A NOTE ON THE SIMULTANEOUS WARING RANK OF MONOMIALS

arXiv:1711.00089v1 [math.AG] 31 Oct 2017

ENRICO CARLINI AND EMANUELE VENTURA

Abstract. In this paper we study the complex simultaneous Waring rank for a collection
of monomials. Our approach is algebraic and combinatorial. For special collections of
monomials, the simultaneous Waring rank is an inclusion-exclusion formula. Moreover,
we give an application to ranks of binomials and maximal simultaneous ranks.

1. Introduction
The problem of determining a minimal simultaneous decomposition for several homogeneous polynomials dates back to the work of Terracini [16], appeared in 1915, where
even the existence of defective cases was observed; for more defective cases, see [10]. More
precisely, let S = C[x0 , . . . , xn ] and let F = {F1 , . . . , Fs } be a collection of homogeneous
polynomials, or forms, F1 , . . . , Fs ∈ S. The simultaneous Waring rank over C of F, denoted by rkC F, is the minimal integer r such that there exists linear forms L1 , . . . , Lr with
the property that every Fi may be written as
r
X
Ldj i , where di = deg Fi .
Fi =
j=1

Equivalently, the linear forms Lj minimally decompose simultaneously all the forms Fi ; note
that the degrees di need not be necessarily the same. The simultaneous decompositions
as above are a direct generalization of the simultaneous diagonalization of matrices to the
context of homogeneous polynomials and, more generally, of tensors. They have recently
appeared in statistics, in the context of decompositions of moments [1, Section 3].
Terracini’s geometric approach led to the notion of Grassmann defectivity of projective
varieties; see [11, Definition 1.1] for Veronese surfaces. In his article, Terracini observed that
the Veronese variety of dimension n and degree d has (k, h)-Grassmann secant variety filling
up all the space if and only if the generic collection of k + 1 forms of degree d can be written
as a linear combination of the powers of h+1 linear forms. More recently, Angelini, Galuppi,
Mella, and Ottaviani [2] studied identifiability properties for simultaneous decompositions
of general collections.
This note is inspired by the problem of explicitly determining the complex simultaneous
Waring rank of arbitrary collections of monomials. Since monomials are the sparsest forms
and are particularly amenable to combinatorial approaches, our point of view to investigate
this question is mainly algebraic and combinatorial.
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 51N35, 05E15, 05E40.
1

2

E. CARLINI AND E. VENTURA

The structure of this note is the following. In Section 2, we recall a useful lower bound
(Proposition 2.1) for a collection of monomials M. We interpret it combinatorially in
Proposition 2.3 as an inclusion-exclusion formula [13, Chapter 2] of complex ranks of
greatest common divisors of monomials varying in all subsets of M. In Section 3, we derive
a formula for the complex simultaneous Waring rank for special pairs (Theorem 3.2). This
extends to an inclusion-exclusion formula of complex ranks of greatest common divisors for
an arbitrary number of special monomials in Proposition 3.7 and Proposition 3.9. Finally,
for collections given by all first derivatives of a given monomial whose exponents are strictly
larger than one, we determine the complex simultaneous Waring rank in Proposition 3.13.
In particular, this shows that not for every collection the complex simultaneous Waring
rank is an inclusion-exclusion as before; this is observed in Remark 3.14. In Section 4, we
give an application of the simultaneous Waring rank to ranks of binomials and maximal
simultaneous ranks of forms.
2. A lower bound
In this section, we recall a useful lower bound for the simultaneous Waring rank of a
collection of special monomials. Before we proceed, we keep the notation from above and
we let T = C[X0 , . . . , Xn ] act by differentiation on S. Given a form F ∈ S, the apolar ideal
of F is the ideal F ⊥ = {G ∈ T | G(F ) = 0} ⊂ T . The apolarity lemma [12, Lemma 1.15]
states that, whenever an ideal of reduced points IX is contained in F ⊥ , F admits a Waring
decomposition with linear forms dual to the points in X. In such a case, X is an apolar
scheme to F .
We are now ready to state the lower bound.
Proposition 2.1. Let M = {Mj }j∈J be a collection of monomials, where each monomial
a
a
a
is of the form Mi = x00,j x11,j · · · xnn,j , and a0,j ≤ ai,j for every i, j. The simultaneous
Waring
 rank rk
 C M is at least the dimension of the finite C-algebra A = T /I, where
⊥
I = ∩j∈J Mj + (X0 ).
Proof. From the proof of [8, Theorem
 3.1], thesum of the
 Hilbert function in all degrees
⊥
⊥
of the ideal I = ∩j∈J (Mj : (X0 )) + (X0 ) = ∩j∈J Mj + (X0 ) gives a lower bound to

the degree of an ideal of reduced points in ∩j∈J Mj⊥ .



As we have established a lower bound for the simultaneous Waring rank of monomials,
let us record the following observation concerning an upper bound.
Remark 2.2. Let M be a collection of monomials M1 , . . . , Ms and let M = lcm(M1 , . . . , Ms ).
We have rkC M ≤ rkC M . This upper bound is far from being optimal in general; see Example 3.4.
We now give a more combinatorial description of the dimension of the algebra A above.
a

a

a

Proposition 2.3. Let M = {Mj }j∈J , where Mj = x00,j x11,j · · · xnn,j , and a0,j ≤ ai,j for
every i, j. Let Mj1 ,...,jk denote the greatest common divisor of Mj1 , . . . , Mjk . The dimension

A NOTE ON THE SIMULTANEOUS WARING RANK OF MONOMIALS

3



of the finite C-algebra A = T /I, where I = ∩j∈J Mj⊥ + (X0 ) is given by the alternating
sum
X
dimC A =
(−1)k+1 rkC Mj1 ,...,jk .
∅6=[k]⊂J

Proof. We show that the standard monomials of A are exactly the monomials dividing at
a
a
least one of the monomials M̃j = X1 1,j · · · Xnn,j . Suppose N is a monomial dividing M̃j for
some j. Then N cannot be a monomial in I, since it does not annihilate M̃j . Conversely,
suppose N ∈
/ I. Hence there exists M̃j such that N does not annihilate it. This implies
that all the exponents of N are at most those of M̃j . In other words, N is a divisor of M̃j .
Thus the set of standard monomials coincides with the divisors of all of the monomia
a
als M̃j = X1 1,j · · · Xnn,j . The number of these divisors is given by the alternating sum
P
k+1 rk M
C j1 ,...,jk . Indeed, the number of divisors of M̃j is rkC Mj . Moreover,
∅6=[k]⊂J (−1)
the number of common divisors of Mj1 , . . . , Mjk is rkC Mj1 ,...,jk . Applying the inclusionexclusion principle [13, Chapter 2.1] we finish the proof.

3. Special collections of monomials
We begin with special pairs of monomials and we determine their complex simultaneous
Waring rank.
Proposition 3.1. Let M = {M1 , M2 }, where M1 = x0 c xa11 · · · xann and M2 = x0 c xb11 · · · xbnn
with 1 ≤ c ≤ ai and 1 ≤ c ≤ bi , for i = 1, . . . , n. Let M12 = gcd(M1 , M2 ), the greatest
common divisor of M1 , M2 . Suppose |ai − bi | = 0, 1 or |ai − bi | ≥ c + 1. Then
rkC M ≤ rkC M1 + rkC M2 − rkC M12 .
Proof. For each i > 0 consider the ideals Ai = (X0c+1 , Xiai +1 ) and Bi = (X0c+1 , Xibi +1 ). Our
argument is for each fixed i.
Let us fix an arbitrary i = 1, . . . , n and suppose ai ≤ bi . Let Fi ∈ (Ai )ai +1 be a
square-free element and note that all monomials of Fi belong to Bi except possibly a scalar
multiple of Xiai +1 . Now consider the colon ideal
Ji = Bi : (Xiai +1 ) = (X0c+1 , Xibi −ai ).
Since |ai − bi | = 0, 1 or |ai − bi | ≥ c + 1, there exists Hi ∈ Ji square-free of minimal degree
with no common factors with Fi . Indeed, if ai − bi = 0, we may take Hi to be a scalar.
If bi − ai = 1, we may take Hi = Xi , as Fi is general and hence avoids such a zero. If
bi − ai ≥ c + 1, we may take Hi = X0bi −ai − Xibi −ai , as Fi is general and hence avoids such
zeros. Thus Gi = Fi Hi is a square-free element of (Bi )bi +1 .
The case ai > bi is analogous. Namely, we pick Fi ∈ (Bi )bi +1 and construct Gi = Fi Hi
square-free in (Ai )ai +1 .
In conclusion, for each i > 0, we construct square-free binary forms Fi ∈ Ai and Gi ∈ Bi
such that one of the two divides the other. Now, let us consider the ideals
I1 = (F1 , . . . , Fn ) ⊂ M1⊥ and I2 = (G1 , . . . , Gn ) ⊂ M2⊥ .

4

E. CARLINI AND E. VENTURA

Note that I1 = I(X1 ) and I2 = I(X2 ), where Xi is a minimal apolar scheme of points for
Mi . By construction X1 ∪ X2 is apolar to M1 and M2 . Moreover, the ideal of X1 ∩ X2 is
precisely
I1 + I2 = (gcd(Fi , Gi ) : i = 1, . . . , n) .
The scheme X1 ∩ X2 is a minimal apolar scheme for M12 . Hence |X1 ∪ X2 | = rkC M1 +
rkC M2 − rkC M12 . This completes the proof.

Theorem 3.2. Let M = {M1 , M2 }, where M1 = x0 c xa11 · · · xann and M2 = x0 c xb11 · · · xbnn
with 1 ≤ c ≤ ai and 1 ≤ c ≤ bi , for i = 1, . . . , n. Let M12 = gcd(M1 , M2 ), the greatest
common divisor of M1 , M2 . Suppose |ai − bi | = 0, 1 or |ai − bi | ≥ c + 1. Then the
simultaneous Waring rank satisfies
rkC M = rkC M1 + rkC M2 − rkC M12 .
Proof. Proposition 3.1 gives the upper bound. We need to show the lower bound. Proposition 2.1 and Proposition 2.3 give the desired lower bound.

Remark 3.3. In the statement of Theorem 3.2 the conditions |ai −bi | = 0, 1 or |ai −bi | ≥ c+1
are always satisfied for c = 1.
The following example shows how the construction in Proposition 3.1 gives a minimal
simultaneous decomposition for special pairs.
Example 3.4. We keep the notation of Proposition 3.1 and Theorem 3.2. Let M =
{M1 , M2 }, where M1 = x0 x31 x42 x73 and M2 = x0 x41 x22 x53 . In this case, we have c = 1 and
M12 = x0 x31 x22 x53 . We consider the ideals A1 = (X02 , X14 ), B1 = (X02 , X15 ), A2 = (X02 , X25 ),
B2 = (X02 , X23 ), A3 = (X02 , X38 ), B3 = (X02 , X36 ). We can choose general square-free binary
forms F1 ∈ A1 , F2 ∈ B2 , F3 ∈ B3 , so that, for H1 = X1 , H2 = X22 − X02 , H3 = X32 − X32 ,
the binary forms G1 = F1 H1 ∈ B1 , G2 = F2 H2 ∈ A2 , G3 = F3 H3 ∈ A3 are square-free.
The zeros of G1 , G2 , G3 provides the minimal apolar scheme to the collection M. Let
M = lcm(M1 , M2 ) = x0 x41 x42 x73 . Thus rkC M ≤ rkC M = 200. On the other hand, we have
rkC M = rkC M1 + rkC M2 − rkC M12 = 178.
We introduce two crucial definitions in order to extend Theorem 3.2 to more general
collections of monomials.
Definition 3.5 ((1,1)-free collections). Let M = {Mj }j∈J be a set of monomials, where
a
a
Mj = x0 x11,j · · · xnn,j . For each 1 ≤ i ≤ n, let us order linearly the exponents of the variable
xi appearing in the monomials Mj ∈ M; let Ei = {ai,k1 ≤ ai,k2 ≤ · · · ≤ ai,k|J | } be the set
of those exponents. Let Di denote the multiset of differences {ai,ks+1 − ai,ks } of successive
elements in Ei . The collection M is said to be (1, 1)-free if, for every i ∈ {1, . . . , n}, the
multiset Di contains 1 at most one time.
Definition 3.6 (Free collections). Let M = {Mj }j∈J be a set of monomials, where Mj =
a
a
xc0 x11,j · · · xnn,j . As in Definition 3.5, let Di denote the multiset of differences {ai,ks+1 −ai,ks }
of successive elements in Ei . The collection M is said to be free if M is (1, 1)-free and, for
every i, the multiset Di does not contain nonzero integers smaller than or equal to c.

A NOTE ON THE SIMULTANEOUS WARING RANK OF MONOMIALS
a

5

a

Proposition 3.7. Let M = {Mj }j∈J , where Mj = xc0 x11,j · · · xnn,j , with ai,j ≥ c, for
every i, j. Assume M is a free collection. Let Mj1 ,...,jk = gcd(Mj1 , . . . , Mjk ), the greatest
common divisor of Mj1 , . . . , Mjk . The simultaneous Waring rank satisfies
X
rkC M =
(−1)k+1 rkC Mj1 ,...,jk .
∅6=[k]⊂J

Proof. Proposition 2.1 and Proposition 2.3 give the lower bound. We show the upper
bound constructing an minimal apolar scheme of points X. For each 1 ≤ i ≤ n, let us
order linearly the exponents of the variable xi appearing in the monomials Mj ∈ M; let
Ei = {ai,k1 ≤ ai,k2 ≤ · · · ≤ ai,k|J | } be the set of those exponents. Since the collection
M is free, for every 1 ≤ i ≤ n, the multiset Di of differences of successive elements in
Ei is (1, 1)-free and does not contain nonzero integers smaller than or equal to c. For
each 1 ≤ j ≤ |J|, the set Xji denotes the set of xi -coordinates of points apolar to Mj .
The procedure presented in the proof of Proposition 3.1 produces the sets Xji , such that
k

k

Xki 1 ⊆ Xki 2 ⊆ · · · ⊆ Xi j ⊆ · · · ⊆ Xi |J | , for every i. Since the collection M is free, the
construction gives a set of points X, all of which differ in at least one coordinate.
Thus for each monomial Mj we have a collection of points Xj that constitute a minimal
apolar scheme for Mj . Hence |Xj | = rkC Mj . The intersection Xj1 ∩ · · · ∩ XSjk is a minimal
collection of points apolar to Mj1 ,...,jk . Since the points in the union X = j∈J Xj decomS
pose all monomials in M, rkC M ≤ | j∈J Xj |. By the inclusion-exclusion principle [13,
Chapter 2.1], the cardinality of the union of the sets Xj is given by the alternating sum
X
X
(−1)k+1 |Xj1 ∩ · · · ∩ Xjk | =
(−1)k+1 rkC Mj1 ,...,jk .
∅6=[k]⊂J

∅6=[k]⊂J

This concludes the proof.



Remark 3.8. The assumption on the collection M being free is necessary for our construction. For instance, if the jth multiset of differences Dj contains 1 two times for some j,
the construction in the proof of Proposition 3.7 does not produce distinct points. Hence,
when a collection is not free, we do not know whether this upper bound is valid or not.
a

a

Corollary 3.9. Let M = {Mj }j∈J , where Mj = x0 x11,j · · · xnn,j , with ai,j ≥ 1 for every
i, j. Assume M is a (1, 1)-free collection. Let Mj1 ,...,jk = gcd(Mj1 , . . . , Mjk ), the greatest
common divisor of Mj1 , . . . , Mjk . The simultaneous Waring rank satisfies
X
rkC M =
(−1)k+1 rkC Mj1 ,...,jk .
∅6=[k]⊂J

We now extend Theorem 3.2 to monomials having, possibly, different supports.
Theorem 3.10. Let M1 = x0 y1a1 · · · ysas z1b1 · · · zrbr and M2 = x0 y1c1 · · · yscs td11 · · · tdℓ ℓ . Here
bi , di ≥ 2, and ai , ci ≥ 0. Let M12 = gcd(M1 , M2 ), the greatest common divisor of M1 and
M2 . The simultaneous Waring rank of M = {M1 , M2 } satisfies
rkC M = rkC M1 + rkC M2 − rkC M12 .

6

E. CARLINI AND E. VENTURA

Proof. As in Theorem 3.2, the lower bound is deduced from a variation of Proposition
2.1: the algebra A = C[X0 , Ys , Zr , Tℓ ]/I, where I = (X0 ) + M1⊥ ∩ M2⊥ , has dimension
rkC M1 + rkC M2 − rkC M12 . Indeed, the monomials not in I are formed by the union of
those that are not in (X0 ) + M1⊥ and those that are not in (X0 ) + M2⊥ . These two sets have
in common the monomials not divisible by X0 and dividing M12 . Hence the dimension of
the finite C-algebra A is rkC M1 + rkC M2 − rkC M12 . To see the upper bound, for both M1
and M2 we construct minimal apolar schemes containing the points [1 : α1,i : · · · : αs,i :
Pmin{a ,c }+1
0 : · · · : 0] (here the number of the last zeros is r + ℓ), where i=1 i i
αk,i = 0 for
each 1 ≤ k ≤ s. Indeed, these points form a minimal apolar scheme for M12 . Moreover,
they can be extended to minimal apolar schemes for both M1 and M2 by the assumption
bi , di ≥ 2. Taking the union of those minimal apolar schemes for M1 and M2 yields the
result.

Remark 3.11. In Theorem 3.10, assuming instead bi = 1 (or di = 1) for some i, we do not
know whether the upper bound is valid or not.
Corollary 3.12. Let M = {M1 , M2 }, where M1 = x0 xa11 · · · xann and M2 = x0 y1b1 · · · ysbs ,
with ai , bi ≥ 2. The simultaneous Waring rank of M satisfies
rkC M = rkC M1 + rkC M2 − 1.
A natural case is when the collection of monomials M is given by all the first partial
derivatives of a fixed monomial M .
Proposition 3.13. Let M = xa00 · · · xann be a monomial with ai > 1 for all i. Let M =
{∂x0 M, . . . , ∂xn M } be the collection of its first derivatives. Then
rkC M = rkC M.
Tn

Proof. Let H = i=0 (∂xi M )⊥ and d = deg M . Since M ⊥ + Td = H, by the apolarity
lemma [12, Lemma 1.15], we have rkC M ≤ rkC M . Again, by the apolarity lemma, proving
the equality is now equivalent to showing that every reduced ideal of points in H is not
supported on strictly less than rkC M points. Let us set F = xa00 −1 xa11 · · · xann . Note that
rkC F = rkC M and, by definition of H, H ⊂ F ⊥ . This concludes the proof.

Remark 3.14. Let M = x20 x21 x22 and let M be the collection of its first partial derivatives.
Proposition 3.13 yields that rkC M = rkC M = 9, whereas the alternating sum in Proposition 3.7 and Corollary 3.9 gives 13. Hence, in general, our hypothesis on the collection M
is necessary.
4. Final remarks
Sub-additivity of the rank and rank of binomials. From the definition, it follows
that rkC (F1 + . . . + Fr ) ≤ rkC F1 + . . . + rkC Fr . The well-known Strassen’s conjecture states
that, whenever the forms are in disjoint sets of variables, then equality holds; see [14, 9, 15].
The simultaneous Waring rank enters the picture because
rkC (F1 + . . . + Fr ) ≤ rkC {F1 , . . . , Fr } ≤ rkC F1 + . . . + rkC Fr .

A NOTE ON THE SIMULTANEOUS WARING RANK OF MONOMIALS

7

In particular, whenever the simultaneous rank is strictly less than the sum of the ranks,
the rank is strictly sub-additive.
As a direct consequence of Theorem 3.2, we obtain an upper bound for the rank of
special binomials.
Corollary 4.1. Let M1 , M2 , M12 be as in Theorem 3.2. Then
rkC (M1 + M2 ) ≤ rkC M1 + rkC M2 − rkC M12 .
Example 4.2. Let M1 = x0 x1 x2 x23 and M2 = x0 x1 x22 x3 , we have rkC M1 = rkC M2 = 12.
Thus, rkC (M1 + M2 ) ≤ 24. Corollary 4.1 implies the improved upper bound
rkC (M1 + M2 ) ≤ 12 + 12 − 8 = 16.
However, in a private communication, Bruce Reznick informed us that rkC (M1 + M2 ) ≤ 15.
Hence this bound is not sharp.
High simultaneous rank. The study of maximal Waring ranks compared with generic
Waring ranks has attracted a lot of attention; see, for instance, [6, 7, 5]. A similar analysis
could be performed in the case of the simultaneous Waring ranks. Here several difficulties
arise due, for example, to the fact that generic simultaneous ranks are largely unknown.
Remark 4.3. The simultaneous rank for a generic collection of k + 1 forms of degree d, in
n+1 variable, is h+1 if and only if the Segre-Veronese variety Pk ×Pn embedded in bidegree
(1, d) is such that its h-secant variety fills up the ambient space. Thus the knowledge of
the generic simultaneous rank relates to the open problem of classifying defective SegreVeronese varieties; see, for example, [3].
In [8], it is shown that monomials in three variables provide examples of forms having
complex rank higher than the generic rank. An analogue result is the following:
Proposition 4.4. Let S = C[x0 , x1 , x2 ]. Then
t+1 t
2
rkC {x0 xt1 xt+1
2 , x0 x1 x2 } = t + 4t + 3,
t+2 t
2
rkC {x0 xt1 xt+2
2 , x0 x1 x2 } = t + 6t + 5.
For t ≥ 1, these ranks are strictly higher than rkC {F1 , F2 }, for generic F1 , F2 ∈ Sd .

Proof. The rank for the generic pair F1 , F2 ∈ Sd is

 
1 d+2
2
2
unless d = 3, in which case the 5th secant variety has codimension one, rather than filling
up the ambient space; see [4, Theorem 1.3]. For d = 2t + 2, the generic rank is


7
2
t + t+3 .
2
For d = 2t + 3, the generic rank is


9
2
t + t+5 .
2

8

E. CARLINI AND E. VENTURA

The result follows by a direct computation.



References
[1] A. Anandkumar, R. Ge, D. Hsu, S. M. Kakade, M. Telgarsky, Tensor Decompositions for Learning
Latent Variable Models, Journal of Machine Learning Research 15:2773–2832, 2014.
[2] E. Angelini, F. Galuppi, M. Mella, and G. Ottaviani, On the number of Waring decompositions for a
generic polynomial vector, J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 2017.
[3] E. Ballico, A. Bernardi, M.V.Catalisano, Higher secant varieties of Pn × P1 embedded in bidegree (a, b),
Commun. Algebra 40(10): 3822–3840, 2012.
[4] K. Baur, J. Draisma, Secant dimensions of low-dimensional homogeneous varieties, Adv. Geom.
10(1):1–29, 2010.
[5] J. Buczyński, K. Han, M. Mella, and Z. Teitler, On the locus of points of high rank, arXiv:
1703.02829, 2017.
[6] G. Blekherman, Z. Teitler, On maximum, typical and generic ranks, Math. Ann. 362(3-4):1021–1031,
2015.
[7] J. Buczyński, Z. Teitler, Some examples of forms of high rank, Collect. Math. 67(3):431–441, 2016.
[8] E. Carlini, M.V. Catalisano, and A.V. Geramita, The solution to Waring’s problem for monomials and
the sum of coprime monomials, J. Algebra, 370:5–14, 2012.
[9] E. Carlini, M.V. Catalisano, and A. Oneto, Waring loci and Strassen conjecture, Adv. Math. 314:630–
662, 2017.
[10] E. Carlini, J. Chipalkatti, On Waring’s problem for several algebraic forms, Comment. Math. Helv.
78(3):494–517, 2003.
[11] C. Dionisi and C. Fontanari, Grassmann defectivity à la Terracini, Le Matematiche 56:245–255, 2001.
[12] A. Iarrobino and V. Kanev, Power sums, Gorenstein algebras, and determinantal loci, Lecture notes
in Mathematics, vol. 1721, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999.
[13] R.P. Stanley, Enumerative Combinatorics, Vol. 1, Corrected reprint of the 1986 original. Cambridge
Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 49, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1997.
[14] V. Strassen, Vermeidung von Divisionen, J. Reine Angew. Math. 264:184–202, 1973.
[15] Z. Teitler, Sufficient conditions for Strassen’s additivity conjecture, Illinois J. Math. 59(4):1071–1085,
2015.
[16] A. Terracini, Sulla rappresentazione delle coppie di forme ternarie mediante somme di potenze di forme
lineari, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl., XXIV, III, 91–100, 1915.
(E. Carlini) Department of Mathematical Sciences, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy
E-mail address: enrico.carlini@polito.it
(E. Ventura) Department of Mathematics, Texas A&M University, College Station, U.S.A.
E-mail address: eventura@math.tamu.edu

