text:
# Untitled Document

Homotopical variations and high-dimensional

Zariski-van Kampen theorems

D. CHÉNIOT (1) and C. EYRAL (2)

(1) Laboratoire d’Analyse, Topologie et Probabilités (UMR CNRS 6632)

Centre de Mathématiques et d’Informatique, Université de Provence

39 rue Joliot-Curie, 13453 Marseille Cédex 13, France

E-mail: cheniot@gyptis.univ-mrs.fr

(2) Department of Mathematics

The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics

Strada Costiera 11, 34014 Trieste, Italy

E-mails: eyralc@ictp.trieste.it or eyralchr@yahoo.com

11 April, 2002

Abstract

In 1933, van Kampen described the fundamental groups of the complements of plane complex projective algebraic curves. Recently, Chéniot-Libgober proved an analogue of this result for higher homotopy groups of the complements of complex projective hypersurfaces with isolated singularities. Their description is in terms of some “homotopical variation operators”. We generalize here the notion of “homotopical variation” to (singular) quasi-projective varieties. This is a first step for further generalizations of van Kampen’s theorem. A conjecture, with a first approach, is stated in the special case of non-singular quasi-projective varieties.

Mathematics Subject Classification 2000: 14F35 (Primary), 14D05, 32S50, 55Q99 (Secondary).

Keywords: Lefschetz theory, homotopy, generic pencils, monodromies.

Introduction

Our topic is best understood in the general frame of Lefschetz type theorems. Let $`X:=YZ`$, where $`Y`$ is an algebraic subset of complex projective space $`\text{}^n`$, with $`n2`$, and $`Z`$ an algebraic subset of $`Y`$ (such an $`X`$ is called an (embedded) quasi-projective variety). Let $``$ be a projective hyperplane of $`\text{}^n`$. The non-singular quasi-projective version of the Lefschetz Hyperplane Section Theorem, proved by Hamm-Lê and Goresky-MacPherson (cf. \[HL1\] and \[GM1,2\]), asserts that if $`X`$ is non-singular and $``$ generic, then the natural maps (between homology and homotopy groups, respectively)

$$H_q(X)H_q(X)\text{and}\pi _q(X,)\pi _q(X,)$$

are bijective for $`0qd2`$ and surjective for $`q=d1`$, where $`d`$ is the least (complex) dimension of the irreducible components of $`Y`$ not contained in $`Z`$. In the special case $`Y=\text{}^n`$, that is for the complement $`X=\text{}^nZ`$ of a projective variety, the bounds can be improved by $`c1`$, where $`c`$ is the least codimension of the irreducible components of $`Z`$ (cf. \[C2\]): then the above maps are bijective for $`0qn+c3`$ and surjective for $`q=n+c2`$ (there is no improvement if $`c=1`$).

The question now arises of determining the kernel of these maps in dimension $`d1`$ (resp. $`n+c2`$ for a complement). For this purpose, it is classical (at least when $`Z=\mathrm{}`$) to consider $``$ as a member of a pencil $`𝒫`$ of hyperplanes of $`\text{}^n`$ with axis a generic $`(n2)`$-plane $``$. The sections of $`X`$ by all the hyperplanes of such a pencil are isotopic to the one by $``$ with the exception of the sections by a finite number of exceptional hyperplanes $`(_i)_i`$. For each $`i`$, there are some homomorphisms

$$\text{var}_{i,q}:H_q(X,X)H_q(X),\text{ for all }q,$$

called “homological variation operators”, defined by patching each relative cycle on $`X`$ modulo $`X`$ with its transform by monodromy around $`_i`$ (cf. \[C3\]). These are defined even if $`X`$ is singular. In loc. cit., the first author showed that if $`X`$ is non-singular, then the kernel of the natural epimorphism

$$H_{d1}(X)H_{d1}(X)$$
$`(E)`$
is equal to the sum of the images of the homological variation operators$`(\text{var}_{i,d1})_i`$ associated to the exceptional members $`(_i)_i`$ of the pencil. In the case of a complement $`X=\text{}^nZ`$, the same is true for the epimorphism

$$H_{n+c2}((\text{}^nZ))H_{n+c2}(\text{}^nZ)$$
$`(E^{})`$
with $`n+c2`$ in place of $`d1`$. Combined with the Hyperplane Section Theorem quoted above, this gives a natural isomorphism

$$H_{d1}(X)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im var}_{i,d1}\stackrel{}{}H_{d1}(X)$$
$`(1)`$
and, in the case of a complement,

$$H_{n+c2}((\text{}^nZ))/\underset{i}{}\text{Im var}_{i,n+c2}\stackrel{}{}H_{n+c2}(\text{}^nZ)$$
$`(1^{})`$
(which coincides with a special case of (1) when $`c=1`$).

This is different from the classical point of view of the Second Lefschetz Theorem (cf. \[Lef\], \[Wa\] and \[AF\]) where the kernel is expressed in terms of “vanishing cycles”, that is $`(d1)`$-cycles of $`X`$ which vanish when $``$ tends to some $`_i`$. But the classical theorem applies only to the case where $`X`$ is non-singular closed (i.e., $`Z=\mathrm{}`$) while formula (1) applies to both the closed and non-closed cases, provided $`X`$ is non-singular. Thus isomorphisms (1) and $`(1^{})`$ are generalizations of the Second Lefschetz Theorem.

But isomorphisms (1) and $`(1^{})`$ may also be considered as generalized homological forms of the classical Zariski-van Kampen theorem on curves. Recall that this theorem expresses the fundamental group of the complement of an algebraic curve in $`\text{}^2`$ by generators and relations. The generators are loops in a generic line, around its intersection points with the curve. The relations are obtained by considering a generic pencil containing this line: each loop must be identified with its transforms by monodromy around the exceptional members of the pencil (cf. \[Za\], \[vK\] and \[C1\]).

The first true (homotopical) generalization of van Kampen’s theorem to higher dimensions was given by Libgober (cf. \[Li\]). It applies to the $`(n1)`$-st homotopy group of the complement of a hypersurface with isolated singularities in $`\text{}^n`$ behaving well at infinity. In this case, if $`n3`$, the fundamental group is  and the $`(n1)`$-st homotopy group is the first higher non-trivial one as explained in \[Li\], and at the same time the first not preserved by hyperplane section. Libgober also showed how the projective case can be deduced from the affine case. The projective version of Libgober’s theorem can be stated in the previous frame as follows. With the notation above, assume that $`Y=\text{}^n`$ with $`n3`$, and $`Z=H`$ where $`H`$ is an algebraic hypersurface of $`\text{}^n`$ having only isolated singularities. Consider a generic pencil of hyperplanes of $`\text{}^n`$ as above. Let $`(\text{}^nH)`$ be a base point in the axis of the pencil. For each $`i`$, we denote by

$$h_{i,q}:\pi _q((\text{}^nH),)\pi _q((\text{}^nH),),\text{ for all }q1,$$

the isomorphism induced by a geometrical monodromy around $`_i`$ leaving fixed the points of $`(\text{}^nH)`$. Then there is a natural isomorphism

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \pi _{n1}((\text{}^n& H),)/(\text{Im }(h_{1,n1}\text{id}),\text{Im }𝒟_{1,n1},\hfill \\ & \mathrm{},\text{Im }(h_{N,n1}\text{id}),\text{Im }𝒟_{N,n1})\stackrel{}{}\pi _{n1}(\text{}^nH,),\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(2)`$
where $`N`$ is the number of the exceptional hyperplanes and where each

$$𝒟_{i,n1}:\pi _{n2}(_i(\text{}^nH),)\pi _{n1}((\text{}^nH),)/\text{Im }(h_{i,n1}\text{id})$$

is some homomorphism called “degeneration operator”.

Later in \[CL\], Chéniot and Libgober showed that the combination (ordinary variations by monodromies - degeneration operators) of \[Li\] is related to some homotopical variation

$$𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}:\pi _{n1}((\text{}^nH),(\text{}^nH),)\pi _{n1}((\text{}^nH),)$$

defined from the homological variation $`\text{var}_{i,n1}`$ of \[C3\] acting in a pencil supported by the universal covering of $`\text{}^nH`$. In particular, (2) yields a natural isomorphism

$$\pi _{n1}((\text{}^nH),)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im }𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}\stackrel{}{}\pi _{n1}(\text{}^nH,).$$
$`(3)`$
Isomorphism (3) can also be deduced from (1) applied to the universal covering of $`\text{}^nH`$ (cf. \[CL\]).

Isomorphism (3) provides a homotopy analogue of isomorphisms (1) and $`(1^{})`$ in the special case of complements of projective hypersurfaces with isolated singularities. Thus, this high-dimensional Zariski-van Kampen theorem is also a homotopy version of the Second Lefschetz Theorem for this special case. But the definition of homotopical variation operators in \[CL\] (as well as the definition of degeneration operators in \[Li\]) relies heavily upon the special topology of complements of hypersurfaces with isolated singularities and does not make sense in a more general setting. The need then arises for an alternative definition which could lead to a more general homotopy analogue of isomorphisms (1) and $`(1^{})`$. It must be said that in a more general situation, the considered homotopy group may not be the first higher non-trivial one but it remains the first not preserved by generic hyperplane section. The aim of this article is to give such an alternative definition and to state a reasonable conjecture generalizing (3) (and (2)) with a first approach toward its proof.

We introduce here new homotopical variation operators,

$$\text{VAR}_{i,q}:\pi _q(X,X,)\pi _q(X,),\text{ for all }q1,$$

which extend those of Chéniot-Libgober and have several advantages with respect to them. Our definition is purely homotopical, that is, it does not go through homology. This frees it from the special topology of the case considered by Chéniot and Libgober, which was precisely required to express homotopy groups with the help of homology groups. In fact our definition is valid for any (singular) quasi-projective variety $`X:=YZ`$. Our operators coincide with those of Chéniot-Libgober when the latter are defined. More precisely, we show that, when $`X:=\text{}^nH`$ and $`q=n1`$, with $`n3`$, and $`H`$ is an algebraic hypersurface having only isolated singularities, then $`\text{VAR}_{i,n1}=𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}`$. In particular, isomorphism (3) is valid with $`\text{VAR}_{i,n1}`$ in place of $`𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}`$. We also show that our homotopical operators are linked by Hurewicz homomorphisms with the homological operators $`\text{var}_{i,q}`$ of \[C3\] and that they are equivariant under the action of the fundamental group.

It is then natural to ask whether isomorphism (1) when $`X`$ is non-singular and isomorphism $`(1^{})`$ are true for homotopy groups, with our homotopical variation operators instead of the homological ones. We show easily that the kernel of the homotopy analogue of epimorphism $`(E)`$ (resp. $`(E^{})`$) contains the images of operators $`\text{VAR}_{i,d1}`$ (resp. $`\text{VAR}_{i,n+c2}`$). Thus, there are well defined epimorphisms

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \pi _{d1}(X,)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im VAR}_{i,d1}& \pi _{d1}(X,)\text{if }d3,\hfill \\ \hfill \pi _1(X,)/\overline{\underset{i}{}\text{Im VAR}_{i,1}}& \pi _1(X,)\text{if }d=2,\hfill \end{array}$$
$`(4)`$
where $`\overline{_i\text{Im VAR}_{i,1}}`$ denotes the normal subgroup generated by $`_i\text{Im VAR}_{i,1}`$, and a well-defined epimorphism

$$\pi _{n+c2}((\text{}^nZ),)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im VAR}_{i,n+c2}\pi _{n+c2}(\text{}^nZ,)$$
$`(4^{})`$
when $`n+c4`$ (if $`c=1`$, $`(4^{})`$ is only a special case of (4)). The question is whether these are isomorphisms. Notice that when $`n3`$ and $`X=\text{}^nH`$ is the complement of a hypersurface $`H`$ with isolated singularities, (4) and $`(4^{})`$ coincide with isomorphism (3) since our operators extend those of Chéniot-Libgober. Also, when $`n=2`$ and $`X:=\text{}^2C`$ is the complement of a plane curve, the second row of (4) coincides with the map that van Kampen’s theorem asserts to be an isomorphism, as we shall see in Section 4.

We conjecture that the answer to our question is almost always yes:

Conjecture.Epimorphism $`(4)`$, where $`X`$ is non-singular, and epimorphism $`(4^{})`$, unless $`Z=\mathrm{}`$, are isomorphisms.

We are far from having a proof of this conjecture. We shall only give a very small step in its direction in the last section.

A detailed exposition from the origins to nowadays of the questions mentioned in this introduction, like the Lefschetz Hyperplane Section Theorem, the Second Lefschetz Theorem or the van Kampen Theorem on curves, can be found in \[E3\].

The content of this article is as follows. Section 1 is devoted to some basic facts on generic pencils and monodromies. In Section 2, we recall the definition of the homological variation operators $`\text{var}_{i,q}`$ of \[C3\] which are used to define the homotopical variation operators $`𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}`$ of \[CL\]. The latter will be described in Section 3. In Sections 4 and 5, we introduce the generalized homotopical variation operators $`\text{VAR}_{i,q}`$, we give their elementary properties and we prove that they coincide with the Chéniot-Libgober operators when the latter are defined. We also prove that there are epimorphisms (4) and $`(4^{})`$ as stated above. Finally, in Section 6, we give a first approach to the conjecture we have formulated.

Notation 0.1. – Throughout the paper, homology groups are singular homology groups with integer coefficients, unless there is an explicit statement of the contrary. We shall note the homology class in a space $`A`$ of an (absolute) cycle $`z`$ by $`[z]_A`$ and the homology class in $`A`$ modulo a subspace $`B`$ of a relative cycle $`z^{}`$ by $`[z^{}]_{A,B}`$. If there is no ambiguity, we shall omit the subscripts. If $`(A,B)`$ is a pointed pair with base point $`B`$, we shall denote by $`F^q(A,B,)`$ the set of relative homotopy $`q`$-cells of $`A`$ modulo $`B`$ based at $``$. These are maps from the $`q`$-cube $`I^q`$ to $`A`$ with the face $`x_q=0`$ sent into $`B`$ and all other faces sent to $``$ (as in \[St, §15\]). We designate by $`F^q(A,)`$ the set of absolute homotopy $`q`$-cells of $`A`$ based at $``$, that is maps from $`I^q`$ to $`A`$ sending the boundary $`\dot{I}^q`$ of $`I^q`$ to $``$. Given $`fF^q(A,B,)`$ (resp. $`F^q(A,)`$), the homotopy class of $`f`$ in $`A`$ modulo $`B`$ based at $``$ (resp. in $`A`$ based at $``$) will be denoted by $`f_{A,B,}`$ (resp. $`f_{A,}`$). Again, if there is no ambiguity, we shall omit the subscripts.

1. Generic pencils and monodromies

Let $`X:=YZ`$, where $`Y`$ is a non-empty closed algebraic subset of $`\text{}^n`$, with $`n2`$, and $`Z`$ a proper closed algebraic subset of $`Y`$. Take a Whitney stratification $`𝒮`$ of $`Y`$ such that $`Z`$ is a union of strata (cf. \[Wh\], \[LT\]), and consider a projective hyperplane $``$ of $`\text{}^n`$ transverse to (the strata of) $`𝒮`$ (the choice of such a hyperplane is generic). Denote by $`d`$ the least dimension of the irreducible components of $`Y`$ not contained in $`Z`$.

Notice that, when $`X`$ is non-singular, the application of the Lefschetz Hyperplane Section Theorems mentioned in the introduction is valid for $``$. Indeed, the genericity of the hyperplane required for these theorems can be specified as its transversality to a Whitney stratification of $`Z`$ (cf. \[HL2, Appendix\], \[GM2, end of the proof of II.5.1\], \[C2, Corollaire 1.2\]).

Now, consider a pencil $`𝒫`$ of hyperplanes of $`\text{}^n`$ having $``$ as a member and the axis $``$ of which is transverse to $`𝒮`$ (the choice of such an axis is generic inside $``$). All the members of $`𝒫`$ are transverse to $`𝒮`$ with the exception of a finite number of them $`(_i)_i`$, called exceptional hyperplanes, for which, nevertheless, there are only a finite number of points of non-transversality, all of them situated outside of $``$ (cf. \[C2\]). If necessary, one may take the liberty of considering some ordinary members of $`𝒫`$, different from $``$, as exceptional ones.

We parametrize the elements of $`𝒫`$ by the complex projective line $`\text{}^1`$ as usual. Let $`\lambda `$ be the parameter of $``$ and, for each $`i`$, let $`\lambda _i`$ be the parameter of $`_i`$. For each $`i`$, take a small closed semi-analytic disk $`D_i\text{}^1`$ with centre $`\lambda _i`$ together with a point $`\gamma _i`$ on its boundary. Choose the $`D_i`$ mutually disjoint. Take also the image $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ of a simple real-analytic arc in $`\text{}^1`$ joining $`\lambda `$ to $`\gamma _i`$ and such that: $`\text{(i) }\mathrm{\Gamma }_iD_i=\{\gamma _i\}`$; $`\text{(ii) }\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^{}=\{\lambda \}\text{ if }ii^{}`$; $`\text{(iii) }\mathrm{\Gamma }_iD_i^{}=\mathrm{}\text{ if }ii^{}`$. Then, set

$$K_i:=\mathrm{\Gamma }_iD_i.$$

Finally, consider a loop $`\omega _i`$ in the boundary $`K_i`$ of $`K_i`$ starting from $`\lambda `$, running along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ up to $`\gamma _i`$, going once counter-clockwise around the boundary of $`D_i`$ and coming along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ back to $`\lambda `$.

Notation 1.1. – For any subsets $`G\text{}^n`$ and $`E\text{}^1`$, note

$$G_E:=\underset{\mu E}{}G𝒫(\mu ),$$

where $`𝒫(\mu )`$ is the member of $`𝒫`$ with parameter $`\mu `$.

The monodromies around each $`_i`$, more precisely above each $`\omega _i`$, proceed from the following lemma.

Lemma 1.2 (cf. \[C3, Lemma 4.1\]). – For each $`i`$, there is an isotopy

$$H:(X)\times IX_{K_i}$$

such that:

(i) $`H(x,0)=x`$, for every $`xX`$;

(ii) $`H(x,t)X_{\omega _i(t)}`$ for every $`xX`$ and every $`tI`$;

(iii) for every $`tI`$, the map $`XX_{\omega _i(t)},`$ defined by $`xH(x,t)`$, is a homeomorphism;

(iv) $`H(x,t)=x`$, for every $`xX`$ and every $`tI`$. As usual, $`I`$ is the unit interval $`[0,1]`$.

The terminal homeomorphism

$$h:XX$$

of $`H`$, defined by $`h(x):=H(x,1)`$, of course leaves $`X`$ pointwise fixed. Such a homeomorphism $`h`$ is called a geometric monodromy of $`X`$ relative to $`X`$ above $`\omega _i`$.

Another choice of loop $`\omega _i`$ within the same homotopy class $`\overline{\omega }_i`$ in $`\text{}^1_i\lambda _i`$ and another choice of isotopy $`H`$ above $`\omega _i`$ as in Lemma 1.2 would give a geometric monodromy isotopic to $`h`$ within $`X`$ by an isotopy leaving $`X`$ pointwise fixed. Thus, the isotopy class of $`h`$ in $`X`$ relative to $`X`$ is wholly determined by the homotopy class $`\overline{\omega }_i`$ of $`\omega _i`$ in $`\text{}^1_i\lambda _i`$.

2. Homological variation operators

Fix an index $`i`$, and consider a geometric monodromy $`h`$ of $`X`$ relative to $`X`$ above $`\omega _i`$. Denote by $`S_q(X)`$ the abelian group of singular$`q`$-chains of $`X`$ with integer coefficients, and by $`h_q:S_q(X)S_q(X)`$ the chain homomorphism induced by $`h`$. Since $`h`$ leaves $`X`$ pointwise fixed (cf. Lemma 1.2), it is easy to see that for every relative $`q`$-cycle $`z`$ of $`X`$ modulo $`X`$, the variation by $`h_q`$ of $`z`$, that is the chain $`h_q(z)z`$, is an absolute $`q`$-cycle of $`X`$ (cf. \[C3, Lemma 4.6\]). Moreover, one has the following lemma.

Lemma 2.1 (cf. \[C3, Lemma 4.8\]). – The correspondence

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \text{var}_{i,q}:H_q(X,X)& H_q(X)\hfill \\ \hfill [z]_{X,X}& [h_q(z)z]_X\hfill \end{array}$$

gives a well-defined homomorphism which depends only on the homotopy class $`\overline{\omega }_i`$ of $`\omega _i`$ in $`\text{}^1_i\lambda _i`$.

This means that another choice of loop $`\omega _i`$ within the same homotopy class $`\overline{\omega }_i`$ in $`\text{}^1_i\lambda _i`$ and another choice of monodromy $`h`$ above $`\omega _i`$ as in Lemma 1.2 would give a homomorphism equal to $`\text{var}_{i,q}`$.

Homomorphism $`\text{var}_{i,q}`$ is called a homological variation operator associated to $`\overline{\omega }_i`$.

These operators were used by the first author in \[C3\] to prove the following result. Theorem 2.2 (cf. \[C3, Proposition 5.1\]). – If $`X`$ is non-singular, then there is a natural isomorphism

$$H_{d1}(X)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im var}_{i,d1}\stackrel{}{}H_{d1}(X).$$

In the special case of the complement of a projective algebraic set, i.e., if $`X:=\text{}^nZ`$, this can be improved into an isomorphism

$$H_{n+c2}(X)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im var}_{i,n+c2}\stackrel{}{}H_{n+c2}(X),$$

where $`c`$ is the least of the codimensions of the irreducible components of $`Z`$.

3. Homotopical variation operators on the complements of

projective hypersurfaces with isolated singularities

Throughout this section, we work under the following hypotheses.

Hypotheses 3.1. – We assume that $`Y=\text{}^n`$, with $`n3`$, and $`Z=H`$, where $`H`$ is a (closed) algebraic hypersurface of $`\text{}^n`$, with degree $`k`$, having only isolated singularities. Thus, $`X=\text{}^nH`$. We also assume that $`𝒮`$ is the Whitney stratification the strata of which are: $`\text{}^nH`$, the singular part $`H_{\text{sing}}`$ of $`H`$, and the non-singular part $`HH_{\text{sing}}`$ of $`H`$. Being transverse to $`𝒮`$ then means avoiding the singularities of $`H`$ and being transverse to the non-singular part of $`H`$. Observe that $`X\mathrm{}`$. We fix a base point $`X`$.

In \[CL\], a $`k`$-fold (unramified) holomorphic covering

$$p:X^{}X$$

is constructed, where $`X^{}:=Y^{}Z^{}`$ is a (pathwise) connected quasi-projective variety in $`\text{}^{n+1}`$. In fact, $`X^{}`$ is the global Milnor fibre of the cone of $`\text{}^{n+1}`$ corresponding to $`H`$. Moreover, it is shown that there is a Whitney stratification $`𝒮^{}`$ of $`Y^{}`$ preserving $`Z^{}`$ and a pencil $`𝒫^{}`$ in $`\text{}^{n+1}`$ with axis $`^{}`$ transverse to $`𝒮^{}`$ such that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill p^1(X)& =^{}X^{}\text{and}\hfill \\ \hfill p^1(𝒫(\mu )X)& =𝒫^{}(\mu )X^{}\text{for every }\mu \text{}^1,\hfill \end{array}$$

the member $`𝒫^{}(\mu )`$ of $`𝒫^{}`$ with parameter $`\mu `$ being transverse to $`𝒮^{}`$ if and only if $`𝒫(\mu )`$ is transverse to $`𝒮`$. Recall that $`=𝒫(\lambda )`$, and put $`^{}:=𝒫^{}(\lambda )`$. Then, for each $`i`$, pencil $`𝒫^{}`$ gives rise to a homological variation operator

$$\text{var}_{i,n1}^{}:H_{n1}(^{}X^{},^{}X^{})H_{n1}(^{}X^{})$$

associated to $`\overline{\omega }_i`$, defined as in section 2.

Given an index $`i`$ and a base point $`p^1()`$, one can then consider the following diagram:

$$\begin{array}{cccc}& H_{n1}(^{}X^{},^{}X^{})& \stackrel{\text{var}{}_{i,n1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}{}& H_{n1}(^{}X^{})\\ & & & \\ & \chi & & \widehat{\chi }\\ & & & \\ & \pi _{n1}(^{}X^{},^{}X^{},)& & \pi _{n1}(^{}X^{},)\\ & & & \\ & \stackrel{~}{\pi }& & \pi \\ & & & \\ & \pi _{n1}(X,X,)& & \pi _{n1}(X,),\end{array}$$
$`(3.2)`$
where $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }`$ and $`\pi `$ are induced by $`p`$ and where $`\chi `$ and $`\widehat{\chi }`$ are Hurewicz homomorphisms. Now, by a general property of covering projections, $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }`$ is an isomorphism (cf. \[Sp, Theorem 7.2.8\]). Moreover, homomorphism $`\widehat{\chi }`$ too is an isomorphism as a consequence of the special fact that $`X`$ is the complement of a projective hypersurface $`H`$ with isolated singularities. Indeed, $`H`$ is then a non-singular hypersurface of $`\text{}^{n1}`$, so that

$$\pi _1(X,)\text{}/k\text{}\text{and}\pi _q(X,)=0\text{for}2qn2$$

(this range may be empty) (cf. \[Li, Lemma 1.1\]). Knowing that $`^{}X^{}`$ is pathwise connected (cf. \[CL, Lemma 2.9\]), these facts imply that $`^{}X^{}`$ is $`(n2)`$-connected, and $`\widehat{\chi }`$ is then an isomorphism by the Hurewicz Isomorphism Theorem.

Thus, for each $`i`$, and for every $`p^1()`$, there is a homomorphism

$$𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}:\pi _{n1}(X,X,)\pi _{n1}(X,)$$

defined by the composition

$$\pi \widehat{\chi }^1\text{var}_{i,n1}^{}\chi \stackrel{~}{\pi }^1$$

in diagram (3.2) (cf. \[CL, Section 5\]).

One shows easily that homomorphism $`𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}`$ does not in fact depend on the choice of the base point $`p^1()`$.

Homomorphism $`𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}`$ is called a homotopical variation operator associated to $`\overline{\omega }_i`$.

These operators were used in \[CL\] to prove the following result.

Theorem 3.3 (cf. \[CL, Theorem 7.1\]). – Under Hypotheses 3.1, there is a natural isomorphism

$$\pi _{n1}(X,)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im }𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}\stackrel{}{}\pi _{n1}(X,).$$

As mentioned in the introduction, Theorem 3.3 is equivalent to the projective version of \[Li, Theorem 2.4\] and also provides a homotopy version of Theorem 2.2 in the special case of complements of projective hypersurfaces with isolated singularities.

4. Generalized homotopical variation operators

In this section, $`X:=YZ`$ is again a (possibly singular) quasi-projective variety as in Sections 1 and 2. We assume further that $`X\mathrm{}`$ and we fix a base point $``$ in $`X`$. Observe that the condition $`X\mathrm{}`$ is equivalent to $`dimX2`$. We also fix an index $`i`$, and consider a geometric monodromy $`h`$ of $`X`$ relative to $`X`$ above $`\omega _i`$ (cf. Section 1).

Let $`q`$ be an integer $`1`$. Since $`h`$ leaves $`X`$ pointwise fixed, if $`fF^q(X,X,)`$ (cf. Notation 0.1), then the map $`f(hf)`$ defined on $`I^q:=[0,1]^q`$ by

$$f(hf)(x_1,\mathrm{},x_q):=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill f(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},12x_q),0x_q\frac{1}{2},& \\ \hfill hf(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},2x_q1),\frac{1}{2}x_q1,& \end{array}$$

is in $`F^q(X,)`$. Notice that the reversion of $`f`$ and its concatenation with $`hf`$ are performed on the variable transverse to the free face. This would in general not make sense but here it does because $`f`$ and $`hf`$ have the same boundary.

Lemma 4.1. – The correspondence

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \text{VAR}_{i,q}:\pi _q(X,X,)& \pi _q(X,)\hfill \\ \hfill f_{X,X,}& f(hf)_{X,}\hfill \end{array}$$

gives a well-defined map which depends only on the homotopy class $`\overline{\omega }_i`$ of $`\omega _i`$ in $`\text{}^1_i\lambda _i`$. If $`q2`$, it is a homomorphism.

The independence assertion follows from the remark we made just after Lemma 1.2. That the map is well-defined is straightforward and one checks easily that it is a homomorphism if $`q2`$ (the sum of homotopy cells being performed as in \[St, §15\]).

We shall call map $`\text{VAR}_{i,q}`$ a generalized homotopical variation operator associated to $`\overline{\omega }_i`$. This terminology is justified by Theorem 5.1 below which asserts that, in the case where the homotopical variation operators of \[CL\] are defined (cf. Section 3), the latter coincide with our generalized operators.

We remark that if our operators are applied to absolute cells of $`X`$ or if their result is considered as relative cells of $`X`$ modulo $`X`$, then they act as what can be called ordinary variations by monodromy. More precisely:

Observation 4.2. – Let $`\text{incl}_q:\pi _q(X,)\pi _q(X,X,)`$ be the natural map. Then,

(i) $`\text{VAR}_{i,q}(\text{incl}_q(x))=x+h_q(x)\text{for all }x\pi _q(X,);`$

(ii) if $`q2`$, $`\text{incl}_q(\text{VAR}_{i,q}(y))=y+\stackrel{~}{h}_q(y)\text{for all }y\pi _q(X,X,);`$where $`h_q`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{h}_q`$ are the automorphisms of $`\pi _q(X,)`$ and $`\pi _q(X,X,)`$ respectively induced by $`h`$.

The right-hand sides of the equalities are written additively though the first group is not a priori commutative if $`q=1`$ nor is the second one if $`q=2`$; the order of operations must then be respected.

Observation 4.2 relies on the same reasons as those which allow the sum of two homotopy cells to be performed indiscriminately on any variable not transverse to the (possible) free face and which make the sum commutative in high dimension. Its detailed proof is left to the reader.

Notice that when $`n=2`$ and $`X`$ is the complement $`\text{}^2C`$ of a plane projective curve, $`X`$ is reduced to a single point and the observation above shows that the epimorphism (4), second row, of the introduction (the existence of which will be justified by Lemma 4.8 below) coincides with the map that van Kampen’s theorem asserts to be an isomorphism.

Operator $`\text{VAR}_{i,q}`$ is linked to the homological variation operator $`\text{var}_{i,q}`$ of Section 2 by Hurewicz homomorphisms. This is stated in the next lemma.

Lemma 4.3. – The following diagram is commutative:

$$\begin{array}{cccc}& H_q(X,X)& \stackrel{\text{var}\text{i,q}}{}& H_q(X)\\ & & & \\ & \chi & & \widehat{\chi }\\ & & & \\ & \pi _q(X,X,)& \stackrel{\text{VAR}\text{i,q}}{}& \pi _q(X,),\end{array}$$

where $`\chi `$ and $`\widehat{\chi }`$ are Hurewicz homomorphisms.

Proof. Since homotopy cells are defined on cubes, it is convenient to use cubical singular homology theory (cf. \[HW\], \[M\]), which is equivalent to ordinary (simplicial) singular theory (cf. \[HW, Section 8.4\]). So, let us first introduce some notation. For any pair of spaces $`(U,V)`$, with $`VU`$, we shall denote by $`H_q^c(U,V)`$ the $`q`$-th cubical singular relative homology group of $`(U,V)`$, by $`[]_{U,V}^c`$ the homology classes in this group, and by $`S_q^c(U,V)`$ the group of $`q`$-dimensional cubical chains of the pair $`(U,V)`$. Given a (continuous) map $`g:(U,V)(U^{},V^{})`$, we shall denote by $`g_q:S_q^c(U,V)S_q^c(U^{},V^{})`$ the induced cubical chain homomorphism. A similar notation is used for the absolute case.

Let $`f`$ be a representative of an element of $`\pi _q(X,X,)`$. We have

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \chi (f_{X,X,})& =[f_q(\iota )]_{X,X}^c\hfill \\ \hfill \widehat{\chi }(f(hf)_{X,})& =[(f(hf))_q(\iota )]_X^c\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\iota :I^qI^q`$ is the identity map (cf. \[HW, 8.8.4\]). Since the expression for $`\text{var}_{i,q}`$ (given by Lemma 2.1) remains valid in cubical theory (by \[HW, 8.4.7 and the paragraph before 8.4.10\]), it then suffices to prove that the following equality holds in $`H_q^c(X)`$:

$$[h_q(f_q(\iota ))f_q(\iota )]_X^c=[(f(hf))_q(\iota )]_X^c.$$
$`(4.4)`$
For this purpose, consider the singular $`q`$-cubes $`\sigma _1,\sigma _2:I^qI^q`$ in $`I^q`$ defined by

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \sigma _1(x_1,\mathrm{},x_q)& :=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},\frac{1x_q}{2}),\hfill \\ \hfill \sigma _2(x_1,\mathrm{},x_q)& :=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},\frac{1+x_q}{2}).\hfill \end{array}$$

Observe that $`\sigma _1+\sigma _2`$ is a relative cycle of $`I^q`$ modulo $`\dot{I}^q`$.

Lemma 4.5. – The following equality holds in $`H_q^c(I^q,\dot{I}^q)`$:

$$[\sigma _1+\sigma _2]_{I^q,\dot{I}^q}^c=[\iota ]_{I^q,\dot{I}^q}^c.$$

Proof. Let $`\sigma :I^{q+1}I^q`$ be the singular $`(q+1)`$-cube in $`I^q`$ defined by

$$\sigma (x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q+1}):=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill (x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},\frac{2x_{q+1}+x_q1}{2}),& \\ \hfill (x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},\frac{1}{2}),& \\ \hfill (x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},\frac{1x_q+2x_{q+1}}{2}),& \end{array}\begin{array}{cc}& x_{q+1}\frac{x_q}{2}+1,\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{x_q}{2}& x_{q+1}\frac{x_q}{2}+1,\hfill \\ & x_{q+1}\frac{x_q}{2}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The boundary operator

$$:S_{q+1}^c(I^q,\dot{I}^q)S_q^c(I^q,\dot{I}^q),$$

applied to $`\sigma `$, satisfies

$$\sigma =(1)^{q+1}\sigma _1(1)^{q+1}\sigma _2(1)^q\iota .$$

Indeed, the face of $`\sigma `$ of index $`(q,0)`$ is degenerated and all other non-mentioned faces are in $`\dot{I}^q`$. The equality in the statement of Lemma 4.5 follows.

Now, since $`f(hf)`$ maps $`(I^q,\dot{I}^q)`$ into $`(X,)`$, this lemma implies

$$[(f(hf))_q(\iota )]_X^c=[(f(hf))_q(\sigma _1+\sigma _2)]_X^c,$$

and since

$$(f(hf))\sigma _1=f\text{and}(f(hf))\sigma _2=hf,$$

one sees immediately that

$$[(f(hf))_q(\sigma _1+\sigma _2)]_X^c=[(hf)_q(\iota )f_q(\iota )]_X^c.$$

This completes the proof of (4.4) and, consequently, the proof of Lemma 4.3.

Operator $`\text{VAR}_{i,q}`$ also satisfies the following equivariance property.

Lemma 4.6. – If $`\gamma F^1(X,)`$ and $`fF^q(X,X,)`$, then

$$\text{VAR}_{i,q}(\gamma _{X,}f_{X,X,})=\gamma _{X,}\text{VAR}_{i,q}(f_{X,X,}),$$

where $``$ denotes equally the action of $`\pi _1(X,)`$ on $`\pi _q(X,X,)`$ or the action of $`\pi _1(X,)`$ on $`\pi _q(X,)`$.

Proof. Let $`\gamma ^{}`$ be the inverse loop of $`\gamma `$ and

$$K_\gamma ^{}:(I^q,\dot{I}^q)\times I(X,X)$$

be a $`\gamma ^{}`$-homotopy starting at $`f`$ (i.e., $`K_\gamma ^{}(x,0)=f(x)`$ for every $`xI^q`$, $`K_\gamma ^{}(x,t)=\gamma ^{}(t)`$ for every $`x\dot{I}^q\{x_q=0\}`$ and every $`tI`$, and $`K_\gamma ^{}(x,t)X`$ for every $`x\{x_q=0\}`$ and every $`tI`$). Denote by $`g`$ the element of $`F^q(X,X,)`$ defined by $`g(x):=K_\gamma ^{}(x,1)`$. One has

$$\gamma _{X,}f_{X,X,}=g_{X,X,}.$$
$`(4.7)`$
Since $`h`$ leaves $`X`$ pointwise fixed, the map

$$𝒦_\gamma ^{}:(I^q,\dot{I}^q)\times I(X,X)$$

defined by

$$𝒦_\gamma ^{}((x_1,\mathrm{},x_q),t):=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill K_\gamma ^{}((x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},12x_q),t),0x_q\frac{1}{2},& \\ \hfill hK_\gamma ^{}((x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},2x_q1),t),\frac{1}{2}x_q1,& \end{array}$$

is a $`\gamma ^{}`$-homotopy from $`f(hf)`$ to $`g(hg)`$ such that $`𝒦_\gamma ^{}(x,t)=\gamma ^{}(t)`$ for every $`(x,t)\dot{I}^q\times I`$. In other words,

$$\gamma _{X,}\text{VAR}_{i,q}(f_{X,X,})=\text{VAR}_{i,q}(g_{X,X,}).$$

Lemma 4.6 then follows from (4.7).

Finally we prove a lemma which justifies the existence of the epimorphisms (4) and $`(4^{})`$ of the introduction. But this lemma is valid for every $`q1`$ and even if $`X`$ is singular.

Lemma 4.8. – The image of operator $`\text{VAR}_{i,q}`$ is contained in the kernel of the natural map $`\pi _q(X,)\pi _q(X,)`$.

Proof. A representative of an element of the image of $`\text{VAR}_{i,q}`$ is of the form $`f(hf)`$ with $`fF^q(X,X,)`$. Let $`H`$ be an isotopy giving rise to $`h`$ as in Lemma 1.2. One defines a homotopy $`I^q\times IX`$ from $`f(hf)`$ to the constant map equal to $``$ by

$$((x_1,\mathrm{},x_q),t)\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill H(f(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},12x_q),2t),& \\ \hfill hf(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},2x_q1),& \\ \hfill hf(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},12x_q),& \\ \hfill hf(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},2t1),& \\ \hfill hf(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{q1},2x_q1),& \end{array}\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 0& t\frac{1}{2},\hfill \\ \hfill 0& t\frac{1}{2},\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{2}& t1,\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{2}& t1,\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{2}& t1,\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 0& x_q\frac{1}{2},\hfill \\ \hfill \frac{1}{2}& x_q1,\hfill \\ \hfill 0& x_q1t,\hfill \\ \hfill 1t& x_qt,\hfill \\ \hfill t& x_q1.\hfill \end{array}$$

By the first half of this homotopy, the lower part of the cell undergoes the monodromy $`h`$ while remaining attached to the upper part; at the end of this process the two half cells become opposite and the second half of the homotopy collapses them together.

Remark. – Since $`\text{Im }HX_{K_i}`$, the proof above shows in fact that the image of $`\text{VAR}_{i,q}`$ is contained in the kernel of the natural map $`\pi _q(X,)\pi _q(X_{K_i},)`$.

5. The link between $`𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}`$ and $`\text{VAR}_{i,n1}`$ – Main result

Throughout this section, we work under Hypotheses 3.1.

Theorem 5.1. – Under Hypotheses 3.1, the homotopical variation operator $`𝒱𝒜_{i,n1}`$ of Chéniot-Libgober which is then well-defined (cf. Section 3) coincides with the generalized homotopical variation operator $`\text{VAR}_{i,n1}`$ (defined in Section 4). Before proving this theorem, observe that, together with Theorem 3.3, it implies the following result.

Theorem 5.2. – Under Hypotheses 3.1, there is a natural isomorphism

$$\pi _{n1}(X,)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im }\text{VAR}_{i,n1}\stackrel{}{}\pi _{n1}(X,).$$

Of course, Theorem 5.2 is equivalent to Theorem 3.3 and to the projective version of \[Li, Theorem 2.4\].

We now turn to the proof of Theorem 5.1.

Proof of Theorem 5.1. Consider the diagram obtained from diagram (3.2) by completing its lower row with the homomorphism

$$\pi _{n1}(X,X,)\stackrel{\text{VAR}\text{i,n-1}}{}\pi _{n1}(X,)$$

and its middle row with the homomorphism

$$\pi _{n1}(^{}X^{},^{}X^{},)\stackrel{\text{VAR}{}_{i,n1}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}}{}\pi _{n1}(^{}X^{},)$$

defined from $`\omega _i`$ as $`\text{VAR}_{i,n1}`$ but with pencil $`𝒫^{}`$ and the point $``$ instead of pencil $`𝒫`$ and the point $``$. We have to show that this new diagram is commutative. But its lower square is indeed commutative since, given a geometric monodromy $`h`$ of $`X`$ relative to $`X`$ above $`\omega _i`$, there exists a geometric monodromy $`h^{}`$ of $`^{}X^{}`$ relative to $`^{}X^{}`$ above $`\omega _i`$ such that

$$ph^{}=hp$$

(cf. \[CL, Remark 4.2\]). As to the upper square, it commutes thanks to Lemma 4.3.

6. A conjecture generalizing the van Kampen theorem to

non-singular quasi-projective varieties

In this section, we come back to the general hypotheses of Section 1, so that $`X:=YZ`$ is again a (possibly singular) quasi-projective variety in $`\text{}^n`$ with $`n2`$ as in Sections 1, 2 and 4. We also assume that $`X\mathrm{}`$; as this condition is equivalent to $`dimX2`$, it will be automatically fulfilled when $`d2`$. We fix a base point $``$ in $`X`$.

The conjecture we made in the introduction can be specified as follows. Conjecture 6.1. – Under the hypotheses of Section 1 and if $`X`$ is non-singular, there are natural isomorphisms

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \pi _{d1}(X,)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im VAR}_{i,d1}& \stackrel{}{}\pi _{d1}(X,)\text{if }d3,\hfill \\ \hfill \pi _1(X,)/\overline{\underset{i}{}\text{Im VAR}_{i,1}}& \stackrel{}{}\pi _1(X,)\text{if }d=2,\hfill \end{array}$$

involving the generalized homotopical variation operators $`\text{VAR}_{i,q}`$ defined in Section 4, with $`\overline{_i\text{Im VAR}_{i,1}}`$ denoting the normal subgroup of $`\pi _1(X,)`$ generated by $`_i\text{Im VAR}_{i,1}`$.

In the special case $`Y=\text{}^n`$, so that $`X=\text{}^nZ`$, and provided $`Z\mathrm{}`$, there is a natural isomorphism

$$\pi _{n+c2}(X,)/\underset{i}{}\text{Im VAR}_{i,n+c2}\stackrel{}{}\pi _{n+c2}(X,)\text{if }n+c4,$$

where $`c`$ is the least of the codimensions of the irreducible components of $`Z`$ (notice that $`n+c2=d1`$ when $`c=1`$).

If proved, this conjecture would extend Theorem 5.2 (and hence Theorem 3.3 and the projective version of \[Li, Theorem 2.4\] reported in the introduction as isomorphism (2)) and would also extend the classical Zariski-van Kampen theorem on curves as remarked in Section 4. It would give a complete homotopy analogue of Theorem 2.2 and thus would gather in a generalized form the Zariski-van Kampen theorem with a homotopical version of the Second Lefschetz Theorem.

We now give a first little approach to this conjecture.

First approach to Conjecture 6.1. By Lemma 4.8, the subgroups by which the quotients are taken are contained in the kernels of the corresponding natural maps (which are epimorphisms by the Lefschetz Hyperplane Section Theorems, as mentioned in the introduction). The reverse inclusion which would lead to the conclusion is much more difficult and not proved at the moment. We are simply giving below, via the following lemma, a first little step in this direction.

Lemma 6.2. – If $`X`$ is non-singular and $`d2`$, there is a natural epimorphism

$$\pi _d(X_K,X,)\pi _d(X,X,),$$

where $`K`$ is the union of the $`K_i`$ (cf. Section 1).

In the special case where $`Y=\text{}^n`$ and $`Z\mathrm{}`$, there is a natural epimorphism

$$\pi _{n+c1}(X_K,X,)\pi _{n+c1}(X,X,),$$

where $`c`$ is as in Conjecture 6.1.

This lemma is a weak homotopical analogue of \[C3, Corollary 3.4\]. It shows that (with the same hypotheses of course) the kernels of the natural maps

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \pi _{d1}(X,)\pi _{d1}(X,)& \text{and}\pi _{d1}(X,)\pi _{d1}(X_K,)\hfill \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{\text{(}resp.}\\ \hfill \pi _{n+c2}(X,)\pi _{n+c2}(X,)& \text{and}\pi _{n+c2}(X,)\pi _{n+c2}(X_K,))\hfill \end{array}$$

are the same. So, with the remarks above, Conjecture 6.1 reduces to the following one.

Conjecture 6.3. – Under the hypotheses of Conjecture 6.1, the kernel of the natural map $`\pi _{d1}(X,)\pi _{d1}(X_K,)`$ is contained in $`_i\text{Im VAR}_{i,d1}`$ if $`d3`$ and in $`\overline{_i\text{Im VAR}_{i,1}}`$ if $`d=2`$.

In the special case where $`Y=\text{}^n`$ and $`Z\mathrm{}`$, the kernel of the natural map $`\pi _{n+c2}(X,)\pi _{n+c2}(X_K,)`$ is contained in $`_i\text{Im VAR}_{i,n+c2}`$ if $`n+c4`$.

To complete this section, it remains to prove Lemma 6.2.

Proof of Lemma 6.2. By the homotopy sequence of the triple

$$(X,X_K,X),$$

it suffices to prove that the pair $`(X,X_K)`$ is $`d`$-connected (resp. $`(n+c1)`$-connected).

We start by noticing that the pair $`(X,X)`$ is $`(d2)`$-connected (resp. $`(n+c3)`$-connected). This is shown by applying the Lefschetz Hyperplane Section Theorem for non-singular quasi-projective varieties (resp. for complements) to the section of $`X`$ by the hyperplane $``$ of $``$. To check the required hypotheses and verify that the conclusion is the announced one, we refer to the beginning of the proof of \[C3, Corollary 3.4\]. We just point out here that the hypothesis $`Z\mathrm{}`$ is crucial to ensure that the codimension of $`Z`$ in $``$ is still $`c`$.

Thus, to show that $`(X,X_K)`$ is $`d`$-connected (resp. $`(n+c1)`$-connected), it is enough to prove the following result which in fact holds even if $`X`$ is singular.

Lemma 6.4. – For this lemma, $`X`$ may be singular. Let $`k`$ be an integer $`0`$. If $`(X,X)`$ is $`k`$-connected, then $`(X,X_K)`$ is $`(k+2)`$-connected.

This is a weak homotopy analogue of \[C3, Lemma 3.9\]. In its proof, the homology excision property is replaced by a much more restrictive homotopy excision theorem, and the Eilenberg-Zilber theorem and Künneth formula by a criterion on the connectivity of the product of two pairs of spaces.

Proof of Lemma 6.4. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\text{}^n}`$ be the blow up of $`\text{}^n`$ along $``$, which is defined by

$$\stackrel{~}{\text{}^n}:=\{(x,\mu )\text{}^n\times \text{}^1x𝒫(\mu )\}.$$

It is a compact analytic submanifold of $`\text{}^n\times \text{}^1`$ with dimension $`n`$.

The projections of $`\text{}^n\times \text{}^1`$ onto its two factors, when restricted to $`\stackrel{~}{\text{}^n}`$, give two proper analytic morphisms

$$\phi :\stackrel{~}{\text{}^n}\text{}^n\text{and}\pi :\stackrel{~}{\text{}^n}\text{}^1.$$

For any subsets $`G\text{}^n`$ and $`E\text{}^1`$, write

$$\stackrel{~}{G}:=\phi ^1(G)\text{and}\stackrel{~}{G}_E:=\stackrel{~}{G}\pi ^1(E).$$

One must not confuse $`\stackrel{~}{G}_E`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{G_E}`$; we have

$$\stackrel{~}{G_E}=\stackrel{~}{G}_E\stackrel{~}{(G)}=\stackrel{~}{G}_E(G\times \text{}^1).$$

For simplicity, we also set

$$L:=X\text{and}M:=X.$$

By stratifying suitably $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ and then applying the First Isotopy Theorem of Thom-Mather (cf. \[Th\], \[Ma\]) one obtains the following lemma.

Lemma 6.5 (cf. \[C2, (11.1.5)\]). – The restriction of $`\pi `$ to $`\stackrel{~}{X}_i\stackrel{~}{X}_{\lambda _i}`$ is a topological locally trivial fibration over $`\text{}^1_i\lambda _i`$ with typical fibre $`\stackrel{~}{X}_\lambda `$ homeomorphic to $`L`$. Moreover, this bundle has $`M\times (\text{}^1_i\lambda _i)`$ as a trivial subbundle of it.

The proof is now along lines very similar to \[La, 8.3\]. Decompose $`\text{}^1`$ into two closed semi-analytic hemispheres $`D_+`$ and $`D_{}`$ such that: (i) $`D_+D_{}=S^1`$, where $`S^1`$ is a $`1`$-sphere; (ii) $`K`$ is contained in $`D_+`$; (iii) $`\lambda S^1`$; (iv) $`D_{}`$ is contained in some coordinate neighbourhood of the fibre bundle $`\stackrel{~}{X}_i\stackrel{~}{X}_{\lambda _i}`$ for a trivialization which preserves the subbundle $`M\times (\text{}^1_i\lambda _i)`$. This choice of $`D_{}`$ implies that the pairs

$$(L\times D_{},L\times S^1M\times D_{})\text{and}(\stackrel{~}{X}_D_{},\stackrel{~}{X}_{S^1}\stackrel{~}{M}_D_{})$$

are homeomorphic. Now, consider the following sequence of pairs of spaces:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill (L\times D_{},L\times S^1M\times D_{})& (\stackrel{~}{X}_D_{},\stackrel{~}{X}_{S^1}\stackrel{~}{M}_D_{})\stackrel{exc}{}\hfill \\ & (\stackrel{~}{X},\stackrel{~}{X}_{D_+}\stackrel{~}{M})(\stackrel{~}{X},\stackrel{~}{X}_K\stackrel{~}{M})\stackrel{\phi _{}}{}(X,X_K).\hfill \end{array}$$

Since $`(L,M)`$ and $`(D_{},S^1)`$ are respectively $`k`$-connected and $`1`$-connected,Exercise 9, p. 95 of \[W\] shows that $`(L\times D_{},L\times S^1M\times D_{})`$, and consequently $`(\stackrel{~}{X}_D_{},\stackrel{~}{X}_{S^1}\stackrel{~}{M}_D_{})`$, are $`(k+2)`$-connected.

Next, for excision $`exc`$, we might use the Homotopy Excision Theorem of Blakers-Massey (cf. \[BM\], \[Sw, 6.21\]) but we do not need its full force. The elementary proof of \[La, (8.2.2)\] which is about a relative homeomorphism can be adapted to an excision and gives the following result. Let $`(A,B)(C,D)`$ be an excision, that is an inclusion of topological pairs such that $`AB=CD`$. Suppose that $`(A,B)`$ is a relative CW-complex and that $`A`$ and $`D`$ are closed in $`C`$. If $`(A,B)`$ is $`m`$-connected for some integer $`m0`$, then $`(C,D)`$ is also $`m`$-connected. Now, since $`(\stackrel{~}{X}_D_{},\stackrel{~}{X}_{S^1}\stackrel{~}{M}_D_{})`$ is triangulable (cf. \[Lo\]) and since $`\stackrel{~}{X}_D_{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{X}_{D_+}\stackrel{~}{M}`$ are closed in $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$, this result can be applied to excision $`exc`$ and shows that

$$(\stackrel{~}{X},\stackrel{~}{X}_{D_+}\stackrel{~}{M})\text{is also }(k+2)\text{-connected}.$$
$`(6.6)`$
Since $`\stackrel{~}{X}\pi ^1(D_+_i\lambda _i)`$ is a fibre bundle (cf. Lemma 6.5) and $`K_i\lambda _i`$ is a strong deformation retract of $`D_+_i\lambda _i`$, the First Homotopy Covering Theorem \[St, §11.3\] shows that $`\stackrel{~}{X}\pi ^1(K_i\lambda _i)`$ is a strong deformation retract of $`\stackrel{~}{X}\pi ^1(D_+_i\lambda _i)`$. Moreover, since the $`\lambda _i`$ are interior points of $`K`$, the deformation retraction may be in fact extended so that $`\stackrel{~}{X}_K`$ is a strong deformation retract of $`\stackrel{~}{X}_{D_+}`$. As furthermore $`\stackrel{~}{X}_K`$ is also a strong deformation retract of $`\stackrel{~}{X}_K\stackrel{~}{M}_{D_+}`$, one deduces that the pair $`(\stackrel{~}{X}_{D_+},\stackrel{~}{X}_K\stackrel{~}{M}_{D_+})`$ is $`q`$-connected for all $`q0`$. By the theorem of Blakers-Massey \[Sw, Theorem 6.21\], applied to the excision

$$(\stackrel{~}{X}_{D_+},\stackrel{~}{X}_K\stackrel{~}{M}_{D_+})(\stackrel{~}{X}_{D_+}\stackrel{~}{M},\stackrel{~}{X}_K\stackrel{~}{M}),$$

the same property holds for $`(\stackrel{~}{X}_{D_+}\stackrel{~}{M},\stackrel{~}{X}_K\stackrel{~}{M})`$. Then, the homotopy sequence of the triple

$$(\stackrel{~}{X},\stackrel{~}{X}_{D_+}\stackrel{~}{M},\stackrel{~}{X}_K\stackrel{~}{M}),$$

together with (6.6), implies that $`(\stackrel{~}{X},\stackrel{~}{X}_K\stackrel{~}{M})`$ is $`(k+2)`$-connected.

Now, the same holds for $`(X,X_K)`$ since

$$\phi _{}:(\stackrel{~}{X},\stackrel{~}{X}_K\stackrel{~}{M})(X,X_K)$$

is a relative homeomorphism (cf. \[La, (8.2.2)\]). This completes the proof of Lemma 6.4 and, consequently, the proof of Lemma 6.2.

Conjecture 6.3, to which Conjecture 6.1 is thus reduced, remains of course the hard part of the work.

The generalized homotopical variation operators introduced here are also certainly a first step for further generalizations of van Kampen’s theorem to singular quasi-projective varieties, the influence of the singularities being measured by the (local or global) rectified homotopical depth (cf. \[G\], \[HL1,2\], \[GM1,2\], \[E1,2\]).

Acknowledgements. The second author would like to thank the ABDUS SALAM International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP) in Trieste for kind hospitality and support.

References

\[AF\] A. Andreotti, T. Frankel, “The second Lefschetz theorem on hyperplane sections”, Global analysis, papers in honor of K. Kodaira (eds D. C. Spencer and S. Iyanaga, University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo; Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1969), 1–20.

\[BM\] A.L. Blakers, W.S. Massey, “The homotopy groups of a triad, II”, Ann. of Math. (2) 55 (1952) 192–201.

\[C1\] D. Chéniot, “Une démonstration du théorème de Zariski sur les sections hyperplanes d’une hypersurface projective et du théorème de van Kampen sur le groupe fondamental du complémentaire d’une courbe projective plane”, Compositio Math. 27 (1973) 141–158.

\[C2\] D. Chéniot, “Topologie du complémentaire d’un ensemble algébrique projectif”, Enseign. Math. (2) 37 (1991) 293–402.

\[C3\] D. Chéniot, “Vanishing cycles in a pencil of hyperplane sections of a non singular quasi-projective variety”, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 72 (1996) 515–544.

\[CL\] D. Chéniot, A. Libgober, “Zariski-van Kampen theorem for higher homotopy groups”, LATP-Preprint 01-25, UMR CNRS 6632, Université de Provence, Marseille, 2001, arXiv:math.AG/0203019.

\[E1\] C. Eyral, “Profondeur homotopique et conjecture de Grothendieck”, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4) 33 (2000) 823–836.

\[E2\] C. Eyral, “Tomographie des variétés singulières et théorèmes de Lefschetz”, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 83 (2001) 141–175.

\[E3\] C. Eyral, “Topology of quasi-projective varieties and Lefschetz theory”, ICTP-Preprint IC/2001/159, The Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, 2001.

\[GM1\] M. Goresky, R. MacPherson, “Stratified Morse theory”, Singularities, Part 1 (Arcata, CA, 1981), Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics 40 (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1983) 517–533.

\[GM2\] M. Goresky, R. MacPherson, Stratified Morse theory (Springer-Verlag, New-York, 1988).

\[G\] A. Grothendieck, Cohomologie locale des faisceaux cohérents et théorèmes de Lefschetz locaux et globaux (SGA2) (Adv. Stud. Pure Math. 2, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1968).

\[HL1\] H.A. Hamm, Lê D.T., “Lefschetz theorems on quasi-projective varieties”, Bull. Soc. Math. France 113 (1985) 123–142.

\[HL2\] H.A. Hamm, Lê D.T., “Rectified homotopical depth and Grothendieck conjectures”, The Grothendieck Festschrift, vol. II (Birkhäuser, Boston, 1991) 311–351.

\[HW\] P.J. Hilton, S. Wylie, Homology theory - An introduction to algebraic topology (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1965).

\[La\] K. Lamotke, “The topology of complex projective varieties after S. Lefschetz”, Topology 20 (1981) 15–51.

\[LT\] Lê D.T., B. Teissier, “Cycles évanescents, sections planes et conditions de Whitney II”, Singularities, Part 2 (Arcata, CA, 1981), Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics 40 (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1983) 65–103.

\[Li\] A. Libgober, “Homotopy groups of the complements to singular hypersurfaces, II”, Ann. of Math. (2) 139 (1994) 117–144.

\[Lo\] S. Łojasiewicz, “Triangulation of semi-analytic sets”, Annali Scu. Norm. Sup. Pisa 18 (1964) 449–474.

\[M\] W.S. Massey, A basic course in algebraic topology (Graduate Texts in Mathematics 127, Springer-Verlag, New-York, 1991).

\[Ma\] J. Mather, Notes on topological stability (mimeographed notes, Harvard University, 1970).

\[Sp\] E.H. Spanier, Algebraic topology (Reprint of the 1966 original, Springer-Verlag, New-York, 1989).

\[St\] N. Steenrod, The topology of fibre bundles (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1951).

\[Sw\] R.M. Switzer, Algebraic topology - Homotopy and homology (Springer-Verlag, New-York, 1975).

\[Th\] R. Thom, “Ensembles et morphismes stratifiés”, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 75 (1969) 240–284.

\[vK\] E.R. van Kampen, “On the fundamental group of an algebraic curve”, Amer. J. Math. 55 (1933) 255–260.

\[W\] G.W. Whitehead, Elements of homotopy theory (Graduate Texts in Mathematics 61, Springer-Verlag, New-York, 1978).

\[Wh\] H. Whitney, “Tangents to an analytic variety”, Ann. of Math. (2) 81 (1965) 496–549.

\[Za\] O. Zariski, “On the problem of existence of algebraic functions of two variables possessing a given branch curve”, Amer. J. Math. 51 (1929) 305–328 .


format: text

text:
# Path Integral Bosonization of the ’t Hooft Determinant: Fluctuations and Multiple Vacua

## I Introduction

The global $`U_L(3)\times U_R(3)`$ chiral symmetry of the QCD Lagrangian (for massless quarks) is broken by the $`U_A(1)`$ Adler-Bell-Jackiw anomaly of the $`SU(3)`$ singlet axial current $`\overline{q}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5q`$. Through the study of instantons , it has been realized that this anomaly has physical effects with the result that the theory contains neither a conserved $`U(1)`$ quantum number, nor an extra Goldstone boson. Instead the effective $`2N_f`$ quark interactions arise, which are known as ’t Hooft interactions. In the case of two flavors they are four-fermion interactions, and the resulting low-energy theory resembles the old Nambu – Jona-Lasinio model . In the case of three flavors they are six-fermion interactions which are responsible for the correct description of $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ physics, and additionally lead to the OZI-violating effects ,

$$_{\text{det}}=\kappa (\text{det}\overline{q}P_Rq+\text{det}\overline{q}P_Lq)$$
(1)
where the matrices $`P_{R,L}=(1\pm \gamma _5)/2`$ are projectors and determinant is over flavor indices.

The physical degrees of freedom of QCD at low-energies are mesons. The bosonization of the effective quark interaction (1) by the path integral approach has been considered in , where the lowest order stationary phase approximation (SPA) has been used to estimate the leading contribution from the ’t Hooft determinant. In this approximation the functional integral is dominated by the stationary trajectories $`r_{\text{st}}(x)`$, determined by the extremum condition $`\delta S(r)=0`$ of the action $`S(r)`$. The lowest order SPA corresponds to the case in which the integrals associated with $`\delta ^2S(r)`$, for the path $`r_{\text{st}}(x)`$ are neglected and only $`S(r_{\text{st}})`$ contributes to the generating functional. The next natural step in this scenario is to complete the semiclassical result of Reinhardt and Alkofer by including the contribution from the integrals associated with the second functional derivative $`\delta ^2S(r_{\text{st}})`$, and this is the subject of our paper.

An alternative method of bosonizing the ’t Hooft determinant has been reviewed in . The special path integral representation for the quark determinant has been obtained by considering $`N_c`$ as an algebraically large parameter. One should not forget that the ’t Hooft’s determinant interactions are induced by instantons and only can be written in the simple determinantal form (1) in the limit of large number of colours – otherwise the many-fermion interactions have a more complicated structure. For our calculations it means, in particular, that the terms of the bosonized Lagrangian induced by the ’t Hooft’s determinant interaction (1) should be of order $`1`$, corresponding to the standard rules of $`N_c`$ counting. In this respect it is worthwhile to note that we have found that the meson vertices, induced by the ’t Hooft’s determinant interactions in the lowest order SPA and the term from the integral associated with the second functional derivative $`\delta ^2S(r_{\text{st}})`$ have the same $`N_c`$-order and should be considered on the same footing.

## II Path Integral Bosonization

To be definite, let us consider the theory of the quark fields in four dimensional Minkowski space, with dynamics defined by the Lagrangian density

$$=_{\text{NJL}}+_{\text{det}}.$$
(2)
The first term here is the extended version of the Nambu – Jona-Lasinio (NJL) Lagrangian $`_{\text{NJL}}=_0+_{\text{int}}`$, consisting of the free field part

$$_0=\overline{q}(i\gamma ^\mu _\mu \widehat{m})q,$$
(3)
and the $`U(3)_L\times U(3)_R`$ chiral symmetric four-quark interaction

$$_{\text{int}}=\frac{G}{2}[(\overline{q}\lambda _aq)^2+(\overline{q}i\gamma _5\lambda _aq)^2].$$
(4)
We assume that quark fields have color and flavor indices running through the set $`i=1,2,3`$; $`\lambda _a`$ are the standard $`U(3)`$ Gell-Mann matrices with $`a=0,1,\mathrm{},8`$. The current quark mass, $`\widehat{m}`$, is a nondegenerate diagonal matrix with elements $`\text{diag}(\widehat{m}_u,\widehat{m}_d,\widehat{m}_s)`$, it explicitly breaks the global chiral $`U(3)_L\times U(3)_R`$ symmetry of the $`_{\text{NJL}}`$ Lagrangian. The second term in (2) is given by (1). Letting

$$s_a=\overline{q}\lambda _aq,p_a=\overline{q}i\gamma _5\lambda _aq,s=s_a\lambda _a,p=p_a\lambda _a$$
(5)
yields

$$_{\text{det}}=\frac{\kappa }{64}\left[\text{det}(s+ip)+\text{det}(sip)\right]$$
(6)
with determinants written in terms of the mesonic type quark bilinears. This identity is a first step to the bosonization of the theory with Lagrangian (2).

The dynamics of the system is described by the vacuum transition amplitude in the form of the path integral

$$Z=𝒟q𝒟\overline{q}\mathrm{exp}\left(id^4x\right).$$
(7)
By means of a simple trick, suggested by Reinhardt and Alkofer, it is easy to write down this amplitude as

$$Z=𝒟q𝒟\overline{q}𝒟\sigma _a𝒟\varphi _a𝒟r_1^a𝒟r_2^a\mathrm{exp}\left(id^4x^{}\right)$$
(8)
with

$`^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{q}(i\gamma ^\mu _\mu \widehat{m}\sigma +i\gamma _5\varphi )q{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2G}}\left[(\sigma _a)^2+(\varphi _a)^2\right]+r_1^a(\sigma _a+G\overline{q}\lambda _aq)`$ (9)
$`+`$ $`r_2^a(\varphi _aG\overline{q}i\gamma _5\lambda _aq){\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{(4G)^3}}\left[\text{det}(\sigma +i\varphi )+\text{det}(\sigma i\varphi )\right].`$ (10)
Eq.(8) defines the same expression as Eq.(7). To see this one has to integrate first over auxiliary fields $`r_1^a,r_2^a`$. It leads to $`\delta `$-functionals which can be integrated out by taking integrals over $`\sigma _a`$, and $`\varphi _a`$, and which bring us back to the expression (7). From the other side, it is easy to rewrite Eq.(8) in a form appropriate to finish the bosonization, i.e., to calculate the integrals over quark fields and integrate out from $`Z`$ the unphysical part of the auxiliary $`r_1^a,r_2^a`$ scalar fields. Indeed, introducing new variables $`\sigma \sigma +Gr_1,\varphi \varphi +Gr_2`$, and after that $`r_12r_1\sigma /G,r_22r_2\varphi /G`$ we have

$$Z=𝒟\sigma _a𝒟\varphi _a𝒟q𝒟\overline{q}\mathrm{exp}\left(id^4x_q(\overline{q},q,\sigma ,\varphi )\right)𝒟r_{1a}𝒟r_{2a}\mathrm{exp}\left(id^4x_r(\sigma ,\varphi ,r_1,r_2)\right)$$
(11)
where

$`_q`$ $`=`$ $`\overline{q}(i\gamma ^\mu _\mu \widehat{m}\sigma +i\gamma _5\varphi )q,`$ (12)
$`_r`$ $`=`$ $`2G\left[(r_{1a})^2+(r_{2a})^2\right]2(r_{1a}\sigma _a+r_{2a}\varphi _a){\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{8}}\left[\text{det}(r_1+ir_2)+\text{det}(r_1ir_2)\right].`$ (13)
The Fermi fields enter the action bilinearly, we can always integrate over them, because in this case we deal with the standard Gaussian type integral. At this stage one should also shift the scalar fields $`\sigma _a\sigma _a+\mathrm{\Delta }_a`$ by demanding that the vacuum expectation values of the shifted fields vanish $`<0|\sigma _a|0>=0`$. In other words, all tadpole graphs in the end should sum to zero, giving us gap equations to fix parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }_a`$. Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }_a=m_a\widehat{m}_a`$, with $`m_a`$ denoting the constituent quark masses ***The shift by the current quark mass is needed to hit the correct vacuum state, see e.g. .. To evaluate path integrals over $`r_{1,2}`$ one has to use the method of stationary phase, or, after the formal analytic continuation in the time coordinate $`x_4=ix_0`$, the method of steepest descents. Let us consider this task in some detail.

The Euclidean (imaginary time) version of the path integral under consideration is

$$J(\sigma ,\varphi )=_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝒟r_{1a}𝒟r_{2a}\mathrm{exp}\left(d^4x_r(\sigma ,\varphi ,r_1,r_2)\right).$$
(14)
This integral is hopelessly divergent even if $`\kappa =0`$. One should say at this point that we are not really interested in (14) but only in its analytic continuation. Let us suppose we analytically change $`_r(\sigma ,\varphi ,r_1,r_2)`$ in some way such that we go from this situation back to the one of interest. To keep the integral convergent, we must distort the contour of integration into the complex plane following the standard procedure of the method of the steepest descents. This method gives the first term in an asymptotic expansion of $`J(\sigma ,\varphi )`$, valid for $`\mathrm{}0`$. We lead the contour along the straight line which is parallel to the imaginary axis and crosses the real axis at the saddle point $`r_{\text{st}}^a`$. It is in the sense of this continuation that the integral $`J(\sigma ,\varphi )`$ of (14) is to be interpreted as

$$J(\sigma ,\varphi )=_{i\mathrm{}+r_{\text{st}}}^{+i\mathrm{}+r_{\text{st}}}𝒟r_{1a}𝒟r_{2a}\mathrm{exp}\left(d^4x_r(\sigma ,\varphi ,r_1,r_2)\right).$$
(15)
Near the saddle point $`r_{\text{st}}^a`$,

$$_r_r(r_{\text{st}})+\frac{1}{2}\underset{\alpha ,\beta }{}\stackrel{~}{r}_\alpha _{\alpha \beta }^{\prime \prime }(r_{\text{st}})\stackrel{~}{r}_\beta $$
(16)
where the saddle point, $`r_{\text{st}}^a`$, is a solution of the equations $`_r^{}(r_1,r_2)=0`$ determining a flat spot of the surface $`_r(r_1,r_2)`$.

$$\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill 2Gr_1^a(\sigma +\mathrm{\Delta })_a\frac{3\kappa }{8}A_{abc}(r_1^br_1^cr_2^br_2^c)& =& 0\hfill \\ \hfill 2Gr_2^a\varphi _a+\frac{3\kappa }{4}A_{abc}r_1^br_2^c& =& 0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(17)
This system is well-known from . The totally symmetric constants, $`A_{abc}`$, come from the definition of the flavor determinant: $`detr=A_{abc}r^ar^br^c`$, and equal to

$$A_{abc}=\frac{1}{3!}ϵ_{ijk}ϵ_{mnl}(\lambda _a)_{im}(\lambda _b)_{jn}(\lambda _c)_{kl}.$$
(18)
They are closely related with the $`U(3)`$ constants $`d_{abc}`$. We use in (16) symbols $`\stackrel{~}{r}^a`$ for the differences $`(r^ar_{\text{st}}^a)`$. To deal with the multitude of integrals in (15) we define a column vector $`\stackrel{~}{r}`$ with eighteen components $`\stackrel{~}{r}_\alpha =(\stackrel{~}{r}_1^a,\stackrel{~}{r}_2^a)`$ and with the matrix $`_{\alpha \beta }^{\prime \prime }(r_{\text{st}})`$ being equal to

$$_{\alpha \beta }^{\prime \prime }(r_{\text{st}})=4GQ_{\alpha \beta },Q_{\alpha \beta }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\delta _{ab}\frac{3\kappa }{8G}A_{abc}r_{1\text{st}}^c& \frac{3\kappa }{8G}A_{abc}r_{2\text{st}}^c\\ \frac{3\kappa }{8G}A_{abc}r_{2\text{st}}^c& \delta _{ab}+\frac{3\kappa }{8G}A_{abc}r_{1\text{st}}^c\end{array}\right).$$
(19)
Eq.(15) can now be concisely written as

$$J(\sigma ,\varphi )=\mathrm{exp}\left(d^4x_r(r_{\text{st}})\right)_i\mathrm{}^{+i\mathrm{}}𝒟\stackrel{~}{r}_\alpha \mathrm{exp}\left(2Gd^4x\stackrel{~}{r}^\text{t}Q(r_{\text{st}})\stackrel{~}{r}\right)\left[1+𝒪(\mathrm{})\right].$$
(20)
Our next task is to evaluate the integrals over $`\stackrel{~}{r}_\alpha `$. Before we do this, though, some comments should be made about what we have done so far:

(1) The first exponential factor in Eq.(20) is not new. It has been obtained by Reinhardt and Alkofer in . A bit of manipulation with expressions (13) and (17) leads us to the result

$$_r(r_{\text{st}})=\frac{2}{3}\left\{G[(r_{1\text{st}}^a)^2+(r_{2\text{st}}^a)^2]2[(\sigma +\mathrm{\Delta })_ar_{1\text{st}}^a+\varphi _ar_{2\text{st}}^a]\right\}.$$
(21)
One can try to solve Eqs.(17) looking for solutions $`r_{1\text{st}}^a`$ and $`r_{2\text{st}}^a`$ in the form of increasing powers in $`\sigma _a,\varphi _a`$

$`r_{1\text{st}}^a`$ $`=`$ $`h_a+h_{ab}^{(1)}\sigma _b+h_{abc}^{(1)}\sigma _b\sigma _c+h_{abc}^{(2)}\varphi _b\varphi _c+\mathrm{}`$ (22)
$`r_{2\text{st}}^a`$ $`=`$ $`h_{ab}^{(2)}\varphi _b+h_{abc}^{(3)}\varphi _b\sigma _c+\mathrm{}`$ (23)
Putting these expansions in Eqs.(17) one can obtain the series of selfconsistent equations to determine the constants $`h_a`$, $`h_{ab}^{(1)}`$, and $`h_{ab}^{(2)}`$

$`2Gh_a\mathrm{\Delta }_a{\displaystyle \frac{3\kappa }{8}}A_{abc}h_bh_c=0,`$ (24)
$`2G\left(\delta _{ac}{\displaystyle \frac{3\kappa }{8G}}A_{acb}h_b\right)h_{ce}^{(1)}=\delta _{ae},`$ (25)
$`2G\left(\delta _{ac}+{\displaystyle \frac{3\kappa }{8G}}A_{acb}h_b\right)h_{ce}^{(2)}=\delta _{ae}.`$ (26)
The other constants can be obtained from these ones, for instance, we have

$$h_{abc}^{(1)}=\frac{3\kappa }{8}h_{a\overline{a}}^{(1)}h_{b\overline{b}}^{(1)}h_{c\overline{c}}^{(1)}A_{\overline{a}\overline{b}\overline{c}},h_{abc}^{(2)}=\frac{3\kappa }{8}h_{a\overline{a}}^{(1)}h_{b\overline{b}}^{(2)}h_{c\overline{c}}^{(2)}A_{\overline{a}\overline{b}\overline{c}},h_{abc}^{(3)}=\frac{3\kappa }{4}h_{a\overline{a}}^{(2)}h_{b\overline{b}}^{(2)}h_{c\overline{c}}^{(1)}A_{\overline{a}\overline{b}\overline{c}}.$$
(27)
As a result the effective Lagrangian (21) can be expanded in powers of meson fields. Such an expansion (up to the terms which are cubic in $`\sigma _a,\varphi _a`$) looks like

$$_r(r_{\text{st}})=2h_a\sigma _ah_{ab}^{(1)}\sigma _a\sigma _bh_{ab}^{(2)}\varphi _a\varphi _b+𝒪(\text{field}^3).$$
(28)
(2) Our result (20) has been based on the assumption that all eigenvalues of matrix $`Q`$ are positive. It is true, for instance, if $`\kappa =0`$. It may happen, however, that some eigenvalues of $`Q`$ are negative for some range of parameters $`G`$ and $`\kappa `$. In these cases there are no conceptual difficulties, for from the very beginning we deal with well defined Gaussian integrals and the integration over the corresponding $`\stackrel{~}{r}_\alpha `$ simply does not require analytic continuation.

We now turn to the evaluation of the path integral in Eq.(20). In order to define the measure $`𝒟\stackrel{~}{r}_\alpha `$ more accurately let us expand $`\stackrel{~}{r}_\alpha `$ in a Fourier series

$$\stackrel{~}{r}_\alpha (x)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_{n,\alpha }\phi _n(x),$$
(29)
assuming that suitable boundary conditions are imposed. The set of the real functions $`\{\phi _n(x)\}`$ form an orthonormal and complete sequence

$$d^4x\phi _n(x)\phi _m(x)=\delta _{nm},\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\phi _n(x)\phi _n(y)=\delta (xy).$$
(30)
Therefore

$$𝒟\stackrel{~}{r}_\alpha \mathrm{exp}\left(2Gd^4x\stackrel{~}{r}^\text{t}Q(r_{\text{st}})\stackrel{~}{r}\right)=𝑑c_{n,\alpha }\mathrm{exp}\left\{2Gc_{n,\alpha }\lambda _{nm}^{\alpha \beta }c_{m,\beta }\right\}=\frac{C}{\sqrt{det(2G\lambda _{nm}^{\alpha \beta })}}.$$
(31)
The normalization constant $`C`$ is not important for the following. The matrix $`\lambda _{nm}^{\alpha \beta }`$ is equal to

$$\lambda _{nm}^{\alpha \beta }=d^4x\phi _n(x)Q_{\alpha \beta }(x)\phi _m(x).$$
(32)
From (19) and (30) it follows that

$$2G\lambda _{nm}^{\alpha \beta }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}h_{ac}^{(1)1}& 0\\ 0& h_{ac}^{(2)1}\end{array}\right)_{\alpha \sigma }\left(\delta _{\sigma \beta }\delta _{nm}+d^4x\phi _n(x)F_{\sigma \beta }(x)\phi _m(x)\right)$$
(33)
with

$$F_{\sigma \beta }=\frac{3\kappa }{4}A_{eba}\left(\begin{array}{cc}h_{ce}^{(1)}(r_{1\text{st}}^ah_a)& h_{ce}^{(1)}r_{2\text{st}}^a\\ h_{ce}^{(2)}r_{2\text{st}}^a& h_{ce}^{(2)}(r_{1\text{st}}^ah_a)\end{array}\right)_{\sigma \beta }.$$
(34)
Only the matrix $`F_{\sigma \beta }`$ depends here on fields $`\sigma ,\varphi `$. By absorbing in $`C`$ the irrelevant field independent part of $`2G\lambda _{nm}^{\alpha \beta }`$, and expanding the logarithm in the representation $`det(1+F)=\mathrm{exp}\text{tr}\mathrm{ln}(1+F)`$, one can obtain finally for the integral in (20)

$$J(\sigma ,\varphi )=C^{}e^{S_r},S_r=d^4x\left\{_r(r_{\text{st}})+\frac{1}{2}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^n}{n}\text{tr}\left[F_{\alpha \beta }^n(r_{\text{st}})\right]\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\phi _m(x)\phi _m(x)\right\}.$$
(35)
The sum over $`m`$ in this expression, however, is not well defined and needs to be regularized. One can regularize it by introducing a Gaussian cutoff $`M`$ damping the contributions from the large momenta $`k^2`$

$$\underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\phi _m(x)\phi _m(x)=\delta (0)_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d^4k}{(2\pi )^4}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{k^2}{M^2}\right)=\frac{M^4}{16\pi ^2}$$
(36)
This procedure does not decrease the predictability of the model, for anyway one has to regularize the quark loop contributions in (11). Alternatively, following ideas presented in , one can introduce the Ansatz:

$$S_r=d^4x\left\{_r(r_{\text{st}})+\frac{a}{2G^2}\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^n}{n}\text{tr}\left[F_{\alpha \beta }^n(r_{\text{st}})\right]\right\}$$
(37)
proposing that the undetermined dimensionless constant $`a`$ will be fixed by confronting the model with experiment afterwards.

## III The Ground State

Let us study the ground state of the model under consideration, then properties of the excitations will follow naturally. To make further progress let us note that Eqs.(24) have non-trivial solutions for $`h_0,h_3,h_8`$, corresponding to the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry in the physical vacuum state with order parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i0(i=u,d,s)`$. We may then use this fact to rewrite Eqs.(24) as a system of only three equations to give $`h_i`$

$$2Gh_i\mathrm{\Delta }_i=\frac{\kappa }{8}t_{ijk}h_jh_k$$
(38)
where the totally symmetric coefficients $`t_{ijk}`$ are equal to zero except for $`t_{uds}=1`$. They are related to coefficients $`A_{abc}`$ by the embedding formula $`3\omega _{ia}A_{abc}e_{bj}e_{ck}=t_{ijk}`$ where matrices $`\omega _{ia}`$, and $`e_{ai}`$ are defined as follows

$$e_{ai}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\sqrt{2}& \sqrt{2}& \sqrt{2}\\ \sqrt{3}& \sqrt{3}& 0\\ 1& 1& 2\end{array}\right),\omega _{ia}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\sqrt{2}& \sqrt{3}& 1\\ \sqrt{2}& \sqrt{3}& 1\\ \sqrt{2}& 0& 2\end{array}\right).$$
(39)
Here the index $`a`$ runs $`a=0,3,8`$ (for the other values of $`a`$ the corresponding matrix elements are equal to zero). We have also $`h_a=e_{ai}h_i`$, and $`h_i=\omega _{ia}h_a`$. Similar relations can be obtained for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_a`$. In accordance with these notations we will use, for instance, that $`h_{ci}^{(1)}=\omega _{ia}h_{ca}^{(1)}`$.

A tadpole graphs calculation gives for the gap equations the following result

$$2h_i+\frac{3a\kappa }{8G^2}\left(h_{ab}^{(2)}h_{ab}^{(1)}\right)A_{abc}h_{ci}^{(1)}=\frac{N_c}{2\pi ^2}m_iJ_0(m_i^2)$$
(40)
where the left hand side is the contribution from (37) and the right hand side is the contribution of the quark loop from (11) with a regularized quadratically divergent integral $`J_0(m^2)`$ being defined as

$$J_0(m^2)=_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{dt}{t^2}e^{tm^2}\rho (t,\mathrm{\Lambda }^2),\rho (t,\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)=1(1+t\mathrm{\Lambda }^2)\mathrm{exp}(t\mathrm{\Lambda }^2).$$
(41)
The second term on the left hand side of Eq.(40) is the correction resulting from the Gaussian integrals of the steepest descent method, comprising the effects of small fluctuations around the stationary path. If one puts for a moment $`a=0`$ in Eq.(40), and combines the result with Eqs.(38), one finds gap equations which are very similar to the ones obtained in  (see equation (2.12) therein). At fixed input parameters $`G,\kappa ,\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of the model, the gap equations can be solved giving us the constituent quark masses $`m_i`$ as functions of the current quark masses, $`m_i=m_i(\widehat{m}_j)`$. Alternatively, by fixing $`\widehat{m}_i`$, one can obtain from the gap equations the non-trivial solutions $`m_i=m_i(G,\kappa ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$. In particular, when $`\widehat{m}_u=\widehat{m}_d`$, these equations can be solved for $`G`$ and $`\kappa `$, giving expressions

$$G=\left(\frac{2\pi ^2}{N_c}\right)\frac{m_u\mathrm{\Delta }_uJ_0(m_u^2)m_s\mathrm{\Delta }_sJ_0(m_s^2)}{m_u^2J_0^2(m_u^2)m_s^2J_0^2(m_s^2)},\kappa =\left(\frac{8\pi ^2}{N_c}\right)^2\frac{m_s\mathrm{\Delta }_uJ_0(m_s^2)m_u\mathrm{\Delta }_sJ_0(m_u^2)}{m_uJ_0(m_u^2)[m_u^2J_0^2(m_u^2)m_s^2J_0^2(m_s^2)]}.$$
(42)
In Fig.1 we plot the curves of $`G`$ and $`\kappa `$ versus $`m_u`$ keeping constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.87\text{GeV},m_s=572\text{MeV},\widehat{m}_s=200\text{MeV},\widehat{m}_u=6\text{MeV}`$. One can readily see that at given values for $`(m_u,m_s)`$ the curves yield unique values of $`(G,\kappa )`$, i.e. the vacuum state is well-defined in this case.

Let us consider now the general case which we have when $`a>0`$ in Eq.(40). To illustrate the qualitative difference with the previous case we put for definiteness $`a=1`$ and look again for the solutions $`G=G(m_u)`$ and $`\kappa =\kappa (m_u)`$ with the same set of fixed parameters. The corresponding curves are plotted in Fig.2. If the mass $`m_u`$ is sufficiently low that $`m_u<m_u^{(min)}`$, (in the figures denoted by the region left the turning point $`c`$) or sufficiently high that $`m_u^{(max)}<m_u<m_s`$, (in the figures denoted by the region right to the turning point $`b`$), then there exists again a single solution with unique values of $`(G,\kappa )`$. However, there is now a region for $`m_u`$ in which $`m_u^{(min)}<m_u<m_u^{(max)}`$, where three values of couplings $`(G,\kappa )`$ are possible.

Conversely, one can study the solutions: $`m_u=m_u(G,\kappa ),m_s=m_s(G,\kappa `$ at fixed values of input parameters: $`\mathrm{\Lambda },\widehat{m}_u=\widehat{m}_d,\widehat{m}_s)`$. As starting input values for the couplings $`G`$ and $`\kappa `$ in the gap equations we take the ones already determined along the path $`abcd`$ shown in Fig.2, obtained at a constant value of the strange quark mass, $`m_s=572`$ MeV. For a chosen value of the set $`(G,\kappa )`$ we then search for further solutions $`(m_u,m_s)`$ of the Eq.(40), displaying results in Fig.3 for $`m_u`$ and in Fig.4 for $`m_s`$, correspondingly. The dashed curves are the repetition of the solutions encountered in Fig.2. The bold dashes in Fig.3 indicate that we only find this one solution at fixed values of $`G,\kappa `$. Combining the information of Figs.3 and 4, one sees that one has up to four solutions at fixed $`G,\kappa `$. Indeed, travelling along the original path $`abcd`$ one observes the following: the branch $`ab`$ is accompanied by three other branches, marked as $`A,B`$ and $`C`$ which belong to the same class of solutions. One sees that these solutions have negative $`\kappa `$ values. From the turning point $`b`$ until the maximum value of $`G`$ (and corresponding $`\kappa `$) (bold dashes) we have no other solutions to the gap equations, as already stated. From this maximum $`G`$ value to the turning point $`c`$ and further along the $`cd`$ arm we encounter further two branches, denoted by $`D`$ and $`E`$ to the solutions of Eqs.(40) with same $`G,\kappa `$. They are positive $`\kappa `$ solutions.

This very rich structure of the vacuum solutions implies the possibility of having several different values of the quark condensates for the same $`G,\kappa `$ parameters, embracing also the possibility which has been considered in connection with generalized chiral perturbation theory (see e.g. section 4 in ). We give here only a few examples. At $`G=4.54\text{GeV}^2,\kappa =153.04\text{GeV}^5`$ we have three solutions. The solution $`m_u=346\text{MeV},m_s=572\text{MeV}`$, on the $`cd`$ arm has the quark condensates $`<\overline{u}u>^{1/3}=236.8\text{MeV}`$, $`<\overline{s}s>^{1/3}=183.5\text{MeV}`$ and the ratio $`R=(<\overline{s}s>/<\overline{u}u>)^{1/3}=0.775`$; the second solution, on the $`E`$ branch with $`m_u=535\text{MeV},m_s=732\text{MeV}`$ has condensates $`<\overline{u}u>^{1/3}=249\text{MeV}`$, $`<\overline{s}s>^{1/3}=183\text{MeV}`$ and the ratio $`R=0.738`$; the third solution, located at the $`D`$ branch with $`m_u=46\text{MeV},m_s=418\text{MeV}`$ has condensates $`<\overline{u}u>^{1/3}=131\text{MeV}`$, $`<\overline{s}s>^{1/3}=172\text{MeV}`$ and $`R=1.313`$. We chose the next example at $`G=8.126\text{GeV}^2,\kappa =544.81\text{GeV}^5`$, where there are four solutions. The solution $`m_u=316\text{MeV},m_s=572\text{MeV}`$, on the $`ab`$ arm has the quark condensates $`<\overline{u}u>^{1/3}=233\text{MeV}`$, $`<\overline{s}s>^{1/3}=184\text{MeV}`$ and $`R=0.787`$; the second solution, on the $`B`$ branch with $`m_u=624\text{MeV},m_s=205\text{MeV}`$ has condensates $`<\overline{u}u>^{1/3}=249\text{MeV}`$, $`<\overline{s}s>^{1/3}=56.7\text{MeV}`$ and $`R=0.227`$; the third solution, located at the $`A`$ branch with $`m_u=421\text{MeV},m_s=1.84\text{GeV}`$ has condensates $`<\overline{u}u>^{1/3}=14.4\text{MeV}`$, $`<\overline{s}s>^{1/3}=86\text{MeV}`$ and $`R=0.353`$. The fourth solution, on the $`C`$ branch, with $`m_u=1.394\text{GeV},m_s=1.594\text{GeV}`$ has condensates $`<\overline{u}u>^{1/3}=230\text{MeV}`$, $`<\overline{s}s>^{1/3}=120\text{MeV}`$ and the ratio $`R=0.524`$. As a final example we take the solutions at $`G=11.96\text{GeV}^2G_{max},\kappa =371.491\text{GeV}^5`$, where the branches $`D`$ and $`E`$ emerge and are very close to each other with $`m_u=1.56\text{GeV},m_s=1.72\text{GeV}`$. The corresponding condensates are $`<\overline{u}u>^{1/3}=224\text{MeV}`$, $`<\overline{s}s>^{1/3}=105\text{MeV}`$ and $`R=0.467`$. The other solution is at the path $`bc`$ with $`m_u=290\text{MeV},m_s=572\text{MeV}`$ with condensates $`<\overline{u}u>^{1/3}=229\text{MeV}`$, $`<\overline{s}s>^{1/3}=184\text{MeV}`$ and $`R=0.8`$.

To summarize, we have found that in the presence of the ’t Hooft interaction, treated beyound the lowest order SPA, several solutions to the gap equations are possible at some range of input parameters, i.e. the same values of $`G,\kappa ,\mathrm{\Lambda },\widehat{m}_i`$ lead to different sets of constituent quark masses $`(m_u,m_s)`$ and, therefore, to different values of the quark condensates. A quite different scenario emerges for the hadronic vacuum, which can now be multivalued. It makes our result essentially different from the ones obtained in . These findings must be further analysed in order to establish which of the extrema correspond to minima or maxima of the effective potential. This step will be done elsewhere in conjunction with the determination of the meson mass spectrum, as it also requires dealing with the terms with two powers of the meson fields in the ansatz of solutions Eq.(22) and in the related Lagrangian (28).

## IV Concluding remarks

The purpose of this work has been twofold. Firstly we have developed the technique which is necessary to go beyound the lowest order SPA in the problem of the path integral bosonization of the ’t Hooft six quark interaction. We have shown how the pre-exponential factor, connected with the steepest descent approach and which is responsible for the quantum fluctuations around the classical path, can be treated exactly, order by order, in a scheme of increasing number of mesonic fields, while preserving all chiral symmetry requirements. This technique is rather general and can be readily used in other applications. Second, we have explored with considerable detail the implications of taking the quantum fluctuations in account in the description of the hadronic vacuum. A very complex multivalued vacuum emerges at fixed values of the input parameters $`G`$, $`\kappa `$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and current quark masses. We encountered several classes of solutions. Searching in an interval of constituent quark masses from zero to $`3`$GeV, we found $`G,\kappa `$, regions caracterized by one, three and four solutions. The multiple vacua may have very interesting physical consequences and applications.

## Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Dmitri Diakonov for valuable correspondence. We thank Dmitri Osipov and Pedro Costa for their help in converting the “Mathematica” generated figures into the final ones. This work is supported by grants provided by Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, POCTI/35304/FIS/2000 and NATO ”Outreach” Cooperation Program.