# Inverse Systems of Local Rings

- 725 Downloads

## Abstract

Matlis duality and the particular case of Macaulay correspondence provide a dictionary between the Artin algebras and their inverse systems. Inspired in a result of Emsalem we translate the problem of classification of Artin algebras to a problem of linear system of equations on the inverse systems.

The main purpose of these notes is to use this result to classify Artin Gorenstein algebras with Hilbert function {1, 3, 3, 1}, level algebras and compressed algebras. The main results presented in these notes were obtained in collaboration with M.E. Rossi.

## 2.1 Introduction

These notes are based on a series of lectures given by the author at the Vietnam Institute for Advanced Study in Mathematics, Hanoi, during the period February 8–March 7, 2014. The aim of these three lectures was to present some recent results on the classification of Artin Gorenstein and level algebras by using the inverse system of Macaulay. These notes are not a review on the known results of Macaulay’s inverse systems. See [12, 20, 21, 22, 23] and [11] for further details on inverse systems.

Let Open image in new window be the ring of the formal series and let *S* = **k**[*y*_{1}, …, *y*_{n}] be a polynomial ring. Macaulay established a one-to-one correspondence between the Gorenstein Artin algebras *A* = *R*∕*I* and cyclic submodules 〈*F*〉 of the polynomial ring S. This correspondence is a particular case of Matlis duality because the injective hull of **k** as *R*-module is isomorphic to *S*. The structure of *S* as *R*-module is defined, depending on the characteristic of the residue field **k**, by derivation or by contraction. Macaulay’s correspondence establish a dictionary between the algebraic-geometric properties of Artin Gorenstein algebras *A* and the algebraic properties of its inverse system *F* or the geometric properties of the variety defined by *F* ≡ 0. See [13] for the extension to higher dimensions of Macaulay’s correspondence.

In the second chapter we review the main results on injective modules. We prove the existence on the injective hull of a ring and we prove Matlis’ duality for a complete ring. The main references used in this chapter are: [28] and [27].

In the third chapter we study Macaulay’s correspondence that is a particular case of Matlis’ duality. In the main result of this we prove that *S* is the injective hull of the residue field of the *R*-module **k**. From this result and Matlis’ duality we deduce Macaulay’s correspondence. We end the chapter computing the Hilbert function of a quotient *A* = *R*∕*I* in terms of its inverse system. The main references used in this chapter are: [18, 20, 21, 22, 23] and [25].

The fourth chapter is devoted to give a quick introduction to Artin Gorenstein, level and compressed algebras. We only quote the results needed to achieve the main goal of these notes. The main references used in this chapter are: [20] and [21].

The fifth chapter is the core of these notes. We present the main results obtained in collaboration with M.E. Rossi on the classification of Artinian Gorenstein algebras, level algebras and compressed algebras, [12] and [11]. After a short review of the classification of Artin algebra we show the difficulty of the problem of the classification of Artin algebras recalling some results obtained in collaboration with Valla, [14] and [15].

Inspired in a result of Emsalem, [16], we translate the problem of classification of Artin algebras to a problem of linear systems of equations. The study of these systems of equations permits to establish the main result of this paper, Theorem 2.5.10. We end the chapter by giving a complete analytic classification of Artin Gorenstein algebras with Hilbert function {1, 3, 3, 1} by using the Weierstrass form of an elliptic plane curve. The main references used in this chapter are: [12, 20] and [11].

In Sect. 2.6 we consider the problem of computing the Betti numbers of an ideal *I* by considering only its inverse system without computing the ideal *I*. The main open problem is to characterize the complete intersection ideals in terms of their inverse systems. In this chapter we focus the study on the computation of the last Betti number (i.e. the Cohen-Macaulay type) and the first Betti number (i.e. the minimal number of generators)

In the last chapter we show that some results of the chapter four cannot be generalized and we present several explicit computations of the minimal number of generators of some families of Artin Gorenstein and level algebras.

In these notes we omit reviewing some recent interesting results on the rationality of the Poincaré series of an Artin Gorenstein algebra, on the smoothability of the Artinian algebras, and the applications of these results to the study of the geometric properties of Hilbert schemes, see for instance [4, 5] and their reference’s list.

The examples of this paper are done by using the Singular library [7, 8], and Mathematica^{Ⓡ}.

## 2.2 Injective Modules: Matlis’ Duality

Given a commutative ring *R* we denote by *R*_*mod*, resp. *R*_*mod*.*Noeth*, *R*_*mod*.*Artin*, the category of *R*-modules, resp. category of Noetherian *R*-modules, Artinian *R*-modules.

### Definition 2.2.1 (Injective Module)

Let *R* be a commutative ring and let *E* be an *R*-module. *E* is injective if and only if Hom_{R}(⋅, *E*) is an exact functor.

*R*-module

*E*the contravariant functor Hom

_{R}(⋅,

*E*) is right exact, we have that

*E*is injective if and only for all injective morphism

*h*:

*M*→

*N*and for all morphism

*f*:

*M*→

*E*, where

*M*and

*N*are

*R*-modules, there exists a morphism

*g*:

*N*→

*E*making the following diagram commutative:

In the following result we collect some basic properties of injective modules.

### Proposition 2.2.2

- (i)
*If a R-module E is injective, then every short exact sequence splits:*$$\displaystyle \begin{aligned}0\longrightarrow E \longrightarrow M \longrightarrow N \longrightarrow 0 \end{aligned}$$ - (ii)
*If an injective module E is a submodule of a module M, then E is a direct summand of M, in other words, there is a complement S with M*=*S*⊕*E.* - (iii)
*If*(*E*_{j})_{∈J}*is a family of injective R-modules, then*∏_{j ∈ J}*E*_{j}*is also an injective module.* - (iv)
*Every direct summand of an injective R-module is injective.* - (v)
*A finite direct sum of injective R-modules is injective.*

Now that we have showed some of the properties of the injective modules, we need to find an easier way to check the injectivity of a module. This criterion is the following:

### Proposition 2.2.3 (Baer’s Criterion)

*A R-module E is injective if and only if every homomorphism f *:* I *→* E, where I is an ideal of R, can be extended to R.*

### Proof

First, if *E* is injective, then, as *I* is a submodule of *R*, the existence of an extension *g* of *f* is just a a straight consequence of the injectivity of *E*.

*M*is a submodule of a

*R*-module

*N*: We may assume that M is a submodule of

*N*. Let us consider the set

*X*= {(

*M′*,

*g′*)|

*M*⊂

*M′*⊂

*N*,

*g′*|

_{M}=

*f*}. Note that

*X*≠ ∅ because (

*M*,

*f*) ∈

*X*. Now we put a partial order in

*X*, (

*M′*,

*g′*) ≼ (

*M*″,

*g*″), which means that

*M′*⊂

*M*″ and

*g*″ extends

*g′*. It is easy to see that any chain in

*X*has an upper bound in

*X*(just take the union). By Zorn’s Lemma we have that there is a maximal element (

*M*

_{0},

*g*

_{0}) of

*X*. If

*M*

_{0}=

*N*we are done, so we can assume that there is some

*b*∈

*N*that is not in

*M*

_{0}. Define

*I*= {

*r*∈

*R*:

*r*.

*b*∈

*M*

_{0}}, which is clearly an ideal of

*R*. Now define

*h*:

*I*→

*E*by

*h*(

*r*) =

*g*

_{0}(

*r*.

*b*). By hypothesis, there is a map

*h*

^{∗}extending

*h*. Finally define

*M*

_{1}=

*M*

_{0}+ 〈

*b*〉 and

*g*

_{1}:

*M*

_{1}→

*E*by

*a*

_{0}∈

*M*

_{0}and

*r*∈

*R*. Notice that if \(a_0+r.b=a_0^{\prime }+r'.b\) then \((r-r')b=a_0^{\prime }-a_0\in M_0\) and (

*r*−

*r′*) ∈

*I*. Therefore,

*g*

_{0}((

*r*−

*r′*)

*b*) and

*h*(

*r*−

*r′*) are defined and we have:

Clearly, *g*_{1}(*a*_{0}) = *g*_{0}(*a*_{0}) for all *a*_{0} ∈ *M*_{0}, so that the map *g*_{1} extends *g*_{0}. We conclude that (*M*_{0}, *g*_{0}) ≼ (*M*_{1}, *g*_{1}) and *M*_{0} ≠ *M*_{1}, contradicting the maximality of (*M*_{0}, *g*_{0}). Therefore, *M*_{0} = *N*, the map *g*_{0} is a lifting of *f* and then *E* is injective.

### Proposition 2.2.4

*If R is a Noetherian ring and* (*E*_{j})_{j ∈ J} *is a family of injective R-modules, then* ⊕_{j ∈ J}*E*_{j} *is an injective R-module.*

### Proof

*I*is an ideal of

*R*. If

*x*∈⊕

_{j}

*E*

_{j}, then

*x*= (

*e*

_{j}), where

*e*

_{j}∈

*E*

_{j}. Since R is noetherian,

*I*is finitely generated. There exists a finite set

*S*such that Im(

*f*) ⊂⊕

_{s ∈ S}

*E*

_{s}. But we already know that the finite direct sums are injective. Hence, there is a homomorphism

*g′*:

*R*→⊕

_{s ∈ S}

*E*

_{s}. Finally, composing

*g′*with the inclusion of ⊕

_{s ∈ S}

*E*

_{s}into ⊕

_{j ∈ J}

*E*

_{j}completes the given diagram.

Next step is to show that any *R*-module is a sub-module of an injective module, for this end we have to recall the basics of divisible modules.

### Definition 2.2.5 (Divisible Modules)

Let *M* be an *R*-module over a ring *R* and let *r* ∈ *R*∖*Z*(*R*) and *m* ∈ *M*. We say that *m* is divisible by *r* if there is some *m′*∈ *M* with *m* = *rm′*. In general, we say that *M* is a divisible module if for all *r* ∈ *R*∖*Z*(*R*) and for all *m* ∈ *M* we have that m is divisible by r.

### Proposition 2.2.6

*Every injective module E is divisible.*

### Proof

*E*is injective. Let

*e*∈

*E*and

*a*∈

*R*∖

*Z*(

*R*), we must find

*x*∈

*E*with

*e*=

*ax*. Define

*f*: (

*a*) →

*E*by

*f*(

*ra*) =

*rm*. Observe that this map is well defined because a is not a zero divisor. Since

*E*is injective we have the following diagram: where \(\overline {f}\) extends

*f*. In particular, \(m=f(a)=\overline {f}(a)=a\overline {f}(1)\). So, the

*x*that we need is \(x=\overline {f}(1)\).

### Proposition 2.2.7

*Let R be a principal ideal domain and M an R-module. Then we have that M is divisible if and only if M is injective.*

### Proof

We are going to use Baer’s criterion. Assume that *f* : *I* → *E* is a homomorphism where *I* is a non zero ideal. By hypothesis, *I* = (*a*) for some non zero *a* ∈ *I*. Since *E* is divisible, there is some *e* ∈ *E* with *f*(*a*) = *ae*. Define *h* : *R* → *E* by *h*(*s*) = *se*. It is easy to check that *h* is a homomorphism, moreover, it extends *f*. That is, if *s* = *ra* ∈ *I*, we have that *h*(*s*) = *h*(*ra*) = *rae* = *rf*(*a*) = *f*(*ra*). Therefore, by Baer’s criterion, *E* is injective.

### Lemma 2.2.8

*Let R be a ring. Then:*

- (i)
*For all G abelian groups,*\(\mathrm {Hom}_{\mathbb {Z}}(R,G)\)*is an R-module.* - (ii)
*If G is injective as a*\(\mathbb {Z}\)*-module, then*\(\mathrm {Hom}_{\mathbb {Z}}(R,G)\)*is R-injective.*

### Proof

- (i)
This statement is clear, because the addition is as usual, and with the multiplication by elements of

*R*, we define (*rf*)(*x*) =*f*(*rx*) if*r*∈*R*and \(f\in \mathrm {Hom}_{\mathbb {Z}}(R,G)\). - (ii)
If we have a monomorphism

*g*:*M*_{1}→*M*_{2}and a homomorphism \(f:M_1\rightarrow \mathrm {Hom}_{\mathbb {Z}}(R,G)\), we have to find an extension from*M*_{2}to \(\mathrm {Hom}_{\mathbb {Z}}(R,G)\). But if we have that*f*, we can also define a homomorphism*f′*between*M*_{1}and*G*in the following way,*f′*(*m*_{1}) = (*f*(*m*_{1}))(1). Is an homomorphism because*f*is also an homomorphism. So, as*G*is injective, we can find an extension of*f′*, namely \(\overline {f'}\). With this map, we can define the extension we wanted \(\overline {f}(m_2):R\rightarrow G\) where \(\overline {f}(m_2)(r)=\overline {f'}(rm_2)\). The way that we constructed the map assure us that is an homomorphism and that extends*f*.

### Theorem 2.2.9

*Let R be a ring and M an R-module. Then there exists an R-injective module E and a monomorphism f *:* M *→* E. In other words, any module M can be embedded as a submodule of an injective module.*

### Proof

*M*is a \(\mathbb {Z}\)-module we have that \(M\cong \mathbb {Z}^{(I)}/H\) for a suitable subgroup

*H*of \(\mathbb {Z}^{(I)}\). Notice that \(\mathbb {Z}^{(I)}\subset \mathbb {Q}^{(I)}\) as abelian groups, so \(M\subset G=\mathbb {Q}^{(I)}/H\). But as \(\mathbb {Q}\) is divisible, we have that also

*G*is divisible. Hence

*M*↪

*G*, where

*G*is an injective abelian group. So from the last Lemma we deduce that \(\mathrm {Hom}_{\mathbb {Z}}(R,G)\) is an

*R*-injective module. Then we have the exact sequence of

*R*-modules

*M*in

*E*; it is enough to show that the linear map \(f:M\rightarrow \mathrm {Hom}_{\mathbb {Z}}(R,M)\), defined by

*f*(

*m*)(

*r*) =

*rm*if

*r*∈

*R*, is injective. If

*f*(

*m*)(

*r*) = 0 for all

*r*∈

*R*, we have that

*f*(

*m*)(1) =

*m*= 0.

### Definition 2.2.10 (Proper Essential Extensions)

Let *R* be a ring and let *N* ⊂ *M* be *R*-modules. We say that *M* is an essential extension of *N* if for any non-zero submodule *U* of *M* one has *U* ∩ *N* ≠ 0. An essential extension *M* of *N* is called proper if *N* ≠ *M*.

### Proposition 2.2.11

*Let R be a ring.*

- (i)
*An R-module N is injective if and only if it has no proper essential extensions.* - (ii)
*Let N*⊂*M be an essential extension. Let E be an injective module containing N. Then there exists a monomorphism ϕ*:*M*→*E extending the inclusion N*⊂*M.*

### Proof

- (i)
Let’s assume that

*N*is injective and let*N*⊂*M*be an essential extension. Since*N*is injective,*N*is a direct summand of*M*, Proposition 2.2.2. Let*S*be the complement of*N*in*M*, Proposition 2.2.2. Then*N*∩*S*= 0 and so, the extension*N*⊂*M*is essential, so*S*= 0 and*N*=*M*. Conversely, suppose that*N*has no proper essential extensions. Let*E*be an injective module containing*N*, Theorem 2.2.9. Let us consider the set of submodules*M*⊂*E*such that*M*∩*N*= 0. This set is not empty 0 ∈*X*and it is inductively ordered. By Zorn’s Lemma there is a maximal element*L*∈*X*, so*N*≅*N*+*L*∕*L*⊂*E*∕*L*. This extension is essential. Let*K*be an*R*-module*L*⊂*K*⊂*E*such that*K*∕*L*∩ (*N*+*L*)∕*L*= 0. Hence*K*∩ (*N*+*L*) = 0, so*K*∩*N*= 0. From the maximality of*L*we deduce*K*=*L*. Since*N*has no proper essential extensions we obtain*E*=*N*+*L*. On the other hand we have*L*∩*N*= 0, so*E*=*N*⊕*L*. From Proposition 2.2.2 we get that*N*is injective. - (ii)
Since

*E*is injective there exists a homomorphism*ϕ*:*M*→*E*extending the inclusion*N*⊂*M*. If \(\operatorname {ker}(\phi )\neq 0\) then \(\operatorname {ker}(\phi )\cap M\neq 0\) because the extension*N*⊂*M*is essential. Let \(0\neq x\in \operatorname {ker}(\phi )\cap M\) then we get a contradiction:*x*=*ϕ*(*x*) = 0.

### Definition 2.2.12

Let be *R* a ring and *M* an *R*-module. An injective hull of *M* is an injective module *E*_{R}(*M*) such that *M* ⊂ *E*_{R}(*M*) is an essential extension.

### Proposition 2.2.13

*Let R be a ring and let M be an R-module.*

- (i)
*M admits an injective hull. Moreover, if M*⊂*I and I is injective, then a maximal essential extension of M in I is an injective hull of M.* - (ii)
*Let E be an injective hull of M, let I be an injective R-module, and α*:*M*→*I a monomorphism. Then there exists a monomorphism φ*:*E*→*I such that the following diagram is commutative, where i is the inclusion:**In other words, the injective hulls of M are the “minimal” injective modules in which M can be embedded.* - (iii)
*If E and E′ are injective hulls of M, then there exists an isomorphism φ*:*E*→*E′ such that the following diagram commutes:*

### Proof

- (i)
We know by Theorem 2.2.9 that we can embed

*M*into an injective module*I*. Now consider \(\mathscr {S}\) to be the set of all essential extensions*N*with*M*⊂*N*⊂*I*. Applying Zorn’s Lemma to this set yields to a maximal essential extension*M*⊂*E*such that*E*⊂*I*. We claim that*E*has no proper essential extensions and because of Proposition 2.2.11 we can say that*E*will be injective and therefore it will be the injective hull we are looking for. Assume that*E*has a proper essential extension*E′*. Since*I*is injective, there exists*ψ*:*E′*→*I*extending the inclusion*E*⊂*I*. Suppose \(\operatorname {ker} \psi =0\); then Im*ψ*⊂*I*is an essential extension of*M*(in*I*) properly containing*E*, which contradicts the fact that*E*is maximal. On the other hand, since*ψ*extends the inclusion*E*⊂*I*we have \(E\cap \operatorname {ker}\psi =0\). But this contradicts with the essentiality of the extension*E*⊂*E′*. And then we have the result we were looking for. - (ii)
Since

*I*is injective,*α*can be extended to an homomorphism*φ*:*E*→*I*. We have that*φ*|_{M}=*α*, and so \(M\cap \operatorname {ker} \varphi =\operatorname {ker} \alpha =0\). Thus, since the extension*M*⊂*E*is essential, we even have \(\operatorname {ker} \phi =0\) and therefore*φ*is a monomorphism. - (iii)
By (ii) there is a monomorphism

*ϕ*:*E*→*E′*such that*ϕ*|_{M}equals the inclusion*M*⊂*E′*. Then, as Im*ϕ*≅*E*because of the injectivity, Im*ϕ*is also injective and hence a direct summand of*E′*. However, since the extension*M*⊂*E′*is essential,*ϕ*is exhaustive because there can’t be direct summands different than the total. Therefore,*ϕ*is an isomorphism.

### Remark

*M*. We let

*E*

^{0}(

*M*) =

*E*

_{R}(

*M*) and denote the embedding by

*∂*

^{−1}. Now suppose that the injective resolution has been constructed till the

*i*-th step: We define then

*E*

^{i+1}=

*E*

_{R}(Coker

*∂*

^{i−1}), and

*∂*

^{i}is defined as the inclusion.

### Definition 2.2.14

Let \((R,\mathfrak {m},{\mathbf {k}})\) be a local ring. Given an *R*-module *M* the Matlis dual of *M* is *M*^{∨} = Hom_{R}(*M*, *E*_{R}(**k**)). We write (−)^{∨} = Hom_{R}(−, *E*_{R}(**k**)), which is a contravariant exact functor from the category *R*_*mod* into itself.

### Proposition 2.2.15

*Let* \((R,\mathfrak {m},{\mathbf {k}})\) *be a local ring. Then* (−)^{∨} *is a faithful functor. Furthermore, if M is a R-module of finite length, then ℓ*_{R}(*M*^{∨}) =* ℓ*_{R}(*M*)*. If R is in addition an Artin ring then ℓ*_{R}(*E*_{R}(**k**)) =* ℓ*_{R}(*R*) <* ∞.*

### Proof

*M*is a nonzero

*R*-module then

*M*

^{∨}is nonzero. Let’s take a non-zero cyclic submodule \(R/\mathfrak {a}\) of

*M*. Since \(\mathfrak {a}\subset \mathfrak {m}\) we have the maps

**k**

^{∨}= Hom

_{R}(

**k**,

*E*

_{R}(

**k**))≅

**k**. Applying the functor (−)

^{∨}to this diagram we get

*M*

^{∨}is nonzero.

*M*be a finite length

*R*-module, we use induction on

*ℓ*(

*M*) to prove

*ℓ*

_{R}(

*M*) =

*ℓ*

_{R}(

*M*

^{∨}). If

*ℓ*

_{R}(

*M*) = 1, then

*M*is a simple

*R*-module and thus \(M\cong R/\mathfrak {m}={\mathbf {k}}\). Thus

*ℓ*

_{R}(

*M*

^{∨})≅

*ℓ*

_{R}(

**k**) = 1. For the general case, pick a simple submodule

*S*⊂

*M*. We apply (−)

^{∨}to the short exact sequence:

*S*≅

**k**, we have

*ℓ*(

*S*

^{∨}) = 1. Now, by induction,

*ℓ*

_{R}((

*M*∕

*S*)

^{∨}) =

*ℓ*

_{R}(

*M*∕

*S*) =

*ℓ*

_{R}(

*M*) − 1. We conclude then

*ℓ*

_{R}(

*M*

^{∨}) =

*ℓ*

_{R}(

*M*).

Let us assume that *R* is Artin, so *ℓ*_{R}(*R*) < *∞*. From the first part we get *ℓ*_{R}(*E*_{R}(**k**)) = *ℓ*_{R}(*R*) < *∞*.

### Proposition 2.2.16

*Let R be a ring,*\(\mathfrak {a}\)

*an ideal of R and M a R-module annihilated by*\(\mathfrak {a}\)

*. Then, if E*=

*E*

_{R}(

*M*)

*:*

### Proof

*M*and \((0:_E\mathfrak {a})\) are annihilated by \(\mathfrak {a}\) and thus can be thought as \(R/\mathfrak {a}\)-modules. Clearly \(M\subset (0:_E\mathfrak {a})\subset E\). Since all \(R/\mathfrak {a}\)-submodule of \((0:_E\mathfrak {a})\) is also a

*R*-submodule of

*E*, necessarily \((0:_E\mathfrak {a})\) is an essential extension on

*M*. So now we need to check that \((0:_E\mathfrak {a})\) is injective. So let us consider a diagram of \(R/\mathfrak {a}\)-modules: We have to prove that there is \(g:B\longrightarrow 0:_E\mathfrak {a})\) such that

*f*=

*g*∘

*i*. But as we can think these modules as

*R*-modules, we can replace \((0:_E\mathfrak {a})\) by

*E*and, since

*E*is injective, we can extend the diagram and make the diagram commutative. But this commutativity implies that \(\text{Im}(g)\subset (0:_E\mathfrak {a})\) and therefore the original diagram also commutes.

### Corollary 2.2.17

*Let*\((R,\mathfrak {m},{\mathbf {k}})\)

*be a local ring and E*=

*E*

_{R}(

**k**)

*. Let*\(\mathfrak {a}\)

*be an ideal of R. Then:*

- (i)
\(E_{R/\mathfrak {a}}({\mathbf {k}})=(0:_E\mathfrak {a})\)

- (ii)
\(E=\bigcup _{t\ge 1}E_{R/\mathfrak {m}^t}({\mathbf {k}})\)

Now it’s time to prove some technical results with the assumption that we need, the completeness of the Noetherian local ring.

### Lemma 2.2.18

*Let*\((R,\mathfrak {m},{\mathbf {k}})\)

*be a complete Noetherian local ring and E*=

*E*

_{R}(

**k**)

*. Then:*

- (i)
*R*^{∨}≅*E and E*^{∨}≅*R.* - (ii)
*For every R-module M the natural map M*→*M*^{∨∨}*induce isomorphisms R*→*R*^{∨∨}*and E*→*E*^{∨∨}.

### Proof

- (i)
It is well known that

*R*^{∨}=*Hom*_{R}(*R*,*E*)≅*E*. Now let’s prove*E*^{∨}≅*R*. Assume first that*R*is Artinian. Consider the map*θ*:*R*→*E*^{∨}= Hom_{R}(*E*,*E*) which sends an element*r*∈*R*to the homothety defined by*r*. Since*ℓ*(*R*) =*ℓ*(*E*^{∨}), Proposition 2.2.15, we only need to prove that*θ*is injective. Suppose that*rE*= 0. Then, by the last Corollary,*E*_{R∕(r)}(**k**) = (0 :_{E}(*r*)) =*E*, and, by the same argument,*ℓ*(*E*) =*ℓ*(*R*∕(*r*)). This implies that*ℓ*(*R*) =*ℓ*(*R*∕(*r*)), then*r*= 0.Assume now that

*R*is Noetherian and complete. We consider the map*θ*:*R*→*E*^{∨}= Hom_{R}(*E*,*E*) as above, we will prove that*θ*is an isomorphism. Let’s write \(R_t=R/\mathfrak {m}^t\) for each*t*. By the last corollary \(E_t:=E_{R_t}({\mathbf {k}})=(0:_E\mathfrak {m}^t)\). Let*φ*∈Hom_{R}(*E*,*E*) =*E*^{∨}. It is clear that*φ*(*E*_{t}) ⊂*E*_{t}and thus \(\varphi \in \mathrm {Hom}_{R_t}(E_t,E_t)\). Since*R*_{t}is Artinian we have*φ*is a homothety defined by an element*r*_{t}∈*R*_{t}. The fact*E*_{t}⊂*E*_{t+1}implies that \(r_t-r_{t+1}\in \mathfrak {m}^t\) for all*t*≥ 1. In consequence, \(r=(r_t)_t\in \hat {R}=R\) and \(r_t=r+\mathfrak {m}^t\) for all*t*≥ 1. We claim that*φ*is given by multiplication by*r*. This follows from the fact that*E*= ∪_{t}*E*_{t}and that*φ*(*e*) =*r*_{t}*e*for all*e*∈*E*_{t}. Moreover,*r*is uniquely determined by*φ*, and we conclude that*θ*is bijective. - (ii)
We consider the natural homomorphism

*γ*:*M*→*M*^{∨∨}= Hom_{R}(Hom_{R}(*M*,*E*),*E*) given by*γ*(*m*)(*φ*) =*φ*(*m*). Fisrt we prove that*γ*:*R*→*R*^{∨∨}is an isomorphism. This map is the composition of the two isomorphisms given in part (i)*R*≅*E*^{∨}≅(*R*^{∨})^{∨}. In fact, if*r*∈*R*, the map*R*≅*E*^{∨}sends*r*to multiplication by*r*,*h*_{r}:*E*→*E*. Now the map*E*^{∨}≅(*R*^{∨})^{∨}sends*h*_{r}to*α*_{r}defined by*α*_{r}(*φ*) =*h*_{r}(*φ*(1)) =*φ*(*r*), so*α*_{r}=*γ*(*r*). The case of*E*is analogous to this one.

### Proposition 2.2.19

*Let*\((R,\mathfrak {m},{\mathbf {k}})\)

*be a complete Noetherian local ring and E*=

*E*

_{R}(

**k**).

- (i)
*There is an order-reversing bijection*⊥*between the set of R-submodules of E and the set of ideals of R given by: if M is a submodule of E then*(*E*∕*M*)^{∨}≅*M*^{⊥}= (0 :_{R}*M*)*, and*(*R*∕*I*)^{∨}≅*I*^{⊥}= (0 :_{E}*I*)*for an ideal I*⊂*R,* - (ii)
*E is an Artinian R-module,* - (iii)
*an R-module is Artinian if and only if it can be embedded in E*^{n}*for some*\(n\in \mathbb {N}\).

### Proof

*i*) Since

*M*⊂

*M*

^{⊥⊥}we have to prove that

*M*

^{⊥⊥}⊂

*M*. Consider the exact sequence

*E*, we get an injective homomorphism, Lemma 2.2.18,

*g*∈ (

*E*∕

*M*)

^{∨}is mapped to an

*r*∈

*R*such that (

*θ*

^{−1}∘

*π*

^{∨})(

*g*) =

*r*, or equivalently

*g*∘

*π*=

*π*

^{∨}(

*g*) =

*h*

_{r}=

*θ*(

*r*) where

*h*

_{r}:

*E*→

*E*is the homothety defined by

*r*. Since

*g*∘

*π*(

*M*) =

*g*(0) = 0 we get

*rM*= 0, so (

*E*∕

*M*)

^{∨}⊂

*M*

^{⊥}. On the other hand if

*r*∈

*M*

^{⊥}then we can consider the map

*g*:

*E*∕

*M*→

*E*such that \(g(\overline {x})= r x\) for all

*x*∈

*E*. It is easy to see that (

*θ*

^{−1}∘

*π*

^{∨})(

*g*) =

*r*, so \((E/M)^\vee \stackrel {\theta ^{-1} \pi ^\vee }{\cong }M^\perp \). Let

*x*∈

*E*∖

*M*then there is

*g*∈ (

*E*∕

*M*)

^{∨}such that \(g(\overline {x})\neq 0\), Lemma 2.2.18. From the above isomorphism we deduce that there is

*r*∈

*M*

^{∨}such that

*rx*≠ 0. This shows that

*M*

^{∨∨}⊂

*M*and then

*M*=

*M*

^{∨∨}.

*I*be an ideal of

*R*. As in the previous case we have

*I*⊂

*I*

^{⊥⊥}. From the natural exact sequence

*θ*

^{−1}∘

*π*

^{∨}maps (

*R*∕

*I*)

^{∨}to

*I*

^{⊥}. Let

*r*∈

*R*∖

*I*then there is

*g*∈ (

*R*∕

*I*)

^{∨}such that \(g(\overline {r})\neq 0\), Lemma 2.2.18. Hence \(x=g(\overline {1})\in I^\perp \) and

*rx*≠ 0, i.e.

*r*∉(0 :

_{R}

*x*). Since \(I^{\perp \perp }=\bigcap _{x\in I^\perp } (0:_R x)\) we get

*I*

^{⊥⊥}⊂

*I*and then

*I*=

*I*

^{⊥⊥}.

(*ii*) Since *R* is Noetherian, by (*i*) we get that *E* is Artinian.

(*iii*) We consider the set *X* of kernels of all homomorphisms *F* : *M*→*E*^{n}, for all \(n\in \mathbb N\). This is a set of submodules of *M*. Since *M* is Artininan there is a minimal element \(\operatorname {ker}(F)\) of *X*, where *F* : *M*→*E*^{n} for some \(n\in \mathbb N\). Assume that \(\operatorname {ker}(F)\neq 0\) and pick \(0\neq x \in \operatorname {ker}(F)\). From Proposition 2.2.15 there is *σ* : *M*→*E* such that *σ*(*x*) ≠ 0. Let us consider *F*^{∗} : *M*→*E*^{n+1} defined by *F*^{∗}(*y*) = (*F*(*y*), *σ*(*y*)). Since \(\operatorname {ker}(F^*)\varsubsetneq \operatorname {ker}(F)\) we get a contradiction with the minimality of \(\operatorname {ker}(F)\).

Assume that *M* is a submodule of *E*^{n} for some integer *n*. From (*ii*) we get that *M* is an Artin module.

In the next result we will prove Matlis’ duality, see [28] Theorem 5.20.

### Theorem 2.2.20 (Matlis Duality)

*Let*\((R,\mathfrak {m},{\mathbf {k}})\)

*be a complete Noetherian local ring, E*=

*E*

_{R}(

**k**)

*and let M be a R-module. Then:*

- (i)
*If M is Noetherian then M*^{∨}*is Artinian.* - (ii)
*If M is Artinian then M*^{∨}*is Noetherian.* - (iii)
*If M is either Noetherian or Artinian then M*^{∨∨}≅*M.* - (iv)
*The functor*(−)^{∨}*is a contravariant, additive and exact functor.* - (v)
*The functor*(−)^{∨}*is an anti-equivalence between R_mod*.*Noeth and R_mod*.*Artin (resp. between R_mod*.*Artin and R_mod*.*Noeth). It holds*(−)^{∨}∘ (−)^{∨}*is the identity functor of R_mod*.*Noeth (resp. R_mod*.*Artin).*

### Proof

- (i)Let’s consider a presentation of
*M*Since (−)^{∨}is exact, it induces an exact sequence: Thus*M*^{∨}can be seen as a submodule of (*R*^{n})^{∨}≅(*R*^{∨})^{n}≅*E*^{n}, Lemma 2.2.18. Since*E*is Artinian as we saw in the previous corollary, so is*E*^{n}and hence also*M*^{∨}. Applying the functor (−)^{∨}again we get a commutative diagram: whose rows are exact. Since we proved that in this context*R*→*R*^{∨∨}is an isomorphism,*M*≅*M*^{∨∨} - (ii)We proved that
*M*↪*E*^{n}for some \(n\in \mathbb {N}\). Since*E*is Artinian, so is*E*^{n}∕*M*and thus*E*^{n}∕*M*↪*E*^{m}for some \(m\in \mathbb {N}\). In consequence, we have an exact sequence: As before, if we apply (−)^{∨}we have an exact sequence: and*M*^{∨}can be seen as a quotient of (*E*^{n})^{∨}≅(*E*^{∨})^{n}≅*R*^{n}, where the isomorphism is the one we proved in Lemma 2.2.18. This implies that*M*^{∨}is Noetherian. - (iii)Finally, we apply the functor (−)
^{∨}to the last exact sequence we obtain the commutative diagram And again, since*E*→*E*^{∨∨}is an isomorphism,*M*≅*M*^{∨∨} - (iv)
This is a consequence of the previous statements.

## 2.3 Macaulay’s Correspondence

Let **k** be an arbitrary field. Let Open image in new window be the ring of the formal series with maximal ideal \({\mathfrak m} =(x_1,\cdots ,x_n)\) and let *S* = **k**[*y*_{1}, …, *y*_{n}] be a polynomial ring, we denote by *μ* = (*x*_{1}, …, *x*_{n}) the homogeneous maximal ideal of *S*.

It is well known that *R* is an *S*-module with the standard product. On the other hand, *S* can be considered as *R*-module with two linear structures: by derivation and by contraction.

*char*(

**k**) = 0, the

*R*-module structure of

*S*by derivation is defined by

*char*(

**k**) ≥ 0, the

*R*-module structure of

*S*by contraction is defined by:

### Proposition 2.3.1

*For any field*

**k**

*there is a R-module homomorphism*

*If char*(**k**) = 0 *then σ is an isomorphism of R-modules.*

### Proof

*char*(

**k**) = 0 then the inverse of

*σ*is

*y*

^{α}→(1∕

*α*!)

*y*

^{α}

Given a family of polynomials *F*_{j}, *j* ∈ *J*, we denote by 〈*F*_{j}, *j* ∈ *J*〉 the submodule of *S* generated by *F*_{j}, *j* ∈ *J*, i.e. the **k**-vector subspace of *S* generated by *x*^{α} ∘ *F*_{j}, *j* ∈ *J*, and \(\alpha \in \mathbb N^n\). We denote by 〈*F*_{j}, *j* ∈ *J*〉_{k} the **k**-vector space generated by *F*_{j}, *j* ∈ *J*.

In the next result we compute the injective hull of the residue field of a power series ring, [18, 25].

### Theorem 2.3.2

*Let*Open image in new window

*be the n-dimensional power series ring over a field*

**k**

*. If*

**k**

*is of characteristic zero then*

*If*

**k**

*is of positive characteristic then*

### Proof

*E*=

*E*

_{R}(

**k**). From Corollary 2.2.17 we get

Notice that *S*_{≤i−1} := {*f* ∈ *S*∣deg(*f*) ≤ *i* − 1}⊂ *S* is an sub-*R*-module of *S*, with respect to the derivation or contraction structure of *S*, and that *S*_{≤i−1} is annihilated by \( {\mathfrak m}_R^i\). Hence *S*_{≤i−1} is an \(R/ {\mathfrak m}_R^i\)-module. For any characteristic of the ground field **k** the extension **k** ⊂ *S*_{≤i−1} := {*f* ∈ *S*∣deg(*f*) ≤ *i* − 1} is essential. In fact, let 0 ≠ *M* ⊂ *S*_{≤i−1} be a sub-\(R/{\mathfrak m}_R^i\)-module then it holds 1 ∈ *M*.

From the previous results we can recover the classical result of Macaulay, [23], for the power series ring, see [16, 21].

*I*⊂

*R*is an ideal, then (

*R*∕

*I*)

^{∨}is the sub-R-module of

*S*that we already denote by

*I*

^{⊥}, see Proposition 2.2.19,

*I*. Given a sub-

*R*-module

*M*of

*S*then dual

*M*

^{∨}is an ideal of

*R*that we already denote by (

*S*∕

*M*)

^{⊥}, see Proposition 2.2.19,

### Proposition 2.3.3 (Macaulay’s Duality)

*Let* Open image in new window *be the n-dimensional power series ring over a field* **k***. There is a order-reversing bijection* ⊥ *between the set of finitely generated sub-R-submodules of* Open image in new window *and the set of* \({\mathfrak m}\)*-primary ideals of R given by: if M is a submodule of S then M*^{⊥} = (0 :_{R}*M*)*, and I*^{⊥} = (0 :_{S}*I*) *for an ideal I *⊂* R.*

### Proof

The one-to-one correspondence is a particular case of Proposition 2.2.19. Theorem 2.2.20 gives the one-to-one correspondence between finitely generated sub-*R*-submodules of *S* and \({\mathfrak m}\)-primary ideals of *R*.

### Remark

Macaulay proved more as we will see later on. Trough this correspondence Macaulay proved that Artin Gorenstein **k**-algebras *A* = *R*∕*I* of socle degree *s* correspond to *R*-submodules of *S* generated by a polynomial *F* of degree *s*, see Proposition 2.4.4.

Let *A* = *R*∕*I* be an Artin quotient of *R*, we denote by \({\mathfrak n}={\mathfrak m}/I\) the maximal ideal of *A*. The socle of *A* is the colon ideal \(\operatorname {Soc}(A) = 0 :_A {\mathfrak n}\), notice that \(\operatorname {Soc}(A)\) is a **k**-vector space subspace of *A*. We denote by *s*(*A*) the *socle degree* of *A*, that is the maximum integer *j* such that \({\mathfrak n}^j \neq 0.\) The (Cohen-Macaulay) *type* of *A* is \(t(A) := \operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}} \operatorname {Soc}(A)\).

*A*=

*R*∕

*I*is by definition

*A*is the integer \(e(A):=\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}} (A) = \operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}} I^{\perp }\), Propositions 2.3.3 and 2.2.19. Notice that

*s*(

*A*) is the last integer such that \(\operatorname {HF}_A(i)\neq 0\) and that \(e(A)=\sum _{i=0}^s \operatorname {HF}_A(i)\). The embedding dimension of

*A*is \(\operatorname {HF}_A(1)\).

### Example 2.3.4

Let Open image in new window be a polynomial. We consider the *R*-module structure of *S* = **k**[*x*, *y*] defined by the contraction ∘. Then 〈*F*〉 = 〈*F*, *y*^{2} + *x*, *y* + *x*, *x*, 1〉_{k} and \(\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}}(\langle F\rangle )=5\). We have that \(I=\operatorname {Ann}_R(\langle F\rangle )=(xy-y^3, x^2-xy)\), i.e. *I* is a complete intersection ideal of *R*. The Hilbert function of *A* is \(\operatorname {HF}_A=\{1,2,1,1\}\), so *e*(*A*) = 5 and *s*(*A*) = 3

The associated graded ring to *A* is the graded **k**-algebra ring \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)= \oplus _{i\ge 0} {\mathfrak n}^i/{\mathfrak n}^{i+1}\). Notice that the Hilbert function of *A* and its associated graded ring \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\) agrees. We denote by *I*^{∗} the homogeneous ideal of *S* generated by the initial forms of the elements *I*. It is well known that \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\cong S/I^*\) as graded **k**-algebras, in particular \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)_i\cong (S/I^*)_i\) for all *i* ≥ 0.

*S*

_{≤i}(resp.

*S*

_{<i}, resp.

*S*

_{i}), \(i\in \mathbb N\), the

**k**-vector space of polynomials of

*S*of degree less or equal (resp. less, resp. equal to) to

*i*, and we consider the following

**k**-vector space

### Proposition 2.3.5

*For all i*≥ 0

*it holds*

### Proof

*R*-modules

**k**-vector spaces:

### Proposition 2.3.6

- 1.
〈∣〉

*is a bilinear non-degenerate map of***k***-vector spaces.* - 2.
*If I is an ideal of R then*$$\displaystyle \begin{aligned}I^\perp =\{G\in S\mid \langle I \mid G\rangle =0\} \end{aligned}$$ - 3.〈∣〉
*induces a bilinear non-degenerate map of***k***-vector spaces*$$\displaystyle \begin{aligned}\overline{\langle \mid \rangle}:\frac{R}{I}\times I^\perp \longrightarrow {\mathbf{k}} \end{aligned}$$ - 4.
*We have an isomorphism of***k***-vector spaces:*$$\displaystyle \begin{aligned}\left(\frac{S}{I^*}\right)_i\cong (I^\perp)_i \end{aligned}$$*for all i*≥ 0.

We will denote by ∗ the duality defined by exact pairing \(\overline {\langle \mid \rangle }\), notice that (*R*∕*I*)^{∗}≅*I*^{⊥}.

If \({ \underline i}=(i_1,\cdots , i_n)\in \mathbb N^n\) is a integer *n*-pla we denote by \(\partial _{{ \underline i}}(G)\), *G* ∈ *S*, the derivative of *G* with respect to \(y_1^{i_1}\cdots y_n^{i_n}\), i.e. \(\partial _{{ \underline i}}(G)=(x_1^{i_1}\cdots x_n^{i_n})\circ G\).

*Ω*= {

*ω*

_{i}} be the canonical basis of \( R/{\mathfrak m}^{s+1} \) as a

**k**-vector space consisting of the standard monomials

*x*

^{α}ordered by the deg-lex order with

*x*

_{1}> ⋯ >

*x*

_{n}and, then the dual basis with respect to ∗ is the basis \(\varOmega ^*=\{ \omega _i^* \} \) of

*S*

_{≤j}where

*δ*

_{ij}= 0 if

*i*≠

*j*and

*δ*

_{ii}= 1.

## 2.4 Gorenstein, Level and Compressed Algebras

### Definition 2.4.1

An Artin ring *A* is Gorenstein if *t*(*A*) = 1; *A* is an Artin level algebra if \(\operatorname {Soc}(A)={\mathfrak m}^s\), where *s* is the socle degree of *A*.

### Proposition 2.4.2

*Let A*=

*R*∕

*I be an Artin ring, the following conditions are equivalent:*

- (i)
*A is Gorenstein,* - (ii)
*A*≅*E*_{A}(**k**)*as R-modules,* - (iii)
*A is injective as A-module.*

### Proof

*i*). Since the extension \({\mathbf {k}}=\operatorname {Soc}(A) \subset A\) is essential we have the

*A*-module extensions, Proposition 2.2.11 (

*ii*),

*A*=

*E*

_{A}(

**k**), Proposition 2.2.15. Since

*S*≅

*E*

_{k}(

**k**) is an injective

*R*-module, (

*ii*) implies (

*iii*).

Given an *R*-module *M* we denote by *μ*(*M*) the minimal number of generators of *M*.

### Proposition 2.4.3

*Let A*=

*R*∕

*I be an Artinian local ring. Then*

*In particular the Cohen-Macaulay type of A is*

### Proof

*R*-modules

Given a polynomial *F* ∈ *S* of degree *r* we denote by top(*F*) the degree *r* form of *F* where *r* = deg(*F*).

### Proposition 2.4.4

*Let I be an* \({\mathfrak m}\)*-primary ideal of R. The quotient A *=* R*∕*I is an Artin level algebra of socle degree s and Cohen-Macaulay type t if and only if I*^{⊥} *is generated by t polynomials F*_{1}, ⋯ , *F*_{t} ∈* S such that* deg(*F*_{i}) =* s, i *= 1, ⋯ , *t, and* top(*F*_{1}), ⋯ , top(*F*_{t}) *are* **k***-linear independent forms of degree s. In particular, A *=* R*∕*I is Gorenstein of socle degree s if and only if I*^{⊥} *is a cyclic R-module generated by a polynomial of degree s.*

### Proof

*A*is an Artin level algebra of socle degree

*s*and Cohen-Macaulay type

*t*. In particular \(\operatorname {Soc}(A)={\mathfrak n}^s={\mathfrak m}^s+I/I\) so

*I*

^{∨}is generated by

*t*polynomials

*F*

_{1}, ⋯ ,

*F*

_{t}of degree

*s*and top(

*F*

_{1}), ⋯ , top(

*F*

_{t}) are

**k**-linear independent.

*I*

^{⊥}= 〈

*F*

_{1}, ⋯ ,

*F*

_{t}〉 such that deg(

*F*

_{i}) =

*s*,

*i*= 1, ⋯ ,

*t*, and that top(

*F*

_{1}), ⋯ , top(

*F*

_{t}) are

**k**-linear independent forms of degree

*s*. Hence

*F*

_{1}, ⋯ ,

*F*

_{t}is a minimal system of generators of

*I*

^{⊥}, in particular

*μ*

_{R}(

*I*

^{⊥}) =

*t*and from the last result we have that

*t*is the Cohen-Macaulay type of

*A*. Furthermore, since deg(

*F*

_{i}) =

*s*,

*i*= 1, ⋯ ,

*t*, we have

*A*is Artin level of socle degree

*s*.

In the last section we will prove the following result, see Proposition 2.6.3,

### Corollary 2.4.5

*Let A*=

*R*∕

*I be an Artin algebra of embedding dimension two. Then*

*A is Gorenstein if and only if I is a complete intersection.*

*A*=

*R*∕

*I*is the integer

*r*such that \(I \subseteq {\mathfrak m}^r\) and \(I\nsubseteq {\mathfrak m}^{r+1}\). The

*socle type*of

*A*is the sequence

*σ*(

*A*) = (0, …,

*σ*

_{r−1},

*σ*

_{r}, …,

*σ*

_{s}, 0, 0, … ),

*s*is the socle degree of

*A*, with

*σ*

_{s}> 0 and

*σ*

_{j}= 0 for

*j*>

*s*, . See [20] for some conditions on a sequence of integers to be the socle type of an Artin algebra

### Remark

An Artin algebra of socle degree *s* and Cohen-Macaulay type *t* is level if and only if *σ*_{j} = 0 for *j* ≠ *s* and *σ*_{s} = *t*. The Artin algebra is Gorenstein if and only if *σ*_{j} = 0 for *j* ≠ *s* and *σ*_{s} = 1 .

We say that the Hilbert function \(\operatorname {HF}_A\) is maximal in the class of Artin level algebras of given embedding dimension and socle type, if for each integer *i*, \(\operatorname {HF}_A(i) \ge \operatorname {HF}_{B}(i)\) for any other Artin algebra *B* in the same class. The existence of a maximal \(\operatorname {HF}_A\) was shown for graded algebras by Iarrobino [20]. In the general case by Fröberg and Laksov [17], by Emsalem [16], by Iarrobino and the author of this notes in [10] in the local case.

### Definition 2.4.6

An Artin algebra *A* = *R*∕*I* of socle type *σ* is compressed if and only if it has maximal length \(e(A)= \operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}} A\) among Artin quotients of *R* having socle type *σ* and embedding dimension *n*.

*A*is an Artin algebra of socle type

*σ*, it is known that for

*i*≥ 0,

### Definition 2.4.7

**k**-algebra

*A*of socle degree

*s*, socle type

*σ*and initial degree

*r*is

*compressed*if

*A*of socle degree

*s*, type

*t*and embedding dimension

*n*is compressed if

*t*= 1 and the above equality holds then

*A*is called

*compressed Gorenstein algebra*or also

*extremal Gorenstein algebra*.

*σ*(see [20, Definition 2.2]). For instance if

*r*is the initial degree of

*A*, then

*s*≥ 2(

*r*− 1), then it is easy to see that

*σ*

_{r−1}= 0 because \(\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}} S_{s-(r-1)} \ge \operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}} S_{r-1}\). This is the case if

*A*is Gorenstein.

The following result was proved in [20, Proposition 3.7 and Corollary 3.8].

### Proposition 2.4.8

*A compressed local algebra A *=* R*∕*I whose dual module I*^{⊥} *is generated by F*_{1}, …, *F*_{t} *of degrees d*_{1}, …, *d*_{t} *has a compressed associated graded ring* \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A) \) *whose dual module is generated by the leading forms of F*_{1}, …, *F*_{t}. *Conversely if* \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A) \) *is compressed, then A is compressed and* \(\sigma (A)=\sigma (gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)). \)

*A*is Gorenstein. On the other hand, if

*A*is Gorenstein then \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\) is no longer Gorenstein. In order to study the associated graded ring to

*A*Iarrobino considered the following construction. For

*a*= 0, ⋯ ,

*s*− 1,

*s*=

*s*(

*A*), consider the homogeneous ideals of \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\)

*a*≥ 1 then

*C*(

*a*)

_{i}= 0 for all

*i*≥

*s*−

*a*and

*C*(0)

_{i}= 0 for all

*i*≥

*s*+ 1

### Definition 2.4.9 (Iarrobino’s *Q*-Decomposition of \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\))

*a*= 0, ⋯ ,

*s*− 1 we consider the \(gr_{{\mathfrak m}_A}(A)\)-module

*A*and \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\) agree we have the Iarrobino’s

*Shell decomposition*of \(\operatorname {HF}_A\):

### Proposition 2.4.10

*If A is Artin Gorenstein then Q*(

*a*)

*is a reflexive*\(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\)

*-module:*

*i *= 0, ⋯ , *s *−* a. In particular,* \(\operatorname {HF}_{Q(a)}\) *is a symmetric function w.r.t* \(\frac {s-a}{2}\).

### Example 2.4.11 (Shell Decomposition)

*A*=

*R*∕

*I*The Shell decomposition of \(\operatorname {HF}\) is,

*s*= 3, so

*m*≥

*n*. In fact, all function {1,

*m*,

*n*, 1},

*m*≥

*n*, is the Hilbert function of an Artin Gorenstein algebra Theorem 2.5.11. Notice that from Macaulay’s characterization of Hilbert functions we get that {1,

*m*,

*n*, 1} is the Hilbert function of an Artin algebra iff \(1\le n\le \binom {m+1}{2}\), [3, 30].

The following result is due to De Stefani, [6], it is a generalization of some results of Iarrobino.

### Proposition 2.4.12

*Let A*=

*R*∕

*I be an Artin level algebra of socle degree s and Cohen-Macaulay type t. Then*

- (i)
\(Q(0)= gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)/C(1)\)

*is the unique (up to iso) graded level quotient of*\(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\)*with socle degree s and Cohen-Macaulay type t.* - (ii)
*Let F*_{1}, ⋯ ,*F*_{t}∈*S be generators of I*^{⊥}*such that such that*deg(*F*_{i}) =*s, i*= 1, ⋯ ,*t, and*top(*F*_{1}), ⋯ , top(*F*_{t})*are***k***-linear independent forms of degree s, Proposition*2.4.4*. Then Q*(0)≅*R*∕〈top(*F*_{1}), ⋯ , top(*F*_{t})〉^{⊥}. - (iii)
*The associated graded ring*\(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\)*is an Artin level algebra of socle degree s and Cohen-Macaulay type t iff*\(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\cong Q(0)\).

As corollary we get:

### Proposition 2.4.13

*Let A*=

*R*∕

*I be an Artin Gorenstein algebra of socle degree s. Then the following conditions are equivalent:*

- (i)
\(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\)

*is Gorenstein,* - (ii)
\(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)=Q(0)\)

*,* - (iii)
\(\operatorname {HF}_A\)

*is symmetric.*

## 2.5 Classification of Artin Rings

It is known that there are a finite number of isomorphism classes for *e* ≤ 6. J. Briançon [2] proved this result for *n* = 2, \({\mathbf {k}}=\mathbb C\); G. Mazzola [24] for \({\mathbf {k}}=\bar {\mathbf {k}}\) and *char*(**k**) ≠ 2, 3; finally B. Poonen [26] proved the finiteness for any \({\mathbf {k}}=\bar {\mathbf {k}}\). On the other hand D.A. Suprunenko [31] proved that if **k** infinite, there are infinite number of isomorphism classes for *e* ≥ 7.

The problem of classification is in general very hard. For instance, before the paper [12], an open problem was the classification of Artin algebras with Hilbert function {1, *m*, *n*, 1}, even if *A* is Gorenstein.

*A*=

*R*∕

*I*is Almost Stretched if \({\mathfrak m}^2\) is minimally generated by two elements or equivalently, the Hilbert function of

*A*is

*t*+ 1 ≤

*s*. We say that

*A*is of type (

*s*,

*t*).

In the following result we present the possible analytic types of almost stretched algebras, [14, 15] and [9]. In fact, we proved more: we determined the pairwise analytic types of almost stretched algebras. We omit describing it here.

### Theorem 2.5.1

*Let A *=* R*∕*I be an Almost Stretched algebra of type* (*s*, *t*) *with* 3 ≤* t *+ 1 ≤* s.*

*If there is not r such that*2(

*r*+ 1) =

*s*−

*t*+ 1

*or s*≥ 3

*t*− 1

*then I is isomorphic to one of the following ideals:*

*Assume that s*≤ 3

*t*− 2

*and let r be the integer such that*2(

*r*+ 1) =

*s*−

*t*+ 1

*, then I is isomorphic to one of the following ideals:*

*Where I* _{ p,
z} *is the ideal generated by*

\(\{x_ix_j\}_{1\le i< j\le n, (i,j)\neq (1,2)}, \{x_j-x_1^s\}_{3\le j\le n}, x_2^2-x_1^{p+1}x_2- zx_1^{s-t+1}, x_1^tx_2\)

### Example 2.5.2 ([15])

*A*be an Artin Gorenstein algebra with Hilbert function {1, 2, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1}. Then the analytic types are represented by

- 1.
*I*_{1}= (*y*^{2}−*xy*−*x*^{4},*x*^{3}*y*) - 2.
*I*_{2}= (*y*^{2}−*x*^{3}*y*−*x*^{4},*x*^{3}*y*) - 3.
*I*_{c}= (*y*^{2}−*x*^{2}*y*−*cx*^{4},*x*^{3}*y*),*c*∈**k**^{∗}

The main result of this section shows that some Artin algebras are isomorphic to their associated graded ring. J. Emsalem called these algebras “canonically graded”.

### Definition 2.5.3 (Emsalem)

An Artin local algebra *A* = *R*∕*I* is canonically graded if *A* is analytically isomorphic to \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A)\cong R/I^*R\).

Notice that there are non-canonically graded algebras, for instance:

### Example 2.5.4 ([15])

*A*be an Artin Gorenstein algebras with \(\operatorname {HF}_A=\{1,2,3,2,1\}\) then

*A*is is isomorphic to one and only one of the following quotients of

*R*=

**k**[[

*x*

_{1},

*x*

_{2}]]:

- 1.
\(I_1=(x_1^4,x_2^2)\),

- 2.
\(I_2=(x_1^4, x_1^2+x_2^2)\), and

- 3.
\(I_3=(x_1^4, x_2^2-x_1^3)\).

*R*∕

*I*

_{3}is not canonically graded.

From now on we assume that the ground field **k** is of characteristic zero.

*L*is a submodule of

*S*generated by a sequence \( \underline G := G_1, \dots , G_t \) of polynomials of

*S*, then we will write

Given a form *G* of degree *s* and an integer *q* ≤ *s*, we denote by *Δ*^{q}(*G*) the \(\binom {n-1+s-q}{n-1}\times \binom {n-1+q}{n-1}\) matrix whose columns are the coordinates of \(\partial _{{ \underline i}}(G)\), \(|{ \underline i}|=q\), with respect to \((x^{L})^* = \frac 1 {L !} y^{L}\), |*L*| = *s* − *q*. We will denote by \((L, { \underline i})\) the corresponding position in the matrix *Δ*^{q}(*G*). In the following \( L + { \underline i} \) denotes the sum in \(\mathbb N^n.\)

### Proposition 2.5.5 ([11])

*Let G*∈

*S*=

**k**[

*y*

_{1}, ⋯ ,

*y*

_{n}]

*be a form of degree s*.

*Then*

*for i *= 0, ⋯ , *s. The equality holds if and only if A*_{G} *is compressed.*

*Given an integer i*≤

*s, then*

*where* ^{ τ } *denotes the transpose matrix.*

Notice that from the last result and Proposition 2.3.5 it is easy to deduce an alternative proof of the fact that a graded Gorenstein algebra *A*_{G} has symmetric Hilbert function.

*i*≤

*s*the block matrix

### Proposition 2.5.6

*Let*\(A=A_{ \underline G} \)

*be a compressed algebra of socle degree s and Cohen-Macaulay type type t*.

*Then for every i*= 1, …,

*s*

### Proof

By Proposition 2.4.8 we know that *gr*_{μ}(*A*) is level compressed of socle degree *s* and type *t*. Since *gr*_{μ}(*A*) is level if and only if \(gr_{\mu }(A) \simeq Q(0)= S/\langle {\mathrm {top}}( \underline {G})\rangle ^\perp , \) the result follows by Proposition 2.5.5.

**k**-algebra

*C*, quotient of

*R*, we will denote by

*Aut*(

*C*) the group of the automorphisms of

*C*as a

**k**-algebra and by

*Aut*

_{k}(

*C*) as a

**k**-vector space. Since

*R*is complete

*φ*∈

*Aut*(

*R*) is determined by

*i*= 1, ⋯ ,

*n*, i.e.

*φ*acts by substitution of

*x*

_{i}by

*φ*(

*x*

_{i}).

*M*(

*φ*) with respect to the basis

*Ω*of size \( r= dim_K (R/{{\mathfrak m}}^{s+1}) = {{n+s} \choose s} \) already defined at the end of Sect. 2.5. Given

*I*and

*J*ideals of

*R*such that \({\mathfrak m}^{s+1}\subset I, J, \) there exists an isomorphism of

**k**-algebras

*φ*is canonically induced by a

**k**-algebra automorphism of \( R/{{\mathfrak m}}^{s+1} \) sending \(I/{{\mathfrak m}}^{s+1}\) to \(J/{{\mathfrak m}}^{s+1}.\) In particular

*φ*is an isomorphism of

**k**-vector spaces. Dualizing

**k**-vector subspaces where (

*R*∕

*I*)

^{∗}≃

*I*

^{⊥}and (

*R*∕

*J*)

^{∗}≃

*J*

^{⊥}of

*S*

_{≤s}according to the exact paring (2.3.6). Hence

^{τ}

*M*(

*φ*) is the matrix associated to

*φ*

^{∗}with respect to the basis

*Ω*

^{∗}of

*S*

_{≤s}.

We denote by \({\mathscr R}\) the subgroup of *Aut*_{k}(*S*_{≤s}) (automorphisms of *S*_{≤s} as a **k**-vector space) represented by the matrices ^{τ}*M*(*φ*) of *Gl*_{r}(**k**) with \(\varphi \in Aut (R/{{\mathfrak m}}^{s+1}) \). For all *p* ≥ 1, *I*_{p} denotes the identity matrix of order \(\binom {n+p-1}{p}.\) By Emsalem, [16, Proposition 15], the classification, up to analytic isomorphism, of the Artin local **k**-algebras of multiplicity *e*, socle degree *s* and embedding dimension *n* is equivalent to the classification, up to the action of \({\mathscr R}, \) of the **k**-vector subspaces of *S*_{≤s} of dimension *e*, stable by derivations and containing the **k**-vector space *S*_{≤1}.

*s*. Let \(\varphi \in Aut (R/ {\mathfrak m}^{s+1}), \) from the previous facts we have

*row vector*of the coefficients of the polynomial with respect to the basis

*Ω*

^{∗}by

*φ*

_{s−p}be an automorphism of \(R/{\mathfrak m}^{s+1}\) such that

*φ*

_{s−p}=

*Id*modulo \({\mathfrak m}^{p+1}\), with 1 ≤

*p*≤

*s*, that is

*j*= 1, …,

*n*and \( a_{{ \underline i}}^j \in {\mathbf {k}}\) for each

*n*-uple \( { \underline i}\) such that \(|{ \underline i}|=p+1.\) In the following we will denote \({ \underline a}: = (a_{{ \underline i}}^1, |{ \underline i}|=p+1 ; \cdots ; a_{{ \underline i}}^n, |{ \underline i}|=p+1 )\in {\mathbf {k}}^{n \binom {n+p}{n-1}}. \)

*φ*

_{s−p}, say

*M*(

*φ*

_{s−p}), is an element of

*Gl*

_{r}(

**k**), \(r=\binom {n+s}{s+1}\), with respect to the basis

*Ω*of \(R/{\mathfrak m}^{s+1}\). We write

*M*(

*φ*

_{s−p}) = (

*B*

_{i,j})

_{0≤i,j≤s}where

*B*

_{i,j}is a \(\binom {n+i-1}{i}\times \binom {n+j-1}{j}\) matrix of the coefficients of monomials of degree

*i*appearing in \(\varphi (x^{{ \underline j}}) \) where \({ \underline j}=(j_1, \dots , j_n) \) such that \(|{ \underline j}|=j.\) It is easy to verify that:

*M*(

*φ*

_{s−p}) has the following structure The entries of

*B*

_{p+1,1},

*B*

_{p+2,2}, …,

*B*

_{s,s−p}are linear forms in the variables \(a_{{ \underline i}}^j\), with \(|{ \underline i}|=p+1\),

*j*= 1, ⋯ ,

*n*. We are mainly interested in

*B*

_{s,s−p}which is a \(\binom {n+s-1}{s}\times \binom {n+s-p-1}{s-p}\) matrix whose columns correspond to

*x*

^{W}with |

*W*| =

*s*−

*p*and the rows correspond to the coefficients of

*x*

^{L}with |

*L*| =

*s*in

*φ*(

*x*

^{W}).

Let *F*, *G* be polynomials of degree *s* of *P* and let *φ*_{s−p} be a **k**-algebra isomorphism of type (2.5) sending *A*_{F} to *A*_{G}. We denote by *F*[*j*] (respectively *G*[*j*]) the homogeneous component of degree *j* of *F* (respectively of *G*), that is *F* = *F*[*s*] + *F*[*s* − 1] + … (*G* = *G*[*s*] + *G*[*s* − 1] + …).

*G*[

*s*] w.r.t.

*Ω*

^{∗}, i.e.

*M*

^{[s−p]}(

*G*[

*s*]) of size \( \binom {n-1+s-p}{n-1} \times n \binom {n+p}{n-1} \) and entries in the \({\mathbf {k}}[\alpha _{ \underline i} ] \) such that

*M*

^{[s−p]}(

*G*[

*s*]). We label the columns of

*M*

^{[s−p]}(

*G*[

*s*]) with the set of indexes \((j,{ \underline i})\),

*j*= 1, ⋯ ,

*n*, \(|{ \underline i}|=p+1\), corresponding to the entries of \({ \underline a} = (a_{{ \underline i}}^1, |{ \underline i}|=p+1 ; \cdots ; a_{{ \underline i}}^n, |{ \underline i}|=p+1 )\in {\mathbf {k}}^{n \binom {n+p}{n-1}}\).

For every *i* = 1, ⋯ , *n*, we denote \(S^i_p\) the set of monomials *x*^{α} of degree *p* such that *x*^{α} ∈ *x*_{i}(*x*_{i}, ⋯ , *x*_{n})^{p−1}, hence \(\#(S^i_p)={p-1+n-i \choose p-1}. \)

### Lemma 2.5.7

*where M*

_{j}

*is a matrix of size*\(\binom {s-p-1+n-j}{s-p-1}\times \binom {n+p}{n-1}, \)

*j*= 1, ⋯ ,

*n, defined as follows: the entries of M*

_{j}

*are the entries of M*

^{[s−p]}(

*G*[

*s*])

*corresponding to the rows*\(W\in \log (S^j_{s-p})\)

*and columns*\((j,{ \underline i})\)

*,*\(|{ \underline i}|=p+1\)

*. We label the entries of M*

_{j}

*with respect to these multi-indices. Then it holds:*

- (i)
*for all*\(W=(w_1,\cdots ,w_n)\in \log (S^1_{s-p})\)*and*\({ \underline i}\)*,*\(|{ \underline i}|=p+1\)*,*$$\displaystyle \begin{aligned}w_1 \varDelta^{p+1}(G[s])_{(W-\delta_1,{\underline i})} ={M_1}_{(W,(1,{\underline i}))}, \end{aligned}$$ - (ii)
*for all j*= 1, ⋯ ,*n*− 1*,*\(W\in \log (S_{s-p}^{j+1})\)*,*$$\displaystyle \begin{aligned}M_{j+1, (W,(j+1,*))}= w_{j+1} M_{j,(L,(j,*))} \end{aligned}$$*with L*=*δ*_{j}+*W*−*δ*_{j+1}*,*

From the last result we get the key result of this chapter.

### Corollary 2.5.8

*If s *≤ 4 *then rank* (*M*^{[s−p]}(*G*[*s*])) *is maximal if and only if rank* (*Δ*^{p+1}(*G*[*s*])) *is maximal.*

### Proof

Notice that *M*^{[s−p]}(*G*[*s*]) has an upper-diagonal structure where the rows of the diagonal blocks *M*_{j} are a subset of the rows of the first block matrix *M*_{1}. Let us assume that the number of rows of *M*_{1} is not bigger than the number of columns of *M*_{1}, as a consequence the same holds for *M*_{j} with *j* > 1. Then we can compute the rank of *M*^{[s−p]}(*G*[*s*]) by rows, so rank (*M*^{[s−p]}(*G*[*s*])) is maximal if and only if rank (*Δ*^{p+1}(*G*[*s*])) is maximal. Since *M*_{1} is a \(\binom {s-p-2+n}{s-p-1}\times \binom {n+p}{n-1}\) matrix, if \(\binom {n+s-p-2}{s-p-1}=\binom {n+s-p-2}{n-1}\le \binom {n+p}{n-1}\) we get the result. This inequality is equivalent to *n* + *s* − *p* − 2 ≤ *n* + *p*, i.e. *s* ≤ 2*p* + 2, since *p* ≥ 1 we get that *s* ≤ 4.

*s*of

*S*. Let

*φ*

_{s−p}be a

**k**-algebra isomorphism of type (2.5) sending \(A_{ \underline F}\) to \(A_{ \underline G} \) where \({ \underline F}=F_1, \dots ,F_t . \) In particular we assume that, as in (2.6),

*r*= 1, …,

*t*. We deduce the analogues of (2.7) and we restrict our interest to

*t*times the matrix

*B*

_{s,s−p}and where \( [ \underline G[s]]_{\varOmega ^*}\) is the row \(([G_r[s]]_{\varOmega ^*} : r=1, \dots , t).\) In accordance with (2.8), it is defined the matrix

*M*

^{[s−p]}(

*G*

_{r}[

*s*]) of size \( \binom {n-1+s-p}{n-1} \times n \binom {n+p}{n-1} \) and entries depending on \( [ \underline G[s]]_{\varOmega ^*}\) such that

*M*

^{[s−p]}(

*G*[

*s*]), already described in Lemma 2.5.7 and its blocks correspond to suitable submatrices of \((\varDelta ^{p+1}( \underline G[s]))\) (see (2.2)). Hence we have an analogue to (2.7) for the level case

*r*= 1, …,

*t*.

In the next result we generalize the main result of [12].

### Theorem 2.5.9

*Let A be an Artin compressed Gorenstein local* **k***-algebra. If s *≤ 4 *then A is canonically graded.*

### Proof

Let *A* be an Artin compressed Gorenstein local **k**-algebra of socle degree *s* ≥ 2 and embedding dimension *n*. Then *A* = *A*_{G} with *G* ∈ *S* a polynomial of degree *s* and \(gr_{\mu }(A)= S/\operatorname {Ann}(G[s]) \) is a compressed Gorenstein graded algebra of socle degree *s* ≥ 2 and embedding dimension *n* (see Proposition 2.4.8).

*s*≤ 3 then

*A*is canonically graded. Let us assume

*s*= 4, then the Hilbert function is \(\{ 1, n, {n+1 \choose 2}, n, 1\}. \) Because

*A*

_{G[4]}is a compressed Gorenstein algebra with the same Hilbert function of

*A*, we may assume

*G*=

*G*[4] +

*G*[3]. In fact

*S*

_{1},

*S*

_{2}⊆〈

*G*[4]〉

_{R}because of (2.5.6) and, as a consequence, it is easy to see that 〈

*G*[4] +

*G*[3]〉

_{R}= 〈

*G*[4] +

*G*[3] +

*G*[2] + …〉

_{R}. We have to prove that there exists an automorphism \(\varphi \in Aut(R/{\mathfrak m}^{5}) \) such that

*j*= 1, …,

*n*

*M*

^{[3]}(

*G*[4]) has maximal rank and it coincides with the number of rows, so there exists a solution \({ \underline a} \in {\mathbf {k}}^n \) of (2.12) such that

*F*[3] = 0 and

*F*[4] =

*G*[4].

The aim is now to list classes of local compressed algebras of embedding dimension *n*, socle degree *s* and socle type *σ* = (0, …, *σ*_{r−1}, *σ*_{r}, …, *σ*_{s}, 0, 0, … ) which are canonically graded. Examples will prove that the following result cannot be extended to higher socle degrees. This result extends the main result of [12] and [6].

### Theorem 2.5.10

*Let A*=

*R*∕

*I be an Artin compressed*

**k**

*-algebra of embedding dimension n*,

*socle degree s and socle type σ*.

*Then A is canonically graded in the following cases:*

- (1)
*s*≤ 3*,* - (2)
*s*= 4*and e*_{4}= 1*,* - (3)
*s*= 4*and n*= 2.

### Proof

Since a local ring with Hilbert function {1, *n*, *t*} is always graded, we may assume *s* ≥ 3.

If *s* = 3 and *A* is a compressed level algebra, then *A* is canonically graded by De Stefani [6]. If *A* is not necessarily level, but compressed, then by (2.1) the socle type is {0, 0, *σ*_{2}, *σ*_{3}} and the Hilbert function is {1, *n*, *h*_{2}, *σ*_{3}} where \(h_2 = \min \{ \operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}} R_2, \sigma _2+ \sigma _3 n\}.\) Then we may assume that in any system of coordinates *I*^{⊥} is generated by *e*_{2} quadratic forms and *e*_{3} polynomials \(G_1, \dots , G_{\sigma _3} \) of degree 3. Then the result follows because \(R/\operatorname {Ann}_R(G_1, \dots , G_{\sigma _3}) \) is a 3-level compressed algebra of type *σ*_{3} and hence canonically graded.

Let us assume *s* = 4 and *σ*_{4} = 1. We recall that if *A* is Gorenstein, then the result follows by Theorem 2.5.9. Since *A* is compressed, then by (2.1) the socle type is (0, 0, 0, *σ*_{3}, 1). This means that *I*^{⊥} is generated by *e*_{3} polynomial of degree 3 and one polynomial of degree 4. Similarly to the above part, because *S*_{≤2} ⊆ (*I*^{∗})^{⊥}, *I*^{⊥} can be generated by *σ*_{3} forms of degree 3 and one polynomial of degree 4. As before the problem is reduced to the Gorenstein case with *s* = 4 and the result follows.

Assume *s* = 4 and *n* = 2. If *σ*_{4} = 1, then we are in case (2). If *σ*_{4} > 1, because *A* is compressed, the possible socle types are: *σ*_{i} = (0, 0, 0, 0, *i*) with *i* = 2, ⋯ , 5 and since *A* is compressed, the corresponding Hilbert function is {1, 2, 3, 4, *i*}. In each case *A* is graded because the Hilbert function forces the dual module to be generated by forms of degree four.

As a corollary of the last result we get [12].

### Theorem 2.5.11

*Let A be an Artinian Gorenstein*

**k**

*-algebra with Hilbert function*{1,

*n*,

*m*, 1}

*. Then the following conditions are equivalent:*

- (i)
*A is canonically graded,* - (ii)
*m*=*n,* - (iii)
*A is compressed.*

From this result we can deduce

### Corollary 2.5.12 ([12])

*The classification of Artinian Gorenstein local* **k** *-algebras with Hilbert function* \(\operatorname {HF}_A=\{1,n,n,1\}\) *is equivalent to the projective classification of the hypersurfaces* \( V(F)\subset \mathbb {P}^{n-1}_{{\mathbf {k}}}\) *where F is a degree three non degenerate form in n variables.*

Next we will recall the classification of the Artin Gorenstein algebras for *n* = 1, 2, 3, [12].

If *n* = 1, then it is clear that *A*≅**k**[[*x*]]∕(*x*^{4}), so there is only one analytic model. If *n* = 2 we have the following result:

### Proposition 2.5.13 ([12])

*Let A be an Artinian Gorenstein local K-algebra with Hilbert function*\(\operatorname {HF}_A=\{1,2,2,1\}\)

*. Then A is isomorphic to one and only one of the following quotients of R*=

*K*[[

*x*

_{1},

*x*

_{2}]]

*:*

*n*= 3 first we have to study with detail the classification of plane curves, in particular, the elliptic curves, see for instance [29]. Any plane elliptic cubic curve \(C\subset \mathbb P^{2}_{{\mathbf {k}}}\) is defined, in a suitable system of coordinates, by a Weierstrass’ equation, [29],

*a*,

*b*∈

**k**such that 4

*a*

^{3}+ 27

*b*

^{2}≠ 0. The

*j*invariant of

*C*is

*i*= 1, 2, are projectively isomorphic if and only if

*j*(

*a*

_{1},

*b*

_{1}) =

*j*(

*a*

_{2},

*b*

_{2}).

*W*(

*j*) the following elliptic curves with

*j*as moduli : \(W(0)=y_2^2y_1+y_2y_3^2-y_1^3\), \( W(1728)= y_2^2y_3-y_1y_3^2-y_1^3\), and for

*j*≠ 0, 1728

We will show by using the library INVERSE-SYST.LIB that:

### Proposition 2.5.14

*Let A be an Artin Gorenstein local*

**k**

*-algebra with Hilbert function*\(\operatorname {HF}_A=\{1,3,3,1\}\)

*. Then A is isomorphic to one and only one of the following quotients of R*=

**k**[[

*x*

_{1},

*x*

_{2},

*x*

_{3}]]

*:*

*with:*

\(H_j=6jx_1x_2- 144(j-1728)x_1x_3+72(j-1728)x_2x_3- (j-1728)^2 x_3^2\) *, and*

\(G_j=jx_1^2-12(j-1728)x_1x_3+ 6(j-1728)x_2x_3+ 144(j-1728)x_3^2\) *;*

*I*(*j*_{1})≅*I*(*j*_{2}) *if and only if j*_{1} =* j*_{2}.

### Proof

Let us assume that *F* is the product of the linear forms *l*_{1}, *l*_{2}, *l*_{3}. If *l*_{1}, *l*_{2}, *l*_{3} are **k**-linear independent we get the first case. On the contrary, if these linear forms are **k**-linear dependent, we deduce that *F* is degenerate. Let us assume that *F* is the product of a linear form *l* and an irreducible quadric *Q*. According to the relative position of *V* (*l*) and *V* (*Q*) we get the second and the third case.

Let *F* be a degree three irreducible form. The first seven models can be obtained from the corresponding inverse system *F* by using the command idealAnn of [8]. For the last case see [8].

## 2.6 Computation of Betti Numbers

In this chapter we address the following problem: How can we compute the Betti numbers of *I* in terms of its Macaulay’s inverse system *L* = *I*^{⊥} without computing the ideal *I*? This is a longstanding problem in commutative algebra that has been considered by many authors, see for instance [22], Chap. 9, Problem L. For instance, if *A* = *R*∕*I* is an Artin Gorenstein local ring then its inverse system is a polynomial *F* on the variables *x*_{1}, …, *x*_{n} of degree the socle degree of *A*. In this chapter we compute the Betti numbers of *A* in terms of the polynomial *F* instead of computing *I* and then to compute the Betti numbers of *A* = *R*∕*I*.

*I*be an \({\mathfrak m}\)-primary ideal of

*R*. Let \(\mathbb F_{\bullet }\) be a minimal free resolution of the

*R*-module

*R*∕

*I*

*p*-th Betti number of

*R*∕

*I*is \(\beta _p(R/I)={\mathrm {rank}}\,_R(\mathbb F_p)\), 1 ≤

*p*≤

*n*. Tensoring \(\mathbb F_{\bullet }\) by the

*R*-module

**k**we get the complex

*p*= 1, …,

*n*. Let us now consider Koszul’s resolution of

*R*defined by the regular sequence

*x*

_{1}, …,

*x*

_{n}

*R*-basis of

*R*

^{n}:

*e*

_{i}= (0, …, 1

^{(i}, …, 0) ∈

*R*

^{n},

*i*= 1, …,

*n*; for all 1 ≤

*i*

_{1}< ⋯ <

*i*

_{p}≤

*n*we set \(e_{i_1,\dots , i_p}=e_{i_1}\wedge \dots e_{i_p}\in \bigwedge ^p R^n\). Since the set \(e_{i_1,\dots , i_p}\), 1 ≤

*i*

_{1}< ⋯ <

*i*

_{p}≤

*n*, form a

*R*-basis of \(\mathbb K_p\) we define the morphism

*i*

_{1}< ⋯ <

*i*

_{p}≤

*n*, this defines an isomorphism of

*R*-modules \(\bigwedge ^p R^n\stackrel {\phi _p}{\cong }R^{{n \choose p}}\), such that \(\phi _p(e_{i_1,\dots , i_p})=v_{i_1,\dots , i_p}\), 1 ≤

*i*

_{1}< ⋯ <

*i*

_{p}≤

*n*, is the element of \(R^{{n \choose p}}\) with all entries zero but the (

*i*

_{1}, …,

*i*

_{p})-th that it is equal to 1. We denote by

*Δ*

_{p}the associated matrix to

*d*

_{p}with respect the above bases of \(R^{{n \choose p}}\) and \(R^{{n \choose p-1}}\), notice that the entries of

*Δ*

_{p}are zero or ±

*x*

_{i},

*i*= 1, …,

*n*.

*d*

_{p}the morphism \(\operatorname {Id}_{R/I}\otimes _R d_p\) then

*p*= 1, …,

*n*. If we consider the dual of \(R/I \otimes _R \mathbb K_{\bullet }\) with respect to

*E*we get,

*L*=

*I*

^{⊥},

### Proposition 2.6.1

*Let L*⊂

*S be a finitely generated sub-R-module of S of dimension*\(e=\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}}(L)\)

*. If I*=

*Ann*

_{R}(

*L*) ⊂

*R then*

*for p *= 1, …, *n.*

### Proof

*L*is a finitely dimensional

**k**-vector space and the duallzing functor

^{∗}is exact and additive we get

*t*≥ 0 let

*W*

_{t}be the set of standard monomials

*x*

^{α}, \(\alpha \in \mathbb N^n\), of degree at most

*t*ordered by the local deg-rev-lex ordering with

*x*

_{n}< ⋯ <

*x*

_{1}. For instance, for

*n*= 3 and

*t*= 2, \(W_2=\{ x_3^2, x_3 x_2, x_3 x_1, x_2^2, x_2x_1,x_1^2, x_3, x_2, x_1, 1\}\). For all

*p*= 1, …,

*n*we consider the following set \(\mathscr M_{s,p}\) of linearly independent elements of \(R^{n \choose p}\)

*α*) ≤

*s*, 1 ≤

*i*

_{1}< ⋯ <

*i*

_{p}≤

*n*. Notice that \(\# (\mathscr M_{s,p})= {n+s\choose n}{n \choose p}\).

*s*= deg(

*L*). Given a

**k**-basis

*w*

_{1}, …,

*w*

_{e}of

*L*we consider the following

**k**-basis, say

*B*

_{p}, of \(L^{{n \choose p}}\):

*i*= 1, …,

*e*, 1 ≤

*i*

_{1}< ⋯ <

*i*

_{p}≤

*n*. We denote by \(\varDelta ^+_p(L)\) the matrix such that the columns are the coordinates of \(d_p^*(w_{i_1,\dots ,i_p}^i)\) with respect the basis \(\mathscr M_{s,p-1}\). This is a matrix of \({n+s\choose n}{n \choose p}\) rows and \(e{n\choose p-1}\) columns and the entries are zero or ±

*x*

_{i},

*i*= 1, …,

*n*. Then we have:

### Proposition 2.6.2

*For any finitely generated R-module L and*1 ≤

*p*≤

*n we have*

*If*\(e=\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}}(L)\)

*and I*=

*Ann*

_{R}(

*L*) ⊂

*R then*

*for p *= 1, …, *n.*

From this result we get that the determination of the Betti number *β*_{p}(*R*∕*I*) involves the computation of the rank of \(\varDelta ^+_p(L)\), *p* = 1, …, *n*. Recall that these matrices are huge, see the comments before last result, so they are difficult to manage. Moreover, this method of computation of Betti numbers implies the computation or election of a **k**-basis of *L*. This is not possible if we want to consider a general *L* or the deformations of *L*, see Example 2.6.7.

In the next result we compute the Cohen-Macaulay type of *R*∕*I* and we partially recover the classical result of Macaulay. In the second part, case *n* = 2, we prove a well known result of Serre that can be deduced from Hilbert-Burch structure theorem, i.e. the class of codimension two complete intersection ideals coincides with the class of codimension two Gorenstein ideals.

### Proposition 2.6.3

*Let L be a finitely generated R-module of S of dimension e. Then the Cohen-Macaulay type of R*∕

*I, I*=

*Ann*

_{R}(

*L*)

*, is*

*In particular, for n*= 2

*then*

*In particular, I is a complete intersection if and only if R*∕*I is Gorenstein.*

### Proof

The first result is Proposition 2.4.3.

*n*= 2. Then the complex \((R/I \otimes _R \mathbb K_{\bullet })^*\) is

*p*= 1 we get

*I*is a complete intersection ideal, i.e.

*μ*(

*I*) = 2, if and only if

*t*(

*R*∕

*I*) = 1, i.e.

*R*∕

*I*is Gorenstein.

*R*-module

*L*of

*S*we denote by \(L :_S {\mathfrak m}\) the sub-

*R*-module of

*S*formed by the polynomials

*h*∈

*S*such that \({\mathfrak m} \circ h\subset L \). Notice that if

*L*⊂

*S*

_{≤s}then \(L:_S {\mathfrak m}\subset S_{\le s+1}\) and, in particular, \(\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}}(L:_S {\mathfrak m})<\infty \). We consider the

**k**-vector space morphism induced by \(d_{1}^*\)

*h*∈

*S*

_{≤s+1}. It is easy to prove that \( L:_S {\mathfrak m}=(d_{1,s}^{*})^{-1}(L^n ). \)

### Proposition 2.6.4

*Let L*⊂

*S be a finitely generated sub-R-module of S of dimension*\(e=\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}}(L)\)

*and degree s*= deg(

*L*)

*. If I*=

*Ann*

_{R}(

*L*) ⊂

*R then*

### Proof

*V*=

*L*

^{n}then we have

*Claim*\( \mu (I)=\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}}\left (L :_S {\mathfrak m} /L\right ) \).

*Proof of the Claim*Let us consider the exact sequence of

*R*-modules

*S*-modules

*h*∈

*S*then \(h\in ({\mathfrak m} I)^{\perp }\) if and only if \(0=({\mathfrak m} I)\circ h= I\circ ({\mathfrak m} \circ h)\), so \(({\mathfrak m} I)^{\perp }\) is the set of polynomial

*h*such that \({\mathfrak m} \circ h \subset L\), i.e. \(({\mathfrak m} I)^{\perp }= L:_S {\mathfrak m}\).

*Claim*we get

Next we will compute \(\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}}(\mathrm {im}(d_{1,s}^{*}) +L^n)\) by considering a matrix that we are going to define. We denote by \(\mathbb M_s\) the \(n {n+s \choose n} \times \left ( {n+s+1 \choose n}-1 \right ) \)-matrix such that the *i*-th column, \(i\in [1,{n+s+1 \choose n}-1]\), consists in the coordinates of *x*_{n} ∘ *x*^{α},…, *x*_{1} ∘ *x*^{α} with respect the base *W*_{s}, where *x*^{α} is the *i*-th monomial of *W*_{s+1}.

*L*⊂

*S*be a finitely generated

*R*-module of dimension

*e*and degree

*s*. We pick a basis

*w*

_{1}, …,

*w*

_{e}of

*L*and we consider the following basis, say

*B*, of

*L*

^{n}: \((0,\dots , \stackrel {j}{w_i},\dots , 0)\in L^n\) for

*j*= 1, …,

*n*,

*i*= 1, …,

*e*. We denote by \(\mathbb B(L)\) the \(n {n+s \choose n} \times ( n.e ) \)-matrix, such that the columns consists of the coordinates of the elements of

*B*with respect \(\mathscr M_{s,1}\). Finally, \(\mathbb M(L)\) is the \(n {n+s \choose n} \times \left ( {n+s+1 \choose n}-1 + n.e \right )\) block matrix

*L*⊂

*S*, see for instance Example 2.6.7, we have to avoid considering a basis of

*L*. Let

*F*

_{1}, …,

*F*

_{r}be a system of generators of

*L*as

*R*-module. Then consider the following system of generators of

*L*as

**k**-vector space

*x*

^{α}∘

*F*

_{i}for all \(\alpha \in \mathbb N^n\) of degree less or equal to

*s*= deg(

*L*) and for all

*i*= 1, …,

*r*. We consider now the following system of generators, say

*B*

^{+}, of

*L*

^{n}:

*j*= 1, …,

*n*, \(\alpha \in \mathbb N^n\) with deg(

*α*) ≤

*s*. We denote by \(\mathbb B^{+}(L)\) the \(n {n+s \choose n} \times r {n+s\choose n } \)-matrix, such that the columns are the coordinates of the system of generators

*B*

^{+}with respect \(\mathscr M_{s,1}\). This (lazy) method generates a matrix

*G*

_{s}such that where

*Id*is the identity matrix of dimension \({n+s+1\choose n}-1\) and

*Z*is the \(\left (n {n+s \choose n}- {n+s+1\choose n}+1\right )\times ({n+s+1\choose n}-1)\) zero matrix. We denote by \(\mathbb L^*(L)\), resp. \(\mathbb M^*(L)\), the sub-matrix of \( G_s\mathbb L(L)\), resp. \( G_s\mathbb M(L)\), consisting of the last \(n {n+s\choose n}- {n+s+1\choose n}+1\) rows and the last \(n r {n+s\choose n}\), resp.

*n*.

*e*, columns. Hence we have

### Proposition 2.6.5

*Let L be a degree s finitely generated sub-R-module of S. Then*

- (i)
\({\mathrm {rank}}\, (\mathbb M(L))= {\mathrm {rank}}\, (\mathbb L(L))\)

*and*\({\mathrm {rank}}\, (\mathbb M^*(L))={\mathrm {rank}}\, (\mathbb L^*(L))\)*,* - (ii)
\({\mathrm {rank}}\, (\mathbb M(L))={\mathrm {rank}}\, (\mathbb M^*(L))+{n+s+1\choose n}-1\).

### Remark

Recall that \(\varDelta ^+_1(L)\) is a matrix of \(n {n+s\choose n}\) rows and *e* columns. If we mimic the construction of the matrix \(\mathbb M^*(L)\) in the definition of \(\varDelta ^+_1(L)\), i.e. considering a system of generators of *L* instead a **k**-basis of *L*, we get a matrix with \(n{n+s\choose n}\) rows and \(n r {n+s \choose n}\) columns. Notice that \(\mathbb M^*(L)\) is a smaller matrix: has \(n{n+s\choose n}- {n+s+1\choose n}+1\) rows and \(n r {n+s \choose n}\) columns.

In the next result we compute more efficiently the minimal number of generators of an ideal by considering the matrix \(\mathbb M^*(L)\).

### Theorem 2.6.6

*Let L*⊂

*S be a finitely generated sub-R-module of S of dimension*\(e=\operatorname {dim}_{{\mathbf {k}}}(L)\)

*and degree s*= deg(

*L*)

*. If I*=

*Ann*

_{R}(

*L*) ⊂

*R then*

*In particular, I is a complete intersection if and only if* \({\mathrm {rank}}\, (\mathbb M^*(L))=(e-1) (n-1)\).

### Example 2.6.7

*n*= 2 and consider a general polynomial of degree two

*A*=

*R*∕

*I*,

*I*=

*Ann*(〈

*F*〉), is an Artinian Gorenstein ring of embedding dimension two, in particular

*μ*(

*I*) = 2. Hence the Hilbert function of

*A*is {1, 2, 1}. \(\mathbb L(F)\) is the 12 × (9 + 2.6)-matrix: The matrix \(\mathbb L^*(F)\) is

*A*is two the rank of this matrix is 3. Hence \({\mathrm {rank}}\,(\mathbb M^*(F))=3\) and by Proposition 2.6.6

*μ*(

*I*) = 4 − 3 + 1 = 2, as expected, Proposition 2.4.3.

## 2.7 Examples

In this chapter we present several explicit examples proving that some results cannot be improved. We also give some explicit computations of the matrices introduced in chapter 5 and some explicit commutations of the minimal number of generators following the results of Chapter 6.

The following example shows that Theorem 2.5.9 fails if *A* is Gorenstein of socle degree *s* = 4, but not compressed, i.e. the Hilbert function is not maximal.

### Example 2.7.1 ([15])

*A*be an Artin Gorenstein local

**k**-algebra with Hilbert function \(\operatorname {HF}_A=\{1,2,2,2,1\}\). The local ring is called almost stretched and a classification can be found in [15]. In this case

*A*is isomorphic to one and only one of the following rings :

- (a)
*A*=*R*∕*I*with \(I=(x_1^4, x_2^2) \subseteq R={\mathbf {k}}[[x_1, x_2]], \) and \(I^{\perp }=\langle y_1^3 y_2\rangle . \) In this case*A*is canonically graded, - (b)
*A*=*R*∕*I*with \(I=(x_1^4, -x_1^3 + x_2^2)\subseteq R={\mathbf {k}}[[x_1, x_2]], \) and \(I^{\perp }=\langle y_1^3 y_2+ y_2^3\rangle \). The associated graded ring is of type (*a*) and it is not isomorphic to*R*∕*I*. Hence*A*is not canonically graded. - (c)
*A*=*R*∕*I*with \(I=(x_1^2+x_2^2, x_2^4) \subseteq R={\mathbf {k}}[[x_1, x_2]], \) and \(I^{\perp }=\langle y_1 y_2(y_1^2-y_2^2) \rangle . \) In this case*A*is graded.

The following example shows that Theorem 2.5.9 cannot be extended to compressed Gorenstein algebras of socle degree *s* = 5.

### Example 2.7.2 ([11])

*A*=

*R*∕

*I*is a compressed Gorenstein algebra with \(\operatorname {HF}_{A}=\{1,2,3,3,2,1\}\), \(I^*=(x_1^4,x_2^3)\) and \(I^{\perp }=\langle y_1^3 y_2^2 + y_2^4\rangle \). Assume that there exists an analytic isomorphism

*φ*of

*R*mapping

*I*into

*I*

^{∗}. It is easy to see that the Jacobian matrix of

*φ*is diagonal because \((I^*)^{\perp } = \langle y_1^3 y_2^2\rangle . \) We perform the computations modulo (

*x*

_{1},

*x*

_{2})

^{5}, so we only have to consider the following coefficients of

*φ*

*a*,

*b*are units,

*i*,

*j*,

*k*∈

**k**. After the isomorphism

*x*

_{1}→ 1∕

*ax*

_{1},

*x*

_{2}→ 1∕

*bx*

_{2}, we may assume

*a*=

*b*= 1. Then we have

*α*∈

*K*,

*β*∈

*R*such that

*α*= 0 and

*I*is not isomorphic to

*I*

^{∗}.

*φ*as above sending

*I*into

*I*

^{∗}. If we denote by (

*z*

_{i})

_{i=1,…,6}the coordinates of a homogeneous form

*G*[5] of degree 5 in

*y*

_{1},

*y*

_{2}with respect to

*Ω*

^{∗}, then the matrix

*M*

^{[4]}(

*G*[5]) (

*s*= 5,

*p*= 1) has the following shape

*z*

_{i}are zero but

*z*

_{3}= 12, hence the above matrix has rank 4 and it has not maximum rank given by Corollary 2.5.8. Since all the rows are not zero except the last one, it is easy to see that \(F[4] = y_2^4\) is not in the image of

*M*

^{[4]}(

*G*[5]), as (2.7) requires.

The following example shows that Theorem 2.5.10 cannot be extended to compressed type 2 level algebras of socle degree *s* = 4.

### Example 2.7.3 ([11])

*S*=

**k**[

*y*

_{1},

*y*

_{2},

*y*

_{3}] of degree 4 and define in

*R*=

**k**[[

*x*

_{1},

*x*

_{2},

*x*

_{3}]] the ideal

*A*=

*R*∕

*I*is a compressed level algebra with socle degree 4, type 2 and Hilbert function \(\operatorname {HF}_A=\{1,3,6,6,2\}\). We prove that

*A*is not canonically graded.

We know that *I*^{∗} = *Ann*(*G*_{1}[4], *G*_{2}[4]) and we prove that *A* and \(gr_{{\mathfrak n}}(A) \) are not isomorphic as **k**-algebras. Let *φ* an analytic isomorphism sending *I* to *I*^{∗}, then it is easy to see that *φ* = *I*_{3} modulo (*x*_{1}, *x*_{2}, *x*_{3})^{2}. The matrix *M*^{[3]}(*G*_{1}[4], *G*_{2}[4]) is of size 20 × 18 and, accordingly with (2.7), we will show that \(y_3^3\) is not in the image of *M*^{[3]}(*G*_{1}[4], *G*_{2}[4]).

*F*

_{1}[4],

*F*

_{2}[4] be two homogeneous forms of degree 4 of

*R*=

**k**[

*y*

_{1},

*y*

_{2},

*y*

_{3}]. We denote by \((z_i^j)_{i=1,\dots , 15}\) the coordinates of

*F*

_{j}[4] with respect the basis

*Ω*

^{∗},

*j*= 1, 2. Then the 20 × 18 matrix

*M*

^{[3]}(

*F*

_{1}[4],

*F*

_{2}[4]) has the following shape, see (2.9), It is enough to specialize the matrix to our case for proving that \(y_3^3\) is not in the image of

*M*

^{[3]}(

*G*

_{1}[4],

*G*

_{2}[4]).

Next we will show how to apply the main result of the chapter six, Theorem 2.6.6. We assume that the ground field **k** is infinite.

### Example 2.7.4

Artin Graded Level algebras of type 2.

*F*,

*G*be two forms of degree three of

*S*=

**k**[

*x*

_{1},

*x*

_{2},

*x*

_{3}]. We write \(I=\operatorname {Ann}_R(\langle F, G \rangle )\). Then \(\mathbb L^*(\langle F, G\rangle )\) is a 26 × 120 matrix in the coefficients of

*F*,

*c*

_{1}, …,

*c*

_{10}, and the coefficients of

*G*,

*c*

_{11}, …,

*c*

_{20}. This matrix has rank 17 considered as matrix with entries in the field

*K*of fractions of

*c*

_{1}, …,

*c*

_{20}. This means that for generic

*c*

_{1}, …,

*c*

_{20}the matrix \(\mathbb L^*(\langle F, G\rangle )\) has rank 17. Moreover, there is a 17 × 17 submatrix of \(\mathbb L^*(\langle F , G\rangle )\) whose determinant is non-zero in

*K*

*G*

_{4}is a form of degree 4 on

*c*

_{1}, …,

*c*

_{10}and

*G*

_{8}is a form of degree 8 on

*c*

_{11}, …,

*c*

_{20}. The condition

*c*

_{1}

*c*

_{12}−

*c*

_{2}

*c*

_{11}≠ 0 implies that

*F*,

*G*are linearly independent over

**k**, so

*A*=

*R*∕

*I*is an Artin level algebra of socle degree three and type 2. If the determinant, say

*D*

_{2}, of the matrix

*A*is three.

**k**-vector space

*V*generated by

*x*

_{i}∘

*F*,

*i*= 1, 2, 3;

*x*

_{i}∘

*G*,

*i*= 1, 2, 3. The dimension of

*V*equals \(\operatorname {HF}_A(2)\) and agrees with the rank of the following matrix

*D*

_{3}of this matrix is non-zero then the Hilbert function of

*A*is {1, 3, 6, 2}. Hence, if

*D*

_{1}

*D*

_{2}

*D*

_{3}≠ 0 then

*A*is a compressed Artin level algebra of type 2, socle degree 3, embedding dimension 3 and Hilbert function {1, 3, 6, 2}. From Theorem 2.6.6 we get

Let \(\mathbb P_{{\mathbf {k}}}^9 \times \mathbb P_{{\mathbf {k}}}^9\) be the space parameterizing the pairs (*F*, *G*) up to scalars in each component. Since *D*_{1}*D*_{2}*D*_{3} is bi-homogeneous form of degree 26 on (*c*_{1}, …, *c*_{10}) and (*c*_{11}, …, *c*_{20}), in this example we have shown a principal non-empty subset \(U=\mathbb P_{{\mathbf {k}}}^9 \times \mathbb P_{{\mathbf {k}}}^9\setminus V(D_1 D_2 D_3)\) parameterizing a family of compressed Artin level algebra of type 2, socle degree 3, embedding dimension 3 and Hilbert function {1, 3, 6, 2}.

### Example 2.7.5

Artin Gorenstein algebras with Hilbert function {1, 4, 4, 1}.

*F*of degree 3 of Open image in new window . We write

*I*= 〈

*F*〉

^{⊥}. Then \(\mathbb L^*(F)\) is a 71 × 140 matrix in the coefficients of

*F*, say

*c*

_{1}, …,

*c*

_{35}. This matrix has rank 25 considered as matrix with coefficients in the field

*K*of fractions of

*c*

_{1}, …,

*c*

_{35}. Hence for generic values of

*c*

_{1}, …,

*c*

_{35}the ring

*A*=

*R*∕

*I*is a compressed Gorenstein algebra with Hilbert function {1, 4, 4, 1}, and the matrix \(\mathbb L^*(F)\) has rank 25 so

### Example 2.7.6

Artin Gorenstein algebras with Hilbert function {1, 3, 3, 1}.

In this example we assume that the ground field **k** is algebraically closed. In [12] we prove that all Artin Gorenstein algebra *A* = *R*∕*I* with Hilbert function {1, *n*, *n*, 1} is isomorphic to its associated graded ring. Hence in the case *n* = 3 we may assume that *I*^{⊥} is generated by a form *F* in *x*_{1}, *x*_{2}, *x*_{3} of degree three. In [12, Proposition 3.7 ] we classify such algebras in terms of the geometry of the projective plane cubic *C* defined by *F*. Next we will compute the minimal number of generators of *I* in the case that *C* is non-singular by using the main theorem of this paper.

*C*,

*λ*≠ 0, 1,

*j*-invariant of

*C*is

*W*is

*j*(

*λ*) ≠ 0 then

*μ*(

*I*) = 2.8 − (10 + 4) + 1 = 3, i.e.

*I*is a complete intersection, as we get in [12, Proposition 3.7]. If

*j*(

*λ*) = 0, i.e.

*C*is the elliptic Fermat curve, then one gets rank (

*W*) = 2 for all roots of \(\det (W)=0\). Hence

*μ*(

*I*) = 2.8 − (10 + 2) + 1 = 5 as we get in [12, Proposition 3.7].

## Notes

### Acknowledgements

I am grateful to Le Tuan Hoa and to Ngo Viet Trung for giving me the opportunity to speak about one of my favorite subjects. I am also grateful to the participants for their kind hospitality and mathematical discussions that made a very interesting and productive month in the city of Hanoi. We thank to Marcela Silva and Roser Homs for their useful comments and remarks. Last but not least, I am greatly indebted to M. E. Rossi for a long time collaboration on Macaulay’s inverse systems and other topics. Some of the main results of these notes are made in collaboration with M. E. Rossi.

## References

- 1.M. Böij, Betti numbers of compressed level algebras. J. Pure Appl. Algebra
**134**(2), 111–131 (1999)Google Scholar - 2.J. Briançon, Description de \({\mathrm{Hilb}}^{n}\mathbb C\{x,y\}\). Inv. Math.
**41**, 45–89 (1977)Google Scholar - 3.W. Bruns, J. Herzog,
*Cohen-Macaulay Rings*, revised edn. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 39 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997)Google Scholar - 4.G. Casnati, J. Elias, R. Notari, M.E. Rossi, Poincaré series and deformations of Gorenstein local algebras. Commun. Algebra
**41**(3), 1049–1059 (2013)Google Scholar - 5.G. Casnati, J. Jelisiejew, R. Notari, Irreducibility of the Gorenstein loci of Hilbert schemes via ray families. Algebra Number Theory
**9**, 1525–1570 (2015)Google Scholar - 6.A. De Stefani, Artinian level algebras of low socle degree. Commun. Algebra
**42**(2), 729–754 (2014)Google Scholar - 7.W. Decker, G.-M. Greuel, G. Pfister, H. Schönemann, Singular 4-0-1 –A computer algebra system for polynomial computations (2014). www.singular.uni-kl.de
- 8.J. Elias, Inverse-syst.lib–Singular library for computing Macaulay’s inverse systems (2015). arXiv:1501.01786Google Scholar
- 9.J. Elias, R. Homs, On the analytic type of Artin algebras. Commun. Algebra
**44**, 2277–2304 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 10.J. Elias, A. Iarrobino, The Hilbert function of a Cohen-Macaulay local algebra: extremal Gorenstein algebras. J. Algebra
**110**, 344–356 (1987)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 11.J. Elias, M.E. Rossi, Analytic isomorphisms of compressed local algebras. Trans. Am. Math. Soc.
**364**(9), 4589–4604 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 12.J. Elias, M.E. Rossi, Isomorphism classes of short Gorenstein local rings via Macaulay’s inverse system. Proc. Am. Math. Soc.
**143**(3), 973–987 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar - 13.J. Elias, M.E. Rossi, The structure of the inverse system on Gorenstein k-algebras. Adv. Math.
**314**, 306–327 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 14.J. Elias, G. Valla, Structure theorems for certain Gorenstein ideals. Mich. Math. J.
**57**, 269–292 (2008). Special volume in honor of Melvin HochsterGoogle Scholar - 15.J. Elias, G. Valla, Isomorphism classes of certain Gorenstein ideals. Algebr. Represent. Theory
**14**, 429–448 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 16.J. Emsalem, Géométrie des points épais. Bull. Soc. Math. France
**106**(4), 399–416 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 17.R. Froberg, D. Laksov,
*Compressed Algebras*. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1092 (Springer, Berlin, 1984), pp. 121–151Google Scholar - 18.P. Gabriel, Objects injectifs dans les catégories abéliennes. Séminaire P. Dubriel 1958/1959 (1959), pp. 17–01, 32Google Scholar
- 19.R. Hartshorne,
*Deformation Theory*. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 257 (Springer, Berlin, 2010)Google Scholar - 20.A. Iarrobino, Compressed algebras: artin algebras having given socle degrees and maximal length. Trans. Am. Math. Soc.
**285**(1), 337–378 (1984)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 21.A. Iarrobino, Associated graded algebra of a Gorenstein Artin algebra, Mem. Am. Math. Soc.
**107**(514), viii+115 (1994)Google Scholar - 22.A. Iarrobino, V. Kanev,
*Power Sums, Gorenstein Algebras, and Determinantal Loci*. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1721 (Springer, Berlin, 1999). Appendix C by Iarrobino and Steven L. KleimanGoogle Scholar - 23.F.S. Macaulay,
*The Algebraic Theory of Modular Systems*. Revised reprint of the original 1916 original. With an introduction of P. Robert, Cambridge Mathematical Library (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994)Google Scholar - 24.G. Mazzola, Generic finite schemes and Hochschild cocycles. Comment. Math. Helv.
**55**(2), 267–293 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 25.D.G. Northcott, Injective envelopes and inverse polynomials. J. Lond. Math. Soc.
**8**, 290–296 (1972)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar - 26.B. Poonen,
*Isomorphism Types of Commutative Algebras of Finite Rank Over an Algebraically Closed Field*. Computational Arithmetic Geometry, Contemp. Math., vol. 463 (Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, 2008), pp. 111–120Google Scholar - 27.J.J. Rotman,
*An Introduction to Homological Algebra*(Academic, New York, 1979)zbMATHGoogle Scholar - 28.D.W. Sharpe, P. Vamos,
*Injective Modules*(Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1972)zbMATHGoogle Scholar - 29.J.H. Silverman,
*The Arithmetic of Elliptic Curves*, 2nd edn. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 106 (Springer, Dordrecht, 2009)Google Scholar - 30.R.P. Stanley, Hilbert functions of graded algebras. Adv. Math.
**28**, 57–83 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar - 31.D.A. Suprunenko, On maximal commutative subalgebras of the full linear algebra. Uspehi Mat. Nauk (N.S.)
**11**(3(69)), 181–184 (1956)Google Scholar