arXiv:1608.00327v6 [math.CV] 23 Dec 2017

CR Singularities and Generalizations of Moser’s Theorem I

Valentin Burcea
Abstract. Let (z1 , . . . , zN , w) be the coordinates in CN +1 . Let M ⊂ CN +1 be the real-analytic submanifold defined near p = 0 as follows






2
2
2
2
3
w = z1 z 1 + · · · + zN z N + λ1 z1 + z 1 + · · · + λN zN + z N + O |z|
,
where λ1 , . . . , λN ≥ 0. We assume that M is formally equivalent to the following model




2
2
2
2
2
2
w = z1 z 1 + · · · + zN z N + λ1 z1 + z 1 + · · · + λN zN + z N + z1 z N + z 1 zN .
We prove that M is biholomorphicaly equivalent to the model assuming that N > 1.

1. Introduction and Main Result
This note is motivated by the local equivalence problem in complex analysis and Theorem[25] of Moser. Two real-analytic submanifolds
may be only formally biholomorphically equivalent as it has been proven by Moser-Webster[24] and Gong[13] in the CR Singular situation[4],[6],
and respectively by Kossovskiy-Shafikov[19] in the CR situation[2]. Moser[25] considered the local equivalence problem for the real-analytic
surface in C2 defined near p = 0 as follows


(1.1)
w = zz + O |z|3 ,
where (z, w) are the coordinates in C2 . Moser[25] proved that if (1.1) is formally equivalent to the following model

(1.2)

w = zz,

then (1.1) is biholomorphically equivalent to it. This result is known as Theorem of Moser[25].
In this note, the following equivalence result is proven
Theorem 1.1. Let (z1 , . . . , zN , w) be the coordinates in CN+1 . Let M ⊂ CN+1 be a submanifold defined near p = 0 as follows




2
+ z 2N + O |z|3 ,
(1.3)
w = z1 z 1 + · · · + zN z N + λ1 z12 + z 21 + · · · + λN zN

where λ1 , . . . , λN ≥ 0. We assume that that M is real-analytic and formally equivalent to the following model


2
w = z1 z 1 + · · · + zN z N + λ1 z12 + z 21 + · · · + λN zN
+ z 2N + z12 z N + z 21 zN .

(1.4)

Then M is holomorphically equivalent to the model assuming that N > 1.

The proof of this result is based on a careful analysis of formal equivalences in the local defining equations (1.3) of M and (1.4) of
the model. The main role is played by real submanifolds existent near the C.-R. singularity p = 0, which are minimal hypersurfaces in CN .
More precisely, we adapt the methods of Mir[22],[23] applying Approximation Theorem of Artin[1] under the assumption that M is formally
equivalent to the model from (1.4). The presence of the terms of order 3 in (1.4) has a non-degeneracy role for concluding the convergence of
the formal transformation, regardless that the expression of the terms of degree 3 from (1.4) is not invariant.
The CR Singularities[4],[6] in codimension 2 are important for the area of the analysis of several complex variables. Dolbeault[8], [9]
and Dolbeault-Tomassini-Zaitsev[10],[11] observed that near the C.-R. singularity p = 0, the real submanifold M is of strictly positive C.-R.
dimension, when N > 1. This contrasts with the case of Moser-Webster[24] in C2 , where near the C.-R. singularity[4] the real submanifold
is totally real. They[10],[11] used the C.-R. structure existent around the C.-R. singularity and the existence of the CR Singularities[4],[6] in
order to study the problem of the existence of Levi-flat hypersurfaces with prescribed boundary[10],[11], when N > 1. Huang-Yin[16],[17]
impresivelly exploited the C.-R. structure around the C.-R. singularity[4],[6] in order to study the local hull of holomorphy[18], when N > 1.
Gong-Lebl[14] constructed normal forms for real C.-R. singular submanifolds of codimension 2 which are Levi-flat at the C.-R. points, when
N > 1. The existence of CR Singularities has been used by Slapar[27],[26] in order to show the existence of regular Stein neighborhood bases
for compact real surfaces[26] in C2 .
Acknowledgements I thank Prof. Xiaojun Huang for useful discussions regarding the Generalization [15] of Theorem [25] of Moser.
I thank Dr. Jiri Lebl for interesting conversations about [7]. I thank to my supervisor Prof. Dmitri Zaitsev for many long conversations
regarding C.-R. Singularities[11] while I had been working in the School of Mathematics of Trinity College Dublin. I thank for hospitality
to the Departament of Mathematics of the Federal University of Minas Gerais during my short visit there. I would also like to thank Prof.
Nordine Mir for remarks on some preliminary draft of this note. Special Thanks to Science Foundation of Ireland.
Keywords: CR singularity, equivalence problem, Artin Approximation.
This project was supported principally by CAPES, being initiated with Science Foundation Ireland grant 10/RF P/MT H2878.
1

2

VALENTIN BURCEA

2. Preparations
Let

M, M ′

⊂

CN+1

be real-analytic submanifolds defined near p = 0 as follows
M : w = Q (z, z) + ϕ(z, z),

(2.1)



M ′ : w′ = Q z ′ , z ′ ,



where ϕ(z, z) = O |z|3 and Q (z, z) is the model of degree 3 defined by the right-side from (1.4).

We consider the formal equivalence between M and M ′ defined as follows

(2.2)
w ′ , z ′ = (g(z, w), f1 (z, w), . . . , fN (z, w)) = (g(z, w), f (z, w)) .

Following [5],[29], we can eventually compose with an linear automorphism of the quadratic model from (1.4) in order to assume that


X (N)
X (1)
X
X
k
k
k
k

fk (z)w
(2.3)
,
fk (z)w , . . . , zN +
fk (z)w = z1 +
gk (z)w , f (z, w) = z +
g(z, w) = w +
k≥0

k≥0

k≥0

k≥0

where fk (z) and gk (z) are formal holomorphic power series, for all k ∈ N.
The formula of the terms of bidegree 3 in (2.1) may be become different by further changes of coordinates. The presence of these terms
is just a non-degeneracy condition as we shall observe throughout next computations for finding suitable analytic systems. In order to have
simplified computations, we firstly assume that we have formal normalized equivalences. It follows thus by (2.1) and (2.2) that


g(z, w) = Q f (z, w), f (z, w) ,
(2.4)
or by (2.3) equivalently to

X

(2.5)

k≥0



gk (z)w k = Q z +

X

k≥0

fk (z)w k , z +

X

k≥0



fk (z)w k  .

Because M and M ′ are formally equivalent, it follows that there exist {ai,j (z, z, w, w)}i,j=1,2 real-formal functions defined near 0 ∈ CN+1
which are not identically vanishing, satisfying by (2.1) the following


X
X
X
k
k
k

fk (z)w
= a11 (z, z, w, w) (Re w − Q (z, z) − Re ϕ(z, z))
fk (z)w , z +
gk (z)w − Q z +
(2.6)
k≥0
k≥0
k≥0
+ a12 (z, z, w, w) (Im w − Im ϕ(z, z)) + i (a21 (z, z, w, w) (Re w − Q (z, z) − Re ϕ(z, z)) + a22 (z, z, w, w) (Im w − Im ϕ(z, z))) ,

Restricting (2.1) at w = x, for each x ∈ (0, ǫ) with given ǫ > 0, we obtain the following real-analytic hypersurfaces


2
+ z 2N + Reϕ(z, z) − x.
(2.7)
ρ1 (z, z, x) = 0, ρ1 (z, z, x) = z1 z 1 + · · · + zN z N + λ1 z12 + z 21 + · · · + λN zN

Dolbeault-Tomassini-Zaitsev [10],[11] observed that near the C.-R. singularity p = 0, the real submanifold M ⊂ CN+1 defined as in (1.3),
may be non-minimal at its C.-R. points. This fact motivates the problem study in CN , because (2.7) defines also a hypersurface in CN . More
precisely, we make the following observation
Lemma 2.1. Let (z1 , . . . , zN ) be the coordinates in CN and let ρ1 (z, z, x) be defined as in (2.7). If px ∈ CN is chosen such that
(2.8)

ρ1 (px , px , x) = 0,

∂ρ1 (px , px , x)
6= 0,
∂zN

then (2.8) is a hypersurface of finite type at px .
Proof. The existence of the point px 6= 0, for each x ∈ (0, ǫ), may be obtained following Dolbeault-Tomassini-Zaitsev [10],[11]. Following
[2], we consider the following base of C.-R. vector fields associated to (2.8) defined as follows

−1 

∂
∂ρ1
∂
∂ (Reϕ(z, z))
(2.9)
Lk =
−
(px , px )
zk + 2λk z k +
, k = 1, . . . , N − 1.
∂z k
∂z N
∂z k
∂zN
Making computations, we observe that


−1
−1


∂ρ2
∂ρ2
∂
∂
(px , px )
(1 + O(1)) −
(px , px )
(1 + O(1)) ,
L1 , L1 = −
∂z N
∂zN
∂z N
∂zN
which gives us the missing direction. Here O(1) is a formal power series depending of z, z and x without constant term. It follows that (2.8)
defines a hypersurface of finite type at px .


Following Mir[22],[23], we complexify the real submanifolds defined by w = x ∈ (0, ǫ) in the real part in (2.1). We replace z 1 , . . . , z N with
ζ1 , . . . , ζN ∈ C in (2.1). We conclude the following local defining equation:
C2N ⊃ Mx : ρ1 (z, ζ, x) = 0,

(2.10)

where ρ1 (z, ζ, x) = x − Q (z, ζ) − ϕ (z, ζ) − ϕ (ζ, z).

Next, we consider px ∈ Mx satisfying (2.8). We consider the complexified C.-R. vector fields for Mx defined as follows
(2.11)

L⋆1 =

∂ρ1 (z, ζ, x) ∂
∂ρ1 (z, ζ, x)
∂ρ1 (z, ζ, x) ∂
∂
∂ρ1 (z, ζ, x) ∂
−
, . . . , L⋆N−1 =
−
.
∂ζN
∂ζ1
∂ζ1
∂ζN
∂ζN
∂ζN−1
∂ζN−1 ∂ζN

By Theorem of Implicit Functions, it follows by (2.8) the existence of the real hypersurfaces
(2.12)

Nx : Im zN = ψ (x, z1 , z 1 , . . . , zN−1 , z N−1 , Re zN ) ,

defined near 0 ∈ R. Here ψ : R2N−1 → R depends analytically on x ∈ (0, ǫ). Moreover, we can assume that ψ does not contain pure terms in z
or in z by changing eventually the coordinates.

CR SINGULARITIES AND GENERALIZATIONS OF MOSER’S THEOREM I

3

Continuing the study of (2.6) fixing x ∈ (0, ǫ) in (2.1), it follows by taking the real part in (2.6) that


X
1 X
k
k
gk (z) (x + iIm ϕ(z, ζ)) +
−x−
g k (ζ) (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))
2 k≥0
k≥0


(2.13)
X
X
k
k

f k (ζ) (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))
fk (z) (x + iIm ϕ(z, ζ) , ζ +
+Q z+
k≥0

k≥0

= a11 (z, ζ, x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ) , x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ)) (x − Q (z, ζ) − ϕ (z, ζ) − ϕ (ζ, z)) .

We observe that by (2.8), it follows by continuity that, for z near px , we have
∂ρ1 (v1 (z), 0, x)
6= 0,
∂zN

(2.14)

where v1 is the first Segre mapping defined by [22],[2] as follows
v1 : CN −→ CN ,

(2.15)

v1 (z) = v1 (z1 , . . . , zN−1 , zN ) = (z1 , . . . , zN−1 , 0) .

Before going ahead, we introduce the following notations

∂ρ1 (z, ζ, x)


, k = 1, . . . , N ;
 Hk (z, ζ, x) =
∂zk
(2.16)





∂ (ϕ (z, ζ) − ϕ (ζ, z))
∂ (ϕ (z, ζ) − ϕ (ζ, z))

 Vr (z, ζ) = HN (z, ζ, x)
− Hr (z, ζ, x)
,
∂ζr
∂ζr

r = 1, . . . , N − 1.

In order to apply Approximation Theorem of Artin[1], we construct by (2.13), (2.15) convenient analytic systems as follows.

2.1. Analytic Systems. Following the procedure of Mir[22],[23], we apply successively L⋆1 , . . . , L⋆N−1 in (2.13) evaluating everything
using the real-analytic hypersurfaces defined in (2.12). We obtain by (2.16) the following analytic equation


X
Vr (z, ζ)  X
k−1
k−1 
kgk (ζ) (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))
kgk (z) (x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ))
−
− Er (ζ, z, x) +
2
k≥1
k≥1

X
∂gk (ζ)
∂gk (ζ)
−
HN (z, ζ, x)
(ζ) − Hr (z, ζ, x)
(x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k = (zr + 2λr ) HN (z, ζ, x) − (zN + 2λN ) Hr (z, ζ, x)
∂ζr
∂ζN
k≥1



N
X
X
Vr (z, ζ) X  X  (l)
(l)
(l)
kζl fk (z) (x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k−1
2λl ζl fk (ζ) (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k−1 +
+
k zl fk (ζ) +
−
2
k≥1
k≥1
l=1
k≥1
−

X

(l)

(l)

(k + p)λl fk (ζ) fp (ζ) (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k+p−1 +

k,p≥1

+

−

(k +

X

(l)
(p)
pfk (z)fk

k+p−1

+ iIm ϕ (z, ζ))

+

k

(ζ) (x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ)) (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))



(N)
−Hr (z, ζ, x) fk (z)

+

X

l=1 k≥1

+




λl 
 HN

N X
X

l=1 k,p≥0

+

X

(p)

(l)

kfk (z)fk

(ζ) (x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k−1 (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))p

k,p≥0

k,p≥0

N
X

(l)

2kλl zl fk (z) (x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k−1

k≥1
(l)
(l)
p) λl fk (z)fp (z) (x

X

k,p≥1

(2.17)

X

N X
X

l=1 k,p≥0



+

N
X

X

k





p−1 

X

+

k≥1


(r)
(x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k HN (z, ζ, x) fk (z)

(l)

(x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ)) zl HN (z, ζ, x)

(l)

∂fk (ζ)

− Hr (z, ζ, x)
∂ζr




(l)
(l)
∂ ζl fk (ζ) 
∂ ζl fk (ζ)
 (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k
− Hr (z, ζ, x)
(z, ζ, x)

∂ζr
∂ζN
l=1 k≥1

∂


λl 
HN (z, ζ, x)




(l)
(l)
fk (ζ) fp (ζ)
∂ζr

∂

− Hr (z, ζ, x)

p



(l)

∂fk (ζ)

(2.18)



Er (ζ, z, x) = Lr ζ1 +

+ z1 +

X

k≥0

X

k≥0



∂ζr

f k (ζ) (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k  zN +



k 

fk (z) (x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ))

ζN +

X

k≥0



−

X

k≥0

2

fk (z) (x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ))k 

2 

k

f k (ζ) (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))



(l)
∂f (ζ)
(l)
,
Hr (z, ζ, x) fk (z) k
∂ζN

where Er (ζ, z, x) is defined as follows



∂ζN





(l)
(l)
fk (ζ) fp (ζ)

 (x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ))2k

∂ζN

(l)
(x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ)) (x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ)) HN (z, ζ, x) fk (z)
k

∂fk (ζ)

,

for all r = 1, . . . , N − 1,

4

VALENTIN BURCEA

which may be computed and expanded by similar manners as (2.17), for all r = 1, . . . , N − 1. These computations are restricted to the
complexification of (2.12). It is clear that (ζ, z) = (0, v1 (z)) belongs to the complexification of Nx and also that
∂g
∂f k
(0) and
(0) may not vanish, for all k ∈ N and l = 1, . . . , N .
∂ζl
∂ζl

(2.19)

Thus (2.17) gives by (2.19), (2.12) and (2.15) the following analytic system:


2

 f1 (v1 (z), x) + (fN (v1 (z), x)) HN (v1 (z), 0, x) + P1 (f1 (v1 (z), x) , . . . , fN (v1 (z), x)) = χ1 (v1 (z), x) ,



f2 (v1 (z), x) HN (v1 (z), 0, x) + P2 (f1 (v1 (z), x) , . . . , fN (v1 (z), x)) = χ2 (v1 (z), x) ,
(2.20)

 ......................................................................................................



fN−1 (v1 (z), x) HN (v1 (z), 0, x) + PN−1 (f1 (v1 (z), x) , . . . , fN (v1 (z), x)) = χN−1 (v1 (z), x) ,

where P1 , P2 , . . . , PN−1 are polynomials in N variables. The coefficients of these polynomials and χ1 (v1 (z), x) , . . . , χN−1 (v1 (z), x) are power
series holomorphic in z1 , . . . , zN−1 , formal in x ∈ (0, ǫ) and with no constant terms.
The analytic system (2.20) is formed just by N −1 equations, but is defined by N formal power series. Thus (2.20) does not contain sufficient
equations in order to conclude the desired partial convergence. This fact is overcamed by applying L⋆1 L⋆1 in (2.13) evaluating everything using
the complexifications of real hypersurfaces defined in (2.8). This gives by (2.14) and (2.15) another analytic equation
fN (v1 (z), x) (HN (v1 (z), 0, x))2 + P (fN (v1 (z), x)) = χN (v1 (z), x) ,

(2.21)

where P is a polynomial. Its coefficients and χN (v1 (z), x) are power series holomorphic in z1 , . . . , zN−1 , formal in x ∈ (0, ǫ) and with no
constant terms. Identifying the coefficients of x in (2.21), it follows by induction on k ∈ N and (2.14) that
(N)

(2.22)

fk

(z)|z=v

1 (z)

is convergent,

for all k ∈ N .

L⋆1 L⋆1

Moreover, we apply
in (2.13). Then we take derivatives with respect to z1 , . . . , zn in (2.20) of length |I| = n , for any I ∈ NN . Restricting
the obtained identity using the complexifications of real hypersurfaces defined in (2.8), it follows by (2.15) that


 I
∂ fN
∂ I fN
(v1 (z), x) (HN (v1 (z), 0, x))2 1 + P ′
(v1 (z), x)
= χ′N (v1 (z), x) .
(2.23)
I
I
∂z
∂z
where P ′ is a polynomial. Its coefficients and χ′N (v1 (z), x) are holomorphic series in z1 , . . . , zN−1 , formal in x ∈ (0, ǫ) and with no constant
term, but depending on
(N)

∂ I fk

(z)
|z=v1 (z) , where k ∈ N, I ∈ NN with |I| < n.
∂z I
Identifying the coefficients of x in (2.23), we conclude by induction on k ∈ N and by (2.14) that
(2.24)

(N)

∂ I fk

(z)
|z=v1 (z) is convergent, where k ∈ N, I ∈ NN with |I| = n.
∂z I
Returning in (2.20), we identitify the coefficients of x in (2.20) by induction on k ∈ N⋆ . Following Proposition 4.2 from Mir[22], we conclude
by (2.20) and (2.14) that

(2.25)

(l)

(2.26)

fk (z)|z=v1 (z) is convergent,

where l = 1, . . . , N and k ∈ N .

Moreover, taking derivatives with respect to z1 , . . . , zn in (2.20) of length |I| = n with I ∈ NN , and then repeating the previous procedure
evaluating using the first Segre mapping (2.15), we conclude the following analytic system
!


 I

I
2
I

∂ f1
∂ I fN
 ∂ f1 (v (z), x) + ∂ fN (v (z), x) H (v (z), 0, x) + P

(v1 (z), x) , . . . ,
(v1 (z), x) = χ′1 (v1 (z), x) ,
1
1
1
1
N

I
I
I
I

∂z
∂z
∂z
∂z





 I

 ∂ I f2
∂ I fN
∂ f1

(v1 (z), x) HN (v1 (z), 0, x) + P2
(v1 (z), x) , . . . ,
(v1 (z), x) = χ′2 (v1 (z), x) ,
(2.27)
∂z I
∂z I
∂z I




.....................................................................................................................




 I

If

∂ f1
∂ I fN
∂

N−1


(v
(z),
x)
H
(v
(z),
0,
x)
+
P
(v
(z),
x)
,
.
.
.
,
(v
(z),
x)
= χ′N−1 (v1 (z), x) ,
1
1
1
1
N
N−1
∂z I
∂z I
∂z I

′
are polynomials in N variables. The coefficients of these polynomials and χ′1 (v1 (z), x) , . . . , χ′N−1 (v1 (z), x) are power
where P1′ , P2′ , . . . , PN−1
series holomorphic in z1 , . . . , zN−1 , formal in x ∈ (0, ǫ) and with no constant terms, but depending on
(l)

∂ I fk (z)

(2.28)

By induction on the length of I ∈ NN

|z=v1 (z) , where l = 1, . . . , N , k ∈ N, I ∈ NN with |I| < n.
∂z I
and following Proposition 4.2 from Mir[22], we conclude by (2.20), (2.14) and (2.14) that

(l)

∂ I fk (z)

|z=v1 (z) is convergent, where l = 1, . . . , N , k ∈ N, I ∈ NN with |I| = n.
∂z I
Returning to (2.17), we identify again the coefficients of x by induction on k ∈ N⋆ , concluding by (2.14) and (2.15) that
(2.29)

∂ I gk (z)
|z=v1 (z) is convergent, where k ∈ N, for all I ∈ Nn .
∂z I
We have to observe that the defining equations are considered near certain points px ∈ Mx which is sufficient. These points may be
eventually changed leading to the same conclusion. It remains to show the following
(2.30)

CR SINGULARITIES AND GENERALIZATIONS OF MOSER’S THEOREM I

5

Lemma 2.2. Any holomorphic polynomial change of coordinates of degree 2 leaving the quadratic model invariant in (1.4) produces mixed
terms of bidegree 3 in (1.4).
Proof. It is suficient to consider the following invertible holomorphic transformation of (1.4) of coordinates :


N
N
X
X

(1)
(N)
′
′
(2.31)
z , w =  z1 +
aij zi zj + b1 w, . . . , zN +
aij zi zk + bN w, w  .
i=1

i,j=1

Replacing everything in the corresponding local defining equations, it follows by (1.4) that
( N
!)
N
X
X


(k)
2
+ z 2N
zk
aij zi zj + bk z1 z 1 + · · · + zN z N + λ1 z12 + z 21 + · · · + λN zN
w = Q(z, z) + Re
k=1

(2.32)

+ 2Re

(

N
X

k=1

λk zk

N
X
i=1

i=1

!)


(k)
2
+ z 2N
aij zi zj + bk z1 z 1 + · · · + zN z N + λ1 z12 + z 21 + · · · + λN zN
+ O(3).

Studying the mixed terms of degree 3 in (2.32), it follows that any holomorphic change of coordinates eliminating the present terms, will generate
other mixed terms of degree 3. Thus the presence of the mixed terms of degree 3 can not be eliminated by changing the coordinates.

The existence of mixed terms of degree 3 is fundamental in order to construct convenient analytic systems for concluding partial convergence
observations. Any change of coordinates eliminating those mixed terms, produces other mixed terms of degree 3 which replace their nondegeneracy role. For instance, if the coefficient of z1 z2 z1 does not vanish, we can apply L⋆1 L⋆2 to the local defining equation in the new
coordinates. We find thus desired analytic systems by similar manners.
3. Proof of Theorem 1.1
The proof is inspired by Lemma 6.1 of Mir[22]. Here the minimality of the hypersurfaces (2.12) is fundamental in order to consider standard
parametrizations using Segre sets[2]. Generally, the minimality is the standard geometrical condition in order to conclude convergence results for
formal holomorphic transformations. Baouendi-Mir-Rothschild[3], Mir[22],[23], Sunyé[28], Merker[20], Meylan-Mir-Zaitsev[21] are suggested
for related studies where the minimality is considered. Kossovskiy-Shafikov[19] showed recently that between two nonminimal real-analytic
formally equivalent submanifolds in the complex space, it may not exist holomorphic equivalences.
The proof relies on Approximation Theorem of Artin[1]. We look at z = (z1 , . . . , zN ), z = ζ = (ζ1 , . . . , ζN ) as independent variables taking
in consideration the complexifiation of (2.12). Moreover, we need to more generally assume that x ∈ C. By a translation, we can consider x
near 0 ∈ C. By (2.2), we rewrite (2.17) more generally as follows
1
R (z, x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ) , A (x, ζ, z)) = − B (x, z, ζ) ,
2

(3.1)
where the following notations are used

1
B (x, z, ζ) = − g (ζ, x − iIm ϕ (ζ, z)) ,
2
Following Mir[22],[23], the following expression is also considered
(3.2)

(3.3)

A (x, ζ, z) = f (ζ, x − iIm ϕ (z, ζ)) ,

T ((λ, µ) , z, x, ζ) = R (z, x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ) , λ) − µ,

R (z, w, λ) = Q (f (z, w), λ) −

1
g(z, w).
2

λ ∈ CN , µ ∈ C.

In order to apply Approximation Theorem of Artin[1], we have to reconsider the situation introducing more variables as follows. We
′
1 − z 2 , where x , x , z 1 , z 2 ∈ C. Defining also z ′ = (z , . . . , z
assume that x = x1 − x2 , zN = zN
1
1
2 N N
N−1 ) and ζ = (ζ1 , . . . , ζN−1 ), we consider the
N


1 , z 2 , ζ, denoted by C z ′ , x , x , z 1 , z 2 , ζ
throughout
the
rest of this note.
ring of the formal power series in z ′ , x1 , x2 , zN
1
2 N N
N
We are ready now to give the proof
Proof. We conclude by (2.29) and (2.30) the following
(3.4)


∂ k+n 
2
1
, x1 − x2 , ζ |x1 =x2 ,
− zN
T (λ, µ) , z ′ , zN
∂ k zN ∂xn
1

1 =z 2
zN
N

is convergent, for all n, k ∈ N⋆ .

From Approximation Theorem of Artin[1], we obtain that the following analytic system



∂ k+n
1
2
1
2
T (C, D) z ′ , x1 − x2 , zN
− zN
, ζ z ′ , zN
− zN
, x1 − x2 , ζ |x1 =x2 , z 1 =z 1 ≡ 0, for all n, k ∈ N,
1 n
N
N
∂ k x1 k ∂zN


1
′
1
and
admits an convergent solution (C, D) z , zN , x1 , ζ agreeing in its Taylor expansion up to a certain order with A x1 , ζ, z ′ , zN

′
1
B x1 , z , zN , ζ defined by (3.2). It follows that

 ′


1
1
2
1 , z2 , ζ .
(3.6)
T (C, D) z ′ , x1 , ζ, zN
, z , x 1 − x 2 , zN
− zN
, ζ ≡ 0 in C z ′ , x1 , x2 , zN
N

(3.5)

2 = 0 in (3.6), we obtain by (3.3) and (3.2) that
Taking x2 = 0 and zN

(3.7)

R (z, x + iIm ϕ (z, ζ) , D (z, x, ζ)) = C (z, x, ζ) in C [[z, x, ζ]].

In order to prove the convergence of f and g, we use Proposition 6.2 from Mir[22] defining a parametrization of (3.7) as follows. By (2.12), we
conclude the existence of the following varieties
n
o
(3.8)
Qz = z ∈ CN ; ζN = Θ z, ζ ′ , x ,

6

VALENTIN BURCEA

where Θ is convergent near 0 ∈ C2N−1 . Since N > 1, it follows by Lemma 2.1 that the hypersurfaces (2.7) are actually of finite type fixing x
near 0 in C. Thus, considering the following mapping


(3.9)
V x, z, ζ ′ = D x, zN , ζ ′ , Θ z, ζ ′ , x ,
we obtain following[22] an application of maximum generic rank:



(3.10)
C × CN × CN−1 ∋ x, z, ζ ′ 7−→ x, z, ζ ′ , Θ z, ζ ′ , x , V x, z, ζ ′ , ,

which parametrizes (3.7). It follows that R is convergent and thus that f (z, x + Im ϕ (z, ζ)) and g (z, x + Im ϕ (z, ζ)) are convergent. Taking
ζ = 0 previously, it follows that f and g are convergent. The proof is finished.


Finally, we mention that new generalizations of Theorem of Moser[25] have been concluded by Huang-Yin[15] using the assumption that
(1.1) is formally equivalent with the quadratic model in (1.1) with λ1 = · · · = λN = 0, and respectively by the author[5] in a more general
situation. In those cases, this approach does not apply because it does not exists sufficient equations in order to obtain partial convergence
observations. Thus the existence of the terms of degree 3 may be seen as a non-degeneracy condition. These terms of bidegree 3 may be
eventually selected differently. Thus there are many other suitable models which may be used in order to generalize Theorem of Moser[25].
References
[1] Artin, M. — On the solutions of analytic equations. Inv. Math. 5 (1968), 277 − 291.
[2] Baouendi, M.S.; Ebenfelt, P.; Rothschild, L.P. — Real Submanifolds in Complex Space and Their Mappings. Princeton Math. Ser. 47, Princeton Univ.
Press, 1999.
[3] Baouendi, M.S.; Mir, N.; Rothschild, L.P.— Reflection ideals and mappings between generic submanifolds in complex space. J. Geom. Anal., 12 (4)
(2002), pp. 543 − 580.
[4] Bishop, E. — Differentiable Manifolds In Complex Euclidian Space. Duke Math. J. 32 (1965), no. 1, 1-21.
[5] Burcea, V. — A normal form for a 2-codimensional submanifold M ⊂ CN +1 near a CR singurity. Adv. in Math. 243 (2013), 262-295.
[6] Burcea, V. — On a family of analytic discs attached to a real submanifold M ⊂ CN +1 , Methods and Applications of Analysis 20, 1, (2013), 69-78.
[7] Burcea, V. — Real Submanifolds in Complex Spaces, Acta Mathematica Sinica-English Series. 33, (2017), 1, 1-20.
[8] Dolbeault, P. — On Levi-flat hypersurfaces with given boundary in Cn . Sci. China Ser. A 51, (2008), no. 4, 541 − 552.
[9] Dolbeault, P. — Boundaries of Levi-flat hypersurfaces: special hyperbolic points. Ann. Polon. Math. 106, (2012), 145 − 170.
[10] Dolbeault, P.; Tomassini, G.; Zaitsev, D. —On Levi-flat hypersurfaces with prescribed boundary. Pure Appl. Math. Q , 6, (2010), no. 3, (Special
Issue: In honor of Joseph J. Kohn. Part 1), 725 − 755.
[11] Dolbeault, P.; Tomassini, G.; Zaitsev, D. —Boundary problem for Levi flat graphs. Indiana Univ. Math. J.60 (2011), no. 1, 161 − 170.
[12] Gong, X. — On the convergence of normalizations of real analytic surfaces near hyperbolic complex tangents. Comment. Math. Helv. 69 (1994), no. 4,
549 − 574.
[13] Gong, X. — Existence of real analytic surfaces with hyperbolic complex tangent that are formally, but not holomorphically equivalent to quadrics.
Indiana Univ. Math. J. 53 (2004), no. 1, 83 − 95.
[14] Gong, X.; Lebl, J.— Normal forms for CR singular codimension-two Levi-flat submanifolds. Pacific J. Math 275 (2015), no. 1, 115 − 165.
[15] Huang, X.; Yin, W. — A codimension two CR singular submanifold that is formally equivalent to a symmetric quadric. Int. Math. Res. Notices (2009),
no. 15, 2789 − 2828.
[16] Huang, X.; Yin, W. — Flattening of CR singular points and the analicity of the local hull of holomorphy I. Math. Ann. 365 (2016), no. 1-2, 381399.
[17] Huang, X.; Yin, W. — Flattening of CR singular points and the analicity of the local hull of holomorphy II. Adv. Math. 308 (2017), 1009-1073.
[18] Huang, X.; Krantz, S. — On a problem of Moser. Duke Math. J., 78, (1995), no. 1, 213 − 228.
[19] Kossovskiy, I. ; Shafikov, R. —Divergent CR-Equivalences and Meromorphic Differential Equations.Journal of European Math. Society,18, (2016),
no.12, 2785 − 2819.
[20] Merker, J.— Convergence of formal invertible CR mappings between minimal holomorphically nondegenerate real analytic hypersurfaces. Int. J. Math.
Math. Sci. 26 (2001), no. 5, 281 − 302.
[21] Meylan, F.; Mir, N.; Zaitsev, D.— Approximation and convergence of formal CR-mappings.Int. Math. Res. Not. 2003, no. 4, 211 − 242.
[22] Mir, N.— Formal biholomorphic maps of real analytic hypersurfaces.Math. Res. Lett. 7 (2000), no. 2-3, 343 − 359.
[23] Mir, N.— On the convergence of formal mappings. Comm. Anal. Geom. 10 (2002), no. 1, 23 − 59.
[24] Moser, J.; Webster, S. — Normal forms for real surfaces in C2 near complex tangents and hyperbolic surface transformations. Acta Math. 150 (1983),
255 − 296.
[25] Moser, J. —Analytic Surfaces in C2 and their local hull of holomorphy. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Ser. A.I. Math. 10 (1985), 397-410.
[26] Slapar, M. —On Stein Neighborhood Basis of Real Surfaces. Math. Z. 247 (2004), no. 4, 863 − 879.
[27] Slapar, M. —Modelling complex points up to isotopy. J. Geom. Analysis 23 (2013), no. 4, 1932 − 1943.
[28] Sunyé, J.C.— On formal maps between generic submanifolds in complex space. J. Geom. Anal. 19, (2009), no. 4, 944 − 962.
[29] Zaitsev, D. — New Normal Forms for Levi-nondegenerate Hypersurfaces. Several Complex Variables and Connections with PDE Theory and Geometry.
Complex analysis-Trends in Mathematics, Birkhuser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, (Special Issue: In the honour of Linda Preiss Rothschild), pp. 321 − 340,
(2010).
V. Burcea: Departaments of Mathematics, The Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
E-mail address: valentin@maths.tcd.ie

