arXiv:1601.06574v2 [math.AG] 6 Aug 2016

Real Rank Geometry of Ternary Forms
Mateusz Michalek, Hyunsuk Moon,
Bernd Sturmfels, and Emanuele Ventura
Abstract
We study real ternary forms whose real rank equals the generic complex rank, and we
characterize the semialgebraic set of sums of powers representations with that rank.
Complete results are obtained for quadrics and cubics. For quintics we determine the
real rank boundary: it is a hypersurface of degree 168. For quartics, sextics and septics
we identify some of the components of the real rank boundary. The real varieties of
sums of powers are stratiﬁed by discriminants that are derived from hyperdeterminants.

1

Introduction


Let R[x, y, z]d denote the d+2
-dimensional vector space of ternary forms f of degree d.
2
These are homogeneous polynomials of degree d in three unknowns x, y, z, or equivalently,
symmetric tensors of format 3×3× · · · ×3 with d factors. We are interested in decompositions
f (x, y, z) =

r
X
i=1

λi · (ai x + bi y + ci z)d ,

(1)

where ai , bi , ci , λi ∈ R for i = 1, 2, . . . , r. The smallest r for which such a representation
exists is the real rank of f , denoted rkR (f ). For d even, the representation (1) has signature
(s, r − s), for s ≥ r/2, if s of the λi ’s are positive while the others are negative, or vice versa.
The complex rank rkC (f ) is the smallest r such that f has the form (1) where ai , bi , ci ∈ C.
The inequality rkC (f ) ≤ rkR (f ) always holds, and is often strict. For binary forms, this
phenomenon is well-understood by now, thanks to [7, 16]. For ternary forms, explicit regions
where the inequality is strict were identiﬁed by Blekherman, Bernardi and Ottaviani in [6].
The present paper extends these studies. We focus on ternary forms f that are general
in R[x, y, z]d . The complex rank of such a form is referred to as the generic rank. It depends
only on d, and we denote it by R(d). The Alexander-Hirschowitz Theorem [2] implies that


(d + 2)(d + 1)
otherwise.
(2)
R(2) = 3, R(4) = 6, and R(d) =
6
We are particularly interested in general forms whose minimal decomposition is real. Set

Rd = f ∈ R[x, y, z]d : rkR (f ) = R(d) .
1

This is a full-dimensional semialgebraic subset of R[x, y, z]d . Its topological boundary ∂Rd
is the set-theoretic diﬀerence of the closure of Rd minus the interior of the closure of Rd .
Thus, if f ∈ ∂Rd then every open neighborhood of f contains a general form of real rank
equal to R(d) and also a general form of real rank bigger than R(d). The semialgebraic set
∂Rd is either empty or pure of codimension 1. The real rank boundary, denoted ∂alg (Rd ),
is deﬁned as the Zariski closure of the topological boundary ∂Rd in the complex projective
d+2
space P(C[x, y, z]d ) = P( 2 )−1 . We conjecture that the variety ∂alg (Rd ) is non-empty, and
hence has codimension 1, for all d ≥ 4. This is equivalent to R(d) + 1 being a typical rank,
in the sense of [6, 7, 16]. This is proved for d = 4, 5 in [6] and for d = 6, 7, 8 in this paper.
Our aim is to study these hypersurfaces. The big guiding problem is as follows:
Problem 1.1. Determine the polynomial that defines the real rank boundary ∂alg (Rd ).
The analogous question for binary forms was answered in [25, Theorem 4.1]. A related and
equally diﬃcult issue is to identify all the various open strata in the real rank stratiﬁcation.
Problem 1.2. Determine the possible real ranks of general ternary forms in R[x, y, z]d .
This problem is open for d ≥ 4; the state of the art is the work of Bernardi, Blekherman and Ottaviani in [6]. For binary forms, this question has a complete answer, due to
Blekherman [7], building on earlier work of Comon and Ottaviani [16]. See also [25, §4].
For any ternary form f and the generic rank r = R(d), it is natural to ask for the space
of all decompositions (1). In the algebraic geometry literature [29, 33], this space is denoted
VSP(f ) and called the variety of sums of powers. By deﬁnition, VSP(f ) is the closure of
the subscheme of the Hilbert scheme Hilbr (P2 ) parametrizing the unordered conﬁgurations

(a1 : b1 : c1 ), (a2 : b2 : c2 ), . . . , (ar : br : cr ) ⊂ P2
(3)

that can occur in (1). If f is general then the dimension of its variety of sums of powers
depends only on d. By counting parameters, the Alexander-Hirschowitz Theorem [2] implies


 3 if d = 2 or 4,
dim(VSP(f )) =
(4)
2 if d = 0 (mod 3),


0 otherwise.

In Table 1 we summarize what is known about the varieties of sums of powers. In 2/3 of all
cases, the variety VSP(f ) is ﬁnite. It is one point only in the case of quintics, by [26].
We are interested in the semialgebraic subset SSP(f )R of those conﬁgurations (3) in
VSP(f ) whose r points all have real coordinates. This is the space of real sums of powers.
Note that the space SSP(f )R is non-empty if and only if the ternary form f lies in the
semialgebraic set Rd . The inclusion of SSP(f )R in the real variety VSP(f )R of real points of
VSP(f ) is generally strict. Our aim is to describe these objects as explicitly as possible.
A key player is the apolar ideal of the form f . This is the 0-dimensional Gorenstein ideal
o
n
∂ ∂ ∂ 
annihilates f (x, y, z) .
(5)
, ,
f ⊥ = p(x, y, z) ∈ R[x, y, z] : p
∂x ∂y ∂z
2

Ternary forms
Quadrics
Cubics
Quartics
Quintics
Sextics
Septics
Octics

R(d)
3
4
6
7
10
12
15

VSP(f )
del Pezzo threefold V5
P2
Fano threefold V22 of genus 12
1 point
K3 surface V38 of genus 20
5 points
16 points

Reference
Mukai [27]
Dolgachev, Kanev [19]
Mukai [27]
Hilbert, Richmond, Palatini; see [33]
Mukai [28]; see also [33]
Dixon, Stuart [18]
Ranestad, Schreyer [33]

Table 1: Varieties of sums of powers for ternary forms of degree d = 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.
A conﬁguration (3) lies in VSP(f ) if and only if its homogeneous radical ideal is contained
in f ⊥ . Hence, points in SSP(f )R are 1-dimensional radical ideals in f ⊥ whose zeros are real.
Another important tool is the middle catalecticant of f , which is deﬁned as follows. For
any partition d = u + v, consider the bilinear form Cu,v (f ) : R[x, y, z]u ×R[x, y, z]v → R that
∂
∂
∂
maps (p, q) to the real number obtained by applying (p · q)( ∂x
, ∂y
, ∂z
) to the polynomial f .
We identify Cu,v (f ) with the matrix that represents the bilinear form with respect to the
monomial basis. The middle catalecticant C(f ) of the ternary form f is precisely that matrix,
where we take u = v = d/2 when d is even, and u = (d−1)/2, v = (d+1)/2 when d is odd.

The hypothesis d ∈ {2, 4, 6, 8} ensures that C(f ) is square of size equal to R(d) = d/2+2
.
2
Proposition 1.3. Let d ∈ {2, 4, 6, 8} and f ∈ R[x, y, z]d be general. The signature of any
representation (1) coincides with the signature of the middle catalecticant C(f ). If C(f ) is
positive definite then SSP(f )R = VSP(f )R , and this set is always non-empty provided d ≤ 4.
P
Proof. If f = ri=1 λi ℓdi as in (1) then C(f ) is the sum of the rank one matrices λi C(ℓdi ). If
C(f ) has rank r then its signature is (# positive λi , # negative λi ). The identity SSP(f )R =
VSP(f )R will be proved for d = 2 in Theorem 2.1, and the same argument works for d = 4, 6, 8
as well. The last assertion, for d ≤ 4, is due to Reznick [35, Theorem 4.6].

The structure of the paper is organized by increasing degrees: Section d is devoted to
ternary forms of degree d. In Section 2, we determine the threefolds SSP(f )R for quadrics,
and in Section 3 we determine the surfaces SSP(f )R for cubics. Theorem 3.1 summarizes
the four cases displayed in Table 2. Section 4 is devoted to quartics f and their real rank
boundaries. We present an algebraic characterization of SSP(f )R as a subset of Mukai’s Fano
threefold V22 , following [24, 27, 29, 33, 36]. In Section 5, we use the uniqueness of the rank 7
decomposition of quintics to determine the irreducible hypersurface ∂alg (R5 ). We also study
the case of septics (d = 7), and we discuss VSPX for arbitrary varieties X ⊂ PN . Finally,
Section 6 covers all we know about sextics, starting in Theorem 6.1 with a huge component
of the boundary ∂alg (R6 ), and concluding with a case study of the monomial f = x2 y 2 z 2 .
This paper contains numerous open problems and conjectures. We are fairly conﬁdent
about some of them (like the one stated prior to Problem 1.1). However, others (like Conjectures 4.3 and 5.5) are based primarily on optimism. We hope that all will be useful in
inspiring further progress on the real algebraic geometry of tensor decompositions.
3

2

Quadrics

The real rank geometry of quadratic forms is surprisingly delicate and interesting. Consider a
general real quadric f in n variables. We know from linear algebra that rkR (f ) = rkC (f ) = n.
More precisely, if (p, q) is the signature of f then, after a linear change of coordinates,
f = x21 + · · · + x2p − x2p+1 − · · · − x2p+q

(n = p + q).

(6)

The stabilizer of f in GL(n, R) is denoted SO(p, q). It is called the indefinite special
orthogonal group when p, q ≥ 1. We denote by SO+ (p, q) the connected component
of SO(p, q) containing the identity. Let G denote the stabilizer in SO+ (p, q) of the set

{x21 , . . . , x2p }, {x2p+1 , . . . , x2n } . In particular, if f is positive deﬁnite then we get the group
of rotations, SO+ (n, 0) = SO(n), and G is the subgroup of rotational symmetries of the
n-cube, which has order 2n−1 n!.
Theorem 2.1. Let f be a rank n quadric of signature (p, q). The space SSP(f )R can be identified with the quotient SO+ (p, q)/G. If the quadric f is definite then SSP(f )R = VSP(f )R =
SO(n)/G. In all other cases, SSP(f )R is strictly contained in the real variety VSP(f )R .
Proof. The analogue of the ﬁrst assertation over an algebraically closed ﬁeld appears in [34,
Proposition 1.4]. To prove SSP(f )R P
= SO+ (p, P
q)/G over R, we argue as follows. Every rank
p
2
2
n decomposition of f has the form i=1 ℓi − p+q
j=p+1 ℓj , and is hence obtained from (6) by
an invertible linear transformation xj → ℓj that preserves f . These elements of GL(n, R)
are taken up to sign reversals and permutations of the sets {ℓ1 , . . . , ℓp } and {ℓp+1,P
. . . , ℓn }.
2
2
Suppose that f is not deﬁnite, i.e. p, q ≥ 1. Then we can write f = 2ℓ1 − 2ℓ2 + nj=3 ±ℓ2j .
√
P
Over C, with i = −1, this can be rewritten as f = (ℓ1 + iℓ2 )2 + (ℓ1 −iℓ2 )2 + nj=3 ±ℓ2j . This
decomposition represents a point in VSP(f )R \SSP(f )R . There is an open set of such points.
Let f be deﬁnite and consider any point in VSP(f )R . It corresponds to a decomposition
f =

k
X
j=1

2

(a2j−1 + ib2j−1 )(ℓ2j−1 + iℓ2j ) + (a2j + ib2j )(ℓ2j−1 − iℓ2j )

2



+

n
X

cj ℓ2j ,

j=2k+1

where ℓ1 , . . . , ℓn are independent real linear forms and the a’s and b’s are in R. By rescaling ℓ2j
and ℓ2j−1 , we obtain a2j−1 + ib2j−1 = 1. Adding the right hand side to its complex conjugate,
we get cj ∈ R and a2j + ib2j = 1. The catalecticant C(f ) is the matrix that represents f . A
change of basis shows that C(f ) has ≥ k negative eigenvalues, hence k = 0.
The geometry of the inclusion SSP(f )R into VSP(f )R is already quite subtle in the case
of binary forms, i.e. n = 2. We call f = a0 x2 + a1 xy + a2 y 2 hyperbolic if its signature is (1, 1).
Otherwise f is deﬁnite. These two cases depend on the sign of the discriminant a0 a2 − 4a21 .
Corollary 2.2. Let f be a binary quadric of rank 2. If f is definite then SSP(f )R =
VSP(f )R = P1R . If f is hyperbolic then SSP(f )R is an interval in the circle VSP(f )R = P1R .

4

Proof. The apolar ideal f ⊥ is generated by two quadrics q1 , q2 in R[x, y]2 . Their pencil
P(f2⊥ ) is VSP(f ) ≃ P1 . A real point (u : v) ∈ P1R = VSP(f )R may or may not be in SSP(f )R .
The ﬁbers of the map P1R → P1R given by (q1 , q2 ) consist of two points, corresponding to the
decompositions f = ℓ21 ±ℓ22 . The ﬁber over (u : v) consists of the roots of the quadric uq2 −vq1 .
If f is deﬁnite then both roots are always real. Otherwise the discriminant with respect to
(x, y), which is a quadric in (u, v), divides P1R into SSP(f )R and its complement.
Example 2.3. Fix the hyperbolic quadric f = x2 − y 2 . We take q1 = xy and q2 = x2 + y 2 .
The quadric uq2 − vq1 = u(x2 +y 2) − vxy has two real roots if and only if (2u−v)(2u+v) < 0.
Hence SSP(f )R is the interval in P1R deﬁned by −1/2 < u/v < 1/2. In the topological
description in Theorem 2.1, the group G is trivial, and SSP(f )R is identiﬁed with the group



cosh(α) sinh(α)
+
: α∈R .
SO (1, 1) =
sinh(α) cosh(α)
The homeomorphism between SO+ (1, 1) and the interval between −1/2 and 1/2 is given by
α 7→

u
cosh(α) · sinh(α)
=
.
v
cosh(α)2 + sinh(α)2



The resulting factorization u(x2 + y 2 ) − vxy = sinh(α)x − cosh(α)y cosh(α)x − sinh(α)y
2
2
yields the decomposition f = cosh(α)x + sinh(α)y − sinh(α)x + cosh(α)y .
♦

It is instructive to examine the topology of the family of curves SSP(f )R as f runs over
the projective plane P2R = P(R[x, y]2 ). This plane is divided by an oval into two regions:
(i) the interior region {a0 a2 − 4a21 < 0} is a disk, and it parametrizes the deﬁnite quadrics;
(ii) the exterior region {a0 a2 −4a21 > 0} is a Möbius strip, consisting of hyperbolic quadrics.

Over the disk, the circles VSP(f )R provide a trivial P1R –ﬁbration. Over the Möbius strip,
there is a twist. Namely, if we travel around the disk, along an S1 in the Möbius strip, then
the two endpoints of SSP(f )R get switched. Hence, here we get the twisted circle bundle.
The topic of this paper is ternary forms, so we now ﬁx n = 3. A real ternary form of rank
3 is either deﬁnite or hyperbolic. In the deﬁnite case, the normal form is f = x2 + y 2 + z 2 ,
and SSP(f )R = VSP(f )R = SO(3)/G, where G has order 24. In the hyperbolic case, the
normal form is f = x2 + y 2 − z 2 , and SSP(f )R ( VSP(f )R = SO+ (2, 1)/G, where G has
order 4. These spaces are three-dimensional, and they sit inside the complex Fano threefold
V5 , as seen in Table 1. We follow [29, 34] in developing our algebraic approach to SSP(f )R .
This sets the stage for our study of ternary forms of degree d ≥ 4 in the later sections.
Fix S = R[x, y, z] and f ∈ S2 a quadric of rank 3. The apolar ideal f ⊥ ⊂ S is artinian,
Gorenstein, and it has ﬁve quadratic generators. Its minimal free resolution has the form
A

0 −→ S(−5) −→ S(−3)5 −→ S(−2)5 −→ S −→ 0.

(7)

By the Buchsbaum-Eisenbud Structure Theorem, we can choose bases so that the matrix A
is skew-symmetric. The entries are linear, so A = xA1 + yA2 + zA3 where A1 , A2 , A3 are real
5

V
skew-symmetric 5×5-matrices. More invariantly, the matrices A1 , A2 , A3 lie in 2 f3⊥ ≃ R10 .
The ﬁve quadratic generators of the apolar ideal f ⊥ are the 4×4-subpfaﬃans of A.
The three points (ai : bi : ci ) in a decomposition (1) are deﬁned by three of the ﬁve
quadrics. Hence VSP(f ) is identiﬁed with a subvariety of the Grassmannian Gr(3, 5), deﬁned
by the condition that the three quadrics are the minors of a 2 × 3 matrix with linear entries.
Equivalently, the chosen three quadrics need to have two linear syzygies. After taking a set
of ﬁve minimal generators of f ⊥ containing three such quadrics, the matrix A has the form


⋆ T
.
(8)
A =
−T t 0
Here, 0 is the zero 2 × 2 matrix and T is a 3 × 2 matrix of linear forms. The 2 × 2-minors
of T – which are also pfaﬃans of A – are the three quadrics deﬁning the points (ai : bi : ci ).
Proposition 2.4. The threefold
V VSP(f ) is the intersection of the Grassmannian Gr(3, 5),
in its Plücker embedding in P( 3 f3⊥ ) ≃ P9 , with the 6-dimensional linear subspace

P6A = U ∈ P9 : U ∧ A1 = U ∧ A2 = U ∧ A3 = 0 .
(9)
Proof. This fact was ﬁrst observed by Mukai [27]. See also [33, §1.5]. If U = u1 ∧u2 ∧u3 lies in
this intersection then the matrix A has the form (8) for any basis that contains u1 , u2 , u3.

Note that any general codimension 3 linear section of Gr(3, 5) arises in this manner. In
other words, we can start with three skew-symmetric 5 × 5-matrices A1 , A2 , A3 , and obtain
VSP(f ) = Gr(3, 5) ∩ P6A for a unique quadratic form f . In algebraic geometry, this Fano
threefold is denoted V5 . It has degree 5 in P9 , and is known as the quintic del Pezzo threefold.
Our space SSP(f )R is a semialgebraic subset of the real Fano threefold VSP(f )R ⊂ P9R .
If f is hyperbolic then the inclusion is strict. We now extend Example 2.3 to this situation.
Example 2.5. We shall compute the algebraic representation of SSP(f )R for f = x2 +y 2 −z 2 .
The apolar ideal f ⊥ is generated by the 4 × 4 pfaﬃans of the skew-symmetric matrix


0

x

−y z

0

−x 0 −z y −y 


z
0 0 −x = x(e12 − e35 ) − y(e13 − e24 + e25 ) + z(e14 − e23 ).
A = y
−z −y 0 0 0 
0

y

x

0

(10)

0

Here eij = ei ∧ ej . This is in the form (8). We ﬁx aﬃne

1 0 0

U = rowspan of 0 1 0
0 0 1

coordinates on Gr(3, 5) as follows:

a b
c d .
(11)
e g

If we write pij for the signed 3 × 3-minors obtained by deleting columns i and j from this
3 × 5-matrix, then we see that VSP(f ) = P6A ∩ Gr(3, 5) is deﬁned by the aﬃne equations
p12 − p35
=
ad − bc + e
= 0,
p13 − p24 + p25 = be − ag + d + c = 0,
p14 − p23
=
b + de − cg
= 0.
6

(12)

We now transform (10) into the coordinate system given by U and its orthogonal complement:



⋆ T
−T t 0



=

1
0

0
a
b



0
1
0
c
d

0 a b
1
0 c d
0


1 e g  · A · 0

a
e −1 0
g 0 −1
b





0
1
0
c
d

0 a b
0 c d

1 e g .
e −1 0 
g 0 −1



(13)

The lower right 2 × 2-block is zero precisely when (12) holds. The upper right block equals


(be + c)x + (−ac + bc − e)y − (a2 + 1)z
(bg + d)x + (−ad + bd − g)y − abz
T = (de − a)x + (−c2 + cd − 1)y − (ac + e)z (dg − b)x + (−cd + d2 + 1)y − (bc + g)z .
egx + (−ce + cg + a)y − (ae − c)z
(g 2 + 1)x + (−de + dg + b)y − (be − d)z
Writing T = xT1 + yT2 + zT3 , we regard T as a 2 × 3 × 3 tensor with slices T1 , T2 , T3 whose
entries are quadratic polynomials in a, b, c, d, e, g. The hyperdeterminant of that tensor equals
 
Det(T ) = discrw Jacx,y,z ( T · w1 )
(by Schläﬂi’s formula [31, §5])
(14)
8 2 6 4
8 2 4 6
8 2 2 8
= 27a c d g + 54a c d g + 27a c d g + · · · − 4d2 + 2e2 − 6eg − 8g 2 − 1.
In general, the expected degree of the hyperdeterminant of this form is 24. In this case, after
some cancellations occur, this is a polynomial in 6 variables of degree 20 with 13956 terms.
Now, consider any real point (a, b, c, d, e, g) that satisﬁes (12). The 2 × 2-minors of T deﬁne
three points ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 in the complex projective plane P2 . These three points are all real if
and only if Det(T ) < 0.
♦
Our derivation establishes the following result for the hyperbolic quadric f = x2 +y 2 −z 2 .
The solutions of (12) correspond to the decompositions f = ℓ21 + ℓ22 − ℓ23 , as described above.
Corollary 2.6. In affine coordinates on the Grassmannian Gr(3, 5), the real threefold
VSP(f )R is defined by the quadrics (12). The affine part of SSP(f )R ≃ SO+ (2, 1)/G is the
semialgebraic subset of points (a, . . . , e, g) at which the hyperdeterminant Det(T ) is negative.
We close this section with an interpretation of hyperdeterminants (of next-to-boundary
format) as Hurwitz forms [38]. This will be used in later sections to generalize Corollary 2.6.
Proposition 2.7. The hyperdeterminant of format m × n × (m+n−2) equals the Hurwitz
form (in dual Stiefel coordinates) of the variety of m × (m+n−2)-matrices of rank ≤ m − 1.
The maximal
minors of such a matrix whose entries are linear forms in n variables define

m+n−2
points
in Pn−1 , and the above hyperdeterminant vanishes when two points coincide.
n−1

Proof. Let X be the variety of m × (m + n − 2)-matrices of rank ≤ m − 1. By [22, Theorem
3.10, Section 14.C], the Chow form of X equals the hyperdeterminant of boundary format
m × n × (m + n − 1). The derivation can be extended to next-to-boundary format, and it
shows that the m × n × (m + n − 2) hyperdeterminant is the Hurwitz form of X. The case
m = n = 3 is worked out in [38, Example 4.3].
7

In this paper we are concerned with the case n = 3. In Corollary 2.6 we took m = 2.
Corollary 2.8. The hyperdeterminant
of format 3×m×(m+1) is an irreducible homogeneous

m+1
polynomial of degree 12 3 . It serves as the discriminant for ideals of m+1
points in P2 .
2

Proof. The formula 12 m+1
is derived from the generating function in [22, Theorem 14.2.4],
3
specialized to 3-dimensional tensors in [31, §4]. For the geometry see [31, Theorem 5.1].

3

Cubics

The case d = 3 was studied by Banchi [4]. He gave a detailed analysis of the real ranks
of ternary cubics f ∈ R[x, y, z]3 with focus on the various special cases. In this section, we
consider a general real cubic f . We shall prove the following result on its real decompositions.
Theorem 3.1. The semialgebraic set SSP(f )R is either a disk in the real projective plane
or a disjoint union of a disk and a Möbius strip. The two cases are characterized in Table 2.
The algebraic boundary of SSP(f )R is an irreducible sextic curve that has nine cusps.
Our point of departure is the following fact which is well-known, e.g. from [4, §5] or [6].
Proposition 3.2. The real rank of a general ternary cubic is R(3) = 4, so it agrees with the
complex rank. Hence, the closure of R3 is all of R[x, y, z]3 , and its boundary ∂R3 is empty.
Proof. Every smooth cubic curve in the complex projective plane P2 can be transformed, by
an invertible linear transformation τ ∈ PGL(3, C), into the Hesse normal form (cf. [3]):
f = x3 + y 3 + z 3 + λxyz.

(15)

Suppose that the given cubic is deﬁned over R. It is known classically that the matrix τ can
be chosen to have real entries. In particular, the parameter λ will be real. Also, λ 6= −3;
otherwise the curve would be singular. Banchi [4] observed that 24(λ + 3)2 f is equal to


(6+λ)x−λy−λz

3


3 
3

3
+ (6+λ)y−λx−λz + (6+λ)z−λx−λy + λ(λ2 +6λ+36) x+y+z .

By applying τ −1 , one obtains the decomposition for the original cubic. The entries of the
transformation matrix τ ∈ PGL(3, R) can be written in radicals in the coeﬃcients of f . The
corresponding Galois group is solvable and has order 432. It is the automorphism group of
the Hesse pencil; see e.g. [3, Remark 4.2] or [15, Section 2].
Remark 3.3. The Hesse normal form (15) is well-suited for this real structure. For any
ﬁxed isomorphism class of a real elliptic curve over C, there are two isomorphism classes over
R, by [37, Proposition 2.2]. We see this by considering the j-invariant of the Hesse curve:
3

j(f ) = −

λ3 (λ − 6)3 (λ2 + 6λ + 36)
.
(λ + 3)3 (λ2 − 3λ + 9)3
8

(16)

For a ﬁxed real value of j(f ), this equation has two real solutions λ1 and λ2 . These two
elliptic curves are isomorphic over C but not over R. They are distinguished by the sign of
the degree 6 invariant T of ternary cubics, which takes the following value for the Hesse curve:
T (f ) = 1 −

4320λ3 + 8λ6
.
66

(17)

If T (f ) = 0 then the two curves diﬀer by the sign of the Aronhold invariant. This proves
that any real smooth cubic is isomorphic over R to exactly one element of the Hesse pencil.
An illustrative example is the Fermat curve x3 + y 3 + z 3 . It is unique over C, but it has
two distinct real models, corresponding to λ = 0 or 6. The case λ = 6 is isomorphic over R
to g = x3 + (y + iz)3 + (y − iz)3 . This real cubic satisﬁes rkC (g) = 3 but rkR (g) = 4. Here,
the real surface VSP(g)R is non-empty, but its semialgebraic subset SSPR (g) is empty.
We now construct the isomorphism VSP(f ) ≃ P2 for ternary cubics f as shown in
Table 1. The apolar ideal f ⊥ is a complete intersection generated by three quadrics q0 , q1 , q2 .
We denote this net of quadrics by f2⊥ . Conversely, any such complete intersection determines
a unique cubic f . The linear system f2⊥ deﬁnes a branched 4 : 1 covering of projective planes:

F : P2 → P2 , (x : y : z) 7→ q0 (x, y, z) : q1 (x, y, z) : q2 (x, y, z) .

We regard F as a map from P2 to the Grassmannian Gr(2, f2⊥ ) of 2-dimensional subspaces of
f2⊥ ≃ C3 . It takes a point ℓ to the pencil of quadrics in f2⊥ that vanish at ℓ. The ﬁber of F is
the base locus of that pencil. Let B ⊂ P2 be the branch locus of F . This is a curve of degree
six. The ﬁber of F over any point in P2 \B consists of four points ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 , ℓ4 , and these
determine decompositions f = ℓ31 + ℓ32 + ℓ33 + ℓ34 . In this manner, the rank 4 decompositions
of f are in bijection with the points of P2 \B. We conclude that VSP(f ) = Gr(2, f2⊥ ) ≃ P2 .

Second proof of Proposition 3.2. We follow a geometric argument, due to De Paolis in 1886,
as presented in [4, §5] and [6, §3]. Let H(f ) be the Hessian of f , i.e. the 3 × 3 determinant
of second partial derivatives of f . We choose a real line ℓ1 that intersects the cubic H(f ) in
three distinct real points. The line ℓ1 is identiﬁed with its deﬁning linear form, and hence
with a point in the dual P2 . That P2 is the domain of F . We may assume that F (ℓ1 )
is not in the branch locus B. There exists a decomposition f = ℓ31 + ℓ32 + ℓ33 + ℓ34 , where
ℓ2 , ℓ3 , ℓ4 ∈ C[x, y, z]1 . We claim that the ℓi have real coeﬃcients. Let ∂p (f ) be the polar
conic of f with respect to p = ℓ1 ∩ ℓ2 . This conic is a C-linear combination of ℓ23 and ℓ24 . It is
singular at the point ℓ3 ∩ ℓ4 . In particular, p belongs to ℓ1 and to the cubic H(f ). Hence, p
is a real point, the conic ∂p (f ) is real, and its singular point ℓ3 ∩ ℓ4 is real. The latter point
is distinct from p = ℓ1 ∩ ℓ2 because f is smooth. After relabeling, all pairwise intersection
points of the lines ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 , ℓ4 are distinct and real. Hence the lines themselves are real.
The key step in the second proof is the choice of the line ℓ1 . In practise, this is done
by sampling linear forms ℓ1 from R[x, y, z]1 until H(f ) ∩ ℓ1 consists of three real points p.
For each of these, we compute the singular point of the conic ∂p (f ) and connect it to p by
a line. This gives the lines ℓ2 , ℓ3 , ℓ4 ∈ R[x, y, z]1 . The advantage of this method is that the
coordinates of the ℓi live in a cubic extension, and are easy to express in terms of radicals.
9

In order to choose the initial line ℓ1 more systematically, we must understand the structure
of SSP(f )R . This is our next topic. By deﬁnition, SSP(f )R is the locus of real points
p ∈ P2 = Gr(2, f2⊥ ) for which the ﬁber F −1 (p) is fully real. Such points p have the form
p = F (ℓ) where ℓ is a line that meets the Hessian cubic H(f ) in three distinct real points.
Example 3.4. Let f be the Hesse cubic (15). The net f2⊥ is spanned by the three quadrics
q0 = λx2 − 6yz, q1 = λy 2 − 6xz, and q2 = λz 2 − 6xy.
These quadrics deﬁne the map F : P2 → P2 . We use coordinates (x : y : z) on the domain
P2 and coordinates (a : b : c) on the image P2 . The branch locus B of F is the sextic curve
177147λ4(a6 + b6 + c6 ) − (1458λ8 − 157464λ5 + 4251528λ2)(a4 bc + ab4 c + abc4 )
+(36λ10 − 5832λ7 − 39366λ4 − 5668704λ)(a3b3 + a3 c3 + b3 c3 )
−(λ12 − 216λ9 − 61236λ6 + 3621672λ3 + 8503056)a2b2 c2 .
We regard the Hessian H(f ) as a curve in the image P2 . This cubic curve equals
H(f ) = a3 + b3 + c3 −

λ3 + 108
abc.
3λ2

(18)

The ramiﬁcation locus of the map F is the Jacobian of the net of quadrics:
 ∂q ∂q ∂q 
0

0

∂x

∂y
∂q1
∂y
∂q2
∂y

 1
C(f ) = det  ∂q
∂x
∂q2
∂x

0

∂z
∂q1 
∂z 
∂q2
∂z

= x3 + y 3 + z 3 +

54 − λ3
xyz.
9λ

(19)

This cubic is known classically as the Cayleyan of f ; see [3, Prop. 3.3] and [21, eqn. (3.27)].
We note that the dual of the cubic C(f ) is the sextic B. The preimage of B = C(f )∨
under F is a non-reduced curve of degree 12. It has multiplicity 2 on the Cayleyan C(f ).
The other component is the sextic curve dual to the Hessian H(f ). That sextic equals
H(f )∨ = −2187λ8 (x6 + y 6 + z 6 ) + (162λ10 + 34992λ7 + 1889568λ4)(x4 yz + xy 4 z + xyz 4 )
+(−12λ11 + 486λ8 − 41990λ5 − 15116544λ2)(x3 y 3 + x3 z 3 + y 3z 3 )+
+(λ12 − 2484λ9 − 244944λ6 + 5038848λ3 + 136048896)x2y 2 z 2 .
So, we constructed four curves: the cubic C(f ) and the sextic H(f )∨ in the domain P2 =
{(x : y : z)}, and the cubic H(f ) and the sextic B = C(f )∨ in the image P2 = {(a : b : c)}. ♦
A smooth cubic f in the real projective plane is either a connected curve, namely a
pseudoline, or it has two connected components, namely a pseudoline and an oval. In the
latter case, f is hyperbolic. The cubic in the Hesse pencil (15) is singular for λ = −3, it
is hyperbolic if λ < −3, and it is not hyperbolic if λ > −3. This trichotomy is the key
for understanding SSP(f )R . However, we must consider this trichotomy also for the Hessian
cubic H(f ) in (18) and for the Cayleyan cubic C(f ) in (19). The issue is whether their Hesse
3 +108
3
parameters − λ 3λ
and 54−λ
are bigger or smaller than the special value −3. The values
2
9λ
at which the behavior changes are λ = −3, 0, 6. Table 2 summarizes the four possibilities.
10

λ < −3
hyperbolic
not hyperbolic
hyperbolic
4, 2, 0
disk
Oriented Matroid (+, +, +, +)
f
H(f )
C(f )
#F −1 (•)R
SSP(f )R

−3 < λ < 0
not hyperbolic
hyperbolic
hyperbolic
4, 2, 4
disk ⊔ Möbius strip
(+, +, +, +) ⊔ (+, +, −, −)

0<λ<6
not hyberbolic
hyperbolic
not hyperbolic
4, 2
disk
(+, +, +, −)

6<λ
not hyperbolic
hyperbolic
hyperbolic
4, 2, 0
disk
(+, +, +, +)

Table 2: Four possible types of a real cubic f of form (15) and its quadratic map F : P2 → P2 .

(a) Domain P2 = {(x : y : z)}

(b) Image P2 = {(a : b : c)}

Figure 1: Ramiﬁcation and branching for λ < −3. The triangular region in (b) is SSP(f )R .
Three possible hyperbolicity behaviors are exhibited by the three cubics f, H(f ), C(f ).
One of these behaviors leads to two diﬀerent types, seen in the second and fourth column
in Table 2. These two types are distinguished by the ﬁbers of the map F : P2 → P2 . These
ﬁbers are classiﬁed by the connected components in the complement of the Cayleyan C(f ).
There are three such components if C(f ) is hyperbolic and two otherwise. The ﬁfth row in
Table 2 shows the number of real points over these components. For 6 < λ, there are no real
points over one component; here, the general ﬁbers have 4, 2 or 0 real points. However, for
−3 < λ < 0, all ﬁbers contain real points; here, the general ﬁbers have 4, 2 or 4 real points.
Proof of Theorem 3.1. After a coordinate change by a matrix τ ∈ PGL(3, R), we can assume
that the cubic f is in the Hesse pencil (15). Hence so are the associated cubics H(f ) and
C(f ). If we change the parameter λ so that all three cubics remain smooth, then the real
topology of the map F is unchanged. This gives four diﬀerent types for SSP(f )R , the locus
of fully real ﬁbers. The sextic B divides the real projective plane into two or three connected
components, depending on whether its dual cubic C(f ) = B ∨ is hyperbolic or not.
Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 illustrate the behavior of the map F in the four cases given by the
columns in Table 2. Each ﬁgure shows the plane P2 with coordinates (x : y : z) on the left
11

Figure 2: Ramiﬁcation and branching for −3 < λ < 0. The locus SSP(f )R is bounded by
the (red) sextic curve on the right. It consists of the triangular disk and the Möbius strip.

Figure 3: Ramiﬁcation and branching for λ > 6. The triangular region is SSP(f )R .
and the plane P2 with coordinates (a : b : c) on the right. The map F takes the left plane
onto the right plane. The two planes are dual to each other. In particular, points on the
left correspond to lines on the right. Each of the eight drawings shows a cubic curve and a
sextic curve. The two curves on the left are dual to the two curves on the right.
In each right diagram, the thick red curve is the branch locus B and the thin blue curve
is the Hessian H(f ). In each left diagram, the turquoise curve is the Cayleyan C(f ) = B ∨ ,
and the thick blue curve is the sextic H(f )∨ dual to the Hessian. Each of the eight cubics
has either two or one connected components, depending on whether the curve is hyperbolic
or not. The complement of the cubic in P2R has three or two connected components. The
diagrams verify the hyperbolicity behavior stated in the third and fourth row of Table 2.
Note that each sextic curve has the same number of components in P2R as its dual cubic.
Consider the three cases where C(f ) is hyperbolic. These are in Figures 1, 2 and 3. Here,
P2R \B has three connected components. The ﬁbers of F could have 0, 2 or 4 real points on
12

Figure 4: Ramiﬁcation and branching for 0 < λ < 6. The triangular region is SSP(f )R .
these three regions. The innermost region has four real points in its ﬁbers. It is bounded
by the triangular connected component of the (red) branch curve B, which is dual to the
pseudoline of C(f ). This innermost region is connected and contractible: it is a disk in P2R .
If λ 6∈ [−3, 0] then this disk is exactly our set SSP(f )R . This happens in Figures 1 and 3.
However, the case λ ∈ (−3, 0) is diﬀerent. This case is depicted in Figure 2. Here, we see
that SSP(f )R consists of two regions. First, there is the disk as before, and second, we have
the outermost region. This region is bounded by the oval that is shown as two unbouded
branches on the right in Figure 2. That region is homeomorphic to a Möbius strip in P2R .
The key observation is that the ﬁbers of F over that Möbius strip consist
P of four real points.
Figure 2 reveals something interesting for the decompositions f = 4i=1 ℓ3i . These come in
two diﬀerent types, for λ ∈ (−3, 0), one for each of the two connected components of SSP(f )R .
Over the disk, all four lines ℓi intersect the Hessian H(f ) only in its pseudoline. Over the
Möbius strip, the ℓi intersect the oval of H(f ) in two points and the third intersection point
is on the pseudoline. Compare this with Figure 3: the Hessian H(f ) is also hyperbolic, but
all decompositions are of the same type: three lines ℓi intersect H(f ) in two points of its oval
and one point of its pseudoline, while the fourth line intersects H(f ) only in its pseudoline.
It remains to consider the case when C(f ) is not hyperbolic. This is shown in Figure 4.
The branch curve B = C(f )∨ divides P2R into two regions, one disk and one Möbius strip.
The former corresponds to ﬁbers with four real points, and the latter corresponds to ﬁbers
with two real points. We conclude that SSP(f )R is a disk also in this last case. We might
note, as a corollary, that all ﬁbers of F : P2 → P2 contain real points, provided 0 < λ < 6.
For all four columns of Table 2, the algebraic boundary of the set SSP(f )R is the branch
curve B. This is a sextic with nine cusps because it is dual to the smooth cubic C(f ).
One may ask for the topological structure of the 4 : 1 covering over SSP(f )R . Over the
disk, our map F is 4P
: 1. It maps four disjoint disks. Each linear form in the corresponding
decompositions f = 4i=1 ℓ3i comes from one of the four regions seen in the left pictures:
(i) in Figure 1, inside the region bounded by H(f )∨ and cut into four by C(f );
13

(ii) in Figure 2, inside the spiky triangle bounded by H(f )∨ and cut into four by C(f );
(iii) in Figures 3 and 4, one inside the triangle bounded by H(f )∨ and the others in the
region bounded by the other component of H(f )∨ cut into three regions by C(f ).
The situation is even more interesting over the Möbius strip. We can continuously change the
set {ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 , ℓ4 }, reaching in the end the same as at the beginning, but cyclicly permuted.
Remark 3.5. Given a ternary cubic f with rational coeﬃcients, how to decide whether
SSP(f )R has one or two connected components? The classiﬁcation in Table 2 can be used
for this task as follows. We ﬁrst compute the j-invariant of f and then we substitute the
rational number j(f ) into (16). This gives a polynomial of degree 4 in the unknown λ. That
polynomial has two distinct real roots λ1 < λ2 , provided j(f ) 6∈ {0, 1728}. They satisfy
λ1 < λ2 < −3, or 0 < λ1 < λ2 < 6, or (−3 < λ1 < 0 and 6 < λ2 ). Consider the involution
that swaps λ1 with λ2 . This ﬁxes the case in Figure 1, and the case in Figure 4, but it swaps
the cases in Figures 2 and 3. Thus this involution preserves the hyperbolicity bahavior. We
get two connected components, namely both the disk and Möbius strip, only in the last case.
The correct λ is identiﬁed by comparing the sign of the degree six invariant T (f ), as in (17).
Example 3.6. The following cubic is featured in the statistics context of [39, Example 1.1]:


x+y+z
x
y
2
2
2
4
x+y+z
z  = (x + y + z)3 − (x + y)3 − (x + z)3 − (y + z)3 .
f = det  x
3
3
3
3
y
z
x+y+z
Its j-invariant equals j(f ) = 16384/5. The corresponding real Hesse curves have parameters
λ1 = −13.506... and λ2 = −5.57..., so we are in the case of Figure 1. Indeed, the curve V (f )
is hyperbolic, as seen in [39, Figure 1]. Hence SSP(f )R is a disk, shaped like a spiky triangle.
The real decomposition above is right in its center. Moreover, we can check that T (f ) < 0.
Hence λ1 provides the unique curve in the Hesse pencil that is isomorphic to f over R. ♦
Remark 3.7. The value 1728 for the j-invariant plays a special role. A real cubic f is
hyperbolic if j(f ) > 1728, and it is not hyperbolic if j(f ) < 1728. Applying this criterion to
a given cubic along with its Hessian and Cayleyan is useful for the classiﬁcation in Table 2.
What happens for j(f ) = 1728? Here, the two real forms of the complex curve V (f )
diﬀer: one is hyperbolic and the other one is not. For example, f1 = x3 − xz 2 − y 2 z is
hyperbolic and f2 = x3 + xz 2 − y 2z is not hyperbolic. These two cubics are isomorphic over
C, with j(f1 ) = j(f2 ) = 1728, and they are also isomorphic to their Hessians and Cayleyans.
We ﬁnd noteworthy that the topology of SSP(f )R can distinguish
between the two real

forms of an elliptic curve. This happens when j(f ) < 1728 < min j(H(f )), j(C(f )) . Here
the two real forms of the curve correspond to the second and fourth column in Table 2.
We close this section by explaining the last row of Table 2. It concerns the oriented
matroid [5] of the conﬁguration {(ai , bi , ci ) : i = 1, . . . , r} in the decompositions (1). For
d = 3 the underlying matroid is always uniform. This is the content of the following lemma.
14

P
Lemma 3.8. Consider a ternary cubic f = 4i=1 ℓ3i whose apolar ideal f ⊥ is generated by
three quadrics. Then any three of the linear forms ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 , ℓ4 are linearly independent.
Proof. Suppose ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 are linearly dependent. They are annihilated by a linear operator p
as in (5). Let q1 and q2 be independent linear operators that annihilate ℓ4 . Then pq1 and pq2
are independent quadratic operators annihilating f . Adding a third quadric would not lead
to a complete intersection. This is a contradiction, since f ⊥ is a complete intersection.
In the situation ofPLemma 3.8 there is unique vector v = (v1 , v2 , v3 , v4 ) ∈ (R\{0})4
satisfying v1 = 1 and 4i=1 vi ℓi = 0. The oriented matroid of (ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 , ℓ4 ) is the sign vector
+, sign(v2 ), sign(v3 ), sign(v4 ) ∈ {−, +}4 . Up to relabeling there are only three possibilities:
(+, +, +, +): the four vectors ℓi contain the origin in their convex hull;
(+, +, +, −): the triangular cone spanned by ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 in R3 contains ℓ4 ;
(+, +, −, −): the cone spanned by ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 , ℓ4 is the cone over a quadrilateral.
For a general cubic f , every point in SSP(f )R is mapped to one of the three sign vectors
above. By continuity, this map is constant on each connected component of SSP(f )R . The
last row in Table 2 shows the resulting map from the ﬁve connected components to the
three oriented matroids. Two of the ﬁbers have cardinality one. For instance, the ﬁber over
(+, +, −, −) is the Möbius strip in SSP(f )R . This is the ﬁrst of the following two cases.
Corollary 3.9. For a general ternary cubic f , we have the following equivalences:
(i) The space SSP(f )R is disconnected if and only if f is isomorphic over R to a cubic of
the form x3 + y 3 + z 3 + (ax + by − cz)3 where a, b, c are positive real numbers.
(ii) The Hessian H(f ) is hyperbolic and the Cayleyan C(f ) is not hyperbolic if and only if
f is isomorphic to x3 + y 3 + z 3 + (ax + by + cz)3 where a, b, c are positive real numbers.
Proof. The sign patters (+, +, −, −) and (+, +, +, −) occur in the second and third column
in Table 2 respectively. The corollary is a reformulation of that fact. The sign pattern
(+, +, +, +) in columns 1,2 and 4 corresponds to cubics x3 + y 3 + z 3 − (ax + by + cz)3 .
Remark 3.10. The ﬁber over the oriented matroid (+, +, +, +) consists of cubics of the form
x3 +y 3 +z 3 −(ax+by+cz)3 , where a, b, c > 0. It may seem surprising that this space has three
components in Table 2. One can pass from one component to another, for instance, by passing
through singular cubics, like 24xyz = (x+y +z)3 +(x−y −z)3 +(−x+y −z)3 +(−x−y +z)3 .

4

Quartics

In this section we ﬁx d = 4 and we consider a general ternary quartic f ∈ R[x, y, z]4 . We have
r = R(4) = 6 and dim(VSP(f )) = 3, so the quartic f admits a threefold of decompositions
f (x, y, z) = λ1 (a1 x + b1 y + c1 z)4 + λ2 (a2 x + b2 y + c2 z)4 + · · · + λ6 (a6 x + b6 y + c6 z)4 . (20)
By the signature of f we mean the signature of C(f ). This makes sense by Proposition 1.3.
15

According to the Hilbert-Burch Theorem, the radical ideal IT of the point conﬁguration
{(ai : bi : ci )}i=1,...,6 is generated by the 3 × 3-minors of a 4 × 3-matrix T = T1 x + T2 y + T3 z,
where T1 , T2 , T3 ∈ R4×3 . We interpret T also as a 3 × 3 × 4-tensor with entries in R, or as
a 3 × 3-matrix of linear forms in 4 variables. The determinant of the latter matrix deﬁnes
the cubic surface in P3 that is the blow-up of the projective plane P2 at the six points. The
apolar ideal f ⊥ is generated by seven cubics, and IT ⊂ f ⊥ is generated by four of these.
Mukai [29] showed that VSP(f ) is a Fano threefold of type V22 , and a more detailed study
of this threefold was undertaken by Schreyer in [36]. The topology of the real points in that
Fano threefold was studied by Kollár and Schreyer in [24]. Inside that real locus lives the
semialgebraic set we are interested in. Namely, SSP(f )R represents the set of radical ideals
IT , arising from tensors T ∈ R3×3×4 , such that IT ⊂ f ⊥ and the variety V (IT ) consists of six
real points in P2 . This is equivalent to saying that the cubic surface of T has 27 real lines.
Disregarding the condition IT ⊂ f ⊥ for the moment, this reality requirement deﬁnes a
full-dimensional, connected semialgebraic region in the tensor space R3×3×4 . The algebraic
boundary of that region is deﬁned by the hyperdeterminant Det(T ), which is an irreducible
homogeneous polynomial of degree 48 in the 36 entries of T . Geometrically, this hyperdeterminant is the Hurwitz form in [38, Example 4.3]. This is Proposition 2.7 for m = n = 3.
We are interested in those ternary forms f whose apolar ideal f ⊥ contains IT for some
T in the region described above. Namely, we wish to understand the semialgebraic set

R4 = f ∈ R[x, y, z]4 : SSP(f )R 6= ∅ .
The following is a step towards understanding the algebraic boundary ∂alg (R4 ) of this set.

Theorem 4.1. The algebraic boundary ∂alg (R4 ) is a reducible hypersurface in the P14 of
quartics. One of its irreducible components has degree 51; that component divides the quartics
of signature (5, 1). Another irreducible component divides the region of hyperbolic quartics.
Proof. By [6, Example 4.6], ∂alg (R4 ) is non-empty, so it must be a hypersurface. We next
identify the component of degree 51. The anti-polar of a quartic f , featured in [6, §5.1] and
in [20], is deﬁned by the following rank 1 update of the middle catalecticant:


Ω(f )(a, b, c) := det C(f + ℓ4 ) − det C(f )
for ℓ = ax + by + cz.
(21)
Writing “Adj” for the adjoint matrix, the Matrix Determinant Lemma implies

Ω(f )(a, b, c) := (a2 , ab, ac, b2 , bc, c2 ) · Adj(C(f )) · (a2 , ab, ac, b2 , bc, c2 )T .

(22)

The coeﬃcients of the anti-polar quartic Ω(f ) are homogeneous polynomials of degree 5 in
the coeﬃcients of f . The discriminant of Ω(f ) is a polynomial of degree 135 = 27 × 5 in the
coeﬃcients of f . A computation reveals that this factors as det(C(f ))14 times an irreducible
polynomial Bdisc(f ) of degree 51. We call Bdisc(f ) the Blekherman discriminant of f .
We claim that Bdisc(f ) is an irreducible component of ∂alg (R4 ). Let f be a general
quartic of signature (5, 1). Then det(C(f )) is negative, and the quartic Ω(f ) is nonsingular.
We claim that rkR (f ) = 6 if and only if the curve Ω(f ) has a real point. The only-if direction
16

is proved in a more general context in Lemma 6.4. For the if-direction, we note that the
anti-polar quartic curve divides P2R into regions where Ω(f ) has opposite signs. Hence, we
can ﬁnd ℓ such that det C(f + ℓ4 ) = 0, and therefore rkR (f ) = 6. Examples in [6, §5.1]
show that rkR (f ) can be either 6 or 7. We conclude that, among quartics of signature (5, 1),
the boundary of R4 is given by the Blekherman discriminant Bdisc(f ) of degree 51.
To prove that ∂alg (R4 ) is reducible, we consider the following pencil of quartics:
(6x − 4y + 17z)4 + (4x − 16y − 5z)4 + (20x + 2y − 19z)4
−(15y − 17z)4 − (13x + 14y + 9z)4 − (16x − 6y − 18z)4
4
3
+ t · (−2x +2x z−x2 y 2+2x2 yz+x2 z 2 +xy 3 −xy 2 z−2xyz 2 +xz 3 +y 4 +y 3z+2y 2z 2 −2yz 3 −2z 4 ).
ft

=

At t = 0, we obtain a quartic f0 of signature (3, 3) that has real rank 6. One checks that
f0 is smooth and hyperbolic. We substitute ft into the invariant of degree 51 derived above,
and we note that the resulting univariate polynomial in t has no positive real roots. So, the
ray {ft } given by t ≥ 0 does not intersect the boundary component we already identiﬁed.
For positive parameters t, the discriminant of ft is nonzero, until t reaches τ1 = 6243.83.....
This means that ft is smooth hyperbolic for real parameters t between 0 and τ1 . On the
other hand, the rank of the middle catalecticant C(ft ) drops from 6 to 5 when t equals
τ0 = 3103.22..... Hence, for τ0 < t < τ1 , the quartics ft are hyperbolic and of signature (4, 2).
By [6, Corollary 4.8], these quartics have real rank at least 7. This means that the half-open
interval given by (0, τ0 ] crosses the boundary of R4 in a new irreducible component.
Remark 4.2. One of the starting points of this project was the question whether rkR (f ) ≥ 7
holds for all hyperbolic quartics f . This was shown to be false in [6, Remark 4.9]. The above
quartic f0 is an alternative counterexample, with an explicit rank 6 decomposition over Q.
We believe that, in the proof above, the crossing takes place at τ0 , and that this newly
discovered component is simply the determinant of the catalecticant det(C(f )). But we have
not been able to certify this. Similar examples suggest that also the discriminant disc(f )
itself appears in the real rank boundary. Based on this, we propose the following conjecture.
Conjecture 4.3. The real rank boundary ∂alg (R4 ) for ternary quartics is a reducible hypersurface of degree 84 = 6 + 27 + 51 in P14 . It has three irreducible components, namely
the determinant of the catalecticant, the discriminant, and the Blekherman discriminant.
Algebraically,
∂alg (R4 ) = det(C(f )) · disc(f ) · Bdisc(f ).
The construction of the Blekherman discriminant extends to the case when f is a sextic
or octic; see Lemma 6.4. For quartics f , we can use it to prove rkR (f ) > 6 also when the
signature is (4, 2) or (3, 3). We illustrate this for the quartic given by four distinct lines.
Example 4.4. We claim that f = xyz(x+y+z) has rkR (f ) = 7. For the upper bound, note
12f = x4 + y 4 + z 4 − (x + y)4 − (x + z)4 − (y + z)4 + (x + y + z)4 .
The catalecticant C(f ) has signature (3, 3). The anti-polar quartic Ω(f ) = a2 b2 + a2 c2 +
b2 c2 − a2 bc − ab2 c − abc2 is nonnegative. By [6, Section 5.1], we have rkR (f ) = 7.
♦
17

If f is a general ternary quartic of real rank 6 then SSP(f )R is an open semialgebraic set
inside the threefold VSP(f )R . Our next goal is to derive an algebraic description of this set.
We begin by reviewing some of the relevant algebraic geometry found in [17, 27, 29, 33, 36].
The Fano threefold VSP(f ) in its anticanonical embedding is a subvariety of the Grassmannian Gr(4, 7) in its Plücker embedding in P34 . It parametrizes 4-dimensional subspaces
of f3⊥ ≃ R7 that can serve to span IT . In other words, the Fano threefold VSP(f ) represents
quadruples of cubics in f3⊥ that arise from a 3 ×3 ×4-tensor T as described above. Explicitly,
34
VSP(f ) is the intersection of Gr(4, 7) with a linear subspace P13
A in P . This is analogous to
Proposition 2.4, but more complicated. The resolution of the apolar ideal f ⊥ has the form
A

0 −→ S(−7) −→ S(−4)7 −→ S(−3)7 −→ S −→ 0.
By the Buchsbaum-Eisenbud Structure Theorem, we can write A = xA1 +yA2 +zA3 where
A1 , A2V
, A3 are real skew-symmetric 7×7-matrices. In other words, the matrices A1 , A2 , A3
lie in 2 f3⊥ . The seven cubic generators of the ideal f ⊥ are the 6×6-subpfaﬃans of A.
The ambient space P34
V4for⊥ the Grassmannian Gr(4, 7) is the projectivation of the 35dimensional vector space
f3 . The matrices A1 , A2 , A3 determine the following subspace:
P13
A :=

4
6
^
^

U∈
f3⊥ : U ∧ A1 = U ∧ A2 = U ∧ A3 = 0 in
f3⊥ .

(23)

Each constraint U ∧ Ai = 0 gives seven linear equations, for a total of 21 linear equations.
Lemma 4.5. The Fano threefold VSP(f ) of degree 22 is the intersection of the Grassmannian Gr(4, 7) with the linear space P13
A . Its defining ideal is generated by 45 quadrics, namely
the 140 quadratic Plücker relations defining Gr(4, 7) modulo the 21 linear relations in (23).
Proof. This description of the Fano threefold V22 was given by Ranestad and Schreyer in [33]
and by Dinew, Kapustka and Kapustka in [17, Section 2.3]. We veriﬁed the numbers 22 and
45 by a direct computation.
It is important to note that we can turn this construction around and start with any
three general skew-symmetric 7 × 7-matrices A1 , A2 , A3 . Then the 6 × 6-subpfaﬃans of
xA1 + yA2 + zA3 generate a Gorenstein ideal whose socle generator is a ternary quartic f .
This correspondence shows how to go from rank 6 decompositions of f to points U in
34
VSP(f ) = Gr(4, 7) ∩ P13
A ⊂ P . Given the conﬁguration X = {(ai : bi : ci )} in (20), the
point U is the space of cubics that vanish on X. Conversely, given any point U in VSP(f ),
we can choose a basis of f3⊥ such that our 7 × 7-matrices Ai have the form analogous to (8):


⋆ Ti
for i = 1, 2, 3.
Ai =
−Tit 0
Here Ti is a 4 × 3-matrix, and 0 is the zero 3 × 3-matrix. The four 3 × 3-minors of the 4 × 3matrix T = xT1 + yT2 + zT3 are among the seven 6 × 6-subpfaﬃans of A = xA1 + yA2 + zA3 .
These four cubics deﬁne the six points in the decomposition (20).
18

We are now ready to extend the real geometry in Corollary 2.6 from quadrics to quartics.
Let V = (vij ) be a 4×3-matrix of unknowns. These serve as aﬃne coordinates on Gr(4, 7).
Each point is the row span of the 4×7-matrix U = Id4 V . This is analogous to (11).
Proceeding as in (13), we consider the skew-symmetric 7 × 7-matrix






Id4 V
Id4 V
⋆ T
.
(24)
·A·
=
V t −Id3
V t −Id3
−T t 0
Its entries are linear forms in x, y, z whose coeﬃcients are quadratic polynomials in the 12
aﬃne coordinates vij . Vanishing of the lower right 3 × 3-matrix deﬁnes VSP(f ). The matrix
T is identiﬁed with a 4 × 3 × 3-tensor whose entries are quadratic polynomials in the vij .
Theorem 4.6. Let f be a general ternary quartic of real rank 6. Using the affine coordinates
vij on Gr(4, 7), the threefold VSP(f )R is defined by nine quadratic equations in R12 . If f has
signature (6, 0) then SSP(f )R equals VSP(f )R . If SSP(f )R is a proper subset of VSP(f )R
then its algebraic boundary has degree 84. It is the hyperdeterminant of the 4×3×3-tensor T .
Proof. The description of VSP(f ) in aﬃne coordinates follows from Lemma 4.5. The equations in (23) mean that the linear map given by A vanishes on the kernel of U. This translates
into the condition that the lower right 3 × 3-matrix in (24) is zero. Each of the 3 coeﬃcients
of the 3 upper diagonal matrix entries must vanish, for a total of 9 quadratic equations.
If f has signature (6, 0) then we know from Proposition 1.3 that SSP(f )R = VSP(f )R .
In general, a point (vij ) of VSP(f )R lies in SSP(f )R if and only if all six zeros of the ideal IT
are real points in P2 . The boundary of SSP(f )R is given by those (vij ) for which two of these
zeros come together in P2 and form a complex conjugate pair. The Zariski closure of that
boundary is the hypersurface deﬁned by the hyperdeterminant Det(T ), by Proposition 2.7.
The hyperdeterminant of format 4 × 3 × 3 has degree 48 in the tensor entries. For our
tensor T , the entries are inhomogeneous polynomials of degree 2, so the degree of Det(T ) is
bounded above by 96 = 2 × 48. A direct computation reveals that the actual degree is 84.
The degree drop from 96 to 84 is analogous to the drop from 24 to 20 witnessed in (14).
At present we do not know whether the hyperdeterminantal boundary always exists:
Conjecture 4.7. If the quartic f has real rank 6 and its signature is (3, 3), (4, 2) or (5, 1)
then the semialgebraic set SSP(f )R is strictly contained in the variety VSP(f )R .
Our next tool for studying VSP(f ) is another quartic curve, derived from f , and endowed
with a distinguished even theta characteristic θ. Recall that there is a unique (up to scaling)
invariant of ternary cubics in degree 4. This is the Aronhold invariant, which vanishes on
cubics g with rkC (g) ≤ 3. For the given quartic f , the Aronhold quartic S(f ) is deﬁned by
S(f )(p) := the Aronhold invariant evaluated at ∂p (f ).

(25)

Following [19], we call f the Scorza quartic of S(f ). Points on S(f
to lines in the
P)6 correspond
4
threefold VSP(f ). To see this, consider any decomposition f = i=1 ℓi , representing a point
in VSP(f ). This point lies on a P1 in VSP(f ) if and only if three of the lines ℓ1 , ℓ2 , . . . , ℓ6
19

meet. Indeed, if a ∈ ℓ1 ∩ ℓ2 ∩ ℓ3 in P2 then ∂p (f ) is a sum of three cubes, i.e. p ∈ S(f ). We
may regard ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 as linear forms in two variables, so that ℓ41 + ℓ42 + ℓ43 is a binary quartic.
This binary quartic has a P1 of rank 4 decomposition, each giving a decomposition of f , with
3
ℓ4 , ℓ5 , ℓ6 ﬁxed. The resulting line in VSP(f ) ⊂ P13
A is the set of 4-planes U containing the P
of cubics Q · a, where Q is a quadric vanishing on ℓ4 , ℓ5 , ℓ6 . This gives all lines on VSP(f ).
One approach we pursued is the relationship of the real rank of f with its topology in
2
PR . A classical result of Klein and Zeuthen, reviewed in [32, Theorem 1.7], states that there
are six types of smooth plane quartics in P2R , and these types form connected subsets of P14
R :
4 ovals, 3 ovals, 2 non-nested ovals, hyperbolic, 1 oval, empty curve.

(26)

We consider the pairs of types given by a general quartic f and its Aronhold quartic S(f ).
Proposition 4.8. Among the 36 pairs of topological types (26) of smooth quartic curves in
the real projective plane P2R , at least 30 pairs are realized by a quartic f and its Aronhold
quartic S(f ). Every pair not involving the hyperbolic type is realizable as f, S(f ) .
Proof. This was established by exhaustive search. We generated random quartic curves
using various sampling schemes, and this led to 30 types. The six missing types are listed in
Conjecture 4.9. For a concrete example, here is an instance where f and S(f ) are empty:
f = (3x2 +5zx−5yx−5z 2 −3yz)2 +(7x2 +7zx−7yx+z 2 −yz−5y 2 )2 +(5x2 +7zx+7yx−8z 2 −2yz+2y 2 )2

At the other end of the spectrum, let us consider
f =

1439x4 + 1443y 4 − 2250(x2 + y 2 )z 2 + 3500x2 y 2 + 817z 4 − x3 z − x3 y
−5x2 z 2 − 7x2 yz − 4xz 3 − 6xyz 2 + xy 2 z + 6xy 3 − 3yz 3 + 5y 2 z 2 + 7y 3z

For this quartic, both f and S(f ) have 28 real bitangents, so they consist of four ovals.
Conjecture 4.9. If a smooth quartic f on P2R is hyperbolic then its Aronhold quartic S(f ) is
either empty or has two ovals. If f consists of three or four ovals then S(f ) is not hyperbolic.
We now describe the construction in [29] of eight distinguished Mukai decompositions
f = ℓ41 + ℓ42 + ℓ43 + ℓ412 + ℓ413 + ℓ423 .

(27)

The conﬁguration ℓ12 , ℓ23 , ℓ13 is a biscribed triangle of the Aronhold quartic S(f ). Being
a biscribed triangle means that ℓij is tangent to S(f ) at a point qij , the lines ℓij and ℓik meet
at a point qi on the curve S(f ), and the line ℓi is spanned by qij and qik .
Let D = q1 + q2 + q3 + q12 + q13 + q23 be a divisor on the Aronhold quartic S(f ). The
biscribed triangle ℓ12 ℓ13 ℓ23 is a contact cubic [32, §2], and 2D is its intersection divisor with
S(f ). The associated theta characteristic is given by θ ∼ q12 + q13 + q1 − q23 . Each of the
points q12 , q13 , q23 ∈ S(f ) represents a line on the Fano threefold VSP(f ) ⊂ P13
A . The pairs
(q12 , q13 ), (q12 , q23 ), (q13 , q23 ) lie in the Scorza correspondence, as deﬁned in [19, 36]. Indeed,
the corresponding second derivatives of f are ℓ212 , ℓ213 and ℓ223 , so the lines q12 , q13 , q23 on
VSP(f ) intersect pairwise. In fact, there is a point of VSP(f ) on all three lines, namely (27).
20

Example 4.10. We illustrate the concepts above, starting with the skew-symmetric matrix


0

−x+y+3z

z

−y + z

y

y+z

x

−x

0

0

0

x−y−3z
0
x−y+3z −x−3y+z −x + z 2x−2y y−z 


 −z
−x+y−3z
0
x+y+z
0
y
−y 


0
z
−3z
z .
A = A1 x+A2 y+A3 z =  −y − z x+3y−z −x−y−z
 −x

x−z
0
−z
0
0
0 

 x
−2x + 2y
−y
3z
0
0
0 
0

−z

0

Its 6 × 6 pfaﬃans generate the apolar ideal f ⊥ . Orthogonal to this is the rank 6 quartic
f = x4 + y 4 + z 4 + (x + y)4 + (y + z)4 + (z + x)4 .
The upper right 4 × 3-block of A has rank 2 precisely on these six points ℓ1 , ℓ2 , ℓ3 , ℓ12 , ℓ13 , ℓ23 .
Here, q1 = (−1:1:1), q2 = (1:−1:1), q3 = (1:1:−1), q12 = (0:0:1), q13 = (0:1:0), q23 = (1:0:0).
The theta characteristic θ on the Aronhold quartic S(f ) is deﬁned by the contact cubic
(x + y)(x + z)(y + z). This is the lower right 3 × 3-minor in the determinantal representation


5x + 5y + 5z
x−y
x−z
y−z

x−y
x+y+z
x
−y 
.
S(f ) = det


x−z
x
x+y+z
z
y−z
−y
z
x+y+z
This matrix is constructed from the contact cubic by the method in [32, Proposition 2.2]. ♦
We write VSP(f )Muk for the subvariety of VSP(f ) given by Mukai decompositions (27).
Mukai [29] showed that VSP(f )Muk is a ﬁnite set with eight elements. We are interested in
VSP(f )Muk
:= VSP(f )Muk ∩ VSP(f )R
R

and SSP(f )Muk
:= VSP(f )Muk ∩ SSP(f )R .
R

One idea we had for certifying rkR (f ) = 6 is to compute the eight points in VSP(f )Muk . If
(27) is fully real for one of them then we are done. Unfortunately, this algorithm may fail.
The semialgebraic set of quartics with real Mukai decompositions is strictly contained in R4 :
Proposition 4.11. There exist quartics f of real rank 6 such that SSP(f )Muk
is empty.
R
Proof. Consider the eight Mukai decompositions (27) of the following quartic of real rank 6:
f = (21x + y + 9z)4 + (14x − 13y + 14z)4 + (13x + 5y − 7z)4
+ (2x − 5y − 13z)4 − (12x + 15y − 9z)4 − (12x + 21z)4 .
The lines ℓi and ℓj in (27) intersect in the point qij ∈ S(f ). If both lines are real then so is qij .
But, a computation shows that S(f ) has no real points. This implies SSP(f )Muk
= ∅.
R

21

Figure 5: The left picture shows a Blum-Guinand quartic in blue and its Aronhold quartic in
red. The Aronhold quartic does not meet the sextic covariant, shown in black on the right.
Example 4.12. We close this section by discussing the Blum-Guinand quartics in [11]. Set
fa,b,m := (x2 + y 2 − a2 z 2 − b2 z 2 )(m4 x2 + y 2 − m2 (a2 + b2 )z 2 ) + a2 b2 (m2 − 1)2 z 4 .
p
p
The parameters a, b, m satisfy 0 < b < a and b/a < m < a/b. Blum-Guinand quartics
have 28 real
q bitangents, so they consist of four ovals. Figure 5 shows this for a = 20, b = 8

and m = 20
− 0.1. The diagram on the left has fa,b,m in blue and S(fa,b,m ) in red. The
8
sextic covariant, deﬁned by (25) but with S replaced by the sextic invariant T , is shown on
the right in black. The cubic ∂p (fa,b,m ) has real rank 4 for all p ∈ S(fa,b,m ); cf. Remark 3.3.
For the chosen parameters, for each direction there exists a line that meets the Blum quartic
at 4 real points.√We can conclude that rkR (fa,b,m ) ≥ 7. In general, the signature is (4,2) if
√
2 − 1 < m < 2 + 1 and (3,3) otherwise. The picture seen in Figure 5 can change. For
instance, the Aronhold quartic S(fa,b,m ) has no real points when a = 70, b = 8, m = 6/5. ♦

5

Quintics and Septics

A general ternary quintic f ∈ R[x, y, z]5 has complex rank R(5) = 7. The decomposition
f = ℓ51 + ℓ52 + ℓ53 + ℓ54 + ℓ55 + ℓ56 + ℓ57

(28)

is unique by a classical result of Hilbert, Richmond and Palatini. Oeding and Ottaviani [30]
explained how to compute the seven linear forms ℓi by realizing them as eigenvectors of a
certain 3×3×3-tensor. Inspired by [33, §1.5], we propose the following alternative algorithm:
Algorithm 5.1. Input: A general ternary quintic f . Output: The decomposition (28).
1. Compute the apolar ideal f ⊥ . It is generated by one quartic and four cubics g1 , g2, g3 , g4 .
2. Compute the syzygies of f ⊥ . Find the unique linear syzygy (l1 , l2 , l3 , l4 ) on the cubics.
3. Compute a vector (c1 , c2 , c3 , c4 ) ∈ R4 \{0} that satisfies c1 l1 + c2 l2 + c3 l3 + c4 l4 = 0.
22

4. Let J be the ideal generated by the cubics c2 g1 − c1 g2 , c3 g2 − c2 g3 and c4 g3 − c3 g4 .
Compute the variety V (J) in P2 . It consists precisely of the points dual to ℓ1 , ℓ2 , . . . , ℓ7 .
To prove the correctness of this algorithm, we recall what is known about the ideal J
of seven points in P2 . The ideal J is Cohen-Macaulay of codimension 2, so it is generated
by the maximal minors of its Hilbert-Burch matrix T . According to [1, Theorem 5.1], this
matrix has the following form if and only if no six of the seven points lie on a conic:


q1 l1
T = q2 l2  .
(29)
q3 l3
Here l1 , l2 , l3 are independent linear forms and q1 , q2 , q3 are quadratic forms in x, y, z.
Proposition 5.2. Algorithm 5.1 computes the unique decomposition of a general quintic f .
In the resulting representation (28), no six of the seven lines ℓi are tangent to a conic.
Proof. Let f be a general quintic. The apolar ideal f ⊥ in S is generated by four cubics
g1 , g2 , g3 , g4 and one quartic h. This ideal is Gorenstein of codimension 3. The BuchsbaumEisenbud Structure Theorem implies that the minimal free resolution of f ⊥ has the form
A

B

0 −→ S(−8) −→ S(−4) ⊕ S(−5)4 −→ S(−4) ⊕ S(−3)4 −→ S −→ 0.
The matrix A is skew-symmetric of size 5 × 5, i.e.

0
q12
q13 q14
−q12
0
q23 q24


0
q34
A = −q13 −q23
−q14 −q24 −q34 0
−l1 −l2 −l3 −l4


l1
l2 

l3 
.
l4 
0

(30)

Here the li ’s are linear forms and the qij ’s are quadrics. As described above and in Section 2,
we should ﬁnd a 5 × 5 matrix U such that the lower right 2 × 2 submatrix of U · A · U t is the
zero matrix. Since f is general, we may assume that the li span R[x, y, z]1 . After relabeling
if necessary, we can write c1 l1 + c2 l2 + c3 l3 + l4 = 0 for some scalars c1 , c2 , c3 . Setting c4 = 1,
these are the scalars in Step 3 of Algorithm 5.1. Let


1 0 0 0 0
 0 1 0 0 0


.
0
0
1
0
0
U = 


c1 c2 c3 1 0
0 0 0 0 1
We perform row and column operations by the

0
−q12

A′ = U · A · U t = 
−q13
′
−q14
−l1
23

following right and left multiplication:

′
q12
q13 q14
l1
′
0
q23 q24
l2 

′
−q23
0
q34
l3 
.
′
′
−q24
−q34
0 0
−l2 −l3 0 0

The inverse column operation on the row

1
0
0
 0
1
0

′

0
1
B = g1 g2 g3 g4 h  0
−c1 −c2 −c3
0
0
0

vector B of minimal generators of f ⊥ gives

0 0
0 0


g
−c
g
g
−c
g
g
−c
g
g
h
0 0
=
.
1
1
4
2
2
4
3
3
4
4

1 0
0 1

Let J = hgi − ci g4 : i = 1, 2, 3i denote the ideal generated by the ﬁrst three cubics. This
is the ideal in Step 4 of the algorithm. We claim that V (J) consists of seven points in P2 .
By construction, we have B ′ · A′ = 0, and the columns of A′ span the syzygies on B ′ . The
entries of B ′ are the 4 × 4 subpfaﬃans of A′ . The ﬁrst three entries are the subpfaﬃans that
involve the last two rows and columns. These three 4 × 4 pfaﬃans are the 2 × 2-minors of
 ′

q14 l1
′
l2  .
T = q24
′
q34 l3
This is a Hilbert-Burch matrix for the ideal J. Hence J is an ideal of seven points in P2 .
Moreover, since l1 , l2 and l3 are linearly independent, no six points of them lie on a conic.
Dually, this means that no six of the seven lines ℓi used in (28) are tangent to a conic.
It is easy to decide whether the real rank of a given ternary quintic f is 7 or not. Namely,
one computes the unique complex decomposition (28) and checks whether it is real. The real
rank boundary corresponds to transition points where two of the linear forms in (28) come
together and form a complex conjugate pair. The following is our main result on quintics.
Theorem 5.3. The algebraic boundary ∂alg (R5 ) of the set R5 = {f : rkR (f ) = 7} is an irreducible hypersurface of degree 168 in the P20 of quintics. It has the parametric representation
g = ℓ51 + ℓ52 + ℓ53 + ℓ54 + ℓ55 + ℓ46 ℓ7 ,

where ℓ1 , . . . , ℓ7 ∈ R[x, y, z]1 .

(31)

Proof. The parametrization (31) deﬁnes a unirational variety Y in P20 . The Jacobian of
this parametrization is found to have corank 1. This means that Y has codimension 1 in
P20 . Hence Y is an irreducible hypersurface, deﬁned by a unique (up to sign) irreducible
homogeneous polynomial Φ in 21 unknowns, namely the coeﬃcients of a ternary quintic.
Let g be a real quintic (31) that is a general point in Y . For ǫ → 0, the real quintics
(ℓ6 +ǫℓ7 )5 −ℓ56 and (iℓ6 +ǫℓ7 )5 +(−iℓ6 +ǫℓ7 )5 converge to the special quintic ℓ46 ℓ7 in P20
R . Hence
20
any small neighborhood of g in PR contains quintics of real rank 7 and quintics of real rank
≥ 8. This implies that Y lies in the algebraic boundary ∂alg (R5 ). Since Y is irreducible and
has codimension 1, it follows that ∂alg (R5 ) exists and has Y as an irreducible component.
We carried out an explicit computation to determine that the (possibly reducible) hypersurface ∂alg (R5 ) has degree 168. This was done as follows. Fix the ﬁeld K = Q(t),
where t is a new variable. We picked random quintics f1 and f2 in Q[x, y, z]5 , and we ran
Algorithm 5.1 for f = f1 + tf2 ∈ K[x, y, z]5 . Step 4 returned a homogeneous ideal J in
24

K[x, y, z] that deﬁnes 7 points in P2 over the algebraic closure of K. By eliminating each
of the three variables, we obtain binary forms of degree 7 in K[x, y], K[x, z] and K[y, z].
Their coeﬃcients are polynomials of degree 35 in t. The discriminant of each binary form is
a polynomial in Q[t] of degree 420 = 12 × 35. The greatest common divisor of these three
discriminants is a polynomial Ψ(t) of degree 168. We checked that Ψ(t) is irreducible in Q[t].
By deﬁnition, Φ is an irreducible homogeneous polynomial with integer coeﬃcients in
the 21 coeﬃcients of a general quintic f . Its specialization Φ(f1 + tf2 ) is a non-constant
polynomial in Q[t], of degree deg(X) in t. That polynomial divides Ψ(t). Since the latter is
irreducible, we conclude that Φ(f1 + tf2 ) = γ · Ψ(t), where γ is a nonzero rational number.
Hence Φ has degree 168. We conclude that deg(Y ) = 168, and therefore Y = ∂alg (R5 ).
Theorem 5.3 was stated for a very special situation, namely ternary quintics. We shall
now describe a geometric generalization. Let X be any irreducible projective variety in the
complex projective space PN that is deﬁned over R and whose real points are Zariski dense.
We set d = dim(X). The generic rank is the smallest integer r such that the rth secant
variety σr (X) equals PN . Given f ∈ PN , we deﬁne VSPX (f ) to be the closure in the Hilbert
scheme Hilbr (X) of the set of conﬁgurations of r distinct points in X whose span contains
f . Now, VSP stands for variety of sums of points. This object agrees with that studied
by Gallet, Ranestad and Villamizar in [23].
inclusive deﬁnitions seen in
 It diﬀers from more
2
other articles. In particular, if N = d+2
−
1
and
X
=
ν
(P
)
is
the dth Veronese surface
d
2
then VSPX (f ) = VSP(f ). In this case, we recover the familiar variety of sums of powers.
The objects of real algebraic geometry studied in this paper generalize in a straightforward
manner. We write VSPX (f )R for the variety of real points in VSPX (f ), and we deﬁne
SSPX (f )R to be the semialgebraic subset of all f that lie in an (r − 1)-plane spanned by
r real points in X. Following Blekherman and Sinn [9], we are interested in generic points
in PN
R whose real rank equals the generic complex rank. These comprise the semialgebraic
set RX = {f ∈ PN
R : SSPX (f )R 6= ∅}. The topological boundary ∂RX is the closure of RX
minus the interior of that closure. If X has more than one typical real rank then ∂RX is
non-empty and its Zariski closure ∂alg (RX ) is a hypersurface in PN . This hypersurface is the
real rank boundary we are interested in.
Example 5.4. Let N = 20 and X = ν5 (P2 ) the ﬁfth Veronese surface in P20 . Then r = 7
and ∂alg (RX ) equals the irreducible hypersurface of degree 168 described in Theorem 5.3. ♦
This example generalizes as follows. Let X ⊂ PN as above, and let τ (X) denote its
tangential variety. By deﬁnition, τ (X) is the closure of the union of all lines that are tangent
to X. We also consider the (r − 2)nd secant variety σr−2 (X). The expected dimensions are


dim τ (X) = 2d and dim σr−2 (X) = (r − 2)d + r − 3.

We are interested in the join of the two varieties, denoted σr−2 (X) ⋆ τ (X). This is an
irreducible projective variety of expected dimension rd + r − 2 in PN . It comes with a distinguished parametrization, generalizing that in (31) for the Veronese surface of Example 5.4.
The following generalization of Theorem 5.3 explains the geometry of the real rank boundary:

25

Conjecture 5.5. Suppose rd + r = N and VSPX (f ) is finite for general f . Then σr−2 (X) ⋆
τ (X) is an irreducible component of ∂alg (RX ). Equality holds when VSPX (f ) is a point.
One diﬃculty in proving this conjecture is that we do not know how to control interactions
among the distinct decompositions f = f1 + · · · + fr of a general point f ∈ PN into r points
f1 , . . . , fr on the variety X. Moreover, we do not even know that ∂alg (RX ) is non-empty.
To illustrate Conjecture 5.5, we prove it in the case when X is the 7th Veronese surface.
The parameters are d = 2, N = 35, and r = 12. We return to the previous notation, so f is
a general ternary form in R[x, y, z]7 . Here we can show that 13 is indeed a typical real rank.
Proposition 5.6. The real rank boundary ∂alg (R7 ) is a non-empty hypersurface in P35 with
one of the components equal to the join of the tenth secant variety and the tangential variety.
Proof. For a general septic f , the minimal free resolution of the apolar ideal f ⊥ equals
A

0 −→ S(−10) −→ S(−6)5 −→ S(−4)5 −→ S −→ 0.

(32)

This is as in (7), but now the entries of the skew-symmetric 5 ×5-matrix A are quadratic. To
ﬁnd the ﬁve rank 12 decompositions of f , we proceed as in Example 2.5: we solve the matrix
equation (13). The matrix entry in position (4, 5) is a homogeneous quadric in x, y, z whose
six coeﬃcients are inhomogeneous quadrics in the unknowns a, b, c, d, e, g. These coeﬃcients
must vanish. This system of six equations in six unknowns deﬁnes VSP(f ) in C6 . It has
precisely ﬁve solutions. For each of these solutions we consider the upper right 3×2-matrix T .
Its entries are quadrics in x, y, z. The 2 × 2-minors of T deﬁne the desired 12 points in P2 .
We apply the above algorithm to the point in σ10 (X) ⋆ τ (X) given by the septic
f :=

(11x + 13y − 12z)(−18x + 13y − 16z)6 + (2x − 12y + z)7 + (3x − 13y − 7z)7
+(−6x + 5y + 15z)7 + (16x + 5y + 14z)7 + (18x − 19y − 9z)7 + (−4x + 10y − 18z)7
+(11x + 9y + 10z)7 + (−19x + 15y − z)7 + (−4x − 20y − 16z)7 + (2x + 20y − 18z)7 .

This septic f has complex rank 12, but its real rank is larger. The output of our decomposition algorithm shows that four of the ﬁve decompositions are not fully real. This remains
true in a small neighborhood of f . Near the point (11x + 13y − 12z)(−18x + 13y − 16z)6 in
the tangential variety τ (X), some septics have real rank 2 and some others have real rank 3.
Hence, the above decomposition of f can change from purely real to a decomposition that
contains complex linear forms. The same holds for all nearby points in the join variety. We
conclude that a general point of the join in a small neighborhood of f belongs to ∂(R7 ).
Our algorithm for septics f computes the ﬁvePelements in VSP(f ) along with the 12 linear
7
2
forms in each of the ﬁve decompositions f = 12
i=1 ℓi . It outputs 60 points in P . These
come in 5 unlabeled groups of 12 unlabeled points in P2 . Here are two concrete instances.
P
7
Example 5.7. First, consider the septic f = 12
i=1 ℓi of real rank 12 that is deﬁned by
ℓ1 = −7x + 14y + 3z, ℓ2 = −13x − 12y + 20z, ℓ3 = −7x − 5y − 18z,
ℓ4 = 12x − 16y + 17z, ℓ5 = −8x + 16y + 7z,
ℓ6 = 15x − 8y + 2z,
ℓ7 = 13x − 7y − 11z,
ℓ8 = −x − 3y − 3z,
ℓ9 = 18x − 4y − 7z,
ℓ10 = 19x − 9y + 7z,
ℓ11 = 15y − 17z,
ℓ12 = −19x − 2y + 11z.
26

Here, all 60 points in P2 are real. This means that the variety of sums of powers is fully real,
and the twelve ℓi in each of the ﬁve decompositions
are real: VSP(f ) = VSP(f )R = SSP(f )R .
P
Second, consider the real septic f = 6i=1 (ℓ7i + ℓ̄7i ) deﬁned by the complex linear forms
ℓ1 = 8x + 11y − 15z + i(13x + 15y + 17z), ℓ2 = −16x + 6y + 11z + i(−4x + 19y + 16z),
ℓ3 = 5x + 13y − 3z + i(−2x + 4y + 5z),
ℓ4 = 8x + 8y − 7z + i(−13x − 12y − 8z),
ℓ5 = −5x − 20y − 15z + i(−8x + 18y + 7z), ℓ6 = −14x − 18y − 7z + i(−9x − 2y + 19z).

This satisﬁes VSP(f )R 6= SSP(f )R = ∅. None of the 60 points in P2 are real. Our two
examples are extremal. One can easily ﬁnd other septics f with VSP(f )R 6= SSP(f )R .
♦

6

Sextics

We now consider ternary forms of degree six. The generic complex rank for sextics is R(6) =
10. Our ﬁrst result states that both 10 and 11 are typical real ranks, in the sense of [6, 7, 16].
Theorem 6.1. The algebraic boundary ∂alg (R6 ) is a hypersurface in the P27 of ternary
sextics. One of its irreducible components is the dual to the Severi variety of rational sextics.
Proof. We use notation and results from [8]. Let P3,6 denote the convex cone of nonnegative
rational sextics and Σ3,6 the subcone of sextics that are sums of squares of cubics over R. The
dual cone Σ∨3,6 consists of sextics f whose middle catalecticant C(f ) is positive semideﬁnite.
∨
Its subcone P3,6
is spanned by sixth powers of linear forms. It is known as the Veronese
∨
is a full-dimensional semialgebraic subset of R[x, y, z]6 .
orbitope. The diﬀerence Σ∨3,6 \P3,6
We claim that general sextics f in that set have real rank ≥ 11. Let f be a general sextic
∨
in Σ∨3,6 \P3,6
. Suppose that rkR (f ) = 10. The middle catalecticant C(f ) is positive deﬁnite.
Proposition 1.3 tells us that the signature of any representation (1) is (10, 0). This means
∨
that f lies in the Veronese orbitope P3,6
. This is a contradiction to the hypothesis, and we
conclude rkR (f ) ≥ 11. Using [6, Theorem 1.1], this means that 11 is a typical rank.
∨
Consider the algebraic boundary of the Veronese orbitope P3,6
. One of its two components is the determinant of the catalecticant C(f ), which is the algebraic boundary of the
spectrahedron Σ∨3,6 . The other component is the dual of the Zariski closure of the set of
extreme rays of P3,6 \Σ3,6 . That Zariski closure was shown in [8, Theorem 2] to be equal to
the Severi variety of rational sextics, which has codimension 10 and degree 26312976 in P27 .
∨
Every generic boundary point of P3,6
that is not in the spectrahedron Σ∨3,6 represents a linear
functional whose maximum over P3,6 occurs at a point in the Severi variety.
A result of Choi, Lam and Reznick (cf. [8, Proposition 7]) states that every general
∨
supporting hyperplane of P3,6
touches the Veronese surface in precisely 10 rays. Every form
∨
in the cone spanned by these rays has real rank ≤ 10. Consider the subset of P3,6
obtained
by replacing each of the 10 rays by a small neighborhood. This deﬁnes a full-dimensional
∨
subset of forms f ∈ P3,6
that satisfy rkR (f ) = 10. By construction, this subset must intersect
∨
the boundary of P3,6 in a relatively open set. Its Zariski closure is the hypersuface dual to
the Severi variety. We conclude that this dual is an irreducible component of ∂alg (R6 ).

27

Remark 6.2. The same proof applies also for octics (d = 8), ensuring that the algebraic
boundary ∂alg (R8 ) exists. Indeed, R(8) = 15 coincides with the size of the middle catalec∨
ticant f , and we can conclude that every octic in Σ∨3,8 \P3,8
has real rank bigger than 15.
However, for even integers d ≥ 10, this argument no longer works, because the generic
 complex rank exceeds the size of the middle catalecticant. In symbols, R(d) > d/2+2
. New
2
ideas are needed to establish the existence of the hypersurface ∂alg (Rd ) for d ≥ 9.
We record the following upper bounds on the real ranks of general ternary forms.
Proposition 6.3. Let m(d) be the maximal typical rank of a ternary form of degree d. Then



d+1
− 2, 2R(d) .
m(d) ≤ min
2
In particular, typical real ranks for ternary sextics are between 10 and 19.
Proof. The same argument as in [6, Proposition 6.2] shows m(d) ≤ m(d − 1) + d. The
binomial bound follows by induction. The bound 2R(d) comes from [10, Theorem 3].
The anti-polar construction in (21) extends to f of degree d = 6 and d = 8. We deﬁne


Ω(f )(a, b, c) = det C(f + ℓd ) − det C(f )
for ℓ = ax + by + cz.

Lemma 6.4. Let f be a general ternary form of degree d ∈ {4, 6, 8} that is not in the cone
Pd∨ spanned by dth powers. If Ω(f ) has no real zeros than the real rank of f exceeds R(d).
Proof. Suppose that f is of minimal generic rank R(d). Since f is not a sum of dth powers
of linear forms over R, by Proposition 1.3, there exists a real linear form ℓ = ax + by + cz

such that the catalecticant matrix of f + ℓd is degenerate; hence Ω(f )(ℓ) = −det C(f ) .
′d
On the other hand, there exists ℓ′ such that the
 catalecticant matrix of −f + ℓ also drops
′
′
rank, so Ω(f )(ℓ ) = −Ω(−f )(ℓ ) = det C(f ) . Hence the real curve deﬁned by Ω(f ) is
non-empty.
Let f ∈ R[x, y, z]6 be general, with rkC (f ) = R(6) = 10. In what follows we derive the
algebraic representation of the K3 surface VSP(f ) and its semialgebraic subset SSP(f )R .
The apolar ideal f ⊥ is generated by nine quartics. The minimal free resolution of f ⊥ equals
A

S → S(−5)9 −→ S(−4)9 → S → 0.
Here A is a skew-symmetric 9×9-matrix with V
linear entries.
V2 9 Its 8×8 subpfaﬃans generate
2 ⊥
⊥
f . We write A = A1 x+A2 y+A3 z where Ai ∈
f4 ≃
R . The variety VSP(f ) is a K3
surface of genus 20 and degree 38. See [28, 33] for details and proofs. The following representation, found in [33, Theorem 1.7 (iii)], is analogous to Proposition 2.4 and Lemma 4.5.
Proposition 6.5. The surface
) is the intersection of the Grassmannian Gr(5, 9), in
V5 VSP(f
⊥
its Plücker embedding in P( f4 ) ≃ P125 , with the 20-dimensional linear subspace

P20
=
U ∈ P125 : U ∧ A1 = U ∧ A2 = U ∧ A3 = 0 .
A
Inside this space, VSP(f ) is cut out by 153 quadrics, obtained from the Plücker relations.
28

For any sextic f , we can compute the surface VSP(f ) explicitly, by the method explained
for quadrics in Example 2.5. Namely, as in (11), we introduce local coordinates on Gr(5, 9).
The equations deﬁning P20
in the
A translate into quadrics

 20 local coordinates. In analogy to

(13), we transform the 9 × 9-matrix A into

⋆
T
−T t 0

. Here, T is a 5 × 4-matrix of linear
P
6
forms whose 4 × 4 minors deﬁne the ten points in P2 in the representation f = 10
i=1 ℓi . We
can study SSP(f )R and its boundary inside the real K3 surface VSP(f )R by means of the
hyperdeterminant for m = 4 in Corollary 2.8. The following example demonstrates this.
P
Example 6.6. Consider the sextic ternary f = i+j+k=3(ix+ jy + kz)6 , where i, j, k ∈ Z≥0 .
It is is given by a real rank 10 representation. Consider the 9 × 9 matrix of linear forms in
some minimal free resolution of the apolar ideal f ⊥ . We transform this matrix into


0
l1
l2
l3
l4
l 5 l 6 l 7 l8
−l1
0
l9
l10
l11 l12 l13 l14 l15 


−l2 −l9
0
l16
l17 l18 l19 l20 l21 



−l3 −l10 −l16
0
l
l
l
l
l
22
23
24
25
26


,
−l
−l
−l
−l
0
l
l
l
l
A = 
4
11
17
22
27
28
29
30


−l5 −l12 −l18 −l23 −l27 0 0 0 0 


−l6 −l13 −l19 −l24 −l28 0 0 0 0 


−l7 −l14 −l20 −l25 −l29 0 0 0 0 
−l8 −l15 −l21 −l26 −l30 0 0 0 0
6885
4050
175770
4050
3240
37665
810
324
810
631 x − 631 y − 631 z, l2 = − 631 x + 631 y + 631 z l3 = − 631 z, l4 = 631 x + 631 y +
5
21
4
67230
67230
2791260
3240
2025
631 z, l5 = − 631 x, l6 = 631 x, l7 = − 631 x, l8 = 0, l9 = − 631 x − 631 y −
631 z, l10 = 631 x −
4050
37665
55728
70308
13446
25
25
1482
818
251
631 y + 631 z, l11 = − 631 x − 631 y − 631 z, l12 = 631 x − 631 z, l13 = − 631 x + 631 y + 631 z, l14 =
852
10
20
4050
6885
175770
70308
55728
13446
668
631 x− 631 y+z, l15 = 631 y− 631 z, l16 = − 631 x+ 631 y− 631 z, l17 = 631 x+ 631 y+ 631 z, l18 =
20
668
818
1482
251
25
25
10
− 631
x + 631
z, l19 = 852
631 x − 631 y − z, l20 = − 631 x + 631 y − 631 z, l21 = − 631 y + 631 z, l22 =
810
324
2025
4
21
5
5
− 631 x − 631 y − 631 z, l23 = 0, l24 = 631 y, l25 = − 631 y, l26 = 631 y, l27 = 631 z, l28 = − 430
631 z, l29 =
430
5
z,
l
=
−
z.
The
upper
right
5
×
4-submatrix
of
A
drops
rank
precisely
on
the ten
30
631
631
2

where l1 =

points (i : j : k) ∈ P where i + j + k = 3 in nonnegative integers.

We introduce local coordinates on Gr(5, 9) as follows. Let U be the row span of Id5 V ,
where V = (vij ) is a 5 × 4 matrix of unknowns. We transform A into the coordinate system
given by U and its orthogonal complement:






Id5 V
Id5 V
⋆ T
.
·A·
=
V t −Id4
V t −Id4
−T t 0

We proceed as in Example 2.5. The lower right 4 × 4 block is zero whenever the corresponding 18 quadrics in the 20 local coordinates vanish. The submatrix T is a 3 × 4 × 5
tensor. Its hyperdeterminant Det(T ) is the discriminant for our problem. By Corollary 2.8,
this is a polynomial of degree 120 in the entries of T . The specialization of Det(T ) to the
20 local coordinates has degree ≤ 240. That polynomial represents the algebraic boundary
of SSP(f)R inside VSP(f )R , similarly to Corollary 2.6.
♦
29

In the paper we focused on general ternary forms. Special cases are also very interesting:
Example 6.7. Consider the monomial f = x2 y 2 z 2 . By [14], this has rkR (f ) ≤ 13 because
360f = 4(x6 + y 6 + z 6 ) + (x + y + z)6 + (x + y − z)6 + (x − y + z)6 + (x − y − z)6


−2 (x + y)6 + (x − y)6 + (x + z)6 + (x − z)6 + (y + z)6 + (y − z)6 .

The apolar ideal is f ⊥ = hx3 , y 3, z 3 i. The radical ideal generated by general cubics in f ⊥ ,
C1 = αx3 + βy 3 + γz 3

and C2 = α′ x3 + β ′ y 3 + γ ′ z 3 ,

(33)

proves that rkC (f ) = 9. We can replace C1 and C2 by two linear combinations that are
binomials, say C1′ = x3 + δz 3 and C2′ = y 3 + ǫz 3 . For any choice of δ and ǫ, at most three of
the nine points of V (C1′ , C2′ ) ⊂ P2 are real. This shows rkR (f ) ≥ 10.
We next prove rkR (f ) ≥ 11. Assume that p1 , p2 , . . . , p10 ∈ P2R give a rank 10 decomposition of f . Consider a pencil of cubics C1 + t · C2 passing through p1 , . . . , p8 . We may
assume p10 6∈ V (C1 , C2 ) and C2 (p9 ) = 0. We claim that C2 vanishes also at p10 . Indeed, C2
acts by diﬀerentiation and gives C2 (f ) = λ10 C2 (p10 )ℓ310 where λ10 ∈ R∗ and C2 (p10 ) is the
evaluation at p10 . However, C2 (f ) = C2 (x2 y 2z 2 ) contains none of the pure powers x3 , y 3, z 3
and so C2 passes through p10 as well. We now know that C1 vanishes at neither p9 nor p10 .
Diﬀerentiation gives
C1 (f ) = αℓ39 + βℓ310 ,

where α = λ9 C1 (p9 ), β = λ10 C1 (p10 ) and λ9 , λ10 ∈ R∗ .

Let ℓ9 = a9 x + b9 y + c9 z and ℓ10 = a10 x + b10 y + c10 z. The coeﬃcients of x3 , y 3, z 3 in the
cubic C1 (f ) vanish. Hence
αa39 + βa310 = αb39 + βb310 = αc39 + βc310 = 0.
Over R, these equations imply a9 = −(β/α)1/3 a10 , b9 = −(β/α)1/3 b10 , c9 = −(β/α)1/3 c10 .
So, p9 and p10 are the same point in P2 . This is a contradition and we conclude rkR (f ) ≥ 11.
At present we do not know whether the real rank of f is 11, 12 or 13. The argument
above can be extended to establish the following result: if rkR (f ) ≤ 12 then there exists a
decomposition (1) whose points (ai : bi : ci ) all lie on the Fermat cubic V (x3 + y 3 + z 3 ).
Let us explore the possibility rkR (f ) = 12. Then it is likely that the (ai : bi : ci ) are the
complete intersection of a cubic and a quartic. They can be assumed to have the form:
x3 + y 3 + 1 = ax4 + bx3 y + cx3 + dx + ey + 1 = 0.

(34)

Hence, determining the real rank of f leads directly to the following easy-to-state question:
Can we find real constants a, b, c, d, e such that all 12 solutions to the equations (34) are
real? If the answer is “yes” then we can conclude rkR (f ) ≤ 12. Otherwise, we cannot reach
a conclusion. A systematic approach to this Real Root Classiﬁcation problem is via the
discriminant of the system (34). This discriminant is a polynomial of degree 24 in a, b, c, d, e.
We would need to explore the connected components of the complement of this hypersurface
in R5 . For further reading on the rank geometry of monomials we refer to [12, 13].
♦
30

Acknowledgements.
We are grateful to Greg Blekherman for his help with this project. We also thank Giorgio Ottaviani
and Frank-Olaf Schreyer for valuable discussions. Bernd Sturmfels was supported by the US National Science Foundation (DMS-1419018) and the Einstein Foundation Berlin. Mateusz Michalek
is a PRIME DAAD fellow and acknowledges the support of Iuventus Plus grant 0301/IP3/2015/73
of the Polish Ministry of Science.

References
[1] H. Abo, A. Seigal and B. Sturmfels: Eigenconfigurations of tensors, Algebraic and Geometric
Methods in Discrete Mathematics, (eds. H. Harrington, M. Omar and M. Wright), American
Mathematical Society, Contemporary Mathematics, to appear.
[2] J. Alexander and A. Hirschowitz: Polynomial interpolation in several variables, J. Algebraic
Geom. 4 (1995) 201–222.
[3] M. Artebani and I. Dolgachev: The Hesse pencil of plane cubic curves, Enseign. Math. 55
(2009) 235–273.
[4] M. Banchi: Rank and border rank of real ternary cubics, Bollettino dell’Unione Matematica
Italiana 8 (2015) 65–80.
[5] A. Björner, M. Las Vergnas, B. Sturmfels, N. White and G. Ziegler: Oriented Matroids,
Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 46, Cambridge University Press, 1993.
[6] A. Bernardi, G. Blekherman and G. Ottaviani: On real typical ranks, arXiv:1512.01853.
[7] G. Blekherman: Typical real ranks of binary forms, Found. Comput. Math. 15 (2015) 793–798.
[8] G. Blekherman, J. Hauenstein, J.C. Ottem, K. Ranestad and B. Sturmfels: Algebraic boundaries of Hilbert’s SOS cones, Compositio Mathematica 148 (2012) 1717–1735.
[9] G. Blekherman and R. Sinn: Real rank with respect to varieties, Linear Algebra and its Applications 505 (2016) 344–360.
[10] G. Blekherman and Z. Teitler: On maximum, typical and generic ranks, Mathematische Annalen 362 (2015) 1021–1031.
[11] R. Blum and A.P. Guinand: A quartic with 28 real bitangents, Canadian Mathematical Bulletin
7 (1964) 399–404.
[12] W. Buczyńska, J. Buczyński and Z. Teitler: Waring decompositions of monomials, Journal of
Algebra 378 (2013) 45–57.
[13] E. Carlini, M.V. Catalisano, A.V. Geramita: The solution to Waring’s problem for monomials
and the sum of coprime monomials, Journal of Algebra 370 (2012) 5–14.
[14] E. Carlini, M. Kummer, A. Oneto and E. Ventura:
arXiv:1602.01151.

On the real rank of monomials,

[15] M. Chan and B. Sturmfels, Elliptic curves in honeycomb form, Algebraic and combinatorial
aspects of tropical geometry, Contemp. Math., vol. 589, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI,
(2013) 87-107.
[16] P. Comon and G. Ottaviani: On the typical rank of real binary forms, Linear and Multilinear
Algebra 60 (2012) 657–667.

31

[17] S. Dinew, G. Kapustka and M. Kapustka: Remarks on Mukai threefolds admitting C∗ action,
arXiv:1506.03286.
[18] A. Dixon and T. Stuart: On the reduction of the ternary quintic and septimic to their canonical
forms, Proc. London Math. Soc. (2) 4 (1906) 160–168.
[19] I. Dolgachev and V. Kanev: Polar covariants of plane cubics and quartics, Advances in Mathematics 98 (1993) 216–301.
[20] I. Dolgachev: Dual homogeneous forms and varieties of power sums, Milan J. Math. 72 (2004)
163–187.
[21] I. Dolgachev: Classical Algebraic Geometry: A Modern View, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012.
[22] I.M. Gel’fand, M.M. Kapranov and A.V. Zelevinsky: Discriminants, Resultants and Multidimensional Determinants, Birkhäuser, Boston, 1994.
[23] M. Gallet, K. Ranestad and N. Villamizar: Varieties of apolar subschemes of toric surfaces,
arXiv:1601.00694.
[24] J. Kollár and F.-O. Schreyer: Real Fano 3-folds of type V22 , The Fano Conference, 515–531,
Univ. Torino, Turin, 2004.
[25] H. Lee and B. Sturmfels: Duality of multiple root loci, Journal of Algebra 446 (2016) 499–526.
[26] M. Mella: Base loci of linear systems and the Waring problem, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 137
(2009) 91–98.
[27] S. Mukai: Fano 3-folds, Complex Projective Geometry, London Math. Soc. Lecture Notes, vol.
179, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992, pp. 255–263.
[28] S. Mukai: Polarized K3 surfaces of genus 18 and 20, Complex Projective Geometry, London
Math. Soc. Lecture Notes, vol. 179, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992, pp. 264–276.
[29] S. Mukai: Plane quartics and Fano threefolds of genus twelve, The Fano Conference, 563–572,
Univ. Torino, Turin, 2004.
[30] L. Oeding and G. Ottaviani: Eigenvectors of tensors and algorithms for Waring decomposition,
J. Symbolic Comput. 54 (2013) 9–35.
[31] G. Ottaviani: Introduction to the hyperdeterminant and to the rank of multidimensional matrices, Commutative Algebra, 609–638, Springer, New York, 2013.
[32] D. Plaumann, B. Sturmfels and C. Vinzant: Quartic curves and their bitangents, Journal of
Symbolic Computation 46 (2011) 712–733.
[33] K. Ranestad and F.-O. Schreyer: Varieties of sums of powers, J. Reine Angew. Math. 525
(2000) 147–181.
[34] K. Ranestad and F.-O. Schreyer: The variety of polar simplices, Documenta Mathematica 18
(2013) 469–505.
[35] B. Reznick: Sums of even powers of real linear forms, Memoirs of the AMS 96 (1992) n. 463.
[36] F.-O. Schreyer: Geometry and algebra of prime Fano 3-folds of genus 12, Compositio Math.
127 (2001) 297–319.
[37] J. Silverman: Advanced Topics in the Arithmetic of Elliptic Curves, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 151, Springer, New York, 1994.
[38] B. Sturmfels: The Hurwitz form of a projective variety, J. Symbolic Comput., to appear.
[39] B. Sturmfels and C. Uhler: Multivariate Gaussians, semidefinite matrix completion, and convex algebraic geometry, Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics 62 (2010) 603–638.

32

Authors’ addresses:
Mateusz Michalek, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany; Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland,
wajcha2@poczta.onet.pl
Hyunsuk Moon, KAIST, Daejeon, South Korea, octopus14@kaist.ac.kr
Bernd Sturmfels, University of California, Berkeley, USA, bernd@berkeley.edu
Emanuele Ventura, Aalto University, Finland, emanuele.ventura@aalto.fi

33

