ON r-STACKED TRIANGULATED MANIFOLDS

arXiv:1209.0868v1 [math.CO] 5 Sep 2012

SATOSHI MURAI AND ERAN NEVO
Abstract. The notion of r-stackedness for simplicial polytopes was introduced
by McMullen and Walkup in 1971 as a generalization of stacked polytopes. In
this paper, we define the r-stackedness for triangulated homology manifolds and
study their basic properties. In addition, we find a new necessary condition for
face vectors of triangulated manifolds when all the vertex links are polytopal.

1. Introduction
A triangulated d-ball is said to be r-stacked if it has no interior faces of dimension
≤ d − r − 1, and the boundary of an r-stacked d-ball is called an r-stacked (d − 1)sphere. It is known that r-stacked d-balls and (d − 1)-spheres with r < d2 have
many nice combinatorial properties, and they have been used to obtain several important results on polytopes and triangulated spheres. For example, they appeared
in Barnette’s lower bound theorem [Ba1, Ba2] and in the generalized lower bound
conjecture given by McMullen and Walkup [MW]. They also appeared in the proof
of the sufficiency of the famous g-theorem by Billera and Lee [BL] (see [KlL]) as well
as in the construction of many non-polytopal triangulated spheres given by Kalai
[Ka1]. The purpose of this paper is to extend this notion to triangulated manifolds,
and establish their fundamental properties.
Throughout the paper, we fix a field k. For a simplicial complex ∆ and its face
F ∈ ∆, the link of F in ∆ is the simplicial complex
lk∆ (F ) = {G ∈ ∆ : F ∪ G ∈ ∆ and F ∩ G = ∅}.
A simplicial complex ∆ of dimension d is said to be a (k-)homology d-sphere if,
for all faces F ∈ ∆ (including the empty face ∅), one has βi (lk∆ (F )) = 0 for
e i (∆; k) is the ith Betti
i 6= d − #F and βd−#F (lk∆ (F )) = 1, where βi (∆) = dimk H
number of ∆ over k. A simplicial complex is said to be pure if all its facets have the
same dimension. A (k-)homology d-manifold without boundary is a d-dimensional
pure simplicial complex all whose vertex links are k-homology spheres. A pure
d-dimensional simplicial complex ∆ is said to be a (k-)homology d-manifold with
boundary if it satisfies
(i) for all ∅ =
6 F ∈ ∆, βi (lk∆ (F )) vanish for i 6= d − #F and is equal to 0 or 1
for i = d − #F .
(ii) the boundary ∂∆ = {F ∈ ∆ : βi (lk∆ (F )) = 0} ∪ {∅} of ∆ is a k-homology
(d − 1)-manifold without boundary.
Research of the first author was partially supported by KAKENHI 22740018. Research of the
second author was partially supported by Marie Curie grant IRG-270923 and by ISF grant.
1

2

SATOSHI MURAI AND ERAN NEVO

Triangulations of topological manifolds are examples of homology manifolds. Also,
condition (ii) can be omitted if we replace k by Z (see [Mi]).
We say that a homology d-manifold ∆ with boundary is r-stacked if it has no
interior faces (namely, faces which are not in ∂∆) of dimension ≤ d − r − 1. Also, a
homology manifold without boundary is said to be r-stacked if it is the boundary of
an r-stacked homology manifold with boundary. We prove the following properties
for r-stacked homology manifolds.
(a) Enumerative criterion: We give a simple criterion for the r-stackedness in
terms of h-vectors and Betti numbers for homology manifolds with boundary (Theorem 3.1). Also, we give a similar result for (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 1)-manifolds without boundary with r ≤ d2 when all the vertex
links are polytopal (Corollary 5.8). In particular, these results prove that
r-stackedness depends only on face numbers and Betti numbers for these
manifolds.
(b) Vanishing of Betti numbers and missing faces: We show that if a homology
manifold (with or without boundary) is r-stacked, then it has zero Betti numbers and no missing faces in certain dimensions (Corollary 3.2 and Theorem
4.4).
(c) Uniqueness of stacked manifolds: For an (r − 1)-stacked (d − 1)-manifold ∆
without boundary, it is shown that if r ≤ d2 then there is a unique (r − 1)stacked homology manifold Σ such that ∂Σ = ∆ (Theorem 4.2).
(d) Local criterion: For r < d2 , we show that a homology (d−1)-manifold without
boundary is (r−1)-stacked if and only if all its vertex links are (r−1)-stacked
(Theorem 4.6).
(e) The g̃-vector — a new necessary condition for face vectors: Motivated by a
recent conjecture given by Bagchi and Datta, we define the g̃-vector of a simplicial complex ∆, and show that it is an M-vector if ∆ is an (r − 1)-stacked
homology (d − 1)-manifolds without boundary when r ≤ d2 . Moreover, regardless of stackedness, we show that the same result holds for connected
orientable rational homology manifolds all whose vertex links are polytopal
(Theorem 5.4).
Most of the results listed above are natural extensions of known results for triangulated balls and spheres. However their proofs are not straightforward and we
believe that these properties are useful in the study of face numbers of triangulated
manifolds. Indeed, the results about the g̃-vector prove that [BD2, Conjecture 1.6]
holds for all homology manifolds all whose vertex links are polytopal.
About (c) and (d), the same results were proved independently by Bagchi and
Datta [BD3, Theorem 2.19] with essentially the same proof. Their results also prove
vanishing of missing faces in (b).
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we recall basic properties of
′
h - and h′′ -vectors which play an important role in the study of face numbers of
homology manifolds. In Section 3, we study r-stacked homology manifolds with
boundary. In Sections 4 and 5, we study r-stacked homology manifolds without
boundary and consider the g̃-vector.

ON r-STACKED TRIANGULATED MANIFOLDS

3

2. h′ - and h′′ -vectors
In this section, we recall h′ - and h′′ -vectors and their algebraic meanings. We first
recall some basics on simplicial complexes. A simplicial complex ∆ on the vertex
set V is a collection of subsets of V satisfying that F ∈ ∆ and G ⊂ F imply G ∈ ∆.
Elements of ∆ are called faces of ∆ and subsets of V which are not faces of ∆ are
called non-faces of ∆. The maximal faces of ∆ (with respect to inclusion) are called
the facets of ∆ and the minimal non-faces of ∆ are called the missing faces of ∆.
The dimension of a face (or a missing face) F is #F − 1, where #X denotes the
cardinality of a finite set X, and a face (or a missing face) of dimension k is called
a k-face (or a missing k-face). Also, the dimension of a simplicial complex is the
maximum dimension of its faces. For a simplicial complex ∆ of dimension d − 1, let
fk = fk (∆) be the number of k-faces of ∆ for k = −1, 0, . . . , d − 1, where f−1 = 1.
The vector f (∆) = (f−1 , f0 , . . . , fd−1 ) is called the f -vector of ∆. Also, the h-vector
h(∆) = (h0 (∆), h1 (∆), . . . , hd (∆)) of ∆ is defined by the relation
d
X
′

i=0
′′

i

hi (∆)t =

d
X

fi−1 (∆)ti (1 − t)d−i .

i=0

Now we define h - and h -vectors. For a simplicial complex ∆ of dimension d − 1, its
h′ -vector h′ (∆) = (h′0 (∆), . . . , h′d (∆)) and its h′′ -vector h′′ (∆) = (h′′0 (∆), . . . , h′′d (∆))
are defined by
 X
i−1
d
′
(−1)i−k βk−1 (∆)
hi (∆) = hi (∆) −
i
k=1

for i = 0, 1, . . . , d, and by
h′′i (∆)

 X
 
i
d
d
i−k
′
βi−1 (∆)
= hi (∆) −
(−1) βk−1 (∆) = hi (∆) −
i k=1
i

for i = 0, 1, . . . , d − 1 and h′′d (∆) = h′d (∆). Note that
P
P
d−k
h′d (∆) = dℓ=0 (−1)ℓ−d fℓ−1 − d−1
βk−1 (∆) = βd−1 (∆).
k=0 (−1)

If one knows the Betti numbers of ∆, then knowing h(∆) is equivalent to knowing
h′ (∆) (or h′′ (∆)).
h′ - and h′′ -vectors have nice algebraic meanings in terms of Stanley–Reisner rings.
Let S = k[x1 , . . . , xn ] be a polynomial ring over a field k with deg xi = 1 for all i.
For a simplicial complex ∆ on [n] = {1, 2, . . . , n}, the Stanley–Reisner ring of ∆ is
the quotient ring
k[∆] = S/I∆
where I∆ = (xi1 · · · xik : {i1 , . . . , ik } 6∈ ∆). If ∆ has dimension d − 1 and k is infinite,
there is a sequence Θ = θ1 , . . . , θd ∈ S1 of linear forms such that dimk (S/(I∆ +
(Θ))) < ∞. This sequence Θ is called a linear system of parameter (l.s.o.p. for
short) of k[∆]. In the rest of this paper, we always assume that k is infinite.
A simplicial complex ∆ of dimension d − 1 is said to be Cohen–Macaulay (over
e i (lk∆ (F ); k) vanishes for i 6= d − 1 − #F . Note that any
k) if, for all F ∈ ∆, H
Cohen–Macaulay simplicial complex is pure. A pure simplicial complex is said to be

4

SATOSHI MURAI AND ERAN NEVO

Buchsbaum (over k) if all its vertex links are Cohen–Macaulay. Homology manifolds
are examples of Buchsbaum simplicial complexes.
Let m = (x1 , P
. . . , xn ) be the graded maximal ideal of S. For a graded S-module
N, let FN (t) = i∈Z (dimk Ni )ti be the Hilbert Series of N, where Ni is the graded
component of N of degree i, and let Soc (N) = {f ∈ N : mf = 0} be the socle of N.
The following results shown in [Sc, p. 137] and [NS1, Theorem 3.5] give algebraic
meanings of h′ - and h′′ -vectors.
Lemma 2.1. Let ∆ be a Buchsbaum simplicial complex of dimension d − 1, Θ =
θ1 , . . . , θd an l.s.o.p. of k[∆] and R = S/(I∆ + (Θ)). Then
(i) (Schenzel) FR (t) = h′0 (∆) + h′1 (∆)t + · · · + h′d (∆)td .
(ii) (Novik–Swartz) dimk (Soc (R))i ≥ di βi−1 (∆) for all i. In particular, there
is an ideal N ⊂ Soc (R) such that FR/N (t) = h′′0 (∆) + h′′1 (∆)t + · · · + h′′d (∆)td .
In the rest of this section, we study the relation between the vanishing of h′′ numbers and missing faces. For a homogeneous ideal I ⊂ S, let µk (I) be the
number of elements of degree k in a minimal generating set of I, namely, µk (I) =
dimk (I/mI)k . Since missing faces of ∆ correspond to the minimal generators of I∆ ,
µk (I∆ ) is equal to the number of missing (k − 1)-faces of ∆.
Lemma 2.2. Let I ⊂ S be a homogeneous ideal, w ∈ S1 a linear form and k ≥ 2
an integer. If the multiplication ×w : (S/I)k−1 → (S/I)k is injective then µk (I) =
µk (I + (w)).
Proof. It is clear that µk (I) ≥ µk (I + (w)) for k ≥ 1 even without injectivity
assumption. We show µk (I) ≤ µk (I + (w)). Let σ1 , . . . , σt ∈ I be elements of degree
k which are linearly independent in I/mI. What we must prove is that they are
also linearly independent in (I + (w))/m(I + (w)).
Let τ = λ1 σ1 + · · · + λt σt ∈ m(I + (w)), where λ1 , . . . , λt ∈ k. We claim τ ∈ mI.
Indeed, if τ 6∈ mI then there are ρ′ ∈ mI and ρ′′ 6∈ I such that τ = ρ′ + wρ′′ ,
which implies ρ′′ is in the kernel of the multiplication map ×w : (S/I)k−1 → (S/I)k ,
contradicting the assumption.

Lemma 2.3. For a homogeneous ideal I ⊂ S, if (S/I)j = 0 for some j ≥ 0 then
µk (I) = 0 for k ≥ j + 1.
Proof. Since (S/I)j = 0, we have Ik = mk for k ≥ j. Thus µk (I) = µk (m) = 0 for
j ≥ k + 1.

The following statement appears in [Sc, Corollary 2.5 and Theorem 4.3].
Lemma 2.4 (Schenzel). Let ∆ be a Buchsbaum simplicial complex of dimension
d − 1, R = k[∆], Θ = θ1 , . . . , θd an l.s.o.p. of k[∆], and let K(i) be the kernel of
×θi : R/(θ1 , . . . , θi−1 )R → R/(θ1 , . . . , θi−1 )R.

Then dimk K(i)j = i−1
βj−1 (∆) for all i and j.
j

Proposition 2.5. Let ∆ be a Buchsbaum simplicial complex of dimension d − 1. If
h′′r (∆) = 0 then

ON r-STACKED TRIANGULATED MANIFOLDS

5

(i) βk (∆) = 0 for k ≥ r.
(ii) ∆ has no missing faces of dimension ≥ r + 1.
Proof. Let Θ be an l.s.o.p. of k[∆]. Since h′′r (∆) = 0, by Lemma 2.1(ii) all elements
in S/(I∆ + (Θ)) of degree r are contained in the socle of S/(I∆ + (Θ)). This fact
implies
S/(I∆ + (Θ))k = 0 for all k ≥ r + 1.

Then since dimk (S/(I∆ +(Θ)))k ≥ kd βk−1 (∆) by Lemma 2.1(ii), we have βk (∆) = 0
for k ≥ r, proving (i). Moreover, this fact and Lemmas 2.2 and 2.4 show µk (I∆ ) =
µk (I∆ + (Θ)) for k ≥ r + 1. Since S/(I∆ + (Θ))r+1 = 0 by (1), the statement (ii)
follows from Lemma 2.3.

(1)

3. Stacked manifolds with boundary
In this section, we study r-stacked manifolds with boundary. Recall that a homology d-manifold with boundary is said to be r-stacked if it has no interior faces
of dimension ≤ d − r − 1 and that a homology manifold without boundary is said to
be r-stacked if it is the boundary of an r-stacked homology manifold with boundary.
For a simplicial complex ∆ of dimension d − 1, let
gi (∆) = hi (∆) − hi−1 (∆)
for i = 0, 1, . . . , d.
Enumerative criterion. It is known that a homology ball ∆ is (r − 1)-stacked if
and only if hr (∆) = 0. See [Mc, Proposition 2.4]. We first extend this property for
stacked manifolds.
Let ∆ be a homology (d−1)-manifold with boundary. Then the Dehn–Sommerville
relations for homology manifolds with boundary [Gr, Corollary 2.2] say
 
d
(2)
(−1)d−1−i χ
e(∆)
gi (∂∆) = hi (∆) − hd−i (∆) +
i
P
k
where χ
e(∆) = d−1
fk (∆) is the reduced Euler characteristic. By substitutk=−1 (−1) 
P
d Pd−i
k
d−i−k
′′
βk−1 (∆) and χ
e(∆) = d−1
ing hd−i (∆) = hd−i (∆) + i
k=0 (−1) βk (∆)
k=1 (−1)
to (2), we obtain
  X
d−1
d
′′
(3)
(−1)d−1−i−k βk (∆).
gi (∂∆) = hi (∆) − hd−i (∆) +
i k=d−i
Theorem 3.1. Let 1 ≤ r ≤ d and let ∆ be a homology (d − 1)-manifold with
boundary. Then ∆ is (r − 1)-stacked if and only if h′′r (∆) = 0.
Proof. We first prove that ∆ is (r − 1)-stacked if and only if gi (∂∆) = hi (∆) for all
i ≤ d − r. Indeed, it is clear that ∆ is (r − 1)-stacked if and only if fi (∂∆) = fi (∆)
for all i ≤ d − r − 1. Consider the equations
(4)

d
X
i=0

i

fi−1 (∆)t =

d
X
i=0

hi (∆)ti (t + 1)d−i

6

SATOSHI MURAI AND ERAN NEVO

and
(5)

d−1
X

fi−1 (∂∆)t =

d−1
X

hi (∂∆)ti (t + 1)d−i−1

=

d−1
X

hi (∂∆){ti (t + 1)d−i − ti+1 (t + 1)d−(i+1) }.

i

i=0

i=0

i=0

By comparing the coefficients of the polynomials in (4) and (5), we conclude that
fi (∂∆) = fi (∆) for i ≤ d − r − 1 if and only if hi (∂∆) − hi−1 (∂∆) = hi (∆) for all
i ≤ d − r.
We first prove the ‘if’ part. Suppose h′′r (∆) = 0. Then we have h′′k (∆) = 0 for all
k ≥ r (see (1) in the proof of Proposition 2.5). Also, βr (∆) = · · · = βd−1 (∆) = 0 by
Proposition 2.5. Then the Dehn–Sommerville relation (3) shows
gi (∂∆) = hi (∆)
for all i ≤ d − r, as desired.
Next, we prove the ‘only if’ part. Suppose gi (∂∆) = hi (∆) for all i ≤ d − r. The
Dehn–Sommerville relations (3) imply
  X
 
d−1
d
d
′′
(6)
(−1)d−1−i−k βk (∆)
βd−i (∆) +
hd−i (∆) = −
i k=d−i+1
i
for all i ≤ d − r. We show by induction on i that βd−i (∆) = 0 and h′′d−i (∆) = 0 for
i ≤ d − r: The claim is clear for i = 0 by (6). For i > 0, by induction
the second

d
′′
summand on the right-hand side of (6) vanish. Thus hd−i (∆) = − i βd−i (∆). Since
h′′ -vectors and Betti numbers are non-negative we have h′′d−i (∆) = βd−i (∆) = 0. 
Vanishing of missing faces. If ∆ is an (r − 1)-stacked triangulated ball then ∆ is
Cohen–Macaulay and hr (∆) = 0. These facts and Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3 say that ∆
has no missing faces of dimension ≥ r (another proof of this fact was given in [BD3,
Lemma 2.10]). Proposition 2.5 and Theorem 3.1 prove an analogue of this fact for
manifolds.
Corollary 3.2. Let ∆ be an (r −1)-stacked homology manifold with boundary. Then
(i) βk (∆) = 0 for k ≥ r.
(ii) ∆ has no missing k-faces of dimension ≥ r + 1.
Finally, we give a few known examples of stacked manifolds.
Example 3.3 (Kühnel–Lassmann construction [Kü, KüL]). Let Kd,n be the simplicial complex on [n] generated by the facets
{{i, i + 1, . . . , i + d − 1} : i = 1, 2, . . . , n},
where i + k means i + k − n if i + k > n. If n ≥ 2d − 1 then Kd,n is a homology
manifold whose boundary triangulates either S 1 × S d−3 or a non-orientable S d−3 bundle over S 1 [KüL]. Since the interior faces of Kd,n are {i, i + 1, . . . , i + d − 2}
for i = 1, 2, . . . , n, the simplicial complex Kd,n is 1-stacked and has the h′′ -vector
(1, n − d, 0, . . . , 0).

ON r-STACKED TRIANGULATED MANIFOLDS

7

Example 3.4 (Klee–Novik construction [KN]). Let X = {x1 , . . . , xd } and Y =
{y1 , . . . , yd} be disjoint sets. For integers 0 ≤ i ≤ d − 2, let Bd,i be the simplicial
complex on the vertex set X ∪ Y generated by the facets
{{z1 , . . . , zd } : zi ∈ {xi , yi } and #{k : {zk , zk+1} 6⊂ X and {zk , zk+1 } 6⊂ Y } ≤ i}.
The simplicial complex Bd,i is a combinatorial manifoldwhose boundary triangulates
S i × S d−i−2 and its h′′ -vector is given by h′′k (Bd,i ) = kd for k ≤ i and h′′i+1 (Bd,i ) = 0
[KN, Proposition 5.1]. In particular, these triangulated manifolds are i-stacked by
Theorem 3.1.
Remark 3.5. If ∆ is an (r − 1)-stacked triangulated ball then ∆ has no missing
r-faces. However, an (r − 1)-stacked homology manifold with boundary could have
missing r-faces. Indeed, the simplicial complex K4,7 in Example 3.3 is 1-stacked but
has a missing face {1, 4, 7}.
4. Stacked manifolds without boundary
In Sections 4 and 5, we study (r − 1)-stacked (d − 1)-manifold without boundary
with r ≤ d2 . In this section, we study these manifolds from combinatorial viewpoints.
Uniqueness of stacked manifolds. A homology d-manifold ∆ with boundary is
e k (∆; k) = 0 for all k and ∂∆ is a (k-)homology
said to be a (k-)homology d-ball if H
(d − 1)-sphere. For a simplicial complex ∆ on [n], let
∆(r) = {F ⊂ [n] : skelr (F ) ⊂ ∆},
where skelr (F ) = {G ⊂ F : #G ≤ r + 1} is the r-skeleton of F . This simplicial
complex can be defined algebraically. For a homogeneous ideal I ⊂ S, let I≤k be
the ideal generated by all elements in I of degree ≤ k. Then it is easy to see that
(I∆ )≤r+1 = I∆(r) .
For an (r −1)-stacked homology (d −1)-sphere ∆, it was shown by McMullen [Mc,
Theorem 3.3] (for polytopes) and by Bagchi and Datta [BD1, Proposition 2.10] (for
triangulated spheres) that an (r − 1)-stacked homology d-ball Σ satisfying ∂Σ = ∆
is unique. Moreover, the following result was shown in [BD1, Corollary 3.6] (for
polytopes) and in [MN, Lemma 2.1 and Theorem 2.3] (for homology spheres) by a
different approach.
Lemma 4.1. Let 1 ≤ r ≤ d+1
and ∆ an (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 1)-sphere.
2
If Σ is an (r − 1)-stacked homology d-ball with ∂Σ = ∆ then Σ = ∆(r − 1).
Proof. Observe that Σ has no missing faces of dimension ≥ r (see the discussion
before Corollary 3.2). Then we have IΣ = (IΣ )≤r . Since Σ and ∆ have the same
(d − r)-skeleton and r − 1 ≤ d − r, we have (IΣ )≤r = (I∆ )≤r . Hence
IΣ = (IΣ )≤r = (I∆ )≤r = I∆(r−1) ,
which implies Σ = ∆(r − 1).
The following is an extension of Lemma 4.1.



8

SATOSHI MURAI AND ERAN NEVO

Theorem 4.2. Let 1 ≤ r ≤ d2 and ∆ an (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 1)-manifold
without boundary. If Σ is an (r − 1)-stacked homology d-manifold with ∂Σ = ∆ then
Σ = ∆(r).
Proof. Since Σ is (r − 1)-stacked, by Corollary 3.2(ii), Σ has no missing faces of
dimension ≥ r + 1, namely, IΣ = (IΣ )≤r+1 . Then the statement follows in the same
way as in the proof of Lemma 4.1.

Remark 4.3. We cannot replace ∆(r) by ∆(r − 1) in Theorem 4.2 by the same
reason as in Remark 3.5. Similarly, the statement fails when r = d+1
.
2
Vanishing of missing faces. It was shown by Kalai [Ka2, Proposition 3.6] and
Nagel [Na, Corollary 4.6] that if ∆ is an (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 1)-sphere
and r ≤ d2 then ∆ has no missing k-faces for r ≤ k ≤ d − r (they write statements
only for polytopes but Nagel’s proof works for homology spheres). This fact can be
generalized as follows.
Theorem 4.4. Let 1 ≤ r < d2 and let ∆ be an (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 1)manifold without boundary. Then
(i) βk (∆) = 0 for r ≤ k ≤ d − 1 − r.
(ii) ∆ has no missing k-faces with r + 1 ≤ k ≤ d − r.
Proof. Let Σ be an (r − 1)-stacked homology d-manifold with ∂Σ = ∆. Since Σ
and ∆ have the same (d − r)-skeleton, we have βi (∆) = βi (Σ) for i < d − r and
µj (I∆ ) = µj (IΣ ) for j ≤ d − r + 1. Then the statement follows from Corollary
3.2.

Remark 4.5. Lemma 4.1 and the above proof give another proof for the fact that if
r ≤ d2 and if ∆ is an (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 1)-sphere then ∆ has no missing
k-faces for r ≤ k ≤ d − r.
Local criterion. Next, we discuss a local criterion of stackedness. We say that a
homology d-manifold without boundary is locally r-stacked if all its vertex links are
r-stacked. It is clear from the definition that if a homology manifold ∆ is r-stacked
then it is locally r-stacked. It was shown by Kalai [Ka2, Proposition 3.5] that if
r < d2 then the converse holds for the boundary of a simplicial d-polytope. This
property can be extended as follows:
Theorem 4.6. Let 1 ≤ r < d2 . Then a homology (d − 1)-manifold without boundary
is (r − 1)-stacked if and only if it is locally (r − 1)-stacked.
Proof. The ‘only if’ part is obvious. We prove the ‘if’ part. The proof is similar to
that of [Mc, Theorem 5.3]. Let ∆ be a locally (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 1)manifold without boundary. For every vertex v of ∆, let
Dv = lk∆ (v)(r − 1).
Then since lk∆ (v) is (r −1)-stacked, Dv is a homology ball whose boundary is lk∆ (v)
by Lemma 4.1. Let
[
Σ=
v ∗ Dv ,
v

ON r-STACKED TRIANGULATED MANIFOLDS

9

where v ∗ Γ denotes the cone of Γ over a vertex v. We claim that Σ is an (r − 1)stacked homology manifold with ∂Σ = ∆.
For any vertex v of ∆, we have
[
lkΣ (v) = Dv ∪
u ∗ lkDu (v).
u6=v

Since lk∆ (v) and lk∆ (u) are (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 2)-spheres, they have no
missing r-faces (see Remark 4.5). Thus
lkDu (v) = lklk∆ (u)(r−1) (v) = lklk∆ (u) (v)(r − 1)
and
lkDv (u) = lklk∆ (v)(r−1) (u) = lklk∆ (v) (u)(r − 1).
Then since lklk∆ (v) (u) = lklk∆ (u) (v), we have u ∗ lkDu (v) = u ∗ lkDv (u) ⊂ Dv . Hence
lkΣ (v) = Dv
for any vertex v of ∆, which implies that Σ is a homology manifold with boundary.
Also, one has
F ∈ ∂Σ ⇔ F − v ∈ ∂(lkΣ (v)) = ∂Dv = lk∆ (v) for some v ∈ F ⇔ F ∈ ∆
which implies ∂Σ = ∆. Finally, we show that Σ is (r − 1)-stacked: if F ∈ Σ is an
interior face then F − v is an interior face of lkΣ (v) = Dv , where v ∈ F , and we have
dim F > d − r since lk∆ (v) is (r − 1)-stacked.

Remark 4.7. Theorem 4.6 fails for r = d2 . Indeed, the join ∆ of boundaries of
two r-simplices is a (2r − 1)-sphere which is not (r − 1)-stacked but it is locally
(r − 1)-stacked. Indeed, ∆ is not (r − 1)-stacked since ∆(r − 1) is the power set of
[n]. Also, ∆ is locally (r − 1)-stacked since, for every vertex v of ∆, lk∆ (v) is the
boundary of the join of an (r − 1)-simplex and the boundary of an r-simplex.
Remark 4.8. Theorems 4.2 (for r < d2 ), 4.4(ii) and 4.6 were also proved independently by Bagchi and Datta [BD3, Theorem 2.19] with essentially the same method.
5. New necessary condition for face numbers of manifolds
McMullen and Walkup [MW] conjectured that, for the boundary complex ∆ of
a simplicial d-polytope, one has hr−1 (∆) ≤ hr (∆) for r ≤ d2 and if equality holds
for some r then ∆ is (r − 1)-stacked. This conjecture is called the generalized lower
bound conjecture (GLBC for short). The first part of the GLBC was solved by
Stanley [St1] in his proof of the necessity of the g-theorem and the second part
of the GLBC was recently proved in [MN]. Recall that a connected homology dmanifold ∆ without boundary is said to be orientable if βd (∆) = 1. Motivated by the
GLBC, Bagchi and Datta [BD2, Conjecture 1.6] suggested the following conjecture.
Conjecture 5.1 (GLBC for triangulated manifolds). Let ∆ be a connected triangulated (d − 1)-manifold without boundary. Then
 Pr
r−j
(i) hr (∆) ≥ hr−1 (∆) + d+1
βj−1 (∆) for r = 1, 2, . . . , ⌊ d2 ⌋.
j=1 (−1)
r
(ii) if an equality holds for some r < d2 in (i) then ∆ is locally (r − 1)-stacked.

10

SATOSHI MURAI AND ERAN NEVO

Concerning part (i) of the conjecture, a similar conjecture was given by Swartz
[Sw]. Moreover, it was proved by Novik and Swartz that (i) holds for all homology
manifolds all whose vertex links satisfy certain algebraic property called the weak
Lefschetz property. See [NS3, p. 270, Inequality (9)]. Also, the conjecture is known
to be true for orientable manifolds when r = 2 [NS1, Theorem 5.2].
Conjecture 5.1 suggests us to study the following invariant of simplicial complexes,
which we call the g̃-vector. For a simplicial complex ∆ of dimension d − 1, let
 r

d+1 X
(−1)r−j βj−1 (∆)
g̃r (∆) = hr (∆) − hr−1 (∆) −
r
j=1
for r = 0, 1, 2, . . . , ⌊ d2 ⌋, where g̃0 (∆) = 1, and let g̃(∆) = (g̃0 (∆), g̃1 (∆), . . . , g̃⌊ d ⌋ (∆)).
2
Then Conjecture 5.1(i) asks if g̃k (∆) ≥ 0 for all k when ∆ is a connected triangulated
manifold without boundary. For an (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 1)-manifold with
r ≤ d2 , its g̃-vector has the following simple but interesting form.
Proposition 5.2. Let 1 ≤ r ≤ d2 and let ∆ be an (r−1)-stacked homology d-manifold
with boundary. Then g̃i (∂∆) = h′′i (∆) for i ≤ d2 .
Proof. Since ∆ and ∂∆ have the same ⌊ d2 ⌋-skeleton, βk−1 (∆) = βk−1 (∂∆) for k ≤ d2 ,
and, as shown in the proof of Theorem 3.1,
gi (∂∆) = hi (∆)

P
i
i−j
for i ≤ d2 . Subtracting d+1
βj−1 (∆) from the above equation, we
j=1 (−1)
i
obtain the desired equation.

Recall that a vector h = (h0 , h1 , . . . , ht ) ∈ Zt+1 is said to be an M-vector if there
is a standard graded k-algebra A such that hk = dimk Ak for k = 0, 1, . . . , t. Lemma
2.1(ii) shows that, in Proposition 5.2, g̃(∂∆) is not only a non-negative vector but
also an M-vector. It is natural to ask if g̃(∂∆) is an M-vector for any homology
manifold without boundary. In this section, we prove that this property as well
as Conjecture 5.1 hold for orientable homology manifolds all whose links satisfy a
certain algebraic condition described below.
We say that a homology (d − 1)-sphere ∆ on [n] has the weak Lefschetz property
(WLP for short) if there is an l.s.o.p. Θ of k[∆] = S/I∆ and a linear form w ∈ S1
such that the multiplication
(7)

×w : (S/(I∆ + (Θ)))i−1 → (S/(I∆ + (Θ)))i

is injective for i ≤ d+1
and is surjective for i ≥ d+1
. Note that it is known that the
2
2
boundary complex of a simplicial polytope has the WLP over the rationals. The
following result is due to Swartz [Sw, Theorem 4.26]
Lemma 5.3 (Swartz). Let ∆ be a connected orientable homology (d − 1)-manifold
without boundary on [n]. Suppose that all the vertex links of ∆ have the WLP. Then
there is an l.s.o.p. Θ of k[∆] and a linear form w such that the multiplication map
×w : (S/(I∆ + (Θ)))i−1 → (S/(I∆ + (Θ)))i
is surjective for all i ≥

d
2

+ 1.

ON r-STACKED TRIANGULATED MANIFOLDS

11

The main result of this section is the following.
Theorem 5.4. With the same assumptions and notation as in Lemma 5.3, let R =
S/(I∆ + (Θ)) and R′ = R/wR. Then
(i) there is an ideal J ⊂ R′ such that dimk (R′ /J)i = g̃i (∆) for i ≤
particular, g̃(∆) is an M-vector.
(ii) if g̃r (∆) = 0 for some r < d2 then ∆ is locally (r − 1)-stacked.

d
.
2

In

Theorem 5.4(i) extends the result of Novik and Swartz [NS3] who proved the nonnegativity of g̃-vectors for homology manifolds all whose vertex links have the WLP,
and Theorem 5.4(ii) proves that Conjecture 5.1(ii) holds for these manifolds. In
particular, Conjecture 5.1 holds for any rational homology manifold all whose vertex
links are polytopal, namely, are the boundary complexes of simplicial polytopes. It
was conjectured that any homology sphere has the WLP. Thus, if this conjecture is
true then Conjecture 5.1 holds for all orientable homology manifolds.
We first introduce some lemmas which are used in the proof the above theorem.
The following was shown in [No, Lemma 7.3] and in [NS2, Theorem 1.4].
Lemma 5.5. Let ∆ be a connected orientable homology (d − 1)-manifold without
boundary on [n].
(i) (Novik) h′′i (∆) = h′′d−i (∆) for all i.
(ii) (Novik–Swartz) Let Θ = θ1 , . . . , θd be an l.s.o.p. of k[∆], R = S/(I∆ + (Θ))
L
′′
′′
′′
d
and N = d−1
j=0 Soc (R)j . Then FR/N (t) = h0 (∆) + h1 (∆)t + · · · + hd (∆)t .
Moreover, R/N is Gorenstein.
Corollary 5.6. If ∆ is a connected orientable homology (d − 1)-manifold without
boundary then g̃i (∆) = h′′d−i (∆) − h′d−i+1 (∆) for i ≤ d2 .
Proof. A routine computation shows
g̃i (∆) =

h′′i (∆)

−

h′′i−1 (∆)


d
βi−1 (∆).
−
i−1


On the other hand, by Lemma 5.5(i) and the Poincaré duality βd−i (∆) = βi−1 (∆),
h′′i (∆) = h′′d−i (∆) and




d
d
′′
′′
βd−i (∆) = h′d−i+1 (∆).
βi−1 (∆) = hd−i+1 (∆) +
hi−1 (∆) +
i−1
i−1
Hence we have g̃i (∆) = h′′d−i (∆) − h′d−i+1 .



The next result about the stackedness was essentially shown in [MW] (necessity)
and in [MN, Theorem 5.3] (sufficiency).
Lemma 5.7. Let 1 ≤ r ≤ d2 . If a homology (d − 1)-sphere ∆ has the WLP then ∆
is (r − 1)-stacked if and only if gr (∆) = 0.
Now we prove Theorem 5.4.

12

SATOSHI MURAI AND ERAN NEVO

Proof of Theorem 5.4. (i) Let M ∨ be the Matlis dual of a graded S-module M (c.f.
[BH, §3.6]). Note that dimk Mj∨ = dimk M−j for all j. Consider the short exact
sequence (N is as in Lemma 5.5(ii))
0 −→ N −→ R −→ R/N −→ 0
and its Matlis dual
(8)

φ

0 ←− N ∨ ←− R∨ ←− (R/N)∨ ←− 0.

Let
A = Im φ ⊂ R∨ .
Then, since R/N is Gorenstein by Lemma 5.5(ii), we have
(9)
A∼
= (R/N)∨ ∼
= R/N(+d),
where R/N(+d) denotes the graded module R/N shifted in degree by +d. Thus
(R/N(+d))k = (R/N)k+d for all k.
By Lemma 5.3, the multiplication ×w : Ri → Ri+1 is surjective for i ≥ d2 . Thus
the multiplication
(10)

∨
∨
×w : R−i−1
→ R−i

is injective for i ≥ d2 . Since mN ∨ = 0, we have mR∨ ⊂ A by (8). Thus wR∨ ⊂ A is
a submodule of A. Then, by (9), there is an ideal I of R such that
A/wR∨ ∼
= R/(I + N)(+d).
Observe that I +N ⊃ wR since wR∨ ⊃ wA. We claim that the ideal J = (I +N)/wR
of R′ = R/wR satisfies the desired conditions. Indeed, since
R′ /J ∼
= A/wR∨ (−d)
= R/(I + N) ∼
and since dimk (R/N)i = h′′i (∆) = h′′d−i (∆) by Lemma 5.5, it follows from (9) and
(10) that, for i ≤ d2 ,
∨
dimk (R′ /J)i = dimk Ai−d − dimk Ri−1−d
= h′′d−i (∆) − h′d−i+1 (∆) = g̃i (∆),

where we use Corollary 5.6 for the last equality.
(ii) The proof is similar to that of [NS1, Theorem 5.2]. Suppose g̃r (∆) = 0. Since
g̃r (∆) = h′′d−r (∆) − h′d−r+1 (∆), the multiplication
×w : (R/N)d−r → Rd−r+1
is bijective by Lemma 5.3. For a vertex v of ∆, let st∆ (v) = v ∗ lk∆ (v) be the star
of v in ∆. Since st∆ (v) ⊂ ∆, by the Kind–Kleinschmidt condition [St2, III Lemma
2.4], Θ is an l.s.o.p. of k[st∆ (v)] = S/Ist∆ (v) (regarding st∆ (v) as a simplicial complex
on [n]). Consider the commutative diagram
(S/(Ist∆ (v) + (Θ)))d−r

×x

v
−→

×w ↑

Rd−r+1
↑ ×w

×x

v
(S/(Ist∆ (v) + (Θ)))d−r−1 −→
(R/N)d−r .

ON r-STACKED TRIANGULATED MANIFOLDS

13

Since S/(Ist∆ (v) + (Θ)) is Gorenstein and has socle elements only in degree d − 1, by
[Sw, Proposition 4.24] the horizontal maps in the above diagram are injective. Then
since the right vertical map is an isomorphism, the left vertical map is injective.
This implies
hd−r−1 (lk∆ (v)) = hd−r−1 (st∆ (v)) ≤ hd−r (st∆ (v)) = hd−r (lk∆ (v)).
Since lk∆ (v) has the WLP by the assumption, its h-vector is unimodal. Hence we
have hd−r−1 (lk∆ (v)) = hd−r (st∆ (v)). Then, by the Dehn–Sommerville equation, it
follows that gr−1 (lk∆ (v)) = 0, and lk∆ (v) is (r − 1)-stacked by Lemma 5.7.

The local criterion for stackedness and Theorem 5.4 imply the following criterion
for stackedness.
Corollary 5.8. Let r < d2 and let ∆ be a connected orientable homology (d − 1)manifold without boundary. If all the vertex links of ∆ have the WLP then ∆ is
(r − 1)-stacked if and only if g̃r (∆) = 0.
Proof. The ‘if’ part follows from Theorems 4.6 and 5.4. The ‘only if’ part follows
from Theorem 3.1 and Proposition 5.2.

We end this paper by a few questions.
Conjecture 5.9. With
and notation as in Theorem 5.4,
 the same assumptions
d+1
d
′
dimk (Soc R )r ≥ r βr−1 (∆) for r ≤ 2 .

If the conjecture is true, it will give a necessary condition for h-vectors of triangulated manifolds stronger than Theorem 5.4(i). Indeed, Conjecture 5.9 implies
Theorem 5.4(i) since [NS2, Theorem 3.2] implies


d+1
′
′′
′
βr−1
dimk Rr = dimk Rr − dimk (R/Soc (R))r−1 = hr − hr−1 = g̃r +
r

for i ≤ d2 . For (r − 1)-stacked homology (d − 1)-manifolds without boundary with
r ≤ d2 , the conjecture follows from Lemma 2.1(ii) by taking (Θ, w) for ∆ to be
a general l.s.o.p. of k[Σ], where Σ is the (r − 1)-stacked homology manifold with
∂Σ = ∆. The conjecture also holds for triangulations of the product of spheres
(under the WLP assumption) since the ideal J in Theorem 5.4 is concentrated in a
single degree in this case.
Question 5.10. Is it true that if ∆ is a homology (2k − 1)-manifold without boundary such that g̃k (∆) = 0 then ∆ is (k − 1)-stacked?
A similar question was raised by Novik–Swartz [NS1, Problem 5.3] when k = 2.
However, we do not have an answer even for this case.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Isabella Novik for helpful comments on an earlier version
of this paper.

14

SATOSHI MURAI AND ERAN NEVO

References
[Ba1] D.W. Barnette, The minimum number of vertices of a simple polytope, Israel J. Math. 10
(1971), 121–125.
[Ba2] D.W. Barnette, A proof of the lower bound conjecture for convex polytopes, Pac. J. Math.
46 (1973) 349–354.
[BD1] B. Bagchi and B. Datta, On stellated spheres, shellable balls, lower bounds and a combinatorial criterion for tightness, arXiv:1102.0856.
[BD2] B. Bagchi and B. Datta, On stellated spheres and a tightness criterion for combinatorial
manifolds, arXiv:1207.5599.
[BD3] B. Bagchi and B. Datta, On k-stellated and k-stacked spheres, arXiv:1208.1389.
[BL] L. Billera and C.W. Lee, A proof of the sufficiency of McMullen’s conditions for f -vectors of
simplicial convex polytopes, J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 31 (1981), 237-255.
[BH] W. Bruns and J. Herzog, Cohen–Macaulay rings, Revised Edition, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 1996.
[Gr] H.-G. Gräbe, Generalized Dehn-Sommerville equations and an upper bound theorem, Beitrage
Algebra Geom. 25 (1987), 47–60.
[Ka1] G. Kalai, Many triangulated spheres, Discrete Comput. Geom. 3 (1988), 1–14.
[Ka2] G. Kalai, Some aspects of the combinatorial theory of convex polytopes, in: T. Bisztriczky
(ed.) et al., Polytopes: Abstract, Convex, and Computational, NATO ASI Ser., Ser. C, Math.
Phys. Sci. 440, 1994, pp. 205–229.
[KlL] P. Kleinschmidt and C.W. Lee, On k-stacked polytopes, Discrete Math. 48 (1984), 125–127.
[Kü] W. Kühnel, Higher dimensional analogues of Császárfs torus, Results. Math. 9 (1986), 95–106.
[KüL] W. Kühnel and G. Lassmann, Permuted difference cycles and triangulated sphere bundles,
Discrete Math. 162 (1996), 215–227.
[KN] S. Klee and I. Novik, Centrally symmetric manifolds with few vertices, Adv. Math. 229
(2012), 487–500
[Mc] P. McMullen, Triangulations of simplicial polytopes, Beiträge Algebra Geom. 45 (2004), 37–
46.
[MW] P. McMullen and D.W. Walkup, A generalized lower-bound conjecture for simplicial polytopes, Mathematika 18 (1971), 264–273.
[Mi] W.J.R. Mitchel, Defining the boundary of a homology manifold, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 110
(1990), 509–513
[MN] S. Murai and E. Nevo, On the generalized lower bounda conjecture for polytopes and spheres,
arXiv:1203.1720.
[Na] U. Nagel, Empty simplices of polytopes and graded Betti numbers, Discrete Comput. Geom.,
39 (2008) 389–410.
[No] I. Novik, Upper bound theorems for homology manifolds, Israel J. Math. 108 (1998), 45–82.
[NS1] I. Novik and E. Swartz, Socles of Buchsbaum modules, complexes and posets, Adv. Math.
222 (2009), 2059–2084.
[NS2] I. Novik and E. Swartz, Gorenstein rings through face rings of manifolds, Compos. Math.
145 (2009), 993–1000.
[NS3] I. Novik and E. Swartz, Applications of Klee’s Dehn-Sommerville relations, Discrete Comput.
Geom. 42 (2009), 261–276.
[Sc] P. Schenzel, On the number of faces of simplicial complexes and the purity of Frobenius, Math.
Z. 178 (1981), 125–142.
[St1] R.P. Stanley, The number of faces of a simplicial convex polytope, Adv. in Math. 35 (1980),
236–238.
[St2] R.P. Stanley, Combinatorics and commutative algebra, Second edition, Progr. Math., vol.
41, Birkhäuser, Boston, 1996.
[Sw] E. Swartz, Face enumeration: from spheres to manifolds, J. Eur. Math. Soc. 11 (2009),
449–485

ON r-STACKED TRIANGULATED MANIFOLDS

15

Satoshi Murai, Department of Mathematical Science, Faculty of Science, Yamaguchi University, 1677-1 Yoshida, Yamaguchi 753-8512, Japan.
Eran Nevo, Department of Mathematics, Ben Gurion University of the Negev,
Be’er Sheva 84105, Israel

