Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/SVG/jax.js
Research article Special Issues

Optimised block bootstrap: an efficient variant of circular block bootstrap method with application to South African economic time series data

  • Received: 25 August 2024 Revised: 24 September 2024 Accepted: 30 September 2024 Published: 30 October 2024
  • MSC : 62F40

  • This study introduced the optimized block bootstrap (OBB), a novel method designed to enhance time series prediction by reducing the number of blocks while maintaining their representativeness. OBB minimized block overlap, resulting in greater computational efficiency while preserving the temporal structure of data. The method was evaluated through extensive simulations of autoregressive moving average (ARMA) models and South Africa economic data which included inflation rates, gross domestic product (GDP) growth, interest rates, and unemployment rates. Results demonstrated that OBB consistently outperformd circular block bootstrap (CBB), providing more accurate forecasts with lower root mean square error (RMSE), which assessed variance, and lower mean absolute error (MAE), which measured bias, across various time series models and parameter settings. Consequently, the OBB method was applied to forecasting of the South Africa economic data, extending up to 2027. The novel approach presented by OBB offered a valuable tool for improving predictive accuracy in time series forecasting, with potential applications across diverse fields such as finance and environmental modeling.

    Citation: James Daniel, Kayode Ayinde, Adewale F. Lukman, Olayan Albalawi, Jeza Allohibi, Abdulmajeed Atiah Alharbi. Optimised block bootstrap: an efficient variant of circular block bootstrap method with application to South African economic time series data[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 30781-30815. doi: 10.3934/math.20241487

    Related Papers:

    [1] Tongzhu Li, Ruiyang Lin . Classification of Möbius homogeneous curves in R4. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 23027-23046. doi: 10.3934/math.20241119
    [2] Fawaz Alharbi, Yanlin Li . Vector fields on bifurcation diagrams of quasi singularities. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 36047-36068. doi: 10.3934/math.20241710
    [3] Roa Makki . Some characterizations of non-null rectifying curves in dual Lorentzian 3-space D31. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(3): 2114-2131. doi: 10.3934/math.2021129
    [4] Young Joon Ahn . An approximation method for convolution curves of regular curves and ellipses. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 34606-34617. doi: 10.3934/math.20241648
    [5] Fumei Ye, Xiaoling Han . Global bifurcation result and nodal solutions for Kirchhoff-type equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8331-8341. doi: 10.3934/math.2021482
    [6] Muhsin Incesu . LS (3)-equivalence conditions of control points and application to spatial Bézier curves and surfaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(2): 1216-1246. doi: 10.3934/math.2020084
    [7] Young Joon Ahn . G2/C1 Hermite interpolation of offset curves of parametric regular curves. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 31008-31021. doi: 10.3934/math.20231587
    [8] Shudi Yang, Zheng-An Yao . Weight distributions for projective binary linear codes from Weil sums. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8600-8610. doi: 10.3934/math.2021499
    [9] Khudija Bibi . Solutions of initial and boundary value problems using invariant curves. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 22057-22066. doi: 10.3934/math.20241072
    [10] Yan Ma, Di Han . On the high-th mean of one special character sums modulo a prime. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 25804-25814. doi: 10.3934/math.20231316
  • This study introduced the optimized block bootstrap (OBB), a novel method designed to enhance time series prediction by reducing the number of blocks while maintaining their representativeness. OBB minimized block overlap, resulting in greater computational efficiency while preserving the temporal structure of data. The method was evaluated through extensive simulations of autoregressive moving average (ARMA) models and South Africa economic data which included inflation rates, gross domestic product (GDP) growth, interest rates, and unemployment rates. Results demonstrated that OBB consistently outperformd circular block bootstrap (CBB), providing more accurate forecasts with lower root mean square error (RMSE), which assessed variance, and lower mean absolute error (MAE), which measured bias, across various time series models and parameter settings. Consequently, the OBB method was applied to forecasting of the South Africa economic data, extending up to 2027. The novel approach presented by OBB offered a valuable tool for improving predictive accuracy in time series forecasting, with potential applications across diverse fields such as finance and environmental modeling.



    Let X be a connected projective smooth curve over an algebraically closed field k and GAut(X) be a finite subgroup. Then G acts in a natural way on the space of the holomorphic differential forms on X, and thus we obtain a k-linear representation GGL(H0(X,ΩX)). In other words, H0(X,ΩX) is a k[G]-module.

    If we want to study the k[G]-module structure on H0(X,ΩX), a basic problem is to determine the multiplicity of each indecomposable representation on it. The group algebra k[G] is reductive (or we say semisimple) if and only if the characteristic char(k) is either zero or coprime with the order of G; in this case the indecomposable representations of G are exactly its irreducible representations.

    The Chevalley-Weil formula tells us that the multiplicity of each irreducible representation can be characterized by the genus of the quotient curve X/G and the ramification data in the quotient map π:XX/G, which is a branched (or ramified) cover.

    The study of the Chevalley-Weil formula can be traced back to the late 19th century when Hurwitz [8] studied finite cyclic automorphism groups on compact Riemann surfaces (k=C). Later, in the 1930s, Chevalley and Weil [2] calculated the irreducible multiplicities for a general finite group G in the unramified case of π. Shortly after, Weil independently resolved the ramified case [18]. This result is therefore named the Chevalley-Weil formula, and the formula also holds for the characteristic p case with k[G] semisimple[9].

    When char(k)=p#G, the structure of H0(X,ΩX) becomes more complicated, so people usually impose some restrictions on the cover π and the group G. There has been some research on the case where the ramified cover is tamely ramified [9,16] or weakly ramified [10]. In addition, there has been research on some special automorphism groups, such as cyclic groups [17], finite p-groups [5], or groups with cyclic Sylow subgroups [1]. There are also some studies over perfect fields [12].

    For general theory, in 1980, Ellingsrud and Lønsted [4] used the language of equivariant K-theory to study the Lefschetz trace of coherent G-sheaves on projective varieties for k[G] semisimple. They obtained precise results of the k[G]-module structure on H0(X,L) where L is an invertible G-sheaf and X is a smooth projective curve [4, Theorem 3.8], which is a generalization of the Chevalley-Weil formula.

    For higher dimensions, Nakajima gave some basic results in the 1980s. Consider a finite étale Galois cover f:XY between two projective algebraic varieties over a field k with G=Gal(X/Y). Then for any coherent G-sheaf F, there exists a finitely generated free k[G]-module complex

    L:0L0L1Lm0,

    such that Hi(X,F)Hi(L) as k[G]-modules[15]. The approach basically follows Mumford's method in [14, II.5 Lemma 1].

    When the étale condition on the cover f is replaced by the requirement that f be tamely ramified, the result will be weaker: the above finitely generated free k[G]-module complex is just a finitely generated projective k[G]-module complex [16]. It leads to a corollary that Hn(X,F) is k[G]-projective when Hi(X,F)=0 for all other in. Now for a non-empty finite G-invariant set S in the curve X, we have H1(X,ΩX(S))=0 (and therefore Hi(X,ΩX(S))=0 for all i>0). As a direct consequence of the above result, when π is tamely ramified, the logarithmic differential space H0(X,ΩX(S)) is a projective k[G]-module. It should be noted that the field above need not be algebraically closed.

    Almost at the same time, Kani described H0(X,ΩX) through the study of logarithmic differential space H0(X,ΩX(S)), also obtaining that H0(X,ΩX(S)) is projective [9]. However, at the end of his paper, Kani also pointed out that most of his results were covered by Nakajima's work. Nevertheless, Kani's proof process is more precise and also provides valuable tools for the main results of this paper.

    For smooth curves, the Chevalley-Weil formula was well understood by now, but no attempt has been made for singular curves. The case of a nodal curve is a good frame in which to generalize the Chevalley-Weil formula.

    Now let X be a connected projective nodal curve over an algebraically closed field k, GAut(X) is a finite subgroup of order n with k[G] semisimple, and π:XY=X/G is the quotient map. Then Y is also a nodal curve.

    In Section 2.1, we demonstrate that the regular differentials of nodal curves are suitable generalizations of the holomorphic differentials. A regular differential φH0(X,ωX) is essentially a log differential in H0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSX)) that satisfies certain residue relations, where ˆSX is the preimage of the singular points under the normalization ˆXX. Therefore G acts (right) naturally on the regular differential space H0(X,ωX). Here ωX is the dualizing sheaf of X.

    In this paper, we set the goal to calculate the multiplicity of every character χ:Gk×, that is, the dimension of the eigenspace:

    H0(X,ωX)χ:={φH0(X,ωX)σφ=χ(σ)φ,σG}.

    Remark 1.1. Every 1-dimensional representation is its own character. Although characters are the simplest irreducible representations, it still contains a lot of information that we are concerned about. There are mainly two reasons why we study it:

    When G is cyclic (or abelian), all irreducible representations of G are 1-dimensional;

    The space of G-invariant regular differentials is just the eigenspace of trivial character 1G:Gk×, namely H0(X,ωX)G=H0(X,ωX)1G.

    Recall that when X is smooth, every G-invariant holomorphic differential on X is the pullback of a holomorphic differential on the quotient curve Y=X/G (see Proposition 3.2). Consequently,

    dimkH0(X,ΩX)G=gY,

    where gY denotes the (geometric) genus of Y.

    When X is a nodal curve, we establish that

    H0(X,ωX)G=πH0(Y,ωY),

    proven for the irreducible case in Proposition 3.5 and extended to the general case (where X has multiple irreducible components) in Proposition 4.3. This leads to

    dimkH0(X,ωX)G=pa(Y),

    where pa(Y) is the arithmetic genus of Y. This result generalizes the smooth case mentioned earlier.

    For an arbitrary character χ:Gk×, when X is smooth, we have:

    dimkH0(X,ΩX)χ=gY1+mχ+χ,1G.

    In this expression:

    gY is the genus of Y.

    ● The term mχ is defined as

    mχ=QYeQ1eQ+1nχ,RG,QG1nχ,RGG.

    Here:

    – The sum runs over all points QY.

    eQ:=eP is the ramification index at any Pπ1(Q). Note that eQ>1 if and only if Q is a branch point, with RG,Q=0 at all other points; therefore the sum is finite.

    RG denotes the ramification module of π and RG,Q is the ramification module at the point Q (see Section 2.4).

    ● The notation χ,VG:=dimkHomk[G](W,V) represents the multiplicity of χ in a G-representation V, where W is the irreducible k[G]-module corresponding to χ.

    a denotes the greatest integer less than or equal to a.

    When X is a nodal curve, we require the quotient curve Y=X/G to be smooth* (see Remark 3.9).

    *Note that the smoothness assumption is imposed for a general character χ, while in the case of the trivial character χ=1G, the quotient Y=X/G is permitted to be nodal.

    For the irreducible case, we have

    H0(X,ωX)χH0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSχX))χ,

    where ˆXX is the normalization. We present the Chevalley-Weil formula for irreducible nodal curves in Theorem 3.13:

    dimkH0(X,ωX)χ=gY1+mχ(ˆSχX)+χ,1G.

    In this expression:

    ˆSχXˆSX is the singular χ-set of π (see Proposition 3.7).

    ● The term mχ(ˆSχX) is an integer defined as

    mχ(ˆSχX)=#ˆπ(ˆSχX)+Qˆπ(ˆSχX)eQ1eQ+1nχ,RG,QG1nχ,RGG.

    Here:

    ˆπ:ˆXY is the projection map after normalization.

    #ˆπ(ˆSχX) denotes the number of points in the image of ˆSχX under ˆπ.

    eQ and RG,RG,Q are defined as before, but for ˆπ this time.

    Remark 1.2. Compared to the smooth case, the difference in dimkH0(X,ωX)χ arises between mχ and mχ(ˆSχX). The latter incorporates additional ramification data at singularities (the singular χ-set). Note that when ˆSχX=, we have

    H0(X,ωX)χH0(ˆX,ΩˆX)χ,

    and mχ(ˆSχX)=mχ, just as in the smooth case.

    In particular, when X is smooth, we have ˆX=X, so this formula is a direct generalization of the smooth one.

    In the general case, let X=di=1Xi be the decomposition into irreducible components. We can reduce the computation to the irreducible case.

    Let α1:ˆX1X1 be the normalization of X1, and then ˆX1ˆπ1Y=X1/G1 is the induced covering map of smooth curves and we have

    H0(X,ωX)χH0(X1,ωX1(Iχ1))χ1H0(ˆX1,ΩˆX1[ˆSχ1X1Iχ1])χ1.

    Here:

    G1:={σGσ(X1)=X1} is the stabilizer subgroup of G on the component X1.

    χ1:G1k× is the restriction of χ to G1.

    ˆSχ1X1 is the singular χ1-set of ˆπ1.

    I1 denotes the intersection locus in X (comprising all intersection points of the irreducible components) restricted to X1 and

    Iχ1={PI1τGPG1 such that χ(τ)=1}.

    Here GP is the stabilizer subgroup.

    ˆSχ1X1Iχ1=, since the points in I1 are all nodes in X, but smooth points in X1.

    By applying the same argument as in the irreducible case, we obtain the Chevalley-Weil formula on connected nodal curves in Theorem 4.5:

    dimkH0(X,ωX)χ=gY1+mχ1(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1)+δχ.

    ● See the term mχ1(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1) in (4.14).

    ● The final term δχ=0 or 1 where δχ=1 if and only if Iχ1= and χ1=1G1.

    Remark 1.3. Compared to the H0(X1,ωX1)χ1, the difference lies between mχ1(ˆSχ1X1) and mχ1(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1). The latter includes additional ramification data at intersection points. Note that when d=1, we have X=X1 and Iχ1=. Therefore,

    H0(X,ωX)χH0(X1,ωX1)χ1.

    Hence, this formula directly generalizes the irreducible case mentioned above.

    In this paper, we consider a finite group G acting faithfully on a connected nodal curve X over an algebraically closed field k. Let #G=n and suppose that either char(k)=pn or char(k)=0 so that k[G] is semisimple. A curve means an equidimensional reduced projective scheme of finite type of dimension 1 over k.

    Let X be a connected nodal curve. Since X is a projective variety, the dualizing sheaf ωX always exists and can be explicitly described. Generally speaking, if XPNk with codimension r, then the dualizing sheaf of X is given by ωX=ExtrPNk(OX,ωPNk) [7, Ⅲ.7.5]. Once the dualizing sheaf exists, it is unique together with its trace map [7, Ⅲ.7.2].

    It can be seen that the construction above involves a choice of ambient space PNk. However, for the nodal curve, there is a simpler description based on its normalization.

    Let α:ˆXX be the normalization of reduced curves [11, 7.5.1], namely we have ˆX=1idˆXi, where each ˆXi is the normalization of the irreducible component Xi in X. Each ˆXi is a smooth curve, so ωˆX=ΩˆX is the canonical sheaf of X. Let ˆSXˆX be the preimage of the nodes in X, and then we define the sheaf of regular differentials on an open subset VX by

    ωregX(V):={ηΓ(α1(V),ΩˆX(ˆSX))ˆPα1(P)ResˆP(η)=0,PV}. (2.1)

    We can see that ωregX is an OX-module, and we call its global sections the regular differentials on X. We say a meromorphic differential φ0 in ˆX with at worst simple poles is regular at a point PX if ˆPα1(P)ResˆP(φ0)=0, namely the residue relation holds at P.

    Remark 2.1. The definition and properties of residues for differentials on curves can be found in [7, Ⅲ.7.14]. Note that when X is a smooth curve, the regular differentials on X are exactly the holomorphic differentials. Therefore, regular differentials are the natural generalization of holomorphic differentials.

    In fact, the following fact holds for dualizing sheaves on nodal curves:

    Theorem 2.2. Let X be a nodal curve, and then we have the canonical isomorphism ωregXωX.

    This is a highly nontrivial result. In the exercises of [6, 3.A], one can verify the universal property of the dualizing sheaf by endowing ωregX with a trace map. For further verification on the compatibility, the readers are referred to the detailed proof in [3, 5.2].

    In summary, the dualizing sheaf on a nodal curve has a precise characterization that depends only on the structure of meromorphic differentials with at worst simple poles in ΩˆX(ˆSX).

    It is known that H0(X,ωX) is a k-vector space of dimension pa(X), the arithmetic genus of X. Since the finite group G acts on X, both the rational function field K(X) and H0(X,ωX) are naturally (right) k[G]-modules. Every 1-dimensional representation is its own character. Our goal is to compute the multiplicity of every character χ:Gk×, that is, the dimension of the eigenspace H0(X,ωX)χ:={φH0(X,ωX)σφ=χ(σ)φ,σG} over k.

    For the sake of discussion, let X be smooth for the rest of this section. Let GAut(X) be a finite group of automorphisms of order n. Then the quotient map π:XY:=X/G is a Galois covering, i.e., K(X)/K(Y) is a Galois field extension, where K(X) and K(Y) are the rational function fields of the corresponding curves.

    Proposition 2.3. Let χ:Gk× be a character, and then there exists a rational function fχK(X)× such that σfχ=χ(σ)fχ,σG.

    This result is a special case of the following theorem (in [13, 5.23]):

    Theorem 2.4. Let E/F be a Galois field extension, and let G=Gal(E/F). Then H1(G,E×)=0.

    Remark 2.5. (NOTES below Corollary 5.25 in [13]). This theorem is a generalization of the famous Hilbert's Theorem 90, which was first discovered by Kummer in the case of Q[ξp]/Q, and later generalized by Emmy Noether. This theorem and its various generalizations are all referred to as Hilbert's Theorem 90.

    Here we only prove Proposition 2.3. Before that, we first prove a lemma:

    Lemma 2.6 (Dedekind's independence theorem). Let F be a field, and G be a group. Then any finite number of different group homomorphisms χ1,,χm:GF× are linearly independent over F, i.e.,

    aiχi=0a1=0,,am=0.

    Proof. We use induction on m. The statement is obvious when m=1. Assume it holds for m1. Suppose there exist aiF such that

    a1χ1(x)+a2χ2(x)++amχm(x)=0,xG.

    Next, we prove ai=0. Without loss of generality, suppose for some gG, χ1(g)χ2(g), and then we have

    a1χ1(g)χ1(x)+a2χ2(g)χ2(x)++amχm(g)χm(x)=0,xG.

    Subtracting the first equation multiplied by χ1(g) from this equation, we get

    a2χ2++amχm=0,ai=ai(χi(g)χ1(g)).

    By induction, ai=0,i=2,,m. Since χ2(g)χ1(g)0, a2=0, thus we have

    a1χ1+a3χ3++amχm=0.

    By the induction hypothesis, the rest of the ai=0.

    Proof of Proposition 2.3. Consider the mapping

    τGχ(τ)τ:K(X)K(X).

    By the above lemma, this mapping is not zero, so there exists a rational function gK(X) such that

    f:=τGχ(τ)τg0.

    Note that, for σG, we have

    σf=τGχ(τ)στ(g)=τGχ(σ)1χ(στ)στ(g)=χ(σ)1f.

    Thus fχ:=f1 is the desired function.

    The quotient map π:XY is also a ramified cover. Let eP be the ramification index at PX, and then we have the ramification divisor

    Rπ=PX(eP1)P.

    For a divisor D=aiPiDiv(X), define πDDiv(Y) by

    πD=aiπ(Pi).

    If D=aiQiDiv(Y) is a divisor and rR, then define rDDiv(Y) by

    rD=raiQi,

    where rai denotes the greatest integer rai. Define πDDiv(Y) by

    πD:=iPπ1(Qi)(aieP)PDiv(Y).

    Proposition 2.7 (Kani [9]). Let G be a finite group (of order n) acting on a smooth curve X with Rπ the ramification divisor of π:XY=X/G. Suppose DDiv(X) is a G-invariant divisor, and then for the trivial character χ=1G, we have

    H0(X,OX(D))G=πH0(Y,OYn1πD), (2.2)
    H0(X,ΩX(D))G=πH0(Y,ΩYn1π(D+Rπ)). (2.3)

    For any character χ, let fχK(X) be such that σfχ=χ(σ)fχ for all σG (whose existence is guaranteed by Hilbert's Theorem 90). Then

    H0(X,OX(D))χ=fχπH0(Y,OYn1π(D+(fχ))), (2.4)
    H0(X,ΩX(D))χ=fχπH0(Y,ΩYn1π(D+(fχ)+Rπ)). (2.5)

    Proof. (More details are given here than in [9].) First, it is easily deduced from the definition that ππD=nD since D is G-invariant.

    For (2.2), we have Dπn1πD and hence H0(X,OX(D))GπH0(Y,OYn1πD). Conversely, if fH0(X,OX(D))G, then f=πe with some eK(Y). Hence

    π((f)+D)=n(e)+πD0,

    which implies (e)+n1πD0.

    To prove (2.3), fix a meromorphic differential 0φΩ(Y), which exists by Riemann-Roch provided that the pole multiplicities are sufficiently high. By

    H0(X,ΩX(D))=H0(X,OX(D+(πφ)))πφ=H0(X,OX(D+π(φ)+Rπ))πφ,

    we have

    H0(X,ΩX(D))G=H0(X,OX(D+π(φ)+Rπ))Gπφ=πH0(Y,OYn1π((D+π(φ)+Rπ)))πφ=π(H0(Y,OY(n1π(D+Rπ))+(φ))φ)=πH0(Y,ΩYn1π(D+Rπ)).

    Finally, (2.4) and (2.5) for general χ follow from

    H0(X,OX(D))χ=fχH0(X,OX(D+(fχ)))G,
    H0(X,ΩX(D))χ=fχH0(X,ΩX(D+(fχ)))G.

    Note that the divisor (fχ) is G-invariant, so it suffices to repeat the discussion above with D replaced by D+(fχ).

    The constructions in this section are based on Kani's work[9]. Fix a point PX, and let GP:={σGσ(P)=P} be the stabilizer subgroup of G at P, which is a cyclic group of order eP. Then there is a unique character θP:GPk× such that for any fK(X)×,

    σffθP(σ)vP(f)(modmP),σGP,

    where vP denotes the valuation at P and mP the maximal ideal of the local ring OP.

    Set

    RG,P:=IndGGP(eP1d=0dθdP).

    *Here dθdP means dθdP.

    Definition 2.8. Let Bl(Y) be the branch locus of π:XY, namely the subset of all branch points in Y. For a point QY, we define the ramification module of Q by

    RG,Q:=Pπ1(Q)RG,P,

    and the ramification module of π by

    RG:=QYRG,Qi.

    Note that this is a finite sum because RG,Q=0 for QBl(Y).

    Let χ:Gk× be a character and fχK(X)χ as in Proposition 2.3. Since χn=1G, we have fnχk(X)G=πk(Y). Write (fnχ)=π(nA+B) where A,BDiv(Y) and n1B=0. Note that Supp(B)Bl(Y), so we write B=QBl(Y)bQQ. By definition, we have

    bQ=nvQ(fnχ)n,

    In the expression vQ(fnχ), the function fnχ is regarded as a rational function on Y. Consequently, we have vP(fnχ)=eQvQ(fnχ).

    where r=rr denotes the fractional part of r.

    The following lemma shows that this B is independent of the choices of fχ:

    Lemma 2.9. Let χ:Gk× be a character. Then for any QBl(Y), we have

    nvQ(fnχ)n=χ,RG,QG. (2.6)

    Proof. Let Pπ1(Q). Then by Frobenius reciprocity, we have

    χ,RG,PG=χ|GP,eP1d=0dθdPGP. (2.7)

    Note that θdP runs through are all the irreducible representations of GP, and hence we have

    χ,RG,PG=aχ|GP=θaP, (2.8)

    for 0a<eP. Choose a generator σ of GP, and then by the definition of fχ, we have

    σfχ=χ(σ)fχ=θP(σ)afχ.

    Furthermore, by the definition of θP, we have

    θP(σ)a=σfχfχθP(σ)vP(fχ)(modmP),

    which implies avP(fχ)(modeP) since θP(σ) has order eP in k×. Finally,

    χ,RG,PGeP=vP(fχ)eP=vQ(fnχ)n=bQn,

    and hence we have

    χ,RG,QG=χ,Pπ1(Q)RG,PG=nePχ,RG,PG=bQ.

    Here is a basic result on the nodal curve quotient [11, 10.3.48]:

    Proposition 3.1. Let X be a reduced nodal curve, and GAut(X) be a finite automorphism group on X. Then the quotient curve Y=X/G is a nodal curve. More precisely, let PX be a closed point, and Q be its image in Y. Then we have the following results:

    (a) If X is smooth at P, then Y is smooth at Q;

    (b) If P is an ordinary double point on X, then Q is either a smooth point or an ordinary double point.

    Let X be an irreducible nodal curve in this section.

    Let G be a finite group acting on an irreducible nodal curve X and Y=X/G the quotient curve, which is also an irreducible nodal curve. We want to study the G-invariant space of regular differentials H0(X,ωX)G. It is a classical fact that:

    Proposition 3.2. If X is smooth, then

    dimkH0(X,ΩX)G=gY.

    Proof. With the notations of Section 2.3, let eQ:=eP for any Pπ1(Q). Note that

    n1πRπ=QYeQ1eQQ=0.

    By Proposition 2.7 (2.3), we have

    H0(X,ΩX)G=πH0(Y,ΩYn1πRπ)=πH0(Y,ΩY),

    which is of dimension gY, the geometric genus of Y.

    Here comes a natural question: For the covering π:XY of irreducible nodal curves, do we still have the equality

    dimkH0(X,ωX)G=pa(Y)? (3.1)

    The answer is yes.

    Consider the normalizations ˆXX and ˆYY, respectively. We have a canonical isomorphism ˆX/G=ˆY, so there is a commutative diagram:

    This induces the corresponding morphisms of differentials

    (3.2)

    The lower row is obtained by ˆπ1(ˆSY)ˆSX, since XY maps smooth points to smooth points.

    Lemma 3.3. There is a canonical inclusion

    πH0(Y,ωY)H0(X,ωX),

    that makes (3.2) commute.

    Proof. We say {P1,P2}ˆSX is a pair if the two points are precisely the preimages of the same node in X. In this context, a differential φH0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSX)) is regular if and only if

    ResP1φ=ResP2φ,

    for every pair {P1,P2}.

    In this situation, we say that {P1,P2} is the preimage of the corresponding node, denoted by P. Note that for any pair {P1,P2}, the ramification indices are equal, i.e.,

    eP1=eP2,

    since the orbits of both points have the same cardinality, namely, #{σ(P)XσG}.

    Now, consider a regular differential φYH0(Y,ωY). For any pair {P1,P2}=α1(P)ˆSX, we have

    Resˆπ(P1)φY=Resˆπ(P2)φY.

    Moreover, for any point P0ˆX, the pullback satisfies

    ResP0(ˆπφY)=eP0Resˆπ(P0)φY.

    Thus, applying these equalities for the pair {P1,P2}, we obtain

    ResP1(ˆπφY)=eP1Resˆπ(P1)φY=eP2Resˆπ(P2)φY=ResP2(ˆπφY). (3.3)

    This shows that ˆπφY is regular at P, and hence is a regular differential in X.

    Furthermore, we have

    Lemma 3.4. For the left column of (3.2), we have

    H0(X,ωX)GH0(ˆX,ΩˆX(π1(ˆSY)))G.

    Proof. All we need is to show a G-invariant regular differential has no poles at ˆSXˆπ1(ˆSY). Suppose ˆSXˆπ1(ˆSY), otherwise there is nothing to prove.

    Given a pair {P1,P2}ˆSXˆπ1(ˆSY), we know that the points of ˆSXˆπ1(ˆSY) are mapped to the smooth locus of Y, and hence there exists a σG such that σ(P1)=P2. So for any regular differential φH0(X,ωX)G, we have ResP1φ=ResP1σφ=Resσ(P1)φ=ResP2φ. As ResP1φ=ResP2φ by definition, it forces that ResP1φ=ResP2φ=0, which implies φ has no poles at {P1,P2}.

    Now we can give a positive answer to (3.1).

    Theorem 3.5. With the notations above, the lower row of the canonical commutative diagram

    is an isomorphism. Moreover, both H0(X,ωX)G and H0(Y,ωY) are the subspaces of log differentials satisfying the residue relations, so we have the isomorphism for the upper row. In particular, we have dimkH0(X,ωX)G=pa(Y).

    Back to the smooth case, we have the following:

    Proposition 3.6. Suppose π:XY is the quotient morphism of smooth curves and SY is a finite set. Then

    H0(Y,ΩY(S))H0(X,ΩX(π1(S))G (3.4)

    is an isomorphism.

    Proof. By Proposition 2.7 (2.3), we have

    H0(X,ΩX(π1(S))G=πH0(Y,ΩY(n1π(π1(S)+Rπ))).

    *Here and there, we adopt the convention that every finite subset is interpreted as an effective divisor when needed.

    First, note that for the divisor n1ππ1(S), the coefficient corresponding to a point QS is exactly 1/eQ. Now, consider

    n1ππ1(S)+n1πRπ=aQQ,

    and analyze the coefficient aQ for each prime divisor Q by considering three cases:

    ● If QBl(Y)S (i.e., Q belongs to the branch locus but is not in S), then

    aQ=eQ1eQ=0.

    ● If QSBl(Y) (i.e., Q is in S but not in the branch locus), then

    aQ=1.

    ● If QSBl(Y) (i.e., Q is both in S and in the branch locus), then

    aQ=1eQ+eQ1eQ=1=1.

    Since these are the only possibilities, it follows that n1π(π1(S)+Rπ)=S.

    Proof of Theorem 3.5. Apply Proposition 3.6 to ˆπ:ˆXˆY and ˆSYˆY.

    Let χ be a character of G, and α:ˆXX the normalization. With the notations in (3.2), consider the embedding

    H0(X,ωX)χH0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSX))χ.

    We want to determine the image of H0(X,ωX)χ in H0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSX))χ.

    Proposition 3.7. Suppose that Y is smooth. Define

    ˆSχX:={ˆPˆSXτGα(ˆP)s.t.τ(ˆP)ˆPandχ(τ)=1}. (3.5)

    Then the image of H0(X,ωX)χ in H0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSX))χ is equal to H0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSχX))χ. So we have an isomorphism

    H0(X,ωX)χH0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSχX))χ. (3.6)

    We call ˆSχX the singular χ-set of π.

    Proof. Let φ0H0(X,ωX)χ a regular differential. If it has poles on a pair {P1,P2}ˆSX, then there is some TGP such that T(P1)=P2, which is guaranteed by the smoothness of Y. So we have

    χ(T)ResP1(φ0)=ResP1(Tφ0)=ResP2(φ0)=ResP1(φ0),

    Hence T(P2)=P1 by symmetry.

    which implies χ(T)=1 and P1,P2ˆSχX. In particular, when ˆSχX=, we see that any regular differential in H0(X,ωX)χ has no pole on ˆX.

    Conversely, assume φH0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSχX))χ and ˆSχX. Let {P1,P2}ˆSχX be a pair. By definition, there is some automorphism TGP such that T(P1)=P2 and χ(T)=1. Hence

    ResP1φ=ResP1Tφ=ResT1(P1)φ=ResP2φ.

    This means φ is regular.

    Remark 3.8. If χ=1G is the trivial representation, then χ(σ)1 for any σG, and hence ˆS1GX=. By Propositions 3.7 and 3.2, we obtain

    H0(X,ωX)GH0(ˆX,ΩˆX)G=πH0(Y,ΩY).

    This conclusion is consistent with Proposition 3.5 in the case that Y is smooth, in which case ˆSY=.

    Remark 3.9. Here we explain why the condition of Y being smooth is needed. Suppose the meromorphic differential φ0H0(ˆX,ΩˆX(S)) has a simple pole at some point P1S, i.e., ResP1φ00. If φ0H0(X,ωX)χ, then φ0 is regular at α(P1) (α is the normalization), so that there exists a pair {P1,P2} on ˆX satisfying the following two conditions:

    (a) vP2(φ0)=vP1(φ0)=1;

    (b) ResP2φ0=ResP1φ0.

    For condition (a), generally, we cannot determine the value vP2(φ0) from vP1(φ0). However, when Y is smooth, we have the following commutative diagram:

    Here ˆπ is a ramified cover of smooth curves. Since P1,P2 are mapped to the same point in Y (through X), there exists an automorphism τ that permutes the pair {P1,P2} and satisfies τφ0=χ(τ)φ0. Consequently, we must have

    vP2(φ0)=vP1(φ0)

    and

    ResP2φ0=χ(τ)ResP1φ0.

    For condition (b), under the hypothesis Y being smooth, it is equivalent to say χ(τ)=1 for some (and hence any) automorphism τ permuting {P1,P2}. Furthermore, this criterion works for the intersection points in a nodal curve with several irreducible components (see Section 4.2).

    Assume Y=X/G is smooth for the rest of this section, and then ˆπ:ˆXY is the induced ramified cover of π:XY. Now we compute the dimension of H0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSχX))χ through Proposition 2.7.

    Let fχ be a rational function on ˆX such that σfχ=χ(σ)fχ,σG. Set

    Dχ:=n1ˆπ(ˆSχX+(fχ)+Rˆπ).

    By Proposition 2.7 (2.5), we have

    H0(ˆX,ΩˆX(ˆSχX))χ=fχˆπH0(Y,ΩY(Dχ)).

    At this point, we reduce the problem to calculating the dimension of H0(Y,ΩY(Dχ)).

    Using the Riemann-Roch theorem on Y, we have

    dimkH0(Y,ΩY(Dχ))=dimkH0(Y,OY(Dχ))+degDχ+gY1. (3.7)

    For dimkH0(Y,OY(Dχ)), we have:

    Lemma 3.10. The space H0(Y,OY(Dχ)) vanishes except when χ=1G, and in this case, we have dimkH0(Y,D1G)=1.

    Proof. We will prove the following:

    1) If ˆSχX, then degDχ>0.

    2) The divisor Dχ is principal if and only if χ=1G; in this case, ˆSχX=.

    Recall that we have

    ˆπ(fχ)=QYneQaQQ,

    where aQ=vP(fχ), Pˆπ1(Q). Note that

    n1ˆπ((fχ)+Rˆπ)=QaQ+eQ1eQQQaQeQQ=n1ˆπ(fχ).

    Therefore, we have the inequalities

    degn1ˆπ(ˆSχX+(fχ)+Rˆπ)degn1ˆπ((fχ)+Rπ)degn1ˆπ(fχ)=0. (3.8)

    Now, write

    ˆπ(ˆSχX)=QYneQcQQ.

    If ˆSχX, then there exists some point Q such that cQ1. Hence, we can write

    degDχ=QQcQ+aQ+eQ1eQ+cQ+aQ+eQ1eQQQcQ+aQ+eQ1eQ+aQ+eQeQ>QaQeQ=0. (3.9)

    Thus we have degDχ>0 provided ˆSχX, and consequently

    dimkH0(Y,OY(Dχ))=0.

    Next, assume that χ=1G. It follows that ˆSχX= and fχ=ˆπh for some rational function hK(Y). Then we have

    Dχ=n1ˆπ(ˆπh)+n1ˆπRˆπ=n1ˆπ(ˆπh)+n1ˆπRˆπ=n1ˆπ(ˆπh)+0=(h), (3.10)

    which shows that Dχ is principal. Therefore, in this case, dimkH0(Y,OY(Dχ))=1.

    Conversely, suppose that Dχ is a principal divisor; that is, there exists some rational function hK(Y) such that Dχ=(h). Then degDχ=0, which forces ˆSχX=. Then, by the previous calculations,

    0=degn1ˆπ((fχ)+Rˆπ)=QaQ+eQ1eQQaQeQ=degn1ˆπ(fχ)=0.

    This chain of equalities implies that

    aQ+eQ1eQ=aQeQ,

    which means that eQaQ. Therefore,

    Dχ=n1ˆπ(fχ)=(h).

    Applying ˆπ to both sides, we obtain

    n1ˆπˆπ(fχ)=ˆπ(h),

    which implies that (fχ)=(ˆπh). In other words, fχK(X)G, i.e., χ=1G.

    Now we want to calculate degDχ.

    Definition 3.11. Let SˆX be a finite subset stable by G, and define

    mχ(S):=#ˆπ(S)+Qˆπ(S)eQ1eQ+1nχ,RG,QG1nχ,RGG, (3.11)

    where RG,Q and RG are ramification modules of ˆπ:ˆXY.

    Lemma 3.12. We have degDχ=mχ(ˆSχX), which is independent of the choice of fχ.

    Proof. Let (fnχ)=ˆπ(nA+B) as in the discussion before Lemma 2.9 satisfying n1B=0. Then we have

    Dχ=n1ˆπˆSχX+n1ˆπ(fχ)+n1ˆπRˆπ=n1ˆπˆSχX+n2ˆπˆπ(nA+B)+n1ˆπRˆπ.

    Note that

    n1ˆπˆSχX=Qˆπ(ˆSχX)1eQQ , n1ˆπRˆπ=QBl(Y)eQ1eQQ.

    So we decompose n1ˆπ(ˆSχX)=U+V into two parts according to whether the point is branched, so that V is a Q-divisor which is supported on the branch locus of ˆπ, i.e., Supp(V)=Bl(Y)ˆπ(ˆSχX). So U is an integer divisor with all coefficients equal to 1. Now we have

    Dχ=U+A+V+n1B+n1ˆπRˆπ. (3.12)

    Let B=QbQQ (supported on Bl(Y)) and according to degB=degnA, we get

    degDχ=degU+QSupp(V)1+bQn+Qˆπ(ˆSχX)eQ1eQ+bQnQbQn=#ˆπ(ˆSχX)+Qˆπ(ˆSχX)eQ1eQ+bQnQbQn. (3.13)

    By (2.6) in Lemma 2.9, we have bQ=χ,RG,QG, so

    degDχ=#ˆπ(ˆSχX)+Qˆπ(ˆSχX)eQ1eQ+1nχ,RG,QG1nχ,RGG=mχ(ˆSχX). (3.14)

    We summarize the discussion in this section.

    Let X be an irreducible nodal curve over k, G be a finite automorphism group of order n on X, and Y=X/G be a smooth curve. Let ˆπ:ˆXY be the ramified cover induced by the normalization π:XY, and ˆSXˆX be the preimage of the singular points of X on ˆX. Denote RG the ramification module of ˆπ, and RG,Q the ramification module of QY.

    Theorem 3.13 (The Chevalley-Weil formula on irreducible nodal curves). Let χ:Gk× be a character. If the quotient curve Y=X/G is smooth, then

    dimkH0(X,ωX)χ=gY1+mχ(ˆSχX)+χ,1G. (3.15)

    Here ˆSχX is the singular χ-set of π as in (3.5), and in Definition 3.11,

    mχ(ˆSχX)=#ˆπ(ˆSχX)+Qˆπ(ˆSχX)eQ1eQ+1nχ,RG,QG1nχ,RGG.

    In particular, when χ=1G, we have ˆSχX= and dimkH0(X,ωX)G=gY. This is the special case that ˆSY= in Proposition 3.5.

    Example 3.14 (Hyperelliptic stable curves). We call a stable curve C a hyperelliptic stable curve if there exists a 2-order automorphism J:CC such that C/J=P1. Such an automorphism of C is called an involution.

    Let C be an irreducible hyperelliptic stable curve with N (1) nodes, and ˆC be the normalization of C with genus g. Then ˆπ:ˆCP1 has 2g+2 fixed points, which are also all the ramification points of ˆπ, with ramification index all equal to 2. So the number of branch points on P1 is #Bl(P1)=2g+2 and no branch point lies in ˆπ(ˆSC).

    Note that the Galois group G=JZ2 has two characters 1G and χ, where χ(J)=1.

    For χ=1G, we have dimkH0(C,ωC)G=g(P1)=0.

    For χ, we have ˆSχC=ˆSC, so sχ=N. The induced character at any branch point P is

    θP:GP=Gk,J1.

    Therefore RG,Q=θP, so for all QBl(P1), we have χ,RG,QG=1, and then χ,RGG=2g+2. We calculate

    mχ(ˆSχC)=sχ+QBl(P1)eQ1eQ+12χ1,RG,QG12χ,RGG=N+2g+2(g+1)=pa(C)+1. (3.16)

    Finally, we get dimkH0(C,ωC)χ=g(P1)1+mχ(ˆSχC)=pa(C).

    In this section, let X be a connected nodal curve with several irreducible components. Suppose that X admits a finite automorphism group G, and let π:XY=X/G be the quotient morphism. Consequently, Y=X/G is also a connected nodal curve.

    We will prove that H0(X,ωX)G=πH0(Y,ωY) and then generalize Theorem 3.13 to the Chevalley-Weil formula for connected nodal curves, assuming the smoothness of Y for the same reasons stated in Remark 3.9.

    Due to the abundance of symbols, in the following, we will replace some round brackets with square brackets, such as using H0(Y,ωY[IY]) instead of H0(Y,ωY(IY)).

    Let Y=jYj be the decomposition into irreducible components. Then

    YjY

    is the normalization at the intersection points. Let IYj be the set of intersection points of Yj with other components, and we call it the intersection locus of Yj. Note that these points are nodes in the whole Y, but smooth points in each Yj.

    Then we can decompose the regular differential of Y by the irreducible components:

    H0(Y,ωY)jH0(Yj,ωYj[IYj]),φ(φ|Yj)j. (4.1)

    Furthermore let ˆYjYj be the normalization. Then we have

    H0(Yj,ωYj[IYj])H0(ˆYj,ΩˆYj[ˆSYjIYj]).

    Now let Xj:=π1(Yj) be the preimage of an irreducible component. This is a nodal curve but could be disconnected and we have*

    H0(X,ωX)jH0(Xj,ωXj[IXj]), (4.2)

    *If a curve X decomposes as X=X1X2, then the space of differentials decomposes as H0(X,ωX)=H0(X1,ωX1)H0(X2,ωX2).

    where IXj=π1(IYj). In fact, the information of the eigenspace H0(Xj,ωXj)χ of the regular differentials is contained in any single irreducible component.

    Let X be a (possibly disconnected) nodal curve decomposed into its irreducible components

    X=di=1Xi,

    and suppose that Y=X/G is irreducible. Then the action of G on the set of irreducible components {X1,,Xd} is transitive, and in particular, all these irreducible components are isomorphic. Let SX be a G-invariant divisor, and set Si:=S|Xi. Consequently, G acts on

    di=1H0(Xi,ωXi[Si]).

    More precisely, for any σG we define the permutation of the indices by setting σ(i) via the relation σ(Xi)=Xσ(i). Then for any φH0(Xi,ωXi[Si]) we have:

    σφH0(Xσ1(i),ωXσ1(i)[Sσ1(i)]).

    σ acts by pullback on the differentials (that is, if σ:XjXi and φH0(Xi,ωXj), then σφ:=σφH0(Xj,ωXj).

    Let Gi:={σGσ(Xi)=Xi} denote the stabilizer subgroup of Xi. Then we have:

    Proposition 4.1. Given a character χ:Gk× with restriction χi:=χ|Gi:Gik× to Gi, we have a canonical projection

    pi:(di=1H0(Xi,ωXi[Si]))χH0(Xi,ωXi[Si])χi, (4.3)

    which is an isomorphism.

    Proof. We show this holds for p1.

    Suppose

    (φ1,,φd)(di=1H0(Xi,ωXi[Si]))χ.

    Then for any σG we have

    σ(φ1,,φd)=(σφi)σ1(i)=(χ(σ)φi)i.

    Since G acts transitively on the set {X1,,Xd}, for each i there exists some σi:XiX1. Hence, we can express the tuple as

    (φ1,,φd)=(φ1,χ(σ2)1σ2φ1,,χ(σd)1σdφ1),

    which shows that the tuple (φi)i is completely determined by its first component φ1. This proves that the projection

    p1:(di=1H0(Xi,ωXi[Si]))χH0(X1,ωX1[S1])

    is injective. It remains to show that φ1 lies in the χ1-eigenspace. For any element τG1 (the stabilizer of X1), we have τ(1)=1 and χ(τ)=χ1(τ). Therefore,

    τφ1=χ1(τ)φ1,

    which confirms that φ1 indeed belongs to H0(X1,ωX1[S1])χ1.

    Conversely, let

    φ1H0(X1,ωX1[S1])χ1,

    and for each i choose an isomorphism σi:XiX1 as before. We need to show that

    (χ(σi)1σiφ1)i

    defines an element of

    (di=1H0(Xi,ωXi[Si]))χ.

    First, note that if we choose two different isomorphisms σi,τi:XiX1, then τ1iσi is an element of the stabilizer G1 of X1. Since φ1 lies in the χ1-eigenspace, we have

    τ1iσiφ1=χ1(τ1iσi)φ1.

    Because the character χ restricts on G1 to χ1, this can be rewritten as

    τ1iσiφ1=χ(τi)1χ(σi)φ1.

    Multiplying both sides on the left by χ(σi)1χ(τi)τi yields

    χ(σi)1σiφ1=χ(τi)1τiφ1.

    Thus, the section

    (φ1,χ(σ2)1σ2φ1,,χ(σd)1σdφ1)

    is independent of the particular choice of the isomorphisms σi.

    Next, let τG be arbitrary. We may assume that τ sends the index j to i, that is, τ(j)=i. Then, by the definition of the action, we have

    τ(χ(σi)1σiφ1)=χ(σi)1(τσi)φ1.

    Since τσi and σj are both isomorphisms from Xj to X1, we have

    χ(τσi)1(τσi)φ1=χ(σj)1σjφ1.

    Thus,

    τ(χ(σi)1σiφ1)=χ(σi)1χ(τσi)χ(σj)1σjφ1=χ(τ)χ(σj)1σjφ1.

    It follows that

    τ(φ1,χ(σ2)1σ2φ1,,χ(σd)1σdφ1)=χ(τ)(φ1,χ(σ2)1σ2φ1,,χ(σd)1σdφ1).

    In conclusion, we obtain that p1 is an isomorphism.

    Let Xj be a chosen irreducible component of Xj. By Proposition 4.1, there are immersions

    H0(Xj,ωXj)χH0(Xj,ωXj[IXj])χj,

    and

    H0(Xj,ωXj[IXj])χH0(Xj,ωXj[IjIXj])χj,

    where χj=χ|Gj. Consequently, we obtain the chain of inclusions

    H0(X,ωX)χjH0(Xj,ωXj[IjIXj])χjjH0(ˆXj,ΩˆXj[ˆSXjIXjIj])χj. (4.4)

    Here:

    Gj={σGσ(Xj)=Xj} and |Gj|=|G|/dj if Xj has dj irreducible components.

    Ij=IXjXj.

    IXj is the set of intersection points of Xj with other components in Xj.

    ˆSXj is the preimage of nodes in the normalization ˆαj:ˆXjXj.

    Now we consider the G-invariant regular differentials. Suppose χ=1G and consider the following diagram as (3.2):

    (4.5)

    Lemma 4.2. There is a canonical inclusion

    πH0(Y,ωY)H0(X,ωX)

    that makes the diagram above commute.

    Proof. Let

    φYH0(Y,ωY)

    be a regular differential on Y and consider its image in the lower left-hand corner:

    ˆπφYjH0(ˆXj,ΩˆXj[ˆSXjIXjIj])Gj.

    We need to verify that the residues of ˆπφY satisfy the relation

    ResP1(ˆπφY)=ResP2(ˆπφY),

    where {P1,P2} is a pair in ˆX, i.e., P1 and P2 are points lying over the same node P in X.

    Without loss of generality, assume that P1ˆX1, the normalization of X1, which is a chosen irreducible component of X1. Then

    ResP1(ˆπφY)=eP1Resˆπ(P1)φY,

    where eP1 is the ramification index of P1 in the cover of smooth curves

    ˆπ1:ˆX1ˆY1.

    According to Lemma 3.3, the remaining task is to establish the equality

    eP1=eP2.

    To see this, let lP denote the total number of elements in the orbit of the point P (which is common to both P1 and P2) under the action of the group G. Then the orbit of P1 has exactly lP/d1 elements in ˆX1, where d1 is the number of irreducible components in X1. Hence, by the very definition of the ramification index we obtain

    eP1=|G1|lP/d1=|G|lP.

    By the same argument to P2, we also have

    eP2=|G|lP.

    This completes the proof.

    The same argument as Lemma 3.4 tells us

    H0(X,ωX)GjH0(ˆXj,ΩˆXj[ˆπ1j(ˆSYjIYj)])Gj.

    With the notations above, we have:

    Theorem 4.3. The upper and lower row of the canonical commutative diagram

    are both isomorphisms. In particular, we have dimkH0(X,ωX)G=pa(Y).

    Proof. By Proposition 3.6, we have

    ˆπjH0(ˆYj,ΩˆYj[ˆSYjIYj])H0(ˆXj,ΩˆXj[ˆπ1j(ˆSYjIYj)])Gj.

    So we have the isomorphism for the lower row. Moreover, both H0(X,ωX)G and H0(Y,ωY) are the subspaces of log differentials satisfying the residue relations, so we have the isomorphism for the upper row.

    Let Y be smooth for the remaining part of this section. We are going to calculate dimkH0(X,ωX)χ for general χ.

    Let X=di=1Xi be the decomposition of irreducible components, and then we can decompose the regular differential space on X into each irreducible component:

    H0(X,ωX)di=1H0(Xi,ωXi[Ii]),φ(φ|Xi), (4.6)

    where Ii is the intersection locus of Xi.

    Since Y is smooth, then by the criterion in Remark 3.9, set

    Iχi:={PIiτGPGi s.t. χ(τ)=1} (4.7)

    as those intersection points that could be the poles of φ|Xi for φH0(X,ωX)χ, and then we have the isomorphism

    H0(X,ωX)χ(di=1H0(Xi,ωXi[Iχi]))χ. (4.8)

    Applying Proposition 4.1 shows that

    (di=1H0(Xi,ωXi[Iχi]))χH0(X1,ωX1[Iχ1])χ1. (4.9)

    So far, our research object has been reduced to the action of the stabilizer subgroup G1 on the irreducible nodal curve X1.

    Remark 4.4. With the notations above, note that Iχi= when χ=1G. For the quotient morphism π1:X1X1/G1=Y, we have

    H0(X,ωX)GH0(X1,ωX1)G1H0(Y,ωY). (4.10)

    This first isomorphism is by (4.9) and the second is by Theorem 3.5. This is a special case of Theorem 4.3, and we have

    dimkH0(X,ωX)G=g(Y). (4.11)

    Now it remains to calculate dimkH0(X1,ωX1[Iχ1])χ1.

    Let ˆπ1:^X1Y be the normalization of π1, Bl(Y) the branch locus, RG1 the ramification module of ˆπ1, and RG1,Q the ramification module of QY. If we let #G=n, then n1:=#G1=n/d.

    Let ˆSχ1X1 be the singular χ1-set of X1 as (3.5), and then we have the isomorphism

    H0(X1,ωX1[Iχ1])χ1H0(ˆX1,ΩˆX1[ˆSχ1X1Iχ1])χ1 (4.12)

    by the same argument as in Proposition 3.7.

    By Proposition 2.7 (2.5) again, we have

    H0(^X1,ΩˆX1[ˆSχ1X1Iχ1])χ1=fχ1ˆπ1H0(Y,ΩY n11π(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1+(fχ1)+Rˆπ1)),

    where fχ1K(X1)× satisfies σfχ1=χ1(σ)fχ1,σG1.

    Set Dχ1:= n11π(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1+(fχ1)+Rˆπ1). By the Riemann-Roch theorem, we have

    dimkH0(X,ωX)χ=dimkH0(Y,ΩY(Dχ1))=dimkH0(Y,OY(Dχ1))+degDχ1+gY1. (4.13)

    Applying the calculation of Lemma 3.12, we have

    degDχ1=mχ1(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1),

    and see that

    mχ1(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1)=#ˆπ1(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1)+Qˆπ1(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1)eQ1eQ+dnχ1,RG1,QG1dnχ1RG1G1 (4.14)

    in Definition 3.11.

    Finally, through the discussion of Lemma 3.10, we get

    dimkH0(Y,OY(Dχ1))=δχ, (4.15)

    where δχ=0 or 1. δχ=1 if and only if Dχ1 is principal; in this case, Iχ1= and χ1=1G1.

    In this context, we require that ˆSχ1X1Iχ1 is empty. In particular, when χ1=1G1, note that ˆSχ1X1=; however, Iχ1 is determined by χ rather than χ1. See Example 4.6 where even though χ1=id, Iχ1 is nonempty.

    In summary, we have obtained the following:

    Let X be a connected nodal curve with d irreducible components, and G an automorphism group on X of order n. Assume that the quotient curve Y=X/G is smooth. Then there exists a canonical ramified cover ˆπ1:ˆX1X1/G1Y for an irreducible component X1 with G1={σGσ(X1)=X1}.

    Theorem 4.5 (The Chevalley-Weil formula on connected nodal curves). Let χ:Gk× be a character. If the quotient curve Y=X/G is smooth, then

    dimkH0(X,ωX)χ=gY1+mχ1(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1)+δχ, (4.16)

    where χ1 is the restriction of χ on G1, and see mχ1(ˆSχ1X1Iχ1) in (4.14) and δχ in (4.15).

    In particular, when χ=1G, we have dimkH0(X,ωX)G=gY.

    Example 4.6. Let the curves C1C2P1 intersect transversely at m>2 points, and consider the hyperelliptic stable curve C=C1C2, with the involution J which permutes C1 and C2. Then we have the quotient mapping π:CC/J=P1. The arithmetic genus of C is pa(C)=m1 (see [11, Proposition 7.5.4 and Lemma 10.3.18]) and the Galois group J has two characters 1G and χ.

    For χ, note that the cover π1:C1P1 induced by π is an isomorphism, so we have χ1=id. Therefore ˆSidC1= and mχ1(ˆSidC1Iχ1)=#π(Iχ1)=m. By Theorem 4.5, we have

    dimkH0(C,ωC)χ=gP11+m=m1=pa(C). (4.17)

    For χ=1G, by (4.11), we have dimkH0(C,ωC)G=pa(P1)=0.

    In this work, we have systematically investigated the eigenspaces of regular differentials on a nodal curve X under the action of a finite automorphism group G. Our primary achievement is the demonstration that the dimension of the space of G-invariant regular differentials is the arithmetic genus of the quotient curve X/G, providing a non-trivial generalization of the smooth case. Furthermore, under the condition that X/G is smooth, we have successfully extended the Chevalley-Weil formula to the nodal setting, obtaining an exact expression for the dimension of the eigenspace for any one-dimensional character χ. This was accomplished by first addressing irreducible nodal curves and incorporating a singular χ-set, then reducing the analysis on a conncected nodal curve to that on one of its irreducible components. This reduction involves adding correction terms that account for certain intersection points on that component. These explicit formulas illuminate how nodal singularities (including intersection points) contribute to the dimensions of these eigenspaces, advancing our understanding of group actions on differentials of nodal curves.

    The author declares that he has not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    This article is part of the author's doctoral thesis presented to Xiamen University. The author would like to thank his supervisor Wenfei Liu for his advice and support, and he is grateful to Professor Qing Liu for helpful discussions during his visit to the University of Bordeaux. This work has been supported by the NSFC (No.11971399) and by the Presidential Research Fund of Xiamen University (No.20720210006).

    The author declares no competing interests.



    [1] K. Ayinde, J. Daniel, A. Adepetun, O. S. Ewemooje, Moving block bootstrap method with better elements representation for univariate time series data, Reliability: Theory & Applications, 18 (2023), 671–688. https://doi.org/10.24412/1932-2321-2023-374-671-688 doi: 10.24412/1932-2321-2023-374-671-688
    [2] P. Burridge, A. M. R. Taylor, Bootstrapping the HEGY seasonal unit root tests, J. Econometrics, 123 (2004), 67–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2003.10.029 doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2003.10.029
    [3] E. Carlstein, The use of subseries values for estimating the variance of a general statistic from a stationary sequence, Ann. Statist., 14 (1986), 1171–1179. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176350057 doi: 10.1214/aos/1176350057
    [4] T. Chai, R. R. Draxler, Root mean square error (RMSE) or mean absolute error (MAE), Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., 7 (2014), 1525–1534. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmdd-7-1525-2014 doi: 10.5194/gmdd-7-1525-2014
    [5] J. Daniel, K. Ayinde, OBL: optimum block length, package version 0.2.1, 2022. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=OBL.
    [6] B. Efron, Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife, In: Breakthroughs in statistics, New York, NY: Springer, 1992,569–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_41
    [7] P. Hall, Resampling a coverage pattern, Stoch. Proc. Appl., 20 (1985), 231–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4149(85)90212-1 doi: 10.1016/0304-4149(85)90212-1
    [8] M. A. Hannan, D. N. T. How, M. S. H. Lipu, M. Mansor, P. J. Ker, Z. Y. Dong, et al., Deep learning approach towards accurate state of charge estimation for lithium-ion batteries using self-supervised transformer model, Sci. Rep., 11 (2021), 19541. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-98915-8 doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-98915-8
    [9] T. Hesterberg, Bootstrap, WIRS: Computational Statistics, 3 (2011), 497–526. https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.182
    [10] J.-P. Kreiss, S. N. Lahiri, Bootstrap methods for time series, In: Handbook of statistics, Elsevier, 30 (2012), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53858-1.00001-6
    [11] D. Kugiumtzis, Evaluation of surrogate and bootstrap tests for nonlinearity in time series, Stud. Nonlinear Dyn. Econ., 12 (2008), 4. https://doi.org/10.2202/1558-3708.1474 doi: 10.2202/1558-3708.1474
    [12] H. R. Kunsch, The jackknife and the bootstrap for general stationary observations, Ann. Statist., 17 (1989), 1217–1241. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176347265 doi: 10.1214/aos/1176347265
    [13] M. W. Liemohn, A. D. Shane, A. R. Azari, A. K. Petersen, B. M. Swiger, A. Mukhopadhyay, Rmse is not enough: guidelines to robust data-model comparisons for magnetospheric physics, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 218 (2021), 105624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jastp.2021.105624 doi: 10.1016/j.jastp.2021.105624
    [14] R. Lyu, Y. Qu, K. Divaris, D. Wu, Methodological considerations in longitudinal analyses of microbiome data: a comprehensive review, Genes, 15 (2024), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes15010051 doi: 10.3390/genes15010051
    [15] T. Mathonsi, T. L. van Zyl, A statistics and deep learning hybrid method for multivariate time series forecasting and mortality modeling, Forecasting, 4 (2022), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/forecast4010001 doi: 10.3390/forecast4010001
    [16] Macrotrends LLC, South Africa GDP Growth Rate 1961–2022, 2023. Available from: https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/ZAF/south-africa/gdp-growth-rate.
    [17] F. Petropoulos, E. Spiliotis, The wisdom of the data: getting the most out of univariate time series forecasting, Forecasting, 3 (2021), 478–497. https://doi.org/10.3390/forecast3030029 doi: 10.3390/forecast3030029
    [18] D. N. Politis, J. R. Romano, A circular block-resampling procedure for stationary data, Technical reports, Stanford University Department of Statistics, & National Science Foundation, 1991. Available from: https://purl.stanford.edu/xh812zd4638.
    [19] D. N. Politis, J. P. Romano, The stationary bootstrap, J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 89 (1994), 1303–1313. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1994.10476870
    [20] M. R. Qader, S. Khan, M. Kamal, M. Usman, M. Haseeb, Forecasting carbon emissions due to electricity power generation in bahrain, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 29 (2022), 17346–17357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-16960-2 doi: 10.1007/s11356-021-16960-2
    [21] B. Radovanov, A. Marcikić, A comparison of four different block bootstrap methods, Croat. Oper. Res. Rev., 5 (2014), 189–202. https://doi.org/10.17535/crorr.2014.0007 doi: 10.17535/crorr.2014.0007
    [22] W. J. Raseman, B. Rajagopalan, J. R. Kasprzyk, W. Kleiber, Nearest neighbor time series bootstrap for generating influent water quality scenarios, Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess., 34 (2020), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-019-01762-3 doi: 10.1007/s00477-019-01762-3
    [23] X. Shao, The dependent wild bootstrap, J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., 105 (2010), 218–235. https://doi.org/10.1198/jasa.2009.tm08744
    [24] K. Singh, On the asymptotic accuracy of efron's bootstrap, Ann. Statist., 9 (1981), 1187–1195. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176345636 doi: 10.1214/aos/1176345636
    [25] K. Singh, M. Xie, Bootstrap: a statistical method, Rutgers University, USA, 2008. Available from: https://statweb.rutgers.edu/mxie/RCPapers/bootstrap.pdf.
    [26] The R Core Team, The R Project for Statistical Computing, 2022. Available from: https://www.r-project.org/.
    [27] H. D. Vinod, New bootstrap inference for spurious regression problems, J. Appl. Stat., 43 (2016), 317–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/02664763.2015.1049939 doi: 10.1080/02664763.2015.1049939
    [28] S. Wang, Y. Fan, S. Jin, P. Takyi-Aninakwa, C. Fernandez, Improved anti-noise adaptive long short-term memory neural network modeling for the robust remaining useful life prediction of lithium-ion batteries, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe., 230 (2023), 108920. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2022.108920 doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2022.108920
    [29] S. Wang, F. Wu, P. Takyi-Aninakwa, C. Fernandez, D.-I. Stroe, Q. Huang, Improved singular filtering-gaussian process regression-long short-term memory model for whole-life-cycle remaining capacity estimation of lithium-ion batteries adaptive to fast aging and multi-current variations, Energy, 284 (2023), 128677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.128677 doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.128677
    [30] Y. Wang, New developments in sequential change point detection for time series and spatio-temporal analysis, PhD thesis, University of Connecticut, 2023.
    [31] A. Young, Consistency without inference: instrumental variables in practical application, Eur. Econ. Rev., 147 (2022), 104112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2022.104112 doi: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2022.104112
    [32] G. A. Young, Bootstrap: More than a stab in the dark?, Statist. Sci., 9 (1994), 382–395. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177010383 doi: 10.1214/ss/1177010383
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(982) PDF downloads(49) Cited by(0)

Figures and Tables

Figures(19)  /  Tables(9)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog