2006
DOI: 10.1090/s1056-3911-06-00454-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the topological index of irregular surfaces

Abstract: We study the topological index of some irregular surfaces that we call generalized Lagrangian. We show that under certain hypotheses on the base locus of the Lagrangian system the topological index is non-negative. For the minimal surfaces of general type with q = 4 and p g = 5 we prove the same statement without any hypothesis.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
39
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By 1-connectedness of D and (A + E)B = 2, we must have A i (D − A i ) = 1, for i = 1, 2, and so we conclude as above that A i is 1-connected and A 2 i 0, for i = 1, 2. Then from 0 = (A + E) 2 …”
Section: ] Let X ⊂ P R+1 Be a Non Degenerate Irreducible Threefold Amentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…By 1-connectedness of D and (A + E)B = 2, we must have A i (D − A i ) = 1, for i = 1, 2, and so we conclude as above that A i is 1-connected and A 2 i 0, for i = 1, 2. Then from 0 = (A + E) 2 …”
Section: ] Let X ⊂ P R+1 Be a Non Degenerate Irreducible Threefold Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is easily done under the assumption that S has an irrational pencil of genus > 1 (cf. [2,20]), but the matter becomes very hard if one assumes that S has no such pencil. Examples of surfaces with these properties are known only for q = 3, 4.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In [1] Barja, Naranjo and Pirola prove the inequality K 2 ≥ 8χ under some technical assumptions on the base locus of the canonical system. Furthermore, they make a detailed study of the case q = 4 (and hence p g = 5), showing that the inequality K 2 ≥ 8χ holds in this case without any extra assumption.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the general case we prove inequalities for the invariants of S which are weaker than the one in [1] but require no extra assumptions:…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%