arXiv:1701.04738v1 [math.AG] 17 Jan 2017

MORI DREAM SPACES AND BLOW-UPS
ANA-MARIA CASTRAVET
Abstract. The goal of the present article is to survey the general
theory of Mori Dream Spaces, with special regards to the question:
When is the blow-up of toric variety at a general point a Mori
Dream Space? We translate the question for toric surfaces of Picard number one into an interpolation problem involving points in
the projective plane. An instance of such an interpolation problem
is the Gonzalez-Karu theorem that gives new examples of weighted
projective planes whose blow-up at a general point is not a Mori
Dream Space.

1. Introduction
Mori Dream Spaces were introduced in [HK00] as a natural Mori
theoretic generalization of toric varieties. As the name suggests, their
main feature is that the Minimal Model Program (MMP) can be run
for any divisor (not just the canonical divisor class). In particular, as
for toric varieties, one only has to look into the combinatorics of the
various birational geometry cones to achieve the desired MMP steps.
As being a Mori Dream Space is equivalent to all (multi-)section rings
being finitely generated, it is not surprising that non-trivial examples
may be hard to find. It was not until the major advances in the MMP,
that Hu and Keel’s original conjecture that varieties of Fano type are
Mori Dream Spaces was proved [BCHM10]. Although there are many
examples outside of the Fano-type range, these often have an ad-hoc
flavor. Certain positivity properties of the anticanonical divisor (such
as being of Fano type or Calabi-Yau type) of a Mori Dream Space are
reflected in the multi-section rings [Oka16], [GOST15], but no clear
picture emerges in general. More often than not, the usual operations of
blowing up, taking projective bundles, crepant resolutions, hyperplane
sections, when applied to Mori Dream Spaces, do not lead to Mori
Dream Spaces.
Our current goal is to pay special attention to blow-ups of Mori
Dream Spaces, in particular, blow-ups at a single (general) point. More
specifically, the following is a question asked by Jenia Tevelev:
1

Question 1.1. Let X be a projective Q-factorial toric variety over
an algebraically closed field k. When is the blow-up Blp X of X at a
general point p not a MDS?
Using the action of the open torus T = (k∗ )n , we may assume the
point p is the identity e of T . Currently, the only known examples of
X toric such that Ble X is not a MDS fall into the following categories:
(I) Certain (singular) toric projective surfaces with Picard number
one;
(II) Certain toric varieties for which there exists a small modification that admits a surjective morphism into one of the toric
surfaces in (I). (Note that small modifications and images of
Mori Dream Spaces are Mori Dream Spaces [HK00], [Oka16]).
All known examples are in characteristic zero, since the only examples of surfaces in (I) are in characteristic zero. Eventually, blowing
up (very) general points1 on a toric variety leads to non Mori Dream
Spaces: for example, the blow-up of P2 at r very general points is toric
if and only if r ≤ 3 and a Mori Dream Space if and only if r ≤ 8.
A good portion of the examples in (I) are weighted projective planes
P(a, b, c) for a certain choice of weights (a, b, c). Until [CT15], [GK16],
the only known examples of varieties as in Question 1.1 were of this type
[GNW94]. The question whether Ble P(a, b, c) is a Mori Dream Space
is equivalent to the symbolic Rees algebra of a so-called monomial
prime ideal being Noetherian, and as such, it has a long history. Major
progress was recently achieved by Gonzalez and Karu [GK16] by using
methods of toric geometry. However, the main question remains open:

Question 1.2. For which triples (a, b, c) the blow-up Ble P(a, b, c) of
P(a, b, c) at the identity point e is not a MDS?
With the exception of (a, b, c) = (1, 1, 1), in all examples where
the Mori Dream Space-ness of Ble P(a, b, c) is understood (one way
or another), it happens that Ble P(a, b, c) contains a negative curve C,
different than the exceptional divisor E above the point e. In positive characteristic, the existence of the negative curve C implies that
Ble P(a, b, c) is a Mori Dream Space by Artin’s contractability theorem
[Art62]. No triples (a, b, c) 6= (1, 1, 1) are known for which Ble P(a, b, c)
contains no negative curve (other than E). If such an example exists
(in any characteristic), it would imply the Nagata conjecture
on linear
√
2
systems on blow-ups of PC at abc points [CK11]. If abc ∈
/ Z, such
1Recall

that the blow-up of a toric variety along a torus invariant stratum is a
toric variety.
2

an example would have many important consequences: new cases of
the Nagata conjecture, examples of irrational Seshadri constants, new
examples when Ble P(a, b, c) is not a Mori Dream Space, etc.
The goal of the present article is two-fold. First, to survey some of
the general theory of Mori Dream Spaces, along with known results and
open problems related to Question 1.1. Second, to use the toric geometry methods of Gonzalez and Karu in order to translate Question 1.2
(and more generally, Question 1.1 in the case of surfaces of Picard number one) into an interpolation problem involving points in the (usual)
projective plane P2 (this translation is likely not new to the experts).
As an illustration of this approach, we reprove (or rather, present a
shortcut in the proof of) the main theorem in [GK16] (Thm. 8.7).
The advantages are that the interpolation problem is really equivalent
to the original question, and there are further potential applications
towards Question 1.1 and Question 1.2. For example, both of the following questions can be reformulated into interpolation problems: (a)
whether Ble P(a, b, c) is a Mori Dream Space when in the presence of
a negative curve, or (b) whether Ble P(a, b, c) has any negative curves
at all. The drawback is that the interpolation problem seems to be
almost equally difficult.
By interpolation, we simply mean to separate points lying in the
lattice points of a plane polytope (so in a grid!) by curves of an appropriate degree. For example, to prove that Ble P(9, 10, 13) has no
negative curve (other than E), it suffices to answer affirmatively:
Question 1.3. Let ∆ be the polytope in R2 with vertices (0, 0), (10, 40),
(36, 27). For every q ≥ 1, let
√
mq = ⌊q 1170⌋ + 1.
Is it true that for every q ≥ 1 and any point (i, j) ∈ q∆ ∩ Z2 , there
exists a curve C ⊂ R2 of degree mq passing through all the points
(i′ , j ′ ) 6= (i, j) in q∆ ∩ Z2 , but not (i, j)?
Structure of paper. The first three sections present a general survey
on Mori Dream Spaces: Section 2 reviews the basic definitions and
properties, Section 3 presents several key examples, while Section 4
gives an overview of the “structure theory”. The last four sections
focus on blow-ups at a general point. Section 5 discusses generalities
on blow-ups of (not necessarily toric) surfaces of Picard number one,
while Section 6 presents the special case of weighted projective planes.
Section 7 discusses blow-ups of higher dimensional toric varieties, with
Losev-Manin spaces playing a central role. Finally (the linear algebra
3

heavy) Section 8 translates Question 1.1 in the case of surfaces of Picard
number one, into an interpolation problem and proves Thm. 8.7 as an
application.
Conventions and Notations. Unless otherwise specified, we work
over an algebraically closed field k of arbitrary characteristic. For an
abelian group Γ and a field K, we denote ΓK the K-vector space Γ⊗Z K.
Acknowledgements. I am grateful to Jenia Tevelev who pointed out
Question 1.1 and the surrounding circle of ideas. I thank Shinosuke
Okawa for his questions and comments, José Gonzalez and Antonio
Laface for useful discussions, and the anonymous referees for several
useful comments. This work is partially supported by NSF grant DMS1529735. I thank Institut de Mathématiques de Toulouse for its hospitality during the writing of this paper.
2. Mori Dream Spaces
Mori Dream Spaces are intrinsically related to Hilbert’s 14’th problem. Many of the results on finite generation of multi-section rings
go back to Zariski and Nagata (see [Mum76]). For a survey of Mori
Dream Spaces from the invariant theory perspective, see [McK10]. In
what follows, we briefly recall the definitions and basic properties from
[HK00]. We found [Oka16] to be a useful additional reference.
Let X be a projective variety over k. We denote by N1 (X) the group
of Cartier divisors modulo numerical equivalence2. The cone generated
by nef divisors in N1 (X)R is denoted Nef(X). Similarly, the closure of
the cone of effective divisors (resp., movable divisors) is denoted Eff(X)
(resp., Mov(X)). Recall that an effective divisor is called movable if its
base locus has codimension at least 2. Similarly, if N1 (X) is the group
of 1-cycles modulo numerical equivalence3, the Mori cone NE(X) is the
closure in N1 (X)R of the cone of effective 1-cycles.
The closure operations in the definition of Eff(X), Mov(X) and
NE(X) are not necessary for Mori Dream Spaces (see Prop. 2.3 below).
A small Q-factorial modification (SQM for short) of a normal projective variety X is a small (i.e., isomorphic in codiemsnion one) birational
map X 99K Y to another normal, Q-factorial projective variety Y .
Definition 2.1. A normal projective variety X is called a Mori Dream
Space (MDS for short) if the following conditions are satisfied:
2N1 (X)
3The

is a finitely generated abelian group.
dual of N1 (X) under the intersection pairing.
4

(1) X is Q-factorial, Pic(X) is finitely generated, with
Pic(X)Q ∼
= N1 (X)Q ;
(2) Nef(X) is generated by finitely many semiample divisors;
(3) There are finitely many SQMs fi : X 99K Xi such that each Xi
satisfies (1) and (2), and Mov(X) is the union of fi∗ Nef(Xi )4.
Remarks 2.2. (a) If k is not the algebraic closure of a finite field, the
condition that Pic(X) is finitely generated is equivalent to the condition
Pic(X)Q ∼
= N1 (X)Q , but not otherwise (see [Oka16, Rmk. 2.4])5.
(b) Semiampleness and polyhedrality in conditions (2) and (3) are
key, guaranteeing that all the MMP steps are reduced to combinatorics
(finding the divisor class with the desired numerical properties).
A birational map f : X 99K Y between normal projective varieties is
called contracting if the inverse map f −1 does not contract any divisors.
If E1 , . . . Ek are the prime divisors contracted by f , then E1 , . . . Ek are
linearly independent in N1 (X)R and each Ei spans an extremal ray of
Eff(X). The effective cone of a MDS also has a decomposition into
rational polyhedral cones:
Proposition 2.3. [HK00, Prop. 1.11 (2)] Let X be a MDS. There are
finitely many birational contractions gi : X 99K Yi , with Yi a MDS,
such that
[
Eff(X) =
Ci ,
i

gi∗ Nef(Yi )

Ci =
+ R≥0 {E1 , . . . , Ek },
where E1 , . . . , Ek are the prime divisors contracted by gi .
The cones Ci are called the Mori chambers of X. Prop. 2.3 is best
interpreted as an instance of Zariski decomposition: for each effective
Q-Cartier divisor D, there exists a birational contraction g : X 99K Y
(factoring through an SQM and a birational morphism X 99K X ′ → Y )
and Q-divisors P and N, such that P is nef on X ′ , N is an effective
divisor contracted by g and for m > 0 sufficiently large and divisible,
the multiplication map given by the canonical section xm
N
H0 (X, O(mP )) → H0 (X, O(mD))
4If

f : X 99K Y is birational map, the pull back f ∗ D of a Cartier divisor D from
Y is defined as p∗ (q ∗ D), where p : W → X, q : W → Y are given by a common
resolution. If f is small, f ∗ D is simply the push forward f∗−1 (D) via the inverse
map f −1 .
5In the original definition in [HK00], only the condition Pic(X) ∼ N1 (X)
Q
Q =
appears, but as explained in [Oka16], adding both conditions seems more natural.
5

is an isomorphism. To see this, simply take
P = g ∗g∗ (D),

N = D − P.

Remarks 2.4. (a) If X is a MDS, all birational contractions X 99K Y
with Q-factorial Y , are the ones that appear in Prop. 2.3. In particular,
any such Y is a MDS.
(b) The SQMs in Def. 2.1 are the only SQMs of X. In particular,
any SQM of a MDS is itself a MDS.
Definition 2.5. Let X be a normal variety. For a semigroup Γ ⊂
WDiv(X)6 of Weil divisors on X, we define the multi-section ring
R(X, Γ) as the Γ-graded ring:
M
R(X, Γ) =
H0 (X, O(D))
D∈Γ

with the multiplication induced by the product of rational functions.
When Γ is a group such that the class map ΓQ → Cl(X)Q is an isomorphism, we call R(X, Γ) a Cox ring of X and denote this by Cox(X)7.
The definition of Cox(X) depends on the choice of Γ, but basic properties, such as finite generation as a k-algebra, do not. Note that if
Γ′ ⊂ Γ is finite index subgroup, then R(X, Γ) is an integral extension
of R(X, Γ′ ). For more details on Cox rings see [ADHL15], [LV09].
Mori Dream Spaces can be algebraically characterized as follows:
Theorem 2.6. [HK00, Prop. 2.9] Let X be a projective normal variety
satisfying condition (1) in Def. 2.1. Then X is a MDS if and only if
Cox(X) is a finitely generated k-algebra.
Sketch of Proof. If Cox(X) is finitely generated, let V be the affine variety Spec(Cox(X)). Since Cox(X) is graded by a lattice Γ ⊂ WDiv(X),
the algebraic torus T = Hom(Γ, Gm ) naturally acts on the affine variety V . Let χ ∈ Γ be a character of T which corresponds to an ample
divisor in Γ. Then X is V //χ T , the GIT quotient constructed with
respect to the trivial line bundle on V endowed with a T -linearization
by χ. Similarly, all small modifications of X can be obtained as GIT
quotients V //χ T , for different classes χ in Γ (thus the Mori chamber
decomposition is an instance of variation of GIT). The “only if” implication follows from the more general Lemma 2.7.

Lemma 2.7. Let X be a MDS and let Γ be a finitely generated group
of Weil divisors. Then R(X, Γ) is a finitely generated k-algebra.
6WDiv(X)

is the group freely generated by prime Weil divisors in X.
greater generality of working with Weil divisors rather than than Cartier
divisors will be essential in Section 6.
7The

6

Proof. We follow the proof in [Oka16, Lemma 2.20]. The key facts used
are (i) R(X, Γ) is finitely generated if Γ is generated by finitely many
semiample divisors ([HK00, Prop. 2.8]); (ii) Zariski decomposition as
in Prop. 2.3. When R(X, Γ) is a Cox ring, this is immediate: as Nef(X)
is a full cone inside N1 (X)R , if Γ is generated by Q-divisors that are
generators of Nef(X) (hence, ΓQ ∼
= Cl(X)Q ), the result follows by (i).
For the general case, without loss of generality, we may replace Γ
with a subgroup of finite index. In particular, we may assume that Γ
has no torsion. For a Mori chamber C, denote ΓC = Γ∩C (a semigroup).
As there are finitely many Mori chambers and the support of R(X, Γ) is
the union of ΓC , it is enough to prove that R(X, ΓC ) is finitely generated.
We may assume that there is g : X → Y birational morphism, with
C = g ∗ Nef(Y ) + R≥0 {E1 , . . . , Ek },

where E1 , . . . , Ek are the prime divisors contracted by g. Note that
since C is a rational polyhedral cone, ΓC is a finitely generated semigroup. For a set of generators D1 , . . . , Dr we consider Zariski decompositions as in Prop. 2.3: Di = Pi + Ni , with Q-divisors Pi in g ∗ Nef(X)
and Ni effective and supported on E1 , . . . , Ek . Up to replacing each
Di with a multiple, we may assume Pi and Ni are Z-divisors. Then
R(X, ΓC ) is isomorphic to an algebra over R(Y, P1 , . . . , Pr ) generated
by the canonical sections xN1 , . . . , xNk . By (i), it follows that R(X, ΓC )
is finitely generated.

3. Examples
We give several examples and non-examples of MDS (along with all
the possible different ways in which the MDS property can fail). In
Example 3.7 we show how the property of being a MDS is neither an
open, nor a closed condition.
Example 3.1. Projective Q-factorial toric varieties are MDS, as they
have Cox rings which are polynomial algebras generated by sections
corresponding to the 1-dimensional rays of the defining fan [Cox95].
Example 3.2. Q-factorial varieties of Fano type are MDS if char k =
0 [BCHM10]. A variety X is said to be of Fano type if there is a
Kawamata log-terminal (klt) pair (X, ∆), such that −(KX + ∆) is
ample. Examples include toric varieties, Fano varieties (∆ = ∅) and
weak Fano varieties (−KX is big and nef) with klt singularities. SQMs
of varieties of Fano type are of Fano type in characteristic zero (see for
example [GOST15], [KO15]).
7

Example 3.3. Any projective Q-factorial variety with ρ = 1 is trivially
a MDS. Starting with ρ ≥ 2, there is no classification for MDS, not
even for rational surfaces (see Sections 6 and 8).
Example 3.4. A projective, normal, Q-factorial surface X is a MDS
if and only if the Mori cone NE(X) is rational polyhedral and every nef
divisor D is semiample. By Zariski’s theorem [Laz04, Rmk. 2.1.32],
every movable divisor on a projective surface is semiample. In particular, Mov(X) = Nef(X). Hence, a nef divisor D is semiample if and
only if a multiple mD is movable for some m > 0.
Example 3.5. Let X be the blow-up of P2 at points p1 , . . . , pr in
general position. If r ≤ 8, X is a del Pezzo surface NE(X) is generated
by the (finitely many) (−1)-curves if r ≥ 3. It follows by induction on
r that every nef divisor is semiample.
If r ≥ 9 and the points p1 , . . . , pr are in very general position, then
X has infinitely many (−1)-curves (hence, Eff(X) has infinitely many
extremal rays and X is not a MDS). It is enough to prove that there
are infinitely many (−1)-classes when r = 9 and the points are the base
points of a general cubic pencil. In this case
φ|−KX | : X → P1

is an elliptic fibration whose sections are the (−1)-curves on X. Sections of φ correspond to k(t)-points of the generic fiber E = Xk(t) (an
elliptic curve over k(t)). The Mordell-Weil group Pic0 (E) is the group
of sections of π, once we fix one section as the identity. It follows
that Pic0 (E) is infinite if for a smooth cubic C containing p1 , . . . , p9 if
O(pi − pj ) ∈ Pic0 (C) is non-torsion line bundle for some i 6= j.
When X contains only finitely many (−1)- curves (an extremal rational elliptic surface), X is a MDS [AL11]. There is a complete classification extremal rational elliptic surfaces, by Miranda-Persson in characteristic zero [MP86] and Lang in positive characteristic [Lan91, Lan94].
For example, it follows from this classification that if char k 6= 2, 3, 5
then the blow-up X of P2 at distinct points p1 , . . . , p9 which are the
base points of a cubic pencil, is extremal if and only if the points are
the 9 flexes of a smooth cubic in the pencil, i.e., this is the Hesse
configuration in P2 (unique, up to PGL3 ).
Example 3.6. Let X be the blow-up of Pn at very general points
p1 , . . . , pr and let E1 , . . . , Er be the corresponding exceptional divisors.
Generalizing the case of del Pezzo surfaces, the following are equivalent
[Muk05], [CT06]:
8

(a) X is a MDS
(b) Eff(X) is rational polyhedral8;
(c) The following inequality holds:
1
1
1
+
> .
n+1 r−n−1
2
The Weyl group W associated to the three-legged Dynkin diagram
T2,n+1,r−n−1 acts on Pic(X) preserving effective divisors. Every element
in the orbit W.E1 (which contains all Ei ’s) generates and extremal ray
of Eff(X). The group W is finite if and only if the above inequality
holds, which for n ≥ 5 translates to r ≤ n + 3.
Assume r = n + 3. Let C be the unique rational normal curve in Pn
passing through p1 , . . . , pn+3 . Then X is a moduli space of parabolic
rank 2 vector bundles on (C, p1, . . . , pn+3 ) [Bau91], [Muk03], [Muk05].
Varying stability gives rise to all the SQMs of X. In particular, X
has an SQM which is a weak Fano, hence, X is of Fano type (see also
[AM15]).
Example 3.7. Generalizing Ex. 3.6 for r = n + 3, let X be the blowup of Pn at any number r of points lying on on a rational normal
curve. Then X is a MDS [CT06]. Hence, being a MDS is not an open
condition. We now give an example (due to Hassett and Tschinkel)
that shows that being a MDS is not a closed condition either.
Consider a family of blow-ups Xt of P3 along points pt1 , . . . , pt9 lying
on some rational normal curve (hence, Xt is a MDS). Such a family
admits a degeneration to the blow-up X0 of P3 at nine points which
are the intersection points of two smooth cubics contained in a plane
Λ ⊂ P3 (we may assume that the nine points are not the nine flexes of
the cubics). Let E1 , . . . , E9 be the exceptional divisors on X0 and let
S be the proper transform of the plane. As X0 is an equivariant Ga compactification of P3 \ Λ = G3a , it follows that Eff(X0 ) is generated by
E1 , . . . , E9 , while NE(X0 ) is generated by curves in S. As the restriction
map Pic(S) → Pic(X0 ) is an isomorphism, it follows that NE(X0 ) =
NE(S) via this identification. As seen in Ex. 3.5, NE(S) is not a
rational polyhedral cone if the cubic pencil is not the Hesse pencil.
Hence, X0 is not a MDS.
Example 3.8. If X is a Calabi-Yau variety of dimension at most 3,
then X is a MDS if and only if Eff(X) is rational polyhedral, generated
by effective divisor classes. (The abundance conjecture implies the
same statement in higher dimensions [McK10, Cor. 4.5].) This is
clearly the case if ρ(X) = 1. If X is a K3 surface with ρ(X) ≥ 3, Eff(X)
8Nef(X)

is rational polyhedral, generated by semiample divisors for r ≤ 2n.
9

is rational polyhedral if and only if Aut(X) is finite ([Kov94, Thm.
1, Rmk. 7.2], [PŠ71]). In this case, Eff(X) is generated by smooth
rational curves. If ρ(X) = 2, although Eff(X) is rational polyhedral,
it may not be generated by effective classes [Kov94, Thm. 2].
Example 3.9. Rational normal projective varieties with a complexity one torus action are MDS by [HS10]. Such varieties X admit a
faithful action of a torus of dimension dim(X) − 1. Examples include
projectivizations of toric rank 2 vector bundles (see 4.1.2) and several
singular del Pezzo surfaces.
By [Bri07], wonderful varieties are MDS. Wonderful varieties admit
an action of a semi-simple algebraic group G which has finitely many
orbits. Examples include toric varieties, flag varieties G/P and and
the complete symmetric varieties of De Concini and Procesi [DCP83].
4. Structure Theory
As for log-Fano varieties, there is little “structure theory” for MDS:
• If X is a MDS, any normal projective variety which is an SQM
of X, is also a MDS. This follows from the fact that the fi of
Def. 2.1 are the only SQMs of X (see Rmk. 2.4).
• [Oka16, Thm. 1.1] If f : X → Y is a surjective morphism of
projective normal Q-factorial varieties and X is a MDS, then Y
is a MDS. When f is birational, this follows from [HK00] (see
Rmk. 2.4).
4.1. Projective bundles. The projectivization P(E) of a vector bundle E on a MDS may or may not be a MDS.
4.1.1. If L1 , . . . , Lk are line bundles on a MDS X, then P(L1 ⊕. . .⊕Lk )
is also a MDS [Bro13, Thm. 3.2], [CG13, Prop. 2.6] (see also [Jow11]).
4.1.2. Toric vector bundles. A vector bundle E on a toric variety X is
called toric if E admits an action of the open torus of X that is linear
on fibers and compatible with the action on the base. For example,
a direct sum of line bundles is a toric vector bundle. By [GHPS12],
a projectivized toric bundles P(E) is a MDS if and only if a certain
blow-up Y of the fiber of P(E) → X above the identity point of the
torus is a MDS. Hence, toric P1 -bundles are always MDS (see also Ex.
3.9). In fact, any blow-up of a projective space along linear subspaces
can appear as the variety Y [GHPS12, Cor. 3.8] (in particular, Ex.
3.6, Ex. 3.7). Moreover, there is an example of a toric vector bundle
on the Losev-Manin space LM n such that Y = M 0,n [GHPS12, p. 21]
(see 7.3 for details on Losev-Manin spaces).
10

The question whether P(E) is a MDS seems difficult for non-toric
vector bundles E, even when rk E = 2 [MOSC14].
4.2. Ample divisors. An ample divisor in a MDS may or may not be
a MDS. A question of Okawa: does every MDS have a (not necessarily
ample) divisor which is a MDS?
4.2.1. Lefschetz-type theorems [Jow11]. If X is a smooth MDS of
dimension ≥ 4 over C which satisfies a certain GIT condition, then
any smooth ample divisor Y ⊂ X is a MDS. Moreover, the restriction
map identifies N1 (X) and N1 (Y ). Under this identification, every Mori
chamber of Y is a union of some Mori chambers of X and Nef(Y ) =
Nef(X). The GIT condition is stable under taking products and taking
the projective bundle of the direct sum of at least three line bundles.
The GIT condition is satisfied by smooth varieties of dimension at least
2 and with ρ = 1. For toric varieties, the GIT condition is equivalent
to the corresponding fan Σ being 2-neighborly, i.e., for any 2 rays of
Σ, the convex cone spanned by them is also in Σ. See also [AL12] for
examples of non-ample divisors which are MDS.
4.2.2. Hypersurfaces in Pm ×Pn [Ott15]. If X ⊂ Pn ×Pm is a hypersurface of type (d, e), the cones Nef(X), Mov(X) and Eff(X) are rational polyhedral. If m, n ≥ 2, X is a MDS (as proved also in [Jow11]).
If m = 1 and d ≤ n or e = 1, then X is a MDS. However, a very
general hypersurface X ⊂ P1 × Pn of degree (d, e) with d ≥ n + 1 and
e ≥ 2 is not MDS, as Nef(X) is generated by H1 and neH2 − dH1
(where Hi = p∗i O(1) and p1 , p2 are the two projections), and the divisor neH2 − dH1 has no effective multiple. As noted in [Ott15], it is
the value of d, rather than −KX , that determines whether a general
hypersurface of degree (d, e) is a MDS or not. In particular, it is not
true that a sufficiently ample hypersurface in a MDS is again a MDS.
4.3. Smooth rational surfaces. A smooth rational surface X whose
anticanonical class −KX is big (the Iitaka dimension κ(−KX ) is 2) is
a MDS [TVV11, Thm. 1]9. There are examples of smooth rational
surfaces with −KX big, which are not of Fano type [TVV11]. Smooth
rational surfaces X with κ(−KX ) = 1 are MDS if and only if Eff(X) is
rational polyhedral [AL11]. It is not clear what this condition means
in practice. By Ex. 3.5, if X = Bl P2p1 ,...,p9 , where p1 , . . . , p9 are the
base points of a cubic pencil, then X is a MDS if and only if p1 , . . . , p9
9There is evidence that the same result holds for all projective Q-factorial rational

surfaces - see Thm. 6.6.
11

are the 9 inflection points of the cubics in the pencil (the configuration
is unique up to Aut(P2 )). When the points are not the base points of
a cubic pencil, it is not clear what the precise condition should be for
X to be a MDS.
When κ(−KX ) ≤ 0, the question is less settled. There exist smooth
rational surfaces (of arbitrarily large Picard number) with κ(−KX ) =
−∞ which are MDS [HP15].
4.4. Surfaces with ρ(X) = 2. The classification of singular rational
MDS surfaces with ρ(X) = 2 is far from settled (see Sections 6 and 8).
In general, understanding when the blow-up Blp X of a surface X with
ρ(X) = 1 at a general point p is a MDS, is related to the rationality of
Seshadri constants (see Section 5) and is not understood in most cases.
4.5. Singularities of Cox rings and positivity of −KX . Assume
char k = 0 and let X be a MDS. Then X is of Fano type (resp., CalabiYau type) if and only if Spec(Cox(X)) has klt singularities (resp. log
canonical singularities) [KO15] (see also [GOST15], [Bro13]). Recall
that X is said to be of Calabi-Yau type if there exists a log-canonical
pair (X, ∆) such that (KX + ∆) is Q-linearly trivial. It would be
interesting if the condition −KX ∈ Eff(X) is also reflected in Cox(X).
5. Blow-ups of surfaces of Picard number one
Let X be a projective, Q-factorial, normal surface with ρ(X) = 1.
Let H be an ample Q-divisor on X and let
w := H 2 .
If p ∈ X is a general point, let Blp X denote the blow-up of p and E
be the exceptional divisor. The Mori cone of Blp X has the form
NE(Blp X) = R≥0 {E, R},

R = H − ǫE,

ǫ ∈ R>0 .

There are two possibilities:
either R2 = 0, or R2 < 0. Assume that
√
R2 = 0. Then ǫ = w and we have
Nef(X) = R≥0 {H, R}.
In particular, ǫ is the Seshadri constant ǫ(H, p) of H at the point p.
Then Blp X is a MDS if and only if R is semiample (in particular,
ǫ ∈ Q). There are no known examples (in any dimension) of irrational
Seshadri constants at points. For example, if√ X ⊂ P3 is a general
quintic surface, it is expected that ǫ(O(1), p) = 5 for a general point p.
We discuss other conjectural examples of irrational Seshadri constants
in Section 6.
12

Assume now R2 < 0. Then there exists an irreducible curve C on
Blp X such that C 2 < 0 and C spans the same ray as R. Then Blp X
is a MDS if and only if the class
w
R⊥ := H − E
ǫ
is semiample, or equivalently, using Zariski’s theorem, the ray spanned
by R⊥ contains a movable divisor. As E and C span NE(Blp X) and
R⊥ is the extremal ray of Nef(X), it follows that R⊥ is semiample if
and only if C is not contained in the base locus of d(R⊥ ), for some
d > 0. We state this observation as a Lemma:
Lemma 5.1. Let X be a projective, Q-factorial surface with Picard
number ρ(X) = 1 and let p ∈ X be a general point. Let Blp X be the
blow-up of X at p and let E be the exceptional divisor. Assume that
Blp X contains an irreducible curve C 6= E such that C 2 < 0. Then
Blp X is a MDS if and only if there exists an effective divisor D on
Blp X such that D · C = 0 and the linear system |D| does not contain
C as a fixed component. Equivalently, there exists a curve D̄ on X that
intersects the image C̄ of C in X only at p and with multiplicity one.
Remark 5.2. Assume the situation in Lemma 5.1 and char k > 0. If X
and p can be defined over the algebraic closure of a finite field, then a
divisor D as in the Lemma always exists. This follows from [Art62] if
X is smooth. In general, one can consider the desingularization of X
and the same conclusion holds.
6. Blow-ups of weighted projective planes
Let a, b, c > 0 be pairwise coprime integers and consider the weighted
projective space
P = P(a, b, c) = Proj S,
where S = k[x, y, z] and x, y, z have degrees
deg(x) = a,

deg(y) = b,

deg(z) = c.

Then P is a toric, projective, Q-factorial surface with Picard number
one. Note that P is smooth outside the three torus invariant points,
but singular at some of these points if (a, b, c) 6= (1, 1, 1). If D1 , D2 , D3
are the torus invariant (Weil) divisors, let
H = m1 D1 + m2 D2 + m3 D3 ,
for some integers m1 , m2 , m3 such that m1 a + m2 b + m3 c = 1. Then
Cl(P) = Z{H},

Pic(P) = Z{abcH},
13

1
.
abc
Moreover, OProj S (d) ∼
= O(dH) for all d ∈ Z and H0 (P, O(d)) can be
identified with the degree d part Sd of S. If π : Ble P → P is the blowup map, let E = π −1 (e). We abuse notations and denote by H the
pull-back π −1 (H) (note that e does not belong to the support of H).
We have Cl(Ble P) = Z{H, E} and hence a Cox ring of Ble P is
M
Cox(Ble P) =
H0 (X, O(dH − lE)).
H2 =

d,l∈Z

It was observed by Cutkosky [Cut91] that finite generation of Cox(Ble P)
is equivalent to the finite generation of the symbolic Rees algebra Rs (p)
of the prime ideal p of S defining the point e, or equivalently p is a
monomial prime, i.e., the kernel of the k-algebra homomorphism:
φ : k[x, y, z] → k[t],

φ(x = ta ,

φ(y) = tb ,

φ(z) = tc .

The symbolic Rees algebra of a prime ideal p in a ring R, is the ring
M
p(l) , where p(l) = pl Rp ∩ R.
Rs (p) :=
l≥0

In our situation, symbolic Rees algebra Rs (p) can be identified with
the following subalgebra of Cox(X):
M
H0 (X, O(dH − lE)),
d,l∈Z≥0

which is clearly finitely generated if and only if Cox(Ble P) is finitely
generated (or equivalently Noetherian).
The study of the symbolic Rees algebras Rs (p) for monomial primes
has a long history: [Hun82], [Hun87], [Cut91], [GNS91a], [GNS91b],
[Sri91], [GM92], [GNW94], [KM09], [CK11], [GK16]. Prior to [GK16],
the only non-finitely generated examples known were the following:
Theorem 6.1. [GNW94, Cor. 1.2, Rmk. 4.5] Assume (a, b, c) is one
of the following:
• (7m − 3, 5m2 − 2m, 8m − 3), with m ≥ 4 and 3 ∤ m,
• (7m − 10, 5m2 − 7m + 1, 8m − 3), with m ≥ 5, 3 ∤ 7m − 10 and
m 6≡ −7(mod 59).
Then Ble P(a, b, c) is not a MDS when char k = 0.
The original proof of Theorem 6.1 involved a reduction to positive
characteristic. Using methods of toric geometry, Gonzalez and Karu
[GK16] gave a different proof to Theorem 6.1, which allows allows for
many more examples of toric surfaces X with Picard number one for
14

which Ble X is not a MDS in characteristic zero (Thm. 8.7 - to be
discussed in detail in Section 8). In particular:
Theorem 6.2. [GK16] If char k = 0 Ble P(a, b, c) is not a MDS if
(a, b, c) is one of the following:
(7, 15, 26),

(7, 17, 22),

(10, 13, 21),

(11, 13, 19),

(12, 13, 17).

The above are all the triples (a, b, c) with a + b + c ≤ 50 that satisfy
the conditions in Thm. 8.7. Key in all the examples in [GK16] is that
Ble P has a negative curve, other than E (hence, Lemma 5.1 applies).
√
Question 6.3. Are there any triples (a, b, c) for which abc ∈
/ Z and
Ble P(a, b, c) contains no curves C 6= E with C 2 < 0?
√
As explained in Section 5, if abc ∈
/ Z and Ble P(a, b, c) has no
negative curves, then Ble P is not a MDS (in any characteristic), as
NE(Ble P) and Nef(Ble P) have an irrational extremal ray generated
1
by H − √abc
E. In particular, Seshadri constant ǫ(H, e) is irrational.
Furthermore, if k = C, the Nagata conjecture for P2 and abc points
holds [CK11, Prop. 5.2.].
If char k > 0 and Ble P is not a MDS, then Ble P has no negative
√
/
curve, other than E (see Rmk. 5.2). In particular, either abc ∈
1
Z or H − √abc
E is not semiample. If Ble P(a, b, c) has no negative
curve in characteristic p, by standard reduction p methods, it follows
Ble P(a, b, c) has no negative curves in characteristic zero.
Question 6.4. [KM09] Does Ble P(9, 10, 13) contain a curve C 6= E
with C 2 < 0?
In Section 8 we discuss an approach (for char k = 0) to the classifcation problem 1.2 by reducing the question to an interpolation problem.
In particular, Question 6.4 has a negative answer (in char k = 0, hence,
also in char k = p for all but finitely many primes p) if and only if there
is an affirmative answer to the following:
Question 6.5. (Question 1.3) Let ∆ be the polytope in R2 with coordinates (0, 0), (10, 40), (36, 27). For every q ≥ 1, let
√
mq = ⌊q 1170⌋ + 1.
Is it true that for every q ≥ 1 and any point (i, j) ∈ q∆ ∩ Z2 , there
exists a curve C ⊂ R2 of degree mq passing through all the points
(i′ , j ′ ) 6= (i, j) in q∆ ∩ Z2 , but not (i, j)?
15

Computer calculations show that the answer is affirmative for q ≤ 5.
Most known affirmative results are covered by the following:
Theorem 6.6. [Cut91] If the anticanonical divisor of Ble P(a, b, c)
−K = (a + b + c)H − E

is big, then Ble P(a, b, c) is a MDS. In particular, if (−K)2 > 0, i.e., if
√
a + b + c > abc,
then Ble P(a, b, c) is a MDS.
Note that if (a, b, c) 6= (1, 1, 1) and −K is big, Ble P(a, b, c) has a
negative curve, other than E. Several particular cases of Thm. 6.6 were
proved previously by algebraic methods [Hun82], [Hun87]. Srinivasan
[Sri91] gave examples of triples (a, b, c) for which Ble P(a, b, c) is a MDS,
but −K is not always big:
(a) (6, b, c), for any b, c
(b) (5, 77, 101) (in this case κ(−K) = −∞).
A particular case of Theorem 6.6 is when one of a, b, c is ≤ 4. As
noted in [Cut91], when compared with (b) above, this raises the question whether Ble P(5, b, c) is always a MDS.
7. Blow-ups of higher dimensional toric varieties
Recall that a toric variety X corresponds to the data (N, Σ) where
N is a lattice (a finitely generated free Z-module) and a fan Σ ⊂ NR .
Then X = X(N, Σ) is Q-factorial if and only the fan Σ is simplicial.
Two toric varieties X = X(N, Σ) and X ′ = X(N ′ , Σ′ ) are isomorphic in
codimension one if and only if Σ and Σ′ have the same rays. To reduce
dimensions when considering Question 1.1, one has the following result:
Proposition 7.1. [CT15, Prop. 3.1] Let π : N → N ′ be a surjective
map of lattices with kernel of rank 1 spanned by a vector v0 ∈ N. Let
Γ be a finite set of rays in NR spanned by elements of N, such that the
rays ±R0 spanned by ±v0 are not in Γ. Let Σ′ ⊂ NR′ be a complete
simplicial fan with rays given by π(Γ). Suppose that the corresponding
toric variety X ′ is projective. Then
(1) There exists a complete simplicial fan Σ ⊂ NR with rays given
by Γ ∪ {±R0 } and such that the corresponding toric variety X
is projective and π induces a surjective morphism p : X → X ′ .
(2) There exists an SQM Z of Ble X such that the rational map
Z 99K Ble X ′ induced by p is regular. In particular, if Ble X is
a MDS then Ble X ′ is a MDS.
16

Corollary 7.2. Assume X = X(N, Σ) is a toric variety of dimension
n. Assume there exists a saturated sublattice
N ′ ⊂ N,

rk N ′ = n − 2

with the following properties:
(1) The vector space N ′ ⊗ Q is generated by rays R of Σ with the
property that −R is also a ray of Σ.
(2) There exist three rays of Σ with primitive generators u, v, w
whose images generate N/N ′ and such that
au + bv + cw = 0 (mod N ′ )
for some pairwise coprime integers a, b, c > 0.
Then there exists a rational map Ble X 99K Ble P(a, b, c) which is a
composition of SQMs and surjective morphisms between normal, projective, Q-factorial varieties. In particular, if Ble X is a MDS, then
Ble P(a, b, c) is a MDS.
7.3. Losev-Manin spaces. Let LM n be the Losev-Manin space
[LM00]. The space LM n can be described also as the blow-up of Pn−3
at points p1 . . . , pn−2 in linearly general position and the proper transforms of all the linear subspaces spanned by the points, in order of
increasing dimension. The space LM n is a toric variety and its fan Σ
is the barycentric subdivision of the fan of Pn−3 . It has lattice
N = Z{e1 , . . . , en−2 }/Z{e1 + . . . + en−2 },

and rays generated by the primitive lattice vectors
X
ei , for all I ⊂ {1, . . . , n − 2}, 1 ≤ #I ≤ n − 3.
i∈I

Notice that rays of this fan come in opposite pairs. To construct, for
all n, a sublattice N ′ ⊂ N satisfying the conditions in Cor. 7.2, we can
proceed as follows: we partition
a a
{1, . . . , n − 2} = S1
S2
S3
into subsets of size a + 2, b + 2, c + 2 (so n = a + b + c + 8). We also
fix some indices ni ∈ Si , for i = 1, 2, 3. Let N ′ ⊂ N be the sublattice
generated by the following vectors:
eni + er

for r ∈ Si \ {ni }, i = 1, 2, 3.

If π : N → N/N ′ is the projection map, then we have the following:
(1) N ′ is a lattice generated by the vectors π(eni ), for i = 1, 2, 3;
(2) aπ(en1 ) + bπ(en2 ) + cπ(en3 ) = 0.
17

Corollary 7.4. Let n = a + b + c + 8, where a, b, c are positive pairwise
coprime integers. If Ble LM n is a MDS then Ble P(a, b, c) is a MDS.
Cor. 7.4 and Theorems 6.1 and 6.2 give examples of integers n when
Ble LM n is not a MDS (for n ≥ 134 if ones uses Theorem 6.1 and
n ≥ 50 if one uses Theorem 6.2). A smaller n for which Ble LM n is
not a MDS was subsequently obtained in [GK16], using Cor. 7.2 and
projecting from a different sublattice N ′ used in the proof of Cor. 7.4:
Theorem 7.5. [GK16] If char k = 0, Ble LM 13 is not a MDS.
Cor. 7.2 is used to prove that if Ble LM 13 is a MDS, then Ble P(7, 15, 26)
is a MDS. However, Ble P(7, 15, 26) is not a MDS (Thm. 6.2). The
smallest known n (as of the time of this writing) for which Ble LM n is
not a MDS was recently obtained in [HKL16] by again using Cor. 7.2
and projecting from a yet different sublattice:
Addendum 7.6. [HKL16] If char k = 0, Ble LM 10 is not a MDS.
Cor. 7.2 is used to prove that if Ble LM 10 is a MDS, then Ble P(12, 13, 17)
is a MDS. However, Ble P(12, 13, 17) is not a MDS (Thm. 6.2).
Lemma 7.7. If Ble LM n+1 is a MDS, then Ble LM n is a MDS.
Proof. Note that although there exist forgetful maps LM n+1 → LM n ,
in general it is not clear whether one can resolve the rational map
Ble LM n+1 99K Ble LM n
by an SQM followed by a surjective morphism. However, if Ble LM n+1
is a MDS, this is always the case, and we are done by [Oka16].

As Ble LM 6 is a MDS in any characteristic (follows from [Cas09] see 7.9; moreover, it is a threefold of Fano type), we are left with:
Question 7.8. Is Ble LM n a MDS for 7 ≤ n ≤ 9, char k = 0?
7.9. Losev-Manin spaces and the moduli spaces M 0,n There is
a close connection between the blow-ups Ble LM n of the Losev-Manin
spaces and the moduli spaces M 0,n of stable, n-pointed rational curves.
By Kapranov [Kap93], M 0,n is the blow-up of Pn−3 at points p1 . . . , pn−1
in linearly general position and the proper transforms of all the linear
subspaces spanned by the points, in order of increasing dimension. Up
to changing coordinates, we may assume that
p1 = [1, 0, 0, . . . , 0], p2 = [0, 1, 0, . . . , 0], . . . , pn−2 = [0, 0, 0, . . . , 1],
pn−1 = e = [1, 1, 1, . . . , 1].
18

Note that pn−1 is the identity of the open torus in LM n . Moreover,
M 0,n is the blow-up of LM n along e, and the (proper transforms of
the) linear susbpaces spanned by e and {pi }i∈I , for all the subsets I of
{1, . . . , n − 2} with 1 ≤ #I ≤ n − 5. In particular, there is a projective
birational morphism M 0,n → Ble LM n .
Theorem 7.10. [CT15]
(1) If M 0,n is a MDS, then Ble LM n is a MDS;
(2) If Ble LM n+1 is a MDS, then M 0,n is a MDS.

The existence of forgetful maps M 0,n+1 → M 0,n implies that if
M 0,n+1 is a MDS, then M 0,n is a MDS. Combined with Cor. 7.4 and
the resuts in 7.3, Thm. 7.10 gives a negative answer to the question of
Hu and Keel [HK00] whether M 0,n is a MDS.
Theorem 7.11. [CT15],[GK16],[HKL16] If n ≥ 10, M 0,n is not a
MDS in characteristic 0.
Note that M 0,6 is a MDS in any characteristic [Cas09] (moreover, it
is a threefold of Fano type). The range 7 ≤ n ≤ 9 is still open.
Part (1) of Thm. 7.10 follows from [HK00] (see Rmk. 2.4). Part (2)
follows from:
Theorem 7.12. [CT15] Let Xn be the toric variety which is the blowup of Pn−3 along points p1 , . . . , pn−2 and (all the proper transforms
of ) the linear subspaces of codimension at least 3 spanned by the points
p1 , . . . , pn−2 . Then Ble Xn+1 is an SQM of a P1 -bundle over M 0,n which
is the projectivization of a direct sum of line bundles.
Hence, M 0,n is a MDS if and only if Ble Xn+1 is a MDS. In particular:
• If n ≥ 11, then Ble Xn is not a MDS if char k = 0;
• If n ≤ 7, then Ble Xn is a MDS.

7.13. Further questions.
(1) Are there other examples of toric varieties besides Losev-Manin
spaces, to which Cor. 7.2 applies?
(2) What are the simplest smooth toric varieties X for which Ble X
is not a MDS? Any smooth Fano varieties?
If X is a projective, Q-factorial toric variety such that all the torus
invariant divisors are not movable, then Ble X is not toric. It may or
may not be a MDS (for example, when X is LM 6 or LM n with n ≥ 10).
If some of the torus invariant divisors are movable, then Ble X may be
toric (for example when X = Pn ), but may not even be a MDS (for
example, when X = Xn from Thm. 7.12). It would be interesting to
find a geometric criterion for Ble X to not be a MDS.
19

8. Blow-ups of toric surfaces
In this section we assume
char k = 0.
Let (X∆ , H) be a polarized toric projective surface with H an ample Q-Cartier divisor on X∆ corresponding to the rational polytope
∆ ⊂ NR∗ = R2 . If X∆ has Picard number ρ, then ∆ is a rational
polytope with ρ + 2 vertices. If d > 0 is an integer such that d∆ has
integer coordinates, then global sections of OX∆ (dH) can be identified
with Laurent polynomials (considered as regular functions on the open
torus):
X
f=
a(i,j) xi y j ∈ H0 (X, O(dH)).
(i,j)∈d∆∩Z2

The vertices of ∆ correspond to the ρ + 2 torus invariant points of
X. A section f vanishes at a torus invariant point if and only if the
coefficient aij of the corresponding vertex in d∆ is zero. We fix a vertex
(x1 , y1 ) of ∆ and and let p1 be the corresponding torus invariant point.
For simplicity, we assume this is the “leftmost lowest” point of ∆.
We now translate into linear algebra the condition that a global
section of OX∆ (dH) has a certain multiplicity at the point e. Let Nd
be the number of lattice points (i, j) ∈ d∆ ∩ Z2 and let Rm be the
number of derivatives δxa δyb of order ≤ m − 1 in two variables:

m(m + 1)
.
2
Definition 8.1. We order the pairs (i, j) and the pairs (a, b) lexicographically (so the first (i, j) corresponds to the leftmost point (dx1 , dy1 )
of d∆). We define two Nd × Rm matrices A = Ad,m and B = Bd,m ,
whose entries for the pairs (i, j) and (a, b) as are given as follows:
   
j
i
a b
i j
,
b!
A(i,j),(a,b) = δx δy (x y )(1, 1) = a!
b
a
Rm = 1 + 2 + . . . + m =

B(i,j),(a,b) = ia j b .
where we denote for any integers n, k (k ≥ 0, but n possibly negative)
 
n(n − 1)(n − 2) . . . (n − k + 1)
n
=
.
k
k!
We write N = Nd , R = Rm , A = Ad,m , B = Bd,m , whenever there is
no risk of confusion.
Lemma 8.2. The matrix Bd,m can be obtained from Ad,m by a sequence
of reversible column operations.
20

Proof. We claim that for every column (a, b) of A, starting from left
to right, we can do (reversible) column operations on A involving only
previous columns, and end up with the column that has entries ia j b
for every row (i, j). For simplicity, we may first ignore
 the j’s and
i
consider the situation when one matrix has entries a! a and the other
ia (with rows indexed by i and columns by a). It is easy to see that
one can do reversible column operations from one matrix to the other:
use induction on a and expand the product
i(i − 1)(i − 2) . . . (i − a + 1).

The general case is similar.


Lemma 8.3. Let A be an N × R matrix with entries in Q. The following are equivalent:
P
(a) Any linear combination
αj Rj of the rows Rj of the matrix A
that is zero, must have αi = 0,
(b) There exists a linear combination of the columns of A that equals
the vector ei = (0, 0, . . . , 1, 0 . . . 0) ∈ RNd .
In particular, A has rank N if and only if for every 1 ≤ i ≤ N, there
exists a linear combination of the columns of A which equals ei .
Proof. May assume i = 1. Consider the pairing (, ) : V × W → Q with
V a Q-vector space with basis e1 , . . . , eN and W a Q-vector space with
basis f1 , . . . , fR and (eu , fv ) = auv . Let
φ : V → W ∗,

φ∗ : W → V ∗

be the induced linear maps. Condition (b) is equivalent to the dual
vector e∗1 ∈ V ∗ being in the image of the map φ∗ . Condition (a) is
equivalent to the kernel K of the map φ being contained in the span
of e2 , . . . , eN . Let I = Im(φ) ⊂ W ∗ . Hence, there is an exact sequence
0 → K → V → I → 0.

Consider the inclusion map u : K → V . Dualizing, it follows that
Im(φ∗ ) = I ∗ = ker(u∗ ). Hence, e∗1 ∈ Im(φ∗ ) if and only if u∗ (e∗1 ) = 0.
As u∗ (e∗1 ) is the linear functional K → Q given by k 7→ e∗1 (k), for
k ∈ K, it follows that u∗ (e∗1 ) = 0 if and only if e∗1 (k) = 0, for all k ∈ K,
or equivalently, K is contained in the span of e2 , . . . , eN .

Lemma 8.4. Let Ble X∆ be the blow-up of X∆ at the identity point e
and let E denote the exceptional divisor. The following are equivalent:
(i) The linear system |dH − mE| is empty,
(ii) The matrix Ad,m has linearly independent rows,
21

(iii) The matrix Bd,m has linearly independent rows,
(iv) For every (i, j) ∈ d∆ ∩ Z2 , there exists a polynomial f (x, y) ∈
Q[x, y] of degree ≤ m − 1, such that f (i, j) 6= 0 and
f (i′ , j ′ ) = 0 for all (i′ , j ′ ) ∈ d∆ ∩ Z2 , (i′ j ′ ) 6= (i, j).
Equivalently, condition (iv) says that one can separate any lattice
point in d∆ from the rest by degree m − 1 plane curves.
Proof. A non-zero section of OX∆ (dH) has multiplicity m at the point
e if and only if there exists a non-zero linear combination of the rows of
Ad,m which is zero. Hence, (i) is clearly equivalent to (ii). By Lemma
8.2, (ii) is equivalent to (iii). By Lemma 8.3, (iii) is equivalent to
(iv).

Lemma 8.5. Let Ble X∆ be the blow-up of X∆ at the identity point e
and let E denote the exceptional divisor. The following are equivalent:
(i) All non-zero sections of the linear system |dH − mE| (if any)
define curves that pass through the torus invariant point p1 ,
(ii) There exists a linear combination of the columns of the matrix
Ad,m that equals the vector (1, 0 . . . , 0) ∈ RNd ,
(iii) There exists a linear combination of the columns of the matrix
Bd,m that equals the vector (1, 0 . . . , 0) ∈ RNd ,
(iv) There exists a polynomial f (x, y) ∈ Q[x, y] of degree ≤ m − 1,
such that f (dx1 , dy1 ) 6= 0 and
f (i, j) = 0 for all (i, j) ∈ d∆, (i, j) 6= (dx1 , dy1 ).
Equivalently, condition (iv) says that there exists a plane curve of
degree ≤ m − 1 that passes through all the lattice points in d∆, except
the lefmost point.
Proof. Condition (i) is equivalent to the fact that any non-zero section
of OX∆ (dH) which has multiplicity m at the point e, must haveP
the coefficient a(dx1 ,dy1 ) is zero. Equivalently, any linear combination
αi Ri
of rows Ri of the matrix A that is zero, must have α1 = 0. By Lemma
8.3 this is equivalent to condition (ii). Lemma 8.2 implies that (ii) and
(iii) are equivalent. Condition (iv) is just a reformulation of (iii). 
Consider now the situation when ρ(X∆ ) = 1 (i.e., ∆ is a triangle)
and Ble (X∆ ) has a curve C 6= E with C 2 < 0. As in [GK16], we
assume that the point (0, 0) is one vertex of ∆, the point (0, 1) lies
in the interior of a non-adjacent edge, and moreover, C is the proper
22

transform of the closure C̄ of the curve defined by the section 1 − y of
OX∆ (H). Then C̄ = H in Cl(X∆ ) and
C = H −E

in Cl(Ble X∆ ).

The condition C 2 < 0 is equivalent to
w := H 2 = 2(Area(∆)) < 1.
Denote by (x1 , y1) the leftmost point of ∆ and by (x2 , y2 ) the rightmost point of ∆. Let p1 , respectively p2 , be the corresponding torus
invariant points. Note that C̄ contains p1 and p2 . Moreover, w = H 2 =
x2 − x1 is the width of ∆.

The main theorem in [GK16] becomes an instance of the following more general statement, which shows that the question of Ble X∆
not being a MDS is equivalent to solving an interpolation problem for
points in the (usual) affine plane.
Proposition 8.6. Let (X∆ , H) be a polarized projective toric surface
with ρ(X∆ ) = 1 corresponding to a triangle ∆ as above. Assume
w = H 2 < 1.
Then Ble X∆ is not a MDS if and only if for any sufficiently divisible
integer d > 0 such that d∆ has integer coordinates, there exists a curve
C ⊂ A2 of degree dw−1 that passes through all the lattice points d∆∩Z2
except the point (dx1 , dy1).
Proof. By Lemma 5.1, Ble X∆ is not a MDS if and only if any non-zero
effective divisor D with class dH − dwE (d > 0) contains C in its fixed
locus, or equivalently, the image D̄ of D in X∆ contains some other
point of C̄ than e (for example p1 ). Hence, Ble X∆ is not a MDS if
and only if for any sufficiently large and divisible d, any element of the
linear system |dH − dwE| contains p1 . The result now follows from
Lemma 8.5.

The difficult part is of course to solve the interpolation problem
posed in Prop. 8.6. We claim that the main theorem in [GK16] gives
sufficient (but not necessary) conditions for this.

Theorem 8.7. [GK16, Thm. 1.2] Let (X∆ , H) be a polarized projective
toric surface with Picard number one, corresponding to a triangle ∆ as
above and assume
w = H 2 < 1.
If s1 < s2 < s3 are the slopes defining the triangle ∆, let
n = #([s1 , s2 ] ∩ Z).
23

Assume that
#((n − 1)[s2 , s3 ] ∩ Z) = n,

and ns2 ∈
/ Z.

Then for any integer d > 0 such that d∆ has integer coordinates, there
exists a curve C ⊂ A2 of degree dw −1 that passes through all the lattice
points d∆∩Z2 except the leftmost point (dx1 , dy1). In particular, Ble X∆
is not a MDS by Proposition 8.6.
As mentioned in [GK16], #([s1 , s2 ] ∩ Z) represents the number of
points in d∆∩Z2 (for any d such that d∆ has integer coordinates) lying
in the second column from the left, i.e., the column with x coordinate
mx1 + 1. Similarly, for any k ≥ 1, the number
#((k − 1)[s2 , s3 ] ∩ Z)
is the number of points in d∆ ∩ Z2 lying in the k-th column from the
right, i.e., the column with x coordinate mx2 − (k − 1). None of these
numbers depend on d. The condition ns2 ∈
/ Z is equivalent to the
(n + 1)-th column from the right not containing a lattice point on the
top edge (see Rmk. 8.9).
Proof of Theorem 8.7. As in [GK16], we first transform the triangle d∆
by integral translations and shear transformations (i, j) 7→ (i, j + ai)
for a ∈ Z. Clearly, the assumptions still hold for the new triangle. To
see that the conclusion is also not affected, recall that the conclusion
is equivalent to the fact that any section f of H0 (X∆ , dH)
X
a(i,j) xi y j
f (x, y) =
(i,j)∈d∆∩Z2

that vanishes to order dw at e = (1, 1) has the coefficient a(dx1 ,dx2 ) =
0 (i.e., f vanishes at the torus invariant point p1 ). The translation
operation multiplies f with a monomial, and the shear transformation
performs a change of variables on the torus. The two operations do not
affect the order of vanishing of f at e or whether f vanishes at p1 .
We first apply a shear transformation, so that −2 < s2 < −1 (possible since s2 ∈
/ Z). We then translate the triangle so that the leftmost
point moves to a point with x-coordinate −1 and the rightmost point
moves to a point on the x-axis. As there are precisely n lattice points
in the n-th column from the right, it follows from −2 < s2 < −1 and
that the n points are, in coordinates
(α, 0),

(α, 1),

(α, 2),

. . . , (α, n − 1),
24

for some α ≥ 0,

along with 0 ≤ s3 . Note ns2 ∈
/ Z implies α > 010. It also follows that
for all 0 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, the column in d∆ with x-coordinate α + i has
exactly i lattice points:
(α + i, 0),

(α + i, 1),

(α + i, 2),
2

. . . , (α + i, n − 1 − i).

We denote these points {Qj } (a total of n 2+n points). Let the n lattice
points in d∆ in the second column from the left be
P0 = (β, 0),

P1 = (β + 1, 0), ,

. . . , Pn−1 = (β + n − 1, 0),

for some β ≥ 0. As −2 < s2 < −1, the rightmost point must be
L = (−1, β + n + 1).

As the width of d∆ is dw, the integers α, β are related to w, s2 by
α = dw − n,

β = −s2 (dw) − n − 1,

−s2 =

β+n+1
α+n

Lemma 8.8. There is a unique curve C of degree ≤ n passing through
2
points {Pi } and {Qi }. The curve C passes through the point
the n +3n
2
L if and only if nβ = (n + 1)α (or, equivalently, −s2 = 1 + n1 ).
Remark 8.9. It is not hard to see that the condition ns2 ∈
/ Z is equiv1
alent to −s2 = 1 + n , which in turn says that (n + 1)-th column from
the right not containing a lattice point on the top edge.
Assuming Lemma 8.8, Theorem 8.7 follows by considering the union
C ′ of the curve C with all the vertical lines
x = 1,

. . . x = (α − 1).

x = 2,

Note that the degree of C ′ equals dw − 1. Clearly, if ns2 ∈
/ Z, Lemma
′
8.8 implies that C does not pass through L.
Proof of Lemma 8.8. We first write down a basis G0 , . . . , Gn for the
vector space of polynomials in Q[x, y] of degree ≤ n that vanish at the
points {Qj } as follows. For all 0 ≤ i ≤ n, let



y
x−α
.
Gi (x, y) =
n−i
i
Consider now the equation of a curve C that passes through {Qj }:
f (x, y) =

n
X

ci Gi (x, y),

i=0

10We

ci ∈ Q.

may also take α > 0 at the expense of proving the statement only for
sufficiently large and divisible d.
25

Let M be the (n + 1) × (n + 1) matrix with rows indexed by points
P0 , P1 , . . . , Pn−1, L (hence, the last row corresponds to L) and columns
indexed by G0 , . . . , Gn , such that the entry corresponding to the row
Pi (resp. L) and column Gj is Gj (Pi ) (resp. Gj (L)), i.e.,

 
β+i
−α
, 0 ≤ i ≤ n − 1,
MPi ,Gj = Gj (0, β + i) =
n−j
j



−1 − α β + n + 1
.
ML,Gj = Gj (−1, β + n + 1) =
n−j
j

Let M ′ be the n × (n + 1) matrix obtained by taking the first n rows
of M. Clearly, there is a unique curve C passing through {Qj } and
{Pj } if and only if there is a unique solution c = (ci ) (up to scaling) to
the linear system M ′ · c = 0, i.e.,
rk M ′ = n.
To prove this, successively substract row Pn−2 from row Pn−1 , row
Pn−3 from row Pn−2 , etc, row P0 from row P1 . The result is that the
last column of M ′ has the last (n − 1) entries 0. Substracting row Pn−2
from row Pn−1 , row Pn−3 from row Pn−2 , etc, row P1 from row P2 leaves
the second column of M ′ with the last (n − 2) entries 0. Continuing
in

k
k
the same fashion (and using the relation k+1
=
+
)
we
obtain
l+1
l+1
l
an “upper diagonal” matrix n × (n + 1) matrix M ′′ with entries:
 −α β 
if i + j ≤ n
′′
j
n−i−j
MPi ,Gj =
0
if i + j > n
Hence, rk M ′ = rk M ′′ = n.
We now prove that det M = 0 if and only if nβ = (n + 1)α. Clearly,
the curve C passes through the point L if and only if det M = 0, hence,
this would finish the proof. Let M̃ be the matrix obtained by adding
to the matrix M ′′ the last row of M, i.e.,
 −α β 
if i + j ≤ n
j
n−i−j
M̃Pi ,Gj =
0
if i + j > n,
M̃L,Gj




−1 − α β + n + 1
.
=
n−j
j

Clearly, det M = det M̃ . Let M̃ (1) be the matrix obtained
from M̃

by first dividing the column corresponding to Gj by −α
(for
every j)
j 

−1−α
−α α+j
and multiplying the last row with α. Using that
=
,
j
j
α
26

the entries of M̃ (1) are given by


β
(1)
n−i−j
M̃Pi ,Gj =
0
(1)

M̃L,Gj

if i + j ≤ n
if i + j > n,


β+n+1
.
= (α + j)
n−j

Let M̃ (2) be the matrix obtained from M̃ (1) by first multiplying the
last row with (−1), then adding to the last row the sum of rows:






n+1
n+1
n+1
(row Pn−1 ),
(row P1 ) + . . . +
(row P0 ) +
n
1
0
1
then finally dividing the last row by ( β+n+1
). Using the identities



 
 

n−j 
X
n−1
n
β+n+1
n+1
β
=n
, l
=
l−1
l
n−j
i
n−i−j
i=0

it follows that the entries in the last row of M̃ (2) are:


β+n
(2)
, 1 ≤ j ≤ n,
M̃L,Gj =
n−j−1


(α + n)(n + 1)
β+n
(2)
−
M̃L,G0 =
.
n−1
(β + n + 1)

Finally, let M̃ (3) be the matrix obtained from M̃ (2) by substracting
from the last row, the following sum of rows:


 
 
n
n
n
(row Pn−1 ).
(row P2 ) + . . . +
(row P1 ) +
n−2
1
0
The matrix M̃ (3) has entries
(3)

1 ≤ j ≤ n,

M̃L,Gj = 0,
(3)

M̃L,G0 = n −

(α + n)(n + 1)
.
(β + n + 1)

(3)

Note that M̃L,G0 = 0 if and only if nβ = (n + 1)α. As M̃ (3) is an upper
(3)
triangular matrix with det M̃ (3) = M̃L,G0 , the result follows.


There are other possible applications of Prop. 8.6 that are not covered by Theorem 8.7 towards the classification problem 1.2 (see also
[He16]). For toric surfaces of higher Picard number, we expect that
solving an interpolation problem analogous to the one posed in Prop.
27

8.6 will lead to examples of non Mori Dream Spaces. An interesting
question is whether there is higher dimensional version of Prop. 8.6.

28

References
[ADHL15] I. Arzhantsev, U. Derenthal, J. Hausen, and A. Laface, Cox rings, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 144, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015.
[AL11] M. Artebani and A. Laface, Cox rings of surfaces and the anticanonical
Iitaka dimension, Adv. Math. 226 (2011), no. 6, 5252–5267.
, Hypersurfaces in Mori dream spaces, J. Algebra 371 (2012),
[AL12]
26–37.
[AM15] C. Araujo and A. Massarenti, Explicit log Fano structures on blow-ups
of projective spaces (2015), available at arXiv:1505.02460.
[Art62] M. Artin, Some numerical criteria for contractability of curves on algebraic surfaces, Amer. J. Math. 84 (1962), 485–496.
[Bau91] S. Bauer, Parabolic bundles, elliptic surfaces and SU(2)-representation
spaces of genus zero Fuchsian groups, Math. Ann. 290 (1991), no. 3,
509–526.
[BCHM10] C. Birkar, P. Cascini, C. D. Hacon, and J. Mc Kernan, Existence of
minimal models for varieties of log general type, J. Amer. Math. Soc.
23 (2010), no. 2, 405–468.
[Bri07] M. Brion, The total coordinate ring of a wonderful variety, J. Algebra
313 (2007), no. 1, 61–99.
[Bro13] M. Brown, Singularities of Cox rings of Fano varieties, J. Math. Pures
Appl. (9) 99 (2013), no. 6, 655–667.
[Cas09] A.-M. Castravet, The Cox ring of M 0,6 , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 361
(2009), no. 7, 3851–3878.
[CG13] P. Cascini and Y. Gongyo, On the anti-canonical ring and varieties of
Fano type, Saitama Math. J. 30 (2013), 27–38 (2013).
[CK11] S. D. Cutkosky and K. Kurano, Asymptotic regularity of powers of ideals
of points in a weighted projective plane, Kyoto J. Math. 51 (2011), no. 1,
25–45.
[Cox95] D. A. Cox, The homogeneous coordinate ring of a toric variety, J. Algebraic Geom. 4 (1995), no. 1, 17–50.
[CT06] A.-M. Castravet and J. Tevelev, Hilbert’s 14th problem and Cox rings,
Compos. Math. 142 (2006), no. 6, 1479–1498.
[CT15]
, M 0,n is not a Mori dream space, Duke Math. J. 164 (2015),
no. 8, 1641–1667.
[Cut91] S. D. Cutkosky, Symbolic algebras of monomial primes, J. Reine Angew.
Math. 416 (1991), 71–89.
[DCP83] C. De Concini and C. Procesi, Complete symmetric varieties, Invariant
theory (Montecatini, 1982), 1983, pp. 1–44.
[GHPS12] J. L. González, M. Hering, S. Payne, and H. Süss, Cox rings and pseudoeffective cones of projectivized toric vector bundles, Algebra Number
Theory 6 (2012), no. 5, 995–1017.
[GK16] J. L. González and K. Karu, Some non-finitely generated Cox rings,
Compos. Math. 152 (2016), no. 5, 984–996.
[GM92] S. Goto and M. Morimoto, Non-Cohen-Macaulay symbolic blow-ups for
space monomial curves, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 116 (1992), no. 2,
305–311.
29

[GN94] S. Goto and K. Nishida, The Cohen-Macaulay and Gorenstein Rees algebras associated to filtrations, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1994. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 110 (1994), no. 526.
[GNS91a] S. Goto, K. Nishida, and Y. Shimoda, The Gorensteinness of symbolic
Rees algebras for space curves, J. Math. Soc. Japan 43 (1991), no. 3,
465–481.
, Topics on symbolic Rees algebras for space monomial curves,
[GNS91b]
Nagoya Math. J. 124 (1991), 99–132.
[GNW94] S. Goto, K. Nishida, and K. Watanabe, Non-Cohen-Macaulay symbolic
blow-ups for space monomial curves and counterexamples to Cowsik’s
question, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 120 (1994), no. 2, 383–392.
[GOST15] Y. Gongyo, S. Okawa, A. Sannai, and S. Takagi, Characterization of
varieties of Fano type via singularities of Cox rings, J. Algebraic Geom.
24 (2015), no. 1, 159–182.
[He16] Z. He, New examples and non-examples of Mori Dream Spaces when
blowing up toric surfaces of Picard number one, in preparation (2016).
[HK00] Y. Hu and S. Keel, Mori dream spaces and GIT, Michigan Math. J. 48
(2000), 331–348.
[HKL16] J. Hausen, S. Keicher, and A. Laface, On blowing up the weighted projective plane (2016), available at arXiv:1608.04542.
[HP15] D. Hwang and J. Park, Redundant blow-ups of rational surfaces with
big anticanonical divisor, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 219 (2015), no. 12,
5314–5329.
[HS10] J. Hausen and H. Süß, The Cox ring of an algebraic variety with torus
action, Adv. Math. 225 (2010), no. 2, 977–1012.
[Hun82] C. Huneke, On the finite generation of symbolic blow-ups, Math. Z. 179
(1982), no. 4, 465–472.
[Hun87]
, Hilbert functions and symbolic powers, Michigan Math. J. 34
(1987), no. 2, 293–318.
[Jow11] S.-Y. Jow, A Lefschetz hyperplane theorem for Mori dream spaces,
Math. Z. 268 (2011), no. 1-2, 197–209.
[Kap93] M. M. Kapranov, Veronese curves and Grothendieck-Knudsen moduli
space M 0,n , J. Algebraic Geom. 2 (1993), no. 2, 239–262.
[KM09] K. Kurano and N. Matsuoka, On finite generation of symbolic Rees
rings of space monomial curves and existence of negative curves, 2009,
pp. 3268–3290.
[KO15] Y. Kawamata and S. Okawa, Mori dream spaces of Calabi-Yau type
and log canonicity of Cox rings, J. Reine Angew. Math. 701 (2015),
195–203.
[Kov94] S. J. Kovács, The cone of curves of a K3 surface, Math. Ann. 300
(1994), no. 4, 681–691.
[Lan91] W. E. Lang, Extremal rational elliptic surfaces in characteristic p. I.
Beauville surfaces, Math. Z. 207 (1991), no. 3, 429–437.
[Lan94]
, Extremal rational elliptic surfaces in characteristic p. II. Surfaces with three or fewer singular fibres, Ark. Mat. 32 (1994), no. 2,
423–448.

30

[Laz04] R. Lazarsfeld, Positivity in algebraic geometry. I, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys in
Mathematics, vol. 48, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004.
[LM00] A. Losev and Y. Manin, New moduli spaces of pointed curves and pencils
of flat connections, Michigan Math. J. 48 (2000), 443–472.
[LV09] A. Laface and M. Velasco, A survey on Cox rings, Geom. Dedicata 139
(2009), 269–287.
[McK10] J. McKernan, Mori dream spaces, Jpn. J. Math. 5 (2010), no. 1, 127–
151.
[MOSC14] R. Muñoz, G. Occhetta, and L. E. Solá Conde, On rank 2 vector bundles
on Fano manifolds, Kyoto J. Math. 54 (2014), no. 1, 167–197.
[MP86] R. Miranda and U. Persson, On extremal rational elliptic surfaces,
Math. Z. 193 (1986), no. 4, 537–558.
[Muk03] S. Mukai, An introduction to invariants and moduli, Cambridge Studies
in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 81, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003. Translated from the 1998 and 2000 Japanese editions by
W. M. Oxbury.
, Finite generation of the Nagata invariant rings in A-D-E cases,
[Muk05]
RIMS preprint # 1502 (2005).
[Mum76] D. Mumford, Hilbert’s fourteenth problem–the finite generation of subrings such as rings of invariants, Mathematical developments arising from Hilbert problems (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Vol. XXVIII,
Northern Illinois Univ., De Kalb, Ill., 1974), 1976, pp. 431–444.
[Oka16] S. Okawa, On images of Mori dream spaces, Math. Ann. 364 (2016),
no. 3-4, 1315–1342.
[Ott15] J. C. Ottem, Birational geometry of hypersurfaces in products of projective spaces, Math. Z. 280 (2015), no. 1-2, 135–148.
[PŠ71] I. I. a. Š. Pjateckiı̆-Šapiro I. R., Torelli’s theorem for algebraic surfaces
of type K3, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 35 (1971), 530–572.
[Sri91] H. Srinivasan, On finite generation of symbolic algebras of monomial
primes, Comm. Algebra 19 (1991), no. 9, 2557–2564.
[Tot08] B. Totaro, Hilbert’s 14th problem over finite fields and a conjecture on
the cone of curves, Compos. Math. 144 (2008), no. 5, 1176–1198.
[TVV11] D. Testa, A. A. Várilly, and M. Velasco, Big rational surfaces, Math.
Ann. 351 (2011), no. 1, 95–107.
Ana-Maria Castravet: Department of Mathematics, Northeastern University,
360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115
E-mail address: noni@alum.mit.edu

31

