THE ZARISKI-LIPMAN CONJECTURE FOR LOG CANONICAL SPACES
STÉPHANE DRUEL

arXiv:1301.5910v1 [math.AG] 24 Jan 2013

Abstract. In this paper we prove the Zariski-Lipman conjecture for log canonical spaces.

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Preliminaries
3. Canonical desingularizations, and the Zariski-Lipman conjecture for klt spaces
4. The Camacho-Sad formula
5. Proof of Theorem 1.1
References

1
2
3
4
7
8

1. Introduction
The Zariski-Lipman conjecture asserts that a complex variety X with a locally free tangent sheaf TX is necessarily smooth ([Lip65]). The conjecture has been shown in special cases; for hypersurfaces or homogeneous
complete intersections ([Hoc75, SS72]), for local complete intersections ([Käl11]), for isolated singularities
in higher-dimensional varieties [vSS85, Sect. 1.6], and more generally, for varieties whose singular locus has
codimension at least 3 [Fle88].
The Minimal Model Program was initiated in the early eighties as an attempt to extend the birational
classification of surfaces to higher dimensions. It became clear that singularities are unavoidable in the
birational classification of higher dimensional complex projective varieties; this led to the development of a
powerful theory of singularities of pairs (see Definition 3.4 for basic notions, such as klt and log canonical
singularities). The class of log canonical singularities is the largest class of singularities where the conjectures
of the Minimal Model Program are expected to hold.
The Zariski-Lipman conjecture has been shown for klt spaces in [GKKP11] (see also [AD11, Corollary
5.7]). In this paper we prove the conjecture for log canonical spaces. Notice that log canonical spaces in
general have singularities in codimension 2.
Theorem 1.1 (Zariski-Lipman conjecture for log canonical spaces). Let X be a log canonical space such
that the tangent sheaf TX is locally free. Then X is smooth.
We remark that the results hold as well for singularities of complex analytic spaces, and algebraic varieties
defined over a field of characteristic zero.
The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we study entire solutions of a particular system of
polynomial equations. In Section 3 we review basic definitions of singularities of pairs, and the notion of
canonical desingularization. In section 4 we recall the Camacho-Sad formula, and provide applications to
surfaces with trivial logarithmic tangent sheaf (see Proposition 4.8). The proof of Theorem 1.1 occupies
section 5.
Notation and conventions. Throughout this paper, we work over the field of complex numbers. Varieties
are always assumed to be irreducible and reduced. We denote by Sing(X) the singular locus of a variety X.
If X is a variety, we denote by TX the tangent sheaf of X.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 14B05, 32B05.
The author was partially supported by the project CLASS of Agence nationale de la recherche, under agreement ANR-10JCJC-0111.
1

2

STÉPHANE DRUEL

2. Preliminaries
Let r be a positive integer, and let e1 , . . . , er be complex numbers. We define the rational function Φe1 ,...,er
by the formula
1
Φe1 ,...,er (x) =
1
er −
1
er−1 −
1
··· −
1
e2 −
.
e1 − x
Notice that
1
.
(2.1)
Φe1 ,...,er (x) =
er − Φe1 ,...,er−1 (x)
Write
Φe1 ,...,er (x) =

ar (e1 , . . . , er )x + br (e1 , . . . , er )
cr (e1 , . . . , er )x + dr (e1 , . . . , er )

where ar , br , cr , dr ∈ C[z1 , . . . , zr ].
Suppose that r > 2. Then, by (2.1), we have

ar (z1 , . . . , zr ) = cr−1 (z1 , . . . , zr−1 )



br (z1 , . . . , zr ) = dr−1 (z1 , . . . , zr−1 )
(2.2)
c

r (z1 , . . . , zr ) = zr cr−1 (z1 , . . . , zr−1 ) − ar−1 (z1 , . . . , zr−1 )


dr (z1 , . . . , zr ) = zr dr−1 (z1 , . . . , zr−1 ) − br−1 (z1 , . . . , zr−1 ),


a1 (z1 ) = 0
a2 (z1 , z2 ) = −1






b1 (z1 ) = 1
b2 (z1 , z2 ) = z1
(2.3)
and
c1 (z1 ) = −1
c2 (z1 , z2 ) = −z2






d2 (z1 , z2 ) = z2 z1 − 1.
d1 (z1 ) = z1
Thus, for any r > 3, we obtain

 br (z1 , . . . , zr ) =
b1 (z1 ) =
(2.4)

b2 (z1 , z2 ) =

zr−1 br−1 (z1 , . . . , zr−1 ) − br−2 (z1 , . . . , zr−2 )
1
z1 .

Note that br ∈ C[z1 , . . . , zr−1 ].

We denote by Sr the symmetric group on r letters. The proof of Theorem 5.2 makes use of the following
elementary result.
Lemma 2.5. Let r be a positive integer, and let e1 , . . . , er be integers. Suppose that for any s ∈ Sr
Φes(1) ,...,es(r) (x) = x as rational functions. Then e1 = · · · = er , and e1 ∈ {−1, 0, 1}.
Proof. Notice that Φe1 ,...,er (x) = x (as rational functions) if and only if ar (e1 , . . . , er ) = dr (e1 , . . . , er ),
br (e1 , . . . , er ) = 0, and cr (e1 , . . . , er ) = 0. Note also that we must have r > 2.
If r = 2, then b2 (e1 , e2 ) = e1 = 0, and c2 (e1 , e2 ) = −e2 = 0. Thus e1 = e2 = 0.
Suppose that r > 3. Then
1
er −

= Φe1 ,...,er (x) = x,

1
er−1 − Φe1 ,...,er−2 (x)

and hence

(1 − er−1 er )x + er−1
.
1 − er x
Now, by replacing (e1 , . . . , er−2 , er−1 , er ) with (e1 , . . . , er−2 , er , er−1 ), we obtain
Φe1 ,...,er−2 (x) =

Φe1 ,...,er−2 (x) =

(1 − er−1 er )x + er
1 − er−1 x

THE ZARISKI-LIPMAN CONJECTURE FOR LOG CANONICAL SPACES

3

This yields er−1 = er . This easily implies that e1 = · · · = er .
Suppose that r = 3. Then b3 (e1 , e2 , e3 ) = e1 e2 − 1 = e21 − 1 = 0. Therefore, either e1 = e2 = e3 = 1, or
e1 = e2 = e3 = −1.
Suppose that r > 4. We assume from now on that e1 6= 0. Hence ei 6= 0 for all i ∈ {1, . . . , r}.
Let 2 6 k 6 r be an integer such that bk (e1 , . . . , ek ) = 0, and bk−1 (e1 , . . . , ek−1 ) 6= 0 (recall that
b1 (z1 ) = 1).
If k = 2, then e1 = 0, yielding a contradiction. Thus k > 3, and by (2.4), we must have
ek−1 bk−1 (e1 , . . . , ek−1 ) = bk−2 (e1 , . . . , ek−2 ).
Thus ek−1 divides bk−2 (e1 , . . . , ek−2 ), and since e1 = · · · = ek−2 , ek−1 divides bk−2 (0, . . . , 0). On the other
hand, bk−2 (0, . . . , 0) ∈ {−1, 0, 1} by (2.4) again. Thus ek ∈ {−1, 0, 1}, completing the proof of Lemma
2.5.

Remark 2.6. Φ0,...,0 (x) = x if and only if r ≡ 0 (mod 2), Φ1,...,1 (x) = x if and only if r ≡ 0 (mod 3), and
Φ−1,...,−1 (x) = x if and only if r ≡ 0 (mod 3).
3. Canonical desingularizations, and the Zariski-Lipman conjecture for klt spaces
3.1 (Logarithmic tangent sheaf). Let Y be a nonsingular variety of dimension n > 1, and ∆ ⊂ Y a divisor
with simple normal crossings. That is, ∆ is an effective divisor and its local equation at an arbitrary point
y ∈ Y decomposes in the local ring Oy into a product y1 · · · yk , where y1 , . . . , yk form part of a regular system
of parameters (y1 , . . . , yn ) of Oy . Let
TY (− log ∆) ⊆ TY = DerC (OY )
be the subsheaf consisting of those derivations that preserve the ideal sheaf OY (−∆). One easily checks that
the logarithmic tangent sheaf TY (− log ∆) is a locally free sheaf of Lie subalgebras of TY , having the same
restriction to Y \ ∆, and hence the same rank n.
If ∆ is defined at y by the equation y1 · · · yk = 0 as above, then a local basis of TY (− log ∆) (after
localization at y) consists of
y1 ∂1 , . . . , yk ∂k , ∂k+1 , . . . , ∂n ,
where (∂1 , . . . , ∂n ) is the local basis of TY dual to the local basis (dy1 , . . . , dyn ) of Ω1Y .
A local computation shows that TY (− log ∆) can be identified with the subsheaf of TY containing those
vector fields that are tangent to ∆ at smooth points of ∆.
The dual of TY (− log ∆) is the sheaf Ω1Y (log ∆) of logarithmic differential 1-forms, that is, of rational
1-forms α on Y such that α and dα have at most simple poles along ∆.
The top exterior power ∧n TY (− log ∆) is the invertible sheaf OY (−KY −∆), where KY denotes a canonical
divisor.
We will need the following observation.
Lemma 3.2. Let Y be a smooth variety of dimension at least 2, and ∆ ⊂ Y a divisor with simple normal
crossings. If H ( Y is a smooth hypersurface such that ∆ ∩ H is smooth of pure codimension 2 in X, then
there is an exact sequence
∗
0 → NH/Y
→ Ω1Y (log ∆)|H → Ω1H (log ∆|H ) → 0.
∗
Proof. Consider the composite map α : NH/Y
→ Ω1Y |H → Ω1Y (log ∆)|H , and the morphism β : Ω1Y (log ∆)|H →
1
ΩH (log ∆|H ) induced by the restriction map. A local computation shows that α and β yield an exact sequence
as claimed.


3.3 (Singularities of pairs). We recall some definitions of singularities of pairs, developed in the context of
the Minimal Model Program.
P
Definition 3.4 (See [KM98, section 2.3]). Let X be a normal variety, and B = ai Bi an effective Q-divisor
on X, i.e., B is a nonnegative Q-linear combination of distinct prime Weil divisors Bi ’s on X. Suppose that
KX + B is Q-Cartier, i.e., some nonzero multiple of it is a Cartier divisor.
Let π : Y → X be a log resolution of the pair (X, B). This means that Y is a smooth variety, π is a
birational projective morphism whose exceptional set Exc(π) is of pure codimension one, and the divisor

4

STÉPHANE DRUEL

Ei + π∗−1 B has simple normal crossings, where the Ei ’s are the irreducible components of Exc(π). There
are uniquely defined rational numbers a(Ei , X, B)’s such that
X
a(Ei , X, B)Ei .
KY + π∗−1 B = π ∗ (KX + B) +
P

Ei

The a(Ei , X, B)’s do not depend on the log resolution π, but only on the valuations associated to the Ei ’s.
Let
discrep(X, B) = inf {a(E, X, B)}
E

where E runs through all the prime exceptional divisors of all projective birational morphisms. Then, either
discrep(X, B) = −∞, or −1 6 discrep(X, B) 6 1. If X is smooth, then discrep(X, 0) = 1.
We say that (X, B) is log terminal (or klt ) if all ai < 1, and, for some log resolution π : Y → X of (X, B),
a(Ei , X, B) > −1 for every π-exceptional prime divisor Ei . We say that (X, B) is log canonical if all ai 6 1,
and, for some log resolution π : Y → X of (X, B), a(Ei , X, B) > −1 for every π-exceptional prime divisor
Ei . If these conditions hold for some log resolution of (X, B), then they hold for every log resolution of
(X, B). Moreover, (X, B) is log canonical (respectively, klt) if and only if discrep(X, B) > −1 (respectively,
discrep(X, B) > −1 and all ai < 1).
We say that X is klt (respectively log canonical) if so is (X, 0).
3.5 (Canonical desingularization). In the proofs of Theorems 1.1 and 3.8, we will consider a suitable resolution of singularities, whose existence is guaranteed by the following theorem.
Theorem 3.6 ([Kol07, Theorems 3.35, and 3.45] and [GKK10, Corollary 4.7]). Let X be a normal variety.
Then there exists a resolution of singularities π : Y → X such that
(1) π is an isomorphism over X \ Sing(X), and
(2) π∗ TY (− log ∆) ≃ TX where ∆ is the largest reduced divisor contained in π −1 (Sing(X).
Notice that Supp(∆) = Exc(π). In particular, ∆ has simple normal crossings. We call a resolution π as
in Theorem 3.6 a canonical desingularization of X.
3.7 (Zariski-Lipman conjecture for klt spaces). Recall from [GKKP11] that the Zariski-Lipman conjecture
holds for klt spaces (see also [AD11, Corollary 5.7] for related results). We reproduce the proof from [AD11,
Corollary 5.7] for the reader’s convenience.
Theorem 3.8 ([GKKP11]). Let X be a klt space such that the tangent sheaf TX is locally free. Then X is
smooth.
Proof. We assume to the contrary that Sing(X) 6= ∅. Let π : Y → X be a canonical desingularization of X,
and let ∆ be the largest reduced divisor contained in π −1 (Sing(X)). Note that ∆ 6= 0 since Sing(X) 6= ∅.
Consider the morphism of vector bundles
π ∗ TX ≃ π ∗ (π∗ TY (− log ∆)) → TY (− log ∆),
where π ∗ (π∗ TY (− log ∆)) → TY (− log ∆) is the evaluation map. It induces an injective map of sheaves
π ∗ OX (−KX ) ≃ π ∗ det(TX ) ֒→ det(TY (− log ∆)) ≃ OY (−KY − ∆).
This implies that a(∆i , X) 6 −1 for any irreducible component ∆i of ∆, yielding a contradiction and
completing the proof Theorem 3.8.

Remark 3.9. We have the following reformulation of Theorem 3.8. Let X be a variety such that the tangent
sheaf TX is locally free. If X is not smooth, then discrep(X) ∈ {−∞, −1}.
4. The Camacho-Sad formula
4.1 (Foliations). A (singular) foliation on a smooth complexe analytic surface S is a locally free subsheaf
L ( TS of rank 1 such that the corresponding twisted vector field ~v ∈ H 0 (X, TS ⊗L ⊗−1 ) has isolated zeroes.
Its singular locus Sing(L ) is the zero locus of ~v . Considering the natural perfect pairing Ω1S ⊗ Ω1S → ωS , we
see that L ( TS gives rise to a twisted 1-form with isolated zeroes ω ∈ H 0 (X, Ω1S ⊗ M ) with M = ωS ⊗ L .
Conversely, given a twisted 1-form ω ∈ H 0 (X, Ω1S ⊗ M ) with isolated zeroes, we define a foliation as the
kernel of the morphism TS → L given by the contraction with ω.

THE ZARISKI-LIPMAN CONJECTURE FOR LOG CANONICAL SPACES

5

4.2 (Camacho-Sad formula). Let C ⊂ S be a compact L -invariant curve, and let p ∈ C ∩ Sing(L ). Let
ω be a local 1-form defining L in a neighborhood of p, and let f be a local equation of C at p. Then
there exist nonzero local functions g and h, and a local 1-form η such that f and h are relatively prime and
gω = hdf + f η (see [Suw95, Lemma 1.1]). Following [Suw95], we set
CS(L , C, p) = −Resp

1
η|C .
h

The right hand side depends only on L and C.
Example 4.3. Let (x, y) be local coordinates at p. Suppose that L is given by the local 1-form ω =
λx(1 + o(1))dy − µy(1 + o(1))dx with µ 6= 0. Set p = (0, 0), and let C be the invariant curve defined by
x = 0. Then CS(L , C, p) = µλ .
We can now state the Camacho-Sad formula (see [Suw95, Theorem 2.1], see also [CS82]).
Theorem 4.4 (Camacho-Sad formula). Let L be a foliation on a smooth complex analytic surface S, and
let C ⊂ S be a compact L -invariant curve. Then
X
CS(L , C, p).
C2 =
p∈C∩Sing(L )

4.5. Here we give some applications of the Camacho-Sad formula. The following two are immediate consequences of Theorem 4.4, of independent interest.
Lemma 4.6. Let S be smooth surface, Q a line bundle on S, and TS ։ Q a surjective map of sheaves. Let
C ⊂ X be a smooth complete connected curve of genus g. If degC (Q) < 2−2g, then g = 0, and degC (Q) = 0.
Proof. Let L be the kernel of TS ։ Q. Suppose that degC (Q) < 2 − 2g. Then the composite map
TC → TS |C → Q|C is the zero map, and hence TC = L|C ( TS |C , and NC/S ≃ Q|C . In particular, C is a
leaf of the regular foliation by curves L ( TS . By the Camacho-Sad formula (see Theorem 4.4), we must
have degC (Q) = C 2 = 0. This completes the proof of Lemma 4.6.

Corollary 4.7. Let S be smooth surface, Q a line bundle on S, and TS ։ Q a surjective map of sheaves.
Let C ⊂ X be a smooth complete connected curve of genus g 6 1. Then degC (Q) > 0.
The next result is crucial for the proof of Theorem 1.1.
Proposition 4.8. Let S be smooth surface, and let C ⊂ S be a possibly reducible complete curve with simple
normal crossings. If TS (− log C) ≃ OS ⊕ OS , then the intersection matrix of irreducible components of C is
not negative definite.
Proof. Let C ′ be a connected component of C, and set C ′′ = C \ C ′ . Then, up to replacing S by S \ C ′′ , we
may assume that C is a connected curve.
We denote the irreducible components of C by C1 , . . . , Cr (r > 1). Recall that the dual graph Γ of C is
defined as follows. The vertices of Γ are the curves Ci , and for i 6= j, the vertices Ci and Cj are connected
by Ci · Cj edges.
We argue by contradiction and assume that the intersection matrix {Ci · Cj }i,j is negative definite.
Notice that OS (KS ) ≃ OS (−C) since det(TS (− log C)) ≃ OS (−KS − C), and TS (− log C) ≃ OS ⊕ OS .
By the adjunction formula, for 1 6 i 6 r, we have
X
Cj |Ci ),
OCi (KCi ) ≃ OS (KS + Ci )|Ci ≃ OCi (−
j6=i

and hence
degCi (OCi (KCi ) = 2g(Ci ) − 2 = −

X

degCi (OCi (Cj |Ci )) 6 0.

j6=i

Thus, one of the following holds.
(1) Either C is irreducible, and g(C) = 1, or
(2) r > 2, Ci ≃ P1 for all 1 6 i 6 r and the dual graph of C is a cycle.

6

STÉPHANE DRUEL

Suppose first that C is irreducible with g(C) = 1. Recall that there is a surjective map of sheaves
TS (− log C) ։ TC . On the other hand, TS (− log C) ≃ OS ⊕ OS . Hence, there exists a non-zero global vector
field ~v ∈ H 0 (S, TS (− log C)) ⊆ H 0 (S, TS ) such that ~v|C 6= 0. Since TC ≃ OC , ~v (s) 6= 0 for any s ∈ C. Set
L = OS ~v ( TS . Then, C is a complete L -invariant curve, disjoint from the singular locus Sing(L ). Thus,
by the Camacho-Sad formula (see Theorem 4.4), we must have C 2 = 0, yielding a contradiction.
Suppose that r > 2, Ci ≃ P1 for any 1 6 i 6 r and that the dual graph of C is a cycle. If r = 2, then
C1 ∩ C2 = {p1 , p2 } with p1 6= p2 . Suppose that r > 3. By renumbering the Ci ’s if necessary, we may assume
that for each i ∈ {1, . . . , r}, Ci meets C \ Ci in pi ∈ Ci−1 and pi+1 ∈ Ci+1 , where Cr+1 = C1 . Note that
pr+1 = p1
Let ~vk ∈ H 0 (S, TS (− log C)) ⊆ H 0 (S, TS ) for k ∈ {1, 2} such that TS (− log C) ≃ OS ~v1 ⊕ OS ~v2 . Let λ ∈ C.
Set ~vλ = ~v1 + λ~v2 , and Lλ = OS ~vλ ⊆ TS .
Set C0 = Cr . Fix i ∈ {1, . . . , r}, and let (xi , yi ) be local coordinates at pi such that xi (respectively, yi )
is a local equation of Ci−1 (respectively, Ci ) at pi . Then xi ∂xi and yi ∂yi are local generators of TS (− log C)
at pi . Therefore, there exist local functions ai , bi , ci , di at pi such that the matrix


ai b i
ci di
is invertible, and such that


~v1
~v2

= ai (xi , yi )xi ∂xi + bi (xi , yi )yi ∂yi ,
= ci (xi , yi )xi ∂xi + di (xi , yi )yi ∂yi .

Thus
~vλ = (ai (xi , yi ) + λci (xi , yi ))xi ∂xi + (bi (xi , yi ) + λdi (xi , yi ))yi ∂yi ,
and a local generator for Lλ is given by the 1-form
ωλ

(ai (xi , yi ) + λci (xi , yi ))xi dyi − (bi (xi , yi ) + λdi (xi , yi ))yi dxi
(ai (pi ) + λci (pi ))xi (1 + o(1))dyi − (bi (pi ) + λdi (pi ))yi (1 + o(1))dxi .

=
=

a1 (p1 )
br (pr )
ar (pr )
1)
This implies that for λ ∈ C \ {− db11(p
(p1 ) , − c1 (p1 ) , . . . , − dr (pr ) , − cr (pr ) }

(1) ~vλ vanishes exactly at {p1 , . . . , pr };
(pi )+λci (pi )
(see Example 4.3);
(2) CS(Lλ , Ci−1 , pi ) = abii(p
i )+λdi (pi )
(3) CS(Lλ , Ci , pi ) =

bi (pi )+λdi (pi )
ai (pi )+λci (pi )

(see Example 4.3).

In particular, Lλ ( TS is a foliation by curves on S, Sing(Lλ ) = {p1 , . . . , pr }, and CS(Lλ , Ci , pi ) =
1
CS(Lλ ,Ci+1 ,pi ) .
Set ei = Ci2 ∈ Z. Notice that for each i ∈ {1, . . . , r}, we have
CS(Lλ , Ci+1 , pi+1 ) =
=
Set xλ = CS(Lλ , C1 , p1 ) =

1
CS(Lλ ,Ci ,pi+1 )
1
ei −CS(Lλ ,Ci ,pi )

a1 (p1 )+λc1 (p1 )
b1 (p1 )+λd1 (p1 ) .

Then

xλ = CS(Lλ , C1 , p1 ) = CS(Lλ , Cr+1 , pr+1 ) =
=

1
er −

1
er−1 −CS(Lλ ,Cr−1 ,pr−1 )

by (3)
by the Camacho-Sad formula

= ··· =

1
er − CS(Lλ , Cr , pr )
1

= Φe1 ,...,er (xλ )

1

er −

1

er−1 −

1

···−
e2 −
a1 (p1 )
br (pr )
ar (pr )
1)
for any λ ∈ C \ {− db11(p
(p1 ) , − c1 (p1 ) , . . . , − dr (pr ) , − cr (pr ) }.
This implies that
Φe1 ,...,er (x) = x

1
e1 − CS(Lλ , C1 , p1 )

THE ZARISKI-LIPMAN CONJECTURE FOR LOG CANONICAL SPACES

7

as rational functions. And similarly, if s ∈ Sr , then
Φes(1) ,...,es(r) (x) = x.
By Lemma 2.5, we must have e1 = · · · = er = −1, yielding a contradiction since (C1 +C2 )2 = −2+2C1 ·C2 >
0. This completes the proof of Proposition 4.8.


5. Proof of Theorem 1.1
We will use the following theorem to reduce to the surface case.
Theorem 5.1 ([Fle88, Corollary]). Let X be a variety such that the tangent sheaf TX is locally free. If
codimX Sing(X) > 3, then X is smooth.
We are now in position to prove our main result. Notice that Theorem 1.1 is a immediate consequence of
Theorem 5.2 below.
Theorem 5.2 (Zariski-Lipman conjecture for log canonical pairs). Let (X, B) be a log canonical pair such
that the tangent sheaf TX is locally free. Then X is smooth.
Proof. Notice first that KX is Cartier since the tangent sheaf TX is locally free. This implies that X is log
canonical as well.
Let us assume to the contrary that Sing(X) 6= ∅. By Theorem 5.1, we have codimX Sing(X) = 3. By
replacing X with an affine open dense subset, we may assume that X is affine, and that Sing(X) is irreducible
⊕ dim(X)
of codimension 2. We may also assume without loss of generality that TX ≃ OX
.
Let π : Y → X be canonical desingularization of X, and let ∆ be the largest reduced divisor contained
in π −1 (Sing(X)). Note that ∆ 6= 0. As in the proof of Theorem 3.8, we consider the morphism of vector
bundles
π ∗ TX → TY (− log ∆),
and the induced injective map of sheaves
π ∗ OX (−KX ) ≃ π ∗ det(TX ) ֒→ det(TY (− log ∆)) ≃ OY (−KY − ∆).
This yields a(∆i , X) 6 −1 for any irreducible component ∆i of ∆. Thus that a(∆i , X) = −1 since X has
log canonical singularities, and we have an isomorphism
π ∗ TX ≃ TY (− log ∆).
Suppose that dim(X) > 3. Let G1 ⊂ X be a general hyperplane section, and set H1 = π −1 (G1 ) ⊂ Y .
Then G1 is a normal affine variety (see for instance [BS95, Theorem 1.7.1]). Moreover H1 is smooth, and
∆ ∩ H1 has simple normal crossings by Bertini’s Theorem. By Lemma 3.2, there is an exact sequence
0 → NH∗1 /Y → Ω1Y (log ∆)|H1 → Ω1H1 (log ∆|H1 ) → 0.
Note that NH∗1 /Y ≃ π ∗ NG∗1 /X ≃ OY . Thus, there exist regular functions g1 , . . . , gr on G1 such that the
⊕ dim(Y )

map OY ≃ NH∗1 /Y → Ω1Y (log ∆)|H1 ≃ OY
|H1 is given by g1 ◦ π|H1 , . . . , gr ◦ π|H1 . Let i ∈ {1, . . . , r}
such that gi |H1 ∩Sing(X) 6= 0. Then, by replacing X with X \ {gi = 0} if necessary, we may assume that
⊕ dim(H )

1
(and ∆ 6= 0). Let G2 , . . . , Gdim(X)−2 ⊂ X be a general hyperplane sections, and
Ω1H1 (log ∆|H1 ) ≃ OH1
−1
set Hi = π (Gi ) ⊂ Y , S = H1 ∩· · ·∩Hdim(X)−2 , C = ∆∩H1 · · ·∩Hdim(X)−2 , and T = G1 ∩· · ·∩Gdim(X)−2 =
π(S). Then S is smooth, and C has simple normal crossings. Proceeding by induction, we conclude that
by replacing T with an appropriate open subset, we may assume that TS (− log C) ≃ OS⊕2 (and C 6= 0).
Observe that the induced morphism π|S : S → T is birational with exceptional locus C. This implies that
the intersection matrix of irreducible components of C is negative definite. But this contradicts Proposition
4.8, completing the proof of Theorem 5.2.


8

STÉPHANE DRUEL

References
[AD11]
[BS95]

C. Araujo and S. Druel, On fano foliations, Preprint arXiv:1112.4512, 2011.
M. C. Beltrametti and A. J. Sommese, The adjunction theory of complex projective varieties, de Gruyter Expositions
in Mathematics, vol. 16, Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin, 1995. MR 1318687 (96f:14004)
[CS82]
C. Camacho and P. Sad, Invariant varieties through singularities of holomorphic vector fields, Ann. of Math. (2)
115 (1982), no. 3, 579–595. MR 657239 (83m:58062)
[Fle88]
H. Flenner, Extendability of differential forms on nonisolated singularities, Invent. Math. 94 (1988), no. 2, 317–326.
MR 958835 (89j:14001)
[GKK10] D. Greb, S. Kebekus, and S. J. Kovács, Extension theorems for differential forms and Bogomolov-Sommese vanishing
on log canonical varieties, Compos. Math. 146 (2010), no. 1, 193–219. MR 2581247
[GKKP11] D. Greb, S. Kebekus, S. J. Kovács, and Thomas Peternell, Differential forms on log canonical spaces, Publ. Math.
Inst. Hautes Études Sci. (2011), no. 114, 87–169. MR 2854859
[Hoc75]
M. Hochster, The Zariski-Lipman conjecture for homogeneous complete intersections, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 49
(1975), 261–262. MR 0360585 (50 #13033)
[Käl11]
R. Källström, The Zariski-Lipman conjecture for complete intersections, J. Algebra 337 (2011), 169–180.
MR 2796069 (2012d:14001)
[KM98]
J. Kollár and S. Mori, Birational geometry of algebraic varieties, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 134,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998, With the collaboration of C. H. Clemens and A. Corti, Translated
from the 1998 Japanese original. MR 1658959 (2000b:14018)
[Kol07]
J. Kollár, Lectures on resolution of singularities, Annals of Mathematics Studies, vol. 166, Princeton University
Press, Princeton, NJ, 2007. MR 2289519 (2008f:14026)
[Lip65]
J. Lipman, Free derivation modules on algebraic varieties, Amer. J. Math. 87 (1965), 874–898. MR 0186672 (32
#4130)
[SS72]
G. Scheja and U. Storch, Differentielle Eigenschaften der Lokalisierungen analytischer Algebren, Math. Ann. 197
(1972), 137–170. MR 0306172 (46 #5299)
[Suw95]
T. Suwa, Indices of holomorphic vector fields relative to invariant curves on surfaces, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 123
(1995), no. 10, 2989–2997. MR 1291793 (95m:32054)
[vSS85]
D. van Straten and J. Steenbrink, Extendability of holomorphic differential forms near isolated hypersurface singularities, Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg 55 (1985), 97–110. MR 831521 (87j:32025)
Stéphane Druel: Institut Fourier, UMR 5582 du CNRS, Université Grenoble 1, BP 74, 38402 Saint Martin
d’Hères, France
E-mail address: druel@ujf-grenoble.fr

