Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften 334 A Series of Comprehensive Studies in Mathematics Series editors M. Berger B.Eckmann P, de la Harpe F Hirzebruch N. Hitchin L. Hérmander M.-A.Knus A. Kupiainen G, Lebeau M. Ratner D. Serre Ya. G. Sinai N.J.A. Sloane B. Totaro A. Vershik M. Waldschmidt Editor-in-Chief A.Chenciner J.Coates S.R.S. VaradhanEdoardo Sernesi Deformations of Algebraic Schemes Q SpringerEdoardo Semesi Université "Roma Tre" Department of Mathematics Largo San Leonardo Murialdo 1 00146 Roma, Italy e-mail: sernesi @mat.uniromas.it Library of Congress Control Number: 2006924565 Mathematics Subject Classification (2000): 14D15, 14B12 ISSN 0072-7830 ISBN-10 3-540-30608-0 Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York ISBN-13 978-3-540-30608-5 Springer Berlin Heidelberg New York ‘This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concemed, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilm or in any other way. and storage in data bunks. Duplication of this publication fo patts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the German Copyright Law of September 9, 1965. in its current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Violations are liable for prosecution under the German Copyright Law Springer is a part of Springer Science+Business Media springer com © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidebers 2006 Printed in The Netherlands The use of general descriptive names, registered names, traclemarks, ete. in this publication dees not imply, ceven in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. Typesetting: by the author and SPI Publisher Services using a Springer LXTEX macro package Cover design: design & production GmbH, Heidelberg Printed on acid-free paper SPIN: 11371335 4u/SPL 543210Preface In one sense, deformation theory is as old as algebraic geometry itself: this is because all algebro-geometric objects can be “deformed” by suitably varying the coefficients of their defining equations, and this has of course always been known by the classical geometers. Nevertheless, a correct understanding of what “deforming” means leads into the technically most difficult parts of our discipline. It is fair to say that such technical obstacles have had 4 vast impact on the crisis of the classical language and on the development of the modern one, based on the theory of schemes and on cohomological methods. The modem point of view originates from the seminal work of Kodaira and Spencer on small deformations of complex analytic manifolds and from its forma- lization and wanslation into the language of schemes given by Grothendieck. I will not recount the history of the subject here since good surveys already exist (e.g. [27]. [138], [145], [168]). Today, while this area is rapidly developing, a self-contained text covering the basic results of what we can call “classical deformation theory” seems to be missing, Moreover, a number of technicalities and “well-known” facts are scattered in a vast literature as folklore, sometimes with proofs available only in the complex analytic category. This book is an attempt to fill such a gap, at least par- tially. More precisely, it aims at giving an account with complete proofs of the results and techniques which are needed to understand the local deformation theory of alge- braic schemes over an algebraically closed field, thus providing the tools needed, for example, in the local study of Hilbert schemes and moduli problems. The existing monographs, like [14], [93], [105], [109], [124], [163], [175], [176]. [184], all aim at goals different from the above For these reasons my approach has been to work exclusively in the category of locally noetherian schemes over a fixed algebraically closed field k, to avoid switch- ing back and forth between the algebraic and the analytic category. I tried to make the text self-contained as much as possible, but without forgetting that all the technical ideas and prerequisites can be found in [3] and [2]: therefore the reader is advised to keep a copy of them to hand while reading this text. In any case a good fami- liarity with [84] and with a standard text in commutative algebra like [48] or [127]VI Preface will be generally sufficient; the classical [167] and [190] will be also useful. A good acquaintance with homological algebra is assumed throughout. One of the difficulties of writing about this subject is that it needs a great num- ber of technical results, which make it hard to maintain a proper balance between generality and understandability. In order to overcome this problem I tied to keep the technicalities to a minimum, and [ introduced the main deformation problems in an elementary fashion in Chapter 1; they are then reconsidered as functors of Artin rings in Chapter 2, where the main results of the theory are proved. The first two chapters therefore give a self-contained treatment of formal deformation theory via the “classical” approach; cotangent complexes and functors are not introduced, nor the method of differential graded Lie algebras. Another chapter ueals in more detail the most important deformation functors, with the single exception of vector bun- dles; this was motivated by reasons of space and because good monographs on the subject are already available (e.g. [90], [118], (59). Although they are not the central issue of the book, I considered it necessary to include a chapter on Hilbert schemes and Quot schemes, since it would be impossible to give meaningful examples and applications without them, and because of the lack of an appropriate reference. De- formation theory is closely tied with classical algebraic geometry because some of the issues which had remained controversial and unclear in the old language have found a natural explanation using the methods discussed here. I have included a sec- tion on plane curves which gives a good illustration of this point. Unfortunately, important topics and results have been omitted because of lack of space, energy and competence. In particular, I did not include the construction of any global moduli spaces/stacks, which would have taken me too far from the main theme. ‘The book is organized in the following way. Chapter 1 starts with a concise teat- ment of algebra extensions which are fundamental in deformation theory. It then discusses locally trivial infinitesimal deformations of algebraic schemes. Chapter 2 deals with “functors of Artin rings”, the abstract tool for the study of formal defor- mation theory. The main result of this theory is Schlessinger’s theorem. A section on obstruction theory, an elementary but crucial technical point, is included. We discuss the relation between formal and algebraic deformations and the algebraization prob- lem. This part is not entirely self-contained since Artin’s algebraization theorem is not proved in general and the approximation theorem is only stated. The last section explains the role of automorphisms and the related notion of “isotriviality”. Chap- ter 3 is an introduction to the most important deformation problems. By applying Schlessinger's theorem to them, we derive the existence of formal (semiuniversal deformations. Many examples are discussed in detail so that all the basic principles of deformation theory become visible. This chapter can be used as a reference for several standard facts of deformation theory, and it can be also helpful in supplement- ing the study of the more abstract Chapter 2. Chapter 4 is devoted to the construction and general properties of Hilbert schemes, Quot schemes and their variants, the “flag Hilbert schemes”. It ends with a section on plane curves, where the main properties of Severi varieties are discussed. My approach to the proof of existence of nodal curves with any number of nodes uses multiple point schemes and is apparently new.Preface VII In the Appendices I have collected several topics which are well known and standard but [ felt it would be convenient for the reader to have them available here. Acknowledgements. Firstly, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to D. Lieberman, who introduced me to the study of deformations of complex mani- folds a long time ago. More recently, R. Hartshorne, after a careful reading of a previous draft of this book, made a number of comments and suggestions which sig- nificantly contributed in improving it. I warmly thank him for his generous help. For many extremely useful remarks on another draft of the book I am also indebted to M. Brion. I gratefully acknowledge comments and suggestions from other colleagues and students, in particular: L. Badescu, I. Bauer, A. Bruno, M. Gonzalez, A. Lopez, M. Manetti, A. Molina Rojas, D. Tossici, A. Verra, A. Vistoli I would also like to thank L, Caporaso, F. Catanese, C. Ciliberto, L. Ein, D. Laksoy and H. Lange for encouragement and support which have been of great help.Contents ‘Terminology and notation Introduction 1 Infinitesimal deformations .................... 1.1 Extensions Lud LL LL3 1.2. Locally trivial deformations .............. 121 12. 1 1.24 1.25 Generalities .... wee ‘The module Exa(R, 1) « Extensions of schemes Generalities on deformations Infinitesimal deformations of nonsingular affine schemes Extending automorphisms of deformations . First-order locally trivial deformations Higher-order deformations — obstructions 2 Formal deformation theory 2.1 Obstructions . 22. Functors of Artin rings . ‘The theorem of Schlessinger ‘The local moduli functors 241 242 243 2.5 Formal versus algebraic deformations 2.6 Automorphisms and prorepresentability ...... 2.6.1 262 Generalities Obstruction spaces . Algebraic surfaces ‘The automorphism functor .......... IsotrivialityExamples of deformation functors... 3.1 32 3.4 Morphisms Hilbert and Quot schemes.......000.....0022200000 4.1 Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity 4.2 Flatness in the projective case 42.1 Flatness and Hilbert polynomials : 4.2.2 Stratifications ..0....... eee 4.2.3. Flattening stratifications............. 4.3. Hilbert schemes 43.1 Generalities .. 43.2. Linear systems ... 43.3. Grassmannians .. 434 Existence . 44 Quot schemes.............. 44.1 Existence 44.2 Local properties 4.5 Flag Hilbert schemes 45.1 Existence .....000... 4.5.2 Local properties ..... 4.6 Examples and applications Contents Affine schemes .. .. 3.1.1 First-order deformations 3.1.2 The second cotangent module and obstructions . : 3.1.3 Comparison with deformations of the nonsingular locus 7 3.14 Quotient singularities... Closed subschemes . eee eee 3.2.1 The local Hilbert functor 3.2.2. Obstructions . : 3.23. The forgetful morphism... 3.24 The local relative Hilbert functor Invertible sheaves .. . eee eee 3.3.1 The local Picard functors 3.3.2. Deformations of sections, I 3.3.3. Deformations of pairs (X, L) 3.3.4 Deformations of sections, I. 3.4.1 Deformations of a morphism leaving domain and target fixed 157 3.4.2 Deformations of a morphism leaving the target fixed 3.4.3 Morphisms from a nonsingular curve with fixed target 3.4.4 Deformations of a closed embedding 3.45 Stability and costability ..... 4.6.1 Complete intersections 4.6.2, An obstructed nonsingular curve in P* 4.6.3 An obstructed (nonreduced) scheme 4.6.4 Relative grassmannians and projective bundlesContents XI 4.6.5 Hilbert schemes of points ..... 4.6.6 Schemes of morphisms 4.6.7 Focal loci... 4.7 Plane curves 4.7.1 Equisingular infinitesimal deformations 47.2 The Severi varieties ... : 4.7.3 Nonemptiness of Severi varieties A. Flatne 269 B_ Differentials 279 C Smoothness... 666 cece e cece ce eee eee eee eee ee 293 D_ Complete intersections . . feet eeeecceeeeeeees 305 D.1 Regular embeddings |=... : cee ~ 305 D2 Relative complete intersection morphisms .. feces - 307 E Funetorial language 313 References...... - 321 List of symbols. . - 329 Index ... - 333Terminology and notation All rings will be commutative with 1. A ring homomorphism A — B is called essentially of finite type (e-f.t.) if B is a localization of an A-algebra of finite type. We will also say that B is efit. over A. We will always denote by k a fixed algebraically closed field. All schemes will be assumed to be defined over k, locally noetherian and separated, and all algebraic sheaves will be quasi-coherent unless otherwise specified. If X and Y are schemes we will write X x ¥ instead of X x4 Y. If Sis a scheme ands € Swe denote by k(s) = Og../mg,s the residue field of $ at s. As is customary, various categories will be denoted by indicating their objects within parentheses when it will be clear what the morphisms in the category are. For instance (sets), (A-modules), etc. The class of objects of a category C will be denoted by ob(C), The dual of a category C will be denoted by C°. Given categories € and D, a contravariant functor F from C to D will be always denoted as a covariant functor F:C+D ‘We will consider the following categories of k-algebras A= the category of local artinian k-algebras with residue field k the category of complete local noetherian k-algebras with residue field k the category of local noetherian k-algebras with residue ficld k (k-algebras) = the category of noetherian k-algebras A Morphisms are unitary k-homomorphisms, which are local in A, A and A*. For a given A in ob(A*) we will consider the following: A, = the category of local artinian 4-algebras with residue field k the category of local noetherian A-algebras with residue field k At2 Terminology and notation ‘They are subcategories of A and A® respectively. If is in ob(A) then we will let Ay = the category of complete local noetherian A-algebras with residue field k which is a subcategory of A. Moreover, we will set: (schemes) = the category of schemes (ie. of locally noetherian separated k-schemes) and (algschemes) = the category of algebraic schemes Fora given scheme Z we set (schemes/Z) (algschemes/Z) the category of Z-schemes the category of algebraic Z-schemes h'(X, F) denotes dim[H'(X, )] where F is a coherent sheaf on the complete scheme X, When no confusion is possible we will sometimes write H!(F) and hi! (F) instead of H'(X, F) and h' (X, F) respectively. LI; Xi denotes the disjoint union of the schemes X; If E isa vector space or a locally free sheaf we will always denote its dual by EY If V isak-vector space we will denote by IP (V) the projective space Proj(Sym(V)) (where Sym(—) is the symmetric algebra of —): thus the closed points of P(V) are the one-dimensional subspaces of V. Similarly, if’ E is a locally free sheaf on an algebraic scheme S, the projective bundle associated to E will be defined as IP(E) = Proj(Sym(E”)) Note that this definition is dual to the one given in [84], p. 162. For all definitions not explicitly given we will refer to (841.Introduction La méihode générale consiste toujours a faire des constructions formelles, ce qui consiste essentiellement & faire de la géométric algébrique sur un anneau artinien, et é en tirer des conclusions de nature “algébrique” en utilisant les trois théorémes fondamentaux (Grothendieck [71], p. 11). Deformation theory is a formalization of the Kodaira~Nirenberg-S pencer-Kuranishi (KNSK) approach to the study of small deformations of complex manifolds. Its main ideas are clearly outlined in the series of Bourbaki seminar expositions by Grothendieck which go under the name of “Fondements de la Géométrie Algsbrique” (21; in particular they are explained in detail in [72] (see especially page 17), while the technical foundations are laid in [71]. The quotation at the top of this page gives a concise description of the method employed. The first step of this formalization consists in studying infinitesimal deforma- tions, and this is accomplished via the notion of “functor of Artin rings”; the study of such functors leads to the construction of “formal deformations”. This method enhances the analogies between the analytic and the algebraic cases, and at the same time hides some delicate phenomena typical of the algebraic geometrical world. These phenomena become visible when one tries to pass from formal to algebraic deformations. The techniques of deformation theory have a variety of applications which make them an extremely usefull tool, especially in understanding the local structure of schemes defined by geometrical conditions or by functorial construc- tions. In this introduction we shall explain in outline the logical structure of deforma- tion theory; for this purpose we will start by outlining the KNSK theory of small deformations of compact complex manifolds. Given a compact complex manifold X, a family of deformations of X is a com- mutative diagram of holomorphic maps between complex manifolds xX oc # ery tn » > B with « proper and smooth (i.e. with everywhere surjective differential), B connected and where * denotes the singleton space. We denote by 2; the fibre w '(t),t € B Itis a standard fact that, locally on B, 4’ is differentiably a product so that x can be viewed locally as a family of complex structures on the differentiable manifold Xi.4 Introduction ‘The family € is crivial at 1, if there is a neighbourhood UC B of 4, such that we have r~!(U) = X x U analytically. Kodaira and Spencer started by defining, for every tangent vecto derivative of the family x along & ox, & €1,,B, the as an element € H'(X,Tx) thus giving a linear map «:T,,B > H'(X,Ty) called the Kodaira—Spencer map of the family x. They showed that if m is trivial at t, then x(£) = 0 for all © € 7;,B. Then they investigated the problem of classifying all small deformations of X, by constructing a “complete family" of deformations of X. A family ¢ as above is called complete if for every other family of deformations of X: x Y aid te » “ M there is an open neighbourhood VC M and a commutative diagram x a “ piv) > x + L v = B inducing an isomorphism p~!(V) = V xp 4’. The family is called universal if it is complete and moreover, the morphism V — B is unique locally around m, for each family 17 as above. Kodaira and Spencer proved that if « is surjective then the family Eis complete. The following existence result was then proved: ‘Theorem 0.0.1 (Kodaira-Nirenberg-Spencer [106])./ H?(X, Ty) = 0 then there exists a complete family of deformations of X whose Kodaira-Spencer map is an isomorphism. If, moreover, H°(X, Tx) = 0 then such complete family is universal Later Kuranishi [111] generalized this result by showing that a complete family of deformations of X such that « is an isomorphism exists without assumptions on H?(X. Ty) provided the base B is allowed to be an analytic space. We want to rephrase everything algebraically as far as possible. Let’s fix an alge- braically closed field k and consider an algebraic k-scheme X. A local deformation, or a Local family of deformations, of X is a cartesian diagram xX > xX ge 4 tz Speck) cS where z is a flat morphism, S = Spec(A) where A is a local k-algebra with residue field k, and X is identified with the fibre over the closed point. If X is nonsingularIntroduction 5 and/or projective we will require x to be smooth andJor projective. We say that € is a deformation over Spec(A) or over A. If in particular A is an artinian local k-algebra then we speak of an infinitesimal deformation. The notion of local family has the fundamental property of being funtorial. Given two deformations of X: x > x x > y és 4 tz and 4 tp Spec(k) © Spee(A) Spectk) Cc Spec(A) parametrized by the same Spee(A), an isomorphism ¢ ~ 1 is defined to be a mor- phism f : A’ > ) of schemes over Spec(A) inducing the identity on the closed fibre, i.e. such that the following diagram x xv N x 4 y N\ gc spec(A) is commutative. Consider the category A® = (noetherian local k-algebras with residue field k) and its full subcategory A (artinian local k-algebras with residue field k) One defines a covariant functor Defy : A* — (sets) by Defy(A) = (local deformations of X over Spec(A))/ (isomorphism) This is the functor of local deformations of X; its restriction to A is the functor of infinitesimal deformations of X. One may now ask whether Defy is representable, namely if there is a noetherian local k-algebra © and a local deformation xX o> 4 or 4 tp Spec(k) C Spec() which is universal, i.e. such that any other local deformation ¢ is obtained by pulling back v under a unique Spec(A) — Spec(Q). ‘The approach of Grothendieck to this problem was to formalize the method of Kodaira and Spencer, which consists in a formal construction followed by a proof of convergence. In the search for the universal deformation » the formal construetion6 Introduction corresponds to the construction of the sequence of its restrictions to the truncations Spec(O/mey! Xs ae Mn 4 4‘ n=O Spec(k) — Spec(O/mitf!) ‘These are infinitesimal deformations of X because the rings O/m's' are in A. The sequence f = {u,,} can be considered as a formal approximation of v. It is a special case of a formal deformation: more precisely, a formal deformation of X is given by complete local k-algebra R with residue ficld k and by a sequence of infinitesimal deformations x os Xn Sn J 4 nz0 m1 Spec(k) > Spee(R/m'g*) such that &, > G1 under the truncation R/m'p'! — R/m’.. In our case R = O. ‘The goal of the formal step in deformation theory is the construction of @ for a given X, i.¢. of a formal deformation having a suitable universal property which is inherited from the corresponding property of », and which we do not need to specify now. Obserye that in trying to perform the formal step we will at best succeed in de- scribing © and not O. Since a formal deformation consists of infinitesimal deforma- tions, for the construction of @ we will only need to work with the covariant functor Defx : A — (sets) A covariant functor F : A — (sets) is called a functor of Artin rings. To every complete local k-algebra R we can associate a functor of Artin rings fig by AeA) Hom a(R, A) A functor of this form is called prorepresentable. By categorical general nonsense ‘one shows that a formal deformation & defines a morphism of functors (a natural tansformation) hy — Defy and that this morphism is an isomorphisin precisely when é is universal. Therefore we see that the search for d is a problem of prorep- resentability of Defy. More generally, to every local deformation problem there cor responds a functor of Artin rings F analogous to Defy; the task of constructing a formal universal deformation for the given problem consists in showing that F is prorepresentable, producing the ring R prorepresenting F and the formal uni- versal deformation defining the isomorphism he > F. This is the scheme of ap- proach to the formal part of every local deformation problem as it was outlined by Grothendieck. What one needs is to find criteria for the prorepresentability of a functor of Artin rings; we will also need to consider properties weaker than prorep- resentability (semiuniversality) satisfied by more general classes of functors coming from interesting deformation theoretic problems. Necessary and sufficient conditions of prorepresentability and of semiuniversality are given by Schlessinger’s theorem. After having solved the problem of existence of a formal universal (or semiuni- versal) deformation by means of necessary and sufficient conditions for its existenceIntroduction 7 ‘one still has to decide whether © and » exist and to find them. To pass from O to © is the analogue of the convergence step in the Kodaira-Spencer theory, and it is a very difficult problem, the algebraization problem. Under reasonably general as sumptions one shows that there exists a deformation » over an algebraic local ring (ie. the henselization of a local k-algebra essentially of finite type) which does not quite represent the functor Defy but at least has a universal (or semiuniversal) associ- ated formal deformation. The further property of representing Defy is not in general satisfied by (©, »), being related to the existence of nontrivial automorphisms of X This part of the theory is largely due to the work of M. Artin, and based on the notions of effectivity of a formal deformation and of local finite presentation of a functor, al- ready introduced by Grothendieck. The main technical tool is Artin’s approximation theorem.1 Infinitesimal deformations ‘The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the reader to deformation theory in an elementary and direct fashion. We will be especially interested in first-order defor mations and obstructions and in giving them appropriate interpretation mostly by elementary Cech cohomology computations. We will start by introducing some al- gebraic tools needed. For other notions used we refer the reader to the appendices. 1.1 Extensions 1.1.1 Generalities Let A > R be aring homomorphism. An A-exiension of R (or of R by 1) is an exact sequence (Rog): O51 > RRO where R’ is an A-algebra and g is a homomorphism of A-algebras whose kernel 1 isan ideal of R’ satisfying J? = (0). This condition implies that J has a structure of R-module, (R’, 9) is also called an extension of A-algebras. If (R’,@) and (R”, yw) are A-extensions of R by J, an A-homomorphism & +R’ > RV is called an isomorphism of extensions if the following diagram commutes: 0+ 1 > RK > R 0 \l ve I O+ T > RY + R +0 Such a ¢ is necessarily an isomorphism of A-algebras. More generally, given A- extensions (R’, 9) and (R”, y) of R, not necessarily having the same kernel, a homo- morphism of A-algebras r : R’ >” such that yr = 9 is called a homomorphism of extensions. The following lemma is immediate. Lemma 1.1.1, Let (R’,¢) be an extension as above. Given an A-algebra B and two A-homomorphisms fi, fo: B > R' such that gfy = ofr the induced map10 1 Infinitesimal deformations fo fi: B > 1 isan A-derivation, In particular, given two homomorphisms of extensions risra:(R’,@) + (R",) the induced map ry =r) : R’ — ker(y) is an A-derivation, The A-extension (R’, 9) is called wrivial if it has a section, that is, if there exists a homomorphism of A-algebras 6 : R + RY such that go = 1p. We also say that (R’, g) splits, and we call o a splitting. Given an R-module J, a trivial A-extension of R by I can be constructed by considering the A-algebra R&I whose underlying A-module is R & 7 and with mul- tiplication defined by (13, /) = s.r) +81) The first projection p:REISR defines an A-extension of R by 7 which is trivial: a section q is given by gr) = 0). ‘The sections of p can be identified with the A-derivations d : R > 1. Indeed, if we have ascction a : R > R@I with a (r) = (r,d(r)) then for all r,r' € R: corr’) = (rr deer) =a)a") = de)’, d@’)) = Or", rd(r') + r'd@)) and if a € A then: o(ar) = (ar, d(ar)) = ac(r) = alr, d(r)) = (ar,ad(r)) hence d : R — J is an A-derivation, Conversely, every A-derivation d : R > / defines a section ag: R > R®I by ag(r) = (r,d(r)). Every trivial A-extension (R’,g) of R by I is isomorphic to (R@I, p). If @ : R > R’isasection an isomorphism € : RGI —> R’ is given by: EU) = or) +8 and its inverse is Mr) =). = er) An A-extension (P, f) of R will be called versal if for every other A-extension (R’, @) of R there is a homomorphism of extensions r : (P, f) > (R’,@). If R = P/I where P is a polynomial algebra over A then 05 1/P > P/P+R>O isa versal A-extension of R. Therefore, since such a P always exists, we see that every A-algebra R has a versal extension,1.1 Extensions = 11 Examples 1.1.2. (i) Every A-extension of A is trivial because by definition it has a section. Therefore it is of the form A@V for an A-module V. In particular, if ¢ is an indeterminate the A-extension A[r]/(r) of A is trivial, and is denoted by Ale] (where € = ¢ mod (17) satisfies «7 = 0). The corresponding exact sequence is: 0> (> All>A>0 Ale] is called the algebra of dual numbers over A. Gi) Assume that K is a field. If R is a local K-algebra with residue field K a K-extension of R by K is called a small extension of R. Let Rf: 0+ H>RSR-0 be a small K-extension; in other words ¢ € m gis annihilated by mg’ so that (0) is a K-vector space of dimension one. (A’, f) is trivial if and only if the surjective linear map induced by f: mp me flim my me is not bijective Indeed for the trivial K-extension 0> > RW > RO REO) - Conversely, if fi is not injective then /\ (7) 0; choose a vector subspace UC mpr/mp, such that mp /miy = U ® () and let VC R’ be the subring generated by U. Then V is a subring mapped isomorphically onto R by f. The in- verse of fiy is a section of /, therefore (R’, f) is trivial. For example, it follows from this criterion that the extension of K-algebras hence the map i is not injective because /i(7) = 0. we have 1 € im pig) \a "Kiel Kia) = o> Ald, A, (De) n > 2, is nontrivial, iii) Let K be a field. The K-algebra Kle els Kine yary isa K-extension of K[é] by K in two different ways. The first 0 () > Klee Kel 012 1 Infinitesimal deformations is a tivial extension, isomorphic to p*((Kle'], p’)) O> () > Klelxx Kle] > Kle] +0 I + bP 05 &) = Kiel] 4 Kk +0 The isomorphism is given by Klee] —> Kel xx Kle'] atbe+bleo > (atbeatble) ‘The second way is by “sum”: 0+ =e) Klee] > Klel =0 athe+b'e we at(b+be We leave it as an exercise to show that (K [e, €’], +) is isomorphic to (Ke, €'], Pe). 1.1.2 The module Ex4(R, J) Let A > R be aring homomorphism. In this subsection we will show how to give an R-module structure to the set of isomorphism classes of extensions of an A-algebra R by amodule /, closely following the analogous theory of extensions in an abelian category as explained, for example, in Chapter III of [123] Let (R’, @) be an A-extension af R by I and f : S > R a homomorphism of A-algebras. We can define an A-extension f*(R', @) of S by I, called the pullback of (R’, @) by f, in the following way: SAR): 0+ 1 > RxpS > 8 30 L Lf (R’,@) + 0+ 1 > R + R 30 where R’ x x S denotes the fibred product defined in the usual way. Let A: I + J be ahomomorphism of R-modules. The pushout of (R’, @) by is the A-extension 2,(R’, g) of R by J defined by the following commutative diagram o> 1“ RF 4 RR oO va 4 {I 05 7 > RI + R +0 where . R6I R J= sy u (Ca), A), te} Definition 1.1.3. For every A-algebra R and for every R-module I we define Exa(R, 1) 10 be the set of isomorphism classes of A-extensions of R by 1. If (R’,@) is such an extension we will denote by [R’, @] € Exa(R, 1) its class.1.1 Extensions 13 Using the operations of pullback and pushout it is possible to define an R-module structure on Ex 4(R, /). Ifr © Rand [R’, g] € Exa(R, 1) we define rR 9] =[e(R 91 where r: J + / is the multiplication by r. Given [R’, @],[R”, w] € Ex,(R, 1), to define their sum we use the following diagram: 0 0 0 \ 4 4 Tel I = 1 Nog J Om 1b > RxeR > RK > 0 \ t+ oN 4 o> T > R” > R > 0 t tN 0 0 0 which defines an A-extension: (Ro xp RC): OF TBI Ri xR” + RO We define ER] LR" yl = LCR! xe REI where 3: I ® I + 1 is the “sum homomorphism”: 5( ® j) +i. Proposition 1.1.4. Let A — R be a ring homomorphism and I an R-module. With the operations defined above Ex,(R, 1) is an R-module whose zero element is [R&I, p]. This construction defines a covariant functor: (R-modules) —> (R-modules) T m Ex,(R, 7) (Pit dS) > fe Bxa(R, D> ExalR, J)) Proof. Straightforward, a It is likewise straightforward to check that if f : R > S is a homomorphism of Acalgebras and 7 isan S-module, then the operation of pullback induces an applica- tion; fs Exa(S. 1) > Exa(R, 1) which is a homomorphism of R-modules. We have the following useful result Proposition 1.1.5. Ler A be a ring, f : S—> Ra homomorphism of A-algebras and lei I be an R-module. Then there is an exact sequence of R-modules: 0 Ders(R, 1) > Dera(R, 1) > Dera(S, 1) 5 RL — Exs(R, 1) 2+ Exa(R, 1) Ls Exa(S, 1) @s R14 1 Infinitesimal deformations Proof. vis the obvious application sending an S-extension to itself considered as an A-extension. An A-extension Os 1+ R4-R>0 is also an S-extension if and only if there exists! : $ > R such that the triangle R > R Nt s commutes, and this is equivalent to saying that *(R’, ) is trivial, This proves the exactness in Exa(R, 1). The homomorphism p is defined by letting p(d) = (ROI, p) where the structure of S-algebra on ROI is given by the homomorphism, st> (f(s), d(s)) Clearly, np = 0. On the other hand, for (Rog): OF TF > R —» R 30 Ss to define an element of ker() there must exist an isomorphism of A-algebras R’ > R&I inducing the identity on / and on R. Hence the composition S > R’ > ROI is of the form sr (f(s), ds) for some d € Dera(S, 1): therefore the sequence is exact at Exs(R, 1). To prove the exactness at Dera(S, 2) note that p(d) = Oif and only if p : R@I > Rhasasection as a homomorphism of $-algebras, if and only if there exists an A-derivation R > I whose restriction to S is d: this proves the assertion. The exactness at Ders(R, 1) and Der,(, 1) is straightforward. a Definition 1.1.6. The R-module Ex,(R, R) is called the first cotangent module of R aver A and it is denoted by T},4. In the case A = k we will write T instead of Thc Proposition 1.1.7. Let A > B he an eft. ring homomorphism and let B = P/J where P is a smooth A-algebra. Then for every B-module M we have an exact sequence: Der4(P, M) > Homg(J/J?, M) > Ex4(B, M) > 0 a.) IfA > B is a smooth homomorphism then Ex4(B,M) = 0 for every B-module M. Proof. We have a natural surjective homomorphism. Homg(J/J2,M) = Ex4(B,M) a At)1.1 Extensions 15 where nO d/P > PIP > BO The surjectivity follows from the fact that 7 is versal. The extension A.(1p) is trivial if and only if we have a commutative diagram O> WP > P/P + B +0 V4 + {| 0+ M + BEM + B +0 if and only if 4 extends to an A-derivation D : P/J* — M, equivalently to an A-derivation D : P > M. The last assertion is immediate (see Theorem C9). 0 Corollary 1.1.8. fA > B is an eft. ring homomorphism and M isa finitely gener- ated B-module then Ex4(B, M) isa finitely generated B-module. In particular T} ,. isa finitely generated B-module and we have an exact sequence: 0 Homg(2g/a.M) > Homp(@p/4 @p B,M) > (1.2) — Homg(I/I?, M) > Ex4(B,M) > 0 if B = P/J for a smooth A-algebra P and an ideal J CP. Proof. Iisa direct consequence of the exact sequence (1.1). a 1.1.3 Extensions of schemes Let X — S be a morphism of schemes. An extension of X/S is a closed immersion X ¢ X', where X’ is an S-scheme, defined by a sheaf of ideals TC Ox, such that Z? = 0. It follows that 7 is, in a natural way, a sheaf of Ox-modules, which coincides with the conormal sheaf of X c X’. To give an extension X CX’ of X/S is equivalent to giving an exact sequence on X: E: 03T> Oy 2 Oy +0 where T is an Ox-module, g is a homomorphism of Os-algebras and I? = 0 in Ox; we call € an extension of X/S by T or with kernel T. Two such extensions Ox’ and Ox” are called isomorphic if there is an Os-homomorphism a : Ox > Ox» inducing the identity on both Z and Oy. It follows that @ must necessarily be an S-isomorphism. We denote by Ex(X/S,Z) the set of isomorphism classes of extensions of X/S with keel Z. In the case where Spec(B) —> Spec(A) is a morphism of affine schemes and Z = M we have an obvious identification: Exa(B, M) EX(X/S,D) If S = Spec(A) is afline we will sometimes write Exa(X,Z) instead of Ex(X/Spec(A), Z). Exactly as in the affine case one proves that Ex(X/S,Z) is a T(X, Ox)-module with identity element the class of the trivial extension 0>T> Ox8T > Ox > 016 1 Infinitesimal deformations where Oy®@T is defined as in the affine case (see Section 1.1). The correspondence T+ Ex(X/S,7) defines a covariant functor from Oy-modules to '(X, Ox)-modules. In deformation theory the case J = Oy is the most important one, being related to first-order deformations. If, more generally, T is a locally free sheaf we get the notions of ribbon, carper ete. (see [17)). Using the fact that the exact sequence (1.2) of page 15 localizes, it is immediate to check that the cotangent module localizes. More specifically, it is straightforward to show that given a morphism of finite type of schemes f : X — S one can define a quasi-coherent sheaf Ty, on X with the following properties. If U = Spec(A) is an affine open subset of § and V = pec(B) is an affine open subset of f~!(U), then PWV T4)8) = Thy It follows from the properties of the cotangent modules that T}.,. is coherent. Tg is called the first cotangent sheaf of X/S. We will write T} if S = Spec(k). For future reference it will be convenient to state the following: Proposition 1.1.9. (i) If X is an algebraic scheme then T} is supported on the sin- gular locus of X. More generally, if X — S is a morphism of finite type of algebraic schemes then T.,. is supported on the locus where X is not smooth over S. (ii) Ifwe have a closed embedding X < ¥ with ¥ nonsingular, then we have an exact sequence of coherent sheaves on X: 05 Ty > Tyyx > Nxyy + TY > O (3) so that, letting Ny, y =ket[Nx/y > T}], we have the short exact sequence O Tx > Tyix > Nyy > 0 (14) Nyy is called the equisingular normal sheaf of X in ¥. (iii) For every scheme S and morphism of S-schemes f > X —> ¥ we have an exact sequence of sheaves 0 Txyy + Txys > Hom(f*Q}/s, Ox) > Thy > Thys > THs (1.5) (iv) When S = Spec(k) and f is a closed embedding of algebraic schemes, with ¥ nonsingular, we have Ty) y = Oand Ny;y = T},y. Moreover, (1.3) is a special case of (1.5) in this case. Proof. (i) Use Proposition 1.1.1. (ii) (1.3) globalizes the exact sequence (1.2), (ii) (1.5) globalizes the exact sequence of Proposition 1.1.5. (iv) Follows from (1.2) and 1.1.5. a1.1 Extensions 17 Note that the first half of the exact sequence (1.5) is the dual of the cotangent sequence of f. For more about (1.5) see also (3.43), page 162. The following is a basic result: ‘Theorem 1.1.10, Let X = S be a morphism of finite type of algebraic schemes and La coherent locally free sheaf on X. Assume that X is reduced and S-smooth on a dense open subset. Then there is a canonical identification EX(X/S,2) = Ext, (Qh, 5D) which to the isomorphism class of an extension of X/S: E£:0+T + Oy + Oy +0 associates the isomorphism class of the relative conormal sequence of XC X': ce10-+ TS Obys)ix > Oks +0 (which és exact also on the left). Proof. Suppose given an extension £. Since T is locally free and X is reduced in order to show that cg is exact on the left it suffices to prove that ker(4) is torsion, equivalently that c¢ is exact at every general closed point. of any irreducible com- ponent of X. Since X is smooth over § at x it follows from 1.1.7 that there is an affine open neighbourhood U of x such that €\,) is trivial. From Theorem B.3 we de- duce that the relative conormal sequence of E\y is split exact. Since it coincides with the restriction of cx: to U we see that djy is injective; this shows that ker(@) is tor- sion and ¢¢ is exact. Since isomorphic extensions have isomorphic relative cotangent sequences we have a well-defined map c— Ex(X/S, 2) > Eat, (Qh, 5.2) Now let n0>T>AS QL. +0 define an element of Ext{,, (Qy,5.Z). Letting d : Ox — Qy,¢ be the canonical derivation, consider the sheaf of Os algebras O = A x 1 Ox: over an open subset U CX we have P(U, OQ) = [(a, f) : pla) = d(f)) and the multiplication rule is (a, fla’, f) = (fal + fa, £7) ‘Then we have an exact commutative diagram 0+ I+ 0 > Oy 0 ll id id 0+ T+ As at 2x5 018 1 Infinitesimal deformations where one immediately checks that the projection d is an Os-derivation and therefore it must factor as 1g O > 2540580 Ox + A and we have an exact commutative diagram o> I= oO => Oy, =0 I + 4d IT > Qb,0,@00x > Qys +0 (1.6) i] Y {| 0+ I= A > Ds 20 which implies 2/,,, @o0 Ox = A. Therefore, letting e,, be the extension given by the first row of (1.6), we see that c.,, = 1. Similarly, one shows that ¢,. = £ for any [£] ¢ Ex(X/S,Z). Therefore c_ and ¢_ are inverse of euch other and the conclusion follows. a Corollary 1.1.11. Let X — S he a morphism of finite type of algebraic schemes, smooth on a dense open subset of X. Assume X reduced. Then there is a canonical isomorphism of coherent sheaves on X: We Ty)5 = Ext, (Qk )s. Ox) In particular, if X is a reduced algebraic scheme then Y= Exth, (Qk, Ox) and if, moreover, X = Spec Bo) then Tp, = Exty(Qzy/x, Bo) Proof. An immediate consequence of the above theorem. a A closer analysis of the proof of Theorem 1.1.10 shows that without assuming X reduced we only have an inclusion Exto, (Qk, Ox) C Ty NOTES 1. An alternative approach to the topics treated in this section can be obtained by means of the so-called “truncated cotangent complex”, first introduced in [76]. A more general version of the cotangent complex was introduced in [120] and later incorporated in general theories of André [4], Quillen [146] and Tate [181]. Here we will just recall the main facts about the truncated cotangent complex, without entering into any details, with the only purpose of showing the relation to the notions introduced in this section. For details we refer to [94 Let A be a ring and R an A-algebra, To every A-extension 7051s RRO1.1 Extensions 19 we associate a complex co(7) of R-modules (also denoted c4(g)) defined as follows: coli) = Arya @eR a = 7 erly) = (0) nF#O1 dy = e141) > col) is the map x H+ d(x) @ 1. In other words c4(7) consists of the first map in the conormal sequence of g. Ifr : (R’, @) > (R", w) is a homomorphism of A-extensions then r induces a homomorphism of complexes cal) sea) > cow) in an obvious way. The following is casy to establish: © Letryry : (Rg) > (R%y) be two homomorphisms of A-extensions of R. Then ca(r)) and ¢ (72) are homotopic. As an immediate consequence we have: © if(E, p) and (F, g) are two versal A-extensions of R then the complexes ce(p) and c«(q) are homotopically equivalent. Definition L112. Let A bearing, R an A-algebra and (E, p) a versal A-extension of R. The homotopy class of the complex c4(p) is called the (truncated) cotangent complex of R over A and denoted by T (R/A). If R = P/T fora polynomial A-algebra P the A-extension Oo PF > PIP + R>O «7 is versal und therefore the complex HP 2s Op, Op R (8) where d is the map appearing in the conormal sequence of A > P —> R, represents T(R/ A). If R is eft. and P is replaced by a smooth A-algebra then (1.7) is again a versal A-extension and (1.8) again represents 7(R/ A). From the fact that every A-algebra R can be obtained as the quotient of a polynomial A-algebra P it follows that the cotangent complex 7(R/A) exists for every A-algebra R. The cotangent complex can be used to define “upper and lower cotangent functors”, as follows, Definition 1.1.13. Let A = B be a ring homomorphism, M a B-module, and let ce = (C1 2S Co) represent T{B/A). Then for 1 = 0,1 the lower cotangent module of B over A relative 10 M is: T(B/A, M) = Hi (co @p M) und the upper cotangent module of B over A relative 10 M is: F!(B/A,M) = H' tomes, MD) Because of the definition of cotangent complex it follows that the cotangent modules are independent on the choice of the complex cg representing 7(B/A), but only depend on20 1 Infinitesimal deformations A,B, M. Moreover, one immediately checks that the definition is functorial in M and there fore we have covariant functors: T)(B/A, -) : (B-modules) (B-modules) and . 7'(B/A, ~) : (B-modules) > (B-modules) One immediately sees that for / = 0 the cotangent functors are: To(B/A, M) = Q5/a nM and 7°(B/A, M) = Dera(B, M) From the extension (1.7) we obtain the exact sequences: 0 > 7(B/A. M) > 1/P &_ M > Qpj4 Bp M > Qpa@pM +O id a 0 = Homg(Qg/4,.M) > Homg (Op) @p B.M) > Homp(I/22, My 7\(B/A, My = 0 If B is e.£¢. then in (1.7) P can be chosen to be a smooth A-algebra; in this case it follows that 7,(B/A, M) and T'(B/A,M) are finitely generated B-modules if M is finitely generated Moreover, recalling Corollary 1.1.8, we see that we have an identification T'(B/A, M) = Exa(B, M) 2. The topics of this section originate from [76]. See also [1], Ch. 0) y, § 18. The proof of Theorem 1.1.10 has been taken from [17 see also [66]. 1.2 Locally trivial deformations 1.2.1 Generalities on deformations Let X be an algebraic scheme. A cartesian diagram of morphisms of schemes Xx > xX nid da Spec(k) “> § where 1 is flat and surjective, and S is connected, is called a family of deforma- tions, or simply a deformation, of X parametrized by S, or over S: we call § and A’ respectively the parameter scheme and the 1o1al scheme of the deformation, If $ is al- gebraic, for each k-rational point ¢ € S the scheme-theoretic fibre 4’(1) is also called a deformation of X. When S = Spec(A) with A in ob(.4*) and s € S is the closed point we have a local family of deformations (shortly a local deformation) of X over A. The deformation 77 will be also denoted by (S, 7) or (A, ) when S’ = Spec(A).1.2 Locally trivial deformations 21 ‘The local deformation (A, 7) is infinitesimal (resp. first-order) if A € ob(A) (resp. A= kfe]). Given another deformation x > y 1 1 Speck) > S of X over S, an isomorphism of with ¢ is an S-isomorphism ¢ : > Y inducing the identity on X, i.e, such that the following diagram is commutative: Xx \ 4, “ Ss By a pointed scheme we will mean a pair (S, s) where Sis a scheme ands € S$. If K isa field we call (5, s) a K-pointed scheme if K = k(s). Observe that for every X and for every k-pointed scheme (S, s) there exists at least one family of deformation of X over S, namely the product family: Xx + xxs + + Speclk) > S$ A deformation of X over S is called trivial if it is isomorphic to the product family. It will be also called a trivial family with fibre X. All fibres over k-rational points of a trivial deformation of X parametrized by an algebraic scheme are isomorphic to X. The converse is not wue: there are deformations which are not trivial but have isomorphic fibres over all the k-rational points (see Example 1.2.2(ii) below). The scheme X is called rigid if every infinitesimal deformation of X over A is trivial for every A in ob(A). Given a deformation 1 of X over § as above and a morphism (S', s') + (S,s) of k-pointed schemes there is induced a commutative diagram by base change X + Xxss! 1 + Spectk) > S which is clearly a deformation of X over S’. This operation is functorial, in the sense that it commutes with composition of morphisms and the identity morphism does not change 1). Moreover, it carries isomorphic deformations to isomorphic ones. An infinitesimal deformation 77 of X is called /ocally trivial if every point x € X has an open neighbourhood Uy C X such that Uo > Xu, + + Spec(k) > 8 is a wivial deformation of Us.22 1 Infinitesimal deformations Remark 1.2.1. Let x 4x no} ja Speck) —> S be a family of deformations of an algebraic scheme X parametrized by an algebraic scheme S and let Z CX bea proper closed subset. Then xyz 4b aim 1 dn Spec(k) + Ss isa family of deformations of X\Z having the same fibres as overt € S fort #s thus such fibres are deformations both of X and of X\Z. This shows that the defi- nition of family of deformations given above is somewhat ambiguous unless we as- sume that m is projective or that the deformation is infinitesimal. In what follows we will restrict to the consideration of deformations of projective schemes and/or of finitesimal deformations when discussing the general theory, so that such ambiguity will be removed; only occasionally will we consider non-infinitesimal deformations of affine schemes. Examples 1.2.2. (i) The quadric @ ¢ A? of equation xy — projection = 0 defines, via the Aa > at (Cr) an a flat family @ > A! whose fibres a the fibre Q(0) i: nonsingular, re affine conics. This family is not trivial since ingular, hence not isomorphic to the fibres Q(t), 1 # 0, which are (ii) Consider, for a given integer m > 0, the rational ruled surface Fy = P(Opiln) ® Ops) ‘The suuctural morphism 2 : Fy, — JP! defines a flat family whose fibres are all isomorphic to JP'; but if m > 0 then m is not a trivial family because F,, # Fy = IP! x dp! (see Example B.1 L(iii)). (iii) Let 0 < n < m be two distinct nonnegative integers having the same parity and let k=4(m — n). Consider two copies of A? x JP! given as Proj(k[?, 2. Gy, €1]) =: W and Proj(k[r, z’, &j,é{]) =: W" (here the rings are graded with respect to the variables ¢ and é). Letting ¢ = ¢1/go and ¢’ = €/& consider the open subsets Spec(k[s,z.€]) CW, Spectkli, 2/6") CW’ and glue them together along the open subsets, Spee(klr, 2,27, €D) C Speck, 2, 1)1.2 Locally trivial deformations. 23 and Spec(k[t, z/, 2’! €')) ¢ Spectkie,<,2”0) according to the following rules: ger, (9) This induces a gluing of W and W’ along Proj(kr, 2,271, Go, GD) and Projtkle,2'.2"', go. Call the resulting scheme VV and f : W— A! = Spec(ki1}) the morphism induced by the projections. Then f is a flat morphism because it is locally a projection; moreover, WO) = Fin Let W° = f-!(A!\(0}) and f° : We — A!\{O} the restriction of f In kl, 11, 2, €] define and ink[t,1—! nek Itis straightforward to verify that the gluing (1.9) induces the relation Cae ‘This means that we have an isomorphism we = F, x (A'\O)) compatible with the projections to A'\(0}. Therefore the family f° is trivial, in par ticular all its fibres are isomorphic to F,, but the family f is not trivial because WO) = Fn (iv) Let f + X — Y bea surjective morphism of algebraic schemes, with X integral and ¥ an irreducible and nonsingular curve. Then f is flat. This is a special case of Prop. III.9.7 of [84]. Therefore f defines a family of deformations of any of its closed fibres. 1.2.2 Infinitesimal deformations of nonsingular affine schemes ‘We will start by considering infinitesimal deformations of affine schemes. We need the following: Lemma 1.2.3. Let Zo be a closed subscheme of a scheme Z, defined by a sheaf of nilpotent ideals N C Oz. If Zo is affine then Z is affine as well.24 1 Infinitesimal deformations Proof. Letr > 2 be the smallest integer such that N’ = (0). Since we have a chain of inclusions ZD VIN) > V(NT™) DD VIN) = Zo it suffices to prove the assertion in the case r = 2. In this ease N is a coherent Oz,-module, and therefore H\(Z,N) = H'(Zo,N) =0 Let Ro be the k-algebra such that Zo = Spec(Ro). We have the exact sequence: 0 H°(Z,N) > H°(Z, Oz) > Ry > 0 Put R = HZ, Oz) and let Z’ = Spec(R). We have a commutative diagram, zz \7 Zo The sheaf homomorphism #~!Oz, + Oz is clearly injective and @ is a homeomor- phism, It will therefore suffice to prove that 0~'Oz, — Oz is surjective. Let € Zand f ¢ [(U,Oz) for some affine open neighbourhood U of <. Let fo = fiunzy. It is possible to find yo, yo € Ro such that fr = 2, yo(z) # 0 and yo = 0 on Zp\U, because Zp is affine. Let y € R be such that yz, = yo (it exists by the surjectivity of R — Rg). Then w(z) # 0 and y = 0on Z\U. There exists 1 >> O such that y" f =: ¢ © R (it suffices to cover Z with affines). Then f= feo 'Oz. a Let By be a k-algebra, and let Xj = Spec(Bp). Consider an infinitesimal defor- mation of Xj) parametrized by Spec(A), where A is in ob(.A). By definition this is a cartesian diagram Xo > # 1 + Speck) + Spec(A) where A’ is a scheme flat over Spec(A). By Lemma 1.2.3 2’ is necessarily affine. Therefore, equivalently, we can talk about an infinitesimal deformation of Bo over A as a cartesian diagram of k-algebras: Bo Bo t + (1.10) As k with A > B flat, Note that to give this diagram is the same as to give A > B flat and a K-isomorphism B &4k > Bo, We will sometimes abbreviate by calling A B the deformation. Given another deformation A — B' of By over A, an isomorphism of deforma- tions of A + B to A > B’ isa homomorphism ¢ : B — B’ of A-algebras inducing a commutative diagram:1.2 Locally trivial deformations 25 Bo 7 N B 4 B _ 7 A It follows from Lemma A.4 that such a g is an isomorphism. An infinitesimal deformation of Bp over A is trivial if it is isomorphic to the product deformation Bo SkA > By t t A > k The k-algebra Bg is called rigid if Spec(Bo) is rigid. Theorem 1.2.4. Every smooth k-algebra is rigid. In particular, every affine nonsin- gular algebraic variety is rigid. Proof. Suppose k —> Bo is smooth, and suppose given a first-order deformation of Bo: BoeS> B mo tf t Kiel > k Consider the commutative diagram: b> By thot kle]_ > Bole] where Bole] = Bo@k[e]. Since f is smooth (because flat with smooth fibre, see [84], ch. IIT, Th. 10.2) and the right vertical morphism is a k[e extension, by Theorem C.9 there exists a k[c]-homomorphism ¢ : B > Bole] making the diagram Bo Bo tThN ft kKle] > Bole] commutative. Therefore ¢ is an isomorphism of deformations and yo is trivial. Consider more generally a deformation of By B= Bo att t A> k parametrized by A in ob(A). To show that 9 is trivial we proceed by induction on d= dim(A). The case d = 2 has been already proved; assume d > 3 and let 0-5 A> A> 0