arXiv:1802.00809v1 [] 2 Feb 2018

Arf good semigroups with fixed conductor
Giuseppe Zito

Abstract
In this paper we present a new algorithm to calculate the set of Arf numerical semigroups
with given conductor. Moreover, we extend the previous problem to the class of good semigroups, presenting procedures to compute the set of the Arf good semigroups of Nr with a
fixed conductor c ∈ Nr , for all r ∈ N.

Introduction
The aim of this paper is to present some procedures regarding Arf subsemigroups of Nr for
r ≥ 1. The concept of Arf numerical semigroup firstly arises from the problem of studying
the equivalence between two algebroid branches. Given an algebroid branch R, its multiplicity
sequence is defined to be the sequence of the multiplicities of the succesive blowups Ri of R. Two
algebroid branches are equivalent if they have the same multiplicity sequence (cf. [3, Definition
1.5.11]). This approach, more geometric in nature, was translated in algebraic terms by Arf. In
[1] he introduced the concept of Arf ring and showed that for each ring R there is a smallest
Arf overring R′ , called the Arf closure of R, that has also the same multiplicity sequence of
R. In the same paper it is proved that two algebroid branches are equivalent if and only if their
Arf closure have the same value semigroup, that is a numerical Arf semigroup i.e. a numerical
semigroup S such that S(s) − s is a semigroup, for each s ∈ S, where S(s) = {n ∈ S; n ≥ s}.
In the numerical case an Arf semigroup S = {s0 = 0 < s1 < s2 , . . .} is completely described
by its multiplicity sequence, that is the sequence of the differences si+1 − si . So it is possible
to study the Arf numerical semigroups by focusing on the properties of these sequences with
a combinatorial approach. In this paper we give new procedures to calculate all Arf numerical
semigroups with a prescribed conductor (this problem was already addressed in [4]). Then we
address the Arf semigroups of Nr focusing on the class of good semigroups. The concept of good
semigroup was introduced in [2]. Its definition depends on the properties of the value semigroup
of a one-dimensional analytically unramified ring (for example the local ring of an algebraic
Keywords: Arf numerical semigroup, good semigroup, algebroid curve, conductor.
Mathematics Subject Classification (2010): 20M14, 13A18, 14H50,20-04.

1

curve), but in the same paper it is shown that the class of good semigroups is bigger than the class
of value semigroups. Therefore, the good semigroups can be seen as a natural generalization of
the numerical semigroups and can be studied without referring to the ring theory context, with a
more combinatorical approach. In this paper we deal only with local good semigroups. A good
semigroup S ⊆ Nn is local if the zero vector is the only element of S with zero coordinates. We
extend the definition of Arf semigroup to the good semigroups of Nr in a natural way considering
the usual partial ordering of Nr , where v ≤ u if and only if v[i] ≤ w[i] for all i = 1, . . . , r.
Extending the concept of multiplicity sequence, in [2] it is also shown that to each local Arf good
semigroup can be associated a multiplicity tree that characterizes the semigroup completely. A
tree T of vectors of Nn has to satisfy some properties to be a multiplicity tree of a local Arf
good semigroup. For instance it must have multiplicity sequences along its branches (because
the projection are Arf numerical semigroups) and each node must be able to be expressed as a
sum of nodes in a subtree of T rooted in it. In [7], taking in account this 1-1 correspondence,
it is presented a way to describe a multiplicity tree of an Arf semigroup of Nr by mean of an
ordered collection E of multiplicity sequences and a matrix M(T )E = (pi,j ). In the same paper
it is shown that we can consider a particular class of trees, the untwisted ones, that are easier to
study since they can be expressed by a vector of Nr−1 instead of a matrix. This is not restrictive
because every multiplicity tree can be transformed by an opportune permutation into an untwisted
one (this implies that the corresponding semigroups are isomorphic). Then, using the properties
of this representation and the procedure developed in the numerical case, we address the problem
of computing the set of all the Arf good semigroups of Nr with an untwisted tree and a given
conductor c, where the conductor c of a good semigroup S ⊆ Nr is the minimal vector such that
c + Nr ⊆ S (the existence of such a vector is guaranteed by the properties of good semigroups).
The structure of the paper is the following.
In Section 1, we firstly recall some definitions and properties concerning the numerical semigroups. Then we address the problem, already studied in [4], of finding the set of the multiplicity
sequences of all the Arf numerical semigroups with a fixed conductor. In [4] the authors found a
recursive algorithm for the computation of such a set, while in this section it is presented a non
recursive procedure to determine it, that is faster than the previous one, when used for large value
of the conductor.
In Section 2, we begin to deal with semigroups in higher dimensions. To do that we recall
the definition of good semigroups and the properties of the multiplcity tree of an Arf local good
semigroup. We denote by Cond(c) the set of all the untwisted multiplicity trees of Arf good
semigroups with conductor c ∈ Nr . In order to find a recursive procedure for the computation of
Cond(c), we start by solving the base case r = 2.
In Section 3 we address the general case and, using Lemma 3.1 and the base cases for r = 1
and r = 2, we are able to present a procedure that builds inductively the sets Cond(c) in all
dimensions and for any value of the vector c. We give a strategy for computing the set Cond(c)
of all the possible multiplicity trees (twisted and untwisted) associated to an Arf semigroup with
conductor c. At the end of the section we give an example with r = 3 on the computation of this
2

set and we present some tables containing the cardinalities of the constructed sets for particular
values of the conductor c.
The procedures presented here have been implemented in GAP ([6]).

1 An algorithm for Cond(n) where n ∈ N
In [4] it is presented an algorithm for the computation of the set of the Arf numerical semigroups
with a given conductor. In this section we give a new procedure for the computation of such a set
that appeared to be faster when implemented in GAP.
First of all we recall some definitions and we fix some notations. A numerical semigroup S
is a submonoid of (N, +) such that N \ S is finite. The maximum F (S) of the set Z \ S is known
as the Frobenius number of S. The conductor c(S) of S is the smallest number such that n ∈ S
for all n ≥ c(S), and it is clear that we have c(S) = F (S) + 1.
We are interested in a particular class of numerical semigroups, i.e. the set of Arf numerical
semigroups. A numerical semigroup S is said to be Arf if S(s) − s is a semigroup for each s ∈ S,
where S(s) = {n ∈ S; n ≥ s}. A nonincreasing sequence M = {mn ; n ≥ 1} of N∗ = N \ {0}
is called a multiplicity sequence if
• There exists k ∈ N∗ such that mn = 1 for all n ≥ k;
Ps(n)
• For all n ∈ N∗ there exists s(n) ≥ n + 1 such that mn = k=n+1 mk .
In the following we describe a multiplicity sequence M by the finite vector M = [m1 , . . . , mk ]
where mk is the last entry in M different from one. We make an exception for the constant
multiplicity sequence M = {1, . . . , 1, . . .} that will be represented by the vector M = [1]. Given
a vector v we always denote by v[i] its i-th component
In [5, Corollary 39] it is proved that a nonempty subset of N is an Arf numerical semigroup if
and only if there exists a multiplicity sequence M = [m1 , . . . , mk ] such that
S = {0, m1 , m1 + m2 , . . . , m1 + · · · + mk , →} , where with n → we mean that all integers larger
than n are in S. Thus we have a 1-1 correspondence between Arf numerical semigroups and multiplicity sequences and, in the following, we will deal mainly with the latter. If M = [m1 , . . . , mk ]
is a multiplicity sequence, we call k the length of M and we will denote it by l(M). We also denote by AS(M) the Arf numerical semigroup associated to M. Now, from the previous result,
it is clear that if M is a mutliplicity sequence different from [1], then the conductor of AS(M)
Pl(M )
mi , while the conductor of AS([1]) = N is 0. We denote by Cond(n) the set of the
is i=1
multiplicity sequences of Arf numerical semigroups with conductor n.
We want to compute Cond(n) with n ∈ N. If n = 0 then Cond(n) = {[1]}, while if n = 1 then
Cond(n) = ∅. Thus, we suppose n > 1. Denote by T n (i) = {M ∈ Cond(i) : M[1] + i ≤ n} for
all i = 2, . . . , n − 2. Now suppose that M = [m1 , . . . , mk ] ∈ Cond(n). If k = 1 then M = [n],
otherwise we have the following situation:
• 2 ≤ m1 < n − 1 and [m2 , . . . , mk ] ∈ Cond(n − m1 );
• m1 ∈ AS([m2 , . . . , mk ]);
3

• m2 − m1 ≤ 0 ⇒ m2 + n − m1 ≤ n ⇒ [m2 , . . . , mk ] ∈ T n (n − m1 ).
Hence, if we know T n (i) for i = 2, . . . , n − 2, then we can compute Cond(n) in the following
way:
n−2
[
Cond(n) =
{[n − i, M] : M ∈ T n (i), n − i ∈ AS(M)} ∪ {[n]} .
i=2

Now we need a way to compute T n (i). Suppose that M = [m1 , . . . , mk ] ∈ T n (i). If k = 1, and
2 · i ≤ n then M = [i], otherwise we have the following situation:
• 2 ≤ m1 < i − 1 and [m2 , . . . , mk ] ∈ Cond(i − m1 ) = Cond(q);
• q + m2 = i − m1 + m2 ≤ i ≤ n ⇒ [m2 , . . . , mk ] ∈ T n (q);
• m1 ∈ AS([m2 , . . . , mk ]);


.
• m1 + i ≤ n ⇒ 2m1 ≤ n + m1 − i ⇒ 2m1 ≤ n − q ⇒ m1 ≤ n−q
2
n
n
So each T (i) can be constructed using T (q) with q < i. Thus, we have the following
algorithm for Cond(n) for n > 1.
input : An integer n > 1
output: The set Cond(n) of all the multiplicity sequences of Arf semigroups with
conductor n
Cond(n) ←− {[n]}
for i ← 2 to n − 2 do
if i ≤ n2 then
T n (i) ←− {[i]}
end
else
T n (i) ←− ∅
end
end
for i ← 2 to n − 2 do
for M ∈ T n (i) do
if n − i ∈ AS(M) then
Cond(n) ←− Cond(n) ∪ {[n − i, M]}
end

 
do
for k ∈ AS(M) ∩ 2, . . . , n−i
2
T n (i + k) ←− T n (i + k) ∪ {[k, M]}
end
end
end
Cond(n)
Algorithm 1:

4

2 Arf good semigroups of N2 with given conductor
From this section we begin to deal with Arf good semigroups of Nr . First of all we recall some
important definitions and results. A good semigroup S of Nr is a submonoid of (Nr , +) such that
(cf. [2])
• For all a, b ∈ S, min(a, b) ∈ S;
• If a, b ∈ S and a[i] = b[i] for some i ∈ {1, . . . , n}, then there exists c ∈ S such that
c[i] > a[i] = b[i], c[j] ≥ min(a[j], b[j]) for j ∈ {1, . . . , n} \ {i} and c[j] = min(a[j], b[j])
if a[j] 6= b[j];
• There exists δ ∈ S such that δ + Nr ⊆ S
(where we are considering the usual partial ordering in Nr : a ≤ b if a[i] ≤ b[i] for each
i = 1, . . . , r). The previous properties guarantee that for a good semigroup S there exists a
minimal vector c(S) such that c(S) + Nr ⊆ S. Such a vector is said to be the conductor of S.
In this paper we always deal with local good semigroups. A good semigroup S is local if the zero
vector is the only vector of S with some component equal to zero. However, it can be shown that
every good semigroup is the direct product of local semigroups (cf. [2, Theorem 2.5]).
An Arf semigroup of Nr , is a good semigroup such that S(α) − α is a semigroup, for each
α ∈ S , where S(α) = {β ∈ S; β ≥ α}. The multiplicity tree T of a local Arf semigroup S ⊆ Nr
is a tree whose nodes are vectors nji ∈ Nr , where with nji we mean that this node is in the i-th
branch on the j-th level (the root of the tree is n11 = n1i for all i because we are in the local case
and at level one all the branches must be glued) and we have


[  X j
ni ,
S = {0}

j
′
T

ni ∈T ′

where T ′ ranges over all finite subtree of T rooted in n11 .
Furthermore a tree T is a multiplicity tree of an Arf semigroup if and only if its nodes satisfy
the following properties (cf. [2, Theorem 5.11] ).
• There exists L ∈ N such that for m ≥ L, nm
i = (0, . . . , 0, 1, 0 . . . , 0) (the nonzero coordinate is in the i-th position) for any i = 1, . . . , n;
• nji [h] = 0 if and only if nji is not in the h-th branch of the tree;
• Each nji can be obtained as a sum of nodes in a finite subtree T ′ of T rooted in nji .

Notice that from these properties it follows that we must have multiplicity sequences along each
branch. Therefore a multiplicity tree T of an Arf semigroup of Nr can be represented by an

5

ordered collection of r multiplicity sequences E and by an upper triangular matrix r × r


0 p1,2 p1,3 . . . p1,r
0
0 p2,3 . . . p2,r 



M(T )E = . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

0
0
0 . . . pr−1,r 
0
0
0 ...
0
where pi,j is the highest level such that the i-th and the j-th branches are glued in T . Suppose that
E = {M1 , . . . , Mr }, then in [7, Proposition 1.2], it is shown that the values that can be assigned
to the pi,j , in order to have a tree compatible with the previous properties, depend only on Mi and
Mj . In particular, if Mi = Mj , pi,j can be any positive integer, while, if Mi 6= Mj , there exists a
level kE (i, j) ∈ N∗ such that pi,j is at most kE (i, j). If we set si,k as the integer such that
Mi [k] =

si,k
X

Mi [l],

l=k+1

then we have
kE (i, j) = min {min(si,k , sj,k ) : si,k 6= sj,k } .
Thus, if M1 and M2 are two distinct multiplicity sequences, we define the compatibility between M1 and M2 as the integer Comp(M1 , M2 ) = kE (1, 2) where E = {M1 , M2 }. While
if M1 = M2 we set by definition Comp(M1 , M2 ) = +∞. A tree T is untwisted if two nonconsecutive branches are glued at level l if and only if all the consecutive branches between them
are glued at a level greater or equal to l. We call twisted a tree that is not untwisted. From the
definition it follows that the matrix of an untwisted tree T ∈ τ (E) is such that:
pi,j = min {pi,i+1 , . . . , pj−1,j } for all i < j.
So an untwisted tree can be completely described by the second diagonal of its matrix. Thus in the
following we will indicate an untwisted tree by a vector TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1) where pi = pi,i+1 .
Remark 2.1. It is easy to see that a twisted tree can be converted to an untwisted one by accordingly permuting its branches (the corresponding Arf semigroups are therefore isomorphic). Thus
in the following we can focus only on the properties of the untwisted trees, that are easier to study,
because the twisted ones can be always obtained by permutation of an untwisted tree.
The aim of this and the following section is to find a procedure that let us to determine all the
local Arf semigroup S ⊆ Nr with a given conductor c ∈ Nr . For the Remark 2.1, we can focus
only on the untwisted trees.
We denote by Cond(c) the set of all the untwisted multiplicity trees of Arf semigroups in
Nr with conductor c ∈ Nr (in the case r = 1 we have the multiplicity sequences and from the
previous section we have a procedure to determine such a set).
We notice the following general fact.
6

Proposition 2.2. Let S be an Arf semigroup of Nr , T the corresponding multiplicity tree and Mi
for i = 1, . . . , n the multiplicity sequences of its branches.
We introduce the following integers
d(i) = min {j ∈ N : Mi [j] = 1 and the i−th branch is not glued to other branches at level j} ,
for i = 1, . . . , r.
Then c = (c[1], . . . , c[n]) is the conductor of S where
d(i)−1

X

c[i] =

Mi [k] for i = 1, . . . , n.

k=1


Proof. Denote by N(T ) = nji the set of the nodes of T . We call ei = (0, . . . , 0, 1, 0, . . . , 0),
where the non zero coordinate is in the i-th position. Now, from the definition of the integers d(i),
it follows that
d(i)

• ni

= ei for all i = 1, . . . , r;

d(i)−1

• ni

6= ei for all i = 1, . . . , r.

n
o
j(i)
We consider the subtree T ′ of T such that N(T ′ ) = ni : i = 1, . . . , r; j(i) = 1, . . . , d(i) − 1 .
Then we have
• T ′ is rooted in n11 (it corresponds to an element of the associated Arf good semigroup);
• ei ∈
/ N(T ′ ) for all i = 1, . . . , r;
• If T ′′ is such that T ′ ⊆ T ′′ ⊆ T then N(T ′′ ) \ N(T ′ ) consists only of nodes of the type ei .
From the previous properties it is clear that the element corresponding to the subtree T ′ must
be the conductor of the Arf semigroup associated to T . It is also trivial that the sum of all the
elements of N(T ′ ) is equal to c = (c[1], . . . , c[n]) where
d(i)−1

c[i] =

X

Mi [k] for i = 1, . . . , n.

k=1

Remark 2.3. Using the notations of Proposition 2.2, given an untwisted tree TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1 ),
where E = {M1 , . . . , Mr }, it is easy to show that
d(i) − 1 = max(l(Mi ), pi , pi−1 ) for i = 2, . . . , r − 1
d(1) − 1 = max(l(M1 ), p1 ) and d(r) − 1 = max(l(Mr ), pr−1).

7

Now, we focus on the case r = 2 and we determine a procedure to compute Cond(c) where c
is a fixed arbitrary vector (c[1], c[2]). Suppose that TE = (p) ∈ Cond(c) where E = {M1 , M2 }.
From the previous remark d(1) − 1 = max(l(M1 ), p) and d(2) − 1 = max(l(M2 ), p). We have
the following cases:
• Case d(1) − 1 = l(M1 ) and d(2) − 1 = l(M2 ).
We have p ≤ min(l(M1 ), l(M2 )). Furthermore, we have p ≤ Comp(M1 , M2 ) because T is
well defined. Because TE = (p) ∈ Cond(c) we have:
c[1] =

d(1)−1

l(M1 )

d(2)−1

X

X

X

M1 [k] =

M1 [k] and c[2] =

M2 [k] =

X

M2 [k],

k=1

k=1

k=1

k=1

l(M2 )

and from it we deduce, if c[1] 6= 1 and c[2] 6= 1, that M1 ∈ Cond(c[1]) and M2 ∈ Cond(c[2]). If
c[1] = 1 then we can deduce M1 = [1] ∈ Cond(0) (the same for c[2]).
Remark 2.4. The multiplicity sequence M = [1] is the only one such that the sum of its entries
up to to its length is not equal to the conductor of its associated Arf numerical semigroup (that is
N with conductor 0). In order to have a more compact notation in the following, we define the set
Cond∗ (c) for all c ∈ N \ {0}, where
• Cond∗ (c) = Cond(c) for all c 6= 1;
• Cond∗ (1) = Cond(0).
So in this case T belongs to the following set:
S 1 (c) = {TE = (k) : E = {M1 , M2 } ; Mi ∈ Cond∗ (c[i]) and
1 ≤ k ≤ min(Comp(M1 , M2 ), l(M1 ), l(M2 ))} .
On the other hand, we can notice that S 1 (c) ⊆ Cond(c) (using the inverse implications).
• Case d(1) − 1 = l(M1 ) and d(2) − 1 6= l(M2 ).
Hence d(2) − 1 = p and l(M2 ) < p ≤ min(l(M1 ), Comp(M1 , M2 )). Therefore:
l(M1 )

c[1] =

X
k=1

M1 [k] , c[2] =

p
X
k=1

l(M2 )

M2 [k] =

X

M2 [k] +

k=1

p
X

k=l(M2 )+1

l(M2 )

M2 [k] =

X

M2 [k] + p − l(M2 ),

k=1

and from this we can deduce M1 ∈ Cond∗ (c[1]) and, denoted by k(2) = c[2] − (p − l(M2 )),
M2 ∈ Cond∗ (k(2)). Notice that k(2) < c[2].
Now, for all k < c[2] we define the set:
I1 (k) = {TE = (p) : E = {M1 , M2 } , M1 ∈ Cond∗ (c[1]), M2 ∈ Cond∗ (k) and
p = l(M2 ) + c[2] − k ≤ min(l(M1 ), Comp(M1 , M2 ))} .

8

Thus T belongs to
c[2]−1

S21 (c)

=

[

I1 (k).

k=1

With the inverse implication we can easily show that S21 (c) ⊆ Cond(c).
• Case d(1) − 1 6= l(M1 ) e d(2) − 1 = l(M2 ).
We have d(1) − 1 = p and l(M1 ) < p ≤ min(l(M2 ), Comp(M1 , M2 )). Hence:
c[1] =

p
X

l(M1 )

M1 [k] =

k=1

X

M1 [k] +

p
X

l(M1 )

X

M1 [k] =

k=l(M1 )+1

k=1

l(M2 )

M1 [k] + p − l(M1 ); c[2] =

k=1

X

M2 [k],

k=1

and from this we obtain M2 ∈ Cond∗ (c[2]) and, denoted by k(1) = c[1] − (p − l(M1 )), we deduce
M1 ∈ Cond∗ (k(1)). Notice that k(1) < c[1].
For all k < c[1] we define the set:
I2 (k) = {TE = (p) : E = {M1 , M2 } , M1 ∈ Cond∗ (k), M2 ∈ Cond∗ (c[2]) and
p = l(M1 ) + c[1] − k ≤ min(l(M2 ), Comp(M1 , M2 ))} .
Therefore T belongs to
c[1]−1

S22 (c)

=

[

I2 (k).

k=1

With the inverse implication we can easily show that S22 (c) ⊆ Cond(c).
• Case d(1) − 1 6= l(M1 ) and d(2) − 1 6= l(M2 ).
Then d(2) − 1 = p, d(1) − 1 = p and we have max(l(M1 ), l(M2 )) < p ≤ Comp(M1 , M2 ). It
follows:
c[1] =

p
X

l(M1 )

M1 [k] =

k=1

c[2] =

p
X
k=1

M2 [k] =

X

M1 [k] +

p
X

k=1

k=l(M1 )+1

l(M2 )

p
X

X
k=1

M2 [k] +

k=l(M2 )+1

l(M1 )

M1 [k] =

X

M1 [k] + p − l(M1 )

k=1

l(M2 )

M2 [k] =

X

M2 [k] + p − l(M2 ).

k=1

If we denote by k(1) = c[1] − (p − l(M1 )) and by k(2) = c[2] − (p − l(M2 )), we have
M1 ∈ Cond∗ (k(1)) and M2 ∈ Cond∗ (k(2)).
Furthermore, notice that k(1) < c[1] and k(2) < c[2]. Now, for all k1 < c[1] and k2 < c[2] we
define the set:
I(k1 , k2 ) = {TE = (p) : E = {M1 , M2 } , Mi ∈ Cond∗ (ki ) for i = 1, 2 and
p = l(M1 ) + c[1] − k1 = l(M2 ) + c[2] − k2 ≤ Comp(M1 , M2 )} .

9

So T belongs to
[

S 3 (c) =

I(k1 , k2 ) ⊆ Cond(c).

1≤ki <c[i]

Even in this case we can show that S 3 (c) ⊆ Cond(c).
We have studied all the possible cases so we proved
S 1 (c) ∪ S12 (c) ∪ S22 (c) ∪ S 3 (c) = Cond(c).
All the previous set can be computed by using the procedure given in the case r = 1 so we have
found a procedure to compute Cond(c) when r = 2.
Example 2.5. Let us compute Cond([4, 5]).
First of all we compute S 1 ([4, 5]). We need Cond∗ (4) and Cond∗ (5). They are:
Cond∗ (4) = {[4], [2, 2]} and Cond∗ (5) = {[5], [3, 2]} .
Hence when we compute S 1 ([4, 5]) we find:
• E1 = {M1 = [4], M2 = [5]}. Thus Comp(M1 , M2 ) = 5 and
min(l(M1 ), l(M2 )) = 1. Then we have only the tree T1 = TE1 = (1).
• E2 = {M1 = [4], M2 = [3, 2]}. Thus Comp(M1 , M2 ) = 3 and
min(l(M1 ), l(M2 )) = 1. Then we have only the tree T2 = TE2 = (1).
• E3 = {M1 = [2, 2], M2 = [5]}. Thus Comp(M1 , M2 ) = 2 and
min(l(M1 ), l(M2 )) = 1. Then we have only the tree T3 = TE3 = (1).
• E4 = {M1 = [2, 2], M2 = [3, 2]}. We have Comp(M1 , M2 ) = 2 and
min(l(M1 ), l(M2 )) = 2. So we have the trees T4 = TE4 = (1) and T5 = TE4 = (2) .
Hence S 1 ([4, 5]) = {T1 , T2 , T3 , T4 , T5 }.

(1, 0)

(0, 1)

(1, 0)

(0, 1)

(1, 0)

(0, 2)

(2, 0)

(0, 1)

(4, 5)

(4, 3)

(2, 5)

T1

T2

T3

(1, 0)

(0, 1)

(2, 0)

(0, 2)

(1, 0)

(0, 1)
(2, 2)

(2, 3)

(2, 3)

T4

T5
10

Now we compute S12 ([4, 5]). The only value k such that I1 (k) 6= ∅ is k = 4 and we have:
• c[1] = 4, k = 4. If we consider M1 = [2, 2] ∈ Cond∗ (4) ,
M2 = [4] ∈ Cond∗ (4) and E5 = {M1 , M2 } we have
l(M2 ) + c[2] − k = 2 ≤ min(l(M1 ), Comp(M1 , M2 )) = min(2, 2) = 2.
Hence we have the tree T6 = TE5 = (2).
Therefore S12 ([4, 5]) = {T6 }. Let us compute S22 ([4, 5]). The only value k such that I2 (k) 6= ∅ is
k = 3 and we have:
• k = 3, c[2] = 5. If we consider M1 = [3] ∈ Cond∗ (3) ,
M2 = [3, 2] ∈ Cond∗ (5) and E6 = {M1 , M2 } we have
l(M1 ) + c[1] − k = 1 + 4 − 3 = 2 ≤ min(l(M2 ), Comp(M1 , M2 ) = min(2, 3) = 2.
Hence we have the tree T7 = TE6 = (2).
Therefore S22 ([4, 5]) = {T7 }.
We finally compute S 3 ([4, 5]).
The only values of k1 and k2 such that I(k1 , k2 ) 6= ∅ are the following:
• k1 = 2, k2 = 3. If we consider M1 = [2] ∈ Cond∗ (2),
M2 = [3] ∈ Cond∗ (3) and E7 = {M1 , M2 } we have
l(M1 ) + c[1] − k1 = 1 + 4 − 2 = 3 = 1 + 5 − 3 = l(M2 ) + c[2] − k2 ≤ Comp(M1 , M2 ) = 3.
Thus we have the tree T8 = TE7 = (3).
• k1 = 3, k2 = 4. If we consider M1 = [3] ∈ Cond∗ (3) ,
M2 = [4] ∈ Cond∗ (4) and E8 = {M1 , M2 } we have
l(M1 ) + c[1] − k1 = 1 + 4 − 3 = 2 = 1 + 5 − 4 = l(M2 ) + c[2] − k2 ≤ Comp(M1 , M2 ) = 4.
Thus we have the tree T9 = TE8 = (2). Hence S 3 ([4, 5]) = {T8 , T9 }.

(1, 0)
(1, 0)

(0, 1)

(1, 0)

(0, 1)

(0, 1)
(1, 1)

(2, 1)

(1, 2)

(1, 1)

(2, 4)

(3, 3)

(2, 3)

T6

T7

T8
11

(1, 0)

(0, 1)
(1, 1)
(3, 4)

T9
Summarizing, we have Cond([4, 5]) = {T1 , T2 , T3 , T4 , T5 , T6 , T7 , T8 , T9 }.
Example 2.6. Using the previous results it is easy to implement an algorithm that computes the
number of Arf semigroups of N2 with a given conductor. Each entry of the following table is such
a number, where the conductors range from (1, 1) to (20, 20).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

1 2
3
4
5
1 1
1
2
2
1 2
2
4
4
1 2
3
4
5
2 4
4 10 9
2 4
5
9 12
4 8
9 18 19
3 6
7 15 15
7 14 16 33 34
6 12 14 28 32
10 20 22 49 51
9 18 21 43 45
17 34 39 81 86
12 24 26 59 62
25 50 57 120 128
20 40 46 96 102
32 64 71 156 161
27 54 60 131 139
49 98 111 236 250
34 68 75 167 172
68 136 155 328 347

6
4
8
9
18
19
41
30
68
60
99
92
171
122
252
201
326
275
497
344
687

7
8
9
10
11
3
7
6
10
9
6
14
12
20
18
7
16
14
22
21
15 33
28
49
43
15 34
32
51
45
30 68
60
99
92
30 54
48
80
74
54 129 108 180 164
48 108 108 160 147
80 180 160 284 242
74 164 147 242 245
134 306 271 454 412
104 222 202 337 307
204 453 404 676 611
163 371 330 545 502
264 593 522 878 798
221 499 459 748 685
399 901 809 1336 1215
285 632 566 961 868
556 1251 1120 1867 1688

12
17
34
39
81
86
171
134
306
271
454
412
798
567
1148
927
1492
1273
2277
1608
3159

13
12
24
26
59
62
122
104
222
202
337
307
567
469
849
694
1115
961
1689
1224
2347

14
25
50
57
120
128
252
204
453
404
676
611
1148
849
1750
1383
2224
1897
3389
2403
4710

15
20
40
46
96
102
201
163
371
330
545
502
927
694
1383
1192
1805
1556
2753
1976
3822

16
32
64
71
156
161
326
264
593
522
878
798
1492
1115
2224
1805
2992
2493
4433
3174
6155

17
27
54
60
131
139
275
221
499
459
748
685
1273
961
1897
1556
2493
2244
3798
2734
5266

18
49
98
111
236
250
497
399
901
809
1336
1215
2277
1689
3389
2753
4433
3798
6867
4814
9394

19
20
34
68
68
136
75
155
167 328
172 347
344 687
285 556
632 1251
566 1120
961 1867
868 1688
1608 3159
1224 2347
2403 4710
1976 3822
3174 6155
2734 5266
4814 9394
3634 6701
6701 13219

3 Arf semigroups of Nr with a given conductor
In this section we study the general case. We want to develope a recursive procedure to calculate
Cond(c) for c ∈ Nr , using the fact that we already know how to solve the base cases r = 1 and
r = 2. In order to do that is very useful the following Lemma.
Lemma 3.1. Consider c = (c[1], . . . , c[r]) ∈ Nr , with r ≥ 3 and suppose that the untwisted tree
T = TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1 ) ∈ Cond(c), where E = {M1 , . . . , Mr }. If t ∈ {2, . . . , r − 1}, then we
have that at least one of the following conditions must hold:
• T1 = TE1 = (p1 , . . . , pt−1 ) ∈ Cond((c[1], . . . , c[t])) with E1 = {M1 , . . . , Mt } ;
12

• T2 = TE2 = (pt , . . . , pr−1) ∈ Cond((c[t], . . . , c[r])) with E2 = {Mt , . . . , Mr } .
Proof. We assume by contradiction that
• T1 ∈
/ Cond((c[1], . . . , c[t]));
• T2 ∈
/ Cond((c[t], . . . , c[r])).
Let us consider the following integers (which are clearly linked to the conductor):
d(i) = min {j ∈ N : Mi [j] = 1 and the i-th branch in T is not glued to other branches at level j},
for i = 1, . . . , r.
d1 (i) = min {j ∈ N : Mi [j] = 1 and the i-th branch in T1 isn’t glued to other branches at level j},
for i = 1, . . . , t.
d2 (i) = min {j ∈ N : Mi [j] = 1 and the i-th branch in T2 isn’t glued to other branches at level j},
for i = t, . . . , r.
We have d1 (l) = d(l), for all l = 1, . . . , t−1, and d2 (m) = d(m), for all m = t+1, . . . , r. Furthermore, d1 (t) ≤ d(t) and d2 (t) ≤ d(t). In fact we have noticed that d(t)−1 = max(l(Mt ), pt−1 , pt ),
while d1 (t) − 1 = max(l(Mt ), pt−1 ) and d2 (t) − 1 = max(l(Mt ), pt ).
From T ∈ Cond(c) we deduce that
d(i)−1

X

Mi [k] = c[i] for i = 1, . . . , r.

k=1

We denote respectively by (c1 [1], . . . , c1 [t]) and by (c2 [t], . . . , c2 [r])) the conductors of T1 and T2 .
We have:
d1 (l)−1
d(l)−1
X
X
c1 [l] =
Ml [k] =
Ml [k] = c[l] for l = 1, . . . , t − 1
k=1

k=1

d2 (m)−1

and c2 [m] =

X

d(m)−1

Mm [k] =

k=1

X

Mm [k] = c[m], for m = t + 1, . . . , r

k=1

and this implies, because T1 ∈
/ Cond((c[1], . . . , c[t])) and T2 ∈
/ Cond((c[t], . . . , c[r])), that
d1 (t)−1

c1 [t] =

X

d2 (t)−1

Mt [k] 6= c[t] and c2 [t] =

k=1

X

Mt [k] 6= c[t],

k=1

and therefore we have d1 (t) < d(t) and d2 (t) < d(t).
From this it would follow
d(t) − 1 = max(l(Mt ), pt−1 , pt ) = max(max(l(Mt ), pt−1 ), max(l(Mt ), pt ))) =
= max(d1 (t) − 1, d2(t) − 1) < d(t) − 1
and we obtain a contradiction.
13

Now, using this Lemma, we can introduce an algorithm that solves our problem working
inductively. Given c ∈ Nr , with r ≥ 3, we want to compute Cond(c). We suppose that we are
able to solve the problem for all s < r and we develope a strategy for the r case.
Let us fix some notations. If k = 2, . . . , r − 1, we denote by ck = (c[1], . . . , c[k]) and by
k
c = (c[k + 1], . . . , c[r]). Similarly, if E = {M1 , . . . , Mr }, we denote by Ek = {M1 , . . . , Mk }
and by E k = {Mk+1 , . . . , Mr } . Furthermore, for i = 1, . . . , r − 1, we define the integers
∗
pi = max(l(Mi ), pi−1 ) and p∗i = max(l(Mi+1 ), pi+1 ), where, by definition, we set p∗r−1 = l(Mr )
and ∗ p1 = l(M1 ).
Fixed c ∈ Nr , we suppose to have a tree T = TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1 ) ∈ Cond(c) with
E = {M1 , . . . , Mr }. Consider t ∈ {2, . . . , r − 1}. It follows from Lemma 3.1 that we only
have two cases:
• Case T1 = TEt = (p1 , . . . , pt−1 ) ∈ Cond(ct ).
We clearly have d1 (i) = d(i) for all i = 1, . . . , t − 1, while from T1 ∈ Cond(ct ) it follows
that d1 (t) = d(t). Hence:
∗

pt = max(l(Mt ), pt−1 ) = d1 (t) − 1 = d(t) − 1 = max(pt , pt−1 , l(Mt )) = max(∗ pt , pt )

and we deduce that pt ≤ ∗ pt .
We consider the tree T2 = TE t = (pt+1 , . . . , pr−1 ), (if t = r − 1 we have T2 = Mr ). We
clearly have d2 (i) = d(i) for all i = t + 2, . . . , r.
On the other hand d2 (t + 1) − 1 = max(l(Mt+1 ), pt+1 ) = p∗t may be different from
d(t + 1) − 1 = max(l(Mt+1 , pt+1 , pt ) = max(p∗t , pt ).
Hence we have the following two subcases:
◮ Subcase d2 (t + 1) = d(t + 1).
In this case we have T2 ∈ Cond(ct ) and pt ≤ p∗t (if t = r−1 we have T2 = Mr ∈ Cond∗ (c[r])).
We also recall that we must have the compatibility condition pt ≤ Comp(Mt , Mt+1 ).
Thus we have discovered that T belongs to the following set:
S11 (c) = {TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1) : E = {M1 , . . . , Mr } ; TEt = (p1 , . . . , pt−1 ) ∈ Cond(ct );
TE t = (pt+1 , . . . , pr−1 ) ∈ Cond(ct ) with 1 ≤ pt ≤ min(∗ pt , p∗t , Comp(Mt , Mt+1 )) .
It is very easy to check that we also have S11 (c) ⊆ Cond(c). If t = r − 1 the previous set has the
following definition:
S11 (c) = {TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1) : E = {M1 , . . . , Mr } ; TEr−1 = (p1 , . . . , pr−2 ) ∈ Cond(cr−1 );
Mr ∈ Cond∗ (c[r]); 1 ≤ pr−1 ≤ min(∗ pr−1 , l(Mr ), Comp(Mr−1 , Mr ))} .
◮ Subcase d2 (t + 1) 6= d(t + 1).
14

In this case we have
pt = d(t + 1) − 1 > d2 (t + 1) − 1 = max(l(Mt+1 ), pt+1 ) = p∗t .
Hence
d(t+1)−1

c[t + 1] =

X

Mt+1 [k] =

pt
X

∗

Mt+1 [k] =

k=1

k=1

pt
X

Mt+1 [k] + pt − p∗t

k=1

and from this it follows that T2 ∈ Cond((k[t + 1], c[t + 2], . . . , c[r])), where
∗

pt
X

d2 (t+1)−1

X

Mt+1 [k] =

k=1

Mt+1 [k] = k[t + 1] < c[t + 1],

k=1

and we have T2 ∈ Cond∗ (k[t+1]) in the case t = r−1. Thus we have k[t+1] = c[t+1]−(pt −p∗t ).
For all the kt+1 ∈ N such that kt+1 < c[t + 1] we define the set:
I1 (kt+1 ) = {TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1 ) : E = {M1 , . . . , Mr } ; TEt = (p1 , . . . , pt−1 ) ∈ Cond(ct );
TE t = (pt+1 , . . . , pr−1) ∈ Cond((kt+1 , c[t + 2], . . . , c[r]));
pt = p∗t + c[t + 1] − kt+1 ≤ min(∗ pt , Comp(Mt , Mt+1 ))} .
Hence T belongs to the following set:
c[t+1]−1

S12 (c)

=

[

I1 (kt+1 ),

kt+1 =1

and it is clear that S12 (c) ⊆ Cond(c).
If t = r − 1 the previous set has the following definition:

I1 (kr ) = TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1) : E = {M1 , . . . , Mr } ; TEr−1 = (p1 , . . . , pr−2 ) ∈ Cond(cr−1 );
Mr ∈ Cond∗ (kr ); pr−1 = l(Mr ) + c[r] − kr ≤ min(∗ pr−1 , Comp(Mr−1 , Mr ))} .
• Case T2 = TE t−1 = (pt , . . . , pr−1 ) ∈ Cond(ct−1 ).
We only have to adapt the considerations made in the previous case to this case. Thus we
directly give the sets which arise without further justifications.
◮ If t 6= 2,

S21 (c) = TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1 ) : E = {M1 , . . . , Mr } ; TE t−1 = (pt , . . . , pr−1 ) ∈ Cond(ct−1 );
TEt−1 = (p1 , . . . , pt−2 ) ∈ Cond(ct−1 ) con 1 ≤ pt−1 ≤ min(∗ pt−1 , p∗t−1 , Comp(Mt , Mt−1 )) .
◮ If t = 2,
S21 (c) = {TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1 ) : E = {M1 , . . . , Mr } ; TE 1 = (p2 , . . . , pr−1) ∈ Cond(c1 );
15

M1 ∈ Cond∗ (c[1]); 1 ≤ p1 ≤ min(l(M1 ), p∗1 , Comp(M1 , M2 ))} .
We have S21 (c) ⊆ Cond(c).
For all kt−1 ∈ N such that 1 ≤ kt−1 < c[t − 1] we consider:
◮ If t 6= 2,

I2 (kt−1 ) = TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1 ) : E = {M1 , . . . , Mr } ; TE t−1 = (pt , . . . , pr−1 ) ∈ Cond(ct−1 );
TEt−1 = (p1 , . . . , pt−2 ) ∈ Cond((c[1], . . . , c[t − 2], kt−1 ));
pt−1 = ∗ pt−1 + c[t − 1] − kt−1 ≤ min(p∗t−1 , Comp(Mt−1 , Mt )) .
◮ If t = 2,

I2 (k1 ) = TE = (p1 , . . . , pr−1 ) : E = {M1 , . . . , Mr } ; TE 1 = (p2 , . . . , pr−1 ) ∈ Cond(c1 )
M1 ∈ Cond∗ (k1 ); p1 = l(M1 ) + c[1] − k1 ≤ min(p∗1 , Comp(M1 , M2 ))} .
We have that:
c[t−1]−1

S22 (c) =

[

I2 (kt−1 ) ⊆ Cond(c).

kt−1 =1

The previous lemma ensures that we have considered all the possibilities. So we showed that
Cond(c) ⊆ S11 (c) ∪ S12 (c) ∪ S21 (c) ∪ S22 (c),
hence
S11 (c) ∪ S12 (c) ∪ S21 (c) ∪ S22 (c) = Cond(c).
Due to our induction hypothesis all the previous sets can be computed so we developed an algorithm which computes Cond(c).
Now we have a way to compute all the untwisted multiplicity trees with a given conductor c
for all the c ∈ Nr . Suppose that we want to find also the twisted multiplicity trees with conductor
c. We will call Cond(c) the set of all multiplicity trees (twisted or untwisted) associated to an Arf
semigroup with conductor c. Suppose that T is a twisted tree in Cond(c) with c ∈ Nr . Then there
exists a permutation σ ∈ S r , where S r is the symmetric group, such that σ(T ) is untwisted and it
clearly belongs to Cond(σ(c)). From this it follows that:
[ 
σ −1 (T ) : T ∈ Cond(σ(c)) .
Cond(c) =
σ∈S r

Example 3.2. Let us compute Cond([3, 2, 4]). In this case r = 3, therefore we have t = 2. First
of all we compute S11 ([3, 2, 4]). Because t = r − 1 the definition of this set is:
S11 ([3, 2, 4]) = {TE = (p1 , p2 ) : E = {M1 , M2 , M3 } ; TE2 = (p1 ) ∈ Cond([3, 2]);
M3 ∈ Cond∗ (4); 1 ≤ p2 ≤ min(l(M3 ),∗ p2 , Comp(M2 , M3 ))} .
Then to do that we need the follwing sets:
16

• Cond([3, 2]) = {A1 , A2 } where A1 = TF1 = (1) and A2 = TF2 = (2) with F1 = {[3], [2]}
and F2 = {[2], [1]} .
• Cond∗ (4) = {[2, 2], [4]}
Hence we consider:
• E1 = {M1 = [3], M2 = [2], M3 = [2, 2]} and we have
min(max(l(M2 ), p1 ), Comp(M2 , M3 ), l(M3 )) = min(1, 2, 2) = 1. Thus we only have the
tree T1 = TE1 = (1, 1).
• E2 = {M1 = [3], M2 = [2], M3 = [4]} and we have
min(max(l(M2 ), p1 ), Comp(M2 , M3 ), l(M3 )) = min(1, 3, 1) = 1. Thus we only have the
tree T2 = TE2 = (1, 1).
• E3 = {M1 = [2], M2 = [1], M3 = [2, 2]} and we have
min(max(l(M2 ), p1 ), Comp(M2 , M3 ), l(M3 )) = min(2, 2, 2) = 2. Thus we have the trees
T3 = TE3 = (2, 1) and T4 = TE3 = (2, 2).
• E4 = {M1 = [2], M2 = [1], M3 = [4]} and we have
min(max(l(M2 ), p1 ), Comp(M2 , M3 ), l(M3 )) = min(2, 2, 1) = 1. Thus we only have the
tree T5 = TE4 = (2, 1).
Hence S11 ([3, 2, 4]) = {T1 , T2 , T3 , T4 , T5 } .
Now we compute S12 ([3, 2, 4]). We find k3 = 3 as the only value such that I(k3 ) 6= ∅. In fact,
if we consider A2 and M3 = [3], we have:
• E5 = {M1 = [2], M2 = [1], M3 = [3]} and we have
l(M3 ) + c[3] − k3 = 2 ≤ min(max(l(M2 ), p1 ), Comp(M2 , M3 ))) = min(2, 2) = 2. Thus
we have the tree T6 = TE5 = (2, 2).

(0, 0, 1)
(1, 0, 0)

(0, 1, 0)

(1, 0, 0)

(0, 0, 2)

(0, 1, 0)

(3, 2, 2)

(3, 2, 4)

T1

T2

17

(0, 0, 1)

(1, 0, 0)

(0, 0, 1)

(0, 1, 0)
(1, 1, 0)

(1, 0, 0)

(0, 0, 2)

(0, 0, 1)

(1, 1, 2)

(2, 1, 2)

(2, 1, 2)

T3

(1, 0, 0)

(0, 1, 0)

T4

(0, 1, 0)

(1, 0, 0)

(1, 1, 0)

(0, 0, 1)

(0, 1, 0)

(0, 0, 1)

(1, 1, 1)

(2, 1, 4)

(2, 1, 3)

T5

T6

Now we compute S21 ([3, 2, 4]). We are in the case t = 2 so its definition is:
S21 ([3, 2, 4]) = {TE = (p1 , p2 ) : E = {M1 , M2 , M3 } ; TE 1 = (p2 ) ∈ Cond([2, 4]);
M1 ∈ Cond∗ (3); 1 ≤ p1 ≤ min(l(M1 ), p∗1 , Comp(M1 , M2 ))} .
Then to do that we need the following sets:
Cond([2, 4]) = {B1 , B2 , B3 , B4 } , where
• B1 = TG1 = (2) with G1 = {[1], [2, 2]} ;
• B2 = TG2 = (1) with G2 = {[2], [2, 2]};
• B3 = TG3 = (2) with G3 = {[1], [3]} ;
• B4 = TG4 = (1) with G4 = {[2], [4]} ;
• Cond∗ (3) = {[3]} .
Hence we consider:
• E6 = {M1 = [3], M2 = [1], M3 = [2, 2]} and we have
min(max(p2 , l(M2 )), Comp(M1 , M2 ), l(M1 )) = min(2, 2, 1) = 1. Thus we only have the
tree T7 = TE6 = (1, 2).
• E1 = {M1 = [3], M2 = [2], M3 = [2, 2]} and we have
min(max(p2 , l(M2 )), Comp(M1 , M2 ), l(M1 )) = min(1, 3, 1) = 1. Thus we only have the
tree, already found in S11 ([3, 2, 4]), T1 = TE1 = (1, 1).

18

• E7 = {M1 = [3], M2 = [1], M3 = [3]} and we have
min(max(p2 , l(M2 )), Comp(M1 , M2 ), l(M1 )) = min(2, 2, 1) = 1. Hence we have the tree
T8 = TE7 = (1, 2).
• E2 = {M1 = [3], M2 = [2], M3 = [4]} and we have
min(max(p2 , l(M2 )), Comp(M1 , M2 ), l(M1 )) = min(1, 3, 1) = 1. Thus we only have the
tree, already found in S11 ([3, 2, 4]), T2 = TE2 = (1, 1).
Hence S21 ([3, 2, 4]) = {T1 , T2 , T7 , T8 } .
Now we compute S22 ([3, 2, 4]). We find k1 = 2 as the only value such that I(k1 ) 6= ∅, and
I(2) contains two elements. In fact, if we consider B1 and B3 and M1 = [2], we have:
• E3 = {M1 = [2], M2 = [1], M3 = [2, 2]} and we have
l(M1 ) + c[1] − k1 = 2 ≤ min(max(p2 , l(M2 )), Comp(M1 , M2 ))) = min(2, 2) = 2. Thus
we only have the tree, already found in S11 ([3, 2, 4]), T4 = TE3 = (2, 2).
• E5 = {M1 = [2], M2 = [1], M3 = [3]} and we have
l(M1 ) + c[1] − k1 = 2 ≤ min(max(p2 , l(M2 )), Comp(M1 , M2 ))) = min(2, 2) = 2. Thus
we only have the tree, already found in S12 ([3, 2, 4]), T6 = TE5 = (2, 2).
Thus S21 ([3, 2, 4]) ∪ S22 ([3, 2, 4]) = {T1 , T2 , T4 , T6 , T7 , T8 }.
(0, 1, 0)
(1, 0, 0)

(0, 0, 1)

(0, 1, 0)

(0, 1, 2)

(1, 0, 0)

(3, 1, 2)

(0, 0, 1)
(0, 1, 1)

(3, 1, 3)

T7

T8

Hence, Cond([3, 2, 4]) = {T1 , T2 , T3 , T4 , T5 , T6 , T7 , T8 }.
If we compute the set Cond([3, 2, 4]), with the technique explained above, we find that:
[
Cond([3, 2, 4]) = Cond([3, 2, 4]) {T9 , T10 } ,
where


0

• T9 = M(T )E8 = 0
0

0

• T10 = M(T )E9 = 0
0


1 2
0 1 where E8 = {M1 = [2], M2 = [2], M3 = [2, 2]}.
0 0

1 2
0 1 where E9 = {M1 = [2], M2 = [2], M3 = [3]}.
0 0
19

(1, 0, 0)

(0, 0, 1)

(1, 0, 0)

(1, 0, 2)

(0, 1, 0)

(0, 0, 1)
(1, 0, 1)

(2, 2, 2)

(0, 1, 0)
(2, 2, 3)

T9

T10

Example 3.3. It is easy to implement an algorithm that computes the number of untwisted Arf
semigroups of N3 with a given conductor. In the following table we have the values obtained for
some conductors.
c
|Cond(c)|
[1, 1, 1]
1
[2, 2, 2]
4
[3, 3, 3]
9
[4, 4, 4]
50
[5, 5, 5]
72
[6, 6, 6]
425
[7, 7, 7]
294

c
|Cond(c)|
[8, 8, 8]
2401
[9, 9, 9]
1940
[10, 10, 10]
8126
[11, 11, 11]
6671
[12, 12, 12]
37750
[13, 13, 13]
18263
[14, 14, 14] 123498

c
|Cond(c)|
[15, 15, 15]
71736
[1, 2, 3]
2
[2, 3, 4]
8
[3, 4, 5]
18
[4, 5, 6]
86
[5, 6, 7]
144
[6, 7, 8]
542

c
|Cond(c)|
[7, 8, 9]
843
[8, 9, 10]
2901
[9, 10, 11]
3913
[10, 11, 12]
11178
[11, 12, 13]
13942
[12, 13, 14]
40278
[13, 14, 15]
47675

Example 3.4. The following table contains the value of |Cond(c)| for some values of c.
c
[1, 1, 1]
[2, 2, 2]
[3, 3, 3]
[4, 4, 4]
[5, 5, 5]
[6, 6, 6]

Cond(c)
1
5
12
66
98
567

c
[7, 7, 7]
[8, 8, 8]
[9, 9, 9]
[10, 10, 10]
[11, 11, 11]
[12, 12, 12]

c
[1, 2, 3]
[2, 3, 4]
[3, 4, 5]
[4, 5, 6]
[5, 6, 7]
[6, 7, 8]

Cond(c)
406
3217
2650
10992
9131
50903

20

Cond(c)
2
10
26
110
192
701

c
[7, 8, 9]
[8, 9, 10]
[9, 10, 11]
[10, 11, 12]
[11, 12, 13]
[12, 13, 14]

Cond(c)
1145
3828
5289
14908
19147
53144

Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Marco D’Anna for his helpful comments and suggestions. Special
thanks to Pedro Garcı́a-Sánchez for his careful reading of an earlier version of the paper and for
many helpful hints regarding the implementation in GAP of the presented procedures.

References
[1] C. Arf Une interpretation algebrique de la suite des ordres de multiplicite d’une
branche algebrique Proc. London Math. Soc. (2), 50:256-287, 1948.
[2] V. Barucci, M. D’Anna, R. Fröberg Analitically unramifed one-dimensional semilocal rings and their value semigroups, in J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 147 (2000), 215-254.
[3] A. Campillo, Algebroid curves in positive characteristic,Lecture Notes in Math. 813,
Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, (1980).
[4] P. A. Garcia-Sanchez, B. A. Heredia, H. I. Karakas, J. C. Rosales Parametrizing Arf
numerical semigroups, J. Algebra Appl. Vol. 16, No. 11 (2017) .
[5] J. C. Rosales, Principal ideals of numerical semigroups, Bull. Belg. Math. Soc.
Simon Stevin 10 (2003), 329 - 343.
[6] The GAP Group, GAP-Groups, Algorithms and Programming, Version 4.7.5 , 25
(2014).
[7] G. Zito, Arf good semigroups, to appear in Journal of Algebra and its Applications
(2018).
GIUSEPPE ZITO-Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica-Università di Catania-Viale Andrea Doria, 6, I-95125 Catania- Italy.
E-mail address: giuseppezito@hotmail.it

