arXiv:1011.1564v3 [math.AG] 8 May 2013

3 × 3 MINORS OF CATALECTICANTS
CLAUDIU RAICU
Abstract. Secant varieties of Veronese embeddings of projective space are classical varieties
whose equations are far from being understood. Minors of catalecticant matrices furnish some of
their equations, and in some situations even generate their ideals. Geramita conjectured that this
is the case for the secant line variety of the Veronese variety, namely that its ideal is generated by
the 3 × 3 minors of any of the “middle” catalecticants. Part of this conjecture is the statement
that the ideals of 3 × 3 minors are equal for most catalecticants, and this was known to hold
set-theoretically. We prove the equality of 3 × 3 minors and derive Geramita’s conjecture as a
consequence of previous work by Kanev.

1. Introduction
A folklore theorem (see [GP82,Eis88,Con98]) states that the defining ideal of any secant variety
of a rational normal curve is generated by the minors of a generic Hankel matrix, and that apart
from trivial restrictions, it doesn’t matter which Hankel matrix we choose to take the minors of.
For example, consider a rational quartic curve C in P4 , the image of the embedding
[x : y] −→ [x4 : x3 y : x2 y 2 : xy 3 : y 4 ].
If we let z0 , · · · , z4 denote the coordinate functions on P4 , then



z0 z1
z0 z1 z2 z3
and  z1 z2
z1 z2 z3 z4
z2 z3

the relevant Hankel matrices are

z2
z3  .
z4

The ideals of 2 × 2 minors of the two matrices coincide and generate the ideal of C, while the
determinant of the second one cuts out the cubic 3-fold which is the union of the lines secant to
C. The union of the higher dimensional planes secant to C covers the whole ambient space P4 ,
which corresponds to the fact that the above matrices don’t have minors of size larger than three.
Unlike the case of P1 which is completely understood, we do not know in general the equations
of the secant varieties of Veronese embeddings of higher dimensional projective spaces. Minors
of catalecticant matrices (which are generalized versions of Hankel matrices, see Section 2.2 for
definitions) provide some equations for these secant varieties, but turn out not to be sufficient in
many cases.
Determinantal loci of catalecticant matrices are of particular interest in their own right, but
also via their connection to Hilbert functions of Gorenstein Artin algebras, the polynomial Waring
problem, or configurations of points in projective space (see [Ger96, IK99]). In [Ger99], Geramita
gives a beautiful exposition of classical results about catalecticant varieties, and proposes several
Date: March 30, 2018.
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 14M12.
Key words and phrases. Catalecticant matrices, Veronese varieties, secant varieties.
1

2

CLAUDIU RAICU

further questions (see also [IK99, Chapter 9]). We recall the last one, which we shall answer
affirmatively. It is divided into two parts:
Question 1.1. Write Cat(t, d − t; n) for the t-th generic catalecticant matrix (see Section 2.2),
and I3 (Cat(t, d − t; n)) for the ideal generated by its 3 × 3 minors.
(a) Is it true that
I3 (Cat(2, d − 2; n)) = I3 (Cat(t, d − t; n))
for all t with 2 ≤ t ≤ d − 2?
(b) Is it true that for n ≥ 3 and d ≥ 4
I3 (Cat(1, d − 1; n)) ( I3 (Cat(2, d − 2; n))?
Our main result answers positively both parts of Question 1.1:
Theorem 5.1. Let K be a field of characteristic 0 and let n, d ≥ 2 be integers. The following
statements hold:
(1) For all t with 2 ≤ t ≤ d − 2 one has
I3 (Cat(2, d − 2; n)) = I3 (Cat(t, d − t; n)).
(2) If d ≥ 4 then there is a strict inclusion
I3 (Cat(1, d − 1; n)) ( I3 (Cat(2, d − 2; n)).
Geramita also conjectures that any of the catalecticant ideals I3 (Cat(t, d − t; n)), 2 ≤ t ≤ d − 2,
is the ideal of the secant line variety of the d-uple embedding of Pn−1 . This follows by combining
Theorem 5.1 with the result of Kanev [Kan99] which states that the ideal of the secant line variety
of the Veronese variety is generated by the 3 × 3 minors of the first and second catalecticants:
Corollary 5.2. Any of the ideals I3 (Cat(t, d − t; n)), 2 ≤ t ≤ d − 2, is the ideal of the secant line
n−1
.
variety of the d-th Veronese embedding of PK
As mentioned earlier, when n = 2 it is well-known [GP82, Eis88, Con98] that
Ik (Cat(k − 1, d − k + 1; 2)) = Ik (Cat(t, d − t; 2))

(1.1)

for all t with k − 1 ≤ t ≤ d − k + 1, and that any of these ideals is the ideal of the (k − 2)-nd
secant variety of the rational normal curve in Pd . This fact will turn out to be useful in the proof
of Theorem 5.1.
Theorem 5.1 yields special cases of two general conjectures. One of them is implicit in
Geramita’s question Q4 from [Ger99]:
Conjecture 1.2. For all k, n ≥ 2, d ≥ 2k − 2 and t with k − 1 ≤ t ≤ d − k + 1, one has
Ik (Cat(k − 1, d − k + 1; n)) = Ik (Cat(t, d − t; n)).
Moreover, the following inclusions hold:
Ik (Cat(1, d − 1; n)) ( Ik (Cat(2, d − 2; n)) ( · · · ( Ik (Cat(k − 1, d − k + 1; n)).
The other one is a conjecture by Sidman and Smith [SS11]:
Conjecture 1.3. Let k be a positive integer. If X ⊂ Pn is embedded by the complete linear series
of a sufficiently ample line bundle, then the homogeneous ideal of the (k − 2)-nd secant variety of
X is generated by the k × k-minors of a 1-generic matrix of linear forms.

3 × 3 MINORS OF CATALECTICANTS

3

Conjecture 1.3 has been proven to be false for singular X [BGL10], but there are no known
smooth counterexamples. The case X = Pr is a sufficiently interesting special case. In [BB10]
it is shown that minors of catalecticants are not enough to cut out the secant varieties even for
very positive embeddings of projective space. Both conjectures 1.2 and 1.3 are known to be true
for k = 2, by results of Pucci [Puc98] and Sidman and Smith [SS11]. The argument in [Puc98] is
rather long, so we will give a simplified proof in Section 4. The case k = 3 is treated in Section 5.
We prove the case k = 4 of Conjecture 1.2 in [Rai11, Section 6.3], using similar techniques.
The main tool that we will be using in our proofs is the reduction to the “generic” situation, as
explained in [Rai12]. Showing the equality of the spaces of minors for the various catalecticants
reduces to the more combinatorial problem of showing that certain representations of a symmetric
group coincide.
The structure of the paper is as follows. In Section 2 we establish some notation from representation theory, and recall some basic facts about catalecticant varieties and secant varieties of
Veronese varieties. In particular, we describe the relationship between catalecticant matrices and
Gorenstein Artin algebras, which motivates Conjecture 1.2. In Section 3 we set up the “generic
case”: we introduce certain representations of symmetric groups which correspond by specialization to ideals of minors of catalecticant matrices. We then illustrate our techniques in Section 4
by giving a simple proof of Pucci’s result - Conjecture 1.2 in the case k = 2. In Section 5 we give
an affirmative answer to Geramita’s Question 1.1 (Theorem 5.1).
2. Preliminaries
2.1. Representation theory. For an introduction to the representation theory of the symmetric
and general linear groups see [FH91] or [Mac95]. Given a finite dimensional vector space V over a
field K of characteristic zero, we denote by GL(V ) the group of invertible linear transformations
of V . For a positive integer N , we write SN for the group of permutations of the set {1,
P· · · , N }.
A partition λ of an integer N is a nonincreasing sequence λ1 ≥ λ2 ≥ · · · with N =
λi . We
write λ = (λ1 , λ2 , · · · ). Alternatively, if µ is a partition having ij parts equal to µj for all j,
then we write µ = (µi11 · µi22 · · · ). To a partition λ we associate a Young diagram which consists of
left-justified rows of boxes, with λi boxes in the i-th row. We shall identify a partition λ with its
Young diagram. A tableau is a filling of the Young diagram. The canonical tableau is the one that
numbers the boxes consecutively from left to right, top to bottom. For λ = (3, 3, 1) = (11 · 32 ),
the canonical tableau is
1 2 3
4 5 6.
7
The irreducible representations of GL(V ) and SN that will concern us are classified by partitions. For GL(V ), they are the Schur functors Sλ V , with the convention that S(d) V = Symd V is
the d-th symmetric power of V , while S(1k ) V = Λk V is the k-th exterior power of V . For G = SN ,
we write [λ] for the irreducible representation corresponding to the partition λ. [(N )] denotes the
trivial representation, while [(1N )] denotes the sign representation.
The GL(V )– (resp. SN –) representations W that we consider decompose as a direct sum of
Sλ V ’s (resp. [λ]’s). We write
M
W =
Wλ ,
λ

4

CLAUDIU RAICU

where Wλ ≃ (Sλ V )mλ (resp. Wλ ≃ [λ]mλ ) is the λ-isotypic component of W . mλ = mλ (W ) is
called the multiplicity of Sλ V (resp. [λ]) in W .
Up to making some choices, each Wλ contains a distinguished subspace hwtλ (W ), called the
λ-highest weight space of W . For GL(V ), this is the space of vectors of weight λ invariant under
(some choice of) the Borel subgroup, while for SN it is the vector space cλ · W , where cλ is a
Young symmetrizer. The defining property that will be important for us is that hwtλ (W ) is a
vector space of dimension mλ (W ) which generates Wλ as a GL(V )– (resp. SN –) representation.
2.2. Catalecticant varieties. Given a vector space V of dimension n over K, with basis B =
{x1 , · · · , xn }, we consider its dual space V ∗ with dual basis E = {e1 , · · · , en }. For every positive
integer d we get a basis of S(d) V ∗ consisting of divided power monomials e(α) of degree d in the
ei ’s, as follows. If α ⊂ {1, · · · , n} is a multiset of size |α| = d, then we write eα for the monomial
Y
ei .
i∈α

We often identify α with the multiindex (α1 , · · · , αn ), where αi represents the number of occurrences of i in the multiset α. We write e(α) for eα /α!, where α! = α1 ! · · · αn !. For a, b > 0 with
a + b = d we get a divided power multiplication map S(a) V ∗ ⊗ S(b) V ∗ → S(d) V ∗ , sending e(α) ⊗ e(β)
to e(α∪β) . We can represent this via a multiplication table whose rows and columns are indexed
by multisets of sizes a and b respectively, and whose entry in position (α, β) is e(α∪β) . The generic
catalecticant matrix Cat(a, b; n) is defined to be the matrix obtained from this multiplication table
by replacing each e(α∪β) with the variable zα∪β , where (zγ )|γ|=d ⊂ S(d) V is the dual basis to
(e(γ) )|γ|=d ⊂ S(d) V ∗ .
One can also think of zγ ’s as the coefficients of the generic form of degree d in the ei ’s, F =
P
zγ e(γ) . Specializing the zγ ’s we get an actual form f ∈ S(d) V ∗ , and we denote the corresponding
catalecticant matrix by Catf (a, b; n). Any such form f is the dual socle generator of some Gorenstein
Artin algebra A [Eis95, Thm. 21.6] with socle degree d and Hilbert function
hi (A) = rank(Catf (i, d − i; n)).
Macaulay’s theorem on the growth of the Hilbert function of an Artin algebra [BH93, Thm. 4.2.10]
implies that if hi < k for some i ≥ k − 1, then the function becomes nonincreasing from that point
on. In particular, since A is Gorenstein, h is symmetric, so if hi < k for some k − 1 ≤ i ≤ d − k + 1,
then we have
h1 ≤ h2 ≤ · · · ≤ hk−1 = hk = · · · = hd−k+1 ≥ hd−k+2 ≥ · · · ≥ hd .
If we denote by Ik (i) = Ik (Cat(i, d − i; n)) the ideal of k × k minors of the i-th generic catalecticant, then the remarks above show that whenever k − 1 ≤ d − k + 1 we have the following
up-to-radical relations:
Ik (1) ⊂ · · · ⊂ Ik (k − 1) = · · · = Ik (d − k + 1) ⊃ · · · ⊃ Ik (d − 1).
Conjecture 1.2 states that these relations hold exactly. We prove the conjecture in the case k = 3
in Section 5.

3 × 3 MINORS OF CATALECTICANTS

5

2.3. Secant Varieties of Veronese Varieties. Given a vector space U over a field K of characteristic zero, we write PU for the projective space of lines in U . For 0 6= u ∈ U , we denote by
[u] the corresponding line. For d a positive integer, we consider the Veronese embedding
Verd : P(V ∗ ) → P(S(d) V ∗ ), given by [e] 7→ [e(d) ].
Its k-th secant variety is the Zariski closure of the union of the linear subspaces spanned by
collections of k + 1 points in the image of Verd . We denote it by σk+1 (Verd (PV ∗ )). Note that for
k = 0 this is just the image of Verd .
The homogeneous coordinate ring of P(S(d) V ∗ ) is S = Sym(S(d) V ), the symmetric algebra over
S(d) V . Using the basis (zα ) ⊂ S(d) V dual to (e(α) ) ⊂ S(d) V ∗ we can write S as the polynomial
ring K[zα ]. An important open problem is to find the ideal I ⊂ S of polynomials vanishing on
σk (Verd (PV ∗ )) (see [LO11] for the current state of the art). The following result is well-known
(see [IK99] or [Lan12]).
Lemma 2.1. For every 1 ≤ i ≤ d and k ≥ 1, the ideal Ik+1 (Cat(i, d − i; n)) is contained in the
ideal of σk (Verd (PV ∗ )).
3. The “Generic” Case
The material in this section is based on [Rai12, Section 3B]. The basic idea is to use Schur-Weyl
duality in order to translate questions about representations of general linear groups, such as the
vector spaces spanned by the minors of catalecticants, into questions about representations of
symmetric groups and tableau combinatorics.
We write N = N (r, d) = r · d, and consider the vector space Wdr with basis consisting of
monomials in commuting variables zαi
m = zα1 · · · zαr , where α1 ⊔ · · · ⊔ αr is a partition of the set {1, · · · , N },
with |αi | = d for all i = 1, · · · , r.
An element σ of the symmetric group SN acts on a monomial m as follows:
σ(m) = σ(zα1 · · · zαr ) = zσ(α1 ) · · · zσ(αr ) ,
where for a subset α ⊂ {1, · · · , N }, σ(α) = {σ(x) : x ∈ α}.
Definition 3.1 (Generic flattenings). For k ≤ r, a, b with a + b = d, and disjoint subsets
α1 , · · · , αk , β1 , · · · , βk ⊂ {1, · · · , N } with |αi | = a, |βi | = b for all i = 1, · · · k, we let
[α1 , · · · , αk |β1 , · · · , βk ] = det(zαi ∪βj )1≤i,j≤k .
Fixing k, d and a, b with a+b = d, we define the ideal of generic k×k minors of the a-th catalecticant
to be the collection, indexed by the degree r, of subrepresentations Ikr (a, b) ⊂ Wdr spanned by the
expressions
[α1 , · · · , αk |β1 , · · · , βk ] · zγ1 · · · zγr−k ,
where α1 ⊔ · · · ⊔ αk ⊔ β1 ⊔ · · · ⊔ βk ⊔ γ1 ⊔ · · · ⊔ γr−k form a partition of the set {1, · · · , N }, with
|αi | = a, |βi | = b, |γi | = d.

6

CLAUDIU RAICU

Example 3.2. Take d = k = r = 3, a = 2 and b = 1. A typical element of

z{1,2,3} z{1,2,7}
D = [{1, 2}, {4, 6}, {5, 8}|{3}, {7}, {9}] = det  z{4,6,3} z{4,6,7}
z{5,8,3} z{5,8,7}

I33 (a, b) looks like

z{1,2,9}
z{4,6,9}  .
z{5,8,9}

It would be desirable to understand the decomposition into irreducible SN –representations of
all Ikr (a, b). This is of course a hopeless goal at this point, since not even the case k = 1, i.e. the
symmetric plethysm problem of decomposing Wdr , is understood in general. Nevertheless, we will
be able to achieve our goal in the case of the representations I22 (a, b) and I33 (a, b). This will allow
us to prove conjectures 1.2 and 1.3 in the special case k = 3, X = Pn , and to reprove Pucci’s
result (Theorem 4.1). We start with a general observation:
Proposition 3.3. For any k, r, d, the subrepresentation Ikr (1, d − 1) ⊂ Wdr is the sum of the
irreducible subrepresentations of Wdr corresponding to partitions λ with at least k parts.
Proof. This is a special case of Proposition 3.20 in [Rai12].



Remark 3.4. Proposition 3.3 is the analogue in the setting of SN -representations of Corollary
7.2.3 in [Wey03] or Theorem 5.2.3.6 in [Lan12]. The representations Ikr (1, d − 1) give the “generic
equations” for the subspace varieties.
Given a partition λ of N , we index the boxes of its Young diagram in the usual way: the
i-th box is the one whose entry in the canonical tableau is equal to i. Given a partition λ and
monomial m = zα1 · · · zαr , we identify the element cλ · m ∈ hwtλ (Wdr ) with a tableau of shape λ,
having d entries equal to i in the positions indexed by the elements of the set αi . For example, if
λ = (6, 2), r = d = 3, m = z1,3,8 · z2,4,7 · z5,6,9 , we write
cλ · m = 1 2 1 2 3 3 .
2 1 3
Two tableaux differing by a permutation of the numbers {1, · · · , r} correspond to the same monomial, so we identify them:
cλ · m = cλ · z2,4,7 · z5,6,9 · z1,3,8 = 3 1 3 1 2 2 .
1 3 2
Lemma 3.5. With the above conventions, we have
(1) T = cλ · m = 0 if T has repeated entries in some column.
(2) T1 = cλ ·m1 and T2 = cλ ·m2 are equal up to sign (T1 = ±T2 ) if T1 , T2 differ by permutations
within columns or by permutations of columns of the same size.
Proof. This is a special case of Lemma 3.16 in [Rai12].



Definition 3.6. Let a, b and Ikr (a, b) as in Definition 3.1, let
D = [α1 , · · · , αk |β 1 , · · · , β k ] · zγ k+1 · · · zγ r ∈ Ikr (a, b),
and let λ be a partition of N . We let γ i = αi ∪ β i for i = 1, · · · , k, and consider the tableau
T = cλ · m corresponding to the monomial m = zγ 1 · · · zγ r . We represent the element cλ · D ∈
hwtλ (Ikr (a, b)) as a tableau T̂ with some of the entries circled, obtained from T by circling the
entries in the boxes located at positions indexed by the elements of α1 , · · · , αk . Alternatively, since

3 × 3 MINORS OF CATALECTICANTS

7

[α1 , · · · , αk |β 1 , · · · , β k ] = [β 1 , · · · , β k |α1 , · · · , αk ], we can circle the entries in the boxes located
at positions indexed by the elements of β 1 , · · · , β k , and obtain a different tableau with circled
entries which represents the same element of Ikr (a, b). Using the expansion of the determinant
X
sgn(σ) · T σ ,
T̂ =
σ∈Sk

Tσ

where sgn(σ) denotes the sign of σ, and
is the tableau obtained from T by replacing the entries
located at positions indexed by elements of αi with σ(i), for i = 1, · · · , k.
Example 3.7. Let D be as in Example 3.2, α1 = {1, 2}, α2 = {4, 6}, α3 = {5, 8}, β 1 = {3},
β 2 = {7}, and β 3 = {9}. We get
m = z1,2,3 · z4,6,7 · z5,8,9 ,
so that
1 1 1 2 3
,
T = cλ · m = 2 2 3
3
and

'&%$
!"#
!"#
!"#
!"#
1 '&%$
1 1 '&%$
2 '&%$
3
'&%$
!"#
'&%$
!"#
T̂ = cλ · D = 2 2 3
.

3
We have
2 2 1 1 3
3 3 1 2 1
1 1 1 3 2
2 2 1 3 1
3 3 1 1 2
− 2 2 1
− 3 2 2
+ 3 2 1
+ 1 2 2
.
T̂ = T − 1 2 3
3
3
3
3
3
Notice that all the tableaux pictured above have a repeated entry in one of their columns, hence
are equal to zero by Lemma 3.5. This shows that T = T̂ ∈ I33 (2, 1). This example captures the
main trick in our proof of Geramita’s conjecture.
Proposition 3.8. Let W denote the GL(V )-representation S(r) (S(d) V ), let N = r · d and let
W ′ = Wdr be the SN -representation described above. We fix a partition λ of N having at most
n = dim(V ) parts. There exist polarization and specialization maps
Pλ : hwtλ (W ) −→ hwtλ (W ′ ),

Qλ : hwtλ (W ′ ) −→ hwtλ (W ),

inducing inverse isomorphisms between
hwtλ (Ikr (a, b)) ≃ hwtλ (Ik (Cat(a, b; n))r ).
Proof. This is a special case of Proposition 3.27 in [Rai12].

(3.1)


It follows that in order to show that Ik (Cat(a, b; n)) are all the same as long as a, b ≥ 2, it
suffices to prove the corresponding statement in the generic case, i.e. for the representations
Ikr (a, b).
Corollary 3.9 (Inheritance, [Lan12]). Let k, r ≥ 0 and fix λ a partition with t parts. The multiplicity of the irreducible representation Sλ V in Ik (Cat(a, b; n))r is independent of the dimension
n of the vector space V , as long as t ≤ n.
Proof. The left hand side of (3.1) is independent on n, and the isomorphism holds as long as
t ≤ n.


8

CLAUDIU RAICU

4. 2 × 2 Minors
In this section we give two proofs of the following result of Pucci, which is the case k = 2
of Conjecture 1.2. The first proof works in arbitrary characteristic, while the second one is a
characteristic zero proof meant to illustrate the methods that we shall use in the case of higher
minors.
Theorem 4.1 ([Puc98]). Let K be a field of arbitrary characteristic and let n, d ≥ 2 be integers.
For all t with 1 ≤ t ≤ d − 1 we have
I2 (Cat(1, d − 1; n)) = I2 (Cat(t, d − t; n)).
Proof in arbitrary characteristic. For multisets m1 , m2 , n1 , n2 we let
zm1 ∪n1 zm1 ∪n2
zm2 ∪n1 zm2 ∪n2

[m1 , m2 |n1 , n2 ] =

.

With this notation, we have the following identity for multisets u1 , u2 , v1 , v2 , α1 , α2 , β1 , β2 :
[u1 ∪ u2 , v1 ∪ v2 |α1 ∪ α2 , β1 ∪ β2 ] = [u1 ∪ α1 , v1 ∪ β1 |u2 ∪ α2 , v2 ∪ β2 ]
+ [u1 ∪ β2 , v1 ∪ α2 |v2 ∪ α1 , u2 ∪ β1 ].

(4.1)

We shall prove that I2 (Cat(a, b; n)) ⊂ I2 (Cat(a + 1, b − 1; n)) for a + b = d and 1 ≤ a ≤
d − 2. This is enough to prove the equality of the 2 × 2 minors of all the catalecticants, since
I2 (Cat(1, d − 1; n)) = I2 (Cat(d − 1, 1; n)). Since the ideal I2 (Cat(a, b; n)) is generated by minors
[m1 , m2 |n1 , n2 ] with |m1 | = |m2 | = a and |n1 | = |n2 | = b, it follows from 4.1 that it’s enough to
decompose m1 , m2 , n1 , n2 as
m1 = u1 ∪ u2 ,

m 2 = v1 ∪ v2 ,

n1 = α1 ∪ α2 ,

n2 = β1 ∪ β2 ,

in such a way that
|u1 | + |α1 | = |v1 | + |β1 | = a + 1, |u2 | + |α2 | = |v2 | + |β2 | = b − 1,
|u1 | + |β2 | = |v1 | + |α2 | = b − 1, |v2 | + |α1 | = |u2 | + |β1 | = a + 1,

(4.2)

or
|u1 | + |α1 | = |v1 | + |β1 | = a + 1,

|u2 | + |α2 | = |v2 | + |β2 | = b − 1,

|u1 | + |β2 | = |v1 | + |α2 | = a + 1,

|v2 | + |α1 | = |u2 | + |β1 | = b − 1.

(4.3)

If a ≤ 2b − 2, then we can find 0 ≤ x, y ≤ b − 1 with x + y = a. Choose any such x, y and
decompose
m1 = u1 ∪ u2 ,

m 2 = v1 ∪ v2 ,

with |u2 | = |v1 | = x and |u1 | = |v2 | = y,

and
n1 = α1 ∪ α2 , n2 = β1 ∪ β2 ,

with

|α1 | = x + 1, |β1 | = y + 1, |α2 | = b − 1 − x and |β2 | = b − 1 − y.
It’s easy to see then that (4.2) is satisfied.
If b ≤ 2a + 2, then since b ≥ 2 (a ≤ d − 2), we can find 1 ≤ x, y ≤ a + 1 with x + y = b. Choose
any such x, y and decompose
n1 = α1 ∪ α2 ,

n2 = β1 ∪ β2 ,

with |α2 | = |β1 | = x and |α1 | = |β2 | = y,

3 × 3 MINORS OF CATALECTICANTS

9

and
m1 = u1 ∪ u2 , m2 = v1 ∪ v2 ,

with

|u1 | = a + 1 − y, |v1 | = a + 1 − x, |u2 | = y − 1 and |v2 | = x − 1.
It’s easy to see then that (4.3) is satisfied.
If neither of a ≤ 2b − 2 and b ≤ 2a + 2 holds, then
a ≥ 2b − 1 ≥ 2(2a + 3) − 1 = 4a + 5,
so 0 ≥ 3a + 5, a contradiction.



Proof in characteristic zero. By Proposition 3.8, it’s enough to treat the “generic case”. We
want to show that for positive integers a, b with a + b = d, and N = 2d, all SN -subrepresentations
(1) are the same. Clearly the trivial representation [(N )] is not contained
I22 (a, b) ⊂ Wd2 = indSSN
d ∼S2
2
in any I2 (a, b), so
⌊d/2⌋

I22 (a, b)

⊆

Wd2 /[(N )]

=

M

[(2 · (d − i), 2 · i)], for all a, b with a + b = d.

i=1

(see [Mac95, I.8, Ex. 6] for the formula of the decomposition of Wd2 into irreducible representations; as the rest of the proof will show, we don’t really need the precise description of this
decomposition).
We will finish the proof by showing that the above inclusions are in fact equalities for all a, b.
To see this, it’s enough to prove that for any a, b with a + b = d, any partition λ with two parts,
and any monomial m = zα · zβ , with α ⊔ β = {1, · · · , N }, we have cλ · m ∈ I22 (a, b). Fix then such
a, b, λ = (λ1 , λ2 ) and m = zα · zβ .
Recall from Section 3 that we can identify cλ · m with a tableau T of shape λ with 1’s in the
positions indexed by the elements of α, and 2’s in the positions indexed by the elements of β.
Recall also that if T has repeated entries in a column, then T = 0. Since permutations within
columns of T can only change the sign of T , and permutations of the columns of T of the same
size don’t change the value of T (Lemma 3.5), we can assume that in fact m = z{1,··· ,d} ·z{d+1,··· ,N }
and
T = cλ · z{1,··· ,d} · z{d+1,··· ,N } = 1 1 1 · · · 2 2 · · ·.
2 2 ···
Consider the sets
α1 = {2, · · · , a + 1}, α2 = {1, · · · , d} \ α1 , β1 and β2 = {d + 1, · · · , N } \ β1 ,
where β1 is any subset with a elements of {d + 1, · · · , N } containing λ1 + 1. Let T̃ be the tableau
obtained from T by circling the boxes corresponding to the entries of α1 and β1 (see Definition 3.6).
We have
T̃ = cλ · [α1 , β1 |α2 , β2 ] = cλ · (zα1 ∪α2 · zβ1 ∪β2 − zα1 ∪β2 · zα2 ∪β1 ) = T − T ′ ,
where T ′ is a tableau with two equal entries in its first column, i.e. T ′ = 0. We get
T = T̃ ∈ I22 (a, b),
completing the proof.



10

CLAUDIU RAICU

Remark 4.2. The characteristic zero case also follows by inheritance (Proposition 3.8 and Corollary 3.9): since all the partitions λ that show up have at most two parts, it suffices by inheritance
to prove the theorem when n = 2, but in this case all the catalecticant ideals are the same, as
remarked in the introduction (1.1).
5. Geramita’s Conjecture
We are now ready to give an affirmative answer to Geramita’s Question 1.1 in the Introduction.
Theorem 5.1. Let K be a field of characteristic 0 and let n ≥ 2, d ≥ 4 be integers. The following
statements hold:
(1) For all t with 2 ≤ t ≤ d − 2 we have
I3 (Cat(2, d − 2; n)) = I3 (Cat(t, d − t; n)).
(2) There is a strict inclusion
I3 (Cat(1, d − 1; n)) ( I3 (Cat(2, d − 2; n)).
Corollary 5.2. Any of the ideals I3 (Cat(t, d − t; n)), 2 ≤ t ≤ d − 2, is the ideal of the secant line
n−1
.
variety of the d-th Veronese embedding of PK
Proof. This follows from [Kan99, Theorem 3.3(ii)] and Theorem 5.1.



Proof of Theorem 5.1. To prove (1), it suffices by Proposition 3.8 to show that I33 (2, d − 2) =
I33 (t, d − t) ⊂ Wd3 for 2 ≤ t ≤ d − 2. The λ-highest weight spaces of all I33 (t, d − t), 2 ≤ t ≤ d − 2,
are the same when λ has at most two parts. This follows by inheritance: combine Proposition 3.8
with the fact that the theorem is known when n = 2 (1.1). We shall prove that when λ has three
parts, the λ-isotypic component of I33 (t, d − t) is equal to the λ-isotypic component of Wd3 for all
t with 1 ≤ t ≤ d − 1 (we already know this when t = 1, by Proposition 3.3). This will imply (1)
and the inclusion of (2). The reason why this inclusion is strict for d ≥ 4 is because it is already
strict when n = 2, and because inheritance holds for catalecticant ideals.
Consider a partition λ = (λ1 , λ2 , λ3 ) with 3 parts, a monomial m ∈ Wd3 with corresponding
tableau T = cλ · m, and integers 2 ≤ a ≤ b with a + b = d. We shall prove that T ∈ I33 (a, b).
We will see that if λ has only one entry in the second column, then T = 0, so let’s assume
this isn’t the case for the moment. We may also assume that T has no repeated entries in a
column (Lemma 3.5). Since permuting the numbers 1, 2, 3 in the tableau T doesn’t change T ,
and permutations within the columns of T preserve T up to sign, we may assume that T contains
the subtableau
1 1
2 2
3
in its first two columns (there may or may not be a third box in the second column of λ).
It follows that m = zγ1 zγ2 zγ3 , with γ1 = {1, 2, · · · }, γ2 = {λ1 + 1, λ1 + 2, · · · } and γ3 =
{λ1 + λ2 + 1, · · · }, |γi | = d. Consider subsets αi ⊂ γi , |αi | = a satisfying the conditions
1, 2 ∈ α1 ,

λ1 + 1 ∈ α2 , λ1 + 2 ∈
/ α2 ,

λ1 + λ2 + 1 ∈
/ α3 ,

3 × 3 MINORS OF CATALECTICANTS

11

and let βi = γi \ αi , for i = 1, 2, 3. Let T̃ be the tableau obtained from T by circling the entries
of α1 , α2 , α3 , so that T̃ ∈ I33 (a, b). T̃ looks like
'&%$
!"#
!"#
1 '&%$
1 ···
!"#
T̃ = '&%$
2
2 · · ·.
3 ···

We get
T̃ = cλ · [α1 , α2 , α3 |β1 , β2 , β3 ] = T +

5
X

±Tj ,

j=1

where each Tj is a tableau with repeated entries in one of its first two columns (i.e. Tj = 0). It
follows that
T = T̃ ∈ I33 (a, b),
as in Example 3.7, which is what we wanted to prove.
To see that T = cλ · m = 0 for all monomials m when λ = (3d − 2, 1, 1), it suffices to notice
that if σ is the transposition of the (3d − 1)-st and 3d-th boxes of λ (the 2nd and 3rd boxes in the
first column of λ), then σ(T ) = cλ · (σ · m) and T are the same up to permutations of columns
size 1 (and permutations of the entries of the alphabet A = {1, 2, 3}). It follows that
cλ · m = cλ · (σ · m) = (cλ · σ) · m = −cλ · m,
so that T = cλ · m = 0, as desired. Alternatively, it follows from [Mac95, I.8, Ex. 9] that [λ] does

not appear in the decomposition of Wd3 into irreducible representations, so cλ · Wd3 = 0.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank David Eisenbud for his guidance throughout the project, Charley Crissman for numerous conversations on the subject, and Tony Geramita, Tony Iarrobino and Bernd
Sturmfels for helpful comments and suggestions. I also thank Dan Grayson and Mike Stillman for
making Macaulay2 [GS], which served as a good source of inspiration. This work was partially
supported by National Science Foundation Grant No. 0964128.
References
[BH93] Winfried Bruns and Jürgen Herzog, Cohen-Macaulay rings, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics,
vol. 39, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993. MR1251956 (95h:13020)
[BB10] Weronika Buczyńska and Jaroslaw Buczyński, Secant varieties to high degree Veronese reembeddings,
catalecticant matrices and smoothable Gorenstein schemes, arXiv 1012.3563 (2010). To appear in Journal
of Algebraic Geometry.
[BGL10] Jaroslaw Buczyński, Adam Ginensky, and J. M. Landsberg, Determinantal Equations for Secant Varieties
and the Eisenbud-Koh-Stillman Conjecture, arXiv 1007.0192 (2010). To appear in Journal of London
Mathematical Society.
[Con98] Aldo Conca, Straightening law and powers of determinantal ideals of Hankel matrices, Adv. Math. 138
(1998), no. 2, 263–292, DOI 10.1006/aima.1998.1740. MR1645574 (99i:13020)
[Eis88] David Eisenbud, Linear sections of determinantal varieties, Amer. J. Math. 110 (1988), no. 3, 541–575,
DOI 10.2307/2374622. MR944327 (89h:14041)
[Eis95]
, Commutative algebra, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 150, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995.
With a view toward algebraic geometry. MR1322960 (97a:13001)
[FH91] William Fulton and Joe Harris, Representation theory, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 129, SpringerVerlag, New York, 1991. A ﬁrst course; Readings in Mathematics. MR1153249 (93a:20069)

12

CLAUDIU RAICU

[Ger96] Anthony V. Geramita, Inverse systems of fat points: Waring’s problem, secant varieties of Veronese varieties and parameter spaces for Gorenstein ideals, The Curves Seminar at Queen’s, Vol. X (Kingston, ON,
1995), Queen’s Papers in Pure and Appl. Math., vol. 102, Queen’s Univ., Kingston, ON, 1996, pp. 2–114.
MR1381732 (97h:13012)
[Ger99]
, Catalecticant varieties, Commutative algebra and algebraic geometry (Ferrara), Lecture Notes in
Pure and Appl. Math., vol. 206, Dekker, New York, 1999, pp. 143–156. MR1702103 (2000f:14075)
[GP82] Laurent Gruson and Christian Peskine, Courbes de l’espace projectif: variétés de sécantes, Enumerative
geometry and classical algebraic geometry (Nice, 1981), Progr. Math., vol. 24, Birkhäuser Boston, Mass.,
1982, pp. 1–31 (French). MR685761 (84m:14061)
[GS] Daniel R. Grayson and Michael E. Stillman, Macaulay 2, a software system for research in algebraic
geometry, Available at http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2/.
[IK99] Anthony Iarrobino and Vassil Kanev, Power sums, Gorenstein algebras, and determinantal loci, Lecture
Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1721, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999. Appendix C by Iarrobino and Steven L.
Kleiman. MR1735271 (2001d:14056)
[Kan99] Vassil Kanev, Chordal varieties of Veronese varieties and catalecticant matrices, J. Math. Sci. (New York)
94 (1999), no. 1, 1114–1125. Algebraic geometry, 9. MR1703911 (2001b:14078)
[Lan12] J. M. Landsberg, Tensors: Geometry and Applications, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 128, American Mathematical Society, 2012.
[LO11] J. M. Landsberg and Giorgio Ottaviani, Equations for secant varieties of Veronese and other varieties,
arXiv 1111.4567 (2011). To appear in Annali di Matematica Pura e Applicata.
[Mac95] I. G. Macdonald, Symmetric functions and Hall polynomials, 2nd ed., Oxford Mathematical Monographs,
The Clarendon Press Oxford University Press, New York, 1995. With contributions by A. Zelevinsky;
Oxford Science Publications. MR1354144 (96h:05207)
[Puc98] Mario Pucci, The Veronese variety and catalecticant matrices, J. Algebra 202 (1998), no. 1, 72–95, DOI
10.1006/jabr.1997.7190. MR1614174 (2000c:14071)
[Rai11] Claudiu Raicu, Secant Varieties of Segre-Veronese Varieties, ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2011. Thesis
(Ph.D.)–University of California, Berkeley. MR2942194
[Rai12]
, Secant varieties of Segre–Veronese varieties, Algebra & Number Theory 6 (2012), no. 8, 1817–
1868, DOI 10.2140/ant.2012.6.1817.
[SS11] Jessica Sidman and Gregory Smith, Linear determinantal equations for all projective schemes, Algebra &
Number Theory 5 (2011), no. 8, 1041–1061, DOI 10.2140/ant.2011.5.1041.
[Wey03] Jerzy Weyman, Cohomology of vector bundles and syzygies, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 149,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003. MR1988690 (2004d:13020)
Department of Mathematics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544-1000
Institute of Mathematics “Simion Stoilow” of the Romanian Academy
E-mail address: craicu@math.princeton.edu

