arXiv:1707.00305v2 [math.AC] 16 Sep 2017

ANTICANONICAL MODULES OF SEGRE PRODUCTS
VIVIANA ENE, JÜRGEN HERZOG, AND DUMITRU I. STAMATE
Dedicated to Dorin Popescu at his 70th birthday
Abstract. We compute the anticanonical module of the Segre product of standard graded K-algebras and determine its depth.

Introduction
Let R be a standard graded Cohen–Macaulay K-algebra with canonical module
ωR . If R is Gorenstein, then ωR ∼
= R. Otherwise, if R happens to be generically
Gorenstein, then ωR may be identified with an ideal of height one. In this case one
may study the powers ωRa with a ∈ Z, and ask for which integers a the ideal ωRa is
Cohen–Macaulay. This question has been answered in [3] for the canonical module
of determinantal rings.
The ideal ωR−1 is commonly called the anticanonical ideal. Correspondingly, for
any Cohen–Macaulay K-algebra R, one calls the R-dual of ωR , namely ωR∗ =
HomR (ωR , R), the anticanonical module of R. This module is of particular interest.
Indeed, assume as before that R is generically Gorenstein. Let S be a Noether
normalization of R and σ : Q(R) → Q(S) a trace map, where Q(S) and Q(R) denote the total ring of fractions of S and R, respectively. Then the complementary
module CσR/S is defined and it is shown in [6, Satz 7.20] that CσR/S is isomorphic to
the canonical ideal of R. Its inverse is the Dedekind different Dσ (R/S). In number
theory this invariant encodes the ramification of the corresponding field extension,
and by definition it is isomorphic to the anticanonical ideal of R.
The anticanonical ideal appears as well in other homological contexts. As observed
in [7, Lemma 2.1], ωR−1 ωR describes the non-Gorenstein locus of R. Thus, if R is
Gorenstein on the punctured spectrum of R, then height(ωR−1ωR ) = dim R. On the
other hand, the anticanonical module is isomorphic to an ideal of height one. It may
be a Cohen–Macaulay ideal or not, while ωR is always Cohen–Macaulay.
In this paper we study the anticanonical module of the Segre product of standard
graded Cohen–Macaulay K-algebras. One motivation for us to study this question
came from the study of Hibi rings [8]. Their canonical ideals are well understood,
while at present this is not the case for their anticanonical ideals. The Hibi ring of
a sum of finite posets is just the Segre product of the Hibi rings of each summand.
Thus if we understand how to compute the anticanonical module of Segre products,
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 13H10; Secondary 13C14.
Key words and phrases. Canonical module, Anticanonical module, Gorenstein rings.
1

then for the study of the anticanonical ideal of a Hibi ring one may restrict oneself
to the case that the underlying poset is not a sum of two posets.
Our study of the canonical and anticanonical module of Segre products is based
on results from the fundamental paper “On graded rings, I” by Goto and Watanabe
[5]. There it is shown [5, Theorem 4.3.1] that if R and S are two standard graded
algebras with dim R, dim S ≥ 2 and T = R♯S, then ωT = ωR ♯ωS . One would then
expect that ωT∗ ∼
= ωR∗ ♯ωS∗ , and of course this would be true if, more generally, for
any finitely generated graded R-module M and any finitely generated graded Smodule N, it would follow that (M♯N)∗ ∼
= M ∗ ♯N ∗ . Example 1.2 shows that this
is not always the case. Therefore, in the first section of this paper we introduce
friendly families of algebras. We say that the family of standard graded K-algebras
R1 , . . . , Rm is friendly if the natural map
α : R1 (a1 )∗ ♯ · · · ♯Rm (am )∗ → (R1 (a1 )♯ · · · ♯Rm (am ))∗
is an isomorphism for all integers a1 , . . . , am . When m = 2 we say that (R1 , R2 ) is a
friendly pair. We show in Theorem 1.3, that if R1 , . . . , Rm is a friendly family, then
∗
(M1 ♯ · · · ♯Mm )∗ ∼
when Mi is a finitely generated graded Ri -module,
= M1∗ ♯ · · · ♯Mm
i = 1, . . . , m. We also prove in this section that if R1 , . . . , Rm are standard graded
toric rings with depth Ri ≥ 2 for i = 1, . . . , m, then R1 , . . . , Rm is a friendly family,
see Theorem 1.6.
We apply these results in Section 2 to conclude that for any pair (R, S) of standard
graded Cohen–Macaulay toric rings with dim R, dim S ≥ 2, we have the desired
isomorphism ωT∗ ∼
= ωR∗ ♯ωS∗ , where T = R♯S. This follows from Corollary 2.1, where
this result is formulated more generally for friendly pairs. In particular, if we assume
that R and S are Gorenstein rings of dimension ≥ 2 and with negative a-invariant,
we deduce from this result in Proposition 2.4 that the canonical module of the Segre
product T = R♯S is reflexive, which in turn, as a consequence of [6, Theorem 7.31],
implies that the localization TP is Gorenstein for any height 1 prime ideal P of T.
The concept of a friendly family can be extended to positively graded or multigraded algebras. Results similar to Theorems 1.3 and 1.6 may be formulated in that
generality. In view of later applications in Section 2 we restricted to the standard
graded case.
The next part of Section 2 is devoted to determine the depth of the anticanonical
module for R♯S when (R, S) is a friendly pair of standard graded Cohen–Macaulay
K-algebras. Inspired by Proposition 4.2.2 in [5], we determine, in terms of a and b,
the depth of R(a)♯S(b) when R and S are standard graded Gorenstein K-algebras,
and use this result in Corollary 2.7 to characterize those pairs of friendly Gorenstein
K-algebras for which the anticanonical module of the Segre product R♯S is Cohen–
Macaulay.
In Theorem 2.8 we generalize Corollary 2.7 to Segre products of finitely many
Gorenstein algebras. Namely, given R1 , . . . , Rm a friendly family of standard graded
Gorenstein K-algebras of dimension at least two, with −ρi denoting the a–invariant
of Ri for i = 1, . . . , m, Theorem 2.8 describes for which integers a the module
T {a} = R1 (−aρ1 )♯ · · · ♯Rm (−aρm )
2

of uniform twists of the canonical module of T = ♯m
i=1 Ri is a Cohen-Macaulay T module. In particular, assuming ρ1 ≥ · · · ≥ ρm , the anticanonical module ωT∗ is
Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
2m−1 ρm > 2m−2 ρm−1 > · · · > 2ρ2 > ρ1 ,
see Corollary 2.10.
In Proposition 2.11 we see that if all ρi ’s are positive and not all equal (i.e. T is
Cohen-Macaulay, and not a Gorenstein ring), then the set of a’s such that T {a} is
Cohen-Macaulay represents a bounded interval which is explicitly described.
If we assume, moreover, that ⊗m
i=1 Ri is a domain, which is for instance the case
when the Ri ’s are toric rings, then the canonical module and its dual may be identified with ideals in T . In Proposition 2.13, which is the last result in this paper, we
describe which powers ωTa are Cohen-Macaulay, using the previous Proposition 2.11.
1. Friendly families of standard graded algebras
Let R be a standard graded K–algebra, where K is a field, and M a finitely
generated graded R–module. Then the dual of M, M ∗ = HomR (M, R) is graded by
M ∗ = ⊕i∈Z HomiR (M, R) where
HomiR (M, R) = {ϕ ∈ HomR (M, R) : ϕ(Mk ) ⊆ Rk+i for all k}.
In what follows, we will also consider the graded K–dual of M, namely
M ∨ = HomK (M, K) = ⊕i∈Z HomK (M−i , K).
Let S be another standard graded K–algebra and N a finitely generated graded
S–module. Let T = R♯S be the Segre product of R and S. The algebra T is also
standard graded with the grading T = ⊕i≥0 (Ri ⊗K Si ). The Segre product M♯N is
a graded T –module with M♯N = ⊕j∈Z (Mj ⊗K Nj ).
There is a natural homogeneous T –module homomorphism α : M ∗ ♯N ∗ → (M♯N)∗
defined as follows. An element of (M ∗ ♯N ∗ )i = Mi∗ ⊗ Ni∗ is a sum of elements of
the form ϕ ⊗ ψ with ϕ ∈ Mi∗ , ψ ∈ Ni∗ . Here Mi∗ denotes the i-th homogeneous
component of M ∗ . Then α(ϕ ⊗ ψ) ∈ (M♯N)∗i is the map (M♯N)k → Rk+i ⊗ Sk+i
given by m ⊗ n 7→ ϕ(m) ⊗ ψ(n).
We can iterate this construction. In general, given R1 , . . . , Rm standard graded
algebras, and Mi a graded Ri -module, i = 1, . . . , m, we can construct a natural map
∗
α : M1∗ ♯ · · · ♯Mm
→ (M1 ♯ · · · ♯Mm )∗ .

Definition 1.1. The family of algebras R1 , . . . , Rm is called friendly if the natural
map
α : R1 (a1 )∗ ♯ · · · ♯Rm (am )∗ → (R1 (a1 )♯ · · · ♯Rm (am ))∗
is an isomorphism for all integers a1 , . . . , am .
In case m = 2 we say that (R1 , R2 ) is a friendly pair.
Not all families of standard graded K–algebras are friendly, as the following example shows.
3

Example 1.2. Let x and y be indeterminates over K and let R = K[x]/(x3 ) and
S = K[y]/(y 2). Then R♯S = K ⊕ Kxy. One has R(2)♯S(1) = Kx ⊕ Kx2 y,
with x sitting in degree −1, therefore R(2)♯S(1) ∼
= (R♯S)(1). On the other hand,
R(2)∗ ♯S(1)∗ ∼
R(−2)♯S(−1)
=
Ky.
=
Thus (R(2)♯S(1))∗ ∼
= (R♯S)(−1) has two nonzero components, while R(2)∗ ♯S(1)∗
has only one nonzero component. Hence these two modules cannot be isomorphic
and (R, S) is not a friendly pair.
However, we show in Theorem 1.6 that any finite collection of standard graded
toric rings is friendly. The following result will be useful to that purpose. At the
same time, Theorem 1.3 gives a wider class of modules for which the map α used
before is an isomorphism.
Theorem 1.3. Let R1 , . . . , Rm be a friendly family of standard graded K-algebras,
and T = ♯m
i=1 Ri . If Mi is a finitely generated graded Ri -module for i = 1, . . . , m, then
∗
m
∗
the natural map α : ♯m
i=1 Mi → (♯i=1 Mi ) is an isomorphism of graded T -modules.
Proof. The statement is proved by induction on
r = |{i : Mi is not free, i = 1, . . . , m}|.
If r = 0, by the definition of a friendly family and taking into account that the
dual functor and the Segre product commute with finite direct sums, it follows that
α is an isomorphism.
Let r > 0 and assume that the conclusion of the theorem holds when at most
r − 1 of the Mi ’s are not free. Without loss of generality we may assume M1 is not
free. Let
(1)

G → F → M1 → 0

be a presentation of M1 by finitely generated graded free R1 -modules. We dualize
(1) and then apply the exact functor −♯(♯i>1 Mi ) to obtain the exact sequence
(2)

∗
∗
∗
0 → ♯m
i=1 Mi → F ♯(♯i>1 Mi ) → G ♯(♯i>1 Mi ).

Similarly, if we first apply −♯(♯i>1 Mi ) to (1) and then we dualize, we have the
exact sequence
(3)

∗
∗
∗
0 → (♯m
i=1 Mi ) → (F ♯(♯i>1 Mi )) → (G♯(♯i>1 Mi )) .

The maps α induce a map between the chains (2) and (3). By the inductive
hypothesis, the two rightmost maps α are isomorphisms, hence using the 5-Lemma
([12, Exercise 1.3.3]) we get that the leftmost map α is an isomorphism, as well.
This finishes the proof.

Let us make a simple remark before proceeding to the main result of this section.
Remark 1.4. Let R and S be standard graded algebras such that the natural map
α : R(a)∗ ♯S → (R(a)♯S)∗
4

is an isomorphism for all a ∈ Z. Then
(R(a)♯S(b))∗ =
∼
=
=
=

((R(a − b)♯S)(b))∗ = (R(a − b)♯S)∗ (−b)
((R(a − b))∗ ♯S)(−b) = (R(b − a)♯S)(−b)
R(−a)♯S(−b)
R(a)∗ ♯S(b)∗ for all a, b ∈ Z.

Thus (R, S) is a friendly pair in the sense of Definition 1.1.
We note that, by [9, Corollary 16], the Segre product of two standard graded toric
rings R, S is a standard graded toric ring, as well. For the convenience of the reader
we include a short proof of this statement.
Proposition 1.5. Tensor products and Segre products of standard graded toric rings
are standard graded toric rings, too. In particular, they are domains.
Proof. Let R = K[ta1 , . . . , tan ] = K[A] where A is an integer matrix with column
vectors a1 , . . . , an and S = K[sb1 , . . . , sbm ] = K[B] where B is an integer matrix with
column vectors b1 , . . . , bm . Let I be the kernel of the morphism K[x1 , . . . , xn ] → K[A]
induced by xi 7→ tai for 1 ≤ i ≤ n, and J the kernel of the morphism K[y1, . . . , ym ] →
K[B] induced by yj 7→ sbj for 1 ≤ j ≤ m. Then
R ⊗K S ∼
= K[x, y]/IK[x, y] + JK[x, y]
where K[x, y] denotes the polynomial ring in the variables x1 , . . . , xn , y1 , . . . , ym .
Let L1 , L2 be the following lattices in Zn : L1 = {c ∈ Zn : Ac = 0} and L2 = {d ∈
m
Z : Bd = 0.} Then I = IL1 and J = IL2 where ILj is the lattice ideal of Lj for
j = 1, 2.
Let
(
!
!
!
)
c
A
0
c
L=
∈ Zn ⊕ Zm :
=0 .
d
0 B
d
Then IL = (IL1 + IL2 )K[x, y]. As Zn /L1 and Zm /L2 are torsion free, Zn ⊕ Zm /IL is
torsion free as well, hence IL is a prime ideal ([11, Theorem 8.2.2] or [4, Theorem 2.1])
and
R ⊗K S ∼
= K[x, y]/IL = K[C],
!

A 0
where C =
.
0 B
This implies that the morphism R ⊗K S → K[ta1 , . . . , tan , sb1 , . . . , sbm ] = K[C]
induced by tai ⊗ 1 7→ tai and 1 ⊗ sbj 7→ sbj is an isomorphism. Since R and S are
standard graded, we get
R♯S = K[tai sbj : 1 ≤ i ≤ n, 1 ≤ j ≤ m].

Theorem 1.6. Any finite family of standard graded toric rings of depth at least two
is friendly.
5

Proof. For the proof we make a series of reductions. Firstly, we note that it is
enough to prove the statement for friendly pairs, and then argue by induction on
the cardinality of the family of algebras. Indeed, if R1 , . . . , Rm are a friendly family of
standard graded toric rings of depth at least 2, and m ≥ 3, then for all a1 , . . . , am ∈ Z
we have
(4)

∗ ∼
∗
(♯m
= ((♯m−1
i=1 Ri (ai ))
i=1 Ri (ai ))♯Rm (am ))
∗
∗
∼
= (♯m−1
i=1 Ri (ai )) ♯Rm (am )
∗
∗
∼
= (♯m−1
i=1 Ri (ai ) )♯Rm (am )
∗
∼
= ♯m
i=1 Ri (ai ) .

Here, for the isomorphism in (4) we used Theorem 1.3 applied to the algebras ♯m−1
i=1 Ri
and Rm that are toric (cf. Proposition 1.5) and form a friendly pair, see the base
case which is discussed in the next paragraph.
For the induction step to work we need to prove the base case m = 2 in a
slightly more general setup. We let R and S be toric standard graded algebras
with depth R ≥ 2 or depth S ≥ 2. Without loss of generality, we may assume that
depth S ≥ 2. According to Remark 1.4, for checking that (R, S) is a friendly pair it
suffices to show that (R(a)♯S)∗ ∼
= R(a)∗ ♯S ∗ or, equivalently, (R(a)♯S)∗ ∼
= R(−a)♯S
for all a ∈ Z. Suppose that we have proved the latter isomorphism for a > 0, and
let a < 0. Then
(R(a)♯S)∗ = ((R♯S(−a))(a))∗ = (R♯S(−a))∗ (−a) ∼
= (R♯S(a))(−a) = R(−a)♯S.
Thus, in order to complete the proof, we need to show that if a > 0, then
(R(−a)♯S)∗ ∼
= R(a)♯S.
As a T = R♯S– module, R(−a)♯S is generated by 1 ⊗ Sa . Let f be a monomial in
·f
Ra . Since R is a domain, the multiplication map R(−a) → R is injective, and since
♯S is an exact functor, the induced map R(−a)♯S → R♯S is injective. Thus, the
map R(−a)♯S → R ⊗K S is injective as well. It follows that R(−a)♯S is isomorphic
to the ideal J of T generated by f ⊗ Sa . Therefore, up to a shift, (R(−a)♯S)∗ is
isomorphic to the inverse J −1 of J.
Since J is a monomial ideal, it follows that J −1 is a fractionary monomial ideal.
1
Let x = gg12 ⊗h
= gg21 ⊗ hh12 ∈ J −1 where g1 , g2 , h1 , h2 are monomials with deg g1 =
⊗h2
deg h1 = i and deg g2 = deg h2 = j. Then f gg21 ⊗ hh12 Sa ⊆ R♯S. This implies that
h1 /h2 ∈ U −1 , where U denotes the ideal of S generated by its homogeneous component of degree a. Since depth S ≥ 2, and U is a primary ideal in S with radical the
maximal graded ideal of S, we have grade U ≥ 2, which implies that U −1 ∼
= S by [2,
Exercise 1.2.24]. Hence h1 /h2 ∈ S which means i − j ≥ 0. Then f g1/g2 ∈ Ra+i−j ,
that is, g1 /g2 ∈ f −1 Ra+i−j . We obtain xf ∈ (R(a)♯S). Therefore, we have proved
that J −1 ⊆ f −1 (R(a)♯S).
On the other hand, J = f (R(−a)♯S) and f −1 (R(a)♯S)f (R(−a)♯S) ⊆ R♯S, which
implies that f −1 (R(a)♯S) ⊆ J −1 . Hence J −1 = f −1 (R(a)♯S), which proves our claim.

6

2. The anticanonical module and its twists
Let R be a standard graded K–algebra of dim R = r with maximal graded ideal
m. The module ωR = (Hmr (R))∨ ∼
= HomK (Hmr (R), K) is called the canonical module
r
of R. Here Hm (R) denotes the r-th local cohomology module of R. We refer the
reader to [5] for several properties of ωR .
Let ωR∗ be the dual of ωR , that is, ωR∗ = HomR (ωR , R). The module ωR∗ is called
the anticanonical module of R.
When R is a Cohen-Macaulay normal domain with canonical ideal ωR , it is customary to define the anticanonical module of R as the element in the divisor class
group Cl(R) which is the inverse to the canonical class [ωR ]. Then −[ωR ] = [ωR−1]
by the way Cl(R) is defined. By [2, Corollary 3.3.19] one has that ωR is a divisorial
ideal, i.e. (ωR−1 )−1 = ωR . It follows that ωR−1 = ((ωR−1 )−1 )−1 . On the other hand,
((ωR−1 )−1 )−1 is a divisorial ideal of R, see [1, Lemma 4.48(c)]. This implies that ωR−1
is a divisorial ideal, as well. We have ωR−1 ∼
= ωR∗ , since grade ωR > 0, see [10, Lemma
3.14]. This shows that −[ωR ] = [ωR∗ ] and our definition for the anticanonical module
of R agrees with the classical one when R is normal.
Theorem 1.3 has several consequences.
Corollary 2.1. Let (R, S) be a friendly pair of standard graded algebras with depth R ≥
2, depth S ≥ 2 and T = R♯S. Then
ωT∗ ∼
= ωR∗ ♯ωS∗ .
In particular, if S is Gorenstein with a–invariant σ, then
ωT∗ ∼
= ωR∗ ♯S(−σ).
Moreover, if ωR∗ is generated by w1 , . . . , wm with deg wi = ρi for 1 ≤ i ≤ m and
σ ≤ min1≤i≤m ρi , then ωT∗ is generated by wi ⊗ Sρi −σ , 1 ≤ i ≤ m.
Proof. By [5, Theorem 4.3.1], we have ωT ∼
= ωR ♯ωS . Hence, the desired isomorphism
follows by applying Theorem 1.3. The second isomorphism follows since ωS = S(σ)
if S is Gorenstein with a–invariant σ.

Remark 2.2. With notation as in Corollary 2.1, it is not true in general that ωT∗ and
ωR∗ ♯ωS∗ are isomorphic. Indeed, for the algebras R = K[x]/(x3 ) and S = K[y]/(y 2)
in Example 1.2 one has ωR ∼
= R(2), ωS ∼
= S(1), hence ωR∗ ♯ωS∗ = R(−2)♯S(−1) = Ky.
We note that the ring R♯S is graded isomorphic with the ring S, hence ωT∗ has two
nonzero components. This shows that ωT∗ and ωR∗ ♯ωS∗ are not isomorphic.
Corollary 2.3. Let (R, S) be a pair of friendly standard graded algebras and T =
R♯S. Assume that R, S are Gorenstein of a-invariants ρ, respectively, σ, and dim R,
dim S ≥ 2. Then ωT∗ ∼
= R(−ρ)♯S(−σ), hence ωT∗ is isomorphic to R(σ)♯S(ρ) up to a
shift.
Proof. Under our hypothesis, we have ωR = R(ρ) and ωS = S(σ). It follows that
ωT ∼

= R(ρ)♯S(σ), thus ωT∗ ∼
= R(−ρ)♯S(−σ) = (R(σ)♯S(ρ))(−ρ − σ).
7

Proposition 2.4. Let (R, S) be a pair of friendly standard graded algebras and
T = R♯S. Assume that R, S are Gorenstein of a-invariants ρ < 0, respectively,
σ < 0, and dim R, dim S ≥ 2. Then
(i) the canonical module ωT is reflexive;
(ii) the localization TP is Gorenstein for any height 1 prime ideal P of T.
Proof. (i). We have (R(ρ)♯S(σ))∗∗ ∼
= (R(−ρ)♯S(−σ))∗ ∼
= R(ρ)♯S(σ), thus the canonical module of T is reflexive.
Statement (ii) follows by [6, Theorem 7.31].

Remark 2.5. Note that, in the setting of Corollary 2.3, ωT is generated by 1⊗Sσ−ρ if
ρ < σ and ωT∗ is generated by Rσ−ρ ⊗1. This shows that one can easily find examples
of rings R, S such that µ(ωT ) > µ(ωT∗ ) or µ(ωT∗ ) > µ(ωT ). By µ(M) we denote the
minimal number of homogeneous generators of a finitely generated graded module
M.
It would be interesting to see under which conditions the anticanonical module of
Corollary 2.3 is Cohen-Macaulay. To this aim, we first prove a slightly more general
result, inspired by [5, Proposition 4.2.2].
Proposition 2.6. Let R, S be Gorenstein standard graded algebras with dim R =
r ≥ 1 and dim S = s ≥ 1. Let ρ be the a–invariant of R and σ the a–invariant of S.
Let M = R(a)♯S(b) for some integers a, b. The following statements hold:
(i) If r = s > 1, then depth M = r if a − b ≥ −σ or a − b ≤ ρ, and M is
Cohen-Macaulay if −σ > a − b > ρ.
(ii) If r > s > 1, then
depth M =

(

s,
r,

if b − a ≤ σ,
if a − b ≤ ρ and a − b < −σ,

and M is Cohen-Macaulay in all the other cases, that is, if −σ > a − b > ρ.
(iii) If r > s = 1, then depth M = 1 if b − a ≤ σ and M is Cohen-Macaulay
otherwise.
(iv) If r = s = 1, then M is Cohen-Macaulay for any a, b.
Proof. We first note that (iv) follows by [5, Theorem 4.2.3]. Let us now prove
statements (i)–(iii).
By [5, Theorem 4.2.3], dim R♯S = r + s − 1. Let m, n, and p be the maximal
graded ideals of R, S, and, respectively, R♯S. Since dim R > 1 or dim S > 1, by [5,
Theorem 4.1.5], we have
(5) H q (M) ∼
= (R(a)♯H q (S(b)))⊕(H q (R(a))♯S(b))⊕(⊕i+j=q+1 H i (R(a))♯H j (S(b))),
p

n

m

m

n

∼
for every q ≥ 0. By local duality [2, Theorem 3.6.19], we have
= R∨ if
q = r and Hmq (R(ρ)) = 0 if q 6= r. Hence, Hmq (R(a)) = Hmq (R(ρ))(a − ρ) = R∨ (a − ρ)
if q = r and Hmq (R(a)) = 0, otherwise. Similarly, we get Hnq (S(b)) = S ∨ (b − σ) if
q = s and Hnq (S(b)) = 0, otherwise.
(i). Let r = s > 1. By using (5), we get Hpq (M) = 0 if q 6= r, q < 2r + 1, and
H r (M) ∼
= (R(a)♯H r (S(b)))⊕(H r (R(a))♯S(b)) ∼
= (R(a)♯S ∨ (b−σ))⊕(R∨ (a−ρ)♯S(b)).
Hmq (R(ρ))

p

n

m

8

Thus Hpr (M) 6= 0 if and only if there exists i such that (R(a)♯S ∨ (b − σ))i 6= 0 or
(R∨ (a − ρ)♯S(b))i 6= 0. This is equivalent to (a + i ≥ 0 and b − σ + i ≤ 0) or
(a − ρ + i ≤ 0 and b + i ≥ 0) which means −a ≤ i ≤ σ − b or −b ≤ i ≤ ρ − a.
Therefore, Hpr (M) 6= 0 if and only if b − a ≤ σ or a − b ≤ ρ. This implies (i).
(ii). Let r > s > 1. By using (5), we get Hps (M) ∼
= (R(a)♯Hns (S(b))). Thus,
Hps (M) 6= 0 if and only if R(a)♯S ∨ (b − σ)i 6= 0. With similar calculations as in case
(i), we get Hps (M) 6= 0 if and only if b − a ≤ σ. Next, Hpr (M) ∼
= Hmr (R(a))♯S(b) =
R∨ (a − ρ)♯S(b). Thus Hpr (M) 6= 0 if and only if there exists i with a − ρ + i ≤ σ
and b + i ≥ 0. Hence, Hpr (M) 6= 0 if and only if a − b ≤ ρ and the conclusion of (ii)
follows.
(iii). Let r > s = 1. By (5), we get Hp1 (M) ∼
= R(a)♯Hn1 (S(b)) ∼
= R(a)♯S ∨ (b − a).
1
Thus, Hp (M) 6= 0 if and only if there exists i such that i + a ≥ 0 and b − σ + i ≤ 0.
This implies that Hp1 (M) 6= 0 if and only if b − a ≤ σ. In this case, depth M = 1.

Corollary 2.7. Let (R, S) be a pair of friendly standard graded algebras and T =
R♯S. Assume that R, S are Gorenstein of a-invariants ρ, respectively, σ, and dim R,
dim S ≥ 2. Then, the anticanonical module ωT∗ is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
σ > 2ρ and ρ > 2σ.
Proof. By Corollary 2.3, we have ωT∗ ∼
= R(−ρ)♯S(−σ). The conclusion follows by
applying Proposition 2.6 for a = −ρ and b = −σ.

We can generalize the above corollary to any friendly family R1 , . . . , Rm of Gorenstein standard graded algebras of dimension at least two.
Theorem 2.8. Let R1 , . . . , Rm be a friendly family of standard graded algebras with
dim Ri = di ≥ 2 for 1 ≤ i ≤ m. Assume that Ri is Gorenstein of a–invariant −ρi
for 1 ≤ i ≤ m, with ρ1 ≥ ρ2 ≥ · · · ≥ ρm . Set T = R1 ♯ · · · ♯Rm and let a be any
integer.
Then the T -module M = ♯m
i=1 Ri (−aρi ) is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
(1 − a)ρℓ+1 > −aρℓ ,
for ℓ = 1, . . . , m − 1, if a ≤ 0, or
aρℓ+1 > (a − 1)ρℓ , for ℓ = 1, . . . , m − 1, if a > 0.
In particular, if M is a Cohen-Macaulay module then T is a Cohen-Macaulay ring.
Proof. Let Mi = Ri (−aρi ) and mi the graded maximal ideal of Ri for 1 ≤ i ≤ m.
Let m be the graded maximal ideal of ♯m
i=1 Ri . By applying induction on m and [5,
Proposition 4.4.3, Theorem 4.1.5], we obtain:
dim ♯m
i=1 Mi

(6)

=

m
X

di − (m − 1)

i=1

and
(7)

Hmq (M) ∼
=

m
M
ℓ=1

M

1≤i1 <···<iℓ ≤m
j1 +···+jℓ =q+(ℓ−1)

M1 ♯ · · · ♯Hmj1i1 (Mi1 )♯ · · · ♯Hmjℓi (Miℓ )♯ · · · ♯Mm .
ℓ

9

Using [2, Theorems 3.5.7 and 3.6.18] we get
(8)

Hmj i (Mi ) = Hmj i (Ri (−aρi )) = 0 if j 6= di and
Hmdii (Mi ) = Hmdii (Ri (−aρi )) ∼
= Hmdii (Ri )(−aρi ) ∼
= (ωR∨i )(−aρi )
∼
= (Ri (−ρi ))∨ (−aρi ) ∼
= R∨ ((1 − a)ρi ).
i

Pm

Set d = i=1 di − (m − 1). We know that M is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
Hmq (M) = 0 for all q < d. When q = d, each summand in the RHS of (7) corresponds
to a choice of ℓ with 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ m, of 1 ≤ i1 < · · · < iℓ ≤ m and j1 , . . . , jℓ such that
P
Pℓ
Pm
j1 +· · ·+jℓ = m
i=1 (di −1)+ℓ. The latter equation implies
i=1 (ji −1) =
i=1 (di −1).
Since ji ≤ di we must have ℓ = m, ji = di for i = 1, . . . , m and i1 = 1, . . . , im = m,
hence
di
Hmd (M) ∼
= ♯m
i=1 Hmi (Mi ).
On the other hand, by (8), for any nonzero summand in the RHS of (7) with
ℓ = Pm we must have i1 = 1, . . . , im = m and j1 = d1 , . . . , jm = dm , therefore
q= m
i=1 di − (m − 1) = d.
Therefore, M is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if, for 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ m − 1, and for all
1 ≤ i1 < · · · < iℓ ≤ m, we have
d

di

d

di

M1 ♯ · · · ♯Hmii11 (Mi1 )♯ · · · ♯Hmiℓℓ (Miℓ )♯ · · · ♯Mm = 0.
Note that, by (8),
M1 ♯ · · · ♯Hmii11 (Mi1 )♯ · · · ♯Hmiℓℓ (Miℓ )♯ · · · ♯Mm 6= 0
if and only if there exists k such that k−aρi ≥ 0 for i 6∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ } and (1−a)ρi +k ≤
0 for i ∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }. This is equivalent to the inequalities
min{(a − 1)ρi : i ∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }} ≥ k ≥ max{aρi : i 6∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }}.
Thus, we derive that
di

d

M1 ♯ · · · ♯Hmii11 (Mi1 )♯ · · · ♯Hmiℓℓ (Miℓ )♯ · · · ♯Mm = 0
if and only if
(9)

max{aρi : i ∈
/ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }} > min{(a − 1)ρi : i ∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }}.

Consequently, M is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if, for 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ m − 1, and for all
1 ≤ i1 < · · · < iℓ ≤ m, inequality (9) holds.
Case a < 0. The inequalities (9) are equivalent to
(10)

(1 − a) max{ρi : i ∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }} > −a min{ρi : i 6∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }}

for all ℓ and i1 , . . . , iℓ as above.
Let 1 ≤ ℓ ≤ m − 1. By (10), we have
(1 − a) max{ρm−ℓ+1 , . . . , ρm } > −a min{ρ1 , . . . , ρm−ℓ }
which implies (1 − a)ρm−ℓ+1 > −aρm−ℓ . Equivalently, (1 − a)ρℓ+1 > −aρℓ for
ℓ = 1, . . . , m − 1.
10

Conversely, if (1 − a)ρm−ℓ+1 > −aρm−ℓ then, for any 1 ≤ i1 < · · · < iℓ ≤ m, we
have
(1 − a) max{ρi : i ∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }} ≥ (1 − a)ρm−ℓ+1
> −aρm−ℓ ≥ −a min{ρi : i 6∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }},
and (10) holds.
Case a = 0. According to (9), M is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
0 > − max{ρi : i ∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }} = −ρi1 ,
for all ℓ < m and i1 < · · · < iℓ , which is equivalent to requiring ρi > 0 for i =
1, . . . , m.
In case a = 1, the inequalities (9) imply that M is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
ρi > 0 for i = 1, . . . , m.
Case a > 1. Now (9) implies that M is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
(11)

a max{ρi : i 6∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }} > (a − 1) min{ρi : i ∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }}

for all 1 ≤ ℓ < m and 1 ≤ i1 < · · · < iℓ ≤ m. In particular, for any 1 ≤ ℓ < m one
has
a max{ρℓ+1 , . . . , ρm } > (a − 1) min{ρ1 , . . . , ρℓ },
i.e. aρℓ+1 > (a − 1)ρℓ for 1 ≤ ℓ < m. We check that the latter inequalities imply
(11). Indeed, for ℓ < m and i1 < · · · < iℓ we have
a max{ρi : i 6∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }} ≥ a{ρℓ+1 , . . . , ρm } = aρℓ+1
> (a − 1)ρℓ = (a − 1) min{ρ1 , . . . , ρℓ }
≥ (a − 1) min{ρi : i ∈ {i1 , . . . , iℓ }}.
Let us assume that M is a Cohen-Macaulay T -module. To prove that T is a
Cohen-Macaulay ring is equivalent to the a-invariants of Ri be negative for all i,
see [5, Theorem 4.4.1(i)], or equivalently that ρm > 0. This was checked above for
0 ≤ a ≤ 1.
If a > 1, the inequality aρm > (a − 1)ρm−1 gives ρm > (a − 1)(ρm−1 − ρm ) ≥ 0.
Similarly, when a < 0, the inequality (1 − a)ρm > aρm−1 implies that ρm > a(ρm −
ρm−1 ) ≥ 0, as desired.

Remark 2.9. In the setting of Theorem 2.8, for a = 0 we get M = ♯m
i=1 Ri = T , and
m
m
∼
∼
if a = 1 we get M = ♯i=1 Ri (−ρi ) = ♯i=1 ωRi = ωT , see [5, Theorem 4.3.1].
Corollary 2.10. In the setting of Theorem 2.8, assume a 6= 0, 1. Denote C =
(a/(a − 1))sgn(a) . Then M is a Cohen-Macaulay T -module if and only if
C m−1 ρm > C m−2 ρm−1 > · · · > Cρ2 > ρ1 .
In particular, the anticanonical module ωT∗ is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
2m−1 ρm > 2m−2 ρm−1 > · · · > 2ρ2 > ρ1 .
11

Proof. The first part follows immediately from Theorem 2.8. For the computation
of the anticanonical module ωT∗ we use that ωRi = Ri (−ρi ), hence ωR∗ i = Ri (ρi ) for
all i. Moreover, since the algebras R1 , . . . , Rm are friendly, [5, Theorem 4.3.1] yields
ω∗ ∼
= (♯m ωR )∗ ∼
= ♯m ω ∗ ∼
= ♯m Ri (ρi ).
T

i=1

i

i=1 Ri

i=1


Proposition 2.11. Let R1 , . . . , Rm be a friendly family of standard graded algebras
with dim Ri ≥ 2 for 1 ≤ i ≤ m. Assume that Ri is Gorenstein of a–invariant −ρi for
1 ≤ i ≤ m with ρ1 ≥ ρ2 ≥ · · · ≥ ρm > 0. Let ρ = max{ρi /ρi+1 : i = 1, . . . , m − 1}.
{0}
For any integer a we set T {a} = ♯m
.
i=1 Ri (−aρi ) and we let T = T
{a}
Then the T -module T
is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if either ρ = 1 or
1
ρ
<a<
.
1−ρ
ρ−1
Proof. Since ρi > 0 for all i, it follows that T is a Cohen-Macaulay ring, cf. [5,
Theorem 4.4.4(i)]. Our hypothesis on the ρi ’s implies that ρ ≥ 1. Equality holds if
and only if ρ1 = · · · = ρm , i.e. T {a} is a shifted copy of T , hence Cohen-Macaulay.
As a matter of facts, the case ρ = 1 is equivalent to T being Gorenstein, by [5,
Theorem 4.4.7].
Assume ρ > 1. Then 1/(1 − ρ) < 0 and 1 < ρ/(ρ − 1). Since T is Cohen-Macaulay
it follows from Theorem 2.8 that T {1} is Cohen-Macaulay, too.
If a > 1, by Theorem 2.8 we see that T {a} is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
a/(a − 1) > ρℓ /ρℓ+1 for ℓ = 1, . . . , m − 1, i.e. a/(a − 1) > ρ, which is equivalent to
1 + 1/(a − 1) > ρ, and to 1/(a − 1) > ρ − 1. Thus a < ρ/(ρ − 1).
If a < 0, by Theorem 2.8 it follows that T {a} is Cohen-Macaulay if and only if
(a − 1)/a > ρ, which is equivalent to a > 1/(1 − ρ).

Corollary 2.12. In the setting of Proposition 2.11, assume ρ > 1. Then T {a} is
Cohen-Macaulay only for a = 0, 1 if and only if ρ ≥ 2. In particular, the anticanonical module ωT∗ is not Cohen-Macaulay when ρ ≥ 2.
Proof. It is clear that 1/(1 − ρ) < 0 and ρ/(ρ − 1) = 1 + 1/(ρ − 1) > 1, hence T {a} is
Cohen-Macaulay for a = 0, 1. That these are the only values, by Proposition 2.11,
it is equivalent to having −1 ≤ 1/(1 − ρ) and ρ/(ρ − 1) ≤ 2. It is easy to check that
both conditions mean ρ ≥ 2.
As noted in the proof of Corollary 2.10, the anticanonical module ωT∗ ∼
= T {−1} and
by the above arguments it is not Cohen-Macaulay when ρ ≥ 2.

By [2, Proposition 3.3.18], for a standard graded Cohen-Macaulay algebra R which
is generically Gorenstein (for instance, a domain), its canonical module may be
identified with an ideal in R, that we call a canonical ideal of R. If I and J are two
canonical ideals of R, they are isomorphic and there exists an element x invertible
in Q(R) such that I = xJ. Hence, for any integer a the T -modules I a and J a are
isomorphic, and Cohen-Macaulay or not at the same time.
The next result describes which powers of the canonical ideal of a Segre product
of some friendly Gorenstein algebras are Cohen-Macaulay.
12

Proposition 2.13. Let R1 , . . . , Rm be a friendly family of standard graded Gorenstein K-algebras of dimension at least two such that R1 ⊗K · · · ⊗K Rm is a domain.
Let −ρi be the a–invariant of Ri for i = 1, . . . , m. Assume ρ1 ≥ ρ2 ≥ · · · ≥ ρm > 0
and that ρ = max{ρi /ρi+1 : i = 1, . . . , m − 1} > 1.
a
Let T = ♯m
i=1 Ri , ωT a canonical ideal of T , and a any integer. Then ωT is a
Cohen-Macaulay T -module if and only if
1
ρ
<a<
.
1−ρ
ρ−1
Proof. The Segre product T is a Cohen-Macaulay ring which is not Gorenstein, since
all ρi ’s are positive and ρ > 1. By [5, Theorem 4.3.1], the canonical module of T
is isomorphic to ♯m
i=1 Ri (−ρi ), which is generated by 1 ⊗ R2,ρ1 −ρ2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ Rm,ρ1 −ρm .
Here Ri,j denotes the jth homogeneous component of Ri for i = 1, . . . , m and j ≥ 0.
Pick f = u1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ um−1 ⊗ 1 with 0 6= ui ∈ Ri,ρi −ρm for i = 1, . . . , m − 1. Since
⊗m
i=1 Ri is a domain it follows that T is a domain, as well. Therefore, the map
·f
φ : ♯m
i=1 Ri (−ρi ) → T is injective. Without loss of generality we may assume that ωT
is the image of φ. Hence
ωT = (u1 ⊗ u2 R2,ρ1 −ρ2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ um−1 Rm−1,ρ1 −ρm−1 ⊗ Rm,ρ1 −ρm )T.
Assume a > 0. Since the algebras Ri are standard graded, we get
ωTa = (ua1 ⊗ ua2 R2,a(ρ1 −ρ2 ) ⊗ · · · ⊗ uam−1 Rm−1,a(ρ1 −ρm−1 ) ⊗ Rm,a(ρ1 −ρm ) )T.
Arguing as above, we have that ωTa is isomorphic to the T -module ♯m
i=1 Ri (−aρi ), for
all a > 0.
With a similar argument we may identify the anticanonical module ωT∗ ∼
= ♯m
i=1 Ri (ρi )
with the ideal
ωT∗ = (R1,ρ1 −ρm ⊗ v2 R2,ρ2 −ρm ⊗ · · · ⊗ vm−1 Rm−1,ρ1 −ρm−1 ⊗ vm )T,
where 0 6= vi ∈ Ri,ρ1 −ρi for i = 2, . . . , m. A similar discussion shows the isomorphism
ωTa ∼
= ♯m
i=1 Ri (−aρi ) for negative a, as well.
The conclusion now follows by Theorem 2.11.

Acknowledgement. We thank an anonymous referee for valuable comments, in
particular for suggesting a correction to Theorem 1.6.
Dumitru Stamate was supported by a fellowship at the Research Institute of the
University of Bucharest (ICUB).
References
[1] W. Bruns, J. Gubeladze, Polytopes, Rings and K-theory, Springer Monographs in Mathematics,
Springer, 2009.
[2] W. Bruns, J. Herzog, Cohen-Macaulay rings, Revised Ed., Cambridge University Press, 1998.
[3] W. Bruns, T. Römer, A. Wiebe, Initial algebras of determinantal rings, Cohen-Macaulay and
Ulrich ideals, Michigan Math. J. 53 (2005), 71–81.
[4] D. Eisenbud, B. Sturmfels, Binomial ideals, Duke Math. J. 84 (1996), 1–45.
[5] S. Goto, K.-i. Watanabe, On graded rings, I, J. Math. Soc. Japan 30 (2) (1978), 179–213.
[6] J. Herzog, E. Kunz, Der kanonische Modul eines Cohen-Macaulay Rings, Lecture Notes in
Mathematics, vol 238 Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1971.
13

[7] J. Herzog, T. Hibi, D. I. Stamate, The trace of the canonical module, Preprint 2016,
arXiv:1612.02723.
[8] T. Hibi, Distributive lattices, affine semigroup rings and algebras with straightening laws, In:
“Commutative Algebra and Combinatorics” (M. Nagata and H. Matsumura, Eds.), Adv. Stud.
Pure Math. 11, North–Holland, Amsterdam, (1987), 93–109.
[9] T. Kahle, J. Rauh, Toric fiber products versus Segre products, Abh. Math. Semin. Univ. Hambg.
84 (2014) no. 2, 187–201.
[10] H. Lindo, Trace ideals and centers of endomorphism rings of modules over commutative rings,
J. Algebra 482 (2017), 102–130.
[11] R. Villarreal, Monomial Algebras, Second Edition, Monographs and Research Notes in Mathematics, Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2015.
[12] Ch. A. Weibel, An Introduction to Homological Algebra, Cambridge Stud. Adv. Math., vol.
38, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994.
Viviana Ene, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Ovidius University,
Bd. Mamaia 124, 900527 Constanta, Romania
E-mail address: vivian@univ-ovidius.ro
Jürgen Herzog, Fachbereich Mathematik, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Campus
Essen, 45117 Essen, Germany
E-mail address: juergen.herzog@uni-essen.de
Dumitru I. Stamate, ICUB/Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Bucharest, Str. Academiei 14, Bucharest – 010014, Romania
E-mail address: dumitru.stamate@fmi.unibuc.ro

14

