MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I asked this question on and someone even put a bounty on it, yet there was no answer. Hence, I am asking here. Assume $\Bbbk$ to be a field of characteristic zero.

Definition. A polynomial $f\in\Bbbk[x_0,\ldots,x_n]$ is called multilinear if $\deg_{x_i}(f)=1$ for each $0\le i \le n$. In other words, $f$ is linear in each variable. If $f$ is homogeneous of degree $d$, then $f$ is a linear combination of monomials of the form $x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_d}$ with $0\le i_1<i_2<\cdots<i_d\le n$.

Given an ideal $I=(f_1,\ldots,f_r)\subseteq\Bbbk[x_0,\ldots,x_n]$ with the property that the $f_i$ are irreducible, homogeneous, multilinear polynomials of (pairwise) different degrees, I am asking whether $I$ is radical.

I actually don't believe it holds in general - if this is the case, I would love to see a counterexample.

If it is true however, then I am sure that the assumption on the degree can not be dropped (see this example of an ideal generated by irreducible, homogeneous, multilinear polynomials which is not radical). I would also love to see a proof in this case, of course.

Thanks a lot in advance!

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 10 down vote accepted

One general fact that comes to mind: If an ideal $I\subset \mathbb{k}[x_1,\dots,x_n]$ contains an element of the form $f = gx_1 + h$ where $g,h$ don't use $x_1$, and $g$ is a nonzerodivisor mod $I$, then the primary components of $I\cap \mathbb{k}[x_2,\dots,x_n]$ and $I$ are in bijection. This is birational projection and I learned it from Mike Stillman (see Proposition 23 in the appendix of

Now here is almost a counter-example to your question:

$$ I = \langle x_{1} x_{9}-x_{4}x_{8}, x_{4}x_{6}-x_{7}x_{9}, x_{2}x_{5}-x_{3}x_{9}, x_{2}x_{3}-x_{5}x_{6} \rangle \subset \mathbb{k}[x_1,\dots,x_9]$$

This ideal has 6 components, one of which is primary with minimal prime $\langle x_9, x_5, x_4, x_2 \rangle$.

If I read your hypotheses correctly, the only bit missing is the pairwise different degrees of the generators. I have an inkling that this may be a red herring. If I modify my example by adding some extra unrelated variables, then the embedded component over $\langle x_9, x_5, x_4, x_2 \rangle$ is essentially unchanged:

$$\langle x_{1}x_{9}-x_{4}x_{8}, x_{4}x_{6}y_{1}-x_{7}x_{9}y_{2}, x_{2}x_{5}y_{3}y_{4}-x_{3}x_{9}y_{5}y_{6}, x_{2}x_{3}y_{7}y_{8}y_{9}-x_{5}x_{6}y_{10}y_{11}y_{12} \rangle$$

The Binomials package in Macaulay2 quickly confirms that this ideal is not radical.

share|cite|improve this answer
Great! Thanks a bunch. – Jesko Hüttenhain Sep 4 '13 at 11:32
Now let me get the bounty :) – Thomas Kahle Sep 4 '13 at 13:12
There is no Theorem 23 in that arxiv paper. – user26857 Dec 14 '15 at 17:35
It's Proposition 23. I fixed the answer, thanks. – Thomas Kahle Dec 15 '15 at 5:45

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.