Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Stratified Hyperbolicity of the moduli stack of stable minimal models, I

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that every stratum of a birationally admissible stratification of the moduli stack of stable minimal models is hyperbolic, via Borel-Moore cohomology and a logarithmic Higgs sheaf.

desk verdict Serious new Viehweg-Zuo construction via Borel-Moore cohomology; main theorem is significant but depends on unverified ampleness and properness results of Birkar. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.17537 v1 pith:ORQ4NXV2 submitted 2025-06-21 math.AG

Junchao Shentu This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AG MSC 14D2214D0714C3014J1014D23
keywords moduliofstableminimalmodelsKSBAstackstratifiedhyperbolicityloggeneraltypelogarithmicHiggssheafBorel-MoorecohomologyvariationmixedHodgestructuresDeligne-Mumford
topics The Hodge Conjecture
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proves that the moduli stack of stable minimal models — the compactification parameterizing semi-log-canonical pairs with semi-ample canonical bundle — is hyperbolic in a stratified sense. The main theorem says that any birationally admissible family of stable minimal models over a smooth quasi-projective base, whose classifying map to the moduli stack is generically finite, has base of log general type. Since a birationally admissible stratification always exists, each of its strata carries this hyperbolicity property: every generically finite cover of any closed substack of a stratum is of log general type. This extends the classical hyperbolicity program for families of polarized manifolds to the singular boundary strata of moduli of stable pairs, giving a partial answer to a question raised in the construction of these moduli spaces.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Borel-Moore cohomology of a simple normal crossing pair $(X,D)$, $H^i_{BM}(X\setminus D;\mathbb{Q})$, studied through its family version as a graded-polarizable admissible variation of mixed Hodge structures. Its top Hodge piece is $O_X(K_X+D)$, so the determinant polarization $\det f_*(O(rK_{X/S}+rB+raA))$ embeds into the lowest Hodge piece of the associated lower canonical logarithmic Higgs bundle. The Higgs field then propagates this subbundle through the Hodge filtration, giving the morphism to $\Omega_S^{\otimes m}(\log D)$ that makes $K_S+D$ big. This is the classical Higgs-sheaf mechanism for hyperbolicity, rebuilt with Borel-Moore cohomology and mixed Hodge theory to handle singular fibers and boundary divisors.

What would settle it

Construct a smooth quasi-projective base $S$ whose logarithmic canonical bundle $K_S+D$ is not big (for instance $\mathbb P^1$ minus one or two points, or an elliptic curve minus a point) supporting a birationally admissible family of stable minimal models with generically finite classifying map to the moduli stack. Such a family would contradict the main theorem directly; alternatively, locate a closed substack of a stratum admitting a generically finite cover that is not of log general type.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the natural determinant line bundle on the moduli stack, $\lambda_{a,r}=\det f_*(r(K_{X/S}+B+aA))$, is not just a polarization but the seed of the hyperbolicity argument. The paper shows that, for a birationally admissible family, the Borel-Moore cohomology of a simple normal crossing log birational model carries an admissible variation of mixed Hodge structures whose lower canonical logarithmic Higgs bundle contains this determinant line bundle as its lowest Hodge piece. Iterating the Higgs field produces a non-zero morphism from a tensor power of the determinant bundle to a tensor power of the logarithmic cotangent bundle, twisted by a weakly positive sheaf. Because the determinant bundle is ample, its pullback is big, and the known positivity-to-bigness criterion forces $K_S+D$ to be big. The birationally admissible condition — existence of a simple normal crossing log birational model — is precisely what makes the Borel-Moore variation well-behaved enough to run this argument on every stratum, including the boundary.

Load-bearing premise

The proof's starting point is the claim that the moduli stack is complete and carries an ample determinant line bundle, as asserted by the cited moduli theorem together with the cited semipositivity results; if that external foundation fails, the main theorem collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The boundary strata of the moduli stack of stable curves are hyperbolic, including the deep boundary; in particular the whole stack $\overline{\mathcal M}_{g,n}$ is hyperbolic under this notion.
  • No birationally admissible family of stable minimal models with maximal variation can have base $\mathbb P^1$, an abelian variety, or any other variety whose logarithmic canonical bundle is not big; such bases force isotriviality or non-admissibility.
  • The hyperbolicity statement covers principal and boundary strata uniformly, so the classical results for smooth canonically polarized families now extend to stable slc pairs with semi-ample canonical class.
  • Every generically finite cover of a closed substack of a stratum is of log general type, a strong stack-theoretic hyperbolicity that rules out large families of varieties mapping essentially finitely to the moduli stack.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the same construction can be pushed past the birationally admissible condition, the failure is likely concentrated in degenerate fibers; the paper's own examples of a Lefschetz pencil over $\mathbb P^1$ and an elliptic base with degenerating polarization suggest the hypothesis is close to optimal rather than merely technical.
  • The Borel-Moore Higgs bundle may carry more information than bigness: the same morphisms could yield non-vanishing of symmetric powers of the logarithmic cotangent sheaf, potentially implying Brody or algebraic hyperbolicity of the strata rather than only log-general-type hyperbolicity.
  • Because the stratification is chosen rather than canonical, one can test whether the hyperbolicity conclusion is independent of the choice of functorial desingularization; if different choices produce incompatible strata, the statement would have to be read as a property of the chosen filtration.
  • For other moduli stacks with an ample determinant-type line bundle and a well-behaved universal family, the same Borel-Moore mechanism would likely produce stratified hyperbolicity once the required Hodge-theoretic inputs are available.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper claims a stratified hyperbolicity theorem for Birkar's moduli stack of stable minimal models. The main result, Theorem 1.1, states that the base of any birationally admissible family of (d, Φ_c, Γ, σ)-stable minimal models with generically finite classifying map is of log general type; Theorem 1.3 then concludes that each stratum of a birationally admissible stratification is hyperbolic. The proof develops a variation-of-mixed-Hodge-structures package for Borel-Moore cohomology of simple normal crossing pairs, proves admissibility and a geometric description of the lower canonical extension, constructs a Viehweg-Zuo type Higgs sheaf containing the Kollár-type determinant polarization, and uses the Campana-Paun big-cotangent criterion. The main theorems are explicitly conditional on Birkar's properness theorem for the moduli stack and on the ampleness of the determinant line bundle λ_{a,r}, which are used as black boxes.

Significance. If the main theorems are correct, the paper gives a positive answer to a question of Birkar on the global geometry of moduli of stable minimal models, and it extends the Viehweg-Zuo/Campana-Paun/Popa-Schnell hyperbolicity results beyond the smooth principal stratum to the boundary strata of the stack. The stratified statement appears to be new even for the canonical stratification of M_{g,n}. The paper's constructive machinery—Borel-Moore VMHS, admissibility, lower canonical extension, and the fiber-product argument—is substantial and, modulo the external inputs, mostly carried out in detail. The inclusion of the determinant polarization into the top Hodge bundle is an explicit and useful observation. However, the central claim rests on external theorems whose exact hypotheses are not verified, and there is an internal inconsistency between the Q-divisor convention in Definition 2.1 and the line-bundle statements that follow.

major comments (3)
  1. [Definition 2.1; Lemma 2.8; Eq. (3.3)] Definition 2.1 allows D ≥ 0 to be a Weil Q-divisor with arbitrary nonnegative coefficients, but Lemma 2.8 asserts an isomorphism F^n_{(X,D),BM} ≃ O_X(K_X + D)[−n] and Eq. (3.3) uses O_X(K_{X/S} + D − f^*D_S)[−n]. For a Q-divisor D, the sheaves O_X(K_X + D) and O_X(−D) are not defined as line bundles, and the decompositions D[k], the residue/Gysin maps, and Lemma 2.5 require D to be reduced, or at least integral. Since Section 4 and Theorem 5.10 apply the construction to Q-divisors such as Δ_o = B_o + aA_o and its pullbacks, this is not a harmless convention: the isomorphism in Lemma 2.8 is exactly what produces the inclusion of the determinant line bundle into the top Hodge bundle in Lemma 3.19 and Lemma 4.3. The authors should either restrict Definition 2.1 to integral/reduced divisors and explain how Q-boundaries are converted, or extend the proof of Lemma 2.8 to Q-divisors explicitly.
  2. [Theorem 5.1 and Proposition 5.3] The entry point of the Viehweg-Zuo machinery in Theorem 5.10 is the bigness of det(W), obtained as (ξ∘σ)^*λ_{a,r} = det(W) with λ_{a,r} ample by Proposition 5.3 and ξ∘σ generically finite. Proposition 5.3 is proved in two sentences by citing Kollár's criterion [27, §2.9] and nefness results of Fujino [16] and Kovács-Patakfalvi [35]. The statement needed here, however, is not literally the KSBA projectivity proved in those papers: it concerns Birkar's full class of (d, Φ_c, Γ, σ)-stable minimal models, where K_X + B is only semi-ample and A is an auxiliary polarization, and it requires the determinant line bundle to descend to and be ample on the coarse moduli space of the Deligne-Mumford stack delivered by [4, Theorem 1.14]. Neither the properness statement of Theorem 5.1 nor this ampleness statement is independently verified in the manuscript. If either has a gap, det(W) need not be big and the entire construction culminating in Theorem 5.10 collapses. The authors should provide a proof or a precise reference that covers this exact class and this exact descent statement.
  3. [Theorem 6.1, proof] The proof applies Proposition 3.18 to the subsheaf K ⊂ eH^w on U to conclude that −c1(K) is pseudo-effective, and then uses det(j_*(K^∨)) to produce a morphism into Ω^{⊗n0 r_K}_S(log D). But Proposition 3.18 is stated for a coherent subsheaf of eH^k on a projective eS, while in Theorem 6.1 the sheaves eH^w and K are only defined on U = S \ Z with codim_S Z ≥ 2, and their extension to S is not discussed. The later use of determinants and double duals requires K to extend to a coherent subsheaf of the reflexive extension of eH^w, and pseudo-effectivity of −c1(K) must be checked on S. This is likely fixable by a standard Hartogs-type extension argument, but as written it is a gap in the proof of the main theorem.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Theorem 4.1] In the statement of Theorem 4.1(2), the first occurrence of logarithmic poles says 'along D_g' while the final inequality is with Ω_V(log(D_f ∩ V)); the intended divisor is D_f, not D_g.
  2. [Section 4.2] The notation S'_o appears in 'V^n_{g_o,BM} on S'_o' but is never defined; it should presumably be the open set U or S \ D_g.
  3. [Theorem 5.10, Last step] In the descent from \tilde S to S, the display uses a mixture of σ_* and σ^* without making the base space of each sheaf explicit; in particular, 'σ_*O_{\tilde S}⊗M^{-1} ⊂ O_S^{⊕N'}' and the subsequent line would be much clearer if the pushforwards and pullbacks were written with their domains and targets.
  4. [Introduction and Definition 1.1] The abstract says 'every schematic generically finite covering of any closed substack' while the body defines hyperbolicity using generically finite morphisms from smooth quasi-projective varieties; the terminology should be reconciled.
  5. [Throughout] There are several typos and small notational slips, e.g., 'natual' in Theorem 2.13(3), 'discription' before Theorem 3.16, 'to to' in the proof of Lemma 5.5, and the undefined 'S'_o' mentioned above; a careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's derivation is an application of external black-box theorems (Birkar, Fujino, Kovacs-Patakfalvi, Campana-Paun, Brunebarbe) and contains no fitted-input-as-prediction or self-referential reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The main theorems (Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.3) are obtained by constructing a Viehweg-Zuo type Higgs sheaf from an admissible family of stable minimal models (Theorem 5.10), then applying the Campana-Paun criterion to conclude bigness of the log canonical bundle. None of the paper's inputs are defined in terms of the target statement: the birationally admissible condition is a geometric hypothesis on the family (existence of an snc log birational model, Definition 5.9), not a reformulation of 'the base is of log general type' or 'the stratum is hyperbolic'. The stratification statement (Theorem 1.3) follows from Lemma 6.6, which produces a dense open substack where the universal family is strictly birationally admissible via generic smoothness of a semi-log resolution, and from the fact that base changes of strictly birationally admissible families remain birationally admissible; this is a direct application, not a circular reuse of the conclusion. The ampleness of the Kollar-type polarization lambda_{a,r} (Proposition 5.3) is quoted from external sources (Fujino [16], Kovacs-Patakfalvi [35]) via Kollar's criterion, and the properness of the moduli stack is quoted from Birkar [4]; these are independent support, not the paper's own claims, and no parameter is fitted to the target result. The paper does rely on unverified external inputs, most notably Birkar's preprint [4, Theorem 1.14], but reliance on external theorems is a dependency risk, not circularity. There are no self-citations invoked as load-bearing evidence, no uniqueness theorem imported from the author's prior work, and no renaming of a known empirical result as a new prediction. Therefore the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a stack of external results, most notably Birkar's unpublished moduli theorem and the ampleness of the Kollar-type polarization. The paper contributes the Hodge-theoretic construction and the stratification framework, but the existence of the moduli stack and the positivity inputs are assumed.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Birkar's moduli theorem: M_slc(d, Phi_c, Gamma, sigma) is a proper DM stack with projective coarse moduli space (Theorem 5.1, from [4]).
    Used throughout Sections 5 and 6; proved in a preprint (arXiv:2211.11237) that the paper does not independently verify.
  • domain assumption Ampleness of lambda_{a,r} (Proposition 5.3, from Fujino [16] and Kovacs-Patakfalvi [35]).
    Needed to conclude det(W) is big after pullback by a generically finite morphism, which is the starting point of the VZ sheaf construction in Theorem 5.10.
  • domain assumption Campana-Paun theorem [6, Theorem 7.11]: if Omega_S^{otimes m}(log D) contains a big line bundle, then K_S + D is big.
    Used in the last step of Theorem 6.1 to conclude S_o is of log general type.
  • domain assumption Brunebarbe [5, Theorem 1.4] / Zuo [54]: for a polarized variation of Hodge structure, any theta-invariant subsheaf K of the associated Higgs bundle has -c1(K) pseudo-effective.
    Used in Proposition 3.18 to prove -c1(K) pseudo-effective, needed to rule out n0=0 in Theorem 6.1.
  • domain assumption Functorial semi-log resolution of singularities (Bierstone-Vera Pacheco [3], Kollar [28, Section 10.4]).
    Used to define birationally admissible stratifications and to construct semi-log resolutions in Lemma 6.6 and Step 2 of Theorem 5.10.
  • standard math Standard Hodge theory: polarizability and admissibility of variations of mixed Hodge structure from smooth projective families (Peters-Steenbrink [40], Steenbrink [45], Kashiwara [21], Qianyu Chen [7]).
    Underlies Sections 2 and 3 constructions.
  • standard math Steenbrink's theory of limits of Hodge structures and the relative monodromy weight filtration [45, Proposition 4.23].
    Used in Theorem 3.12.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stratified Hyperbolicity of the moduli stack of stable minimal models, I." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ORQ4NXV2

@misc{pith2026250617537,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stratified Hyperbolicity of the moduli stack of stable minimal models, I},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ORQ4NXV2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.17537}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper, we introduce a birationally admissible stratification on the Deligne-Mumford stack of stable minimal models (e.g., the KSBA moduli stack), such that the universal family over each stratum admits a simple normal crossing log birational model. We further demonstrate that each stratum is hyperbolic in the sense that every schematic generically finite covering of any closed substack is of logarithmic general type. This provides a partial answer to C.Birkar's question regarding the global geometry of the moduli of stable minimal models.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Stratified Hyperbolicity of the moduli stack of stable minimal models, II: Big Picard Theorem and the stratified Brody hyperbolicity

    math.AG 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Every stratum in a birationally admissible stratification of Birkar's moduli stack of stable minimal models is Picard hyperbolic, Borel hyperbolic, and Brody hyperbolic.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [16]

    , Semipositivity theorems for moduli problems , Ann. of Math. (2) 187 (2018), no. 3, 639–665. MR3779955

    work page 2018

  2. [35]

    S. J. Kov´ acs and Z. Patakfalvi, Projectivity of the moduli space of stable log-varieties and subadditivity of log-Kodaira dimension, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 30 (2017), no. 4, 959–1021. MR3671934

    2017

  3. [1]

    Alexeev, Complete moduli in the presence of semiabelian group action , Ann

    V. Alexeev, Complete moduli in the presence of semiabelian group action , Ann. of Math. (2) 155 (2002), no. 3, 611–708. MR1923963

    work page 2002

  4. [2]

    S. Ju. Arakelov, Families of algebraic curves with fixed degeneracies , Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 35 (1971), 1269–1293. MR0321933

    work page 1971

  5. [3]

    Bierstone and F

    E. Bierstone and F. Vera Pacheco,Resolution of singularities of pairs preserving semi-simple normal crossings, Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas F´ ıs. Nat. Ser. A Mat. RACSAM 107 (2013), no. 1, 159–188. MR3031268

    2013

  6. [4]

    Birkar, Moduli of algebraic varieties , arXiv:2211.11237

    C. Birkar, Moduli of algebraic varieties , arXiv:2211.11237

    arXiv

  7. [5]

    Brunebarbe, Semi-positivity from higgs bundles , arXiv:1707.08495

    Y. Brunebarbe, Semi-positivity from higgs bundles , arXiv:1707.08495

    arXiv

  8. [6]

    Campana and M

    F. Campana and M. P˘ aun,Foliations with positive slopes and birational stability of orbifold cotangent bundles, Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. 129 (2019), 1–49. MR3949026

    work page 2019

Show all 54 references
  1. [7]

    Chen, Limits of hodge structures via holonomic D-modules , arXiv:2103.03983

    Q. Chen, Limits of hodge structures via holonomic D-modules , arXiv:2103.03983

    arXiv

  2. [8]

    Deligne and D

    P. Deligne and D. Mumford, The irreducibility of the space of curves of given genus , Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. 36 (1969), 75–109. MR262240

    1969

  3. [9]

    Deligne, ´Equations diff´ erentielles ` a points singuliers r´ eguliers, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol

    P. Deligne, ´Equations diff´ erentielles ` a points singuliers r´ eguliers, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 163, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1970. MR0417174

    1970

  4. [10]

    I, Actes du Congr` es International des Math´ ematiciens (Nice, 1970), Tome 1, 1971, pp

    , Th´ eorie de Hodge. I, Actes du Congr` es International des Math´ ematiciens (Nice, 1970), Tome 1, 1971, pp. 425–430. MR0441965

    1970

  5. [11]

    I , Inst

    , La conjecture de Weil. I , Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. 43 (1974), 273–307. MR340258

    1974

  6. [12]

    III, Inst

    , Th´ eorie de Hodge. III, Inst. Hautes ´Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. 44 (1974), 5–77. MR498552

    1974

  7. [13]

    El Zein, Th´ eorie de Hodge des cycles ´ evanescents, Ann

    F. El Zein, Th´ eorie de Hodge des cycles ´ evanescents, Ann. Sci. ´Ecole Norm. Sup. (4) 19 (1986), no. 1, 107–184. MR860812

    1986

  8. [14]

    [Current Mathematical Topics], Hermann, Paris, 1991

    , Introduction ` a la th´ eorie de Hodge mixte, Actualit´ es Math´ ematiques. [Current Mathematical Topics], Hermann, Paris, 1991. MR1160988

    1991

  9. [15]

    Fujino, Abundance theorem for semi log canonical threefolds , Duke Math

    O. Fujino, Abundance theorem for semi log canonical threefolds , Duke Math. J. 102 (2000), no. 3, 513–532. MR1756108

    2000

  10. [17]

    MR4177797

    , Iitaka conjecture—an introduction , SpringerBriefs in Mathematics, Springer, Singapore, [2020] ©2020. MR4177797

    2020

  11. [18]

    Fujino and T

    O. Fujino and T. Fujisawa, Variations of mixed Hodge structure and semipositivity theorems, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 50 (2014), no. 4, 589–661. MR3273305

    2014

  12. [19]

    Hacking, Compact moduli of plane curves , Duke Math

    P. Hacking, Compact moduli of plane curves , Duke Math. J. 124 (2004), no. 2, 213–257. MR2078368

    2004

  13. [20]

    S. J. Kov´ acs and B. Taji,Hodge sheaves underlying flat projective families , arXiv:2103.03515v2

    arXiv

  14. [21]

    Kashiwara, A study of variation of mixed Hodge structure , Publ

    M. Kashiwara, A study of variation of mixed Hodge structure , Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 22 (1986), no. 5, 991–1024. MR866665

    1986

  15. [22]

    Kebekus and S

    S. Kebekus and S. J. Kov´ acs, Families of canonically polarized varieties over surfaces , Invent. Math. 172 (2008), no. 3, 657–682. MR2393082

    2008

  16. [23]

    , Families of varieties of general type over compact bases , Adv. Math. 218 (2008), no. 3, 649–652. MR2414316

    2008

  17. [24]

    , The structure of surfaces and threefolds mapping to the moduli stack of canonically polarized varieties, Duke Math. J. 155 (2010), no. 1, 1–33. MR2730371

    2010

  18. [25]

    Koll´ ar and N

    J. Koll´ ar and N. I. Shepherd-Barron,Threefolds and deformations of surface singularities , Invent. Math. 91 (1988), no. 2, 299–338. MR922803

    1988

  19. [26]

    Koll´ ar,Moduli of varieties of general type , arXiv:1008.0621

    J. Koll´ ar,Moduli of varieties of general type , arXiv:1008.0621

    arXiv

  20. [27]

    Koll´ ar,Projectivity of complete moduli, J

    J. Koll´ ar,Projectivity of complete moduli, J. Differential Geom. 32 (1990), no. 1, 235–268. MR1064874

    1990

  21. [28]

    200, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013

    , Singularities of the minimal model program , Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 200, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. With a collaboration of S´ andor Kov´ acs. MR3057950

    2013

  22. [29]

    231, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, 2023

    , Families of varieties of general type, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 231, Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, 2023. With the collaboration of Klaus Altmann and S´ andor J. Kov´ acs. MR4566297

    2023

  23. [30]

    Koll´ ar and C

    J. Koll´ ar and C. Y. Xu,Moduli of polarized Calabi-Yau pairs , Acta Math. Sin. (Engl. Ser.) 36 (2020), no. 6, 631–637. MR4110324

    2020

  24. [31]

    S. J. Kov´ acs,Smooth families over rational and elliptic curves , J. Algebraic Geom. 5 (1996), no. 2, 369–385. MR1374712

    1996

  25. [32]

    Algebraic Geom

    , Algebraic hyperbolicity of fine moduli spaces , J. Algebraic Geom. 9 (2000), no. 1, 165–174. MR1713524 STRATIFIED HYPERBOLICITY OF THE MODULI STACK OF STABLE MINIMAL MODELS, I 49

    2000

  26. [33]

    131 (2002), no

    , Logarithmic vanishing theorems and Arakelov-Parshin boundedness for singular varieties, Compositio Math. 131 (2002), no. 3, 291–317. MR1905025

    2002

  27. [34]

    3983–3991

    , Viehweg’s conjecture for families over Pn, 2003, pp. 3983–3991. Special issue in honor of Steven L. Kleiman. MR2007392

    2003

  28. [36]

    Oguiso and E

    K. Oguiso and E. Viehweg, On the isotriviality of families of elliptic surfaces , J. Algebraic Geom. 10 (2001), no. 3, 569–598. MR1832333

    2001

  29. [37]

    S. G. Park, Viehweg hyperbolicity for whitney equisingular families with gorenstein rational singularities , arXiv:2210.03160v2

    arXiv

  30. [38]

    A. N. Parˇ sin,Algebraic curves over function fields. I , Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 32 (1968), 1191–1219. MR0257086

    1968

  31. [39]

    Patakfalvi, Viehweg’s hyperbolicity conjecture is true over compact bases , Adv

    Z. Patakfalvi, Viehweg’s hyperbolicity conjecture is true over compact bases , Adv. Math. 229 (2012), no. 3, 1640–1642. MR2871152

    2012

  32. [40]

    C. A. M. Peters and J. H. M. Steenbrink, Mixed Hodge structures, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Gren- zgebiete. 3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics], vol. 52, ...

    2008

  33. [41]

    Popa and C

    M. Popa and C. Schnell, Viehweg’s hyperbolicity conjecture for families with maximal variation, Invent. Math. 208 (2017), no. 3, 677–713. MR3648973

    2017

  34. [42]

    Saito, Modules de Hodge polarisables , Publ

    M. Saito, Modules de Hodge polarisables , Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 24 (1988), no. 6, 849–995 (1989). MR1000123

    1988

  35. [43]

    Schmid, Variation of Hodge structure: the singularities of the period mapping , Invent

    W. Schmid, Variation of Hodge structure: the singularities of the period mapping , Invent. Math. 22 (1973), 211–319. MR382272

    1973

  36. [44]

    J. H. M. Steenbrink, Mixed Hodge structure on the vanishing cohomology , Real and complex singularities (Proc. Ninth Nordic Summer School/NAVF Sympos. Math., Oslo, 1976), 1977, pp. 525–563. MR485870

    1976

  37. [45]

    Steenbrink, Limits of Hodge structures , Invent

    J. Steenbrink, Limits of Hodge structures , Invent. Math. 31 (1975/76), no. 3, 229–257. MR429885

    1975

  38. [46]

    Steenbrink and S

    J. Steenbrink and S. Zucker, Variation of mixed Hodge structure. I , Invent. Math. 80 (1985), no. 3, 489–542. MR791673

    1985

  39. [47]

    Taji, On the Kodaira dimension of base spaces of families of manifolds , J

    B. Taji, On the Kodaira dimension of base spaces of families of manifolds , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 225 (2021), no. 11, Paper No. 106729, 21. MR4231551

    2021

  40. [48]

    Viehweg, Weak positivity and the additivity of the Kodaira dimension for certain fibre spaces , Algebraic varieties and analytic varieties (Tokyo, 1981), 1983, pp

    E. Viehweg, Weak positivity and the additivity of the Kodaira dimension for certain fibre spaces , Algebraic varieties and analytic varieties (Tokyo, 1981), 1983, pp. 329–353. MR715656

    1981

  41. [49]

    Viehweg and K

    E. Viehweg and K. Zuo, On the isotriviality of families of projective manifolds over curves , J. Algebraic Geom. 10 (2001), no. 4, 781–799. MR1838979

    2001

  42. [50]

    , Base spaces of non-isotrivial families of smooth minimal models , Complex geometry (G¨ ottingen, 2000), 2002, pp. 279–328. MR1922109

    2000

  43. [51]

    , On the Brody hyperbolicity of moduli spaces for canonically polarized manifolds , Duke Math. J. 118 (2003), no. 1, 103–150. MR1978884

    2003

  44. [52]

    Wei and L

    C. Wei and L. Wu, Hyperbolicity for Log Smooth Families with Maximal Variation , Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 1 (2023), 708–743. MR4530119

    2023

  45. [53]

    Xu and Z

    C. Xu and Z. Zhuang, On positivity of the CM line bundle on K-moduli spaces , Ann. of Math. (2) 192 (2020), no. 3, 1005–1068. MR4172625

    2020

  46. [54]

    Zuo, On the negativity of kernels of Kodaira-Spencer maps on Hodge bundles and applications , 2000, pp

    K. Zuo, On the negativity of kernels of Kodaira-Spencer maps on Hodge bundles and applications , 2000, pp. 279–301. Kodaira’s issue. MR1803724 Email address: stjc@ustc.edu.cn School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, 230026, China

    2000

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.