THE NON-LEFSCHETZ LOCUS

arXiv:1609.00952v1 [] 4 Sep 2016

MATS BOIJ, JUAN MIGLIORE, ROSA M. MIRÓ-ROIG, AND UWE NAGEL
Abstract. We study the weak Lefschetz property of artinian Gorenstein algebras and
in particular of artinian complete intersections. In codimension four and higher, it is an
open problem whether all complete intersections have the weak Lefschetz property.
For a given artinian Gorenstein algebra A we ask what linear forms are Lefschetz
elements for this particular algebra, i.e., which linear forms ℓ give maximal rank for
all the multiplication maps ×ℓ : [A]i −→ [A]i+1 . This is a Zariski open set and its
complement is the non-Lefschetz locus.
For monomial complete intersections, we completely describe the non-Lefschetz locus. For general complete intersections of codimension three and four we prove that the
non-Lefschetz locus has the expected codimension, which in particular means that it is
empty in a large family of examples. For general Gorenstein algebras of codimension
three with a given Hilbert function, we prove that the non-Lefschetz locus has the expected codimension if the first difference of the Hilbert function is of decreasing type.
For completeness we also give a full description of the non-Lefschetz locus for artinian
algebras of codimension two.

1. Introduction
If A = R/I is an artinian standard graded algebra over the polynomial ring R =
k[x1 , . . . , xn ], where k is a field, then A is said to have the Weak Lefschetz Property
(WLP) if the homomorphism induced by multiplication by a general linear form, from
every degree to the next, has maximal rank. In this paper we will always assume that k
has characteristic zero.
A famous result in commutative algebra says that an artinian monomial complete intersection over a field of characteristic zero has the WLP (and even a stronger condition
called the Strong Lefschetz Property). This was proved in [20], [21], and [19]. A consequence of this is that if the generator degrees are specified, a general complete intersection
with those generator degrees has the WLP. It is an open question whether every complete
intersection has the WLP. Notice that the result above fails to distinguish between a
monomial complete intersection and a general one (always with fixed generator degrees).
We give a finer measure of the Lefschetz property that does distinguish between these
(conjecturally in all cases, and we give a proof in ≤ 4 variables).
Suppose that such a standard graded algebra A is given. For any pair of consecutive
components Ai and Ai+1 , we can consider the locus Li of linear forms that fail to induce
a homomorphism of maximal rank on these components. We will observe that for each
i the variety Li is a determinantal variety, so depending on the absolute value of the
difference dim[A]i+1 − dim[A]i , there is an expected codimension. If the variety achieves
this codimension, its degree (as a possibly non-reduced scheme) is also known. One can
then ask further questions about Li , such as what are its irreducible components. If Li
fails to have the expected codimension, it is still determinantal but its degree is less clear.
We define the non-Lefschetz locus LI to be the union of these loci Li , viewed as subvarieties of the corresponding projective space (Pn−1 )∗ , over all possible sets of consecutive
components. The algebra A fails to have the WLP if and only if LI = (P n−1 )∗ . The
1

variety LI is thus a union of determinantal varieties in general. If A is Gorenstein (e.g. a
complete intersection), there is a natural sequence of inclusions of the Li , so LI is in fact
itself a determinantal variety. (See Proposition 2.5.)
In this paper we will study the non-Lefschetz locus for specific algebras (monomial algebras) and we will consider it in the case of the general element of an irreducible family
(complete intersections of prescribed generator degrees). Much more difficult is the question of whether every element of an irreducible family (specifically complete intersections)
has the WLP, i.e. whether the non-Lefschetz locus is always of positive codimension for
such algebras.
In Section 3 we completely characterize the non-Lefschetz locus of monomial complete
intersections (Proposition 3.1) and we also find all the possible Jordan types of linear
forms in such algebras (Proposition 3.7).
In Section 4 we conjecture that the non-Lefschetz locus of a general complete intersection has the expected codimenion in the sense that will be made precise in Section 2. We
prove this conjecture for complete intersections of codimension three (Theorem 4.10) and
codimension four (Theorem 4.13).
In Section 5 we study the non-Lefschetz locus of a general artinian Gorenstein algebra
of codimension three with a given Hilbert function. In Theorem 5.1 we prove that the
non-Lefschetz locus has the expected codimension if the g-vector associated to the Hilbert
function is of decreasing type, while it is of codimension one otherwise.
In Section 6 we give a complete description of the situation for algebras in codimension
two.
Acknowledgements. Part of this work was carried out during a visit to IHP in Paris
and part of the work was carried out during a visit to CIRM in Trento. We are very
grateful for these opportunities. We are also grateful to Anthony Iarrobino and Junzo
Watanabe for useful discussions related to this work.
The first author was partially supported by the grant VR2013-4545, the second author by the National Security Agency under Grant H98230-12-1-0204 and by the Simons
Foundation under Grant #309556, the third author by the grant MTM2013-45075-P and
the fourth author by the National Security Agency under Grant H98230-12-1-0247 and
by the Simons Foundation under Grant #317096.
2. Preliminaries
Let R = k[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ] where k is an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero.
Let M be a graded R-module of finite length. We first briefly recall an idea, originally
due to Joe Harris, dealing with an isomorphism invariant of M. For further details see
[15].
The module structure of M is determined by a collection of homomorphisms φi : [R]1 →
Homk (Mi , Mi+1 ) as i ranges from the initial degree of M to the penultimate degree where
M is not zero. Since φi is trivial if either [M]i or [M]i+1 is zero, we assume that this is not
the case (we do not assume that M is generated in the first degree, so a zero component
could lie between non-zero ones). Let ℓ = a1 x1 + · · · + an xn , and let us refer to the ai
as the dual variables. If we choose bases for [M]i and for [M]i+1 , we can view φi as a
(dim[M]i+1 ) × (dim[M]i ) matrix Bi whose entries are linear forms in the dual variables.
For any fixed t we can thus consider the ideal of (t+1)×(t+1) minors of Bi , and this is an
isomorphism invariant of M. However, for our purposes it is enough to consider the ideal of
maximal minors of Bi . Denoting by Yi the scheme defined by the ideal of maximal minors
of Bi , we can view Yi as lying in the dual projective space (Pn−1)∗ = Proj(k[a1 , . . . , an ]).
2

We have an expected codimension for Yi , and if that codimension is achieved then we also
have a formula for deg Yi :
Lemma 2.1. Without loss of generality assume that dim[M]i ≤ dim[M]i+1 (otherwise
consider the transpose of Bi ). For sufficiently general entries of Bi , the codimension of

dim Mi+1
Yi is dim[M]i+1 − dim[M]i + 1. If this codimension is achieved, then deg Yi = dim
.
Mi −1

Example 2.2 ([15]). Harris’s motivation was to apply this machinery to liaison theory. For
instance, let C ⊂ P3 be the union of four general lines. Let
M
H 1 (P3 , IC (t)),
M(C) =
t∈Z

the Hartshorne-Rao module of C. We have




dim M(C)t =




3
4
2
0

if t = 0;
if t = 1;
if t = 2;
otherwise.

Taking M =
 M(C), the expected codimension of Y0 is 4 − 3 + 1 = 2, and the expected
degree is 42 = 6. One can show that in fact Y0 is the curve in (P3 )∗ obtained as the duals
of the four components of C together with the duals of the two 4-secant lines of C. It
then follows from the fact that Y0 is an isomorphism invariant, and some now-classical
results of liaison theory (with a small argument), that C is the only union of skew lines
in its even liaison class.
Our idea now is to apply this machinery to the study of the Weak Lefschetz property.
Traditionally, we say that an artinian algebra A = R/I has the Weak Lefschetz property
(WLP) if there is a linear form ℓ ∈ [A]1 such that, for all integers i, the multiplication
map
×ℓ : [A]i → [A]i+1
has maximal rank, i.e. it is injective or surjective. In this case, the linear form ℓ is called a
Lefschetz element of A. (We will often abuse terminology and say that the corresponding
ideal has the WLP.) The Lefschetz elements of A form a Zariski open, possibly empty,
subset of [A]1 , which as above we will projectivize and view in (Pn−1 )∗ . This open set is
nothing but (Pn−1 )∗ \ LI . This is our primary focus in this paper, but we note that A is
said to have the Strong Lefschetz property (SLP) if the analogous statements are true for
the multiplication maps
×ℓd : [A]i → [A]i+d
for all i and d.
If we consider A as an R-module, to say that A satisfies the WLP is equivalent to
saying that none of the varieties Yi is all of (Pn−1 )∗ . We first relabel the Yi with a more
descriptive notation for our application.
Definition 2.3. Given an artinian graded algebra A = R/I, we define
LI := {[ℓ] ∈ P([A]1 ) | ℓ is not a Lefschetz element} ⊂ (Pn−1 )∗
and we call it the non-Lefschetz locus of I (or of A). For any integer i ≥ 0, we define
LI,i := {ℓ ∈ [A]1 | ×ℓ : [A]i −→ [A]i+1 does not have maximal rank} ⊂ (Pn−1 )∗ .
3

In order to study the non-Lefschetz locus from a scheme-theoretic perspective, we view
LI,i not as a set but rather as the subscheme of (Pn−1 )∗ defined by the maximal minors of a
suitable matrix, as explained above, taking M = A. The size of this matrix is determined
by the Hilbert function of A. More precisely, we introduce S = k[a1 , a2 , . . . , an ] as the
homogeneous coordinate ring of the dual projective space (Pn−1 )∗ , where we think of the
coordinates a1 , a2 , . . . , an as the coefficients in ℓ = a1 x1 + a2 x2 + · · · + an xn . For each
degree i, the multiplication by ℓ on S ⊗k A gives the map
×ℓ : S ⊗k [A]i −→ S ⊗k [A]i+1
of free S-modules which is represented by a matrix of linear forms in S given a choice of
bases for [A]i and [A]i+1 . The locus LI,i ⊆ (Pn−1 )∗ is scheme-theoretically defined by the
ideal of maximal minors of this matrix and we denote this ideal by I(LI,i ). SObserve that
this ideal is independent of the choice of bases. In this way, we have LI = i≥0 LI,i , and
T
LI ⊆ (Pn−1)∗ is defined by the homogeneous ideal I(LI ) = i≥0 I(LI,i ).
Definition 2.4. If codim LI,i takes the value prescribed by Lemma 2.1, where now
dim[M]i is the value of the Hilbert function of A in degree i, (and hence the degree
of LI,i is also determined by the Hilbert function), then we say that Li has the expected
codimension and the expected degree.

Since in this article we are studying Gorenstein algebras, especially complete intersections, it will be useful to know that the non-Lefschetz locus is determined by the failure
of injectivity of the multiplication by linear forms in a single degree. It is clear on a
set-theoretical level that this is true (cf. [16, Proposition 2.1]). We will now look at the
question when there is an inclusion of the ideals I(LI,i+1 ) ⊆ I(LI,i ) which will ensure that
we only have to consider the middle degree even when we look at the non-Lefschetz locus
defined scheme-theoretically and not only set-theoretically.
Proposition 2.5. If hA (i) ≤ hA (i + 1) ≤ hA (i + 2) and [soc A]i = 0, then I(LI,i+1) ⊆
I(LI,i ).
Proof. The ideal I(LI,i+1 ) is generated by the maximal minors of the matrix representing
the map ×ℓ : S ⊗k [A]i+1 −→ S ⊗k [A]i+2 , where ℓ = a1 x1 + a2 x2 + · · · + an xn . Each such
minor equals the determinant of the matrix representing the map
×ℓ : S ⊗k [B]i+1 −→ S ⊗k [B]i+2
where B = A/J and J is an ideal generated by hA (i + 2) − hA (i + 1) forms of degree i + 2.
Since [A]i = [B]i and [A]i+1 = [B]i+1 , we can prove the inclusion I(LI,i+1 ) ⊆ I(LI,i ) for A
by proving the inclusion for all such quotients B = A/J. Therefore, we will now assume
that hA (i + 1) = hA (i + 2).
Suppose that LI,i+1 = (Pn−1 )∗ . Then I(LI,i+1) = h0i and the inclusion of ideals is
trivial. If LI,i = (Pn−1 )∗ we will also have that LI,i+1 = (Pn−1 )∗ since A by assumption
does not have socle in degree i and the inclusion of ideals is again trivial. Thus we only
have to consider the case when LI,i 6= (Pn−1 )∗ and LI,i+1 6= (Pn−1 )∗ . In this case, we can
change coordinates so that ×xn : [A]i −→ [A]i+1 and ×xn : [A]i+1 −→ [A]i+2 both have
maximal rank. Consider the diagram
4

S ⊗k [A]i

×ℓ

×xn
S ⊗k [A]i+1

S ⊗k [A]i+1
×xn

×ℓ

S ⊗k [A]i+2

The injectivity of the two vertical maps shows that we can choose monomial cobases
for [A]i , [A]i+1 and [A]i+2 in such a way that the matrix representing the map ×ℓ : S ⊗k
[A]i −→ S ⊗k [A]i+1 is a submatrix of the matrix representing the map ×ℓ : S ⊗k [A]i+1 −→
S ⊗k [A]i+2 . The ideal I(LI,i+1) is principal, generated by the determinant of the matrix
representing the map ×ℓ : S ⊗k [A]i+1 −→ S ⊗k [A]i+2 . Since the two matrices have the
same number of rows, the Laplace expansion of the determinant of the larger matrix shows
that this determinant is in the ideal generated by the maximal minors of the submatrix,
which proves the inclusion I(LI,i+1 ) ⊆ I(LI,i ).

Corollary 2.6. If A = R/I is Gorenstein of socle degree e then LI = LI,i schemetheoretically, where i = ⌊ e−1
⌋.
2
Proof. If A does not have the WLP, we have LI = LI,i = (Pn−1 )∗ . If A has the WLP the
Hilbert function is unimodal and by Proposition 2.5 and the duality of the Gorenstein
algebra we get the equality.

Remark 2.7. If A = R/I has socle in degree i, we need not have the inclusion I(LI,i+1) ⊆
I(LI,i ) since we then have that I(LI,i ) = h0i while I(LI,i+1 ) might be non-trivial.
If A is not Gorenstein, but level, we can get a similar result as Corollary 2.6 but in
some cases we will have to use two degrees instead of one since we cannot apply duality.
(cf. [16, Proposition 2.1] for the set-theoretic statement.)
3. The non-Lefschetz locus of a monomial complete intersection
In this section and the next we will restrict ourselves to the case of complete intersections. In this section we study monomial complete intersections.
Notice that to say that an artinian ideal I ⊂ R has the WLP is equivalent to saying that
codim LI ≥ 1. The aim of this section is to study codim LI when I = hF1 , · · · , Fn i ⊂ R is
a monomial complete intersection. We know that for a monomial complete intersection,
hence for a general choice of F1 , · · · , Fn , R/I has the WLP, thanks to the main result of
[20], [21] and [19]; and the same holds for any choice of Fi if n ≤ 3 (cf. [10]). Nevertheless,
we will see in this section and the next that the non-Lefschetz locus behaves very differently
for monomial complete intersections than it does for general complete intersections.
Proposition 3.1. Let I = hxd11 , · · · , xdnn i ⊂ R := k[x1 , · · · , xn ] be an artinian monomial
complete intersection, with socle degree e = d1 + · · · + dn − n. Assume without loss of
generality that dn ≥ · · · ≥ d1 ≥ 2. Then the following characterization of the Lefschetz
elements holds.
(1) If dn > ⌊ e+1
⌋ then ℓ = a1 x1 + a2 x2 + · · · + an xn is a Lefschetz element if and only
2
if an 6= 0.
⌋ then ℓ = a1 x1 + a2 x2 + · · · + an xn is a Lefschetz
(2) If e is even and dn ≤ ⌊ e+1
2
element if and only if ai = 0 for at most one index i and aj 6= 0 for all indices j
with dj > 2.
(3) If e is odd and dn ≤ ⌊ e+1
⌋ then ℓ = a1 x1 + a2 x2 + · · · + an xn is a Lefschetz element
2
if and only if a1 a2 · · · an 6= 0.
5

Proof. We start by fixing the linear form ℓ = a1 x1 + a2 x2 + · · · + an xn . Let A = R/I, let
S = {i : ai 6= 0} ⊆ {1, 2, . . . , n} and define the subrings A′ and A′′ of A as the subrings
′
′′
generated by {xi }i∈S and by {xi }i∈S
/ , respectively. Both A and A are monomial complete
intersections and ℓ acts trivially on A′′ while it is a Lefschetz element on A′ .
In order to determine whether or not ℓ is a Lefschetz element on A, it is sufficient to
consider the injectivity of the multiplication map in the middle degree, i.e.,
× ℓ : [A]⌊ e−1 ⌋ −→ [A]⌊ e+1 ⌋ .

(3.1)

2

2

For any integer j, we have that
[A]j = ([A′ ]j ⊗ [A′′ ]0 ) ⊕ ([A′ ]j−1 ⊗ [A′′ ]1 ) ⊕ · · · (⊕[A′ ]0 ⊗ [A′′ ]j )
and since ℓ acts trivially on A′′ , the injectivity of (3.1) is equivalent to injectivity in each
component
×ℓ : [A′ ]⌊ e−1 ⌋−i ⊗ [A′′ ]i −→ [A′ ]⌊ e+1 ⌋−i ⊗ [A′′ ]i ,
2

2

for all i ≥ 0.

Now, injectivity in the top degree ×ℓ : [A′ ]⌊ e−1 ⌋ −→ [A′ ]⌊ e+1 ⌋ implies injectivity in the
2
2
lower degrees of A′ . Since ℓ is a Lefschetz element on A′ , we have injectivity of the latter
map if and only if
dimk [A′ ]⌊ e−1 ⌋ ≤ dimk [A′ ]⌊ e+1 ⌋ .
2

2

Since ⌊ e+1
⌋ is above the middle degree if S 6= {1, 2, . . . , n}, we must have a flat top in
2
⌋ and degree ⌊ e+1
⌋ in this situation,
the Hilbert function of A′ between degree e′ − ⌊ e+1
2
2
′
′
where e is the socle degree of A . If this forced flat top has length two, we must have
⌋ − 1 = e′ − ⌊ e+1
⌋ which is only possible if e is even and e′ = e − 1. In this case A′′
⌊ e+1
2
2
is generated by one variable xi with di = 2 and ℓ is a Lefschetz element on A.
If there is a flat of length at least three, it follows from [19, Theorem 1] that one of the
generators of the defining ideal of A′ must have a degree which is above the end of the
flat. There can be at most one di which is greater than ⌊ e+1
⌋, so in this case we must
2
⌋.
In
this
case,
ℓ
is
a
Lefschetz
element
of
A.
have dn > ⌊ e+1
2
We now relate what we have shown with the statements of our proposition.
In the case (1), we get that ℓ is a Lefschetz element if and only if dn is the degree of
one of the generators of the defining ideal of A′ , which is equivalent to an 6= 0.
If dn ≤ ⌊ e+1
⌋, the only case when ℓ is a Lefschetz element and A′ 6= A is when e is even
2
and A′′ = k[xi ]/hx2i i. This shows (2) and (3).

Remark 3.2. Case 2 of Proposition 3.1 shows that the non-Lefschetz locus does not need
to be unmixed. The smallest example is for d1 = d2 = 2 and d3 = d4 = 3 where we get
I(LI ) = ha2 a23 a54 , a1 a23 a54 , a1 a2 a3 a54 , a2 a33 a44 , a1 a33 a44 , a22 a23 a44 , a1 a2 a23 a44 , a21 a23 a44 , a1 a22 a3 a44 ,
a21 a2 a3 a44 , a2 a43 a34 , a1 a43 a34 , a22 a33 a34 , a21 a33 a34 , a1 a22 a23 a34 , a21 a2 a23 a34 , a2 a53 a24 , a1 a53 a24 ,
a22 a43 a24 , a1 a2 a43 a24 , a21 a43 a24 , a1 a22 a33 a24 , a21 a2 a33 a24 , a1 a2 a53 a4 , a1 a22 a43 a4 , a21 a2 a43 a4 i
p
with radical I(LI )) = ha1 a3 a4 , a2 a3 a4 i = ha1 , a2 i ∩ ha3 i ∩ ha4 i.

Example 3.3. Proposition 3.1 only gives us that LI is defined set-theoretically by the
equation a1 · · · an = 0 in the cases given by (3). Scheme-theoretically, LI is defined by an
ideal generated by maximal minors of certain matrices as seen in Section 2. For instance,
if n = 3 and d1 = d2 = d3 = 4, the Hilbert function is (1, 3, 6, 10, 12, 12, 10, 6, 3, 1) and
the defining polynomial of LI is a41 a42 a43 . More generally, if n = 3 and d1 = d2 = d3 = d
where d is even, then the Hilbert function of R/I is (1, h1 , . . . , he ) with e = 3d − 3 and
2
d 2
h 3d−4 = h 3d−2 = 3 d and the defining polynomial of L is (a a a )( 2 ) .
2

2

I

2

6

1 2 3

This example leads to the following two immediate corollaries.
Corollary 3.4. If hF1 , . . . , Fn i is any complete intersection in k[x1 , . . . , xn ] with deg F1 =
· · · = deg Fn = d, and if n(d − 1) is odd (i.e. if n is odd and d is even), then the value of
the Hilbert function in degrees n(d−1)−1
and n(d−1)+1
is divisible by n.
2
2
Corollary 3.5. Let I = hxd11 , . . . , xdnn i. If d1 = · · · = dn = 2 and n is even then
the non-Lefschetz locus LI has codimension 2. In all other cases, it has codimension 1.
Furthermore, if d1 = · · · = dn = d where n is odd and d is even, then I(LI ) = (aα1 · · · aαn )
n
.
where α = n1 h n(d−1)−1 and h n(d−1)−1 = h n(d−1)+1 . When d = 2, this is equal to n−1
2

2

2

2

Proof. The ideas are contained in the proof of Proposition 3.1. In particular, under the
hypothesis d1 = · · · = dn = d where n is odd and d is even, the expected codimension
of the non-Lefschetz locus is achieved, namely codimension 1. In this case the degree of
the non-Lefschetz locus is equal to h n(d−1)−1 , and the generating polynomial has to be
2
symmetric with respect to all n variables. The fact that α is an integer is guaranteed by
Corollary 3.4.

Remark 3.6. One can also study the non-Lefschetz locus with respect to the Strong Lefschetz Property. Junzo Watanabe has communicated to us that he has extended Corollary 3.5 for the question of the Strong Lefschetz Property, showing that a1 x1 + · · · + an xn
is a Strong Lefschetz element for R/(x21 , . . . , x2n ) if and only if a1 a2 . . . an 6= 0. Thus the
non-Lefschetz locus for R/(x21 , . . . , x2n ) for the Strong Lefschetz Property has codimension
1, not 2 as it was for the non-Lefschetz locus for the Weak Lefschetz Property.
Notice that if a linear form ℓ is a non-Weak-Lefschetz element for R/I then of course
it is a non-Strong-Lefschetz element, so Watanabe’s case is the only one left open by
Corollary 3.5.

3.1. Jordan types. Multiplication by a linear form ℓ corresponds to a nilpotent linear
operator on the artinian algebra A. The Jordan type of this nilpotent operator is an
integer partition PL of dimk A.
The study of Jordan types refines the study of Lefschetz properties as we have the
following:
• ℓ is a weak Lefschetz element if and only if the number of parts of PL equals the
maximal value of the Hilbert function of A.
• ℓ is a strong Lefschetz element if and only if PL equals the dual partition the
partition given by the Hilbert function of A.
Here we investigate the possible Jordan types of linear forms for the case when A is a
monomial complete intersection.
For a degree sequence d1 , d2 , . . . , dn let Pd1 ,d2 ,...,dn denote the dual partition to the partition given by the Hilbert function of an artinian complete intersection of type (d1 , d2 , . . . , dn ).
For a partition P we denote by P k the partition given by repeating all parts of P k times.
Proposition 3.7. Let A = k[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ]/hxd11 , xd22 , . . . , xdnn i be a monomial complete
intersection in characteristic
zero.
Q
Q The possible Jordan types for linear forms ℓ are
Pdmi ,di ,...,di , where m = nj=1 dj / kj=1 dij , for all non-empty subsequences di1 , di2 , . . . , dik
1
2
k
of d1 , d2 , . . . , dn .
Proof. From the action of the torus (k ∗ )n we see that the Jordan type of a linear form ℓ =
a1 x1 +a2 x2 +· · ·+an xn depends only on which coefficients are non-zero. Let {i1 , i2 , . . . , ik }
7

be the indices for which the coefficients are non-zero and let {j1 , j2 , . . . , jn−k } be the
remaining indices.
Let A′ be the artinian monomial complete intersection of type (di1 , di2 , . . . , dik ) and let
A′′ be the artinian mononomial complete intersection of type (dj1 , dj2 , . . . , din−k ). We now
Pk
have A ∼
= A′ ⊗ A′′ and ℓ = j=1 aij xij is a strong Lefschetz element acting on the first
factor while it acts trivially on the second factor. Thus the Jordan type of ℓ is Pdmi ,di ,...,di ,
1
2
k
Q
Q
where m = dimk A′′ == nj=1 dj / kj=1 dij .


Example 3.8. The situation is easiest to summarize when all degrees are equal. Consider
for example the case n = 4 and d1 = d2 = d3 = d4 = 2. There are combinatorially just
four possible subseqences and the four possible Jordan types are
[5 33 12 ],

[4 22 ]2 = [42 24 ],

[3 1]4 = [34 14 ] and [2]8 ,

corresponding to the linear forms x1 +x2 +x3 +x4 , x1 +x2 +x3 , x1 +x2 and x1 , respectively.
4. The non-Lefschetz locus of a general complete intersection
In the previous section we considered the non-Lefschetz locus of a monomial complete
intersection, and saw that it has codimension 1. We also know that a general complete
intersection has a non-Lefschetz locus of positive codimension (since the complete intersection has the WLP, thanks to the main result of [20], [21] and [19]). The purpose of
this section is to describe the precise codimension of this locus for a general complete
intersection.
Notation 4.1. We begin in the setting of R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ], and then turn to the case
n = 3, 4. Throughout this section we will fix integers 2 ≤ d1 ≤ · · · ≤ dn , and I will be a
complete intersection ideal, I = hF1 , . . . , Fn i, where deg Fi = di and Fi P
is a general form
of degree di . We will denote by e the socle degree of R/I, namely e = ( ni=1 di ) − n. We
will denote by (1, h1 , . . . , he−1 , he ) the h-vector (i.e. Hilbert function) of R/I.
We will describe the expected codimension of the non-Lefschetz locus in Conjecture 4.3.
One of our goals is to prove that for n = 3 or 4, and for a general choice of Fi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
the non-Lefschetz locus LI of I = hF1 , . . . , Fn i has the expected codimension.

Remark 4.2. When the Fi are general, we know that R/I has the WLP, so LI 6= (Pn−1 )∗ .
In the case where the socle degree e is odd, the Hilbert function of R/I has at least two
values in the middle that are equal. Thanks to Corollary 2.6, this means that LI is defined
by the vanishing of the determinant of a square matrix of size h e−1 × h e+1 , hence (since
2
2
LI 6= (Pn−1 )∗ ) LI is a hypersurface of degree δI = h e−1 . So the case of odd socle degree is
2
completely understood, and from now on we will assume without loss of generality that
e is even.
Based on computer experiments [8] and our results in four or fewer variables, we make
the following conjecture.
Conjecture 4.3. Let I = hF1 , · · · , Fn i ⊂ R be a complete intersection ideal of general
forms as in Notation 4.1, and assume that e is even (see Remark 4.2). Then
codim LI = min{h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1, n}
where we consider the empty set to have codimension n in Pn−1 . In particular, LI ⊂
(Pn−1 )∗ is non-empty if and only if h 2e − h 2e −1 ≤ n − 2 and in that case δI := deg(LI ) =

he
2
.
h e −h e +1
2

2 −1

8

Remark 4.4. Notice that in Conjecture 4.3 the hypothesis that the complete intersection
artinian ideal I ⊂ R is generated by general forms cannot be dropped. In fact, a complete
intersection I ⊂ k[x1 , x2 , x3 ] of type (3, 3, 3) has h-vector (1, 3, 6, 7, 6, 3, 1), so the expected
codimension of the non-Lefschetz locus LI is 2; and we will see later that indeed it is
true for a general choice of 3 cubics F1 , F2 , F3 ∈ k[x1 , x2 , x3 ] (cf. Theorem 4.10). But
unfortunately it is not true for every choice. For instance, we saw in the last section
that if we take I = hF1 , F2 , F3 i = hx31 , x32 , x33 i we get that codim LI = 1 since a line
a1 x1 + a2 x2 + a3 x3 ∈ k[x1 , x2 , x3 ] fails to be a Lefschetz element of k[x1 , x2 , x3 ]/hx31 , x32 , x33 i
if and only if a1 a2 a3 = 0. Therefore, if we fix coordinates a1 , a2 and a3 in (P2 )∗ , the
support of LI is the union of the lines ℓ1 : a1 = 0, ℓ2 : a2 = 0 and ℓ3 : a3 = 0.
Remark 4.5. We will see shortly that to measure the non-Lefschetz locus in (P(n−1) )∗ , it
will be enough to measure how many such algebras fail the WLP in a suitable irreducible
parameter space. As noted in Section 2, if R/I is a complete intersection and the WLP
fails, it must fail ”in the middle”, and possibly also in other degrees. By semicontinuity
and under the hypothesis that e is even, to measure the dimension of the set of algebras
failing the WLP (in an irreducible parameter space) we can assume that WLP fails from
degree h 2e −1 to h 2e (and, by duality, from h e2 to h 2e +1 ), and that the failure is just by one.
Remark 4.6. We have d1 ≤ · · · ≤ dn . For large values of dn the question of the nonLefschetz locus for a general complete intersection with generator degrees d1 , . . . dn is
clear.
(1) If dn ≥ d1 + · · · + dn−1 − (n − 1) + 2 = d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n + 3 then h 2e −1 = h 2e
(remembering that we are assuming e even), and the conjecture is clear (with the
non-Lefschetz locus consisting of the linear forms through individual points).
(2) If dn = d1 + · · ·+ dn−1 − (n − 1) + 1 = d1 + · · ·+ dn−1 − n + 2 then R/(F1 . . . Fn−1 ) is
the coordinate ring of the reduced complete intersection set of points, Z, in Pn−1
defined by (F1 , . . . , Fn−1 ), which reaches the multiplicity in degree d1 +· · ·+dn−1 −
(n − 1). If {hi } is the Hilbert function of R/(F1 , . . . , Fn ), then clearly
• d1 + · · · + dn−1 − (n − 1) = 2e ;
• h 2e − h 2e −1 = 1;
• h 2e = d1 d2 . . . dn−1 .
• The Hilbert function of R/I agrees with that of R/IZ in degrees ≤ 2e .
Notice that Z has the Uniform Position Property, since the Fi are general. We
claim that
a linear form ℓ fails to have maximal rank from degree 2e −1 to degree
e
if and only if ℓ vanishes on (any) two points of Z.
2
Indeed, if P1 , P2 ∈ Z, notice first that the Hilbert function of Z\{P1 } agrees with
that of Z up to and including degree 2e −1, and is one less than that of Z from then
on. The Hilbert function of Z\{P1 , P2 } agrees with that of Z up to and including
degree 2e − 2, is one less than that of Z in degree 2e − 1, and is two less than that
of Z from degree 2e on. In particular, there is a form of degree 2e − 1 vanishing on
all of Z except P1 ∪ P2 , but the same is not true for all of Z except only P1 .
Since R/IZ has depth 1, a linear form ℓ not vanishing on any point of Z is a
non-zerodivisor, so the resulting multiplication from degree 2e − 1 to degree 2e is
injective. If ℓ vanishes at just one point, P1 , of Z, then for a form F of degree
9

e
2

− 1, ℓ · F = 0 in R/I means that F vanishes at all points of Z except P1 . But
we know that any form of degree 2e − 1 vanishing at all but one point must in fact
vanish on all of Z, so F = 0 in R/I. On the other hand, any linear form vanishing
on the line spanned by P1 and P2 lies in the non-Lefschetz locus, which then has
he
codimension 2 and degree 22 as claimed in Conjecture 4.3.

(3) If dn = d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n + 1 then R/I has odd socle degree, so the non-Lefschetz
locus has codimension 1 and degree d1 . . . dn−1 − 1.

(4) Finally, assume that dn = d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n. In this case hF1 , . . . , Fn−1 i defines a
complete intersection set of d1 · · · dn−1 points, Z, and its Hilbert function reaches
its multiplicity in degree d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n + 1 = deg Fn + 1. More precisely,
letting s = d1 + · · · + dn−1 and d = d1 · · · dn−1 , its Hilbert function is
degree 0 1 2 . . .
1 n h2 . . .

(s − n − 1) (s − n) (s − n + 1) (s − n + 2) . . .
d−n
d−1
d
d
...

and the Hilbert function of R/I is
degree 0 1 2 . . . (s − n − 1) (s − n) (s − n + 1) . . . e − 1 e
1 n h2 . . .
d−n
d−2
d−n
...
n
1
For a linear form ℓ ∈ R, the failure of ×ℓ : [R/I]s−n−1 → [R/I]s−n to be injective is
equivalent to the condition that the restriction F̄n of Fn to R/hℓi is in the restricted
ideal hF̄1 , . . . , F̄n−1 i. Since I is artinian, it follows then that hF̄1 , . . . , F̄n−1 i is a
complete intersection. In particular, ℓ is a non-zerodivisor on R/hF1 , . . . , Fn−1 i.
We also note that in this situation, the conjectured codimension of LI is (d − 2) −
(d − n) + 1 = n − 1 in (Pn−1 )∗ , i.e. there should only be a finite number of linear
forms failing to induce an injective homomorphism from degree s − n − 1 to degree
s − n.
Thus from now on we may assume that dn ≤ d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n, and if equality holds
we have an equivalent condition for failure to have maximal rank.
Our goal in this section is to prove Conjecture 4.3 in the cases n = 3 and n = 4. We
begin with a description of the approach that we will take except for Theorem 4.10. Fix
degrees d1 , . . . , dn for the complete intersections in R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ], with d1 ≤ d2 ≤
· · · ≤ dn . Let CI(d1 , . . . , dn ) be the irreducible space parametrizing all such complete
intersections. Let (Pn−1 )∗ be the projective space parametrizing the linear forms of R (up
to scalar multiple). For each complete intersection I and linear form ℓ, we consider the
pair (ℓ, I) ∈ (Pn−1 )∗ × CI(d1 , . . . , dn ). Let X be the set of such pairs such that ℓ is not a
Lefschetz element for A = R/I.
Since the di are given, there is a precise degree where this latter condition must be
checked: (ℓ, I) ∈ X if and only if ×ℓ : [R/I] 2e −1 → [R/I] 2e fails to be injective (recall
that the socle degree e is assumed to be even, thanks to Remark 4.2). Since the general
element of CI(d1 , . . . , dn ) has the WLP, there are expected values for the Hilbert function
of R/(I, ℓ) in degrees 2e and 2e + 1 (the latter being 0), and (ℓ, I) ∈ X if and only if these
values are not achieved.
Consider the projections φ1 and φ2 :
(ℓ, I) ∈
(4.1)

(Pn−1 )∗ × CI(d1 , . . . , dn )
φ1
φ2
(Pn−1 )∗

CI(d1 , . . . , dn )
10

⊃ X

We need to show that there is a non-empty open set U ⊂ CI(d1 , . . . , dn ) such that if
I ∈ U then the closure of φ1 (φ−1
2 (I) ∩ X) has the expected codimension as described in
Conjecture 4.3. Thus we want to show that the intersection of X with the generic fibre
of φ2 has the expected dimension (computed from Conjecture 4.3). More precisely, let
m = (n − 1) − min{h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1, n}, the expected dimension of LI , and let I be a general
element of CI(d1, . . . , dn ). Then Conjecture 4.3 says that
dim(φ−1
2 (I)) ∩ X = m.

(4.2)

We will reformulate this. Let p = dim CI(d1 , . . . , dn ). We want to show that there is an
open subset U ⊂ CI(d1 , . . . , dn ) such that
dim(φ−1
2 (U) ∩ X) = m + p.
Now, φ1 is surjective, and the fibres all have the same dimension (since we can always do
a change of variables). Thus we want to show that for any linear form ℓ (viewed as an
element of (Pn−1 )∗ ),
−1
dim(φ−1
2 (U) ∩ X ∩ φ1 (ℓ)) = m + p − (n − 1).

So from now on we fix a linear form ℓ. We denote by ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ) the irreducible
space of ideals in S = R/(ℓ) with generators in degrees d1 , . . . dn . We note that an ideal in
ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ) may have only n−1 minimal generators. This would happen for instance
if dn > d1 + · · · + dn−1 − (n − 1) and ℓ is a non-zerodivisor on R/hF1 , . . . , Fn−1 i, but we
have assumed this not to be the case in Remark 4.6. But even avoiding this situation, it
may happen that an ideal in CI(d1 , . . . , dn ) restricts to an ideal in ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ) with
only n − 1 minimal generators. Let V ⊂ ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ) be the open subset consisting
of restricted ideals (F̄1 , . . . , F̄n ) such that all the F̄i are minimal generators.
Consider the morphism
CI(d1 , . . . , dn )
φ

(4.3)

ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ).
We want to study a certain subvariety, Y ⊂ ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ). The precise definition of
Y will depend on the value of dn , breaking into two cases, but the treatment of Y will be
the same in both cases.
Case 1: dn = d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n. We have seen in Remark 4.6 (4) that in this case m = 0,
and that failure of maximal rank is equivalent to F̄n ∈ hF̄1 , . . . , F̄n−1 i, which then is a
complete intersection. By Remark 4.5, or by direct observation in this case, we can assume
that the Hilbert function of the restricted ideal differs by one, in degrees d1 +· · ·+dn−1 −n
and d1 + · · · + dn−1 − (n − 1), from the expected one. Let Y ⊂ ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ) be the
subset in the complement of V consisting of those ideals such that the first n−1 generators
form a regular sequence, and the last generator is not minimal.
Case 2: dn < d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n. In this case we let Y ⊂ V be the set of ideals I¯ such that
hS/I¯( 2e + 1) > 0. (The distinction between the cases is that the ideals of Y are complete
intersections in Case 1, and are not complete intersections in Case 2.)
Notice that in both cases,
−1
dim φ−1 (Y ) = dim(φ−1
2 (U) ∩ X ∩ φ1 (ℓ)).

11

Notice also that the fibres of φ over V ∪ Y all have the same dimension, namely
p − dim ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ).
So we want to show that
dim Y + p − dim ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ) = m + p − (n − 1),
i.e. that
dim Y = m − (n − 1) + dim ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ).
Equivalently, we want to show that
(4.4)

The codimension of Y in ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ) is min{h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1, n}.

This is what we will prove in the results below.
We have noted above that without loss of generality we can assume that dn ≤ d1 +
· · · + dn−1 − n, and that the case of equality is handled slightly differently from the case
of strict inequality. We now consider equality.
Proposition 4.7. Let I = hF1 , . . . , Fn i ⊂ R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ] be a complete intersection
generated by general forms of degrees 2 ≤ d1 ≤ d2 ≤ · · · ≤ dn . Assume that dn =
d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n. Then Conjecture 4.3 is true.
Proof. We have defined the quasi-projective variety Y in Case 1 above. From what we
said in Remark 4.6 (4) and in Case 1 of the discussion above, we want to show that the
codimension of Y in ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ) is n − 1. We recall that a complete intersection of
type (d1 , . . . , dn−1 ) in R/hℓi with d1 ≥ 2 has Hilbert function with value n − 1 in degree
dn = d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n.
Now, let Mℓ (d1 , . . . , dn−1 ) be the variety parametrizing the ideals with generator degrees d1 , . . . , dn−1 , and let U ′ ⊂ Mℓ be the dense open subset consisting of complete
intersections of type (d1 , . . . , dn−1). Consider
(4.5)

Y ⊆ ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn )
φ
U ′ ⊆ Mℓ (d1 , . . . , dn−1) .

We have that Y is contained in φ−1 (U ′ ), and φ−1 (U ′ ) is a dense open subset of
ACIℓ (d1 , . . . , dn ). For any J ∈ U ′ , the codimension of φ−1 (J) ∩ Y in φ−1 (J) is n − 1,
thanks to the Hilbert function observation above. The desired conclusion (4.4) follows
from this.

Thus from now on we can assume that dn < d1 + · · · + dn−1 − n, and that we are in
Case 2 above. To fix the ideas for most of the rest of the paper in a simple first case, we
first state the case n = 3 and deg(Fi ) = d for 1 ≤ i ≤ 3 and prove the analogous case
n = 4 and deg(Fi ) = d for 1 ≤ i ≤ 4.
Proposition 4.8. Let I = hF1 , F2 , F3 i ⊂ R = k[x1 , x2 , x3 ] be a complete intersection
generated by general forms of degree (d, d, d), d ≥ 2. Then we have
(1) If e is odd then codim LI = 1 and LI ⊂ (P2 )∗ is a curve of degree 3( d2 )2 .
3d2 +1 
he
4
(2) If e is even then codim LI = h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1 = 2 and deg LI = 22 =
.
2

Proposition 4.9. Let I = hF1 , F2 , F3 , F4 i ⊂ R = k[x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ] be a complete intersection generated by general forms of degree (d, d, d, d), d ≥ 2.
12

(1) If d = 2 then codim LI = 3, and in particular LI ⊂ (P3 )∗ is a set of 20 different
points.
(2) If d ≥ 3 then LI = ∅.
Proof. (1) The h-vector of R/I is (1, 4, 6, 4, 1) and LI is a scheme defined by the maximal
minors of a 4×6 matrix with linear entries. We will prove that LI ⊂ (P3 )∗ has codimension
3 and consists of 20 different points which shows that LI is a standard determinantal
scheme. If ℓ fails to give an injection from degree 1 to degree 2, then there is a linear
form M such that ℓM ∈ I. So we first want to know how many reducible quadrics lie in
the projectivization of the 4-dimensional vector space generated by F1 , F2 , F3 , F4 inside
P[R]2 = P9 . The dimension of the space of such reducible quadrics is 6, and its degree is
10 ([11], top of page 300). Thus its intersection with a general 3-dimensional linear space
in P9 is a set of 10 points in P9 . Such a linear space avoids the locus of double planes,
and each of the 10 points is of the form ℓ1 ℓ2 where either ℓ1 or ℓ2 could play the role of ℓ
for us. Thus there are 20 such linear forms, or 20 points in (P3 )∗ .
(2) Let (1, h1 , h2 , · · · , he−1 , he ) be the h-vector of R/I. Therefore, e = 4d − 4.
Claim: h 2e − h 2e −1 = d.
We will prove a more general result in Lemma 4.11, but here we give a completely
different proof to illustrate a different approach.
Proof of the Claim: We consider the rank 3 vector bundle E on P3
E := ker(OP3 (−d)4

(F1 ,F2 ,F3 ,F4 )

−→

OP3 ).

Using the exact sequences
0 −→ E −→ OP3 (−d)4 −→ OP3 −→ 0, and
0 −→ OP3 (−4d) −→ OP3 (−3d)4 −→ OP3 (−2d)6 −→ E −→ 0,
we get
H 0 (P3 , E(t)) = 0
H 2 (P3 , E(t)) = 0
H 3 (P3 , E(t)) = 0

for all
for all
for all

t < 2d
t∈Z
t ≥ d − 3.

Therefore, we have
h e2 − h 2e −1 = h1 (P3 , E(2d − 2)) − h1 (P3 , E(2d − 3))
= −χ(E(2d − 2)) + χ(E(2d − 3)) = d
where the last equality follows applying the Riemann-Roch Theorem, and the Claim is
proved.
Since h 2e − h 2e −1 = d, LI is expected to be empty and this is what we will prove. To this
end, we set S = k[x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ]/(ℓ) ∼
= k[x1 , x2 , x3 ] where ℓ = a1 x1 + a2 x2 + a3 x3 + a4 x4 ∈
[R]1 is a linear form. Call Ad,d,d,d the set of almost complete intersection ideals J ⊂ S of
type (d, d, d, d). It holds that



 
d+2
d+2
− 16 = 2d2 + 6d − 12.
)=4
dim Ad,d,d,d = dim Gr 4,
2
2
Denote by Bd,d,d,d the set of almost complete intersection ideals J ⊂ S of type (d, d, d, d)
and h-vector (1, h1 − 1, h2 − h1 , · · · , h 2e −1 − h 2e −2 , h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1 = d + 1, 1). A general
13

ideal J in Bd,d,d,d can be linked by means of a complete intersection J ′ of type (d, d, d) to
a Gorenstein ideal J1 with socle degree 2d − 3 and h-vector


 
  

d−1
d
d
d−1
, · · · , 6, 3, 1).
− 1,
− 1,
,
(1, 3, 6, · · · ,
2
2
2
2
Observe that
(i) the dimension of the Gorenstein ideals J1 with h-vector



 
  


d−1
d
d
d−1
, · · · , 6, 3, 1
− 1,
− 1,
,
1, 3, 6, · · · ,
2
2
2
2

is 2d−1
− d − 2 = 2d2 − 4d − 1 (see [4, Example 5.2]),
2

(ii) the dimension of complete intersections J ′ of type (d, d, d) contained in J1 is
dim Gr(3, 3d) = 3(3d − 3) (note that dim[J1 ]d = d+2
− d−1
= 3d), and
2
2

(iii) the dimension of complete intersections of type (d, d, d) contained in J is dim Gr(3, 4) =
3.
To compute dim Bd,d,d,d we use liaison. The computation is



2d − 1
− d − 2 + (9d − 9) − 3 = 2d2 + 5d − 13.
dim Bd,d,d,d =
2
We have only to justify subtracting the value from (iii) in this computation. Indeed, this
is to remove over-counting, since the same ideal J can be reached from many different
ideals J1 using different complete intersections in J. Now subtracting, we see that the
difference of the dimensions is
(2d2 + 6d − 12) − (2d2 + 5d − 13) = d + 1 = h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1.
Since this is > n − 1 for d ≥ 3, the locus is empty according to (4.4).



Theorem 4.10. Let I = hF1 , F2 , F3 i ⊂ R = k[x1 , x2 , x3 ] be a complete intersection
artinian ideal generated by general forms of degree (d1 , d2 , d3 ). Assume that d1 ≤ d2 ≤ d3 .
Let e be the socle degree of R/I and let (1, h1 , · · · , he−1 , he ) be the h-vector of R/I. Then
(1) If e is odd then codim LI = 1 and LI ⊂ (P2 )∗ is a plane curve of degree


dd
if d3 ≥ d1 + d2

 1 2
2
2
2
2


d1 d2 − (d1 + d2 − d3 ) = 2d1 d2 + 2d1 d3 + 2d2 d3 − d1 − d2 − d3 if d3 < d1 + d2 .
4
4
(2) If e is even then
(
1 if d3 ≥ d1 + d2 + 1,
codim LI = h e2 − h 2e −1 + 1 =
2 if d3 ≤ d1 + d2 − 1.

Moreover, if d3 ≥ d1 + d2 + 1 then LI ⊂ (P2 )∗ is a planecurve of degree d1 d2 ; and
if d3 ≤ d1 + d2 − 1 then LI ⊂ (P2 )∗ is a finite set of n2I points, where
nI =

2d1d2 + 2d1 d3 + 2d2 d3 + 1 − d21 − d22 − d23
4
14

Proof. It is well known that I has WLP and hence codim LI ≥ 1.
(1) If d3 ≥ d1 + d2 arguing as in Remark 4.6 we see that J = hF1 , F2 i is the ideal of a
set of d1 d2 different points in P2 , h e−1 = h e+1 = d1 d2 and
2

2

×ℓ : (R/I) e−1 −→ (R/I) e+1
2

2

with ℓ = ax + by + cz fails to be injective if and only if ℓ passes through one of the d1 d2
points defined by J. Therefore, codim(LI ) = 1 and deg(LI ) = d1 d2 .
Assume d3 < d1 + d2 . In this case we consider the syzygy bundle associated to I, i.e.
the rank 2 vector bundle E on P2 defined by
E := ker(⊕3i=1 OP2 (−di )

(F1 ,F2 ,F3 )

−→

OP2 ).

By [1, Corollary 2.7], E is µ-stable. By [3, Theorem 2.2], the linear form ℓ = ax + by + cz
fails to be a Lefschetz element of I if and only if ℓ = 0 is a jumping line of E if and only if
E|ℓ ∼
= Oℓ (a1ℓ ) ⊕ Oℓ (a2ℓ ) with |a1ℓ − a2ℓ | ≥ 2. Since the first Chern class c1 (E( d1 +d22 +d3 )) = 0,
we can apply [17, Theorem 2.2.3], and we get that the set JE of jumping lines of E is a
curve of degree c2 (E( d1 +d22 +d3 )) in (P2 )∗ . Therefore, the non-Lefschetz locus LI of I is a
plane curve of degree


(d1 + d2 − d3 )(d1 − d2 + d3 ) (d1 + d2 − d3 )(−d1 + d2 + d3 )
d1 + d2 + d3
) =
+
c2 E(
2
4
4
(d1 − d2 + d3 )(−d1 + d2 + d3 )
2d1 d2 + 2d1 d3 + 2d2 d3 − d21 − d22 − d23
+
=
.
4
4
(2) If d3 ≥ d1 + d2 + 1 the result follows from Remark 4.6. So, let us assume that
d3 ≤ d1 + d2 − 1. Let (1, h1 , h2 , · · · , he−1 , he ) be the h-vector of R/I.
Claim: h 2e − h 2e −1 = 1. To prove the claim, we consider the rank 2 vector bundle E on P2
E := ker



(F1 ,F2 ,F3 )
⊕3i=1 OP2 (−di ) −→



OP2 .

By [1, Corollary 2.7], E is µ-stable. Using the fact that E is a µ-stable rank 2 vector
bundle on P2 , c1 (E) = −d1 − d2 − d3 and Enorm = E( d1 +d22+d3 −1 ), we get
H 0 (P2 , E(h 2e ) = H 2 (P2 , E(h 2e )) = H 0 (P2 , E(h 2e −1 )) = H 2 (P2 , E(h 2e −1 )) = 0.
Therefore, we have
h 2e − h 2e −1 = h1 (P2 , E(h 2e )) − h1 (P2 , E(h 2e −1 ))
= −χ(E(h 2e )) + χ(E(h 2e −1 )) = 1
where the last equality follows applying the Riemann-Roch Theorem, and the claim is
proved.
Thanks to the claim, the expected codimension of LI ⊂ (P2 )∗ is two and, in fact, we are

2d d +2d d +2d d +1−d21 −d22 −d23
going to prove that LI ⊂ (P2 )∗ is a set of n2I , nI := 1 2 1 3 24 3
, different
2
points. To this end, we consider the rank 2 vector bundle E on P


(F1 ,F2 ,F3 )
E := ker ⊕3i=1 OP2 (−di ) −→ OP2 .

By [1, Corollary 2.7], E is µ-stable. By [3, Theorem 2.2], the linear form ℓ = ax + by + cz
fails to be a Lefschetz element of I if and only if ℓ = 0 is a jumping line of E if and only if
E|ℓ ∼
= Oℓ (a1ℓ ) ⊕ Oℓ (a2ℓ ) with |a1ℓ − a2ℓ | ≥ 2. Since the first Chern class c1 (E( d1 +d22+d3 −1 )) =
15

−1, we can apply [12, Corollary 10.7.1], and we get that E has exactly c2 (E(
jumping lines. Let us compute c2 (E( d1 +d22+d3 −1 )). From the exact sequence

d1 +d2 +d3 −1
))
2

2



0 −→ E −→ ⊕3i=1 OP2 (−di ) −→ OP2 −→ 0
we get that c1 (E) = −d1 − d2 − d3 and c2 (E) = d1 d2 + d1 d3 + d2 d3 . Since
 


 
2
d1 + d2 + d3 − 1
d1 + d2 + d3 − 1
d1 + d2 + d3 − 1
c2 E
= c2 (E) + c1 (E)
+
,
2
2
2
we have

 
2d1 d2 + 2d1 d3 + 2d2 d3 + 1 − d21 − d22 − d23
d1 + d2 + d3 − 1
=
c2 E
2
4

and we conclude that the set JE of jumping lines of E is a set of n2I points in (P2 )∗ , where
2d1d2 + 2d1 d3 + 2d2 d3 + 1 − d21 − d22 − d23
nI :=
,
4

which proves what we want.



Our next goal is to prove Conjecture 4.3 for n = 4. To this end the following lemmas
will be very useful.
Lemma 4.11. Let I = hF1 , F2 , F3 , F4 i ⊂ R = k[x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ] be a complete intersection
artinian ideal generated by general forms of degree (d1 , d2 , d3, d4 ). Assume that d1 ≤ d2 ≤
d3 ≤ d4 . Let e = d1 + d2 + d3 + d4 −4 be the socle degree of R/I and let (1, h1 , · · · , he−1 , he )
be the h-vector of R/I. Then
(1) If e is odd then
h e−1 = h e+1
2

2





1 −d1 + d2 + d3 − d4 + 1
1 d1 + d2 + d3 − d4 + 1
+
= d1 d2 d3 −
3
3
4
4

(2) If e is even then
h 2e − h 2e −1 =



0

d1 +d2 +d3 −d4
2


d
1

if d4 ≥ d1 + d2 + d3
if − d1 + d2 + d3 ≤ d4 ≤ d1 + d2 + d3
if d4 ≤ −d1 + d2 + d3 .

Proof. Let h′i be the h-vector of R/hf1 , f2 , f3 i. Then for e odd we get
h e−1 =
2

dX
4 −1
i=0

e−1

h′e−1 −i =
2

2
X

e−1
−d4
2

h′j = d1 d2 d3 −

X
j=0

−d4
j= e+1
2
d1 +d2 +d3 −d4 −5
2

= d1 d2 d3 −

h′j −

X

d1 +dX
2 +d3 −3

h′j

j= e+1
2

d1 +d2 +d3 −3− e+1
2

h′j −

j=0

X

h′j

j=0

d1 +d2 +d3 −d4 −7
2

d1 +d2 +d3 −d4 −5
2

= d1 d2 d3 −

X
j=0

16

h′j −

X
j=0

h′j



j−d1 +2
In the range 0 ≤ j ≤ d1 +d2 +d23 −d4 −5 we have that h′j = j+2
−
since d2 >
2
2
d1 +d2 +d3 −d4 −5
. For any m we have that
2
 m−1
m 
X j + 2 m + 3 m + 2 1 2m + 4
X
j+2
=
+
=
.
+
3
3
2
2
3
4
j=0
j=0
Thus we conclude that the maximum value of the h-vector is




1 d1 + d2 + d3 − d4 − 1
1 −d1 + d2 + d3 − d4 − 1
h e−1 = h e+1 = d1 d2 d3 −
+
.
2
2
3
3
4
4
When e is even we want to compute the difference
h −h
e
2

e
−1
2

=

dX
4 −1

h′e −i − h′e−2 −i = h′e − h′e−2 −d4 +1 = h′e − h′e −d4
2

2

2

i=0

2

2

2

= h′d1 +d2 +d3 −3 + d4 −1 − h′d1 +d2 +d3 −d4 −2 = h′d1 +d2 +d3 −3 − d4 −1 − h′d1 +d2 +d3 −d4 −2
2

2

2

2

2

2

′

= h d1 +d2 +d3 −d4 −1 − h′d1 +d2 +d3 −d4 −2 .
2

2

j+2
2

j−d1 +2
2

Again, we are in a range where we can use the expression h′j =
−
that




−d1 + d2 + d3 − d4
d1 + d2 + d3 − d4
−
h 2e − h 2e −1 =
2
2
+
+




to conclude

where [x]+ = x for x ≥ 0 and [x]+ = 0 for x < 0. For d4 ≤ −d1 + d2 + d3 this expression
equals d1 and for d ≥ −d1 + d2 + d3 it equals the first term, which concludes the proof of
the lemma.

We denote by Gor(H) the scheme parametrizing artinian Gorenstein codimension 3
algebras R/I with h-vector H = (1, h1 , · · · , he−1, he ) [6]. We have
Lemma 4.12. Let H = (1, h1 , · · · , he−1, he ) and H ′ = (1, h′1 , · · · , h′e−1 , h′e ) be the hvectors of two artinian Gorenstein codimension 3 algebras with odd socle degree e = 2r +1.
Assume that
(
h′i = hi ,
for i 6= r, r + 1,
′
hi = hi − 1, for i = r, r + 1.
Then, it holds:
dim Gor(H) − dim Gor(H ′) = hr+1 − 2hr+3 + hr+4 + 1.
Proof. By [4, Example 5.2], we have
e

X
1
dim Gor(H) = (3hr + hr−1 −
hi pi )
2
i=0

where pi = hi − 3hi−1 + 3hi−2 − hi−3 . Therefore after a long but routine calculation we
obtain
P
P
dim Gor(H) − dim Gor(H ′) = 12 (3hr + hr−1 − ei=0 hi pi ) − 21 (3h′r + h′r−1 − ei=0 h′i p′i )
= hr+1 − 2hr+3 + hr+4 + 1
which proves what we want.


17

Theorem 4.13. Let I = hF1 , F2 , F3 , F4 i ⊂ R = k[x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ] be a complete intersection
artinian ideal generated by general forms of degree (d1 , d2 , d3, d4 ). Assume that d1 ≤ d2 ≤
d3 ≤ d4 . Let e be the socle degree of R/I and let (1, h1 , · · · , he−1, he ) be the h-vector of
R/I. Then
(1) If e is odd then the non-Lefschetz locus LI ⊂ (P3 )∗ is a surface of degree




1 −d1 + d2 + d3 − d4 − 1
1 d1 + d2 + d3 − d4 − 1
+
.
h e−1 = d1 d2 d3 −
2
3
3
4
4
(2) If e is even then
codim LI = min{h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1, 4}.
In particular, LI ⊂ (Pn−1 )∗ is non-empty if and only if h 2e − h 2e −1 ≤ 2 if and only
if d4 ≥ d1 + d2 + d3 or −d1 + d2 + d3 ≤ d4 ≤ d1 + d2 + d3 and d1 + d2 + d3 − d4 ≤ 4
he
or d4 ≤ −d1 + d2 + d3 and d1 ≤ 2. In these cases δI := deg(LI ) = h e −h e2 +1 .
2

2 −1

Proof. Part (1) follows from Lemma 4.11 taking into account that if R/I has the WLP
and the socle degree is odd then the non-Lefschetz locus is a surface of degree h e−1 .
2
We now consider (2). By Remark 4.6 (1) , if d4 ≥ d3 + d2 + d1 (remembering that e is
even, so d4 6= d3 + d2 + d1 − 1), then h 2e = h 2e −1 = d1 d2 d3 and LI ⊂ (Pn−1 )∗ is a surface of
degree d1 d2 d3 . By Remark 4.6 (2) , if d4 = d3 +d2 +d1 −2, then h 2e −h 2e −1 = 1, h 2e = d1 d2 d3

n−1
and LI ⊂ (P3 )∗ is an arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay curve of degree d1 d2 ···d
. By
2
Proposition 4.7 if d4 = d1 + d2 + d3 − 4 then codim LI = min{h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1, 4} = 3 (where
he
the last equality follows from Lemma 4.11 (2)) and has degree 32 .
From now on we assume d4 ≤ d1 + d2 + d3 − 6. We fix a linear form ℓ and we set
S = R/(ℓ). We denote by Ad1 ,d2 ,d3 ,d4 the set of almost complete intersection ideals J ⊂ S
of type (d1 , d2 , d3 , d4 ) and by Bd1 ,d2 ,d3 ,d4 the set of almost complete intersection ideals
J ⊂ S of type (d1 , d2 , d3 , d4) and h-vector
(1, h1 − 1, h2 − h1 , · · · , h 2e −1 − h 2e −2 , h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1, 1).

A general ideal J in Ad1 ,d2 ,d3 ,d4 can be linked by means of a complete intersection K of
type (d1 , d2 , d3 ) to a Gorenstein ideal G with socle degree s := d1 + d2 + d3 − d4 − 3 and
h-vector HG = (1, f1 , · · · , fs ). A general ideal J ′ in Bd1 ,d2 ,d3 ,d4 can be linked by means of
a complete intersection K of type (d1 , d2 , d3 ) to a Gorenstein ideal G′ with socle degree s
and h-vector HG′ = (1, f1′ , · · · , fs′ ). Moreover, we have:
fi′ = fi for i 6= s−1
, s+1
2
2
.
′
fi = fi − 1 for i = s−1
, s+1
2
2
According to (4.4), to finish the proof it is enough to demonstrate that
dim Gor(HG ) − dim Gor(HG′ ) = h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1
(see also the end of the proof of Proposition 4.9 for the equivalence). Let us prove it. To
this end, we denote by (1, h̃1 , · · · , h̃w ) the h-vector of the complete intersection ideal K
in S of type (d1 , d2 , d3). So, w = d1 + d2 + d3 − 3. Applying Lemma 4.12, we obtain
dim Gor(HG ) − dim Gor(HG′ ) = f s−1 +1 − 2f s−1 +3 + f s−1 +4 + 1
2
2
2
= (f s−1 +1 − f s−1 +2 ) + (f s−1 +2 − 2f s−1 +3 + f s−1 +4 ) + 1
2
2
2
2
2
= −∆f s−1 +2 − ∆2 f s−1 +4 + 1.
2

2

18

Since G (resp. G′ ) is linked to J (resp. J ′ ) by a complete intersection K of type d1 , d2 , d3
we have fi = h̃i+d4 for i = s−1
+ 1, s−1
+ 2. So, we get:
2
2
−∆f s−1 +2 − ∆2 f s−1 +4 + 1 = −∆h̃ d1 +d2 +d3 +d4 + ∆2 h̃ d1 +d2 +d3 +d4 +2 + 1
2
2

2
2

1
if
d
≥
d1 + d2 + d3
4

d1 +d2 +d3 −d4
=
+ 1 if − d1 + d2 + d3 ≤ d4 ≤ d1 + d2 + d3
2

d + 1
if d4 ≤ −d1 + d2 + d3 .
1

Therefore, applying Lemma 4.11, we conclude that

dim Gor(HG ) − dim Gor(HG′ ) = h 2e − h 2e −1 + 1.

5. The non-Lefschetz locus of a general height three Gorenstein
algebra
When the Hilbert function is fixed, the height three Gorenstein algebras with that
Hilbert function lie in a flat family [6], so it makes sense to talk about the general Gorenstein algebra in this family. From now on, we will abuse terminology and refer to a general
Gorenstein algebra, and assume that it is understood that we have fixed the Hilbert function; we will also assume that it is understood that in this section we refer only to the
height three situation, except for a small remark at the end of the section. In this section we will describe the codimension of the non-Lefschetz locus of a general Gorenstein
algebra, and in particular describe exactly when it is of the expected codimension (given
the Hilbert function) in the sense of the earlier sections. One might expect that just as
with complete intersections, the general Gorenstein algebra has non-Lefschetz locus of the
expected codimension, but this is not always the case. We give a classification of those
Hilbert functions for which the general Gorenstein algebras fail to have non-Lefschetz
locus of the expected codimension.
The Hilbert functions of height three Gorenstein algebras are well-understood. They
are the so-called Stanley-Iarrobino (SI) sequences of height three. They are characterized
as follows. A sequence h = (1, 3, h2 , . . . , he−1 , he ) is an SI-sequence if and only if
(i) h is symmetric.
(ii) Setting gi = hi − hi−1 for 1 ≤ i ≤ ⌊ 2e ⌋, the sequence g = (1, 2, g2, . . . , g⌊ 2e ⌋ ) satisfies
Macaulay’s growth condition.
Condition (ii) says that the sequence (1, 3, h2, . . . , h⌊ 2e ⌋ ) is the beginning of the Hilbert
function of some zero-dimensional scheme in P2 of degree h⌊ 2e ⌋ . It is important to note that
it does not mean that for every Gorenstein algebra R/I with this Hilbert function, the
components of R/I up to degree ⌊ 2e ⌋ actually coincide with the corresponding components
of a zero-dimensional scheme. If such a condition does hold, and if the zero-dimensional
scheme is reduced, we will say that R/I “comes from points.” For any SI-sequence, by
taking a suitable Gorenstein quotient of the coordinate ring of a suitable reduced set
of points, there is always a subfamily (of the Gorenstein family corresponding to the
SI-sequence) that does come from points.
We say that a sequence (1, 2, g2, g3 , . . . , gk ) is of decreasing type if begins with (1, 2, 3, . . . )
(growing with the polynomial ring k[x, y]), then is possibly flat, then is strictly decreasing.
Theorem 5.1. Fix an SI-sequence h = (1, 3, h2 , . . . , he−2, 3, 1) of socle degree e.
19

(i) If there are two or more consecutive values of hi that are equal then the general
Gorenstein algebra with Hilbert function h has non-Lefschetz locus of the expected
codimension, namely one. This holds, in particular, when e is odd.
(ii) Assume e is even and
(5.1)

h = (1, 3, h2, . . . , h 2e −1 , h 2e , h 2e +1 , . . . , he−2 , 3, 1)
where h 2e −1 < h 2e > h e2 +1 . Let g be the sequence of positive first differences, as
above. Then the general Gorenstein algebra with this Hilbert function has nonLefschetz locus of the expected codimension if and only if g is of decreasing type.
If g is not of decreasing type then the non-Lefschetz locus has codimension one.

Proof. Suppose h⌊ 2e ⌋ = h⌊ 2e ⌋+1 , for instance if the socle degree e is odd. Then the expected codimension of the non-Lefschetz locus is one. Since it is known that the general
height three artinian Gorenstein algebra with any given Hilbert function has the WLP [9],
the non-Lefschetz locus of the general Gorenstein algebra with odd socle degree has the
expected codimension. So from now on assume that e is even, and that h 2e −1 < h 2e > h 2e +1 .
We first assume that g is of decreasing type. Our strategy will be to construct an
explicit Gorenstein algebra having such a Hilbert function and non-Lefschetz locus of
expected codimension; then by semicontinuity the general Gorenstein algebra with this
Hilbert function has non-Lefschetz locus of the expected codimension.
So consider the SI-sequence (5.1), and assume that its first difference is of decreasing
type. Let Z be a reduced set of h 2e points in P2 with Hilbert function given by
(1, 3, h2, . . . , h 2e −1 , h 2e , h 2e , . . . ).
The h-vector of Z is given by the first difference sequence g. Let I be an artinian Gorenstein ideal obtained as a suitable quotient of R/IZ , so that the Hilbert function of R/I is
precisely h. (See [2].) This means that [I]i = [IZ ]i for i ≤ 2e . We want to show:
(i) LI = ∅ if g 2e ≥ 2;
(ii) codim LI = 2 if g 2e = 1;
We have already seen that codim Li = 1 if g 2e = 0, so we have assumed h 2e −1 < h 2e .
Because g is of decreasing type, we can assume that Z has the Uniform Position Property
(UPP) by a result by Maggioni and Ragusa [14]. In particular it has the 2-CayleyBacharach Property: the Hilbert functions of Z minus a point are all the same, and the
Hilbert functions of Z minus two points are all the same. We consider the multiplication
on R/IZ from degree 2e − 1 to degree 2e by a linear form ℓ. Notice that by UPP, ℓ vanishes
on at most two points since h1 = 3 (so not all points lie on a line).
Case 1: ℓ does not vanish on any point of Z.
Then ℓ is a non-zerodivisor, so the multiplication is injective and ℓ is a Lefschetz
element.
Case 2: ℓ vanishes at exactly one point, P , of Z.
Let Y = Z\P , defined by IY = IZ : ℓ. Notice that since h 2e −1 < h 2e , and Z has the
UPP, we have [IY ] 2e −1 = [IZ ] 2e −1 . From the diagram
×ℓ

0 → [IY /IZ ] 2e −1
||
0

[R/I] 2e −1 −→ [R/I] 2e
||
||
×ℓ
→ [R/IZ ] e2 −1 −→ [R/IZ ] 2e
20

we see that multiplication by ℓ is again injective, i.e. ℓ is a Lefschetz element.
Case 3: ℓ vanishes at exactly two points, P and Q, of Z.
We obtain the same diagram as in Case 2. In this case, though, we have [IY /IZ ] 2e −1 = 0
if and only g 2e ≥ 2. If g 2e = 1, then [IY /IZ ] 2e −1 6= 0. Thus LI = ∅ if g 2e ≥ 2, and
codim LI = 2 if g 2e = 1, both of which correspond to the expected codimension. In the
he
latter case, the degree formula gives deg LI = 22 , which can be seen directly as all
choices of two points of Z.
Thus we have constructed an explicit Gorenstein algebra with Hilbert function h and
non-Lefschetz locus of the expected codimension, so as noted above, by semicontinuity
the general Gorenstein algebra has non-Lefschetz locus of the expected codimension.
It remains to consider the case where g is not of decreasing type. In this case the same
approach will not work, since it is a priori possible that the Gorenstein algebras coming
from points in this case fail to have non-Lefschetz locus of the expected codimension, but
nevertheless the general one does. We will show by a different method that this is not
the case.
So assume that gi−1 = gi for some i ≤ 2e , and that i − 1 is the least degree for which
gi−2 > gi−1 = gi . Assume also that R/I is general in the flat family of Gorenstein algebras
with this Hilbert function. By a result of Ragusa and Zappalà [18] the generators of I of
degree ≤ i − 1 all have a common factor, F , of degree gi . Furthermore, the generators of
the ideal I : F of degree ≤ i − 1 span the ideal of a reduced set of points, Z, in P2 .
In order to prove our statement on the non-Lefschetz locus, let ℓ be a linear form and
let Y be defined by IZ : ℓ. This time we consider the multiplication from degree i − 1 to
degree i. We have a diagram
×ℓ

0 → [IY · F/IZ · F ]i−1

[R/I]i−1
−→
[R/I]i
||
||
×ℓ
→ [R/IZ · F ]i−1 −→ [R/IZ · F ]i

But dimk [R/IZ ]j reaches its multiplicity in degree i − 2 − gi [5], so whenever ℓ vanishes
at a point of Z, [IY · F/IZ · F ]i−1 is not zero and the multiplication fails to have maximal
rank. Thus the non-Lefschetz locus in degree i − 1 has codimension one. By Proposition
2.5 we are done.

Remark 5.2. Using the ideas from the proof of Theorem 5.1, it is easy to construct an
artinian Gorenstein algebra whose non-Lefschetz locus is non-reduced, for almost any SIsequence h. We simply relax the generality condition on Z and allow three points to lie
on a line. The only obstacle is when the h-vector of Z does not allow this, i.e. when it is
(1), (1, 1)
Remark 5.3. If g is not of decreasing type and A has odd socle degree, then even though
LI is of the expected codimension, it is still true that its behavior is not the expected one
because in earlier degrees it is a hypersurface when we expect it not to be.
Remark 5.4. Since complete intersections of codimension three have g-vectors of decreasing type, Theorem 5.1 is a generalization of Theorem 4.10. However, since the method of
proof is completely different, we prefer to give the proof of Theorem 4.10 in Section 4.
6. The non-Lefschetz locus in codimension two
In this short section we describe the situation in codimension two. Let R = k[x, y]
and let I be an artinian ideal in R. Now the Hilbert function of R/I has the form
21

(1, 2, h2 , . . . , he ), where hi = i+1 until the initial degree of hR/I , and then is non-decreasing
from then on. Furthermore, if hi = hi+1 for some i, this represents maximal growth of the
Hilbert function, so Macaulay’s theorem [13] together with Gotzmann’s theorem [7] gives
that the greatest common divisor of all the elements in I of degree i and degree i + 1 has
degree hi .
For fixed Hilbert function, the algebras having that Hilbert function form an irreducible
family. For a general such algebra, if hi+1 < hi then the elements of I in degree i + 1 do
not have a common divisor.
Lemma 6.1. Let I be any artinian graded ideal in R = k[x, y]. Let {hi } be the h-vector
of R/I. Fix any degree i. There exists a linear form ℓ such that ×ℓ : [R/I]i−1 → [R/I]i
fails to have maximal rank if and only if I has a common factor, say F , between all forms
of degree i. We have deg F ≤ hi .
Proof. The fact that the degree of a GCD in degree i must be ≤ hi is well known. Assume
that the forms of degree i in I have a GCD, say F , of positive degree. If F ∈ I then [I]i is
the degree i part of a principal ideal (F ), we have hi−1 = hi = deg F . But in R, F factors
into linear factors. Thus clearly the non-Lefschetz locus consists precisely of the factors
of F (counted with multiplicity). That is, the locus in (P1 )∗ of linear forms ℓ for which
×ℓ : [R/I]i−1 → [R/I]i fails to have maximal rank is zero-dimensional of degree equal to
deg F = hi . (This is not quite the same as the non-Lefschetz locus since we are looking
only in degrees i − 1 and i.)
Suppose instead that the GCD, F , is not in I and has degree d ≤ hi . We have
dim[I]i = i + 1 − hi = m, say. Choose a basis for [I]i of the form {F A1 , . . . , F Am }. Say
F factors as F = ℓ1 · · · ℓd . For each factor of F , for instance ℓ1 , we have m independent
elements of [R]i−1 such that multiplication by ℓ1 is zero in R/I. Now,
hi−1 − hi = (i − dim[I]i−1 ) − (i + 1 − dim[I]i ) = m − 1 − dim[I]i−1 < m
so multiplication by ℓ1 has a larger kernel than expected (surjectivity implies a kernel of
dimension hi−1 − hi ) and so fails to have maximal rank.
Conversely, assume that I does not have a GCD in degree i. We want to show that
multiplication by any linear form ℓ gives a homomorphism of maximal rank from degree
i − 1 to degree i. In degrees smaller than the initial degree of I, R/I agrees with the
polynomial ring, so the result is clear. If hi−1 = hi then by the result of Davis [5] I has
a GCD in degree i. Thus we may assume that hi−1 > hi . Suppose that there exists a
linear form ℓ for which the corresponding multiplication from degree i − 1 to degree i is
not surjective. Consider the exact sequence
×ℓ

0 → [R/(I : ℓ)(−1)]i −→ [R/I]i → [R/(I, ℓ)]i → 0.
By assumption, [R/(I, ℓ)]i 6= 0. But R/(ℓ) ∼
= k[x]. This means that the restriction of
[I]i modulo ℓ is zero. This can only happen if ℓ is a GCD for [I]i , contradicting our
assumption. The result follows.

Proposition 6.2. Let R = k[x, y]. Fix a Hilbert function {hi } that exists for artinian
graded quotients of R. Let R/I be a general algebra with this Hilbert function. For any
i, there exists a linear form ℓ such that ×ℓ : [R/I]i−1 → [R/I]i fails to have maximal
rank if and only if hi−1 = hi . In particular, if R/I is a general complete intersection of
type (d1 , d2 ), with d1 ≤ d2 , then the non-Lefschetz locus is empty if and only if d1 = d2 .
Otherwise, the degree of the non-Lefschetz locus is d1 .
22

References
[1] G. Bohnhorst and H. Spindler. The stability of certain vector bundles on Pn . In Complex algebraic
varieties (Bayreuth, 1990), volume 1507 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages 39–50. Springer, Berlin,
1992.
[2] M. Boij. Gorenstein Artin algebras and points in projective space. Bull. London Math. Soc., 31(1):11–
16, 1999.
[3] H. Brenner and A. Kaid. Syzygy bundles on P2 and the weak Lefschetz property. Illinois J. Math.,
51(4):1299–1308, 2007.
[4] A. Conca and G. Valla. Hilbert function of powers of ideals of low codimension. Math. Z., 230(4):753–
784, 1999.
[5] E. D. Davis. Complete intersections of codimension 2 in Pr : the Bezout-Jacobi-Segre theorem revisited. Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino, 43(2):333–353 (1986), 1985.
[6] S. J. Diesel. Irreducibility and dimension theorems for families of height 3 Gorenstein algebras.
Pacific J. Math., 172(2):365–397, 1996.
[7] G. Gotzmann. Eine Bedingung für die Flachheit und das Hilbertpolynom eines graduierten Ringes.
Math. Z., 158(1):61–70, 1978.
[8] D. R. Grayson and M. E. Stillman. Macaulay2, a software system for research in algebraic geometry.
Available at http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2/.
[9] T. Harima. Characterization of Hilbert functions of Gorenstein Artin algebras with the weak Stanley
property. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 123(12):3631–3638, 1995.
[10] T. Harima, J. C. Migliore, U. Nagel, and J. Watanabe. The weak and strong Lefschetz properties
for Artinian K-algebras. J. Algebra, 262(1):99–126, 2003.
[11] J. Harris. Algebraic geometry, volume 133 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New
York, 1995. A first course, Corrected reprint of the 1992 original.
[12] K. Hulek. Stable rank-2 vector bundles on P2 with c1 odd. Math. Ann., 242(3):241–266, 1979.
[13] F. S. Macaulay. Some Properties of Enumeration in the Theory of Modular Systems. Proc. London
Math. Soc., S2-26(1):531, 1929.
[14] R. Maggioni and A. Ragusa. The Hilbert function of generic plane sections of curves of P3 . Invent.
Math., 91(2):253–258, 1988.
[15] J. Migliore. Geometric invariants for liaison of space curves. J. Algebra, 99(2):548–572, 1986.
[16] J. C. Migliore, R. M. Miró-Roig, and U. Nagel. Monomial ideals, almost complete intersections and
the weak Lefschetz property. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 363(1):229–257, 2011.
[17] C. Okonek, M. Schneider, and H. Spindler. Vector bundles on complex projective spaces. Modern
Birkhäuser Classics. Birkhäuser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, 2011. Corrected reprint of the 1988 edition, With an appendix by S. I. Gelfand.
[18] A. Ragusa and G. Zappalà. Properties of 3-codimensional Gorenstein schemes. Comm. Algebra,
29(1):303–318, 2001.
[19] L. Reid, L. G. Roberts, and M. Roitman. On complete intersections and their Hilbert functions.
Canad. Math. Bull., 34(4):525–535, 1991.
[20] R. P. Stanley. Weyl groups, the hard Lefschetz theorem, and the Sperner property. SIAM J. Algebraic
Discrete Methods, 1(2):168–184, 1980.
[21] J. Watanabe. The Dilworth number of Artinian rings and finite posets with rank function. In Commutative algebra and combinatorics (Kyoto, 1985), volume 11 of Adv. Stud. Pure Math., pages 303–312.
North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1987.

23

Department of Mathematics, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, S-100 44 Stockholm, Sweden
E-mail address: boij@kth.se
Department of Mathematics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA
E-mail address: migliore.1@nd.edu
Facultat de Matemàtiques, Departament de Matemàtiques i Informàtica, Gran Via des
les Corts Catalanes 585, 08007 Barcelona, Spain
E-mail address: miro@ub.edu
Department of Mathematics, University of Kentucky, 715 Patterson Office Tower,
Lexington, KY 40506-0027, USA
E-mail address: uwe.nagel@uky.edu

24

