Proof.
Part (1) is essentially true by definition. Namely, if y \in Z, then we can take k = 0 and V_0 = W_0 = \overline{\{ y\} }.
Proof of (2). Let y \leadsto y' be a nontrivial specialization and let V_0 \subset W_0 \supset V_1 \subset W_1 \supset \ldots \subset W_ k is a system for y. Here there are two cases. Case I: V_ k = W_ k, i.e., c_ k = 0. In this case we can set V'_ k = W'_ k = \overline{\{ y'\} }. An easy computation shows that \delta (V_0, W_0, \ldots , V'_ k, W'_ k) \leq \delta (V_0, W_0, \ldots , V_ k, W_ k) because only b_{k - 1} is changed into a bigger integer. Case II: V_ k \not= W_ k, i.e., c_ k > 0. Observe that in this case \max _{i = 0, 1, \ldots , k} (c_ i + c_{i + 1} + \ldots + c_ k - b_ i - b_{i + 1} - \ldots - b_{k - 1}) > 0. Hence if we set V'_{k + 1} = W_{k + 1} = \overline{\{ y'\} }, then although k is replaced by k + 1, the maximum now looks like
\max _{i = 0, 1, \ldots , k + 1} (c_ i + c_{i + 1} + \ldots + c_ k + c_{k + 1} - b_ i - b_{i + 1} - \ldots - b_{k - 1} - b_ k)
with c_{k + 1} = 0 and b_ k = \text{codim}(V_{k + 1}, W_ k) > 0. This is strictly smaller than \max _{i = 0, 1, \ldots , k} (c_ i + c_{i + 1} + \ldots + c_ k - b_ i - b_{i + 1} - \ldots - b_{k - 1}) and hence \delta (V_0, W_0, \ldots , V'_{k + 1}, W'_{k + 1}) \leq \delta (V_0, W_0, \ldots , V_ k, W_ k) as desired.
Proof of (3). Given y \in Y and z \in \overline{\{ y\} } \cap Z we get the system
V_0 = \overline{\{ z\} } \subset W_0 = \overline{\{ y\} }
and c_0 = \text{codim}(V_0, W_0) = \dim (\mathcal{O}_{\overline{\{ y\} }, z}) by Properties, Lemma 28.10.3. Thus we see that \delta (V_0, W_0) = 0 + c_0 = c_0 which proves what we want.
Proof of (4). Let \delta be a dimension function on Y. Let V_0 \subset W_0 \supset V_1 \subset W_1 \supset \ldots \subset W_ k be a system for y. Let y'_ i \in W_ i and y_ i \in V_ i be the generic points, so y_0 \in Z and y_ k = y. Then we see that
\delta (y_ i) - \delta (y_{i - 1}) = \delta (y'_{i - 1}) - \delta (y_{i - 1}) - \delta (y'_{i - 1}) + \delta (y_ i) = c_{i - 1} - b_{i - 1}
Finally, we have \delta (y'_ k) - \delta (y_{k - 1}) = c_ k. Thus we see that
\delta (y) - \delta (y_0) = c_0 + \ldots + c_ k - b_0 - \ldots - b_{k - 1}
We conclude \delta (V_0, W_0, \ldots , W_ k) \geq k + \delta (y) - \delta (y_0) which proves what we want.
Proof of (5). The function \delta (y) = \dim (\overline{\{ y\} }) is a dimension function. Hence \delta (y) \leq \delta _ Z(y) by part (4). By part (3) we have \delta _ Z(y) \leq \delta (y) and we are done.
Proof of (6). Given such a sequence of points, we may assume all the specializations y'_ i \leadsto y_{i + 1} are nontrivial (otherwise we can shorten the chain of specializations). Then we set V_ i = \overline{\{ y_ i\} } and W_ i = \overline{\{ y'_ i\} } and we compute \delta (V_0, W_1, V_1, \ldots , W_{k - 1}) = k because all the codimensions c_ i of V_ i \subset W_ i are 1 and all b_ i > 0. This implies \delta _ Z(y'_{k - 1}) \leq k as y'_{k - 1} is the generic point of W_ k. Then \delta _ Z(y) \leq k by part (2) as y is a specialization of y_{k - 1}.
Proof of (7). This is clear as their are fewer systems to consider in the computation of \delta ^{Y'}_{Y' \cap Z}.
\square
Comments (0)