DIVERGENT SERIES AND SERRE’S INTERSECTION FORMULA FOR
GRADED RINGS

arXiv:1507.08928v1 [] 31 Jul 2015

DANIEL ERMAN

On a smooth variety, Serre’s intersection formula [Ser00, V.3] computes intersection multiplicities via an alternating sum of the lengths of Tor groups. When the variety is singular,
the corresponding sum can be a divergent series. But there are alternate geometric approaches for assigning (often fractional) intersection multiplicities in some singular settings.
Our motivating question comes from Fulton, who asks whether an analytic continuation
of the divergent series from Serre’s formula can be related to these fractional multiplicities [Ful98, Example 20.4.4].
In this note, we show how ideas from Avramov and Buchweitz [AB93] answer Fulton’s
question in the context of graded rings. Namely, [AB93] use a rational function to provide
an analytic continuation of the Hilbert series of the total Tor module associated to an intersection (see Theorem 0.1). Evaluating this rational function at t = 1 provides a notion
of intersection multiplicity that extends Serre’s definition (see Corollary 0.2). We then show
that the resulting multiplicity agrees with the multiplicities obtained for Q-Cartier divisors
or on normal surfaces via alternate definitions used in algebraic geometry (see Theorem 0.3).
For an isolated hypersurface singularity, similar techniques are used in [BVS12, Theorem 2.2] to study Hochster’s Theta pairing. Other related results are discussed in Remark 3.4.
We illustrate this with an example. Let R := C[x, y, z]/hf i be the coordinate ring of a
cubic curve. Let X = Spec(R) ⊆ A3 . If L, L′ ⊆ X are lines connecting distinct flex points to
the origin, then 3L and 3L′ are both Cartier divisors, and they intersect only at the origin
P ∈ X. Since (3L · 3L′ )P = deg X = 3, the local intersection multiplicity (L · L′ )P is 31 .
Now let I, J be the ideals of these two lines. Directly applying Serre’s formula yields:
∞
X

(−1)i length TorR
i (R/I) = 1 − 1 + 1 − 1 + . . .
i≥0

To assign a value to this divergent series, we might first consider the series
∞
X
 i
2
3
F (T ) :=
(−1)i length TorR
i (R/I, R/J) · T = 1 − T + T − T + . . .
i=0

as suggested in [Ful98, Example 20.4.4]. But the resulting analytic continuation at T = 1
1
(by 1+T
) would have yielded a multiplicity of F (1) = 21 instead of 13 .
On the other hand, since everything is graded, there is another natural power series in the
picture, namely the alternating sum of the Hilbert series of Tori (R/I, R/J). This is denoted
χ(R/I, R/J)(t) in [AB93]. Since Tori is concentrated entirely in degree ⌊ 3i2 ⌋ we get
χ(R/I, R/J)(t) :=

∞
X

(−1)i HSTori (R/I,R/J) (t) = 1 − t + t3 − t4 + t6 − t7 + · · · ∈ Z[[t]]

i=0

The author was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1302057.
1

1
Using the rational function 1+t+t
2 as our analytic continuation, we obtain the desired intersection multiplicity χ(R/I, R/J)(1) = 13 .

Generalizing this method provides an approach for defining intersection multiplicities in
the singular case, at least as long as everything is graded. We fix a field k, let R be a
graded k-algebra (i.e. R0 = k), and let M, N be finitely generated graded R-modules.
Following [AB93], we define
X
(*)
χ(M, N)(t) :=
(−1)i HSTori (M,N ) (t),
i≥0

where HSM (t) denotes the Hilbert series of a graded module M. Note that χ(M, N)(t) can
L

be thought of as the Hilbert series of the derived tensor product M ⊗ N.
If either M or N has finite projective dimension, and if M ⊗ N has finite length, then
χ(M, N)(t) is a Laurent polynomial in Z[t, t−1 ]. Thus χ(M, N)(1) ∈ Z and equals the alternating sum of the lengths of the Tori , and it was shown by Peskine-Szpiro [PS74, Théorème,
2(iv)] that this extension of Serre’s formula satisfies Vanishing and Positivity.1
In the case where M and N both have infinite projective dimension, Tori can be nonzero for
infinitely many values of i, and thus Serre’s formula would yield a divergent sum. However,
Avramov and Buchweitz observed that χ(M, N)(t) admits a simple analytic continuation as
a rational function.
Theorem 0.1 (Avramov-Buchweitz). Let k be a field, R a finitely graded k-algebra, and let
M, N finitely generated, graded R-modules. Then
1
· eM,N (t)
χ(M, N)(t) =
dim
M
+dim N −dim R
(1 − t)
where eM,N (t) ∈ Q(t) is a rational function. Moreover, eM,N (1) ∈ Q>0 .
The theorem essentially appears as [AB93, Proposition 8].2 Using this rational function as
an analytic continuation of χ(M, N)(t), we can always define χ(M, N)(1) ∈ Q ∪ {∞}.
Corollary 0.2. Let k be a field, R a finitely generated k-algebra, and let M, N finitely
generated, graded R-modules.
(1) χ(M, N)(1) = ∞ ⇐⇒ dim M + dim N > dim R.
(2) Positivity: χ(M, N)(1) ∈ Q>0 ⇐⇒ dim M + dim N = dim R.
(3) Nonvanishing: χ(M, N)(1) = 0 ⇐⇒ dim M + dim N < dim R.
The corollary, which has a precursor in [PS74, Théorème, 2(iv)] in the case where M or N
has finite projective dimension, is an immediate consequence of Theorem 0.1.
For a graded singularity Spec R, one thus has an intersection multiplicity χ(M, N)(1).
The contribution of this note is the observation that this definition recovers the multiplicities
obtained by two alternate approaches from algebraic geometry: from Q-Cartier divisors on
normal varieties, or from a resolution of singularities of a normal surface.
1The

corresponding result fails in the non-graded case. See [DHM85].
proposition assumes that R is generated in degree 1, but their proof works equally well for a
nonstandard grading.
2That

2

Theorem 0.3. Let R be a graded k-algebra that is a normal domain, and let X = Spec R.
Let C, D ⊆ X be an integral curve and an effective divisor that intersect properly at the origin
P ∈ X and that are defined by homogeneous ideals IC , ID ⊆ R. If either: D is Q-Cartier or
X is a surface, then we have
(D · C)P = χ(R/ID , R/IC )(1) and lies in Q>0 ,
where (D · C)P denotes the local intersection multiplicity at P .
See [Ful98, Example 7.1.16] or [Mum61, II(b)] for the definition of (D · C)P on a normal
surface. For a Cartier divisor E defined locally by a function f , and intersecting a curve
C properly at point P , we use the standard definition (E · C)P := length OC,P /hf i. Then
for a Q-Cartier divisor D where eD is Cartier, we take the natural local version of [Kol13,
Definition 1.4], setting (D · C)P : − = 1e (eD · C)P .
This note is structured as follows. In §1, we gather some of the background on Hilbert
series that we will use in our proof. §2 contains the proof of Theorem 0.3. In §3, we consider
examples of computing χ(M, N)(1) and we discuss the relation with some other results from
the literature.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to many people for helpful conversations and references: Dima Arinkin,
Lucho Avramov, Bhargav Bhatt, Ragnar-Olaf Buchweitz, Andrei Căldăraru, William Fulton,
Craig Huneke, and Kevin Tucker.
1. Background
In this section we summarize some results about Hilbert series. Let R be a finitely generated, graded k-algebra with generators in degrees d1 , . . . , ds . Let S = k[x1 , . . . , xs ] with
generators in the same degrees and with a surjection S → R of graded rings. We write
HSM (t) for the Hilbert series of a graded module M.
Lemma 1.1. For any finitely generated, graded R-module M, we have
1
· eM (t) where eM (t) ∈ Q(t) and eM (1) ∈ Q>0 .
HSM (t) =
(1 − t)dim M
Proof. See [BH93, Proposition 4.4.1], which is equivalent but in a slightly different form. 
Lemma 1.2. Let M, N be finitely generated R-modules. Then
HSM (t) HSN (t)
.
χ(M, N)(t) =
HSR (t)
In particular, χ(M, N)(t) is a rational function.
Proof. This is proven in [AB93, Lemma 7(ii)], where it is cited as mathematical folklore. 
(t) HSN (t)
Proof of Theorem 0.1. By Lemma 1.2, we have χ(M, N)(t) = HSMHS
. We then apply
R (t)
Lemma 1.1 to obtain

 

1
1
· eM (t) · (1−t)dim N · eN (t)
(1−t)dim M
(1 − t)dim R
eM (t)eN (t)
χ(M, N)(t) =
=
·
.
1
dim
M
+dim
N
(1 − t)
eR (t)
· eR (t)
(1−t)dim R

3

This is exactly the statement of [AB93, Proposition 8(i)], which is only stated in the case
where R is generated in degree 1, but their proof applies just as well in this context.
N (1)
Since eM (1), eN (1), eR (1) are all strictly positive, it follows that eM e(1)e
∈ Q>0 . Setting
R (1)
eM,N (t) :=

eM (t)eN (t)
eR (t)

and evaluating at t = 1, we obtain all three parts of the theorem.



2. Proof of Main Result
Proof of Theorem 0.3. Q-Cartier case: Since D is Q-Cartier, we may assume that eD
equals a Cartier divisor E defined by the homogeneous principal ideal IE = hf i. By definition, we then have
(D · C)P := 1e (E · C)P = 1e dimk OC,P /hf |C i.
Since C is not contained in D, it is also not contained in E and thus f |C 6= 0. It follows that TorR
i (RE , RC ) 6= 0 if and only if i = 0. We can then compute χ(RE , RC )(1) =
dimk Tor0 (RE , RC ) = dimk OC,P /hf |C i. We thus have
(D · C)P = 1e χ(RE , RC )(1).

(1)

We next relate the constants mD (1) and mE (1). We define X0 := Proj R, which is a normal
projective variety, and we let D0 = Proj(R/ID ) and E0 = Proj(R/IE ) be the corresponding
divisors on X0 . Note that eD0 is still equivalent to the Cartier divisor E0 . Moreover, if we
write H0 for the Weil divisor corresponding to OX0 (1), then D0 , E0 , and H0 are all positive
rational multiples of one another, and hence each is ample.
Let n be the dimension of X0 . For any r we have the short exact sequence
0 → OX0 (−D0 + rH0 ) → OX0 (rH0 ) → OD0 (rH0 |D0 ) → 0.
Thus, for r ≫ 0 we compute
dim(R/ID )r = h0 (D0 , OD0 (rH0 |D0 ))
= h0 (X0 , OX0 (rH0 )) − h0 (X0 , OX0 (−D0 + rH0 )),
Since X0 is normal, we may apply Asymptotic Riemann-Roch to compute the above two
terms up to O(r n−2), and after some simple cancellations we obtain:
H0n−1 · D0 n−2
r
+ O(r n−2).
(n − 1)!
In the above line, the intersection product is computed on X0 . Since Lemma 1.1 implies
mD (1) n−1
1
that HSR/ID (t) = (1−t)
+ O(r n−2). We
n mD (t), we can also write dim(R/ID )r = (n−1)! r
thus conclude that
mD (1) = H0n−1 · D0 .
A similar computation yields mE (1) = H0n−1 · E0 , which then implies that
=

(2)

mE (1) = e · mD (1).

Finally, we turn our attention to comparing the series χ(RE , RC )(t) and χ(RD , RC )(t):
mE (t)mC (t) e · mD (t)mC (t)
−
χ(RE , RC )(t) − e · χ(RD , RC )(t) =
mR (t)
mR (t)
mC (t)
.
= (mE (t) − e · mD (t))
mR (t)
4

But by (2), mE (1) = e · mD (1), and so plugging in t = 1 yields
χ(RE , RC )(1) − e · χ(RD , RC )(1) = 0.
Combining this with (1), we conclude that
(D · C)P = 1e χ(RE , RC )(1) = χ(RD , RC )(1).
Normal surface case: Next we take the case where X is a normal surface. We define
X0 = Proj(R), which is a smooth curve since R is a normal, graded ring of dimension 2.
Let H0 be the ample Cartier divisor corresponding to OX0 (1). We define C0 and D0 as the
divisors corresponding to C and D on X0 . Since C, D are integral, we have that C0 and D0
is each a single point on X0 . For all r ≫ 0, we have
dim(R/IC )r = H 0 (C0 , OC0 (r)) = deg C0 = 1.
Thus mC (1) = 1. Similarly mD (1) = deg D0 = 1. Moreover, for r ≫ 0, we can use
Riemann-Roch to compute
dim Rr = H 0 (X0 , OX0 (rH0 )) = (deg H0 ) · r + O(1)
and hence we also have mR (1) = deg H0 .
e → X with exceptional divisor E
Blowing up the cone point of X, we get a resolution π : X
2
where E = − deg H0 = −mR (1). We use Mumford’s definition (see [Ful98, Example 7.1.16]
or [Mum61, II(b)]) to define
∗
∗
(C · D)P := πnum
C · πnum
D.
∗
e that pushes forward to C and that intersects the
where πnum
C is the unique Q-divisor on X
∗
exceptional divisor in multiplicity 0, and where πnum
D is similarly defined. It follows that
1
∗
e
πnum C = C + mR (1) E and similarly for D. We then compute:



e·D
e+ 1
e·E+E·D
e + 1 2 E2
π∗ C · π∗ D = C
C
num

num

mR (1)

=0+

2
mR (1)

−

=

1
mR (1)

=

mC (1)mD (1)
.
mR (1)

mR (1)

1
mR (1)

This is precisely equal to χ(R/ID , R/IC )(1) by the proof of Theorem 0.1 from above.



3. Examples and remarks
Example 3.1 (Rational normal cone). Let X ⊆ Ad+1 = Spec(k[x0 , . . . , xd ]) be the cone over
the rational normal curve of degree d. Let L be the class of a line through the origin.
Note that L is a Q-Cartier divisor and L2 = d1 . Let R be thecoordinate ring ofX, so
x0 x1 . . . xd−1
that R is k[x0 , . . . , xd ] modulo the 2 × 2 minors of the matrix
. Let
x1 x2 . . . xd
I1 = hx0 , . . . , xd−1 i and I2 = hx1 , . . . , xd i be ideals of two different lines L1 and L2 on X.
5

V (J)
P
•

V (I)

Figure 1. In Example 3.2, X is the union of the two planes meeting at a
point P . Two lines V (I) and V (J) intersect at P with multiplicity 12 .
A direct computation (using e.g. Lemma 1.2) yields:
χ(R/I1 , R/I2 )(t) = 1 − (d − 1)t + (d − 1)2 t2 − (d − 1)3 t3 + (d − 1)4 t4 − . . .
1
=
.
1 + (d − 1)t
Evaluating at t = 1 we get χ(R/I1 , R/I2 )(1) =

1
1+(d−1)

= 1d .

Example 3.2. The intersection formulas from Corollary 0.2 make sense even when X fails to
be normal. For instance, let R = Q[x, y, z, w]/(xz, xw, yz, yw) be the coordinate ring of two
planes in A4 intersecting at the origin. Let I = (x, y, w) and J = (y, z, w) be the ideals of
two lines. Then
χ(R/I, R/J)(t) = (1 − 2t + 5t2 − 12t3 + 29t4 − 70t5 + 169t6 − . . . )


1
=
.
1 + 2t − t2
Hence χ(R/I, R/J)(1) = 21 .
Example 3.3. Let X = Spec(k[x, y, z, w]/(xw − yz)) be the cone over the quadric surface.
Let D = V (x, y) and E = V (z, w), which are both planes lying in X. Note that D ∩ E is
supported on the origin, so we have
3 = codim D ∩ E > codim D + codim E = 2.
Write ID , IE for the defining ideals of D and E. We have
χ(R/ID , R/IE )(t) = 1 + t2 + t4 + . . .
1
=
.
1 − t2
This has a pole at t = 1, hence χ(R/ID , R/IE )(1) = ∞.
Remark 3.4. We conclude with several remarks:
(1) A similar rational function expression for the total Ext-module Ext∗ (M, N) is given
in [ABS97] where it was used to recover and greatly expand on a ramification formula
for modular invariants from [BCB95].
(2) In [BVS12], the authors use the series χ(M, N)(t) in their analysis of Hochster’s
Theta pairing in the case of a graded hypersurface singularity. The authors go on to
analyze the nongraded case as well, relating the Theta pairing to a linking number
of associated cycles, thus proving a conjecture of Steenbrink.
6

(3) In [Gul86], Gulliksen considers another way to obtain a Serre-like intersection formula
in the case of non-regular rings (and not just in the graded case). In particular, he
proves that if you take a surjective map S → R, where S is a regular ring of minimal
embedding dimension, then the resulting sum
X
χS (M, N) :=
(−1)i dim TorSi (M, N)
i

will not depend on the choice of the ring S. In the graded case, this formula gives
different results than the formula χ(M, N)(1). For instance, in the example from the
introduction, we could choose S := C[x, y, z] and then
χS (R/I, R/J) = 3 − 3 = 0.
In fact, this equals zero by [Ser00, IV.3] because dim R/I+dim R/J = dim R < dim S,
and something similar will hold for every non-trivial example where Corollary 0.2
yields a positive, rational multiplicity.
(4) Serre’s definition contains the implicit idea of attaching a multiplicity to an object
L

like R/I ⊗R R/J. A similar idea appears in [GS09], where the authors use techniques
for summing divergent series to show how to recover numerical data, like degree, in
terms of homological data contained in what they call a semi-free resolution.
L

(5) For any flat family of graded modules Mt over a base T , the Hilbert series Mt ⊗N does
not depend on t ∈ T . In particular, χ(M, N)(1) is finite whenever dim M + dim N ≤
dim R, regardless of whether M ⊗ N has finite length. It is thus possible to define
degenerate intersection multiplicities like χ(R/I, R/I)(1).
(6) The proof of Theorem 0.3 relies on the fact that mR/IDe (1) = e · mR/ID (1) when R is
normal and ID is a cxdimension 1 ideal. This can fail when R is not normal. For
instance, let R = Spec(C[x, y, z]/hy 2z − x3 i) and let D be the line defined by the
ideal ID = hx, yi. Then mR/ID (1) = 1 whereas mR/ID2 (1) = 3.
References
[AB93] Luchezar L. Avramov and Ragnar-Olaf Buchweitz, Lower bounds for Betti numbers, Compositio
Math. 86 (1993), no. 2, 147–158. ↑1, 2, 3, 4
[ABS97] Luchezar L. Avramov, Ragnar-Olaf Buchweitz, and Judith D. Sally, Laurent coefficients and Ext
of finite graded modules, Math. Ann. 307 (1997), no. 3, 401–415. ↑6
[BCB95] D. J. Benson and W. W. Crawley-Boevey, A ramification formula for Poincaré series, and a
hyperplane formula for modular invariants, Bull. London Math. Soc. 27 (1995), no. 5, 435–440. ↑6
[BH93] Winfried Bruns and Jürgen Herzog, Cohen-Macaulay rings, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 39, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993. ↑3
[BVS12] Ragnar-Olaf Buchweitz and Duco Van Straten, An index theorem for modules on a hypersurface
singularity, Mosc. Math. J. 12 (2012), no. 2, 237–259, 459 (English, with English and Russian
summaries). ↑1, 6
[DHM85] Sankar P. Dutta, M. Hochster, and J. E. McLaughlin, Modules of finite projective dimension with
negative intersection multiplicities, Invent. Math. 79 (1985), no. 2, 253–291. ↑2
[Ful98] William Fulton, Intersection theory, 2nd ed., Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete.
3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics [Results in Mathematics and Related Areas.
3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics], vol. 2, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1998. ↑1,
3, 5
[GS09] Vassily Gorbounov and Vadim Schechtman, Homological algebra and divergent series, SIGMA
Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. 5 (2009), Paper 034, 31. ↑7
7

[Gul86] Tor H. Gulliksen, A note on intersection multiplicities, Algebra, algebraic topology and their
interactions (Stockholm, 1983), Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1183, Springer, Berlin, 1986, pp. 192–
194. ↑7
[Kol13] János Kollár, Singularities of the minimal model program, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics,
vol. 200, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. With a collaboration of Sándor Kovács.
↑3
[Mum61] David Mumford, The topology of normal singularities of an algebraic surface and a criterion for
simplicity, Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. 9 (1961), 5–22. ↑3, 5
[PS74] Christian Peskine and Lucien Szpiro, Syzygies et multiplicités, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. A 278
(1974), 1421–1424 (French). ↑2
[Ser00] Jean-Pierre Serre, Local algebra, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
2000. Translated from the French by CheeWhye Chin and revised by the author. ↑1, 7
Department of Mathematics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI
E-mail address: derman@math.wisc.edu
URL: http://math.wisc.edu/~derman/

8

