This section develops the construction of configurations of symplectic curves in terms of almost toric tropical diagrams. Theorem 3.12 is the result from the present section used in the proof of Theorem 1.4. In a nutshell, tropical curves in almost toric diagrams consist of two pieces: tropical curves in toric diagrams, as developed by G. Mikhalkin [47, 48], and tropical local models near the cut singularities of the affine structure. These new tropical local models are discussed in this section. There are two useful perspectives: from the viewpoint of contact 3-manifolds or directly from the perspective of symplectic 4-manifolds; we will present the latter.Footnote 3
Symplectic-tropical curves
The central ingredient in Theorem 3.12 and in our argument in Sect. 3.4 is the notion of a symplectic-tropical curve in an almost toric diagram, which we abbreviate STC. This is the content of the following definition.
Let \(P_X \subset {\mathbb {R}}^2\) be an ATBD representing an ATF \(\pi : X \longrightarrow B\) of a symplectic 4-manifold X. Let \(\Gamma \) be an oriented graph, with edges decorated by primitive \({\mathbb {Z}}^2\) vectors and a multiplicity in \({\mathbb {Z}}_{> 0}\). Given an oriented edge \(\gamma \) from a vertex b to a vertex c, b is said to be negative and c positive, with respect to \(\gamma \).
Definition 4.1
A symplectic-tropical curve \({\mathscr {C}}: \Gamma \longrightarrow P_X\) is a \(C^0\)-embedding which satisfies the following conditions:
-
(i)
Vertices are either univalent (boundary), bivalent (bending) or trivalent (interior). The edges associated with boundary vertices shall be called leaves;
-
(ii)
All boundary vertices are negative;
-
(iii)
Images under \({\mathscr {C}}\) of boundary vertices are either on the boundary of the polytope \(P_X\) or on a node. The images of bending vertices belong to the cuts (hence come endowed with an associated monodromy matrix). The images of interior vertices belong to the complement of cuts, nodes, and boundary;
-
(iv)
\({\mathscr {C}}\) restricted to the (interior of) the edges is a \(C^{\infty }\)-embedding and tangent lines have lateral limits at each vertex, which are oriented according to the orientation of the corresponding edge. We call a vector on this limit tangent lines a limit vector;
-
(v)
If \(\mathbf{v }\) is a positively oriented vector tangent to the image of an edge under \({\mathscr {C}}\), with associated primitive vector \(\mathbf{w }\in {\mathbb {Z}}^2\), then \(\langle \mathbf{v }| \mathbf{w }\rangle > 0\);
-
(vi)
For a boundary vertex over the boundary of \(P_X\), the primitive \({\mathbb {Z}}^2\)-vector associated to its corresponding leaf must be orthogonal to the boundary and pointing towards the interior of \(P_X\). (The multiplicity of the edge can be arbitrary);
-
(vii)
For a boundary vertex over a node of \(P_X\), the primitive \({\mathbb {Z}}^2\)-vector \(\mathbf{w }\) associated to its corresponding leaf must be orthogonal to the cut, and its orientation is determined by (ii) and (v). (The multiplicity can be arbitrary);
-
(viii)
Let \(\gamma _1\) and \(\gamma _2\) be two edges meeting at a bending vertex, with monodromy matrix M. First, the bending vertex must be positive w.r.t. one edge and negative w.r.t. the other. Assume that we go counter-clockwise from \({\mathscr {C}}(\gamma _1)\) to \({\mathscr {C}}(\gamma _2)\). If \(\mathbf{v }\) is a positively oriented limit vector for \({\mathscr {C}}(\gamma _1)\) at this bending vertex, then \(M \mathbf{v }\) is a positively oriented limit vector for \({\mathscr {C}}(\gamma _2)\). Moreover, if \(\mathbf{w }\) is the primitive vector associated to \(\gamma _1\), then the primitive vector associated to \(\gamma _2\) must be \((M^T)^{-1} \mathbf{w }\). In this case, the multiplicity of \(\gamma _1\) and \(\gamma _2\) must be the same;
-
(ix)
For the three edges \(\gamma _j\), \(j = 1,2,3\), associated to an interior vertex b, with associated vectors \(\mathbf{w }_j\) and multiplicity \(m_j\), the following balancing condition must be satisfied:
where \(\varepsilon _j = \pm 1\) according to b being positive or negative with respect to \(\gamma _j\), \(j = 1,2,3\). \(\square \)
There are many conditions in Definition 4.1, but the idea is the following. We travel along an edge with cycles, according to the multiplicity, represented by its associated vector, as in Remark 2.2. Condition (v) will guarantee that the surfaces are symplectic as we travel along the edges; condition (ix) implies that the sum of these cycles arriving at a vertex are null-homologous, which will allow us to glue them together (by a bounding null-homology); conditions (vi) and (vii) guarantee that the corresponding cycles collapse as we arrive at an edge, or can collapse at the nodal fiber; condition (viii) says that the map \(\Gamma \rightarrow B\) given by composing with the inverse of the homeomorphism \(B \rightarrow P_X\), is actually smooth at the bending vertex, and the associated vector changes accordingly. The remaining pieces of notation are required to write the balancing condition (4–1) in a precise and consistent way.
We represent a symplectic-tropical curve by just drawing its image \({\mathscr {C}}(\Gamma )\), and labeling the multiplicity of each edge. The label is implicitly 1 if the edge is drawn unlabeled. Conditions (vi)–(ix) determine the associated vectors and multiplicities, up to the ambiguity given by the sign and orientation of the edges that are not leaves, which we basically ignore since they are just an artifact to write (ix) consistently. For instance, Fig. 5 represents three different symplectic lines in an ATF of \(\mathbb {CP}^2\). In the leftmost picture, the leaves are decorated with the associated vectors \((1,-1)\), (0, 1) and \((-1,-2)\), accordingly, while the other two edges have labels \(\pm (1,0)\) and \(\pm (1,1)\), the signs being determined by (ix) and by how one decides to orient the edges.
The core constructive result in this section, which justifies Definition 4.1, is the following:
Theorem 4.2
Let \({\mathscr {C}}: \Gamma \longrightarrow P_X\) be a symplectic-tropical curve as above, and \({\mathcal {N}}\subseteq P_X\) a neighborhood of \({\mathscr {C}}(\Gamma )\). Then there exists a closed symplectic curveFootnote 4C embedded in X, projecting to \({\mathcal {N}}\) under \(\pi : X \longrightarrow B\). In addition, the intersection of C with the anti-canonical divisor \(K_X\subseteq X\) defined by the boundary of \(P_X\) is given by the sum of the multiplicities of the corresponding boundary vertices. \(\square \)
In this context, we say that the symplectic surface C is represented by the symplectic-tropical curve \({\mathscr {C}}(\Gamma )\). See [52, Proposition 8.2] for a discussion on the anti-canonical divisor \(K_X\subseteq X\). In order to prove Theorem 4.2, we need to construct local models near the nodes and the trivalent vertices. This is the content of the following subsections.
Remark 4.3
We could consider embeddings of graphs with interior vertices having valency greater than 3, and write a rather involved definition for symplectic-tropical curves. In this case, these graphs could be viewed as a limit of graphs as in Definition 4.1, and a result similar to Theorem 4.2 holds. \(\square \)
Local model near the nodes
The interesting case near the nodes is that we may arrive at a node with multiplicity \(k\in {\mathbb {N}}\) greater than 1. We shall now argue directly in the 4-dimensional symplectic domain and monitor the projections onto the ATBD. In principle, we would need to get k disjoint capping 2-disks with boundary in k copies of the collapsing cycle nearby a nodal singularity. That is not possible if we force the boundary of these 2-disks to be entirely contained in a torus fibre. In consequence, for \(k >1\), our 2-disks cannot project exactly over a segment under the projection \(\pi \), but rather onto a 2-dimensional thickening of a segment in \(P_X\).
Let us start with the local model for \(k = 1\), where we are to collapse only one cycle through a symplectic 2-disk to the singular point. Consider the local model of a nodal fibre as in Definition 2.1, and the complex notation \(\pi (x,y)={\overline{x}}{y}\) for the almost toric fibration the map \(\pi \). Choose \(\varepsilon \in {\mathbb {R}}^{>0}\) sufficiently small. In this case, the 2-disk
$$\begin{aligned} \sigma _1 = (re^{i\theta },-ire^{i\theta }),\qquad 0 \le |r| \le \varepsilon ,\quad \theta \in [0, 2\pi ] \end{aligned}$$
is a symplectic 2-disk with boundary \(c(\theta ) = (\varepsilon e^{i\theta }, -i\varepsilon e^{i\theta })\), which is part of the symplectic line \(y = -ix\) and projects via \(\pi = {\overline{x}} y\) to the half-line \(i{\mathbb {R}}_{\le 0}\). Let us now discuss the case of higher \(k\in {\mathbb {N}}\).
Let us introduce a second symplectic 2-disk in this neighborhood, disjoint from the above, so that its boundary is isotopic, and arbitrarily close, to the collapsing boundary cycle \(c(\theta )\) above. Fix a value \(\delta _2\in {\mathbb {R}}^{>0}\), thought to be small with respect to \(\varepsilon ^2\), and a monotone non-increasing \(C^{\infty }\)-bump function \(\Psi _2(s)\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \Psi _2(s)\equiv \delta _2 \text{ for } s\approx 0,\qquad \Psi _2(s)\equiv 0 \text{ for } s \ge 1,\qquad \Psi _2(s) > 0 \text{ for } s \in [0, \varepsilon ^2]. \end{aligned}$$
By taking \(\delta _2\) sufficiently small, we can take \(\Psi \) as \(C^1\)-close to 0 as necessary. We can then guarantee that the line \(l_2 := \{y = -ix + \Psi _2(|x|^2)\}\) is still symplectic. Then our second disk \(\sigma _2\) is taken to be the intersection of the symplectic line \(l_2\) with the half-space defined by \(\mathrm{im}({\overline{x}} y) \ge - \varepsilon ^2\), where \(\mathrm{im}\) denotes the imaginary part. Note that, by construction, \(\sigma _2 \cap \sigma _1 = \emptyset \).
Now, in order to then construct \(k\in {\mathbb {N}}\) mutually disjoint symplectic 2-disks, with their boundary being isotopic and close to the collapsing boundary cycle \(c(\theta )\), we only need to take \(\delta _k> \delta _{k-1}> \cdots > \delta _2\), \(\delta _i\in {\mathbb {R}}^{>0}\), \(2\le i\le k\), and the corresponding monotone non-increasing \(C^{\infty }\)- bump functions \(\Psi _k(s)> \Psi _{k-1}(s)> \cdots > \Psi _2(s)\), all sufficiently \(C^1\)-close to 0 so that the lines \(l_j :=\{y = -ix + \Psi _j(|x|^2)\}\) are symplectic for \(j= 2, \dots , k\). The symplectic 2-disk \(\sigma _j\) is then taken to be the intersection of the symplectic line \(l_j\) with the half-space \(\mathrm{im}({\overline{x}} y) \ge - \varepsilon ^2\). See Fig. 6 (Left) for a depiction of the projections \(\pi (\sigma _j)\) of such symplectic 2-disks.
Remark 4.4
The equations for the symplectic lines \({ l}_j\) imply that each 2-disk \(\sigma _j\), \(1\le j\le k\), intersects the Lagrangian plane \(x=y\) at a point where \(x = -ix + \Psi _j(|x|^2)\), since by Pythagoras Theorem, we need \(\Psi _j(|x|^2) = \sqrt{2}|x|\), which occurs since we have chosen \(\delta _j\ll \varepsilon ^2\). \(\square \)
Note that the boundary \(\partial \sigma _j\) projects under \(\pi \) to a segment \(I_j\) normal to the half-line \(i{\mathbb {R}}_{\le 0}\). Now, using the fact that the lines \(l_j\) are isotopic to the line \(y = -ix\), which topologically self-intersects once (e.g. relative to the boundary at infinity), we can deduce that the boundary \(\partial \sigma _j\) links \(\partial \sigma _1\) exactly once in the thickened annulus \(\pi ^{-1}(I_k)\), as illustrated in the rightmost picture of Fig. 6.
In proving Theorem 4.2, we may assume that the image of the leaves arrive at a node in a segment, which we can identify in our local model with a segment in \(i {\mathbb {R}}_{\le 0}\). The above discussion is then summarized in the following proposition:
Proposition 4.5
Let \(\pi :X \longrightarrow B\) be an ATF, represented by an ATBD \(P_X\), where we homeomorphically identify B with \(P_X\). Let \(\gamma \) be a leaf of a symplectic-tropical curve \({\mathscr {C}}: \Gamma \longrightarrow P_X\), with boundary vertex over a node, multiplicity \(k \in {\mathbb {Z}}_{>0}\), and \({\mathcal {N}}\) a neighborhood of \({\mathscr {C}}(\gamma )\subseteq B\). Fix a point \(p \in {\mathscr {C}}(\gamma )\) close to the node with collapsing cycle \(\alpha \subset \pi ^{-1}(p)\).
Then we can associate k disjoint symplectic 2-disks \(\sigma _j\), \(1\le j\le k\), such that \(\pi (\sigma _j) \subset {\mathcal {N}}\), with their boundary \(\partial \sigma _j\) arbitrarily close to \(\partial \sigma _1 = \alpha \).
Local modal near interior vertices
Condition (v) in Definition 4.1 and Remark 2.2 allows us to transport the boundary of the symplectic 2-disk \(\sigma _1\) in Proposition 4.5 along the image of the corresponding leaf until it is close to an interior node. (Note that if we hit a bending vertex, condition (viii) guarantees that we can keep moving the same cycle \(\partial \sigma _1\), whose class in the first homology of the fibre is then represented by a different \({\mathbb {Z}}^2\) vector according to the monodromy.) In addition, the boundaries \(\partial \sigma _j\) project to a segment normal to the leaf and, because of its closeness to \(\partial \sigma _1\), we can also transport it using cycles projecting under \(\pi \) to small segments normal to the leaf. In line with Remark 2.2, we can ensure that these surfaces remain symplectic.
At this stage, we need to construct a local model for a symplectic surface near a trivalent vertex b, using the data of (ix), that can be made to project to a given neighborhood of \({\mathscr {C}}(b)\). Moreover, this model needs to glue with prescribed incoming cycles. For that, a first option is to rely on the article [46], where G. Mikhalkin uses O. Viro’s patchworking ideas to construct families of hypersurfaces in \(({\mathbb {C}}^*)^n\), whose amoebae converge to a given tropical hypersurface in \({\mathbb {R}}^n\), see [46, Remark 5.2]. In that manuscript, G. Mikhalkin actually views \(({\mathbb {C}}^*)^n\) as the open stratum of a closed toric variety, in particular having finite volume, so we can symplectically assume that it is indeed a local model. Given the nature of Theorem 4.2, we can assume that the symplectic-tropical curve arrives at the interior vertex in a tropical way, i.e., locally as segments \({{{\varvec{v}}}}_j = {{{\varvec{w}}}}_j\) satisfying the balancing condition (4–1) of Definition 4.1.
A second option, independent of [46], is using the following explicit local model. Over a small disk \({\mathcal {B}}\subseteq B\) centered at an interior vertex \(b \in B\), we have \(\pi ^{-1}({\mathcal {B}}) \cong {\mathcal {B}}\times T^2\), and the fibration is given by the projection onto the first factor. The projection of the symplectic curve to the \(T^2\) factor is known as the coamoeba of that curve. We aim at first constructing what will be the coamoeba out of the balancing condition (4–1) and—out of that data—then building our local model for the symplectic curve. We want the surface to be so that its boundary projects to straight cycles, having only double crossings. Moreover, away from the pre-image of the double crossings, the rest of the surface will project injectively into polygons divided by the straight cycles. The homology classes of the boundary are represented by \(m_j\) disjoint copies of \(\varepsilon _j\mathbf{w }_j\), \(j = 1,2,3\), where \(\mathbf{w }_j\) are the vectors associated with the interior vertex b and hence satisfy the balancing condition (4–1) from Definition 4.1 (ix). Figure 7 (Left) illustrates the coamoeba of the local model we will build for the neighborhood of the interior vertex in the ATBD from Fig. 5 (Center). The balancing condition associated with the interior vertex is \( (1,-1) + 3(0,1) + (-1,-2) = 0\).
The existence of the above mentioned configuration for the coamoeba is equivalent to the existence of a dimer modelFootnote 5 embedded in \(T^2\). We label each convex polygon of our coamoeba black or white, where a black polygon can only share a vertex with a white one. The vertices of the dimer model are then placed in the interior of the polygons according to their colours, and for each intersection of the boundary cycles we associate an edge, projecting inside the coamoeba. See Fig. 7 (Right). Then the straight cycles are taken to be the collection of zigzag paths associated to the dimer. For concepts related to dimer models, including zigzag paths, and its relationship with coamoebas, we refer the reader to the recent works [12, 15, 22, 24]. Thus, from the discussion above, our aim is then to provide a dimer model with prescribed set of homology classes for its collection of zigzag paths. Moreover, we want the zigzag paths to be straight. This is achieved in Proposition 4.7 below.
Remark 4.6
If one does not require the paths to be straight, then the article [22, Section 6] constructs an algorithm to build a dimer model out of the prescribed classes for the collection of zigzag paths. (Again, with non-straight cycles.) Now, note that in [15, Example 4.1], an example of a collection of 5 classes in \(H_1(T^2)\) that cannot be realized by straight cycles, that are the zigzag paths of a dimer model, is given. Nevertheless, in case the collection of classes are given by copies of only 3 primitive classes, one can in fact construct a dimer model with straight set of zigzag paths, as shown in the upcoming Proposition 4.7. We believe this is likely well-known to experts but we did not find references in the literature. \(\square \)
Proposition 4.7
Given \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1,{{{\varvec{w}}}}_2,{{{\varvec{w}}}}_3 \in H_1(T^2;{\mathbb {Z}})\), primitive classes satisfying
$$\begin{aligned} m_1{{{\varvec{w}}}}_1 + m_2{{{\varvec{w}}}}_2 +m_3{{{\varvec{w}}}}_3 = 0,\qquad m_1,m_2,m_3\in {\mathbb {N}}, \end{aligned}$$
there exists a dimer model in \(T^2\) with zigzag paths realised by \(m_j\) straight lines in the classes \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_j\), \(j= 1,2,3\). Moreover, the components containing the vertices of the dimer can be taken to be triangles.
Proof
Figure 8 essentially provides a proof by drawing. In detail, let us assume, without loss of generality, that \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1 = (1,0)\), and let \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_2 = (a_2,b_2)\), \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_3 = (a_3,b_3)\). Take the straight cycle \([0,1]\times \{0\}\) in \(T^2 = {\mathbb {R}}^2/{\mathbb {Z}}^2\), in the class \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1 = (1,0)\), and consider \(|m_2b_2| = |m_3b_3|\) equidistant points in [0, 1]. For \(j = 2,3\), take \(m_j\) straight lines with slope \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_j\), passing through the first \(m_j\) points in the segment [0, 1], and consider them as cycles in \(T^2 = {\mathbb {R}}^2/{\mathbb {Z}}^2\). It can be seen that these lines intersect at heights which are multiples of \(1/m_1 \mod {\mathbb {Z}}\). For \(k = 0, \dots , m_1 - 1\), take the cycles \([0,1]\times \{k/m_1\}\), each of them intersecting the other straight lines in \(|m_2b_2| = |m_3b_3|\) triple points. In that way, \(T^2 \) is divided into triangles, as illustrated in Fig. 8 (Left). Then, moving the horizontal cycles slightly up, we build the required dimer, as shown in Fig. 8. \(\square \)
From this dimer model, constructed from the data of the balancing condition (4–1), we will now build a smooth surface in \(I \times T^2\), where \(I = [-\epsilon ,\epsilon ]\), with boundary \(m_j\) copies of cycles in class \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_j = \varepsilon _j\mathbf{w }_j\) in \(H_1(I \times T^2; {\mathbb {Z}}) \cong H_1(T^2; {\mathbb {Z}})\), living at heights \(-\epsilon , 0, \epsilon \) for \(j = 2,1,3\), respectively.
Consider the congruent white triangles and, in each, take a segment from its vertex given by the intersection of the cycles in the classes \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_2\) and \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_3\), to the midpoint of the opposite edge. We name the primitive direction of this segment \({{{\varvec{f}}}}= (\alpha , \beta )\), and abuse notation by calling \({{{\varvec{f}}}}\) the segment itself. Consider then a smooth foliation of the triangle minus the vertices, so that following it gives an isotopy from the edge in the \(\mathbf{w }_2\) cycle to half of the edge in the \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1\) cycle union the segment \({{{\varvec{f}}}}\), and then from the other half of the edge in the \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1\) cycle union the segment \({{{\varvec{f}}}}\) to the the edge in the \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_3\) cycle, as illustrated in Fig. 9 (Left). Considering each leaf of the foliation as level sets of a smooth function \(\rho _2\) from the triangle minus vertices to I, its graph embeds into \(I \times T^2\), as in Fig. 9 (Right). Now, taking a symmetric version of the foliation and function \(\rho _2\) on the black triangles of the dimer model, this ensures that the compactification of the union of the graphs is a smooth surface in \(I \times T^2\), with the desired boundaries.
Note that this embedding can be made symplectic into the region \({\mathcal {B}}\times T^2\), the symplectic neighborhood of the pre-image of the interior vertex b, by embedding the segment I into \({\mathcal {B}}\) in an appropriate direction. Nonetheless, we can also build our surface to project on the \((p_1,p_2)\) coordinates on \({\mathcal {B}}\), much like in the work of Mikhalkin [45, 46].
Remark 4.8
For convenience, we shall now perform a change of local coordinates, from \((p_1, \theta _1, p_2, \theta _2)\) to new coordinates \((\rho _1, \phi _1, \rho _2, \phi _2)\), where the symplectic form will be
$$\begin{aligned} dp_1\wedge d\theta _1 + dp_2\wedge d\theta _2 = d\rho _1\wedge d\phi _1 + d\rho _2\wedge d\phi _2. \end{aligned}$$
This change of the basis is performed in the \(T^2\) chart, going from \({{{\varvec{e}}}}_1=(1,0)\), and \({{{\varvec{e}}}}_2 = (0,1)\), to \({{{\varvec{e}}}}_1\) and \({{{\varvec{f}}}}= (\alpha , \beta )\). This corresponds to setting \(\phi _1 = \theta _1 - (\alpha /\beta )\cdot \theta _2\), and \(\phi _2 = \theta _2/\beta \), so \(\theta _1 {{{\varvec{e}}}}_1 + \theta _2 {{{\varvec{e}}}}_2 = \phi _1 {{{\varvec{e}}}}_1 + \phi _2 {{{\varvec{f}}}}\). Setting \(\rho _1 = p_1\) and \(\rho _2 = \alpha p_1 + \beta p_2\) ensures that \(dp_1\wedge d\theta _1 + dp_2\wedge d\theta _2 = d\rho _1\wedge d\phi _1 + d\rho _2\wedge d\phi _2\). These coordinates \((\rho _1, \phi _1, \rho _2, \phi _2)\) are used in the following proposition. \(\square \)
We are now ready to construct all the required local models for the symplectic surfaces in Theorem 4.2. (These local models are used in Sect. 4.1.3.) This is the content of the following proposition:
Proposition 4.9
Let \({\mathscr {C}}: \Gamma \longrightarrow P_X\) be a symplectic-tropical curve in an ATF \(\pi :X \longrightarrow B\), represented by an ATBD \(P_X\), b be an interior vertex and \({\mathcal {B}}\) a small disk centered at b, whose boundary intersects \({\mathscr {C}}(\Gamma )\) in the points \(p_1\), \(p_2\), \(p_3\). Let \(\mathbf{w }_j\) be the associated vector corresponding to the edge containing \(p_j\), for \(1\le j\le 3\), hence satisfying the balancing condition (4–1).
Then there exists a symplectic curve in X, projecting to \({\mathcal {B}}\), whose boundary projects to the points \(p_j\), and represents cycles whose classes in \(H_1(\pi ^{-1}(p_j);{\mathbb {Z}})\) are given by \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_j = \varepsilon _j\mathbf{w }_j\), \(1\le j\le 3\).
Proof
Figure 10 illustrates how the embedding will look like in each of the (white) triangles, by describing the amoeba and coamoeba together. The interior vertex corresponds to \((\rho _1,\rho _2) = (0,0)\), and we vary \(\rho _1\) in a small enough interval \([-\delta , \delta ]\). First, we associate to the coamoeba in Fig. 10 (left) a smooth surface inside \(I\times T^2\), as explained before. (Recall Fig. 9.) This smooth surface will be the projection of the corresponding piece of our symplectic surface into the \((\rho _2,\phi _1,\phi _2)\) coordinates. Hence, our foliation in the triangle corresponds to the level sets of the coordinate \(\rho _2\), i.e. \(\rho _2\) constant. It is left to us to determine the \(\rho _1\) coordinate of each point, ensuring the symplectic condition. Each edge of the triangle in the coamoeba has constant \((\rho _1,\rho _2)\) coordinates corresponding to the vertices of the amoeba. Using the same name for the edges as for their homology classes, we choose \(\rho _1\) so that \(\rho _1({{{\varvec{w}}}}_3) = \rho _1({{{\varvec{w}}}}_2) < 0 \le \rho _1({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1)\). The \(\rho _1\) coordinate decreases as we move along the \(\rho _2\) level sets from bottom to top. Also, as we vary \(\phi _1\) positively in the horizontal segments (\(\phi _2\) constant) in the triangle, we choose \(\rho _1\) so that its variation is non-negative for \( \rho _2 \le 0\) and non-positive for \(\rho _2 \ge 0\); also the \(\rho _2\)-coordinate varies positively. We also note that the segments in our smooth surface that projected to the vertices of the triangle in \(T^2\), will project to the boundary of the amoeba in \({\mathcal {B}}\).
Now, in order to check the symplectic condition for the above surface, we probe with the following paths \(\xi ^1\), \(\xi ^2\). The path \(\xi ^1\) is given by following the horizontal segment (\(\phi _2\) constant) in the coamoeba, and \(\xi ^2\) is given by following the \(\rho _2\) level sets in the coamoeba (as depicted in Fig. 10 and oriented towards the positive direction of \(\phi _2\)). Denote by \(d\rho _i^j\) and \(d\phi _i^j\) the coordinates of \(d\rho _i\) and \(d\phi _i\), along the j-th path, for \(i,j =1,2\). We have that,
$$\begin{aligned} d\rho _1^1 = {\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \ge 0 &{} \text {if} \ \rho _2 \le 0 \\ \le 0 &{} \text {if} \ \rho _2 \ge 0 \end{array}\right. } \ , \ d\phi _1^1 \ge 0\ , \ d\rho _2^1 > 0\ , \ d\phi _2^1 = 0 \ , \end{aligned}$$
Note that we oriented the path \(\xi ^2\) so that \( d\phi _2^2 > 0\). For \(\rho _2 < 0\), the path \(\xi ^2\) goes from the left-most (orange) vertex, to the top (teal) vertex, and hence \(d\phi _1^2 > 0\) there. For the \(\rho _2 > 0\) part, the path goes from the right-most (pink) vertex, to the top (teal) vertex, and thus \(d\phi _1^2 < 0\). Note also that the curve in the amoeba picture have \(d\rho _1^2 < 0\). In conclusion, we obtain:
$$\begin{aligned} d\rho _1^2 < 0\ , \ d\phi _1^2 = {\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \ge 0 &{} \text {if} \ \rho _2 \le 0 \\ \le 0 &{} \text {if} \ \rho _2 \ge 0 \end{array}\right. } \ , \ d\rho _2^2 = 0\ , \ d\phi _2^2 > 0\ . \end{aligned}$$
In particular, we get that:
as desired, where \(\partial \xi ^i\) is the tangent vector to the \(\xi ^i\) curve. An analogous embedding is defined for the black triangles, with the same amoeba image on the \((\rho _1,\rho _2)\) projection, and we obtain a smooth embedding of the surface as required. \(\square \)
Remark 4.10
Note that we could simply take \(\rho _1 \equiv 0\) over the surface, and it would still satisfy (4–2). Hence we can indeed get a symplectic embedding of our surface over a fixed interval in \({\mathcal {B}}\).
Finally, notice that we chose our amoeba (with small \(\delta \)) so that the tangency of the amoeba at the vertices are far from being orthogonal to the corresponding \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_j\) direction. Let \({\mathcal {H}}_j\) be the half-plane whose boundary line is normal to \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_j\), passes through b, and contains the vertex of the amoeba corresponding to \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_j\). The symplectic conditions (4–2) and (v) from Definition 4.1, ensure that the path in \({\mathscr {C}}(\Gamma )\) associated to \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_j\) is in \({\mathcal {H}}_j\). Hence, we can connect this path to the corresponding \(p_j\) via a path still satisfying the condition of never being orthogonal to \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_j\). \(\square \)
Connecting the local models
In the subsection we conclude Theorem 4.2 by gluing together the local models provided in Proposition 4.5 and Proposition 4.9 above.
The local model at an interior vertex gives us \(m_j\) copies of the boundary corresponding to \(\mathbf{w }_j\), equidistant in our parametrisation of \(T^2\). We now follow the path that passes through \(p_j\), as in Proposition 4.9:
-
If it hits another interior vertex, we just follow these constant cycles and the surfaces glue naturally.
-
If it hits a boundary vertex over the boundary of \(P_X\), we build the surface again by keeping the cycles constant, and the cycles smoothly collapses to a point since near the boundary of \(P_X\) we have a toric model.
Now, due to the nature of the boundaries resulting from Proposition 4.5, we need to do additional work in order to glue to the local models given by Proposition 4.5, as follows (recall Fig. 6).
To connect k straight cycles, which we color in red, to k curling cycles, which we color blue—see again Fig. 6—we consider dimers as the ones illustrated in Fig. 11. The figures depicts the cases \(k = 3\) and 4, and readily generalizes for any \(k \ge 1\). Independent of k, the components containing the vertices of these dimer models are either a bi-gon, a 3-gon or a 4-gon. The analysis for getting a symplectic embedding for each of these pieces, especially the 3-gons and the bi-gons, is similar to the one we made in the proof of Proposition 4.9, and we employ the analogous terminology now.
Remark 4.11
The main difference is that the \(\rho _2\) coordinate at most of the pieces of the blue cycles is not constant, but this was not crucial for getting the symplectic curve in Proposition 4.9. This makes the boundary of the surface project into segments, rather than points. \(\square \)
To replicate the analysis in the proof of Proposition 4.9 to the 4-gons, it is better to subdivide it into two 3-gons and two bigons. Figure 12 illustrates an example of a coamoeba (with some \(\rho _2\) level sets depicted), the corresponding piece of the smooth surface, and the amoeba. Remark 4.10 still holds and we could actually view the amoeba picture as straight segments, but the blue boundaries would still project to sub-segments.
Now, we do not know that the boundaries \(\partial \sigma _j\), who live in the product of an interval with \(T^2\), project exactly in the pattern as depicted in Fig. 11, for \(2\le j\le k\). The only information we have is that they are mutually linked and that the projections intersect each horizontal cycle generically twice. Nevertheless, this is in fact not a problem, since for each one of them we can draw the actual projection and the corresponding generic curve as in Fig. 11.
These curves will generate a dimer, either one annulus or two bi-gons. Hence, we can connect them with a smooth symplectic surface. The condition \(\Psi _k(s)> \Psi _{k-1}(s)> \cdots > \Psi _2(s)\) we required in the discussion before the statement of Proposition 4.5, ensures that we can place these surfaces inside mutually disjoint thickened tori for \(2\le j\le k\). This explains how to patch the boundaries \(\partial \sigma _j\) to straight cycles for our \((\theta _1,\theta _2)\) coordinates on the torus.
Finally, the cycles built in Proposition 4.9 are equidistant in our coordinates for \(T^2\), but the straight cycles we just built are sufficiently close to \(\partial \sigma _1\). (In this metric sense, Fig. 11 is misleading for visual purposes.) Using the notation of Proposition 4.9, we promptly see that this is not a problem, since we can move apart these close cycles—thought to be given by \(\phi _2\) constant—until their projections to \(T^2\) become equidistant, by moving only in the corresponding \(\rho _2\) direction. The symplectic condition (4–2) is readily checked, by taking the first curve the horizontal ones in the coamoeba part, and the second curves vertical ones, so \(d\rho _1^1 = d\rho _1^2 = 0\), \(d\rho _2^1 = d\rho _2^2 > 0\), \(d\phi _2^2 = 0\).
All these connecting surfaces can be made to project into sufficiently small regions in the almost toric fibrations, in particular inside the neighborhood \({\mathcal {N}}\) of our given symplectic-tropical curve \({\mathscr {C}}(\Gamma )\). This concludes the proof of Theorem 4.2. \(\square \)
From now on, we will ease notation by calling \({\mathscr {C}}\) the symplectic-tropical curve obtained in Theorem 4.2 from \({\mathscr {C}}: \Gamma \rightarrow P_X\). At this stage, Theorem 4.2 allows us to construct symplectic surfaces \(C({\mathscr {C}})\subseteq X\) associated to symplectic-tropical curves \({\mathscr {C}}\subseteq B\), for an almost toric fibration \(\pi :X\longrightarrow B\). The upcoming Sect. 4.2 shall now address the general combinatorics appearing in the ATBD associated to Del Pezzo surfaces, which are crucial for the construction of the required symplectic-tropical curves used in our proof of Theorem 1.4 in Sect. 3.
Combinatorial background for triangular shaped ATFs
As in [56] consider the ATBD of triangular shape for a Del Pezzo surface containing the monotone Lagrangian torus \(\Theta ^{n_1,n_2,n_3}_{p,q,r}\) as a visible fibre, i.e., not inside a cut. This ATBD is related to the Markov type equation:
where \(G = \sqrt{dn_1n_2n_3}\) and d is the degree of the corresponding Del Pezzo. These equations yield the Diophantine equations in Sect. 3.3. In [56], it is shown that \(n_1p^2\), \(n_2q^2\) and \(n_3r^2\) correspond to the determinant of the primitive vectors associated with the corners of the corresponding ATBD.
Forcing the common edge of the corners corresponding to \(n_2q^2\) and \(n_3r^2\) to be horizontal, we get that the cuts and the primitive vectors of the remaining edges are as illustrated in Fig. 13, where we name (l, q) and (m, r) the direction of the cuts—compare with [52, Figure 13] and [55, Proposition 2.2, Figure 2]. The condition that the third determinant is \(n_1p^2\) then becomes:
This yields the equalities
$$\begin{aligned} n_2n_3r^2ql - n_2n_3q^2rm = n_3r^2 + n_2q^2 + n_1p^2 = Gpqr \end{aligned}$$
and upon dividing by \(n_2n_3qr\), we obtain
Equation (4–5) is used to build symplectic-tropical curves in the \(\varepsilon \)-neighborhood depicted in Fig. 13.
Symplectic-tropical curves in the edge neighborhood \({\mathfrak {N}}\)
Let \({\mathfrak {B}}\) be a neighborhood of an edge in an ATBD, containing its associated cuts, as illustrated in Fig. 13. Let \({\mathfrak {N}}\) denote the preimage of \({\mathfrak {B}}\) in X. By studying the combinatorics of the ATF, we show that we can construct a symplectic-tropical curve (Definition 4.1) inside \({\mathfrak {B}}\), and by Theorem 4.2, there is a corresponding symplectic curve in \({\mathfrak {N}}\). These symplectic curves will have the same intersection with the anti-canonical divisor as the rational curves highlighted in Fig. 1. Their homology classes can differ from the rational curves listed in \({\mathscr {H}}\) (Fig. 1), by the classes of the Lagrangian spheres projecting in between two nodes inside \({\mathfrak {N}}\). In order to obtain them in the desired homology class, we will need to modify our curves in the pre-image of the neighborhood of the cuts, containing the Lagrangian spheres. This correction is done in the next Sect. 4.3.
The collapsing cycle corresponding to the node associated with the cut (l, q), respectively (m, r), is represented by the orthogonal vector \((q,-l)\), respectively \((-r, m)\). Consistent with Definition 4.1 (vii), consider a symplectic-tropical curve with: one interior vertex; one leaf going towards one of the nodes with \((q,-l)\) collapsing cycle, with multiplicity r; another leaf going towards one of the nodes with \((-r, m)\) collapsing cycle, with multiplicity q; and the third going towards the bottom edge, with multiplicity \(\frac{Gp}{n_2n_3}\).
These choices satisfy the balancing condition (4–1) of Definition 4.1 (ix), since from (4–5):
Hence we get a symplectic-tropical curve in \({\mathfrak {N}}\) by Theorem 4.2.
Let us understand the behaviour of a family of such curves as we deform our Del Pezzo surface towards the corresponding limit orbifold. From the proof of [56, Theorem 4.5], and considering both the limit orbifold and the limit orbiline \({\mathcal {A}}\) corresponding to the limit of the horizontal line in Fig. 13, we get that the intersection of \({\mathcal {A}}\) with the anticanonical divisor \([{\mathcal {A}}] + [{\mathcal {B}}] + [{\mathcal {C}}]\), where \([{\mathcal {B}}]\) and \([{\mathcal {C}}]\) are the classes of the other orbilines, is:
Note that qr times this number is the one found in Eq. (4–5). Hence, the symplectic-tropical curve we construct limits to an orbi-curve in the class \(qr{\mathcal {A}}\). In particular, for the symplectic-tropical curve to be a smoothing of that orbiline in the class \({\mathcal {A}}\), we must have \(q=1\) and \(r=1\).
Required symplectic-tropical curves in the \({\mathfrak {N}}\) for Theorem 1.4
Consider the triangular-shaped ATFs of \(\mathbb {CP}^2\), \(\mathbb {CP}^1 \times \mathbb {CP}^1\), \(Bl_3(\mathbb {CP}^2)\) and \(Bl_4(\mathbb {CP}^2)\), [56] with one smooth corner, i.e., satisfying a Markov type equation of the form
Let \({\mathfrak {N}}\) be a neighborhood of the edge opposite the frozen smooth vertex, introduced in Sect. 4.2.1. The results of the previous subsections yield the following
Theorem 4.12
The homology class of the symplectic divisors highlighted in Fig. 1 can be realized as a symplectic-tropical curve in \({\mathfrak {N}}\).
Proof
First note that for the equations associated with \(\mathbb {CP}^2\), \(\mathbb {CP}^1 \times \mathbb {CP}^1\), \(Bl_3(\mathbb {CP}^2)\) and \(Bl_4(\mathbb {CP}^2)\), the quantity \(G/n_2n_3\) is respectively, 3, 2, 1, 1, which is the intersection number of the symplectic divisors in the corresponding spaces with the anti-canonical divisor. Thus, Theorem 4.2 and Sect. 4.2.1 suffice for the case of \(\mathbb {CP}^2\). For the remaining cases, one needs to ensure the correct intersection with the Lagrangian spheres. This can be achieved case by case using that
$$\begin{aligned} 1 + n_2q^2 \equiv 0 \mod n_3,\qquad 1 + n_3r^2 \equiv 0 \mod n_2. \end{aligned}$$
For instance, in the case of \(Bl_4(\mathbb {CP}^2)\), we get \(q^2 \equiv -1 \mod 5\), so \(q \equiv 2\), or \(3 \mod 5\). Take the divisor of Fig. 1 that intersects two Lagrangian spheres. Following the mutations in [56, Figure 17], at the triangular-shape ATBD [56, Figure 17 (\(A_4\))], these spheres become the top and bottom spheres, of the 4-chain of Lagrangian spheres. If \(q \equiv 2 \mod 5\), apply Proposition 4.13 taking the 2 intersections to the top and bottom node. If \(q \equiv 3 \mod 5\), we arrive at the three interior nodes instead, having the same intersection number with the Lagrangian spheres. One can check that the sign is correct by looking at the first instance when \(q=2\) and observing that the mutation \(q \rightarrow 5r - q\) switches between \(q \equiv 2 \mod 5\) and \( q \equiv 3 \mod 5\) (the first case \(q =2\) is depicted as \(A_1\) in Fig. 20). \(\square \)
Deforming symplectic-tropical curves
The previous subsection and Theorem 4.2 provides a symplectic sphere in the desired homology class, for each of the examples. Nevertheless, the actual intersection number with the Lagrangian 2-spheres, or between two representatives, is off in the majority of the casesFootnote 6. In this section we further deform the symplectic-tropical curves to take into account the required intersection with the Lagrangian 2-spheres. In the next section we develop technical results to deal with intersections of chains of symplectic spheres, keeping the same intersection with the Lagrangian spheres.
So, we need to be able to have control of the intersection number of our symplectic-tropical curve \({\mathscr {C}}\) with the Lagrangian 2-spheres that appear naturally for a pair of nodes lying inside the same cut. For that, let us prove Proposition 4.13, with the following notation.
Let \({\mathscr {C}}: \Gamma \longrightarrow P_X\) be a symplectic-tropical curve in an ATF of X, represented by the ATBD \(P_X\) and \({\mathcal {N}}\) a neighborhood of \({\mathscr {C}}(\Gamma )\), as before. Consider a class of n nodes of the ATBD inside the same cut, so that at least one of the nodes is in \({\mathscr {C}}(\Gamma )\) and let \({\mathcal {M}}\) be a neighborhood of the cut. Let \(S_1, \dots , S_{n-1}\) be Lagrangian spheres projecting inside the cut to consecutive segments between the nodes. Also name \(S_0 = S_n =\emptyset \). Let m be the sum of the multiplicities of the leaves arriving at these n nodes, and choose \(d < n\) nodes, where \(m \equiv d \mod n\).
Proposition 4.13
There is a symplectic curve projecting to \({\mathcal {N}}\cup {\mathcal {M}}\) with the property that its intersection with \(S_1 \cup \dots \cup S_{n-1}\) consists of exactly d points, each projecting to one of the d chosen nodes. \(\square \)
The reminder of this subsection is devoted to the proof of Proposition 4.13. The idea is that, since \(m -d = kn\), we can place disks \(\sigma _j\) as in Proposition 4.5, for \(2\le j\le k+1\) at all the n nodes. Naming \(n_1, \dots , n_n\) be the n nodes in a cut, in order, and \(S_i\) a Lagrangian sphere projecting to the cut between the consecutive nodes \(n_i\), \(n_{i+1}\), we see that the signed intersection of \(S_i\) with the collection of kn disks is zero, since the sphere \(S_i\) intersects the k disks only around the \(n_i\) and \(n_{i+1}\) nodes, with opposite signs. Thus, it is clear that, at least smoothly, we can pairwise cancel these intersections. Nevertheless, before that, we need to connect the disks.
Let us focus now on how to construct in Lemma 4.14 a symplectic pair of pants \({\mathcal {P}}\) that we can glue to the boundary of a pair of symplectic 2-disks \(\sigma _j\) near the \(n_i\) and \(n_{i+1}\) nodes.
Lemma 4.14
There is a symplectic disk \(\Sigma _j^{i,i+1}\) in the cut neighborhood \({\mathcal {M}}\), containing the two symplectic 2-disks \(\sigma ^i_j\) and \(\sigma ^{i+1}_j\) as a subset, with boundary in a thickened 2-torus \({\mathbb {T}}\), and whose class is twice the collapsing class of the nodes via the identification \(H_1({\mathbb {T}};{\mathbb {Z}}) \cong H_1(T^2;{\mathbb {Z}})\).
Denote by \({\mathcal {P}}\) the pair of pants which is the closure of \(\Sigma _j^{i,i+1} \setminus (\sigma ^i_j \cup \sigma ^{i+1}_j)\). \(\square \)
Figure 14 shows on the left the amoeba corresponding to the \(\Sigma _j^{i,i+1}\) surface. The idea is to then isotope it to a different surface \({\Sigma '}_j^{i,i+1}\) with boundary still in \(I\times T^2\), such that the intersection with the Lagrangian 2-sphere \(S_i\) is empty.
Proof of Lemma 4.14
Let us assume the cut is vertical, and thus the collapsing cycle is given by a \(\theta _2\)-constant curve in the \((\theta _1,\theta _2)\) coordinates of \(T^2\). Making a change of action-angle coordinates, if needed, we may assume that the collapsing cycles corresponding to the \(n_i\) nodes are slightly phased-out. We thus draw the \(T^2\) projection of the boundary of the 2-disks \(\sigma _j\), recalling that each of them links once the horizontal cycle in a thickened torus that they live in (recall the construction before Proposition 4.5). We color these boundaries blue, and draw a dimer model that indicates the coamoeba of the pair of pants \({\mathcal {P}}\) we will construct, as illustrated in the first picture of Fig. 15. We will color the other boundary of \({\mathcal {P}}\) red. We number the components of the red curve in the dimer model of Fig. 15 (Left) as indicated, and sketch the profile of its \(p_2\) coordinate as indicated in Fig. 16.
The curves \(\partial \sigma _j\) can be taken sufficiently close to the collapsing cycle \(\partial \sigma _1\), so we assume its \(\theta _2\) variation is small enough with respect to the difference \(p_1\) between the coordinate of the red curve and the \(p_1\) coordinate of the blue curve. (Essentially, we take them small with respect to the size of \({\mathcal {M}}\).)
The dimer model we are considering consists of two bi-gons and two tri-gons. We carefully analyze the \((p_1,p_2)\)-coordinates we associate to these pieces, to ensure that we get a symplectic pair of paints \({\mathcal {P}}\) connecting the blue boundaries to the red one. The corresponding amoebas, together with the \(\theta _1\)- and \(\theta _2\)-level sets, are indicated in Fig. 17 (Middle). There is a curve in the amoeba corresponding to the vertices of the bi-gon that will be crucial in the further analysis. This curve shall be named the pink curve, and in this case it is a horizontal segment.
Following analogous conventions for the analysis of amoebas and coamoebas as in the proof of Proposition 4.9, with \(\rho _i\) corresponding to \(p_i\) and \(\phi _i\) to \(\theta _i\), we take the first curve \(\xi ^1\) corresponding to a \(\theta _2\)-level set, oriented with \(d\theta _1^1 >0\) and the second curve \(\xi ^2\) corresponding to a \(\theta _1\)-level set, with the orientation such that the \(p_1\) coordinate is decreasing, i.e., \(dp_1^2 < 0\).
First, let us study the bi-gon pieces. We assume that the \(\theta _2\) variation is sufficiently small for the red curve as well, so if we fix the norm of \(dp^2\) as we travel, we then have that \(d\theta _2^2\) is small enough away from the vertices. As indicated in Fig. 17, we choose \(\xi ^1\) so that \(dp_2^1 = 0\) and \(d\theta _2^1 = 0\). As we move along \(\xi ^1\) at the bottom of the bi-gon, the \(p_1\) coordinate increases up to the middle of the horizontal curve in the amoeba and decreases from the middle until the end. The logic is reversed as we move to the top of the bi-gon. So, \(\omega ( \partial \xi ^1, \partial \xi ^2) = - d \theta _1^1 dp_1^2 > 0\) (recall Eq. (4–2)), as desired. The limit case where \(\theta _2\) attains the maximum and the minimum in the bi-gon can be analyzed by replacing the \(\xi ^1\) curve by the respective red and blue curves. Since it also corresponds to maximum and minimum of the \(p_2\) coordinate, we still have \(dp_2^1 = 0\) and \(d\theta _2^1 = 0\), ensuring positivity of \(\omega ( \partial \xi ^1, \partial \xi ^2)\).
Second, we now turn our attention to the tri-gon, as depicted in Fig. 17. We first notice that the \(p_2\) coordinates associated with the bottom vertex of the tri-gon, must be different for the edge labeled 2 and the edge labeled 6, the latter being greater than the former, recall Figs. 15 and 16. This implies that we must not only consider one curve with that corresponding \(\theta _2\)-coordinate constant, but rather a family of curves. The shaded region in the bottom-middle picture of Fig. 17 indicates the image of these curves under the \((p_1,p_2)\)-projection. The analysis at the top of this part of the coamoeba is similar to before, with \(dp_2^1 = 0\) and \(d\theta _2^1 = 0\) and \(\omega ( \partial \xi ^1, \partial \xi ^2) = - d \theta _1^1 dp_1^2 > 0\). (Note that we do not remain stationary with \(d\theta _1^1 = 0\) at the top part of the coamoeba.) At the bottom part, we do have \(dp_2^1 > 0\) as \(\xi ^1\) travels from the 2 curve to the 6 curve and we also have \(d\theta _2^2 > 0\), as we are traveling from the red curve to the blue curve along \(\xi ^2\), with \(dp_1^2 < 0\). That way, since \(d\theta _1^1 \ge 0\), we have
$$\begin{aligned} \omega ( \partial \xi ^1, \partial \xi ^2) = - d \theta _1^1 dp_1^2 + d \theta _2^2 dp_2^1 > 0. \end{aligned}$$
Gluing analogous models for the bottom part of the diagram in a consistent way provides our symplectic pair of pants. \(\square \)
We now move towards the construction of the surface \({\Sigma '}_j^{i,i+1}\) that does not intersect the Lagrangian sphere \(S_i\). Given our choice of coordinates, the Lagrangian sphere projects to a vertical segment in the \((p_1,p_2)\) factor. In order to keep working with the same coordinates in the region we want to do the modification of our curve, we modify the ATBD, without changing our ATF, simply by reversing the direction of the cuts associated with the nodes \(n_{i+1}, \dots , n_n\) (this operation was named transferring the cut in [55]). Note that we already made this operation in Figs. 14, 17. The rightmost diagrams of Fig. 17 represent the projection of \(S_i\) by a vertical dashed segment, which is different than the one we use to represent the cuts. Let \((p_1,p_2) = (0,0)\) be the midpoint of this dashed segment.
From Remark 4.4, we see that \(\sigma ^i_j\) and \(\sigma ^{i+1}_j\) both intersect \(S_i\) once, and with opposite signs. We consider disks \({\sigma '}^i_j\) and \({\sigma '}^{i+1}_j\), obtained from \(\sigma ^i_j\) and \(\sigma ^{i+1}_j\) by carving out a neighborhood of the intersection point with \(S_i\), with their \((p_1,p_2)\) projection as illustrated in Fig. 14 (Right). We keep coloring their boundary blue, and their coamoeba projection is similar to the ones we just analyzed, as it is sufficiently close to the corresponding collapsing cycle with constant \(\theta _2\)-coordinate. Thus, we can also build a dimer model as in Fig. 15 (Left), to build a pair of paints \({\mathcal {P}}'\), and we also color the other boundary of \({\mathcal {P}}'\) red.
Recall that we named a pink curve, and the \((p_1,p_2)\) image of the vertices corresponding to the intersection of the blue and red curves in the coamoeba coordinates \((\theta _1,\theta _2)\), which we will refer to as pink vertices. The pink curves and the pink vertices will play the following role in our construction. As before, we focus on the top part of the coamoeba, the bottom part being symmetric under the reflection around the \(p_2 = 0\) coordinate (or at least having a symmetric behaviour, since our coamoeba picture is not symmetric.) Then the pink curve corresponding to the top bi-gon will be the graph of a non-increasing convex function \(p_2(p_1)\), starting at a point with \(p_1 <0\), \(p_2 >0\), becoming negative before \(p_1\) becomes 0, and eventually becoming constant at some point where \(p_1>0\). Let us call x the endpoint in the \(p_2\)-constant segment, with smallest \(p_1\)-coordinate. Since the pink curve of the bottom bi-gon is the reflection around the \(p_2 = 0\) of the pink curve for the top bi-gon, these curves will intersect at some point with negative \(p_1\) coordinate. Also, the pink curve of the bottom bi-gon ends at a segment with positive constant \(p_2\) coordinate. For that to happen, the \(p_2\)-coordinate of the red curve needs to move different as we move along the different parts of the coamoeba, as indicated in Fig. 16. Note that, as illustrated in Fig. 16, we maintain the property that the \(p_2\)-coordinate at the common point of the segments labeled 2 and 3 is smaller than the one corresponding to the segments 5 and 6. We also need to ensure the following. Consider the point of intersection between the \((p_1,p_2)\) projection of the top blue curve and the projection of \(S_i\). Look at the \(\theta _2\)-coordinate of the circle of \(S_i\) over this point, and consider its intersections \(q_1\), \(q_2\) with the blue curve. We draw the coamoeba profile of the red curve so that \(q_1\), \(q_2\) are precisely the pink vertices, as illustrated in Fig. 15 (Center). We make analogous choices for drawing the red curves at the bottom of the coamoeba.
We are now in shape to prove the following lemma.
Lemma 4.15
There is a symplectic disk \({\Sigma '}_j^{i,i+1}\) in the cut neighborhood \({\mathcal {M}}\), disjoint from the Lagrangian 2-sphere \(S_i\), containing the symplectic 2-disks \({\sigma '}^i_j\) and \({\sigma '}^{i+1}_j\) as a subset, with boundary in a thickened torus \({\mathbb {T}}\), whose homology class is twice the collapsing class of the nodes via the identification \(H_1({\mathbb {T}};{\mathbb {Z}}) \cong H_1(T^2;{\mathbb {Z}})\).
Denote by \({\mathcal {P}}'\) the pair of pants which is the closure of \({\Sigma '}_j^{i,i+1} \setminus ({\sigma '}^i_j \cup {\sigma '}^{i+1}_j)\).
Proof
As in the previous proof, we will draw in the \((p_1,p_2)\)-coordinates the level sets of the \(\theta _2\) and \(\theta _1\) coordinates, naming the former \(\xi ^1\) and the latter \(\xi ^2\). Let us start looking at the bi-gon, and describe the projection of the \(\xi ^1\) curve in the amoeba. Each curve starting close to the \(\theta _2\) minimum, up to a certain height b (to be specified), will have a horizontal projection, with the maximum of the \(p_1\) coordinate corresponding to half of the \(\theta _1\) coordinate of \(\xi ^1\). This last property is preserved, even when we start at a height greater than b, but then, the image becomes a graph of a non-increasing function \(p_2(p_1)\), eventually limiting to the part of the pink curve that stops at x, as illustrated in the top-right picture of Fig. 17. We assume that the derivative is smaller in norm than the derivative of the graph giving the pink curve. For the top part of the coamoeba, the \(\xi ^1\) curves have constant \(p_2\) coordinates, with the minimum of the \(p_1\) coordinate attained at the middle of the \(\theta _1\) coordinate. The amoeba projection of the \(\xi ^2\) curves are also indicated in the top-right picture of Fig. 17. In particular, analyzing the symplectic condition for the top of the coamoeba part, is essentially done as in the proof of Lemma 4.14, compare the top-middle and top-right pictures of Fig. 17.
To ensure the symplectic condition at the bottom of the coamoeba, we need to carefully choose the point b, recalling that we can choose the red curve so that the \(\theta _2\) variation is small enough compared with the \(\theta _1\) variation. Away form the points in \(\xi ^1\) with maximum \(p_1\) coordinate, let us move along the \(\xi ^i\) curves with the normalised condition \(|dp_1^i| = 1\). The variation \(d\theta _2^2\) will then be bounded by an extremely small constant (w.r.t. the \(\theta _1\) diameter of the coamoeba). We take a constant b, large enough to ensure that \(\omega (\partial \xi ^1, \partial \xi ^2) = d\theta _1^1 - dp_2^1 d\theta _2^2 > 0\), recalling that we forced \(dp_2^1\) to be zero for points at \(\theta _2\) heights smaller than b and \(|dp_2^1|\) is bounded by the maximum slope of the pink curve. In the points on \(\xi ^1\) with maximal \(p_1\) coordinate, we simply have \(dp_2^1 = 0\) and \(\omega (\partial \xi ^1, \partial \xi ^2) = - d\theta _1^1 dp_1^2 > 0\). We let the reader check the positivity for the limiting points at the pink curve.
Let us now move to the tri-gon part of the coamoeba. For the top part we choose a height c in the coamoeba, playing a similar role as b in the above paragraph. If the \(\theta _2\) coordinate of \(\xi ^1\) is bigger than c, we take the amoeba part to have constant \(p_2\) coordinate. So if the \(\theta _2\) coordinate is not smaller than c, we have \(dp_2^1 = 0\) and \(\omega (\partial \xi ^1, \partial \xi ^2) = - d\theta _1^1 dp_1^2 > 0\). The analysis regarding the symplectic condition is done as in the last paragraph for the part corresponding to the \(\theta _2\) coordinate smaller than c. For the bottom part, recall that the \(p_2\) coordinate corresponding to the part 2 of the coamoeba of the red curve is smaller than the one corresponding to the part 6. So we can take \(dp^1_2 > 0\). The analysis now is similar to the analogous part in the proof of Lemma 4.14. We have \(d\theta ^1_1 \ge 0\) (being zero at the middle of the \(\xi ^1\) curves whose \(\theta _2\) coordinate is not bigger than the pink vertices), \(dp_2^1 > 0\), \(d\theta ^1_2 = 0\), \(dp^2_1 < 0\), \(d\theta _1^2 = 0\), \(d\theta ^2_2 > 0\), since we move on \(\xi ^2\) from the red curve to the blue curve.
The fact that we chose the pink curve to cross \(p_1 = 0\) with negative \(p_2\) coordinate promptly ensures that the coamoeba region of \(S_i\) corresponding to the segment given by the intersection of \(p_1 = 0\) with the amoeba of the bi-gon, does not intersect the bi-gon itself. For the tri-gon part, looking at the amoeba projection, we see that \(S_i\) does not intersect the region of the surface corresponding to the bottom of the tri-gon. The fact that we chose the coamoeba of our red curve so that the pink vertices coincide with the points \(q_1\), \(q_2\), ensures that the part of the surface whose coamoeba corresponds to the top of the tri-gon does not intersect the Lagrangian \(S_i\) as well, as required. \(\square \)
Remark 4.16
There is a smooth way to isotope the boundary of \({\mathcal {P}}\) to the boundary of \({\mathcal {P}}'\), and following that, a smooth way to isotope the amoebas of \(\Sigma _j^{i,i+1}\) to the ones of \(\left( \Sigma _j^{i,i+1}\right) '\), see again Fig. 17, as well as the small differences on the coamoebas. Hence, we can isotope from \(\Sigma _j^{i,i+1}\) to \(\left( \Sigma _j^{i,i+1}\right) '\), with their boundaries restricted to a thickened torus \({\mathbb {T}}=I\times T^2\). \(\square \)
Now we see that the symplectic surface \({\Sigma '}_j^{i,i+1}\) intersects the Lagrangian 2-sphere \(S_{i+1}\) once in a point belonging to \({\sigma '}_j^{i+1}\). In an analogous fashion to Lemma 4.15, we can chop out of \({\Sigma '}_j^{i,i+1}\) the intersection point with \(S_{i+1}\) and then glue its boundary, the boundary of \({\sigma '}_j^{i+2}\) (where we remove the intersection of \(\sigma _j^{i+2}\) with \(S_{i+1}\)), and the boundary of a newly chosen “red curve” in a thickened torus that has three times the homology of the collapsing cycle in this thickened torus, with a new pair of pants. Naming the former two curves blue, the first step would be to construct a dimer model between the blue curves and the red curve, so that the behaviour of this new surface obtained from the dimer model, on the region where it could intersect \(S_{i+1}\), is the same as the one analyzed in Lemma 4.15. Denote this surface by \({\Sigma '}_j^{i,i+2}\). We can iterate this process and consider symplectic surfaces \({\Sigma '}_j^{i,i+k}\) in the cut neighborhood \({\mathcal {M}}\), that do not intersect \(S_i, \dots , S_{i+k-1}\), and has boundary on a thickened torus, whose homology class is \(k+1\) times the collapsing cycle. This process leads to the following:
Lemma 4.17
There exists a symplectic disk \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,n}\) inside \({\mathcal {M}}\), not intersecting the Lagrangian set \(\bigcup _{i=1}^{n-1} S_i\), and whose boundary lies on a thickened torus \(I \times T^2\), with boundary class being n times the class of the collapsing cycle.
Proof
We build this surface iteratively as indicated above, starting with \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,2}\). The algorithm to build the red curve and the corresponding dimer model is illustrated for going from \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,3} \cup \sigma _j^4\) to \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,4}\) in the third diagram of Fig. 15. We chose the red curve to pass through consecutive chambers of the complement of the curves given by the coamoeba projection of the blue curves, which we recall is the boundary of the disconnected surface obtained by chopping off the intersections of \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,i} \cup \sigma _j^{i+1}\) with \(S_i\). We do it so that the top part of the dimer, corresponding to one bi-gon and two tri-gons, has the same configuration as in Lemma 4.15, including the points analogous to \(q_1,q_2\). Recalling Remark 4.16, we can think that we first glue a pair of pants \({\mathcal {P}}\) as before to the boundaries of \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,i} \cup \sigma _j^{i+1}\) and then isotope to our desired surface \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,i +1}\), with the modifications happening in the same framework as in the proof of Lemma 4.15. \(\square \)
Now we should inductively build the surfaces \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,n}\), for j going from 1 to k, making sure these surfaces do not intersect. Recall that the boundaries of \(\sigma _j\) and \(\sigma _{j+1}\) are linked in the thickened 3-dimensional neighborhood. We can achieve non-intersection by adjusting the crossings of blue and red curves between different amoebas, and the \(p_2\) coordinate. Thus we can ensure the required non-intersection just by looking at the \((\theta _1, \theta _2, p_2)\) projection of the surfaces. The case \(n =2\) is illustrated in Fig. 15d. We can then get the other d disks, carrying the collapsing cycle from the respective nodes to the boundary of the same thickened torus. They project to curves inside the amoeba of the \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,n}\) disks, see Fig. 18. After doing that, still within the cut neighborhood \({\mathcal {M}}\), we can connect the boundaries of the \({\Sigma '}_j^{1,n}\) surfaces, \(j=1,\dots ,k\) and of the d disks by \(m = kn + d\) straight cycles and redistribute these cycles over curves connecting to our symplectic-tropical curve \({\mathscr {C}}(\Gamma )\), as we did in the Sect. 4.1.3. Fig. 18 illustrates the amoeba image of this local model of a deformed symplectic-tropical curve, when \(n=4\), \(m=11\), so \(k=2\) and \(d=3\). This finishes the proof of Proposition 4.13. \(\square \)
We can glue all these local models now, as we did in Sect. 4.1.3, to get deformed symplectic-tropical curves, intersecting Lagrangian spheres only at prescribed nodes, with the number determined by the total multiplicity and the number of nodes at a given cut.
Further deformations of symplectic tropical curves
In this subection we introduce a series of additional techniques regarding symplectic-tropical curves, that will allow us to visualize chains of them inside an ATF. When we say a chain of symplectic curves, we imply that the total intersection between them is equal to the geometric intersection. Thus, it is not enough to simply construct an STC for each curve in the chain, as we did in the previous sections, as we want to geometrically realize the homological intersection. We start with a simple observation:
Remark 4.18
First, for \(i=1,2\), let \({\mathscr {C}}_i\) denote two STCs as in Definition 4.1. Let \(C_i\) denote a STC in X represented by \({\mathscr {C}}_i\) as in Theorem 4.2, and let \(\gamma _i\) be an edge of \({\mathscr {C}}_i\). If the homology classes in the Lagrangian torus fibers associated with the edges \(\gamma _1\) and \(\gamma _2\) are the same, then any intersection between \(\gamma _1\) and \(\gamma _2\) can be taken to be empty as an intersection of the symplectic surface \(C_1\) and \(C_2\), since we can just assume we carry disjoint cycles in the same homology class. \(\square \)
We will also need the following:
Proposition 4.19
Consider a thickened torus \({\mathbb {T}}= [-\epsilon , \epsilon ]\times T^2\), as the pre-image of a segment in the regular part of a base of an ATF. Let \(\alpha \) be a straight cycle in \(\{0\} \times T^2\) represented by \(v \in H_1({\mathbb {T}};{\mathbb {Z}}) \cong H_1(T^2;{\mathbb {Z}}) \cong {\mathbb {Z}}^2\), \(\beta \) be a cycle in the class v that wraps around \(\alpha \) once, and \(\gamma _\pm \) be a straight cycle in \(\{\pm \epsilon \} \times T^2\), represented by \(u_\pm \), with \(\det u_{\pm } \wedge v = \pm 1\), and \(u_- = u_+ - v\).
Then there exists a symplectic pair of pants in the complement in \({\mathbb {T}}\setminus \alpha \), with boundary \(\gamma _- \cup \beta \cup \gamma _+\).
Proof
Use the dimer model represented in Fig. 19b to build a symplectic surface as in Sect. 4.1.2, making sure that the 0 level set of the height function (\(\rho _2\) in Proposition 4.9) is disjoint from the straight cycle \(\alpha \). The end result is depicted in Fig. 19c. \(\square \)
Remark 4.20
Applying this result for \(\partial \sigma _j\), the boundary of a disk \(\sigma _j\) as in Proposition 4.5, we see that we can pass with all the \(\sigma _l\), with \(l < j\) (the ones with boundary closer to \(\alpha = \partial \sigma _1\)) through the middle of the surface constructed in Proposition 4.19. The amoeba of this process is depicted in Fig. 19a. \(\square \)
Now, the top left diagram in Fig. 20, on the left of the first row, is an ATBD diagram for \(\mathbb {CP}^1 \times \mathbb {CP}^1\). It can be obtained from the top right diagram of Fig. 1, after we apply nodal trades. For this diagram in Fig. 20, we apply the above Remark 4.20 to visualise STCs in the neighborhood \({\mathfrak {N}}\) of the highlighted edge of the ATF of \(\mathbb {CP}^1 \times \mathbb {CP}^1\). They are representatives of the classes \(H_1 = [{\mathbb {C}}{\mathbb {P}}^1 \times \{\text {point}\}]\) and \(H_2= [\{\text {point}\} \times {\mathbb {C}}{\mathbb {P}}^1 ]\). Remarks 4.20, 4.18, are used to visualize a 4-chain of STCs in the neighborhood \({\mathfrak {N}}\) of the highlighted edge of the ATF of \(Bl_3(\mathbb {CP}^2)\) of triangular shape depicted in Fig. 1. The homology classes for the spheres in this 4-chain are the ones corresponding to the highlighted edges of the toric diagram for \(Bl_3(\mathbb {CP}^2)\) in Fig. 1. Figure 20 also shows a 3-chain of symplectic spheres in the ATBD of \(Bl_4(\mathbb {CP}^2)\) of [56, Diagram \((A_4)\)]. Their classes corresponds to the highlighted 3-chain in the first diagram of \(Bl_4(\mathbb {CP}^2)\) in Fig. 1.
Now, we can iteratively apply Remark 4.20 in the neighborhood of one or more nodes. We are going to use simplified pictures, for visual purposes. For instance, Fig. 21a shows a simplified depiction of two nonintersecting STCs near two nodes of a cut in an ATF, with associated vector v. Surrounding each node, we see a \(\sigma _j\) type curve, where we applied Remark 4.20a times around each node and then unite their amoebas using Remark 4.18. Figure 21b shows an alternative version, where we took 2b curves around a unique node associated with the vector w, and applied Remarks 4.20, 4.18 to get two disjoint symplectic curves.
Let us now shift our focus to what happens as we approach the local model nearby a trivalent vertex of an STC, with two (or more) sets of curves satisfying the balancing condition (4–1). The first observation is that if you arrive with two sets of cycles with total homology represented by \({{{\varvec{v}}}}\in {\mathbb {R}}^2\) and want to glue them to sets of cycles with homoloy \({{{\varvec{w}}}}\) and \(-{{{\varvec{w}}}}- {{{\varvec{v}}}}\), using two non-intersecting surfaces, the price you pay is that the cycles corresponding to \({{{\varvec{w}}}}\) and \(-{{{\varvec{w}}}}- {{{\varvec{v}}}}\) in the boundary of the second surface, must link the corresponding boundaries on the first surface a total amountFootnote 7 of \({{{\varvec{w}}}}\wedge {{{\varvec{v}}}}\). We define precisely what we mean by cycles linking within the regular part of a Lagrangian torus fibration:
Definition 4.21
Let \({\mathbb {D}}\) be a 2-disk, fix a point \(o \in {\mathbb {D}}\) and take two disjoint 1-cycles \(\alpha \), \(\sigma \) in \({\mathbb {D}}\times T^2\) away from \(\{o\}\times T^2\). We view \(\sigma \) as a cycle in \(H_1({\mathbb {D}}\times T^2 \setminus \alpha ; {\mathbb {Z}}) \cong H_1(T^2; {\mathbb {Z}}) \oplus {\mathbb {Z}}\), where the first summand corresponds to \(\{o\}\times T^2 \hookrightarrow {\mathbb {D}}\times T^2 \setminus \alpha \).
By definition, the linking between \(\sigma \) and \(\alpha \) is the projection of the class \([\sigma ] \in H_1({\mathbb {D}}\times T^2 \setminus \alpha ; {\mathbb {Z}})\) onto the (rightmost) \({\mathbb {Z}}\)-factor. The sign involves a choice of generator for the \({\mathbb {Z}}\) cycle, that we assume the same, when dealing with more than one 1-cycle relative to \(\alpha \). \(\square \)
Let us summarize the above discussion into the following statement:
Proposition 4.22
Consider the local model for a symplectic surface near the interior vertex constructed in Proposition 4.9, associated to the balancing condition \(m_1{{{\varvec{w}}}}_1 + m_2{{{\varvec{w}}}}_2 +m_3{{{\varvec{w}}}}_3 = 0\). Consider the number \(d = m_1m_2 |{{{\varvec{w}}}}_1 \wedge {{{\varvec{w}}}}_2|\) and \(d= \delta _1 + \delta _2\), a two partition \(\delta _1, \delta _2 \in {\mathbb {Z}}_{\ge 0}\).
Then there exists another disjoint symplectic surface in the same local neighborhood such that the boundaries satisfies the following two conditions:
-
The \(m_3\) boundaries associated to \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_3\) are parallel copies of the corresponding boundaries of the original curve inside the same torus fibre;
-
The boundaries associated to \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1\) and \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_2\) link the corresponding boundaries of the original curve, in the sense of Definition 4.21, \(\delta _1\) and \(\delta _2\) times, respectively.
Proof
We start with the dimer model for the original surface constructed in Proposition 4.9. Recall that we used \((\rho _1,\rho _2)\) coordinates for the amoeba description, with \(\rho _2 \in [-\epsilon , \epsilon ]\). We will construct another dimer model for our second surface, and build the amoeba as in Sects. 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.3.
In the intersection of these two dimer models we will record the \(\rho _2\)-coordinate of the new curve in the dimer model, to be less than \(-\epsilon \) or greater than \(\epsilon \). This will be indicated in the same diagram, as follows. If coamoeba regions of the two surfaces intersect, the boundary of the lower region will be denoted by a dotted segment in the intersection. Figure 22 (d) illustrates two non-intersecting surfaces via their coamoeba projection. By the work developed in Sects. 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.3, the construction of such dimer model, with the additional \(\rho _2\) information, will be enough to ensure that we obtain two disjoint symplectic surfaces.
As before we take \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1 = (1,0)\), and we use the following algorithm to construct the dimer model, which concludes Proposition 4.22.
Algorithm for the Dimer Model:
-
Step 1
Color the \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1\) cycles red, \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_2\) cycles blue, \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_3\) cycles green.
-
Step 2
For each of the \(|d| = m_1m_2 |{{{\varvec{w}}}}_1 \wedge {{{\varvec{w}}}}_2|\) intersections between the red and blue cycles of the original curve, draw cycles linking both blue and red cycles, as illustrated in Fig. 22a, in the same pattern. Color \(\delta _1\) of them red and the other \(\delta _2\) of them blue.
-
Step 3
Consider a new green cycle, parallel to the original green, constructed as a positive shift in, say, the \(\phi _2\) coordinate of the amoeba (the \(\phi _i\)-coordinates being the coamoeba coordinates as in the notation of Proposition 4.9).
-
Step 4
Replace the red/blue links of Step 2, by chains of the same color, “linking” the corresponding original curve, with one end on the new green cycle and crossing the original blue and red cycle twice, to the left of the new green cycle. The first crossing is above and the second below the original dimer, with respect to the \(\rho _2\) coordinate, as illustrated in Fig. 22b.
-
Step 5
For each red/blue linking chain, we connect its “tail” with the “head” of the adjacent chain of the same color, using a red/blue 1-chain parallel to the original chain of the same color, forming the new red/blue cycles as illustrated in Fig. 22c.
-
Step 6
Paint the regions that were created by the new green, red and blue cycles, passing below or above the original dimer accordingly, as illustrated in Fig. 22d.
\(\square \)
Remark 4.23
We could allow linkings for the \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_3\) cycles, provided the total linking is still d. This is not needed for our purposes, and it would make the construction algorithm more intricate. \(\square \)
Remark 4.24
After getting the two surfaces of Proposition 4.22, one can actually run an analogous algorithm to get yet a third, fourth and n-th surfaces, disjoint from the previous ones, with boundary so that the green cycle is parallel to the previous green cycles, and the red/blue cycles links each red/blue cycles of the previous surfaces \(\delta _1\)/\(\delta _2\) times. For that, one just needs to replicate the intersection pattern of the n-th red/blue curve, with the previous \((n-1)\) ones. \(\square \)
Now assume that we arrive at the surface near the interior node, constructed in Proposition 4.9, with \(m_3\) straight (green) \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_3\) cycles, parallel to the original one, and \(m_1\) (red) \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1\) cycle, linking the original curve c times. We can adjust the new red curves, so that the curves arrive linking the dimer model over one red/blue vertex as in Fig. 23a.
Proposition 4.25
Consider the above setup and \(d\in {\mathbb {N}}\) as in Proposition 4.22. Then there exists a symplectic surface connecting the \(m_3\) \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_3\)-cycles (green) and \(m_1\) \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_1\)-cycles (red), with \(m_2\) \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_2\)-cycles (blue), linking the original \({{{\varvec{w}}}}_2\)-cycles \((c + d)\) times.
Proof
At each vertex having the linking of the red curves, we construct a local model as illustrated by Fig. 23a, b. We note that the new blue chain links the original blue at the red linking number plus 1. In Fig. 23, the red cycles are linking 4 times and the new blue cycle links 5 times the original blue cycle. (A generalization of the picture is clear.) Now we add blue links to the remaining intersections of the originals blue and red curves, as in Step 2 of the algorithm of Proposition 4.22. Then we can run Step 5, Step 6 of the above algorithm in an analogous fashion, noting that the local model of Fig. 23b is well adapted for that. \(\square \)
Remark 4.26
As in Remark 4.24, let us assume that we have arrived to a 3rd set of \(m_1\) red cycles (correspondingly 4th,...,nth), each linking \(c'\) times one red cycle for each of the previous surfaces, and a 3rd set of \(m_3\) green cycles (correspondingly 4th,...,nth), parallel to the green cycles of the previous surfaces. By inspecting Fig. 23a, b, now imagining that the red surface represents the two previously constructed surfaces (correspondingly three,..., and \(n-1\) surfaces), close to each other, and the third surface is represented by the blue surface in Fig. 23b (correspondingly by the 4th,..., and nth surface). As in the proof of Proposition 4.25, after the initial adjustment of concentrating the several red links in one node as before, we can locally construct the third blue link (correspondingly 4th,...,nth) in a manner that locally links all other previous blue cycles with linking number being the local red linking number plus one, i.e. with linking number \(c' + 1\). Close to the boundary of the local region, the third local surface will lay above the previous two surfaces (similarly above the previous three,..., and \(n-1\) surfaces). Hence we can globally construct the third surface as in the proof of Proposition 4.25 (and similarly with the 4th,..., and nth surfaces). \(\square \)
Getting chains of symplectic-tropical curves
Let us apply the results of Sect. 4.4 to construct the required chains of symplectic-tropical curves used in Theorem 3. There are three cases, corresponding to \(\mathbb {CP}^1\times \mathbb {CP}^1\), \(Bl_3(\mathbb {CP}^2)\) and \(Bl_4(\mathbb {CP}^2)\), which we now analyze.
The case of \(\mathbb {CP}^1\times \mathbb {CP}^1\).
Consider the triangular-shaped ATF of the symplectic monotone \(\mathbb {CP}^1 \times \mathbb {CP}^1\), with a smooth corner, associated to a solution of the Diophantine equation
$$\begin{aligned} 1 + q^2 + 2r^2 = 4qr. \end{aligned}$$
Let \({\mathfrak {N}}\) be a neighborhood of the edge opposite the smooth corner —where the frozen vertex is located—and consider its associated cuts, as in Sect. 4.2.1.
Proposition 4.27
There is a 2-chain of symplectic-tropical curves inside the edge neighborhood \({\mathfrak {N}}\), such that the associated symplectic curves belong to the classes \(H_1\) and \(H_2\), and have total intersection number one, i.e., equal to their topological intersection.
Proof
We need to revisit the specific combinatorics in this situation. The associated Markov type equation of interest is \(1 + q^2 + 2r^2 = 4qr.\) From Eq. (4–5), we see that the determinant between the associated vectors \(v = (-r,m)\) and \(w = (q, -l)\) is \(v \wedge w = 2\). It follows from the corresponding Vieta jumping (Proposition 3.9) that \(q = 2a + 1\) and \(r = 2b +1\) are odd. Hence, we can rewrite the balancing condition as:
where \(u = av + bw + (0,1)\). We readily see that \(w \wedge u = u \wedge v = 1\). In consequence, we are allowed to use the vectors \(\pm u\), with each of the vectors v and w as in Proposition 4.19. Finally, we look at
$$\begin{aligned} u \wedge (0,1) = -\frac{q-1}{2}r + \frac{r-1}{2}q = \frac{r - q}{2}. \end{aligned}$$
Assume that \(q > r\), so that u points to the left. Then we deduce that
$$\begin{aligned} 2v - u \wedge (0,1) = \frac{q -5r}{2} < 0, \end{aligned}$$
because \(1 + 2r^2 = q(4r - q)\), so \(q < 4r\).
Now, Fig. 24 is a depiction of the chain of symplectic spheres in \({\mathfrak {N}}\) in classes \(H_1\) and \(H_2\). The intersection is depicted by a star. The top picture records the homology classes of the cycles corresponding to each edge. The bottom picture records the linking between the two cycles obtained by applying Propositions 4.22 and 4.25. We note that we get the Markov equation as a compatibility equation for the interior vertice associated with the 2(0, 1) cycles. Indeed, since \(qv\wedge rw = 2qr\), we must have
$$\begin{aligned} 2qr = r^2 + a + 1 + aq = \frac{2r^2 + q - 1 + 2 + (q-1)q}{2} = \frac{2r^2 + q^2 + 1}{2}. \end{aligned}$$
In the case \(r > q\), we replace the vector u by \(-u\) in Fig. 24, and note that \(u \wedge (0,1) > 0\) and
$$\begin{aligned} 2v + u \wedge (0,1) = \frac{-q -3r}{2} < 0. \end{aligned}$$
The case \(r = q\) is depicted in Fig. 20. \(\square \)
Remark 4.28
The construction obtained by the above picture in Fig. 24 is equivalent to the construction of two (geometrically) disjoint copies of the \(H_1\) class, to which we can apply a Dehn twist with respect to the visible Lagrangian 2-sphere. \(\square \)
The case of \(Bl_3(\mathbb {CP}^2)\).
Let us now consider a triangular-shaped ATF for the symplectic 4-manifold \(Bl_3(\mathbb {CP}^2)\), with a smooth corner, associated to a solution of the Diophantine equation
$$\begin{aligned} 1 + 2q^2 + 3r^2 = 6qr, \end{aligned}$$
\({\mathfrak {N}}\) a neighborhood of the edge opposite the smooth corner, and its associated cuts, as in Sect. 4.2.1. In this case, the required chain of symplectic surfaces reads:
Proposition 4.29
There exists a 4-chain of symplectic-tropical curves inside the edge neighborhood \({\mathfrak {N}}\) whose associated symplectic curves lie in the exceptional classes \(E_1\), \(E_2\), \(B_2 = H - E_1 - E_3\) and \(B_3 = H - E_1 - E_2\), and the intersection between two of them equals their geometric intersection.
Proof
From Eq. (4–5), we deduce that the determinant between associated vectors \(v = (-r,m)\) and \(w = (q, -l)\) is \(v \wedge w = 1\). From the corresponding Vieta jumping (Proposition 3.9), we obtain that \(q^2 \equiv -1 \mod 3\), and thus \(q \equiv 1\) or \(2 \mod 3\), and \(r \equiv 1 \mod 2\).
Figure 25 illustrates the case \(q = 3a + 1\), \(r=2b +1\). As before, the intersection is depicted by a star in the bottom picture, and occurs exactly as we change the linking number between cycles. The top picture records the homology classes of the cycles corresponding to each edge. The bottom picture records the linking between the two cycles by applying Propositions 4.22 and 4.25. In this case, the linking numbers \(\delta \) and \(\varepsilon \), will depend on the curves we are taking into account. We have that \(\varepsilon ,\delta \in \{0,1\}\) and \(\delta + \varepsilon = 1\). The compatibility condition becomes:
$$\begin{aligned} qr&= b + \varepsilon +br + a + \delta +aq = \frac{ 3(r-1)(r+1) + 6 + 2(q - 1)(q+1)}{6} \\&= \frac{3r^2 + 2q^2 + 1}{6} \end{aligned}$$
Figure 26 illustrates the second case \(q = 3a + 2\), \(r=2b +1\). In this case, we have \(\varepsilon \in \{0,1\}\), \(\delta \in \{1,2\}\) and \(\delta + \varepsilon = 2\), where the compatibility becomes:
$$\begin{aligned} qr&= b + \varepsilon +br + 2a + \delta +aq = \frac{ 3(r-1)(r+1) + 12 + 2(q-2)(q+2)}{6}\\&= \frac{3r^2 + 2q^2 + 1}{6}, \end{aligned}$$
as required. This concludes the construction for the case of \(Bl_3(\mathbb {CP}^2)\). \(\square \)
The case of \(Bl_4(\mathbb {CP}^2)\).
Finally, we consider a triangular-shaped ATF for the symplectic surface \(Bl_4(\mathbb {CP}^2)\), with a smooth corner, associated to a solution of the Diophantine equation
$$\begin{aligned} 1 + q^2 + 5r^2 = 5qr, \end{aligned}$$
\({\mathfrak {N}}\) a neighborhood of the edge opposite the smooth corner, together with the associated cuts, as in Sect. 4.2.1. The required chain of symplectic curves is obtained in the following
Proposition 4.30
There exists a 3-chain of symplectic-tropical curves inside the edge neighborhood \({\mathfrak {N}}\) whose associated symplectic curves belong to the exceptional classes \(A_1 = H - E_1 - E_4\), \(A_2 = E_4\), and \(A_5 = E_1\), and their pairwise intersections equal their geometric intersections.
Proof
Let us revisit the specific combinatorics of the situation: the associated Markov type equation of interest is \(1 + q^2 + 5r^2 = 5qr\), and from Eq. (4–5), the determinant between the associated vectors \(v = (-r,m)\) and \(w = (q, -l)\) is \(v \wedge w = 1\). As above, Proposition 3.9 shows that \(q^2 \equiv -1 \mod 5\), and thus \(q \equiv 2\) or \(3 \mod 5\). Figure 27 shows the case \(q = 2 + 5a\).
As before, we have the compatibility associated with the (0, 1) cycles, using \(qv\wedge rw = qr\), and giving the associated Diophantine equation:
$$\begin{aligned} qr = r^2 + 2a + 1 + aq = \frac{5r^2 + (q - 2)(q+2) + 5}{5} = \frac{5r^2 + q^2 + 1}{5}. \end{aligned}$$
For the second case, Fig. 28 shows the case \(q = 3 + 5a\), and the compatibility becomes:
$$\begin{aligned} qr = r^2 + 3a + 2 + aq = \frac{5r^2 + (q - 3)(q+3) + 10}{5} = \frac{5r^2 + q^2 + 1}{5}. \end{aligned}$$
This concludes the verification for the case of \(Bl_4(\mathbb {CP}^2)\). \(\square \)