Continuity of HYM connections with respect to metric variations

The proof is the same as the standard proof of Kähler identities, but only on sections and 1-forms. Indeed, if \alpha is a (0,1) form and s a 0-form with values in E,

We obtain the second identity. The first one is similar. We deduce that, on smooth sections,

and similarly,

The equality \Delta_{\Theta,\nabla} = \Delta_{\Theta,\partial} + \Delta_{\Theta,\overline{\partial}} always hold by definition even if we don’t assume d\Theta = 0. The third equality involving Laplacians is the sum of the two first and the fourth one is their difference.

The first equality is a direct consequence of the fact that \Delta_{\Theta,\nabla} = \nabla^*\nabla on smooth forms. The second one comes from Lemma 2.1, which implies that \Delta_{\Theta,\nabla} = \Delta_{\Theta,\partial} + \Delta_{\Theta,\overline{\partial}} and if \Lambda_\Theta\boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}} F_\nabla = 0, \Delta_{\Theta,\partial} = \Delta_{\Theta,\overline{\partial}} hence \Delta_{\Theta,\nabla} = 2\Delta_{\Theta,\overline{\partial}} = 2\overline{\partial}^*\overline{\partial}.

We have for all smooth Hermitian sections s of \mathrm{End}(E),

hence,

where \alpha_s = \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^s\overline{\partial}(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{-s}) + \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{-s}\partial(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^s) \in \boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\Omega^1(X,\mathrm{End}_H(E,h)). We have \alpha_0 = 0 and if v \in T_s\Omega^0(X,\mathrm{End}_H(E,h)) = \Omega^0(X,\mathrm{End}_H(E,h)),

Hence \frac{\partial}{\partial s}|_{s = 0}\alpha_s \cdot v = \partial v - \overline{\partial} v symmetrically. Since \alpha_s \wedge \alpha_s is quadratic and \alpha_0 = 0, its derivative at 0 vanishes thus,

After applying \Lambda_\Theta, by Lemma 2.1, we deduce that d\Psi(0) = \Delta_{\Theta,\nabla}.

This is a standard result. See for example [Huybrechts_Lehn, Theorem 1.6.7, Corollary 1.6.10].

Step 1 : For all real number a, for all K \subset U compact, the set F_{K,a} = \bigcup_{\varphi \in K} \{\varphi \geqslant a\} \cap D is finite.

Indeed, F_{K,a} \subset D is discrete so if it is infinite, then it is unbounded. In this case, there is a sequence (v_m) of elements of F_{K,a} such that \left\| v_m \right\| \rightarrow +\infty where \left\| \cdot \right\| = \sqrt{\left< \cdot,\cdot \right>} is any Euclidean norm on V. Up to extracting, \frac{v_m}{\left\| v_m \right\|} \rightarrow v_\infty \in V is in the unit sphere. For all fixed m, v_m \in \bigcup_{\varphi \in K} \{\varphi \geqslant a\} so there is a \varphi_m \in K such that \varphi_m(v_m) \geqslant a. Up to extracting again, \varphi_m \rightarrow \varphi_\infty \in K.

Let \epsilon > 0 and \varphi = \varphi_\infty + \epsilon\left< v_\infty,\cdot \right>. Since U is open, for \epsilon small enough, \varphi \in U. For all integer m,

This contradicts the boundedness from above of \varphi(D). It proves that F_{K,a} is indeed finite. In particular, when K = \{\varphi\} is a singleton and a = \sup(\varphi(D)) - 1, we obtain that for all \varphi \in U, the set,

is finite. In particular, it proves that the \sup is reached (and it is reached finitely many times).

Step 2 : The map \varphi \mapsto \max(\varphi(D)) is continuous on U.

Let \varphi_0 \in U and K \subset U be a compact set such that \varphi_0 \in K^o. Let v \in D such that \max(\varphi_0(D)) = \varphi_0(v) and a = \max(\varphi_0(D)) - 1. Clearly, v \in F_{K,a} and when \varphi is close enough to \varphi_0, then \varphi \in K and \varphi(v) \geqslant a. Thus,

so the w \in D that verify \max(\varphi(D)) = \varphi(w) belong to F_{K,a}. In other words, for all \varphi close enough to \varphi_0, \max(\varphi(D)) = \max(\varphi(F_{K,a})).

Since F_{K,a} is finite, \varphi \mapsto \max(\varphi(F_{K,a})) is continuous at \varphi_0, proving the wanted result.

Step 3 : Conclusion.

Let K \subset U be an arbitrary compact set. By the continuity result of step 2,

is well defined and by the result of step 1,

is finite. For all \varphi \in K, if v \in D is such that \max(\varphi(D)) = \varphi(v), then \varphi(v) \geqslant a so v \in F. We deduce that \sup(\varphi(D)) is reached by an element in the finite set F, which is the wanted result.

Let V = H^{1,1}(X,\mathbb{R}). By Serre duality, V^\lor is naturally identified with H^{n - 1,n - 1}(X,\mathbb{R}) thus we can see \mathcal{B}_X as an open subset of V^\lor. Let,

The first Chern classes belong to the lattice H^2(X,\mathbb{Z}) hence,

is discrete. For each fixed [\Theta] \in \mathcal{B}_X, \{c \cup [\Theta]|c \in D\} \subset \mathbb{R} is bounded from above. This is a standard fact uses to build Harder-Narasimhan filtrations (see for example [Kobayashi, Lemma 5.7.16]).

Therefore, we can use Lemma 3.4 which tells us that for all compact K \subset \mathcal{B}_X, there is a finite set F \subset D such that for all [\Theta] \in K,

Let F = \{c^1,\ldots,c^p\} and for all k, \mathcal{S}_k \subset \mathcal{E} with 0 < \mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{S}_k) < \mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{E}) such that \frac{c_1(\mathcal{S}_k)}{\mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{S}_k)} = c^k. This tuple fits. Indeed, when [\Theta] \in K,

The same equivalence holds with weak inequalities.

By Corollary 3.5, if K \subset \mathcal{B}_X is compact, there is an integer p and a p-tuple \mathcal{S}_1,\ldots,\mathcal{S}_p \subsetneq \mathcal{E} of coherent sheaves such that for all k, 0 < \mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{S}_k) < \mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{E}) and,

It gives then local polyhedral structures.

Moreover, since the pairing H^{n - 1,n - 1}(X,\mathbb{R}) \times H^{1,1}(X,\mathbb{R}) \rightarrow \mathbb{R} is non-degenerate by Serre duality, for each \mathcal{S},

From here, the results about the finite dimensional cones follow from basic topology and convex geometry, and the results about the infinite dimensional cones follow from the continuity of the projection onto H^{n - 1,n - 1}(X,\mathbb{R}).

Let \mathcal{S}_1,\ldots,\mathcal{S}_p \subset \mathcal{E} be a finite family of coherent sheaves given by Corollary 3.5 such that C = \bigcap_{k = 1}^p \{l_{\mathcal{S}_k} \geqslant 0\} \cap K. We may assume that the l_{\mathcal{S}_k} are pairwise distinct. Up to rearranging the \mathcal{S}_k, we may also assume that the faces F_{[\Theta_2]} and F_{[\Theta_1]} \subset F_{[\Theta_2]} are defined by the equations,

for some 0 \leqslant i \leqslant j \leqslant p. Moreover, since [\Theta_1] (resp. [\Theta_2]) belongs to the relative interior of F_{[\Theta_1]} (resp. F_{[\Theta_2]}), we have l_{\mathcal{S}_k}([\Theta_1]) > 0 when k > j (resp. l_{\mathcal{S}_k}([\Theta_2]) > 0 when k > i).

Let,

be a Jordan-Hölder filtration for \mathcal{E} with respect to [\Theta_2]. We have,

where \mathcal{G}_k = \mathcal{F}_k/\mathcal{F}_{k - 1}. By definition, for all k, l_{\mathcal{F}_k}([\Theta_2]) = 0. Since the \mathcal{F}_k destabilise \mathcal{E} with respect to [\Theta_2] \in K, there must exist an integer 1 \leqslant q \leqslant p such that \frac{c_1(\mathcal{F}_k)}{\mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{F}_k)} = \frac{c_1(\mathcal{S}_q)}{\mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{S}_q)}. The equality l_{\mathcal{F}_k}([\Theta_2]) = l_{\mathcal{S}_q}([\Theta_2]) = 0 implies that q \leqslant i. In particular, q \leqslant j so for all k, l_{\mathcal{F}_k}([\Theta_1]) = 0. It implies that each \mathcal{F}_k is [\Theta_1]-semi-stable by [\Theta_1]-semi-stability of \mathcal{E}. Therefore, for all k, l_{\mathcal{G}_k}([\Theta_1]) = 0 and \mathcal{G}_k is [\Theta_1]-semi-stable as a quotient of [\Theta_1]-semi-stable sheaves of the same [\Theta_1]-slope.

It means that the \mathcal{F}_k form a filtration of \mathcal{E} by semi-stable sub-sheaves with torsion-free semi-stable quotients with respect to [\Theta_1]. Let us consider a maximal refinement of this filtration with for all 1 \leqslant k \leqslant m,

Then, the \mathcal{F}_{k,q} form a Jordan-Hölder filtration of \mathcal{E} with respect to [\Theta_1] thus on the one hand,

and on the other hand, for each k, the \mathcal{F}_{k - 1,q}/\mathcal{F}_{k - 1} form a Jordan-Hölder filtration of \mathcal{G}_k = \mathcal{F}_k/\mathcal{F}_{k - 1} with respect to [\Theta_1] so, by (Proof),

It proves the lemma.

This is a direct consequence of Lemma 3.7 and the fact that the graded object of a sheaf which is not locally free is itself not locally free (in particular, if \mathcal{E} is not locally free, these cones are empty).

For the first one, we can use (?) to obtain,

The result follows from the smoothness of \Phi and the fact that products are smooth for the {'\!A} norm. See [Adams_Fournier, Theorem 4.12] for reference. For the second map, we have,

Once more, the smoothness follows from the smoothness of products for the A norm.

When W is a space of functions, we denote by A(W) its completion with respect to an A norm.

Let \Pi_\bot : \Omega_0^0(X,\mathrm{End}_H(E,h)) \rightarrow \boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\frak{k}^\bot be the orthogonal projection on \boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\frak{k}^\bot with respect to \left< \cdot,\cdot \right>_0 and,

By Lemma 4.1, \Psi is smooth when we endow the starting \boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\frak{k}^\bot with a \mathcal{C}^2 norm, the arrival one with a \mathcal{C}^0 norm and U with a \mathcal{C}^0 norm. And by Proposition 2.3,

and \Delta_0 is a symmetric semi-definite positive operator and it is continuous from \mathcal{C}^2(\Omega_0^0(X,\mathrm{End}_H(E,h))) to \mathcal{C}^0(\Omega_0^0(X,\mathrm{End}_H(E,h))). According to Proposition 2.2, the kernel of the Laplacian \Delta_0 (thus its cokernel) is \boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\frak{k}. In particular, \Pi_\bot\Delta_0 = \Delta_0 and,

is an isomorphism.

By the implicit function theorem, up to shrinking U \times B, there is a unique smooth \sigma : \mathcal{C}^0(U) \times B \rightarrow \mathcal{C}^2(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\frak{k}^\bot) such that \sigma(0,0) = 0 and for all (\varepsilon,b) \in \mathcal{C}^0(U) \times B, \Psi(\varepsilon,b,\sigma(\varepsilon,b)) = 0. When we set \tilde{\Phi}(\varepsilon,b) = \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{\sigma(\varepsilon,b)} \cdot \overline{\partial}_b - \overline{\partial}_0, the first point is immediate and the third point is verified. For the second one, notice that for all u \in K and all (\varepsilon,b) \in U \times B

By uniqueness of \sigma, it implies that u^*\sigma(\varepsilon,u \cdot b)u = \sigma(\varepsilon,b). Therefore,

It proves the second point. For the fourth point, we have for all b,

Therefore, \frac{\partial}{\partial b}_{|b = 0}\Psi(0,b,0) = \Pi_\bot(\partial_0^*d\Phi(0) + \overline{\partial}_0^*d\Phi(0)^*). Now, recall that the image of d\Phi(0) is the space V of (0,1)-harmonic forms. In particular, it is included in the kernel of \partial_0^*. Similarly, d\Phi(0)^* takes values in \ker(\overline{\partial}_0^*) because \nabla_0 is unitary. Thus \frac{\partial}{\partial b}_{|b = 0}\Psi(0,b,0) = 0. Therefore, when we differentiate the equality \Psi(0,b,\sigma(0,b)) at b = 0,

Since \frac{\partial}{\partial b}|_{b = 0}\sigma(0,b) belongs to \boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\frak{k}^\bot where \Delta_0 is injective, we have \frac{\partial}{\partial b}|_{b = 0}\sigma(0,b) = 0 hence,

We deduce the fourth point and we showed along the way that \frac{\partial}{\partial b}|_{b = 0}\sigma(0,b) = 0. All we have left to show is that the \sigma(\varepsilon,b) are smooth as sections when \varepsilon \in U and that \sigma has the wanted regularity. The first part follows from elliptic regularity. For the second one, we know by Lemma 4.1 that,

is an isomorphism. Therefore, we can apply the implicit function theorem with these norms and we obtain a smooth map \tilde{\sigma} : A'(U') \times B' \rightarrow {'\!A}(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\frak{k}^\bot) which verifies \Psi(\varepsilon,b,\tilde{\sigma}(\varepsilon,b)) = 0.

By uniqueness of \sigma, \sigma_{|U'} = \tilde{\sigma} is smooth from (U',\left\| \cdot \right\|_{A'}) \times B' to (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\frak{k}^\bot,\left\| \cdot \right\|_{'\!A}).

This is due to the fact that \frac{\partial}{\partial b}|_{b = 0}\tilde{\Phi}(0,b) : v \mapsto v is \mathbb{C}-linear, hence, for all v \in T_0B = V,

It means that \Omega_0(\cdot,\boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}} \cdot) at b = 0 is a positive quadratic form. By openness of positivity, up to shrinking U and B, \Omega_\varepsilon is positive at any point b of B, hence the result.

By density, it is enough to verify it for b \in \mathcal{O}.

Step 1 : Finding an orthogonal decomposition of E where \Phi(b) is strictly upper triangular.

Recall from the beginning of Section ? that,

where \gamma_{ij} \in \Omega^{0,1}(X,\mathrm{Hom}(G_j,G_i)). If t > 0 and g_t = \sum_{k = 1}^m t^k\mathrm{Id}_{G_k}, we have g_t \cdot \overline{\partial}_0 = \overline{\partial}_0 so,

In other words, we can find Dolbeault operators \overline{\partial} in the gauge orbit of \overline{\partial}_E arbitrarily close to \overline{\partial}_0. By property of the Kuranishi slice, we can find elements b' \in \mathcal{O} arbitrarily close to 0. By Hilbert–Mumford criterion [GRS, Theorem 12.4], there is a \xi \in \boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\frak{k} such that,

Since \Phi is G-equivariant, \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{t\xi} \cdot \Phi(b) \underset{t \rightarrow +\infty}{\longrightarrow} 0. \xi is a Hermitian holomorphic global section of \mathrm{End}(\mathcal{E}_0). By the spectral theorem, we can can diagonalise it as,

where the \lambda_1 < \cdots < \lambda_p are its increasing eigenvalues and the G_{b,k} are its eigenspaces. They are sub-bundles of \mathcal{E}_0 and they are pairwise orthogonal. Since \mathcal{E}_0 is [\Theta_0]-polystable, it implies that the [\Theta_0]-slope of each G_{b,k} equals the [\Theta_0]-slope of \mathcal{E}_0. In the orthogonal decomposition,

we can decompose \Phi(b) as,

We have,

We deduce that for all i \geqslant j, \gamma_{ij,b} = 0 so \Phi(b) is strictly upper triangular. In particular, if we set, F_{b,k} = \bigoplus_{i = 1}^k G_{b,i}, each F_{k,b} is preserved by \overline{\partial}_b so,

is a holomorphic sub-bundle of \mathcal{E}_b = (E,\overline{\partial}_b).

Step 2 : Computing the scalar product between \nu_{\infty,\varepsilon}(b) and each a_S = \frac{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}}{\mathrm{rk}(S)}\mathrm{Id}_S - \frac{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}}{\mathrm{rk}(S^\bot)}\mathrm{Id}_{S^\bot} \in \frak{k}.

Let \mathcal{S} \subset \mathcal{E}_b be a sub-bundle with 0 < \mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{S}) < \mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{E}) and S its smooth structure. Let \mathrm{Id}_S defined as the orthogonal projection on S and \mathrm{Id}_{S^\bot} = \mathrm{Id}_E - \mathrm{Id}_S the orthogonal projection on S^\bot. Then, in the decomposition E = S \oplus S^\bot, we can write \overline{\partial}_b = \overline{\partial}_{b|S} + \beta_{S,b}. \beta_{S,b} is the second fundamental form of S. and by [Kobayashi, Equation (1.6.12)],

where F_b is the curvature of the Chern connection associated to \overline{\partial}_b on E, F_S is some curvature form on \mathcal{S} and F_{S^\bot} is some curvature form on \mathcal{E}_b/\mathcal{S} (they depend on b). By Chern-Weil theory,

and for any (0,1)-form \beta, \displaystyle \int_X \mathrm{tr}(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\beta^*\wedge\beta) \wedge \Theta_\varepsilon = \left\| \beta \right\|_\varepsilon^2 and \displaystyle \int_X \mathrm{tr}(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{i}}\beta\wedge\beta^*) \wedge \Theta_\varepsilon = -\left\| \beta \right\|_\varepsilon^2. We can now compute that,

Step 3 : Inequality with \nu_{\infty,\varepsilon}.

Applying step 2 with the particular case \mathcal{S} = \mathcal{F}_{k,b} \subset \mathcal{E} with k < p, we obtain,

Moreover, all the l_{\mathcal{S}} : H^{n - 1,n - 1}(X,\mathbb{R}) \rightarrow \mathbb{R} are continuous thus,

where C_3 and C_4 are positive constants that only depend on \mathrm{rk}(\mathcal{E}), \max_{1 \leqslant k \leqslant p}\left\{\left\| l_{\mathcal{F}_{k,b}} \right\|\right\},
\sup_{\varepsilon \in U}\{\mathrm{Vol}_\varepsilon(X)\} (which is finite up to shrinking U) and the fact that the \left\| \cdot \right\|_\varepsilon are uniformly equivalent. Clearly, it exists a constant C_5 independent from \varepsilon and b such that for all k and \varepsilon, \left\| a_{F_{k,b}} \right\|_\varepsilon \leqslant C_5. Let for all \varepsilon, \Pi_\varepsilon be the orthogonal projection on \frak{k} with respect to \left< \cdot,\cdot \right>_\varepsilon. We have,

We deduce from (Proof) and (Proof) that \left\| b \right\|^2 = \mathrm{O}\!\left(\left\| \Pi_\varepsilon\nu_{\infty,\varepsilon}(\overline{\partial}_b) \right\|_\varepsilon + \left\| [\varepsilon] \right\|\right) where the \mathrm{O} is independent from \varepsilon and b. From now on, all the asymptotic expansions are with respect to (\left\| \varepsilon \right\|_{\mathcal{C}^0},b) \rightarrow (0,0).

Step 4 : Conclusion.

By Proposition 4.2, we have \nu_\varepsilon(b) = \nu_{\infty,\varepsilon}(\overline{\partial}_{\varepsilon,b}) with \overline{\partial}_{\varepsilon,b} = \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{\sigma(\varepsilon,b)} \cdot \overline{\partial}_b for some smooth,

which verifies \sigma(0,0) = 0 and \frac{\partial}{\partial b}|_{b = 0}\sigma(0,b) = 0. Therefore,

Moreover, \Delta_0 takes values in \frak{k}^\bot (for \left< \cdot,\cdot \right>_0) hence \Pi_0\Delta_0 = 0. Therefore, the map,

vanishes at each (0,0,s). By Lemma 4.1, it is smooth hence,

Using the fact that \nu_\varepsilon takes values in \frak{k},

Finally,

so,

For all t where the flow is defined, whatever is the choice of the starting point,

It proves that t \mapsto \left\| \nu_\varepsilon(b_\varepsilon(t)) \right\|_\varepsilon decreases while the flow is defined. In particular, by Proposition 4.4,

Let r > 0 such that the closed ball of centre 0 and radius r is included in B. Assume, up to shrinking U, that for all \varepsilon \in U,

Then choose b_\varepsilon(0) close enough to 0 so \left\| \nu_\varepsilon(b_\varepsilon(0)) \right\|_\varepsilon \leqslant 2\left\| \nu_\varepsilon(0) \right\|_\varepsilon \leqslant \frac{r^2}{2C}. It implies by (Proof) that \left\| b_\varepsilon(t) \right\| \leqslant r so b_\varepsilon stays in a compact set included in B. By the finite time explosion theorem, the flow is defined at all time. Moreover,

\varphi_\varepsilon is defined intrinsically in the sense that it doesn’t depend on the choice of the starting point b_\varepsilon(0). Since we have moreover a uniform bound on the norm of b_\varepsilon(t) given by Proposition 4.5, it is enough to verify the wanted equality at t = 0 and the uniform bound follows.

Step 1 : Derivative of the Hermitian part of a gauge transformation.

For all t near 0, by (?), we have \overline{\partial}_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(t)} = \tilde{g}_\varepsilon(t)^{-1} \cdot \overline{\partial}_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)} = \tilde{g}_\varepsilon(t)^{-1}f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)}^{-1} \cdot \overline{\partial}_E hence f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(t)} = f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)}\tilde{g}_\varepsilon(t). In particular, if we set k = f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)} \cdot h, we have,

Let us write the polar decomposition of f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)}\tilde{g}_\varepsilon(t)f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)}^{-1} with respect to k as \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{-s(t)/2}u(t) where u(t) is the unitary part (on the right) of f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)}\tilde{g}_\varepsilon(t)f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)}^{-1}. In particular,

where \cdot^\dagger is the adjoint with respect to k. s is smooth with respect to any Sobolev norm and we have s(0) = 0 because \tilde{g}_\varepsilon(0) = \mathrm{Id}_E so,

where \Re_k is the Hermitian part with respect to k. We deduce that,

Now, recall that for all t, \tilde{g}_\varepsilon(t) = \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{\sigma(\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0))}g_\varepsilon(t)\boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{-\sigma(\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(t))}. Therefore, since \left\| b_\varepsilon(0) \right\| \underset{\varepsilon \rightarrow 0}{=} \mathrm{o}(1), we have,

We deduce from this equality and (Proof) that,

Step 2 : Relation between curvatures.

Since f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(t)} \cdot h = \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{-s(t)/2}u(t) \cdot k = \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{-s(t)/2} \cdot k, we have, by (?),

Moreover, if we call \partial_{E,k} the (1,0) part of the Chern connection associated with (\overline{\partial}_E,k) and we set \partial_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)} = f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)}^{-1} \circ \partial_{E,k} \circ f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)}, we can compute that the connection \nabla_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)} = \partial_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)} + \overline{\partial}_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)} is unitary with respect to h. Thus, by uniqueness, \nabla_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)} is the Chern connection associated with (\overline{\partial}_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)},h). Let \nabla_{E,k} = \partial_{E,k} + \overline{\partial}_E be the associated connection. Notice that

These connections are conjugated. It is due to the fact that f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)} : (E,\overline{\partial}_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(0)},h) \rightarrow (E,\overline{\partial}_E,k) is both holomorphic and unitary.

Therefore,

Thus,

Step 3 : Conclusion.

Finally, by (?), when \varepsilon \rightarrow 0,

Assume first of all that \mathcal{E} is [\Theta_\varepsilon]-stable. Let for all t, f_{\varepsilon,b_\varepsilon(t)} \cdot h = \boldsymbol{\mathrm{e}}^{-s(t)/2} \cdot h for some s(t) Hermitian with respect to h. We may assume that for all t,

Then, by the inequality (?) and Proposition 4.6, for all t,

It means that t \mapsto s(t) is L^2 bounded. We have by definition,

thus t \mapsto \tilde{g}_\varepsilon(t) and t \mapsto \tilde{g}_\varepsilon(t)^{-1} are L^2 bounded. We also have,

thus t \mapsto g_\varepsilon(t) and t \mapsto g_\varepsilon(t)^{-1} are bounded too (for any norm since they lie in a finite dimensional vector space). Therefore, we can find a sequence t_m \rightarrow +\infty such that g_\varepsilon(t_m) \rightarrow g_\varepsilon \in G is invertible and in particular,

Let l = \nu_\varepsilon(b_{\infty,\varepsilon}) \in \frak{k}.

Since the norm of the moment map decreases by Proposition 4.5, \left\| \nu_\varepsilon(b_\varepsilon(t)) \right\|_\varepsilon \rightarrow \left\| l \right\|_\varepsilon. By Proposition 4.6, up to shrinking U,

and inequality (?) implies that \varphi is bounded from below hence l = 0.

In the semi-stable case, we have by Theorem 3.6 that \varepsilon = \lim_{m \rightarrow +\infty} \varepsilon_m for some \varepsilon_m such that \mathcal{E} is [\Theta_{\varepsilon_m}]-stable. The b_{\infty,\varepsilon_m} remain in a compact set included in B so, up to extraction, we may build b_{\infty,\varepsilon} \in B \cap \overline{\mathcal{O}} as \lim_{m \rightarrow +\infty} b_{\infty,\varepsilon_m}. The bound on the norm of b_{\infty,\varepsilon} is given by Proposition 4.4.

Let for all \varepsilon \in U such that \mathcal{E} is [\Theta_\varepsilon]-semi-stable, \overline{\partial}_\varepsilon = \overline{\partial}_0 + \tilde{\Phi}(\varepsilon,b_{\infty,\varepsilon}) where b_{\infty,\varepsilon} is given by Proposition 4.7. The HYM condition is fulfilled and when \Theta_\varepsilon is in the stable cone, b_{\infty,\varepsilon} \in \mathcal{O} so,

When \Theta_\varepsilon is only in the semi-stable cone, by [Buchdahl_Schumacher, Theorem 4](In this paper, the results are proven in the Kähler case. However, in the third point of their conclusion and in the remark following [Buchdahl_Schumacher, Proposition 3.2], the authors notice that the only obstruction for it to work on any compact complex manifold equipped with a Gauduchon metric is that in this case, the slope might not be of topological nature. In the balanced case, the slope is of topological nature since it only depends on the first Chern class of the bundle and not on the choice of its representative.),

By smoothness of \sigma given by Proposition 4.2 and the bound on the norm of b given by Proposition 4.7, we have, when \varepsilon \rightarrow 0,

For all \Theta \in \underline{\mathcal{C}}_{ss}(\mathcal{E}), \mathrm{Gr}_{[\Theta]}(\mathcal{E}) is a [\Theta]-polystable vector bundle so Proposition 3 tells us that the set,

is exactly one \mathcal{G}-orbit so \Gamma_\mathcal{E} is well defined and indeed takes values in \mathcal{H}(E)/\mathcal{G}. Let K \subset \mathcal{B}_X be a convex compact subset. It is enough to show continuity on the polyhedral cone C = \underline{\mathcal{C}}_{ss}(\mathcal{E}) \cap K for all such K and we may assume that C \neq \emptyset. We have to consider three cases.

First case : \mathcal{C}_s(\mathcal{E}) \cap C \neq \emptyset. In this case, continuity of \Gamma at each point \Theta_0 is a consequence of Theorem 4.8.

Second case : It exists \Theta_0 \in C such that F_{[\Theta_0]} is the whole cone C and \mathcal{E} is [\Theta_0]-polystable. In this case, let us write,

with the \mathcal{E}_k [\Theta_0]-stable with the same [\Theta_0]-slope. For all \Theta \in \underline{\mathcal{C}}_{ss}(\mathcal{E}), each \mathcal{E}_k is [\Theta]-semi-stable and have the same [\Theta]-slope as \mathcal{E} because [\Theta] \in F_{[\Theta_0]}. It implies that,

Moreover, any \Theta-HYM connection on \mathrm{Gr}_{[\Theta]}(\mathcal{E}) makes this decomposition holomorphic and induces a \Theta-HYM connection on each \mathrm{Gr}_{[\Theta]}(\mathcal{E}_k). Therefore, it makes sense to write that \Gamma_\mathcal{E} = \sum_{k = 1}^m \Gamma_{\mathcal{E}_k}. The fact that each \Gamma_{\mathcal{E}_k} is continuous is the first case because for all k, \Theta_0 \in \mathcal{C}_s(\mathcal{E}_k) \cap C.

Third case : General case. C is assumed to be non-empty so there is a \Theta_0 such that F_{[\Theta_0]} = C. Thus, for all \Theta \in \underline{\mathcal{C}_{ss}}(\mathcal{E}), F_{[\Theta]} \subset F_{[\Theta_0]}. Therefore, a consequence of Lemma 3.7 is that,

and \mathrm{Gr}_{[\Theta_0]}(\mathcal{E}) is a [\Theta_0]-polystable vector bundle. We conclude thanks to the second case.