.

For any d>0d>0, there exists an abelian variety AA of dimension n2n\geq 2 with a primitive ample divisor LL of type (1,,1,d)(1,\ldots,1,d) such that h0(A,L)=dh^{0}(A,L)=d (and Ln=n!dL^{n}=n!d). A general abelian variety of type (1,1,,d)(1,1,\ldots,d) has the Picard rank 11. Hence abelian varieties of dimension 2\geq 2 are algebraically unbounded (cf. [BL04, 8.11(1)]).

The statement in Theorem 1.1 does not hold when dimX4\dim X\geq 4. Let Xd:=Ad×2X_{d}:=A_{d}\times\mathbb{P}^{2}, where (Ad,Ld)(A_{d},L_{d}) is a general abelian variety with a primitive polarization LdL_{d} of type (1,,1,d)(1,\ldots,1,d) as above. Then there exists a smooth member Dd:=Ad×C|KXd|D_{d}:=A_{d}\times C\in|{-}K_{X_{d}}| so that (Xd,Dd)(X_{d},D_{d}) is a plt CY pair and DdD_{d} is irreducible and reduced, where C2C\subset\mathbb{P}^{2} is an elliptic curve. Such DdD_{d} forms an unbounded family since there is no non-constant map CAdC\rightarrow A_{d} and Pic(Ad×C)PicAd×PicC\operatorname{Pic}(A_{d}\times C)\simeq\operatorname{Pic}A_{d}\times\operatorname{Pic}C.

We can also show such DdD_{d} forms a birationally unbounded family by a similar argument as Claim 2.17 using the relative MMP guaranteed by [HMX18, Theorem 1.2] as follows. Suppose that {Ddd>0}\{D_{d}\mid d\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0}\} is birationally bounded. Then, as in Claim 2.17, we can construct a smooth family ϕ:𝒜T\phi\colon\mathcal{A}\rightarrow T over a smooth variety TT with infinitely many points tdTt_{d}\in T and a birational map μd:𝒜tdDd\mu_{d}\colon\mathcal{A}_{t_{d}}\dashrightarrow D_{d}. By [HMX18, Theorem 1.2], we obtain a birational map 𝒜𝒜\mathcal{A}\dashrightarrow\mathcal{A}^{\prime} to a good minimal model 𝒜\mathcal{A}^{\prime} of 𝒜\mathcal{A} over TT with a morphism ϕ:𝒜T\phi^{\prime}\colon\mathcal{A}^{\prime}\rightarrow T. Since an abelian variety contains no rational curve and there is no flop on it, we see that 𝒜tdDd\mathcal{A}^{\prime}_{t_{d}}\simeq D_{d} for tdTt_{d}\in T. Let \mathcal{H}^{\prime} be a ϕ\phi^{\prime}-ample line bundle on 𝒜\mathcal{A}^{\prime}. By considering |𝒜td\mathcal{H}^{\prime}|_{\mathcal{A}^{\prime}_{t_{d}}} and its pull-back to AdA_{d} for sufficiently large dd, we obtain a contradiction as before. Hence we obtain the required birational unboundedness.

3. Birational bounded family of Du Val K3 surfaces
which are unbounded

We consider the following problem in this section.

Problem 3.1.

Let SS be a smooth K3 surface with an ample line bundle LL with L2=2dL^{2}=2d for a fixed d>0d>0. Let SSS\rightarrow S^{\prime} be a birational morphism onto a normal surface SS^{\prime} (which is a Du Val K3 surface). Does there exist an ample line bundle LL^{\prime} on SS^{\prime} with L2NdL^{\prime 2}\leq N_{d} for some NdN_{d} determined by dd?

The following example in the e-mail from Keiji Oguiso is a counterexample to the problem and shows that a birational bounded family of Du Val K3 surfaces can be unbounded.

Example 3.2.

Let d,md,m be any positive integers. Let SS be a polarized K3 surface of degree 2d2d of Picard number 22 such that Pic(S)=HC{\rm Pic}\,(S)=\mathbb{Z}H\oplus\mathbb{Z}C with intersection form

(H2)=2d,(H.C)=m,(C2)=2(H^{2})=2d\,\,,\,\,(H.C)=m\,\,,\,\,(C^{2})=-2\,\,

which is constructed in [Ogu94, Theorem 3] (The d=2d=2 case is treated in [Mor84]). We know that HH is very ample when d2d\geq 2 and CC is a (2)(-2)-curve by [Ogu94, Lemma 1.2].

We have a contraction π:ST\pi:S\to T of CC to the rational double point of type A1A_{1}. Let LL be an ample Cartier divisor on TT. (Note that the local class group of A1A_{1} is /2\mathbb{Z}/2 so that 2L2L^{\prime} is Cartier for any Weil divisor LL^{\prime} on TT). Then

πL=aH+bC,\pi^{*}L=aH+bC,

where aa and bb are integers and moreover a>0a>0, as πL\pi^{*}L is a nef and big Cartier divisor. Since π\pi is the contraction of CC, it follows that (πL.C)=0(\pi^{*}L.C)=0. Hence, by πL=aH+bC\pi^{*}L=aH+bC, we have

a(H.C)+b(C2)=0.a(H.C)+b(C^{2})=0.

Substituting (H.C)=m(H.C)=m and (C2)=2(C^{2})=-2 into the equation above, it follows that

b=am2.b=\frac{am}{2}.

Also, from πLbC=aH\pi^{*}L-bC=aH with (πL.C)=0(\pi^{*}L.C)=0, (C2)=2(C^{2})=-2 and (πL)2=(L2)(\pi^{*}L)^{2}=(L^{2}) (as π\pi is a birational morphism), we have

(L2)2b2=(πLbC)2=a2(H2)=2da2.(L^{2})-2b^{2}=(\pi^{*}L-bC)^{2}=a^{2}(H^{2})=2da^{2}.

Hence, for any ample Cartier divisor on TT, we have

(L2)=2da2+2b2=a2(2d+m22)2d+m22.(L^{2})=2da^{2}+2b^{2}=a^{2}(2d+\frac{m^{2}}{2})\geq 2d+\frac{m^{2}}{2}.

Since mm can be taken any positive integer, it follows that the degree of the polarizations on the birational contractions of polarized K3 surfaces of degree 2d2d is unbounded. Hence contractions of polarized K3 surfaces of a fixed degree do not necessarily form a bounded projective family.

Remark 3.3.

In this remark, we ask whether the surface SS and TT in Example 3.2 can be embedded in a rationally connected 3-fold when d=2d=2.

We have an embedding S3S\subset\mathbb{P}^{3} as a quartic surface. When m=2lm=2l is even, we can construct a 3-fold X¯\bar{X} which contains TT as an anticanonical hypersurface so that (X¯,T)(\bar{X},T) is a plt CY pair as follows.

Assume that m=2lm=2l is even. By the above consideration, the effective cone NE¯(S)Pic(S){\overline{\operatorname{NE}}}(S)\subset\operatorname{Pic}(S)\otimes\mathbb{R} of SS is generated by (2)(-2)-curves by [Kov94, Theorem 2]. Hence we can write NE¯(S)=0[C]+0[Γ]{\overline{\operatorname{NE}}}(S)=\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}[C]+\mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}[\Gamma] for some (2)(-2)-curve Γ\Gamma. Note that lHClH-C is effective since (lHC)2=2(lH-C)^{2}=-2 and (lHC)H=2l>0(lH-C)\cdot H=2l>0. Note that such classes can be reducible in general.

We show that ΓlHC\Gamma\sim lH-C as follows. Note that we can write Γ=aHbC\Gamma=aH-bC for some a,b>0a,b\in\mathbb{Z}_{>0}. Since we have

2=(aHbC)2=4a22mba2b2,-2=(aH-bC)^{2}=4a^{2}-2mba-2b^{2},

we obtain a(2amb)=2a2mba=b21=(b1)(b+1)a(2a-mb)=2a^{2}-mba=b^{2}-1=(b-1)(b+1). If b>1b>1, then we have 2amb=2(alb)>02a-mb=2(a-lb)>0 and

aHbC=(alb)H+b(lHC)>0C+>0(lHC)NE¯(S).aH-bC=(a-lb)H+b(lH-C)\in\mathbb{R}_{>0}C+\mathbb{R}_{>0}(lH-C)\subset{\overline{\operatorname{NE}}}(S).

Hence aHbCaH-bC is not on the boundary of NE¯(S){\overline{\operatorname{NE}}}(S). Thus we see that b=1b=1 and a=la=l, that is, ΓlHC\Gamma\sim lH-C.

Now let μ:X3\mu\colon X\rightarrow\mathbb{P}^{3} be the blow-up along Γ\Gamma. Let EΓ:=μ1(Γ)E_{\Gamma}:=\mu^{-1}(\Gamma) be the exceptional divisor and S~X\tilde{S}\subset X be the strict transform of SS. Let

L:=μ𝒪3(l2+1)lEΓ.L:=\mu^{*}\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^{3}}(l^{2}+1)-lE_{\Gamma}.

We see that the restriction L|S~=(l2+1)Hl(lHC)=H+lCL|_{\tilde{S}}=(l^{2}+1)H-l(lH-C)=H+lC is the line bundle which induces the birational contraction π:ST\pi\colon S\rightarrow T in Example 3.2.

Now assume that l>4l>4. We see that LL is base point free and induces a birational morphism as follows. Note that

(2) L=μ𝒪(1)+l(μ𝒪(l)EΓ)L=\mu^{*}\mathcal{O}(1)+l(\mu^{*}\mathcal{O}(l)-E_{\Gamma})

and the linear system |μ𝒪(l)EΓ||\mu^{*}\mathcal{O}(l)-E_{\Gamma}| contains S~+Sl4\tilde{S}+S_{l-4} for all Sl4|μ𝒪(l4)|S_{l-4}\in|\mu^{*}\mathcal{O}(l-4)|. Hence the base locus BsL\operatorname{Bs}L of |L||L| is contained in S~\tilde{S}. Since L|S~L|_{\tilde{S}} is base point free, we see that LL is nef. By (2), we see that LL is big. Finally, we have an exact sequence

H0(X,L)H0(S~,L|S~)H1(X,LS)=0H^{0}(X,L)\rightarrow H^{0}(\tilde{S},L|_{\tilde{S}})\rightarrow H^{1}(X,L-S)=0

by the Kawamata-Viehweg vanishing since S~|KX|\tilde{S}\in|{-}K_{X}|, LS~=KX+LL-\tilde{S}=K_{X}+L and LL is nef and big. This implies that |L||L| is base point free and induces a birational contraction ΦL:XX¯\Phi_{L}\colon X\rightarrow\bar{X}. We see that ΦL(S~)T\Phi_{L}({\tilde{S}})\simeq T.

We see that (X¯,T)(\bar{X},T) is a plt CY pair although X¯\bar{X} is not \mathbb{Q}-Gorenstein.

Remark 3.4.

Let S3S\subset\mathbb{P}^{3} be as in Remark 3.3 for an odd m3m\geq 3. As in Remark 3.3, we see that NE¯(S){\overline{\operatorname{NE}}}(S) is generated by CC and another 2-2-curve Γ\Gamma. However, it seems difficult to describe Γ\Gamma explicitly. In order to find such a class, we need to find an integer solution (a,b)(a,b) of the quadratic equation

4a22mab2b2=24a^{2}-2mab-2b^{2}=-2

with a,b>0a,b>0 . By a computer program in [Mat15], we find solutions for an explicit mm. For m=15m=15, the solutions are (a,b)=(2G,F15G)(a,b)=(2G,F-15G), where

F+G233=(2144801346/2+140510608/2233)nfor n0.F+G\sqrt{233}=(2144801346/2+140510608/2\sqrt{233})^{n}\ \ \text{for }n\geq 0.

4. Some results in higher dimensional case

We consider the following problem in this section.

Problem 4.1.

Let n>0n>0 and XX be a normal projective rationally connected nn-fold with an irreducible D|KX|D\in|{-}K_{X}| such that (X,D)(X,D) is a plt pair (and DD is a strict CY variety with only canonical singularities). Does such DD form a birationally bounded family?

Remark 4.2.

If dimX=4\dim X=4, then DD is a CY 3-fold. By taking a small \mathbb{Q}-factorial modification and running KXK_{X}-MMP as before, we may assume that there is a Mori fiber space ϕ:XS\phi\colon X\rightarrow S which induces a surjective morphism ϕD:=ϕ|D:DS\phi_{D}:=\phi|_{D}\colon D\rightarrow S. The problem is to bound this DD.

If dimS=0\dim S=0, then XX is a \mathbb{Q}-Fano 4-fold with canonical singularities and it is bounded (cf. [Bir21]), thus DD is also bounded. If dimS=2\dim S=2, then ϕD:DS\phi_{D}\colon D\rightarrow S is an elliptic fibration. Indeed, we check this as in the proof of Proposition 2.6 since its general fiber is an anticanonical member of the general fiber of ϕ\phi which is a log del Pezzo surface. Hence DD is birationally bounded by Gross’ theorem [Gro94]. If dimS=3\dim S=3, then DSD\rightarrow S is a generically 2:1-cover and DSD\rightarrow S is branched along a divisor RSR\subset S since SS is rationally connected. Thus (S,12R)(S,\frac{1}{2}R) is a klt CY pair and R|2KS|R\in|{-}2K_{S}|. SS is birationally bounded by [CDCH+21, Theorem 1.6] and DD is also birationally bounded.

Hence the problem is reduced to the case dimS=1\dim S=1. However, we don’t know how to show the boundedness in these cases.

Chen Jiang also pointed out the following.

Proposition 4.3.

Let n,m>0n,m>0. Let (X,D)(X,D) be a nn-dimensional reduced plt CY pair such that XX is of Fano type. Assume that there exists a \mathbb{Q}-divisor BDB\neq D such that mBmB is integral, KX+B0K_{X}+B\equiv 0 and (X,B)(X,B) is lc.

Then the pair (X,D)(X,D) is log bounded.

Proof.

We see that (X,D)(X,D) is ϵ\epsilon-plt for some ϵ>0\epsilon>0 by Proposition 2.5(i). Then we see that (X,12(B+D))(X,\frac{1}{2}(B+D)) is ϵ\epsilon^{\prime}-lc for ϵ:=min{1/2m,ϵ/2}\epsilon^{\prime}:=\min\{1/2m,\epsilon/2\}. By [HX15, Theorem 1.3], we see that (X,D)(X,D) forms a log bounded family. ∎

Remark 4.4.

The following is pointed out by Yoshinori Gongyo and Roberto Svaldi after the submission to arXiv.

Proposition 4.5.

Let (X,D)(X,D) be a reduced plt CY pair such that XX is of Fano type.

  1. (i)

    Then (X,D)(X,D) is log bitarionally bounded.

  2. (ii)

    Assume that XX is \mathbb{Q}-factorial. Then (X,D)(X,D) is log bounded.

Proof.

(i) By taking a small \mathbb{Q}-factorial modification, we may assume that XX is \mathbb{Q}-factorial. Let μ:XX\mu\colon X\dashrightarrow X^{\prime} be a birational map induced by a (KX)(-K_{X})-MMP which exists since XX is a Mori dream space by [BCHM10]. Then we see that KX-K_{X^{\prime}} is nef and big. Let D:=μDD^{\prime}:=\mu_{*}D. Note that μ\mu does not contract DD since DD is big. Then the pair (X,D)(X^{\prime},D^{\prime}) is also a plt CY and ϵ\epsilon-plt for some ϵ>0\epsilon>0 by Proposition 2.5. By these, we see that XX^{\prime} is an ϵ\epsilon-lc weak Fano variety, thus it is bounded by [Bir21]. Hence DKXD^{\prime}\equiv-K_{X^{\prime}} is also bounded.

(ii) We also use the notation in (i). Then (X,D)(X^{\prime},D^{\prime}) is ϵ\epsilon-plt and KX-K_{X^{\prime}} is nef and big. Thus we can take a positive integer mm determined by dimX\dim X such that mKX-mK_{X^{\prime}} is base point free. Then, by taking a general member of A|mKX|A^{\prime}\in|{-}mK_{X^{\prime}}| and putting B:=1mAB^{\prime}:=\frac{1}{m}A^{\prime}, we obtain a 1m\frac{1}{m}-lc CY pair (X,B)(X^{\prime},B^{\prime}). Moreover, KX+BK_{X^{\prime}}+B^{\prime} is an mm-complement (cf. [Bir19, 2.18]). Then we obtain an mm-complement KX+BK_{X}+B as in [Bir19, 6.1(3)], where BB is the sum of the strict transform of BB^{\prime} and some effective divisor supported on the μ\mu-exceptional divisors. Hence, by Proposition 4.3, we see that (X,D)(X,D) is log bounded. ∎

Johnson–Kollár [JK01] proved that there are only finitely many quasismooth weighted CY hypersurfaces of fixed dimension. Chen [Che15] proved that there are only finitely many families of CY weighted complete intersections. CY varieties in toric varieties are often considered in mirror symmetry and so on. Although toric varieties are unbounded, we can show the following.

Corollary 4.6.

Let XX be a normal projective toric variety with D|KX|D\in|{-}K_{X}| with only canonical singularities. Then (X,D)(X,D) form a log bounded family. (Thus both XX and DD are bounded. )

Proof.

Note that, since XX is toric and \mathbb{Q}-Gorenstein in codimension 2, we see that XX has only canonical singularities in codimension 2 by [Ste88, Theorem 5]. Thus DD is Cartier in codimension 2 and (X,D)(X,D) is plt by inversion of adjunction (cf. [KM98, Theorem 5.50]).

Let ΔX\Delta\subset X be the union of toric divisors. Then we see that (X,Δ)(X,\Delta) is lc. By applying Proposition 4.3, we obtain the claim. ∎

Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank Keiji Oguiso for valuable discussions through e-mails and allowing him to use the argument in Example 3.2. He also thanks Chen Jiang for pointing out mistakes and improvements in the manuscript. He is grateful to Yoshinori Gongyo, Kenji Hashimoto and Roberto Svaldi for valuable comments. The author is grateful to the anonymous referees for careful reading and many valuable comments. This work was partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP17H06127, JP19K14509.

References

  • [ABR02] Selma Altınok, Gavin Brown, and Miles Reid, Fano 3-folds, K3K3 surfaces and graded rings, Topology and geometry: commemorating SISTAG, Contemp. Math., vol. 314, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2002, pp. 25–53. MR 1941620
  • [Ale94] Valery Alexeev, Boundedness and K2K^{2} for log surfaces, Internat. J. Math. 5 (1994), no. 6, 779–810. MR 1298994
  • [BCHM10] Caucher Birkar, Paolo Cascini, Christopher D. Hacon, and James McKernan, Existence of minimal models for varieties of log general type, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 23 (2010), no. 2, 405–468. MR 2601039
  • [Bir19] Caucher Birkar, Anti-pluricanonical systems on Fano varieties, Ann. of Math. (2) 190 (2019), no. 2, 345–463. MR 3997127
  • [Bir21] by same author, Singularities of linear systems and boundedness of Fano varieties, Ann. of Math. (2) 193 (2021), no. 2, 347–405. MR 4224714
  • [BL04] Christina Birkenhake and Herbert Lange, Complex abelian varieties, second ed., Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences], vol. 302, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004. MR 2062673
  • [CDCH+21] Weichung Chen, Gabriele Di Cerbo, Jingjun Han, Chen Jiang, and Roberto Svaldi, Birational boundedness of rationally connected Calabi-Yau 3-folds, Adv. Math. 378 (2021), 107541. MR 4191257
  • [Che15] Jheng-Jie Chen, Finiteness of Calabi-Yau quasismooth weighted complete intersections, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2015), no. 12, 3793–3809. MR 3356738
  • [CK16] Alessio Corti and Anne-Sophie Kaloghiros, The Sarkisov program for Mori fibred Calabi-Yau pairs, Algebr. Geom. 3 (2016), no. 3, 370–384. MR 3504536
  • [Cor00] Alessio Corti, Singularities of linear systems and 33-fold birational geometry, Explicit birational geometry of 3-folds, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., vol. 281, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2000, pp. 259–312. MR 1798984
  • [CS] Gabriele Di Cerbo and Roberto Svaldi, Birational boundedness of low dimensional elliptic Calabi-Yau varieties with a section, https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.02997.
  • [GKKP11] Daniel Greb, Stefan Kebekus, Sándor J. Kovács, and Thomas Peternell, Differential forms on log canonical spaces, Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. (2011), no. 114, 87–169. MR 2854859
  • [Gon13] Yoshinori Gongyo, Abundance theorem for numerically trivial log canonical divisors of semi-log canonical pairs, J. Algebraic Geom. 22 (2013), no. 3, 549–564. MR 3048544
  • [Gro94] Mark Gross, A finiteness theorem for elliptic Calabi-Yau threefolds, Duke Math. J. 74 (1994), no. 2, 271–299. MR 1272978
  • [HMX14] Christopher D. Hacon, James McKernan, and Chenyang Xu, ACC for log canonical thresholds, Ann. of Math. (2) 180 (2014), no. 2, 523–571. MR 3224718
  • [HMX18] by same author, Boundedness of moduli of varieties of general type, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 20 (2018), no. 4, 865–901. MR 3779687
  • [HX15] Christopher D. Hacon and Chenyang Xu, Boundedness of log Calabi-Yau pairs of Fano type, Math. Res. Lett. 22 (2015), no. 6, 1699–1716. MR 3507257
  • [IF00] A. R. Iano-Fletcher, Working with weighted complete intersections, Explicit birational geometry of 3-folds, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., vol. 281, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2000, pp. 101–173. MR 1798982 (2001k:14089)
  • [Jia13] Chen Jiang, Bounding the volumes of singular weak log del Pezzo surfaces, Internat. J. Math. 24 (2013), no. 13, 1350110, 27. MR 3158579
  • [JK01] Jennifer M. Johnson and János Kollár, Fano hypersurfaces in weighted projective 4-spaces, Experiment. Math. 10 (2001), no. 1, 151–158. MR 1822861 (2002a:14048)
  • [Kaw13] Yujiro Kawamata, On the abundance theorem in the case of numerical Kodaira dimension zero, Amer. J. Math. 135 (2013), no. 1, 115–124. MR 3022959
  • [KM98] János Kollár and Shigefumi Mori, Birational geometry of algebraic varieties, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 134, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998, With the collaboration of C. H. Clemens and A. Corti, Translated from the 1998 Japanese original. MR 1658959 (2000b:14018)
  • [Kol13] János Kollár, Singularities of the minimal model program, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 200, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013, With a collaboration of Sándor Kovács. MR 3057950
  • [Kol17] by same author, Conic bundles that are not birational to numerical Calabi-Yau pairs, Épijournal Géom. Algébrique 1 (2017), Art. 1, 14. MR 3743104
  • [Kov94] Sándor J. Kovács, The cone of curves of a K3K3 surface, Math. Ann. 300 (1994), no. 4, 681–691. MR 1314742
  • [KX16] János Kollár and Chenyang Xu, The dual complex of Calabi-Yau pairs, Invent. Math. 205 (2016), no. 3, 527–557. MR 3539921
  • [Lin03] Jiayuan Lin, Birational unboundedness of \mathbb{Q}-Fano threefolds, Int. Math. Res. Not. (2003), no. 6, 301–312. MR 1939018
  • [Mat15] Keith Matthews, http://www.numbertheory.org/php/binarygen.html, 2015.
  • [Mor84] Shigefumi Mori, On degrees and genera of curves on smooth quartic surfaces in 𝐏3{\bf P}^{3}, Nagoya Math. J. 96 (1984), 127–132. MR 771073
  • [Ogu94] Keiji Oguiso, Two remarks on Calabi-Yau Moishezon threefolds, J. Reine Angew. Math. 452 (1994), 153–161. MR 1282199
  • [Rei80] Miles Reid, Canonical 33-folds, Journées de Géometrie Algébrique d’Angers, Juillet 1979/Algebraic Geometry, Angers, 1979, Sijthoff & Noordhoff, Alphen aan den Rijn—Germantown, Md., 1980, pp. 273–310. MR 605348 (82i:14025)
  • [RS06] G. V. Ravindra and V. Srinivas, The Grothendieck-Lefschetz theorem for normal projective varieties, J. Algebraic Geom. 15 (2006), no. 3, 563–590. MR 2219849
  • [Ste88] J. Stevens, On canonical singularities as total spaces of deformations, Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg 58 (1988), 275–283. MR 1027448
  • [vGS07] Bert van Geemen and Alessandra Sarti, Nikulin involutions on K3K3 surfaces, Math. Z. 255 (2007), no. 4, 731–753. MR 2274533