## On the Universal Scheme of r -relative clusters of a family

Pau Brustenga i Moncusí

February 1, 2016

## Introduction

Kleiman introduced in (Kleiman, 1981) the iterated blowups, varieties X r which naturally parametrize ordered clusters of r (possibly infinitely near) points of a variety X , for each r . These have proved to be very useful in enumerative geometry, and in other areas of algebraic geometry, especially in the case when X is a surface. See for instance (Kleiman, 1981), (Kleiman and Piene, 1999), (Roé, 2001a), (Roé, 2001b), (De Poi, 2003), (Kleiman and Piene, 2004), (Fernández de Bobadilla, 2005), (Ran, 2005) and (Alberich-Carramiñana and Roé, 2005).

Following the general philosophy that Grothendieck expounds in his Éléments de Géometrie Algébrique', given a scheme B , we generalise the concept of point cluster of a variety to the B -point cluster of B -variety S , or relative clusters of a family of varieties π : S → B . We define schemes Cl r that generalise the iterated blow ups in the sense that they naturally parametrize clusters of r B -points of a B -variety S , or r -relative clusters of a family of varieties π : S → B , and we prove their existence if B is projective and S quasiprojective (Theorem 2.16).

Kleiman's varieties X r can be identified as our Cl r for the particular 'absolute' case when B = Spec K . In the case of surfaces (especially P 2 ) these varieties have received a good deal of attention in the literature for themselves (i.e., not just for applications) see for instance (Harbourne, 1988), (Paxia, 1991) -who does not consider the possibility of infinitely near points - (Roé, 2004) or (Kleiman and Piene, 2011). Our approach, taking the point of view of universal families and representable functors, is closer in spirit to that of (Harbourne, 1988). The relations between Kleiman varieties and Hilbert schemes became a recurring theme which was clarified in (Kleiman and Piene, 2011); it is natural to hope that the analogous forgetful maps (eliminating the ordering of the B -points) from the universal schemes Cl r will be useful in the study of the relative Hilbert scheme Hilb S /B . Harbourne goes even further in the case of P 2 , considering isomorphisms between fibers of the universal family and the corresponding moduli problem, which gives rise to a quotient stack. We do not deal with these issues here.

When B is regular an explicit construction of Cl r +1 is possible, in terms of iterated blow ups centred at suitable sheaves of ideals with support at a subscheme of Cl 2 r := Cl r × Cl r -1 Cl , which fails to be Cartier only along the diagonal. r To this extent, the construction is indeed analogous the one in (Kleiman, 1981) for the absolute case, which works by iteratively blowing up along diagonals; but new phenomena appear in the relative case. To be precise, we show that there is an open subscheme V ⊆ Cl r +1 , parametrizing the clusters of sections in which the image of the last section is not contained in the exceptional divisor of the blow up of Cl , and a stratification r /unionsq p ∈ P Cl p → Cl , 2 r by locally closed subschemes, such that V is isomorphic to a subset of strata /unionsq p ∈ adm Cl p (Theorems 3.9 and 3.10). For some strata whose closure intersects the diagonal, the corresponding component of Cl r +1 is (an open subset of) a blowup as above; since strata are often singular along the diagonal, the centre of the blowup is not always uniquely determined (but the blowup map is uniquely determined). It also happens that infinitely near B -points exist, which are not limits of 'ordinary' B -points.

In Section 4 we show a few simple examples illustrating these new phenomena, in the case of families of surfaces.

## Acknowledgements

I thank my thesis advisor, Joaquim Roé, for his great support.

## 1 Preliminaries

On the whole article we fix an algebraically closed base field K , we consider all scheme a K -scheme and all morphism a morphism of K -schemes.

Let Y be a scheme and y ∈ Y a point. We denote k y ( ) the residue field of y and em y : Spec( k y ( )) → Y the embedding of y in Y . Given another scheme X , we denote X y the product Spec( k y ( )) × Spec( K ) X . Given a morphism f : X → Y and a subscheme W ⊆ Y , we denote f -1 ( W ) the schematic pre-image (i.e. the pull back by f of the inclusion W → Y , which is a subscheme of X ) and X y the fibre of f at y (i.e. X y := f -1 ( y )).

Consider the following diagram.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-4d88b92d-f76c-4c4d-b47f-e342a65e8e23.jpg)

We call it a Cartesian diagram when both squares are Cartesian. We use the following fact without further reference: if the right hand square is Cartesian then the left hand square is Cartesian if and only if so is the big one obtained by composing the rows, see (Hartshorne, 1977, p.89).

Definition 1.1. We call a scheme which is a finite or countable disjoint union of quasiprojective schemes a piecewise quasiprojective scheme.

Lemma 1.2. Given a separated morphism α X : → Y , any section a Y : → X of α is a closed embedding.

Proof. It is straightforward to check that the diagram

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-88f8653f-0fa8-4ec4-9880-2e33e1974a04.jpg)

is Cartesian, where ∆ is the diagonal, which is a closed embedding by hypothesis. Therefore so is the morphism a .

Lemma 1.3. Given the following diagram where the square is Cartesian,

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-402cfa67-0743-4c44-9b6a-c2ae0bc4b6dc.jpg)

if a Y : → X is a section of α then there is a unique section b : Y ′ → X ′ of β that makes the following diagram Cartesian.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-6e71b07d-fc1f-4245-a03f-baccbacd70f1.jpg)

Proof. Consider the following Cartesian diagram.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-0d1cf9ac-761d-4108-9610-49beb5d9ae96.jpg)

Since the big square of the diagram is Cartesian, and obviously Y ′ ∼ = Y × Y Y ′ , we have Z ∼ = Y ′ and the claim follows.

We will use the above lemma to construct sections of a given morphism.

Remark 1.3.1. Under the conditions of Lemma 1.3, if the morphism α is separated then so is β and, by Lemma 1.2, the morphisms a and b are closed embeddings.

Definition 1.4. Let π : S → B be a morphism. A sections family (or sf) of π is a couple ( Y, ρ ) consisting of a scheme Y and a morphism ρ : Y × B →S such that the composition π ◦ ρ is the projection over B .

Let ( X,ψ ) be an sf of π , we call ( X,ψ ) a Universal sections family (or Usf) of π if it satisfies the following universal property: for any sf ( Y, ρ ) of π there is a unique morphism f : Y → X such that ρ = ψ ◦ ( f × Id B ).

If a Usf of a morphism π : S → B exists, by abstract nonsense it is unique up to unique isomorphism.

Given a morphism π : S → B there is the contravariant functor S. \_:Sch → Set corresponding to the parameter space problem of sections of π defined as follows. For every scheme Y , let

S.Y := { ρ ∈ Hom Sch ( Y × B, S ) such that ( Y, ρ ) is an sf of π }

and for every morphism f : Y ′ → Y , let S.f := ( f × Id B ) ∗ , see (Grothendieck, 1960, C.2.).

Definition 1.5. Given ( Y, ρ ) an sf of a morphism π : S→ B and y ∈ Y , slightly abusing language we call the morphism y := S. em ( ) : y ρ B y →S the section associated to y .

If y is a closed point, since k y ( ) = ∼ K the morphism y can be identified with a section of π .

Proposition 1.6. A scheme X represents the functor S. \_ associated to a morphism π : S→ B if and only if X is the Usf of π .

Proof. We just sketch the proof. If ( X,ψ ) is the Usf of π then we can construct a natural isomorphism µ : S. \_ → Hom Sch (\_ , X ) as follows. Given a scheme Y , for each ρ ∈ S.Y , by the universal property of ( X,ψ ), we define µ Y ( ρ ) ∈ Hom Sch ( Y, X ) as the unique morphism such that ρ = S. µ ( Y ( ρ ))( ψ ).

If X represents S. \_, we fix a natural isomorphism η : S. \_ → Hom Sch (\_ , X ). If ψ := η -1 X (Id X ) ∈ S.X , then the couple ( X,ψ ) is the Usf of π .

Corollary 1.6.1. If the Usf ( X,ψ ) of a morphism π : S → B exists, the map σ → σ from the closed points of X to the set of sections of π is bijective.

Theorem 1.7 (Grothendieck) . Given a morphism π : S → B , if B is proper and S is piecewise quasiprojective, then the Usf ( X,ψ ) of π exists and the scheme X is piecewise quasiprojective.

Proof. We consider the scheme S as the finite or countable disjoint union of quasiprojective schemes ⊔ i ∈ I S i . For each i ∈ I the Usf ( X , ψ i i ) of π | S i : S → i B exists, see (Grothendieck, 1961, 4.c) and X i is piecewise quasiprojective. So, X := ⊔ i ∈ I X i and the morphism ψ := ⊔ i ∈ I ψ i ◦ θ are the Usf of π , where θ is the isomorphism from X × B to ⊔ i ∈ I ( X i × B ).

For an alternative exposition to (Grothendieck, 1961, 4.c), see (Nitsure, 2005, 2 nd ex. after Th.6.6).

The rest of this section is devoted to a general construction that appears on some proofs. It is not our main object of study.

Definition 1.8. Let W be a scheme. Let π : S → B be a morphism with S a W -scheme and π ′ : S → W × B the product morphism of π : S → B and S → W . Given Y f → W a W -scheme and a sf ρ Y : × B →S of π , we call the triplet ( Y, ρ, f ) a W -split section family (or W -ssf) of π ′ if the morphism ρ is a W -morphism. (Here B is not assumed to be a W -scheme, but Y × B is a W -scheme via the first projection.)

Let ( X,α,g ) be a W -ssf of π ′ , we call ( X,α,g ) a Universal W -split sections family (or W -Ussf) of π ′ if it satisfies the following universal property: for any W -ssf ( Y, ρ, f ) of π ′ there is a unique morphism G : Y → X such that ρ = α ◦ ( G × Id B ).

It is straightforward to check that in this case the condition f = g ◦ G is satisfied. If a W -Ussf of π ′ exists, by abstract nonsense it is unique up to unique isomorphism.

Remark 1.8.1. In the Definition 1.8 the morphism ρ is a W -morphism if and only if π ′ ◦ ρ = f × Id B

Lemma 1.9. Let W be a scheme. Let π : S → B be a morphism with S a W -scheme and π ′ : S → W × B the product morphism of π : S → B and S → W . If the Usf ( X,ψ ) of π and the Usf ( BW,ϕ W ) of the projection W × B → B exist, then the W -Ussf of π ′ exists too.

Remark 1.9.1. The Usf ( BW,ϕ W ) and the scheme of morphisms from B to W represent isomorphic functors, see (Grothendieck, 1960, C.2.) or (Grothendieck, 1961, 4.c). So its existence is equivalent, and if they exist they are isomorphic.

Proof. The couple ( X,π ′ ◦ ψ ) is an sf of the projection W × B → B . By the universal property of ( BW,ϕ W ) there is a unique morphism h : X → BW such that π ′ ◦ ψ = ϕ W ◦ ( h × Id B ).

The couple ( W, Id ( W B × ) ) is an sf of W × B → W . By the universal property of ( BW,ϕ W ) there is a unique morphism i : W → BW such that Id ( W B × ) = ϕ W ◦ ( i × Id B ). Given a closed t ∈ B we define the morphism λ t : BW → W as the composition of the morphism ϕ W ◦ (Id BW × em ): t BW ∼ = BW × k t ( ) → W × B with W × B → W . By definition λ t ◦ i = Id W , so i is a closed embedding, because it is a section of λ t which is separated and surjective, and we consider W as a subscheme of BW .

Now, if Z := h -1 ( W ), it is straightforward to check that the triplet ( Z, ψ | ( Z × B ) , h | Z ) is the W -Ussf of π ′ .

Corollary 1.9.2. If W and S are piecewise quasiprojective and B is projective then the W -Ussf ( X,α,g ) of π ′ exists and X is piecewise quasiprojective.

Proof. The scheme W × B is piecewise quasiprojective. So by Theorem 1.7 the hypotheses of Lemma 1.9 are satisfied and the claim follows.

Definition 1.10. Let W be a scheme. Let π : S → B be a morphism with S a W -scheme and π ′ : S → W × B the product morphism of π : S → B and S → W . Given ( Y, ρ, f ) a W -ssf of π ′ and y ∈ Y , we denote S f ( y ) the fibre at f ( y ) ∈ W of the morphism S→ W . Then the morphism y : B y →S has image contained in S f ( y ) and we call its corestriction ˜: y B y →S f ( y ) the W -split section associated to y .

## 2 Clusters of sections

Notation 2.1. Let a : Y → X be a closed embedding corresponding to a finite type sheaf of ideals (this is always the case if a is a closed embedding and X is locally Noetherian). We denote bl a : Bl a ( X ) → X the blow up of X at a Y ( ).

Definition 2.2. We call a family a separated surjective flat morphism π : S → B of finite type where B is of finite type and irreducible and the generic fibre is integral.

For this section we fix a family π : S → B and an integer r ≥ 0.

Given a projective variety S , a cluster over S is a finite set of points K of S or of a finite sequence of point centred blow ups of S such that, for every p ∈ K , if q is a point such that p is infinitely near to q , then q ∈ K , see (Casas-Alvero, 2000). For each r ≥ 1 there is a family of smooth projective varieties X r which parametrizes ordered r -point clusters of S , see (Kleiman, 1981).

Let σ : B →S be a section of π : S → B . Let ˜ be π π ◦ bl σ and E σ be the exceptional divisor in Bl σ ( S ).

A section of ˜ whose image is contained in π E σ is said to belong to the first infinitesimal neighbourhood of the section σ . Inductively, for an integer k &gt; 0 a section τ belongs to the ( k +1) -th infinitesimal neighbourhood of σ if τ belongs to the first infinitesimal neighbourhood of a section in the k -th infinitesimal neighbourhood of σ . A section infinitely near to σ is a section in some infinitesimal neighbourhood of σ .

Lemma 2.3. Let W be a ground scheme. Let X f → W be a finitely presented W -scheme. If Y i → X is a closed subscheme which is flat over W , then the blow up X of X at Y commutes with every base change W ′ → W . Furthermore, if X is flat over W then so is X

Proof. Fix a base change W ′ → W . Consider q : X ′ → X and Y ′ → Y the base change of X Y , and i ′ : Y ′ → X ′ the pull back of i . We call X ′ the blow up of X ′ at Y ′ .

Consider I the defining ideal sheaf of Y in X and I ′ the defining ideal sheaf of Y ′ in X ′ (i.e. the kernel of O X ′ → ( i ′ ) ∗ O Y ′ ). There is a natural isomorphism (see (Vakil, 2015))

$$\mathcal { \cdot } \cdots \mathcal { \cdot } \cdots ^ { \prime } \cdots \mathcal { \cdot } \cdots ^ { \prime \prime } \mathcal { \cdot } \cdots \\ \mathcal { X } \coloneqq \mathcal { P } r o j \left ( p ^ { * } \left ( \bigoplus _ { n \geq 0 } \mathcal { I } ^ { n } \right ) \right ) & \cong \mathcal { P } r o j \left ( \bigoplus _ { n \geq 0 } \mathcal { I } ^ { n } \right ) \times _ { X } X ^ { \prime } = \overline { X } \times _ { W } W ^ { \prime } \\ \text{The functor $p^{*}$ commute with colimits, so $p^{*} \left ( \bigoplus _ { n > 0 } \mathcal { I } ^ { n } \right ) = \bigoplus _ { n > 0 } p ^ { * } \left ( \mathcal { I } ^ { n } \right ).$$

The functor p ∗ commute with colimits, so p ∗ ( ⊕ n ≥ 0 I n ) = ⊕ n ≥ 0 p ∗ ( I n ). Since Y is flat over W the ideal sheaf I ′ is p ∗ ( I ), (Vakil, 2015) Then for each n ≥ 0 ( I ′ ) n = ( p ∗ ( I )) n but ( p ∗ ( I )) n = p ∗ ( I n ) (Vakil, 2015). Hence X = X ′ .

Now if X is flat over W the sheaf I is also flat over W . Since the sheaf I I / 2 ∼ = I ⊗ O X O X / I is flat over W , the sheaf I 2 is flat over W and by induction so is I n for all n ≥ 1.

Corollary 2.3.1. Consider the following Cartesian diagram.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-79d288e5-b35b-44b0-86f9-6f630074a42b.jpg)

Let α : X → Y be a separated morphism and a : Y → X a section of α . By Lemma 1.2 the morphism a is a closed embedding. Assume that a corresponds to a finite type sheaf of ideals. Then β is separated and b is a closed embedding corresponding to a finite type sheaf of ideals.

Consider the blow ups bl a : Bl ( a X ) → X and bl b : Bl ( b X ′ ) → X ′ . If the morphism α is flat and finitely presented, then there is a unique morphism θ g ( ):Bl ( b X ′ ) → Bl a ( X ) which makes the following diagram Cartesian.

$$\begin{array} { c } \psi _ { b l _ { b } } \psi _ { b l _ { b } } \psi _ { b l _ { b } } \\ \bar { \Phi } _ { b } ( X ^ { \prime } ) \stackrel { \Phi } { \longrightarrow } X ^ { \prime } \\ \bar { \Phi } _ { b } \bar { \downarrow } \\ \bar { \Phi } _ { a } ( X ) \stackrel { \Phi } { \longrightarrow } X \end{array}$$

Proof. The scheme X ′ is the base change of X by Y ′ → Y and the identity morphism α ◦ a is flat.

Corollary 2.3.2. Given a section σ : B → S of the family π : S → B , the morphism π ◦ bl σ : Bl σ ( S → ) B is a family.

Proof. The morphism π ◦ bl σ is separated and surjective. By Lemma 2.3 it is flat and commutes with any base change B ′ → B , so its generic fibre η is integral because η is a blow up of the generic fibre of π .

Definition 2.4. An ordered r -relative cluster of π : S → B is a finite sequence of morphisms ( σ , . . . , σ 0 r ) such that for all n = 0 , . . . , r each σ n is a section of the family π n : S n → B defined recursively as follows.

The family π 0 is π , so S 0 is S . For n = 0 , . . . , r -1 the scheme S n +1 is Bl σ n ( S n ) and the family π n +1 is the composition π n ◦ bl σ n ( π n is a family by Corollary 2.3.2).

Definition 2.5. An ordered r -relative clusters family of π : S → B (or an r -rcf) is a couple ( C, β · ) consisting of a scheme C and a finite sequence β · of morphisms β , . . . , β 0 r such that for all n = 0 , . . . , r each β n is a section of the morphism π C n : S C n → C × B defined recursively as follows.

The morphism π C 0 is Id C × π : C × S → C × B . For n = 0 , . . . , r -1 the scheme S C n +1 is Bl β n ( S C n ) and the morphism π C n +1 is the composition π C n ◦ bl β n , as shown in the following commutative diagram.

$$\begin{array} { c } \succeq \\ \mathcal { S } _ { n + 1 } ^ { C } \coloneqq \mathbf B l _ { \beta _ { n } } \underbrace { \left ( \mathcal { S } _ { n } ^ { C } \right ) \xrightarrow { \text{bl} _ { \beta _ { n } } } \mathcal { S } _ { n } ^ { C } \\ \pi _ { n + 1 } ^ { C } \underset { C \times B } { \longrightarrow } \pi _ { n } ^ { C } \left \lfloor \right ) \beta _ { n } } \\ C \times B \end{array}$$

Given an r -rcf ( C, β · ) of π , if the morphism π C 0 : C ×S→ C × B is a family (e.g. C = Spec( K )) then the sequence ( β , . . . , β 0 r ) is just an ordered r -relative cluster of π C 0 .

Remark 2.5.1. For an r -rcf ( C, β · ) of π the blow up bl β r : S C r +1 →S C r and the morphism π C r +1 := π C r ◦ bl C β r exist. But the morphism π C r +1 may admit no sections.

Notation 2.6. Given an r -rcf ( C, β · ) of π with k ≤ r and β · = ( β , . . . , β 0 r ), we denote by β · | k the subsequence ( β , . . . , β 0 k ), so ( C, β · | k ) is a k -rcf.

Remark 2.6.1. Given an r -rcf ( C, β · ) with k ≤ r , the target schemes of β i and ( β · | k ) i are the same.

Definition 2.7. Let ( C, β · ) and ( C , β ′ ′ · ) be r -rcf of π : S → B and f : C → C ′ a morphism. Given k ≤ r , we call a morphism g : S C k →S C ′ k a k -section lift of f if the following diagram commutes.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-03c68293-b8cb-458b-aa51-bb6bc77aad90.jpg)

Given k ≤ r +1, we call the morphism g the k -projection lift of f if the following diagram is Cartesian.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-ab4f93a8-be88-4c24-9f45-4a4f0e5b85bd.jpg)

Remark 2.7.1. If the morphism g : S C k →S C ′ k is the k -projection lift of f then it is a k -section lift of f if and only if the diagram (1) is Cartesian.

The following Proposition is an immediate consequence of Corollary 2.3.1 and Remark 2.7.1.

Proposition 2.8. Let ( C, β · ) and ( C , β ′ ′ · ) be r -rcf of π : S → B with k ≤ r and f : C → C ′ a morphism. If a morphism g : S C k →S C ′ k is both the k -projection and a k -section lift of f then there is a unique morphism θ g ( ) : S C k +1 →S C ′ k +1 which is the ( k +1) -projection lift of f .

Definition 2.9. Amorphism between two r -rcf ( C, β · ) and ( C , β ′ ′ · ) of π : S → B , or an r -rcf-morphism , is a morphism of schemes f : C → C ′ such that for all n = 0 , . . . , r the morphism f n : S C n →S C n , defined recursively as follows, is an n -section lift of f .

The morphism f 0 is f × Id S , which is the 0-projection lift of f . By hypothesis f 0 is a 0-section lift of f . By Proposition 2.8 there is a unique morphism f 1 := θ f ( 0 ) : S C 1 →S C ′ 1 which is the 1-projection lift of f . Again by hypothesis f 1 is a 1-section lift of f and we can iterate the process.

Clearly by definition the r -rcf-morphisms are stable under composition and the identity is an r -rcf-morphism from an r -rcf to itself. So the set of all r -rcf of π is a category with the r -rcf-morphisms as morphisms.

Remark 2.9.1. For each n = 0 , . . . , r the morphism f n : S C n →S C ′ n is both the n -projection and an n -section lift of f . There is a unique morphism f r +1 :

S C r +1 →S C ′ r +1 which is the ( r +1)-projection lift of f . Furthermore, if ( C, β · ) is an ( r +1)-rcf of π , the following diagram commutes.

$$\begin{array} { c c } \lambda & \lambda \\ C \times B \xrightarrow { \beta _ { r + 1 } } \mathcal { S } _ { r + 1 } ^ { C } \xrightarrow { f _ { r + 1 } } \mathcal { S } _ { r + 1 } ^ { C ^ { \prime } } \\ \underset { \text{Id} C \times B } { \overset { \pi _ { r + 1 } ^ { C } } { \vdots } } \overset { f _ { r + 1 } } { \vdots } \overset { f _ { r + 1 } ^ { C ^ { \prime } } } { \vdots } \overset { f _ { r + 1 } ^ { C ^ { \prime } } } { \vdots } \end{array}$$

i.e. ( C, ( f r +1 ◦ β r +1 ) , f ) is a C ′ -ssf of π C ′ r +1 .

Notation 2.10. We denote f : ( C, β · ) → ( C , β ′ ′ · ) a morphism f : C → C ′ which is an r -rcf-morphism from ( C, β · ) to ( C , β ′ ′ · ).

Definition 2.11. Let (Cl r , α r · ) be an r -rcf of π : S → B . We call (Cl r , α r · ) an Universal r -relative clusters family (or r -Urcf) of π if it satisfies the following universal property: for any r -rcf ( C, β · ) of π there is a unique morphism f : C → Cl r which is an r -rcf-morphism f : ( C, β · ) → (Cl r , α r · ).

If an r -Urcf of π : S → B exists, by abstract nonsense, it is uniquely determined, up to unique isomorphism. We denote it by (Cl r , α r · ), for each n = 0 , . . . , r + 1 we denote the scheme S Cl r n by S r n and the morphism π Cl r n by π r n . For each n = 0 , . . . , r we denote the blow up bl α r n by bl r n +1 .

Remark 2.11.1. A couple ( Y, ρ ) is an sf of π : S → B if and only if the couple ( Y, (Id Y × Y ρ )) is a 0-rcf of π . The morphism (Id Y × Y ρ ) : Y × B → Y × S is a section of (Id Y × π ) which is separated and surjective. So, by Lemma 1.2 the image of (Id Y × Y ρ ) is closed and, if the Usf ( X,ψ ) and the 0-Urcf (Cl 0 , α 0 0 ) of π exist, X ∼ = Cl 0 and α 0 0 ∼ = Id X × X ψ .

Notation 2.12. If the r -Urcf (Cl r , α r · ) of π : S → B exists then the couples (Cl r , α r · | r -1 ) and ( Cl r , ( α , . . . , α r 0 r r -2 , bl r r ◦ α r r )) are ( r -1)-rcf of π . So, if the ( r -1)-Urcf ( Cl r -1 , α r -1 · ) of π exists too, there are two ( r -1)-rcf-morphisms

$$p ^ { r - 1 } \colon ( \text{Cl} _ { r }, \alpha ^ { r } _ { \bullet } | _ { r - 1 } ) & \longrightarrow \left ( \text{Cl} _ { r - 1 }, \alpha ^ { r - 1 } _ { \bullet } \right ) \\ \psi _ { - 1 } & \psi _ { - 1 } & \psi _ { - 1 } & \psi _ { - 1 } & \psi _ { - 1 } \cup \psi _ { - 1 } \cup \psi _ { - 1 } \cup \psi _ { - 1 } \cup \psi _ { - 1 } \cup \psi _ { - 1 }$$

$$f ^ { r - 1 } \colon & \left ( \text{Cl} _ { r }, \left ( \alpha _ { 0 } ^ { r }, \dots, \alpha _ { r - 2 } ^ { r }, \text{bl} _ { r } ^ { r } \circ \alpha _ { r } ^ { r } \right ) \right ) \longrightarrow \left ( \text{Cl} _ { r - 1 }, \alpha _ { \bullet } ^ { r - 1 } \right ) \ \cdot \\ \text{Remark 2.12.1. If for each $n=(r-1)$, $r,(r+1)$ the $n$-Urcf of $\pi \colon \mathcal{S} \to B$ exists,}$$

Remark 2.12.1. If for each n = ( r -1) , r, ( r +1) the n -Urcf of π : S→ B exists, then p r -1 ◦ p r = p r -1 ◦ f r as ( r -1)-rcf-morphisms.

In the forthcoming sections we always consider an ( r +1)-Urcf Cl r +1 to be a Cl -scheme with structure morphism r p r ; in particular when we consider some fibre product of some ( r + 1)-Urcf it will be understood with respect to the morphism p r .

Given the family π : S → B and an integer r ≥ 0 there is the contravariant functor Cl r : K - Sch → Set corresponding to the parameter space problem of the ordered r -relative clusters of π defined as follows. It sends each scheme C to the set of sequences of morphisms

$$\mathcal { A } ^ { r } C \coloneqq \{ \beta _ { \bullet } \colon C \times B \to \mathcal { S } _ { \bullet } ^ { C } \text{ such that } ( C, \beta _ { \bullet } ) \text{ is an $r$-rcf of $\pi$} \}.$$

Given a morphism f : C → C ′ and a sequence of morphisms β ′ · ∈ Cl r C ′ the image β · := Cl r f ( β ′ · ) is a sequence of morphisms such that ( C, β · ) is an r -rcf of π and f is an r -rcf-morphism between ( C, β · ) and ( C , β ′ ′ · ). For n = 0 , . . . , r we construct recursively each section β n of the morphism π C n and each morphism f n : S C n →S C ′ n at the same time as follows.

The morphism f 0 is f × Id S , which is the 0-projection lift of f . We define β 0 : C × B →S C 0 as the section given by Lemma 1.3 applied to the diagram (2) with g = f 0 and the section β ′ 0 . Now f : ( C, β 0 ) → ( C , β ′ ′ 0 ) is a 0-rcf-morphism and f 0 is a 0-section lift of f . By Proposition 2.8 there is a unique morphism f 1 := θ f ( 0 ) : S C 1 →S C ′ 1 which is the 1-projection lift of f . We can iterate the process to obtain β n and f n +1 for n = 1 , . . . , r .

Given two r -rcf ( C, β · ) and ( C , β ′ ′ · ) of π : S → B , in the definition of the functor Cl r it was shown that a morphism f : C → C ′ is an r -rcf-morphism f : ( C, β · ) → ( C , β ′ ′ · ) if and only if β · = Cl r f ( β ′ · ), which gives an explanation for the (maybe surprising at first sight) definition of r -rcf-morphism.

Definition 2.13. Given an r -rcf ( C, β · ) of π : S → B and c ∈ C , slightly abusing language we call the sequence of morphisms ( c 0 , . . . , c r ) := Cl r em ( c β · ) the ordered r -relative cluster associated to c .

Proposition 2.14. Given an r -rcf ( C, β · ) of π : S → B and a closed c ∈ C , the ordered r -relative cluster associated to c is an ordered r -relative cluster of π .

Proof. Clearly from the definition c n is a section of π Spec( k c ( )) n and S Spec( k c ( )) n +1 is the blow up of S Spec( k c ( )) n at c n ( B c ). Note that the schemes S Spec( k c ( )) 0 and B c are respectively isomorphic to S and B , so c 0 can be identified with a section of π .

Remark 2.14.1. For each n = 0 , . . . , r +1, the scheme S Spec( k c ( )) n is isomorphic to the fibre over c ∈ C of S C n → C .

Theorem 2.15 is a natural generalisation of Proposition 1.6 and is proved essentially the same way.

Theorem 2.15. A scheme C represents the functor Cl r associated to π : S → B if and only if C is the r -Urcf of π .

Corollary 2.15.1. If the r -Urcf (Cl r , α r · ) of the morphism π : S→ B exists, the following map is bijective.

$$\Psi \, \colon \, & \text{Cl} _ { r } ( K ) \xrightarrow { \, \{ \text{orred} \, r \text{-relative clusters of $\pi$} \} } \\ & c \quad \longmapsto \quad ( \underline { c } ^ { 0 }, \dots, \underline { c } ^ { r } )$$

Theorem 2.16. Given the family π : S→ B , if B is projective and S is piecewise quasiprojective then its r -Urcf (Cl r , α r · ) exists and the scheme Cl r is piecewise quasiprojective.

Proof. We work by induction over r . For r = 0, Remark 2.11.1 and Theorem 1.7 says that the 0-Urcf of π exists, it is its Usf which is piecewise quasiprojective.

Assume that the ( r -1)-Urcf (Cl r -1 , α r -1 · ) of π exists with Cl r -1 piecewise quasiprojective.

The scheme S r -1 r is piecewise quasiprojective. By Corollary 1.9.2 the (Cl r -1 )-Ussf of π r -1 r : S r -1 r → Cl r -1 × B exists. We denote it by (Cl r , γ r , p r -1 ), note that Cl r is piecewise quasiprojective.

We will see that the scheme Cl r represents the functor Cl r . First we will construct a morphism of functors ν from Cl r to Hom Sch (\_ Cl ) and then its , r inverse µ .

Given a scheme Z and a β · ∈ Cl r ( Z ), the couple ( Z, β · | r -1 ) is an ( r -1)-rcf of π . By the universal property of the ( r -1)-Urcf (Cl r -1 , α r -1 · ) of π there is a unique morphism f : Z → Cl r -1 such that β · | r -1 = Cl r -1 f ( α r -1 · ). Since ( Z, β ) is an r -rcf of π , by Remark 2.9.1 the triplet ( Z, ( f r ◦ β r ) , f ) is a (Cl r -1 )-ssf of π r -1 r . By the universal property of the (Cl r -1 )-Ussf (Cl r , γ r , p r -1 ) of π r -1 r there is a unique morphism ν Z ( β · ): Z → Cl r such that f r ◦ β r = γ r ◦ ( ν Z ( β · ) × Id B ). Then ν is clearly a morphism of functors.

Given a scheme Z and a morphism h : Z → Cl , we define ( r β , . . . , β 0 r -1 ) = Cl r -1 ( p r -1 ◦ h )( α r -1 · ). Observe that S Z r is Bl β r -1 ( S Z r -1 ) which endowed with the morphism ( p r -1 ◦ h ) r : S Z r →S r -1 r . By Remark 2.9.1 the scheme S Z r is the fibre product ( Z × B ) × (Cl r -1 × B ) S r -1 r . We use this fact to define the morphism β r : Z × B →S Z r as

$$\beta _ { r } \coloneqq \text{Id} _ { ( Z \times B ) } \times _ { ( \text{Cl} _ { r - 1 } \times B ) } ( \gamma _ { r } \circ ( h \times \text{Id} _ { B } ) )$$

which is clearly well defined. Then µ z ( h ) := ( β , . . . , β 0 r ) and µ is a morphism of functors.

We leave to the reader to check that ν and µ are inverse one to each other.

Remark 2.16.1. Given the ( r -1)-Ussf (Cl r -1 , α r -1 · ) of π and the scheme Cl , r the sequence of morphisms α r · is µ Cl r (Id Cl r ). In particular,

$$\alpha _ { r } ^ { r } = \text{Id} _ { ( \text{Cl} _ { r } \times B ) } \times _ { ( \text{Cl} _ { r - 1 } \times B ) } \gamma _ { r }$$

and γ r = p r -1 r ◦ α r r .

## 3 Cl r +1 as a blowup scheme

In this section we consider a family π : S → B with S quasiprojective and B projective and regular. By Theorem 2.16 the r -Urcf (Cl r , α r · ) of π exists for all integer r ≥ 0.

Note from the proof of Theorem 2.16 that for all integer r ≥ 0 the triplet (Cl r , γ r , p r -1 ) is the (Cl r -1 )-Ussf of π r -1 r : S r -1 r → Cl r × B , where γ r : Cl r × B → S r -1 r is γ r = p r -1 r ◦ α r r .

Notation 3.1. Given an r ≥ 0 and a e ∈ Cl r we fix the following notation.

- · From the (Cl r -1 )-Ussf (Cl r , γ r , p r -1 ) of π r -1 r , the (Cl r -1 )-split section ˜: e B e → S ( r -1 r ) p r -1 ( e ) associated to e .
- · From the r -Urcf (Cl r , α r · ) of π , the ordered r -relative cluster ( e , . . . , e 0 r ) associated to e , where e r : B e → S ( r r ) e .

- · From the sf (Cl r , γ r ) of S r -1 r π r -1 r → Cl r -1 × B → B there is the section e : B e →S r -1 r associated to e .

Remark 3.1.1. For integers n, m ≥ 0 and d ∈ Cl n we denote ( i n m d ) : ( S n m d ) →S n m the inclusion. The relation between e , ˜ and e e r are

$$\underline { e } = \left ( i _ { r } ^ { r - 1 } \right ) _ { p ^ { r - 1 } ( e ) } \circ \tilde { e } = p _ { r } ^ { r - 1 } \circ \left ( i _ { r } ^ { r } \right ) _ { e } \circ \underline { e } ^ { r }. \\ \text{an integer } \, r \, \geq \, 0 \text{ for the rest of the section.} \text{ } \text{Con}$$

We call E the exceptional divisor of the blow up bl r r +1 : S r r +1 →S r r (see Definition 2.11), whose centre is the image of α r r , a closed subscheme (note that α r r is a section so its image is closed).

Now fix an integer r ≥ 0 for the rest of the section. Consider Cl 2 r := Cl r × Cl r -1 Cl r with the projections q 1 , q 2:Cl 2 r → Cl r over the first and the second factor respectively and ∆ r its diagonal morphism. Observe that p r -1 ◦ q 1 = p r -1 ◦ q 2.

Our goal is to describe part of the components of Cl r +1 as a blow up of Cl r × Cl r -1 Cl r in analogy with Kleiman (Kleiman, 1981). Observe that the component of Cl r +1 such that for all its points b the image of b is contained in E can not be emerge from this blow up.

For the following definition note from the proof of Theorem 2.16 that the scheme S r r is the fibre product (Cl r × B ) × (Cl r -1 × B ) S r -1 r .

Definition 3.2. We define ρ : Cl 2 r × B →S r r as the product morphism,

$$( q 1 \times \text{Id} _ { B } ) \times _ { ( \text{Cl} _ { r - 1 } \times B ) } ( \gamma _ { r } \circ ( q 2 \times \text{Id} _ { B } ) )$$

which is clearly well defined and makes the following diagram commute.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-58f86187-e6fa-4608-af36-6bc8d1d052ba.jpg)

We also define the morphism F : Cl r +1 → Cl 2 r as the product p r × Cl r -1 f r which is well defined by Remark 2.12.1.

Explicitly, over the closed points, ρ sends each ( c, d, t ) to ( c, d r ( )), which is t possible because p r -1 ( c ) = p r -1 ( d ).

Given a closed b ∈ Cl r +1 the pair of ordered r -relative clusters associated to the image F b ( ) = ( c, d ) ∈ Cl 2 r is ( ( b 0 , . . . , b r -1 , b r ) , ( b 0 , . . . , b r -1 , bl r r +1 ◦ b r +1 ) ) . Lemma 3.3. The following diagram commutes.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-e01ef3b3-2805-4492-83ac-4207dca68723.jpg)

Proof. It is an immediate consequence of Remark 2.16.1 and the definitions of F and ρ .

Remark 3.3.1. Observe that ρ ◦ (∆ r × Id B ) = α r r , so the centre of the blow up bl r r +1 : S r r +1 →S r r is ρ (∆ (Cl ) r r × B ).

Lemma 3.4. The triplet (Cl 2 r , ρ, q 1) is the Cl r -Ussf of π r r : S r r → Cl r × B .

Proof. The schemes Cl r and S r r are piecewise quasiprojective and B is projective. By Corollary 1.9.2 the Cl -Ussf ( r Y, β, f ) of π r r exists. The triplet (Cl 2 r , ρ, q 1) is a Cl -ssf r of π r r . So there is a unique morphism L : Cl 2 r → Y such that ρ = β ◦ ( L × Id B ) and q 1 = f ◦ L .

In fact, the morphism L is an isomorphism, we are going to find its inverse H Y : → Cl . 2 r By the universal property of the Cartesian square of the following diagram, to construct H such that H L ◦ = Id Cl 2 r it is enough to find a morphism g : Y → Cl r which makes the following diagram commute.

1

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-189cfe44-a310-4b6c-8528-ae18ddabb893.jpg)

Furthermore, by the universal properties of the Cl -Ussf ( r Y, β, f ) and the fibre product S r r = (Cl r × B ) × (Cl r -1 × B ) S r -1 r the equality L ◦ H = Id Y holds if p r -1 r ◦ β = γ r ◦ ( g × Id B ).

The triplet ( Cl r , γ r , p r -1 ) is the (Cl r -1 )-Ussf of the morphism π r -1 r : S r -1 r → Cl r -1 × B . The triplet ( Y, ( p r -1 r ◦ β , ) ( p r -1 ◦ f ) ) is a (Cl r -1 )-ssf of π r -1 r . So there is a unique morphism g : Y → Cl r such that p r -1 r ◦ β = γ r ◦ ( g × Id B ) and p r -1 ◦ f = p r -1 ◦ g . Finally the triplet ( Cl 2 r , ( p r -1 r ◦ ρ , ) ( p r -1 ◦ q 2) ) is a (Cl r -1 )-ssf of π r -1 r too, but by definition of ρ , p r -1 r ◦ ρ = γ r ◦ ( q 2 × Id B ), so by the universal property of the (Cl r -1 )-Ussf ( Cl r , γ r , p r -1 ) the morphism q 2 is the unique morphism satisfying this equality and q 2 = g ◦ L .

Notation 3.5. Given e ∈ Cl 2 r we fix the following notation.

- · From the sf (Cl 2 r , ρ ) of S r r π r r → Cl r × B → B there is the section e 2 : B e →S r r associated to e (with a subindex intended to highlight its difference to the c : B c →S r r for a given c ∈ Cl ). r
- · From the Cl -Ussf (Cl r 2 r , ρ, q 1) of π r r : S r r → Cl r × B the Cl -split r section ˜: e B e → S ( r r ) q 1( e ) associated to e .

Remark 3.5.1. The relation between e 2 and ˜ is e e 2 = ( i r r ) q 1( e ) ◦ ˜. e

Given a closed ( c, d ) ∈ Cl 2 r and t ∈ B ( c,d ) , by definition of ρ , ( c, d ) 2 ( ) t = ( c, d r ( )). t Furthermore, given c ∈ Cl , r c = ∆ ( ) . r c 2

Proposition 3.6. Given a point b ∈ Cl r +1 , its image F b ( ) = e ∈ Cl 2 r belongs to ∆ (Cl ) r r if and only if b B ( b ) ⊆ E , and given t ∈ B b , b t ( ) belongs to E if and only if

$$\underline { e } _ { 2 } ( t ) \in \rho \left ( \Delta _ { r } ( \text{Cl} _ { r } ) \times B \right ).$$

Proof. By Lemma 3.3, e 2 = bl r r +1 ◦ b . Then the proposition follows from Remark 3.3.1.

Remark 3.6.1. Given b ∈ Cl r +1 , the section b r +1 of the ordered ( r + 1)relative cluster ( b 0 , . . . , b r +1 ) associated to b belongs to the first infinitesimal neighbourhood of section b r , or b r +1 is infinitely near to b r , if and only if F b ( ) ∈ ∆ (Cl ). r r

We denote V the open set Cl r +1 \ F -1 (∆ (Cl )) r r which parameterize the ordered ( r +1)-relative clusters ( c 0 , . . . , c r +1 ) such that the section c r +1 is not contained in E (i.e. c r +1 is not infinitely near to c r ).

We denote I the closed set ρ -1 ( α r r (Cl r × B )) = ρ -1 ( ρ (∆ (Cl ) r r × B )) ⊆ Cl 2 r × B whose closed points are the closed ( c, d, t ) ∈ Cl 2 r × B such that c r ( ) = t d r ( ). t

We define the scheme J by the following Cartesian square,

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-60a4ccf6-f1e4-4f78-a87e-e0fde80c00e9.jpg)

where I → Cl 2 r is the restriction of the projection Cl 2 r × B → Cl 2 r to I .

Remark 3.6.2. Let b ∈ V be a point with image F b ( ) = e ∈ Cl . 2 r Since bl r r +1 ◦ b = e 2 we have (via the blow up bl r r +1 )

$$\underline { b } ( B ^ { b } ) \, \sl \, E \cong \underline { e } _ { 2 } ( B ^ { e } ) \, \sl \, \alpha _ { r } ^ { r } \left ( \text{Cl} _ { r } \times B \right ).$$

Hence the strict transform of e 2 ( B ) by the blow up bl r r +1 is

$$\overline { ( \text{bl} ^ { r } _ { r + 1 } ) ^ { - 1 } \left ( \underline { e } _ { 2 } ( B ^ { e } ) \, \sum \alpha ^ { r } _ { r } \left ( \text{Cl} _ { r } \times B \right ) \right ) } = \overline { b ( B ^ { b } ) } \, \sum E = b ( B ^ { b } )$$

where the last equality is because b B ( b ) ⊆ E since b ∈ V .

/negationslash

Remark 3.6.3. Given e ∈ Cl , the scheme 2 r

$$\underline { e } _ { 2 } ( B ^ { e } ) \cap \alpha _ { r } ^ { r } ( \text{Cl} _ { r } \times B )$$

is isomorphic to the fibre I e of I → Cl . 2 r

Definition 3.7. Given e ∈ Cl , we call 2 r e a pair of admissible r -relative clusters if

$$\underline { e } _ { 2 } ( B ^ { e } ) \cap \alpha _ { r } ^ { r } ( B )$$

is an effective Cartier divisor of e 2 ( B ). If e is closed equal to ( c, d ) we also call d admissible with respect to c .

We denote by Cl adm r ⊆ Cl 2 r (resp. by Cl adm c ⊆ Cl ) the set of all pairs of r admissible r -relative clusters (resp. the set of all admissible r -relative clusters with respect to c ).

Corollary 3.7.1. The set Cl adm r and for all closed c ∈ Cl r , the set Cl adm c are constructible.

Proof. By Remark 3.6.2, Cl adm r = F (Cl r +1 ) \ ∆ (Cl ) and Cl r r adm c = f r (Cl r +1 ) \ { } c (the definition of f r is in Notation 2.12). The claim follows from Chevalley's theorem (Hartshorne, 1977, ex. 3.19).

Proposition 3.8. J ⊆ V × B is a relative effective Cartier divisor on ( V × B /V )

Proof. The following diagram, where the vertical arrows are the projections, is a Cartesian square.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-fef05cb7-0922-45f9-825e-ebdb085afc19.jpg)

Hence the scheme J = V × Cl 2 r I is a closed subscheme of V × B , the morphism J → V is the (flat) projection V × B → V restricted to J and the following diagram is Cartesian.

)

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-a55b3cfa-c695-4258-bd05-6c46e29aec15.jpg)

So J = ( ρ ◦ ( F | V × Id B )) -1 ( α r r (Cl r × B )) and by Lemma 3.3 the scheme J is just ( γ r +1 | V × B ) -1 ( E ).

/negationslash

For every b ∈ V , the fibre J b of J → V is isomorphic (via γ r +1 | B b = b ) to b B ( b ) ∩ E which is an effective Cartier divisor of b B ( b ) (note that b B ( b ) ∩ E = b B ( b ) by Proposition 3.6 and b ∈ V ).

Then J b is an effective Cartier divisor in the fibre ( V × B ) b of V × B → V (note that ( V × B ) b ∼ = B b ) and the proposition follows from lemma (Stacks Project Authors, 2015).

Theorem 3.9. Given the family π : S → B with S quasiprojective and B projective and regular, there is a stratification, ⊔ p Cl p → Cl 2 r by connected locally closed subschemes, such that

- (1) There are two kinds of stratum. Type I with all e ∈ Cl p an admissible pair of r -relative clusters and type II with all e ∈ Cl p not admissible pair of r -relative clusters.
- (2) ∆ (Cl ) r r is a stratum itself of type II.
- (3) V is isomorphic to the all disjoint union of type I strata, which we call adm Cl p .

⊔ Proof. The stratification ⊔ p Cl p → Cl 2 r of Cl 2 r is the stratification by a locally finite set of connected locally closed subschemes given by the flattening stratification of the morphism I → Cl 2 r (see (Nitsure, 2005) for the existence and the universal property of such flattening stratification) with the strata decomposed into connected components.

- (1) Given Cl p a stratum, by (Grothendieck, 1962, VI, Theorème 2.1 (i)) and (Kleiman, 2005, 3.4), the set of e ∈ Cl p such that I e ⊆ B e is an effective Cartier divisor is both open and closed (here we use the hypothesis B regular). So, if there is e ∈ Cl p such that I e ⊆ B e is an effective Cartier divisor then so is

- I e ′ ⊆ B e ′ for all e ′ ∈ Cl p (note that Cl p is connected) and then Remark 3.6.3 gives the statement.
- (2) For all e ∈ Cl , the dimension of the fibre 2 r I e of the morphism I → Cl 2 r is equal to dim( B ) if and only if e ∈ ∆ (Cl ) and then r r I e ∼ = B e . Therefore by the equidimensionality of the fibres of a flat morphism the closed set ∆ r (Cl ) is a r stratum (note from the definition of a family that B is irreducible).
- (3) By Proposition 3.8 and the universal property of the flattening stratification there is a unique morphism F ′ : V → ⊔ p Cl p which makes the following diagram commute.

⊔

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-0d1cfd13-cef5-4461-890e-cff5f8c33ac5.jpg)

Furthermore, by Remark 3.6.2 and the universal property of (Cl r +1 , γ r +1 , p r ), F ′ ( V ) = ⊔ adm Cl . p We call F 0 : V → ⊔ adm Cl p the corestriction of F ′ which is surjective.

We define /unionsq adm I p by the following Cartesian square.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0552v3-figure-10d63592-7c59-4c7e-b593-369922f26b8c.jpg)

The scheme /unionsq adm I p is a subscheme of /unionsq adm Cl p × B . The morphism /unionsq adm I p → /unionsq adm Cl p is the restriction of the (flat) projection /unionsq adm Cl p × B →/unionsq adm Cl p to /unionsq adm I p .

The scheme /unionsq adm I p is the pre-image of the centre of blow up bl r r +1 by the morphism ρ restricted to /unionsq adm Cl p × B . By the universal properties of the blow up bl r r +1 and of the Cl -Ussf (Cl r r +1 , γ r +1 , p r ), there is a unique morphism G :

Given b ∈ V consider the fibre J b of the (flat) morphism J → V (Proposition 3.8). By the Cartesian diagram (3) the scheme J b is the pull back by (( /unionsq adm I p ) F 0 ( b ) → F 0 ( b ) of b → F 0 ( b ). Hence J b is a field extension of ( /unionsq adm I p ) F 0 ( b ) , in particular their Hilbert polynomial is equal (Stacks Project Authors, 2015). So, by (Hartshorne, 1977, III.9.9) and that F 0 is exhaustive, the Hilbert polynomial of ( /unionsq adm I p ) e is locally constant on e ∈ /unionsq adm Cl p and again by (Hartshorne, 1977, III 9.9) the morphism /unionsq adm I p →/unionsq adm Cl p is flat. Furthermore, for all e ∈ /unionsq adm Cl , ( p /unionsq adm I p ) e ⊆ B e is an effective Cartier divisor, so by (Stacks Project Authors, 2015), /unionsq adm I p ⊆ /unionsq adm Cl p × B is a relative effective Cartier divisor on ( /unionsq adm Cl p × B / ) /unionsq adm Cl . p

/unionsq adm Cl p → Cl r +1 which makes the following diagram commute.

$$\begin{array} { c } \cdot & \quad \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ & \quad G \times \text{Id} _ { B } \Big | ^ { \gamma _ { r + 1 } } & \Big | ^ { \gamma _ { r + 1 } } & \Big | ^ { \quad \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \$$

By Lemma 3.3 and the universal property of the Cl -Ussf r ( Cl 2 r , ρ, q 1 ) clearly F ◦ G = Id /unionsq adm Cl p . We have G ( /unionsq adm Cl ) p ⊆ F -1 ( /unionsq adm Cl ) and since ∆ (Cl ) p r r is not a Type I stratum F -1 ( /unionsq adm Cl ) p ⊆ V . We call G 0 : /unionsq adm Cl p → V the corestriction of G to V .

Finally, by the universal properties of the Cl r -Ussf (Cl r +1 , γ r +1 , p r +1 ) and of the blow up bl r r +1 and by above commutative diagram and Lemma 3.3 the equality G 0 ◦ F 0 = Id V holds.

Remark 3.9.1. Cl adm r ( K ) = ⊔ adm Cl ( p K ). The following theorem is an immediate consequence of the previous Theorem 3.9.

Theorem 3.10. Each irreducible component Z of Cl r +1 is either

- 1. composed entirely of clusters whose ( r +1) 'th section is infinitely near to the r 'th (and F Z ( ) ⊂ ∆ (Cl ) r r ),
- 2. isomorphic to a type I stratum whose closure does not intersect ∆ (Cl ) r r ,
- 3. birational to a irreducible component of a type I stratum whose closure intersects ∆ (Cl ) r r , in this case F | Z is a blowup map whose centre fails to be Cartier only on ∆ (Cl ) r r .

## 4 Examples

In this section we collect a few simple examples on surfaces in which the Universal family of relative clusters behave differently to Kleiman's iterated blow ups in distinct ways.

We consider families π : S→ B with B and S projective; by Theorem 2.16 the r -Urcf (Cl r , α r · ) of π exists for all r ≥ 0. For all the examples we fix the notation of the Section 3 for r = 0. Finally, if ( X,ψ ) is the Usf of π , by Remark 2.11.1 the scheme Cl 0 is isomorphic to X . We refer to the elements of Cl 0 as sections and Cl 1 as clusters.

Example 4.1. We will show a family in which there are infinitely many components of Cl 1 filled up with infinitely near sections which are not limits of distinct sections, a phenomena which does not occur on an absolute setting S→ Spec( K ).

Consider a smooth family π : S→ C of relative dimension 2 with C a smooth curve. There are no restrictions to the pairs of admissible sections because the dimension of the base is 1. Given the stratification ⊔ p Cl p → Cl 2 0 of the Theorem 3.9, ∆ (Cl ) is the unique type II stratum and, by Remark 3.9.1, 0 0

$$\cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \cdot \quad \\ \left ( \bigsqcup _ { p } C \mathbf l ^ { p } \, \sum _ { \Delta _ { 0 } ( C \mathbf l _ { 0 } ) } \right ) \cong V \subseteq C \mathbf l _ { 1 } \,.$$

There are finitely or countably many irreducible components C d of Cl 0 with d ∈ N . For any pair of integers d, d ′ ≥ 0 there is a positive integer which bounds the degree of the 0-cycle intersection of σ B ( ) and σ ′ ( B ) for any pair of sections ( σ, σ ′ ) ∈ ( C d × C d ′ ) ( K ). Given an integer i ≥ 0, we call D i the locally closed subscheme of Cl 2 0 consisting of the pairs of sections which intersect at a 0-cycle of degree i . The flattening stratification of I → Cl 2 0 is:

$$\text{Cl} _ { 0 } ^ { 2 } = \bigsqcup _ { i \geq 0 } D _ { i } & \sqcup \Delta _ { 0 } ( \text{Cl} _ { 0 } ), \\ \text{Ad each nair of noefficient inator}$$

For each i ≥ 0 and each pair of positive integers d, d ′ ≥ 0 D i,d,d ′ := D i ∩ ( C d × C d ′ ) is either empty or an irreducible component of the stratum D i . We call ˜ D i,d,d ′ the component of V isomorphic to D i,d,d ′ .

Now assume for simplicity C = P 1 . For each σ ∈ Cl ( 0 K ) the exceptional divisor of the fibre ( S 0 1 ) σ is a rational surface isomorphic to P ( N σ ( P 1 ) / S ) ∼ = P ( O P 1 ( a ) ⊕O P 1 ( b )), for some a, b in Z , which is the Hirzebruch surface, F | b - | a . If e := b -a ≥ 0,

$$\text{Pic} ( E ) = \mathbb { Z } [ C ] + \mathbb { Z } [ F ]$$

with C 2 = -e , F 2 = 0 and CF = 1. So, an irreducible curve linearly equivalent to D = nC + mF intersects each fibre ( ( S 0 1 ) σ ) t at exactly one point, for each t ∈ P 1 , if and only if 1 = D F · = n . The curve D is the image of a section if and only if it is irreducible and D = C + mF with m = 0 or m ≥ e . The Usf X E of E → P 1 has a component ( X E m ) for each m ≥ e . Since Cl 2 0 is locally Noetherian there are a finite number of ˜ D i,d,d ′ such that ( σ, σ ) ∈ F D ( ˜ i,d,d ′ ) = D i,d,d ′ . So, there are infinitely many ( X E m ) with F (( X E m ) ) ⊆ ∆ (Cl ) filled up with 0 0 sections of E that are not a limit of sections of some D i,d,d ′ .

In each irreducible component of Cl 0 there is a locally closed subscheme N ( a, b ), for each possible pair of integers ( a, b ), formed by the sections σ with N σ ( P 1 ) / S ∼ O = P 1 ( a ) ⊕O P 1 ( b ). Over N ( a, b ), for each m &gt;&gt; 0, there is a family of rational quasiprojective varieties parametrizing all sections infinitely near to sections in N ( a, b ) and of class C + mF . These families form irreducible components of Cl . 1

Example 4.2. We will see that Cl 1 can be smaller than Cl 0 . The phenomenon is due to the admissibility restriction on pairs, which does not exist on an absolute setting or when the base is a curve.

Consider π : P 2 × P 2 → P 2 the projection over the second factor. The scheme Cl 0 is an union of irreducible connected components C d each one isomorphic to an open subscheme of P ( K u,v, w [ ] 3 d ), for d ∈ N the degree of the sections.

The following easy lemma is left to the reader.

Lemma 4.1. Given c = [ P 1 : P 2 : P 3 ] and d = [ Q 1 : Q 2 : Q 3 ] two morphisms of P 2 → P 2 , with c non constant and Z := c ( P 2 ) ∩ d ( P 2 ) not equal to c ( P 2 ) . Then, Z is not a Cartier divisor in c ( P 2 ) .

Corollary 4.1.1. The only pairs of admissible sections of π are the constant ones.

If e ∈ Cl 1 and F e ( ) = ( c, d ) ∈ Cl 2 0 with c a constant section, Bl c ( P 2 ) ( P 2 × P 2 ) = Bl ( ∼ q P 2 ) × P 2 , for some q ∈ P 2 , and the exceptional divisor is isomorphic

to P 1 × P 2 → P 2 , which admits constant sections only. The cluster e must be constant, even it is infinitely near to c (e.i. if c = d ). It is also possible to see that there are no other pairs of infinitely near sections, so

$$Cl _ { 1 } = B l _ { \Delta _ { p 2 } } ( \mathbb { P } ^ { 2 } \times \mathbb { P } ^ { 2 } ).$$

Example 4.3. Let us now illustrate, with an explicit computation in a particular case of example I, that the centre ideal of a blow up ( F | Z in the notation of Theorem 3.10) need not be the ideal sheaf of ∆ r (Cl ) r ∩ F Z ( ). Note also that in this case the centre ideal is not uniquely determined, although the blow up map is. This can happen because of the singularities in F Z ( ).

Given a line R in P 3 , choose coordinates [ x : y : z : t ] such that R = V ( x, y ). We are interested in the family given by the pencil of planes { αy -βx = 0 , } where [ α : β ] ∈ P 1 and whose total space is S := Bl R ( P 3 ).

Any line in P 3 which does not meet R determines a section of π . There is an open subscheme U 1 of Cl 0 isomorphic to A 4 in such a way that each point ( a, b, c, d ) ∈ A 4 is mapped to the line

$$L _ { ( a, b, c, d ) } \coloneqq V \left ( \begin{array} { c } a x + b y + z \\ c x + d y + t \end{array} \right ) \subseteq \mathcal { S }. \quad \text{
   \text{                                                                                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                                                                        \text{                                                                                                                                                                                                  
     \text{                                                                                                                                                                                                
       \text{                                                                                                                                                                                              
        
                                                                                                                                                                                              
         \text{$$

In this example we consider all the objects of Section 3 restricted over U 1 instead of the whole Cl . 0 The morphism ρ U : 1 × U 1 × B → U 1 ×S is

$$\rho \left ( ( a, b, c, d ), ( a ^ { \prime }, b ^ { \prime }, c ^ { \prime }, d ^ { \prime } ), [ u \colon v ] \right ) =$$

$$= \left ( ( a, b, c, d ), [ u \colon v \colon - a ^ { \prime } u - b ^ { \prime } v \colon - c ^ { \prime } u - d ^ { \prime } v ], [ u \colon v ] \right ).$$

/negationslash

Let Y be V (( a -a ′ )( d -d ′ ) -( b -b ′ )( c -c ′ )) ⊂ U 1 × U 1 . Given p = p ′ ∈ U 1 , the line L p meets L p ′ if and only if ( p, p ′ ) ∈ Y and in this case they meet always at a simple point. The flattening stratification of the morphism I → U 1 × U 1 is

$$U _ { 1 } \times U _ { 1 } = \Delta _ { 0 } ( C l _ { 0 } ) \sqcup ( Y \, \sum \Delta _ { 0 } ( C l _ { 0 } ) ) \sqcup Y ^ { c }$$

We now focus on the irreducible component Z of Cl 1 dominating the stratum Y \ ∆ (Cl ). In fact, 0 0 F Z ( ) = Y is a singular quadric in A 8 , with singular locus ∆ (Cl ). 0 0

If [ ν : µ ] are the coordinates of a P 1 , the blow up S 0 1 of S 0 0 at V ( ax + by + z, cx + dy + ), the image of t α 0 0 , is

$$V \left ( \mu ( a x + b y + z ) - \nu ( c x + d y + t ) \right ) \subseteq U _ { 1 } \times \mathcal { S } \times \mathbb { P } ^ { 1 }.$$

The morphism ρ restricted to the stratum ( Y \ ∆ (Cl )) 0 0 × P 1 extends to S 0 1 . Over the coordinates [ ν : µ ], it is [ a -a ′ : b -b ′ ] or [ c -c ′ : d -d ′ ]. If both expressions are well defined, they are equal since ( a, b, c, d, a , b , c , d ′ ′ ′ ′ ) belongs to Z .

If [ ω : η ] are coordinates of a P 1 , the blow up of U 1 × U 1 at the ideal ( a -a , b ′ -b ′ ) is

$$V ( \eta ( a - a ^ { \prime } ) - \omega ( b - b ^ { \prime } ) ) \subseteq U _ { 1 } \times U _ { 1 } \times \mathbb { P } ^ { 1 }.$$

The strict transform ˜ Y of Y under this blow up is a small resolution of Y . The morphism ρ extends over all ˜ Y × P 1 →S 0 1 , over the coordinates [ ν : µ ] it is just [ ω : η ]. That implies ˜ Y ∼ = Z , because any two distinct points of ˜ Y give two distinct sections of S 0 1 . Observe that the ideal is not unique: the ideal ( c -c , d ′ -d ′ ) works too.

## References

| Alberich-Carramiñana, M. and Roé, J. (2005). Enriques diagrams and adjacency of planar curve singularities. Canad. J. Math. , 57(1):3-16.                                                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Casas-Alvero, E. (2000). Singularities of plane curves , volume 276 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series . Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge.                                                                |
| De Poi, P. (2003). Threefolds in P 5 with one apparent quadruple point. Comm. Algebra , 31(4):1927-1947.                                                                                                                         |
| Fernández de Bobadilla, J. (2005). Moduli spaces of polynomials in two vari- ables. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. , 173(817):x+136.                                                                                                      |
| Grothendieck, A. (1958-1960). Technique de descente et théorèmes d'existence en géométrie algébriques. ii. le théorème d'existence en théorie formelle des modules. Séminaire Bourbaki , 5:369-390.                              |
| Grothendieck, A. (1960-1961). Techniques de construction et théorèmes d'existence en géométrie algébrique. IV. Les schémas de Hilbert. Séminaire Bourbaki , 6:249-276.                                                           |
| Grothendieck, A. (1962). Fondements de la géométrie algébrique. [Extraits du Séminaire Bourbaki, 1957-1962.] . Secrétariat mathématique, Paris.                                                                                  |
| Harbourne, B. (1988). Iterated blow-ups and moduli for rational surfaces. In Algebraic geometry (Sundance, UT, 1986) , volume 1311 of Lecture Notes in Math. , pages 101-117. Springer, Berlin.                                  |
| Hartshorne, R. (1977). Algebraic geometry . Springer-Verlag, New York- Heidelberg. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, No. 52.                                                                                                        |
| Kleiman, S. L. (1981). Multiple-point formulas. I. Iteration. Acta Math. , 147(1- 2):13-49.                                                                                                                                      |
| Kleiman, S. L. (2005). The Picard scheme. In Fundamental algebraic geometry , volume 123 of Math. Surveys Monogr. , pages 235-321. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI.                                                             |
| Kleiman, S. L. and Piene, R. (1999). Enumerating singular curves on surfaces. In Algebraic geometry: Hirzebruch 70 (Warsaw, 1998) , volume 241 of Contemp. Math. , pages 209-238. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI.              |
| Kleiman, S. L. and Piene, R. (2004). Node polynomials for families: methods and applications. Math. Nachr. , 271:69-90.                                                                                                          |
| Kleiman, S. L. and Piene, R. (2011). Enriques diagrams, arbitrarily near points, and Hilbert schemes. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. Rend. Lincei (9) Mat. Appl. , 22(4):411-451. Appendix B by Ilya Tyomkin. |
| Nitsure, N. (2005). Construction of Hilbert and Quot schemes. In Fundamental algebraic geometry , volume 123 of Math. Surveys Monogr. , pages 105-137. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI.                                         |

Paxia, G. (1991). On flat families of fat points. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 112(1):19-23.

Ran, Z. (2005). Geometry on nodal curves. Compos. Math. , 141(5):1191-1212.

Roé, J. (2001a). Conditions imposed by tacnodes and cusps. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 353(12):4925-4948 (electronic).

Roé, J. (2001b). On the existence of plane curves with imposed multiple points. J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 156(1):115-126.

Roé, J. (2004). Varieties of clusters and Enriques diagrams. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. , 137(1):69-94.

Stacks Project Authors, T. (2015). Stacks Project .

Vakil, R. (2015). The Rising Sea: Foundations Of Algebraic Geometry Notes .
Pau Brustenga
On the Universal Scheme of $r$-relative clusters of a family
We generalize the concept of $r$-point clusters of a scheme $S$ to
$r$-relative clusters of a $B$-scheme $\mathcal{S}$. Define schemes $Cl_r$ that
naturally parametrize the $r$-relative clusters which generalize the Kleiman's
construction of the iterated blowups by $r$-point clusters. We show that the
iterated construction of $Cl_{r+1}$ from $Cl_{r}$ is something more than just
to do a blow up of $Cl_r\times_{Cl_{r-1}} Cl_r$ at the diagonal. We show a few
simple examples illustrating the situations that may occur.