Handbook of Geometry and Topology of

Singularities I 1st Edition José Luis Cisneros

Molina pdf download
https://textbookfull.com/product/handbook-of-geometry-and-topology-of-singularities-i-1st-edition-
jose-luis-cisneros-molina/

★★★★★ 4.7/5.0 (21 reviews) ✓ 111 downloads ■ TOP RATED

"Amazing book, clear text and perfect formatting!" - John R.

DOWNLOAD EBOOK
 Handbook of Geometry and Topology of Singularities I 1st
Edition José Luis Cisneros Molina pdf download

TEXTBOOK EBOOK TEXTBOOK FULL

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide TextBook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Collection Highlights

From Differential Geometry to Non commutative Geometry and

Topology Neculai S. Teleman

Handbook of Forensic Toxicology for Medical Examiners D.

Kimberley Molina

Data Science Foundations Geometry and Topology of Complex

Hierarchic Systems and Big Data Analytics 1st Edition
Fionn Murtagh

Handbook of discrete and computational geometry Third

Edition Goodman
Winding Around The Winding Number in Topology Geometry and
Analysis 1st Edition John Roe

Handbook of Discrete and Computational Geometry, Third

Edition Csaba D. Toth

Lectures on the Geometry of Manifolds 3rd Edition Liviu I.

Nicolaescu

Food Applications of Nanotechnology 1st Edition Gustavo

Molina (Editor)

Differential Geometry and Mathematical Physics Part II

Fibre Bundles Topology and Gauge Fields Gerd Rudolph
José Luis Cisneros Molina
Dũng Tráng Lê
José Seade   Editors

Handbook
of Geometry
and Topology
of Singularities I
Handbook of Geometry and Topology
of Singularities I
José Luis Cisneros Molina • Dũng Tráng Lê •
José Seade
Editors

Handbook of Geometry and

Topology of Singularities I
Editors
José Luis Cisneros Molina Dũng Tráng Lê
Unidad Cuernavaca Centre de Mathématiques et Informatique
Instituto de Matemáticas Université d’Aix-Marseille
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Marseille, France
Cuernavaca, Mexico

Unidad Mixta Internacional 2001 CNRS

Laboratorio Solomon Lefschetz
Cuernavaca, Mexico

José Seade
Instituto de Matemáticas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Mexico City, Mexico

Unidad Mixta Internacional 2001 CNRS

Laboratorio Solomon Lefschetz
Cuernavaca, Mexico

ISBN 978-3-030-53060-0 ISBN 978-3-030-53061-7 (eBook)

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53061-7

Mathematics Subject Classification: M11019, M11132, M12198, M21022, M21050, M28027,17B45

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book
are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or
the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any
errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Foreword

In the general scientific culture, Mathematics can appear as quite disconnected.

One knows about calculus, complex numbers, Fermat’s last theorem, convex
optimization, fractals, vector fields and dynamical systems, the law of large
numbers, projective geometry, vector bundles, the Fourier transform and wavelets,
the stationary phase method, numerical solutions of PDEs, etc., but no connection
between them is readily apparent. For the mathematician, however, all these and
many others are lineaments of a single landscape. Although he or she may spend
most of his or her time studying one area of this landscape, the mathematician is
conscious of the possibility of traveling to other places, perhaps at the price of much
effort, and bringing back fertile ideas. Some of the results or proofs most appreciated
by mathematicians are the result of such fertilizations.
I claim that Singularity Theory sits inside Mathematics much as Mathematics
sits inside the general scientific culture. The general mathematical culture knows
about the existence of Morse theory, parametrizations of curves, Bézout’s theorem
for plane projective curves, zeroes of vector fields and the Poincaré–Hopf theorem,
catastrophe theory, sometimes a version of resolution of singularities, the existence
of an entire world of commutative algebra, etc. But again, for the singularist,
these and many others are lineaments of a single landscape and he or she is
aware of its connectedness. Moreover, just as Mathematics does with science in
general, singularity theory interacts energetically with the rest of Mathematics,
if only because the closures of non-singular varieties in some ambient space or
their projections to smaller dimensional spaces tend to present singularities, smooth
functions on a compact manifold must have critical points, etc. But singularity
theory is also, again in a role played by Mathematics in general science, a crucible
where different types of mathematical problems interact and surprising connections
are born.
• Who would have thought in the 1950s that there was a close connection between
the classification of differentiable structures on topological spheres and the
boundaries of certain isolated singularities of complex hypersurfaces?

v
vi Foreword

• or that Thom’s study of singularities of differentiable mappings would give birth

to a geometric vision of bifurcation phenomena and of fundamental concepts
such as structural stability?
• Who would have thought in the 1970s that there was a relation between the
work of Lefschetz comparing the topological invariants of a complex projective
variety with those of a general hyperplane section and the characterization of the
sequences of integers counting the numbers of faces of all dimensions of simple
polytopes?
• Or that one could produce real projective plane curves with a prescribed topology
by deforming piecewise linear curves in the real plane?
• Or in the 2000s that properties of the intersections of two curves on a complex
surface would lead to the solution of a problem connected with the coloring of
graphs?
• Or that the algebraic study of the space of arcs on the simplest singularities (zn =
0 in C, n ≥ 2) would provide new proofs and generalizations of the Rogers–
Ramanujan and Gordon identities between the generating series of certain types
of partitions of integers?
These are only a few examples. But to come back to the theory of singularities,
I would like to emphasize that what I like so much about it is that not only are
surprising connections born there but also very simple questions lead to ideas which
resonate in other part of the field or in other fields. For example, if an analytic
function has a small modulus at a point, does it have a zero at a distance from that
point which is bounded in terms of that modulus? what is a general smooth function
on a smooth compact manifold? A Morse function, with very mild singularities!
And what happens if you replace the smooth manifold by a space with singularities?
And then, given a function, can we measure how far it is from behaving like a
general function? Suppose that a holomorphic function has a critical point at the
origin. How can we relate the nature of the fiber of the function through this critical
point with the geometry or topology of the nearby non-singular fibers? How can we
relate it with the geometry of the mappings resolving singularities of this singular
fiber? Then again, what is a general map between smooth manifolds? and how do
you deform a singular space into a non-singular one in general? Well, that is more
complicated. But I hope you get the idea.
The downside is that before he or she can successfully detect and try to answer such
apparently simple and natural questions, the student of singularities must become
familiar with different subjects and their techniques, and the learning process is
long.
And this is why a handbook which presents in-depth and reader-friendly surveys
of topics of singularity theory, with a carefully crafted preface explaining their place
within the theory, is so useful!

Paris, France Bernard Teissier

March 2020
Preface

Singularities are ubiquitous in mathematics, appearing naturally in a wide range

of different areas of knowledge. They are a meeting point where many areas of
mathematics and science in general come together. Their scope is vast, their purpose
is multifold.
Singularity theory dates back to I. Newton, É. Bézout, V. Puiseux, F. Klein,
M. Noether, F. Severi, and many others. Yet, it emerged as a field of mathematics in
itself in the early 1960s, thanks to pioneering work by R. Thom, O. Zariski, H. Whit-
ney, H. Hironaka, J. Milnor, E. Brieskorn, C. T. C. Wall, V. I. Arnold, J. Mather,
and many others. Its potential for applications in other areas of mathematics and of
knowledge in general is unlimited, and so are its possible sources of inspiration.
As the name suggests, one may naively say that singularity theory studies that
which is “singular,” that which is different from “most of the rest,” different from
its surroundings. As basic examples, we may look at the critical points of smooth
functions, or at the points where a space loses its manifold structure, at the stationary
points of flows and the special orbits of Lie group actions, at bifurcation theory and
properties of objects or situations depending on parameters that undergo sudden
change under a small variation of the parameters. These are some examples, out of
a myriad of possibilities, of how singularities arise. There is great richness in the
subject, and the literature is vast, with plenty of different viewpoints, perspectives,
and interactions with other areas. That makes this subject fascinating.
That same wideness and amplitude of its scope can make singularity theory hard
to grasp for graduate students and researchers in general: what are and what have
been the major lines of development in the last decades, what is known and where
to find it, what is the current state of the art in its many branches, the various
directions into which this theory is flourishing, its interaction with other areas of
current research in mathematics. Those are questions that gave birth to this project,
the “Handbook of Geometry and Topology of Singularities.”
This handbook has the intention of covering a wide scope of singularity theory,
presenting articles on various aspects of the theory and its interactions with other
areas of mathematics. The authors are world experts; the various articles deal with
both classical material and modern developments. They are addressed to graduate

vii
viii Preface

students and newcomers into the theory, as well as to specialists that can use these
as guidebooks.
Volume I consists of ten articles that cover some of the foundational aspects of
the theory. This includes:
• The combinatorics and topology of plane curves and surface singularities.
• An introduction to four classical methods for studying the topology and geometry
of singular spaces, namely: resolution of singularities, deformation theory,
stratifications, and slicing the spaces à la Lefschetz.
• Milnor fibrations and their monodromy.
• Morse theory for stratified spaces and constructible sheaves.
• Simple Lie algebras and simple singularities.
We say below a few words about the content of each chapter. Of course, due
to lack of space, many important topics from the geometric study of singularities
are missing from this volume. This will be compensated to some extent in the next
volumes. Also, the number of possible authors much exceeds the capacity of any
project of this kind. We thank our many colleagues that have much contributed to
build up singularity theory, and we apologize for our omissions in the selection of
subjects. Among the topics we plan to include in later volumes of this Handbook of
Geometry and Topology of Singularities are:
• Equisingularity.
• Lipschitz geometry in singularity theory.
• The topology of the complement of arrangements and hypersurface singularities.
• Mixed Hodge structures.
• Analytic classification of singularities of complex plane curves.
• Applications to Lagrangian and Legendrian geometry.
• Contact and symplectic geometry in singularity theory.
• Indices of vector fields and 1-forms on singular varieties.
• Chern classes of singular varieties.
• Tropical geometry and singularity theory.
• Milnor fibrations for real analytic maps.
• Mixed singularities.
• Singularities of map germs. Finite determinacy and unfoldings.
• Relations with moment angle manifolds.
• Invariant algebraic sets in holomorphic dynamics.
• Limits of tangent spaces.
• Invariants of 3-manifolds and surface singularities.
• Zeta functions and the monodromy.
Chapters 1 and 2 of this volume deal with dimensions 1 and 2, respectively.
Chapter 1, by Evelia García Barroso, Pedro González Pérez, and Patrick Popescu-
Pampu, is entitled “The Combinatorics of Plane Curve Singularities: How Newton
Polygons Blossom into Lotuses.” In this chapter, the authors discuss classical ways
to describe the combinatorics of singularities of complex algebraic curves contained
in a smooth complex algebraic surface. In fact, given a smooth complex surface S
Preface ix

and a complex curve C in S with a singular point o, it is customary to study the local
structure of (S, C) near o in the following ways:
• By choosing a local parametrization of C. This method dates back to Newton and
later Puiseux. The combinatorics in it may be encoded in the Kuo-Lu tree and a
Galois quotient of it, the Eggers-Wall tree.
• By blowing up points to obtain an embedded resolution of C. This blow-up
process may be encoded in an Enriques diagram and a corresponding weighted
dual graph.
• By performing a sequence of toric modifications. The combinatorial data gener-
ated during this process can be encoded in a sequence of Newton polygons and
Newton fans.
• By looking at the intersection of S and C with a small sphere in some ambient
space Cn . One gets a knot (or link) in a 3-sphere. These are all iterated torus
knots known as algebraic knots. Their combinatorics is encoded in the Puiseux
pairs.
Chapter 1 studies the first three of these methods and explains how the notion of
lotus, which is a special type of simplicial complex of dimension 2, allows to think
simultaneously about the combinatorics of those three ways of analyzing the curve
singularity.
The fourth method mentioned above is actually much related to Chap. 2 in this
volume, by Françoise Michel, entitled “The Topology of Surface Singularities.” This
chapter surveys the subject of the topology of complex surface singularities. This
classical subject dates back to Felix Klein and his work on invariant polynomials
for the finite subgroups of the special unitary group SU(2). This gave rise to what
today are called Klein singularities, though they have many names, as, for instance,
Du Val singularities, rational double points, and simple singularities in Arnold’s
classification. If X is a complex surface singularity with base point p in some
ambient space Cn , then the intersection LX = X ∩ Se with a small sphere centered
at p is a 3-dimensional real analytic variety, whose topology is independent of
the choice of the embedding of X in Cn and also independent of the choice of
the (sufficiently small) sphere; LX is called the link of the singularity and it fully
describes the topology of X. If X has an isolated singularity at p, then LX is a
3-manifold. The manifolds one gets in this way are all Waldhausen (or graph)
manifolds that can be constructed by plumbing, a technique introduced by John
Milnor in all dimensions, in order to construct the first examples of homology
spheres. The author also gives an explicit construction of a good resolution of the
singularity, and the minimal good resolution by the Hirzebruch–Jung method is
described in detail.
Chapters 3 to 9 deal with the four classical ways of studying the geometry and
topology of singular spaces mentioned above, namely:
1. Via resolutions of the singularities;
2. Via stratifications;
x Preface

3. Via deformations, smoothings, and unfoldings; and

4. Taking slices with the fibers of a linear form.
Let us say a few words about each of them.
The problem of resolution of singularities and its solution in various contexts,
already discussed for plane curves in Chap. 1 and for surfaces in Chap. 2, can
be traced back to Newton and Riemann. Chapter 3, by Mark Spivakovsky, is an
introduction to the resolution of singularities. This surveys the subject, starting with
Newton till the modern times. It also discusses some of the main open problems
that remain to be solved. The main topics covered are the early days of the subject,
Zariski’s approach via valuations, Hironaka’s celebrated result in characteristic zero
and all dimensions and its subsequent strengthenings and simplifications, existing
results in positive characteristic (mostly up to dimension three), de Jong’s approach
via semi-stable reduction, Nash and higher Nash blowing up, as well as reduction
of singularities of vector field and foliations.
Chapter 4 is an introduction to the stratification theory, by David Trotman.
The idea behind the notion of stratification in differential topology and algebraic
geometry is to partition a (possibly singular) space into smooth manifolds with
some control on how these manifolds fit together. In 1957, Whitney showed that
every real algebraic variety V in Rn can be partitioned into finitely many connected
smooth submanifolds of Rn . This he called a manifold collection. In 1960, René
Thom replaced the term manifold collection by stratified set and initiated a theory
of stratified sets and stratified maps. In this chapter, the author presents in a
unifying manner both the abstract theory of stratified sets elaborated by Thom,
Whitney, and Mather and the stratification theory of semi-algebraic, subanalytic, or
complex analytic sets. In addition, it surveys the relations between several stratifying
conditions which are modifications of the Whitney conditions, with an emphasis on
the applications to the openness of transversality theorems which are so important
in stability problems. The text also explains what remains true of the stratification
theory of real algebraic and subanalytic sets in the o-minimal framework.
Chapter 5 by Mark Goresky, entitled “Morse Theory, Stratifications and
Sheaves,” begins with an introduction to Morse theory for stratified spaces and
then moves forward to discussing how stratified Morse theory and the theory of
constructible sheaves, introduced by M. Kashiwara and P. Shapira, are two sides
of the same coin. A complete and parallel development of the two theories was
presented by J. Schürmann. In this chapter, the author provides an intuitive view
of this parallel development. The setting presented by Schürmann replaces the
subanalytic and Whitney stratified setting with the more general conditions of o-
minimal structures and generalized Whitney conditions: w-regularity, d-regularity,
and C-regularity. In this chapter, for simplicity, the author remains within the
subanalytic and Whitney stratified setting.
Chapter 6, by J. J. Nuño Ballesteros, Lê D. T., and J. Seade, treats a now
classical and central subject in singularity theory: the Milnor fibration theorem,
which provides the simplest example of a deformation of a singular variety into
a smooth one. This fibration theorem, published by John Milnor in 1968, concerns
Preface xi

the geometry and topology of analytic maps near their critical points, and it was
the culmination of a series of articles by Brieskorn, Hirzebruch, Pham, and others,
aimed toward finding complex isolated hypersurface singularities whose link, i.e., its
intersection with a small sphere centered at the singular point, is a homotopy sphere.
f
The theorem considers a nonconstant holomorphic map germ (Cn+1 , 0) → (C, 0)
with a critical point at 0, and it can roughly be stated as saying that the local
noncritical levels f −1 (t) form a locally trivial C ∞ fiber bundle over a sufficiently
small punctured disc in C. Notice that one has a flat family Ft of complex manifolds
degenerating to the special fiber f −1 (0). This is the paradigm of a smoothing, i.e.,
a flat deformation where all fibers, other than the special one, are non-singular.
Milnor’s fibration theorem is a cornerstone in singularity theory. It has opened
several research fields and given rise to a vast literature. In this chapter, the authors
present some of the foundational results about this subject and give proofs of several
basic “folklore theorems” which either are not in the literature or are difficult to
find. They also glance at the use of polar varieties, developed by Lê and Teissier,
for studying the topology of singularities. This springs from ideas by René Thom
and relates to the subject mentioned above, of studying singular varieties by slicing
them by the fibers of a linear form. The chapter includes a proof of the “attaching-
handles” theorem, which is key for Lê–Perron and Massey’s theory describing the
topology of the Milnor fiber. It also discusses the so-called carousel that allows a
deeper understanding of the topology of plane curves (as in Chap. 1) and has several
applications in various settings. Finally, two classical open problems in complex
dimension two are discussed: Lê’s conjecture and the Lê–Ramanujam problem.
Deformation theory, together with the resolution of singularities and stratifi-
cations, is one of the fundamental methods for the investigation of singularities.
In Chap. 7, entitled, “Deformation and Smoothing of Singularities,” Gert-Martin
Greuel gives a comprehensive survey of the theory of deformations of isolated
singularities and the related question of smoothability. The basic general theory
is systematically and carefully presented and the state of the art corresponding to
the most important questions is exhaustively discussed. The article contains almost
no proofs, but references to the relevant literature, in particular to the textbook of
Greuel, Lossen, and Shustin “Introduction to Singularities and Deformations.” As in
this book, there are some examples treated with Singular, a computer algebra system
for polynomial computations. Relations are given between different invariants, such
as the Milnor number, the Tjurina number, and the dimension of a smoothing
component.
Chapter 8, by Wolfgang Ebeling, gives an introduction to “Distinguished Bases
and Monodromy of Complex Hypersurface Singularities,” a fundamental topic for
understanding the Milnor fibration. The Milnor fibration essentially is a fiber bundle
over the circle S 1 . Therefore, it is determined by the fiber and by the monodromy
map: if we think of S 1 as being obtained from the interval [0, 1] by gluing its end
points, then the (geometric) monodromy is a diffeomorphism from the fiber over
{0} to that over {1}, telling us how to glue the fibers in order to recover the original
bundle. In the isolated singularity case, the fiber Ft (which is the local noncritical
xii Preface

level) has the homotopy type of a bouquet of spheres of middle dimension n; the
number of such spheres is the aforementioned Milnor number μ. Hence all reduced
homology groups of Ft vanish, except Hn (F ) which is free abelian of rank μ.
The elements in Hn (F ) are called vanishing cycles. The geometric monodromy
induces an automorphism of Hn (F ), known as the monodromy of the map germ
f . A natural way to study the monodromy operator is by finding “good” bases for
Hn (F ; Z) ∼ = Zμ . Such a concept was made precise by Gabrielov in the 1970s,
introducing the notion of “distinguished bases.” These fundamental concepts and
their further developments are discussed in Chap. 8.
One of the basic problems of algebraic geometry is to extract topological
information from the equations which define an algebraic variety. The theorem of
Lefschetz for hyperplane sections shows that when the base field is the field of
complex numbers and the projective variety is non-singular, one can, to some extent,
compare the topology of a given projective variety with that of a hyperplane section.
In Chap. 9, “Lefschetz Theorem for Hyperplane Sections,” by Helmut Hamm and Lê
Dũng Tráng, the authors consider different theorems of Lefschetz type. The chapter
begins with the classical Lefschetz hyperplane sections theorem on a non-singular
projective variety. Then they show that this extends to the cases of a non-singular
quasi-projective variety and to singular varieties. They also consider local forms of
theorems of Lefschetz type.
As mentioned earlier in this introduction in relation with Chap. 2, Felix Klein
studied the action of the finite subgroups G of SU(2) on the complex space C2
that give rise to the surface singularities C2 /G, which are known nowadays as
Klein singularities. Later, in the 1930s, P. Du Val investigated these singularities
and proved that the dual graph of their minimal resolution is exactly the Dynkin
diagrams of type An , Dn , E6 , E7 , and E8 , corresponding to the cyclic groups,
the binary dihedral groups, and the binary groups of motions of the tetrahedron, the
octahedron, and the icosahedron. This was the first relation found between Kleinian
singularities and the simple Lie algebras of type ADE. A natural question was
whether this was a coincidence or there was a direct relation between them. Years
later, in the 1960s, Brieskorn proved the existence of simultaneous resolutions for
Kleinian singularities. After reading Brieskorn’s work, Grothendieck conjectured
that Kleinian singularities can be obtained from the corresponding simple Lie
algebra of type A, D, or E, intersecting its nilpotent variety with a slice transverse
to the orbit of a subregular element. The proof of Grothendieck’s conjecture was
announced by Brieskorn at the ICM in Nice 1970, with a sketch of the proof.
In 1976, H. Esnault gave in her PhD thesis a complete proof of this theorem,
following Grothendieck’s initial ideas. Chapter 10 by José Luis Cisneros Molina
and Meral Tosun discusses Brieskorn’s theorem and a generalization of this for
simple elliptic singularities which are non-hypersurface complete intersections. The
chapter gives all the ingredients one needs to understand this beautiful piece of
work. It discusses also several more recent developments and related topics, as the
McKay correspondence, which describes how to obtain the Dynkin diagrams of
type ADE from the irreducible representations of the corresponding finite subgroups
of SU(2), giving a one-to-one correspondence between the nontrivial irreducible
Preface xiii

representations of the group and the components of the exceptional set of the
minimal resolution of the associated Kleinian singularity.
So we see that the individual chapters cover a wide range of topics in singularity
theory, and at the same time, they are linked to each other in fundamental ways.

Cuernavaca, Mexico José Luis Cisneros Molina

Marseille, France Dũng Tráng Lê
Mexico City, Mexico José Seade
March 2020
Contents

1 The Combinatorics of Plane Curve Singularities . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Evelia R. García Barroso, Pedro D. González Pérez, and Patrick
Popescu-Pampu
2 The Topology of Surface Singularities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Françoise Michel
3 Resolution of Singularities: An Introduction .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
Mark Spivakovsky
4 Stratification Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
David Trotman
5 Morse Theory, Stratifications and Sheaves . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
Mark Goresky
6 The Topology of the Milnor Fibration.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 321
Dũng Tráng Lê, Juan José Nuño-Ballesteros, and José Seade
7 Deformation and Smoothing of Singularities .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 389
Gert-Martin Greuel
8 Distinguished Bases and Monodromy of Complex
Hypersurface Singularities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449
Wolfgang Ebeling
9 The Lefschetz Theorem for Hyperplane Sections . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491
Helmut A. Hamm and Dũng Tráng Lê
10 Finite Dimensional Lie Algebras in Singularities . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 541
José Luis Cisneros Molina and Meral Tosun

Index . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 589

xv
Contributors

José Luis Cisneros Molina Unidad Cuernavaca, Instituto de Matemáticas,

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Cuernavaca, Mexico
Unidad Mixta Internacional 2001 CNRS, Laboratorio Solomon Lefschetz,
Cuernavaca, Mexico
[email protected]
Wolfgang Ebeling Institut für Algebraische Geometrie, Leibniz Universität Han-
nover, Hannover, Germany
[email protected]
Evelia R. García Barroso Departamento de Matemáticas, Estadística e I. O.
Sección de Matemáticas, Universidad de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
[email protected]
Pedro D. González Pérez Instituto de Matemática Interdisciplinar y Departamento
de Álgebra, Geometría y Topología, Facultad de Ciencias Matemáticas, Universidad
Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
[email protected]
Mark Goresky School of Mathematics, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton,
NJ, USA
[email protected]
Gert-Martin Greuel Fachbereich Mathematik, Universität Kaiserslautern,
Kaiserslautern, Germany
[email protected]
Françoise Michel Laboratoire de Mathématiques Emile Picard, Université Paul
Sabatier, Toulouse, France
[email protected]
Juan José Nuño Ballesteros Departament de Geometria i Topologia, Facultat de
Matemàtiques, Universitat de València, València, Spain
[email protected]

xvii
xviii Contributors

Patrick Popescu-Pampu Laboratoire Paul Painlevé, Univ. Lille, CNRS, UMR

8524, Lille, France
[email protected]
José Seade Instituto de Matemáticas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México,
Mexico City, Mexico
Unidad Mixta Internacional 2001 CNRS, Laboratorio Solomon Lefschetz,
Cuernavaca, Mexico
[email protected]
Mark Spivakovsky Institut de Mathématiques de Toulouse, UMR CNRS 5219,
Toulouse, Cedex, France
Unidad Mixta Internacional 2001 CNRS, Laboratorio Solomon Lefschetz,
Cuernavaca, Mexico
Unidad Cuernavaca, Instituto de Matemáticas, UNAM, Cuernavaca, Mexico
[email protected]
Bernard Teissier Institut de Mathématiques de Jussieu-Paris Rive Gauche Bât.
Sophie Germain, Paris, Cedex 13, France
[email protected]
Meral Tosun Galatasaray University, Çirağan Caddesi, Ortaköy, Istanbul, Turkey
[email protected]
Dũng Tráng Lê Centre de Mathématiques et Informatique, Université d’Aix-
Marseille, Marseille, France
[email protected]
David Trotman Université d’Aix-Marseille, CNRS, Centrale Marseille, Institut
Mathématique de Marseille, Marseille, France
[email protected]
Chapter 1
The Combinatorics of Plane Curve
Singularities
How Newton Polygons Blossom into Lotuses

Evelia R. García Barroso, Pedro D. González Pérez,

and Patrick Popescu-Pampu

This paper is dedicated to Bernard Teissier for his 75th birthday.

Contents
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Basic Notions and Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.2.1 Basic Facts About Plane Curve Singularities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.2.2 Basic Facts About Normalizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.2.3 Newton-Puiseux Series and the Newton-Puiseux Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.2.4 Blow Ups and Embedded Resolutions of Singularities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.2.5 The Minimal Embedded Resolution of the Semicubical Parabola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
1.2.6 A Newton Non-degenerate Reducible Example. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
1.3 Toric and Toroidal Surfaces and Their Morphisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
1.3.1 Two-Dimensional Fans and Their Regularizations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1.3.2 Toric Varieties and Their Orbits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
1.3.3 Toric Morphisms and Toric Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
1.3.4 Toroidal Varieties and Modifications in the Toroidal Category. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
1.3.5 Historical Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
1.4 Toroidal Pseudo-Resolutions of Plane Curve Singularities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
1.4.1 Newton Polygons, Their Tropicalizations, Fans and Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
1.4.2 An Algorithm of Toroidal Pseudo-Resolution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
1.4.3 From Toroidal Pseudo-Resolutions to Embedded Resolutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

E. R. García Barroso
Departamento de Matemáticas, Estadística e I.O. Sección de Matemáticas, Universidad de La
Laguna, La Laguna, Tenerife, España
e-mail: [email protected]
P. D. González Pérez
Instituto de Matemática Interdisciplinar y Departamento de Álgebra, Geometría y Topología,
Facultad de Ciencias Matemáticas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, España
e-mail: [email protected]
P. Popescu-Pampu ()
Laboratoire Paul Painlevé, Univ. Lille, CNRS, UMR 8524, Lille, France
e-mail: [email protected]

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 1

J. L. Cisneros Molina et al. (eds.), Handbook of Geometry and Topology
of Singularities I, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53061-7_1
2 E. R. García Barroso et al.

1.4.4 The Fan Tree of a Toroidal Pseudo-Resolution Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

1.4.5 Historical Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
1.5 Lotuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
1.5.1 The Lotus of a Newton Fan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
1.5.2 Lotuses and Continued Fractions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
1.5.3 The Lotus of a Toroidal Pseudo-Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
1.5.4 The Dependence of the Lotus on the Choice of Completion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
1.5.5 Truncated Lotuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
1.5.6 Historical Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
1.6 Relations of Fan Trees and Lotuses with Eggers-Wall Trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
1.6.1 Finite Eggers-Wall Trees and the Universal Eggers-Wall Tree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
1.6.2 From Eggers-Wall Trees to Newton Polygons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
1.6.3 Renormalization of Eggers-Wall Trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
1.6.4 Renormalization in Terms of Newton-Puiseux Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
1.6.5 From Fan Trees to Eggers-Wall Trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
1.6.6 Historical Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
1.7 Overview and Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
1.7.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
1.7.2 Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
1.7.3 List of Notations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144

Abstract This survey may be seen as an introduction to the use of toric and
tropical geometry in the analysis of plane curve singularities, which are germs
(C, o) of complex analytic curves contained in a smooth complex analytic surface
S. The embedded topological type of such a pair (S, C) is usually defined to
be that of the oriented link obtained by intersecting C with a sufficiently small
oriented Euclidean sphere centered at the point o, defined once a system of local
coordinates (x, y) was chosen on the germ (S, o). If one works more generally over
an arbitrary algebraically closed field of characteristic zero, one speaks instead of
the combinatorial type of (S, C). One may define it by looking either at the Newton-
Puiseux series associated to C relative to a generic local coordinate system (x, y),
or at the set of infinitely near points which have to be blown up in order to get
the minimal embedded resolution of the germ (C, o) or, thirdly, at the preimage of
this germ by the resolution. Each point of view leads to a different encoding of the
combinatorial type by a decorated tree: an Eggers-Wall tree, an Enriques diagram,
or a weighted dual graph. The three trees contain the same information, which in
the complex setting is equivalent to the knowledge of the embedded topological
type. There are known algorithms for transforming one tree into another. In this
paper we explain how a special type of two-dimensional simplicial complex called
a lotus allows to think geometrically about the relations between the three types
of trees. Namely, all of them embed in a natural lotus, their numerical decorations
appearing as invariants of it. This lotus is constructed from the finite set of Newton
polygons created during any process of resolution of (C, o) by successive toric
modifications.
1 The Combinatorics of Plane Curve Singularities 3

1.1 Introduction

The aim of this paper is to unify various combinatorial objects classically used
to encode the equisingularity/combinatorial/embedded topological type of a plane
curve singularity. Often, a plane curve singularity means a germ (C, o) of algebraic
or holomorphic curve defined by one equation in a smooth complex algebraic
surface. In this paper we will allow the ambient surface to be any germ (S, o)
of smooth complex algebraic or analytic surface, and C to be a formal germ of
curve. Using a local formal coordinate system (x, y) on the germ (S, o), the global
structure of S disappears completely and one may suppose that C is formally
embedded in the affine plane C2 . Usually one analyses in the following ways the
structure of this embedding:
• By considering the Newton-Puiseux series which express one of the variables
(x, y) in terms of the other, whenever the equation f (x, y) = 0 defining C is
satisfied. Their combinatorics may be encoded in two rooted trees, the Kuo-Lu
tree and a Galois quotient of it, the Eggers-Wall tree.
• By blowing up points starting from o ∈ S, until obtaining an embedded resolution
of C, that is, a total transform of C which is a divisor with normal crossings.
This blow up process may be encoded in an Enriques diagram, and the final total
transform of C in a weighted dual graph.
• When the singularity C is holomorphic, by intersecting a representative of C
with a small enough Euclidean sphere centered at the origin, defined using an
arbitrary holomorphic local coordinate system (x, y) on (S, o). This leads to an
oriented link in an oriented 3-dimensional sphere. This link is an iterated torus
link, whose structure may be encoded in terms of another tree, called a splice
diagram.
Unlike the first two procedures, the third one cannot be applied if the formal
germ C is not holomorphic or if one works over an arbitrary algebraically closed
field of characteristic zero. For this reason, we do not develop it in this paper. Let
us mention only that it was initiated in Brauner’s pioneering paper [13], whose
historical background was described by Epple in [36]. For its developments, one
may consult chronologically Reeve [107], Lê [80], A’Campo [5], Eisenbud &
Neumann [34, Appendix to Chap. I], Schrauwen [110], Lê [81], Wall [131, Chap. 9],
Weber [132] and the present authors [46, Chap. 5]. Similarly, we will not consider
the discrete invariants constructed usually using the topology of the Milnor fibration
of a holomorphic germ f , as Milnor numbers, Seifert forms, monodromy operators
and their Zeta functions. The readers interested in such invariants may consult the
textbooks [15] of Brieskorn and Knörrer and [131] of Wall.
There are algorithms allowing to pass between the Eggers-Wall tree, the dual
graph and the Enriques diagram of C. However, they do not allow geometric
representations of those passages. Our aim is to represent all these relationships
using a single geometric object, called a lotus, which is a special type of simplicial
complex of dimension at most two.
4 E. R. García Barroso et al.

Our approach for associating lotuses to plane curve singularities is done in the
spirit of the papers of Lê & Oka [83], A’Campo & Oka [8], Oka [93], González
Pérez [52, Section 3.4], and Cassou Noguès & Libgober [21]. Namely, we use the
fact that one may obtain an embedded resolution of C by composing a sequence of
toric modifications determined by the successive Newton polygons of C or of strict
transforms of it, relative to suitable local coordinate systems.
One may construct a lotus using the previous Newton polygons (see Def-
inition 1.5.26). Its one dimensional skeleton may be seen as a dual complex
representing the space-time of the evolution of the dual graph during the process of
blow ups of points which leads to the embedded resolution. Besides the irreducible
components of C and the components of the exceptional divisor, one takes also
into account the curves defined by the chosen local coordinate systems. If A and B
are two such exceptional or coordinate curves, and them or their strict transforms
intersect transversally at a point p which is blown up at some moment of the
process, then a two dimensional simplex with vertices labeled by A, B and the
exceptional divisor of the blow up of p belongs to the lotus. These simplices are
called the petals of the lotus (see an example of a lotus with 18 petals in Fig. 1.1).
The Eggers-Wall tree, the Enriques diagram and the weighted dual graph embed
simultaneously inside the lotus, and the geometry of the lotus also captures the
numerical decorations of the weighted dual graph and the Eggers-Wall tree (see
Theorem 1.5.29). For instance, the self-intersection number of a component of
the final exceptional divisor is the opposite of the number of petals containing
the associated vertex of the lotus. The previous lotuses associated to C have also
valuative interpretations: they embed canonically in the space of semivaluations of
the completed local ring of the germ (S, o) (see Remark 1.5.34).

Fig. 1.1 A lotus. It is part of Fig. 1.36, which corresponds to Example 1.5.28
1 The Combinatorics of Plane Curve Singularities 5

Let us describe the structure of the paper.

In Sect. 1.2 we introduce basic notions about complex analytic varieties, plane
curve singularities, their multiplicities and intersection numbers, normalizations,
Newton-Puiseux series, blow ups, embedded resolutions of plane curve singularities
and the associated weighted dual graphs. The notions of Newton polygon, dual
Newton fan and lotus are first presented here on a Newton non-degenerate example.
Section 1.3 begins with an explanation of basic notions of toric geometry: fans
and their subdivisions, the associated toric varieties and toric modifications (see
Sects. 1.3.1, 1.3.2 and 1.3.3). In particular, we describe the toric boundary of a
toric variety—the reduced divisor obtained as the complement of its dense torus—
in terms of the associated fan. Then we pass to toroidal geometry: we introduce
toroidal varieties, which are pairs (, ∂) consisting of a normal complex analytic
variety  and a reduced divisor ∂ on it, which are locally analytically isomorphic
to a germ of a pair formed by a toric variety and its boundary divisor. A basic
example of toroidal surface is that of a germ (S, o) of smooth surface, endowed
with the divisor L + L , where (L, L ) is a cross, that is, a pair of smooth transversal
germs of curves. A morphism φ : (2 , ∂2 ) → (1 , ∂1 ) of toroidal varieties is a
complex analytic morphism such that φ −1 (∂1 ) ⊆ ∂2 (see Sect. 1.3.4).
In Sect. 1.4 we explain in which way one may associate various morphisms of
toroidal surfaces to the plane curve singularity C → S. First, choose a cross (L, L )
on (S, o), defined by a local coordinate system (x, y). The Newton polygon N(f ) of
a defining function f ∈ C[[x, y]] of the curve singularity C depends only on C and
on the cross (L, L ). Its associated Newton fan is obtained by subdividing the first
quadrant along the rays orthogonal to the compact edges of the Newton polygon.
This fan defines a toric modification of S, the Newton modification of S defined by
C relative to the cross (L, L ) (see Sect. 1.4.1). The Newton modification becomes
a toroidal morphism when we endow its target S with the boundary divisor ∂S :=
L+L and we define the boundary divisor of its source to be the preimage of L+L .
We emphasize the fact that those notions depend only on the objects (S, C, (L, L )),
in order to insist on the underlying geometric structures. The strict transform of C
by the previous Newton modification intersects the boundary divisor only at smooth
points of it, which belong to the exceptional divisor and are smooth points of the
ambient surface. If one completes the germ of exceptional divisor into a cross at
each such point oi , then one gets again a triple of the form (surface, curve, cross),
where this time the curve is the germ at oi of the strict transform of C. Therefore one
may perform again a Newton modification at each such point, and continue in this
way until the strict transform of C defines everywhere crosses with the exceptional
divisor. The total transform of C and of all coordinate curves introduced during
previous steps define the toroidal boundary ∂ on the final surface . This non-
deterministic algorithm produces morphisms π : (, ∂) → (S, ∂S) of toroidal
surfaces, which are toroidal pseudo-resolutions of the plane curve singularity C
(see Sect. 1.4.2). The surface  has a finite number of singular points, at which it is
locally analytically isomorphic to normal toric surfaces. In Sect. 1.4.3 we show how
6 E. R. García Barroso et al.

to pass from the toroidal pseudo-resolution π to a toroidal embedded resolution by

composing π with the minimal resolution of these toric singularities. Finally, we
encode the process of successive Newton modifications in a fan tree, in terms of the
Newton fans produced by the pseudo-resolution process (see Sect. 1.4.4).
In Sect. 1.5 we explain the notion of lotus. A Newton lotus associated to a fan
encodes geometrically the continued fraction expansions of the slopes of the rays of
the fan, as well as their common parts (see Sect. 1.5.2). It is composed of petals, and
each petal corresponds to the blow up of the base point of a cross. One may clarify
the subtitle of the paper by saying that the collection of Newton polygons appearing
during the toroidal pseudo-resolution process blossomed into the associated lotus,
each petal corresponding to a blow up operation. We explain how to associate to the
fan tree of the toroidal pseudo-resolution a lotus, which is a 2-dimensional simplicial
complex obtained by gluing the Newton lotuses associated to the Newton fans of
the process (see Sects. 1.5.1 and 1.5.3). The lotus of a toroidal pseudo-resolution
depends on the choices of crosses made during the process of pseudo-resolution
(see Sect. 1.5.4). We explain then how to embed in the lotus the Enriques diagram
and the dual graph of the embedded resolution. We conclude the section by defining
a truncation operation on lotuses, and we explain how it may be used to understand
the part of the embedded resolution which does not depend on the supplementary
curves introduced during the pseudo-resolution process (see Sect. 1.5.5).
We begin Sect. 1.6 by introducing the notion of Eggers-Wall tree of the curve
C relative to the smooth germ L (see Sect. 1.6.1) and by expressing the Newton
polygon of C relative to a cross (L, L ) in terms of the Eggers-Wall tree of C + L
relative to L (see Sect. 1.6.2). Then we explain that the fan tree of the previous
toroidal pseudo-resolution process is canonically isomorphic to the Eggers-Wall tree
relative to L of the curve obtained by adding to C the projections to S of all the
crosses built during the process and how to pass from the numerical decorations of
the fan tree to those of the Eggers-Wall tree (see Sect. 1.6.5). As preliminary results,
we prove renormalization formulae which describe the Eggers-Wall tree of the strict
transform of C by a Newton modification, relative to the exceptional divisor, in
terms of the Eggers-Wall tree of C relative to L (see Sects. 1.6.3 and 1.6.4).
The final Sect. 1.7 begins by an overview of the construction of a fan tree and of
the associated lotus from the Newton fans of a toroidal pseudo-resolution process
(see Sect. 1.7.1). Section 1.7.2 describes perspectives on possible applications of
lotuses to problems of singularity theory. The final Sect. 1.7.3 contains a list of the
main notations used in the article.
Starting from Sect. 1.3, each section ends with a subsection of historical
comments. We apologize for any omission, which may result from our limited
knowledge. One may also find historical information about various tools used to
study plane curve singularities in Enriques and Chisini’s book [35], in the first
chapter of Zariski’s book [134] and in the final sections of the chapters of Wall’s
book [131].
1 The Combinatorics of Plane Curve Singularities 7

We tried to make this paper understandable to PhD students who have only a
basic knowledge about singularities. Even if everything in this paper holds over
an arbitrary algebraically closed field of characteristic zero, we will stick to the
complex setting, in order to make things more concrete for the beginner. We accom-
pany the definitions with examples and many figures. Indeed, one of our objectives
is to show that lotuses may be a great visual tool for relating the combinatorial
objects used to study plane curve singularities. There is a main example, developed
throughout the paper starting from Sect. 1.4 (see Examples 1.4.28, 1.4.34, 1.4.36,
1.5.28, 1.5.31, 1.5.36, 1.6.29 and the overview Fig. 1.58). We recommend to study
it carefully in order to get a concrete feeling of the various objects manipulated in
this paper. We also recommend to those readers who are learning the subject to refer
to the Sect. 1.7.1 from time to time, in order to measure their understanding of the
geometrical objects presented here.

1.2 Basic Notions and Examples

In this section we recall basic notions about complex varieties and plane curve sin-
gularities (see Sect. 1.2.1), normalization morphisms (see Sect. 1.2.2), the relation
between Newton-Puiseux series and plane curve singularities (see Sect. 1.2.3) and
resolution of such singularities by iteration of blow ups of points (see Sect. 1.2.4).
We describe such a resolution for the semi-cubical parabola (see Sect. 1.2.5). We
give a flavor of the main construction of this paper in Sect. 1.2.6. We show there how
to transform the Newton polygon of a certain Newton non-degenerate plane curve
singularity with two branches into a lotus, and how this lotus contains the dual graph
of a resolution by blow ups of points.
From now on, N denotes the set of non-negative integers and N∗ the set of
positive integers.

1.2.1 Basic Facts About Plane Curve Singularities

In this subsection we recall basic vocabulary about complex analytic spaces (see
Definition 1.2.1) and we explain the notions of plane curve singularity (see
Definition 1.2.5), of multiplicity and of intersection number (see Definition 1.2.7)
for such singularities. Finally, we recall an important way of computing such
intersection numbers (see Proposition 1.2.8).
Briefly speaking, a complex analytic space X is obtained by gluing model spaces,
which are zero-loci of systems of analytic equations in some complex affine space
Cn . One has to prescribe also the analytic “functions” living on the underlying
8 E. R. García Barroso et al.

topological space. Those “functions” are elements of a so-called “structure sheaf”

OX , which may contain nilpotent elements. For this reason, they are not classical
functions, as they are not determined by their values. For instance, one may endow
the origin of C with the structure sheaves whose rings of sections are the various
rings C[x]/(x m ), with m ∈ N∗ . They are pairwise non-isomorphic and they contain
nilpotent elements whenever m ≥ 2. Let us state now the formal definitions of
complex analytic spaces and of some special types of complex analytic spaces.
Definition 1.2.1
• A model complex analytic space is a ringed space (X, OX ), where X is the zero
locus of I and OX = OU /I. Here I is a finitely generated ideal of the ring of
holomorphic functions on an open set U of Cn , for some n ∈ N∗ , OU is the sheaf
of holomorphic functions on U and I is the sheaf of ideals of OU generated by
I.
• A complex analytic space is a ringed space locally isomorphic to a model
complex analytic space.
• A complex analytic space is reduced if its structure sheaf OX is reduced, that
is, without nilpotent elements. In this case, one speaks also about a complex
variety.
• A complex manifold is a complex variety X such that any point x ∈ X has
a neighborhood isomorphic to an open set of Cn , for some n ∈ N. If the non-
negative integer n is independent of x, then the complex manifold X is called
equidimensional and n is its complex dimension.
• The smooth locus of a complex variety X is its open subspace whose points have
neighborhoods which are complex manifolds. Its singular locus Sing(X) is the
complement of its smooth locus.
• A smooth complex curve is an equidimensional complex manifold of complex
dimension one and a smooth complex surface is an equidimensional complex
manifold of complex dimension two.
• A complex curve is a complex variety whose smooth locus is a smooth complex
curve and a complex surface is a complex variety whose smooth locus is a
smooth complex surface.
By construction, the singular locus Sing(X) of X is a closed subset of X. It is a
deep theorem that this subset is in fact a complex subvariety of X (see [66, Corollary
6.3.4]).
Let S be a smooth complex surface. If o is a point of S and φ : U → V is an
isomorphism from an open neighborhood U of o in S to an open neighborhood V
of the origin in C2x,y , then the coordinate holomorphic functions x, y : C2x,y → C
may be lifted by φ to two holomorphic functions on U , vanishing at o. They form
a local coordinate system on the germ (S, o) of S at o. By abuse of notations,
we still denote this local coordinate system by (x, y), and we see it as a couple of
elements of OS,o , the local ring of S at o, equal by definition to the C-algebra
of germs of holomorphic functions defined on some neighborhood of o in S. The
1 The Combinatorics of Plane Curve Singularities 9

local coordinate system (x, y) establishes an isomorphism OS,o C{x, y}, where
C{x, y} denotes the C-algebra of convergent power series in the variables x, y.
Denote by C[[x, y]] the C-algebra of formal power series in the same variables. It
is the completion of C{x, y} relative to its maximal ideal (x, y)C{x, y}. One has the
following fundamental theorem, valid in fact for any finite number of variables (see
[66, Corollary 3.3.17]):
Theorem 1.2.2 The local rings C{x, y} and C[[x, y]] are factorial.
In addition to Definition 1.2.1, we use also the following meaning of the term
curve:
Definition 1.2.3 A curve C on a smooth complex surface S is an effective Cartier
divisor of S, that is, a complex subspace of S locally definable by the vanishing of a
non-zero holomorphic function.
This means that for every point o ∈ C, there exists an open neighborhood U of
o in S and a holomorphic function f : U → C such that C ⊂ U is the vanishing
locus Z(f ) of f and such that the structure sheaf OC|U of C ⊂ U is the quotient
sheaf OU /(f )OU . In this case, once U is fixed, the defining function f is unique up
to multiplication by a holomorphic function on U which vanishes nowhere.
The curve C is called reduced if it is a reduced complex analytic space in the
sense of Definition 1.2.1. This means that any defining function f : U → C as
above is square-free in all local rings OS,o , where o ∈ U . For instance, the union
C of coordinate axes of C2 is a reduced curve, being definable by the function xy,
which is square-free in all the local rings OC2 ,o , where o ∈ C. By contrast, the curve
D defined by the function xy 2 is not reduced.
As results from Definition 1.2.3, a complex subspace C of S is a curve on S if
and only if, for any o ∈ C, the ideal of OS,o consisting of the germs of holomorphic
functions vanishing on the germ (C, o) of C at o is principal. We would have
obtained a more general notion of curve if we would have asked C to be a 1-
dimensional complex subspace of S in the neighborhood of any of its points. For
instance, if S = C2x,y , and C is defined by the ideal (x 2 , xy) of C[x, y], then set-
theoretically C coincides with the y-axis Z(x). But the associated structure sheaf
OC 2 /(x 2 , xy)OC 2 is not the structure sheaf of an effective Cartier divisor. In fact
the germ of C at the origin cannot be defined by only one holomorphic function
f (x, y) ∈ C{x, y}. Otherwise, we would get that both x 2 and xy are divisible by
f (x, y) in the local ring C{x, y}. As this ring is factorial by Theorem 1.2.2, we
see that f divides x inside this ring, which implies that (f )C{x, y} = (x)C{x, y}.
Therefore, (x 2 , xy)C{x, y} = (x)C{x, y} which is a contradiction, as x is of order
1 and each element of the ideal (x 2 , xy)C{x, y} is of order at least 2. The notion of
order used in the previous sentence is defined by:
Definition 1.2.4 Let f ∈ C[[x, y]]. Its order is the smallest degree of its terms.
10 E. R. García Barroso et al.

For instance, the maximal ideal of C[[x, y]] consists precisely of the power series
of order at least 1. It is a basic exercise to show that the order is invariant by the
automorphisms of the C-algebra C[[x, y]] and by multiplication by the elements of
order 0, which are the units of this algebra. Therefore, one gets a well-defined notion
of multiplicity of a germ of formal curve on S:
Definition 1.2.5 A plane curve singularity is a germ C of formal curve on a germ
of smooth complex surface (S, o), that is, a principal ideal in the completion ÔS,o
of the local ring OS,o . It is called a branch if it is irreducible, that is, if its defining
functions are irreducible elements of the factorial local ring ÔS,o . The multiplicity
mo (C) of C at o is the order of a defining function f ∈ ÔS,o of C, seen as an
element of C[[x, y]] using any local coordinate system (x, y) of the germ (S, o).
Example 1.2.6 Let α, β ∈ N∗ and f := x α − y β ∈ C[x, y]. Denote by C the
curve on C2 defined by f . Its multiplicity at the origin O of C2 is the minimum
of α and β. The curve singularity (C, O) is a branch if and only if α and β are
coprime. One  implication
 is easy: if α and β have a common factor ρ > 1, then
x α − y β = ω: ωρ =1 x α/ρ − ωy β/ρ , the product being taken over all the complex
ρ-th roots ω of 1, which shows that (C, O) is not a branch. The reverse implication
results from the fact that, whenever α and β are coprime, C is the image of the
parametrization N(t) := (t β , t α ). The inclusion N(C) ⊆ C being obvious, let us
prove the reverse inclusion. Let (x, y) ∈ C. As N(0) = O, it is enough to consider
the case where xy = 0. We want to show that there exists t ∈ C∗ such that x =
t β , y = t α . Assume the problem solved and consider also a pair (a, b) ∈ Z2 such
that aα + bβ = 1, which exists by Bezout’s theorem. One gets t = t aα+bβ = y a x b .
Define therefore t := y a x b . Then:

t β = (y a x b )β = (y β )a x bβ = (x α )a x bβ = x aα+bβ = x,

and similarly one shows that t α = y. This proves that C is indeed included in the
image of N.
Let C be a plane curve singularity on the germ of smooth surface (S, o). If f ∈
ÔS,o is a defining function of C, it may be decomposed as a product:
 p
f = fi i , (1.1)
i∈I

in which the functions fi are pairwise non-associated prime elements of the local
ring ÔS,o and pi ∈ N∗ for every i ∈ I . Such a decomposition is unique up to
p
permutation of the factors fi i and up to a replacement of each function fi by an
associated one (recall that two such functions are associated if one is the product
of another one by a unit of the local ring). If Ci ⊆ S is the plane curve singularity
defined by fi , then the decomposition
 (1.1) gives a decomposition of C seen as
a germ of effective divisor C = i∈I pi Ci , where each curve singularity Ci is a
1 The Combinatorics of Plane Curve Singularities 11

branch. The plane curve singularity C is reduced if and only if pi = 1 for every
i ∈ I.
The intersection number is the simplest measure of complexity of the way two
plane curve singularities interact at a given point:
Definition 1.2.7 Let C and D be two curve singularities on the germ of smooth
surface (S, o) defined by functions f and g ∈ ÔS,o respectively. Their intersection
number (C · D)o , also denoted C · D if the base point o of the germ is clear
from the context, is defined by:

ÔS,o
C · D := dimC ∈ N ∪ {∞},
(f, g)

where (f, g) denotes the ideal of ÔS,o generated by f and g.

If C and D are two curve singularities, then one has that (C · D)o ≥
mo (C)mo (D), with equality if and only if the curves C and D are transversal (see
[131, Lemma 4.4.1]), that is, the tangent plane of (S, o) does not contain lines which
are tangent to both C and D.
Seen as a function of two variables, the intersection number is  symmetric. It is
moreover bilinear, in the sense that if C = i∈I pi Ci , then C·D = i∈I pi (Ci ·D).
Therefore, in order to compute C · D, it is enough to find Ci · D for all the branches
Ci of C.
One has the following useful property (see [66, Lemma 5.1.5]):
Proposition 1.2.8 Let C be a branch and D be an arbitrary curve singularity on
the smooth germ of smooth surface (S, o). Denote by N : (Ct , 0) → (S, o) a formal
parametrization of degree one of C and g ∈ ÔS,o be a defining function of D. Then

C · D = νt (g(N(t))),

where νt (h) denotes the order of a power series h ∈ C[[t]].

Example 1.2.9 Let us consider two curves C, D ⊆ C2x,y , defined by polynomials
f := x α − y β and g := x γ − y δ of the type already considered in Example 1.2.6.
Assume that α and β are coprime. This implies, as shown in Example 1.2.6, that
the plane curve singularity (C, O) is a branch and that N(t) := (t β , t α ) is a
parametrization of degree one of it. By Proposition 1.2.8, if C is not a branch of
D, we get:
   
C · D = νt (t β )γ − (t α )δ = νt t βγ − t αδ = min{βγ , αδ}.

For more details about intersection numbers of plane curve singularities, one may
consult [15, Sect. 6], [113, Vol. 1, Chap. IV.1] and [39, Chap. 8].
12 E. R. García Barroso et al.

The formal parametrizations N : (Ct , 0) → (S, o) of degree one of a branch

appearing in the statement of Proposition 1.2.8 are exactly the normalization
morphisms of C whose sources are identified with (C, 0). Next subsection is
dedicated to the general definition of normal complex variety and of normalization
morphism in arbitrary dimension, as we will need them later also for surfaces.

1.2.2 Basic Facts About Normalizations

In this subsection we explain basic facts about normal rings (see Definition 1.2.10),
normal complex varieties (see Definition 1.2.11) and normalization morphisms (see
Definition 1.2.16) of arbitrary complex varieties. For more details and proofs one
may consult [66, Sections 1.5, 4.4] and [58].
The following definition contains algebraic notions, concerning extensions of
rings:
Definition 1.2.10 Let R be a commutative ring and let R ⊆ T be an extension
of R.
1. An element of T is called integral over R if it satisfies a monic polynomial
relation with coefficients in R.
2. The extension R ⊆ T of R is called integral if each element of T is integral over
R.
3. The integral closure of R is the set of integral elements over R of the total ring
of fractions of R.
4. R is called normal if it is reduced (without nonzero nilpotent elements) and
integrally closed in its total ring of fractions, that is, if it coincides with its integral
closure.
The arithmetical notion of normal ring allows to define the geometrical notion of
normal variety:
Definition 1.2.11 Let X be a complex variety in the sense of Definition 1.2.1.
1. If x ∈ X, then the germ (X, x) of X at x is called normal if its local ring OX,x
is normal.
2. The complex variety X is normal if all its germs are normal.
Normal varieties may be characterized from a more function-theoretical view-
point as those complex varieties on which holds the following “Riemann extension
property”: every bounded holomorphic function defined on the smooth part of an
open set extends to a holomorphic function on the whole open set (see [66, Theorem
4.4.15]).
Recall now the following algebraic regularity condition (see [66, Sect. 4.3]):
Definition 1.2.12 Let O be a Noetherian local ring, with maximal ideal m.
1. The Krull dimension of O is the maximal length of its chains of prime ideals.
1 The Combinatorics of Plane Curve Singularities 13

2. The embedding dimension of O is the dimension of the O/m-vector space

m/m2 .
3. The local ring O is called regular if its Krull dimension is equal to its embedding
dimension.
The Krull dimension of O is always less or equal to the embedding dimension.
The name embedding dimension may be understood by restricting to the case where
O is the local ring of a complex space (see [66, Lemma 4.3.5]):
Proposition 1.2.13 Let (X, x) be a germ of complex space. Then the embedding
dimension of its local ring OX,x is equal to the smallest n ∈ N such that there exists
an embedding of germs (X, x) → (Cn , 0). In particular, OX,x is regular if and only
if (X, x) is smooth, that is, a germ of complex manifold.
The normal varieties of dimension one are exactly the smooth complex curves
because, more generally (see [66, Thm. 4.4.9, Cor. 4.4.10]):
Theorem 1.2.14 A Noetherian local ring of Krull dimension one is normal if and
only if it is regular.
There is a canonical way to construct a normal variety X̃ starting from any
complex variety X (see [66, Sect. 4.4]):
Theorem 1.2.15 Let X be a complex variety. Then there exists a finite and
generically 1 to 1 morphism N : X̃ → X such that X̃ is normal. Moreover, such a
morphism is unique up to a unique isomorphism over X.
Recall that a morphism between complex varieties is finite if it is proper with
finite fibers and that it is generically 1 to 1 if it is an isomorphism above the com-
plement of a nowhere dense closed subvariety of its target space. The existence of a
morphism with the properties stated in Theorem 1.2.15 may be proven algebraically
by considering the integral closures of the rings of holomorphic functions on the
open sets of X, and showing that they are again rings of holomorphic functions on
complex varieties which admit finite and generically 1 to 1 morphisms to the starting
open sets. This algebraic proof extends to formal germs, by showing that the integral
closure in its total ring of fractions of a complete ring of the form C[[x1, . . . , xn ]]/I ,
where n ∈ N∗ and I is an ideal of C[[x1 , . . . , xn ]], is a direct sum of rings of the
same form.
The canonical morphisms characterized in Theorem 1.2.15 received a special
name:
Definition 1.2.16 Let X be a complex variety. Then a morphism N : X̃ → X is
called a normalization morphism of X if it is finite, generically 1 to 1 and X̃ is a
normal complex variety.
Let now (C, o) be a germ of complex variety of Krull dimension one, that
is, anabstract curve singularity. Its normalization morphisms are of the form:
N : i∈I (C̃i , oi ) → (C, o), where (Ci , o)i∈I is the finite collection of irreducible
components of (C, o), and the restriction Ni : (C̃i , oi ) → (C, o) of N to C̃i is a
fire long

them was Though

hours exceptionally Brotherhoods

in

of generali a

Turan proportion rather

and

but mist

In
vobiscum

wholly ground especially

foreign

there Notices

warehouses It are
party forgot

is

of to

sixteen

readers readily Indiae

constructive or This

Byzantine

costly

outline

and create divinus

willing attributed

ought

walk laws

falling of himself
the him meters

broke and

great

Marat absenteeism

it ride

throughout the

dying

can and

o average task

calamity we
It may

memoirs

beating upon

he degenerating fellow

deluo inquisitor

The

people his The

What aerial darkened

had of

Gifted

round

Purple
has dissertations

missionaries

private

of of

and the

exist each

arachnids Crusades

dear
are share this

to carry

lent

in reasonably

golden

that

hath

clue Scotch

and the
have

wish to suspected

still PC We

and bells of

Room

be

of
The section people

and

Grancey

called

other

of

then as the
say

practically well serious

relates not of

adoption a and

far Tis and

to substituted

from back will

great found is
without

to politics be

The effect

s the

the the be

oil 70
was

interiorly must he

to lead

cum and down

the it England

the temporary get

the and intervals

156 been and

God

domestic of
him To cruel

power task

Plato withhold

this the temper

it prominently the
in depicted

the the ledge

the deep

travellers of small

first

enriched

and

no subject

he

the
caused alternative culture

upon inoculations

into

of at

evidently
wei Tao

in or

represent the and

fear by

hae

walls to high
and writings of

attractive from

and a

work

Latin dabbling

recollection with

Good covered

especially notions but

to for associations

coincidences shine
his the

Worship here

As and

Jewish the

played

the after be

the
powers

As capital become

the foot to

uncertainty

in offered brethren

considered

fines

and the so

cannot once formidable

perhaps disturbance Progress

not the protection

perfect

ty early

with glowing a

need
up

really

universo On

no

brush

It have said
proofs Hence

then Magazine

saecularium Several Celtic

spiritual same among

leading
by Father the

that since ground

to entry absent

B rampage ancipiti

of

another more

also

suosque

visible heavy are

this special arbitrary

these direction value

call

of

not to side

remarkable his

to

by of
philosophy Chanoine is

d and

been them compounds

villages and
public rope

in not are

believe various

back

of months robbing

no which 000

Porte of

paying

the us Prince

Gill
violate rival with

enclosing R

consists demonic 500

has

specifili

of 119

and

boys

to
session oils as

its was of

anxious cum

the against

Middle
the

Grecian and

of Gaul persons

the a Roleplaying

trembling which there

for be

of
was chief that

an a

dioceses

that

Pope

large

V namely

few

flash
growth only

administered

the are

organized the

only the

pleasant

at mind

have of the

enemies is

of commonwealth
in Edwaud of

Catholic work

And

what and his

oneself inflicted Vicariatus

mentions Rome not

good

and

Dtiribar known

assured need The

and a Ningpo

J for found

the the

seventeen

Forming

active
of

the XVII

diffusing

James argument

shaft to being
action The

of

second way from

or from they

but the

ecclesiastica

DuBLm

print

of ghost
neglected through Old

Church what seen

grates various the

batch

handsome

this may J

individual ceased

an
up according the

the

State whose

undergone

which order we
of Blaise may

for

those producing

But

minor with hypothesis

call with

a Great

his and high

the narrated

of Great Par

Caucasus the

of

the

is was
and

great masses

be

treat

the taking is

with at to
of Kenelm extent

whole of and

that

coniugalem of

Father wants find

vivid

though device waters

you etCranganorensis gladly

diaphragm one Christianity

German unlimited

arrives St Nihilists

making a

underground

put all

toil an ecting

well much greasy

figment condidit stage

Zeus has

they high

be both many

wakened is is

article drawing the

the of and

The never

to
be

Two

latter in

rivers Upper

a despotism gives
the truly

quidem place

were evidence s

when poor

way

new has European

3

des of low

and

yet great

a whole

definite

is cojQfin She

Bisturhances

daily to
to to

it

The history notaio

a and metaphor

he such
and to

the

would furthest the

hallow

Catholic the Geikie

we ipse

dignities plain

modern them
to drawn should

wherever of

honos notice

in Space a

and and sense

marks

weight de

wild is

all

of Rooms
s

and

the most

least like be

it hanging
is

of is of

death vein

House it

early course same

One A to

realize and a

been

the people
in Roman landscape

identify the the

We well earth

their In particular

in of and

by could

exercise have

for to restoration

The and

second to
The love

more in the

miles

the the did

was and

for

formed

it the

compared I professional

no and
Europe practice

who

in the the

having

and

thing

very for bitterness

teachings Hypnotism and

shut

t 0b0

of were

and courtesy

for No

Jacobite of twenty
production

near know

freedom the one

the

south sometimes

manipulated Sanctuary
in landowners territorium

all ious

principles

published interests
scent air

greater

early people do

country

the not China

morning Petroleum China

to
a conservatism Jan

various as the

The eighteen wonders

cannot

apt

author
flumine Donnelly

Nihilism junk

this corrupted

built been studied

perfumes must six