Theorem 2.2 (Cartan–Kähler). Let I⊂Ω∗(M) be a real analytic differential ideal. Let P⊂M be a connected, p-dimensional, real analytic, Kähler-regular integral manifold of I.
Suppose that r=r(P) is a non-negative integer. Let R⊂M be a real analytic submanifold of M which is of codimension r, which contains P, and which satisfies the condition that TxR and H(TxP) are transverse in TxM for all x∈P.
Then there exists a real analytic integral manifold of I, X, which is connected and (p+1)-dimensional and which satisfies P⊂X⊂R. This manifold is unique in the sense that any other real analytic integral manifold of I with these properties agrees with X on an open neighborhood of P.

Proof. The theorem is local, so it suffices to prove existence and uniqueness in a neighborhood of a single point x0∈P. Let s=dim⁡M−(r+p+1). (The following proof holds with the obvious simplifications if any of p, r, or s are zero. For simplicity of notation, we assume that they are all positive.)

Our hypothesis implies that the vector space TxR∩H(TxP) has dimension p+1 for all x∈P. It follows that we may choose a local (real analytic) system of coordinates centered on x0 of the form x1,…,xp,y,u1,…,us,v1,…,vr so that P is given in this neighborhood by the equations y=u=v=0, R is given in this neighborhood by the equations v=0, and, for all x∈P, the polar space H(TxP) is spanned by the vectors {∂/∂xj}1≤j≤p∪{∂/∂y}∪{∂/∂vρ}1≤ρ≤r.

Now, there exists a neighborhood U of Tx0P in Gp(TM) so that every E∈U with base point z∈M has a basis of the form

Xi(E)=(∂/∂xi+qi(E)∂/∂y+piσ(E)∂/∂uσ+wiρ(E)∂/∂vρ)|z.

The functions x,y,u,v,q,p,w form a coordinate system on U centered on Tx0P. By the definition of H(Tx0P), there exist s real analytic (p+1)-forms κ1,…,κs in I with the property that

H(Tx0P)={v∈Tx0M∣κσ(v,∂/∂x1,∂/∂x2,…,∂/∂xp)=0 for 1≤σ≤s}.

In fact, we may even assume that κσ(v,∂/∂x1,∂/∂x2,…,∂/∂xp)=duσ(v) for 1≤σ≤s and all v∈Tx0M. By the Kähler-regularity of Tx0P, we may assume, by shrinking U if necessary, that, for all E∈Vp(I)∩U with base point z∈M, we have

H(E)={v∈TzM∣κσ(v,X1(E),X2(E),…,Xp(E))=0 for 1≤σ≤s}.

If we seek v∈H(E) of the form

v=(a∂/∂y+bσ∂/∂uσ+cρ∂/∂vρ)|z,

then the s equations κσ(v,X1(E),X2(E),…,Xp(E))=0 are, of course, linear equations for the quantities a, b, and c of the form

Aσ(E)a+Bτσ(E)bτ+Cρσ(E)cρ=0.

Again, by hypothesis, when E=Tx0P these s equations are linearly independent and reduce to the equations bσ=0. Thus, by shrinking U if necessary, we may assume that the s×s matrix B(E)=(Bτσ(E)) is invertible for all E∈U. It follows that there exist unique real analytic functions Gσ on U so that, for each E∈U based at z∈M, the vector Y(E)=(∂/∂y+Gσ(E)∂/∂uσ)|z satisfies

κσ(Y(E),X1(E),X2(E),…,Xp(E))=0.

Since the functions x,y,u,v,q,p,w form a coordinate system on U centered on Tx0P, we may regard the functions Gσ as functions of these variables.

We first show that there exists a real analytic submanifold of R of the form v=0,u=F(x,y) on which the forms κσ vanish. Note that the following vectors would be a basis of the tangent space to such a submanifold at the point z(x,y)=(x,y,F(x,y),0):

Xi(x,y)=(∂/∂xi+∂iFσ(x,y)∂/∂uσ)|z(x,y)Y(x,y)=(∂/∂y+∂yFσ(x,y)∂/∂uσ)|z(x,y).

It follows that the function F would have to be a solution to the system of P.D.E. given by

(13)∂yFσ=Gσ(x,y,F,0,0,∂xF,0).

Moreover, in order that the submanifold contain P (which is given by the equations y=u=v=0), it is necessary that the function F satisfy the initial condition

(14)F(x,0)=0.

Conversely, if F satisfies (13) and (14), then the submanifold of R given by v=0 and u=F(x,y) will both contain P and be an integral of the set of forms {κσ}1≤σ≤s.

By the Cauchy–Kowalevski theorem, there exists a unique real analytic solution F of (13) and (14). We let X⊂R denote the (unique) submanifold of dimension p+1 constructed by this method. Replacing the functions u in our coordinate system by the functions u−F(x,y) will not disturb any of our normalizations so far and allows us to suppose, as we shall for the remainder of the proof, that X is described by the equations u=v=0.

We must now show that X is an integral manifold of I. We have already seen that X is the unique connected real analytic submanifold of dimension p+1 which satisfies P⊂X⊂R and is an integral of the forms {κσ}1≤σ≤s. We now show that all of the p-forms in I vanish on X.

Again using the Kähler-regularity of Tx0P, let β1,…,βa be a set of real analytic p-forms in I so that the functions fc(E)=βc(X1(E),…,Xp(E)) for 1≤c≤a have linearly independent differentials on U and have the locus Vp(I)∩U as their set of common zeros. (We may have to shrink U once more to do this.) Since Tx0X lies in Vp+1(I) by construction, Proposition 1.8 shows that Tx0X is Kähler-ordinary. In fact, the proof of Proposition 1.8 shows that the (p+1)-forms {βc∧dy}1≤c≤a∪{κσ}1≤σ≤s have Vp+1(I)∩U+ as their set of ordinary common zeros in some neighborhood U+ of Tx0X in Gp+1(TM). Thus, in order to show that X is an integral manifold of I, it suffices to show that the forms {βc∧dy}1≤c≤a vanish on X.
Shrinking U+ if necessary, we may suppose that every E+∈U+ has a basis

X1(E+),X2(E+),…,Xp(E+),Y(E+)

that is dual to the basis of 1-forms dx1,dx2,…,dxp,dy. If we set

Bc(E+)=βc∧dy(X1(E+),X2(E+),…,Xp(E+),Y(E+))Kσ(E+)=κσ(X1(E+),X2(E+),…,Xp(E+),Y(E+)),

then we have

Vp+1(I)∩U+={E+∈U+∣Bc(E+)=Kσ(E+)=0}.

Since I is an ideal, the forms βc∧dxi are also in I and hence vanish on Vp+1(I)∩U+. Thus, if we set

Bci(E+)=βc∧dxi(X1(E+),X2(E+),…,Xp(E+),Y(E+)),

then the functions Bci are in the ideal generated by the functions Bc and Kσ. It follows that there exist real analytic functions A and L on U+ so that

Bci=AbciBb+LσciKσ.

Since Kσ(TzX)=0 for all z∈X by construction, it follows that

Bci(TzX)=Abci(TzX)Bb(TzX)

for all z∈X.
Since I is differentially closed, the forms dβc are in I. Thus, if we set

Dc(E+)=dβc(X1(E+),X2(E+),…,Xp(E+),Y(E+)),

there must exist functions G and H on U+ so that

Dc=GbcBb+HσcKσ.

Again, since Kσ(TzX)=0, we must have

Dc(TzX)=Gbc(TzX)Bb(TzX)

for all z∈X.

Now, if we restrict the forms βc to X, then we have an expansion of the form

βc|X=Bc(x,y)dx1∧⋯∧dxp+∑i(−1)p−i+1Bci(x,y)dx1∧⋯∧dxi−1∧dxi+1∧⋯∧dxp∧dy,

where, for z=(x,y,0,0)∈X, we have set Bc(x,y)=Bc(TzX) and Bci(x,y)=Bci(TzX). We also have the formula

dβc|X=(−1)p(∂yBc(x,y)+∑i∂iBci(x,y))dx1∧⋯∧dxp∧dy=Dc(x,y)dx1∧⋯∧dxp∧dy,

where we have written Dc(x,y)=Dc(TzX) for z as before. Using the formulas

Dc(x,y)=Gbc(x,y)Bb(x,y)Bci(x,y)=Abci(x,y)Bb(x,y),

we see that the functions Bc(x,y) satisfy a linear system of P.D.E. of the form

∂yBc(x,y)=A~bci(x,y)∂iBb(x,y)+G~bc(x,y)Bb(x,y)

for some functions A~ and G~ on X. Moreover, since TzX is an integral element of I when y=0, we have the initial conditions Bc(x,0)=0. By the uniqueness part of the Cauchy–Kowalevski theorem and the fact that all of the functions involved are real-analytic, it follows that the functions Bc(x,y) must vanish identically. In turn, this implies that the forms βc vanish on X. Hence X is an integral manifold of I, as we wished to show. Since we have already established uniqueness, we are done. ◻