THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF
MODULES

arXiv:1109.5628v2 [] 2 Apr 2014

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS
Abstract. The set of the first Hilbert coefficients of parameter ideals relative to a module–its
Chern coefficients–over a local Noetherian ring codes for considerable information about its
structure–noteworthy properties such as that of Cohen-Macaulayness, Buchsbaumness, and
of having finitely generated local cohomology. The authors have previously studied the ring
case. By developing a robust setting to treat these coefficients for unmixed rings and modules,
the case of modules is analyzed in a more transparent manner. Another series of integers arise
from partial Euler characteristics and are shown to carry similar properties of the module.
The technology of homological degree theory is also introduced in order to derive bounds for
these two sets of numbers.

Dedicated to Professors N. V. Trung and G. Valla for their groundbreaking contributions to the theory
of Hilbert functions.

1. Introduction
Let R be a Noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m and let I be an m-primary ideal. There
is a great deal of interest on the set of I-good filtrations of R. More concretely, on the set of
multiplicative, decreasing filtrations
A = {In | I0 = R, In+1 = IIn , n ≫ 0}
of R ideals which are integral over the I-adic filtration, conveniently coded in the corresponding
Rees algebra and its associated graded ring
X
X
R(A) =
In tn , grA (R) =
In /In+1 .
n≥0

n≥0

Our focus here is on a set of filtrations both broader and more narrowly defined. Let M be
a finitely generated R-module. The Hilbert polynomial of the associated graded module
M
grI (M ) =
I n M/I n+1 M,
n≥0

more precisely the values of the length λ(M/I n+1 M ) of M/I n+1 M for large n, can be assembled
as


r
X
n+r−i
(−1)i ei (I, M )
PM (n) =
,
r−i
i=0

AMS 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 13H10, 13H15, 13A30.
The first author is partially supported by a grant from the City University of New York PSC-CUNY
Research Award Program-44. The second author is partially supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Researches (C) in Japan (19540054). The fourth author is supported by a grant from MIMS (Meiji Institute for
Advanced Study of Mathematical Sciences). The fifth author is supported by JSPS Ronpaku (Dissertation of
PhD) Program. The last author is partially supported by the NSF.
1

2

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS

where r = dimR M > 0. In most of our discussion, either I or M is fixed, and by simplicity we
set ei (I, M ) = ei (M ) or ei (I, M ) = ei (I), accordingly. Occasionally the first Hilbert coefficient
e1 (I, M ) is referred to as the Chern coefficient of I relative to M ([32]).
The authors have examined ([8], [9], [13], [32]) how the values of e1 (Q, R) codes for structural
information about the ring R itself. More explicitly one defines the set
Λ(M ) = {e1 (Q, M ) | Q is a parameter ideal for M }
and examines what its structure expresses about M . In case M = R, this set was analyzed
for the following extremal properties:
(a) 0 ∈ Λ(R);
(b) Λ(R) contains a single element;
(c) Λ(R) is bounded.
The task of determining the elements of Λ(M ) has turned out to be rather daunting. More
amenable has been the approach to obtain specialized bounds using cohomological techniques.
An unresolved issue has been to describe the character of the set Λ(M ), in particular the role
of its extrema and the gap structure of the set itself.
The other invariant of the module M in our investigation is the following. Let Q =
(x1 , x2 , . . . , xr ) be a parameter ideal for M . We denote by Hi (Q; M ) (i ∈ Z) the i–th homology module of the Koszul complex K• (Q; M ) generated by the system x = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xr }
of parameters of M . We put
X
(−1)i−1 λR (Hi (Q; M ))
χ1 (Q; M ) =
i≥1

and call it the first Euler characteristic of M relative to Q; hence
χ1 (Q; M ) = λR (M/QM ) − e0 (Q, M )
by a classical result of Serre (see [1], [26]).
In analogy to Λ(M ), one defines the set
Ξ(M ) = {χ1 (Q; M ) | Q is a parameter ideal for M }
and examines again what its structure expresses about M . Most of the properties of this set
can be assembled from a diverse literature, particularly from [26, Appendice II]. The outcome
is a listing that mirrors, step-by-step, all the properties of the set Λ(M ) that we study.
We shall now describe more precisely our results. Section 2 starts with a review of some
elementary computation rules for e1 (Q, M ) under hyperplane sections, more properly modulo
superficial elements. Since part of our goal is to extend to modules our previous results on
rings, given the ubiquity of the unmixedness hypothesis, we develop a fresh setting to treat
the module case. It made for more transparent proofs. These are carried out in Sections 3–5.
Section 6 introduces homological degree techniques to obtain special bounds for the set
Λ(M ). The treatment here is more general and sharper than in [32]. Thus in Corollary 6.7 it
is proved that the set
ΛQ (M ) = {e1 (q, M ) : q is a parameter ideal for M with the same integral closure as that of Q},
is finite. In Section 7, we treat the sets Ξ(M ) and ΞQ (M ), focusing on the properties that
have analogs in Λ(M ) (see Table 1). In particular, we prove that Euler characteristics can

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

3

be uniformly bounded by homological degrees (Theorem 7.2). We also consider the numerical
function, which we call the Hilbert characteristic of M with respect to Q = (x):
h(x; M ) =

r
X
(−1)i ei (Q, M ).
i=0

If the system x = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xr } of parameters of M forms a d–sequence for M , h(x; M ) has
some properties of a homological degree. They are enough to bound the Betti numbers βi (M )
in terms of βi (R/m), a well-known property of cohomological degrees. Finally, in Section 8,
we recast in the context of Buchsbaum-Rim coefficients several questions treated in this paper.
A street view of our results for the convenience of the reader is given in the following table.
Let R be a Noetherian local ring with infinite residue class field and M a finitely generated
R-module with r = dimR M ≥ 2. Let P(M ) be the collection of systems x = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xr }
of parameters of M . In [8] and in this paper, the authors study multiplicity derived numerical
functions
f : P(M ) −→ N
on emphasis on the nature of its range
Xf (M ) = {f (x) | x ∈ P(M )}.
For the two functions e1 (x, M ) and χ1 (x; M ), more properly f1 (x) = −e1 (x, M ), and f2 (x) =
χ1 (x; M ), respectively, identical assertions about the character of Xf (M ) are expressed in the
following grid:
Xf (M ) ⊆ [0, ∞)

M

[19]

0 ∈ Xf (M )

M Cohen-Macaulay

Theorem 3.1

|Xf (M )| < ∞

[26, Appendice II]
∗

M generalized Cohen-Macaulay Theorem 4.5∗

[26, Appendice II]
[6]

|Xf (M )| = 1

M Buchsbaum

Theorem 5.4

[28]

|{f (x) | Q = (x)}| < ∞

Q

Corollary 6.7

Corollary 7.3

∗

TABLE 1. Properties of a finitely generated module M carried by the values of either function. An
adorned reference [XY]∗ requires that the module M be unmixed. The third and fourth columns refer
to the functions f1 (x) and f2 (x) respectively.

2. Preliminaries
Throughout this section let R be a Noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m and let
M be a finitely generated R–module. For basic terminology and properties of Noetherian
rings and Cohen–Macaulay rings and modules we make use of [3] and [20]. For convenience
of exposition we treat briefly the role of hyperplane sections in Hilbert functions and examine
unmixed modules. We add further clarifications when we define homological degrees.
Hyperplane sections and Hilbert polynomials. We need rules to compute these coefficients.
Typically they involve so called superficial elements or filter regular elements. We keep the
terminology of generic hyperplane section, even when dealing with Samuel’s multiplicity with
respect to an m–primary ideal I and its Hilbert coefficients ei (M ) = ei (I, M ). Hopefully
this usage will not lead to undue confusion. We say that h ∈ I is a parameter for M , if
dimR M/hM < dimR M .

4

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS

Let us begin with the following.
Lemma 2.1. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring, I an m–primary ideal of R, and M a
finitely generated R–module. Let h ∈ I and suppose that λ(0 :M h) < ∞. Then we have the
following.
(a) h is a parameter for M , if dimR M > 0.
(b) λ(0 :M h) ≤ λ(H0m (M/hM )).
(c) [24, (1.5)] If dimR M > 1 and M/hM is Cohen–Macaulay, then M is Cohen–Macaulay.
Proof. Suppose that dimR M > 0 and let p ∈ SuppR M with dim R/p = dimR M . Then
h
= (0),
1
since p 6= m. As dimRp Mp = 0, we get h 6∈ p. Hence h is a parameter for M , if dimR M > 0.
We look at the exact sequence
(0) :Mp

ϕ

h

h

0 → (0) :M h → H0m (M ) → H0m (M ) → H0m (M/hM ) → H1m (M ) → H1m (M ) → H1m (M/hM ) → · · ·
of local cohomology modules derived from the exact sequence
h

0 → (0) :M h → M → M → M/hM → 0
of R–modules. We then have
λ((0) :M h) = λ(Im ϕ) = λ(H0m (M/hM )) − λ((0) :H1m (M ) h) ≤ λ(H0m (M/hM )).
Therefore, if dimR M > 1 and M/hM is Cohen–Macaulay, then h is M –regular and hence M
is Cohen–Macaulay as well.
✷
We will make repeated use of [21, (22.6)] and [19, Section 3]. See also [23] and [24] for a
more general version of these results.
Proposition 2.2. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring, I an m–primary ideal of R, and M a
finitely generated R–module with r = dimR M > 0. Let h ∈ I and assume that h is superficial
for M with respect to I (in particular h ∈ I \ mI).
(a) The Hilbert coefficients of M and M/hM satisfy
ei (M ) = ei (M/hM ) for 0 ≤ i < r − 1 and
er−1 (M ) = er−1 (M/hM ) + (−1)r λ(0 :M h).
(b) Let 0 → A → B → C → 0 be an exact sequence of finitely generated R–modules. If
t = dimR A < s = dimR B, then ei (B) = ei (C) for 0 ≤ i < s − t. In particular, if t = 0
and s ≥ 2, then e1 (B) = e1 (C).
(c) If M is a module of dimension 1 and I is a parameter ideal for M , then
e1 (M ) = −λ(H0m (M )).
(d) If M is a module of dimension 2 and I is a parameter ideal for M , then
e1 (M ) = e1 (M/hM ) + λ(0 :M h) = −λ(H0m (M/hM )) + λ(0 :M h) = −λ((0) :H1m (M ) h).
Proof. See Proof of Lemma 2.1 for assertion (d).

✷

The following Corollary was previously observed in [19]. By induction on r = dimR M , it
also can be achieved independently, using Proposition 2.2.

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

5

Corollary 2.3. If M is a module of positive dimension and I is a parameter ideal for M , then
e1 (I, M ) ≤ 0.

Unmixed modules. We recall the notion of unmixed local rings and modules and develop a
setting to study their Hilbert coefficients.
Definition 2.4. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring of dimension d. Then we say that
b
b where R
b is the m–adic completion of R.
R is unmixed, if dim R/p
= d for every p ∈ AssR,
Similarly, let M be a finitely generated R–module of dimension r. Then we say that M is
b = r for every p ∈ Ass b M
c, where M
c denotes the m–adic completion of M .
unmixed, if dim R/p
R
Our formulation of unmixedness is the following.

Theorem 2.5. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module with
dimR M = dim R. Then the following conditions are equivalent :
(i) M is an unmixed R–module ;
b of rings together with an embedding
(ii) There exists a surjective homomorphism S → R
c ֒→ Sn as an S–module for some n > 0, where S is a Gorenstein local ring with
M
dim S = dim R.
Proof. We have only to prove (i) ⇒ (ii). We may assume R is complete. Thanks to Cohen’s
structure theorem of complete local rings, we can choose a surjective homomorphism S → R of
rings such that S is a Gorenstein local ring with dim S = dim R. Then, because AssS M ⊆ AssS
and the Sp –module Mp is reflexive for all p ∈ AssS M , the canonical map
M → HomS (HomS (M, S), S)
is injective, while we get an embedding
HomS (HomS (M, S), S) ֒→ Sn
for some n > 0, because HomS (M, S) is a finitely generated S–module. Hence the result.

✷

Corollary 2.6 ([11]). Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–
module with dimR M = dim R ≥ 2. If M is an unmixed R–module, then H1m (M ) is finitely
generated.
Proof. We may assume R is complete. We maintain the notation in Proof of Theorem 2.5 and
let n denote the maximal ideal of S. Then, applying the functors Hin (∗) to the exact sequence
0 → M → Sn → C → 0
of S–modules, we get H1m (M ) ∼
= H0n (C), because depthS ≥ 2. Hence H1m (M ) is finitely generated.
✷

6

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS

3. Vanishing of e1 (Q, M )
Let R be a Noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m and M a finitely generated R–module
with r = dimR M . Recall that a parameter ideal for M is an ideal Q = (x1 , x2 , . . . , xr ) ⊆ m in
R with λ(M/QM ) < ∞.
Theorem 3.1. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module with
dimR M ≥ 2. Suppose that M is unmixed and let Q be a parameter ideal for M . Then the
following conditions are equivalent :
(i) M is a Cohen–Macaulay R–module ;
(ii) e1 (Q, M ) = 0.
Proof. We set e1 (Q) = e1 (Q, M ). It is enough to show that if M is not Cohen–Macaulay, then
e1 (Q) < 0. We may assume that R is complete with an infinite residue field and dim R =
dim M .
Choose a Gorenstein local ring (S, n) and a surjection S → R, with dim S = dim R. If Q is a
parameter ideal of R, there exists a parameter ideal q of S such that qR = Q ([9, Lemma 3.1]).
Therefore the associated graded module of Q relative to M is isomorphic to the associated
graded module of q with respect to the S–module M :
grQ (M ) ≃ grq (M ),
which implies that
e1 (Q) = e1 (q, M ),
where e1 (q, M ) denotes the first Hilbert coefficient of q with respect to the S–module M .
Consider the exact sequence of S–modules obtained from Proposition 2.5:
0 → M → Sn → C → 0.
Let y be a superficial element for q with respect to M such that y is part of a minimal generating
set of q. We may assume that y is a nonzero divisor on M . By tensoring the exact sequence
of S–modules with S/(y), we get
ζ

0 → T = TorS1 (S/(y), C) → M/yM → Sn /ySn → C/yC → 0.
Let M ′ = M/yM and N = Im(ζ) and consider the short exact sequence:
0 → T → M ′ → N → 0.
Then either T = 0 or T has finite length λ(T ) < ∞. Note that N is an unmixed S/(y)-module.
We use induction on d = dim M to show that if M is not Cohen–Macaulay, then e1 (q, M ) < 0.
Let d = 2 and q = (y, z). Then T 6= 0 so that λ(T ) < ∞. Applying the Snake Lemma to
0 −−−−→ T ∩ z n M ′ −−−−→ z n M ′ −−−−→ z n N −−−−→ 0






y
y
y

0 −−−−→
T
we get, for sufficiently large n,

−−−−→

M′

−−−−→

N

λ(M ′ /z n M ′ ) = λ(T ) + λ(N/z n N ).

−−−−→ 0

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

7

Computing the Hilbert polynomials, we have
e1 (q, M ) = e1 (q/(y), M/yM ) = −λ(T ) < 0.
Now suppose that d ≥ 3. From the exact sequence
0 → T → M ′ = M/yM → N → 0,
we have
e1 (q, M ) = e1 (q/(y), M/yM ) = e1 (q/(y), N ).
By an induction argument, it is enough to show that N is not Cohen–Macaulay since dim(S/(y)) =
d − 1.
Suppose that N is Cohen–Macaulay. Let n be the maximal ideal of S/yS. From the exact
sequence
0 → T → M ′ = M/yM → N → 0,
we obtain the long exact sequence:
0 → H0n (T ) → H0n (M ′ ) → H0n (N ) → H1n (T ) → H1n (M ′ ) → H1n (N ).
By the assumption that N is Cohen–Macaulay of dimension d − 1 ≥ 2 and the fact that T is
a torsion module, we get
0 → T ≃ H0n (M ′ ) → 0 → 0 → H1n (M ′ ) → 0.
From the exact sequence
·y

0 → M → M → M ′ = M/yM → 0,
we obtain the following exact sequence:
·y

0 → T ≃ H0n (M ′ ) → H1n (M ) → H1n (M ) → H1n (M ′ ) = 0.
Since H1n (M ) is finitely generated by Corollary 2.6 and H1n (M ) = yH1n (M ), we have H1n (M ) = 0.
This means that T = 0. Therefore
0 → T = 0 → M/yM ≃ N → 0.
Since N is Cohen–Macaulay, M/yM is Cohen–Macaulay. Since y is regular on M , M is
Cohen–Macaulay, which is a contradiction.
✷

Example 3.2. ([32]). Let M = R = k[[x, y, z]]/(z(x, y, z)). Then Hm0 (R) = (z), and S =
R/Hm0 (R) ≃ k[[x, y]] is Cohen-Macaulay. If Q is a parameter ideal of R, then e1 (Q, R) =
e1 (QS, S) = 0. Hence e1 (Q, R) = 0, but R is not Cohen-Macaulay. Therefore the unmixdness
condition is necessary Theorem 3.1.
Let us list some consequences of Theorem 3.1. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M a
finitely generated R-module. We put
AsshR M = {p ∈ AssR M | dim R/p = dimR M }.

8

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS

T
Let (0M ) = p∈AssR M M (p) be a primary decomposition of 0M in M , where M (p) is a p–
primary submodule of M for each p ∈ AssR M . We put
\
UM (0) =
M (p)
p∈AsshR M
and call it the unmixed component of M . We then have the following.
Lemma 3.3. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module with
r = dimR M > 0. Let Q be a parameter ideal for M . Let U = UM (0) and suppose that
U 6= (0). We put N = M/U . Then the following assertions hold.
(a) dimR U < dimR M.
(b)
e1 (Q, M ) =


 e1 (Q, N )


e1 (Q, N ) − s0

if dimR U ≤ r − 2,
if dimR U = r − 1,

L
where s0 ≥ 1 denotes the multiplicity of the graded grQ (R)–module n≥0 U/(Qn+1 M ∩ U ).
(c) e1 (Q, M ) ≤ e1 (Q, N ) and the equality e1 (Q, M ) = e1 (Q, N ) holds if and only if
dimR U ≤ r − 2.
Proof. (a) This is clear, since Up = (0) for all p ∈ AsshR M .
(b) We write
λR (U/(Q

n+1

M ∩ U )) = s0






n+t
n+t−1
− s1
+ · · · + (−1)t st
t
t−1

for n ≫ 0 with integers {si }0≤i≤t , where t = dimR U . Then the claim follows from the exact
sequence 0 → U → M → N → 0 of R–modules, which gives
λR (M/Qn+1 M ) = λR (N/Qn+1 N ) + λR (U/(Qn+1 M ∩ U )), ∀ n ≥ 0.
(c) This follows from (b) and the fact that s0 ≥ 1.

✷

Theorem 3.4. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module with
r = dimR M ≥ 2. Suppose that R is a homomorphic image of a Cohen–Macaulay ring. Let
U = UM (0) and let Q be a parameter ideal for M . Then the following conditions are equivalent :
(i) e1 (Q, M ) = 0 ;
(ii) M/U is a Cohen–Macaulay R–module and dimR U ≤ r − 2.
Proof. It is enough to prove (i) ⇒ (ii). If dimR U = r − 1, then by (i) and Lemma 3.3–(b),
we obtain 0 ≥ e1 (Q, M/U ) = s0 ≥ 1, which is a contradiction. Hence dimR U ≤ r − 2. This
means that 0 = e1 (Q, M ) = e1 (Q, M/U ). By Theorem 3.1, M/U is Cohen–Macaulay.
✷
The implication (i) ⇒ (ii) in Theorem 3.4 is not true in general without the assumption
that R is a homomorphic image of a Cohen–Macaulay ring. See [8, Remark 2] for an example.
The following corollary gives a characterization of Cohen–Macaulayness.

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

9

Corollary 3.5. Let R be a Noetherian local ring, M a finitely generated R–module with
r = dimR M > 0, and Q a parameter ideal for M . Let 1 ≤ k ≤ r be an integer and assume
that ei (Q, M ) = 0 for all 1 ≤ i ≤ k. Then
dimR
b UM
c(0) ≤ r − (k + 1) and

r−j
Hm
(M ) = (0)

for all 1 ≤ j ≤ k. In particular, if k = r, then M is a Cohen–Macaulay R–module.
Proof. We may assume that R is complete. We put U = UM (0) and N = M/U . Then
e0 (Q, M ) = e0 (Q, N ), since dimR U < r. Therefore, by Theorem 3.4 N is a Cohen–Macaulay
R–module, so that we have exact sequences
0 → U/Qn+1 U → M/Qn+1 M → N/Qn+1 N → 0
of R–modules for all n ≥ 0. Hence, computing Hilbert polynomials, we get dimR U ≤ r−(k+1).
r−j
r−j
Let 1 ≤ j ≤ k. Then Hm
(U ) = (0), since dimR U < r − j, while Hm
(N ) = (0), as N is a
r−j
Cohen–Macaulay R–module with dimR N = r. Thus Hm (M ) = (0) as claimed.
✷
Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module. In [8] the authors
examined the rings with e1 (Q, R) vanishing. Here we briefly extend this theory to modules.
Let us begin with the definition.
Definition 3.6. A finitely generated R–module M is called a Vasconcelos module1, if either
dimR M = 0, or dimR M > 0 and e1 (Q, M ) = 0 for some parameter ideal Q for M .
Every Cohen–Macaulay module is by definition Vasconcelos. Here is a basic characterization.
We omit the proof, since it is similar to those in the ring case.
Theorem 3.7. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module
with r = dimR M ≥ 2. Let U = UM
c(0) be the unmixed component of (0) in the m–adic
c
completion M of M . Then the following conditions are equivalent :
(i) M is a Vasconcelos R–module ;
(ii) e1 (Q, M ) = 0 for every parameter ideal Q for M ;
b
c/U c(0) is a Cohen–Macaulay R–module
(iii) M
and dimR
b UM
c(0) ≤ r − 2 ;
M
b
c
c
b
(iv) There exists a proper R–submodule L of M such that M /L is a Cohen–Macaulay R–
module with dimR
b L ≤ r − 2.
c is a Vasconcelos R–module
b
When this is the case, M
and Hr−1 (M ) = (0).
m

Remark 3.8. Several properties of Vasconcelos rings such as [8, 3.5, 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12,
3.13, 3.15, 3.16, 3.17] can be all extended to Vasconcelos modules.
4. Generalized Cohen–Macaulayness of modules with Λ(M ) finite

Let R be a Noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m and M a finitely generated R–module
with r = dimR M > 0. In this section we study the problem of when the set
Λ(M ) = {e1 (Q, M ) | Q is a parameter ideal for M }
is finite. Part of the motivation comes from the fact that generalized Cohen–Macaulay modules have this property. Recall that M is said to be generalized Cohen–Macaulay, if all the
1The terminology is due to the other five authors.

10

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS

local cohomology modules {Him (M )}0≤i<r are finitely generated (see [6] where these modules
originated).
Assume that M is a generalized Cohen–Macaulay R–module with r = dimR M ≥ 2 and put

r−1 
X
r−2 i
s=
h (M ),
i−1
i=1

hi (M )

λR (Him (M ))

where
=
for each i ∈ Z. If Q is a parameter ideal for M , by the proof of
[12, Lemma 2.4] we have that e1 (Q, M ) ≥ −s. Since e1 (Q, M ) ≤ 0 by Corollary 2.3, it follows
that Λ(M ) is a finite set.
Let us establish here that if M is unmixed and Λ(M ) is finite, then M is indeed a generalized
Cohen–Macaulay R–module (Proposition 4.2).
Assume now that R is a homomorphic image of a Gorenstein local ring and that AssR M =
AsshR M . Then R contains a system x1 , x2 , . . . , xr of parameters of M which forms a strong
d-sequence for M , that is, the sequence xn1 1 , xn2 2 , . . . , xnr r is a d-sequence for M for all integers
n1 , n2 , . . . , nr ≥ 1 (see [5, Theorem 2.6] or [17, Theorem 4.2] for the existence of such systems
of parameters). For each integer q ≥ 1 let Λq (M ) be the set of values e1 (Q, M ), where Q runs
over the parameter ideals for M such that Q ⊆ mq and Q = (x1 , x2 , . . . , xr ) with x1 , x2 , . . . , xr
a d-sequence for M . We then have Λq (M ) 6= ∅, Λq+1 (M ) ⊆ Λq (M ) for all q ≥ 1, and α ≤ 0
for every α ∈ Λq (M ) (Corollary 2.3).
The following result plays a key role in our argument. The proof which we present here is
based on Theorem 2.5 and slightly different from that of the ring case.
Lemma 4.1. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and assume that R is a homomorphic
image of a Gorenstein ring. Let M be a finitely generated R–module with r = dimR M ≥ 2
and AssR M = AsshR M . Assume that Λq (M ) is a finite set for some integer q ≥ 1 and put
ℓ = − min Λq (M ). Then mℓ Him (M ) = (0) for all i 6= r and hence all the local cohomology
modules {Him (M )}0≤i<r are finitely generated.
Proof. Passing to the ring R/[(0) :R M ], we may assume that R is a Gorenstein ring with
dim R = dimR M = r. Enlarging the residue class field R/m of R if necessary, we may assume
the field R/m is infinite. By Corollary 2.6 H1m (M ) is finitely generated, since M is unmixed.
Suppose that r = 2. We put ℓ′ = λ(H1m (M )). Let Q = (x, y) ⊆ mq be a system of parameters
for M such that QH1m (M ) = (0) and x, y is a d-sequence for M . Then x is superficial for M
with respect to Q. Hence by Proposition 2.2 (d) we get e1 (Q, M ) = −λ(H1m (M )) = −ℓ′ . Thus
′
ℓ ≥ ℓ′ , as −ℓ′ = e1 (Q, M ) ∈ Λq (M ). Hence mℓ H1m (M ) = (0), because mℓ H1m (M ) = (0).
Suppose that r ≥ 3 and that our assertion holds true for r − 1. We have an exact sequence
(♯)

0 → M → Rn → C → 0

of R–modules by Theorem 2.5. Choose an R-regular element x ∈ R so that x is superficial
both for M and C with respect to m. Let us fix an integer m ≥ 1. We put y = xm , N = M/yM ,
and look at the exact sequence
ϕ

0 → (0) :C y → N → (R/yR)n → C/yC → 0
of R–modules obtained by sequence (♯). Let L = Im ϕ. Then dimR L = r − 1, AssR L =
AsshR L, and H0m (N ) ∼
= (0) :C y, because L is an R–submodule of (R/yR)n and λ((0) :C y) <
∞. Hence L ∼
= N/H0m (N ).

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

11
′

′

Let q ′ ≥ q be an integer such that mq N ∩ H0m (N ) = (0). Let y2 , y3 , . . . , yr ∈ mq be a
system of parameters for L and assume that y2 , y3 , . . . , yr is a d-sequence for L. Then, since
(y2 , y3 , . . . , yr )N ∩ H0m (N ) = (0), we get y2 , y3 , . . . , yr forms a d-sequence for N also. Therefore,
since y is M -regular, the sequence y1 = y, y2 , . . . , yr forms a d-sequence for M , whence y1 is
superficial for M with respect to Q = (y1 , y2 , . . . , yr ). Consequently
e1 ((y2 , y3 , . . . , yr ), L) = e1 ((y2 , y3 , . . . , yr ), N ) = e1 (Q, M ) ∈ Λq (M ),
so that Λq′ (L) ⊆ Λq (M ). Hence, because the set Λq′ (L) is finite, the hypothesis of induction
′′
on r yields that mℓ Him (L) = (0) for all i 6= r − 1, where ℓ′′ = − min Λq′ (L). Thus, because
ℓ′′ ≤ ℓ, mℓ Him (L) = (0) for all i 6= r − 1. Hence mℓ Him (N ) = (0) for all 1 ≤ i < r − 1, because
Him (N ) ∼
= Him (L) for i ≥ 1.
Look now at the exact sequence
xm

xm

i+1
(♯♯) · · · → H1m (M ) → H1m (M ) → H1m (N ) → · · · → Him (N ) → Hi+1
m (M ) → Hm (M ) → · · ·

of local cohomology modules. We then have
i
h
m
= (0)
x
mℓ (0) :Hi+1
m (M )
for all integers 1 ≤ i ≤ r − 2 and m ≥ 1, since mℓ Him (N ) = (0) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ r − 2. Thus
mℓ Hi+1
m (M ) = (0), because
i
[ h
m
.
Hi+1
(0) :Hi+1
m
m (M ) =
m (M )
m≥1

On the other hand, from sequence (♯♯) we get the embedding H1m (M ) ⊆ H1m (N ), choosing the
integer m ≥ 1 so that xm H1m (M ) = (0). Hence mℓ H1m (M ) = (0), which completes the proof of
Lemma 4.1.
✷
c), passing to the completion M
c of M and applying Lemma 4.1, we
Since Λ(M ) = Λ(M
readily get the following.
Proposition 4.2. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated unmixed
R–module with r = dimR M ≥ 2. Assume that Λ(M ) is a finite set and put ℓ = − min Λ(M ).
Then mℓ Him (M ) = (0) for every i 6= r, so that M is a generalized Cohen–Macaulay R–module.
We conclude this section with a characterization of R–modules for which Λ(M ) is finite.
Let us note the following with a brief proof.
Lemma 4.3. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module with
r = dimR M ≥ 2. Assume that there exists an integer t ≥ 0 such that e1 (Q, M ) ≥ −t for every
parameter ideal Q for M . Then dimR UM (0) ≤ r − 2.
Proof. Let U = UM (0) and N = M/U . Assume that dimR U = r − 1. Choose a system
x1 , x2 , . . . , xr of parameters of M such that xr U = (0). Let ℓ > t be an integer and put
Q = (xℓ1 , x2 , . . . , xr ). Then we get exact sequences
0 → U/(Qn+1 M ∩ U ) → M/Qn+1 M → N/Qn+1 N → 0
of R–modules for all n ≥ 0. Let us take an integer k ≥ 0 so that
Qn M ∩ U = Qn−k (Qk M ∩ U )

12

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS

for n ≥ k and consider U ′ = Qk M ∩ U . Let q = (xℓ1 , x2 , . . . , xr−1 ). We then have
Qn−k U ′ = qn−k U ′ ,
as xr U = (0). Hence for all n ≥ k
λR (M/Qn+1 M ) = λR (N/Qn+1 N ) + λR (U ′ /qn−k+1 U ′ ) + λR (U/U ′ ),
which yields −t ≤ e1 (Q, M ) = e1 (Q, N ) − e0 (q, U ′ ). Hence
−t ≤ e1 (Q, M ) = e1 (Q, N ) − e0 (q, U ),
because e0 (q, U ) = e0 (q, U ′ ) (remember that λ(U/U ′ ) < ∞). Therefore, since e1 (Q, N ) ≤ 0 by
Corollary 2.3, we get
ℓ ≤ ℓe0 ((x1 , x2 , . . . , xr−1 ), U ) = e0 (q, U ) ≤ e1 (Q, N ) + t ≤ t,
which is impossible. Thus dimR U ≤ r − 2.

✷

Remark 4.4. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module with
r = dimR M ≥ 2. Assume that dimR UM (0) ≤ r − 2. Let q be a parameter ideal for
N = M/UM (0). Then one can find a parameter ideal Q for M with QN = qN , so that
e1 (q, N ) = e1 (q, M ) by Lemma 3.3. Hence Λ(M ) = Λ(N ).
The goal of this section is the following.
Theorem 4.5. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module
with r = dimR M ≥ 2. Let U = UM
c(0) denote the unmixed component of (0) in the m-adic
c of M . Then the following conditions are equivalent :
completion M
(i) Λ(M ) is a finite set ;
b
c/U is a generalized Cohen–Macaulay R–module
(ii) M
and dimR
b U ≤ r − 2.

When this is the case, one has the estimation
0 ≥ e1 (Q, M ) ≥ −


r−1 
X
r−2
i=1

i−1

c/U )
hi (M

for every parameter ideal Q for M .
Proof. We may assume that R is complete.
(i) ⇒ (ii) Since the set Λ(M ) is finite, by Proposition 4.3 we get dimR U ≤ r − 2. By Remark
4.4 the set Λ(M/U ) is finite, so that M/U is a generalized Cohen–Macaulay R–module by
Proposition 4.2.
(ii) ⇒ (i) By [12, Lemma 2.4] the set Λ(M/U ) is finite and hence the set Λ(M ) is also finite
by Lemma 3.3.
See [12, Lemma 2.4] for the last assertion.

✷

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

13

5. Buchsbaumness of modules possessing constant first Hilbert coefficients of
parameters
Let R be a Noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m and M a finitely generated R–module
with r = dimR M > 0. In this section we study the problem of when e1 (Q, M ) is independent
of the choice of parameter ideals Q for M . Part of the motivation comes from the fact that
Buchsbaum modules have this property. We establish here that if e1 (Q, M ) is constant and
M is unmixed, then M is indeed a Buchsbaum R–module (Theorem 5.4). See [13] for the ring
case.
First of all let us recall some definitions. A system x1 , x2 , . . . , xr of parameters of M is said
to be standard, if it forms a d+ -sequence for M , that is, x1 , x2 , . . . , xr forms a strong d-sequence
for M in any order. Remember that M possesses a standard system of parameters if and only
if M is a generalized Cohen–Macaulay R–module ([29]).
Let Q be a parameter ideal for M . Then we say that Q is standard, if it is generated by a
standard system of parameters of M . Remember that Q is standard if and only if the equality

r−1 
X
r−1 i
h (M ) := I(M )
λR (M/QM ) − e0 (Q, M ) =
i
i=0

holds ([29, Theorem 2.1]). It is known that every system of parameters of M contained in a
standard parameter ideal for M is standard ([29]).
Suppose
M is a generalized Cohen–Macaulay R–module with r = dimR M ≥ 2 and
Pr−1 that
r−2 i
h
(M ). If Q is a parameter ideal for M , then by [12, Lemma 2.4] we get
s =
i=1 i−1
e1 (Q, M ) ≥ −s, where the equality holds if Q is standard ([25, Korollar 3.2]).
We say that our R–module M is Buchsbaum, if every parameter ideal for M is standard.
Hence, if M is a Buchsbaum R-module with r = dimR M ≥ 2, then M is a generalized
Cohen–Macaulay R–module with

r−1 
X
r−2 i
e1 (Q, M ) = −
h (M )
i−1
i=1

for every parameter ideal Q. See [28] for a detailed theory of Buchsbaum rings and modules.
We begin with the following two results, whose proofs are similar to those in the ring case
(see [8, Lemma 4.5] and [13, Proposition 2.3]).
Lemma 5.1. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M a generalized Cohen–Macaulay
R–module with r = dimR M ≥ 2 and depthR M > 0. Let Q be a parameter ideal for M such
Pr−1 r−2 i
i
that e1 (Q, M ) = − i=1
i−1 h (M ). Then QHm (M ) = (0) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ r − 1.
For each x ∈ m, we put UM (x) :=

S

n≥0 [xM :M

mn ].

Proposition 5.2. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M a generalized Cohen–Macaulay
R–module with r = dimR M ≥ 3 and depthR M > 0. Let Q = (x1 , x2 , . . . , xr ) be a parameter
ideal for M . Assume that (x1 , xr )H1m (M ) = (0) and that the parameter ideal (x1 , x2 , . . . , xr−1 )
for the generalized Cohen–Macaulay R–module M/UM (xr ) is standard. Then UM (x1 )∩QM =
x1 M.

14

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS

We then have the following, which is the key in our argument. The proof is similar to the
ring case [13, Theorem 2.1] but let us note a brief proof in order to see how we use the previous
results Lemma 5.1 and Proposition 5.2.
Theorem 5.3. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and let M be a generalized Cohen–
Macaulay R–module with r = dimR M ≥ 2 and depthR M > 0. Let Q be a parameter ideal for
M . Then the following conditions are equivalent :
(i) Q is a standard parameter
ideal for M ;
Pr−1 r−2 i
(ii) e1 (Q, M ) = − i=1
h
(M ).
i−1

Proof. We have only to show the implication (ii) ⇒ (i). To do this, we may assume that
the residue class field R/m of R is infinite. We write Q = (x1 , x2 , . . . , xr ), where each xj is
superficial for M with respect to Q. Remember that by Lemma 5.1 QHim (M ) = (0) for all
i 6= r. Hence Q is standard, if r = 2 ([29, Corollary 3.7]).
Assume that r ≥ 3 and that our assertion holds true for r − 1. Let 1 ≤ j ≤ r be an integer.
We put N = M/xj M , M = N/H0m (N ) (= M/UM (xj )), and Qj = (xi | 1 ≤ i ≤ r, i 6= j). Then
Him (N ) ∼
= Him (M ) for all i ≥ 1. On the other hand, since xj Him (M ) = (0) for i 6= r and xj is
M -regular, for each 0 ≤ i ≤ r − 2 we have the short exact sequence
0 → Him (M ) → Him (N ) → Hi+1
m (M ) → 0
of local cohomology modules. Hence I(M ) = I(N ) and
e1 (Q, M ) = e1 (Qj , N ) = e1 (Qj , M )

r−2 
X
r−3 i
h (M )
≥ −
i−1
i=1

r−2 
X
r−3 i
h (N )
= −
i−1
i=1

r−2 
X
r−3
[hi (M ) + hi+1 (M )]
= −
i−1
i=1
r−1
X r − 2
hi (M )
= −
i−1
i=1

= e1 (Q, M ),
so that the equality
e1 (Qj , M ) = −


r−2 
X
r−3
i=1

i−1

hi (M )

holds for the parameter ideal Qj for the generalized Cohen–Macaulay R–module M = M/UM (xj ).
Thus by the hypothesis of induction on r = dimR M , Qj is a standard parameter ideal for
M/UM (xj ) for every 1 ≤ j ≤ r. Hence UM (x1 ) ∩ QM = x1 M by Proposition 5.2. Thus
Q1 is standard parameter ideal for M/x1 M ([29, Corollary 2.3]). Therefore Q is a standard
parameter ideal for M , because I(M ) = I(M/x1 M ) ([29, Corollary 2.4]).
✷
We are now ready to prove the main result of this section.

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

15

Theorem 5.4. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M an unmixed R–module with
r = dimR M ≥ 2. Then the following conditions are equivalent :
(i) M is a Buchsbaum R–module ;
(ii) The first Hilbert coefficient e1 (Q, M ) of M is constant and independent of the choice
of parameter ideals Q for M .
When this is the case, one has the equality

r−1 
X
r−2 i
e1 (Q, M ) = −
h (M )
i−1
i=1

for every parameter ideal Q for M , where

hi (M )

= λ(Him (M )) for each 1 ≤ i ≤ r − 1.

Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii) This is due to Schenzel [25].
(ii) ⇒ (i) Since ♯Λ(M ) = 1, by Proposition
4.2 M is a generalized Cohen–Macaulay R–
Pr−1 r−2 i
module. Hence Λ(M ) = {− i=1 i−1 h (M )} by [25, Korollar 3.2], so that by Theorem 5.3
every parameter ideal Q for M is standard. Thus M is, by definition, a Buchsbaum R–module
([27]).
See [25] for the last assertion.

✷

We now in a position to conclude this section with a characterization of R–modules possessing ♯Λ(M ) = 1.
Theorem 5.5. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module
with r = dimR M ≥ 2. Let U = UM
c(0) be the unmixed component of (0) in the m-adic
c
completion M of M . Then the following conditions are equivalent :
(i) ♯Λ(M ) = 1 ;
c/U is a Buchsbaum R–module
b
(ii) M
and dim b U ≤ r − 2.
R

When this is the case, one has the equality

e1 (Q, M ) = −


r−1 
X
r−2
i=1

for every parameter ideal Q for M .

i−1

c/U )
hi (M

Proof. We may assume R is complete.
(i) ⇒ (ii) Since ♯Λ(M ) = 1, dimR U ≤ r − 2 by Proposition 4.3. We get ♯Λ(M/U ) = 1 by
Remark 4.4, so that by Theorem 5.4 M/U is a Buchsbaum R-module.
(ii) ⇒ (i) We get by Theorem 5.4 that ♯Λ(M/U ) = 1 and hence ♯Λ(M ) = 1 by Lemma 3.3.
See Theorem 5.4 for the last assertion.

✷

6. Homological degrees
In this section we deal with the variation of the extended degree function hdeg ([7, 30]),
labeled hdegI (see [18], [31, p. 142]). We recall the basic properties of these functions. These
techniques and their relationships to e1 (I) have been mentioned in [32] but the treatment here
is more focused. It will lead to sharper bounds in the case of e1 (I, M ).

16

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS

Cohomological degrees. Let R be a Noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m and infinite
residue class field. Let M(R) denote the category of finitely generated R-modules and let I
be an m–primary ideal of R. Then one has the following extension of the classical multiplicity.
Definition 6.1. A cohomological degree, or extended multiplicity function with respect to I,
is a function
Deg(·) : M(R) → N
that satisfies the following conditions. Let M ∈ M(R).
(a) If L = Γm (M ) is the R-submodule of elements of M that are annihilated by a power
of the maximal ideal m and M = M/L, then
Deg(M ) = Deg(M ) + λ(L).
(b) (Bertini’s rule) If M has positive depth, then
Deg(M ) ≥ Deg(M/hM )
for every generic hyperplane section h ∈ I \ mI.
(c) (The calibration rule) If M is a Cohen-Macaulay R–module, then
Deg(M ) = deg(M ),
where deg(M ) = e0 (I, M ) is the Samuel multiplicity of M with respect to I.
The existence of cohomological degrees in arbitrary dimensions was established in [30]. Let
us formulate it for the case where the ring R is complete. The use of the more general
Samuel multiplicities was introduced in [18]. When precision demands, we denote the degree
and homological degree functions associated to the m-primary ideal I by degI and hdegI ,
respectively.
For the rest of this section suppose that R is complete. For each finitely generated R–module
M and j ∈ Z let
Mj = HomR (Hjm (M ), E),
where E = ER (R/m) denotes the injective envelope of the residue class field. Then, thanks to
the local duality theorem, one gets dimR Mj ≤ j for all j ∈ Z.
Definition 6.2. Let M be a finitely generated R-module with r = dimR M > 0. Then the
homological degree of M is the integer
hdeg(M ) = deg(M ) +


r−1 
X
r−1
j=0

j

· hdeg(Mj ).

We call attention to the fact (see [30] for details) that the notion of generic hyperplane section
used for hdeg(M ) are superficial elements for M and for all Mj , but also for the iterated ones
of these modules (there are only a finite number of them).
We will employ hdeg to derive lower bounds for e1 (I, M ).

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

17

Homological torsion. There are other combinatorial expressions of the terms hdegI (Mj ) that
behave well under hyperplane sections.
Definition 6.3. Let M be an R-module with r = dimR M ≥ 2. For each integer 1 ≤ i ≤ r − 1
we put

r−i 
X
r−i−1
(i)
TI (M ) =
· hdegI (Mj ).
j−1
j=1

Hence

(r−1)

(2)

(1)

hdegI (M ) > TI (M ) ≥ TI (M ) ≥ · · · ≥ TI
If M is a generalized Cohen-Macaulay R–module, then

r−i 
X
r−i−1
(i)
TI (M ) =
λ(Hjm (M ))
j−1

(M ).

j=1

which is independent of I.
We then have the following.
Theorem 6.4. [30, Theorem 2.13] Let M be a finitely generated R–module with r = dimR M
(i)
(i)
and let h be a generic hyperplane section. Then TI (M/hM ) ≤ TI (M ) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ r − 2.
We now turn this into a uniform bound for the first Hilbert coefficient of a module M relative
to an ideal I generated by a system of parameters of M . We note that there are general bounds
for all Hilbert coefficients ei (I, M ) for arbitrary m-primary ideals I ([22]). Those developed
here have a more specialized character and hold only for e1 (I, M ) and parameter ideals I.
Theorem 6.5. Let M be a finitely generated R–module with dimR M = dim R ≥ 2 and let Q
be a parameter ideal of R. Then
(1)

−e1 (Q, M ) ≤ TQ (M ).
Proof. Let d = dim R and let h ∈ Q \ mQ be a generic hyperplane section used for hdegQ (M ).
Since
(1)
(1)
−e1 (Q, M ) = −e1 (Q, M/H0m (M )) and TQ (M/H0m (M )) ≤ TQ (M ),
replacing M with M/H0m (M ) if necessary, we may assume depthR M ≥ 1. We may also assume
that h is superficial for M and for all Mj (0 ≤ j ≤ d − 1) with respect to Q. Hence h is
M –regular and λ(M1 /hM1 ) < ∞ (remember that dimR M1 ≤ 1). Suppose d = 2. Then
(1)
TQ (M ) = hdegQ (M1 ) and −e1 (Q, M ) = λ((0) :H1m (M ) h) by Proposition 2.2 (d). On the other
hand, from the exact sequence
h

0 −→ M −→ M −→ M/hM −→ 0
of R–modules, we obtain the exact sequence
h

0 → (0) :H1m (M ) h → H1m (M ) → H1m (M ).
Then, taking the Matlis dual, we have an epimorphism
M1 /hM1 → HomR ((0) :H1m (M ) h, E) → 0,
so that
λ((0) :H1m (M ) h) = hdegQ (HomR ((0) :H1m (M ) h, E)) ≤ hdegQ (M1 /hM1 ) ≤ hdegQ (M1 )

18

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS
(1)

by Theorem 6.4. Thus −e1 (Q, M ) ≤ TQ (M ). If d ≥ 3, then we get
(1)

(1)

TQ/(h) (M/hM ) ≤ TQ (M ).
Hence the result follows, since −e1 (Q, M ) = −e1 (Q/(h), M/hM ) by Proposition 2.2 (a).

✷

When the module is generalized Cohen-Macaulay we recover the bound discussed at the
beginning of Section 4.
Corollary 6.6. If M is a generalized Cohen-Macaulay R–module with dimR M ≥ 1, then the
Hilbert coefficients e1 (Q, M ) are bounded for all parameter ideals Q for M .
Proof. Passing to the ring R/[(0) :R M ], we may assume that dim R = dimR M and that
Q is a parameter ideal of R. Then e1 (Q, M ) ≤ 0 by Corollary 2.3. We get by Theorem 6.5
P
(1)
(1)
j
d−2
−e1 (Q, M ) ≤ TQ (M ), while TQ (M ) = d−1
j=1 j−1 λ(Hm (M )) is independent of the choice
of Q. Hence the result.
✷
Corollary 6.7. Suppose that dimR M ≥ 1. Then the set
{e1 (Q, M ) | Q are parameter ideals of M with the same integral closure}
is finite.
Proof. For each parameter ideal Q of M we get e1 (Q, M ) ≤ 0, while Theorem 6.5 asserts that
(1)
(1)
e1 (Q, M ) ≥ −TQ (M ). Hence the result follows, because TQ (M ) depends only on Q, the
integral closure of Q.
✷
7. Euler characteristics and Hilbert characteristics
The relationship between partial Euler characteristics and superficial elements make for
a straightforward comparison with extended degree functions. Unless otherwise specified,
throughout it is assumed that R is a Noetherian complete local ring with infinite residue
class field. We will prove that Euler characteristics can be uniformly bounded by homological
degrees. The basic tool is the following observation, which is found in the proof of [3, Theorem
4.6.10 (a)].
Proposition 7.1. Let M be a finitely generated R-module with r = dimR M ≥ 2. Let x =
{x1 , x2 , . . . , xr } be a system of parameters for M and set x′ = {x2 , . . . , xr }. Then
χ1 (x; M ) = χ1 (x′ ; M/x1 M ) + χ1 (x′ ; 0 :M x1 ).
Theorem 7.2. Let M be a finitely generated R-module with dimR M = dim R = d ≥ 1. Then
for every system x = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xd } of parameters of R, one has
χ1 (x; M ) ≤ hdegQ (M ) − degQ (M ),
where Q = (x).
Proof. As λ(M/QM ) = χ1 (x; M ) + degQ (M ), we have only to show λ(M/QM ) ≤ hdegQ (M ).
Let h ∈ Q \ mQ be a generic hyperplane section used for hdegQ (M ). Then, since λ(M/QM ) =
λ((M/hM )/Q·(M/hM )) and hdegQ/(h) (M/hM ) ≤ hdegQ (M ), by induction on d we may
assume d = 1. When d = 1, χ1 (x; M ) = λ(0 :M x1 ) and hence λ(M/QM ) = χ1 (x; M ) +
degQ (M ) ≤ λ(H0m (M )) + degQ (M ) = hdegQ (M ), as wanted.
✷

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

19

Corollary 7.3. Suppose that dimR M ≥ 1. Then for every primary ideal I of M , the set
ΞI (M ) = {χ1 (x, M ) | x are systems of parameters of M with (x) = I}
is finite.
Proof. Both hdegQ (M ) and degQ (M ) depend only on the integral closure I = Q of Q = (x).
✷

Definition 7.4. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module with
r = dimR M ≥ 1. For each system x = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xr } of parameters of M , the Hilbert
characteristic of M with respect to Q = (x) is defined to be
h(x; M ) =

r
X
(−1)i ei (Q, M ).
i=0

The following proposition shows that the Hilbert characteristic can be characterized as a
quasi-cohomological degree for M .
Proposition 7.5. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module
with r = dimR M ≥ 1. Let x = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xr } be a system of parameters of M and a d–
sequence for M . Then the Hilbert characteristic of M with respect to x satisfies the following.
(a) Suppose that x1 is a superficial element for M and depthR M ≥ 1. Then
h(x; M ) = h(x′ ; M/x1 M ),
where x′ = {x2 , . . . , xr }.
(b) Let M0 = H0m (M ) and M ′ = M/M0 . Then
h(x; M ) = h(x; M ′ ) + λ(M0 ).
Proof. Let Q = (x). Recall that, by [14, Proposition 3.4], we have (−1)r er (Q, M ) = λ(Hm0 (M )).
(a) We may assume that x1 is M –regular. By Proposition 2.2, we obtain
h(x; M ) =

r−1
r−1
X
X
(−1)i ei (x′ , M/x1 M ) = h(x′ ; M/x1 M ).
(−1)i ei (Q, M ) + (−1)r er (Q, M ) =
i=0

i=0

(b) By applying Proposition 2.2-(b) to the exact sequence 0 → M0 → M → M ′ → 0, we get
ei (Q, M ) = ei (Q, M ′ ) for all 0 ≤ i ≤ r − 1.

20

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS

Note that (−1)r er (Q, M ′ ) = λ(Hm0 (M ′ )) = 0. Hence
h(x; M ) =

r
X

(−1)i ei (Q, M ) =

r−1
X
(−1)i ei (Q, M ) + λ(M0 )
i=0

i=0

r−1
X
(−1)i ei (Q, M ′ ) + λ(M0 )
=
i=0

=

r
X
(−1)i ei (Q, M ′ ) + λ(M0 )
i=0

= h(x; M ′ ) + λ(M0 ).
✷
Proposition 7.6. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring and M a finitely generated R–module
with r = dimR M ≥ 1. Let x = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xr } be a system of parameters of M and a
d–sequence for M . Let Q = (x). Then
h(x; M ) = λ(M/QM ).
In particular, h(x; M ) ≥ e0 (Q, M ) with equality if and only if M is Cohen–Macaulay.
Proof. Using [10, Theorem 3.7], one can prove that
(−1)i ei (Q, M ) = χ1 (x1 , . . . , xr−i , xr−i+1 ; M ) − χ1 (x1 , . . . , xr−i ; M ) ≥ 0
for all 1 ≤ i ≤ r. Therefore
h(x; M ) = e0 (Q, M ) +

r
X
(−1)i ei (Q, M )
i=1

r
X
(χ1 (x1 , . . . , xr−i , xr−i+1 ; M ) − χ1 (x1 , . . . , xr−i ; M ))
= e0 (Q, M ) +
i=1

= χ0 (x; M ) + χ1 (x; M )
= λ(M/QM ).
✷
Corollary 7.7. Let x be a system of parameters of M which is a d–sequence for M . Suppose
that x ∈ m \ m2 . Then the Betti numbers βiR (M ) satisfy
βiR (M ) ≤ λ(M/(x)M ) · βiR (k).
Proof. It follows from the argument of [31, Theorem 2.94], where we use the properties of
h(x; M ) in the induction part.
✷
Remark 7.8. Note that the condition x ∈ m \ m2 in Corollary 7.7 is needed in the induction
R/(x1 )
argument which requires the inequality of Betti numbers βi
(k) ≤ βiR (k)([15, Corollary
3.4.2]).

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

21

8. Buchsbaum-Rim coefficients
In this section let us note another set of related questions, concerned about the vanishing
and the negativity of the Buchsbaum-Rim coefficients of modules.
Let R be a Noetherian local ring with maximal ideal m and d = dim R ≥ 1. The BuchsbaumRim multiplicity ([4]) arises in the context of an embedding
0 → E −→ F = Rs −→ C → 0
of R–modules, where E ⊆ mF and C has finite length. Let
ϕ : Rm −→ F = Rs
be an R–linear map represented by a matrix with entries in m such that Im ϕ = E. We then
have a homomorphism
S(ϕ) : S(Rm ) −→ S(Rs )
of symmetric algebras, whose image is the Rees algebra R(E) of E, and whose cokernel we
denote by C(ϕ). Hence
0 → R(E) −→ S(Rs ) = R[T1 , T2 , . . . , Ts ] −→ C(ϕ) → 0.
This exact sequence (with a different notation) is studied in [4] in great detail. Of significance
for us is the fact that C(ϕ), with the grading induced by the homogeneous homomorphism
S(ϕ), has components of finite length, for which we have the following. Let E n = [R(E)]n and
F n = [S(F )]n for n ≥ 0, where F = Rs .
Theorem 8.1. λ(F n /E n ) is a polynomial in n of degree d + s − 1 for n ≫ 0:




n+d+s−2
n+d+s−3
λ(F n /E n ) = br(E)
− br1 (E)
+ lower terms.
d+s−1
d+s−2
This polynomial is called the Buchsbaum-Rim polynomial of E. The leading coefficient
br(E) is the Buchsbaum-Rim multiplicity of ϕ; if the homomorphism ϕ is understood, we
shall simply denote it by br(E). This number is determined by an Euler characteristic of the
Buchsbaum-Rim complex ([4]).
Assume now the residue class field of R is infinite. The minimal reductions U of E are
generated by d+ s − 1 elements. We refer to U as a parameter module of F . The corresponding
coefficients are br(U ) = br(E) but br1 (U ) ≤ br1 (E). It is not clear what the possible values of
br1 (U ) are, and in similarity to the case of ideals, we can ask the following.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

br1 (U ) ≤ 0?
Suppose that R is unmixed. Then is R Cohen-Macaulay, if br1 (U ) = 0?
Are the values of br1 (U ) bounded?
What happens in low dimensions?

As for question (a), a surprising result of Hayasaka and Hyry shows the negativity of br1 (U )
in the following way. It gives an eminent proof of Corollary 2.3.

Theorem 8.2 ([16, Theorem 1.1]). λ(F n /U n ) ≥ br(U ) n+d+s−2
for all n ≥ 0. Hence
d+s−1
br1 (U ) ≤ 0.

22

L. GHEZZI, S. GOTO, J. HONG, K. OZEKI, T.T. PHUONG, AND W. V. VASCONCELOS


They also proved that R is a Cohen-Macaulay ring, once λ(F n /U n ) = br(U ) n+d+s−2
for
d+s−1
n+d+s−2
n
n
some n ≥ 1. When this is the case, one has the equality λ(F /U ) = br(U ) d+s−1 for all
n ≥ 0, whence br1 (U ) = 0 ([2, Theorem 3.4]).
Note that question (c) is answered affirmatively for s = 1 in Corollary 6.7.
We close this paper with the following.
Conjecture 8.3. Let (R, m) be a Noetherian local ring with dim R ≥ 2 and let U ⊆ mRs
be a parameter module of Rs (s > 0). Then R is a Cohen-Macaulay ring if and only if R is
unmixed and br1 (U ) = 0.
References
[1] M. Auslander and D. Buchsbaum, Codimension and multiplicity, Ann. Math. 68 (1958), 625–657.
[2] J. Brennan, B. Ulrich and W. V. Vasconcelos, The Buchsbaum–Rim polynomial of a module, J. Algebra
241 (2001), 379–392.
[3] W. Bruns and J. Herzog, Cohen-Macaulay Rings, Cambridge University Press, 1993.
[4] D. Buchsbaum and D. S. Rim, A generalized Koszul complex II. Depth and multiplicity, Trans. Amer.
Math. Soc. 111 (1965), 197–224.
[5] N. T. Cuong, p-standard system of parameters and p-standard ideals in local rings, Acta Mathematica
Vietnamica 20 (1995), 145–161.
[6] N. T. Cuong, P. Schenzel and N. V. Trung, Verallgemeinerte Cohen–Macaulay–Moduln, Math. Nachr. 85
(1978), 57–73.
[7] L. R. Doering, T. Gunston and W. V. Vasconcelos, Cohomological degrees and Hilbert functions of graded
modules, American J. Math. 120 (1998), 493–504.
[8] L. Ghezzi, S. Goto, J. Hong, K. Ozeki, T. T. Phuong and W. V. Vasconcelos, Cohen–Macaulayness versus
the vanishing of the first Hilbert coefficient of parameter ideals, J. London Math. Soc. 81 (2010), 679–695.
[9] L. Ghezzi, J. Hong and W. V. Vasconcelos, The signature of the Chern coefficients of local rings, Math.
Research Letters 16 (2009), 279–289.
[10] S. Goto, J. Hong and W. V. Vasconcelos, The homology of parameter ideals, J. Algebra 368 (2012), 271–299.
[11] S. Goto and Y. Nakamura, Multiplicities and tight closures of parameters, J. Algebra 244 (2001), 302–311.
[12] S. Goto and K. Nishida, Hilbert coefficients and Buchsbaumness of associated graded rings, J. Pure and
Appl. Algebra 181 (2003), 61–74.
[13] S. Goto and K. Ozeki, Buchsbaumness in local rings possessing constant first Hilbert coefficient of parameters, Nagoya Math. J. 199 (2010), 95–105.
[14] S. Goto and K. Ozeki, Uniform bounds for Hilbert coefficients of parameters, in Commutative Algebra and
its Connections to Geometry, 97–118, Contemp. Math. 555, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2011.
[15] T. Gulliksen and G. Levin, Homology of local rings, Queen’s Paper in Pure and Applied Mathematics, No.
20 Queen’s University, Kingston, Ont. 1969.
[16] F. Hayasaka and E. Hyry, On the Buchsbaum-Rim function of a parameter module, J. Algebra 327 (2011),
307–315.
[17] T. Kawasaki, On Cohen–Macaulayfication of certain quasi-projective schemes, J. Math. Soc. Japan 50
(1998), 969–991.
[18] C. H. Linh, Upper bound for the Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity of associated graded modules, Comm.
Algebra 33 (2005), 1817–1831.
[19] M. Mandal, B. Singh and J. K. Verma, On some conjectures about the Chern numbers of filtrations, J.
Algebra 325 (2011), 147–162.
[20] H. Matsumura, Commutative Algebra, Benjamin/Cummings, Reading, 1980.
[21] M. Nagata, Local Rings, Interscience, New York, 1962.
[22] M. E. Rossi, N. V. Trung and G. Valla, Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity and extended degree, Trans.
Amer. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), 1773–1786.
[23] M. E. Rossi and G. Valla, On the Chern number of a filtration, Rend. Semin. Mat. Univ. Padova 121
(2009), 201–222.

THE CHERN NUMBERS AND EULER CHARACTERISTICS OF MODULES

23

[24] M. E. Rossi and G. Valla, Hilbert Functions of Filtered Modules, Lecture Notes of the Unione Matematica
Italiana 9, Springer-Verlag, Berlin; UMI, Bologna, 2010.
[25] P. Schenzel, Multiplizitäten in verallgemeinerten Cohen–Macaulay–Moduln, Math. Nachr. 88 (1979), 295–
306.
[26] J.-P. Serre, Algèbre Locale. Multiplicités, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 11, Springer, Berlin, 1965.
[27] J. Stückrad and W. Vogel, Toward a theory of Buchsbaum singularities, Amer. J. Math. 100 (1978),
727–746.
[28] J. Stückrad and W. Vogel, Buchsbaum Rings and Applications, Springer, Berlin, 1986.
[29] N. V. Trung, Toward a theory of generalized Cohen–Macaulay modules, Nagoya Math. J. 102 (1986), 1–49.
[30] W. V. Vasconcelos, The homological degree of a module, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 350 (1998), 1167–1179.
[31] W. V. Vasconcelos, Integral Closure, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, New York, 2005.
[32] W. V. Vasconcelos, The Chern coefficients of local rings, Michigan Math. J. 57 (2008), 725–743.
Department of Mathematics, New York City College of Technology-Cuny, 300 Jay Street,
Brooklyn, NY 11201, U. S. A.
E-mail address: lghezzi@citytech.cuny.edu
Department of Mathematics, School of Science and Technology, Meiji University, 1-1-1 Higashimita, Tama-ku, Kawasaki 214-8571, Japan
E-mail address: goto@math.meiji.ac.jp
Department of Mathematics, Southern Connecticut State University, 501 Crescent Street,
New Haven, CT 06515-1533, U. S. A.
E-mail address: hongj2@southernct.edu
Department of Mathematics, School of Science and Technology, Meiji University, 1-1-1 Higashimita, Tama-ku, Kawasaki 214-8571, Japan
E-mail address: kozeki@math.meiji.ac.jp
Department of Information Technology and Applied Mathematics, Ton Duc Thang University,
98 Ngo Tat To Street, Ward 19, Binh Thanh District, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
E-mail address: sugarphuong@gmail.com
Department of Mathematics, Rutgers University, 110 Frelinghuysen Rd, Piscataway, NJ 088548019, U. S. A.
E-mail address: vasconce@math.rutgers.edu

