Arxiv:1801.07636V1 [Math.DG]

arXiv:1801.07636v1 [math.DG] 23 Jan 2018 emtyt takClb’ eondpolmo xsec o existence of Kähler fin potentials problem of to space renowned 1980s of Calabi’s in geometry attack Calabi to E. by geometry [ introduced Kähler class was the which within 7], [6, metric [ class osatsaa uvtr cc)o opc Kähler manif compact a on (csck) curvature scalar constant iwo emty.Ti rbe a enkoni h edt b sca to its field of the terms in e known in the been metric derive has the to problem control is This to steps geometry). or key of PDE), view the of c of view and One exi point approach dimension general. to pr how the in work, as where deep technically Donaldson’s well assumption than (as Other surface K-stability roles. toric to equivalent on is relied csck of existence [20]. in results and [16]), also (see ontol auh’ erc u loteFnlrmetric Finsler the also but metric, Mabuchi’s only not to GT,wihlast i ojcue[1 yeaiigtede the examining by [21] conjecture his ha to functional convex leads di a which infinite of (GIT), Donaldson’s point include which critical setting, a dimensional of existence of ons nldn avs epudrtnig[8 9 ftegeomet the of 19] [18, understanding deep Darvas’ including K [12][Introduction]. and conjectur of [41] stability existence Yau-Tian-Donaldson for of review discussion historic the detailed more a For ometry. rprescnetr aeb .Ta 4] hr h proper the where [45], Aubin’s of Tian terms G. in by made conjecture properness fgoei asadCe-oado’ edscsaiiyc of stability properness geodesic Chen-Donaldson’s of and rays geodesic of in hnsrslto 9 fDnlsnscnetr that conjecture Donaldson’s in of [9] resolution Chen’s rm nipratnto sMabuchi’s is notion important An gram. eeg adKplsaiiy.Ti okrle nrcn d recent on relies work This K-polystability). (and -energy eetyCe n hn 1,1,1]hv aesrrsn bre surprising made have 13] 12, [11, Cheng and Chen Recently o h xsec at ntecs ftrcsrae .Donal S. surface, toric of case the in part, existence the For eetyBra-avsL 4 ]poe htteexistence the that proved 5] [4, Berman-Darvas-Lu Recently H H a ejitb unique a be joint be can 2 n ski rtclpitof point critical a is csck and [2] ω .AKalrmti ihcntn clrcraueaespeci are curvature scalar constant with Kähler metric A ]. erci qiaett eutv rpresrdcdprop properness/reduced pro We reductive ergy. to metrics. equivalent invariant is for metric only properness ness/reduced eutv properness reductive rpr ouoteato h ugopi h dniycompo identity the of flow in the subgroup with the commutes action which the modulo proper, netea ercwt xrmlvector ca extremal extremal prior with the a metric to new adapted no extremal are modifications an there necessary and Kähl are [13] compact there follows a argument on Our Kähler metric metric. scalar constant of istence Abstract. NCLB’ XRMLMTISADPROPERNESS AND METRICS EXTREMAL CALABI’S ON K nti ae eetn eetbekhog fCe-hn [1 Chen-Cheng of breakthrough recent extend we paper this In eeg ntrso itnefnto of function distance of terms in -energy J fntoa n inscnetr a atymtvtdb c by motivated partly was conjecture Tian’s and -functional H ω and .I 2] .K oado rpsdabatflpormi K¨ in program beautiful a proposed Donaldson K. S. [21], In ]. := eue properness reduced { C φ 1 ∈ , 1 C edscwudpa nipratrl nDnlsnspro- Donaldson’s in role important an play would geodesic V ∞ 1. eitouetoesnilyeuvln oin,called notions, equivalent essentially two introduce We . K ( H M EYN HE WEIYONG eeg.Mmcigfiiedmninlstig criteri- setting, dimensional finite Mimicking -energy. K Introduction ihteMbcimti [39], metric Mabuchi the with : ) eeg 3,3] hc scne along convex is which 38], [39, -energy V eosreta n a etrdcieproper- reductive test can one that observe We . ω fadol ftemdfidMbcieeg is energy Mabuchi modified the if only and if φ 1 = ω H + samti pc,weeaytopoints two any where space, metric a is √ o rjciemnfls erfrto refer we manifolds, projective for e reso h oie auh en- Mabuchi modified the of erness − esoa emti nain theory invariant geometric mensional d netr,adCe’ ojcue[9] conjecture Chen’s and onjecture, 1 1 rmnfl oClb’ extremal Calabi’s to manifold er eta xsec fa extremal an of existence that ve skadetea erc including metric, extremal and csck l ( old n h ovxt of convexity the and , ∂ ebe rpsdi hsinfinitely this in proposed been ve e epoeta hr exists there that prove We se. pres.Dnlsnsapproach Donaldson’s operness). i opeinof completion ric H φ> ∂φ vlpet nKähler geometry, in evelopments ¯ tneo sksee intractable seemed csck of stence eto uoopimgroup automorphism of nent siae edd u rather but needed, estimates iaie of rivatives fcc mle h rpresof properness the implies csck of esol lomninthe mention also should We . esof ness skmtisi em fthe of terms in metrics csck f tmt fscn re (from order second of stimate M, sn[2 3 4 rvdthat proved 24] 23, [22, dson ne nlsspa essential play analysis onvex a uvtr fo on of point (from curvature lar aoia representative canonical a d lcsso aaisextremal Calabi’s of cases al xrml ad h csck The hard. extremely e 0 [ khog ntesuyof study the in akthrough ω } . ] J , K eeg a proposed was -energy ,1,1]o ex- on 13] 12, 1, ,wt xdKähler fixed a with ), K eeg tinfinity at -energy H C nomlge- onformal ihrespect with K 1 , 1 eeg [2] -energy geodesics ahler 2 WEIYONG HE equation reads, given a Kähler potential such that gi¯j + φi¯j > 0, i¯j g ∂i∂¯ log det(g ¯ + φ ¯) = constant − φ j ij ij This is a formidable fourth order nonlinear elliptic equation on φ. How to derive its a priori estimates, in particular to control n +∆φ, seemed to be totally out of sight. An attempt made by Chen and the author [15] is to derive second order estimate through the complex Monge-Ampere equation under certain “minimal” assumption on ratio of the volume forms, with the motivation to derive second order estimates in terms of csck equation. The classical results of Yau [46] and Aubin [1] using maximum principle to control n +∆φ through the complex Monge-Ampere equation require regularity of the volume ratio up to C2. As a comparison, together with Chen in [15] we have obtained a rather optimal regularity depending on 1,p W -norm of the volume ratio, where p > 2dimRM is the optimal power. We also mention the work together with Chen and Darvas [14], where we obtained the control of second order (n+∆φ), assuming merely d1-distance bound and upper bound for Ricci curvature. This result builds upon deep analysis in pluripotential theory and the complex Monge-Ampere equation. Using this result, we have proved the properness of -energy implies the existence of csck along Chen’s continuity path [10] if we assume Ricci curvatureK upper bound [14][Theorem 1.4]. This seemed to summarize the author’s knowledge of limitation to control the second order through its scalar curvature (see in particular the discussion in [14] after Theorem 1.4 and Remark 2.1).

Here come the breakthrough of Chen-Cheng [11, 12, 13]. In short, Chen and Cheng have obtained the a priori estimates by treating csck type equations as two coupled second order elliptic equations. Their methods are very skillful and truly amazing. Using these estimates and recent developments in K¨ahler geometry, they proved the following theorem,

Theorem 1 (Chen-Cheng). Suppose the -energy is proper with respect to d1 modulo Aut0(M), then there exists a smooth csck in (M, [ωK], J). Chen and Cheng proved much more, including Donaldson’s conjecture [21] and Chen-Donaldson geodesic stability conjecture. We refer the readers to [11, 12, 13] for their exciting achievements. In this paper we deal with Calabi’s extremal metrics, by extending Chen-Cheng’s breakthrough [11, 12, 13] on the existence of constant scalar curvature metric (csck) in (M, [ω], J) to the extremal case. We prove the following, Theorem 2. Let V be an extremal vector field of (M, [ω], J), which is unique up to the choice of a maximal compact subgroup of Aut0(M). Then the following statements are equivalent, (1) There exists an extremal metric in (M, [ω], J). (2) The modified -energy is proper with respect to d modulo the action of Aut (M,V ), K 1 0 the subgroup of Aut0(M) which commutes with the flow of V .

Remark 1.1. By results of [19] and [20], the properness in terms of d1 and the properness in terms of Aubin’s J-functional are equivalent. When V = 0, Theorem 2 is reduced to Theorem 1 and [5][Theorem 1.3]. How to formulate a precise notion of properness for -energy is indeed a subtle issue when K Aut0(M) = 0. This was clarified by Zhou-Zhu[48] and Darvas-Rubinstein [20]. In particular, they disproved6 the following conjecture [20], Conjecture 3. Let (M,ω,J) be a compact Kähler manifold. Let K be a maximal compact subgroup of Aut (M). Then contains a constant scalar curvature metric if and only if - 0 H K energy is proper on the subset K consisting of K-invariant metrics. H ⊂H It is usually much more effective to check properness for metrics with sufficient symmetry. Our observation is that, one can still restrict to K-invariant metrics, for a maximal compact subgroup of Aut0(M,V ), if we assume that Aut0(M,V ) is the complexification of K. Note that Aut0(M,V ) has to be the complexification of its maximal compact subgroup if there exists an extremal metric by Calabi [7] (see Theorem 2.1). We write G = Aut0(M,V ) for simplicity. We shall also consider a compact subgroup K K such that the Lie algebra of K 0 ⊂ 0 consisting of reduced holomorphic vector fields and let G0 be the complexification of K0. We ONCALABI’SEXTREMALMETRICSANDPROPERNESS 3 introduce the notion reductive-properness (for the pair (K, G)) and reduced properness (for the pair (K0, G0)), see Definition 2.1, Definition 2.2 and Definition 2.3. These two definitions are essentially the same, in view of Calabi’s decomposition (2.4). Reductive properness and reduced properness seem to be right replacements of properness needed in Conjecture 3. We have the following Theorem 4. The following statements are equivalent, (1) There exists an extremal metric in (M, [ω], J) with extremal vector field V . (2) The X -energy is reductive-proper restricted to K with respect to d ,G. K H 1 (3) The X -energy is reduced-proper restricted to K0 with respect to d ,G0 . K H 1 Acknowledgement: The author thanks Prof. Xiuxiong Chen sincerely for his kindness to ask him to write down the extremal case. The author also thanks Song Sun for insightful discussions. The author is partly supported by an NSF grant, award no. 1611797.

2. Preliminaries We recall some basic concepts in Kähler geometry, in particular those related to Calabi’s extremal metric [6, 7]. A good reference for extremal metrics may be found in Gauduchon [27][Chapter 2, 3, 4]. We consider the space of normalized Kähler potentials, which can be identified with the space of Kähler metrics in the class class [ω],

(2.1) = φ C∞(M) : ωφ = ω + √ 1∂∂φ¯ > 0, Iω(φ) = 0 , H0 { ∈ − } where the functional Iω is deﬁned to be n 1 k n k (2.2) Iω(φ)= φ ω ω − . (n + 1)! Z φ ∧ M Xk=0 I I n I Note that the -functional can be characterized as δ = M δφωφ . We also deﬁne the ω,χ functional, for a (1, 1)-form χ, R n 1 1 − k n 1 k (2.3) Iω,χ(φ)= φχ ω ω − − n! Z ∧ φ ∧ M Xk=0

When the dependence on ω is clear, we simply write the functional I(φ) and Iχ(φ). We should mention that I is a functional deﬁned on , which depends a particular normalization, for example, I(φ + c)= I(φ)+ cVol(M). H

We need some preparations on the automorphism group of (M, J). Let Aut0(M) be the identity component of the automorphism group and h be its Lie algebra. Calabi’s extremal metric is defined to be that R is a real holomorphic vector field, hence J R is a Killing vector field (of the extremal metric).∇ We recall the following result of Calabi, ∇ Theorem 2.1 (Calabi). Let (M,g,J) be an extremal Kähler metric. The complex Lie algebra h has the following orthogonal decomposition 0 λ (2.4) h = h ( λ> h ), ⊕ ⊕ 0 where h0 denotes the kernel of [J R, ], i.e. the centralizer of J R in h, and for any λ> 0, hλ denotes the subspace of elements ∇X of· h such that [J R, X]= λJX∇ . In particular, the identity ∇ component of isometry group Isom0(g) of g is a maximal compact subgroup of Aut0(M). Calabi’s theorem is a generalization of Matsushima’s results on Kähler-Einstein metrics [40] and Lichnerowicz’s results [37] on constant scalar curvature metrics. A point to make is that an extremal vector field is a priori determined by (M, [ω], J) due to Futaki-Mabuchi [26], regardless whether an extremal metric exists or not (as a consequence of Futaki-Mabuchi bilinear form). Such a real holomorphic vector field is unique up to the conjugate action of Aut0(M). Hence the Futaki invariant [25] is zero if and only if V = 0. By Calabi’s theorem, if an extremal 0 exists, then Aut0(M,V ) corresponds to the Lie algebra h , hence it is the complexification of a maximal compact subgroup K. In particular, we have the decomposition (2.5) h0 = a ham Jham, ⊕ ⊕ 4 WEIYONG HE where ham is the Lie algebra of reduced (holomorphic) Killing vector field, and a is the Abelian algebra of parallel holomorphic vector fields. The Lie algebra of K, k = a ham as in the decomposition (2.5). ⊕ Given the (real) extremal vector field V , we refer the corresponding holomorphic vector field X = V iJV as the (complex) extremal vector field. We assume the background metric ω is − invariant, LJV ω = 0. It follows that X has a real holomorphic potential, denoted as θX , such that ¯ ∂θ ∂ X = gjk X , ∂z¯k ∂zj n where θX is normalized such that M θX ω = 0 We are interested in the invariant metrics. Consider the normalized space of KählerR potentials which is invariant under the action of JV ,

X = φ : LJV φ = 0 H { ∈H } Note that JV induces a compact subtorus T in G and hence X denotes the potentials which H0 are invariant under the T -action. We also use the notation = X . In general, for HX H ∩H0 any compact subgroup of Aut0, denote P be P -invariant elements in X . We also mention 0H 1 H that G acts on and it preserves := X I (0). For any φ X , we denote the H0 HX H ∩ − ∈ H corresponding holomorphic potential as θX (φ) and we have the following

(2.6) θX (φ)= θX + V (φ) It is straightforward to check that the normalization condition holds given (2.6),

n θX (φ)ωφ = 0. ZM A metric ωφ is extremal if and only if it satisﬁes the equation

(2.7) Rφ R = θX (φ). − 2.1. The metric completion ( , d1). Generalizing the Mabuchi metric on (which corresponds to d in Darvas’ setting),H T. Darvas [18] introduced the notion of d Hdistance on 2 1 H (more generally dp for p [1, )), ∈ ∞ n ωφ ξ 1,φ = ξ , ξ Tφ = C∞(M). k k ZM | | n! ∀ ∈ H One can then define the length of curves in and the distance function d1(φ0, φ1) for φ0, φ1 in . The later is imply the infimum of the lengthH of the curves connecting φ and φ . Darvas H 0 1 proved that ( , d1) is a metric space, built upon Chen’s result [8] that ( , d2) (with the Mabuchi metric)H is a metric space. Guegj and Zeriahi [30] introduced the finiteH energy space of ω-plurisubharmonic functions, for any p 1, ≥ p p n n n (2.8) = φ psh(M,ω) : φ ωφ < , ωφ = ω E { ∈ ZM | | ∞ ZM ZM } V. Guedj conjectured [29] that the metric completion with the Mabuchi metric is precisely 2. T. Darvas [18, 19] proved Guedj’s conjecture. Indeed, he proved that the metric completionE of p p with respect to dp for any p is , with the following characterization for ( , dp), which we Honly state for p = 1 for our purpose,E E Theorem 2.2 (Darvas). There exists a constant C > 1 depending only on n such that 1 (2.9) C− I(u, v) d (u, v) CI (u, v), u, v ≤ 1 ≤ 1 ∈H where we define n n ωu ωv I1(u, v)= u v + ZM | − | n! n! We will also use the following notations 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 = I− (0), = φ : φ is invariant under the action of P , = I− (0). E0 E ∩ EP { ∈E } E0,P EP ∩ We note that Aut0(M) acts on the Kähler forms by pullback, for σ Aut0(M), σ∗ωφ = ωψ. Hence it induces an Aut (M) action on (instead of , since we need∈ to specify the choice 0 H0 H of the constant; we also use the notation ψ = σ[φ] to indicate the action). The Aut0(M) action ONCALABI’SEXTREMALMETRICSANDPROPERNESS 5

1 on 0 is d1-isometric and it extends to its metric completion ( 0 , d1), see [20][Lemma 5.10]. NoteH that G-action preserves 0 , and it extends to its metric completionE ( 1 , d ). HX E0,X 1 2.2. The modified -energy, its convexity and the properness. We recall several well- known functionals inK Kähler geometry. Since notations are not used uniformly in literature, we include some details and our notations are mostly consistent with [27][Chapter 4]. Fix a base metric ω. We recall the I-functional defined above, n 1 k n k Iω(φ)= φ ω ω − . (n + 1)! Z ∧ φ M Xk=0

When the base metric ω is changed to ωψ, we write ωφ = ωψ + √ 1∂∂¯(φ ψ) and we have − − n 1 k n k Iω (φ)= (φ ψ)ω ω − ψ (n + 1)! Z − ψ ∧ φ Xk=0 M For a given real (1, 1) form χ, we also deﬁne n 1 1 − k n 1 k Iω,χ(φ)= φ χ ω ω − − . n! Z ∧ ∧ φ M Xk=0 We recall the so-called J-functional, with the base metric ω, n 1 n k k 1 n (2.10) Jω(φ)= φω − ω φω . (n + 1)! Z ∧ φ − n! Z φ Xk=0 M M

When the base metric ω is clear, we simply write Jω = J. It can be characterized by its derivative, n dJ(φ) ∂φ ωφ (2.11) = (trφω n) dt ZM ∂t − n! We have the relation 1 n J(φ)= I(φ) φωφ. − n! ZM Note that Iω(φ) is a functional on φ , while Jω(φ) does not depend on the normalization ∈ H condition on φ, hence a functional on Kähler metrics. It is often written as Jω(ωφ). For a given real (1, 1) form χ, we also define Jω,χ by n 1 n 1 − k n 1 k 1 k n k Jω,χ(φ)= φ χ ω ω − − χφ ω ω − (2.12) n! Z ∧ ∧ φ − (n + 1)! Z ∧ φ M Xk=0 M Xk=0 =Iχ(φ) χI(φ) − where χ takes the form n 1 1 ω − χ = Vol− (M, [ω]) χ . Z ∧ (n 1)! M − We also define Aubin’s I-functional and J-functional as follows,

1 n n Iω(φ) := I(ω,ωφ)= φ ω ω n! Z − φ (2.13) M 1 n Jω(φ) := J(ω,ωφ)= φω Iω(φ). n! ZM − We have the following well-known facts, see for example [27][Proposition 4.2.1], 1 n (2.14) 0 I(φ) J(φ) I(φ) ≤ n + 1 ≤ ≤ n + 1 It follows that, 1 n (2.15) I(φ) J(φ)= I(φ) J(φ) I(φ) n + 1 ≤ − ≤ n + 1 6 WEIYONG HE

Now we recall that the Mabuchi’s -energy can be characterized by its variation, K n ωφ δK = δφ(Rφ R) , − ZM − n! where R is the average of the scalar curvature. Following Chen [9], the -energy reads, K (2.16) ω(φ)= Hω(φ)+ Jω, Ric(φ), K − where Hω(φ) is the entropy with the form n n ωφ ωφ Hω(φ)= log n . ZM ω n!

In particular, the J Ric-functional takes the form − n n 1 nR k n k 1 − k n 1 k J Ric(φ)= φ ω ω − φ Ric ω ω − − − (n + 1)! Z ∧ φ − n! Z ∧ ∧ φ M Xk=0 M Xk=0 =RI(φ) IRic(φ) − Now we recall the definition of the modified -energy [28, 42]. For metrics in X , the K H modified X energy is characterized by K n ωφ (2.17) δ X = δφ(Rφ R θX (φ)) K − ZM − − n!

Hence the modiﬁed -energy X takes the form K K X (2.18) X (φ)= H(φ)+ J Ric(φ)+ J (φ), K − X where the functional J (φ) takes the form, for a path φt connecting 0 and φ in X , H 1 ωn X φt J (φ)= dt φ˙tθX (φt) Z0 ZM n! 1,1 An important fact about the -energy ( X ) is that they are convex along C geodesics connecting points in (conjecturedK by Chen),K proved by Berman-Berndtson [2] (see also Chen-Li-Paun [16]) H

1,1 Theorem 2.3 (Berman-Berndtsson). The -energy (φt) is convex in t along the C geodesics K K φt connecting φ , φ , for t [0, 1]. 0 1 ∈H ∈ X 1,1 Since J (φ) is linear along a C -geodesic, hence the modified -energy X is convex along 1,1 K K the C geodesics in X (see [2][Section 4]). As a direct consequence of the convexity, H Corollary 2.1. Suppose an extremal metric exists in (M, [ω], J) with extremal vector field V . Then an extremal metric minimizes the modified -energy X over X . K K H 1 In [4], Berman-Davars-Lu extended the -energy to ( , d1) and proved that the -energy is convex along the geodesics in 1. K E K E Theorem 2.4 (Berman-Davars-Lu). The -energy can be extended to a functional : 1 K 1 K E → R + using the formula (2.16). Such a -energy in is the greatest d1-lsc extension of -energy∪ { ∞} on . Moreover, -energy is convexK along the finiteE energy geodesics of 1. K H K E 1 1 Let X be the metric completion of X in with respect to d1 (see [20][Lemma 5.4]). We E 1 H E 1 can then extend X to X such that it is convex along the geodesics in X . First we recall a classical result ofK X.H. ZhuE [50][Corollary 5.3], E

Proposition 2.1 (X.H. Zhu). There exists a uniform constant C (independent of φ X ) 1 ∈ H such that θX (φ) C . | |≤ 1 As a consequence, we have

X 1 Proposition 2.2. The functional J (φ) on X has a unique d -continuous extension to . H 1 EX ONCALABI’SEXTREMALMETRICSANDPROPERNESS 7

X Proof. By definition of J , if φt is any smooth path in X with end point φ , φ H 0 1 1 JX JX ˙ n (φ0) (φ1) dt φ θX (φt) ωφt | − |≤ Z0 ZM | || | 1 ˙ n C1 dt φ ωφt C1l1(γ), ≤ Z0 ZM | | ≤ where l1(γ) stands for the length of the curve γ with respect to d1. Taking infimum over all such γ we have X X J (φ0) J (φ1) Cd1(φ0, φ1). | − |≤ JX 1 As a direct consequence of Theorem 2.4 and the linearity of along geodesics in X , we have the following convexity of the modified -energy. E K 1 R Corollary 2.2. The X -energy can be extended to a functional X : X + using K 1 K E → ∪ { ∞} the formula (2.16). Thus extended, the X -energy in X is the greatest d1-lsc extension of K E 1 X -energy on X and X -energy is convex along the finite energy geodesics of X . Moreover, K H K E 1 if an extremal metric exists with extremal vector field V , then it minimizes X over . K EX We need a notion of properness of the modified -energy in terms of d relative to G-action K 1 as follows. For any given metric ω0, we consider its G-orbit

ω0 = φ σ∗ω = ωφ, σ G O { ∈H0| 0 ∈ } Given any other K¨ahler metric ωϕ such that ϕ , the distance function ∈H0 d1(ϕ, ω0 )= inf d1(ϕ, ψ) O ωψ ω0 ∈O Note that since G acts on isometrically, we know that H0 inf d1(ϕ, ψ)= inf d1(ϕ, σ[ψ]) = inf d1(σ1[ϕ],σ2[ψ]). ω ω σ G σ1,σ2 G ψ∈O 0 ∈ ∈ Hence we deﬁne the d1 distance relative to the action of G as

d1,G(ϕ, φ)= inf d1(ϕ, σ[ψ]), σ G ∈ where σ[ψ] denotes the Kähler potential of σ ωψ. We can restrict the distance d ,G to ∈ H0 ∗ 1 0 since G-action preserves 0 and 0 is a totally geodesic submanifold of . HX HX HX H0 Definition 2.1 (Properness modulo G). The modified -energy is proper with respect to d1,G if the following conditions hold, K

(1) The modified -energy X is bounded from below on X . K K0 H (2) For any sequence φi , d ,G(0, φi) implies X (φi) . ∈HX 1 →∞ K →∞ Remark 2.1. The notion of properness of -energy was first introduced by G. Tian [43], with the properness of -energy in terms of Aubin’sK J-functional. Tian [44] proved that the properness of -energy isK equivalent to existence of Kähler-Einstein metric on Fano manifolds. Later on TianK [45] has made a properness conjecture. Chen has made a properness conjecture with the properness of -energy in terms of Mabuchi’s metric d . A general properness conjecture was K 2 then clarified by Darvas-Rubinstein [20] in terms of d1 and also Aubin’s J-functional, modulo the action of Aut0(M). Our definition is adaption of [13][Definition 3.1] to the extremal case. The notion of properness of modified -energy has been studied extensively [48, 49, 36]. K As we shall see that the properness of X with respect to d1,G is equivalent to the existence of a smooth extremal metric. It is oftenK much more effective to check properness for metrics which are sufficiently symmetric. Let K Aut0(M,V ) be a maximal compact subgroup and ⊂ 0 we consider K-invariant metrics. We assume h , the Lie algebra of Aut0(M,V ), satisfies the decomposition as in (2.5). We define the reductive properness as follows, Definition 2.2 (Reductive properness). Given a maximal compact subgroup K Aut (M,V ) ⊂ 0 such that (2.5) holds for a K-invariant metric, we call the X -energy is reductive-proper, K restricted on K , with respect to d ,G if the following conditions hold, H 1 8 WEIYONG HE

(1) X is bounded below on K. K 0 H (2) For a sequence φi , then d ,G(0, φi) implies that X (φi) . ∈HK 1 →∞ K →∞ Note that in the deﬁnition above, we only assume that X is bounded below on K , for K-invariant metrics. We shall need the following well-knownKfact [25, 38, 26], H Lemma 2.1. The -energy is invariant under the action of Aut (M) if and only if the Futaki K 0 invariant is zero. If the X -energy is bounded below, then it is invariant under the action of K G = Aut0(M,V ). In general, the X -energy, when restricted on K, is invariant under the action of G if (2.5) is assumed. K H

Proof. Suppose σ Aut (M). Let Y be a holomorphic vector field such that σt is one- ∈ 0 parameter subgroup generated by the flow of YR, with σ0 = id, σ1 = σ. We write with σ ω = ω + √ 1∂∂φ¯ (t). By definition of -energy, we have t∗ − K d dφ ωn dφ ωn (σt∗ω)= σt∗ t=0(Rω R) = t=0(Rω R) dtK − ZM dt | − n! − ZM dt | − n! The righthand side is a constant (independent of t) and it is indeed just the real part of the Futaki invariant [25] (hence a constant independent of ω). Now we consider the X -energy. We consider the group action by Aut (M,V ), which K 0 preserve V . For σ Aux (M,V ), let σt be one parameter subgroup generated by the flow of ∈ 0 YR. We know that σt∗ω in invariant with respect to JV . Hence X (σt∗ω) is well defined and real-valued. We compute, by definition of modified Mabuchi’s energy,K d dφ ωn (2.19) X (σt∗ω)= σt∗ t=0(Rω R θX ) dtK − ZM dt | − − n! We compute d ¯ σ∗ω t = LYR ω = √ 1∂∂Re(θY (ω)), dt t | =0 − where θY (ω) is the complex potential of Y with respect to ω. Hence we have d ωn ωn (2.20) X (σt∗ω)= Re(θY )(Rω R) + Re(θY )θX dtK − ZM − n! ZM n! The righthand side is independent of t. Hence if X is bounded from below over X , the K H righthand side has to be zero. This implies that X is invariant under the action of Aut (M,V ). K 0 In most general case, suppose we do not know X is bounded below a priori (σt∗ω might not be K-invariant in general). We consider K-invariantK metrics. By (2.5), we only need to consider YR Jham. We still have (2.20); note that the righthand side is independent of the choice of ω (this∈ conclusion does not require ω to be K-invariant) for any Y ham Jham. The first term is the real part of Futaki invariant, the second term is Futaki-Mabuchi∈ ⊕ bilinear form. Both are independent of the choice of the metric ω. By the definition of extremal vector field, the righthand side of (2.20) is always zero [26].

It might be more convenient to consider a maximal subgroup K Aut (M,V ) such that 0 ⊂ 0 its Lie algebra consists of holomorphic vector fields with nonempty zeros. Let G0 be the complexification of K0. Note that G0 is simply the reduced part of Aut0(M,V ). The Lie algebras satisfy g0 = k Jk (when an extremal metric exists, with extremal vector field V , 0 ⊕ 0 the Lie algebra corresponds to ham Jham). Using the pair (K0, G0), we can define the reduced properness: ⊕

Deﬁnition 2.3 (reduced properness). We say X is reduced-proper if the following conditions hold K

(1) X is bounded below on K0 . K H (2) X , when restricted on K0 , is proper with respect to d1,G0 . That is, for a sequence K 0 H of φi , then d ,G0 (0, φi) implies that X (φi) . ∈HK0 1 →∞ K →∞ The following is well-known [25, 38, 26],

Lemma 2.2. The X -energy is G invariant. K 0 ONCALABI’SEXTREMALMETRICSANDPROPERNESS 9

Proof. This is simply the definition of the extremal vector field, when a maximal compact group K0 specified, via the Futaki-Mabuchi bilinear form [26].

3. Extremal metrics and properness We prove Theorem 2 and Theorem 4 in this section, which we recall as follows,

Theorem 3.1. Let (M, [ω, J]) be a compact Kähler manifold with extremal vector field V . Then the following statements are equivalent (1) (M, [ω, J]) admits an extremal metric with extremal vector field V . (2) The X -energy is proper with respect to d ,G. K 1 (3) The X -energy, restricted on K, is reductive-proper with respect to d ,G. K H 1 (4) The X -energy, restricted on K0 , is reduced-proper with respect to d ,G0 K H 1 3.1. Chen-Cheng’s a priori estimates. We summarize Chen-Cheng’s a prior estimates re- garding csck type equations. Consider the following equation for φ , ∈H det(g ¯ + φ ¯) ij ij = eF (3.1) det(gi¯j) ∆φF = f + trφη, where f is a smooth function and η is a smooth real (1, 1) form.

Theorem 3.2 (Chen-Cheng, Theorem 3.1 [12]). There exists a uniformly bounded positive constant C0 1, depending only on the background geometry (M,ω), the upper bound of ≥ n ωφ n entropy log( n )ω , and max f , max η ω such that M ω φ | | | | R 1 (3.2) φ C0 C ,C− ω ωφ C ω. k∇ k ≤ 0 0 ≤ ≤ 0 Consider also the following more general equation for φ,

det(g ¯ + φ ¯) ij ij = eF (3.3) det(gi¯j) ∆φF = R + trφ(Ric β), − where β = β0 + √ 1∂∂f¯ 0. Assume β0 is a bounded (1, 1)-form and f is normalized such that sup f = 0, e f− Lp0 (M≥ ) for some p > 1 specified below. − ∈ 0 Theorem 3.3 (Chen-Cheng, Theorem 2.3 [13]). Assume β 0. Let φ be a smooth solution ≥ of (3.3). Suppose p0 kn for some positive constant kn depending only on n := dimCM (kn sufficiently large, say ≥10n2 + 100) . Then for any 1 p p 1, ≤ ≤ 0 − (3.4) F + f 1,2p + n +∆φ Lp C, k kW k k ≤ ωn φ n p0f n where C depend on an upper bound of entropy M log( ωn )ωφ, p0, and the bound of M e− ω , max R , max β ω and the background metric R(M,ω). The dependence is uniformR in p . | | | 0| 0 Remark 3.1. Technically, the arguments by Chen and Cheng are subtle. The key is to consider the scalar curvature type equation as two coupled elliptic equations on potential φ and log- volume form F . Their methods are combination of very skillful applications of maximum principle and extremely skillful integral methods on compact manifolds. The results and ideas using integral method on compact manifolds in [15] are actually used in a significant way in [11, 12, 13]. More strikingly, Chen and Cheng have obtained C0 estimates (and all higher order estimates) depending only on the entropy bound (and scalar curvature bound of course). As a comparison, the dependence on volume-ratio in this case is even weaker, than the C0 estimate obtained by Kolodziej [34] for the complex Monge-Ampere equations. This dependence down to the entropy and scalar curvature is absolutely crucial for geometric applications such as properness conjecture. 10 WEIYONG HE

3.2. Properness implies existence. In this section we prove the existence of an extremal metric given the properness of the modified -energy modulo Aut0(M,V ). we shall see that the proof can be modified slightly for reductive-propernessK and reduced properness. We consider the modified continuity path of Chen [10] for extremal metrics,

(3.5) t(Rφ R θX (φ)) (1 t)(trφω n) = 0 − − − − − where ω,ωφ are both T -invariant. The functional corresponding the continuity path (3.5) is denoted by

(3.6) K˜t = t X (φ) + (1 t)J(φ). K − 3.2.1. Openness. First we prove the openness of the modiﬁed continuity path (3.5). The openness when V = 0 follows from the results of [10, 31, 47]. We generalize their results to extremal case. Technically the following theorem is a generalization of Hashimoto’s result [31][Theorem 1.2] for V = 0, and its proof is a modiﬁcation of Hashimoto’s proof.

Theorem 3.4. Suppose we have two Kähler metrics ω and α such that Λωα = const. We assume ω, α are both T -invariant. Then there exists a constant r(ω, α) depending only on ω, α such that r r(ω, α), there exists φ X such that ωφ satisfies Rφ θX (φ) Λω (rα)= const. ≥ ∈H − − φ Proof. We call ω a α-twisted extremal metric if it satisfies the equation

R(ω) θX Λωα = const − − Denote S(ω)= R(ω) θX Λωα. We compute its linearization, given δω = √ 1∂∂ψ¯ , − − − (3.7) S(ψ)= ∗ ωψ + (∂S(ω), ∂ψ¯ )ω + (α, √ 1∂∂ψ¯ )ω + (∂Λωα, ∂ψ¯ )ω, L −DωD − 1,0 0,1 1,0 where ω : C (X) C (T M Ω ) is defined by ωψ = ∂¯( ψ), and is its D ∞ → ∞ ⊗ D ∇ Dω∗ formal adjoint and ∗ is called Lichnerowicz operator. The linearization of scalar curvature was first computedD inD Calabi’s paper [6] and was studied extensively by LeBrun-Simanca [35] when they considered deformation of extremal metrics. Our formula (3.7) is a straightforward modification of Hashimoto’s computation [31][Page 5]. Note that we have θX (φ)= θX + X(φ), for ωφ = ω + √ 1∂∂φ¯ , hence the extra term is given by δθX = X(ψ) = (∂θX , ∂ψ¯ )ω (θX is real for T -invariant− metrics). This together with Hashimoto’s computation we have (3.7). At an α-twisted extremal metric, we note that the linearized operator reads

(3.8) S(ψ)= ∗ ωψ + Fω,α, L −DωD where we define the operator, following [31][Section 2], Fω,α : C C by ∞ → ∞ (3.9) Fω,α(ψ) := (α, √ 1∂∂ψ¯ )ω + (∂Λωα, ∂ψ¯ )ω. − By [31][Lemma 2.2] we know that Fω,α is a complex self-adjoint operator and its kernel consists of constant functions. The strategy is, first we construct approximate solutions to rα for r> 0 sufficiently large, and then apply the inverse function theorem to get an actual solution. To construct approximation, we observe the following,

Proposition 3.1. Let ω, α be T -invariant K¨ahler metrics satisfying Λωα = const and let ρ(ω, V ) be the unique solution of the equation

n ∆ωρ = R(ω) R θX , ρω = 0. − − ZM √ 1 ¯ Let α1 = α + r− ∂∂ρ be Kähler for r > 0 sufficiently large, depending only on ω, α. Then ω is rα1-twisted extremal metric. Note that ρ and hence α1 are both T -invariant. Thus ω is an rα -twisted extremal metric for α [α] which differs α by order r 1. Next we 1 1 ∈ − want to improve this observation order by order, so that ωm [ω] is an rαm-twisted extremal m ∈ metric for αm [α] which differs α by order r− . We proceed as follows. Suppose Λωα = const. We write ∈ R(ω) θX rΛωα = const + (R(ω) R θX ). 1 − − −1 − Consider ω1 := ω + r− ∂∂φ¯ 1. We write θX (ω1)= θX + X(r− φ1). We compute, ¯ 1 (3.10) R(ω ) θX (ω ) rΛω1 α = const + (R(ω) R θX ) + (α, √ 1∂∂φ )ω + O(r− ), 1 − 1 − − − − 1 ONCALABI’SEXTREMALMETRICSANDPROPERNESS 11 where we have used the fact that X(φ ) is uniformly bounded by Proposition 2.1. Given | 1 | Λωα = const, we use [31][Lemma 3.2] to solve the linear elliptic equation of φ1 such that

(3.11) (R(ω) R θX ) + (α, √ 1∂∂φ¯ )ω = 0. − − − 1 The point is that the operator Fω,α in (3.9) is a second order linear elliptic operator which has zero kernel modulo constants. We emphasize two properties of the solution φ1. The ﬁrst is that φ1 is T -invariant, and the second is that we have uniform control on derivatives of φ1 in terms of ω, α by the elliptic equation (3.11). With this in mind we rewrite (3.10) as 1 (3.12) R(ω ) θX (ω ) rΛω1 α = const + r− f ,r, 1 − 1 − 1 1 where f1,r is a uniformly bounded smooth function. In particular we have ω1 = ω + O(r− ). We repeat the procedure (by induction) as follows. Suppose we have constructed φ1, , φm 1 and correspondingly for i = 1, ,m 1, · · · − · · · − 1 i ωi := ω + √ 1∂∂¯(r− φ + + r− φi) − 1 · · · such that for 1 i m 1, we have for a uniformly bounded smooth function fi,r (we can ≤n ≤ − assume M fi,rωi = 0), R i R(ωi) θX (ωi) rΛω α = const + r− fi,r. − − i m Next we construct φm and ωm := ωm 1 + r− φm as follows. We write − R(ωm) θX (ωm) rΛωm α =(R(ωm 1) θX (ωm 1) rΛωm−1 α) − − − − − − 1 m ¯ m + r − (α, √ 1∂∂φm)ω −1 + O(r− ) − m 1 m 1 m m =const + r − fm 1,r + r − (α, √ 1∂∂φ¯ m)ω + O(r− ), − − 1 where we have used the fact that ωm 1 = ω + O(r− ). We can then solve φm such that − (α, √ 1∂∂φ¯ m)ω + fm 1,r fm 1, r = 0, − − − − n where fm 1,r is the average of fm 1,r with respect to ω . The standard elliptic theory then − − gives a uniform control on φm. We summarize the discussions above as,

Lemma 3.1. Suppose ω, α are T -invariant and Λωα = const. Then for each m N, there ∈ exist φ , , φm C such that 1 · · · ∈ ∞ 1 m ωm = ω + √ 1∂∂¯(r− φ + + r− φm) − 1 · · · n such that for a function fm,r with M fm,rωm = 0 (which is uniformly bound in C∞ for all sufficiently large r), R m R(ωm) θX (ωm) rΛω α = const + r− fm,r. − − m n We can then solve the equation ∆ωm hm,r = fm,r such that M hm,rωm = 0. As noted above, 1 ωm = ω + O(r− ) is uniformly equivalent to ω for each m (independentR of r and m when r is sufficiently large). The standard elliptic theory then gives uniform control on hm,r. Denote m αm = α + r √ 1∂∂h¯ m,r. Then it satisfies the equation, − − (3.13) R(ωm) θX (ωm) rΛω αm = const. − − m m Hence αm α = O(r− ) and we have obtained rαm-twisted extremal metric ωm. We emphasize that the assumption− that ω, α are both T -invariant is necessary, which are used implicitly that all solutions φi are T -invariant, hence θX (ωi) are all real valued. Next we apply the inverse function theorem between Banach spaces to perturb rαm-twisted extremal metric ωm to get an rα-twisted extremal metric. The argument proceeds exactly the same as in [31][Section 3.2] with two modifications. We replace the twisted csck equation by the twisted extremal equation

R(ω) θX (ω) rΛωα = const, − − and hence by (3.7) and in particular (3.8), the linearized operator is exactly the same as in the twisted csck case (compare [31], (5)). We need to apply inverse function theorem in a T -invariant way, by considering functional spaces which are T -invariant. We briefly summarize k,2 the argument. Consider T -invariant Sobolev spaces W0,T for k sufficiently large, normalized 1,1 k,2 such that the average is zero with respect to ω, and ΩT be W real (1, 1)-forms on M 12 WEIYONG HE which are invariant with respect to T -action. Take the Banach space B := Ω1,1 W k+4,2, 1 T × 0,T ¯ 1,1 k,2 U := (η, φ) B1 ωm + √ 1∂∂φ > 0 . Take B2 := ΩT W0,T . We define the map, for constant{ r> 0,∈ | − } ×

Tr(η, φ) := (αm + η, R(ωm,φ) θX (ωm,φ) rΛω (αm + η)) − − m,φ with ωm,φ = ωm + √ 1∂∂φ¯ . We identify (αm,ωm) to be 0 B . We also write the operators − ∈ 1 Λm = Λω , m and Fm for corresponding operators defined using ωm, αm. (3.8) gives the m Dm∗ D linearized operator DTr at 0 B by (ωm is rαm-twisted) ∈ 1 1 0 η˜ DTr 0(˜η, φ˜)= | rΛm ∗ m + rFmφ˜ − −DmD k+4,2 k,2 Since the kernel of m + rFm : W W is zero, it follows that DTr : B B is Dm∗ D 0 → 0 |0 1 → 2 an invertible operator with the inverse P = Pr, ˜ 1 0 η˜ Pr(˜η, φ)= 1 1 r( ∗ m + rFm)− Λm ( ∗ m + rFm)− φ˜ −DmD −DmD We have the estimate Pr Cr for uniform constant C and r > 1 as in [31]. We compute k k ≤ Tr(0, 0) = (αm,R rc), where c is the topological constant (the average of Λω αm, depending − m only on [ω] and α). We need to find η, φ such that Tr(η, φ) = (α, R rc). Then the exact −m same application of inverse function theorem applies for α αm = O(r− ), m sufficiently large ([31][Theorem 3.4, Section 3.2]). − Similar to [31][Corollary 1.4], we have the following, Corollary 3.1. Suppose that ω is α-twisted extremal for two T -invariant Kähler metrics α, ω. Then if α˜ is a T -invariant metric such that α˜ α is sufficiently small in the C∞-norm, then there exists an α˜ twisted extremal metric in [ω]−which is T -invariant. Remark 3.2. Theorem 3.4 and Corollary 3.1 have straightforward generalizations to a K- invariant setting, if we assume that ω and α are both K-invariant, where K is a (maximal) compact subgroup of Aut0(M,V ). The only modification we need is to replace T by K. 3.2.2. Closedness. Theorem 3.4 and Corollary 3.1 imply that we can solve the equation (3.5) in an interval [0,t ) for some 0 < t 1. Now we show that t = 1 under the assumption 0 0 ≤ 0 that the modified -energy X is bounded below in X . Our argument is a modification of Chen-Cheng [13][SectionK 3].K Note that we can rewriteH the equation as ωn = eF ωn (3.14) φ ∆φF = (R (1 t)n/t + θX (φ)) + trφ(Ric(ω) (1 t)ω/t) − − − − − Given the estimates above, we have a direct consequence that (3.5) has a smooth solution for t [0, 1). ∈ Lemma 3.2. Suppose the modified -energy X is bounded below on X , then (3.5) has a smooth solution for t [0, 1). K K H ∈ Proof. Since X is bounded below, it follows that K K˜t C (1 t)d (0, φ) C ≥ 1 − 1 − for any t [0, 1). This depends on (2.15), ∈ 1 J(φ) I(φ), ≥ n + 1 and the estimate in [20][Proposition 5.5], 1 I(φ) C− d (0, φ) C, φ . ≥ 1 − ∈H0 0 Suppose φ(t) solves (3.5). By the convexity of the X and the convexity of K˜t (along ∈ H K the geodesics in X ), it follows that φ(t) minimizes K˜t. Hence we have K˜t < . It follows that for any t [0H, 1), ∞ ∈ 1 d (0, φ)

X Note that both J Ric(φ) and J (φ) are bounded by Cd1(0, φ) for some uniformly bounded constant C. It follows− that, for any t [0, 1), ∈ n ωφ n 1 (3.15) n!H(φ)= log n ωφ

As a direct consequence of properness with respect to d1,G and Lemma 3.3, this gives the desired distance bound modulo G.

Corollary 3.2. We have the bound on d1,G,

sup d1,G(0, φ˜i) < . i ∞ 0 Hence we can ﬁnd a σi G, φi such that ∈ ∈HX (3.17) ωφi = σi∗ωφ˜ , and sup d1(0, φi) < . i i ∞

With the uniform bound of distance d1(0, φi), we need to show that φi converges uniformly. We show that the entropy of φi is uniformly bounded in the next, Proposition 3.2. We have ωn φi n (3.18) H := sup n!H(φi) = sup log n ωφi < ∞ i i ZM ω ∞

Proof. By Lemma 2.1, X is invariant under the action of Aut (M,V ) since X is bounded K 0 K below over X . Hence sup X (φi) = sup X (φ˜i) < . Recall H i K i K ∞ X X (φ)= H(φ)+ J Ric(φ)+ J (φ) K − X Since J Ric , J are bounded when supi d1(0, φi) < . This implies that H < . | − | | | ∞ ∞ ∞ ¯ We need to consider the equation which φi satisﬁes. Denote ωi = σi∗ω = ω + √ 1∂∂hi, with 0 − the normalization sup hi = 0 (note that hi is in X , but not in in general). H HX 14 WEIYONG HE

Lemma 3.4. The potential φi satisﬁes the following equations

n Fi n ωφi = e ω (3.19) 1 ti 1 ti ∆φi Fi = (R − n + θi)+trφi (Ric(ω) − ωi), − ti − ti where θi = θX (φ˜i) σi = θX (φi). ◦ n ω ˜ ˜ φi Proof. We write Fi = log ωn . We have the following,

n n F˜i n F˜i σi n ω = σ∗(ω ), σ∗(e ω )= e ◦ ω φi i φ˜i i i ωn n F˜i σi n φi It follows that ω = e ω . Denote F = log n . Hence we have φi ◦ i i ω n ωi (3.20) Fi = F˜i σi + log ◦ ωn

Now we write the second equation (at t = ti) in (3.5) in its equivalent form, n 1 n n 1 ω − ω ω − φ˜i 1 ti φ˜i 1 ti φ˜i √ 1∂∂¯F˜i = (R − n θX (φ˜i)) + (Ric(ω) − ω) − ∧ (n 1)! − − ti − n! − ti ∧ (n 1)! − − Pulling back by σi, we obtain ωn 1 n ωn 1 φi− 1 ti ωφi 1 ti φi− √ 1∂∂¯(F˜i σi) = (R − n θX (φ˜i) σi) + (Ric(ωi) − ωi) − ◦ ∧ (n 1)! − − ti − ◦ n! − ti ∧ (n 1)! − − Combining (3.20), we obtain ωn 1 ωn ωn 1 φi− 1 ti φi 1 ti φi− (3.21) √ 1∂∂F¯ i = (R − n θX(φ˜i) σi) +(Ric(ω) − ωi) − ∧ (n 1)! − − ti − ◦ n! − ti ∧ (n 1)! − − For simplicity we denote

(3.22) θi := θX (φ˜i) σi = θ −1 (φi)= θX (φi), ◦ (σi)∗ X where we use that G-action preserves X. We can rewrite (3.21) as

1 ti 1 ti (3.23) ∆φi Fi = (R − n + θi)+trφi (Ric(ω) − ωi) − ti − ti This completes the proof. With the preparation above, we can then state the main theorem which gives an extremal metric with extremal vector ﬁeld V.

Theorem 3.5. When ti 1, ωφi converges smoothly to a smooth extremal metric ωφ with extremal vector ﬁeld V. → Proof. Note that the equation (3.19) diﬀers Chen’s continuity path for csck only by the term θi, which is uniformly bounded. Hence the argument proceeds almost identical to Chen-Cheng [13][Section 3]. Denote

1 ti 1 ti 1 ti 1 ti Ri = R − n + θi, βi = − ωi, (β0)i = − ω,fi = − hi. − ti ti ti ti Chen-Cheng [13][Lemma 3.11] prove that (using Tian’s α-invariant [44]), for any p> 1, there exists ǫp > 0 such that if ti (1 ǫp, 1), one has ∈ −

pfi n e− ω C, ZM ≤ for a constant C uniformly bounded (independent of p due to the choice of ǫp). Hence Chen- Cheng’s Theorem 3.3 applies to get the following estimate

Fi + fi 1,2p + n +∆φi Lp C , k kW k k ≤ 1 ONCALABI’SEXTREMALMETRICSANDPROPERNESS 15 where C1 = C1(p,ω,H ) (see (3.18)). By taking a subsequence, we can pass to the limit to get T -invariant functions∞ φ W 2,p, F W 1,p for any p< such that ∗ ∈ ∗ ∈ ∞ 1,α p φi φ in C and √ 1∂∂φ¯ i ∂∂φ¯ weakly in L ∗ ∗ → α − → p (3.24) Fi + fi F in C and (Fi + fi) F weakly in L → ∗ ∇ →∇ ∗ ωk ωk weakly in Lp, 1 k n. φi → φ∗ ≤ ≤ It follows that φ is a weak solution of extremal metric in the following sense, ∗ n F∗ n (3.25) ωφ∗ = e ω , and for any u C (M), we have ∈ ∞ n 1 n n 1 c ωφ∗− ωφ∗ ωφ∗− (3.26) d F du = u(R + θX (φ )) + uRic . − Z ∗ ∧ ∧ (n 1)! − Z ∗ n! ∧ (n 1)! M − M − n fi p Next we claim that M fi ω 0. Given the claim, it follows that e− 1 in L for any | | → → ′ R p fi n p< by a modiﬁed Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem since supi M e− ω < ∞ ′ ∞ (take p

1 such that 1 3,p (3.27) C0− ω ωφ∗ C0ω, φ W . ≤ ≤ ∗ ∈ By (3.19), we have

1 ti 1 ti ∆φi (Fi + fi) = (R − n + θi)+trφi (Ric(ω) − ω) − ti − ti For any smooth function u, we write n 1 n n 1 ω − ω ω − c φi 1 ti φi 1 ti φi (Fi + fi)d du = u(R − n + θX (φi)) + u(Ric − ω) . Z ∧ (n 1)! − Z − ti n! − ti ∧ (n 1)! M − M − α k Given the convergence of Fi + fi F in C , ωi converges weakly and φi converges to φ in Cα, we can then pass to the limit→ to get∗ ∗ n 1 n n 1 ω − ω ω − c φ∗ φi φ∗ (3.28) F d du = u(R + θX (φ )) + uRic . Z ∗ ∧ (n 1)! − Z ∗ n! ∧ (n 1)! M − M − The standard elliptic theory together with (3.27) implies that φ is a smooth extremal metric with extremal vector field V . ∗ By carefully checking the process above, the proof can be carried out in a K-invariant way with necessary modifications, for a maximal compact subgroup K of Aut0(M,V ). Note that we only assume X is bounded below on K, the K-invariant metrics. By assumption K H G = Aut0(M,V ) is the complexification of K. Now we assume reductive-properness and we show that there exists an extremal metric. We indicate modifications required in the above arguments to solve (3.5). We choose ω to be K-invariant and apply Theorem 3.4 and Corollary 3.1 in a K-invariant way (simply replacing T by K) to get solutions which are K-invariant 16 WEIYONG HE in an open interval [0,t ) for t 1. Since X is bounded below on K, then at any time 0 0 ≤ K H t [0, 1), for any φ K, we have, ∈ ∈H 1 t X (φ) + (1 t)J(φ) (1 t) I(φ) C K − ≥ − n + 1 − Lemma 3.2 applies that the continuity path (3.5) has a K-invariant solution for each t [0, 1) ∈ by the same argument. Now we consider t 1. Let φ˜i solve the equation (3.5) at ti 1. We establish the following, → → Lemma 3.5. We have the following, ˜ ˜ ˜ Kti (φi)= inf Kti (φ) inf X (φ),ti 1 φ K → K K → ∈H H (3.29) X (φ˜i) inf X (φ),ti 1 K → K K → H (1 ti)J(φ˜i) 0. − → Using the fact that X is bounded below over K, the same argument then applies, with K H ˜ inf X replaced by inf K . Applying reductive-properness assumption to the sequence φi, we H H get the distance bound sup d1,G(0, φ˜i) < . There exists σi G with σ∗ω ˜ = ωφ such that i ∞ ∈ i φi i sup d (0, φi) < . Note that φi and ωh = σ ω would not be K-invariant (only T -invariant) i 1 ∞ i i∗ in general since K is not a normal subgroup of Aur (M,V ). But X is invariant under the 0 K action of G, by Lemma 2.1. Hence Proposition 3.2 and Lemma 3.4 both hold, such that φi solves the equation (3.19), together with the uniform bounds supi d1(0, φi) < ,H < . By ∞ ∞ ∞ the same argument as in Theorem 3.5, we get a smooth extremal metric φ as the limit of φi ∗ (passing to subsequence). The proof for the pair (K0, G0) is identical. 3.3. Existence of an extremal metric implies properness modulo G. The main result of this section is to prove the following regularity result, which generalizes Chen-Cheng’s result [12][Theorem 5.1] to extremal case. 1 1 Theorem 3.6. Let φ X be a minimizer of X over . Then φ is smooth and it defines a smooth extremal metric.∗ ∈E K E ∗ Remark 3.3. It is a conjecture of Darvas-Rubinstein [20] that a minimizer of -energy in 1 is a smooth csck and it was proved by Chen-Cheng [12]. Earlier the author, togetherK withE Y. Zeng [32], proved partly Chen’s conjecture that a C1,1 minimizer of is a smooth csck and it extends to extremal case. K First we prove the following result, generalizing [12][Lemma 5.2]. 1 1 Lemma 3.6. Let φ X be a minimizer of X over . Then there exists a smooth extremal metric in [ω] with extremal∗ ∈E vector field V . K E Proof. We want to solve the equation (3.5) up to t = 1. By Lemma 3.2, the equation has a smooth solution at t [0, 1). Choose a sequence ti 1, and let φi be the solution at t = ti, ∈ → 1 with normalization I(φi) = 0. Note that φi minimizes K˜t over , similar to [12][Corollary], i EX replacing -energy by X . Hence it follows that K K ti X (φ ) + (1 t)J(φi) ti X (φi) + (1 t)J(φi) ti X (φ ) + (1 t)J(φ ) K ∗ − ≤ K − ≤ K ∗ − ∗ This implies J(φi) J(φ ). Now J is proper in the sense J(φ) δd1(0, φ) C, for φ 0. It follows that ≤ ∗ ≥ − ∈H 1 sup d1(0, φi) (C + J(φ )) < . i ≤ δ ∗ ∞ This in turn implies that, ωn φi n sup log n ωφi < i ZM ω ∞ It then follows from Theorem 3.2, that φi converges to a smooth function φ which defines a smooth extremal metric. ∞ One can proceed by generalizing the strong uniqueness theorem of csck as in [5] to extremal case. Here we follow the proof of [12][Theorem 5.2] to prove Theorem 3.6. ONCALABI’SEXTREMALMETRICSANDPROPERNESS 17

1 Proof. Let φ be a minimizer of X over X . By Lemma 3.7 below, we can ﬁnd a sequence ∗ K E φi X such that d1(φi, φ ) 0 and also the entropy converges, H(φi) H(φ ). Since ∈ HX ∗ → → ∗ J Ric, J are all d1 continuous, it follows that X (φi) X (φ ). We consider the following continuity− path, for each i, K → K ∗

(3.30) t(Rφ θX (φ) R) (1 t)(trφωφ n) = 0. − − − − i −

The openness follows from Theorem 3.4 and Corollary 3.1 by taking α = ωφi . Denote the J I functionals i, i, Ji,Ii to be the corresponding functionals with the base Kähler form as ωφi . By definition we have J J i(φ)= (ωφi ,ωφ),Ii(φ)= I(ωφi ,ωφ), Ji(φ)= J(ωφi ,ωφ) The corresponding functional for the path (3.30) is i K˜ := t X + (1 t)Ji. t K − Since for each i, Ji is proper, hence arguing exactly as in Lemma 3.2, we can get a unique smooth t t t ˜ i solution φi to the equation (3.30), for t [0, 1) with Iω(φi) = 0. Note that φi minimizes Kt 1 ∈ over X . It follows that for any φ H ∈EX t t (3.31) t X (φ ) + (1 ti)Ji(φ ) t X (φ) + (1 t)Ji(φ) K i − i ≤ K − Taking φ = φi in (3.31) (noting that φi minimizes Ji(φ)), we have t t (3.32) 0 = Ji(φi) Ji(φ ), and hence X (φ ) X (φi) ≤ i K i ≤ K Taking φ = φ in (3.31) (noting that φ minimizes X ), we have ∗ ∗ K t Ji(φi) Ji(φ ). ≤ ∗ In other words, we have t (3.33) 0 = Ji(φi) Ji(φi) Ji(φ ). ≤ ≤ ∗ Hence we have, by the result of T. Darvas (see Theorem 2.2), 1 Ji(φ ) = (Ii Ji)(φ ) Ii(φ ) Cd1(φi, φ ) 0. ∗ − ∗ ≤ n + 1 ∗ ≤ ∗ → Note that we have, t t 1 t Ji(φ ) = (Ii Ji)(φ ) Ii(φ ) i − i ≥ n + 1 i t Hence it follows that Ii(φ ) 0 when i , uniform in t. By [3][Theorem 1.8], we have i → →∞ t t Iω(φ ) Cn(Iω(φi)+ Ii(φ )) C i ≤ i ≤ This gives the distance bound (see [20][Proposition 5]), t t d (0, φ ) CIω(φ )+ C. 1 i ≤ i Together with the X -energy bound (3.32), this gives the uniform upper bound of the entropy t K H(φi), uniformly in i and t (0, 1). By Chen-Cheng’s key estimate Theorem 3.2, we conclude t ∈ 0 that φ converges to a smooth ui when t 1, such that ui solves the equation i → ∈HX Ru R θX (ui) = 0. i − − In other words, ui defines an extremal metric for each i and we have Ii(ui) 0 when i . → →∞ Note that d1(0, ui) is also uniformly bounded, this implies that by passing to a subsequence, if 0 necessary ui converges to a smooth extremal potential u . It follows that ∈HX I(ωu,ωφ∗ ) C (Ii(ui)+ I(ωφ ,ωφ∗ )) 0. ≤ i → This implies that u differs by φ by a constant (see [12][Lemma 5.7] for example). ∗ We need an approximation in d1 with convergent entropy in a T -invariant way, where T is the compact subtorus generated by JV . 1 Lemma 3.7. Given u , there exists uk X such that d1(u, uk) 0 and Hω(uk) X n ∈ E ∈ H 1 ωu n → → Hω(u), where the entropy is defined to be Hω(u)= n! M log( ωn )ω . R 18 WEIYONG HE

Proof. Our argument is a modiﬁcation of [4][Lemma 3.1]. We can suppose H(u) < . Other- ∞ wise any uk X with d1(uk, u) 0 satisﬁes the requirement, since Fatou’s lemma implies n ∈ H → ωu that H is lower semi-continuous with respect to d1 topology. Let h = ωn 0. First we denote 1 1 1 ≥ hk = h for k− h k, and hk = k for h > k and hk = k− for h < k− . Since h is T -invariant, ≤ ≤ 1 so is hk. Clearly hk is a positive bounded function and hk h in L and → n n hk log hkω h log hω . ZM → ZM ˜ ˜ We approximate hk by a smooth function hk which is bounded for each k such that hk hk L1 < 1 p | − | k− (the approximation can be taken in any L norm for any p < since hk is uniformly bounded for each k) and ∞

n n 1 (3.34) hk log hkω h˜k log h˜kω < k− . Z − Z M M

We need to choose h˜k such that it is T -invariant. Since hk and ω are both T -invariant, hence for any σ T , h˜k σ is also an approximation of hk which satisfies (3.34) in particular. Taking average with∈ respect◦ to T -action, that gives a T -invariant approximation, T ˜ hk = σ∗(hk)dµσ ZT where µ is a T -invariant measure (a Haar measure) on T with µ(T ) = 1. Now we solve the Calabi-Yau equation hT ωn ωn = k vk T n M hk ω By the uniqueness (modulo constant) of the solutionR we know that vk X . By [4][Theorem ∈H 2.8] we have h˜ X such that d1(vk, h) 0 (after passing to a subsequence). By [19][Theorem ∈Hn n → 5(i)] we have ωh = ωu . The uniqueness [30] then implies that h = u modulo a constant. Hence we can suppose that d (vk, u) 0 with the desired entropy approximation. 1 → Lemma 3.7 has an obvious generalization, for any connected compact subgroup P of Aut0(M), we can have a smooth P -invariant approximation of 1 with convergent entropy. EP 1 Corollary 3.3. Given u P , there exists uk P such that d1(u, uk) 0 and Hω(uk) n ∈ E ∈ H1 ωu n → → Hω(u), where the entropy is defined to be Hω(u)= n! M log( ωn )ω . As a direct application, we have the following, R Theorem 3.7. Suppose (M, [ω], J) admits an extremal Kähler metric with extremal vector field V . Then the modified X energy is d1,G proper, as defined in Definition 2.1. In particular we get two constants C,DK > 0 such that

X (φ) Cd ,G(0, φ) D. K ≥ 1 − 1 Proof. We argue that X is d1,G proper in X . We choose the base metric ω to be an extremal K E 1 metric. Suppose otherwise, there exists φi such that X (φi) C, but d (0,σ[φi]) ∈E0,X K ≤ 1 →∞ for any σ G. Connecting 0 and φi by a d geodesic with unit speed (which is not unique in ∈ 1 general [19]). Such a geodesic exists by Darvas’s result [19]. Consider the point ui along the geodesic such that d (0, ui) = 1. The convexity of X along the d geodesic [4] implies that 1 K 1 X (ui) X (φi) (3.35) K K 0. d1(0, ui) ≤ d1(0, φi) →

Given X (ui) 0 and d (0, ui) = 1, the compactness result (which relies on results of [18, 19] K → 1 and [3]) implies that ui converges to u in d1-topology (by subsequence), and X (u) = 0 (lower semicontinuity). It follows that u is a smooth extremal metric with extremalK vector ﬁeld by Theorem 3.6. 1 For φ˜i with φ˜i = σ[φi] for some σ G, such that d (0, φ˜i) . Since X is ∈ E0,X ∈ 1 → ∞ K G-invariant, X (φ˜i) C. The discussion above then applies to φ˜i. Connecting 0 and φ˜i by the K ≤ geodesic withu ˜i = σ[ui], whereu ˜i is the point along the geodesic such that d1(0, u˜i) = 1. By the discussion above, we get that d (0, u˜)=1andu ˜ = σ[u] such that X (˜u) = 0. Since this 1 K ONCALABI’SEXTREMALMETRICSANDPROPERNESS 19 discussion holds for any σ G, this implies that d1,G(0, u) = 1. This contradicts the fact that G acts transitively on extremal∈ metrics with the extremal vector ﬁeld V [2, 16]. By checking X (φi) the proof more carefully, when d(x, φi) , if we have K 0, then (3.35) still applies → ∞ d1(0,φi) → to get that X (u) = 0, and it leads to contradiction. Hence, we can get constants C,D > 0 such that, K X (φ) Cd ,G(0, φ) D. K ≥ 1 −

Remark 3.4. Reductive properness and reduced properness are weaker than G-properness a priori. With the properness, one should be able to prove relative K-polystability if an extremal metric exists, in view of [5].

References [1] Aubin, T., Equations du type Monge-Ampère sur les vari’et’es kähl’eriennes compactes. Bull. Sci. Math. (2) 102 (1978), no. 1, 63-95. [2] Berman, Robert J.; Berndtsson, Bo, Convexity of the K-energy on the space of Kähler metrics and uniqueness of extremal metrics. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 30 (2017), no. 4, 1165-1196. [3] Berman, R.; Boucksom, S; Eyssidieux, P; Guedj, V; Zeriahi, A., Kähler-Einstein metrics and the Kähler-Ricci flow on log Fano varieties, arXiv:1111.7158. [4] Berman, Robert J.; Darvas, Tamás; Lu, Chinh H., Convexity of the extended K-energy and the large time behavior of the weak Calabi flow. Geom. Topol. 21 (2017), no. 5, 2945-2988. [5] Berman, R. J., Darvas, T., & Lu, C. H., Regularity of weak minimizers of the K-energy and applications to properness and K-stability. arXiv:1602.03114. [6] Calabi, E., Extremal Kähler metrics. In Seminar on Differential Geometry(1982) Vol.102, p. 259. Princeton University Press. [7] Calabi, E., Extremal Kähler metrics II. In Differential geometry and complex analysis(1985), pp. 95-114. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. [8] Chen, X., On the lower bound of the Mabuchi energy and its application. Int. Math. Res. Not. 12(2000), 607-623. [9] Chen, X., The space of Kähler metrics. J. Differential Geom. 56(2)(2000), 189-234. [10] Chen, X., On the existence of constant scalar curvature Kähler metric: a new perspective. Ann. Math. Québec(2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40316-017-0086-x [11] Chen, X.; Cheng, J., On the constant scalar curvature Kähler metrics, apriori estimates, arXiv:1712.06697 [12] Chen, X.; Cheng, J., On the constant scalar curvature Kähler metrics, existence results, arXiv:1801.00656 [13] Chen, X.; Cheng, J., On the constant scalar curvature Kähler metrics, general automorphism group, arXiv:1801.05907 . [14] Chen, X.;Darvas, T.; He, W., Compactness of Kähler metrics with bounds on Ricci curvature and I functional, arXiv:1712.05095 [15] Chen, Xiuxiong; He, Weiyong, The complex Monge-Ampère equation on compact Kähler manifolds. Math. Ann. 354 (2012), no. 4, 1583-1600. [16] Chen, X., Li, L., P˘aun, M., Approximation of weak geodesics and subharmonicity of Mabuchi energy. arxiv:1409.7896. [17] Chen, X.; P˘aun, M; Zeng, Y. , On deformation of extremal metrics, arXiv:1506.01290. [18] Darvas, T., The Mabuchi completion of the space of Kähler potentials. Amer. J. Math. 139 (2017), no. 5, 1275-1313. [19] Darvas, T., The Mabuchi geometry of finite energy classes. Adv. Math. 285 (2015), 182?219. [20] Darvas, Tamás; Rubinstein, Yanir A. Tian’s properness conjectures and Finsler geometry of the space of Khler¨ metrics. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 30 (2017), no. 2, 347-387. [21] Donaldson, S. K. Symmetric spaces, Kähler geometry and reduced dynamics. Northern California Symplec- tic Geometry Seminar, 13?33, Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2, 196, Adv. Math. Sci., 45, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1999. [22] Donaldson, S. K. Scalar curvature and stability of toric varieties. J. Differential Geom. 62 (2002), no. 2, 289-349. [23] Donaldson, S. K. Extremal metrics on toric surfaces: a continuity method. J. Differential Geom. 79 (2008), no. 3, 389-432. [24] Donaldson, S. K. Constant scalar curvature metrics on toric surfaces. Geom. Funct. Anal. 19 (2009), no. 1, 83-136. [25] Futaki, A., An obstruction to the existence of Einstein Kähler metrics. Invent. Math. 73 (1983), no. 3, 437-443. [26] Futaki, A.,; Mabuchi, T., Bilinear forms and extremal Kähler vector fields associated with Kähler classes. Math. Ann. 301(1)(1995), 199-210. [27] Gauduchon, P., Calabi’s extremal Kähler metrics: An elementary introduction, germanio.math.unifi.it/wp- content/uploads/2015/03/dercalabi.pdf 20 WEIYONG HE

[28] Guan, D., On modified Mabuchi functional and Mabuchi moduli space of Kähler metrics on toric bundles, Math. Res. Letters 6 (1999), 547-555. [29] Guedj, V., The metric completion of the Riemannian space of Kähler metrics, arXiv:1401.7857. [30] Guedj, V., Zeriahi, A., The weighted Monge-Amp`re energy of quasiplurisubharmonic functions. J. Funct. Anal. 250(2) (2007), 442-482. [31] Hashimoto, Y., Existence of twisted constant scalar curvature Kähler metrics with a large twist. Preprint, 2015, arXiv:1508.00513. [32] He, Weiyong; Zeng, Yu; Constant scalar curvature equation and the regularity of its weak solution, arXiv:1705.01236. [33] Hisamoto, T. Stability and coercivity for toric polarizations, arXiv:1610.07998. [34] Kolodziej, S., The complex Monge-Ampère equation and pluripotential theory. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 178 (2005), no. 840, x+64 pp. [35] LeBrun, C.; Simanca, S. R., Extremal Kähler metrics and complex deformation theory. Geom. Funct. Anal. 4 (1994), no. 3, 298-336. [36] Li, Haozhao; Shi, Yalong, A criterion for the properness of the K-energy in a general Kähler class (II). Commun. Contemp. Math. 18 (2016), no. 6, 1550071, 15 pp. [37] Lichnerowicz, André, Transformation analytiques dùne variétékählérienne. compacte. (French) Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math. Phys. R. P. Roumaine (N.S.) 2 (50) 1958 165-174. [38] Mabuchi, T., K-energy maps integrating Futaki invariants. Tohoku Math. J. (2) 38(4)(1986), 575-593. [39] Mabuchi, T., Some symplectic geometry on compact Kähler manifolds. I, Osaks J. Math. 24 (1987), no. 2, 227-252. [40] Matsushima, Yozˇo, Sur la structure du groupe dhoméomorphismes` analytiques dùne certaine variété kählérienne. (French) Nagoya Math. J. 11 1957 145-150. [41] Phong, D. H.; Sturm, Jacob Lectures on stability and constant scalar curvature. Handbook of geometric analysis, No. 3, 357?436, Adv. Lect. Math. (ALM), 14, Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2010. [42] Simanca, S., A K-energy characterization of extremal Kähler metrics, Proc. Amer. math. Soc. 128, no 5 (2000), 1531-1535. [43] Tian, Gang The K-energy on hypersurfaces and stability. Comm. Anal. Geom. 2 (1994), no. 2, 239-265. [44] Tian, G., Kähler-Einstein metrics with positive scalar curvature. Invent. Math. 130 (1997), no. 1, 1-37. [45] Tian, G.,Canonical Metrics in Kähler Geometry. Birkhäuser, 2000. [46] Yau, S. T., On the ricci curvature of a compact kähler manifold and the complex monge-ampère equation, I. Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 31(3)(1978), 339-411. [47] Zeng, Y., Deformations from a given Kähler metric to a twisted cscK metric. arxiv:1507.06287. [48] Zhou, Bin; Zhu, Xiaohua, Minimizing weak solutions for Calabi’s extremal metrics on toric manifolds. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 32 (2008), no. 2, 191-217. [49] Zhou, Bin; Zhu, Xiaohua, Relative K-stability and modified K-energy on toric manifolds. Adv. Math. 219 (2008), no. 4, 1327-1362. [50] Zhu, Xiaohua, Kähler-Ricci soliton typed equations on compact complex manifolds with c1(M) > 0. J. Geom. Anal. 10 (2000), no. 4, 759-774.

Department of Mathematics, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403. E-mail address: [email protected]