arxiv: v1 [math.dg] 5 Jan 2016

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG arxiv:1601.00729v1 [math.dg] 5 Jan 2016 Abstract. In this paper, we study semistable Higgs sheaves over compact Kähler manifolds, we prove that there is an approximate admissible Hermitian-Einstein structure on a semistable reflexive Higgs sheaf consequently, the Bogomolove type inequality holds on a semi-stable reflexive Higgs sheaf. 1. Introduction Let (,ω) be a compact Kähler manifold, E be a holomorphic vector bundle on. Donaldson-Uhlenbeck-Yau theorem states that the ω-stability of E implies the existence of ω-hermitian-einstein metric on E. Hitchin [17] Simpson [32] proved that the theorem holds also for Higgs bundles. We [25] proved that there is an approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure on a semi-stable Higgs bundle, which confirms a conjecture due to Kobayashi [19] (also see [18]). There are many interesting important works related ([21, 17, 32, 4, 6, 12, 5, 1, 3, 7, 22, 23, 29, 27, 28], etc.). Among all of them, we recall that, Bo Siu [6] introduced the notion of admissible Hermitian metrics on torsion-free sheaves, proved the Donaldson-Uhlenbeck-Yau theorem on stable reflexive sheaves. Let E be a torsion-free coherent sheaf, Σ be the set of singularities where E is not locally free. A Hermitian metric H on the holomorphic bundle E \Σ is called admissible if (1) F H H,ω is square integrable; (2) Λ ω F H H is uniformly bounded. Here F H is the curvature tensor of Chern connection D H with respect to the Hermitian metric H, Λ ω denotes the contraction with the Kähler metric ω. Higgs bundle Higgs sheaf are studied by Hitchin ([17]) Simpson ([32], [33]), which play an important role in many different areas including gauge theory, Kähler hyperkähler geometry, group representations, nonabelian Hodge theory. A Higgs sheaf on (, ω) is a pair (E,φ) where E is a coherent sheaf on the Higgs field φ Ω 1,0 (End(E)) is a holomorphic section such that φ φ = 0. If the sheaf E is torsion-free (resp. reflexive, locally free), then we say the Higgs sheaf (E, φ) is torsion-free (resp. reflexive, locally free). A torsionfree Higgs sheaf(e, φ) is said to be ω-stable(respectively, ω-semi-stable), if for every φ-invariant coherent proper sub-sheaf F E, it holds: µ ω (F) = deg ω(f) rank(f) < ( )µ ω(e) = deg ω(e) rank(e), (1.1) where µ ω (F) is called the ω-slope of F. Given a Hermitian metric H on the locally free part of the Higgs sheaf (E,φ), we consider the Hitchin-Simpson connection φ := E +φ, D 1,0 H,φ := D1,0 H +φ H, D H,φ = φ +D 1,0 H,φ, (1.2) 1991 athematics Subject Classification. 53C07, 58E15. Key words phrases. Higgs sheaf, approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure, Bogomolov inequality. The authors were supported in part by NSF in China, No. 11571332, 11131007, 11526212. 1

2 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG where D H is the Chern connection with respect to the metric H φ H is the adjoint of φ with respect to H. The curvature of the Hitchin-Simpson connection is F H,φ = F H +[φ,φ H ]+D 1,0 H φ+ Eφ H, (1.3) where F H is the curvature of the Chern connection D H. A Hermitian metric H on the Higgs sheaf (E, φ) is said to be admissible Hermitian-Einstein if it is admissible satisfies the following Einstein condition on \Σ, i.e 1Λω (F H +[φ,φ H ]) = λid E, (1.4) 2π where λ is a constant given by λ = Vol(,ω) µ ω(e). Hitchin ([17]) Simpson ([32]) proved that a Higgs bundle admits a Hermitian-Einstein metric if only if it s Higgs poly-stable. Biswas Schumacher [8] studied the Donaldson-Uhlenbeck-Yau theorem for reflexive Higgs sheaves. In this paper, we study the semi-stable Higgs sheaves. We say a torsion-free Higgs sheaf (E, φ) admits an approximate admissible Hermitian-Einstein structure if for every positive δ, there is an admissible Hermitian metric H δ such that sup 1Λ ω (F Hδ +[φ,φ H δ ]) λid E Hδ (x) < δ. (1.5) x \Σ The approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure was introduced by Kobayashi ([19]) on a holomorphic vector bundle, it is the differential geometric counterpart of the semi-stability. Kobayashi [19] proved there is an approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure on a semi-stable holomorphic vector bundle over an algebraic manifold, which he conjectured should be true over any Kähler manifold. The conjecture was confirmed in [18, 25]. In this paper, we proved our theorem holds for a semi-stable reflexive Higgs sheaf over a compact Kähler manifold. Theorem 1.1. A reflexive Higgs sheaf (E, φ) on an n-dimensional compact Kähler manifold (, ω) is semi-stable, if only if it admits an approximate admissible Hermitian-Einstein structure. Specially, for a semi-stable reflexive Higgs sheaf (E, φ) of rank r, we have the following Bogomolov type inequality (2c 2 (E) r 1 c 1 (E) c 1 (E)) ωn 2 0. (1.6) r (n 2)! The Bogomolov inequality was first obtained by Bogomolov([9]) for semi-stable holomorphic vector bundles over complex algebraic surfaces, it had been extended to certain classes of generalized vector bundles, including parabolic bundles orbibundles. By constructing a Hermitian-Einstein metric, Simpson proved the Bogomolov inequality for stable Higgs bundles on compact Kähler manifolds. Recently, Langer ([20]) proved the Bogomolov type inequality for semi-stable Higgs sheaves over algebraic varieties by using an algebraic-geometric method. His method can not be applied to the Kähler manifold case. We use analytic method to study the Bogomolov inequality for semi-stable reflexive Higgs sheaves over compact Kähle manifolds, new idea is needed. We now give an overview of our proof. As in [6], we make a regularization on the reflexive sheaf E, i.e. take blowing up with smooth centers finite times π i : i i 1, where i = 1,,k 0 =, such that the pull-back of E to k modulo torsion is locally free π = π 1 π k : k (1.7) is biholomorphic outside Σ. In the following, we denote k by, the exceptional divisor π 1 Σ by Σ, the holomorphic vector bundle (π E /torsion) by E. Since E is locally free outside Σ, the holomorphic bundle E is isomorphic to E on \ Σ, the pull-back field

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 3 π φ is a holomorphic section of Ω 1,0 (End(E)) on \ Σ. By Hartogs extension theorem, the holomorphicsection π φ can be extended to the whole as a Higgsfield of E. In the following, we also denote the extended Higgs field π φ by φ for simplicity. So we get a Higgs bundle (E,φ) on which is isomorphic to the Higgs sheaf (E,φ) outside the exceptional divisor Σ. It is well known that is also Kähler ([15]). Fix a Kähler metric η on set ω ǫ = π ω +ǫη (1.8) for any small 0 < ǫ 1. Let K ǫ (t,x,y) be the heat kernel with respect to the Kähler metric ω ǫ. Bo Siu (Lemma 3 in [6]) obtained a uniform Sobolev inequality for (,ω ǫ ), using Cheng Li s estimate ([11]), they got a uniform upper bound of the heat kernels K ǫ (t,x,y). Given a smooth Hermitian metric Ĥ on the bundle E, it is easy to see that there exists a constant Ĉ0 such that ( Λ ωǫ FĤ Ĥ + φ 2 ) ωn ǫ Ĥ,ω ǫ Ĉ0, (1.9) for all 0 < ǫ 1. This also gives a uniform bound on Λ ωǫ (FĤ +[φ,φ Ĥ]) Ĥ ω n ǫ. We study the following evolution equation on Higgs bundle(e, φ) with the fixed initial metric Ĥ with respect to the Kähler metric ω ǫ, H ǫ (t) 1 H ǫ(t) = 2( 1Λ ωǫ (F Hǫ(t) +[φ,φ Hǫ(t) ]) λ ǫ Id E ), t (1.10) H ǫ (0) = Ĥ, 2π where λ ǫ = Vol(,ω µ ω ǫ) ǫ (E). Simpson ([32]) proved the existence of long time solution of the above heat flow. By the stard parabolic estimates the uniform upper bound of the heat kernels K ǫ (t,x,y), we know that Λ ωǫ (F Hǫ(t) + [φ,φ Hǫ(t) ]) Hǫ(t) has a uniform L 1 bound for t 0 a uniform L bound for t t 0 > 0. As in [6], taking the limit as ǫ 0, we have a long time solution H(t) of the following evolution equation on \ Σ [0,+ ), i.e. H(t) satisfies: H(t) 1 H(t) = 2( 1Λ ω (F H(t) +[φ,φ H(t) ]) λid E ), t (1.11) H(0) = Ĥ. Here H(t) can be seen as a Hermitian metric defined on the locally free part of E, i.e. on \Σ. In order to get the admissibility of Hermitian metric H(t) for positive time t > 0, we should show that φ H(t),ω L for t > 0. In fact, we can prove that φ H(t),ω has a uniform L bound for t t 0 > 0. In [24], by using the maximum principle, we proved this uniform L bound of φ H(t),ω along the evolution equation for the Higgs bundle case. In the Higgs sheaf case, since the equation (1.11) has singularity on Σ, we can not use the maximum principle directly. So we need new argument to get a uniform L bound of φ H(t),ω, see section 3 for details. The key part in the proof of Theorem 1.1 is to prove the existence of admissible approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure on a semi-stable reflexive Higgs sheaf. The Bogomolov type inequality (1.6) is an application. In fact, we prove that if the reflexive Higgs sheaf (E,φ) is semi-stable, along the evolution equation (1.11), we must have sup 1Λ ω (F H(t) +[φ,φ H(t) ]) λid E H(t) (x) 0, (1.12) x \Σ as t +. We prove (1.12) by contradiction, if not, we can construct a saturated Higgs subsheaf such that its ω-slope is greater than µ ǫ (E). Since the singularity set Σ is a complex analytic subset with co-dimension at least 3, it is easy to show that (\Σ,ω) satisfies all three assumptions that Simpson ([32]) imposes on the non-compact base Kähler manifold. Let s

4 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG recall Simpson s argument for a Higgs bundle in the case where the base Kähler manifold is non-compact. Simpson assumes that there exists a good initial Hermitian metric K satisfying sup \Σ Λ ω F K,φ K <, then he defines the analytic stability for (E,φ,K) by using the Chern- Weil formula with respect to the metric K (Lemma 3.2 in [32]). Under the K-analytic stability condition, he constructs a Hermitian-Einstein metric for the Higgs bundle by limiting the evolution equation (1.11). Here, we have to pay more attention to the analytic stability (or semi-stability) of (E, φ). Let F be a saturated sub-sheaf of E, we know that F can be seen as a sub-bundle of E outside a singularity set V = Σ F Σ of codimension at least 2, then Ĥ induces a Hermitian metric ĤF on F. Bruasse (Proposition 4.1 in [10]) had proved the following Chern-Weil formula deg ω (F) = \V c 1 (F,ĤF) ωn 1 (n 1)!, (1.13) where c 1 (F,ĤF) is the first Chern form with respect to the induced metric ĤF. By (1.13), we see that the stability (semi-stability ) of the reflexive Higgs sheaf (E,φ) is equivalent to the analytic stability (semi-stability) with respect to the metric Ĥ in Simpson s sense. But, we are not clear whether the above Chern-Weil formula is still valid if the metric Ĥ is replaced by an admissible metric H(t) (t > 0). So, the stability (or semi-stability) of the reflexive Higgs sheaf (E, φ) may not imply the analytic stability (or semi-stability ) with respect to the metric H(t) (t > 0). The admissible metric H(t) (t > 0) can not be chosen as a good initial metric in Simpson s sense. On the other h, the initial metric Ĥ may not satisfy the curvature finiteness condition (i.e. Λ ω FĤ,φ Ĥ may not be L bounded), so we should modify Simpson s argument in our case, see the proof of Proposition 4.1 in section 4 for details. If the reflexive Higgs sheaf (E,φ) is ω-stable, it is well known that the pulling back Higgs bundle (E,φ) is ω ǫ -stable for sufficiently small ǫ. By Simpson s result ([32]), there exists an ω ǫ -Hermitian-Einstein metric H ǫ for every small ǫ. In [6], Bo Siu point out that it is possible to get an ω-hermitian-einstein metric H on the reflexive Higgs sheaf (E,φ) as a limit of ω ǫ -Hermitian-Einstein metric H ǫ of Higgs bundle (E,φ) on as ǫ 0. In the end of this paper, we solve this problem. Theorem 1.2. Let H ǫ be an ω ǫ -Hermitian-Einstein metric on the Higgs bundle (E,φ), by choosing a subsequence rescaling it, H ǫ must converge to an ω-hermitian-einstein metric H in local C -topology outside the exceptional divisor Σ as ǫ 0. This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we recall some basic estimates for the heat flow (1.10) give proofs for local uniform C 0, C 1 higher order estimates for reader s convenience. In section 3, we give a uniform L bound for the norm of the Higgs field along the heat flow (1.11). In section 4, we prove the existence of admissible approximate Hermitian- Einstein structure on the semi-stable reflexive Higgs sheaf complete the proof of Theorem 1.1. In section 5, we prove Theorem 1.2. 2. Analytic preliminaries basic estimates Let (,ω) be a compact Kähler manifold of complex dimension n, (E,φ) be a reflexive Higgs sheaf on with the singularity set Σ. There exists a bow-up π : such that the pulling back Higgs bundle (E,φ) on is isomorphic to (E,φ) outside the exceptional divisor Σ = π 1 Σ. It is well known that is also Kähler ([15]). Fix a Kähler metric η on set ω ǫ = π ω +ǫη for 0 < ǫ 1. Let K ǫ (x,y,t) be the heat kernel with respect to the Kähler

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 5 metric ω ǫ. Bo Siu (Lemma 3 in [6]) obtained a uniform Sobolev inequality for (,ω ǫ ). Combining Cheng Li s estimate ([11]) with Grigor yan s result (Theorem 1.1 in [16]), we have the following uniform upper bound of the heat kernels, furthermore, we also have a uniform lower bound of the Green functions. Proposition 2.1. (Proposition 2 in [6]) Let K ǫ be the heat kernel with respect to the metric ω ǫ, then for any τ > 0, there exists a constant C K (τ) which is independent of ǫ, such that 0 K ǫ (x,y,t) C K (τ)(t n exp( (d ω ǫ (x,y)) 2 )+1) (2.1) (4+τ)t for every x,y 0 < t < +, where d ωǫ (x,y) is the distance between x y with respect to the metric ω ǫ. There also exists a constant C G such that G ǫ (x,y) C G (2.2) for every x,y 0 < ǫ 1, where G ǫ is the Green function with respect to the metric ω ǫ. Let H ǫ (t) be the long time solutions of the heat flow (1.10) on the Higgs bundle (E,φ) with the fixed smooth initial metric Ĥ with respect to the Kähler metric ω ǫ. By (1.9), there is a constant Ĉ1 independent of ǫ such that 1Λ ωǫ (FĤ +[φ,φ Ĥ]) λ ωǫ n ǫ Id E Ĥ Ĉ1. (2.3) For simplicity, we set: Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) = 1Λ ωǫ (F Hǫ(t) +[φ,φ Hǫ(t) ]) λ ǫ Id E. (2.4) The following estimates are essentially proved by Simpson (Lemma 6.1 in [32], see also Lemma 4 in [25]). Along the heat flow (1.10), we have: ( ǫ t )tr(φ(h ǫ(t),ω ǫ )) = 0, (2.5) Then, for t > 0, ( ǫ t ) Φ(H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ) 2 H ǫ(t) = 2 D H ǫ,φ(φ(h ǫ (t),ω ǫ )) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ, (2.6) ( ǫ t ) Φ(H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t) 0. (2.7) ωǫ n Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t) max Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t)(x) x Φ(Ĥ,ω ωǫ n ǫ) Ĥ Ĉ1, (2.8) ω n ǫ, (2.9) K ǫ (x,y,t) Φ(Ĥ,ω ǫ) Ĥ ωǫ n max Φ(H ǫ (t+1),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t+1)(x) K ǫ (x,y,1) Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t) x. (2.10) By the upper bound of the heat kernels (2.1), we have max Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t)(x) C K (τ)ĉ1(t n +1), (2.11) x ωǫ n max Φ(H ǫ (t+1),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t+1)(x) 2C K (τ) Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t) x. (2.12)

6 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG Set exp(s ǫ (t)) = h ǫ (t) = Ĥ 1 H ǫ (t), (2.13) where S ǫ (t) End(E) is self-adjoint with respect to Ĥ H ǫ(t). By the heat flow (1.10), we have: t logdet(h ǫ(t)) = tr(h 1 h ǫ ǫ t ) = 2tr(Φ(H ǫ(t),ω ǫ )), (2.14) tr(s ǫ (t)) ωn ǫ = logdet(h ǫ (t)) ωn ǫ = 0 (2.15) for all t 0. In the following, we denote: B ω1 (δ) = {x d ω1 (x,σ) < δ}, (2.16) where d ω1 is the distance function with respect to the Kähler metric ω 1. Since Ĥ is a smooth Hermitian metric on E, φ Ω 1,0 (End(E)) is a smooth field, π ω is degenerate only along Σ, there exist constants ĉ(δ 1 ) ˆb k (δ 1 ) such that { Λ ωǫ FĤ Ĥ + φ 2 Ĥ,ω ǫ }(y) ĉ(δ 1 ), { k Ĥ F Ĥ 2 Ĥ,ω ǫ + k+1 Ĥ φ 2 Ĥ,ω ǫ } ˆb k (δ 1 ), (2.17) for all y \B ω1 ( δ 2 ), all 0 ǫ 1 all k 0. In order to get a uniform local C 0 -estimate of h ǫ (t), We first prove that Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t) is uniform locally bounded, i.e. we obtain the following Lemma. Lemma 2.2. There exists a constant C 1 (δ 1 ) such that for all (x,t) ( \B ω1 (δ)) [0, ), all 0 < ǫ 1. Proof. Using the inequality (2.9), we have ( Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t)(x) Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t)(x) C 1 (δ 1 ) (2.18) \B ǫ( δ 2 ) + B ǫ( δ 2 ) Noting K ǫ (x,y,t) ωn ǫ = 1 using (2.17), we have K ǫ (x,y,t) Φ(Ĥ,ω ǫ) Ĥ(y) ωn ǫ \B ǫ( δ 2 ) (ĉ(δ 1 )+λ ǫ r) K ǫ (x,y,t) ωn ǫ (y) ĉ 1 (δ 1 ). ) K ǫ (x,y,t) Φ(Ĥ,ω ǫ) Ĥ(y) ωn ǫ (y). (2.19) (2.20) where ĉ 1 (δ 1 ) is a constant independent of ǫ. Since π ω is degenerate only along Σ, there exists a constant ã(δ) such that ã(δ)ω 1 < π ω < ω ǫ < ω 1 (2.21) on \B ω1 ( δ 4 ), for all 0 < ǫ 1. Let x \B ω1 (δ) y (B ω1 ( δ 2 )), it is clear that d ωǫ (x,y) d π ω(x,y) > ã(δ)d ω1 (x,y) δ ã(δ). (2.22) 2

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 7 Let a(δ) = δ ã(δ) 2. If x \B ω1 (δ) y B ω1 ( δ 2 ), we have for all 0 ǫ 1. Then, d ωǫ (x,y) a(δ) (2.23) K ǫ (x,y,t) Φ(Ĥ,ω ǫ) Ĥ(y) ωn ǫ(y) B ω1 ( δ 2 ) C k (τ) (t n exp( d ω ǫ (x,y) B ω1 ( δ 2 ) (4+τ)t )+1) Φ(Ĥ,ω ǫ) Ĥ(y) ωn ǫ(y) C k (τ) (t n exp( a(δ) B ω1 ( δ 2 ) (4+τ)t )+1) Φ(Ĥ,ω ωǫ n ǫ) Ĥ C k (τ) ( a(δ) 4+τ n) n exp( n) Φ(Ĥ,ω ωǫ n ǫ) Ĥ B ω1 ( δ 2 ) ( a(δ) C k (τ)ĉ1 4+τ n) n exp( n), (2.24) for all (x,t) ( \B ω1 (δ)) [0, ). It is obvious that (2.19), (2.20) (2.24) imply (2.18). By a direct calculation, we have t log(trh ǫ(t)+trh 1 ǫ (t)) = tr(h ǫ(t) h 1 ǫ (t) hǫ(t) t ) tr(h 1 ǫ (t) hǫ(t) t h 1 ǫ (t)) trh ǫ (t)+trh 1 ǫ (t) 2 Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t), (2.25) log( 1 2r (trh ǫ(t)+trh ǫ (t) 1 )) S ǫ (t) Ĥ r 1 2 log(trhǫ (t)+trh ǫ (t) 1 ), (2.26) where r = rank(e). By (2.8) (2.18), we have log(trh ǫ (t)+trh 1 ǫ (t)) log(2r) ωn ǫ Ĉ 1 t, (2.27) log(trh ǫ (t)+trh 1 ǫ (t)) log(2r) 2 C 1 (δ 1 )T (2.28) for all (x,t) ( \B ω1 (δ)) [0,T]. Then, we have the following local C 0 -estimate of h ǫ (t). Lemma 2.3. There exists a constant C 0 (δ 1,T) which is independent of ǫ such that for all (x,t) ( \B ω1 (δ)) [0,T], all 0 < ǫ 1. S ǫ (t) Ĥ(x) C 0 (δ 1,T) (2.29) In the following lemma, we derive a local C 1 -estimate of h ǫ (t). Lemma 2.4. Let T ǫ (t) = h 1 ǫ (t) Ĥh ǫ (t). Assume that there exists a constant C 0 such that max S ǫ (t) Ĥ(x) C 0, (2.30) (x,t) ( \B ω1 (δ)) [0,T]

8 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG for all 0 < ǫ 1. Then, there exists a constant C 1 depending only on C 0 δ 1 such that for all 0 < ǫ 1. Proof. By a direct calculation, we have ( ǫ t )trh ǫ(t) max T ǫ (x,t) ( \B (t) Ĥ,ωǫ C 1 (2.31) ω1 ( 3 2 δ)) [0,T] = 2tr( 1Λ ωǫ h ǫ (t) h 1 ǫ (t) Ĥh ǫ (t))+2tr(h ǫ (t)φ(ĥ,ω ǫ)) +2 1Λ ωǫ tr{h ǫ (t) ([φ,φ Hǫ(t) ] [φ,φ Ĥ])} = 2tr( 1Λ ωǫ h ǫ (t) h 1 ǫ (t) Ĥh ǫ (t))+2tr(h ǫ (t)φ(ĥ,ω ǫ)) +2 1Λ ωǫ tr{[φ,h ǫ (t)] h 1 ǫ (t)[h ǫ (t),φ Ĥ]} 2tr( 1Λ ωǫ h ǫ (t) h 1 ǫ (t) Ĥh ǫ (t))+2tr(h ǫ (t)φ(ĥ,ω ǫ)), (2.32) t T ǫ(t) = Hǫ(t)(h 1 ǫ (t) t h ǫ(t)) = 2 Hǫ(t)(Φ(H ǫ (t),ω ǫ )), (2.33) ( ǫ t ) T ǫ(t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ 2 Hǫ(t)T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Č1( Λ ωǫ F Hǫ(t) Hǫ(t) + FĤ Hǫ(t),ω ǫ + φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + Ric(ω ǫ ) ωǫ ) T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Č2 Ĥ(Λ ωǫ FĤ) Hǫ(t),ω ǫ T ǫ (t) Hǫ(t),ω ǫ Ĥφ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ, (2.34) where constants Č1,Č2 depend only on the dimension n the rank r. By the local C 0 -assumption (2.30), the local estimate (2.18) the definition of ω ǫ, it is easy to see that all coefficients in the right term of (2.34) are uniformly local bounded outside Σ. Then there exists a constant Č3 depending only on δ 1 C 0 such that ( ǫ t ) T ǫ(t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ 2 Hǫ(t)T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Č3 T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Č3 (2.35) on the domain \B ω1 (δ) [0,T]. Let ϕ 1, ϕ 2 be nonnegative cut-off functions satisfying: { 0, x Bω1 ( 5 ϕ 1 (x) = 4 δ), 1, x \B ω1 ( 3 2 δ), (2.36) ϕ 2 (x) = { 0, x Bω1 (δ), 1, x \B ω1 ( 5 4 δ), (2.37) dϕ i 2 ω 1 8 δ, c 2 δ ω 2 1 1 ϕ i c δ ω 2 1. By the inequality (2.21), there exists a constant C 1 (δ 1 ) depending only on δ 1 such that for all 0 < ǫ 1. We consider the following test function ( dϕ i 2 ω ǫ + ǫ ϕ i ) C 1 (δ 1 ), (2.38) f(,t) = ϕ 2 1 T ǫ(t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ +Wϕ 2 2 trh ǫ(t), (2.39)

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 9 where the constant W will be chosen large enough later. From (2.32) (2.34), we have ( ǫ t )f = ϕ 2 1 (2 H ǫ(t)t ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Č3 T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Č3 + ωǫ ϕ 2 1 T ǫ(t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ (2.40) +4 ϕ 1 ϕ 1, T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ωǫ +W ωǫ ϕ 2 2 trh ǫ(t)+4w ϕ 2 ϕ 2, trh ǫ (t) ωǫ +2Wϕ 2 2 (tr( 1Λ ωǫ h 1 ǫ (t) Ĥh ǫ (t) h ǫ (t)))+tr(h ǫ (t)(φ(ĥ,ω ǫ))). We use 2 ϕ 1 ϕ 1, T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ωǫ 4ϕ 1 ϕ 1 ωǫ T ǫ (t) Hǫ(t),ω ǫ Hǫ(t)T ǫ (t) Hǫ(t),ω ǫ ϕ 2 1 T ǫ(t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ 4 ϕ 1 2 ω ǫ T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ, (2.41) W ϕ 2 ϕ 2, trh ǫ (t) ωǫ ϕ 2 2 trh ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ W 2 ϕ 2 2 ω ǫ, (2.42) choose T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ = tr( 1Λ ωǫ h 1 ǫ (t) Ĥh ǫ (t)h 1 ǫ (t)(h 1 ǫ (t) Ĥh ǫ (t)) T H ǫ (t)) = tr( 1Λ ωǫ h 1 ǫ (t) Ĥh ǫ (t)h 1 ǫ (t) h ǫ (t)) e C0 tr( 1Λ ωǫ h 1 ǫ (t) Ĥh ǫ (t) h ǫ (t)), (2.43) W = (Č3 +4C 1 (δ 1 )+2r)e C 0 +1. (2.44) Then there exists a positive constant C 0 depending only on C 0 δ 1 such that ( ǫ t )f ϕ2 1 Hǫ(t)T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ +ϕ 2 2 T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ C 0 (2.45) on [0,T]. Let f(q,t 0 ) = max [0,T] η, by the definition of ϕ i the uniform local C 0 -assumption of h ǫ (t), we can suppose that: By the inequality (2.45), we have (q,t 0 ) \B ω1 ( 5 4 δ) (0,T]. T ǫ (t 0 ) 2 H ǫ(t 0),ω ǫ (q) C 0. (2.46) So there exists a constant C 1 depending only on C 0 δ 1, such that T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ (x) C 1 (2.47) for all (x,t) \B ω1 ( 3 2δ) [0,T] all 0 < ǫ 1. OnecangetthelocaluniformC estimatesofh ǫ (t)bythestardschauderestimateofthe parabolic equation after getting the local C 0 C 1 estimates. But by applying the parabolic Schauder estimates, one can only get the uniform C estimates of h ǫ (t) on \B ω1 (δ) [τ,t], where τ > 0 the uniform estimates depend on τ 1. In the following, we first use the maximum principle to get a local uniform bound on the curvature F Hǫ(t) Hǫ(t),ω ǫ, then we apply the elliptic estimates to get local uniform C estimates. The benefit of our argument is that we can get uniform C estimates of h ǫ (t) on \B ω1 (δ) [0,T]. In the following, for simplicity, we denote Ξ ǫ,j = j H ǫ(t) (F H ǫ(t) +[φ,φ Hǫ(t) ]) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ (x)+ j+1 H ǫ(t) φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ (2.48)

10 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG for j = 0,1,. Here Hǫ(t) denotes the covariant derivative with respect to the Chern connection D Hǫ(t) of H ǫ (t) the Riemannian connection ωǫ of ω ǫ. Lemma 2.5. Assume that there exists a constant C 0 such that max S ǫ (t) Ĥ(x) C 0, (2.49) (x,t) ( \B ω1 (δ)) [0,T] for all 0 < ǫ 1. Then, for every integer k 0, there exists a constant C k+2 depending only on C 0, δ 1 k, such that max Ξ ǫ,k C k+2 (2.50) (x,t) ( \B ω1 (2δ)) [0,T] for all 0 < ǫ 1. Furthermore, there exist constants Ĉk+2 depending only on C 0, δ 1 k, such that max k+2 h (x,t) ( \B ǫ Ĥ,ωǫ ω1 (2δ)) [0,T] Ĥ Ĉk+2 (2.51) for all 0 < ǫ 1. Proof. By computing, we have the following inequalities (see Lemma 2.4 Lemma 2.5 in ([24]) for details): ( ǫ t ) H ǫ(t)φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ 2 Hǫ(t) Hǫ(t)φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ C 7 ( F Hǫ(t) Hǫ(t),ω ǫ + Rm(ω ǫ ) ωǫ + φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ) Hǫ(t)φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ C 7 φ Hǫ(t),ω ǫ Ric(ω ǫ ) ωǫ Hǫ(t)φ Hǫ(t),ω ǫ, (2.52) ( ǫ t ) F H ǫ(t) +[φ,φ Hǫ(t) ] 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ 2 Hǫ(t)(F Hǫ(t) +[φ,φ Hǫ(t) ]) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ C 8 ( F Hǫ(t) +[φ,φ Hǫ(t) ] 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + Hǫ(t)φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ) 3 2 C 8 ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + Rm(ω ǫ ) ωǫ )( F Hǫ(t) +[φ,φ Hǫ(t) ] 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + Hǫ(t)φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ), then (2.53) ( ǫ t )Ξ ǫ,0 2Ξ ǫ,1 C 8 (Ξ ǫ,0 ) 3 2 C 8 ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + Rm(ω ǫ ) ωǫ )(Ξ ǫ,0 ) C 8 Ric(ω ǫ ) 2 ω ǫ, (2.54) where C 7, C 8 are constants depending only on the complex dimension n the rank r. Furthermore, we have ( ǫ t )Ξ ǫ,j 2Ξ ǫ,j+1 Ćj(Ξ ǫ,j ) 1 2 { ((Ξ ǫ,i ) 1 2 + φ 2 Hǫ(t),ω ǫ + Rm(ω ǫ ) ωǫ + Ric(ω ǫ ) ωǫ ) i+k=j ((Ξ ǫ,k ) 1 2 + φ 2 Hǫ(t),ω ǫ + Rm(ω ǫ ) ωǫ + Ric(ω ǫ ) ωǫ )}, (2.55) where Ćj is a positive constant depending only on the complex dimension n, the rank r j. Direct computations yield the following inequality (see (2.5) in ([24]) for details): ( ǫ t ) φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ 2 Hǫ(t)φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ +2 Λ ωǫ [φ,φ Hǫ(t) ] 2 H ǫ(t) 2 Ric(ω ǫ) ωǫ φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ. (2.56)

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 11 From the local C 0 -assumption (2.30), we see that φ Hǫ(t),ω ǫ is also uniformly bounded on \ B ω1 (δ) [0,T]. By Lemma 2.4, we have T ǫ (t) Hǫ(t),ω ǫ is uniformly bounded on \ B ω1 ( 3 2 δ) [0,T]. We choose a constant Ĉ depending only on δ 1 C 0 such that 1 2Ĉ Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ )(x) Ĉ (2.57) on \B ω1 ( 3 2δ) [0,T]. We consider the test function: ζ(x,t) = ρ 2 Ξ ǫ,0 (x,t) Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ )(x), (2.58) where ρ is a cut-off function satisfying: { 0, x Bω1 ( 13 ρ(x) = 8 δ), 1, x \B ω1 ( 7 4 δ), (2.59) dρ 2 ω 1 8 δ, c 2 δ ω 2 1 1 ρ c δ ω 2 1. We suppose (x 0,t 0 ) \ B ω1 ( 3 2δ) (0,T] is a maximum point of ζ. Using (2.35), (2.52), (2.54), (2.56) the fact ζ = 0 at the point (x 0,t 0 ), we have 0 ( ǫ t )ζ (x 0,t 0) = 1 Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ) ( ǫ t )(ρ2 Ξ ǫ,0 ) ρ 2 Ξ ǫ,0 (Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ )) 2( ǫ t )(Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ )) 2 Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ) (ζ) (Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ )) Ξ ǫ,0 2Ξ ǫ,0 Č3 T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Č3 (Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ )) 2{ρ2 Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ) 2 Ric(ω ρ 2 ǫ ) ωǫ φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ) C 8 ρ 2 Ξ 1 2 ǫ,0 C 8 ρ 2 ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + Rm(ω ǫ ) ωǫ ) 8 dρ 2 ω ǫ + ωǫ ρ 2 } C 8 ρ 2 Ric(ω ǫ ) 2 ω ǫ Ĉ ( φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ + T ǫ (t) 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ ). (2.60) So there exist positive constants Ċ2 C 2 depending only on C 0 δ 1, such that ζ(x 0,t 0 ) Ċ2, (2.61) Ξ ǫ,0 (x,t) C 2 (2.62) for all (x,t) \B ω1 ( 7 4 δ) [0,T]. Furthermore, we choose two suitable cut-off functions ρ 1, ρ 2, a suitable constant A which depends only on C 0 δ 1, a test function ζ 1 (x,t) = ρ 2 1 Ξ ǫ,1 +Aρ 2 2 Ξ ǫ,0. (2.63)

12 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG Running a similar argument as above, we can show that there exist constants C 3 Ċ3 depending only on C 0 δ 1 such that Ξ ǫ,1 (x,t) C 3, (2.64) ĤF Hǫ(t) 2 Ĥ,ω ǫ Ċ3 (2.65) for all (x,t) \B ω1 ( 15 8 δ) [0,T]. Recalling the equality Ĥh ǫ (t) = h ǫ (t)(f Hǫ(t) FĤ)+ h ǫ (t) (h ǫ (t)) 1 Ĥh ǫ (t) (2.66) noting that Kähler metrics ω ǫ are uniform locally quasi-isometry to π ω outside the exceptional divisor Σ, by stard elliptic estimates, because we have local uniform bounds on h ǫ, T ǫ, F Hǫ FĤ, we get a uniform C 1,α -estimate of h ǫ on \B ω1 ( 61 32 δ) [0,T]. We can iterate this procedure by induction then obtain local uniform bounds for Ξ ǫ,k, k Ĥ F H ǫ(t) 2 Ĥ,ω ǫ, h ǫ C k+1,α on \B ω1 (2δ) [0,T] for any k 1. From the above local uniform C -bounds on H ǫ, we get the following Lemma. Lemma 2.6. By choosing a subsequence, H ǫ (t) converges to H(x,t) locally in C topological on \ Σ [0, ) as ǫ 0 H(t) satisfies (1.11). 3. Uniform estimate of the Higgs field In this section, we prove that the norm φ H(t),ω is uniformly bounded along the heat flow (1.11) for t t 0 > 0. Firstly, we know φ 2 Ĥ,ω ǫ L 1 (,ω ǫ ) the L 1 -norm is uniformly bounded. In fact, φ 2 Ĥ,ω ǫ ω n ǫ = tr( 1Λ ωǫ (φ φ Ĥ)) ωn ǫ = tr(φ φ Ĥ) ωn 1 ǫ (n 1)! Čφ <, where Čφ is a positive constant independent of ǫ. oreover, we will show the L 1+2a -norm of φ 2 is also uniformly bounded, for any 0 2a < 1 Ĥ,ω ǫ 2. Let s recall Lemma 5.5 in [31] (see also Lemma 5.8 in [26]). Lemma 3.1. ([31]) Let (,ω) be a compact Kähler manifold of complex dimension n, π : be a blow-up along a smooth complex sub-manifold Σ of complex codimension k where k 2. Let η be a Kähler metric on, consider the family of Kähler metric ω ǫ = π ω+ǫη. Then for any 0 2a < 1 ηn k 1, we have ω L 2a (,η), the L 2a (,η)-norm ǫ n of ηn ω is uniformly bounded independent of ǫ, i.e. there is a positive constant C such that ǫ n for all 0 < ǫ 1. (3.1) ( ηn ωǫ n ) 2aηn C (3.2)

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 13 Since φ Ω 1,0 (End(E)) is a smooth section ω ǫ = π ω + ǫη, there exists a uniform constant C φ such that ( φ 2 ω n ǫ ) Ĥ,ω ǫ η = n = C φ ( φ 2 Ĥ,ω ǫ ω n ǫ η n ntr(φ φ Ĥ) ω n 1 ǫ η n C φ (3.3) for all 0 < ǫ 1. By (3.2), for any 0 2a < 1 2, there exists a uniform constant C φ such that φ 2(1+2a) ωǫ n Ĥ,ω ǫ ( φ 2 ω n ǫ ) Ĥ,ω = ǫ 1+2a ( η n) 1+2aω n ǫ η n ω ǫ n (3.4) ) 1+2a ( η n ω n ǫ ) 2aη n for all 0 < ǫ 1. By limiting (3.4), we have the following lemma. Lemma 3.2. For any 0 2a < 1 2, we have φ 2 Ĥ,ω L1+2a ( \ Σ,ω), i.e. there exists a constant C φ such that φ 2(1+2a) ω n C Ĥ,ω φ. (3.5) \Σ On \Σ, we get ((2.5) in [24] for details) ( t ) φ 2 H(t),ω 2 H(t)φ 2 H(t),ω +2 1Λ ω [φ,φ H(t) ] 2 H(t) 2 Ric ω ω φ 2 H(t),ω. (3.6) By a direct computation, we have ( t )log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e) = 1 log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e)( t ) φ 2 H(t),ω φ 2 H(t),ω φ 2 H(t),ω ( φ 2 H(t),ω +e)2 Combining this with (3.6), we obtain 1 log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e)( t ) φ 2 H(t),ω 2 1,0 H(t) φ 2 H(t),ω φ 2 H(t),ω ( φ 2. H(t),ω +e)2 (3.7) ( t )log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e) 2 Λ ω[φ,φ H(t) ] 2 H(t) φ 2 H(t),ω +e 2 Ric ω ω (3.8) on \Σ. Based on Lemma 2.7 in [33], we obtain 1Λ ω [φ,φ H(t) ] H(t) = [φ,φ H(t) ] H(t),ω a 1 φ 2 H(t),ω a 2( φ 2 +1), (3.9) Ĥ,ω where a 1 a 2 are positive constants depending only on r n. Then, for any 0 2a < 1 2, we have 2 Λ ω [φ,φ H(t) ] 2 H(t) ( Λ ω [φ,φ H(t) ] H(t) +e) 2 6e 2 ( Λ ω [φ,φ H(t) ] H(t) +e) 1+a 2 6e 2 a 3 ( φ 2 H(t),ω +e)1+a 2 a4 φ 2+a Ĥ,ω a 5, (3.10)

14 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG where a 3, a 4 a 5 are positive constants depending only on a, r n. Then it is clear that (3.8) implies: on \Σ. ( t )log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e) a 3( φ 2 H(t),ω +e)a 2 a4 φ 2+a Ĥ,ω a 5 2 Ric ω ω, (3.11) In the following, we denote: For any b > 1, we have: ( t )fb = bf b 1 ( t )f +b(b 1) f 2 ωf b 2 f = log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e). (3.12) a 3 bf b 1 ( φ 2 H(t),ω +e)a 2 a4 bf b 1 φ 2+a Ĥ,ω (a 5 +2 Ric ω ω )bf b 1 +b(b 1) f 2 ω fb 2. Choosing a cut-off function ϕ δ with ϕ δ (x) = { 1, x \B2δ (Σ), 0, x B δ (Σ), where B δ = {x d ω (x,σ) < δ}, integrating by parts, we have ϕ 4 t δf bωn = ϕ 4 δ( t )fbωn + 4ϕ 3 δ ϕ δ f bωn a 3 bϕ 4 δf b 1 ( φ 2 ωn H(t),ω +e)a 2 a 4 bϕ 4 δf b 1 φ 2+a ω n Ĥ,ω (a 5 +2 Ric ω ω )bϕ 4 δf b 1ωn + b(b 1)ϕ 4 δ f 2 ωf b 2ωn 4bϕ 3 δ ϕ δ ω f ω f b 1ωn a 3 bϕ 4 δ fb 1 ( φ 2 ω n H(t),ω +e)a 2 a 4 bϕ 4 δ fb 1 ( φ 2 ω n Ĥ,ω )1+a 2 (a 5 +2 Ric ω ω )bϕ 4 δf b 1ωn 4b b 1 ϕ2 δ ϕ δ 2 ωf bωn a 3 bϕ 4 δf b 1 f (b 1)B( φ 2H(t),ω +e)a 2 f (b 1)B ( ) 1 ( a 4 b (ϕ 3 δf b 1 ) pωn p (a 5 +2 Ric ω ω )bϕ 4 δ fb 1ωn 4b ( )1 ( ϕ 4 δ b 1 f2bωn 2 ϕ δ 4 ω where q = 2(1+2a) 2+a, p = 2(1+2a) 3a B = 2(1+2a) 3a C(a,b) depending only on a b such that ( φ 2 H(t),ω +e)a 2 ω n ϕ q δ ( φ 2 Ĥ,ω )1+2aωn ω n )1 2, ) 1 q (3.13) (3.14) (3.15) + 2b b 1. We can see that there exists a constant (log( φ 2 C(a,b). (3.16) H(t),ω +e))(b 1)B

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 15 Since the complex codimension of Σ is at least 3, we can choose the cut-off function ϕ δ such that ϕ δ 4 ω n ω O(δ 4 δ 6 ) = O(δ 2 ). (3.17) By (3.5), we obtain ( ) 1 ϕ 4 t δf bωn a 6 ϕ 4 δf (b 1)Bωn a 7 ϕ 4 δf (b 1)Bωn B ( ) 1 ( ) (3.18) b a 8 ϕ 4 δf (b 1)Bωn B a 9 ϕ 4 δf (b 1)Bωn (b 1)B, where a i are positive constants depending only on r,n,a,b, Ric ω ω,vol(,ω) C φ for i = 6,7,8,9. Lemma3.3. For any b > 1, there exists a constantĉb depending only on r,n,b, Ric ω ω,vol(,ω) C φ such that (log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e))bωn \Σ Ĉb (3.19) for all t 0. Proof. Suppose that ϕ4 δ fbωn (t ) = max t [0,T] ϕ4 δ fbωn (t) with t > 0. Choosing a = 1 8 in (3.20), at point t, we have 0 t t=t ϕ 4 δf bωn a 6 a 8 ( ϕ 4 δf (b 1)Bωn a 7 ϕ 4 δf (b 1)Bωn ( ) 1 B a 9 ( ) 1 ϕ 4 δf (b 1)Bωn B ϕ 4 δf (b 1)Bωn ) b (b 1)B. (3.20) Thisinequalityimpliesthatthereexistsaconstant C b dependingonlyonr,n,b, Ric ω ω,vol(,ω) C φ such that ϕ 4 δf (b 1)Bωn (t ) C b. (3.21) So we have max ϕ 4 δf bωn t [0,T] (t) C b + (log( φ 2 Ĥ,ω +e))bωn. (3.22) Noting that the last term in the above inequality is also bounded, letting δ 0, we obtain the estimate (3.19). then By the heat equation (1.11), we have t log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e) = t φ 2 H(t),ω φ 2 H(t),ω +e = 2 [Φ(H(t),ω),φ],φ H(t) φ 2 H(t),ω +e 2 Φ(H(t),ω) H(t), By (2.11), we have (3.23) (log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e)) 2 Ric ω ω 2 Φ(H(t),ω) H(t). (3.24) max Φ(H(t),ω) H(t)(x) C K (τ)ĉ1(t n +1). (3.25) x \Σ

16 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG So there exists a positive constant C (t 1 0 ) depending only on t 1 0 Ric ω ω such that on \Σ, for t t 0 > 0. Then, we have C (t0 1 ) ϕ 2 δ fωn = = (log( φ 2 H(t),ω +e)) C (t 1 0 ) (3.26) ϕ 2 δ f fωn div(ϕ 2 δ f f)ωn (ϕ δ f) 2 ω for t t 0 > 0. By (3.17) (3.19), we obtain f 2 ω n ω = lim \Σ δ 0 lim (ϕ δ f) 2 ω n ω δ 0 lim δ 0 C (t 1 0 ) Ĉb ω n + \B 2δ (Σ) C (t 1 0 )ϕ2 δ f + ϕ δ 2 ω f2ωn (ϕ 2 δ f) fωn ϕ δ 2 ω f2ωn f 2 ω n ω (3.27) (3.28) for t t 0 > 0. This implies f W 1,2 (,ω) f satisfies the elliptic inequality f C (t0 1 ) globally on in weakly sense for t t 0 > 0. By the stard elliptic estimate (see Theorem 8.17 in [14]), we can show that f L () for all t t 0 > 0, the L -norm depending on C (t0 1 ), the Lb -norm (i.e. Ĉ b ) the geometry of (,ω), i.e. we have the following proposition. Proposition 3.4. Along the heat flow (1.11), there exists a positive constant Ĉφ depending only on r,n,t 1 0,C φ the geometry of (,ω) such that for all t t 0 > 0. sup φ 2 H(t),ω Ĉφ (3.29) \Σ Recalling the Chern-Weil formula in [32] (Proposition 3.4) using Fatou s lemma, we have 4π 2 (2c 2 (E) c 1 (E) c 1 (E)) ωn 2 (n 2)! =lim4π 2 ǫ 0 =lim ǫ 0 =lim ǫ 0 \Σ (2c 2 (E) c 1 (E) c 1 (E)) ωn 2 ǫ (n 2)! tr(f Hǫ(t),φ F Hǫ(t),φ) ωn 2 ǫ (n 2)! ( F Hǫ(t),φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Λ ωǫ F Hǫ(t),φ 2 H ǫ(t) )ωn ǫ ( F H(t),φ 2 H(t),ω 1Λ ω F H(t),φ 2 H(t) )ωn (3.30) for t > 0. Here, over a non-projective compact complex manifold, the Chern classes of a coherent sheaf can be defined by the classes of Atiyah-Hirzenbruch ([2], see [16] for details).

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 17 The L estimate of φ 2 H(t),ω, (2.11) the above inequality imply that F H(t) H(t),ω is square integrable Λ ω F H(t) H(t) is uniformly bounded, i.e. we have the following corollary. Corollary 3.5. Let H(t) be a solution of the heat flow (1.11), then H(t) must be an admissible Hermitian metric on E for every t > 0. 4. Approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure Let H ǫ (t) be the long time solution of (1.10) H(t) be the long time solution of (1.11). We set: exps(t) = h(t) = Ĥ 1 H(t), (4.1) exps(t 1,t 2 ) = h(t 1,t 2 ) = H 1 (t 1 )H(t 2 ), (4.2) exps ǫ (t 1,t 2 ) = h ǫ (t 1,t 2 ) = H 1 ǫ (t 1 )H ǫ (t 2 ). (4.3) By Lemma 3.1 in [32], we have ωǫ log(trh+trh 1 ) 2 Λ ωǫ (F H,φ ) H 2 Λ ω (F K,φ ) K, (4.4) where exps = h = K 1 H. By the uniform lower bound of Green functions G ǫ (2.11) the inequalities (2.26), we have S ǫ (t 1,t 2 ) L ( ) C 1 S ǫ (t 1,t 2 ) L 1 (,ω ǫ) +C 2(t 1 0 ) (4.5) for 0 < t 0 t 1 t 2, where C 1 is a constant depending only on the rank r C 2 (t 1 0 ) is a constant depending only on C K, C G t 1 0. By limiting, we also have S(t 1,t 2 ) L (\Σ) C 1 S(t 1,t 2 ) L 1 (\Σ,ω) +C 2 (t 1 0 ) (4.6) for 0 < t 0 t 1 t 2. On the other h, (2.25) (2.26) imply that r 1 2 S(t1,t 2 ) L1 (\Σ,ω) Vol(,ω)log(2r) t2 ω n 1Λ ω F H(s),φ λid E H(s) ds t 1 \Σ Ĉ1(t 2 t 1 ). So, we know that the metrics H(t 1 ) H(t 2 ) are mutually bounded each other on E \Σ. (E \Σ,φ) can be seen as a Higgs bundle on the non-compact Kähler manifold ( \ Σ,ω). Let s recall Donaldson s functional defined on the space P 0 of Hermitian metrics on the Higgs bundle (E \Σ,φ) (see Section 5 in [32] for details), µ ω (K,H) = \Σ (4.7) tr(s 1Λ ω F K,φ )+ Ψ(S)(D φs),d φs K ω n, (4.8) where Ψ(x,y) = (x y) 2 (e y x (y x) 1), exps = K 1 H. Since we have known that Λ ω F H(t),φ H(t) is uniformly bounded for t t 0 > 0, it is easy to see that H(t) (for every t > 0) belongs to the definition space P 0. By Lemma 7.1 in [32], we have a formula for the derivative with respect to t of Donaldson s functional, d dt µ(h(t 1),H(t)) = 2 \Σ Φ(H(t),φ) 2 H(t) ω n. (4.9)

18 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG Proposition 4.1. Let H(t) be the long time solution of (1.11). If the reflexive Higgs sheaf (E, φ) is ω-semi-stable, then 1Λ ω F H(t),φ λid E 2 ω n H(t) 0, (4.10) as t +. \Σ Proof. We prove (4.10) by contradiction. If not, by the monotonicity of Λ ω (F H(t),φ ) λid L 2, we can suppose that lim 1Λ ω F H(t),φ λid E 2 ω n t + H(t) = C > 0. (4.11) By (4.9), we have µ ω (H(t 0 ),H(t)) = t t 0 \Σ for all 0 < t 0 t. Then it is clear that (4.7) implies lim inf t + Λ ω F H(s),φ λid E 2 ω n H(s) ds C (t t 0 ) (4.12) µ ω (H(t 0 ),H(t)) r 1 C 2. (4.13) S(t 0,t) L 1 (\Σ,ω) Ĉ 1 By the definition of Donaldson s functional (4.8), we must have a sequence t i + such that On the other h, it is easy to check that S(1,t i ) L 1 (\Σ,ω) +. (4.14) S(t 1,t 3 ) H(t1) r( S(t 1,t 2 ) H(t1) + S(t 2,t 3 ) H(t2)) (4.15) for all 0 t 1,t 2,t 3. Then, by (4.6), we have lim S(t 0,t i ) L1 (\Σ,ω) +, (4.16) i S(t 0,t) L (\Σ) r S(1,t) L (\Σ) +r S(t 0,1) L (\Σ) r 2 C 3 ( S(t 0,t) L 1 + S(t 0,1) L 1)+r S(t 0,1) L (\Σ) +rc 4 (4.17) for all 0 < t 0 t, where C 3 C 4 are uniform constants depending only on r, C K C G. Set u i (t 0 ) = S(t 0,t i ) 1 L S(t 1 0,t i ) S H(t0)(E \Σ ), where S H(t0)(E \Σ ) = {η Ω 0 ( \ Σ,End(E \Σ )) η H(t0) = η}, then u i (t 0 ) L 1 = 1. By (2.15) (4.5), we have trs(t 0,t i ) ωn = 0, (4.18) so \Σ \Σ tru i (t 0 ) ωn = 0. (4.19) Bythe inequalities(4.13), (4.14), (4.17), thelemma5.4in[32], wecanseethat, bychoosing a subsequence which we also denote by u i (t 0 ), we have u i (t 0 ) u (t 0 ) weakly in L 2 1, where the limit u (t 0 ) satisfies: u (t 0 ) L 1 = 1, tr(u (t 0 )) ωn = 0 u (t 0 ) L r 2 C 3. (4.20)

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 19 Furthermore, if Υ : R R R is a positive smooth function such that Υ(λ 1,λ 2 ) < (λ 1 λ 2 ) 1 whenever λ 1 > λ 2, then tr(u (t 0 ) ω n 1Λ ω (F H(t0),φ))+ Υ(u (t 0 ))( φ u (t 0 )), φ u (t 0 ) H(t0) \Σ r 1 2 C Ĉ 1. (4.21) Since u (t 0 ) L Λ ω (F H(t0),φ) L 1 are uniformly bounded (independent of t 0 ), (4.21) implies that: there exists a uniform constant Č independent of t 0 such that φ u (t 0 ) 2 ω n H(t 0) Č. (4.22) \Σ From Lemma 2.2, we see that Ĥ H(t 0) are locally mutually bounded each other. By choosing a subsequence, we have u (t 0 ) u weakly in local L 2 1 outside Σ as t 0 0, where u satisfies tr(u ) ωn = 0, u L 1 = 1. (4.23) Since 1Λ ωǫ F Hǫ(t),φ Hǫ(t) L for t > 0, by the uniform upper bound of the heat kernels (2.1), we have ω n 1Λ ω F H(t),φ H(t) B ω1 (δ)\σ =lim ǫ 0 B ωǫ n 1Λ ωǫ F Hǫ(t),φ Hǫ(t) ω1 (δ) lim ǫ 0 B ω1 (δ) =lim ǫ 0 B ω1 (δ) lim ǫ 0 + K ǫ (x,y,t) 1Λ ωǫ FĤ,φ Ĥ(y) ωn ǫ(y) ( ( + \B ω1 (2δ) B ω1 (2δ) B ω1 (2δ) B ω1 (δ)( \B ω1 (2δ) 1Λ ω FĤ,φ Ĥ B ω1 (2δ)\Σ K ǫ (x,y,t) 1Λ ωǫ FĤ,φ Ĥ(y) ωn ǫ(y) ωn ǫ(x) ) Kǫ (x,y,t) 1Λ ωǫ FĤ,φ Ĥ(y) ωn ǫ(y) C K (τ)t n exp ( d ω ǫ (x,y) (4+τ)t ω n +C K (τ)t n exp ( a(δ) ) Volω1 (B ω1 (δ)) (4+τ)t ωn ǫ(x) ) ω n ǫ (x) ) 1Λωǫ FĤ,φ Ĥ(y) ωn ǫ(y) ) ω n ǫ (x) ω n 1Λ ω FĤ,φ Ĥ. (4.24) By (4.24) the uniform bound of u (t 0 ) L, we have lim tr(u (t 0 ) 1Λ ω F t H(t0),φ) ωn = tr(u 1Λω FĤ,φ ) ωn 0 0. (4.25) Let s denote SĤ(E \Σ ) = {η Ω 0 ( \Σ,End(E \Σ )) η Ĥ = η}. (4.26) û (t 0 ) = (h(t 0 )) 1 2 u (t 0 ) (h(t 0 )) 1 2. (4.27)

20 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG It is easy to check that: û (t 0 ) SĤ(E \Σ ) û (t 0 ) Ĥ = u (t 0 ) H(t0). Furthermore, we have: Lemma 4.2. For any compact domain Ω \ Σ any positive smooth function Υ : R R R, we have lim Υ(u (t 0 ))( φ u (t 0 )), φ u (t 0 ) t H(t0) Υ(û (t 0 ))( φ û (t 0 )), φ û (t 0 ) Ĥ ωn = 0. 0 0 Ω (4.28) Proof. At each point x on Ω, we choose a unitary basis {e i } r i=1 with respect to the metric H(t 0 ), such that u (t 0 )(e i ) = λ i e i. Then, {ê i = (h(t 0 )) 1 2e i } is a unitary basis with respect to the metric Ĥ û (t 0 )(ê i ) = λ i ê i. Set: then φ u (t 0 )(e i ) = ( φ u (t 0 )) j i e j, φ û (t 0 )(ê i ) = ( φ û (t 0 )) j iêj, (4.29) r φ u (t 0 ) 2 H(t = 0),ω ( φ u (t 0 )) j i,( φu (t 0 )) j i ω, (4.30) i,j=1 Υ(u (t 0 ))( φ u (t 0 )), φ u (t 0 ) H(t0) = r Υ(λ i,λ j )( φ u (t 0 )) j i,( φu (t 0 )) j i ω, (4.31) i,j=1 Υ(û (t 0 ))( φ û (t 0 ))(ê i ) = Υ(û (t 0 ))( φ û (t 0 )), φ û (t 0 ) Ĥ = By the definition, we have r Υ(λ i,λ j )( φ û (t 0 )) j iêj, (4.32) j=1 r Υ(λ i,λ j )( φ û (t 0 )) j i,( φû (t 0 )) j i ω. (4.33) i,j=1 φ û (t 0 ) = (h(t 0 )) 1 2 φ u (t 0 ) (h(t 0 )) 1 2 + φ (h(t 0 )) 1 2 u (t 0 ) (h(t 0 )) 1 2 (h(t 0 )) 1 2 u (t 0 ) (h(t 0 )) 1 2 φ (h(t 0 )) 1 2 (h(t0 )) 1 2 = (h(t 0 )) 1 2 φ u (t 0 ) (h(t 0 )) 1 2 + φ (h(t 0 )) 1 2 (h(t0 )) 1 2û (t 0 ) û (t 0 ) φ (h(t 0 )) 1 2 (h(t0 )) 1 2, (4.34) ( φ û (t 0 )) j i = ( φu (t 0 )) j i +(λ i λ j ){ φ (h(t 0 ) 1 2 (h(t0 )) 1 2 } j i, (4.35) where φ (h(t 0 ) 1 2 (h(t0 ) 1 2 )(êi ) = ( φ (h(t 0 ) 1 2 (h(t0 ) 1 2 ) j iêj. By (4.20), (4.31), (4.33) (4.35), we have Υ(û (t 0 ))( φ û (t 0 )), φ û (t 0 ) Ĥ Υ(u (t 0 ))( φ u (t 0 )), φ u (t 0 ) H(t0) 8(r 2 C 3 ) 2 (B (Υ))( φ u (t 0 ) H(t0) φ (h(t 0 ) 1 2 (h(t0 )) 1 2 Ĥ + φ (h(t 0 ) 1 2 (h(t0 )) 1 2 2Ĥ), (4.36) where B (Υ) = max [ r2 C 3,r 2 C 3] 2 Υ. Since H(t) are smooth on \Σ [0,1] h(t) Id E locally in C -topology as t 0, it is easy to check that sup( (h(t 0 )) 1 2 φ (h(t 0 )) 1 2 Ĥ,ω + φ (h(t 0 )) 1 2 (h(t0 )) 1 2 Ĥ,ω ) C Ω (t 0 ), (4.37) x Ω where C Ω (t 0 ) 0 as t 0 0. On the other h, φ u (t 0 ) H(t0),ω are uniform bounded in L 2, so (4.36) (4.37) imply (4.28).

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 21 By (4.21), (4.25) (4.28), we have that given any compact domain Ω \Σ any positive number ǫ > 0, tr(u 1Λω FĤ,φ) ωn \Σ + ω n Υ(û (t 0 ))( φ û (t 0 )), φ û (t 0 ) Ĥ r C 1 2 + ǫ Ω Ĉ 1 (4.38) for small t 0. As we know that û (t 0 ) u in L 2 (Ω), û (t 0 ) Ĥ is uniformly bounded in L φ û (t 0 ) Ĥ,ω is uniformly bounded in L 2 (Ω). By the same argument as that in Simpson s paper (Lemma 5.4 in [32]), we have \Σ tr(u 1Λω FĤ,φ ) ωn + Υ 1 2 (u )( φ u ) 2 L q (Ω) C r 1 2 +2 ǫ (4.39) Ĉ 1 for any q < 2 any ǫ. Since ǫ, q < 2 Ω are arbitrary, we get ω n C tr(u 1Λω FĤ,φ )+ Υ(u )( φ u ), φ u Ĥ r 1 2. (4.40) Ĉ 1 \Σ By the above inequality the Lemma 5.5 in [32], we can see that the eigenvalues of u are constant almost everywhere. Let λ 1 < < λ l denote the distinct eigenvalue of u. Since tru ωn = 0 u L 1 = 1, we must have l 2. For any 1 α < l, define function P α : R R such that { 1, x λα, P α = (4.41) 0, x λ α+1. Set π α = P α (u ), Simpson (p887 in [32]) proved that: (1) π α L 2 1 ( \Σ,ω,Ĥ); (2) πα 2 = π α = πα Ĥ ; (3) (Id E π α ) π α = 0; (4) (Id E π α )[φ,π α ] = 0. By Uhlenbeck Yau s regularity statement of L 2 1 -subbundle ([35]), π α represent a saturated coherent Higgs sub-sheaf E α of (E,φ) on the open set \Σ. Since the singularity set Σ is co-dimension at least 3, by Siu s extension theorem ([34]), we know that E α admits a coherent analytic extension Ẽα. By Serre s result ([30]), we get the direct image i E α under the inclusion i : \Σ is coherent. So, every E α can be extended to the whole as a saturated coherent Higgs sub-sheaf of (E,φ), which will also be denoted by E α for simplicity. By the Chern-Weil formula (1.13) (Proposition 4.1 in [10]) the above condition (4), we have Set deg ω (E α ) = = \Σ \Σ tr(π α 1Λω FĤ) π α 2 ω n Ĥ,ω tr(π α 1Λω FĤ,φ ) D φ π α 2 ω n (4.42) K,ω. l 1 ν = λ l deg ω (E) (λ α+1 λ α )deg ω (E α ). (4.43) α=1

22 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG Since u = λ l Id E l 1 α=1 (λ α+1 λ α )π α \Σ tru ωn = 0, we have then l 1 λ l rank(e) (λ α+1 λ α )rank(e α ) = 0, (4.44) α=1 l 1 ν = (λ α+1 λ α )rank(e α )( deg ω (E) rank(e) deg ω (E α) ). (4.45) rank(e α ) α=1 By the argumentsimilar to the one used in Simpson s paper (P888in [32]) the inequality (4.40), we have ν = tr(u 1Λω FĤ,φ ) l 1 + (λ α+1 λ α )(dp α ) 2 (u )(D φu ),D (4.46) α=1 r 1 2 C Ĉ 1. φu Ĥ On the other h, (4.45) the semi-stability imply ν 0, so we get a contradiction. Proof of Theorem 1.1 By (2.12), we have sup 1Λ ω (F H(t+1),φ ) λid E 2 H(t+1) (x) C K x \Σ \Σ If the reflexive Higgs sheaf (E, φ) is ω-semi-stable, (4.10) implies 1Λ ω (F H(t),φ ) λid E 2 ω n H(t). (4.47) sup 1Λ ω (F H(t),φ ) λid E 2 H(t+1) (x) 0, (4.48) x \Σ ast +. Bycorollary3.5, weknowthat everyh(t) is anadmissible Hermitianmetric. Then we get an approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure on a semi-stable reflexive Higgs sheaf. By choosing a subsequence ǫ 0, we have H ǫ (t) converge to H(t) in local C -topology. Applying Fatou s lemma we obtain 4π 2 (2c 2 (E) r 1 c 1 (E) c 1 (E)) ωn 2 r (n 2)! =lim4π 2 ǫ 0 (2c 2 (E) r 1 r =lim tr(f ǫ 0 H ǫ(t),φ F H ǫ(t),φ =lim ǫ 0 c 1 (E) c 1 (E)) ωn 2 ǫ (n 2)! ωn 2 ǫ ) (n 2)! FH ǫ(t),φ 2 H ǫ(t),ω ǫ Λ ωǫ FH ω ǫ(t),φ 2 ǫ n H ǫ(t) ω n FH(t),φ 2 H(t),ω \Σ \Σ 1Λ ω F H(t),φ λid E 1 r tr( 1Λ ω F H(t),φ λid E )Id E 2 ω n H(t) (4.49)

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 23 for t > 0, where FH,φ is the trace free part of F H,φ. Let t +, then (4.10) implies the following Bogomolov type inequality (2c 2 (E) r 1 c 1 (E) c 1 (E)) ωn 2 0. (4.50) r (n 2)! Now we prove that the existence of an approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure implies the semistability of (E, φ). Let s be a θ-invariant holomorphic section of a reflexive Higgs sheaf (G,θ) on a compact Kähler manifold (,ω), i.e. there exists a holomorphic 1-form η on \Σ G such that θ(s) = η s, where Σ G is the singularity set of G. Given a Hermitian metric H on G, by computing, we have 1Λω s, [θ,θ H ]s H = 1Λ ω θ H s,θ H s H 1Λ ω θs,θs H = 1Λ ω θ H s θ H s s,s H s 2,θ H s θ H s s,s H H s 2 H H 1Λ ω θ H s s,s H s 2, θ H s s,s H H s 2 H 1Λ ω φs,φs H H = θ H s θ H s s,s H s 2 2 H,ω 0, H (4.51) where we have used θ(s) = η s in the third equality. Then, we have the following Weitzenböck formula 1 2 ω s 2 H = 1Λ ω s 2 H = D 1,0 H s 2 H,ω + 1Λ ω s,f H s H = D 1,0 H s 2 H,ω s, 1Λ ω F H,θ s H 1Λ ω s,[θ,θ H ]s H D 1,0 H s 2 H,ω s, 1Λ ω F H,θ s H (4.52) on \Σ G. We suppose that the reflexive Higgs sheaf(g, θ) admits an approximate admissible Hermitian- Einstein structure, i.e. for every positive δ, there is an admissible Hermitian metric H δ such that sup 1Λ ω F Hδ,θ λ(g)id Hδ (x) < δ. (4.53) x \Σ G If deg ω G is negative, i.e. λ(g) < 0, by choosing δ small enough, we have ω s 2 H δ 2 D 1,0 H s 2 H δ,ω λ(g) s 2 H δ (4.54) on \Σ G. Since every H δ is admissible, by Theorem 2 in [6], we know that s Hδ L (). Then, the inequality (4.54) can be extended globally to the compact manifold. So, we must have s 0. (4.55) Assume that(e, φ) admits an approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure F is a saturated Higgs subsheaf of (E,φ) with rank p. Let G = p E det(f) 1, θ be a Higgs filed naturally induced on G by the Higgs field φ. One can check that (G,θ) is also a reflexive Higgs sheaf which admits an approximate Hermitian-Einstein structure with constant λ(g) = 2pπ Vol(,ω) (µ ω(e) µ ω (F)). (4.56)

24 JIAYU LI, CHUANJING ZHANG, AND XI ZHANG The inclusion F E induces a morphism det(f) p E which can be seen as a nontrivial θ-invariant holomorphic section of G. From above, we have λ(g) 0, so the reflexive sheaf (E, φ) is ω-semistable. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1. 5. Limit of ω ǫ -Hermitian-Einstein metrics Assumethatthe reflexivehiggssheaf(e,φ) isω-stable. It iswellknownthatthe pullingback Higgs bundle (E,φ) is ω ǫ -stable for sufficiently small ǫ. By Simpson s result ([32]), there exists an ω ǫ -Hermitian-Einstein metric H ǫ for every sufficiently small ǫ. In this section, we prove that, by choosing a subsequence rescaling it, H ǫ converges to an ω-hermitian-einstein metric H in local C -topology outside the exceptional divisor Σ. As above, let Ĥ be a fixed smooth Hermitian metric on the bundle E over. By taking a constant on H ǫ, we can suppose that ωǫ n trŝǫ = logdet(ĥǫ) ωn ǫ = 0. (5.1) where exp(ŝǫ) = ĥǫ = Ĥ 1 H ǫ. Let H ǫ (t) be the long time solutions of the heat flow (1.10) on the Higgs bundle (E,φ) with the fixed initial metric Ĥ with respect to the Kähler metric ω ǫ. We set: exp( S ǫ (t)) = h ǫ (t) = H ǫ (t) 1 H ǫ. (5.2) By (2.15), (5.1) noting that exp(ŝǫ) = exp(s ǫ (t))exp( S ǫ (t)), we have tr S ǫ (t) ωn ǫ = logdet( h ǫ (t)) ωn ǫ = 0 (5.3) for all t 0. We first give a uniform L 1 estimate of Ŝǫ. Lemma 5.1. There exists a constant Ĉ which is independent of ǫ, such that Ŝǫ L1 (,ω := ωǫ n ǫ,ĥ) Ŝǫ Ĥ Ĉ (5.4) for all 0 < ǫ 1. Proof. We prove (5.4) by contradiction. If not, there exists a subsequence ǫ i 0 such that lim i Ŝǫ i L1 (,ω ǫi,ĥ). (5.5) By (2.26), (2.27) (4.15), we also have lim S ǫi (t) i L 1 (,ω ǫi,h ǫi (t)), (5.6) forallt > 0. By(4.4), theuniformlowerboundofgreenfunctionsg ǫ (2.11)theinequalities (2.26), we have S ǫ (1) L (,H ǫ(1)) `C 1 S ǫ (1) L1 (,ω ǫ,h ǫ(1)) + `C 2, (5.7) where `C 1 `C 2 are uniform constants independent of ǫ t. Using the inequality (4.15) again, we have S ǫ (t) L (,H ǫ(t)) r2 `C1 ( S ǫ (t) L1 (,ω ǫ,h ǫ(t)) + S ǫ(t,1) L1 (,ω ǫ,h ǫ(1)) ) +r S ǫ (t,1) L (,H ǫ(1)) +r`c 2 (5.8)

SEI-STABLE HIGGS SHEAVES AND BOGOOLOV TYPE INEQUALITY 25 for all t > 0. Set ũ i (t) = S ǫi (t) 1 S L 1 (,ω ǫi,h ǫi (t)) ǫi (t), then ũ i (t) L 1 (,ω ǫ,h ǫ(t)) = 1. By (5.3) (5.8), we have tru i (t) ωn ǫ = 0 ũ i (t) L (,H ǫi (t)) C(t). Since H ǫ(t) H(t) locally in C -topology ω ǫ are locally uniform bounded outside Σ, by the Lemma 5.4 in [32], we can show that, by choosing a subsequence which we also denote by ũ i (t), we have ũ i (t) ũ(t) weakly in L 2 1,loc ( \ Σ,ω,H(t)), where the limit ũ(t) satisfies: ũ(t) L1 ( \ Σ,ω,H(t)) = 1, \ Σ tr(ũ(t))ωn = 0. By (5.8), we have ũ(t) L ( \ Σ,ω,H(t)) r2 `C1. (5.9) Furthermore, if Υ : R R R is a positive smooth function such that Υ(λ 1,λ 2 ) < (λ 1 λ 2 ) 1 whenever λ 1 > λ 2, then tr(ũ(t) ω n 1Λ ω (F H(t),φ ))+ Υ(ũ(t))( φ ũ(t)), φ ũ(t) H(t) \ Σ (5.10) 0. Since \Σ is biholomorphic to \ Σ, E is locally free on \Σ, ũ(t) can be seen as an L 2 1 section of End(E). By the same argument as that in section 4 (the proof of (4.40)), we can show that, by choosing a subsequence t 0, we have ũ(t) ũ 0 weakly in local L 2 1, where ũ 0 satisfies tr(ũ 0 ) ωn = 0, ũ 0 L 1 (\Σ,ω,Ĥ) = 1, ũ(t) L (\Σ,Ĥ) r2 `C1. (5.11) \Σ ω n tr(ũ 0 1Λω FĤ,φ )+ Υ(ũ 0 )( φ ũ 0 ), φ ũ 0 Ĥ 0. (5.12) Now, by Simpson s trick (P888 in [32]), we can construct a saturated Higgs subsheaf F of (E,φ) with µ ω (F) µ ω (E), which contradicts with the stability of (E,φ). Proof of Theorem 1.2 Since Ŝǫ L1 (,ω ǫ, ˆ) are uniformly bounded, by (2.26), (2.27) (4.15), there also exists a uniform constant `C 3 such that By (5.7), we have S ǫ (1) L 1 (,ω ǫ,h ǫ(1)) `C 3. (5.13) S ǫ (1) L (,H ǫ(1)) `C 1 `C3 + `C 2 (5.14) for all 0 < ǫ 1. By the local estimate (2.29) in Lemma 2.3, we see that there exists a constant C 0 (δ 1 ) independent of ǫ such that Ŝǫ Ĥ(x) C 0 (δ 1 ) (5.15) for all x \B ω1 (δ) all 0 < ǫ 1. Since H ǫ satisfies the ω ǫ -Hermitian-Einstein equation (1.4), by the same argument as that in Lemmas 2.4 2.5 in section 2, we have uniform higher-order estimates for h ǫ, i.e. there exist constants C k (δ 1 ) independent of ǫ, such that ĥǫ C k+1,α, \B ω1 (2δ) C k+1 (δ 1 ) (5.16)