ON THE ARITHMETICALLY COHEN-MACAULAY PROPERTY FOR
SETS OF POINTS IN MULTIPROJECTIVE SPACES

arXiv:1702.01199v2 [math.AG] 9 Oct 2017

GIUSEPPE FAVACCHIO, ELENA GUARDO, AND JUAN MIGLIORE
Abstract. We study the arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay (ACM) property for finite sets
of points in multiprojective spaces, especially (P1 )n . A combinatorial characterization,
the (⋆)-property, is known in P1 × P1 . We propose a combinatorial property, (⋆s ) with
2 ≤ s ≤ n, that directly generalizes the (⋆)-property to (P1 )n for larger n. We show
that X is ACM if and only if it satisfies the (⋆n )-property. The main tool for several of
our results is an extension to the multiprojective setting of certain liaison methods in
projective space.

1. Introduction
A motivating problem in algebraic geometry and commutative algebra concerns multiprojective spaces. Given a finite collection of points X ⊆ Pa1 × · · · × Pan it is interesting
to describe the homological invariants of the quotient ring of X. An important property
is whether the collection is arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay (ACM) or not, i.e. whether
the quotient ring is a Cohen-Macaulay ring. It is no longer the case (as it is in projective
space) that a finite set of points is automatically ACM. It is of interest to understand
which finite sets of points are ACM.
A characterization of finite sets with the ACM property is only known in P1 × P1 .
We know several classifications of ACM sets of reduced and fat points in P1 × P1 , in
terms of the Hilbert function, separators, and combinatorial properties (for example see
[1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]). Unfortunately, Examples 3.4, 4.10 in [6] and Examples 3.4, 3.12,
5.10 in [7] show that these characterizations cannot be generalized to other ambient spaces
such as Pn ×Pm or Pa1 ×· · ·×Pan , but there remains the hope that they can be generalized
to P1 × P1 × · · · × P1 = (P1 )n .
Our focus in this paper is to better understand ACM sets of points in (P1 )n by extending
some standard tools in the homogeneous setting to the multihomogeneous setting. These
include basic double G-linkage, liaison addition, and liaison. Although our focus in this
paper is not on Hilbert functions, we do give multigraded Hilbert function formulas for
these generalized constructions.
For a set of points X in P1 × P1 , it is known (cf. for instance [10] Theorem 4.11) that
X is ACM if and only if it satisfies the so-called (⋆)-property (see page 5 of this paper
for the definition). We first give a new proof of this result using liaison theory (Corollary
2.9). In P1 × P1 , the (⋆)-property is equivalent to the inclusion property (Definition 2.5).
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 13C40, 13C14, 13A15, 14M05.
Key words and phrases. points in multiprojective spaces, arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay, linkage.
Revised Version: August 15, 2017.
1

2

G. FAVACCHIO, E. GUARDO, AND J. MIGLIORE

However, we use liaison addition to show in Example 2.12 that the inclusion property
does not characterize ACM sets of points in P1 × P1 × P1 (or (P1 )n for larger n).
On the other hand, we show in Proposition 2.7 that the inclusion property does imply
the ACM property in (P1 )n . If X ⊂ (P1 )n is an ACM set of points and πi is any projection
to a copy of (P1 )n−1 then X decomposes in a natural way to a disjoint union of level subsets
(see Definition 2.5). We show in Theorem 3.2 that these level subsets are all ACM, as are
their complements.
We introduce for sets of points in (P1 )n the (⋆s )-property for 2 ≤ s ≤ n (Definition
3.6), a generalization of the (⋆)-property, and we show in Theorem 3.16 that for s = n
this characterizes the ACM property.
In [11] the authors began the study of the Hilbert function of any finite set of points,
X, in P1 × P1 × P1 . We hope that the characterization in this paper will help in the future
classification of Hilbert functions of ACM finite sets of points in (P1 )n .
2. Some constructions and a new proof
We work over a field of characteristic zero.
Definition 2.1. For V = Pa1 × · · · × Pan we define
ai × · · · × Pan
πi : V → Pa1 × · · · × Pc
to be the projection omitting the i-th component and
ηi : V → Pai
to be the projection to the i-th component.
Let e1 , . . . , en be the standard basis of Nn . Let xi,j , with 1 ≤ i ≤ n and 0 ≤ j ≤ ai for
all i, j, be the variables for the different Pai . Let
R = K[x1,0 , . . . , x1,a1 , . . . , xn,0, . . . , xn,an ],
where the degree of xi,j is ei .
A subscheme X of V is defined by a saturated ideal, IX , generated by a system of
multihomogeneous polynomials in R in the obvious way. We say that X is arithmetically
Cohen-Macaulay (ACM) if R/IX is a Cohen-Macaulay ring.
Let N = a1 + · · · + an + n. Given a subscheme X of V together with its homogeneous
ideal IX , we can also consider the subscheme X̄ of PN −1 defined by IX . Notice that
if X is a zero-dimensional subscheme of V , IX almost never defines a zero-dimensional
subscheme of PN −1 . For example, if n = 2, a1 = a2 = 1, then a finite subset, X, of P1 × P1
corresponds to a finite union of lines, X̄, in P3 (of a certain type). The subscheme X ⊂ V
is ACM if and only if the subscheme X̄ ⊂ PN −1 is ACM.
The following construction is a special case of so-called Basic Double G-Linkage – cf.
[16] Lemma 3.4 for a more general version, or [10] Theorem 4.9 for what is used here.
Proposition 2.2 ([16] Corollary 3.5). Let V1 ⊂ V2 ⊂ · · · ⊂ Vr ⊂ Pn be ACM of the same
dimension ≥ 1. Let H1 , . . . , Hr be hypersurfaces, defined by forms F1 , . . . , Fr , such that
for each i, Hi contains no component of Vj for any j ≤ i. Let W0 ⊂ V1 be an ACM
subscheme, and for each i ≥ 1 let Wi be the ACM scheme defined by the corresponding

ACM POINTS IN MULTIPROJECTIVE SPACES

3

hypersurface sections: IWi = IVi + (Fi ). Let Z be the sum of the Wi , viewed as divisors
on Vr . Then
(i) Z is ACM.
(ii) As ideals we have
IZ = IVr + Fr · IVr−1 + Fr Fr−1 IVr−2 + · · · + Fr Fr−1 · · · F2 IV1 + Fr Fr−1 · · · F1 IW0 .
(iii) Let di = deg Fi . The Hilbert functions are related by the formula
hZ (t) = hWr (t) + hWr−1 (t − dr ) + hWr−2 (t − dr − dr−1 ) + . . .
+hW1 (t − dr − dr−1 − · · · − d2 ) + hW0 (t − dr − dr−1 − · · · − d1 ).
A multihomogeneous version of the above proposition, taking W0 to be empty (since for
the purposes of this paper it is not needed), is given in the next proposition. Recall that
the ideal of a zero-dimensional subscheme of the multiprojective space defines a subscheme
of higher dimension in projective space.
Proposition 2.3. Let V1 ⊂ V2 ⊂ · · · ⊂ Vr ⊂ Pa1 ×· · ·×Pan be ACM of the same dimension
≥ 1. Fix h ∈ {1, . . . , n}. Let H1 , . . . , Hr be hypersurfaces, defined by multihomogeneous
forms F1 , . . . , Fr with degree deg(Fi ) = Di eh := di ∈ Nn , for some Di ∈ N, such that
for each i, Hi contains no component of Vj for any j ≤ i. Let Wi be the ACM schemes
defined by the corresponding hypersurface sections: IWi = IVi + (Fi ). Let Z be the sum of
the Wi , viewed as divisors on Vr . Then
(i) Z is arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay.
(ii) As ideals we have
IZ = IVr + Fr · IVr−1 + Fr Fr−1 IVr−2 + · · · + Fr Fr−1 · · · F2 IV1 + (Fr Fr−1 · · · F1 ).
(iii) The Hilbert functions are related by the formula
hZ (t) = hWr (t) + hWr−1 (t − dr ) + hWr−2 (t − dr − dr−1 ) + . . .
+hW1 (t − dr − dr−1 − · · · − d2 ).
Remark 2.4. As the name suggests, basic double G-linkage actually does something
stronger: it preserves the even Gorenstein liaison class (originally [15], but see [16]
Lemma 3.4 (iv)). This means that in Proposition 2.2 something stronger is actually
true: without initially assuming that W0 is ACM we have that Z is ACM if and only
if W0 is, since the ACM property is preserved under liaison. This latter is a standard
fact whose roots go back at least to Gaeta in the 40s and 50s, to Hartshorne in the 60s,
to Rao in the 70s, and to Schenzel [18] in 1982 (the first time Gorenstein liaison was
considered rather than only complete intersection liaison), and is based on the fact that
the Hartshorne-Rao modules are invariant up to shifts and duals in the Gorenstein liaison
class, and are all zero if and only if the scheme is ACM. These facts are collected in [14]
Lemma 1.2.3 and Theorem 5.3.1.
This has the following consequence, which we will use in Corollary 2.9. We follow
the notation of Proposition 2.2. Let W0 ⊂ P1 × P1 be a finite set. Let V1 be a union of
hyperplanes of multidegree (0, 1) containing W0 and let F1 be a hyperplane of multidegree
(1, 0) not containing any point of X. Let W1 be the complete intersection of V1 and F1 ,
and let Z = W0 ∪ W1 . Then Z is ACM if and only if W0 is ACM.

4

G. FAVACCHIO, E. GUARDO, AND J. MIGLIORE

Definition 2.5. Let X ⊂ (P1 )n be a finite, reduced subscheme and fix a value of i,
1 ≤ i ≤ n. Let {[k1 , ℓ1 ], . . . , [kt , ℓt ]} = ηi (X). For 1 ≤ j ≤ t, let Hj be the hyperplane
defined by ℓj xi,0 − kj xi,1 and let Xj = X ∩ Hj . We call the Xj the i-level sets of X. We
say that X has the inclusion property with respect to πi if the subsets πi (Xj ) of (P1 )n−1 ,
for 1 ≤ j ≤ t, admit a total ordering by inclusion and are all ACM.
Note that the i-level sets are a natural stratification of the points of X obtained by taking
all points with prescribed i-th coordinate.
Example 2.6. Let X ⊂ P1 × P1 × P1 be the following set of points.

✲

π2
π3

✠

π1

❄

The next pictures show the decompositions of X as unions of 1-level sets, 2-level sets
and 3-level sets respectively. Note that X has the inclusion property with respect to π1
but not with respect to π2 or π3 .

Indeed, we have π1 (X4 ) ⊇ π1 (X3 ) ⊇ π1 (X2 ) ⊇ π1 (X1 ), but no such chain of inclusions
holds for π2 (X1′ ), π2 (X2′ ) and π2 (X3′ ), or for π3 (X1′′ ), π3 (X2′′ ) and π3 (X3′′ ).
Proposition 2.7. Let X ⊂ (P1 )n be a finite set. Assume that for some 1 ≤ i ≤ n, X has
the inclusion property with respect to πi . Then X is ACM.
Proof. Recall that the inclusion property includes the assumption that the i-level sets are
all ACM. We first note that if W is a finite subset of (P1 )n−1 then πi−1 (W ) is a finite union
of lines (copies of the i-th P1 ) in V sitting over W . We have that the finite set W is ACM
if and only if the curve πi−1 (W ) is ACM, since they are defined by the same equations.
Furthermore, in the notation of Definition 2.5, Xj = πi−1 (πi (Xj )) ∩ Hj .

ACM POINTS IN MULTIPROJECTIVE SPACES

5

Notice that
X = [(πi−1 (πi (X1 )) ∩ H1 ] ∪ · · · ∪ [(πi−1 (πi (Xt )) ∩ Ht ].
The inclusion property then implies an analogous inclusion property for the curves
πi−1 (πi (Xj )). Since all these curves are ACM, the result follows from Proposition 2.2. 
Remark 2.8. Note that for P1 × P1 , X satisfies the inclusion property with respect to
πi (for i = 1, 2) if and only if it satisfies the so-called (⋆)-property, namely that even after
re-indexing, X contains no subset of type (a) in Remark 3.10 below (cf. [10] Definition
3.19), where it is understood that the intersection points that are non-bullets do not lie
in X. In Definition 3.6 we will extend the (⋆)-property to higher dimension.
The following is part of the known classification of ACM sets of points in P1 × P1 (again
see [10] Theorem 4.11). We now give a short new proof of this result.
Corollary 2.9. Let V = P1 × P1 . Let X ⊂ V be a finite set of points. Then X is ACM
if and only if X satisfies the inclusion property with respect to either π1 or π2 .
Proof. Notice that in P1 all finite subsets are ACM, so i-level sets in P1 × P1 are automatically ACM. Then the fact that if X satisfies the inclusion property with respect to
one of the projections then X is ACM follows immediately from Proposition 2.7.
We now prove the converse. Suppose that X is ACM but does not satisfy the inclusion
property with respect to either projection. Without loss of generality, we may assume
that there is no value j such that
|π1−1 (π1 (X)) ∩ Hj | = |Xj | or |π2−1 (π2 (X)) ∩ Hj | = |Xj |.
In other words, thinking of X as a subset of the intersection points of a grid of “horizontal”
lines and “vertical” lines, we may assume that no row or column contains the maximum
possible number of points of X. Indeed, if this were the case then we can remove such a
row or column of points, and what remains is still ACM thanks to Remark 2.4.
We now consider X as a union of lines in P3 . The “vertical” lines of our grid correspond
to a union of planes in P3 containing X, as do the “horizontal” lines, and these unions
have no plane in common. Hence they provide a geometric link of X to some union of
lines Y in P3 , which is again ACM by standard results in liaison theory (cf. [14]). Notice
that the product of the minimal number of “vertical” lines in the grid containing X is a
minimal generator of IX , as is the product of the minimal number of “horizontal” lines
in the grid containing X (Theorem 1.2 in [3]).
The key observation is that if we view Y as part of our grid, it is simply the points of
the grid that do not belong to X. By our observation, the minimal set of “vertical” and
“horizontal” lines containing Y are identical to those containing X. If we link back using
the same complete intersection, we re-obtain X. But now in both links we have used
minimal generators for the ideal. Since X has codimension two (a crucial ingredient!), if
X were ACM, a sequence of two links using minimal generators in both cases would result
in a set of points whose number of minimal generators is two less than that of X. (This
is due primarily to Apery and Gaeta; see for instance [14] Theorem 6.1.3, applied twice.)
Since we instead have exactly X again, X is not ACM so we have our contradiction. 

6

G. FAVACCHIO, E. GUARDO, AND J. MIGLIORE

It is natural to wonder if the analogue of Corollary 2.9 holds for a larger product of
P1 ’s. We now show that this is not the case. For simplicity we will give our example
for P1 × P1 × P1 , but the same idea and construction works for any number. Of course
one direction of a supposed analogue of Corollary 2.9 is given by Proposition 2.7, so we
need to exhibit an ACM set of points not satisfying the inclusion property with respect
to any of the three projections. We will use the following result, which generalizes an
unpublished result of P. Schwartau, and is a multihomogeneous version of [2] Corollary
1.6, Theorem 1.3 and Corollary 1.5.
Theorem 2.10. Let V1 , . . . , Vr be subschemes of Pa1 × · · · × Pan , with 2 ≤ r ≤ n. Assume
that Vi are all equidimensional of codimension r. Choose multihomogeneous polynomials
F1 , . . . , Fr with di = deg Fi = Di · ei ∈ Nn so that
\
Fi ∈
IVj .
1≤j≤r
j 6= i

and (F1 , . . . , Fr ) is a regular sequence. Let V be the complete intersection scheme defined
by (F1 , . . . , Fr ). Let I = F1 IV1 + · · · + Fr IVr and let Z be the scheme defined by I. Then
(i) As sets, Z = V1 ∪ · · · ∪ Vr ∪ V .
(ii) I is a saturated ideal.
(iii) If hX (t) denotes the Hilbert function of a scheme X then we have
hZ (t) = hV (t) + hV1 (t − d1 ) + · · · + hVr (t − dr ).
(iv) Z is ACM if and only if V1 , . . . , Vr are all ACM.
Remark 2.11. If ∆hX (t) denotes the first difference of the Hilbert function of a scheme
X (see [7], Definition 2.8) then we note that item (iii) is equivalent to
(2.1)

∆hZ (t) = ∆hV (t) + ∆hV1 (t − d1 ) + · · · + ∆hVr (t − dr ).

With this construction we now show that the analogue of Corollary 2.9 does not hold
for P1 × P1 × P1 .
Example 2.12. In P1 × P1 × P1 consider the points
V1 = ([1, 1], [1, 1], [1, 1]) , V2 = ([2, 1], [2, 1], [2, 1]) , V3 = ([3, 1], [3, 1], [3, 1]).
Note that IVi = (x1,0 − ix1,1 , x2,0 − ix2,1 , x3,0 − ix3,1 ), and all three are ACM. Let
F1 = (x1,0 − 2x1,1 )(x1,0 − 3x1,1 )
F2 = (x2,0 − x2,1 )(x2,0 − 3x2,1 )
F3 = (x3,0 − x3,1 )(x3,0 − 2x3,1 )
Let
I = F1 IV1 + F2 IV2 + F3 IV3 .
Theorem 2.10 shows that I is the saturated ideal of the union of 11 points, namely
V1 , V2 , V3 and the 8 points of intersection of F1 , F3 and F3 , and that X is ACM. One
checks, however, that X fails to have the inclusion property with respect to any direction.

ACM POINTS IN MULTIPROJECTIVE SPACES

7

V1
✲

π2
π3

✠

π1

V2

❄

V3

The same idea can be used to construct an example for a product of any number of copies
of P1 .
Remark 2.13. Using formula (2.1) we can write the first difference of the Hilbert function
of X in Example 2.12. We get
0
∆hX (0, j, k) = 1
2
3

0
1
1
1
0

1
1
1
0
0

2
1
0
0
0

3
0
0
0
0

···
···
···
···
···

0
∆hX (1, j, k) = 1
2
3

0
1
1
0
0

1
1
1
0
0

2
0
0
0
0

3
0
0
0
0

···
···
···
···
···

∆hX (2, 0, 0) = 1 and ∆hX (i, j, P
k) = 0 otherwise. One can check that there is no hyperplane containing 6 points, but j,k ∆hX (0, j, k) = 6. So we cannot generalize Theorem
3.1 in [11] i.e. we are not able to count the number of points on a plane directly from the
Hilbert function even in the ACM case.
Having the preceding example, it becomes of great interest to find a characterization
of those sets of points in P1 × P1 × P1 and, more generally, in (P1 )n that are ACM. We
will do this in the next section.
Remark 2.14. It is not hard to show that if we move the point V2 = ([2, 1], [2, 1], [2, 1])
to the bottom plane in the above picture,

the Hilbert function remains the same but now X does have the inclusion property. This
shows that from the Hilbert function one cannot determine whether or not an ACM set
of points has the inclusion property.
3. ACM sets of points in (P1 )n
Let R = K[x1,0 , x1,1 , x2,0 , x2,1 , . . . , xn,0 , xn,1 ] be the coordinate ring for (P1 )n , which we
shall also view as the coordinate ring for P2n−1 . Let X ⊂ (P1 )n be a finite set of points.

8

G. FAVACCHIO, E. GUARDO, AND J. MIGLIORE

Since IX defines both a set of points in (P1 )n and a union of linear varieties in P2n−1 , we
will abuse notation and denote by X also the subvariety of P2n−1 defined by this ideal.
As above, we can view the i-level sets of X with respect to any direction, and we often
refer to them simply as level sets.
Notation 3.1. Let X be as above. We write X = X1 ∪ X2 ∪ · · · ∪ Xr to represent
the decomposition of X into level sets with respect to some direction; without loss of
generality we assume it is the first. Viewed in P2n−1 , any given Xi is the intersection of
a hyperplane defined by a linear form ℓi in the variables x1,0 and x1,1 and a variety X i in
P2n−1 defined by the variables x2,0 , x2,1 , . . . , xn,0 , xn,1 . X i is ACM in P2n−1 if and only if
Xi is ACM in the i-th copy of (P1 )n−1 , which in turn is equivalent to Xi being ACM as a
subscheme of P2n−1 (with ideal (ℓi ) + IX i ). We denote by IX i the corresponding ideal in
R. For convenience we will denote by A1,i the hyperplanes in the variables x1,0 and x1,1
containing at least one point of X, by A2,i the hyperplanes in the variables x2,0 and x2,1
containing at least one point of X, etc. We will abuse notation and use the same notation
for the corresponding linear forms.
Theorem 3.2. Let X ⊂ (P1 )n be a finite set. Choose any of the n projections; without
loss of generality assume it is π1 . Let X1 , . . . , Xr be the level sets with respect to this
ci ∪ · · · ∪ Xr
projection. If X is ACM then for each i, both Xi and X\Xi = X1 ∪ · · · ∪ X
are ACM.
Proof. Notice that the first assertion follows immediately from the second, by removing
level sets one at a time.
We now prove that X\Xi is ACM. We have n families of linear forms, namely the A1,i
that are linear combinations of x1,0 and x1,1 , the A2,i that are linear combinations of x2,0
and x2,1 , etc. We replace each of these linear forms by a new variable. Supposing that
|{A1,i | A1,i ∩ X =
6 ∅}| = r1 ,
|{A2,i | A2,i ∩ X =
6 ∅}| = r2 ,
..
.
|{An,i | An,i ∩ X 6= ∅}| = rn ,
let us call the new variables a1,1 , . . . , a1,r1 , a2,1 , . . . , a2,r2 , . . . , an,1 , . . . , an,rn . Let S be the
polynomial ring in these r1 + · · · + rn variables. We form the monomial ideal in S given by
the intersection of ideals of the form (a1,i , a2,j , . . . , an,k ) corresponding to the components
of X. This intersection defines a height n monomial ideal, J ⊂ S.
Consider J as an ideal, say J, in the ring T = S[x1,0 , x1,1 , x2,0 , x2,1 , . . . , xn,0 , xn,1 ], where
S is defined in the previous paragraph. Being a cone, J continues to be a height n
monomial ideal. Consider the linear forms a1,i1 − A1,i1 , a2,i2 − A2,i2 , . . . , an,in − An,in ,
where 1 ≤ i1 ≤ r1 , . . . , 1 ≤ in ≤ rn . Let L be the ideal generated by all these linear forms.
We have that
R/IX ∼
= T /(J, L),
the former of which is ACM. Since the ideals IX of R and J of T both have height n, we
can view the addition of each linear form in L as a proper hyperplane section, giving that
T /J is also Cohen-Macaulay.

ACM POINTS IN MULTIPROJECTIVE SPACES

9

Now let x be any of the r1 + r2 + · · · + rn variables of S (viewed in T ). Corollary 3.2(a)
of [12] (see also Theorem 1.5 in [13] and Proposition 1.2 in [17]) shows that the following
inequality holds for the projective dimension
pd(T /(J, x)) ≤ pd(T /J) + 1.
From the exact sequence
0 → T /(J : x)(−1) → T /J → T /(J, x) → 0
it then follows, by the Depth Lemma (see [19] Lemma 1.3.9 or [20] Lemma 3.1.4), that
T /(J : x) is also Cohen-Macaulay. Then again passing to the hyperplane sections, we see
that X\Xi is ACM.

The following corollary is immediate.
Corollary 3.3. If X ⊂ (P1 )n is ACM then the union of any number of level sets of X in
any given direction is ACM.
Corollary 3.4. If X ⊂ (P1 )n is a finite ACM set of points then its multihomogeneous
ideal (hence also its homogeneous ideal) is minimally generated by products of linear forms
of type Ai,j .
Proof. This follows from the argument in Theorem 3.2, since the monomial ideal passes
to an ideal generated by products of linear forms, and the ACM property means that the
Betti diagram (in particular the minimal generators) is preserved under proper hyperplane
sections.

Remark 3.5. Corollary 3.4 is not true without the ACM assumption. Indeed, the ideal
of three general points in P1 × P1 × P1 is easily seen to have minimal generators of degree
(1, 1, 0), (1, 0, 1), (0, 1, 1) that are not products of linear forms.
Let P, Q ∈ (P1 )n . We denote by YP,Q a height n multihomogeneous complete intersection of least degree containing P and Q, with each minimal generator being a product
of at most two hyperplanes in the same family {Aj,1, . . . , Aj,rj } (see Notation 3.1 and
Theorem 3.2 for the notation).
Definition 3.6. Let X be a finite set of points in (P1 )n and s be an integer such that
2 ≤ s ≤ n. Then X has the (⋆s ) property if, for any integer s′ , such that 2 ≤ s′ ≤ s, there
do not exist two points P, Q ∈ (P1 )n with either of the following properties:
(i) P, Q ∈ X such that the ideal defining YP,Q has exactly s′ minimal generators of
degree 2 and X ∩ YP,Q = {P, Q};
(ii) P, Q ∈
/ X such that the ideal defining YP,Q has exactly s′ minimal generators of
degree 2 and YP,Q ∩ X = YP,Q \ {P, Q}.
Remark 3.7. If P, Q have the property that YP,Q has only one minimal generator of
degree 2, this does not violate the (⋆s ) property for any s because of the condition that
2 ≤ s′ . Thus a set X with the (⋆s )-property may have two such points.
Example 3.8. Let X := {Q112 , Q121 , Q122 , Q211 , Q212 , Q221 } be the set of 6 points in
P1 × P1 × P1 where Qijk := {[i : 1], [j : 1], [k : 1]} . One can check that X has the (⋆2 )
property and it does not have the (⋆3 ) property. Indeed, for instance the smallest complete

10

G. FAVACCHIO, E. GUARDO, AND J. MIGLIORE

intersection containing Q112 , Q121 is defined by (A1 , B1 B2 , C1 C2 ), which contains a third
point of X, where for the convenience of the reader we have denoted Ai := x10 − ix11 ,
Bj := x20 − jx21 and Ck := x30 − kx31 . However, X fails the (⋆3 ) property. Indeed,
the smallest complete intersection Y containing the points Q111 , Q222 ∈
/ X is defined by
(A1 A2 , B1 B2 , C1 C2 ), and Y ∩ X = Y \{Q111 , Q222 } (in this case this is actually equal
to X).
Remark 3.9. It is natural for us, considering the ambient space we are studying, to
define the (⋆s ) property by using a geometric interpretation. Moreover, we will describe
this property from a combinatorial point of view in Lemma 3.14 and Lemma 3.15.
Remark 3.10. For points in P1 × P1 , the (⋆2 )-property coincides with the (⋆)-property
of [10] Definition 3.19 (see also Remark 2.8 above). For points in P1 × P1 × P1 we can
rewrite Definition 3.6 as follows. Let X be a finite set of points in P1 × P1 × P1 . Then X
has the (⋆3 )-property if there is no complete intersection YP,Q whose intersection with X
(after possibly reindexing) has any of the following three forms:

(a)
(b)
(c)
If X ⊂ (P ) satisfies the (⋆n )-property then (for example) in particular the behavior of
type (a), (b) or (c) does not occur.
1 n

Corollary 3.11. Let X ⊂ (P1 )n be a finite set and assume that X is ACM. Then X
satisfies the (⋆n )-property.
Proof. We will view X as lying in P2n−1 . We first note that it is enough to prove that X
contains no subset of type (i) in Definition 3.6. Indeed, the fact that X does not contain
a subset of the form (ii) follows from (i)
To Q
see this, consider a complete
Q by liaison.
Q
intersection containing X, of the form ( A1,i , A2,i , . . . , An,i ). It links X to a union
of (n − 1)-planes X ′ (still viewed in P2n−1 ), and X contains a subset of the form (i) if and
only if X ′ contains one of the form (ii). But by standard facts in liaison theory (cf. [14]),
X is ACM if and only if X ′ is ACM, so we are done.
Thus it remains only to prove that if X is ACM then it does not contain a subset of
the form given in (i). Suppose to the contrary that such a subset does occur in X. Then
we can selectively remove level sets with respect to different projections, until we remain
only with the non-degenerate set {P, Q} in a suitable copy of (P1 )s for some s ≤ n. By
a repeated application of Theorem 3.2, we obtain the assertion that {P, Q} is ACM in
(P1 )s . But this is clearly impossible since the ideals of P and of Q do not share any linear
forms, so viewed as subschemes of P2s−1 , P and Q are disjoint. Contradiction.

Proposition 3.12. Let X ⊂ (P 1 )n be a finite set. Choose any of the n projections;
without loss of generality assume that it is π1 . Let Y1 = X1 be any level set (after possibly
re-indexing) with respect to this projection and let Y2 = X2 ∪ · · · ∪ Xr be the union of the
remaining level sets, with r ≥ 3. Then X is ACM if and only if the following conditions
hold.
(a) Both Y1 and Y2 are ACM.

ACM POINTS IN MULTIPROJECTIVE SPACES

11

(b) IY1 + IY2 is the saturated ideal of a dimension (n − 2) union of linear spaces.
(c) The scheme defined by IY1 + IY2 is ACM of dimension (n − 2).
Proof. In both directions we will use the exact sequence
(3.1)

0 → IY1 ∩ IY2 → IY1 ⊕ IY2 → IY1 + IY2 → 0.

Observe that IX = IY1 ∩IY2 . Note that two components of X, which are all (n−1)-planes in
P2n−1 , meet in dimension (n−2) if and only if (n−1) of their n defining multihomogeneous
hyperplanes coincide. They meet in lower dimension if and only if fewer than (n − 1) of
their defining multihomogeneous hyperplanes coincide.
Assume first that (a), (b) and (c) hold. Then the ACM property for X comes immediately from a consideration of cohomology of the long exact sequence coming from the
sheafification of (3.1).
Now assume that X is ACM. Part (a) is Theorem 3.2. Part (b) is immediate from the
cohomology sequence, since X is ACM so its first cohomology is zero. Again considering
the long exact sequence in cohomology coming from the sheafification of (3.1), the fact
that X is ACM and both Y1 and Y2 are ACM of dimension (n − 1) immediately gives that
the (n − 2)-dimensional scheme defined by IY1 + IY2 is ACM, giving (c).

Remark 3.13. Let X ⊂ P1 ×P1 ×P1 be a finite set (a priori not necessarily ACM). Choose
any of the 3 projections; without loss of generality assume it is π1 . Let X1 , . . . , Xr be the
level sets with respect to this projection. If X has the (⋆3 )-property (so in particular X
does not contain any set in configuration (a) in Remark 3.10) then, for each j, Xj is ACM
thanks to Corollary 2.9 and Remark 2.8.
Our next goal is to show that X ⊆ (P 1 )n is ACM if and only if it has the (⋆n )-property.
We first make a small modification of the notation introduced at the beginning of this
section. Given u ∈ Nn , we denote by Pu the point whose ideal is generated by
(A1u1 , A2,u2 , . . . , An,un ).
Define d(v, w) := |{i | vi 6= wi }|.
Lemma 3.14. Let X ⊂ (P1 )n be a finite set with the (⋆s )-property, for some 2 ≤ s ≤ n.
Moreover, suppose that v, w ∈ Nn are such that d(v, w) = r ≤ s and Pv , Pw ∈ X. Then
there exist u0 , . . . ur ∈ Nn such that
• u0 = v, ur = w;
• Pui ∈ X for i = 1, . . . , r;
• d(ui , ui−1 ) = 1 for i = 1, . . . , r.
Proof. Note that the (⋆s )-property implies the (⋆i )-property for i ≤ s by definition. We
proceed by induction on r. If r = 1 the result is trivial, and for r = 2 the result follows
immediately from the (⋆2 )-property. Now take v, w ∈ Nn such that d(v, w) = r > 2 and
Pv , Pw ∈ X. Since X has the (⋆s )-property, there exists Pu ∈ X such that uj ∈ {vj , wj },
for each component of u. Then apply the inductive hypothesis on the vectors v, u and

u, w.
Lemma 3.15. Let X ⊂ (P1 )n be a finite set with the (⋆s )-property. Moreover, suppose
that v, w ∈ Nn are such that d(v, w) = r ≤ s, v1 6= w1 , and Pv , Pw ∈ X. Then there exist
a, b ∈ Nn such that

12

G. FAVACCHIO, E. GUARDO, AND J. MIGLIORE

•
•
•
•

Pa , Pb ∈ X,
a1 6= b1 ,
d(a, b) = 1
ai , bi ∈ {vi , wi } for i = 1 . . . n.

Proof. It follows from Lemma 3.14.



Theorem 3.16. Let X ⊂ (P1 )n be a finite set. Then X has the (⋆n )-property if and only
if X is ACM.
Proof. If X is ACM then it was shown in Corollary 3.8 that X satisfies the (⋆n )-property,
so we only have to prove the converse. We proceed by simultaneous induction on n and
on t, the number of level sets with respect to some projection (say π1 ). We have already
shown the case n = 2, so we can assume n ≥ 3.
If t is equal to 1, the result follows from the inductive hypothesis on n. Let t > 1 and
X = X1 ∪ X2 ∪ · · · ∪ Xt . Let Y1 = X1 be any level set (after possibly re-indexing) with
respect to this projection and let Y2 = X2 ∪ · · · ∪ Xt be the union of the remaining level
sets. Given v ∈ Nn−1 , we denote by Lv the line in (P1 )n through P(1,v) whose ideal is
generated by (A2v1 , A3,v3 , . . . , An,vn−1 ) for some Ai,j .
We assume A1,1 ∈ Re1 is the linear form defining the hyperplane containing Y1 . We
denote by Ŷ1 the set of lines Lv passing through a point of Y1 , i.e. Ŷ1 = π1−1 (π1 (X1 )).
(Viewed in P2n−1 , Ŷ1 is a union of codimension n − 1 linear spaces.)
By induction on n and on t, we know that Y1 and Y2 are ACM. In particular, this means
that Ŷ1 is also ACM. Hence we have an equality of saturated ideals IY1 = (A1,1 ) + IŶ1 .
Then it follows from the following exact sequence
0 → IY1 ∩ IY2 → IY1 ⊕ IY2 → (A1,1 ) + IŶ1 + IY2 → 0
that it is enough to show that IŶ1 + IY2 is an ACM ideal (clearly of height n) and A1,1 is
a regular form in R/(IŶ1 + IY2 ). We proceed by steps.
(σ1 ) We show that Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 is an ACM set of points.
By the inductive hypothesis on t, it suffices to show that it has the (⋆n )-property.
More precisely, we prove that Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 has the (⋆s )-property for every s such that
2 ≤ s ≤ n.
• Ŷ1 ∩Y2 contains no subset of type (i). Let v, w ∈ Nn be such that d(v, w) = s and
Pv , Pw ∈ Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 . Note that both points are also in X but not in Y1 . However,
by construction, P(1,v2 ,...,vn ) , P(1,w2 ,...,wn ) ∈ Y1 (so in particular, in X).
Assume, by contradiction, that Pv and Pw define a subset of Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 of type (i),
i.e. that no other point in the smallest complete intersection containing Pv , Pw
belongs to Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 . Since X has the (⋆n )-property, by Lemma 3.14 there exist
u0 , . . . , us as in the statement of lemma, “joining” Pv to Pw .
By our assumption, in particular Pus−1 is not in Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 , but it is in X. Notice
that the “path” from Pv to Pw is obtained by changing one coordinate at a time
from v to w in the shortest possible way. Since neither v nor w has a 1 as first
coordinate, us−1 is not of the form (1, z2 , . . . , zn ). Then by applying Lemma 3.15

ACM POINTS IN MULTIPROJECTIVE SPACES

13

to the points P(1,v2 ,...,vn ) and Pus−1 , we get a contradiction by forcing a point of
Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 to lie in the complete intersection.
• Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 contains no subset of type (ii). Indeed, if it did then this subset is
contained in X, contradicting the (⋆n )-property of X.
(σ2 ) We make a technical observation concerning the “outlier” points.
We denote by Y1′ the set of points P(1,v) ∈ Y1 (where now v ∈ Nn−1 ) such that the line
Lv has empty intersection with Y2 , and we denote by Y2′ := Y2 \ (Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 ). Let F ∈ IŶ1 ∩Y2
and assume that F is a product of linear forms of type Ai,j . Taking the ideal of the empty
set to be R, we claim that
F ∈ (IY2′ ) ∪ (IY1′ ).
We assume that both Y1′ and Y2′ are non-empty; otherwise the statement is trivial. Assume
by contradiction that F ∈
/ (IY2′ ) ∪ (IY1′ ). Then there exist P := P(1,u) ∈ Y1′ and Q :=
′
/ (A1,1 , A2,u1 , . . . An,un−1 ) and F ∈
/ (A1,2 , A2,v1 , . . . An,vn−1 ). Now,
P(2,v) ∈ Y2 , such that F ∈
′
′
/ Y2 ; moreover, since P(2,v) ∈ Y2 we have P(1,v) ∈
/ Y1 . But X has
P(1,u) ∈ Y1 implies P(2,u) ∈
the (⋆n )-property, so by Lemma 3.15 there exist w ∈ Nn−1 such that P(1,w) , P(2,w) ∈ X.
Thus P(2,w) ∈ Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 . Since, for any index i, wi ∈ {ui , vi } and F ∈ (A1,2 , A2,w1 , . . . An,wn−1 )
is a product of linear forms Ai,j we get either F ∈ IP or F ∈ IQ , which contradicts the
assumption.
(σ3 ) We show that IŶ1 ∩Y2 ⊆ IŶ1 + IY2 .
From (σ1 ) we know that Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 is ACM, so IŶ1 ∩Y2 is minimally generated by products
of linear forms of type Ai,j (by Corollary 3.4). Let F ∈ IŶ1 ∩Y2 be such a generator. From
the minimality of F we note that F ∈
/ (A1,1 ). From (σ2 ) we have F ∈ IY1′ ∪ IY2′ .
Assume first that F ∈ IY2′ . Then trivially F ∈ IY2 ⊆ IŶ1 + IY2 .
Assume now that F ∈
/ IY2′ ; in particular, there exists a point, say P(2,u) ∈ Y2′ , such that
F ∈
/ (A1,2 , A2,u1 , . . . , An,un−1 ). We collect the relevant facts:
(f1 ) P(1,u) ∈
/ Y1 by definition of Y2′ ;
(f2 ) F ∈ IY1′ by (σ2 );
/ (A1,2 , A2,u1 , . . . , An,un−1 ) and F ∈
/ (A1,1 ).
(f3 ) F ∈ IŶ1 ∩Y2 , F ∈
We want to show that F ∈ IŶ1 . Choose any point P := P(1,v) ∈ Y1 . We consider two cases.
• If P = P(1,v) ∈ Y1′ then from (f2 ) and (f3 ) we get F ∈ (A1,1 , A2,v1 , . . . , An,vn−1 ) so
F ∈ (A2,v1 , . . . , An,vn−1 ) since F ∈
/ (A1,1 ) and F is a product of linear forms of type
Ai,j .
• Assume P = P(1,v) ∈ Y1 \ Y1′ .
- We first use the (⋆n )-property of X. We have P(1,v) , P(2,u) ∈ X but P(1,u) ∈
/X
′
by definition of Y2 . It follows by Lemma 3.15 applied to the points P(1,v) and
P(2,u) of X that there is some point P(2,z) ∈ Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 with zh ∈ {uh , vh } (here
/ X). Importantly, since P ∈
/ Y1′ , at least one of the
we have used P(1,u) ∈
coordinates zh must be vh .

14

G. FAVACCHIO, E. GUARDO, AND J. MIGLIORE

- Now we have: F vanishes at P(2,z) , F does not vanish at P(2,u) , and the
components of z are all from v or u. Therefore, since u 6= z and F is a
product of linear forms of the form Ai,j , at least one linear factor of F comes
from v. Therefore F ∈ IŶ1 as desired.
This concludes the proof of (σ3 ).
To complete the proof of our theorem, note that in R we always have
q
IŶ1 ∩Y2 ⊇ IŶ1 + IY2 ⊇ IŶ1 + IY2 .
Thus, IŶ1 +IY2 is the ideal of an ACM set of reduced points in (P1 )n , as desired. Moreover,
this implies that A1,1 is a regular form in R/(IŶ1 + IY2 ) since no point of Ŷ1 ∩ Y2 belongs
to the hyperplane defined by A1,1 .

4. Acknowledgements
The first author thanks University of Notre Dame for the hospitality. This work was
done while the first author was partially supported by the National Group for Algebraic
and Geometrical Structures and their Applications (GNSAGA-INdAM), and the third
author was partially supported by a Simons Foundation grant (#309556) and by FIR
UNICT 2014 while he was visiting University of Catania. The second author thanks FIR
UNICT 2014 and GNSAGA.
All the authors thank the anonymous referee for a very careful reading of the manuscript
and for his/her helpful suggestions.
References
[1] M. Baczyńska, M. Dumnicki, A. Habura, G. Malara, P. Pokora, T. Szemberg, J. Szpond, H. TutajGasińska, Points fattening on P1 × P1 and symbolic powers of bi-homogeneous ideals. J. Pure Appl.
Algebra 218 (2014), no. 8, 1555–1562.
[2] A.V. Geramita and J. Migliore, A generalized liaison addition, J. Algebra 163 (1994), 139–164.
[3] S. Giuffrida, R. Maggioni and A. Ragusa. On the postulation of 0-dimensional subschemes on a
smooth quadric. Pacific Journal of Mathematics 155, no.2, (1992): 251-282.
[4] E. Guardo, Fat point schemes on a smooth quadric. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 162 (2001), no. 2-3,
183–208.
[5] E. Guardo, A. Van Tuyl, Fat Points in P1 × P1 and their Hilbert functions. Canad. J. Math. 56
(2004), no. 4, 716–741.
[6] E. Guardo, A. Van Tuyl, Separators of points in a multiprojective space. Manuscripta Math. 126
(2008), no. 1, 99–113.
[7] E. Guardo, A. Van Tuyl, ACM sets of points in multiprojective space. Collect. Math. 59 (2008), no.
2, 191–213.
[8] E. Guardo, A. Van Tuyl, Classifying ACM sets of points in P1 × P1 via separators. Arch. Math.
(Basel) 99 (2012), no. 1, 33–36.
[9] E. Guardo, A. Van Tuyl, Separators of Arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay fatpoints in P1 × P1 . J.
Commut. Algebra 4 (2012), no. 2, 255–268.
[10] E. Guardo and A. Van Tuyl, “Arithmetically Cohen-Macaulay sets of points in P1 × P1 ,” Springer
Briefs in Mathematics (2015).

ACM POINTS IN MULTIPROJECTIVE SPACES

15

[11] E. Guardo and A. Van Tuyl. On the Hilbert functions of sets of points in P1 × P1 × P1 . Mathematical
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society. Vol. 159. No. 01. Cambridge University Press,
2015.
[12] J. Herzog, A generalization of the Taylor complex construction, Comm. Alg. 35 (5), 1747-1756, 2007.
[13] G. Kalai, R. Meshulam Intersections of Leray Complexes and Regularity of Monomial Ideals, J.
Combin. Theory Ser. A, 113 (7): 1586-1592, 2006.
[14] J. Migliore, “Introduction to Liaison Theory and Deficiency Modules,” Birkhäuser, Progress in
Mathematics 165, 1998.
[15] J. Kleppe, J. Migliore, R. Miró-Roig, U. Nagel and C. Peterson, “Gorenstein Liaison, Complete
Intersection Liaison Invariants and Unobstructedness,” Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 154 no. 732 (2001).
[16] J. Migliore and U. Nagel, Reduced arithmetically Gorenstein schemes and simplicial polytopes with
maximal Betti numbers, Adv. Math. 180 (2003), 1–63.
[17] A. Rauf, Depth and Stanley depth of multigraded modules. Comm. Algebra 38 (2010), no.2, 773–784.
[18] P. Schenzel, Notes on liaison and duality, J. Math. Kyoto Univ. 22-3 (1982) 485–498.
[19] R. H. Villareal, “Monomial Algebras,” Monographs and textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics,
238, Marcel Dekker, Inc NY 2001.
[20] W.V. Vasconcelos, “Arithmetic of Blowup Algebras,” London Math. Soc., Lecture Notes Series 195,
Cambridge 1994.
Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica, Viale A. Doria, 6 - 95100 - Catania, Italy
E-mail address: favacchio@dmi.unict.it
Dipartimento di Matematica e Informatica, Viale A. Doria, 6 - 95100 - Catania, Italy
E-mail address: guardo@dmi.unict.it
Department of Mathematics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556
E-mail address: migliore.1@nd.edu

