On the Local Cohomology of Reflexive Modules of Rank One over Normal Semigroup Rings
Markus Perling
*
*
Institut für Mathematik, Universität Paderborn, 33098 Paderborn, Germany, perling@math.upb.de
March 24, 2005
Abstract
In this work we describe the local cohomology of reflexive modules of rank one over normal semigroup rings with respect to monomial ideals. Using our description we show that the problem of classifying maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules of rank one can be rephrased in terms of finding integral solutions to certain sets of linear inequalities.
1 Introduction
The motivation for this paper stems from my earlier and ongoing work on equivariant sheaves over toric varieties (see [Per04a] , [Per03] and [Per04b] ). The main theme of this theory is the interplay between the combinatorics of toric geometry and non-combinatorial aspects from linear algebra. In a sense, this theory extends the combinatorial theory of toric varieties to a semi-combinatorial theory over toric varieties. It turns out that an important building block which we should understand are the reflexive sheaves of rank one. This paper has been written in order to clarify at least a few aspects of these sheaves.
In the case of affine toric varieties, these sheaves correspond to reflexive modules of rank one over a normal semigroup rings
, where
is an algebraically closed field and
a normal subsemigroup of some lattice
. The main results of this work are related to the following problems:
-
(i)
the computation of local cohomology modules of reflexive modules of rank one over
with respect to monomial ideals,
-
(ii)
the classification of maximal Cohen-Macaulay (MCM) modules of rank one over
.
Recall that a normal semigroup is of the form
where the
are linear forms in
, the module dual to
, and the brackets
denote the canonical pairing. The
over
span a strictly convex polyhedral cone
in the vector space
(see also section 2 ).
Denote
the algebraic torus acting on the affine toric variety
. The
-invariant divisor class group is isomorphic to the free group
. By a well-known correspondence, there is a one-to-one correspondence between
-invariant divisors
and
-graded reflexive module of rank one over
, denoted
. Forgetting the grading on
in a natural way induces a one-to-one correspondence between isomorphism classes of reflexive modules of rank one and rational equivalence classes of Weil-divisors. Let
, then, as an
-graded module,
can explicitly be represented as the
-linear span of a
-lattice submodule
of
, which is determined by inequalities
Local cohomology.
Using this representation of
, the main technical result of this paper will be a characterization in terms of simplicial cohomology of the local cohomology of
with respect to a monomial ideal. For any ring
, an ideal
of
and any
-module
, there is the functor
The local cohomology modules
are defined as the right derived functors of
and have the following characterization:
In general, an explicit description of the modules
is very difficult. However, in our case
is an ideal in
generated by monomials, and the modules
are in a natural way
-graded and admit an explicit combinatorial description. For this, we construct an
-graded resolution of
(Proposition 5.1 ):
where the
are
-acyclic
-modules. Applying
to
then yields an isomorphism
. To analyze this cohomology a bit deeper, we consider the support and cosupport of
. The support of
is defined to be set of faces
of
such that the corresponding orbit
is contained in the variety
. To introduce the cosupport, we denote
the simplex spanned by
, i.e. the set underlying
coincides with
, but we choose an order on this set, such that
becomes an oriented combinatorial simplex. Then the cosupport
of
is the set of those
such that the minimal face
of
where
contains
, is not contained in the support of
.
Then
in a natural way can be considered as a simplicial subcomplex of
. Now, for any
, let
. Then we have for the
-th graded component of the complex
(Corollary 5.3 ):
i.e. we identify the graded components
with the
-th reduced cohomology of the simplicial complex
. Note that this kind of identification is not new but has been applied in the literature several times to study the local cohomology of (not necessarily normal) semigroup rings (see, for instance, [GW78] , [TH86] , [Mus00] ). In fact, the constructions in this work are a quite straightforward adaption of the methods of Trung and Hoa [TH86] . The new aspect here is that we apply this technique to the study of more general
-modules. We remark that local cohomology of general
-graded modules has been studied before (see [HM04] , [HM03] ), but here, as will be explained below, we will arrive at a more explicit combinatorial picture for the case of the modules
.
Maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules of rank one.
By a classical theorem of Hochster, the rings
are Cohen-Macaulay and it is a natural problem to classify (maximal) Cohen-Macaulay modules over
. Although there exists a huge amount of literature concerning the classification of MCM modules in various contexts, to my knowledge, there has not yet been done much work for the case of rings
. The only references I am aware of and which are explicitly devoted to this topic, are [BG03] and [BG02] . One of the main results of [BG03] (Corollary 5.2) — from the perspective of this paper, at least — is that over a normal semigroup ring there exist only finitely many isomorphism classes of MCM modules of rank one.
However, despite of this finiteness result, it seems that a complete classification is very difficult, if not impossible, to achieve. The relevant combinatorics behind such a classification is given by the hyperplane arrangement defined by the real hyperplanes
in
. To this hyperplane arrangement one can associate its combinatorial type which is represented by the so-called matroid of flats; this structure essentially captures the information on intersections of the hyperplanes
. It is a well-known fact that
is MCM if and only if
for all
, where
is the maximal
-graded ideal in
. So, by the results above,
is MCM if and only if for every subset
such that
for some
, the system of linear inequalities
| |
| |
has no solution in
. So, we can phrase the problem of classifying MCM modules of rank one over
as follows. Given the matroid of flats of a hyperplane arrangement
, then, how many possibilities are there to realize (up to translation) combinatorially equivalent hyperplane arrangements such that a certain subset of the open cells of
(and part of their boundaries, respectively) does not intersect the lattice
? A definitive general solution by now seems to be out of reach.
Overview of the paper.
In section 2 , we introduce some general facts and notation from toric geometry, which will be used throughout the paper. In section 3 we introduce the simplex over the set of rays of the fan
and recall some elementary and basic facts on simplicial chain complexes. In section 4 we construct a class of
-modules which are acyclic with respect to local cohomology functors of monomial ideals. We use these modules to construct acyclic resolutions for the modules
in section 5 . In that section we also characterize the graded components of local cohomology modules in terms of reduced cohomology of certain cell complexes. Section 6 presents some easy observations and examples concerning the chambers of
and the vanishing and nonvanishing of local cohomology in certain degrees. Section 7 is a short insertion to give the clear statement about the conditions on
to be MCM. In section 8 we collect some more facts about the depth of the modules
.
2 Toric preliminaries
General notions.
We introduce some notation from the theory of toric varieties. For general overview on toric varieties we refer to [Oda88] , [Ful93] . We will always assume that
is an algebraically closed field.
will denote an affine toric variety over
defined by a strongly convex rational polyhedral cone
contained in the real vector space
over a lattice
. We always assume that
. Let
be the lattice dual to
and let
be the canonical pairing. This pairing extends in a natural way to the scalar extensions
and
. Elements of
are denoted by
,
, etc. if written additively, and by
,
, etc. if written multiplicatively, i.e.
. The lattice
is identified with the group of characters of the torus
acting on
. For any cone
we will use the following notation:
-
∙
faces of
are denoted by small Greek letters such as
,
, etc., the natural order among faces is denoted by
;
-
∙
for any set
of faces of
, we call the set
the star of
; if
, then
is called star closed;
-
∙
, the faces of dimension 1, called rays; below we will often find it more convenient to denote this set
(by abuse of notation);
-
∙
denotes the primitive lattice element spanning the ray
;
-
∙
denotes the the irreducible
-invariant Weil divisor on
associated to
;
-
∙
is the cone dual to
;
-
∙
;
-
∙
is the subsemigroup of
associated to
;
-
∙
is the unique maximal subgroup of
contained in
;
-
∙
the semigroup ring
is identified with the coordinate ring of
, and the group ring
is identified with the coordinate ring of
;
-
∙
let
, then
denotes the orbit associated to
in
;
-
∙
let
, then
is
intersected with the subvector space of
spanned by
over
,
is the dual module of
, where there is a canonical identification
; moreover, we there is the canonical splitting
;
-
∙
denotes the stabilizer subgroup of
over
;
, note that
.
Recall that dualizing
via
induces an order-reversing one-to-one correspondence between faces of
and faces of
.
Reflexive modules of rank one.
There exists a short exact sequence of
-modules:
where
is the
-st Chow group of
, i.e. the group of rational equivalence classes of Weil divisors on
, and
the group which is freely generated over the
-invariant irreducible Weil divisors of
. It was observed by Reid [Rei80] that there is a one-to-one correspondence of classes
and isomorphism classes of reflexive sheaves
of rank one over
, where
is some representative for
. Every reflexive module of rank one over
is isomorphic to
for some Weil divisor
, and in fact, there is a one-to-one correspondence between rational equivalence classes of Weil divisors and reflexive
-modules of rank one. The above short exact sequence implies that every class
can be represented by a
-invariant Weil divisor
, where
and
. By
-invariance, to
there corresponds a reflexive
-module of rank one, denoted
, which has a natural
-graded structure together with a natural
-graded embedding
. Namely, denote
, which corresponds to the shifted half space
, where
such that
. We define
, then
is a well-defined
-graded reflexive
-submodule of
.
Monomial ideals.
Let
be a semigroup ideal, then
is an ideal in
.
On the other hand, for every
-graded ideal
the set
forms a semigroup ideal in
. We call the class of ideals coming from semigroup ideals the monomial ideals.
Definition 2.1:
Let
be a monomial ideal, then its support is defined as
Note that
is star-closed and the variety
coincides with
. Moreover, in the particular case where
is the unique maximal homogeneous ideal of
, we have
and
.
3 The simplex spanned by
We denote
the simplex spanned by
, i.e. the set underlying
coincides with
, but we choose a total ordering on the elements of
, i.e.
. Any subset
corresponds to a face of
with orientation induced by the ordering of
. In what follows we will find it convenient to identify
and
as sets and to write
instead of
.
For any
with
, we consider the augmented cochain complex:
which is an exact sequence of
-modules, as
is contractible. To avoid to mention the case
repeatedly as a special case in exactness arguments, we adopt the convention that for
the corresponding augmented cochain complex is
.
For any two subsets
, the canonical projections
for every
, induce a surjective chain map
.
Definition 3.1:
Let
, then we denote
i.e.
is the minimal face of
such that
. If
, then
is the zero cone.
Definition 3.2:
Let
be any set of faces of
, then we set
which we consider as a simplical subcomplex of
. If
for some
, then we write
instead of
, and we denote
simply by
. If
is a monomial ideal and
, then we also write
instead of
.
is called the cosupport of
in
.
Clearly, for every
,
implies
, and
is a simplicial subcomplex of
.
Now let
be any subset which we consider as subsimplex and let
any set of faces of
, then we set
, which is a subcomplex of both
and
. Therefore there exists a subcomplex
of
which is build of the terms
The relative reduced cohomology
then is the homology of the quotient complex
. Note that because
is contractible, there are isomorphisms
for every
. Likewise, for our chosen field
, we obtain the relative reduced cohomology with coefficients in
as the homology of
and
for every
.
4
-Acyclic Modules
Definition 4.1:
Let
be a nonempty subset, then we set
and define
In the special case where
, we write
and
, respectively.
Clearly, we have
and
a
-module.
Let
and any
, then for any subset
the set
is contained in
. This is in particular true when
is a subgroup of
. Thus the following lemma is immediate:
Lemma 4.2:
Let
be any subgroup and
. Then for any
the set
is contained in
if and only if
.
Proposition 4.3:
Let
be a monomial ideal,
and
, then:
-
(i)
-
(ii)
The module
is
-acyclic.
-
Proof.
Let first
, such that
. So there exists an integral element
in the relative interior of
such that the monomial
is contained in
.
As the group
contains
(note that
) and thus
, we have
. This implies that any power of
is a nonzero divisor of the module
, and moreover, multiplication by
even represents an automorphism of the module
. So, any power of
also acts as an automorphism on the local cohomology modules
for every
. But because the (ring theoretic) support of
is contained in the support of
, for every element
there exists some
such that
, hence
for every
. So for
, ( i ) and ( ii ) are true.
Now consider the case
, i.e
. In that case,
contains no monomial whose degree is contained in
, and thus not in
, so for every
, there exists some
such that
. So, the support of
is contained in the support of
, and thus
and
for every
.
5 A
-Acyclic Resolution
Let
and define
. Then we can consider the exact sequence
, respectively
. For every
, we can identify the vector space at the
-th position of the complex
as follows:
With this identification for every
, we obtain an exact sequence of vector spaces:
where the maps
are given by the direct sum of the cochain maps of the complexes
for every
.
Proposition 5.1:
For any monomial ideal
, the complex
is a
-acyclic resolution of
.
-
Proof.
The exactness of
already follows from its exactness as complex of
-vector spaces. The
-acyclicity of the
has already been considered in the previous section, so it remains only to show that
indeed is a complex of
-modules. For this, by
-linearity it suffices to show that
for any
and
, where
is considered as
-linear homomorphism. Consider any
, then we have inclusions
, and we observe that multiplication with
just results in the chain map
, which yields the desired result.
We define
as the subcomplex of
which is build of the terms
It is straightforward to see that degree-wise, for every
, this complex coincides with the complex
.
Proposition 5.2:
for every
.
-
Proof.
Because
is acyclic, we have that
. By proposition 4.3 , ( ii ),
if
and
if
, so the claim follows.
Corollary 5.3:
For every
and every
:
-
Proof.
Degreewise, for every
, the complex
is the augmented complex of relative cohomology with coefficients in
of the pair
, shifted by 1.
So, in every degree, we have an identification of the cohomology groups
. Evaluating the long exact cohomology sequence, using that
for all
, we obtain that
for every
.
6 The Chambers in
Determined by
In this section we assume the divisor
to be fixed, except where explicitly stated otherwise. For understanding the local cohomology modules
, it is important to know whether for some
a system of inequalities
| |
| |
has integral solutions or not. For every
, the linear equation
defines a hyperplane
in
, and the set of hyperplanes
,
forms a hyperplane arrangement in
. The set of inequalities above determines a chamber
in the complement of this hyperplane arrangement, i.e., if nonempty, the closure of the set of points
fulfilling these inequalities form a polyhedron bounded by the hyperplanes
.
To be more precise, we define
to be the set of points fulfilling the strict inequalities
| |
| |
and
analogously, but allowing equality in both types of equations. Note that 'ss' above stands for semi-strict inequalities. Moreover, note that we have for simpler notation omitted any reference to the divisor
. The complement
then equals the set
. We have the following:
Lemma 6.1:
The chambers
and
are in one-to-one correspondence.
-
Proof.
We show that if some point
is contained in
, then there exists a point
which is contained in
, and vice versa. Let first
for some
, then it is clearly contained in
. Now let
for some
. Let
given by precisely those
such that
. Now, as the strict inequalities form an open condition, we can choose an
-neighbourhood
in
such that for all points
the same strict inequalities hold as for
. Now, the inequalities
for
determine a convex, unbounded, polyhedron in
which is not contained in a proper subspace of
, and
is located in its boundary. Thus
must intersect the interior of this polyhedron, and we can choose some
from the intersection of
and the interior of the polyhedron. Then it follows that
.
To better understand the chambers type
, we have also to consider the chambers of type
, which are closed polyhedra in
. Denote
the convex polyhedral cone generated over
by the lattice vectors
for
and by
for
.
Then every
can be written as Minkowski sum
, where
is a compact polyhedron and
is the dual cone of
. Our first observation is that the polyhedra
do not have lineality spaces (see also [Zie95] , §1.5):
Lemma 6.2:
The cones
have dimension
in
.
-
Proof.
Assume the vectors
for
and
for
span a proper subvector space of
, then also the vectors
, for
, span a proper subvector space, but this is not possible, since
.
So, the cone
can be identified with the recession cone (sometimes also called the characteristic cone) of the polyhedron
. In general,
is not
-dimensional.
being
-dimensional is equivalent to that
does not contain a nonzero subvector space of
. A general criterion for
not containing a nonzero subvector space is obtained by checking the intersection of the two cones
and
, where
is spanned over
by
,
and
is spanned over
by
,
.
Lemma 6.3:
contains a nonzero subvector space if and only if
.
-
Proof.
Assume first that
contains a nonzero subvector space
and let
. Then we can write
, where
. Because also
, we have
, for
.
Summing up, we obtain
where not all of the
,
and not all of the
,
are zero, and thus the nonzero element
is contained in
and
. In the other direction, let
, i.e.
, where
not all zero. Then
and
and thus
contains the subvector space spanned by
.
It would be nice if one could determine the dimension of the recession cone solely by the combinatorics involved with the
s, but in general this seems not to be possible, as example 6.9 below will show. However, at least in the two extremal cases there are some tools available. For the case of vanishing recession cones, the corresponding chambers
are bounded, and these bounded chambers can at least be counted by means of the matroid of flats associated to the hyperplane arrangement
. For this, we refer to the book [BLS
+
93] , chapter 4, in particular Corollary 4.6.8. The theory developed there also yields a formula for counting all chambers
. The other extremal case is that of the recession cone
having dimension
. For these we can make use of the connection to local cohomology as developed in the previous sections.
Proposition 6.4:
Let
be
-dimensional. Then either
or
is contractible.
-
Proof.
First note that
, then
is just the negative cone of
, so we may assume that
. Let
be
-dimensional and assume that
, i.e.
.
Then the corresponding hyperplane arrangement
is a central arrangement and the interior of
coincides with the chamber
in the complement of this arrangement, which therefore is nonempty. Moreover,
has nonempty intersection with
. Choosing some
, we can compute the local cohomology
in degree
, where
is the maximal homogeneous ideal of
. A well-known result states that the ring
is Cohen-Macaulay, and thus all these local cohomology modules for
vanish. This in particular implies by Corollary 5.3 that the reduced cohomology groups
vanish for
. So, because
, this implies that
is a contractible topological space.
The case
.
We show that in the case
, there are possible only two types of recession cones
, namely either
is strictly convex, or
. For
, the cell complex
is a topological 1-dimensional sphere which can explicitly be realized as follows. Choose a hyperplane
of
such that
is a bounded polyhedron. Then the vertices of
are given by
and the facets of
coincide with the facets of
intersected with
. The set
then is geometrically realized as the union of all
and
-dimensional faces of
intersected with
, i.e.,
has an explicit realization as the boundary of a convex polytope in the plane
. Moreover,
can be identified with a union of closed intervals in
. It is straightforward to see that the two cones
and
intersect nontrivially if and only if the sets
,
intersect, where
and
are convex hulls of the points
,
and of the points
,
, respectively. We have the following
Proposition 6.5:
The cones
and
intersect nontrivially if and only if
consists of more than one interval. In that case
.
-
Proof.
First note that, because
is a circle,
consists of as many intervals as
.
It follows from elementary geometric considerations that in the case
consists of one interval, the polytopes
and
can not intersect, and in the case where
consists of more than one interval, one can choose vertices
and
such that the lines
,
, intersect in some point
different from
. By arguments used before, this implies that
contains the subvector space spanned by
, and because
lies in the relative interior of the cone spanned by
,
also contains the 2-dimensional vector space spanned by
over
. Moreover, the points
,
are contained respectively on both, the positive and the negative side of this vector space, so
.
Now we can prove:
Theorem 6.6:
In the case
, for
, there are the following possibilities:
-
(i)
and
has
-dimensional recession cone
,
-
(ii)
and
is either bounded or empty.
-
Proof.
We only observe that for
,
is equivalent to that
is contractible and apply propositions 6.4 and 6.5 .
We give the easiest example for the case
:
Example 6.7:
Let
be spanned over
by the primitive vectors
,
,
,
and we consider the divisor
for some
. For simplicity, we write here and in the examples below
instead of
and
instead of
. The hyperplane arrangement determined by
realizes precisely 15 nonempty chambers out of 16 possible choices
, with a unique bounded chamber for
. We have
, and so the local cohomology module
does not vanish if
. This is the case for every
. For
, the
, and thus
is a Cohen-Macaulay module. We obtain another Cohen-Macaulay module by analogous considerations for
, where this time the unique bound chamber is realized for
. Altogether, in this example there are three isomorphism classes of maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules, represented by
itself,
, and
.
We conclude that in the case
, for computing local cohomology of the modules
it suffices to check the disconnected subsets
. In general, this may not be so simple, as we will see in the following examples. The first example shows that even for topologically nontrivial
, in general, the chamber
must not be bounded.
Example 6.8:
Let
be spanned over
by the primitive vectors
,
,
,
,
. This is the cone from the previous example extended by one ray in four-dimensional direction. We choose
for some
, and it is straightforward to see that, because
is orthogonal to the other
, the number of chambers is double the number of chambers of the previous example. Moreover, it is easy to see that this time there are no bounded chambers, but still, for
, we have that
consists of two points, and hence
The next example shows that the contractibility of
does not imply that the recession cone
is strictly convex. Moreover, the example shows that the strict convexity of
can not depend on the combinatorics of
in a simple way, but also depends on the concrete embedding of the cone
in
.
Example 6.9:
Consider the four-dimensional cone
spanned by
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
, i.e.
is spanned over the three-dimensional unit cube shifted to the hyperplane
. Set
. Then
is contractible and we have
for all
. But, we have
, so the cones
and
intersect, and the recession cone
is of dimension smaller than
.
Now consider the cone
which is spanned by the same
as
, except that
and
are replaced by
and
.
is combinatorially equivalent to
, but by straightforward computation one finds that
and
do not intersect, and thus
is a
-dimensional recession cone of
and thus
is nonempty for every module
over
.
7 Maximal Cohen-Macaulay Modules of Rank One
By the results of section 5 , the problem of classifying maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules (MCMs) of rank one now has essentially become a problem of integer programming.
To see this more clearly, let us reformulate the results for this case. For
being an MCM is equivalent to that all local cohomology modules
vanish for
, where
is the maximal homogeneous ideal of
. This in particular is equivalent to the vanishing of the cohomology groups
for every
and every
.
Now, as we have seen in example 6.7 , not every
such that
is nonempty in
equals
for some
, i.e. not every
has nonempty intersection with
although it is realized in the complement of the arrangement
. So let us state the MCM-condition for
as a theorem:
Theorem 7.1:
is an MCM if and only if for every
one of the following two conditions holds:
-
(i)
for all
,
-
(ii)
for some
and the chamber
is either empty or has empty intersection with
.
We also state another, equivalent formulation:
Theorem 7.2:
is an MCM if and only if for every
one of the following two conditions holds:
-
(i)
for all
,
-
(ii)
for some
and the system of inequalities
| |
| |
has no integral solution.
One can relate the classification problem for MCMs of rank one to the problem of understanding hyperplane arrangements in
induced by the hyperplanes
, which are shifts of hyperplanes
corresponding to some cone
(such that, in particular, the hyperplanes
are rational). If one fixes the combinatorial type of the hyperplane arrangement
, say, its matroid of flats, then, in how many ways can this hyperplane arrangement be realized by shifting hyperplanes
, while keeping the combinatorial type, such that the cells
with some nonvanishing cohomology group do not intersect
?
8 Singularity Sets
In order to actually proof that some module
is an MCM, one effectively has to check the inequalities of theorem 7.2 for nearly all possible sets
which in general is a quite expensive task. In practice, however, it might be a better strategy to check that some given
is not an MCM. In the rest of this paper we will collect some general results which can be helpful for this purpose.
We introduce the notion of singularity sets; for the general theory of singularity sets and their relation to local cohomology we refer to the book [ST71] . For a variety
over some algebraically closed field
and some coherent sheaf
, the singularity sets of
are defined for integers
as
i.e. the set of points
in
such that the depth of the stalk
does not exceed
.
The sets
are closed subsets of
and every coherent sheaf defines a filtration of
by closed subsets
. This filtration of course becomes stationary for
with
. We are only interested in the situation where
is an affine toric variety and
, i.e. the sheafification of the module
over
. Because
is
-invariant, the depth of
remains constant over every orbit
. For
, he restriction
corresponds to the localization
, where
is a lattice element from the relative interior of the cone
; in particular,
.
Denote
, then the semigroup
splits into a cartesian product
. Correspondingly, the affine toric variety
splits into the cartesian product
, where
is an affine toric variety of dimension
. The corresponding projection
is a flat morphism. The following is a well-known fact on equivariant sheaves or
-graded modules, respectively, which we present without proof.
Proposition 8.1:
Every
-equivariant coherent sheaf
over
is isomorphic to
for some
-equivariant sheaf
over
. Equivalently, every finitely generated
-graded
-module
is isomorphic to
for some
-graded
-module
.
In particular,
, where
is a
-invariant divisor on
and
is the sheafification of the
-graded
-module
. We obtain:
Lemma 8.2:
For every
, we have
.
-
Proof.
As the morphism
is flat and thus local, we can apply [Mat89] , Thm. 23.3 and obtain
for every point
, where here
denotes the maximal homogeneous ideal of
.
With help of this lemma, we set:
Definition 8.3:
Let
, then we set
In this definition, we have omitted any explicit reference to
for clearer notation.
Note that
is star-closed, and by the discussion above,
is equal to
for all
. Now observe:
Lemma 8.4:
is MCM if and only if
for
.
Denote
, where we consider
as a subcomplex of the simplex of
. The following lemma is immediate:
Lemma 8.5:
Let
and
, then
.
For any subset
, the splitting
is compatible with linear inequalities
, for
, respectively
for
, in the sense that some
fulfills these inequalities if and only if every
with
fulfills these inequalities. The following is the main result of this section:
Theorem 8.6:
if and only if
for some
and some subset
and there exists an integral solution to the system of inequalities
| |
| |
in
or equivalently, in
.
-
Proof.
We have
if and only if
for some
, where
is the maximal homogeneous ideal of
. This in turn is equivalent to that there exists some
and some
such that
, where
. Moreover, by lemma 8.5 ,
.
The theorem can help to reduce the number of inequalities one has to check in order to determine the sets
. However, in the case
, this is not of much help.
Proposition 8.7 ([ST71] , Corollary 1.21):
Let
be an irreducible variety of dimension
and let
be a coherent sheaf on
, then
is reflexive if and only if
for all
.
For
this implies that
is either
or empty. References
-
W. Bruns and J. Gubeladze. Semigroup algebras and discrete geometry. In Séminaires et Congrès, volume 6, pages 43–127. Soc. Math. France, Paris, 2002.
-
W. Bruns and J. Gubeladze. Divisorial Linear Algebra of Normal Semigroup Rings. Algebras and Representation Theory, 6:139–168, 2003.
-
A. Björner, M. Las Vergnas, B. Sturmfels, N. White, and G. Ziegler. Oriented matroids, volume 46 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, 1993.
-
W. Fulton. Introduction to Toric Varieties. Princeton University Press, 1993.
-
S. Goto and K. Watanabe. On graded rings. II:
-graded rings. Tokyo J. Math., 1:237–261, 1978.
-
D. Helm and E. Miller. Bass numbers of semigroup-graded local cohomology. Pacific J. of Math., 209(1):41–66, 2003.
-
D. Helm and E. Miller. Algorithms for graded injective resolutions and local cohomology over semigroup rings. 2004. To appear.
-
H. Matsumura. Commutative Ring Theory, volume 8 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, 1989.
-
M. Mustata. Local Cohomology at Monomial Ideals. J. Symb. Comput., 29(4–5):709–720, 2000.
-
T. Oda. Convex Bodies and Algebraic Geometry, volume 15 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. Springer, 1988.
-
M. Perling. Resolutions and Moduli for Equivariant Sheaves over Toric Varieties. PhD thesis, Universität Kaiserslautern, 2003.
-
M. Perling. Graded Rings and Equivariant Sheaves on Toric Varieties. Mathematische Nachrichten, 263–264:181–197, 2004.
-
M. Perling. Resolutions for Equivariant Sheaves over Toric Varieties. ICTP preprint no. IC/2004/59, 2004. math.AG/0503501.
-
M. Reid. Canonical 3-folds. In A. Beauville, editor, Géométrie Algébrique, Angers 1979, pages 273–310. Sijthoff & Noordhoff, Alphen aan den Rijn, The Netherlands, 1980.
-
Y.-T. Siu and G. Trautmann. Gap-Sheaves and Extension of Coherent Analytic Subsheaves. Number 172 in Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, 1971.
-
N. V. Trung and L. T. Hoa. Affine semigroups and Cohen-Macaulay rings generated by monomials. Trans. AMS, 298(1):145–167, 1986.
-
G. Ziegler. Lectures on Polytopes, volume 152 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, 1995.