### Motivic integration, the McKay correspondence and wild ramification (tentative title)

### Takehiko Yasuda

Department of Mathematics, Graduate School of Science, Osaka University Toyonaka, Osaka 560-0043, JAPAN

Email address: takehikoyasuda@math.sci.osaka-u.ac.jp.ac.jp

version: 2021-11-11

### Contents

Chapter 1. Introduction 6

1.1. Notation, terminology and convention 6

Chapter 2. The Grothendieck ring of varieties and realization maps 7

2.1. The Grothendieck ring of varieties 7

2.2. Realization maps 9

2.3. The localizationMk 12

2.4. The completionMck 13

2.5. Realization maps fromMc_{k} 15

2.6. Piecewise trivialA^{n}-bundles 17

Chapter 3. Jet schemes and arc schemes 18

3.1. Notation of power series rings, formal disks,etc. 18

3.2. Jets 18

3.3. Truncation morphisms 21

3.4. Arcs 22

3.5. Order functions 23

3.6. Jacobian ideals of varieties 24

3.7. Hensel’s lemma and lifting of jets 25

3.8. Cylinders 27

Chapter 4. Motivic integration over smooth varieties 29

4.1. Motivic measures 29

4.2. Almost bijectivity 31

4.3. Jacobian ideals of morphisms 32

4.4. The change of variables formula 32

4.5. Strong K-equivalence 35

4.6. Fractional powers ofL 36

4.7. Explicit formula 38

Chapter 5. Motivic integration over singular varieties 42 5.1. Jacobian orders in terms of modules of differentials 42

5.2. The derivation induced by two jets 43

5.3. Bundle structure of truncation maps 45

5.4. Boundedness of fiber dimensions 47

5.5. Ordinary cylinders 47

5.6. Negligible subsets 48

5.7. Admissible functions and motivic integrals 49

5.8. Jacobian orders for morphisms 50

5.9. Fiber inclusion lemma 50

3

CONTENTS 4

5.10. Preservation of cylinders underf∞ 52

5.11. TheA^{e}-fibration lemma 52

5.12. Preservation of admissible functions 53

5.13. The change of variables formula 54

5.14. Group actions 54

Chapter 6. Stringy motives 55

6.1. Singularities in the minimal model program 55

6.2. Log pairs 57

6.3. Stringy motives 58

6.4. Basic properties of stringy motives 60

6.5. Special local uniformization 62

6.6. The minimal log discrepancy via stringy motives 64

6.7. Imperfect fields and non-normal varieties 66

Chapter 7. Working over a formal disk 68

7.1. Jet schemes and arc schemes 68

7.2. Motivic integration 69

7.3. Stringy motives 70

7.4. Explicit formula 71

7.5. Mixed characteristics 73

7.6. p-adic measures 73

Chapter 8. The McKay correspondence: the tame case 75

8.1. The original McKay correspondence 75

8.2. Pseudo-A^{n}-bundles 77

8.3. The motivic McKay correspondence: the tame case 80

8.4. Twisted arcs 83

8.5. Untwisting 85

8.6. Equivariant motivic integration for untwisted arcs 88 8.7. Proof of the tame motivic McKay correspondence 91

Chapter 9. The McKay correspondence: the wild case 93

9.1. G-covers of the formal disk 93

9.2. P-moduli space 94

9.3. Twisted arcs 95

9.4. Hom schemes 96

9.5. Untwisting revisited 99

9.6. A rough sketch of the wild McKay correspondence 100 9.7. Linear actions: tuning modules andv-functions 101

9.8. The tame case revisited 105

9.9. The point-counting version and mass formulae 106

9.10. The caseG=Z/pZ 106

9.11. The caseG=Z/p^{n}Z 106

9.12. More examples 106

9.13. Non-linear actions 106

9.14. Duality 106

CONTENTS 5

Chapter 10. Deligne-Mumford stacks 107

10.1. Motivation 107

10.2. Categories fibered in groupoids 108

10.3. Grothendieck topologies and sites 110

10.4. Stacks 111

10.5. Fiber products and schematic morphisms 112

10.6. DM stacks and algebraic spaces 113

10.7. Points and their automorphism groups 115

10.8. Inertia stacks 116

10.9. Coarse moduli spaces 117

10.10. Quotient stacks 117

10.11. Étale groupoid schemes 119

10.12. Quasi-coherent sheaves 119

10.13. Local structure of DM stacks 120

10.14. Hom stacks 120

Chapter 11. Untwisted arcs 122

11.1. Untwisted jets and arcs 122

Chapter 12. Twisted formal disks 125

12.1. Twisted formal disks 125

12.2. A pseudo-universal family of twisted formal disks 126

12.3. Galoisian group schemes 126

12.4. The Artin-Schreier theory 127

Appendix A. This is an appendix 132

A.1. Quotients of schemes by finite group actions 132

A.2. Descent 132

Appendix. Bibliography 134

CHAPTER 1

### Introduction

1.1. Notation, terminology and convention

Throughout the book, we fix a base field k. We denote byLa field extension ofkunless otherwise noted.

We assume that all schemes are separated.

By ak-variety, we mean an integral scheme of finite type overk.

By a ring, we mean a unital commutative ring unless otherwise noted.

For a ringR, we denote byRJtK (resp. RLtM) the ring of formal power series (resp. Laurent power series) with coefficients inR. Note that for a domainR,RLtM is not generally the same as the fraction field of RJtK; this is different from some authors’ notation.

For a morphismf:Y →X of schemes and an ideal sheafI ⊂ O_{X}, we denote
byf^{−1}I the pullback of I as an ideal sheaf, which was denoted by f^{−1}I · O_{Y} or
I · O_{Y} in [Har77, p. 163]. When X is an affine schemeSpecR, we often identify
f^{−1}I with the corresponding ideal ofR.

For ak-schemeX, ak-algebraRand a subsetC⊂X, we denote by C(R)the subset ofX(R)consisting of R-pointsSpecR→X with image contained inC.

6

CHAPTER 2

### The Grothendieck ring of varieties and realization maps

2.1. The Grothendieck ring of varieties

Motivic integration take values in the complete Grothendieck ring of varieties,
denoted by Mc_{k}, or a variant of it. Elements of this ring is considered as a toy
version of motives that Grothendieck devised in order to unify various cohomology
theories.

Definition2.1.1. We define theGrothendieck ring ofk-varieties, denoted by K0(Vark), to be the quotient group of the free abelian group L

Z{X} generated by isomorphism classes{X}ofk-schemes of finite type modulo thescissor relation:

ifY is a closed subscheme ofX, then

{X}={Y}+{X\Y}.

Namely we take the quotient of L

Z{X} by the submodule generated by the ele- ments of the form

{X} − {Y} − {X\Y}.

The multiplication on the additive groupK_{0}(Var_{k})is given by
{X} · {Y}:={X×kY}.

By abuse of terminology, we call the class {X}of a k-scheme X in K0(Vark)the motive of X and denote it sometimes by M(X) (but more often keep using the notation{X}).

Remark 2.1.2. It is more common to denote the class of a scheme X in
K_{0}(Var_{k}) by[X] rather than{X}. We reserve the brackets[·]to denote quotient
stacks.

It is easy to see thatK_{0}(Var_{k})becomes a commutative ring. The identities for
addition and multiplication are respectively0 ={∅}and1 ={Speck}.

The scissor relation in particular shows that the class {X} of a scheme X in
K_{0}(Var_{k}) is independent of the scheme structure of X. Namely we have{X} =
{X_{red}}withX_{red}the associated reduced scheme ofX. Therefore, for a locally closed
subsetC of a schemeX of finite type, the class{C} ∈K0(Vark)is well-defined.

Lemma2.1.3. If a schemeX of finite type is the disjoint union of locally closed subsetsCi⊂X,1≤i≤n, then{X}=Pn

i=1{Ci}.

Proof. The proof is by Noetherian induction on the pair

p(X) := (dimX,the number of irreducible components ofX)∈N^{2}.
Here N^{2} is given the lexicographic order. Thus we need to show the lemma for a
givenX, assuming that the lemma holds for every schemeX^{0} withp(X^{0})< p(X).

7

2.1. THE GROTHENDIECK RING OF VARIETIES 8

First consider the case where X is reducible. Let X1 ⊂X be an irreducible
component andX2⊂X its complement. From the scissor relation,{X}={X1}+
{X2}. Let Ci,j := Ci∩Xj for 1 ≤ i ≤ n and j = 1,2, which are locally closed
subsets of X_{j}. Since p(X_{j}) < p(X), we have {Xj} = P

i{Ci,j}. We also have {Ci}={Ci,1}+{Ci,2}from the scissor relation. Thus

{X}={X1}+{X2}=X

i,j

{Ci,j}=X

i

{Ci}.

Next consider the case where X is irreducible. Each C_{i} is written as the in-
tersection Y ∩U of a closed subset Y and an open subset U. If C_{i} contains the
generic point, then the closed subset Y is the whole varietyX and C_{i}=U. Thus
exactly one ofCi’s, sayC1, is an open dense subset ofX. From the scissor relation,
{X}={C1}+{X\C1}. Sincep(X\C1)< p(X), we have{X\C1}=Pn

i=2{Ci}.

Thus

{X}={C1}+{X\C1}={C1}+

n

X

i=2

{Ci}=

n

X

i=1

{Ci}.

Remark2.1.4. Everyk-schemeX of finite type is the disjoint union of finitely many integral subschemesXi ⊂X. It follows that K0(Vark)is in fact generated by the classes ofk-varieties. Similarly we get the same ring if we usek-varieties in Definition 2.1.1 instead ofk-schemes of finite type.

Definition 2.1.5. Let X be a k-scheme of finite type. For a locally closed subset C ⊂ X, we can define {C} ∈ K0(Vark) by giving any scheme structure to C. A subsetC ⊂X is said to beconstructible if there exists a decomposition C=F

iC_{i} into finitely many locally closed subsets C_{i}. For such aC, we define an
element{C} ∈K_{0}(Var_{k})to beP

i{Ci}.

Lemma 2.1.6. The class {C} ∈K0(Vark)of a constructible subsetC is well- defined.

Proof. Let C = F

iCi and C =F

jCj be decompositions by finitely many locally closed subsets. If we putCi,j:=Ci∩Cj, thenCi=F

jCi,jandCj=F

iCi,j. By Lemma 2.1.3,{Ci}=P

j{Ci,j} and{Cj}=F

i{Ci,j}. Thus X

i

{Ci}=X

i,j

{Ci,j}=X

j

{Cj}.

Definition 2.1.7. We denote the element{A^{1}k} ∈K0(Vark)associated to an
affine lineA^{1}k byL.

Example2.1.8. InK0(Vark), we have {Gm,k}=L−1,

{A^{n}k}=L^{n},

{P^{n}k}=L^{n}+L^{n−1}+· · ·+ 1.

The first equality follows from the scissor relation. The second one follows from the
definition of multiplication. The third one follows from the scissor relation and the
decompositionP^{n}k =A^{n}k tA^{n−1}k t · · · tSpeck.

2.2. REALIZATION MAPS 9

Example2.1.9. For a vector bundleV →X of rankr, we have{V}={X}L^{r}.
Indeed, there exists a stratificationX=F

Xi into locally closed subsets such that
for eachi,V|Xi∼=Xi×A^{r}k. Thus

{V}=X

i

{V|Xi}=X

i

{Xi×A^{r}k}=X

i

{Xi}L^{r}={X}L^{r}.

The following compactness property of constructible subsets is useful and will be used without explicit mention.

Lemma 2.1.10. Let X be ak-scheme of finite type and letC andCi,i∈I be constructible subsets ofX. If C⊂S

i∈IC_{i}, then there exists a finite subset I^{0} ⊂I
such that C⊂S

i∈I^{0}C_{i}. In particular, ifC=F

i∈IC_{i} is a stratification ofC, then
I is finite.

Proof. The proof is by induction. IfdimC≤0, thenC has at most finitely many points and the lemma holds. WhendimC >0, then we take a finite setI0⊂I such that every point of Cof maximum dimension is contained in some Ci, i∈I0

(there are only finitely many points of maximum dimension). Then C\S

i∈I0Ci

has less dimension than C. By induction hypothesis, there exists a finite subset I1⊂I such that C\S

i∈I0Ci⊂S

i∈I1Ci. We can take the desired finite set I^{0} to

beI0∪I1.

2.2. Realization maps

The ringK_{0}(Var_{k})is huge and it is convenient to have maps from it to simpler
rings such as polynomial rings or the ring of integers. We call such mapsrealization
mapsor simplyrealizations. We can associate a realization map to each generalized
Euler characteristic.

Definition2.2.1. LetRbe a ring and letVark be the category ofk-varieties.

A map χ:Vark → R is called a generalized Euler characteristic if the following conditions hold:

(1) IfY is a closed subvariety ofX, then χ(X) =χ(Y) +χ(X\Y).

(2) For two varieties X andY, we haveχ(X×_{k}Y) =χ(X)χ(Y).

For a generalized Euler characteristicχ, from the first condition and the def-
inition of K0(Vark), we have a unique group homomorphism χ^{0}: K0(Vark)→ R
making the following diagram commutative.

Var_{k} ^{M} //

χ %%

K_{0}(Var_{k})

χ^{0}

R

The second condition then shows that χ^{0} is a ring homomorphism. Namely the
natural map

M :Vark→K0(Vark), X7→M(X) ={X}

is the universal generalized Euler characteristic. We will usually denote the induced
realizationχ^{0} by the same symbol as the original mapχ.

Remark2.2.2. We can defineχ(C)for a constructible subsetCof ak-scheme of finite type in the same way as defining{C}.

2.2. REALIZATION MAPS 10

Example2.2.3. Ifk is a finite field, then thepoint counting map ]:Vark→Z, X7→]X(k)

is a generalized Euler characteristic. Therefore we get the corresponding realization
map ]: K_{0}(Var_{k}) → Z. For each r ∈ Z>0, we also have the generalized Euler
characteristic

]_{r}:Var_{k} →Z, X7→]X(k_{r})

withk_{r}/k the extension of degreer and get a realization]_{r}: K_{0}(Var_{k})→Z.
Example2.2.4. For aC-varietyX, thetopological Euler characteristicetop(X)∈
Zis given by

etop(X) :=X

i

(−1)^{i}dim_{Q}H^{i}_{c}(X(C),Q),

where H^{∗}_{c}(X(C),Q) are singular cohomology groups of X(C) (given with the an-
alytic topology) with compact support. For an arbitrary fieldk, we can similarly
defineetop(X), usingl-adic cohomology groupsH^{i}_{c}(X⊗kk^{sep},Ql)instead. Herelis
the prime number different from the characteristic ofk. It is known that the defini-
tion usingl-adic cohomology is independent of the choice ofl [Nic11, pp. 198–199]

and gives the same value as the one defined in terms of singular cohomology. If
X is smooth, then from the Poincaré duality, we may use the usual cohomology
H^{i} rather than the one with compact support. The map e_{top}: Var_{k} → Z is a
generalized Euler characteristic.

Example 2.2.5. The Poincaré polynomial of a smooth properk-variety X is defined to be

P(X) = P(X;t) :=X

i

(−1)^{i}bi(X)t^{i} ∈Z[t],

whereb_{i}(X)denotes thei-th Betti numberdim_{Q}_{l}H^{i}(X⊗_{k}k^{sep},Ql)forl-adic coho-
mology, which is known to be independent ofl. There exists a (necessarily unique)
generalized Euler characteristic P :Vark → Z[t] such that for smooth proper X,
P({X}) = P(X) (see [Nic11, Appendix]). When k is a finitely generated field,
we can expressP(X)for a general (not necessarily smooth or proper) varietyX in
terms of weight filtration onH^{i}_{c}(X⊗kk^{sep},Ql).

Example 2.2.6. If k is a subfield of C, we can also define the E-polynomial (also called theHodge-Deligne polynomial), denoted byE(X) = E(X;u, v)∈Z[u, v]

such that ifX is smooth and proper, then E(X;u, v) = X

p,q∈Z

(−1)^{p+q}h^{p,q}(X(C))u^{p}v^{q},

whereh^{p,q}are Hodge numbers. In the general case,E(X)can be expressed in terms
of the mixed Hodge structure on H^{i}_{c}(X(C),Q). The map E :Vark → Z[u, v] is a
generalized Euler characteristic.

Lemma 2.2.7 (Properties of P(X) and E(X)). Let X be a k-scheme of fi- nite type. In the following assertions, those equalities and statements involving E-polynomials are restricted to the casek⊂C.

(1) We haveP(X; 1) = etop(X),E(X;t, t) = P(X;t)andE(X; 1,1) = etop(X).

(2) We have dimX = (deg P(X))/2 and dimX = (deg E(X))/2, with the conventiondim∅= deg 0 =−∞.

2.2. REALIZATION MAPS 11

(3) If X 6=∅, then the coefficient ofT^{2 dim}^{X} in P(X) is equal to the number
of irreducible components ofX⊗kk^{sep}of maximal dimension dimX.
(4) IfX 6=∅, then the coefficient of(uv)^{dim}^{X} inE(X)is equal to the number

of irreducible components ofX⊗kk^{sep}of dimensiondimX and this term
is the only term of degree2 dimX.

(5) If X is smooth and proper, then P(X) and E(X) satisfy the Poincaré duality, that is, the following functional equations hold;

P(X;t^{−1})t^{2 dim}^{X}= P(X;t),
E(X;u^{−1}, v^{−1})(uv)^{2 dim}^{X} = E(X;u, v).

Sketch of proof. (1) The first equality follows from the definitions ofetop

and P. The second one follows from the Hodge decomposition of cohomology groups. The first two equalities imply the last.

(2), (3) and (4) We sketch the proof only when k has characteristic zero.

See [Nic11, Prop. 8.7] for the general case. If X is smooth and proper, then the assertions are clear. From the additivity of P(X), by compactification and resolution, we can write

P(X) = P(X^{0})−P(Y)

whereX^{0} is smooth and proper andY is of dimension<dimX. The assertions for
P(X)follows by induction. Similarly for E(X).

(5) From the usual Poincaré duality, we have the following equalities of Betti numbers and Hodge numbers

b_{i}=b_{2d−i} andh^{p,q}=h^{d−p,d−q} (d:= dimX),

which show the assertion.

Example 2.2.8. We can construct a realization map from “nice” cohomology functors with compact support

H^{i}_{c}:Vark→A,

whereA is some abelian category having tensor products. The Grothendieck ring
ofA, denotedK_{0}(A), is the quotient of the free Z-moduleL

Z{M} generated by
isomorphism classes{M} of objects modulo the submodule generated by elements
{M_{1}} − {M_{2}}+{M_{3}}for all short exact sequences

0→M1→M2→M3→0.

The product onK0(A)is given by{M}{N}={M ⊗N}. Let us define χ:Vark→K0(A)

byχ(X) :=P

(−1)^{i}{H^{i}_{c}(X)}. For ak-variety X and a closed subvarietyY ⊂X,
we have the long exact sequence,

· · · →H^{i}_{c}(X\Y)→H^{i}_{c}(X)→H^{i}_{c}(Y)→H^{i+1}_{c} (X\Y)→ · · ·.

This and the Künneth formula show thatχ is a generalized Euler characteristic.

Ifk=C, we can putA=MHS, the category of mixed Hodge structures say
overQandH^{i}_{c}(X) = H^{i}_{c}(X(C),Q)and get a generalize Euler characteristic

χHodge:Var_{C}→K0(MHS).

For an arbitraryk, we denote by Gk the absolute Galois group of k. We may
take A =Rep_{l}(G_{k}), the category of continuous representations overQl with l a

2.3. THE LOCALIZATIONM_{k} 12

prime number different from the characteristic of k. Using the étale cohomology
groupsH^{i}_{c}(X) = H^{i}_{c}(X⊗kk^{sep},Ql), we get a generalized Euler characteristic

χl:Vark→K0(Rep_{l}(Gk)).

Ifkis finite, we have the well-define map

φr: K0(Rep_{l}(Gk))→Ql, {V} 7→Tr(F^{r}|V),

whereF is the geometric Frobenius action. From the Grothendieck-Lefschetz trace formula [Mil80, Th. 13.4], we have the commutative diagram.

K0(Vark) ^{]}^{r} //

χ_{l}

Z _

K0(Rep_{l}(Gk))

φr

//Ql

Lemma 2.2.9. If k is a finite field, then for every positive integer r, the map ]r:Vark →Zfactors throughχl.

Example 2.2.10. When k has characteristic zero, there exists a realization map K0(Vark) →K0(CHMk)to the Grothendieck ring of Chow motives, which follows from results of [GS96,GNA02].

2.3. The localization Mk

Definition 2.3.1. We define Mk to be the localization K0(Vark)[L^{−1}] of
K_{0}(Var_{k}) by L. An effective element of Mk is an element of the form {X}L^{n}
withX ak-scheme of finite type andna (possibly negative) integer.

We will need effective elements with negative exponent n when defining the
motivic measure on an arc space. As a group,M_{k}is generated by effective elements.

Remark2.3.2. If a realization mapχ: K_{0}(Var_{k})→RsendsLto an invertible
element, then it uniquely extends to a mapMk →R, which we keep denoting by
the same symbol, sayχ in this case.

Lemma 2.3.3. We have:

H^{i}_{c}(A^{d}k^{sep},Ql)∼=
(

Ql(−d) (i= 2d) 0 (i6= 2d) Similarly, when k=C, we have:

H^{i}_{c}(C^{d},Q)∼=
(

Q(−d) (i= 2d) 0 (i6= 2d) Proof. From [MR073, XV, Cor. 2.2 ], we have:

H^{i}_{c}(A^{d}k^{sep},Ql)∼= H^{i}_{c}(Speck^{sep},Ql)∼=
(

Ql (i= 0) 0 (i6= 0)

When k =C, similar isomorphisms for singular cohomology follow from the fact
thatC^{d}is contractible. The lemma follows from the Poincaré duality [Mil80, Cor.

11.2], [PS08, Th. 6.23 and Cor. B.25].

2.4. THE COMPLETION Mc_{k} 13

Example2.3.4. The above lemma shows

etop(A^{1}k) = 1,P(A^{1}k) =t^{2},E(A^{1}_{C}) =uv,
χl(A^{1}k) ={Ql(−1)}, χHodge={Q(−1)}.

From Remark 2.3.2, the topological Euler characteristic realizatione_{top}: K_{0}(Var_{k})→
Z(Example 2.2.4) uniquely extends to a map

etop:Mk →Z.

As for the Poincaré polynomial realization, we may extend the target ring Z[t] to
Z[t^{±}]to get

P :Mk →Z[t^{±}].

Similarly, from the E-polynomial realization, we induce a map
E :M_{C}→Z[u^{±}, v^{±}].

RealizationsχHodge andχétsendLto an invertible element and induce
χHodge:M_{C}→K0(MHS),

χ_{l}:M_{k} →K_{0}(Rep_{l}(G_{k}))

respectively. Whenkis a finite field, then the maps]_{r}extends to
]r:Mk →Q.

2.4. The completion Mck

We will need to consider infinite sums of effective elements and discuss their convergence. For this purpose, we define a completion ofMk and get a topological ring.

Definition2.4.1. Thedimension of an effective element{X}L^{n} is defined by
dim{X}L^{n} := dimX+n.

Lemma 2.4.2. The dimension of an effective element is independent of the
choice of its expression as {X}L^{n}.

Proof. From Lemma 2.2.7, for an effective elementα={X}L^{n},
dimα= dimX+n= 1

2deg P(X) +n= 1

2deg P(α).

The last term is clearly independent of the choice of the expression.

Definition 2.4.3. Form ∈Z, we define Fm⊂ Mk to be the subgroup gen-
erated by effective elements of dimension ≤ −m. We get a descending filtration
{Fm}_{m∈Z} such that FmFn ⊂ Fm+n and a projective system of abelian groups
{Mk/Fm}_{m∈Z}. We define the complete Grothendieck ring ofk-varieties to be the
projective limit

Mck:= lim

←−Mk/Fm.

This becomes a complete topological ring as follows. We give the discrete
topologies toMk/Fmand the limit topology toMck, which makes Mck a complete
topological group. If we define Fb_{m} to be the projective limit of{Fm/F_{n}}n, then
{Fb_{m}}_{m}is a fundamental system of open neighborhoods of0. SinceF_{m}F_{n} ⊂F_{m+n},
for two elements(α_{m})_{m∈}_{Z} and(β_{m})_{m∈}_{Z} of Mck withα_{m}, β_{m}∈ Mk/F_{m}, products

2.4. THE COMPLETION Mc_{k} 14

αmβm are well-defined as elements of Mk/Fm^{2}. Thus the sequence (αmβm)m∈Z

defines an element ofMck. We define the product of(αm)_{m∈Z} and(βm)_{m∈Z} to be
this element.

Definition 2.4.4. The image of an effective element {X}L^{n} ∈ M_{k} is again
called aneffective element and denoted by{X}L^{n}.

InMck, an effective element of dimensionnbelongs toFb_{−n}. Therefore a series
(αn)_{n≥0} of effective elements with dimαn → −∞ converges to0 and the infinite
sumP

nαn converges to some element inMck. More generally:

Definition 2.4.5. Let αi ∈ Mck, i ∈ I be effective elements indexed by a countable set. We say that thesumP

i∈Iαi converges if for every integerm, there are at most finitely many αi of dimension ≥ m. We call the element given by a convergent sumP

i∈Iαi apseudo-effective element. We define itsdimension to be max{dimαi}. When the sumP

i∈Iαi does not converge, we say that it diverges.

If it is the case, we formally putP

i∈Iαi:=∞.

Thus a countable sumP

i∈Iα_{n} of effective elements always give an element of
Mck∪ {∞}. Then we can generalize all these to countable sums of pseudo-effective
elements as follows:

Definition 2.4.6. Let α_{i} ∈ Mck, i ∈ I be pseudo-effective elements indexed
by a countable set. We say that the sum P

i∈Iα_{i} converges if for every integerm,
there are at most finitely many α_{i}’s of dimension ≥m. If it is the case, we define
the element P

i∈Iαi ∈ Mck in the obvious way. Otherwise we say that the sum diverges and we putP

i∈Iαi:=∞.

Divergent sums don’t give an element ofMck. When an infinite sum of pseudo- effective elements diverges, it is sometimes useful to classify them depending on how “large” infinities they are.

Definition 2.4.7. For a (not necessarily convergent) countable sumP

i∈Iα_{i}
of pseudo-effective elements, we define itsdimension to besup{dimα_{i}} ∈Z∪ {∞}.

If the sum diverges and has dimensiond, then we write X

i∈I

αi:=∞d,

We say that the sum isdimensionally bounded if it has finite dimension.

If we write{∞_{∗}}:={∞_{d}|d∈Z∪ {∞}}, a countable sumP

i∈Iα_{i} of pseudo-
effective elements thus defines an element of

Mck∪ {∞∗}, which refines the one defined inMck∪ {∞}.

The following lemma will be used to show that motivic integrals are well-defined
inMc_{k}∪ {∞_{∗}}.

Lemma2.4.8. LetI be an at most countable set. For eachi∈I, letβij,j ∈Ji

be at most countably many pseudo-effective elements such that αi := P

j∈Jiβij

converges (note that this is automatic if Ji is finite). Then X

i∈I

αi= X

i∈I,j∈J_{i}

βij inMck∪ {∞_{∗}}.

2.5. REALIZATION MAPS FROMMc_{k} 15

In particular, one side converges (resp. dimensionally bounded) if and only if so does the other side.

Proof. Sincedimαi= max{dimβij|j∈Ji}, we have that sup

i

dimα_{i}= sup

i,j

dimβ_{ij}.

ThereforePα_{i} is dimensionally bounded if and only if so doesPβ_{ij}.

Let m ∈Z. If there are at most finitely many β_{ij}’s of dimension≥m, then
there are at most finitely many α_{i}’s of dimension ≥m. Conversely suppose that
I_{m}:={i∈I|dimα_{i}≥m}is a finite set. Fori∈I\I_{m}, we havedimβ_{ij} < m. For
i ∈I_{m}, since P

j∈Jiβ_{ij} converges, J_{i,m} :={j ∈ J_{i} | dimβ_{ij} ≥m} is a finite set.

Therefore

{(i, j)|dimβij ≥m}= [

i∈Im

Ji,m,

which is a finite set. In conclusion, there are at most finitely manyβij’s of dimension

≥mif and only if there are at most finitely manyαi’s of dimension≥m. We have proved thatP

αi converges if and only if so doesP βij.

The equality sup_{i}dimαi = sup_{i,j}dimβij now shows the equality P

iαi = P

i,jβij when these sums diverge. It remains to show that when they converge, their limits are the same. This holds because the two sums reduce to the same

finite sum moduloFb_{m}for every m∈Z.

2.5. Realization maps from Mck

We can extend some of realization maps discussed above further from M_{k} to
Mck by completing the target ring with respect to a filtration compatible the one
ofMk.

Example2.5.1. Consider the Poincaré polynomial realizationP :Mk→Z[t^{±}]
(see Examples 2.2.5 and 2.3.4). The ring of Laurent power series

ZLt^{−1}M=
(

X

i∈Z

ait^{i}|ai∈Z, ai= 0 (i0)
)

is the completion ofZ[t^{±}]with respect to the descending filtration{Fm}_{m∈Z}, where
Fm := t^{−m}Z[t^{−}], the subgroup of Laurent polynomials of degree ≤ −m. Since
P(Fm)⊂F_{−2m}, the above realization map induces the map between the comple-
tions,

P :Mc_{k}→ZLt^{−1}M.

Similarly, ifk=C, we can extend the E-polynomial realization (see Examples 2.2.6 and 2.3.4) to get

E :Mck→ZLu^{−1}, v^{−1}M.

Example 2.5.2. We can extend χ_{Hodge}: M_{C} → K_{0}(MHS) as follows. For
m∈Z, we defineF_{m}⊂K_{0}(MHS)to be the subgroup generated by mixed Hodge
structures of weight≤ −m. We then define the completion

Kc_{0}(MHS) := lim

←−K_{0}(MHS)/F_{m}.

2.5. REALIZATION MAPS FROMMc_{k} 16

This has a natural ring structure of ring like Mc_{C}. Since χHodge(Fm)⊂F2m, the
above mapχHodge induces

χ_{Hodge}:Mc_{C}→Kc_{0}(MHS).

For a finitely generated fieldk, there exists a full abelian subcategorymRep_{l}(Gk)⊂
Rep_{l}(Gk)ofmixed representations, which are equipped with weight filtration. As
in the case of mixed Hodge structures, we can define the completionKc_{0}(mRep_{l}(G_{k}))
of the Grothendieck ringK_{0}(mRep_{l}(G_{k}))and extend the realization mapχ_{l}to

χ_{l}:Mc_{k} →Kc_{0}(mRep_{l}(G_{k})).

As was already noted, motivic integration take values in Mck or some variant of it. As a special and important case, if we integral the constant function1on the whole arc space of a smooth varietyX, we get the valueM(X) ={X}inMck. It is essential to know what information onX can be extracted from this value. Firstly we can use realization mapsP andEto extract some numerical data.

Proposition2.5.3. LetX andY bek-varieties such that{X}={Y}inMck. (1) We haveP(X) = P(X)andetop(X) = etop(Y).

(2) If k=C, we also haveE(X) = E(Y).

(3) If k is a finite field and ifkr/k is the degree rextension, then ]X(kr) = ]Y(kr).

(4) IfX andY are smooth and proper, then they have the same Betti numbers (either for the l-adic cohomology or the singular cohomology in the case k⊂C): for everyi∈Z,bi(X) =bi(Y).

(5) IfX andY are smooth and proper and ifk=C, then they have the same
Hodge numbers: for every p, q∈Z,h^{p,q}(X) =h^{p,q}(Y).

Proof. (1) The equalityP(X) = P(Y)is obtained by sending{X}={Y}by
the mapP :Mck→ZLt^{−1}M. Note that since the completion mapZ[t^{±}]→ZLt^{−1}Mis
injective, havingP(X) = P(Y)inZLt^{−1}Mis equivalent to having the same equality
inZ[t^{±}]. The other equality follows by substituting 1 fort;

e_{top}(X) = P(X; 1) = P(Y; 1) = e_{top}(Y).

(2) We can use the realization map E :Mck → ZLu^{−1}, v^{−1}M to deduce this
assertion.

(3) Since K0(mRep_{l}(Gk)) → Kc0(mRep_{l}(Gk)) is injective [Yas06, p. 728],
we get equalities χét(X) = χét(Y) in K0(mRep_{l}(Gk)). From the commutative
diagram at the end of Example 2.2.8,

]X(k_{r}) =]_{r}({X}) =]_{r}({Y}) =]Y(k_{r}).

.

(4) WhenX is smooth and proper, the Poincaré polynomial is just the gener- ating function of Betti numbers. The assertion follows fromP(X) = P(Y).

(5) Similarly, the E-polynomial is the generating function of Hodge numbers in the smooth and proper case. The equalityE(X) = E(Y)implies the assertion.

Proposition 2.5.4. Let X andY be smooth and properk-varieties such that {X}={Y} inMck.

2.6. PIECEWISE TRIVIAL A^{n}-BUNDLES 17

(1) Ifkis finitely generated, then we have isomorphisms ofGk-representations
H^{i}(X⊗kk^{sep},Ql)^{ss}∼= H^{i}(Y ⊗kk^{sep},Ql)^{ss}.

Here the superscriptss means the semi-simplification.

(2) If k=C, then we have isomorphisms of Hodge structures
H^{i}(X(C),Q)∼= H^{i}(Y(C),Q) (i∈Z).

Sketch of proof. Since the mapsK_{0}(mRep_{l}(G_{k}))→Kc_{0}(mRep_{l}(G_{k}))and
K_{0}(MHS)→Kc_{0}(MHS) are injective [Yas06, p. 728], we get equalitiesχ_{l}(X) =
χ_{l}(Y)andχ_{Hodge}(X) =χ_{Hodge}(Y)respectively in the non-complete Grothendieck
ring. Since cohomology groups H^{i} have pure weight 2i, we can deduce degree-
wise equalities {H^{i}(X)} ={H^{i}(Y)}. In general, the equality {M} ={N} in the
Grothendieck group of an abelian category implies an isomorphismM^{ss} ∼=N^{ss} of
semi-simplifications. The first assertion now follows. For the second assertion, the
Hodge structure onH^{i}(X(C),Q)is polarizable and hence semi-simple [PS08, Cor.

2.12]. (The polarizability is well-known when X is projective. In the general case, we can apply Chow’s lemma to embed cohomology groups into ones of a smooth projective variety.) Thus the semi-simplification does not change Hodge structures

on cohomology groups.

2.6. Piecewise trivial A^{n}-bundles

Definition 2.6.1. Letf:W →V be a morphism ofk-schemes of finite type.

Let D ⊂ W and C ⊂ V be constructible subsets with f(D) ⊂ C. We say that
the induced map f|_{D}: D → C is a piecewise trivial A^{n}-bundle if there exists a
stratification C =Fl

i=1C_{i} by locally closed subsets C_{i} ⊂V such that for each i,
(f|D)^{−1}(C_{i})⊂W is a locally closed subset and C_{i}-isomorphic to A^{n}Ci =A^{n}k ×kC_{i}
with the reduced structures onCi and(f|D)^{−1}(Ci).

Lemma 2.6.2. With the above notation, if f|D:D →C is a piecewise trivial
A^{n}-bundle, then{D}={C}L^{n}.

Proof. LetC=F

iC_{i} be as above. Then
{D}=G

i

{(f|D)^{−1}(Ci)}=G

i

({Ci}L^{n}) = G

i

Ci

!

L^{n} ={C}L^{n}.

The following lemma is useful to show that some map of constructible subsets
is a piecewise trivialA^{n}-bundle.

Lemma2.6.3. We keep the above notation. Suppose that for every pointc∈C,
(f|D)^{−1}(c)is a closed subset of the scheme-theoretic fiberf^{−1}(c). Then there exists
a (necessarily finite) stratificationC=F

Ci into locally closed subsetsCi⊂V such
that (f|D)^{−1}(Ci)are locally closed subsets ofW .

Proof. Letη∈C be a point of maximal dimension and letE be the Zariski
closure of(f|D)^{−1}(η)in W. The setsD andE coincide when restricted tof^{−1}(η).

Therefore there exists a locally closed subset C^{0} ⊂V such that η ∈C^{0} ⊂C and
such thatDandE coincide when restricted to(f|D)^{−1}(C^{0}). In particular,f^{−1}(C^{0})
is a locally closed subset ofW. It is now easy to show the lemma by induction on
the dimension and the number of points of maximal dimension.

CHAPTER 3

### Jet schemes and arc schemes

The type of motivic integration that we discuss mainly in this book is integra- tion over arc spaces of varieties. Arc spaces are constructed as limits of jet schemes.

To define measures on arc spaces, we need properties of truncation maps between jet schemes. Throughout the chapter,X andY denotek-schemes of finite type.

3.1. Notation of power series rings, formal disks,etc.

For a k-algebra R, we denote by RJtK the ring of formal power series with
coefficients inRand byRLtMthe localizationRJtK^{t}byt, that is, the ring of Laurent
power series with coefficients in R. In particular, if L is a field, LLtM is also a
field. We define DR := SpecRJtK and call it the formal disk over R. If R is an
algebraically closed field, we call it also a geometric formal disk. For n ∈ Z≥0,
we put DR,n := SpecRJtK/(t^{n+1}) = SpecR[t]/(t^{n+1}). Sometimes, following the
conventiont^{∞}= 0, we write DR= D_{R,∞}.

3.2. Jets

Definition 3.2.1. Letn∈Z≥0and letR be ak-algebra. Ann-jet of X over R is a k-morphism DR,n →X. A geometric n-jet of X is an n-jet of X over an algebraically closed field.

A geometric 0-jet is just a geometric point and a geometric 1-jet is a Zariski tangent vector (over some algebraically closed field).

Remark 3.2.2. In the context of complex analytic spaces, if X = C^{d}, then
a morphism (C,0) → X from the germ of C at the origin is given by a tuple
(h_{1}, . . . , h_{d})of convergent power series h_{i}. Considering ann-jet of X amounts to
looking only at the terms ofh_{i} of degree≤nby ignoring the terms of degree> n.

Definition 3.2.3. Ann-th jet scheme ofX, denoted byJnX, is (ak-scheme representing) the functor:

(Aff_{k})^{op}→Set

SpecR7→HomSch_{k}(DR,n, X)

For a morphismf:Y →X ofk-schemes, we denote the induced morphismJnY → JnX byfn.

Here we follow the usual convention of identifying a scheme with the associated
functor (Aff_{k})^{op} → Set (for instance, [EH00, VI]). As we will see shortly in
Proposition 3.2.8, the functorJ_{n}X is indeed representable by a scheme.

Lemma 3.2.4. We have an isomorphism

J_{n}(A^{d}k)∼=A^{d(n+1)}k = Speck[x^{(j)}_{i} |1≤i≤d,0≤j≤n]

18

3.2. JETS 19

such that anR-point (r^{(j)}_{i} )∈A^{d(n+1)}k (R)corresponds to the n-jet:

DR,n= SpecR[t]/(t^{n+1})→A^{d}k

r^{(0)}_{i} +r_{i}^{(1)}t+· · ·+r^{(n)}_{i} t^{n} ←[xi

Proof. We have the following one-to-one correspondences, which are functo- rial inR:

(JnA^{d}k)(SpecR)↔HomAlg_{k}(k[x1, . . . , xd], R[t]/(t^{n+1}))

↔ R[t]/(t^{n+1})⊕d

↔R^{⊕d(n+1)}

↔A^{d(n+1)}k (SpecR).

Therefore there is an isomorphismJn(A^{d}k)∼=A^{d(n+1)}k which induces the correspon-
dence of the lemma between points ofA^{d(n+1)}k andn-jets.

Let us writek[x^{(∗)}∗ ] =k[x^{(j)}_{i} |1≤i≤d,0≤j ≤n]. The lemma in particular
shows that the universaln-jet

u: (JnA^{d}k)×kSpeck[t]/(t^{n+1})→A^{d}k

is given by:

Speck[x^{(∗)}_{∗} ][t]/(t^{n+1})→A^{d}k

x^{(0)}_{i} +x^{(1)}_{i} t+· · ·+x^{(n)}_{i} t^{n} ←[x_{i}

Lemma 3.2.5. For a closed subscheme X = V(f_{1}, . . . , f_{l}) ⊂ A^{d}k, we define
F_{λ}^{(j)}∈k[x^{(∗)}∗ ](1≤λ≤l,0≤j ≤n) by

u^{∗}(fλ) =fλ(u^{∗}(x1), . . . , u^{∗}(xd)) =F_{λ}^{(0)}+F_{λ}^{(1)}t+· · ·+F_{λ}^{(n)}t^{n},

whereuis the universaln-jet. Then the isomorphismJ_{n}(A^{d}k)∼=A^{d(n+1)}k of Lemma
3.2.4 induces the isomorphism of subschemes,

JnX ∼=V(F_{λ}^{(j)}|1≤λ≤l,0≤j ≤n).

Proof. Letγ be an n-jet ofA^{d}k overR and let (r^{(j)}_{i} )_{i,j} ∈A^{d(n+1)}k (R)be the
corresponding point. We have

γ^{∗}(f_{λ})

=fλ(γ^{∗}(x1), . . . , γ^{∗}(xd))

=f_{λ}(r_{1}^{(0)}+r^{(1)}_{1} t+· · ·+r^{(n)}_{1} t^{n}, . . . , r^{(0)}_{d} +r_{d}^{(1)}t+· · ·+r^{(n)}_{d} t^{n})

=F_{λ}^{(0)}(r^{(∗)}_{∗} ) +F_{λ}^{(1)}(r^{(∗)}_{∗} )t+· · ·+F_{λ}^{(n)}(r^{(∗)}_{∗} )t^{n}.
Therefore the following conditions are equivalent:

(1) The n-jetγgives ann-jet ofX.
(2) For everyλ,γ^{∗}(f_{λ}) = 0.

(3) For everyλandj,F_{λ}^{(j)}(r^{(∗)}_{∗} ) = 0.

(4) The point (r∗^{(∗)})lies in the subscheme defined byF_{λ}^{(j)}’s.

This shows that the isomorphismJ_{n}(A^{d}k)∼=A^{d(n+1)}k restricts to the isomorphism of

the lemma of subfunctors.

3.2. JETS 20

Example3.2.6. Consider the plane curveX =V(y^{2}+x^{3})⊂A^{2}k.Then
u^{∗}(f) =(y^{(0)}+y^{(1)}t+· · ·+y^{(n)}t^{n})^{2}+ (x^{(0)}+x^{(1)}t+· · ·+x^{(n)}t^{n})^{3}

=(y^{(0)})^{2}+ (x^{(0)})^{3}+

2y^{(0)}y^{(1)}+ 3(x^{(0)})^{2}x^{(1)}
t

+

2y^{(0)}y^{(2)}+ (y^{(1)})^{2}+ 3(x^{(0)})^{2}x^{(2)}+ 3x^{(0)}(x^{(1)})^{2}

t^{2}+· · · .
ThusJ1Xis the closed subscheme ofA^{4}kwith coordinatesx^{(0)}, x^{(1)}, y^{(0)}, y^{(1)}defined
by

(y^{(0)})^{2}+ (x^{(0)})^{3}= 2y^{(0)}y^{(1)}+ 3(x^{(0)})^{2}x^{(1)}= 0

andJ_{2}Xis the closed subscheme ofA^{6}kwith coordinatesx^{(0)}, x^{(1)}, x^{(2)}, y^{(0)}, y^{(1)}, y^{(2)}
defined by

(y^{(0)})^{2}+ (x^{(0)})^{3}= 2y^{(0)}y^{(1)}+ 3(x^{(0)})^{2}x^{(1)}

= 2y^{(0)}y^{(2)}+ (y^{(1)})^{2}+ 3(x^{(0)})^{2}x^{(2)}+ 3x^{(0)}(x^{(1)})^{2}= 0.

We have the morphism JnX → X such that for each k-algebra R, the map (JnX)(R)→X(R)sends ann-jetDR,n→X to theR-point

SpecR ,→D_{R,n}→X.

Lemma3.2.7. Let f:Y →X be an étale morphism (e.g. an open immersion).

Then we have a natural isomorphism of functors (Affk)^{op}→Set,
J_{n}Y ∼= (JnX)×_{X}Y.

Proof. Giving anR-point of the right side is equivalent to giving a commu- tative diagram of solid arrows with the vertical arrows given:

SpecR

//Y

f

DR,n //<<

X

From the formal étaleness (for definition, see [Gro67, Def. 17.1.1]) of f, this is in turn equivalent to giving the dashed arrow, that is, anR-point of the left side of the isomorphism. We have got the desired correspondence of points.

Proposition3.2.8. The functorJ_{n}X is a scheme of finite type which is affine
overX.

Proof. The functor is the Weil restriction

R_{(k[t]/(t}n+1))/k X⊗kk[t]/(t^{n+1})

and hence the proposition follows from a general result [BLR90, p. 195]. But we give a more ad-hoc proof.

LetX=S

Uibe an affine open covering and letUij :=Ui∩Uj, which are again affine (we assume that all schemes are separated). From Lemma 3.2.5, JnUi and JnUijare affine finite type schemes. From Lemma 3.2.7, morphismsJnUij→JnUi

andJnUij →JnUj are open immersions. We can glueJnUialongJnUij to get the
schemeJnX. SinceJnX×XUi∼= JnUiare affine and of finite type, the morphism
J_{n}X → X is affine (in particular, separated) and of finite type. This shows the

proposition.

3.3. TRUNCATION MORPHISMS 21

Lemma3.2.9. Ifι:Z →X is an immersion (resp. an open immersion, a closed immersion), then so is the induced morphism ιn: JnZ→JnX.

Proof. The assertion for open immersions follows from Lemma 3.2.7. The one for closed immersions follows from the local description of jet schemes in Lemma 3.2.5. The one for general immersions follows from these two cases.

3.3. Truncation morphisms

For integersn^{0} ≥n, we have the natural surjectionR[t]/(t^{n}^{0}^{+1})→R[t]/(t^{n+1}),
which maps

r0+r1t+· · ·+rn^{0}t^{n}^{0}7→r0+r1t+· · ·+rnt^{n}.

Namely this truncates polynomials by cutting off the terms of degree > n. The
map corresponds to the closed immersionDR,n,→DR,n^{0}.

Definition3.3.1. LetX be ak-scheme. We define thetruncation morphism
π^{n}_{n}^{0}: Jn^{0}X →JnX

by mapping ann^{0}-jet

DR,n^{0}

−→γ X to then-jet

D_{R,n},→D_{R,n}^{0} −→^{γ} X.

Example 3.3.2. When X = A^{d}k, through the isomorphism of Lemma 3.2.4,
the truncation mapπ^{n}_{n}^{0}: J_{n}0A^{d}k→J_{n}A^{d}k corresponds to the morphismA^{d(n}

0+1)

k →

A^{d(n+1)}k mapping

(r_{i}^{(j)})_{1≤i≤d,}_{0≤j≤n}^{0}7→(r_{i}^{(j)})_{1≤i≤d,}_{0≤j≤n}.
The correspondingk-algebra homomorphism is the inclusion

k[x^{(j)}_{i} |1≤i≤d,0≤j≤n],→k[x^{(j)}_{i} |1≤i≤d,0≤j≤n^{0}].

Lemma 3.3.3. Truncation morphismsπ^{n}_{n}^{0}: Jn^{0}X →JnX are affine.

Proof. Take an affine open covering X = S

iU_{i}. This induces affine open
coveringsJ_{n}X=S

iJ_{n}U_{i}andJ_{n}^{0}X=S

iJ_{n}^{0}U_{i}. The lemma holds, sinceJ_{n}^{0}U_{i} is
the preimage ofJ_{n}U_{i} by the mapπ_{n}^{n}^{0}: J_{n}^{0}X→J_{n}X.

The following proposition is essential when defining a measure on an arc space.

Proposition 3.3.4. Let X be a smooth k-variety of dimension d. Then the
morphismπ^{n}_{n}^{0}: J_{n}^{0}X →J_{n}Xis a Zariski locally trivial fibration with fiberA^{d(n}

0−n)

k .

Namely, there exists an open covering J_{n}X = SU_{i} such that (π^{n}_{n}^{0})^{−1}(U_{i}) is U_{i}-
isomorphic to U_{i}×_{k}A^{d(n}

0−n)

k . In particular, truncation morphisms are surjective.

Proof. There exists an open covering X = S

Vj such that each Vj has an
étale morphism toA^{d}k (given by a local coordinate system). From Lemma 3.2.7, we
have the Cartesian diagram:

Jn^{0}Vj //

Jn^{0}A^{d}k

JnVj //JnA^{d}k

3.4. ARCS 22

Since JnVj form a Zariski covering of JnX, it suffices to show the proposition in
the caseX =A^{d}k. This case follows from the explicit description in Example 3.3.2.

(Note that the surjectivity of truncation morphisms follows also from the definition

of formal smoothness.)

3.4. Arcs

Definition3.4.1. LetRbe ak-algebra. Anarc of X overRis ak-morphism DR→X from the formal disk over R. WhenRis an algebraically closed field, we call it ageometric arc of X.

Definition 3.4.2. We define the arc scheme of X, denoted by J_{∞}X, to be
the projective limit of jet schemes,

J_{∞}X := lim

←−J_{n}X.

For a morphismf:Y →Xofk-schemes, we denote the induced morphismJ_{∞}Y →
J_{∞}X byf_{∞}.

Note that since truncation morphismsJ_{n+1}X →J_{n}X are affine, the projective
limit exists [Gro66, Prop. 8.2.3].

Remark3.4.3. IfXhas positive dimension, thenJ_{∞}Xis neither of finite type
nor Noetherian.

Lemma 3.4.4 ( [Bha16]). The scheme J_{∞}X represents the following functor:

J∞X: (Affk)^{op}→Set

SpecR7→HomSch_{k}(DR, X)
Proof. WhenX is an affine schemeSpecS, then

(J∞X)(R) = lim

←−HomAlg_{k}(S, R[t]/(t^{n+1}))

= HomAlg_{k}(S, RJtK)

= Hom_{Sch}_{k}(D_{R}, X).

We refer the reader to [Bha16] for the general case.

Remark 3.4.5. In general, the underlying set of a k-scheme X is identified
with the set of equivalence classes of geometric pointsSpecL→X; two geometric
pointsSpecL1→X andSpecL2→X areequivalent if there exist an algebraically
closed fieldL_{3} and morphismsSpecL_{3}→SpecL_{i},i= 1,2, such that the following
diagram is commutative.

SpecL3 //

SpecL1

SpecL2 //X

Applying this toJ∞X(resp. JnX), we can identify the underlying set ofJ∞Xwith
the set of equivalence classes of geometric arcsD_{L} →X. Two arcs D_{L}_{1} →X and
D_{L}_{2}→Xareequivalentif there exist an algebraically closed fieldL_{3}and morphisms

3.5. ORDER FUNCTIONS 23

SpecL3→SpecLi,i= 1,2, such that the following diagram is commutative.

DL_{3} //

DL_{1}

DL_{2} //X

Definition3.4.6. For eachn∈Z≥0, the natural mapJ_{∞}X→JnXis denoted
byπn and again called atruncation morphism.

By the identificationR[t]/(t^{n+1}) =RJtK/(t^{n+1}), we can regardD_{R,n}as a closed
subscheme ofD_{R}. The morphismπ_{n}sends an arcγ: D_{R}→X to the inducedn-jet
DR,n,→DR

−→γ X.

Lemma3.4.7. Let f:Y →X be an étale morphism (e.g. an open immersion).

Then we have a natural isomorphism of functors (Affk)^{op}→Set,
J_{∞}Y ∼= (J∞X)×_{X}Y.

Proof. From Lemma 3.2.7,

J∞Y = lim←−JnY ∼= lim←−((JnX)×XY).

Recall that a projective limit and a fiber product interchange [Gro66, Lem. 8.2.6], or more generally, two limits in a category interchange [Rie17, Th. 3.8.1]. Thus the last limit is isomorphic to

lim←−JnX

×XY = (J∞X)×XY.

Lemma3.4.8. Ifι:Z →X is an immersion (resp. an open immersion, a closed
immersion), then so is the induced morphism ι_{∞}: J_{∞}Z→J_{∞}X.

Proof. The assertion for open immersions follows from Lemma 3.4.7. As for
closed immersions, we may assume that X is affine. Then JnX are affine, say
SpecAn. From Lemma 3.2.9, we can write JnZ = SpecAn/In for some ideal
In ⊂ An. Then J_{∞}X = Spec lim

−→An and J_{∞}Z = Spec lim

−→(An/In). Since the direct limit is an exact functor, the natural maplim

−→An→lim

−→(An/In)is surjective.

The assertion for closed immersions follows and so does the assertion for general

immersions.

Remark 3.4.9. Since every geometric arc SpecLJtK→X factors through the associated reduced schemeXred, the morphismJ∞Xred→ J∞X is bijective and we may identify these spaces set-theoretically.

3.5. Order functions

Definition 3.5.1. Let Z ( X be a proper closed subscheme defined by an ideal sheafI ⊂ OX. We define a function

ordZ = ord_{I}: J_{∞}X →Z≥0∪ {∞}

as follows: if a point γ ∈ J_{∞}X is represented by a geometric arc γ: D_{L} → X
(see Remark 3.4.5) and if γ^{−1}I = (t^{m}), then ord_{I}(γ) := m. Here we follow the
convention that(t^{0}) = (1)and(t^{∞}) = (0).

Lemma 3.5.2.