text:
# Quadrupole collectivity of neutron-rich Neon isotopes.

## 1 Introduction

The properties of the ground and lowest-lying excited states of nuclei close to the stability valley are determined to a great extent by the underlying mean field in which all the nucleons move. The nuclear mean field, obtained through the mean field approximation to the nuclear many body problem, provides the important concepts of magic numbers (or shell closures) and that of spontaneous symmetry breaking. For nuclei with proton and/or neutron numbers close to the magic ones symmetry conserving (i.e. non superconducting and spherical) ground states are expected. On the other hand, nuclei away from the magic configurations are expected to show strong symmetry breaking at the mean field level leading to deformed (and superconducting) ground states which are the heads of bands generated kinematically by restoring the broken symmetries -like the well known example of the rotational bands.

Almost thirty years ago, experimental evidences were found in the neutron-rich light nuclei around 31Na Thibault.75 ; Touchard.82  pointing to the breaking of the N=20 magic number. The first attempt to understand the phenomenon from a theoretical point of view Campi.75  suggested that correlations beyond mean field coming from the restoration of the rotational symmetry could be strong enough as to overcome the mean field shell effects and lead to deformed ground states for closed shell nuclei like 31Na and 32Mg. Further theoretical studies using the Shell Model (SM) approach were carried out Poves.87 ; Warburton.90  and it was suggested that an intruder configuration consisting of a two particle two hole neutron excitation from the sd shell into the f7/2 one was the responsible for deformation in the ground state of 32Mg.

The recent availability of Radioactive Ion Beam facilities in several laboratories like Ganil, GSI, MSU and Riken to cite a few and the development of very efficient mass separators and solid state detectors has made possible to measure up many properties concerning the ground state and the lowest lying excited states of many exotic, neutron-rich light nuclei. In particular, the exploration of both the $`N=20`$ and $`N=28`$ shell closures far from stability has proven to be a rich source of new phenomena. Among the variety of available experimental data, the most convincing evidence for a deformed ground state in the region around $`N=20`$ is found in the 32Mg nucleus where both the excitation energies of the lowest lying $`2^+`$32Mg.E2+  and $`4^+`$ 32Mg.E4+  states and the $`B(E2,0^+2^+)`$ transition probability 32Mg.BE2  have been measured. The low excitation energy of the $`2^+`$ state, the high value of the $`B(E2)`$ transition probability and also the ratio $`E(4_1^+)/E(2_1^+)=2.6`$ are fairly compatible with the expectations for a rotational band. Additional evidence comes from the neighboring isotope 34Mg where the $`E(2_1^+)`$ is only 0.66 MeV, the $`B(E2,0^+2^+)`$ is 631 $`e^2\text{fm}^2`$ and the $`E(4_1^+)/E(2_1^+)`$ ratio is 3.2, that is, the $`0_1^+`$, $`2_1^+`$ and $`4_1^+`$ satisfy all the requirements to belong to a strongly deformed rotational band Yoneda.01 ; Iwa.01 .

From a theoretical point of view, the ground state of 32Mg is spherical at the mean field level. However, when the zero point rotational energy correction (ZPRE) stemming from the restoration of the rotational symmetry is considered, the energy landscape as a function of the quadrupole moment changes dramatically and 32Mg becomes deformed Campi.75 ; Berger.93 ; Rein.99 ; Heenen.99 ; Rayner.2000 . A more careful analysis of the energy landscape including the ZPRE correction reveals that, in fact, there are two coexistent configurations (prolate and oblate) with similar energies indicating thereby that configuration mixing of states with different quadrupole intrinsic deformation has to be considered. Therefore, an Angular Momentum Projected Generator Coordinate Method (AMP-GCM) calculation with the quadrupole moment as collective coordinate is called for. We have applied this method in Ref. Rayner.2000.a  to the study of the nuclei 30-34Mg with the Gogny force. We have obtained prolate ground states for 32-34Mg indicating that the $`N=20`$ shell closure is not preserved for the Mg isotopes. Moreover, a good agreement with the experimental data for the $`2^+`$ excitation energies and $`B(E2)`$ transition probabilities was obtained. The method has been used to study quadrupole collectivity of the Si isotopes Rayner.2001 , the N=28 isotopes N=28  as well as the superdeformed band in 32S ref\_32S  with quite a good success.

The purpose of this paper is to extend the AMP-GCM calculations to the study of the Neon (two proton less than Magnesium) isotopes from A=20 up to A=34. Contrary to the Magnesium isotopic chain, the Neon neutron drip line (N=22) is very close to the neutron magic number N=20 and therefore the study of the Neon isotopes is a good testing ground to examine both the systematic of deformation and the possible erosion of the N=20 spherical shell closure very close to the neutron drip line. Another interesting point is the study of the possible magicity of N=16 suggested in recent analyses Ozawa:2000 .

The paper is organized as follows: In section 2 a brief overview of the theoretical framework is presented. In section 3.1 the mean field results are discussed. In the next section the effect of angular momentum projection on the mean field observables is described. Finally, in section 3.3 the results of the configuration mixing calculations are presented and compared to the experimental data and other theoretical approaches. We end up with the conclusions in section 4.

## 2 Theoretical framework

As mentioned in the introduction ours is a mean field based procedure where the underlying mean field is determined first and then additional correlations beyond mean field are included. Those additional correlations are handled in the framework of the angular momentum projected Generator Coordinate Method (AMP-GCM) with the mass quadrupole moment as generating coordinate. As we restrict ourselves to axially symmetric configurations, we use the following ansatz for the $`K=0`$ AMP-GCM wave functions

$$|\mathrm{\Phi }_\sigma ^I=𝑑q_{20}f_\sigma ^I(q_{20})\widehat{P}_{00}^I|\phi (q_{20}).$$
(1)
For each angular momentum $`I`$ the different AMP-GCM states (labelled by $`\sigma `$) are linear combinations of the set of angular momentum projected intrinsic wave functions $`|\phi (q_{20})`$ generated by solving the Hartree-Fock-Bogoliubov (HFB) equation constrained to yield the desired mass quadrupole moment $`q_{20}=\phi (q_{20})\left|z^21/2(x^2+y^2)\right|\phi (q_{20})`$.

The intrinsic wave functions are restricted to be axially symmetric (i.e. $`K=0`$) and are obtained by solving the HFB equation with the Gogny interaction Dech\_Gogny.80  (D1S parameterization Berger.84\_D1S ). The HFB equation is discretized by expanding the quasiparticle operators associated to the intrinsic wave functions $`|\phi (q_{20})`$ in a Harmonic Oscillator (HO) basis containing eleven major shells and with equal oscillator lengths (in order to make the basis closed under rotations Robledo.94 ). As we are dealing with quite light systems we have to consider the center of mass problem. This is handled by subtracting the center of mass kinetic energy both in the calculation of the energy and in the HFB variational procedure. Finally, concerning the Coulomb interaction, we have only taken into account its contribution to the direct field in the variational procedure. The exchange Coulomb energy (computed in the Slater approximation) is added, in a perturbative fashion, at the end of the calculation and the contribution of the Coulomb interaction to the pairing energy is completely disregarded.

In order to obtain the angular momentum projected wave functions we use the standard angular momentum projector operator restricted to $`K=0`$ states Hara.95

$$\widehat{P}_{00}^I=\frac{(2I+1)}{8\pi ^2}𝑑\mathrm{\Omega }d_{00}^I(\beta )e^{i\alpha \widehat{J}_z}e^{i\beta \widehat{J}_y}e^{i\gamma \widehat{J}_z}.$$
(2)
Finally, the “collective amplitudes” $`f_\sigma ^I(q_{20})`$ as well as the energies of the AMP-GCM states $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_\sigma ^I`$ are obtained through the solution of the Hill-Wheeler (HW) equation

$$𝑑q_{20}^{}^I(q_{20},q_{20}^{})f_\sigma ^I(q_{20}^{})=E_\sigma ^I𝑑q_{20}^{}𝒩^I(q_{20},q_{20}^{})f_\sigma ^I(q_{20}^{})$$
(3)
which is given in terms of the projected norm

$$𝒩^I(q_{20},q_{20}^{})=\phi (q_{20})\left|\widehat{P}_{00}^I\right|\phi (q_{20}^{})$$
(4)
and the projected hamiltonian kernel

$$^I(q_{20},q_{20}^{})=\phi (q_{20})\left|\widehat{H}\widehat{P}_{00}^I\right|\phi (q_{20}^{}).$$
(5)
As the generating states $`\widehat{P}_{00}^I|\phi (q_{20})`$ are not orthogonal, the “collective amplitudes” $`f_\sigma ^I(q_{20})`$ cannot be interpreted as probability amplitudes. Instead, one usually introduce Ring\_Suck.80  the “collective" wave functions

$$g_\sigma ^I(q_{20})=𝑑q_{20}^{}f_\sigma ^I(q_{20}^{})\left(𝒩^I(q_{20},q_{20}^{})^{}\right)^{1/2}$$
(6)
which are orthonormal $`𝑑q_{20}g_{\sigma }^{I}{}_{}{}^{}(q_{20})g_\sigma ^{}^I^{}(q_{20})=\delta _{I,I^{}}\delta _{\sigma ,\sigma ^{}}`$ and therefore their module squared has the meaning of a probability.

In order to readjust the particle number on the average for the projected wave functions the Hamiltonian in Eq. (5) has been replaced by $`\widehat{H}^{}=\widehat{H}\lambda _n(\widehat{N}N_0)\lambda _p(\widehat{Z}Z_0)`$ where $`\lambda _n`$ and $`\lambda _p`$ are chemical potential parameters (see Ref Rayner.2002 , and references therein).

The $`B(E2)`$ transition probabilities are computed using the AMP-GCM wave functions

$`B(E2,I_iI_f)={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{2I_i+1}}\times `$ (7)
$`|{\displaystyle 𝑑q_{20}𝑑q_{20}^{}f_{\sigma _f}^{I_f}(q_{20}^{})I_fq_{20}^{}}\widehat{Q}_2I_iq_{20}f_{\sigma _i}^{I_i}(q_{20})|^2`$
with

$`{\displaystyle \frac{I_fq_{20}^{}\widehat{Q}_2I_iq_{20}}{(2I_i+1)(2I_f+1)}}={\displaystyle \underset{\mu }{}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}I_i& 2& I_f\\ \mu & \mu & 0\end{array}\right)\times `$
$`{\displaystyle _0^{\frac{\pi }{2}}}𝑑\beta \mathrm{sin}\beta d_{\mu ,0}^{I_i}(\beta )\phi (q_{20}^{})\widehat{Q}_{2\mu }e^{i\beta \widehat{J}_y}\phi (q_{20})`$
where the indices i and f stand for the initial and final states and $`\widehat{Q}_{2\mu }`$ are the charge quadrupole moment operators. As we are using the full configuration space no effective charges are needed. Further details on the computational procedure can be found in Ref Rayner.2002 .

## 3 Discussion of the results

### 3.1 Mean field approximation.

Before discussing the mean field results, the convergence of our calculations with the size of the Harmonic Oscillator (HO) basis used to discretize the HFB equation has to be tested as we are dealing with near drip-line nuclei like 32,34Ne. First, one should note that, due to the proximity of the drip-line, the full HFB approximation must be used Doba.84 ; Doba.96 . It is also evident that absolute convergence for the binding energies can only be attained for HO basis with an infinity number of shells ($`N_{shell}`$). However, it is expected that other physical observables like excitation energies, transition probabilities, etc can be accurately described with a finite number of shells.

In order to determine how many shells are needed for an accurate description of the physical observables we have first studied the behavior of the HFB energy as a function of the oscillator length parameter $`b_0`$ ($`b_{}=b_z=b_0)`$ and the number of shells for the nuclei 32Ne and 34Ne. The results are plotted in panels a) and d) of Fig. 1. As expected the curves become more and more flat for increasing values of $`N_{shell}`$ and already the $`N_{shell}=17`$ basis can be considered as a good approximation for an infinite basis in both isotopes as the dependence of the energies on the oscillator length is very weak for a wide range of $`b_0`$ values. However, $`N_{shell}=17`$ makes the HO basis too big for our purposes as we have to evaluate the AMP-GCM hamiltonian kernel which is a quantity requiring two orders of magnitude more computing time than the whole HFB calculation. We have found that $`N_{shell}=11`$ is a good compromise between accuracy and computing time as the energy still shows a weak dependency on the oscillator length around the minima located at $`b_0=2.1`$ fm for both 32Ne (panel a) and 34Ne (panel d). As an example of the adequacy of the $`N_{shell}=11`$ calculations let us consider the two neutron separation energy of 34Ne. The $`N_{shell}=17`$ ground state energies for 32Ne and 34Ne are 403 keV and 420 keV lower than the $`N_{shell}=11`$ energies implying that the two neutron separation energy of 34Ne computed with $`N_{shell}=11`$ differs by 17 keV from the one computed with $`N_{shell}=17`$.

In order to study the suitability of the $`N_{shell}=11`$ basis for other nuclear properties we have performed calculations with $`N_{shell}=12`$. The mean field results for both calculations are compared on the right hand side panels of Fig. 1. In panels b) and e) the energy landscapes of 32Ne and 34Ne are shown as a function of the quadrupole moment for the $`N_{shell}=11`$ and $`N_{shell}=12`$ calculations. In the upper panels c) and f) we have represented the energy differences between both calculations. The conclusion is that in the region $`0.7\text{b}q_{20}1.2\text{b}`$ the shape of the energy landscapes do not change much when the basis is increased from $`N_{shell}=11`$ to $`N_{shell}=12`$. As we will see later on this is the range of $`q_{20}`$ values where the collective dynamics is concentrated and therefore it is not expected to find significant differences between the $`N_{shell}=11`$ and $`N_{shell}=12`$ results.

In Fig. 2 the mean field potential energy surfaces (MFPES) are plotted as a function of the axially symmetric quadrupole moment $`q_{20}`$ for the even-even Neon isotopes 20-34Ne. The MFPES shown do not include the Coulomb exchange energy and they have been shifted to accommodate them in a single plot (see figure caption).

Both 20Ne and 22Ne are prolate deformed in their ground states. In 20Ne the prolate ground state corresponds to $`q_{20}=0.4`$b $`(\beta _2=0.37)`$ and an oblate local minimum also appears at $`q_{20}=0.1`$b $`(\beta _2=0.09)`$ with an excitation energy of $`1.71`$ MeV. In the case of 22Ne the ground state corresponds to $`q_{20}=0.5`$b $`(\beta _2=0.40)`$ and another local minimum is found at $`q_{20}=0.2`$b $`(\beta _2=0.17)`$ with an excitation energy of $`2.24`$ MeV. The nucleus 24Ne is a clear example, in the considered isotopic chain, of very strong shape coexistence since, while the oblate ground state is locate at $`q_{20}=0.3`$b $`(\beta _2=0.22)`$, a prolate isomeric state is also found at $`q_{20}=0.2`$b $`(\beta _2=0.15)`$ with an excitation energy with respect to the oblate ground state of 77 keV. On the other hand, the nuclei 26-30Ne show spherical ground states indicating that the N=20 shell closure is preserved at the mean field level. The MFPES of both 26,28Ne are particularly flat around their spherical ground states. In the nucleus 30Ne we obtain a prolate shoulder at $`q_{20}=0.8`$b $`(\beta _2=0.37)`$ at an excitation energy of 2.70 MeV with respect to the spherical ground state. This prolate shoulder is around 1 MeV higher than the one found in similar HFB calculations in32Mg (see for example Rayner.2000.a ). In the drip-line systems 32Ne and 34Ne, prolate deformed ground states are found. The ground states have $`q_{20}=0.6`$b $`(\beta _2=0.26)`$ and $`q_{20}=0.8`$b $`(\beta _2=0.31)`$, respectively. In addition, an oblate isomeric state is found in 34Ne at $`q_{20}=0.3`$b $`(\beta _2=0.12)`$ with an excitation energy of 2.39 MeV with respect to the prolate ground state.

Another interesting point concerns the stability of the Ne isotopes against neutron emission. From the absolute minimum of the MFPES’ depicted in Fig. 2 (the one of 30Ne is marked with a horizontal line) it can be deduced that 32Ne is not stable against two neutron emission. This is in clear contradiction with the experimental results as they indicate that 32Ne is indeed stable against two neutron emission GANIL\_1 ; GANIL\_2 ; SAKU\_1 . On the other hand, the nucleus 34Ne is slightly stable against two neutron emission, but it is not against four neutron emission.

In Fig. 3 the proton and neutron particle-particle correlation energies $`E_{pp}=\frac{1}{2}Tr\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\kappa ^{}\right)`$, which are commonly used to discuss pairing correlations (see for example Refs. Dech\_Gogny.80 ; Pairing ), are plotted as a function of the quadrupole deformation for all the isotopes considered. The evolution of the particle-particle correlation energies is well correlated with the structures found in the MFPES. Non-zero proton pairing correlations are found in all the spherical or oblate minima. In addition, sizeable neutron pairing correlations are found in 20,22Ne and 32,34Ne for the spherical and the oblate minima. Vanishing proton pairing correlations are found in the prolate side in a window starting at $`0.5`$b and ending in 1.0 b in 20Ne. For the other isotopes the starting and ending points increase with the neutron number. Neutron pairing correlations vanish in the ground states of both 26Ne and 30Ne. In the later case this is a consequence of the N=20 shell closure found at the mean field level.

It should be stressed here that the unphysical collapse of pairing correlations found in Fig. 3 is an indication that one should also consider in these isotopes dynamical pairing correlations and their coupling to the quadrupole degree of freedom in the scope of a formalism beyond the mean field in order to treat them in an equal footing. However, this multidimensional configuration mixing calculation is a cumbersome task with the present-day computational facilities.

### 3.2 Correlations beyond the mean field: Angular momentum projection.

Before considering the full AMP-GCM it is instructive to look into the angular momentum projected energy surfaces (AMPPES) defined as

$$E^I(q_{20})=\frac{^I(q_{20},q_{20})}{𝒩^I(q_{20},q_{20})}$$
(9)
and shown in Fig. 4 for the nuclei 20-34Ne and $`I=0`$, 2, 4, and 6. The corresponding mean field energy landscapes (dashed curves with boxes) are also included for comparison. For details on the missing points in the $`I=2`$, 4 and 6 curves refer to Rayner.2002 . The most remarkable fact about Fig. 4 is how strongly the restoration of the rotational symmetry modifies the mean field picture of the $`I=0`$ configurations. Contrary to the mean field case, two minima, one prolate and the other oblate, are obtained for all the Neon isotopes for $`I^\pi =0^+`$. The prolate minimum is, with the exception of 24Ne, the absolute minimum in all the isotopes considered. For increasing spin values either the energy difference between the prolate and oblate minima increases or the oblate minimum is washed out.

The nucleus 24Ne, with its $`I^\pi =0^+`$ oblate ground state is the exception in all the Neon isotopes studied. The orbital responsible for such an oblate minimum is the neutron $`d_{\frac{5}{2}}`$ orbital which becomes fully occupied in this nucleus and favors oblate deformations. The absolute minimum remains oblate for $`I^\pi =2^+`$ but already at $`I^\pi =4^+`$ it becomes prolate deformed.

In addition, shape coexistence is expected in the nuclei 26Ne, 28Ne and 30Ne as their $`I^\pi =0^+`$ prolate and oblate minima are very close in energy (414, 577 and 936 keV, respectively). These minima are separated by barriers which are 2.4, 2.2 and 1.3 MeV high, respectively.

Finally, it is also worth to compare the intrinsic quadrupole deformation of the ground state of 30Ne with the one of 32Mg Rayner.2000 . In Fig. 5 we have plotted the $`I^\pi =0^+`$ and $`2^+`$ AMPPES for both 30Ne and 32Mg. From this plot we conclude that the absolute minimum of the $`I^\pi =0^+`$ AMPPES in 30Ne has half the deformation of the corresponding minimum in 32Mg. On the other hand, the $`I^\pi =2^+`$ deformations are practically identical. From this results one may expect, as is the case, very similar spectroscopic quadrupole moments for the first $`2^+`$ states in 30Ne and 32Mg and a reduction of the $`B(E2)`$ transition probability in 30Ne as compared to the one of 32Mg.

### 3.3 Correlations beyond the mean field: Angular momentum projection and configuration mixing.

The AMPPES of the previous subsection show for some nuclei and/or some spin values the phenomenon of shape coexistence and therefore configuration mixing has to be considered in order to gain a better understanding of the structure of these states. We have considered configuration mixing in the framework of the Angular Momentum Projected Generator Coordinate Method (AMP-GCM) described in section 2. The intrinsic axial quadrupole moment $`q_{20}`$ with values in the range $`1.5\text{b}q_{20}2.5\text{b}`$ and with a mesh size $`\mathrm{\Delta }q_{20}`$ of $`10\text{fm}^2`$ has been chosen as generating coordinate.

In Fig. 6 we have plotted the AMP-GCM energies $`E_\sigma ^I`$ obtained by solving the Hill-Wheeler equation and placed them along the $`q_{20}`$-axis according to their “average intrinsic quadrupole moment" defined as

$$\overline{q}_{20}^{I,\sigma }=𝑑q_{20}g_\sigma ^I(q_{20})^2q_{20}$$
(10)
In this figure we have also plotted the $`I^\pi =0^+`$ AMPPES to guide the eye. The first noticeable fact is that the correlated $`0^+`$ ground states have a lower energy than the absolute minimum of the corresponding AMPPES. This energy gain due to the quadrupole correlations increases the binding energies and can be relevant for a proper description of the two neutron separation energies. The second prominent feature is that configuration mixing decreases the deformation of the $`0_1^+`$ ground states with respect to the minimum of the AMPPES. The ground states of the nuclei 24Ne and 26Ne become spherical whereas the ones of 28Ne and 30Ne become weakly deformed. The other nuclei remain well deformed in their ground states and develop a rather well defined rotational band up to the maximum spin considered for $`\sigma =1`$. In addition, a well defined rotational band is obtained for $`I2`$ in 30Ne. On the other hand, the excited states ($`\sigma =2`$) only show a rotational band pattern for those nuclei well deformed in their ground state. Another interesting point concerns the energy gain due to configuration mixing of the ground state: it is 0.6 MeV for 20Ne, increases up to 0.9 MeV for 24Ne and 26Ne and then monotonically decreases up to 0.55 MeV in 34Ne. The energy gain is correlated with the shape of the AMPPES for I=0, namely, if the AMPPES shows a well defined minimum the energy gain is smaller than in the case where the minimum is broader.

To gain a deeper insight into the intrinsic structure of the AMP-GCM sates the ground band ($`\sigma =1`$) collective wave functions squared $`g_\sigma ^I(q_{20})^2`$ are plotted in Fig. 7 along with the corresponding AMPPES. For 20Ne and 22Ne the ground state collective wave functions are well inside the prolate wells indicating that both systems are dominated by prolate deformations in the considered spin range. The average deformation values are 0.39b, 0.58b, 0.59b and 0.58b for the $`0_1^+`$, $`2_1^+`$, $`4_1^+`$ and $`6_1^+`$ states in 20Ne, while the corresponding values in 22Ne are 0.39b, 0.56b, 0.61b and 0.63b. In the nucleus 24Ne, the configuration mixing calculation provides a spherical $`0_1^+`$ instead of the oblate absolute minimum found in its AMPPES. An almost spherical $`2_1^+`$ state ($`\overline{q}_{20}^{I=2,\sigma =1}=0.08`$b) is also found in this nucleus. On the other hand, a band crossing takes place for the state $`4_1^+`$ and the collective wave function becomes prolate deformed with $`\overline{q}_{20}^{I=4,\sigma =1}=0.39`$b and $`\overline{q}_{20}^{I=6,\sigma =1}=0.79`$b. Similar results have recently been found Rayner.2002  in the $`N=14`$ system 26Mg. The experimental spectroscopic quadrupole moment of the lowest $`2^+`$ state in 26Mg is -13.5 $`e\text{fm}^2`$ Endt.98  indicating that this is a prolate state. However, the low excitation energy of the $`0_2^+`$ in 26Mg (3.588 MeV) compared with the same quantity in 24Mg (6.432 MeV) clearly indicates strong shape coexistence between oblate and prolate solutions. Unlike 26Mg, there is not experimental information concerning the spectroscopic quadrupole moment of the lowest $`2^+`$ state in 24Ne but again the experimental excitation energies of the $`0_2^+`$ in 24Ne and 26Ne (4.764 MeV and 3.691 MeV, respectively) are significantly lower than the 6.235 MeV measured in 22Ne Endt.98 ; Endt.90  pointing towards a strong shape coexistence in the ground state of the former nuclei. Our results predict a strong shape coexistence for the $`0_1^+`$ and $`2_1^+`$ states in 24Ne as well as for the $`0_1^+`$ states in 26Ne and 28Ne that manifest itself in the $`0_2^+`$ excitation energies of 3.509 and 3.005 MeV for 24,26Ne, respectively.

The $`0_1^+`$ wave functions in both 26Ne and 28Ne show a great admixture of prolate and oblate configurations that leads to spherical ground states on the average. On the other hand, for $`I^\pi 2^+`$ the collective wave functions in these two nuclei become prolate deformed with deformation values of 0.34b, 0.59b and 0.94b for the states $`2_1^+`$, $`4_1^+`$ and $`6_1^+`$ in 26Ne while the corresponding values in 28Ne are 0.26b, 0.93b and 1.04b. Our results do not fully support the suggestion of Ozawa:2000  concerning the magicity of N=16 in neutron rich light nuclei. It is true that 26Ne has a spherical ground state, but the deformation of the $`2_1^+`$ is too strong as to be considered a vibrational state. Similar results are also found in Ref. Rayner.2002  for the N=16 nucleus 28Mg.

The $`0_1^+`$ wave function in 30Ne also shows a significant admixture of the oblate and prolate configurations and, as a consequence, the deformation in the ground state is reduced to 0.16 b that represents one third of the value corresponding to the absolute minimum in the $`I^\pi =0^+`$ AMPPES. This clearly shows that, as in 32Mg Heenen.99 ; Rayner.2000.a ; Rayner.2002 , the deformation effects in 30Ne are the result of a subtle balance between the zero point corrections associated with the restoration of the rotational symmetry and the fluctuations in the collective parameters (in our case the axially symmetric quadrupole moment). From the comparison with the value of $`\overline{q}_{20}^{I=0,\sigma =1}=0.43`$ b already found Rayner.2000.a ; Rayner.2002  in 32Mg we conclude that dynamical deformation effects are strongly suppressed in 30Ne as could have been forecasted from the different AMPPES topology we have already seen in Fig.5. On the other hand, the $`2_1^+`$, $`4_1^+`$ and $`6_1^+`$ wave functions in 30Ne are inside the prolate wells and the average deformations of 0.83b, 0.93b and 0.94b are very close to the ones found in 32Mg.

In both 32Ne and 34Ne, the ground state collective wave functions become prolate. The dynamical deformation values for the $`0_1^+`$, $`2_1^+`$, $`4_1^+`$ and $`6_1^+`$ in 32Ne are 0.42b, 0.90b, 0.98b, 1.05b while the corresponding values in 32Ne are 0.69b, 0.94b, 0.99b and 1.0b. All these values show the stability of deformation effects in Neon isotopes as we move towards the drip-line.

Here we will make a few comments on the AMP-GCM results in the nuclei 32Ne and 34Ne when the basis is increased from $`N_{Shell}=11`$ to $`N_{Shell}=12`$. The effect on the projected energy landscapes can be seen in the corresponding panels of Fig. 4 where $`N_{Shell}=12`$ curves are plotted as dashed lines. The results with $`N_{Shell}=12`$ and $`N_{Shell}=11`$ only show very small differences at large absolute values of $`q_{20}`$. On the other hand, in the region of physical significance ($`.7\text{b}q_{20}1.2\text{b}`$) the results are practically indistinguishable. Since this range of $`q_{20}`$ values is the one where the collective dynamics is concentrated (i.e, the tails of the collective wave functions go to zero outside this range) we do not expect big changes in the excitation energies. For the 32Ne nucleus, it turns out that the excitation energies of all the members of the ground state rotational band obtained in the $`N_{Shell}=12`$ calculation are around 7 keV higher than the ones in the $`N_{Shell}=11`$ case, i.e., only the $`0_1^+`$ state has been pushed down. For 34Ne the average shift is 6 keV. As a consequence, the transition gamma ray energies remain unaltered by the increase of the basis size. On the other hand, the excitation energies (with respect to the true ground state) of the members of the excited rotational band decrease on the average 40 keV in 32Ne and 32 keV in 34Ne and therefore, as in the previous case, the intra-band gamma ray energies remain the same. From these results we conclude that our calculations are well converged in terms of the basis size.

Coming back to the discussion of our results, in Table 1 we present our results for the ground band spectroscopic quadrupole moments. A very good agreement is observed between the calculated spectroscopic values of the $`2_1^+`$ states in 20Ne and 22Ne and the experimental values (shown in boldface) for these nuclei which are -23 $`e\text{fm}^2`$ Raghavan.89  and -17 $`e\text{fm}^2`$ Endt.98 , respectively. In addition, our results are consistent with the Shell Model predictions (shown in brackets) for the spectroscopic quadrupole moments of the $`2_1^+`$ states Caurier.98 ; Caurier.01 . Obviously, the discrepancies are larger for the shape coexistent nuclei 24-28Ne, It is also worth mentioning here that the value obtained for the spectroscopic quadrupole moment of the $`2_1^+`$ state in 30Ne (-15.80 $`e\text{fm}^2`$) is only slightly smaller than the similar quantity in 32Mg (-19.50 $`e\text{fm}^2`$).

In Fig. 8 we compare the results of the AMP-GCM two neutron separation energies $`S_{2N}=E_{0_1^+}(N2)E_{0_1^+}(N)`$ with the corresponding mean field results (see subsection 3.1) and also with the available experimental values taken from Ref. AUDI ; Sarazin.00 . The AMP-GCM improves the $`S_{2N}`$ of 26Ne as compared to the mean field results and also makes bound (unlike the mean field prediction) the nucleus 32Ne in good agreement with the experimental results GANIL\_1 ; GANIL\_2 ; SAKU\_1 . On the other hand, the nucleus 34Ne becomes unstable against two neutron emission in the AMP-GCM approach. Our results are very similar to the ones predicted in the framework of the QMCD Utsumo.99 ; OTSUKA\_REVIEW  specially around $`N=20`$ but we differ in the prediction concerning 34Ne. Finally, it is worth mentioning that the AMP-GCM binding energy is the sum of the mean field binding energy of the intrinsic state plus the energy gain due to the restoration of the rotational symmetry plus the energy gain due to the configuration mixing. Therefore, the differences in $`S_{2N}`$ obtained in the AMP-GCM and the mean field are due to the last two contributions. The analysis of those contributions shows that the rotational energy correction is the main responsible for the differences observed in $`S_{2N}`$ and therefore is the ingredient needed to make 32Ne stable.

In Fig. 9 the excitation energies of the $`2_1^+`$ and $`4_1^+`$ states and the $`B(E2,0_1^+2_1^+)`$ transition probabilities obtained in the AMP-GCM are compared with the available experimental values and also with the predictions of the QMCD Utsumo.99 ; OTSUKA\_REVIEW . Concerning the $`B(E2,0_1^+2_1^+)`$ transition probabilities we clearly see, from panel a), that the agreement with the available experimental data Endt.90 ; Endt.98 ; Reed.99 ; Prity.99 ; Azaiez.99 ; Guillemaud.02  is rather satisfactory and in most cases (with the exception of 26Ne where our prediction appears a little bit low) our results stay within the experimental error bars. On the other hand, our results are also consistent with the predictions of the QMCD Utsumo.99 ; OTSUKA\_REVIEW . Our results although not as good as the QMCD ones, are very satisfactory considering that the parameters of the Gogny force have not been fitted to the region and/or the physics of quadrupole collectivity and also that no effective charges have been used in our calculations of the transition probabilities.

Our results for the $`2_1^+`$ excitation energies agree well with the experiment in 20Ne and 22Ne Endt.90 ; Endt.98  and also with the theoretical result of Otsuka in 34Ne. For the other isotopes our $`2^+`$excitation energies are always higher than experiment and the QMCD predictions. The same happens for the $`4^+`$ excitation energies. The disagreement between our results and the experiment (or the QMCD predictions) can be attributed to the fact that the nuclei involved are nice examples of shape coexistence. In the presence of shape coexistence the quadrupole degree of freedom probably is not enough to describe accurately the observables and other degrees of freedom like triaxiality or pairing fluctuations should be included. However, and based on the nice agreement between our electromagnetic transition probabilities and the experimental ones, we can conclude that the quadrupole degree of freedom is the main ingredient in the physical picture of the neutron rich Neon isotopes.

## 4 Conclusions

We have performed angular momentum projected Generator Coordinate Method calculations with the Gogny interaction D1S and the mass quadrupole moment as generating coordinate in order to describe quadrupole collectivity in the even-even nuclei 20-34Ne. The lighter isotopes 20Ne and 22Ne as well as the heavier ones 32Ne and 34Ne are well deformed in their ground states whereas the other isotopes are either spherical (24Ne and 26Ne) or slightly deformed like 28Ne and 30Ne. The later isotope is less deformed in its ground state than its isotone 32Mg. The two neutron separation energies compare well with experimental data and show that 32Ne is bound. Moreover, the $`B(E2)`$ transition probabilities from the ground state to the $`2^+`$ state are well reproduced in all the cases. Only the $`2^+`$ excitation energies come too high as compared to the experiment for the shape coexistent isotopes.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work has been supported in part by the DGI, Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología (Spain) under project BFM2001-0184.


format: text

text:
# Some Calabi–Yau threefolds with obstructed deformations over the Witt vectors

## Introduction

A fundamental result in deformation theory states that each infinitesimal deformation of a compact complex Kähler manifold $`Y`$ with trivial dualizing sheaf extends to a deformation of arbitrarily high order. In other words, the base of the versal deformation is smooth. This result is due to several authors (see Bogomolov , Kawamata , Ran , Tian , Todorov ).

It is open whether or to what extend this holds true over ground fields $`k`$ of characteristic $`p>0`$. I gave a sufficient condition for unobstructedness involving crystalline cohomology groups and formal liftings to characteristic zero . Deligne  proved that any K3-surface lifts projectively to characteristic zero. In contrast, Hirokado  found a smooth threefold in characteristic $`p=3`$ that does not admit a formal lifting. Here the deformations over the Witt vectors $`W=W(k)`$ are necessarily obstructed.

A natural question to ask: What is the relation between obstructions for deformations over Artin $`k`$-algebras and deformations over Artin $`W`$-algebras? Unfortunately, there are almost no examples that could shed some light on the situation. The goal of this paper is construct some interesting new examples of Calabi–Yau threefolds $`Y`$ in characteristic $`p=2`$ and $`p=3`$ that do not formally lift to characteristic zero.

Our examples are pencils of supersingular K3-surfaces over the projective line. The construction draws from the theory of supersingular abelian surfaces and generalized Kummer surfaces. The starting point is Moret-Bailly’s nontrivial pencil of abelian surface . It turns out that my threefold $`Y`$ in characteristic $`p=2`$ has some nontrivial deformations over $`k`$-algebras. This seems to be the first example of nonliftable Calabi–Yau manifolds with nontrivial deformations. It would be interesting to know whether or not the Hodge–de Rham spectral sequence $`H^r(Y,\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^s)^{r+s}(Y,\mathrm{\Omega }_Y^{})`$ degenerates.

The paper is organized as follows: In the first section I consider threefolds with trivial canonical class that are fibered in supersingular K3-surfaces. At this stage we do not care about existence and merely deduce some properties from our assumptions. In Section 2 we shall see that it is impossible to lift such threefolds to characteristic zero, even in a formal way. We turn in Section 3 to the existence question. Here we use an approach of Moret-Bailly to construct threefolds with trivial canonical class that are fibered in supersingular abelian surfaces. The construction works precisely at the primes $`p=2`$ and $`p=3`$, but the two cases have different features. This becomes clear in Section 4: Here the associated family of Kummer surfaces easily gives examples, in characteristic $`p=3`$, of our nonliftable Calabi–Yau threefolds. This approach fails, however, in characteristic $`p=2`$ due to results of Shioda and Katsura. We deal with this problem in Section 5: Discarding Kummer surfaces, we work with generalized Kummer surfaces by replacing the sign involution by an automorphism of order three. We compute the discriminant of the intersection form in Section 6, which relies on descent theory and theta groups. It turns out that discriminant jumps in pencils. This is crucial in Section 7: Here we construct the desired nonliftable Calabi–Yau threefold for $`p=2`$. The nontrivial deformations are detected by jumping discriminants. In the last Section we compute the Artin–Mazur formal group $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Y^3`$.

###### Acknowledgement.

I wish to thank Stefan Müller-Stach, Klaus Künneman, Uwe Jannsen, and Jean-Marc Fontaine for helpful discussions. I am also grateful to the referee, who suggested several simplifications and pointed out some errors in the first version.

## 1. Calculation of invariants

Let $`k`$ be an algebraically closed ground field of characteristic $`p>0`$. Suppose $`Y`$ is a smooth proper threefold with $`\omega _Y=𝒪_Y`$, endowed with a smooth morphism $`f:Y^1`$ such that all geometric fibers $`Y_{\overline{t}}`$, $`t^1`$ are K3-surfaces with Picard number $`\rho (Y_{\overline{t}})=22`$. We shall see in the following sections that such threefold actually exists in characteristics $`p=2`$ and $`p=3`$. In this section I merely collect some consequences from the assumptions.

We start by computing the Hodge numbers $`h^{0i}(Y)=h^i(𝒪_Y)`$:

###### Proposition 1.1.

We have $`h^0(𝒪_Y)=h^3(𝒪_Y)=1`$ and $`h^1(𝒪_Y)=h^2(𝒪_Y)=0`$.

###### Proof.

Clearly $`h^0(𝒪_Y)=1`$ because $`Y`$ is connected. The Leray–Serre spectral sequence for $`f:Y^1`$ gives an exact sequence

$$H^1(^1,f_{}𝒪_Y)H^1(Y,𝒪_Y)H^0(^1,R^1f_{}𝒪_Y).$$

The fibers $`Y_t`$ are connected, so $`𝒪_^1f_{}𝒪_Y`$ is bijective, and the term on the left vanishes. The cohomology groups $`H^1(Y_t,𝒪_{Y_t})`$ vanish for all $`t^1`$, hence $`R^1f_{}𝒪_Y=0`$ by semicontinuity, so the term on the right vanishes as well. We conclude $`h^1(𝒪_Y)=0`$. The remaining Hodge numbers follow from Serre duality. ∎

Smooth proper $`n`$-folds $`X`$ with $`\omega _X=𝒪_X`$ and $`h^1(𝒪_X)=\mathrm{}=h^{n1}(𝒪_X)=0`$ are called *Calabi–Yau* $`n`$-folds. They play an important role in the classification of schemes with trivial canonical class  and mirror symmetry. Our $`Y`$ is an example of a Calabi–Yau threefold.

###### Proposition 1.2.

The algebraic fundamental group $`\pi _1(Y,y)`$ vanishes.

###### Proof.

Let $`yY`$ be a closed point and $`z^1`$ be its image. According to , Exposé X, Corollary 1.4, we have an exact sequence

$$\pi _1(Y_z,y)\pi _1(Y,y)\pi _1(^1,z).$$

The K3-surface $`Y_z`$ and the projective line $`^1`$ are simply connected, so the same holds for $`Y`$. ∎

Let $`\eta ^1`$ be the generic point. Then $`Y_\eta `$ is a K3-surface over the function field $`\kappa (\eta )`$. Choose an algebraic closure of $`\kappa (\eta )`$ and let $`Y_{\overline{\eta }}`$ be the corresponding geometric generic fiber.

###### Lemma 1.3.

The Picard group $`\mathrm{Pic}(Y_\eta )`$ is free of rank $`\rho (Y_\eta )=22`$, and the inclusion map $`\mathrm{Pic}(Y_\eta )\mathrm{Pic}(Y_{\overline{\eta }})`$ is bijective.

###### Proof.

To simplify notation, set $`S=Y_\eta `$ and $`K=\kappa (\eta )`$, let $`K\stackrel{~}{K}\overline{K}`$ be separable and algebraic closures, and write $`\stackrel{~}{S}=S\stackrel{~}{K}`$ and $`\overline{S}=S\overline{K}`$. First note that the map $`\mathrm{Pic}(\stackrel{~}{S})\mathrm{Pic}(\overline{S})`$ is bijective, because the Picard scheme $`\mathrm{Pic}_{S/K}`$ is smooth and 0-dimensional.

According to Tsen’s Theorem, we have $`\mathrm{Br}(K)=0`$. This implies that the injection $`\mathrm{Pic}(S)\mathrm{Pic}(S/K)`$ is bijective, where the right hand side denotes the group of rational points in $`\mathrm{Pic}_{S/K}`$. Note that $`\mathrm{Pic}(S/K)=\mathrm{Pic}(\stackrel{~}{S})^G`$, where $`G=\mathrm{Gal}(\stackrel{~}{K}/K)`$ is the Galois group. By assumption, $`\mathrm{Pic}(\stackrel{~}{S})=\mathrm{Pic}(\overline{S})`$ is free of rank 22, so it remains to check that $`G`$ acts trivially on $`\mathrm{Pic}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$. The following argument suggested by the referee proves this:

Fix a prime power $`l^n`$ with $`lp`$ and consider the constructible sheaf $`\mu _{l^n}`$ on $`Y`$, which is constant. Its direct image $`R^2f_{}(\mu _{l^n})`$ is a constructible sheaf, and locally constant because $`f:Y^1`$ is smooth (, Chapter I, Lemma 8.13). Then it must be constant because $`^1`$ is simply connected. Passing to the generic fiber, we infer that the $`G`$-action on $`H^2(\stackrel{~}{S},\mu _{l^n})`$ is trivial. Using the Kummer sequence, we deduce that $`G`$ acts trivially on $`\mathrm{Pic}(\stackrel{~}{S})`$ as well. ∎

###### Proposition 1.4.

The Picard group $`\mathrm{Pic}(Y)`$ is a free group of rank $`\rho (Y)=23`$.

###### Proof.

The closure of any Cartier divisor on $`Y_\eta `$ is a Cartier divisor on $`Y`$, because $`Y`$ is locally factorial. Therefore the restriction map $`\mathrm{Pic}(Y)\mathrm{Pic}(Y_\eta )`$ is surjective. An invertible $`𝒪_Y`$-module that is trivial on $`Y_\eta `$ is trivial on some open neighborhood of $`Y_\eta `$. It is then trivial on the preimage of some nonempty open subset $`U^1`$, because $`f:Y^1`$ is a closed map. Hence it comes from a Cartier divisor supported by the preimage of $`^1U`$. In other words, the sequence

$$0\mathrm{Pic}(^1)\mathrm{Pic}(Y)\mathrm{Pic}(Y_\eta )0$$

is exact. By Lemma 1.3, $`\mathrm{Pic}(Y_\eta )`$ is a free group of rank $`\rho (Y_\eta )=22`$, and the statement follows. ∎

We now turn to the *Brauer group* $`\mathrm{Br}(Y)=H^2(Y,𝔾_m)`$, where the cohomology is taken with respect to the étale topology.

###### Proposition 1.5.

The Brauer group $`\mathrm{Br}(Y)`$ is annihilated by $`p`$.

###### Proof.

Set $`S=Y_\eta `$ and let $`\overline{S}=Y_{\overline{\eta }}`$ the geometric generic fiber. It follows from , Corollary 1.8 that the restriction map $`\mathrm{Br}(Y)\mathrm{Br}(S)`$ is injective. The Leray–Serre spectral sequence for the structure morphism $`g:S\mathrm{Spec}\kappa (\eta )`$ yields a spectral sequence $`H^r(\eta ,R^sg_{}𝔾_{m,S})H^{r+s}(S,𝔾_{m,S})`$. The stalk $`(R^1g_{}𝔾_{m,S})_{\overline{\eta }}=\mathrm{Pic}(\overline{S})`$ is a finitely generated free group of finite rank, so $`H^1(\eta ,R^1g_{}𝔾_{m,S})=0`$. The group $`H^2(\eta ,g_{}𝔾_{m,S})=\mathrm{Br}(\eta )`$ vanishes by Tsen’s Theorem. It follows that the edge map $`\mathrm{Br}(S)H^0(\eta ,R^2g_{}𝔾_{m,S})`$ is injective. The latter group is contained in $`\mathrm{Br}(\overline{S})`$. Now $`\overline{S}`$ is a K3-surface with Picard number $`\rho =22`$ over an algebraically closed field. Artin’s argument for , Theorem 1.7 shows that the abelian group $`\mathrm{Br}(\overline{S})`$ is annihilated by $`p`$. ∎

Next we calculate the $`l`$-adic Betti numbers $`b_i(Y)=dim__lH^i(Y,_l)`$ and the Euler characteristic $`e(Y)=(1)^ib_i(Y)`$, where $`l`$ is any prime number different from $`p`$.

###### Proposition 1.6.

The $`l`$-adic Betti numbers $`b_i=b_i(Y)`$ and Euler characteristic are as follows: $`b_0=b_6=1`$, and $`b_1=b_3=b_5=0`$, and $`b_2=b_4=23`$, and $`e=48`$.

###### Proof.

Obviously $`b_0=1`$ because $`Y`$ is connected. Proposition 1.2 implies that $`H^1(Y,/l^n)=0`$ for each $`n>0`$, hence $`b_1=0`$. To proceed, consider the Leray–Serre spectral sequence

$$H^r(^1,R^sf_{}(\mu _{l^n}))H^{r+s}(Y,\mu _{l^n}).$$

The constructible sheaves $`R^sf_{}(\mu _{l^n})`$ are constant, by the same argument as in the proof of Lemma 1.3. It follows from the proper base change theorem that $`R^sf_{}(\mu _{l^n})=0`$ for $`s`$ odd, because then the K3-surfaces $`Y_t`$ satisfy $`H^s(Y_t,\mu _{l^n})=0`$. Therefore the spectral sequence must degenerate. Moreover, $`H^r(^1,R^sf_{}(\mu _{l^n}))`$ vanishes for $`r`$ odd because $`^1`$ is simply connected.

From this we immediately deduce $`H^3(Y,\mu _{l^n})=0`$ and hence $`b_3=0`$. The module $`H^2(Y,\mu _{l^n})`$ is isomorphic to the sum of $`H^2(^1,\mu _{l^n})`$, which has rank $`1`$, and $`H^0(^1,R^2f_{}(\mu _{l^n}))`$, which has rank $`22`$. The latter holds because by the stalks $`R^2f_{}(\mu _{l^n})_t=H^2(Y_t,\mu _{l^n})`$ have rank $`22`$. Consequently $`b_2=23`$, and the remaining Betti numbers follow from Poincaré duality. ∎

We finally observe that $`Y`$ carries an ample invertible sheaf:

###### Proposition 1.7.

The scheme $`Y`$ is projective.

###### Proof.

It suffices to check that the morphism $`f:Y^1`$ is projective. The generic fiber $`Y_\eta `$ is a regular surface, hence there is an ample invertible $`𝒪_{Y_\eta }`$-module $`_\eta `$. Extend it to an invertible $`𝒪_Y`$-module $``$ and fix a point $`t^1`$. The specialization map $`\mathrm{Pic}(Y_\eta )\mathrm{Pic}(Y_t)`$ has finite cokernel, because all fibers have Picard number $`\rho =22`$. Hence $`C>0`$ for any curve $`CY_t`$. We also have $`_t_t=_\eta _\eta >0`$. This implies that $`_t=|_{Y_t}`$ is ample, and therefore $``$ is $`f`$-ample. ∎

## 2. Nonliftability

We keep the assumptions from the preceding section. We say that our Calabi–Yau threefold $`Y`$ admits a *formal lifting to characteristic zero* if there is a complete local noetherian ring $`R`$ with residue field $`R/𝔪=k`$ containing $``$ as a subring, together with a proper flat formal $`R`$-scheme $`\mathrm{Spf}(R)`$ with closed fiber $`_0=Y`$. For example, a smooth proper scheme $`X`$ admits a formal lifting to characteristic zero if $`H^2(X,\mathrm{\Theta }_X)=0`$. The first main result of this paper is:

###### Theorem 2.1.

The Calabi–Yau threefold $`Y`$ does not admit a formal lifting to characteristic zero.

###### Proof.

Suppose to the contrary that there is a formal lifting $`\mathrm{Spf}(R)`$ to characteristic zero. We may assume that $`R`$ is integral, say with field of fractions $`RQ`$. Choose a descending sequence of ideals $`𝔪=I_0I_1\mathrm{}`$ so that $`I_n/I_{n+1}`$ have length one. Let $`Y_n`$ be the infinitesimal neighborhood of $`Y`$ defined by the ideal $`I_{n+1}𝒪_{}`$. The exact sequence

$$H^1(Y,𝒪_Y)\mathrm{Pic}(Y_{n+1})\mathrm{Pic}(Y_n)H^2(Y,𝒪_Y)$$

implies that the restriction map $`\mathrm{Pic}()\mathrm{Pic}(Y)`$ is bijective. According to Proposition 1.7, there is an ample invertible $`𝒪_Y`$-module, so Grothendieck’s Algebraization Theorem tells us that $``$ is algebraizable. Write $`=Z^{}`$ for some smooth proper $`g:Z\mathrm{Spec}(R)`$. Note that $`\mathrm{Pic}(Z)=\mathrm{Pic}()=\mathrm{Pic}(Y)`$. In particular, the dualizing sheaf $`\omega _{Z/R}`$ is trivial, and the generic fiber $`Z_\eta `$ over $`R`$ is a Calabi–Yau threefold in characteristic zero.

Now Hirokado’s argument  yields a contradiction: Using that the constructible sheaves $`R^3g_{}(\mu _{l^n})`$ are constant, we deduce $`b_3(Z_{\overline{\eta }})=b_3(Y)=0`$. On the other hand, the Hodge–de Rham spectral sequence for $`Z_{\overline{\eta }}`$ degenerates, hence $`b_3(Z_{\overline{\eta }})h^{3,0}(Z_{\overline{\eta }})=1`$, contradiction. ∎

As a consequence, the deformation functor $`D_Y`$ is not formally smooth. Here $`D_Y`$ is the functor which associates to an Artin algebra $`R`$ over the Witt vectors $`W(k)`$ the set $`D_Y(R)`$ of isomorphism classes of proper flat $`R`$-schemes $`𝔜`$ together with an identification $`𝔜_0Y`$.

###### Remark 2.2.

The 1-dimensional Calabi–Yau manifolds are the elliptic curves, and Grothendieck showed that any smooth proper curve lifts to characteristic zero (, Exposé III, Corollary 7.4). The 2-dimensional Calabi–Yau manifolds are the K3-surface. According to Deligne , every K3-surface lifts to characteristic zero. Hirokado’s  counterexample showed that one cannot hope for any general result like this in higher dimensions. The upshot of this paper is that nonliftability might be quite frequent for Calabi–Yau manifolds.

## 3. Moret-Bailly’s pencil of abelian surfaces

The task now is to construct pencils of K3-surfaces $`Y`$ as in Section 1. In this section we take a first step into that direction by constructing a pencil of abelian surfaces with similar properties.

Fix an algebraically closed field $`k`$ of characteristic $`p>0`$.

Let $`A`$ be the *superspecial* abelian surface, that is, $`A`$ is a 2-dimensional abelian variety isomorphic to the product of two supersingular elliptic curves. Note that $`A`$ does not depend, up to isomorphism, on the choice of the supersingular elliptic curves by , Theorem 3.5. Its *$`a`$-number*

$$a(A)=dim_k\mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{gr}}(\alpha _p,A)$$

equals $`a(A)=2`$, and we have an embedding of group schemes $`\alpha _p^2A`$. Actually, Oort proved in , Theorem 2 that an abelian surface is superspecial if and only if its $`a`$-number is $`a=2`$.

Fix an integer $`n1`$ and an exact sequence

(1)
$$0𝒪_^1(n)𝒪_^1^2𝒪_^1(n)0.$$

Such extensions correspond to pairs of sections $`r,sH^0(^1,𝒪_^1(n))`$ without common zeros. Let $`X^{}=A\times ^1`$ be the constant relative abelian variety over $`^1`$, and $`HX^{}`$ the relative radical subgroup scheme of height $`\mathrm{ht}(H)=1`$ whose $`p`$-Lie algebra is isomorphic to

$$\mathrm{Lie}(H/^1)=𝒪_^1(n)𝒪_^1^2=\mathrm{Lie}(\alpha _p^2/^1)=\mathrm{Lie}(X^{}/^1),$$

as explained in , Exposé VIIA, Theorem 7.2. Here the inclusion $`𝒪_^1(n)𝒪_^1^2`$ comes from the extension (1). This works because both Lie bracket and $`p`$-th power operation are trivial for $`\mathrm{Lie}(\alpha _p^2)`$.

The quotient $`X=X^{}/H`$ is a relative abelian surface over $`^1`$, whose fibers $`X_t`$, $`t^1`$ are supersingular abelian surfaces. This construction is due to Moret-Bailly , who considered the case $`n=1`$.

###### Proposition 3.1.

We have $`\mathrm{Lie}(X/^1)𝒪_^1(np)𝒪_^1(n)`$.

###### Proof.

Moret-Bailly showed this for $`n=1`$. In the general case, the family $`X^1`$ comes from the family with $`n=1`$ via pullback along the map $`(r,s):^1^1`$ of degree $`n`$. For the convenience of the reader I recall Moret-Bailly’s arguments:

First note that $`\mathrm{Lie}(X/^1)`$ is dual to the conormal sheaf $`N_{H/X^{}}`$ restricted to the zero section $`^1H`$. To see this we use cotangent complexes (see , Exposé VIII, and ). Consider the commutative diagram of cotangent complexes

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}L_{X/^1}^{}|_H& & L_{H/^1}^{}& & L_{H/X}^{}\\ & & & & \mathrm{id}& & \\ & & L_{X^{}/X}^{}|_H& & L_{H/X}^{}& & L_{H/X^{}}^{}\end{array}$$

in the derived category of perfect complexes on $`H`$. Here the rows are distinguished triangles coming from the two compositions $`HX^1`$ and $`HX^{}X`$. The vertical map on the left is the base change map induced from the cartesian diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}H& & X^{}\\ & & & & \\ ^1& \underset{0}{}& X\end{array}$$

This base change map is a quasiisomorphism according to , Chapter II, Corollary 2.2.3, because $`𝒯\text{or}_r^{𝒪_X}(𝒪_X^{},𝒪_^1)=0`$ for $`r>0`$ since $`X^{}X`$ is flat. It then follows that there is a quasiisomorphism $`L_{X/^1}^{}|_HL_{H/X^{}}^{}[1]`$ in the derived category, and the induced bijection on cohomology yields the desired identification $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{X/^1}^1|_HN_{H/X^{}}`$.

To calculate the latter, we may replace $`X^{}`$ by $`X^{\prime \prime }=𝔾_{a,^1}^2`$ via the canonical composition of closed embeddings

$$\alpha _{p,^1}^2{}_{p}{}^{}X_{}^{}𝔾_{a,^1}^2$$

as explained in , page 136. Let $`U,VH^0(^1,𝒪_^1(1))`$ be homogeneous coordinates, and write $`𝔾_a^2=\mathrm{Spec}k[x,y]`$. Let $`R=k[x,y,U,V]`$ be the homogeneous coordinate ring for $`X^{\prime \prime }`$, and $`IR`$ the homogeneous ideal for $`HX^{\prime \prime }`$. Then $`I=(y^p,x^p,sxry)`$, where $`r,s`$ are the two homogeneous polynomials in $`U,V`$ of degree $`n`$ defining $`\mathrm{Lie}(H)\mathrm{Lie}(X^{}/^1)=\mathrm{Lie}(X^{\prime \prime }/^1)`$. The Hilbert–Burch Theorem (see , Theorem 20.12) tells us that

(2)
$$0R(n)R(np)\stackrel{\phi _2}{}RRR(n)\stackrel{\phi _1}{}I0$$

is an exact sequence of graded $`R`$-modules where the maps are given by the matrices

$$\phi _2=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& r^p\\ rysx& s^p\\ x^p& (rysx)^{p1}\end{array}\right)\text{and}\phi _1=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}y^p,& x^p,& sxry\end{array}\right).$$

Indeed, the entries of $`r^p\phi _1`$ are the $`2\times 2`$-minors of $`\phi _2`$ with the appropriate signs (note that the sequence in  on page 137 corresponding to (2) is slightly incorrect). Tensoring the resolution with the residue ring $`\overline{R}=R/(x,y)`$, we obtain an exact sequence

$$\overline{R}(n)\overline{R}(np)\stackrel{\overline{\phi }_2}{}\overline{R}\overline{R}\overline{R}(n)\stackrel{\overline{\phi }_1}{}I/(x,y)I0,$$

which in turn gives an exact sequence

$$0\overline{R}(np)\overline{R}\overline{R}\overline{R}(n)\stackrel{\overline{\phi }_1}{}I/(x,y)I0.$$

The map on the left is defined by the transpose of $`(r^p,s^p,0)`$, and its cokernel is the graded $`\overline{R}`$-module $`\overline{R}(np)\overline{R}(n)`$. The letter defines the locally free $`𝒪_^1`$-module $`𝒪_^1(np)𝒪_^1(n)`$, which by construction is dual to $`\mathrm{Lie}(X/^1)`$. ∎

This has an interesting consequence for the dualizing sheaf $`\omega _X`$:

###### Corollary 3.2.

The dualizing sheaf $`\omega _X`$ is trivial if and only if either $`p=3`$ and $`n=1`$, or $`p=2`$ and $`n=2`$.

###### Proof.

We have $`\omega _{X/^1}=𝒪_X(npn)`$ by Proposition 3.1 and $`\omega _^1=𝒪_^1(2)`$, so $`\omega _X=𝒪_X(npn2)`$. Consequently $`\omega _X`$ is trivial if and only if $`n(p1)=2`$, and the result follows. ∎

We shall see in the following sections how to obtain from $`X`$ as above some interesting Calabi–Yau threefolds.

## 4. A pencil of Kummer surfaces

We now examine the family $`X^1`$ of abelian surface constructed in the preceding section in the special case $`p=3`$ and $`n=1`$. This is the first of the two cases where $`\omega _X`$ is trivial.

Since $`p2`$ and $`k`$ is algebraically closed, the kernel $`{}_{2}{}^{}XX`$ of the multiplication by two map $`[2]:XX`$ consists of sixteen disjoint sections. We may also view $`{}_{2}{}^{}X`$ as the relative fixed point scheme of the sign change map $`[1]:XX`$. Let $`Z=X/[1]`$ be the corresponding quotient scheme. It inherits a fibration $`Z^1`$ whose fibers $`Z_t`$ are singular Kummer surfaces. Let $`D_\eta Z_\eta `$ be the reduced singular locus and $`DZ`$ be its closure. By flatness, each fiber $`D_t`$ is the reduced singular locus. The sixteen singular points on $`Z_t`$ are rational double points of type $`A_1`$. The blowing up of $`D_t`$ yields the minimal resolution. Let $`XZ`$ be the blowing up with center $`DZ`$. Then $`Y`$ is a smooth threefold, and the fibers $`Y_t`$ of the induced family $`Y^1`$ are Kummer K3-surfaces.

###### Proposition 4.1.

We have $`\rho (Y_{\overline{t}})=22`$ for every $`t^1`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`E`$ is supersingular, the Picard number of $`A`$ is $`\rho (A)=6`$, so $`\rho (B_{\overline{t}})=6`$ as well. It then follows from , Proposition 3.1 that $`\rho (Y_{\overline{t}})=16+6=22`$. ∎

###### Proposition 4.2.

The dualizing sheaf $`\omega _Y`$ is trivial.

###### Proof.

Let $`\eta ^1`$ be the generic point. Then $`\omega _{Y_\eta }`$ is trivial, because $`Y_\eta `$ is a K3-surface. Hence $`\omega _Y=𝒪_Y(m)`$ for some integer $`m`$. The relative dualizing sheaf $`\omega _{Y/Z}`$ is supported by the exceptional locus of $`YZ`$. It must be trivial, because it is trivial on the generic fiber. We conclude $`\omega _Z=𝒪_Z(m)`$. The canonical map $`f:XZ`$ is étale on $`X{}_{2}{}^{}X`$, so the invertible sheaves $`\omega _X`$ and $`f^{}(\omega _Z)`$ coincide outside $`{}_{2}{}^{}X`$. Since $`X`$ satisfies Serre’s condition $`(S_2)`$ and $`{}_{2}{}^{}XX`$ has codimension two, we must have $`\omega _Xf^{}(\omega _Z)`$ by , Theorem 1.12. Consequently $`m=0`$, and $`\omega _Y`$ must be trivial. ∎

We conclude that $`Y`$ satisfies the assumptions from Section 1, so $`Y`$ is a Calabi–Yau threefold with $`b_2=23`$ that does not admit a formal lifting to characteristic zero.

Note that the preceding approach does not work for $`p=2`$, because then $`Z_t`$ is a rational surfaces with an elliptic singularity (see , Corollary 2.12, or , Theorem A, or , Proposition 1). We shall sidestep this problem in the next sections.

## 5. Generalized Kummer surfaces

In this section we construct some *generalized Kummer surfaces*. This terminology is due to Katsura , and denotes K3-surfaces arising as minimal resolutions of quotients of abelian surfaces by finite group actions. Katsura studied mainly the case $`p3`$. Throughout we work in characteristic $`p=2`$. Let $`B`$ be an abelian surface. According to , Theorem A, the corresponding singular Kummer surface $`B/[1]`$ is birational to a K3-surface if and only if $`B`$ is ordinary, and a rational surface if and only if $`B`$ is supersingular. To obtain K3-surfaces from supersingular abelian surfaces, we shall replace the sign involution $`[1]`$ by an automorphism of order three.

In this section our ground field $`k`$ contains $`𝔽_4`$, but is not necessarily algebraically closed. Let $`E`$ be the supersingular elliptic curve given by the Weierstrass equation $`x^3=y^2+y`$ and fix a primitive third root of unity $`\zeta 𝔽_4`$. Let $`\phi :EE`$ be the automorphism given by $`(x,y)(\zeta x,y)`$. This defines an action of $`G=/3`$ on $`E`$. The induced representation on $`H^0(E,\mathrm{\Omega }_E^1)`$ is scalar multiplication by $`\zeta `$, because $`dx`$ is an invariant differential form on $`E`$. The action on $`E`$ has three fixed points, namely $`(0,0)`$, $`(0,1)`$, and $`\mathrm{}`$. Each fixed point $`xE`$ comes along with a representations $`\rho _x:G\mathrm{Aut}_{\kappa (x)}(𝔪_x/𝔪_x^2)`$ taking values in $`𝔽_4^\times \kappa (x)^\times `$ The generator $`\phi `$ maps to $`\zeta 𝔽_4^\times `$ under each $`\rho _x`$ because $`𝔪_x/𝔪_x^2=\mathrm{\Omega }_E^1(x)`$.

Now consider the superspecial abelian surface $`A=E\times E`$, endowed with the action of $`G`$ via $`\varphi =(\phi ,\phi )`$. Let $`\alpha _2A`$ be any embedding of group schemes.

###### Proposition 5.1.

The subgroup scheme $`\alpha _2A`$ is stable under the $`G`$-action.

###### Proof.

We have to check that $`\varphi (\alpha _2)=\alpha _2`$ as subschemes in $`A`$. The origin $`xA`$ is clearly a fixed point for $`\varphi `$. Let $`𝔪𝒪_{A,x}`$ be the maximal ideal. The first order infinitesimal neighborhood of $`x`$ is the spectrum of $`R=k𝔪/𝔪^2`$. As remarked above, $`\varphi `$ acts via scalar multiplication by $`\zeta `$ on $`𝔪/𝔪^2`$. Hence $`G`$ leaves any subscheme of $`\mathrm{Spec}(R)`$ invariant. ∎

We see that the $`G`$-action on the superspecial abelian surface $`A=E\times E`$ descends to a $`G`$-action on the supersingular abelian surface $`B=A/\alpha _2`$. Its fixed points are easy to determine: We saw that $`\phi `$ has precisely three fixed points. In turn, $`\varphi :AA`$ has $`9=3\times 3`$ fixed points, and the same holds on $`B`$. These fixed points correspond to the singularities on $`B/G`$, which is a proper normal surface.

###### Proposition 5.2.

The singularities on $`B/G`$ are rational double points of type $`A_2`$.

###### Proof.

It suffices to check this for the origin $`xA`$, because we may replace any fixed point of $`\phi :EE`$ by the origin of $`E`$. Let $`\widehat{E}`$ be the formal completion at the origin $`yE`$, which is a formal group isomorphic to $`\widehat{𝔾}_a`$ because $`E`$ is supersingular. Hence there uniformizer $`u𝒪_{E,y}^{}`$ such that the multiplication $`\widehat{E}\times \widehat{E}\widehat{E}`$ is given by the formal group law $`uu+u^{}`$. In turn, there is a regular system of parameters $`u,v𝒪_{A,x}^{}`$ such that $`uu+u^{}`$ and $`vv+v^{}`$ is the formal group law for $`\widehat{A}`$.

Write $`\alpha _2=\mathrm{Spec}k[ϵ]`$. The action $`\alpha _2\times \widehat{A}\widehat{A}`$ is given by $`uu+iϵ`$ and $`vv+jϵ`$ for some $`i,jk`$ that do not vanish both, say $`j0`$. A power series $`f(u,v)`$ is invariant under the $`\alpha _2`$-action if and only if $`f(u,v)=f(u+iϵ,v+jϵ)`$. For example, $`x^{}=u^2`$ and $`y^{}=u+vi/j`$ are $`\alpha _2`$-invariants. Using that $`𝒪_{A,x}^{}`$ is a free module of rank two over $`𝒪_{B,x}^{}`$ by , page IV-37, Proposition 22, we infer that $`x^{},y^{}𝒪_{B,x}^{}`$ is a regular system of parameters. The induced $`G`$-action has $`\varphi ^{}(x^{})\zeta ^2x^{}`$ and $`\varphi ^{}(y^{})\zeta y^{}`$ modulo $`𝔪^2`$, where $`𝔪𝒪_{B,x}^{}`$ denotes the maximal ideal. Using Lemma 5.4 below, we find another regular system of parameters $`x,y𝒪_{B,x}^{}`$ with $`\varphi ^{}(x)=\zeta ^2x`$ and $`\varphi ^{}(y)=\zeta y`$. The $`G`$-invariants are then generated by $`x^3,xy,y^3`$, and this means that $`B/G`$ acquires a rational double point of type $`A_2`$. ∎

A local computation shows that blowing-up the reduced singular locus in a rational double point of type $`A_2`$ yields the minimal resolution, and the exceptional divisor consists of two smooth rational $`(2)`$-curves intersecting transversely.

###### Theorem 5.3.

The minimal resolution $`S`$ of $`B/G`$ is a K3-surface.

###### Proof.

The $`G`$-action on $`B`$ has the following four properties: First, it has no fixed curves. Second, the generator of $`G`$ has some isolated fixed points. Third, all singularities on $`B/G`$ are rational singularities by Proposition 5.2. Finally, the induced $`G`$-action on $`H^0(B,\omega _B)=k`$ is trivial. To see this choose a fixed point $`xB`$. Let $`𝔪𝒪_{B,x}`$ be the maximal ideal. We saw that the $`k`$-linear $`G`$-action on $`𝔪/𝔪^2`$ is diagonizable with eigenvalues $`\zeta ,\zeta ^2`$. Using $`det(𝔪/𝔪^2)=\mathrm{\Omega }_B^2(x)`$, we infer that $`G`$ must act via $`1=\zeta \zeta ^2`$ on global 2-forms.

Assuming $`p2`$, Katsura showed that under the preceding four conditions the minimal resolution $`S`$ of $`B/G`$ is a K3-surface (, Theorem 2.4 and Lemma 2.7). Actually, he showed without any assumption on the characteristic that $`\omega _S`$ is trivial, and that $`S`$ is neither abelian, hyperelliptic, nor quasihyperelliptic. It then follows from the classification of surfaces that $`S`$ is either a K3-surface or a nonclassical Enriques surface . The latter exists only in characteristic $`p=2`$. An Enriques surface, however, has by definition $`l`$-adic Betti number $`b_2=10`$. On the other hand we have $`b_2(S)>18`$, due to the exceptional curves coming from the nine rational double points of type $`A_2`$ on $`B/G`$. Therefore, $`S`$ must be a K3-surface. ∎

We used the following fact in the proof for Proposition 5.2. I include a proof for lack of reference.

###### Lemma 5.4.

Let $`R`$ be a regular local noetherian $`k`$-algebra and $`f:RR`$ an $`k`$-automorphism of finite order $`m>0`$ prime to the characteristic $`p`$. It $`k`$ contains a primitive $`m`$-th root of unity $`\zeta `$, then there is a regular system of parameters $`u_1,\mathrm{},u_dR^{}`$ and integers $`n_1,\mathrm{},n_d`$ such that $`f(u_i)=\zeta ^{n_i}u_i`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`𝔪R`$ be the maximal ideal. The induced $`k`$-linear map on $`𝔪/𝔪^2`$ is diagonizable with eigenvalues of the form $`\zeta ^{n_i}`$, because $`m`$ is prime to $`p`$ and $`\zeta k`$. Hence there is a regular system of parameters $`u_iR`$ whose classes modulo $`𝔪^2`$ are eigenvectors for the eigenvalues $`\zeta ^{n_i}`$. Suppose we have a homogeneous ideal $`IR`$ with $`f(u_i)\zeta ^{n_i}u_i`$ modulo $`I`$. If $`I0`$, then choose a homogeneous subideal $`JI`$ so that $`I=J+ku^l`$, with the usual multiindex notation $`u^l=u_1^{l_1}\mathrm{}u_d^{l_d}`$. Then $`f(u_i)\zeta ^{n_i}+yu^l`$ modulo $`J`$ for some $`yk`$. We distinguish two cases: If $`m`$ divides $`e=l_in_i`$, then the congruence

$$u_i=f^m(u_i)\zeta ^{mn_i}u_i+yu^l(1+\zeta ^e+\mathrm{}+\zeta ^{e(m1)})=u_i+yu^lm$$

modulo $`J`$ implies $`y=0`$. If $`m`$ does not divide $`e`$, then the congruence

$$f(u_i+xu^l)\zeta ^{n_i}u_i+yu^l+x\zeta ^eu^l=\zeta ^{n_i}(u_i+xu^l)+u^l(y+x(\zeta ^e1))$$

modulo $`J`$ shows that me may choose $`xk`$ so that $`y+x(\zeta ^e1)=0`$ and then replace $`u_i`$ by $`u_i+xu^l`$. The principle of noetherian induction finishes the proof. ∎

## 6. Discriminants and Artin invariants

We keep the notation as in the preceding section, such that $`A=E\times E`$ and $`B=A/\alpha _2`$ for some embedding $`\alpha _2A`$. We saw that the minimal resolution $`S`$ of $`B/G`$ is a K3-surface, so $`\mathrm{Pic}(S)`$ is a free group of rank $`\rho (S)22`$. The goal of this section is to calculate the discriminant of this intersection pairing on $`\mathrm{Pic}(S)`$. It turns out that it depends in a subtle way on the position of $`\alpha _2A`$, and this will be crucial in Section 7.

First, we examine the effect of the isogeny $`g:AB`$ on Picard groups. Consider the following four elliptic curves $`C_iA`$: Set $`C_1=E\times 0`$ and $`C_2=0\times E`$, let $`C_3=\mathrm{\Delta }_E`$ be the diagonal subscheme, and $`C_4=\mathrm{\Gamma }_\phi `$ the graph of the automorphisms $`\phi :EE`$. Note that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_E\mathrm{\Gamma }_\phi `$ is the fixed scheme of $`\phi :EE`$, which consists of three reduced points, hence $`C_3C_4=3`$.

Let $`V_A`$ be the free abelian group generated by the $`C_i`$. To simplify calculations, we introduce another basis $`C_i^{}`$ for $`V_A`$ as follows: Set $`C_i^{}=C_i`$ for $`i=1,2`$, and $`C_i^{}=C_iC_1C_2`$ for $`i=3,4`$. The corresponding intersection matrix has an orthogonal decomposition

(3)
$$(C_i^{}C_j^{})=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1\\ 1& 2\end{array}\right),$$

hence $`\mathrm{disc}(V_A)=3`$. It follows that the map $`V_A\mathrm{NS}(A)`$ is injective, and we may regard $`V_A`$ as a subgroup of both $`\mathrm{Pic}(A)`$ or $`\mathrm{NS}(A)`$.

The exact sequence $`0\alpha _2AB0`$ induces an exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{Hom}(\alpha _2,𝔾_m)\mathrm{Pic}_{B/k}^0\mathrm{Pic}_{A/k}^00$$

by , Theorem 1 on page 143. So $`\mathrm{Pic}(B)\mathrm{Pic}(A)`$ is injective, and we can form the intersection $`V_B=V_A\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ inside $`\mathrm{Pic}(A)`$. Note that we may regard $`V_B`$ as either a subgroup $`V_B\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ or as a subgroup $`V_B\mathrm{Pic}(A)`$.

###### Proposition 6.1.

The group $`V_A/V_B`$ is annihilated by 2.

###### Proof.

Given an invertible $`𝒪_A`$-module $``$, let $`K()A`$ be the kernel of the morphism $`A\mathrm{Pic}_{A/k}^0`$, $`xT_x^{}()^{}`$. According to , Corollary 4.1.1 and Theorem 2.3 we have $`=g^{}(𝒩)`$ for some invertible $`𝒪_B`$-module $`𝒩`$ if and only if $`\alpha _2K()`$. For $`_i=𝒪_A(C_i)`$ we have $`K(_i)=C_i`$ and $`K(_i^2)=2C_i`$, by considering the quotient morphism $`AA/C_i`$. Obviously we have $`\alpha _22C_i`$, so $`_i^2`$ lies in $`V_B`$. ∎

The group $`V_B`$ is closely related to $`\mathrm{Pic}(S)`$ and $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)`$:

###### Proposition 6.2.

The map $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)\mathrm{NS}(A)`$ factors through $`V_B\mathrm{NS}(A)`$.

###### Proof.

We have $`\rho (B/G)4`$ because $`\rho (S)22`$ and there are $`18`$ exceptional curves for the resolution of singularities $`SB/G`$. The elliptic curves $`C_iA`$ are $`G`$-invariant, and $`2C_i`$ are $`\alpha _2`$-invariant. Let $`h:AB/G`$ be the canonical morphism and $`D_i=h(C_i)`$. The $`D_iB/G`$ are integral Weil divisors. Since the singularities on $`B/G`$ are rational double points of type $`A_2`$, the Weil divisors $`3D_i`$ are Cartier. By construction, $`h^{}(3D_i)=n_iC_i`$ for some integers $`n_i1`$. It follows that $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)\mathrm{NS}(A)`$ factors over $`\mathrm{NS}(A)(V_A)`$. Since $`\mathrm{disc}(V_A)=3`$ is square free, the subgroup $`V_A\mathrm{NS}(A)`$ is a direct summand, so the map factors over $`V_A`$, and therefore over $`V_B`$ as well. ∎

The subgroup $`V_BV_A`$ depends on the position of $`\alpha _2A`$. Let $`xA`$ be the origin, and choose a regular system of parameters $`u,v𝒪_{A,x}^{}`$ such that $`uu+u^{}`$, $`vv+v^{}`$ is the formal group law for the formal group $`A^{}`$. Write $`\alpha _2=\mathrm{Spec}k[ϵ]`$. Then the embedding $`\alpha _2A^{}`$ is of the form $`uu+iϵ`$ and $`vv+jϵ`$ for some $`(i,j)𝔸^2(k)\left\{0\right\}`$. The subgroup scheme $`\alpha _2A`$ depends only on the homogeneous coordinates $`(i:j)^1(k)`$. Let us regard the $`𝔽_4`$-valued points $`^1(𝔽_4)`$ as a subset of the $`k`$-valued points $`^1(k)`$.

###### Proposition 6.3.

Set $`v=dim_{𝔽_2}(V_A/V_B)`$. Then $`v=3`$ if the homogeneous coordinates satisfy $`(i:j)^1(𝔽_4)`$, and $`v=4`$ otherwise.

###### Proof.

Consider an invertible $`𝒪_A`$-module of the form $`=𝒪_A(_{i=1}^4n_iC_i^{})`$, where $`n_i\{0,1\}`$ and at least one coefficient $`n_i`$ is nonzero. The idea is to check whether $`\alpha _2A`$ might be contained in $`K()A`$. First note that $`K()`$ is a finite group scheme of length $`\chi ()^2`$ if $`\chi ()0`$, and of dimension $`>0`$ otherwise, according to , page 150. The Riemann–Roch Theorem and $`n_i^2=n_i`$ gives

$$\chi ()=(\underset{i=1}{\overset{4}{}}n_iC_i^{})^2/2=n_1n_2n_3n_4+n_3n_4.$$

If $`\chi (L)`$ is odd then $`K()`$ is an finite group scheme of odd length, hence $`\alpha _2K()`$. The number $`\chi ()`$ is odd except if $`(n_1,\mathrm{},n_4)`$ is of the form

$$(1,0,0,0),(0,1,0,0),(1,1,1,0),(1,1,0,1),(1,1,1,1).$$

In these cases we compute the group schemes $`K()A`$. In the first four cases we have $`_{i=1}^4n_iC_i^{}=C_j`$ for some $`1j4`$, and hence $`K()=C_j`$.

It remains to treat the last case $`_{i=1}^4C_i^{}`$. Modulo $`2V_A\mathrm{Pic}(A)`$, this divisor is linearly equivalent to

$$C=C_1^{}+C_2^{}3C_3^{}3C_4^{},$$

so $`_{i=1}^4C_i^{}V_B`$ if and only if $`CV_B`$. Consider the graph $`C_5=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\phi ^2}`$ of the automorphism $`\phi ^2=\phi ^1:EE`$. Since $`C_5`$ is $`G`$-invariant and $`2C_5`$ is $`\alpha _2`$-invariant, some multiple of $`𝒪_A(C_5)\mathrm{Pic}(A)`$ is the preimage of some class in $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)`$. By Proposition 6.2, we must have $`C_5V_A\mathrm{NS}(A)`$. But then $`C`$ must be numerically equivalent to $`C_5`$, because $`CC_i=C_5C_i`$ for $`1i4`$. In turn, we have $`K(𝒪_A(C))=K(𝒪_A(C_5))=C_5`$.

Now we are done: Recall that $`\phi :EE`$ was defined on affine coordinates by $`(x,y)(\zeta x,y)`$. An easy calculation shows that $`(i:j)^1(𝔽_4)`$ holds if and only if $`\alpha _2A`$ is contained in precisely one $`C_j`$ from the elliptic curves $`C_1=E\times 0`$, $`C_2=0\times E`$, $`C_3=\mathrm{\Delta }_E`$, $`C_4=\mathrm{\Gamma }_\phi `$, and $`C_5=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\phi ^2}`$. In this situation we have $`V_B=2V_A+C_j`$ and $`v=3`$. If $`(i:j)^1(𝔽_4)`$, then $`V_B=2V_A`$ and $`v=4`$. ∎

We come to the main result of this section:

###### Theorem 6.4.

The group $`\mathrm{Pic}(S)`$ of the K3-surface $`S`$ is free of rank $`\rho (S)=22`$. The discriminant $`d`$ of the intersection pairing on $`\mathrm{Pic}(S)`$ is $`d=2^2`$ if the homogeneous coordinates satisfy $`(i:j)^1(𝔽_4)`$, and $`d=2^4`$ otherwise.

###### Proof.

We have $`d=2^n`$ for some integer $`n0`$ as explained in , page 556. To determine this integer it suffices to compute the discriminant of the 2-adic intersection form $`\mathrm{Pic}(S)_2`$ up to units. The intersection matrix with respect to the exceptional divisors for the resolution of singularities $`SB/G`$ is

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{9}{}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1\\ 1& 2\end{array}\right).$$

Its discriminant is the unit $`27_2`$, hence $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)_2\mathrm{Pic}(S)_2`$ is an orthogonal direct summand, and it suffices to compute the discriminant of $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)_2`$.

I claim that the inclusion $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)_2V_B_2`$ from Proposition 6.2 is bijective. Indeed: If $`g:BB/G`$ denotes the projection map, we have $`g_{}g^{}(D)=3D`$ for any divisor $`DB/G`$ by the projection formula. This implies that the inclusion $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)V_B`$, which has finite index, becomes bijective after tensoring with $`_2`$. Moreover, the discriminants of the intersection forms on $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)`$ and $`V_B\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$ differ only by a power of the 2-adic unit $`3_2`$.

For our purpose it suffices to compute the discriminant of $`V_B`$ endowed with the intersection form from $`V_B\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$. Let us write $`V_B^{}`$ for the same module $`V_B`$, but endowed with the intersection form from $`V_B\mathrm{Pic}(A)`$. Then $`\mathrm{disc}(V_B)=2^4\mathrm{disc}(V_B^{})`$. Indeed, if $`h:AB`$ denotes the projection map, then $`2()=(_A_A)`$ for any $`\mathrm{Pic}(B)`$.

This does it: We have $`\mathrm{disc}(V_A)=3`$ and $`V_A/V_B(V_A_2)/(V_B_2)`$. According to , Corollary on page 49, this gives

$$\mathrm{disc}(V_B^{}_2)=\mathrm{disc}(V_A_2)\mathrm{ord}(V_A/V_B)^2=32^{2v},$$

where $`v=dim_{𝔽_2}(V_A/V_B)`$. Using Proposition 6.3, we infer that up to 2-adic units $`\mathrm{Pic}(B/G)`$ has discriminant $`2^{234}=2^2`$ if $`(i:j)^1(𝔽_4)`$, and $`2^{244}=2^4`$ otherwise. ∎

For a K3-surface in characteristic $`p>0`$ with Picard number $`\rho =22`$ and discriminant $`d=p^{2\sigma _0}`$, the integer $`\sigma _0`$ is called the *Artin invariant*. We see that our K3-surface $`S`$ has Artin invariant $`\sigma _0(S)=1`$ or $`\sigma _0(S)=2`$.

## 7. Nonrigidity

Let $`k`$ be an algebraically closed field of characteristic $`p=2`$. Up to isomorphism, there is only one supersingular elliptic curve $`E`$, which is given by the Weierstrass equation $`x^3=y^2+y`$. Set $`A=E\times E`$ and $`X^{}=A\times ^1`$, and choose an exact sequence

$$0𝒪_^1(2)\stackrel{r,s}{}𝒪_^1^2𝒪_^1(2)0$$

given by two homogeneous quadratic polynomials $`r,sH^0(^1,𝒪_^1(2))`$ without common zeros. As explained in Section 3, this defines a relative subgroup scheme $`HX^{}`$, whose quotient $`X=X^{}/H`$ has $`\omega _X=𝒪_X`$. As in the preceding section, the group $`G=/3`$ acts on $`E`$, hence diagonally on $`A`$, and the induced fiberwise action on $`X^{}^1`$ descends to a fiberwise action on $`X^1`$. Set $`Z=X/G`$ and let $`YZ`$ be the minimal resolution of singularities. The same arguments as in Section 4 show that $`\omega _Y=𝒪_Y`$, and that the fibers $`Y_t`$ for the induced fibration $`f:Y^1`$ are K3-surfaces with Picard number $`\rho (Y_t)=22`$. So the smooth threefold $`Y`$ satisfies the assumptions of Section 1, hence is a Calabi–Yau threefold in characteristic $`p=2`$ without any formal lifting to characteristic zero. In particular, the deformations over the $`W(k)`$-algebras are obstructed. However, we shall see that there are many unobstructed deformations over $`k`$-algebras.

###### Proposition 7.1.

The fiber $`Y_t`$ has Artin invariant $`\sigma _0(Y_t)=1`$ if and only if the homogeneous coordinates satisfy $`(r(t):s(t))^1(𝔽_4)`$, and $`\sigma _0(Y_t)=2`$ otherwise.

###### Proof.

This follows from Proposition 6.4 and the definition of $`Y_y`$ as the minimal resolution of the quotient of $`X_t=X_t^{}/H_t`$ by $`G`$. ∎

Choose homogeneous coordinates $`t=(t_0:t_1)`$ for $`^1`$ and consider, for example, the case $`r=t_0^2`$ and $`s=t_1^2`$. Then $`(r:s)=(t_0^2:t_1^2)`$ is $`𝔽_4`$-valued if and only if $`(t_0:t_1)`$ is $`𝔽_4`$-valued, and there are precisely 5 such points on $`^1`$.

Now consider the case that $`r=t_0^2+at_0t_1`$ and $`s=t_1^2`$, where $`ak`$ is a nonzero element. The quotient $`r/s=(t_0/t_1)^2+a(t_0/t_1)=P(t_0/t_1)`$ is given by the separable polynomial $`P(x)=x^2+ax`$, hence $`P(x)=b`$ has two distinct roots for each $`b𝔽_4`$. This means that there are precisely 8 points on $`^1`$ with $`t_10`$ for which $`(r(t):s(t))`$ is $`𝔽_4`$-valued, plus the additional point $`(1:0)`$.

This observation leads to nontrivial deformations over the formal power series ring $`R=k[[T]]`$: Consider the two quadrics $`r=t_0^2+Tt_0t_1`$ and $`s=t_1^2`$ with coefficients from $`R`$. It is easy to see that the construction of our Calabi–Yau threefolds carries over to a relative situation, so the two quadrics $`r,s`$ define a family $`Y\mathrm{Spec}(R)`$ of threefolds. The second main result of this paper is that this are nontrivial deformations:

###### Theorem 7.2.

The deformation $`Y\mathrm{Spec}(R)`$ is not formally isomorphic to the trivial deformation $`Y_0R\mathrm{Spec}(R)`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose to the contrary that these deformations are formally isomorphic. Then they are isomorphic, and in particular their generic geometric fibers $`Y_L`$ and $`Y_0L`$ are isomorphic, where $`L`$ is the algebraic closure of $`k((T))`$. But we saw above that the $`Y_0L`$ has 5 fibers over $`_L^1`$ whose Artin invariant is $`\sigma _0=1`$, whereas $`Y_L`$ has 9 such fibers, contradiction. ∎

## 8. The Artin–Mazur formal group

We now go back to the situation in Section 1, such that $`Y`$ is a smooth proper threefold with $`\omega _Y=𝒪_Y`$ endowed with a smooth morphism $`f:Y^1`$ whose geometric fibers are K3-surfaces with $`\rho =22`$ in characteristic $`p>0`$. The goal of this section is to compute the *Artin–Mazur formal group* $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Y^3`$ of such Calabi–Yau threefolds. Let me recall some definitions: If $`A`$ is a local Artin $`k`$-algebra with maximal ideal $`IA`$, we may view the sheaf $`1+I_k𝒪_Y`$ as an abelian subsheaf of $`(A_k𝒪_Y)^\times `$. This gives a functor of Artin rings $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Y^3(A)=H^3(Y,1+I_k𝒪_Y)`$. Artin and Mazur proved in , Proposition 1.8 that, for schemes like $`Y`$, this functor is representable by a 1-dimensional formal group.

###### Proposition 8.1.

The Artin–Mazur formal group $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Y^3`$ of our Calabi–Yau threefold $`Y`$ is isomorphic to the formal additive group $`\widehat{𝔾}_a`$.

###### Proof.

The referee suggested the following direct argument: Let $`W=W(k)`$ be the ring of Witt vectors, and $`WK`$ be its quotient field. It follows from , Corollary 1 that the $`l`$-adic Betti numbers $`b_i`$ for the projective smooth scheme $`Y`$ coincide with the $`W`$-rank of the crystalline cohomology groups $`H^i(Y/W,𝒪_{Y/W})`$. In particular, $`H^3(Y/W,𝒪_{Y/W})K=0`$. On the other hand, the part of the $`F`$-crystal $`H^3(Y/W,𝒪_{Y/W})K`$ whose slopes fall into the interval $`[0,1)`$ is the Dieudonné module for the maximal $`p`$-divisible quotient of the formal group $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Y^3`$ (compare , Remark 5.13 and , Corollary 3.3). It then follows from the classification of 1-dimensional formal groups that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Y^3=\widehat{𝔾}_a`$. ∎

It follows from a result of Geer and Katsura (, Proposition 16.4) that the Frobenius operator $`F`$ on the Witt vector cohomology $`H^3(Y,W_i𝒪_Y)`$ vanishes for all $`i1`$. Indeed, the Witt vector cohomology $`H^3(Y,W𝒪_Y)`$ is the Dieudonné module for the formal group $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Y^3`$.