A note on Fourier-Mukai partners of abelian varieties over positive characteristic fields
Abstract.
Over complex numbers, the Fourier-Mukai partners of abelian varieties are well-understood. A celebrated result is Orlov’s derived Torelli theorem. In this note, we study the FM-partners of abelian varieties in positive characteristic. We notice that, in odd characteristics, two abelian varieties of odd dimension are derived equivalent if their associated Kummer stacks are derived equivalent, which is Krug and Sosna’s result over complex numbers. For abelian surfaces in odd characteristic, we show that two abelian surfaces are derived equivalent if and only if their associated Kummer surfaces are isomorphic. This extends the result [7] to odd characteristic fields, which solved a classical problem originally from Shioda. Furthermore, we establish the derived Torelli theorem for supersingular abelian varieties and apply it to characterize the quasi-liftable birational models of supersingular generalized Kummer varieties.
Key words and phrases:
Fourier-Mukai partner, abelian variety, derived Torelli Theorem, Kummer variety2021 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 14F08; Secondary 14K051. Introduction
Let be an abelian variety over an algebraically closed field . It is desirable to have a description of the derived category of via its associated Kummer stack , where acts on by the involution . When is an abelian surface, the singular Kummer variety admits a crepant resolution, denoted by . A classical problem raised by Shioda is
Question 1.1 ([23]).
For two abelian surfaces and , if , then can we conclude that ?
Over complex numbers, Question 1.1 was solved in [7, 18]: two abelian surfaces have isomorphic Kummer surfaces if and only if they are derived equivalent. Their proof relies on the use of Hodge theory and global Torelli theorem for abelian surfaces, which are missing in positive characteristic fields. More generally, Stellari has investigated this problem for abelian varieties of arbitrary dimension in [26].
In this paper, we are interested in above questions over positive characteristic fields. In particular, we would like to extend the result of [7] and [26] to fields with odd characteristic. The following result gives an answer of Shioda’s question over positive characteristic fields.
Theorem 1.2.
Assume . Let and be abelian varieties of dimension over . Then the following holds:
-
(i)
If is derived equivalent to , then Kummer stack is derived equivalent to .
-
(ii)
If is odd, then the converse of (i) holds.
-
(iii)
If , then and are derived equivalent if and only if . If is supersingular, then is derived equivalent to if and only if .
The statements (i) and (ii) will be proved with techniques around equivariant derived categories, which is already known in [9, 20] with . In the same way, we will generalize them to the case that .
The proof of statement (iii) will be divided into two cases.
-
•
For the finite height case, we can prove a lifting theorem for Kummer structures (see §3.3). Then the specialization argument of derived equivalences will imply this statement.
-
•
For the supersingular case, it can be concluded by supersingular Torelli theorem for abelian varieties (see §4.2).
Notice that Theorem 1.2 shows that supersingular abelian surfaces do not have any non-trivial Fourier-Mukai partners. We expect that there is a similar characterization for higher dimension supersingular abelian varieties.
As an application, we can characterize the quasi-liftably birational class (cf. [6, Definition 3.3]) of irreducible symplectic varieties which come from the moduli space of sheaves on supersingular abelian surfaces. Consider the moduli space of Gieseker-Maruyama -stable sheaves on with Mukai vector such that , denoted by . Recall that the fiber of the Albanese morphism
is an irreducible symplectic variety of dimension in the sense of loc.cit. . A consequence in loc.cit. asserts that the generalized Kummer type variety is quasi-liftably birational to some generalized Kummer variety , where is a Fourier-Mukai partner of . Here we verify that .
Theorem 1.3.
Let . Suppose that and . Let be a supersingular abelian surface and let be the generalized Kummer type variety. Then
-
(i)
is quasi-liftably birational equivalent to .
-
(ii)
if is quasi-liftably birational to for some abelian surface and , then .
Acknowledgement: We are grateful to Lie Fu for helpful discussions and comments. We also want to thank the referee for several useful comments. The authors are supported by NKRD Program of China (No. 2020YFA0713200), NSFC General Program (No. 11771086) and Shanghai Pilot Program for Basic Research (No. 21TQ00).
2. Equivariant derived category of schemes
2.1. Equivariant quasi-coherent sheaves
Let be a constant finite group scheme over and let be a quasi-compact and quasi-separated scheme over a field with a -action
A -equivariant quasi-coherent sheaf on is a pair such that is a quasi-coherent sheaf on and is a family of isomorphisms satisfying the following cocycle condition:
| (2.1.1) |
We call a -linearization of . For instance, is a -equivariant quasi-coherent sheaf. In this paper, we denote by the category of -equivariant quasi-coherent -modules.
Remark 2.1.
If the cocyle condition (2.1.1) for is missing, then will be called -invariant.
Let be the quotient stack given by the -action on and denote by the category of quasi-coherent sheaves on (cf. [15, §9]). There is a well-known stacky description for -equivariant quasi-coherent sheaves on as follows.
Lemma 2.2.
There is a canonical equivalence of categories
Moreover, if is locally noetherian, then we also have .
Proof.
Assume that is locally noetherian. Consider the functor
where is the sheaf on defined as follows. For any object
lying on a -scheme , the pull-back is a -equivariant quasi-coherent sheaf on as is -equivariant. The descent theory along -torsor for the stack of quasi-coherent sheaves establishes a canonical equivalence:
| (2.1.2) |
see [27, Theorem 4.46] for example. Take to be one in the isomorphism class in corresponding to . It remains to show that is quasi-coherent (resp. coherent).
Consider the smooth covering where is the trivial torsor on defined by and is the group action of on . Since the is an isomorphism
we can see by the previous construction, which is quasi-coherent (resp. coherent). Thus by [15, Proposition 9.1.15], we can see is quasi-coherent (resp. coherent).
The converse is similar. We just take to be the quasi-coherent sheaf (resp. coherent sheaf) . The linearization is from the definiton of quasi-coherent sheaves (resp. coherent sheaves) on . ∎
The Lemma 2.2 implies that the category is a Grothendieck category (cf. [25, Tag 0781]). This promises a nice homological algebraic theory on -equivariant quasi-coherent sheaves. In the following literature, the -equivariant derived category of means the bounded derived category of , denoted by . A useful fact for -equivariant derived category is the derived McKay correspondence established by Bridgeland–King–Reid [3]. The restriction of the Hilbert–Chow morphism gives a morphism
under the natural inclusion .
Theorem 2.3 (Bridgeland–King–Reid).
Assume that . Suppose the following two conditions hold
-
(BKR1)
is locally trivial as a -bundle,
-
(BKR2)
has dimension .
Then there is a derived equivalence between and .
Proof.
The original proof in loc.cit. is for . However, this also proceeds for general case that (cf. [4, Theorem 2.4.5]). ∎
Corollary 2.4.
Suppose . Let be an abelian surface over . Let be the involution on and the finite group scheme over generated by . Then .
Proof.
We can view as the closure of the subset of reduced -clusters in the Hilbert scheme of two points on . In this case (BKR2) is satisfied and the canonical sheaf is trivial as an -bundle. Thus Theorem 2.3 implies that there is a Fourier-Mukai transform
as . ∎
Let us recall some general duality theorem for the -equivariant derived category. The -action on also induces -action on the triangulated category . Thus we can also consider the -equivariant category (cf. [5, §2]). Under the assumption that , we have an exact equivalence
| (2.1.3) |
by loc.cit. Theorem 7.1. Therefore, we will not distinguish and in the rest of the paper if acts on and .
Let be the character group of . There exists an induced -action on the -equivariant derived category as follows. For each , one can define a line bundle on twisted by as
The action of on is given by tensoring .
Definition 2.5.
For any -equivariant object in , the -action on a is given by twisting the linearization:
This gives a -action on the triangulated categories .
Consider the identification .
Proposition 2.6 (A. Elagin).
Assume is noetherian. There are exact equivalences
Proof.
Remark 2.7.
With the same notations in Corollary 2.4, we have , where is the character dual to , acting naturally on .
Corollary 2.8.
If , then . In particular, if is an abelian surface, then . ∎
3. Lifting of derived equivalences
3.1. Equivariant derived equivalences
In this part, we will recollect some preliminary facts on lifting theory and descent theory of equivariant equivalences in [9, 20] and extend them to all algebraically closed fields. With the notations as in §2, we will always assume the order of is coprime to . Let and be two projective -schemes or quotient stacks equipped with actions. Let be an exact functor.
Definition 3.1.
An exact functor is called a descent of if it fits into the following 2-commutative diagrams
where are structure morphisms of quotients. We may also call a lift of .
Remark 3.2.
Consider the -linear triangluated category . The non-trivial line bundles on induce a natural -action on by taking tensor product (cf. Definition 2.5). This leads to the following definition.
Definition 3.3.
Let and be two -linear triangulated categories with and actions respectively. Let be a group isomorphism. An exact functor is called -twisted equivariant if
When , the will be called -equivariant for simplicity. If a descent of is -equivariant as an exact functor, then it will be called a -equivariant descent of .
The following examples of equivariant functors is the most frequently used throughout this paper. Let be an abstract group isomorphism, then there is an action of on (or ) by
For instance, if , then this action is just the diagonal action of . The -equivariant derived category of under the action given by is denoted by . If there is an object in such that
then is a -twisted -equivariant exact functor. A -twisted -equivariant functor of this form is called integral and will be denoted by , where the object is called its kernel. In this case, we can forget the linearization of the kernel , which will defines an integral functor
It is not hard to check that is a lift of .
A well-known fact is that a -equivariant descent of a Fourier-Mukai transform is still an exact equivalence (cf. [9, Proposition 3.10] or [20, Lemma 5]).
Proposition 3.4.
Let be a -equivariant object in for some abstract isomorphism . If is an exact equivalence, then the integral functor
will also be an exact equivalence.
The proof in loc.cit. also works for any algebraically closed field such that . We sketch it here for reader’s convenience.
Proof.
Take the kernel of right adjoint inverse of :
It admits a natural -lineaization induced by . Denote by . Note that the pull-back functor is just the forgetful functor of linearization. Therefore . On the other hand, we have in . Via computing the cohomology of , we can show that the set of linearizations of forms a principal homogeneous space under the action of (cf. [20, Lemma 1]). In particular, since admits the trivial linearization, the set of its linearizations is equal to . It means that there is some such that . Since tensoring line bundles will induce a derived equivalence, we can conclude that is an exact equivalence. ∎
Suppose is a cyclic group. Then by a direct computation. This implies that any Fourier-Mukai kernel (resp. ) admits a -linearization (resp. -linearization). Now we can lift a -equivariant derived equivalence along cyclic Galois coverings, i.e. morphisms of smooth -stacks 111The quotient here is in stack-theoretical sense (cf. [22])..
Corollary 3.5 ([9, Proposition 4.3]).
Let and be two cyclic Galois coverings. Suppose that there is an isomorphism . Then any -twisted equivariant Fourier-Mukai transform
lifts to a derived equivalence
∎
3.2. Proof of Theorem 1.2 (i) and (ii)
Proposition 3.6 (Proposition 3.1, [26]).
If there is a Fourier-Mukai transform
then .
Proof.
We repeat Stellari’s proof for this statement here. Let be the abstract isomorphism . Let be the generator of . Let be the translation of a point on . As , by [19, Corollary 3.4], we have
for some , line bundle .
It is well-known that the Fourier-Mukai kernel is isomorphic to for some semi-homogeneous sheaf on , which implies
for some . Thus , where . As is divisible, we can find a line bundle on such that . Let . We can see
| (3.2.1) |
On the other hand, since is obtained from by tensoring line bundles, it also induces a Fourier-Mukai transform from to . The isomorphism (3.2.1) ensures that is -invariant, which also implies admits a linearization as . Therefore by Proposition 3.4. ∎
Krug and Sosna proved the converse direction for odd dimensional abelian varieties (cf. [9, Proposition 5.13]). Their statement there is over , while we extend it to algebraically closed fields in positive characteristic.
Proposition 3.7.
Let and are two abelian varieties in dimension , . Any Fourier-Mukai transform between Kummer stacks
has a lift
Proof.
The stack has non-trivial torsion canonical bundle when is odd (cf. [9]). Let . We can take the abstract isomorphism , whose actions are given by tensoring. Notice that is just the shift of Serre functor on . Therefore is -twisted equivariant as Serre functor commutes with all Fourier-Mukai transforms. Thus any can be lifted to an exact equivalence by the Corollary 3.5. ∎
This proves Theorem 1.2 (ii).
Remark 3.8.
We wonder if the Kummer stacks will imply or not. The same question can be asked for two pairs and satisfying (BKR1) and (BKR2) such that their quotients have isomorphic crepant resolution.
3.3. Lifting Kummer structures
To prove the Theorem (iii), we need to use the lifting of Kummer surfaces. A technical lemma is
Lemma 3.9.
Let be a K3 surface over . Suppose is a relative K3 surface, lifting to some finite extension of the ring of Witt vectors , such that the specialization map is an isomorphism
| (3.3.1) |
For any abelian surface satisfying , there is an abelian scheme over such that and .
Proof.
We may follow the idea of [24, Proposition 1.1] to prove the existence of the lifting. Let be the exceptional curve on with respect to the -torsion point . It has a unique Cartier divisor extension by the construction. Moreover, the divisor
is -divisible as is equal to the extension of via (3.3.1). Therefore, we have a double covering of -schemes
which is branched along . We can contract the curves lying over to points:
where is a smooth proper scheme over . Thus we can see is the required abelian scheme since where is the involution of induced by the double covering . ∎
3.4. Derived Torellli theorem and specialization
Let and be two abelian varieties. Consider the set of symplectic isomorphisms
Let be the set of exact equivalences from to . Then the derived Torelli theorem for abelian varieties asserts
Theorem 3.10 (Orlov–Polishchuk).
The following lemma shows that derived equivalence is preserved under smooth specialization.
Lemma 3.11.
For two abelian schemes and over , any derived equivalence has a specialization , which is also a derived equivalence.
Proof.
It is known that any derived equivalence induces a symplectic isomorphism . By using the Matsusaka-Mumford theorem (cf. [13, Chapter I. Corollary 1]), can be extended to an isomorphism such that the restriction is a specialization of . On the other hand, we can also take the specialization of . As . The graph of is the diagonal of . Thus the specialization is also a symplectic isomorphism. Hence the derived equivalence is from Theorem 3.10. ∎
3.5. Proof of Theorem 1.2 (iii): finite height case
Given two abelian surfaces and , if there is an exact derived equivalence , then we have by Proposition 3.6. Then we have
because the Kummer surface does not have non-trivial Fourier-Mukai partners (cf. [12, Theorem 1.1]).
Recall that an abelian surface is called of finite height if it is not supersingular. Assume that and are of finite heights. In this case, if is a Kummer surface isomorphic to , then is a K3 surface with finite height. There is a Néron-Severi lattice preserving lifting of over some (cf. [11, Corollary 4.2]). By Lemma 3.9, there exist relative abelian surfaces and over such that
Due to [7, Theorem 0.1 (1)], the generic fibers of and are geometrically derived equivalent. By using the standard spreading out argument and [19, Lemma 2.12], we can find a finite extension of such that , where is the fraction field of . The assertion follows from Lemma 3.11.
4. Supersingular derived Torelli theorem
In this section, we will focus on derived categories of supersingular abelian varieties. There is a cohomological realization of the derived Torelli theorem for supersingular abelian varieties using supersingular abelian crystals and supersingular K3 crystals.
Throughout the rest part, we fix an algebraically closed field in characteristic . We also denote for the ring of Witt vectors of and for the Frobenius morphism.
4.1. Abelian crystals and K3 crystals
For supersingular abelian varieties, we can give a cohomological realization of Theorem 3.10 via Ogus’ supersingular Torelli theorem ([14]).
Let be an abelian variety of dimension over . Recall that is supersingular if the crystalline cohomology is purely of slope as a weight one -crystal with natural Frobenius. Over an algebraically closed field, it is also equivalent to say that is isogenous to a -fold product of supersingular elliptic curves (cf. [16, Theorem (4.2)]).
Definition 4.1.
An abelian crystal of genus is a -crystal of rank endowed with an isomorphism between -crystals , whose Hodge numbers of Hodge polygon are both equal to . The isomorphism is called the trace of abelian crystal .
As its name indicates, for a -dimensional abelian variety , the -crystal is an example of abelian crystal. The trace map of is given by
Here the first isomorphism is coming from the multiplication of and the cup-product of its crystalline cohomology.
The crystalline Torelli theorem of supersingular abelian varieties states that, for any integer , there is a bijection
| (4.1.1) |
See [14, Theorem 6.2].
The second crystalline cohomology of an abelian surface is also equipped with a structure called K3-crystal which is defined as follows.
Definition 4.2.
We say a -crystal is K3-crystal with rank , if there is a symmetric bilinear form on , satisfying:
-
(i)
is of weight , that means ;
-
(ii)
the Hodge number , that means is of rank 1;
-
(iii)
is perfect;
-
(iv)
for any .
Inside a K3-crystal , there is a natural -lattice defined as
equipped with bilinear form induced from . A K3-crystal is called supersinguar if it is purely of slope 1. If is supersingular of rank , then its Tate module is a free -module of rank , which comes from the definition of pure of slope . Its discriminant is equal to for some integer , which is called the Artin invariant of .
Let be an abelian surface over . Then is naturally endowed with a K3-crystal structure. Consider the canonical isomorphism
one can see that is supersingular if and only if is supersingular as a K3-crystal. An important observation due to Ogus is that the functor forms an equivalence from the category of supersingular abelian crystals of genus 2 to the category of supersingular K3 crystals of rank 6 (cf. [14, Proposition 6.9]). Thus the crystalline Torelli theorem for supersingular abelian surfaces can be rephrased in terms of K3-crystals, that means two supersingular abelian surfaces and are isomorphic if and only if
Remark 4.3.
This also implies that any supersingular abelian surface is principal polarized, since there is a natural isomorphism of K3-crystals . This can also deduced from the classification of Néron-Severi lattices of supersingular abelian surfaces (cf. [6, Lemma 6.2]).
One can characterize -crystals via the characteristic space. Let be a supersingular K3 crystal with Artin invariant . We have the an orthogonal decomposition (not unique!) for its Tate module:
| (4.1.2) |
such that is of rank , and are both perfect, since the cokernel of is killed by . The kernel
forms a -dimensional -vector space which is totally isotropic with respect ot and it is isomorphic to the image of
It also forms a strictly characteristic subspace of (cf. [14, Definition 3.19] for the definition and loc.cit. Remark 3.16 for the explanation). Let , which is another strictly characteristic subspace of . We also call it the characteristic space of the -crystal .
The classification of -crystals (see [14, Theorem 3.20]) asserts that
Theorem 4.4 (Ogus).
For two supersingular -crystals and of the same rank, if and only if there is an isomorphism of pairs .
4.2. Supersingular derived Torelli theorem
Let be the Poincaré line bundle on associated to the polarization . There is a canonical isomorphism between Dieudonné modules:
| (4.2.1) |
which corresponds to the first crystalline Chern class
see [1, Théorèm 5.1.2]. We have a natural quadratic form on the -crystal :
With abelian crystals, we are able to provide a cohomological description of Theorem 3.10 for supersingular abelian varieties.
It is clear that any symplectic isomorphism will induce an isomorphism of abelian crystals
by taking Künneth decomposition.
Conversely, we can write the isomorphism into a -matrix
in which are all morphisms between -crystals. Then being isometry in terms of the quadratic form is equivalent to satisfying matrix equation
It implies that
Now suppose or is supersingular. By Ogus’s crystalline Torelli theorem for supersinsgular abelian varieties (cf. [14, Theorem 6.2]), we can find an isomorphism such that . It also satisfies if we rewrite into the following matrix form uniquely:
Note that
by the identification . Thus we have
Thus . Therefore, we have the following
Proposition 4.5.
For arbitrary supersingular abelian varieties and over , the following statements are equivalent.
-
(i)
.
-
(ii)
There is a isometry of abelian crystals
with respect to .
For supersingular abelian surfaces, we have the following consequence via K3-crystals.
Theorem 4.6.
Let and be two supersingular abelian surfaces over . Then if and only if .
Proof.
It is clear that when then if they are derived equivalent. The given derived equivalence induces an isometry between K3 crystals , where
is the Mukai K3-crystal of equipped with the Mukai pairing. Since (cf. [14, (1.6)]), we have
Therefore, the characteristic subspace of is equal to
which is isomorphic to the characteristic subspace of . Let
be decomposition of -lattice as in (4.1.2). Then there is a decomposition of the Tate module of :
where the second inner product is from the restriction of Mukai pairing. Therefore
which implies an isomorphism between K3-crystals:
Then the isomorphism follows from the crystalline Torelli theorem. ∎
Now we can give a summary of the known equivalence relations between supersingular abelian surfaces.
Corollary 4.7.
Let be two abelian surfaces. If is supersingular, then the following statements are equivalent:
-
(a)
There is an isomorphism ;
-
(b)
There is an isomorphism between K3-crystals ;
-
(c)
There is an isomorphism between Kummer surfaces ;
-
(d)
There is a derived equivalence ;
-
(e)
There is a derived equivalence .
Proof.
We firstly note that the supersingularity is invariant under the relations listed in the statements. Hence is supersingular in each statement.
Therefore, the statement (iii) in Theorem 1.2 is true for supersingular abelian surfaces.
Remark 4.8.
We suspect whether every supersingular abelian variety has only trivial (in the strong sense) Fourier-Mukai partners, i.e. . This requires that admits a principal polarization, which holds if (cf. Remark 4.3). But it may fail in higher dimensional case. See [10, §10] for the discussion of non-principal polarizations on supersingular abelian varieties of any genus. It will be very interesting to know if .
4.3. Proof of Theorem 1.3
We can see there is a quasi-liftably birational map
| (4.3.1) |
with , and some (supersingular) abelian surface derived equivalent to (cf. [6, Theorem 6.12]). Then (i) follows from the fact does not have non-trivial Fourier-Mukai partners (cf. 4.7).
To prove (ii), our strategy is to endow with a natural222Here the “natural” means the structure should be at least functorial with respect to algebraic correpsondences. K3-crystal structure, which is closely related to that of . Combining the algebraic correspondence given by the birational map (4.3.1), one can show that there is an isomorphism between K3-crystals of and . In fact,
Lemma 4.9.
Assume that .
-
(i)
For any abelian surface and positive integer , we can endow the -crystal with the Beauville-Bogomolov form , which makes a K3 crystal of rank 7.
-
(ii)
There is an orthogonal decomposition with respect to :
(4.3.2)
Proof.
Let be a lifting of abelian surface to the Witt vector ring , which is an abelian scheme over (cf. [17, (11.1)]). Consider the summation of points . The fiber of at the origin point is a lifting of generalized Kummer variety , which will be denoted by as a -scheme. For the geometric generic fiber , we have the Beauville-Bogomolov form on -adic étale cohomology . There is an orthogonal decomposition
| (4.3.3) |
such that . The Beauville-Bogomolov form on can be defined by applying integral crystalline-étale comparison (cf. [2, Theorem 1]) and denoted by . It is followed by a decomposition of -crystals
with respect to .
The bilinear form induced by is perfect since . A direct computation shows that
The canonical decomposition (4.3.2) implies the Hodge number . Therefore, is a K3-crystal. ∎
By the decomposition (4.3.2), we have
Thus there is an isomorphism between Tate modules (as -lattices)
| (4.3.4) |
Lemma 4.10.
Under the same assumption in 4.9, if is supersingular, then we have an isomorphism of characteristic subspaces
Proof.
Consider the following commutative diagram
The horizontal injective morphisms are isometric embeddings from (4.3.4). Thus it is not hard to see that they induces isomorphic characteristic subspaces. ∎
Remark 4.11.
The Lemma 4.10 can be viewed as a higher dimensional analogue to the relationship between supersingular abelian surfaces and their associated supersingular Kummer surfaces, which is a miracle used in Ogus’s proof of crystalline Torelli theorem for supersingular Kummer surfaces.
Lemma 4.12.
If and are quasi-liftably birational equivalent, then there is an isomorphism of -crystals preserving Beauville-Bogomolov forms.
Proof.
We may assume that and are liftable as and over some finite extension of , whose geometric generic fibers are birational equivalent irreducible symplectic varieties. Then there is a correspondence for some totally ramified finite field extension of , such that is a -equivariant isomorphism, compatible with Beauville-Bogomolov forms (cf. [8, Lemma 2.6]). The construction in Lemma 4.9 implies that there is an isomorphism of -crystals as we required. ∎
If and are quasi-liftably birational equivalent, then and are also quasi-liftably birational equivalent by combining (4.3.1). This implies that there exists isomorphisms between characteristic subspaces
Therefore, by Theorem 4.4 there is an isomorphism of K3-crystals
Now we can conclude that by Ogus’s crystalline Torelli theorem for supersingular abelian surfaces.
References
- [1] (1982) Théorie de Dieudonné cristalline. II. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 930, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. External Links: ISBN 3-540-11556-0, Document, Link, MathReview (Lucile Bégueri) Cited by: §4.2.
- [2] (2018) Integral -adic Hodge theory. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. 128, pp. 219–397. External Links: ISSN 0073-8301, Document, Link, MathReview (Daniel Robert Gulotta) Cited by: §4.3.
- [3] (2001) The McKay correspondence as an equivalence of derived categories. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 14 (3), pp. 535–554. External Links: ISSN 0894-0347, Document, Link, MathReview (Ana Jeremías López) Cited by: §2.1, §2.1.
- [4] Derived categories. Note: www.math.lsa.umich.edu/~idolga/derived9.pdf Cited by: §2.1.
- [5] (2014) On equivariant triangulated categories. arXiv:1403.7027. Cited by: §2.1, §2.1, Remark 3.2.
- [6] (2021) Supersingular irreducible symplectic varieties. In Rationality of Algebraic Varieties, Progress in Mathematics, Vol. 342, pp. 191–244. Cited by: §1, §4.3, Remark 4.3.
- [7] (2003) Kummer structures on surface: an old question of T. Shioda. Duke Math. J. 120 (3), pp. 635–647. External Links: ISSN 0012-7094, Document, Link, MathReview (Trygve Johnsen) Cited by: A note on Fourier-Mukai partners of abelian varieties over positive characteristic fields, §1, §1, §3.5.
- [8] (1999) Compact hyper-Kähler manifolds: basic results. Invent. Math. 135 (1), pp. 63–113. External Links: ISSN 0020-9910, Document, MathReview (I. Dolgachev) Cited by: §4.3.
- [9] (2015) Equivalences of equivariant derived categories. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 92 (1), pp. 19–40. External Links: ISSN 0024-6107, Document, Link, MathReview (Jon Eivind Vatne) Cited by: §1, Remark 2.7, §3.1, §3.1, §3.2, §3.2, Corollary 3.5.
- [10] (1998) Moduli of supersingular abelian varieties. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 1680, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. External Links: ISBN 3-540-63923-3, Document, MathReview (Ben Moonen) Cited by: Remark 4.8.
- [11] (2018) A note on the cone conjecture for K3 surfaces in positive characteristic. Math. Res. Lett. 25 (6), pp. 1879–1891. External Links: ISSN 1073-2780, Document, Link, MathReview (Junmyeong Jang) Cited by: §3.5.
- [12] (2015) Fourier-Mukai partners of K3 surfaces in positive characteristic. Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Supér. (4) 48 (5), pp. 1001–1033. External Links: ISSN 0012-9593, Document, Link, MathReview (Christian Liedtke) Cited by: §3.5.
- [13] (1964) Two fundamental theorems on deformations of polarized varieties. Amer. J. Math. 86, pp. 668–684. External Links: ISSN 0002-9327, Document, MathReview (R. C. Hartshorne) Cited by: §3.4.
- [14] (1979) Supersingular crystals. In Journées de Géométrie Algébrique de Rennes (Rennes, 1978), Vol. II, Astérisque, Vol. 64, pp. 3–86. External Links: MathReview (G. Horrocks) Cited by: §4.1, §4.1, §4.1, §4.1, §4.1, §4.2, §4.2.
- [15] (2016) Algebraic spaces and stacks. American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications, Vol. 62, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI. External Links: ISBN 978-1-4704-2798-6, Document, Link, MathReview (Stefan Schröer) Cited by: §2.1, §2.1.
- [16] (1974) Subvarieties of moduli spaces. Invent. Math. 24, pp. 95–119. External Links: ISSN 0020-9910, Document, MathReview (H. Popp) Cited by: §4.1.
- [17] (1987) Lifting algebraic curves, abelian varieties, and their endomorphisms to characteristic zero. In Algebraic geometry, Bowdoin, 1985 (Brunswick, Maine, 1985), Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Vol. 46, pp. 165–195. External Links: Document, MathReview (Tsutomu Sekiguchi) Cited by: §4.3.
- [18] (1997) Equivalences of derived categories and surfaces. J. Math. Sci. (New York) 84 (5), pp. 1361–1381. Note: Algebraic geometry, 7 External Links: ISSN 1072-3374, Document, Link, MathReview (Jong Hae Keum) Cited by: §1.
- [19] (2002) Derived categories of coherent sheaves on abelian varieties and equivalences between them. Izv. Ross. Akad. Nauk Ser. Mat. 66 (3), pp. 131–158. External Links: ISSN 1607-0046, Document, MathReview (Alexander E. Polishchuk) Cited by: §3.2, §3.5, Theorem 3.10.
- [20] (2007) Equivariant autoequivalences for finite group actions. Adv. Math. 216 (1), pp. 62–74. External Links: ISSN 0001-8708, Document, Link, MathReview (Alessio Del Padrone) Cited by: §1, §2.1, §3.1, §3.1, §3.1.
- [21] (2003) Abelian varieties, theta functions and the Fourier transform. Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, Vol. 153, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. External Links: ISBN 0-521-80804-9, Document, Link, MathReview (Balázs Szendrői) Cited by: Theorem 3.10.
- [22] (2005) Group actions on stacks and applications. Michigan Math. J. 53 (1), pp. 209–236. External Links: ISSN 0026-2285, Document, Link, MathReview (Ivan S. Kausz) Cited by: footnote 1.
- [23] (1977) Some remarks on Abelian varieties. J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. IA Math. 24 (1), pp. 11–21. External Links: ISSN 0040-8980, MathReview (Jacques Vélu) Cited by: Question 1.1.
- [24] (1979) Supersingular surfaces. In Algebraic geometry (Proc. Summer Meeting, Univ. Copenhagen, Copenhagen, 1978), Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 732, pp. 564–591. External Links: MathReview (Piotr Blass) Cited by: §3.3.
- [25] (2022) The stacks project. Note: https://stacks.math.columbia.edu Cited by: §2.1.
- [26] (2007) Derived categories and Kummer varieties. Math. Z. 256 (2), pp. 425–441. External Links: ISSN 0025-5874, Document, Link, MathReview (Emanuele Macrí) Cited by: §1, §1, Proposition 3.6.
- [27] (2005) Grothendieck topologies, fibered categories and descent theory. In Fundamental algebraic geometry, Math. Surveys Monogr., Vol. 123, pp. 1–104. External Links: Document, MathReview Entry Cited by: §2.1.