Let $\mathrm{M}$ be a finitely generated submonoid of $\mathbb{Z}^{\oplus d}$ for some $d$, let $A := k[\mathrm{M}]$ be the associated monoid algebra over a field $k$, let $\mathfrak{m} \subset A$ be a maximal ideal corresponding to a $k$-point of $A$. Is the local ring $A_{\mathfrak{m}}$ geometrically unibranch, i.e. does the strict henselization $(A_{\mathfrak{m}})^{\mathrm{sh}}$ have a unique minimal prime?

Remarks/thoughts: If the monoid $\mathrm{M}$ is "saturated" (if $x \in \mathrm{M}^{\mathrm{gp}}$ is an element such that there exists $n \in \mathbb{Z}_{\ge 1}$ for which $nx \in \mathrm{M}$, then $x \in \mathrm{M}$), then $A$ is a normal domain (see [1, Proposition 3.4.1]), so $A_{\mathfrak{m}}$ and $(A_{\mathfrak{m}})^{\mathrm{sh}}$ are also normal domains (by e.g. [2, Tag 00GY] and [2, Tag 06DI] respectively).


[1] Ogus, "Lectures in Logarithmic Algebraic Geometry", version of Oct 24, 2017, link

[2] Stacks Project

Keywords: singularities of toric varieties, geometrically unibranch, completion, henselization, minimal primes, semigroup

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ By Hartshorne's connectedness theorem, it suffices to prove that the scheme is $S2$ and that it is unibranch in codimension $1$. The set of points where the scheme is not $S2$ is closed (by Auslander's theorem, 6.11.1 and 6.11.2 of EGA4). This closed set is also stable under the action of the multiplicative group $\text{Spec}\ k[M^{\text{gp}}].$ Thus, it suffices to check at the generic point of every closed orbit that the scheme is $S2$ and the scheme is unibranch at the codimension $1$ orbit closures that contain that generic point. $\endgroup$ Oct 28, 2017 at 22:39
  • $\begingroup$ If you knew about this somewhat surprising result (note that the Stacks project uses a different definition of geometrically unibranch), it should be expected that the answer is negative in general. (Presumably the example you had in mind was $k[x^2,x^3]$; this is somehow the only type of example.) $\endgroup$ Oct 29, 2017 at 17:47
  • $\begingroup$ @R.vanDobbendeBruyn Thanks for letting me know about the surprising result. The definition I used is equivalent to that of the Stacks Project by this lemma. Could you explain your remark that the answer should be expected to be negative in general? Unless I am mistaken, the cuspidal cubic $k[x^{2},x^{3}]$ is geometrically unibranch, since there is only one prime of $k[x]$ lying over the cusp via the normalization map $k[x^{2},x^{3}] \to k[x]$. $\endgroup$ Oct 29, 2017 at 19:27
  • $\begingroup$ A ring $R$ is geometrically unibranch if and only if the normalisation $\operatorname{Spec} \tilde R \to \operatorname{Spec} R$ is radicial. Over an algebraically closed field or in characteristic $0$, this should land you in the situation of the surprising result. Thus there exists a filtration $R = R_0 \subseteq \ldots \subseteq R_m = \tilde R$ such that $R_i = R_{i-1}[b_i]$ for an element $b_i$ satisfying $b_i^2 , b_i^3 \in R_{i-1}$. It seems that this should not be the case for these monoid algebras, unless you have something like $k[x^2,x^3]$. $\endgroup$ Oct 29, 2017 at 21:16
  • $\begingroup$ @R.vanDobbendeBruyn OK, perhaps I see what you mean. Since the normalization of the monoid algebra corresponds to taking the monoid algebra of the saturation $\mathrm{M}^{\mathrm{sat}}$, roughly speaking the corresponding statement about monoids would be that finitely generated submonoids $\mathrm{M} \subseteq \mathbb{Z}^{\oplus d}$ can be saturated by applying the operation "adjoin an element $a \in \mathrm{M}^{\mathrm{sat}}$ for which $2a,3a \in \mathrm{M}$" a finite number of times, which seems strong. $\endgroup$ Oct 29, 2017 at 23:08

1 Answer 1


Edit. As Friedrich Knop points out, these schemes are typically not even $S2$. I added an example at the end. (I believe it is the example that Friedrich Knop was suggesting.)

Original answer. This is not true. Let $d$ equal $2.$ Let $n\geq 2$ be an integer that is prime to the characteristic of $k.$ Inside $\mathbb{Z}^{\oplus 2},$ consider the subsemigroup $M$ generated by the following three elements, $$a=(1,0),\ \ b=(0,1), \ \ c = (n,-n).$$ Denote by $x$ and $y$ the elements of $k[M]$ corresponding to $a$ and $b.$ Then $k[M]$ is the $k$-subalgebra of $k[x,x^{-1},y,y^{-1}]$ generated by $x,$ by $y,$ and by $z=x^n/y^n.$ This has presentation, $$k[M] = k[x,y,z]/\langle y^nz -x^n \rangle.$$ Now consider the maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m} = \langle x,y,z-1\rangle.$ Because $n$ is prime to the characteristic, the ring extension $$k[M] \to k[M][u]/\langle (u+1)^n-z \rangle,$$ is étale near $\mathfrak{m}$. After adjoining $u$, it is clear the local ring near the maximal ideal $\mathfrak{n} = \langle x,y,z-1,u \rangle$ is not unibranch, i.e., $$k[x,y,u]/\langle (y(1+u))^n - x^n \rangle,$$ is not unibranch near $\langle x,y,u\rangle.$

I suspect that for every subsemigroup $M$ of $\mathbb{Z}^{\oplus d},$ the semigroup ring $k[M]$ is $S2.$ If the ring $k[M]$ is $S2,$ then examples such as the one above would be the only examples. Precisely, if $k[M]$ is $S2$ and if $\text{Spec}\ k[M]$ is unibranch at all codimension $1$ points, then by Hartshorne's Connectedness Theorem, the scheme is unibranch everywhere.

Edit. As Friedrich Knop points out, these schemes are typically not even $S2.$ For instance, let $M$ be the subsemigroup of $\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}^{\oplus 3}$ with the following generators, $$M = \mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}\cdot (1,0,0) + \mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}\cdot (0,1,0) + \mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0} \cdot (1,0,1) + \mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}\cdot (0,1,1) + \mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0} \cdot (0,0,2).$$ Denote the respective generators of $k[M]$ as follows, $$x = \chi^{(1,0,0)}, \ y = \chi^{(0,1,0)}, \ u = \chi^{(1,0,1)}, \ v= \chi^{(0,1,1)}, \ w = \chi^{(0,0,2)}.$$ Then a presentation for the semigroup ring is, $$k[M] = k[x,y,u,v,w]/\langle u^2 - x^2w, v^2-y^2w,xv-yu,uv-xyw \rangle.$$ This is smooth if we invert either $x$, so that the fraction $z=ux^{-1}$ is in the fraction ring, or if we invert $y$, so that the fraction $z=vy^{-1}$ is in the fraction ring. Thus, the singular locus is contained in the common vanishing set of $x$ and $y$. Set-theoretically, this implies that also $u$ and $v$ equal $0$, so that the singular locus is in the affine line $\text{Spec}\ k[w].$

Since $\text{Spec}\ k[M]$ has dimension $3$ and the singular set has dimension $1$, this ring is $R1$. Yet it is not normal, since $z$ satisfies the monic polynomial $z^2 -w=0$. Therefore, by Serre's Criterion for normality, the semigroup ring $k[M]$ is not $S2.$

Please note, if you do the similar analysis as in the original example for the maximal ideal $\mathfrak{m} = \langle x,y,u,v,w-1\rangle,$ it turns out that this new example is even worse. The strict henselization is not unibranch, and it is even disconnected by removing the codimension $2$ zero scheme of $\langle x,y,u,v\rangle.$ So it appears that we should expect no form of unibranchedness / connectedness for the strict henselizations of a non-normal semigroup ring.

  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Semigroups rings are not $S2$, in general. To see this, just carry the example to a higher dimension $d\ge3$. Let's take $n=2$, for simplicity. Let $M\subseteq\mathbb N^d$ be the set of elements $(a_1,\ldots,a_d)$ with $a_1=\ldots=a_{d-1}=0\Rightarrow 2|a_d$. Then the singular set of ${\rm Spec}k[M]$ is $1$. So $k[M]$ is $R1$, it is not normal, so can't be S2. $\endgroup$ Oct 29, 2017 at 12:12
  • $\begingroup$ @FriedrichKnop. I added the example showing that semigroup rings can fail to be $S2.$ $\endgroup$ Oct 29, 2017 at 13:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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