Arxiv:Math/0411538V2 [Math.AG] 8 May 2006 H-T.Te Locntutdtemdl Pc Frn Wse S Twisted 1 Rank of Space a Moduli with Space

Home , Projective bundle

arXiv:math/0411538v2 [math.AG] 8 May 2006 H-t.Te locntutdtemdl pc frn wse s twisted 1 rank of space a moduli with space. overlap the moduli some the constructed also of also are structure ge They There a intrins developed space surfaces. [Ho-St]. Lieblich moduli on the [Li], sheaves constructed paper twisted and his of stack In algebraic of sheaves. terms twisted of moduli the fGohnic,ta is, that Grothendieck, of wse hae over sheaves twisted sdn nscin4 sa plcto forrsls ubehsand Huybrechts results, our of application an As 4. generally. section conjecture b transform in Fourier-Mukai the done o of is spaces version t twisted deformation moduli consider the the can non-emptyness, to we the sheaves consider stable we usual particular, of In space moduli the on ibr oyoilascae oaln udecmn from coming the bundle on bundle line line a ample to sh an usual associated to a associated polynomial as polynomial sheaf Hilbert Hilbert twisted the a consider using We of follows. as is construction ufc) hntemdl pc flclyfe wse hae st is sheaves twisted free locally of space X moduli the then surface), ouisae[,Tm .]adtevlaiecieinfrpropernes for criterion valuative cons the the and Hence 4.7] Thm. equivalence. Simpso [S, with Morita space modu coincides via moduli the condition algebra stability of Azumaya our construction that associated us Simpson’s informed of Lieblich modification M. a is construction ersnigatrincas[ class torsion a representing the tbetitdsevson sheaves twisted stable wse hae loapa fw osdrapoetv udeover bundle projective a consider we if appear also sheaves twisted O]soe htteeuvlnecasi ecie ntrso h Ho Stellar the and Huybrechts of by terms proved der and in the modified for was described conjecture holds this is also class result equivalence similar a C˘ald˘araru the that that conjectured showed [Or] E t one eie aeoy npriua,h eeaie Mukai, a on generalized C˘ald˘araru spaces he moduli [C2], studie particular, non-fine thesis In to the transforms his category. is Fourier-Mukai In derived functor bounded integral categories. its the the that showed of equivalence Bridgeland and Orlov Mukai, hae on sheaves pt h utpiainb osat n ie wse ha.I th If sheaf. twisted a gives and space constants moduli by the multiplication the to up α aeoiso oeetsheaves coherent of categories ru Br( group ijk i hsw opciytemdl pc fpoetv ude yusin by bundles projective of space moduli the compactify we Thus . oain o oal resheaf free locally a For Notation: .MrmnadD ubehscmuiae oteato htM that author the to communicated Huybrechts D. and Markman E. ic u aneapeo wse hae r hs on those are sheaves twisted of example main our Since nscin3 ecnie h ouisaeo wse hae na on sheaves twisted of space moduli the consider we 3, section In 1991 Let nti ae,w en oino h tblt o wse ha a sheaf twisted a for stability the of notion a define we paper, this In on S id euvlnecasso eisal wse hae.I particular In sheaves. twisted semi-stable of classes -equivalence U E OUISAE FTITDSEVSO RJCIEVARIETY PROJECTIVE A ON SHEAVES TWISTED OF SPACES MODULI X ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics i i easm htteei oal free locally a is there that assume We . n isomorphisms and X easot rjcievreyover variety projective smooth a be X .Atitdsefntrlyapasi ecnie o-n moduli non-fine a consider we if appears naturally sheaf twisted A ). nedtetasto ucin ftelcluieslfmle sat families universal local the of functions transition the Indeed . M C sfie hnteuieslfml ensa nerlfntro the on functor integral an defines family universal the than fine, is u oeo h eut eg,sbeto .)as odoe n field any over hold also 2.2) subsection (e.g., results the of some But . P X ( E eas osrc rjciecmatfiaino h ouispa moduli the of compactification projective a construct also We . ϕ α Proj( = ) ij ] D ∈ : ( E M H i | 2 ) U E ( i X, → ∩ L 14D20. navariety a on U D O j n ∞ → X × =0 ( 1. X .An ). 0. E S K .Asm that Assume ). wse sheaves Twisted n j T YOSHIOKA OTA C ¯ Introduction | ( U Let . E i α ∩ α )). titdsef htis, that sheaf, -twisted X U titdsheaf -twisted j , 1 uhthat such P α ( E := K ) ufc.Frteuuldrvdctgr,Orlov category, derived usual the For surface. 3 → { X α K X ijk X p n h egt2Hdesrcue Then structure. Hodge 2 weight the and ype ufcso bla ufcs econsider we surfaces, abelian or surfaces 3 sa is ϕ sn iesoa ouisae,which spaces, moduli dimensional 2 using y nodrt en h tblt.Te the Then stability. the define to order in emdl pc fpoetv ude over bundles projective of space moduli he vdctgr ftitdsevs Recently sheaves. twisted of category ived cwy eas tde h ouispaces moduli the studied also He way. ic ,if i, ii eoe h rjciebnl ntesense the in bundle projective the denotes E ∈ wse tbesevs(f M2,[Y1]). [Mu2], (cf. sheaves stable twisted f a nteBae-eeivrey Instead variety. Brauer-Severi the on eaf K X id = h aeoyo wse hae and sheaves twisted of category the d K s. := ae yN omn n .Stuhler U. and Hoffmann N. by paper H ro n rdeadsrslso the on results Bridgeland’s and Orlov ufc.W eeaiekonresults known generalize We surface. 3 ρ . rcinas olw rmSimpson’s from follows also truction ufc n dim and surface 3 acigcniini aifid i.e., satisfied, is condition patching e ( 0 isaeo sa hae c.[Y3]). (cf. sheaves usual of space li ibihidpnetyconstructed independently Lieblich . X ore-ua uco,ie,i san is it i.e., functor, Fourier-Mukai { ( if evsadsuidtesymplectic the studied and heaves g tutr fteMkilattice. Mukai the of structure dge E wse hae.Teie fthe of idea The sheaves. twisted g U ( tlai[-t]poeC˘ald˘araru’s prove [H-St2] Stellari ea hoyo wse hae in sheaves twisted of theory neral i ) E dcntuttemdl pc of space moduli the construct nd H α i , ’ tblt o oue vrthe over modules for stability n’s rurSvr ait,w s the use we variety, Brauer-Severi ≥ i ∩ ϕ 1 ϕ , ie neeeto h Brauer the of element an gives ( ji 2i HS] si well-known, is As [H-St]. in 12 U X, ij j = ) space sytepthn condition patching the isfy ∩ O } ϕ X U sacleto fsheaves of collection a is ij − k (e.g. 0 = ) 1 , M and O X × M fteuulstable usual the of ) one derived bounded ϕ } dim = ki . ea2-cocycle a be ◦ eb adding by ce ϕ X jk X sa is ◦ Than . ϕ ij K = 3 Let X be a smooth projective variety over C. Let α := α H0(U U U , × ) be a 2-cocycle { ijk ∈ i ∩ j ∩ k OX } representing a torsion class [α] H2(X, × ). An α-twisted sheaf E := (E , ϕ ) is a collection of sheaves ∈ OX { i ij } E on U and isomorphisms ϕ : E E such that ϕ = id , ϕ = ϕ−1 and ϕ ϕ ϕ = i i ij i|Ui∩Uj → j|Ui∩Uj ii Ei ji ij ki ◦ jk ◦ ij αijk idEi . If all Ei are coherent, then we say that E is coherent. Let Coh(X, α) be the category of coherent α-twisted sheaves on X. ∨ If Ei are locally free for all i, then we can glue P(Ei ) together and get a projective bundle p : Y X with δ([Y ]) = [α], where [Y ] H1(X,PGL(r)) is the corresponding cohomology class of Y and δ→: × ∈ H1(X,PGL(r)) H2(X, ) is the connecting homomorphism induced by the exact sequence → OX (1.1) 1 × GL(r) P GL(r) 1. → OX → → → Thus [α] belongs to the Brauer group Br(X). If X is a smooth projective surface, then Br(X) coincides with 2 × ∨ the torsion part of H (X, ). Let P ∨ (λ ) be the tautological line bundle on P(E ). Then, ϕ induces X (Ei ) i i ij O O ∗ −1 an isomorphism ϕij : P(E∨)(λi)|p−1(U ∩U ) P(E∨)(λj )|p−1(U ∩U ). (p (α )) := ( P(E∨)(λi), ϕij ) is O i i j → O j i j L { O i } an p∗(α−1)-twisted line bundle on Y . e e 1.1. Sheaves on a projective bundle. In this subsection, we shall interpret twisted sheaves as usual sheaves on a Brauer-Severi variety. Let p : Y X be a projective bundle. Let X = iUi be an analytic −1 →r−1 −1 ∪ open covering of X such that p (Ui) = Ui P . We set Yi := p (Ui). We fix a collection of tautological ∼ × ∨ line bundles Yi (λi) on Yi and isomorphisms φji : Yi∩Yj (λj ) Yi∩Yj (λi). We set Gi := p∗( Yi (λi)) . O ∗ O → O O Then Gi are vector bundles on Ui and p (Gi)(λi) defines a vector bundle G of rank r on Y . We have the Euler sequence (1.2) 0 G T 0. → OY → → Y/X → Thus G is a non-trivial extension of T by . Y/X OY 1 Lemma 1.1. Ext (TY/X , Y )= C. Thus G is characterized as a non-trivial extension of TY/X by Y . In particular, G does not dependO on the choice of the local trivialization of p. O

Proof. Since Rp (G∨) = 0, the Euler sequence inplies that Ext1(T , ) = H0(Y, ) = C. ∗ Y/X OY ∼ OY ∼ Definition 1.1. For a projective bundle p : Y X, let ǫ(Y )(:= G) be a vector bundle on Y which is a non-trivial extension → (1.3) 0 ǫ(Y ) T 0. → OY → → Y/X → ′ By the exact sequence 0 µr SL(r) P GL(r) 1, we have a connecting homomorphism δ : H1(X,PGL(r)) H2(X,µ →). Let→o : H2(X,µ→ ) H2→(X, × ) be the homomorphism induced by the → r r → OX .′inclusion µ ֒ × . Then we have δ = o δ r → OX ◦ Definition 1.2. For a Pr−1-bundle p : Y X corresponding to [Y ] H1(X,PGL(r)), we set w(Y ) := δ′([Y ]) H2(X,µ ). → ∈ ∈ r Lemma 1.2 ([C1],[H-Sc]). If p : Y X is a Pr−1-bundle associated to a vector bundle E on X, i.e., ∨ → Y = P(E ), then w(Y ) = [c1(E) mod r]. Lemma 1.3. [c (G) mod r]= p∗(w(Y )) H2(Y,µ ). 1 ∈ r ∗ ∗ Proof. There is a line bundle L on Y X Y such that L|Y × Y = p ( Y ( λi)) p ( Y (λi)), where i Ui i ∼ 1 i 2 i × O −∨ ⊗ O pi : Y X Y Y , i =1, 2 are i-th projections. By the definition of G, p1∗(L) ∼= G . Hence p1 : Y X Y Y is the× projective→ bundle P(G∨) Y . Then we get [c (G∨) mod r]= w(Y Y )= p∗(w(Y )).× → → − 1 ×X Lemma 1.4. Let p : Y X be a Pr−1-bundle. Then the following conditions are equivalent. → (1) Y = P(E∨) for a vector bundle on X. (2) w(Y ) NS(X) µ . ∈ ⊗ r (3) There is a line bundle L on Y such that L −1 = −1 (1). |p (x) ∼ Op (x) ∗ Proof. (2) (3): If w(Y ) = [D mod r], D NS(X), then c1(ǫ(Y )) p (D) 0 mod r. We take a line bundle L on⇒Y with c (ǫ(Y )) p∗(D)= rc (L∈). (3) (1): We set E∨−:= p (L).≡ Then Y = P(E∨). 1 − 1 ⇒ ∗ Definition 1.3. Coh(X, Y ) is a subcategory of Coh(Y ) such that E Coh(X, Y ) if and only if ∈ (1.4) E = p∗(E ) (λ ) |Yi ∼ i ⊗ OYi i for E Coh(U ). For simplicity, we call E Coh(X, Y ) a Y -sheaf. i ∈ i ∈ 2 By this definition, (U , E ) gives a twisted sheaf on X. Thus we have an equivalence { i i } ∗ −1 ΛL(p (α )) : Coh(X, Y ) Coh(X, α) (1.5) ∼= E p (E L∨), 7→ ∗ ⊗ ∗ −1 −1 where (p (α )) := ( Y (λi), φij ) is a twisted line bundle on Y and α idO (λ ) = φki φjk φij . L { O i } ijk Yi i ◦ ◦ We have the following relations: ∨ ∗ ∨ ∗ p∗(G E)|Ui =p∗(p (Gi ) Yi ( λi) p (Ei) Yi (λi)) (1.6) ⊗ ⊗ O − ⊗ ⊗ O =p p∗(G∨ E )= G∨ E , ∗ i ⊗ i i ⊗ i ∗ p∗(E)|U =p∗(p (Ei) Yi (λi)) (1.7) i ⊗ O =E p ( (λ )) = G∨ E . i ⊗ ∗ OYi i i ⊗ i ∗ ∨ ∨ Lemma 1.5. A coherent sheaf E on Y belongs to Coh(X, Y ) if and only if φ : p p∗(G E) G E is an isomorphism. In particular E Coh(X, Y ) is an open condition. ⊗ → ⊗ ∈ ∗ ∨ ∗ ∗ ∨ Proof. φ|Yi is the homomorphism p Gi p p∗(E( λi)) p Gi E( λi). Hence φ|Yi is an isomorphism if and only if p∗p (E( λ )) E( λ ) is an⊗ isomorphism,− → which is⊗ equivalent− to E Coh(X, Y ). ∗ − i → − i ∈ Lemma 1.6. Assume that H3(X, Z)tor =0. Then H∗(Y, Z) = H∗(X, Z)[x]/(f(x)), where f(x) H∗(X, Z)[x] ∼ ∈ is a monic polynomial of degree r. In particular, H2(X, Z) µ ′ H2(Y, Z) µ ′ is injective for all r′. ⊗ r → ⊗ r 2 Z 2 Z Z Proof. R p∗ is a local system of rank 1. Since c1(KY/X ) is a section of this local system, R p∗ ∼= . Let 2i i 3 h be the generator. Then R p∗Z = Zh . Since H (X, Z)tor = 0, by the Leray spectral sequence, we get a 2 ∼ 0 2 2 i surjective homomorphism H (Y, Z) H (X, R p∗Z). Let x H (Y, Z) be a lifting of h. Then x is a lifting i 0 2i Z → ∈ ∗ Z ∗ Z of h H (X, R p∗ ). Therefore the Leray-Hirsch theorem implies that H (Y, ) ∼= H (X, )[x]/(f(x)). ∈

Lemma 1.7. Assume that o(w(Y )) = o(w(Y ′)).

′ − − ⊠ − (i) Then there is a line bundle L on Y X Y such that L|p′ 1(x)×p−1(x) ∼= p′ 1(x)(1) p 1(x)( 1) ′ ′ × ′ O ∗ O − for all x X. If L Pic(Y X Y ) also satisﬁes the property, then L = L q (P ), P Pic(X), ∈ ′ ∈ × ⊗ ∈ where q : Y X Y X is the projection. (ii) We have an× equivalence→ L ′ ΞY →Y ′ : Coh(X, Y ) Coh(X, Y ) (1.8) → ∗ E p ′ (p′ (E) L), 7→ Y ∗ Y ⊗ where p ′ : Y ′ Y Y ′ and p′ : Y ′ Y Y are projections. Y ×X → Y ×X → ′∗ ∗ ′ ′ ′ Remark 1.1. We also see that E is a Y -sheaf if and only if p (E) L = p ′ (E ) for a sheaf E on Y . Y ⊗ ∼ Y Deﬁnition 1.4. Assume that H3(X, Z) = 0. For a Y -sheaf E of rank r′,[c (E) mod r′] H2(Y,µ ′ ) tor 1 ∈ r belongs to p∗(H2(X,µ ′ )). We set w(E) := (p∗)−1([c (E) mod r′]) H2(X,µ ′ ). r 1 ∈ r By Lemmas 1.3 and 1.7, we see that

L L Lemma 1.8. (i) By the functor ΞY →Y ′ in Lemma 1.7, w(ΞY →Y ′ (E)) = w(E) for E Coh(X, Y ). (ii) w(ǫ(Y )) = w(Y ). ∈

2. Moduli of twisted sheaves

2.1. Deﬁnition of the stability. Let (X, X (1)) be a pair of a projective scheme X and an ample line bundle (1) on X. Let p : Y X be a projectiveO bundle over X. OX → Deﬁnition 2.1. A Y -sheaf E is of dimension d, if p∗(E) is of dimension d.

For a coherent sheaf F of dimension d on X, we define ai(F ) Z by the coefficient of the Hilbert polynomial of F : ∈ d m + i (2.1) χ(F (m)) = a (F ) . i i i=0 X G ∨ Let G be a locally free Y -sheaf. For a Y -sheaf E of dimension d, we set ai (E) := ai(p∗(G E)). Thus we have ⊗ d m + i (2.2) χ(G, E p∗ (m)) = χ(p (G∨ E)(m)) = aG(E) . ⊗ OX ∗ ⊗ i i i=0 X 3 Definition 2.2. Let E be Y -sheaf of dimension d. Then E is (G-twisted) semi-stable (with respect to (1)), if OX (i) E is of pure dimension d, (ii) ∨ ∨ χ(p∗(G F )(m)) χ(p∗(G E)(m)) (2.3) G ⊗ G ⊗ ,m 0 ad (F ) ≤ ad (E) ≫ for all subsheaf F =0 of E. 6 If the inequality in (2.3) is strict for all proper subsheaf F = 0 of E, then E is (G-twisted) stable with respect to (1). 6 OX h Theorem 2.1. Let p : Y X be a projective bundle. There is a coarse moduli scheme M X/C parametrizing → h S-equivalence classes of G-twisted semi-stable Y -sheaves E with the G-twisted Hilbert polynomial h. M X/C is a projective scheme. Remark 2.1. The construction also works for a projective bundle Y X over any field and also for a family of projective bundles, by the fundamental work of Langer [L]. →

′ ′ ′ L Lemma 2.2. Let p : Y X be a projective bundle with o(w(Y )) = o(w(Y )) and ΞY →Y ′ the correspon- → L ′ dence in Lemma 1.7. Then a Y -sheaf E is G-twisted semi-stable if and only if ΞY →Y ′ (E) Coh(X, Y ) is L ∈ ΞY →Y ′ (G)-twisted semi-stable. In particular, we have an isomorphism of the corresponding moduli spaces.

L⊠OS L Indeed, since Ξ ′ ( ) = Ξ ′ ( k(s)), if we have a flat family of Y -sheaves , Y ×S→Y ×S ∗ s Y →Y ∗⊗ {Es}s∈S E ∈ ′ ′ ′ L⊠OS Coh(Y S), then is also a flat family of Y -sheaves, where := Ξ ′ ( ). × {Es}s∈S E Y ×S→Y ×S E ′ ′ L Remark 2.2. For a locally free Y -sheaf G, we have a projective bundle Y X with ǫ(Y ) = ΞY →Y ′ (G). Hence it is sufficient to study the ǫ(Y )-twisted semi-stability. → Remark 2.3. This definition is the same as in [C1]. If Y = P(G∨) for a vector bundle G on X, then Coh(X, Y ) is equivalent to Coh(X) and G-twisted stability is nothing but the twisted semi-stability in [Y3]. Definition 2.3. Let λ be a rational number. Let E be a Y -sheaf of dimension d. Then E is of type λ with respect to the G-twisted semi-stability, if (i) E is of pure dimension d, (ii) G G ad−1(F ) ad−1(E) (2.4) G G + λ ad (F ) ≤ ad (E) for all subsheaf F of E. If λ = 0, then E is µ-semi-stable. 2.2. Construction of the moduli space. From now on, we assume that G = ǫ(Y ) (cf. Remark 2.2). Let P (x) be a numerical polynomial. We shall construct the moduli space of G-twisted semi-stable Y -sheaves E with χ(p (G∨ E)(n)) = P (n). ∗ ⊗ 2.2.1. Boundedness. Let E be a Y -sheaf. Then (2.5) p∗p (G∨ E) G E ∗ ⊗ ⊗ → ∗ ∨ ∨ ∨ is surjective. Indeed p p∗(G E) G E is an isomorphism and G G Y is surjective. ⊗ → ⊗ ⊕N ∨ ⊗ → O We take a surjective homomorphism X ( nG) p∗(G G), nG 0. Then we have a surjective homomorphism p∗( ( n ))⊕N G∨ O G.− → ⊗ ≫ OX − G → ⊗ Lemma 2.3. Let E be a Y -sheaf of pure dimension d. If

G G G ad−1(E) (2.6) ad−1(F ) ad (F ) G ν ≥ ad (E) − !

G ′ ′ ad−1(E) ∨ ′ for all quotient E F , then ad−1(F ) ad(F ) aG(E) ν nG for all quotient p∗(G E) F . In → ≥ d − − ⊗ → particular (2.7) S := E Coh(X, Y ) E satisfies (2.6) and χ(p (G∨ E)(nH)) = P (n) ν { ∈ | ∗ ⊗ } is bounded. 4 Proof. Since p∗p (G∨ E) = G∨ E, we have a surjective homomorphism ∗ ⊗ ∼ ⊗ (2.8) p∗( ( n H))⊕N E G p∗p (G∨ E) G p∗(F ′). OX − G ⊗ → ⊗ ∗ ⊗ → ⊗ By our assumption, we get a (p (G∨ E)) (2.9) a (p (G∨ G) F ′) a (p (G∨ G) F ′) d−1 ∗ ⊗ n ν . d−1 ∗ ⊗ ⊗ ≥ d ∗ ⊗ ⊗ a (p (G∨ E)) − G − d ∗ ⊗ ∨ ′ 2 ′ ∨ ′ 2 ′ Since ad−1(p∗(G G) F ) = rk(G) ad−1(F ) and ad(p∗(G G) F ) = rk(G) ad(F ), we get our claim. The boundedness⊗ of S ⊗follows from the boundedness of p (G⊗∨ E⊗) E S and Lemma 2.4 below. ν { ∗ ⊗ | ∈ ν } ∨ Lemma 2.4. Let S be a bounded subset of Coh(X). Then T := E Coh(X, Y ) p∗(G E) S is also bounded. { ∈ | ⊗ ∈ } ∗ ∨ ′ Proof. For E T , we set I(E) := ker(p p∗(G E) G E). We shall show that T := I(E) E T is bounded. We∈ note that I(E) Coh(X, Y ) and⊗ we have⊗ an→ exact sequence { | ∈ } ∈ (2.10) 0 p (G∨ I(E)) p (G∨ E) p (G G∨) p (G∨ E) 0. → ∗ ⊗ → ∗ ⊗ ⊗ ∗ ⊗ → ∗ ⊗ → ∨ ∨ ∗ ∨ Since p∗(G E) S, p∗(G I(E)) E T is also bounded. Since p p∗(G I(E)) G I(E) is surjective and⊗I(E)∈ is a subsheaf{ ⊗ of p∗p |(G∨∈ E}) G, T ′ is bounded. ⊗ ⊗ → ∗ ⊗ ⊗ Corollary 2.5. Under the same assumption (2.6), there is a rational number ν′ which depends on ν such that G ′ ′ ad−1(E) ′ (2.11) ad−1(F ) ad(F ) G + ν ≤ ad (E) ! for a subsheaf F ′ p (G∨ E). ⊂ ∗ ⊗ Combining this with Langer’s important result [L, Cor. 3.4], we have the following Lemma 2.6. Under the same assumption (2.6), d 0 G h (G, E) 1 ad−1(E) ′ (2.12) G G + ν + c , ad (E) ≤  d! ad (E) !  +   where c depends only on (X, (1)), G, d and aG(E). OX d 2.2.2. A quot-scheme. Since p (G∨ E)(n), n 0 is generated by global sections, ∗ ⊗ ≫ (2.13) H0(G∨ E p∗ (n)) G E p∗ (n) ⊗ ⊗ OX ⊗ → ⊗ OX i ∨ i ∗ is surjective. Since R p∗(G E)=0 for i> 0, we also see that H (E p X (n)) = 0, i> 0 and n 0. ⊗ ∨ ⊗ O N≫ We fix a sufficiently large integer n0. We set N := χ(p∗(G E)(n0)) = P (n0). We set V := C . We consider the quot-scheme Q parametrizing all quotients ⊗ (2.14) φ : V G E ⊗ → ∨ such that E Coh(X, Y ) and χ(p∗(G E)(n)) = P (n0 + n). By Lemma 2.4, Q is bounded, in particular, it is a quasi-projective∈ scheme. ⊗ Lemma 2.7. Q is complete. Proof. We prove our claim by using the valuative criterion. Let R be a discrete valuation ring and K the quotient field of R. Let φ : V G be a R-flat family of quotients such that K Coh(X, Y ), R ⊗ → E E ⊗R ∈ where V := V C R. We set := ker φ. We have an exact and commutative diagram: R ⊗ I 0 p∗p ( G∨) V G G∨ p∗p ( G∨) 0 −−−−→ ∗ I⊗ −−−−→ R ⊗ ⊗ −−−−→ ∗ E ⊗ −−−−→ (2.15) ψ

 ∨ ∨  ∨ 0 G VR G G G 0 −−−−→ I ⊗y −−−−→ ⊗ ⊗ −−−−→ E ⊗y −−−−→ We shall show that ψ is an isomorphism. Obviously ψ is surjective. Since is R-flat, has no R-torsion, ∗ ∨ E E which implies that p p∗( G ) is a torsion free R-module. Hence ker ψ is also torsion free. On the other hand, our choice of impliesE ⊗ that ψ K is an isomorphism. Therefore ker ψ = 0. E ⊗ Since ker φ Coh(X, Y ), we have a surjective homomorphism ∈ (2.16) V Hom(G, G p∗ (n)) Hom(G, E p∗ (n)) ⊗ ⊗ OX → ⊗ OX for n 0. Thus we can embed Q as a subscheme of an Grassmann variety Gr(V W, P (n0 + n)), where ≫ ∗ ⊗ W = Hom(G, G p X (n)). Since all semi-stable Y -sheaf are pure, we may replace Q by the closure of the open subset parametrizing⊗ O pure quotient Y -sheaves. The same arguments in [Y3] imply that Q//GL(V ) is 5 the moduli space of G-twisted semi-stable sheaves. The details are left to the reader. For the proof, we also use the following. Let (R, m) be a discrete valuation ring R and the maximal ideal m. Let K be the fractional field and k the residue field. Let be a R-flat family of Y R-sheaves such that K is pure. E ⊗ E⊗R Lemma 2.8. There is a R-flat family of coherent Y R-sheaves and a homomorphism ψ : such that k is pure, ψ is an isomorphism and ψ is⊗ an isomorphicF at generic points of Supp(E→Fk). F ⊗R K k F ⊗R By using [S, Lem. 1.17] or [H-L, Prop. 4.4.2], we first construct as a usual family of sheaves. Then the very construction of it, becomes a Y R-sheaf. F F ⊗ h ss 2.3. A family of Y -sheaves on a projective bundle over MX/C. Assume that Q consists of stable ss h points. Then Q M X/C is a principal P GL(N)-bundle. For a scheme S, fS : Y S S denotes the → ss ⊠ × → projection. Let be the universal quotient sheaf on Y Q . V := HomfQss (G Qss , ) is a locally free sheaf on Qss. WeQ consider the projective bundle q : P(×V ) Qss. Since is GLO(N)-linearized,Q V is also GL(N)-linearized. Then we have a quotient ψ : P(V ) P(V→)/PGL(N) withQ the commutative diagram: → q P(V ) Qss −−−−→ (2.17)   ^h  q h M C := P(V )/PGL(N) M C X/ y −−−−→ yX/ ∗ ∗ Since (1 q) ( ) f ( P ( 1)) is P GL(N)-linearlized, we have a family of G-twisted stable Y -sheaves Y × Q ⊗ P(V ) O (V ) − ^h ∗ ∗ ∗ ∨ h ^h on Y M C with (1 ψ) ( )=(1 q) ( ) f ( P ( 1)). Hence Coh(Y M C, Y M C) E × X/ Y × E Y × Q ⊗ P(V ) O (V ) − E ∈ × X/ × X/ ^h ∗ ∗ (if is locally free). Let W be a locally free sheaf on M C such that ψ (W ) = q (V )( 1). Then we also E X/ − ∨ ^h h ^h ∗ ∨ h have W = ǫ(M C) Coh(M C, M C) and f (W ) descends to a sheaf on Y M C. X/ X/ X/ ^h X/ ∈ E⊗ M X/C × Remark 2.4. There is also a family of G-twisted stable Y -sheaves ′ on Y P(V ∨)/PGL(N) such that ′ h ∨ E × Coh(Y M C, Y P(V )/PGL(N)). E ∈ × X/ ×

3. Twisted sheaves on a projective K3 surface 3.1. Basic properties. Let X be a projective K3 surface and p : Y X a projective bundle. → Lemma 3.1. For a locally free Y -sheaf E, c (Rp (E∨ E)) (r 1)(w(E)2) mod2r. 2 ∗ ⊗ ≡− − 2 2 Proof. First we note that (r 1)(D ) mod2r is well-deﬁned for D H (Z,µr), Z = X, Y . We take 2 − ∗ ∈ ∗ ∨ a representative α H (X, Z) of w(E). Then c1(E) p (α) mod r. Hence c2(p (Rp∗(E E))) = ∈ 2 ∗ 2 ≡ 4 ⊗ 4 2rc2(E) (r 1)(c1(E) ) (r 1)(p (α )) mod 2r. Since H (X, Z) is a direct summand of H (Y, Z), c (Rp (E−∨ −E)) (r ≡1)( −α2)− mod2r. 2 ∗ ⊗ ≡− − Let K(X, Y ) be the Grothendieck group of Y -sheaves. Lemma 3.2. (1) There is a locally free Y -sheaf E such that rk E = min rk E > 0 E Coh(X, Y ) . 0 0 { | ∈ } (2) K(X, Y ) = ZE0 K(X, Y )≤1, where K(X, Y )≤1 is the submodule of K(X, Y ) generated by E Coh(X, Y ) of dim⊕E 1. ∈ ≤ ∨∨ Proof. (1) Let F be a Y -sheaf such that rk F = min rk E > 0 E Coh(X, Y ) . Then E0 := F satisﬁes the required properties. (2) We shall show that the{ image| of ∈E Coh(X,} Y ) in K(X, Y ) belongs to ZE K(X, Y ) by the induction of rk E. We may assume that rk E∈ > 0. Let T be the torsion submodule 0 ⊕ ≤1 of E. Then E = T + E/T in K(X, Y ). Since Hom(E0( nH),E/T ) = 0 for n 0, we have a non-zero homomorphism ϕ : E ( nH) E/T . By our choice of E− , ϕ is injective.6 Since≫E ( nH) = E E 0 − → 0 0 − 0 − 0|nH in K(X, Y ), E = ((E/T )/E0 + E0) + (T E0|nH ). Since rk(E/T )/E0 < rk E, we get (E/T )/E0 ZE0 K(X, Y ) , and hence E also belongs to Z−E K(X, Y ) . ∈ ⊕ ≤1 0 ⊕ ≤1

Remark 3.1. rk E0 is the order of the Brauer class of Y . Let , be the Mukai pairing on H∗(X, Z): h i (3.1) x, y = x∨y, x,y H∗(X, Z). h i − ∈ ZX 6 Definition 3.1. Let G be a locally free Y -sheaf. For a Y -sheaf E, we define a Mukai vector of E as ∨ ch(Rp∗(E G )) vG(E) := ⊗ tdX (3.2) ch(Rp (G G∨)) ∗ ⊗ =(rk(E),ζ,b) H∗(X,pQ), p ∈ where p∗(ζ) = c (E) rk(E) c1(G) and b Q. More generally, for G Coh(X, Y ) with rk G> 0, we define 1 − rk G ∈ ∈ vG(E) by (3.2). Since Rp (E G∨) Rp (E G∨)∨ = Rp (E E∨) Rp (G G∨), ∗ 1 ⊗ ⊗ ∗ 2 ⊗ ∗ 1 ⊗ 2 ⊗ ∗ ⊗ ch(Rp (E G∨)) ch(Rp (E G∨))∨ v (E ), v (E ) = ∗ 1 ⊗ ∗ 2 ⊗ td h G 1 G 2 i − ch(Rp (G G∨)) X ZX ∗ ⊗ (3.3) = ch(Rp (E E∨)) td − ∗ 1 ⊗ 2 X ZX = χ(E , E ). − 2 1 ∗ We define an integral structure on H (X, Q) such that vG(E) is integral. This is due to Huybrechts and Stellari [H-St]. For a positive integer r and ξ H2(X, Z), we consider an injective homomorphism ∈ T : H∗(X, Z) H∗(X, Q) (3.4) −ξ/r → x e−ξ/rx. 7→ T preserves the bilinear form , . −ξ/r h i 2 2 Lemma 3.3. We take a representative ξ H (X, Z) of w(G) H (X,µr), where rk(G) = r. We set ξ/r ∈ ∗ ∈ (rk(E),D,a) := e vG(E). Then (rk(E),D,a) belongs to H (X, Z) and [D mod rk(E)] = w(E). ∗ 2 ∗ ∗ ∗ Proof. We set σ := (c1(G) p (ξ))/r H (Y, Z). Since p (D) = p (ζ) + rk(E)p (ξ)/ rk(G) = c1(E) rk(E)σ H2(Y, Z), we get D− H2(X, Z∈). By Lemma 3.1, we see that − ∈ ∈ eξ/rv (E),eξ/rv (E) = v (E), v (E) h G G i h G G i (3.5) =c (Rp (E E∨)) 2 rk(E)2 2 ∗ ⊗ − (D2) mod 2 rk(E). ≡ Hence a Z. The last claim is obvious. ∈ ξ/r Remark 3.2. e vG(E) is the same as the Mukai vector defined by the rational B-field ξ/r in [H-St]. More −1 precisely, there is a topological line bundle L on Y with c1(L) = σ and E L is the pull-back of a ξ/r ⊗ i topological sheaf Eξ/r on X. Then we see that e vG(E) = ch(Eξ/r)√tdX (we use H (X, Q)=0 for i> 4, or we deform X so that L becomes holomorphic). Definition 3.2. [H-St] We define a weight 2 Hodge structure on the lattice (H∗(X, Z), , ) as h i H2,0(H∗(X, Z) C) :=T −1 (H2,0(X)) ⊗ −ξ/r 2 (3.6) H1,1(H∗(X, Z) C) :=T −1 ( Hp,p(X)) ⊗ −ξ/r p=0 M H0,2(H∗(X, Z) C) :=T −1 (H0,2(X)). ⊗ −ξ/r We denote this polarized Hodge structure by (H∗(X, Z), , , ξ ). h i − r Lemma 3.4. The Hodge structure (H∗(X, Z), , , ξ ) depends only on the Brauer class δ′([ξ mod r]). h i − r Proof. If δ′([ξ mod r]) = δ′([ξ′ mod r′]) H2(X, × ), then we have r′ξ rξ′ = L+rr′N, where L NS(X) ∈ OX − ∈ and N H2(X, Z). Then we have the following commutative diagram: ∈ − ξ r H∗(X, Z) e H∗(X, Q) −−−−→ L −N ′ (3.7) e e rr ∗  Z ∗  Q H (X, ) ′ H (X, ). ξ y −−−−→− ′ y e r Thus we have an isometry of Hodge structures ξ ξ′ (3.8) (H∗(X, Z), , , ) = (H∗(X, Z), , , ). h i −r ∼ h i −r′ 7 Definition 3.3. Let Y X be a projective bundle and G a locally free Y -sheaf. Let ξ H2(X, Z) be a lifting of w(G) H2(X,µ→), where r = rk(G). ∈ ∈ r ∗ ∗ ξ (i) We define an integral Hodge structure of H (X, Q) as T−ξ/r((H (X, Z), , , r )). ∗ h i − (ii) v := (r,ζ,b) is a Mukai vector, if v T−ξ/r(H (X, Z)) and ζ Pic(X) Q. Moreover if v is ∗ ∈ ∈ ⊗ primitive in T−ξ/r(H (X, Z)), then v is primitive.

Deﬁnition 3.4. Let v := (r,ζ,b) H∗(X, Q) be a Mukai vector. ∈ Y,G Y,G (i) M H (r,ζ,b) (resp. MH (r,ζ,b)) denotes the coarse moduli space of S-equivalence classes of G- twisted semi-stable (resp. stable) Y -sheaves E with vG(E)= v. (ii) Y,G(r,ζ,b)ss (resp. Y,G(r,ζ,b)s) denotes the moduli stack of G-twisted semi-stable (resp. MH MH stable) Y -sheaves E with vG(E)= v.

′ L Y,G ss Lemma 3.5. Assume that o(w(Y )) = o(w(Y )). Then Ξ ′ induces an isomorphism (v) = ′ ′ Y →Y H ∼ Y ,G ss ′ L ′ ′ MY,ǫ(Y ) ss H (v) , where G := ΞY →Y ′ (G). Moreover if dim Y = dim Y and w(Y )= w(Y ), then H (v) = M ′ ′ M ∼ Y ,ǫ(Y )(v)ss. MH ′ L ′ ∗ ∨ Proof. We use the notation in Lemma 1.7. For a Y -sheaf E, we set E := ΞY →Y ′ (E). Then pY (E G ) = ∨ ⊗ ∼ ∗ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ pY ′ (E G ). Hence vG(E) = vG (E ). If dim Y = dim Y and w(Y ) = w(Y ), then since w(ǫ(Y )) = ′ ⊗ ∗ L w(ǫ(Y )), replacing L by L q (P ), P Pic(X), we may assume that c1(ΞY →Y ′ (ǫ(Y ))) = c1(ǫ(Y )). Thus L ⊗ ′ ∈ ΞY →Y ′ (ǫ(Y )) = ǫ(Y )+ T in K(X, Y ), where T is a Y -sheaf with dim T = 0. From this fact, we get ′ L ′ ′ Y ,Ξ ′ (ǫ(Y )) Y →Y (v)ss = Y ,ǫ(Y )(v)ss. MH MH

Let E be a Y -sheaf. Then the Zariski tangent space of the Kuranishi space is Ext1(E, E) and the 2 obstruction space is the kernel Ext (E, E)0 of the trace map

(3.9) tr:Ext2(E, E) H2(Y, ) = H2(X, ). → OY ∼ OX Hence as in the usual sheaves on a K3 surfaces [Mu1], we get the following.

2 Proposition 3.6. Let E be a simple Y -sheaf. Then the Kuranishi space is smooth of dimension vG(E) +2 with a holomorphic symplectic form. In particular, v (E)2 2. h i h G i≥−

Corollary 3.7. Let E be a µ-semi-stable Y -sheaf such that E = lE0 +F K(X, Y ), F K(X, Y )≤1. Then v (E)2 2l2. ∈ ∈ h G i≥− 3.1.1. Wall and Chamber. In this subsection, we generalize the notion of the wall and the chamber for the usual stable sheaves to the twisted case.

Lemma 3.8. Assume that there is an exact sequence of twisted sheaves

(3.10) 0 E E E 0, → 1 → → 2 → such that Ei, i =1, 2 are µ-semi-stable Y -sheaves. We set Ei = liE0 + Fi K(X, Y ) with Fi K(X, Y )≤1. Then we have ∈ ∈ v (E)2 (l v (F ) l v (F ))2 (3.11) h G i +2l 2 G 1 − 1 G 2 . l ≥− ll1l2 This lemma easily follows from Corollary 3.7 and the following lemma.

Lemma 3.9. Let E0 be a locally free Y -sheaf such that rk E0 = min rk E > 0 E Coh(X, Y ) . For an exact sequence of twisted sheaves { | ∈ }

(3.12) 0 E E E 0, → 1 → → 2 → we have v (E )2 v (E )2 v (E)2 (l v (F ) l v (F ))2 (3.13) h G 1 i + h G 2 i h G i = 2 G 1 − 1 G 2 , l1 l2 − l ll1l2 where E = l E + F and E = lE + F in K(X, Y ) with F , F K(X, Y ) . i i 0 i 0 i ∈ ≤1 8 Proof. v (E )2 v (E )2 v (E)2 v (F ), v (F ) h G 1 i + h G 2 i h G i = l v (E )2 +2 v (E ), v (F ) + h G 1 G 1 i l l − l 1h G 0 i h G 0 G 1 i l 1 2 1 v (F ), v (F ) + l v (E )2 +2 v (E ), v (F ) + h G 2 G 2 i 2h G 0 i h G 0 G 2 i l 2 v (F ), v (F ) (3.14) l v (E )2 +2 v (E ), v (F ) + h G G i − h G 0 i h G 0 G i l v (F ), v (F ) v (F ), v (F ) v (F ), v (F ) =h G 1 G 1 i + h G 2 G 2 i h G G i l1 l2 − l (l v (F ) l v (F ))2 = 2 G 1 − 1 G 2 . ll1l2

Deﬁnition 3.5. We set v = vG(lE0 + F ), where F is of dimension 1 or 0. 2 (i) For a ξ NS(X) with 0 < (ξ2) l (2l2 + v2 ), we deﬁne a wall W as ∈ − ≤ 4 h i ξ (3.15) W := L Amp(X) R (ξ,L)=0 . ξ { ∈ ⊗ | } (ii) A chamber with respect to v is a connected component of Amp(X) R W . ⊗ \ ξ ξ (iii) A polarization H is general with respect to v, if H does not lie on any wall. S 2 Remark 3.3. The concept of chambers and walls are determined by rk(lE0 + F ) and v . Thus they do not depend on the choice of Y and G. h i Proposition 3.10. Keep notation as above. ′ Y,G ss Y,G ss (i) If H and H belong to the same chamber, then (v) = ′ (v) . ′ H ∼ H Y,G Y,G M M ss ′ ss (ii) If H is general, then H (vG(F )) ∼= H (vG (F )) for F K(X, Y ) with rk F > 0. (iii) If M M ∈ l2 (3.16) min (D2) > 0 D NS(X), (D,H)=0 > (2l2 + v2 ), {− | ∈ } 4 h i then H is general with respect to v. The proof is standard (cf. [H-L]) and is left to the reader. By Proposition 3.10 and Proposition 3.6, we have Theorem 3.11. Assume that v is a primitive Mukai vector and H is general with respect to v. Then all G- Y,G twisted semi-stable Y -sheaves E with vG(E)= v are G-twisted stable. In particular MH (v) is a projective manifold, if it is not empty.

Y,G In the next subsection, we show the non-emptyness of the moduli space. We also show that MH (v) is a K3 surface, if v2 = 0. h i Proposition 3.12. (cf. [Mu3, Prop. 3.14]) Assume that Pic(X) = ZH. Let E be a simple twisted sheaf with v (E)2 0. Then E is stable. h G i≤ For the proof, we use Lemma 3.9 and the following:

Lemma 3.13. [Mu3, Cor. 2.8] If Hom(E1, E2)=0, then (3.17) dim Ext1(E , E ) + dim Ext1(E , E ) dim Ext1(E, E). 1 1 2 2 ≤ 3.2. Existence of stable sheaves. In this subsection, we shall show that the moduli space of twisted sheaves is deformation equivalent to the usual one. In particular we show the non-emptyness of the moduli space. Theorem 3.14. [H-Sc] H1(X,PGL(r)) H2(X,µ ) is surjective. → r 2 r−1 Proposition 3.15. For a w H (X,µr), there is a P -bundle p : Z X such that w(Z)= w and ǫ(Z) is µ-stable. ∈ → D. Huybrechts informed us that the claim follows from the proof of Theorem 3.14. Here we give another proof which works for other surfaces. 9 Proof. Let p : Y X be a Pr−1-bundle with w(Y ) = w. We set E := ǫ(Y ). In order to prove our → 0 claim, it is sufficient to find a µ-stable locally free Y -sheaf E of rank r with c1(E) = c1(E0). For points n x , x ,...,x X, let F be a Y -sheaf which is the kernel of a surjection E −1 (1). We take 1 2 n ∈ 0 → i=1 Op (xi) a smooth divisor D mH , m 0. We set D := p−1(D). Let Exti(F, F ( D)) be the kernel of the trace 0L map ∈ | | ≫ − (3.18) Exti(F, F ( D)) He i(Y, ( D)) = Hi(X, ( eD)). − → OY − ∼ OX − 2 1 If n 0, then the by the Serre duality, Ext (F, F ( D))0 ∼= Hom(F, F (D))0 = 0. Hence Ext (F, F )0 1≫ e − e → Ext (F|D, F|D)0 is surjective. Since F|D deforms to a µ-stable vector bundle on D, F deforms to a Y -sheaf F ′ such that F ′ is µ-stable. Then F ′ is also µ-stable.e Then E := (F ′)∨∨esatisfies required properties. |D e e e e Theorem 3.16.e Let Y X be a projective bundle and G a locally free Y -sheaf. Let vG := (r,ζ,b) → Y,G be a primitive Mukai vector with r > 0. Then MH (vG) is an irreducible symplectic manifold which is 2 hvGi/2+1 deformation equivalent to HilbX for a general polarization H. In particular (1) M Y,G(v ) = if and only if v2 2. H G 6 ∅ h Gi≥− (2) If v2 =0, then M Y,G(v ) is a K3 surface. h Gi H G We divide the proof into several steps. Y,ǫ(Y ) ξ/ rk(G) ′ Step 1 (Reduction to MH (r, 0, a)) : Let ξ be a lifting of w(G). Then e vG = (r,D,b ) H∗(X, Z). By Theorem 3.14, there is− a projective bundle Y ′ X such that w(Y ′) = [D mod r]. Since∈ D/r ξ/ rk(G) = ζ/r Pic(X) Q, o(w(Y ′)) = o(w(Y )).→ Let G′ be a locally free Y -sheaf such that L − ′ ′ ∈ ⊗ ′ ′ ΞY →Y ′ (G ) = ǫ(Y ), where we use the notation in Lemma 1.7. By Lemma 1.8, w(G ) = w(ǫ(Y )) = [D mod r]. Then replacing L by L q∗(P ), P Pic(X), we may assume that eξ/ rk Gv (G′) = (r,D,c), ⊗ ∈ G c Z. Hence vG′ (E) = (r, 0, a) for a Y -sheaf E with vG(E) = (r,ζ,b). Since H is general with respect ∈ − ′ ′ to (r,ζ,b), Proposition 3.10 implies that M Y,G(r,ζ,b) = M Y,G (r, 0, a). By Lemma 3.5, M Y,G (r, 0, a) = ′ ′ H ∼ H H ∼ Y ,ǫ(Y ) ′ ′ − Y,G − MH (r, 0, a). Therefore replacing (Y, G) by (Y ,ǫ(Y )), we shall prove the assertion for MH (r, 0, a) with G = ǫ(Y ).− − 2 Step 2: First we assume that w(Y ) NS(X) µr H (X,µr). Then the Brauer class of Y is trivial, that is, Y = P(F ) for a locally free sheaf∈ F on X.⊗ Since⊂H is general with respect to (r, 0, a), Proposition Y,G X,OX 2 − 3.10 (ii) and Lemma 3.5 imply that MH (r, 0, a) ∼= MH (r,D,c) with 2ra = (D ) 2rc. By [Y1, Thm. X,OX − ra+1 − 8.1], MH (r,D,c) is deformation equivalent to HilbX . We next treat the general cases. We shall deform the projective bundle Y X to a projective bundle in Step 2. → Step 3: We first construct a local family of projective bundles.

Proposition 3.17. Let f : ( , ) T be a family of polarized K3 surfaces. Let p : Y t0 be a projective bundle associated to a stableXY -sheafH →E. Then there is a smooth morphism U T whose→ X image contains t → 0 and a projective bundle p : U such that = Y . Y→X×T Yt0 ∼ ∨ P ∨ .(( Proof. We note that p∗(KY/X ) is a vector bundle on t0 and we have an embedding Y ֒ (p∗(KY/X t0 X → t0 P ∨ PN−1 ⊕N ∨ .( We take an embedding (p∗(KY/X )) ֒ t0 by a suitable quotient Xt ( n t0 ) p∗(KY/X t0 → ×X O 0 − H → t0 ⊕N More generally, let S T S be a projective bundle and a surjective homomorphism X×T S( n ) → p (K∨ ). ThenY →X× we have an embedding ֒ PN−1 S. O − H ∗ YS /X×T S S T Y → ×X × N−1 Let Y be a connected component of the Hilbert scheme HilbPN−1×X /T containing Y . Let P 0 Y ⊂ × T Y be the universal subscheme. Let ϕ : T Y be the projection. Let Y be an open subscheme of X× 1 Y→X× 0 0 −1 Y such that ϕ|X×T {t} is smooth and H (Tϕ (x,t))=0for(x, t) T Y . Since Y Y , it is non-empty. 0 0 ∈X× ∈ Then ϕ is locally trivial on T Y . Thus T Y is a projective bundle. If Y is a projective bundleX associated × to aY→X× twisted vector bundle E, then the obstruction for the infinites- 2 0 ∨ imal liftings belongs to H ( nd(E)/ X ) ∼= H ( nd(E)0) , where nd(E)0 is the trace free part of nd(E). Hence if E is simple (and rkE E is notO divisibleE by the characteristic),E then there is no obstructionE for the infinitesimal liftings. In particular Y0 T is smooth at Y . → Step 4 (A relative moduli space of twisted sheaves): Let f : ( , ) T be a family of polarized K3 surfaces and p : a projective bundle on . We set g := fX Hp.→ We note that Hi( , Ω ) = 0, Y → X X ◦ Yt Yt/Xt i = 1 and H1( , Ω )= C for t T . Hence L := Ext1(T , ) R1g (Ω ) is a line bundle on T . t Yt/Xt g Y/X Y ∼= ∗ Y/X By6 the local-globalY spectral sequence,∈ we have an isomorphism O (3.19) Ext1(T ,g∗(L∨)) = H0(T, Ext1(T ,g∗(L∨))) = H0(T, ). Y/X ∼ g Y/X ∼ OT We take the extension corresponding to 1 H0(T, ): ∈ OT (3.20) 0 g∗(L∨) T 0 → → G → Y/X → 10 ∗ such that t = ǫ( t). Let v := (r,ζ,b) R f∗Q be a family of Mukai vectors with ζ NS( /T ) Q. Then as G Y ∈ ∈ X Y,G⊗ in the absolute case, we have a family of the moduli spaces of semi-stable twisted sheaves M (X ,H)/T (v) T Y,G → parametrizing -twisted semi-stable -sheaves E on , t T with v (E) = v . M (v) T is a Gt Yt Xt ∈ Gt t (X ,H)/T → projective morphism. Let E be a t-twisted stable t-sheaf. By our choice of ζ, det(E) is unobstructed G Y Y,G under deformations over T , and hence E itself is unobstructed. Therefore M(X ,H)/T (v) is smooth over T . Step 5 (A family of K3 surfaces): Let d be the moduli space of the polarized K3 surfaces (X,H) with 2 M (H )=2d. is constructed as a quotient of an open subscheme T of a suitable Hilbert scheme HilbPN C. Md / Let ( , ) T be the universal family. Let Γ be the abstruct K3 lattice and h a primitive vector with X H → (h2)=2d. Let be the period domain for polarized K3 surfaces (X,H). Let τ : T T be the universal D 2 → covering and φ˜ : H ( ˜ , Z) Γ, t˜ T a trivialization on T . We may assume that φ˜( ˜ )= h. Then t Xτ(t) → ∈ t Hτ(t) we have a period map p : T . By the surjectivity of the period map, we can showe that p is surjective: Let U be a suitable analytic neighborhood→ D e of a point x . Thene we have a family of polarized K3 surfaces ∈ D ( , ) U and an embeddinge of as a subscheme of PN U. Thus we have a morphism h : U T . XU HU → X × → The embedding is unique up to the action of P GL(N + 1). Moreover if there is a point t˜ T such that 0 ∈ p(t˜ ) U, then we have a lifting h : U T of h : U T such that t˜ = h(p(t˜ )). Then U T is the 0 ∈ → → 0 0 → → D identity. Hence we can construct a lifting of any path on intersecting p(T ). Since is connected,e we get the assertion. e e D e D e Step 6 (Reduction to step 2): We take a point t T . We set (X,H) :=e ( , ). Let p : Y X ∈ Xτ(t) Hτ(t) → be a Pr−1-bundle. Assume that H is general with respect to v := (r, 0, a). We take a D Γ with − e e ∈ [D mod r] = φ (w(Y )). Let e ,e ,...,e be a Ze-basise of Γ such that e = φ ( ) and D = ae + t 1 2 22 1 t Hτ(t) 1 22 2 2 2 be2. For an η i=3 Zei Γ with (e1)(η ) (e1, η) < 0, we set η := e2 + rkη Γ, k 0. Since 2 ∈e ⊂ − e ∈e ≫ (e1) (e1,e2 + rkη) det L 2 0 for k 0, the signature of the primitive sublattice L := Ze1 Zη (e1,e2 + rkη) ((e2 + rkη) ) ≪ ≫ e ⊕ ⊥ ⊥ of Γ is of type (1, 1). Moreover e1 L does not contain a ( 2)-vector. We take a general ω L Γ C with (ω,ω)=0 and (ω, ω¯) > 0. Then∩ ω⊥ Γ = L. Replacing− ω by its complex conjugate if∈ necessary,∩ ⊗ wee ∩ may assume that ω . Since p is surjective, there is a point t˜1 H such that p(t˜1) = ω. Then ∈ D ∈ Xτ(t1) is a K3 surface with Pic( ) = Z Zφ−1(e + rkη). Hence [φ−1(D) mod r] = [φ−1(ae + bη) τ(t1) τ(t1) 2 1 X H ⊕ t1 e t1 t1 e mod r] Pic( τ(t )) µr. Since ∈ X 1 ⊗ e e e e e e e r2 (3.21) min (L2) 0 = L Pic( ), (L, )=0 (2r2 + v2 ), {− | 6 ∈ Xτ(t1) Hτ(t1) } ≫ 4 h i Proposition 3.10 (iii) implies that is a generale polarizatione with respect to v. Then by the following Hτ(t1) lemma, we can reduce the proof to Step 2. Therefore we complete the proof of Theorem 3.16. e i r−1 i −1 Lemma 3.18. For t1, t2 T , let Y ˜ , i = 1, 2 be P -bundles with w(Y ) = [φ (D) mod r] τ(ti) t˜i i ∈ → X and Gi := ǫ(Y ). Let v = (r, 0, a) be a primitive Mukai vector. Assume that τ(t˜i), i = 1, 2 are general 1 − 2 H eY e,G1 e Y ,G2 polarization. Then MH (r, 0, a) is deformation equivalent to MH (r, 0, a). τ(t˜1) − τ(t˜2) − Proof. In order to simplify the notation, we denote M Y,ǫ(Y )(r, 0, a) by M(Y ) for a projective bundle Y over Ht − ( , ). By Proposition 3.15 and Lemma 3.5, we may assume that ǫ(Y i) (i =1, 2) is µ-stable. Let γ : [0, 1] Xt Ht → T be a path from t˜ = γ(0) to t˜ = γ(1) and γ := τ γ. Then we have a trivialization φ : H2( ,µ ) 1 2 ◦ s Xγ(s) r → Γ Z µr. By Proposition 3.15, there is a projective bundle Ys γ(s) such that φs(w(Ys)) = [D mode r] and ⊗ → X s s ǫe(Ys) is µ-stable for eaches [0, 1]. Bye Proposition 3.17,e we have a family of projective bundles T Y s s ∈ s s −1 s Y →X×s s over a T -scheme ψ : Y T such that there is a point y (ψ ) (γ(s)) Y with Ys = ys and ψ → ∈s s ⊂ Y s Y ,G s is smooth at y . Then we have a family of moduli spaces M s s (r, 0, a) Y , where is the (X×T Y ,H)/Y s s s s − → H pull-back of to T Y (Step 4). Since ψ is smooth, ψ (Y ) is an open subscheme of T containing H X × e γ(s). We take an analytic open neighborhood Us of γ(s) such that Us is contractible and has ae section s s −1 σs : Us Y with σs(γ(s)) = y . Let Vs be a connected neighborhood of s which is contained in f (Us). Since [0→, 1] is compact, we can take a finite open covering of [0, 1]: [0, 1] = n V , s < s < < s . ∪j=1 sj 1 2 ··· n Since t T rk Pic( )=1 is a dense subset of T , there is a point t U U such that t is { ∈ | Xt } j ∈ sj ∩ sj+1 j sufficiently close to a point γ(sj,j+1), sj,j+1 Vsj Vsj+1 and Pic( tj ) = Z tj . Under the identification 2 2 ∈ ∩ sj sjX H sj+1 sj+1 H ( t,µr) = H ( γ(s),µr) for t Us, we have w( ) = w( i ) and w( ) = w( j+1 ). Since ∼ σi (tj ) y σj+1 (tj ) y X X ∈ Y sj Y sj+1Y Y tj is sufficiently close to the point γ(sj,j+1), we have w( ) = w( ). Hence by Lemma 3.5, Yσj (tj ) Yσj+1 (tj ) M( sj ) is isomorphic to M( sj+1 ). By Step 4, M( sj ) is deformation equivalent to M( sj ). Yσj (tj ) Yσj+1 (tj ) Yσj (tj−1) Yσj (tj ) Therefore M( s1 ) is deformation equivalent to M( sn ). By using Step 4 again, we also see that Yσ1 (t1) Yσn(tn−1) 11 1 0 s1 2 1 M(Y )= M( 0 ) is deformation equivalent to M( ) and M(Y )= M( 1 ) is deformation equivalent Yy Yσ1(t1) Yy to M( sn ). Therefore our claim holds. Yσn(tn−1)

2 Remark 3.4. Let vG := (r,ζ,b) be a Mukai vector with r, vG > 0 which is not necessary primitive. By the Y,G h i same proof, we can also show that M H (vG) is an irreducible normal variety for a general H (cf. [Y2]).

Y,G 3.3. The second cohomology groups of moduli spaces. By Theorem 3.16, MH (vG) is an irreducible 2 Y,G symplectic manifold, if vG is primitive and H is general. Then H (MH (vG), Z) is equipped with a bilinear form called the Beauville form. In this subsection, we shall describe the Beauville form in terms of the Mukai lattice. Let p : Y X be a projective bundle with w(Y ) = [ξ mod r] and set G := ǫ(Y ). We consider a Mukai → 2 lattice with a Hodge structure (H∗(X, Z), , , ξ ) in this subsection. We set w := r(1, 0, a 1 (ξ ) ), h i − r r − 2 r2 a Z. In this subsection, we assume that w is primitive, that is, gcd(r,ξ,a) = 1. We set v := weξ/r = (r,ξ,a∈ ) H∗(X, Z). Then v is algebraic. ∈ ^ Let q : M Y,G(w) M Y,G(w) be a projective bundle in subsection 2.3 and the family of twisted H → H E ^Y,G ∨ ^Y,G ^Y,G ^Y,G sheaves on Y MH (w). We set W := ǫ(MH (w)). Let π ^Y,G : Y MH (w) MH (w) and × MH (w) × → ^Y,G ∗ ∨ πY : Y M (w) Y be projections. Then (1Y q)∗( π (W )) is a quasi-universal family on H e^Y,G × → × E ⊗ MH (w) Y,G Y MH (w). e × Y,G e G ⊥ ∗ Y,G Let πX : X MH (w) X be the projection. We deﬁne a homomorphism θv : v H (MH (w), Q) by × → →

(3.22) θG(u) := [ ∨π∗ (e−ξ/ru)] v Q X 3 ZX where [...]3 means the degree 6 part and

tdM Y,G(w) √tdX H ∗ ∨ ∗ ∨ := ch(R(p q)∗(πY (G ) π ^ (W ))) (3.23) Q ch(Rp (G∨ G)) ch(qRq (W ∨ W )) × ⊗E⊗ M Y,G (w) ∗ ⊗ ∗ ⊗ H ∗ Y,G pH (X M (w)p, Q). ∈ × H e e ∨ ∨ Remark 3.5. If ξ is algebraic, then Y is isomorphic to the projective bundle P(F ) and G = F Y (1), Y,G ⊗ O where F is a vector bundle of rank r on X with c1(F ) = ξ. In this case, MH (w) is the usual moduli − ∗ ∗ ∨ space of stable sheaves F with the Mukai vector v and R(p q)∗(π ( Y ( 1)) π (W )) is a Y ^Y,G × O − ⊗E⊗ MH (w) quasi-universal family. Since ch F/ ch(F F ∨)= e−ξ/r, we have ⊗ e e p tdM Y,G(w) − ξ H ∗ ∗ ∨ (3.24) = e r tdX ch(R(p q)∗(π ( Y ( 1)) π (W ))). q ∨ Y ^Y,G Q ch(Rq∗(W W )) × O − ⊗E⊗ MH (w) p ⊗ G p e e Hence θv is the usual Mukai homomorphism, which is deﬁned over Z. Let p′ : Y ′ X be another Pr−1-bundle with w(Y ′) = w(Y ). Then by the proof of Lemma 3.5, we see that the following→ diagram is commutative:

v⊥ v⊥

′ G G (3.25) θv θv ′ ′ Y,G Y ,G H2(M  (w), Q) H2(M  (w), Q), Hy −−−−→ H y ′ L ′ G where G := ΞY →Y ′ (G)= ǫ(Y ). Since is algebraic, θv preserves the Hodge structure. By the deformation G Q argument, Remark 3.5 implies that θv is defined over Z. Moreover it preserves the bilinear forms. Theorem 3.19. For ξ H2(X, Z) with [ξ mod r]= w(Y ), we set v = weξ/r. ∈ (i) If v2 > 0, then θG : v⊥ H2(M Y,G(w), Z) is an isometry of the Hodge structures. h i v → H (ii) If v2 =0, then θG induces an isometry of the Hodge structures v⊥/Zv H2(M Y,G(w), Z). h i v → H The second claim is due to Mukai [Mu4]. 12 4. Fourier-Mukai transform 4.1. Integral functor. Let p : Y X be a projective bundle such that δ([Y ]) = [α] Br(X) and p′ : Y ′ ′ → ′ ′ ′ ′ ∈ ′ ′ → X a projective bundle such that δ([Y ]) = [α ] Br(X ). Let πX : X X X and πX′ : X X X be ′ ∈ ′ ′ × → × → projections. We also let πY : Y Y Y and πY ′ : Y Y Y be projections. We set G := ǫ(Y ) and G′ := ǫ(Y ′). × → × → Definition 4.1. Let Coh(e X′ X, Y ′, Y ) be thee subcategory of Coh(Y ′ Y ) such that Q Coh(Y ′ Y ) ′ ′ × ′ ∗ ′ ′ ∨× ′ ∨ ∈ × belongs to Coh(X X, Y , Y ) if and only if (p p) (p p)∗(G Q G ) ∼= G Q G . In terms of local ×′ ′ × ′× ′ ⊠ ⊗ ⊗ ′ ⊗∗ ⊗ ′ trivialization of p,p , this is equivalent to Q|Y ×Y = Y ( λ ) Y (λj ) (p p) (Qij ), Qij Coh(U Uj). i j ∼ O i − i O j ⊗ × ∈ i × Coh(X′ X, Y ′, Y ) is equivalent to Coh(X′ X, α′−1 α). × × × Remark 4.1. We take twisted line bundles (p′∗(α′−1)) on Y ′ and (p∗(α−1)) on Y respectively which give ′∗ ′−1 L ∗ L−1 equivalences ΛL(p (α )) : Coh(X′, Y ′) = Coh(X′, α′) and ΛL(p (α )) : Coh(X, Y ) = Coh(X, α) in (1.5). ′∗ ′−1 ∼∨ ∗ −1 ∼ Then we have an equivalence ΛL(p (α )) ΛL(p (α )): × Coh(X′ X, Y ′, Y ) Coh(X′ X, α′−1 α) (4.1) × → × × Q (p′ p) ( (p′∗(α′−1)) Q (p∗(α−1))∨). 7→ × ∗ L ⊗ ⊗ L ′ ′ ′ ′−1 ′ ′ Let D(X X, Y , Y ) ∼= D(X X, α α) be the bounded derived category of Coh(X X, Y , Y ). For D(X×′ X, Y ′, Y ), we define× an integral× functor × Q ∈ × Q ′ ′ ΦX′→X : D(X , Y ) D(X, Y ) (4.2) → ∗ e x Rπ ( π ′ (x)). 7→ Y ∗ Q⊗ Y For D(X′ X, Y ′, Y ) and D(X′′ X′, Y ′′, Y ′), we have Q ∈ × R ∈ × e e Q R S (4.3) Φ ′ Φ ′′ ′ =Φ ′′ , X →X ◦ X →X X →X ∗ ∗ ∗ ′′ ′ where = Rπ ′′ (π ′′ ′ ( ) π ′ ( )) and π : Y Y Y ( ) is the projection. S Y ×Y ∗ Y ×Y R ⊗ Y ×Y Q ( ) × × → 4.1.1. Cohomological correspondence. For simplicity, we denote the pull-backs of G and G′ to Y ′ Y by the e e ′ e ∨ ∗ e ′ ∨ × same letters. For example G G implies π ′ (G ) π (G ). We note that ⊗Q⊗ Y ⊗Q⊗ Y (4.4) R(p′ p) (G′ G∨) D(X′ X) × ∗ ⊗Q⊗ ∈ × satisfies (4.5) (p′ p)∗(R(p′ p) (G′ G∨)) = G′ G∨. × × ∗ ⊗Q⊗ ⊗Q⊗ We define a homomorphism Q ∗ ′ ∗ (4.6) Ψ ′ : H (X , Q) H (X, Q) X →X → by Q ΨX′→X (y)

′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ∗ ∗ ′ ∨ √tdX tdY /X √tdX tdY/X ′ :=πX∗ (p p)∗ (p p) πX (y) ch(G ) ch( ) ch(G ) ∨ (4.7) ◦ × × ◦ Q ch(G′ G′) ch(G∨ G)! ⊗ ⊗ ′ ∗ √tdX √tdX p ′ p′ ∨ =πX∗ π ′ (y) ch(R(p p)∗(G G )) , X ′ ′∨ ′ ∨ ch(Rp (G G )) ch(Rp∗(G G)) × ⊗Q⊗ ! ∗ ⊗ ⊗ where tdX , tdX′ ,... are identiﬁedp with their pull-backs.p S Q R Lemma 4.1. Ψ ′′ =Ψ ′ Ψ ′′ ′ . X →X X →X ◦ X →X Proof. π : X′′ X′ X ( ) denotes the projection to ( ). We note that ( ) × × → ∗ ′′ ′ ′′ ′∨ ∗ ′ ′ ∨ πX′′×X R(p p )∗(G G ) πX′×X (R(p p)∗(G G )) (4.8) × ⊗R⊗ ⊗ × ⊗Q⊗ ′′ ′ ′′ ∨ ∗ ′ ′∨ ′ =R(p p p) (G G ) π ′ (Rp (G G )). × × ∗ ⊗R⊗Q⊗ ⊗ X ∗ ⊗ Then ∗ ′′ ′ ′′ ′∨ π ′′ ch R(p p ) (G G ) X ×X × ∗ ⊗R⊗ · ′ ∗ ′ ′ ∨ ∗ tdX (4.9) π ′ (ch (R(p p) (G G ))) π ′ X ×X × ∗ ⊗Q⊗ X ch(Rp′ (G′∨ G′)) ∗ ′′ ′ ′′ ∨ ∗ ⊗ = ch (R(p p p) (G G )) π ′ (td ′ ). × × ∗ ⊗R⊗Q⊗ X X 13 Since ′′ ′ ′′ ∨ ∗ π ′′ (ch (R(p p p) (G G )) π ′ (td ′ )) X ×X∗ × × ∗ ⊗R⊗Q⊗ X X ′′ ′ ′′ ∨ = ch (Rπ ′′ (R(p p p) (G G ))) X ×X∗ × × ∗ ⊗R⊗Q⊗ (4.10) ′′ ′′ ∨ = ch(R(p p) Rπ˜ ′′ (G G )) × ∗ ◦ Y ×Y ∗ ⊗R⊗Q⊗ = ch(R(p′′ p) (G′′ G∨)), × ∗ ⊗S⊗ we get

(4.11)

′′ S ∗ ′′ ′′ ∨ √tdX √tdX Ψ ′′ (z)=πX∗ π ′′ (z) ch(R(p p)∗(G G )) X →X X ′′ ′′∨ ′′ ∨ × ⊗S⊗ ch(Rp (G G )) ch(Rp∗(G G)) ! ∗ ⊗ ⊗ Q R =Ψ ′ Ψ ′′ ′ (z). p p X →X ◦ X →X

Lemma 4.2. Assume that the canonical bundles KX ,KX′ are trivial. Then ∨ Q Q ∗ ∗ ′ (4.12) x, Ψ ′ (y) = Ψ ′ (x),y , x H (X, Q), y H (X , Q), h X →X i h X→X i ∈ ∈ where , is the Mukai pairing. h i Proof. (4.13) Q x, Ψ ′ (y) h X →X i Q ∨ = xΨX′→X (y) − X Z ∨ ′ ∗ ∗ √tdX √tdX ′ ′ ∨ = πX (x) πX′ (y) ch(R(p p)∗(G G )) ′ ′ ′∨ ′ ∨ − X ×X ch(Rp (G G )) ch(Rp∗(G G)) × ⊗Q⊗ ! Z ∗ ⊗ ⊗ ′ √tdXp √tdX p ′ ′∨ ∨ ∗ ∗ ∨ = ch(R(p p)∗(G G))πX (x) πX′ (y ) ′ ′ ′∨ ′ ∨ − X ×X ch(Rp (G G )) ch(Rp∗(G G)) × ⊗Q ⊗ ! Z ∗ ⊗ ⊗ ∨ Q p ∨ p = ΨX→X′ (x)y − X′ Z∨ Q = Ψ ′ (x),y . h X→X i

4.2. Fourier-Mukai transform induced by stable twisted sheaves. Let p : Y X be a projective → ′ Y,G bundle over an abelian surface or a K3 surface. Let G be a locally free Y -sheaf. Assume that X := M H (v) ′ ^Y,G ′ is a surface and consists of stable sheaves. We set Y := M H (v). Let be the family on Y Y . We consider integral functors E × E ′ ′ ΦX′→X : D(X , Y ) D(X, Y ) (4.14) → ∗ x Rπ ( π ′ (x)), 7→ Y ∗ E ⊗ Y ∨ E ′ ′ Φ ′ [2] : D(X,X) D(X , Y ) (4.15) X→X → e e y Rπ ′ ( ∨ π∗ (y)[2]). 7→ Y ∗ E ⊗ Y Remark 4.2. Let (p′∗(α−1)) and (p∗(α−1)) be twisted line bundles on Y ′ and Y respectively in (1.5). ∗ − ′∗ ′− L(p (α 1)) L E L(p L(α 1)) −1 ′ ′ e e Then Λ Φ ′ (Λ ) : D(X , α ) D(X, α) is an integral functor with the kernel ◦ X →X ◦ → R(p′ p) ( (p′∗(α′−1)) (p∗(α−1))∨) D(X′ X, α′−1 α). × ∗ L ⊗E⊗L ∈ × × C˘ald˘araru [C2] developed a theory of derived category of twisted sheaves. In particular, Grothendieck- ∨ E E Serre duality holds. Then we see that ΦX→X′ [2] is the adjoint of ΦX′→X . As in the usual Fourier-Mukai functor, we see that the following theorem holds (see [Br], [C1]). ∨ ∨ E E E E E Theorem 4.3. Φ ′ [2] Φ ′ = 1 and Φ ′ Φ ′ [2] = 1. Thus Φ ′ is an equivalence. X→X ◦ X →X ∼ X →X ◦ X→X ∼ X →X Then we have the following which also follows from a more general statement [H-St, Thm. 0.4]. E Corollary 4.4. ΨX′→X induces an isometry of the Hodge structures: ξ′ ξ (4.16) (H∗(X′, Z), , , ) = (H∗(X, Z), , , ). h i − r ∼ h i −r 14 E Proof. Obviously ΨX′→X induces an isometry of the Hodge structures over Q. If X is a K3 surface such ′ E that w(Y ) NS(X) µr and X is a ﬁne moduli space, then ΨX′→X is deﬁned over Z. For a general case, we use the∈ deformation⊗ arguments. We also have the following which is used in [Y4]. ′ ∨ Corollary 4.5. Assume that X consists of locally free Y -sheaves. Then |Y ′×{y}, y Y is a simple ′ ∨ ′ E ∈ Y -sheaf. If NS(X) = ZH, then ′ , y Y is a stable Y -sheaf. ∼ E|Y ×{y} ∈ ∨ ∨ E E − ∨ ′ Proof. Since ΦX→X′ [2] is an equivalence, ΦX→X′ ( p 1(p(y))(1)) = |Y ′×{y} is a simple Y -sheaf. If NS(X) ∼= O∨ E Z, then Proposition 3.12 implies the stability of ′ . E|Y ×{y}

Acknowledgement. First of all, I would like to thank Daniel Huybrechts and Paolo Stellari. They proved C˘ald˘araru’s conjecture. Moreover Huybrechts gave me many valuable suggestions on this paper. I would also like to thank Eyal Markman and Shigeru Mukai for valuable discussions on the twisted sheaves and their moduli spaces. Thanks also to Max Lieblich for explaining the relation of our moduli spaces with Simpson’s moduli spaces of modules over the Azumaya algebra. References

[Br] Bridgeland, T., Equivalences of triangulated categories and Fourier-Mukai transforms, Bull. London Math. Soc. 31 (1999), 25–34, math.AG/9809114 [C1] C˘ald˘araru, A., Nonfine moduli spaces of sheaves on K3 surfaces, Int. Math. Res. Not. 2002, no. 20, 1027–1056 [C2] C˘ald˘araru, A., Derived categories of twisted sheaves on Calabi-Yau manifolds, Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University (2000) [D] De Jong, A. J., The period-index problem for the Brauer group of an algebraic surface, Duke Math. J. 123 (2004), 71–94 [Ho-St] Hoffmann, N., Stuhler, U., Moduli schemes of rank one Azumaya modules, math.AG/0411094 [H-L] Huybrechts, D., Lehn, M., The geometry of moduli spaces of sheaves, Aspects of Mathematics, E31. Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig, 1997 [H-Sc] Huybrechts, D., Schröer, S., The Brauer group of analytic K3 surfaces, Int. Math. Res. Not. (2003), no. 50, 2687–2698 [H-St] Huybrechts, D., Stellari, P., Equivalences of twisted K3 surfaces, math.AG/0409030 [H-St2] Huybrechts, D., Stellari, P., Proof of C˘ald˘araru’s conjecture. An appendix to a paper by Yoshioka, math.AG/0411541 [L] Langer A., Moduli spaces of sheaves in mixed characteristic, Duke Math. J., 124 (2004), 571–586 [Li] Lieblich, M., Moduli of twisted sheaves, math.AG/0411337 [Mu1] Mukai, S., Duality between D(X) and D(Xˆ ) with its application to Picard sheaves, Nagoya Math. J., 81 (1981), 153–175 [Mu2] Mukai, S., Symplectic structure of the moduli space of sheaves on an abelian or K3 surface, Invent. math. 77 (1984), 101–116 [Mu3] Mukai, S., On the moduli space of bundles on K3 surfaces I, Vector bundles on Algebraic Varieties, Oxford, 1987, 341–413 [Mu4] Mukai, S., Vector bundles on a K3 surface, Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, Vol. II (Beijing, 2002), 495–502, Higher Ed. Press, Beijing, 2002. [Or] Orlov, D., Equivalences of derived categories and K3 surfaces, J. Math. Sci. (NY), 84 (1997) 1361–1381 [S] Simpson, C., Moduli of representations of the fundamental group of a smooth projective variety I, Publ. Math. I.H.E.S. 79 (1994), 47–129 [Y1] Yoshioka, K., Moduli spaces of stable sheaves on abelian surfaces, math.AG/0009001, Math. Ann. 321 (2001), 817–884 [Y2] Yoshioka, K., Twisted stability and Fourier-Mukai transform I, Compositio Math. 138 (2003), 261–288 [Y3] Yoshioka, K., Twisted stability and Fourier-Mukai transform II, Manuscripta Math. 110 (2003), 433–465 [Y4] Yoshioka, K., Stability and the Fourier-Mukai transform II, preprint (sections 3, 4 of math.AG/0112267)

Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Kobe University, Kobe, 657, Japan E-mail address: [email protected]