J. Elisenda Grigsby and Stephan Wehrli - On The Naturality of The Spectral Sequence From Khovanov Homology To Heegard Floer Homology

a
r
X
i
v
:
0
9
0
7
.
4
3
7
8
v
1

[
m
a
t
h
.
G
T
]

2
7

J
u
l

2
0
0
9
ON THE NATURALITY OF THE SPECTRAL SEQUENCE FROM
KHOVANOV HOMOLOGY TO HEEGAARD FLOER HOMOLOGY
J. ELISENDA GRIGSBY AND STEPHAN WEHRLI
Abstract. In [18], Ozsv ath-Szab o established an algebraic relationship, in the form
of a spectral sequence, between the reduced Khovanov homology of (the mirror of) a
link L S
3
and the Heegaard Floer homology of its double-branched cover. This
relationship, extended in [19] and [4], was recast, in [5], as a specic instance of a
broader connection between Khovanov and Heegaard Floertype homology theories,
using a version of Heegaard Floer homology for sutured manifolds developed by Juh asz
in [7]. In the present work we prove the naturality of the spectral sequence under certain
elementary TQFT operations, using a generalization of Juhaszs surface decomposition
theorem valid for decomposing surfaces geometrically disjoint from an imbedded framed
link.
1. Introduction
Let L S
3
be a link. There is an algebraic connection, discovered by Ozsvath and
Szab o, between the Khovanov homology [10] of L and the Heegaard Floer homology [17]
of the double-branched cover of L. Specically, in [18], Ozsvath-Szabo construct a spec-
tral sequence whose E
2
term is

Kh(L) and whose E
term is

HF((S
3
, L)). Here (and
throughout),

Kh denotes Khovanovs reduced homology [11], L denotes the mirror of L,
(A, B) denotes the double-branched cover of A branched over B, and

HF denotes the
( version of the) Heegaard Floer homology [17]. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, all
Khovanov and Heegaard Floer homology theories discussed in this paper will be considered
with coecients in Z
2
.
Later work, of Roberts in [19] and the authors in [4], placed Ozsvath-Szabos work in a
more general context, leading to:
a proof, in [4], that Khovanovs categorication, [12], of the reduced, ncolored
Jones polynomial detects the unknot whenever n 2, as well as
a new method, due to Baldwin-Plamenevskaya [2], for establishing the tightness of
certain contact structures.
In [5], we recast [18], [19], and [4] as specic instances of a broader relationship between
Khovanov- and Heegaard Floer-type homology theories, using a version of Heegaard Floer
homology for sutured manifolds developed by Juhasz in [7]. The aim of the present work
is to prove that the connection between Khovanov and Heegaard-Floer homology behaves
well under certain natural geometric operations.
In particular, let D represent an oriented disk, A an oriented annulus, and I = [0, 1] the
oriented closed unit interval. In [4] we prove the existence of a spectral sequence from the
Khovanov homology of any admissible balanced tangle, T D I, to the sutured Floer
homology of (DI, T). Here, DI is viewed as a product sutured manifold in the sense
JEG was partially supported by an NSF postdoctoral fellowship and NSF grant number DMS-0905848.
SW was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship of the Fondation Sciences Mathematiques de Paris.
1
2 J. ELISENDA GRIGSBY AND STEPHAN WEHRLI
T
F
T
Figure 1. Adjoining a trivial strand, separated from an nbalanced tangle,
T D I, by a vertical disk, F, to form an n + 1balanced tangle, T
DI.
of Gabai [3] (Denition 2.1), sutured Floer homology [7] is an invariant of balanced sutured
manifolds (see Denitions 2.1 and 2.2), and an admissible nbalanced tangle (Denition 2.4)
is a properly-imbedded 1manifold satisfying:
(1) T (D I) = , and
(2) |T (D {1})| = |T (D {0})| = n Z
0
,
where two admissible nbalanced tangles are considered equivalent if they are ambiently
isotopic through admissible nbalanced tangles. In [5], we prove the existence of a similar
spectral sequence from the Khovanov homology of a link (admissible 0balanced tangle), L,
in the product sutured manifold AI to the sutured Floer homology of (A I, L).
These spectral sequences are constructed, following [18], by associating to an enhanced
projection (diagram) of T D I (resp., L A I) a framed link, L
L
(D I, T)
(resp., L
L
(A I, L)). By counting holomorphic polygons in a particular choice of
Heegaard multi-diagram compatible with L
T
(resp., L
L
), one obtains a ltered complex,
X(L
T
) (resp., X(L
L
)), with an associated link surgeries spectral sequence whose E
2
term is
an appropriate version of Khovanov homology for T (resp., for L) and whose E
term is
the sutured Floer homology of (D I, T) (resp., of (A I, L)).
Roberts, in [20, Sec. 7], proves that the ltered quasi-isomorphism type (Denition 2.6)
of X(L
T
) (resp., X(L
L
)) is invariant of the choice of multi-diagram, and Baldwin, in [1],
proves that the ltered quasi-isomorphism type of X(L
T
) is independent of the projection
of T (resp., L), yielding, for any nbalanced tangle T D I (resp., any link L A I)
a sequence of invariants, one for every page of the link surgeries spectral sequence for L
T
(resp., L
L
).
1
In the present work, we show that these invariants behave as expected with respect to
the following standard TQFT-type operations:
(1) trivial inclusion (see Figure 1),
(2) horizontal stacking (see Figure 2), and
(3) vertical cutting (see Figure 3).
In particular, let F(T) := X(L
T
) (resp., F(L) := X(L
L
)) denote the ltered chain
complex, described above and in Notation 2.7, associated to the balanced tangle T DI
(resp., link L A I). We prove:
1
Baldwin and Roberts state their theorems only for the case where T D I is a 1balanced tangle,
but their arguments are all local, hence work equally well in our more general setting. See Remark 3.9.
KH, SFH, AND NATURALITY 3
T
1
F
T
1
+T
2
T
1
Figure 2. Stacking two (projections of) balanced tangles, T
1
, T
2
DI,
to obtain a new balanced tangle, T
1
+T
2
D I.
Cut
L AI T D I
Figure 3. Cutting a link, L AI, to obtain a balanced tangle, T DI.
Theorem 5.1. (Trivial inclusion) Let T DI be a balanced tangle in the product sutured
manifold D I, and let T
D I be the tangle obtained from T by adjoining a trivial

strand separated from T by a properly-imbedded Iinvariant disk, F, as in Figure 1. Then
F(T) = F(T
).
Theorem 5.2. (Stacking) Let T
i
(D I)
i
, for i = 1, 2, be two nbalanced tangles, and
let T
1
+ T
2
D I be any nbalanced tangle obtained by stacking a projection, P(T
1
), of
T
1
on top of a projection, P(T
2
), of T
2
as in Figure 2. Then
F(T
1
+T
2
) = F(T
1
) F(T
2
).
Theorem 5.8. (Cutting) [5, Thm. 3.1] Let L A I be a link, and let T D I be any
balanced tangle admitting a projection whose closure in A I is a projection of L. Then
F(T) F(L).
In the above, F
1
= F
2
means that F
1
is ltered quasi-isomorphic (Denition 2.6) to
F
2
, and F
1
F
2
means that F
1
is ltered quasi-isomorphic to a direct summand of F
2
.
These naturality theorems follow from an extension of work of Juhasz, who proves, in
[8], that the Floer homology of a sutured manifold behaves nicely in the presence of ad-
missible decomposing surfaces (Denition 4.1), properly-imbedded surfaces with boundary
intersecting the sutures in a controlled fashion. In particular, an admissible decomposing
surface, S, induces a splitting of the sutured Floer chain complex, and performing a surface
decomposition (Denition 4.1) along S picks out a direct summand of the splitting.
Using degeneration techniques suggested to us by Robert Lipshitz, we prove a generalized
version of Juhaszs surface decomposition theorem, applicable to ltered chain complexes
arising from sutured multi-diagrams. More precisely:
Theorem 4.5. Let L (Y, ) be a framed link in a strongly-balanced sutured manifold
(Denition 2.2), and let S (Y, ) be a connected decomposing surface satisfying:
(1) S L = , and
(2) for every component V of R() the closed components of the intersection V S
consist of parallel oriented boundary-coherent curves (Denition 4.4).
Let (Y
) be the sutured manifold obtained by decomposing along S and L
(Y
)
the induced image of L. If X(L) (resp., X(L
)) is the ltered complex associated to L (resp.,

L
), then
X(L
) X(L).
The paper is organized as follows:
In Section 2, we x notation.
In Section 3, we discuss splitting of the link surgeries spectral sequence in the pres-
ence of a decomposing surface disjoint from the link.
In Section 4, we prove the surface decomposition theorem for sutured multi-diagrams
(Theorem 4.5).
In Section 5, we prove the naturality results (Theorems 5.1, 5.2, and 5.8). In this
last section, we also discuss the relationship between the stacking operation and a
generalized version of the Murasugi sum.
Acknowledgments: We thank John Baldwin, Matt Hedden, Nathan Habegger, Andr as
Juhasz, Mikhail Khovanov, Rob Kirby, Robert Lipshitz, Peter Ozsvath, Lawrence Roberts,
and Liam Watson for interesting conversations. We are particularly indebted to Robert
Lipshitz for providing us with both the key idea in the proof of Theorem 4.5 and extremely
valuable feedback on a preliminary draft. A portion of this work was completed while
the second author was a visiting postdoctoral fellow at Columbia University, supported
by a Swiss NSF fellowship for prospective researchers. We are grateful to the Columbia
mathematics department for its hospitality.
2. Definitions and Notation Conventions
We shall assume familiarity with [4] and [5], where most relevant background material
and notation is collected. See, in particular:
[4, Sec. 2], which contains necessary denitions and results related to sutured man-
ifolds and sutured Floer homology collected from [3], [7], and [8];
[4, Sec. 4], which develops Ozsvath-Szabos link surgeries spectral sequence ([18])
for framed links in sutured manifolds;
[4, Sec. 5] (resp, [5, Sec. 2]), which explains how to associate to an admissible
balanced tangle, T (resp., link L) in the product sutured manifold, D I (resp,
A I), two chain complexes and a spectral sequence from the rst to the second,
one arising from a Khovanov-type construction and the other arising from Juhaszs
Heegaard Floer-type construction applied to (D I, T) (resp., (A I, L)).
We repeat the following denitions and establish the following notation for the conve-
nience of the reader:
Denition 2.1. [3] A sutured manifold (Y, ) is a compact, oriented 3manifold with bound-
ary Y along with a set Y of pairwise disjoint annuli A() and tori T(). The interior
of each component of A() contains a suture, an oriented simple closed curve which is
homologically nontrivial in A(). The union of the sutures is denoted s().
Every component of R() = Y Int() is assigned an orientation compatible with the
oriented sutures. Let R
+
() (resp., R
()) denote those components of R() whose normal

vectors point out of (resp., into) Y .
Denition 2.2. [7, Defn. 2.2] A sutured manifold (Y, ) is said to be balanced if (R
+
) =
(R
), and the maps

0
()
0
(Y ) and
0
(Y )
0
(Y ) are surjective.
2
A sutured manifold (Y, ) is said to be strongly balanced if for each component F of Y ,
(F R
+
()) = (F R
().
Denition 2.3. A product sutured manifold is a sutured manifold of the form (FI, FI),
where F is an oriented surface with F = and I = [0, 1] is the closed unit interval.
Denition 2.4. [4, Defn. 5.1-5.2] Let F be an oriented surface with F = , and let
(F I, F I) be the associated product sutured manifold, with F
+
:= F {1} (resp.,
F
:= F {0}).
An admissible nbalanced tangle, T F I is (any representative of) an equivalence
class of properly-imbedded (unoriented) 1manifolds satisfying
T (F I) Int(F
+
) Int(F
),
T
1
, T
2
are equivalent if they can be connected by an ambient isotopy acting trivially
on F I,
|T F
+
| = |T F
| = n Z
0
.
We will often refer to 0balanced tangles as links.
Let D represent an oriented disk and A an oriented annulus. In the present work, we will
focus on admissible balanced tangles T DI and links L A I.
Notation 2.5. Let F be a ltered chain complex. We will denote by ss(F) the spectral
sequence induced by F and E
i
(F) its ith page.
Denition 2.6. Let F
1
, F
2
be two ltered chain complexes. We shall say that F
1
, F
2
are
ltered quasi-isomorphic if there exists a third ltered chain complex, F
, and ltered chain

maps
j
: F
j
F
,
such that
j
: E
i
(F
j
) E
i
(F
)
is an isomorphism for all i Z
+
, j = 1, 2.
If F
1
and F
2
are ltered quasi-isomorphic, we shall say
F
1
= F
2
.
2
The equivalence of this denition to the original denition in [7] is immediate.
Notation 2.7. Let D denote an oriented disk, A an oriented annulus, and I = [0, 1] the
oriented closed unit interval.
Let T D I (resp., L A I) be an admissible balanced tangle (resp., link) in
the product sutured manifold D I (resp., A I), and let L
T
(D I, T) (resp.,
L
L
(AI, L)) be its associated surgery link in the double-branched cover, constructed
as in [4, Sec. 5] (resp., [5, Sec. 2]) by taking the preimage of simple arcs at each crossing of
the projection of T DI R
3
to the xz plane (resp., of L A I to A).
We will denote by F(T) (resp., F(L)) the ltered complex inducing the link surgeries
spectral sequence associated to L
T
(resp., L
L
). Recall that E
2
(F(T)) (resp., E
2
(F(L))) is
an appropriate version of the Khovanov homology of T (resp., L) and E
(F(T)) (resp.,
E
(F(L)) is SFH((DI, T)) (resp., SFH((AI, L)). Note that F(T) (resp., F(L))
is well-dened, up to ltered quasi-isomorphism (see Remark 3.9).
In addition, we note:
(1) Unless explicitly stated otherwise, every sutured manifold encountered in the present
paper may be assumed to be strongly balanced with no toroidal sutures (i.e., T() =
). Each sutured manifold will furthermore be endowed with a Riemannian metric,
along with a canonical unit vector eld along Y , denoted v
0
(Notation 3.1).
(2) If (Y, ) is a standard sutured manifold of one of the types describe in [4, Ex.
2.5-2.7] or obtained from such a sutured manifold by taking a cyclic branched cover
over an admissible, properly imbedded 1manifold as described in [4, Defn. 2.11],
we will sometimes omit reference to in the notation.
(3) SFH(Y ) will denote the sutured Floer homology [7] of (Y, ), and SFH(Y ; s) will
denote the sutured Floer homology of (Y, ) in the Spin
c
structure s. Recall that
a Spin
c
structure on a sutured manifold is a homology class of unit vector elds on
(Y, ), all of which agree with v
0
on Y (see Denition 3.2). SFH(Y ) is the homol-
ogy of any chain complex, CFH(Y ), obtained by applying the standard Heegaard
Floer construction to the two half-dimensional tori, T
, T
Sym
d
(), associated
to a balanced Heegaard diagram, (, , ), for (Y, ). In particular, generators of
CFH(Y ) are elements x T
. See [7] for more details.

3. Splitting the Link Surgeries Spectral Sequence
In [4, Sec. 4] (following [18, Sec. 4]), it was proved that an oriented, framed link
L = L
1
. . . L
in a balanced, sutured manifold (Y, ) induces a link surgeries spectral sequence which
converges to SFH(Y, ), the sutured Floer homology of (Y, ). In this section, we prove
that this spectral sequence splits as a direct sum of spectral sequences in the presence of
a properly-imbedded surface (S, S) (Y, Y ) satisfying L S = . This generalizes [19,
Sec. 7], which treats the case of a Seifert surface in a sutured knot complement.
3.1. Sutured multi-diagrams, Spin
c
structures, and Alexander gradings. In order
to set up the statement of the result, we recall some denitions.
Notation 3.1. [7, Not. 3.1] Let v
0
be a non-zero vector eld along Y that points into Y
along R
(), points out of Y along R

+
(), and on is the gradient of the height function
s() I I.
Denition 3.2. [7, Sec. 4] A Spin
c
structure, s, on a sutured manifold, (Y, ) is a homology
class of nowhere-vanishing vector elds on Y , all agreeing with v
0
on Y . Two non-vanishing
vector elds are said to be homologous if, away from nitely many points in Int(Y ), they
are homotopic through non-vanishing vector elds, rel Y . The set of Spin
c
structures on
(Y, ) will be denoted Spin
c
(Y, ).
Denition 3.3. [8, Defn. 3.6] If s Spin
c
(Y, ), and t is a trivialization of v
0
, then c
1
(s, t)
is the relative Euler class of (v
0
)
with respect to t.
Remark 3.4. Note that if (Y, ) is strongly-balanced, then (v
0
)
is trivializable ([8, Prop.

3.4]).
With these notions in place, we see that a properly-imbedded surface, (S, S) (Y, Y ),
in a balanced, sutured 3manifold, (Y, ), induces a splitting of any chain complex, CFH(Y ),
used to compute SFH(Y ). In particular, let [S] H
2
(Y, Y ; Z) denote the homology class
of S and dene:
s
k
(S) := {s Spin
c
(Y, ) | c
1
(s, t), [S] = 2k.}
Subject to the map s : T
Spin
c
(Y, ) dened in [7, Sec. 4] (following [17,
Sec. 2.6]), [S] endows the generators of CFH(Y ) with a
1
2
Zgrading, which we will call the
Alexander
S
grading, or A
S
grading, for short. In particular, if x T
is a generator
of CFH(Y ), then we dene
A
S
(x) :=
1
2
c
1
(s(x), t), [S].
Since the dierential on the complex is Spin
c
-structure preserving, it is, in particular, A
S
grading preserving. Hence, [S] induces a decomposition of SFH(Y ):

SFH(Y ) =
k
1
2
Z
SFH(Y ; s
k
(S)).
In other words,
A
S
(x) = k s(x) s
k
(S).
Remark 3.5. Gradings induced on sutured Floer chain complex generators by properly-
imbedded surfaces were dened by Juhasz in [9, Sec. 4]. Note that changing the trivialization
induces an overall shift in the A
S
gradings by half the rotation number around S of the
new trivialization with respect to the old, by [9, Lem. 3.11].
Now, suppose L = L
1
. . . L
is an oriented, framed link in a sutured manifold (Y, ).

Denote by (
1
, . . . ,
) the tuple of framings and (

1
, . . . ,
) the tuple of meridians.

Then to each multi-framing,
I = (m
1
, . . . , m
) {0, 1, }
,
in the sense of [18, Sec. 4], we can associate a sutured manifold, Y
I
, obtained by doing m
i
framed surgery on L
i
for each i = 1, . . . , . Here means no surgery, 0 means
i
framed
surgery, and 1 means (
i
+
i
)framed surgery.
Beginning with the data of a bouquet La
1
. . . a
(where a
i
is an embedded arc in Y
whose interior is disjoint form L and from a
j
for j = i, and which connects a point on L
i
to
a point on R
+
()), we can construct a sutured Heegaard diagram (, ,
I
) representing a
sutured manifold, Y (I), homeomorphic to Y
I
, as follows. Let
(, {
1
, . . . ,
d
}, {
+1
, . . .
d
})
be a sutured Heegaard diagram for Y L
, where
L
:= N(L a
1
. . . a
)
is a regular neighborhood of the bouquet, and let
1
, . . . ,
(Y L
) be disjoint simple
closed curves specifying the multi-framing I = (m
1
. . . , m
). If we set (
I
)
i
:=
i
for i
and (
I
)
i
:=
i
for < i d, then (, ,
I
) is a Heegaard diagram representing the
sutured manifold, Y (I), obtained from Y L
by attaching 3-dimensional 2-handles along

the curves
i
Y L
. Furthermore, there is a dieomorphism

3
f
I
: Y
I
Y (I),
which restricts to the identity map on Y
I
L
= Y L
, where L
denotes a suitably chosen

thickening of the regular neighborhood L
. In particular, this implies that Y

I
and Y (I) are
equivalent as sutured manifolds and that we have a canonical inclusion i
I
:= f
I
|
Y L
of
Y L
into Y (I) for each I {0, 1, }
. Moreover, f
I
|
YI
agrees with the identity map on
(Y
I
) L
, and since L
Y
I
is a disjoint union of disks, this determines f
I
|
YI
uniquely
up to isotopy relative to (Y
I
) L
.
Denition 3.6. We endow the set {0, 1, }
with the dictionary order, and we call a tuple

I
= (m
1
, . . . , m
) {0, 1, }
an immediate successor of I = (m
1
, . . . , m
) if there exists
some j such that m
i
= m
i
when i = j and (m
j
, m
j
) is either (0, 1) or (1, ).
It is explained in [4, Sec. 4] (following [18, Sec. 4]) how to construct a sutured Heegaard
multi-diagram
_
, ,
Ii
1
, . . . ,
Iim
_
for every subset
{I
i1
, . . . , I
im
} {0, 1, }
,
beginning with the data of a bouquet subordinate to L.
Notation 3.7. Let {I
i1
, . . . , I
im
} {0, 1, }
be any nonempty subset. We denote by

_
, ,
{Ii
1
,...,Iim
}
_
any sutured multi-diagram compatible with L, produced by the method
outlined in [4, Sec. 4]. I.e.,
_
, ,
{Ii
1
,...,Iim
}
_
:=
_
, ,
Ii
1
, . . . ,
Iim
_
.
In particular, for each I {I
i1
, . . . , I
im
}, (, ,
I
) is a sutured Heegaard diagram for
Y (I).
We will have particular interest in {0, 1, }
{0, 1, }
and {0, 1}
{0, 1, }
.
Accordingly:
Denition 3.8. Given a framed component link L, we call any
_
, ,
{0,1,}
_
a full
sutured multi-diagram for L and
_
, ,
{0,1}
_
a (0, 1) sutured multi-diagram for L.
From these sutured multi-diagrams, one obtains chain complexes:
From a full sutured multi-diagram for L, one constructs a chain complex
X =
I{0,1,}
CFH(Y (I)),
where CFH(Y (I)) is the chain complex associated to (, ,
I
). The dierential
D : X X
3
when considered as a map between smooth manifolds with corners, cf. [13].
is specied, on a generator CFH(Y (I)), by
D :=
{I=I
0
<...<I
j
=J}
D
I
1
<...<I
j ().
Here the index set of the inner sum is taken over the set of all increasing sequences I
to J having the property that I
i+1
is an immediate successor of I
i
, and D
I
0
<...<I
j
is dened by counting certain holomorphic j +2gons in the sutured multi-diagram,
(, ,
I
1, . . . ,
I
j ).
From a (0, 1) sutured multi-diagram for L, one similary constructs the complex
X
(0,1)
X, with restricted dierential D
(0,1)
. It is then proved, in [4, Prop. 4.1],
that X
(0,1)
is a ltered chain complex, whose associated spectral sequence has E
1
term
I{0,1}
SFH(Y (I)),
and E
term SFH(Y (I
)), where I
:= (, . . . , ).
Remark 3.9. By work of Roberts in [20, Sec. 7], we know that the ltered quasi-
isomorphism type of X (resp., X
(0,1)
) is independent of the choice of full (resp., (0, 1))
sutured multi-diagram for L and, hence, each term of the associated spectral sequence is an
invariant of the framed link L (Y, ).
More specically, any two full or (0, 1) sutured multi-diagrams compatible with a given
framed link L (Y, ) are related by a sequence of (de)stabilizations, isotopies, and han-
dleslides. Roberts, in [20, Sec. 7], constructs a ltered chain map associated to each type of
move, which he proves is a ltered quasi-isomorphism.
4
In the case of a (de)stabilization,
this map is the obvious ltered chain isomorphism [17, Sec. 10], while in the case of an
isotopy (resp., handleslide), the map is obtained by counting holomorphic polygons in a su-
tured multi-diagram containing the curves before and after the isotopy (resp., handleslide).
To prove that each map is a ltered chain map, he uses polygon associativity [18, Sec. 4],
verifying in each case that certain ends of 1dimensional moduli spaces of polygons cancel
in pairs as in [18, Lem. 4.5]. Since each map agrees with the one dened by Ozsvath-Szabo
in the proof of the isotopy (resp., handleslide) invariance of Heegaard Floer homology (see
[17], [7]), it induces an isomorphism on the E
1
page.
Furthermore, if a link L
T
(D I, T) (resp., L
L
(A I, L)) is obtained from
an admissible balanced tangle T D I (resp., a link L A I) as in [4] (resp., [5]),
then each page of the link surgeries spectral sequence associated to L
T
(resp., L
L
) is an
invariant of T (resp., L). This follows immediately from [1], in which Baldwin proves that if
two projections of a link L in S
3
are related by a sequence of Reidemeister moves, then the
resulting link surgeries spectral sequence for L
L
is an invariant of L. His arguments transfer
to our more general setting without change. We need only note:
(1) Any two projections of a balanced tangle T D I are related by projection
isotopies, Reidemeister moves, and insertion/deletion of a braid at either the top
or bottom. Projection isotopies do not aect L
T
, and insertion/deletion of a braid
at the top or bottom results in a ltered quasi-isomorphic complex, because all
resolutions of a braid have backtracking except the trivial one (see [4, Sec. 5.2]).
4
More precisely, Roberts proves the existence of a 1quasi-isomorphism, a ltered chain map inducing
an isomorphism on the E
1
page (and, hence, an isomorphism on every subsequent page) of the associated
spectral sequence.
(2) Any two diagrams for a link L AI are related by diagram isotopies and Reide-
meister moves which, by [1], yield ltered quasi-isomorphic complexes.
Bearing Remark 3.9 in mind, if L (Y, ) is a framed link, we will henceforth refer to
the link surgeries spectral sequence associated to L. Similarly, if a link L
T
(D I, T)
(resp., L
L
(AI, L)) is obtained from an admissible balanced tangle T DI (resp.,
a link L AI) as in [4] (resp., [5]), then we will refer to the spectral sequence associated
to T (resp., L).
Now suppose L = L
1
. . . L
(Y, ) is geometrically disjoint

5
from a given ori-
ented, imbedded decomposing surface (S, S) (Y, Y ) satisfying all of the hypotheses of
Theorem 4.5. In view of [8, Lem. 4.5], we can then assume that S may be isotoped in a
neighborhood of Y so that it is good, i.e. so that each component of S intersects both
R
+
() and R
(). This, in turn, implies that each component of Y S intersects both

R
+
() and R
(), so we can nd a bouquet La

1
. . . a
geometrically disjoint from S.

Denoting by L
a (thickened) regular neighborhood of La

1
. . . a
as in the paragraph
preceding Denition 3.6, we can in fact assume that S is fully contained in Y L
. In the
following denitions, I {0, 1, }
is an arbitrary multi-framing, and Y (I) is the sutured

manifold dened in the paragraph preceding Denition 3.6.
Denition 3.10. Let (S, S) (Y, Y ) be a decomposing surface that is fully contained in
Y L
. Then we denote by S
I
the image of S under the natural imbedding Y L
Y (I),
and we say that S
I
Y (I) is compatible with S Y .
Now x a trivialization, t, of the oriented 2-plane eld (v
0
)
on Y . Recall that Y
I
is
the sutured manifold obtained by performing Isurgery on L Y , hence Y
I
= Y for all
I {0, 1, }
.
Denition 3.11. For each I {0, 1, }
, let f
I
: Y
I
Y (I) be the smooth map intro-
duced in the paragraph preceding Denition 3.6 and
df
I
: TY
I
TY (I)
its dierential. Then we denote by t
I
:= df
I
(t) the trivialization of (v
0
)
on Y (I) induced
by t, and we say that t
I
is compatible with t.
Given the trivializations t
I
, we can endow each chain complex, CFH(Y (I)), with A
SI
gradings and this, in turn, endows

X =
I{0,1,}
CFH(Y (I))
with A
S
gradings. The following lemma veries that the dierential, D, in the complex, X,
respects this grading.
Lemma 3.12. Let L = L
1
. . . L
(Y, ) be an oriented, framed link and S (Y, )

a decomposing surface satisfying the conditions of Theorem 4.5. Suppose I
1
< . . . < I
k
is a sequence of multi-framings such that I
i+1
i
for each
i {1, . . . , k 1}, and (, ,
I
1, . . . ,
I
k) is an associated sutured multi-diagram. Then
the map D
I
1
<...<I
k obtained by counting holomorphic (k +1)gons preserves A
S
gradings.
Proof. Let
2
(x, , . . . , , y) be a domain representing a (k + 1)gon contributing to
D
I
1
<...<I
k, where
(1) x T
I
1
5
Note that if L
i
S = 0 algebraically, one can nd a homologous surface, S
, which satises this condition.

(2) y T
I
k
, and
(3) is the canonical top-degree generator in each of T
I
i
T
I
i+1
for each i
{1, . . . , k 1}.
Recall (see [4, Sec. 3]) that one associates to a sutured multi-diagram, (,
0
, . . . ,
k
), a
4manifold:
W
0
,...,
k :=
(P
k+1
)
k
i=0
(e
i
U
i
)
(e
i
) (e
i
U
i
)
.
Here, U
i
is the compression body obtained from [0, 1] by attaching a 3-dimensional
2-handle along each curve
i
j
{1}, for each
i
j

i
. P
k+1
is a topological (k +1)gon, with
vertices labeled v
i
, for i Z
k+1
, clockwise, and e
i
is the edge connecting v
i
to v
i+1
. Note
that for each i Z
k+1
, the sutured manifold
Y
i+1 := U
i
_
{0}
U
i+1
sits naturally as a subset of W
0
,...,
k , so we may dene:
(1) Z := W
0
,...,
k
_
iZ
k
Int(Y
i+1 ).
Letting W denote the 4manifold obtained as above from the sutured multi-diagram
(, ,
I
1, . . . ,
I
k), we obtain a related 4manifold, W, by appropriately capping o
certain subsets of the boundary of W. We will view W as a cobordism (with corners)
between Y
,
I
1
and Y
,
I
k
.
More explicitly, let U
(resp., U
I
i
) denote the compression body obtained from [0, 1]
by attaching 3-dimensional 2-handles along the curves
j
{1} (resp., (
I
i )
j
{1}). Since
I
i+1
i
for i {1, . . . , k1}, the compression body U
I
i+1
can
be obtained from U
I
i
by performing surgery on a framed knot K
i
U
I
i
corresponding to
the component of L on which the multi-framings I
i
and I
i+1
disagree. More precisely, we
have a dieomorphism f
i
: U
I
i
(K
i
) U
I
i+1
, where U
I
i
(K
i
) is the result of performing
surgery on K
i
U
I
i
. Let g
i
: U
I
i
U
I
i+1
be the restriction of f
i
to U
I
i
(K
i
) =
U
I
i
, and let W
i
be the 4-manifold obtained from U
I
i
[0, 1] by attaching a 4-dimensional
2-handle along the framed knot K
i
{1}. Then
W
i
= (U
I
i
{0}) (U
I
i
[0, 1]) (U
I
i
(K
i
) {1})
= (U
I
i
{0}) (U
I
i
[0, 1]) (U
I
i+1
{1}),
where, in the second line, U
I
i
[0, 1] is glued to U
I
i+1
{1} using the map g
i
id
{1}
.
The boundary of W
i
contains a subset dieomorphic to Y
I
i ,
I
i+1
= U
I
i

{0}
U
I
i+1
(namely the subset (U
I
i
{0}) ({0} [0, 1]) (U
I
i
(K
i
) {1})), and hence we can
use W
i
to cap o the copy of Y
I
i ,
I
i+1
that appears in the boundary of W = W
,
I
1 ,...,
I
k
(see Figure 4). After doing this for each i {1, . . . , k 1}, we obtain
W := W W
1
. . . W
k1
,
and, by analogy to (1) above, we denote:
Z := W
_
Int
_
Y
,
I
1
__
_
Int
_
Y
,
I
k
__
Note that Z can be identied with the mapping cylinder of the map
g : Y
,
I
1
Y
,
I
k
,
dened as the identity map on (U
) ( {0}) and as the composition

g
k1
. . . g
1
: R
+
(U
I
1
) R
+
(U
I
k
)
on R
+
(U
I
1
) := (U
I
1
) ( {0}).
Now recall (cf. [4, Defn. 3.5]):
Denition 3.13. A relative Spin
c
structure for a pair (W, Z) with W a 4manifold and
Z W a closed, smoothly-imbedded submanifold is an equivalence class of pairs (, P)
where P is a nite collection of points in W Z, and is an oriented 2-plane eld on
W P, agreeing with a xed, oriented 2plane eld,
0
, on Z. Two such pairs (, P)
and (
, P
) are considered to be equivalent if there is a compact 1-manifold C W Z

containing P and P
and with the property that |

WC
and
|
WC
are isotopic rel. Z. We
denote by Spin
c
(W, Z) the set of all relative Spin
c
structures for the pair (W, Z).
In [4, Sec. 3.1] (following [17]) it is shown how to associate to the domain,
2
(x, , . . . , , y), a relative Spin
c
structure s() Spin
c
(W, Z). Moreover, s() extends
uniquely to a Spin
c
structure s() Spin
c
(W, Z) satisfying
s()|
Y (I
1
)
= s(x) and s()|
Y (I
k
)
= s(y),
where the xed oriented 2plane eld,
0
, on Z

= (Y
,
I
1
) [0, 1] is dened as
0
:= (v
0
)
0.
The proof of the lemma is now based on the following two observations:
(1) The surfaces S
I
1 and S
I
k are isotopic in W rel. Z.
(2) The trivializations, t
I
1 = df
I
1(t) and t
I
k = df
I
k(t), of (v
0
)
on Y (I
1
) and Y (I
k
)
extend naturally, via the map g, to a trivialization, t
Z
, of
0
on Z.
Observation (1) implies that
[S
I
1] = [S
I
k] H
2
(W, Z; Z),
and observation (2), combined with the naturality of the relative rst Chern class, imply
that
c
1
(s(), t
Z
) H
2
(W, Z; Z)
restricts to
c
1
(s(x), t
I
1 ) H
2
(Y (I
1
), Y (I
1
); Z)
and
c
1
(s(y), t
I
k ) H
2
(Y (I
k
), Y (I
k
); Z).
Here, we use the following denition for the rst Chern class of a relative spin
c
structure,
s Spin
c
(W, Z), with respect to a trivialization, t
Z
, of the xed 2plane eld,
0
, over Z:
Denition 3.14. Let s Spin
c
(W, Z) be represented by a pair, (, P), where P is a nite
collection of points in W Z, and is an oriented 2plane eld on W P, agreeing with
0
over Z. Then
c
1
(s, t
Z
) H
2
(W, Z; Z)
is the relative Euler class of with respect to t
Z
. It is the obstruction to extending t
Z
to a
trivialization of over the (relative) 2skeleton of (W, Z).
P
4
e U
Y
,
I
1
Y
,
I
k
Y
,
I
1
Y
,
I
k
e U
I
1
e U
I
3
e U
I
2
Figure 4. Before capping o, the gure on the left represents the 4
manifold W
,
I
1 ,
I
2,
cI
3
. Capping o Y
I
1 ,
I
2
and Y
I
2,
I
3
with a copy
of the restriction to the upper compression body of the appropriate 4
dimensional 2handle attachment (pictured in green) yields the 4manifold
cobordism associated to the sequence I
1
, I
2
, I
3
, as illustrated on the right.
The red dotted lines represent the critical levels of the associated relative
Morse decomposition.
We conclude:
A
S
(x) =
1
2
c
1
(s(x), t
I
), [S
I
1]
=
1
2
c
1
(s(), t
Z
), [S
I
1]
=
1
2
c
1
(s(), t
Z
), [S
I
k]
=
1
2
c
1
(s(y), t
I
k ), [S
I
k]
= A
S
(y),
as desired.
With this lemma in hand, it is now straightforward to construct a splitting of the link
surgeries spectral sequence of [4, Prop. 4.1], as follows.
Proposition 3.15. Let (Y, ) be a sutured manifold, (S, S) (Y, Y ) an oriented surface,
and L = L
1
. . . L
(Y, ) an oriented, framed link satisfying L S = . For each

m
1
2
Z, let
X
(0,1)
m
X
(0,1)
be the subcomplex of X
(0,1)
corresponding to those elements x CFH(Y (I)) satisfying
A
SI
(x) = m,
where I ranges over all elements in {0, 1}
.
If D
(0,1)
m
denotes the restricted dierential, then (X
(0,1)
m
, D
(0,1)
m
) is a ltered chain complex
whose associated spectral sequence has E
1
term
I{0,1}
SFH( Y (I) ; s
m
(S
I
) )
and whose E
term is
SFH( Y (I
) ; s
m
(S) ),
where I
:= (, . . . , ).
Proof. By analogy to the notation established above, let X
m
X denote the subset of the
full complex,
X :=
I{0,1,}
CFH(Y (I))
corresponding to those elements in A
SI
grading m and let D
m
denote the restricted dier-
ential. Lemma 3.12 tells us that (X
m
, D
m
) is a subcomplex of (X, D) and
_
X
(0,1)
m
, D
(0,1)
m
_
is a subcomplex of
_
X
(0,1)
, D
(0,1)
_
for each m Z.
Furthermore, recall that
_
X
(0,1)
, D
(0,1)
_
is a ltered chain complex, where the ltration
arises from a dierent grading on the complex. Namely, if x CFH(Y (I)), with I =
(m
1
, . . . , m
), then we say that x is in ltration-grading
i=1
m
i
. (X
(0,1)
, D
(0,1)
) is then
a ltered chain complex, since D
(0,1)
is non-decreasing with respect to this grading. This
ltration-grading descends to each component,
_
X
(0,1)
m
, D
(0,1)
m
_
, of the splitting, endowing
_
X
(0,1)
m
, D
(0,1)
m
_
with the structure of a ltered chain complex for each m Z.
Now the proof follows exactly as in the proof of [4, Prop. 4.1], following the proof of
[18, Thm. 4.1]. Lemma 3.12 tells us that the various chain maps and homotopy maps
split according to A
SI
grading. Furthermore, domains representing 1dimensional moduli
spaces of holomorphic polygons, which we degenerate to prove polygon associativity (see
[17, Sec. 8.4], [18, Sec. 4], [4, Sec. 3.3]), also respect A
SI
grading, by the same argument
used in the proof of Lemma 3.12. One need only note that each pair of cancelling terms
in the proof of an analogue of [18, Lem. 4.5] appears in the same A
SI
graded component.
The rest of the argument, applied to each A
SI
grading separately, is identical.
4. Surface decompositions
In the previous section, we proved that the link surgeries spectral sequence associated to a
framed link in a sutured manifold splits in the presence of a properly-imbedded surface whose
intersection with the link is empty. In this section, we will investigate the algebraic eect
on the link surgeries spectral sequence of cutting the sutured manifold open (decomposing)
along such a surface. The main result is a generalization to multi-diagrams of Juhaszs
surface decomposition theorem ([8, Thm. 1.3]).
4.1. Background and statement of theorem. We recall a few denitions related to
surface decompositions in sutured manifolds in preparation for stating the main theorem.
Denition 4.1. [8, Defn. 2.4] A decomposing surface in a sutured manifold, (Y, ), is a
properly imbedded, oriented surface, (S, S) (Y, Y ) such that for every component, ,
of (S) , one of the following occurs:
is a properly imbedded non-separating arc in such that | s()| = 1.
is a simple closed curve in an annular component, A, of representing the same
homology class in A as s().
is a homotopically nontrivial curve in a torus component T of , and if is another
component of T (S), then and represent the same homology class in T.
Denition 4.2. Given a decomposing surface, S, in a sutured manifold, Y , the result of
decomposing Y along S is a new sutured manifold, (Y
), obtained as follows.
Y
= Y Int(N(S)),

= ( Y
) N(S
+
R
()) N(S
R
+
()),
R
+
(
) = ((R
+
() Y
) S
+
) Int(
),
R
) = ((R
() Y
) S
) Int(
),
where S
+
(resp., S
) is the component of N(S) Y
whose normal vector eld points out

of (resp., into) Y
.
Denition 4.3. [8, Defn. 3.7] Let (Y, ) be a strongly-balanced sutured manifold, v
0
the
xed unit vector eld on Y as in 3.1, t a choice of trivialization of v
0
, and S a decomposing
surface in (Y, ). Then
c(S, t) := (S)
I(S)
2
r(S, t),
where (S) is the Euler characteristic of S, I(S) = |S s()| is the geometric intersection
of S with s(), and r(S, t) is the rotation of the projection into v
0
of the positive unit
normal eld of S along S with respect to t.
Denition 4.4. [8] A curve C R() is said to be boundary-coherent if either [C] = 0 in
H
1
(R()) or C is oriented as the boundary of its interior.
Now recall (Denition 3.8) that one obtains a ltered chain complex, X
(0,1)
, from a (0, 1)
sutured multi-diagram, (, ,
{0,1}
), for a framed component link, L, in a balanced
sutured manifold. If S is a decomposing surface geometrically disjoint from L, then X
(0,1)
splits according to A
S
gradings:
X
(0,1)
=
m
X
(0,1)
m
,
where X
(0,1)
m
is the subcomplex of X
(0,1)
corresponding to those elements x CFH(Y (I))
satisfying A
SI
(x) = m.
Theorem 4.5. Let L (Y, ) be a framed link in a strongly-balanced sutured manifold, and
let S (Y, ) be a connected decomposing surface satisfying:
(1) S L = , and
(2) for every component V of R() the closed components of the intersection V S
consist of parallel oriented boundary-coherent curves.
Let (Y
) be the sutured manifold obtained by decomposing along S and L
(Y
)
the induced image of L. If X
(0,1)
(resp.,
_
X
(0,1)
_
) is the ltered complex associated to a

(0, 1) sutured multi-diagram for L (resp., L
), then (X
(0,1)
)
is ltered quasi-isomorphic to
X
(0,1)
k
for k =
1
2
c(S, t).
We have abused notation above, using c(S, t) to refer to c(S
I
, t) for any choice of I
{0, 1}
(since c(S
I1
, t) = c(S
I2
, t) for all pairs I
1
, I
2
{0, 1, }
). The above theorem says

that (X
(0,1)
)
is ltered quasi-isomorphic to a direct summand of X

(0,1)
under the splitting
induced by S (Y, ). Furthermore, c(S, t) identies the Alexander grading of this direct
summand.
4.2. Surface multi-diagrams. To prove Theorem 4.5, we will need special multi-diagrams
compatible with a collection of decomposing surfaces.
Denition 4.6. Let
{(Y
j
,
j
)|j = 1, . . . , n}
be a nite collection of balanced, sutured manifolds and S
j
Y
j
a decomposing surface
for each j {1, . . . , n}, in the sense of [8, Defn. 2.4]. A balanced sutured multi-diagram
adapted to the collection {S
j
Y
j
|j = 1, . . . , n} is a tuple (, ,
1
, . . . ,
n
, P) such that
(1) (, ,
j
) is a balanced sutured Heegaard diagram dening the sutured manifold Y
j
in the sense of [7, Defn. 2.8],
(2) P is a closed subsurface of with P a graph satisfying:
P = A B such that B = and A
j
= for all j = 1, . . . , n, and
A B = P is the set of vertices of the graph.
(3) (, ,
j
, P) is adapted to S
j
in the sense of [8, Defn. 4.3]. In particular, for each
j = 1, . . . , n, the surface obtained by smoothing the corners of
_
P
_
1
2
__
_
A
_
1
2
, 1
__
_
B
_
0,
1
2
__
Y
j
is equivalent to S
j
(in the sense of [8, Defn. 4.1]).
As in [8, Defn. 4.3], we call a tuple (, ,
1
, . . . ,
n
, P) satisfying the above properties a
surface multi-diagram.
Denition 4.7. Given a sutured multi-diagram (, ,
1
, . . . ,
n
, P) adapted to a col-
lection, {S
j
Y
j
}, of decomposing surfaces, we can uniquely associate to it a tuple
(
1
, . . . ,
n
, P
A
, P
B
, p), where (
1
, . . . ,
n
) is a balanced sutured multi-diagram
such that for each j = 1, . . . , n, the tuple (
j
, P
A
, P
B
, p) represents the balanced su-
tured manifold obtained by decomposing (Y
j
,
j
) along S
j
and satises the properties listed
in [8, Defn. 5.1].
In particular, P
A
, P
B

are closed subsurfaces, p :
is smooth, a local dieo-

morphism on its interior, and its restrictions,
p : (
(P
A
P
B
)) ( P),
p : P
A
P, and
p : P
B
P
are dieomorphisms.
Suppose that L = L
1
. . . L
is a framed link in a sutured manifold (Y, ) and

(S, S) (Y, Y ) is a decomposing surface satisfying conditions (1) and (2) in the statement
of Theorem 4.5. As in Section 3, for each I {0, 1, }
we let Y (I) denote the sutured

manifold obtained by doing Isurgery on L and let S
I
denote the surface in Y (I) compatible
to S Y in the sense of Denition 3.10.
Since surgery on L Y aects neither S nor SR(), S
I
is a decomposing surface
satisfying conditions (1) and (2) in the statement of Theorem 4.5 for each I {0, 1, }
.
A decomposing surface in a sutured manifold, (Y, ), determines a distinguished set of
elements in Spin
c
(Y, ) as follows. This set will play a large role in the proof of Theorem
4.5.
Denition 4.8. [8, Defn. 1.1] A Spin
c
structure s Spin
c
(Y, ) is said to be outer with
respect to a decomposing surface (S, S) (Y, Y ) if there exists a unit vector eld on Y
representing s which is nowhere equal to the negative unit normal vector eld on S. As in
[8], we denote the set of Souter Spin
c
structures on (Y, ) by O
S
.
Notation 4.9. Given a compatible collection, {S
I
Y (I)}, of properly-imbedded, oriented
surfaces as in Denition 3.10, we denote by O
I
the subset
I
O
SI

I
Spin
c
(Y (I))
corresponding to the union over all S
I
outer Spin
c
structures.
Given a link L (Y, ) and a decomposing surface S Y satisfying conditions (1) and
(2) of the statement of Theorem 4.5, the following two results explain how to construct a full
sutured multi-diagram for L that is also a surface multi-diagram adapted to the collection
{S
I
Y (I) | I {0, 1, }
}.
Lemma 4.10. Let L be an oriented, framed link in a strongly-balanced sutured manifold
(Y, ) and let S (Y, ) a decomposing surface satisfying conditions (1) and (2) in the
statement of Theorem 4.5. For each I {0, 1, }
, let (Y (I)
) the sutured manifold

obtained by decomposing (Y (I), ) along S
I
.
Then S is isotopic, in the complement of L, to a decomposing surface S
such that each

component of S
intersects both R
+
() and R
(). Furthermore, for each I {0, 1, }
,
decomposing Y (I) along S
I
also gives (Y (I)
), and O
I
= O
I
.
Proof. The isotopy S S
described in the proof of [8, Lem. 4.5] takes place in a neigh-

borhood of Y , hence avoids L Int(Y ). The rest of the result then follows from [8, Lem.
4.5].
Proposition 4.11. Let L be an oriented, framed link in a strongly-balanced sutured mani-
fold, and let S be a decomposing surface satisfying:
(1) S L = , and
(2) each component of S intersects both R
+
() and R
().
Then there exists an admissible full sutured multi-diagram for L that is also a surface
multi-diagram adapted to the collection
_
S
I
Y (I)|I {0, 1, }
_
.
See [4, Sec. 3.2] for the denition of an admissible sutured multi-diagram.
Proof. Since each component of S intersects both R
(), it follows that the boundary

of each component of S intersects both R
() and there are no closed components of S

contained entirely in .
We begin as Juhasz does in the proof of [8, Prop. 4.4], by dening a function
f : Y S [1, 4]
with f
1
_
3
2
_
S a polygon, P S. Since S L = , L is contained in the complement,
Y N(S). Furthermore, since the boundary of each component of S intersects R
+
(), each
component of Y N(S) intersects R
+
().
We now form a bouquet on L as in [4][Sec. 4] by choosing a collection of arcs a
1
, . . . , a
from the link components L

1
, . . . L
to R
+
(). Let L
:= N(L a
1
. . . a
) as in the
discussion preceding Denition 3.10, and extend the function, f, to a Morse function, f
0
,
on Y L
. We deform this Morse function to a self-indexing one with no index 0 or index

3 critical points. In the process, we may need to move S to an isotopic surface, S
.
Let = f
1
_
3
2
_
and let = (
1
, . . . ,
d
) (resp.,
0
= (
+1
, . . . ,
d
)) be the intersection
of gradient ow lines from the index 1 critical points (resp., to the index 2 critical points).
Then (, ,
0
) is a (non-balanced) sutured Heegaard diagram for Y L
compatible with
S
. Each I {0, 1, }
species an extension of
0
to
I
as in [4, Sec. 4].
_
, ,
{0,1,}
_
is then a full sutured multi-diagram for L that is also a surface multi-diagram adapted to
the collection, S
I
Y (I). In particular, P is a closed subsurface with P a graph
satisfying:
P = A B such that B = and A
I
= for all I {0, 1, }
, and
A B = P is the set of vertices of the graph.
To make
_
, ,
{0,1,}
_
admissible, wind the curves in
{0,1,}
in the complement
of A P, as in [8, Prop. 4.8], employing the inductive argument from the proof of [4, Lem.
3.12].
Note that Proposition 4.11 implies the existence of an admissible surface multi-diagram
for L adapted to {S
I
Y (I) | I {I
i1
, . . . , I
i
k
}} for any subset, {I
i1
, . . . , I
i
k
} {0, 1, }
.
4.3. Polygon counts in cylindrical sutured Floer homology. In [14], Lipshitz provides
a reformulation of the Heegaard Floer homology of a closed 3manifold, Y , using counts of
holomorphic curves in the symplectic manifold [0, 1] R, where is a Heegaard surface
for Y . Sutured Floer homology admits an analogous reformulation, as briey described in [4,
Sec. 2.1]. In this section, we discuss the cylindrical analogue of holomorphic polygon counts
in sutured multi-diagrams. This construction is implicit in [14, Sec. 10], which describes
holomorphic triangle and 4gon counts.
We will also make use of some of the theory describing moduli space degenerations ap-
pearing in [16]. In order to place ourselves in the correct context to directly apply relevant
results, we will sometimes nd it convenient to ll in each boundary component of with
a disk containing a basepoint, obtaining a closed Heegaard surface,

. This poses no ex-
tra complications, since counts of holomorphic polygons whose domains miss the basepoint
regions correspond naturally to holomorphic polygon counts in the original sutured setting.
Denition 4.12. By a holomorphic ngon (n 2 Z) we mean any region in C with
smooth boundary and n cylindrical ends, as pictured in Figure 5.
6
When n 3, all such ob-
jects are conformally equivalent,
7
and when n > 3, the moduli space of (marking-preserving
conformal equivalence classes of) such objects is parameterized by a space homeomorphic to
R
n3
.
8
We will use P
n
to denote an ngon, considered as a topological object, and (P
n
, j
P
)
to denote an ngon equipped with a specic complex structure, j
P
R
n3
.
As in [14, Fig. 7], each P
n
is equipped with a clockwise labeling of its boundary com-
ponents: e
0
, . . . , e
n1
, and an associated labeling of its cylindrical ends: v
0,1
, . . . , v
n,0
. We
denote by M
Pn
the moduli space of marked conformal equivalence classes of ngons.
Now let (,
0
, . . . ,
n
) be a sutured multi-diagram, where, for each i = 0, . . . , n,
i
= (
i
)
1
. . . (
i
)
d
is a disjoint union of d circles (d 0 a xed integer) imbedded in , such that the set,
{[(
i
)
1
], . . . , [(
i
)
d
]}, is linearly-independent in H
1
(; Z).
We form the 4manifold
W
0,...,n
:= P
n+1
,
6
Any such region is conformally equivalent to the unit disk in C with n boundary punctures.
7
When n = 2, the space of conformal equivalences is homeomorphic to R.
8
This parameterization is not natural, but can be accomplished by, for example, using a conformal
equivalence to identify three of the boundary punctures with three specied, xed points on the unit circle
and parameterizing by arclength from the variable punctures to a xed puncture.
e
2
v
1,2
v
2,3
v
3,4
v
4,0
v
0,1
e
1
e
3
e
4
e
0
v
1,2
v
2,3
v
3,4
v
4,0
v
0,1
Figure 5. A holomorphic 5gon C (left) with edges labeled e
0
, . . . , e
4
and cylindrical ends labeled v
0,1
, . . . , v
4,0
, conformally equivalent to the unit
disk C with 5 boundary punctures (right).
equipped with the obvious projection maps,
: W
0,...,n
and
P
: W P
n+1
, and
let
W
i,i+1
= v
i,i+1
denote the cylindrical ends of W
0,...,n
. We now endow W
0,...,n
with a split symplectic
form, =
+
P
and choose generic almost complex structures on the cylindrical ends
satisfying [14, (J1)-(J5)] along with a family,
{J
a
| a M
Pn+1
},
of almost complex structures on W
0,...,n
satisfying [14, (J1)-(J4)] when n + 1 = 3 and
the obvious analogues of conditions (1)-(7) of [14, Sec. 10.6.2] when n+1 4.
9
We will say
that a family of almost complex structures as above satises Lipshitzs conditions.
An intersection point, x
i

i+1
, is now dened to be any dtuple of distinct points,
x = (x
1
, . . . , x
d
)
i

i+1
,
such that exactly one x
j
lies on each circle of
i
and exactly one x
j
lies on each circle of
i+1
.
For each i = 0, . . . , n, let C
i
denote the disjoint union of cylinders,
i
e
i
W
0,...,n
.
Now, given
(x
0
, . . . , x
n
) (
0

1
) . . . (
n

0
),
let
2
(x
0
, . . . , x
n
) denote the set of homology classes of continuous maps
f : (R, R)
_
W
0,...,n
,
n
_
i=0
C
i
_
9
Conditions (5) and (6) are made recursively with reference to all possible degenerations of an ngon as
in [17, Sec. 8.1.5], [4, Fig. 3].
such that
R is a (non-compact) surface with boundary and cylindrical ends, and
the cylindrical ends of R are asymptotic to x
i
v
i,i+1
in a one-to-one fashion. In
particular, there is a bijective correspondence between cylindrical ends of R and
cylinders, (x
i
)
j
v
i,i+1
.
If A
2
(x
0
, . . . , x
n
) is a homology class as above (see [14, Sec. 10]), then it corresponds
naturally to a homotopy class
A

2
(x
0
, . . . , x
n
) (in the sense of [17, Sec. 8.1.2]).
Furthermore, let (W
0,...,n
)
Ja
represent the 4manifold, W
0,...,n
, equipped with the
complex structure, J
a
. Then if we denote by M
A
Ja
the moduli space of embedded holomor-
phic curves
f : (R, R)
_
(W
0,...,n
)
Ja
,
n
_
i=0
C
i
_
,
and by
M
A
:=
_
aM
P
n+1
M
A
Ja
the union over the moduli spaces associated to the marked equivalence classes, then there is
a tautological correspondence
10
([21], [14, Sec. 13]) between M
A
and M(
A
), the moduli
space of holomorphic n + 1gons in Sym
d
() representing
A
(with respect to suitable
almost complex structures).
4.4. Proof of surface decomposition theorem for sutured multi-diagrams. With
the relevant background material in place, we turn to the proof of Theorem 4.5. The
following technical lemma is crucial to allowing an identication of the appropriate moduli
spaces appearing in the denition of the boundary map for the chain complexes in Theorem
4.5. The idea for the proof was suggested to us by Robert Lipshitz.
Lemma 4.13. Let (,
0
,
1
, . . . ,
n
, P) be an admissible surface multi-diagram (Denition
4.6).
11
Recall that P is an imbedded subsurface with P = A B, such that
i
B = if i = 0, and
i
A = if i = 0.
Let x
i

i

i+1
for each i Z
n+1
, and suppose that x
0
, x
n
are outer in the sense of
[8, Defn. 5.3].
Fix A
2
(x
0
, x
1
, . . . , x
n
) such that (
A
) = 0 (resp., (
A
) = 1) if n > 1 (resp., if
n = 1).
12
Then there exists a family, {J
a
| a M
Pn+1
}, of almost complex structures on W
0,...,n
satisfying Lipshitzs conditions such that for every (R, R) M
A
,
R
P
:= R
1
(P)
splits as a disjoint union
R
P
= R
A
R
B
,
where
A
:=
(R
A
) and
B
:=
(R
B
) satisfy
A
(A
0
)
B
(B
i=0

i
).
10
with respect to suitable almost complex structures
11
In Denition 4.6, we used the notations instead of
0
and
i
instead of
i
, for 1 i n.
12
We make this index restriction because the proof of Theorem 4.5 only requires an identication of
0-dimensional moduli spaces of polygons. Furthermore, Lipshitz imposes transversality requirements on
families of almost complex structures [14, Sec. 10.6.2, (1)(7)] only for curves of index 1.
We summarize Lemma 4.13 as follows: There exists a family of almost complex structures
on W
0,...,n
with respect to which the intersection of a xed Maslov index 0 holomorphic
curve with
1
(P) splits as the disjoint union of a curve having boundary of type A and a
curve having boundary of type B.
Proof. Let a
1
, . . . , a
r
(resp., b
1
, . . . , b
r
) be the edges in A P (resp., B P). Form

by lling in the boundary components of with disks containing basepoints.

13
Denote by
P

the image of P, and by Z
1
, . . . , Z
m

the images of the boundary components of
P, under the inclusion map.
Given an almost complex structure, j, on

, let (Z) denote the length of a closed curve,
Z, with respect to a xed complete hyperbolic metric associated to j (c.f.[6, Chp. IV]).
Choose a generic sequence, {j
}
iN
, of almost complex structures on

with respect to
which (Z
1
), . . . , (Z
m
) 0 as i and a corresponding sequence,
_
J
a
|a M
Pn+1
_
iN
,
of families of almost complex structures on W
0,...,n
satisfying Lipshitzs conditions.
Suppose M
A
= for innitely many choices of (j
)
i
, i N. Then there exists a
subsequence of imbedded holomorphic surfaces,
(R
i
k
, R
i
k
) W
0,...,n
,
such that
each R
i
k
represents the homology class A,
the associated domain, (A) =
(R
i
k
), of each R
i
k
misses the basepoints, and
the sequence converges to a matched pair of simple holomorphic combs R
P
and
R
P
, where R
P
(resp., R
P
) projects to

P (resp., to

P) under the map
.
We say that R
P
(resp., R
P
) is the holomorphic comb over

P (resp., over

P).
Here we adopt the terminology from [16, Sec. 5, 9]. By a straightforward analogue of
the arguments found in [16, Prop. 5.20] and [15, Prop. 4.2.1], matched pairs of simple
holomorphic combs form the top stratum of the compactication of M
A
.
Recall that a simple holomorphic comb [16, Defn. 5.15] is a pair, (u, v), of holomorphic
imbeddings of surfaces with decorated cylindrical ends, where u maps to P
n+1
, v maps to
(Z
1
. . .Z
m
)RP
n+1
, and there is a 1 to 1 correspondence between the Reeb decorations
of u at east and the Reeb chord decorations of v at west . See [16, Sec. 5.2, Conditions
(1)-(5)] for the appropriate conditions on the curve v in (Z
1
. . . Z
m
) RP
n+1
in the
case n = 1. When n > 1, we replace condition (3) with the requirement that v P
n+1
.
This condition, combined with the maximum principle, will force P
n+1
to be equipped with
a degenerate holomorphic structure, and, under the map
P
, v will map to a single point in
(the degeneration of) P
n+1
.
More explicitly, since
P
: R
i
k
P
n+1
is holomorphic for each i
k
, ([14, Condition J4]),
the projections,
P
, of the interiors of the limiting curves, R
P
and R
P
, must also be
holomorphic. Hence, any cylindrical end of R
P
(resp., R
P
) must project to a cylindrical
end of P
n+1
. In other words, P
n+1
is equipped with a (degenerate) holomorphic structure
such that the images of the cylindrical ends of R
P
(resp., R
P
) project to cylindrical ends
of (the degeneration of) P
n+1
. Each cylindrical end can be topologically identied with
some open half-neighborhood of a smoothly-imbedded arc in P
n+1
. We will refer to these
arcs as vanishing arcs and label them
1
, . . . ,
r
. See Figure 6.
Each connected component of P
n+1

i
i
is then conformally equivalent to some holo-
morphic kgon (1 k n + 1) which, upon xing a parameterization (see Denition
13
See the discussion at the beginning of Section 4.3.
N
(
i
)
i
Figure 6. A polygon, P
n+1
(left), pictured as a unit disk with boundary
punctures, along with the oriented vanishing arcs, {
i
}, induced by the
degeneration of the holomorphic structure on along Z
1
, . . . , Z
m
. The half-
neighborhoods, N
(
i
), of the smoothly imbedded arcs,
i
, are equipped
with cylindrical holomorphic structures, as indicated in the gure on the
right. (Note that we may need to rescale to deal with at components as
in, e.g., [14, Proof of Lemma 8.2].)
4.12), can be conformally identied with the standard unit disk with marked points on the
boundary.
14
Each holomorphic curve,
v (Z
1
. . . Z
m
) R P
n+1
,
is mapped, under
P
, to the image of one of the vanishing arcs under this identication.
A pair, (u
1
, v
1
) and (u
2
, v
2
) of holomorphic combs is matched if the asymptotics of v
1
at east match the (orientation-reverse) of the asymptotics of v
2
at east [16, Sec. 9].
More precisely, let P
n+1
be equipped with a (possibly degenerate) holomorphic structure as
above, with vanishing arcs
1
, . . . ,
r
. Choose orientations on the
i
and label by N
+
(
i
)
(resp., N
(
i
)) the open half-neighborhood of
i
oriented compatibly (resp., incompatibly)
with
i
.
15
Then we say that (u
1
, v
1
) and (u
2
, v
2
) are a matched pair of holomorphic combs
14
Neighborhoods of the marked points correspond to cylindrical ends under this identication.
15
Note that an orientation on the circles, Z
i
, will induce an orientation on the vanishing arcs,
i
.
if, under the map,
P
, the interior of u
i
maps holomorphically to the interior of
P
n+1
i
in such a way that
there is a 1 to 1 (cyclic-orientation-reversing on each boundary component) identi-
cation of the limiting Reeb chords of v
1
at east with the limiting Reeb chords
of v
2
at east , and
if a cylindrical end of u
1
projects to N
+
(
i
) under the map
P
, and it is identied
(under the sequence of 1 to 1 correspondences described above and in the deni-
tion of a holomorphic comb) with a cylindrical end of u
2
, then the corresponding
cylindrical end of u
2
maps to N
(
i
).
If n = 1 (hence P
n+1
[0, 1] R), the evaluation maps ev : u
i
R (as described
in [16, Sec. 5.1]) agree under the correspondence.
Remark 4.14. Since our chosen sequence, {j
}
iN
, of almost complex structures on is
generic, and we are restricting our attention to index 0 (resp., index 1) domains when n > 1
(resp, n = 1), we may assume, for any comb, (u, v), we encounter, that the part, v, mapping
into (Z
1
. . . Z
m
) RP
n+1
is trivial, in the sense of the discussion following [16, Defn.
5.14].
Bearing this in mind, whenever we refer to a holomorphic comb, we will henceforth
mean a holomorphic imbedding, u, into P
n+1
of a (possibly disconnected) surface with
decorated cylindrical ends limiting on Reeb chords in (Z
1
. . . Z
m
) P
n+1
.
Since we are interested in the topology of
P
, let us focus on the holomorphic comb over
P. More specically, for each i

k
, let (R
P
)
i
k
represent R
i
k

1
P), and let R

P
represent
the holomorphic comb which projects, via
, to

P in the limit.
Then R
P
has cylindrical ends of two types:
those asymptotic to x
i
v
i,i+1
(these are the analogues of Reeb chords at , in
the language of [16, Sec. 5]), and
those asymptotic to , where is a Reeb chord in (Z
1
. . . Z
m
) P
n+1
.
We now make two key observations:
(1) Each cylindrical end of R
P
limits on a Reeb chord whose boundary points are either
both of type A or both of type B. Recall that a type A (resp., type B) boundary
is one that lies on curves in
0
(resp.,
i
for i = 0). This follows because the
cylindrical ends of R
P
are asymptotic to Reeb chords in either x
i
v
i,i+1
or in
(Z
1
. . . Z
m
) P
n+1
. All cylindrical ends of the rst type have boundaries of type
B only since, by assumption, x
0
and x
n
the only intersection points corresponding
to Reeb chords with boundaries of both type A and Blie in outer Spin
c
structures,
hence do not appear among the cylindrical ends of R
P
. By the positioning of the
basepoints in the regions adjacent to the circles, Z
i
(see Figure 7), each cylindrical
end of the second type will have boundary points which are either both of type A
or both of type B.
(2) Each of
P
: R
i
k
P
n+1
along with the limit
P
: R P
n+1
is a dfold branched covering map [14, 16].
P
type A
curves
type B
curves
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Z
1
Z
2
Z
3
basepoints
Figure 7. A subsurface

P

associated to a surface multi-diagram.
The positioning of the basepoints in the regions adjacent to the boundary,
(Z
1
. . . Z
m
), of P forces the east cylindrical ends of holomorphic
combs to have boundary of either type A or type B but not both.
Orient the circles, Z
1
, . . . , Z
m
, as the boundary of

P, and let
i
be the associated oriented
vanishing arcs of P
n+1
with respect to the sequence {(j
) | i N} (see Footnote 15). Then

each east cylindrical end of R
P
is mapped to a particular element of {N
+
(
i
)} under the
projection,
P
.
Now let {
N
+
(
i
)} denote the set of connected components of the dfold branched covers
in R of {N
+
(
i
)}. Similarly, let {C
i
} denote the set of connected components of
P
n+1
_
N
+
(
i
),
and let {
C
i
} denote the connected components of their dfold branched covers in R. By
observation 1, above, if

C
i
R
P
, then

C
i
has curves of only one type (either type A or
type B) on its boundary. Hence, the (necessarily connected) projection of

C
i
to has the
same property.
Furthermore, each

N
+
(
i
) has boundary curves of only one type. Let
(
C
P
)
A
=
_
_
C
i
R
P
|
C
i
is type A.
_
(
N
+
())
A
=
_
_
N
+
(
i
) | (
N
+
(
i
)) is type A.
_
Analogously dene (
C
P
)
B
and (
N
+
())
B
.
Then
__
C
P
_
A
N
+
()
_
A
_
__
C
P
_
B
N
+
()
_
B
_
= .
Taking
R
A
:=
__
C
P
_
A
N
+
()
_
A
_
, and
R
B
:=
__
C
P
_
B
N
+
()
_
B
_
,
we therefore can realize R
P
as a disjoint union:
R
P
= R
A
R
B
,
such that the projection,
(R
P
) =
P
, can be decomposed as
P
=
A
+
B
,
where
A
(resp.,
B
) has boundary of type A (resp., type B), as desired.
Lemma 4.13 implies that we can choose a suitable almost complex structure with respect
to which a holomorphic polygon represented by any xed domain, A (representing a topo-
logical polygon between generators in outer spin
c
structures), must split as claimed. If the
surface multi-diagram is admissible, we can nd a suitable almost complex structure with
respect to which holomorphic polygons for all such domains split as claimed:
Corollary 4.15. Let (,
0
, . . . ,
n
, P) be an admissible surface multi-diagram. Then there
exists some generic almost complex structure, j
, on such that for every choice of the

following data:
a non-empty ordered subset,
{i
0
= 0, i
1
, . . . , i
k
} {0, . . . , n}
an associated family, {J
a
|a M
P
k+1
}, of almost complex structures on W
0,i
1
,...,i
k
satisfying Lipshitzs conditions,
a (k + 1)tuple (x
0
, . . . , x
k
) with x
j
T
i
j
T
i
j+1
and x
0
, x
k
outer, and
a domain A
2
(x
0
, . . . , x
k
),
each surface (R, R) M
A
satises the property that
R
P
:= R
1
(P)
splits as a disjoint union
R
P
= R
A
R
B
,
where
A
:=
(R
A
) (resp.,
B
:=
(R
B
)) has boundary of type A only (resp., type B
only).
Proof. Since (,
0
, . . . ,
n
) is admissible, there are a nite number of domains that can
represent holomorphic (k + 1)gons, for any 1 k n, since there are a nite number of
domains with non-negative coecients. Of these domains, let
1
, . . . ,
m
be those for which
P
:=
i
P does not split as
A
+
B
. Now choose a sequence {j
}
iN
, of almost complex
structures on as in the proof of Lemma 4.13 along with a choice of family,
{J
a
|a M
P
k+1
},
of almost complex structures on W
0,i
1
,...,i
k
for each 1 k n. If, for each (j
)
i
,
there exists some
l
, with l {1, . . . , m}, such that M(
l
) = , then, by the pigeonhole
principle, there exists some xed l
0
{1, . . . , m} and some subsequence {(j
)
ic
}
cN
such
that M(
l0
) = for all (j
)
i
k
, contradicting Lemma 4.13.
Proposition 4.16. Let (, ,

{0,1}
, P) be a (0, 1) sutured multi-diagram for L Y
adapted to a collection,
{S
I
Y (I)|I {0, 1}
},
of decomposing surfaces S
I
for Y (I), and let L
be the image of L in (Y
), the sutured
manifold obtained by decomposing along S.
Let (
{0,1}
, P
A
, P
B
, p) be the tuple obtained from this data as in Denition 4.7.
Then (
{0,1}
) is a (0, 1) sutured multi-diagram for L
.
Furthermore,
X
sO
I
(X; s),
where
= denotes a ltered quasi-isomorphism.

In the above, X (resp., X
) is the ltered chain complex obtained from the (0, 1) sutured

multi-diagram,
_
, ,
{0,1}
_ _
resp.,
_
{0,1}
__
, as in the discussion following Def-
inition 3.8, and
sO
I
(X; s) refers to the complex whose generators lie in O
I
, the outer
spin
c
structures, with restricted dierential.
Proof. (
I
) is a sutured Heegaard diagram for Y
(I) for each I, by [8, Prop. 5.2],

since (, ,
I
I
Y (I) for each I {0, 1}
. Hence,
_
{0,1}
_
is a (0, 1) sutured multi-diagram for L
.
In order to prove that
X
sO
I
(X; s),
we rst note that, since (, ,
I
I
Y (I) for each I, and the generators
x T
T
I
lying in O
SI
are precisely those satisfying x P = , by [8, Lem. 5.4].
Furthermore, there is a set-wise bijection
{x T
T
I
|x P = } T
I
for each I, hence a bijection between the generators of
sO
I
(X; s) and of X
.
To prove that the chain complexes are ltered quasi-isomorphic, it will suce to show
that the dierentials on the complexes X
and
sO
I
(X; s) agree for a suitable generic
almost complex structure on (inducing a generic almost complex structure on
).
To this end, let
(I
i1
, . . . , I
i
k
) {0, 1}
be any ordered subset as in Section 3.1. We will construct a one-to-one correspondence

between embedded holomorphic surfaces representing holomorphic kgons in
W
,I
1
,...,I
k
:= P
k+1
and
W
I
1
,...,
I
k
:=
P
k+1
.
First, note that Corollary 4.15 ensures the existence of a generic almost complex structure,
j
, on with respect to which the intersection,

P
:= P, of any given candidate domain,
, for any holomorphic kgon associated to any ordered subset
(I
i1
, . . . , I
i
k
) {0, 1}
as in Section 3.1 can be decomposed as
P
=
A
+
B
,
where
A
(resp.,
B
) has boundary curves of type A only (resp., of type B only).
Fix such an almost complex structure, j
, on , and choose a family, {J

a
|a M
P
k+1
},
on P
k+1
satisfying Lipshitzs conditions for each k = 1, . . . , n. Now let
(R, R) P
k+1
be a holomorphic embedding representing a holomorphic (k+1)gon, and let =
(R)
be its associated domain.
By Lemma 4.13,
P
splits as
A
+
B
, so we can lift uniquely to a domain,
,
satisfying p(
) = under the covering projection, p :
. We construct
by lifting
A
to
A
P
A
and
B
P
B
as in Figure 8 and taking
= p
1
(
P
) +
A
+
B
.
Now, pull back a family of almost complex structures, {J
a
}, on
P
n
along the map
(p I) : (
P
k+1
) ( P
k+1
).
Note that {J
a
} satises Lipshitzs conditions, since {J
a
} does. We then construct an imbed-
ded surface
(R
, R
P
k+1
by choosing the unique lift,
(R
, R
) := (p
1
I)(R, R),
satisfying the property that
(R
) =
. By construction, (R
, R
P
k+1
represents
a holomorphic (k + 1)gon with domain,
.
Conversely, suppose that (R
, R
) is an imbedded holomorphic surface with respect to

an almost complex structure in the family, {J
a
} constructed above. Then
(R, R) := (p I)(R
, R
)
is holomorphic with respect to the the corresponding almost complex structure in the family,
{J
a
}.
To see that the holomorphic map i : R P
k+1
is also an imbedding, suppose, aiming
for a contradiction, that it is not. Then there exist points a = b R such that i(a) = i(b).
In particular, i(a) = i(b) project to the same point of under the map
and to the same

point of P
k+1
under the map
P
.
B
P
P
P
A
A
P
B
Figure 8. Lifting a domain, , satisfying
P
=
A
+
B
to a domain,
, by lifting
P
to
P
and
A
P (resp.,
B
P) to
A
P
A
(resp.,
B
P
B
).
To see that this is impossible, note that since R
is imbedded in
P
k+1
, i(a) and
i(b) must be the images under the map p I of points a
A
) P
A
P
k+1
and
b

1
(
B
) P
B
P
k+1
, else the double point of R will lift to a double point of R
.
Now let R
P
(resp., R
P
) represent the preimage of P (resp., P) under the map
and (P
k+1
)
P
(resp., (P
k+1
)
P
) its image under
P
. Then
P
(i(a)) = [
P
(p I)] (a
)
must necessarily lie in a dierent connected component of P
k+1
(P
k+1
)
P
than
P
(i(b)) = [
P
(p I)] (b
),
since the boundary of its connected component has curves of type A only, and the boundary
of the connected component containing
P
(i(b)) has curves of type B only.
In particular,
P
(i(a)) =
P
(i(b)), and we conclude that i : R P
k+1
is an imbedding,
as desired.
We are now ready to prove Theorem 4.5.

Proof of Theorem 4.5. By Proposition 4.11, there exists a (0, 1) sutured multi-diagram,
_
, ,
{0,1}
, P
_
for L that is also a surface multi-diagram compatible with the collection
{S
I
Y (I)|I {0, 1}
}.
By Proposition 4.16, the multi-diagram,
_
{0,1}
_
, obtained as in Denition 4.7 is
a (0, 1)sutured multi-diagram compatible with L
. Furthermore, if X
(0,1)
_
resp., (X
(0,1)
)
_
is the (0, 1)ltered chain complex corresponding to the sutured multi-diagram
_
, ,
{0,1}
_
(resp.,
_
{0,1}
_
), then Proposition 4.16 tells us that
_
X
(0,1)
_
sO
I
(X; s).
But [8, Lem. 3.10] tells us that, for each I {0, 1}
, s O
SI
i
c
1
(s, t), [S
I
] = c(S
I
, t).
Hence,
_
X
(0,1)
_
{s
k
(S) | k=
1
2
c(S,t)}
_
X
(0,1)
; s
k
(S)
_
= X
(0,1)
k
.
Furthermore (see [20, Sec. 7]) any other choice of a (0, 1) sutured multi-diagram for L
(resp., L
) yields a ltered chain complex that is ltered quasi-isomorphic to X

(0,1)
(resp.,
to
_
X
(0,1)
_
). See Remark 3.9).

5. Naturality of the Spectral Sequence
In this section, we discuss consequences of Theorem 4.5. We shall see that various natural
geometric operations on balanced tangles can be understood in terms of surface decompo-
sitions on their sutured double branched covers, which will, in particular, imply that the
algebra of the spectral sequence from Khovanov homology to sutured Floer homology, de-
scribed in [4] and [5], behaves as expected with respect to the geometric operations.
In what follows, recall that any admissible balanced tangle T D I (resp., link L
AI) can be represented by an enhanced projection (diagram) P(T) (resp., P(L)). See [4,
Sec. 5] and [5, Sec. 2].
Theorem 5.1. (Trivial inclusion) Let T D I be an nbalanced tangle in the product
sutured manifold D I, and let T
D I be the (n + 1)balanced tangle obtained from

T by adjoining a trivial strand separated from T by a properly-imbedded Iinvariant disk,
F, as in Figure 1. Let F(T), F(T
) be the associated ltered complexes as in Denition 2.7.

Then
F(T) = F(T
).
Proof. Let

F denote the preimage of F in (DI, T
), which is a (2component) vertical

decomposing surface satisfying conditions (1) and (2) of the statement of Theorem 4.5.
Then, as in the proof of Proposition 4.11, we can choose a Morse function on (D I, T)
whose gradient is everywhere tangent to

F. In particular, (see, e.g., the constructions in [7,
Sec. 4], [17, Sec. 2.6]) any Spin
c
structure on Y (I) for any I {0, 1}
can be represented
by a (homology class of) unit vector eld that is everywhere tangent to

F. This implies (see
Denition 4.8) that every generator in F(T
) is outer with respect to

F.
Furthermore, decomposing along

F produces the sutured manifold which is the disjoint
union of (D I, T) and a product sutured manifold. Theorem 4.5 then implies
F(T) = F(T
),
as desired.

Theorem 5.2. (Stacking) Let T
i
(D I)
i
, for i = 1, 2, be two nbalanced tangles, and
let T
1
+ T
2
D I be any nbalanced tangle obtained by stacking a projection, P(T
1
), of
T
1
on top of a projection, P(T
2
), of T
2
as in Figure 2. Then
F(T
1
+T
2
) = F(T
1
) F(T
2
).
Proof. Let F denote the disk along which the two product sutured manifolds (DI)
1
and
(D I)
2
are glued and

F its preimage in (D I, T
1
+ T
2
). Applying nger moves as in
the proof of [8, Lem. 4.5], we move

F to an equivalent surface satisfying conditions (1) and
(2) of the statement of Theorem 4.5.
As in the proof of Proposition 4.11, we choose a Morse function on (D I, T
1
+ T
2
)
whose restriction to

F points in either the positive normal direction to

F (along the quasi-
polygon P

F) or is tangent to

F (along the vertical regions,

F P). In particular, as in
the proof of Theorem 5.1, any Spin
c
structure on Y (I) can be represented by a unit vector
eld agreeing with the above vector eld on

F, hence every generator of F(T
1
+T
2
) is outer
with respect to

F.
By Theorem 4.5, we then obtain
F(T
1
+T
2
) = F(T
1
) F(T
2
),
as desired.
Theorem 5.3. (Oset stacking) Let T
i
be an n
i
balanced tangle in (D I)
i
for i = 1, 2.
For k Z, let T
1
+
k
T
2
be any nbalanced tangle obtained by koset stacking any projection
P(T
1
) of T
1
atop any projection, P(T
2
), of T
2
, as in Figure 9. More precisely, one forms
T
1
+
k
T
2
from projections, P(T
1
) and P(T
2
), by
stacking P(T
1
) atop P(T
2
) so that the leftmost strand of P(T
2
) is |k| strands to the
right (resp., to the left) of the left-most strand of P(T
1
) when k 0 (resp., k 0),
adjoining trivial strands to both P(T
1
) and P(T
2
) to ensure that both are nbalanced,
for minimal n.
Then
F(T
1
+
k
T
2
) = F(T
1
) F(T
2
).
Remark 5.4. If T
i
is an n
i
balanced tangle for i = 1, 2, then T
1
+
k
T
2
is an nbalanced
tangle, with
n =
_
max(n
1
, n
2
+k) when k 0
max(n
1
+|k|, n
2
) when k < 0.
With notation as above, note that m = (n
1
+n
2
)n is the number of overlapping strands
(of the nontrivial parts) of T
1
+
k
T
2
. We will often refer to m = (n
1
+n
2
) n as the overlap
of T
1
, T
2
in T
1
+
k
T
2
.
Proof of Theorem 5.3. This is an immediate corollary of Theorems 5.1 and 5.2.
There is also a natural geometric relationship between links in AI and balanced tangles
in DI, along with a corresponding naturality result for the associated spectral sequences.
To understand this relationship, recall (see [19], [4]) that A I can be identied as the
sutured complement of a standard unknot, B S
3
, via the identication:
A I = {(r, , z) | r [1, 2], [0, 2), z [0, 1]} R
3
= S
3
,
B = {(r, , z) | r = 0} S
3
T
1
+
k
T
2
T
1
T
2
Figure 9. Oset stacking two balanced tangles T
1
and T
2
to obtain a new
balanced tangle, T
1
+
k
T
2
. In the above, P(T
1
) is stacked atop P(T
2
) with
oset k = 1 and overlap m = 1.
Denition 5.5. Let a [0, 2). Then
a
:= {(r, ) A| = a}
denotes the properly-imbedded arc with argument a, oriented outward, and
D
a
:=
a
I
denotes the corresponding Iinvariant disk, endowed with the product orientation.
Denition 5.6. (Cutting) Let L A I be a link in the product sutured manifold
(A I, A I), P(L) a projection of L, and D
a
an Iinvariant disk. Then we denote
by
a
(P(L)) the balanced tangle projection obtained by decomposing AI along D
a
.
Denition 5.7. (Gluing) Let T D I be a balanced tangle in the product sutured
manifold (D I, D I) and P(T) a projection of T. Then we denote by
1
a
(P(T))
the annular link projection obtained by identifying D
+
and D
at = a, as in Figure 10.
1
a
(P(T)) is the braid closure of P(T), considered as a link in A I.
The following result was proved in [4]. We recall it here, since it provides another example
of the naturality of the spectral sequence relating Khovanov homology and Heegaard Floer
homology.
Theorem 5.8. (Cutting) [5, Thm. 3.1] Let L A I be a link, and let T D I be
any balanced tangle admitting a projection, P(T), such that
1
a
(P(T)) is a projection of
L. Then F(T) is a direct summand of F(L). If there exists a
[0, 2) such that

|D
a
L| < |D
a
L|,
then F(T) = 0, i.e., the trivial direct summand of F(L).
Remark 5.9. Note that Theorem 5.8 is proved by applying Theorem 4.5 to
D
a
= (D
a
, D
a
L),
1
a
= a
a
Figure 10. (A projection of) an annular link, along with (a projection of)
a balanced tangle obtained by cutting A I along a vertical disk, D
a
=
a
I, for some a [0, 2).
a (Z
2
equivariant) Seifert surface for

B (A I, L), the preimage of B in (A I, L).
Furthermore, the Euler characteristic of

D
a
is given by:
(
D
a
) = 2 |D
a
L|,
by the Riemann-Hurwitz formula. In particular, the vanishing/non-vanishing of F(T) de-
tects the Thurston norm of the cohomology class Poincare dual to [
D
a
].
5.1. Oset stacking, generalized Murasugi sum, and annular link composition.
Link projections in AI can be composed. This composition is closely related to both the
oset stacking operation and a generalization of the Murasugi sum operation.
Denition 5.10. (Annular link composition) For i = 1, 2, let L
i
(AI)
i
be a link, P(L
i
)
a projection, and k Z.
Then the koset composition, denoted P(L
1
) +
k
P(L
2
), is dened as:
P(L
1
) +
k
P(L
2
) :=
1
a
(
a
(P(L
1
)) +
k

a
(P(L
1
))).
See Figure 11.
Denition 5.11. (Generalized Murasugi sum) For i = 1, 2, let L
i
be a nullhomologous link
in the three-manifold Y
i
and S
i
a choice of Seifert surface for L
i
. For i = 1, 2, let F
i
S
i
be a subsurface satisfying:
Each boundary component of F
i
is a cyclic graph whose edges can be labeled either
1 or 2 such that no two adjacent edges have the same label. In particular, there are
an even number of vertices and edges.
The type 1 edges (resp., type 2 edges) are in the boundary (resp., in the interior)
of S
1
, and the type 2 edges (resp., type 1 edges) are in the boundary (resp., in the
interior) of S
2
.
There exists an orientation-reversing homeomorphism, : F
1
F
2
, preserving
the labelings of the boundary graphs.
Then one forms a new 3manifold, Y
1
#
F
Y
2
by identifying Y
1
(F
1
I) with Y
2
(F
2
I)
along their common boundary, as follows.
2
T
1
T
2
T
1
T
L
1
L
2
L
1
+
2
L
2
Figure 11. The annular link projection on the right is obtained by cutting
open projections of L
1
and L
2
, oset stacking the resulting balanced tangles,
and regluing the result. In the example above, the oset for the stacking
operation is 2 and the overlap is 2.
(1) Note that, for i = 1, 2,
(Y
i
F
i
I) = (F
i
{0}) (F
i
I) (F
i
{1}).
(2) Identify F
1
{0} with F
2
{0} and F
1
{1} with F
2
{1} using .
(3) Identify F
1
I with F
2
I using the canonical (orientation-reversing) level-
preserving homeomorphism.
The generalized Murasugi sum, S
1

F
S
2
, is the imbedded surface in Y
1
#
F
Y
2
obtained
by identifying S
1
{0} and S
2
{0} along : (F
1
{0}) (F
2
{0}). Note that the
boundary of S
1
F
S
2
is a link,
L
1
F
L
2
=
_
i=1,2
S
i
(S
i
F
i
),
which we also call the generalized Murasugi sum of L
1
and L
2
.
Note that when F
1

= F
2
is a disk, Y
1
#
F
Y
2
is the connected sum operation, and S
1
F
S
2
is the standard Murasugi sum.
Remark 5.12. Let L
1
+
k
L
2
be any link obtained from L
1
, L
2
by a koset composition.
Then (AI, L
1
+
k
L
2
) is a generalized Murasugi sum of (AI, L
1
) and (AI, L
2
).
More specically, projection to the coordinate endows AI with an S
1
valued Morse
function with bers D
. For a generic isotopy class representative of L A I, this S

1
valued Morse function can be lifted to one for (AI, L) whose bers are (D
, D
L).
If L is obtained as a koset composition of L
1
and L
2
with overlap m, then (AI, L)
is obtained from (AI, L
i
) for i = 1, 2 by a generalized Murasugi sum along a subsurface
T
T
2
2
1
1
T
T
1
Figure 12. To obtain the gure on the right, we begin with two annular
link projections, remove a neighborhood of a trivial product region in each,
and identify the result. In the double-branched cover, this corresponds to
performing a generalized Murasugi sum along a subsurface of the double-
branched cover of
i
I for i = 1, 2.
of (D
, D
L) of genus g with b boundary components, where

g =
_
m1
2
_
, and
b =
_
1 if m is odd, and
0 if m is even.
See Figures 12 and 13.
References
[1] John Baldwin. On the spectral sequence from Khovanov homology to Heegaard Floer homology.
math.GT/0809.3293, 2008.
[2] John Baldwin and Olga Plamenevskaya. Khovanov homology, open books, and tight contact structures.
math.GT/0808.2336, 2008.
[3] David Gabai. Foliations and the topology of 3-manifolds. J. Dierential Geom., 18(3):445503, 1983.
[4] J. Elisenda Grigsby and Stephan Wehrli. On the colored Jones polynomial, sutured Floer homology,
and knot Floer homology. math.GT/0807.1432, 2008.
[5] J. Elisenda Grigsby and Stephan Wehrli. Khovanov homology, sutured Floer homology, and annular
links. math.GT/0907.4375, 2009.
1
2 T
T
F
2
F
1
F
1

F
2
F
1
F
2
S
1 S
2
(L
2
)
(L
1
)
Figure 13. Annular link composition corresponds to a generalized Mura-
sugi sum in the double-branched cover. In the top gure, we see two de-
composed annular links being prepared to oset-stack with overlap 2. In
the double-branched cover, ber surfaces

S
i
(the preimages of the shaded
S
i
for i = 1, 2) of the circle-valued Morse functions are identied along the
subsurfaces

F
i
. Note that the green edges of
F
1
are in the interior and
the red edges are on the boundary of

S
1
, whereas the green edges of
F
2
are on the boundary and the red edges are in the interior of

S
2
.

F
1
and

F
2
are identied as illustrated in the bottom gure.
[6] Christoph Hummel. Gromovs compactness theorem for pseudo-holomorphic curves, volume 151 of
Progress in Mathematics. Birkh auser Verlag, Basel, 1997.
[7] Andr as Juh asz. Holomorphic discs and sutured manifolds. Algebr. Geom. Topol., 6:14291457 (elec-
tronic), 2006.
[8] Andr as Juh asz. Floer homology and surface decompositions. Geom. Topol., 12(1):299350, 2008.
[9] Andras Juh asz. The sutured Floer homology polytope. math.GT/0802.3415, 2008.
[10] Mikhail Khovanov. A categorication of the Jones polynomial. Duke Math. J., 101(3):359426, 2000.
[11] Mikhail Khovanov. Patterns in knot cohomology. I. Experiment. Math., 12(3):365374, 2003.
[12] Mikhail Khovanov. Categorications of the colored Jones polynomial. J. Knot Theory Ramications,
14(1):111130, 2005.
[13] John M. Lee. Introduction to smooth manifolds, volume 218 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics.
Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003.
[14] Robert Lipshitz. A cylindrical reformulation of Heegaard Floer homology. Geom. Topol., 10:9551097
(electronic), 2006.
[15] Robert Lipshitz. A Heegaard Floer invariant of bordered three-manifolds. PhD thesis, Stanford Univer-
sity, 2006.
[16] Robert Lipshitz, Peter Ozsv ath, and Dylan Thurston. Bordered Heegaard Floer homology: Invariance
and pairing. math.GT/0810.0687, 2008.
[17] Peter Ozsv ath and Zolt an Szab o. Holomorphic disks and topological invariants for closed three-
manifolds. Ann. of Math. (2), 159(3):10271158, 2004.
[18] Peter Ozsv ath and Zolt an Szab o. On the Heegaard Floer homology of branched double-covers. Adv.
Math., 194(1):133, 2005.
[19] Lawrence P. Roberts. On knot Floer homology in double branched covers. math.GT/0706.0741, 2007.
[20] Lawrence P. Roberts. Notes on the Heegaard-Floer link surgery spectral sequence. math.GT/0808.2817,
2008.
[21] Ivan Smith. Serre-Taubes duality for pseudoholomorphic curves. Topology, 42(5):931979, 2003.
Columbia Math Dept.;2990 Broadway MC4406; NY, NY 10027
E-mail address: egrigsby@math.columbia.edu
Institut de Mathematiques de Jussieu; Universite Paris 7; 175 rue du Chevaleret; bureau 7B3;
75013 Paris, France
E-mail address: wehrli@math.jussieu.fr

J. Elisenda Grigsby and Stephan Wehrli - On The Naturality of The Spectral Sequence From Khovanov Homology To Heegard Floer Homology

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

J. Elisenda Grigsby and Stephan Wehrli - On The Naturality of The Spectral Sequence From Khovanov Homology To Heegard Floer Homology

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

a

D I be the tangle obtained from T by adjoining a trivial

) be the sutured manifold obtained by decomposing along S and L

)) is the ltered complex associated to L (resp.,

()) denote those components of R() whose normal

), and the maps

, and ltered chain

. See [7] for more details.

(), points out of Y along R

is trivializable ([8, Prop.

grading preserving. Hence, [S] induces a decomposition of SFH(Y ):

is an oriented, framed link in a sutured manifold (Y, ).

) the tuple of framings and (

) the tuple of meridians.

by attaching 3-dimensional 2-handles along

. Furthermore, there is a dieomorphism

denotes a suitably chosen

. In particular, this implies that Y

into Y (I) for each I {0, 1, }

with the dictionary order, and we call a tuple

be any nonempty subset. We denote by

(Y, ) is geometrically disjoint

(). This, in turn, implies that each component of Y S intersects both

(), so we can nd a bouquet La

geometrically disjoint from S.

a (thickened) regular neighborhood of La

is an arbitrary multi-framing, and Y (I) is the sutured

gradings and this, in turn, endows

(Y, ) be an oriented, framed link and S (Y, )

, which satises this condition.

) ( {0}) and as the composition

) are considered to be equivalent if there is a compact 1-manifold C W Z

and with the property that |

(Y, ) an oriented, framed link satisfying L S = . For each

), then we say that x is in ltration-grading

) is the component of N(S) Y

whose normal vector eld points out

) be the sutured manifold obtained by decomposing along S and L

) is the ltered complex associated to a

). The above theorem says

is ltered quasi-isomorphic to a direct summand of X

are closed subsurfaces, p :

is smooth, a local dieo-

is a framed link in a sutured manifold (Y, ) and

we let Y (I) denote the sutured

) the sutured manifold

such that each

(). Furthermore, for each I {0, 1, }

described in the proof of [8, Lem. 4.5] takes place in a neigh-

(), it follows that the boundary

() and there are no closed components of S

from the link components L

. We deform this Morse function to a self-indexing one with no index 0 or index

by lling in the boundary components of with disks containing basepoints.

P. More specically, for each i

P), and let R

) | i N} (see Footnote 15). Then

, on such that for every choice of the

Proposition 4.16. Let (, ,

= denotes a ltered quasi-isomorphism.

) is the ltered chain complex obtained from the (0, 1) sutured

(I) for each I, by [8, Prop. 5.2],