2
$\begingroup$

I am studying analytic spreads from Bruns-Herzog's book. The definition is clear but calculation of the analytic spread of an ideal is hard for me in practice. I wonder if it is hard for you too.

Is there is a intuitive interpretation of an analytic spread that can help for a better understanding of it?

or

Is there any software that can help to calculate the analytic spread of (perhaps some special) ideals?

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, I also find it very difficult. $\endgroup$
    – Will Jagy
    Commented Dec 17, 2014 at 20:53

1 Answer 1

7
$\begingroup$

Question 1: Interpretation

Ok, so here is how I like to think of it from a geometric perspective.

Definition: (Under moderate hypotheses) analytic spread of an ideal $J$ is the minimum number of generators of an ideal with the same integral closure as $J$.

Definition: Two ideals $J, J'$ have same integral integral closure if and only if their normalized blowups $X = X'$ are the same with equal pullbacks $J \cdot O_X = J' \cdot O_X$.

The number of generators of an ideal of course gives a bound on the number of affine charts you need to cover a blowup.

Putting these together you obtain that:

Fact: Analytic spread of $J$ is a canonical upper bound on the number of affine charts you need to cover the blowup of $J$. In other words, it measures the complexity of a blowup of $J$.

Let's look at the usual:

Example: Consider $J = \langle x^3, x^2y, xy^2, y^3 \rangle \subseteq k[x,y]$. Then the analytic spread is two, corresponding to the ideal $J' = \langle x^3, y^3 \rangle$. The normalized blowup of $J'$ is the same as the blowup of $J$, which is just blowing up the origin in $\mathbb{A}^2$. On the other hand, you only need two charts to cover the blowup of $J$, the chart corresponding to inverting $x^3$, and the chart corresponding to inverting $y^3$.

Now, it could be that the analytic spread is exactly the minimum number of charts needed to cover the blowup, I don't know (if it's important I could think of a couple people I would ask).

Finally, if you were looking for more algebraic interpretations, I would see if anything in the Swanson-Huneke book on integral closure helps.

Question 2: Computing it

Did you try:

http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2/doc/Macaulay2-1.6/share/doc/Macaulay2/ReesAlgebra/html/_analytic__Spread.html

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think I can do that here, but I would suggest you read a little algebraic geometry (for instance, the first and second chapter of Hartshorne would cover all of this). $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 18, 2014 at 13:33
  • $\begingroup$ @user 1, I don't quite understand what you are saying. If you have an example that you don't think is right, probably it should go on the Macaulay2 google group. Are you using the latest version of M2 (version 1.7?) $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 26, 2015 at 18:27
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, first what is your definition of analytic spread. What is theirs. Do they agree in non-equdimensional rings. Probably you should figure out why it's giving you the wrong answer (ie, maybe the current implementation only works for domains) and post this on the google group... At the very least the documentation can be fixed so people know what this can be applied to... I haven't checked carefully, but what is the dimension of the special fiber ring in this case? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 27, 2015 at 7:12
  • $\begingroup$ Ok, well if you are confident it is a bug in that package in Macaulay2, you should post it to the google group. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 27, 2015 at 16:20

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .