arXiv:1511.01553v2 [math.AG] 29 Dec 2017

A CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL RATIONAL
SINGULARITIES VIA CORE OF IDEALS
TOMOHIRO OKUMA, KEI-ICHI WATANABE, AND KEN-ICHI YOSHIDA
Abstract. The notion of pg -ideals for normal surface singularities has been
proved to be very useful. On the other hand, the core of ideals has been proved
to be very important concept and also very mysterious one. However, the computation of the core of an ideal seems to be given only for very special cases. In this
paper, we will give an explicit description of the core of pg -ideals of normal surface
singularities. As a consequence, we give a characterization of rational singularities
using the inclusion of the core of integrally closed ideals.

1. Introduction
Let (A, m) be a two-dimensional excellent normal local domain containing an
algebraically closed field. We always assume that (A, m) is not regular. When
(A, m) is a rational singularity, Lipman [14] proved that any integrally closed mprimary ideal I is stable, namely, I 2 = QI for some (every) minimal reduction Q,
and that if I and I ′ are integrally closed m-primary ideals, then the product II ′ is
also integrally closed. (Later, Cutkosky [4] showed that this property characterizes
the rational singularities for two-dimensional excellent normal local domains.) These
facts play very important role to study ideal theory on a two-dimensional rational
singularity.
In [15], the authors introduced the notion of pg -ideals for two-dimensional excellent
normal local domain containing an algebraically closed field and proved that the pg ideals inherit nice properties of integrally closed ideals of rational singularities (in
a rational singularity, every integrally closed ideal is a pg -ideal by our definition).
Namely, any pg -ideal I is stable and if I and I ′ are pg -ideals, then II ′ is integrally
closed and also a pg -ideal.
Let f : X → Spec A be a resolution of singularity. Then pg (A) := ℓA (H 1 (X, OX ))
is independent of the choice of a resolution and an important invariant of A (here
we denote by ℓA (M) the length of an A module M). The invariant pg (A) is called
the geometric genus of A. A rational singularity is characterized by pg (A) = 0.
Let I ⊂ A be an integrally closed m-primary ideal. Then there exists a resolution of singularities f : X → Spec A and an anti-nef cycle Z on X so that
IOX = OX (−Z) and I = IZ := H 0 (X, OX (−Z)). In general, we can show that
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 14B05; Secondary 13B22, 14J17, 13A15,
13H15.
Key words and phrases. core of ideals, good ideal, pg -cycle, pg -ideal, surface singularity, rational
singularity.
This work was partially supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 26400064, 26400053,
25400050.
1

2

TOMOHIRO OKUMA, KEI-ICHI WATANABE, AND KEN-ICHI YOSHIDA

ℓA (H 1 (X, OX (−Z))) ≤ pg (A) for any cycle Z such that OX (−Z) has no fixed components. If equality holds, then Z is called a pg -cycle and I = IZ is called a pg -ideal.
The core of an ideal I is the intersection of all reductions of I. The notion of
core of ideals was introduced by Rees and Sally [18], and many properties of the
core have been shown by Corso–Polini–Ulrich [2], [3], Huneke–Swanson [8], Huneke–
Trung [9], Hyry–Smith [10], Polini–Ulrich [17]. The core of ideals is related to
coefficient, adjoint and multiplier ideals. However, it seems to the authors that the
computation of the core is given only for very special cases.
In this paper, we will show that if I = IZ is a pg -ideal and Q is a minimal reduction
of I, there exists a cycle Y ≥ 0 on X such that Q : I = IZ−Y and core(I) = I2Z−Y .
In particular, this implies that if A is rational, X0 is the minimal resolution, and
K = KX/X0 (the relative canonical divisor), then core(I) = I2Z−K (see Theorem 4.6
for general case). Moreover, we obtain that if I and I ′ are pg -ideals and I ′ ⊂ I,
then core(I ′ ) ⊂ core(I) (see Theorem 4.11). If A is not a rational singularity, then
there exist a pg -ideal I ′ and an integrally closed non-pg -ideal I such that I ′ ⊂ I and
core(I ′ ) 6⊂ core(I) (see Proposition 3.4). Therefore, we obtain a characterization of
rational singularities in terms of core of ideals, which is our main theorem.
Theorem 1.1 (See Theorem 3.2). The following conditions are equivalent if char(k) 6=
2
(1) For any integrally closed m-primary ideals I ′ ⊂ I, we have core(I ′ ) ⊂ core(I).
(2) A is a rational singularity.
An m-primary ideal I is said to be good if I 2 = QI and I = Q : I for some
minimal reduction Q of I (see [6], [15]). As an application of the theorem, we show
the following existence theorem for good ideals, which generalizes [15, Theorem 4.1]
for non-Gorenstein local domains.
Theorem 1.2 (See Theorem 4.6). Any two-dimensional excellent normal local domain A over an algebraically closed field admits a good pg -ideal.
Let us explain the organization of this paper.
In Section 2, we recall the definition and several basic properties of pg -ideals. In
Section 3, we prove Theorem 1.1 using the property that taking the core preserves
the inclusion of pg -ideals (Theorem 4.11), and will show that if I0 is not a pg -ideal,
then for some n ≥ 1 we can construct a pg -ideal I ′ ⊂ I = I0n with core(I ′ ) 6⊂ core(I).
In Section 4, we show that Q : I and core(I) are also pg -ideals for a pg -ideal I and
its minimal reduction Q (Theorem 4.4), and give an algorithm for obtaining these
ideals (Theorem 4.6). We also prove some characterization of good ideals and the
existence of good ideals in A. In Section 5, we give a maximal pg -ideal contained in
a given integrally closed m-primary ideal.
2. Preliminary on pg -ideals
Throughout this paper, let (A, m) be a two-dimensional excellent normal local
domain containing an algebraically closed field and f : X → Spec A a resolution of
singularities
with exceptional divisor E := f −1 (m) unless otherwise specified. Let
Sr
E = i=1 Ei be the decomposition into irreducible components of E. A Z-linear

A CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL RATIONAL SINGULARITIES

Pr

combination Z =
i=1 ni Ei is called a cycle. We say a cycle Z =
effective if ni ≥ 0 for every i. We denote Z ≥ Z ′ if Z − Z ′ is effective.

Pr

i=1

3

ni Ei is

First, we recall the definition of pg -ideals. If I is an integrally closed m-primary
ideal of A, then there exists a resolution X → Spec A and an effective cycle Z on X
such that IOX = OX (−Z). In this case, we denote the ideal I by IZ ,1 and we say
that I is represented on X by Z. Note that IZ = H 0 (X, OX (−Z)). Furthermore, if
ZC < 0 for every (−1)-curve C on X, then we say that I is minimally represented.
We obtain a unique minimal representation of I by contracting (−1)-curves C with
ZC = 0 successively (cf. [15, §3]).
We say that OX (−Z) has no fixed component if H 0 (X, OX (−Z)) 6= H 0 (X, OX (−Z−
Ei )) for every Ei ⊂ E, i.e., the base locus of the linear system H 0 (X, OX (−Z)) does
not contain any component of E. It is clear that OX (−Z) has no fixed component
when I is represented by Z.
We denote by h1 (OX (−Z)) the length ℓA (H 1 (X, OX (−Z))). We put pg (A) =
h1 (OX ) and call it the geometric genus of A.
The number h1 (OX (−Z)) is independent of the choice of representations of I = IZ
(cf. [15]) and is an important invariant of the ideal for our theory. We have the
following result for this invariant.
Proposition 2.1 ([15, 2.5, 3.1]). Let Z ′ and Z be cycles on X and assume that
OX (−Z) has no fixed components. Then we have h1 (OX (−Z ′ −Z)) ≤ h1 (OX (−Z ′ )).
In particular, we have h1 (OX (−Z)) ≤ pg (A); if the equality holds, then OX (−Z) is
generated.
Definition 2.2. (1) Let I = IZ = H 0 (X, OX (−Z)) be an integrally closed ideal
represented by Z > 0 on X. We call I a pg -ideal if h1 (OX (−Z)) = pg (A).
(2) A cycle Z > 0 is called a pg -cycle if OX (−Z) is generated and h1 (OX (−Z)) =
pg (A).
Remark 2.3. If pg (A) = 0, then A is called a rational singularity. On a rational
singularity, every integrally closed m-primary ideal is a pg -ideal by definition (cf.
[14]) and conversely, this property characterizes a rational singularity because we
always have integrally closed ideal I = IZ such that h1 (OX (−Z)) = 0 (cf. [5]).
In [15], we have seen many good properties of pg -ideals. We will review some of
these properties.
Let Z and Z ′ be nonzero effective cycles on the resolution X → Spec A such that
OX (−Z) and OX (−Z ′ ) are generated. Take general elements a ∈ IZ , b ∈ IZ ′ and
put
ε(Z, Z ′) := ℓA (IZ+Z ′ /aIZ ′ + bIZ )
= pg (A) − h1 (OX (−Z)) − h1 (OX (−Z ′ )) + h1 (OX (−Z − Z ′ )).
Then 0 ≤ ε(Z, Z ′) ≤ pg (A); see [15, 2.6].
The following proposition gives an important property of pg -ideals.
Proposition 2.4 (see [15, 3.5, 3.6]). Let Z and Z ′ be the cycles as above.
1When

we write IZ , we assume that OX (−Z) is generated by global sections.

4

TOMOHIRO OKUMA, KEI-ICHI WATANABE, AND KEN-ICHI YOSHIDA

(1) If Z is a pg -cycle, then ε(Z, Z ′) = 0 for any Z ′ , and
IZ+Z ′ = aIZ ′ + bIZ
for general elements a ∈ IZ and b ∈ IZ ′ . In particular, the product IZ IZ ′ is
integrally closed and h1 (OX (−Z − Z ′ )) = h1 (OX (−Z ′ )).
(2) Z and Z ′ are pg -cycles if and only if so is Z + Z ′ .
Proof. The “if part” of (2) follows from Proposition 2.1. The other claims follow
from [15, 3.5].

Recall that an ideal J ⊂ I is called a reduction of I if I is integral over J or,
equivalently, I r+1 = I r J for some r (e.g., [20]). An ideal Q ⊂ I is called a minimal
reduction of I if Q is minimal among the reductions of I. Any minimal reduction of
an m-primary ideal is a parameter ideal.
Corollary 2.5 (see [15, 3.6]). Let I and I ′ be any integrally closed m-primary ideals.
(1) I and I ′ are pg -ideals if and only if so is II ′ .
(2) Assume that I is a pg -ideal. Then I n is a pg -ideal for every n > 0. If Q is a
minimal reduction of I, then I 2 = QI and I ⊂ Q : I.
Assume that pg (A) > 0. Then we give a characterization of pg -ideals by cohomological cycle. Let KX denote the canonical divisor on X. Let ZKX denote the
canonical cycle, i.e., the Q-divisor supported in E such that KX + ZKX ≡ 0. By [19,
§4.8], there exists the smallest cycle CX > 0 on X such that h1 (OCX ) = pg (A), and
CX = ZKX if A is Gorenstein and the resolution f : X → Spec A is minimal. The
cycle CX is called the cohomological cycle on X.
Proposition 2.6. Assume that pg (A) > 0 and let C ≥ 0 be the minimal cycle such
that H 0 (X \ E, OX (KX )) = H 0 (X, OX (KX + C)). Then C is the cohomological
cycle. Therefore if g : X ′ → X is the blowing-up at a point in Supp CX and E0 the
exceptional set for g, then CX ′ = g ∗ CX − E0 . For any cycle D > 0 without common
components with CX , we have h1 (OD ) = 0.
Proof. By the Grauert-Riemenschneider vanishing theorem2 and the duality theorem, we have
ℓA (H 0 (X \ E, OX (KX ))/H 0(X, OX (KX ))) = ℓA (HE1 (X, OX (KX ))) = pg (A),
ℓA (H 0(X, OX (KX + C))/H 0(X, OX (KX ))) = h0 (OC (KX + C))) = h1 (OC ).
Thus h1 (OC ) = pg (A).3 Let C ′ > 0 be a cycle such that C ′ < C. By the assumption,
we have
h1 (OC ′ ) = ℓA (H 0 (OX (KX + C ′ ))/H 0 (OX (KX ))) < ℓA (HE1 (OX (KX ))) = pg (A).
Let D > 0 be a cycle without common components with C. As in the proof of [19,
§4.8] (putting A = 0), we obtain the surjection H 1 (OC+D ) → H 1 (OC ) ⊕ H 1 (OD ).
Since h1 (OC+D ) = h1 (OC ) = pg (A), it follows that H 1 (OD ) = 0.

We have the following characterization of pg -ideals in terms of cohomological cycle.
2Note

that the Grauert-Riemenschneider vanishing theorem holds in any characteristic in dimension 2 ([5]).
3This result was already obtained by Tomari [21].

A CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL RATIONAL SINGULARITIES

5

Proposition 2.7 ([15, 3.10]). Assume that pg (A) > 0. Let Z > 0 be a cycle
such that OX (−Z) has no fixed component. Then Z is a pg -cycle if and only if
OCX (−Z) ∼
= OCX .
Now we will define the core of an ideal I of A.
Definition 2.8. Let I be an m-primary ideal of A.
(1) The core of I is defined by
\
Q.
core(I) =
Q is a reduction of I

(2) I is said to be stable if I 2 = QI for any minimal reduction Q of I. By this
definition, if I is stable, then I ⊂ Q : I and I 2 ⊂ core(I).
(3) I is said to be good if I is stable and Q : I = I for any minimal reduction Q
of I ([6], [15]). If I is integrally closed and stable, then I 2 = core(I) if and
only if I is a good ideal (see Lemma 4.1).
Remark 2.9 ([6]). If A is Gorenstein, then I is good if and only if I is stable and
e(I) = 2ℓA (A/I), where e(I) denotes the multiplicity of I (if I = IZ , then e(IZ ) =
−Z 2 ). We have shown the existence of good pg -ideals when A is Gorenstein in [15].
We also have a characterization of pg -ideal in terms of the Rees algebras.
Proposition 2.10 ([16]). Let I be an integrally closed m-primary ideal I. Then the
following conditions are equivalent.
(1) I is a pg -ideal. L
(2) The Rees algebra n≥0 I n tn ⊂ A[t] is a Cohen-Macaulay normal domain.
(3) I 2 = QI and I n = I n for every n > 0, where J denotes the integral closure
of an ideal J.
In Section 4, we will give the description of core(I) for a pg -ideal I.
3. A question on core of integrally closed ideals
The core of an ideal I is the intersection of all the reductions of I, or, equivalent to
say, the intersection of all the minimal reductions of I. We are interested whether
taking the core preserves the inclusion of ideals. But it is obvious that if ideals
I ′ ⊂ I have the same integral closure, then core(I ′ ) ⊃ core(I), since a reduction of
I ′ is also a reduction of I. So, we ask the following question.
Question 3.1. Let (A, m) be a two-dimensional excellent normal local domain
and let I ′ ⊂ I be integrally closed m-primary ideals. Then is it always true that
core(I ′ ) ⊂ core(I)?
Question 3.1 was asked in [8] and then in [10, Question 5.5.2]. When A is twodimensional Gorenstein rational singularity this question was answered affirmatively
(see [10, 5.5.1]). On the other hand, Kyungyong Lee [13] gave a counterexample to
this question in a regular local ring of dimension 4.
The answer to this question and the main theorem of this paper is the following.

6

TOMOHIRO OKUMA, KEI-ICHI WATANABE, AND KEN-ICHI YOSHIDA

Theorem 3.2. Let (A, m) be a two-dimensional excellent normal local domain.
Then the following conditions are equivalent if char(k) 6= 2.
(1) For any integrally closed m-primary ideals I ′ ⊂ I, we have core(I ′ ) ⊂ core(I).
(2) A is a rational singularity.
Proof. If A is a rational singularity then every integrally closed ideal is a pg -ideal.
We will show in Theorem 4.11 that the answer to Question 3.1 is positive if both I
and I ′ are pg -ideals. Hence the implication (2) =⇒ (1) is true.
The implication (1) =⇒ (2) follows from Proposition 3.4.

Remark 3.3. The implication (2) ⇒ (1) holds if char(k) = 2, since Theorem 4.11
does not depend on char(k).
By applying some results in Section 4 and Section 5, we shall prove the following.
Proposition 3.4. Assume that pg (A) > 0 and char(k) 6= 2. Let I = IZ be an
integrally closed ideal such that I 2 6= QI for some minimal reduction Q of I and
that I 2 is integrally closed. Then there exists a pg -ideal I ′ ⊂ I such that core(I ′ ) 6⊂
core(I).
In particular, if I = IZ is an integrally closed ideal which is not a pg -ideal, then
for some n > 0, there exists a pg -ideal I ′ ⊂ I n such that core(I ′ ) 6⊂ core(I n ).
Proof. Suppose that a minimal reduction Q of I is generated by a system of parameters a, b ∈ I. Let us prove that I 2 6⊂ Q. If I 2 ⊂ Q holds, then I 2 = I 2 = I 2 ∩ Q =
QI = QI by Huneke–Itoh theorem (see [7], [11]). This contradicts the assumption.
Hence I 2 6⊂ Q.
Now, since I 2 6⊂ Q and since char(k) 6= 2, for a general element f of I, f 2 6∈ Q
and in particular, f 2 6∈ core(I). On the other hand, by Theorem 5.1, there exists a
pg -ideal I ′ ⊂ I such that f ∈ I ′ . Then f 2 ∈ I ′2 ⊂ core(I ′ ), since I ′ is stable. This
shows that core(I ′ ) 6⊂ core(I).
k
For a given I = IZ , which is not a pg -ideal, choose n so that I nk = I n and
h1 (OX (−nZ)) = h1 (OX (−nkZ)) for every positive integer k. Such n exists since the
normalized Rees algebra of I is Noetherian and h1 (OX (−nZ)) is a decreasing function of n (cf. Proposition 2.1). Clearly I n = InZ is not a pg -ideal by Proposition 2.4
(2). Let Qn be a minimal reduction of I n . Since h1 (OX (−nZ)) = h1 (OX (−2nZ)),
from the exact sequence
0 → OX → OX (−nZ)⊕2 → OX (−2nZ) → 0,
2

we obtain ℓA (I n /Qn I n ) = pg (A) − h1 (OX (−nZ)) > 0. Therefore we can apply the

first claim to the ideal I n .
Example 3.5. Let A = k[[x, y, z]]/(x2 + y 4 + z 4 ), where k is an algebraically closed
field.4 Then core(m) = m2 since m is a good ideal (cf. Remark 2.9, Lemma 4.1).
Note that core(m) is not integrally closed since x is integral over m2 . It is easy to
show that for every integrally closed ideal I ′ ⊂ m, core(I ′ ) ⊂ core(m) = m2 .
Let f0 : X0 → Spec A be the minimal resolution. Then f0−1 (m) = E0 is an
elliptic curve {x2 + y 4 + z 4 = 0} in the weighted projective space P(2, 1, 1). We
4If

char(k) = 2, then we change x2 + y 4 + z 4 to x2 + g(y, z), where g(y, z) is a form of degree 4
with no multiple roots.

A CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL RATIONAL SINGULARITIES

7

have pg (A) = 1, m = IE0 , h1 (OX0 (−nE0 )) = 0 for n > 0 by the vanishing theorem
(cf. [5]). Now, let I := I2E0 = m2 , which is generated by m2 and x. Then I n is
integrally closed (cf. [19, 4.24]) and not a pg -ideal for every n > 0. It is easy to see
that ℓA (I 2 /QI) = pg (A) = 1 for any minimal reduction Q of I.
Take a general element g of I and let P1 , . . . , P4 ∈ E0 be the intersection points of
E0 and divX (g) − 2E0 . Let f1 : X → X0 be the blowing-up of these 4 points and let
Ei = f1−1 (Pi ), i = 1, . . . , 4. We again denote by E0 the strict transform of E0 on X.
P
Then Z = 2E0 + 3 4i=1 Ei is a pg -cycle on X and KX Z = 0. By Kato’s RiemannRoch formula ([12], cf. [15, 2.8]), we have ℓA (A/IZ ) = 6 and ℓA (A/m3 ) = 7. Thus
IZ = (g) + m3 ⊂ I. Since 2ℓA (A/IZ ) = −Z 2 , IZ is also a good ideal (cf. Remark 2.9)
and core(IZ ) = IZ2 . On the other hand, as we have seen in the proof of Proposition
3.4, g 2 6∈ core(I). Thus we conclude that core(IZ ) 6⊂ core(I).
4. Computation of core(I) and Q : I of a pg -ideal I
Let I = IZ be an integrally closed ideal of A represented on some resolution X,
and let Q be any minimal reduction of I. We begin by recalling a description of
core when I is stable.
Lemma 4.1. Assume that I 2 = QI. Then
(4.1)

core(I) = Q2 : I = (Q : I)I = (Q : I)Q.

Moreover, if core(I) is integrally closed, then so is Q : I.
Proof. The formula (4.1) is obtained in [15, 5.6]. Assume that core(I) is integrally
closed and Q is generated by a, b ∈ I. Let x ∈ A be integral over Q : I. Then ax is
integral over Q(Q : I). Since (Q : I)Q = (Q : I)I = core(I), we have ax ∈ Q(Q : I).
Thus ax = au + bv for some u, v ∈ Q : I. Since a(x − u) = bv, we have that
x − u ∈ (b) ⊂ Q, and thus x ∈ Q : I. Hence Q : I is integrally closed.

Lemma 4.2. Let D > 0 be a cycle on X. Then we have the following.
(1) H 0 (OD (D)) = 0.
(2) h1 (OD (D)) = (−D 2 + KX D)/2.
(3) pg (A) + h1 (OD (D)) = h1 (OX (D)). Therefore h1 (OX (D)) ≥ pg (A) and the
equality holds if and only if h1 (OD (D)) = 0.
(4) If h1 (OD (D)) = 0, then each connected component of the support of D contracts to a nonsingular point. More precisely, if E1 ≤ D is a (−1)-curve,
g : X → X ′ the contraction of E1 , and if F := g∗ D 6= 0, then h1 (OF (F )) = 0
and D = g ∗ F + nE1 with n = 0 or 1.
Proof. Although the claim (1) is stated in [22], we will give a short proof for the
convenience of the readers. By adjunction, KD = (KX + D)|D and by duality
on D, h0 (OD (D)) = h1 (OD (KX )). Since H 1 (X, OX (KX )) → H 1 (D, OD (KX )) is
surjective and H 1 (X, OX (KX )) = 0 by Grauert-Riemenschneider vanishing theorem,
we have the desired result. The statement (2) follows from (1) and the RiemannRoch formula: h1 (OD (D)) = −χ(OD (D)) = (−D 2 + KX D)/2.
The assertion (3) follows from (1) and the exact sequence
0 → OX → OX (D) → OD (D) → 0.

8

TOMOHIRO OKUMA, KEI-ICHI WATANABE, AND KEN-ICHI YOSHIDA

(4) If D contains no (−1)-curve, then KX D ≥ 0, and thus 2h1 (OD (D)) = −D 2 +
KX D ≥ −D 2 > 0. Assume that 2h1 (OD (D)) = −D 2 + KX D = 0 and E1 be a
(−1)-curve in D. Let g : X → X ′ be the contraction of E1 and F = g∗ D. Then
there exists an integer n such that D = g ∗ F + nE1 . We have
−D 2 + KX D = −F 2 + KX ′ F + n2 − n.
Since n2 − n ≥ 0 for any n ∈ Z and −F 2 + KX ′ F ≥ 0 by (2), we obtain that
−F 2 + KX ′ F = n2 − n = 0. Therefore we can inductively contract all components
of D to nonsingular points.

The following lemma is essential for our main theorem of this section.
Lemma 4.3. Let I = IZ be a pg -ideal represented on some resolution X, and Q
a minimal reduction of I. Assume that OX (−Z + Y ) is generated for some cycle
0 < Y < Z on X. Then the following conditions are equivalent.
(1) IZ IZ−Y = QIZ−Y .
(2) h1 (OX (Y )) = pg (A) and IZ−Y is a pg -ideal.
Note that the first condition implies IZ−Y ⊂ Q : IZ .
Proof. Assume Q = (a, b) and consider the exact sequence
0 → OX → OX (−Z)⊕2 → OX (−2Z) → 0,
where the map OX (−Z)⊕2 → OX (−2Z) is defined by (x, y) 7→ ax + by. Tensoring
OX (Y ) to this exact sequence, we obtain
0 → OX (Y ) → OX (−Z + Y )⊕2 → OX (−2Z + Y ) → 0.
Note that IZ IZ−Y = I2Z−Y and h1 (OX (−Z + Y )) = h1 (OX (−2Z + Y )) by Proposition 2.4. Now, taking the long exact sequence of this sequence, we see that
IZ IZ−Y = QIZ−Y if and only if H 1 (OX (Y )) → H 1 (OX (−Z + Y )⊕2 ) is injective,
and this is also equivalent to that
2h1 (OX (−Z + Y )) = h1 (OX (Y )) + h1 (OX (−2Z + Y )).
Thus (1) is equivalent to that h1 (OX (−Z + Y )) = h1 (OX (Y )). On the other hand,
we have h1 (OX (−Z +Y )) ≤ pg (A) ≤ h1 (OX (Y )) by Proposition 2.1 and Lemma 4.2.
Therefore, the condition (1) is equivalent to the equalities
h1 (OX (−Z + Y )) = pg (A) = h1 (OX (Y )),
namely, the condition (2).



Now we can state the main theorem of this section.
Theorem 4.4. Let I = IZ be a pg -ideal, where Z is a pg -cycle on a resolution X
of Spec A. Then core(I) and Q : I are also represented on X. Furthermore, we can
write Q : I = IZ−Y and core(I) = I2Z−Y , where Y is the maximal positive cycle on
X satisfying the following two conditions:
(1) h1 (OX (Y )) = pg (A) and
(2) IZ−Y is a pg -ideal.
In particular, if I is a pg -ideal, so are Q : I and core(I).

A CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL RATIONAL SINGULARITIES

9

Proof. By Proposition 2.10, the Rees algebra R(I) is normal and Cohen-Macaulay.
Hence core(I) is integrally closed by [10, Proposition 5.5.3]. It follows from Lemma
4.1 that Q : I is also integrally closed. By Corollary 2.5, we have I ⊂ Q : I. Suppose
that I and Q : I are represented by cycles Z ′ and Z ′ − Y on some resolution X ′ ,
respectively, where Y is an effective cycle on X ′ . Note that Y satisfies the condition
(1) of Lemma 4.3 by (4.1). We may assume that Z ′ C < 0 or (Z ′ − Y )C < 0 for any
(−1)-curve C on X ′ . If C is a (−1)-curve and Z ′ C = 0, then Y C > 0. However,
this is impossible because Y blows down to a nonsingular point and Y C ≤ 0 if
C ≤ Y by Lemma 4.2. Thus I is minimally represented on X ′ . Hence there exists a
birational morphism α : X → X ′ and Q : I is also represented on the resolution X
by α∗ (Z ′ − Y ) = Z − α∗ Y . Thus we can write Q : I = IZ−Y0 , where Y0 = α∗ Y ≥ 0.
By (4.1) and Lemma 4.3, we see that core(I) = I2Z−Y0 and that Y0 satisfies our
conditions (1) and (2). On the other hand, if a cycle Y ≥ 0 on X also satisfies our
conditions, then Lemma 4.3 implies that IZ−Y ⊂ Q : I = IZ−Y0 . Hence we must
have Y ≤ Y0 .

Note that even if I is minimally represented on X, Q : I is not necessarily minimally represented on X. In Theorem 4.6, we shall give an algorithm to calculate
Q : I and a minimal good ideal containing I starting from a pg -ideal I = IZ .
In the situation of Theorem 4.4, I is a good ideal if and only if Y = 0. Hence we
obtain the following.
Corollary 4.5. Assume that I is a pg -ideal. Then the following are equivalent.
(1) I is a good ideal.
(2) core(I) = I 2 .
(3) core(I 2 ) = core(I)2 .
Theorem 4.6. Let I = IZ be a pg -ideal represented on X and let Q be a minimal
reduction of I.
(1) Let X = X1 → X2 → · · · → Xn+1 be the sequence of contractions, where
each fi : Xi → Xi+1 is a contraction of a (−1)-curve Ei on Xi , which does
not intersect the cohomological cycle CXi . This process stops when every
(−1)-curve on Xn+1 intersects CXn+1 . Let K be the relative canonical divisor
KX/Xn+1 of the composite f : X → Xn+1 .
Then Q : I = H 0 (X, OX (−Z + K)). Note that Z − K is anti-nef if and
only if any (−1)-curve C on X satisfies ZC < 0; in this case, K coincides
with Y in Theorem 4.4. Also, f∗ Z is a pg -cycle and If∗ Z is the minimal good
ideal containing IZ . In particular, every two-dimensional excellent normal
local domain has good ideals.
(2) Let C be a (−1)-curve on X which does not intersect CX such that ZC =
−m < 0 and g : X → X ′ the contraction of C. Then g∗ Z is also a pg -cycle.
Let I ′ = Ig∗ Z and Q′ a minimal reduction of I ′ . In this case, if Q′ : I ′ = IZ ′
for some cycle Z ′ on X ′ , then Q : I = Ig∗ Z ′ +(m−1)C .
Proof. Let Fi be the total transform of Ei on X. Then Fi Fj = 0 for i 6= j. Let
n
n
X
X
bi .
ai , and b =
bi = −ZFi , ai = min{1, bi }, a =
i=1

i=1

10

TOMOHIRO OKUMA, KEI-ICHI WATANABE, AND KEN-ICHI YOSHIDA

P
We will prove that a cycle Y := ni=1 ai Fi satisfies Q : I = IZ−Y . Since a2i = ai , we
have
n
n
X
X
2
2
−Y + KX Y =
ai (−Fi + KX Fi ) =
ai (−Ei2 + KXi Ei ) = 0.
i=1

i=1

From Lemma 4.2, we have h1 (OY (Y )) = 0 and that Y is the maximal cycle on
X satisfying h1 (OX (Y )) = pg (A). By Theorem 4.4, it is sufficient to show that
Z − Y is a pg -cycle.
We have f∗ Z and f ∗ f∗ Z are pg -cycles by Proposition 2.7 and
P
Z = f ∗ f∗ Z + ni=1 bi Fi . Take any decreasing sequence of cycles {Z0 , . . . , Zb } such
that
Z0 = Z,

Za = Z − Y,

Zb = f ∗ f∗ Z,

Ci := Zi − Zi+1 ∈ {F1 , . . . , Fn }.

1

Then every Zi is anti-nef. Let hi = h (OX (−Zi )). Consider the exact sequence
0 → OX (−Zi ) → OX (−Zi+1 ) → OCi (−Zi+1 ) → 0.
Note that any nef invertible sheaf L on Ci is generated and satisfies H 1 (L) = 0 (cf.
[14]). Since H 1 (OCi (−Zi+1 )) = 0, we have hi ≥ hi+1 ; however the equality holds for
every 0 ≤ i < b because hb = h0 = pg (A). Thus H 0 (OX (−Zi+1 )) → H 0 (OCi (−Zi+1 ))
is surjective and hi = pg (A) for each 0 ≤ i < b. Thus H 0 (OX (−Zi+1 )) has no base
points on Supp Ci . Therefore if OX (−Zi ) is generated, so is OX (−Zi+1 ). Since
OX (−Z0 ) is generated, OX (−Zi ) is also generated and Zi is a pg -cycle for every
0 ≤ i ≤ b. Hence Q : I = IZ−Y . Now it is clear that for any minimal reduction
Q∗ of If∗ Z , we have Q∗ : If∗ Z = If∗ Z , namely, If∗ Z is a good ideal. The argument
above also shows this is the minimal good ideal containing IZ . If ZC < 0 for every
(−1)-curve C on X not intersecting CX , then ai = 1 for every 1 ≤ i ≤ n, and thus
Y = K.
Let C = E1 , g = f1 , and X ′ = X2 . We will show that if ZC = 0, we have
0
H (X, OX (−Z + K)) = H 0 (X ′ , OX ′ (−g∗ Z + K ′ )), where K ′ = KX ′ /Xn+1 . This
claim implies the formula Q : I = H 0 (OX (−Z + K)); in fact, it can be reduced to
the case n = 1. We have that g ∗ OX ′ (−g∗ Z + K ′ ) = OX (−Z + K − C) and the exact
sequence
0 → OX (−Z + K − C) → OX (−Z + K) → OC (−Z + K) → 0.
Since ZC = 0, we have OC (−Z) ∼
= H 0 (OP1 (−1)) = 0.
= OC and H 0 (OC (−Z + K)) ∼
Hence we obtain the claim. Assume that m := −ZC > 0. By Proposition 2.7, g∗ Z
is a pg -cycle on X ′ . Let I ′ = Ig∗ Z and Q′ a minimal reduction of I ′ . Let Y ′ be
the effective cycle on X ′ such that Q′ : I ′ = Ig∗ Z−Y ′ . Then Y = g ∗ Y ′ + C. Thus
Z − Y = g ∗g∗ Z + mC − (g ∗Y ′ + C) = g ∗ (g∗ Z − Y ′ ) + (m − 1)C.

Remark 4.7. (1) If I = IZ is a pg -ideal, then the minimal good ideal containing I (the
“good closure” of I) is obtained by “taking Q : I” several times (cf. Theorem 4.11).
Namely, if I1 = Q : I and Q1 is a minimal reduction of I1 , then I2 = Q1 : I1 is again
a pg -ideal. We obtain Qm : Im = Im for some m > 0. The smallest positive integer
m with this property is given by m = max{b1 , . . . , bn }, where bi ’s are the integers
in the proof of Theorem 4.6.
(2) If A is a rational singularity, then Xn+1 in Theorem 4.6 is always the minimal
resolution since we may regard CX = 0 (cf. [15, 5.1]). If A is a rational Gorenstein

A CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL RATIONAL SINGULARITIES

11

singularity (i.e., rational double point), then K = KX and Q : I coincides with the
multiplier ideal J (I). In this case, we have core(I) = J (I 2 ) = IJ (I) by Lemma 4.1.
Example 4.8. Let X0 be the minimal resolution and f : X → X0 the natural
morphism. Assume that the exceptional divisor F of X0 is a nonsingular
P rational
curve and F = f (E1 ). For any ideal I = IZ represented by Z =
ni Ei on
X, the good closure of I is If∗ Z = In1 F = mn1 (cf. [1]). Since good ideals in a
rational singularity are integrally closed by [15, 2.4], the set of good ideals in A is
{mn | n ∈ Z>0 }.
Let us consider an explicit example of the procedure in Remark 4.7 (1). Suppose
that A = k[[x, y, z]]/(x2 − yz) and X is obtained by the blowing up at the nodal
points of divX0 (x). We write E = E0 + E1 + E2 , where E02 = −4 and E12 =
E22 = −1. Then K := KX/X0 = E1 + E2 and E is the maximal ideal cycle. Let
W = E0 + 2(E1 + E2 ). Then IW = (x) + m2 since ℓA (A/IW ) = 3 by Kato’s
Riemann-Roch formula. Fix an integer n and let Z = nE0 + 2n(E1 + E2 ). For
0 ≤ k ≤ n, let Zk = nE0 + (2n − k)(E1 + E2 ). Since Zk = (n − k)W + kE,
Ik := IZk = ((x) + m2 )n−k mk . From Theorem 4.6, for any minimal reduction Qk of
Ik , we obtain that Qk : Ik = Ik+1 for 0 ≤ k < n and Qn : In = In .
The next theorem follows from Theorem 4.6.
Theorem 4.9. There always exist good pg -ideals in any two-dimensional excellent
normal local domain containing an algebraically closed field.
Let I = IZ be a pg -ideal minimally represented on X. Then IZ is good if and only
if every (−1)-curve on X intersects the cohomology cycle CX .
Corollary 4.10. Assume that I is a pg -ideal. Then I is a good ideal if and only if
core(II ′ ) = core(I) core(I ′ ) for any pg -ideal I ′ .
Proof. Assume that I and I ′ are represented on X by pg -cycles Z and Z ′ , respectively, and that I is a good ideal. By Theorem 4.9, we may assume that Z ′ C < 0
for every (−1)-curve C on X which does not intersect CX ; then Z + Z ′ has also
this property. Let Q′ (resp. Q′′ ) be a minimal reduction of I ′ (resp. II ′ ). By
Theorem 4.6 (1), we obtain that Q′′ : II ′ = IZ+Z ′ −K and Q′ : I ′ = IZ ′ −K . Since
core(I) = I 2 = I2Z by Corollary 4.5, it follows from Theorem 4.4 that
core(II ′ ) = I2(Z+Z ′ )−K = I2Z+(2Z ′ −K) = core(I) core(I ′ ).
The converse follows from Corollary 4.5.



From (1) of Theorem 4.6 and Lemma 4.1, we have the following result concerning
Question 3.1 of §2.
Theorem 4.11. Let I1 ⊂ I2 be pg -ideals, and let Qi be a minimal reduction of Ii
(i = 1, 2). Then Q1 : I1 ⊂ Q2 : I2 and also core(I1 ) ⊂ core(I2 ).
Question 4.12. Let (A, m) be a two-dimensional excellent normal local domain and
let I1 ⊂ I2 be integrally closed m-primary ideals and let Qi be a minimal reduction of
Ii for i = 1, 2. Assume that I2 is a pg -ideal (we do not assume that I1 is a pg -ideal).
Is it true that core(I1 ) ⊂ core(I2 ) and that Q1 : I1 ⊂ Q2 : I2 ?

12

TOMOHIRO OKUMA, KEI-ICHI WATANABE, AND KEN-ICHI YOSHIDA

5. Existence of pg -ideal containing a given element of I.
We show that for any g ∈ m there exists a pg -ideal containing g. In fact, we prove
the following.
Theorem 5.1. Let I be an integrally closed m-primary ideal and g an arbitrary
element of I. Then there exists h ∈ I such that the integral closure of the ideal
(g, h) is a pg -ideal.
Proof. Suppose that I is represented by a cycle Z > 0 on a resolution X. We write
divX (g) = ZX + HX , where ZX is a cycle and HX is the strict transform of the
divisor H := divSpec A (g). Let CX be the cohomological cycle on X. Then, by
Proposition 2.7, ZX is a pg -cycle if and only if
(5.1)

Supp CX ∩ Supp HX = ∅.

By Proposition 2.6, taking blowing-ups at the intersection of the cohomological
cycle and the strict transform of H successively, we may assume that the condition
(5.1) is satisfied. Since ZX ≥ Z, we have IZX ⊂ I. Since OX (−ZX ) is generated,
there exists h ∈ IZX such that g and h generate OX (−ZX ). Then we obtain that
IZX = (g, h).

The idea for obtaining the pg -ideal in the proof above is used in the last paragraph
of Example 3.5, where the element “h ∈ I” in Theorem 5.1 can be g +h′ with general
element h′ ∈ m3 .
Definition 5.2. Let h ∈ m. There exists a unique resolution f : X → Spec A
such that CX and the strict transform H ⊂ X of divSpec A (h) have no intersection,
and that f is minimal among the resolutions with these properties. Note that
such a resolution is obtained by taking blowing-ups successively from the minimal
resolution. Then Z := divX (h) − H is a pg -cycle by Proposition 2.7 and every (−1)curve C on X satisfies ZC < 0 and CX C < 0.We call IZ the pg -ideal associated with
h.
From now on, we assume that the following condition holds for any integrally
closed m-primary ideal I ⊂ A:
(C1) If h ∈ I is a general element and I is represented by Z on X, and if divX (h) =
Z + H, then the divisor H is a disjoint union of nonsingular curves and each
component of H intersects the exceptional set transversally.
This condition holds in case the singularity is defined over a field of characteristic zero, since Bertini’s theorem can be applied to the image of H 0 (OX (−Z)) →
H 0 (OEi (−Z)).
Theorem 5.3. Let J = IM be an integrally closed m-primary ideal represented
by a cycle M on a resolution Y → Spec A, which is obtained by taking the minimal resolution of the blowing-up of J. Assume that h ∈ J satisfies the condition
divY (h) = M + H, where H is the strict transform of divSpec(A) (h) on Y .
If I is the pg -ideal associated to h, then we have
e(I) − e(J) ≥ CY H = −CY M

and ℓA (J/I) ≤ −CY M,

A CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL RATIONAL SINGULARITIES

13

where the latter inequality is strict if J is not a pg -ideal.
If, moreover, h ∈ J is a general element, then we have the equalities
e(I) − e(J) = CY H = −CY M,

ℓA (J/I) = CY H − pg (A) − h1 (OY (−M))



and in this case I is a maximal pg -ideal contained in J.
In particular, every pg -ideal is associated with its general element.
Proof. First note that by definition, J is a pg -ideal if pg (A) − h1 (OY (−M)) = 0, and
this condition is equivalent to that CY M = 0 by Proposition 2.7.
We prove e(I) − e(J) ≥ CY H = −CY M by induction on CY H = −CY M. Our
assertion is obvious if CY H = 0.
In order to construct a resolution X → Y such that I = IZ is represented by a
cycle Z on X, we proceed by successive blowing-ups at points
X = Yr → Yr−1 → . . . → Y1 → Y0 = Y
and take anti-nef cycles Z0 = M, Z1 , . . . , Zr = Z so that
divYi (h) = Zi + Hi ,
where Hi is the strict transform of H on Yi . Note that CX H = 0.
We assume CY H > 0 and take a point P ∈ CY ∩ H. We also assume that
H has multiplicity a at P . Let π : Y1 → Y be the blowing-up at P and put
E0 = π −1 (P ). Then Z1 = π ∗ (M) + aE0 , since divY1 (h) = π ∗ (divY (h)) = π ∗ (M) +
aE0 + H1 = Z1 + H1 . We have seen in Proposition 2.6 that CY1 = π ∗ (CY ) − E0 .
Since CY1 H1 = CY H − a < CY H, we may assume −Z 2 − (−Z1 )2 ≥ CY1 H1 by our
induction hypothesis. Also, we have (−Z12 ) − (−M 2 ) = a2 . Hence we have
(−Z12 ) − (−M 2 ) ≥ CY H − CY1 H1
with equality if and only if a = 1.
If h ∈ J is a general element, by the condition (C1), we have a = 1 at every point
P ∈ CY ∩ H and hence equality e(I) − e(J) = CY H. Furthermore, from the exact
sequence
0 → OY1 (−Z1 ) → OY1 (−π ∗ (M)) → OE0 → 0,
we have I1 := H 0 (Y1 , OY1 (−Z1 )) ⊂ IM with ℓA (IM /I1 ) ≤ 1 and h1 (Y1 , OY1 (−Z1 )) =
h1 (Y, OY (−M)) or h1 (Y1 , OY1 (−Z1 )) = h1 (Y, OY (−M)) + 1, the latter holds if and
only if I1 = IM . Hence we have the equality

ℓA (J/I) = CY H − pg (A) − h1 (OY (−M)) .
Now, assume e(I) − e(J) = CY H and I ′ is a pg -ideal such that I ⊂ I ′ ⊂ J. We
may assume that I = IZ and I ′ = IZ ′ with Z ≥ Z ′ are represented on a resolution
X and we have a morphism φ : X → Y . Since I ′ ⊂ J, we have Z ′ ≥ φ∗ (M). Since
M = φ∗ (Z) ≥ φ∗ (Z ′ ) ≥ φ∗ (φ∗ (M)) = M, we must have φ∗ (Z ′ ) = M.
Take a general element h′ ∈ I ′ so that divX (h′ ) = Z ′ + H̃ ′, where H̃ ′ is the strict
transform of divSpec(A) (h′ ) on X. Then we have divY (h′ ) = φ∗ (divX (h′ )) = M + H ′ ,
where H ′ = φ∗ (H̃ ′ ), and we have CY H ′ = −CY M. Since I ′ is a pg -ideal, we must
have CX H̃ ′ = 0. By the argument as above, we have e(I ′ ) − e(J) ≥ CY H ′ =
−CY M = e(I) − e(J). Since I ⊂ I ′ , we have I ′ = I and we have shown that I is a
maximal pg -ideal contained in J.


14

TOMOHIRO OKUMA, KEI-ICHI WATANABE, AND KEN-ICHI YOSHIDA

Corollary 5.4. Let I be a maximal pg -ideal of A. Then I is a good ideal with
e(I) = e(m) − CX MX and µA (I) := ℓA (I/Im) = e(m) + 1, where f : X → Spec A is
any resolution such that m and I are represented on X and mOX = OX (−MX ).
Furthermore if A is Gorenstein, then
ℓA (A/I) = e(I)/2 = e(m) + pa (MX ) − 1.
Proof. We use the notation above and assume that J = IM = m. By Remark 4.7
(1), I is a good ideal. Let φ : X → Y be the natural morphism.
Since φ∗ M = MX and φ∗ CY = CX + D for some cycle D ≥ 0 with φ∗ (D) = 0 by
Proposition 2.6, we have CY M = (CX + D)(φ∗ M) = CX (φ∗ M) = CX MX . Hence
the first equality follows from Theorem 5.3. Since Z = φ∗ M + D ′ with a cycle
D ′ ≥ 0 satisfying φ∗ (D) = 0 and ZMX = (φ∗ M)2 = M 2 , it follows from [15, 6.2]
that µA (I) = −M 2 + 1 = e(m) + 1.
Suppose that A is Gorenstein. Then we may assume that KX and KY are cycles.
It follows from Remark 2.9 and [15, 4.2] that ℓA (A/I) = −Z 2 /2 and KX Z = 0. By
Proposition 2.6, there exists an effective cycle C ′ such that KY = −CY + C ′ and
Supp CY ∩ Supp C ′ = ∅, and KX + CX = φ∗ (KY + CY ). Then we obtain that
(KY + CY )M = φ∗ (KY + CY )Z = (KX + CX )Z = 0.
Thus CY M = −KY M. Using the formulas above and pa (M) = (M 2 + KY M)/2 + 1,
we obtain
e(I) = −M 2 + KY M = 2(−M 2 ) + M 2 + KY M = 2(e(m) + pa (M) − 1).
Clearly, pa (M) = pa (MX ), since φ∗ M = MX . Hence we obtain the last assertion. 
Example 5.5. Let C be aL
nonsingular curve with genus g and D a divisor on
L C with
deg D = e > 0. Let R = n≥0 Rn , where Rn = H 0 (OC (nD)), and m = n≥1 Rn .
Let a = a(R), where

a(R) = max n ∈ Z H 1 (OC (nD)) 6= 0 (cf. [23, (2.2)]).
Assume that a ≥ 0, aD ∼ KC , and that R is generated by R1 as R0 -algebra. Then R
is Gorenstein by [23, (2.9)]. Let Y → Spec R be the blowing up of m and E ⊂ Y the
exceptional set; we have E ∼
= C. Then Y is the minimal resolution with E 2 = −e
and m is represented by M := E.
Since R is Gorenstein, there exists an integer k such that KY = −kE. From
(KY + E)E = deg KC = ae, we have KY = −CY = −(a + 1)E. We have
−M 2 = e,

CY M = (a + 1)e.

Let I be a pg -ideal associated with a general element h ∈ m. Since pa (M) = g and
h1 (OC ((a + 1)D)) = 0, from Theorem 5.3, we obtain that
µR (I) = e + 1,

ℓR (R/I) = e + g − 1 = h0 (OC ((a + 1)D)).

We will show that I = ma+2 + (h). Let X → Spec R (A is replaced by R), Z, and
H be as in Definition 5.2, and let φ : X → Y be the natural morphism. To obtain
X from Y , we need a + 1 blowing ups at the intersection of the exceptional set and
each irreducible component of the strict transform of divSpec R (h) (cf. the proof of
Theorem 5.1). Since the coefficient of the irreducible component of the exceptional
set of X intersecting H in the cycle Z is a + 2, we have (a + 2)φ∗ M ≥ Z. Therefore,

A CHARACTERIZATION OF TWO-DIMENSIONAL RATIONAL SINGULARITIES

15

Pa+1
ma+2 + (h) ⊂ I. L
Note that Rn ∼
= mn /mn+1 and ℓR (R/ma+2 ) = n=0 dim Rn . Since
h ∈ m \ m2 and n≥0 mn /mn+1 is a domain, the homomorphism
×h

R/ma+1 −−−−→ (h) + ma+2 /ma+2
is bijective. Therefore
ℓR (R/(h) + ma+2 ) = ℓR (ma+1 /ma+2 ) = ℓR (Ra+1 ) = h0 (OC ((a + 1)D)) = ℓR (R/I).
Hence I = (h) + ma+2 .
Acknowledgement. The authors thank the referee for careful reading of the paper
and helpful comments.
References
[1] Michael Artin, On isolated rational singularities of surfaces, Amer. J. Math. 88 (1966), 129–
136.
[2] Alberto Corso, Claudia Polini, and Bernd Ulrich, The structure of the core of ideals, Math.
Ann. 321 (2001), no. 1, 89–105.
[3]
, Core and residual intersections of ideals, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 354 (2002), no. 7,
2579–2594 (electronic).
[4] Steven Dale Cutkosky, A new characterization of rational surface singularities, Invent. Math.
102 (1990), no. 1, 157–177.
[5] Jean Giraud, Improvement of Grauert-Riemenschneider’s theorem for a normal surface, Ann.
Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 32 (1982), no. 4, 13–23 (1983).
[6] Shiro Goto, Sin-Ichiro Iai, and Kei-Ichi Watanabe, Good ideals in Gorenstein local rings,
Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 353 (2001), no. 6, 2309–2346 (electronic).
[7] Craig Huneke, Hilbert functions and symbolic powers , Michigan Math. J. 34 (1987), 293–318.
[8] Craig Huneke and Irena Swanson, Cores of ideals in 2-dimensional regular local rings, Michigan Math. J. 42 (1995), no. 1, 193–208.
[9] Craig Huneke and Ngô Viêt Trung, On the core of ideals, Compos. Math. 141 (2005), no. 1,
1–18.
[10] Eero Hyry and Karen E. Smith, On a non-vanishing conjecture of Kawamata and the core of
an ideal, Amer. J. Math. 125 (2003), no. 6, 1349–1410.
[11] Shiroh Itoh, Integral closure of ideals generated by regular sequence, J. Algebra 117 (1988),
390–401.
[12] Masahide Kato, Riemann-Roch theorem for strongly pseudoconvex manifolds of dimension 2,
Math. Ann. 222 (1976), no. 3, 243–250.
[13] Kyungyong Lee, A short note on containment of cores, Comm. Algebra 36 (2008), no. 10,
3890–3892.
[14] Joseph Lipman, Rational singularities, with applications to algebraic surfaces and unique factorization, Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. (1969), no. 36, 195–279.
[15] Tomohiro Okuma, Kei-ichi. Watanabe, and Ken-ichi. Yoshida, Good ideals and pg -ideals in
two-dimensional normal singularities, Manuscripta Math. 150 (2016), no. 3-4, 499–520.
[16]
, Rees algebras and pg -ideals in a two-dimensional normal local domain, Proc. Amer.
Math. Soc. 145 (2017), no. 1, 39–47, arXiv:1511.00827.
[17] Claudia Polini and Bernd Ulrich, A formula for the core of an ideal, Math. Ann. 331 (2005),
no. 3, 487–503.
[18] David Rees and Judith D. Sally, General elements and joint reductions, Michigan Math. J.
35 (1988), no. 2, 241–254.
[19] Miles Reid, Chapters on algebraic surfaces, Complex algebraic geometry, IAS/Park City Math.
Ser., vol. 3, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1997, pp. 3–159.

16

TOMOHIRO OKUMA, KEI-ICHI WATANABE, AND KEN-ICHI YOSHIDA

[20] Irena Swanson and Craig Huneke, Integral Closure of Ideals, Rings, and Modules, London
Mathematical Society, Lecture Note Series 336, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New
York/Melbourne/Madrid/ Cape Town/Singapore/Sãn Paulo, 2006.
[21] Masataka Tomari, A survey on normal surface singularities (in Japanese), Algebraic Geometry and Topology of Degenerations, Singularities and Coverings (Tagajo, March 1996).
[22] Jonathan M. Wahl, Vanishing theorems for resolutions of surface singularities, Invent. Math.
31 (1975), no. 1, 17–41.
[23] Kei-ichi Watanabe, Some remarks concerning Demazure’s construction of normal graded rings,
Nagoya Math. J. 83 (1981), 203–211.
(Tomohiro Okuma) Department of Mathematical Sciences, Faculty of Science, Yamagata University, Yamagata, 990-8560, Japan.
E-mail address: okuma@sci.kj.yamagata-u.ac.jp
(Kei-ichi Watanabe) Department of Mathematics, College of Humanities and Sciences, Nihon University, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo, 156-8550, Japan
E-mail address: watanabe@math.chs.nihon-u.ac.jp
(Ken-ichi Yoshida) Department of Mathematics, College of Humanities and Sciences, Nihon University, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo, 156-8550, Japan
E-mail address: yoshida@math.chs.nihon-u.ac.jp

