It is of course very natural to compare this newly defined stratification $${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,0}\subset {\mathcal{Z}}_{g,1}\subset \dots \subset {\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}\subset \dots \subset {\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0$$  with the more classical stratification of ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_g$  defined in terms of syzygies of $K_C$  . If for each $i\ge 0$  we set $${\mathcal{N}}_{g,i}:=\left\{\right[C]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_g:(C,K_C\left)\text{fails property}\right(N_i\left)\right\},$$  then Green's Conjecture for generic curves of fixed gonality (cf. [V3] , [V2] ) can be read as saying that for all $0\le i\le (g-2)/2$  , the locus ${\mathcal{N}}_{g,i}$  coincides with the $(i+2)$  -gonal locus ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{g,i+2}^1$  of curves with a ${\mathfrak{g}}_{i+2}^1$  , while ${\mathcal{N}}_{g,i}={\mathcal{ℳ}}_g$  for all $i\ge (g-1)/2$  . One of the morals of this paper is that the stratification ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}$  is very different in nature from the one given by gonality: whereas ${\mathcal{N}}_{g,0}$  is the locus of hyperelliptic curves of genus $g$  , the smallest stratum ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,0}$  is intimately related to the locus of curves lying on $K3$  surfaces which is well-known to be transversal to any Brill-Noether locus (a curve of genus $g$  lying on a general $K3$  surface satisfies the Brill-Noether Theorem, cf. [L] ).

We have already seen that ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}={\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0$  when $g\le 6i+8$  (cf. Remark  2.4 ). A result due to Mukai and Voisin (cf. [V1] , Proposition 3.2) states that if $C$  is a smooth curve of genus $g=2k-2$  sitting on a $K3$  surface $S$  with $\text{Pic}\left(S\right)=\mathbb{Z}\left[C\right]$  , then for all $A\in W_k^1\left(C\right)$  the multiplication map ${\text{Sym}}^2{H}^0(K_C\otimes A^{\vee })\to H^0\left(\right(K_C\otimes A^{\vee }{)}^{\otimes 2})$  is not surjective, in other words, $\left[C\right]\in {\mathcal{Z}}_{g,0}$  . In a forthcoming paper we will show that the converse also holds, that is, the closure in ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_g$  of the smallest stratum ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,0}$  coincides with the locus $${\mathcal{K}}_g:=\left\{\right[C]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_g:C\text{lies on a}K3\text{surface}\}.$$  The possibility of such an equality of cycles has already been raised in Voisin's paper (cf. [V1] , Remarques 4.13). Its main appeal lies in the fact that it gives an intrinsic characterization of a curve lying on a $K3$  surface which makes no reference to the $K3$  surface itself! We now make the following:

Conjecture 2.6. For an even genus $g\ge 6i+10$  , the stratum ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}$  is a proper subvariety of ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0$  . In particular, when $g=6i+10$  , the stratum ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}$  is a divisor on ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0$  .

In this paper we will compute the class of the compactification ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  of ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}$  inside ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  when $g=6i+10$  (assuming that ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}$  is a divisor). Our calculation will show the estimate $$6<s\left({\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}\right)<6+12/(g+1)$$  for the slope of ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  , that is, the divisors ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  provide an infinite sequence of counterexamples to the Slope Conjecture. For $g\le 8$  the conjecture is trivially true because ${\mathcal{K}}_g={\mathcal{ℳ}}_g$  , that is, every curve of (even) genus $g\le 8$  sits on a $K3$  surface. The first interesting case is $g=10$  when the conjecture holds and the identification ${\mathcal{K}}_{10}={\mathcal{Z}}_{10,0}$  is part of a more general picture (see [FP] for details). We have checked Conjecture  2.6 for all genera $g\le 24$  sometimes using the program Macaulay. We will describe this in detail in the most interesting cases, $g=16$  and $g=22$  , when the strata ${\mathcal{Z}}_{16,1}$  and ${\mathcal{Z}}_{22,2}$  are divisors on ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{16}$  and ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{22}$  respectively.

Theorem 2.7. Let $C$  be a general curve of genus $16$  . Then every linear series $A\in W_9^1\left(C\right)$  gives an embedding $C\stackrel{|K_C\otimes A^{\vee }|}{⟶}{\text{P}}^7$  of degree $21$  such that the ideal of $C$  is scheme-theoretically cut out by quadrics (that is, it satisfies property $\left(N_1\right)$  ). In particular ${\mathcal{Z}}_{16,1}$  is a divisor on ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{16}$  .

• Proof. From the irreducibility of the Hurwitz scheme of coverings of ${\text{P}}^1$  it follows that the variety ${\mathcal{G}}_9^1={\mathcal{G}}_{16,9}^1$  parametrizing pairs $(C,A)$  with $\left[C\right]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{16}$  and $A\in W_9^1\left(C\right)$  is irreducible. To prove that ${\mathcal{Z}}_{16,1}$  is a divisor it is enough to exhibit an element $(C,A)\in {\mathcal{G}}_9^1$  with $K_C\otimes A^{\vee }$  very ample, such that the embedded curve $C\stackrel{|K_C\otimes A^{\vee }|}{\hookrightarrow }{\text{P}}^7$  is scheme-theoretically cut out by quadrics.
  We consider $13$  general points in ${\text{P}}^2$  denoted by $p_1,p_2,q_1,\dots ,q_7$  and $r_1,\dots ,r_4$  respectively, and define the linear system $$H\equiv 8h-3(E_{p_1}+E_{p_2})-2{\sum }_{i=1}^7{E}_{q_i}-{\sum }_{j=1}^4{E}_{r_j}$$  on the blow-up $S=B{l}_{13}\left({\text{P}}^2\right)$  . Here $h$  denotes the pullback of the line class from ${\text{P}}^2$  .

  Using the program Macaulay it is easy to check that $S\stackrel{\left|H\right|}{\hookrightarrow }{\text{P}}^7$  is an embedding and the graded Betti diagram of $S$  is

  $$\begin{array}{cccc}1& -& -& -\end{array}$$

  $$\begin{array}{cccc}-& 7& -& -\end{array}$$

  $$\begin{array}{ccccc}-& -& 35& 56& \end{array}$$

  Thus $S$  is scheme-theoretically cut out by quadrics. To carry out this calculation we chose the $13$  points in ${\text{P}}^2$  randomly using the Hilbert-Burch theorem so that they satisfy the Minimal Resolution Conjecture (see [SchT] for details on how to pick random points in ${\text{P}}^2$  using Macaulay). Next we consider a curve $C\subset S$  in the linear system

  $$\begin{array}{c}C\equiv 14h-5(E_{p_1}+E_{p_2})-4{\sum }_{i=1}^6{E}_{q_i}-3E_{q_7}-2{\sum }_{j=1}^3{E}_{r_j}-E_{r_4}.\end{array}$$

  (2)

  By using Macaulay we pick $C$  randomly in its linear system and then check that $C$  is smooth, $g\left(C\right)=16$  and $\text{deg}\left(C\right)=21$  . To show that $C$  is scheme-theoretically cut out by quadrics one can either compute directly the Betti diagram of $C$  or otherwise use thatsince $S$  is cut out by quadrics, to conclude the same thing about $C$  , it suffices to show that the map $$m:H^0(S,H)\otimes H^0(S,2H-C)\to H^0(S,3H-C)$$  is surjective (or equivalently injective). Since $h^0(S,2H-C)=2$  , from the base point free pencil trick we get that $\text{Ker}\left(m\right)=H^0(S,C-H)=0$  , because $C-H\equiv 6h-2E_{p_1}-2E_{p_2}-2{\sum }_{i=1}^6{E}_{q_i}-E_{q_7}-{\sum }_{j=1}^3{E}_{r_j}$  is clearly not effective for a general choice of the $13$  points. □

Remark 2.8. A possible objection to this proof could be that while we defined the Hurwitz space ${\mathcal{G}}_9^1\to {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{16}^0$  over the open part of ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{16}$  consisting of curves carrying no ${\mathfrak{g}}_8^1$  's, the curve $C$  we constructed in the proof of Theorem  2.7 might lie outside ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{16}^0$  .

However, this does not affect our conclusions because for every $g$  and $l<(g+3)/2$  , the Hurwitz space of pairs $(C,A)$  with $\left[C\right]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_g$  an $A\in W_l^1\left(C\right)$  , is an irreducible variety, that is, there can be no component of the Hurwitz space mapping to a proper subvariety of the $l$  -gonal locus ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{g,l}^1$  (This statement can be easily proved with the methods from [AC1] ).

Remark 2.9. For later use we are going to record a slight generalization of Theorem  2.7 . The conclusion of the theorem holds for the image in ${\text{P}}^7$  of any plane curve $C$  that is sufficiently general in the linear system given by  2  $\left(\right)$  . In particular one can choose $C$  to have a cusp at a general extra point $y\in {\text{P}}^2$  , in which case we obtain that a general one-cuspidal curve $C\subset {\text{P}}^7$  of arithmetic genus $16$  and degree $21$  is cut out by quadrics (this again is quite easily checked with Macaulay). Since the Hilbert scheme of these curves is irreducible (use again the Hurwitz scheme), it follows that for a general $(C,y)\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{15,1}$  and for an arbitrary linear system $L\in W_{21}^7\left(C\right)$  having a cusp at $y$  , the cuspidal image curve $C\stackrel{\left|L\right|}{\to }{\text{P}}^7$  is scheme-theoretically cut out by quadrics.

In a somewhat similar manner we are going to show that for $g=22$  the locus ${\mathcal{Z}}_{22,2}$  is a divisor. This calculation seems to have tested the limits of what Macaulay can compute at the moment.

Theorem 2.10. Let $C$  be a general curve of genus $22$  . Then for every linear series $A\in W_{12}^1\left(C\right)$  we have that $|K_C\otimes A^{\vee }|$  is very ample and the resulting embedding $A\stackrel{|K_C\otimes A^{\vee }|}{\hookrightarrow }{\text{P}}^{10}$  satisfies property $\left(N_2\right)$  . In particular, the locus of curves $C$  of genus $22$  carrying a linear series ${\mathfrak{g}}_{30}^{10}=K_C(-{\mathfrak{g}}_{12}^1)$  that fails to satisfy $\left(N_2\right)$  , is a divisor on ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{22}$  .

• Proof. Ideally we would like to construct a rational surface $S\subset {\text{P}}^{10}$  which satisfies property $\left(N_2\right)$  and then consider a suitable curve $C\subset S$  with $g\left(C\right)=22$  and $\text{deg}\left(C\right)=30$  . For numerical reasons this will turn out not to be possible but we will be able to construct a smooth curve $C^{\prime }\subset S$  with $g\left(C^{\prime }\right)=20$  and $\text{deg}\left(C^{\prime }\right)=28$  which satisfies $\left(N_2\right)$  . The desired curve $C$  will be a smoothing in ${\text{P}}^{10}$  of $C\cup L\cup L^{\prime }$  , where $L$  and $L^{\prime }$  are general chords of $C^{\prime }$  . We start by choosing random points $p,p_1,\dots ,p_7,q_1,\dots ,q_5\in {\text{P}}^2$  . Then the linear system $$H=11h-4E_p-3{\sum }_{i=1}^7{E}_{p_i}-2{\sum }_{j=1}^5{E}_{q_j}$$  yields an embedding $S\subset {\text{P}}^{10}$  of $B{l}_{13}\left({\text{P}}^2\right)$  . Using Macaulay we get that the upper left corner of the Betti diagram of $S$  is

  $$\begin{array}{ccccc}1& -& -& -& -\end{array}$$

  $$\begin{array}{ccccc}-& 29& 98& 72& -\end{array}$$

  $$\begin{array}{ccccc}-& -& -& 264& -\end{array}$$

  that is, $S$  satisfies property $\left(N_2\right)$  , hence $H^1(S,{\wedge }^3{M}_S(1\left)\right)=0$  . If $\Gamma \equiv H$  is a general hyperplane section of $S$  , then $g(\Gamma )=13$  , $\text{deg}(\Gamma )=22$  and an argument very similar to the one in Lemma  2.1 shows that the vector bundle $M_{\Gamma }$  is stable. In particular $H^1(\Gamma ,{\wedge }^2{M}_{\Gamma }(2\left)\right)=0$  . Since $M_{S|\Gamma }\sim =M_{\Gamma }\oplus {\mathcal{O}}_{\Gamma }$  one can write the exact sequence $$0⟶{\wedge }^i{M}_S\left(1\right)⟶{\wedge }^i{M}_S\left(2\right)⟶{\wedge }^i{M}_{\Gamma }\left(2\right)\oplus {\wedge }^{i-1}{M}_{\Gamma }\left(2\right)⟶0,$$  which leads to the vanishing $H^2(S,{\wedge }^3{M}_S(1\left)\right)=0$  . Suppose now that $C\subset S$  is a smooth non-degenerate curve. We have a commutative diagram:

  $$\begin{array}{ccccc}& & H^1\left(C,{\wedge }^3{M}_C\left(1\right)\right)& ⟶& {\wedge }^3{H}^0\left({\mathcal{O}}_C\left(1\right)\right)\otimes H^1\left({\mathcal{O}}_C\right(1\left)\right)\end{array}$$

  $$\begin{array}{ccccc}& & \downarrow =& & \downarrow =\end{array}$$

  $$\begin{array}{ccccc}{H}^1\left({\wedge }^2{M}_S(2H-C)\right)& \hookrightarrow & H^2\left({\wedge }^3{M}_S(H-C)\right)& \to & {\wedge }^3{H}^0\left({\mathcal{O}}_S\right(1\left)\right)\otimes H^2(H-C),\end{array}$$

  where the left vertical map is isomorphic because $H^1(S,{\wedge }^3{M}_S(1\left)\right)=H^2(S,{\wedge }^3{M}_S(1\left)\right)=0$  . To conclude that $C$  satisfies $\left(N_2\right)$  , it suffices to show that $H^1\left(S,{\wedge }^2{M}_S(2H-C)\right)=0$  , or equivalently, that the map $f:{\wedge }^2{H}^0\left({\mathcal{O}}_S\right(1\left)\right)\otimes H^0(2H-C)\to H^0\left(M_S\right(3H-C\left)\right)$  obtained from the Koszul complex, is surjective. If $\left(\text{deg}\left(C\right),g\left(C\right)\right)=(30,22)$  , then one can check easily that $h^0(S,2H-C)=3$  and $h^0(S,M_S(3H-C\left)\right)=207$  , hence $f$  cannot be surjective for dimensional reasons. The closest we can get to these numerical invariants is when $\left(\text{deg}\right(C),g(C\left)\right)=(28,20)$  and this is the type of curve on $S$  we will be looking for. Take $$C^{\prime }\equiv 17h-6E_p-5{\sum }_{i=}^7{E}_{p_i}-3{\sum }_{j=1}^5{E}_{q_j},$$  and consider the embedding $C^{\prime }\subset {\text{P}}^{10}$  given by $\left|H\right|$  . Using Macaulay we check that $C^{\prime }$  is a smooth curve of genus $20$  and degree $28$  with graded Betti diagram

  $$\begin{array}{cccc}1& -& -& -\end{array}$$

  $$\begin{array}{cccc}-& 27& 80& -\end{array}$$

  $$\begin{array}{cccc}-& -& -& 432\end{array}$$

  Hence $C^{\prime }$  satisfies $\left(N_2\right)$  . Now choose two general chords $L$  and $L^{\prime }$  of $C$  and define $C:=C^{\prime }\cup L\cup L^{\prime }$  . Clearly $g\left(C\right)=22,\text{deg}\left(C\right)=30$  and one last check with Macaulay shows that $b_{2j}\left(C\right)=0$  for $j\ge 2$  , that is, $C$  satisfies $\left(N_2\right)$  .

  □

Remark 2.11. Just like in the case $g=16$  we have a slight variation of the last Theorem. The same proof shows that for a general $(C,y)\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{21,1}$  and for an arbitrary linear series $L\in W_{30}^{10}\left(C\right)$  that has a cusp at $y$  , the one-cuspidal image curve $C\stackrel{\left|L\right|}{\to }{\text{P}}^{10}$  satisfies property $\left(N_2\right)$  .

3 Intersection theory calculations on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$ 

Let $C$  be a Brill-Noether general curve of genus $g=2k-3\ge 3$  . We denote by $C_d$  the $d$  -th symmetric product of $C$  , by $\mathcal{U}\subset C\times C_d$  the universal divisor and by ${\pi }_1:C\times C_d\to C$  and ${\pi }_2:C\times C_d\to C_d$  the two projections. We shall consider the triple product $C\times C\times C_d$  together with the maps $$u:C\times C\times C_d\to C\times C_d\text{and}v:C\times C\times C_d\to C\times C_d$$  given by $(y,p,D)\stackrel{u}{\mapsto }(y,D)$  and $(y,p,D)\stackrel{v}{\mapsto }(p,D)$  . We define the cohomology classes $$\eta ={\pi }_1^{*}\left(\right[point\left]\right)\in H^2(C\times C_d)\text{and}x={\pi }_2^{*}\left(D_{x_0}\right)\in H^2(C\times C_d),$$  where $x_0\in C$  is an arbitrary point and $D_{x_0}:=\{D\in C_d:x_0\in D\}$  (the definition of $x$  is obviously independent of the point $x_0$  ). Finally, if ${\delta }_1,\dots ,{\delta }_{2g}\in H^1(C,\mathbb{Z})\sim =H^1(C_d,\mathbb{Z})$  is a symplectic basis, then we define the class $$\gamma :=-{\sum }_{\alpha =1}^g\left({\pi }_1^{*}\left({\delta }_{\alpha }\right){\pi }_2^{*}\left({\delta }_{g+\alpha }\right)-{\pi }_1^{*}\left({\delta }_{g+\alpha }\right){\pi }_2^{*}\left({\delta }_{\alpha }\right)\right).$$  With these notations we have the formula (cf. [ACGH] , p. 338) $$[\mathcal{U}]\equiv d\eta +\gamma +x,$$  corresponding to the Hodge decomposition of $[\mathcal{U}]$  . It is also useful to record the standard formulas ${\gamma }^3=\gamma \eta =0$  , ${\eta }^2=0$  and ${\gamma }^2=-2\eta {\pi }_2^{*}\left(\theta \right)$  , where $\theta \in H^2(C_d,\mathbb{Z})$  is the pullback of the class of the theta divisor on $\text{Jac}\left(C\right)$  .

From now on we specialize to the case $d=k-2$  and we consider the line bundle $\mathcal{ℳ}:={\pi }_1^{*}\left(K_C\right)\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{C\times C_{k-2}}(-\mathcal{U})$  , hence $c_1(\mathcal{ℳ})=(3k-6)\eta -\gamma -x$  . We will be interested in intersecting the divisors ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  with two types of curves in the boundary of ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  which are defined as follows: we fix a Brill-Noether general curve $C$  of genus $g=2k-3$  , a general point $q\in C$  and a general elliptic curve $E$  . We define two $1$  -parameter families

$$\begin{array}{c}{C}^0:=\{C/y\sim q:y\in C\}\subset {\Delta }_0\subset {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g\text{and}{C}^1:=\{C{\cup }_{y}E:y\in C\}\subset {\Delta }_1\subset {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g.\end{array}$$

(3)

It is well-known that these families intersect the generators of $\text{Pic}\left({\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g\right)$  as follows:

$$C^0\cdot \lambda =0,C^0\cdot {\delta }_0=-(4k-6),C^0\cdot {\delta }_1=1\text{and}{C}^0\cdot {\delta }_j=0\text{for}j\ge 2,\text{and}$$  $$C^1\cdot \lambda =0,C^1\cdot {\delta }_0=0,C^1\cdot {\delta }_1=-(4k-8),C^1\cdot {\delta }_j=0\text{for}j\ge 2.$$  To understand the intersections of $C^0$  and $C^1$  with ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,j}$  we first describe all limit linear series ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  on curves from $C^0$  and $C^1$  .

Lemma 3.1. (1) Let $C_y^1=C{\cup }_{y}E$  be an element of $C^1$  . Then limit linear series of type ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  on $C_y^1$  are in 1:1 correspondence with complete linear series $L$  on $C$  of type ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  satisfying the condition $h^0(C,L\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_C(-2y\left)\right)=h^0(C,L)-1$  . Thus we have an isomorphism between the the variety of limit ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  on all curves $C_y^1$  with $y\in C$  and the smooth curve $$X:=\left\{\right(y,D)\in C\times C_{k-2}:h^0(C,D+2y)\ge 2\}.$$  (2) Let $C_y^0=C/y\sim q$  be an element of $C^0$  . Then limit linear series of type ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  on $C_y^0$  are in 1:1 correspondence with complete linear series $L$  on $C$  of type ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  satisfying the condition $h^0(C,L\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_C(-y-q\left)\right)=h^0(C,L)-1.$  Thus there is an isomorphism between the space of limit ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  on all curves $C_y^0$  with $y\in C$  and the smooth curve $$Y:=\left\{\right(y,D)\in C\times C_{k-2}:h^0(C,D+y+q)\ge 2\}.$$ 

• Proof. We only prove (1) the remaining case being similar. Suppose $l$  is a limit linear series on $C_y^1$  and denote by $l_C$  and $l_E$  the aspects of $l$  . Using the additivity of the Brill-Noether number (see e.g. [EH1] , Lemma 3.6), we get that $0=\rho (2k-2,k-2,3k-6)\ge \rho (l_C,y)+\rho (l_E,y)$  . Since the vanishing sequence at $y$  of the $E$  -aspect of $l$  is $$a^{l_E}\left(y\right)\le (2k-5,2k-4,\dots ,3k-8,3k-6),$$  it follows that we also have the inequality $a^{l_C}\left(y\right)\ge (0,2,\dots ,k-1)$  for the vanishing sequence at $y$  of the $C$  -aspect of $l$  . The fact that we have an equality $a^{l_C}\left(y\right)=(0,2,\dots ,k-1)$  for each limit linear series $l$  and the fact that the $C$  -aspect of $l$  is a complete linear series $\left|L_C\right|$  on $C$  such that $h^1(C,L_C)=1$  and $h^1(L_C\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_C(-2y\left)\right)=2$  , easily follow from the assumption that $C$  is Brill-Noether general. □

In what follows we compute the class of the curves $X$  and $Y$  :

Proposition 3.2. Let $C$  be a Brill-Noether general curve of genus $g=2k-3$  and $q\in C$  a general point.

(1) The class of the curve $X=\left\{\right(y,D)\in C\times C_{k-2}:h^0(C,D+2y)\ge 2\}$  is given by $$\left[X\right]\equiv \frac{{\theta }^{k-2}}{(k-2)!}-\frac{{\theta }^{k-3}x}{(k-3)!}-\frac{2{\theta }^{k-3}\gamma }{(k-3)!}+\frac{2x{\theta }^{k-4}\gamma }{(k-4)!}-\frac{4(k+1)}{(k-4)!}x{\theta }^{k-4}\eta +\frac{4k-2}{(k-3)!}{\theta }^{k-3}\eta .$$  (2) The class of the curve $Y=\left\{\right(y,D)\in C\times C_{k-2}:h^0(C,D+y+q)\ge 2\}$  is given by $$\left[Y\right]\equiv \frac{{\theta }^{k-2}}{(k-2)!}-\frac{{\theta }^{k-3}x}{(k-3)!}-\frac{{\theta }^{k-3}\gamma }{(k-3)!}+\frac{x{\theta }^{k-4}\gamma }{(k-4)!}-\frac{k+1}{(k-4)!}x{\theta }^{k-4}\eta +\frac{k-1}{(k-3)!}{\theta }^{k-3}\eta .$$ 

• Proof. We will realize both $X$  and $Y$  as pullbacks of degeneracy loci and compute their classes using the Thom-Porteous formula. We consider the map $\epsilon :C\times C_{k-2}\to C_k$  given by $\epsilon (y,D):=2y+D$  . It is easy to check that $${\epsilon }^{*}\left(x\right)=2\eta +x\text{and}{\epsilon }^{*}\left(\theta \right)=4g\eta +\theta -2\gamma .$$  Then $X={\epsilon }^{*}\left(C_k^1\right)$  and to compute the class of $C_k^1=\{E\in C_k:h^0(E)\ge 2\}$  we introduce the rank $k$  vector bundle $\mathcal{P}:=\left({\pi }_2{)}_{*}\right({\pi }_1^{*}{K}_C\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{\mathcal{U}})$  on $C_k$  having total Chern class $c_t(\mathcal{P})=(1-x{)}^{-k+4}{e}^{\frac{\theta }{1-x}}$  (cf. [ACGH] , pg. 240). There is a natural bundle map ${\phi }^{\vee }:{\epsilon }^{*}\left({\mathcal{P}}^{\vee }\right)\to H^0(K_C{)}^{\vee }\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{C\times C_{k-2}}$  , and $X=Z_{k-1}\left({\phi }^{\vee }\right)$  . Then by Thom-Porteous, we can write $$\left[X\right]={\left[\frac{1}{c_t\left({\epsilon }^{*}\right({\mathcal{P}}^{\vee }\left)\right)}\right]}_{k-2}={\epsilon }^{*}\left(\frac{{\theta }^{k-2}}{(k-2)!}-\frac{x{\theta }^{k-3}}{(k-3)!}\right)=$$  $$=\frac{(4g\eta +\theta -2\gamma {)}^{k-2}}{(k-2)!}-\frac{(4g\eta +\theta -2\gamma {)}^{k-3}(2\eta +x)}{(k-3)!},$$  which quickly leads to the desired expression for $\left[X\right]$  .
  To compute the class of $Y$  we proceed in a similar manner: we consider the map $\chi :C\times C_{k-2}\to C_k$  given by $\chi (y,D):=y+q+D$  . Then ${\chi }^{*}\left(x\right)=x+\eta$  and ${\chi }^{*}\left(\theta \right)=g\eta +\theta -\gamma$  . For each $(y,D)\in C\times C_{k-2}$  we have a natural map $$H^0(K_{C|y+q+D}{)}^{\vee }\to H^0(K_C{)}^{\vee }$$  which globalizes to a vector bundle map ${\psi }^{\vee }:{\chi }^{*}\left({\mathcal{P}}^{\vee }\right)\to H^0(K_C{)}^{\vee }\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{C\times C_{k-2}}$  and then it is clear that $Y=Z_{k-1}\left({\psi }^{\vee }\right)$  . Applying Thom-Porteous again, we obtain $$\left[Y\right]={\left[\frac{1}{c_t\left({\chi }^{*}\right({\mathcal{P}}^{\vee }\left)\right)}\right]}_{k-2}={\chi }^{*}\left(\frac{{\theta }^{k-2}}{(k-2)!}-\frac{x{\theta }^{k-3}}{(k-3)!}\right)=$$  $$=\frac{(g\eta +\theta -\gamma {)}^{k-2}}{(k-2)!}-\frac{(g\eta +\theta -\gamma {)}^{k-3}(\eta +x)}{(k-3)!},$$  which after a straightforward calculation gives the class of $Y$  . □

We also need the following intersection theoretic result:

Lemma 3.3. For $j\ge 1$  we denote by ${\mathcal{ℱ}}_j:=\left({\pi }_2{)}_{*}\right({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j})$  the vector bundle on $C_{k-2}$  with fibre ${\mathcal{ℱ}}_j\left(D\right)=H^0(C,j{K}_C-jD)$  over each $D\in C_{k-2}$  . Then $c_1\left({\mathcal{ℱ}}_j\right)=-j^2\theta -j(3j-2)(k-2)x$  .

• Proof. We apply Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch for the map ${\pi }_2:C\times C_{k-2}\to C_{k-2}$  . We obtain that $$c_1\left({\mathcal{ℱ}}_j\right)={\left[({\pi }_2{)}_{*}\left(\left(1+j\left(\right(3k-6)\eta -\gamma -x)+\frac{j^2}{2}\left(\right(3k-6)\eta -\gamma -x{)}^2\right)\cdot \left(1-(2k-4)\eta \right)\right)\right]}_1=$$  $$=-j^2\theta -j(3j-2)(k-2)x.$$  □

Recall that we have realized ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}$  as the image of a degeneracy locus ${\mathcal{U}}_{g,i}$  of a vector bundle map $\phi :\mathcal{A}\to \mathcal{ℬ}$  over ${\mathcal{G}}_k^1$  . To compute the class of ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  when $g=6i+10$  (or at least to determine its slope), we are going to extend the determinantal structure of ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}$  over the boundary divisors ${\Delta }_0$  and ${\Delta }_1$  in ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  .

We denote by ${\widetilde{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g:={\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0\cup {\Delta }_0^0\cup {\Delta }_1^0$  the locally closed subset of ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  consisting of the locus ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0$  of smooth curves carrying no linear systems ${\mathfrak{g}}_{k-1}^1$  to which we add the open subset ${\Delta }_1^0\subset {\Delta }_1$  consisting of $1$  -nodal genus $g$  curves $C{\cup }_{y}E$  with $[C,y]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{g-1}$  being such that $C$  has no ${\mathfrak{g}}_{k-1}^1$  ramified at $y$  and $E$  is an elliptic tail, and the locus ${\Delta }_0^0\subset {\Delta }_0$  containing $1$  -nodal irreducible genus $g$  curves $C^{\prime }=C/q\sim y$  , where $q,y\in C$  and $\left[C\right]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{g-1}$  is such that $C$  has no ${\mathfrak{g}}_{k-1}^1$  containing $y$  and $q$  in the same fibre, together with their degenerations consisting of unions of a smooth genus $g-1$  curve and a nodal rational curve. One can then extend the covering $\sigma :{\mathcal{G}}_k^1\to {\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0$  to a proper finite map $$\sigma :{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_k^1\to {\widetilde{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$$  by letting ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_k^1$  be the locus of limit ${\mathfrak{g}}_k^1$  's on the treelike curves from ${\widetilde{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  (see [EH1] , Theorem 3.4 for the construction of the space of limit linear series). Note that over a curve $[C^{\prime }=C/q\sim y]\in {\Delta }_0^0$  , the fibre ${\sigma }^{-1}\left(\right[C^{\prime }\left]\right)$  consists of line bundles $L$  of degree $3k-6$  on the normalization $C$  satisfying $h^0\left(L\right)=k-1$  and $h^0\left(L\right(-q-y\left)\right)=h^0\left(L\right)-1$  and we have an isomorphism of schemes ${\sigma }^{-1}\left(C^0\right)=Y$  ; similarly, the fibre of ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_k^1$  over a point $\left[C{\cup }_{y}E\right]\in {\Delta }_1^0$  is isomorphic to the space of linear series $L$  on $C$  of type ${\mathfrak{g}}_{6k-3}^{k-2}$  , having a cusp at the point of attachment $y$  , which gives rise to the isomorphism ${\sigma }^{-1}\left(C^1\right)=X$  (Here $X$  and $Y$  are the curves $X$  and $Y$  defined in Lemma  3.1 ).

For each integers $0\le i\le k-2$  and $j\ge 2$  we shall define vector bundles ${\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}$  over ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_k^1$  with fibre $${\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}(C,A)=H^0({\wedge }^i{M}_L\otimes L^{\otimes j})$$  over every point $(C,A=K_C\otimes L^{\vee })\in {\mathcal{G}}_k^1$  . Therefore ${\mathcal{G}}_{i,2|{\mathcal{G}}_k^1}=\mathcal{ℬ}$  , where $\mathcal{ℬ}$  is the vector bundle we introduced in Proposition  2.5 . Of course the question is how to extend this description over ${\Delta }_0^0\cup {\Delta }_1^0$  . We first construct the vector bundles ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}$  :

Proposition 3.4. For each integer $j\ge 2$  there exists a vector bundle ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}$  over ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_k^1={\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  of rank $k(3j-2)-6j+3$  whose fibres admit the following description:

• $\bullet$  For $(C,A=K_C\otimes L^{\vee })\in {\mathcal{G}}_k^1$  , we have that ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}(C,A)=H^0(C,L^{\otimes j})$  .
• $\bullet$  For $t=(C{\cup }_{y}E,L)\in {\sigma }^{-1}\left({\Delta }_1^0\right)$  , where $L$  is the linear series ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  on $C$  uniquely determining a limit ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  on $C{\cup }_{y}E$  , we have that $${\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}\left(t\right)=H^0(C,L^{\otimes j}(-2y\left)\right)+\mathbb{C}\cdot u^j\subset H^0(C,L^{\otimes j}),$$  where $u\in H^0(C,L)$  is any section such that $ord$  ${}_y\left(u\right)=0$  .
• $\bullet$  For $t=(C/y\sim q,L)\in {\sigma }^{-1}\left({\Delta }_0^0\right)$  , where $q,y\in C$  and $L$  is a ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  on $C$  , we have that $${\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}\left(t\right)=H^0(C,L^{\otimes j}(-y-q\left)\right)\oplus \mathbb{C}\cdot u^j\subset H^0(C,L^{\otimes j}),$$  where $u\in H^0(C,L)$  is a section such that $ord$  ${}_y\left(u\right)=ord$  ${}_q\left(u\right)=0$  .

• Proof. The scheme ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  of limit linear series over the entire moduli space of treelike curves of genus $g$  was defined in [EH1] , pg. 354-360, as the image inside the Grassmann bundle associated to the pushforward of a Poincare bundle on a space of “compatible frames”. If we restrict ourselves to curves from ${\widetilde{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  , the scheme ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}\to {\widetilde{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  becomes proper and finite. The morphism ${\mathcal{G}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{j(3k-6)}^{k(3j-2)-6j+2}$  given by $(C,L)\mapsto (C,L^{\otimes j})$  can be extended to a morphism ${\nu }_j:{\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}\to {\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{j(3k-6)}^{k(3j-2)-6j+2}$  as follows. We fix $t=\left(C{\cup }_{y}E,l=(l_C,l_E)\right)$  a limit ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  , where $l_C=(L_C,H^0(L_C\left)\right)\in G_{3k-6}^{k-2}\left(C\right)$  is such that $H^0\left(L_C\right)=H^0\left(L_C\right(-2y\left)\right)\oplus \mathbb{C}\cdot u$  , for a certain $u\in H^0\left(L_C\right)$  with ${\text{ord}}_y\left(u\right)=0$  , while $l_E=\left({\mathcal{O}}_E\left(\right(3k-6\left)y\right),(2k-5)p+\left|\right(k-1\left)p\right|\right)$  (any limit ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  on $C{\cup }_{y}E$  is of this form). Then we set ${\nu }_j\left(t\right):=(l_C^j,l_E^j)$  , where $l_C^j=\left(L_C^{\otimes j},H^0\left(L_C^{\otimes j}\right(-2y\left)\right)\oplus \mathbb{C}\cdot u^j\subset H^0\left(L_C^{\otimes j}\right)\right)$  and $l_E^j=\left({\mathcal{O}}_E\left(j\right(3k-6\left)p\right),(2k-3)p+\left|\left(k(3j-2)-6j+3\right)p\right|\right)$  . In other words, $(l_C^j,l_E^j)$  is the $j$  -th power of the original limit linear series ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  .
  For a point $z=(C/y\sim q,L_C)\in {\Delta }_0^0$  with $L_C$  being a ${\mathfrak{g}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  such that $H^0\left(L_C\right)=H^0\left(L_C\right(-y-q\left)\right)\oplus \mathbb{C}\cdot u$  , we define ${\nu }_j\left(z\right):=\left(L_C^{\otimes j},H^0\left(L_C^{\otimes j}\right(-y-q\left)\right)\oplus \mathbb{C}\cdot u^j\subset H^0\left(L_C^{\otimes j}\right)\right)$  .

  The fact that ${\nu }_j$  can be constructed algebraically follows easily from the equations of the scheme ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  described in [EH1] , pg. 358. The variety ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{j(3k-6)}^{k(3j-2)-6j+2}$  carries a tautological vector bundle $\mathcal{T}={\mathcal{T}}_C$  with fibre over each point corresponding to a curve from ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0\cup {\Delta }_0^0$  being the space of global sections of the linear series, while the fibre over a point corresponding to a curve from ${\Delta }_1^0$  is the space of sections of the aspect of the limit linear series corresponding to the curve of genus $g-1$  . We define ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}:={\nu }_j^{*}(\mathcal{T})$  . The description of the fibres of the vector bundle ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}$  is now immediate. □

Having defined the vector bundles ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}$  we now define inductively all vector bundles ${\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}$  : first we define ${\mathcal{G}}_{1,j}$  as the kernel of the multiplication map ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j+1}$  , that is, by the exact sequence $$0⟶{\mathcal{G}}_{1,j}⟶{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}⟶{\mathcal{G}}_{0,j+1}⟶0.$$  Having defined ${\mathcal{G}}_{l,j}$  for all $l\le i-1$  , we define the vector bundle ${\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}$  by the exact sequence

$$\begin{array}{c}0⟶{\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}⟶{\wedge }^i{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}\stackrel{d_{i,j}}{⟶}{\mathcal{G}}_{i-1,j+1}⟶0.\end{array}$$

(4)

Proposition 3.5. For each integers $j\ge 2$  and $1\le i\le k-2$  , the Koszul multiplication map $d_{i,j}:{\wedge }^i{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{i-1,j+1}$  is well-defined and surjective. In particular one can define the vector bundle ${\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}:=Ker$  $\left(d_{i,j}\right)$  and the exact sequence  4  $\left(\right)$  makes sense.

• Proof. We do induction on $i$  and start with the case $i=1$  . We only check the surjectivity of the map ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j+1}$  over the locus ${\sigma }^{-1}\left({\Delta }_1^0\right)$  , the other cases, namely ${\sigma }^{-1}\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0\right)$  and ${\sigma }^{-1}\left({\Delta }_0^0\right)$  being quite similar. It is enough to show that if $C$  is a sufficiently general curve of genus $2k-3$  , $y\in C$  is a point and $L\in W_{3k-6}^{k-2}\left(C\right)$  is a linear system with a cusp at $y$  , then the map $H^0\left(L\right)\otimes H^0\left(L^{\otimes j}\right(-2y\left)\right)\to H^0\left(L^{\otimes (j+1)}\right(-2y\left)\right)$  is onto. This is equivalent to $H^1(M_L\otimes L^{\otimes j}(-2y\left)\right)=0$  which follows because $M_L$  is stable (cf. Lemma  2.1 ).
  We now treat the general case $1\le i\le k-2$  and we want to show that the Koszul map $d_{i,j}:{\wedge }^i{H}^0\left(L\right)\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}\left(L\right)\to {\mathcal{G}}_{i-1,j+1}\left(L\right)$  is surjective for each $j\ge 2$  and for each $(C,L)$  as above. For simplicity we have denoted ${\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}\left(L\right)={\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}\left(t\right)$  , where $t\in {\sigma }^{-1}\left({\Delta }_1^0\right)$  is the point $(C{\cup }_{y}E,l)$  , $E$  is an arbitrary elliptic tail and $l$  is a limit linear series uniquely determined by the $C$  -aspect $L$  of $l$  . We can then write $H^0\left(L\right)/H^0\left(L\right(-2y\left)\right)=\mathbb{C}\cdot u$  , where $u\in H^0\left(L\right)$  is uniquely determined up to translation by an element from $H^0\left(L\right(-2y\left)\right)$  .

  We first claim that the restriction of the Koszul differential $$d_{i,j}^0:{\wedge }^i{H}^0\left(L\right)\otimes H^0\left(L^{\otimes j}\right(-2y\left)\right)\to H^0\left({\wedge }^{i-1}{M}_L\otimes L^{\otimes (j+1)}(-2y)\right)$$  is surjective. This is so because $\text{Coker}\left(d_{i,j}^0\right)=H^1({\wedge }^i{M}_L\otimes L^{\otimes j}(-2y\left)\right)=0$  (use again that $M_L$  is a stable bundle). But then since $$H^0\left({\wedge }^{i-1}{M}_L\otimes L^{\otimes (j+1)}(-2y)\right)\subset {\mathcal{G}}_{i-1,j+1}\left(L\right)$$  is a linear subspace of codimension $\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{k-2}{i-1}\right)$  , to prove that $d_{i,j}$  itself is surjective it suffices to notice that the image of the injective map ${\wedge }^{i-1}{H}^0\left(L\right(-2y\left)\right)\to {\wedge }^{i-1}{H}^0\left(L\right)\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j+1}\left(L\right)$  given by $$f_1\wedge \dots \wedge f_{i-1}\mapsto f_1\wedge \dots \wedge f_{i-1}\otimes u^{j+1}-{\sum }_{l=1}^{i-1}(-1{)}^{l-1}u\wedge f_1\wedge \dots \wedge {\check{f}}_l\wedge \dots \wedge f_{i-1}\otimes f_l{u}^j$$  is entirely contained in $\text{Im}\left(d_{i,j}\right)$  and is clearly disjoint from $H^0\left({\wedge }^{i-1}{M}_L\otimes L^{\otimes (j+1)}(-2y)\right)$  .

  □

To compute the intersection numbers of the divisors ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  with the test curves $C^0$  and $C^1$  we need to understand the restriction of the vector bundle ${\mathcal{G}}_{i,2}$  to $X$  and $Y$  .

Proposition 3.6. Let $C$  be a general curve of genus $2k-3$  and $k=3i+6$  with $i\ge 0$  .

If $C^1$  is the test curve in ${\Delta }_1$  obtained by attaching to $C$  a fixed elliptic tail at a varying point of $C$  and $X={\sigma }^{-1}\left(C^1\right)$  , then we have the following formula:

$$c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{2,i|X}\right)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{3i+5}{i}\right)(c_{x}x+c_{\eta }\eta +c_{\gamma }\gamma +c_{\theta }\theta ),$$  where $$c_{\eta }=-\frac{(2i+5)(27i+40)}{3i+5},c_x=-\frac{2i+5}{(3i+4)(3i+5)(i+1)}(27i^4+153i^3+331i^2+323i+120)$$  $$c_{\gamma }=\frac{(2i+5)(5i+8)}{(3i+4)(3i+5)},c_{\theta }=-\frac{(2i+5)(27i^3+101i^2+124i+48)}{(3i+3)(3i+4)(3i+5)}.$$ 

• Proof. For $j\ge 2$  we define the jet bundle $J_1\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j}\right):=\left(u_{*}\right)\left(v^{*}\left({\mathcal{O}}_{C\times C_{k-2}}\right({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j}\left)\right)\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{2\Delta }\right)$  .
  We have two exact sequences of vector bundles on $X$  :

  $$0⟶u_{*}{\left(v^{*}\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j}\right)\otimes \mathcal{O}(-2\Delta )\right)}_{|X}⟶{\mathcal{G}}_{0,j|X}⟶{\mathcal{ℳ}}_{|X}^{\otimes j}⟶0$$  and $$0⟶u_{*}{\left(v^{*}\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j}\right)\otimes \mathcal{O}(-2\Delta )\right)}_{|X}⟶{\pi }_2^{*}({\mathcal{ℱ}}_j{)}_{|X}⟶J_1({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j}{)}_{|X}⟶0,$$  from which we can write that $$c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{0,j|X}\right)=c_1\left({\pi }_2^{*}\right({\mathcal{ℱ}}_j{)}_{|X})-c_1\left(({\pi }_1^{*}{K}_C\otimes {\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j}{)}_{|X}\right)=$$  $$=-j^2\theta -(3j+4)(k-2)\eta +j\gamma -j\left(\right(3j-2\left)\right(k-2)+1)x.$$  From the exact sequences defining ${\mathcal{G}}_{i,2}$  we then obtain that $$c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{i,2|X}\right)={\sum }_{l=0}^i(-1{)}^l{c}_1({\wedge }^{i-l}{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1|X}\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,l+2|X}).$$  Note that Riemann-Roch gives that $\text{rk}\left({\mathcal{G}}_{0,l+2}\right)=(3k-6)l+4k-9$  , while $c_1\left({\wedge }^{i-l}{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1|X}\right)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{k-2}{i-l-1}\right)(-\theta -(k-2\left)x\right).$  To obtain a closed formula for $c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{i,2|X}\right)$  we now specialize to the case $k=3i+6$  and we write that $$c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{i,2|X}\right)={\sum }_{l=0}^i(-1{)}^l[\left(3(3i+4)l+(3i+5)\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{3i+4}{i-l-1}\right)(-\theta -(3i+4\left)x\right)+$$  $$+\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{3i+5}{i-l}\right)\left(-(l+2{)}^2\theta -(l+2)\gamma -(3i+4\left)\right(3l+10)\eta -(l+2\left)\right((3l+4)(3i+4)+1)x\right)].$$  A long but elementary calculation leads to the stated formula.

  □

A similar calculation computes the first Chern class of ${\mathcal{G}}_{i,2|Y}$  :

Proposition 3.7. Let $(C,q)$  be a general pointed curve of genus $2k-3$  and $C^0$  the test curve in ${\Delta }_0$  obtained by identifying the fixed point $q$  with a varying point $y$  on $C$  . If $Y={\sigma }^{-1}\left(C^0\right)$  , then we have the formula $$c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{i,2|Y}\right)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{3i+5}{i}\right)(d_{x}x+d_{\eta }\eta +d_{\theta }\theta ),$$  where $$d_{\eta }=\frac{2i+5}{3i+5},d_x=c_x=-\frac{2i+5}{(3i+4)(3i+5)(i+1)}(27i^4+153i^3+331i^2+323i+120)$$  $$d_{\theta }=c_{\theta }=-\frac{(2i+5)(27i^3+101i^2+124i+48)}{(3i+3)(3i+4)(3i+5)}.$$ 

• Proof. We define ${\Gamma }_q:=C\times \left\{q\right\}\times C_{k-2}$  and denote by $\iota :C\times C_{k-2}\hookrightarrow {\Gamma }_q$  the inclusion map.
  Then we have the exact sequences on $Y$  $$0⟶\left(u_{*}\right){\left(v^{*}\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j}\right)\otimes \mathcal{O}(-\Delta -{\Gamma }_q)\right)}_{|Y}⟶{\mathcal{G}}_{0,j|Y}⟶{\mathcal{ℳ}}_{|Y}^{\otimes j}⟶0,$$  and $$0⟶{\iota }^{*}{\left(v^{*}\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j}\right)\otimes \mathcal{O}(-\Delta )\right)}_{|Y}⟶\left(u_{*}\right){\left(v^{*}\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j}\right)\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{\Delta +{\Gamma }_q}\right)}_{|Y}⟶{\pi }_2^{*}({\mathcal{ℱ}}_j{)}_{|Y}⟶0.$$  Using that $c_1(\mathcal{ℳ})=(3k-6)\eta -\gamma -x$  , it is now straightforward to check that $$c_1\left({\iota }^{*}\left(v^{*}\right({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes j})\otimes \mathcal{O}(-\Delta \left)\right)\right)=-jx-\eta ,$$  hence $c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{0,j|Y}\right)=c_1\left({\pi }_2^{*}\right({\mathcal{ℱ}}_j){)}_{|Y}+jx+\eta =-j^2\theta +\eta -j((3j-2)(k-2)-1)x.$  But then as in the previous proposition we have that $$c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{i,2|Y}\right)={\sum }_{l=0}^i(-1{)}^l{c}_1({\wedge }^{i-l}{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1|Y}\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,l+2|Y}),$$  which after some calculations yields the stated formula in the special case $k=3i+6$  . □

Next, for $1\le i\le k-2$  and $j\ge 0$  we define vector bundles ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,j}$  over ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  having fibre ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,j}(C,L)=H^0\left({\wedge }^i{M}_{{\text{P}}^{k-2}}\right(j\left)\right)$  over each point $(C,L)\in {\mathcal{G}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  corresponding to an embedding $C\stackrel{\left|L\right|}{\hookrightarrow }{\text{P}}^{k-2}$  .

Recall that we have defined the vector bundles ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}$  over ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  . We define the vector bundles ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,j}$  inductively as follows: ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{1,j}$  is defined as the kernel of the multiplication map ${\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\otimes {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{0,j+1}$  , that is, ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{1,j}={\mathcal{G}}_{1,j}$  . Having already defined ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i-1,j}$  for all $j$  , we define ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,j}$  via the exact sequence

$$\begin{array}{c}0⟶{\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,j}⟶{\wedge }^i{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\otimes {\text{Sym}}^j{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}⟶{\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i-1,j+1}⟶0.\end{array}$$

(5)

There is a natural vector bundle morphism ${\phi }_{i,j}:{\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,j}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}$  over ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  ; when $k=3i+6$  and $j=2$  , then $\text{rank}\left({\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,j}\right)=\text{rank}\left({\mathcal{G}}_{i,j}\right)$  , and the degeneracy locus of ${\phi }_{i,2}$  is the partial compactification over ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  of the locus ${\mathcal{U}}_{g,i}$  defined in Proposition  2.5 .

Next we compute the Chern classes of ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,j}$  along the curves $X$  and $Y$  :

Proposition 3.8. When $k=3i+6$  , we have the following formulas for the first Chern class of ${\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2}$  :

$$c_1\left({\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2|X}\right)=c_1\left({\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2|Y}\right)=-\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{3i}{i}\right)\left(\frac{9(3i+1)(3i+2)(3i+4{)}^2}{4(2i+3)(2i+1)}x+\frac{9(3i+1)(3i+2)(3i+4)}{4(2i+3)(2i+1)}\theta \right).$$ 

• Proof. Using repeatedly the sequence ( 5 ) we obtain the formula $$c_1\left({\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2|X}\right)=c_1\left({\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2|Y}\right)={\sum }_{l=0}^i(-1{)}^l{c}_1({\wedge }^{i-l}{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1|X}\otimes {\text{Sym}}^{l+2}{\mathcal{G}}_{0,1|X}).$$  Since $c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\right)=-\theta -(3i+4)x$  and $c_1\left({\text{Sym}}^j\right({\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\left)\right)=\frac{j(3i+4+j)}{(3i+5)(3i+4)}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{3i+j+3}{j}\right)c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{0,1}\right)$  , the stated formula is obtained after a straightforward calculation. □

4 The slope of the divisors ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$ 

In this section we finish the calculation of the first few coefficients in the expansion of the virtual divisor ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  . We fix $i\ge 0$  and $g=6i+10$  , hence $\phi :{\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{i,2}$  is a morphism between two vector bundles of the same rank defined over ${\tilde{\mathcal{G}}}_{3k-6}^{k-2}$  . We make the following assumption which at the moment we can check only for $g=10,16,22,28$  :

Assumption 4.1. The vector bundle morphism $\phi :{\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{i,2}$  is non-degenerate at a general point from ${\sigma }^{-1}\left({\Delta }_1^0\right)$  .

Note that since ${\sigma }^{-1}\left({\Delta }_1^0\right)$  is irreducible, to prove Assumption  4.1 it suffices to show that a general one-cuspidal curve $C\subset {\text{P}}^{3i+4}$  of arithmetic genus $6i+10$  and degree $9i+12$  , satisfies property $\left(N_i\right)$  . We carried this out for $g=16,22$  (cf. Remarks  2.9 and  2.11 ), while the case $g=10$  was treated in [FP] . Assumption  4.1 implies that $\phi$  is non-degenerate over a general point from ${\sigma }^{-1}\left({\Delta }_0^0\right)$  and also over a general point from ${\sigma }^{-1}\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0\right)$  , which is equivalent to ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}$  being a divisor on ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_g^0$  . Therefore Assumption  4.1 is slightly stronger than Conjecture  2.6 .

Suppose Assumption  4.1 holds, hence ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  is a divisor on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  and we can write $${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}\equiv A\lambda -B_0{\delta }_0-B_1{\delta }_1-\cdots -B_{3i+5}{\delta }_{3i+5},$$  where $\lambda ,{\delta }_0,\dots ,{\delta }_{3i+5}$  are the generators of $\text{Pic}\left({\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g\right)$  . We start with the following:

Lemma 4.2. One has the relation $A-12B_0+B_1=0$  .

• Proof. We pick a general point $[C,y]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{g-1,1}$  and at the fixed point $y$  we attach to $C$  a Lefschetz pencil of plane cubics. If we denote by $R\subset {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  the resulting curve, then it is well-known that $R\cdot \lambda =1,R\cdot {\delta }_0=12,R\cdot {\delta }_1=-1$  and $R\cdot {\delta }_j=0$  for $j\ge 2$  . Thus the relation $A-12B_0+B_1=0$  follows automatically if we can show that ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}\cap R=\varnothing$  .
  To achieve this, take $\left[C{\cup }_{y}E\right]$  an arbitrary curve from $R$  , where $E$  is any elliptic curve.

  Using the fact that limit ${\mathfrak{g}}_{9i+12}^{3i+4}$  on $C{\cup }_{y}E$  are in $1:1$  correspondence with linear series $L\in W_{9i+12}^{3i+4}\left(C\right)$  having a cusp at $y$  (this being a statement that holds independent of $E$  ), the hypothesis that $\left[C{\cup }_{y}E\right]\in {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  , translates into $\phi :{\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{i,2}$  being degenerate at a point in ${\sigma }^{-1}\left(\right[C{\cup }_{y}E\left]\right)$  , which contradicts Assumption  4.1 . □

Theorem 4.3. Fix integers $i\ge 0$  and $g=6i+10$  and suppose that Assumption  4.1 holds on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  . Then ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}$  is an effective divisor on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  an its class is given by the formula $${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}\equiv \frac{(6i+7)!!2^{3i+3}}{(3i+4)(3i+5)(i+2)!(2i+1)!}\left(a\lambda -b_0{\delta }_0-\cdots -b_{3i+5}{\delta }_{3i+5}\right),$$  where $$a=\frac{(4i+7)(6i^2+19i+12)}{(2i+3)(i+2)},b_0=\frac{12i^2+31i+18}{3(2i+3)}$$  $$b_1=\frac{12i^2+33i+20}{i+2}.$$  In particular, $$\frac{a}{b_0}=\frac{3(4i+7)(6i^2+19i+12)}{(12i^2+31i+18)(i+2)}$$  satisfies the inequalities $6<\frac{a}{b_0}<6+\frac{12}{g+1},$  which is below the value predicted by the Slope Conjecture.

• Proof. We fix a general pointed curve $(C,q)\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{6i+9,1}$  and construct the test curves $C^1\subset {\Delta }_1$  and $C^0\subset {\Delta }_0$  . Since $C^0,C^1\subset {\widetilde{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  fill-up ${\Delta }_0^0$  and ${\Delta }_1^0$  respectively, Assumption  4.1 guarantees that the map $\phi :{\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2}\to {\mathcal{G}}_{i,2}$  is non-degenerate along $X$  and $Y$  (in the case of $Y$  , use that $Y\cap {\Delta }_1\ne \varnothing$  ). Then $$C^0\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}=c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{i,2|Y}\right)-c_1\left({\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2|Y}\right)\text{and}{C}^1\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}=c_1\left({\mathcal{G}}_{i,2|X}\right)-c_1\left({\mathcal{\mathscr{H}}}_{i,2|X}\right).$$  On the other hand $$C^0\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}=(12i+18)B_0-B_1\text{and}{C}^1\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}=(12i+16)B_1,$$  while we already know that $A-12B_0+B_1=0.$  Using Propositions  3.6 ,  3.7 ,  3.8 , the expressions for $\left[X\right]$  and $\left[Y\right]$  as well as the well-known formula ${\theta }^j{x}^{k-2-j}=g!/(g-j)!$  on $C_{k-2}$  , we get a linear system of $3$  equations in $A,B_0$  and $B_1$  which leads to the stated expression for $\left[{\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}\right]$  . □

Remark 4.4. In the simplest case $i=0$  , we can compare the formula for $\left[{\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{g,i}\right]$  with our findings in [FP] . We have that ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{10,0}\equiv 42(7\lambda -{\delta }_0-5{\delta }_1-\cdots )$  , whereas Theorem 1.6 from [FP] says that if ${\mathcal{K}}_{10}$  is the divisor on ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{10}$  of curves lying on a $K3$  surface then ${\overline{\mathcal{K}}}_{10}=7\lambda -{\delta }_0-5{\delta }_1-\cdots$  . Since we have also established the set-theoretic equality ${\mathcal{Z}}_{10,0}={\mathcal{K}}_{10}$  (cf. [FP] , Theorem 1.7), it follows that there is a scheme-theoretic equality ${\mathcal{Z}}_{10,0}=42{\mathcal{K}}_{10}$  . Here $42$  is the number of pencils ${\mathfrak{g}}_6^1$  on a general curve of genus $10$  , and its appearance in the formula of $\left[{\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{10,0}\right]$  has a clear geometric meaning:

if a Brill-Noether general curve $\left[C\right]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{10}$  fails $\left(N_0\right)$  for one linear system ${\mathfrak{g}}_{12}^4=K_C(-{\mathfrak{g}}_6^1)$  , then it fails $\left(N_0\right)$  for all $42$  linear systems ${\mathfrak{g}}_{12}^4$  it possesses, that is, the map $\sigma :{\mathcal{U}}_{10,0}\to {\mathcal{K}}_{10,0}$  is $42:1$  .

To finish the proof of Theorems  1.1 and  1.2 we specialize to the cases $g=16$  and $22$  and note that Assumption  4.1 is satisfied in these situations (cf. Theorems  2.7 and  2.10 ). The bounds on the coefficients $b_j$  with $j\ge 2$  follow from Theorem 1.1 from [FP] which says that the inequalities $b_j\ge (6j+18)b_0-(j+1)a$  , where $2\le j\le 9$  or $j=11$  , hold for the coefficients of any effective divisor $$D\equiv a\lambda -b_0{\delta }_0-\cdots -b_{[g/2]}{\delta }_{[g/2]}$$  on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  satisfying the condition ${\Delta }_j\mathbb{⊈}\text{supp}\left(D\right)$  for all $j$  (in [FP] there is also a slightly worse bound for $b_{10}$  , which when used in the case of ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{22,2}$  , gives that $b_{10}\ge 1296$  ).

5 An effective divisor on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$ 

In this section we describe how to construct effective divisors on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,n}$  using syzygy type conditions for pointed curves. We treat only one example. We denote by ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1$  the closure in ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$  of the locus ${\mathcal{Z}}_{14,0}^1$  of smooth pointed curves $[C,p]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{14,1}$  for which there exists a linear series $L\in W_{18}^6\left(C\right)$  such that the map $${\mu }_{L,p}:{\text{Sym}}^2{H}^0(C,L(-p\left)\right)\to H^0(C,L^{\otimes 2}(-2p\left)\right)$$  is not an isomorphism. Just like the in the case of the loci ${\mathcal{Z}}_{g,i}$  on ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_g$  , the locus ${\mathcal{Z}}_{14,0}^1$  can be naturally viewed as the pushforward of the degeneracy locus of a morphism between two vector bundles of the same rank $21$  over ${\mathcal{G}}_{18}^6{\times }_{{\mathcal{ℳ}}_{14}}{\mathcal{ℳ}}_{14,1}$  .

We are going to show that ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1$  is a divisor and in order to compute its class we need some preparations. Recall that for $g\ge 3$  , the group $\text{Pic}\left({\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,1}\right)$  is freely generated by $\lambda$  , the tautological class $\psi$  and the boundary classes ${\delta }_i=\left[{\Delta }_i\right]$  with $0\le i\le g-1$  , where for $i\ge 1$  , the generic point of ${\Delta }_i$  is a union of two smooth curves of genus $i$  and $g-i$  meeting at a point, the marked point lying on the genus $i$  component. We denote by $\pi :{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,1}\to {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  the natural forgetful map. We can then write the class of ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1$  on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$  as $${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1\equiv a\lambda +c\psi -b_0{\delta }_0-b_1{\delta }_1-\cdots -b_{13}{\delta }_{13}.$$  As before, we will determine the relevant coefficients in the expression of $\left[{\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1\right]$  by intersecting our divisor with various test curves.

Proposition 5.1. Let $C$  be a general curve of genus $14$  and $\tilde{C}={\pi }^{-1}\left(\right[C\left]\right)\subset {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$  , the test curve obtained by letting the marked point vary along $C$  . Then $\tilde{C}\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1=12012$  , hence $c=\tilde{C}\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1/(2g-2)=462$  .

• Proof. Let us fix a linear series $L\in W_{18}^6\left(C\right)$  . We count the number of points $p\in C$  , for which the multiplication map ${\mu }_{L,p}$  not injective. If $p_1:C\times C\to C$  and $p_2:C\times C\to C$  are the two projections, we define the vector bundles $$\mathcal{ℰ}:=\left(p_2{)}_{*}\right(p_1^{*}\left(L\right)\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{C\times C}(-\Delta ))\text{and}\mathcal{ℱ}:=(p_2{)}_{*}\left(p_1^{*}\right(L^{\otimes 2})\otimes {\mathcal{O}}_{C\times C}(-2\Delta \left)\right).$$  There is a natural multiplication map ${\mu }_L:{\text{Sym}}^2(\mathcal{ℰ})\to \mathcal{ℱ}$  , and the cardinality of its degeneracy locus is just $c_1(\mathcal{ℱ})-c_1\left({\text{Sym}}^2\right(\mathcal{ℰ}\left)\right)$  . A simple calculation shows that $c_1(\mathcal{ℰ})=-4x-\theta =-18$  , hence $c_1\left({\text{Sym}}^2\right(\mathcal{ℰ}\left)\right)=-126$  , while $c_1(\mathcal{ℱ})=-98$  . We obtain that ${\mu }_{L,p}$  is not an isomorphism for precisely $28$  points $p\in C$  . Since $C$  has $429$  linear series ${\mathfrak{g}}_{18}^6$  (cf.
  [ACGH] ), we obtain $c=(\tilde{C}\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1)/26=429\cdot 28/26=462$  . □

For more relations among the coefficients of $\left[{\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1\right]$  we define the map $\nu :{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{1,2}\to {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,1}$  obtained by attaching to each $2$  -pointed elliptic curve $[E,q,p]$  a fixed general $1$  -pointed curve $[C,q]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{g-1}$  (the point of attachment being $q$  ). One has the pullback formulas $${\nu }^{*}\left(\lambda \right)=\lambda ,{\nu }^{*}\left(\psi \right)={\psi }_p,{\nu }^{*}\left({\delta }_0\right)={\delta }_0,{\nu }^{*}\left({\delta }_1\right)=-{\psi }_q\text{and}{\nu }^{*}\left({\delta }_{g-1}\right)={\delta }_{qp},$$  where ${\psi }_p$  and ${\psi }_q$  are the tautological classes corresponding to the marked points $p$  and $q$  , while ${\delta }_{qp}$  is the boundary component of curves having a rational tail containing both $q$  and $p$  . On ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{1,2}$  these classes are not independent and we have the relations ${\psi }_q={\psi }_p$  , $\lambda ={\psi }_p-{\delta }_{qp}$  and ${\delta }_0=12({\psi }_p-{\delta }_{qp})$  (see e.g. [AC2] , Proposition 1.9).

Proposition 5.2. If $\nu :{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{1,2}\to {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$  is as above, then ${\nu }^{*}\left({\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1\right)=\varnothing$  . It follows that we have the relations $$a-12b_0+b_{13}=0\text{and}c+b_1=b_{13}.$$ 

• Proof. We assume that $[X=C{\cup }_{q}E,p\in E]\in {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1$  . Then there exists a limit linear series ${\mathfrak{g}}_{18}^6$  on $X$  determined by its aspects $L_C\in W_{18}^6\left(C\right)$  and $L_E\in W_{18}^6\left(E\right)$  , together with compatible elements $${\rho }_C\in \text{Ker}\{{\mu }_{L_C}:{\text{Sym}}^2{H}^0(L_C)\to H^0(L_C^{\otimes 2}\left)\right\},{\rho }_E\in \text{Ker}\{{\mu }_{L_E}:{\text{Sym}}^2{H}^0(L_E)\to H^0(L_E^{\otimes 2}\left)\right\},$$  satisfying the inequality $${\text{ord}}_q\left({\rho }_C\right)+{\text{ord}}_q\left({\rho }_E\right)\ge \text{deg}\left(L_C\right)+\text{deg}\left(L_E\right)=36$$  and such that ${\rho }_E\in {\text{Sym}}^2{H}^0\left(L_E\right(-p\left)\right)$  (see [FP] , Section 4, for how to study multiplication maps in the context of limit linear series). Because $(C,q)\in {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{13,1}$  is general, the vanishing sequence of $L_C$  at $q$  equals $(0,2,3,4,5,6,7)$  , the vanishing sequence of $L_E$  at $q$  is $(11,12,13,14,15,16,18)$  and finally, the vanishing sequence of $L_E$  at $p$  is either $(0,1,2,3,4,5,6)$  or $(0,1,2,3,4,5,7)$  , depending on whether $p-q\in {\text{Pic}}^0\left(E\right)$  is a $7$  -torsion class or not.
  We claim that ${\text{ord}}_q\left({\rho }_E\right)\le 29(=13+16=14+15)$  . Indeed, otherwise ${\text{ord}}_q\left({\rho }_E\right)\ge 30(=14+16=15+15)$  , and since ${\rho }_E\in {\text{Sym}}^2{H}^0\left(L_E\right(-p\left)\right)$  , after subtracting base points ${\rho }_E$  becomes a $\ne 0$  element in the kernel of the map ${\text{Sym}}^2{H}^0\left(N\right)\to H^0\left(N^{\otimes 2}\right)$  , where $N=L_E(-p-14q)\in {\text{Pic}}^3\left(E\right)$  . This is obviously impossible. Therefore ${\text{ord}}_q\left({\rho }_E\right)\le 29$  , so by compatibility, ${\text{ord}}_q\left({\rho }_C\right)\ge 7(=2+5=3+4)$  . We now show that when $(C,p)\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{13,1}$  is chosen generically, there can be no such element ${\rho }_C$  which leads to a contradiction.

  Claim: Suppose ${\sigma }_0,{\sigma }_2,{\sigma }_3,{\sigma }_4,{\sigma }_5,{\sigma }_6,{\sigma }_7$  is a basis of $H^0\left(L_C\right)$  adapted to the point $q$  in the sense that ${\text{ord}}_q\left({\sigma }_i\right)=i$  . If $W(q,L_C)\subset {\text{Sym}}^2{H}^0\left(L_C\right)$  denotes the $17$  -dimensional subspace spanned by the elements ${\sigma }_i\cdot {\sigma }_j$  with $4\le i\le j\le 7$  , ${\sigma }_3\cdot {\sigma }_j$  for $j\ge 4$  and ${\sigma }_2\cdot {\sigma }_j$  for $j\ge 5$  , then the restriction of the multiplication map $W(q,L_C)\to H^0\left(L_C^2\right(-7q\left)\right)$  is an isomorphism. (Note that $W(q,L_C)$  does not depend on the chosen basis $\left\{{\sigma }_i\right\}$  ).

  The proof of this claim is similar to the proof of Theorem 5.1 in [FP] . It is enough to construct a single $1$  -cuspidal curve $X\subset {\text{P}}^6$  with $p_a\left(X\right)=14$  and $deg\left(X\right)=18$  , such that if $\nu :C\to X$  is the normalization of $X$  and $q\in C$  is the inverse image of the cusp, then $X$  does not lie on any quadric contained in $W\left(q,{\nu }^{*}\left({\mathcal{O}}_X\right(1\left)\right)\right)$  . We construct the following cuspidal curve: define $\Gamma \subset {\text{P}}^6$  to be the image of the map $t\stackrel{f}{\mapsto }[1,t^2,t^3,t^4,t^5,t^6,t^7]$  , then choose a general hyperplane $H\subset {\text{P}}^6$  which intersects $\Gamma$  in distinct points $p_1,\dots ,p_7$  . Take $D\subset H$  to be a general smooth curve of genus $g\left(D\right)=7$  and $\text{deg}\left(D\right)=11$  which passes through $p_1,\dots ,p_7$  . Then $X:=\Gamma \cup D$  is a curve of arithmetic genus $14$  and degree $21$  having a cusp at the point $q=f\left(0\right)\in \Gamma$  . The quadrics in $W\left(q,{\nu }^{*}\left({\mathcal{O}}_X\right(1\left)\right)\right)$  can of course be written down explicitly and to show that $D$  can be chosen such that it is not contained in any quadric from $W\left(q,{\nu }^{*}\left({\mathcal{O}}_X\right(1\left)\right)\right)$  amounts to a simple counting argument. □

Remark 5.3. The claim we have just proved also shows that ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1$  is a divisor on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$  . Alternatively, this can be proved in the same way as Theorem  2.7 .

We now determine the coefficient $b_1$  :

Proposition 5.4. Consider general curves $[E,p,q]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{1,2}$  and $\left[C\right]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{13}$  , and denote by $C^2\subset {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$  the test curve consisting of points $\left\{\right[C{\cup }_{q}E,p\in E]{\}}_{\{q\in C\}}$  . Then $C^2\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1=133848$  , therefore $b_1=C^2\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1/24=5577.$ 

• Proof. Throughout the proof we will use the notations introduced in Proposition  3.6 .
  From the proof of Proposition  5.2 it is clear that the intersection number $C^2\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1$  equals the number of pairs $(q,D)\in X\subset C\times C_6$  such that the map $$W(q,K_C(-D\left)\right)\to H^0(K_C^{\otimes 2}(-2D-7q))$$  is not an isomorphism. To compute this number we construct the rank $17$  vector bundle $W$  over $X$  having fibre $W(q,D)=W(q,K_C(-D\left)\right)$  over each point $(q,D)\in X$  . The curve $C$  being general, the vanishing sequence $a^{K_C(-D)}\left(q\right)$  will be generically equal to $(0,2,3,4,5,6,7)$  , while at a finite number of points $(q,D)\in X$  we will have that $a^{K_C(-D)}\left(q\right)=(0,2,3,4,5,6,8)$  . In order to compute $c_1\left(W\right)$  we note that $W$  has a subbundle $W_1\subset W$  which fits into two exact sequences:

  $$0⟶{\text{Sym}}^2{u}_{*}{\left(v^{*}(\mathcal{ℳ})\otimes \mathcal{O}(-4\Delta )\right)}_{|X}⟶W_1\to u_{*}(v^{*}(\mathcal{ℳ})\otimes \mathcal{O}(-4\Delta )){}_{|X}\otimes \mathcal{P}⟶0,$$  where $\mathcal{P}=u_{*}{\left(v^{*}(\mathcal{ℳ})\otimes {\mathcal{ℐ}}_{\Delta }^3/{\mathcal{ℐ}}_{\Delta }^4\right)}_{|X}$  , and $$0⟶W_1⟶W⟶u_{*}(v^{*}(\mathcal{ℳ})\otimes \mathcal{O}(-5\Delta )){}_{|X}\otimes u_{*}{\left(v^{*}(\mathcal{ℳ})\otimes {\mathcal{ℐ}}_{\Delta }^2/{\mathcal{ℐ}}_{\Delta }^3\right)}_{|X}⟶0.$$  Next, we consider the multiplication map $W\to u_{*}{\left(v^{*}\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes 2}\right)\otimes \mathcal{O}(-7\Delta )\right)}_{|X}$  whose degeneration locus we want to compute. The intersection number $C^2\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1$  is equal to $$\left(c_1\left(u_{*}\left(v^{*}\right({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes 2})\otimes \mathcal{O}(-7\Delta \left)\right)\right)-c_1\left(W\right)\right)\cdot \left[X\right]=(3\theta -7x-\gamma +18\eta )\cdot \left[X\right]=133848,$$  as it turns out after a short calculation. Here we have used that $c_1\left(W\right)$  can be computed from the two exact sequences involving $W$  and $W_1$  , while $$c_1\left(u_{*}\left(v^{*}\right({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes 2})\otimes \mathcal{O}(-7\Delta \left)\right)\right)=c_1\left({\mathcal{ℱ}}_2\right)-c_1\left(J_6\right({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes 2}\left)\right)=-4\theta -34x+14\gamma -756\eta .$$  □

Since $b_1=5577$  we now obtain that $b_{13}=b_1+c=6039$  . To compute the coefficient $b_0$  (and thus the $\lambda$  -coefficient $a$  ) we use our last test curve:

Proposition 5.5. Let $(C,q,p)\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{13,2}$  be a general $2$  -pointed curve. We denote by $C^3\subset {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$  the family consisting of curves $\left\{\right[C/y\sim q,p]{\}}_{\{y\in C\}}$  . Then $C^3\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1=c+26b_0-b_{13}=24453$  . It follows that $b_0=1155$  and $a=7821$  .

• Proof. We retain the notations introduced in Proposition  3.7 . We construct a vector bundle map ${\text{Sym}}^2(\mathcal{ℰ})\to \mathcal{ℱ}$  over the curve $Y\subset C\times C_6$  , where $\mathcal{ℰ}=u_{*}\left(v^{*}(\mathcal{ℳ})\otimes \mathcal{O}(-{\Gamma }_p)\right)$  is the bundle with fibre $\mathcal{ℰ}(y,D)=H^0\left(K_C(-D-p)\right)$  , while $\mathcal{ℱ}$  is the bundle with fibre $$\mathcal{ℱ}(y,D)=H^0\left(K_C^{\otimes 2}(-2D-2p-y-q)\right)\oplus \mathbb{C}\cdot t^2\subset H^0\left(K_C^{{\otimes }^2}(-2D-2p)\right),$$  where $H^0\left(K_C(-D-p)\right)/H^0\left(K_C(-D-p-y-q)\right)=\mathbb{C}\cdot t$  , for every $(y,D)\in Y$  .
  It is easy to show that $c_1(\mathcal{ℰ})=-5x-\theta$  , hence $c_1\left({\text{Sym}}^2\right(\mathcal{ℰ}\left)\right)=-35x-7\theta$  . The class $c_1(\mathcal{ℱ})$  can be computed from the exact sequence $$0⟶u_{*}{\left(v^{*}\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes 2}\right)\otimes \mathcal{O}(-2{\Gamma }_p-{\Gamma }_q-\Delta )\right)}_{|Y}⟶\mathcal{ℱ}⟶{\left({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes 2}\otimes \mathcal{O}(-2{\Gamma }_p)\right)}_{|Y}(-A)⟶0,$$  where $A=Y\cap {\pi }_1^{-1}\left(p\right)$  is the effective divisor on the curve $Y$  consisting of all points $(p,D)$  such that $h^0(p+q+D)\ge 2$  . Using the formula for $\left[Y\right]$  (cf. Proposition  3.7 ), we get that $\left|A\right|=429$  . We also compute that $c_1\left(u_{*}\left(v^{*}\right({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes 2})\otimes \mathcal{O}(-2{\Gamma }_p-{\Gamma }_q-\Delta \left)\right)\right)=-4\theta -40x-33\eta +2\gamma$  and of course $c_1({\mathcal{ℳ}}^{\otimes 2}\otimes \mathcal{O}(-2{\Gamma }_p\left)\right)=2(17\eta -\gamma -x)$  . Therefore we can write that $$C^3\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1=\left(c_1(\mathcal{ℱ})-c_1\left({\text{Sym}}^2\right(\mathcal{ℰ}\left)\right)\right)\cdot \left[Y\right]-\left|A\right|=(-7x+3\theta +\eta )\cdot \left[Y\right]-\left|A\right|=24453.$$  □

We have thus far determined the coefficients $a,c,b_0,b_1,b_{13}$  in the expansion of $\left[{\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1\right]$  . This is already enough to conclude that $\left[{\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1\right]$  lies outside the cone of $\text{Pic}\left({\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}\right)$  spanned by pullbacks of effective divisors from ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14}$  , Brill-Noether divisors on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$  and boundary divisors (see the discussion after Theorem  1.4 for the relevance of this result). To get a bound on the remaining coefficients $b_j$  for $2\le j\le 12$  , we use a variant of Theorem 1.1 from [FP] . The boundary divisor ${\Delta }_j\subset {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14,1}$  with $3\le j\le 12,j\ne 4$  is filled-up by pencils $R_j$  obtained by attaching to a fixed $2$  -pointed curve $[B,p,q]\in {\mathcal{ℳ}}_{j,2}$  a variable $1$  -pointed curve $[C,q]\in {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{14-j,1}$  moving in a Lefschetz pencils of curves of genus $14-j$  sitting on a fixed $K3$  surface. Deformations of $R_j$  cover ${\Delta }_j$  for $j\ne 2,4$  , hence we have that $R_j\cdot {\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{14,0}^1\ge 0$  . Since one also has the relations (see [FP] , Lemma 2.4) $$R_j\cdot \lambda =15-j,R_j\cdot {\delta }_j=-1,R_j\cdot {\delta }_0=6(17-j),R_j\cdot \psi =0\text{and}{R}_j\cdot {\delta }_i=0\text{for}i\ne 0,j,$$  we immediately get the estimate $b_j\ge 15+27j$  for all $3\le j\le 12$  , $j\ne 4$  . To obtain the bounds $b_2\ge 325$  and $b_4\ge 271$  we use similar pencils filling up ${\Delta }_2$  and ${\Delta }_4$  respectively.

We skip these details. This completes the proof of Theorem  1.4 .

6 The Kodaira dimension of ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,n}$ 

In this last section we use the effective divisors ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{16,1}$  and ${\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{22,2}$  to improve Logan's results about which moduli spaces ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,n}$  are of general type. For a general reference about $\text{Pic}\left({\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,n}\right)$  we refer to [AC2] and [Log] . For each $1\le i\le n$  we denote by ${\pi }_i:{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,n}\to {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,1}$  the morphism forgetting all marked points except the one labelled by $i$  and we also consider the map $\pi :{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,n}\to {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  which forgets all marked points. We recall that the canonical class of ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,n}$  is given by the formula $$K_{{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{g,n}}=13\lambda -2{\delta }_0+{\sum }_{i=1}^n{\psi }_i-2{\sum }_{i\ge 0,S}{\delta }_{i:S}-{\sum }_S{\delta }_{1:S}.$$  Here ${\psi }_i$  is the tautological class corresponding to the $i$  -th marked point, while ${\delta }_{i:S}$  with $i\ge 0$  and $\varnothing \ne S\subset \{1,\dots ,n\}$  denotes the class of the boundary divisor with generic point being a union of two curves of genus $i$  and $g-i$  such that the marked points on the genus $i$  component are precisely those labelled by $S$  .

Proof of Theorem  1.3 . We start with the case $g=22$  and we show that ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{22,2}$  is of general type. On ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{22,2}$  we consider the averaged pullback of the Weierstrass divisor $$W_{12}:={\pi }_1^{*}\left(\overline{\mathcal{W}}\right)+{\pi }_2^{*}\left(\overline{\mathcal{W}}\right)\equiv -2\lambda +\frac{g(g+1)}{2}({\psi }_1+{\psi }_2)-{\sum }_{i\ge 0,S\ne \varnothing }{c}_{i:S}{\delta }_{i:S},$$  where $c_{i:S}\ge 0$  , and significantly, the coefficient of ${\delta }_0$  is $0$  . By Theorem  1.2 , we have another effective class, namely $\left[{\pi }^{*}\right({\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{22,2}\left)\right]=c(\frac{1665}{256}\lambda -{\delta }_0-\cdots )$  , where $c>0$  . One can easily check that $K_{{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{22,2}}$  can be written as a positive combination of $\left[W_{12}\right],\left[{\pi }^{*}\right({\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{22,2}\left)\right],{\psi }_1+{\psi }_2$  and some other boundary classes. Since ${\psi }_1+{\psi }_2$  is big and nef, it follows that ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{22,2}$  is of general type.

When $g=21$  we use the maps ${\chi }_{i,j}:{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{21,5}\to {\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{22}$  for $1\le i<j\le 5$  , where ${\chi }_{i,j}$  identifies the marked points labelled by $i$  and $j$  and forgets those labelled by $\{i,j{\}}^c$  .

The $\mathbb{Q}$  -divisor class $${\sum }_{i<j}{\chi }_{i,j}^{*}\left({\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{22,2}\right)\equiv c(\frac{1665}{256}\lambda -{\delta }_0+\frac{2}{5}{\sum }_{i=1}^5{\psi }_i-\cdots ),\text{where}c>0,$$  is obviously effective on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{21,5}$  . Since the $\mathbb{Q}$  -class $-\lambda +11{\sum }_{i=1}^5{\psi }_i-0\cdot {\delta }_0-\cdots$  , is also effective (cf. [Log] , Theorem 5.4 we have retained only the coefficients that play a role in our argument), once again we see that $K_{{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{21,5}}$  can be written as the sum of an effective divisor and a positive multiple of ${\sum }_{i=1}^5{\psi }_i$  .

Finally we settle the case $g=16$  : we adapt Theorem 5.4 from [Log] to conclude that the $\mathbb{Q}$  -class $-\lambda +\frac{23}{9}\left({\sum }_{i=1}^9{\psi }_i\right)-0\cdot {\delta }_0-\cdots$  , is effective on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{16,9}$  (precisely, this is the class of the $S_9$  -orbit of the closure in ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{16,9}$  of the effective divisor $D$  on ${\mathcal{ℳ}}_{16,9}$  consisting of points $[C,p_1,\dots ,p_9]$  such that $h^0(C,2p_1+\cdots +2p_7+p_8+p_9)\ge 2$  and we have explicitly indicated that the coefficient of ${\delta }_0$  is $0$  and retained only the coefficients that are significant for this calculation). The class $\left[{\pi }^{*}\right({\overline{\mathcal{Z}}}_{16,1}\left)\right]=c(\frac{407}{61}\lambda -{\delta }_0-\cdots )$  , where $c>0$  , is also effective and one writes $K_{{\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{16,9}}$  as a positive sum of these two effective classes, boundary classes and the big and nef class ${\sum }_{i=1}^9{\psi }_i$  . $\square$ 

Remark 6.1. Theorem 6.3 from [Log] claims that ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_{22,4}$  is of general type but the numerical argument used in the proof seems to be incorrect.

References

1. E. Arbarello and M. Cornalba, Footnotes to a paper of Beniamino Segre, Math. Ann. 256 (1981), 341-362.
2. E. Arbarello and M. Cornalba, Calculating cohomology groups of moduli spaces of curves via algebraic geometry, Inst. Hautes Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. 88 (1998), 97-127.
3. E. Arbarello, M. Cornalba, P. Griffiths and J. Harris, Geometry of algebraic curves, Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften 267, Springer.
4. D. Eisenbud and J. Harris, Limit linear series: basic theory, Invent. Math. 85 (1986), 337-371.
5. D. Eisenbud and J. Harris, Irreducibility of some families of linear series with Brill-Noether number $-1$  , Ann. Scient. Ec. Norm. Sup.(4) 22 (1989), 33–53.
6. D. Eisenbud and J. Harris, The Kodaira dimension of the moduli space of curves of genus $\ge 23,$  Invent. Math. 90 (1987), 359–387.
7. G. Farkas, The geometry of the moduli space of curves of genus $23$  , Math. Ann. 318 (2000), 43-65.
8. G. Farkas and M. Popa, Effective divisors on ${\overline{\mathcal{ℳ}}}_g$  , curves on $K3$  surfaces and the Slope Conjecture, J. Algebraic Geometry, 14 (2005), 241-267.
9. M. Green and R. Lazarsfeld, Some results on syzygies of finite sets and algebraic curves, Compositio Math. 67 (1988), 301-314.
10. J. Harris and D. Mumford, On the Kodaira dimension of the moduli space of curves, Invent. Math. 67 (1982), 23-88.
11. J. Harris and I. Morrison, Slopes of effective divisors on the moduli space of stable curves, Invent. Math. 99 (1990), 321–355.
12. R. Lazarsfeld, A sampling of vector bundle techniques in the study of linear series, in: Lectures on Riemann Surfaces, (M. Cornalba, X. Gomez-Mont, A. Verjovsky eds.), World Scientific 1989, 500-559.
13. D. Khosla, Harvard Ph.D. Thesis (2005).
14. A. Logan, The Kodaira dimension of moduli spaces of curves with marked points, Amer. J. of Math. 125 (2003), 105-138.
15. F.-O. Schreyer and F. Tonoli, Needles in a Haystack: Special Varieties via Small Fields, in: Computations in Algebraic Geometry with Macaulay 2, Algorithms and Computations in Math. 8 (2002) 251-279.
16. C. Voisin, Sur l'application de Wahl des courbes satisfaisant la condition de Brill-Noether-Petri, Acta Math. 168 (1992), 249-272.
17. C. Voisin, Green's generic syzygy conjecture for curves of even genus lying on a $K3$  surface, J. Eur. Math. Soc. 4 (2002), 363-404.
18. C. Voisin, Green's canonical syzygy conjecture for generic curves of odd genus, math.AG/0301359, to appear in Compositio Math.

Department of Mathematics, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712 E-mail address: gfarkas@math.utexas.edu