arXiv:1802.10178v1 [math.AC] 27 Feb 2018

ON THE CONTAINMENT PROBLEM FOR FAT POINTS
IMAN BAHMANI JAFARLOO

GIUSEPPE ZITO

Abstract. Given an ideal I, the containment problem is concerned about finding
the values m and n such that the m-th symbolic power of I is contained in its n-th
ordinary power. In this paper we consider this problem focusing on two classes of
ideals of fat points. In particular we study the ideal of n points on a line in PN
and the ideal of three nonlinear points in PN for N ≥ 2.

1. introduction
Let us consider the polynomial ring K[x0 , . . . , xN ] = K[PN ] = R, where K is an
algebraically closed field of any characteristic. In general,
T if I is a homogeneous
ideal of R, the m-th symbolic power of I is I (m) = R ∩ ( p∈ASS(I) (I m Rp )). However
in this
T paper we will always deal with ideals of fat points that are ideals of the form
I = i I(Pi )mi , where Pi are distinct points in PN , I(Pi ) is the ideal of all the forms
that vanish at Pi and the multiplicity mi is a non-negative integer. For
T ideals of
this type, the m-th symbolic power can be simply defined as I (m) = i I(Pi )mmi .
During the last decades, there has been a lot of interest comparing powers of ideals
with symbolic powers in various ways; see for example, [Hoc73], [Swa00], [Kod00],
[ELS01], [HH02], and [LS06]. It is easy to see that I r ⊆ I (r) ⊆ I (m) if and only if
r ≥ m. Furthermore I (m) ⊆ I r implies m ≥ r but the converse is not true in general.
Therefore it makes sense to ask the containment question: given an ideal I, for which
m and r is the symbolic power I (m) contained in the ordinary power I r ? In [BH10b]
and [BH10a], Bocci and Harbourne introduced and studied an asymptotic quantity,
known as the resurgence, whose computation is clearly linked to our containment
problem. Specifically, given an ideal I of fat points
 in R, the resurgence of I, denoted
by ρ(I), is defined as the quantity ρ(I) = sup mr : I (m) 6⊆ I r .

From the results of [ELS01] and [HH02], it follows that I (m) ⊆ I r whenever
m ≥ Nr. Thus, we can conclude that ρ(I) ≤ N for any homogeneous ideal in R.
In general, directly computing ρ(I) is quite difficult and it has been determined
only in very special cases. For example, it is known that ρ(I) = 1 when I is
generated by a regular sequence [BH10a]. The resurgence is also known for some
kind of monomial ideals [GHM13, Theorem 4.11] or for the ideal of a projective cone
[BH10a, Proposition 2.5.1].

Somewhat more is known for ideals I defining zero-dimensional subschemes of
projective space. For example, if I defines a zerodimensional subscheme such that
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 14N20, 13A15, 13F20.
Key words and phrases. Containment, fat points scheme, symbolic powers, resurgence.
1

2

I. BAHMANI JAFARLOO

G. ZITO

α(I) = reg(I), where reg(I) is the Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity of I and α(I)
is the degree of a nonzero element of I of least degree, then the resurgence can be
completely described in terms of numerical invariants of I ( [BH10a, Corollary 2.3.7]
and [BH10b, Corollary 1.2]). One of these invariants is the Waldschmidt constant
(m)
. In particular, in [BH10b, Theorem 1.2]
of I that is α̂(I(Z)) = limm→∞ α(I(Z))
m
α(I(Z))
the authors proved that ρ(I(Z)) ≥ α̂(I(Z)) .
T
P
We denote by Z = ni=1 mi Pi ⊆ PN the subscheme defined by I(Z) = i I(Pi )mi ,
where the Pi is distinct point in PN . In this paper we compute the resurgence of
I(Z) P
for some classes of fat point subschemes. In section 2, we study the subscheme
Z = ni mi Pi in PN , where the points Pi belong to the same line and give a precise
answer to the value of the resurgence.
Theorem 1.1. Let Z be a fat points scheme, where P1 , . . . , Pn are distinct collinear
points in PN . Then I(Z)(m) = I(Z)m for all m ∈ N, thus ρ(I(Z)) = 1.
The strategy used in the proof consists in splitting the ideal I(Z) into a product
of symbolic powers of complete intersection schemes, and using the fact, showed
in [ZS75, Lemma 5 and Theorem 2 of Appendix 6], that the ideal of a complete
intersection is such that I (m) = I m for all m, we manage to prove Theorem 1.1. In
section 3, we study the subschemes of the type Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 , where
the Pi are nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 . For this class of ideals
we find that the value of the resurgence ρ(I(Z)) depends on the assignment of the
multiplicities mi .
Theorem 1.2. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 and
suppose that m1 + m2 > m3 and m1 + m2 + m3 is odd. If Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 ,
then
m1 + m2 + m3 + 1
ρ(I(Z)) =
.
m1 + m2 + m3
We split the ideal I(Z) in a proper way and using the results of previous section,
first
P we show that ρ(I(Z)) = 1 whenever m1 + m2 < m3 or m1 + m2 ≥ m3 where
mi is even (Propositions 3.2 and 3.6). Finally, using the bound given by the
inequality ρ(I(Z)) ≥ α(I(Z))
and the consequences of several lemmas, we manage to
α̂(I(Z))
prove Theorem 1.2.

Acknowledgement
This project started during the summer school PRAGMATIC 2017. The authors
would like to thank Enrico Carlini, Tai Huy Ha, Brian Harbourne and Adam Van
Tuyl, for giving very interesting lectures and for sharing open problems. They
also wish to thank all the organizers of PRAGMATIC 2017 for giving them the
opportunity to attend the school.

ON THE CONTAINMENT PROBLEM FOR FAT POINTS

3

2. Fat points on a line in PN
Let L be a line in PN . We
P choose {P1 , . . . , Pn } as a set of points which lie on L.
Consider the scheme Z = ni=1 mi Pi , where the multiplicities m1 ≤ m2 ≤ · · · ≤ mn
are nonnegative integers. In this section, we study the containment problem for this
case in order to find the value of the resurgence and we prove Theorem 1.1.
Proving the main theorem in this section, requires some lemmas in order to represent the case in a convenient way. The following lemma plays a significant role
throughout this section.
Lemma 2.1. Let F ∈ R be a homogeneous form. Then F ∈ hL, x2 , . . . , xN im , where
L ∈ K[x0 , x1 ] is a homogeneous linear form, if and only if it can be written as
F =

d i2 +···+i
XN =k
X

gk,i2 ,...,iN · xi22 · · · xiNN

(1)

i2 ,...,iN

k=0

m−k

where gk,i2 ,...,iN ∈ K[x0 , x1 ] and L

|gk,i2,...,iN for all k ≤ m and i2 , . . . , iN .

′
Proof. Let F ∈ hL, x2 , . . . , xN im be a degree d form as (1), where gk,i
is ho2 ,...,iN
mogeneous forms of degree d − k in K[x0 , x1 ]. Consider a linear form H ∈ K[x0 , x1 ]
such that H ∈
/ hL, x2 , . . . , xN i. Hence, K[H, L][x2 , . . . , xN ] = R and it follows that
R has a basis, as a K-vector space, which consists of all monomials H i0 Li1 xi22 · · · xiNN
generated by H, L, x2 , . . . , xN . We conclude that hL, x2 , . . . , xN im is a K-vector
space spanned by the monomials H i0 Li1 xi22 . . . xiNN in K[H, L][x2 , . . . , xN ], such that
PN
j=1 ij ≥ m. Assume L = ax0 + bx1 , H = cx0 + dx1 such that ad − bc 6= 0.
We suppose that x0 = αL + βH and x1 = γL + δH, therefore we can write
′
gk,i
(x0 , x1 ) = gk,i2,...,iN (L, H) with same degree. Thus,
2 ,...,iN

F =

d i2 +···+i
XN =k
X
k=0

Given
that F

n

the basis H Li1 xi22
∈ hL, x2 , . . . , xN im if
i0

gk,i2,...,iN (L, H) · xi22 · · · xiNN .

i2 ,...,iN

. . . xiNN

:

o
for hL, x2 , . . . , xN im , it follows
j=1 ij ≥ m

PN

and only if Lm−k |gk,i2,...,iN ∀k ≤ m, i2 , . . . , iN .



Remark 1. Considering the previous proof, since hL = ax0 + bx1 , x2 , . . . , xN i is the
ideal of the point P = [−b : a : 0 : · · · : 0], indeed, we showed that
F ∈ I(mP ) if and only if (ax0 + bx1 )m−k |gk,i2,...,iN ∀ k ≤ m, ∀i2 , . . . , iN .
The following corollary is immediately deduced from the previous lemma.
Corollary 2.2. Given distinct points Pi = [−di : ci : 0 : · · · : 0], i = 1,
P. n. . , n, on
the line x2 = x3 = . . . = xN = 0, let F be a form as (1). Then F ∈ I( i=1 mi Pi )
if and only if (ci x0 + di x1 )mi −k |fk,i2 ,...,iN ∀ i = 1, . . . , n, k ≤ mi and ∀i2 , . . . , iN .
InP
other words, we have shown that a set of generators of the homogeneous ideal
I( ni=1 mi Pi ) consists of “monomials” of the type La11 · · · · Lann · xb22 · · · xbNN , where
Lj = cj x0 + dj x1 and aj + b2 + · · · + bN ≥ mj , j = 1, .., n.

4

I. BAHMANI JAFARLOO

G. ZITO

All things considered, we are ready to prove the main theorem of this section.
Proof of Theorem 1.1.
We can assume that the points lie on the line x2 = x3 = . . . = xN = 0 and
m1 ≤ · · · ≤ mn . We denote by Li the linear form in K[x0 , x1 ] such that we have
I(Pi ) = hLi , x2 , . . . , xN i for all i = 1, . . . , n. Furthermore, we denote the fat points
scheme Zi = (mi − mi−1 )(Pi + · · · + Pn ) for i = 1, . . . , n and we define m0 = 0.
Notice that
I(Zi )(m) = I(Zi )m for all m.
(2)
In fact, the ideal I(Zi ) is a power of a complete intersection scheme (a set of simple
point on a line), and by [ZS75, Lemma 5 and Theorem 2 of Appendix 6], its
Q symbolic
powers and regular powers are always equal. Now, we claim that I(Z) = ni=1 I(Zi ).
Let us to prove the claim: the inclusion “ ⊇ ” is immediately concluded from the
definition of I(Z). For proving the
Qn other inclusion “ ⊆ ”, it suffices to consider
Corollary 2.2 and show that M ∈ i=1 I(Zi ) for all monomials of the following type
M=

La11

·

· · · Lann

·

xb22

· · · xbNN

∈ I(Z) iff aj +

N
X

bi ≥ mj , ∀1 ≤ j ≤ n.

(3)

i=2

By using the definition of Zi , it is easy to see for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
a′
L11

·

′
· · · Lann

·

b′
x22

b′
· · · xNN

∈ I(Zi ) iff

a′j

+

N
X

b′t ≥ mi − mi−1 , ∀i ≤ j ≤ n.

(4)

t=2

Thus, our goal is splitting the monomial M ∈ I(Z) in a proper way in order to
Q
P
show that M ∈ ni=1 I(Zi ). Set b = N
i=2 bi and consider the following cases:
2 −b
n −b b2
· · · Lm
x2 · · · xbNN divides
• Case b ≤ m1 : by (3) the polynomial P = L1m1 −b Lm
2
n
M,
mi − b ≤ ai forQall i. Furthermore P can be written as,
Qn since
mn−1 −mn−2 mn−1 −mn−2
m1 −b QN
n−1
Ln
)Lnmn −mQ
,
· i=2 xbi i )( ni=2 Lim2 −m1 ) · · · (Ln−1
( i=1 Li
where the j-th part of the last product is in I(Zj ) by (4). Thus M ∈ ni=1 I(Zi ).
• Case mi−1 ≤ b ≤ mi : since b ≥ mi−1 ≥ m1 , it can be found integers c1,i for
P
i = 2, . . . , N, such that 0 ≤ c1,i ≤ bi and N
i=2 c1,i = m1 .
P
c
≥
m
−
m
≥
m
Because b − N
i−1
1
2 − m1 , we can find some integers c2,i
i=2 1,i
PN
for i = 2, . . . , N such that 0 ≤ c2,i ≤ bi − c1,i and
i=2 c2,i = m2 − m1 . Following this way, for k ≤ i − 1, there exist integers ck,i for i = 2, . . . , N such that
Pk−1
P
0 ≤ ck,i ≤ bi − j=1
cj,i and N
i=2 ck,i = mk − mk−1 . The condition (3) implies that
mi+1 −b
n −b
mi − b ≤ ai for all i. So, the polynomial Q = Limi −b Li+1
· · · Lm
· xb22 · · · xbNN
n
divides M. Furthermore Q can be written as:
(

N
Y
t=2

c
xt 1,t ) · · · (

N
Y
t=2

c
xt i−1,t )(

n
Y
t=i

Ltmi −b

·

N
Y
t=2

bt −
xt

Pi−1

j=1 cj,t

)···(

n
Y

mn−1 −mn−2

Lt

n −mn−1
)Lm
,
n

t=n−1

Q
where the j-th part of the product is in I(Zj ) by (4). Thus M ∈ ni=1 I(Zi ).
• Case mn ≤ b: same as the previous case, P
for each k ≤ n,
P we can find integers
k−1
ck,i ∀ i = 2, . . . , N such that 0 ≤ ck,i ≤ bi − j=1
cj,i and N
i=2 cki = mk − mk−1 .
cn−1,N
c
cn−1,2
c
c1N
c2N
c12
c22
The monomial N = (x2 · · · xN )(x2 · · · xN ) · · · (x2
· · · xN
)·(x2n,2 · · · xNn,N )

ON THE CONTAINMENT PROBLEM FOR FAT POINTS

5

Q
divides M. Furthermore, N ∈ ni=1 I(Zi ), since by (4), its j-th factor belongs to
I(Zj ). Thus theQ
proof of the claim
By previous claim and (2) we
Qn is completed.
n
(m)
m
m
= i=1 I(Zi ) . Then by applying the claim to the
obtain I(Z) Q= i=1 I(Zi ) Q
n
(m)
scheme mZ, i=1 I(Zi )
= ni=1 I(mZi ) = I(mm1 P1 + · · · + mmn Pn ) = I(Z)(m) .
Hence, we conclude I(Z)(m) = I(Z)m for all m ∈ N.

3. Three nonlinear points in PN
P3
N
In this section we study the fat point schemes Z =
i=1 mi Pi in P , where
P1 , P2 and P3 are not collinear and mi is nonnegative integer. We can assume
P1 = [0 : 0 : 1 : 0 : · · · : 0], P2 = [0 : 1 : 0 : · · · : 0], P3 = [1 : 0 : 0 : · · · : 0] and
m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 . Notice that ideal I(Pi ) is a square-free monomial ideal. We are
interested in computing the resurgence ρ(I(Z)) of the ideal I(Z). In particular, we
want to understand how the resurgence of scheme Z depends on the values of the
multiplicities mi .
The following lemma gives some conditions for a monomial to belong to I(Z).
Lemma 3.1. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and mi ≥ 0. We
define the fat points scheme Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 . Then the monomial
N = xa00 xa11 · · · xaNN ∈ I(Z) if and only if (a0 , . . . , aN ) satisfies the following system of inequalities


y0 + y1 + y3 + · · · + yN ≥ m1
Cond(Z) := y0 + y2 + y3 + · · · + yN ≥ m2
(5)

y + y + y + · · · + y ≥ m .
1
2
3
N
3
Proof. The thesis easily follows from the fact that the ideal I(Z) is,
T3
mi
= hx0 , x1 , x3 , . . . , xN im1 ∩ hx0 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xN im2 ∩ hx1 , x2 , x3 , . . . , xN im3
i=1 I(Pi )
which is an intersection of powers of square-free monomial ideals.


Notice that in previous lemma, in order to simplify the notation, we made implicit
the dependence of Cond(Z) on m1 , m2 , m3 . We divide this section in two subsections
where we study distinct configuration for the multiplicities mi .
3.1. Case m1 +m2 < m3 . The aim of this subsection is to prove the following result.
Proposition 3.2. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 .
Let Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 be a fat points scheme. If m1 + m2 < m3 , Then
I(Z)(m) = I(Z)m for all m ∈ N and consequently ρ(I(Z)) = 1.
In order to prove Proposition 3.2, we want to show that the ideal I(Z) can be
seen as a product of ideals I(Zi ), where Zi is a scheme of fat points on a line which
is easier to study by means of the results obtained in the previous section. The
following lemma helps us in this direction.

6

I. BAHMANI JAFARLOO

G. ZITO

Lemma 3.3. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 .
Consider fat points scheme Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 . If m1 + m2 < m3 , then
I(Z) = I(m1 (P1 + P3 )) · I(m2 (P2 + P3 )) · I((m3 − m1 − m2 )P3 ).
Proof. Set Z1 = m1 (P1 + P3 ), Z2 = m2 (P2 + P3 ) and Z3 = (m3 − m1 − m2 )P3 . The
inclusion I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ) ⊆ I(Z) is trivial from the definition. Now, we show the
other inclusion holds. Thus, let us consider a monomial N = xa00 xa11 · · · xaNN ∈ I(Z)
P
and ai satisfies the system Cond(Z), and set b = N
i=3 ai . We have the following
cases:
• Case a1 + b < m1 : by Cond(Z) it follows that a0 ≥ m1 − a1 − b > 0 and
a2 ≥ m3 − a1 − b = (m1 − a1 − b) + m2 + (m3 − m1 − m2 ). Then, the monomial
m3 −m1 −m2
2
(x0m1 −a1 −b xa11 x2m1 −a1 −b xa33 · · · xaNN ) · (xm
)
2 ) · (x2

divides N and belongs to I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ) because the j-th part of the above
product is in I(Zj ) by Cond(Zj ) for j = 1, 2, 3.
• Case a1 + b ≥ m1 and a2 + b < m2 : proof is similar to the previous case by using
a2 + b < m2 .
• Case a1 + b ≥ m1 and a2 + b ≥ m2 : we have four subcases
◮ Subcase a1 ≥ m1 and a2 ≥ m2 : we can write N as
m2
a0 a1 −m1 a2 −m2 a3
1
(xm
x2
x3 · · · xaNN ).
1 ) · (x2 ) · (x0 x1

The first two factors belong respectively to I(Z1 ) and I(Z2 ) while the third one is in
I(Z3 ) because Cond(Z) implies a1 + a2 + a3 + · · · + aN − m1 − m2 ≥ m3 − m1 − m2 .
Hence, Cond(Z3 ) are satisfied.
P
◮ Subcase a1 < m1 and a2 ≥ m2 : by a1 + b ≥ m1 , we deduce N
ai ≥ m1 − a1 .
Pi=3
N
Then, for each i = 3, . . . , N, we can choose 0 ≤ bi ≤ ai such that i=3 bi = m1 − a1 .
a0 a2 −m2 a3 −b3
2
It can be written N = (xa11 xb33 · · · xbNN ) · (xm
x3
· · · xaNN −bN ), where
2 ) · (x0 x2
it is easy to check the first two factors belong respectively to I(Z1 ) and I(Z2 ) while
the third term is in I(Z3 ) because Cond(Z) implies that
PN
P
a2 + a3 + · · · + aN − m2 − N
i=1 ai − m1 − m2 ≥ m3 − m1 − m2 . So,
i=3 bi =
Cond(Z3 ) are satisfied.
◮ Subcase a1 ≥ m1 and a2 < m2 : proof of this case is similar to the proof of previous
one.
◮ Subcase a1 < m1 and a2 < m2 : Cond(Z) implies that
N
X

ai = b = (a1 + a2 + b − m1 − m2 ) + (m1 − a1 ) + (m2 − a2 )

i=3

≥ (m3 − m1 − m2 ) + (m1 − a1 ) + (m2 − a2 ).

Because the three last summands are all positive we can choose for all i = 3, . . . , N,
some integers 0 ≤ ci , di , ei ≤ ai such that
(
PN
d = m2 − a2
• ci + di + ei ≤ ai ∀ i = 3, . . . , N
•
PN i=3 i
PN
•
•
i=3 ei = m3 − m1 − m2 .
i=3 ci = m1 − a1

ON THE CONTAINMENT PROBLEM FOR FAT POINTS

7

So, the monomial M = (xa11 xc33 · · · xcNN ) · (xa22 xd33 · · · xdNN ) · (xe3i · · · xeNN ) divides N and
belongs to I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ) because its j-th factor belongs to I(Zj ) by Cond(Zj )
for j = 1, 2, 3.

Now we can give a proof of Proposition 3.2.
Proof of Proposition 3.2. By Lemma 3.3 and Theorem 1.1, it follows that
I(Z)m =I(m1 (P1 + P3 ))m · I(m2 (P2 + P3 ))m · I((m3 − m1 − m2 )P3 )m
=I(m1 (P1 + P3 ))(m) · I(m2 (P2 + P3 ))(m) · I((m3 − m1 − m2 )P3 )(m)
=I(mm1 (P1 + P3 )) · I(mm2 (P2 + P3 )) · I(m(m3 − m1 − m2 )P3 ).
Now, by applying Lemma 3.3 to scheme Z ′ = mm1 P1 + mm2 P2 + mm3 P3 ,
I(Z)(m) = I(Z ′ ) = I(mm1 (P1 + P3 )) · I(mm2 (P2 + P3 )) · I(m(m3 − m1 − m2 )P3 ).
So, the proof is complete.



3.2. Case m1 + m2 ≥ m3 . In this subsection, we deal with the case m1 + m
P2 ≥ m3
showing how the value of the resurgence depends on the parity of the sum 3i=1 mi .
Using the same approach of the previous subsection, we want to split in a convenient
way the ideal I(Z) as a product of ideals I(Zi ).
Lemma 3.4. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 . We
consider scheme Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 . If m1 + m2 ≥ m3 , then
I(Z) = I((m1 +m2 −m3 )(P1 +P2 +P3 ))·I((m3 −m2 )(P1 +P3 ))·I((m3 −m1 )(P2 +P3)).
Proof. Set Z1 = (m1 + m2 − m3 )(P1 + P2 + P3 ), Z2 = (m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ) and
Z3 = (m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 ). The inclusion I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ) ⊆ I(Z) is trivial by
the definition. We just need to show that if a monomial N = xa00 xa11 · · · xaNN ∈ I(Z),
P
then N ∈ I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ). Thus, suppose N ∈ I(Z), and set b = N
i=3 ai . We
have the following cases:
• Case a1 + b < m3 − m2 : considering the system Cond(Z)
(
a0 ≥ m1 − a1 − b = (m1 + m2 − m3 ) + (m3 − m2 − a1 − b)
a2 ≥ m3 − a1 − b = (m1 + m2 − m3 ) + (m3 − m2 − a1 − b) + (m3 − m1 ),
where all the numbers between parenthesis are nonnegative.
So, the

 monomial
M = ((x0 x2 )m1 +m2 −m3 ) · (x0 x2 )m3 −m2 −a1 −b xa11 xa33 · · · xaNN · x2m3 −m1 divides N .
Furthermore, M belongs to I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ) because the j-th factor belongs to
I(Zj ) by Cond(Zj ) for j = 1, 2, 3. Thus N ∈ I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ).
• Case a1 + b ≥ m3 − m2 and a2 + b < m3 − m1 : proof is similar to previous case
using a2 + b < m3 − m1 .
• Case a1 + b ≥ m3 − m2 and a2 + b ≥ m3 − m1 : we have four subcases,
◮ Subcase a1 ≥ m3 − m2 and a2 ≥ m3 − m1 : we can write

8

I. BAHMANI JAFARLOO

G. ZITO

N = (xa00 xa11 −m3 +m2 xa22 −m3 +m1 xa33 · · · xaNN ) · (x1m3 −m2 ) · (x2m3 −m1 ) where the first factor
is in I(Z1 ) because Cond(Z) implies


a0 + a1 + a3 + · · · + aN − m3 + m2 ≥ m1 + m2 − m3
a0 + a2 + a3 + · · · + aN − m3 + m1 ≥ m1 + m2 − m3

a + a + a + · · · + a − 2m + m + m ≥ m + m − m .
1
2
3
N
3
1
2
1
2
3

So, Cond(Z1 ) are satisfied. Furthermore, it is easy to check that x1m3 −m2 ∈ I(Z2 )
and x2m3 −m1 ∈ I(Z3 ). Thus N ∈ I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ).
◮ Subcase a1 ≥ m3 − m2 and a2 < m3 − m1 :
PN
a2 + b ≥ m3 − m1 implies b ≥ m3 − m1 − a2 > 0 then
ai ≥ m3 − m1 − a2 . For
Pi=3
N
each i = 3, . . . , N we can choose 0 ≤ bi ≤ ai such that i=3 bi = m3 − m1 − a2 . We
can write N = (xa00 xa11 −m3 +m2 x3a3 −b3 · · · xaNN −bN ) · (x1m3 −m2 ) · (xa22 xb33 · · · xbNN ), where
the first factor is in I(Z1 ) because by Cond(Z), it follows

PN
P

b − m3 + m2 − N
a0 + a1 +P
i=0 ai − 2m3 + m1 + m2 ≥ m1 + m2 − m3
i=3 bi =
PN
N
a0 + b − i=3 bi = a0 + i=2 ai + m1 − m3 ≥ m1 + m2 − m3

a + b + m − m − PN b = PN a + m + m − 2m ≥ m + m − m .
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
i=1 i
i=3 i
So, the conditions at Cond(Z1 ) are satisfied. As we have seen in the previous subcase,
the second factor belongs to I(Z2 ). Furthermore, it is easy to check, using Cond(Z3 ),
that xa22 xb33 · · · xbNN ∈ I(Z3 ). Thus N ∈ I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ).
◮ Subcase a1 < m3 − m2 and a2 ≥ m3 − m1 : proof is similar to the previous one.
◮ Subcase a1 < m3 − m2 and a2 < m3 − m1 : by Cond(Z), we have
N
X

ai = b = (a1 + a2 + b + m1 + m2 − 2m3 ) + (m3 − m2 − a1 ) + (m3 − m1 − a2 )

i=3

≥ (m1 + m2 − m3 ) + (m3 − m2 − a1 ) + (m3 − m1 − a2 ).

Because the last three summands are all positive, it is possible to choose for all
i = 3, . . . , N some integers 0 ≤ ci , di , ei ≤ ai such that
(
PN
• ci + di + ei ≤ ai ∀ i = 3, . . . , N •
c = m1 + m2 − m3
PNi=3 i
PN
• i=3 ei = m3 − m1 − a2 .
•
i=3 di = m3 − m2 − a1

By Cond(Zi ), it follows that M = (xc33 · · · xcNN ) · (xa11 xd33 · · · xdNN ) · (xa22 xe3i · · · xeNN ) belongs to I(Z1 )·I(Z2)·I(Z3 ). Since M divides N , we deduce N ∈ I(Z1 )·I(Z2)·I(Z3).
So, in all the possible cases, N ∈ I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ) and the proof of the lemma is
complete.

The next lemma helps us to deal with subschemes of the type (2q+r)(P1 +P2 +P3 )
that appeared as a factor in the splitting presented in Lemma 3.4.
Lemma 3.5. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN . If q, r ∈ N with 0 ≤ r < 2,
then I((2q + r)(P1 + P2 + P3 )) = I(2(P1 + P2 + P3 ))q · I(P1 + P2 + P3 )r .

ON THE CONTAINMENT PROBLEM FOR FAT POINTS

9

Proof. We give a proof by induction on q. For the base case q = 0, we need to
show that I(r(P1 + P2 + P3 )) = I(P1 + P2 + P3 )r . But this is trivial for r = 0, 1.
For the induction, we suppose that the lemma is true for q − 1 and we prove that it
holds for q. We claim that
I((2q + r)(P1 + P2 + P3 )) = I(2(P1 + P2 + P3 )) · I((2(q − 1) + r)(P1 + P2 + P3 )).
Proof of the claim. Set Z1 = (2q + r)(P1 + P2 + P3 ), Z2 = 2(P1 + P2 + P3 ) and
Z3 = (2(q − 1) + r)(P1 + P2 + P3 ). The inclusion I(Z2 ) · I(Z3) ⊆ I(Z1 ), is trivial from
the definition. Therefore, we show that if a monomial N = xa00 xa11 · · · xaNN ∈ I(Z1 )
P
then N ∈ I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ). Thus, consider N ∈ I(Z1 ). Set b = N
i=3 ai . We have the
following cases:
•PCase b ≥ 2: for each i = 3, . . . , N, it can be chosen 0 ≤ bi ≤ ai such that
N
bN
b3
a0 a1 a2 a3 −b3
· · · xaNN −bN ), then we can
i=3 bi = 2. If we write N = (x3 · · · xN ) · (x0 x1 x2 x3
easily deduce by Cond(Z2 ) and Cond(Z3 ), that N ∈ I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ).
• Case b = 1: we have three subcases.
◮ Subcase a0 = 0: by Cond(Z1 ) it follows that
a1 ≥ 2q + r − 1 ≥ 1 and a2 ≥ 2q + r − 1 ≥ 1.

(6)

Therefore, N = (x1 x2 xa33 · · · xaNN ) · (xa11 −1 xa22 −1 ), where it is easy to see that the first
factor is in I(Z2 ). So we need to show that the second one is in I(Z3 ). By Cond(Z1 )
it follows
(
aj − 1 ≥ 2(q − 1) + r
for j = 1, 2 by (6)
a1 + a2 − 2 ≥ 2q + r − 3
by Cond(Z1 ).
Notice that, we cannot have a1 +a2 −2 = 2q +r −3 which implies a1 +a2 = 2q +r −1.
In fact, by (6), it follows 4q + 2r − 2 ≤ a1 + a2 = 2q + r − 1 so 2q + r ≤ 1, which is a
contradiction. Then, also a1 + a2 − 2 ≥ 2(q − 1) + r and the conditions at Cond(Z3 )
are satisfied.
◮ Subcase a1 = 0 and a2 = 0: these cases are similar to the previous one.
◮ Subcase a0 , a1 , a2 > 0: we can write N = (x0 x1 x2 ) · (xa00 −1 xa11 −1 xa22 −1 xa33 · · · xaNN ),
where it is easy to prove that the two factors belong to I(Z2 ) and I(Z3 ) respectively.
• Case b = 0: we have the following subcases.
◮ Subcase a0 = 0: by Cond(Z1 ) it follows that
a1 ≥ 2q + r ≥ 2 and a2 ≥ 2q + r ≥ 2.

(7)

Therefore, N = (x21 x22 ) · (xa11 −2 xa22 −2 ), where it is immediately concluded the first
factor belongs to I(Z2 ), while xa11 −2 xa22 −2 ∈ I(Z3 ) because Cond(Z1 ) implies
(
aj − 2 ≥ 2(q − 1) + r
for j = 1, 2 by (7)
a1 + a2 − 4 ≥ 2q + r − 4
by Cond(Z1 ).
Notice that we cannot have a1 + a2 − 4 = 2q + r − 4 which implies a1 + a2 = 2q + r.
In fact, by (7), it follows that 4q + 2r ≤ a1 + a2 = 2q + r, thus 2q + r ≤ 0, which is
a contradiction. Similarly, we can show that the equality a1 + a2 − 4 = 2q + r − 3
does not hold. Then, also a1 + a2 − 4 ≥ 2(q − 1) + r and the conditions at Cond(Z3 )
are satisfied.
◮ Subcase a1 = 0 and a2 = 0: these cases are similar to the previous one.

10

I. BAHMANI JAFARLOO

G. ZITO

◮ Subcase a0 , a1 , a2 > 0: if we write N = (x0 x1 x2 ) · (xa00 −1 x1a1 −1 x2a2 −1 ), then we can
deduce N ∈ I(Z2 ) · I(Z3 ) by Cond(Z2 ) and Cond(Z3 ). So, the proof of the claim is
complete. By the inductive step
I((2q + r)(P1 + P2 + P3 )) = I(2(P1 + P2 + P3 )) · I((2(q − 1) + r)(P1 + P2 + P3 ))
= I(2(P1 + P2 + P3 )) · I(2(P1 + P2 + P3 ))q−1 · I(P1 + P2 + P3 )r ,
and proof of the lemma is complete.
Now, we can solve our main problem when


P3

i=1

mi is even.

Proposition 3.6. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 .
Denote by Z the corresponding fat points scheme Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 . If
m1 + m2 ≥ m3 and m1 + m2 + m3 is even, then I(Z)(m) = I(Z)m for all m ∈ N and
ρ(I(Z)) = 1.
Proof. Since m1 + m2 + m3 is even, we can set m1 + m2 − m3 = 2q. By Lemma
3.4, Theorem 1.1 and Lemma 3.5:
I(Z)m = I(2q(P1 + P2 + P3 ))m I((m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ))m I((m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 ))m
= I(2(P1 + P2 + P3 ))mq I((m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ))(m) I((m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 ))(m)
= I(2mq(P1 + P2 + P3 ))I(m(m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ))I(m(m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 )).
Now, by applying Lemma 3.4 to the fat point scheme Z ′ = mm1 P1 +mm2 P2 +mm3 P3 ,
we obtain
I(Z ′ ) = I(2mq(P1 + P2 + P3 )) · I(m(m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 )) · I(m(m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 )).
So, the proof is complete, since I(Z ′ ) = I(Z)(m) .



P
Let 3i=1 mi be odd. Our aim is proving
Theorem 1.2. We present
a proof divided
P
P
m
+1
m
+1
i
i
in two steps, showing that ρ(I(Z)) ≥ P mi and ρ(I(Z)) ≤ P mi . We find the
lower bound by using results from the literature, generalizing in a proper way the
case N = 2, while the upper bound is proved by directly considering the definition
of resurgence and using further preliminary lemmas on the splitting of the symbolic
powers. By Lemma 3.4 and Lemma 3.5, we can deduce the following corollary.
Corollary 3.7. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 .
Denote by Z the corresponding fat points scheme Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 . If
m1 + m2 > m3 and m1 + m2 + m3 is odd, then
I(Z)(k) = I(P1 +P2 +P3 )(k) ·I((m1 −1)P1 +(m2 −1)P2 +(m3 −1)P3 )(k) for all k ∈ N.
Proof. Consider k ∈ N. We write k = 2q1 + r where r < 2. Since m1 + m2 + m3
is odd, it follows m1 + m2 − m3 is odd and we can write m1 + m2 − m3 = 2q2 + 1.

ON THE CONTAINMENT PROBLEM FOR FAT POINTS

11

Set Z1 = P1 + P2 + P3 . Because km1 + km2 = k(m1 + m2 ) > km3 , we can apply
Lemma 3.4 to the scheme kZ and we obtain that I(Z)(k) is equal to
I(k(m1 + m2 − m3 )Z1 )I(k(m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ))I(k(m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 ))
= I((2(2q1 q2 + q1 + rq2 ) + r)Z1 )I(k(m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ))I(k(m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 ))
= I(2Z1 )2q1 q2 +q1 +rq2 I(Z1 )r I(k(m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ))I(k(m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 )),
where the last equality holds by Lemma 3.5. By Lemma 3.5:
I(Z1 )(k) = I((2q1 + r)Z1 ) = I(2Z1 )q1 I(Z1 )r .
By applying Lemma 3.4 to the scheme Z ′ = k(m1 −1)P1 +k(m2 −1)P2 +k(m3 −1)P3
(we can use it because k(m1 − 1) + k(m2 − 1) = k(m1 + m2 − 2) ≥ k(m3 − 1) since
m1 + m2 ≥ m3 + 1).
I(Z ′ ) = I((m1 − 1)P1 + (m2 − 1)P2 + (m3 − 1)P3 )(k)
= I(k(m1 + m2 − m3 − 1)Z1 )I(k(m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ))I(k(m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 ))
= I((2(2q1 q2 + rq2 )Z1 )I(k(m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ))I(k(m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 ))
= I(2Z1 )2q1 q2 rq2 I(k(m3 − m2 )(P1 + P3 ))I(k(m3 − m1 )(P2 + P3 )),
where the last equality holds by Lemma 3.5. Thus, using the previous equation, we
have
I(Z)(k) = I(P1 + P2 + P3 )(k) · I((m1 − 1)P1 + (m2 − 1)P2 + (m3 − 1)P3 )(k) .

Notice that in general the equality I(Z)(a+b) = I(Z)(a) · I(Z)(b) is not satisfied.
However, the previous results imply the following corollary which tells us when this
splitting is possible for I(Z).
Corollary 3.8. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 .
Denote by Z the fat points scheme Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 . If m1 + m2 > m3 and
m1 + m2 + m3 is odd, then
(
I(Z)(k) = I(Z)(2i) · I(Z)(k−2i) for 1 ≤ i ≤ k2 − 1 if k is even
I(Z)(k) = I(Z)(i) · I(Z)(k−i) for 1 ≤ i ≤ k − 1 if k is odd.
Proof. • Case k even: suppose that k = 2q. Then I(Z)(2q) = I(2Z)(q) , where 2Z is
a fat points scheme that satisfies the condition of the Proposition 3.6. Therefore
I(2Z)(q) = I(2Z)q = I(2Z)i · I(2Z)q−i = I(2Z)(i) · I(2Z)(q−i) = I(Z)(2i) · I(Z)(k−2i) .
• Case k odd: suppose that k = 2q + 1. By Proposition 3.6, Lemma 3.5, Corollary
3.7 and the even case, it follows that
I(Z)(2q+1) = I(P1 + P2 + P3 )(2q+1) · I((m1 − 1)P1 + (m2 − 1)P2 + (m3 − 1)P3 )(2q+1)
= I(P1 + P2 + P3 )(2q) I(P1 + P2 + P3 )I((m1 − 1)P1 + (m2 − 1)P2 + (m3 − 1)P3 )2q+1
= I(Z) · I(Z)(2q) = I(Z) · I(Z)(2i) · I(Z)(2q−2i) = I(Z)(2i+1) · I(Z)(2q−2i)
and the desired result follows.



12

I. BAHMANI JAFARLOO

G. ZITO

The following proposition and corollary are proved in P2 in order to generalize
them for any N.
Proposition 3.9. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be three nonlinear points in P2 and consider
Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 . Without loss of generality we assume P1 = [0 : 0 : 1],
P2 = [0 : 1 : 0], P3 = [1 : 0 : 0]. PSuppose m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 , if m1 + m2 > m3 and
3
P3
i=1 mi +1
P
.
3
i=1 mi is odd. Then ρ(I(Z)) ≥
m
i=1

i

Proof. We want to use the following inequality

ρ(I(Z)) ≥ α(I(Z))/α̂(I(Z)),

(8)

which was proved in [BH10b, Theorem 1.2]. To compute α(I(Z)), we focus on the
degree of the monomials xa y bz c in I(Z) (because I(Z) is a monomial ideal). A
monomial xa y b z c belongs to I(Z) if and only if a + b ≥ m1 , a + c ≥
m , b + c ≥ m3 .
P3 2
P3
mi
a b c
y z ) =ma + b + c ≥ i=1
It follows 2(a + b + c) ≥ i=1 mi . So, deg(xl
. Then, all
2
P3
P
m
3
i
i=1
monomials in I(Z) have degree greater than
. Since i=1 mi is odd, hence
2
m P3
l P3
m +1
i=1 mi
= i=12 i . Thus, we proved that
2
α(I(Z)) ≥ (

3
X

mi + 1)/2.

(9)

i=1

Now, consider m ∈ N and the 2m-th symbolic power I(Z)(2m) . Considering the
definition of symbolic powers,
I(Z)(2m) = hx, yi2m·m1 ∩ hx, zi2m·m2 ∩ hy, zi2m·m3 .
Then xa y bz c ∈ I(Z)(2m) if and only if
a + b ≥ 2m · m1 , a + c ≥ 2m · m2 , b + c ≥ 2m · m3 .

(10)

Hence
xm(m1 +m2 −m3 ) y m(m1 +m3 −m2 ) z m(m2 +m3 −m1 ) ∈ I(Z)(2m) .
(11)
The monomial in (11) has degree m(m1 + m2 + m3 ).
So, α(I(Z)(2m) ) ≤ m(m1 + m2 + m3 ) for all m ∈ N. Notice also that by (10), if
P
xa y b z c ∈ I(Z)(2m) then deg(xa y bz c ) = a + b + c ≥ m( 3i=1 mi ), and we conclude
P
α(I(Z)(2m) ) = m( 3i=1 mi ). Thus we obtain the Waldschmidt constant of I(Z) as
follow:
P
P3
α(I(Z))(2m)
m( 3i=1 mi )
mi
α(I(Z))(m)
= lim
= lim
= i=1 .
α̂(I(Z)) = lim
m→∞
m→∞
m→∞
m
2m
2m
2
3
X
mi )/2.
(12)
α̂(I(Z)) = (
i=1

Eventually by (9), (12) and (8),
P3
α(I(Z))
i=1 mi + 1
≤
≤ ρ(I(Z)),
P
3
α̂(I(Z))
i=1 mi

ON THE CONTAINMENT PROBLEM FOR FAT POINTS

and the desired result is given.

13



As a consequence of the results which were proved in [BH10b, Theorem 3.4], we
can deduce the following corollary for three simple points in P2 .
Corollary 3.10. Let P1 = [0 : 0 : 1], P2 = [0 : 1 : 0], P3 = [1 : 0 : 0]. Then
ρ(I(P1 + P2 + P3 )) = 4/3.
From the previous corollary we can deduce the following useful lemma.
Lemma 3.11. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN . Then
I(P1 + P2 + P3 )(r) ⊆ I(P1 + P2 + P3 )r−1 for 1 ≤ r ≤ 4.
Proof. We work by induction on r. It is trivial for r = 1 . For the induction
suppose that it is true for r − 1 and we prove it for r.
Consider N = xa00 xa11 · · · xaNN ∈ I(P1 + P2 + P3 )(r) then


a0 + a1 + a3 + · · · + aN ≥ r
(13)
a0 + a2 + a3 + · · · + aN ≥ r

a + a + a + · · · + a ≥ r.
1
2
3
N
PN
Set b = i=3 ai . We have the following cases:
• Case b = 0: we can see the monomial N as an element of the ideal

I(P1∗ + P2∗ + P3∗ )(r) , where P1∗ = [0 : 0 : 1], P2∗ = [0 : 1 : 0], P3∗ = [1 : 0 : 0]
in P2 . In fact, it is easy to see that a monomial xa00 xa11 xa22 in K[x0 , x1 , x2 ] is in
I(P1∗ + P2∗ + P3∗ )(r) if and only if it belongs to I(P1 + P2 + P3 )(r) . By Corollary 3.10,
ρ(I(P1∗ + P2∗ + P3∗ )) = 4/3. Furthermore, r ≤ 4 implies 4r − 4 ≤ 3r, therefore
r/(r − 1) ≥ 4/3 = ρ(I(P1∗ + P2∗ + P3∗ )). Then, using the definition of resurgence
I(P1∗ + P2∗ + P3∗)(r) ⊆ I(P1∗ + P2∗ + P3∗ )r−1 and N ∈ I(P1∗ + P2∗ + P3∗ )r−1 . Hence,
N ∈ I(P1 + P2 + P3 )r−1 .
PN
• Case
i=3 ai = b > 0: there exists i ∈ {3, . . . , N} such that ai > 0. We assume
i = 3. We write N = (x3 ) · (xa00 xa11 xa22 xa33 −1 · · · xaNN ), where x3 ∈ I(P1 + P2 + P3 ). By
(13) it follows that xa00 xa11 xa22 x3a3 −1 · · · xaNN ∈ I(P1 +P2 +P3 )(r−1) ⊆ I(P1 +P2 +P3 )r−2 ,
where the last inclusion holds for the induction. Hence, N ∈ I(P1 + P2 + P3 )r−1 . 
Now we can prove the following important lemma.
Lemma 3.12. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 and
suppose that m1 + m2 > m3 and m1 + m2 + m3 is odd. Let Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3
be a scheme of fat points. Then
P

P

i)
(a). I(Z)(q(P mi +1)) ⊆ I(Z)q( m
for all q ∈ N,
P
P
(b). I(Z)(q( mi +1)+r) ⊆ I(Z)q( mi )+r−1 for all q ∈ N and 0 < r <
mi + 1.

Proof. Let us start with proving
on q. First, we let q = 1 as
P (a) by induction
P
( mi +1)
mi
the base case. Therefore, I(Z)
⊆ I(Z)
. Set Z1 = P1 + P2 + P3 and
Z2 = (m1 − 1)P1 + (m2 − 1)P2 + (m3 − 1)P3 , and we define

14

I. BAHMANI JAFARLOO

G. ZITO

P
P
P
W (n1 , n2 , n3 ) = (n1 + 3i=1 ni )P1 + (n2 +P 3i=1 ni )P2 + (n3 + 3i=1 ni )P3 , for ni ≥ 1.
3
We claim that I(W (n1 , n2 , n3 )) ⊆ I(Z1 ) i=1 ni , for all ni ≥ 1.
P3
Proof of the claim. We prove by induction on sum
i=1 ni . The base case
P3
by Lemma 3.11 it holds. Now,
is
i=1 ni = 3, with n1 = n2 = n3 = 1 and
P3
P3
′
we suppose the claim holds for ni such that i=1 n′i <
i=1 ni and we prove it
for ni . Because we have already considered the case n1 = n2 = n3 = 1, there
must exist an i such that ni > 1. We can assume
that n3 > 1. We consider
PN
aN
a0 a1
N = x0 x1 · · · xN ∈ I(W (n1 , n2 , n3 )). Set b = i=3 ai .
• Case b = 0: we have the following subcases.
◮ Subcase a1 = 0: by Cond(W (n1 , n2 , n3 )), it follows
P
P
≥ n1 + n2 + 2n3 ≥ 3i=1 ni , then it can be writa0 ≥ 2n1 + n2 + n3 ≥ 3i=1Pni and a2 P
P3

a −

3

n

3

a −

P3

n

ten N = (x0 x2 ) i=1 ni x00 i=1 i x22 i=1 i ∈ I(Z1 ) i=1 ni , because x0 x2 ∈ I(Z1 ).
◮ Subcase a2 = 0: similar to the subcase a1 = 0.
◮ Subcase a1 , a2 > 0: we can write, N = (x1 x2 )xa00 xa11 −1 xa22 −1 , where x1 x2 ∈ I(Z1 ).
It is easy, using the fact that ai satisfy the conditions at Cond(W (n1 , n2 , n3 )), to
check that xa00 xa11 −1 x2a2 −1 ∈ I(W (n1 , n2 , n3 − P
1)). So, using induction P
(n3 − 1 ≥ 1)
3
3
a0 a1 −1 a2 −1
n
−1
i
x0 x1 x2
∈ I(W (n1 , n2 , n3 − 1)) ⊆ I(Z1 ) i=1
, and N ∈ I(Z1 ) i=1 ni .
PN
• Case
i=3 ai = b > 0: without loss of generality, let a3 > 0.
We can write N = (x3 ) · (xa00 xa11 xa22 x3a3 −1 · · · xaNN ), where x3 ∈ I(Z1 ). By
using
P3
Cond(W (n1 , n2 , n3 )), the second factor is in I(W (n1 , n2 , n3 − 1))
⊆ I(Z1 ) i=1 ni −1 ,
P3
where the last inclusion holds by induction.P Hence N ∈ I(Z1 ) i=1 ni . So the claim
is proved. Now, from the definition I(Z1 ) mi +1 · I(Z2 ) ⊆ I(W (m1 , m2 , m3 )). By
Corollary 3.7 and the fact ρ(I(Z2 )) = 1, by Proposition 3.6 it follows
P

I(Z)(

mi +1)

= I(Z1 )(

P

mi +1)

P

· I(Z2 )(

= I(Z1 )(

mi +1)

· I(Z2 ) · I(Z2 )

⊆ I(Z1 )

P

mi

P

· I(Z2 )

P

mi

mi +1)

P

= I(Z1 )(

P

mi

mi +1)

· I(Z2 )

P

mi +1

⊆ I(W (m1 , m2 , m3 )) · I(Z2 )

= (I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ))

P

mi

= I(Z)

P

mi

P

mi

,

and the base case is proved.
We suppose that (a) is true forP
q − 1, then we prove it for q. By induction and
mi + 1 is even,
Corollary 3.8, using the fact that
P

I(Z)(q(

mi +1))

P

= I(Z)((q−1)(

P

⊆ I(Z)(q−1)(

mi +1))

mi )

P

· I(Z)(

· I(Z)

P

mi

mi +1)

P

= I(Z)q(

mi )

.

For proving (b), we work by induction on q as before. First of all, we
Pneed to prove
(r)
r−1
the base case for q = 0. Hence, I(Z) ⊆ I(Z)
for 1 < r <
mi + 1. Set
Z1 = P1 + P2 + P3 and Z2 = (m1 − 1)P1 + (m2 − 1)P2 + (m3 − 1)P3 . We define
V (n1 , n2 ,P
n3 , r) = (r + n1 − 1)P1 + (r + n2 − 1)P2 + (r + n3 − 1)P3 for ni ≥ 1 and
1<r<
ni + 1. We claim that I(V (n1 , n2 , n3 , r)) ⊆ I(Z1 )r−1 always holds.
P
Proof of the claim. We work by induction on the sum
ni . The base case is
(r)
ni = 1. Then we have to prove I(P1 + P2 + P3 ) ⊆ I(P1 + P2 + P3)r−1 , for 1 < r < 4
and this is true by Lemma 3.11. We suppose that the claim is true for assignment n′i

ON THE CONTAINMENT PROBLEM FOR FAT POINTS

15

P ′ P
such that
ni < ni , then we prove it for ni . Because we have already considered
the case n1 = n2 = n3 = 1, there must exist an i such that ni > 1. We canP
assume
that n3 > 1. We consider N = xa00 xa11 · · · xaNN ∈ I(V (n1 , n2 , n3 , r)). Set b = N
i=3 ai ,
and we consider cases depending upon b.
• Case b = 0: we have the following subcases.
◮ Subcase a1 = 0: by Cond(V (n1 , n2 , n3 , r)), it follows that
a0 ≥ r + n1 − 1 ≥ r − 1 and a2 ≥ r + n3 − 1 ≥ r − 1.
So we can write N = (x0 x2 )r−1 xa00 −r+1 xa22 −r+1 ∈ I(Z1 )r−1 , because x0 x2 ∈ I(Z1 ).
◮ Subcase a2 = 0: similar to the case a1 = 0.
◮ Subcase a1 , a2 > 0: we write, N = (x1 x2 )xa00 x1a1 −1 x2a2 −1 , where x1 x2 ∈ I(Z1 ).
By Cond(V (n1 , n2 , n3 , r)), we deduce xa00 x1a1 −1 x2a2 −1 ∈ I(V (n1 , n2 , n3 − 1, r − 1)).
So for induction (n3 − 1 ≥ 1 and r − 1 < (n1 + n2 + n3 − 1) + 1) we conclude
xa00 xa11 −1 xa22 −1 ∈ I(V (n1 , n2 , n3 − 1, r − 1)) ⊆ I(Z1 )r−2 , and N ∈ I(Z1 )r−1 .
PN
• Case
i=3 ai = b > 0: we can assume that a3 > 0.
Then we can write N = (x3 )(xa00 xa11 xa22 xa33 −1 · · · xaNN ), where x3 ∈ I(Z1 ). Using
Cond(V (n1 , n2 , n3 , r)), we deduce xa00 xa11 xa22 xa33 −1 · · · xaNN ∈ I(V (n1 , n2 , n3 −1, r −1)).
So for induction (n3 − 1 ≥ 1 and r − 1 < (n1 + n2 + n3 − 1) + 1) we see
xa00 xa11 xa22 x3a3 −1 · · · xaNN ∈ I(V (n1 , n2 , n3 − 1, r − 1)) ⊆ I(Z1 )r−2 , and N ∈ I(Z1 )r−1 .
So the claim is true. From the definition I(Z1 )r · I(Z2 ) ⊆ I(V (m1 , m2 , m3 , r)). By
Corollary 3.7 and the fact that by Proposition 3.6, ρ(I(Z2 )) = 1,
I(Z)(r) = I(Z1 )(r) · I(Z2 )(r) = I(Z1 )(r) · I(Z2 )r = I(Z1 )(r) · I(Z2 ) · I(Z2 )r−1
⊆ I(V (m1 , m2 , m3 , r)) · I(Z2 )r−1 ⊆ I(Z1 )r−1 · I(Z2 )r−1
= (I(Z1 ) · I(Z2 ))r−1 = I(Z)r−1 ,
and the base case is proved. Now we can proceed with the inductive step. We
suppose that (b) is true for q − 1, thenP
we prove it for q. By induction and Corollary
3.8 we can write, using the fact that
mi + 1 is even,
P

I(Z)(q(

mi +1)+r)

P

= I(Z)((q−1)(
⊆ I(Z)

mi +1)+r)

P
(q−1)( mi )+r−1

P

· I(Z)(

· I(Z)

P

mi +1)

mi

P

= I(Z)q(

Thus the proof of lemma is complete.

mi )+r−1

.


By Lemma 3.12 we can deduce the following crucial corollary.
Corollary 3.13. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be
points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3 ,
Pnonlinear
and suppose that m1 + m2 > m3 and 3i=1 mi is odd. If Z = m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 ,
P
P
then ρ(I(Z)) ≤ ( 3i=1 mi + 1)/( 3i=1 mi ).

P
P
(m)
Proof. It is enough to show that if m/n ≥ ( P
mi +1)/( mP
⊆ I(Z)n .
i ) then I(Z)
Suppose that
1)/( mi ). Then we can del P m andm n are such that m/n ≥ ( mi + P
P
m
+1
i
duce m ≥ P mi n . Now, n can be written as n = q mi + r with 0 ≤ r < mi .

16

I. BAHMANI JAFARLOO

G. ZITO

Thus
 X
 ( P
r
q( mi + 1) if r = 0
P
m ≥ q(
mi + 1) + r + P
=
mi
q( mi + 1) + r + 1 if r 6= 0.

If r = 0, by Lemma 3.12

P

P

I(Z)(m) ⊆ I(Z)(q( mi +1)) ⊆ I(Z)q mi = I(Z)n .
P
If r =
6 0, then r ′ = r + 1 < mi + 1. By Lemma 3.12
P

′

I(Z)(m) ⊆ I(Z)(q( mi +1)+r ) ⊆ I(Z)q
P
P
Then ρ(I(Z)) ≤ ( 3i=1 mi + 1)/( 3i=1 mi ).

P

mi +r ′ −1

= I(Z)n .


By Corollary 3.13 we deduce the following result which generalizes Proposition
3.9 to the case N > 2.

Corollary 3.14. Let P1 , P2 and P3 be nonlinear points in PN and m1 ≤ m2 ≤ m3
and suppose that P
m1 +m2 > m3 and
P3 m1 +m2 +m3 is odd. If Z = m1 P1 +m2 P2 +m3 P3 ,
3
then ρ(I(Z)) ≥ ( i=1 mi + 1)/( i=1 mi ).
Proof. Consider Corollary 3.13 when N = 2. By Proposition 3.9
P
mi + 1
∗
∗
∗
,
ρ(I(m1 P1 + m2 P2 + m3 P3 )) = P
mi

where P1∗ = [0 : 0 : 1], P2∗ = [0 : 1 : 0], P3∗ = [1 : 0 : 0]. By contradiction, suppose
that
P
mi + 1
ρ(I(Z)) < P
= ρ(I(m1 P1∗ + m2 P2∗ + m3 P3∗ ))
mi
o
nm
= sup
: I(m1 P1∗ + m2 P2∗ + m3 P3∗ )(m) 6⊆ I(m1 P1∗ + m2 P2∗ + m3 P3∗)n .
n
Hence, it follows that there exists m/n such that
(
m/n ≥ ρ(I(Z)) then I(Z)(m) ⊆ I(Z)n
I(m1 P1∗ + m2 P2∗ + m3 P3∗ )(m) 6⊆ I(m1 P1∗ + m2 P2∗ + m3 P3∗ )n .

Thus, there exists a monomial N = xa00 xa11 xa22 ∈ I(m1 P1∗ + m2 P2∗ + m3 P3∗ )(m) such
that N ∈
/ I(m1 P1∗ + m2 P2∗ + m3 P3∗ )n . For the monomial N in K[x0 , x1 , x2 ], we have
N ∈ I(m1 P1∗ + m2 P2∗ + m3 P3∗)(m) if and only if N ∈ I(Z)(m) . Then N ∈ I(Z)n , and
∗
∗
∗ n
similarly this implies N ∈ I(m1 PP
3 P3 ) . Therefore we have found a
1 + m2 P2 + mP
3
3

contradiction. Then, ρ(I(Z)) ≥ ( i=1 mi + 1)/( i=1 mi ).
Now we can give a proof of Theorem 1.2.
Proof of Theorem 1.2. The desired result immediately follows from Corollary
3.13 and Corollary 3.14.


ON THE CONTAINMENT PROBLEM FOR FAT POINTS

17

References
[BH10a] Cristiano Bocci and Brian Harbourne. Comparing powers and symbolic powers of ideals.
J. Algebraic Geom., 19(3):399–417, 2010.
[BH10b] Cristiano Bocci and Brian Harbourne. The resurgence of ideals of points and the containment problem. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 138(4):1175–1190, 2010.
[ELS01] Lawrence Ein, Robert Lazarsfeld, and Karen E. Smith. Uniform bounds and symbolic
powers on smooth varieties. Invent. Math., 144(2):241–252, 2001.
[GHM13] A. V. Geramita, B. Harbourne, and J. Migliore. Star configurations in Pn . J. Algebra,
376:279–299, 2013.
[HH02] Melvin Hochster and Craig Huneke. Comparison of symbolic and ordinary powers of
ideals. Invent. Math., 147(2):349–369, 2002.
[Hoc73] Melvin Hochster. Criteria for equality of ordinary and symbolic powers of primes. Math.
Z., 133:53–65, 1973.
[Kod00] Vijay Kodiyalam. Asymptotic behaviour of Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity. Proc.
Amer. Math. Soc., 128(2):407–411, 2000.
[LS06]
Aihua Li and Irena Swanson. Symbolic powers of radical ideals. Rocky Mountain J.
Math., 36(3):997–1009, 2006.
[Swa00] Irena Swanson. Linear equivalence of ideal topologies. Math. Z., 234(4):755–775, 2000.
[ZS75]
Oscar Zariski and Pierre Samuel. Commutative algebra. Vol. II. Springer-Verlag, New
York-Heidelberg, 1975. Reprint of the 1960 edition, Graduate Texts in Mathematics,
Vol. 29.
i. bahmani jafarloo, dipartimento di scienze matematiche, politecnico di torino,
italy
E-mail address: iman.bahmanijafarloo@polito.it
i. bahmani jafarloo, dipartimento di matematica, università di torino, italy
E-mail address: iman.bahmanijafarloo@unito.it
g. zito, dipartimento di matematica e informatica, università di catania, italy
E-mail address: giuseppezito@hotmail.it

