FREIMAN IDEALS
∗

arXiv:1709.02827v1 [] 8 Sep 2017

JÜRGEN HERZOG AND GUANGJUN ZHU

Abstract. In this paper we study the Freiman inequality for the minimal number
of generators of the square of an equigenerated monomial ideal. Such an ideal is
called a Freiman ideal if equality holds in the Freiman inequality. We classify all
Freiman ideals of maximal height, the Freiman ideals of certain classes of principal
Borel ideals, the Hibi ideals which are Freiman, and classes of Veronese type ideals
which are Freiman.

Introduction
Let I be an equigenerated monomial ideal with analytic spread ℓ(I). It has been
shown in [8, Theorem 1.9] that µ(I 2) ≥ l(I)µ(I) − l(I)
. Here µ(J) denotes the
2
minimal number of generators of a graded ideal J. This inequality is the consequence
of a well-known theorem from additive number theory, due to Freiman [4]. It should
be noted that the above lower bound for the minimal number of the generators of
the square of a monomial ideal is no longer valid, if I is not equigenerated. Indeed,
for each m ≥ 6 there exists a monomial ideal I in two variables with µ(I) = m and
µ(I 2 ) = 9, see [3].
We call an equigenerated
 monomial ideal I a Freiman ideal (or simply Freiman),
l(I)
2
if µ(I ) = l(I)µ(I) − 2 . It is the aim of this paper to classify all Freiman ideals
within given families of equigenerated monomial ideals.
In Section 1 we analyze the Freiman inequality from the view point of commutative
algebra. Let I be a graded ideal in the polynomial ring S = K[x1 , .L
. . , xn ] over a
field K. The fiber cone F (I) of I is the standard graded K-algebra k≥0 I k /mI k ,
where m = (x1 , . . . , xn ) is the graded maximalP
ideal of S. The Hilbert series of F (I)
ℓ(I)
is of the form Q(t)/(1 − t) , where Q(t) = i≥0 hi ti is a polynomial with integer
coefficients hi . It has been noticed in [8, Corollary 2.6] the surprising fact, that,
as a consequence of the Freiman inequality, one has h2 ≥ 0 for any equigenerated
monomial ideal. Moreover, h2 = 0 if and only if I is a Freiman ideal.
We do not know whether the fiber cone of any Freiman ideal is Cohen–Macaulay.
For all families of Freiman ideals considered in this paper, the fiber cone of a Freiman
ideal is Cohen–Macaulay.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 13C99; Secondary 13H05, 13H10.
Key words and phrases. monomial ideals, powers of ideals, minimal number of generators, principal Borel ideals, Hibi ideals, ideals of Veronese type.
The paper was written while the second author was visiting the Department of Mathematics of
University Duisburg-Essen. She want to express her thanks for the hospitality.
* Corresponding author.
1

Assuming the fiber cone of a given equigenerated monomial ideal I is Cohen–
Macaulay, it is not hard to show (see Proposition 1.3 and Corollary 1.9) that the
following conditions are equivalent:
(a) I is Freiman.
(b) F (I) has minimal multiplicity.
(c) There exists an integer k ≥ 2 such that




ℓ(I) + k − 2
ℓ(I) + k − 2
k
.
µ(I) − (k − 1)
µ(I ) =
k
k−1


ℓ(I)+k−2
(d) For all integer k ≥ 1 one has µ(I k ) = ℓ(I)+k−2
µ(I)
−
(k
−
1)
.
k−1
k

Moreover, if I is Freiman and F (I) is Cohen–Macaulay, then the reduction number
of I is one, and I is level. If, in addition, we assume that I is equimultiple, that is,
if ℓ(I) = height(I), then these properties actually characterize Freiman ideals, see
Corollary 1.5 and Corollary 1.7.

In Section 2 we give a complete characterization of Freiman ideals of height n in the
polynomial ring S = K[x1 , . . . , xn ] with n ≥ 2, where K is a field. In Theorem 2.1 it
is first observed that if I ⊂ S is an equigenerated monomial ideal of height n which
is generated in degree d, then I is Freiman if and only if I 2 = (xd1 , . . . , xdn )I. This
result is then used to prove Theorem 2.4, which is the main theorem of this section.
In order to formulate this main result, we need the following definition. Let I ⊂ S
be a monomial ideal. The unique minimal set of monomial generators of I is denoted
by G(I). Let G(I) = {u1 , . . . , um} and let q ≥ 1 be an integer. We denote by I [q] the
monomial ideal with G(I [q] ) = (uq1 , . . . , uqm ). The ideal I [q] is called the qth pseudoFrobenius power of I. It is obvious that I is Freiman if and only if I [q] is Freiman.
Thus, in the classification of Freiman ideals it suffices to consider monomial ideals
which are not proper pseudo-Frobenius powers of other monomial ideals. With this
concept and notation introduced, we are ready to present Theorem 2.4, which says
the following: Let n, d ≥ 2 be two integers and I ⊂ K[x1 , . . . , xn ] an equigenerated
monomial ideal of height n generated in degree d. Suppose that I is not a proper
pseudo-Frobenius power of another monomial ideal. Then I is Freiman, if and
only if, up to a relabeling of the variables, I = (x1 , . . . , xr )d + (xdr+1 , . . . , xdn ) with
r ≤ min{3, n} if d = 2, and r ≤ min{2, n} if d ≥ 3. In the case that d = 1, it follows
that I = (x1 , . . . , xn ). This ideal is obviously Freiman.
In Corollary 2.6 we discuss the question in which cases the product of two equigenerated monomial ideals I and J of height n in K[x1 , . . . , xn ] is a Freiman ideal. It
turns out that this is never the case, if n ≥ 4, while if n = 3, the product IJ is
Freiman if and only if I = J = (xd1 , xd2 , xd3 ) for some integer d ≥ 1.
In Section 3 we study classes of monomial ideals which naturally appear in combinatorics and geometry, and ask which of them are Freiman. The classes of ideals
considered here are the principal Borel ideals, the Hibi ideals and the ideals of
Veronese type. For a principal Borel ideal I with Borel generator u = xi xj with
i ≤ j, it is shown in Theorem 3.2(a) that I is Freiman, if and only if j ≤ 3, or j > 3
and i ≤ 2. For principal Borel ideals of degree d ≥ 3 we only have very partial
2

results. The reason is that checking the Freiman condition for such ideals leads
to difficult numerical problems, which at this moment, we are not able to handle.
May be there exists another approach to these problems which we are aware of at
present. Actually we expect that if u is a monomial of degree d ≥ 3 such that x1
does not divide u, and I is the ideal whose Borel generator is u, then I is Freiman
if and only if u = xd−1
2 xj and 2 ≤ j. The “if” part of this expected result is shown
in Theorem 3.2(b), and both directions for n = 3 are shown in Theorem 3.3.
For Hibi ideals we have a complete answer. Recall that if P is a finite poset and
I(P ) is the set of poset ideals of P , then the Hibi ideal HP is the monomial ideal
in the polynomial
ring S = K[{xp , yp }p∈P ], whose generators are the monomials
Q
Q
uI = (
xp )(
yp ) with I ∈ I(P ). It is shown in Theorem 3.4 that HP is
p∈I(P )

p∈P \I(P )

Freiman if and only if there exists p ∈ P such that P \ {p} is a chain. A typical
example of such a poset, but not the only one, is a poset consisting of the chain plus
an extra element which is incomparable with all the elements of this chain.
For Veronese type ideals we give a complete answer in three cases. Given positive
integers n, d, and a sequence a of integers 1 ≤ a1 ≤ a2 ≤ · · · ≤ an ≤ d with
P
n
i=1 ai > d, one defines the monomial ideal Ia,d ⊂ S = K[x1 , . . . , xn ] with
G(Ia,d) = {xb11 xb22 · · · xbnn |

n
X

bi = d and bi ≤ ai for i = 1, . . . , n}.

i=1

Ideals of this form are called ideals of Veronese type. If ai = d for i = 1, . . . , n then
Ia,d = (x1 , . . . , xn )d , and (x1 , . . . , xn )d is Freiman if and only if d = 1, n ≤ 2, or
n = 3 and d = 2, see Theorem 2.3.
If ai = 1 for i = 1, . . . , n, then Ia,d is the so-called squarefree Veronese ideal which,
as is common, we also denote by In,d . In this case In,d is Freiman if and only if d = 1
or d = n − 1, see Theorem 3.5. For the proof we use the result of De Negri and Hibi
which says that the fiber cone of a Veronese type ideal is Cohen–Macaulay, and that
In,d is level if and only if d = 1, d = n − 1, or d ≥ 2 and n = 2d − 1, n = 2d or
n = 2d + 1. Thus we may apply our result from Section 1 which says that Freiman
ideals whose fiber cone is Cohen–Macaualy must be level, and it remains to check
only these cases.
Katzman [10] determined the multiplicity of the fiber cone of a Veronese type ideal.
The formula is rather complicated, but in the case that ai = d − 1 for i = 1, . . . , n,
the formula simplifies and one has e(F (Ia,d)) = dn−1 − n. Now by using the fact,
shown in Section 1, that Freiman ideals, whose fiber cone is Cohen–Macaulay, must
have minimal multiplicity, we show in Theorem 3.6 that Ia,d is Freiman if and only
if n = 2, or n = 3 and d = 2.
The results of this paper show that Freiman ideals are rather rare. Thus one can
hope that a classification of all principal Borel Freiman ideals and all Veronese type
Freiman ideals is possible. We are not so optimistic that Freiman ideals in general
can be classified. The Hibi ideals which are Freiman show that it would be hard to
find a general pattern for all Freiman ideals.
3

1. The Freiman inequality
Let K be a field and S = K[x1 , . . . , xn ] the polynomial ring in n indeterminates
over K, and let I ⊂ S be a graded ideal. The minimal number of generators of
I will be denoted by µ(I). The ideal I is called equigenerated, if all elements of a
minimal set of generators of I have the same degree.
An ideal J ⊆ I is called a reduction of I if I k+1 = JI k for some nonnegative
integer k. The reduction number of I with respect to J is defined to be
rJ (I) = min{k | I k+1 = JI k }.
A reduction J of I is called a minimal reduction if it does not properly contain any
other reduction of I. The reduction number of I is defined to be the number
r(I) = min{rJ (I) | J is a minimal reduction of I}.
By Northcott and Rees [12] it is known that µ(J) = ℓ(I) for every minimal
reduction J of I, if K is infinite. Here ℓ(I) denotes the analytic
of I, which
L spread
k
is defined to be the Krull dimension of the fiber cone F (I) = k≥0 I /mI k .
It is known that height(I) ≤ ℓ(I) ≤ min{dim(S), µ(I)}. The ideal I is called
equimultiple, if height(I) = l(I).
A well-known theorem of Freiman [4] implies the following result [8]:
Theorem 1.1. Let I ⊂ S be an equigenerated monomial ideal. Then


l(I)
2
.
µ(I ) ≥ l(I)µ(I) −
2
It is of interest to know when we have equality in the above theorem. To have a
short name, we say that an equigenerated monomial
ideal I is a Freiman ideal (or

ℓ(I)
2
simply Freiman), if µ(I ) = ℓ(I)µ(I) − 2 . For simplicity we set


ℓ(I)
2
∆(I) = µ(I ) − ℓ(I)µ(I) +
2
for any graded ideal I ⊂ S.
Remarks 1.2. (a) Let HilbF (I) (t) = Q(t)/(1 − t)ℓ(I) with Q(t) = 1 + h1 t + h2 t2 + · · ·
be the Hilbert series of the fiber cone F (I) of I, where I ⊂ S is a graded ideal of S.
In [8] it has been noticed that ∆(I) = h2 . Thus an equigenerated monomial ideal is
Freiman if and only if h2 = 0.
(b) Let J ⊂ K[x1 , . . . , xr ] with r < n be an equigenerated monomial ideal, and
let I = JS. Then I is Freiman if and only if J is Freiman. Indeed, µ(I) = µ(J) and
µ(I 2 ) = µ(J 2 ).
Let R be a standard graded K-algebra. We denote by e(R) the multiplicity of R
and by emb dim(R) the embedding dimension of R. By Abhyankar [1] it is known
that
emb dim(R) ≤ e(R) + dim R − 1,
if R is a domain. The same inequality holds if R is Cohen–Macaulay [13]. The
K-algebra R is said to have minimal multiplicity if emb dim(R) = e(R) + dim R − 1.
4

Proposition 1.3. Let I be an equigenerated monomial ideal. Suppose that F (I) is
Cohen–Macaulay. Then I is Freiman, if and only if F (I) has minimal multiplicity.
This is for example the case, if F (I) is a hypersurface ring defined by a quadratic
polynomial.
Proof. The Hilbert series of the fiber cone F (I) of I is of the form
X
1 + h1 t + h2 t2 + h3 t3 + h4 t4 + · · ·
µ(I k )tk =
HilbF (I) (t) =
.
ℓ(I)
(1
−
t)
k≥0
P
Since F (I) is Cohen–Macaulay, it follows that i≥2 hi ≥ 0 and that
h1 = emb dim F (I) − dim F (I).

It follows that F (I) has minimal multiplicity if and only if hi = 0 for all i ≥ 2. For
a Cohen–Macaulay ring we have h2 = 0 if and only if hi = 0 for all i ≥ 2. This
yields the desired result.

Examples 1.4. Let I = (x2 , y 2, z 3 , xy), J = (x2 , y 2, z 2 , xy, xz) and L = (x, y, z)2 .
Then I is Freiman, and F (I) is a hypersurface ring defined by a quadric. J is not
Freiman, because ℓ(J) = 3, and 13 = µ(J 2 ) > 3µ(J)−3 = 12. Finally, L is Freiman,
and F (L) is Cohen–Macaulay with minimal multiplicity.
In Theorem 2.3 it is shown for n ≥ 3, the ideal (x1 , . . . , xn )m is Freiman if and
only if m = 1, n ≤ 2, or n = 3 and m = 2.
Let T = K[z1 , . . . , zm ] be a polynomial ring over a field K, J ⊂ T a graded ideal
with graded minimal free T -resolution F. The ideal J is said to have a d-linear
resolution if Fi = T (−d − i)βi for all i, and T /J is said to be level, if T /J is Cohen–
Macaulay, and the last module in the graded free resolution of J is generated in a
single degree.
Corollary 1.5. Let I ⊂ S be a Freiman ideal, and suppose that F (I) is Cohen–
Macaulay. Then the defining ideal of F (I) has a 2-linear resolution and F (I) is
level.
Proof. We may assume that K is an infinite field. Then there exists a maximal regular sequence y1 , . . . , yℓ(I) of linear forms in F (I). Let F (I) = F (I)/(y1, . . . , yℓ(I))F (I).
Since F (I) and F (I) have the same multiplicity, and since by Proposition 1.3, F (I)
has minimal multiplicity, it follows that n̄2 = 0, where n̄ denotes the graded maximal
ideal of F (I). This implies that F (I) is level and has a 2-linear resolution. Since
F (I) is obtained from F (I) by reduction modulo a regular sequence of linear forms,
the desired result follows.

In the following theorem we consider more generally when for a graded ideal I we
have ∆(I) = 0.
Theorem 1.6. Let I ⊂ S be a graded ideal.
(a) If ∆(I) = 0 and F (I) is Cohen–Macaulay, then r(I) = 1.
5

(b) If I is equimultiple and r(I) = 1, then ∆(I) = 0 and F (I) is Cohen–
Macaulay.
Proof. (a) Without loss of generality we may assume that K is infinite. We set
ℓ = ℓ(I). The case ℓ = 0 is trivial. So we may assume that ℓ ≥ 1. Since F (I) is
Cohen–Macaulay, we can choose an F (I)-regular sequence y1 , . . . , yℓ ∈ F (I)1 , where
yi = fi + mI with fi ∈ I.
P
Let HilbF (I) (t) = QF (I) (t)/(1 − t)ℓ with deg Q(t) = q and QF (I) (t) = qi=0 hi ti .
Since we assume that F (I) is Cohen–Macaulay, it follows that hi > 0 for i = 0, . . . , q.
By Remark 1.2(a), ∆(I) = h2 . Thus our assumption implies that h2 = 0, and hence
hi = 0 for all i ≥ 2.
Let J = (f1 , . . . , fℓ ) and F (I) = F (I)/(J + mI)F (I). Since y1 , . . . , yℓ is a regular
sequence on F (I), it follows that QF (I) (t) = QF (I) (t). This implies that F (I)i = 0
for i ≥ 2. Equivalently,
I 2 = JI + mI 2 .
Thus, Nakayama’s lemma yields I 2 = JI, as desired.
(b) By Shah [14, Corollary 1(a)], our assumptions imply that F (I) is Cohen–
Macaulay. Let J = (f1 , . . . , fℓ ) with fi as in part (a). Then the elements yi = fi +mI
in F (I)1 form a regular sequence and F (I)2 = 0, where F (I) = F (I)/(y1, . . . , yℓ )F (I).
Since F (I) and F (I) have the same h-vector, it follows that h2 = h̄2 = 0. Thus
∆(I) = 0.

Corollary 1.7. Let I be an equigenerated monomial ideal.
(a) If I is Freiman and F (I) is Cohen–Macaulay, then r(I) = 1.
(b) If I is equimultiple and r(I) = 1, then I is Freiman and F (I) is Cohen–
Macaulay.
In the next result we consider the minimial number of generators of the powers
of a graded ideal.
Proposition 1.8. Let I ⊂ S be a graded ideal with analytic spread l = ℓ(I). Then


(a) µ(I k ) ≥ l+k−2
µ(I) − (k − 1) l+k−2
for all k ≥ 1, if hi ≥ 0 for all i ≥ 2.
k−1 
k 
l+k−2
l+k−2
k
(b) µ(I ) = k−1 µ(I) − (k − 1) k
for all k ≥ 1, if and only if hi = 0 for
all i ≥ 2.
(c) Assume in addition that F (I) is Cohen–Macaulay. Then the following conditions are equivalent:
(i) ∆(I) = 0.


(ii) µ(I k ) = l+k−2
µ(I) − (k − 1) l+k−2
for all k ≥ 1.
k−1 
k 
l+k−2
l+k−2
k
(iii) µ(I ) = k−1 µ(I) − (k − 1) k
for some k ≥ 2.

Proof. (a) For the fiber cone of the ideal I, we have
HilbF (I) (t) =

X
k≥0

µ(I k )tk =

1 + h1 t + h2 t2 + h3 t3 + h4 t4 + · · ·
(1 − t)ℓ
6





ℓ+2 3
ℓ+1 2
t + ···)
t +
= (1 + h1 t + h2 t + · · · )(1 + ℓt +
3
2


ℓ+1
+ h2 )t2 + · · ·
= 1 + (h1 + ℓ)t + (h1 ℓ +
2

 X

k 
ℓ+k−i−1
ℓ+k−1
hi ]tk + · · · .
+
+ [
k−i
k
i=1
2

It follows that

 
ℓ
ℓ+1
+ h2 .
+ h2 = ℓµ(I) −
µ(I) = h1 + ℓ, and µ(I ) = h1 ℓ +
2
2


2

Moreover, for all k ≥ 3 we have

 


 

ℓ
ℓ+k−3
ℓ+k−2
ℓ+k−1
k
hk−1 + hk
h2 + · · · +
h1 +
+
µ(I ) =
1
k−2
k−1
k


 

k 
X
ℓ+k−i−1
ℓ+k−2
ℓ+k−1
hi
(µ(I) − ℓ) +
+
=
k
−
i
k−1
k
i=2

 X



k 
ℓ+k−i−1
ℓ+k−2
ℓ+k−2
hi .
+
µ(I) − (ℓ − 1)
=
k−i
k
k−1
i=2
k
P

Since hi ≥ 0 for all i ≥ 2, it follows that

i=2

ℓ+k−i−1
k−i


hi ≥ 0 for all i ≥ 2. This yields

the desired conclusion.


(b) The proof of (a) shows that µ(I k ) = ℓ+k−2
µ(I) − (k − 1) ℓ+k−2
for all k ≥ 1,
k−1
k
if hi = 0 for all i ≥ 2.


Conversely, suppose that µ(I k ) = ℓ+k−2
µ(I) − (k − 1) ℓ+k−2
for all k ≥ 1. Then
k−1
k


X ℓ + k − 2
ℓ+k−2 k
]t
µ(I) − (k − 1)
HilbF (I) (t) = 1 +
[
k
k−1
k≥1
=

1 + [µ(I) − ℓ]t
.
(1 − t)ℓ

This shows that hi = 0 for all i ≥ 2.
(c) (i) ⇒ (ii): If ∆(I) = 0, then h2 = 0. Since F (I) is Cohen–Macaulay, it follows
that hi = 0 for i ≥ 2. Therefore, the assertion follows from (b).
(ii) ⇒ (iii): is trivial.
(iii) ⇒ (i): Let k ≥ 2. By the proof of (a) we know that





k 
X
ℓ+k−i−1
ℓ+k−2
ℓ+k−2
k
hi .
]=
µ(I) − (ℓ − 1)
µ(I ) − [
k−i
k
k−1
i=2
Therefore, (iii) implies that

k
P

i=2

∆(I) = 0.

ℓ+k−i−1
k−i


hi = 0. In particular, h2 = 0 and hence


7

Corollary 1.9. Proposition 1.8 implies
monomial ideal I is
 that an equigenerated

l+k−2
l+k−2
k
Freiman if and only if µ(I ) = k−1 µ(I) −(k −1) k
for all or just some k ≥ 2.
2. Freiman ideals of maximal height
The following result gives a characterization of Freiman ideals of maximal height.
Theorem 2.1. Let I ⊂ K[x1 , . . . , xn ] be an equigenerated monomial ideal generated
in degree d with height I = n. Then I is Freiman if and only if I 2 = JI, where
J = (xd1 , . . . , xdn ). If the equivalent conditions hold, then F (I) is Cohen–Macaulay.
Proof. Assume that G(I) = {u1 , . . . , un+t} where ui = xdi for 1 ≤ i ≤ n, un+i =
x1ai1 x2ai2 · · · xanin with 0 ≤ aij < d for 1 ≤ j ≤ n and 1 ≤ i ≤ t. Thus µ(I) = n + t
and ℓ(I) = n.
Assume first that I 2 = JI. Then, since I is equimultiple, Theorem 1.6(b) implies
that I is Freiman.
Conversely, suppose that I is Freiman. Then


  

n+1
n
ℓ(I)
2
+ nt.
=
= n(n + t) −
µ(I ) = ℓ(I)µ(I) −
2
2
2
Let L = (un+1 , . . . , un+t). Since G(J 2 ) ∩ G(JL) = ∅, we see that


n+1
2
2
+ µ(JL).
µ(JI) = µ(J + JL) = µ(J ) + µ(JL) =
2
Note that µ(JL) = nt, and hence µ(I 2 ) = µ(JI). Indeed, suppose that xdi un+j =
xdk un+l . If i = k, then j = l. On the other hand, if i 6= k, it follows that xdi divides
un+l , a contradiction. Thus, xdi un+j = xdk un+l if and only if i = k and j = l.
Since the monomials of G(J 2 ), G(JL) and G(I 2 ) are all of degree 2d and J 2 +JL ⊆
2
I , it follows that I 2 = JI.
The remaining statement follows from Theorem 1.6(b).

Theorem 2.4 will give a full characterization of Freiman ideals of height n in
S = K[x1 , . . . , xn ]. Before proving this theorem we need two preliminary results.
Proposition 2.2. Let I ⊂ K[x1 , . . . , xm ] be an equigenerated monomial ideal generated in degree d. Let K[y1 , . . . , yn ] be another polynomial ring and J = (y1d , . . . , ynd ).
Then I is Freiman if and only if I + J is Freiman.
Proof. It is enough to show that the assertion holds for n = 1. Let J = (y1d),
then µ(J) = 1, µ(I + J) = µ(I) + 1, µ(JI) = µ(I), ℓ(I + J) = ℓ(I) + 1 and
(I + J)2 = I 2 + JI + J 2 . Since the monomials of G(I 2 ), G(JI) and G(J 2 ) are
pairwise distinct, it follows that
µ((I + J)2 ) = µ(I 2 ) + µ(JI) + µ(J 2 ) = µ(I 2 ) + µ(I) + 1.
If I is Freiman, then


ℓ(I)
.
µ(I ) = ℓ(I)µ(I) −
2
2

8

It follows that


ℓ(I)
+ µ(I) + 1
µ((I + J) ) = ℓ(I)µ(I) −
2


ℓ(I) + 1
= (ℓ(I) + 1)(µ(I) + 1) −
2


ℓ(I + J)
.
= ℓ(I + J)µ(I + J) −
2
2

This implies that I + J is Freiman.
Conversely, if I + J is Freiman, then


ℓ(I + J)
,
µ((I + J) ) = ℓ(I + J)µ(I + J) −
2
2

i.e.,


ℓ(I) + 1
.
µ(I ) + µ(I) + 1 = (ℓ(I) + 1)(µ(I) + 1) −
2
2

Thus


ℓ(I)
.
µ(I ) = ℓ(I)µ(I) −
2
This implies that I is Freiman.
2



Theorem 2.3. Let m be a positive integer. Then I = (x1 , . . . , xn )m is Freiman if
and only if m = 1, n ≤ 2, or n = 3 and m = 2.
Proof. We may assume that n ≥ 3 and m ≥ 2, because otherwise the statement
m
holds from Theorem 2.1. If n ≥ 4, then xm−1
xm−1
x3 x4 ∈ I 2 \ (xm
1
2
1 , . . . , xn )I. Hence
I is not Freiman by Theorem 2.1. So we only need show that if n = 3, then
I = (x1 , . . . , xn )m is Freiman if and only if m = 2. In this case,

 


 

2m + 2
3 + 2m − 1
m+2
3+m−1
2
.
=
and µ(I ) =
=
µ(I) =
2m
2m
m
m
It follows that



  
(m − 1)(m − 2)
m+2
2m + 2
3
+3=
−3
=
∆(I) = µ(I ) − 3µ(I) +
.
m
2m
2
2
2

Therefore, I = (x1 , x2 , x3 )m is Freiman if and only if m = 2.



One more definition and a simple observation is required before we can formulate
Theorem 2.4, let I be a monomial ideal and let r ≥ 1 be an integer. Let G(I) =
{u1 , . . . , um}. We let I [r] be the monomial ideal with G(I [r] ) = {ur1, . . . , urm }. The
monomial ideal I [r] is called the rth pseudo-Frobenius power of I. It is called a proper
pseudo-Frobenius power of I, if r ≥ 2.
Since µ(I k ) = µ((I [r])k ) for all k, it follows that I is Freiman if and only if I [r] is
Freiman. It is also obvious that F (I) ∼
= F (I [r]).
9

Theorem 2.4. Let I ⊂ K[x1 , . . . , xn ] with n ≥ 2 be a Freiman ideal of height n
generated in degree d ≥ 2, and suppose that I is not a proper pseudo-Frobenius power
of another monomial ideal. Then, up to a relabeling of the variables,
I = (x1 , . . . , xr )d + (xdr+1 , . . . , xdn )
with r ≤ min{3, n} if d = 2, and r ≤ min{2, n} if d ≥ 3.
Proof. It follows from Proposition 2.2 and Theorem 2.3 that I is Freimann, if I =
(x1 , . . . , xr )d + (xdr+1 , . . . , xdn ) with r ≤ min{3, n} if d = 2, and r ≤ min{2, n} if
d ≥ 3.
For the converse direction we will use the result of Theorem 2.1 which says that I
is Freiman if and only if I 2 = JI, where J = (xd1 , . . . , xdn ). This implies in particular,
that I k = J k−1 I for all k ≥ 2.
Assume first that d = 2. Suppose that xi xj , xk xl ∈ I with pairwise different
indices. Then xi xj xk xl ∈ JI ⊂ J, which is impossible. If G(I) contains no mixed
product, then I = J. If G(I) contains one mixed product, say x1 x2 , then I =
(x1 , x2 )2 + (x23 , . . . , x2n ). If G(I) contains two mixed products, they must have a
common factor. Say, x1 x2 , x1 x3 ∈ I. Then x21 x2 x3 ∈ JI. This implies that x2 x3 ∈ I,
and hence x1 x2 , x1 x3 , x2 x3 ∈ I. Thus in this case, I = (x1 , x2 , x3 )2 + (x24 , . . . , x2n ).
Next we consider the case that d ≥ 3. For a monomial u ∈ S we set supp(u) =
{i : xi |u}, and first show:
(1) if I is Freiman and there exists u ∈ G(I) \ G(J), then | supp(u)| = 2.
Indeed, let u ∈ G(I) \ G(J) with | supp(u)| = m ≥ 3. We may assume that
u = xa11 · · · xamm with 0 < ai < d for i = 1, . . . , m. Let ai (d − 1) ≡ ri mod d with
0 ≤ ri < d. It follows that ri = d − ai . Hence (ai − 1) is the highest power of xdi
which divides ud−1 and we get
d−am
ud−1 = (xd1 )a1 −1 · · · (xdm )am −1 x1d−a1 · · · xm
.

It follows that ud−1 ∈ J d−m \ J d−m+1 , because (a1 − 1) + · · · + (am − 1) = d − m.
Since ud−1 ∈ I d−1 = J d−2 I ⊂ J d−2 , it follows that m = 2.
Now suppose there exists a monomial u ∈ G(I) with | supp u| = 2. We may
assume that supp u = {1, 2}. Let S be the set of all monomials u in G(I) with
d−j j
2
i
supp u = {1, 2}. Let xd−i
1 x2 , x1 x2 ∈ S. If i + j ≤ d, then, since I = JI, it follows
d−(i+j) i+j
d−(i+j−d) i+j−d
that x1
x2 ∈ I, and if i+j > d, then x1
x2
∈ I. This shows that the
d−i i
elements i+ dZ ∈ Z/dZ with x1 x2 ∈ S form a subgroup U of Z/dZ. Any subgroup
of Z/dZ is cyclic. Let 0 < a < d be the smallest integer with a + dZ ∈ U. Then a
a
a r
divides d and xd−la
xla
1
2 ∈ I for l = 0, . . . , r, where r = d/a. Hence (x1 , x2 ) ⊂ I with
ar = d and a minimal with this property.
Suppose G(I) contains another monomial with support {i, j} =
6 {1, 2}, say v =
d−e e
a d−e e
xi xj with 0 < e < d. Suppose that {1, 2} ∩ {i, j} = ∅. Then xd−a
xj ∈
1 x2 xi
I 2 ⊂ J with all exponents less than d, a contradiction. Hence {i, j} ∩ {1, 2} =
6 ∅,
b
b s
and we may assume that {i, j} = {2, 3}. Then (x2 , x3 ) ⊂ I with bs = d and b
minimal with this property. Hence we have (xa1 , xa2 )r + (xb2 , xb3 )s ⊂ I. It follows that
2d−(a+b) b
d−b b
2
w1 = xa1 x2
x3 = (xa1 xd−a
2 )(x2 x3 ) ∈ I ⊂ J. If a + b > d, then all exponents
10

d−(a+b)

of w1 are less than d, a contradiction, and if a + b < d, then xa1 x2
xb3 ∈ I,
contradicting the fact that G(I) does not contain monomials whose support has
more than 2 elements. Thus we must have that a + b = d. This shows that
(xb2 , xb3 )s = (xa2 , xa3 )r . It follows that xa1 x2d−2a
xa3 ∈ I 2 . Since d = ra with r ≥ 2
2
it follows that d − 2a ≥ 0. Therefore, w2 = xa1 xd−2a
xa3 ∈ I. If d > 2a, then
2
| supp(w2 )| = 3, a contradiction. Hence, d = 2a, and (xa1 , xa2 )2 + (xa2 , xa3 )2 ⊂ I. If
there exists no other monomial in G(I), whose cardinality is 2. Then
2a
I = (xa1 , xa2 )2 + (xa2 , x23 )2 + (x2a
3 , . . . , xn ).

Since we assume that I is not a proper pseudo-Frobenius power, it follows that
d = 2, contradicting our assumption that d ≥ 3.
By the above arguments, if there exists other elements u ∈ G(I) with supp(u) =
{i, j}, then {i, j} ∩ {1, 2} =
6 ∅ and {i, j} ∩ {2, 3} =
6 ∅. Therefore, {i, j} = {1, 3}, and
hence
2a
I = (xa1 , xa2 )2 + (xa2 , xa3 )2 + (xa1 , xa3 )2 + (x2a
3 , . . . , xn ).
Since we assume that I is not a proper pseudo-Frobenius power, it follows that a = 1
and d = 2, contradicting our assumption that d ≥ 3.

Corollary 2.5. Let I ⊂ K[x1 , . . . , xn ] be a Freiman ideal of height n. Then F (I) is
Cohen–Macaulay.
Proof. By Theorem 2.1 we know that r(I) = 1. Therefore, since I is equimultiple,
the assertion follows from Corollary 1.7. Here we give an alternative proof using
Theorem 2.4: We first notice that if I is a graded ideal and J = (I, f ) where
f is a homogeneous polynomial and a non-zerodivisor modulo I. Then F (J) is
a polynomial ring over F (I) in one indeterminates. Therefore, F (I) is Cohen–
Macaulay if and only if F (J) is Cohen–Macaulay. Thus, in order to prove that F (I)
is Cohen–Macaulay for a Freiman ideal of height n in K[x1 , . . . , xn ], it is enough,
due to Theorem 2.4, to show that F (L) is Cohen–Macaulay for L = (xa1 , xa2 , xa3 )2
or L = (xa1 , xa2 )r . In both cases F (L) is just a Veronese ring, which is known to be
Cohen–Macaulay, see for example [2].

If in Corollary 2.5 we do not suppose that height(I) = n, is it still true that F (I)
Cohen–Macaulay?
Corollary 2.6. Let I, J ⊂ K[x1 , . . . , xn ] be an equigenerated monomial ideals of
height n. Then the following holds:
(a) If n = 3, then IJ is Freiman, if and only if I = J = (xd1 , xd2 , xd3 ) for some
integer d ≥ 1.
(b) If n ≥ 4, then IJ is not Freiman.
Proof. (a) If I = J = (xd1 , xd2 , xd3 ) for some integer d ≥ 1, then IJ is Freiman by
Theorem 2.4.
Conversely, if IJ is Freiman. Let I = (xd11 , xd21 , xd31 , . . .), J = (xd12 , xd22 , xd32 , . . .)
with d1 ≥ d2 ≥ 1 and d1 6= 1. Suppose I or J contains a monomial generator u with
supp(u) ≥ 2. Suppose u ∈ G(I) with supp(u) > 2. Let v ∈ G(J). Then uv ∈ G(IJ)
and supp(uv) > 2. This contradicts (1), since we assume that IJ is Freiman.
11

Now suppose that supp(u) = 2 for u ∈ G(I) or u ∈ G(J). We assume that
u ∈ G(I) and u = xai xdj 1 −a with i 6= j. Since n = 3, we may choose the integer k
with 1 ≤ k ≤ 3 and k 6= i, j. Then xai xdj 1 −a xdk2 ∈ G(IJ), contradicting (1).
It follows that I = (xd11 , xd21 , xd31 ) and J = (xd12 , xd22 , xd32 ). We show that d1 =
d2 . This then yields the desired conclusion. Indeed, suppose that d2 6= d1 . Then
1 2d2
x2d
∈ (IJ)2 \ M(IJ) where M = (xd11 +d2 , xd21 +d2 , xd31 +d2 ), contradicting our
1 x2
assumption that IJ is Freiman.
2a
(b) If IJ is Freiman, then, by Theorem 2.4, we have IJ = (xa1 , xa2 , xa3 )2 +(x2a
4 , . . . , xn )
a
a r
ar
ar
a
a
a 2
or IJ = (x1 , x2 ) + (x3 , . . . , xn ) with a ≥ 1, r > 1. If IJ = (x1 , x2 , x3 ) +
2a
a a a
2
a
a r
(x2a
4 , . . . , xn ), then x1 x2 x3 ∈ I J ⊂ IJ, contradiction (1). If IJ = (x1 , x2 ) +
a ar−a ar
ar
a ar−a
ar
ar
∈ IJ ⊂ I. Since x3 ∈ J, it follows that x1 x2 x3 ∈
(x3 , . . . , xn ), then x1 x2
IJ, contradiction (1).

The reader may wonder why in Corollary 2.6 we did not consider the case n = 2.
The reason is that there is no simple answer in this case. For example, for any
integer d ≥ 4 there are many different ideals I ⊂ K[x1 , x2 ] of degree d such that
I 2 = (x1 , x2 )2d (which is Freiman).
But we can give an answer, if we assume that I and J are Freiman. Since any
Freiman ideal in two variables is of the form (xa1 , xa2 )r (see Theorem 2.4), the following
results provides the required answer.
Proposition 2.7. Let I = (xa1 , xa2 )r and J = (xb1 , xb2 )s . Then IJ = (xc1 , xc2 )t for
some c and t if and only if b = ka for some positive integer k and r ≥ k − 1.
Proof. We may assume that a ≤ b. The generating set of IJ is
ar+bs−(ai+bj) ai+bj
x2

G(IJ) = {x1

| i = 0, . . . , r, j = 0, . . . , s}.

Thus IJ = (xc1 , xc2 )t , if and only if A = B, where
A = {ai + bj | i = 0, . . . , r, j = 0, . . . , s} and B = {cl | l = 0, . . . , t}.
Since the smallest nonzero element of A is a and the smallest nonzero element of B
is c, it follows that c = a.
Since b ∈ A and A = B, and all elements of B are multiples of a, we obtain that
b = ka for some integer k ≥ 1.
Since ar + kas = at, we have r + ks = t. Therefore, t > k, and hence (k −1)a ∈ B.
Suppose that r < k − 1, then this implies that (k − 1)a 6∈ A, because it cannot be
written in the form ia + kaj with i = 0, . . . , r and j = 0, . . . , s. Hence we must have
that r ≥ k − 1.
Conversely, if b = ka for some integer k ≥ 1 and r ≥ k − 1, then the generating
set of IJ is
a(r+ks)−a(i+kj) a(i+kj)
x2

G(IJ) = {x1

| i = 0, . . . , r, j = 0, . . . , s}.

Let C = {i + kj | i = 0, . . . , r, j = 0, . . . , s} and D = {l | l = 0, . . . , r + ks}. It is
clear that C ⊂ D. We have to show that C = D, and this is obviously the case if
r ≥ k − 1.

12

3. Special classes of Freiman ideals
3.1. Principal Borel ideals. Let S = K[x1 , . . . , xn ] be the polynomial ring in n
indeterminates over a field K. A monomial ideal I ⊂ S is called strongly stable,
if for all u ∈ G(I) and all j ∈ supp(u) it follows that xi (u/xj ) ∈ I for all i < j.
Given monomials u1 , . . . , um ∈ S, there exists a unique smallest strongly stable ideal,
denoted B(u1 , . . . , um), which contains the monomials u1 , . . . , um . The monomial
ideal I is called a principal Borel ideal, if I = B(u) for some monomial u ∈ S.
Let u ∈ S be a monomial. We set m(u) = max{j | j ∈ supp(u)}.
Lemma 3.1. Let I = B(u1 , . . . , um ), where u1 , . . . , um ∈ S are monomials of same
degree. Then ℓ(I) = max{m(v) | v ∈ G(I)}.
Proof. Let C be the integer matrix whose rows correspond to the exponent vectors of
the monomials in G(I). Then ℓ(I) = dim F (I) = rank(C), see [5, Lemma 10.3.19].
Let s = max{m(v) | v ∈ G(I)}. Then each jth column of C with j > s is zero.
Therefore, rank(C) ≤ s. Now let v ∈ G(I) with m(v) = s. Since I is strongly stable,
the monomials vi = xi (v/xs ) belong to G(I) for = 1, . . . , s, The exponent vectors of
these monomials are linearly independent. Therefore, rank(C) ≥ s.

Theorem 3.2. Let K be a field and S = K[x1 , . . . , xn ] be the polynomial ring in n
indeterminates over K.
(a) Let u = xi xj with i ≤ j be a monomial of degree 2 in S. Then B(u) is
Freiman if and only if j ≤ 3, or j > 3 and i ≤ 2.
(b) Let i, j and d be integers such that u = xd−1
xj with d ≥ 3 and 1 ≤ i ≤ j ≤ n.
i
Then B(u) is Freiman if i ≤ 2.
Proof. (a) Let I = B(u). By Remark 1.2(b) we may assume that u = xi xn , then
I = (x1 , . . . , xi )(x1 , . . . , xn ) = (x1 , . . . , xi )2 + (x1 , . . . , xi )(xi+1 , . . . , xn )
and
I 2 = (x1 , . . . , xi )2 (x1 , . . . , xn )2
= (x1 , . . . , xi )4 + (x1 , . . . , xi )3 (xi+1 , . . . , xn ) + (x1 , . . . , xi )2 (xi+1 , . . . , xn )2 .
Since G((x1 , . . . , xi )2 ) ∩ G((x1 , . . . , xi )(xi+1 , . . . , xn )) = ∅, we obtain that


i2
i+1
i
+ i(n − i) = ni − + .
µ(I) =
2
2
2
A similar argument shows that




 

i+1 n+1−i
i+2
i+3
2
(n − i) +
+
µ(I ) =
2
2
3
4
i(i + 1) 3
(3i − 6i2 − 3i + 6 − 8ni2 + 6ni + 6n2 i + 14n + 6n2 ).
=
4!
13

By using Lemma 3.1, we then get


ℓ(I)
2
]
∆(I) = µ(I ) − [ℓ(I)µ(I) −
2
i(i + 1) 3
(3i − 6i2 − 3i + 6 − 8ni2 + 6ni + 6n2 i + 14n + 6n2 )
=
4!
 
i2
i
n
− n(ni − + ) +
2
2
2
 
i
n
2
2
3
2
=
[6n (i − 3) + n(−8i + 18i + 2) + (3i − 6i − 3i + 6)] +
2
4!
1
[6n2 (i2 − 3i + 2) + n(−8i3 + 18i2 + 2i − 12) + (3i4 − 6i3 − 3i2 + 6i)]
=
4!
(i − 1)(i − 2) 2
[6n − 2n(4i + 3) + 3i(i + 1)].
=
4!
If i = 1 or i = 2, then ∆(I) = 0, i.e., I is Freiman.
Now, we assume that i ≥ 3. Put f (n, i) = 6n2 − 2n(4i + 3) + 3i(i + 1). Then
f (n, 3) = 6(n − 2)(n − 3).
It follows that I is Freiman, if and only if n = i = 3.
If i ≥ 4, then f (n, i) is a strictly monotonic increasing function for n ≥ i. Notice
that
f (i, i) = 6i2 − 2i(4i + 3) + 3i(i + 1) = i(i − 3) > 0.
Therefore, f (n, i) > 0 for all n ≥ i, this shows that ∆(I) > 0 for all 4 ≤ i ≤ n. This
completes the proof of (a).
d−1
(b) As in (a) we may assume that j = n. If u = xd−1
1 xn , then I = x1 (x1 , . . . , xn ).
Thus µ(I) = µ(J), µ(I 2 ) = µ(J 2 ) where J = (x1 , . . . , xn ). This implies that I is
Freiman, see Theorem 2.3.
If u = xd−1
2 xn , then

I = (x1 , x2 )d−1 (x1 , . . . , xn ) = (x1 , x2 )d + (x1 , x2 )d−1 (x3 , . . . , xn )
and
I 2 = (x1 , x2 )2d−2 (x1 , . . . , xn )2
= (x1 , x2 )2d + (x1 , x2 )2d−1 (x3 , . . . , xn ) + (x1 , x2 )2d−2 (x3 , . . . , xn )2 .
As in part (a) we see that
µ(I 2 ) = µ((x1 , x2 )2d ) + µ((x1 , x2 )2d−1 (x3 , . . . , xn ))
+ µ((x1 , x2 )2d−2 (x3 , . . . , xn )2 ).
Hence


n−1
µ(I ) = (2d + 1) + 2d(n − 2) + (2d − 1)
2
 
n
+ n.
= (2d − 1)
2
2

14

It follows that
 
n
]
∆(I) = µ(I ) − [nµ(I) −
2
 
 
n
n
+ n − n[(d + 1) + d(n − 2)] +
= (2d − 1)
2
2
= 0.
2


Note that for any monomial u ∈ S it follows that B(u) is Freiman if and only
if B(xk1 u) is Freiman. Hence, if we want to classify the principal Borel ideals B(u)
which are Freiman, we may assume that x1 does not divide u. We expect that for
any monomial u ∈ S of degree d > 2 such that x1 does not divide u, the principal
Borel ideal B(u) is Freiman if u = xd−1
2 xj with j ≥ 2. For the case that n = 3, this
is shown in the next result.
Theorem 3.3. Let u = xa11 xa22 xa33 ∈ K[x1 , x2 , x3 ] with ai ≥ 0 for i = 1, 2 and a3 ≥ 1.
Then B(u) is Freiman if and only if a3 = 1, or a3 = 2 and a2 = 0.
Proof. Let I = B(u), then µ(I) = µ(J), µ(I 2 ) = µ(J 2 ), where J = B(xa22 xa33 ). Note
that
a3
X
a2
a3
J = (x1 , x2 ) (x1 , x2 , x3 ) =
(x1 , x2 )a2 +i (x3 )i .
i=0

This implies that

 X

a3
a3 
X
a3 + 2
a2 + 1 + i
.
=
(a2 + 1 + i) = a2 (a3 + 1) +
µ(I) =
2
a2 + i
i=0
i=0
Similarly,
2

µ(I ) =


2a3 
X
2a2 + 1 + i
i=0

2a2 + i



2a3
X
2a3 + 2
.
=
(2a2 + 1 + i) = 2a2 (2a3 + 1) +
2
i=0

By Lemma 3.1, it follows that




a3 + 2
2a3 + 2
]+3
− 3[a2 (a3 + 1) +
∆(I) = 2a2 (2a3 + 1) +
2
2


a3 − 1
.
= a2 (a3 − 1) +
2
Therefore, I is Freiman if and only if a3 = 1, or a3 = 2 and a2 = 0.

3.2. Hibi ideals. Fix a field K, and let P be a finite poset. A poset C is called a
chain, if C is totally ordered, that is if any two elements of C are comparable. By
definition, the length of the chain C is equal to |C| − 1. The rank of P , denoted
rank(P ), is the maximal length of a chain in P . We always have rank(P ) ≤ |P | − 1,
and equality holds, if and only if P itself is a chain.
Attached to P we consider a monomial ideal HP in the polynomial ring S =
K[{xp , yp }p∈P ]. This ideal is called the Hibi ideal of the poset P . To define HP , let
15

I(P ) be the set of poset ideals of P . Recall that a subset I ⊂ P is called a poset
ideal of P , if for all p, q ∈ P with p ∈ P and q ≤ p, it follows that q ∈ P . Now the
Hibi ideal associated to P is the squarefree monomial ideal
Y
Y
HP = ({uI }I∈I(P ) ), where uI = (
xp )(
yp ).
p∈I(P )

p∈P \I(P )

Note that each uI is a squarefree monomial of degree |P |.
Theorem 3.4. Let P be a finite poset. Then HP is Freiman if and only if there
exists p ∈ P such that the subposet P \ {p} of P is a chain.
Proof. By Remarks 1.2(a) it suffices to show that h2 = 0. Since F (HP ) is Cohen–
Macaulay (see [9]), it follows that h2 = 0 if and only if hi = 0 for all i ≥ 2. Therefore,
h2 = 0 if and only if for the a-invariant of F (HP ) we have a(F (HP )) ≤ 1 − ℓ(HP ).
It is known that ℓ(HP ) = |P | + 1 and that a(F (HP )) = − rank P − 2 (see [3]). It
follows that HP is a Freiman ideal if and only if rank(P ) ≥ |P | − 2.
Now suppose that there exists p ∈ P such that P \ {p} is a chain. Then |P | − 2 =
rank(P \ {p}) ≤ rank(P ). Therefore, HP is Freiman.
Conversely, if HP is Freiman, then rank(P ) ≥ |P | − 2. Suppose P \ {p} is not
a chain for any p ∈ P . Then P is not a chain. Let C ⊂ P be a chain with
rank(C) = rank(P ). Since P is not a chain, there exists p ∈ P \ C. Then
|P | − 2 = |P \ {p}| − 1 ≥ rank(P \ {p}) = rank(P ) ≥ |P | − 2.
Therefore, |P | = rank(P ) + 2. This means that P = C ∪ {q} with q 6∈ C. Then
P \ {q} is a chain, a contradiction.

3.3. Ideals of Veronese type. Given positive
Pn integers n, d and a sequence a of
integers 1 ≤ a1 ≤ a2 ≤ · · · ≤ an ≤ d with i=1 ai > d, one defines the monomial
ideal Ia,d ⊂ S = K[x1 , . . . , xn ] with
G(Ia,d) = {xb11 xb22 · · · xbnn |

n
X

bi = d and bi ≤ ai for i = 1, . . . , n}.

i=1

By [11, Corollary 2.2], F (Ia,d) is a Cohen–Macaulay of dimension n.
If ai = d for i = 1, . . . , n, then Ia,d = (x1 , . . . , xn )d , and we have seen in Theorem 2.3 that (x1 , . . . , xn )d is Freiman if and only if n ≤ 2, d = 1 or n = 3 and
d = 2.
If ai = 1 for i = 1, . . . , n, then Ia,d is the so-called squarefree Veronese ideal which
we also denote In,d . In this case we have
Theorem 3.5. In,d is Freiman if and only if d = 1, d = n − 1.
Proof. Since F (In,d) ∼
= F (In,n−d) for all 1 ≤ d ≤ n − 1, it follows that In,d is Freiman
if and only if In,n−d is Freiman. If d = 1, then In,d = (x1 , . . . , xd ) is Freiman by
Theorem 2.3. Therefore, In,d is also Freiman for d = n − 1.
Conversely, assume that In,d is Freiman. It is known from [11, Corollary 2.2] that
F (In,d ) is Cohen–Macaulay. Therefore, Corollary 1.5 implies that In,d is level. By
16

[7, Theorem 2.1], this implies that d = 1, d = n − 1, or d ≥ 2 and n = 2d − 1, n = 2d
or n = 2d + 1. Since F (In,d ) ∼
= F (In,n−d ) for all 1 ≤ d ≤ n − 1, we may assume that
n ≥ 2d, and it is enough to show that if d ≥ 2 and n = 2d or n = 2d + 1, then In,d
is not Freiman.
To see this, first observe that

 
d  
X
n − 2i
n
n
2
.
and µ(In,d) =
µ(In,d ) =
d
−
i
2i
d
i=0
 n−2i
n
The first equation is obvious. For the second equation, we notice that 2i
d−i
2
counts the number of monomials (xi1 · · · xid )(xj1 · · · xjd ) ∈ In,d
with
|{i1 , . . . , id } ∩ {j1 , . . . , jd }| = i.
By [11, Corollary 2.2], ℓ(In,d ) = n for any 1 ≤ d ≤ n − 1, it follows that
 
n
2
.
∆(In,d ) = µ(In,d ) − nµ(In,d) +
2
If d ≥ 2 and n = 2d, then
∆(I2d,d ) =
=
=
=

 
2d
− 2dµ(I2d,d ) +
2

   
  X
d  
2d
2d
2d 2d − 2i
2d
+
− 2d
+
2
d
d−i
2i
d
i=1
  


  X
   
d 
2d
2d 2d − 2i
2d
2d 2d − 2
2d
+
+
− 2d
+
2
d−i
2i
d
d−1
2
d
i=2
  



d 
X
2d
2d 2d − 2i
2d − 1
2
+
(d − 4d + 2) +
2
d−i
2i
d
i=2
2
µ(I2d,d
)

> 0.
It follows that I2d,d is not Freiman.
If d ≥ 2 and n = 2d + 1, then
∆(I2d+1,d ) =
=
=
+



2d + 1
− (2d + 1)µ(I2d+1,d ) +
2

 



 X

d 
2d + 1
2d + 1
2d + 1 2d + 1 − 2i
2d + 1
+
− (2d + 1)
+
2
d
d−i
2i
d
i=1




 

2d + 1
2d + 1 2d − 1
2d + 1
− (2d + 1)
+
d
d−1
2
d





d
X
2d + 1
2d + 1 2d + 1 − 2i
+
2
d−i
2i
i=2
2
µ(I2d+1,d
)

17


 

 X

d 
2d + 1
2d + 1 2d + 1 − 2i
(2d + 1)(d − 3) 2d
+
+
=
2
d−i
2i
d−1
2
i=2
> 0.
This implies that I2d+1,d is not Freiman.



We conclude this paper with the classification of all Freiman ideals for another
family of ideals of Veronese type.
Theorem 3.6. Let d, n ≥ 2 be positive integers and ai = d − 1 for i = 1, . . . , n, then
Ia,d is Freiman if and only if n = 2, or n = 3 and d = 2.
Proof. In [10, Corollary 2.11], Katzman showed that the multiplicity of F (Ia,d) is
given by the fomula
X
X
e(F (Ia,d)) =
(−1)|S| (d −
ai )n−1 ,
S∈M

i∈S

P
where M is the set of subsets S of {1, . . . , n} with i∈S ai < d.
Since we assume that ai = d − 1 for i = 1, . . . , n, it follows from the above formula
by Katzman that
e(F (Ia,d)) = dn−1 − n.
Since F (Ia,d) is Cohen–Macaulay, Proposition 1.3 implies Ia,d is Freiman if and
only if F (Ia,d) has minimal multiplicity. This is the case if and only if
µ(Ia,d) = e(F (Ia,d )) + dim(F (Ia,d)) − 1.
Since dim(F (Ia,d )) = n (see [11, Corollary 2.2]), this is equivalent to the equation


n+d−1
− n = dn−1 − 1.
d

Let f (n, d) = dn−1 − n+d−1
+ n − 1. Then f (n, d) = 0, if and only if Ia,d is Freiman.
d
Note that


d+1
+ 2 − 1 = 0,
f (2, d) = d −
d
and


(d − 1)(d − 2)
d+2
+3−1 =
f (3, d) = d −
.
d
2
2

Now, we prove that if n ≥ 4, then f (n, d) > 0 for any d ≥ 2. We prove this by
induction on n.


(d − 1)(5d2 − d − 12)
d+3
3
+4−1 =
f (4, d) = d −
> 0,
d
6
18

and f (n, d) = dn−1 −
f (n + 1, d) =
>
=

=

n+d−1
d



+ n − 1 > 0, by induction hypothesis. Then


n+d
n
+n
d −
d




n+d
n+d−1
+n
− n + 1] −
d[
d
d

 

n+d−1
n+d−1
− n(d − 1) + d
−
(d − 1)
d−1
d
d−1
Q
(n + i) − d!
i=1
(n(d − 1) − d).
d!

P
Since ni=1 ai > d and ai = d − 1 for i = 1, . . . , n, it follows that n(d − 1) − d > 0.
Therefore, f (n, d) > 0 for any d ≥ 2, and hence f (n, d) = 0 if and only if n = 2, or
n = 3 and d = 2.

Acknowledgement. This paper is supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (11271275) and by the Foundation of the Priority Academic
Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions.
References
[1] S. S. Abhyankar, Local rings of high embedding dimension, Amer. J. Math., 89 (1967), 1073–
1077.
[2] W. Bruns and J. Herzog, Cohen-Macaulay rings, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
UK, 1998.
[3] S. Eliahou, J. Herzog and M. Mohammadi Saem, Monomial ideals with tiny squares. Preprint
2017.
[4] G. A. Freiman, Foundations of a structural theory of set addition, Translations of mathematical monographs 37, Amer. Math. Soc. Providence, Phode Island, 1973.
[5] J. Herzog and T. Hibi, Monomial ideals, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 260, Springer, London, 2010.
[6] J. Herzog and T. Hibi, Cohen-Macaulay polymatroidal ideals, Eur. J. Comb., 27 (2006), 513–
517.
[7] J. Herzog, T. Hibi and M. Vladoiu, Ideals of fiber type and polymatroids, Osaka J. Math., 42
(2005), 807–829.
[8] J. Herzog, M. Mohammadi Saem and N. Zamani, On the number of generators of powers of
an ideal, arXiv: 1707.07302v1.
[9] T. Hibi, Distributive lattices, affine semigroup rings and algebras with straightening laws,
in “Proceedings USA-Japan Workshop on Commutative Algebra and Combinatorics” (M.
Nagata and H. Matsumura, Eds.), pp. 93-109. Advanced Studies in Pure Math., Vol. 11,
North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1987.
[10] M. Katzman, The Hilbert series of Algebras of the veronese type, Comm. Algebra, 33 (2015),
1141–1146.
[11] E. De Negri and T. Hibi, Gorenstein algebras of Veronese type, J. Algebra, 193 (1997), 629–
639.
[12] D. G. Northcott and D. Rees, Reductions of ideals in local rings, Proc. Cambridge Philos.
Sot., 50 (1954), 145–158.
19

[13] J. D. Sally, On the associated graded rings of a local Cohen–Macaulay ring, J. Math. Kyoto
Univ., 17(1)(1977), 19–21.
[14] K. Shah, On the Cohen-Macaulayness of the fiber cone of an ideal, J. Algebra, 143 (1991),
156–172.
Jürgen Herzog, Fachbereich Mathematik, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Campus
Essen, 45117 Essen, Germany
E-mail address: juergen.herzog@uni-essen.de
Guangjun Zhu, School of Mathematical Sciences, Soochow University, Suzhou
215006, P. R. China
E-mail address: zhuguangjun@suda.edu.cn

20

