Abstract
The aim of this paper is to make a connection between design theory and algebraic geometry/commutative algebra. In particular, given any Steiner System S(t, n, v) we associate two ideals, in a suitable polynomial ring, defining a Steiner configuration of points and its Complement. We focus on the latter, studying its homological invariants, such as Hilbert Function and Betti numbers. We also study symbolic and regular powers associated to the ideal defining a Complement of a Steiner configuration of points, finding its Waldschmidt constant, regularity, bounds on its resurgence and asymptotic resurgence. We also compute the parameters of linear codes associated to any Steiner configuration of points and its Complement.
Introduction
Combinatorial design theory is the study of arranging elements of a finite set into patterns (subsets, words, arrays) according to specified rules. It is a field of combinatorics connected to several other areas of mathematics including number theory and finite geometries. In the last years, the main techniques used in combinatorial and algebraic geometry allow design theory to grow up involving applications in other areas such as in coding theory, cryptography, and computer science.
A \(t(v,n,\lambda )\)design \(D=(V,B)\) is a pair consisting of a set V of v points and a collection B of nsubsets of V, called blocks, such that every tsubset (or ttuple) of V is contained in exactly \(\lambda \) blocks in B.
The numbers \(v=V\), \(b=B, n\), \(\lambda \), and t are called the parameters of the design.
A Steiner system (V, B) of type S(t, n, v) is a \(t(v,n,1)\) design, that is, a collection B of nsubsets (blocks) of a vset V such that each ttuple of V is contained in a unique block in B. The elements in V are called vertices or points and those of B are called blocks. In particular, a Steiner triple system of order v, STS(v), is a collection of triples (3subsets) of V, such that each unordered pair of elements is contained in precisely one block, and a Steiner quadruple system of order v, SQS(v), is a collection of quadruples (4subsets) of V such that each triple is found in precisely one block.
A geometric study of some particular classes of Steiner systems, with an eye on the automorphism groups, can be found in [57]. There exists a very extensive literature on STSs and SQS, e.g. [5, 6, 11,12,13, 27,28,29,30, 37, 40,41,45, 47] to cite some of them.
In this paper we study special configurations of reduced points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\) constructed on Steiner Systems, combining Combinatorial Algebraic Geometry and Commutative Algebra. We found many results concerning geometric and algebraic codes and Steiner systems (or designs in general) but we did not find in the literature any result concerning the study of combinatorial structures, as Steiner systems, using their homological invariants. Thus, we consider this paper as a starting point of the study of combinatorial designs, such as Steiner systems, using the homological invariants of their defining ideals. An introduction of coding theory with the use of Algebraic Geometry can be found in [56]. In particular, we can refer to [48] for some techniques used to study algebraic varieties with special combinatorial features. Recently, connections between commutative algebra and coding theory have gained much attention (see [15, 16, 19, 24, 31, 34, 38, 52,53,54] for more results in this direction). For a background in commutative algebra with a view toward algebraic geometry we suggest [20].
The paper is structured as follow. Section 2 provides the background on designs, ideals of points, symbolic and regular powers of ideals, containment problem and monomial ideals. We introduce two finite sets of reduced points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\) called Steiner configuration and Complement of a Steiner configuration (see Definitions 2.3 and 2.4). As pointed out in Remark 2.5, a Steiner configuration of points and its Complement constructed from a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v) are subschemes of a so called star configuration of \(\left( {\begin{array}{c}v \\ n\end{array}}\right) \) points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\).
In Sect. 3, we will focus on the Complement of a Steiner configuration of points because it is a proper hyperplanes section of a monomial ideal that is the StanleyReisner ideal of a matroid (see Theorem 3.4). Thus, each mth symbolic power of such a monomial ideal is arithmetically CohenMacaulay and, after a proper hyperplanes section, it agrees with the mth symbolic power of the ideal defining a Complement of a Steiner configuration (see Proposition 3.6). This connection allows us to study the homological invariants of the ideal \(I_{X_C}\) of the Complement of a Steiner configuration. We start with the description of the initial degree \(I_{X_C},\) i.e. we describe the minimum integer d such that \((I_{X_C})_d\ne (0)\) or, equivalently, the least degree d of a minimal generator of \(I_{X_C}\). We also compute its Waldschmidt constant and give results on the containment problem of \(I_{X_C}\), i.e. the problem of determining for which m and d the containment \(I_{X_C}^{(m)}\subseteq I_{X_C}^d\) holds. Section 4 is devoted to the computation of the Hilbert Function, the regularity and graded Betti numbers of \(I_{X_C}.\) In particular, we give some bounds for the asymptotic resurgence and the resurgence of \(I_{X_C}.\)
Unfortunately, the monomial ideal associated to a Steiner configuration of points does not lead to a CohenMacaulay algebra and we cannot apply the same methods as for its Complement. From a combinatorial point of view, two Steiner systems having the same parameters could have very different properties. Computational experiments give us examples where such differences effect the homological invariants. We pose Questions 4.15 and 4.16 on the behaviour of Steiner configurations of points to lead us and the interested researcher towards future works.
We end the paper with an application to coding theory. Following [15, 24, 52,53,54,55], we study special linear codes associated to a Steiner configuration of points and its Complement. In particular, their combinatorial structure allows us to compute the Hamming distance of the associated code (Proposition 5.2 and Theorem 5.4).
The computer softwares CoCoA [1] and Macaulay2 [32] were indispensable for all the computations we made.
Preliminaries and notation
Steiner systems play an important role in Design Theory. We use [11] and [13] as main references for all the background on this topic.
The existence of a Steiner system strongly depends on the parameters (t, n, v). For instance if \(t=2\) and \(n=3\) then \(v\equiv 1,3 \mod (6)\) must hold. There are known necessary conditions for the existence of a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v) that are not in general sufficient. If a Steiner system (V, B) of type S(t, n, v) exists, then \(B=\frac{{v \atopwithdelims ()t}}{{n \atopwithdelims ()t}}.\)
Example 2.1
One of the simplest and most known examples of Steiner system is the Fano Plane. It is unique up to isomorphism and it is a Steiner system of type S(2, 3, 7) with block set
Ideals of Steiner configuration of points and its complement
Let V be a set of v points and \({\mathcal {H}}:=\{H_1, \ldots H_v\}\) be a collection of distinct hyperplanes \(H_j\) of \({\mathbb {P}}^n\) defined by the linear forms \(\ell _j\) for \(j=1\dots ,n\) and \(n\le v\). Assume that any n hyperplanes in \({\mathcal {H}}\) meet in a point. There is a natural way to associate a point in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\) to a nsubset of V. Indeed, given a nsubset \(\sigma :=\{\sigma _1, \ldots \sigma _n\}\) of V, we denote by \(P_{{\mathcal {H}}, \sigma }\) the point intersection of the hyperplanes \(H_{\sigma _1},\ldots , H_{\sigma _n}.\) Then the ideal \(I_{P_{{\mathcal {H}}, \sigma }}=(\ell _{\sigma _1},\ldots , \ell _{\sigma _n})\subseteq k[{\mathbb {P}}^n]\) is the vanishing ideal of the point \(P_{{\mathcal {H}}, \sigma }\).
Definition 2.2
Given a set V of v points and a general collection Y of subsets of V, we define the following set of points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\) with respect to \({\mathcal {H}}\)
and its defining ideal
In particular, if \(n\le v\) are positive integers and V is a set of v points, we denote by \(C_{(n,v)}\) the set containing all the nsubsets of V.
Definition 2.3
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v) with \(t<v\le n\). We associate to B the following set of points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\)
and its defining ideal
We call \(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, B}\) the Steiner configuration of points associated to the Steiner system (V, B) of type S(t, n, v) with respect to \({\mathcal {H}}\) (or just \(X_{ B}\) if there is no ambiguity).
Definition 2.4
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v) with \(t<n\le v\). We associate to \(C_{(n,v)}\setminus B\) the following set of points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\)
and its defining ideal
We call \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},C_{(v,n)}\setminus B}\) the Complement of a Steiner configuration of points with respect to \({\mathcal {H}} \) (or CSteiner \(X_{\text {C}}\) if there is no ambiguity).
Remark 2.5
Note that from Definition 2.2, it follows that \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},C_{(n,v)}}\) is a so called star configuration of \({v \atopwithdelims ()n}\) points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\). In particular, from Definitions 2.3 and 2.4, \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},C_{(n,v)}\setminus B}\) is the Complement of the Steiner configuration \(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, B}\) in the star configuration \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},C_{(n,v)}}\). Thus, a Steiner configuration of points and its Complement are subschemes of a star configuration of \({v \atopwithdelims ()n}\) points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\). See for instance [7,8,9, 25, 26] for recent results on star configurations and see [55] for the connections between linear codes and ideals of star configurations.
Remark 2.6
Since the set \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},B}\) contains B points, we have that
Example 2.7
Consider the Steiner configuration associated to (V, B) of type S(2, 3, 7) as in Example 2.1. Take \({\mathcal {H}} :=\{H_1, \ldots , H_7 \}\) a collection of 7 distinct hyperplanes \(H_i\) in \({\mathbb {P}}^3\) defined by a linear form \(\ell _i\) for \(i=1,\ldots ,7\), respectively, with the property that any 3 of them meet in a point \(P_{{\mathcal {H}},\sigma }=H_{\sigma _1}\cap H_{\sigma _2}\cap H_{\sigma _3}\), where \(\sigma =\{\sigma _1,\sigma _2,\sigma _3\}\in B\). We get that \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},C_{(3,7)}}\) is a star configuration of \({7\atopwithdelims ()3}=35\) points in \({\mathbb {P}}^3\), \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},B}:=\cup _{\sigma \in B}~ \{P_{{\mathcal {H}}, \sigma } \}\) is a Steiner configuration consisting of 7 points in \({\mathbb {P}}^3\) and \(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, C_{(3,7)}\setminus B}\) is a CSteiner configuration consisting of \({7 \atopwithdelims ()3}7= 28\) points in \({\mathbb {P}}^3.\) Their defining ideals are respectively,
Symbolic and regular powers of an ideal and the containment problem
In this section, we recall some definitions and known results concerning the symbolic and regular powers of ideal of points.
Let I be a homogeneous ideal in the standard graded polynomial ring \(R:=k[x_0, \ldots , x_n ].\) Given an integer m, we denote by \(I^m\) the regular power of the ideal I. The mth symbolic power of I is defined as
where Ass(I) denotes the set of associated primes of I. If I is a radical ideal (this includes for instance squarefree monomial ideals and ideals of finite sets of points) then
It always holds that \(I^{m}\subseteq I^{(m)}.\) In particular, the containment problem is of interest, i.e. the problem of determining for which m and d the containment \(I^{(m)}\subseteq I^d\) holds. We refer the reader to [2,3,4, 17, 18, 36, 50] for a partial list of papers on this topic.
The investigation of this problem led to the introduction of other invariants with the aim of comparison between symbolic and ordinary powers of an ideal.
Let I be a homogeneous ideal, the real number
is called resurgence of I (see [3, 4]). For a homogeneous ideal \((0)\subset I \subset k[{\mathbb {P}}^n ]\), in [33] the authors define an asymptotic resurgence as follows:
The resurgence is strictly related to the Waldschmidt constant of I, introduced in [59] in a completely different setting. If \(\alpha (I)\) is the minimum integer d such that \(I_d\ne (0),\) then the Waldschmidt constant of I, \({{\widehat{\alpha }}}(I)\), is the real number
Given r distinct points \(P_i \in {\mathbb {P}}^n\) and nonnegative integers \(m_i\), we denote by \(Z = m_1P_1 +\cdots + m_rP_r \subset {\mathbb {P}}^n\) the set of fat points defined by \(I_Z = \bigcap _i I_{P_i}^{m_i},\) where \(I_{P_i}\) is the prime ideal generated by all forms which vanish at \(P_i.\) The set \(X=\{P_1,\ldots ,P_ r\}\) is called the support of Z. When \(m_i=m\) for all i, \(I_ Z= \bigcap _i I_{P_i}^{m}=I_X^{(m)}.\)
If I is the ideal of a set of (fat) points, we denote by \(I_i\) (resp. \(R_i\)) the vector space span in I (resp. R) of the forms of degree i in I (resp. R). The function \(H: {\mathbb {N}} \rightarrow {\mathbb {N}}\) such that \(H(i)=\dim _k(R/I)_i= \dim _k R_i\dim _k I_i\) is called the Hilbert Function of R/I and it is denoted by \(H_{R/I}(i)\). The CastelnuovoMumford regularity of I, denoted by \({{\,\mathrm{reg}\,}}(I)\), is the least degree \(t > 0\) such that \(\dim (R/I)_t = \dim (R/I)_{t1}\).
Theorem 1.2.1 in [4] shows that if I defines a 0dimensional scheme, i.e., a finite set of points, then
In [33], Theorem 1.2. shows that (1) \(1\le \dfrac{\alpha (I)}{{{\widehat{\alpha }}} (I)} \le \rho _a (I)\le \rho (I)\le h\) where \(h = min(N, h_I )\) and \(h_I\) is the maximum of the heights of the associated primes of I; (2) if I is the ideal of a (nonempty) smooth subscheme of \({\mathbb {P}}^n\), then \(\rho _a(I )\le \frac{\omega (I )}{{{\widehat{\alpha }}} (I)}\le \frac{{{\,\mathrm{reg}\,}}(I)}{{{\widehat{\alpha }}} (I)}\) where \(\omega (I)\) is the largest degree in a minimal homogeneous set of generators of I.
Monomial ideals, simplicial complexes
In this section, we show how monomial ideals form an important link between commutative algebra and combinatorics. A monomial ideal is uniquely determined by the monomials it contains. Monomial ideals also arise in graph theory. Given a graph G with vertices \(\{x_1,\ldots , x_v\}\), we associate the ideal \(I_G\) in \(k[x_1, \ldots , x_v]\) generated by the quadratic monomials \(x_ix_j\) such that \(x_i\) is adjacent to \(x_j\). From known results in the literature, it is possible to determine many invariants for monomial ideals.
In particular, ideals generated by squarefree monomials have a beautiful combinatorial interpretation in terms of simplicial complexes. In the next sections, we will use these properties to completely describe the most important homological invariants of an ideal defining a Complement of a Steiner configuration of points. This is equivalent to say that we are describing special subsets of star configurations using tools from combinatorics and algebraic geometry. Unfortunately, the ideal defining a Steiner configuration of points cannot be described using monomial ideals, and we cannot determine its homological invariants. So, the problem is still open. At the end of the paper, we will be able to describe the parameters of the linear codes associated to both a Steiner configuration of points and its Complement.
We refer to [35] for notation and basic facts on monomial ideals and to [4] for an extensive coverage of the theory of StanleyReisner ideals.
Definition 2.8
An ideal I in a polynomial ring R is called a monomial ideal if there is a subset \({\mathcal {A}}\subset {\mathbb {Z}}^n_{\ge 0}\) (possible infinite) such that I consists of all polynomials of the form \(\sum _{\alpha \in {\mathcal {A}}} h_{\alpha } x^{\alpha }\), where \(h_{\alpha }\in R\).
Definition 2.9
A simplicial complex \(\Delta \) over a set of vertices \( V=\{x_1,\ldots ,x_v\}\) is a collection of subsets of V satisfying the following two conditions:

(1)
\(\{x_i\}\in \Delta \) for all \(1\le i\le v\)

(2)
if \(F \in \Delta \) and \(G\subset F\), then \(G\in \Delta \).
An element F of \(\Delta \) is called a face, and the dimension of a face F of \(\Delta \) is \(F1\), where F is the number of vertices of F. The faces of dimensions 0 and 1 are called vertices and edges, respectively, and \(\dim \emptyset = 1\).
The maximal faces of \(\Delta \) under inclusion are called facets of \(\Delta \). The dimension of the simplicial complex \(\Delta \) is \(\dim \Delta = \max \{\dim F~ ~ F \in \Delta \}\). We refer to idimensional faces as ifaces. We denote the simplicial complex \(\Delta \) with facets \(F_1,\ldots , F_q\) by \(\Delta = \langle F_1,\ldots , F_q\rangle \) and we call \(\{F_1,\ldots , F_q\}\) the facet set of \(\Delta \).
If \(\Delta \) is a ddimensional simplicial complex, the most important invariant is the fvector (or face vector) of \(\Delta \) and it is denoted by \((f_0,\ldots , f_d) \in {\mathbb {N}}^{d+1}\), where \(f_i\) denotes the number of idimensional faces in \(\Delta \). From the monomial ideal point of view, the fvector is encoded in the Hilbert series of the quotient ring \(R/I_{\Delta }\) and it is related to the hvector of a suitable set of points in \( {\mathbb {P}}^n\) (see Sect. 4). We will use Remark 2.11 to show the connections between StanleyReisner ideals, simplicial complexes, matroids and Steiner systems to determine Waldschmidt constant and bounds for the resurgence (see Sect. 3), Betti numbers, Hilbert function, and regularity of the ideal of a Complement of a Steiner configurations of points (see Sect. 4).
The Alexander dual of a simplicial complex \(\Delta \) on \(V=\{x_1,\ldots ,x_v\}\) is the simplicial complex \(\Delta ^{\vee }\) on V with faces \(V\setminus \sigma \), where \(\sigma \not \in \Delta \).
The StanleyReisner ideal of \(\Delta \) is the ideal \( I_\Delta :=(x^{\sigma } ~ ~ \sigma \not \in \Delta )\) of \(R = k[x_1,\ldots , x_v]\), where \(x^{\sigma } =\Pi _{i \in \sigma } ~ x_i\). It is well known that the StanleyReisner ideals are precisely the squarefree monomial ideals. The quotient ring \(k[\Delta ] := R/I_{\Delta }\) is the StanleyReisner ring of the simplicial complex \(\Delta \).
Each simplicial complex has a geometric realization as a certain subset of a finite dimensional affine space.
If V is a set v points, we denote by \(k[V]:=k[x_1,\ldots , x_v]\) the standard graded polynomial ring in v variables. Given a nsubset of V, \(\sigma :=\{{i_1}, {i_2}, \ldots , {i_n}\}\subseteq V,\) we will write
for the prime ideal generated by the variables indexed by \(\sigma \), and
for the monomial given by the product of the variables indexed by \(\sigma \).
Let \(n\le v\) be positive integers, and V a set of v points; recall that \(C_{(n,v)}\) is the set containing all the nsubsets of V.
Definition 2.10
If \(T\subset C_{(n,v)}\), we define two ideals
and
called the face ideal of T and the cover ideal of T, respectively.
Remark 2.11
It is well known that \(J_T\) is the StanleyReisner ideal \(I_{\Delta _T}\) of the simplicial complex
Then \(J_T\) is generated by the monomials \(M_b\) with \(b\notin \Delta _T.\) We also recall that \(I_T\) and \(J_T\) are the Alexander duals of each other.
Since \(J_T\) is a squarefree monomial ideal, the mth symbolic power of \(J_T\) (Theorem 3.7 in [14]) is
Matroid and configurations of points from Steiner systems: Waldschmidt constant and containment problem
This section is devoted to show how the results of the previuos sections are related to our special configurations of points. In particular, we will show that the Complement of a Steiner configuration of points is connected with the theory of matroids.
Definition 3.1
A simplicial complex \(\Delta \) is said to be a matroid if \(F,G\in \Delta \) and if \(F>G\) then there exists \(i\in F\setminus G\) such that \(G\cup \{i\}\in \Delta \).
We also recall that we say that a homogeneous ideal J in a polynomial ring R is CohenMacaulay (CM) if R/J is CohenMacaulay, i.e. \(\text {depth}(R/J) = \text {Krulldim}(R/J).\) Varbaro in [58] and Minh and Trung in [46] have independently shown the following
Theorem 3.2
(Varbaro [58], Minh and Trung [46]) Let \(\Delta \) be a simplicial complex. Then \(k[V]/I_{\Delta }^{(m)}\) is CohenMacaulay for each \(m\ge 1\) if and only if \(\Delta \) is a matroid.
Terai and Trung in [51] proved if \(I_{\Delta }^{(m)}\) is CohenMacaulay for some \(m\ge 3\) then \(\Delta \) is a matroid.
To shorten the notation, from now on we set \(C:=C_{(n,v)}\setminus B\). Let \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},B}\) be a Steiner configuration of points and \(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, C}\) its Complement as previous defined with respect to a collection \({\mathcal {H}}\) of hyperplanes in \({\mathbb {P}}^{n}.\)
We claim that \(I_{X_{{\mathcal {H}}, C}}^{(m)}\) and \(J_C^{(m)}\) share the same homological invariants for any positive integer m. In particular, the key point of our argument is that \(J_C\) is the StanleyReisner ideal of the simplicial complex \(\Delta _C\), and that \(\Delta _C\) is a matroid (see Theorem 3.4).
Several times in the literature simplicial complexes have been associated to Steiner systems. See for instance [12, 49]. In Example 4.6 in [18] the well known Fano matroid is used to construct a CohenMacaulay ideal I such that \(I^{(3)}\ne I^3\) and \(I^{(2)}\ne I^2.\) The quoted example is one of the cases described in Corollary 3.10.
We need the following auxiliary lemma.
Lemma 3.3
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v). If \(C_{(vn1,v)}\) is the set containing all the \((vn+1)\)subsets of V, then \(C_{(vn1,v)}\subseteq \Delta _C\).
Proof
Let F be a \((vn1)\)set of V. In order to prove the lemma we need to find \(G\in C\) such that \(F \subseteq V\setminus G,\) i.e., \(G \subseteq V\setminus F.\) First note that \(V\setminus F=n+1\), so we can take two nsubsets \(G_1, G_2\) of \(V\setminus F\) sharing a \(n1\)subset. Since \(n1\ge t\), from the definition of Steiner Systems at least one of them, say \(G_1,\) does not belong to G. Then \(G_1\in C\) and \(G\subseteq V\setminus F.\) \(\square \)
The next results are useful to describe the Complement of a Steiner configuration of points using the combinatorial properties of matroids.
Theorem 3.4
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v). Then \(\Delta _C\) is a matroid.
Proof
Let F, G be two maximal elements in \(\Delta _C\), i.e., F, G belong to the facet set of \(\Delta _C\) . Assume by contradiction \((F\setminus \{i\})\cup \{j\}\notin \Delta _C\) for each \(i\in F\) and for each \(j\in F\). Then all the sets \(\sigma _{i,j}:=V\setminus ((F\setminus \{i\})\cup \{j\})\) belong to B. Since \(n\ge 2\), at least two blocks of B share a \((n1)\)set. That is a contradiction because \(n1>t1\) from Definition 2.3. \(\square \)
Proposition 3.5
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v). Then \(k[V]/J_C^{(m)}\) is CohenMacaulay for each \(m\ge 1.\)
Proof
Since \(J_C=I_{\Delta _C}\), it is a consequence of Theorem 3.2 and Theorem 3.4. \(\square \)
Now, given a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v) we are able to describe some homological invariants of the ideal associated to a Complement of Steiner configuration of points. Unfortunately, we have no similar result as Proposition 3.5 that should hold for a Steiner configuration of points.
We now prove the main claim of this section.
Proposition 3.6
\(I_{X_{{\mathcal {H}},C}}^{(m)}\subseteq k[{\mathbb {P}}^n]\) and \(I_{\Delta _C}^{(m)}\subseteq k[V]\) share the same homological invariants.
Proof
It is an immediate consequence of Theorem 3.6. in [26]. Indeed, \(k[V]/I_{\Delta _C}^{(m)}\) is CohenMacaulay, and any subset of at most n linear forms in \(\{\ell _1, \ldots , \ell _v\}\) is a \(k[{\mathbb {P}}^n]\)regular sequence. \(\square \)
The CohenMacaulay property of \(k[V]/I_{\Delta _C}^{(m)}\) also allows us to look at \(I_{X_{{\mathcal {H}},C}}^{(m)}\) as a proper hyperplane section of \(I_{\Delta _C}^{(m)}\) (see [57]). This construction is quite standard but is very useful to describe combinatorial properties for arithmetically CohenMacaulay varieties X, i.e, \(\text {depth}(R/I_X) = \text {Krulldim}(R/I_X)\), not only in projective spaces, but also in multiprojective spaces, see for instance [21,22,23, 26]. The common idea is to relate, when possible, ideals of arithmetically CohenMacaulay varieties to monomial ideals in order to study their invariants.
We start with the description of the initial degree \(\alpha (J_C)\) of \(J_C=I_{\Delta _C},\) i.e. we describe the minimum integer d such that \((J_C)_d\ne (0)\) or, equivalently, the least degree d of a minimal generator of \(J_C\) . For the ease of the reader, we prove the following result that shows that \(\{\alpha (J_C^{m})\}_m\) is a strictly increasing sequence.
Lemma 3.7
Let \({\mathfrak {p}}\subseteq k[V]\) be a squarefree monomial ideal and \(M\in {\mathfrak {p}}^m\). Then \(\dfrac{\partial M}{\partial x_j}\in {\mathfrak {p}}^{m1}\) for any \(j\in V\).
Proof
Set \({\mathfrak {p}}={\mathfrak {p}}_{\sigma }\) where \(\sigma \subseteq V\) and let \(x_1^{a_1}\ldots x_v^{a_v}\in {\mathfrak {p}}^m\). Then \(\sum \limits _{i\in \sigma }{a_i}\ge m.\) If \(a_j=0\) then trivially \(0\in {\mathfrak {p}}^{m1}.\) If \(a_j>0\) then \(\dfrac{\partial M}{\partial x_j}=a_j x_1^{a_1}\ldots x_j^{a_j1}\ldots x_v^{a_v}\) and \(\sum \limits _{i\in \sigma }{a_i}\ge m1.\) \(\square \)
Proposition 3.8
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v). Then

(i)
\(\alpha (J_{C})=vn\);

(ii)
\(\alpha (J_{C}^{(q)})=vn+q\) for \(2\le q<n\);

(iii)
\(\alpha (J_{C}^{(m)})=\alpha (J_{C}^{(q)})+pv\), where \(m=pn+q\) and \(0\le q<n\).
Proof
 (i):

We have \(J_C=I_{\Delta _C}=(M_{\sigma } \ \ \sigma \not \in \Delta _C)\). From Lemma 3.3 we have that the elements not in \(\Delta _C\) have cardinality at least \(vn.\) On the other hand, for any \(\beta \in B\) we have \(V\setminus \beta \not \in \Delta _C\).
 (ii):

First we show \(\alpha (J_{C}^{(q)})\le vn+q\). Let \(\beta \in B\) and \(\sigma \subseteq \beta \) with \(\sigma =q\), then we claim \(M_{(V\setminus \beta )\cup \sigma }\in \alpha (J_{C}^{(q)})\). Assume by contradiction \(M_{(V\setminus \beta )\cup \sigma }\notin {\mathfrak {p}}_{\tau }^q\) for some \(\tau \in V.\) Then \((V\setminus \beta )\cap \sigma \cap \tau = \emptyset \) but this is a contradiction since \(vn+q+n>n.\) On the other hand, if \(q>2\) the statement follows by Lemma 3.7, since \(\alpha (J_{C}^{(q)})>\alpha (J_{C}^{(q1)})= vn+q1\). If \(q=2\) we proceed by contradiction. Let \(M\in J_{C}^{(2)}\) be a monomial such that \(\deg M = vn+1.\) Then there are at least \(n1\) variables that do not divide M. Since \(t\le n1\), there is at most one block in B containing these variables. Therefore there are at least \(vn\) elements of C containing them. Since \(M\in J_{C}^{(2)}\), M belongs to each of these ideals to the power of 2, i.e., there are \(vn\) variables \(x_j\) such that \(x_j^2_M.\) So \(\deg M \ge 2(vn)> vn+1.\)
 (iii):

We show that \(J_C^{(m)}:M_V=J_C^{(mn)}.\)

If \(F\in J_{C}^{(mn)}\) then \(M_VF\in {J_C^{(n)}}\cdot J_{C}^{(mn)}\subseteq J_{C}^{(m)}\).

If \(FM_V\in J_{C}^{(m)}\) then, by Lemma 3.7, \(FM_{V\setminus \sigma }\in J_{C}^{(mn)}\) for any \(\sigma \in T\). Thus \(FM_{V\setminus \sigma }\in {\mathfrak {p}}_{\sigma }^{(mn)}\). This implies \(F\in {\mathfrak {p}}_{\sigma }^{(mn)}\).
Then \(\alpha (J_{C}^{(m)})= \alpha (J_{C}^{(mn)})+v =\cdots =\alpha (J_{C}^{(q)})+pv\), where \(m=pn+q\) and \(0\le q<n\). \(\square \)
From Proposition 3.6 and Proposition 3.8, the initial degree of the ideal of a CSteiner configuration of points only depends on the parameters (t, n, v) of the Steiner system.
Using the previous results, we have the following theorem:
Theorem 3.9
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v). Then

(i)
\(\alpha (I_{X_C})=vn\);

(ii)
\(\alpha (I_{X_C}^{(q)})=vn+q\), for \(2\le q <n;\)

(iii)
\(\alpha (I_{X_C}^{(m)})=\alpha (I_{X_C}^{(q)})+pv\), where \(m=pn+q\) and \(0\le q<n\) and \(\alpha (I_{X_C}^{(n)})=\alpha (I_{X_C}^{(0)})+v=v.\)
An important consequence of Theorem 3.9 is related to the containment problem.
Corollary 3.10
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v). Then \(I_{X_C}^{(m)}\not \subseteq I_{X_C}^{d}\) for any pair (m, d) such that
In particular, if \(v>2n\) then
Proof
From item i) in Theorem 3.9\(\alpha (I_{X_C}^d)=d(vn)\). Therefore, it is enough to take m such that \(\alpha (I_{X_C}^{(m)})<d(vn)\). If \(m\equiv 1 \mod n\) then, from items i) and iii) in Theorem 3.9, we get \(\alpha (I_{X_C}^{(m)})=(vn)+\dfrac{(m1)v}{n}\). Then \((vn)+\dfrac{(m1)v}{n}<d(vn)\) implies the statement. If \(m\not \equiv 1 \mod n\) then \(m=pn+q\) and \(2\le q\le n\) and, from items ii) and iii) in Theorem 3.9, we get \(\alpha (I_{X_C}^{(m)})=vn+mpn+pv= (1+p)(vn)+m.\) Thus \((1+p)(vn)<d(vn)+m\) implies \(d>1+p+\dfrac{m}{(vn)}\ge 1+\dfrac{mn}{n}+\dfrac{m}{(vn)}.\)
In the case \(m=n\), we get \(1+\dfrac{mn}{n}+\dfrac{m}{(vn)}= 1+\dfrac{n}{(vn)}<2.\) \(\square \)
Example 3.11
If \(X:=X_{{\mathcal {H}}, C_{(3,7)}\setminus B}\subseteq {\mathbb {P}}^3\) is the CSteiner configuration of points as in Example 2.7, then \(I_{X}^{(3)}\not \subseteq {I_{X}}^{2}\).
Another immediate corollary allows us to compute the Waldschmidt constant of a CSteiner configuration. The Waldschmidt constant of a uniform matroid was computed in Theorem 7.5 in [2]. Properties of a uniform matroid were also studied in [26].
Corollary 3.12
If (V, B) is a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v), then the Waldschmidt constant of \(I_{X_C}\) is
Proof
From [10], Lemma 1, the limit \({\widehat{\alpha }}(I_{X_C})=\lim \limits _{m\rightarrow +\infty } \dfrac{\alpha (I_{X_C}^{(m)})}{m}\) exists. Then from Theorem 3.9 we have
\(\square \)
Remark 3.13
The homological invariants do not depend on the choice of the hyperplanes, provided that we take them meeting properly.
Homological invariants of CSteiner configurations of points: Hilbert function and graded Betti numbers
In this section we describe the Hilbert function of a CSteiner configuration of points. We recall some known definitions. For a finite set of points \(X\subset {\mathbb {P}}^n\) the Hilbert function of X is defined as the numerical function \(H_X: {\mathbb {N}} \rightarrow {\mathbb {N}}\) such that
where \(R=k[{\mathbb {P}}^n]\) and the first difference of the Hilbert function is defined by \(\Delta H_X(i):=H_X(i)H_X(i1).\) The hvector of X is denoted by
where \(h_i = \Delta H_X(i)\) and p is the last index such that \(\Delta H_X(i) > 0\). If I is the ideal of a set of points, analogously to the case of fat points, \({{\,\mathrm{reg}\,}}(I)\) denotes the CastelnuovoMumford regularity of I.
The next result gives us informations on the hvector of a CSteiner configuration of points \(X_C\). Recall that given a Steiner system (V, B) of type S(t, n, v), the number of blocks is \(B=\dfrac{{v\atopwithdelims ()t}}{{n\atopwithdelims ()t}}\) and that the last entry \(h_p\) of \(h_{X_{C}}\) is in degree \(p=vn.\) With the previous notation, we have the following:
Proposition 4.1
If (V, B) is a Steiner system S(t, n, v), then the hvector of \(X_C\) is
Proof
From Theorem 3.9 we have \(\alpha (I_{\Delta _C})\) is \(vn\). From Remark 2.11, a set of minimal generators of degree \(vn\) has B elements. So we only need to show that \(h_{X_C}(vn+1)=0.\) This follows since \(\sum _{j=0}^{vn}h_{X_C}(j)= {v \atopwithdelims ()n}B= \deg X_C.\) \(\square \)
The regularity of \(I_{X_C}\) is an easy consequence of Proposition 4.1:
Corollary 4.2
\({{\,\mathrm{reg}\,}}(I_{X_C})=\alpha (I_{X_C})+1=vn+1\).
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v). A minimal graded free resolution of \(I_{X_C}\) will be written as
where \( R(j)\) is the free Rmodule obtained by shifting the degrees of R by j, i.e. so that \(R(j)_a = R_{aj}.\)
The number \(\beta _{i,j}(I_{X_C})\) is called the (i, j)th graded Betti numbers of \(I_{X_C}\) and equals the number of minimal generators of degree j in the ith syzygy module of \(I_{X_C}.\)
Another consequence of Proposition 4.1 is that
This means that the nonzero graded Betti numbers only occur in two rows of the Betti table \(\beta (I_{X_C}):=\left( \beta _{i,i+j}(I_{X_C})\right) _{i,j}\) of \(I_{X_C}\).
The next proposition excludes the existence of first syzygies in degree \(vn+1.\)
Proposition 4.3
If (V, B) is a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v), then
Proof
From Proposition 3.6 it is enough to show that \(\beta _{1, vn+1}(J_C)=0\). By contradiction, let \(\alpha _1,\alpha _2\in B\) be two distinct blocks of the Steiner system (V, B) such that the monomials \(M_1:=M_{V\setminus \alpha _1}\) and \(M_2:=M_{V\setminus \alpha _2}\) give a linear syzygy. Then \(\gcd (M_1,M_2)\) has degree \(vn1.\) This implies \(\alpha _1\cap \alpha _2=n1\ge t,\) a contradiction to Definition 2.3 of Steiner system. \(\square \)
Proposition 4.4
If (V, B) is a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v), then
Proof
It is matter of computation to show that
and
and for \(i<vn\)
Then
and
and for \(i<vn\)
So we have
Then the statement follows from Proposition 4.3. \(\square \)
Corollary 4.5
If (V, B) is a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v), then \(\beta _{0,vn+1}(I_{X_C})=0\) if and only if \(t=n1.\)
Proof
From Proposition 4.4 we have
If \(t=n1\) then we get
If \(\beta _{0,vn+1}(I_{X_C})=0\) then we have
and then
This implies
and then \(t=n1.\) \(\square \)
Corollary 4.6
If \(t=n1\), we have
Corollary 4.7
We have
where \(\omega (I_{X_C})\) is the largest degree in a minimal homogeneous set of generators of \(I_{X_C}.\)
Recalling that the resurgence and the asymptotic resurgence of I are defined as \(\rho (I):=\sup \left\{ \dfrac{m}{d} \  \ I^{(m)}\not \subseteq I^{d}\right\} \) and \(\rho _{a}(I) = \sup \left\{ \frac{m}{r} : I ^{(mt)}\not \subseteq I^{ r t} \hbox { for all}\ t>> 0\right\} \), respectively, the following results give the bounds:
Corollary 4.8
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v).

(1)
If \(t=n1\) then
$$\begin{aligned} \dfrac{(vn)n}{v}= \rho _a(I_{X_C})\le \rho (I_{X_C})\le \dfrac{(vn+1)n}{v}. \end{aligned}$$ 
(2)
If \(t<n1\)
$$\begin{aligned} \dfrac{(vn)n}{v} \le \rho _a(I_{X_C})\le \rho (I_{X_C})\le \dfrac{(vn+1)n}{v}. \end{aligned}$$
Proof
By Theorem 1.2.1 in [4] and by Theorem 3.9 and Corollary 4.7 we have
\(\square \)
Remark 4.9
From Lemma 2.3.4 in [4], if \(d{{\,\mathrm{reg}\,}}(I_{X}) \le \alpha (I_{X}^{(m)})\), then \(I_{X}^{(m)} \subseteq I^d\). Moreover, if \(d\alpha (I_X)>\alpha (I_X^{(m)})\) then \(I_X^{(m)} \not \subseteq I_X^d\). The range of values not covered by these bounds has length
For a CSteiner configuration \(X_{C}\), from Corollary 4.2, this number is equal to
Example 4.10
We compute the hvector and the graded Betti numbers of a CSteiner System \(X_C\) of type S(2, 3, v). We have \(B=\frac{v(v1)}{6}\) and then
In this case, we have: \(\beta _{0,v3}= \frac{v(v1)}{6},\) \(\beta _{1,v2}= 0,\) \(\beta _{1,v1}= \frac{v(v3)}{2}\) and \(\beta _{2,v}= \frac{(v1)(v3)}{6}.\) In particular, \(\alpha (I_{X_C})=\omega ((I_{X_C})=v3\) and \({{\,\mathrm{reg}\,}}(I_{X_C})=v2.\)
In the following example we compute the graded Betti numbers of a CSteiner configuration of type S(t, n, v) where \(t< n1.\)
Example 4.11
Consider a Steiner system (V, B) of type S(2, 4, 13) where \(V=13\) and
Setting \(C:=C_{(4,13)}\setminus V\), we construct a CSteiner configuration \(X_C\) in \({\mathbb {P}}^4\). We have
We have \(\beta _{0,9}= 13,\) \(\beta _{0,10}= 234,\) \(\beta _{1,11}=702,\) \(\beta _{2,12}= 663,\) \(\beta _{3,13}=207.\) In particular, we have \(\alpha (I_{X_C})=9\) and \(\omega (I_{X_C})= {{\,\mathrm{reg}\,}}(I_{X_C})=10\).
In general, the following question is open.
Question 4.12
Let \(X_C\subseteq {\mathbb {P}}^n\) be a CSteiner configuration of points of type S(t, n, v). Do the graded Betti numbers and the Hilbert Function of \(I_{X_C}^{(m)}\) only depend on the parameters (t, n, v)?
We don’t have any formula to describe the Hilbert function of \(I_{X_C}^{(m)}\). For \(m=1\) Proposition 4.1 implies that the hvector of \(X_C\) is a pure Osequence (see [39] for all the terminology and background on this topic). This is not always true if \(m>1\). Using [1] and [32], we can show examples where the hvectors could be not unimodal or not differentiable.
Example 4.13
Consider a Steiner system \((V_1,B_1)\) of type S(2, 3, 7). Set \(X_{C_1}:=X_{C_{(3,7)}\setminus B_1}\). Using [32], we found that \(I_{X_{C_1}}^{(7)}\) has the following hvector
that is a nonunimodal sequence (the index denotes the degree in which the dimension occurs, for instance, above the entry 153 is in degree 16).
Example 4.14
Consider a Steiner configuration \((V_2,B_2)\) of type S(2, 3, 9) and set \(X_{C_2}:=X_{C_{(3,7)}\setminus B_2}.\) Using [32], we found that the hvector of \({I_{X_{C_2}}^{(10)}}\) is
that is unimodal but not differentiable (the positive part of the first difference is not an Osequence).
We end this section with the following questions on \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},B}\) suggested by experimental evidences using [1] and [32]. From a combinatorial point of view, two Steiner systems having the same parameters could have very different properties. We have examples where such differences effect the homological invariants.
Question 4.15
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v), and \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},B}\) the associated Steiner configuration of points. Assume that the hyperplanes in \({\mathcal {H}}\) are chosen generically. Do the Hilbert function and the graded Betti numbers of \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},B}\) only depend on t, n, v?
Question 4.16
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v), and \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},B}\) the associated Steiner configuration of points. Assume that the hyperplanes in \({\mathcal {H}}\) are chosen generically. Are the Hilbert function and the graded Betti numbers of \(X_{{\mathcal {H}},B}\) generic with respect to the Hilbert function? (i.e. the same as a set of B generic points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\)?)
Application to coding theory
In this section we show an application of the previous results on Steiner and CSteiner configurations of points to coding theory. We recall the basic notion on linear coding and we compute the parameters of a linear code associated to a Steiner configuration and a CSteiner configuration of points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n\). We refer to [15, 24, 52,53,54,55] for a detailed initial motivation to study the connections between the minimum distance and some invariants coming from commutative/homological algebra. There are several ways to compute the minimum distance. One of them comes from linear algebra.
Let k be any field and \(X=\{P_1, \ldots , P_r \}\subseteq {\mathbb {P}}^n\) a not degenerate finite set of reduced points. The linear code associated to \(\Gamma \) denoted by \({\mathcal {C}}(X)\) is the image of the injective linear map \(\varphi : k^{n+1}\rightarrow k^{r}.\)
We are interested in three parameters \([X,k_{X}, d_{X} ]\) that we use to evaluate the goodness of a linear code. The first number X is the cardinality of X. The number \(k_{X}\) is the dimension of the code as klinear vector space, that is the rank of the matrix associated to \(\varphi \). The number \(d_{X}\) denotes the minimal distance of \({\mathcal {C}}(X)\), that is the minimum of the Hamming distance of two elements in \({\mathcal {C}}(X)\). The Singleton bound gives always an upper bound for this number: \(d_{X}\le Xn\). When \(d_X=Xn\) the code is called a maximal distance separable code (MDS code).
The linear code associated to X has generating matrix of type \((n+1) \times r\)
where \(c_i\) are the coordinates of \(P_i.\) Then the linear code \({\mathcal {C}}(X)\) has parameters \([X, Rank(A(X)), d_{X}]\). Assuming that A(X) has no proportional columns is equivalent to say that the points \(P_i\) are distinct points in \({\mathbb {P}}^n.\) Then \(X=r,\) \(Rank(A(X))=n+1\) and \(r  d_X\) is the maximum number of these points that fit in a hyperplane of \({\mathbb {P}}^n.\) Remark 2.2 in [52, 53] says that the minimum distance \(d_X\) is also the minimum number such that \(rd_X\) columns in A(X) span an ndimensional space. The generating matrix A(X) of an \([X, n+1, d]\)linear code \({\mathcal {C}}\) naturally determines a matroid \(M({\mathcal {C}}).\)
Denoted by hyp(X) the maximum number of points contained in some hyperplane, \(d_{X}\) has also geometrical interpretation, that is \(d_{X}=Xhyp(X)\), see Sect. 2 in [52] and Remark 2.7 in [54]. In particular, the authors borrowed this terminology from coding theory since \(d_X\) is exactly the minimum distance of the (equivalence class of) linear codes with generating matrix having as columns the coordinates of the points of X.
Set \(X_B:=X_{{\mathcal {H}},B}.\) We apply the results of the previous sections to compute the parameters of linear codes associated to both a Steiner configuration \(X_B\) of points and its Complement \(X_C\).
Proposition 5.1
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v) with \(V=v\). If \(X_B\) is the Steiner configuration of points and \(X_C\) its Complement, we have
and
Proof
Let \(H_1\in {\mathcal {H}}\) be one of the hyperplanes involved in the construction of a Steiner configuration. Then it is clear by definition that the number of blocks in B containing 1, i.e., the number of points in \(H_1\) is
Since the star configuration \(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, C_{(n,v)}}\) has \({v1\atopwithdelims ()n1}\) points lying on \(H_1\), we get
\(\square \)
Proposition 5.2
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system of type S(t, n, v) with \(V=v\). Then a Steiner configuration of points \(X_B\subseteq {\mathbb {P}}^n\) defines a linear code with
A CSteiner configuration of points \(X_C\subseteq {\mathbb {P}}^n\) defines a linear code with
Proof
The statement follows from Proposition 5.1 since, from Remark 2.7 in [54], for a set of points X it is \(d_{X}=Xhyp(X).\) \(\square \)
Remark 5.3
For a Steiner triple system S(2, 3, v) with block set B, define \(C:=C_{(3,v)}\setminus B\). Then \(X_B\) and \(X_C\) have the following minimal distance
and
With the above results, we have
Theorem 5.4
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system S(t, n, v) with \(V=v\). Then

(1)
the parameters of the linear code defined by a Steiner configuration of points \(X_B\) are \(\left[ B,n+1, d_{X_B}\right] ;\)

(2)
the parameters of the linear code defined by a Complement of a Steiner configuration of points \(X_{C}\) are \(\left[ \left( {\begin{array}{c}v\\ n\end{array}}\right) B,n+1, d_{X_{C}}\right] .\)
Theorem 5.5
Let (V, B) be a Steiner system S(t, n, v) with \(V=v\).

(1)
If \(n= \dfrac{{v1\atopwithdelims ()t1}}{{n1\atopwithdelims ()t1}}\) then \({\mathcal {C}}(X_{B})\) is a MDS code;

(2)
if \(n= {{v1\atopwithdelims ()t1}}\dfrac{{v1\atopwithdelims ()t1}}{{n1\atopwithdelims ()t1}}\) then \({\mathcal {C}}(X_{C})\) is a MDS code;
Example 5.6
Consider the Steiner system S(2, 3, 7). The blocks are, up to isomorphism, \(B:=\{\{1,2,3\},\{1,4,5\},\{1,6,7\}, \{2,4,6\}, \{2,5,7\}, \{3,4,7\}, \{3,5,6\}\}.\)
Let \(\ell _i:= x+2^iy+3^iz+5^iw\in {\mathbb {C}}[x,y,z,w]= {\mathbb {C}}[{\mathbb {P}}^3]\) be linear forms and let \(H_i\subseteq {\mathbb {P}}^3\) be the hyperplane defined by \(\ell _i\) for \(i=1,\ldots ,7\). Set \({\mathcal {H}} :=\{H_1, \ldots , H_7 \}\). One can check that any three hyperplanes in \({\mathcal {H}}\) meet in one point. Computing with Cocoa [1] the generating matrix of the linear code \({\mathcal {C}}(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, B})\) defined by the Steiner configuration on B we get
where the columns are the seven coordinates (among the thirtyfive) of the intersection points of any three hyperplanes \(H_1,\dots ,H_7\) corresponding to the seven blocks B. The parameters of the code \({\mathcal {C}}(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, B})\) are [7, 4, 4].
We note that only in this particular case, the linear code \({\mathcal {C}}(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, B})\) associated to a Steiner system of type S(2, 3, 7) has \(d_{X_B}=4=73\) and \({\mathcal {C}}(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, B})\) is a maximal distance separable code (MDS).
We now compute linear code \({\mathcal {C}}(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, C_{(3,7)}\setminus B})\) associated to the Complement of the Steiner configuration. We get
where the columns are the twentyeight coordinates of the intersection points (among the thirtyfive) of any three hyperplanes \(H_1,\dots ,H_7\) corresponding to the twentyeight blocks
The parameters of the code \({\mathcal {C}}(X_{{\mathcal {H}}, C_{(3,7)}\setminus B})\) are [28, 4, 16].
References
Abbott J., Bigatti A.M., Robbiano L.: CoCoA: a system for doing Computations in Commutative Algebra. Available at http://cocoa.dima.unige.it
Bocci C., Cooper S.M., Guardo E., Harbourne B., Janssen M., Nagel U., Seceleanu A., Van Tuyl A., Vu T.: The Waldschmidt constant for squarefree monomial ideals. J. Algebr. Comb. 44(4), 875–904 (2016).
Bocci C., Harbourne B.: The resurgence of ideals of points and the containment problem. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 138(4), 1175–1190 (2010).
Bruns W., Herzog J.: CohenMacaulay Rings, vol. 39. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Revised Edition (1998).
Buratti M., Gionfriddo G., Milazzo L., Voloshin V.: Lower and upper chromatic numbers for \(BSTS(2^h1)s\). Comput. Sci. J. Moldova 9(2), 259–272 (2001).
Buratti M., Rinaldi G., Traetta T.: 3pyramidal Steiner triple systems. Ars Math. Contemp. vol 13, No. 1 (2017).
Carlini E., Catalisano M.V., Guardo E., Van Tuyl A.: Hadamard star configurations. Rocky Mount. J. Math 49(2), 419–432 (2001).
Carlini E., Guardo E., Van Tuyl A.: Star configurations on generic hypersurfaces. J. Algebra 407, 1–20 (2014).
Catalisano M.V., Guardo E., Shin Y.S.: The Waldschmidt constant of special \(k\)configurations in \({\mathbb{P}}^n\). J. Pure Appl. Algebra. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpaa.2020.106341.
Chudnovsky G.V.: Singular points on complex hypersurfaces and multidimensional Schwarz Lemma. In: M–J Bertin (ed.) Seminaire de Theorie des Nombres, Paris 1979–80, Seminaire Delange–Pisot–Poitou, Progress in Math vol. 12. Birkhauser, Boston (1981).
Colbourn C.J., Dinitz J.H.: CRC Handbook of Combinatorial Designs. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2010).
Colbourn C.J., Pulleyblank W.R.: Matroid Steiner problems, the Tutte polynomial and network reliability. J. Comb. Theory Ser. B 47(1), 20–31 (1989).
Colbourn C.J., Rosa A.: Triple Systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1999).
Cooper S.M., Embree R.J., Há H.T., Hoefel A.H.: Symbolic powers of monomial ideals. Proc. Edinb Math. Soc. 60(1), 39–55 (2017).
Cooper S.M., Guardo E.: Fat points, partial intersections and Hamming distance. J. Algebra Appl. 19(4), 2050071 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219498820500711.
Cooper S.M., Seceleanu A., Tohaneanu S., Vaz Pinto M., Villarreal R.H.: GMD functions for scheme based linear codes and algebraic invariants of Geramita ideals. Adv. Appl. Math. 112, 101940 (2020).
Czapliśki A., Glówka A., Malara G., LampaBaczyńska M., LuszczSwidecka P., Pokora P., Szpond J.: A counterexample to the containment \(I^{ (3)}\subseteq I^2\) over the reals. Adv. Geom. 16(1), 77–82 (2016).
Dao H., De Stefani A., Grifo E., Huneke C., Núñez Betancourt L.: Symbolic powers of ideals. In: Singularities and Foliations. Geometry, Topology and Applications, pp. 387–432. Springer, Cham (2015).
De Boer M., Pellikaan R.: Groebner bases for codes. Some Tapas of Computer Algebra. Chap. 10, pp. 237–259. Springer, Berlin (1999).
Eisenbud D.: Commutative Algebra: With a View Toward Algebraic Geometry. SpringerVerlag, New York (1995).
Favacchio G., Guardo E., Migliore J.: On the arithmetically CohenMacaulay property for sets of points in multiprojective spaces. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 146, 2811–2825 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1090/proc/13981.
Favacchio G., Guardo E., Picone B.: Special arrangements of lines: codimension two ACM varieties in \({\mathbb{P}}^1\times {\mathbb{P}}^1\times {\mathbb{P}}^1\). J. Algebra Appl. 18(4), 1 (2019).
Favacchio G., Migliore J.: Multiprojective spaces and the arithmetically CohenMacaulay property. Math. Proc. Cambr. Philos. Soc. 166(3), 583–597 (2019).
Garrousian M., Tohaneanu S.O.: Minimal distance of linear codes and \(\alpha \)invariants. Adv. Appl. Math. 71, 190–207 (2015).
Geramita A., Harbourne B., Migliore J.: Star configurations in \({\mathbb{P}}^n\). J. Algebra 376, 279–299 (2013).
Geramita A., Harbourne B., Migliore J., Nagel U.: Matroid configurations and symbolic powers of their ideals. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 369(10), 7049–66 (2017).
Gionfriddo L.: A conjecture of Berge about linear hypergraphs and Steiner systems \(S(2, 4, v)\). Discret. Math. 255, 125–133 (2002).
Gionfriddo M., Milazzo L., Rosa A., Voloshin V.: Bicoloring Steiner systems \(S(2, 4, v)\). Discret. Math. 283, 249–253 (2004).
Gionfriddo M., Guardo E., Milazzo L.: Extending bicolorings for Steiner triple systems. Appl. Anal. Discret. Math. 7(2), 225–234 (2013).
Gionfriddo M., Guardo E., Milazzo L., Voloshin V.: Feasible sets of smalle bicolorable STSs. Austr. J. Math 59(1), 107–119 (2014).
Gold L., Little J., Schenck H.: CayleyBacharach and evaluation codes on complete intersections. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 196, 91–99 (2005).
Grayson D.R., Stillman M.E.: Macaulay 2, a software system for research in algebraic geometry
Guardo E., Harbourne B., Van Tuyl A.: Asymptotic resurgences for ideals of positive dimensional subschemes of projective space. Adv. Math. 246, 114–127 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2013.05.027.
Hansen J.: Linkage and codes on complete intersections. Appl. Algebra Eng. Commun. Comput. 14(3), 175–185 (2003).
Herzog J., Hibi T.: Monomial Ideals. Springer, London (2011).
LampaBaczyńska M., Malara G.: On the containment hierarchy for simplicial ideals. J. Pure Appl. Algebra. 219(12), 402–412 (2015).
Lindner C.C., Rosa A.: Steiner quadruple systems—a survey. Discret. Math. 21, 147–181 (1978).
MartinezBernal J., Pitones Y., Villarreal R.H.: Minimum distance functions of complete intersections. J. Algebra Appl. (2017). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219498818502043.
Migliore J., Nagel U., Zanello F.: Pure \(O\)sequences: known results, applications, and open problems. In: Peeva I. (ed.) Commut. Algebra. Springer, New York (2013).
Milazzo L., Tuza Z.: Upper chromatic number of Steiner triple systems and quadruple systems. Discrete Math. 174, 247–259 (1997).
Milazzo L.: Strict colourings for classes of Steiner triple systems. Discret. Math. 182, 233–243 (1998).
Milazzo L., Tuza Zs: Logarithmic upper bound for the upper chromatic number of \(S(t, t+1, v)\) systems. ARS Comb. 92, 213–223 (2009).
Milazzo L., Tuza Zs, Voloshin V.: Strict colorings of Steiner triple and quadruple systems: a survey. Discret. Math. 261, 399–411 (2003).
Milici S.: Colouring Steiner triple systems. Rendiconti del Seminario Matematico di Messina Serie II Tomo XXV Supplemento al n.8, 113–118 (2002).
Milici S., Rosa A., Voloshin V.: Steiner systems with specified block colour patterns. Discret. Math. 240, 145–160 (2001).
Minh N.C., Trung N.V.: CohenMacaulayness of monomial ideals and symbolic powers of StanleyReisner ideals. Adv. Math. 226(2), 1285–306 (2011).
Reid C., Rosa A.: Steiner systems S(2, 4,v)—a survey.
Smith G.G., Sturmfels B.: Combinatorial Algebraic Geometry: Selected Papers From 2016 Apprenticeship Program. Springer, Berlin (2017).
Swartz E.: Topological representations of matroids. J. Am. Math. Soc. 16(2), 427–42 (2003).
Szemberg T., Szpond J.: On the containment problem. Rend. Circolo Mat. Palermo. Ser. 66(2), 233–45 (2017).
Terai N., Trung N.V.: CohenMacaulayness of large powers of StanleyReisner ideals. Adv. Math. 229(2), 711–30 (2012).
Tohaneanu S.O.: The minimum distance of sets of points and the minimum socle degree. J. Pure Appl. Algebra. 215(11), 2645–51 (2011).
Tohaneanu S.O.: Lower bounds on minimal distance of evaluation codes. Appl. Algebra Eng. Commun. Comput. 20(5–6), 351 (2009).
Tohaneanu S.O., Van Tuyl A.: Bounding invariants of fat points using a coding theory construction. J. Pure Appl. Algebra. 217(2), 269–79 (2013).
Tohaneanu S.O., Xie Y.: Homological properties of ideals genertaed by \(\alpha \)product of linear forms. (2019). https://128.84.21.199/pdf/1906.08346v3.pdf
van Lint J., van der Geer G.: Introduction to Coding Theory and Algebraic Geometry. Birkhäuser, Basel (2012).
Van Maldeghem H.: Some remarks on Steiner systems. Desig. Codes Cryptogr. 29, 199–213 (2003).
Varbaro M.: Symbolic powers and matroids. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 139(7), 2357–66 (2011).
Waldschmidt M.: Propriétés arithmétiques de fonctions de plusieurs variables II. Séminaire P. Lelong (Analyse), 1975/76, pp. 108–135. Lecture Notes Math., vol. 578. Springer, Heidelberg (1977)
Acknowledgements
This project began in April 2018 when E. Guardo and L. Milazzo met together with the idea of making an interdisciplinary project between their own fields of research, such as Combinatorics and Commmutative Algebra/Algebraic Geometry. This is one of the two projects where L. Milazzo gave his contribution with the idea of involving other mathematicians, such as E. Ballico and G. Favacchio. There is another one, still not published and in progress, that involves other people from University of Catania. However, L. Milazzo became quite ill in February 2019, and after many years battle with his illness fought with huge strengh and courage, unexpectedly he passed away on March 4, 2019 in Catania. Lorenzo gave ideas to this paper, and turned his attention to this paper every time he could do it. Unfortunately, Lorenzo was not able to see the final version of this paper and we feel that his contributions warrant an authorship. Lorenzo’s interests and contributions to the topics in this paper should be recognized. Lorenzo is greatly missed to all of us. The first author was partially supported by MIUR (Italy). G. Favacchio, E. Guardo and L. Milazzo’s work has been supported by the Università degli Studi di Catania, “Piano della Ricerca 2016/2018 Linea di intervento 2”. All the authors are members of GNSAGA of INdAM (Italy). We thank M. Gionfriddo, B. Harbourne, and S. Milici for their useful conversations on the topic and for their encouragement in finishing the project. We also thank Zs. Tuza for his useful comments in the revised version of the paper. The authors thank the two anonymous referees for their useful comments that improved the previous version of the paper.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Catania within the CRUICARE Agreement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by G. Korchmaros.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Ballico, E., Favacchio, G., Guardo, E. et al. Steiner systems and configurations of points. Des. Codes Cryptogr. 89, 199–219 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s1062302000815x
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s1062302000815x
Keywords
 Steiner systems
 Monomial ideals
 Symbolic powers
 Stanley Reisner rings
 Linear codes
Mathematics Subject Classification
 51E10
 13F55
 13F20
 14G50
 94B27