This paper studies the sequence of mixed Łojasiewicz exponents for pairs of monomial ideals, providing combinatorial formulas and relations with other invariants in complex analytic geometry.
Contribution
It introduces a combinatorial expression for the sequence when one ideal is diagonal and explores its relations with other numerical invariants.
Findings
01
Derived a combinatorial formula for the sequence when J is diagonal
02
Established relations between Łojasiewicz exponents and other invariants
03
Analyzed the sequence for monomial ideals of finite colength
Abstract
We analyze the sequence LJ∗(I) of mixed \L ojasiewicz exponents attached to any pair I,J of monomial ideals of finite colength of the ring of analytic function germs (Cn,0)→C. In particular, we obtain a combinatorial expression for this sequence when J is diagonal. We also show several relations of LJ∗(I) with other numerical invariants associated to I and J.
Equations271
e(J)e(I)⩽LJ(1)(I)⋯LJ(n)(I),
e(J)e(I)⩽LJ(1)(I)⋯LJ(n)(I),
\phi_{\Gamma}(k)=\min\bigg{\{}\frac{M_{\Gamma}}{\ell(v^{i},\Gamma_{+})}\langle k,v^{i}\rangle:i=1,\dots,s\bigg{\}},\quad\textnormal{for all
$k\in\mathbb{R}^{n}_{\geqslant 0}$}.
\phi_{\Gamma}(k)=\min\bigg{\{}\frac{M_{\Gamma}}{\ell(v^{i},\Gamma_{+})}\langle k,v^{i}\rangle:i=1,\dots,s\bigg{\}},\quad\textnormal{for all
$k\in\mathbb{R}^{n}_{\geqslant 0}$}.
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.
Taxonomy
TopicsCommutative Algebra and Its Applications · Polynomial and algebraic computation · Algebraic Geometry and Number Theory
Full text
The sequence of mixed Łojasiewicz exponents
associated to pairs of ideals
Carles Bivià-Ausina
Institut Universitari de Matemàtica Pura i Aplicada,
Universitat Politècnica de València,
Camí de Vera, s/n,
46022 València,
Spain
We analyze the sequence LJ∗(I) of mixed Łojasiewicz exponents
attached to any pair I,J of monomial ideals of finite colength of the ring of analytic function germs (Cn,0)→C.
In particular, we obtain a combinatorial expression for this sequence when J is diagonal. We also show
several relations of LJ∗(I) with other numerical invariants associated to I and J.
Key words and phrases:
Łojasiewicz exponents, integral closure of ideals, mixed multiplicities of ideals, monomial ideals, Newton polyhedra
The author was partially supported by DGICYT Grant MTM2015-64013-P
1. Introduction
The multiplicity and the Łojasiewicz exponent of ideals of finite colength in a Noetherian local ring
are fundamental numerical invariants that have numerous applications in commutative algebra, algebraic geometry and singularity theory
(see for instance [17, 20, 25]).
The notion of multiplicity of ideals in a Noetherian local ring was extended to sequences of ideals (I1,…,In) of finite colength by
Risler and Teissier in [25]. This notion was further developed by Rees in his article [21], where
he also introduced the fundamental notion of joint reduction.
Moreover, Swanson gave in [24] a version of the Rees’ multiplicity theorem for mixed multiplicities.
Łojasiewicz exponents were initially introduced in the context of complex analytic geometry.
Due to the fundamental work of Lejeune and Teissier [17], Łojasiewicz exponents admit an equivalent formulation in terms of the
notion of integral closure of ideals. Consequently, these numbers have a translation in terms of multiplicities of ideals, by virtue of the Rees’
multiplicity theorem (see relation 10).
Let (R,m) be a Noetherian local ring of dimension n. In [3] we considered an extension of
the notion of mixed multiplicity of n
ideals of finite colength of R to certain sequences of ideals
(I1,…,In) that are not assumed to have finite colength. We call this number the Rees’ multiplicity of (I1,…,In)
and we denote it by σ(I1,…,In). Analogous to the idea of extending the notion of Samuel multiplicity of ideals to sequences
of n ideals in a ring of dimension n, in [4] we started the task of developing a similar idea for Łojasiewicz exponents
of ideals. Hence, if (I1,…,In) is a sequence of ideals of R for which
σ(I1,…,In)<∞ and if J is a proper ideal of R, then we introduced the notion of mixed
Łojasiewicz exponent of (I1,…,In) with respect to J (see Definition 3.3). This number is denoted by LJ(I1,…,In).
Let On be the ring of analytic function germs (Cn,0)→C and let mn be the maximal ideal of On.
In [4] we addressed the problem of finding an effective
procedure to compute LJ(I1,…,In) in the case where R=On, the ideals I1,…,In are generated by monomials
and J=mn. In [7, 8] we considered the problem of determining LJ(I1,…,In) for ideals
in On with the aid of a fixed Newton filtration.
By [9, Corollary 3.8], the following relation between multiplicities and Łojasiewicz exponents holds:
[TABLE]
where I and J are ideals of finite colength of R
and LJ(i)(I)=LJ(I,…,I,J,…,J),
with I repeated i times and J repeated n−i times.
We denote the vector (LJ(n)(I),…,LJ(1)(I)) by LJ∗(I).
In [14], Hickel proved inequality (1), by using different techniques,
in the case where R is an equicharacteristic regular local ring and
J equals the maximal ideal. In this context, he also characterized the class of ideals
I for which equality holds in (1) when n=2 (see [14, Proposition 5.1]).
Let us denote Lmn(i)(I) by L0(i)(I), for all i=1,…,n.
In [5, Theorem 3.5] we
proved that, if I is a monomial ideal of On, then e(I)=L0(1)(I)⋯L0(n)(I) if and only if
there exist homogeneous polynomials g1,…,gn∈C[x1,…,xn] such that I=⟨g1,…,gn⟩.
That is, we characterized the equality in (1) when I is a monomial ideal and J=mn.
Let I and J be monomial ideals of On of finite colength.
The main purpose of this article is to compute the sequence LJ∗(I)
in terms of the combinatorial information supplied by the respective Newton polyhedra of I and J.
We have obtained an upper bound for each LJ(i)(I) which becomes an equality when J is diagonal,
that is, when J is of the form J=⟨x1a1,…,xnan⟩, for some a1,…,an∈Z⩾1,
where the bar denotes integral closure. The results of the article are mainly motivated by the problem of characterizing the equality in (1),
by [6, Theorem 5.5] and the results of [14].
Next we describe more precisely the structure and contents of the article.
In Section 2 we recall some notions and results needed to expose our work.
Hence we recall basic notions like Newton filtration, J-non-degenerate sequence of ideals and J-non-degenerate map,
where J denotes a fixed monomial ideal of finite colength of On (these notions generalize the notion of semi
weighted-homogeneous map (Cn,0)→(Cn,0)).
Section 3 is devoted to developing general results about the sequence LJ∗(I), when I and J are arbitrary
ideals of a Noetherian local ring R. In particular, in Proposition 3.5 we prove that LJ∗(I) forms a decreasing sequence provided that I⊆J. We also introduce and characterize the class of Hickel ideals with respect to J (see Corollary 3.7).
In Section 4 we explore the sequence LJ∗(I) when the ideal I is generated by the components of a J-non-degenerate map
(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) and J is a monomial ideal of On of finite colength.
We obtain an expression for this sequence when I⊆J (see Theorem 4.3)
and derive a characterization of J-non-degenerate maps in terms of LJ∗(I) (see Corollary 4.4).
Let I and J be arbitrary monomial ideals of On of finite colength. The main result of
Section 5 is Theorem 5.10,
where we show how to obtain an upper bound for the elements of the sequence
LJ∗(I) from any J-non-degenerate sequence
of ideals contained in I.
Section 6 is devoted to showing two applications of Theorem 5.10. In [6]
we constructed a particular J-non-degenerate sequence (K1,…Kn) of ideals contained in I. So we apply
this special sequence of ideals to derive an upper bound for the numbers LJ(i)(I) in
terms of the Newton filtration of J and the intersection with Γ+(I)
of the half rays determined by the vertices of Γ+(J).
The second application deals with the case where J is diagonal. In this case we show that the mentioned upper bounds actually coincide with the numbers
LJ(i)(I).
As a corollary, we obtain that if J is diagonal, then
equality holds in (1) if and only if there exists some s⩾1 such that
Is=⟨g1,…,gn⟩, where (g1,…,gn) is J-non-degenerate
(see Corollary 6.9).
2. Preliminary concepts
2.1. Newton filtrations
In this section we show some combinatorial definitions that we need in order to expose our results. These definitions
already appear in [6, Section 4] and [8, Section 3]. For the sake of completeness we include some of them also here.
Let On denote the ring of analytic function germs (Cn,0)→C.
Let us fix coordinates (x1,…,xn) in Cn. If k∈Z⩾0n, then we denote the monomial
x1k1⋯xnkn by xk. We say that a proper ideal I of On is monomial when I admits a generating system formed by monomials.
Let h∈On and let h=∑kakxk be the Taylor expansion of h around the origin. The
support of h, denoted by supp(h), is the set {k∈Z⩾0n:ak=0}.
If Δ is any subset of R⩾0n, then we denote by hΔ the sum of those terms akxk such that k∈supp(h)∩Δ.
We set hΔ=0 whenever supp(h)∩Δ=∅.
Given an ideal I of On, the support of I, denoted by supp(I),
is defined as the union of the supports of the elements of I.
If A⊆Z⩾0n, A=∅, then the Newton polyhedron determined by A is the set
Γ+(A) obtained as the convex hull of {k+v:k∈A,v∈R⩾0n}.
If Γ+ is a subset of R⩾0n such that Γ+=Γ+(A), for some A⊆Z⩾0n, then we will say that
Γ+ is a Newton polyhedron.
Given an element h∈On, h=0, the Newton polyhedron of h
is Γ+(h)=Γ+(supp(h)). If h=0, then we set Γ+(h)=∅.
Analogously, given a non-zero ideal I⊆On, the Newton polyhedron of I, is defined as
Γ+(I)=Γ+(supp(I)). It is known that if I is a monomial ideal of On, then
the integral closure of I is generated by those monomials xk such that k∈Γ+(I) (see for instance [15, Proposition 1.4.6]
or [27, Proposition 3.4]).
Let us fix a Newton polyhedron Γ+⊆Rn. We say that Γ+ is convenient when Γ+ meets each
coordinate axis in a point different from the origin. In particular, if J is a proper ideal of On of finite colength, then
Γ+(J) is convenient.
If v∈R⩾0n, then we define ℓ(v,Γ+)=min{⟨v,k⟩:k∈Γ+}, where ⟨,⟩
denotes the standard scalar product in Rn. We also set Δ(v,Γ+)={k∈Γ+:⟨v,k⟩=ℓ(v,Γ+)}.
We say that a subset Δ⊆Γ+ is a face of Γ+ when there exists some v∈R⩾0n such that
Δ(v,Γ+)=Δ. In this case we say that vsupportsΔ. If Δ is a face of Γ+, then the dimension of Δ is the minimum of the dimensions
of the affine subspaces of Rn containing Δ. The faces of Γ+ of dimension [math] or n−1 will be called
vertices or facets, respectively. We denote by v(Γ+) the set of vertices of Γ+.
The union of all compact faces of Γ+ will be denoted by
Γ and we will refer to this subset of Γ+ as the Newton boundary of Γ+.
We say that a given vector v∈Z⩾0n, v=0, is primitive, when the non-zero components of v are mutually prime
integers. We denote by F(Γ+) the set of primitive vectors of Z⩾0n supporting some facet of Γ+.
Let us denote by Fc(Γ+) the set of those v∈F(Γ+) such that Δ(v,Γ+)
is compact and by F′(Γ+) the set of those v∈F(Γ+) such that ℓ(v,Γ+)>0. Obviously
Fc(Γ+)⊆F′(Γ+) and equality holds if Γ+ is convenient.
Let us suppose that F′(Γ+)={v1,…,vs}, for some primitive vectors v1,…,vs∈Z⩾0n, s⩾1.
Let MΓ denote the least common multiple of {ℓ(v1,Γ+),…,ℓ(vs,Γ+)}. We define the
filtrating map associated to Γ+ as the map
ϕΓ:R⩾0n→R⩾0 given by
[TABLE]
If Δ is any subset of Rn, then we denote by C(Δ) the cone
over Δ, that is, the union of all half-lines emanating from the origin and passing through some point of Δ.
It is easy to check that ϕΓ(Z⩾0n)⊆Z⩾0n,
ϕΓ(k)=MΓ, for all k∈Γ, and the map ϕΓ is linear on each
cone C(Δ), where Δ is any compact face of Γ+.
Therefore, we define the map νΓ:On→R⩾0∪{+∞} by
\nu_{\Gamma}(h)=\min\big{\{}\phi_{\Gamma}(k):k\in\operatorname{supp}(h)\big{\}}
for any h∈On, where we set νΓ(0)=+∞.
For any r∈Z⩾0, let us consider the ideal
[TABLE]
Obviously Br+1⊆Br, for all r∈Z⩾0.
Thus {Br}r⩾0 is a decreasing sequence of ideals.
We will indistinctly refer to the map νΓ or to the family of ideals {Br}r⩾0 as the Newton filtration induced by Γ+ (see also [11, 16]). This notion generalizes the notion of weighted homogeneous filtration of On.
2.2. Mixed multiplicities and J-non-degeneracy of sequences of ideals
Along this section we will suppose that (R,m) is a Noetherian local ring of dimension n.
If I is an ideal of R, then we denote by I the integral closure of I and, if I has finite colength, then
e(I) will denote the Samuel multiplicity of I (see [15, 18, 28]).
Given g1,…,gr∈R, if these elements generate an ideal of finite colength of R, then we will also write
e(g1,…,gr) instead of e(⟨g1,…,gr⟩).
If I1,…,In are ideals of R of finite colength,
then we denote by e(I1,…,In) the mixed multiplicity
of I1,…,In defined by Teissier and Risler in [25, §2].
We also refer to [15, §17.4], [21] or [24] for the definition and fundamental properties of mixed multiplicities of ideals.
Given two ideals I and J of R of finite colength and an integer
i∈{1,…,n}, we define
[TABLE]
where I is repeated i times and J is repeated n−i times.
Definition 2.1**.**
[3] Let I1,…,In be ideals of R. If the set of natural numbers {e(I1+mr,…,In+mr):r∈Z⩾1} is bounded, then we define the Rees’ mixed multiplicity
of I1,…,In as
[TABLE]
Otherwise, we set σ(I1,…,In)=∞.
Let us suppose that the residue field k=R/m is
infinite. Let I1,…,Ir be proper ideals of R and let us
fix a generating system ai1,…,aisi of Ii,
for all i=1,…,r. Let s=s1+⋯+sr. We say that a given
property holds for sufficiently general elements of
I1⊕⋯⊕Ir if there exists a non-empty
Zariski-open set U in ks such that all elements (g1,…,gr)∈I1⊕⋯⊕Ir satisfy the said property provided that
(a)
for all i=1,…,r: gi=∑juijaij, where uij∈R, for all j=1,…,si, and
2. (b)
the image of (u11,…,u1s1,…,ur1,…,ursr) in ks belongs to U.
Proposition 2.2**.**
[3, 2.9]*
Let (R,m) be a Noetherian local ring of dimension n with infinite residue field.
Let I1,…,In be proper ideals of R. Then, σ(I1,…,In)<∞ if and only if
there exist elements gi∈Ii, for i=1,…,n, such that
⟨g1,…,gn⟩ has finite colength. If σ(I1,…,In)<∞, then
σ(I1,…,In)=e(g1,…,gn) for
sufficiently general elements (g1,…,gn)∈I1⊕⋯⊕In.*
We remark that the case of Proposition 2.2 where I1,…,In have finite colength
follows as a consequence of the theorem of existence of joint reductions (see [15, p. 336] or [24, p. 4]).
Along the rest of this section, we will suppose that J is a monomial ideal of On of finite colength.
We denote by νJ the Newton filtration induced by Γ+(J) and by
ϕJ the corresponding filtrating map. Let us also set MJ=MΓ(J), where Γ(J)
denotes the Newton boundary of Γ+(J).
If I is a non-zero ideal of On, then we define νJ(I)=min{νJ(h):h∈I}.
For instance, if J=mn, then ϕmn(k)=∣k∣, for all k∈R⩾0n, where ∣(k1,…,kn)∣=k1+⋯+kn, for any (k1,…,kn)∈R⩾0n.
Let (I1,…,In) be an n-tuple of proper ideals such that
σ(I1,…,In)<∞. In general, we have that
[TABLE]
(see [8, Proposition 3.2]).
We say that (I1,…,In) is J-non-degenerate when equality holds in (5)
(see [8, Definition 3.3]).
Let g=(g1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) be an analytic map germ.
We say that g is J-non-degenerate when the n-tuple of ideals (⟨g1⟩,…,⟨gn⟩) is J-non-degenerate.
That is, when
[TABLE]
In Theorem 2.3 we recall a characterization of this class of maps given in [11].
Let h∈On, h=0, and suppose that h=∑kakxk is the Taylor expansion of h
around the origin. If Δ is a compact face of Γ+(J), then we denote by pJ,Δ(h) the sum of all terms akxk
such that k∈C(Δ) and νJ(xk)=νJ(h). If no such terms exist, then we set pJ,Δ(h)=0.
Theorem 2.3**.**
[11, 3.3]**
Let g=(g1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) be an analytic map germ such that g−1(0)={0}.
Then, the following conditions are equivalent:
(a)
g* is J-non-degenerate;*
2. (b)
the set germ at [math] of common zeros of pJ,Δ(g1),…,pJ,Δ(gn)
is contained in {x∈Cn:x1⋯xn=0}, for all compact faces Δ of Γ+(J).
Under the hypothesis of Theorem 2.3, let us assume that
νJ(g1)=⋯=νJ(gn)=MJ. Hence pJ,Δ(gi)=(gi)Δ, for all i=1,…,n.
Therefore, in this case, g is J-non-degenerate if and only if
e(g1,…,gn)=e(J), which is to say that ⟨g1,…,gn⟩ is a reduction of J,
by the Rees’ multiplicity theorem [15, p. 222].
Remark 2.4**.**
We recall that reductions of monomial ideal ideals are characterized in [3, Proposition 3.6]. These are the so called
Newton non-degenerate ideals (see [3, 11, 23, 27]).
Let I=⟨g1,…,gs⟩ be an ideal of On. Then,
I is called
Newton non-degenerate when the set germ at [math] of {x∈Cn:(g1)Δ(x)=⋯=(gs)Δ(x)=0}
is contained in {x∈Cn:x1⋯xn=0}, for all compact faces Δ of Γ+(I)
(it is immediate to check that this definition does not depend on the chosen generating
system of I). This kind of ideals was originally introduced by Saia in [23] motivated by the notion of Newton non-degenerate function (see [16]).
As we see in the next result, if g is a J-non-degenerate map, then the sequence of mixed multiplicities ei(I(g),J), i=0,…,n, can also be expressed in terms of νJ, where I(g) denotes the ideal of On generated by the component functions of g.
Proposition 2.5**.**
[6]**
Let g=(g1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) be a J-non-degenerate map.
Let di=νJ(gi), for all i=1,…,n. Let us suppose that d1⩽⋯⩽dn. Then
[TABLE]
The next result shows a characterization of the J-non-degeneracy of n-tuples of ideals.
Proposition 2.6**.**
[6]**
Let I1,…,In be ideals of On such that σ(I1,…,In)<∞.
Then, (I1,…,In) is J-non-degenerate if and only if there exist a1,…,an,d∈Z⩾1 such that
σ(I1a1,…,Inan)=e(Jd) and νJ(I1a1)=⋯=νJ(Inan)=dMJ.
We remark that the previous result has been our motivation to introduce in [6, Definition 7] the notion
of J-non-degeneracy of a sequence of elements g1,…,gn in an arbitrary local ring (R,m), where J denotes
any proper ideal of R. We will apply the following result in Section 4.
Corollary 2.7**.**
*Let J be a monomial ideal of On of finite colength.
Let (I1,…,In) be a J-non-degenerate n-tuple of ideals of On.
Then, (I1,…,Ii−1,J,Ii+1,…,In) is J-non-degenerate, for all i=1,…,n.
*
Proof.
Let us suppose, without loss of generality, that i=1. Let M=MJ. By Proposition 2.6, there exist
a1,…,an,d∈Z⩾1 such that e(I1a1,…,Inan)=e(Jd) and νJ(I1a1)=⋯=νJ(Inan)=dM.
In particular, the condition νJ(I1a1)=dM implies that
I1a1⊆Jd.
Therefore
[TABLE]
where we have applied (5) in the first inequality of (7). Hence the result follows by applying
Proposition 2.6.
∎
3. Mixed Łojasiewicz exponents and Hickel ideals
Let J and I be proper ideals of On. Let us suppose that
{f1,…,fp} is a generating system of J and
{g1,…,gq} is a generating system of I. Let us consider the maps
f=(f1,…,fp):(Cn,0)→(Cp,0) and g=(g1,…,gq):(Cn,0)→(Cq,0).
The Łojasiewicz exponent of I with respect to J, denoted by LJ(I), is defined
as the infimum of the set of those α∈R⩾0 for which there exists a constant C>0 and an open neighbourhood U of 0∈Cn
such that
[TABLE]
When the set of such α is empty, then we fix LJ(I)=+∞.
It is known that LJ(I) exists if and only if V(I)⊆V(J) and, if this is the case, then LJ(I) is a rational number
(see [17, Théorème 4.6] or [26]). Moreover, in [17, Théorème 7.2] the Łojasiewicz exponent of I
with respect to J is characterized as follows:
[TABLE]
Therefore J⊆I if and only if LJ(I)⩽1.
Remark 3.1**.**
(a)
Let us suppose that V(I)=V(J). By (9) it is immediate to see that LJ(I)LI(J)⩾1.
Hence, if J⊆I, then LI(J)⩾1.
2. (b)
We recall that relation (9) constitutes the definition of Łojasiewicz exponent of I with respect to J whenever
I and J are ideals of an arbitrary Noetherian local ring such that J⊆I.
Let g∈On, g=0. We define the order of g, denoted by ord(g), as the maximum of those r∈Z⩾0
for which g∈mnr. We set ord(0)=+∞. If I is an ideal of On, then we define the order of I as
ord(I)=min{ord(g):g∈I}=max{r∈Z⩾0:I⊆mnr}.
Let φ=(φ1,…,φn):(C,0)→(Cn,0) be an analytic curve.
We define the order of φ as ord(φ)=min{ord(φ1),…,ord(φn)}.
Let φ∗:On→O1 be the ring morphism given by g↦g∘φ, for all g∈On.
If I=⟨g1,…,gs⟩ is a non-zero ideal of On, then
ord(φ∗(I))=min{ord(g∘φ):g∈I}=min{ord(g1∘φ),…,ord(gs∘φ)}.
[17]**
Let I and J be proper ideals of On such that V(I)⊆V(J). Then
[TABLE]
where Ω denotes the set of non-zero analytic curves φ:(C,0)→(Cn,0).
We recall that in the Rees’ multiplicity theorem the quasi-unmixedness condition on the given ring is required (see [15, p. 222]).
This condition is also known as formal equidimensionality (see [15, p. 401] or
[18, p. 251]). Moreover, by [13, p. 149],
if (R,m) is a Noetherian local ring, then R is quasi-unmixed
if and only if the equality J=I holds, for any
pair of ideals J and I of R such that J⊆I and e(I)=e(J).
In the remaining section, we denote by (R,m) a Noetherian quasi-unmixed local ring of dimension n.
Let us fix two integers p,q∈Z⩾1 and let I and J be ideals of R.
Then, we have the following equivalences:
[TABLE]
Therefore, by (9), we can write LJ(I) as follows:
[TABLE]
As recalled in Section 2.2,
the notion of Samuel multiplicity of an ideal I of R of finite colength was extended to n-tuples
(I1,…,In) of ideals of finite colength by Teissier and Risler in [25].
Analogously, applying the notion of Rees’ mixed multiplicity (Definition 2.1)
and relation (10), we extended the notion of Łojasiewicz exponent LJ(I) to n-tuples of ideals LJ(I1,…,In)
(see [4] and [8]).
Let I1,…,In be ideals of R such that σ(I1,…,In)<∞ and let J
be a proper ideal of R.
We define
[TABLE]
When J=m, we denote rm(I1,…,In) simply by r(I1,…,In)
.
Definition 3.3**.**
Let I1,…,In
be ideals of R such that σ(I1,…,In)<∞. Let J be a proper ideal of R.
The Łojasiewicz exponent of I1,…,In with respect to J, denoted by
LJ(I1,…,In), is defined as
Let I1,…,Ii,J,I be ideals of R, where i∈{1,…,n−1}.
If there is no risk of confusion, when we write σ(I1,…,Ii,J,…,J) or LI(I1,…,Ii,J,…,J),
we will tacitly assume that J is repeated n−i times, where we recall that n=dim(R).
Given ideals I and J of R and an index i∈{1,…,n}, we denote by
LJ(i)(I) the Łojasiewicz exponent LJ(I,…,I,J,…,J), where I is repeated i times and J is repeated n−i times.
Thus LJ(n)(I)=LJ(I). We set LJ∗(I)=(LJ(n)(I),…,LJ(1)(I)).
We will denote Lm(i)(I) and Lm∗(I) by L0(i)(I) and L0∗(I), respectively, for all i∈{1,…,n}.
Let g=(g1,…,gp):(Cn,0)→(Cp,0) be an analytic map germ and let J be an ideal of On. If
i∈{1,…,n}, then we denote LJ(i)(⟨g1,…,gp⟩) also by LJ(i)(g). We will also write
L0∗(g) instead of L0∗(⟨g1,…,gp⟩).
Proposition 3.4**.**
Let J be a proper ideal of R.
For each i=1,…,n, let us consider ideals Ii and Ji of R
such that Ii⊆Ji and σ(I1,…,In)=σ(J1,…,Jn)<∞. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
It follows by replacing the maximal ideal m by J in the proof of [4, Proposition 4.7].
∎
Proposition 3.5**.**
Let I and J be ideals of R of finite colength such that I⊆J and let i∈{1,…,n}, where n=dim(R)⩾2. Then
[TABLE]
Moreover
[TABLE]
Proof.
As observed in Remark 3.1, the inclusion I⊆J implies that LJ(n)(I)=LJ(I)⩾1.
Hence the case i=n comes from (10).
Let i∈{1,…,n−1}. Let us prove first that LJ(i)(I)⩾1. If LJ(i)(I)<1,
by (12), there exists r,s∈Z⩾1 such that r<s and
[TABLE]
Since I⊆J and r<s, we have Is⊆Js⊆Js⊆Jr.
Therefore, the member on the left side of (17) is equal to ei(Jr,Jr)=e(Jr)=rne(J). Joining this with (17) and considering
the inclusion I⊆J, we obtain that
[TABLE]
Then, r⩾s, which is a contradiction, since r<s. Hence LJ(i)(I)⩾1,
for all i=1,…,n.
Let us fix any i∈{1,…,n−1}. Since LJ(i)(I)⩾1, by applying (13), we can write:
Let us prove (16). Let us fix r,s∈Z⩾1 such that r⩾s and ei+1(Is+Jr,J)=ei+1(Is,J).
By virtue of the theorem of existence of superficial sequences (see for instance [15, Proposition 17.2.2])
and [15, Theorem 17.4.6] (see also [25, p. 306]), there exists a sufficiently general element
(h1,…,hn−i)∈J⊕⋯⊕J such that, if R1=R/⟨h1,…,hn−i⟩ and R2=R/⟨h1,…,hn−i−1⟩, then
the following relations hold
[TABLE]
As indicated after Lemma 3.2, we assume that R is quasi-unmixed. Therefore the quotient rings R1 and R2 are also quasi-unmixed, by
[15, Proposition B.4.4].
Hence, by the Rees’ multiplicity theorem (see [15, p. 222]), we have that the condition ei+1(Is+Jr,J)=ei+1(Is,J)
and relation (19) imply that
[TABLE]
Let π:R2→R1 denote the natural projection. Taking π to both sides of (20)
and applying the persistence property of the integral closure of ideals (see [15, p. 2]), that is, the fact that the
image of the integral closure of a given ideal through a ring morphism is contained in the integral closure of
the image of the ideal, we conclude that
[TABLE]
which implies that e((Is+Jr)R1)=e(IsR1), that is,
ei(Is+Jr,J)=ei(Is,J), by (18). Therefore, by applying (15), we conclude that
LJ(i+1)(I)⩾LJ(i)(I).
∎
Let us consider in O2 the ideals J=m22 and I=m2. Then, we have that LJ(2)(I)=21 and
LJ(1)(I)=1. Hence we observe that the condition I⊆J can not be eliminated in (16).
Let I and J be ideals of On of finite colength.
By [9, Corollary 3.8] we know that
[TABLE]
We say that I is Hickel with respect to J when equality holds in (22). If this condition holds when J=mn, then
we will simply say that I is a Hickel ideal (see [10, Section 2.2]). The same notions are defined analogously for
analytic maps g:(Cn,0)→(Cp,0) such that g−1(0)={0}.
Proposition 3.6**.**
Let I and J be ideals of R of finite colength. Let i∈{1,…,n}. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
By the theorem of existence of superficial sequences (see [15, Proposition 17.2.2]),
there exists a sufficiently general element (gi+1,…,gn)∈J⊕⋯⊕J such that
if p:R→R/⟨gi+1,…,gn⟩ denotes the canonical projection, then
ei(I,J)=e(p(I)) and ei−1(I,J)=ei−1(p(I),p(J)).
By [9, Proposition 3.1] we know that
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
where the second inequality of (23) follows from [9, Proposition 3.6].
∎
As we see in the following lemma, the sequence LJ∗(I) is determined by the sequence of mixed multiplicities
e0(I,J),e1(I,J),…,en(I,J) when I is Hickel with respect to J. The following result is analogous to [10, Lemma 5.5].
Corollary 3.7**.**
Let I and J be ideals of R of finite colength. Then
[TABLE]
for all i=1,…,n,
and the following conditions are equivalent:
(a)
I* is Hickel with respect to J.*
2. (b)
e(J)ei(I,J)=LJ(1)(I)⋯LJ(i)(I), for all i=1,…,n.
3. (c)
Let us see the implication (a) ⇒ (b). So, let us assume that I is Hickel with respect to J. Then, we have the following inequalities
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
Using this equality, we similarly obtain that
[TABLE]
Thus, by applying finite induction we obtain relation (b). The implication (b) ⇒ (a) and the
equivalence between (b) and (c) are obvious.
∎
4. The sequence LJ∗(I) and J-non-degeneracy
Along this section, we will suppose that J is a monomial ideal of finite colength of On.
Let I1,…,In be a family of n ideals of On such that σ(I1,…,In)<∞ and let I be another ideal of On.
Then, the pair (I;I1,…,In) is said to be J-linked when there exists some i0
for which (I1,…,Ii0−1,I,Ii0+1,…,In) is J-non-degenerate
and νJ(Ii0)=max{νJ(I1),…,νJ(In)}.
Theorem 4.1**.**
[8, 3.11]**
Let I1,…,In be ideals of On such that σ(I1,…,In)<∞.
Let {Br}r⩾0 be the Newton filtration induced by Γ+(J).
Let ri=νJ(Ji), for all i=1,…,n.
If (I1,…,In) is J-non-degenerate and I is a proper ideal of On, then
[TABLE]
and the above inequalities turn into equalities if (I;I1,…,In) is J-linked.
Corollary 4.2**.**
Let (I1,…,In) be a J-non-degenerate n-tuple of ideals of On.
Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Corollary 2.7, it follows that (J;I1,…,In) is J-linked.
Then, (26) follows by applying Theorem 4.1 to (J;I1,…,In).
∎
To any primitive vector w=(w1,…,wn)∈Z⩾1n, we associate the following ideal of On:
[TABLE]
Corollary 4.2 says, in particular, that, if g:(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) is a
semi-weighted homogeneous map with respect to w (see [8, p. 793]),
then
[TABLE]
where dw(h) denotes the degree of h with respect to w, for any h∈On; that is,
dw(h)=min{⟨k,w⟩:k∈supp(h)}, where ⟨,⟩ denotes the standard scalar product.
As a consequence, if f:(Cn,0)→(C,0) is a semi-weighted homogeneous function with respect to w (see [8, p. 793]) and
if we denote min{w1,…,wn} by w0, then
[TABLE]
We recall that, by the main result of [12], if f:(Cn,0)→(C,0) is a semi-weighted homogeneous function such that dw(f)=d, then
L0(∇f)=w0d−w0, provided that d⩾2wi, for all i=1,…,n.
Theorem 4.3**.**
Let g=(g1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) be an analytic map germ such that
g is J-non-degenerate and let M=MJ. Let di=νJ(gi), for all i=1,…,n, and let us suppose that d1⩽⋯⩽dn.
Then
[TABLE]
for all i=1,…,n−1. If moreover ⟨g1,…,gn⟩⊆J, then M⩽d1 and equality holds in
(28), that is, LJ(i)(g)=Mdi, for all i=1,…,n.
Proof.
Let I=⟨g1,…,gn⟩ and let i∈{1,…,n−1}.
By Proposition 2.5, we have that
[TABLE]
Moreover, the number on the right of the previous equality can be also interpreted as
[TABLE]
where (hi+1,…,hn) is a sufficiently general element of J⊕⋯⊕J such that the
map (g1,…,gi,hi+1,…,hn) is J-non-degenerate.
Thus, by Proposition 3.4, we obtain the inequality
[TABLE]
where the first equality follows from Corollary 4.2. Hence (28) follows.
Let us suppose that I⊆J. By Proposition 3.5 we have that
[TABLE]
The inclusion I⊆J also implies that M⩽d1. We claim that
[TABLE]
By (30), this would imply that LJ(i)(I)⩽Mdi
and hence LJ(i)(I)=Mdi, by (29).
Let k(1),…,k(r)∈Z⩾0n such that xk(1),…,xk(r) is a minimal generating set of J.
Hence
[TABLE]
(see for instance [15, Proposition 8.15] or [28, Corollary 1.40]). By Proposition 2.2,
there exist generic C-linear combinations f1,…,fi of {g1M,…,gnM,xdik(1),…,xdik(r)}
and generic C-linear combinations fi+1,…,fn of {xk(1),…,xk(r)} such that
⟨f1,…,fn⟩ has finite colength and
[TABLE]
Since the ideals I and J have finite colength, the existence of such elements f1,…,fn also follows by the theorem of
existence of joint reductions (see [21, Theorem 1.4] or [22, Theorem 1.6]).
Let B denote the column matrix obtained as the
transpose of the matrix
[TABLE]
Let A denote a matrix of size i×(n+r) with entries in C such that
[TABLE]
Since the coefficients of A are generic, we can assume that the submatrix C formed the first
i columns of A is invertible. Therefore, by multiplying both sides of (33) by C−1, we obtain that
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
for some coefficients αsj, βsℓ∈C, s=1,…,i, j=i+1,…,n, ℓ=1,…,r.
Since d1⩽⋯⩽dn, we have that νJ(fs′)=dsM, for all s=1,…,i.
Then, from (32) and (34), we obtain the following:
[TABLE]
where the inequality of (35) is an application of (5).
Thus ei(IM+Jdi,J)⩾ei(IM,J).
Moreover, the inclusion IM⊆IM+Jdi implies that
ei(IM,J)⩾ei(IM+Jdi,J).
Hence, we conclude that (31) is true and hence
the result follows.
∎
Corollary 4.4**.**
Let g=(g1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) be an analytic map germ such that g−1(0)={0}. Let
di=νJ(gi), for all i=1,…,n, and let M=MJ. Let us suppose that
M⩽d1⩽⋯⩽dn. Then, the following conditions are equivalent:
(a)
g:(Cn,0)→(Cn,0)* is J-non-degenerate.*
2. (b)
LJ(i)(g)=Mdi, for all i=1,…,n.
In particular, if g satisfies any of the above conditions, then g is Hickel with respect to J.
Proof.
Let I=⟨g1,…,gn⟩. The implication (a) ⇒ (b) follows as an immediate application of Corollary 4.2, when i=n, and Theorem 4.3, when i<n (let us remark that the condition M⩽d1⩽⋯⩽dn implies
⟨g1,…,gn⟩⊆J).
Let us assume that (b) holds. Then, by (5) and (22), we have the following chain of inequalities:
[TABLE]
Hence all inequalities become equalities, in particular (a) follows.
Let us suppose that (a) or (b) holds. Then
[TABLE]
where the first equality follows from (6) and the second follows from item (b). Thus, the ideal I is Hickel with respect to J.
∎
Remark 4.5**.**
(1)
Under the hypothesis of Corollary 4.4, if g is Hickel with respect to J then g is not J-non-degenerate in general.
For instance, let us consider the map g:(C2,0)→(C2,0) given by g(x,y)=(x2+y3,x2−y3). We observe that
e(g)=6, L0(1)(g)=2, L0(2)(g)=3, since I(g)=⟨x2,y3⟩. Hence g is Hickel with respect to m2 but g is not m2-non-degenerate.
2. (2)
Let w=(w1,…,wn)∈Z⩾1n.
It is known that if g=(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) is a weighted homogeneous map with respect to w such that
g−1(0)={0}, then L0∗(g1,…,gn) is not always determined by w and the vector of degrees dw(g) of g with respect to w
(see for instance [10, Example 4.3]). However, as seen in Corollary 4.4,
all numbers of the sequence LJw∗(g1,…,gn) depend only on w and dw(g), where Jw is the ideal of On defined in (27).
5. The sequence LJ∗(I) when I and J are monomial ideals
Let L⊆{1,…,n}, L=∅. Let ∣L∣ denote the number of elements of L.
If K=R or C, then we denote by KLn the set of those k∈Kn such that ki=0, for all i∈/L.
If h∈On, h=0, and h=∑kakxk is the Taylor expansion of h around the origin, then we denote by hL
the sum of those akxk such that k∈supp(h)∩RLn.
We set hL=0 if supp(h)∩RLn=∅.
Given an ideal I of On, we denote by IL
the ideal of O∣L∣ generated by all elements hL such that h∈I.
Let us suppose that L={i1,…,ir}, where 1⩽i1<⋯<ir⩽n.
Let πL:Cr→Cn be the embedding defined by πL(xi1,…,xir)=(y1,…,yn), where
yi=0, if i∈/L, and yi=xi, if i∈L.
Let πL∗:On→Or be the morphism given by πL∗(h)=h∘πL, for all h∈On.
We observe that hL=πL∗(h), for any h∈On. This implies that
IL=πL∗(I), for any ideal I of On.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let I and J be ideals of On such that V(I)⊆V(J). Let L⊆{1,…,n}, L=∅. Then
LJL(IL) exists and
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since V(I)⊆V(J), we have that LJ(I) exists (see [17] or [26]).
By (9), let p,q∈Z⩾1 such that Jq⊆Ip. Applying πL∗ to both sides of this inclusion, we obtain that
[TABLE]
where the last inclusion follows from the persistence property of the integral closure of ideals (see [15, p. 2]).
Therefore, by relation (9), inequality (37) follows.
∎
Alternatively, the previous result also arises as a direct consequence of the original formulation of Łojasiewicz exponents by means of analytic inequalities
(see (8)).
Here we recall a definition from [2] (which in turn is very similar to [3, Definition 3.1]).
Definition 5.2**.**
Let g1,…,gp∈On, where p⩽n. Let
Γ+ denote the Minkowski sum Γ+(g1)+⋯+Γ+(gp). Let Δ be a compact face of Γ+.
The face Δ is univocally expressed as Δ=Δ1+⋯+Δp, where Δi
is a compact face of Γ+(gi), for all i=1,…,p. We
say that the sequence g1,…,gp satisfies the (BΔ)* condition* when
[TABLE]
We say that g1,…,gp is a non-degenerate sequence when the following conditions hold:
(a)
the ring On/⟨g1,…,gp⟩ has dimension n−p;
2. (b)
g1,…,gp satisfy the (BΔ) condition, for all
compact faces Δ of Γ+ with dim(Δ)⩽p−1.
Let J be a monomial ideal of On of finite colength, n⩾2, and
let i∈{0,1,…,n−1}. We denote by
Gi(J) the family of maps (gi+1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn−i,0) whose components constitute a non-degenerate sequence
and supp(gj)=v(Γ+(J)), for all j=i+1,…,n.
Proposition 5.3**.**
Let I1,…,In be monomial ideals of On of finite colength. Let
g1,…,gn∈On such that Γ+(gi)=Γ+(Ii), for all i=1,…,n.
The following conditions are equivalent:
(a)
⟨g1,…,gn⟩* has finite colength and e(g1,…,gn)=e(I1,…,In);*
2. (b)
the sequence g1,…,gn is non-degenerate.
Proof.
It follows as an immediate application of [2, Theorem 5.5] and [2, Proposition 5.4].
∎
Remark 5.4**.**
We point out that G0(J) consists of those maps g=(g1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) such that g1,…,gn generate
a reduction of J (see [3, Proposition 3.6]) and supp(gj)=v(Γ+(J)), for
all j=1,…,n. Moreover Gn−1(J) is formed by the functions of J whose support is equal to v(Γ+(J)).
With the aim of simplifying the notation, if g=(g1,…,gp):(Cn,0)→(Cp,0) is an analytic map
and I is any ideal of On, then we will denote the image of I in the quotient ring On/⟨g1,…,gp⟩
by Ig.
Lemma 5.5**.**
Let I1,…,Ii be ideals of On, n⩾2, where i∈{1,…,n−1}. Let gi+1,…,gn∈On such that the multiplicity
σ(I1,…,Ii,gi+1,…,gn) is finite.
Let g=(gi+1,…,gn). Then σ((I1)g,…,(Ii)g)<∞ and
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let R=On/⟨gi+1,…,gn⟩ and let p:On→R be the natural projection.
By Proposition 2.2, there exists a sufficiently general element (h1,…,hi)∈I1⊕⋯⊕Ii
such that ⟨h1,…,hi,gi+1,…,gn⟩ is an ideal of finite colength and
σ(I1,…,Ii,gi+1,…,gn)=e(h1,…,hi,gi+1,…,gn). Therefore
[TABLE]
Hence we have that σ((I1)g,…,(Ii)g)<∞ and dimOn/⟨gi+1,…,gn⟩=i. Therefore, by Proposition 2.2,
the element (h1,…,hi) can be taken in such a way that
equality holds in (38). Thus the result follows.
∎
Let us fix i∈{0,1,…,n−1}. Since v(Γ+(J)) is finite, the elements of Gi(J) are polynomial maps.
In the following result we identify each g∈Gi(J) with the family of coefficients of the components of g,
so we can consider Gi(J) as a subset of a complex vector space of finite dimension.
Theorem 5.6**.**
Let J be a monomial ideal of On of finite colength, n⩾2, and
let i∈{0,…,n−1}. Then
Gi(J) contains a non-empty Zariski open set and
any (gi+1,…,gn)∈Gi(J) verifies that
[TABLE]
for any family of monomial ideals I1,…,Ii of On such that σ(I1,…,Ii,J,…,J)<∞.
Proof.
Let us identify Gi(J) with a subset of CN(n−i), where N is the number of elements of v(Γ+(J)). Hence, Gi(J) contains the family of those maps
(Cn,0)→(Cn−i,0) whose support coincides with v(Γ+(J)) and are Newton non-degenerate,
in the sense of [2, Definition 3.8].
Therefore, as a direct consequence of [2, Lemma 6.11], it follows that Gi(J) contains a non-empty Zariski open set.
Let us consider the case i=0 of relation (39).
If g=(g1,…,gn)∈G0(J), then ⟨g1,…,gn⟩ is Newton non-degenerate and Γ+(⟨g1,…,gn⟩)=Γ+(J).
In particular, ⟨g1,…,gn⟩=J, by [3, Proposition 3.6], and thus e(g1,…,gn)=e(J).
Let us suppose that i>0.
Let us fix any g=(gi+1,…,gn)∈Gi(J).
Let I1,…,Ii be monomial ideals of On such that σ(I1,…,Ii,J,…,J)<∞.
Let us suppose first that Ij has finite colength, for all j=1,…,i.
By Proposition 2.2, there exists a sufficiently general element (h1,…,hi)∈I1⊕⋯⊕Ii
such that
[TABLE]
Since gi+1,…,gn is a non-degenerate sequence and hi is a generic C-linear combination of a fixed generating system of
Ii, we can suppose, by [2, Lemma 5.5], that hi,gi+1,…,gn is a non-degenerate sequence.
Inductively, we conclude that the elements h1,…,hi can be chosen in such a way that (40) holds and
h1,…,hi,gi+1,…,gn is a non-degenerate sequence. The latter condition implies, by Proposition 5.3, that
[TABLE]
By (40) and (41), it follows that σ(I1,…,Ii,gi+1,…,gn)=e(I1,…,Ii,J,…,J).
Let us suppose now that some of the ideals I1,…,Ii has not finite colength.
By the case discussed before, we have that
[TABLE]
for all r∈Z⩾1. By hypothesis, for any big enough r, the term on the right of (42) is independent from r
and equal to σ(I1,…,Ii,J,…,J).
So the same happens with the multiplicity on the left of (42).
Let us remark that, for any big enough r∈Z⩾1, the following inequalities hold:
[TABLE]
Thus, by (42), we have that σ(I1,…,Ii,gi+1,…,gn) is finite and
[TABLE]
∎
Proposition 5.7**.**
Let I and J be monomial ideals of On of finite colength, n⩾2.
Let i∈{1,…,n−1} and let g∈Gi(J). Then
[TABLE]
and equality holds if I⊆J.
Proof.
Let us fix an index i∈{1,…,n−1} and let g=(gi+1,…,gn)∈Gi(J). Then,
given two integers r,s⩾1, we have the following inequalities:
[TABLE]
Hence, if ei(Is,Js)=ei(Is+Jr,Js+Jr), then (44) becomes an equality. That is, e(Igs)=e((Is+Jr)g).
By (13), this implies that LJg(Ig)⩽LJ(i)(I).
Let us suppose that I⊆J. Hence Ig⊆(J)g⊆Jg, for all g∈Gi(J), where
the second inclusion follows from the persistence of the integral closure under ring morphisms (see [15, p. 2]).
Thus 1⩽LJg(Ig) (see Remark 3.1).
Let us suppose that LJg(Ig)<LJ(i)(I).
Then there exist some r,s∈Z⩾1 such that 1⩽LJg(Ig)<sr<LJ(i)(I).
In particular, r>s and the inequality sr<LJ(i)(I) means that
[TABLE]
Since r>s, we obtain that
[TABLE]
Moreover
ei(Is,Js)=sn−iei(Is,J). Hence (45) and (46) imply that
[TABLE]
Since g∈Gi(J), by Lemma 5.5 and Theorem 5.6, the following equalities hold:
[TABLE]
The condition LJg(Ig)<sr means that Jgr⊆Igs, which implies that
e(Igs)=e((Is+Jr)g). Hence, by (48) and (49),
we obtain that ei(Is,J)=ei(Is+Jr,J), which contradicts (47).
Therefore we have that LJg(Ig)=LJ(i)(I).
∎
Corollary 5.8**.**
Let I and J be monomial ideals of On of finite colength, n⩾2. Let us suppose that I⊆J.
Let i∈{1,…,n−1}. Then
[TABLE]
for any r∈Z⩾1.
Proof.
Let us fix an r∈Z⩾1. The relation LJ(Ir)=rLJ(I) follows immediately from (9)
and holds for any pair of ideals I and J of finite colength of any local ring R. Let i∈{1,…,n−1} and
let us fix an element g∈Gi(J). In particular, LJg(Igr)=rLJg(Ig).
The condition I⊆J implies that Igr⊆Jgr⊆Jgr and
consequently LJg(Igr)=LJ(i)(Ir), by Proposition 5.7.
Hence (50) follows.
∎
Lemma 5.9**.**
Let n⩾2 and let us fix an index i∈{1,…,n−1}.
Let f1,…,fi,gi+1,…,gn be elements of On generating an ideal of finite colength in On.
Let g=(gi+1,…,gn).
If J is any proper ideal of On, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let r,s∈Z⩾1. Then the following chain of inequalities holds:
[TABLE]
If e(f_{1}^{s},\dots,f_{i}^{s},g_{i+1}^{s},\dots,g_{n}^{s})=e\big{(}f_{1}^{s}+J^{r},\dots,f_{i}^{s}+J^{r},g_{i+1}^{s}+J^{r},\dots,g_{n}^{s}+J^{r}\big{)},
then we obtain that (52) becomes an equality, which is to say that
[TABLE]
In particular, applying Definition 3.3 we obtain inequality (51).
∎
Theorem 5.10**.**
Let I and J be two monomial ideals of On of finite colength, n⩾2.
Let K1,…,Kn be ideals of On contained in I such that (K1,…,Kn) is J-non-degenerate.
Let
di=νJ(Ki), for all i=1,…,n, and let us suppose that d1⩽⋯⩽dn. Then
LJ(I)⩽MJdn.
If moreover I⊆J, then
[TABLE]
for all i∈{1,…,n−1}.
Proof.
By Proposition 2.2, we can consider an element
(f1,…,fn)∈K1⊕⋯⊕Kn such that e(f1,…,fn)=σ(K1,…,Kn).
By Proposition 3.4, we have that LJ(f1,…,fn)⩽LJ(K1,…,Kn).
Since Ki⊆I, for all i=1,…,n, we have ⟨f1,…,fn⟩⊆I. Thus LJ(I)⩽LJ(f1,…,fn).
By Corollary 4.2 we deduce that LJ(K1,…,Kn)=MJdn.
Joining the above inequalities, we obtain the following:
[TABLE]
Let us suppose that I⊆J and let us fix an index i∈{1,…,n−1}.
By Theorem 5.6, we can consider a map g=(gi+1,…,gn)∈Gi(J).
The inclusion I⊆J implies
that LJ(i)(I)=LJg(Ig), by Proposition 5.7.
By hypothesis, the n-tuple of ideals (K1,…,Kn) is J-non-degenerate. Therefore, by Corollary 2.7,
we have that (K1,…,Ki,J,…,J) is J-non-degenerate, where J is repeated n−i times. In particular
σ(K1,…,Ki,J,…,J)<∞. By Theorem 5.6, it follows that
[TABLE]
By virtue of Proposition 2.2, we can consider a sufficiently general element (f1,…,fi)∈K1⊕⋯⊕Ki such that
Therefore, by (53) and the fact that νJ(fj)⩾dj, for all j=1,…,i, we have the following:
[TABLE]
where the first inequality of (54) comes from (5). Hence the inequalities of (54)
become equalities, which means that (f1,…,fi,gi+1,…,gn) is J-non-degenerate and νJ(fj)=dj, for all j=1,…,i.
Therefore, we deduce the following:
[TABLE]
The condition fj∈Kj⊆I⊆J implies that dj⩾νJ(I)⩾νJ(J)=MJ, for all j=1,…,i.
Then the member on the right side of
(55) is equal to MJdi and the result follows.
∎
6. Applications
In this section we show an application of Theorem 5.10 by means of a specific
family of ideals (K1,…,Kn) constructed in [6]. In order to express this, we need to expose
some preliminary definitions in the next subsection. We will also show that the computation of the whole sequence
LJ∗(I) is possible whenever J is a diagonal ideal.
6.1. A bound for the quotient of multiplicities of two monomial ideals and its relation with Łojasiewicz exponents
If J is a monomial ideal of On of finite colength and A is a closed subset of
R⩾0n, then we define νJ(A)=min{ϕJ(k):k∈A}. We denote by Γ(J) the Newton boundary of Γ+(J).
Let h∈On. We will say that h is J-homogeneous when νJ(h)=νJ(xk), for
any k∈supp(h). Given a map g:(Cn,0)→(Cp,0), we say that g is J-homogeneous when
each component function of g is J-homogeneous.
Definition 6.1**.**
[6]
Let I and J be monomial ideals of On of finite colength. We define, for all i∈{1,…,n}, the following number:
[TABLE]
Therefore ai,J(I)∈Q⩾0, for all i=1,…,n.
It easily follows that a1,J(I)⩽⋯⩽an,J(I).
We will denote ai,m(I) simply by ai(I), for all i=1,…,n.
Let us remark that the set of compact faces of Γ+(m) is given by {Γ(m)∩RLn:L⊆{1,…,n},L=∅}
and ϕm(k)=∣k∣, for all k∈R⩾0n. Therefore
[TABLE]
Hence we recover the definition of the integers ai(I) given in [5, p. 197].
Let I be an ideal of On of finite colength and let u∈Z⩾0n, u=0.
We denote by kuI the point of intersection of Γ(I) with the half-line {λu:λ∈R⩾0}.
Therefore, if J is another monomial ideal of On of finite colength, we have
[TABLE]
We also observe that, under the conditions of Definition 6.1, the maximum
that leads to the computation of ai,J(I) is attained at some point of v(Γ+(I))∪{kuI:u∈v(Γ+(J))}.
The point kuI has rational coordinates, for all u∈Z⩾0n, u=0. Hence,
we define
[TABLE]
Theorem 6.2**.**
[6]**
Let I and J be monomial ideals of On of finite colength.
Let c=cJ(I) and let M=MJ.
For any i∈{1,…,n}, let us consider the ideal
[TABLE]
Then (K1,…,Kn) is J-non-degenerate.
The numbers ai,J(I) have the following property, proven in [6, Theorem 4.12].
Theorem 6.3**.**
[6]**
Let I,J⊆On be monomial ideals of On of finite colength. Let M=MJ.
Then
there exists a J-homogeneous and J-non-degenerate polynomial map
g=(g1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) and some s∈Z⩾1 such that Is=⟨g1,…,gn⟩ and
νJ(gi)=sai,J(I), for all i=1,…,n.
As observed in [6, Remark 5.6], when equality holds in (58), then the number s appearing in item (b)
can be taken as s=cJ(I)MJ. In particular, we can take s=1 when J=mn.
Corollary 6.4**.**
Let I,J be monomial ideals of On of finite colength such that I⊆J. Then
[TABLE]
for all i∈{1,…,n−1}.
Proof.
Let M=MJ, let c=cJ(I) and let ϕ=ϕJ.
Let us consider the ideals K1,…,Kn of On defined in (57).
By Theorem 6.2, we know that (K1,…,Kn) is J-non-degenerate. Moreover
νJ(Ki)=ai,J(IcM), for all j=1,…,n,
and νJ(K1)⩽⋯⩽νJ(Kn).
Let us fix an index i∈{1,…,n−1}. By Theorem 5.10, we have that
[TABLE]
Since we assume that I⊆J, Corollary 5.8 implies the equality LJ(i)(IcM)=cMLJ(i)(I).
By joining this fact with (60), relation (59) follows.
∎
In the following example we see that, in general, inequality (59) can be strict (we will see that this is not
the case when J is diagonal).
Example 6.5**.**
Let us consider the ideals I and J of O2 given by I=⟨x5,y5⟩ and J=⟨x4,xy,y4⟩.
We observe that I⊆J, MJ=4 and a1,J(I)=ϕJ(25,25)=10. So
MJa1,J(I)=25.
A straightforward reproduction of the argument of the
proof of [4, Corollary 3.4] consisting of replacing the powers of the maximal ideal by
the powers J leads to the equality LJ(I,J)=LJ(f,g), provided that (f,g) is a sufficiently general element of I⊕J
(see [7, Theorem 3.6]).
Let H=⟨f,g⟩. Let KH denote the ideal of O2
generated by the monomials xk1yk2 which are integral over H, k1,k2∈Z⩾0.
By applying [1, Corollary 4.8], we observe that KH=⟨x5,x2y,xy2,y5⟩.
The inclusion KH⊆H implies that LJ(H)⩽LJ(KH).
It is easy to check that a2,J(KH)=ϕJ(23,23)=6. Then, we obtain the following inequalities:
[TABLE]
In the study of examples, the computation of ϕJ(k) for a given k∈Z⩾0n can be done with the program Gérmenes [19]
developed by A. Montesinos-Amilibia.
Corollary 6.6**.**
Let I,J be monomial ideals of On of finite colength such that I⊆J and let M=MJ. Then
[TABLE]
and both inequalities turn into equalities if and only if there exists a polynomial map
g=(g1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) and some s∈Z⩾1 such that
g is J-non-degenerate and J-homogeneous, Is=⟨g1,…,gn⟩ and νJ(gi)=sai,J(I),
for all i=1,…,n.
Proof.
The first inequality of (61) comes from (1) and the second inequality of (61)
is a direct application of Corollary 6.4. The characterization of when both inequalities of (61) become equalities
follows from Theorem 6.3.
∎
6.2. The sequence LJ∗(I) when J is diagonal
Let us fix coordinates (x1,…,xn) in Cn. We say that an ideal J⊆On
is diagonal when there exist positive integers a1,…,an such that
J=⟨x1a1,…,xnan⟩.
In the next result we show some cases where (59) becomes an equality.
Theorem 6.7**.**
Let I,J be monomial ideals of On of finite colength. Then
[TABLE]
If, moreover, J is diagonal and I⊆J, then
[TABLE]
for all i=1,…,n.
Proof.
Let us see first relation (62). Let ϕ=ϕJ and let p,q∈Z⩾1.
As recalled in Section 2.2, the integral closure of a monomial ideal of On is generated by
the monomials whose support belongs to the Newton polyhedron of the given ideal. Hence we have the following equivalences:
Let us fix an index i∈{1,…,n−1}. Let us see that (63) holds provided that J is diagonal and I⊆J.
Let us suppose that J is diagonal. Since LJ(i)(I)=LJ(i)(I) we can suppose that
there exist positive integers a1,…,an such that J=⟨x1a1,…,xnan⟩.
By Proposition 2.2, let us consider a sufficiently general element
(h1,…,hi,g1,…,gn−i)∈I⊕⋯⊕I⊕J⊕⋯⊕J
such that
Let us denote by A the ideal ⟨h1,…,hi,g1,…,gn−i⟩
and let us fix a subset L⊆{1,…,n} with ∣L∣=n−i+1. In order to simplify the notation,
with no loss of generality,
we will suppose that L={1,…,n−i+1}.
Hence, by Lemmas 3.2 and 5.1, we obtain that
[TABLE]
where ΩL is the set of analytic arcs φ:(C,0)→(CLn,0).
Let us consider the map ψ:(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) given by ψ(x1,…,xn)=(x1a1,…,xnan).
Let us observe that each gj can be expressed as gj=fj∘ψ, for all j=1,…,n−i, where f1,…,fn−i
are generic linear forms of C[x1,…,xn].
The matrix of coefficients of the system of linear equations f1L=⋯=fn−iL=0 has size (n−i)×(n−i+1).
Applying the Gauss elimination process to this system, we conclude that there exist polynomials
g1,…,gn−i of the form
[TABLE]
for some γj∈C∖{0}, for all j=1,…,n−i, such
that
[TABLE]
Let a=a1⋯an. Let us consider the analytic arc φ0:(C,0)→(CLn,0) given by
[TABLE]
for all t∈C. Let us write γj=rjeiθj, where rj∈R>0, θj∈[0,2π[, for all j=1,…,n−i, and in
(67) we consider the definition γj1/aj=rj1/ajeiθj/aj, for all i=1,…,n−i.
We observe that
[TABLE]
for all t∈C and all j=1,…,n−i.
The compact face of dimension n−1 of Γ+(J) is supported by the vector w=(a1a,…,ana).
This vector has integer coordinates but is not primitive in general. Let v denote the smallest vector of the form
v=λw, λ>0, such that v is primitive. Hence v=w01w, where w0
denotes the greatest common divisor of the components of w.
Moreover ϕJ(k)=⟨v,k⟩, for all k∈R⩾0n
and MJ=w0a.
For any f∈On, f=0, we define νJ′(f)=min{⟨w,k⟩:k∈supp(f)}.
We also set νJ′(0)=+∞. Then νJ′(f)=w0νJ(f), for all f∈On.
By (68), we know that gj∘φ0=0, for all j=1,…,n−i.
Since the coefficients of the forms f1,…,fn−i are chosen generically, we can assume that the numbers γ1,…,γn−i
verify that all the arcs h1L∘φ0,…,hiL∘φ0 are non-zero.
Hence, we conclude that
[TABLE]
Thus we finally obtain, by (64), (65), (69) and (70) that
[TABLE]
That is, we have proved that
[TABLE]
for all L⊆{1,…,n} such that ∣L∣=n−i+1. This means that
[TABLE]
We have already proved in Corollary 6.4 that the inequality LJ(i)(I)⩽MJai,J(I) holds in general.
Therefore equality (63) follows.
∎
Remark 6.8**.**
(a)
Given any diagonal ideal J of On and i∈{0,1,…,n−1}, the compact faces of Γ+(J) of dimension i are given
by {Γ(J)∩RLn:L⊆{1,…,n},∣L∣=i+1}.
In particular, analogous to (56), if I denotes any monomial ideal of On of finite colength, we have:
[TABLE]
2. (b)
Let I be a monomial ideal of On of finite colength.
As a direct application of (56) and Theorem 6.7 in the case J=mn, we obtain that
[TABLE]
for all i=1,…,n. The above relation was already proven in [9, Corollary 4.2] by means of a completely different argument
based on toric modifications.
Let J be a diagonal ideal of On given by J=⟨x1a1,…,xnan⟩, where
a1,…,an∈Z⩾1n. Let wJ=(a1a1⋯an,…,ana1⋯an) and let
vJ=w01wJ, where w0 denotes the greatest common divisor of the components of wJ.
Then the filtrating map ϕJ:R⩾0n→R⩾0 is given by ϕJ(k)=⟨vJ,k⟩, for all k∈R⩾0n. Therefore MJ=w0a1…an.
Corollary 6.9**.**
Under the conditions and notation of the above paragraph,
let I be another monomial ideal of On of finite colength such that I⊆J. Then
there exists some s⩾1 such that Is=⟨g1,…,gn⟩,
where g=(g1,…,gn):(Cn,0)→(Cn,0) is a weighted homogeneous map
with respect to vJ such that dvJ(gi)=sai,J(I), for all i=1,…,n.
Proof.
By Theorem 6.7 we know that LJ(i)(I)=MJai,J(I), for all i=1,…,n. Hence the result follows as an immediate
consequence of Theorem 6.3.
∎
If J is a diagonal ideal, then it follows immediately from the definition of cJ(I) that cJ(I)=1, for any monomial ideal I of finite colength of On. Therefore, as remarked after Theorem 6.3, when equality holds in (72), then the integer s appearing in item (b) of
the previous corollary can be taken as s=cJ(I)MJ=w0a1⋯an.
Example 6.10**.**
Let us consider the ideals J and I of O3 given by
J=⟨xa,yb,zc⟩ and I=⟨xd,yd,zd,xeyeze⟩,
where a,b,c,d,e are positive integers such that 1⩽a⩽b⩽c⩽d and abc⩽e(bc+ac+ab)⩽abd.
These conditions imply that νJ(I)=ϕJ(e,e,e) and I⊆J. By Theorem 6.7, the sequence LJ∗(I) is given by
[TABLE]
By Corollary 6.9, we know that
e(J)e(I)⩽LJ(1)(I)LJ(2)(I)LJ(3)(I). We observe that e(I)=3d2e and e(J)=abc. Therefore
[TABLE]
which is the case, since we assume that a⩽b⩽c. Moreover equality holds if and only if a=b=c.
Example 6.11**.**
Let us consider the diagonal ideals of On given by J=⟨x1a1,…,xnan⟩ and
I=⟨x1b1,…,xnbn⟩, where ai,bi∈Z⩾1, bi⩾ai, for all i=1,…,n (so that I⊆J).
Let us consider a permutation σ of {1,…,n} such that
aσ(1)bσ(1)⩽⋯⩽aσ(n)bσ(n).
Then, as a consequence of Theorem 6.7 we have that
LJ(i)(I)=aσ(i)bσ(i), for all i=1,…,n.
Remark 6.12**.**
If I and J are monomial ideals of On of finite colength, then LJ(I) can be also computed by means of the
Newton filtration induced by Γ+(I). That is, by [9, Proposition 5.3], we have that LJ(I)=νI(J)MI.
Joining this fact with (62), if I⊆J, then we obtain the following relation:
[TABLE]
Let I and J be any pair of ideals of On of finite colength.
In accordance with inequality (1) and the results of Hickel [14, p. 643], there arises the problem of studying if the
condition
[TABLE]
determines some structure for the integral closure of I.
We conjecture that equality (73) holds if and only if there exists some s⩾1 such that
Is=⟨g1,…,gn⟩, where (g1,…,gn) is J-non-degenerate (see [6, Definition 4.7]), that is,
there exists some d⩾1 and some a1,…,an∈Z⩾1 such that
⟨g1a1,…,gnan⟩=Jd.
By Corollary 6.6, we know that this is true
if I is monomial and J is diagonal.
Let J be a diagonal ideal of On.
In the following example we show that if I is not a monomial ideal of On
and is Hickel with respect to J, that is, equality holds in (72), then
we can not expect the same characterization appearing in Corollary 6.9. More precisely, in the context of Corollary 6.9,
the condition of J-homogeneity of the map g is too strong if I is not monomial.
Example 6.13**.**
Let us consider the ideal I of O2 given by I=⟨x4+y2,x5⟩. We observe
that e(I)=10=L0(1)(I)L0(2)(I).
The set of vertices of Γ+(I) is {(4,0),(0,2)}. If there exist two homogeneous polynomials g1,g2∈C[x,y] such that
Is=⟨g1,g2⟩, for some s⩾1,
then deg(g1)=4s and deg(g2)=2s, or vice versa. The Newton boundary Γ(I)
is formed by the segment joining the points (4,0) and (0,2). Hence it follows that g1 or g2 is a monomial.
Moreover, the condition Is=⟨g1,g2⟩ implies that ⟨g1,g2⟩
has finite colength. Thus ⟨g1,g2⟩ is Newton non-degenerate (see Remark 2.4).
In particular, the ideal Is is Newton non-degenerate. So
I must be Newton non-degenerate too, which is not the case. Then the initial assumption is not true, that is,
the equivalence of Corollary 6.9 does not hold in general if I is not a monomial ideal and J is equal to the maximal ideal.
Bibliography28
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] C. Bivià-Ausina, The integral closure of ideals in ℂ { x , y } ℂ 𝑥 𝑦 \mathbb{C}\{x,y\} , Comm. Algebra. 31 , No. 12 (2003), 6115–6134.
2[2] C. Bivià-Ausina, Mixed Newton numbers and isolated complete intersection singularities , Proc. London Math. Soc. 94 , No. 3 (2007), 749–771.
3[3] C. Bivià-Ausina, Joint reductions of monomial ideals and multiplicity of complex analytic maps , Math. Res. Lett. 15 , No. 2 (2008), 389–407.
4[4] C. Bivià-Ausina, Local Łojasiewicz exponents, Milnor numbers and mixed multiplicities of ideals , Math. Z. 262 , No. 2 (2009), 389-409.
5[5] C. Bivià-Ausina, Multiplicity and Łojasiewicz exponent of generic linear sections of monomial ideals , Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 91 , No. 2 (2015), 191–201.
6[6] C. Bivià-Ausina, Integral closure and bounds for quotients of multiplicities of monomial ideals , J. Algebra 501 , No. 1 (2018), 233–254.
7[7] C. Bivià-Ausina and S. Encinas, The Lojasiewicz exponent of a set of weighted homogeneous ideals , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 215 , No. 4 (2011), 578–588.
8[8] C. Bivià-Ausina and S. Encinas, Łojasiewicz exponent of families of ideals, Rees mixed multiplicities and Newton filtrations , Rev. Mat. Complut. 26 , No. 2 (2013), 773–-798.