arXiv:0901.1052v4 [] 24 Feb 2017

Doset Hibi rings with an application to
invariant theory
Mitsuhiro MIYAZAKI
Dept. Math., Kyoto University of Education,
Fushimi-ku, Kyoto, 612-8522, Japan
Abstract
We define the concept of a doset Hibi ring and a generalized doset
Hibi ring which are subrings of a Hibi ring and are normal affine semigrouprings. We apply the theory of (generalized) doset Hibi rings to
analyze the rings of absolute orthogonal invariants and absolute special orthogonal invariants and show that these rings are normal and
Cohen-Macaulay and has rational singularities if the characteristic of
the base field is zero and is F-rational otherwise. We also state criteria
of Gorenstein property of these rings.
Keywords:Hibi ring, sagbi, doset, ring of invariants, Schubert subvariety
MSC:13F50, 13A50, 13H10, 14M15

1

Introduction

Grassmannians and their Schubert subvarieties are fascinating objects and
attract many mathematicians. Let m and n be integers with 1 ≤ m ≤ n and
Gm (V ) be the Grassmannian consisting of all m-dimensional vector subspaces
of an n-dimensional vector space V over a field K. Then the homogeneous
coordinate ring of Gm (V ) is K[Γ(X)], where X = (Xij ) is the m × n matrix
of indeterminates and Γ(X) is the set of m-minors of X.
Fix a complete flag 0 = V0 ( V1 ( · · · ( Vn = V of subspaces of V .
Definition 1.1 For integers a1 , . . . , am with 1 ≤ a1 < · · · < am ≤ n, we define Ω(a1 , . . . , am ) := {W ∈ Gm (V ) | dim(W ∩ Vai ) ≥ i for i = 1, 2, . . . , m}.
It is known that Ω(a1 , . . . , am ) is a subvariety of Gm (V ) and called the Schubert subvariety of Gm (V ).
1

Set bi := n − am−i+1 + 1 for i = 1, . . . , m. Then it is known that there
exists a universal m × n matrix Z with entries in a K-algebra S with the
condition Ii (Z≤bi −1 ) = (0) for i = 1, . . . , m, where Z≤j denotes the m × j
matrix consisting of the first j columns of Z and Ii (M) denotes the ideal
generated by the i-minors of a matrix M. To be pricise, Z is an m × n
matrix with entries in a K-algebra S such that
(1.1) Ii (Z≤bi −1 ) = (0) for i = 1, . . . , m and
(1.2) if Ii (M≤bi −1 ) = (0) for i = 1, . . . , m for a matrix with entries in
some K-algebra S ′ , then there is a unique K-algebra homomorphism
K[Z] → S ′ which maps Z to M,
where K[Z] denotes the K-subalgebra of S generated by the entries of Z.
By the universal property, Z is unique up to isomorphism. Further, it is also
known that K[Γ(Z)] is the homogeneous coordinate ring of Ω(a1 , . . . , am ),
where Γ(Z) is the set of m-minors of Z.
On the other hand, because of the universal property of Z, any subgroup
of GL(m, K) acts on K[Z]. In this paper, we study the rings of absolute
O(m) and SO(m)-invariants (see Definition 3.2), denoted as K[Z]O(m,−) and
K[Z]SO(m,−) respectively, of K[Z].
We now state the contents of this paper. We first establish notation,
recall known facts and state basic facts in Section 2 in order to simplify the
proofs and clarify the structure of the theory of the main part of this paper,
Sections 3, 4 and 5.
In Section 3, we show that the ring of absolute O(m) and SO(m)invariants are precisely the expected ones, i.e., K[Z]O(m,−) = K[Z ⊤ Z] and
K[Z]SO(m,−) = K[Z ⊤ Z, Γ(Z)]. See Subsection 2.2 for notation. We use the
result of DeConcini and Procesi [DP] about the ring of absolute invariants.
Since Richman wrote in the introduction of [Ric] that the proof of [DP] is
incorrect, we state a down to earth proof of the result of DeConcini and
Procesi about the ring of absolute invariants.
In Section 4, we introduce the concept of doset Hibi rings and their generalization. They are subrings of a Hibi ring and are normal affine semigrouprings, therefore are Cohen-Macaulay. We apply the theory of doset
Hibi rings and generalized doset Hibi rings to investigate the property of
K[Z]O(m,−) (resp. K[Z]SO(m,−) ) by showing it is isomorphic to a subring of
a polynomial ring over K, whose initial algebra is a doset Hibi ring (resp.
a generalized doset Hibi ring) in an appropriate monomial order. In particular, K[Z]O(m,−) (resp. K[Z]SO(m,−) ) is a normal Cohen-Macaulay ring and
has rational singularities if charK = 0 and is F-rational if charK > 0.

2

Finally in Section 5, we state a criterion of Gorenstein property of a
doset Hibi ring and a generalized doset Hibi ring. As an application, we
state a criterion of Gorenstein preperty of K[Z]O(m,−) (resp. K[Z]SO(m,−) ),
see Theorems 5.6 and 5.8. We note that the criterion of Gorenstein property
of K[Z]O(m,−) is already obtained by Conca [Con] and Goto [Got]. Therefore,
Theorem 5.6 recovers their result.
Here we remark that for an n × n matrix of indeterminates T =
(Tij ), Bruns, Römer and Wiebe [BRW, Remark 3.10] pointed out that
K[T ]/Im+1 (T ) is isomorphic to K[X ⊤ X] and normal Cohen-Macaulay with
rational singularities if charK = 0 and is F-rational if charK > 0 by using
the same method as this paper. Generalization of their result to K[Z ⊤ Z] and
the result of K[Z ⊤ Z, Γ(Z)] are contained in Sections 2 and 4. We also give
a criterion of the Gorenstein property for these generalized cases in Section
5 and study the relation to the invariant theory in Section 3.

2

Preliminaries

In this section, we establish notation, recall known facts and show some basic
facts in order to prepare the main part of this paper.
In this paper, all rings and algebras are commutative with identity element. We denote by N the set of non-negative integers, by Z the set of
integers, by R the set of real numbers and by R≥0 the set of non-negative
real numbers. We denote by |X| the cardinality of a set X.

2.1

Normal affine semigrouprings

Let K be a field and X1 , . . . , Xr indeterminates, S a finitely generated
additive submonoid of N r . We set K[S] := K[X s | s ∈ S] where X s =
X1s1 · · · Xrsr for s = (s1 , . . . , sr ). Then
Theorem 2.1 ([Hoc])

(1) K[S] is normal if and only if S = ZS ∩R≥0 S.

(2) If K[S] is normal, then it is Cohen-Macaulay.
If S = ZS ∩ R≥0 S, then by Farkas’ theorem and the fundamental theorem
of abelian groups, S is isomorphic to a toroidal monoid in the terminology
of Stanley [Sta, p. 81]. Therefore by [Sta, p. 82], we have the follwoing
Theorem 2.2 If K[S] is normal, then the canonical module of K[S] is
M
KX s ,
s∈relintR≥0 S∩S

3

where relintR≥0 S denotes for the interior of R≥0 S in the affine subspace
spanned by R≥0 S.
Stanley also stated, in the same article, a criterion of Gorenstein property
for graded Cohen-Macaulay domains.
Theorem 2.3 ([Sta, 4.4 Theorem]) Let A be an N -graded CohenMacaulay domain with A0 = K. Suppose dim A = d. Then A is Gorenstein
if and only if there is ρ ∈ Z such that Hilb(A, 1/λ) = (−1)d λρ Hilb(A, λ),
where Hilb denotes the Hilbert series.
As a corollary, we have the following fact.
Corollary 2.4 Let A and B be N -graded Cohen-Macaulay domains with
A0 = B0 = K. Suppose Hilb(A, λ) = Hilb(B, λ). Then A is Gorenstein
if and only if B is Gorenstein. In particular, if A is a graded subring of
a polynomial ring with monomial order and the initial algebra in A of A is
finitely generated over K and Cohen-Macaulay, then A is Gorenstein if and
only if in A is Gorenstein.
Note, by the flat deformation argument, we see that if A is an N -graded
subalgebra of a polynomial ring with monomial order and in A is CohenMacaulay, then A is Cohen-Macaulay.

2.2

Determinantal rings

Let m and n be integers with 0 < m ≤ n and K a field. For an m × n matrix
M with entries in a K algebra S, we denote by M ⊤ the transposed matrix of
M, by It (M) the ideal of S generated by t-minors of M, by M≤j the m × j
matrix consisting of the first j-columns of M, by Γ(M) the set of m-minors
of M and by K[M] the K-subalgebra of S generated by the entries of M.
We define posets Γ(m × n) and Γ′ (m × n) by Γ(m × n) := {[c1 , . . . , cm ] |
1 ≤ c1 < · · · < cm ≤ n} and Γ′ (m × n) := {[c1 , . . . , cr ] | r ≤ m, 1 ≤ c1 <
· · · < cr ≤ n}. The order of Γ′ (m × n) is defined by
[c1 , . . . , cr ] ≤ [d1 , . . . , ds ]
⇐⇒ r ≥ s, ci ≤ di for i = 1, 2, . . . , s,
def

and the order of Γ(m × n) is defined by that of Γ′ (m × n). Note that
Γ′ (m × n) is a distributive lattice and Γ(m × n) is a sublattice of Γ′ (m × n).
For [c1 , . . . , cr ] ∈ Γ′ (m × n), we define its size to be r and denote it by
size[c1 , . . . , cr ].
4

We also define the poset ∆(m × n) by ∆(m × n) := {[α|β] | α ∈ Γ′ (m ×
m), β ∈ Γ′ (m × n), sizeα = sizeβ}, and define the order of ∆(m × n) by
[α|β] ≤ [α′ |β ′]
def
⇐⇒ α ≤ α′ in Γ′ (m × m) and β ≤ β ′ in Γ′ (m × n).
Note also that ∆(m × n) is a distributive lattice.
For γ ∈ Γ(m × n), we set Γ(m × n; γ) := {δ ∈ Γ(m × n) | δ ≥ γ}.
′
Γ (m × n; γ) for γ ∈ Γ′ (m × n) and ∆(m × n; δ) for δ ∈ ∆(m × n) are defined
similarly.
For an m×n matrix M = (mij ) and δ = [c1 , . . . , cr |d1 , . . . , dr ] ∈ ∆(m×n),
we denote the minor det(mci dj ) by δM or [c1 , . . . , cr |d1 , . . . , dr ]M . We also
denote the maximal minor det(micj ) of M by δM or [c1 , . . . , cm ]M , for δ =
[c1 , . . . , cm ] ∈ Γ(m × n).
We use standard terminology on Hodge algebras. Standard references on
the notion of Hodge algebra are [DEP2] and [BH, Chapter 7]. However, we
use the term “algebra with straightening law” (ASL for short) to mean an
ordinal Hodge algebra in the terminology of [DEP2].
Let X = (Xij ) be an m × n matrix of indeterminates, i.e., entries Xij are
independent indeterminates. Then the following facts are known.
Theorem 2.5 ([DEP1]) (1) K[Γ(X)] is an ASL over K on Γ(m × n)
with structure map δ 7→ δX .
(2) K[X] is an ASL over K on ∆(m × n) with structure map [α|β] 7→
[α|β]X .
From now on, we fix γ = [b1 , b2 , . . . , bm ] ∈ Γ(m × n). Set γ ∗ =
[1, . . . , m|b1 , . . . , bm ] ∈ ∆(m × n) and R = K[X]/(∆(m × n) \ ∆(m ×
n; γ ∗ ))K[X]. Then R is an ASL on ∆(m × n; γ ∗ ). Therefore, the pair Kalgebra R and the image of X in R satisfy (1.1) and (1.2) of introduction.
Set


W11 W12 · · ·
 W21 W22 · · ·

W :=  ..
..
..
 .
.
.
Wm1 Wm2 · · ·

and


0
 0
Uγ := 
 ···
0

···
···
···
···

0
0
···
0

U1b1
0
···
0

···
···
···
···

U1b2 −1 U1b2
0
U2b2
···
···
0
0

W1m
W2m
..
.

Wmm
···
···
···
···






···
···
···
0

where Wij and Uij are independent indeterminates. Then
5

U1bm
U2bm
···
Umbm

···
···
···
···


U1n
U2n 
,

Umn

Theorem 2.6 ([Miy]) The natural map K[X]/(∆(m × n) \ ∆(m ×
n; γ ∗ ))K[X] → K[W Uγ ] induced by K[X] → K[W Uγ ], (X 7→ W Uγ ) is an
isomorphism. In particular, W Uγ has the universal property (1.1) and (1.2)
of introduction.
Here we state a result on the initial algebra of K[W Uγ ] in K[W, Uγ ] along
the same line as [BRW, section 3] (see also [BC]). As a by-product, we obtain
another proof of Theorem 2.6.
First we introduce a diagonal monomial order (i.e., a monomial order
such that the leading monomial of any minor of W or Uγ is the product of
the entries of its main diagonal) on K[W, Uγ ] with Wij > Wı′ j , Wij > Wi′ ,
Uij > Uı′ j and Uij > Ui′ for any possible i, ı′ , j and ′ with i < ı′ and j < ′ .
For example, degree lexicographic order on the polynomial ring K[W, Uγ ]
defined by W11 > W21 > · · · > Wm1 > W12 > · · · > Wmm > U1b1 > U1b1 +1 >
· · · > U1n > U2b2 > · · · > Umn . Then we obtain the following
Lemma 2.7

(1) For [c1 , . . . , cr |d1 , . . . , dr ] ∈ ∆(m × n; γ ∗ ),
lm([c1 , . . . , cr |d1 , . . . , dr ]W Uγ ) =

r
Y

Wcj j Ujdj .

j=1

Qu
(2) If µ =
i=1 [ci1 , . . . , cir(i) |di1 , . . . , dir(i) ] is a standard monomial on
∆(m × n; γ ∗ ), then
lm(µW Uγ ) =

r(i)
u Y
Y

Wcij j Ujdij ,

i=1 j=1

where µW Uγ :=

Qu

i=1 [ci1 , . . . , cir(i) |di1 , . . . , dir(i) ]W Uγ .

(3) If µ and µ′ are standard monomials on ∆(m × n; γ ∗ ) with µ 6= µ′ ,
then lm(µW Uγ ) 6= lm(µ′W Uγ ). In particular, {µW Uγ | µ is a standard
monomial on ∆(m × n; γ ∗ )} is linearly independent over K.
(4) The natural map K[X]/(∆(m × n) \ ∆(m × n; γ ∗ ))K[X] → K[W Uγ ]
induced by K[X] → K[W Uγ ], (X 7→ W Uγ ) is an isomorphism. In
particular, K[W Uγ ] is an ASL on ∆(m × n; γ ∗ ).
(5) For any a ∈ K[W Uγ ], there is a unique standard monomial µ on ∆(m×
n; γ ∗ ) such that lm(a) = lm(µW Uγ ).

6

Proof (1) is proved by using the following equation on determinants and
the assumption of the monomial order.
[c1 , . . . , cr |d1 , . . . , dr ]W Uγ
X
=
[c1 , . . . , cr |j1 , . . . , jr ]W [j1 , . . . , jr |d1 , . . . , dr ]Uγ .
1≤j1 <···<jr ≤m

(2) follows from (1). The rest is proved straight forwardly or by the same
way as [BRW, Section 3].
We set Zγ := W Uγ in the following. As a corollary, we see the following
Proposition 2.8 Zγ has the universal property (1.1) and (1.2) and
{[α|β]Zγ | [α|β] ∈ ∆(m × n; γ ∗ )} is a sagbi basis of K[Zγ ].
We set Dm,n := {(α, β) | α, β ∈ Γ′ (m × n), α ≤ β and sizeα = sizeβ} and
′
:= Dm−1,n ∪ Γ(m × n). We define the order on Dm,n by lexcographic
Dm,n
way, i.e.,
def

(α, β) < (α′ , β ′ ) ⇐⇒ α < α′ or (α = α′ and β < β ′ ).
′
We also define the order on Dm,n
by extending the orders of Dm−1,n and
Γ(m × n) and set
def

δ < (α, β) ⇐⇒ δ < α in Γ′ (m × n)
for δ ∈ Γ(m × n) and (α, β) ∈ Dm−1,n . Then the following fact is known.
Theorem 2.9 ([DP, Section 5]) (1) K[X ⊤ X] is a Hodge algebra over
K on Dm,n with structure map (α, β) 7→ [α|β]X ⊤ X , where the ideal of
monomials on Dm,n defining this Hodge algebra structure is generated
by
{(α, β)(α′, β ′ ) | β 6≤ α′ and β ′ 6≤ α}.
′
(2) K[X ⊤ X, Γ(X)] is a Hodge algebra over K on Dm,n
with structure map
δ 7→ δX for δ ∈ Γ(m × n) and (α, β) 7→ [α|β]X ⊤ X for (α, β) ∈ Dm−1,n ,
′
where the ideal of monomials on Dm,n
defining this Hodge algebra structure is generated by

{(α, β)(α′, β ′ ) | (α, β), (α′, β ′ ) ∈ Dm−1,n , β 6≤ α′ and β ′ ≤
6 α}
∪ {δ(α, β) | δ ∈ Γ(m × n), (α, β) ∈ Dm−1,n and δ 6≤ α in Γ′ (m × n)}
∪ {δδ ′ | δ, δ ′ ∈ Γ(m × n), δ 6≤ δ ′ , δ ′ 6≤ δ}.
7

In the following, when we mention about the concept of Hodge algebra
′
on Dm,n and Dm,n
, such as standard monomials, the ideals of monomials
defining the Hodge algebra structures are the ones in Theorem 2.9. In [DEP2,
Section 18], DeConcini, Eisenbud and Procesi showed that K[X ⊤ X] is a doset
algebra. However, every doset algebra has a structure of a Hodge algebra
by ordering the elements of the doset lexicographically. In fact, DeConciniProcesi [DP, Lemmas 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4] essentially proved the following fact
also.
Theorem 2.10 Let T = (Tij ) be an n × n symmetric matrix of indeterminates, i.e., {Tij }1≤i≤j≤n are independent indeterminates and Tji = Tij for
j > i. Then K[T ]/Im+1 (T ) is a Hodge algebra over K on Dm,n with structure map (α, β) 7→ [α|β]T , where T is the image of T in K[T ]/Im+1 (T ) and
we set Im+1 (T ) = (0) if m = n.
As a corollary of Theorems 2.9 and 2.10, we see the following fact.
Corollary 2.11 Let T be an n × n symmetric matrix of indeterminates.
Then the K-algebra homomorphism K[T ]/Im+1 (T ) → K[X] induced by T 7→
X ⊤ X is an isomorphism.
For an
Qv m × n matrix M and for a standard monomial
we set νM :=
νQ =
i=1 [ci1 , . . . , cir(i) ], [di1 , . . . , dir(i) ] on Dm,n ,
v
and for a standard monomial
i=1 [ci1 , . . . , cir(i) |di1 , . . . , dir(i) ]M ⊤ M
Qv′′
Qv ′
′
′
ν =
i=1 [ci1 , . . . , cir(i) ], [di1 , . . . , dir(i) ] on Dm,n , we
i=1 [ei1 , . . . , eim ]
Q
Q
′′
′
′
set νM
:= vi=1 [ei1 , . . . , eim ]M vi=1 [ci1 , . . . , cir(i) |di1 , . . . , dir(i) ]M ⊤ M .
By the same argument as the proof of Lemma 2.7, we see the following
facts.
Lemma 2.12

(1) For [c1 , . . . , cr |d1 , . . . , dr ] ∈ ∆(m × m), we have
lm([c1 , . . . , cr |d1, . . . , dr ]W ⊤ W ) =

r
Y

Wjcj Wjdj .

j=1

Q
(2) If ν = vi=1 ([ci1 , . . . , cir(i) ], [di1 , . . . , dir(i) ]) is a standard monomial on
Dm,m , then
r(i)
v Y
Y
Wjcij Wjdij .
lm(νW ) =
i=1 j=1

(3) If ν and ν ′ are standard monomials on Dm,m with ν 6= ν ′ , then
′
lm(νW ) 6= lm(νW
). In particular, {νW | ν is a standard monomial
on Dm,m } is linearly independent over K.
8

(4) For any a ∈ K[W ⊤ W ], there is a unique standard monomial ν on Dm,m
such that lm(a) = lm(νW ). In particular, {[α|β]W ⊤ W | (α, β) ∈ Dm,m }
is a sagbi basis of K[W ⊤ W ].
′ Q ′′
Lemma 2.13 (1) If ν = [1, . . . , m]v vi=1 ([ci1 , . . . , cir(i) ], [di1 , . . . , dir(i) ]) is
′
a standard monomial on Dm,m
, then
lm(νW ) = (

m
Y

′′

Wjj )

v′

r(i)
v Y
Y

Wjcij Wjdij .

i=1 j=1

j=1

′
(2) If ν and ν ′ are standard monomials on Dm,m
with ν 6= ν ′ , then
′
lm(νW ) 6= lm(νW
). In particular, {νW | ν is a standard monomial
′
on Dm,m } is linearly independent over K.

(3) For any a ∈ K[W ⊤ W, det W ], there is a unique standard monomial
′
ν on Dm,m
such that lm(a) = lm(νW ). In particular, {det W } ∪
{[α|β]W ⊤ W | (α, β) ∈ Dm−1,m } is a sagbi basis of K[W ⊤ W, det W ].
Finally in this section we make the following remark. Let T be an n × n
symmetric matrix of indeterminates. Set
R = K[T ]/{(α, β) ∈ Dn,n | α 6≥ γ}K[T ],
and
Dγ := {(α, β) ∈ Dn,n | α ≥ γ}.
where γ = [b1 , . . . , bm ] ∈ Γ(m × n) is the element fixed after Theorem 2.5.
Then R is a Hodge algebra over K on Dγ since Dn,n \ Dγ is a poset ideal of
Dn,n . Let Tγ be the image of T in R. Then Tγ has the following universal
property, where we set bm+1 := n + 1.
(1) Ii ((Tγ )≤bi −1 ) = (0) for i = 1, . . . , m + 1 and
(2) if M is an n × n symmetric matrix with entries in some K-algebra S
such that Ii (M≤bi −1 ) = (0) for i = 1, . . . , m + 1, then there is a unique
K-algebra homomorphism K[Tγ ] −→ S which maps Tγ to M.
By the same argument as the proof of Lemma 2.7, we see the following
fact, cf. [BRW, Remark 3.10].
Lemma 2.14

(1) For ([c1 , . . . , cr ], [d1 , . . . , dr ]) ∈ Dγ ,
lm([c1 , . . . , cr |d1 , . . . , dr ]Zγ⊤ Zγ ) =

r
Y
j=1

9

Wjj2 Ujcj Ujdj .

Q
(2) If ν = li=1 ([ci1 , . . . , cir(i) ], [di1 , . . . , dir(i) ]) is a standard monomial on
Dγ , then
r(i)
l Y
Y
Wjj2 Ujcij Ujdij .
lm(νZγ ) =
i=1 j=1

(3) If ν and ν ′ are standard monomials on Dγ with ν 6= ν ′ , then lm(νZγ ) 6=
lm(νZ′ γ ). In particular, {νZγ | ν is a standard monomial on Dγ } is
linearly independent over K.
(4) The natural map K[T ]/(Dn,n \ Dγ )K[T ] → K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ] induced by
K[T ] → K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ], (T 7→ Zγ⊤ Zγ ) is an isomorphism.
(5) Zγ⊤ Zγ is the universal n × n symmetric matrix with Ii (M≤bi −1 ) = (0)
for i = 1, . . . , m + 1 and {[α|β]Zγ⊤Zγ | (α, β) ∈ Dγ } is a sagbi basis of
K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ].

3

Rings of invariants and sagbi bases

Recall that we have fixed integers m, n with 0 < m ≤ n and γ =
[b1 , b2 , . . . , bm ] ∈ Γ(m × n).
For any g ∈ GL(m, K), Ii ((gZγ )≤bi −1 ) = (0) for i = 1, . . . , m. Therefore,
by the universal property of Zγ , there is a K-automorphism of K[Zγ ] sending
Zγ to gZγ , i.e., any subgroup of GL(m, K) acts on K[Zγ ].
We define the orthogonal group and the special orthogonal group naively.
Definition 3.1 Let R be a commutative ring. We set O(m, R) := {g ∈
GL(m, R) | g ⊤ g = Em } and SO(m, R) := {g ∈ O(m, R) | det g = 1}.
Next we make the following
Definition 3.2 Let f ∈ K[Zγ ]. f is called a naive O(m)-invariant if f g = f
for any g ∈ O(m, K). f is called an absolute O(m)-invariant if for any
K-algebra B, if we denote the image of f in B[Zγ ] as f , f g = f for any
g ∈ O(m, B). The ring of naive (resp. absolute) O(m)-invariants is denoted
by K[Zγ ]O(m,K) (resp. K[Zγ ]O(m,−) ). Naive (resp. absolute) SO(m)-invarinats
and K[Zγ ]SO(m,K) (resp. K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) ) are defined similarly.
Note that we allow nilpotent elements in B in the above definition. In particular, SO(m, B) is not identical to O(m, B) even in the case where charK = 2.
The concept of absolute O(m) and SO(m)-invariants are defined in [DP, Section 2]. We recall known results about the ring of naive and absolute O(m)
and SO(m)-invariants.
10

Theorem 3.3 Let X = (Xij ) be an m × n matrix of indeterminates.
(1) If K is an infinite field and charK 6= 2, then K[X]O(m,K) = K[X ⊤ X]
and K[X]SO(m,K) = K[X ⊤ X, Γ(X)].
(2) If K is an infinite field and charK = 2, then K[X]O(m,K) =
K[X ⊤ X, {X1j + · · · + Xmj | 1 ≤ j ≤ n}].
(3) K[X]O(m,−) = K[X ⊤ X] and K[X]SO(m,−) = K[X ⊤ X, Γ(X)].
(1) and (2) are due to Richman [Ric] and (3) is due to DeConcini and Procesi
[DP]. (3) is valid even in the case where charK = 2. As is noted above,
we require f to be an absolute O(m)-invariant that for any K-algebra B,
including the one such that SO(m, B) ( O(m, B), f g = f for any g ∈
O(m, B). Thus, K[X]O(m,−) and K[X]SO(m,−) are different even in the case
where charK = 2 (see the following another proof of (3) of Theorem 3.3).
Since Richman [Ric, page 45] wrote that the proof of [DP] is incorrect, we
state a down to earth proof of (3) of Theorem 3.3.
First we show that K[X]SO(m,−) = K[X ⊤ X, Γ(X)]. We follow [Ric, Section 4]. Only the proof of [Ric, Proposition 13] is to be modified. We use
the notation of [Ric, Section 4]. Suppose f ∈ K[C, m × 2]SO(2,−) . Let T1
and T2 be indeterminates. Set B1 = K[T1 , T2 ]/(T12 + 1 − T22 ). Since T2 is a
non-zerodivisor of B1 , B1 is a subring of B1 [1/T2 ]. We set B = B1 [1/T2 ] and


1 1 −T1
.
g=
1
T2 T1
Then g ∈ SO(m, B).
Since f is an absolute SO(2)-invariant in the terminology of the present
paper, we see that f g = f . Write
f = c1 |M1 |hW1 i + · · · + ck |Mk |hWk i
as [Ric, (4.5)]. Since
 e1 (M )  e2 (M )
T1
1
g
(|M|hW i) =
|M̂ |hW i +
T2
T2

X

hij T1i T2j ,

i≥0
0≥j≥−e1 (M )−e2 (M )

where hij ∈ K[C, m × 2] and the leading monomials of hij ′ s are strictly less
than the leading monomial of |M̂|hW i. Thus, if we define E, J and J ′ as in
[Ric, page 62],
X
X
T2E f ≡
cj |M̂j |hWj i + T1
cj |M̂j |hWj i + y + T1 z mod (T2 , T12 + 1),
j∈J

j∈J ′

11

where y and z are elements of K[C, m × 2] whose leading monomials are
strictly less than the leading monomial of some element |M̂j |hWj i with j ∈
J ∪ J ′.
Since 1, T1 is a free basis of K[C, m × 2][T1 , T2 ]/(T2 , T12 + 1) as a free
module over K[C, m × 2], we see that E = 0.
Thus, we see the counterpart of [Ric, Proposition 13], and therefore, we
see that K[X]SO(m,−) = K[X ⊤ X, Γ(X)] by the same argument as the proof
of [Ric, Proposition 14].
Next we show that K[X]O(m,−) = K[X ⊤ X]. The inclusion K[X]O(m,−) ⊃
K[X ⊤ X] is obvious. Suppose f ∈ K[X]O(m,−) . Then f ∈ K[X]SO(m,−) .
Therefore, by the above proved fact and Theorem 2.9, we see that there are
′
standard monomials ν1 , . . . , νk of Dm,n
such that
f = c1 (ν1 )X + · · · + ck (νk )X .
Set J = {j | νj is a product of odd number of elements of Γ(m × n) and
elements of Dm−1,n }, where we alow empty product of elements of Dm−1,n .
Let T be an indeterminate and B = K[T ]/(T 2 − 1). Then


T


1


h=
 ∈ O(m, B)
.
.

. 
1
and
fh = T

X

cj (νj )X +

j∈J

X

cj (νj )X .

j6∈J

Since 1, T is a free basis of B[X] as a free module over K[X] and f h = f ,
we see that J = ∅. Therefore, f ∈ K[X ⊤ X].
Since the ring of naive invariants is identical to the absolute invariant
except the case where charK = 2 or K is a finite field, we focus on the
absolute invariants in the rest of this paper.
As a corollary of (3) of Theorem 3.3, we see the following fact.
Corollary 3.4

(1) K[W ]O(m,−) = K[W ⊤ W ].

(2) K[W ]SO(m,−) = K[W ⊤ W, det W ].
Here we note the following basic fact.
Lemma 3.5 Let K[X1 , . . . , Xs , Y1 , . . . , Yt ] be a polynominal ring over K
with monomial order and A a K-subalgebra of K[X1 , . . . , Xs ]. If S is a
sagbi basis of A in K[X1 , . . . , Xs ], then S ∪ {Y1 , . . . , Yt } is a sagbi basis of
A[Y1 , . . . , Yt ] in K[X1 , . . . , Xs , Y1 , . . . , Yt ].
12

Now we state the following
Theorem 3.6 (1) {[α|β]Zγ⊤ Zγ | (α, β) ∈ Dγ } is a sagbi basis of
K[W ⊤ W, Uγ ] ∩ K[Zγ ]. In particular, K[Zγ ]O(m,−) = K[W ⊤ W, Uγ ] ∩
K[Zγ ] = K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ].
(2) {[α|β]Zγ⊤ Zγ | (α, β) ∈ Dγ } ∪ {δZγ | δ ∈ Γ(m × n; γ)} is a sagbi
basis of K[W ⊤ W, det W, Uγ ] ∩ K[Zγ ]. In particular, K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) =
K[W ⊤ W, det W, Uγ ] ∩ K[Zγ ] = K[Zγ⊤ Zγ , Γ(Zγ )].
Proof (1): It is clear that K[W ⊤ W, Uγ ] ∩ K[Zγ ] ⊃ K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ]. Thus,
[α|β]Zγ⊤ Zγ ∈ K[W ⊤ W, Uγ ] ∩ K[Zγ ] for any (α, β) ∈ Dγ . Let a be an arbitrary
element of K[W ⊤ W, Uγ ] ∩ K[Zγ ]. Then by Lemma 2.7 (5), we see that there
∗
is a unique standard
Qu monomial µ on ∆(m×n; γ ) such that lm(a) = lm(µZγ ).
Set µ =
i=1 [αi |βi ], α1 ≤ · · · ≤ αu , β1 ≤ · · · ≤ βu , and αi =
[ci1 , . . . , cir(i) ], βi = [d1i , . . . , dir(i) ] for i = 1, . . . , u. Then by Lemma 2.7
(2) we see that
r(i)
u Y
Y
Wcij j Ujdij .
(3.1)
lm(a) = lm(µZγ ) =
i=1 j=1

On the other hand, we see, by Lemma 2.12 (2), (4) and Lemma 3.5, that


s(i)
v Y
Y
(3.2)
Wjc′ij Wjd′ij  × (a monomial of U·· ′ s)
lm(a) = 
i=1 j=1

for some c′ij and d′ij , since a ∈ K[W ⊤ W, Uγ ].
By comparing (3.1) and (3.2), we see that cij = j, c′ij = j, and d′ij = j for
any i, j in the equations. Further, we see that u is even and r(2i − 1) = r(2i)
for i = 1, . . . , u/2. Therefore if we set αi′ = [d2i−1,1 , . . . , d2i−1,r(2i−1) ] and
Q
′
′
βi′ = [d2i,1 , . . . , d2i,r(2i) ], then (αi′ , βi′ ) ∈ Dγ for i = 1, . . . , u/2, u/2
i=1 (αi , βi ) is
a standard monomial on Dm,n and
lm(a) =

u/2
Y

lm([αi′ |βi′]Zγ⊤ Zγ )

i=1

by Lemma 2.14 (2). Therefore, the former part of (1) follows. Since the
action of O(m, B) on B[Zγ ] is induced by the action of O(m, B) on B[W ] for
any K-algebra B, we see the latter part of (1) by Corollary 3.4 (1).
(2): Again, it is clear that K[W ⊤ W, det W, Uγ ]∩K[Zγ ] ⊃ K[Zγ⊤ Zγ , Γ(Zγ )].
Thus, [α|β]Zγ , δZγ ∈ K[W ⊤ W, det W, Uγ ] ∩ K[Zγ ] for any (α, β) ∈ Dγ and
13

δ ∈ Γ(m × n; γ). Let a be an arbitrary element of K[W ⊤ W, det W, Uγ ] ∩
K[Zγ ]. By Lemma 2.7 (5), we see that there is a standard monomial
µ on
Qu
∗
∆(m × n; γ ) such that lm(a) = lm(µZγ ). Set, as before, µ = i=1 [αi |βi ],
α1 ≤ · · · ≤ αu , β1 ≤ · · · ≤ βu , and αi = [ci1 , . . . , cir(i) ], βi = [d1i , . . . , dir(i) ]
for i = 1, . . . , u. Then by using Lemma 2.13 (1), (3), Lemma 3.5 and the
same argument as in the proof of (1), we see that cij = j for any i, j and
there is w ∈ N such that w ≤ u, r(i) = m ⇐⇒ i ≤ w, u − w is even
and r(2i − 1 + w) = r(2i + w) for i = 1, . . . , (u − w)/2. Therefore if we set
αi′′ = [d2i−1+w,1, . . . , d2i−1+w,r(2i−1+w) ] and βi′′ = [d2i+w,1 , . . . , d2i+w,r(2i+w) ] for
i = 1, . . . , (u − w)/2 and δi = [di1 , . . . , dim ] for i = 1, . . . , w, then
lm(a) =

r(i)
u Y
Y

Wjj Ujdij =

i=1 j=1

w
Y

(u−w)/2

lm((δi )Zγ )

i=1

Y

lm([αi′′ |βi′′]Zγ⊤ Zγ )

i=1

by Lemma 2.7 (2) and Lemma 2.14 (2). The rest is proved along the same
line with (1).

4

Doset Hibi rings

Let P be a finite partially ordered set (poset for short). The length of a
chain (totally ordered subset) X of P is |X| − 1. The rank of P , denoted
by rankP , is the maximum of the lengths of chains in P . A poset is said
to be pure if its all maximal chains have the same length. For x, y ∈ P , y
covers x, denoted by x <· y, means x < y and there is no z ∈ P such that
x < z < y. For x, y ∈ P with x ≤ y, we set [x, y]P := {z ∈ P | x ≤ z ≤ y}.
The height of an element x ∈ P , denoted by htP x or simply htx is the rank
of {y ∈ P | y ≤ x}.
Let H be a finite distributive lattice. A join-irreducible element in H is
an element α ∈ H such that α can not be expressed as a join of two elements
different from α, i.e., α = β ∨ γ ⇒ α = β or α = γ. Note that we treat the
unique minimal element of H as a join-irreducible element.
Let P be the set of all join-irreducible elements in H. Then it is known
that H is isomorphic to J(P ) \ {∅} ordered by inclusion, where J(P ) is the
set of all poset ideals of P . The isomorphisms Φ : H → J(P ) \ {∅} and
Ψ : J(P ) \ {∅} → H are given by
Φ(α) := _
{x ∈ P | x ≤ α in H} for α ∈ H and
Ψ(I) :=
x
for I ∈ J(P ) \ {∅}.
x∈I

Let P and Q be posets. A map ν : P → Q is an order reversing map or
an anti-homomorphism if x ≤ y in P implies ν(x) ≥ ν(y) in Q and strictly
14

order reversing if x < y in P implies ν(x) > ν(y) in Q. The set of all order
reversing maps from P to N is denoted by T (P ). The set of all strictly order
reversing maps from P to N \ {0} is denoted by T (P ).
Let H be a finite distributive lattice, P the set of join-irreducible elements and {Tx }x∈P a family of indeterminates indexed by P . We set
Q
ν(x)
T ν = x∈P Tx for ν ∈ T (P ). Hibi [Hib] defined the ring RK (H), called
the Hibi ring nowadays, as follows.
Q
Definition 4.1 RK (H) := K[ x≤α Tx | α ∈ H].
Hibi [Hib] showed the following theorems.

Theorem 4.2 RK (H) is an ASL over K on H with structure map α →
7
Q
x≤α Tx . The straightening law of RK (H) is αβ = (α ∧ β)(α ∨ β) for α,
β ∈ H with α 6∼ β.
Theorem 4.3 RK (H) is a K-vector space with basis {T ν | ν ∈ T (P )}. In
particular, by Theorem 2.1, RK (H) is a normal affine semigroupring and
hence Cohen-Macaulay. Further, by Theorem 2.2, the canonical module of
RK (H) is a K-vector space with basis {T ν | ν ∈ T (P )}.
By analyzing the relations of the leading monomials of the elements of
∆(m × n; γ ∗ ), embeded by the structure map of the ASL K[Zγ ] of Lemma
2.7 (4), we see the following
Proposition 4.4 in K[Zγ ] is the Hibi ring over K on ∆(m × n; γ ∗ ). In
particular, it is normal. In particular, by [CHV, Corollary 2.3], K[Zγ ] is
normal and Cohen-Macaulay and has rational singularities if charK = 0 and
is F-rational if charK > 0.
Let L be another distributive lattice, Q the set of join-irreducible elements
in L and ϕ : H → L a surjective lattice homomorphism, i.e., a surjective map
from H to L such that ϕ(x ∨ y) = ϕ(x) ∨ ϕ(y) and ϕ(x ∧ y) = ϕ(x) ∧ ϕ(y).
We set
^
ϕ∗ (β) :=
α.
α∈ϕ−1 (β)

Then the following facts hold.
Lemma 4.5

(1) ϕ∗ (ϕ(α)) ≤ α for any α ∈ H.

(2) ϕ(ϕ∗ (β)) = β for any β ∈ L.
(3) β1 ≤ β2 ⇒ ϕ∗ (β1 ) ≤ ϕ∗ (β2 ).
15

(4) For α ∈ H and β ∈ L, ϕ(α) ≥ β ⇐⇒ α ≥ ϕ∗ (β).
(5) y ∈ Q ⇒ ϕ∗ (y) ∈ P .
(6) If y0 is the unique minimal element of L, then ϕ∗ (y0 ) is the unique
minimal element of H.
Proof (1): Since α ∈ ϕ−1 (ϕ(α)), we see that
^
α′ = ϕ∗ (ϕ(α)).
α≥
α′ ∈ϕ−1 (ϕ(α))

(2): Since ϕ is a lattice homomorphism, it holds
^
^
ϕ(ϕ∗ (β)) = ϕ(
α) =
α∈ϕ−1 (β)

ϕ(α) = β.

α∈ϕ−1 (β)

(3): Take α0 ∈ ϕ−1 (β1 ). Then for any α ∈ ϕ−1 (β2 ), ϕ(α0 ∧ α) = ϕ(α0 ) ∧
ϕ(α) = β1 ∧β2 = β1 . Therefore, α0 ∧α ∈ ϕ−1 (β1 ) so ϕ∗ (β1 ) = ∧α′ ∈ϕ−1 (β1 ) α′ ≤
α0 ∧ α ≤ α. Since α is an arbitrary element of ϕ−1 (β2 ), we see that
^
ϕ∗ (β1 ) ≤
α = ϕ∗ (β2 ).
α∈ϕ−1 (β2 )

(4): If ϕ(α) ≥ β, then α ≥ ϕ∗ (ϕ(α)) ≥ ϕ∗ (β) by (1) and (3). On the other
hand, if α ≥ ϕ∗ (β), then ϕ(α) ≥ ϕ(ϕ∗ (β)) = β by (2).
(5): If ϕ∗ (y) = α ∨ α′ , then ϕ(α) ∨ ϕ(α′ ) = ϕ(α ∨ α′ ) = ϕ(ϕ∗ (y)) = y.
Therefore y = ϕ(α) or y = ϕ(α′ ), since y is join-irreducible. By symmetry,
we may assume that y = ϕ(α). Then ϕ∗ (y) = ϕ∗ (ϕ(α)) ≤ α by (1). On the
other hand, ϕ∗ (y) = α ∨ α′ ≥ α. Therefoer ϕ∗ (y) = α.
(6): Clear.
By (2) and (3) of Lemma 4.5, we may regard L as a subposet (not a
sublattice) of H by ϕ∗ . Then, by (5) of Lemma 4.5, Q is identified to a
subset of P . Note that Q contains the unique minimal element of H under
this identification by (6) of Lemma 4.5.
Lemma 4.6 By the identification above, the composition map J(P ) \ {∅} ≃
ϕ
H → L ≃ J(Q) \ {∅} is identical to the map I 7→ I ∩ Q.
Proof Recall that lattice isomorphisms H ≃ J(P ) \ {∅} and L ≃ J(Q) \ {∅}
are obtained by ΦH : H → J(P ) \ {∅}, (α 7→ {x ∈ P | x ≤ α}) and ΦL : L →
J(Q) \ {∅}, (β 7→ {y ∈ Q | y ≤ β}). Let α be an arbitrary element of
H. Then ΦL (ϕ(α)) = {y ∈ Q | y ≤ ϕ(α)}. Since y ≤ ϕ(α) if and only
if ϕ∗ (y) ≤ α by (4) of Lemma 4.5, we see that by the embedding of L in
H by ϕ∗ , ΦL (ϕ(α)) is identified to {y ∈ Q | y ≤ α} which is equal to
{x ∈ P | x ≤ α} ∩ Q = ΦH (α) ∩ Q.
16

Let us recall the definition of dosets [DEP2, Section 18].
Definition 4.7 A subset D of H × H is called a doset of H if
(1) {(α, α) | α ∈ H} ⊂ D ⊂ {(α, β) ∈ H × H | α ≤ β} and
(2) for α, β and γ ∈ H with α ≤ β ≤ γ,
(α, γ) ∈ D ⇐⇒ (α, β) ∈ D, (β, γ) ∈ D.
Now let L be another distributive lattice, Q the set of join-irreducible elements of L and ϕ : H → L a surjective lattice homomorphism. We set
D := {(α, β) ∈ H × H | α ≤ β, ϕ(α) = ϕ(β)}. Then it is easily verified that
D is a doset of H.
We define the doset Hibi ring as follows.
Definition 4.8 The doset Hibi ring over K defined by ϕ, denoted by DK (ϕ)
is the K-subalgebra of RK (H) generated by {αβ | (α, β) ∈ D}.
Note that if (α, β), (α′ , β ′ ) ∈ D, then
(αβ)(α′β ′)
= (α ∧ α′ )(α ∨ α′ )(β ∧ β ′ )(β ∨ β ′ )
= (α ∧ α′ )((α ∨ α′ ) ∧ (β ∧ β ′ ))((α ∨ α′ ) ∨ (β ∧ β ′ ))(β ∨ β ′ )

(4.1)

and
ϕ((α ∨ α′ ) ∧ (β ∧ β ′ )) = ϕ(α ∧ α′ )
ϕ((α ∨ α′ ) ∨ (β ∧ β ′ )) = ϕ(β ∨ β ′ ),
since ϕ(α) = ϕ(β) and ϕ(α′ ) = ϕ(β ′). Therefore (α ∧ α′ , (α ∨ α′ ) ∧ (β ∧ β ′ )),
((α ∨ α′ ) ∨ (β ∧ β ′ ), β ∨ β ′ ) ∈ D.
In particular, by applying the straightening law repeatedly, we see that
{α1 α2 · · · α2r−1 α2r | α1 ≤ α2 ≤ · · · ≤ α2r , (α2i−1 , α2i ) ∈ D for i = 1, . . . , r}
is a K-free basis of the doset Hibi ring.
Example 4.9 (1) If L is a set with only one element and ϕ : H → L is the
unique map, then DK (ϕ) is the second Veronese subring of RK (H).
(2) If L = H and ϕ is the identity map, then DK (ϕ) = K[α2 | α ∈ H],
which is isomorphic to RK (H).

17

Regarding RK (H) as a subring of K[Tx | x ∈ P ], a standard monomial
α1 α2 · · · αs with α1 ≤ α2 ≤ · · · ≤ αs corresponds to T ν , where ν(x) = |{i |
x ≤ αi }|. On the other hand, by the identification L ≃ J(Q) \ {∅} and
Q ⊂ P , ϕ(α) corresponds to {y ∈ Q | y ≤ α in H} by Lemma 4.6. Therefore
a standard monomial α1 α2 · · · α2r on H with α1 ≤ α2 ≤ · · · ≤ α2r satisfies
(α2i−1 , α2i ) ∈ D for i = 1, . . . , r if and only if ν(y) ≡ 0 (mod 2) for any
y ∈ Q, where ν is an element of T (P ) corresponding to α1 · · · α2r . Therefore
we have the following
Theorem 4.10 DK (ϕ) is a free K-module with basis {T ν | ν ∈ T (P ),
ν(y) ≡ 0 (mod 2) for any y ∈ Q}. In particular, by Theorem 2.1, DK (ϕ) is
a normal affine semigroupring, and therefore, is Cohen-Macaulay.
Note the description of DK (ϕ) in the theorem above depends only on H
and Q. Therefore we can generalize the notion of doset Hibi ring as follows.
Definition 4.11 Let H be a finite distributive lattice, P the set of joinirreducible elements of H, Q a subset of P . We define the generalized doset
Hibi ring defined by H and Q, denoted by DK (H, Q), as DK (H, Q) := K[T ν |
ν ∈ T (P ), ν(y) ≡ 0 (mod 2) for any y ∈ Q].
The following theorem is a direct consequence of the definition and Theorem 2.1.
Theorem 4.12 The generalized doset Hibi ring DK (H, Q) is a free Kmodule with basis {T ν | ν ∈ T (P ), ν(y) ≡ 0 (mod 2) for any y ∈ Q}. In
particular, DK (H, Q) is a normal affine semigroupring and hence is CohenMacaulay.
Note that if Q contains the minimal element x0 of H, then by setting L =
J(Q) \ {∅} and ϕ the map corresponding to J(P ) \ {∅} → J(Q) \ {∅},
(I 7→ I ∩ Q), DK (H, Q) is equal to DK (ϕ). In particular, DK (H, Q) is a
doset Hibi ring.
Here we consider a generating system of DK (H, Q) as a K-subalgebra of
RK (H). Set H1 := {α ∈ H | y ≤ α for some y ∈ Q}, H2 = H \ H1 and
ψ : H1 → J(Q) \ {∅}, (α 7→ {y ∈ Q | y ≤ α}).
Lemma 4.13 Let α1 α2 · · · αr be a standard monomial on H with α1 ≤ α2 ≤
· · · ≤ αr , α1 , . . . , αs ∈ H2 and αs+1 , . . . , αr ∈ H1 . Then α1 · · · αr ∈
DK (H, Q) if and only if r − s ≡ 0 (mod 2) and ψ(αs+2i−1 ) = ψ(αs+2i ) for
i = 1, 2, . . . , (r − s)/2.

18

Proof Let ν be the element of T (P ) corresponding to α1 · · · αr . Then ν(x) =
|{j | x ≤ αj }|. Therefore ν(y) = |{j | j > s and ψ(αj ) ∋ y}| for y ∈ Q. Since
∅=
6 ψ(αs+1 ) ⊂ ψ(αs+2 ) ⊂ · · · ⊂ ψ(αr ), ν(y) ≡ 0 (mod 2) for any y ∈ Q if
and only if r − s ≡ 0 (mod 2) and ψ(αs+2i−1 ) = ψ(αs+2i ) for i = 1, 2, . . . ,
(r − s)/2. The result follows from Theorem 4.12.
Now assume that Q has a unique minimal element y0 . Then H1 = {α ∈
H | α ≥ y0 } and H2 = {α ∈ H | α 6≥ y0 }.
Lemma 4.14

(1) If α, β ∈ H1 , then α ∧ β, α ∨ β ∈ H1 .

(2) If α ∈ H1 and β ∈ H2 , then α∧β ∈ H2 , α∨β ∈ H1 and ψ(α∨β) = ψ(α).
(3) If α, β ∈ H2 , then α ∧ β, α ∨ β ∈ H2 .
(4) If α, β ∈ H1 , then ψ(α ∧β) = ψ(α) ∩ψ(β) and ψ(α ∨β) = ψ(α) ∪ψ(β).
(5) If α, β, α′ , β ′ ∈ H1 , ψ(α) = ψ(β) and ψ(α′ ) = ψ(β ′ ), then ψ(α ∧ α′ ) =
ψ((α ∨ α′ ) ∧ (β ∧ β ′ )) and ψ(β ∨ β ′ ) = ψ((α ∨ α′ ) ∨ (β ∧ β ′)).
Proof Let δ be an element of H and I the corresponding element of J(P ) \
{∅} by the lattice isomorphism H ≃ J(P ) \ {∅}. Then δ ∈ H1 if and only if
I ∋ y0 , and ∧ and ∨ operations in H correspond to ∩ and ∪ in J(P ) \ {∅}
respectively. Furthermore, ψ(δ) = I ∩ Q if δ ∈ H1 . The lemma is proved
straightfowardly by these facts.
Now we state the following
Proposition 4.15 If Q has a unique minimal element, then DK (H, Q) is a
K-subalgebra of RK (H) generated by {αβ | α, β ∈ H1 , α ≤ β and ψ(α) =
ψ(β)} ∪ H2 .
Proof We set G = {αβ | α, β ∈ H1 , α ≤ β and ψ(α) = ψ(β)} ∪ H2 . Then
by Lemma 4.13, we see that DK (H, Q) ⊂ K[G].
To prove the reverse inclusion, let µ be an arbitrary product of elements
of G. Then by Lemma 4.14 and equation (4.1), we see that, by repeated
application of the straightening law of RK (H), µ is equal to a standard
monomial α1 · · · αr with α1 ≤ · · · ≤ αr such that for some s, α1 , . . . , αs ∈ H2 ,
αs+1 , . . . , αr ∈ H1 , r −s ≡ 0 (mod 2) and ψ(αs+2i−1 ) = ψ(αs+2i ) for i = 1, 2,
. . . , (r −s)/2. Then again by Lemma 4.13, we see that α1 · · · αr ∈ DK (H, Q).
Therefore µ ∈ DK (H, Q).

19

Now we apply the theory of (generalized) doset Hibi rings to the ring of
absolute O(m) and SO(m)-invariants.
Set L = {1, 2, . . . , m} with reverse order and ϕ : Γ′ (m × n; γ) → L,
(δ 7→ sizeδ). Then ϕ is a surjective lattice homomorphism and ϕ∗ (j) =
[b1 , b2 , . . . , bj ] for 1 ≤ j ≤ m. By analyzing the relations of the leading monomials of the sagbi basis {[α|β]Zγ⊤ Zγ | (α, β) ∈ Dγ } of K[Zγ ]O(m,−) = K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ],
and the sagbi basis {[α|β]Zγ⊤ Zγ | (α, β) ∈ Dγ , sizeα < m} ∪ {δZγ | δ ∈
Γ(m × n; γ)} of K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) = K[Zγ⊤ Zγ , Γ(Zγ )] (c.f. Theorem 3.6), we see
the following
Theorem 4.16 (1) in K[Zγ ]O(m,−) = in K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ] is the doset Hibi ring
over K defined by ϕ.
(2) in K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) = in K[Zγ⊤ Zγ , Γ(Zγ )] is the generalized doset Hibi ring
defined by Γ′ (m × n; γ) and {[b1 , . . . , bm−1 ], . . . , [b1 , b2 ], [b1 ]}.
In particular, in K[Zγ ]O(m,−) and in K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) are normal affine semigrouprings and therefore K[Zγ ]O(m,−) and K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) are normal and
Cohen-Macaulay, and has rational singularities if charK = 0 and is Frational if charK > 0.

5

Gorenstein property

In this section, we stat a criterion of the Gorenstein property of a (generalized) doset Hibi ring.
Let H be a finite distributive lattice, P the set of join-irreducible elements
of H and Q a subset of P and {Tx }x∈P the family of indeterminates indexed
by P . Set T (P, Q) := {ν ∈ T (P ) | ν(y) ≡ 0 (mod 2) for any y ∈ Q} and
T (P, Q) := {νL∈ T (P ) | ν(y) ≡ 0 (mod 2) for any y ∈ Q}. Then since
DK (H, Q) =
KT ν , we see, by Theorem 2.2, that the canonical
ν∈T (P,Q)L
module of DK (H, Q) is ν∈T (P,Q) KT ν .
def

We define a order on T (P, Q) by ν ≤ ν ′ ⇐⇒ ν ′ − ν ∈ T (P, Q), where
(ν ′ − ν)(x) := ν ′ (x) − ν(x) for any x ∈ P . Then it is clear that T ν is a
generator of the canonical module of DK (H, Q) if and only if ν is a minimal
element of T (P, Q). In particular, DK (H, Q) is Gorenstein if and only if
T (P, Q) has a unique minimal element.
Now we set P + := P ∪ {∞}, where ∞ is a new element and x < ∞ for
any x ∈ P and Q+ := Q ∪ {∞}. We also set P̃ := P + ∪ {(y1 , y2 ) ∈ Q+ × Q+ |
y1 <· y2 in P + } and define the order on P̃ by extending the order relation on
P by y1 < (y1 , y2 ) < y2 for y1 , y2 ∈ Q+ with y1 <· y2 in P + . Then we have
the following result.
20

Theorem 5.1 DK (H, Q) is Gorenstein if and only if the following two conditions are satisfied.
(1) P̃ is pure.
(2) For any y, y ′ ∈ Q+ with y < y ′ , rank[y, y ′]P̃ ≡ 0 (mod 2).
Proof First we define ν̃0 : P̃ → N by downward induction as follows.
• ν̃0 (∞) = 0.
• If x 6= ∞ and ν̃0 (x′ ) is defined for any x′ ∈ P̃ with x′ > x, we set

max{ν̃0 (x′ ) + 1 | x′ > x}
if x 6∈ Q,
ν̃0 (x) =
2⌈max{ν̃0 (x′ ) + 1 | x′ > x}/2⌉ if x ∈ Q.
Then it is clear that ν0 := ν̃0 |P ∈ T (P, Q) and ν(x) ≥ ν0 (x) for any ν ∈
T (P, Q) and x ∈ P . In particular, ν0 is a minimal element of T (P, Q).
Now we start the proof of the theorem and we first prove the “if” part of
the theorem. By assumptions (1) and (2), it is easily verified that ν̃0 (x) =
ν̃0 (x′ ) + 1 for any x, x′ ∈ P̃ with x <· x′ . Therefore, by the definition of P̃ ,
we see that ν − ν0 ∈ T (P, Q) for any ν ∈ T (P, Q). Thus, ν0 is the unique
minimal element of T (P, Q) and DK (H, Q) is Gorenstein.
Next we prove the “only if” part. If (1) or (2) is not valid, then there are
x, x′ ∈ P̃ with x <· x′ in P̃ such that ν̃0 (x) ≥ ν̃0 (x′ )+2. Since x′ 6= ∞ in such
a case, we see that there are x, x′ ∈ P such that x <· x′ in P , {x, x′ } 6⊂ Q
and ν0 (x) ≥ ν0 (x′ ) + 2 or there are y, y ′ ∈ Q such that y <· y ′ in P and
ν0 (y) ≥ ν0 (y ′ ) + 4. We classify this phenomena into three cases.
Case 5.1.1 There are y, y ′ ∈ Q such that y <· y ′ in P and ν0 (y) ≥ ν0 (y ′)+4.
Case 5.1.2 There are x, x′ ∈ P such that x <· x′ , x 6∈ Q and ν0 (x) ≥
ν0 (x′ ) + 2.
Case 5.1.3 There are x, x′ ∈ P such that x <· x′ , x ∈ Q, x′ 6∈ Q and
ν0 (x) ≥ ν0 (x′ ) + 2.
As for Case 5.1.1, we set

ν0 (z)
ν(z) =
ν0 (z) + 2

z≤
6 y ′ or z = y,
z ≤ y ′ and z 6= y.

Then it is easily verified that ν ∈ T (P, Q) and ν − ν0 6∈ T (P, Q) since
(ν − ν0 )(y) = 0 and (ν − ν0 )(y ′) = 2. Therefore, there is a minimal element
of T (P, Q) other than ν0 .
21

As for Case 5.1.2, we set

 ν0 (z)
ν0 (z) + 1
ν(z) =

ν0 (z) + 2

z≤
6 x′ ,
z = x,
z ≤ x′ and z 6= x.

Then it is easily verified that ν ∈ T (P, Q) and ν − ν0 6∈ T (P, Q) since
(ν − ν0 )(x) = 1 and (ν − ν0 )(x′ ) = 2. Therefore, there is a minimal element
of T (P, Q) other than ν0 .
Finally, as for Case 5.1.3, we set

z 6≤ x′ or z = x,
 ν0 (z)
ν0 (z) + 1 z = x′ ,
ν(z) =

ν0 (z) + 2 z < x′ and z 6= x.
Again it is easily verified that ν ∈ T (P, Q) and ν − ν0 6∈ T (P, Q). Therefore,
there is a minimal element of T (P, Q) other than ν0 .
In any case, we see that DK (H, Q) is not Gorenstein.

Example 5.2

(1) If
P =

r
t
t
r ✁✁
❅
❅✁t

,

where big dots express elements of Q, then

P+ =

t
r ❆
❆
t
❆t
✁
r
✁
❅
t
❅✁

and P̃ =

Therefore, DK (H, Q) is Gorenstein.
(2) If
P =

22

r
t
r
r ✁✁
❅
❅✁t

,

t
r ❆r
❆
t
❆t
r ✁r✁
❅
❅✁
t

.

then
t
r ❆
❆
t
❆r
✁
r
✁
❅
❅✁t

P+ =

= P̃ .

Therefore, P̃ is not pure and DK (H, Q) is not Gorenstein.
(3) If

P =

then

P+ =

t
r ❆
❆
❆t
r
t
t
r
✁
r
✁
❅
❅✁
t

r
r
t
t
t
r
r ✁✁
❅
❅✁t

,

and P̃ =

t
r ❆r
❆
r
❆t
t
r
t
r
r ✁r✁
❅
❅✁t

.

Thus, there are y, y ′ ∈ Q+ such that y < y ′ and rank[y, y ′]P̃ = 3.
Therefore, DK (H, Q) is not Gorenstein.
Finally, we apply Theorem 5.1 to obtain a criterion of Gorenstein
property of in K[Zγ ]O(m,−) and in K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) . Recalled that we have
fixed γ = [b1 , . . . , bm ] ∈ Γ(m × n). Note by Corollary 2.4, K[Zγ ]O(m,−)
(resp. K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) ) is Gorenstein if and only if so is in K[Zγ ]O(m,−) (resp.
in K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) ).
First we note the following lemma which is easily proved.
Lemma 5.3 Let H be a distributive lattice and x an element of H which is
not minimal. Then x is join-irreducible if and only if there uniquely exists
an element α ∈ H such that α <· x.
In order to apply Theorem 5.1 to the ring of absolute invariants, we first analyze the structure of the set of join-irreducible elements of Γ′ (m×n; γ). Let P
be the set of join-irreducible elements of Γ′ (m × n; γ) and δ = [d1 , d2 , . . . , dt ]
be an element of Γ′ (m × n; γ) \ {γ}.
23

We consider the condition that δ ∈ P . First we state the following lemma
which is easily proved.
Lemma 5.4 Let [c1 , . . . , cs ], [c′1 , . . . , c′s′ ] ∈ Γ′ (m × n; γ). Then
[c1 , . . . , cs ] <· [c′1 , . . . , c′s′ ]
in Γ′ (m × n; γ) if and only if
(1) s = s′ + 1, cs = m and c′i = ci for 1 ≤ i ≤ s′ or
(2) s = s′ and there exists i such that c′i = ci + 1 and c′j = cj for j 6= i.
Now consider the condition of δ = [d1 , . . . , dt ] ∈ P . First consider the case
where sizeδ = m. By Lemmas 5.3 and 5.4, we see that δ is join-irreducible if
and only if there is a unique index i such that
di > bi

and di > di−1 + 1,

where we set d0 = 0. Note that i = min{j | dj > bj } and δ =
[b1 , . . . , bi−1 , di , max{di + 1, bi+1 }, . . . , max{di + m − i, bm }] in this case.
Next consider the case where sizeδ = t < m. By Lemmas 5.3 and 5.4, we
see that δ is join-irreducible if and only if δ = [b1 , . . . , bt ] or there is i such
that
dj = bj for j < i and dj = n − t + j for j ≥ i.
Now we construct a map from P \ {γ} to Z × N . Let δ = [d1 , . . . , dt ]
be an arbitrary element of P \ {γ}. Set i = min{j | dj > bj }, where we set
dt+1 = n+1 in the case where δ = [b1 , . . . , bt ]. Set ξ(δ) = (n−di −m+i, i−1).
Then ξ is a map from P \ {γ} to Z × N . Note that i is the unique index
such that
di > bi and di > di−1 + 1,
where we set d0 = 0. Also note that n − di − m + i = |{j | j 6∈ {d1 , . . . , dm }
and di < j ≤ n}| in the case where t = m and n − di − m + i = t − m in
the case where t < m. In particular, sizeδ = m if and only if the first entry
of ξ(δ) is non-negative. Note also that i − 1 = |{j | j ∈ {d1 , . . . , dt } and
1 ≤ j < di }|.
Suppose δ ′ = [d′1 , . . . , d′t′ ] ∈ P \ {γ}. Set ı′ = min{j | d′j > bj }, where
we set d′t′ +1 = n + 1 as above. First assume that ξ(δ ′) = ξ(δ). Then ı′ = i,
d′i = di and d′j = max{d′i + j − i, bj } = max{di + j − i, bj } = dj for i < j ≤ m
in the case where t = m or t′ − m = t − m and d′j = n − t′ + j = n − t + j = dj
for i ≤ j ≤ t in the case where t < m. Therefore, we see that δ ′ = δ, i.e., ξ
is injective.
24

Next assume that δ ′ > δ. Then ı′ ≤ i, d′i ≥ di and d′i − d′ı′ = i − ı′ , since
max{d′ı′ + i − ı′ , bi } = d′i ≥ di > bi , where we set d′t′ +j = n + j for j > 0.
Therefore, n − d′ı′ − m + ı′ = n − d′i − m + i ≤ n − di − m + i and ı′ − 1 ≤ i − 1.
Thus, we see that ξ is an anti-homomorphism from P \ {γ} to Z × N .
Set ξ(δ) = (a, b). First suppose that b > 0. Then i ≥ 2 and δ ′′ =
[d1 , . . . , di−2 , di − 1, di , . . . , dt ] is an element of P \ {γ} such that ξ(δ ′′ ) =
(a, b − 1), where we set dt+1 = n + 1 in the case where δ = [b1 , . . . , bt ] as
above. Next suppose that a − b > −m and (a, b) 6= (−m + 1, 0). Since
ξ([b1 , . . . , bt ]) = (t − m, t), we see that δ 6= [b1 , . . . bt ], i.e., i ≤ t. Set δ ′′ =
[d1 , . . . , di−1 , di + 1, max{di + 2, di+1 }, . . . , max{di + m − i + 1, dm }] in the case
where t = m and n − di > m − i or δ ′′ = [d1 , . . . , di−1 , di+1, . . . dt ] in the case
where t < m or n − di = m − i. Note also δ ′′ = [d1 , . . . , di−1 ] = [b1 , . . . , bi−1 ]
in the case where i = t and dt = n. It is easily verified that δ ′′ ∈ P \ {γ} and
ξ(δ ′′ ) = (a − 1, b).
Set P ′ = {(x, y) ∈ Z × N | y ≥ 0, x − y ≥ −m, (x, y) 6= (−m, 0)}.
Then P ′ is a subposet of Z × N with unique minimal element (−m + 1, 0).
Further, we see that P \ {γ} is anti-isomorphic to the poset ideal Imξ of P ′
by the above argument. Since ξ is an anti-homomorphism, Imξ is the poset
ideal of P ′ generated by {ξ(δ) | δ is a minimal element of P \ {γ}}.
By Lemma 5.3, we see that δ ∈ Γ′ (m × n; γ) is a minimal element of
P \ {γ} if and only if δ ·> γ in Γ′ (m × n; γ). Thus, in order to study the set of
minimal elements of P \ {γ}, we consider the set {δ ∈ Γ′ (m × n; γ) | δ ·> γ}.
We separate {b1 , b2 , . . . , bm } into blocks and define the gaps between them.
Set U = {u | 1 ≤ u ≤ m, bu + 1 < bu+1 } = {u(1), . . . , u(k)} with u(1) <
· · · < u(k), where we set bm+1 := n + 1. Then U 6= ∅ if and only if γ 6=
[n − m + 1, . . . , n].
First consider the case where γ = [n − m + 1, . . . , n]. Then P \ {γ} has
the unique minimal element [n − m + 1, . . . , n − 1] = [b1 , . . . , bm−1 ]. Since
ξ([b1 , . . . , bm−1 ]) = (−1, m − 1), we see that P \ {γ} is anti-isomorphic to
{(x, y) ∈ Z × N | 0 ≤ y ≤ m − 1, x ≤ −1, x − y ≥ −m, (x, y) 6= (−m, 0)}.
In particular, P is pure.
Next consider the case where γ 6= [n − m + 1, . . . , n]. U 6= ∅ and k ≥ 1
in this case. Set χ0 := {1, 2, . . . , b1 − 1}, B1 := {b1 , b2 , . . . , bu(1) }, χ1 :=
{bu(1) + 1, bu(1) + 2, . . . , bu(1)+1 − 1}, B2 := {bu(1)+1 , bu(1)+2 , . . . , bu(2) }, χ2 :=
{bu(2) + 1, bu(2) + 2, . . . , bu(2)+1 − 1}, B3 := {bu(2)+1 , bu(2)+2 , . . . , bu(3) }, . . . ,
Bk := {bu(k−1)+1 , bu(k−1)+2 , . . . , bu(k) }, χk := {bu(k) +1, bu(k) +2, . . . , bu(k)+1 −1}
and Bk+1 := {bu(k)+1 , bu(k)+2 , . . . , bm }. Note that if bm < n, then u(k) = m
and Bk+1 = ∅.
By Lemma 5.4 and the above remark, we see that the minimal elements
of P \ {γ} are γ1 = [b1 , . . . , bu(1)−1 , bu(1) + 1, bu(1)+1 , . . . , bm ], γ2 = [b1 ,
. . . , bu(2)−1 , bu(2) + 1, bu(2)+1 , . . . , bm ], . . . , γk−1 = [b1 , . . . , bu(k−1)−1 , bu(k−1) +
25

1, bu(k−1)+1 , . . . , bm ] and γk = [b1 , . . . , bm−1 , bm + 1] in the case where
bm < n and γ1 , . . . , γk−1, γk = [b1 , . . . , bu(k)−1 , bu(k) + 1, bu(k)+1 , . . . , bm ] and
γk+1 = [b1 , b2 , . . . , bm−1 ] in the case where bm = n.
Note that
|Bj | = u(j) − u(j − 1)
for 2 ≤ j ≤ k and
|Bk+1 | = m − u(k)
in the case where bm = n. Further,
|χj−1 | + |Bj | = bu(j) − bu(j−1)
for 2 ≤ j ≤ k and
|χk | + |Bk+1| = bm − bu(k) = n − bu(k)
in the case where bm = n. Thus, we see that
|χj−1| = bu(j) − bu(j−1) − u(j) + u(j − 1)
for 2 ≤ j ≤ k and
|χk | = n − bu(k) − m + u(k)
in the case where bm = n.
Note also that
ξ(γj ) = (n − bu(j) − 1 − m + u(j), u(j) − 1)
for 1 ≤ j ≤ k and
ξ(γk+1) = (−1, m − 1)
in the case where bm = n. Therefore, the difference between the second
entries of ξ(γj ) and ξ(γj−1) is |Bj | and the difference between the first entries
of ξ(γj ) and ξ(γj−1) is |χj−1| for 2 ≤ j ≤ k (resp. 2 ≤ j ≤ k + 1) if bm < n
(resp. bm = n). Since P ′ is a poset with unique minimal element (−m + 1, 0),
we see that htP ′ (a, b) = a + b + m − 1 for any (a, b) ∈ P ′ . Therefore, we see
that htP ′ ξ(γj ) = htP ′ ξ(γj−1) if and only if |Bj | = |χj−1| for 2 ≤ j ≤ k (resp.
2 ≤ j ≤ k + 1) if bm < n (resp. bm = n).
Example 5.5 (1) If m = 7, n = 15 and γ = [2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14], then
k = 4, u(1) = 1, u(2) = 4, u(3) = 5, u(4) = 7 and χ0 = {1},
B1 = {2}, χ1 = {3, 4, 5}, B2 = {6, 7, 8}, χ2 = {9}, B3 = {10},
χ3 = {11, 12}, B4 = {13, 14}, χ4 = {15} and B5 = ∅. γ1 =
[3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14], γ2 = [2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14], γ3 = [2, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14]
and γ4 = [2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 15]. Further, ξ(γ1 ) = (6, 0), ξ(γ2 ) = (3, 3),
ξ(γ3 ) = (2, 4) and ξ(γ4 ) = (0, 6). Therefore, the Hasse diagram of
P \ {γ} is the following.
26

[2]
[2, 6]
[2, 6, 7]
[2, 6, 7, 8]
[2, 6, 7, 8, 10]
[2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13]

r
r ❅r
❅r ❅ r
❅ ❅
r
❅r ❅r
❅ r ❅r ❅ r
❅
❅r ❅ r
r
❅r
❅
❅ r ❅r ❅ r
❅ ❅r
❅
❅
r
r
❅r ❅ r
❅r
❅ r ❅r ❅ r ❅ r ❅ r
❅
❅
❅r ❅ r
❅r
r
❅r
❅
❅r
❅ r ❅r ❅ r ❅ r ❅❅r ❅r
❅
❅
❅
❅r
r ❅r ❅ r
❅r ❅r
❅
❅
❅
❅r
❅r
❅r ❅ r

γ4

γ3

γ2

γ1

(2) If m = 7, n = 14 and γ = [2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14], then k = 3, u(1) = 1,
u(2) = 4, u(3) = 5 and χ0 = {1}, B1 = {2}, χ1 = {3, 4, 5}, B2 =
{6, 7, 8}, χ2 = {9}, B3 = {10}, χ3 = {11, 12} and B4 = {13, 14}. γ1 =
[3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 14], γ2 = [2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14], γ3 = [2, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13, 14]
and γ4 = [2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13]. Further, ξ(γ1 ) = (5, 0), ξ(γ2) = (2, 3),
ξ(γ3 ) = (1, 4) and ξ(γ4 ) = (−1, 6). Therefore, the Hasse diagram of
P \ {γ} is the following.

[2]
[2, 6]
[2, 6, 7]
[2, 6, 7, 8]
[2, 6, 7, 8, 10]
γ4 = [2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13]

r
r ❅r
❅r ❅ r
❅ ❅
r
❅r ❅r
❅ r ❅r ❅ r
❅
❅r ❅ r
r
❅r
❅ r ❅r ❅ r ❅ r
❅ ❅
❅
❅r
r
r
❅r ❅ r
❅
❅ r ❅r ❅ r ❅ r ❅ r
❅
❅
❅ ❅ r
❅r
r
❅r ❅r
❅
❅r
❅
❅
❅r
❅r
r
❅r ❅r
❅
❅
❅
❅r
❅r ❅r
r

γ3

γ2

γ1

Now we state criteria of Gorenstein property of the rings of absolute
invariants.
First we consider the ring of absolute O(m)-invariants and give another proof of the result of Conca [Con, Corollary 2.3] (the case where
γ = [1, 2, . . . , m] is due to Goto [Got]).
Theorem 5.6 Suppose that γ 6= [n − m + 1, . . . , n].
27

(1) If bm < n, then K[Zγ ]O(m,−) = K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ] is Gorenstein if and only if
|Bi | = |χi−1 | for i = 2, 3, . . . , k and |χk | ≡ 1 (mod 2).
(2) If bm = n, then K[Zγ ]O(m,−) = K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ] is Gorenstein if and only if
|Bi | = |χi−1 | for i = 2, 3, . . . , k and |Bk+1| = |χk | − 1.
Remark 5.7 We regard the null condition “|Bi | = |χi−1 | for i = 2, . . . , k”
valid if k = 1.
Proof of Theorem 5.6. Set Q = {[b1 , . . . , bi ] | i = 1, . . . , m}. Then
in K[Zγ ]O(m,−) ≃ DK (Γ′ (m × n; γ), Q) by Theorem 4.16. Let P̃ be the poset
defined as in the preceding paragraph of Theorem 5.1.
We first consider the case where bm < n. Then P̃ = P + and P + is pure if
and only if |Bj | = |χj−1 | for 2 ≤ j ≤ k by the argument before Example 5.5.
Further, since rank[ξ(y), ξ(y ′)]P ′ ≡ 0 (mod 2) for any y, y ′ ∈ Q+ \ {γ} with
y > y ′ , (2) of Theorem 5.1 hold true if and only if rank[γ, [b1 , . . . , bm ]] ≡
(mod 2). Since rank[γ, [b1 , . . . , bm−1 ]] = n − bm + 1 = |χk | + 1, we see the
result by Corollary 2.4 and Theorem 5.1.
Next we consider the case where bm = n. γ <· [b1 , . . . , bm−1 ] = γk+1 in
this case. Thus (2) of Theorem 5.1 always holds true. Further, P̃ is pure
if and only if htξ(γ1) = · · · = htξ(γk ) = htξ(γk+1) + 1 in P ′ . Therefore,
by the argument before Example 5.5, we see the result by Corollary 2.4 and
Theorem 5.1.
Note that if γ = [n−m+1, . . . , n], then we see that K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ] is isomorphic
to a polynomial ring with 21 m(m + 1) variables by Lemma 2.14 (4). In
particular, K[Zγ⊤ Zγ ] is Gorenstein.
Next we consider the ring of absolute SO(m)-invariants.
Theorem 5.8 (1) If bm < n, then K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) = K[Zγ⊤ Zγ , Γ(Zγ )] is
Gorenstein if and only if |Bi | = |χi−1 | for i = 2, 3, . . . , k.
(2) If bm = n and γ 6= [n − m + 1, . . . , n], then K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) =
K[Zγ⊤ Zγ , Γ(Zγ )] is Gorenstein if and only if |Bi | = |χi−1 | for i = 2,
3, . . . , k + 1.
(3) If γ = [n − m + 1, . . . , n], then K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) = K[Zγ⊤ Zγ , Γ(Zγ )] is
Gorenstein.
Proof Set Q = {[b1 , . . . , bi ] | 1 ≤ i ≤ m − 1}. Then K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) ≃
DK (Γ′ (m × n; γ), Q) by Theorem 4.16. Let P̃ be the poset defined as in
the preceding paragraph of Theorem 5.1. Then P̃ = P + and rank[y, y ′]P̃ ≡ 0
(mod 2) for any y, y ′ ∈ Q+ with y < y ′ , i.e., (2) of Theorem 5.1 is always
28

valid. Therefore, if γ 6= [n − m + 1, . . . , n], we see by Corollary 2.4 and Theorem 5.1, that K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) is Gorenstein if and only if htξ(γ1 ) = · · · = htξ(γk )
in P ′ in the case where bm < n or htξ(γ1 ) = · · · = htξ(γk+1) in P ′ in
the case where bm = n. Further, we see that K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) is Gorenstein if
γ = [n − m + 1, . . . , n]. Thus, the theorem follows by the argument before
Example 5.5.
As a corollary, we see the following fact.
Corollary 5.9 Suppose that γ 6= [n − m + 1, . . . , n].
(1) If bm < n and K[Zγ ]O(m,−) is Gorenstein, then K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) is Gorenstein.
(2) If bm = n and K[Zγ ]O(m,−) is Gorenstein, then K[Zγ ]SO(m,−) is not
Gorenstein.

References
[BC]

Bruns, W. and Conca, A.: F -rationality of determinantal rings and
their Rees rings. Michigan Math. J. 45 (1998) 291–299.

[BH]

Bruns, W. and Herzog, J.: “Cohen-Macaulay rings.” Cambridge
studies in advanced mathematics 39 Cambridge University Press
(1993)

[BV]

Bruns, W. and Vetter, U.: “Determinantal Rings.” Lecture Notes in
Mathematics 1327 Springer (1988)

[BRW] Bruns, W. Römer, T. and Wiebe, A: Initial algebras of determinantal rings, Cohen-Macaulay and Ulrich ideals. Michigan Math. J. 53
(2005), 71–81.
[Con]

Conca, A: Divisor class group and the canonical class of determinantal rings defined by ideals of minors of a symmetric matrix Arch.
Math. 63 (1994), 216–224.

[CHV] Conca, A., Herzog, J. and Valla, G.: Sagbi bases with applications
to blow-up algebras. J. reine angew. Math. 474 (1996), 113–138.
[DEP1] DeConcini, C., Eisenbud, D. and Procesi, C.: Young Diagrams and
Determinantal Varieties. Inv. Math. 56 (1980), 129–165

29

[DEP2] DeConcini, C., Eisenbud, D. and Procesi, C.: “Hodge Algebras.”
Astérisque 91 (1982)
[DP]

DeConcini, C. and Procesi, C.: A characteristic-free approach to
invariant theory, Adv. Math. 21 (1976), 330–354.

[Got]

Goto, Shiro. ”On the Gorensteinness of determinantal loci.” Journal
of Mathematics of Kyoto University 19.2 (1979): 371-374.

[Hib]

Hibi, T.: Distributive lattices, affine smigroup rings and algebras
with straightening laws. in “Commutative Algebra and Combinatorics” (M. Nagata and H. Matsumura, ed.), Advanced Studies in
Pure Math. 11 North-Holland, Amsterdam (1987), 93–109.

[Hoc]

Hochster, M.: Rings of invariants of tori, Cohen-Macaulay rings
generated by monomials and polytopes. Ann. of Math. 96 (1972),
318-337

[Miy]

Miyazaki, M: A Note on the Invarints of the Group of Triangular
Matrices Acting on Generic Echelon Matrices, Bulletin of Kyoto
University of Education Ser. B 85 (1994), 57–62.

[Ric]

Richman, David R.:The fundamental theorems of vector invariants.
Adv. Math. 73 (1989), 43–78.

[Sta]

Stanley, R. P.: Hilbert Functions of Graded Algebras. Adv. Math.
28 (1978), 57–83.

30

