This paper establishes an upper bound on the stability index for the depth of integral closures of powers of monomial ideals and classifies when these closures become Cohen-Macaulay for large powers.
Contribution
It provides a new upper bound on the depth stability index of integral closures of monomial ideals and characterizes ideals with eventually Cohen-Macaulay integral closures.
Findings
01
Upper bound on $ar{ ext{dstab}}(I)$ in terms of ring dimension and generating degree
02
Classification of monomial ideals with Cohen-Macaulay integral closures for large powers
03
Depth of $R/ar{I^n}$ stabilizes beyond a certain power
Abstract
Let I be a monomial ideal I in a polynomial ring R=k[x1,...,xr]. In this paper we give an upper bound on \dstab(I) in terms of r and the maximal generating degree d(I) of I such that \depthR/In is constant for all n⩾\dstab(I). As an application, we classify the class of monomial ideals I such that In is Cohen-Macaulay for some integer n≫0.
n0(I):={1ℓ(I)(ℓ(I)−1)d(I)ℓ(I)−2 if ℓ(I)⩽2, if ℓ(I)>2.
n0(I):={1ℓ(I)(ℓ(I)−1)d(I)ℓ(I)−2 if ℓ(I)⩽2, if ℓ(I)>2.
astab(I)=min{m∣AssR/In=AssR/Imfor all n⩾m}.
astab(I)=min{m∣AssR/In=AssR/Imfor all n⩾m}.
Δα(In)=⟨[r]∖supp(aj)∣j∈{1,…,q} and ⟨aj,α⟩<nbj⟩.
Δα(In)=⟨[r]∖supp(aj)∣j∈{1,…,q} and ⟨aj,α⟩<nbj⟩.
{x∈Rr∣⟨aj,x⟩⩾nbj,j=1,…,q}.
{x∈Rr∣⟨aj,x⟩⩾nbj,j=1,…,q}.
m>max{nbj−⟨aj,α⟩∣1≤j⩽q},
m>max{nbj−⟨aj,α⟩∣1≤j⩽q},
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Full text
Stability of Depth and Cohen-Macaulayness of Integral Closures of Powers of Monomial Ideals
Le Tuan Hoa and Tran Nam Trung
Institute of Mathematics, VAST, 18 Hoang Quoc Viet, 10307 Hanoi, Viet Nam
Let I be a monomial ideal I in a polynomial ring R=k[x1,...,xr]. In this paper we give an upper bound on dstab(I) in terms of r and the maximal generating degree d(I) of I such that depthR/In is constant for all n⩾dstab(I). As an application, we classify the class of monomial ideals I such that In is Cohen-Macaulay for some integer n≫0.
Key words and phrases:
Depth, monomial ideal, simplicial complex, integral closure.
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification:
13D45, 05C90
Introduction
Let R=k[x1,…,xr] be a polynomial ring over a field k and a a homogeneous ideal in R. It was shown by Brodmann [2] that depthR/an is constant for n≫0. The smallest integer m>0 such that depthR/an=depthR/am for all n⩾m is called the index of depth stability and is denoted by dstab(a). Since the behavior of depth function depthR/an is quite mysterious (see [7, 5]), it is of great interest to bound dstab(a) in terms of r and a. However, until now this problem is only solved for a few classes of monomial ideals (see, e.g., [7, 8, 20]). The bound obtained in [20] for ideals generated by square-free monomials of degree two is rather small and optimal. However, this problem is still open for a general square-free monomial ideal.
In this direction, it is also of interest to consider similar problems for other powers of a. In [10] together with Kimura and Terai we were able to solve the problem of bounding the index of depth stability for symbolic powers of square-free monomial ideals. In this paper we are interested in bounding the index of depth stability dstab(a) for integral closures, which is defined as the smallest integer m>0 such that depthR/an=depthR/am for all n⩾m. Like in the case of ordinary powers, dstab(a) is well-defined. We only consider the problem for monomial ideals I. In this context one can use geometry and convex analysis to describe the integral closures of In (see Definition 1.1 and some properties after it). Then one can use Takayama’s formula (see Lemma 1.4) to compute the local cohomology modules of R/In. This approach was successfully applied in several papers (see, e.g., [10, 11, 19]). In particular, one can show that in the class of monomial ideals the behavior of the function depthR/In is much better than that of depthR/In: it is “quasi-decreasing” (see Lemma 1.5) while the function depthR/In can be any convergent non-negative numerical function (see [5]). Our main result is Theorem 2.3, where we can give an upper bound on dstab(I) in terms of r and the maximal generating degree d(I) of I for any monomial ideal I. Although our bound is very big, an example shows that an upper bound must depend on d(I), and in the worst case must be an exponential function of r.
In order to bound dstab(I) we have to study the index of stability for the associated primes on R/In. This in some sense corresponds the zero depth case and was firstly done in [19]. In this paper we can improve the main result of [19] by giving an essentially better bound, see Theorem 1.7.
As an application we classify all monomial ideals such that R/In is a Cohen-Macaulay ring for all n⩾1 (or for some fixed n=n0≫0). It turns out that only equimultiple ideals have this property, see Theorem 3.1. In the case of square-free monomial ideals, we can then derive a criterion for the Cohen-Macaulayness of R/In for some fixed n⩾3, see Theorem 3.7. This criterion is exactly the one for the Cohen-Macaulayness of R/In given in [17, Theorem 1.2].
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 1 we study the stability of associated primes and give an upper bound on astab(I) of a monomial ideal. In Section 2 we prove the main Theorem 2.3. The study of Cohen-Macaulay property of R/In is done in the last section.
1. Stability of associated primes
Let R:=k[x1,…,xr] be a polynomial ring over a field k with the maximal homogeneous ideal m=(x1,…,xr).
Throughout this paper, let I be a proper monomial ideal in R. Let N,R,R+ be the set of non-negative integers, real numbers and non-negative real numbers, respectively. For a vector α=(α1,…,αr)∈Nr, we denote by xα=x1α1⋯xrαr.
The integral closure of an arbitrary ideal a of R is the set of elements x in R that satisfy an integral relation
[TABLE]
where ai∈ai for i=1,…,n. This is an ideal and is denoted by a.
The integral closure of a monomial ideal I is a monomial ideal as well. We can geometrically describe I by using its Newton polyhedron.
Definition 1.1**.**
Let I be a monomial ideal of R. We define
(1)
For a subset A⊆R, the exponent set of A is E(A):={α∣xα∈A}⊆Nr.
2. (2)
The Newton polyhedron of I is NP(I):=conv{E(I)}, the convex hull of the exponent set of I in
the space Rr.
Let G(I) denote the minimal generating system of monomials of I and
[TABLE]
the maximal generating degree of I. Let e1,...,er be the canonical basis of Rr.
The first part of the following result is [19, Lemma 6]. It gives more precise information on the coefficients of defining equations of supporting hyperplanes of NP(I).
Lemma 1.2**.**
The Newton polyhedron NP(I) is the set of solutions of a system of inequalities of the form
[TABLE]
such that each hyperplane with the equation ⟨aj,x⟩=bj defines a facet of NP(I), which contains sj affinely
independent points of E(G(I)) and is parallel to r−sj vectors of the canonical basis. Furthermore, we can
choose 0=aj∈Nr,bj∈N for all j=1,...,q; and if we write aj=(aj1,…,ajr), then
[TABLE]
where sj is the number of non-zero coordinates of aj.
Proof.
The first part of the lemma is [19, Lemma 6]. Moreover, it also claims that aj∈R+r and b∈R+. For the second part, let H be a hyperplane which defines a facet of NP(I). W.l.o.g, we may assume that H is defined by s affinely independent points α1,...,αs∈E(G(I)) and is parallel to r−s vectors es+1,…,er. Then the defining equation of H can be written as
[TABLE]
Expanding this determinant in the first row, we get: a1′x1+⋯+as′xs=b′, where ai′ are the (1,i)-cofactor for i=1,…,s and b′ is the (1,s+1)-cofactor of this determinant. Clearly, a1′,…,as′,b′∈Z. Note that we may take ai=∣ai′∣ and b=∣b′∣. Expanding the determinant
[TABLE]
in the last column, we get
[TABLE]
Let det(cij) be a determinant in the above sum. By Hadamard’s inequality, we have
[TABLE]
Hence a1=∣a1′∣⩽sd(I)s−1. Similarly, ai⩽sd(I)s−1 for i=2,…,r, as required.
∎
The following lemma is a crucial result in the study of the stability of Ass(R/In).
Lemma 1.3**.**
Let I be a monomial ideal in R with r>2. If m∈AssR/Is for some s⩾1, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let m:=(r−1)rd(I)r−2. Since the sequence {AssR/In}n⩾1 is increasing by [6, Proposition 16.3], it suffices to show that m∈AssR/Im.
As m∈AssR/Is, by [19, Lemma 13], there is a supporting hyperplane of NP(I), say H, of the form ⟨a,x⟩=b such that all coordinates of a are positive. By Lemma 1.2, this hyperplane passes through r affinely independent points of E(G(I)), say α1,…,αr. Let J:=(xα1,…,xαr). Clearly, H is still a supporting plane of NP(J). Again by Lemma 1.2, the Newton polyhedron NP(J) can be represented by a system of inequalities
[TABLE]
where 0=aj∈Nr and bj∈N. Let Hj={x∈Rr∣⟨aj,x⟩=bj} for j=1,…,q. We may assume that q is minimal and Hq=H. Since J is generated by exactly r monomials and q is taken to be minimal, by Lemma 1.2, each hyperplane Hj, where j⩽q−1, must be parallel to at least one of the vectors e1,…,er. Hence, by the second statement of Lemma 1.2, we may assume that
[TABLE]
Consider the barycenter α:=r1(α1+⋯+αr) of the simplex [α1,…,αr]. Then α is a relative interior point of the facet Hq∩NP(J) of NP(J). Therefore, α does not lie in Hj for all j=1,…,q−1, and so
[TABLE]
Next, we may assume that aqr=min{aq1,…,aqr}>0. Let β:=mα−er. Then β=(r−1)d(I)r−2(α1+⋯+αr)−er∈Zr. Since α1,...,αr∈Hq are affinely independent and aq1,...,aqr>0, there exists j⩽r such that αjr>0, whence αjr⩾1. Hence β∈Nr. Moreover,
[TABLE]
Therefore β∈/NP(Jm) and also β∈/NP(Im) (recall that H=Hq).
On the other hand, we claim that
[TABLE]
Indeed, for i=r, β+er=mα∈mNP(J)=NP(Jm). For i⩽r−1, we have
[TABLE]
Let j⩽q−1. Since rα=α1+⋯+αr∈NP(Jr)∩Nr, by (1.4), we have ⟨aj,rα⟩>rbj, which implies ⟨aj,rα⟩⩾rbj+1. Hence
Since NP(Jm)=mNP(J)⊆mNP(I)=NP(Im), β+ei∈NP(Im), whence xβxi∈Im. As shown above, β∈NP(Im). Therefore, m∈AssR/Im, as required.
∎
A main tool in the study of the set of associated primes and the depth of rings is using local cohomology modules. In the setting of monomial ideals, one often uses a generalized version of a Hochster’s formula given by Takayama in [16]. Let us recall this formula here.
Since R/I is an Nr-graded algebra, Hmi(R/I) is an Zr-graded module over R. For every degree α∈Zr we denote by Hmi(R/I)α the α-component of Hmi(R/I).
Let Δ(I) denote the simplicial complex corresponding to the Stanley-Reisner ideal I, i.e.
[TABLE]
where [r] denotes the set {1,2,...,r}. For every α=(α1,…,αr)∈Zr, we define its co-support to be the set CSα:={i∣αi<0}. For a subset F of [r], let RF:=R[xi−1∣i∈F].
Set
[TABLE]
We set Hi(∅;k)=0 for all i, Hi({∅};k)=0 for all i=−1, and H−1({∅};k)=k. Thanks to [4, Lemma 1.1] we may formulate Takayama’s formula as follows.
As an immediate consequence of this result is the following“quasi-decreasing” property of the depth function depthR/In. We don’t know if this property holds for an arbitrary homogeneous ideal.
Lemma 1.5**.**
For any monomial ideal I of R, we have
(1)
depthR/Im⩾depthR/Imn for all m,n⩾1.
2. (2)
limn→∞depthR/In=dimR−ℓ(I),* where ℓ(I) denotes the analytic spread of I.*
Proof.
Replacing Im by J, it suffices to prove the statement for m=1. Let t:=depthR/I. Then we must have Hmt(R/I)α=0 for some α∈Zr. By Lemma 1.4,
[TABLE]
For n⩾1, we have CSnα=CSα and
[TABLE]
The middle equality follows from (1.1). Together with Equation (1.7) and Lemma 1.4, this fact implies that
[TABLE]
This means depthR/In⩽t.
Let J:=Ir−1. By [21, Theorem 7.29], J is torsion-free. Thus, by [3, Proposition 3.3], we have
[TABLE]
For each m⩾1, by [21, Corollary 7.60], we have Jm=Im(r−1). Hence
[TABLE]
Note that ℓ(J)=ℓ(Ir−1)=ℓ(Ir−1)=ℓ(I), so the desired equality follows.
∎
Let F be a subset of [r]. Put R[F]=k[xi∣i∈/F] and denote by I[F] the ideal of R[F] obtained from I by setting xi=1 for all i∈F. Then
I[F]R=IRF∩R.
If F={i} for some i∈[r], then we write R[i] and I[i] instead of R[{i}] and I[{i}] respectively.
Remark 1.6**.**
Let I be a monomial ideal in R. Then,
(1)
Using (1.1) it is easy to see that In[F]=I[F]n for any n⩾1 (cf. [11, Lemma 4.6]).
2. (2)
If I is Cohen-Macaulay, then I[F] is Cohen-Macaulay.
We can now give an improvement of the main result, Theorem 16, in [19].
Theorem 1.7**.**
Let I be a monomial ideal of R and
[TABLE]
Then, AssR/In=AssR/In0(I) for all n⩾n0(I).
Proof.
Fix an index i⩽r. It is well known that the analytic spread of I is equal to the minimal number of generators of a minimal reduction of I. Since I[i] is obtained from I by setting xi=1, this implies that ℓ(I)⩾ℓ(I[i]) and d(I[i])⩽d(I). Hence n0(I[i])⩽n0(I). Using this remark, Remark 1.6(1) and Lemma 1.5, we can prove the theorem by induction on r. The proof is similar to that of [19, Theorem 16], so we omit details here.
∎
Remark. Set
[TABLE]
It can be called the index of stability for the associated primes of R/In. An example given in [19, Proposition 17] shows that an upper bound on astab(I) must be of the order d(I)r−2, provided that r is fixed. The coefficient of d(I)r−2 in the upper bound given in [19, Theorem 16] is r2r−1.
2. Stability of Depth
In this section we study the stability index of the depth function depthR/In. It is clear that a simplicial complex Δ is defined by the set of its maximal faces, say F1,...,Fs. In this case we write Δ=⟨F1,...,Fs⟩. Keeping the notations in Lemma 1.2, we set supp(aj):={i∣aji=0}.
We can describe Δα(In) as follows.
Lemma 2.1**.**
For any α∈Nr and n⩾1, we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let F∈Δα(In). We may assume that F={s+1,…,r} for some 0⩽s⩽r. By Lemma 1.2 and (1.2), we can deduce that NP(In) is the set of solutions of the system
[TABLE]
Since CSα=∅, xα∈/InRF if and only if xαxγ∈/In for any monomial xγ∈k[xs+1,…,xr]. Taking xγ=xs+1m⋯xrm, where
[TABLE]
is fixed, it implies that there is 1≤p⩽q such that
[TABLE]
Assume that there is i⩾s+1 such that api>0. Then
[TABLE]
a contradiction. Hence ap(s+1)=⋯=apr=0, whence F⊆[r]∖supp(ap) . Then ⟨ap,α⟩=⟨ap,α+m(es+1+er)⟩<nbp.
Conversely, assume that there is j⩽q such that F⊆[r]∖supp(aj), i.e. aj(s+1)=⋯=ajr=0, and
⟨aj,α⟩<nbj. Then for all monomials xγ∈k[xs+1,…,xr], we have
⟨aj,α+γ⟩=⟨aj,α⟩<nbj.
By (1.1) and Lemma 1.2, this implies xαxγ∈/In. From (1.6), we get that F∈Δα(In). This completes the proof of the lemma.
∎
The following lemma is the main step in the proof of Theorem 2.3
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let m⩾1 and t:=depthR/Im. Assume that Hmt(R/Im)β=0 for some β∈Nr. If r⩾3, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
For simplicity, set n∗:=r(r2−1)rr/2(r−1)rd(I)(r−2)(r+1). We keep the notations in Lemma 1.2.
Assume that supp(aj)=[r] for some 1⩽j⩽q. By [19, Lemma 14] we have m∈AssR/In for all n≫0. By Lemma 1.3, it yields m∈AssR/In for all n⩾n∗. Thus, depthR/In=0 for n⩾n∗, and the lemma holds in this case.
We now assume that supp(aj)=[r] for all j=1,…,q, i.e. the number of non-zero coordinates of aj is strictly less than r. By Lemma 1.2, we have
Hence Δβ(Im) is not acyclic. In particular, p⩾1.
For each n⩾1, put
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
It is clear that Cn=nC1. By Lemma 2.1, Cn∩Nr⊆Γ(In).
Assume that Cn∩Nr=∅. Then for any α∈Cn∩Nr, by Lemma 1.4, we have
[TABLE]
whence depthR/In⩽t.
Thus, in order to complete the proof of the lemma, it remains to show that Cn∩Nr=∅ for any n⩾n∗. Fix such an integer n.
Since β∈Cm=mC1, C1=∅. First, we prove that C1 is bounded in Rr. Assume that aji=0 for some 1⩽i⩽r and for all j=1,…,p. Then, for any s≫0, by Formula (2.2) we get that β+sei∈Cm, which implies Δβ+sei(Im)=Δβ(Im). Again by Lemma 1.4, we have
[TABLE]
This contradicts the Artiness of Hmt(R/Im). Hence, for each i⩽r, there is ji⩽p such that ajii⩾1.
Let y=(y1,…,yr) be an arbitrary point of C1⊆R+r . Then for each i⩽r, we have
yi⩽ajiiyi⩽⟨aji,y⟩<bji. This implies that C1 is bounded and so is Cn.
Let Cn be the closure of Cn in Rr with respect to the usual Euclidean topology. Then Cn is bounded as well. Moreover,
[TABLE]
and hence Cn is a polytope.
We next claim that C1 is full dimensional. Indeed, for any y∈C1, by Formula (2.2) we can choose a real number ε>0 such that for all real numbers ε1,…,εr with 0⩽ε1,…,εr⩽ε, we have y+ε1e1+⋯+εrer∈C1. This means that the parallelotope [y1,y1+ε]×⋯×[yr,yr+ε]⊆C1 , and thus C1 is full dimensional in Rr, as claimed.
Since the polytope C1 is full dimensional, by the Decomposition Theorem for polyhedra (see [15, Corollary 7.1.b]), we can find r+1 vertices, say α0,…,αr, of the polytope C1, which are affinely independent. Let α=r+11(α0+⋯+αr) be the barycenter of the r-simplex [α0,α1,…,αr]⊆C1.
For each i⩽r, set λi=⌈αi⌉−αi⩾0, where ⌈αi⌉ is the least integer which is bigger than or equal αi. Then λ1+⋯+λr<r and γ:=nα+λ1e1+⋯+λrer∈Nr. In order to show Cn∩Nr=∅, it suffices to show that
γ∈Cn.
Now, fix an index j⩽p. Since α0,α1,…,αr are affinely independent in Rr, there is at least one point not lying in the hyperplane
⟨aj,x⟩=bj. We may assume that α0 is such a point. From Formula (2.3) we then have
[TABLE]
Since α0 is a vertex of the polytope C1, by [15, Formula 23 in Page 104], α0 can be represented as the unique solution of a system of linear equations of the form:
[TABLE]
where ∣S∣=r. By Cramer’s rule we have
α0i=δi/δ for all i⩽r, where δ,δ1,…,δr∈N and δ is the absolute value of the determinant of this system of linear equations. In particular, δα0∈Nr.
Using the inequalities (2.1) and Hadamard’s inequality applied to δ, we get
[TABLE]
By (2.4) we have ⟨aj,δα0⟩<δbj, whence ⟨aj,δα0⟩⩽δbj−1 because aj,δα0∈Nr. Let c=n/(r+1)δ, then by (2.5), c⩾r(r−1)d(I)r−2. We then have
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
So ⟨aj,γ⟩⩽nbj−1, for all j⩽p. This means that γ∈Cn, as required.
∎
We are now in position to prove the main result of this section.
Theorem 2.3**.**
Let I be a monomial ideal of R. Let
[TABLE]
Then, depthR/In=dimR−ℓ(I) for all n⩾n1(I).
Proof.
We prove the theorem by induction on r. If r⩽2, and I=0, then depthR/In=0,1, and depthR/In=0 if and only if m∈Ass(R/In). Since Ass(R/In) is constant for all n⩾1 in this case (by [12, Proposition 16]), we get
Assume that r⩾3. By virtue of Lemma 1.5(2) and symmetry, it suffices to show that
[TABLE]
for any m,n⩾n1(I). Let t:=depthR/Im. As Hmt(R/Im)=0, by Lemma 1.4, there is β∈Zr such that
[TABLE]
In particular, Δβ(Im)=∅. If CSβ=∅, i.e., β∈Nr, then (2.6) follows from Lemma 2.2.
We now assume that CSβ=∅. Without loss of generality, we may assume that
CSβ={s+1,…,r} for some integer 0⩽s⩽r. If s=0, i.e. CSβ=[r], then Δβ(Im)={∅}. By Lemma 1.4, it follows that Hm0(R/Im)=0, which is equivalent to m∈AssR/Im. Since r⩾3, n⩾n1(I)>(r−1)rd(I)r−2, m∈AssR/In by Lemma 1.3. Hence, depthR/In=0=depthR/Im in this case.
Assume that s⩾1. Let R′:=k[x1,…,xs]=R[{s+1,...,r}] (in the notation before Remark 1.6) and I′:=I[{s+1,...,r}]⊆R′. Let β=(β1,…,βr) and β′:=(β1,…,βs)∈Ns. Then, by Formula (1.6), Δβ′(I′m)=Δβ(Im). Let n:=(x1,…,xs) be the maximal homogeneous ideal of R′. Using (2.7) and Lemma 1.4 we obtain
[TABLE]
Hence I′=R′ and depthR′/I′m⩽t−∣CSβ∣, or equivalently depthR/Im⩾∣CSβ∣+depthR′/I′m. On the other hand, by [10, Lemma 1.3], we have depthR/Im⩽∣CSβ∣+depthR′/I′m and depthR/In⩽∣CSβ∣+depthR′/I′n. Hence
[TABLE]
and (noticing that n1(I′)⩽n1(I), since d(I′)⩽d(I) and s⩽r)
[TABLE]
∎
Remark. Set
[TABLE]
One can call it the index of depth stability for integral closures. Then Theorem 2.3 says that dstab(I)≤n1(I). It seems that this bound is too big. However, an example given in [19, Proposition 17] shows that an upper bound on dstab(I) must be at least of the order d(I)r−2.
3. Cohen-Macaulay property
In this section we apply results in previous sections to study the Cohen-Macaulayness of integeral closures of powers of monomial ideals. We say that I is equimultiple if ℓ(I)=ht(I). Note that, by [1, Theorem 2.3], we can compute ℓ(I) in terms of geometry of NP(I).
[TABLE]
Therefore, the condition I being equimultiple is independent on the characteristic of the base field k.
Theorem 3.1**.**
Let I be a monomial ideal of R. The following conditions are equivalent
(1)
R/In* is a Cohen-Macaulay ring for all n⩾1,*
2. (2)
R/In* is a Cohen-Macaulay ring for some n⩾n1(I), where n1(I) is defined in Theorem 2.3,*
3. (3)
I* is an equimultiple ideal of R.*
Proof.
If R/In is a Cohen-Macaulay ring for some n≥n1(I), then by Theorem 2.3 we have
dimR/In=depthR/In=dimR−ℓ(I).
On the other hand, dimR/In=dimR/I=dimR−ht(I). Hence, ℓ(I)=ht(I).
In the rest of this section we will improve the above theorem for the class of square-free monomial ideals. We need some auxiliary results.
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let I be an unmixed monomial ideal and I=Q1∩⋯∩Qs be an irredundant primary decomposition of I. Assume that In is unmixed for some n⩾1. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
We prove by induction on s and on r. If s=1 (which also includes the case r=1) there is nothing to prove.
Assume that s⩾2 and r⩾2. Since I is unmixed, Qj=m for all j⩽s. For each i⩽r, let
[TABLE]
If there is j0≤s such that j0∈∪i=1rAi, then x1,...,xr∈Qj0, a contradiction. Hence ∪i=1rAi=[s] and I=⋂i=1r(∩j∈AiQj)), where we set ∩j∈AiQj=R if Ai=∅. Moreover, using Remark 1.6(1) and the induction hypothesis on r, we may assume that ∣Ai∣<s for all i⩽r.
It is well-known that one can get a primary decomposition of a monomial ideal a⊂R by repeated application of the formula (B,uv)=(B,u)∩(B,v), where B is a set of monomials and u,v are monomials having no common variable. Based on this fact, it is immediate to see that one can get a primary decomposition of a[i]R from that of a by deleting those primary components whose associated prime ideals contain xi (recall that a[i] is obtained from G(I) by setting xi=1).
Using this remark we see that I[i] is an unmixed ideal for all i⩽r. Moreover I[i]=∩j∈AiQj and I=∩i=1rI[i].
By Remark 1.6(1) I[i]nR=(In)[i]R and In=∩i=1rI[i]nR. Since In is unmixed, by the above remark, all I[i]nR are unmixed ideals. Since ∣Ai∣<s, by the induction hypothesis on s, we also get I[i]nR=∩j∈AiQjn.
Let J:=Q1n∩⋯∩Qsn. This is an unmixed ideal. Hence, as shown above, J=⋂i=1rJ[i]R and J[i]R=∩j∈AiQjn=I[i]nR . Then J=∩i=1rI[i]nR=In, as required.
∎
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let y be a new variable and S=R[y]=k[x1,...,xr,y]. Then, for every n⩾1 we have
(1)
(I,y)n=∑i=0nyiIn−iS.
2. (2)
(I,y)n* is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if Ii is Cohen-Macaulay for all i⩽n.*
Proof.
(1) The inclusion ∑i=0nyiIn−iS⊆(I,y)n follows from the fact that I1⋅I2⊆I1I2 for all ideals I1 and I2 in S.
In order to prove the reverse inclusion, let G(I)={xα1,…,xαs}. Set αj∗=(αj,0)∈Nr+1 and let er+1 be the (r+1)-th unit vector of Rr+1. Assume that (α,β)∈NP((I,y)n)∩Nr+1. From (1.2) we see that there are non-negative numbers a1,...,as,b such that ∑j=1raj+b⩾n and
(α,β)=∑j=1sajαj∗+ber+1.
Then b=β∈N. If b⩾n, then xαyβ∈ynS. Assume that b<n. Then ∑j=1raj⩾n−b>0 and α=∑j=1sajαj∈NP(In−b). Hence, by (1.1), xαyβ∈ymIn−mS. In both cases, xαyβ∈∑i=0nyiIn−iS, i.e., (I,y)n⊆∑i=0nyiIn−iS.
(2) From (1) we deduce that
[TABLE]
as R-modules, and the conclusion follows.
∎
From now on, let I be an ideal generated by square-free monomials. Such an ideal is often called a Stanley-Reisner ideal and is associated to the simplicial complex Δ:=Δ(I). In this case we also denote I by IΔ. Note that we do not require that Δ contains all vertices {i}, i⩽r. Recall that for a face F∈Δ, the link of F is defined by
[TABLE]
We simply write lkΔi for lkΔ{i}.
Corollary 3.4**.**
If IΔn is Cohen-Macaulay, then so is IlkΔin for every vertex i of Δ.
Proof.
Let S=k[xj∣j=i]. Then R=S[xi]. Let J=IΔR[xi−1]∩S. We have Jn=IΔnR[xi−1]∩S, whence Jn is Cohen-Macaulay.
Denote by V(Δ) the set of vertices of a simplicial complex Δ. Let Y={xj∣j∈/V(lkΔi) and j=i}. By [17, Lemma 2.1] we have
[TABLE]
It follows that J=(IlkΔi,Y) as ideals in S. By Lemma 3.3 we conclude that IlkΔin is Cohen-Macaulay.
∎
Note that IΔ is a complete intersection if and only if any two of its minimal monomial generators have no common variable. Recall that dimΔ=max{∣F∣∣F∈Δ}−1.
Lemma 3.5**.**
Assume that dimΔ=0 and that IΔn is Cohen-Macaulay for some n⩾2. Then, IΔ is a complete intersection. Moreover, Δ has at most two vertices.
Proof.
Since dimΔ=0, we may assume that Δ=⟨{1},…,{s}⟩ for some s⩽r. Then
[TABLE]
If s⩽2, then IΔ is a complete intersection. It remains to show that s⩽2.
Assume on the contrary that s⩾3. Since
[TABLE]
we can check that m=I2:(x1x2x3), but x1x2x3∈IΔ2. Hence m∈AssR/I2. Using the non-decreasing property of the sets associated prime ideals of integral closures of powers of an ideal (see [6, Proposition 16.3]), we have m∈AssR/In. Hence IΔn is not Cohen-Macaulay, a contradiction.
∎
Lemma 3.6**.**
Assume that dimΔ=1 and that IΔn is Cohen-Macaulay for some n⩾3. Then, IΔ is a complete intersection.
Proof.
Since IΔn is Cohen-Macaulay and IΔn=IΔ, Δ is Cohen-Macaulay by [9, Theorem 2.6]. Since dimΔ=1, this property implies that Δ is connected. In particular, every facet of Δ has exactly two vertices, and we can regard Δ as a connected graph without isolated vertices. We may assume that V(Δ)=[s] for some s⩽r.
If s=2, then Δ is just an edge, and IΔ=(x3,...,xr). Assume that s⩾3. For each vertex i of Δ, by Corollary 3.4 and Lemma 3.5, lkΔ(i) is either one vertex or consists of exactly two vertices. Consequently, Δ is either a path or a cycle.
For each edge {i,j} of Δ , set Pij=(xs+1,...,xr;xl∣1≤l⩽s;l=i and l=j). Then,
IΔ=∩{i,j}∈ΔPij.
Since IΔn is unmixed, by Lemma 3.2 we have
[TABLE]
where IΔ(n) is the n-th symbolic power of IΔ. This implies that IΔ(n) is Cohen-Macaulay. By [13, Theorem 2.4], every pair of disjoint edges of Δ is contained in a cycle of length 4. Since Δ is either a path or a cycle, we conclude that Δ is either a path of length two, or a cycle of length 3 or 4. Hence, either IΔ=(x4,...,xr;x1x3),(x4,...,xr;x1x2x3) or IΔ=(x5,...,xr;x1x3,x2x4) - all are complete intersections.
∎
We can now improve Theorem 3.1 for square-free monomial ideals by giving an exact description of all square-free monomial ideals IΔ such that IΔn is Cohen-Macaulay for some n⩾3.
Theorem 3.7**.**
Let Δ be a simplicial complex. Then the following conditions are equivalent:
(1)
IΔn* is Cohen-Macaulay for every n⩾1;*
2. (2)
IΔn* is Cohen-Macaulay for some n⩾3;*
3. (3)
IΔ* is a complete intersection;*
4. (4)
IΔ* is an equimultipe ideal.*
Proof.
(1)⇒(2) and (3)⇒(4) are clear. (4)⇒(1) follows from Theorem 3.1.
It remains to prove that (2)⇒(3). The following proof is similar to that of [17, Theorem 4.3]. We prove the implication by induction on dimΔ. The case dimΔ⩽1 follows from Lemmas 3.5 and 3.6. Assume that dimΔ⩾2. Since IΔn is Cohen-Macaulay and IΔn=IΔ, IΔ is Cohen-Macaulay by [9, Theorem 2.6]. In particular, Δ is connected. On the other hand,
by Corollary 3.4, IlkΔin is Cohen-Macaulay for all i⩽s, where w.l.o.g. we assume V(Δ)=[s]. By the induction hypothesis, IlkΔi is a complete intersection.
Since Δ is connected, this implies that IΔ is a complete intersection complex by [18, Theorem 1.5].
∎
Note that [17, Theorem 1.2] states that the last condition in Theorem 3.7 is also equivalent to the Cohen-Macaulayness of R/In for all n⩾1 (or for some fixed n⩾3).
The property that the Cohen-Macaulay property of In for some n⩾3 forces that for all n is very specific for square-free monomial ideals. For an arbitrary monomial ideal, the picture is much more complicate, as shown by the following example.
Example 3.8**.**
Let d⩾3 and I=(xd,xyd−2z,yd−1z)⊂R=k[x,y,z]. Then (x,y,z)∈Ass(R/In) if and only if n⩾d (see the example in [19, Page 54]). Since dimR/I=1, it follows that:
(1)
R/In is Cohen-Macaulay for each n=1,…,d−1;
2. (2)
R/In is not Cohen-Macaulay for any n⩾d.
Note that ht(I)=2 and ℓ(I)=3 in this case.
Acknowledgment
This work is partially supported by NAFOSTED (Vietnam) under the grant number 101.04-2015.02.
Bibliography21
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] C. Bivia-Ausina, The analytic spread of monomial ideals , Comm. Algebra, 31 (2003), 3487-3496.
2[2] M. P. Brodmann, The Asymptotic Nature of the Analytic Spread , Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos Soc. 86 (1979), 35-39.
3[3] D. Eisenbud and C. Huneke, Cohen-Macaulay Rees Algebras and their Specializations , J. Algebra 81 (1983) 202-224.
4[4] D. H. Giang and L. T. Hoa, On local cohomology of a tetrahedral curve , Acta Math. Vietnam., 35 (2010), 229-241.
5[5] H. T. Ha, D. H. Nguyen, N. V. Trung and T. N. Trung, Symbolic powers of sums of ideals , Preprint Ar Xiv:1702.01766.
6[6] M. Herrmann, S. Ikeda, U. Orbanz, Equimultiplicity and Blowing up, Springer-Verlag, 1988.
7[7] J. Herzog and T. Hibi, The Depth of Powers of an Ideal , J. Algebra 291 (2005), 534-550.
8[8] J. Herzog and A. A. Qureshi, Persistence and stability properties of powers of ideals , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 219 (2015), 530-542.