Arxiv:2001.06521V1 [Math.AG]

arXiv:2001.06521v1 [math.AG] 17 Jan 2020 ntesneo elno Bi7 seas Gn8 hoe ..81 and 4.6.28.1] Theorem [Gin98, also (see [Bei87] Beilinson of sense the in atadtevnsigcceo holonomic a of cycle vanishing the and part § epnec se[a8,Term2]). Theorem [Kas83, (see respondence leri etn n[BB93, in setting algebraic eryadvnsigcce o holonomic for cycles vanishing and nearby hyaeas eyueu,frisac at Si8 sdnab an nearby used modules. Hodge [Sai88] pure Saito of definition instance microloca inductive for the an give useful, Beilin under vanishing to very by [KS13] cycles and also instance Schapira Nearby are for and They perspectives, Kashiwara [Del73]. different and Deligne from by algebraically studied introduced widely first are are they and D V ak422v].Aohrpito h ro ftecmaio stha varieties is smooth comparison on transplanted the modification. be of much can without proof 0 it instan the characteristic algebraic, for of purely (see point is Bernstein proof Another and Beilinson by 4.2.2(v)]). hinted mark been has proof the n aihn ylsi h es fReanHletcorrespondenc Riemann-Hilbert compariso the of of sense proof the simple ing in a give cycles Beilinson will vanishing of we and cycles Then vanishing eigenvalues. r and slight other nearby a to of give construction we the BVWZ20], BVWZ19, of [WZ19, ment in development its and [Mai16] D eua ucinon function regular .]b sn oaiainof localization using by 2.4] X fitain ahwr Ks3 endnab n aihn cycles vanishing and nearby defined [Kas83] Kashiwara -filtration, mdlsadpoe oprsntermi h es fRiemann- of sense the in theorem comparison a proved and -modules elno n enti osrce h nptn o oeprecis more (or unipotent the constructed Bernstein and Beilinson sn h ocle ahwr-agag lrto,a ela t refi its as well as filtration, Kashiwara-Malgrange so-called the Using Let 2010 nti ril,b sn h hoyo eaieholonomic relative of theory the using by article, this In h dao h eryadvnsigcce a etae akt Gr to back traced be can cycles vanishing and nearby the of idea The e od n phrases. and words Key mdl.For -module. V fitain seTerm11,wihw eiv snw oee,ess However, new. is believe we which 1.1), Theorem (see -filtrations X ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics Abstract. h dao elno n enti,wtotuigteKashi the using without Bernstein, and V Beilinson corres of Riemann-Hilbert of idea sense the the in cycles vanishing and NTECMAIO FNAB YLSVIA CYCLES NEARBY OF COMPARISON THE ON -filtrations. easot leri ait over variety algebraic smooth a be α nti ril,w ieasml ro ftecmaio fne of comparison the of proof simple a give we article, this In ∈ X C o ooopi ucinon function holomorphic a (or ednt the denote we , D mdl;pres sheaf; perverse -module; § C .]b sn h opeering complete the using by 4.2] [ t ihu opein n hncn“le h open the “glue” can then One completion. without ] 1. b -FUNCTIONS Introduction E WU LEI 41;3S0 32S40. 32S30; 14F10; α nab yl of cycle -nearby 1 D D mdlsusing -modules C mdl ln n eua functions regular any along -module b fnto;nab yl;vnsigcycle. vanishing cycle; nearby -function; o ope aiod and manifold) complex a (or X n let and ) M D odnefollowing pondence mdlsb Maisonobe by -modules along wara-Malgrange C b fntosudrthe under -functions [[ t M ] e lo[BG12, also see ]]; f eaholonomic a be yΨ by n Bernstein and l,nilpotent) ely, e[B3 Re- [BB93, ce o holonomic for ihu us- without e vrfilsof fields over arby eet the nement, vanishing d ibr cor- Hilbert fnearby of n o [Bei87] son ic the since t othendieck f,α [Lic09]). setting. l entially M cycles efine- and f a 2 LEI WU denote the vanishing cycle of along f by Φ (see 2.2 for definitions). The M f M § sheaves Ψ and Φ are the same as Ψnil( ) and Φnil( ) in [BG12, 2.4]. f,0M f M M M § From construction, Ψf,α and Φf have the action by s, where s is the independent variable introducedM in definingM b-functions (see 2.1) and Ψ only § f,αM depends on U . The b-functionM| is also called the Bernstein-Sato polynomial. At least for = M OX , there are algorithms to compute b-functions with the help of computer program (for instance Singular and Macaulay2). On the contrary, Kashiwara-Malgrange filtrations are more difficult to deal with from algorithmic perspectives as far as we know. Therefore, it seems easier to deal with nearby and vanishing cycles via b-functions. Following Beilinson’s idea in [Bei87], we define the nearby and vanishing cycles for C-perverse sheaves by using Jordan blocks. Let K be a perverse sheaf of C- coefficients on X. One can also work with perverse sheaves with arbitrary fields of coefficients, see for instance [Rei10]. When we talk about perverse sheaves on an algebraic variety over C, we use the Euclidean topology by default. If one wants to work with algebraic varieties with other base fields of characteristic zero, then one can consider étale sheaves. For λ C∗ we define the λ-nearby cycle by ∈ 1 1 1/λ ψf,λK := lim i− Rj (K U f0− Lm ), m ∗ →∞ | ⊗ where j : U = X D ֒ X and D is the divisor defined by f = 0, i: D ֒ X and \λ → → f0 = f U . Here Lm is isomorphic to the local system given by a m m Jordan | 1 × block with the eigenvalue λ− on C∗ (see 3 for the construction). For all m Z, λ § Z ∈ Lm naturally form a direct system with respect to the natural order on . The vanishing cycle of K• along f is then defined by 1 φ K := Cone(i− K ψ K). f → f,1 We then have a canonical morphism can: ψ K φ K f,1 → f fitting in the tautological triangle

1 can +1 i− K ψ K φ K . → f,1 −−→ f −−→ 1/λ The monodromy action on Lm naturally induces the monodromy action on both ψ K and φ K, denoted by T . By construction, T λ acts on ψ K nilpotently. f,λ f − f,λ When λ = 1, log Tu induces Var: φ K ψ K. f → f,1 See 4 for details. The above deﬁnition of nearby and vanishing cycles coincides § with Deligne’s construction (see [Bj93, Chapter VI. 6.4.6] for ψf,1K and [Wu17, 3] and [Rei10] in general). The morphism Var corresponds to the “Var” morphism§ deﬁned in [Kas83]. The rest of this paper is mainly about the proof of the following comparison theorem. Theorem 1.1. Assume that is a regular holonomic D -module. Then we have M X DR(Ψf,α ) i ψf,λDR( )[ 1] M ≃ ∗ M − ON THE COMPARISON OF NEARBY CYCLES VIA b-FUNCTIONS 3

2π√ 1α for every α C where λ = e − and the monodromy action T corresponds to ∈ 2π√ 1s 2π√ 1(s+α) T DR(e− − ) = DR(λ e− − ) ≃ · under the isomorphisms (since s + α acts on Ψ nilpotently), and f,αM DR(Φf ) i φf DR( )[ 1] M ≃ ∗ M − where DR denotes the de Rham functor for D-modules. Furthermore, we have natural morphisms of D-modules v :Φ Ψ and c :Ψ Φ f M → f,0M f,0M → f M so that there exists an isomorphism of quivers c can DR Ψf,0 Φf i ψf,1 DR( ) φf DR( ) [ 1] . M v M ≃ ∗ M Var M −

Remark 1.2. In Theorem 1.1, we see that Ψf,α+k correspond to a unique nearby cycle of DR( ) for all k Z. Namely, the Riemann-HilbertM correspondence for nearby cyclesM is Z-to-1. However,∈ Ψ is unique up to the t-action by Eq.(4). f,α+kM Acknowledgement. The author thanks P. Zhou for useful comments.

2. Nearby and vanishing cycles for holonomic D-modules 2.1. b-function and Localization. We recall the construction of b-functions. Let X be a smooth algebraic variety over C of dimension n and let f be a regular function on X. We denote by D the divisor defined by f = 0, by j : U = X D ֒ X → \the open embedding and by i: D ֒ X the closed embedding. We assume that → MU is a (left) holonomic DU -module so that = D MU U ·M0|U for some fixed coherent OX -submodule 0 j ( U ) throughout this section. We then introduce an independent variableMs and⊆ consider∗ M the free C[s]-module s s j ( U [s] f )= j ( U ) f C C[s]. ∗ M · ∗ M · ⊗ s The module j ( U [s] f ) has a natural DX [s]-module structure by requiring ∗ M · s s 1 v(f )= sv(f)f − , for any vector field v on X, where DX [s] := DX C C[s]. Notice that the module s ⊗ j ( U [s] f ) is not necessarily coherent over DX [s]. We then consider the coherent D∗ M[s]-submodule· generated by f s+k X M0 · s+k s DX [s] 0 f j ( U [s] f ) M · ⊆ ∗ M · for every k Z. It is obvious that we have inclusions ∈ D [s] f s+k1 D [s] f s+k2 X M0 · ⊆ X M0 · when k k . 1 ≥ 2 Definition 2.1 (b-function). The b-function of U along f, also called the Bernstein- Sato polynomial, is the monic polynomial b(s) MC[s] of the least degree so that ∈ D [s] f s b(s) annihilates X M0 · . D [s] f s+1 X M0 · 4 LEI WU

In particular, if we pick U = OU and 0 = OX , then the above definition gives us the usual b-functionM for f (see for instanceM [Kas77]). From definition, the roots of the b-function of U depends on the choice of 0. However, we will see that an arithmetic set generatedM by the roots is independentM with the choice. Remark 2.2. In the case that X is a complex manifold and f is a holomorphic function on X, for an analytic holonomic D -module , one can use ( D), the X M M ∗ algebraic localization of along D, to replace j ( U ) and define b-functions in the analytic setting in aM similar way. ∗ M Theorem 2.3 (Bernstein and Sato). The b-functions along f exist for holonomic DU -modules.

The above theorem for OU is due to Bernstein algebraically and Sato analytically. Bj¨ork extended it for arbitrary holonomic modules in the analytic setting (see [Bj93, Chapter VI]).

Definition 2.4 (Localization). Assume that is a (left) coherent DX [s]-module and q is a prime ideal in C[s]. Then we defineN the localization of at q by N = C C[s] Nq N ⊗ [s] q where C[s]q is the localization of C[s] at q. In particular, if q is the ideal generated by 0 C[s] (i.e. q is the generic point of C = SpecC[s]), then becomes a ∈ Nq coherent DX(s)-module, where X(s) is the variety defined over C(s) of X after the base change C C(s), where C(s) is the fractional field of C[s]. → s+k s We write the localization of DX [s] 0 f and j ( U [s] f ) at m by M · ∗ M · s+k s DX [s]m 0 f and j ( U [s]m f ) M · ∗ M · respectively for a maximal ideal m C[s] and by ⊆ s+k s DX (s) 0 f and j ( U (s) f ) M · ∗ M · the localization at the generic point. Definition 2.5 (Duality). Assume that is a (left) coherent D [s]-module and N X q is a coherent DX [s]q-module for a prime ideal q C[s]. We then define the Nduality by ⊆ 1 D( ) := homD ( , D [s]) O ω− [n], N R X [s] N X ⊗ X and 1 D( ) := homD ( , D [s] ) O ω− [n] Nq R X [s]q Nq X q ⊗ X where ωX is the dualizing sheaf of X. The twist by ωX is to make the dual of (resp. ) a complex of left D [s]-modules (resp. D [s] -modules). N Nq X X q In the case that D( ) (resp. D( q)) has only the zero-th cohomological sheaf non-zero, we also use DN( ) (resp. D(N )) to denote 0(D( )) (resp. 0(D( ))). N Nq H N H Nq Since the variable s is in the center of DX [s], one can easily check that duality and localization commute, i.e. (1) D( ) D( ). N q ≃ Nq We can evaluate at the residue field of a maximal ideal m C[s]: N ⊆ L C C N ⊗ [s] m ON THE COMPARISON OF NEARBY CYCLES VIA b-FUNCTIONS 5 where C C is the residue field C[s]/m and the L denotes the derived tensor m ≃ ⊗C[s] functor over C[s]; it gives a complex of coherent DX -modules. Furthermore, since DX [s] is free over C[s], one can check that evaluation and duality commute, i.e. L L (2) D( ) C C D( C C ), N ⊗ [s] m ≃ N ⊗ [s] m where the second D denotes the duality functor for complexes of coherent D- modules. Because of the evaluation functor and its commutativity with duality, we also call DX [s]-modules the relative D-modules over C[s]. See [WZ19, 5] for further discussions of relative D-modules for the multi-variate s and also [BVWZ19,§ 3] in general. § The following lemma is obvious to check; see also [BVWZ20, Lemma 5.3.1] for a multi-variate version. Lemma 2.6. We have s s s D( [s] f ) D( )[s] f − D( )[s] f MU · ≃ MU · ≃ MU · where the last isomorphism is given by substituting s by s (and hence it is not canonical). −

s+k Lemma 2.7. The DX [s]-module DX [s] 0 f is n-Cohen-Macaulay for every k Z, i.e. the complex D(D [s] f s+Mk) only· has one non-zero cohomology sheaf ∈ X M0 · 0 s+k n s+k 1 (D(D [s] f )) xt (D [s] f , D [s]) O ω− . H X M0 · ≃E X M0 · X ⊗ X s+k Proof. By [Mai16, Proposition 14] (taking p = 1), we see that DX [s] 0 f is n-pure (see for instance [BVWZ19, 4] for the definition of purity). Moreover,M · by s+k§ [Mai16, Résultat 2], DX [s] 0 f is relative holonomic (see [BVWZ19, Defini- tion 3.2.3]). By [BVWZ19,M Theorem· 3.2.2], since we have a single s, n-purity is equivalent to n-Cohen-Macaulayness for relative holonomic modules over C[s]. The proof is then done.

By the above lemma and the isomorphism (1), we immediately have:

s+k Corollary 2.8. For every prime ideal q C[s], the DX [s]q-module DX [s]q 0 f ⊆ sM+k · is n-Cohen-Macaulay for every k Z, i.e. the complex D(DX [s]q 0 f ) only has one non-zero cohomology sheaf∈ M · 0 s+k n s+k 1 (D(D [s] f )) xt (D [s] f , D [s] ) O ω− . H X qM0 · ≃E X qM0 · X q ⊗ X The above corollary is the same as [BG12, Lemma 2(a) and Corollary 3]. But our proof (by using Lemma 2.7) is diﬀerent from the approach in loc. cit. See also [WZ19, 5] for the multi-variate generalization. § For every α C, we denote by mα the maximal ideal of α in C[s], that is, the ideal generated∈ by s α, and C its residue ﬁeld. − α Lemma 2.9. We have s k s DX (s) 0 f − = j ( U (s) f ) M · ∗ M · for every k Z. Moreover, for every α C, there exists k > 0 so that ∈ ∈ 0 D s k s X [s]mα 0 f − = j ( U [s]mα f ) M · ∗ M · for all k > k0. 6 LEI WU

Proof. We write by b(s) the b-function of U . Since b(s + k) is invertible in C(s), s+k s M we have DX (s) 0 f = DX (s) 0 f for every k Z. Hence, the ﬁrst statement follows. The secondM · statement canM be· proved similarly.∈

We define j!-extensions s s j!( U (s) f ) := D j D( (s) f ) M · ◦ ∗ ◦ M · and s D D s j!( U [s]mα f ) := j ( [s]mα f ) M · ◦ ∗ ◦ M · for every α C. By Lemma 2.6, Corollary 2.8 and Lemma 2.9 (both for D( U )), they are both∈ sheaves (instead of complexes). M 1 Since D D is identity, using the adjunction pair (j− , j ), we have natural morphisms ◦ ∗ s s j!( U (s) f ) j ( U (s) f ) M · → ∗ M · and s s j!( U [s]mα f ) j ( U [s]mα f ) M · → ∗ M · for every α C. For every∈α C, the multi-valued function f α gives a local system on U. We ∈ α then denote by U f the holonomic DU -module twisted by the local system given by f α. It isM obvious· by construction that f α is Z-periodic, that is, MU · (3) f α = f α+k MU · MU · for every k Z. ∈ Example. For some α C, consider the regular holonomic module ∈ C[t, 1/t] tα · α α by assigning t∂t t = αt , where t is the complex coordinate of the complex plane C and tα is the· symbol of the multivalued function “tα”. Then the multi-valued α log t α flat section on C∗, the punctured complex plane, is e− t . Consequently, the monodromy T of the underlying rank 1 local system (around· the origin coun- 2π√ 1α terclockwise) is the multiplication by e− − , by choosing different branches of log t. By using the Deligne-Goresky-MacPherson extension (or the minimal extension), the following theorem is first proved by Ginsburg in [Gin86, 3.6 and 3.8], as well as in [BG12], which is essentially due to Beilinson and Bernstein.§ See also [WZ19, Theorem 5.3] for the multi-variate generalization. Theorem 2.10 (Beilinson and Bernstein). We have: s s (1) the natural morphism j!( U (s) f ) j ( U (s) f ) is isomorphic and M · s+k→ ∗ M · they are both equal to DX (s) 0 f for every k Z; M · s ∈ s (2) the natural morphism j!( U [s]mα f ) j ( U [s]mα f ) is injective for every α C; M · → ∗ M · (3) for every∈α C, there exists k Z so that for all k > k we have ∈ 0 ∈ + 0 s D s k j ( U [s]mα f )= X [s]mα 0 f − , ∗ M · M · j ( [s] f s)= D [s] f s+k, ! MU mα · X mα M0 · α q.i. D s k L C j ( U f ) X [s]mα 0 f − C[s] α ∗ M · ≃ M · ⊗ ON THE COMPARISON OF NEARBY CYCLES VIA b-FUNCTIONS 7

and α q.i. s+k L j ( f ) D [s] f C s C ; ! MU · ≃ X mα M0 · ⊗ [ ] α (4) for every α C, if α + k is not a root of the b-function of U for every k Z, then∈ we have M ∈ s s D s+k j!( U [s]mα f )= j ( U [s]mα f )= X [s]mα 0 f M · ∗ M · M · and α α q.i. D s+k L C j!( U f )= j ( U f ) X [s]mα 0 f C[s] α M · ∗ M · ≃ M · ⊗ for every k Z, where q.i. stands for quasi-isomorphism. ∈ 2.2. Nearby and vanishing cycles. We now give constructions of nearby and vanishing cycles. We continue using the notations and setups in 2.1. We assume that is a holonomic D -module so that . § M X M|U ≃MU Definition 2.11. For every α C, the α-nearby cycle of is ∈ Ms j ( U [s]m−α f ) ∗ Ψf,α Ψf,α U = M · s . M≃ M j ( [s] − f ) ! MU m α · The above definition needs Theorem 2.10 (2) to get the quotient. From definition, the α-nearby cycle of only depends on U . Recall that D [s] M f s has a t-actionM| given by X M0 · t s = s +1. · By definition, t acts on Ψ and f,αM (4) t Ψ =Ψ . · f,αM f,α+1M We define Λ by the discrete set: Z roots of the b-function of U . By Eq.(3), Λ is independent of choices of . By− Theorem 2.10 (4), we see thatM M0 Ψ = 0 iff α Λ. f,αMU 6 ∈ When α =0, Ψ coincides with Ψnil( ) in [BG12, 2.4]. f,0MU M § Proposition 2.12. For every α C, we have ∈ (1) (s + α)N annihilates Ψ for some N 0. f,αMU ≫ (2) Ψf,α U is holonomic DX -module supported on D; moreover, if U is regularM holonomic, then so is Ψ ; M f,αMU (3) D(Ψf,α U ) Ψf, αD( U ). M ≃ − M Proof. This proposition is essentially proved in [BB93, 4.2]. We give a proof here for completeness. § By Theorem 2.10 (3), we have D s k X [s]mα 0 f − Ψf, α U = M · − M D [s] f s+k X mα M0 · N Therefore, (s α) annihilates Ψf, α U for some N 0 by using the b-function of . The first− statement is thus− proved.M ≫ MU For the second one, it is obvious that Ψf,α U is supported on D. We then prove holonomicity. Using Theorem 2.10 (3)M one more time, we obtain a short exact sequence s α j ( U [s]mα f ) α ∗ 0 j ( U f ) 2M · s j ( U f ) 0. → ∗ M · → (s α) j ( U [s]mα f ) → ∗ M · → − · ∗ M · 8 LEI WU

s j ( U [s]mα f ) ∗ Hence, 2M · s is holonomic. By induction, we then have (s α) j ( U [s]mα f ) − · ∗ sM · j ( U [s]mα f ) ∗ NM · s is holonomic. (s α) j ( U [s]mα f ) −By Part· (1),∗ M we have· N Ψf, α U =Ψf,α U /(s α) Ψf,α U . − M M − · M s j ( U [s]mα f ) ∗ Therefore, Ψf, α U is a quotient of NM · s , from which we − M (s α) j ( U [s]mα f ) have proved the holonomicity. Regularity− can be· proved∗ M similarly.· The third one follows from Lemma 2.6 and Eq.(1). We now give an alternative description of α-nearby cycle.

Proposition 2.13. For each α C, Ψf,α U is canonically isomorphic to the ∈ s Mk s k generalized α-eigenspace of DX [s] 0 f − /DX [s] 0 f − with respect to the s-action for−k 0. M · M · ≫ s k Proof. Using the b-function, we ﬁrst know that the s-action on DX [s] 0 f − /DX [s] 0 s k M · M · f − admits a minimal polynomial for each k 0. Hence, we have the generalized ≥ s k s k α-eigenspace. Since as a C[s]-module, DX [s] 0 f − /DX [s] 0 f − is supported at a ﬁnite subset of SpecC[s] (determinedM by· the b-function).M · Therefore, its α-eigenspace is naturally s k s k (D [s] f − /D [s] f − ) . X M0 · X M0 · mα The proof is now done by Theorem 2.10(3).

We write by bf (s) the b-function for OU along f. Since D(OU ) OU , we have the following well-known fact as an immediate corollary of Proposition≃ 2.12 (2):

Corollary 2.14. If α is a root of bf (s), then α + k is also a root of bf (s) for some k Z. − ∈ Deﬁnition 2.15 (Beilinson). The maximal extension of is MU s j ( U [s]m0 f ) Ξ( )= ∗ M · . MU s j ( [s] f s) · ! MU m0 · Using Theorem 2.10 (3) with α = 0, we then have the following two short exact sequences

α− β− (5) 0 j ( ) Ξ( ) Ψ 0 → ! MU −−→ MU −−→ f,0MU → and

β+ α+ (6) 0 Ψf,0 U Ξ( U ) j ( U ) 0, → M −−→ M −−→ ∗ M → where β+ is induced by the isomorphism s s j ( U [s]m0 f ) Ψ · ∗ M · . f,0MU ≃ s j ( [s] f s) · ! MU m0 · By construction, (5) and (6) are dual to each other. Since , we have natural morphisms M|U ≃MU j ( U ) and j!( U ) M → ∗ M M →M ON THE COMPARISON OF NEARBY CYCLES VIA b-FUNCTIONS 9 where the second one is obtained by taking duality of the ﬁrst one. We then have the following commutative diagram

α+ Ξ( U ) j ( U ) M ∗ M (7) α−

j ( ) . ! MU M Deﬁnition 2.16 (Beilinson). The vanishing cycle of is M 0 Φf := ([j!( U ) Ξ( U ) M j ( U )]) M H M → M ⊕ → ∗ M where the complex is the total complex of the above double complex in degrees 1, 0 and 1. − Using the two short exact sequences (5) and (6), we have i (8) ([j!( U ) Ξ( U ) M j ( U )]) = 0 for i =0. H M → M ⊕ → ∗ M 6 We then have the morphisms of DX -modules (9) c :Ψ Φ f,0M → f M given by c(η) = (β+(η), 0), and (10) v :Φ Ψ f M → f,0M given by v(ξ,m)= β (ξ). Then − v c = s and c v = (s, 0). ◦ ◦ The above construction of Ξ( U ) and Φf exactly follows the recipe in [Bei87] nil M M and Φf coincides with Φ ( ) in [BG12, 2.4]. TheM following corollary followsM immediately§ from Proposition 2.12 and (8). Corollary 2.17. We have:

(1) Ξ( U ) and Φf are both holonomic; moreover, if is regular holonomic,M then so areM Ξ( ) and Φ ; M MU f M (2) D(Ξ( U )) Ξ(D( U )); (3) D(Φ M ) ≃Φ (D M). f M ≃ f M

3. Twisted DX [s]-module by Jordan block

We discuss DX [s]-modules twisted by local systems given by Jordan blocks. We first consider a key example: Local systems of Jordan blocks on C∗. For α C and m 1, we define a free OC[1/t]-module ∈ ≥ m 1 − α O 1 α Km = M C[t− ]el l=0 with a naturally defined connection by requiring ∇ α 1 α α el = (αel + el 1), ∇ t − C α where t is the coordinate of the complex plane . The generator el can be under- l α log t stood as the formal symbol of the multi-valued function t l! and we convention- α ally set e 1 = 0. − 10 LEI WU

We can identify t with the action of Jα,m, where Jα,m is the m m Jordan block with the eigenvalue∇α. The nilpotent part of t is then J , or more× explicitly ∇ 0,m nil α α (t ) (el )= el 1. ∇ − α C C It is then obvious that the multivalued -ﬂat sections of Km (on ∗) are the -span of ∇

Jα,m log t α e− ek k=0,...,m 1. { · } − We set Lλ the local system of the multivalued -ﬂat sections of Kα , or equivalently m ∇ m α q.i. λ DR(K ) C∗ L [1], m | ≃ m 2π√ 1α where λ = e − . The monodromy action T (around the origin of the complex plane counterclock- λ 2π√ 1Jα,m wise) on Lm is given by e− − . In particular log T = 2π√ 1J u − − 0,m where Tu is the uniportent part of T in the Jordan-Chevalley decomposition. By construction, we have a direct system of D-modules Kα Kα . ···→ m → m+1 → · · · Applying DR, we then obtain a direct system of local systems Lλ Lλ . ···→ m → m+1 → · · · We now deﬁne the DX [s]-module

m 1 α,k − D s k α m := M X [s] 0 f − el , N M · ⊗ l=0 by assigning the s-action by

α α α s (ηel ) = (s + α)ηel ηel 1 · − − s k for η a section of DX [s] 0 f − . We therefore have a direct symstem of DX [s]- modules M · α,k α,k . ···→Nm → Nm+1 → · · · .Let ι : X ֒ Y = X C be the graph embedding of f, i.e → × ι(x) = (x, f(x)). By identifying s with ∂ t, we have a natural injection − t α,k α , −m ֒ ι+(j ( U )) OY p1∗Km (11) N → ∗ M ⊗ where ι+ denotes the D-module direct image functor and p1 : Y C the projection (cf. [BMS06, 2.4]). The above injection is indeed a morphism→ of log D-modules with the log structure§ along X 0 ; see [WZ19, 2] for deﬁnitions. ×{ } § Lemma 3.1. Assume that b(s) is the b-function of along f. Then MU m α,0 α, 1 b(s + α) annihilates / − . Nm Nm ON THE COMPARISON OF NEARBY CYCLES VIA b-FUNCTIONS 11

Proof. By construction, we have a short exact sequence of DX [s]-modules α,k α,k 0 m 1 m 0. → N − → N → Q → We also know that α,k s k+α D [s] f − . N1 ≃ X M0 · ≃Q By substituting s + α for s, we know b(s k + α) annihilates − s k+α s k+1+α D [s] f − /D [s] f − . X M0 · X M0 · Therefore, we obtain the required statement by induction.

Proposition 3.2. For each α C, there exists k > 0 so that for all k k ∈ 0 ≥ 0 α,k s α,k q.i. 1 1/λ DR( m m ) ι Rj (DR( U ) f0− Lm ) N −→N ≃ ∗ ∗ M ⊗ and α, k s α, k q.i. 1 1/λ DR( − − ) ι j (DR( ) f − L ) Nm −→Nm ≃ ! ! MU ⊗ 0 m α,k s α,k for all m, where the complex [ m m ] is in degrees 1 and 0, and λ = 2π√ 1α N −→N − e − . Proof. Under the inclusion (11), we have α,k α 1 1/λ m U ι+j ( U ) OY p1∗Km− U ι+j ( U ) U C p1− Lm . N | ≃ ∗ M ⊗ | ≃ ∗ M | ⊗ By using Theorem 2.10(3), we have that α,k L C α,k L C α,k L C m C[s] 0 ( m )m0 C[s] α j ( m U ) C[s] 0, N ⊗ ≃ N ⊗ mα ≃ ∗ N | ⊗ α,k α,k C where ( m )m0 is the localization of m at m0, the maximal ideal of 0 . Moreover,N since we identify s with ∂ tN, we further have ∈ − t q.i. α,k L C α ∂t α j ( m U ) C[s] 0 [ι+j ( U ) OY p1∗Km− ι+j ( U ) OY p1∗Km− ]. ∗ N | ⊗ ≃ ∗ M ⊗ −→ ∗ M ⊗ By using the Koszul decompostions of de Rham complexes (see for instance [Wu17, 4.1]), we therefore have § α,k s α,k q.i. α DR( m m ) DRY (ι+j ( U ) OY p1∗Km− ), N −→N ≃ ∗ M ⊗ where the second DR is taken over the ambient space Y . Since α ι+(j ( U )) OY p1∗Km− ∗ M ⊗ is regular holonomic, we also naturally have

α q.i. o 1 1/λ DRY (ι+j ( U ) OY p1∗Km− ) RjY (ι DR( U ) C p1− Lm ), ∗ M ⊗ ≃ ∗ ∗ M ⊗ o where jY and ι are as in the following diagram o UUι = Y X 0 Y \ ×{ } j jY Xι Y ; see [Bj93, Chapter V.4]. By projection formula for local systems ([KS13, Proposi- tion 2.5.11]), we further have

o 1 1/λ q.i. 1 1/λ RjY (ι DR( U ) C p1− Lm ) ι (Rj (DR( U ) C f0− Lm )) ∗ ∗ M ⊗ ≃ ∗ ∗ M ⊗ 12 LEI WU and the first quasi-isomorphism is obtained. The second quasi-isomorphism can be obtained similarly. The choice of k0 only α,0 α, 1 depends on α and the roots of the b-function annihilating / − . We there- Nm Nm fore can choose a uniform k0 working for all m by Lemma 3.1. 4. Nearby cycles for perverse sheaves via Jordan blocks In this section, we define nearby and vanishing cycles via local systems given by Jordan blocks on C∗, the punctured complex plane. We keep the notations introduced in 2.1. Assume that K is a C-perverse sheaf on X. § Definition 4.1. For λ C∗, the λ-nearby cycle of K is ∈ 1 1 1 1/λ ψf,λ(K) := lim i− Rj (j− K f0− Lm ). ∗ ⊗ −→m The vanishing cycle is 1 φ K := Cone(i− K ψ (K)) f → f,1 1 where the morphism i− K Ψ (K) is induced by the natural map → f,1 1 K Rj (j− K). → ∗ 1/λ The monodromy action T of Lm induces the monodromy action on ψf,λ(K) for each λ, denoted also by T . We then have the induced monodromy action T on φf K, 1 by requiring T acting on i− K identically. By construction, we have the tautological triangle 1 can +1 i− K ψ (K) φ K → f,1 −−→ f −−→ with the induced canonical map can : ψ (K) φ K. f,1 → f We define Var : φ K ψ (K) f → f,1 by log Tu Var := (0, )=(0,J0, ) −2π√ 1 ∞ − where J0, = lim J0,m. ∞ −→m Remark 4.2. Using these definitions, one can prove the perversity of ψf,λK and φf K (with a shift of cohomological degrees) directly. Let us refer to [Rei10] for the proof of this point and other related results.

5. The proof of Theorem 1.1 In this section, we prove Theorem 1.1. Before we start, the following preliminary result about inﬁnite Jordan blocks is needed. Lemma 5.1. [Bj93, 6.4.5 Lemma] Let W be a C-vector space, and let ϕ be a C- linear operator on W admitting a minimal polynomial. Set W = Lk∞=0 W ek and deﬁne ∞ ⊗ ϕ (w ek) = (ϕ α)w ek w ek 1 ∞ ⊗ − ⊗ − ⊗ − for w W (assume e 1 = 0). Then ϕ is surjective and ker(ϕ ) Wα, where ∈ − ∞ ∞ ≃ Wα is the generalized α-eigenspace. ON THE COMPARISON OF NEARBY CYCLES VIA b-FUNCTIONS 13

Proof. Deﬁne a map Wα ker(ϕ ) by → ∞ i w X(ϕ α) w ei. 7→ − ⊗ i 0 ≥ Clearly, this map is an isomorphism. We then prove surjectivity. If w W , then ∈ α i j 1 ϕ ( X(ϕ α) − − w ei)= w ej. ∞ − − ⊗ ⊗ i>j

If w W ⊥, then then ∈ α j i ϕ (X(ϕ α)− w ej i+1)= w ej . ∞ − ⊗ − ⊗ i=1 Therefore, the surjectivity follows. Using the above lemma and Proposition 2.13, we immediately have:

Corollary 5.2. For a holonomic DU -module U and some α C, there exists k 0 so that M ∈ ≫ α,k α,k q.i. m s m Ψf,α U [1] lim( Nα, k Nα, k ) M ≃ m − −→ m − −→m N N Proof of Theorem 1.1. We assume a regular holonomic D -module and write M X U = U . We ﬁrst prove the comparison of nearby cycles. MSinceM| DR and the direct limit functor commute (since DR is identiﬁed with L ω D , one can apply [Wei95, Corollary 2.6.17]), we have X ⊗ • DR(Ψf,α U [1]) i ψf,λDR( U ) M ≃ ∗ M by Corollary 5.2 and Proposition 3.2. α One can check that the operator J0, on lim Ψf,0 m corresponds to the action ∞ m N (s + α) on Ψ under the quasi-isomorphism−→ in Corollary 5.2 by Lemma 5.1. f,αMU log Tu Taking DR, the operator J0, becomes on ψf,λDR( U ) by the con- ∞ −2π√ 1 M struction of the monodromy operator T . Or equivalently,− the monodromy operator T corresponds to 2π√ 1s 2π√ 1(s+α) T DR(e− − ) = DR(λ e− − ). ≃ · We thus have proved the comparison for nearby cycles in Theorem 1.1. We now prove the comparison for vanishing cycles. For simplicity, we write by • the complex A [Ξ( U ) j ( U )] M → ∗ M in degrees 0 and 1, by • the complex B [j!( U ) Ξ( U ) M j ( U )] M → M ⊕ → ∗ M by • the complex C [j ( ) ] ! MU →M in degrees -1 and 0. Then we have a triangle +1 • •[1] •[1] . C → A →B −−→ 14 LEI WU

q.i. Considering the two short exact sequences (5) and (6), we see that Φf • and M ≃ B c q.i. [Ψ Φ ] [ • •]. f,0M −→ f M ≃ A →B We hence have q.i. (12) Φ [1] Cone( • Ψ [1]). f M ≃ C → f,0MU Since q.i. 1 DR( •) i i− DR( ), C ≃ ∗ M we have c can DR(Ψf,0 U [1] Φf [1]) i ψf,0DR( ) φf DR( ) . M −→ M ≃ ∗ M −−→ M Using the short exact sequence (6), we see that the Ψ in f,0MU Cone( • Ψ [1]) C → f,0MU has a s-twist. Therefore, under the quasi-isomorphism (12)

v : Cone( • Ψ [1]) Ψ [1] C → f,0MU → f,0MU is given by (0,s). But the s action on Ψf,0 U is J0, after taking DR. Therefore, we obtain M ∞ v Var DR(Φf [1] Ψf,0 [1]) i (φf DR( ) ψf,0DR( )). M −→ M ≃ ∗ M −−→ M

References

[BB93] Alexander Beilinson and Joseph Bernstein, A proof of Jantzen conjectures, Advances in Soviet mathematics 16 (1993), no. Part 1, 1–50. [Bei87] Alexander Beilinson, How to glue perverse sheaves, K-Theory, Arithmetic and Geom- etry, Springer, 1987, pp. 42–51. [BG12] Alexander Beilinson and Dennis Gaitsgory, A corollary of the b-function lemma, Se- lecta Mathematica 18 (2012), no. 2, 319–327. [Bj93] Jan-Erik Björk, Analytic D-modules and applications, Mathematics and its Applica- tions, vol. 247, Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht, 1993. MR 1232191 [BMS06] Nero Budur, Mircea Mustat¸ˇa, and Morihiko Saito, Bernstein-Sato polynomials of arbitrary varieties, Compos. Math. 142 (2006), no. 3, 779–797. MR 2231202 [BVWZ19] Nero Budur, Robin Veer, Lei Wu, and Peng Zhou, Zero loci of Bernstein-Sato ideals, arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.04010 (2019). [BVWZ20] , Zero loci of Bernstein-Sato ideals II, arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.05728 (2020). [Del73] Pierre Deligne, Le formalisme des cycles évanescents, Groupes de Monodromie en Géométrie Algébrique, Springer, 1973, pp. 82–115. [Gin86] Victor Ginsburg, Characteristic varieties and vanishing cycles, Invent. Math. 84 (1986), no. 2, 327–402. MR 833194 [Gin98] Victor Ginzburg, Lectures on D-modules, Online lecture notes, available at Sabin Cautis’ webpage http://www. math. columbia. edu/ scautis/dmodules/dmodules/ginzburg. pdf, With collaboration of Baranovsky, V. and Evens S (1998). [Kas83] Masaki Kashiwara, Vanishing cycle sheaves and holonomic systems of differential equations, Algebraic geometry (Tokyo/Kyoto, 1982), Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1016, Springer, Berlin, 1983, pp. 134–142. MR 726425 [Kas77] , B-functions and holonomic systems. Rationality of roots of B-functions, In- vent. Math. 38 (1976/77), no. 1, 33–53. MR 0430304 [KS13] Masaki Kashiwara and Pierre Schapira, Sheaves on manifolds: With a short history. Les débuts de la théorie des faisceaux. by Christian Houzel, vol. 292, Springer Science & Business Media, 2013. ON THE COMPARISON OF NEARBY CYCLES VIA b-FUNCTIONS 15

[Lic09] Sam Lichtenstein, Vanishing cycles for algebraic D-modules, Harvard Thesis, March (2009). [Mai16] Philippe Maisonobe, Filtration Relative, l’Id´eal de Bernstein et ses pentes, arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.03354 (2016). [Rei10] Ryan Reich, Notes on beilinson’s” how to glue perverse sheaves”, arXiv preprint arXiv:1002.1686 (2010). [Sai88] Morihiko Saito, Modules de Hodge polarisables, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 24 (1988), no. 6, 849–995 (1989). MR 1000123 [Wei95] Charles A Weibel, An introduction to homological algebra, no. 38, Cambridge university press, 1995. [Wu17] Lei Wu, Nearby and vanishing cycles for perverse sheaves and D-modules, arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.10158 (2017). [WZ19] Lei Wu and Peng Zhou, Log D-modules and index theorems, arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.09276 (2019).

Department of Mathematics, University of Utah. 155 S 1400 E, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA E-mail address: [email protected]