Conversely, injection forms, though being painful and needing help of medical personnel for application, help to quickly achieve necessary concentration of preparation in blood doxycycline online Antibiotic is usually chosen in an empiric way (at random). But when choosing one is obligatory guided by definite rules.

## Ms.u-tokyo.ac.jp

**ON IMAGES OF WEAK FANO MANIFOLDS II**
Abstract. We consider a smooth projective surjective morphismbetween smooth complex projective varieties. We give a Hodge the-oretic proof of the following well-known fact: If the anti-canonicaldivisor of the source space is nef, then so is the anti-canonicaldivisor of the target space. We do not use mod

*p *reduction ar-guments. In addition, we make some supplementary comments onour paper: On images of weak Fano manifolds.

We will work over C, the complex number field. The following the-
orem is the main result of this paper. It is a generalization of [D,Corollary 3.15 (a)].

**Theorem 1.1 **(Main theorem)

**. ***Let f *:

*X → Y be a smooth projec-*

tive surjective morphism between smooth projective varieties. Let D be

an eﬀective Q

*-divisor on X such that *(

*X, D*)

*is log canonical, *Supp

*D*

is a simple normal crossing divisor, and Supp

*D is relatively normal*

crossing over Y . Let ∆

*be a *(

*not necessarily eﬀective*) Q

*-divisor on Y .*

Assume that −(

*KX *+

*D*)

*− f ∗*∆

*is nef. Then −KY − *∆

*is nef.*
By putting

*D *= 0 and ∆ = 0 in Theorem 1.1, we obtain the following

*Date*: 2012/1/5, version 1.20.

2010

*Mathematics Subject Classification. *Primary 14J45; Secondary 14N30,

*Key words and phrases. *anti-canonical divisors, weak positivity.

**Corollary 1.2. ***Let f *:

*X → Y be a smooth projective surjective mor-*

phism between smooth projective varieties. Assume that −KX is nef.

Then −KY is nef.
By putting

*D *= 0 and assuming that ∆ is a small ample Q-divisor,
we can recover [KMM, Corollary 2.9] by Theorem 1.1. Note that The-orem 1.1 is also a generalization of [FG, Theorem 4.8].

**Corollary 1.3 **(cf. [KMM, Corollary 2.9])

**. ***Let f *:

*X → Y be a smooth*

projective surjective morphism between smooth projective varieties. As-

sume that −KX is ample. Then −KY is ample.
Note that Conjecture 1.3 in [FG] is still open. The reader can find
some aﬃrmative results on Conjecture 1.4 in [FG, Section 4].

**Conjecture 1.4 **(Semi-ampleness conjecture)

**. ***Let f *:

*X → Y be a*

smooth projective surjective morphism between smooth projective vari-

eties. Assume that −KX is semi-ample. Then −KY is semi-ample.
In this paper, we give a proof of Theorem 1.1 without mod

*p *reduc-
tion arguments. Our proof is Hodge theoretic. We use a generalizationof Viehweg’s weak positivity theorem following [CZ]. In our previouspaper [FG], we just use Kawamata’s positivity theorem. We note thatTheorem 1.1 is better than [FG, Theorem 4.1] (see Theorem 2.3 below).

We also note that Kawamata’s positivity theorem (cf. [FG, Theorem2.2]) and Viehweg’s weak positivity theorem (and its generalization in[C, Theorem 4.13]) are obtained by Fujita–Kawamata’s semi-positivitytheorem, which follows from the theory of the variation of (mixed)Hodge structure. We recommend the readers to compare the proof ofTheorem 1.1 with the arguments in [FG, Section 4]. By the Lefschetzprinciple, all the results in this paper hold over any algebraically closedfield

*k *of characteristic zero. We do not discuss the case when the char-acteristic of the base field is positive.

**Acknowledgments. **The first author was partially supported by the

Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (A)

*♯*20684001 from JSPS. The sec-

ond author was partially supported by the Research Fellowships of the

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science for Young Scientists. The

authors would like to thank Professor Sebastien Boucksom for inform-

ing them of Berndtsson’s results [B]. They also would like to thank the

Erwin Schr¨

odinger International Institute for Mathematical Physics in
In this section, we prove Theorem 1.1. We closely follow the argu-

**Lemma 2.1. ***Let f *:

*Z → C be a projective surjective morphism from*

a (

*d *+ 1)

*-dimensional smooth projective variety Z to a smooth pro-*

jective curve C. Let B be an ample Cartier divisor on Z such that

Rif∗OZ(

*kB*) = 0

*for every i > *0

*and k ≥ *1

*. Let H be a very*

ample Cartier divisor on C such that Bd+1

*< f ∗*(

*H − KC*)

*· Bd and*

Bd+1

*≤ f ∗H · Bd. Then*
(

*f∗OZ*(

*kB*))

*∗ ⊗ OC*(

*lH*)

*is generated by global sections for l > k ≥ *1

*.*
*Proof. *By the Grothendieck duality

*RHom*(

*Rf∗OZ*(

*kB*)

*, ω• *)

*≃ Rf*
*∗RHom*(

*OZ *(

*kB*)

*, ω•Z*
(

*f∗OZ*(

*kB*))

*∗ ≃ Rdf∗OZ*(

*KZ/C − kB*)
for

*k ≥ *1 and

*i ̸*=

*d*. We note that

*f∗OZ*(

*kB*) is locally free and(

*f∗OZ*(

*kB*))

*∗ *is its dual locally free sheaf. Therefore, we have

*H*1(

*C, *(

*f∗OZ*(

*kB*))

*∗ ⊗ OC*((

*l − *1)

*H*))

*≃ H*1(

*C, Rdf∗OZ*(

*KZ/C − kB*)

*⊗ OC*((

*l − *1)

*H*))

*≃ Hd*+1(

*Z, OZ*(

*KZ − f∗KC − kB *+

*f∗*(

*l − *1)

*H*))
for

*k ≥ *1. By the Serre duality,

*Hd*+1(

*Z, OZ*(

*KZ − f ∗KC − kB *+

*f ∗*(

*l − *1)

*H*))

*H*0(

*Z, OZ*(

*kB *+

*f ∗KC − f ∗*(

*l − *1)

*H*))

*.*
(

*kB *+

*f ∗KC − f ∗*(

*l − *1)

*H*)

*· Bd < *0
if

*l − *1

*≥ k*. Thus, we obtain

*H*0(

*Z, OZ*(

*kB *+

*f ∗KC − f ∗*(

*l − *1)

*H*)) = 0

*H*1(

*C, *(

*f∗OZ*(

*kB*))

*∗ ⊗ OC*((

*l − *1)

*H*)) = 0
for

*k ≥ *1 and

*l > k*. Therefore, (

*f∗OZ*(

*kB*))

*∗ ⊗ OC*(

*lH*) is generatedby global sections for

*k ≥ *1 and

*l > k*.

Let us start the proof of Theorem 1.1.

*Proof of *Theorem 1.1

*. *We prove the following claim.

**Claim. ***Let π *:

*C → Y be a projective morphism from a smooth pro-*

jective curve C and let L be an ample Cartier divisor on C. Then

(

*−π∗KY − π∗*∆ + 2

*εL*)

*· C ≥ *0

*for any positive rational number ε.*
Let us start the proof of Claim. We fix an arbitrary positive rational
number

*ε*. We may assume that

*π*(

*C*) is a curve, that is,

*π *is finite.

We consider the following base change diagram
where

*Z *=

*X ×Y C*. Then

*g *:

*Z → C *is smooth,

*Z *is smooth,Supp(

*p∗D*) is relatively normal crossing over

*C*, and Supp(

*p∗D*) is asimple normal crossing divisor on

*Z*. Let

*A *be a very ample Cartierdivisor on

*X *and let

*δ *be a small positive rational number such that0

*< δ ≪ ε*. Since

*−*(

*KX *+

*D*)

*−f ∗*∆+

*δA *is ample, we can take a generaleﬀective Q-divisor

*F *on

*X *such that

*−*(

*KX *+

*D*)

*− f ∗*∆ +

*δA ∼*Q

*F *.

Then we have

*KX/Y *+

*D *+

*F ∼*Q

*δA − f∗KY − f∗*∆

*.*
*KZ/C *+

*p∗D *+

*p∗F ∼*Q

*δp∗A − g∗π∗KY − g∗π∗*∆

*.*
Without loss of generality, we may assume that Supp(

*p∗D *+

*p∗F *) isa simple normal crossing divisor,

*p∗D *and

*p∗F *have no common irre-ducible components, and (

*Z, p∗D *+

*p∗F *) is log canonical. Let

*m *be asuﬃciently divisible positive integer such that

*mδ *and

*mε *are integers,

*mp∗D*,

*mp∗F *, and

*m*∆ are Cartier divisors, and

*m*(

*KZ/C *+

*p∗D *+

*p∗F *)

*∼ m*(

*δp∗A − g∗π∗KY − g∗π∗*∆)

*.*
Note that

*g *:

*Z → C *is smooth, every irreducible component of

*p∗D *+

*p∗F *is dominant onto

*C*, and the coeﬃcient of any irreduciblecomponent of

*m*(

*p∗D *+

*p∗F *) is a positive integer with

*≤ m*. Therefore,we can apply the weak positivity theorem (cf. [C, Theorem 4.13]) andobtain that

*g∗OZ*(

*m*(

*KZ/C *+

*p∗D *+

*p∗F *))

*≃ g∗OZ*(

*m*(

*δp∗A − g∗π∗KY − g∗π∗*∆))
is weakly positive over some non-empty Zariski open set

*U *of

*C*. Forthe basic properties of weakly positive sheaves, see, for example, [V,Section 2.3]. Therefore,

*E*1 :=

*Sn*(

*g∗OZ*(

*m*(

*δp∗A − g∗π∗KY − g∗π∗*∆)))

*⊗ OC*(

*nmεL*)

*≃ Sn*(

*g∗OZ*(

*mδp∗A*))

*⊗ OC*(

*−nmπ∗KY − nmπ∗*∆ +

*nmεL*)
is generated by global sections over

*U *for every

*n ≫ *0. On the otherhand, by Lemma 2.1, if

*mδ ≫ *0, then we have that

*E*2 :=

*OC*(

*nmεL*)

*⊗ Sn*((

*g∗OZ*(

*mδp∗A*))

*∗*)
is generated by global sections because 0

*< δ ≪ ε *and

*p∗A *is ample on

*Z*. We note that

*E*2

*≃ Sn*(

*OC*(

*mεL*)

*⊗ *(

*g∗OZ*(

*mδp∗A*))

*∗*)

*.*
*OC → E *:=

*E*1

*⊗ E*2
which is surjective over

*U *. By using the non-trivial trace map

*Sn*(

*g∗OZ*(

*mδp∗A*))

*⊗ Sn*((

*g∗OZ*(

*mδp∗A*))

*∗*)

*→ OC,*
*−→ OC*(

*−nmπ∗KY − nmπ∗*∆ + 2

*nmεL*)

*,*
where

*β *is induced by the above trace map. We note that

*g∗OZ*(

*mδp∗A*)is locally free and

*Sn*((

*g∗OZ*(

*mδp∗A*))

*∗*)

*≃ *(

*Sn*(

*g∗OZ*(

*mδp∗A*)))

*∗.*
(

*−nmπ∗KY −nmπ∗*∆+2

*nmεL*)

*·C *=

*nm*(

*−π∗KY −π∗*∆+2

*εL*)

*·C ≥ *0

*.*
Since

*ε *is an arbitrary small positive rational number, we obtain

*π∗*(

*−KY − *∆)

*· C ≥ *0. This means that

*−KY − *∆ is nef on

*Y *.

**Remark 2.2. **In Theorem 1.1, if

*−*(

*KX *+

*D*) is semi-ample, then we

can simply prove that

*−KY *is nef as follows. First, by the Stein factor-

ization, we may assume that

*f *has connected fibers (cf. [FG, Lemma

2.4]). Next, in the proof of Theorem 1.1, we can take

*δ *= 0 and ∆ = 0

when

*−*(

*KX *+

*D*) is semi-ample. Then

*g∗OZ*(

*m*(

*KZ/C *+

*p∗D *+

*p∗F *))

*≃ OC*(

*−mπ∗KY *)
is weakly positive over some non-empty Zariski open set

*U *of

*C*. Thismeans that

*−mπ∗KY *is pseudo-eﬀective. Since

*C *is a smooth projec-tive curve,

*−π∗KY *is nef. Therefore,

*−KY *is nef. In this case, we donot need Lemma 2.1. The proof given here is simpler than the proofof [FG, Theorem 4.1].

We apologize the readers of [FG] for misleading them on [FG, The-
orem 4.1]. A Hodge theoretic proof of [FG, Theorem 4.1] is implicitlycontained in Viehweg’s theory of weak positivity (see, for example,[V]). Here we give a proof of [FG, Theorem 4.1] following Viehweg’sarguments.

**Theorem 2.3 **(cf. [FG, Theorem 4.1])

**. ***Let f *:

*X → Y be a smooth*

projective surjective morphism between smooth projective varieties. If

−KX is semi-ample, then −KY is nef.
*Proof. *By the Stein factorization, we may assume that

*f *has connectedfibers (cf. [FG, Lemma 2.4]). Note that a locally free sheaf

*E *on

*Y *isnef, equivalently, semi-positive in the sense of Fujita–Kawamata, if andonly if

*E *is weakly positive over

*Y *(see, for example, [V, Proposition2.9 e)]). Since

*f *is smooth and

*−KX *is semi-ample,

*f∗OX*(

*KX/Y −KX*)is locally free and weakly positive over

*Y *(cf. [V, Proposition 2.43]).

Therefore, we obtain that

*OY *(

*−KY *)

*≃ f∗OX*(

*KX/Y − KX*) is nef.

Note that our Hodge theoretic proof of [FG, Theorem 4.1], which
depends on Kawamata’s positivity theorem, is diﬀerent from the proofgiven above and plays important roles in [FG, Remark 4.2], which isrelated to Conjecture 1.4.

**2.4 **(Analytic method)

**. **Sebastien Boucksom pointed out that the fol-

lowing theorem, which is a special case of [B, Theorem 1.2], implies

[FG, Theorem 4.1] and [KMM, Corollary 2.9].

**Theorem 2.5 **(cf. [B, Theorem 1.2])

**. ***Let f *:

*X → Y be a proper*

smooth morphism from a compact K¨
*complex manifold Y . If −KX is semi-positive *(

*resp. positive*)

*, then*
*−KY is semi-positive *(

*resp. positive*)

*.*
The proof of [B, Theorem 1.2] is analytic and does not use mod

*p*
reduction arguments. For the details, see [B].

**2.6 **(Varieties of Fano type)

**. **Let

*X *be a normal projective variety. If

there is an eﬀective Q-divisor on

*X *such that (

*X, *∆) is klt and that

*−*(

*KX *+ ∆) is ample, then

*X *is said to be

*of Fano type*.

In [PS, Theorem 2.9] and [FG, Corollary 3.3], the following statement
Let

*f *:

*X → Y *be a proper surjective morphism between normal
projective varieties with connected fibers. If

*X *is of Fano type, thenso is

*Y *.

It is indispensable for the proof of the main theorem in [FG] (cf. [FG,
Theorem 1.1]). The proofs in [PS] and [FG] need the theory of thevariation of Hodge structure. It is because we use Ambro’s canonicalbundle formula or Kawamata’s positivity theorem. In [GOST], Okawa,Sannai, Takagi, and the second author give a new proof of the aboveresult without using the theory of the variation of Hodge structure.

It deeply depends on the minimal model theory and the theory of

*F *-singularities.

We close this paper with a remark on [D]. By modifying the proof
of Theorem 1.1 suitably, we can generalize [D, Corollary 3.14] withoutany diﬃculties. We leave the details as an exercise for the readers.

**Corollary 2.7 **(cf. [D, Corollary 3.14])

**. ***Let f *:

*X → Y be a projective*

surjective morphism from a smooth projective variety X such that Y

is smooth in codimension one. Let D be an eﬀective Q

*-divisor on X*

such that Supp

*D*hor

*, where D*hor

*is the horizontal part of D, is a simple*

normal crossing divisor on X and that (

*X, D*)

*is log canonical over*

the generic point of Y . Let ∆

*be a *not necessarily eﬀective Q

*-Cartier*
(a)

*If −*(

*KX *+

*D*)

*− f ∗*∆

*is nef, then −KY − *∆

*is generically nef.*
(b)

*If −*(

*KX *+

*D*)

*− f ∗*∆

*is ample, then −KY − *∆

*is generically*
B. Berndtsson, Curvature of vector bundles associated to holomorphic

fibrations, Ann. of Math. (2)

**169 **(2009), no. 2, 531–560.

F. Campana, Orbifolds, special varieties and classification theory, Ann.

Inst. Fourier (Grenoble)

**54 **(2004), no. 3, 499–630.

M. Chen, Q. Zhang, On a question of Demailly–Peternell–Schneider,preprint (2011). arXiv:1110.1824
O. Fujino, Y. Gongyo, On images of weak Fano manifolds, to appear inMath. Z.

[GOST] Y. Gongyo, S. Okawa, A. Sannai, S. Takagi, Characterization of varieties
of Fano type via singularities of Cox rings, (2012), preprint
ar, Y. Miyaoka, S. Mori, Rational connectedness and boundedness
of Fano manifolds, J. Diﬀerential Geom.

**36 **(1992), no. 3, 765–779.

Yu. G. Prokhorov, V. V. Shokurov, Towards the second main theorem on

complements, J. Algebraic Geom.

**18 **(2009), no. 1, 151–199.

E. Viehweg,

*Quasi-projective moduli for polarized manifolds*, Ergebnisse

der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete (3) [Results in Mathematics and

Related Areas (3)],

**30**. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1995.

Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Kyoto University,

*E-mail address*:

[email protected]
Graduate School of Mathematical Sciences, The University of Tokyo,
3-8-1 Komaba, Meguro, Tokyo, 153-8914 Japan.

*E-mail address*:

[email protected]
Source: http://www.ms.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~gongyo/papers/nef-nef7.pdf

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 2011 Sasha Ali, Exhibitions Coordinator 323.937.4230 x25 / [email protected] Máximo González: Playful CAFAM presents the first solo exhibition in Los Angeles of Mexico City-based artist Máximo González January 28 – May 6, 2012 LOS ANGELES, CA — Máximo González: Playful is the first major solo exhibition in Los Angeles of Mexico C

Table 1. Important drug interactions netween P450 isoenzyme pathways and targeted therapies P450 isoenzyme Inducer or Substrate Reproduced with permission from ONCOLOGY Nurse Edition, 2/09, Anne Landry, Editor- full citation to come Inhibitors of CYP3A4 These drugs may increase serum levels of bexarotene- ketoconazole, itraconazole, erythromycin, gemfibrozil, grapefruit, grapefru