ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

arXiv:1403.1409v1 [math.AG] 6 Mar 2014

LUCA CHIANTINI AND JUAN MIGLIORE∗
A BSTRACT. Let A = S/J be a standard artinian graded algebra over the polynomial ring S. A
theorem of Macaulay dictates the possible growth of the Hilbert function of A from any degree
to the next, and if this growth is the maximal possible then strong consequences have been given
by Gotzmann. It can be phrased in terms of the base locus of the linear system defined by the
relevant component(s) of J. If J is the artinian reduction of the ideal of a finite set of points in
projective space then this maximal growth for A was shown by Bigatti, Geramita and the second
author to imply strong geometric consequences for the points. We now suppose that the growth
of the Hilbert function is one less than maximal. This again has (not as) strong consequences
for the base locus defined by the relevant component. And when J is the artinian reduction of
the ideal of a finite set of points in projective space, we prove that almost maximal growth again
forces geometric consequences.

C ONTENTS
1. Introduction
2. Preliminaries
3. Forcing a base locus
4. Growth type (. . . , k, k − 1): when there is a non-empty base locus
5. Growth type (. . . , k, k − 1): the basepoint free case
6. Extending Gotzmann’s theorem
7. Further questions
References

1
3
5
16
25
32
33
34

1. I NTRODUCTION
Let S = K[x1 . . . , xr ], where K is an
L algebraically closed field of any characteristic. Let
J ⊂ S be a homogeneous ideal, so J = t∈Z [J]t . The Hilbert function of S/J is the numerical
function defined by hS/J (t) = dimK [S/J]t . For any positive integer n, a theorem of Macaulay
gives an upper bound for hS/J (n + 1) in terms of hS/J (n) and n. When hS/J (n + 1) achieves
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 13D40; Secondary 14M05 .
Key words and phrases. Hilbert function, maximal growth, Macaulay’s theorem, binomial expansion, base
locus.
∗
Part of the work for this paper was done while this author was sponsored by the National Security Agency
under Grant Number H98230-12-1-0204, and by the Simons Foundation under grant #208579. He also thanks the
Italian CNR-GNSAGA.

2

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

this bound, we say that S/J has maximal growth in degree n. If hS/J (n+1) fails by 1 to achieve
the bound, we say that S/J has almost maximal growth in degree n.
In this paper we give results assuming almost maximal growth for S/J in degree n to degree
n + 1. We consider two settings. First, the setting of arbitrary homogeneous ideals. Secondly,
we will restrict ourselves to the artinian reductions of ideals of sets of points: if Z ⊂ Pr is
a finite set of points, with homogeneous ideal IZ , and L is a general linear form, the ideal
Z ,Li
⊂ S is the artinian reduction of IZ by L.
J = hIhLi
For fixed n, the projectivization of the vector space [J]n is a linear system of hypersurfaces
in Pr−1 . As such, it may be basepoint-free or it may have a non-empty base locus. The starting
observation of our research is that if S/J has maximal growth, then a result of Gotzmann
[18] forces the existence of a non-empty base locus, and it gives the dimension and degree of
this locus (as a scheme) through the Hilbert polynomial. For the artinian reduction of a set of
points Z, in [5] Bigatti, Geramita and the second author apply Gotzmann’s result, giving careful
information about the decomposition of Z into the subset lying on the base locus and the subset
off the base locus (this is also a generalization of an old result of Davis for points in P2 , see
[14]). These results are recalled in section 2.
In the case of almost maximal growth, Gotzmann’s result no longer applies, and one focus
of this paper is the fact that more possibilities arise than in the case of maximal growth. We
give results that explain what kinds of base loci can occur, depending on the kind of almost
maximal growth involved. (This latter is a technicality arising from Macaulay’s theorem and
will be made precise in sections 2 and 3.) In almost all cases, a base locus is forced, but now it
can have one of two possible dimensions, and different degrees; see for instance theorem 3.1,
example 3.3 and theorem 3.4. These results are given in section 3.
In the only case where a base locus is not forced, it can still happen that a base locus exists.
This is the topic of section 4. In this case, turning to the artinian reductions of ideals of sets of
points, we give results about a decomposition of Z, analogous to the one mentioned above.
The last possibility is that there is no base locus. This is dealt with in section 5. In this
situation we find our most surprising result. Despite the absence of a base locus, it still turns out
that many of the points are forced to lie on a plane. This is Theorem 5.1. It is very reminiscent
of a result of Maroscia [24], which says essentially that if the value of the Hilbert function of
S/J takes two or more consecutive values less than r then many of the points must lie on a
linear space of specified dimension.
There are several motivations for studying the geometry of sets of points, when the artinian
reduction achieves almost maximal growth. We should mention that a similar analysis, in the
case of sets of points with uniform position properties, allowed results for the theory of curves:
bounds on the genus, existence of special linear series, postulation of nodes of general plane
projections (see [9], [10], [8]). Recent applications to the study of symmetric tensors (for which
the uniform position properties may not hold) can be found in [1], [7], [2].
At the end of the paper, we make a series of remarks on related problems and further extensions.

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

3

2. P RELIMINARIES
Let S = K[x1 , . . . , xr ], where K is an algebraically
closed field of arbitrary characteristic.
L
Let J ⊂ S be a homogeneous ideal, so J = t∈Z [J]t .

Definition 2.1. The Hilbert function of S/J is the numerical function defined by hS/J (t) =
dim[S/J]t for t ≥ 0.
We begin by recalling results of Macaulay and Green that we will need in this paper.
Definition 2.2. Let k and i be positive integers. The i-binomial expansion of k is

 
  
kj
ki−1
ki
,
+ ... +
+
k(i) =
j
i−1
i
where ki > ki−1 > ... > kj ≥ j ≥ 1. We remark that such an expansion always exists and it is
unique (see, e.g., [6] Lemma 4.2.6).
Notation 2.3. Following [4], we define, for any integers a and b,



 

b
kj + b
ki−1 + b
ki + b
,
+ ... +
k(i) a =
+
j+a
i−1+a
i+a

where we set mq = 0 whenever m < q or q < 0. Furthermore, we will set
−1
1
k hii = k(i) 1 and khii = k(i) 0 .

Theorem 2.4. Let L ∈ [S]1 be a general linear form and let A = S/J be a standard graded
′
algebra. Denote by hn the degree n entry of the Hilbert function of A and by hn the degree n
entry of the Hilbert function of A/LA. Then:
(i) (Macaulay) hn+1 ≤ hhni
n .
′
(ii) (Green) hn ≤ (hn )hni .
(iii) (Gotzmann Persistence Theorem) Assume that hA (t) has maximal growth from degree n
to degree n + 1 and that J has no minimal generator in degree ≥ n + 2. Then
d

hA (n + d) = (hA (n))(n)
d

for all d ≥ 0. In particular, the Hilbert function equals the Hilbert polynomial in all
degrees ≥ n.

Proof. (i) See [6], Theorem 4.2.10.
(ii) See [19], Theorem 1.
(iii) See [18].



Definition 2.5. If hA (n + 1) = hA (n)hni , we say that hA has maximal growth in degree n. We
also sometimes say that A has maximal growth from degree n to degree n + 1. If hA (n + 1) =
hA (n)hni − 1, we say that hA (or simply A) has almost maximal growth in degree n.
One can see from the result of Gotzmann that there are different kinds of maximal growth of
the Hilbert function, depending on the degree of the corresponding Hilbert polynomial.

4

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

Definition 2.6. Fix positive integers n and k. Suppose that the n-binomial expansion of k is

  
kn−1
kn
+ ....
+
k=
n−1
n
Then the MG-dimension of k in degree n, denoted MG(k, n), is kn − n.

Indeed, if hA (n) = knn + (lower degree terms), hA has maximal growth from degree n to
degree n + 1 and J has no generators in degree ≥ n + 2, then the Hilbert polynomial of A has
degree kn − n, by Gotzmann’s theorem. This means that the base locus of the linear system is
a scheme of dimension kn − n in Pr−1 .
Notice that we reduce to the case where J has no minimal generators in degree ≥ i if we
substitute J with its truncation J≤i , i.e. the ideal generated by the generators of J which have
degree ≤ i. The ideal J≤i defines the base locus of [Ji ], although it is not necessarily saturated.
Given any value hA (n), the above discussion shows that MG(k, n) is the dimension for the
base locus of [J]n , in case hA (n + 1) is the maximum allowed by Macaulay’s theorem.
Let R = K[x0 , . . . , xr ] and let Z ⊂ Pn be a reduced, zero-dimensional scheme. We will
denote by hZ the Hilbert function of R/IZ . Let L ∈ [R]1 be a general linear form. The ideal
Z ,Li
J = hIhLi
⊂ R/hLi ∼
= S is the artinian reduction of R/IZ , and its Hilbert function is the
h-vector of Z, or of R/IZ . It is possible for R/IZ to fail to have maximal growth from degree
n to degree n + 1, but nevertheless S/J does have maximal growth there (see [5] Example 1.3
(a)).
The main idea of [5] was that if Z ⊂ Pr is a reduced, zero-dimensional scheme with artinian
reduction J, such that S/J has maximal growth in degree n (even if it is not the case that R/IZ
has maximal growth there), this still has strong implications for the geometry of Z. The proofs
in [5] heavily used the Gotzmann Persistence Theorem.
Our interest in this paper focuses on the situation where the growth of the first difference of
the Hilbert function is almost maximal as defined in Definition 2.5. As mentioned above, there
are different kinds of maximal growth, so correspondingly there are different cases of almost
maximal growth to be analyzed. Although this paper should be viewed as a generalization of
parts of [5], it should also be noted that [5] was motivated by the following theorem of E.D.
Davis, which we state more in the language of this paper. (He actually proved a bit more,
including the fact that he did not assume that Z is reduced).
Theorem 2.7 (see [14] Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.2). Let Z ⊂ P2 be a reduced, finite set of
points with homogeneous ideal IZ . Assume that ∆hZ (n) = ∆hZ (n + 1) = k. Then [IZ ]n and
[IZ ]n+1 have a GCD, say F , of degree k. Furthermore, F defines a reduced curve and
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)

(IZ : F ) is the saturated ideal of the subset, Z2 , of Z not lying on the curve defined by F .
(IZ , F ) is the saturated ideal of the subset of Z1 lying on F .
∆hZ (t) = ∆hZ2 (t − k) + hZ1 (t) for all t.
∆hZ2 (t) = 0 for t ≥ n − k.

Remark 2.8. A scheme X with ideal sheaf IX is t-regular if H i (IX (t − i) = 0 for i > 0.
As in [5], we will need the following results from [20].

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

5

(a) ([20] Theorem 1.1) If X ⊂ Pn is a reduced irreducible non-degenerate curve of degree d
then IX is (d + 2 − n)-regular.
(b) ([20] Remark (1), page 497) Let X ⊂ Pn be a reduced but not necessarily irreducible
curve. Suppose X has irreducible components Xi of degree di , and that Xi spans a
Pni ⊂ Pn . Set

di + 2 − ni , if di ≥ 2;
mi =
1
if di = 1 (i.e., if Xi is a line)
P
Then X is ( mi )-regular.

3. F ORCING

A BASE LOCUS

In this section we investigate when almost maximal growth of the Hilbert function of a standard graded algebra S/J from degree n to degree n + 1 forces the existence of a base locus
in [J]n . We do not yet assume that J is the artinian reduction of the ideal of a set of points in
projective space.
The next definition merely gives a notation for the dimension of the base locus of the component of an ideal in a degree n under the assumption that the quotient has maximal growth
(rather than almost maximal growth) from degree n to degree n + 1.
Let J ⊂ S = k[x1 , . . . , xr ] be a homogeneous ideal and let A = S/J. Suppose that hA has
maximal growth from degree n to degree n + 1. Then the base locus of [J]n and the base locus
of [J]n+1 , viewed in Pr−1 , coincide and this locus is a scheme of dimension MG(hA (n), n).
If J is the artinian reduction of the homogeneous ideal of a zero-dimensional scheme Z by a
general linear form, then [IZ ]n has base locus of dimension MG(hA (n), n) + 1, and the same
holds for [IZ ]n+1 . This is the idea behind [5]. We now extend this idea to our setting.
The first step is the case where the MG-dimension of S/J is 1. We assume that the growth of
the Hilbert function of S/J is one less than maximal, and we will show that the dimension of the
base locus is either the same as that occurring for maximal growth, or one less. In Example 3.3
we show that both possibilities for the dimension of the base locus can occur, and we indicate
some possibilities for the degree of the base locus (recalling that for maximal growth the degree
and dimension are both forced).
Theorem 3.1. Let J ⊂ S be a homogeneous ideal, and let A = S/J. Assume that


n+1
+ (lower terms)
(1)
hA (n) =
n

is the n-binomial expansion of hA (n). Equivalently, assume that n + 1 ≤ hA (n) < n+2
.
2
hni
Assume further that hA (n + 1) = hA (n) − 1, i.e. that the growth is one less than maximal.
Then the base locus of [J]n in Pr−1 exists and it is a scheme of dimension either 0 or 1. In other
words, the dimension of the base locus is either MG(hA (n), n) − 1 or MG(hA (n), n).
Proof. For any homogeneous ideal I ⊂ S and linear form L we have the exact sequence

6

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

0

I:L
(−1)
I

(2)

S/I(−1)

×L

S/I

S/(I, L)

0

S/(I : L)(−1)
0

0

We shall use this sequence repeatedly, especially the second short exact sequence. Notice
that S/(I : L)(−1) is the image of S/I(−1) in S/I under multiplication by L.
We first note that under our hypotheses, the base locus cannot have dimension > 1. Indeed,
the Hilbert polynomial of S/J≤n has degree at most 1. We just have to show that the base locus
is not empty.
Let ℓ be a general linear form. For convenience let us denote by
k = hA (n)
p = dim hS/(J,ℓ) (n)
s = dim hS/(J,ℓ) (n + 1)
Thus we have the table
degree i 0
1
dim[S/J]i 1
r
dim[S/(J : ℓ)]i−1
1
dim[S/(J, ℓ)]i 1 r − 1

...
n
n+1
...
k
k hni − 1
. . . k − p k hni − 1 − s
...
p
s

There exist q and m giving the following binomial expansions:
 


 




n−q+2
n
n+1
n−q−m+1
n−q
+···+
+
k =
+···+
+
n−q+1
n−1
n
n−q−m+1
n−q
|
{z
} |
{z
}
q
terms
m
terms



 

n−q+2
n
n+1
+m
+···+
+
=
n−q+1
n−1
n
and




 

n−q+3
n+1
n+2
+ m.
+···+
+
k =
n−q+2
n
n+1
By Green’s theorem, and then by Macaulay’s theorem we have
hni

p ≤ q ≤ n and

s ≤ p ≤ q.

Notice that
m ≤ n − q, and in particular if n = q then m = 0.


We have from the condition (1) that n < hA (n) = k < n+2
= n+2
.
2
n
From the exact sequence (2) we also know that
k hni − 1 − s ≤ k

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

7

so, by the properties of binomials,
s ≥ 
k hni − k− 1

n−q+2
n+2
−1
−
=
n−q+1
n+1
= q − 1.
All together we have
q − 1 ≤ s ≤ p ≤ q ≤ n.
This means that the possibilities for (p, s) are (q − 1, q − 1), (q, q − 1) or (q, q). The first and
third of these represent maximal growth for S/(J, ℓ) since q ≤ n, so the base locus for [(J, ℓ)]n
is zero-dimensional, by Theorem 2.4 (iii). Thus (since ℓ was general) the base locus for [J]n
has dimension 1 = MG(hA (n), n).
Assume now p = q, s = q − 1. This means
dim[S/(J : ℓ)]n−1 = k − q, and dim[S/(J : ℓ)]n = k hni − q,
i.e. we have the table
degree i 0
1
dim[S/J]i 1
r
dim[S/(J : ℓ)]i−1
1
dim[S/(J, ℓ)]i 1 r − 1

...
n
n+1
...
k
k hni − 1
. . . k − q k hni − q
...
q
q−1

(Notice that the passage from k to k hni − 1 occurs from degree n to degree n + 1, while the
growth from k − q to k hni − q is from degree n − 1 to degree n.) We have

 



n+1
n−q+2
n
+m−q
+
+···+
k − q = hA (n) − q =
n
n −1
 n − q + 1


n−q+2
n
+n+1+m−q
+···+
=
n−q+1
n−1
and similarly
k

hni

−q =






n−q+3
n+1
+ n + 2 + m − q.
+···+
n−q+2
n

We have the following cases.
◮ Case 1. If n = q (hence m = 0) then
k−q =
and


 
2
n
+1
+···+
1
n−1




 
3
n+1
+2
+···+
k −q =
2
n
which exceeds maximal growth from degree n − 1 to degree n, so this case cannot occur.
hni



8

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

k−q

=

=











n+1
n

◮ Case 2. If n > q and m < n − q then we get


−q =

n
n−q+2
n−q+1
+ ···+
+
n−1
n−q+1
n−q





n−q+1
n−q

, so that

+m








 
 
 


n
n−q+2
n−q+1
n−q−2

 n−q−1
+ ···+
+
+
+
+ . . .
n−1
n−q+1
n−q
n−q−2

 n−q−1
{z
}
|
m times

and similarly
k

hni

−q

=

=




 

n+1
n−q+3
n−q+2
+ ··· +
+
+m
n
n−q+2
n−q+1




 




 
 

n−q−1
n+1
n−q+3
n−q+2

 n−q
+
+ . . .
+ ···+
+
+

 n−q
n−q−1
n
n−q+2
n−q+1
{z
}
|
m times

which is clearly maximal growth. In this case we have that the base locus of [J : ℓ]n−1
and of [J : ℓ]n has dimension 1, so the base locus of [J]n has dimension at least 1 =
MG(hA (n), n) since [J]n ⊂ [J : ℓ]n .
◮ Case 3. If n > q and m = n − q then we have as above

 



n−q+1
n−q+2
n
+m
+
+···+
k−q =
n−q
n−q+1
n−1
and

 



n
−
q
+
2
n
−
q
+
3
n
+
1
+m
+
+···+
k hni − q =
n−q+1
n−q+2
n


but now m > n−q−1
+ · · · + 11 , so we cannot conclude as in the previous case.
n−q−1
Instead, we consider subcases as follows.
• 3A. If m = n − q = 1, let us first summarize our assumptions at this point.

   

1
3
n+1
+
+···+
k =
2 1
 n 
2
4
n
+
2
+
+···+
k hni =
2
3
n+1
p = q = n−1
s = q− 1 =


 n−2    
n+1
2
3
n
+1=
+
+···+
k−q =
n−1
2  1 
n−1 


1
3
n
+
1
+
+···+
k hni − q =
1
2
n

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

9

Notice that the growth from k − q in degree n − 1 to k hni − q in degree n in this case
is two less than maximal growth. A key observation is that we have
k = k hni − q;
that is,
dim[S/J]n = dim[S/(J : ℓ)]n .
This means that the multiplication ×ℓ : [S/J]n → [S/J]n+1 is injective. Let J1 =
(J : ℓ). Let ℓ2 be a general linear form. Since J does not depend on ℓ, multiplication
by ℓ2 is also injective. Then from the commutative diagram

(3)

0 → [S/J1 ]n−1
↓ ×ℓ2
0 → [S/J1 ]n

0
↓
×ℓ
−→ [S/J]n → [S/(J, ℓ)]n → 0
↓ ×ℓ2
↓ ×ℓ2
×ℓ
−→ [S/J]n+1 → [S/(J, ℓ)]n+1 → 0

and by the Snake Lemma, we see that ×ℓ2 : [S/J1 ]n−1 → [S/J1 ]n is also injective.
We obtain
(4)

dim[S/J1 ]n−1 = dim[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−1 .
Making a similar analysis but using J1 in place of J, we have, after a short calculation,
degree i 0
1
dim[S/J1 ]i 1
r
dim[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]i−1
1
dim[S/(J1 , ℓ2 )]i 1 r − 1

...
...
...
...

n − 1

n+1
n−1

n+1
−
n−1

p1

p1





n+1
n

n

+ · · · + 32 +
n+1
n−1



1
1

n−1

for some p1 . Combining Green’s theorem (in degree n − 1) and Macaulay’s theorem
on the bottom line, we obtain
n − 1 ≤ p1 ≤ n + 1.
On the other hand, from the second line and again invoking Macaulay’s theorem
(remembering the shift), we have




n
n+1
− p1 ≥
n−2
n−1


n
(since n−2
is the smallest value in degree n − 2 that could grow to n+1
in degree
n−1
n − 1), or
p1 ≤ n.
Thus p1 is either equal to n − 1 or n.

10

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

* If p1 = n then the second line of the last table gives


n
,
dim[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−2 =
n−2
so this represents maximal growth for S/(J1 : ℓ2 ) from degree n − 2 to degree
n − 1. From the corresponding Hilbert polynomial we see that [(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−2
and [(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−1 are the degree n − 2 and n − 1 components of the saturated
ideal of a linear space Λ of dimension 2. We have
[IΛ ]n−1 = [(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−1 = [J1 ]n−1 = [(J : ℓ)]n−1 .
On the other hand, we have observed that dim[S/(J : ℓ)]n is two less than the
maximum possible. Thus (J : ℓ) picks up two minimal generators in degree
n, so the base locus of [J : ℓ]n is at least zero-dimensional. Since we have also
seen in this case that [J]n = [J : ℓ]n , we see that the base locus of [J]n is at
least zero dimensional, so we have our desired result.
* If p1 = n−1, then S/(J1 , ℓ2 ) has maximal growth from degree n−1 to degree
n. This means that ([J1 , ℓ2 )]n−1 and [(J1 , ℓ2 )]n have a base locus consisting of
a zero-dimensional scheme. Thus [J1 ]n−1 and [J1 ]n have a base locus consisting of a 1-dimensional scheme, since ℓ2 is general. In particular, [(J : ℓ)]n
has a 1-dimensional base locus. Since [J]n ⊂ [(J : ℓ)]n , we have the desired
result.
• 3B. If m = n − q > 1 then as before we summarize our current assumptions.

 
 



1
n−q
n−q+2
n+1
+···+
+
+···+
k =
1  

n − q + 1 n − q
 n 
2
n
−
q
+
1
n
−
q
+
3
n
+
2
+···+
+
+···+
k hni =
2
n−q+1
n−q+2
n+1
p = q= s +1


n−q
n
+···+
k−q =

 
n − q − 1 
n − 1
1
n
−
q
n
−
q
+
2
n
+
1
+···+
+
+···+
k hni − q =
1
n−q
n−q+1
n
Notice that again, we have
k = k hni − q, i.e. dim[S/J]n = dim[S/(J : ℓ)]n ,
×ℓ

so [S/J]n −→ [S/J]n+1 is injective. We again let J1 = (J : ℓ) and ℓ2 a general
×ℓ2
linear form. Again using the Snake Lemma, we obtain that [S/J1 ]n−1 −→
[S/J1 ]n
is injective, so
dim[S/J1 ]n−1 = dim[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−1

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

11

Let p1 = dim[S/(J1 , ℓ2 )]n−1 and p2 = dim[S/(J1 , ℓ2 )]n . We compute
p2 = dim[S/J
1 ]n − dim S/(Ji1 : ℓh2 )]n−1
h



n+1
n−q+2
n−q
=
+
+
·
·
·
+
+···+
n−q+1
hn 
i n−q

n
n−q
− n−1
+ · · · + n−q−1
= q.

i

1
1

We thus have the table
n−1

degree i . . .
dim[S/J1 ]i . . .
dim[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]i−1 . . .
dim[S/(J1 , ℓ2 )]i . . .



n
n−1



n
n−1

+···+

+···+
p1



n−q
n−q−1



n−q
n−q−1

− p1

h

n

i
n−q+2
+
·
·
·
+
n
n−q+1
h

i
n−q
+ n−q + · · · + 11


n
n−q
+
·
·
·
+
n−1
n−q−1
q

n+1

From Green’s theorem, the first and the third lines of the table show that p1 ≤ q + 1.
From one of the assumptions in Case 3 we have q < n, so from Macaulay’s theorem
applied to S/(J1 , ℓ2 ) we obtain p1 ≥ q. Combining, we have
q ≤ p1 ≤ q + 1.
We have the following possibilities.
* If p1 = q then the bottom line of the above table represents maximal growth
from degree n−1 to degree n. This means that the base loci of [(J1 , ℓ2 )]n−1 and
[(J1 , ℓ2 )]n have dimension 0. Hence [J1 ]n−1 and [J1 ]n have a 1-dimensional
base locus. In particular, [(J : ℓ)]n has a 1-dimensional base locus. Since
[J]n ⊂ [(J : ℓ)]n , we have the desired result.
* Assume that p1 = q + 1 and n − q − 1 > 1. We note that since p1 = q + 1,
and since n − q − 1 > 1, we have




n−q
n−1
+ n − q − 1.
+···+
dim[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−2 =
n−q−1
n−2

 



n−q−1
n−q
n−1
,
+
+···+
=
n−q−2
n−q−1
n−2
so we have maximal growth for S/(J1 : ℓ2 ) from degree n − 2 to degree n − 1,
giving a 1-dimensional base locus. The argument is then the same as above.
* Assume finally that p1 = q + 1 and n − q − 1 = 1. After a short computation,
one sees that


n
.
dim[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−2 =
n−2
So now we have the table

12

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

degree i
dim[S/J1 ]i
dim[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]i−1
dim[S/(J1 , ℓ2 )]i

...
...
...
...

n − 1
+ · · · +
n

n
n−1

n−2

2
1

 

q+1

n





n+1
+
· · · + 43 +
n

n
+ · · · + 21
n−1

2

q

The exact sequence (2) splits into two short exact sequences as indicated (but
use I = J1 and L = ℓ2 ). The fact that
dim[S/J1 ]n−1 = dim[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−1
means that [ J1J:ℓ1 2 ]n−1 = 0, so from the long exact sequence (2) we see that
×ℓ

2
×ℓ2 : [S/J1 ]n−1 −→
[S/J1 ]n is an injection. Thus for a general linear form ℓ3 ,
×ℓ3
[S/J1 ]n−1 −→ [S/J1 ]n is also injective. Setting J2 = (J1 : ℓ2 ), we again ob×ℓ3
tain by the Snake Lemma (as we did in (3)) an injection [S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−2 −→
[S/(J1 : ℓ2 )]n−1 . We now have the following table.

degree i
dim[S/J2 ]i
dim[S/(J2 : ℓ3 )]i−1
dim[S/(J2 , ℓ3 )]i

...
...
...
...

n − 2
n
n−2


n
n−2

− p3

p3

n − 1
+ · · · +
n

n
n−1

n−2



2
1

n−1

where the bottom right dimension is the result of a simple computation. Now
combining Green’s theorem and Macaulay’s theorem, we obtain n−1 ≤ p3 ≤
n − 1, i.e. p3 = n − 1. But then




n−1
n
.
− (n − 1) =
dim[S/(J2 : ℓ3 )]n−3 =
n−3
n−2
This means that S/(J2 : ℓ3 ) has maximal growth from degree n − 3 to n − 2,
so its base locus is 2-dimensional. In fact, by Gotzmann’s theorem, we can
compute the Hilbert polynomial and obtain that the base locus is a plane Λ,
and [J2 : ℓ3 ]n−2 = [IΛ ]n−2 . From the above table we then obtain that [J2 ]n−2 =
[IΛ ]n−2 . Since the growth of the Hilbert function of J2 from degree n − 2 to
degree n − 1 is one less than maximal, the base locus of [J2 ]n−1 is (precisely)
1-dimensional. Indeed, it must be the degree n−1 component of a plane curve
of degree n − 1. From the previous table we have (recalling J2 = J1 : ℓ2 ) that
[J2 ]n−1 = [J1 ]n−1 . The growth of S/J1 from degree n − 1 to degree n is again
one less than maximal, so [J1 ]n has at least a 0-dimensional base locus. In the
same way we obtain that [J1 ]n = [J]n , so we obtain the desired result.
This completes the proof.

Remark 3.2. When
 the base locus has dimension 1, its degree is at most the number d of terms
a+1
of the form a in the n-binomial expansion of hA (n).
Examples exist where this bound is achieved. This can immediately be seen by choosing an
ideal J1 for which S/J1 has Hilbert function hA (n) in degree n and has maximal growth to

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

13

degree n + 1. Then form the ideal J by adding one minimal generator to J1 (say a general form)
in degree n + 1.
The next example shows that all degrees ≤ d can occur at least for some values of hA (n).
Example 3.3. In this example we show that all the possibilities left open by Theorem 3.1 can
occur. The computation were performed with the aid of the computer Algebra Package CoCoA
([13]).
Let S = k[x, y, z], n = 6 and
           
1
2
3
5
6
7
.
+
+
+
+
+
hA (6) = 21 =
1
2
3
4
5
6
Then maximal growth would correspond to hA (7) = 24, so the assumption of Theorem 3.1 is
that hA (7) = 23. Notice that a value of 21 in degree 6 allows a base locus of at most a curve of
degree 3. Let
I = hx6 , x5 y, x5 z, x4 y 2 , x4 yz, x4 z 2 i
J1 = hI, x3 y 3 , x3 y 2 z 2 i
J2 = hI, x2 y 4 i
J3 = hI, xy 5i
J4 = hF, Gi : IP
where P is a general point in P2 and hF, Gi is a general complete intersection of type (4, 6) in
IP . Notice that I and J1 are lex-segment ideals, and J1 has a minimal generator in degree 7
while none of J2 , J3 or J4 do. (J4 has generators in degrees 4, 6 and 8.) One can check that
S/J1 , S/J2 , S/J3 and S/J4 all satisfy the assumption hA (6) = 21 and hA (7) = 23. The Hilbert
polynomials are as follows:
HP (S/J1)
HP (S/J2)
HP (S/J3)
HP (S/J4)

=
=
=
=

3t + 2
2t + 9
t + 16
23 for

for t ≥ 7;
for t ≥ 6;
for t ≥ 7;
t ≥ 7;

Hence the base locus of [J1 ]6 and [J1 ]7 is a curve of degree 3 (defined by x3 ), the base locus of
[J2 ]6 and [J2 ]7 is a curve of degree 2 (defined by x2 ), the base locus of [J3 ]6 and [J3 ]7 is a curve
of degree 1 (defined by x) and the base locus of [J4 ]6 and [J4 ]7 is a zero-dimensional scheme
of degree 24 defined by the complete intersection hF, Gi (since the last generator reduces the
degree by 1, thanks to a standard liaison computation).

When the value of the Hilbert function hA (n) is bigger than or equal to n+2
, we have a
2
similar behavior.
Theorem
3.4. Let J ⊂ S be a homogeneous ideal, and let A = S/J. Assume that hA (n) ≥

n+2
. Assume further that hA (n + 1) = hA (n)hni − 1, i.e. that the growth is one less than
2
maximal. Then the base locus of [J]n in Pr−1 is a scheme of dimension either MG(hA (n), n)−1
or MG(hA (n), n).
Proof. We will use induction on r, the number of variables in S. If r = 3 then [A]≤n = [S]≤n
by the assumption that hA (n) ≥ n+2
(in fact equality must hold), so the base locus is all of
2

14

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

P2 . Notice that in this case [J]n+1 has a base locus consisting of a curve of degree n + 1, by the
assumption of almost maximal growth.
Let us write the n-binomial expansion of hA (n):

 
  
ki
kn−1
kn
+···+
+
(5)
hA (n) =
i
n−1
n

where kn > kn−1 > · · · > ki ≥ i ≥ 1. The condition that hA (n) ≥ n+2
means that
n
kn ≥ n + 2. Hence hA (n)hni ≥ n + 1.
We have



 

ki + 1
kn−1 + 1
kn + 1
hni
,
+···+
+
hA (n) =
i+1
n
n+1



 

ki − 1
kn−1 − 1
kn − 1
+···+
+
(6)
hA (n)hni =
i
n−1
n
and
(7)

hni

[hA (n)hni ]

=




 
ki
kn−1
kn
+···+
+
i+1
n
n+1



where some of the binomials may be zero in the last two equalities. Indeed, all the terms are
non-zero if and only if ki > i.
Let h be a general linear form in S. Mimicking a proof in [6], page 172, we have the following
sequence of inequalities and equalities:

(8)

[hA (n)hni ]hni ≥
≥
≥
=
=

hA/hA (n)hni
hA/hA (n + 1)
hA (n + 1) − hA (n)
hA (n)hni − 1 − hA (n)
[hA (n)hni ]hni − 1.

(Green’s theorem)
(Macaulay’s theorem)
(hypothesis)

The third line comes from the exact sequence
(9)

×h

A(−1) −→ A → A/hA → 0

and the last line is a straightforward computation from the definitions. This means that one of
the inequalities must be strict (differing by 1) and the others must be equalities.
Suppose that the first line of (8) is a strict inequality and the rest are equalities, i.e. we have

(10)

[hA (n)hni ]hni − 1 =
=
=
=

hA/hA (n)hni
hA/hA (n + 1)
hA (n + 1) − hA (n)
hA (n)hni − 1 − hA (n)

There may or may not exist an integer m such that mhni = [hA (n)hni ]hni − 1. If it does not,
then the first line of
 (8) must be an equality. If it does exist then the n-binomial expansion of m
kn −1
begins with n , i.e. MG(hA/hA (n), n) = kn − 1 − n ≥ 1. The second equality in (10) gives

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

that A/hA has maximal growth from degree n to degree n + 1, so in fact

h

15
(J,h)
(h)

i

n

has base locus

of dimension kn − n − 1 ≥ 1, and [J]n has base locus of dimension kn − n = MG(hA (n), n).
Now suppose that the second line of (8) is a strict inequality and the rest are equalities, i.e.
we have
[hA (n)hni ]hni − 1 =
=
=
=

(11)

hA/hA (n)hni − 1
hA/hA (n + 1)
hA (n + 1) − hA (n)
hA (n)hni − hA (n) − 1.

In particular, we have (a) hA (n)hni = hA/hA (n) and (b) the growth of hA/hA is one less than
maximal from degree n to degree n + 1. From (a) and the fact that kn ≥ n + 2, by (6) we obtain
MG(hA/hA
h (n),
i n) = (kn − 1) − n ≥ 1. If (kn − 1) − n = 1, Theorem 3.1 shows that the base
locus of

(J,h)
(h)

n

is a scheme of dimension either 0 or 1, so [J]n defines a scheme of dimension

either 1 or 2, hi.e. either
i MG(hA (n), n) − 1 or MG(hA (n), n). If instead (kn − 1) − n ≥ 2 then
(J,h)
defines a scheme of dimension either (kn − 1) − n or (kn − 1) − n − 1.
by induction (h)
n

Then [J]n defines a scheme of dimension either kn − n or kn − n − 1, i.e. either MG(hA (n), n)
or MG(hA (n), n) − 1.
Finally, suppose that the third line of (8) is a strict inequality and the rest are equalities, i.e.
we have

(12)

[hA (n)hni ]hni − 1 =
=
=
=

hA/hA (n)hni − 1
hA/hA (n + 1) − 1
hA (n + 1) − hA (n)
hA (n)hni − hA (n) − 1.

We again have hA (n)hni = hA/hA (n) but this time the second equation of (12) shows that the
growth of hA/hA is maximal from degree n to degree n+1. We hagainihave MG(hA/hA (n), n) =

kn −n−1. This time maximal growth implies the base locus of (J,h)
has dimension kn −n−1,
(h)
so the base locus of [J]n has dimension kn − n = MG(hA (n), n).


Corollary 3.5. Let Z ⊂ Pr be a finite set of points, let L be a general linear form, and let
Z ,L)
⊂ S = R/(L), where R = k[x0 , . . . , xr ]. Let A = S/J. For some integer n, assume
J = (I(L)
that A satisfies the condition of one of the two previous theorems. Then the base locus of [IZ ]n
is a scheme of dimension either MG(hA (n), n) or MG(hA (n), n) + 1.
Remark 3.6. In the setting of Corollary 3.5, it is clear that we expect many of the points to lie
on the base locus. However, we do not have a good estimate for the number of such points.
Nevertheless, we carefully analyze this question in the next section for the one remaining type
of almost maximal growth (see Proposition 4.13). Furthermore, in section 5, even when there
is no higher dimensional base locus we show the surprising result that there is a “hidden” linear
variety containing many of the points.

16

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

4. G ROWTH

TYPE

(. . . , k, k − 1):

WHEN THERE IS A NON - EMPTY BASE LOCUS

The first case not covered in the last section is the following. Let 2 ≤ k ≤ n. Then an ideal
J ⊂ S = k[x1 , . . . , xr ] with hS/J (n) = k must satisfy hS/J (n + 1) ≤ k by Macaulay’s theorem.
Thus “almost maximal growth” means hS/J (n + 1) = k − 1 ≥ 1. In this case we will see that
[J]n may or may not have a base locus, and that the setting of arbitrary homogeneous ideals
becomes almost trivial, but the setting of artinian reductions of ideals of sets of points is very
interesting.
Thus we now let Z ⊂ Pr be a finite set of reduced points. Let L be a general linear form in
Z ,L
R = k[x0 , . . . , xr ], and let J := IhLi)
⊂ S := R/hLi ∼
= k[x1 , . . . , xr ]. Throughout this section
we make the following assumption.
(13)

Z is a reduced finite set of points whose h-vector has values k and k − 1 in
degrees n and n + 1 respectively, where n ≥ k ≥ 2, and is zero thereafter.

The assumption that the h-vector is zero starting in degree n + 2 is without loss of generality.
Indeed, we can always remove points one at a time so that the Hilbert function is continually
truncated at the top ([26], lemma 5 and proposition 7.iii). This means that the h-vector is
unchanged in all except the last non-zero value, where it drops by one. We repeat this until we
have the desired 0 in degree n + 2.
We recall the relevant result from [5] for maximal growth. (We have suitably revised the
statement to fit in with our situation.)
Theorem 4.1 ([5] Theorem 3.6). Let Z ⊂ Pr be a reduced set of points. Assume that for some
integer n, ∆hZ (n) = ∆hZ (n + 1) = k, where n ≥ k ≥ 1. Then
(a) h[IZ ]≤n i is the saturated ideal of a curve, V , of degree k (not necessarily unmixed).
Furthermore V is reduced.
Let C be the unmixed one-dimensional part of V . Let Z1 be the subset of Z lying on C and let
Z2 be the “residual” set.
(b) h[IZ1 ]≤n i = IC .
(c)

∆hC (t), for t ≤ n + 1;
∆hZ1 (t) =
∆hZ (t), for t ≥ n.
In particular, ∆hZ1 (t) = k for all k ≤ t ≤ n + 1.
The starting point of the proof of the above result was that the maximal growth condition
forces the base locus of the degree n (and degree n+1) component of J to be a zero-dimensional
scheme of degree k (eventually proven to be reduced), which then lifts to a curve of degree k
containing many of the points of Z.
Unfortunately, the main results of [5] used Gotzmann’s theorem, which holds only in the
case of maximal growth. As a result, there are more possibilities in the setting of (13). Thus,
our analysis will be based on a consideration of the possibilities for the base locus of [J]n and
[J]n+1 .

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

17

If Z ⊂ P2 then the analysis was already known to Davis [14]. Thus we will assume
(14)

The h-vector of R/IZ has the form (1, h1 , . . . , k, k − 1, 0), where the k occurs in
degree n ≥ k ≥ 2, and 3 ≤ h1 ≤ r.

Lemma 4.2. Under the assumptions of (14), let W be the base locus of [J]n . Then either
dim W = 0 with deg W ≤ k or W = ∅. In the latter case, the linear system |[J]n | is basepoint
free.
Proof. If W were one-dimensional or more (as a subscheme of the Pr−1 defined by L) then the
elements of [J]n all lie in [IW ]n . This means that the Hilbert function of S/J is greater than or
equal to that of S/IW in degree n, which is not possible since hS/IW (n) ≥ n + 1. This also
shows deg W ≤ k. Hence if the base locus of [J]n is not empty, it is zero-dimensional. The last
assertion is obvious.

We will see that both possibilities allowed by Lemma 4.2 actually can occur. In this section
we deal with the first of the two, i.e. the case dim W = 0. We first show that the base locus can
have any degree ≤ k.
Proposition 4.3. Fix any integer d with 1 ≤ d ≤ k ≤ n. Then there exists a set of points
Z ⊂ Pr satisfying (14), for which [J]n has base locus consisting of precisely d points. That is,
[IZ ]n has a base locus whose 1-dimensional component is a reduced curve of degree d.
Proof. We proceed in three steps. First, fix a plane Γ ⊂ Pr and choose a smooth plane curve C
of degree d on Γ. Choose a general set, Z1 , of
 
d
+ (n − d + 2)d + (d − 1)
1 + · · · + d + d + · · · + d + (d − 1) =
2
points on C. The h-vector of Z1 is (1, . . . , d, d, . . . , d, d − 1) where the last d occurs in degree
n. (The first d entries increase monotonically by 1, but if d = 1 then there is no increase.)
For the second step, if d = k then we do nothing and proceed to the third step. If, instead, we
have d < k, then we want to add points on Γ so that ∆hR/IZ (n) = k, ∆hR/IZ (n + 1) = k − 1,
and the base locus in degree n and n + 1 remains a curve of degree d. We first add one more
general point to Z1 on C, making the value of the h-vector in degree n + 1 now d. Let Z2′ be a
general complete intersection in Γ of type

 

k + n − 2d + 1
k + n − 2d + 1
,
.
2
2
Observe that the h-vector of Z2′ in degree n − d is k − d, and the value in degree n − d + 1
is k − d − 1. Since Z2′ is in uniform position, we can remove any k−d−1
points from Z2′ to
2
obtain a set of points Z2 whose h-vector agrees with that of Z2′ up to degree n − d + 1 and
is zero thereafter. The base locus of the ideal of Z2 in degree n − d is zero-dimensional. Let
Z = Z1 ∪ Z2 . We claim that for t ≤ n + 1 we have
∆hR/IZ (t) = ∆hR/IZ2 (t − d) + hR/IC (t).
It is enough to think of these algebras as quotients of k[x, y, z]. Then this follows from the
work of Davis, but can also be seen directly with a simple computation using Bezout’s theorem,

18

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

since for t ≤ n + 1 any plane curve of degree t containing Z1 must contain C as a component,
so dim[IZ ]t = dim[IZ2 ]t−d . With this formula we obtain that the h-vector of Z has value k in
degree n and k − 1 in degree n + 1 as desired. Also, the base locus of IZ in degrees n and n + 1
has only C as 1-dimensional base locus.
For the third step, observe that Z as constructed so far has h1 = 2. We now merely add up to
r − 2 general points to obtain 3 ≤ h1 ≤ r, and we are finished.

We would like to point out, though, that in Proposition 4.3 there are at least
 
k
+ k(n − k + 3) − 1
1 + 2 + 3 + · · · + k + k + · · · + k + (k − 1) =
2
points on a plane, which also contains the 1-dimensional component. It is possible to construct
examples where the curve (and hence many of the points of Z) does not lie on a plane. We give
an example.
Example 4.4. Consider the case of finite sets of points in P3 and suppose n = 8 and k = 7. We
show that for any 1 ≤ d ≤ 7 there is a set of points Z ⊂ P3 such that
• ∆hR/IZ (8) = 7 and ∆hR/IZ (9) = 6;
• the base locus of [IZ ]8 is a non-degenerate, smooth curve, C, of degree d.
Furthermore, we show that there is a set of points whose h-vector ends (. . . , 7, 6) and whose
base locus for the component in degree 8 is zero-dimensional (in fact it consists only of points
of Z). This is in stark contrast to the h-vector (. . . , 7, 7), where the base locus must be a curve
of degree 7.
For fixed d, 1 ≤ d ≤ 7, let C be a smooth, irreducible arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay curve
of degree d whose h-vector is as short as possible, and let Z1 be a general set of points on C
with h-vector as follows:
d
1
2
3
4

h-vector of Z1
(1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
(1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2)
(1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3)
(1, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4)

d
5
6
7

h-vector of Z1
(1, 3, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5)
(1, 3, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6, 6)
(1, 3, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7)

(Note that the length of the h-vector in the last two cases is one more than the lengths in the
previous cases.)
In the case d = 7 we simply remove any point P from Z1 and we are finished: Z = Z1 −{P }
and the h-vector is (1, 3, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 6).
In the case d = 6 we add 81 general points of P3 to Z1 , arriving at the h-vector
(1, 3, 6, 10, 15, 21, 28, 36, 7, 6).
Now assume 1 ≤ d ≤ 5. Let F1 , F2 be a regular sequence in IC of type (7, 9 − d), hence
also a regular sequence of type (7, 9 − d) in IZ1 . Let L be a general linear form. The ideal
hL, F1 , F2 i is the saturated ideal of a complete intersection, Z2 , of type (7, 9 − d) in the plane
defined by L, hence of 63 − 7d reduced points. Thanks to [[22] Lemma 4.8 and Remark 4.10]

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

19

or [[25] Proposition 5.4.5], the ideal L · IZ1 + hF1 , F2 i is the saturated ideal of the union, Z, of
Z1 and Z2 . Its h-vector is
deg 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8
9
Z1
1 ∗ ∗ d d d d
d
d
Z2 1 2 3 4 ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ 7 − d 6 − d . . .
1 3 ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
7
6
...
By [17], a subset of Z1 ∪ Z2 can be found by removing a suitable set of points of Z2 , so that the
h-vector of the resulting set of points is (1, 3, . . . , 7, 6) (with the 7 in degree 8). We thus have
k = 7, n = 8 so the numerical assumptions are satisfied.
Now, in degrees 7 and 8, Z2 does not have a one-dimensional component in the base locus,
hence one can check from the form of the ideal given above (and confirm on CoCoA) that the
one-dimensional base locus of Z in degree 8 and degree 9 has degree d.
To arrange for the base locus to be zero-dimensional, we replace the set of points on a curve
with any set of points with regularity less than 7 (say), and let hF1 , F2 i be a complete intersection
of type (7, 9) and apply the same construction.

We now ask what consequences are imposed by the assumption that the base locus of [J]n
(or [J]n+1 ) is zero-dimensional of degree d. We first recall the following result.
Proposition 4.5 ([5] Corollary 3.7). Let Z ⊂ Pr be a reduced finite set of points. Assume that
for some n ≥ d, ∆hR/IZ (n) = d and that the saturated ideal h[IZ ]≤n isat defines a curve of
degree d. Then all the conclusions of Theorem 4.1 continue to hold.
Corollary 4.6. Assume that [J]n+1 has a base locus consisting of a zero-dimensional scheme
in Pr−1 of degree k − 1, together with the other assumptions highlighted so far in this section.
Then all the conclusions of Theorem 4.1 continue to hold. In particular, [IZ ]n+1 has a reduced
1-dimensional component of degree k − 1.
Proposition 4.7. Suppose that IZ has a minimal generator of degree n + 1, together with our
assumption (14). Then all the conclusions of Theorem 4.1 continue to hold. In particular, [IZ ]n
has a reduced 1-dimensional component of degree k.
Proof. If IZ has such minimal generator then so does the artinian reduction J. Removing this
generator from J gives a new artinian ideal J ′ that agrees with J through degree n, and whose
Hilbert function has the value k degree n. This means that [J ′ ]n , and hence also [J]n , has a
base locus consisting of a zero-dimensional scheme of degree k. It follows that [IZ ]n has a base
locus with a one-dimensional component of degree k. Thus Proposition 4.5 applies and we are
done.

Corollary 4.8. In the setting of Proposition 4.7, at least
 
k
+ k(n − k + 3) − 1
2
points of Z lie on a curve of degree k. In the setting of Corollary 4.6, at least


k−1
+ (k − 1)(n − k + 4)
2

20

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

points lie on a curve of degree k − 1.
Proof. We will use several times in this paper the observation that if Z1 is a set of points lying
on a curve C of some given degree d then the sum of the entries of the h-vector (i.e. the number
of points) of Z1 is minimized when C is a plane curve, since then Theorem 4.1 (once we know
that it applies) gives that the h-vector is of the form (1, 2, 3, . . . , (d − 1), d, d, . . . , d, ǫ (where
ǫ ≤ d) so this allows the h-vector to grow as slowly as possible. By Theorem 4.1, since the
degree of the curve is k and the curve is reduced, it follows that
|Z1 | ≥ 1 + 2 + · · · + (k − 1) + k + k + · · · + k + (k − 1)
where the two (k − 1)’s occur in degrees k − 2 and n + 1. The result is then an easy calculation.
The same idea gives the second result.

This leads to the next reduction.
(15)

From now on we assume that J, and hence IZ , has no minimal generator
of degree n + 1.

We believe that something like Proposition 4.7 should continue to hold.
Conjecture 4.9. Assume that [J]n has a base locus consisting of a zero-dimensional scheme
in Pr−1 of degree d, together with the other assumptions highlighted so far in this section. As
noted above, we have d ≤ k. Then
(a) h[IZ ]≤n+1 i is the saturated ideal of a reduced curve, V , of degree d (not necessarily
unmixed).
Let C be the unmixed one-dimensional part of V . Let Z1 be the subset of Z lying on C and let
Z2 be the “residual” set.
(b) h[IZ1 ]≤n+1 i = IC .
(c) ∆hZ1 (t) = ∆hC (t), for t ≤ n + 1. In particular, ∆hZ1 (t) = d for all d ≤ t ≤ n + 1.
Question 4.10. We will see in section 5 that in the situation where [J]n is basepoint free, many
points of Z have to lie on a plane. If the above conjecture is true, does it also follow that many
points of Z2 have to lie on a plane? We do not have much information about the Hilbert function
of Z2 , even conjecturally.
Lemma 4.11. Every
H 1 IZ (d − 1) = 0.

0-dimensional subscheme Z

of length d in

Pr

satisfies

Proof. Consider the h-vector, h, of Z. Since the h-vector is the Hilbert function of R/(IZ , L)
for a general linear form L, it follows that if h(i) = 0 for some i then h(i + j) = 0 for all
j > 0. But then h is, at worst, of the form 1 1 1 ...1 0 ... so that h(d) = 0, and the conclusion
follows.

By regularity, it follows that every 0-dimensional subscheme Z of length d has a homogeneous ideal generated in degree ≤ d.

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

21

Lemma 4.12. Given an unmixed reduced curve C of degree d (even reducible) in Pr , then
H 1 IC (d − 1) = 0.
Proof. Well known. See for instance Remark 2.8.



Here is the main new fact.
Proposition 4.13. Assume that the h-vector of R/IZ has the form (1, h1 , . . . , k, k − 1, 0), where
the k occurs in degree n ≥ k ≥ 2. Assume that J, and hence IZ , has no minimal generator
of degree n + 1. Assume that [J]n has a base locus consisting of a zero-dimensional scheme
in Pr−1 of degree d′ . Call C ′ the union of all positive dimensional parts of the saturation of
h[IZ ]≤n i, so deg C ′ = d′ . Let C = (C ′ )red and assume that deg C = d.
Then C has dimension 1 and degree d ≤ k − 1. Furthermore,
 
d
+ 5d points of Z;
• if k − 1 − d ≤ d + 1 then C contains at least 2 ·
2
• If d + 1 ≤ k − 1 − d then C contains at least d2 + d(n − k + 4) points of Z
Proof. The fact that C ′ is a (possibly non reduced) curve of degree d′ contained in the base
locus of [IZ ]n follows at once from the fact that L is a general hyperplane.
Call Z1 the subset of Z lying on C ′ . Notice that indeed Z1 lies on C. Define Z − C = Z2 ,
where Z − C is defined by the homogeneous ideal IZ : IC . Since Z is reduced, we have
Z = Z1 ∪ Z2 .
Since IZ has no minimal generators in degree n + 1, we have for any i ≤ n + 1 that
[IZ ]i ⊆ [IC∪Z2 ]i = [IC∪Z ]i ⊆ [IZ ]i ,
so all of these vector spaces are equal. In particular, IZ coincides up to degree n + 1 with
IC∪Z = IC∪Z2 .
Let L1 ∼
= Pr−1 be a general hyperplane and call W the intersection of L1 and C. Note first
that the h-vector of Z ′ = Z ∪ W coincides with the h-vector of Z for i = 0, . . . , n + 1. Indeed
Z ′ sits in the base locus of h[IZ ]≤n+1 i. In particular the h-vector of Z ′ is k − 1 in degree n + 1.
We claim that the h-vector of Z ′ is 0 in degree n + 3, i.e. that Z ′ is separated by forms of
degree n + 2. To see this, note that the sequence
×L

0 → H 0 IZ (n + 1) −→1 H 0 IZ (n + 2) → H 0 OL1 (n + 2) → 0
is exact (identifying L1 with Pr−1 ), because the h-vector of Z is 0 in degree n + 2, hence
H 1 IZ (n + 1) = 0. With this in mind, we can prove that if Y is any subscheme of Z ′ whose
length is the length of Z ′ minus 1, then there exists a form f of degree n + 2 passing through Y
and not through Z ′ .
◮ If Z ′ − Y is supported in Z, then one takes a form f ′ of degree n + 1 passing through Z ∩ Y
(it exists because Z is separated in degree n + 1) and takes f = f ′ L1 .
◮ If Z ′ − Y is supported in L1 , then one takes one form of degree n + 2 in L1 = Pr−1 which
passes through Y ∩ W and not through W (it exists, by Lemma 4.11) and lifts it to a form f
containing Z, via the surjection
H 0 IZ (n + 2) → H 0 OL1 (n + 2) → 0.

22

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

It follows that the h-vector of Z ′ is k, k − 1, d, 0 in degrees n, n + 1, n + 2, n + 3 respectively.
This proves in particular that d ≤ k − 1.
If d = k − 1, we apply Theorem 4.1 to Z ′ and prove that C has degree d = k − 1. Moreover
C contains a subscheme of Z ′ of length at least (k − 1)(n + 2 − (k − 1)). Since the length of
Z ′ − Z is d = k − 1, the conclusion follows.
Assume then that d < k − 1. By construction the base locus of [IZ ′ ]n+1 contains C. We do
not know if the base locus of [IZ ′ ]n+2 contains C, so we have to consider both possibilities.
Case 1: The base locus of [IZ ′ ]n+2 does not contain C. Call q1 the dimension of the vector
space
[IZ ′ ]n+2 /([IZ ′ ]n+2 ) ∩ [IC ]n+2 ).
We would like to add to Z ′ a set of q1 “general” points of C. From a geometric point of view,
the significance of the number q1 is the following.
This number q1 is the number of points on C that we need to add to
Z ∪ (L1 ∩ C) (where L1 is a general plane) in order to get a set Z1′ such that all
the elements of H 0 IZ1′ (n + 2) contain C.
We note here that the numbers qi introduced below have an analogous geometric meaning: qi is
′
the number of points on C that we need to add to Zi−1
∪ (Li ∩ C) in order to get a set Zi′ such
that all elements of H 0 IZi′ (n + 1 + i) contain C.
The first problem is what this means if C is not irreducible. This will be resolved by the
following procedure. Let {F1 , . . . , Fm } be a basis for ([IZ ′ ]n+2 ∩ [IC ]n+2 ). We have that
dim[IZ ′ ]n+2 = m + q1 , so we can complete this to a basis for [IZ ′ ]n+2 as follows. It is possible that [IZ ′ ]n+2 has a one-dimensional base locus, C1 , whose support is a union of some (but
not all) components of C. Choose a component of C that is not a component of C1 , and let P1
be a general point of this component and let A1 = Z ′ ∪{P1 }. Clearly dim[IA1 ]n+2 = m+q1 −1.
Applying the same procedure but with A1 instead of Z ′ , we obtain a point P2 on some component of C and form A2 = Z ′ ∪ {P1 , P2 } with dim[IA2 ]n+2 = m + q1 − 2. Continuing
in this way, we obtain a set of points {P1 , . . . , Pq1 } so that if Z1′ = Z ′ ∪ {P1 , . . . , Pq1 } then
dim[IZ1′ ]n+2 = dim[IZ ′ ]n+2 − q1 . Since dim[IZ1′ ]n+1 = dim[IZ ′ ]n+1 (the new points all lie in the
base locus), we see that the length of the resulting scheme Z1′ is length(Z) + d + q1, its h-vector
is equal to the h-vector of Z up to degree n + 1, and the h-vector has value d + q1 in degree
n + 2.
It follows that Z1′ is separated in degree n + 2 and it has length d + q1 +length(Z). Moreover
d + q1 ≤ k − 1. If d + q1 = k − 1, the h-vector of Z1′ ends with k − 1, k − 1 in degrees
n + 1, n + 2. As above, we can apply Theorem 4.1 and find that C has degree d = k − 1, and
contains a subset of Z1′ of length at least (k − 1)(n + 2 − (k − 1)). Since the length of Z1′ − Z
is d + q1 = k − 1, the conclusion follows. As above, we can apply Theorem 4.1. We obtain
that IZ1′ has no minimal generator in degree n + 2, and that the base locus of the components
in degrees n + 1 and n + 2 is a curve of degree k − 1. Since we also assumed that there is no
minimal generator in degree n + 1, we get that this curve is C, and that hence d = k − 1 and
q1 = 0 (we get a little bit more: we get that the curve is C ′ , i.e. C ′ is reduced). The estimate for
the number of points of Z that lie on C will be carried out at the end of the proof.

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

23

Assume d + q1 < k − 1. Fix another general hyperplane L2 and repeat the procedure, i.e. add
to Z1′ the set L2 ∩ C and, if the dimension q2 of
[IZ1′ ∪(L2 ∩C) ]n+3 /([IZ1′ ∪(L2 ∩C) ]n+3 ∩ [IC ]n+3 )
is non-zero, also add a set of q2 “general” points on C as above. Call Z2′ the resulting set. As
above, we have a surjection
H 0 IZ1′ (n + 3) → H 0 OL2 (n + 3) → 0
which guarantees that the h-vector of Z2′ ends with k − 1, d + q1 , d + q2 , 0 in degrees n + 1, n +
2, n + 3, n + 4 respectively.
We continue in the same way obtaining, after i steps, a 0-dimensional scheme Zi′ whose hvector ends with k − 1, d + q1 , . . . , d + qi , 0 in degrees n + 1, n + 2, . . . , n + i + 1, n + i + 2
respectively.
We now claim that the qi are strictly decreasing until they reach the value 0. If this were not
the case, then we would have two consecutive degrees in which the first difference of the Hilbert
function of our set of points Zi′ would have the same value d + qi . This forces the base locus of
[IZi′ ]n+1+i to contain a curve of degree d + qi > d. But the artinian reduction of R/IZi′ agrees
with that of R/IZ in degrees n and n + 1, and this base locus has only degree d. The base locus
cannot grow as the degree increases, so this is impossible.
Thus the process stops after m steps, where m is the first value of i such that qi = 0, since
then qi = 0 for all i > m as well, and so we have maximal growth.
Claim: m ≤ min{k − 1 − d, d + 1}.
The fact that the number of steps is at most k − 1 − d is clear: since d + q1 < k − 1, we get
q1 ≤ k − d − 2 so there are at most k − d − 2 non-zero qi , plus qm = 0. We will show that in
fact qd+1 = qd+2 = 0. To see this, note first that C ∪ Zi′ = C ∪ Z2 for any i, since the added
points all lie on C, and recall that Z2 is separated in degree n + 1. It follows that the sequence
0 → H 0 IC∪Z2 (d + n + 1) → H 0 IC (d + n + 1) → H 0 OZ2 → 0
is exact. Indeed, the only issue is the surjectivity of the last map. But if P is a point of Z2 then
there is a form F of degree n + 1 vanishing at the remaining points of Z2 but not at P , and since
IC is generated in degree ≤ d there is a form G of degree d vanishing on C but not at P . The
product F G demonstrates the desired surjectivity.
As a consequence, we have
H 1 IC∪Z2 (d + n + 1) ⊆ H 1 IC (d + n + 1) = 0.
Hence the sequence
0 → H 0 IC∪Z2 (d + n + 1) → H 0 IZ2 (d + n + 1) → H 0 OC (d + n + 1) → 0
is exact. It also means that for any i the map
H 0 IZi′ (d + n + 1) → H 0ID|C (d + n + 1)
surjects, where D is the set on C given by C ∩ Zi′ . Of course H 0 ID|C (d + n + 1) may be zero,
and certainly is zero for large i.

24

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

Now we prove that qd+1 is 0. As noted above, this number qd+1 is the number of points on
C that we need to add to Zd′ ∪ (Ld+1 ∩ C) (where Ld+1 is a general plane) in order to get a
′
′
(n + d + 2) all contain C. So, if we can prove that
set Zd+1
such that the elements of H 0 IZd+1
′
Zd ∪ (Ld+1 ∩ C) has this property (i.e. surfaces of degree n + d + 2 through Zd′ ∪ (Ld+1 ∩ C)
all contain C), then we must have qd+1 = 0.
To see this, suppose to the contrary that there exists a surface F of degree n + d + 2 passing
through Zd′ ∪ (Ld+1 ∩ C) and not containing C. Then F cuts a divisor E in OC (n + d + 2)
which contains D = C ∩ Zd′ and Ld+1 ∩ C. Then E ′ = E − (Ld+1 ∩ C) is a non-trivial divisor
in OC (n + d + 1) containing D. Thus, by the surjection above, E ′ can be lifted to a surface F ′
of degree d + n + 1 which contains D and Z2 , i.e. F ′ contains Zd′ and does not contain C. This
is impossible by the construction of Zd′ .
′
Thus qd+1 = 0. In the same way we have qd+2 = 0, i.e. Zd+2
has an h-vector which ends in
degree d + n + 3 and has value d in degrees d + n + 2 and d + n + 3.
We now give the estimate for the number of points of Z lying on C in Case 1. We know that
after m steps the one-dimensional part of the base locus is already C, without adding points,
′
and that thus in degree n + 1 + m, the decomposition of Zm
according to Theorem 4.1 holds.
′
The total number of points of Zm that lie on C is minimized in the case that C is a plane
curve, so that the h-vector grows as slowly as possible to reach the value d. Thus the number of
′
points of Zm
that lie on C is at least
(1 + 2 + · · · + (d − 1) + d + d + · · · + d
′
where the final d occurs in degree n + 1 + m. Thus Zm
contains at least

 
 
d
d
+ d(n + m − d + 3).
+ d[(n + 1 + m) − (d − 2)] =
2
2
′
To obtain Zm
we added to Z a total of md + (q1 + q2 + · · ·+ qm ) points (where qm = 0). Bearing
in mind that the qi are strictly decreasing as long as they are positive, and that q1 ≤ k − 2 − d,
we have the following lower bound for the cardinality of the original set, Z1 , of points lying on
C.

 
 
d
d
+d(n−d+3)−[q1 +· · ·+qm ].
+d(n+m−d+3)−[md + (q1 + · · · + qm )] =
|Z1 | ≥
2
2
By the above claim, we have m ≤ min{k − 1 − d, d + 1}, where m is the smallest index such
that qm = 0. This gives us two possibilities.

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

25

Assume first that m ≤ k − 1 − d ≤ d + 1, i.e. k ≤ 2d + 2. Notice that this implies
d − (k − 2 − d) ≥ 0, and recall also that k ≤ n and that q1 ≤ k − 2 − d. Then
 
d
+ d(n − d + 3) − [1 + 2 + · · · + (k − 2 − d)]
|Z1| ≥
2
 
d
+ d(k − d + 3) − [1 + 2 + · · · + (k − 2 − d)]
≥
2
 
d
+ [(d − 1) + (d − 2) + · · · + (d − (k − 2 − d))] + 5d
≥
2
 
d
+ [(d − 1) + (d − 2) + · · · + 1 + 0] + 5d
≥
2
   
d
d
+ 5d
+
=
2
2
 
d
+ 5d.
= 2·
2
Now assume that m ≤ d + 1 ≤ k − 1 − d, i.e. k ≥ 2d + 2. We have that qd+1 = 0, so we
maximize q1 + · · · + qm by (k − 2 − d) + · · · + (k − 2d − 1) since the qi are strictly decreasing
and there are at most d non-zero ones.
 
d
+ d(n − d + 3) − [(k − 2 − d) + · · · + (k − 2d − 1)]
|Z1 | ≥
2
 
d
d
+ d(n − d + 3) − [2k − 3d + −3]
=
2
2
= d2 + d(n − k + 4)
Case 2: The base locus of [IZ ′ ]n+2 contains C. In this case q1 and q2 are both zero, so the
computation is as before but easier. Clearly in this case there are more points than in Case 1, so
the claimed bound still holds.

5. G ROWTH

TYPE

(. . . , k, k − 1):

THE BASEPOINT FREE CASE

We continue to assume that dim[S/J]n = k ≥ 2 and dim[S/J]n+1 = k − 1. The other
possibility allowed by Lemma 4.2 is that the linear systems |[J]n | and |[J]n+1 | are basepoint
free, i.e. that h[J]≤n i is artinian (hence also h[J]≤n+1 i is artinian):
(16)

From now on we assume that the degree n component of J has no base locus.
Hence the same is true also in degree n + 1.

26

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

Our goal in this section is to prove the following theorem.
Theorem 5.1. Assume that [J]n and [J]n+1 are base point free, together with the other assumptions highlighted so far in this section. Then there is a distinguished plane Λ such that if Z1 is
the subset of Z lying on Λ and Z2 is the subset of Z lying off Λ then
∆hR/IZ1 (t) = ∆hR/IZ (t)

for t ≥ n

and

∆hR/IZ2 (t) = 0

for t ≥ n − 1.

This will take some preparation, and we devote the rest of this section to its proof.
We know that S/J is artinian, with Hilbert function having values k and k − 1 in degrees
n and n + 1 respectively, and then zero. Clearly the dimension of the socle of S/J in degree
n + 1 is k − 1. Suppose that S/J has a non-zero socle element f in degree n. Then S/(J, f ) has
Hilbert function with value k − 1 in both degrees n and n + 1. Thus the components of (J, f ) in
degrees n and n + 1 have a non-empty base locus. But in degree n + 1, J and (J, f ) coincide.
Thus we have a contradiction to (16).
(17)

From now on we assume that S/J has no non-zero socle in degree n.

It follows that the canonical module of S/J has no minimal generators in the second degree.
Consequently, the same is true for the canonical module of R/IZ :
(18)

From now on we assume that the canonical module of R/IZ has no minimal
generator in its second degree.

With the assumptions (15), (16), (17), (18) in place, we now prove the geometric consequences as described in the theorem.
Let ℓ be an arbitrary (not general) linear form. We have a multiplication
×ℓ : [S/J]n → [S/J]n+1 ,
where these components have dimensions k and k − 1 respectively. Choosing bases for [S/J]n
and [S/J]n+1 and finding the matrices for ×x1 , ×x2 , . . . , ×xr with respect to these bases, we
can represent the multiplication by a linear form ℓ = a1 x1 + a2 x2 + · · · + ar xr as a (k − 1) × k
matrix, A, whose entries are linear forms, mi,j , in the dual variables a1 , . . . , ar . Let us write


m1,1 . . . m1,k
..
..

A=
.
.
mk−1,1 . . . mk−1,k
The vanishing locus of the maximal minors of this matrix corresponds to the set of linear forms
ℓ for which ×ℓ fails to have rank k − 1. This locus has codimension at least 2 in Pr−1 (the dual
projective space).
Remark 5.2. As an aside, suppose that r = 3. Notice that the expected vanishing
locus for the

k
maximal minors of a (k − 1) × k matrix of linear forms is a finite set of 2 points in the dual

projective plane, corresponding to k2 linear forms. If it happens that the degree n component
of J has a base locus consisting of k distinct points, no three on a line, then the linear forms
that fail to give a surjectivity are exactly the k2 lines passing through two of the points.

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

27

We first note that if ℓ is general then ×ℓ is surjective. Indeed, we have the exact sequence
×ℓ

[S/J]n −→ [S/J]n+1 → [S/(J, ℓ)]n+1 → 0
and Green’s theorem (cf. Theorem 2.4) together with the assumption k ≤ n gives that the last
vector space is zero.
Now we want to describe the possible ranks for arbitrary ℓ. There are essentially four possibilities for the rank of ×ℓ, a priori:
Case 1: rk (×ℓ) = k − 1 (i.e. is surjective) for all ℓ.
This is impossible. As noted above, the vanishing locus of the maximal minors of A has
codimension ≤ 2, so there is at least a finite number of points (depending also on r) in the dual
projective space where this rank is < k − 1.
For the remaining cases, we assume that ×ℓ fails to have maximal rank, and we consider the
exact sequence from (2)
(19)

×ℓ

0 → [S/(J : ℓ)]i−1 −→ [S/J]i → [S/(J, ℓ)]i → 0

for different values of i. We are interested in knowing what are the consequences for ℓ if it fails
to give a multiplication of maximal rank. Note that rk (×ℓ) = dim[S/(J : ℓ)]i−1 .
Case 2: For i = n + 1, rk (×ℓ) = k − 2, so dim[(S/(J : ℓ)]n = k − 2.
We represent the relevant data from (2) in the following table. Since (2) is a short exact
sequence of graded modules, we obtain a collection of short exact sequences of vector spaces,
coming from the homogeneous components of the various degrees, i. Each column in the table
below represents the dimensions of the corresponding vector spaces for the degree given in the
top row. By exactness, the second and third entries must add up to the first entry.
degree i 0
1
dim[S/J]i 1
r
dim[S/(J : ℓ)]i−1
1
dim[S/(J, ℓ)]i 1 r − 1

...
n
n+1
...
k
k−1
...
p
k−2
... k − p
1

where p = dim[S/(J : ℓ)]n−1 ≤ k. For simple Hilbert function reasons, we cannot have
0 ≤ p ≤ k − 3 (looking at the middle line) or p = k (looking at the bottom line). If p = k − 1
then S/(J, ℓ) has maximal growth from degree n to degree n + 1, and hence the base locus of
the component of (J, ℓ) in degree n (and n + 1) is non-empty, meaning that the same is true of
J, violating (16). (Notice that we do not need ℓ to be general in order to reach this conclusion.)
Finally, if p = k − 2 then S/(J : ℓ) has maximal growth from degree n − 1 to degree n, so
[J : ℓ]n has a base locus. But (J : ℓ) ⊃ J, so this means that [J]n has a base locus, again
violating (16).
Having established the idea in Case 2, we combine most of the remaining cases as Case 3.
Case 3: 1 ≤ s = rk (×ℓ) ≤ k − 3.
Then we have the following table:

28

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

1
degree i 0
dim[S/J]i 1
r
dim[S/(J : ℓ)]i−1
1
dim[S/(J, ℓ)]i 1 r − 1

...
n
n+1
...
k
k−1
...
p
s
... k − p k − 1 −s

Now for Hilbert function reasons p cannot be equal to 0, 1, . . . , s − 1 (looking at the second
row). Looking at the last row, k − p cannot be equal to 0, 1, . . . , k − 2 − s; that is, we cannot
have p ≥ s + 2. This means that we only have to consider p = s and p = s + 1. For this we
argue exactly as in Case 2.
Case 4: rk (×ℓ) = 0.
Since the other cases have been ruled out by our assumptions, this case must hold. This means
that ×ℓ is the zero map on S/J from degree n to degree n + 1, i.e. that [J]n+1 = [(J, ℓ)]n+1 .
Thus [(IZ , L)]n+1 = [(IZ , L, ℓ̄)]n+1 for any lifting ℓ̄ of ℓ to R (note that L and ℓ̄ are independent).
We now have the table
degree i 0
1
dim[S/J]i 1
r
dim[S/(J : ℓ)]i−1
1
dim[S/(J, ℓ)]i 1 r − 1

...
n
n+1
...
k
k−1
...
p
0
... k − p k − 1

It follows immediately that p = 0, i.e. that (×ℓ) is also the zero map from degree n − 1 to
degree n, and hence that [J]n = [(J, ℓ)]n . In particular, [J]n contains ℓ · [S]n−1 and [J]n+1
contains ℓ · [S]n . Thus [(IZ , L)]n = [(IZ , L, ℓ̄)]n for any lifting ℓ̄ of ℓ to R.
We summarize these facts:
(a) There exists a linear form ℓ ∈ S = R/(L) such that ×ℓ : [S/J]n−1 → [S/J]n
and ×ℓ : [S/J]n → [S/J]n+1 are both the zero map.
(20)
(b) For any lifting ℓ̄ of ℓ to R, we have [J]i = [(J, ℓ)]i , i.e. [(IZ , L)]i =
[(IZ , L, ℓ̄)]i for i = n and n + 1.
By duality,
(21)

The linear form ℓ also annihilates the first and second components of the
canonical module of S/J.

We now return to the matrix, A = (mi,j ), that defines the multiplication from degree n to
degree n+1. Since ×ℓ is surjective for general ℓ, A drops rank in codimension 1 or codimension
2. On the other hand, we have seen that when ×ℓ is not surjective, it is the zero map. We obtain:
Lemma 5.3. The ideal hm1,1 , . . . , mk−1,k i generated by the entries of A defines a codimension 2
linear variety in the dual projective space Pr−1 . Thus up to change of variables we may assume
that the mi,j involve only two (dual) variables. In particular, there exist r − 2 independent

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

29

linear forms in [S]1 that annihilate [S/J]n−1 and [S/J]n . When r = 3, ℓ is unique up to scalar
multiplication.
Proof. We know that the set of ℓ for which ×ℓ is the zero map is a set of codimension ≤ 2,
and it is defined by the ideal hm1,1 , . . . , mk−1,k i. Clearly this defines a linear variety. Suppose
that this variety has codimension 1. Then there is a linear form in the dual variables a1 , . . . , ar
such that each mi,j is a scalar multiple of this linear form. Changing basis if necessary, we
can suppose that this linear form is a1 . This means that for any linear form ℓ involving only
x2 , . . . , xr , we have ×ℓ : [S/J]n → [S/J]n+1 is the zero map, and the same is true replacing n
by n − 1 as noted above. This means that
hx2 , . . . , xr i · [S]n−1 ⊂ [J]n .
But this forces dim[S/J]n and dim[S/J]n+1 both to be ≤ 1, contradicting our assumption that
k > 1. Thus we have shown the first assertion. The second, third and fourth statements are then
immediate.

Lemma 5.4. Let M be a finitely generated graded R-module of depth ≥ 1 and let L be a
general linear form. Let N = M/LM. Without loss of generality say that the initial degree of
M is 0. Assume that there exist linear forms ℓ1 , . . . , ℓr−2 ∈ S = R/(L) that annihilate N0 and
N1 . For each i let ℓ̄i be any lifting of ℓi to R. Then for each i, the image of ×ℓ̄i : M0 → M1
is contained inside the image of ×L : M0 → M1 , and similarly for ×ℓ̄i : M1 → M2 . For a
general lifting ℓ̄, these images actually coincide.
Proof. The first assertion follows from the following commutative diagram (j = 0, 1):
0
↓

0
↓
×ℓ̄

i
Mj−1 −→
↓ ×L

Mj
↓
Nj
↓
0

×ℓ̄

i
−→

×0

−→

Mj
↓ ×L
Mj+1
↓
Nj+1
↓
0

The second assertion follows from a diagram chase, since a general ℓ̄ will be a general element
of the pencil spanned by L and ℓ̄, so it will be a non-zerodivisor for M, since L is.

Corollary 5.5. In the setting of Lemma 5.4, suppose that L and L′ are general linear forms, and
let ℓ1 , . . . , ℓr−2 and ℓ′1 , . . . , ℓ′r−2 be corresponding linear forms in R/L and R/L′ respectively
that annihilate the components Ni and Ni′ = [M/L′ M]i , respectively, where i = 0, 1. Let ℓ̄i and
ℓ̄′i be general liftings. If M has no minimal generator in degree 1, and dim M1 > 2 · dim M0
then L, L′ , ℓ̄1 , . . . , ℓ̄r−2 , ℓ̄′1 , . . . , ℓ̄′r−2 define a point in Pr .
Proof. We have seen that ℓ1 , . . . , ℓr−2 are independent in [S]1 , so L, ℓ̄1 , . . . , ℓ̄r−2 already define
a line in Pr , as do L′ , ℓ̄′1 , . . . , ℓ̄′r−2. Since L′ is general with respect to L and all the ℓi , the linear

30

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

forms define at most a point. If the statement is not true, then together all these linear forms
span [R]1 . Let us compute the dimension of the image of the multiplication
φ : [R]1 ⊗ M0 → M1 .
By Lemma 5.4, the image of ×L : M0 → M1 contains the image of ×ℓ̄i : M0 → M1 for each i,
and similarly the image of ×L′ : M0 → M1 contains the image of ×ℓ̄′i : M0 → M1 for each i.
Hence if m1 , . . . , ms form a basis of M0 , then Lm1 , . . . , Lms , L′ m1 , . . . , L′ ms are a basis for
the image of φ, so the image has dimension ≤ 2 · dim M0 . Since M has no minimal generator
in degree 1, we have a contradiction. The result follows immediately.

Now let M be the canonical module of R/IZ , suitable shifted so that it begins in degree 0.
Note that N is not the canonical module of S/J, but it is a twist of this module. We have
dim M0 = k − 1 and dim M1 = 2k − 1. We know that M has no minimal generator in degree
1 by (18). Thanks to (21), all the assumptions of Corollary 5.5 are satisfied.
Now let us interpret this geometrically. The general linear form L defines a general hyperplane HL and contains no point of Z. The linear forms 0 6= ℓi ∈ S (1 ≤ i ≤ r − 2)
together define a line λℓ in HL ⊂ Pr . Similarly we have a general hyperplane HL′ and a line
λℓ′ ⊂ HL′ ⊂ Pr . The meaning of Corollary 5.5 is that λℓ and λℓ′ meet in a point. Hence they
span a plane Λ.
Recall the “Linear Lemma” of [11]:
Lemma 5.6. Any set of m-planes such that any two of them meet in an (m − 1)-plane, either is
contained in some fixed Pm+1 or has an (m − 1)-plane for base locus.
In our case, taking m = 1, we have that the lines λℓ as L ranges over R1 either lie in a 2-plane
or have a point as base locus. But in the latter case, choosing a hyperplane that avoids this point
leads to a contradiction. Thus all the lines obtained in this way lie in the plane Λ. Notice that
Λ does not depend on the original choice of L, so we may assume that L is general even with
respect to Λ.
Let H be a general element of [IΛ ]1 , and by abuse of notation we denote by H also the
hyperplane in Pr defined by this linear form. Let
IZ1 = (IZ + IΛ )sat

sat
IZ +IΛ
IZ1 |Λ =
⊂ R/IΛ
 IΛ sat
IZ +(H)
IZ1 |H =
⊂ R/hHi
(H)
IZ 2 = IZ : H = IZ : IΛ .
So Z1 is the subset of Z lying on Λ, and Z2 is the subset lying off Λ. Let L be a general linear
I +hLi
form. Let J2 = Z2hLi . Let h be the restriction of H to R/hLi. We have the commutative

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

31

diagram

h

0 →

IZ :H
IZ

h

0 →

i

IZ :H
IZ

n−1

i

 J:h 

0 →

J

n

n

0
↓
×H
→ [R/IZ ]n−1 −→
→
→

↓ ×L
[R/IZ ]n
↓
[S/J]n
↓
0

0
↓
[R/IZ ]n

→

↓ ×L
−→ [R/IZ ]n+1 →
×H

×0

−→

↓
[S/J]n+1
↓
0

[R/(IZ , H)]n

→ 0

[R/(IZ , H)]n+1

→ 0

→ [R/(IZ , H, h)]n+1

where the indicated zero map is multiplication by h. We will also shortly consider this diagram
in degree one less. We obtain (again) [J : h]n = [S]n and [R/(IZ , H, h)]n+1 = [S/J]n+1 .
Now, the image of the middle map ×H in this diagram is [R/IZ2 ]n , and the commutativity
of this diagram means that reduction of [R/IZ2 ]n modulo L is zero. As indicated, everything
continues to work in degree one less. Thus we obtain
∆hR/IZ2 (n − 1) = ∆hR/IZ2 (n) = 0.

(22)
Now consider the diagram
0
↓

0 → [R/IZ2 ]n−1
↓ ×L
0 → [R/IZ2 ]n
↓
[S/J2 ]n
↓
0

0
↓
×H
−→ [R/IZ ]n →
[R/(IZ , H)]n
→ 0
↓ ×L
↓ ×L
×H
−→ [R/IZ ]n+1 → [R/(IZ , H)]n+1 → 0
↓
↓
[S/J]n+1
[R/(IZ , H, L]n+1
↓
↓
0
0

We obtain:
(23)

the induced map [S/J2 ]n → [S/J]n+1 is the zero map.

Applying the Snake Lemma and looking at the rightmost column, we thus get
×L

0 → [S/J2 ]n → [R/(IZ , H)]n −→ [R/(IZ , H)]n+1 → [S/J]n+1 → 0
from which we conclude
(24)

∆hR/IZ (n + 1) = ∆hR/(IZ ,H) (n + 1) + ∆hR/IZ2 (n).

The same holds in degree one less thanks to our observations above. Combining with (22) we
have
(25)

∆hR/IZ (n) = ∆hR/(IZ ,H) (n) and ∆hR/IZ (n + 1) = ∆hR/(IZ ,H) (n + 1).

32

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

Now consider the exact sequences
×H

0 → IZ2 (−1) −→ IZ →

IZ + hHi
→ 0 and
hHi

×H

0 → IZ2 (−1) −→ IZ → IZ1 |H → 0.

+hHi
Equation (22) implies h1 (IZ2 (n − 2)) = 0. Thus IZhHi
is saturated in degrees ≥ n − 1. Since
the Hilbert function of Z1 is the same whether viewed as a subscheme of Pr or as a subscheme
of H or as a subscheme of Λ, we obtain

(26)

∆hR/IZ (t) = ∆hR/IZ1 (t)

for all t ≥ n.

This concludes the proof of Theorem 5.1.
Corollary 5.7. In the setting of Theorem 5.1, at least


k+1
+ (k + 1)(n − k + 2) − 3
2
points of Z must lie on a plane.
Proof. The approach is almost identical to the proof of Corollary 4.8, but now there is a slight
twist. Since [J]n is basepoint free, the h-vector cannot be
(1, 2, . . . , k − 1, k, k, . . . , k, k − 1)
since in this case the component in degree n is still a curve. Thus the smallest possible h-vector
is
(1, 2, . . . , k − 1, k, k + 1, k + 1, . . . , k + 1, k, k − 1)
and this gives the desired bound.

6. E XTENDING G OTZMANN ’ S

THEOREM

We have noted that in [5], use was made of Gotzmann’s Persistence Theorem, which described the behavior of the Hilbert function of Z1 , the subset of Z lying on the base locus (under
the assumption of maximal growth), assuming that no additional generators were present in its
ideal. Although it is not the focus of this paper, it is still of interest to know what the behavior of
the Hilbert function can be when we have almost maximal growth and no additional generators.
To illustrate that something can be said, we consider the situation of Theorem 5.1.
Note that even if Z ⊂ Pr , its artinian reduction agrees in degrees ≥ n with the artinian
reduction of Z1 , the subset of Z lying on the plane Λ. Thus without loss of generality we
can assume that our almost maximal growth arises in the setting of an algebra S/J where
S = k[x, y].
Proposition 6.1. Let S = k[x, y], and let J be a homogeneous ideal in S such that for some
integer n the following hold:
(a) The linear system defined by [J]n has no base locus;
(b) hS/J (n + 1) = hS/J (n) − 1;
(c) J has no minimal generators in degree > n.

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

33

Then for all j ≥ n we have hS/J (j + 1) = max{hS/J (j) − 1, 0}.
Proof. The minimal free resolution of J has the form
0 → F2 → F1 → J → 0
where all summands S(−j) of F1 satisfy j ≤ n. Condition (a) guarantees that J contains a
regular sequence of two forms of degree n.
Now suppose that the assertion is not true. Then there exists some k ≥ n + 1 for which
hS/J (k) = hS/J (k − 1) − 1 and hS/J (k + 1) ≤ hS/J (k) − 2.
Let c be a complete intersection of type (n, n) in I. It links J to a homogeneous artinian ideal
J ′ ⊂ S. We have
hS/J ′ (2n − k − 3) > hS/J ′ (2n − k − 2) = hS/J ′ (2n − k − 1).
Since the latter two represent maximal growth (or possibly 0), a result of [12] (see also [15]
Theorem 3.4) gives that S/J ′ has a non-zero socle element in degree 2n − k − 3. Hence the
minimal free resolution of S/J ′ has a free summand S(−2n + k + 1) in the last free module. By
linkage, this means that J has a minimal generator in degree k+1 ≥ n+2, contradicting (c). 
7. F URTHER

QUESTIONS

Finally, we present some open problems which we leave for future study.
1. When the base locus is of dimension ≥ 2, can we obtain a good bound on the number of
points of Z lying on the base locus?
2. Are there other results extending Gotzmann’s theorem besides the one given in section
6?
3. What happens if we do not assume that Z is reduced? Can we still obtain similar results?
In this case, Z1 becomes the subscheme of Z lying on the base locus, which may or may
not be reduced.
4. Can we obtain similar results for Z of higher dimension?
5. What happens when Z is a reduced set of points in uniform position? In [5] several nice
consequences were obtained. Perhaps similar results can be found here. In particular,
must the base locus be irreducible and must all the points of Z lie on it?
6. We believe that Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.4 can be extended to “maximal growth
minus 2,” and indeed to “maximal growth minus ℓ” for ℓ ≤ r − 2. Specifically, there
should be ℓ + 1 possibilities for the dimension of the base locus in general.
7. In [9] and [10], when the set Z ⊂ P3 is the general hyperplane section of an irreducible
curve in P4 , a result similar to Theorem 5.1 is obtained, with a different approach. More
generally, when there is a large monodromy group acting on Z, the existence of a surface
of degree ℓ containing Z is proven when “maximal growth minus ℓ” holds, for some ℓ.
We wonder if the approach introduced above can extend the results of [9] and [10] to any
sets of points in (very?) uniform position.
8. As we mentioned in the Introduction, we have in mind some applications of our results
on almost maximal growth to the study of symmetric tensors. What other applications
can we obtain from these results?

34

L. CHIANTINI AND J. MIGLIORE

R EFERENCES
[1] E. Ballico and A. Bernardi, A partial stratification of secant varieties of Veronese varieties via curvilinear
subschemes, Sarajevo J. Math. 8 (2012), 33–52.
[2] E. Ballico and L. Chiantini, A criterion for detecting the identifiability of symmetric tensors of size three, Diff.
Geom. Applic. 30 (2012), 233–237.
[3] A. M. Bigatti, Upper Bounds for the Betti Numbers of a Given Hilbert Function, Comm. Algebra 21 (1993),
2317–2334.
[4] A.M. Bigatti and A.V. Geramita: Level Algebras, Lex Segments and Minimal Hilbert Functions, Comm. in
Algebra 31 (2003), 1427-1451.
[5] A.M. Bigatti, A.V. Geramita and J. Migliore, Geometric consequences of extremal behavior in a theorem of
Macaulay, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 346 (1994), 203–235.
[6] W. Bruns and J. Herzog: Cohen-Macaulay rings, Cambridge studies in advanced mathematics, No. 39, Revised edition (1998), Cambridge, U.K.
[7] J. Buczyński, A. Ginensky and J. M. Landsberg, Determinantal equations for secant varieties and the
Eisenbud-Koh-Stillman conjecture, J. London Math. Soc. 88 (2013), 1–24.
[8] L. Chiantini, N. Chiarli and S. Greco, Halphen conditions and postulation of nodes, Adv. Geom. 5 (2005),
237–264.
[9] L. Chiantini, C. Ciliberto and V. di Gennaro, The genus of projective curves in P4 verifying certain flag
conditions, Manuscr. Math. 88 (1995), 119–134.
[10] L. Chiantini and C. Ciliberto, Towards a Halphen theory of linear series on curves, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.
351 (1999), 2197–2212.
[11] L. Chiantini and M. Coppens, Grassmannians of secant varieties, Forum Math. 13 (2001), 615–628.
[12] Y. Cho and A. Iarrobino, Hilbert functions of level algebras, J. Algebra 241 (2001), 745–758.
[13] CoCoATeam, CoCoA: a system for doing Computations in Commutative Algebra. Available at
http://cocoa.dima.unige.it
[14] E.D. Davis, Complete Intersections of Codimension 2 in Pr : The Bezout-Jacobi-Segre Theorem Revisited,
Rend. Sem. Mat. Univers. Politecn. Torino, Vol. 43, 2 (1985), 333–353.
[15] A. Geramita, T. Harima, J. Migliore and Y. Shin, “The Hilbert function of a level algebra,” Memoirs AMS
vol. 186, no. 872 (2007).
[16] A.V. Geramita, M. Kreuzer and L. Robbiano, Cayley-Bacharach schemes and their canonical modules, Trans.
Amer. Math. Soc. 339 (1993), 163–189.
[17] A.V. Geramita, P. Maroscia and L. Roberts, The Hilbert function of a reduced K-algebra, J. London Math.
Soc. (2) 28 (1983), no. 3, 443–452.
[18] G. Gotzmann, Eine Bedingung für die Flachheit und das Hilbertpolynom eines graduierten Ringes, Math. Z.
158 (1978), 61–70.
[19] M. Green, Restrictions of linear series to hyperplanes, and some results of Macaulay and Gotzmann, Algebraic curves and projective geometry (1988), 76-86, Trento; Lecture Notes in Math. 1389 (1989), Springer,
Berlin.
[20] L. Gruson, R. Lazarsfeld and C. Peskine, On a theorem of Castelnuovo and the equations defining space
curves, Invent. Math. 72 (1983), 491–506.
[21] H. A. Hulett, Maximum Betti Numbers of Homogeneous Ideals with a Given Hilbert Function, Comm. Algebra. 21 (1993), 2335–2350.
[22] J.O. Kleppe, J. Migliore, R.M. Miró-Roig, U. Nagel and C. Peterson, “Gorenstein liaison, complete intersection liaison invariants and unobstructedness,” Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 154 (2001), no. 732.
[23] F.S. Macaulay, Some properties of enumeration in the theory of modular systems, Proc. London Math. Soc.
26 (1927), 531–555.
[24] P. Maroscia, Some problems and results on finite sets of points in Pn , Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 997,
Algebraic Geometry – Open Problems (Proceedings, Ravello 1982), Springer, 1983.

ALMOST MAXIMAL GROWTH OF THE HILBERT FUNCTION

35

[25] J. Migliore, “Introduction to Liaison Theory and Deficiency Modules,” Progress in Math., vol. 165,
Birkhäuser Boston, Massachusetts, 1998.
[26] F. Orecchia and I. Ramella, The conductor of one-dimensional local rings with reduced associated graded
ring, Ric. Mat. XLIV (1995), 231–236.
[27] K. Pardue, Deformation Classes of Graded Modules and Maximal Betti Numbers, Illinois J. Math. 40 (1996),
564–585.
(L. Chiantini) D IPARTIMENTO DI I NGEGNERIA DELL’I NFORMAZIONE E S CIENZE M ATEMATICHE , U NIVER S IENA , V IA ROMA 56 (S.N ICCOLO ’), 53100 S IENA , I TALY
E-mail address: luca.chiantini@unisi.it
URL: http://www.diism.unisi.it/˜chiantini

SITA ‘ DI

(J. Migliore) D EPARTMENT OF M ATHEMATICS , U NIVERSITY
E-mail address: migliore.1@nd.edu
URL: http://www.nd.edu/˜jmiglior/

OF

N OTRE DAME , N OTRE DAME , IN 46556

