THE ARITHMETICAL RANK OF THE EDGE IDEALS
OF GRAPHS WITH WHISKERS

arXiv:1307.1652v1 [] 5 Jul 2013

ANTONIO MACCHIA
Abstract. We consider the edge ideals of large classes of graphs with whiskers and for these ideals we prove that
the arithmetical rank is equal to the big height. Then we extend these results to other classes of squarefree monomial
ideals, generated in any degree, proving that the same equality holds.

Mathematics Subject Classiﬁcation (2010): 13A15, 13F55, 14M10, 05C05, 05C38.
Keywords: Set-theoretic complete intersection ideals, arithmetical rank, edge ideals, whiskers, facet ideals.
1. Introduction
Given a Noetherian commutative ring with identity R, the arithmetical rank (ara) of a proper ideal I of R is
deﬁned as the smallest integer s for which there exist s elements a1 , . . . , as of R such that the ideal (a1 , . . . , as )
has the same radical as I. In this case we will say that a1 , . . . , as generate I up to radical. In general ht I ≤ ara I.
If equality holds, I is called a set-theoretic complete intersection. As a consequence of the Auslander-Buchsbaum
formula, whenever an ideal of R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ] generated by squarefree monomials is a set-theoretic complete
intersection, it is a Cohen-Macaulay ideal. The converse is not always true.
We consider the case where R is a polynomial ring over a ﬁeld K and I is the so-called edge ideal of a graph whose
vertices are the indeterminates. Its set of generators is formed by the products of the pairs of indeterminates that
form the edges of the graph. Thus I is generated by squarefree monomials of degree 2, and is therefore a
radical ideal. Large classes of graphs whose edge ideals are Cohen-Macaulay were described by Villarreal [16].
The arithmetical rank of edge ideals has recently been studied by several authors (see e.g. Kummini [12]) and
explicitly determined for some special types of graphs.
According to a well-known result by Lyubeznik [13], if I is a squarefree monomial ideal, the projective dimension
of the quotient ring R/I, denoted pdR R/I, provides a lower bound for the arithmetical rank of I. We deﬁne
the big height of I, denoted bight I, as the maximum height of the minimal prime ideals of I. In general, we
have ht I ≤ bight I ≤ pdR R/I ≤ ara I. If I is not unmixed, then I is not a set-theoretic complete intersection,
but it could still be true that bight I = pdR R/I = ara I. This equality has been established for the edge
ideals of acyclic graphs (the so-called forests) by Kimura and Terai [11] (extending a result by Barile [1]). A
weaker condition is the equality between the arithmetical rank and the projective dimension. This is the case
for lexsegment edge ideals (see Ene, Olteanu, Terai [6]), for the graphs formed by one or two cycles connected
through a path (cyclic and bicyclic graphs, see Barile, Kiani, Mohammadi and Yassemi [2]) and for the graphs
consisting of paths and cycles with a common vertex (see Kiani and Mohammadi [9]). In all these cases, the
arithmetical rank is independent of the ﬁeld K.
As a consequence of what we said above, the classes of Cohen-Macaulay monomial ideals are candidate to be
set-theoretic complete intersections. We consider the family of whisker graphs, obtained by adding a whisker to
each vertex of a given graph, i.e., by attaching a terminal edge to all its vertices. More in general, we can deﬁne
the fully clique-whiskered graphs in the following way: given a graph G, a subset C of the vertex set V (G) is a
1

2

clique if it induces a complete subgraph of G. If we partition V (G) in cliques W1 , . . . , Wt and add a new vertex
wi for every clique and the edges vwi for every v ∈ Wi , then we call the resulting graph a fully clique-whiskered
graph. Cook and Nagel [4] proved that the edge ideals of the fully clique-whiskered graphs are Cohen-Macaulay.
In Section 3 we prove that the big height and the arithmetical rank are equal for a larger class of graphs with
whiskers and, as a consequence, we will deduce that the edge ideals of the fully clique-whiskered graphs are
set-theoretic complete intersections.
The notion of whisker graph can be generalized in another direction. First we can consider a simplicial complex
∆ on the vertex set formed by the indeterminates, instead of a graph, and deﬁne the facet ideal as the ideal
generated by the squarefree monomials corresponding to the facets of ∆. Then we can add a simplex to each
vertex of ∆ and suppose that these simplices are pairwise disjoint. Faridi proved in [8] that the facet ideals
obtained in this way are Cohen-Macaulay. In Section 4 we strengthen this result by showing that they are also
set-theoretic complete intersections. Finally, we will add an arbitrary number of simplices to each vertex of
∆ and prove that the big height of the facet ideal of the simplicial complex obtained in this way equals the
arithmetical rank. All the results presented in this paper are independent of the ﬁeld K.
2. Preliminaries
A useful technique that provides an upper bound for the arithmetical rank of ideals is the following result due
to Schmitt and Vogel.
Lemma 2.1. ([15], p. 249) Let R be a commutative ring with identity and P be a ﬁnite subset of elements of R. Let
P0 , . . . , Pr be subsets of P such that
S
(i) ri=0 Pi = P ;
(ii) P0 has exactly one element;
(iii) if p and p′ are diﬀerent elements of Pi (0 < i < r), there is an integer i′ , with 0 ≤ i′ < i, and an element in
Pi′ which divides pp′ .
P
We set qi = p∈Pi pe(p) , where e(p) ≥ 1 are arbitrary integers. We will write (P ) for the ideal of R generated by
the elements of P . Then
p
p
(P ) = (q0 , . . . , qr ).
Another method to estimate the arithmetical rank of monomial ideals involves the Lyubeznik resolutions and
was developed by Kimura in [10].
Let R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ] and I a monomial ideal of R with minimal set of generators {u1 , . . . , uµ }, where
µ = µ(I) is the minimum number of generators of I. The Taylor resolution of I is
dµ

where T0 = Re∅ , Ts =

dµ−1

d

1
T• : 0 → Tµ −→ Tµ−1 −→ · · · −→
T0 → R/I → 0,
M
Rei1 ···is and ei1 ···is are free basis elements of Ts , with

1≤i1 <···<is ≤µ

deg ei1 ···is = deg lcm(ui1 , . . . , uis ).
The diﬀerentials are deﬁned by
s
X
(−1)j−1
ds (ei1 ···is ) =
j=1

lcm(ui1 , . . . , uis )
ei1 ···ibj ···is .
lcm(ui1 , . . . , uc
ij , . . . , uis )

A Lyubeznik resolution is a graded free resolution of R/I which is a subcomplex of the Taylor resolution of I.

3

Deﬁnition 2.2. ([14]) For every 1 ≤ i1 < · · · < is ≤ µ, the symbol ei1 ···is is called L-admissible if uq does
not divide lcm(uit , uit+1 , . . . , uis ) for all 1 ≤ t < s and for all 1 ≤ q < it . The Lyubeznik resolution of I is the
subcomplex of the Taylor resolution of I generated by all L-admissible symbols.
In the following we will identify the symbol ei1 ···is with the sequence of monomials ui1 , . . . , uis .
A Lyubeznik resolution of I depends on the order of the generators u1 , u2 , . . . , uµ .
Deﬁnition 2.3. The L-length λ of I is the minimum length of the Lyubeznik resolutions of I.
While the Taylor resolution of I is far from being a minimal graded free resolution of I, a Lyubeznik resolution
of I often is minimal.
Theorem 2.4. ([10], Theorem 1) Let I a monomial ideal of R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ], then
ara I ≤ λ.
In the following we will consider squarefree monomial ideals arising from graphs, the so-called edge ideals.
Deﬁnition 2.5. Let G be a graph with vertex set V (G) = {x1 , . . . , xn }, with n ∈ N, n ≥ 1, and whose edge
set is E(G). Suppose that x1 , . . . , xn are indeterminates over the ﬁeld K. The edge ideal of G in the polynomial
ring R = K [x1 , . . . , xn ] is the squarefree monomial ideal


I(G) = xi xj {xi , xj } ∈ E(G) .
For the sake of simplicity, we will use the same notation xi xj for the monomial and for the corresponding edge.
Let G be a graph and x a vertex of G. Adding a whisker to the vertex x of G means adding a new vertex y and
the edge connecting x and y.
Deﬁnition 2.6. A subset C of V (G) is a clique if it induces a complete subgraph of G. A clique vertex-partition
of G is a set π = {W1 , . . . , Wt } of disjoint (possibly empty) cliques of G whose union is V (G).
Notice that G may admit many diﬀerent clique vertex-partitions, and every graph has at least one clique
vertex-partition, namely the trivial partition τ = {{x1 }, . . . , {xn }}.
Deﬁnition 2.7. Given a clique W of G, a clique-whiskering of W is given by adding a new vertex w and connecting w to every vertex in W . Let π = {W1 , . . . , Wt } be a clique vertex-partition of G. Consider the cliquewhiskering of every clique of π obtained by adding the vertex wi to Wi (where wi 6= wj if i 6= j). We call the
graph Gπ obtained in this way fully clique-whiskered. This graph has vertex set V (G) ∪ {w1 , . . . , wt } and edge
set E(G) ∪ {vwi | v ∈ Wi }.
If τ is the trivial partition, we call the Gτ the whisker graph on G. Note that empty cliques produce isolated
vertices.
Example 2.8. Let G be the three-cycle C3 on the vertex set {x1 , x2 , x3 }. There are three distinct clique vertexpartitions of G (without empty cliques): the trivial partition τ = {{x1 }, {x2 }, {x3 }}, π = {{x1 , x2 }, {x3 }} and
ρ = {{x1 , x2 , x3 }}. These partitions produce the following fully clique-whiskered graphs:

4
y3
b

y2
b

τ

Gρ

π

G

G
b

x3

x3
b

x3
b

b

x1
y1
b

b

b

y1

x2

x1
b

b

b

x2

x1

b

b

x2

y2
b

y1

Figure 1. Clique-whiskerings of the three-cycle

Cook and Nagel [4] have shown the following result:
Theorem 2.9. ([4], Corollary 3.5) Let π be a clique vertex-partition of a graph G and let Gπ be the fully cliquewhiskering graph of G on π. Then the ideal I(Gπ ) is Cohen-Macaulay.
Remark 2.10. Suppose that |V (G)| = n. Then ht I(Gπ ) = n because I(Gπ ) is pure (see Bruns-Herzog [3], Cor.
5.1.5) and the ideal generated by the vertices of G is a minimal prime ideal of I(Gπ ).
Theorem 2.9 had previously been proven by Dochtermann and Engström [5] for whisker graphs, which is also a
special case of [8], Theorem 8.2.
In the same way as squarefree monomial ideals generated in degree two can be attached to graphs, squarefree
monomial ideals with generators of any degree can, more in general, be attached to simplicial complexes. This
gives rise to the notion of facet ideal, which has been extensively studied by Faridi in [7] and [8].
Deﬁnition 2.11. Let ∆ be a simplicial complex with vertex set V (∆) and facets F1 , . . . , Fq . A vertex cover for
∆ is a subset A of V (∆), with the property that for every facet Fi there is a vertex v ∈ A such that v ∈ Fi . A
minimal vertex cover of ∆ is a subset A of V (∆) such that A is a vertex cover and no proper subset of A is a
vertex cover for ∆.
Deﬁnition 2.12. Let ∆ be a simplicial complex on the vertex set V (∆) = {x1 , . . . , xn }. The facet ideal of ∆
is the ideal I(∆) in k[x1 , . . . , xn ] generated by all squarefree monomials xi1 · · · xis , such that {xi1 , . . . , xis } is a
facet of ∆.
Proposition 2.13. ([7], Proposition 1) Let ∆ be a simplicial complex over n vertices. Consider the facet ideal
I(∆) in the polynomial ring R = k[x1 , . . . , xn ]. Then an ideal P = (xi1 , . . . , xis ) of R is a minimal prime of I(∆)
if and only if {xi1 , . . . , xis } is a minimal vertex cover for ∆.
Let us consider a simplicial complex ∆ on the vertex set V (∆) = {x1 , . . . , xn }. For every vertex xi , we add a
facet Fi of dimension ≥ 1 such that
• Fi ∩ V (∆) = {xi }, for every i = 1, . . . , n,
• Fi ∩ Fj = ∅ if i 6= j, for every i, j = 1, . . . , n.
We will call ∆′ the simplicial complex obtained in this way.
Theorem 2.14. ([8], Theorem 8.2) With respect to the above notations, the facet ideal I(∆′ ) is Cohen-Macaulay.

5

Remark 2.15. We have that ht I(∆′ ) = n because I(∆′ ) is pure (see Bruns, Herzog [3], Cor. 5.1.5) and, in view
of Proposition 2.13, the ideal generated by the vertices of ∆ is a minimal prime ideal of I(∆′ ).
3. The arithmetical rank of the edge ideals of graphs with whiskers
In this section we prove the equality between the arithmetical rank and the (big) height for the edge ideals of
some classes of graphs obtained by adding one or more whiskers to every vertex of a given graph. We provide
explicit formulas and examine the special case where the graph is a cycle.
Proposition 3.1. Let G be a graph on the vertex set V (G) = {x1 , . . . , xn }. Consider a partition {W1 , . . . , Wt } of
V (G). For all i = 1, . . . , t, and for every xj ∈ Wi add a new vertex yi and the whisker xj yi . Let G′ be the graph
obtained in this way. Then
bight I(G′ ) = ara I(G′ ) = n.
In particular, every fully clique-whiskered graph is a set-theoretic complete intersection.
Proof. Suppose that W1 = {x1 , . . . , xm1 }, W2 = {xm1 +1 , . . . , xm2 }, . . . , Wt = {xmt−1 +1 , . . . , xmt = xn }. First
we show that bight I(G′ ) ≥ n. The set A = {x1 , . . . , xn } is a minimal vertex cover since one of the vertices of
each edge of G′ belongs to A. The vertex cover A is minimal because removing a vertex xj ∈ Wi , for some i, j,
would leave the whisker xj yi uncovered. Hence bight I(G′ ) ≥ n.
Next, we prove that ara I(G′ ) ≤ n. Let us consider the following ordering of the quadratic monomials:
x1 x2 x1 x3
..
.

···

···

x1 xn
..
.

x1 y 1
..
.

xm1 xm1 +1
xm1 +1 xm1 +2
..
.

···
···

xm1 xn
xm1 +1 xn
..
.

xm1 y1
xm1 +1 y2
..
.

xmt−1 +1 xmt−1 +2 · · ·

xmt−1 +1 xn xmt−1 +1 yt
..
..
.
.
xn y t

and arrange the generators of I(G′ ) according to the induced ordering. Let u be an admissible symbol for I(G′ ).
We want to show, by induction on n, that u has length at most n. The claim is true for n = 2, because the symbol
consisting of x1 x2 , x1 y1 , x2 yi is not admissible if i = 1 or i = 2. Let n > 2 and suppose that there are exactly
r monomials in u containing the variable x1 (these are monomials appearing in the ﬁrst row of the above table),
and precisely
x 1 x i1 , x 1 x i2 , . . . , x 1 x ir ,

or

x1 xi1 , x1 xi2 , . . . , x1 xir−1 , x1 y1 .

In both cases, every other monomial in u cannot contain any of the variables xi1 , xi2 , . . . , xir−1 , because x1 xij
divides x1 xir xij and x1 y1 xij for all j = 1, . . . , r − 1. Thus, the remaining monomials in u form an admissible

symbol for a graph of the same type of G′ on a vertex set W ⊂ {x2 , . . . , xn } r {xi1 , . . . , xir−1 } ∪ {y1 , . . . , yt }.
By induction, this symbol has length at most n−1−(r−1) = n−r. Therefore u has length at most r+n−r = n.
It follows, from Theorem 2.4, that ara I(G′ ) ≤ n. Hence bight I(G′ ) = ara I(G′ ) = n.

The second part of the statement follows from Remark 2.10.

6

If G is the whisker graph on a cycle graph Cn , using Lemma 2.1 we can ﬁnd n polynomials that generate
I(G) up to radical and whose expressions are simpler than those obtained using the technique due to Kimura
(compare what follows with the proof of Theorem 1 in [10]).
Given a cycle Cn on the vertex set V (Cn ) = {x1 , . . . , xn }, we consider the n-sunlet graph Sn on Cn , obtained
by adding to each vertex xi of Cn a whisker, whose terminal vertex is yi , for all i = 1, . . . , n.
Example 3.2. For each n ∈ N, n ≥ 3, the edge ideal of the n-sunlet graph Sn is a set-theoretic complete
intersection, namely
ara I(Sn ) = ht I(Sn ) = |V (Cn )| = n.
We distinguish the following cases.
If n = 3, consider the following sums of monomials
q 0 = x1 x2
q 1 = x1 x3 + x2 x3
q 2 = x1 y 1 + x2 y 2 + x3 y 3 .
If n = 4, set
q 0 = x1 x2
q 1 = x1 x4 + x2 x3
q 2 = x1 y 1 + x2 y 2 + x3 x4
q 3 = x3 y 3 + x4 y 4 .
Finally, for n = 5, set
q 0 = x1 x2
q 1 = x1 x5 + x2 x3
q 2 = x1 y 1 + x4 x5
q 3 = x2 y 2 + x3 x4 + x3 y 3 x5 y 5
q 4 = x3 y 3 + x4 y 4 + x5 y 5 .
Now suppose that n ≥ 6. In this case set
q 0 = x1 x2
q 1 = x1 xn + x2 x3
q 2 = x2 y 2 + x3 x4
..
.
qn−4 = xn−4 yn−4 + xn−3 xn−2
qn−3 = x1 y1 + xn−1 xn
qn−2 = xn−3 yn−3 + xn−2 xn−1 + xn−2 yn−2 xn yn
qn−1 = xn−2 yn−2 + xn−1 yn−1 + xn yn .

7

p
Then, in any case, we have I(Sn ) = (q0 , . . . , qn−1 ) by Lemma 2.1. We show that its assumptions are fulﬁlled
by the sets P0 , . . . , Pn−1 , where, for all i = 0, . . . , n − 1, Pi is the set of monomials appearing in qi . It is
straightforward to verify that conditions (i) and (ii) are satisﬁed. Evidently condition (iii) is true if n ∈ {3, 4, 5}.
We prove it for n ≥ 6. The product of the monomials in P1 is x1 xn · x2 x3 , which is a multiple of x1 x2 ∈ P0 . For
i = 2, . . . , n − 4, the product of the monomials of Pi is xi yi · xi+1 xi+2 , which is a multiple of xi xi+1 ∈ Pi−1 .
The product of the monomials of Pn−3 is x1 y1 · xn−1 xn , a multiple of x1 xn ∈ P1 . In Pn−2 , we can form three
products: xn−3 yn−3 · xn−2 xn−1 and xn−3 yn−3 · xn−2 yn−2 xn yn , which are multiples of xn−3 xn−2 ∈ Pn−4 , and
xn−2 xn−1 · xn−2 yn−2 xn yn , which is a multiple of xn−1 xn ∈ Pn−3 . As for Pn−1 , we have xn−2 yn−2 · xn−1 yn−1 ,
which is a multiple of xn−2 xn−1 ∈ Pn−2 , xn−2 yn−2 · xn yn , which is an element of Pn−2 , and xn−1 yn−1 · xn yn
which is a multiple of xn−1 xn ∈ Pn−3 . This completes the proof.
Example 3.2 can be generalized as follows.
Example 3.3. Let Cn be a cycle graph with vertex set {x1 , . . . , xn } and add k whiskers to each vertex of Cn .
Let G be the graph obtained in this way and yi,1 , . . . , yi,k be the terminal vertices of the whiskers on xi . Then
lnm jnk
+
k.
bight I(G) = ara I(G) =
2
2
First we deﬁne a minimal vertex cover of G. We choose the vertices
lnm
jnk
x2j−1 for all j = 1, . . . ,
and y2j,1 , . . . , y2j,k for all j = 1, . . . ,
.
2
2
Thus
bight I(G) ≥

lnm
2

+

jnk
2

k.

Now we deﬁne the same number of polynomials generating I(G) up to radical. We distinguish three cases:
• if n = 3, we set
q 0 = x1 x2
q 1 = x1 x3 + x2 x3
qj+1 = x1 y1,j + x2 y2,j + x3 y3,j
   
for j ∈ {1, . . . , k}. Thus, by Lemma 2.1, ara I(G) ≤ 2 + k = 32 + 32 k.
• if n is even, let q0 , . . . , qn−1 be as in Example 3.2, with yj replaced by yj,1 for all j = 1, . . . , n. Then set
qn+ n2 (j−2) = x1 y1,j + x2 y2,j
qn+ n2 (j−2)+1 = x3 y3,j + x4 y4,j
..
.
qn+ n2 (j−2)+ n2 −1 = xn−1 yn−1,j + xn yn,j
for j ∈ {2, . . . , k}. According to Lemma 2.1, the polynomials q0 , . . . , qn+ n2 (k−1)−1 generate I(G) up to
   
radical. Hence ara I(G) ≤ n + n2 (k − 1) = n2 + n2 k.

8

• if n is odd, let q0 , . . . , qn−1 be as in Example 3.2, with yj replaced by yj,1 for all j = 1, . . . , n. Then set
qn+⌊ n ⌋(j−2) = x1 y1,j + x2 y2,j + xn yn,j x3 y3,j
2

qn+⌊ n ⌋(j−2)+1 = x3 y3,j + x4 y4,j + xn yn,j x5 y5,j
2

..
.
qn+⌊ n ⌋(j−2)+⌊ n ⌋−2 = xn−4 yn−4,j + xn−3 yn−3,j + xn yn,j xn−2 yn−2,j
2

2

qn+⌊ n ⌋(j−2)+⌊ n ⌋−1 = xn−2 yn−2,j + xn−1 yn−1,j + xn yn,j
2
2
   
 
for j ∈ {2, . . . , k}. By Lemma 2.1, ara I(G) ≤ n + n2 (k − 1) = n2 + n2 k.

Therefore

bight I(G) = ara I(G) =

lnm
2

+

jnk
2

k.

4. The arithmetical rank of some facet ideals
In this section we prove the equality between the arithmetical rank and the (big) height for the facet ideals of
some classes of simplicial complexes obtained by adding one or more facets to every vertex of a given simplicial
complex. Again, we provide explicit formulas. The simplicial complexes considered in the following proposition
are a special case of the so-called grafted simplicial complexes considered by Faridi in [8].
Proposition 4.1. Let ∆ be a simplicial complex on the vertex set V (∆) = {x1 , . . . , xn }. For every vertex xi , we
add a facet Fi of dimension ≥ 1 such that
• Fi ∩ V (∆) = {xi }, for every i = 1, . . . , n,
• Fi ∩ Fj = ∅ if i 6= j, for every i, j = 1, . . . , n.
Let ∆′ be the simplicial complex obtained in this way. Then
ht I(∆′ ) = ara I(∆′ ) = n,
thus I(∆′ ) is a set-theoretic complete intersection.
Proof. From Remark 2.15, it follows that ht I(∆′ ) = n. we show that ara I(∆′ ) ≤ n by proving that the Llengthnof I(∆′ ) is at most
o n. For every facet Fi , we denote by uFi the monomial corresponding to Fi and set
(i)

(i)

Fi = xi , y1 , . . . , ypi . Let us consider the lexicographic ordering of the monomial generators of I(∆′ ), with
(1)

(1)

(n)

x1 < x2 < · · · < xn < y 1 < · · · < y p 1 < · · · < y 1

(n)

< · · · < ypn :

u1,1 u1,2 · · ·
u2,1 · · ·

u1,s1
u2,s2
..
.

uF1
uF2
..
.
uFn

Let α be an admissible symbol for ∆′ consisting of the monomials α1 , . . . , αm , for some m ≥ 1. We want
to show, by induction on n, that α has length at most n. The claim is true for n = 2, because the symbol
consisting of x1 x2 , uF1 , uF2 is not admissible. Let n > 2 and suppose that there are exactly r monomials in
α containing the variable x1 (these are monomials appearing in the
If r = 0,
o
n ﬁrst row of the above table).
(i)
(i)
then α is an admissible symbol on the vertex set {x2 , . . . , xn } ∪ y1 , . . . , ypi i = 2, . . . , n , so the claim

9

follows by induction.
If r = 1, then the monomials
α2 , . . . , αm form an admissible symbol β on the vertex set
o
n
(i)
(i)
{x2 , . . . , xn }∪ y1 , . . . , ypi i = 2, . . . , n and, by induction, |β| ≤ n−1. Hence |α| = 1+|β| ≤ 1+n−1 = n.
Now suppose that r ≥ 2 and that the monomials of α containing the variable x1 are precisely
α1 = u1,i1 , α2 = u1,i2 , . . . , αr−1 = u1,ir−1 , and αr = u1,ir or αr = uF1 .
We set Vi = {xj | xj divides αi , xj 6= x1 } for every i = 1, . . . , r (if αr = uF1 , then Vr = ∅). Consider, for every
i = 1, . . . , r − 1, the set Vi r Wi , where Wi = Vi+1 ∪ · · · ∪ Vr .
The following two properties hold:
1) Vi r Wi 6= ∅, for every i = 1, . . . , r − 1,
2) (Vi r Wi ) ∩ Vj = ∅, for every 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r − 1.
For the ﬁrst property, suppose for a contradiction that Vi r Wi = ∅ for some i. Then Vi ⊂ Wi = Vi+1 ∪ · · · ∪ Vr
and this implies that αi divides lcm(αi+1 , . . . , αr ), against the assumption that α is admissible.
The second property is true because Vj ⊂ Wi if 1 ≤ i < j ≤ r − 1.
Note that the indeterminates in Vi ∩ Wi appear both in αi and in some of the monomials αi+1 , . . . , αr . Therefore, for the symbol α to be admissible, at least one indeterminate in Vi r Wi must not appear in the monomials
αr+1 , . . . , αm (otherwise αi divides lcm(αi+1 , . . . , αm )). By virtue of 2), for every j = 1, . . . , r − 1, we can thus
choose an indeterminate xij that appears in αj and does not appear in the monomials αr+1 , . . . , αm , in such
a way that xi1 , . . . , xir−1 are pairwise distinct. It follows that n
the monomials αr+1 , . . . , αm form an admissible
o

(i)
(i)
symbol β on the vertex set {x2 , . . . , xn } r {xi1 , . . . , xir−1 } ∪ y1 , . . . , ypi i ∈ {2, . . . , n} r {i1 , . . . , ir−1 } .
By induction, |β| ≤ n − 1 − (r − 1) = n − r. Then |α| = r + |β| ≤ r + n − r = n.

Corollary 4.2. Let ∆ be a simplicial complex on the vertex set {x1 , . . . , xn }. For every vertex xi , we add mi ≥ 1
facets Fi,1 , . . . , Fi,mi of dimension ≥ 1 such that
• Fi,j ∩ V (∆) = {xi }, for every i = 1, . . . , n and j = 1, . . . , mi ,
• Fi,j ∩ Fi,k = {xi }, for every i = 1, . . . , n and j, k = 1, . . . , mi , j 6= k,
• Fi,j ∩ Fh,k = ∅ if i 6= h, for every i, h = 1, . . . , n, j = 1, . . . , mi and k = 1, . . . , mh .
Call ∆′ the simplicial complex obtained in this way. Then
bight I(∆′ ) = ara I(∆′ ).
Proof. For every facet Fi,j , we denote by uFi,j the monomial corresponding to Fi,j and suppose that
n
o
(i,j)
(i,j)
Fi,j = xi , y1 , . . . , yp(i,j) . Let us consider the lexicographic ordering of the monomial generators of I(∆′ ),
with
(1,1)

x1 < x2 < · · · < xn < y 1

(1,m1 )

< · · · < yp(1,1)
< · · · < y1
(1,1)
u1,1 u1,2 · · ·
u2,1 · · ·
..
.

u1,s1
u2,s2
..
.

(n,mn )

1)
< · · · < yp(1,m
< · · · < y1
(1,m )
1

uF1,1
uF2,1
..
.

xn−1 xn uFn−1,1
uFn,1

···
···

uF1,m1
uF2,m2
..
.

···
···

uFn−1,mn−1
uFn,mn

n)
< · · · < yp(n,m
:
(n,mn )

Let α be an admissible symbol for ∆′ with maximal length and call Γ the simplicial complex ∆ ∪ hF1,1 i ∪ · · · ∪
hFn,1 i, where hF i is the simplex spanned by F . Note that, if uFi,j ∈ α, then uFi,h ∈ α for every h ∈ {1, . . . , mi },

10

otherwise α does not have maximal length. In fact, if uFi,j ∈ α, but uFi,h ∈
/ α for some h 6= j, then the symbol
β obtained by adding uFi,h to α is admissible and |β| > |α|. Now suppose that α consists of the monomials:
uh1 ,j1 , . . . , uhs ,js and uFi1 ,1 , . . . , uFi1 ,mi , . . . , uFik ,1 , . . . , uFik ,mi ,
1

k

ordered as above. We deﬁne the set
n
o
(ih ,mih )
(i ,1)
A = y1 h , . . . , y1
h = 1, . . . , k ∪ {xi | i ∈ {1, . . . , n} r {i1 , . . . , ik }} .
(i ,1)

(ih ,mi )

h
Then A is a minimal vertex cover for ∆′ . First note that, for every h ∈ {1, . . . , n}, xh ∈ A or y1 h , . . . , y1
∈
(j1 ,1)
(jt ,1)
∈ A, with j1 , . . . , jt
A. Hence one of the vertices of each Fi,j belongs to A. Moreover, if y1
, . . . , y1
pairwise distinct, then xj1 · · · xjt ∈
/ ∆. Otherwise, the monomial xj1 · · · xjt would precede the monomials
uF(j1 ,1) , . . . , uF(jt ,1) in the above ordering. Since xj1 · · · xjt divides uF(j1 ,1) · · · uF(jt ,1) , this would imply that α
is not admissible, against our assumption. This shows that one of the vertices of each facet of ∆ belongs to A.
(i,j)
Therefore A is a vertex cover for ∆′ . It is minimal, because removing a vertex y1 or a vertex xi would leave
the facet Fi,j uncovered.
Finally, we prove that the length of α is less than or equal to |A|. Consider the symbol β formed by the monomials

uh1 ,j1 , . . . , uhs ,js and uFi1 ,1 , . . . , uFik ,1 .
n
o
(n,1)
(n,1)
(1,1)
(1,1)
This is an admissible symbol on the vertex set x1 , . . . , xn , y1 , . . . , yp(1,1) , . . . , y1 , . . . , yp(n,1) for the simplicial complex Γ. Hence, by Proposition 4.1, s + k ≤ n and it follows that |α| = s + m1 + · · · + mk ≤
m1 + · · · + mk + n − k = |A|. Therefore,
bight I(∆′ ) ≤ ara I(∆′ ) ≤ |α| ≤ |A| ≤ bight I(∆′ ),
where the second inequality follows from Theorem 2.4.



Remark 4.3. Let G be a graph and add mi ≥ 1 whiskers to each vertex of G. Let us call the graph G′ obtained in
this way a multiwhisker graph on G. Then, from Corollary 4.2, it follows that bight I(G′ ) = ara I(G′ ). Example
3.3 provides an explicit formula when G = Cn and mi = k for every i.
References
[1] M. Barile, On the arithmetical rank of the edge ideals of forests. Comm. Algebra 36 (2008), 12, 4678-4703.
[2] M. Barile, D. Kiani, F. Mohammadi and S. Yassemi, Arithmetical rank of the cyclic and bicyclic graphs. J. Algebra Appl.
11 (2012), 2, 14 pp.
[3] W. Bruns and J. Herzog, Cohen-Macaulay Rings. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996.
[4] D. Cook and U. Nagel, Cohen-Macaulay graphs and face vectors of ﬂag complexes. SIAM J. Discrete Math. 26 (2012), 1,
89-101.
[5] A. Dochtermann and A. Engström, Algebraic properties of edge ideals via combinatorial topology. Electron. J. Combin
16 (2009), 2, 24 pp.
[6] V. Ene, O. Olteanu and N. Terai, Arithmetical rank of lexsegment edge ideals. Bull. Mat. Soc. Sci. Mat. Roumanie (N.S.)
53 (2010), 101, 315-327.
[7] S. Faridi, The facet ideal of a simplicial complex. Manuscripta Math. 109 (2002), 159-174.
[8] S. Faridi, Cohen-Macaulay properties of square-free monomial ideals. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 109 (2005), 2, 299-329.
[9] D. Kiani and F. Mohammadi, On the arithmetical rank of the edge ideals of some graphs. Alg. Coll. 19 (2012), 1, 797-806.
[10] K. Kimura, Lyubeznik resolutions and the arithmetical rank of monomial ideals. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 137 (2009), 11,
3627-3635.

11
[11] K. Kimura and N. Terai, Binomial arithmetical rank of edge ideals of forests. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 141 (2013), 19251932.
[12] M. Kummini, Regularity, depth and arithmetic rank of bipartite edge ideals. J. Algebraic Combin. 30 (2009), 4, 429-445.
[13] G. Lyubeznik, On the local cohomology modules Hai (R) for ideals a generated by monomials in an R-sequence. In
Complete Intersections, Acireale 1983, Lecture Notes in Math., vol.1092, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1984, pp. 214-220.
[14] G. Lyubeznik, A new explicit ﬁnite free resolution of ideals generated by monomials in an R-sequence. J. Pure Appl.
Algebra 51 (1988), 1-2, 193-195.
[15] T. Schmitt and W. Vogel, Note on set-theoretic intersections of subvarieties of projective space. Math. Ann. 245 (1979),
3, 247-253.
[16] R.H. Villarreal, Cohen-Macaulay graphs. Manuscripta Math. 66 (1990), 3, 277-293.

Antonio Macchia, Dipartimento di Matematica, Università degli Studi di Bari “Aldo Moro”,
Via Orabona 4, 70125 Bari, Italy
E-mail address: antonio.macchia@uniba.it

