arXiv:1604.06820v2 [] 9 Nov 2016

On the structure of monomial complete
intersections in positive characteristic
Samuel Lundqvist and Lisa Nicklasson
January 22, 2018
Abstract
In this paper we study the Lefschetz properties of monomial complete
intersections in positive characteristic. We give a complete classification
of the strong Lefschetz property when the number of variables is at least
three, which proves a conjecture by Cook II. We also extend earlier results
on the weak Lefschetz property by dropping the assumption on the residue
field being infinite, and by giving new sufficient criteria.

1

Introduction

Let k be a field and let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ). The algebra A is
considered a graded algebra A = ⊕i≥0 Ai in the usual sense, i.e. Ai consists
of the homogeneous polynomials of degree i. Recall that an artinian graded
algebra has the strong Lefschetz property (SLP) if there is a linear form such
that multiplication by a d’th power of this form has maximal rank in every
degree, for all d. When the characteristic of k is zero, Stanley [16] observed that
the algebra A possesses the SLP. An immediate corollary to Stanley’s result was
a proof of the Fröberg conjecture [4] in n variables and n + 1 forms.
When the characteristic of k is positive, the algebra A does not necessarily
have the SLP. In fact, in many situations it also fails the weak Lefschetz property
(WLP). An artinian graded algebra has the WLP if there is a linear form such
that multiplication by this form has maximal rank in every degree. Thus a
natural problem in characteristic p is to characterize which monomial complete
intersections that have the SLP and the WLP. Partial results have appeared in
[2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 17]. In this paper, we continue this journey using purely algebraic
methods. For a survey of the Lefschetz properties, see [13].
Our main result is Theorem 3.8, where we fully classify the SLP when n ≥ 3.
Namely, let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) where n ≥ 3, di ≥ 2 for all i, and
where k is a field of characteristic p > 0. Let d1 = max(d1 , . . . , dn ) and write
d1 = N1 p + r1 with 0 < r1 ≤ p. We show that A has the SLP if and only if one
of the following two conditions hold.
Pn
1.
i=1 (di − 1) < p,
P
2. d1 > p, di ≤ p for i = 2, . . . , n and ni=2 (di − 1) ≤ min(r1 , p − r1 ).

This settles [3, Conjecture 7.6].

1

We also have results on the WLP. In Proposition 4.3, we remark that when
I ⊂ k[x1 , . . . , xn ] is a monomial ideal and k ′ is a field extension of k, then
A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/I has the WLP if and only if A ⊗k k ′ has the WLP. This
proposition makes it possible for us to finalize the classification of the WLP for
uniform degrees.
We then give a series of sufficient conditions for the presence of the WLP for
mixed degrees, which we believe cover a large part of the algebras with the WLP.
However, the complete characterization of the WLP is still an open question.
We end up by connecting the results on the WLP to the Fröberg conjecture [4].

2

Stanley’s result in positive characteristic

We begin by adopting the proof in [15] of Stanley’s result to positive characteristic. The result will later be used to give sufficient conditions for the presence
of the SLP and the WLP.
Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) = ⊕i≥0 Ai , where k is a field. The
Hilbert function is defined as H(i) = dimk (Ai ), the dimension of Ai as a vector
space over k. A homogeneous element f of degree d defines a linear map Ai →
Ai+d by a 7→ f · a. This map is said to have maximal rank if it is injective or
surjective. We say that multiplication by f has maximal rank in every degree if
the induced multiplication map has maximal rank for each i.
Let s = x1 + · · · + xn . It was proved by Stanley in [16] that multiplication
by sm , where m is a positive integer, has maximal rank in every degree, when
the coefficient field k has characteristic zero. We want to find out when this is
true for a field of P
positive characteristic.
n
Note that t = i=1 (di − 1) is the greatest index for which At 6= 0. In At we
have only one power product, namely x1d1−1 · · · xdnn−1 . This monomial induces
a bijection Ai ↔ At−i , for 0 ≤ i ≤ t, by f 7→ x1d1−1 · · · xdnn−1 /f for monomial
f . This shows that the Hilbert function is symmetric about t/2. It can also be
seen that it is weakly increasing up to t/2. For multiplication by sm to have
maximal rank in every degree, we want it to be injective up to a certain degree,
and surjective for higher degree, by the symmetry of the Hilbert function. We
will see later in this section that it is in fact enough to prove the injectiveness.
To prove the injectiveness we use the same arguments as the proof of Theorem
5 in [15]. The main difference is that we here also take into consideration that
the field k is of positive characteristic. The proof uses formal derivatives, so
for this purpose, we introduce the notation fx′ j for the formal derivative of a
polynomial f , with respect to the variable xj .
Lemma 2.1. Suppose f, h ∈ k[x1 , . . . , xn ] is such that hm f ∈ (xd11 , . . . , xdnn ).
Then
¯
¯
hm+1 fx′ j ∈ (xd11 , . . . , xdnn ),
where d¯j = dj − 1 and d¯i = di for all i 6= j.
Proof. For simplicity we may assume that xj = x1 , and denote the derivatives
by just f ′ . We know that hm f = g1 xd11 + · · · + gn xdnn for some g1 , . . . , gn . Now
take the derivative of hm f with respect to x1 . We get
mhm−1 h′ f + hm f ′ = g1′ xd11 + d1 g1 x1d1 −1 + g2′ xd22 + · · · + gn′ xdnn .
2

After multiplication by h we see that
mhm h′ f + hm+1 f ′ ∈ (x1d1 −1 , xd22 , . . . , xdnn ).
Since hm f ∈ (xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) we can conclude that hm+1 f ′ ∈ (x1d1 −1 , xd22 , . . . , xdnn ).
d1
dn
Theorem 2.2. Let A = k[x
P1n, . . . , xn ]/(x1 , . . . , xn ), where k is a field of characteristic p > 0, let t = i=1 (di − 1). Let m be a positive integer such that
m + t < 2p. Then the map Ai → Ai+m given by

f 7→ f · (x1 + · · · + xn )m
is injective for i ≤ (t − m)/2.
Proof. Let s = x1 + · · · + xn . Suppose that f is a nonzero homogeneous element
such that f ·sm = 0. We shall prove that deg f > (t−m)/2 by induction over the
degree of f . Assume first that deg f = 0. In this case sm = 0. We want to show
that (t − m)/2 < 0, which is to say that m > t. Suppose, for a contradiction,
that m ≤ t. Since m + t < 2p we get 2m < 2p, i. e. m < p. Let us now
αn
1
look at the expansion of sm . Since m ≤ t we can find a monomial xα
1 · · · xn
in the expansion, with αi < di for all i. The coefficient of this monomial is not
divisible by p, because m < p. But this contradicts sm = 0. Hence m > t.
Now assume deg f > 0, and that the claim is true for all homogeneous
polynomials of lower degree. If deg f ≥ p we are already done, since p >
(t − m)/2 by the assumption on m. Therefore we may assume that deg f <
p. Let F be a homogeneous element in k[x1 , . . . , xn ], such that the image of
F in A is f . Since deg F = deg f we can find a variable xj such that the
image of Fx′ j in A is nonzero. By Lemma 2.1 the image of sm+1 F ′ is zero
¯
¯
in k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ), where d¯j = dj − 1 and d¯i = di for all i 6= j.
Note that we have increased m by one, and decreased t by one. The condition
(m + 1) + (t − 1) = m + t < 2p is still true. By the inductive assumption
deg f = deg F = deg F ′ + 1 >

t−m
(t − 1) − (m + 1)
+1=
.
2
2

Remark 2.3. The element x1 + · · · + xn in Theorem 2.2 above can be replaced
by any linear form c1 x1 + · · · + cn xn , where all the ci ’s are nonzero.
Remark 2.4. There is a small mistake in the proof of [15, Theorem 5]. The
derivative is taken w.r.t. xn , where dn = max(d1 , . . . , dn ). But with this choice
of variable, the derivative of F might be 0, and the proof fails. For example
(x1 + x2 + x3 )3 (x1 − x2 ) = 0 in k[x1 , x2 , x3 ]/(x21 , x22 , x33 ), but the derivative of
x1 − x2 w. r. t. x3 is 0. The problem is solved by taking the derivative w.r.t.
another variable.
Note that for m > t the theorem is trivial, because there is nothing to prove.
In that case we don’t need any condition on the characteristic of k. It is also
possible to formulate a condition on the di ’s, instead of p, as we will see in the
following theorem.

3

Theorem
2.5. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ), where k is any field and
Pn
t = i=1 (di − 1). If max(d1 , . . . , dn ) > (t + m)/2 for an integer m, then the
map Ai → Ai+m given by
f 7→ f · (x1 + · · · + xn )m

is injective for all i ≤ (t − m)/2.
Proof. Let f be a homogeneous polynomial such that (x1 + · · · + xn )m f = 0 in
A. Then
(x1 + · · · + xn )m f = g1 xd11 + · · · + gn xdnn in k[x1 , . . . , xn ].
Without loss of generality, we can assume that d1 = max(d1 , . . . , dn ). We can
αn
1
see that g1 6= 0 in the following way. Let cxα
1 · · · xn be the term in f with
highest x1 -degree, and all αi < di . When multiplying by (x1 + · · · + xn )m we
1 +m α2
n
get the term cxα
x2 · · · xα
n , which can not be cancelled by any other term.
1
Hence α1 + m ≥ d1 , and we can conclude that
deg f ≥ d1 − m >

t−m
.
2

We have now seen conditions for the map Ai → Ai+m given by a 7→ a · sm
to be injective for i ≤ (t − m)/2. For completeness we shall now prove that it
follows that the map is surjective for larger i. We remark that this result is not
new, it can for instance be found in [15]. The proof is based on the fact that
Ai × At−i → At ∼
= k is a perfect pairing.
P
Proposition 2.6. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) and t = ni=1 (di − 1),
and let s ∈ A be a form of degree d. The map Ai → Ai+d given by f 7→ f · s
has maximal rank for each i if and only if it is injective for all i ≤ (t − d)/2.
Proof. Suppose that the above map has maximal rank for each i, and let i ≤
(t − d)/2. Recall that the Hilbert function is symmetric about t/2 and weakly
increasing up to t/2. If i + d ≤ t/2, then H(i) ≤ H(i + d), and the multiplication
map should be injective. Suppose i + d ≥ t/2. Since i ≤ (t − d)/2 we have that
t − i ≥ i + d. We use that the Hilbert function is weakly decreasing after t/2
and get H(i) = H(t − i) ≤ H(i + d). Hence the multiplication map is injective.
Let the multiplication maps be denoted by ·s : Ai → Ai+d . Suppose that
·s : Ai → Ai+d is injective, for some fixed i. We shall prove that ·s : At−i−d →
At−i is surjective, which then completes the proof. Let {y1 , . . . , yN } be the
monomial basis for Ai , as a vector space over k. Since ·s : Ai → Ai+d is
injective, sy1 , . . . , syN are linearly independent, and can be extended to a basis
{sy1 , . . . , syN , ξN +1 , . . . , ξM } of Ai+d . Also, if we let m = x1d1 −1 · · · xndn −1 , then
{m} is a basis for At , and { ym1 , . . . , ymN } a basis for At−i . Now, take some
f ∈ At−i . Notice that, for every j = 1, . . . , N we have f yj = cm, where c is the
coefficient of ymj in f . We want to prove that there is some g ∈ At−i−d such that
f = sg, and we will do that by proving f yj = sgyj for every j. To find this g we
first need to define a linear map ψ : Ai+d → At by ψ(syj ) = f yj , and ψ(ξℓ ) = 0.
Let {z1 , . . . , zM } be the monomial basis for Ai+d , and suppose ψ(zj ) = αj m.
∈ At−i−d . Then gzj = αj m, and hence the map ψ
Put g = α1 zm1 + · · · + αM zm
M
is given by multiplication by g. Since ψ(syj ) = f yj , we get that f yj = sgyj for
every j. This proves that the map ·s : At−i−d → At−i is surjective.
4

Theorem 2.2, Theorem 2.5, and Proposition 2.6 can now be combined into
the following theorem, which we will use to derive results on the SLP.
d1
dn
Theorem 2.7. Let A = k[x
Pn1 , . . . , xn ]/(x1 , . . . , xn ), where k is a field of characteristic p > 0, and t = i=1 (di − 1). If max(p, d1 , . . . , dn ) > (t + m)/2 for an
integer m, then the map Ai → Ai+m given by

f 7→ f · (x1 + · · · + xn )m
has maximal rank for each i.
Remark 2.8. We were noticed about the fact that we are not the first to use
the result in [15] in the positive characteristic case — Vraciu [17] has used
similar techniques in order to obtain results on the minimal degree of a nondn−1
, (x1 + · · · + xn−1 )dn ) under
trivial zero-divisor in k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn−1
certain assumptions on the di ’s.

3

The strong Lefschetz property

Definition 3.1. Let A be a graded artinian algebra. We say that A has the
strong Lefschetz property (SLP) if there is a linear form ℓ in A such that the
map Ai → Ai+m , given by a 7→ ℓm · a, has maximal rank for all i and all m ≥ 1.
In this case, ℓ is said to be a strong Lefschetz element.
d1
dn
Let
PnA = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(x1 , . . . , xn ) with k of characteristic p > 0 and
t = i=1 (di − 1). It can easily be seen that when n = 1, we have the SLP
regardless of the characteristic. When n = 2 the situation is more involved, as
is indicated in Theorem 4.9 in [3]. We aim to give a complete characterization
of when A has the SLP, for n ≥ 3, and leave the two variable case out of this
paper.
When p > t, obviously p > (t + m)/2 for all m ≤ t. Then we can use
Theorem 2.7 to conclude that x1 + · · · + xn is a strong Lefschetz element in A.
For m > t, any map Ai → Ai+m = 0 has maximal rank, and there is nothing to
prove. Hence we have the SLP when p > t. This result was also proved by Cook
II in [3, Theorem 3.6], and earlier for two variables by Lindsey in [10, Lemma
5.2].
In [3] it is also given a complete characterization of when A has the SLP, for
k infinite of characteristic 2, and for k infinite of positive characteristic and d1 =
· · · = dn . It is conjectured, [3, Conjecture 7.6], that A, where max(d1 , . . . , dn ) ≤
(t + 1)/2, has the SLP if and only if the characteristic of k is zero or greater
than t. As we have seen, the case of characteristic zero was proved by Stanley
in [16]. Notice that the condition max(d1 , . . . , dn ) ≤ (t + 1)/2 implies n ≥ 3.
The classification that we obtain in Theorem 3.8 will settle the conjecture as a
special case.

3.1

Necessary conditions for the SLP

The key for the necessary condition for A having the SLP is the following two
lemmas.

5

Lemma 3.2. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ), where k is aPfield of charn
acteristic p > 0. Write di = Ni p + ri , with 0 < ri ≤ p. Let N = i=1 Ni .
Let 0 ≤ j ≤ n and m = N − j + 1. Then
r

ℓmp · xr11 xr22 · · · xj j = 0

r

in A, for any linear form ℓ. The monomial xr11 · · · xj j is interpreted as 1 when
j = 0.
Proof. Let ℓ = c1 x1 + · · · + cn xn , with ci ∈ k for i = 1, . . . , n. Since k is a field
of characteristic p, it holds that
X
1p
np
(c1 x1 + · · · + cn xn )mp = (cp1 xp1 + · · · + cpn xpn )m =
ĉα xα
· · · xα
n ,
1
α

Pn
where the sum goes over all n-tuples α = (α1 , . . . , αn ) such that i=1 αi = m.
If m > N , then at least one αi > Ni , in every n-tuple α. Then αi p ≥ (Ni +1)p ≥
di , and hence (c1 x1 + · · · + cn xn )mp = 0.
Assume now that m ≤ N . We need only to include n-tuples α = (α1 , . . . , αn ),
where each αi ≤ Ni , because only these give non-zero terms in the sum. But
then we can find at least one αi = Ni among α1 , . . . , αj , in each n-tuple α,
P
ip
because otherwise ni=1 αi ≤ N − j = m − 1. Thus xα
· xri i = xdi i = 0 and
i
!
X
r
1p
np
(c1 x1 + · · · + cn xn )mp =
ĉα xα
· · · xα
· xr11 · · · xj j = 0
n
1
α

9
3
Example 3.3. Let A = k[x1 , x2 , x3 ]/(x12
1 , x2 , x3 ) with k of characteristic 5.
Then d1 = 2 · 5 + 2, d2 = 5 + 4, d3 = 3, and N = 3. Let j = 1 in Lemma 3.2.
Then m = 3, and ℓ3·5 x21 = 0, for any linear form ℓ. We have t = 11+8+2 = 21,
and deg(x22 ) ≤ (21 − 3 · 5)/2. It follows from Proposition 2.6 that multiplication
by ℓ15 can not have maximal rank, and A does not have the SLP.
We could also choose j = 2 in Lemma 3.2. Then we get that ℓ2·5 x21 x42 = 0.
This is not a proof that A fails to have the SLP, because deg(x21 x42 ) 6≤ (21−2·5)/2.
If we choose j = 3, Lemma 3.2 says that ℓ5 x21 x42 x33 = 0. But this is trivial,
since x21 x42 x33 = 0.

As we saw in the example above, Lemma 3.2 can be used to prove that an
algebra fails to have the SLP, but we need to make sure that the monomial
r
xr11 · · · xj j is nonzero, and of degree small enough. We collect the details of this
in the next lemma. Notice also that the indices 1, 2, . . . , j can be replaced by
any suitable choice of j indices.
Lemma 3.4. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ), where k is a field of characteristic p > 0. Write di = Ni p + ri , with P
0 < ri ≤ p. Let Λ be an index set
n
such that di > ri for all i ∈ Λ, and let m = i=1 Ni − |Λ| + 1. If
Pn
X
(di − 1) − mp
,
ri ≤ i=1
2
i∈Λ

or equivalently

X

ri ≤

i∈Λ

then A fails to have the SLP.

X

ri − n + (|Λ| − 1)p,

i∈Λ
/

6

Proof.
Let Λ be an index set as above. Since ri < di for all i ∈ Λ, and f =
Q
ri
mp
f = 0 for any nonzero linear form ℓ.
x
i∈Λ i 6= 0. By Lemma 3.2 we have ℓ
ThenPthe map Ad → Ad+mp , given by multiplication by ℓmp , is not injective for
d = i∈Λ ri . If
Pn
X
(di − 1) − mp
,
ri ≤ i=1
2
i∈Λ

if follows from Proposition 2.6 that we can not find a strong Lefschetz element.

From now on, we will assume that n ≥ 3 in A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ).
Thus we should also assume di ≥ 2 for all i. Otherwise A might be isomorphic
to a ring with only one or two variables.
Proposition 3.5. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ), where n ≥ 3, d1 ≥
d2 ≥ · · · ≥ dn ≥ 2, and where k is a field of characteristic p > 0. Write
di = Ni p + ri . If one of the conditions below holds, then A fails to have the
SLP.
1. p = 2,
2. p ≥ 3, d1 > p, d2 ≤ p and

Pn

i=2 (di

− 1) > r1 ,

Pn

3. p ≥ 3, d1 > p, d2 ≤ p and r1 + i=2 (di − 1) > p,
Pn
4. p ≥ 3, d1 ≤ p and i=1 (di − 1) ≥ p,

5. p ≥ 3 and d2 > p.

Proof.
1. If k is an infinite field, then A fails to have the SLP [3, Corollary
6.3]. Suppose that k is finite. Let k ′ be an infinite field such that k ⊂ k ′ .
If A has the SLP, so does k ′ [x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ). Thus A fails to
have the SLP.
2. Notice that di = ri for i = 2, . . . , n. Let Λ = {1}. Then
X

ri − n + (|Λ| − 1)p =

n
X

di − n =

i=2

i∈Λ
/

n
X

(di − 1) − 1 ≥ r1 ,

i=2

so by Lemma 3.4, A fails to have the SLP.
3. Let Λ = {}. Then
X

ri − n + (|Λ| − 1)p = r1 +

n
X

(di − 1) − 1 − p ≥ p + 1 − 1 − p = 0,

i=2

i∈Λ
/

so by Lemma 3.4, A fails to have the SLP.
4. Let Λ = {}. Then
X
i∈Λ
/

ri − n + (|Λ| − 1)p =

n
X

(ri − 1) − p =

i=1

so by Lemma 3.4, A fails to have the SLP.
7

n
X
i=1

(di − 1) − p ≥ 0,

5. Let us first assume that ri ≥ 2 for all i. We will not use the order between
d1 and d2 , so we may assume that r1 ≤ r2 . By taking Λ = {1} in Lemma
3.4 we get that A fails to have the SLP when the inequality
r1 ≤ r2 + · · · + rn − n

(1)

holds. The inequality holds in all cases, except when n = 3, r1 = r2 , and
r3 = 2. When taking Λ = {1, 2} in Lemma 3.4 we get the inequality
r1 + r2 ≤ r3 + · · · + rn − n + p.

(2)

In the case when n = 3, r1 = r2 , and r3 = 2, this becomes r1 + r2 ≤ p − 1.
Thus A fails to have the SLP when r1 + r2 ≤ p − 1.
P
Pn
Pn
Let Λ = {}. Then i∈Λ
i=1 ri ≥ p,
i=1 ri −p, so if
/ ri −n+(|Λ|−1)p =
then A fails to have the SLP by Lemma 3.4. In our case, this means that
A fails to have the SLP if r1 + r2 + r3 − 3 ≥ p ⇔ r1 + r2 ≥ p + 1. The
only case that is not covered here is when r1 + r2 = p. However, this can
not happen when r1 = r2 and p is an odd prime.
Next, assume that there is at least one ri = 1. Let Λ = {i |ri = 1}. Notice
that ri = 1 is only allowed when Ni > 0, otherwise we get di = 1. Thus
this
P is an appropriate choice of the set Λ, in Lemma 3.4. In this case
i∈Λ ri = |Λ|, and the inequality from Lemma 3.4 becomes
X
ri − n + (|Λ| − 1)p.
|Λ| ≤
i∈Λ
/

Since

P

i∈Λ
/ ri

≥ 2(n − |Λ|) the above inequality is true if
|Λ| ≤ 2(n − |Λ|) − n + (|Λ| − 1)p.

This can be rewritten as |Λ|(p − 3) + n − p ≥ 0. We know that |Λ| ≥ 1
and p − 3 ≥ 0, so |Λ|(p − 3) + n − p ≥ p − 3 + n − p = n − 3 ≥ 0 is true.
This shows that we do not have the SLP.

3.2

Sufficient conditions for the SLP

We now turn into the sufficient conditions for the SLP.
Proposition 3.6. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ),
Pnwhere k is a field of
characteristic p > 0. Suppose d1 , . . . , dn ≥ 2. Let t = i=1 (di − 1). Then A
has the SLP if t < p.
Proof. We want to show that there is a linear form s such that multiplication
by sm has maximal rank in every degree. If m > t there is nothing to prove,
so assume m ≤ t. Then t + m ≤ 2t < 2p, and by Theorem 2.7, the linear form
x1 + · · · + xn is a strong Lefschetz element.
There is one more case when A has the SLP, as we will see in the next
proposition.
Proposition 3.7. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ), where k is a field of
characteristic p > 0. Let d1 = max(d1 , . . . , dn ), and write d1 = N1 p + r1 where
0 < r1 ≤ p. Then A has the SLP if all the following conditions are satisfied
8

1. d1 > p and di ≤ p for i = 2, . . . , n,
2. r1 +

n
X

(di − 1) ≤ p,

i=2

n
X
(di − 1) ≤ r1 .
3.
i=2

The proof of this proposition uses the same technique as the proof of Theorem 2.2. Notice that, with the notation from Lemma 3.4, di = ri here, for
i = 2, . . . , n.
Pn
Proof. Let t = i=1 (di − 1), and s = x1 + · · · + xn . We want to prove that
s is a strong Lefschetz element, that is, for any positive integer m the map
Ai → Ai+m , given by multiplication by sm , has maximal rank. By Proposition
2.6 it is enough to show that it is injective for i ≤ (t − m)/2. Suppose that
there is a nonzero homogeneous polynomial f such that sm f = 0. We want
to show that deg f > (t − m)/2. The proof is by induction on the degree of
f (1, x2 , . . . , xn ).
Suppose first that deg(f (1, x2 , . . . , xn )) = 0. Then f is a monomial in the
variable x1 only, so f = cxa1 , and without loss of generality we may assume that
c = 1. We have sm xa1 = 0. Let m = N p + r, where 0 ≤ r < p. Then
p r a
sm xa1 = sN p sr xa1 = (xp1 + · · · + xpn )N sr xa1 = xN
1 s x1
p r a
r
by the first condition. Hence xN
1 s x1 = 0. Note that, when expanding s , we
get nonzero coefficients because
Pn r < p.
In the case when r ≤
i=2 (ri − 1), we can find a nonzero term in the
expansion of sr which does not contain the variable x1 . Then, for sm xa1 to be
zero, we must have N p+ a ≥ d1 = N1 p+ r1 . We rewrite this as a ≥ (N1 − N )p+
r1 . We want to show that a > (t − m)/2, which follows if (N1 − N )p + r1 >
(t − m)/2. Since

t−m=

n
X

(di − 1) − m

i=1

=N1 p + r1 − 1 +

n
X

(ri − 1) − (N p + r) = (N1 − N )p +

n
X

(ri − 1) − r

i=1

i=2

the inequality that we want to prove becomes
2((N1 − N )p + r1 ) > (N1 − N )p +

n
X

(ri − 1) − r

i=1

or equivalently
(N1 − N )p + r1 >

n
X

ri − n − r.

i=2

This is true when N1 ≥ N , by our third condition. If N1 < N then
m ≥ N p ≥ N1 p + p > N1 p +

n
X
i=1

9

(ri − 1) = t

by our second condition. Then Ai+m = 0 for any i, and there is nothing to
prove.
Pn
In the other case, when r > i=2 (ri − 1), the term of lowest x1 -degree in
p r a
xN
1 s x1 has x1 -degree
r−

n
X

(ri − 1) + N p + a ≥ d1 .

i=2

Then
a ≥ d1 +

n
X

(ri − 1) − N p − r = t + 1 − m >

i=2

t−m
.
2

This finishes the induction base.
For the induction step, assume that deg(f (1, x2 , . . . , xn )) > 0, and that the
statement holds for homogeneous polynomials of lower degree. Then f contains
at least one variable xj , where j 6= 1 and dj > 1. We know that the xj -degree of
f is less than dj ≤ p. Let F be a homogeneous polynomial in k[x1 , . . . , xn ] such
that the image of F in A is f . Then the image of Fx′ j is nonzero. By Lemma
¯
¯
2.1 the image of sm+1 Fx′ j is 0 in k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ), where d¯j = dj − 1
and d¯i = di for all i 6= j. The three conditions of this proposition hold also for
this ring. By the inductive assumption
deg f = deg F = deg Fx′ j + 1 >

(t − 1) − (m + 1)
t−m
+1=
.
2
2

We have now proved that s is a strong Lefschetz element.

3.3

The classification of the SLP when n ≥ 3

We now combine the results in the two previous sections to obtain a classification
of the SLP when n ≥ 3. The conjecture by Cook II on the SLP [3, Conjecture
7.6] follows as a special case of Theorem 3.8.
Theorem 3.8. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) where
Pnn ≥ 3, di ≥ 2 for
all i, and k is a field of characteristic p > 0. Let t = i=1 (di − 1) and let
d1 = max(d1 , . . . , dn ). Write d1 = N1 p + r1 with 0 < r1 ≤ p. Then A has the
SLP if and only if one of the following two conditions hold
1. t < p,
2. d1 > p, di ≤ p for i = 2, . . . , n and

Pn

i=2 (di

− 1) ≤ min(r1 , p − r1 ).

Proof. The above conditions is exactly the conditions from Proposition 3.6 and
Proposition 3.7. We want to prove that the SLP fails in all other cases. Notice
first that when p = 2, condition 2 in Proposition 3.7 fails. So does the condition
in Proposition 3.6, since t ≥ 3 when n ≥ 3 and all di ≥ 2. This agrees with
Proposition 3.5, which states that we can never have the SLP when p = 2. Let
us assume p ≥ 3 for the remainder of this proof.
Let d1 ≥ · · · ≥ dn be such that A does not fulfill the condition of Proposition
3.6, that is t ≥ p. If condition 1 of Proposition 3.7 is not satisfied, we have one
of the following two cases.

10

• t ≥ p and d1 ≤ p,
• t ≥ p and d2 > p.
In the latter, the inequality t ≥ p is superfluous. By Proposition 3.5 A fails
to have the SLP in these two cases. Suppose instead that the condition 1 of
Proposition 3.7 is satisfied, but that condition 2 or 3 fails. This gives the two
cases
Pn
• t ≥ p, d1 > p, d2 ≤ p and i=2 (di − 1) > r1 ,
P
• t ≥ p, d1 > p, d2 ≤ p and ni=2 (di − 1) > p − r1 .

Also here, the inequality t ≥ p is superfluous and A fails to have the SLP by
Proposition 3.5.

Let us now turn to [3, Conjecture 7.6], namely that if max(d1 , . . . , dn ) ≤
(t + 1)/2, then A has the SLP if and only if the characteristic of k is zero or
greater than t.
We already know that A has the SLP in characteristic zero and by Theorem
3.8, A has the SLP when p > t. Suppose that the characteristic is p ≤ t. We can
assume that d1 = max(d1 ,P
. . . , dn ). Then d1 ≤ (t + 1)/2 ⇔ 2d1 ≤ t + 1 ⇔ 2d1 ≤
P
n
n
for A to have
i=1 (di − 1) + 1 ⇔ d1 ≤
i=2 (di − 1). By Theorem 3.8, in orderP
n
theP
SLP in case p ≤ t, it must hold that d1 > p. But then p < i=2 (di − 1),
n
so i=2 (di − 1) > min(r1 , p − r1 ). Thus A fails to have the SLP and we have
settled the conjecture.

4

The weak Lefschetz property

Definition 4.1. Let A be a graded artinian algebra. We say that A has the
weak Lefschetz property (WLP) if there is a linear form ℓ such that the map
Ai → Ai+1 , given by a 7→ ℓ · a, has maximal rank for all i. In this case, ℓ is
said to be a weak Lefschetz element.
In the next section we will generalize earlier results on the WLP for algebras
of the form k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ). Due to this generalization, the WLP is
now completely classified in the case of uniform di ’s, that is, in the case when
d1 = · · · = dn , see Table 1.
In Section 4.2, we will turn to sufficient conditions on the WLP for mixed
degrees.

4.1

Generalizations of earlier results

The previous results in the literature on the WLP in positive characteristic are
mainly under the assumption that the residue field is infinite. When working
in positive characteristic it is natural to consider finite fields. Our first result
is Proposition 4.3, where we show that the WLP of A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/I is
independent of the cardinality of the field in the case when I is monomial.
Lemma 4.2. Let k be a field and let k ′ be an extension field of k. Let I ⊂
k[x1 , . . . , xn ] be an ideal, let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/I and let f be a form in A.
Then multiplication by f on A has maximal rank in every degree if and only if
multiplication by f on A′ = A ⊗k k ′ has maximal rank in every degree.
11

Proof. It is clear that if multiplication by f on A has maximal rank in every
degree, so does multiplication by f on A′ .
Suppose that multiplication by f on A′ has maximal rank. Since I ⊂
k[x1 , . . . , xn ], this means that we have a set of of matrices with coefficients
in k, all of which has full rank over k ′ . But then they also have full rank over
k, that is, multiplication by f on A has maximal rank in every degree.
We can now generalize [12, Proposition 2.2] by dropping the assumption on
k being infinite.
Proposition 4.3. Let k be a field and let k ′ be an extension field of k. Let
I ⊂ k[x1 , . . . , xn ] be a monomial ideal. Then the following are equivalent.
1. A := k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/I has the WLP.
2. A′ := A ⊗k k ′ has the WLP.
3. x1 + · · · + xn is a weak Lefschetz element of A.
4. x1 + · · · + xn is a weak Lefschetz element of A′ .
Proof. Let k ′′ be an infinite field such that k ⊂ k ′ ⊆ k ′′ . By [12, Proposition
2.2], x1 + · · · + xn is a weak Lefschetz element of A′′ if and only if A′′ has the
WLP. By Lemma 4.2, it follows that x1 + · · · + xn is a weak Lefschetz element
of A if and only if it is a weak Lefschetz element of A′′ . Hence A has the WLP
if and only if A′′ has the WLP. Now repeat the same argument with A replaced
by A′ .
The WLP in three variables for uniform degrees d1 = d2 = d3 = d and k
algebraically closed was classified by Brenner and Kaid [2]. When d1 = · · · =
dn = d with n ≥ 4 and k an infinite field, the WLP was classified by Kustin
and Vraciu [8]. Using Proposition 4.3, we can extend these results. Thus the
WLP in positive characteristic is now classified for uniform degrees, see Table
1 below.
n
2

Condition on the characteristic
Has the WLP independent of the characteristic [6], see also
Remark 4.6.
3, d even fails to have the WLP if and only there exists a k ∈ N and an
3d
3d
> pn > 6k+4
,
n ∈ N+ such that 6k+2
3, d odd fails to have the WLP if and only there exists a k ∈ N and an
3d−1
3d+1
n ∈ N+ such that 6k+2
> pn > 6k+4
, cf. [2] and Proposition 4.3.
Has the WLP if and only if d = kq + r for integers k, q, d with
4
q−1 q+1
e
1 ≤ k ≤ p−1
2 , r ∈ { 2 , 2 } and q = p for some non-negative
integer t, cf. [8] and Proposition 4.3.
≥5
Has the WLP if and only if p > (n(d − 1) + 1)/2, cf. [8] and
Proposition 4.3.
Table 1: The classification of the WLP in positive characteristic for uniform
degrees.

12

4.2

Sufficient conditions for the presence of the WLP for
mixed degrees

For mixed degrees, the situation is far from being understood. A combinatorial
characterization of the WLP for n = 3 and k infinite was given in [9]. Again, by
Proposition 4.3, we can extend this result to finite fields. In [3], Cook II giva a
sufficient condition for the presence of the WLP, under the assumptions n ≥ 3,
and k an infinite field. He conjectured, [3, Conjecture 7.4], that this result can
be slightly improved. This conjecture is true, and the field k does not need to
be infinite, as we will see in the theorem below.
Theorem 4.4. Let A = P
k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ), where k is a field of charn
acteristic p > 0 and t = i=1 (di − 1). If max(p, d1 , . . . , dn ) > (t + 1)/2, then A
has the WLP.
First proof. Combine [17, Theorem 1.6 (II)] and [11, Prop. 5.2], and Proposition
4.3.
Second proof. Put m = 1 in Theorem 2.7, and get that x1 + · · · + xn is a weak
Lefschetz element.
Remark 4.5. As the SLP implies the WLP, we have the WLP when the conditions in Theorem 3.8 are satisfied. But when
Pn condition 1 holds, obviously
p > (t + 1)/2. When condition 2 holds, d1 > i=2 (di − 1). Adding d1 to both
sides, we see that this is equivalent to d1 > (t + 1)/2.
Remark 4.6. For A = k[x1 , x2 ]/(xd11 , xd22 ), the condition max(d1 , d2 ) > (t +
1)/2 is satisfied for any choice of d1 and d2 . By Theorem 4.4, it follows that
this A has the WLP, independent of the characteristic of k. This is a folklore
result, but is mentioned since all the references to this result point to the paper
[6], which only treats characteristic zero.

We will now go deeper into the mixed degree case. While we only focus on
sufficient conditions for the presence of the WLP, we believe that the results,
and especially Theorem 4.8 below, is an important step towards understanding
the WLP for mixed degrees.
First a word on the notation. Let A be a graded algebra over a field k and
let f be a form of degree d. By definition, multiplication by f on A has maximal
rank in every degree if and only if dimk (A/(f ))i = max(dimk Ai − dimk Ai−d , 0)
for i ≥ d. This condition can be expressed in terms of truncated Hilbert series
[4] — multiplication by f on A has maximal rank in every degree if and only
ifP(A/f )(t) = [(1 − td )A(t)], where A(t) denotes the Hilbert series of A where
[ i≥0 ai ti ] means truncate at the first negative coefficient.
We are now ready to state the following useful and probably well known
lemma.
Lemma 4.7. The algebra A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) has the WLP if and
only if multiplication by (x1 + · · · + xn−1 )dn has maximal rank in every degree
dn−1
).
in B = k[x1 , . . . , xn−1 ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn−1
Proof. The algebra A has the WLP if and only if (A/(x1 + · · · + xn ))(t) =
[(1 − t)A(t)], while multiplication by (x1 + · · · + xn−1 )dn on B has maximal rank
in every degree if and only if (B/(x1 + · · · + xn−1 )dn )(t) = [(1 − tdn )B(t)].
13

Now A(t) = (1 − tdn )B[xn](t) = (1 − tdn )B(t)/(1 − t) and A/(x1 + · · · +
xn ) ∼
= B/ (x1 + · · · + xn−1 )dn , so A has the WLP if and only if (A/(x1 + · · · +
xn ))(t) = [(1 − t)A(t)] = [(1 − tdn )B(t)], that is, if and only if multiplication by
(x1 + · · · + xn−1 )dn on B has maximal rank in every degree.
Theorem 4.8. Let k be a field of characteristic p > 0, and let d1 , . . . , dn , a
be positive integers such that di ≤ pa for i = 1, . . . , n − 2. The algebra A =
k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) has the WLP if
d

d

n−1
n−2
B = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn−2
, xn−1

+bpa

a

, xndn +bp )

has the WLP, for any (and hence all) positive integers b. If, in addition, dn−1 +
Pn−2
dn ≥ i=1
(di − 1), A has the WLP if and only if B does.

Proof. We will prove the theorem for b = 1. When this is done we can replace
d1 , . . . , dn by d1 , . . . , dn−2 , dn−1 + pa , dn + pa , and apply the theorem once more.
This shows that the theorem also is true for b = 2, and in the same way for any
positive integer b.
Let
A′ =

k[x1 , . . . , xn−1 ]
dn−1
(xd11 , . . . , xn−1
)

and B ′ =

k[x1 , . . . , xn−1 ]
,
dn−2
dn−1 +pa
d1
(x1 , . . . , xn−2
, xn−1
)

Pn−1
Pn−1
and put tA′ = i=1 (di −1) and tB ′ = i=1 (di −1)+pa . Let s = x1 +· · ·+xn−1 .
By Lemma 4.7 and Proposition 2.6, A has the WLP if and only if multiplication
by sdn is injective for i ≤ (tA′ − dn )/2, in A′ . In the same way B has the WLP
a
if and only if multiplication by sdn +p is injective for i ≤ (tB ′ − (dn + pa ))/2, in
B′.
Suppose first that B has the WLP, and that there is a homogeneous nonzero
f ∈ A′ , such that sdn f = 0 in A′ . If we lift f to the polynomial ring, this can
be realized as
d

d

n−1
n−1
f∈
/ (xd11 , . . . , xn−1
), and sdn f ∈ (xd11 , . . . , xn−1
).

It follows that
a

d

d

n−2
n−1
/ (xd11 , ..., xn−2
, xn−1
xpn−1 f ∈

+pa

a

d

d

n−2
n−1
, xn−1
), and sdn xpn−1 f ∈ (xd11 , ..., xn−2

+pa

).

a

Since di ≤ pa for i = 1, . . . , n − 2 we have that sp = xpn−1 . The two statements
a
above then says that f 6= 0, but sdn +p f = 0, in B ′ . Since multiplication by
dn
s is injective up to degree [(tB ′ − (dn − pa ))/2]
a

deg f >

tA′ − dn
tB ′ − (dn + pa )
=
.
2
2

It follows that A has the WLP.
Suppose now that A has the WLP, and that there is a homogeneous nonzero
a
f ∈ B ′ , such that sdn +p f = 0 in B ′ . Again, this can be realized as
d

d

n−2
n−1
f∈
/ (xd11 , ..., xn−2
, xn−1

+pa

a

d

d

n−2
n−1
, xn−1
), and sdn xpn−1 f ∈ (xd11 , ..., xn−2

14

+pa

).

d

n−1
). If f 6= 0 in A′ , it follows from the fact
It follows that sdn f ∈ (xd11 , . . . , xn−1
that A has the WLP that

deg f >

tB ′ − (dn + pa )
tA′ − dn
=
.
2
2

This shows that B has the WLP. Now we must also consider the case when
dn−1
f = 0 in A′ . This means that f = gxn−1
in B ′ , where g is not divisible by
a
p
xn−1 . Especially, g is not zero. Then deg f ≥ dn−1 . It follows that B has the
WLP, if we can prove that dn−1 > (tB ′ − (dn + pa ))/2. The inequality can be
Pn−2
rewritten as dn−1 + dn ≥ i=1 (di − 1), which is true by assumption.
Pn−2
When i=1 (di −1) ≤ dn−1 +dn < p, the algebra k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn )
has the WLP, by Theorem 4.4. From Theorem 4.8 we now get a family of
a
dn−2
dn−1 +bpa
algebras k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn−2
, xndn +bp ) with the WLP, which
, xn−1
are not all covered by Theorem 4.4.
Example 4.9. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , x5 ]/(x31 , x32 , x43 , x54 , x55 ), with k of characteristic
11. Then t = 2 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 4 = 15, and p > (t + 1)/2, so A has the
WLP by Theorem 4.4. Since 5 + 5 > 2 + 2 + 3 we can apply Theorem 4.8.
Thus k[x1 , . . . , x5 ]/(x31 , x32 , x43 , x5+11b
, x5+11b
) has the WLP, for any nonnegative
4
5
integer b.
In [3, Lemma 3.3], it is shown that if k is an infinite field of characteristic
Pn−1
p > 0 and dn = i=1 (di − 1), then k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) has the WLP if

dn
and only if d1 −1,...,d
is not divisible by p. We will now extend this result.
n−1 −1

Proposition 4.10. Let k be a field
of characteristic p > 0, and suppose dn =

P
n−1
dn
(d
−
1).
If
is
not
divisible by p, then the algebras
i
i=1
d1 −1,...,dn−1 −1
d

n−1
A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) and B = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn−1
, xndn −1 )

dn
both have the WLP. If d1 −1,...,d
is divisible by p, the algebra A fails to
n−1 −1
have the WLP.

dn
A proof of the fact that A has the WLP if and only if d1 −1,...,d
is not
n−1 −1
divisible by p obviously follows from combining the proof of Lemma 3.3 in [3]
and Proposition 4.3. However, instead of only proving that B has the WLP, we
found it natural to give a full proof, with the use of Proposition 2.6.
Notice that (tA + 1)/2 = 2dn /2 = dn , so when p ≤ dn , we cannot use
Theorem 4.4 to draw any conclusion on A when it comes to the WLP. Similarly,
we have (tB + 1)/2 = (2dn − 1)/2, so when p ≤ dn − 1, we are outside the
sufficient conditions in Theorem 4.4.
n −1
Proof. Let R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdn−1
, xdnn +1 ). This algebra has the WLP,
by Theorem 4.4. We next consider the algebra A. The Hilbert function of A
is strictly increasing up to dn − 1, then HA (dn − 1) = HA (dn ), and after dn
it is strictly decreasing. Let s = x1 + · · · + xn . By Proposition 2.6 we only
need to consider the maps ·s : Ai → Ai+1 where i < dn , which should be
injective in the case of WLP. It follows directly from the fact that R has the
WLP, that ·s : Ai → Ai+1 is injective for i < dn − 1. Hence A has the WLP
if and only if ·s : Adn −1 → Adn is injective. Notice that Adn −1 = Rdn −1 and

15

Adn = [R/(xdnn )]dn . The map s : Rdn −1 → Rdn is injective, so it follows that
/ sRdn −1 . It is equivalent
·s : Adn −1 → Adn also is injective, if and only if xdnn ∈
to prove that xdnn 6= 0 in R/(s), which holds if and only if (x1 +. . .+xn−1 )dn 6= 0
dn−1
in k[x1 , . . . , xn−1 ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn−1
). Since


dn
dn−1 −1
dn
xd1 −1 · · · xn−1
in A,
(x1 + . . . + xn−1 ) =
d1 − 1, . . . , dn−1 − 1 1
it follows that A has the WLP if and only if the above multinomial coefficient
is nonzero in k.

dn
Next we assume that d1 −1,...,d
is not divisible by p, and consider B.
n−1 −1
The Hilbert function of B is strictly increasing up to dn − 1, and then strictly
decreasing. The multiplication maps ·s : Bi → Bi+1 inherits the injectivity
from A, when i < dn − 2. To prove that B has the WLP we must prove that the
map ·s : Bdn −2 → Bdn −1 also is injective. We know that ·s : Adn −2 → Adn −1 is
injective, and Bdn −2 = Adn −2 , and Bdn −1 = [A/(xndn −1 )]dn −1 . The injectiveness
follows in the same way as above, if we can prove that (x1 + . . . + xn−1 )dn −1 6= 0
dn−1
in k[x1 , . . . , xn−1 ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn−1
). Now,
(x1 + . . . + xn−1 )dn −1 =
n−1
X
i=1

 d1 −1
dn−1 −1
x1
· · · xn−1
dn − 1
,
xi
d1 − 1, ..., di−1 − 1, di − 2, di+1 − 1, ..., dn−1 − 1

is nonzero if one of the coefficients is nonzero. The sum of these multinomial
coefficients over Z is

n−1
X
dn − 1
=
d1 − 1, ..., di−1 − 1, di − 2, di+1 − 1, ..., dn−1 − 1
i=1



n−1
X
di − 1
dn
dn
=
,
=
d1 − 1, . . . , dn−1 − 1
dn
d1 − 1, . . . , dn−1 − 1
i=1
which is not divisible by p. Then the terms in the sum can not all be divisible
by p, and hence one of the terms in the expansion of (x1 + . . . + xn−1 )dn −1 is
nonzero. This shows that ·s : Bdn −2 → Bdn −1 is injective.
Proposition 4.10 shows that there is an infinite family of WLP-algebras which
are very close to satisfy the sufficient conditions in Theorem 4.4.
Example 4.11. Consider the algebras A = k[x1 , . . . , x5 ]/(x21 , x22 , x23 , x64 , x85 ) and
B = k[x1 , . . . , x5 ]/(x21 , x22 , x23 , x64 , x75 ), with k of characteristic 5. Then tA =
1 + 1 + 1 + 5 + 7 = 15, and tB = 14, so (tA + 1)/2 = 8 and (tB + 1)/2
 > 7.
8
Neither A nor B satisfy the condition in Theorem 4.4. But since 1,1,1,5
is not
divisible by 5, they both have the WLP.
Remark 4.12. Example 4.11 can be generalized to d1 = d2 = · · · = dn−2 = 2,
dn−1 = p + 1, dn = p + n − 2, as long as n − 2 < p.
We have now arrived at our last sufficient condition of the WLP.
Proposition 4.13. Let A = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) and suppose that t =
P
n
2
i=1 (di − 1) is odd. If A has the WLP, so does A[x]/(x ).
16

B
A
C

D

Figure 1: A very rough sketch of the sufficient conditions for the presence of
the WLP. The area A represents the space of parameters for which Theorem
4.4 does not apply, but where the WLP holds. The area B represents the space
of parameters for which we can use Theorem 4.8 to reduce to a case where the
WLP has already been detected. More precisely, the parameters in B are of the
form (d1 , . . . , di−1 , di + bpa , di+1 , . . . , dj−1 , dj + bpa , dj+1 , . . . , dn ), with a, b ≥ 1
and such that k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) has the WLP. The area C represents
the space where Proposition 4.10 can be used, that is, the parameters in C
dn
are of the form (d1 , . . . , dn ) and (d1 , . . . , dn−1 , dn − 1) such that d1 −1,...,d
n−1 −1
is not divisible by the characteristic. Finally, the area D represents the space
where Proposition 4.13 can be used, that is, the parameters in D are of the form
dn−1
(d1 , . . . , dn−1 , 2) such that k[x1 , . . . , xn−1 ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn−1
) has the WLP.
Proof. Let B = A[x]/(x2 ), and notice that Bd = Ad ⊕ xAd−1 . Let s be a
weak Lefschetz element in A. Obviously sxAi ⊆ xAi+1 , and the multiplication
map ·s : xAi → xAi+1 is injective or surjective exactly when ·s : Ai → Ai+1
is. Notice that ·s : A t−1 → A t+1 is bijective. The map ·s : Bi → Bi+1 is
2
2
injective when both ·s : Ai → Ai+1 and ·s : xAi−1 → xAi are so, which is when
i ≤ (t − 1)/2. In the same way we see that it is surjective when i ≥ (t + 1)/2,
and we conclude that ·s : Bi → Bi+1 has maximal rank for all i.
A reasonable question at this point is if Proposition 4.13 can prove the WLP
for some algebra, for which it is not already proven by any of the other results
in this section. The next example shows that this is the case.
Example 4.14. Let k be a field of characteristic 5. By Proposition 4.10, the
algebra k[x1 , . . . , x5 ]/(x31 , x32 , x63 , x64 , x14
5 ) has the WLP. It follows from Proposi2
tion 4.13 that the algebra k[x1 , . . . , x6 ]/(x31 , x32 , x63 , x64 , x14
5 , x6 ) also has the WLP.
This algebra is not covered by Theorem 4.4. One may try to use Proposition
15
4.10 (with the algebra B), but this fails because 1,2,2,5,5
is divisible by 5.

Figure 1 and Table 2 is an approach of describing our current understanding
of the WLP for mixed degrees. Running the experiments in Table 1 takes almost
three hours on a desktop computer. Thus we are far from being able to generate
enough data to get a detailed picture.

Remark 4.15. Vraciu [17] considers the harder problem of deciding the least
degree of a zero-divisor on k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ), and can draw some con17

d1
d1
d1
d1
d1
d1
d1
d1

=2
≥4
=2
≥3
=2
≥3
=2
≥3

p
|A|
|B| |C|
5 455
68 132
5 142
0
68
7 821 195 154
29
36
7 145
11 833 550 154
11 318 272 51
13 1374 1071 250
13 621 540 100

|D| |A \ (B ∪ C ∪ D)|
334
43
0
74
568
134
0
74
498
86
0
45
775
109
0
81

Table 2:
The distribution of the WLP for the set of algebras
Z/pZ[x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 , x5 ]/(xd11 , xd22 , xd33 , xd44 , xd55 ), d1 ≤ d2 ≤ d3 ≤ d4 ≤ d5 ≤
25, p ∈ {5, 7, 11, 13}. The sets A, B, C and D are as in Figure 1. The last
column is the number of WLP algebras which we are not able to detect using
Theorem 4.8, Proposition 4.10, and Proposition 4.13. Calculations were done
with Macaulay2 [5].
clusion on the WLP for mixed degrees when k is infinite. When n ≥ 5, the tuple
(d1 , . . . , d5 , p) = (4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 3) was detected [17, Proposition 5.6], and when
n = 4, a large family of WLP algebras is described [17, Proposition 5.6].

4.3

The Fröberg conjecture in positive characteristic

The results on the WLP has some applications to the Fröberg conjecture in
positive characteristic. Fröberg’s original conjecture is over C.
Conjecture 4.16 (Fröberg [4]). Let R = C[x1 , . . . , xn ]. Then there exist forms
fQ
1 , . . . , fm of degrees d1 , . . . , dm with m ≥ n + 1 such that (R/(f1 , . . . , fm ))(t) =
(1 − tdi )/(1 − t)n .

The conjecture has been shown to be true when n = 2, see [4], when n = 3,
see [1], and when m = n + 1, see [16]. Moreover, Hochster and Laksov [7] has
shown that the series is correct up to degree min(d1 , . . . , dm ) + 1.
The conjecture is believed to be true not only over C, but over any field
k. Fröberg’s proof of the two variable case is independent of the underlying
field, while Anick’s proof in three variables holds in characteristic p only if k
is infinite. The Hochster-Laksov result also works in characteristic p under the
assumption that k is infinite. In [14], it is shown that when m is large enough
and the degrees di are uniform, then the Hochster-Laksov result holds also when
k is finite.
However, Stanley’s result in the m = n + 1 case does require a field of
characteristic zero. Thus the m = n + 1 case is the most attractive unproven
part of the conjecture in positive characteristic. We will show below that partial
results can be derived by using a connection to the WLP.
Theorem 4.17. Fröberg’s conjecture over a field k of characteristic p in n
variables and n + 1 forms of degrees d1 , . . . , dn+1 holds true if the algebra
dn+1
k[x1 , . . . , xn+1 ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn+1
) has the WLP. Especially, the results on the
WLP in Theorem 4.4, Theorem 4.8, Proposition 4.10, and Proposition 4.13
are positive results on the Fröberg conjecture in n − 1 variables and n forms of
degrees d1 , . . . , dn .
18

Proof. Let R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn , (x1 + . . . + xn )dn+1 ). By Lemma

Q
dn+1
4.7, R(t) =
(1 − tdi )/(1 − t)n if and only if k[x1 , . . . , xn+1 ]/(xd11 , . . . , xn+1
)
dn+1
d1
has the WLP. Thus if k[x1 , . . . , xn+1 ]/(x1 , . . . , xn+1 ) has the WLP, the Fröberg
conjecture is satisfied for n+1 forms of degrees d1 , . . . , dn+1 in k[x1 , . . . , xn ].
Remark 4.18. Even if we replace (x1 + · · · + xn )dn+1 by a general form f of
degree dn+1 , we should not expect that the multiplication by f on the algebra
k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn ) has maximal rank in each degree in characteristic
p. For instance, let A = k[x1 , . . . , x6 ]/(x21 , . . . , x26 ), with k of characteristic 2.
Then multiplication by any form f of degree two is not injective, since H(2) =
H(4) = 15, but f 2 = 0 in A. It follows that in order to attack the Fröberg
conjecture in full for m = n + 1 by means of specific forms, another choice than
powers of the variables has to be used.
Problem 4.19. Inspired by Remark 4.18, we would like to address the problem
of the characterization of the algebras for which there exists a form f such that
k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(xd11 , . . . , xdnn , f ) has the Hilbert series conjectured by Fröberg, with
k of positive characteristic.
Acknowledgement. The authors would like to thank Christian Gottlieb for
valuable comments on drafts on this manuscript.

References
[1] D. J. Anick, Thin Algebras of Embedding Dimension Three, J. Algebra,
100 (1986), 235–259.
[2] H. Brenner, A. Kaid, A note on the weak Lefschetz property of monomial
complete intersections in positive characteristic, Collect. Math. 62 (2011),
no. 1, 85–93.
[3] D. Cook II, The Lefschetz properties of monomial complete intersections
in positive characteristic, J. Algebra 369 (2012), 42–58.
[4] R. Fröberg, An inequality for Hilbert series of graded algebras, Math.
Scand. 56 (1985), 117–144.
[5] D. Grayson, M. Stillman, Macaulay2, a software system for research in
algebraic geometry, Available at www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2.
[6] T. Harima, J. Migliore, U. Nagel and J. Watanabe, The Weak and Strong
Lefschetz Properties for Artinian K-Algebras, J. Algebra 262 (2003), 99–
126.
[7] M. Hochster, D. Laksov, The linear Syzygies of generic forms, Comm. Algebra, 15, no. 1-2 (1987), 227–239
[8] A. Kustin, A. Vraciu, The weak Lefschetz property for monomial complete
intersections in positive characteristic, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 366 (2014)
4571–4601.
[9] J. Li and F. Zanello, Monomial complete intersections, the weak Lefschetz
propery and place partitions, Discrete math. 310 (2010), no. 24, 3558–3570.
19

[10] M. Lindsey, A class of Hilbert Series and the strong Lefschetz property,
Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 139 (1) (2011) 79–92.
[11] J. Migliore and R. M. Miró-Roig, Ideals of general forms and the ubiquity
of the weak Lefschetz property, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 182 (2003), no. 1,
79–107.
[12] J. Migliore, R. Miró-Roig, U. Nagel, Monomial ideals, almost complete
intersections and the weak Lefschetz property, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.
363 (2011), 229–257.
[13] J. Migliore, U. Nagel, A tour of the weak and strong Lefschetz properties,
J. Commut. Algebra 5, no.3 (2013), 329–358.
[14] L. Nicklasson, On the Hilbert series of ideals generated by generic forms,
to appear in Comm. Algebra, DOI 10.1080/00927872.2016.1236931.
[15] L. Reid, L.G. Roberts, M. Roitman, On complete intersections and their
Hilbert functions, Canad. Math. Bull. Vol. 34 no. 4 (1991), 525–535.
[16] R. Stanley, Weyl groups, the hard Lefschetz theorem and the Sperner property, Siam J. Alg. Disc. Math. 1 (1980), 168–184.
[17] A. Vraciu, On the degrees of relations on xd11 , . . . , xdnn , (x1 + · · · + xn )dn+1
in positive characteristic, J. Algebra, 423 (2015), 916–949.

20

