format: text

text:
# Singularities on the 2-dimensional moduli spaces of stable sheaves on K3 surfaces

## 0. Introduction

Let $`X`$ be a K3 surface over $``$. Mukai introduced a lattice structure $`,`$ on $`H^{}(X,):=_iH^{2i}(X,)`$ by

(0.1)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill x,y:=& _Xx^{}y\hfill \\ \hfill =& _X(x_1y_1x_0y_2x_2y_0),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`x_iH^{2i}(X,)`$ (resp. $`y_iH^{2i}(X,)`$) is the $`2i`$-th component of $`x`$ (resp. $`y`$) and $`x^{}=x_0x_1+x_2`$. It is now called the Mukai lattice. For a coherent sheaf $`E`$ on $`X`$, we can attach an element of $`H^{}(X,)`$ called the Mukai vector

(0.2)
$$v(E):=\mathrm{ch}(E)\sqrt{\mathrm{td}_X}=\mathrm{ch}(E)(1+\rho _X),$$

where $`\mathrm{ch}(E)`$ is the Chern character of $`E`$, $`\mathrm{td}_X`$ the Todd class of $`X`$ and $`\rho _X`$ the fundamental cohomology class of $`X`$ ($`_X\rho _X=1`$).

###### Definition 0.1.

\[Y3\] We fix an ample divisor $`H`$ on $`X`$ and an element $`GK(X)`$ with $`\mathrm{rk}G>0`$.

1. Let $`E`$ be a torsion free sheaf on $`X`$. $`E`$ is $`G`$-twisted semi-stable (resp. stable) with respect to $`H`$, if

(0.3)
$$\frac{\chi (G,F(nH))}{\mathrm{rk}(F)}\frac{\chi (G,E(nH))}{\mathrm{rk}(E)},n0$$

for $`0FE`$ (resp. the inequality is strict).
2. For a $`wH^{}(X,)_{alg}:=\mathrm{NS}(X)\rho _X`$ with $`\mathrm{rk}w>0`$, we define the $`w`$-twisted semi-stability as the $`G`$-twisted semi-stability, where $`GK(X)`$ satisfies $`v(G)=w`$.

Matsuki and Wentworth \[M-W\] constructed the moduli space of $`w`$-twisted semi-stable sheaves $`E`$ with $`v(E)=v`$. We denote it by $`\overline{M}_H^w(v)`$. If $`w=v(𝒪_X)`$, then the $`v(𝒪_X)`$-twisted semi-stability is nothing but the usual Gieseker’s semi-stability. Hence we denote $`\overline{M}_H^{v(𝒪_X)}(v)`$ by $`\overline{M}_H(v)`$.

Assume that $`v`$ is an isotropic Mukai vector. In \[A\], Abe considered the singularities of $`\overline{M}_H(v)`$. Replacing $`\overline{M}_H(v)`$ by $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$, we shall generalize Abe’s results:

###### Theorem 0.1.

1. $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ is normal.
2. For a suitable choice of $`\alpha `$ with $`|\alpha ^2|1`$, there is a surjective morphism $`\varphi _\alpha :\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha }(v)=M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ which becomes a minimal resolution of the singularities.
3. Let $`x`$ be a point of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ corresponding to the $`S`$-equivalence class $`_{i=0}^nE_i^{a_i}`$, where $`E_i`$, $`0in`$ are $`v`$-twisted stable sheaves. Then the matrix $`(v(E_i),v(E_j))_{i,j=0}^n`$ is of affine type $`\stackrel{~}{A}_n,\stackrel{~}{D}_n,\stackrel{~}{E}_n`$. Assume that $`a_0=1`$. Then the singularity of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ at $`x`$ is a rational double point of type $`A_n,D_n,E_n`$ according as the type of the matrix $`(v(E_i),v(E_j))_{i,j=1}^n`$.

Moreover we shall show that the Weyl chamber of the corresponding finite Lie algebra appears as a parameter space of $`\alpha `$.

If the matrix is of type $`\stackrel{~}{A}_n`$, then the assertion (1) is due to Abe \[A, Thm. 3.3\]. Moreover if $`n=1,2`$, then he showed the assertion (3). The assertion (2) is also contained in \[A, Thm. 3.3\]. The main point of the proof is due to Matsuki and Wentworth \[M-W\] or Ellingsrud and Göttsche \[E-G\]. The $`v`$-twisted stability naturally appears in the study of the Fourier-Mukai transforms. In \[Y3\], \[Y5\], we studied the Fourier-Mukai transform and showed that the Fourier-Mukai transform preserves the $`v`$-twisted semi-stability under suitable assumptions. So the $`v`$-twisted semi-stability is important and this is our original motivation to study the moduli space of $`v`$-twisted semi-stable sheaves. Another motivation is the following: For the GIT quotients related to the moduli spaces of vector bundles on curves with additional structures, the wall crossing behaviors have been studied by several authors. In particular, Thaddeus \[T\] described the wall crossing behavior as a sequence of blowing-ups and blowing-downs and used it to show the Verlinde formula. For the rank two case, Ellingsrud and Göttsche \[E-G\] studied the similar variation problem for the moduli space of stable sheaves on a K3 surface. In this case, Mukai’s elementary transformation appears. For all these examples, the exceptional locus of the blowing-up is irreducible. So it is interesting to construct an example with a reducible exceptional lucus, and a rational double point will be a simple and interesting example to consider.

Our main idea to study the exceptional locus is the same as the one in \[Y1\] to study the Brill-Noether locus of sheaves on K3 surfaces. Let us explain the contents of this note. In section 1, we show that the Donaldson’s determinant line bundle on $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ is ample. The $`w`$-twisted stability depends on the choice of $`w`$. Hence we introduce a suitable parameter space of $`w`$ and introduce a chamber structure on this parameter space. This chamber will become a Weyl chamber of a finite simple Lie algebra in the next section. By using a special kind of Fourier-Mukai transform called reflection, we compare the twisted stability for two $`w`$ (Proposition 1.12). Section 2 is the main part of this note. We first describe the exceptional locus of the resolution as a Brill-Noether locus of sheaves, under the assumption that $`w=v+\alpha `$, $`|\alpha ^2|1`$ belongs to a special chamber. By using the Weyl group action on the parameter space, we can give a set-theoretic description of the exceptional locus for general cases. Finally we shall prove that $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ is normal. In section 3, we give some examples of singular moduli spaces by using the surjectivity of the period map.

## 1. Definitions

Let $`L`$ be a lattice (or a $``$-vector space with a bilinear form) with a weight 2 Hodge structure: $`L=_{p+q=2}L^{p,q}`$. We set $`L_{alg}:=LL^{1,1}`$. The Mukai lattice $`H^{}(X,)`$ has a Hodge structure:

(1.1)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill H^{2,0}(H^{}(X,))& =H^{2,0}(X),\hfill \\ \hfill H^{1,1}(H^{}(X,))& =H^{0,0}(X)H^{1,1}(X)H^{2,2}(X),\hfill \\ \hfill H^{0,2}(H^{}(X,))& =H^{0,2}(X).\hfill \end{array}$$

Then $`H^{}(X,)_{alg}=\mathrm{Pic}(X)\rho _X`$.

### 1.1. Twisted stability

Let $`G`$ be an element of $`K(X)`$ with $`\mathrm{rk}G>0`$. We fix an ample divisor $`H`$ on $`X`$. For a coherent sheaf $`E`$ on $`X`$, we define the $`G`$-twisted rank, degree, and Euler characteristic of $`E`$ by

(1.2)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{rk}_G(E)& :=\mathrm{rk}(G^{}E),\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{deg}_G(E)& :=(c_1(G^{}E),H),\hfill \\ \hfill \chi _G(E)& :=\chi (G^{}E).\hfill \end{array}$$

We shall rewrite the condition (0.3) on the twisted stability. By the Riemann-Roch theorem, we get that

(1.3)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \frac{\chi (G,E(nH))}{\mathrm{rk}(G)\mathrm{rk}(E)}\frac{\chi (G,F(nH))}{\mathrm{rk}(G)\mathrm{rk}(F)}=& n\left(\frac{\mathrm{deg}_G(E)}{\mathrm{rk}_G(E)}\frac{\mathrm{deg}_G(F)}{\mathrm{rk}_G(F)}\right)+\left(\frac{\chi _G(E)}{\mathrm{rk}_G(E)}\frac{\chi _G(F)}{\mathrm{rk}_G(F)}\right)\hfill \\ \hfill =& n\left(\frac{(c_1(E),H)}{\mathrm{rk}(E)}\frac{(c_1(F),H)}{\mathrm{rk}(F)}\right)+\left(\frac{\chi (E)}{\mathrm{rk}(E)}\frac{\chi (F)}{\mathrm{rk}(F)}\right)\hfill \\ & +(\frac{c_1(E)}{\mathrm{rk}(E)}\frac{c_1(F)}{\mathrm{rk}(F)},\frac{c_1(G)}{\mathrm{rk}G}).\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`\phi :\mathrm{Pic}(X)H^{}`$ be the orthogonal projection. Then the twisted stability depends only on $`\phi (c_1(G)/\mathrm{rk}G)H^{}`$ and it is nothing but the twisted stability due to Matsuki-Wentworth \[M-W\].

###### Definition 1.1.

A polarization $`H`$ is general with respect to $`v`$, if the following condition holds:

* for every $`\mu `$-semi-stable sheaf $`E`$ with $`v(E)=v`$, if $`FE`$ satisfies $`(c_1(F),H)/\mathrm{rk}F=(c_1(E),H)/\mathrm{rk}E`$, then $`c_1(F)/\mathrm{rk}F=c_1(E)/\mathrm{rk}E`$.

If $`H`$ is general with respect to $`v`$, then the $`w`$-twisted semi-stability does not depend on the choice of $`w`$. The following theorem was proved in \[M-W\].

###### Theorem 1.1.

\[M-W\] Let $`w`$ be an element of $`H^{}(X,)_{alg}`$ such that $`\mathrm{rk}w>0`$. Then there is a coarse moduli scheme $`\overline{M}_H^w(v)`$ of $`S`$-equivalence classes of $`w`$-twisted semi-stable sheaves $`E`$ with $`v(E)=v`$. $`\overline{M}_H^w(v)`$ is a projective scheme.

###### Definition 1.2.

We denote the open subscheme of $`\overline{M}_H^w(v)`$ consisting of $`w`$-twisted stable sheaves by $`M_H^w(v)`$.

If $`w=v(𝒪_X)`$, then we denote $`\overline{M}_H^w(v)`$ (resp. $`M_H^w(v)`$) by $`\overline{M}_H(v)`$ (resp. $`M_H(v)`$).

###### Proposition 1.2.

$`\overline{M}_H^w(v)\mathrm{}`$ if $`v^22`$.

###### Proof.

We may assume that $`v`$ is primitive. If $`H`$ is general with respect to $`v`$, then \[Y2, Thm. 8.1\] implies that $`\overline{M}_H(v)\mathrm{}`$. By the study of the chamber structure (cf. \[Y3, sect. 1, Prop. 4.2\]), we get our claim ∎

### 1.2. Line bundles on $`\overline{M}_H^w(v)`$

Throughout this note, $`v:=r+\xi +a\rho _X`$, $`\xi \mathrm{Pic}(X)`$ is a primitive isotropic Mukai vector with $`r>0`$.

We define a homomorphism which preserves the Hodge structure and the metric:

(1.4)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\delta :H^2(X,)& & H^{}(X,)\\ D& & D+\frac{(D,\xi )}{r}\rho _X.\end{array}$$

We denote $`\delta (D)`$ by $`\widehat{D}`$. Then we have an orthogonal decomposition:

(1.5)
$$H^{}(X,)=(v\rho _X)\delta (H^2(X,)).$$

Let $`\theta _v^\alpha :v^{}H^2(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v),)`$ be the Mukai homomorphism defined by

(1.6)
$$\theta _v^\alpha (x):=\frac{1}{\rho }\left[p_{M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)}((\mathrm{ch})\sqrt{\mathrm{td}_X}x^{})\right]_1,$$

where $``$ is a quasi-universal family of similitude $`\rho `$. If $`x(v^{}/v)`$, then we have a $``$-line bundle $`L(x)`$ on $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$ such that $`c_1(L(x))=\theta _v^\alpha (x)`$. For $`\widehat{H}=H+\{(H,\xi )/r\}\rho _X`$, $`L(r\widehat{H})`$ is the Donaldson’s determinant line bundle and J. Li \[Li\] showed that canonically $`L(r\widehat{H})`$ extends to a line bundle on $`\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$. We also denote this extension by $`L(r\widehat{H})`$. Then $`L(r\widehat{H})`$ is a nef and big line bundle and we have a contraction map from the Gieseker moduli space to the Uhlenbeck moduli space. Hence $`L(r\widehat{H})`$ is important.

One of the reason we consider the $`v`$-twisted stability is the following proposition.

###### Proposition 1.3.

$`L(r\widehat{H})`$ is an ample line bundle on $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$.

###### Proof.

We recall the construction of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ in \[Y4\]. Let $`E`$ be a $`v`$-twisted stable sheaf with $`v(E)=v`$. We set $`N:=\chi (E,E(nH))`$. Let $`Q:=\mathrm{Quot}_{E(nH)^N/X/}^v`$ be a quot-scheme parametrizing all quotients $`E(nH)^NF`$ such that $`v(F)=v`$ and $`𝒪_Q^NE(nH)𝒬`$ the universal quotient. Let $`Q^{ss}`$ be an open subscheme of $`Q`$ consisting of $`qQ`$ such that

1. $`𝒬_q`$ is $`v`$-twisted semi-stable,
2. $`\mathrm{Hom}(E,E^N)\mathrm{Hom}(E,𝒬_q(nH))`$ is an isomorphism,
3. $`\mathrm{Ext}^i(E,𝒬_q(nH))=0`$, $`i>0`$.

Then we have an isomorphism $`𝒪_{Q^{ss}}^Np_{Q^{ss}}(𝒬p_X^{}(E(nH))^{})`$. $`Q`$ has a natural action of $`GL(N)`$. We set $`_m:=detp_{Q!}(𝒬p_X^{}(E(mH))^{})`$. Since $`𝒬`$ is $`GL(N)`$-linearized, $`_m`$ is also $`GL(N)`$-linearized. By the construction of $`Q`$, $`_{n+m}`$, $`m0`$ gives an embedding of $`Q`$ to a Grassmann variety. Thus $`_{n+m}`$, $`m0`$ is ample. Let $`T:=det(𝒪_Q^N)`$ be the $`GL(N)`$-linearized line bundle induced by the standard action of $`GL(N)`$ on $`𝒪_Q^N`$. The center $`^\times GL(N)`$ acts trivially on $`Q`$ and the action on $`_m`$ is the multiplication by $`\chi (E,E(𝒪_X(mH)))`$-th power of constant. By a simple calculation, we see that $`\chi (E,E(𝒪_X(mH)))=r^2m^2(H^2)/2`$. Hence $`:=_{n+m}^{m^2}_n^{(n+m)^2}`$ and $`^{}:=_{n+m}^{m^2}T^{(n+m)^2}`$ have $`PGL(N)`$-linearizations. By the construction of the moduli space, $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ is described as a GIT quotient $`Q^{ss}\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$, where $`n0`$ and $`^{}`$ is the linearization. Since $`_{|Q^{ss}}=_{|Q^{ss}}^{}`$ as $`PGL(N)`$-line bundles, $`_{|Q^{ss}}`$ descends to an ample line bundle on $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$. We note that

(1.7)
$$=_{n+m}^{m^2}_n^{(n+m)^2}=detp_{Q!}(𝒬p_X^{}(L)^{}),$$

where $`L=m^2E((n+m)H)(n+m)^2E(nH)K(X)`$. Since $`detp_{Q^{ss}!}(𝒬p_X^{}(E)^{})=𝒪_{Q^{ss}}`$,

(1.8)
$$detp_{Q^{ss}!}(𝒬p_X^{}(L)^{})=detp_{Q^{ss}!}(𝒬p_X^{}(L^{})^{}),$$

where $`L^{}=L(m^2(n+m)^2)E`$. Since $`v(L^{})=rmn(m+n)\widehat{H}`$, we get our claim. ∎

###### Corollary 1.4.

1. If $`\xi H`$, then $`\overline{M}_H(v)=\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$. Hence $`L(r\widehat{H})`$ is an ample line bundle on $`\overline{M}_H(v)`$.
2. Let $`_n`$ (resp. $`\overline{}_n`$ ) be the moduli space of polarized (resp. quasi-polarized) K3 surfaces $`(X,H)`$ with $`(H^2)=2n`$. We set $`v:=r+dH+a\rho _X`$, $`d^2(H^2)=2ra`$. Then we have a morphism of the moduli spaces $`_n\overline{}_n^{}`$: $`(X,H)(\overline{M}_H(v),L(\widehat{H}))`$ where $`n=ra/d^2`$ and $`n^{}`$ is determined by the primitive class in $`L(\widehat{H})\mathrm{Pic}(\overline{M}_H(v))`$.

In particular, if $`v:=r+H+a\rho _X`$ satisfies $`\mathrm{gcd}(r,a)=1`$, then $`M_H(v)`$ is compact and $`\widehat{H}=H+2a\rho _X`$ gives a canonical primitive polarization of $`M_H(v)=M_H^v(v)`$.

###### Remark 1.1.

If $`\mathrm{gcd}(r,d)=1`$, then $`M_H(v)`$ consists of $`\mu `$-stable locally free sheaves for a general $`X`$. For a special $`X`$, $`M_H(v)`$ may consist of properly $`\mu `$-semi-stable sheaves. Indeed let $`X^1`$ be an elliptic K3 surface with a section $`\sigma `$. We set $`H:=\sigma +3f`$, where $`f`$ is a fiber of $`\pi `$. If $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)=\sigma f`$, then $`H`$ is an ample divisor with $`(H^2)=4`$. We set $`v=2+H+\rho _X`$. Then $`v^2=0`$ and every member of $`M_H(v)`$ is given by

(1.9)
$$E:=\mathrm{ker}(𝒪_X(\sigma +f)𝒪_X(2f)\stackrel{ev}{}_s),$$

$`sX`$.

For the Mukai homomorphism, Mukai \[Mu2\] showed the following.

###### Theorem 1.5 (Mukai).

Assume that $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$ is compact. Then $`\theta _v^\alpha `$ is surjective and the kernel is $`v`$. Moreover $`\theta _v^\alpha :v^{}/vH^2(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v),)`$ is a Hodge isometry.

By (1.4) and (1.5), we have a sequence of Hodge isometries:

(1.10)
$$H^2(X,)\delta (H^2(X,))(v^{}/v)_{}H^2(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v),).$$

Then since $`\widehat{H}=\delta (H)v^{}`$, we have an isometry

(1.11)
$$\delta (H^{})_{alg}((\widehat{H}^{}v^{})/v)_{alg}.$$

In particular $`((\widehat{H}^{}v^{})/v)_{alg}`$ is negative definite.

### 1.3. Chamber structure

We shall study the dependence of $`\overline{M}_H^w(v)`$ on $`w`$. By (1.3), we may assume that $`w=v+\alpha ,\alpha \delta (H^{})_{alg}`$. Let $`u`$ be a Mukai vector such that $`0<\mathrm{rk}u<\mathrm{rk}v`$, $`v,u0`$, $`u^2=2`$ and $`u,\widehat{H}=0`$. We define a wall $`W_u\delta (H^{})_{alg}_{}`$ with respect to $`v`$ by

(1.12)
$$W_u:=\{\alpha \delta (H^{})_{alg}|v+\alpha ,u=0\}.$$

For a properly $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf $`E`$ with $`v(E)=v`$, we consider the Jordan-Hölder filtration

(1.13)
$$0F_1F_2\mathrm{}F_s=E$$

of $`E`$ with respect to the $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stability, that is, $`E_i:=F_i/F_{i1}`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf with

(1.14)
$$\begin{array}{cc}& (c_1(E_i),H)/\mathrm{rk}E_i=(c_1(E),H)/\mathrm{rk}E=(\xi ,H)/r,\hfill \\ & v+\alpha ,v(E_i)/\mathrm{rk}E_i=v+\alpha ,v/\mathrm{rk}E.\hfill \end{array}$$

We set $`u_i:=v(E_i)`$. Then we see that $`u_i,\widehat{H}=(c_1(E_i),H)(\xi ,H)r_i/r=0`$ and $`v+\alpha ,u_i=0`$.

###### Lemma 1.6.

$`v,u_i0`$ and $`u_i^2=2`$ for some $`i`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`u_i/\mathrm{rk}u_iv/\mathrm{rk}v\widehat{H}^{}\rho _X^{}`$ and $`(\widehat{H}^{}\rho _X^{})_{alg}`$ is negative semi-definite, $`(u_i/\mathrm{rk}u_iv/\mathrm{rk}v)^20`$. Then $`u_i^22u_i,v(\mathrm{rk}u_i/\mathrm{rk}v)`$. Since $`_ju_j,v=v,v=0`$, we get $`u_i,v0`$ for some $`i`$. In particular $`u_i^2<0`$ provided that $`u_i,v<0`$. If $`u_i,v=0`$, then $`u_i\widehat{H}^{}v^{}`$. Since $`\mathrm{rk}u_i<\mathrm{rk}v`$, we get $`u_iv`$. Then (1.11) implies that $`u_i^2<0`$. Since $`u_i^22`$, we conclude that $`u_i^2=2`$. ∎

Therefore $`\alpha W_{u_i}`$. We set

(1.15)
$$𝒰:=\left\{uH^{}(X,)_{alg}\right|\begin{array}{cc}& u^2=2,v,u0,\widehat{H},u=0,\hfill \\ & 0<\mathrm{rk}u<\mathrm{rk}v\hfill \end{array}\}.$$

For a fixed $`v`$ and $`H`$, $`𝒰`$ is a finite set.

###### Lemma 1.7.

If $`\alpha `$ does not lie on any wall $`W_u`$, $`u𝒰`$, then $`\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha }(v)=M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$. In particular, $`\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$ is a K3 surface.

###### Definition 1.3.

Let $`𝒞`$ be a connected component of $`\delta (H^{})_{alg}_{}_{u𝒰}W_u`$. We call $`𝒞`$ a chamber.

As is proved in \[M-W\], we get

###### Proposition 1.8.

The $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stability does not depend on the choice of $`\alpha 𝒞`$. If $`\beta `$ belongs to the closure of $`𝒞`$, then we have a morphism $`\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha }(v)\overline{M}_H^{v+\beta }(v)`$ for $`\alpha 𝒞`$. In particular, we have a morphism $`\varphi _\alpha :\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha }(v)\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ for $`|\alpha ^2|1`$.

Let $`Tv^{}`$ be a sufficiently small neighborhood of $`0`$. Then $`W_u`$ intersects $`T`$ if and only if $`v,u=0`$. Since we are interested in the neighborhood of $`v`$, we may assume that the defining equation of a wall $`W_u`$ belongs to the subset

(1.16)
$$𝒰^{}:=\{u𝒰|v,u=0\}.$$

By the same argument as above, we get the following.

###### Lemma 1.9.

Let $`E`$ be a properly $`v`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`v(E)=v`$ and

(1.17)
$$0F_1F_2\mathrm{}F_s=E$$

the Jordan-Hölder filtration of $`E`$ with respect to the $`v`$-twisted stability. Then $`v(F_i/F_{i1})^2=2`$.

### 1.4. Reflection

For an $`\alpha \delta (H^{})_{alg}`$ with $`|\alpha ^2|1`$, let $`F`$ be a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable torsion free sheaf such that

1. $`v(F)^2=2`$,
2. $`v(F),\widehat{H}/\mathrm{rk}F=(c_1(F),H)/\mathrm{rk}F(\xi ,H)/r=0`$ and
3. $`v,v(F)=\alpha ,v(F)=0`$.

By (i), $`F`$ is a rigid torsion free sheaf, and hence $`F`$ is locally free.

Let $``$ be a coherent sheaf on $`X\times X`$ which is defined by an exact sequence

(1.18)
$$0p_1^{}(F^{})p_2^{}(F)\stackrel{ev}{}𝒪_\mathrm{\Delta }0,$$

where $`p_i:X\times XX`$, $`i=1,2`$ are projections. We consider the Fourier-Mukai transform induced by $``$:

(1.19)
$$\begin{array}{cccc}_{}:& 𝐃(X)& & 𝐃(X)\\ & x& & 𝐑p_2(p_1^{}(x)),\end{array}$$

where $`𝐃(X)`$ is the bounded derived category of $`X`$. Up to shift, the inverse of $`_{}`$ is given by

(1.20)
$$\begin{array}{cccc}\widehat{}_{}:& 𝐃(X)& & 𝐃(X)\\ & y& & 𝐑\mathrm{Hom}_{p_1}(,p_2^{}(y)).\end{array}$$

###### Definition 1.4.

Let $`E`$ be a coherent sheaf on $`X`$.

1. We denote the $`i`$-th cohomology sheaf of $`_{}(E)`$ (resp. $`\widehat{}_{}(E)`$) by $`_{}^i(E)`$ (resp. $`\widehat{}_{}^i(E)`$).
2. $`E`$ satisfies $`\mathrm{WIT}_i`$ with respect to $`_{}`$ (resp. $`\widehat{}_{}`$), if $`_{}^j(E)=0`$ (resp. $`\widehat{}_{}^j(E)=0`$) for $`ji`$.

The Fourier-Mukai transform $`_{}`$ induces an isometry of the Mukai lattice $`_{}:H^{}(X,)H^{}(X,)`$. Let $`R_{v(F)}:H^{}(X,)H^{}(X,)`$ be the reflection defined by the $`(2)`$-vector $`v(F)`$:

(1.21)
$$R_{v(F)}(u)=u+u,v(F)v(F),uH^{}(X,).$$

Then we see that $`_{}=R_{v(F)}`$. Thus the Fourier-Mukai transform $`_{}`$ is the geometric realization of the reflection $`R_{v(F)}`$.

###### Lemma 1.10.

Let $`G`$ be a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf such that $`\mathrm{deg}(G)/\mathrm{rk}G=\mathrm{deg}(F)/\mathrm{rk}F`$ and $`\chi (E+A,G)0`$, where $`E,AK(X)`$ satisfy $`v(E)=v`$, $`v(A)=\alpha `$. Then

(1.22)
$$\mathrm{Ext}^2(_{|\{x\}\times X},G)=0$$

for all $`xX`$.

###### Proof.

Assume that there is a non-zero homomorphism $`\phi :G_{|\{x\}\times X}`$. Then we have a non-zero homomorphism $`\psi :GF`$. Since $`G`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`\mathrm{deg}(G)/\mathrm{rk}G=\mathrm{deg}(F)/\mathrm{rk}F`$ and $`F`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable, we get that $`0\chi (E+A,G)/\mathrm{rk}G\chi (E+A,F)/\mathrm{rk}F=0`$. Hence $`\chi (E+A,G)=0`$ and $`\psi `$ is surjective. Thus $`\mathrm{im}\phi `$ contains $`F`$. On the other hand, by the construction of $`_{|\{x\}\times X}`$, $`_{|\{x\}\times X}`$ does not contain $`F`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{Hom}(G,_{|\{x\}\times X})=0`$. By the Serre duality, we get $`\mathrm{Ext}^2(_{|\{x\}\times X},G)=0`$. ∎

###### Lemma 1.11.

Let $`E,AK(X)`$ be as in Lemma 1.10. Let $`G`$ be a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf such that $`\mathrm{deg}(G)/\mathrm{rk}G=\mathrm{deg}(F)/\mathrm{rk}F`$ and $`\chi (E+A,G)=0`$. Then the evaluation map $`\varphi :\mathrm{Hom}(F,G)FG`$ is injective and $`\mathrm{coker}\varphi `$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf.

###### Proof.

By the $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stability of $`E`$ and $`F`$, we see that $`\mathrm{deg}(\mathrm{im}\varphi )/\mathrm{rk}(\mathrm{im}\varphi )=\mathrm{deg}(F)/\mathrm{rk}F`$ and $`\chi (E+A,\mathrm{im}\varphi )=0`$. Hence we get $`\mathrm{deg}(\mathrm{ker}\varphi )/\mathrm{rk}(\mathrm{ker}\varphi )=\mathrm{deg}(F)/\mathrm{rk}F`$ and $`\chi (E+A,\mathrm{ker}\varphi )=0`$. Assume that $`\mathrm{ker}\varphi 0`$. By the $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stability of $`\mathrm{Hom}(F,G)F`$, $`\mathrm{ker}\varphi `$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable. Then we see that $`\mathrm{ker}\varphi F^k`$, which implies that $`\mathrm{Hom}(F,\mathrm{ker}\varphi )0`$. On the other hand, $`\varphi `$ induces an isomorphism $`\mathrm{Hom}(F,G)\mathrm{Hom}(F,F)\mathrm{Hom}(F,G)`$. Hence we have $`\mathrm{Hom}(F,\mathrm{ker}\varphi )=0`$, which is a contradiction. Therefore $`\mathrm{ker}\varphi =0`$. ∎

###### Proposition 1.12.

We set $`\alpha ^\pm :=\pm ϵv(F)+\alpha `$, where $`0<ϵ1`$.

1. Let $`E`$ be a $`v+\alpha ^{}`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`v(E)=v`$. Then $`\mathrm{WIT}_1`$ holds for $`E`$ with respect to $`_{}`$ and $`_{}^1(E)`$ is a $`v+\alpha ^+`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf.
2. Conversely, for a $`v+\alpha ^+`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf $`E`$ with $`v(E)=v`$, $`\mathrm{WIT}_1`$ holds with respect to $`\widehat{}_{}`$ and $`\widehat{}_{}^1(E)`$ is a $`v+\alpha ^{}`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf.
3. Moreover $`_{}`$ preserves the $`S`$-equivalence classes. Hence we have an isomorphism

(1.23)
$$\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha ^{}}(v)\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha ^+}(v).$$

###### Proof.

We take an element $`AK(X)`$ such that $`v(A)=\alpha `$. We note that $`F`$ is $`(v\pm ϵv(F)+\alpha )`$-twisted stable for $`0ϵ1`$. We first prove (1). We note that $`E`$ is $`v+\alpha ^{}`$-twisted semi-stable. By the definition of $``$, we get an exact sequence

(1.24)
$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}0& & p_2(p_1^{}(E))& & \mathrm{Hom}(F,E)F& & E\\ & & R^1p_2(p_1^{}(E))& & \mathrm{Ext}^1(F,E)F& & 0\\ & & R^2p_2(p_1^{}(E))& & \mathrm{Ext}^2(F,E)F& & 0.\end{array}$$

Since $`\mathrm{deg}F/\mathrm{rk}F=\mathrm{deg}E/\mathrm{rk}E`$ and $`\chi (EϵF+A,F)/\mathrm{rk}F=2ϵ/\mathrm{rk}F<0=\chi (EϵF+A,E)/\mathrm{rk}E`$, the $`v+\alpha ^{}`$-twisted semi-stability of $`E`$ and $`F`$ imply that $`\mathrm{Ext}^2(F,E)=\mathrm{Hom}(E,F)^{}=0`$. Thus $`R^2p_2(p_1^{}(E))=0`$. Since $`E`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable, Lemma 1.11 implies that $`\mathrm{Hom}(F,E)FE`$ is injective, and hence $`p_2(p_1^{}(E))=0`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{WIT}_1`$ holds for $`E`$ and $`_{}^1(E)`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`v(_{}^1(E))=R_{v(F)}(v)=v`$. Assume that $`_{}^1(E)`$ is not $`v+\alpha ^+`$-twisted semi-stable. Then there is an exact sequence

(1.25)
$$0G_1_{}^1(E)G_20$$

such that $`G_1`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`\mathrm{deg}_E(G_1)=\chi (E+A,G_1)=0`$ and $`G_2`$ is a $`v+\alpha ^+`$-twisted stable sheaf with $`\chi (E+ϵF+A,G_2)<0`$. By Lemma 1.10, we get $`\widehat{}_{}^2(G_1)=0`$. Since $`\chi (E+ϵF+A,G_2)<0`$ and $`\chi (E+ϵF+A,F)=2ϵ>0`$, $`\widehat{}_{}^0(G_2)=\mathrm{Hom}(F,G_2)F=0`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{WIT}_1`$ holds for $`G_1`$, $`G_2`$ and we get an exact sequence

(1.26)
$$0\widehat{}_{}^1(G_1)E\widehat{}_{}^1(G_2)0.$$

Since $`\chi (F,\widehat{}_{}^1(G_2))=\chi (F,G_2)>0`$, we get a contradiction.

(2) Conversely, let $`E`$ be a $`v+\alpha ^+`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`v(E)=v`$. Then we have an exact sequence

(1.27)
$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}0& & \mathrm{Hom}_{p_1}(𝒪_\mathrm{\Delta },p_2^{}(E))& & \mathrm{Hom}(F,E)F& & \mathrm{Hom}_{p_1}(,p_2^{}(E))\\ & & \mathrm{Ext}_{p_1}^1(𝒪_\mathrm{\Delta },p_2^{}(E))& & \mathrm{Ext}^1(F,E)F& & \mathrm{Ext}_{p_1}^1(,p_2^{}(E))\\ & & \mathrm{Ext}_{p_1}^2(𝒪_\mathrm{\Delta },p_2^{}(E))& & \mathrm{Ext}^2(F,E)F& & \mathrm{Ext}_{p_1}^2(,p_2^{}(E)).\end{array}$$

By Lemma 1.10, $`\widehat{}_{}^2(E)=\mathrm{Ext}_{p_1}^2(,p_2^{}(E))=0`$. It is easy to see that

(1.28)
$$\begin{array}{cc}& \mathrm{Hom}_{p_1}(𝒪_\mathrm{\Delta },p_2^{}(E))=0,\hfill \\ & \mathrm{Ext}_{p_1}^1(𝒪_\mathrm{\Delta },p_2^{}(E))=0,\hfill \\ & \mathrm{Ext}_{p_1}^2(𝒪_\mathrm{\Delta },p_2^{}(E))=E.\hfill \end{array}$$

Since $`\chi (E+ϵF+A,E)=0<\chi (E+ϵF+A,F)`$, the $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stability of $`E`$ and $`F`$ imply that $`\widehat{}_{}^0(E)=\mathrm{Hom}(F,E)F=0`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{WIT}_1`$ holds with respect to $`\widehat{}_{}`$ and $`\widehat{}_{}^1(E)`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable. Assume that $`\widehat{}_{}^1(E)`$ is not $`v+\alpha ^{}`$-twisted semi-stable. Then there is an exact sequence

(1.29)
$$0G_1\widehat{}_{}^1(E)G_20$$

such that $`G_1`$ is a $`v+\alpha ^{}`$-twisted stable sheaf with $`\mathrm{deg}_EG_1=0`$, $`\chi (EϵF+A,G_1)>0`$, $`\chi (E+A,G_1)=0`$ and $`G_2`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf. Since $`\chi (EϵF+A,G_1)/\mathrm{rk}G_1>0>\chi (EϵF+A,F)/\mathrm{rk}F`$, $`\mathrm{Ext}^2(F,G_1)=\mathrm{Hom}(G_1,F)^{}=0`$. Thus $`R^2p_2(p_1^{}(G_1))=0`$. Since $`G_2`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`\mathrm{deg}_EG_2=\chi (E+A,G_2)=0`$, Lemma 1.11 implies that $`\mathrm{Hom}(F,G_2)FG_2`$ is injective, and hence $`p_2(p_1^{}(G_2))=0`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{WIT}_1`$ holds for $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ with respect to $`_{}`$. Since $`\chi (E+ϵF+A,_{}^1(G_1))>0`$, we get a contradiction.

The last claim (3) will easily follow from the above arguments. We omit the proof. ∎

The following is proved in \[Y1\].

###### Proposition 1.13.

Keep notation as above. Assume that $`v+\alpha ^{}`$ does not lie on walls. Then $`_{}`$ induces an isometry $`R_{v(F)}:v^{}v^{}`$ and the following diagram is commutative.

(1.30)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}v^{}& \stackrel{R_{v(F)}}{}& v^{}\\ \theta _v^\alpha ^{}& & \theta _v^{\alpha ^+}& & \\ H^2(M_H^{v+\alpha ^{}}(v),)& =& H^2(M_H^{v+\alpha ^+}(v),)\end{array}$$

###### Remark 1.2.

If $`\alpha `$ belongs to exactly one wall $`W_u`$, $`u𝒰`$, then there is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf $`F`$ with $`v(F)=u`$. So we can apply Propositions 1.12 and 1.13 to this $`F`$.

## 2. Resolution of the singularities of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$

### 2.1. Exceptional locus of the resolution

Assume that there is a point $`x`$ of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ representing a properly $`v`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf. Assume that $`x`$ is represented by an $`S`$-equivalence class $`_{i=0}^nE_i^{a_i}`$, where $`E_i`$ is a $`v`$-twisted stable sheaf such that $`v(E_i),\widehat{H}=v(E_i),v=0`$ and $`E_iE_j`$ for $`ij`$. We set $`v_i:=v(E_i)`$.

###### Lemma 2.1.

$`v_0+v_1+\mathrm{}+v_n`$ is a negative semi-definite lattice of affine type $`\stackrel{~}{A}_n,\stackrel{~}{D}_n,\stackrel{~}{E}_n`$. More precisely, $`(v_i,v_j)_{i,j=0}^n`$ is the Cartan matrix of the affine Lie algebra $`\stackrel{~}{A}_n,\stackrel{~}{D}_n,\stackrel{~}{E}_n`$. In particular, $`v_0,v_1,\mathrm{},v_n`$ are linearly independent.

###### Proof.

We note that

(2.1)
$$\{\begin{array}{cc}v_i^2=2,\hfill & \\ v_i,v_j0\text{}ij,\hfill & \\ v,v_i=\widehat{H},v_i=0.\hfill & \end{array}$$

If there is a decomposition $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},n\}=IJ`$ such that $`v_i,v_j=0`$ for all $`iI,jJ`$, then $`0=v^2=(_{iI}a_iv_i)^2+(_{jJ}a_jv_j)^2`$. By (1.11), $`_{iI}a_iv_i=_{jJ}a_jv_j=0`$ in $`v^{}/v`$. Since $`0\mathrm{rk}(_{iI}a_iv_i),\mathrm{rk}(_{jJ}a_jv_j)\mathrm{rk}v`$, we get $`I=\mathrm{}`$ or $`J=\mathrm{}`$. Then as in the classification of the singular fiber of an elliptic surface, we get our claim. ∎

Assume that there is another point $`x^{}`$ of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ representing a properly $`v`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf $`_{i=0}^n^{}E_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{a_i^{}}`$, where $`E_i^{}`$ is a $`v`$-twisted stable sheaf such that $`v(E_i^{}),\widehat{H}=v(E_i^{}),v=0`$ and $`E_i^{}E_j^{}`$ for $`ij`$. We set $`v_i^{}:=v(E_i^{})`$. Then we have the following lemma.

###### Lemma 2.2.

(2.2)
$$(v_0+v_1+\mathrm{}+v_n)(v_0^{}+v_1^{}+\mathrm{}+v_n^{}^{}).$$

###### Proof.

We set

(2.3)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill S_1:=& \{i|v_i^{}(v_0+v_1+\mathrm{}+v_n)^{}\},\hfill \\ \hfill S_2:=& \{0,1,\mathrm{},n^{}\}S_1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Then $`v=_{iS_1}a_i^{}v_i^{}+_{iS_2}a_i^{}v_i^{}`$. Assume that $`iS_2`$. Since $`0=v_i^{},v=_ja_jv_i^{},v_j`$, $`v_i^{},v_j<0`$ for some $`j`$. Then $`\chi (E_i^{},E_j)>0`$, which implies that there is a non-zero homomorphism $`E_i^{}E_j`$ or $`E_jE_i^{}`$. Since $`E_i^{}`$ and $`E_j`$ are $`v`$-twisted stable sheaves such that $`\chi (E,E_i^{}(nH))/\mathrm{rk}E_i^{}=\chi (E,E_j(nH))/\mathrm{rk}E_j(=\chi (E,E(nH))/\mathrm{rk}E)`$ for all $`n`$, we get $`E_i^{}E_j`$. Thus $`v_i^{}\{v_0,v_1,\mathrm{},v_n\}`$. Then we get that $`(_{iS_1}a_i^{}v_i^{})^2+(_{iS_2}a_i^{}v_i^{})^2=0`$, and hence $`_{iS_1}a_i^{}v_i^{},_{iS_2}a_i^{}v_i^{}v`$. Since $`\mathrm{rk}(_{iS_2}a_i^{}v_i^{})\mathrm{rk}v`$, $`_{iS_2}a_i^{}v_i^{}=0`$ or $`v`$. If $`_{iS_2}a_i^{}v_i^{}=v`$, then Lemma 2.1 implies that $`S_2=\{0,1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ and $`a_i^{}=a_i`$, which implies that $`x^{}=x`$. Since $`xx^{}`$, we get that $`S_1=\{0,1,\mathrm{},n^{}\}`$. Thus our claim holds. ∎

We shall study the fiber of $`\varphi _\alpha :M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ at $`x`$. By the classification of the (extended) Dynkin diagram, we may assume that $`a_0=1`$. Then $`v_i`$, $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$ become a fundamental root system of the corresponding finite Lie algebra $`𝔤`$ under the change of the sign of the bilinear form.

###### Lemma 2.3.

(2.4)
$$𝒰^{}=(𝒰^{}(\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}v_i)^{})(𝒰^{}\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}v_i)$$

and

(2.5)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝒰^{}(\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}v_i)& =\{u\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}v_i|u^2=2,0<\mathrm{rk}u<\mathrm{rk}v\}\hfill \\ & =\mathrm{\Psi }_+(v\mathrm{\Psi }_+),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\mathrm{\Psi }_+:=\{u=_{i=1}^nb_iv_i|u^2=2,b_i0\}`$ is the set of positive roots of $`𝔤`$.

###### Proof.

For $`u𝒰^{}`$, we set $`w=vu`$. Since $`v,u=0`$, we get $`w^2=u^2=2`$. Since $`0<\mathrm{rk}u<\mathrm{rk}v`$, we have $`\mathrm{rk}w>0`$. By Proposition 1.2, there are $`v`$-twisted semi-stable sheaves $`F`$ and $`G`$ with $`v(F)=u`$ and $`v(G)=w`$. Applying Lemma 2.2 to $`FG`$, we see that $`u=_{i=0}^nb_iv_i_{i=0}^nv_i,a_ib_i0`$ or $`u(_{i=0}^nv_i)^{}`$ according as $`FG`$ is $`S`$-equivalent to $`_{i=0}^nE_i^{a_i}`$ or not. Thus the first claim holds. If $`b_0=0`$, then $`u\mathrm{\Psi }_+`$ and if $`b_0=1`$, then $`w\mathrm{\Psi }_+`$. Thus $`u=vwv\mathrm{\Psi }_+`$. Therefore the second assertion also holds. ∎

Therefore the wall $`W_u`$ corresponds to the wall defining the Weyl chamber. More precisely, $`W_u((_{i=0}^nv_i)/v)`$ is the corresponding wall. We define the fundamental Weyl chamber:

(2.6)
$$D:=\{\alpha \delta (H^{})_{alg}_{}|v_i,\alpha >0,i>0\}.$$

For a small $`\alpha D`$, we describe the exceptional set $`\varphi _\alpha ^1(x)`$. The method is the same as in \[Y1\].

###### Lemma 2.4.

Assume that $`\alpha \delta (H^{})_{alg}`$ belongs to $`D`$ and $`|\alpha ^2|1`$. Let $`F`$ be a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf such that $`v(F)=v_0+_{j>0}b_jv_j`$, $`0b_ja_j`$.

1. If $`v(F)v`$, then $`F`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable and $`F`$ is $`S`$-equivalent to $`E_0(_{j>0}E_j^{b_j})`$ with respect to the $`v`$-twisted stability.
2. For a non-zero homomorphsim $`\varphi :E_iF`$, $`i>0`$, $`\varphi `$ is injective and $`F^{}:=\mathrm{coker}\varphi `$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf.
3. If there is a non-trivial extension

(2.7)
$$0E_iF^{\prime \prime }F0$$

and $`b_i+1a_i`$, then $`F^{\prime \prime }`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable.

###### Proof.

We take elements $`E,AK(X)`$ such that $`v(E)=v`$, $`v(A)=\alpha `$. Since $`|\alpha ^2|1`$, $`F`$ is $`v`$-twisted semi-stable. Assume that $`F`$ is $`S`$-equivalent to $`_{j=0}^n^{}E_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{b_j^{}}`$ with respect to the $`v`$-twisted stability. Since $`F(_{j>0}E_j^{(a_jb_j)})`$ is $`S`$-equivalent to $`_{j=0}^n^{}E_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{b_j^{}}(_{j>0}E_j^{(a_jb_j)})`$, by Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.2, we get that $`F`$ is $`S`$-equivalent to $`E_0(_{j>0}E_j^{b_j})`$ with respect to the $`v`$-twisted stability. Since $`\chi (E+A,F)\chi (E+A,E)=0`$ and $`\chi (E+A,E_i)<0`$ for all $`i>0`$, there is no proper subsheaf $`E^{}`$ such that $`\chi (E+A,E^{}(nH))/\mathrm{rk}E^{}=\chi (E+A,F(nH))/\mathrm{rk}F`$ for all $`n`$. Thus the claim (1) holds.

We next prove (2). Since $`E_i`$ is $`v`$-twisted stable and $`F`$ is $`v`$-twisted semi-stable, $`\varphi `$ is injective and $`F^{}`$ is a $`v`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf. By (1), $`F^{}`$ is $`S`$-equivalent to $`E_0(_{j>0}E_j^{c_j})`$ with respect to the $`v`$-twisted stability, where $`v(F^{})=v_0+_{j>0}c_jv_j`$. If $`F^{}`$ is not $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable, then there is a quotient sheaf $`F^{}G`$ such that $`\mathrm{deg}_EG=0`$ and $`\chi (E+A,G)/\mathrm{rk}G<\chi (E+A,F^{})/\mathrm{rk}F^{}`$. Since $`|\alpha ^2|1`$ and $`\chi (E+A,E_i)<0`$ for all $`i>0`$, we see that $`G`$ is $`v`$-twisted semi-stable and is $`S`$-equivalent to $`_{j>0}E_j^{c_j^{}}`$ with respect to the $`v`$-twisted stability. Hence we get that $`\chi (E+A,G)<0`$, which implies that $`F`$ is not $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable. Therefore $`F^{}`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable.

Finally we prove (3). By our assumption, $`\chi (E+A,F^{\prime \prime })\chi (E+A,E)=0`$. If $`F^{\prime \prime }`$ is not $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable, then there is a quotient sheaf $`F^{\prime \prime }G`$ such that $`\mathrm{deg}_EG=0`$ and $`\chi (E+A,G)/\mathrm{rk}G<\chi (E+A,F^{\prime \prime })/\mathrm{rk}F^{\prime \prime }`$. Then we see that $`G`$ is $`v`$-twisted semi-stable and is $`S`$-equivalent to $`_{j>0}E_j^{c_j^{\prime \prime }}`$ with respect to the $`v`$-twisted stability. Then there is a quotient $`GE_j`$, $`j>0`$. By (2.15), we have an exact sequence

(2.8)
$$0=\mathrm{Hom}(F,E_j)\mathrm{Hom}(F^{\prime \prime },E_j)\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,E_j).$$

We consider the map $`\psi :E_iF^{\prime \prime }GE_j`$. Then $`\psi `$ is an isomorphism, which implies that the extension (2.7) splits. ∎

By Lemma 2.4 (1), we get the following corollary.

###### Corollary 2.5.

We set $`w:=v_0+_{j>0}b_jv_j`$, $`0b_ja_j`$. If $`wv`$, then $`\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha }(w)=M_H^{v+\alpha }(w)`$. In particular, if $`w^2=2`$, then $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(w)`$ is not empty and consists of one element.

###### Corollary 2.6.

Let $`F`$ be a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf with $`v(F)=v_0+_{j>0}b_jv_j`$, $`0b_ja_j`$.

1. If $`v(F)=v`$, then $`dim\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F)1`$.
2. If $`v(F)v`$, then $`dim\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F)=\mathrm{max}\{v(F),v_i,0\}`$.

###### Proof.

We set $`dim\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F)=k`$. By the Riemann-Roch theorem, $`kv(F),v_i`$. Hence if $`k=0`$, then our claims (1), (2) hold. Assume that $`k>0`$. By Lemma 2.4, $`\varphi :\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F)E_iF`$ is injective and $`F^{}:=\mathrm{coker}\varphi `$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable. If $`v(F)=v`$, then $`2v(F^{})^2=2k^2`$. Hence $`k1`$. If $`v(F)v`$, then $`v(F)^2=2`$ and hence $`2v(F^{})^2=22k(k+v(F),v_i)`$. Then $`k+v(F),v_i0`$, which implies that $`k=v(F),v_i`$. ∎

###### Corollary 2.7.

We set $`w=v_0+_{j>0}b_jv_j`$, $`0b_ja_j`$. If $`w^2=(wv_i)^2=2`$, then we have an isomorphism $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(w)M_H^{v+\alpha }(wv_i)`$ sending $`F`$ to $`\mathrm{coker}(E_iF)`$.

###### Proof.

By our assumption, we see that $`w,v_i=1`$. By Corollary 2.6, $`\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F)=`$. By Lemma 2.4 (2), $`F^{}:=\mathrm{coker}(E_iF)`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf with $`v(F^{})=wv_i`$. Conversely for a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf $`F^{}`$ with $`v(F^{})=wv_i`$, we get $`wv_i,v_i=1`$, and hence by Corollary 2.6 and Lemma 2.4 (3), the non-trivial extension of $`F^{}`$ by $`E_i`$ gives a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf $`F`$ with $`v(F)=w`$. ∎

We set

(2.9)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill C_i:=& \left\{(E,U)\right|\begin{array}{cc}& EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v),U\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,E)\hfill \\ & dimU=1\hfill \end{array}\}\hfill \\ \hfill =& \{E_iE|EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

$`C_i`$ is the moduli space of twisted coherent systems.

###### Proposition 2.8.

1. $`C_i\varphi _\alpha ^1(x)`$.
2. $`C_i^1`$ and the natural map $`\pi :C_iM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$ is a closed immersion. In particular, $`C_i`$ is not empty.

###### Proof.

We set $`F:=\mathrm{coker}(E_iE)`$. Then $`E`$ is $`S`$-equivalent to $`E_iF`$ with respect to the $`v`$-twisted stability. By Lemma 2.4 (1), $`F`$ is $`S`$-equivalent to $`E_i^{(a_i1)}_{ji}E_j^{a_j}`$, and hence the first claim holds. We next show the assertion (2). We note that the Zariski tangent space of $`C_i`$ at $`E_iE`$ is

(2.10)
$$\mathrm{Ext}^1(E_iE,E)=\mathrm{Ext}^1(F,E)$$

and the obstruction for the infinitesimal lifting belongs to

(2.11)
$$\mathrm{ker}(\mathrm{Ext}^2(E_iE,E)\mathrm{Ext}^2(E,E)\stackrel{tr}{}H^2(X,𝒪_X)).$$

We shall first show that $`C_i`$ is smooth at $`E_iE`$. Since $`\mathrm{Ext}^2(E_iE,E)=\mathrm{Ext}^2(F,E)=\mathrm{Hom}(E,F)^{}`$, it is sufficient to show that $`\mathrm{Hom}(E,F)=`$. By the exact sequence

(2.12)
$$0E_iEF0,$$

we get an exact sequence

(2.13)
$$0\mathrm{Hom}(F,F)\mathrm{Hom}(E,F)\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F).$$

If $`\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F)0`$, then we get $`dim\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,E)2`$, which contradicts Corollary 2.6. Hence $`\mathrm{Hom}(F,F)\mathrm{Hom}(E,F)`$. By Lemma 2.4 (2), $`F`$ is simple. Therefore $`\mathrm{Hom}(E,F)=`$. Since the homomorphism

(2.14)
$$\mathrm{Ext}^1(E_iE,E)\mathrm{Ext}^1(E,E)$$

between the Zariski tangent spaces is injective, $`C_iM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$ is a closed immersion, provided that $`C_i\mathrm{}`$.

We next show that $`C_i\mathrm{}`$ and isomorphic to $`^1`$. Since $`(vv_i)^2=2`$, Corollary 2.5 implies that $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$ consists of exactly one $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf $`F`$. By Corollary 2.6 (2), $`\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F)=0`$. Thus $`\mathrm{Ext}^2(F,E_i)=\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F)^{}=0`$. Since $`\mathrm{Hom}(F,E_i)=0`$, we get $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(F,E_i)^2`$. Let $`E`$ be a coherent sheaf which is defined by a non-trivial extension

(2.15)
$$0E_iEF0.$$

By Lemma 2.4 (3), $`E`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable. Therefore $`C_i\mathrm{}`$ and $`C_i^1`$. ∎

###### Proposition 2.9.

We identify $`C_i`$ with its image $`\pi (C_i)`$. Then we have

1. (2.16)
$$\varphi _\alpha ^1(x)=_{i=1}^nC_i$$

and $`_{i=1}^nC_i`$ is a simple normal crossing divisor.
2. $`(C_i,C_j)=v_i,v_j`$. In particular the dual graph of $`C_i`$, $`1in`$ is of type $`A_n,D_n,E_n`$.

###### Proof.

By Proposition 2.8 (1), $`\varphi _\alpha ^1(x)_{i=1}^nC_i`$. Since $`\alpha D`$, we get $`\varphi _\alpha ^1(x)=_{i=1}^nC_i`$. We shall study the configuration of $`C_i`$, $`1in`$. Here we give a geometric argument based on Lemma 2.4. We shall prove the following assertions:

1. $`C_iC_j\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`v_i,v_j=1`$.
2. If $`C_iC_j\mathrm{}`$, then $`\mathrm{\#}(C_iC_j)=1`$.
3. If $`C_iC_j\mathrm{}`$, then $`C_i`$ and $`C_j`$ intersect transversely.
4. $`C_iC_jC_k=\mathrm{}`$ for three curves $`C_i,C_j,C_k`$.

(i) Assume that $`C_iC_j\mathrm{}`$ and take a point $`EC_iC_j`$. Then $`E`$ fits in an exact sequence

(2.17)
$$0E_iE_jEF^{}0$$

By Lemma 2.4 (2), $`F^{}`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf. Since $`\delta (H^{})_{alg}`$ is negative definite, $`2v(F^{})^2<0`$. Thus $`v(F^{})^2=2`$. Then $`2=v(F^{})^2=4+2v(E_i),v(E_j)`$, which implies that $`v(E_i),v(E_j)=1`$. Conversely if $`v(E_i),v(E_j)=1`$, then $`(v(v_i+v_j))^2=2`$. Hence there is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf $`F^{}`$ with $`v(F^{})=v(v_i+v_j)`$. By Lemma 2.4 (1), $`F^{}`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable. By Corollary 2.6 (2), $`\mathrm{Hom}(E_i,F^{})=0`$. Hence $`dim\mathrm{Ext}^1(E_i,F^{})=v_i,v(v_i+v_j)=1`$. We also have $`dim\mathrm{Ext}^1(E_j,F^{})=1`$. We take an extension

(2.18)
$$0E_iE_jEF^{}0$$

whose extension class is given by $`(e_i,e_j)\mathrm{Ext}^1(E_i,F^{})\mathrm{Ext}^1(E_j,F^{})`$, $`e_i,e_j0`$. Then Lemma 2.4 (3) implies that $`E`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf with $`v(E)=v`$. Therefore $`C_i`$ and $`C_j`$ intersect at $`E`$.

(ii) Assume that $`C_iC_j\mathrm{}`$. Then every member of $`C_iC_j`$ fits in an extension (2.18). Since $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(v(v_i+v_j))=\{F^{}\}`$ and $`E`$ does not depend on the choice of $`(e_i,e_j)`$, we get $`\mathrm{\#}(C_iC_j)=1`$.

(iii) Assume that $`C_i`$ and $`C_j`$ intersect at $`E`$. Since $`\mathrm{Hom}(E_iE_j,F^{})=0`$ and $`F^{}`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable, $`\mathrm{Ext}^2(F^{},E)=\mathrm{Hom}(E,F^{})^{}=`$. Then we see that the natural homomorphism

(2.19)
$$\mathrm{Ext}^1(E/E_i,E)\mathrm{Ext}^1(E/E_j,E)\mathrm{Ext}^1(E,E)$$

of tangent spaces is an isomorphism, and hence $`C_i`$ and $`C_j`$ intersect transversely.

(iv) If $`C_iC_jC_k\mathrm{}`$, then $`v_i,v_j=v_j,v_k=v_k,v_i=1`$, which implies that $`(v_i+v_j+v_k)^2=0`$. Since $`\delta (H^{})_{alg}`$ is negative definite, this is impossible.

Therefore $`_iC_i`$ is simple normal crossing and $`(C_i,C_j)=v_i,v_j`$. ∎

###### Lemma 2.10.

Let $`[C_i]H_2(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v),)`$ be the fundamental class of $`C_i`$ and $`\mathrm{PD}([C_i])H^2(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v),)`$ the Poincaré dual of $`[C_i]`$. Then

(2.20)
$$\mathrm{PD}([C_i])=\theta _v^\alpha (v_i).$$

###### Proof.

Let $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)=_\lambda U_\lambda `$ be an analytic open covering and $`_\lambda `$ a local universal family on $`U_\lambda \times X`$. Then $`\mathrm{Hom}_{p_{U_\lambda }}(p_X^{}(E_i),_\lambda )=\mathrm{Ext}_{p_{U_\lambda }}^2(p_X^{}(E_i),_\lambda )=0`$ and $`C_iU_\lambda `$ is the scheme-theoretic support of $`\mathrm{Ext}_{p_{U_\lambda }}^1(p_X^{}(E_i),_\lambda )`$, where $`p_X:U_\lambda \times XX`$ and $`p_{U_\lambda }:U_\lambda \times XU_\lambda `$ are projections. For a sufficiently large integer $`n`$, $`V_\lambda :=p_{U_\lambda }(_\lambda p_X^{}(𝒪_X(nH)))`$ is a locally free sheaf on $`U_\lambda `$. Then we can glue $`\{_\lambda p_{U_\lambda }^{}(V_\lambda ^{})\}`$ together and we get a quasi-universal family $``$ on $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)\times X`$. By using the Grothendieck Riemann-Roch theorem, we get that the Poincaré dual of $`[C_i]`$ is $`\theta _v^\alpha (v_i)`$. ∎

###### Remark 2.1.

By Lemma 2.10, the non-emptyness of $`C_i`$ also follows from the fact that $`\theta _v^\alpha (v_i)0`$. Since $`\theta _v^\alpha `$ is an isometry, the configuration of $`C_i`$ is also described by the configuration of $`v_i`$. In particular, we get a different proof of Proposition 2.9.

Since $`\varphi _\alpha ^1(x)`$ is a union of $`(2)`$-curves, we get the following proposition.

###### Proposition 2.11.

$`\varphi _\alpha :M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ is surjective and $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ contains a $`v`$-twisted stable sheaf.

###### Proof.

Let $`x`$ be a point of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ and assume that $`x`$ corresponds to a properly $`v`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf. Then $`\varphi _\alpha ^1(x)\mathrm{}`$ with $`dim\varphi _\alpha ^1(x)=1`$. Since $`\varphi _\alpha :\varphi _\alpha ^1(M_H^v(v))M_H^v(v)`$ is an isomorphism and $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)M_H^v(v)`$ is a finite set, we get our claims. ∎

The remaining of this section is an appendix.

###### Lemma 2.12.

Assume that $`\alpha D`$, $`|\alpha ^2|1`$ satisfies that

(2.21)
$$v_i,\alpha /\mathrm{rk}v_i>v+\underset{j>0}{}a_jv_j,\alpha /\mathrm{rk}(v+\underset{j>0}{}a_jv_j)$$

for all $`i>0`$. Let $`F`$ be a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf such that $`v(F)=v+_{j>0}b_jv_j`$, $`0b_ja_j`$. Then

1. $`F`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable.
2. Let $`F^{}`$ be a coherent sheaf which fits in a non-trivial extension

(2.22)
$$0E_iF^{}F0$$

and $`b_i+1a_i`$. Then $`F^{}`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable.
3. For a subsheaf $`E_i`$, $`i>0`$ of $`F`$, $`F^{}:=F/E_i`$ is $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable.

###### Proof.

We take $`E`$, $`AK(X)`$ with $`v(E)=v`$, $`v(A)=\alpha `$. Let

(2.23)
$$0=F_0F_1F_2\mathrm{}F_s=F$$

be the Jordan-Hölder filtration of $`F`$ with respect to the $`v`$-twisted stability. For $`F_i/F_{i1}`$ with $`F_i/F_{i1}\{E_0,E_1,\mathrm{},E_n\}`$, a similar argument to the proof of Lemma 2.2 shows that $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(F_i/F_{i1},E_j)=0`$ for all $`j`$. Hence replacing the filtration, we may assume that $`F_i/F_{i1}\{E_0,E_1,\mathrm{},E_n\}`$ for $`0ik`$ and $`F_i/F_{i1}\{E_0,E_1,\mathrm{},E_n\}`$ for $`i>k`$. Then we get $`F=F_kF/F_k`$ and $`2v(F)^2=v(F_k)^2+v(F/F_k)^2`$. Assume that $`F_k0`$, that is, $`k>0`$. Then we see that (i) $`v(F_k)=v`$ and $`v(F/F_k)^2=2`$, or (ii) $`v(F_k)^2=2`$ and $`v(F/F_k)v`$. If $`v(F_k)=v`$, then $`v(F_k),\alpha =0`$ and $`v(F/F_k),\alpha =_jb_jv_j,\alpha >0`$, which contradicts the $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stability of $`F`$. Hence the case (i) does not occur. If the case (ii) occurs, then since $`v(F_k)^2=2`$, we get that $`v(F),v(F_i/F_{i1})=v(F_k),v(F_i/F_{i1})0`$ for some $`ik`$. On the other hand, by our choice of $`v(F)`$, we get $`v(F),v(F_i/F_{i1})=0`$ for all $`ik`$. Hence the case (ii) does not occur. Therefore $`F_k=0`$. Then we see that $`F`$ is $`S`$-equivalent to $`E_0(_{j>0}E_j^{(a_j+b_j)})`$.

Our assumption (2.21) implies that

(2.24)
$$\chi (E+A,E_i)/\mathrm{rk}E_i<\chi (E+A,2EE_0)/\mathrm{rk}(2EE_0).$$

Since $`F=2EE_0_{j>0}c_jE_j`$, $`0c_ja_j`$ as an element of $`K(X)`$, we get that

(2.25)
$$\chi (E+A,2EE_0)/\mathrm{rk}(2EE_0)\chi (E+A,F)/\mathrm{rk}F.$$

In the same way as in the proof of Lemma 2.4 (1), we see that $`F`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable sheaf. Thus (1) holds. The proof of (2) and (3) are the same as in the proof of Lemma 2.4. ∎

###### Remark 2.2.

If $`v_i,\alpha =v_j,\alpha `$ for all $`1i,jn`$, then (2.21) is satisfied.

In the same way as in the proof of Corollary 2.7, we get the following.

###### Corollary 2.13.

Assume that $`\alpha D`$, $`|\alpha ^2|1`$ satisfies (2.21). We set $`w=v+_{j>0}b_jv_j`$, $`0b_ja_j`$.

1. If $`wv`$, then $`\overline{M}_H^{v+\alpha }(w)=M_H^{v+\alpha }(w)`$.
2. If $`w^2=(wv_i)^2=2`$, then we have an isomorphism $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(w)M_H^{v+\alpha }(wv_i)`$ sending $`FM_H^{v+\alpha }(w)`$ to $`\mathrm{coker}(E_iF)`$.

###### Remark 2.3.

Assume that $`\alpha D`$, $`|\alpha ^2|1`$ satisfies (2.21). We note that $`H_2(\varphi _\alpha ^1(x),)H_2(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v),)`$ is injective. We can regard $`H_2(\varphi _\alpha ^1(x),)`$ as the Cartan subalgebra of $`𝔤`$. In order to get $`𝔤`$, we set

(2.26)
$$\mathrm{\Psi }:=\{u|u=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}b_iv_i,u^2=2\}.$$

Let $`P(w,wv_i)`$ be the subscheme of $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(w)\times M_H^{v+\alpha }(wv_i)`$ consisting of pairs $`(E,F)M_H^{v+\alpha }(w)\times M_H^{v+\alpha }(wv_i)`$ which fits in an exact sequence

(2.27)
$$0E_iEF0.$$

Then we can show that $`P(w,wv_i)`$ is isomorphic to $`^1`$ or a point. As in \[Na\], we see that there is an action of $`𝔤`$ on $`H_2(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v),)_{u\mathrm{\Psi }}H_0(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v+u),)`$ and we have an isomorphism of $`𝔤`$-module:

(2.28)
$$H_2(\varphi _\alpha ^1(x),)\underset{u\mathrm{\Psi }}{}H_0(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v+u),)𝔤.$$

For a homology class $`[x]H_{2+w^2}(M_H^{v+\alpha }(w),)`$, the action of Chevalley generators $`e_i,f_i,h_i`$, $`1in`$ are given by

(2.29)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill e_i:[x]& p_{M_H^{v+\alpha }(w+v_i)}((M_H^{v+\alpha }(w+v_i)\times [x])P(w+v_i,w))\hfill \\ \hfill f_i:[x]& (1)^{t(w)}p_{M_H^{v+\alpha }(wv_i)}(([x]\times M_H^{v+\alpha }(wv_i))P(w,wv_i))\hfill \\ \hfill h_i:[x]& w,v_i[x],\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`p_{M_H^{v+\alpha }(w+kv_i)}:M_H^{v+\alpha }(w)\times M_H^{v+\alpha }(wv_i)M_H^{v+\alpha }(w+kv_i)`$, $`k=0,1`$ are projections and $`t(w)=(dimM_H^{v+\alpha }(wv_i)dimM_H^{v+\alpha }(w))/2=(w,v_i+1)`$.

### 2.2. Other chambers

###### Definition 2.1.

Let $`W`$ be the Weyl group generated by reflections $`R_{v_i}`$, $`i=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$.

$`W`$ is the Weyl group of $`𝔤`$. By Lemma 2.10 and Proposition 1.13 (also see Remark 1.2), we get the following.

###### Proposition 2.14.

If $`\alpha w(D)`$, $`wW`$, then $`\mathrm{PD}([C_i])=\theta _v^\alpha (w(v_i))`$.

We shall give a set-theoretic description of $`C_i`$. Let $`M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)=_\lambda U_\lambda `$ be an analytic open covering and $`_\lambda `$ a local universal family on $`U_\lambda \times X`$. If $`\mathrm{rk}(w(v_i))=0`$, then we set $`w(v_i):=\eta +b\rho _X`$, where $`\eta \mathrm{Pic}(X)`$ satisfies $`(\eta ^2)=2`$. Then $`0=\widehat{H},w(v_i)=(H,\eta )`$, which contradicts the ampleness of $`H`$. Hence $`\mathrm{rk}w(v_i)0`$. Let $`F_i`$ be a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`v(F_i)=\pm w(v_i)`$. We first assume that $`\mathrm{rk}(w(v_i))>0`$, that is, $`v(F_i)=w(v_i)`$. Since $`\alpha ,w(v_i)=w^1(\alpha ),v_i>0`$, $`\chi (E+A,F_i)=v+\alpha ,v(F_i)=\alpha ,w(v_i)<0`$. Then $`\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_i,E)=0`$ for all $`EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$. If $`E`$ is $`v`$-twisted stable, then $`\mathrm{Hom}(F_i,E)=0`$. Hence $`L_\lambda :=\mathrm{Ext}_{p_{U_\lambda }}^1(p_X^{}(F_i),_\lambda )`$ is a torsion sheaf of pure dimension 1 whose support is contained in $`\varphi _\alpha ^1(x)`$. By the Grothendieck Riemann-Roch theorem, the Poincaré dual of the scheme-theoretic support of $`L_\lambda `$ is $`\theta _v^\alpha (w(v_i))=\mathrm{PD}([C_i])`$. Since $`H^0(M_H^{v+\alpha }(v),𝒪_{M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)}(C_i))=`$, we get that

(2.30)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill C_i& =\{EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)|\mathrm{Ext}^1(F_i,E)0\}\hfill \\ & =\{EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)|\mathrm{Hom}(F_i,E)0\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

If $`\chi (E+A,F_i)>0`$, that is, $`\mathrm{rk}(w(v_i))<0`$, then we see that $`\mathrm{Hom}(F_i,E)=0`$ for all $`EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$ and $`\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_i,E)=0`$ for a $`v`$-twisted stable sheaf $`E`$. Then we also have $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(F_i,E)=0`$. Hence we see that $`\mathrm{Ext}_{p_{U_\lambda }}^1(p_X^{}(F),_\lambda )=0`$ and $`\mathrm{Ext}_{p_{U_\lambda }}^2(p_X^{}(F),_\lambda )`$ is a torsion sheaf of pure dimension 1. Hence we get that

(2.31)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill C_i& =\{EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)|\mathrm{Ext}^2(F_i,E)0\}\hfill \\ & =\{EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)|\mathrm{Hom}(E,F_i)0\}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Therefore we get the following proposition.

###### Proposition 2.15.

Assume that $`\alpha w(D)`$, $`wW`$. Then $`w(v_i)0`$ for $`1in`$. Let $`F_i`$ be a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`v(F_i)=\pm w(v_i)`$ according as the sign of $`\mathrm{rk}(w(v_i))`$. If $`\mathrm{rk}(w(v_i))>0`$, then

(2.32)
$$C_i=\{EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)|\mathrm{Hom}(F_i,E)0\}.$$

If $`\mathrm{rk}(w(v_i))<0`$, then

(2.33)
$$C_i=\{EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)|\mathrm{Hom}(E,F_i)0\}.$$

### 2.3. Normalness of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$

###### Proposition 2.16.

$`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ is normal.

###### Proof.

We take $`\alpha D`$ with $`|\alpha ^2|1`$. Let $`T`$ be a smooth curve and we consider a flat family of polarized K3 surfaces $`\pi :(𝒳,)T`$ such that

1. $`(𝒳_{t_0},_{t_0})=(X,H)`$, $`t_0T`$,
2. there are families of Mukai vectors $`𝐯R^{}\pi _{}`$, $`𝐚R^{}\pi _{}`$ with $`𝐯_{t_0}=v`$, $`𝐚_{t_0}=\alpha `$ and
3. $`\mathrm{rk}\mathrm{Pic}(𝒳_t)3`$ for a point $`tT`$,

where $`(𝒳_t,_t):=(𝒳k(t),k(t))`$ and $`k(t)`$ is the residue field at $`tT`$. Replacing $`T`$ by a suitable covering of $`T`$, we may assume that there is a section of $`\pi `$ and a locally free sheaf $``$ on $`𝒳`$ with $`v(_t)=𝐯_t`$, $`tT`$. We consider the relative quot-scheme $`Q:=\mathrm{Quot}_{(n)^N/𝒳/T}^𝐯T`$ parametrizing all quotients $`_t(n_t)^NF`$, $`tT`$ with $`v(F)=𝐯_t`$, where $`N:=\chi (F(n_t))`$. We denote the universal quotient sheaf by $``$. We set

(2.34)
$$Q^{ss}:=\{qQ|\text{ }_q:=k(q)\text{ is }𝐯_t\text{-twisted semi-stable with respect to }_t\text{ }\}.$$

For $`n0`$, we have a relative coarse moduli space $`\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^𝐯(𝐯):=Q^{ss}/PGL(N)T`$. Since $`T`$ is defined over a field of characteristic 0, $`\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^𝐯(𝐯)_t=\overline{M}__t^{𝐯_t}(𝐯_t)`$ (cf. \[MFK, Thm. 1.1\]). We also have a relative moduli space $`\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^{𝐯+𝐚}(𝐯)T`$. Replacing $`T`$ by an open subscheme, we may assume that $`\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^{𝐯+𝐚}(𝐯)_t`$ consists of $`𝐯_t+𝐚_t`$-twisted stable sheaves on $`𝒳_t`$ for all $`tT`$ and there is no walls between $`𝐯_t`$ and $`𝐯_t+𝐚_t`$. Then $`\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^{𝐯+𝐚}(𝐯)T`$ is a smooth morphism (\[Mu1, Thm. 1.17\]) and we have a morphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }:\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^{𝐯+𝐚}(𝐯)\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^𝐯(𝐯)`$.

###### Claim 2.1.

$`\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^𝐯(𝐯)`$ is normal.

Proof of Claim 2.1: It is sufficient to show that $`Q^{ss}`$ is normal. By Serre’s criterion, we shall show that $`Q^{ss}`$ is Cohen-Macaulay and $`Q^{ss}`$ is regular in codimension 1. We first prove that $`Q^{ss}`$ is Cohen-Macaulay. Let $`Q^{spl}`$ be the open subscheme of $`Q^{ss}`$ parametrizing simple sheaves:

(2.35)
$$Q^{spl}:=\{qQ^{ss}|\text{ }_q\text{ is simple }\}.$$

Then $`Q^{spl}T`$ is a smooth morphism (\[Mu1, Thm. 1.17\]). By the usual deformation theory of sheaves and Lemma 2.17 below, $`Q_t^{ss}`$ is a locally complete intersection scheme for all $`t`$. In particular $`Q_t^{ss}`$ is Cohen-Macaulay. Since $`Q_t^{ss}`$ is smooth at the generic point, $`Q_t^{ss}`$ is reduced. Let $`x_t`$ be the local parameter of $`T`$ at $`t`$. By Lemma 2.18 below, $`x_t`$ is a regular element, which implies that $`Q^{ss}`$ is flat over $`T`$. Then $`Q^{ss}`$ is also Cohen-Macaulay.

We next show that $`Q^{ss}`$ is regular in codimension 1. It is sufficient to show that $`dim(Q^{ss}Q^{spl})dimQ^{ss}2`$. By Lemma 2.17, $`dim(Q_t^{ss}Q_t^{spl})dim(Q_t^{ss}Q_t^s)dimQ_t^{ss}1`$ for all $`tT`$. For a point $`tT`$ with $`\rho (𝒳_t)3`$, by a direct computation, we see that $`dim(Q_t^{ss}Q_t^{spl})dimQ_t^{ss}2`$. Since $`Q^{spl}`$ is an open subscheme of $`Q^{ss}`$, we get that $`dim(Q^{ss}Q^{spl})dimQ^{ss}2`$. Therefore our claim holds.

Since $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a birational morphism, we get

(2.36)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(𝒪_{\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^{𝐯+𝐚}(𝐯)})=𝒪_{\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^𝐯(𝐯)}.$$

Let $`\phi :\overline{M}_H^v(v)_{nor}\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ be the normalization of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ and $`\varphi _\alpha ^{}:M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)\overline{M}_H^v(v)_{nor}`$ the morphism with $`\phi \varphi _\alpha ^{}=\varphi _\alpha `$. Since $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)_{nor}`$ has at worst rational double points as its singularities, we get $`R^1\varphi _\alpha ^{}𝒪_{M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)}=0`$. Since $`\phi `$ is a finite morphism, by the Leray spectral sequence, we get

(2.37)
$$R^1\varphi _\alpha 𝒪_{M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)}=\phi _{}(R^1\varphi _\alpha ^{}𝒪_{M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)})=0.$$

Since $`\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^{𝐯+𝐚}(𝐯)`$ and $`\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^𝐯(𝐯)`$ are flat over $`T`$, by using the base change theorem, we get

(2.38)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(𝒪_{\overline{M}_{𝒳/T,}^{𝐯+𝐚}(𝐯)})k(t_0)=\varphi _{𝐚_{t_0}}(𝒪_{\overline{M}_{_{t_0}}^{𝐯_{t_0}+𝐚_{t_0}}(𝐯_{t_0})}).$$

Combining this with (2.36), we get $`\varphi _\alpha (𝒪_{M_H^{v+\alpha }(v)})=𝒪_{\overline{M}_H^v(v)}`$, which implies that $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ is normal. ∎

###### Lemma 2.17.

We set

(2.39)
$$Q_t^s:=\{qQ_t^{ss}|\text{ }_q\text{ is }𝐯_t+𝐚_t\text{-twisted semi-stable}\}.$$

Then $`dim_{Q_t^{ss}}(Q_t^{ss}Q_t^s)=dimQ_t^s1`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`0F_1F_2\mathrm{}F_s=_q`$ be the Harder-Narasimhan filtration of $`_q`$ with respect to the $`𝐯_t+𝐚_t`$-twisted semi-stability. We set $`v_i:=v(F_i/F_{i1})`$. Then $`\widehat{H},v_i=v,v_i=0`$ and $`v_i^2=2(\mathrm{rk}v_i)^2`$. We shall compute the dimension of an open subscheme of the flag-scheme $`F(v_1,v_2,\mathrm{},v_s)`$ over $`T`$ parametrizing filtrations $`0F_1F_2\mathrm{}F_s=_q`$, $`qQ_t^{ss}`$ such that $`F_i/F_{i1}`$, $`1is`$ are $`𝐯_t+𝐚_t`$-twisted semi-stable sheaves with $`v(F_i/F_{i1})=v_i`$. By the arguments in \[Y3, sect. 3.3\], we get

(2.40)
$$dimF(v_1,v_2,\mathrm{},v_s)dimGL(N)=\underset{i>j}{}v_i,v_j+\underset{i}{}((\mathrm{rk}v_i)^2).$$

By the equality

(2.41)
$$2\underset{i>j}{}v_i,v_j+2\underset{i}{}((\mathrm{rk}v_i)^2)=\underset{ij}{}v_i,v_j+\underset{i}{}v_i^2=v^2=0,$$

we get $`dimF(v_1,v_2,\mathrm{},v_s)dimPGL(N)=1`$. Hence our claim holds. ∎

###### Lemma 2.18.

Let $`(A,𝔪)`$ and $`(B,𝔫)`$ be Noetherian local rings and $`f:AB`$ a local homomorphism. Let $`x𝔪`$ be a non-zero divisor of $`A`$ satisfying

1. $`xB=𝔭_1𝔭_2\mathrm{}𝔭_n`$ for some prime divisors $`𝔭_1,𝔭_2,\mathrm{},𝔭_n`$ of $`B`$, that is, $`B/xB`$ is reduced,
2. $`B_{𝔭_i}`$, $`1in`$ are flat over $`A`$.

Then $`x`$ is also a non-zero divisor of $`B`$.

###### Proof.

We set

(2.42)
$$K:=\{aB|\text{ }x^na=0\text{ for some positive integer }n\text{ }\}.$$

$`K`$ is an ideal of $`B`$ and

(2.43)
$$\{aB|xaK\}=K.$$

We shall prove that $`K=0`$. By (ii), $`K_{𝔭_i}=0`$ for all $`i`$. Since $`(K+xB)/xB`$ is a sub $`B`$-module of $`B/xB`$ and $`B/xB`$ is reduced, we get that $`(K+xB)/xB=0`$. By (2.43), $`K=xK`$. By Nakayama’s lemma, we get $`K=0`$. ∎

## 3. Examples

In this section, we shall give some examples of $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ with one singular point. Let $`L:=(E_8)^2U^3`$ be the K3 lattice, where $`U`$ is the hyperbolic lattice.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Let $`N`$ be an even lattice of signature $`(1,s)`$ which has a primitive embedding $`NL`$. We set $`\mathrm{\Delta }(N):=\{CN|(C^2)=2\}`$. Assume that there is a primitive element $`H`$ such that $`(H^2)>0`$ and $`(H,C)0`$ for all $`C\mathrm{\Delta }(N)`$. Then there is a K3 surface $`X`$ and an isometry $`f:LH^2(X,)`$ such that $`f(N)=\mathrm{Pic}(X)`$ and $`f(H)`$ is ample.

###### Proof.

By the surjectivity of the period map, there is a K3 surface $`X`$ such that $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)=N`$. We set $`\mathrm{\Delta }(X)^+:=\{C\mathrm{Pic}(X)|\text{ }C\text{ is a }(2)\text{-curve}\}`$. By the Picard-Lefschetz reflections, we can find a Hodge isomotry $`\varphi :H^2(X,)H^2(X,)`$ such that $`(\varphi (f(H)),C)>0`$ for all $`C\mathrm{\Delta }(X)^+`$. Replacing $`f`$ by $`\varphi f`$, we can choose $`f(H)`$ to be ample. ∎

###### Lemma 3.2.

Let $`(a_{i,j})_{i,j=0}^n`$ be a Cartan matrix of affine type $`\stackrel{~}{A}_n,\stackrel{~}{D}_n,\stackrel{~}{E}_n`$. Let $`N_1:=((_{i=0}^n\beta _i)\sigma ,(,))`$ be a lattice such that $`(\sigma ^2)=0`$, $`(\sigma ,\beta _0)=1`$, $`(\sigma ,\beta _i)=0`$, $`i>0`$ and $`(\beta _i,\beta _j)=a_{i,j}`$. Assume that there is a primitive embedding $`N_1L`$. Then there is a positive integer $`d`$ and a primitive sublattice $`N:=(_{i=0}^n\xi _i,(,))`$ of $`L`$ such that $`(\xi _i,\xi _j)=a_{i,j}+2d`$.

###### Proof.

Since the signature of $`N_1`$ is $`(1,n+1)`$, there is a vector $`xN_1^{}`$ such that $`2d:=(x^2)>0`$. We set $`\xi _i:=\beta _i+x`$. Then $`_{i=0}^n\xi _i`$ is a primitive sublattice of $`L`$ with $`(\xi _i,\xi _j)=(\beta _i,\beta _j)+(x^2)=a_{i,j}+2d`$. ∎

###### Remark 3.1.

For $`\stackrel{~}{A}_n,\stackrel{~}{D}_n`$, $`n18`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{E}_n`$, there is a primitive sublattice $`N_1`$ of $`L`$ (cf. \[S-N\]).

Let $`C=(a_{i,j})_{i,j=0}^n`$ be a Cartan matrix of affine type $`\stackrel{~}{A}_n,\stackrel{~}{D}_n,\stackrel{~}{E}_n`$ and $`Q:=(_{i=0}^n\alpha _i,(,))`$ the associated root lattice, that is, $`(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)=a_{i,j}`$. Then there is a vector $`\delta :=_{i=0}^na_i\alpha _i`$, $`a_i`$ such that

(3.1)
$$Q^{}:=\{xQ|\text{ }(x,y)=0\text{ for all }yQ\text{ }\}=\delta .$$

By the classification of the Cartan matrix of affine type, we may assume that $`a_0=1`$.

Let $`N:=(_{i=0}^n\xi _i,(,))`$ be a primitive sublattice of $`L`$ (Lemma 3.2) such that

(3.2)
$$(\xi _i,\xi _j)=a_{ij}+2ra,$$

where $`r`$ and $`a`$ are positive integers with $`d=ra`$. We set

(3.3)
$$H:=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}a_i\xi _i.$$

###### Lemma 3.3.

1. $`(H,\xi _j)=2ra(_{i=0}^na_i)`$ for all $`j`$. In particular, $`(H^2)=2ra(_{i=0}^na_i)^2>0`$.
2. $`H^{}:=\{\xi N|(H,\xi )=0\}`$ is negative definite and $`H^{}\mathrm{\Delta }(N)=\mathrm{}`$.

###### Proof.

By (3.1), $`_{i=0}^na_ia_{i,j}=0`$ for all $`j`$. Then we see that

(3.4)
$$(H,\xi _j)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}a_i(\xi _i,\xi _j)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}a_i(a_{ij}+2ra)=2ra(\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}a_i)$$

for all $`j`$. Thus the claim (1) holds. We next show the claim (2). By (3.4), we see that

(3.5)
$$H^{}=\{\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}d_i\xi _i|d_i,\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}d_i=0\}=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n1}{}}(\xi _i\xi _{i+1}).$$

We define a homomorphism

(3.6)
$$\phi :H^{}Q=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}\alpha _i$$

by sending $`\xi _i\xi _{i+1}H^{}`$ to $`\alpha _i\alpha _{i+1}Q`$. Obviously $`\phi `$ is injective and

(3.7)
$$\mathrm{im}\phi =\underset{i=0}{\overset{n1}{}}(\alpha _i\alpha _{i+1})=\{\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}d_i\alpha _i|d_i,\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}d_i=0\}.$$

By (3.2), we see that

(3.8)
$$(\xi _i\xi _{i+1},\xi _j\xi _{j+1})=(\alpha _i\alpha _{i+1},\alpha _j\alpha _{j+1}).$$

Hence $`\phi `$ changes the sign of the bilinear forms. In order to prove our claim, it is sufficient to show the following assertions:

1. $`\mathrm{im}\phi `$ is positive definite.
2. There is no vector $`x\mathrm{im}\phi `$ with $`(x^2)=2`$.

By (3.7), $`\delta `$ does not belong to $`\mathrm{im}\phi `$, which implies that $`\mathrm{im}\phi `$ is positive definite. We next prove the claim (b). Since $`a_0=1`$, we can take $`\{\delta ,\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\mathrm{},\alpha _n\}`$ as a $``$-basis of $`Q`$. Let $`𝔤`$ be the finite simple Lie algebra whose root lattice is $`_{i=1}^n\alpha _i`$. Assume that an element $`x=l\delta +_{i=1}^nm_i\alpha _i`$, $`l,m_i`$ satisfies that $`(x^2)=2`$. Then $`_{i=1}^nm_i\alpha _i`$ becomes a root of $`𝔤`$. Hence $`m_i0`$ for all $`i`$, or $`m_i0`$ for all $`i`$. Since $`\theta :=_{i=1}^na_i\alpha _i`$ is the highest root of $`𝔤`$, $`_{i=0}^na_i>|_{i=1}^nm_i|`$, and hence we get $`l(_{i=0}^na_i)+_{i=1}^nm_i0`$. Thus $`x`$ does not belong to $`\mathrm{im}\phi `$. ∎

Applying Lemma 3.1 to the lattice $`N`$ (see (3.2)), we see that there is a polarized K3 surface $`(X,H)`$ such that the Picard lattice of $`X`$ is $`N`$ with $`H=_{i=0}^na_i\xi `$. We set

(3.9)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill v_i:=& r+\xi _i+a\rho _X,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}in,\hfill \\ \hfill v:=& \underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}a_iv_i.\hfill \end{array}$$

Then we get that

(3.10)
$$\{\begin{array}{cc}v_i,v_j=a_{ij}\hfill & \\ v,v_j=0\hfill & \\ \widehat{H},v_j=0.\hfill & \end{array}$$

Let $`E_i`$ be a $`v`$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`v(E_i)=v_i`$ (Proposition 1.2). If $`E_i`$ is properly $`v`$-twisted semi-stable, then $`\mathrm{rk}\mathrm{Pic}(X)>\mathrm{rk}N`$, which is a contradiction. Hence $`E_i`$ is $`v`$-twisted stable for all $`i`$. Thus $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ has a rational double point of type $`(a_{i,j})_{i,j=1}^n`$. In particular, Remark 3.1 implies that there is a moduli space $`\overline{M}_H^v(v)`$ which has a rational double point of type $`A_n,D_n`$, $`n18`$, or $`E_n`$.

## 4. Appendix

Finally we treat the wall crossing phenomenon under a wall $`W_u`$ with $`u𝒰𝒰^{}`$. Assume that $`\alpha `$ belongs to exactly one wall $`W_u`$. Let $`F`$ be a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted semi-stable sheaf with $`v(F)=u`$. By our assumption, $`F`$ must be $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable. We set $`\alpha ^\pm :=\pm ϵv+\alpha `$. We consider the Fourier-Mukai transform $`_{}`$ in (1.18). Then we see that $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(F,E)=0`$ for $`EM_H^{v+\alpha }(v)`$: Indeed, if $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(F,E)0`$, then we have a non-trivial extension $`0EGF0`$ and we see that $`G`$ is a $`v+\alpha `$-twisted stable. On the other hand, $`v(G)^2<2`$, which is a contradiction. Hence $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(F,E)=0`$. Then, we have an isomorphism

(4.1)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}M_H^{v+\alpha ^{}}(v)& & M_H^{v+\alpha ^{}}(v^{})\\ E& & _{}^1(E),\end{array}$$

where $`v^{}=R_{v(F)}(v)`$. We also have an isomorphsim

(4.2)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}M_H^{v+\alpha ^+}(v^{})& & M_H^{v+\alpha ^+}(v)\\ E& & _{}^1(E).\end{array}$$

Since $`\alpha `$ belongs to exactly one wall, we get that $`M_H^{v+\alpha ^{}}(v^{})=M_H^{v+\alpha }(v^{})=M_H^{v+\alpha ^+}(v^{})`$. Therefore we get an isomorphism $`M_H^{v+\alpha ^{}}(v)M_H^{v+\alpha ^+}(v)`$ and under this identification, we get $`\theta _v^\alpha ^{}=\theta _v^{\alpha ^+}`$.