arXiv:1807.06969v2 [math.AG] 1 Sep 2018

arXiv:1807.06969v2 [math.AG] 1 Sep 2018

DESCENDENTS AND FOURIER-MUKAI

RAHUL PANDHARIPANDE AND HSIAN-HUA TSENG

ABSTRACT. We study here the crepant resolution correspondence for theT-equivariant descendent Gromov-Witten theories ofHilbⁿ(C²)andSymⁿ(C²). The descendent correspondence is obtained from our previous matching of the associated CohFTs by applying Givental’s quantization formula to a specific symplectic transformationK. The first result of the paper is an explicit computation ofK.

Our main result then establishes a fundamental relationship between the Fourier-Mukai equivalence of the associated derived categories (by Bridgeland, King, and Reid) and the symplectic transforma- tionKvia Iritani’s integral structure. The results use Haiman’s Fourier-Mukai calculations and are exactly aligned with Iritani’s point of view on crepant resolution.

CONTENTS

0. Introduction 1

1. Quantum differential equations 6

2. Descendent Gromov-Witten theory 9

3. Descendent correspondence 13

4. Fourier-Mukai transformation 16

References 24

0. INTRODUCTION

0.1. Overview. The diagonal action onC² of the torusT = (C^∗)² lifts canonically to the Hilbert scheme ofnpointsHilbⁿ(C²)and the orbifold symmetric product

Symⁿ(C²) = [(C²)ⁿ/Σn]. Both the Hilbert-Chow morphism

(0.1) Hilbⁿ(C²)→(C²)ⁿ/Σ_n

and the coarsification morphism

(0.2) Symⁿ(C²)→(C²)ⁿ/Σn

areT-equivariant crepant resolutions of the singular quotient variety(C²)ⁿ/Σn.

The geometries of the two crepant resolutionsHilbⁿ(C²) andSymⁿ(C²)are connected in many beautiful ways. The classical McKay correspondence [19] provides an isomorphism on the level

Date: September 2018.

1

ofT-equivariant cohomology:T-equivariant singular cohomology forHilbⁿ(C²)andT-equivariant Chen-Ruan orbifold cohomology forSymⁿ(C²). A lift of the McKay correspondence to an equiv- alence of T-equivariant derived categories was proven by Bridgeland, King, and Reid [4] using a Fourier-Mukai transformation.

Quantum cohomology provides a different enrichment of the McKay correspondence. For the crepant resolutionsHilbⁿ(C²)andSymⁿ(C²), the genus 0 equivalence of theT-equivariant Gromov- Witten theories was proven in [5] using [6, 22]. Going further, the crepant resolution correspon- dence in all genera was proven in [25] by matching the associatedR-matrices and Cohomological Field Theories (CohFTs), see [24, Section 4] for a survey.

The results of [5, 25] concern theT-equivariant Gromov-Witten theory withprimaryinsertions.

However, following a remarkable proposal of Iritani, to see the connection between the Fourier- Mukai transformation of [4] and the crepant resolution correspondence for Gromov-Witten theory, descendentinsertions are required. Our first result here is a determination of the crepant resolution correspondence for the T-equivariant Gromov-Witten theories of Hilbⁿ(C²) and Symⁿ(C²) with descendent insertions via a symplectic transformation K which we compute explicitly. The main result of the paper is a proof of a fundamental relationship between the Fourier-Mukai equivalence of the associated derived categories [4] and the symplectic transformationK via Iritani’s integral structure. The results use Haiman’s Fourier-Mukai calculations [12, 13] and are exactly aligned with Iritani’s point of view on crepant resolutions [16, 17].

0.2. Descendent correspondence. The descendent correspondence for theT-equivariant Gromov- Witten theories ofHilbⁿ(C²)andSymⁿ(C²)is obtained from the CohFT matching of [25] together with the quantization formula of Givental [11]. Our first result is a formula for the symplectic transformation

K∈Id+z⁻¹·End(HT^∗(Hilbⁿ(C²)))[[z⁻¹]]

defining the descendent correspondence.¹

The formula forKis best described in terms of the Fock spaceF which is freely generated overC by commuting creation operatorsα₋kfork ∈Z_>0acting on the vacuum vectorv_∅. The annihilation operatorsαk, k ∈Z_>0 satisfy

αk·v_∅ = 0, k >0 and commutation relations

[αk, αl] =kδk+l. The Fock spaceF admits an additive basis

|µi= 1 z(µ)

Y

i

α₋µiv_∅, z(µ) =|Aut(µ)|Y

i

µi,

indexed by partitionsµ.

An additive isomorphism

(0.3) F ⊗^CC[t1, t2]=^∼ M

n≥0

HT^∗(Hilbⁿ(C²)),

1Cohomology will always be taken here withC-coefficients.

is given by identifying|µion the left with the corresponding Nakajima basis elements on the right.

The intersection pairing(−,−)^Hilbon theT-equivariant cohomology ofHilbⁿ(C²)induces a pairing on Fock space,

η(µ, ν) = (−1)^{|µ|−ℓ(µ)} (t1t2)^ℓ(µ)

δµν

z(µ).

In the following result, we write the formula forKin terms of the Fock space, K∈Id+z⁻¹ ·End(F ⊗^CC[t₁, t₂])[[z⁻¹]], ,

using (0.3).

Theorem 1. The descendent correspondence is determined by the symplectic transformation K given by the formula

K J^λ

= z^|λ| (2π√

−1)^|λ|



 Y

w:T-weights of Tan_λHilbⁿ(C²)

Γ(w/z+ 1)



♠H^λ_z.

Here,J^λ is the Jack symmetric function is defined by equation (1.5) of Section 1, andH^λ_z is the Macdonald polynomial², see [12, 18, 23]. The linear operator

♠:F → F is defined by

♠|µi=z^ℓ(µ)(2π√

−1)^ℓ(µ) Q

iµi

Y

i

µ^µ_i^it1/zµ^µ_i^it2/z

Γ(µit1/z)Γ(µit2/z)|µi.

The descendent correspondence in genus0, expressed in terms of Givental’s Lagrangian cones, is explained³in Theorem 10 of Section 3.2,

L^Sym =CKq^−D/zL^Hilb,

whereD= −|(2,1ⁿ⁻²)iis theT-equivariant first Chern class of the tautological vector bundle on Hilbⁿ(C²). The descendent correspondence for allg, formulated in terms of generating series,

e^{−F1Sym(˜t)}D^Sym =CbKb\ q^−D/z

e^{−F1Hilb(tD)}D^Hilb , is discussed in Theorem 11 of Section 3.3.

For toric crepant resolutions, the symplectic transformation underlying the descendent corre- spondence is constructed in [9] by using explicit slices of Givental’s Lagrangian cones constructed via the Toric Mirror Theorem [7, 10]. We proceed differently here. The symplectic transformation Kis constructed by comparing the two fundamental solutionsS^Hilb andS^Sym of the QDE given by descendent Gromov-Witten invariants ofHilbⁿ(C²)andSymⁿ(C²)respectively. Via theHilb/Sym correspondence in genus 0, Theorem 1 is then simply a reformulation of the calculation of the connection matrix in [23, Theorem 4].

2The footnotezindicates a rescaling of the parameters,H^λ_z =H^λ(^t_z¹,^t_z²).

3See for (2.5) the definition of the symplectic isomorphismC.

0.3. Fourier-Mukai. An equivalence ofT-equivariant derived categories FM:D^bT(Hilbⁿ(C²))→DT^b(Symⁿ(C²))

is constructed by Bridgeland, King, and Reid in [4] via a tautological Fourier-Mukai kernel. We also denote byFMthe induced isomorphism onT-equivariantK-groups,

(0.4) FM:KT(Hilbⁿ(C²))→KT(Symⁿ(C²)).

Iritani [16] has proposed a beautiful framework for the crepant resolution correspondence. In the case of Hilbⁿ(C²) and Symⁿ(C²), the isomorphism (0.4) on K-theory should be related to a symplectic transformation

H^Hilb → H^Sym

via Iritani’s integral structure. The Givental spaces H^Hilb and H^Sym will be defined below (in a multivalued form). A discussion of Iritani’s perspective can be found in [17]. Our main result is a formulation and proof of Iritani’s proposal for the crepant resolutionsHilbⁿ(C²)andSymⁿ(C²).

For the precise statement, further definitions are required.

• Define the operators deg^Hilb₀ ,ρ^Hilb, andµ^HilbonHT^∗(Hilbⁿ(C²))as follows. Forφ ∈HT^k(Hilbⁿ(C²)), deg^Hilb₀ (φ) =kφ ,

µ^Hilb(φ) = k

2 − 2n 2

φ , ρ^Hilb(φ) =c^T₁(Hilbⁿ(C²))∪φ . Themulti-valued Givental spaceHe^Hilb forHilbⁿ(C²)is defined by

He^Hilb =HT^∗(Hilbⁿ(C²),C)⊗^C[t1,t2]C(t1, t2)[[log(z)]]((z⁻¹)). Definition 2. LetΨ^Hilb :KT(Hilbⁿ(C²))→He^Hilb be defined by

Ψ^Hilb(E) =z^−µHilbz^ρHilb

ΓHilb∪(2π√

−1)^degHilb20 ch(E)

,

where ch(−) is the T-equivariant Chern character, ΓHilb ∈ HT^∗(Hilbⁿ(C²)) is the T-equivariant Gamma class ofHilbⁿ(C²)of[9, Section 3.1], and the operators

z^−µHilb :He^Hilb →He^Hilb, z^ρHilb :He^Hilb →He^Hilb are defined by

z^−µHilb =X

k≥0

−µ^Hilblogzk

k! , z^ρHilb =X

k≥0

ρ^Hilblogzk

k! .

Since|µiis identified with the corresponding Nakajima basis element, we have deg^Hilb₀ |µi= 2(n−ℓ(µ))|µi.

Also, sincet1, t2both have degree2, we have

deg^Hilb₀ t1 = 2 =deg^Hilb₀ t2.

• Define the operators⁴deg^Sym₀ ,ρ^Sym, andµ^SymonHT^∗(ISymⁿ(C²))as follows. Forφ∈HT^k(ISymⁿ(C²)), deg^Sym₀ (φ) =kφ ,

µ^Sym(φ) =

deg_CR(φ) 2 − 2n

2

φ , ρ^Sym(φ) = c^T₁(Symⁿ(C²))∪^CRφ .

There aretwodegree operators here: deg^Sym₀ extracts the usual degree of a cohomology class on the inertia orbifold, and deg_CRextracts the age-shifted degree. Also, we have

deg_CRt1 =deg^Sym₀ t1 = 2 =deg_CRt2 =deg^Sym₀ t2. The multi-valued Givental spaceHe^Symfor Symⁿ(C²)is defined by

He^Sym =HT^∗(ISymⁿ(C²))⊗^C[t1,t2]C(t₁, t₂)[[logz]]((z⁻¹)). Definition 3. LetΨ^Sym :K^T(Symⁿ(C²))→He^Symbe defined by

Ψ^Sym(E) =z^−µSymz^ρSym

ΓSym∪(2π√

−1)

degSym 0

2 ch(Ee )

,

where ch(e −) is the T-equivariant orbifold Chern character, ΓSym ∈ HT^∗(ISymⁿ(C²)) is the T- equivariant Gamma class ofSymⁿ(C²)of[9, Section 3.1], and the operators

z^−µSym :He^Sym →He^Sym, z^ρSym :He^Sym→He^Sym are defined by

z^−µSym =X

k≥0

(−µ^Symlogz)^k

k! , z^ρSym =X

k≥0

(ρ^Symlogz)^k

k! .

The precise relationship betweenFMandKvia Iritani’s integral structure is the central result of the paper.

Theorem 4. The following diagram is commutative⁵: KT(Hilbⁿ(C²)) ^{FM //}

Ψ^Hilb

KT(Symⁿ(C²))

Ψ^Sym

He^Hilb

CK

z7→−z // He^Sym.

The bottom row of the diagram of Theorem 4 is determined by the analytic continuation of so- lutions of the quantum differential equation ofHilbⁿ(C²)along the ray from 0 to−1in theq-plane [23, Theorem 4]. A lifting of monodromies of the quantum differential equation of Hilbⁿ(C²)to autoequivalences ofDT^b(Hilbⁿ(C²))has been announced by Bezrukavnikov and Okounkov in [20, Sections 3.2.8 and 5.2.7] and [21, Section 3.2]. In their upcoming paper [2], commutative diagrams

4In the definition ofρ^Symwe denote by∪^CRthe Chen-Ruan cup product on cohomology of the inertia stack.

5Our variablezcorresponds to−zin [9] as can be seen by the difference in the quantum differential equation (2.2) here and the quantum differential equation [9, equation (2.5)]. After the substitutionz7→ −zinK, Theorem 4 matches the conventions of Iritani’s framework in [9].

parallel to Theorem 4 are constructed in cases offlopsof holomorphic symplectic manifolds.⁶The- orem 4 fits into the framework of [2] if the relationship betweenHilbⁿ(C²)andSymⁿ(C²)is viewed morally as a flop in their sense.

A special aspect of the ray from0to−1is the identification of the end result of the analytic con- tinuation (the right side of the diagram) with the orbifold geometrySymⁿ(C²). The identification of the end results of other paths from0to−1with geometric theories is an interesting direction of study. Are there twisted orbifold theories which realize these analytic continuations?

0.4. Acknowledgments. We thank J. Bryan, T. Graber, Y.-P. Lee, A. Okounkov, and Y. Ruan for many conversations about the crepant resolution correspondence forHilbⁿ(C²)andSymⁿ(C²). The paper began with Y. Jiang asking us about the role of the Fourier-Mukai transformation in the results of [25]. We are very grateful to H. Iritani for detailed discussions about his integral structure and crepant resolution framework.

R. P. was partially supported by SNF-200020162928, ERC-2012-AdG-320368-MCSK, ERC- 2017-AdG-786580-MACI, SwissMAP, and the Einstein Stiftung. H.-H. T. was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1506551. The research presented here was furthered during a visit of the authors to Humboldt University in Berlin in June 2018.

1. QUANTUM DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS

1.1. The differential equation. We recall the quantum differential equation forHilbⁿ(C²)calcu- lated in [22] and further studied in [23]. We follow here the exposition [22, 23].

The quantum differential equation (QDE) for the Hilbert schemes of points onC² is given by

(1.1) q d

dqΦ =M_DΦ, Φ∈ F ⊗^CC(t1, t2), whereM_D is the operator of quantum multiplication byD=−|2,1ⁿ⁻²i, (1.2) M_D = (t1+t2)X

k>0

k 2

(−q)^k+ 1

(−q)^k−1α₋kαk − t1+t2

2

(−q) + 1 (−q)−1| · | +1

2 X

k,l>0

ht1t2αk+lα₋kα₋l−α₋k−lαkαl

i.

Here| · |=P

k>0α₋kαk is the energy operator.

While the quantum differential equation (1.1) has a regular singular point at q = 0, the point q=−1is regular.

The quantum differential equation considered in Givental’s theory contains a parameterz. In the case of the Hilbert schemes of points onC², the QDE with parameterz is

(1.3) zq d

dqΦ =M_DΦ, Φ∈ F ⊗^CC(t1, t2).

6In fact, the study of commutative diagrams connecting derived equivalences and the solutions of the quantum differential equation has old roots in the subject. See, for example, [3, 14]. These papers refer to talks of Kontsevich on homological mirror symmetry in the 1990s for the first formulations.

ForΦ∈ F ⊗^CC(t1, t2), define

(1.4) Φz = Φ

t1

z,t2

z , q

. DefineΘ∈Aut(F)by

Θ|µi=z^ℓ(µ)|µi. The following Proposition allows us to use the results in [23].

Proposition 5. IfΦis a solution of (1.1), thenΘΦ_z is a solution of (1.3).

Proposition 5 follow immediately from the following direct computation.

Lemma 6. Fork >0, we haveΘαk = ¹_zαkΘandΘα₋k=zα₋kΘ.

1.2. Solutions. We recall the solution of QDE (1.1) constructed in [23]. Let J_λ ∈ F ⊗^CC(t₁, t₂)

be the integral form of the Jack symmetric function depending on the parameterα= 1/θof [18, 23].

Then

(1.5) J^λ =t^|₂^λ|t^ℓ(₁^·)Jλ|α=−t1/t2

is an eigenfunction ofM_D(0) with eigenvalue −c(λ;t1, t2) := −P

(i,j)∈λ[(j −1)t1+ (i−1)t2].

The coefficient of

|µi ∈ F ⊗^CC(t₁, t₂)

in the expansion ofJ^λis(t1t2)^ℓ(µ)times a polynomial int1andt2 of degree|λ| −ℓ(µ).

The paper [23] also uses a Hermitian pairingh−,−iH on the Fock spaceF defined by the three following properties

• hµ|νi^H = _(t ¹

1t2)^ℓ(µ) δµν

z(µ),

• haf, gi^H =ahf, gi^H, a∈C(t1, t2),

• hf, gi^H =hg, fiH, wherea(t1, t2) =a(−t1,−t2). By a direct calculation, we find

(1.6)

J^λ,J^µ

H =η(J^λ,J^µ),

whereηis theT-equivariant pairing onHilbⁿ(C²). SinceJ^λ corresponds to theT-equivariant class of theT-fixed point ofHilbⁿ(C²)associated toλ,

(1.7) ||J^λ||² =||J^λ||²H = Y

w:tangent weights atλ

w see [23].

There are solutions to (1.1) of the form

Y^λ(q)q^{−c(λ;t1,t2)}, Y^λ(q)∈ F ⊗^CC(t₁, t₂)[[q]],

which converge for|q|<1and satisfyY^λ(0) =J^λ. We refer to [15, Chapter XIX] for a discussion of how these solutions are constructed.

By [23, Corollary 1],

(1.8) hY^λ(q),Y^µ(q)i^H =δλµ||J^λ||²H =hJ^λ,J^µi^H.

As in [23, Section 3.1.3], letYbe the matrix whose column vectors areY^λ. Fix an auxiliary basis {eλ}ofF. We then viewYas the matrix representation⁷of an operator such thatY(eλ) =Y^λ.

Define the following further diagonal matrices in the basis{eλ}:

Matrix Eigenvalues

L z^−|λ|Q

w:tangent weights atλw^1/2

L0 q^{−c(λ;t1,t2)/z}

Define

Y_z =Y t1

z,t2

z, q

. Consider the following solution to (1.3),

(1.9) S= ΘY_zL⁻¹L0.

We may viewSas the matrix representation of an operator where in the domain we use the basis {eλ}while in the range we use the basis{|µi}.

Proposition 7. ΘY_zL⁻¹ can be expanded into a convergent power series in 1/z with coefficients End(F)-valued analytic functions inq, t₁, t₂.

Proof. LetΦ^λbe the column ofΘY_zL⁻¹ indexed byλ. By construction ofY, ΘY_zL⁻¹

q=0 = ΘJ_zL⁻¹, henceΦ^λ

q=0 = ΘJ^λ_zz^|λ|Q

w:tangent weights atλw^−1/2. WriteJ^λ =P

ǫJ^λ_ǫ(t1, t2)|ǫi. Then we have ΘJ^λ_zz^|λ|=X

ǫ

J^λ_ǫ(t1/z, t2/z)z^ℓ(ǫ)z^|λ||ǫi

=X

ǫ

J^λ_ǫ(t1, t2)z^−2ℓ(ǫ)z^{ℓ(ǫ)−|λ|}z^ℓ(ǫ)z^|λ||ǫi=J^λ. Together with (1.7), we findΦ^λ

q=0 =J^λ/||J^λ||.

SinceSis a solution to (1.3),Φ^λ is a solution to the differential equation

(1.10) zq d

dqΦ^λ = (M_D+c(λ;t1, t2))Φ^λ.

By uniqueness of solutions to (1.10) with given initial conditions,Φ^λcan also be constructed using the Peano-Baker series (see [1]) with the initial condition

Φ^λ

q=0 =J^λ/||J^λ||.

As the Peano-Baker series is manifestly a power series inz⁻¹with analytic coefficients, the Propo-

sition follows.

7In the domain ofYwe use the basis{eλ}, while in the range ofYwe use the basis{|µi}.

2. DESCENDENT GROMOV-WITTEN THEORY

2.1. Hilbert schemes. Let S^Hilb(q, tD) be the generating series of genus 0 descendent Gromov- Witten invariants ofHilbⁿ(C²),

(2.1) η(a,S^Hilb(q, tD)b) =η(a, b) +X

k≥0

z^−1−kX

m,d

q^d

m!ha, tDD, ..., tDD

| {z }

m

, bψ_m+2^k i^Hilb0,d^n(C2)

By definition,S^Hilbis a formal power series in1/zwhose coefficients are in End(F)[tD][[q]], written in the basis{|µi}. S^Hilb(q, tD)satisfies the following two differential equations:

(2.2) z ∂

∂tD

S^Hilb(q, tD) = (D⋆tD)S^Hilb(q, tD),

(2.3) zq ∂

∂qS^Hilb(q, tD)−z ∂

∂tD

S^Hilb(q, tD) =−S^Hilb(q, tD)(D·).

Here(D⋆t_D) = (D⋆t_DD)is the operator of quantum multiplication by the divisorD at the point⁸ tDD,

η((D⋆tD)a, b) = X

m≥0,d≥0

q^d

m!hD, a, tDD, ..., tDD

| {z }

m

, bi^Hilb0,d ^n(C2), and(D·)is the operator of classical cup product byD. In particular,

(2.4) (D⋆tD)

tD=0 =M_D(q), (D·) = (D·)

tD=0 =M_D(0).

Equation (2.2) follows from the topological recursion relations in genus0. Equation (2.3) follows from the divisor equations fordescendentGromov-Witten invariants.

We first determineS^Hilb

t_D=0. Combining (2.2) and (2.3) and settingtD = 0, we find zq ∂

∂q

S^Hilb tD=0

=M_D(q)

S^Hilb tD=0

−

S^Hilb tD=0

M_D(0). So, we see

zq ∂

∂q

S^Hilb

tD=0J^λ/||J^λ||

=M_D(q)

S^Hilb

tD=0J^λ/||J^λ||

−

S^Hilb tD=0

M_D(0)J^λ/||J^λ||

=M_D(q)

S^Hilb

tD=0

J^λ/||J^λ||

+c(λ;t1, t2)

S^Hilb

tD=0

J^λ/||J^λ||

.

Since S^Hilb

tD=0,q=0 = Id, we have

S^Hilb

tD=0J^λ/||J^λ||

q=0 = J^λ/||J^λ||. Comparing the result with the proof of Proposition 7, we conclude

S^Hilb

tD=0J^λ/||J^λ||= Φ^λ, asF-valued power series.

LetA : F → F be defined byA(e_λ) = J^λ/||J^λ|| . The above discussion yields the following result.

8We usetDto denote the coordinate ofD.

Proposition 8. As power series in1/z, we haveS^Hilb

tD=0

A=SL⁻₀¹.

By definition,S^Hilbis a formal power series inq. By Proposition 8,S^Hilbis analytic inq.

By the divisor equation for primary Gromov-Witten invariants, we have q ∂

∂q(D⋆t_D)− ∂

∂tD

(D⋆t_D) = 0. A direct calculation then shows that the two differential operators

z ∂

∂tD −(D⋆tD) and zq ∂

∂q −z ∂

∂tD −(−)(D·)

commute. Therefore, equation (2.2) and Proposition 8 uniquely determineS^Hilb(q, tD).

2.2. Symmetric products. We introduce another copy of the Fock spaceF which we denote by Fe. An additive isomorphism

F ⊗e ^CC[t₁, t₂]≃M

n≥0

HT^∗(ISymⁿ(C²),C),

is given by identifying |µi ∈ Fe with the fundamental class [I_µ] of the component of the inertia orbifoldISymⁿ(C²)indexed byµ. The orbifold Poincar´e pairing(−,−)^Sym induces via this iden- tification a pairing onFe,

e

η(µ, ν) = 1 (t1t2)^ℓ(µ)

δµν

z(µ). Following [25, Equation (1.6)], we define

|eµi= (−√

−1)^{ℓ(µ)−|µ|}|µi ∈Fe. We will use the following linear isomorphism

(2.5) C:F →Fe, |µi 7→ |eµi,

which is compatible with the pairingsηandη.e

We recall the definition of the ramified Gromov-Witten invariants of Symⁿ(C²) following [25, Section 3.2]. Consider the moduli spaceM^g,r+b(Symⁿ(C²))of stable maps to Symⁿ(C²)and let

M^g,r,b(Symⁿ(C²)) = [ ev_r+1⁻¹ (I(2))∩...∩ev_r+b⁻¹ (I(2)) /Σb]

where the symmetric groupΣbacts by permuting the lastbmarked points. Define ramified descen- dent Gromov-Witten invariants by

* _r Y

i=1

Iµⁱψ^ki

+Symⁿ(C²) g,b

= Z

[Mg,r,b(Symⁿ(C²))]^vir

Yr i=1

ev_i^∗([Iµⁱ])ψ^ki.

LetS^Sym(u,˜t)be the generating function of genus0ramified descendent Gromov-Witten invari- ants of Symⁿ(C²),

(2.6) η(a,˜ S^Sym(u,t)b) = ˜˜ η(a, b) +X

k≥0

z^−1−kX

m,d

u^d

m!ha,˜tI₍₂₎, ...,tI˜₍₂₎

| {z }

m

, bψ_m+2^k i^Sym0,d^n(C2).

By definition,S^Symis a formal power series in1/zwhose coefficients are in End(Fe)[˜t][[u]], written in the basis{|eµi}. S^Sym satisfies the following two differential equations:

(2.7) z ∂

∂˜tS^Sym(u,t) = (I˜ (2)⋆˜t)S^Sym(u,˜t),

(2.8) ∂

∂uS^Sym(u,˜t) = ∂

∂˜tS^Sym(u,˜t).

Here(I(2)⋆˜t) = (I(2)⋆˜tI₍₂₎)is the operator of quantum multiplication by the divisorI(2) at the point

˜tI₍₂₎,

˜

η((I(2)⋆˜t)a, b) =X

m,d

u^d

m!hI(2), a,˜tI(2), ...,˜tI(2)

| {z }

m

, bi^Sym0,d^n(C2).

Equation (2.7) follows from the genus0topological recursion relations for orbifold Gromov-Witten invariants, see [26]. Equation (2.8) follows from divisor equations for ramifiedorbifold Gromov- Witten invariants, see [5].

We first compare the operators(D⋆t_DD)and(I(2)⋆˜tI(2)). For simplicity, write(2)for the partition (2,1ⁿ⁻²). By [25, Theorem 4], we have

hD, D, ..., D

| {z }

k

, λ, µi^Hilb =(−1)^k+1h(2),(2), ...,(2)

| {z }

k

, λ, µi^Hilb

=(−1)^k+1h(˜2),(˜2), ...,(˜2)

| {z }

k

,λ,˜ µ˜i^Sym

=h−(˜2),−(˜2), ...,−(˜2)

| {z }

k

,λ,˜ µ˜i^Sym,

where( ˜−)is defined in [25, Equation (1.6)]. Therefore, under the identification|µi 7→ |µ˜i, we have (2.9) D⋆tDD =−(˜2)⋆_tD(−(˜2)).

Now,

(˜2) = (−i)ⁿ⁻¹⁻ⁿI(2) = (−i)⁻¹I(2) =iI(2). Hence we have, after−q=e^iu,

(2.10) D⋆tDD = (−i)I(2)⋆˜tI₍₂₎, t˜= (−i)tD. Consider nowS^Sym

_˜

t=0. By (2.7) and (2.8), we have z ∂

∂uS^Sym(u,˜t) = (I(2)⋆t˜)S^Sym(u,˜t). Settingt˜= 0and using (2.4) and (2.10), we find

z ∂

∂u

S^Sym_˜

t=0

=iM_D(−e^iu) S^Sym_˜

t=0

.

Since _∂u^∂ =iq_∂q^∂, we find that, after−q=e^iu,

(2.11) zq ∂

∂q

S^Sym _˜

t=0

=M_D(q) S^Sym

_˜

t=0

.

RecallS = ΘY_zL⁻¹L0 also satisfied the same equation. We may then compareΘY_zL⁻¹L0 and

S^Sym_˜

t=0

by comparing them atu= 0which corresponds toq=−1. Set B =S

q=−1 = ΘYzL⁻¹L0

q=−1.

SinceS^Sym _˜

t=0,u=0 =Id, we have, after−q=e^iu,

(2.12) S^Sym

_˜

t=0 =CSB⁻¹C⁻¹. By Proposition 8, we have

(2.13) CSB⁻¹C⁻¹ =CS^Hilb

tD=0AL0B⁻¹C⁻¹. SinceAL0A⁻¹ =q^D/z,

AL₀B⁻¹ =AL₀A⁻¹AB⁻¹ =q^D/zAB⁻¹. DefineK=BA⁻¹. We can then rewrite (2.13) as

(2.14) S^Sym_˜

t=0 =CS^Hilb

tD=0q^D/zK⁻¹C⁻¹.

By the divisor equation for orbifold Gromov-Witten invariants in [5] (see also [25, Section 3.2]), we have

∂

∂u(I(2)⋆˜t)− ∂

∂t˜(I(2)⋆˜t) = 0. A direct calculation then shows that the two differential operators

z ∂

∂˜t −(I(2)⋆t˜) and ∂

∂u − ∂

∂˜t

commute. ThereforeS^Sym(u,˜t)is uniquely determined by equation (2.7) and S^Sym _˜

t=0. By (2.10), we have

z ∂

∂tD −(D⋆tD) =i

z ∂

∂˜t −(I(2)⋆˜t))

, after−q =e^iu. Then equation (2.14) implies the following result.

Theorem 9. After−q=e^iuand˜t= (−i)tD, we have

S^Sym(u,˜t) =CS^Hilb(q, tD)q^D/zK⁻¹C⁻¹.

2.3. Proof of Theorem 1. By the definition ofBand Proposition 7,Kis an End(F)-valued power series in1/z of the form

K=Id+O(1/z).

By Theorem 9 and the fact thatS^Hilb andS^Symare symplectic, it follows thatKis also symplectic.

Next, we explicitly evaluateK. By the definition ofBand [23, Theorem 4], we have B = ΘYzL⁻¹L0

q=−1

= 1

(2π√

−1)^|·|ΘΓzH_z G⁻_DTz¹ L0

q=−1L⁻¹. (2.15)

Here,G_DTis the diagonal matrix in the basis{eλ}with eigenvalues q^{−c(λ;t1,t2)} Y

w:tangent weights atλ

1 Γ(w+ 1), see [23, Section 3.1.2]. The operatorΓis given by

Γ|µi= (2π√

−1)^ℓ(µ) Q

iµ_i G_GW(t1, t2)|µi, see [23, Section 3.3], where

G_GW(t1, t2)|µi=Y

i

g(µi, t1)g(µi, t2)|µi, and

g(µ_i, t₁)g(µ_i, t₂) = µ^µ_i^it1µ^µ_i^it2 Γ(µit1)Γ(µit2), see [23, Section 3.1.2]. Define

Γ_z =Γ t1

z,t2

z

. Since

K=BA⁻¹ = 1 (2π√

−1)^|·|ΘΓzH_z G⁻_DTz¹ L0

q=−1L⁻¹A⁻¹, and||J^λ||=Q

w:tangent weights atλw^1/2, we see thatKis the operator given by (2.16) K(J^λ) = z^|λ|

(2π√

−1)^|λ|

Y

w:tangent weights atλ

Γ(w/z+ 1)ΘΓzH^λ_z.

The proof Theorem 1 is complete.

3. DESCENDENT CORRESPONDENCE

3.1. Variables. We compare the descendent Gromov-Witten theories ofHilbⁿ(C²)and Symⁿ(C²).

The following identifications will be used throughout:

(3.1) −q=e^iu, ˜t= (−i)tD.

3.2. Genus0. Following [11], consider the Givental spaces

H^Hilb =HT^∗(Hilbⁿ(C²))⊗^C[t1,t2]C(t₁, t₂)[[q]]((z⁻¹)), H^Sym =HT^∗(Symⁿ(C²))⊗^C[t1,t2]C(t1, t2)[[u]]((z⁻¹)), equipped with the symplectic forms

(f, g)^HHilb =Res_z=0(f(−z), g(z))^Hilb, f, g ∈ H^Hilb, (f, g)^HSym =Res_z=0(f(−z), g(z))^Sym, f, g ∈ H^Sym. The choice of bases

{|µiµ∈Part(n)} ⊂HT^∗(Hilbⁿ(C²)), {|eµiµ∈Part(n)} ⊂HT^∗(Symⁿ(C²)),

yields Darboux coordinate systems{p^µ_a, q^ν_b},{ep^µ_a,eq_b^ν}. General points ofH^Hilb,H^Symcan be written in the form

X

a≥0

X

µ

p^µ_a|µi(t1t2)^ℓ(µ)z(µ)

(−1)^{|µ|−ℓ(µ)} (−z)^−a−1

| {z }

p

+X

b≥0

X

ν

q_b^ν|νiz^b

| {z }

q

∈ H^Hilb,

X

a≥0

X

µ

e

p^µ_a|eµi(t1t2)^ℓ(µ)z(µ)

1 (−z)^−a−1

| {z }

e p

+X

b≥0

X

ν

e q_b^ν|eνiz^b

| {z }

e q

∈ H^Sym.

Define the Lagrangian cones associated to the generating functions of genus 0 descendent and ancestor Gromov-Witten invariants as follows:

L^Hilb ={(p,q)p =dqF0^Hilb} ⊂ H^Hilb, L^Hilban,tD ={(p,q)p=dqFan,t^HilbD,0} ⊂ H^Hilb, L^Sym={(ep,eq)

ep=dq_eF0^Sym} ⊂ H^Sym, L^Sym_an,˜t={(ep,eq)

ep=dq_eF_a,^Sym˜t,0} ⊂ H^Sym, where

F0^Hilb(t) = X

d,k≥0

q^d

k!ht(ψ), ...,t(ψ)

| {z }

k

i^Hilb0,d , Fan,t^HilbD,0(t) = X

d,k,l≥0

q^d

k!l!ht( ¯ψ), ...,t( ¯ψ)

| {z }

k

, t_DD, ..., t_DD

| {z }

l

i^Hilb0,d ,

F0^Sym(et) = X

b,k≥0

u^b

k!het(ψ), ...,et(ψ)

| {z }

k

i^Sym0,b , F_an,^Sym˜t,0(et) = X

b,k,l≥0

u^b

k!l!het( ¯ψ), ...,et( ¯ψ)

| {z }

k

, tI(2), ..., tI(2)

| {z }

l

i^Sym0,b .

Here,q=t−1zandqe=et−1z are dilaton shifts.

By the descendent/ancestor relations [8], we have

L^Hilb =S^Hilb(q, tD)⁻¹L^Hilban,tD, L^Sym =S^Sym(u,˜t)⁻¹L^Sym_an,t˜. By the genus0crepant resolution correspondence proven⁹in [5], we have

CL^Hilban,tD =L^Sym_an,˜t. Theorem 10. We haveL^Sym =CKq^−D/zL^Hilb.

9In particular, the results of [5] implies thatL^Hilban,tD is analytic inq.

Proof. Using Theorem 9, we calculate

L^Sym=S^Sym(u,˜t)⁻¹L^Sym_an,t˜

=S^Sym(u,˜t)⁻¹CL^Hilban,tD

=CKq^−D/zS^Hilb(q, tD)⁻¹L^Hilban,tD

=CKq^−D/zL^Hilb.

3.3. Higher genus. Consider the total descendent potentials, D^Hilb = exp X

g≥0

~^g−1Fg^Hilb

!

, Fg^Hilb(t) = X

d,k≥0

q^d

k!ht(ψ), ...,t(ψ)

| {z }

k

i^Hilbg,d ,

D^Sym= exp X

g≥0

~^g−1Fg^Sym

!

, Fg^Sym(et) = X

b,k≥0

u^b

k!het(ψ), ...,et(ψ)

| {z }

k

i^Symg,b ,

and the total ancestor potentials¹⁰, A^Hilban,tD = exp X

g≥0

~^g−1Fan,t^HilbD,g

!

, Fan,t^HilbD,g(t) = X

d,k,l≥0

q^d

k!l!ht( ¯ψ), ...,t( ¯ψ)

| {z }

k

, tDD, ..., tDD

| {z }

l

i^Hilbg,d ,

A^Sym_an,˜t= exp X

g≥0

~^g−1F_an,^Sym˜t,g

!

, F_an,^Sym˜t,g(et) = X

b,k,l≥0

u^b

k!l!het( ¯ψ), ...,et( ¯ψ)

| {z }

k

, tI(2), ..., tI(2)

| {z }

l

i^Symg,b .

Givental’s quantization formalism [11] produces differential operators by quantizing quadratic Hamiltonians associated to linear symplectic transforms by the following rules:

qd^µaq_b^ν = q_a^µq^ν_b

~ ,qd^µap^ν_b =q^µ_a ∂

∂q_b^ν,pd^µap^ν_b =~ ∂

∂qa^µ

∂

∂q_b^ν , ed

q^µaeq_b^ν = qe_a^µqe^ν_b

~ ,qed^µape^ν_b =qe^µ_a ∂

∂eq_b^ν,epd^µape^ν_b =~ ∂

∂eqa^µ

∂

∂qe_b^ν . By the descendent/ancestor relations [8], we have

D^Hilb=e^F1Hilb(tD) \

S^Hilb(q, tD)⁻¹A^Hilban,tD, D^Sym=e^F1Sym(˜t) \

S^Sym(u,˜t)⁻¹A^Sym_an,˜t,

whereF₁^Hilb andF₁^Symare generating functions of genus1primary invariants with insertionsDand I(2)respectively.F₁^SymandF₁^Hilb can be easily matched using [25, Theorem 4].

Theorem 11. We havee^{−F1Sym(˜t)}D^Sym =CbbK\ q^−D/z

e^{−F1Hilb(tD)}D^Hilb .

10The results of [25] imply thatA^Hilban,tD depends analytically inq.

Proof. By [25, Theorem 4], we haveCbA^Hilban,tD =A^Sym_an,˜t. Using Theorem 9, we calculate S^Sym\(u,˜t)⁻¹A^Sym_an,t˜=Cb \

Kq^−D/zS^Hilb(q, tD)⁻¹A^Hilban,t_D. Therefore, we conclude

e^{−F1Sym(˜t)}D^Sym = \

S^Sym(u,˜t)⁻¹A^Sym_an,˜t

=Cb \

Kq^−D/zS^Hilb\(q, tD)⁻¹A^Hilban,t_D

=Cb \ Kq^−D/z

e^{−F1Hilb(tD)}D^Hilb .

4. FOURIER-MUKAI TRANSFORMATION

4.1. Proof of Theorem 4. We first localize the top row of the diagram of Theorem 4:

KT(Hilbⁿ(C²))loc FM //

Ψ^Hilb

KT(Symⁿ(C²))loc Ψ^Sym

He^Hilb

CK

z7→−z //He^Sym.

Here, loc denotes tensoring by Frac(R(T)), the field of fractions of the representation ringR(T)of the torusT. The mapsΨ^Hilb andΨ^Symare still well-defined since theT-equivariant Chern character of a representation is invertible. The commutation of the above diagram immediately implies the commutation of the diagram of Theorem 4.

Letkλ ∈KT(Hilbⁿ(C²))be the skyscraper sheaf supported on the fixed point indexed byλ. The set{kλ

λ ∈ Part(n)}is a basis ofKT(Hilbⁿ(C²))loc as a Frac(R(T))-vector space. The commuta- tion of the localized diagram is then a consequence of the following equality: for allλ∈Part(n),

(4.1) CK

z7→−z◦Ψ^Hilb(kλ) = Ψ^Sym◦FM(kλ). To prove (4.1), we will match the two sides by explicit calculation.

4.2. Iritani’s Gamma class. For a vector bundleVon a Deligne-Mumford stackX, V → X ,

Iritani has defined a characteristic class called theGamma class. Let IX =a

i

Xi

be the decomposition of the inertia stack IX into connected components. By pulling back V to IX and restricting toXⁱ, we obtain a vector bundle V

Xi on Xⁱ. The stabilizer element gi of X associated to the component Xⁱ acts on VXi. The bundleV

Xi decomposes under gi into a direct sum of eigenbundles

V

Xi =⊕⁰≤f <1V^i,f,