Stably irrational hypersurfaces of small slopes

By Stefan Schreieder

Abstract

Let be an uncountable field of characteristic different from two. We show that a very general hypersurface of dimension and degree at least is not stably rational over the algebraic closure of .

1. Introduction

A classical problem in algebraic geometry asks to determine which varieties are rational, i.e., birational to projective space. A very challenging and interesting class of varieties for this question are smooth projective hypersurfaces of low degree. While the problem is solved in characteristic zero and dimension three by the work of Clemens–Griffiths Reference CG and Iskovskikh–Manin Reference IM, it is still wide open in higher dimensions.

A measure for the complexity of the rationality problem for a smooth projective hypersurface is its slope:

If , then , and so is not even separably uniruled.

Generalizing the method of Iskovskikh–Manin to higher dimensions, Pukhlikov Reference Pu1Reference Pu2 in low dimensions and de Fernex in general Reference deF1Reference deF2 have shown that a smooth complex projective hypersurface of slope and dimension at least three is birationally rigid. Again this is much stronger than proving irrationality as it implies for instance .

Using an entirely different method which relies on the existence of regular differential forms on certain degenerations to positive characteristic, Kollár Reference Ko1 showed that a very general complex projective hypersurface of degree at least is not ruled, hence not rational. Recently, Totaro Reference To combined this argument with the specialization method of Voisin and Colliot-Thélène–Pirutka Reference Voi4Reference CTP1 to show that a very general complex projective hypersurface of degree at least is not stably rational; i.e., is irrational for all . Totaro’s result generalized Reference CTP1, where it was shown earlier that a very general complex quartic threefold is not stably rational.

The method of Clemens–Griffiths has been generalized by Murre Reference Mur to threefolds over any field of characteristic different from . In particular, he has shown that over any such field, smooth cubic threefolds are irrational. Similarly, the arguments of Colliot-Thélène–Pirutka in Reference CTP1 work over any uncountable field of characteristic different from two, and so very general quartic threefolds are stably irrational over any such field. In contrast, Kollár and Totaro’s method Reference Ko1Reference To seems to work only over fields of small characteristic, compared to the dimension, and one gets the best bounds in characteristic zero and two. Besides those results, not much seems to be known about the rationality problem for smooth hypersurfaces in positive characteristic. For instance, to the best of my knowledge, up till now it was unknown whether for there are smooth irrational Fano hypersurfaces in over algebraically closed fields of large characteristic, compared to .

1.1. Main result

Before this paper, no smooth projective hypersurface of slope at most was known to be irrational over an algebraically closed field. On the other hand, it is conjectured that at least over the complex numbers there should be smooth hypersurfaces of arbitrary small slopes (and in fact cubics) that are not stably rational. In this paper we produce stably irrational smooth hypersurfaces (e.g. over ) whose degree grows logarithmically in the dimension, thus solving the above conjecture.

To state our result, note that the disjoint intervals for positive integers cover , and so any integer can be uniquely written as for integers and with .

Theorem 1.1.

Let be an uncountable field of characteristic different from two. Let be an integer and write with . Then a very general hypersurface of degree is not stably rational over the algebraic closure of .

The following table illustrates our lower bounds in dimensions .

For , we recover the result of Colliot-Thélène–Pirutka Reference CTP1, and for , our bound coincides with that of Totaro Reference To. However, in all dimensions at least , our bounds are smaller than what was previously known. For instance, it was unknown whether complex quintic fivefolds are rational.

If we write an integer as with as in Theorem 1.1, then . Therefore, Theorem 1.1 implies the following.

Corollary 1.2.

Let be an uncountable field of characteristic different from two. A very general hypersurface of dimension and degree at least is not stably rational over the algebraic closure of .

While Reference Ko1Reference To produced a linear lower bound on the degree, our lower bound grows only logarithmically in , and so we get surprisingly strong results in high dimensions. For instance, over any uncountable field of characteristic different from two, a very general hypersurface of dimension and degree at least is not stably rational.

1.2. Explicit equations

It is possible to write explicit equations for the examples in Theorem 1.1 over countable fields . As our proof uses a new double degeneration argument, this works e.g. over fields admitting two degenerations, such as or . In Appendix A, we give explicit examples in arbitrary dimension and for all degrees covered by Theorem 1.1. We illustrate this now for .

For this, let be an arbitrary integer. As in Theorem 1.1, there are unique integers and with and . Fix an integer . (Any integer has this property.) For simplicity, we additionally assume that is even, but similar examples also exist for odd ; see Appendix A.

For any , define and . The latter yields a bijection , and we put Let be a transcendental number (e.g. or ), and let be odd primes with . Then the hypersurface of dimension and even degree , given by the homogeneous polynomial

is smooth and not stably rational over .

If the dimension is of the special form , then we can circumvent one of the degenerations in our argument, giving rise to examples over fields like and . For instance, if , the examples over will be obtained from the above equation by setting . This leads to the following result.

Theorem 1.3.

Let be a field of characteristic different from two. If has positive characteristic, assume that it has positive transcendence degree over its prime field. Then there are smooth projective hypersurfaces over of arbitrarily small slopes that are stably irrational over the algebraic closure of .

1.3. Unirational hypersurfaces

Up till now, there was no example of a smooth projective unirational hypersurface over an algebraically closed field which was known to be stably irrational. This is slightly surprising and reflects the difficulty of the (stable) rationality problem for smooth hypersurfaces. As for other types of varieties, many unirational but stably irrational examples are known; see e.g. Reference AMReference CTOReference AsoReference Voi4Reference HKTReference HPT2Reference Sch1Reference Sch2.

We prove in fact a strengthening of Theorem 1.1, where we allow the hypersurface to have some given multiplicity along a linear subspace; see Theorem 8.1 and Corollary 8.2. Together with the unirationality result from Reference CMM, we then obtain the following.

Corollary 1.4.

Let . Then a very general quintic hypersurface containing a -plane is a smooth hypersurface that is unirational but not stably rational.

1.4. The integral Hodge conjecture for rationally connected varieties

In Reference Voi1, Voisin proved the integral Hodge conjecture (IHC) for uniruled threefolds, hence for rationally connected ones. Later, Voisin asked whether the IHC for codimension two cycles holds for rationally connected varieties in arbitrary dimension and conjectured that the answer is negative in dimensions at least four; see Reference Voi2, Question 16.

Colliot-Thélène and Voisin Reference CTV showed subsequently that the failure of the IHC for codimension two cycles on a rationally connected smooth complex projective variety is detected by the third unramified cohomology of . Using the six-dimensional example in Reference CTO, Colliot-Thélène and Voisin then concluded that the IHC for rationally connected varieties of dimension at least six in general fails Reference CTV. In the same article, they asked again about the case of rationally connected varieties of dimensions four and five Reference CTV, Question 6.6. For special types of rationally connected four- and fivefolds (including the case of cubics), a positive answer to that question is known to hold; see e.g. Reference Voi2, Theorem 18, Reference CTV, Théorème 6.8, Reference Voi3, Theorem 1.4, and Reference FT, Théorème 3.

As a byproduct of our proof of Theorem 1.1, we obtain the following result, which partially answers a question of Asok Reference Aso, Question 4.5 and, by Reference CTV, completely answers the above-mentioned question of Voisin and Colliot-Thélène–Voisin.

Theorem 1.5.

For integers and with , there is a unirational smooth complex projective variety of dimension with nontrivial -th unramified cohomology:

Corollary 1.6.

In any dimension at least four, there is a smooth complex projective unirational variety for which the integral Hodge conjecture for codimension two cycles fails.

Note that the examples used in the above results are (weak) conic bundles and not hypersurfaces; see Section 8.3 below. For instance, the four-dimensional example in Corollary 1.6 is a (weak) conic bundle over .

1.5. Method

Instead of degenerations to mildly singular varieties in characteristic two, used by Kollár Reference Ko1 and Totaro Reference To, we use in this paper a degeneration to a highly singular hypersurface (corresponding to in the equation in Section 1.2). In fact, the singularities of are so bad that the degeneration method of Voisin Reference Voi4 and Colliot-Thélène–Pirutka Reference CTP1 that has been used in Reference To does not seem to apply; see Remark 7.2 below. Instead, Theorem 1.1 is an application of the method that I have introduced in Reference Sch1 and which generalizes Reference Voi4Reference CTP1 to degenerations where much more complicated singularities are allowed.

One important condition which the degeneration methods in Reference Voi4Reference CTP1 and Reference Sch1 have in common is the existence of some specialization of the varieties we are interested in, such that stable irrationality for can be detected via some cohomological obstruction, e.g. via the existence of some nontrivial unramified cohomology class ; see Reference CTO. The key novelty of the strategy in Reference Sch1 is however the observation that instead of a careful analysis of the singularities of needed for the arguments in Reference CTP1, it suffices to check that the unramified class restricts to zero on all exceptional divisors of a resolution of singularities of . It is exactly this flexibility that we will crucially exploit in this paper.

An additional difficulty arises in positive characteristic, where resolution of singularities is an open problem. To be able to deal with such fields as well, we will develop in Section 3 below an analogue of the method of Reference Sch1 where one replaces a resolution of singularities of by an alteration of suitable degree, which always exists by the work of de Jong and Gabber. While the method from Reference Sch1 can be adopted to alterations, it seems impossible to use alterations in the context of the original method of Reference Voi4Reference CTP1.

We will use a degeneration of a very general hypersurface of degree to a special hypersurface of degree and multiplicity along an -plane . Blowing up the -plane, we get a (weak) -fold quadric bundle (cf. Reference Sch1, Section 3.5), and we use that structure to produce a nontrivial unramified cohomology class . The first examples of quadric bundles with nontrivial unramified cohomology over (resp., ) and fiber dimension (resp., ) have been constructed in Reference AMReference CTO. Recently, these results have been generalized to arbitrary with in Reference Sch1.

The main difficulties that we face are as follows. Firstly, we need to find a nontrivial unramified cohomology class for a hypersurface of small slope, while all previously known examples have large slopes; see Reference Sch1. Secondly, the known methods from Reference CTOReference Sch1 do not seem to work in dimensions of the form . Finally, we have to arrange that restricts to zero on all exceptional divisors of a resolution of (or more generally on all subvarieties of an alteration of that lie over the singular locus of ). I have noticed before (cf. Reference Sch1Reference Sch2) that such a vanishing result is often automatically satisfied for all subvarieties that do not dominate , and we prove a general such vanishing result in Theorem 9.2 below. However, the key additional issue here is that also has to restrict to zero on the (weak) -fold quadric bundle that we introduce in the blow-up as exceptional divisor.

In this paper we introduce a new construction method for quadric bundles with nontrivial unramified cohomology which circumvents all complications mentioned above at the same time. Our construction is inspired by an example of a quadric surface bundle over that played a key role in the work of Hassett, Pirutka, and Tschinkel Reference HPT1, Example 8. An important step in the argument is a degeneration of the quadric bundle to a bundle with a section, hence to a rational variety, which allows us to control the unramified cohomology of ; see Section 6 below. Together with the initial degeneration to the singular hypersurface , this yields a double degeneration argument, which is the main technical innovation of the paper.

2. Preliminaries

2.1. Conventions

A variety is an integral separated scheme of finite type over a field. For a scheme , we denote its codimension one points by . A property holds for a very general point of a scheme if it holds at all closed points inside some countable intersection of open dense subsets. A quadric bundle is a flat projective morphism of varieties whose generic fiber is a smooth quadric; if we drop the flatness assumption, is called a weak quadric bundle.

2.2. Alterations

Let be a variety over an algebraically closed field . An alteration of is a proper generically finite surjective morphism , where is a nonsingular variety over . De Jong proved that alterations always exist; see Reference deJo. Later, Gabber showed that one can additionally require that be prime to any given prime number which is invertible in ; see Reference IT, Theorem 2.1.

2.3. Galois cohomology and unramified cohomology

Let be a prime and let be a field of characteristic different from which contains all -th roots of unity. We identify the Galois cohomology group with the étale cohomology , where denotes the constant sheaf. We have via Kummer theory. Using this isomorphism, we denote by the cup product of the classes , represented by . If has transcendence degree over an algebraically closed subfield , then for all ; see Reference Se, II.4.2.

For any discrete valuation ring with residue field and fraction field , both of characteristic different from , there is a residue map

This has the following property; see e.g. Reference Sch1, Lemma 9.

Lemma 2.1.

In the above notation, suppose that . Let be a uniformizer, let be integers, and let be units in . Then

where denotes the image of in and denotes the symbol where is omitted and where we use the convention that the above sum is one if and zero if .

Proof.

The cases follow from Reference CTO, Proposition 1.3. For , the lemma follows from

where the summand for is understood to be . The latter identity follows from , which itself is a consequence of the well-known relation (see e.g. Reference Ke, Lemma 2.2) and the assumption .

Assume now that is the function field of a normal variety over a field . The unramified cohomology group is the subgroup of that consists of all elements that have trivial residue at any geometric discrete rank one valuation on that is trivial on .⁠Footnote1 If is a scheme point in the smooth locus of , then any that is unramified over comes from a class in , and so it can be restricted to yield a class ; see Reference CT1, Theorem 4.1.1. That is, any can be restricted to the generic point of any subvariety which meets the smooth locus of .

1

We follow the convention used in Reference Mer, which slightly differs from Reference CTO, where also nongeometric valuations are considered. Both definitions coincide by Reference CT1, Theorem 4.1.1 if is smooth and proper.

2.4. Quadratic forms

Let be a field of characteristic different from two. For , we denote by the quadratic form over . The orthogonal sum (resp., tensor product) of two quadratic forms and over will be denoted by (resp., ). We say that and are similar if there is some with . For any field extension of and any quadratic form over such that is integral over , we denote by the function field of the projective quadric over that is defined by .

A quadratic form over is called a Pfister form if it is isomorphic to the tensor product of forms for , where . If is a square in , then we may ignore the signs. As usual, we denote this tensor product by . Isotropic Pfister forms are hyperbolic; see e.g. Reference Lam, Theorem X.1.7.

The following result is due to the work of many people, including Arason, Elman, Lam, Knebusch, and Voevodsky.

Theorem 2.2.

Let be a field with and let . The Pfister form is isotropic if and only if .

Proof.

The theorem follows from Reference EL, Main Theorem 3.2 and Voevodsky’s proof of the Milnor conjecture Reference Voe.

Theorem 2.3.

Let be a field with and let be an integral projective quadric, defined by a quadratic form over . Let and consider . Assume . Then the following are equivalent:

(1)

;

(2)

the Pfister form becomes isotropic over ;

(3)

is similar to a subform of the Pfister form .

Proof.

The equivalence of (1) and (2) follows from Theorem 2.2. Since , is anisotropic over by Theorem 2.2. The equivalence of (2) and (3) is thus a consequence of the subform theorem of Arason and Knebusch; see Reference Lam, Corollary X.4.9.

2.5. Decompositions of the diagonal

We say that a variety admits an integral decomposition of the diagonal if in for some zero-cycle of degree one and some cycle with for some closed algebraic subset . Equivalently, in , where is the class of the diagonal and is the base change of the zero-cycle to the function field . Sometimes, we will also write and for the corresponding base changes.

Recall that a variety is called retract rational if there are nonempty open subsets and , for some integer , and morphisms and with . It is known (and not hard to see) that stably rational varieties are retract rational. We have the following lemma, which in the case where is smooth and proper is due to Colliot-Thélène and Pirutka Reference CTP1, Lemme 1.5.

Lemma 2.4.

Let be a proper variety over a field . If is retract rational (e.g. stably rational), then it admits an integral decomposition of the diagonal.

Proof.

Suppose that there are nonempty open subsets and , for some integer , and morphisms and with . Let and be the closures of the graphs of and , respectively. Let be the function field of and consider the diagram

where , , , and denote the natural projections, respectively. Since and are birational, , and so the diagonal of gives rise to a zero-cycle on . Since and are proper, the pushforwards and are defined on the level of Chow groups. There is also a refined Gysin homomorphism , defined as follows; see Reference Ful, Definition 8.1.2. Since is smooth, the graph is a regularly embedded closed subvariety. For a cycle on , the cycle is then defined as the intersection of with (viewed as a cycle on ).

We claim that

where is the class of the -point of induced by the diagonal of . To see this, note that the pushforward is represented by the generic point of the graph of inside . In particular, lies inside the open subset over which is an isomorphism. Hence, is represented by the -point of that corresponds to the generic point of the graph of the rational map induced by . Hence, corresponds to the generic point of the graph of the rational map , which is the diagonal, because . We have thus proven that (Equation 1) holds, as we want. (Note that all closed points considered above have residue field and the morphisms , , and induce isomorphisms between those residue fields, so no multiplicities show up in the above computations.)

On the other hand, is generated by the class of the -point for any -point , and we may choose . Since has degree one, we conclude that . Since is an isomorphism above , the -point gives rise to a unique -point such that . If denotes the image of in , then we conclude that

The lemma then follows by comparing this with (Equation 1) above.

2.6. Specializations

We say that a variety over a field specializes (or degenerates) to a variety over a field , with algebraically closed, if there is a discrete valuation ring with residue field and fraction field with an injection of fields such that the following holds. There is a flat proper morphism such that is isomorphic to the special fiber and is isomorphic to the base change of the generic fiber . With this definition, we have for instance the following. Let be a flat proper morphism of varieties over an algebraically closed uncountable field whose fibers are integral. Then the fiber over a very general point degenerates to the fiber for any closed point ; cf. Reference Sch1, §2.2.

3. Degeneration method

In previous degeneration methods Reference Voi4Reference CTP1Reference Sch1, it was crucial that the special fiber admit a resolution of singularities. This leads to difficulties in positive characteristic, where resolutions of singularities are not known to exist in general. In this section we show that the method in Reference Sch1 still works if we replace resolutions by alterations of suitable degree, which exist in arbitrary characteristic by the work of de Jong and Gabber; see Section 2.2 above. Here we have no control on the birational geometry of ; for instance, might be of general type and of positive geometric genus even though is rationally connected. In particular, we cannot expect that admits a decomposition of the diagonal, and so the method of Reference Voi4Reference CTP1 does a priori not work in this context.

Proposition 3.1.

Let be a proper geometrically integral variety over a field which degenerates to a proper variety over an algebraically closed field . Let be a prime different from and let be an alteration whose degree is prime to . Suppose that for some there is a nontrivial class such that

Then does not admit an integral decomposition of the diagonal. In particular, is not retract rational and hence not stably rational.

Remark 3.2.

In many important examples, the vanishing condition in Proposition 3.1 turns out to be automatically satisfied; see e.g. Reference Sch1Reference Sch2 and Proposition 5.1 below. A quite general result in this direction is proved in Theorem 9.2 of this paper, which makes it easy to apply the above proposition in many cases.

Proof of Proposition 3.1.

Replacing by its base change to the algebraic closure of , we may assume that is algebraically closed. By Lemma 2.4, admits an integral decomposition of the diagonal if it is retract rational or stably rational. For a contradiction, we thus assume that admits an integral decomposition of the diagonal. Via the specialization homomorphism on Chow groups Reference Ful, Section 20.3, we then conclude that there is a decomposition of the diagonal of . We let be the function field of and get

where denotes the class of the diagonal and is the base change of a zero-cycle of degree one.

Let be the smooth locus of and let . We have the following commutative diagram:

Since is flat, is defined on the level of Chow groups. Since and are smooth, is defined as well; see Reference Ful, §8. Applying to (Equation 2), we thus get

We have , where denotes the base change of a zero-cycle (not necessarily of degree one). Let be the pullback of via the morphism . It then follows that

where denotes the base change of to .

Let be the graph of . Let be the zero-cycle given by the generic point of . Since is étale above a neighborhood of the diagonal point, we find that

Applying the localization exact sequence Reference Ful, Proposition 1.8 to the inclusion , we then conclude from (Equation 3), (Equation 4), and (Equation 5) that

where is a zero-cycle on whose support is contained in .

Recall that there is a bilinear pairing

If is a closed point of , it is defined as follows. Pulling back via and noting that we obtain a class that is unramified over and hence also over the larger field . We may thus consider the restriction of to the closed point . The class is then given by pushing down via the finite morphism . Since is smooth and proper over , this pairing descends from the level of cycles to Chow groups; see Reference Mer, §2.4.

Let us now consider the class . We aim to pair this class with . To this end, recall that the graph is isomorphic to and so the generic point of , which represents , has residue field and is induced by . By the above description of the pairing, this implies that

This class is nonzero, because is prime to and . On the other hand, using the decomposition of in (Equation 6), we claim that

which contradicts the previous computation, as we want. To prove our claim, note that because is the base change of a zero-cycle on , and so this pairing factors through the restriction of to , which vanishes because since and is algebraically closed. To see that , note that is supported on the complement of in , and so it suffices to see that for any closed point . The image of a closed point via is the function field of a subvariety that is contained in ; that is, is a subvariety of that maps to the singular locus of . The pairing factors through the restriction of to the function field of , and so we conclude that because by assumptions, as . This proves the above claim, which finishes the proof of the proposition.

Remark 3.3.

In the above notation, we may by Reference IT, Theorem 2.1 assume that the irreducible components of are smooth. The injectivity property (see e.g. Reference CT1, Theorem 3.8.1) then implies that restricts to zero on any subvariety that maps to if and only if it restricts to zero on all components of .

4. A special quadratic form

Let be a field of characteristic different from two. Let be an integer and consider the function field . Let be homogeneous coordinates on . For , we then consider the following rational function on :

Let be a nontrivial homogeneous polynomial and put

We will always assume that satisfies the following two conditions. Firstly,

This condition is equivalent to asking that not vanish at points of the form and hence not on any nonempty intersection of coordinate hyperplanes . Secondly, we will assume that

For , consider

Further let

be a bijection with . We put and and get .

For , we then define

This quadratic form will play a key role in our arguments; it should be compared to the Pfister form

By Theorem 2.2, the Pfister form is related to the class

Lemma 4.1.

We have .

Proof.

We use Lemma 2.1 and take successive residues of along , , , to reduce the statement to the observation that is nonzero. This proves , as we want.

Example 4.2.

If , we may consider

which defines a smooth conic that is tangent to the lines for . In this case, conditions (Equation 9) and (Equation 10) are satisfied. For , the corresponding quadratic form from (Equation 12) coincides with the example of Hassett–Pirutka–Tschinkel in Reference HPT1, Example 8. If denotes the corresponding projective quadric surface, then is nontrivial and unramified over by Reference HPT1, Proposition 11.

In the next section, we show that the projective quadric defined by in (Equation 12) always has the property that is unramified over as long as (Equation 9) and (Equation 10) hold. We also prove that the vanishing condition needed for the degeneration method in Proposition 3.1 is satisfied under these conditions. Note however that conditions (Equation 9) and (Equation 10) do not imply that is nontrivial. In fact, since , Theorem 2.3 implies that is trivial if and only if is similar to a subform of (and this holds, for instance, when is a square). If , this last property is easily analyzed:

Lemma 4.3.

Let be the projective quadric, defined by in Equation 12. If , then if and only if is not a square in .

Proof.

Since , and have the same dimension. Since and represent a common element, is similar to a subform of if and only if (see Reference Lam, Theorem X.1.8), and this is by Witt’s cancellation theorem equivalent to being a square in . The lemma thus follows from Theorem 2.3, because by Lemma 4.1.

For , the question whether is similar to a subform of is quite subtle, and so it is in general hard to decide whether is nontrivial. For special choices of , this problem will be settled in Section 6 below.

5. A vanishing result

Proposition 5.1.

Let be an algebraically closed field of characteristic different from two. Let be positive integers with . Let be a surjective morphism of proper varieties over whose generic fiber is birational to the quadric over given by in Equation 12. Assume that Equation 9 and Equation 10 hold. Then:

(1)

where is from Equation 14;

(2)

for any dominant generically finite morphism of varieties and for any subvariety which meets the smooth locus of and which does not dominate via , we have

We will prove in Theorem 9.2 below that (in a much more general setting) item (1) in Proposition 5.1, i.e., the fact that is unramified, implies the vanishing in item (2). For sake of simplicity, we prefer not to invoke this general result in the following but rely on a direct argument which uses the explicit description of the quadratic form .

Proof of Proposition 5.1.

Recall first that if (1) holds, then

(by functoriality of unramified cohomology), and so the restriction in item (2) is defined by Reference CT1, Theorem 4.1.1(b). Assuming (1), we claim that it suffices to prove (2) in the case where is a divisor. To see this, let be a subvariety which does not dominate and which meets the smooth locus of . By our conventions, is integral and so it is smooth at the generic point (because is algebraically closed). This implies that the exceptional divisor of the blow-up has a unique component which dominates and this component is birational to , where . Moreover, is smooth at the generic point of this particular component. Since is injective, replacing by thus shows that it suffices to prove (2) in the case where is a divisor that does not dominate .

By Reference Mer, Proposition 1.7, we may up to birational modifications assume that is a divisor on . In order to prove that vanishes, it thus suffices to show that restricts to zero on the generic point of any prime divisor with .

Next, we claim that in order to prove item (1), it suffices to show that has trivial residue at the generic point of any prime divisor that does not dominate . To see this, let be a geometric discrete rank one valuation on that is trivial on . By Reference Mer, Proposition 1.7, there is a normal variety and a dominant birational morphism such that corresponds to a prime divisor on . Replacing by , we may thus assume that corresponds to a prime divisor on . We denote its generic point by . If dominates , then the residue at vanishes by Lemma 2.1: . It thus suffices to treat the case where , as claimed.

As we have seen above, in order to prove the proposition, it suffices to show that

and

where denotes the generic point of a prime divisor with .

We will prove (Equation 15) and (Equation 16) simultaneously. To begin with, we choose a normal projective variety with a birational morphism such that maps to a codimension one point on ; cf. Reference Mer, Propositions 1.4 and 1.7 and Reference Sch1, Lemma 29.

Let be the maximal natural number such that lies on the intersection of coordinate hyperplanes, that is, such that there are integers with for all . The proof proceeds now via two cases.

Case 1.

The image has dimension .

We first show that (Equation 15) and (Equation 16) follow from a different statement that will be easier to check in this case. To this end, consider the local rings and . Further let and be the completions of and , respectively, and let and be the corresponding fraction fields. Since the generic fiber of is birational to the quadric defined by from (Equation 12), inclusion of fields induces a sequence

where we use that is integral over because . The residue of at factors through the image of in via the above sequence; see e.g. Reference CTO, p. 143. Moreover, if , then (see e.g. Reference CT1, §3.3 and 3.8 ), and so the restriction of to factors through the image of in via the above sequence as well. Hence, in order to prove (Equation 15) and (Equation 16), it suffices to establish

Since we are in Case 1, . This implies that because . By the definition of , lies on the intersection of coordinate hyperplanes. The assumption thus implies that is the generic point of for some , and so condition (Equation 9) implies that

There is some such that . Moreover, condition (Equation 10) implies that is even and so coincides with up to squares. Since , condition (Equation 10) implies that is a square in . By (Equation 19), it is in fact a nontrivial square, and so Hensel’s lemma implies that (and hence also ) becomes a square in the field extension of , considered above. Hence, over the field , becomes isomorphic to a subform of . By Theorem 2.3, we thus get

Therefore, (Equation 18) holds, and this implies (as we have seen above) (Equation 15) and (Equation 16).

Case 2.

The image has dimension .

In this case, consider the birational morphism and think about as a class on the generic point of . We aim to show that

This will be enough to conclude (Equation 15) and (Equation 16) for the following reasons. If , then has trivial residue at (see e.g. Reference CTO, p. 143), and so (Equation 15) holds. Moreover, since , can be computed by first restricting to and then pulling it back to . This implies that because , since is a point of dimension over the algebraically closed ground field .

It thus remains to prove (Equation 20). To this end, we choose some such that . Multiplying each by the square of , we get

It is well-known that for all (see e.g. Reference Ke, Lemma 2.2). Applying this to , the above identity yields

Hence, up to relabelling, we may assume that and so does not vanish at . Up to relabelling further, we may also assume that for and for .

If , then (Equation 20) is clear by Lemma 2.1. If , Lemma 2.1 implies that

with , where for denotes the restriction of to (this works because and for do not vanish at ). In particular, is a pullback of a class from . Hence, because is algebraically closed, and so the cohomological dimension of is less than , as we are in Case 2. This proves that (Equation 20) holds, which finishes the proof in Case 2.

This concludes the proof of Proposition 5.1.

6. A nonvanishing result

In this section we aim to construct examples of homogeneous polynomials that satisfy the conditions (Equation 9) and (Equation 10) from Section 4 in such a way that the unramified class from Proposition 5.1 is nontrivial.

Let be a field of positive transcendence degree over its prime field . That is, there is some element that is algebraically independent over and so .

Let be an integer and let be a homogeneous polynomial of degree which contains the monomial nontrivially for all (e.g. ). We then consider

where if is even and otherwise. Since is a square modulo for all , (Equation 10) holds. Since contains nontrivially for all , condition (Equation 9) holds as well.

Let be the projective quadric defined by from (Equation 12), where is as in (Equation 21) above. Specializing shows that for any choice of , the rational function is not a square in . Hence, if , by Lemma 4.3. If , then this statement is in general not true any longer. Indeed, , and so is a subform of if is a square in and the monomial is among the with and the latter implies by Theorem 2.3. For what follows, it is therefore essential to assume that the bijection from (Equation 11) is chosen in such a way that and so the following holds:

Proposition 6.1.

Let be integers with . Let be a field of characteristic different from two and of positive transcendence degree over its prime field . Let . Let be the projective quadric defined by the quadratic form from Equation 12, where is as in Equation 21. Assume that Equation 22 holds. Then, , where .

Proof.

The idea is to specialize . Under this specialization, specializes to , and so becomes isotropic. The specialization of the class is thus nonzero, as it is given by the pullback of a nonzero class (see Lemma 4.1) via a purely transcendental field extension. But then must be nonzero itself. We give the details of this argument in what follows.

For a contradiction, we assume . It follows for instance from Theorem 2.3 that maps to zero in for some finitely generated field extension of with . We choose a normal -variety which admits a surjective morphism such that and corresponds to the natural inclusion. Since is surjective and is normal, we may after shrinking assume that there is a Cartier prime divisor which maps to the origin in .

For , we put , where . The quadratic form

defines a subscheme

over . The fiber of above the generic point of is isomorphic to the quadric over that is defined by the reduction of modulo . Since has full rank, is smooth over . Let be the generic point of . Since the fiber is reduced, the closure of is an irreducible component of the pullback of the Cartier divisor via the natural map . Hence, is generically Cartier, and so is a smooth codimension one point of . The local ring is therefore a discrete valuation ring with fraction field and residue field .

Since for all , gives rise to a class in . This class vanishes by assumptions, because and restriction to the generic point yields an injection ; see e.g. Reference CT1, §3.6. Restricting that class to the closed point of then shows that maps to zero in . By (Equation 21) and (Equation 22), and coincide modulo , and so is isotropic over . Hence, is injective (see e.g. Reference CT1, Proposition 4.1.4), and so vanishes in , which contradicts Lemma 4.1. This concludes the proposition.

Remark 6.2.

If has characteristic zero, then for any prime , Proposition 6.1 holds for the integral polynomial . The proof is essentially the same as the one presented above, where we replace the characteristic zero degeneration by a degeneration to characteristic .

Remark 6.3.

In the above proof, we specialized to . Since becomes isotropic under our specialization, the class from Proposition 5.1 does not stay unramified (because if is rational over ). This is coherent with the observation that in our specialization, the condition (Equation 9) that has been used in an essential way in the proof of Proposition 5.1 is heavily violated, because we specialized to .

7. A hypersurface singular along an -plane

In this section we work over an algebraically closed field of characteristic different from two and put . Let and , and let be homogeneous polynomials of degrees and for . Assume further that the following three conditions are satisfied, where and are as in (Equation 12) and (Equation 13) and satisfies (Equation 9) and (Equation 10). Firstly,

Secondly, there is some with

Thirdly, there is some with

Let and choose homogeneous coordinates on . We consider the hypersurface

of degree . Condition (Equation 23) implies that is integral.

Let be the blow-up of along the -plane . Then, , where and the natural morphism , induced by projection to the -coordinates, identifies to the projection . The blow-up

of along is the proper transform of in , and so we get a morphism . Locally over , is given by the quadratic form

where is a local coordinate that trivializes and trivialize ; cf. Reference Sch1, Section 3.5.

By condition (Equation 24), the generic fiber of is birational to the quadric over defined by in (Equation 12). Hence, is unramified by Proposition 5.1.

Proposition 7.1.

Let be an algebraically closed field of characteristic different from two. Let and . Let be homogeneous polynomials as above such that Equation 23, Equation 24, and Equation 25 hold and consider the corresponding hypersurface from Equation 26. Let be an alteration and let be the natural morphism.

Then any subvariety satisfies .

Proof.

Consider . In the coordinates (Equation 27), the exceptional divisor of the blow-up is given by . Note that might be reducible (e.g. if are not coprime). However, the generic fiber of is a smooth quadric, and so has a unique component that dominates . Moreover, condition (Equation 25) implies that the generic fiber of is defined by a quadratic form that is similar to a subform of . Hence, Theorem 2.3 shows that

Since is anisotropic, the generic fiber is a smooth quadric over . Let be a subvariety which dominates . Since , the injectivity theorem (see e.g. Reference CT1, Theorem 3.8.1), applied to the local ring of at the generic point of , then shows that

Now let be an alteration. The composition yields an alteration of . Let be a subvariety. If does not dominate via , then follows from Proposition 5.1, because condition (Equation 24) implies that the generic fiber of is isomorphic to the projective quadric over , defined by from (Equation 12). On the other hand, if dominates via , then must be a subvariety of , because . Since the generic fiber of is smooth, can be restricted to the generic point of (see Reference CT1, Theorem 4.1.1), and this restriction vanishes by (Equation 28) above. Hence, by functoriality. This finishes the proof of Proposition 7.1.

Remark 7.2.

The exceptional divisor of is a hypersurface of bidegree in , given by . The generic fiber of is thus a hypersurface of degree (with equality if is irreducible) in , and in general it seems very unlikely that such a hypersurface admits a zero-cycle of degree one. In particular, it seems unlikely that admits a universally -trivial resolution; cf. Reference CTP1. Hence, the degeneration method in Reference Voi4Reference CTP1 does not seem to apply to the singular hypersurface considered above. We expect in particular that is not stably rational, and so also the methods from Reference NSReference KT (which assume characteristic zero) do not seem to apply.

8. Proof of main results

8.1. Theorem 1.1

Via Lemma 2.4, Theorem 1.1 follows from the following more general result.

Theorem 8.1.

Let be an uncountable field of characteristic different from two. Let be a positive integer and write , where are integers with . Let be either empty or a linear subspace with . Fix integers and .

Then a very general hypersurface of degree and with multiplicity along does not admit an integral decomposition of the diagonal over the algebraic closure .

Proof.

We aim to reduce to the case where is algebraically closed. To this end, consider the parameter space that parametrizes all hypersurfaces in of degree and with multiplicity along . Suppose we know the theorem over the algebraic closure of . Then there are countably many proper subvarieties , defined over , such that for any hypersurface in , does not admit an integral decomposition of the diagonal. Each is defined over some finite extension of and so it has finitely many orbits under the Galois group . Hence, up to adding all the Galois conjugates, we may assume that is closed under the Galois action. This implies that for a countable union of proper subvarieties that are defined over . It then follows that any hypersurface parametrized by does not admit an integral decomposition of the diagonal over , as we want. We may thus from now on assume that is algebraically closed.

We choose coordinates on such that

In order to prove the theorem, we then specify the hypersurface from Section 7 as follows. Let and be as in (Equation 21) in Section 6 and consider the homogeneous polynomials of degree , defined in Section 4, where we assume that (Equation 22) holds; i.e., .

Case 1.

with even.

Let and consider

for . Since and , is nonnegative. Similarly, because for all .

Since contains the monomial nontrivial for all , from (Equation 21) is not divisible by for any . Hence, are coprime, and so (Equation 23) holds. Since is even, because and are even, the conditions (Equation 24) and (Equation 25) are also satisfied (with ). We may then consider the degree hypersurface from (Equation 26), where .

Now let be a very general hypersurface of degree with even as in the theorem. Then degenerates to ; see e.g. Reference Sch1, §2.2. Let and let be the morphism induced by projection to the -coordinates. Since in (Equation 21) satisfies (Equation 9) and (Equation 10), Proposition 5.1 shows that , where is the class from (Equation 14). By Proposition 6.1, . By de Jong and Gabber, there is an alteration of of odd degree; the natural map yields an alteration of odd degree of . By Proposition 7.1, the restriction vanishes for any subvariety which maps to the singular locus of . It thus follows from Proposition 3.1 that does not admit an integral decomposition of the diagonal, as we want.

Case 2.

with odd.

For , we consider and absorb squares; the formal definition is as follows:

Let and note that for all . We then define

for , where as in Case 1.

Since is not divisible by and , and is not divisible by for any , are coprime, and so (Equation 23) holds. Moreover, since is even, because is even and is odd in case 2, satisfy the conditions (Equation 24) and (Equation 25) with . We may then consider the degree hypersurface from (Equation 26), where .

Now let be a very general hypersurface of degree with odd as in the theorem. Then degenerates to (see e.g. Reference Sch1, §2.2), and we conclude as in Case 1 that does not admit an integral decomposition of the diagonal. This finishes the proof of the theorem.

If we put in Theorem 8.1, we obtain the particularly interesting case of hypersurfaces that contain a linear subspace of dimension . If , then any such hypersurface is singular, but for , a general such hypersurface is smooth, as we will recall below. This yields the following.

Corollary 8.2.

Let be an uncountable field of characteristic different from two. Let be a positive integer and write , where are integers with . Fix integers and .

Then a very general hypersurface of degree and containing a linear space of dimension is smooth and stably irrational over the algebraic closure .

Proof.

Apart from the assertion that is smooth, the corollary is an immediate consequence of the case in Theorem 8.1. To prove smoothness, it suffices to find a single example of a smooth hypersurface of degree which contains a linear space of dimension . If , a smooth example is given by , which contains the linear space if is even and if is odd, where satisfies . If , a smooth example is given by , which contains the linear space This concludes the corollary.

Proof of Corollary 1.4.

Let . By Corollary 8.2, a very general quintic containing a -plane is smooth and stably irrational. On the other hand, at least in characteristic zero, these examples are unirational by Reference CMM. This proves Corollary 1.4.

8.2. Theorem 1.3 and examples over and

Examples of stably irrational smooth quartic threefolds over and of some higher-dimensional hypersurfaces over were previously given in Reference CTP1 and Reference To, respectively. If , then we can also obtain examples defined over small fields like or , as follows. By Lemma 2.4, our result implies Theorem 1.3 stated in the introduction.

Theorem 8.3.

Let be an integer and put . Let be a field of characteristic different from two. If has positive characteristic, assume that it has positive transcendence degree over its prime field. Then for any degree there is a smooth hypersurface of degree whose base change to the algebraic closure of does not admit an integral decomposition of the diagonal.

Proof.

The proof of the theorem follows the same line of argument as the proof of Theorem 8.1, the main difference being that we will degenerate to a hypersurface which is defined over the algebraic closure of a finite field and so the nonvanishing result from Proposition 6.1 does not apply. We will replace that nonvanishing result by Lemma 4.3, which requires the assumption (and so ). We explain the details in what follows.

Let , , and . Further let be an odd prime. We will now work over the algebraic closure of . As in the proof of Theorem 8.1, we choose coordinates on such that

We consider , and . With these choices and for any , we then consider the polynomials used in the proof of Theorem 8.1 (and which depend on the parity of ). These choices determine the hypersurface from Section 7. By definition, is the base change of a hypersurface which is defined over the prime field . Let with natural map . The class is unramified over by Proposition 5.1. Moreover, since is not a square and since , Lemma 4.3 implies that is nontrivial. By Proposition 7.1, the assumptions of the degeneration method (Proposition 3.1) are satisfied by , and so any proper variety which specializes to is not stably rational. This implies the theorem as follows.

If has positive characteristic , then by the assumptions in the theorem, it has positive transcendence degree over its prime field. The generic fiber of a sufficiently general pencil of degree hypersurfaces over which contains gives an example of a smooth hypersurface of degree which is defined over and such that degenerates to . Hence, does not admit a decomposition of the diagonal, as we want.

If has characteristic zero, then we may choose any prime and consider the hypersurface over from above. There is a smooth hypersurface over (in fact over ) and of degree such that degenerates to . This shows that does not admit a decomposition of the diagonal, as we want. This concludes the proof.

8.3. Theorem 1.5 and the integral Hodge conjecture for unirational varieties

Proof of Theorem 1.5.

Let be an integer and put and . Consider the polynomial and the corresponding rational function from (Equation 21). We then consider the quadratic form from (Equation 12), where we assume that the bijection is chosen in such a way that and .

Let be the projective conic over that is defined by . By Hironaka’s theorem, we can choose some smooth complex projective variety of dimension together with a morphism whose generic fiber is isomorphic to . Our choice of and implies that is similar to , and so is unirational; see e.g. Reference Sch1, Lemma 14. On the other hand,

by Propositions 5.1 and 6.1. This proves the theorem in the case where . The general case follows by taking products with projective spaces, because unramified cohomology is a stable birational invariant; see Reference CTO. This concludes the proof of Theorem 1.5.

Proof of Corollary 1.6.

Corollary 1.6 is a direct consequence of Reference CTV, Théorème 1.1 and Theorem 1.5, which produces unirational smooth complex projective varieties in any dimension at least four with .

9. Supplements

9.1. Double covers

It is possible to adapt the arguments of this paper to the case of double covers of projective spaces. The result is as follows; for earlier results on the rationality problem for double covers, see e.g. Reference Ko2Reference Voi4Reference BeaReference CTP2Reference OkaReference HPT2.

Theorem 9.1.

Let be a positive integer and write with . Let be an uncountable field of characteristic different from two. Then a double cover of , branched along a very general hypersurface of even degree , is not stably rational over the algebraic closure of .

Proof.

As in Theorem 8.1, it suffices to treat the case where is algebraically closed. Let be coordinates on and consider the -plane . Let be homogeneous polynomials of degrees and for all . We then consider the hypersurface of degree in , given by

From now on we assume that is even and we consider the double covering , branched along . Introducing an additional variable , is given by the equation . Since vanishes on the plane , contains a copy of , and we consider the blow-up . It is well-known (see e.g. Reference Sch1, Section 3.5) that carries the structure of a weak -fold quadric bundle , which locally over is given by the equation

The exceptional divisor of the blow-up is given by , and so it is the weak -fold quadric bundle given by .

In order to adapt the arguments used for hypersurfaces, we need to ensure that the following two conditions hold. Firstly, there is some with

Secondly, there is some with

The first condition ensures by Propositions 5.1 and 6.1 that

is unramified and nontrivial. Moreover, by the argument in Section 7, condition (Equation 33) ensures together with Proposition 5.1 that for any alteration of , the class restricts to zero on the generic point of any subvariety that maps to the singular locus of .

Let be as in Section 4 and assume that in (Equation 11) is chosen such that and . We consider and absorb squares to obtain polynomials with . For an even integer , we then put

for , where is as in (Equation 21) and is a linear homogeneous polynomial which is not a multiple of for . Then conditions (Equation 32) and (Equation 33) are both satisfied (with ). Applying the same argument as in the proof of Theorem 8.1 shows then that a double cover of , branched along a very general hypersurface of degree , does not admit a decomposition of the diagonal and so it is not stably rational. This concludes the theorem.

9.2. A general vanishing result

Starting with the work of Artin–Mumford and Colliot-Thélène–Ojanguren, many important examples of rationally connected varieties with unramified cohomology are constructed as follows. One starts with a proper morphism whose generic fiber is a smooth quadric over and chooses in such a special way that there is a class whose pullback is nontrivial and unramified over ; see e.g. Reference AMReference CTOReference HPT1Reference Sch1 and the results in Sections 5 and 6 of this paper.

We prove the following vanishing theorem, which shows that in the above situation, the vanishing condition that is needed in the degeneration method in Proposition 3.1 for varieties which specialize to is automatically satisfied. Our result generalizes Reference Sch2, Proposition 7 and shows that in fact item (1) implies (2) in Proposition 5.1.

Theorem 9.2.

Let be a surjective morphism of proper varieties over an algebraically closed field with whose generic fiber is birational to a smooth quadric over . Let and assume that there is a class with .

Then for any dominant generically finite morphism of varieties and for any subvariety which meets the smooth locus of and which does not dominate via , we have .

In the proof of Theorem 9.2, we use the following two results.

Proposition 9.3 (Proposition 8.1 Reference CT2).

Let be a local homomorphism of discrete valuation rings with residue fields and and fraction fields and all of characteristic different from two. Let be the corresponding dominant morphism.

Assume that there is some with . If is unramified, then the restriction of to the closed point of lies in the image of .

Lemma 9.4.

Let be an algebraically closed field of characteristic different from two. Let be a normal variety over and let be a smooth projective quadric over the function field . Then for any codimension one point , there is an open neighborhood of and a smooth variety over together with a proper morphism whose generic fiber is isomorphic to and such that the special fiber of over has the following property: for any component of the reduced special fiber , is smooth over , and, if is nonreduced along , then is rational over .

Proof.

We will frequently use that a variety over is smooth if and only if it is regular, because is algebraically closed. For instance, since is normal, it is regular in codimension one and so it is smooth away from a closed subset of codimension two. It follows that there is a smooth neighborhood of such that the closure is smooth and cut out by a single regular function . After possibly shrinking , we may additionally assume that there are nowhere vanishing regular functions on and an integer such that the generic fiber of the -scheme

is isomorphic to . If , then is smooth over (because ). It follows that is smooth over and the fiber of over is smooth over the residue field , as we want. If , then is smooth over and blowing up the closure of the singular point of the fiber of above yields a model which is smooth over and whose fiber above is of the form . Since and are smooth over , the lemma holds in this case.

If , then has singular locus

Since the are nowhere vanishing on , is a smooth (but if , possibly reducible) quadric bundle over , which is contained in the trivial -bundle

The blow-up is smooth over , because its exceptional (Cartier) divisor is smooth over , as it is given by

where denotes the restriction of to and are local coordinates that trivialize , trivializes locally the pullback of the normal bundle of in via the natural map , and trivializes locally ; cf. Reference CTS, Théorème 3.3. Note that the fiber of above the generic point is smooth over , because is a smooth quadric over and all fibers of are quadrics of full rank.

The fiber of above is reduced and given by , where is the blow-up of the quadric cone in . Here, denotes the fiber of above , and denotes the image of in . The exceptional divisor of is in the above coordinates given by , where denotes the fiber of above . The singular locus of is given by , i.e., by the intersection of with the proper transform of the plane . This shows that the singular locus of is given by , and a similar analysis shows that is smooth over .

Let be the proper transform of . Since is a Cartier divisor on , . Since is smooth over , so is .

Let . Since and are smooth over , so is . Let be the exceptional divisor of and let be the fiber of above . Since is smooth over and the center of the blow-up is given by , which is a trivial -bundle over , we find that is a Zariski locally trivial -bundle over and so it is smooth and rational over . The fiber of over is reduced along all components apart from , where the multiplicity is two: . Since is smooth over and is a smooth quadric, is smooth over . As noted above, is smooth over as well. This shows that satisfies the conclusion of the lemma, as we want.

Proof of Theorem 9.2.

As in the proof of Proposition 5.1, one reduces (after replacing , , and by different birational models) to the case where and are normal and is a divisor on that maps to divisors on and . By functoriality, it thus suffices to prove that restricts to zero on the function field of a given divisor whose generic point maps to a codimension one point .

By assumptions, the generic fiber of is birational to a smooth quadric . Applying Lemma 9.4 to the codimension one point , we get an open neighborhood of , a smooth -variety , and a proper morphism whose generic fiber is isomorphic to . Moreover, for any component of the reduced special fiber , is smooth over , and if is nonreduced along , then is rational over .

We fix some component of and denote by its generic point. We may think about as a codimension one point on : . Since the -varieties and are birational (over ), the class is unramified over by assumptions, and so we can restrict to the generic point of . As before, by slight abuse of notation, we denote this restriction by

Since is algebraically closed, has cohomological dimension less than . We claim that this implies that the above restriction vanishes.

To prove this claim, let us first deal with the case where is reduced along . We consider the discrete valuation rings and . The morphism induces a local homomorphism , which is unramified because is reduced along . Since is unramified over , . Therefore, Proposition 9.3 shows that the restriction lies in the image of and so it must vanish because .

Next, we deal with the case where is not reduced along . In this case, is rational over , and so

The right hand side vanishes because has cohomological dimension less than . To conclude, it thus suffices to see that is unramified over . To see this, note that is smooth and integral over . Since is unramified over , the equivalence of (a) and (b) in Reference CT1, Theorem 4.1.1 shows that for any scheme point , the class comes from a class in . Using functoriality of étale cohomology, we conclude that for any scheme point , the restriction comes from a class in . The equivalence of (b) and (d) in Reference CT1, Theorem 4.1.1 applied to the smooth and proper variety over then shows that is unramified over , as we want. Altogether, we have thus proven that the class in (Equation 34) vanishes.

Up to replacing by another normal model, we may assume that the base change admits a proper birational morphism over . In order to prove that vanishes at the generic point of , it thus suffices to prove that restricts to zero on the generic point of any subvariety which lies over the codimension one point . (That restriction is defined by Reference CT1, Theorem 4.1.1(b) because is unramified over and is smooth over .) We have proven this already if coincides with one of the components of . The general case follows then from the injectivity property (see e.g. Reference CT1, Theorem 3.8.1), because the components of are smooth over . This concludes the proof of the theorem.

Appendix A. Explicit examples

In this section we give in any dimension and in all degrees covered by Theorem 1.1, explicit examples of smooth stably irrational hypersurfaces over countable fields, such as or . If is of the special form , we produce similar examples over smaller fields, such as or .

Let be an integer and write with integers and with . Let further be an integer, and let be a field.

For any , we put and define a bijection via . Set and consider the following homogeneous degree polynomials:

Example A.1.

Let . We consider the homogeneous polynomial , given as follows, where , and are as above.

If is even, then

If is odd, then

Theorem A.2.

Let , write , and let be integers as above. Let be a field with and of transcendence degree at least one if and two otherwise. We specialize the elements , used in Example A.1, as follows:

If , let be an element that is transcendental over the prime field of and let be different prime numbers such that .

If , let be elements that are algebraically independent over the prime field and let be coprime irreducible polynomials.

Then , where is as in Example A.1, is smooth and stably irrational over .

Proof.

Setting , we see that degenerates to , which is a smooth hypersurface by construction. Hence, is smooth. Let be the specialization of , given by . As in the proof of Theorem 8.1, Propositions 5.1, 6.1, and 7.1 imply that this hypersurface satisfies the assumptions of Proposition 3.1. (This requires us to rename the coordinates used in Section 7 by .) Hence, we conclude that is not stably rational over , as we want.

Theorem A.3.

In the above notation, assume that , i.e., , and let be an integer. Let be a field with and of transcendence degree at least one if . We specialize the elements , used in Example A.1, as follows:

If , set , and let be different primes such that .

If , let be transcendental over the prime field , set , and let be coprime irreducible polynomials.

Then , where is as in Example A.1, is smooth and stably irrational over .

Proof.

Setting , we see that degenerates to , which is a smooth hypersurface by construction. Hence, is smooth. Let be the specialization of , given by . As in the proof of Theorem 8.3, Lemma 4.3 and Propositions 5.1 and 7.1 imply that this hypersurface satisfies the assumptions of Proposition 3.1. (This requires us to rename the coordinates used in Section 7 by .) Hence, we conclude that is not stably rational over , as we want.

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to J.-L. Colliot-Thélène, B. Conrad, B. Totaro, and to the excellent referees for many useful comments and suggestions. I had useful discussions about topics related to this paper with O. Benoist and L. Tasin.

Mathematical Fragments

Theorem 1.1.

Let be an uncountable field of characteristic different from two. Let be an integer and write with . Then a very general hypersurface of degree is not stably rational over the algebraic closure of .

Theorem 1.3.

Let be a field of characteristic different from two. If has positive characteristic, assume that it has positive transcendence degree over its prime field. Then there are smooth projective hypersurfaces over of arbitrarily small slopes that are stably irrational over the algebraic closure of .

Corollary 1.4.

Let . Then a very general quintic hypersurface containing a -plane is a smooth hypersurface that is unirational but not stably rational.

Theorem 1.5.

For integers and with , there is a unirational smooth complex projective variety of dimension with nontrivial -th unramified cohomology:

Corollary 1.6.

In any dimension at least four, there is a smooth complex projective unirational variety for which the integral Hodge conjecture for codimension two cycles fails.

Lemma 2.1.

In the above notation, suppose that . Let be a uniformizer, let be integers, and let be units in . Then