2
$\begingroup$

Let us consider an irreducible polynomial $$f \colon= \alpha_e + \alpha_{e-1}X_1 + ... + \alpha_1X_1^{e-1} + X_1^e \in K[[X_2,X_3]][X_1]$$ and set $$\iota_1 \colon K[[X_2,X_3]] \hookrightarrow K[[X_1,X_2,X_3]]/(f).$$

Let us also consider an irreducible polynomial $$g \colon= \beta_e + \beta_{e-1}X_1 + ... + \beta_1X_1^{e-1} + X_1^e \in K[[X_2]][X_1]$$ such that $$g \equiv f\pmod{X_3}.$$ We set $$\iota_2 \colon K[[X_2]] \hookrightarrow K[[X_1,X_2]]/(g).$$

Once and for all, we shall fix the ideal $I_2$ of $K[[X_1,X_2]]$ such that $g \in I_2$, and denote by $J_2$ the intersection $K[[X_2]] \cap I_2$ via embedding $\iota_2$. Set

$$ J_2 = (\gamma) \subset K[[X_2]]. $$

Now we shall consider the ideal $I_1$ of $K[[X_1,X_2,X_3]]$ such that $f \in I_1$ and $I_2 \equiv I_1$ mod $(X_3)$. We denote by $J_1$ the intersection $K[[X_2,X_3]] \cap I_1$ via embedding $\iota_1$.

Suppose that the ideal $J_1$ is monomial; viz.

$$ J_1 = (\delta) \subset K[[X_2,X_3]]. $$

Question 1. Is there a constant $C >0$ which depends only on $I_2$ and $g$ such that the number of generators of $I_1$ is bounded by $C$?

Question 2. What if for a general $m \geq 3$?

That is, for an arbitrary integer $m \geq 3$ suppose that we have an irreducible polynomial $$f \colon= \alpha_e + \alpha_{e-1}X_1 + ... + \alpha_1X_1^{e-1} + X_1^e \in K[[X_2,\ldots,X_m]][X_1]$$ and an ideal $I_1$ of $K[[X_1,\ldots,X_m]]$ such that $$f \in I_1, \qquad g \equiv f \pmod{X_3,\ldots,X_m}, \qquad I_2 \equiv I_1 \pmod{X_3,\ldots,X_m},$$ and $$J_1 \colon= K[[X_2,\ldots,X_m]] \cap I_1 \subset K[[X_1,\ldots,X_m]]/(f)$$ is a monomial ideal of $K[[X_2,\ldots,X_m]]$. Then, is there a constant $C$, depending only on $I_2$ and $g$, such that the number of generators of $I_1$ is bounded by $C$?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

I shall only propose an outline of the possible proof below, where Claim 1, Claim 2 and Claim 3 have not yet been proved rigorously.

We shall begin the outline. So suppose that every element of $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_e$ contains every parameter of $X_3,\ldots,X_m$ in its presentation of the formal summation. Then, we consider the specialisation defined as follows$\colon$

$$(\lozenge) \quad X_i = S(X_3,\ldots,\check{X_i},\ldots,X_m) \in K[[X_3,\ldots,\check{X_i},\ldots,X_m]].$$

Some sort of Bertini argument, i.e. Bertini irreducibility theorem for the hyperplane section, might justify the following Claim 1$\colon$

${\bf Claim\, 1.}$ After the specialisation, by which I mean simply to insert $(\lozenge)$ into the irreducible polynomial $f$ at ${Q}\,2$ in the above, the specialised polynomial $s(f) \in K[[X_2,\ldots,\check{X_i},\ldots,X_m]][X_1]$ remains still irreducible as long as $S(X_3,\ldots,\check{X_i},\ldots,X_m)$ is sufficiently general.

Moreover, conditions in the question remains unchanged with only the number of variables dropped by one. Thus we can use the induction on $m$ when $m \geq 4$. That is, the ideal $I_1$ of the ring $K[[X_1,\ldots,X_m]]$ turns into another ideal $K_1$ of the ring $K[[X_1,\ldots,\check{X_i},\ldots,X_m]]$ after specialisation. Besides, the number of generators of $K_1$ is bounded by the constant $C$ due to the induction hypothesis.

Finally, we propose the following result$\colon$

${\bf Claim\,2.}$ There exists at least one general specialisation $(\lozenge)$ such that both numbers of generators of ideals $I_1$ and $K_1$ coincide with each other as long as $I_1 \not\supset (X_3,\ldots,X_m)$ (i.e., $I_1$ does not contain every parameter $X_3,\ldots,X_m$).

The assumption of $Q\,2$ ensures that actually $I_1 \not\supset (X_3,\ldots,X_m)$ holds, for otherwise $J_1$ might not be monomial. Now, we proceed as follows. Since the number of generators of $K_1$ is bounded by $C$, Claim 2 ensures that the number of generators of $I_1$ is also bounded by $C$ as desired as long as $m \geq 4$. So eventually, the induction argument obliges us only to show the following claim$\colon$

${\bf Claim\,3.}$ $Q\,1$ is correct.

Wishfully, this outline should be justified rigorously at least in the case where every element $\alpha_i$ of $\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_e$ contains every $X_3,\ldots,X_m$ in its presentation of the formal summation, i.e. $\alpha_i = \underset{e_2,\ldots,e_m}{\Sigma} c_{e_2\ldots,e_m \in {\Bbb Z}_{\geq 0}}\,X_2^{e_2} \cdots X_m^{e_m}$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

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