Next Article in Journal
Vbswp-CeaH: Vigorous Buyer-Seller Watermarking Protocol without Trusted Certificate Authority for Copyright Protection in Cloud Environment through Additive Homomorphism
Next Article in Special Issue
Modulated Lacunary Statistical and Strong-Cesàro Convergences
Previous Article in Journal
Ulam Stability of Fractional Hybrid Sequential Integro-Differential Equations with Existence and Uniqueness Theory
Previous Article in Special Issue
Statistical Convergence of Δ-Spaces Using Fractional Order
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Terracini Loci of Segre Varieties

by
Edoardo Ballico
Department of Mathematics, University of Trento, 38123 Povo, TN, Italy
The author is a member of GNSAGA of INdAM (Italy).
Symmetry 2022, 14(11), 2440; https://doi.org/10.3390/sym14112440
Submission received: 30 October 2022 / Revised: 12 November 2022 / Accepted: 14 November 2022 / Published: 17 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Matrix Transformations, Operators and Symmetry)

Abstract

:
Fix a format ( n 1 + 1 ) × × ( n k + 1 ) , k > 1 , for real or complex tensors and the associated multiprojective space Y. Let V be the vector space of all tensors of the prescribed format. Let S ( Y , x ) denote the set of all subsets of Y with cardinality x. Elements of S ( Y , x ) are associated to rank 1 decompositions of tensors T V . We study the dimension δ ( 2 S , Y ) of the kernel at S of the differential of the associated algebraic map S ( Y , x ) P V . The set T 1 ( Y , x ) of all S S ( Y , x ) such that δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 is the largest and less interesting x-Terracini locus for tensors T V . Moreover, we consider the one (minimally Terracini) such that δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 for all A S . We define and study two different types of subsets of T 1 ( Y , x ) (primitive Terracini and solution sets). A previous work (Ballico, Bernardi, and Santarsiero) provided a complete classification for the cases x = 2 , 3 . We consider the case x = 4 and several extremal cases for arbitrary x.
MSC:
15A69; 14N05; 14N07

1. Introduction

Fix a format ( n 1 + 1 ) × × ( n k + 1 ) , k > 1 , for real or complex tensors and the associated multiprojective space Y. Let V be the vector space of all tensors of the prescribed format. Let S ( Y , x ) denote the set of all finite subsets of Y with cardinality x. Elements of S ( Y , x ) are associated to rank 1 decompositions of tensors of that format with x non-zero terms and the associated has a differential S ( Y , x ) P V , and we call δ ( 2 S , Y ) the kernel of the differential of this algebraic map.
Let Y = P n 1 × × P n k be a multiprojective space and ν : Y P r , r = 1 + i = 1 k ( n i + 1 ) , its Segre embedding, i.e., the embedding of Y induced by the complete linear system | O Y ( 1 , , 1 ) | . An element q P r is an equivalence class of non-zero tensors of format ( n 1 + 1 ) × × ( n k + 1 ) , up to a non-zero scalar multiple. For any p Y let 2 p or ( 2 p , Y ) denote the closed subscheme of Y with ( I p ) 2 as its ideal sheaf. For any finite set S Y set 2 S : = p S 2 p . Note that deg ( 2 p ) = 1 + dim Y . As in [1] for any positive integer x let T 1 ( Y , x ) denote the set of all S S ( Y , x ) such that h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 and h 1 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Let T ( Y , x ) denote the set of all S T 1 ( Y , x ) such that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S.
The paper publised by [1] considered the set T ( Y , 3 ) . Herein, we mostly study T ( Y , 4 ) but also provide some general results, and study 3 remarkable subsets of T ( Y , x ) . The following results describe all multiprojective spaces Y such that T ( Y , 4 ) .
Theorem 1. 
Set Y : = P n 1 × × P n k with k 1 and n 1 n k > 0 . We have T ( Y , 4 ) if and only if k 3 , n 1 3 and n 3 2 .
For an arbitrary integer x > 4 , we prove the following existence theorem.
Theorem 2. 
Set Y : = P n 1 × × P n k with k 3 and n 1 n k > 0 . Fix an integer x 5 and assume n 1 x 1 and one of the following set of conditions:
(i)
n 2 x 2 .
(ii)
k 4 and n 3 x 2 .
Then, T ( Y , x ) .
Consider the following highly useful definition ([1], Definition 2.2).
Definition 1. 
Let Y be a multiprojective space and S Y a finite set. The set S is said to be minimally Terracini if δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 and δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 for all A S .
For each positive integer x, let T ( Y , x ) be the set of all S T ( Y , x ) which are minimal Terracini.
In Section 6, we prove the following results.
Theorem 3. 
Fix integers k 4 , x 4 and n 1 n k > 0 , 1 i k , such that n 1 x 1 and n 1 + + n k = 2 x 2 . Set Y : = P n 1 × × P n k . Then, T ( Y , x ) and dim T ( Y , x ) x 4 + i = 1 k ( n i 2 + 2 n i ) .
Theorem 4. 
Fix integers x 3 , k 3 and n 1 n k > 0 such that n 1 = n 2 = x 1 . Set Y = P n 1 × × P n k . Then, T ( Y , x ) = .
In Section 7, we prove the following result.
Theorem 5. 
Let Y be a multiprojective space with at least three factors and dim Y 7 . Then, T ( Y , 4 ) = .
Theorem 5 together with the results of Section 6 gives the following list of all multiprojective spaces Y such that T ( Y , 4 ) .
Theorem 6. 
Let Y = P n 1 × × P n k with n 1 n k > 0 for all i. We have T ( Y , 4 ) if and only if k 3 , n 1 3 and either dim Y = 6 or Y { ( P 1 ) 4 , ( P 1 ) 5 , P 2 × P 2 × P 1 } .
We introduce the following definition.
Definition 2. 
Take S T ( Y , x ) . We say that S is primitive if S T ( Y , # S ) for any S S . Let T ˜ ( Y , x ) denote the set of all primitive S T ( Y , x ) . For any S T ( Y , x ) \ T ˜ ( Y , x ) any set A S such that A T ˜ ( Y , # A ) is called a primitive reduction of S.
Clearly, T ( Y , x ) T ˜ ( Y , x ) T ( Y , x ) . By [1] (Proposition 1.8) T ( Y , 2 ) = . By [1] (Theorem 4.12) T ( Y , 3 ) = if Y ( P 1 ) 4 . Remark 16 gives T ( ( P 1 ) 4 , 3 ) and that S T ( ( P 1 ) 4 , 3 ) if and only if # π i ( S ) = 3 for all i = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , where π i : ( P 1 ) 4 P 1 is the i-th projection.
For any set E in a projective space, P m , let E denote the linear span of E in P m .
For any q ν ( Y ) , i.e., for any equivalence class of non-zero tensors, the rank rank ( q ) of q is the minimal cardinality of a set S Y such that q ν ( S ) . Let S ( Y , q ) denote the set of all S S ( Y , rank ( q ) ) such that q ν ( S ) . The set S ( Y , rank ( q ) ) is often called the solution set of q. Concision ([2], Proposition 3.1.3.1) says that if S S ( Y , q ) for some q, then Y is the minimal multiprojective subspace containing S.
Let S ( Y , x ) denote the set of all S T ( Y , x ) such that S S ( Y , q ) for some q with rank x. An element q ν ( Y ) is said to be concise if there is no multiprojective space Y Y such that q ν ( Y ) . If q is concise, then each S S ( Y , rank ( q ) ) has the property that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S ([2], Proposition 3.1.3.1). If S S ( Y , q ) for some q and δ ( 2 S , Y ) = 0 , then Terracini lemma gives that S is an isolated point of the constructible algebraic set S ( Y , q ) . This observation provided the main geometric reason to study the Terracini loci.
Using the tangential variety of the Segre variety, we prove the following result.
Theorem 7. 
Take Y = ( P 1 ) k with k 5 . Then S ( Y , k ) T ( Y , k ) and S ( Y , k ) T ˜ ( Y , k ) contains an element of the solution set of any concise q τ ( ν ( Y ) ) .
We also prove some more precise results for ( P 1 ) k with low k. In the section “Conclusions and open questions”, we raise and discuss 3 open questions.
We work over an algebraically closed field with characteristic zero K . The reader may assume K = C . However, the non-existence results are clearly then true for all fields contained in K , i.e., for all fields containing Q . When we mentioned a “general S S ( Y , x ) ” it is sufficient to take S in a Zariski dense subset of S ( Y , x ) and in particular, we may take general real rank 1 decompositions of real tensors. For the existence results which use rational normal curves, again we may find solution over R or over Q .

2. Preliminaries

For any variety W and any positive integer x let S ( W , x ) denote the sets of all subsets of W with cardinality x. Let Y = P n 1 × × P n k , k > 0 , n i > 0 for all i. Let ν : Y P r , r = 1 + i = 1 k ( n i + 1 ) , denote the Segre embedding of i, i.e., the embedding of Y induced by the complete linear system | O Y ( 1 , , 1 ) | . Let π i : Y P n i denote the projection of Y onto its i-th factor. For any S S ( Y , x ) the multiprojective space i = 1 k π i ( S ) is the minimal multiprojective subspace containing S. If k 2 , let Y i be the product of all factors of Y, except the i-th one, and let η i : Y Y i denote the projection ( η i is the map that forgets the i-th component of the Y elements).
For any E { 1 , , k } , let Y E be the product of all factors of Y associated to the integer { 1 , , k } \ E and η E : Y Y E the projection. If E = { 1 , 2 } , we may write η 1 , 2 instead of η { 1 , 2 } .
For any ( a 1 , , a k ) Z k set O Y ( a 1 , , a k ) : = i = 1 k π i * ( O P n i ( a i ) ) . For any i { 1 , , k } , let ε i (resp. ε ^ i ) be the element ( a 1 , , a k ) N k such that a i = 1 and a j = 0 for all j i (resp. a i = 0 and a j = 0 for all j i ). We will often use the line bundles O Y ( ε i ) and O Y ( ε ^ i ) . For any zero-dimensional scheme Z Y set δ ( Z , Y ) : = h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) . We often write δ ( Z ) instead of δ ( Z , Y ) . For any p Y , let 2 p or ( 2 p , Y ) denote the closed subscheme of Y with ( I p ) 2 as its ideal sheaf. Note that if W is a hypersurface of Y and p Sing ( W ) , then 2 p W . Fix Y and the positive integer x. Terracini lemma and the semicontinuity theorem for cohomology say that δ ( 2 S , x ) > 0 and h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 for all S ( Y , x ) if and only if the x-secant variety σ x ( ν ( Y ) ) of the Segre variety ν ( Y ) is defective, i.e., σ x ( ν ( Y ) ) ν ( Y ) and dim σ x ( ν ( Y ) ) x ( dim Y + 1 ) 2 .
Remark 1. 
Let S Y = P n 1 × × P n k be a general subset of Y with cardinality s. The s-secant variety σ s ( ν ( Y ) ) is said to be defective if σ s ( Y ) ν ( Y ) and dim σ x ( ν ( Y ) ) x ( dim Y + 1 ) 2 . We recall that σ s ( ν ( Y ) ) is not defective if and only if either δ ( 2 S , Y ) = 0 or h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 (or both if h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = s ( 1 + dim Y ) ). We assume k 3 and we use the convention n 1 n k > 0 .
(a)
σ 3 ( ν ( Y ) ) is defective if and only if either Y = ( P 1 ) 4 or k = 3 , n 1 3 and n 2 = n 3 = 1 ([3], Theorem 4.5).
(b)
σ 4 ( ν ( Y ) ) is defective if and only if either Y = ( P 2 ) 3 or k = 3 , n 2 = 2 , n 3 = 1 and n 1 4 ([3], Theorem 4.6).
Remark 2. 
By the semicontinuity theorem for cohomology, σ x ( ν ( Y ) ) is defective if and only if T 1 ( Y , x ) = S ( Y , x ) . Fix a general S S ( Y , x ) . The multiprojective space Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, i.e., S T ( Y , x ) , if and only if each factor of Y has dimension x 1 .
For any zero-dimensional scheme Z Y and every effective divisor M Y , let Res M ( Z ) denote the closed subscheme of Y with I Z : I M as its ideal sheaf. We have Res M ( Z ) Z , deg ( Z ) = deg ( Z M ) + deg ( Res M ( Z ) ) and for every line bundle L on Y we have the following exact sequence, which we call the residual sequence of M:
0 I Res M ( Z ) L ( M ) I Z M , M L | M 0 .
We have Res M ( 2 p ) = p if p is a smooth point of M, Res M ( 2 p ) = if p Sing ( M ) and Res M ( 2 p ) = 2 p if p M . If Z = Z Z with Z Z = , then Res M ( Z ) = Res M ( Z ) Res M ( Z ) .
Remark 3. 
Fix any multiprojective space Y = P n 1 × × P n k , k > 0 , n i > 0 for all i and let w Y be any connected degree 2 zero-dimensional scheme. Fix any q ν ( w ) such that q ν ( w red ) . Set m : = rank ( q ) . We have 1 m k and the minimal multiprojective space Y containing w is isomorphic to ( P 1 ) m . If m > 1 (and hence k > 1 ), then η i | w is an embedding for all i = 1 , , k . Now assume m = 1 and k > 1 . Let i be the only element of { 1 , , k } such that π 1 ( Y ) is isomorphic to P 1 or, equivalently, such that # π i ( Y ) 1 . The map η j | w is an embedding if and only if j i .
Lemma 1. 
Take any Y, any q and any S S ( Y , q ) . Then all maps η i | S , i = 1 , , k , are injective.
Proof. 
Assume the existence of i { 1 , , k } and a , b S such that a b and η i ( a ) = η i ( b ) , i.e., π j ( a ) = π j ( b ) for all j { 1 , , k } \ { i } . Set S : = S \ { a , b } . Since a b , π i ( a ) π i ( b ) . Let L P n i be the line spanned by π i ( a ) and π i ( b ) . Let Y Y be the dimension 1 multiprojective subspace of Y with L as its i-th factor and π j ( a ) as its j-th factor for all j i . Note that ν ( Y ) is a line containing { ν ( a ) , ν ( b ) } . Therefore, there is e L such that q ν ( S ) { ν ( e ) } . Thus, rank ( q ) < # S , is a contradiction. □
Remark 4. 
Take any Y with k 3 factors, any integer x > 2 and any S T ( Y , x ) . Fix any A S such that # A = 2 and let Y be the minimal multiprojective subspace containing A. We have Y ( P 1 ) m for some m k . The integer m is the number of integers i { 1 , , k } such that # π i ( A ) > 1 . We have m 3 , because δ ( 2 A , Y ) δ ( 2 A , Y ) and δ ( 2 E , ( P 1 ) m ) = 2 for any E ( P 1 ) m with 1 m 2 and ( P 1 ) m the minimal multiprojective space containing E.
Lemma 2. 
Take any Y with k 3 factors, x > 2 , S T ( Y , x ) and any 1 i < j k . Then η i , j | S is injective.
Proof. 
Assume that η i , j | S is not injective. Take A S such that # A = 2 and # η i , j ( A ) = 1 , i.e., π h ( A ) = 1 for all h { 1 , , k } \ { i , j } . Thus, the minimal multiprojective space Y containing A is isomorphic to P 1 or P 1 × P 1 . By [1] (Lemma 2.3) δ ( 2 A , Y ) δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 2 , contradicting the assumption S T ( Y , x ) . □
Remark 5. 
Let Y be a multiprojectve space, and Z Y a zero-dimensional scheme. If deg ( Z ) 2 , then ν ( Z ) is linearly independent. Now assume deg ( Z ) = 3 . Since ν ( Y ) is scheme-theoretically cut out by quadrics, ν ( Z ) is linearly dependent, i.e., ν ( Z ) is a line, if and only if Z Y , i.e., if and only if Z is a line contained in a ruling of Y.
Proposition 1. 
Take an integer e { 1 , 2 , 3 } , a set E Y = P n 1 × × P n k such that # E = e and a connected degree 2 scheme v Y \ E . Set Z : = E v . Assume h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Let W be the minimal subscheme of Z such that h 1 ( I W ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Assume that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing W.
(i)
If e = 1 , then k = 1 , n 1 = 1 and Z = W .
(ii)
Assume e = 2 and k > 1 . Then, k = 2 , n 1 = n 2 = 1 and W = Z . Moreover, there is C | O Y ( 1 , 1 ) | containing W and the converse holds.
(iii)
Assume e = 3 and k > 2 . Then, W = Z , k = 3 and n 1 = n 2 = n 3 = 1 .
Proof. 
Note that deg ( Z ) = e + 2 . Part (a) is true by Remark 5. From now on we assume k > 1 . We have deg ( W ) e + 2 and deg ( W ) = e + 2 if and only if W = Z . We just proved that deg ( W ) 4 . If W = W red , then we use [4] (Proposition 5.2).
Write W = v W with W v s . = . Since h 1 ( I W ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 , there is q ν ( W ) ν ( v ) . The minimality of W gives q ν ( W 1 ) if either W 1 W or W 1 W . Note that q is in the tangential variety of ν ( Y ) . If q ν ( Y ) , then it has rank deg ( W ) 3 and rank 3 only if e = 3 and Z = W . Thus, Y ( P 1 ) k with k 3 and k = 3 only if e = 3 and W = Z . □
Lemma 3. 
Take two-degree 2 connected zero-dimensional schemes u , v Y such that u v = , Y is the minimal mutiprojective space containing Z : = u v , h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 and h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 for all Z Z . Then, k 2 and Y = P 1 × P 1 if k = 2 .
Proof. 
Assume k 3 . By assumption ν ( u ) ν ( v ) is a single point, q. Take C | O Y ( 1 , 1 ) | such that deg ( Z C ) 3 . By [5] (Lemma 5.1) we have Z C . Let i be any integer i { 1 , , k } such that there is H 1 | O Y ( ε i ) | such that e 1 : = deg ( Z H 1 ) is maximal. Set Z 1 : = Res H 1 ( Z ) . Note that deg ( Z 1 ) = z e 1 . Set E 1 : = H 1 Z . Note that deg ( E 1 ) = e 1 . Let e 2 be the maximal integer such that there is j { 2 , , k } and H 2 | O Y ( ε j ) | such that e 2 : = H j Z 1 is maximal. With no loss of generality (we do not impose that the integer n i is non-increasing) we may assume j = 2 . We then continue in the same way, defining the integers e 3 , , the divisors H 3 , and the zero-dimensional schemes E 3 , and Z 3 , such that E i : = H i Z i , e i = # E i , Z i + 1 = Res H 1 ( Z i ) and at each step the integer i is maximal. Note that e 1 e 2 e i e i + 1 and that e i = 0 if and only if Z H 1 H i 1 . Since k deg ( Z ) 1 there is a maximal integer c k such that e c 1 (it exists, because k deg ( Z ) 1 . Since O Y is globally generated, [5] (Lemma 5.1) gives e c = 0 and e c 1 2 . We get e 1 = e 2 = 2 and Z H 1 H 2 . By [5] (Lemma 5.1) we have h 1 ( I Z 1 ( ε ^ 1 ) ) > 0 . Since the Segre embedding of Y 1 is an embedding, we get deg ( η 1 ( Z 1 ) ) = 1 . Set { a } : = u red and { b } = v red . First assume that Z 1 is connected, say Z 1 = v . The set ν ( η 1 1 ( η 1 ( a ) ) ) is contained in a line contained in ν ( Y ) , and hence q ν ( Y ) . Since h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 for all Z Z , q ν ( a ) . Since ν ( Y ) is cut out by quadrics and the intersection of the line ν ( u ) with ν ( Y ) contains the degree 3 scheme ν ( u ) { q } , we get ν ( u ) Y , and hence Y = P 1 × P 1 . Now assume Z 1 = { a , b } . We get π i ( a ) = π i ( b ) for all i > 1 . We also get { a , b } = E 1 , and hence if n 1 = 1 we obtain π 1 ( a ) = π 1 ( b ) . Hence, a = b , a contradiction, if n 1 = 1 . Assume π 1 ( a ) π 1 ( b ) , and hence π 1 ( a ) and π 1 ( b ) are linearly independent. Take M | O Y ( ε 3 ) | containing a. Since π 3 ( a ) = π 3 ( b ) , b M and hence Res M ( Z ) { a , b } . As above, we get π i ( a ) = π i ( b ) for all i 3 . Thus, π 1 ( a ) = π 1 ( b ) , is a contradiction. □
We recall the following lemma which we learned from K. Chandler ([6,7]).
Lemma 4. 
Let W be an integral projective variety, L a line bundle on W with h 1 ( L ) = 0 and S W reg a finite set. Then:
(i)
h 1 ( I ( 2 S , W ) L ) > 0 if and only if for each a S there is a degree 2 scheme v ( a ) W such that v ( a ) red = 2 and h 1 ( I Z L ) > 0 , where Z : = a S v ( a ) .
(ii)
Assume h 1 ( I S , W L ) = 0 . Take a minimal Z Z containing S and such that h 1 ( I Z L ) > 0 . Then, h 1 ( I Z L ) = 1 .
Lemma 5. 
Fix S T ( Y , x ) and take Z as in Lemma 4, i.e., assume Z red S , that each connected component of Z has degree 2 , h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 1 and h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 for all Z Z . Then Z red = S .
Proof. 
Assume S : = Z red S . The “if” part of Lemma 4 gives δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 . Thus, S T ( Y , x ) , is a contradiction. □
Remark 6. 
Take Z as in Lemma 4 for x = 4 and assume S T ( Y , 4 ) . Take a closed subscheme W Z such that 3 deg ( W ) 4 and # W red = 3 . Let Y be the minimal multiprojective space containing W red . Assume the existence of at least k 3 indices such that # π i ( W red ) = 1 , i.e., Y P m 1 × P m 2 × P m 3 with 0 m i 2 for all i. By [1] (Theorem 4.12) and a dimensional count, we get # W red 3 .
Remark 7. 
Take Y = P n 1 × × P n k , k 2 . As in [8] (Examples 2 and 3), let C ( Y ) denote the set of all curves f ( P 1 ) , where f : P 1 Y is a morphism with π i f an isomorphism if n i = 1 , while π i f is an embedding with as its image a rational normal curve if n i 2 . Each C C ( Y ) is called a rational normal curve of Y. The set C ( Y ) is an integral quasi-projective variety and dim C ( Y ) = 3 + i = 1 k ( n i 2 + 2 n i ) .

3. The Tangential Variety

Among the Terracini loci we obtain an interesting family from the tangential variety τ ( ν ( Y ) ) of the Segre variety. Since ν ( Y ) is smooth, τ ( ν ( Y ) ) is the union of all lines L ν ( Y ) such that L ν ( Y ) contains a degree 2 connected zero-dimensional scheme.
From now on in this section, we only consider concise q τ ( ν ( Y ) ) , i.e., we take Y = ( P 1 ) k , k 2 , and take q τ ( ν ( Y ) ) such that rank ( q ) = k .
Lemma 6. 
Take Y = ( P 1 ) k , k 3 . Take q τ ( ν ( Y ) ) such that rank ( q ) = k . Then there is a unique connected degree 2 zero-dimensional scheme v such that q ν ( v ) .
Proof. 
The existence part is true because ν ( Y ) is smooth. Assume the existence of another such a scheme w and set Z : = v w . Thus, 3 deg ( Z ) 4 . The case deg ( Z ) = 4 , i.e., u v = is excluded by Lemma 3. The case deg ( Z ) = 3 , i.e., u red = v red is excluded, because in this case Z is not Gorenstein ([9], Lemma 2.3). □
Lemma 7. 
Take Y with k 3 factors. Let Z Y be the union of two degree 2 connected zero-dimensional scheme, u and v, and a point, c. Let Y be the minimal multiprojective space containing Z. Assume h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 and take a minimal subscheme W Z such that h 1 ( I W ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Then, W = Z and Y P 1 × P 1 × P 1 .
Proof. 
If W Z , we obtain a contradiction by Lemma 3 and Proposition 1. Thus, we may assume W = Z and that either k 4 or n i 2 for at least one integer i. We do not assume that the dimensions of the Y factors are non-increasing and hence we may permute the factors of Y to simplify the notation. Let e 1 be the maximal integer deg ( Z H 1 ) for some i { 1 , , k } and some H 1 | O Y ( ε i ) | . Note that e 1 max { n 1 , , n k } . Permuting the factors of Y, we may assume i = 1 . Set Z 1 : = Res H 1 ( Z ) . Let e 2 be the maximal integer deg ( Z 1 H 2 ) for some i { 2 , , k } and some H 2 | O Y ( ε i ) | . With no loss of generality, we may assume i = 2 . Set Z 2 : = Res H 2 ( Z 1 ) . We define in the same way e 3 , e 4 , Z 3 , Z 4 . Since either k 4 or n i 2 for at least one integer i, e 1 + + e 4 4 , and hence deg ( Z 4 ) 1 . Thus, h 1 ( I Z 4 ) = 0 . By [5] (Lemma 5.1) we have Z H 1 H 4 . We also get that the last integer i with e i > 0 satisfies e i 2 . Thus, e 1 = 3 and e 2 = 2 . Since h 1 ( I Z 1 ( ε ^ 1 ) ) > 0 , deg ( π i ( Z 1 ) ) = 1 for al i > 1 . Set W 1 : = Res H 2 ( Z ) . Since h 1 ( I W 1 ( ε ^ 2 ) ) > 0 , Remark 4 gives that there is either G W 1 with deg ( G ) = 2 and deg ( η 2 ( G ) ) = 1 or deg ( W 1 ) = 3 and there is i { 1 , , k } \ { 2 } with deg ( π j ( W 1 ) ) = 1 for all j { 1 , , k } \ { i , 2 } and dim π 1 ( W 1 ) = 1 . Since deg ( η 2 ( Z 1 ) ) = 1 , ν ( Z 1 ) is contained in the second ruling of ν ( Y ) . Thus, the plane ν ( Z H 1 ) intersects another point α = ν ( β ) of ν ( Y ) . Proposition 1 implies that the minimal multiprojective space Y containing Z H 1 is contained in P 1 × P 1 and that Z H 1 β is contained in a curve of bidegree ( 1 , 1 ) of P 1 × P 1 . Thus, n 1 = 1 and, since k 3 , there are a i P n i , 1 i k , a 1 π 1 ( Y ) , a 2 π 2 ( Y ) such that Y = P 1 × P 1 × { a 3 } × × { a k } and β = ( a 1 , , a k ) . The line ν ( Z 1 ) contains α . Hence, π i ( Z 1 ) = a i , except for at most one i. Since k 3 , we get Y P 1 × P 1 × P 1 . □
We recall the following result ([8], Proposition 7).
Lemma 8. 
Fix a concise q τ ( ν ( Y ) ) \ ν ( Y ) and set k : = rank ( q ) . Then, Y = ( P 1 ) k and dim S ( Y , q ) 2 k 2 .
Proposition 2. 
Take Y = ( P 1 ) 4 . Then S ( Y , 4 ) T ( Y , 4 ) contains a 9-dimensional family associated to rank 4 points q τ ( ν ( Y ) ) and each S S ( Y , q ) satisfies δ ( 2 S ) 6 , h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) 2 .
Proof. 
Since h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 16 and 4 ( 1 + dim Y ) = 20 , the proposition follows from Lemma 8, Terracini lemma and the fact that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing a set evincing the rank of a concise q ν ( Y ) . □
Proof of Theorem 7. 
Fix any q τ ( ν ( Y ) ) with is concise, i.e., rank ( q ) = k , and let v Y be the only degree 2 connected zero-dimensional scheme such that q ν ( v ) (Lemma 6). Set { o } : = v red , say o = ( o 1 , , o k ) . Take Σ = Σ 1 Σ k as in Remark 7. Take a general hyperplane M of ν ( Y ) passing through q and let H | O Y ( 1 , , 1 ) | be the element corresponding to M. Since ν ( o ) q and M is general, o H . Thus, for i = 1 , , k there is a unique a ( i ) Σ i H , and a ( i ) o . Set S : = { a ( 1 ) , , a ( k ) } . Note that Σ = T ν ( o ) ν ( Y ) , and that Σ = { ν ( o ) ν ( S ) } . Since q is contained in the hyperplane M Σ , and M is associated to H, q S . Since rank ( q ) = k , S S ( Y , q ) . Varying M among the hyperplanes of ν ( Y ) containing q, we get that S is not an isolated point of S ( Y , q ) . Thus, δ ( 2 S ) > 0 . Since dim Y = k 5 , we have k ( k + 1 ) 2 k , and hence h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Thus, S T ( Y , k ) . To check that S T ˜ ( Y , k ) it is sufficient to observe that for any a ( i ) S the ( k 1 ) -dimensional multiprojective space π i 1 ( o i ) contains the set S \ { a ( i ) } . □

4. The Usual Terracini Sets and the Solution Sets

Remark 8. 
We have S ( Y , 2 ) = for any Y, because T ( Y , 2 ) = ([1], Proposition 1.8).
Remark 9. 
Obviously T ( P n , x ) = for all x > 0 .
Lemma 9. 
Take Y = P n 1 × P n 2 with n 1 n 2 > 0 . Then, T ( Y , n 1 + 1 ) =
Proof. 
First assume n 1 = n 2 . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing Y, T ( Y , n 1 + 1 ) = by [1] (Lemma 2.4).
Now assume n 1 > n 2 . We use induction on the non-negative integer n 1 n 2 . Assume the existence of S T ( Y , n 1 + 1 ) . To obtain a contradiction, it is sufficient to prove that h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, π 1 ( S ) = P n 1 , i.e., π 1 | S is injective and π 1 ( S ) is linearly independent. Since # S > n 2 + 1 , there is S S such that # S = n 1 and π 2 ( S ) = P n 2 . Set { p } : = S \ S . Let H be the only element of | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing S . Since π 2 ( S ) = P n 2 , H is the minimal multiprojective space containing S . Hence, the inductive assumption gives h 0 ( H , I 2 ( S H , H ( 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . We have Res H ( 2 S ) = 2 p S . Since h 0 ( I 2 p ( 0 , 1 ) ) = 0 , the residual exact sequence of H gives h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . □
Theorem 8. 
If Y = P n 1 × P n 2 , then T ( Y , x ) = for all x.
Proof. 
We may assume n 1 n 2 > 0 . Assume the existence of S T ( Y , x ) . The definition of T ( Y , x ) , gives x n 1 + 1 and the existence of A S such that # A = n 1 + 1 and π 1 ( A ) = P n 1 , i.e., π 1 | A is injective and π 1 ( A ) is linearly independent. To obtain a contradiction, it is sufficient to find S S such that h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . Let Y be the minimal multiprojective space containing A. Since π 1 ( A ) = P n 1 , Y P n 1 × P s for some integer s { 0 , , n 2 } . If s = n 2 , then we may take S = A by Lemma 9. Assume s < n 2 . We use induction on n 2 s allowing the case s = 0 . Thus, we reduce to prove the existence of S in the case s = n 2 1 for some n 2 1 . In this case Y | O Y ( 0 , 1 ) | . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S there is o S \ A such that o H . We claim that we may take S = A { o } . Consider the residual exact sequence
0 I 2 o A ( 1 , 0 ) I 2 S ( 1 , 1 ) I ( 2 A , H ) , H ( 1 , 1 ) 0
of H. Lemma 9 gives h 0 ( H , I ( 2 A , H ) , H ( 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . Clearly h 0 ( I 2 o ( 1 , 0 ) ) = 0 (Remark 9). □
We recall the following result ([10], Proposition 2.3).
Lemma 10. 
Take Y : = P m × P m × P m , m 3 . Then, each secant variety of ν ( Y ) has the expected dimension.
Proposition 3. 
Take k 3 and Y = P n 1 × × P n k with n 1 = n 2 = n 3 = m 3 . Then, T ( Y , m + 1 ) = .
Proof. 
Let π 1 , 2 , 3 : Y Y : = ( P m ) 3 denote the projection of Y onto its first three factors. Assume the existence of S T ( Y , m + 1 ) . In particular, Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing Y and hence # π 4 , , 4 ( S ) = m + 1 and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S : = π 1 , 2 , 3 ( S ) . Thus, S is in the open orbit for the action of ( Aut ( P m ) ) 3 of S ( Y , m + 1 ) . Lemma 10 gives dim σ m + 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) = ( m + 1 ) ( 3 m + 1 ) 1 < ( m + 1 ) 3 . Hence, δ ( 2 S , Y ) = 0 . If k = 3 , then Y = Y . If k 4 we see Y as a multiprojective subspace of Y fixing p i P n i , 4 i k , and applying k 3 times [1] (Proposition 2.7), we get δ ( 2 S , Y ) = 0 . □
Lemma 11. 
Fix a finite set S Y and a Y \ S . Assume the existence of i { 1 , , k } such that π i ( a ) π i ( S ) . Then, δ ( 2 S , Y ) < δ ( 2 ( S { a } ) , Y ) .
Proof. 
The thesis of the lemma is equivalent to proving the following statement: T ν ( a ) ν ( Y ) b S T ν ( b ) ν ( Y ) . By assumption, there are i { 1 , , k } and b S such that π i ( a ) = π i ( b ) . Thus, T ν ( a ) ν ( Y ) T ν ( b ) ν ( Y ) contains a point of ν ( Y ) . □
Lemma 12. 
Fix integers x > m > 0 and E P m such that # E = x and E = P m . Set Y : = P m × ( P 1 ) k 1 for some k 2 . Fix o 2 , , o k P 1 and let A Y be the set of all ( a , o 2 , , a k ) , a E . Fix u Y \ A such that π 1 ( u ) E . Then, δ ( 2 ( A { u } ) , Y ) > δ ( 2 A , Y ) ( x 1 ) ( m + 1 ) .
Proof. 
The first inequality is true by Lemma 11. We have δ ( 2 A , Y ) δ ( 2 E , P m ) ([1], Lemma 2.3). Clearly, δ ( 2 E , P m ) = ( x 1 ) ( m + 1 ) . □
Remark 10. 
Take k = 4 , m = 1 and x = 3 in the set-up of Lemma 15. Thus, Y = ( P 1 ) 4 . We get elements of T ( Y , 4 ) , because h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 16 , 4 ( dim Y + 1 ) = 20 and 1 + ( x 1 ) ( m + 1 ) = 5 .
Lemma 13. 
Take Y = ( P 1 ) 3 and any S S ( Y , 3 ) . Let Y be the minimal multiprojective space containing S.
1. 
If Y = Y , then h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) 1 ; h 0 ( I Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , if and only if S is as in [1] (Proposition 3.2 (iv)). If S is as in [1] (Proposition 3.2 (iv)) with { i , j } = { 1 , 2 } , then the only element, W, of | I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) | is of the form W = W 1 W 2 W 3 with W i | O Y ( ε i ) | . If S is as in [1] (Proposition 3.2 (iv)) with W i | O Y ( ε i ) | . Moreover, dim Sing ( W ) = 1 .
2. 
If Y P 1 × P 1 , then h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 1 .
3. 
If Y P 1 , then 1 h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) 2 .
Proof. 
The case Y = Y is proved in the proof of [1] (Lemma 4.2) with the description of all cases with h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 1 . It is easy to see that a reducible surface W = W 1 W 2 W 3 is singular at all points of S. Thus, W is the only element of | I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) | . Note that Sing ( Y ) is the union of 3 curves.
Assume Y P 1 × P 1 . Obviously, h 0 ( Y , I ( 2 S , Y ) ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . Thus, δ ( 2 S , Y ) = 5 . With no loss of generality, we may assume # π 3 ( S ) = 1 , i.e., Y | O Y ( ε 3 ) . Consider the residual exact sequence of Y :
0 I S ( 1 , 1 , 0 ) I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) I ( 2 S , Y ) ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) 0 .
We have h 0 ( I S ( 1 , 1 , 0 ) = 1 , because Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S. Therefore, h 1 ( I S ( 1 , 1 , 0 ) ) = 0 . Thus, δ ( 2 S , Y ) = δ ( 2 S , Y ) = 5 and h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 1 , concluding the proof of this case.
Assume Y P 1 . Clearly, δ ( 2 S , Y ) = 4 . With no loss of generality, we may assume # π i ( S ) = 1 for i = 2 , 3 , i.e., the existence of o 2 , o 3 P 1 such that Y = P 1 × { o 2 } × { o 3 } . Set Y : = P 1 × P 1 × { o 3 } . Thus, Y | O Y ( 0 , 1 ) | . Consider the residual exact sequence of Y in Y :
0 I S , Y ( 1 , 0 ) I 2 S , Y ( 1 , 1 ) I ( 2 S , Y ) ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) 0 .
Since h 0 ( Y , I ( S , Y ) ( 1 , 0 ) ) = h 0 ( Y , I 2 S , Y ( 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 , (4) gives h 0 ( Y , I 2 S , Y ( 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 , and hence δ ( 2 S , Y ) = 5 . Then, the exact sequence (3) with Y instead of Y gives 1 h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) 2 . □
Remark 11. 
Take any multiprojective space Y and any positive integer x. Assume the existence of S T ( Y , x ) and W | I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) | such that Sing ( W ) S and take any p Sing ( W ) \ S . Since δ ( 2 ( S { p } ) , Y ) δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 , Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S { p } and W | I 2 ( S { p } ) ( 1 , , 1 ) | , S { p } T ( Y , x + 1 ) . Hence, if dim Sing ( W ) > 0 , then T ( Y , y ) for all y > x .
Remark 12. 
We claim that ( P 2 ) 3 is the only multiprojective space such that T 1 ( Y , 4 ) = S ( Y , 4 ) . If k 3 it is sufficient to use part (b) of Remark 1. If k 2 use Remark 9 and Theorem 8.
Proposition 4. 
Fix any multiprojective space Y. Set n : = dim Y ,
w : = ( 1 + h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , , 1 ) ) ) / ( n + 1 ) , z : = max { n + 1 , w } .
Then, T ˜ ( Y , x ) = for all x > z .
Proof. 
Fix A Y such that # A z . Since dim σ x ( ν ( Y ) ) ( x + 1 ) ( n + 1 ) 1 , the semicontinuity theorem for cohomology gives h 1 ( I 2 A ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Take any x > z and any S T ( Y , x ) . We saw that every A S with # A = z has h 1 ( I 2 A ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Since A S , h 0 ( I 2 A ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Thus, to prove that S T ˜ ( Y , x ) it is sufficient to find A with the additional condition that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A. We claim the existence of E S such that # E n + 1 and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing E. Take any a 1 S . The set Y ( 1 ) : = { a 1 } is the minimal multiprojective space containing a 1 . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, there is a ( 2 ) S such that the minimal multiprojective space Y ( 2 ) containing { a 1 , a 2 } strictly contains Y ( 1 ) , and hence, dim Y ( 2 ) > dim Y ( 1 ) . Furthermore, so on to get E after at most n 1 steps. □
Almost always w n + 1 . For instance, if n i = 1 for all i (and hence n = k ) we have w n + 1 if and only if k 5 .
Proposition 5. 
Fix integers x 3 and k 3 . Fix n 1 n k > 0 such that n 1 x 1 , n 2 x 1 and n 3 x 2 . Set Y : = P n 1 × × P n k . Assume σ x 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) ν ( Y ) . Fix lines L P n 1 , R P n 2 and points o i P n i , 3 i k . Let Y Y the multiprojective space with L as its first factor R as its second factors and { o i } as its i-th factor 3 i k . Fix a general ( a , b ) Y × Y and a general S Y with # S = x 2 . Set S : = S { a , b } . Let q be a general element of ν ( S ) . Then, rank ( q ) = x and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S.
Proof. 
Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing { a , b } . Since n 1 n k > 0 , n 1 x 1 , n 2 x 1 , n 3 x 2 , and S is general, Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S. Assume rank ( q ) x 1 . Thus, q σ x 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) . Since Aut ( P n h ) , h = 1 , 2 , acts transitively on the Grassmannian of the lines of P n h , Aut ( P n i ) , i = 3 , , k , a is general in Y and S is general in Y, S { a } is a general subset of Y with cardinality x 1 . Hence, varying S and a the union of the sets ν ( S { a } ) covers a non-empty open subset of σ x 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) . Since for a fixed S { a } the point b is a general point of Y , the closure of the union of all ν ( S ) is the join, J, of ν ( Y ) and σ x 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) . Since q σ x 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) , we get that σ x 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) is a cone with vertex containing ν ( Y ) . Since Y is the image of Y by the action of the group h = 1 k Aut ( P n h ) , we get that σ x 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) is a cone with vertex containing ν ( Y ) . Thus, σ x 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) = ν ( Y ) , a contradiction. □
Remark 13. 
Note that T ( Y , n 1 + 1 ) = T ˜ ( Y , n 1 + 1 ) .
Lemma 14. 
Take Y = P n 1 × P n 2 × P n 3 . We have T ( Y , 4 ) if ( n 1 , n 2 , n 3 ) { ( 3 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 2 , 2 , 1 ) } .
Proof. 
Fix a line L P n 1 , a 1 , b 1 L such that a 1 b 1 and o i P n i , i = 2 , 3 . Set Y : = L × { o 2 } × { o 3 } , a = ( a 1 , o 2 , o 3 ) , and b = ( b 1 , o 2 , o 3 ) . Since δ ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) = 2 , δ ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) 2 .
Take H i , i = 2 , 3 , such that o i π i ( H i ) . Take a general H 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) | and set W : = H 1 H 2 H 3 . Note that { a , b } H 2 H 3 and hence { a , b } Sing ( H 2 H 3 ) Sing ( W ) . By Remark 11, it is sufficient to find c , d Sing ( W ) \ { a , b } such that c d and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S : = { a , b , c , d } . Since M is general, P n 3 = L π 1 ( M ) .
Assume ( n 1 , n 2 , n 3 ) { ( 3 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 2 , 2 , 1 ) } . Take a general c M H 2 and a general d M H 3 . Since π 1 ( H 2 ) = π 1 ( H 3 ) = P n 1 , P n 3 = L π 1 ( M ) and c, d are general, π 1 ( S ) = P n 1 . Since c is general and π 3 ( H 2 ) = P 1 , π 3 ( S ) spans P 1 . Since c and d are general, π 2 ( H 3 ) = P n 2 and π 2 ( S ) = P n 2 . □
Lemma 15. 
Assume k 3 , n 1 { 2 , 3 } and n i 2 for all i = 2 , , k . Then, T ( Y , 4 ) . If n 1 = 3 , then T ˜ ( Y , 4 ) .
Proof. 
With no loss of generality, we may assume n 1 n k > 0 . Since T ( Y , 4 ) = T ˜ ( Y , 4 ) if n 1 = 3 (Remark 13) it is sufficient to prove that T ( Y , 4 ) . Fix a line L P n 1 , a 1 , b 1 L such that a 1 b 1 and o i P n i , 2 i k . Set a : = ( a 1 , o 2 , o k ) , b : = ( b 1 , o 2 , , o k ) and Y : = L × { o 2 } × × { o k } . Since δ ( 2 ( { a , b } ) , Y ) = 2 , δ ( 2 ( { a , b } , Y ) ) 2 . Fix a general ( c , d ) Y × Y and set S : = { a , b , c , d } . Note that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S. We have δ ( 2 S , Y ) δ ( 2 ( { a , b } ) , Y ) 2 . Thus, to prove that S T ( Y , 4 ) it is sufficient to prove that h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Since δ ( 2 S , Y ) 2 , it is sufficient to prove that
4 ( n 1 + + n k + 1 ) 1 + i = 1 k ( n i + 1 ) .
Since k 3 , the difference ψ ( n 1 , , n k ) between the right-hand side and the left-hand side of (5) is a non-decreasing function of each n i . If n 1 = 1 (and hence n i = 1 for all i, then (5) is satisfied if and only if k 5 . Theorems 10 and 11 in the next section give T ( ( P 1 ) k , 4 ) for k = 3 , 4 . For k 3 we have ψ ( n 1 , , n k ) < ψ ( n 1 , , n k , 1 ) . We have ψ ( 3 , 3 , 1 ) = 1 , ψ ( 3 , 2 , 2 ) = 5 , ψ ( 3 , 2 , 1 , 1 ) = 17 , ψ ( 2 , 2 , 1 , 1 ) = 8 , ψ ( 3 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) = 1 . Thus, it is sufficient to check all ( n 1 , , n k ) in the following list ( 2 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 2 , 2 , 1 ) , ( 3 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 2 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) . This is done in Lemma 14. □
Lemma 16. 
Assume k 3 , n 1 = n 2 = 3 and n 3 2 . Then, T ( Y , 4 ) .
Proof. 
Fix lines L , R P 3 and o i P n i , 3 i k . Set Y : = L × R × { o 3 } × × { o k } . Fix a general ( a , b ) Y × Y . Since δ ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) = 2 , we have δ ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) 2 . Fix a general ( c , d ) Y × Y and set S : = { a , b , c , d } . Note that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S and that δ ( S , Y ) δ ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) 2 . Thus, to prove that S T ( Y , 4 ) it is sufficient to prove that the inequality (5) is satisfied. As in the proof of Lemma 15, it is sufficient to observe that it is satisfied if k = 3 and n 3 = 1 . □
Proposition 6. 
Take Y = P n 1 × × P n k with k > 0 and n 1 n k > 0 .
(i)
We have S ( Y , 3 ) if and only if k 3 and n 1 2 .
(ii)
If Y ( P 1 ) 4 , all S S ( Y , 3 ) are as in [1] (Proposition 3.2).
(iii)
Assume Y = ( P 1 ) 4 ; S S ( Y , 3 ) if and only if either S S ( Y , q ) for some q such that rank ( q ) = 3 or it is as in [1] (Proposition 3.2).
Proof. 
Since T ( Y , 3 ) , k 3 and n 1 2 ([1], Theorem 4.12) and all S T ( Y , 3 ) are as described in [1] (Theorem 4.12).
(a)
If Y ( P 1 ) 4 , S T ( Y , 3 ) if and only if either S S ( Y , q ) for some q such that rank ( q ) = 3 or it is as in [1] (Propositions 3.1 and 3.2, Theorem 4.12). The case [1] (Proposition 3.1) is excluded by Lemma 1, because in this case η 1 | S is not injective. Proposition 5 proves that a general S as in [1] (Proposition 3.2) is an element of T ( Y , 3 ) . In (iii), we claim a stronger statement. Fix S as in [1] (Proposition 3.2) and a general q ν ( S ) . We need to prove that rank ( q ) = 3 . Assume rank ( q ) 2 and take A S ( Y , q ) . Set U : = S A . We have # U 5 and h 1 ( I U ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Note that h 1 ( I S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 . Let V be the minimal subset of U containing S and with h 1 ( I V ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Since V contains S, Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing V. Since k 3 , [4] (Theorem 1.1 and Proposition 5.2) gives # V = 5 (hence V = U , rank ( q ) = 2 and A S = ) and Y = ( P 1 ) 3 . In this case, all possible sets V are described in [4] (Lemma 5.8) and π i | V is injective for all i. However, π i | S is not injective for one i by the definition of the example described in [4] (Proposition 3.1), a contradiction.
(b)
Now assume Y = ( P 1 ) 4 . S T ( Y , 3 ) if and only if either S S ( Y , q ) for some q such that rank ( q ) = 3 or it is described in part (a) ([1], Theorem 4.12).
Theorem 9. 
Take Y = ( P 2 ) 3 . Then, T 1 ( Y , 4 ) = S ( Y , 4 ) , T ( Y , 4 ) and S ( Y , 4 ) . Moreover, S T ( Y , 4 ) if and only if the following conditions are satisfied:
(i)
π i | S is injective for all i = 1 , 2 , 3 ;
(ii)
for each A S such that # A = 3 , we have π i ( A ) = P 2 for at least two i { 1 , 2 , 3 } .
Proof. 
Take a general U Y such that # U = 4 . Since σ 4 ( Y ) is defective (Remark 1), U T ( Y , 4 ) . The semicontinuity theorem for cohomology gives T 1 ( Y , 4 ) = S ( Y , 4 ) . The solution set of any q ν ( Y ) with rank 4 is an element of S ( Y , 4 ) . Since σ 3 ( Y ) is not defective and 3 ( 1 + dim Y ) < h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) , δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 for all A U , and hence, U T ( Y , 4 ) . Fix S S ( Y , 3 ) . By Remark 15 the injectivity of all π i | S is a necessary condition to have S T ( Y , 4 ) . Condition (ii) is also necessary by Terracini Lemma and the inequalities h 0 ( O P 1 × P 1 × P 1 ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 8 < 3 ( 1 + dim P 1 × P 1 × P 1 ) and h 0 ( O P 2 × P 1 × P 1 ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 12 < 3 ( 1 + dim P 2 × P 1 × P 1 ) . Now assume (i) and (ii) for the set S. By (i) δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 for all A S such that # A = 2 . Now take A S such that # A = 3 . First assume π i ( A ) = P 2 . In this case A is the open orbit of S ( Y , 3 ) for the action of Aut ( P 2 ) × Aut ( P 1 ) × Aut ( P 1 ) . Since σ 3 ( Y ) is not defective, we get δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 . Now assume dim π i ( A ) = 1 for exactly one i, say for i = 3 . Thus, the minimal multiprojective space Y containing A is isomorphic to P 2 × P 2 × P 1 . Since # π 3 ( A ) = 3 and π i ( A ) = P 2 for i = 1 , 2 , A is in the open orbit for the action on S ( Y , 3 ) of the connected component Aut ( Y ) and dim σ 3 ( Y ) = 17 (Remark 1), we get δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 . We have Y | O Y ( ε 3 ) | . Consider the residual exact sequence of Y :
0 I A ( 1 , 1 , 0 ) I 2 A ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) I ( 2 A , Y ) , Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) 0 .
Since π 1 ( A ) = P 2 , we have h 1 ( I A ( 1 , 1 , 0 ) ) = 0 . Since δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 , (6) gives δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 . Thus, S is minimally Terracini. □

5. Proofs of Theorems 1 and 2

Lemma 17. 
Fix integers k 4 , x 4 and n 1 n k > 0 , 1 i k , such that n 1 x 1 and n 1 + + n k = 2 x 2 . Then,
i = 1 k ( n i + 1 ) x ( 2 x 1 ) .
Proof. 
We fix the integer x 4 .
Observation 1: Fix an integer a 3 . The real function h ( t ) : = t ( a t ) has a unique maximum in the interval [ 1 , a 1 ] and the integers a / 2 and a / 2 are the only one with maximum value for the integers 1 x a 1 .
First assume k = 4 . Applying several times Observation 1, we see that the right hand side of (7) has a minimum with n 1 = x 1 , n 2 = x 3 and n 3 = n 4 = 1 . For these integers, (7) is satisfied.
Now assume k 5 . Since n 1 n k > 0 and n 1 + + n k = 2 x 2 , n k 1 + n k x 1 . We apply Observation 1 to the integer a = n 1 + n k and the inductive assumption for the integers n 1 , , n k 2 , n k 1 + n k (after permuting them to get a non-increasing sequence). □
Proof of Theorem 1. 
Assume T ( Y , 4 ) . For any S T ( Y , 4 ) , Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, and hence, n 1 3 . Obviously k > 1 (Remark 9). Theorem 8 excludes the case k = 2 . Proposition 3 gives n 3 2 .
If k 3 and n i = 1 for all i, then T ( Y , 4 ) by Theorem 10 (the case k = 3 ) and the case m = 1 of Theorem 11. If k 3 , 2 n 1 3 and n 2 2 , then T ( Y , 4 ) by Lemma 16. If k 3 , n 1 = n 2 = 3 and n 3 2 , then T ( Y , 4 ) by Lemma 16. □
Theorem 10. 
Take Y = ( P 1 ) 3 . Then, T ( Y , x ) and T ˜ ( Y , x ) = for all x 4 . Moreover, for all x 4 each set A T ( Y , 3 ) as in [1] (Proposition 3.2) is a primitive reduction of some S T ( Y , x ) .
Proof. 
We have T ( Y , x ) for all x 4 by Remark 11 and part (1) of Lemma 13. Thus, the “Moreover” part is proved.
Take S T ( Y , x ) , x 4 . For each S S such that # S = 3 we have δ ( S , Y ) > 0 . Thus, to prove that T ˜ ( Y , x ) = it is sufficient to find S such that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing Y.
Claim 1. There is u , v S such that u v and the minimal multiprojective space containing { u , v } is not isomorphic to P 1 .
Proof of Claim 1. Assume that Claim 1 is not true, i.e., assume that for all a , b S such that a b , there is A ( a , b ) { 1 , 2 , 3 } such that # A ( a , b ) = 2 and π i ( a ) = π i ( b ) for all i A ( a , b ) . For any u S set u i : = π i ( u ) . By assumption # π i ( S ) 2 for all i = 1 , 2 , 3 . Start with any a = ( a 1 , a 2 , a 3 ) S . There is b S such that b 1 a 1 . Assume b = ( b 1 , a 2 , a 3 ) . There is c S such that c 2 a 2 . If c 1 = b 1 take u = a and v = c . □
Fix u , v S as in Claim 1 and let W be the minimal multiprojective space containing { u , v } . If W = Y , then any w S \ { u , v } shows that S is not primitive. If W P 1 × P 1 , then any w S such that w W shows that S is not primitive. □
Theorem 11. 
Take Y = P m × ( P 1 ) k 1 with m { 1 , 2 } and k 4 . For any integer x 4 , there is S T ( Y , x ) with as a primitive reduction an element A T ( Y , 3 ) described in [1] (Proposition 3.1).
Proof. 
Take any A T ( Y , 3 ) described by [1] (Proposition 3.1). By Remark 11 it is sufficient to find W | I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) | such that dim Sing ( W ) > 0 . As in [1] (Proposition 3.2) take A = { a , b , c } with a = ( a 1 , u 2 , u k ) , b = ( b 1 , u 2 , , u k ) , c = ( c 1 , , c k ) , c i u i for all i > 1 , # { a 1 , b 1 , c 1 } = 3 and a 1 , b 1 , c 1 spanning P m . Set H 2 and H 3 ) be the only element of | O Y ( ε i ) | , i = 2 , 3 , containing a. Note that b H 2 H 3 , and hence, { a , b } Sing ( H 2 H 3 ) . Let H 4 be the only element of | O Y ( ε 4 ) | containing c. Let H 1 be an element of | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing c. Note that A Sing ( H 1 H 2 H 3 H 4 ) and that Sing ( H 1 H 2 H 3 H 4 ) has codimension 2 in Y. If k > 4 , use the union of H 1 H 2 H 3 H 4 and an arbitrary element of | O Y ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) | . □
Theorem 12. 
Fix integers x 4 , k 3 , n 1 { 1 , 2 } and n 2 { 1 , 2 } . Set Y : = P n 1 × P n 2 × ( P 1 ) k 2 . Fix any A T ( Y , 3 ) as in [1] (Proposition 3.2). Then, there is S T ( Y , x ) such that A is a primitive reduction of S.
Proof. 
The set A is primitive, because T ( Y , y ) = for y < 3 (the case y = 1 is trivial and [1] (Proposition 1.8) gives the case y = 2 . By Remark 11 it is sufficient to find W | O Y ( 1 , , 1 ) | such that A Sing ( W ) and dim Sing ( W ) > 0 . Write A = { u , v , o } with u , v , o as in [1] (Proposition 3.2).
(a)
Assume k 4 . For i = 3 , 4 let H i be the only element of | O Y ( ε i ) | containing u. Note that v H 2 H 3 and hence { u , v } Sing ( H 2 H 3 ) . Take H i | O Y ( ε i ) | , i = 1 , 2 , containing o. Thus, A Sing ( H 1 H 2 H 3 H 4 ) . The set Sing ( H 1 H 2 H 3 H 4 ) has codimension 2 in Y. If k > 4 , use the union of H 1 H 2 H 3 H 4 and an arbitrary element of | O Y ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) | .
(b)
Assume k = 3 . Since the case n 1 = n 2 = 1 is true by Theorem 10, we may assume n 1 + n 2 3 , say n 1 = 2 . Let H 3 be the only element of | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing u. Note that v H 3 .
(b1)
Assume n 1 = n 2 = 2 . Take H 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing { o , u } and H 2 | O Y ( ε 2 ) | containing { o , v } . Use H 1 H 2 H 3 .
(b2)
Assume n 1 = 2 and n 2 = 1 . Since o is as in [1] (Proposition 3.2 (v)), there π 2 ( o ) { π 2 ( u ) , π 2 ( v ) } , say π 2 ( o ) = π 2 ( v ) . Take H 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing { o , u } and H 2 | O Y ( ε 2 ) | containing o and hence containing v. Use H 1 H 2 H 3 .
Proof of Theorem 2. 
Assume n 2 x 2 . Fix a line L P n 1 and points o i P n i , 2 i k . Let Y Y the multiprojective space with L as its first factor and { o i } as its i-th factor 2 i k . Fix a general ( a , b ) Y × Y . Since h 1 ( Y , I 2 { a , b } , Y ) = 2 , δ ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) 2 .
Claim 1. We have 2 ( n 1 + + n k + 1 ) 1 + i = 1 k ( n i + 1 ) .
Proof of Claim 1. Let ψ ( n 1 , , n k ) be the difference between the right hand side and the left hand side of the inequality in Claim 1. Since k 3 , ψ ( n 1 , , n k ) is an increasing function in [ 1 , + ) k . Thus, it is sufficient to check that φ ( k ) : = ψ ( 1 , , 1 ) 0 . Since the function φ is an increasing function of k, it is sufficient to observe that φ ( 3 ) = 1 . □
Claim 1 and the inequality δ ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) 2 give h 0 ( I 2 { a , b } , Y ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . By Remark 2 it is sufficient to find W | I 2 { a , b } ( 1 , , 1 ) | such that Sing ( W ) contains a set S such that # S = x 2 , S { a , b } = and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S : = S { a , b } . Take a general H i | I a ( ε i ) | , i = 2 , 3 . Since { a , b } H 2 H 3 , { a , b } Sing ( H 2 H 3 ) . Fix general H 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) and set W : = H 1 H 2 H 3 . Since H 1 is general, L π 1 ( H 1 ) = P n 1 . Fix a general S H 1 H 2 such that # S = x 3 and a general c H 1 H 3 . Set S : = S { c } . Obviously, S { a , b } = and S : = S { a , b } Sing ( W ) . Note that L = { π 1 ( a ) , π 1 ( b ) and that π 1 ( H 1 H 2 ) = π 1 ( H 1 H 3 ) = π 1 ( H 1 ) . Hence π 1 ( S ) = P n 1 . Since R = { p 2 ( a ) , π 2 ( b ) } , R π 2 ( H 2 ) P n 2 and S is general, π 2 ( S ) = P n 2 . Obviously, π i ( o i ) π i ( S ) = P n i for all i > 2 . Thus, Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S.
Now assume k 4 and n 3 x 2 .
By Claim 1 and the inequality δ ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) 2 we have h 0 ( I 2 { a , b } , Y ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . By Remark 2 it is sufficient to find W | I 2 { a , b } ( 1 , , 1 ) | such that Sing ( W ) contains a set S such that # S = x 2 , S { a , b } = and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S : = S { a , b } . Take a general H i | I a ( ε i ) | , i = 3 , 4 . Since { a , b } H 3 H 4 , { a , b } Sing ( H 3 H 4 ) . Fix general H i | O Y ( ε i ) , i = 1 , 2 , and set W : = H 1 H 2 H 3 H 4 . Since H 1 and H 2 are general, L π 1 ( H 1 ) = P n 1 and π 2 ( H 2 ) = P n 2 . Fix a general S H 1 H 2 such that # S = x 2 . Obviously S { a , b } = and S : = S { a , b } Sing ( W ) . Note that L = { π 1 ( a ) , π 1 ( b ) and that π 1 ( H 1 H 2 ) = π 1 ( H 1 ) . We conclude as in the proof of (i). □

6. Minimally Terracini

Remark 14. 
Take Y = P n 1 × × P n k . Fix any S Y such that # S = 4 and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, i.e., π i ( S ) = P n i for all i. If n i = 1 , then # π i ( S ) > 1 . If n i = 2 , then # π i ( S ) > 2 and π i ( S ) is not contained in a line. If n i = 3 , then π i | S is injective and π i ( S ) is linearly independent. If E T ( Y , x ) and n i = x + 1 , then π i | E is injective and π i ( E ) is linearly independent.
Proof of Theorem 3. 
Since h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , , 1 ) ) x ( 1 + dim Y ) (Lemma 17), we have h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 if # S = x and δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 . Fix C C ( Y ) (Remark 7) and a general S C such that # S = x . For any o S , let W ( o ) be the degree 2 zero-dimensional subscheme of the smooth curve C with o has its reduction. Set W : = o S W ( o ) . Note that deg ( W ) = 2 x , W C . Since x n i + 1 for all i and either π i ( C ) = P 1 (case n i = 1 ) or π i ( C ) is a rational normal curve of P n i if n i > 1 , Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S. Since ν ( C ) is a degree dim Y = 2 x 2 rational normal curve in its linear span and deg ( W ) = 2 x , h 1 ( C , I Z , C ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Thus, δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 , and hence, S T ( Y , x ) . Assume S T ( Y , x ) and take a minimal S S such that δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 . Set y : = # S . We have 2 y x 1 . By Lemma 4 and the minimality of y there is a zero-dimensional scheme Z = o S Z ( o ) Y with Z ( o ) red = { o } , deg ( Z ( o ) ) 2 for all o S , h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 and h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 for all Z Z .
Observation 1: Each π i | S is injective and each π i ( S ) is in linear independent position in P n i , i.e., each subset of π i ( S ) with cardinality n i + 1 is linearly independent.
Observation 1 gives h 1 ( I S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 . Thus, Z S , i.e., there is o S such that deg ( Z ( o ) ) = 2 .
Take H 1 | I o ( ε 1 ) | containing min { n i , y } points of S . Since π 1 | S is injective and each π 1 ( S ) is in linear independent position in P n 1 , # ( H 1 S ) = min { y , n 1 } . If y > n 1 , we take in H 1 S as much points x S with deg ( Z ( x ) ) = 2 as possible. Set Z 1 : = Res H 1 ( Z ) and S 1 : = ( Z 1 ) red .
(a)
Assume Z ( o ) H 1 . Note that { o } is a connected component of Z 1 . We take H 2 | O Y ( ε 2 ) | such that o H 2 and H 2 contains min { 1 + # S 1 , n 2 } points of S 1 , taking first the ones which are not connected components of Z 1 . Set Z 2 : = Res H 2 ( Z 1 ) . Note that o is a connected component of Z 2 . We continue in this way, until we get Z c , S c and H c | O Y ( ε c ) | with # S c n c and o H c (we find c k , because n 1 + + n k x > y ). Set Z c + 1 : = Res H c ( Z c ) . First assume Z c \ { o } H c . In this case Z c + 1 = { o } and since h 1 ( I o ) = 0 we obtain a contradiction. Now assume Z c \ { o } H c . In this case, Z c + 1 is a reduced set containing o and with cardinality at most n c . Set u : = ( u 1 , , u n ) N k with u 1 = 0 if i c and u i = 1 if c + 1 i k . By Observation 1, to prove that h 1 ( I Z c + 1 ( u ) ) = 0 (and hence to conclude the proof of this case) it is sufficient to prove that # Z c + 1 n c + 1 + + n k + 1 . We started with Z such that deg ( Z ) 2 y 2 x 2 . We have # Z c + 1 deg ( Z ) n 1 n c 1 deg ( H c Z c ) and # Z c + 1 1 + deg ( H c Z c ) . Since n 1 + + n k 2 x 2 , we conclude.
(b)
Assume Z ( o ) H 1 and Z H 1 . Since we required that H 1 contains as much points x S with deg ( Z ( x ) ) = 2 , Z 1 has at least one connected component, o , of degree 1. We continue as in Step (a), using o instead of o.
(c)
Assume Z H 1 . Hence S H 1 . Thus, y n 1 . First assume deg ( Z ) = 2 y and deg ( η 1 ( Z ( x ) ) ) = 1 for all x S .
(c1)
Assume the existence of x S such that either deg ( Z ( x ) ) = 1 or deg ( η 1 ( Z ( x ) ) ) = 2 . The latter condition is equivalent to the existence of i > 1 such that deg ( π i ( Z ( x ) ) ) = 2 . Instead of H 1 , we take M 1 | I S \ { x } ( ε 1 ) | such that x M 1 . The scheme E : = Res M 1 ( Z ) is the union of Z ( x ) and a subset S of S \ { x } . Thus, deg ( E ) n 1 + 1 . Lemma 2 and the assumption on Z ( x ) give that η 1 | E is an embedding. Since n 2 + + n k x 1 y and deg ( π i ( Z ( x ) ) ) = 2 for some i > 1 , Observation 1 and step (a) applied to η 1 ( E ) Y 1 prove this case.
(c2)
Assume deg ( Z ) = 2 y and deg ( η 1 ( Z ( x ) ) = 1 for all x S . Thus, deg ( π 1 ( Z ( x ) ) ) = 2 for all x S . We order the points o 1 , , o y of S and use M i | O Y ( ε i ) | , 2 i k , first with M k , but never taking a divisor M i containing o 1 . Set Z k : = Res M k ( Z ) , Z k 1 : = Res M k 1 ( Z k ) , and so on. Note that all the connected components of all schemes Z i have degree 2 and that either deg ( Z i ) = 2 y 2 n k 2 n i + 1 or Z i = Z ( x ) . Then, we use that h 1 ( I Z ( x ) ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 , because deg ( π 1 ( Z ( x ) ) ) = 2 .
We have dim C ( Y ) = 3 + i = 1 k ( n i 2 + 2 n i ) (Remark 7) and each C C ( Y ) has x 1 subsets with cardinality x 1 . Take C , C C such that C C . Since C C is a finite set, 2 different rational normal curves may only have finitely many common elements of T ( Y , x ) . Thus, dim T ( Y , x ) x 4 + i = 1 k ( n i 2 + 2 n i ) . □
Remark 15. 
Take any Y with three factors and take A Y such that # A = 2 and δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 . Then, [1] (Propositions 3.1 and 3.2) show that π i | A is injective for all i = 1 , 2 , 3 . Hence, for every every S T ( Y , x ) , x 4 , all π i | S , 1 i 3 , are injective.
Remark 16. 
Take Y = ( P 1 ) 4 and any S Y such that # S = 3 . We have S T ( Y , 3 ) , and in particular, h 1 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 and h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 . Thus, S is minimally Terracini if and only if each A S such that # A = 2 satisfies h 1 ( I 2 A ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 . By [1] (Propositions 3.1 and 3.2) this is the case if and only if for each A S such that # A = 2 we have # π i ( A ) = 2 for at least 3 indices i { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 } . Thus, S T ( Y , 3 ) if and only if π i | S is injective for all i = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 .
Proposition 7. 
Take as Y one of the following multiprojective spaces: P 3 × ( P 1 ) 3 , P 2 × ( P 1 ) 4 , ( P 1 ) 6 . Then, T ( Y , 4 ) . In the first (resp. second, resp. third) case we have dim T ( Y , 4 ) 25 (resp. 21, resp. 19).
Proof. 
In all cases, we have dim Y = 6 and h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , , 1 ) ) 4 ( 1 + dim Y ) . Thus, S T ( Y , 4 ) if and only if δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 . Let C Y be a rational normal curve (Remark 7). Fix a general S S ( C , 4 ) . Since h 0 ( O C ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = dim Y + 1 = 7 and deg ( ( 2 S , Y ) C ) = deg ( ( 2 S , C ) ) = 8 , we have h 1 ( I ( 2 S , C ) ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Since ( 2 S , C ) is a subscheme of the zero-dimensional scheme ( 2 S , Y ) , h 1 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Thus, S T ( Y , 4 ) . Fix A S such that a : = # A { 2 , 3 } . Fix i { 1 , , k } . If n i = 1 , then π i ( C ) = P 1 . The generality of S gives that π i ( A ) are x general points of P 1 . Recall that Aut ( P 1 ) is 3-transitive. If n i 2 , then π i ( C ) is a rational normal curve of P n i , and hence, the generality of S C gives that π i ( A ) is in the open orbit for the action of Aut ( P n i ) . Thus, A is in the open orbit for the action on S ( Y , x ) of the connected component of the identity of Aut ( Y ) . Since σ 2 ( Y ) and σ 3 ( A ) are not defective (Remark 1), S T ( Y , 4 ) .
Since in the first (resp. second, resp. third) case we have dim C = 21 (resp. 17, resp. 15), we get the last assertion of the proposition. □
We do not claim that all S T ( Y , 4 ) are the ones described in the proof of Proposition 7. The following example for Y = ( P 1 ) 6 is in the limit of the family constructed to prove Proposition 7.
Example 1. 
Take ( P 1 ) 6 . Fix a partition E F of { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 } such that # E = # F = 3 . Take a E : = ( a 1 , , a 6 ) with a i = 1 if i E and a i = 0 if i F . Let a F be the multidegree ( 1 , , 1 ) a E . Let C 1 be an integral curve of multidegree a E (all of them are in the same orbit for the action of ( Aut ( P 1 ) ) 6 and the stabilizer for this action acts transitively on C 1 ). Using π i for some i E , we see that C 1 P 1 . Let C 2 Y be an integral curve of multidegree a F such that C 1 C 2 . It is easy to see that # ( C 1 C 2 ) = 1 and that C 1 C 2 is a nodal curve of arithmetic genus 0. Fix a general ( E 1 , E 2 ) C 1 × C 2 such that # E 1 = # E 2 = 2 . Note that C 1 and C 2 are isomorphic to rational normal curves of ( P 1 ) 3 . Since 2 general points of ( P 1 ) 3 are contained in a rational normal curve of ( P 1 ) 3 and σ 2 ( ( P 1 ) 3 ) = P 7 ([10], Example 2.1), E i T ( Y , 2 ) . Fix A S such that x : = # A 3 , A E 1 and E 2 . Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A. Since # π j ( E i ) = 2 for 3 indices j, [1] (Theorem 4.12) gives A T ( Y , x ) . Thus, S T ( Y , 4 ) .
Proposition 8. 
Take Y = P 2 × P 2 × P 1 × P 1 . Then:
1. 
T ( Y , 4 ) ;
2. 
for a general A S ( Y , 3 ) , there are 5 S T ( Y , 4 ) containing A;
3. 
dim T ( Y , 4 ) = 23 .
Proof. 
Fix any smooth C | O Y ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) | and a general S C such that # S = 4 . Obviously, h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) 32 4 × 8 > 0 . Note that C P 2 × P 2 × P 1 and that ν | C is the embedding of C by the complete linear system | O P 2 × P 2 × P 1 ( 1 , 1 , 2 ) | . We have h 0 ( O P 2 × P 2 × P 1 ( 1 , 1 , 2 ) ) = 27 and 4 ( 1 + dim C ) = 24 . Since the fourth secant variety of P 2 × P 2 × P 1 embedded by | O P 2 × P 2 × P 1 ( 1 , 1 , 2 ) | is defective ([11], Theorem 4.13), δ ( 2 S , ν ( C ) ) > 0 . Since the scheme 2 S C does not impose independent conditions to | O Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) | , δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 . Thus, S T ( Y , 4 ) . Since S is general in C, # π i ( S ) = 4 for all i = 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 and no 3 of the points of π i ( S ) , i = 1 , 2 , are collinear. Thus, every subset of S with cardinality x 3 is the open orbit for the action of the connected component of the identity of Aut ( Y ) on S ( Y , x ) . Since the second and third secant varieties of Y are not defective (Remark 1), S T ( Y , 4 ) .
Fix a general A S ( Y , 3 ) . Since h 0 ( O Y ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 4 and A is general, there is a unique C | I A ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) | and C is smooth. We proved that A { p } T ( Y , 4 ) . Thus, dim T ( Y , 4 ) 23 . Since dim ( Y ) = 6 and dim σ 4 ( Y ) = 27 , the set of all S T ( Y , 4 ) has dimension 23 . We get parts (ii) and (iii) with equality, not just the inequality x with x 5 . □
Lemma 18. 
Take either Y = P 3 × P 1 × P 1 or Y = P 2 × P 1 × P 1 . Then, T ( Y , 4 ) = .
Proof. 
Assume the existence of S T ( Y , 4 ) . By Remark 15 each π i | S is injective. Fix A S such that # A = 3 and let Y be the minimal multiprojective space containing A. Since δ ( 2 A , Y ) δ ( 2 A , Y ) ([1], Lemma 2.3), to a contradiction it is sufficient to prove that δ ( 2 A , Y ) > 0 .
(a)
Assume Y = P 3 × P 1 × P 1 . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, π 1 ( S ) = P 3 . Thus, Y P 2 × P 1 × P 1 . Since h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 12 < 3 ( 1 + dim Y ) , δ ( A , Y ) > 0 .
(b)
Assume Y = P 2 × P 1 × P 1 . If Y ( P 1 ) 3 , then δ ( 2 A , Y ) > 0 , because h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 8 < 3 ( 1 + dim Y ) . Now assume Y = Y . Since h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 12 < 3 ( 1 + dim Y ) , δ ( 2 A , Y ) > 0 .
Proposition 9. 
Take either Y = P 2 × P 2 × P 1 or Y = P 2 × ( P 1 ) 3 or Y = ( P 1 ) 5 . Then, T ( Y , 4 ) .
Proof. 
Write Y = P n 1 × × P n k with n 1 n k > 0 . Let f : P 1 Y be the embedding induced by f = ( f 1 , , f k ) , f i : P 1 P n i with f i an isomorphism if n i = 1 , while f i is an embedding with f i ( P 1 ) P n i a degree n i rational normal curve. Set C : = f ( P 1 ) . Note that ν ( C ) is a degree 5 rational normal curve in its linear span. Let W C be a connected degree 3 zero-dimensional scheme. Fix a general q ν ( W ) . A theorem of Sylvester gives the existence of a one-dimensional family U of set S C such that # S = 4 and each S evinces the ν ( C ) -rank of q. Since dim U > 0 and each ν ( S ) , S U irredundantly span q, Terracini lemma gives δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 . Fix A Y such that # A 3 and let Y be the minimal multiprojective space containing A. First assume # A = 2 . Since each f i is injective, Y ( P 1 ) k and A is in the open orbit for the action on S ( Y , 2 ) of ( Aut ( P 1 ) k . Since dim σ 2 ( Y ) = 2 k + 1 , we get δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 . If n 1 = 1 we get δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 . Now assume n 1 = n 2 = 2 . Since # π i ( A ) = 2 , h 1 ( I A ( ε i ) ) = 0 for all i. Take H 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) | and H 2 | O Y ( ε 2 ) | such that Y = H 1 H 2 . Taking the residual exact sequence of Y in H 1 and using that h 1 ( I A ( ε 3 ) ) = 0 , we get δ ( 2 A , H 1 ) = 0 . Then, using the residual exact sequence of H 1 in Y we get δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 .
Now assume # A = 3 . Since each f i is injective, n i 2 for all i and f i ( C ) is a rational normal curve if n i = 2 , then Y = Y and A is in the open orbit of S ( Y , 3 ) for the action of the connected component of the identity of Aut ( Y ) . Since dim σ 3 ( Y ) = 17 (Remark 1), we get δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 . Thus, S is minimally Terracini. □
Lemma 19. 
Take Y = P m × P m × P s with s > 0 . Fix S Y such that # S = m + 1 , Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S and # π 3 ( S ) = m + 1 . Then h 1 ( I 2 S ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 .
Proof. 
Taking linear projections in the 3-rd coordinate, if necessary we reduce to the case s = 1 . In this case, Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S and ( m + 1 ) ( dim Y + 1 ) = h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) . Thus, if the lemma fails, then S T ( Y , m + 1 ) . The case m = 1 follows from [1] (Proposition 1.8). Assume m > 1 . Fix a general q ν ( S ) . By Terracini’s lemma, it is sufficient to prove that S ( q ) = { S } . This is a simple consequence of [8] (Theorem 3). □
Proof of Theorem 4. 
Assume the existence of S T ( Y , x ) . Since S T ( Y , x ) , h 0 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 and δ ( 2 S , Y ) > 0 . Since S T ( Y , x ) , Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, π i | S is injective and π i ( S ) is linearly independent for i = 1 , 2 . Assume for the moment k = 3 . Since δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 for all A S such that # A = 2 , Remark 15 gives that π 3 | S is injective. Lemma 19 gives h 1 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 , a contradiction. Now assume k 4 . Let π 1 , 2 , 3 : Y P m × P m × P s denote the projection onto the first three factors of Y. Since π 1 | S is injective, # π 1 , 2 , 3 ( S ) = m + 1 . The case k = 3 of Lemma 19 shows that { π 1 , 2 , 3 ( S ) } = S ( P m × P m × P s , q ) for a general q ν ( π 1 , 2 , 3 ( S ) . Since # π 1 , 2 , 3 ( S ) = # S , we get { S } = S ( Y , q ) for a general q ν ( S ) . Thus, Terracini Lemma gives h 1 ( I 2 S ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 . □

7. Proof of Theorems 5 and 6

We divide the long proof of Theorem 5 into five different propositions, and then join them together. In Section 6 we proved Theorem 4, which covers some cases of Theorem 5. Since the proofs of Propositions 10–14 have the same beginning, we write here the starting sentences of all 5 proofs and avoid duplications.
Notation 1. 
Assume the existence of S T ( Y , 4 ) . By Lemmas 4 and 5, there is a zero-dimensional scheme Z Y such that Z red = S , each connected component of Z has degree 2 , h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 and h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 for all Z Z . Set z : = deg ( Z ) 8 . For each p S , let Z ( p ) denote the connected component of Z containing p.
Proposition 10. 
Take Y = ( P 1 ) k , k 7 . Then T ( Y , 4 ) = .
Proof. 
For any a S , let e ( a ) be the dimension of the minimal multiprojective space containing Z ( a ) with the convention e ( a ) = 0 if Z ( a ) = { a } . We take a partition S = S S of S with # S = # S = 2 and set Z : = Z ( a S Z ( a ) ) and Z : = Z ( a S Z ( a ) ) . Note that Z Z = , Z and Z . Since S T ( Y , 4 ) , h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 . Since h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 , ν ( Z ) ν ( Z ) . Fix a general q ν ( Z ) ν ( Z ) . There are minimal V Z and V Z such that q ν ( V ) ν ( V ) . The minimality property of Z gives V = Z and V = Z ; however, we typically do not utilize it. Instead, we use U U in place of Z in the construction we provided.
Write S = { p ( 1 ) , p ( 2 ) , p ( 3 ) , p ( 4 ) } . Fix a divisor C | O Y ( ε 1 + ε 2 ) | containing { p ( 1 ) , p ( 2 ) , p ( 3 ) } and set U : = Res C ( Z ) . We have h 1 ( I U ( 1 , , 1 ) ( ε 1 ε 2 ) ) > 0 ([5], Lemma 5.1). Note that U { p ( 1 ) , p ( 2 ) , p ( 3 ) } Z ( p ( 4 ) ) . By [5] (Lemma 5.1), either U = or h 1 ( I U ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . In steps (a), (b) and (c), we assume h 1 ( I U ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 , while step (d) handles the case U = .
(a)
Assume for the moment that η 1 , 2 | U is an embedding and that U S . We get h 1 ( Y 1 , 2 , I η 1 , 2 ( U ) ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . Proposition 1 gives that the minimal multiprojective space containing η 1 , 2 ( U ) contains at most three factors, and hence, the minimal multiprojective space containing S has at most five factors, a contradiction.
(b)
Assume that η 1 , 2 | U is not an embedding. This assumption occurs for exactly two reasons: either U Z ( p ( 4 ) ) , deg ( Z ( p ( 4 ) ) ) = 2 and deg ( η 1 , 2 ( Z ( p ( 4 ) ) ) ) = 1 or there are i , j such that 1 i < j 4 and η 1 , 2 ( p ( i ) ) = η 1 , 2 ( p ( j ) ) . The latter possibility is excluded by Lemma 2. If deg ( Z ( p 4 ) ) = 2 and deg ( η 1 , 2 ( Z ( p ( 4 ) ) ) ) = 1 , then e ( p ( 4 ) ) 2 and deg ( π i ( Z ( p ( 4 ) ) ) ) = 1 for all i > 2 . We may avoid this case by instead taking the first two factors, the factor associated to two of the integers in { 1 , , k } , say i 1 and i 2 , such that v ( p ( 4 ) ) depends on at least one factor of { 1 , , k } \ { i 1 , i 2 } (Lemma 2).
(c)
Assume S U . Note that either U red = U or deg ( U ) = deg ( U red ) + 1 . We have U red U if and only if p ( 4 ) C . Since # U red 3 and h 1 ( I U ( 1 , , 1 ) ( ε 1 ε 2 ) ) > 0 , we get that η 1 ( U ) depends on at most three factors of Y 1 (Remark 5 and Proposition 1), and hence, U depends on four factors at most. Thus, δ ( 2 U , Y ) > 0 (Remark 1) and hence S is not minimally Terracini.
(d)
Assume U = , i.e., Z C . Set C 1 , 2 : = C . Fix integer 1 i < j k and take C i , j | I p ( 1 ) , p ( 2 ) , p ( 3 ) ( ε i + ε j ) | . By steps (a), (b) and (c) we get (by exclusion) Z C i , j .
(e)
Up to now, we only used (roughly speaking) that k 6 , and we know (Proposition 7 and Example 1) that the statement of the theorem is not true if k = 6 . From now on, we use that k 7 . More precisely, we use that z : = deg ( Z ) k + 1 . In steps (a)–(d), we did not use any ordering of the set { 1 , , k } , the only possible difference being whether C i , j is reducible or not. In the following steps, we freely permute the factors of Y. Let i be any integer i { 1 , , k } such that there is H 1 | O Y ( ε i ) | such that e 1 : = deg ( Z H 1 ) is maximal. Set Z 1 : = Res H 1 ( Z ) . Note that deg ( Z 1 ) = z e 1 . Set E 1 : = H 1 Z . Note that deg ( E 1 ) = e 1 . Let e 2 be the maximal integer such that there is j { 2 , , k } and H 2 | O Y ( ε j ) | such that e 2 : = H j Z 1 is maximal. With no loss of generality, we may assume j = 2 . Then, we continue in the same way, defining integers e 3 , , the divisors H 3 , and zero-dimensional schemes E 3 , and Z 3 , such that E i : = H i Z i , e i = # E i , Z i + 1 = Res H 1 ( Z i ) and at each step the integer i is maximal. Note that e 1 e 2 e i e i + 1 and that e i = 0 if and only if Z H 1 H i 1 . Since k deg ( Z ) 1 there is a maximal integer c k such that e c 1 . Assume for the moment e c = 1 . We have deg ( Z c ) = 1 , and hence, h 1 ( I Z c ) = 0 , contradicting [5] (Lemma 5.1). Thus, e c = 0 . In the same way, we get e c 1 2 . Since e 1 e c 2 , we have the following possibilities (for z = 8 , for z < 8 , the first one does not arise, and the second, third, must be modified):
1.
c = 5 , e 1 = e 2 = e 3 = e 4 = 2 ;
2.
c = 4 , e 1 = 4 , e 3 = e 4 = 2 ;
3.
c = 4 , e 1 = 3 , e 2 = 3 , e 4 = 2 ;
4.
c = 3 , z / 2 e 1 z 2 , e 2 = z e 1 .
(e1)
Assume c = 5 , and thus, e 1 = e 2 = e 3 = e 4 = 2 . By [1] (Lemma 5.1) we have h 1 ( I E 4 ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , and hence deg ( π i ( E 4 ) ) = 1 for all i 4 . Fix j { 1 , 2 , 3 } . Using H 4 instead of H j we get deg ( π i ( E j ) ) = 1 for i = j and for i 4 . Then, we use { H } = | I E 4 ( ε 7 ) | and we also get deg ( π 4 ( E j ) ) = 1 . Thus, deg ( π i ( E 1 ) ) = 1 except at most for i = 2 , 3 . Using { H } | I E 2 ( ε 7 ) | and { H } | I E 3 ( ε 7 ) | , we get deg ( π 2 ( E 1 ) ) = 1 and deg ( π 3 ( E 1 ) ) = 1 . Thus, e 1 = 1 , a contradiction.
(e2)
Assume c < 5 , i.e., e 1 + e 2 5 . Since each connected component of Z has degree at most 2, we get that H 1 H 2 contains at least 3 points of S, and hence, H 1 H 2 = C 1 , 2 . Hence, we excluded case (2) and (3), e 1 4 and e 2 = z e 1 . By [5] (Lemma 5.1), we have h 1 ( I Z 1 ( ε ^ 1 ) ) > 0 . Therefore, either η 1 | Z 1 is an embedding and h 1 ( Y 1 , I η 1 ( Z 1 ) ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 or there is a degree 2 scheme w Z 1 such that deg ( η 1 ( w ) ) = 1 . Lemma 2 gives that w is connected, i.e., w = Z ( p ( i ) ) for some i. Since w Z 1 , p ( i ) H 1 . Since e 1 z / 2 , H 1 contains at least two points of S. Take j { 3 , , k } and M j | I p ( i ) ( ε j ) | . Since H 1 M j contains at least three points of S, steps (a)–(d) give Z H 1 M j , and hence, deg ( π j ( Z 1 ) ) = 1 for all j > 2 . Since deg ( π 2 ( Z 1 ) ) = 1 , we also get # ( Z 1 ) red = 1 and hence Z 1 = w . Thus, # ( S H 1 ) = 3 , S H 1 = S \ { p ( i ) } and E 1 is the union of the connected components of Z with a point of S H 1 as its reduction. For any p ( S H 1 ) set m ( p ) : = { 2 , , k } if z ( p ) = { p } , while if deg ( Z ( p ) ) = 2 let m ( p ) denote the set of all j { 2 , , k } such that η j | Z ( p ) is an embedding. Remark 3 gives # m ( p ) k 2 for all p S H 1 . Since # ( S H 1 ) = 3 and k 5 , there is j m ( p ) for all p S H 1 . Fix j p S H 1 m ( p ) and take M | I p ( i ) ( ε j ) | . Set Z : = Res M ( Z ) and Z : = η j ( Z ) Y j . We have h 1 ( I Z ( ε ^ j ) ) > 0 ([5], Lemma 5.1). Since j 2 , w M and hence w Z = . By the definition of j each map η j | Z ( p ) is an embedding. Since δ ( 2 A , Y ) = 0 for all A S H 1 such that # A = 2 , η j | S H 1 is injective. Thus, η j | Z is an embedding and hence h 1 ( Y j , I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = h 1 ( I Z ( ε ^ j ) ) > 0 . Let Y be the minimal multiprojective subspace of Y j containing η j ( S H 1 ) . By [1] (Theorem 4.12), we have Y ( P 1 ) m for some m 4 . Thus, there is h { 2 , , k } and D | O Y ( ε h ) | such that D η h 1 ( Y ) | . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, p ( i ) D . Thus, Res D ( Z ) = w . Since deg ( π i ( w ) ) = 1 for all i > 1 , π 1 | w is an embedding. Therefore, h 1 ( I w ( ε ^ h ) ) h 1 ( I w ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 , contradicting [5] (Lemma 5.1).
Proposition 11. 
Take Y = P 3 × ( P 2 ) m × ( P 1 ) s with m 2 and s 0 . Then, T ( Y , 4 ) = .
Proof. 
We only use the case Y = P 3 × ( P 2 ) 2 , because the proofs are extremely similar in all other cases, but far simpler.
Claim 1. # π i ( S ) = 4 for i = 2 , 3 .
Proof of Claim 1. Assume for instance # π 3 ( S ) 3 , and take a , b S such that π 3 ( a ) = π 3 ( b ) and a b . The minimal multiprojective space Y containing is isomorphic to either P 1 (case π 2 ( a ) = π 2 ( b ) ) or to P 1 × P 1 (case π 2 ( a ) π 2 ( b ) ). Since ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) = 2 ([1], Lemma 2.3), S T ( Y , 4 ) , a contradiction.□
Claim 2. If H | O Y ( ε 2 ) | , M | O Y ( ε 3 ) | and S H M , then Z H M .
Proof of Claim 2. Assume Z H M , i.e., assume E : = Res H M ( Z ) . Since E S , π 1 | S is injective, π 1 ( S ) is linearly independent and # S = h 0 ( O Y ( 1 , 0 , 0 ) , h 1 ( I E ( 1 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 0 , contradicting [5] (Lemma 5.1).□
Claim 3. None of the three points of π i ( S ) , i { 2 , 3 } are collinear.
Proof of Claim 3. Suppose the existence of A S such that # A = 3 and L : = π 3 ( A ) is a line. Set { p } : = S \ A , M : = π 3 1 ( L ) . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, M S = A . Take a general H | I p ( ε 2 ) | . Since S H M , Claim 2 gives Z H M . Since # π 2 ( S ) = 4 (Claim 1) and H is general, H S = { p } , and hence, o A Z ( o ) M . Since h 1 ( I Z ( p ) ( 1 , 1 , 0 ) ) > 0 ([5], Lemma 5.1), deg ( Z ( p ) ) = 2 and deg ( η 3 ( Z ( p ) ) ) = 1 . Fix o A and take M | O Y ( ε 3 ) | containing { p , o } , and H | O Y ( ε 2 ) | containing A \ { o } . Since S H M , Claim 1 gives Z H M . Claim 1 gives Z ( p ) Z ( o ) M and Z : = a A \ { o } Z ( a ) H . Since deg ( Z ( p ) ) = 2 and deg ( η 3 ( Z ( p ) ) ) = 1 , deg ( π 3 ( Z ( p ) ) ) = 2 . Thus, the line π 3 ( Z ( p ) ) contains π 3 ( o ) . Taking another point o A , we get π 3 ( Z ( p ) ) = L and hence S M , a contradiction.□
Claim 4. Fix i { 2 , 3 } and D | O Y ( ε i ) | such that # ( D S ) 2 . Then, # ( D S ) = 2 and o D S Z ( o ) H .
Proof of Claim 4. Claims 1 and 3 give # ( D S ) = 2 . The last assertion of Claim 4 was proved in the proof of Claim 3.□
Fix a , b S such that a b and let M be the only element of | O Y ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) | containing { a , b } (Claim 1). Write S = { a , b , c , d } . We have Z ( a ) Z ( b ) M and Res M ( Z ) = Z ( c ) Z ( d ) (Claim 3 and 4). Hence, h 1 ( I Z ( c ) Z ( d ) ( 1 , 1 , 0 ) ) > 0 ([5], Lemma 5.1). Take a general D | I { c , d } ( 1 , 0 , 0 ) | . We have Res D ( Z ( c ) Z ( d ) ) { c , d } . Claim 1 implies h 1 ( I { c , d } ( 0 , 1 , 0 ) ) = 0 . Thus, Z ( c ) Z ( d ) D ([5], Lemma 5.1). Since D is general, we get π 1 ( Z ( c ) Z ( d ) ) { π 1 ( c ) , π 1 ( d ) } . Taking different subsets of S with cardinality 2, we get π 1 ( Z ( c ) ) x S \ { c } { c , x } = { c } , because # π 1 ( S ) = 4 and π 1 ( S ) is linearly independent. Therefore, deg ( π 1 ( Z ( y ) ) ) = 1 for all y S . Take y S such that deg ( Z ( y ) ) = 2 . Since deg ( π 1 ( Z ( y ) ) ) = 1 , there is i { 2 , 3 } such that deg ( π i ( Z ( y ) ) ) = 2 , and hence, h 1 ( I Z ( y ) ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . If y S and deg ( Z ( y ) ) = 1 , then obviously h 1 ( I Z ( y ) ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . Fix A S such that # A = 3 and let D be the only element of | O Y ( 1 , 0 , 0 ) | containing A because # π 1 ( S ) = 4 and π 1 ( S ) is linearly independent. Set { y } : = S \ A . We saw that a A Z ( a ) D , and hence, Res D ( Z ) = Z ( y ) . Since h 1 ( I Z ( y ) ( 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 , we conclude quoting [5] (Lemma 5.1). □
Proposition 12. 
Take Y = P 3 × ( P 1 ) k 1 , k 5 . Then, T ( Y , 4 ) = .
Proof. 
Take H 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing 3 points of S. By Remark 14, H 1 is uniquely determined by H 1 S and # ( H 1 S ) = 3 . Set z 1 : = deg ( Z H 1 ) , Z 1 : = Res H 1 ( Z ) and S 1 : = Res H 1 ( S ) . Since z 1 3 , deg ( Z 1 ) = z z 1 5 . Take i { 2 , , k } and H 2 | O Y ( ε i ) | such that z 2 : = deg ( Z 1 H 2 ) is maximal, and set Z 2 : = Res H 2 ( Z 1 ) . Permuting the last k 1 factors of Y, we may assume i = 2 . Take i { 3 , , k } and H 3 | O Y ( ε i ) | such that z 3 : = deg ( Z 2 H 3 ) is maximal, and set Z 3 : = Res H 3 ( Z 2 ) . Permuting the last k 2 factors of Y, we may assume i = 3 . Note that z 2 z 3 . We continue in the same way until we obtain an integer c 2 such z c 1 ; since k 1 z z 1 , we find some c k . Since h 1 ( I W ) = 0 for any degree 1 zero-dimensional scheme, [5] (Lemma 5.1) gives z c = 0 , i.e., Z H 1 H c 1 . Permuting the 1-dimensional factors of Y, we may assume H i | O Y ( ε i ) | for all i. Since z c 1 2 and z z 1 5 , either z z 1 = 5 and z 2 = 3 and z 3 = 2 or z z 1 = 4 and z 2 = z 3 = 2 or c = 2 and z 2 = z z 1 . Since h 1 ( I Z 2 ( 0 , 0 , 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 and deg ( Z 2 ) = z 3 = 2 , deg ( π i ( Z 2 ) ) = 1 for all i 3 .
Claim 1. z 1 > 3 .
Proof of Claim 1. Assume z 1 = 3 , i.e., assume Z H 1 = S H 1 . Thus, h 1 ( I Z H 1 ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 by Observation 1. Set H : = H 2 H c 1 . Since Res H ( Z ) H 1 Z , [1] (Lemma 5.1) gives Z H . Observation 1 gives c > 2 , and hence, c = 3 and either z = 8 , z 2 = 3 and z 3 = 2 or z = 7 and z 2 = z 3 = 2 . Since Res H 1 H 2 ( Z ) = Z 3 has degree 2 and h 1 ( I Z 3 ( 0 , 0 , 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 , deg ( π i ( Z 3 ) ) = 1 for all i 3 . First assume Z 3 = { a , b } with a b , and call Y the minimal multiprojective space containing { a , b } . Since deg ( π i ( Z 3 ) ) = 1 for all i 3 , we get δ ( 2 { a , b } , Y ) 2 (Remark 4), a contradiction. Thus, Z 3 is connected. Since Z 3 Res H 1 ( Z ) , Z 3 = Z ( p ) , where { p } : = S \ S H 1 . Since Z H 1 = S \ { p } , we have Z 2 = S \ { p } . Applying [5] (Lemma 5.1), we get h 1 ( I S \ { p } ( 0 , 1 , 0 , 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 . For any A S \ { p } such that # A = 2 , there are at most k 3 integers i with # π i ( A ) = 1 by Lemma 2. Thus, there is i , j { 4 , , k } such that i < j , M i | O Y ( ε i ) | , M j | O Y ( ε i ) | and # ( ( S \ S M ) ) = 2 . Since Res H 1 H 3 M i M j ( Z ) is a single point, h 1 ( I Res H 1 H 3 M i M j ( Z ) ) = 0 , contradicting [5] (Lemma 5.1).□
Claim 1 excludes the case c = z 2 = 3 , z 3 = 2 . Note that Claim 1 is true for each H 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing 3 points of S.
Claim 2. z = 8 .
Proof of Claim 2. Assume z 7 , and write S = { a , b , c , d } with Z ( d ) = { d } . Let H 1 be the only element of | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing { a , b , c } (Observation 1). By Claim 1 Z 1 : = Res H 1 ( Z ) is the union of d and at most 2 points of { a , b , c } , say Z 1 = { d } A with A { a , b , c } and # A 2 . Remark 4 gives that η 1 | Z 1 is injective and hence h 1 ( Y 1 , I η 1 ( Z 1 ) ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = h 1 ( I Z 1 ( ε ^ 1 ) ) > 0 . Proposition 1 gives that the minimal multiprojective space containing η 1 ( Z 1 ) is isomorphic to P 1 and hence the minimal multiprojective space containing the set Z 1 is isomorphic to P # Z 1 1 × P 1 , contradicting Remark 4.□
Claim 3. c = 2 .
Proof of Claim 3. Assume c 2 . By Claims 1 and 2 we get c = 3 , z 1 = 4 , z 2 = 2 and z 3 = 2 . Fix p S and set B : = S \ { p } . Let H 1 be the only element of | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing B. We have Z 1 = Z ( p ) A with A B and # A = 2 . There is M 2 | O Y ( ε 2 ) | containing Z ( p ) , and hence, E : = Res H 1 M 2 ( Z ) A . Since h 1 ( I E ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 ([5], Lemma 5.1), we first get # E = 2 and then δ ( 2 E , Y ) > 0 (Remark 4), contradicting the assumption S T ( Y , 4 ) .□
By Claim 3, Z 1 H 2 for any choice of H 1 containing 3 points of S. Set { p } : = S \ S H . Since z = 8 , Observation 1 gives Z ( p ) Z 1 with deg ( Z ( p ) ) = 2 .
Claim 4. z 2 = 4 .
Proof of Claim 4. Recall that z = 8 and z 1 4 . Assume z 1 5 . We have Z 1 = Z ( p ) { a } with a H 1 S . By Remark 4 there is i > 2 such that π i ( p ) π i ( a ) . Take M | O Y ( ε i ) | such that p M . We have Res H 1 M ( Z ) { p , a } . Since h 1 ( I Res H 1 M ( Z ) ( 0 , 1 , , 1 ) ( ε i ) ) > 0 , we get Res H 1 M ( Z ) = { p , a } and π j ( p ) = π j ( a ) for all j { 2 , , k } \ { k } . Thus, δ ( 2 { p , a } , Y ) 2 , a contradiction.□
The previous claims give the existence of E S H 1 such that # E = 2 and Z 1 = Z ( p ) E H 2 . Write E = { b , c } and { a } = H H 1 \ E . We have Res H 2 ( Z ) = Z ( a ) { b , c } . By Lemma 2 there is j > 2 such that π j ( a ) π j ( b ) . Hence W : = Res H 2 M ( Z ) { a , b , c } and W . Observation 1 gives h 1 ( I W ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 , and hence, h 1 ( I W ( ( 1 , , 1 ) ε 2 ε j ) ) = 0 , contradicting [5] (Lemma 5.1). □
Proposition 13. 
Take Y = P 3 × ( P 2 ) m × ( P 1 ) s with m 1 and s 2 . Then T ( Y , 4 ) = .
Proof. 
To simplify the notation, we take Y = P 3 × P 2 × P 1 × P 1 , but the general case is very similar and all other cases are easier. Assume the existence of S T ( Y , 4 ) and take Z Y such that Z red = S , for each p S the connected component of Z with p as its reduction has degree 2 , h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) > 0 and h 1 ( I Z ( 1 , , 1 ) ) = 0 for every Z Z (Lemma 4). Set z : = deg ( Z ) .
Claim 1. Take any C | O Y ( 1 , 1 , 0 , 0 ) | such that S C and deg ( Z C ) min { z , 5 } . Then, Z C .
Proof of Claim 1. Since the case z 5 is trivial, we may assume z > 5 . Assume Z C . The scheme W : = Res C ( Z ) is a subset of S with cardinality 3 . Since W , h 1 ( I W ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 . Thus, either there is A E such that # A = 2 and # π 3 ( A ) = # π 4 ( A ) = 1 (with δ ( 2 A , Y ) 2 , a contradiction) or # E = 3 and there is i { 3 , 4 } such that # π i ( E ) = 1 (Proposition 1). In the latter case (with, say # π 4 ( E ) = 1 ), δ ( 2 E , Y ) > 0 , unless the minimal multiprojective space Y containing E is isomorphic to P 2 × P 2 × P 1 , i.e., π 2 ( E ) = P 2 and # π 3 ( E ) > 1 . Set { p } : = S \ { p } . Take D | O Y ( ε 2 ) | containing Z ( p ) and let M be the only element of | O Y ( ε 4 ) | containing p. We have Res D M ( Z ) E . Since h 1 ( I E ( 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 0 , [5] (Lemma 5.1) gives Res D M ( Z ) = , i.e., Z D M . Set W : = Res M ( Z ) . We have W Z ( p ) E . Since π 2 ( E ) = P 2 , there is N | O Y ( ε 1 ) | such that p N and E N . Since Res N M ( Z ) , Res N M ( Z ) S and h 1 ( I S ( 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 0 , [5] (Lemma 5.1) gives a contradiction.□
Fix p S and set B : = S \ { p } . Let H be the only element of | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing B. Take D | I Z ( p ) ( ε 2 ) | . Claim 1 gives Z H D . Note that Res H ( Z ) = Z ( p ) A with A B . Since Res H ( Z ) D and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, A E , i.e., deg ( Z H ) 4 .
(a)
Assume deg ( Z H ) = 6 . Thus, Res H ( Z ) = Z ( p ) . Since h 1 ( I Z ( p ) ( 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 ([5], Lemma 5.1), we get z = 8 and deg ( π i ( Z ( p ) ) ) = 1 for all i = 2 , 3 , 4 . Write S H = { a , b , c } . Set { M 3 } : = | I a ( ε 3 ) | and { M 4 } : = | I p ( ε 4 ) | . Note that Z ( p ) M 4 . Take M 2 | O Y ( ε 2 ) | containing { b , c } , except that if b M 3 M 4 (resp. c M 3 M 4 ) ), we take M 2 not containing b (resp. c); this is possible unless π 2 ( b ) = π 2 ( c ) ; if π 2 ( b ) = π 2 ( c ) (and hence π 2 ( a ) π 2 ( b ) ), we reverse the role of a and b. Since Res M 2 M 3 M 4 ( Z ) { a , b , c } and h 1 ( I S ( 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 0 , we get Z M 2 M 3 M 4 . Set W : = Res M 2 M 4 ( Z ) . If W = , we are in a case handles in the proof of Claim 1. Assume W . We get h 1 ( I W ( 1 , 0 , 1 , 0 ) ) > 0 . Hence π 1 ( W ) is linearly dependent. Note that Z ( p ) W = and that W Z ( a ) { b , c } . By Observation 1, π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) { π 1 ( b ) , π 1 ( c ) } 1 , say π 1 ( b ) π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) .
(b)
Assume deg ( Z H ) = 4 . Write B = { a , b , c } with Z H = Z ( a ) { b , c } and deg ( Z ( a ) ) = 2 . By Remark 4 there is i { 3 , 4 } , say i = 4 , such that π 4 ( a ) π 4 ( { b , c } ) . Let N be the only element of | O Y ( ε 4 ) | containing a. We have W : = Res D N ( Z ) { a , b , c } , and hence, h 1 ( I W ( 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 0 . Thus, W = ([5], Lemma 5.1), i.e., Z D N . We conclude as in the proof of Claim 1.
(c)
Assume deg ( Z H ) = 5 . Since we proved the other cases for every choice of p S , we may assume that deg ( Z H ) = 5 for every choice of p S . Write Z H = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) { c } . We have Res H ( Z ) = { c } Z ( p ) and h 1 ( I Res H ( Z ) ( 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 . By Lemma 2 there are at least two integers i { 2 , 3 , 4 } such that π i ( p ) π i ( c ) . Call i 1 and i 2 these integers with i 1 < i 2 . Hence i 2 { 3 , 4 } . With no loss of generality, we may assume i 2 = 4 . Let M 4 denotes the only element of | I p ( ε 4 ) | . We have W : = Res H M 4 ( Z ) = { c , p } with p = p if Z ( p ) M 4 and p = if Z ( p ) M 4 . In both cases W . Using i 3 in both cases, we get h 1 ( I W ( 0 , 1 , 1 , 0 ) ) = 0 , contradicting [5] (Lemma 5.1).
Proposition 14. 
Take Y = ( P 2 ) m × ( P 1 ) s with m > 0 , s 0 and 2 m + s 7 . Then, T ( Y , 4 ) = .
Proof. 
The reader easily check (after the proof) that the proofs we give for 1 m 4 and s : = max { 0 , 7 2 m } prove the general case in which s is larger. Moreover, the proof of the case Y = ( P 2 ) 3 × P 1 gives the case Y = ( P 2 ) 4 . Thus, we only write the cases 1 m 3 and s = 7 3 m .
(a)
Assume Y = ( P 2 ) 3 × P 1 . Take i { 1 , 2 , 3 } such that there is H 1 | O Y ( ε i ) | with z 1 : = deg ( Z H 1 ) maximal. Since dim | O Y ( ε i ) | = 2 , we have z 1 2 . With no loss of generality, we may assume i = 1 . Set Z 1 : = Res H 1 ( Z ) . Take i { 2 , 3 } such that there is H 2 | O Y ( ε i ) | with z 2 : = deg ( Z 1 H 2 ) maximal. Since dim | O Y ( ε i ) | = 2 , we have z 2 min { z z 1 , 2 } . With no loss of generality, we may assume i = 2 . Set Z 2 : = Res H 2 ( Z 1 ) . Take H 3 | O Y ( ε 3 ) | such that z 3 : = deg ( H 3 Z 2 ) is maximal. Set Z 3 : = Res H 3 ( Z 2 ) . Note that z 1 z 2 z 3 . We have z 3 min { z z 1 z 2 , 2 } . Thus, deg ( Z 3 ) = z z 1 z 2 z 3 2 .
(a1)
Assume deg ( Z 3 ) 1 . Since h 1 ( I Z 3 ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 ) ) = 0 , [5] (Lemma 5.1) gives Z 3 = , i.e., Z H 1 H 2 H 3 . In the same way, we get that either z 3 = 0 , i.e., Z H 1 H 2 , or z 3 2 .
(a1.1)
Assume Z H 1 H 2 . Since S Z , and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, z 2 > 0 . Since h 1 ( I Z 1 ( 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , z 2 2 . Note that z 2 z / 2 .
(a1.2)
Assume z 3 2 . Since z 1 z 2 z 3 and z 8 , z 3 = 2 . By [5] (Lemma 5.1), we have h 1 ( I Z 3 ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 , i.e., deg ( π i ( Z 3 ) ) = 1 , for i = 3 , 4 . Since z 8 , either z 2 = 2 or z = 8 and z 1 = z 2 = 3 .
(a1.2.1)
Assume z 2 = 2 . Note that deg ( Res H 1 H 3 ( Z ) ) 2 . The minimality of H 2 gives deg ( Res H 1 H 3 ( Z ) ) = 2 . Using H 1 H 3 , we get deg ( π i ( Res H 1 H 3 ( Z ) ) ) = 1 for i = 2 , 4 . Since z 3 > 0 , there is D | O Y ( ε 2 ) | such that deg ( D Z 1 ) > 2 , contradicting the definition of z 2 .
(a1.2.2)
Assume z = 8 and z 1 = z 2 = 3 . Remember that deg ( π i ( Z 3 ) ) = 1 , for i = 3 , 4 . Set { M 4 } : = | I Z 3 ( ε 4 ) | and W : = Res M 4 ( Z ) . We have w : = deg ( W ) z 2 = 6 . Take i { 1 , 2 , 3 } such that there is M i | O Y ( ε i ) | with w 1 : = deg ( W M i ) maximal and set W 1 : = Res M i ( W ) . Take j { 1 , 2 , 3 } \ { i } such that there is M j | O Y ( ε j ) | with w 2 : = deg ( W 1 M j ) maximal and set W 2 : = Res M j ( W ) . Set { h } : = { 1 , 2 , 3 } \ { i , j } . Take M h | O Y ( ε h ) | with w 3 : = deg ( W 2 M i ) maximal. We have w 1 w 2 w 3 0 . Since dim | O P 2 ( 1 ) | = 2 , for any i { 1 , 2 } if w i 1 , then w i + 1 = 0 . Thus, w = w 1 + w 2 + w 3 . Assume w 3 = 1 . Using M 4 M i M j and [5] (Lemma 5.1), we get a contradiction. Thus, either w 3 2 or w 3 = 0 .
(a1.2.2.1)
Assume w 3 2 . Thus, w = 6 and w 1 = w 2 = w 2 = 2 . Using M 4 M i M j and [5] (Lemma 5.1), we get deg ( π h ( W 3 ) ) = 0 . Since w 1 = w 2 = w 3 = 2 , we may take a different ordering of { 1 , 2 , 3 } . Using M 4 M j M h , we get deg ( π i ( W M i ) ) = 1 . If W M i , then there is N | O Y ( ε i ) | such that W N W M i , contradicting the definition of w 1 . Thus, W M i . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, S M i . Thus, Z 3 is connected and W is the union of the 3 degree 2 connected components of Z with as its reduction the 3 points of S M i . Since z 1 = z 2 = z 3 = 2 , we have deg ( π i ( A ) ) = 2 for all i = 1 , 2 , 3 and all A Z such that deg ( A ) = 2 . Thus, η 4 | W is an embedding, and hence, h 1 ( Y 4 , I η 4 ( W ) ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = h 1 ( I W ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 0 ) ) > 0 . Let Y be the minimal multiprojective space containing S M 1 . If Y is not isomorphic to ( P 1 ) 4 , then there is A S M i such that δ ( 2 A , Y ) 2 , and hence, δ ( 2 A , Y ) 2 ([5], Lemma 2.3). Assume Y ( P 1 ) 4 . We would find x { 1 , 2 , 3 } and N | O Y ( ε x ) | such that # ( W red N ) = 3 , contradicting the assumption w 1 = 2 .
(a1.2.2.2)
Assume w 3 = 0 , and hence, W M i M j . Since we are in the set up of (a1.2.2), we have w 1 = w 2 = 3 , and we may take i = 1 , j = 2 , M i = H 1 and M j = H 2 . We get deg ( π 3 ( Z 3 ) ) = 1 . By Remark 4 Z 3 is connected, say Z 3 = Z ( p ) for some p S and W is the union of the connected components of Z with W red = S \ { p } . As in step (a1.2.2.1), we get W M i . Thus, Z M i M j M 4 . Using [5] (Lemma 5.1), we get w 2 2 . First assume w 2 = 2 . Using M 4 M i , we get deg ( π x ( W 1 ) ) = 1 for x { 1 , 2 , 3 } \ { i } and hence z 1 > 2 , a contradiction. Now assume w 2 3 , and hence, w 1 = w 2 = 3 and w = 6 .
(a2)
Assume deg ( Z 3 ) > 1 . Thus, z = 8 , and deg ( Z 3 ) = z 1 = z 2 = z 3 = 2 . Note that the role of the first three factors of Y are symmetric and that in this case if we take D | O Y ( ε i ) | , i = 1 , 2 , 3 such that deg ( D Z ) 2 , then deg ( D Z ) = 2 and D is the only element of | O Y ( ε i ) | containing D Z . Write S = { a , b , c , d } , and fix a point of S, say d. Set { M 1 } : = | I Z ( a ) ( ε 1 ) | , { M 2 } : = | I Z ( b ) ( ε 1 ) | , { M 3 } : = | I Z ( c ) ( ε 3 ) | . We have Res M 1 M 2 M 3 ( Z ) = Z ( d ) . By [5] (Lemma 5.1), deg ( π 4 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 1 , and hence, there is M 4 | O Y ( ε 4 ) | containing Z ( p ) . Taking a instead of d, we get deg ( π 4 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 . We have Res M 2 M 3 M 4 ( Z ) = Z ( a ) . By [5] (Lemma 5.1), we have h 1 ( I Z ( a ) ( 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) > 0 , i.e., deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 . Take { N 1 } = | I Z ( b ) ( ε 1 ) | , { N 2 } = | I Z ( a ) ( ε 2 ) | . Using N 1 M 3 M 4 , we get deg ( π 2 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 . In a similar way, we get deg ( π 3 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 0 . Since deg ( Z ( a ) ) = 2 , ν is not an embedding, a contradiction.
(b)
Assume Y = ( P 2 ) 2 × ( P 1 ) 3 . Since dim | O Y ( ε 1 ) | = dim | O Y ( ε 2 ) | , there are H 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) | and H 2 | O Y ( ε 2 ) | such that S H 1 H 2 . Since S H 1 H 2 and each connected component of Z has degree 2 , W : = Res H 1 H 2 ( Z ) S .
(b1)
In this step, we prove that W = . Assume w : = # W > 0 . Since W , h 1 ( I W ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 . Fix i { 3 , 4 , 5 } such that there is H 3 | O Y ( ε i ) | such that w 1 : = deg ( W H 3 ) is maximal. Permuting the last three factors of Y, we may assume i = 3 . Take i { 4 , 5 } such that there is H 4 | O Y ( ε i ) | with w 2 : = deg ( Res H 3 ( W ) H 4 ) maximal. Permuting the last two factors of Y, we may assume i = 4 . Take H 5 | O Y ( ε 5 ) | such that w 3 : = deg ( Res H 3 H 4 ( W ) H 4 ) is maximal. Since w 4 , w w 1 w 2 w 3 1 . By [5] (Lemma 5.1), there is c { 1 , 2 , 3 } such that w c 2 and w 1 + + w c = w . Since w 4 , w 1 w 2 w 3 and w c 2 either c = 1 or c = 2 , w 1 = w 2 = 2 and w = 4 .
(b.1)
Assume w 1 = w 2 = 2 and w = 4 , and hence, W = S and z = 8 . Since H 4 W = Res H 3 ( W ) = Res H 1 H 2 H 3 ( Z ) , h 1 ( I Res H 3 ( W ) ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , i.e., π i ( W H 3 ) ) = 1 for i = 4 , 5 . By construction # π 3 ( W H 3 ) = 1 . Thus, W H 3 depends only on two factors of Y, contradicting Lemma 2.
(b1.2)
Assume c = 1 . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, 2 w 1 3 . First assume w 1 = 2 . Since h 1 ( I W ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , W H 3 only depends on the first two factors of Y, contradicting Lemma 2. Now assume w 1 = 3 . Since h 1 ( I W ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , there is either A Y such that # A = 2 and # η 1 , 2 ( A ) = 1 (excluded by Lemma 4) or η 1 , 2 ( W ) depends on only one factor of Y 1 , 2 , say the last one. Thus, # π i ( W ) = 1 for i = 3 , 4 . Set { M i } : = | I W ( ε i ) | , i = 3 , 4 . Note that z = 7 . Set { p } : = S \ W and W ˜ : = o W Z ( o ) . Since Sing ( M 3 M 4 ) W , W ˜ M 3 M 4 . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing Y, p ( M 3 M 3 ) . Thus, Res M 3 M 4 ( Z ) = Z ( p ) . Recall that deg ( Z ( p ) ) = 2 and deg ( π i ( Z ( p ) ) ) = 1 for all i > 0 . Since h 1 ( I Res M 3 M 4 ( Z ) ( 1 , 1 , 0 , 0 , 1 ) ) > 0 ([5], Lemma 5.1), we get deg ( π 1 ( Z ( p ) ) ) = 1 , contradicting the very ampleness of O Y ( 1 , , 1 ) .
(b2)
By step (b1), Z H 1 H 2 for all H i | O Y ( ε i ) | , i = 1 , 2 , such that S H 1 H 2 .
Claim 1. Assume z = 8 and z 1 = 4 . For any i = 1 , 2 , and any E S such that # E = 3 , we have # π i ( S ) = 4 , and π i ( E ) is linearly independent.
Proof of Claim 1. It is sufficient to prove the second statement of Claim 1. Since π i ( S ) = P 2 , any fiber of π i contains two points of S at most. With no loss of generality, we prove the case i = 1 . Assume that π E is a line L and set H 1 : = π 1 1 ( L ) . Write S = { a , b , c , d } with E = { a , b , c } . Take a general H 2 | I d ( ε 2 ) | . By step (b1), Z H 1 H 2 . Since H 2 is general and each connected component of Z has degree 2 , H 2 Z = π 2 1 ( π 2 ( a ) ) Z . Since z 1 = 4 and z = 8 , deg ( H 1 Z ) = 4 , deg ( H 2 Z ) = 4 and deg ( Res H i ( Z ) = 4 . Since # ( ( π 2 1 π 2 ( d ) S ) ) 2 , we get # ( ( π 2 1 π 2 ( d ) S ) ) = 2 , say ( π 2 1 π 2 ( d ) ) S = { c , d } . Thus, Z H 2 = Z ( c ) Z ( d ) . Take M | O Y ( ε 2 ) containing d and b. We get Z M Z ( c ) Z ( d ) { b } , and hence, z 1 > 4 , a contradiction.□
Claim 2. Assume z = 8 and z 1 = 4 . Then, deg ( π i ( Z ( o ) ) ) = 1 for all i = 1 , 2 , and all o S , and for each U i | O Y ( ε i ) | , i = 1 , 2 , such that S U 1 U 2 , we have # ( S H 1 ) = # ( S U 2 ) = 2 , S U 1 U 2 = , and Z U i = o S U i Z ( o ) , i = 1 , 2 .
Proof of Claim 2. Claim 1 gives # π i ( S ) = 4 , and that π i ( S ) is linearly independent. Thus, # ( S H 1 ) = # ( S H 2 ) = 2 and S H 1 H 2 = . Since Z H 1 H 2 , we get Z H 1 = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) and G = Z ( c ) Z ( d ) with S = { a , b , c , d } . Set { M 2 } : = | I c , b ( ε 2 ) | and { M 1 } : = | I a , d ( ε 1 ) | . Step (b1) and Claim 1 give M 1 Z = Z ( a ) Z ( d ) and M 2 Z = Z ( c ) Z ( b ) . Hence Z ( a ) π 1 1 ( π 1 ( a ) ) . Taking different partitions of S into two subsets of cardinality 2 we get deg ( π i ( Z ( o ) ) ) = 1 for all i = 0 , 1 and all o S .□
With no loss of generality, we may assume z 1 : = deg ( Z H 1 ) deg ( Z H 2 ) . Set G : = Res H 1 ( Z ) and g : = deg ( G ) . Fix i { 3 , 4 , 5 } such that there is N 3 | O Y ( ε i ) | with e 1 : = deg ( G N 3 ) maximal. Permuting the last three factors of Y, we may assume i = 3 . Take i { 4 , 5 } such that there is N 4 | O Y ( ε i ) | with 2 2 : = deg ( Res N 3 ( G ) N 4 ) maximal. Permuting the last two factors of Y, we may assume i = 4 . Take N 5 | O Y ( ε 5 ) | such that e 3 : = deg ( Res N 3 N 4 ( W ) N 5 ) is maximal. Since g 4 , g e 1 e 2 e 3 1 . As in step (b1), we get that either g = 4 , e 1 = e 2 = 2 and e 3 = 0 or e 1 = g { 2 , 3 , 4 } , and e 2 = e 3 = 0 . The main difference with respect to step (b1) is that G is not a finite set, in general.
(b2.1)
Assume g = 4 , e 1 = e 2 = 2 and e 3 = 0 . Thus, z = 8 and deg ( Z H 1 ) = 4 . Taking H 1 N 3 , we get h 1 ( I Res N 3 ( G ) ( 0 , 1 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 . Since deg ( Res N 3 ( G ) ) = 2 , Lemma 2 implies that Res N 3 ( G ) is connected, say Res N 3 ( G ) = Z ( a ) for some a S . Since Res N 4 ( G ) G N 3 , we get Res N 4 ( G ) = G N 3 and that G N 4 = Z ( b ) for some b S \ { a } . Since G = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) , we obtain Z H 1 = Z ( c ) Z ( d ) with S = { a , b , c , d } , deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 for i = 2 , 4 , 5 , and deg ( π i ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 for i = 2 , 3 , 5 . Taking N 5 | I Z ( a ) ( ε 5 ) | instead of N 3 , we get deg ( π 3 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 . Using N 5 | I Z ( b ) ( ε 5 ) | instead of N 4 , we get deg ( π 4 ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 . Recall that Res H 2 ( Z ) ) = Z ( c ) Z ( d ) . Using Res H 2 ( Z ) instead G, we get deg ( π i ( Z ( c ) ) ) = deg ( π i ( Z ( d ) ) = 1 for i = 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 . By Lemma 2 there is i { 3 , 4 , 5 } such that π i ( a ) π i ( b ) . Permuting the last three factors (we are allowed to do this at this point, since we run in a situation symmetric with respect to the last three factors), we may assume i = 3 . Fix M | O Y ( ε 5 ) | containing Z ( c ) , D | O Y ( ε 4 ) | containing Z ( d ) , and T | O Y ( ε 3 ) | such that T { a , b } = { b } . We have Res T N 4 D M ( Z ) = { b } . Since h 1 ( I b ) = 0 , [5] (Lemma 5.1) gives a contradiction.
(b2.2)
Assume e 1 = g { 2 , 3 , 4 } and e 2 = e 3 = 0 . We often use the inequality h 1 ( I G ( 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 .
(b2.2.1)
Assume the non-existence of A G such that A is connected, deg ( A ) = 2 and deg ( π i ( A ) ) = 1 for i = 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 . Thus, # G red > 1 . By Lemma 2, η 1 | G is an embedding and hence h 1 ( Y 1 , I η 1 ( G ) ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = h 1 ( I G ( 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 . Since deg ( G ) 4 , there are j , h { 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } such that j h and deg ( π j ( G ) ) = deg ( π h ( G ) ) = 1 . Since π 2 ( S ) = P 2 , j 2 and h 2 . If g 3 there is a third index with the same property, contradicting Lemma 2. Now assume g = 4 , and hence, z = 8 and z 1 = 4 . Write Z H 1 = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) and G = Z ( c ) Z ( d ) with S = { a , b , c , d } and deg ( π i ( Z ( o ) ) ) = 1 for all i = 1 , 2 and all o S (Claims 1 and 2). Take a general M 2 | I c ( ε 2 ) | . Since Res H 1 M 2 ( Z ) = Z ( d ) , we have h 1 ( I Z ( c ) ( 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , and hence, deg ( π i ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 1 for all i > 2 . Thus, deg ( π i ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 1 for all 1 i 5 , a contradiction.
(b2.2.2)
Assume the existence of A G such that A is connected, deg ( A ) = 2 and deg ( π i ( A ) ) = 1 for i = 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 . We have A = Z ( p ) for some p S : = S \ S H 1 .
(b2.2.2.1)
Assume g = 3 . Thus, G = Z ( p ) { a } for some a S \ { p } . By Lemma 4, there is i { 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } such that π i ( a ) π i ( p ) . Take M | I p ( ε i ) | . Since Res H 1 M ( Z ) = { a } and h 1 ( I a ) = 0 , we conclude quoting [5] (Lemma 5.1).
(b2.2.2.2)
Assume g = 4 , and hence, z = 8 . Either G = Z ( p ) Z ( a ) or G = Z ( p ) { a , b } . First assume G = Z ( p ) { a , b } . By Lemma 4 there are i { 3 , 4 , 5 } such that π i ( p ) π i ( a ) and j { 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } \ { i } such that π j ( a ) π j ( b ) . Take M | O Y ( ε i ) | containing p and D | O Y ( ε j ) containing b. Note that Res H 1 M D ( Z ) = { a } . Since h 1 ( I a ) = 0 , we conclude by [5] (Lemma 5.1). Now assume G = Z ( p ) Z ( a ) . Assume for the moment the existence of i { 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } such that deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 2 , and take M i | O Y ( ε i ) | such that a M i and Z ( a ) M i . By Lemma 4 there is j { 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } \ { i } such that π j ( p ) π j ( a ) . Take M j | O Y ( ε j ) | such that p M j and a M j . Since Res H 1 M i M j ( Z ) = { a } , we conclude as above. Now assume deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 for all i > 1 . Note that Z H 1 = Z ( b ) Z ( c ) and Z H 1 H 2 = . Using H 2 instead of H 1 , we get deg ( π i ( Z ( b ) ) ) = deg ( π i ( Z ( c ) ) ) = 1 for all i = 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 . Note the deg ( π 1 ( Z ( p ) ) ) = deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = deg ( π 2 ( Z ( b ) ) ) = deg ( π 2 ( Z ( c ) ) ) = 2 . Take U 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing { p , b } and U 2 | O Y ( ε 2 ) | containing { a , c } . Note that Z U 1 Z ( b ) { p } and Z U 2 Z ( a ) { c } . By step (b1), Z U 1 U 2 . Assume for the moment p U 2 and c U 1 . We get Z U 1 = Z ( p ) Z ( a ) and Z U 2 = Z ( b ) Z ( c ) . Thus, running the previous proof, we get deg ( π 1 ( Z ( b ) ) = 1 , contradicting the very ampleness of O Y ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) . Now assume for instance p U 2 . Therefore, U 2 Z Z ( a ) { p , c } . The maximality property of H 1 gives U 2 Z = Z ( a ) { p , c } and Res U 2 ( Z ) = Z ( b ) { p , c } . We excluded all such cases.
(b2.2.2.3)
Assume g = 2 . We get Z H 1 = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) Z ( c ) with S = { a , b , c , p } . Since S H 1 , p H 1 , and hence, Res H 1 ( Z ) = Z ( p ) . Set Z : = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) Z ( c ) . Recall that h 1 ( I Z ( p ) ( ε ^ 1 ) ) > 0 , and hence, deg ( π i ( Z ( p ) ) ) = 1 for all i > 1 . Thus, deg ( π 1 ( Z ( p ) ) = 2 .
Claim 3. We have π 2 ( S ) = P 2 , i.e., # π 2 ( S ) = 3 , and π 2 ( S ) is linearly independent.
Proof of Claim 3. Assume L : = π 2 ( S ) contained in a line. Since π 2 ( S ) = P 2 , L is a line. Set M : = π 2 1 ( L ) | O Y ( ε 2 ) | . Since S M , p M . Take a general line R P 2 containing π 1 ( p ) . Set D : = π 1 1 ( R ) . Since S M D , Z M D (Claim 1). Since p M , Z ( p ) D . Since deg ( π 1 ( Z ( p ) ) ) = 2 and R is general, Z ( p ) M , a contradiction. □
Claim 4. Set R : = π 1 ( Z ( p ) ) . We have # ( R π 1 ( S ) ) = 1 .
Proof of Claim 4. Since S D : = π 1 1 ( R ) , # ( R π 1 ( S ) ) 2 . Assume # ( R π 1 ( S ) ) = 2 , say π 1 ( b ) R and π 1 ( c ) R . Since π 1 ( S ) is a line, π 1 ( b ) = π 1 ( c ) , and hence, π 1 ( S ) = { π 1 ( a ) , π 1 ( b ) } . Take a general line L P 2 containing π 2 ( a ) , and set M : = π 2 1 ( L ) . Since S D M , Z D M (Claim 1). Since L is general, Claim 3 gives { b , c } M = . Since a D , we get Z ( c ) Z ( b ) Z ( p ) = Z D . Taking Res D ( Z ) , we get deg ( π i ( a ) ) ) for all i > 1 . Since deg ( Z ( a ) ) = 2 , we get deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 2 , and hence, π 1 ( Z ( a ) = π 1 ( S ) . Using D instead of H 1 and M instead of H 2 in the proof of Claim 3, we get that π 2 ( { b , c , p } ) = P 2 . Let M be the only element of | O Y ( ε 2 ) | containing { b , c } . Take D | O Y ( ε 1 ) | containing { a , p } . Claim 1 gives Z D M . Since a M , Z ( a ) D . Since π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) = π 1 ( S ) , p π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) . Thus, Z ( a ) D , a contradiction.□
Now assume π 1 ( S ) R = . Since P 2 = π 2 ( S ) there are b , c S such that b c and π 2 ( p ) { π 2 ( b ) , π 2 ( c ) . With no loss of generality, we may assume b = b and c = c . Take { D } : = | I p , a ( ε 1 ) | and M : = | I c , b ( ε 2 ) | (Claim 3). Claim 1 gives Z D M . Since p M , Z ( p ) D contradicting the assumption a R .□
We just proved that # ( R π 1 ( S ) ) = 1 , say R π 1 ( S ) = { π 1 ( c ) } . Set { M 1 } : = | I { b , c } ( ε 2 ) | and note that a M 1 (Claim 3). Set { D 1 } : = | I { a , p } ( ε 1 ) | . Claim 1 gives Z D 1 M 1 . Since π 1 ( a ) R , p M 1 , i.e., π 2 ( p ) { π 2 ( b ) , π 2 ( c ) . Using a instead of b, we get π 2 ( p ) { π 2 ( a ) , π 2 ( c ) . Claim 3 gives { π 2 ( b ) , π 2 ( c ) { π 2 ( a ) , π 2 ( c ) = { π 2 ( c ) } . Therefore, p 2 ( p ) = π 2 ( c ) . Set { M 2 } : = | I c , b ( ε 2 ) | . Claim 3 gives a M 2 . Take a general D 2 | I a ( ε 1 ) | . Since S D 2 M 2 , Z D 2 M 2 and a M 2 , Z ( a ) D 2 and Z ( c ) M 2 . Since D 2 is general, deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 . Using M 3 : = | I c , a ( ε 2 ) | instead of M 2 , we get deg ( π 1 ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 and Z ( c ) M 3 . Since M 2 M 3 = π 2 1 ( c ) , we get deg ( π 2 ( Z ( c ) ) ) = 1 .
Fix a general D 4 | I a ( ε 1 ) | and a general M 4 | I c ( ε 2 ) | . Since D 4 and M 4 are general, we just proved that Z ( D 4 M 4 ) = Z ( a ) Z ( c ) Z ( p ) , and hence, deg ( π i ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 for i = 3 , 4 , 5 . Since deg ( π 1 ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 , deg ( π 2 ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 2 . Taking a general D 5 | I b ( ε 1 ) | and using D 5 M 4 , we get deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 for i = 3 , 4 , 5 . Since deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 , deg ( π 2 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 2 . Thus, we proved that h 1 ( I Z ( o ) ( 1 , 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 0 for all o S . Let e 1 be the maximal integer e : = # ( S M ) for some i { 3 , 4 , 5 } . Obviously e 1 . Since S M , e 3 . First assume e = 3 . Thus, Res M ( Z ) = Z ( o ) for some o Z . We conclude, because (since i > 2 ) h 1 ( I Z ( o ) ( ε i ) ) h 1 ( I Z ( o ) ( 1 , 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 0 . Now assume e = 1 . The maximality of the integer e gives # π i ( S ) = 4 for all i = 3 , 4 , 5 . Set { U 3 } : = | I p ( ε 3 ) | , { U 4 } : = | I a ( ε 3 ) | and { U 5 } : = | I b ( ε 5 ) | . Since Res U 3 U 4 U 5 ( Z ) = Z ( c ) , it is sufficient to use that h 1 ( I Z ( o ) ( 1 , 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 0 . Now assume e = 2 . With no loss of generality, we may assume M | O Y ( ε 3 ) | . Set S 1 : = M S and S 2 : = S \ S 1 . First assume the existence of i { 4 , 5 } such that # π i ( S 2 ) = 1 . Take M | O Y ( ε i ) | containing exactly one point of S 2 and use that Res M M ( Z ) = Z ( o ) for some o S . Now assume # π i ( S 2 ) = 1 for i = 4 , 5 , and set { U i } : = | I S 2 ( ε i ) | , i = 4 , 5 . Using U 4 (resp. U 5 ), instead of M, and the maximality of the integer e, we get # ( π 5 ( S 1 ) ) = 2 and # π 3 ( S 2 ) = 2 (resp. # π 4 ( S 1 ) = 2 ). Thus, # π i ( S ) = 2 for all i = 3 , 4 , 5 and S 1 S 2 is the partition of S obtained as fibers of the maps π i | S , i = 3 , 4 , 5 . Since π 2 ( c ) = π 2 ( p ) , Lemma 2 gives that p and c are in different sets S 1 and S 2 , say p S 1 and c S 2 , and that π 2 ( p ) { π 2 ( a ) , π 2 ( b ) } . Now the situation is symmetric for a and b. Therefore, we may assume S 1 = { p , a } and S 2 = { c , b } . Take { Q 3 } : = | I p ( ε 3 ) | and take a general Q 2 | I b ( ε 2 ) | . Since π 2 ( p ) π 2 ( b ) , deg ( π 2 ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 2 and Q 2 is general, Res Q 2 Q 3 ( Z ) = Z ( a ) { b } . First assume π 1 ( a ) π 1 ( b ) and take a general Q 1 | I a ( ε 1 ) | . Since deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) = 1 , we get Res Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 ( Z ) = { b } , concluding because h 1 ( I b ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . Now assume π 1 ( a ) = π 1 ( b ) and set { U 1 } : = | I a , p ( ε 1 ) | . Since. π 1 ( a ) π 1 ( Z ( p ) ) , deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = deg ( π 1 ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 and π 1 ( S ) is a line, Res U 1 ( Z ) = Z ( c ) { p } . Take { U 3 } : = | I c ( ε 3 ) | , and use that Res U 1 U 3 ( Z ) = { p } .
(c)
Assume Y = P 2 × ( P 1 ) 5 . Take H 1 | O Y ( ε 1 ) | such that z 1 : = deg ( Z H 1 ) is maximal. Note that z 1 2 = dim | O Y ( ε 1 ) | . Set W : = Res H 1 ( Z ) and w : = deg ( W ) = z z 1 . Fix i { 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } such that there is H 2 | O Y ( ε i ) | with w 1 : = deg ( W H i ) maximal. Permuting the last five factors of Y we may assume i = 2 . Set W 2 : = Res H 2 ( W ) . We continue defining the integers w i and H i | O Y ( ε i ) | (up to a permutation of the last 7 i factors of Y) with w 1 w 5 . Let e be the last integer such that w e 1 . Since dim Y = 7 z 1 , e is well-defined. By [5] (Lemma 5.1), we have w e 2 . Thus, either z = 8 , e = 3 and z 1 = w 1 = w 2 = w 3 = 2 or 1 e 2 . We have h 1 ( I W ( ε ^ 1 ) ) > 0 ([5], Lemma 5.1). For any o S set o ^ : = { o } if deg ( Z ( o ) ) = 2 and o ^ : = if Z ( o ) = { o } . For any A S such that # A { 2 , 3 } call J ( A ) (resp. I ( A ) ) the set of all i { 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 } (resp. i { 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 } ) such that # π i ( A ) 2 . Lemma 2 gives # J ( A ) 3 , and # I ( A ) 4 for all A such that # A = 2 .
Observation 1: Fix A S such that # A = 3 . By [1] (Th. 4.12), # π i ( A ) 2 for at least 5 integers i { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 } .
Claim 5. There is x S such that π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) { π 1 ( x ) } = P 2 and x is unique if and only if # ( π 1 ( S \ { x } ) ) = 1 .
Proof of Claim 5. We saw that R : = π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) is a line. A point x S satisfies Claim 5 if and only if π 1 ( x ) R . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S and π 1 ( d ) S , there is at least one x S satisfying Claim 5.□
Since π 1 ( S ) = P 2 , π 1 ( S ) is a line L R . Since # ( R L ) = 1 , x is unique if and only if π 1 ( S \ { x } ) = L R . Let Σ be the set of all x S such that π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) { π 1 ( x ) } = P 2 .
Observation 2: z 1 = 2 if and only if π 1 | Z is an embedding and π 1 ( E ) = P 2 for every degree 3 subscheme of Z.
(c1)
Assume z = 8 , e = 3 and z 1 = w 1 = w 2 = w 3 = 2 . Since w 1 = w 2 = w 3 = 2 , we may permute the divisors H 2 , H 3 and H 4 , and still obtain residual schemes with the same degrees. Since h 1 ( I W 3 ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , we get deg ( π h ( W H i ) ) = 1 for i = 2 , 3 , 4 , and h = 5 , 6 and for h = i . Hence there are M h | O Y ( ε h ) | , h = 4 , 5 , 6 , such that W M 4 M 5 M 6 . Since z 1 = 2 and P 2 = π 1 ( A ) for all A Z such that deg ( A ) = 3 , we conclude, unless Z M 4 M 5 M 6 . Permuting the last three factors of Y, we may assume that deg ( Z M i ) has the maximum for i = 4 and that deg ( Res M 4 ( Z ) M 5 ) deg ( Res M 4 ( Z ) M 6 ) . Since z 1 = w 1 = 2 , deg ( Z M 4 ) 4 . First assume Z M 4 M 5 and hence deg ( Z M i ) = deg ( Res M i ( Z ) ) = 4 for i = 4 , 5 . We have h 1 ( I Res M i ( Z ) ( ε i ^ ) ) > 0 , i = 4 , 5 . Since S M i , we get that either # ( ( Z M i ) ) = 2 for i = 4 , 5 or # ( ( Z M i ) ) = 2 for i = 4 , 5 . First assume # ( ( Z M i ) ) = 2 , say Z M 4 = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) and Z M 5 = Z ( c ) Z ( d ) . Since z 1 = w 1 = w 2 = 2 , and deg ( π 5 ( Z M 5 ) ) = 1 , Remark 4 and Lemma 2 give the existence of at least one i { 2 , 3 , 6 } such that deg ( π i ( Z M 5 ) ) > 1 . Take D i | O Y ( ε i ) | such that Z D i . Since Z D i Z Res M 4 ( Z ) , we have 1 deg ( Res M 4 D i ( Z ) ) 3 and hence h 1 ( I Res M 4 D i ( Z ) ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 . Now assume # ( ( Z M i ) ) = 3 , say Z M 4 = Z ( a ) { b , c } and Z M 5 = { b , c } Z ( d ) with { b , c } M 4 M 5 . There is i { 2 , 3 , 6 } such that deg ( π i ( Z M 5 ) ) > 1 . Take U i | O Y ( ε i ) | and use M 4 U i . Now assume Z M 4 M 5 . Since deg ( Z ) < 9 , we get Res M 4 M 5 ( Z ) 2 , and hence, h 1 ( I Res M 4 M 5 ( Z ) ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 , concluding the proof.
(c2)
Assume e = 2 . Hence, Z H 1 H 2 H 3 . Since w 2 2 , either w 2 = 2 or z = 8 , z 1 = 2 and w 1 = w 2 = 3 . We have Res H 2 H 3 ( Z ) Z H 1 . Now assume z 1 = 2 and Z H 2 H 3 . We conclude using H 2 H 3 instead of M 4 M 5 as in step (c1). Now assume z 1 = 2 , and Res H 2 H 3 ( Z ) . Since Res H 2 H 3 ( Z ) H 1 , we have deg ( Res H 2 H 3 ( Z ) ) 2 , and hence, we conclude by Observation 2.
Now assume z 1 > 2 . Since w 1 w 2 2 and z 8 , we get w 2 = 2 , w 1 + z 1 = z 2 and ( z 1 , w 1 ) { ( 4 , 2 ) , ( 3 , 3 ) , ( 3 , 2 ) } . Lemma 2 gives Res H 1 H 2 ( Z ) = Z ( d ) for some d S such that deg ( Z ( d ) ) = 2 and deg ( π i ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 1 for all i > 2 . Hence, deg ( π i ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 2 for at least one i { 1 , 2 } .
(c2.1)
Assume w 1 = z 1 = 3 , and hence, z = 8 . By Remark 4, neither Z H 1 nor H 2 Res H 1 ( Z ) are reduced, and hence, Z H 1 = Z ( a ) { b } , Z H 2 = Res H 1 ( Z ) H 2 = Z ( c ) { b } with S = { a , b , c , d } . Since h 1 ( I Res H 1 H 3 ( Z ) ( ε ^ 1 ε 3 ) ) > 0 , either deg ( π i ( Z ( c ) ) ) = 1 for i = 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , or there are at least 3 indices i { 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 } such that π i ( Z ( c ) ) = π 1 ( b ) (Proposition 1). Since h 1 ( I Res H 2 H 3 ( Z ) ( ε ^ 2 ε 3 ) ) > 0 , either deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 for i = 1 , 4 , 5 , 6 or there are at least 3 indices i { 1 , 4 , 5 , 6 } such that π i ( Z ( a ) ) = π 1 ( b ) as schemes (Proposition 1). First assume the existence of i { 4 , 5 , 6 } such that deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 , and π i ( a ) π i ( b ) . Set { U i } : = | I a ( ε i ) | . Since Res H 2 H 3 U i ( Z ) = { b } and h 1 ( I b ( 1 , 0 , ) ) = 0 , we conclude. Since h 1 ( I a ( 1 , 0 , 0 ) ) = 0 , we also conclude if there is j { 4 , 5 , 6 } such that deg ( π j ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 2 and π j ( a ) = π j ( b ) . Now assume that no such i , j { 4 , 5 , 6 } exist. It implies deg ( π h ( Z H ) ) = 1 for h = 4 , 5 , 6 . Take h { 4 , 5 , 6 } such that π h ( d ) π h ( a ) (Proposition 1). Set { U h } : = | I a ( ε h ) | . We have Res H 2 U h ( Z ) = Z ( d ) . Since Res H 2 U h ( Z ) = Z ( d ) , we conclude if deg ( π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 2 . Now assume deg ( π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 1 , and hence, deg ( π 2 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 2 . We use H 1 and H 2 Z instead of H 2 and H 1 Z .
(c2.2)
Assume z 1 = 4 , and hence, w 1 = 2 and z = 8 . Using H 1 H 3 , we get Z H 2 = Z ( c ) for some c S \ { d } such that deg ( π i ( Z ( c ) ) ) = 1 for all i { 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 } . Thus, Z H 1 = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) with S = { a , b , c , d } . Using H 2 H 3 , we get h 1 ( I Z ( a ) Z ( b ) ( 1 , 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 . First assume deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = deg ( π 1 ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 and hence π 1 ( b ) π 1 ( a ) . Taking H 2 M i D j for some 3 < i < j we conclude, unless Z ( a ) M i , i.e., deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 , and Z ( b ) D j , i.e., deg ( π j ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 . Thus, we may assume that deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = deg ( π i ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 for all i J ( { a , b } ) . First assume deg ( π 1 ( Z ( o ) ) ) = 2 for at least one o { c , d } , say for o = c . We take i , j J ( { a , b } ) such that i j and set U i : = | I a ( ε i ) | and { U j } : = | I b ( ε j ) | . We conclude using H 3 U i U j , unless Z ( c ) H 3 U i U j . Since w 1 = 2 , c H 3 . Thus, Z ( c ) H 3 U i U j if and only if either c U i U j or Z ( c ) U i or Z ( c ) U j . To take i , j such that c U i U j , it is sufficient to use that # J ( { a , b } ) ) 3 and deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = deg ( π i ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 for all i J ( { a , b } ) . Now assume deg ( π 1 ( Z ( c ) ) ) = deg ( π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 1 . We get deg ( π 3 ( Z ( c ) ) ) = 2 and deg ( π 2 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 2 . Take i J ( { c , d } ) , say i = 4 . Set { U 4 } : = | I d ( ε 4 ) | . We conclude using H 1 U 4 , because h 1 ( I Z ( c ) ( 0 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 .
(c2.3)
Assume z 1 = 3 , and hence, w 1 = 2 and z = 7 . We get that Res H 1 ( Z ) H 2 = Z ( c ) and Z H 1 = Z ( a ) { b } (up to the names of the elements of S ). Using H 1 H 3 we get deg ( π i ( Z ( c ) ) ) = 1 for i = 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 . Hence deg ( π i ( Z ( c ) ) ) = 2 for at least one i { 1 , 3 } . Using H 2 H 3 we get that either deg ( π i ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 1 for i = 1 , 4 , 5 , 6 or there are at least 3 indices i { 1 , 4 , 5 , 6 } such that π i ( Z ( a ) ) = π 1 ( b ) (Proposition 1). Since z 1 < 4 , there is at most one o S such that deg ( π 1 ( Z ( o ) ) ) = 1 .
Assume for the moment the existence of i { 4 , 5 , 6 } such that π i ( a ) π i ( b ) , say i = 4 . First assume π 1 ( a ) π 1 ( b ) . Take { T 4 } : = | I a ( ε 4 ) | . We have { b } Res T 4 H 2 H 3 ( Z ) { a , b } and we use that h 1 ( I a , b ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 by the assumption π 1 ( a ) π 1 ( b ) . Now assume π 1 ( a ) = π 1 ( b ) . Since z 1 = 3 , deg ( π 1 ( Z ( x ) ) ) = 2 for all x S . Thus, deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 2 , and hence h 1 ( I Z ( a ) ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 . Set { D 4 } : = | I b ( ε 4 ) | and use that Res D 4 H 2 H 3 ( Z ) = Z ( a ) . Now assume π i ( a ) = π i ( b ) for all i = 4 , 5 , 6 . Lemma 2 gives π i ( a ) π i ( b ) for all i = 1 , 2 , 3 . Set M 4 : = | I a ( ε 4 ) | . Use the residual exact sequence with respect to M 4 E 2 if deg ( π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 2 , and the residual exact sequence with respect to M 4 H 3 if deg ( π 1 ( Z ( c ) ) ) = 2 .
(c3)
Assume e = 1 . We get Z H 1 H 2 , and w 1 = z z 1 with w 1 2 and z 1 2 . Thus, h 1 ( I Res H 2 ( Z ) ( ε ^ 2 ) ) > 0 . If z 1 = 2 it is sufficient to use Observation 1. Thus, we only need to test the cases 3 z 1 6 .
(c3.1)
Assume z 1 = 3 . Thus, (after changing the names of the elements of S) either Z H 1 = { a , b , c } , and Res H 1 ( Z ) = Z ( d ) a ^ b ^ c ^ or Z H 1 = Z ( a ) { b } , and Res H 1 ( Z ) = Z H 2 = b ^ Z ( c ) Z ( d ) with deg ( Z ( a ) ) = 2 . First assume Z H 1 = { a , b , c } with, say, π 1 ( c ) { π 1 ( a ) , π 1 ( b ) } . Since S H 2 , { a , b , c } H 2 . Take j J ( { a , b } ) , set { M j } : = | I a ( ε j ) | and use H 2 M j . Now assume Z H 1 = Z ( a ) { b } . If π 1 ( a ) π 1 ( b ) , use H 2 M j with { M j } : = | I a ( ε j ) | . If π 1 ( a ) = π 1 ( b ) , and hence, deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = 2 use H 2 D j with { D j } : = | I b ( ε j ) | .
(c3.2)
Assume z 1 = 4 . Since S H 1 , after changing the names of the elements of S, either Z H 1 = Z ( a ) { b , c } , and Res H 1 ( Z ) = b ^ c ^ Z ( d ) with deg ( Z ( a ) ) = 2 or Z H 1 = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) with deg ( Z ( a ) ) = deg ( Z ( b ) ) = 2 , and Res H 1 ( Z ) = Z H 2 = Z ( c ) Z ( d ) . There are at least 3 indices j > 2 such that π j ( a ) π j ( b ) , say j 1 , j 2 , j 3 . Set { M h } : = | I a ( ε h ) | and { D h } : = | I b ( ε h ) | . If Z H 1 = Z ( a ) { b , c } , π 1 ( b ) π 1 ( c ) , b ^ = c ^ = ) , and { b , c } H 2 , it is sufficient to use H 2 M j 1 . Now assume Z H 1 = Z ( a ) { b , c } and π 1 ( b ) = π 1 ( c ) . Thus, π 1 ( a ) π 1 ( b ) . It is sufficient to use H 2 (case b ^ = c ^ = ) , { b , c } H 2 and deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) = 2 ), H 2 M j 1 (case b ^ = c ^ = ) and { b , c } H 2 and deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) = 1 ) and H 2 M j 1 M j 2 D j 3 (all other cases with c H 2 M j 1 M j 2 D j 3 ). If c H 2 and deg ( Z ( c ) ) = 1 , we exchange the role of b and c.
Now assume Z H 1 = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) and H 2 { a , b } = . Assume for the moment deg ( π 1 ( Z ( o ) ) ) = 2 for at least one o { a , b } , say for o = a . We use H 2 D j 1 D j 2 . Now assume deg ( π 1 ( Z ( a ) ) ) = deg ( π 1 ( Z ( b ) ) ) = 1 , and hence, π 1 ( a ) π 1 ( b ) (by the definition of z 1 ). We use H 2 M j 1 D j 2 . If H 2 { a , b } (and hence, # ( H 2 { a , b } ) = 1 because S H 2 ), then we omit one or two of the divisors M h , D h .
(c3.3)
Assume z 1 = 5 , and hence, w 1 = 3 . Since S H 1 , (after changing the names of the elements of S) we have Z H 1 = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) { c } and Res H 1 ( Z ) = c ^ Z ( d ) with deg ( Z ( a ) ) = deg ( Z ( b ) ) = 2 . Since w 1 = 3 , c ^ = { c } and deg ( Z ( d ) ) = 2 . Fix i , j J ( { c , d } ) such that i j and use H 1 M i M j with { M h } : = | I a ( ε h ) | .
(c3.4)
Assume z 1 = 6 , and hence, w 1 = 2 and z = 8 . By Lemma 2, the scheme Res H 1 ( Z ) is a connected component Z ( d ) of Z, and hence, Z H 1 = Z ( a ) Z ( b ) Z ( c ) with S = { a , b , c , d } . Set S : = { a , b , c } . Since deg ( Z ( d ) ) = 2 and deg ( π i ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 1 for all i > 1 , deg ( π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 2 . Note that this case is symmetric with respect to the permutation of the last five factors of Y.
(c3.4.1)
Assume π i ( d ) π i ( S ) for all i = 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 . Fix x { a , b , c } such that π 1 ( x ) π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) . Since π i ( d ) π i ( S ) for all i = 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , there are M i | O Y ( ε i ) | , 2 i 6 , such that d D : = M 2 M 3 M 4 M 5 M 6 (and hence, Res D ( Z ) Z ( d ) ) and Res D ( Z ) Z ( d ) { x } . Since h 1 ( I { x } Z ( d ) ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 , we conclude.
Claim 6. Let G 1 G be the minimal subscheme such that h 1 ( I G 1 ( ε ^ 6 ) ) > 0 . There is o S such that Z ( o ) G 1 and deg ( η 6 ( Z ( o ) ) ) = 1 .
Proof of Claim 6. Assume the non-existence of any o. By Remark 4, the map η 6 | G red is injective. Thus, the map η 6 | G 1 is an embedding and we have h 1 ( Y 6 , I η 6 ( G 1 ) ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) = h 1 ( I G 1 ( ε ^ 6 ) ) ) > 0 . Let Y be the minimal multiprojective subspace of Y 6 containing η 6 ( ( G 1 ) red ) , and Y the minimal multiprojective space containing G 1 . By [1] (Th. 4.14) either there are u , v ( G 1 ) red such that u v and π i ( u ) = π i ( v ) for at least 3 integers i { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } or # ( G 1 ) red = 3 and Y ( P 1 ) 4 . Since deg ( G ) 5 and h 1 ( Y 6 , I η 6 ( G 1 ) ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , Proposition 1 and Lemma 7 exclude the latter case. Assume the existence of u and v. Since h 1 ( Y 6 , I η 6 ( G 1 ) ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) ) > 0 , the minimality of G 1 and the injectivity of η 6 | G red gives that G 1 contains Z ( u ) Z ( v ) and that the minimal multiprojective space containing η 6 ( Z ( u ) Z ( v ) ) is isomorphic either to P 1 or to P 1 × P 1 . Thus, we get deg ( π i ( Z ( u ) Z ( v ) ) ) = 1 for at least 3 integers i { 1 , , 5 } such that π i ( u ) = π i ( v ) . We may assume π 2 ( Z ( u ) ) = π 2 ( Z ( v ) ) = π 2 ( u ) and π 3 ( Z ( u ) ) = π 3 ( Z ( v ) ) = π 3 ( u ) , but we need to distinguish the case π 1 ( u ) = π 1 ( v ) and the case π 4 ( u ) = π 4 ( v ) . Write S = { u , v , z } with π 6 ( z ) = π 6 ( d ) . Lemma 2 gives the existence of at least 3 indices i { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } such that π i ( z ) π i ( d ) . Remark 4 gives the existence of at least 2 indices i { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } such that # ( π 1 ( S ) ) > 1 . Set M 2 : = | I u ( ε 2 ) | and W : = Res M 2 ( Z ) . We have W and W Z ( z ) Z ( d ) . Since deg ( η 1 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 1 , either Z ( d ) W or W Z ( z ) . If W = Z ( d ) , we use that h 1 ( I Z ( d ) ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 . We also conclude if W = { z } or if W = Z ( d ) { z } and z D 1 : = | I Z ( d ) ( ε 1 ) ) . By Lemma 2, there is i > 2 such that π i ( z ) π i ( d ) . Set { D i } : = | I z ( ε 1 ) | . Using M 2 D i , we conclude if W = Z ( d ) { z } . Now assume W = Z ( z ) Z ( d ) . Using M 2 D i , we conclude if either z D 1 or if deg ( π i ( Z ( z ) ) ) = 2 . If z D 1 and deg ( π 1 ( Z ( z ) ) ) = 2 , we conclude using M 2 D 1 . Now assume z D 1 and deg ( π j ( Z ( z ) ) ) = 1 for j = 1 , i . Since π i ( d ) π i ( z ) , Res M 2 D i ( Z ) = Z ( d ) , and hence, h 1 ( I Res M 2 D i ( Z ) ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 .□
(c3.4.2)
Assume π i ( d ) π i ( S ) for all i = 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 . Note that π 6 ( o ) π 6 ( d ) and that deg ( π 6 ( Z ( o ) ) = 2 . Write S = { u , v , o } . Set { U 6 } : = | I o ( ε 6 ) | . We have Res U 6 ( Z ) = Z ( d ) { o } Z ( u ) Z ( v ) with deg ( Z ( u ) ) 2 , deg ( Z ( v ) ) 2 , Z ( u ) (resp. Z ( v ) ) with u (resp. v) as its reduction, unless it is empty. By Claim 5 there is x S such that h 1 ( I Z ( d ) { x } ( ε 1 ) ) = 0 . Assume for the moment that we may take x = o . Set { U i } : = | I u ( ε i ) | for i = 2 , 3 , and { U i } : = | I v ( ε i ) | for i = 4 , 5 . Since Z ( d ) Res U 2 U 3 U 4 U 5 U 6 ( Z ) Z ( d ) { o } , we conclude in this case. We may use two different multidegrees among ε i , 2 i 5 , for u and the remaining ones for v. We also conclude if deg ( π i ( Z ( w ) ) ) = 1 for at least one w S \ { z } , and at least one i { 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } (for instance if deg ( π 2 ( Z ( u ) ) ) = 1 instead of U 3 we take the element { U 3 } : = | I z ( ε 3 ) | ). Assume deg ( π i ( Z ( w ) ) ) = 1 for all w { u , v } and all 2 i 5 . Assume for instance π 1 ( v ) π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) . Set { Q 4 } : = | I o ( ε 2 ) | and use U 2 U 3 Q 4 U 5 U 6 to conclude this case.
(c3.4.2.1)
By step c3.4.2, we may assume π i ( d ) π i ( S ) for at least one i { 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 } , say for i = 5 . Using | I d ( ε 5 ) | instead of M 6 in Claim 6 we get the existence of o 1 S such deg ( η 5 ( Z ( o 1 ) ) ) = 1 . Since deg ( π 5 ( Z ( o 1 ) ) ) = 2 , o 1 o . Write S = { o , o 1 , o 2 } .
(c3.4.2.2)
Assume π i ( d ) π i ( S ) for i = 2 , 3 , 4 . Set { D 2 } : = | I o ( ε 2 ) | , { D 3 } : = | I o 1 ( ε 3 ) | and { D 4 } : = | I o 2 ( ε 4 ) | . We have Z ( d ) Res D 2 D 3 D 4 ( Z ) Z ( d ) { o 2 } . It would be sufficient to prove that h 1 ( I Res D 2 D 3 D 4 ( Z ) ( 1 , 0 , 0 , 0 , 1 , 1 ) ) = 0 . This vanishing is true if either deg ( π 4 ( Z ( o 2 ) ) ) = 1 or o 2 Σ or π i ( o 2 ) π i ( d ) for at least one i { 5 , 6 } . Assume π 5 ( o 2 ) = π 5 ( d ) , π 6 ( o 2 ) = π 6 ( d ) , o 2 Σ and deg ( π 4 ( Z ( o 2 ) ) ) = 2 . Permuting the set { 2 , 3 , 4 } , we may assume deg ( π 2 ( Z ( o 2 ) ) ) = deg ( π 3 ( Z ( o 2 ) ) ) = 2 . By Lemma 2, there is a set J { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 } such that # J 3 and π i ( o ) π i ( o 1 ) for all i J . Note that { 5 , 6 } J . Set H : = | I Z ( d ) ( ε 1 ) | . Note that Res H ( Z ) { o 2 } Z ( o ) Z ( o 1 ) . First assume { o 2 } Res H ( Z ) . Set N i : = | I o ( ε i ) | and Q i : = | I o 1 ( ε i ) | . Since π i ( o 2 ) = π i ( d ) { o , o 1 } for i = 5 , 6 , it is sufficient to use H N 5 Q 6 . Now assume Res H ( Z ) Z ( o ) Z ( o 1 ) . Since Σ , Res J ( Z ) contains at least one among Z ( o ) and Z ( o 1 ) , say Z ( o ) . If Res H ( Z ) = Z ( o ) we use that deg ( π 6 ( Z ( o ) ) ) = 2 and hence h 1 ( I Z ( o ) ( ε ^ 1 ) ) = 0 . Now assume Res H ( Z ) = Z ( o ) Z ( o 1 ) with either Z ( o 1 ) = { o 1 } or Z ( o 1 ) = Z ( o 1 ) . If J { 1 , 5 , 6 } , i.e., there is i J with i { 2 , 3 , 4 } , it is sufficient to use H N i and that deg ( π 5 ( Z ( o 1 ) ) ) = 2 . Now assume J = { 1 , 5 , 6 } and hence Z ( o 1 ) = Z ( o 1 ) . There are p i P 1 , i = 2 , 3 , 4 , such that { o , o 1 } Δ : = π 1 ( Z ) × { p 2 } × { p 3 } × { p 4 } × P 1 × P 1 . Since π 1 ( Z ( o ) Z ( o 1 ) π 1 ( Z ) and deg ( π i ( Z ( o ) ) ) = deg ( π i ( Z ( o 1 ) ) ) = 1 for i = 2 , 3 , 4 } , we get Z ( o ) Z ( o 1 ) Δ . Set { T 2 } : = | I p 2 ( ε 2 ) | and { T 4 } : = | I o 2 ( ε 4 ) | . Since Res T 2 T 4 ( Z ) = Z ( d ) (by the assumption π i ( d ) π i ( S ) for i = 2 , 4 ) and deg ( π 1 ( Z ( d ) ) ) = 2 , we conclude.
(c3.4.2.3)
Assume the existence of exactly one i { 2 , 3 , 4 } such that π i ( d ) π i ( S ) . With no loss of generality we may assume i = 4 . As in Claim 6, we get the existence of u S such that deg ( η i ( Z ( u ) ) ) = 1 . Since i { 5 , 6 } , u = o 2 . By assumption, π i ( d ) π i ( S ) for i = 2 , 3 . Fix u Σ . Assume for the moment π i ( u ) π i ( d ) for at least one i { 4 , 5 , 6 } . Write S = { u , u 1 , u 2 } . We use the divisor D ( 2 ) D ( 3 ) D ( i ) with { D ( i ) } : = | I v ( ε i ) | , { D 2 } : = | I u 1 ( ε 2 ) | and { D 3 } : = | I u 2 ( ε 3 ) | . We conclude, because Z ( d ) Res D ( 2 ) D ( 3 ) D ( i ) ( Z ) Z ( d ) { u } . Now assume π i ( x ) = π i ( d ) for all i = 4 , 5 , 6 and all x Σ . Remark 4 and [1] (Th. 4.12) applied to Σ { d } give # Σ = 1 . Thus, π 1 ( u 1 ) = π 1 ( u 2 ) . Set H : = | I Z ( d ) ( ε 1 ) | . In this case, we have deg ( π 1 ( Z ( w ) ) ) = 1 for all w S . Thus, Res H ( Z ) = Z ( u ) . Since there is i { 4 , 5 , 6 } with deg ( π i ( Z ( u ) ) ) = 2 , we conclude.
(c3.4.2.4)
Assume the existence of at least 2 indices i { 2 , 3 , 4 } such that π i ( d ) π i ( S ) , say i = 3 and i = 4 . The first part of step c3.4.2.2 gives the equality deg ( η 4 ( Z ( o 2 ) ) ) = 1 . Using i = 3 instead of i = 4 , we get deg ( η 3 ( Z ( o 2 ) ) ) = 1 , and hence, deg ( Z ( o 2 ) ) = 1 , a contradiction.
Proof of Theorem 5. 
Since we may assume k 3 (Remark 9 and Theorem 8) and n 1 3 , all cases are covered by Propositions 9, 11–13. □
Proof of Theorem 6. 
Assume T ( Y , 4 ) . Remark 9 and Theorem 8 give k 3 . Theorem 5 gives dim Y 6 . Theorem 10 excludes the case Y = ( P 1 ) 3 . All cases with dim Y = 6 are allowed by Theorem 3. The case Y = P 3 × P 1 × P 1 and Y = P 2 × P 1 × P 1 are excluded by Lemma 18. Proposition 9 gives the cases Y { P 2 × P 2 × P 1 , P 2 × ( P 1 ) 3 , ( P 1 ) 5 } . Proposition 2 gives the case Y = ( P 1 ) 4 . □

8. Examples

Proposition 15. 
Fix an integer n > 1 and set Y = P n × P n × P 1 × P 1 . Then, a general S S ( Y , 2 n + 1 ) is an element of T ( Y , 2 n + 1 ) S ( Y , 2 n + 1 ) .
Proof. 
A general q σ 2 n + 1 ( ν ( Y ) ) has rank exactly 2 n + 1 and for a general q a general A S ( Y , q ) is a general element of S ( Y , n + 1 ) . By [3] (Prop. 4.7(i)), we have A T 1 ( Y , 2 n + 1 ) . Since A S ( Y , q ) , A S ( Y , 2 n + 1 ) . Since # A = 2 n + 1 > n and A is general, Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A (Remark 14). Thus, A T ( Y , 2 n + 1 ) . Fix E A , E and set e : = # E . Since A is general, E is a general element of S ( Y , e ) . Thus, to prove that δ ( 2 E , Y ) = 0 it is sufficient to use that for each e 2 n the e-th secant variety of Y is not defective ([3], Proposition 4.7(iii)). Thus, A T ( Y , 2 n + 1 ) . □
Proposition 16. 
Take either Y = P 3 × P 3 × P 2 or Y = P 2 × P 2 × P 1 × P 1 . Then, a general S S ( Y , 5 ) is an element of T ( Y , 5 ) S ( Y , 5 ) .
Proof. 
Take k 3 an Y : = P n 1 × × P n k with n 1 n k > 0 . The secant variety σ 5 ( ν ( Y ) ) is defective if and only if either k = 3 and ( n 1 , n 2 , n 3 ) { ( 3 , 3 , 2 ) , ( a , 2 , 1 ) , ( a , 3 , 1 ) } for some a 5 or k = 4 and ( n 1 , n 2 , n 3 , n 4 ) = ( 2 , 2 , 1 , 1 ) ([3], Th. 4.12). Since we are looking at elements of S ( Y , 5 ) such that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing S, we exclude to cases ( a , 3 , 1 ) and ( a , 2 , 1 ) with a 5 . If either Y = P 3 × P 3 × P 2 or Y = P 2 × P 2 × P 1 × P 1 , a general S S ( Y , 5 ) is an element of T ( Y , 5 ) S ( Y , 5 ) . The set S is an element of T ( Y , 5 ) , because any E S may be seen as a general element of S ( Y , # E ) and no secant variety of order 4 of Y is defective (Remark 1). □

9. Conclusions and Further Open Problems

In this paper, we consider four notions of Terracini loci, two of which are introduced here, and provide several results for them with full proofs. Concerning the most interesting one, minimally Terracini sets, T ( Y , x ) , we raise the following two conjectures and the following question.
Conjecture 13. 
Fix an integer x 5 and set Y : = ( P 1 ) k . We conjecture that T ( Y , x ) = if k 2 x 1 .
Conjecture 14. 
Fix integers x 5 , m 2 and set Y : = ( P m ) k . We conjecture that T ( Y , x ) = if k m 2 x 1 .
Question 15. 
Fix an integer x 5 . Find a small integer e x 0 such that T ( Y , x ) = for all multiprojective spaces Y = P n 1 × × P n k such that n 1 n k > 0 and n 1 n k e x .
The multiprojective spaces in Conjectures 13 and 14 are balanced and the dimensions of their secant varieties are known, with one possible exception ([12]). Question 15 concerns the “almost balanced” ones.

Funding

The author received no funding. The author is a member of the GNSAGA of INdAM (Rome, Italy).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The author has no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A.; Santarsiero, P. Terracini locus for three points on a Segre variety. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2012.00574. [Google Scholar]
  2. Landsberg, J.M. Tensors: Geometry and Applications; American Mathematical Society: Providence, RI, USA, 2012; Volume 128. [Google Scholar]
  3. Abo, H.; Ottaviani, G.; Peterson, C. Induction for secant varieties of Segre varieties. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 2009, 361, 767–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Ballico, E. Linearly dependent subsets of Segre varieties. J. Geom. 2020, 111, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A. Stratification of the fourth secant variety of Veronese varieties via the symmetric rank. Adv. Pure Appl. Math. 2013, 4, 215–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Chandler, K.A. Hilbert functions of dots in linearly general positions. In Proceedings of the Conference on Zero-Dimensional Schemes, Ravello, Italy, 7 June 1992; pp. 65–79. [Google Scholar]
  7. Chandler, K. A brief proof of a maximal rank theorem for generic 2-points in projective space. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 2000, 353, 1907–1920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Ballico, E. Examples on the non-uniqueness of the rank 1 tensor decomposition of rank 4 tensors. Symmetry 2022, 14, 1889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Buczyńska, W.; Buczyński, J. Secant varieties to high degree veronese reembeddings, catalecticant matrices and smoothable Gorenstein schemes. J. Algebraic Geom. 2014, 23, 63–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Catalisano, M.V.; Geramita, A.V.; Gimigliano, A. Ranks of tensors, secant varieties of Segre varieties and fat points. Linear Algebra Appl. 2002, 355, 263–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Abo, H.; Brambilla, M.C. On the dimensions of secant varieties of Segre-Veronese varieties. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 2013, 192, 61–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Aladpoosh, T.; Haghighi, H. On the dimension of higher secant varieties of Segre varieties P n × × P n . J. Pure Appl. Algebra 2011, 215, 1040–1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ballico, E. Terracini Loci of Segre Varieties. Symmetry 2022, 14, 2440. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym14112440

AMA Style

Ballico E. Terracini Loci of Segre Varieties. Symmetry. 2022; 14(11):2440. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym14112440

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ballico, Edoardo. 2022. "Terracini Loci of Segre Varieties" Symmetry 14, no. 11: 2440. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym14112440

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop