--- abstract: 'We develop a Gröbner basis theory for a class of algebras that generalizes both PBW-algebras and rings of differential algebras on smooth varieties. Emphasis lies on methods to compute filtrations and graded structures defined by weight vectors. The approach is tailored for bifiltered $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}$-modules satisfying properties of mixed Hodge modules. As a key ingredient in functors of such modules our theory applies to compute the order filtration on pieces of a V-filtration.' address: - | TU Kaiserslautern\ Department of Mathematics\ 67663 Kaiserslautern\ Germany - | TU Kaiserslautern\ Department of Mathematics\ 67663 Kaiserslautern\ Germany author: - Cornelia Rottner - Mathias Schulze bibliography: - 'gbmhm.bib' title: Gröbner basics for mixed Hodge modules --- Gröbner basis, D-module, Hodge module, PBW-algebra 13P10 ,14F10 ,16W70 ,32S35 Introduction {#introduction .unnumbered} ============ Most algorithms in algebraic $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}$-module theory are based on translating $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}$-module theoretic constructions to computationally accessible operations over the ring of differential operators on the affine $n$-space which agrees with the Weyl algebra (see e.g. @OT2001). However, this approach limits the underlying varieties often to affine $n$-spaces. To deal with such constructions for general smooth varieties $X$, we work on a covering of $X$ by affine open sets $U$ on which the tangent sheaf is $\operatorname{\mathcal{O}}_U$-free and glue the results. Each such $U$ can be seen as a closed set in an affine $n$-space and we lift a basis of the tangent sheaf to elements $y_1,\dots,y_m$ of the Weyl algebra. Then $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X(U)$ becomes the factor algebra of the free associative $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}$-algebra $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}\langle x_1,\dots,x_n,y_1,\dots,y_m\rangle$ by the two-sided ideal generated by the defining ideal $I(U)\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\dots,x_n]$ of $U$ and the natural commutation relations of the variables. We refer to such an algebra as a coordinate system algebra. As opposed to Weyl algebras, coordinate system algebras are in general not quotients of PBW-algebras. While there is a Gröbner basis theory for PBW-algebras, we are not aware of a well-developed generalization covering coordinate system rings. We remark that algorithms by @OakuAffine for coordinate system algebras are not sufficiently general for our purpose (see ). In this article we develop a Gröbner basis theory for so-called PBW-reduction-algebras which form a common generalization of PBW-algebras and coordinate system algebras (see ). Combined with gluing techniques this allows for $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}$-module calculations on general smooth varieties [@Rottner]. Such an algebra is a certain quotient of a free associative $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-algebra of type $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle x_1,\dots,x_n\rangle$ by a two-sided ideal containing commutation relations with the property that a subset of the set of standard monomials $\{x_1^{\alpha_1}\cdots x_n^{\alpha_n}\mid \alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\}$ forms a $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-basis. Our Gröbner basis methods rely on so-called PBW-reduction data. While their existence is guaranteed, we know only in special cases how to compute them. We describe a method in case of quotients of PBW-algebras and coordinate system algebras. Generalizing the underlying notions of standard representation and $s$-polynomial, we give a Buchberger criterion for PBW-reduction-algebras for well-orderings. As a consequence we obtain Gröbner basics for PBW-reduction-algebras. Our methods are designed for application to mixed Hodge modules as defined by @Saito2. These objects can be considered as bifiltered $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X$-modules $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}$ with an order and a $V$-filtration satisfying certain compatibilities. A technical ingredient in the construction of Hodge theoretic functors such as the direct image functor and the vanishing cycle functor is the induced order filtration on the $V_0\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X$-submodule $V_\alpha \operatorname{\mathcal{M}}$ for $\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Q}}$. Our goal to compute this filtration gives the direction for the following sections. On a suitable coordinate system algebra $D$ the two filtrations are induced by weight vectors $\mathbf{w}$ and $\mathbf{v}$ on the algebra generators $x_1,\dots,x_n$ and $\operatorname{\mathcal{M}}(U)$ can be represented as a quotient $D^E/Q$ with an induced order filtration. In more generality, we consider a PBW-reduction-algebra $A$ with two filtrations $F_\bullet^\mathbf{v} A$ and $F_\bullet^\mathbf{w} A$ given by weight vectors $\mathbf{v}$ and $\mathbf{w}$. Motivated by our problem in Hodge theory we impose among other conditions the inclusions of algebras $F_0^\mathbf{w} A\subseteq F_0^\mathbf{v} A\subseteq A$. Given a finitely presented $A$-module $M$ with induced $F_\bullet ^\mathbf{w}A$-filtration $F^\mathbf{w}_\bullet M$ and an $F_0^\mathbf{v}A$-submodule $V$ of $M$, our main algorithm (see ) yields the $F_\bullet^\mathbf{w}F_0^\mathbf{v}A$-submodule filtration $F_\bullet^\mathbf{w} V$ on $V$ if it is a good filtration. It computes for increasing integers $k$ the intersection $F_k^\mathbf{w} V$ of the $F_0^\mathbf{v}A$-submodule $V$ and the $F_0^\mathbf{w}A$-submodule $F_k^\mathbf{w}M$ (see ). A stopping criterion () serves to check whether $F_k^\mathbf{w} V$ already generates $F_\bullet^\mathbf{w} V$. Using a common bound for the $\mathbf{v}$-degree of $V$ and $F_k^\mathbf{w} M$, the computation of their intersection is reduced to the case where $M$ is a free $A$-module (see ). Here we reformulate it as an intersection problem over the subalgebra $F_0^\mathbf{v} A$ of $A$. We show that $F_0^\mathbf{v} A$ is again a PBW-reduction-algebra and require $F^\mathbf{w}_\bullet F_0^\mathbf{v} A$ to be a weight filtration on it. We may thus assume that $F^\mathbf{v}_0 A=A$. Finally, we want to intersect an $A$-submodule and an $F^\mathbf{w}_0 A$-submodule of a free $A$-module. This is achieved by a syzygy computation combined with a Gröbner basis computation with respect to a $\mathbf{w}$-degree ordering. In general this might not be a well-ordering. To address this issue, we describe homogenization techniques for PBW-reduction-algebras (see ). The results presented in this article originate from the Ph.D. thesis of the first named author [@Rottner] which was supervised by the second named author. Gröbner basis framework for PBW-reduction-algebras {#800} ================================================== PBW-reduction-algebras {#801} ---------------------- We first fix some notation: By $E$ we usually denote a finite set of module generators on which we pick a total order $<^E$. Given a ring $R$ and a left $R$-module $M$, we write $M^E$ for the direct sum $\bigoplus_{e\in E} M(e)$, where $(e)$ stands for the free generator corresponding to $e\in E$. We identify the $R$-modules $R$ and $R^E$ in case $E$ has cardinality one. For a subset $S\subseteq M$ we define similarly $S^E:=\{s(e)\mid s\in S,e\in E\}\subseteq M^E$. A map of $R$-modules $\psi:M\to N$ induces naturally a map $\psi^E:M^E\to N^E$. Given finite sets $E_1,\dots, E_s$ and $1\leq i_1<\dots <i_l\leq s$, we denote by $\pi_{E_{i_1},\dots,E_{i_l}}$ the projection of $R^{E_{1}}\oplus\dots\oplus R^{E_{s}}$ to $R^{E_{i_1}}\oplus \dots\oplus R^{E_{i_l}}$. Given a left, right and two-sided $R$-module $M$ and a subset $N\subseteq M$, we denote by ${\prescript{}{R}{\left\langleN\right\rangle}}$, ${{\left\langleN\right\rangle_{R}}}$ and ${\text{}_{R}{\left\langleN\right\rangle\text{}_{R}}}={\left\langleN\right\rangle}$ the left, right and two-sided $R$-submodule of $M$ generated by $N$, respectively. Unless said otherwise, we mean by an $R$-module always a left $R$-module. Throughout we denote by $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$ a field and by $x_1,\dots,x_n$ variables. We consider the polynomial ring $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]:= \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[ x_1,\dots, x_n]$ as $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-submodule of the free associative $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-algebra $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}:= \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}{\left\langle x_1,\dots, x_n\right\rangle}$. \[803\] Let $E$ be a finite set. 1. \[803a\] We denote by $$\operatorname{Mon}(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]^E):=\{x_1^{\alpha_1}\cdots x_n^{\alpha_n} (e)\mid \alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n, e\in E\}\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]^E$$ and $$\operatorname{Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E):=\{x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k}(e)\mid k\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}, 1\leq i_1,\dots, i_k\leq n, e\in E\}\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$$ the set of *monomials* of $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]^E $ and $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$, respectively. The set of *standard monomials* $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ is defined as $\operatorname{Mon}(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]^E)$ considered as a subset of $ \operatorname{Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$. Abbreviating ${\underline{x}}^\alpha (e):=x_1^{\alpha_1}\cdots x_n^{\alpha_n} (e)$ for $e\in E$ and $\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$, we often write $p\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E$ in multi-index notation $p=\sum_{e,\alpha} p_{e,\alpha}{\underline{x}}^\alpha (e)$ where $p_{e,\alpha}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$ denotes the coefficient of ${\underline{x}}^\alpha (e)$. 2. \[803d\] A total order $\prec$ on $\operatorname{Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ is called a *monomial ordering* if - \[803dii\] $m(e)\prec m'(e')$ implies $pmq(e)\prec pm'q(e')$ for $m,m',p,q\in\operatorname{Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})$ and $e,e'\in E$. Similarly, a total order $\prec$ on $\operatorname{SMon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ is called a *monomial ordering* if - \[803eii\] ${\underline{x}}^\alpha (e)\prec {\underline{x}}^{\alpha'} (e')$ implies ${\underline{x}}^{\alpha+\gamma} (e)\prec {\underline{x}}^{\alpha'+ \gamma} (e')$ for all $\alpha,\alpha',\gamma \in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ and $e,e'\in E$. A monomial ordering $\prec$ on $\operatorname{(S)Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ satisfying additionally - \[803di\] $(e)\preceq m(e)$ for all $m\in \operatorname{(S)Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})$ and $e\in E$ is called a *(monomial) well-ordering*. Otherwise we say that it is a *(monomial) non-well-ordering*. 3. \[803f\] Let $\prec$ be a monomial ordering on $\operatorname{(S)Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$. If $0\neq t=\sum_{e\in E,m\in \operatorname{(S)Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})} t_{e,m} m(e)\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ with $t_{e,m}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$ and $m'(e'):=\max_\prec \{m(e)\mid t_{e,m}\neq 0\}$, then we define - $\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec}(t):=m'(e')$, the *leading monomial* of $t$, - $\operatorname{lt}_{\prec}(t):=t_{e',m'} m'(e')$, the *leading term* of $t$, - $\operatorname{{lc}}_{\prec}(t):=t_{e',m'}$, the *leading coefficient* of $t$, - $\operatorname{lcomp}_{\prec}(t):=e'$, the *leading component* of $t$, - $\operatorname{tail}_{\prec}(t):=t-\operatorname{lt}_\prec(t)$, the *tail* of $t$, - $\operatorname{le}_\prec(t):=\sum_{1\leq j\leq k} e_{i_j}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ if $m'=x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k}$, the *leading exponent* of $t$, - $\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec}(t):=(\operatorname{le}_\prec(t),e')$, the *extended leading exponent* of $t$, where $e_{i_j}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ stands for the $i_j$th unit vector. For a subset $G\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ we consider the sets - $ \operatorname{l}_{\prec}(G):=\{\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec}(g)\mid g\in G\setminus \{0\}\}\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\times E, $ - $ \operatorname{L}_{\prec}(G):=\{\beta+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec}(g)\mid g\in G\setminus \{0\}, \beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\}\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\times E, $ where we define $\beta+ (\alpha,e):=(\alpha+\beta,e)$ for $\alpha,\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ and $e\in E$. To simplify notation later on, we extend the ordering by setting $\operatorname{{lm}}_\prec (0)\prec \operatorname{{lm}}_\prec (t)$ and $\operatorname{{lm}}_\prec (0)\preceq \operatorname{{lm}}_\prec (t')$ for all $t,t'\in {\prescript{}{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}}{\left\langle\operatorname{(S)Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)\right\rangle}}$ with $t\neq 0$. We denote by $\prec$ also the ordering induced by $\prec$ on $\operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\times E$ via the mapping $(\alpha,e)\mapsto {\underline{x}}^\alpha(e)$ and adopt an analogous convention for $\operatorname{le}_{\prec}(0)$ and $\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec}(0)$. Similarly, we define by abuse of notation $\alpha+\operatorname{le}_{\prec}(0):=\operatorname{le}_{\prec} (0)$ and $\alpha+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec}(0):=\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec} (0)$ for any $\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$. We sometimes omit the index $\prec$ if it is clear from the context. \[369\] Monomial orderings on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})=\operatorname{{Mon}}(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]) $ are the monomial orderings of commutative Gröbner basis theory. \[804\]Let $E$ be a finite set. 1. \[804a\] Clearly the ordering defined by $$\begin{aligned} x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k} \prec' x_{j_1}\cdots x_{j_l} \text{ if and only if } & k<l\\ \text{or } & k=l \text{ and } (i_1,\dots, i_k)<_{\text{lex}} (j_1,\dots, j_k)\end{aligned}$$ is a monomial well-ordering on $\operatorname{Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})$. Note that ${\underline{x}}^{\operatorname{le}(x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k})}\preceq x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k}$. 2. \[804b\] Refine a monomial ordering $\prec$ on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ by a monomial ordering $\prec'$ on $\operatorname{Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ to a monomial ordering $(\prec,\prec')$ on $\operatorname{Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ by setting $$\begin{aligned} x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k}(e)\, (\prec,\prec')\, x_{j_1}\cdots x_{j_l}(e') \text{ if and only if } &\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec'}(x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k}(e)) \prec \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec'}(x_{j_1}\cdots x_{j_l}(e'))\\ \text{ or } &\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec'}(x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k}(e))= \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec'}(x_{j_1}\cdots x_{j_l}(e'))\\ &\text{ and } x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k} \prec' x_{j_1}\cdots x_{j_l}. \end{aligned}$$ We denote also by $\prec$ the special ordering $ (\prec,\prec')$ with $\prec'$ from Part \[804a\]. 3. \[804c\] Let $\prec$ be a monomial ordering on $\operatorname{(S)Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$. Then any $e\in E$ defines a monomial ordering $\prec_e$ on $\operatorname{(S)Mon}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})$ by $$x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k} \prec_e x_{j_1}\cdots x_{j_l} \text{ if and only if } x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k}(e) \prec x_{j_1}\cdots x_{j_l} (e).$$ Eventually, we will restrict ourselves to monomial orderings on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ and refine them to orderings on $\operatorname{{Mon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ as outlined in .\[804b\] above if necessary. The following lists some of the orderings on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ which we will use frequently throughout this article: \[814\] Let $E_1,\dots,E_s$ and $E$ be finite sets. 1. \[814c\]An ordering $\prec$ on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})$ and a total order $<^E$ on $E$ induce the following orderings: 1. The *term over position ordering* (TOP-ordering) on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$: $$\begin{aligned} {\underline{x}}^\alpha (e)\, ( \prec,<^E)\, {\underline{x}}^\beta (e') \text{ if and only if } & {\underline{x}}^\alpha \prec {\underline{x}}^\beta\\ \text{or } & {\underline{x}}^\alpha= {\underline{x}}^\beta \text{ and } e<e', \end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha,\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ and $e,e'\in E$. 2. The *position over term ordering* (POT-ordering) on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$: $$\begin{aligned} {\underline{x}}^\alpha (e)\, (<^E,\prec)\, {\underline{x}}^\beta (e') \text{ if and only if } & e<e'\\ \text{or } & e=e' \text{ and } {\underline{x}}^\alpha\prec {\underline{x}}^\beta, \end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha,\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ and $e,e'\in E$. These orderings are well-orderings if and only if $\prec$ is a well-ordering. 2. \[814d\] Orderings $\prec_1^{E_1},\dots,\allowbreak \prec_s ^{E_s}$ on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{E_1}),\dots,\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{E_s})$, respectively, define the *(module) block ordering* $(\prec_1^{E_1},\dots, \prec_s^{E_s})$ on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{E_1\sqcup\dots\sqcup E_S})$ by $$\begin{aligned} {\underline{x}}^\alpha (e)\, (\prec_1^{E_1},\dots, \prec_s^{E_s}) \, {\underline{x}}^{\beta} (e') \text{ if and only if, for $e\in E_i, e'\in E_j$, } & i>j\\ \text{ or } & i=j \text{ and } {\underline{x}}^\alpha (e) \prec^{E_i}_{i} {\underline{x}}^{\beta} (e'), \end{aligned}$$ where $\alpha,\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$. Notice that $(\prec_1^{E_1},\dots, \prec_s^{E_s}) $ is a well-ordering if and only if all $\prec_i^{E_i}$ are well-orderings. \[348\] Let $E_1,\dots,E_s$ and $E$ be finite sets. If we write from now on $\prec^E$, we implicitly assume that $\prec^E$ is some ordering on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$. Similarly, $(\prec_1^{E_1},\allowbreak\dots, \prec_s^{E_s})$ always denotes a block ordering on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{E_1\sqcup\dots\sqcup E_s})$. We identify $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{E_1}\oplus \dots \oplus \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{E_s}\cong \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{E_1\sqcup\dots\sqcup E_s}$ to define the set of (standard) monomials of the former module as well as monomial orderings on them. The following notions rely on the work by @Bergman: \[805\] Let $E$ be a finite set, $\prec$ a monomial ordering on $\operatorname{{Mon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$. For $s\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E\setminus \{0\}$ and $m,m'\in \operatorname{{Mon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})$ we define the $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-linear *reduction (map) (with respect to $(S,\prec)$)* $$\rho_{m,s,m'}:\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E\to \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E,\; x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_l}(e)\mapsto \begin{cases} m(-\frac{1}{\operatorname{{lc}}_\prec(s)}\operatorname{tail}_\prec(s))m'& \text{if } x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_l}(e)=m\operatorname{{lm}}_\prec(s)m',\\ x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_l}(e)& \text{otherwise.} \end{cases}$$ Let $S\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E $ be a subset. A finite composition of such maps with $s\in S$ is called a *reduction sequence* (with respect to $(S,\prec)$). 1. \[805d\] For a reduction sequence $\rho$ with respect to $(S,\prec)$ we say that $t\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ reduces to $\rho(t)$, a *reduction* of $t$ (with respect to $(S,\prec)$). 2. \[805b\] We call $t\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ *irreducible* (with respect to $(S,\prec)$) if $\rho(t)=t$ for all reductions $\rho$. Such elements generate the $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-submodule $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{S,\prec}\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$. 3. \[805e\] Suppose that $\prec$ is a special ordering as in .\[804b\].Then we call $(S,\prec)$ a *commutation system* if $S=\{s_{i,j,e}\mid 1\leq i<j\leq n,e\in E\}$ where $$s_{i,j,e}:=x_jx_i(e)-c_{ij}x_ix_j(e)-d_{ij}\text{ with } \operatorname{{lm}}_\prec(d_{ij})\prec x_ix_j(e)\prec x_jx_i(e),$$ $c_{ij}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^*$ and $d_{ij}\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E$, and if every element in $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ reduces to an element in $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E$. We refer to the elements of $S$ as commutation relations and to $\rho_{m, s_{i,j,e} ,m'}$ as a *commutation reduction*. We say that an ordering $\prec'$ is *compatible* with $(S,\prec)$ if $(S,\prec')$ is a commutation system. \[807\] Let $E$ be a finite set, $S\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ and $\prec$ a monomial ordering. 1. \[807b\] If $(S,\prec)$ is a commutation system and $S\subseteq S'\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$, then $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{S',\prec}\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{S,\prec}$. 2. \[807a\] If $\prec$ is a well-ordering, every element of $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ reduces to an irreducible element with respect to $(S,\prec)$. If in addition $S$ is a two-sided submodule, then this reduction is unique. This identifies $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{S,\prec}=\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E/S$ as $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-vector spaces and we write $$\rho_{S,\prec}:\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E\to (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{S,\prec}$$ for the map sending elements to their unique irreducible reduction. 3. \[807c\] If $(S,\prec)$ is a commutation system and $\prec$ a well-ordering, we can determine for an element $p\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}$ a finite set $U\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\times S\times \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}$ such that $$p=\rho_{S,\prec'}(p)+\sum_{(t,s,t')\in U} tst' \text{ with } \operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec'}(\rho_{S,\prec'}(p))=\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec'}(p) \text{ and }\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec'}(tst') \preceq' \operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec'}(p)$$ for all orderings $\prec'$ compatible with $(S,\prec)$. In particular $\rho_{S,\prec}=\rho_{S,\prec'}$. We are particularly interested in the following class of $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-algebras: \[808\] A *PBW-reduction-datum* $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ consists of a commutation system $(S,\prec)$, where $\prec$ is a well-ordering and $I\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]$ a finite set such that $$\label{808b} \operatorname{L}_\prec(I)=\operatorname{l}_\prec({\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]).$$ It defines a $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-algebra $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}/{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}$, which we call a *PBW-reduction-algebra* and write by abuse of notation $$\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}/{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec).$$ We say that a monomial (well-)ordering $\prec'$ is a (monomial) (well-)ordering on $ \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}/{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}$ if $\prec'$ is compatible with $(S,\prec)$. \[837\] For a commutation system $(S,\prec)$ and $I\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$ we have that $$\operatorname{l}_\prec({\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}])=\operatorname{L}_\prec({\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]).$$ Indeed, $\rho_{S,\prec}({\underline{x}}^\alpha r)\in {\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]$ with $\operatorname{{lm}}_\prec(\rho_{S,\prec}({\underline{x}}^\alpha r))=\alpha+\operatorname{{lm}}_\prec(r)$ for $r\in {\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]$ and $\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$. In particular the inclusion $\subseteq$ in \[808\] is always satisfied. This makes Condition \[808\] equivalent to $$\operatorname{L}_\prec(I)=\operatorname{L}_\prec({\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]).$$ \[n1\] For a PBW-reduction-datum $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ we can identify the $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-vector spaces $$\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}/{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}=\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{\operatorname{irr}}_{{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle},\prec}=\bigoplus_{\alpha\notin \operatorname{L}_\prec(I)} \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}{\underline{x}}^\alpha$$ The first equality is due to .\[807a\]. Since the set of irreducible standard monomials with respect to $({\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle},\prec)$ forms a $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-basis of $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{\operatorname{irr}}_{{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle},\prec}$ by .\[807b\], it suffices to show that this set agrees with $ \{{\underline{x}}^\alpha\mid \alpha\notin \operatorname{L}_\prec(I)\}$. Clearly, the former set is contained in the latter. On the other hand, ${\underline{x}}^\alpha$ with $\alpha\notin \operatorname{L}_\prec(I)=\operatorname{l}_\prec({\left\langleS\cup I\right\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]})$ is indeed irreducible. \[1000\] PBW-algebras are precisely the PBW-reduction-algebras with PBW-reduction datum of type $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,\{0\},\prec)$. In particular, polynomial rings and Weyl algebras are PBW-reduction-algebras. Given a PBW-algebra with commutation system $(S,\prec)$ with respect to the well-ordering $\prec$. Then ${\left\langleS\right\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}=\{0\}$ by definition and hence Equation is satisfied with $I=\{0\}$. The converse is due to . \[888\] Consider the commutation system $(S,\prec)$, where $\prec$ is a well-ordering, the finite set $I\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$ and the two-sided ideal $R\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}$ containing $S$ and $I$ and satisfying $\operatorname{L}_\prec(I)=\operatorname{l}_\prec(R\cap \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]})$. For $p\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}$ one can compute $a\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^I$ and a finite set $U\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\times S\times \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}$ such that $$p=\rho_{R,\prec}(p)+\sum_{g\in I} a_g g+\sum_{(t,s,t')\in U} tst',$$ $ \operatorname{le}(a_g)+\operatorname{le}(g)\preceq \operatorname{le}(p)$ with equality for some $g\in I$ and $\operatorname{le}(t)+\operatorname{le}(s)+\operatorname{le}(t')\preceq\operatorname{le}(p)$. In particular, $ R={\left\langleS\cup I\right\rangle}$ and $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ is a PBW-reduction datum. By .\[807c\] we can write $p\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}$ as $$\label{n2} p=\rho_{S,\prec} (p)+\sum_{(t,s,t')\in U_p} tst'$$ for some $U_p\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\times S\times \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}$ with $\operatorname{le}(t)+\operatorname{le}(s)+\operatorname{le}(t')\preceq\operatorname{le}(p)$. If $\operatorname{le}(\rho_{S,\prec} (p))\notin \operatorname{l}_\prec(R\cap \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]})$, then $\operatorname{{lm}}(\rho_{S,\prec} (p))\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{\operatorname{irr}}_{R,\prec}$ and we continue with $\operatorname{tail}(\rho_{S,\prec} (p))$. Otherwise pick $g\in I$ such that $\operatorname{le}(p)=\operatorname{le}(\rho_{S,\prec} (p))=\operatorname{le}(g)+\alpha$. .\[807c\] also yields an Equation with $p$ replaced by ${\underline{x}}^\alpha g$. Hence we obtain $$p=c {\underline{x}}^\alpha g+ (\operatorname{tail}(\rho_{S,\prec} (p))-\operatorname{tail}(c\rho_{S,\prec} ({\underline{x}}^\alpha g)))+\sum_{(t,s,t')\in U_p} tst'-c\sum_{(t,s,t')\in U_{{\underline{x}}^\alpha g}} tst'$$ for $c=\operatorname{{lc}}(\rho_{S,\prec} (p))/\operatorname{{lc}}(\rho_{S,\prec}({\underline{x}}^\alpha g))$. Induction on the well-ordering $\prec$ finishes the proof. \[841\] For a commutation system $(S,\prec)$ with well-ordering $\prec$ and a two-sided ideal $S\subseteq R\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}$ exists a finite set $I\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$ such that $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}/R=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ is a PBW-reduction-algebra. Consider the set $$L:=\operatorname{L}_\prec (R\cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}])\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n.$$ By Dickson's Lemma there is a finite subset $L'\subseteq L$ such that for every $\alpha\in L$ exists an $\alpha'\in L'$ with $\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n+\alpha'$. Choose for every $\alpha'\in L'$ an $r_{\alpha'}\in {R}\cap \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$ having leading exponent $\alpha'$. Setting $$I:=\{r_{\alpha'}\mid \alpha'\in L'\},$$ $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}/R=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ is a PBW-reduction-algebra by . In general it is unclear how to obtain the set $I$ of the PBW-reduction datum. In the following special case this is possible. \[812\] Consider the $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-algebra $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle:=\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle x_1, \allowbreak \dots,\allowbreak x_n,\allowbreak y_1,\dots,y_m\rangle$, an ideal $I\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]$ and a commutation system $(S,\prec)$ such that $$S=\{[x_j,x_i]\mid 1\leq i<j \leq n\}\cup\{[y_l,y_k]-d_{kl}\mid 1\leq k<l\leq m\} \cup \{[y_k,x_i]-f_{ik}\mid 1\leq i\leq n, 1\leq k\leq m\},$$ where $d_{kl},f_{ik}\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$. Suppose the surjective $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-linear homomorphism $$\psi: \bigoplus_{\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m} (\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]/J){\underline{y}}^\beta \to \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle/{\left\langleJ\cup S\right\rangle},\; {\overline{{\underline{x}}^\alpha}}{\underline{y}}^\beta\mapsto {\overline{{\underline{x}}^\alpha{\underline{y}}^\beta}}$$ is injective and that $I'$ is a Gröbner basis of $I\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]$ with respect to the ordering induced by $\prec$. Then $(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle,S,I',\prec)$ is a PBW-reduction datum. Let $ 0\neq p=\sum_{\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m}p_{\beta} {\underline{y}}^\beta\in {\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[ {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}]$ with $p_{\beta}\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$. Then ${\overline{0}}={\overline{p}} \in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle/{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}$, hence $\sum_{\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m}{\overline{p_{\beta}}} {\underline{y}}^\beta=\psi^{-1}({\overline{p}})=0$ by hypothesis and $p_\beta\in I$ for all $\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m$. Since $I'$ is a Gröbner basis of $I\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]$ with respect to the ordering induced by $\prec$, it follows that $$(\alpha',\beta'):=\operatorname{le}_{\prec}(p)=(\operatorname{le}_{\prec}(p_{\beta'}),\beta')\in L_\prec(I').\qedhere$$ \[n4\] For $S$ as in , any special well-ordering $\prec$ as in that satisfies $${\underline{x}}^\alpha {\underline{y}}^\beta \prec{\underline{x}}^{\alpha'} {\underline{y}}^{\beta'}\text{ if } |\beta|<|\beta'|$$ (with $\alpha,\alpha'\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ and $\beta,\beta'\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m$) makes $(S,\prec)$ a commutation system. \[923\] In the situation of we call $A=(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle,S, I',\prec)$ an *elementary PBW-reduction datum / algebra*. Generalizing , the following example describes differential operators on smooth, complex affine varieties as PBW-reduction-algebras. \[577\] Let $X$ be a smooth irreducible complex affine variety of dimension $m$ defined by the prime ideal $I\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]$. Its tangent sheaf $\Theta_X$ is a locally free $\operatorname{\mathcal{O}}_X$-module. Note that every element of $\Theta_X(X)= \operatorname{Der}_{\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}}(\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]/I)$ is of the form ${\overline{\theta}}$ for some $\theta\in \Theta_{\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}^n}(\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}^n)=\operatorname{Der}_{\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}}(\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}])$ with $\theta(I)\subseteq I$. After shrinking $X$ if necessary there is an $\operatorname{\mathcal{O}}_X$-basis ${\overline{\theta_1}},\dots,{\overline{\theta_m}}\in \Theta_X(X)=\operatorname{Der}_{\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}}(\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]/I)$ of $\Theta_X$ and there are regular functions ${\overline{f_1}},\dots, {\overline{f_m}}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]/I$ satisfying $ [{\overline{\theta_i}},{\overline{\theta_j}}]=0$ and $[{\overline{\theta_i}},{\overline{f_j}}]=\delta_{ij}$ for $1\leq i,j\leq m$. 1. \[577a\] The global sections of the sheaf of differential operators $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X$ form an elementary PBW-reduction-algebra: We have a $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}$-linear isomorphism (see @Rottner [Lemma 1.2.7]) $$\begin{aligned} \phi:\bigoplus_{\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m} (\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]/I) {\underline{y}}^\beta \to &\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X(X)=\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}\langle {\overline{x_1}},\dots, {\overline{x_n}},{\overline{\theta_1}},\dots,{\overline{\theta_m}}\rangle \subseteq \operatorname{End}_{\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}}(\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]/I),\\ {\overline{{\underline{x}}^\alpha}}{\underline{y}}^\beta \mapsto &{\overline{x_1}}^{\alpha_1}\cdots {\overline{x_n}}^{\alpha_n}{\overline{\theta_1}}^{\beta_1}\cdots {\overline{\theta_m}}^{\beta_m} \end{aligned}$$ and the generators of the $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}$-algebra $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X(X)$ satisfy $[{\overline{x_j}},{\overline{x_i}}]=0$, $[{\overline{\theta_p}},{\overline{\theta_k}}]=0$ and $[{\overline{\theta_k}},{\overline{x_i}}]={{\overline{{\theta}_k(x_i)}}}$ for $1\leq i\leq j\leq n$ and $1\leq k\leq p\leq m$. Consequently, $\psi$ factors through the algebra $$T_X:= \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}\langle {\underline{x}}, {\underline{y}}\rangle / {\left\langleS\cup I\right\rangle},$$ where $$\begin{aligned} S:=&\{[x_j,x_i]\mid 1\leq i<j\leq n\}\cup \{[y_p,y_k]\mid 1\leq k<p\leq m\}\\ \cup &\{ [y_k,x_i]-{\theta}_k(x_i) \mid 1\leq i\leq n, 1\leq k\leq m\}.\end{aligned}$$ This leads to isomorphisms $$\label{n3} \xymatrixrowsep{1pc}\xymatrix{ \phi:\bigoplus_{\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m} (\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]/I){\underline{y}}^\beta \ar[r]^-{\psi}_-{\cong} &T_X\ar[r]_-{\cong} &\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X(X)\\ {\overline{{\underline{x}}^\alpha}}{\underline{y}}^\beta \ar@{|->}[r]& {\overline{{\underline{x}}^\alpha{\underline{y}}^\beta}} \ar@{|->}[r]& {\overline{x_1}}^{\alpha_1}\cdots {\overline{x_n}}^{\alpha_n}\theta_1^{\beta_1}\cdots \theta_m^{\beta_m}. }$$ identifying $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X(X)$ with the elementary PBW-reduction-algebra $T_X$. 2. \[577c\] By identifying $X$ with the closed subvariety $V(I,t-f_m)\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}^n\times \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}_t$, we may assume $f_m$ agrees with $x_n$, and that $\theta_i(x_n)=\delta_{i,m}$. Consider the obvious algebra homomorphism $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}\langle {\underline{x}}, y_1,\dots,y_{m-1},z\rangle \to \operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X(X)$ sending $z$ to ${\overline{x_n}}{\overline{\theta_m}}$ with image $V$. It factors through the PBW-reduction-algebra $T_X^V=\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}\langle {\underline{x}}, y_1,\dots,y_{m-1},z\rangle /{\left\langleS_V\cup I\right\rangle}$ where $$\begin{aligned} S_V:=\{&[x_j,x_i], [y_l,y_k],[z,y_k],[y_k,x_i]-{\theta}^l_k(x_i), [z,x_i]-x_n{\theta}^l_m(x_i)\mid \\ & 1\leq i\leq j\leq n, 1\leq k\leq l\leq m-1 \}\setminus \{0\}.\end{aligned}$$ This extends to a commutative diagram of $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}$-linear maps $$\xymatrixrowsep{1pc}\xymatrix{ \bigoplus_{\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m} (\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]/I){\underline{y}}^\beta \ar[r]^-{\psi}_-{\cong} &T_X\ar[r]_-{\cong} &\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_X(X)\\ \bigoplus_{\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^{m-1},\gamma\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}} (\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]/I)y_1^{\beta_1}\cdots y_{m-1}^{\beta_{m-1}} z^\gamma\ar[u] \ar@{->>}[r]\ar[u]& T_X^V\ar@{->>}[r]\ar[u]& V\ar[u]. }$$ where the right hand square consists of $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}$-algebra homomorphisms. One can show that the left vertical map is injective. It follows that the bottom maps are isomorphisms and the vertical maps are injections. So we may identify $V$ with the elementary PBW-reduction-algebra $T_X^V$. 3. \[577d\] Let $\phi_{x_n}:\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}\langle {\underline{x}},y_1,\dots,y_{m-1},z \rangle\to \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}\langle x_1,\dots,x_{n-1},y_1,\dots,y_{m-1},z \rangle $ be the $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}$-algebra homomorphism that maps $x_n$ to $0$ and acts on all other variables as identity. In the situation of Part \[577c\], $V/x_nV$ can be realized as the elementary PBW-reduction-algebra $$T_X^{V/x_nV}:=(\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}\langle x_1,\dots, x_{n-1}, y_1,\dots,y_{m-1},z\rangle ,S_{V/x_nV},I_{V/x_nV},\prec^{V/x_nV})$$ defined as follows: For $$\begin{aligned} S_{V/x_nV}:=\{&[x_j,x_i], [y_p,y_k],[z,y_k],[z,x_i], [y_k,x_i]-\phi_{x_n}({\theta}_k^l(x_i)) \mid \\ & 1\leq i\leq j\leq n-1, 1\leq k\leq p\leq m-1 \}\setminus \{0\},\end{aligned}$$ pick a well-ordering $\prec^{V/x_nV}$ as in . Now let $I_{V/x_nV}\subseteq \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[x_1,\dots,x_{m-1}]$ be a Gröbner basis of $\phi_{x_n}(I)$ with respect to the ordering induced by $\prec^{V/x_nV}$. Note that the canonical projection $V\to V/x_nV$ induces the same map $ T_X^{V}\to T_X^{V/x_nV}$ as $\phi_{x_n}$. 4. \[577e\] With the assumption of Part \[577c\] assume that the subvariety $X_0:=V(x_n)\cap X\subseteq X$ is smooth. Then $({\overline{f_i}}, \overline{\theta_i})_{1\leq i\leq m-1}$ is a global coordinate system on $X_0$. By Part \[577a\] $\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_{X_0}(X_0)$ identifies with the PBW-reduction-algebra $T_{X_0}$, whose commutation system is obtained by deleting all equations involving $y_m$ from $S$. The natural isomorphism $ V/x_nV\cong \operatorname{\mathcal{D}}_{X_0}(X_0)[{\overline{x_n}}{\overline{\theta_m}}]$ then identifies with the isomorphism $T_X^{V/x_nV}\cong T_{X_0}[z]$ that is induced by the identity of $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}\langle x_1,\dots,x_{n-1},y_1,\dots,y_{m-1},z\rangle$. \[935\] There is an algorithmic approach to the sheaf of differential operators on smooth affine varieties by @OakuAffine. Consider the setup of . Oaku suggests two methods: The first one is based on the statement that the $\operatorname{\mathbb{C}}$-subalgebra of the Weyl-algebra generated by $x_1,\dots,x_n$ and $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_m$ equals $\bigoplus_{\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n,\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m} \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}{\underline{x}}^\alpha\theta_1^{\beta_1}\cdots \theta_m^{\beta_m}$. This does not hold in general: Indeed, there is always a local coordinate system such that $f_i=x_i$ and $\theta_i=\partial_i+\sum_{m+1\leq k\leq n} a_k^i({\underline{x}}) \partial_k$ with $a_k^i({\underline{x}})\in \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]$. In this case $[\theta_j,\theta_i]\in \sum_{m+1\leq k\leq n} \operatorname{\mathbb{C}}[{\underline{x}}]\partial_k$ can only be contained in the above direct sum if it is $0$. However, $\theta_1,\dots,\theta_m$ do not commute in general. Oaku's second method uses the Leibnitz rule to define a non-associative "multiplication". The resulting algorithm is essentially equivalent to . However, Oaku's proof of correctness relies again on the above false statement. \[813\] PBW-reduction-algebras are left and right Noetherian rings. Let $A=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra with $S=\{x_jx_i-c_{ij}x_ix_j-d_{ij}\mid 1\leq i<j\leq n\}$. This gives rise to a multi-filtration $F^\prec_\bullet$ on $A$ indexed by $\operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ (see @MultiFilt) given by $$F^\prec_\alpha A:=\sum_{ {\underline{x}}^\beta\preceq {\underline{x}}^\alpha} \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}{\overline{{\underline{x}}^\beta}},\quad F^\prec_{\prec\alpha} A:=\bigcup_{\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n:{\underline{x}}^\beta\prec{\underline{x}}^\alpha} F^\prec_{\beta} A=\sum_{ {\underline{x}}^\beta\prec {\underline{x}}^\alpha} \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}{\overline{{\underline{x}}^\beta}}$$ for $\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$. Note that this filtration is exhaustive by \[n1\]. By @MultiFilt [Lemma 1.2] it suffices to proof the claim for the associated multi-graded algebra $$\operatorname{Gr}^{F^\prec}\!A:=\bigoplus_{\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n} F^\prec_\alpha A/F^\prec_{\prec\alpha} A.$$ It identifies with a factor algebra of a PBW-algebra by the isomorphism $$\begin{aligned} \varphi: \operatorname{Gr}^{F^\prec}\!A\to & \left(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}/{\left\langle \{x_jx_i-c_{ij} x_ix_j\mid 1\leq i<j\leq n\}\right\rangle}\right)/{\left\langle\{{\overline{\operatorname{{lm}}_\prec(p)}}\mid p\in I\}\right\rangle},\\ \operatorname{Gr}^{F^\prec}_{e_i} \!A \ni \overline{x_i}\mapsto & {\overline{x_i}}+{\left\langle\{{\overline{\operatorname{{lm}}_\prec(p)}}\mid p\in I\}\right\rangle}. \end{aligned}$$ The latter is left and right Noetherian (see e.g. @Noeth [Theorem 4.1]). Gröbner bases for PBW-reduction-algebras {#288} ---------------------------------------- \[292\]Let $A$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra and $E$ a finite set. 1. \[292b\] If $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)$ is a PBW-reduction datum of $A$ for $e\in E$, we call $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$ a PBW-reduction datum for $A^E$ and write $A^E=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$. We say that the monomial (well-)ordering $\prec^E$ on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ is a *(well-)ordering* on $A^E$ if $\prec^E_e$ is an ordering on $e$th summand $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)$ of $A^E$. If $\prec^E_e=\prec_e$ for all $e\in E$, we call $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$ a PBW-reduction datum for $(A^E,\prec^E)$ and write $(A^E,\prec^E)=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$. 2. \[292c\] Abusing notation, we set for $(A^E,\prec^E)=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$ $$\rho_{A^E,\prec^E}:=\bigoplus_{e\in E} \rho_{{\left\langleI_e\cup S_e\right\rangle},\prec^E_e}: \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E\to (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{A^E,\prec^E}:=\bigoplus_{e\in E} \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^{\operatorname{irr}}_{{\left\langleI_e\cup S_e\right\rangle},\prec^E_e}(e).$$ We also define the map $$\tau_{A^E,\prec^E}: A^E\to (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{A^E,\prec^E}\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$$ as the inverse of the composed map $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{A^E,\prec^E}\hookrightarrow \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E\twoheadrightarrow A^E$ using .\[807c\]. We sometimes also use the notation $\rho_{\prec^E}$ and $\tau_{\prec^E}$ for the above maps if that does not cause any ambiguity. For $0\neq a\in A$, we define the data introduced in by the corresponding data of $\tau_{(A^E,\prec^E)}(a)$ and adapt the convention for the leading exponents and monomials of $0$ accordingly. \[833\] Let $A=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra and $E$ and $E_1,\dots, E_s$ finite sets. Then we have: 1. \[833a\] Given a total order $<^E$ on $E$ PBW-reduction data for $(A^E,(\prec,<^E))$ and $(A^E,(<^E,\prec))$ are given by $(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)_{e\in E}$. 2. \[833b\] We identify $A^{E_1\sqcup\dots \sqcup E_s}=A^{E_1}\oplus \dots\oplus A^{E_s}$ extending the notions of to the latter. PBW-reduction data on $(A^{E_i},\prec^{E_i})$ define PBW-reduction data on $(A^{E_1}\oplus \dots\oplus A^{E_s}, \prec_{1,\dots,s}^{E_1,\dots,E_s})$. \[293\] Let $A$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra, $E$ a finite set, $(A^E,\prec^E)=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\allowbreak \prec_e)_{e\in E}$ and $M\subseteq A^E$ an $A$-submodule. 1. \[293a\] We call the finite set $G\subseteq M$ a *Gröbner basis* of $M$ (with respect to $\prec^E$) if every $m\in M$ has a so-called *standard representation*, i.e., there exists $a\in A^G$ such that $$m=\sum_{g\in G} a_gg \text{ and } \operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g)}}(a_g)+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g)\preceq^E \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(m) \text{ for all } g\in G.$$ 2. \[293b\] If $G$ is a Gröbner basis of $M$, we say that $G$ is reduced if $0\notin G$, $\operatorname{{lc}}_{\prec^E}(g)=1$ for all $g\in G$, and if we have for all $g\in G$, $e\in E$ and $\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ $$(\tau_{A^E,\prec^E}(g))_{e,\alpha}\neq 0 \text{ implies } (\alpha,e)\neq\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g')+\gamma \text{ for all } g\neq g'\in G, \gamma\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n.$$ \[846\] Let $A$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra, $E$ a finite set, $\prec^E$ an ordering on $A^E=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$ and $M\subseteq A^E$ an $A$-submodule. To circumvent the problem that we do in general not have a well-defined notion of leading exponents of elements of $A^E$ with respect to $\prec^E$, we define Gröbner bases in this situation as follows: We say that a finite set $G\subseteq M$ is a *Gröbner basis* of $M$ with respect to $\prec^E$ if there exists $h\in (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E)^G$ with ${\overline{h_g}}=g$ for $g\in G$ such that for every $t\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E$ with ${\overline{t}}\in M$ exists $a\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^G$ with $${\overline{t}}=\sum_{g\in G} {\overline{a_g}}g \text{ and } \operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(h_g)}}(a_g)+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(h_g)\preceq^E \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec_E}(t) \text{ for all } g\in G.$$ We say in this case that $\{h_g\mid g\in G\}$ induces a Gröbner basis of $M$ (with respect to $\prec^E$). Notice that since there exists by definition of PBW-reduction-algebras a well-ordering on $A$, every $m\in M$ has a representative in $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E$. Moreover, this definition is compatible with . \[817\] Let $A$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra, $E$ a finite set, $(A^E,\prec^E)=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e, \allowbreak\prec_e)_{e\in E}$ and let $a,a'\in A^E$ be nonzero. 1. \[817a\] Given a finite set $G\subseteq A^E$, we call $r\in A^E$ a *(left) normal form* of $a$ with respect to $G$ if 1. there exists some $h\in A^G$ with $$a=\sum_{g\in G} h_g g+r$$ such that $\operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g)}}(h_g)+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g)\preceq^E \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(a)$ for all $g\in G$ and 2. $\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(r)\notin L_{\prec^E}(G)$ if $r\neq 0$. We call $r $ *reduced* if $(\alpha,e)\notin L_{\prec^E}(G)$ given that $(\tau_{(A^E,\prec^E)}(r))_{e,\alpha}\neq 0$. We define the normal form of $0\in A^E$ with respect to $G$ to be $0$. 2. \[817b\] The *$s$-polynomial* of $a$ and $a'$ with $e:=\operatorname{lcomp}(a)=\operatorname{lcomp}(a')$ is defined by $$\operatorname{spoly}(a,a'):=\begin{cases} \frac{1}{\operatorname{{lc}}({\underline{x}}^{c_{a,a'}}a)}{\underline{x}}^{c_{a,a'}} a-\frac{1}{\operatorname{{lc}}({\underline{x}}^{c_{a',a}} a')}{\underline{x}}^{c_{a',a}} a' & \text{if } {\underline{x}}^{b_{a,a'}}(e)\in (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{A^E,\prec^E},\\ 0&\text {otherwise,} \end{cases}$$ where $b_{a,a'} ,c_{a,a'}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ are given by $(b_{a,a'})_i:=\max\{\operatorname{le}(a)_i,\operatorname{le}(a')_i\}$ and $(c_{a,a'})_i:=(b_{a,a'})_i-\operatorname{le}(a)_i$ for $1\leq i\leq n$. If $\operatorname{lcomp}(a)\neq \operatorname{lcomp}(a')$, we set $\operatorname{spoly}(a,a'):=0$. 3. \[817c\] The *$s$-polynomial* of $a$ and $p\in I_e$ is defined by $$\operatorname{spoly}(a,p):=\begin{cases} {\underline{x}}^{c_{a,p}} a & \text{ if } e=\operatorname{lcomp}(a),\\ 0& \text{ otherwise, } \end{cases}$$ where $c_{a,p}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ is given by $(c_{a,p})_i:=\max\{\operatorname{le}(a)_i,\operatorname{le}(p)_i\} -\operatorname{le}(a)_i$ for $1\leq i\leq n$. \[860\] We keep the notation of . Assume that $a,a'\in A^E$ satisfy $e:=\operatorname{lcomp}(a)=\operatorname{lcomp}(a')$. Then $$\operatorname{{ele}}(\operatorname{spoly}(a,a'))\prec^E (b_{a,a'},e)=\operatorname{{ele}}({\underline{x}}^{c_{a,a'}} a)=\operatorname{{ele}}({\underline{x}}^{c_{a',a}} a').$$ Similarly, we have for $p\in I_e$ $$\operatorname{{ele}}(\operatorname{spoly}(a,p))\prec^E {c_{a,p}}+\operatorname{{ele}}( a).$$ The following algorithm clearly computes a normal form and terminates, hence showing the existence of normal forms: \[Given a PBW-reduction-algebra $A$, a finite set $G\subseteq A^E$, a well-ordering $\prec^E$ on $A^E$ and $a\in A^E$, this algorithm computes a normal form of $a$ with respect to $G$ and $\prec^E$.\] \[1\] A normal form $b\in A^E$ of $a$ with respect to $G$. Choose $g\in \tilde{G} $. Set $a:=\operatorname{{lc}}_{\prec^E}(a)\cdot \operatorname{spoly}(a,g)$. $a$. The above can be modified to return a reduced normal form using the same method as in the commutative setting (see e.g. @SingularBook [Algorithm 1.6.11]). \[818\] Let $A$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra, $E$ a finite set, $\prec^E$ a well-ordering on $A^E$ and $M\subseteq A^E$ an $A$-submodule. If $G$ is a Gröbner basis of $M$, then clearly $m\in A^E$ is an element of $M$ if and only if some / every normal form of $m$ with respect to $G$ is $0$. Our algorithm for computing Gröbner bases is based on a variant of the Buchberger criterion for polynomial rings that takes into account the additional relations: \[816\]\[Buchberger criterion for PBW-reduction-algebras\] Let $A$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra, E a finite set, $(A^E,\prec^E)=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$ and $G\subseteq A^E$ a finite set. Then $G$ is a (left) Gröbner basis (with respect to $\prec^E$) of the $A$-module ${\prescript{}{A}{\left\langleG\right\rangle}}$ if and only if 1. for all $g,g'\in G$ some / any normal form of $\operatorname{spoly}(g,g')$ with respect to $G$ is $0$ and 2. for all $g\in G$ and $p\in I_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g)}$ some / any normal form of $\operatorname{spoly}(a,g)$ with respect to $G$ is $0$. For the proof we adapt a standard proof of the commutative Buchberger criterion to our setting. It relies on the following , whose proof from the commutative setting carries over word by word: \[815\] Let $A$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra, E a finite set, $(A^E,\prec^E)=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$. Let $G\subseteq A^E\setminus \{0\}$ be a finite set whose elements have the same leading monomial. Let $m=\sum_{g\in G} a_g g$ with $a\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^G$ be such that $\operatorname{{lm}}(m)\prec^E \operatorname{{lm}}(g)$ for $g\in G$. Then there exists $d \in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^{G\times G}$ such that $m=\sum_{(g,g')\in G\times G} d_{(g,g')}\operatorname{spoly}(g,g')$. The following remark lists some facts that are used throughout our proof of : \[856\] Let $A$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra, $E$ a finite set, $\prec^E_o$ an ordering on $(A^E,\prec^E)=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$. Define for $l\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}$, $1\leq i_1,\dots,i_l\leq n$ the vector $\alpha:=\sum_{1\leq j\leq l} e_{i_j}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ and let $e\in E$. 1. \[856a\] We have ${\underline{x}}^{\alpha}(e)\preceq^E_o x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_l}(e)$. 2. \[856b\] Independently of the choice of $\prec_o^E$, we can find $r_{i_1,\dots,i_l}\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$ and $f_{i_1,\dots,i_l}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^*$ with $\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E_o}(r_{i_1,\dots,i_l}(e))\prec^E_o (\alpha,e)$ such that $$x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_l}-f_{i_1,\dots,i_l}{\underline{x}}^{\alpha}-r_{i_1,\dots,i_l} \in {\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}{\left\langleS_e\right\rangle\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}}}$$ and hence $${\overline{x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_l}(e)}}={\overline{f_{i_1,\dots,i_l}{\underline{x}}^{\alpha}(e)+r_{i_1,\dots,i_l}(e) }}\in A^E.$$ In particular, for any permutation $\sigma $ of the set $\{1,\dots,l\}$ $${\overline{\frac{1}{f_{i_1,\dots,i_l}}x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_l}(e)-\frac{1}{f_{i_ {\sigma(1)},\dots,i_{\sigma(l)}}}x_{i_{\sigma(1)}}\cdots x_{i_{\sigma(l)}}(e)}}= {\overline{t}}$$ for some $t\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E$ with $\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E_o}(t) \prec^E_o (\alpha,e)$. Suppose now $\prec^E_o=\prec^E$ is fixed. If ${\underline{x}}^{\alpha}(e)\in (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{A^E,\prec^E}$ then $f_{i_1,\dots,i_l}$ and $r_{i_1,\dots,i_l}$ can be additionally chosen such that $$\rho_{A^E,\prec^E}(x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_l}(e))=f_{i_1,\dots,i_l}{\underline{x}}^{\alpha}(e)+ r_{i_1,\dots,i_l}(e).$$ Otherwise $\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(\rho_{A^E,\prec^E}(x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_l}(e)))\prec^E (\alpha,e)$. 3. \[856c\] Let $a\in A$ and $g\in A^E$. Then $\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(ag)\preceq^E \operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g)}}(a)+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g)$ with equality if and only if the monomial with extended leading exponent $\operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g)}}(a)+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g)$ is irreducible. \[Proof of \] By it is clear that if $G$ is a Gröbner basis, then every normal form stated in the criterion is $0$. Conversely, consider $0\neq m\in {\prescript{}{A}{\left\langleG\right\rangle}}$ and choose $h\in A^G$ such that $$\label{857} m=\sum_{g\in G} h_g g$$ satisfying additionally that $$(\alpha,e):=\max\nolimits_{\prec^E} \{\operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g)}}(h_g)+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g)\mid g\in G\}$$ is minimal with respect to $\prec^E$. If $(\alpha,e)\preceq^E \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(m)$ then is a standard representation and we are finished. Otherwise, set $$G':=\{g\in G\mid \operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g)}}(h_g)+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g)=(\alpha,e)\}$$ and write $$\label{863} m=l+\sum_{g'\in G'} \operatorname{tail}_{\prec^E_e}(h_{g'}) g'+\sum_{g\in G\setminus G'} h_g g \quad \text{with}\quad l=\sum_{g'\in G'} \operatorname{lt}_{\prec^E_e}(h_{g'}) g'.$$ By .\[856c\] and by choice of $G'$, we have for $g'\in G'$ $$\begin{aligned} \label{864} \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}( \operatorname{tail}_{\prec^E_e}(h_{g'}) g')\preceq^E& \operatorname{le}_{\prec_e^E}( \operatorname{tail}_{\prec_e^E}(h_{g'}))+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g')\\ \prec^E & \operatorname{le}_{\prec_e^E}(h_{g'}) +\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g')=(\alpha,e),\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ and for $g\in G\setminus G'$ $$\label{865} \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(h_g g)\preceq^E \operatorname{le}_{\prec_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g)}^E}( h_g)+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g)\prec^E (\alpha,e).$$ Hence the leading monomial of $l$ is strictly smaller than ${\underline{x}}^\alpha (e)$. We distinguish two cases: If ${\underline{x}}^\alpha(e)\in (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)^{\operatorname{irr}}_{A^E,\prec^E}$ then all summands of $l$ have leading monomial ${\underline{x}}^\alpha(e)$ according to .\[856c\]. So yields coefficients $d\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^{G'\times G'}$ to write $$\label{825} l=\sum_{(g,g')\in G'\times G'} d_{(g,g')}s_{(g,g')},$$ as a linear combination of $s$-polynomials $$\begin{aligned} \label{n7} s_{(g,g')}=&\operatorname{spoly}(\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec_e^E}(h_g)g,\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec_e^E}(h_{g'})g')\\ =&\frac{1}{\operatorname{{lc}}_{\prec^E}(\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec_e^E}(h_g)g)} \operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec_e^E}(h_g)g - \frac{1}{\operatorname{{lc}}_{\prec^E}(\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec_e^E}(h_{g'})g') }\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec_e^E}(h_{g'})g'.\nonumber\end{aligned}$$ By definition of $c_{g,g'}$ and $c_{g',g}$ (see .\[817b\]) there exists $\beta_{(g,g')}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ such that $c_{g,g'}+\beta_{(g,g')}=\operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_e}(h_g)$ and $c_{g',g}+\beta_{(g,g')}=\operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_e}(h_{g'})$. Applying .\[856b\], we obtain $$\begin{aligned} \label{861} s_{(g,g')}=& (d_g{\underline{x}}^{\beta_{(g,g')}}{\underline{x}}^{c_{g,g'}}+r^{(g,g')})g -(d_{g'}{\underline{x}}^{\beta_{(g,g')}} {\underline{x}}^{c_{g',g}}+{r}^{(g',g)})g' \\ =&{\underline{x}}^{\beta_{(g,g')}}\left( d_g{\underline{x}}^{c_{g,g'}}g -d_{g'} {\underline{x}}^{c_{g',g}}g' \right)+r^{(g,g')} g+r^{(g',g)}g'\end{aligned}$$ for suitably chosen $d_g,d_{g'}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^*$ and $r^{(g,g')},{r}^{(g',g)}\in A$ with $$\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E_e}(r^{(g,g')})\prec^E_e \operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec_e^E}(h_g)\text{ and }\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E_e}({r}^{(g',g)})\prec^E_e \operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec_e^E}(h_{g'}).$$ Adding $\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g)$ and $\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g')$ respectively, we obtain $$\label{866} \operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E_e}(r^{(g,g')})+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g),\ \operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E_e}({r}^{(g',g)})+ \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g') \prec^E_e (\alpha,e).$$ As ${\underline{x}}^\alpha(e)$ is irreducible and ${c_{g,g'}}+\beta_{(g,g')}+\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E}(g)=(\alpha,e)={c_{g',g}}+\beta_{(g,g')}+\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E}(g')$, the monomial with extended leading coefficient $ {c_{g,g'}}+\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E}(g)= {c_{g',g}}+\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E}(g')$ is also irreducible. By and $\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E}(s_{(g,g')})\prec {\underline{x}}^\alpha(e)$. Using it follows that $\operatorname{lt}_{\prec^E}(d_g{\underline{x}}^{c_{g,g'}}g )=\operatorname{lt}_{\prec^E}(d_{g'} {\underline{x}}^{c_{g',g}}g')$. By definition of $\operatorname{spoly}(g,g')$ it means that $$d_g{\underline{x}}^{c_{g,g'}}g -d_{g'} {\underline{x}}^{c_{g',g}}g'=f_{(g,g')} \operatorname{spoly}(g,g')$$ for some $f_{(g,g')}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^*$. Substituting into yields $$\label{862} s_{(g,g')}=f_{(g,g')}{\underline{x}}^{\beta_{(g,g')}}\operatorname{spoly}(g,g')+r^{(g,g')} g+{r'}^{(g,g')}g'$$ and $$\label{868} {\beta_{(g,g')}}+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(\operatorname{spoly}(g,g'))\prec^E (\alpha,e).$$ By hypothesis we find an element $k^{(g,g')}\in A^G$ satisfying $$\label{826} \operatorname{spoly}(g,g')=\sum_{g''\in G}k_{g''}^{(g,g')} g''$$ and $\operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g'')}}(k_{g''}^{(g,g')} )+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g'')\preceq^E \operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(\operatorname{spoly}(g,g'))$. This yields together with .\[856c\] and the estimate $$\begin{aligned} \label{867} \operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g'')}}( {\underline{x}}^{\beta{(g,g'})}k_{g''}^{(g,g')} )+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g'')&\preceq^E \beta_{(g,g')}+\operatorname{le}_{\prec^E_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g'')}}(k_{g''}^{(g,g')} )+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g'')\\\nonumber & \preceq^E \beta_{(g,g')}+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(\operatorname{spoly}(g,g'))\\\nonumber &\prec^E (\alpha,e).\nonumber \end{aligned}$$ Combining we obtain $$l=\sum_{(g,g')\in G'\times G'} d_{(g,g')} \left(f_{(g,g')}\sum_{g''\in G}{\underline{x}}^{\beta{(g,g'})} k_{g''}^{(g,g')} g''+r^{(g,g')} g+{r}^{(g',g)}g'\right)$$ and substituting into contradicts the minimality of $(\alpha,e)$ by . In the other case, ${\underline{x}}^\alpha(e)$ is reducible, say $\alpha=\beta+\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec^E_e}(p)$ for some $p\in I_e$ and $\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$. Then there exists by definition of $\operatorname{spoly}(g,p)$ for $g\in G'$ a vector $\gamma_{g}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ such that $$\operatorname{le}_{\prec_e^E}(h_g)+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(g)=(\alpha,e)=\gamma_g+c_{g,p}+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec_E}(g)$$ (see .\[817c\] for the definition $c_{g,p}$). Therefore there is $q_g\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^*$ $$\operatorname{{lm}}_{\prec_e^E}(h_g) g=(q_g{\underline{x}}^{\gamma_g} \cdot {\underline{x}}^{c_{g,p}}+t_g)g=q_g{\underline{x}}^{\gamma_g}\cdot \operatorname{spoly}(g,p)+ t_g g$$ with $t_g\in A$ such that $\operatorname{le}_{\prec_e^E}(t_g)\prec_e^E \operatorname{le}_{\prec_e^E}(h_g)$ by .\[856b\]. Using that $$\gamma_g+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec^E}(\operatorname{spoly}(p,g))\prec^E \gamma_g+ c_{g,p}+\operatorname{{ele}}_{\prec_E}(g) =(\alpha,e)$$ by and that $ \operatorname{spoly}(g,p)$ has a vanishing normal form with respect to $G$, we may argue as in the first case. This finishes our proof. The above yields the following for computing Gröbner bases: \[Given a PBW-reduction-algebra $A$, a well-ordering $\prec^E$ and a finite set $G\subseteq A^E$, this algorithm computes a Gröbner basis of the module ${\prescript{}{A}{\left\langleG\right\rangle}}$ with respect to $\prec^E$.\] \[1\] A finite set $H\subseteq A^E$ such that $H$ is a Gröbner basis of ${\prescript{}{A}{\left\langleG\right\rangle}}$ with respect to $\prec^E$. Initialize $H:=G\setminus \{0\}:=\{g_1,\dots,g_s\}$. Set $T:=\{(g_i,g_j)\mid 1\leq i<j\leq s \} \cup \{(g,p)\mid g\in H, p\in I_{\operatorname{lcomp}(g)}\}$. Choose $(t_1,t_2)\in T$ and delete it from $T$. Compute a normal form $r$ of $\operatorname{spoly}(t_1,t_2)$ with respect to $H$ and $\prec^E$ by applying . Set $T:=T\cup\{(r,h)\mid h\in H\}\cup \{(r,p)\mid p\in I_{\operatorname{lcomp}(r)}\}$ and $H:=H\cup \{r\}$. $H$. \[819\] is correct and terminates. Correctness follows immediately from . The $\operatorname{L}(H)$ form an increasing sequence of $\operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$-stable subsets of $\operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\times E$. By definition of a normal form it stabilizes exactly if $H$ does. Elements of $\operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\times E$ identify with monomials in $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E$. The latter is Noetherian and termination follows. As in the commutative setting, the above algorithm can be modified to compute a reduced Gröbner basis. An algorithm for computing left generators of a two-sided submodule of a free $A$-module carries over immediately from the setting of PBW-algebras (see e.g. @BuesoBook [Algorithm 6]). In our setting termination is a consequence of . Together with this yields: \[294\]Let $A$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra, $E$ a finite set, $(A^E,\prec^E)=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S_e,I_e,\prec_e)_{e\in E}$ and $G\subseteq A^E$ a finite subset. Then (reduced) Gröbner bases of the left $A$-modules ${\prescript{}{A}{\left\langleG\right\rangle}}$ and ${\text{}_{A}{\left\langleG\right\rangle\text{}_{A}}}$ with respect to $\prec^E$ are computable. \[f1\] We call $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}/{\left\langleI'\cup S\right\rangle}=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I',\prec)$ a *factor PBW-reduction-algebra* of $A=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ if $I\subseteq I'$. The following result explains how we consider factor algebras of PBW-reduction-algebras as PBW-reduction-algebras. \[840\] Let $A=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra and $M\subseteq A$ a two-sided $A$-ideal. Then $ A/ {M} $ is canonically isomorphic to the PBW-reduction-algebra $$\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}/{\left\langleS\cup I\cup \tau_{A,\prec}(G)\right\rangle}=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I\cup \tau_{A,\prec}(G),\prec),$$ where $G$ is a left Gröbner basis of ${M}$ with respect to $\prec$. Clearly the map $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\to A,\, t\mapsto {\overline{t}}$ induces the claimed isomorphism. For the second claim it is by enough to show that $$\operatorname{L}_\prec(I\cup \tau_{(A,\prec)}(G))\supseteq \operatorname{L}_\prec({\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}{\left\langleS\cup I\cup \tau_{A,\prec}(G)\right\rangle\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}}}\cap \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}).$$ So consider $0\neq t\in {\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}{\left\langleS\cup I\cup \tau_{A,\prec}(G)\right\rangle\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}}}\cap \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$. If $\operatorname{le}(t)\in \operatorname{L}_\prec(I)$, we are finished. Otherwise we have according to that $\operatorname{{lm}}(t)$ is irreducible with respect to $({\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}{\left\langleS\cup I\right\rangle\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}}},\prec)$ and hence $\operatorname{{lm}}(t)=\operatorname{{lm}}(\rho_{A,\prec}(t))=\operatorname{{lm}}({\overline{t}})$. By construction ${\overline{t}}\in M$ and for suitable coefficients $a\in A^G$ there is a standard representation with respect to $G$ $${\overline{t}}=\sum_{g\in G} a_g g \text{ and } \operatorname{le}(a_g)+\operatorname{le}(g)\preceq \operatorname{le}({\overline{t}})=\operatorname{le}(t) \text{ for all } g\in G$$ with equality for some $g'\in G$. With $\operatorname{le}(g')=\operatorname{le}( \tau_{A,\prec}(g'))$ the claim follows. \[296\] Let $A$ be a ring, $E$ a finite set and $H_1,\dots, H_s\subseteq A^{E}$ finite subsets. The $A$-module $$\operatorname{syz}_A(H_1,\dots,H_s):=\{(a_1,\dots,a_s)\in A^{H_1}\oplus\dots \oplus A^{H_s}\mid \sum_{1\leq i\leq s}\sum_{h_i\in H_i} (a_i)_{h_i} h_i=0\}$$ is called the *syzygy-module* of $H_1,\dots,H_s$ (in $A^{H_1}\oplus\dots \oplus A^{H_s}$). Similarly, for $h_1,\dots,h_t\in A^E$ we define the *syzygy-module* $ \operatorname{syz}_{A}(h_1,\dots,h_t):=\operatorname{syz}_{A}(\{h_1\},\dots,\{h_t\}). $ Syzygies over PBW-reduction-algebras can be computed as in the commutative case: \[834\] Let $A=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra, $E$ a finite set and $H\subseteq A^E$ finite. Let $G$ be a Gröbner basis of ${\prescript{}{A}{\left\langle\{h+(h)\mid h\in H\} \right\rangle}}\subseteq A^{E\sqcup H}$ with respect to $(<,\prec^{E\sqcup H})$, where $<$ is a total ordering on $E\sqcup H$ with $h<e$ for $e\in E$ and $h\in H$. Then $$\operatorname{syz}_A(H)={\prescript{}{A}{\left\langle \pi_H(G\cap A^H)\right\rangle}}.$$ \[1001\] Given a PBW-reduction algebra $A=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ and a finite set $E$ the following Gröbner basics can be performed as in the commutative setting: 1. \[1001a\] We can decide for submodules of $A^E$ whether one is included in the other using normal form computations with respect to any ordering $\prec^E$ with $\prec^E_e=\prec$ for all $e\in E$ (see ). 2. \[1001b\] A non-commutative variant of @SingularBook [Section 2.8.3] allows to compute intersections of submodules of $A^E$, In the next , we explain how to compute Gröbner bases with respect to non-well-orderings. Weight filtrations {#368} ================== The subject of investigation in this are filtrations of type $F^\mathbf{u}_\bullet A$ induced by a so-called weight vector $\mathbf{u}$ on the PBW-reduction-algebra $A$. These filtrations have been studied theoretically and algorithmically for nonnegative weight vectors on PBW-algebras in @BuesoBook. Combining the methods of @BuesoBook and @OT2001, we develop a Gröbner basis algorithm for computing $F^\mathbf{u}_\bullet A$ for general weight vectors $\mathbf{u}$. Weight filtrations on PBW-reduction-algebras {#297} -------------------------------------------- In this let $A=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra unless stated otherwise. \[298\] Let $\mathbf{u}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$, $E$ a finite set, $L\subseteq A^E$ an $A$-submodule and $\mathbf{s}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^E$. 1. \[298c\] Assigning weight $\mathbf{u}_{i}$ to $x_i$ and weight $\mathbf{s}_e$ to $(e)$ defines a $\operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}$-grading on $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ with $l$th graded piece $ (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)_l^{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}=\bigoplus_{e\in E}\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}_{l-\mathbf{s_e}}^\mathbf{u} (e) $ with $$\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}_{l}^\mathbf{u}:={\prescript{}{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}}{\left\langle\{x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_k}\mid k\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}, 1\leq i_1,\dots,i_k\leq n, \sum\nolimits_{1\leq j\leq k} \mathbf{u}_{i_j}=l\}\right\rangle}}.$$ So every $0\neq r\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ can be uniquely written as $r=\sum_{s_1\leq i\leq s_2} r_i$ with $r_i\in (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)_i^{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}$ and $r_{s_1},r_{s_2}\neq 0$. We call $s_2$ the *${\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}$-degree* of $r$ and write $\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}(r)=s_2$. We set $\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}(0):=-\infty$. If $s_1=s_2$, we say that $r$ is *${\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}$-homogeneous*. We define the *${\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}$-leading terms* of $r$ by $\operatorname{lt}_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}(r):=r_{s_2}$. The elements $r_{s_1},\dots,r_{s_2}$ are called the *${\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}$-homogeneous parts* of $r$. 2. \[298a\] The associated filtration on $F^\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet$ on $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ is defined by $$F^\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]_k \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E:=\{r\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E\mid \deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}(r)\leq k\}$$ for $k\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}$. It induces a quotient filtration $F^\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet A^E:=\bigoplus_{e\in E} F^\mathbf{u}_{\bullet-\mathbf{s}_e} A(e)$, where $F_\bullet^\mathbf{u} A:=({F_\bullet^\mathbf{u} \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}+{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle})/{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}$. We define the ${\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}$-degree for $a\in A^E$ by $$\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}(a):=\deg_{ F^{\mathbf{u}}[\mathbf{s}]}(a):=\inf\{k\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}\mid a\in F^\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]_k A^E\}$$ and extend it to subsets $T$ of $A^E$ or $\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ is by setting $\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]} (T):=\max\{ \deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}(t)\mid t\in T\}$. 3. \[298e\] Using the induced filtrations $F^{\mathbf{u}}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet L:=F^{\mathbf{u}}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet A^E\cap L$ and $F^{\mathbf{u}}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet (A^E/L):=({F^{\mathbf{u}}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet A^E}+L)/L$, we sets the ${\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}$-degree of elements and subsets of $L$ and $A^E/L$ as in Part \[298a\]. 4. We call $\operatorname{Gr}^{\mathbf{u}}\!A:=\bigoplus_{k\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}} F^\mathbf{u}_{k} A/F^\mathbf{u}_{k-1} A$ the *$\mathbf{u}$-graded algebra associated with $A$* and $\operatorname{Gr}^{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}\!L:=\bigoplus_{k\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}} F^\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]_{k} L/F^\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]_{k-1} L$ *$\mathbf{u}$-graded module associated with $L$*. 5. \[298b\] We say that $\mathbf{u}$ is a *weight vector* on $A$ if $\deg_\mathbf{u}(d_{ij})\leq \deg_\mathbf{u}(x_ix_j)$ for all $1\leq i<j\leq n$, where $S=\{x_jx_i-c_{ij}x_ix_j-d_{ij}\mid 1\leq i<j\leq n\}$. In this case we call $F^{\mathbf{u}}_\bullet A$ the *weight filtration* associated to $\mathbf{u}$ on $A$ or the *$\mathbf{u}$-weight filtration* on $A$. If $A\cong \operatorname{Gr}^{\mathbf{u}}\!A$, then we say that $A$ is *$\mathbf{u}$-graded* and speak of *$\mathbf{u}$-homogeneous* elements of $A$. More generally, if $A$ is $\mathbf{u}$-graded, $E$ a finite set and the shift vector $\mathbf{s}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^E$ assigns degree $\mathbf{s}_e$ to $(e)$, then we call a homogeneous element of $A^E$ also $\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]$-homogeneous. We often suppress $\mathbf{s}$ in the above notations if it is the zero vector. \[300\] Let $\mathbf{u}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ be a weight vector on $A$, $E$ a finite set, $\mathbf{s}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^E$ and $L\subseteq A^E$ an $A$-submodule. Then we have for all $a,a'\in A$ $$\deg_{\mathbf{u}}(a\cdot a') \leq \deg_{\mathbf{u}}(a)+\deg_{\mathbf{u}}(a').$$ In particular, $F_\bullet^\mathbf{u}A={\prescript{}{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}}{\left\langle\{{\overline{{\underline{x}}^\alpha}}\mid \langle \mathbf{u},\alpha\rangle \leq \bullet\}\right\rangle}}$ is a filtered $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-algebra and $F^{\mathbf{u}}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet A^E$, $F^{\mathbf{u}}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet L$ and $F^{\mathbf{u}}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet (A^E/L)$ are filtered $F^{\mathbf{u}}_\bullet A$-modules. \[349\] Let $\mathbf{u}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ be a weight vector on $A$, $E$ a finite set, $\prec^E$ an ordering on $A^E$ and $\mathbf{s}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^E$ a shift vector. We define the ordering $\prec_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}^E$ on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)$ by $$\begin{aligned} {\underline{x}}^\alpha (e) \prec_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}^E {\underline{x}}^{\alpha'} (e') \text{ if and only if } & \deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}({\underline{x}}^\alpha (e))<\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}({\underline{x}}^{\alpha'} (e'))\\ \text{ or }& \deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}({\underline{x}}^\alpha (e))=\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}({\underline{x}}^{\alpha'} (e'))\text{ and } {\underline{x}}^\alpha (e) \prec^E {\underline{x}}^{\alpha'} (e') \end{aligned}$$ for $\alpha,\alpha'\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ and $e,e'\in E$. If $\mathbf{s}$ is the zero vector, we also write $\prec_{\mathbf{u}}^E$. We sometimes use the notation $\prec_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}^E$ without explicitly defining an ordering $\prec^E$ on $A^E$. implies that $F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 A$ is a $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-subalgebra of $A$ if $\mathbf{u}$ is a weight vector on $A$. \[220\] Let $\mathbf{u}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ be a weight vector on $A$. 1. \[220a\] The $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-subalgebra $F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 A$ of $A$ is generated by residue classes of finitely many standard monomials. Moreover, such a generating set is computable. 2. \[220e\] The $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-subalgebra $F_0^\mathbf{u}A$ is isomorphic to a PBW-reduction-algebra. 3. \[220c\] The $F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 A$-modules $F^{\mathbf{u}}_j A$ ($j\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}$) are generated by residue classes of finitely many standard monomials. Moreover, such generating sets are computable. <!-- --> 1. Taking exponents $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})\cap F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}$ identifies with $$U_0:=\{\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{R}}^n\mid \langle \mathbf{u},\alpha\rangle \leq 0\}\cap \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n,$$ which is an intersection of a rational cone and the lattice $\operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$. Therefore $U_0$ is a positive affine monoid by Gordan's lemma (see e.g. @Bruns [Lemma 2.9]), and has a computable minimal finite generating set @Koch [Proposition 3.4.6] [@BrunsComp], say $\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_s\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$. This means that $ U_0=\sum_{1\leq i\leq s} \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}\cdot \alpha_i, $ and if $\alpha_i=\beta_1+\beta_2$ with $\beta_1,\beta_2\in U_0$, then $\beta_1=\alpha_i$ or $\beta_2=\alpha_i$ for $1\leq i\leq s$. We claim that $F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 A=\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\overline{{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_1}}},\dots, {\overline{{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_s}}}]$. By , it suffices to show that ${F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\cap {\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})}}$ maps to $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\overline{{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_1}}},\dots, {\overline{{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_s}}}]$. We proceed by induction on the well-ordering $\prec$. The base case is immediate since $1=\min_{\prec}\{ F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\cap \operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}) \}$. Consider now ${\underline{x}}^\alpha\in F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\cap \operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})$. Then $\alpha\in U_0$, and hence $\alpha=\sum_{1\leq i\leq s}l_i\alpha_i$ for some $l\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^s$. By there exists $c\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^*$ and $a\in {\prescript{}{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}}{\left\langle\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})\right\rangle}}$ with $\operatorname{{lm}}(a)\prec {\underline{x}}^\alpha$ such that $${\overline{{\underline{x}}^\alpha}}={\overline{{\underline{x}}^{\sum_{1\leq i\leq s}l_i\alpha_i}}}=c{\overline{({\underline{x}}^{\alpha_1})^{l_1}\cdots ({\underline{x}}^{\alpha_s})^{l_s}}}+{\overline{a}}.$$ The induction hypothesis applied to ${\overline{a}}\in F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 A$ yields the claim. 2. We retain the notation of Part . Consider the surjective $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-algebra map $$\pi: \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{y}}\rangle:=\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle y_1,\dots,y_s\rangle \to F_0^\mathbf{u}A,\; y_i\mapsto {\overline{{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_i}}}.$$ By with $\prec_o^E=\prec_\mathbf{u}$ there exist $f_{ij}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}^*$ and $g_{ij}\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$ with $\operatorname{le}_{\prec}(g_{ij})\prec \alpha_i+\alpha_j$ and $\deg_\mathbf{u}(g_{ij})\leq \deg_\mathbf{u}({\underline{x}}^{\alpha_i}{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_j})\leq 0$ such that $${\underline{x}}^{\alpha_j}{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_i}-f_{ij}{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_i}{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_j}-g_{ij}\in {\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}{\left\langleS\right\rangle\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}}}\subseteq {\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}{\left\langleS,I\right\rangle\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}}}$$ for $1\leq i<j\leq s$. Then $g_{ij}\in F_0^\mathbf{u} A$ and Part yield $g_{ij}'(y_1,\dots,y_s)\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[ {\underline{y}}]$ such that $g'_{ij}({\overline{{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_1}}},\dots, {\overline{{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_s}}})={\overline{g_{ij}}}\in A$. It follows $$S_0:=\{y_jy_i-f_{ij}y_iy_j-g_{ij}'\mid 1\leq i<j\leq s\}\subseteq \ker(\pi).$$ Define the well-ordering $\prec_0$ on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{y}}\rangle)$ by $$\begin{aligned} {\underline{y}}^\beta\prec_0 {\underline{y}}^\gamma \text{ if and only if } & \sum_{1\leq k\leq s}\beta_i \alpha_i\prec \sum_{1\leq k\leq s} \gamma_i\alpha_i \\ \text{ or } &\sum_{1\leq k\leq s}\beta_i \alpha_i=\sum_{1\leq k\leq s} \gamma_i\alpha_i \text{ and } {\underline{y}}^\beta\prec' {\underline{y}}^\gamma,\end{aligned}$$ where $\beta,\gamma\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^s$ and $\prec'$ is some well-ordering on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{y}}\rangle)$. By construction, $(S_0,\prec_0)$ is a commutation system. We conclude that $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{y}}\rangle /\ker \pi$ is a PBW-reduction-algebra isomorphic to $F_0^\mathbf{u} A$ by . 3. We keep the notation of Part and consider first the case $j<0$. Let $\Delta_j:=\{\alpha_i\mid \langle \mathbf{u},\alpha_i\rangle \leq j\} $ and $\Delta'_j:=\{\alpha_i\mid j<\langle \mathbf{u}, \alpha_i\rangle<0\}$. One easily checks that $$\label{d1} U_j:=\{\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\mid \langle \mathbf{u},\alpha\rangle\leq j\}=U_0+V_j:=\{\alpha+v\mid \alpha\in U_0,v\in V_j\},$$ where $V_j:=\Delta_j\cup (U_j\cap \{\sum_{\delta\in \Delta'} l_\delta \delta\mid l\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^{\Delta'}, |l|\leq j\})$. We claim that $$\label{d2} F^\mathbf{u}_j A=\sum_{v\in V_j} F_0^\mathbf{u}A{\overline{{\underline{x}}^v}}.$$ By it suffices to show that $ F^\mathbf{u}_j \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\cap \operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})$ maps to the right hand side. This set has a minimal element ${\underline{x}}^\beta$ with respect to $\prec$ and we must have $\beta\in V_j$. Proceeding by induction, the claim follows as in Part . The case $j=0$ being clear, we assume now $j>0$. Arguing as in the proof of Part , we can compute a minimal finite set of generators $\Gamma$ of $\{\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\mid \langle \mathbf{u},\alpha\rangle\geq 0\}$. As above, we obtain $$U_j:=\{\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n\mid \langle \mathbf{u},\alpha\rangle\leq j\}= U_0 +V_j,$$ where $V_j:=(\{\sum_{\gamma\in \Gamma_j} l_\gamma \gamma\mid l\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^{\Gamma}, |l| \leq j\}\cap (U_j\setminus U_0))\cup \{0\}$ with $\Gamma_j:=G\cap (U_j\setminus U_0)$. With this notation follows as in case $j<0$. \[d3\] Let $\mathbf{u}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ be a weight vector on $A$. 1. \[d3a\] With notation from the proof of .\[220a\] we denote the set $G_A^{\mathbf{u}}:=\{{{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_1}},\dots,{{\underline{x}}^{\alpha_s}}\}$, whose residue classes generate $F_0^{\mathbf{u}}A$ as $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-algebra. 2. \[d3b\] With notation from the proof of .\[220c\] we denote for $j\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}$ the set $P_j^{A,\mathbf{u}}:=\{{\overline{{\underline{x}}^v}}\mid v\in V_j\}$, whose residue classes generate $F^{\mathbf{u}}_jA$ as $F^{\mathbf{u}}_0 A$-module. \[345\] Let $\mathbf{u}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ be a weight vector on $A$. The proof of .\[220a\] and \[220c\] is constructive. It gives a method to represent an element of $F_0^{\mathbf{u}}A$ as a $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-linear combination of products of elements in $G_A^{\mathbf{u}}$ and elements $F_j^{\mathbf{u}}A$ as $F_0^{\mathbf{u}}A$-linear combinations of elements in $P_j^{A,\mathbf{u}}$. \[885\] 1. \[885a\] Let $A=(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle, S,I,\prec)$ (with $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle:=\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle x_1,\dots,x_n,y_1,\dots,y_m\rangle$) be an elementary PBW-reduction-algebra and $\mathbf{v}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^{n+m}$ be any weight vector on $A$. Note that $\mathbf{w}=((0)_{1\leq i\leq n}, (1)_{1\leq i\leq m})$ is a weight vector on $A$. Then $$F_k^\mathbf{v}A\cap F_l^\mathbf{w} A=\left(({F_k^\mathbf{v}\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle \cap F_l^\mathbf{w}\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle \cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[ {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}] })+{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}\right)/{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}$$ for all $k,l\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}$: Indeed let $a\in F_k^\mathbf{v}A\cap F_l^\mathbf{w} A$. By there exist representatives $a^{\mathbf{w}}\in F_l^\mathbf{w}\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle \cap \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[ {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}]$ and $a^{\mathbf{v}}=\sum_{(\alpha,\beta)\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^{n+m}}a^\mathbf{v}_{(\alpha,\beta)}{\underline{x}}^\alpha {\underline{y}}^\beta \in F_k^\mathbf{v}\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle$ of $a$. By $A= \bigoplus_{\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m} (\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]/{\left\langleI\right\rangle}){\underline{y}}^\beta$, and hence ${\overline{\sum_{\alpha\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^{n}} a^\mathbf{v}_{(\alpha,\beta)} {\underline{x}}^\alpha}}=0\in A$ for all $\beta\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^m$ with $|\beta|>l$. Thus $\sum_{(\alpha,\beta)\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^{n+m}, |\beta|\leq l}a^\mathbf{v}_{(\alpha,\beta)}{\underline{x}}^\alpha {\underline{y}}^\beta\in F_k^\mathbf{v}\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle \cap F_l^\mathbf{w}\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}},{\underline{y}}\rangle$ is also a representative of $a$. 2. \[885b\] Let $\mathbf{v}$ and $\mathbf{w}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ be weight vectors on $A=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ such that $$\label{886} F_k^\mathbf{v}A\cap F_l^\mathbf{w} A=\left( ({F_k^\mathbf{v}\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\cap F_l^\mathbf{w}\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}})+{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle} \right)/{\left\langleI\cup S\right\rangle}$$ for $k,l\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}$. By construction (see proof of ) $$F_\bullet^\mathbf{w} F_k^\mathbf{v} A=\sum_{p\in P_k^{A,\mathbf{v}}} (F_{\bullet-\langle \beta_i^k,\mathbf{w}\rangle}^\mathbf{w} F_0^\mathbf{v} A)\cdot {\overline{p}}.$$ \[313\] In the situation of .\[577c\], we have $T_X^V\cong F_0^\mathbf{v} T_X$, where $\mathbf{v}$ is the weight vector assigning weights $-1$ and $1$ to $x_n$ and $y_m$, respectively, and weight $0$ otherwise. By this example and the weight vector $\mathbf{w}=((0)_{1\leq i\leq n},(1)_{1\leq i\leq m})$ on $T_X$ induces the weight vector $\mathbf{w}_\mathbf{v}=((0)_{1\leq i\leq n},(1)_{1\leq i\leq m})$ on $T_X^V$. Moreover, we may assume $$P_k^{T_X,\mathbf{v}}=\begin{cases} \{{x_{n}^k}\}&\text{if }k\leq 0,\\ \{{y_{m}^{l}}\mid 0\leq l\leq k\}& \text{otherwise} \end{cases}$$ and fix this choice. Weight filtrations on submodules of free modules {#334} ------------------------------------------------ In this let $A=(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},S,I,\prec)$ be a PBW-reduction-algebra unless otherwise specified and $\mathbf{u}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ a weight vector on $A$. For a given set $E$, an $A$-submodule $M\subseteq A^E$ and a shift vector $\mathbf{s}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^E$ we show how to compute a finite set of generators $M'$ of the filtration $F_\bullet^{\mathbf{u}}[\mathbf{s}] M$. By definition this means that for every $m\in M$ there are coefficients $a\in A^{M'}$ such that $$m=\sum_{m'\in M'} a_{m'} m' \text{ and } \deg_\mathbf{u}(a_{m'})+\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}(m')\leq \deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}(m) \text{ for all } m'\in M'.$$ \[844\] Let $\mathbf{u}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^n$ be a weight vector on $A$, $E$ a finite set, $\mathbf{s}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^E$ a shift vector, $\prec^E$ an ordering and $M\subseteq A^E$ an $A$-submodule. If $G$ is a Gröbner basis of $M$ with respect to $\prec^E_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}$, then it generates $F^\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]_\bullet M$ as $F_\bullet^\mathbf{u}A$-module. Let $m\in F^\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]_k M$ for some $k\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}$. Choose a representative $m'\in F^\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]_k \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}\cap \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}$ of $m$ using . By assumption there is $a\in {\prescript{}{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}}{\left\langle\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle})\right\rangle}}^G$ and $h\in (\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[{\underline{x}}]}^E)^G$ with ${\overline{h_g}}=g$ satisfying $$m=\sum_{g\in G} {\overline{a_g }}g \text{ and } \operatorname{le}(a_g)+\operatorname{{ele}}(h_g)\preceq^E_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}\operatorname{{ele}}(m')$$ implying $\deg_{\mathbf{u}}({\overline{a_g}})+\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}( g)\leq \deg_{\mathbf{u}}({a_g})+\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}(h_g)\leq \deg_{\mathbf{u}}(m')\leq k$. This means that $m\in \sum_{g\in G} F^\mathbf{u}_{k-\deg_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}( g)} A\cdot g$. Note that if $\prec^E$ is a well-ordering, then $\prec_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}^E$ is a well-ordering if and only if $\mathbf{u}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$. Since Gröbner bases with respect to well-orderings exist by , a finite set of generators of $F^\mathbf{u}_\bullet M$ exists in this case. If $\mathbf{u}\notin \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$, we can still compute Gröbner bases with respect to $\prec_{\mathbf{u}[\mathbf{s}]}^E$. To this end we homogenize $A$ with respect to a weight vector $\mathbf{w}$: \[319\] Let $\mathbf{w}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ be a weight vector on $A$, $E$ a finite set and $\mathbf{s}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{Z}}^E$ a shift vector. 1. \[319e\] We define the *$\mathbf{w}[\mathbf{s}]$-homogenization* of $0\neq p=\sum_{m\in \operatorname{{Mon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)} p_{m} m\in \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$ (with $p_m\in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$) as $$h_{\mathbf{w}[\mathbf{s}]}(p):=\sum_{m\in \operatorname{{Mon}}(\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E)} p_{m} h^{\deg_{\mathbf{w}[\mathbf{s}]}(p)-\deg_{\mathbf{w}[\mathbf{s}]}(m)} m \in \operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle h,{\underline{x}}\rangle^E$$ and set $ h_{\mathbf{w}[\mathbf{s}]}(0)=0$. For $G\subseteq \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}^E$, we set $h_{\mathbf{w}[\mathbf{s}]}(G):=\{h_{\mathbf{w}[\mathbf{s}]}(g)\mid g\in G\}$. We suppress $\mathbf{s}$ if it is the zero vector. 2. \[319a\] The *$\mathbf{w}$-homogenized* algebra associated with $A$ is the $(1,\mathbf{w})$-graded algebra $$A^{\mathbf{w}}=\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle h,{\underline{x}}\rangle/{\left\langleh_\mathbf{w}({\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}{\left\langleS\cup I\right\rangle\text{}_{\operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle}}}})\cup \{hx_i-x_ih\mid 1\leq i\leq n\}\right\rangle}.$$ 3. \[319c\] We define the ordering $(\prec^E)^\mathbf{w}$ on $\operatorname{{SMon}}(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle h,{\underline{x}}\rangle^E)$ for the ordering $\prec^E$ on $A^E$ by $$\begin{aligned} h^\alpha {\underline{x}}^\beta (e)(\prec^E)^\mathbf{w} h^{\alpha'} {\underline{x}}^{\beta'} (e')\text{ if and only if }& \alpha+\langle \mathbf{w},\beta \rangle <{\alpha'}+\langle \mathbf{w},{\beta'} \rangle\\ \text{ or }& \alpha+\langle \mathbf{w},\beta \rangle ={\alpha'}+\langle \mathbf{w},{\beta'} \rangle \text{ and }{\underline{x}}^\beta (e) \prec^E {\underline{x}}^{\beta'} (e') \end{aligned}$$ for $\alpha,\alpha'\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}$, $\beta,\beta'\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ and $e,e'\in E$. 4. \[319d\] We call the $\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}$-algebra homomorphism given by $$d_h:\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle h,{\underline{x}}\rangle\to \operatorname{\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle {\underline{x}}\rangle},\;h\mapsto 1, x_i\mapsto x_i$$ *dehomogenization map*. It induces a map $d_h: A^{\mathbf{w}}\to A$. We denote also the maps $ \bigoplus_{e\in E} d_h$ by $d_h$. Homogenized PBW-reduction-algebras are PBW-reduction-algebras: \[845\] Let $\mathbf{w}\in \operatorname{\mathbb{N}}^n$ be a weight vector on $A$ and set $S^{\mathbf{w}}:=h_\mathbf{w}(S)\cup \{hx_i-x_ih\mid 1\leq i\leq n\}$. Then $A^\mathbf{w}=(\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}\langle h, {\underline{x}}\rangle, S^{\mathbf{w}}, I^\mathbf{w},\prec^{\mathbf{w}}) $ for some set $I^\mathbf{w}\subseteq \allowbreak\operatorname{\mathbb{K}}[h,{\underline{x}}]$ with
{'source': 'arXiv_out/1809'}