arXiv:1412.3607v2 [math.AG] 16 Jun 2016

POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS IN
TWO-DIMENSIONAL LOCAL RINGS WITH RATIONAL
SINGULARITIES
MARIA ALBERICH-CARRAMIÑANA, JOSEP ÀLVAREZ MONTANER,
FERRAN DACHS-CADEFAU, AND VÍCTOR GONZÁLEZ-ALONSO
Abstract. We study the multiplicity of the jumping numbers of an m-primary ideal
a in a two-dimensional local ring with a rational singularity. The formula we provide
for the multiplicities leads to a very simple and efficient method to detect whether a
given rational number is a jumping number. We also give an explicit description of the
Poincaré series of multiplier ideals associated to a proving, in particular, that it is a
rational function.

1. Introduction
Let X be a complex surface with a rational singularity at a point O ∈ X and OX,O
its corresponding local ring. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal where m = mX,O
is the maximal ideal of OX,O . Then, for any real exponent c > 0, we may consider
its corresponding multiplier ideal J (ac ). It turns out that the multiplier ideal becomes
smaller as the parameter c grows and, whenever we have an strict inclusion J (ac−ε ) !
J (ac ) for arbitrarily small ε > 0, we say that c is a jumping number.
Since a is m-primary, its associated multiplier ideals are m-primary as well so they
have finite codimension, as C-vector spaces, in OX,O . This fact prompted Ein-LazarsfeldSmith-Varolin [6] to define the multiplicity of a jumping number as the codimension as
C-vector spaces of two consecutive multiplier ideals. In general, for any positive real
number c we can define its multiplicity as
m(c) := dimC

J (ac−ε )
J (ac )

where ε is small enough. In particular, c is a jumping number whenever m(c) > 0. In
order to gather all the information given by all jumping numbers and their corresponding
multiplicities, Galindo-Monserrat [8] introduced the so-called Poincaré series of multiplier
All four authors were partially supported by Generalitat de Catalunya SGR2014-634 project and Spanish
Ministerio de Economı́a y Competitividad MTM2015-69135-P. FDC is also supported by the KU Leuven
grant OT/11/069. VGA is also supported by the ERC StG 279723 “Arithmetic of algebraic surfaces”
(SURFARI). MAC is also with the Institut de Robòtica i Informàtica Industrial (CSIC-UPC) and the
Barcelona Graduate School of Mathematics (BGSMath).
1

2

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

ideals associated to a as the series with fractional exponents
X
m(c) tc .
Pa (t) =
c∈R>0

The main result in [8] is the fact that the Poincaré series of a simple complete m-primary
ideal a ⊆ OX,O , for a smooth point O, is rational in the sense that it belongs to the field
of fractional functions C(z) where the indeterminate z corresponds to a fractional power
t1/e for a suitable e ∈ N>0 . They also provided a closed formula for Pa (t) that relies in
Järviletho’s formula [11] for the set of jumping numbers.
One of the goals of this paper is to extend their result to the case of any m-primary
ideal in a surface with a rational singularity at O. To do so we provide first a systematic
study of the multiplicities using the theory of jumping divisors introduced in [1]. Another
goal that we achieve is to give a simple numerical criterion (see Theorem 5.2) which
characterizes whether any given rational number is a jumping number.
The paper is organized as follows: First we briefly recall the basics on the theory of
multiplier ideals and the aspects on the theory of singularities that we will use throughout
this work.
In Section §3 we review the notion of jumping divisors introduced in [1]. In fact we will
be mainly interested in the maximal jumping divisor since it satisfies a nice periodicity
property. In particular we will give a geometrical description of this divisor. We also
point out that, en passant, we provide several technical results that will be crucial in the
rest of the paper.
The core of the paper can be found in Section §4. We provide two different formulas to
describe the multiplicity for any c ∈ R>0 . The first one (see Theorem 4.1) is described in
terms of the maximal jumping divisor associated to c. The periodicity of this divisor leads
to Proposition 4.5 that provides a very clean description of the growth of multiplicities in
terms of dicritical components of the maximal jumping divisor. This is the key result that
we will use in the description of the Poincaré series associated to a in the final section.
The second formula for the multiplicity (see Proposition 4.10) is given using the notion
of virtual codimension introduced in [5] and [17].
In Section §5 we provide a very simple (and efficient) algorithm to compute the set of
jumping numbers of a. It boils down to compute the multiplicities of the rational numbers
in the set of candidate jumping numbers. This relies on a simple numerical criterion to
characterize jumping numbers (see Theorem 5.2). Another consequence of the formulas for
the multiplicities is that we can describe those jumping numbers contributed by dicritical
divisors. In particular we give in Theorem 5.5 a full description of the jumping numbers
in the interval (1, 2].
The main result of Section §6 is a description of the Poincaré series of multiplier ideals
for any m-primary ideal a. As a consequence, we can easily recover the case of simple ideals
obtained by Galindo-Monserrat [8] in the smooth case. Finally we relate the Poincaré

POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

3

series to the Hodge spectrum of a generic element f ∈ a. In particular we recover an old
result of Lê Văn Thành-Steenbrink [15] describing the Hodge spectrum of a plane curve.
2. Preliminaries
Let (X, O) be a germ of complex surface with at worst a rational singularity. Let OX,O
denote the local ring at O, m = mX,O ⊆ OX,O the maximal ideal, and let a ⊆ m be an
m-primary ideal. Recall that a log-resolution of the pair (X, a) (or of a, for short) is a
birational morphism π : X ′ → X such that
i) X ′ is smooth (in particular, π is a resolution of the singularity),
ii) the exceptional locus E = Exc (π) is a divisor with simple normal crossings (the
irreducible components E1 , . . . , Er of E are all smooth and intersect transversely),
and
iii) the preimage of a is locally principal, that is, a · OX ′ = OX ′ (−F ) for some effective
divisor F supported on E.
The theory of rational singularities was introduced by Artin in [3] and further developed
by Lipman in [16]. We recall that the point O being (at worst) a rational singularity means
that R1 π∗ OX ′ = 0 for some (hence any) desingularization. A first consequence of Artin’s
results is that the exceptional divisor of any desingularization is a tree of rational curves.
Indeed, according to [3, Proposition 1] a singularity is rational if and only if any effective
divisor D with exceptional support has arithmetic genus (see [2, Page 486])
1
pa (D) = 1 + (KX ′ + D) · D 6 0.
2
Since the components Ei of the exceptional divisor are smooth, we have pa (Ei ) ≥ 0, hence
pa (Ei ) = 0, which means that they are rational. Furthermore, there cannot be a cycle
E1 , . . . , Ek of exceptional components (i.e., such that E1 · E2 = E2 · E3 = · · · = E1 · Ek = 1
and Ei ·Ej = 0 for any other i 6= j), since the formula pa (A + B) = pa (A)+pa (B)+A·B−1
would give pa (E1 + · · · + Ek ) = 1.
The above numerical characterization [3, Proposition 1] of rational singularities is not
satisfying enough, since it involves testing every effective exceptional divisor. In the same
work, Artin proved in [3, Theorem 3] that it is enough to check the fundamental cycle,
the unique smallest non-zero effective divisor Z (with exceptional support) such that
Z · Ei 6 0

for every i = 1, . . . , r.

Another important property of the fundamental cycle is that m · OX ′ = OX ′ (−Z), hence
any desingularization is a log-resolution of the maximal ideal m. .
Since rational singularities are Q-factorial, it is possible to define a relative
Prcanonical divisor Kπ of π, which can be characterized as the unique divisor Kπ = i=1 ki Ei
supported on the exceptional divisor and such that
!
r
X
(2.1)
(Kπ + Ej ) · Ej =
ki Ei · Ej + Ej2 = −2
i=1

4

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

for every exceptional component Ej (because of the adjunction formula). Note that
the coefficients ki are uniquely determined because the intersection matrix (Ei · Ej )i,j is
negative-definite, but they are not necessarily integral nor positive. Moreover, due to this
numerical characterization, KX ′ can be replaced by Kπ to compute the arithmetic genus
as pa (Z) = 1 + 21 (Kπ + Z) · Z.
The ideal a being
Pr m-primary, F is supported on the exceptional locus, hence it can be
written as F = i=1 ei Ei for some positive integers ei . For any component Ei , the excess
of a at Ei is defined as
(2.2)

ρi = −F · Ei > 0.

If C is a curve through O defined by a general element in a, then ρi is the number
e that intersect Ei . The total excess is defined as
of branches
of the strict transform C
Pr
ρ = i=1 ρi , and is therefore the number of branches at O of a general curve of the linear
system defined by a. In particular, ρ > 0.
P
For any R-divisor D = i di Di in X ′ , where the Di are pairwise different prime divisors,
its round-down ⌊D⌋, round-up ⌈D⌉ and fractional part {D} are defined by applying the
corresponding operation to the coefficients di .
The multiplier ideal (sheaf ) associated to a and some real number c ∈ R is defined as
J (ac ) = π∗ OX ′ (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉) .
Since a is m-primary, any multiplier ideal J (ac ) is also m-primary. Furthermore, for any
ε > 0 it holds J (ac ) ⊇ J (ac+ε ), with equality for ε small enough. Hence the multiplier
ideals form a discrete nested sequence
OX,O ! J (aλ1 ) ! J (aλ2 ) ! ... ! J (aλi ) ! ...
indexed by an increasing sequence of rational numbers 0 < λ1 < λ2 < . . . such that
J (aλi ) = J (ac ) ! J (aλi+1 ) for any c ∈ [λi , λi+1 ). The λi are the so-called jumping
numbers of the ideal a. We point out now two properties that will be useful in the sequel:
• (local vanishing) for any c ∈ R, it holds R1 π∗ OX ′ (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉) = 0, and
• (Skoda’s theorem) J (ac ) = aJ (ac−1 ) for any c > 2.
For further properties and some applications of multiplier ideals, we refer the reader to
the book of Lazarsfeld [13].
Being m-primary, the multiplier ideals have finite C-codimension in OX,O . This fact
prompted Ein, Lazarsfeld and Varolin [6] to define the multiplicity of λi as

J aλi−1
m (λi ) = dimC
.
J (aλi )


Since J aλi−1 = J aλi −ε for small ε, we can extend this definition to any c ∈ R as
(2.3)

J (ac−ε )
m (c) := dimC
J (ac )

POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

5

With this definition, it is clear that c is a jumping number if and only if m (c) > 0.
In order to describe the behavior of the jumping numbers and its multiplicities, Galindo
and Montserrat [8] introduced the Poincaré series of multiplier ideals associated to a,
which after our definition of multiplicity can be written as
X
m(c) tc .
(2.4)
Pa (t) =
c∈R>0

We introduce now some technical notation. Given any exceptional component Ei , define
Adj (Ei ) = {Ej | Ei · Ej = 1}

and a (Ei ) = #Adj (Ei ) = Ei · (E − Ei ) ,

the set of exceptional components adjacent to Ei and its number. More generally, for any
reduced exceptional divisor D = Ei1 + · · · + Eim define
AdjD (Ei ) = {Ej 6 D | Ei · Ej = 1}

and aD (Ei ) = #AdjD (Ei ) ,

the set of components adjacent to Ei inside D. Define also the set of components adjacent
to D as
Adj (D) = {Ej | Ej 66 D and D · Ej = 1} .
Finally, denote by vD = m (resp. aD ) the number of irreducible components of D (resp.
intersections between two components of D). Since the exceptional set is a tree of rational
curves, any D as before is a collection of trees of rational curves, and it is then clear that
X
aD (Ei ) = 2aD
Ei 6D

and that vD − aD equals the number of connected components of D. We also say that Ei
is an end of D if Ei 6 D and aD (Ei ) = 1.

Finally we mention that there are two kinds of exceptional divisors that will play a
special role throughout this work:
• An exceptional component Ei is a rupture component if a (Ei ) > 3, that is, it
intersects at least three more components of E (different from Ei ).
• We say that Ei is dicritical if ρi > 0. Dicritical components correspond to Rees
valuations by [16].
3. Jumping divisors
Recall from [1, Definition 4.1] that a jumping divisor for a jumping number λ is a
reduced exceptional divisor G such that λei − ki ∈ Z for every irreducible component
Ei 6 G, and for small ε > 0 satisfies

(3.1)
J aλ−ε = π∗ OX ′ (⌈Kπ − λF ⌉ + G) .
That is, G gives a jump from the multiplier ideal with exponent λ to the previous one.
In [1] it was proved that, given a jumping number λ, every jumping divisor G satisfies
Gλ 6 G 6 Hλ for some special jumping divisors Gλ and Hλ . These divisors are called
respectively minimal and maximal jumping divisor, and the former is extensively studied

6

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

in [1]. The aim of this section is to study the maximal one, which can be defined for any
positive real number c and will play a prominent role in the rest of the paper.
Definition 3.1. Given any real number c ∈ R, we define its associated maximal jumping
divisor as
(3.2)

Hc = ⌈Kπ − (c − ε) F ⌉ − ⌈Kπ − cF ⌉

for a sufficiently small ε > 0. Alternatively, it can be defined as the reduced divisor whose
components are the exceptional curves Ei such that ki − cei ∈ Z.
It follows immediately from the definition that the maximal jumping divisors satisfy
the following periodicity property.
Lemma 3.2. For any real number c ∈ R, we have Hc = Hc+1.
Remark 3.3. The definition of minimal jumping divisors given in [1, Definition 4.3] is more
involved and is closely related to the algorithm given in loc. cit. for the computation of
the chain of multiplier ideals. Is for this reason that minimal jumping divisors are only
defined for jumping numbers in [1]. However one may extend the definition to any positive
real number c if we consider Gc = 0 for any non-jumping number c > 0. Notice that the
equality (3.1) is still trivially satisfied for any divisor G such that Gc 6 G 6 Hc . Regarding
the periodicity of the minimal jumping divisor, we only have Gc = Gc+1 for c > 1 (see [1,
Proposition 4.8]) and there are examples where this equality does not hold for c 6 1.
We focus now on the structure of Hc . We first prove some formulas to compute its
intersection with its irreducible and connected components.
Lemma 3.4. Fix c ∈ R>0 and consider a component Ei of the jumping divisor Hc . Then
X
{cej − kj } .
(⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Ei = −2 + cρi + aHc (Ei ) +
Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

Proof. For any Ei 6 Hc we have
(⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Ei = ((Kπ − cF ) + {−Kπ + cF } + Hc − Ei + Ei ) · Ei =
= (Kπ + Ei ) · Ei − cF · Ei + (Hc − Ei ) · Ei + {cF − Kπ } · Ei .
Let us now compute each summand separately. The first three terms are easy: (Kπ + Ei )·
Ei = −2 follows from the adjunction formula, −cF · Ei = cρi holds by definition, and
clearly aHc (Ei ) = (Hc − Ei ) · Ei because Ei 6 Hc . It only remains to prove that
X
(3.3)
{cF − Kπ } · Ei =
{cej − kj } ,
Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

P
which is also quite immediate. Indeed, writing {cF − Kπ } = rj=1 {cei − ki } Ej , (3.3)
follows by observing that, for j 6= i, Ej · Ei = 1 if and only if Ej ∈ Adj (Ei ), and the term
corresponding to j = i vanishes because we assumed Ei 6 Hc , hence cei − ki ∈ Z.


POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

7

Corollary 3.5. For any c ∈ R>0 and any Ei 6 Hc , the sum
X
cρi +
{cej − kj }
Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

is an integer.

Proposition 3.6. Fix any c ∈ R>0 , and let Hc be its associated maximal jumping divisor.
Then the following inequalities hold:
• (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Ei > −1 for all Ei 6 Hc , and
• (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · H > −1 for any connected component H 6 Hc .
Proof. From Lemma 3.4 we already know that (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc )·Ei > −2 for all Ei 6 Hc .
If equality holds, then it must also hold
• aHc (Ei ) = 0, that is, Ei is an isolated component in Hc ,
• {cej − kj } = 0 for all Ej ∈ Adj (Ei ), that is, every exceptional component Ej
intersecting Ei is also contained in Hc , and
• ρi = 0.
The first two conditions imply that Ei is the only exceptional curve of the log-resolution.
But in this case ρi = ρ > 0 and the third condition is not satisfied.
As for the second part, using Lemma 3.4 for all Ei 6 H and summing up we obtain


X
X

(⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · H = −2vH +
{cej − kj } + cρi  + 2aH
Ei 6H

= −2 +

X

Ei 6H




Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

X

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )



{cej − kj } + c

X

ρi > −2,

Ei 6H

where aH − vH = 1 due to the tree structure of the exceptional divisor and the connectedness of H. Equality holds if and only if
X
X
X
{cej − kj } =
cρi = 0.
Ei 6H Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

Ei 6H

The first condition implies that H is the whole exceptional divisor, and then the second
condition implies that ρ = 0, which is impossible. Hence the inequality must be strict,
and since (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · H ∈ Z, the claim follows.

We will now get some insight on the topology of the Hc .

Theorem 3.7. Fix any c ∈ R>0 , and let Hc be the corresponding maximal jumping
divisor. Then:
• The isolated components of Hc must be either a rupture divisor, a dicritical divisor
or a divisor Ei with a (Ei ) = 2 such that
X
{cej − kj } = 1.
Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

8

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

• An end of a reducible connected component of Hc must be either a rupture divisor,
a dicritical divisor or an end of the whole exceptional divisor.
Proof. Let Ei be an isolated component of Hc . Assume that it is neither a rupture nor a
dicritical component. Then it only has one or two adjacent components in the exceptional
divisor. In the first case, if Ej is the only exceptional component in Adj (Ei ), then the
formula given in Lemma 3.4 reduces to (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Ei = −2 + {cej − kj }. Since
{cej − kj } < 1, we would get (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Ei < −1, contradicting Proposition 3.6.
The only possible remaining case is a (Ei ) = 2. If Adj (Ei ) = {Ej , El }, then we have
(⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Ei = −2 + {cej − kj } + {cel − kl }. Since
0 6 {cej − kj } + {cel − kl } < 2
must be an integer by Corollary 3.5 (we assumed Ei to be non-dicritical, i.e. ρi = 0), it
must equal 0 or 1. But the former contradicts Proposition 3.6, hence the only possibility
is that {cej − kj } + {cel − kl } = 1, which is the last possibility given in the statement.
As for the second assertion, let Ei be an end of a reducible connected component of Hc
that is neither a rupture divisor, nor a dicritical divisor nor an end of the whole exceptional
divisor. Then it has two adjacent components in the whole exceptional divisor, say Ej
and El , but only one of them, say Ej , is in Hc . Then we have
(⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Ei = −2 + {cel − kl } + 1 6∈ Z,
which is impossible.



There are examples where any of these cases is achieved, in particular we may find
isolated components of Hc that are neither a rupture nor a dicritical divisor.
Example 3.8. Consider the ideal a = (x3 , y 10) ⊆ C{x, y}. Its minimal log-resolution has
six exceptional components E1 , . . . , E6 indexed according to the order in which they are
obtained by successive blow-ups. They are arranged as the following dual graph shows
E1

E2

E3

E6

E5

E4

where the dashed arrow indicates that E6 is the only dicritical component, with excess
ρ6 = 1. The relative canonical divisor is Kπ = E1 + 2E2 + 3E3 + 4E4 + 8E5 + 12E6 and the
divisor F such that a · OX ′ = OX ′ (−F ) is F = 3E1 + 6E2 + 9E3 + 10E4 + 20E5 + 30E6 .
The maximal jumping divisor associated to c = 23 is H 3 = E2 + E4 + E5 + E6 . It has
2
two connected components, one of which (E2 ) is as predicted at the first statement of
Theorem 3.7.
4. Multiplicities of Jumping Numbers
Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal. The aim of this section is to describe the
multiplicity
J (ac−ε )
m(c) = dimC
J (ac )

POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

9

for any real exponent c > 0, where ε is small enough. In Theorem 4.1 we will give a
formula described in terms of the maximal jumping divisor associated to c. This formula
and Proposition 4.5 will be the key ingredients for the description of the Poincaré series
associated to a that we will give in Theorem 6.1.
We will also provide a second formula for the multiplicity in Proposition 4.10 that is
based on the concept of virtual codimension considered by Casas-Alvero [5] and Reguera
[17] for the smooth and the rational singularities case respectively.
We start with the first formula.
Theorem 4.1. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal and Hc the maximal jumping divisor
associated to some c ∈ R>0 . Then,
m (c) = (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Hc + # {connected components of Hc } .
Proof. Consider the short exact sequence
0 −→ OX ′ (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉) −→ OX ′ (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) −→ OHc (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) −→ 0
Pushing it forward to X and applying local vanishing for multiplier ideals we get the short
exact sequence
0 −→ π∗ OX ′ (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉) −→ π∗ OX ′ (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) −→
−→ H 0 (Hc , OHc (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc )) ⊗ CO −→ 0
or equivalently, since Hc = ⌈Kπ − (c − ε) F ⌉ − ⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ for ε small enough,
0 −→ J (ac ) −→ J (a(c−ε) ) −→ H 0 (Hc , OHc (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc )) ⊗ CO −→ 0
Therefore the multiplicity of c is just
m (c) = h0 (Hc , OHc (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ))
X
h0 (Ei , OEi (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc )) − aHc ,
=
Ei 6Hc

where in the second equality we have used that Hc has simple normal crossings, and
hence the sections of the line bundle OHc (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) correspond to sections over
each component that agree on the aHc intersections. Indeed, we can consider the twist by
OX ′ (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) of the following exact sequence
M
M
OEi ∩Ej −→ 0,
OEi −→
0 −→ OHc −→
Ei 6Hc

Ei ,Ej 6Hc

where the summands in the last term are length-one skyscraper sheaves (due to the simple
normal crossings condition), the first map is the direct sum of the restrictions OHc → OEi
and the second map is given by the differences at the intersections Ei ∩ Ej .
Recall now that each exceptional component Ei is isomorphic to P1 , and that the
sections of a line bundle on P1 are determined by its degree (namely, h0 (OP1 (d)) = d + 1

10

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

if d > −1 and zero otherwise). Then, using that
deg OEi (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) = (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Ei > −1
by Proposition 3.6, we get
m (c) =

X

((⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Ei + 1) − aHc

Ei 6Hc

= (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Hc + vHc − aHc
= (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Hc + # {connected components of Hc } .

Remark 4.2. When c = λ is a jumping number, the same formula for the multiplicity can
be described using the associated minimal jumping divisor Gλ . Namely,
m(λ) = (⌈Kπ − λF ⌉ + Gλ ) · Gλ + #{connected components of Gλ }
The proof of this result holds verbatim to the one given for Theorem 4.1 but we have to
refer to [1, Proposition 4.16] instead of Proposition 3.6.
For reduced divisors in the interval Gλ < G < Hλ we may have Ei 6 G such that
(⌈Kπ − λF ⌉ + G) · Ei = −2 +

X

{λej − kj } + λρi + aG (Ei ) = −2.

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

Namely, this happens when Ei is a non-dicritical isolated component of G with all adjacent
divisors in Hλ . However, these divisors can also provide a formula for the multiplicity of
a jumping number as follows. Refining the arguments used in the proof of Theorem 4.1
we obtain:
m(λ) = (⌈Kπ − λF ⌉ + G) · G + #{c.c. of G} + # {Ei | (⌈Kπ − λF ⌉ + G) · Ei = −2} .
In some cases it will be more convenient to use the following reinterpretation of the
formula given in Theorem 4.1.
Corollary 4.3. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal and Hc the maximal jumping divisor
associated to some c ∈ R>0 . Then,

m (c) =

X

Ei 6Hc




X

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )



{cej − kj } + cρi  − # {connected components of Hc } .

POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

11

Proof. Using Lemma 3.4 we have:
m(c) = (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Hc + # {connected components of Hc }


X
X
−2 +
{cej − kj } + cρi + aHc (Ei ) + # {c.c. of Hc }
=
Ei 6Hc

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

= −2vH +

=

X

Ei 6Hc




X

Ei 6Hc

X




X

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )



{cej − kj } + cρi  + 2aHc + # {c.c. of Hc }


{cej − kj } + cρi  − # {c.c. of Hc }


As an immediate consequence of this we obtain the following slight generalization of a
result of Tucker [21, Proposition 7.3]. We point out that Järviletho already proved in [11]
that 1 is not a jumping number for simple m-primary ideals.
Corollary 4.4. Suppose that O is a smooth point, and let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary
ideal. The multiplicity of c = 1 is
m(1) = ρ − 1.
In particular, c = 1 is a jumping number if and only if a is not simple.
Proof. The maximal jumping divisor for c = 1 has the same support as F , so the result
follows from Corollary 4.3.

From the formula given above and the periodicity of the maximal jumping divisor Hc ,
it is easy to control the growth of the multiplicities in terms of the excesses at dicritical
components. This result is a key point in the proof of Theorem 6.1.
Proposition 4.5. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal and Hc the maximal jumping
divisor associated to some c ∈ R>0 . Then,
X
ρi .
m (c + 1) − m (c) =
Ei 6Hc

In particular, 0 6 m (c + 1) − m (c) 6 ρ.

Proof. Recall that c and c + 1 have the same jumping divisor Hc (see Lemma 3.2). Therefore, by Theorem 4.1, we have
X
ρi .
m (c + 1) − m (c) = −F · Hc =
Ei 6Hc



12

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

P
4.1. Virtual codimensions. Given an effective R-divisor D = di Ei with exceptional
support we may consider its associated ideal (sheaf) π∗ OX ′ (−D) := π∗ OX ′ (−⌈D⌉). Its
stalk at O is an m-primary complete ideal of OX,O that we will simply denote as ID . We
say that two divisors are equivalent if they define the same ideal. In the equivalence class
of a given divisor D one may find a unique maximal representative, its so-called antinef
e (see [16, §18]). First, recall that an effective divisor with integer coeficients D ′
closure D
is called antinef if −D ′ · Ei > 0, for every exceptional prime divisor Ei .

The antinef closure of D can be computed using an inductive procedure called unloading
that was already described in the work of Enriques [7, IV.II.17] (see also [12], [5, §4.6] and
[17]). Here we will consider the version given by the first three authors in [1]. Unloading
values to any D is to consider the new divisor
X
D ′ = ⌈D⌉ +
ni Ei ,
Ei ∈Θ

where Θ is the set of components Ei 6 D with negative excesses, i.e.

Θ := {Ei 6 D | ρi = −⌈D⌉ · Ei < 0}
m
and ni = Eρi2 . We say that the unloading is tame if ρi = −1 for all Ei ∈ Θ and there
i
are no adjacent divisors in Θ. This is a mild generalization of the notion of tameness
e of D is achieved after finitely many unloading
introduced in [5]. The antinef closure D
steps.
l

Given a divisor D with exceptional support, we will define its virtual codimension or
virtual number of conditions as
⌈D⌉ · (⌈D⌉ + Kπ )
.
2
The main feature of this invariant is that it coincides with the codimension of the associated ideal when D is antinef. For a proof of this result one may consult [5, Proposition
4.7.1] for the smooth case and [17, Proposition 3.7] for the rational singularities case.
C(D) := −

Proposition 4.6. Let D be an antinef divisor and ID its associated ideal. Then:
C(D) = dimC OX,O /ID
This result is no longer true for arbitrary divisors. However, there are some non-antinef
divisors for which this equality holds.
Proposition 4.7. Assume that a divisor D ′ is obtained from a divisor D by performing
a single unloading step. Then C(D) > C(D ′ ) and the equality holds if and only if the
unloading step is tame.
Proof. Notice that, in order to compute the virtual codimension,
l mwe may always assume
P
′
D = ⌈D⌉. Hence, D = D + Ei ∈Θ ni Ei , where Θ and ni = Eρi2 are defined as above.
i

POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

Therefore:
C(D) − C(D ′ ) =
=
=
=

13


− 12 D 2 − D ′ 2 + Kπ · (D − D ′ )

P
P
P
− 12 −2 ( i ni Ei ) D − ( i ni Ei )2 − Kπ · ( i ni Ei )

P
P
P
P
2
1
2
−
−2
(
n
E
)
D
−
(
n
E
)
+
2
n
+
n
E
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
P P i
P2 ni
2
i
j>i ni nj Ei · Ej
i 2 (−2ρi + (ni − 1)Ei − 2) +

We are assuming ni > 1 for all Ei ∈ Θ so the summands n2i (−2ρi + (ni − 1)Ei2 − 2) are
always > 0. P
Notice
P that they are zero if and only if ρi = −1 for all Ei ∈ Θ. On the
other hand, i j>i ni nj Ei · Ej > 0 and equality holds if and only if Ei · Ej = 0 for all
Ei 6= Ej ∈ Θ, i.e. there are no adjacent divisors in the set Θ.

e be the antinef closure of a divisor D and ID their associated ideal,
Corollary 4.8. Let D
then:
e = dimC OX,O /ID
C(D) > C(D)
e are
and the equality holds if and only if all the unloading steps performed to obtain D
tame.
When we deal with multiplier ideals we can extract a very simple formula for the
multiplicity of any real number.

Proposition 4.9. Let Dc and Dc−ε be the antinef closures of ⌊cF − Kπ ⌋ and ⌊(c − ε)F − Kπ ⌋
respectively, for any c ∈ R>0 and ε small enough. Then, the multiplicity of c is
m(c) = C(Dc ) − C(Dc−ε ) =

Dc−ε · (Dc−ε + Kπ ) Dc · (Dc + Kπ )
−
.
2
2

Proof. We have
m(c) = dimC OX,O /J (ac ) − dimC OX,O /J ac−ε



and, using Proposition 4.6, the virtual codimensions coincide with the codimension for
antinef divisors so m(c) = C(Dc ) − C(Dc−ε ) and the result follows.

Actually there is no need to compute the antinef closure of the aforementioned divisors
to obtain the same result.
Proposition 4.10. For any c ∈ R>0 and ε small enough we have
m(c) = C(⌊cF − Kπ ⌋) − C(⌊(c − ε)F − Kπ ⌋) =
⌊(c − ε)F − Kπ ⌋ · (⌊(c − ε)F − Kπ ⌋ + Kπ ) ⌊cF − Kπ ⌋ · (⌊cF − Kπ ⌋ + Kπ )
−
.
2
2
Proof. Recall that ⌈Kπ − (c − ε)F ⌉ = ⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc . Then:
=

C(⌊cF − Kπ ⌋) − C(⌊cF − Kπ ⌋ − Hc ) =
= 21 (⌊cF − Kπ ⌋ − Hc ) · (⌊cF − Kπ ⌋ − Hc + Kπ ) − 12 (⌊cF − Kπ ⌋) · (⌊cF − Kπ ⌋ + Kπ )
= − ⌊cF − Kπ ⌋ · Hc +

Hc ·Hc
2

−

Kπ ·Hc
2

14

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

= (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Hc −

(Hc +Kπ )·Hc
2

= (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Hc + #{connected components of Hc } = m(c).
Here we used the fact that
1
(Kπ + Hc ) · Hc = −vHc + aHc = −#{connected components of Hc }
2
and Theorem 4.1.

Let λ′ < λ be two consecutive jumping numbers of an m-primary ideal a ⊆ OX,O .
Despite the fact that ⌊λ′ F − Kπ ⌋ and ⌊(λ − ε)F − Kπ ⌋ have the same antinef closure
their virtual codimensions may differ. However, we still have the following description of
the multiplicity
Proposition 4.11. Let λ′ < λ be two consecutive jumping numbers of an m-primary ideal
a ⊆ OX,O . Then, the multiplicity of λ is
m(λ) = C(⌊λF − Kπ ⌋) − C(⌊λ′ F − Kπ ⌋) =
=

⌊λ′ F − Kπ ⌋ · (⌊λ′ F − Kπ ⌋ + Kπ ) ⌊λF − Kπ ⌋ · (⌊λF − Kπ ⌋ + Kπ )
−
.
2
2

Proof. Consider all the rational numbers γ ∈ (λ′ , λ) for which there exists at least one
component Ei such that γei − ki ∈ Z. We order them to form a finite sequence of rational
numbers λ′ < γ1 < · · · < γr < λ. Notice that these are the only rational numbers in this
interval where the virtual codimension of ⌊γF − Kπ ⌋ may increase.
We have
m(λ) = C(⌊λF − Kπ ⌋) − C(⌊(λ − ε)F − Kπ ⌋) = C(⌊λF − Kπ ⌋) − C(⌊γr F − Kπ ⌋)
and, at every step of the sequence, m(γi ) = C(⌊γi F − Kπ ⌋) − C(⌊γi−1 F − Kπ ⌋). Therefore
X
m(λ) = m(λ) +
m(γi ) = C (⌊λF − Kπ ⌋) − C (⌊λ′ F − Kπ ⌋)
i>0

due to the fact that m(γi ) = 0 as these rational numbers are not jumping numbers.



Remark 4.12. In the case that X is smooth we can check that the unloading steps needed
to compute the antinef closure of ⌊cF − Kπ ⌋ for any c ∈ R>0 are tame. Indeed, repeating
the same arguments considered in the proof of Proposition 4.11 we may end up with the
case c = 0. It is then easy to check that C (⌊−Kπ ⌋) = C(D0 ) = 0 so we get
C (⌊cF − Kπ ⌋) = C(Dc ) .
This concludes the remark thanks to Corollary 4.8.

POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

15

5. Jumping Numbers via multiplicities
Fix a log-resolution π :P
X ′ −→X of an m-primary ideal aP
⊆ OX,O . Consider the relative
r
canonical divisor Kπ = i=1 ki Ei , and the divisor F = ri=1 ei Ei such that a · OX ′ =
OX ′ (−F ). The jumps between multiplier ideals must occur at rational numbers that
belong to the set of candidate jumping numbers


ki + m
| m ∈ Z>0 .
ei
Not every candidate jumping number is necessarily a jumping number. Using the formulas
for the multiplicity given in the previous section we can easily extract the set of jumping
numbers since we have:
Proposition 5.1. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal and c ∈ R>0 . Then, c is a jumping
number if and only if m(c) > 0.
In addition, we have the following simple criterion
Theorem 5.2. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal and c ∈ R>0 . Then, there exists a
connected component H 6 Hc such that
(⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · H > −1
if and only if m(c) > 0.
Proof. Theorem 4.1 states that the multiplicity of c is:
m (c) = (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · Hc + # {connected components of Hc }
X
((⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · H + 1) ,
=
H6Hc

where the sum is taken over all the connected components H 6 Hc . Then, the result
follows since (⌈Kπ − cF ⌉ + Hc ) · H > −1 by Proposition 3.6.

Therefore we have a simple algorithm to compute the set of jumping numbers of a that
boils down to compute the multiplicity of the rational numbers in the set of candidate
jumping numbers by means of the formula given in Theorem 4.1 or the one given in
Proposition 4.10. We have implemented this algorithm in the Computer Algebra system
Macaulay 2 [9]. The scripts of the source codes as well as the output in full detail of
some examples will be available at the web page
www.pagines.ma1.upc.edu/∼jalvz/multiplier.html
It turns out that this algorithm is more efficient than the algorithms considered by Tucker
in [21] and the first three authors in [1].

16

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

5.1. Jumping numbers contributed by dicritical divisors. Another interesting consequence of the methods developed in the previous sections is the fact that we can describe
a big chunk of the set of jumping numbers by means of an inspection of dicritical divisors.
In the sequel we will consider a dicritical divisor Ei with excess ρi = −F · Ei > 0 and
value vi (F ) = ei .
Theorem 5.3. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal. Let k ∈ N be a non-negative integer
such that eki > ρ1i . Then, λ = eki is a jumping number.
Proof. Let H 6 Hλ be the connected component that contains the dicritical divisor Ei .
For λ = eki > ρ1i we have
(⌈Kπ − λF ⌉ + Hλ ) · H =

X

{λej − kj } +

X

λρj − 2

Ej 6Hλ

Ej ∈Adj(H)

>

X

{λej − kj } +

Ej ∈Adj(H)

X

λρj + 1 − 2 > −1

Ej 6Hλ

j6=i

and the result follows from Theorem 5.2.
For the boundary case λ =

1
ρi



we have the following criteria.

Proposition 5.4. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal. Let k ∈ N be a non-negative
integer such that eki = ρ1i . Then, the following are equivalent:
i) λ = ρ1i is not a jumping number.
ii) Hλ = E is the whole exceptional component, and Ei is the only dicritical divisor.
Proof. Let H 6 Hλ be the connected component that contains the dicritical divisor Ei .
For λ = eki = ρ1i we have
X
X
λρj + 1 − 2
(⌈Kπ − λF ⌉ + Hλ ) · H =
{λej − kj } +
Ej ∈Adj(H)

Ej 6Hλ

j6=i

By Theorem 5.2, λ = eki = ρ1i is not a jumping number when this intersection multiplicity
is −1. Notice that a divisor Ej satisfies {λej − kj } = 0 if and only if Ej 6 Hλ . Thus
X
{λej − kj } = 0
Ej ∈Adj(H)

if and only if Adj(H) = ∅, or equivalently when Hλ = E. On the other hand
X
λρj = 0
Ej 6Hλ

j6=i

if and only if ρj = 0 for all j 6= i, i.e. when there are no dicritical divisors besides Ei .


POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

17

Notice that the result above also generalizes the fact that 1 is not a jumping number
for simple m-primary ideals. We can also extend to our setting Järviletho’s result on
the behavior of the jumping numbers in the interval (1, 2] given in [11, Theorem 9.9] for
simple complete ideals in a smooth surface.
Theorem 5.5. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal. The only jumping numbers in the
interval (1, 2] are the following:
• λ + 1, where λ ∈ (0, 1] is a jumping number.
• λ = eki , for ei < k 6 2ei with Ei dicritical divisor.
Proof. Assume that a jumping number λ ∈ (1, 2] is not of the announced types and
consider its associated maximal jumping divisor Hλ . If λ is not of the first type then
m(λ) − m(λ − 1) > 0. If it is not of the second type, then ρi = 0 for any Ei 6 Hλ . Both
conditions cannot be satisfied simultaneously by Proposition 4.5 so we get a contradiction.

Remark 5.6. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal. A generic element f ∈ a satisfies
J (f c ) = J (ac ) for any c ∈ (0, 1) so Theorem 5.5 says, roughly speaking, that the jumping
numbers of a are governed by the jumping numbers of a generic element f ∈ a and the
dicritical divisors of a.
6. Poincaré series of multiplier ideals
Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal. In this section we will give a very simple description of the Poincaré series of multiplier ideals.
X X
X
m(c) tc =
m(c + k) tc+k
Pa (t) =
c∈R>0

c∈(0,1] k∈N

To such purpose we only need to control the following two issues: First we have to
describe the multiplicities of the jumping numbers in the interval (0, 1]. This can be
done using the formulas given in Theorem 4.1 or Proposition 4.10. Secondly, and equally
important, we have to control the recurrence that these multiplicities satisfy. As shown in
Proposition 4.5, dicritical components in the maximal jumping divisor allow us to describe
the recurrence.
The main result of this section is the fact that the Poincaré series of multiplier ideals
is rational in the sense that it belongs to the field of fractional functions C(z), where the
indeterminate z corresponds to a fractional power t1/e for e ∈ N>0 being the least common
multiple of the denominators of all jumping numbers. The formula for the Poincaré series
that we obtain is the following:
Theorem 6.1. Let a ⊆ OX,O be an m-primary ideal. The Poincaré series of a can be
expressed as

X  m(c)
t
Pa (t) =
+ ρc
tc
1−t
(1 − t)2
c∈(0,1]

where ρc = −F · Hc and Hc is the maximal jumping divisor associated to c.

18

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

Proof. Let c ∈ (0, 1] be a real number. For any k ∈ N we have, applying Proposition 4.5
m(c + k) = m(c) + kρc ,
where ρc = m(c + 1) − m(c) = −F · Hc . It follows that
X
m(c + k) tc+k = m(c) tc + (m(c) + ρc ) tc+1 + (m(c) + 2ρc ) tc+2 + · · ·
k>0

=



m(c)
t
+ ρc
1−t
(1 − t)2

Thus we get the desired result.



tc


For the case of simple m-primary ideals we can easily recover the extension to the
case where X has rational singularities of the main result of Galindo-Monserrat [8]. Our
formulation slightly differs from theirs because we collect jumping numbers by the growth
of the multiplicities instead of its critical divisors.
Corollary 6.2. [8, Theorem 2.1] Let a ⊆ OX,O be a simple m-primary ideal. The Poincaré
series of a can be expressed as

X  m(c)
X m(c)
t
c
t +
+
tc
Pa (t) =
1−t
1 − t (1 − t)2
c∈(0,1]
ρc =0

c∈(0,1]
ρc =1

Proof. Simple m-primary ideals only have one dicritical divisor with excess 1 so the result
follows.

6.1. Hodge Spectrum. Let X be a smooth complex variety of dimension d and consider
an hypersurface with an isolated singularity at O defined by f ∈ OX,O . The Hodge
spectrum Sp(f ) associated to f was introduced by Steenbrink [19] using the canonical
mixed Hodge structure of the cohomology groups of the Milnor fiber of f . It is a fractional
polynomial
X
Sp(f ) =
n(c) tc ,
c∈[0,d]

where the rational number c ∈ Q is an exponent or spectral number if its associated
multiplicity n(c) is strictly positive. It is also known that the sum of all spectral numbers,
counted with multiplicity, is equal to the Milnor number of f and that they are symmetric
with respect to d2 , i.e. n(c) = n(d − c)

Budur [4] established a nice relation between the Hodge spectrum and the set of multiplier ideals. More precisely, the multiplicity of spectral numbers and the multiplicity
of the so-called inner jumping numbers coincide in the interval (0, 1]. We point out that
the usual jumping numbers are inner jumping numbers whenever they are not integer
numbers in the case of hypersurfaces with isolated singularities.
In the case where X has dimension two we can make a closer relationship between the
Hodge spectrum of a plane curve f ∈ OX,O , that we assume as a generic element of an

POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

19

m-primary ideal a ⊆ OX,O , and the Poincaré series of multiplier ideals of a. Roughly
speaking, the information given by the Hodge spectrum is equivalent, taking into account
the symmetry with respect to 1, to the information given by the terms of the Poincaré
series in the interval (0, 1). The aim of this section is to strengthen this relationship
recovering some old results on the Hodge spectrum of a plane curve by using our methods.
The spectrum of a plane curve has been described by Lê Văn Thành and Steenbrink in
[15] (see also [14], [18]). For the convenience of the reader we will reformulate their result
using the terminology we are considering in this paper. To this aim, we consider a partial
order on the exceptional components of the log-resolution. Since we are assuming that
O is a smooth point, the exceptional divisor is naturally a rooted tree of rational curves,
where the root E1 is the (strict transform of) the exceptional divisor of the blow-up of O.
The partial order is then defined by the paths from E1 , i.e. Ei precedes Ej if Ei belongs
to the chain of components connecting E1 and Ej . For any i 6= 1, we denote by p (i) the
index of the exceptional component immediately preceding Ei , so that Ep(i) belongs to
the chain connecting E1 and Ei , and Ei · Ep(i) = 1. The set of rupture or dicritical divisors
different from the root E1 will be denoted R, i.e.

R = {i | Ei 6= E1 is a rupture or dicritical divisor}.

Theorem 6.3. [15, Theorem 1.5] Let f ∈ OX,O be the equation of a plane curve with an
isolated singularity at the origin O. Let c ∈ Q be a rational number. Then, its associated
multiplicity n(c) in the Hodge spectrum of f is n(c) = n′ (c) + n′′ (c) , where:

· n′ (c) = # Ei | i∈ R and Ei + Ep(i) 6 Hc 
X
X
−1 +
{cej } + cρi 
· n′′ (c) =
Ei 6Hc
i∈R∪{1}

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

If we assume f as a generic element of an m-primary ideal a ⊆ OX,0 we can recover this
result using the formula given in Theorem 4.1.

Proposition 6.4. Let f ∈ OX,O be the equation of a plane curve with an isolated singularity at the origin O. For any c ∈ (0, 1) we have n(c) = m(c).

20

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

Proof. Lê Văn Thành and Steenbrink’s formula states that:

X

−1 +
n(c) = # Ei | i ∈ R and Ei + Ep(i) 6 Hc +
Ei 6Hc
i∈R∪{1}

X

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )



{cej } + cρi 


= # Ei | i ∈ R and Ei + Ep(i) 6 Hc − # {Ei | i ∈ R ∪ {1} and Ei 6 Hc }


X
X

{cej } + cρi 
+
Ei 6Hc
i∈R∪{1}

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )


= −# Ei | i ∈ R, Ei 6 Hc and Ep(i) 66 Hc − δ +

X

Ei 6Hc
i∈R∪{1}




X



{cej } + cρi 

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

where δ = 1 if E1 6 Hc and δ = 0 otherwise. Due to the rooted tree structure of the
exceptional divisor, every connected component of Hc has exactly one minimal component
Ei (the closest to E1 ), and clearly Ep(i) 66 Hc if i 6= 1. There is therefore a bijection
between the set Ei | i ∈ R, Ei 6 Hc and Ep(i) 66 Hc and the connected components of
Hc that contain some rupture or dicritical component but do not contain E1 . Hence we
have proved
n
o

connected components of Hc
# Ei | i ∈ R, Ei 6 Hc and Ep(i) 66 Hc + δ = # containing
a divisor Ei , i∈R∪{1} ,
which gives the following expression for n (c):

(6.1)

n(c) =

X

Ei 6Hc
i∈R∪{1}




X

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )



{cej } + cρi  − #

n

connected components of Hc
containing a divisor Ei , i∈R∪{1}

o

On the other hand, Corollary 4.3 gives (recall that ki ∈ Z because O is a smooth point)


X
X

{cej } + cρi  − # {connected components of Hc } .
(6.2)
m (c) =
Ei 6Hc

Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

To prove that both formulas coincide, we have to consider the terms
X
{cej } + cρi
Ej ∈Adj(Ei )

for the Ei 6 Hc with i 6∈ R ∪ {1}, as well as the connected components of Hc containing
only components of this kind.

POINCARÉ SERIES OF MULTIPLIER IDEALS

21

Consider first an Ei which is not an isolated component of Hc . On P
the one hand, by Theorem 3.7, all its adjacent components are contained in Hc , and hence Ej ∈Adj(Ei ) {cej } = 0.
Since it is not dicritical, ρi = 0, and therefore Ei does not contribute to the first summand of m (c). On the other hand, the connected component H of Hc containing Ei
contains also either a rupture or dicritical component (again by Theorem 3.7), and hence
its contribution to the second summand of (6.2) is already taken into account in (6.1).
To finish the proof, it remains to consider the Ei which are isolated components of Hc .
In
P this case, Theorem 3.7 says that the contribution of Ei to the first term of (6.2) is
Ej ∈Adj(Ei ) {cej } = 1, which cancels with the contribution to the number of connected
components.

References
[1] M. Alberich-Carramiñana, J.Àlvarez Montaner and F. Dachs-Cadefau, Multiplier ideals in twodimensional local rings with rational singularities, preprint available at arXiv:1412.3605. Accepted
in Mich. Math. J.
[2] M. Artin, Some numerical criteria for contractability of curves on algebraic surfaces, Amer. J. Math.
84 (1962), 485–496.
[3] M. Artin, On isolated rational singularities of surfaces, Amer. J. Math. 88 (1966), 129–136.
[4] N. Budur, On Hodge spectrum and multiplier ideals, Math. Ann. 327 (2003), 257–270.
[5] E. Casas-Alvero, Singularities of plane curves, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Series, 276, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000.
[6] L. Ein, R. Lazarsfeld, K. Smith and D. Varolin, Jumping coefficients of multiplier ideals, Duke
Math. J. 123 (2004), 469–506.
[7] F. Enriques and O. Chisini, Lezioni sulla teoria geometrca delle equazioni e delle funzioni algebriche,
N. Zanichelli, Bologna, (1915).
[8] C. Galindo and F. Monserrat, The Poincaré series of multiplier ideals of a simple complete ideal in
a local ring of a smooth surface, Adv. Math. 225 (2010), 1046–1068.
[9] D. Grayson and M. Stillman, Macaulay 2. Available at: http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2.
[10] E. Hyry and T. Järviletho, Jumping numbers and ordered tree structures on the dual graph,
Manuscripta Math. 136 (2011), 411–437.
[11] T. Järviletho, Jumping numbers of a simple complete ideal in a two-dimensional regular local ring,
Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 214 (2011), no. 1009, viii+78 pp.
[12] H. Laufer, On rational singularities, Amer. J. Math. 94 (1972), 597–608.
[13] R. Lazarsfeld, Positivity in algebraic geometry. II, volume 49, (2004), Springer-Verlag, xviii+385.
[14] Lê Văn Thành, Quelques remarques sur le spectre de singularité d’un germe de courbe plane, Singularities (Warsaw, 1985), 419–427, Banach Center Publ., 20, Warsaw, 1988..
[15] Lê Văn Thành and J. Steenbrink, Le spectre d’une singularité d’un germe de courbe plane, Acta
Math. Vietnam. 14 (1989), 87–94.
[16] J. Lipman, Rational singularities, with applications to algebraic surfaces and unique factorization,
Inst. Hautes tudes Sci. Publ. Math. 36 (1969) 195–279.
[17] A. J. Reguera, Curves and proximity on rational surface singularities, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 122
(1997) 107–126.
[18] R. Schrauwen, Topological series of isolated plane curve singularities, Enseign. Math. 36 (1990),
115–141.
[19] J. Steenbrink, Mixed Hodge structure on the vanishing cohomology, in Real and Complex Singularities
(Proc. Nordic Summer school, Oslo, 1976, pp. 525–563) Alphen a/d Rijn: Sijthoff & Noordhoff 1977.

22

M. ALBERICH, J. ÀLVAREZ, F. DACHS, AND V. GONZÁLEZ

[20] K. E. Smith and H. Thompson, Irrelevant exceptional divisors for curves on a smooth surface. in:
Algebra, geometry and their interactions, Contemp. Math. 448 (2007), 245–254.
[21] K. Tucker, Jumping numbers on algebraic surfaces with rational singularities, Trans. Amer. Math.
Soc. 362 (2010), 3223–3241.
Deptartament de Matemàtiques, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Av. Diagonal
647, Barcelona 08028, Spain
E-mail address: Maria.Alberich@upc.edu, Josep.Alvarez@upc.edu
KU Leuven, Department of Mathematics, Celestijnenlaan 200B box 2400, BE-3001 Leuven, Belgium
E-mail address: Ferran.DachsCadefau@wis.kuleuven.be
Institut für Algebraische Geometrie, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Welfengarten 1,
30167 Hannover, Germany
E-mail address: gonzalez@math.uni-hannover.de

