Abstract
We prove a base point freeness result for linear systems of forms vanishing at general double points of the projective plane. For tensors we study the uniqueness problem for the representation of a tensor as a sum of terms corresponding to points and tangent vectors of the Segre variety associated with the format of the tensor. We give complete results for unions of one point and one tangent vector.
1. Introduction
Let be an integral and non-degenerate n-dimensional variety.
To recall the classical notion of abstract secant variety, its map to and its differential (computed in geometric term by A. Terracini) we use the following notation.
For any closed subscheme let denote its linear span. Let denote the set of all smooth points of X. For any let (or just ) denote the closed subscheme of X with as its ideal sheaf. The scheme is a zero-dimensional scheme and . Moreover, is the Zariski tangent space of X at o. For all finite subsets set .
Fix a positive integer . Let denote the set of all such that and S is linearly independent. The set is a smooth quasi-projective variety and its closure in the Hilbert scheme of X is an integral projective variety, singular if . Let denote the set of all pairs such that and for all . The set is a smooth quasi-projective variety. The closure of in is a closed and irreducible projective variety, often called the abstract s-secant variety of X. Call the morphism induced by the projection . The irreducible variety is the s-secant variety of X, i.e., the closure in of the union of all linear spaces for some subset of X with cardinality s. However, since is usually very singular (even for nice X) we consider the differential of only at the points of . Set . Fix . A. Terracini proved that the image of the differential of at does not depend on q: it is the linear span of all tangent spaces , , i.e., it is ([1], Cor. 1.11). Since Alessandro Terracini’s classical papers the study of the differential of gave (for very good reasons: the results were both nice and useful) several papers, most of them for the case S general in X so that the rank of is the integer . Some recent papers also considered the case in which S is not general ([2,3]). Here we consider both cases, S general and S very specific. An arrow of is a connected degree 2 scheme . Since v is assumed to be connected, its reduction is a point, . The Zariski tangent space of X is the union of all arrows of X. Thus, the linear span has the expected dimension if and only if all unions of s arrows, each of them with as its support a different point of S, are linearly independent. This observation due to K. Chandler ([4,5,6]) had many applications ([6,7,8]). A union of points and arrows may also be used to describe tensors and homogeneous polynomials. For instance in the additive decomposition of degree d forms an arrow corresponds to a term in the sum of the form , where ℓ and are non-proportional linear forms, while a point corresponds to an addendum , .
We consider a general S for the Veronese embeddings of , but we ask if is scheme-theoretically the scheme or not. This is tricky and we discuss in more details why it is tricky in Section 4. For all positive integers n and d let (resp. ) be the maximal integer such that and is globally generated (resp. and has no base points outside ), where Z is a general union of x double points of . These integers may be expressed with the geometric language used for the additive decomposition of degree d forms in the following way. Let , , denote the order d Veronese embedding of , i.e., the embedding given evaluating all degree d forms in variables. Set . The integer is the maximal integer such that and scheme-theoretically.
We prove the following result.
Theorem 1.
Fix integers and z such that . Let be a general union of z double points. Then and is globally generated.
The vanishing of is well-known, but it is put in the statement because for a non-general E (call if F) it is easy to obtain globally generated for some F such that . To prove Theorem 1 we use a degeneration of several planar double points ([9]).
A natural question is the extension of Theorem 2 to the case . We ask also for the proof of similar results for tensors of certain formats and certain tensor ranks and for the case of partially symmetric tensors.
In Section 5 we consider the following uniqueness problem for tensors. For which formats there is a concise tensor which can be irredundantly determined by the union of a point and an arrow for more than one union of a point and an arrow? Propositions 1 and 2 and Theorem 3 give the list of the exceptional cases.
The last section is speculative. Suppose that at a certain the differential of the Terracini map has a kernel. Is there a condition (using higher derivatives) which says if the fiber of at is positive-dimensional?
Unless otherwise stated we work over an algebraically closed field of characteristic 0.
2. Preliminaries
Let X be an integral projective variety. Let be an effective Cartier divisor of X and Z a zero-dimensional closed subscheme of X. The residual scheme of Z is the closed subscheme of X with : as its ideal sheaf. We have . For every line bundle on X the following sequence
is exact. We will say that (1) is the residual exact sequence of D (without mentioning Z and ). Take . We have and . Let be an arrow such that . If , then . If , then (as schemes) and . If is an effective Cartier divisor, then , where denote the sum as effective divisors.
Let be an integral and non-degenerate variety. For any the X-rank of q is the minimal cardinality of a finite subset of X whose linear span contains q.
Fix a quasi-projective variety T of dimension at least 2 and . Let be arrows such that and . The scheme is called a planar double point or a planar double point of T. The next remark explains the properties of planar double points.
Remark 1.
Fix a quasi-projective variety T of dimension at least 2 and . Let be arrows such that and . Set . We have and . There are arrows such that and . Moreover, if , then . The Zariski tangent space of Z at o has dimension 2 and there is a quasi-projective variety such that , and . If , then we take , but if there are infinitely many quasi-projective varieties such that , and . Fix any such M. The scheme Z is the closed subscheme of M with as its ideal sheaf. If T is embedded in a projective space, then Z spans a plane.
3. Veronese Varieties
In this section, we prove Theorem 2. In Section 4 we discuss why it does not follow from known results on weak nondefectivity and tangenential nondefectivity ([10,11,12,13]).
Obviously for all .
For all positive integers n and d let denote the maximal cardinality of a finite set such that . Obviously and . Since the singular locus of a quadric hypersurface is a linear space, . A key theorem due to Alexander and Hirschowitz ([14,15,16,17]) computes for all and says that for all , unless . Moreover, , , and .
Remark 2.
Obviously . Please note that if (and hence is not the trivial line bundle) and for all and , except in the 4 exceptional cases .
Remark 3.
Let be a general subset such that . The Castelnuovo–Mumford lemma gives that is spanned and that . Thus, .
Remark 4.
Since any 2 points of a projective space are collinear, . Take and . Since 4 general points of are the complete intersection of 2 conics and , we have . Thus, in a few cases the upper bound in Remark 3 is sharp.
Lemma 1.
.
Proof.
Since and , . Thus, it is sufficient to prove that . Fix a smooth cubic and take such that . Take such that o is not contained in any line spanned by 2 of the points of . We need to prove that has no base points outside S and that . We have . Since is very ample, the residual exact sequence of D shows that has no base locus outside . Thus, it is sufficient to use that is projectively normal and that . □
To prove Theorem 1 we prove the following result.
Theorem 2.
Fix integers and z such that . Then there is a connected zero-dimensional scheme such that Z is a flat limit of a family of z pairwise disjoint double points, and has no base points outside .
Lemma 2.
Let be a smooth curve. Fix and positive integers such that . Then there is a zero-dimensional scheme such that , , Z is a flat limit of a family of unions of z pairwise disjoint double points, and .
Proof.
If we use ([18], Proposition 5.1.2), which corresponds in the set-up of [9] to the front collision, which just adds the escaliers of the z double points. Assume and set . Please note that . We take a specialization Z of a family of general unions with B a general unions of double points of with as reduction general points of C and E a general union of e double points of . Then we apply e times (each time to a different connected component of E) ([18], §5.2) with the escalier of a double point of . □
Proof of Theorem 2:
Let t be the maximal positive integer such that and .
Claim 1:
.
Proof of Claim 1:
Assume . Since t is maximal, , i.e., , i.e., . We have , i.e., , contradicting the assumption .
Fix a general . Thus, C is smooth and . Set . By Lemma 2 there is a connected zero-dimensional scheme such that and . Thus, is a general connected zero-dimensional subscheme of C of degree . By [19] and . Since and C is projectively normal, . The residual exact sequence of C gives and that the restriction map is surjective. Call W the scheme-theoretic base locus of . Since C is a smooth curve and is a general connected degree w subscheme of C,20] gives that no point of is a base point of . The surjectivity of gives that no point of is a base point of . Since a general osculating space of a curve is not hyperosculating and is surjective, we obtain as schemes. Since , . Since is a general connected degree subscheme of the smooth curve C and ,20] gives . Thus, has no base point outside C. Since no point of is a base point of , no is a base point of . □
Proof of Theorem 1:
Being globally generated is an open condition in families of coherent sheaves with constant cohomology. Thus, it is sufficient to prove that if the scheme Z constructed in the proof of Theorem 2 is globally generated. Let be the image of the evaluation map . Since , to conclude the proof it is sufficient to prove that . Since has no base points outside , W is a connected zero-dimensional scheme. Take C, t and w as in the proof of Theorem 2. We saw that . Since , . Please note that is a general connected zero-dimensional scheme of degree . Hence has no base points ([20]; note that in [20] “curve” means “smooth curve”). Consider the residual exact sequence
We saw that and that and are globally generated. Thus, is globally generated. □
4. Base Point Freeness
In this section, we point out why it is still open, even for generic symmetric rank, although very similar statements are true, stated and proved in the literature ([10,11,12,13]).
Assume characteristic zero.
Let be an integral and non-degenerate variety. Set and fix an integer such that and , i.e., X is not secant s-defectivity. Fix a general such that and set . Since , has dimension . Take a general hyperplane containing Z. There are key notions due to C. Ciliberto and L. Chiantini (weak nondefectivity and tangential nondefectivity) ([10,11,12]) which when they are satisfies imply that H is tangent to only at the points of S. This true statement does not imply that meets only at S and the linear spaces contained in X and containing at least one point of S, even when has codimension . It would seem intuitively true, but it is only conjectural for curves and false in some cases for higher-dimensional smooth manifolds ([21]).
We say that Assumption 1 holds if the following conjectural statement is true:
Assumption 1.
Assume . Let , , be any integral and non-degenerate curve. For a general the tangent line of X at p meets X only at p.
An assumption similar to Assumption 1 trivially fail for all X such that and X is covered by lines. However, an example due to M. Ohno shows that it may fail even for smooth manifolds of general type [21]. See [22,23] for many partial solutions and applications of Assumption 1. Thus, we cannot freely extend to general unions of double points the following observation concerning general finite sets.
Remark 5.
Let be an integral and non-degenerate variety. Set . Let be a general set such that . In characteristic 0 an easy application of the linear general position of a general codimension n linear section gives (scheme-theoretic intersection).
For any and all positive integer m let denote the closed subscheme of with as its ideal sheaf. The linear space is the m-osculating linear space of X at o. Motivated by [20] we consider the following Condition (Assumption 2):
Assumption 2.
Assume . Fix integers . Let be any integral and non-degenerate curve. For a general the m osculating space of X at p meets X only at p and the support of the union of the point and the arrow. Usually, this support is a very small part of the Segre variety.
We are working over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero, because Assumption 1 fails in positive characteristic even for some smooth curves ([24], Example 4.1). In characteristic 0 Assumptions 1 and 2 holds for all smooth curves ([20,23,24], Theorem 3.1)
5. Tensors
Tensors associated with an arrow are exactly the tensors contained in the tangential variety of the Segre variety related to the format of the tensor. In this section we describe all concise tensors which are linear combinations in two different ways of a rank 1 tensor and a tensor associated with an arrow (Theorem 3). Theorem 3 lists 7 cases with for each case a quotation of an example or remark of the paper. The remark or example describes in detail each exceptional case. In each case we describe by how many parameters the possible unions of an arrow and a point depend.
We recall the following properties of the Segre varieties and their connection with tensors and the tensor rank of a tensor ([25]).
Let , , , , be a multiprojective space. Let denote the projection of Y onto its i-th factor. If set and let denote the projection. The map is the map forgetting the i-th coordinate of each . Let denote the Segre embedding of .
For all set . The line bundles , , form a -basis of the abelian group . The Künneth formula gives if some , if for all i and if for all i. For any let (resp. ) be the line bundle on Y with multidegree with and for all (resp. We have . Set . Let denote the Segre embedding of Y.
For any tensor T of format , , the tensor rank of T is the -rank of the element associated with T.
The main result of this section is the following one.
Theorem 3.
Let be a union of a point and an arrow. Assume that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing Y. Fix such that for any . Assume the existence of a union of a point and an arrow such that and . Then Y is as in one of the following cases (assuming for all ):
- 1 .
- and either , or and .
- 2 .
- and either , or and .
- 3 .
- , and are as in Remark 10.
- 4 .
- , and are as in Remark 11.
- 5 .
- , and are as in Example 9.
- 6 .
- , and A, B are as in Example 3.
- 7 .
- and is as in Examples 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8.
In each case we give a rough description of the possible B’s. The one with (resp. ) are listed in Remark 10 (resp. 11). The last case, i.e., Examples 4, 5, 7 or 8 are the only cases which allow any .
Remark 6.
Let be a zero-dimensional scheme of degree . The minimal multiprojective subspace of Y containing Z is the multiprojective space . Write for some positive integers s and , . We have for all i and this is in general the only restriction we may obtain from the isomorphism class of Z as an abstract scheme. Of course, and if the h-th positive-dimensional factor of is contained in the i-th-dimensional factor of Y, then .
Remark 7.
([26], Lemma 4.4) Let be a zero-dimensional scheme such that and is linearly dependent. Since ν is an embedding, and is a line. Since is scheme-theoretically cut out by quadrics and , then . Since the only linear subspaces contained in the Segre variety X are the one contained in a fiber of one of its k rulings, there is of such that for all , is an embedding and is a line.
Remark 8.
Take with , and B curvilinear. The point q has border rank ([27], Proposition 1.1 and Theorem 1.2) and the minimal multiprojective space with contains all curvilinear degree b schemes such that and are contained in ([28], Theorem 2.5).
Example 1.
Let be a zero-dimensional scheme such that , W spans , W is linearly dependent, but all proper subschemes are linearly independent. Obviously . Since and for all lines , and either W is the complete intersection of 2 conics or for exactly one line L and there is such that all is of the form with . In both cases there are non-curvilinear W’s. In the latter case the latter case and W is the union of the fat point and some .
Example 2.
Let be a degree 4 scheme. Since , if and only if there is containing W. If is linearly independent for all , then D is unique, because in this case.
Proposition 1.
Let be an arrow such that Y is the minimal multiprojective space. Set . Fix . There is a zero-dimensional scheme such that , , and if and only if one of the following cases occur:
- 1 .
- , ;
- 2 .
- , ;
- 3 .
- , .
- (a)
- In case (1) we may take (with ), and reduced or and Z an arrow.
- (b)
- In case (2) is the complete intersection of two conics in the plane .
- (c)
- In case (3) there are reduced Z (parametrized by a plane minus a line) and arrows Z (parametrized by a line minus the point corresponding to v).
Proof.
Cases (1), (2) and (3) occur and in each case the possible schemes Z described in (a), (b) and (c) are the schemes which occur (Examples 1 and 2).
Now we prove the “only if” part. Set . Thus, . Since , . First assume . We are in the case (1) by Example 1. Now assume and hence . Theorem 7 gives that we are in one of these cases (1), (2) and (3). □
Remark 9.
Proposition 1 describes all degree 4 schemes , W not reduced and not containing a connected component of degree at least 3, such that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing W, is linearly dependent and all proper subschemes of are linearly independent. For the case W reduced, see [29] and/or [30]. For an arbitrary W of degree 4, see [31]. In [26,29,30,31] there are related results obtained under assumptions with minor differences. For instance in [26] we assume that q has rank 3 and that Y is the minimal multiprojective space such that . Here we do not assume that is the minimal Segre spanning q, because it seems too restrictive. Making the assumption that is concise for q would drastically cut some proofs. Requiring that q has not cactus rank would allow the interested reader to omit Propositions 1 and 2.
Remark 10.
Assume .
(a) Assume for at least one i, say . Since any matrix has rank , for each there are infinitely many such that and . Now assume . Since is the tangential variety of , we obtain the existence of an arrow such that . By ([32], Ex. II.3.22(b)) we see that q is associated with at least sets S and arrows Z.
(b) Assume and hence . There are with tensor rank 2 and tensors spanned by with Z connected and of degree 2. As in part (a) we obtain with and A union of an arrow and a point.
Proposition 2.
Let be the union of an arrow v and a point . Assume that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A. Fix such that there is no with . There is a zero-dimensional scheme such that and if and only if A, Y and Z are as follows:
- 1.
- and (here , say );
- 2.
- , ;
- 3.
- , ; ;
- 4.
- , .
- (i)
- In case (1) the schemes Z are as follows:
- (i1)
- and Z is the point of Y such that ;
- (i2)
- Z is any degree 2 subscheme.
- (ii)
- In case (2) there are schemes Z formed by 2 points and schemes Z which are arrows.
- (iii)
- In cases (3) and (4) there are at least schemes Z formed by 2 points and at least schemes Z which are arrows; in this case Y is not the minimal multiprojective space such that .
Proof.
All listed cases are associated with some Z and the schemes Z are as described in Remarks 10 and 11. Thus, it is sufficient to prove the “only if” part.
Since and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, for all i.
Set . Please note that . Since there is no such that , we have . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, for all i. If , then . If , then and is linearly independent. Proposition 1 covers the case . Thus, we may assume , i.e., .
If , then Z is any degree 2 scheme spanning a line containing and not intersecting A. All cases with are covered by Remark 10. Thus, we may assume .
- (a)
- Assume for the moment for some i, say and hence . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing Y, and is linearly independent. Take and . The scheme is contained in Z.
- (a1)
- Assume . Since , quoting ([33], Lemma 5.1) we obtain . Since and is globally generated, we obtain and for all . Thus, . Fix . Since and , ([33], Lemma 5.1) gives . Since and is an embedding with linearly independent image, we obtain a contradiction.
- (a2)
- Assume , i.e., assume . By step (a1) we may also assume with . Set := and take and . Since , we also obtain and . Assume that either or , say . We get . The residual exact sequence of and ([33], Lemma 5.1) give a contradiction because and is linearly independent. Assume that either or , say . The residual exact sequence of gives a contradiction. Thus, . Using we obtain with the union of u and a point of , call it e. Since , for all . Take . Using R we obtain . Using we obtain . Thus, for all . Since , there are and such that . First assume . Since , ([33], Lemma 5.1) gives . Since and is linearly independent, we obtained a contradiction. Now assume . If (resp. ) we may take instead of (resp. T) a general element of its complete linear system and obtain a contradiction, because Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A. Thus, and . One of the two divisors T or , say T, contains v. Set . Please note that . We obtain , i.e., for all . If we obtain , a contradiction. Please note that if Z is connected. Assume and hence . Since , . Hence . Since , we obtain . Hence the residual exact sequence of gives a contradiction.
- (b)
- Assume . All cases with are listed. Thus, we assume . Let be the maximal integer such that for some and some . With no loss of generality we may assume . Set . Let be the maximal integer such that for some and some . With no loss of generality we may assume . Set . Obviously . Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, .
- (b1)
- Assume . Quoting ([33], Lemma 5.1) we obtain a contradiction.
- (b2)
- Assume . Thus, . If applying ([33], Lemma 5.1) to we obtain a contradiction. Assume . The definition of gives that each , , is an embedding. Fix intersecting . Please note that . The residual exact sequence of and ([33], Lemma 5.1) gives a contradiction.
- (b3)
- Assume . The definition of gives that each is an embedding. Take such that and set . Please note that and that . Since is an embedding, , contradicting ([33], Lemma 5.1).
- (b4)
- Assume . If quoting ([33], Lemma 5.1) we obtain a contradiction. Now assume , i.e., assume . If there are and with , then quoting ([33], Lemma 5.1) with respect to we obtain a contradiction. Thus, we may assume for all . Hence is an embedding. Set . Since in step (b1) we excluded the case and , we have and hence . By assumption and hence .
- (b4.1)
- Assume . Using M instead of H in the first part of step (b4) we obtain for all . Take , , containing E. We obtain . We also have . Please note that the set is a point and that is a line of the Segre variety . We obtain . Since , we obtain , i.e., Z is not reduce. Using H instead of M we obtain . Using M and , , we obtain is contained in the point , absurd.
- (b4.2)
- Assume . In the set-up of step (b4.1) we may also assume that for all . Set . Let be a degree 2 scheme. Since is an embedding, there is such that is an embedding. Let be an element of containing a point of . Fix and set . Since , . By ([33], Lemma 5.1) we first obtain and then for all . Either E is the union of 3 points, say , or the union of a point a and an arrow z.
- (b4.2.1)
- Assume . Thus, . Take . Taking containing c we obtain for all . Taking containing b we obtain for all . Thus, for all . Varying i we obtain for all . In this case is a line contained in the -ruling of the Segre . Thus, is linearly dependent. Since , Proposition 1 gives . Since and for any , we obtain . Since is linearly independent, . Thus, is contained in the plane, , which also contains the line . Since for any , for any and , for all . Thus, (scheme-theoretically). Since contains no plane . Since and is scheme-theoretically cut out by quadrics, is the union of 2 lines. Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, we obtain (([29], Proposition 5.2) or ([30], Proposition 1.1) or Theorem 1), a contradiction.
- (b4.2.2)
- Assume and set . Take . We obtain for all . Varying i we obtain for all . Take , but call the integer associated with this degree 2 scheme. We obtain for all . Thus, . Thus, is a line contained in the w-th ruling of . If we conclude as in step (b4.2.1). Assume . Either or Z is connected and . Take and . By construction . Thus, , contradicting ([33], Lemma 5.1).
□
Remark 11.
Take and hence . A general is contained in for sets such that , unions A of an arrow and a point and for exactly one set such that . A general q in the tangential variety of is contained in for sets such that , unions A of an arrow and a point and exactly one arrow, but no set A with cardinality 2.
Example 3.
Take and take such that and there is with . This case covers cases (4) and (5) of ([26], Theorem 7.1), case (4) being the case H irreducible, while case (5) being the case H reducible. If H is irreducible (resp. it is reducible), then q is in the linear span of (resp. ) subsets of with cardinality 3. For many we have for some union A of an arrow and a point.
Lemma 3.
Let be a planar double point. Set and write with v and w arrows with o as their reduction. Fix such that and set and . Assume that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing , that contains a point q and that for any . Then and if .
Proof.
By assumption . Thus, there is an arrow such that . Proposition 1 shows that the minimal multiprojective space containing is either a projective space or . If , then the lemma is true. Assume . Since , we obtain , a contradiction. □
Example 4.
Assume . We do the construction for the first 2 positive integers, but the case in which we take any two distinct elements of is similar. Fix arrows such that and is the minimal multiprojective space containing , but that is a plane. Thus, is a single point. Fix and . Set with embedded in the first two factors of Y. Fix , , such that for all i. Set . Thus, is a single point, . Fix and with the restriction that if and if . Set . Please note that is the line spanned by and . Please note that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing if and only if one of the following conditions holds:
- 1.
- is the minimal multiprojective space containing .
- 2.
- is not the minimal multiprojective space containing , i.e., for exactly one ; in this case we require and .
Example 5.
The construction done in Example 4 works if instead of the arrow we take 2 distinct points of .
Example 6.
Assume . We do the construction for the first 2 positive integers, but the case in which we take any two distinct elements of is similar. Set and fix . Let L and be the elements of and containing a. Let (resp. ) be the arrow of L (resp. ) containing a. Fix and . Set with embedded in the first two factors of Y. Fix , , such that for all i. Set and . Fix and with the restriction that if and if . Set . Please note that is the line spanned by and and it is not contained in . We obtain that a general has rank 2. Please note that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing if and only if and .
Example 7.
Take either or , . Fix and take an arrow such that and for all . Please note that with . Fix such that for . If assume . Set . Please note that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A. Each has tensor rank at most 2, because there is such that .
Example 8.
Take either or , . Fix such that and for all . Take an arrow such that and for all . Please note that with . If assume . Set . Please note that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A and that for all .
Lemma 4.
Take , . Theorem 3 is true for Y and all B such that and .
Proof.
Assume the existence of such that B is either the union of an arrow and a point or the union of 3 distinct points, and . Set . By Propositions 1 and 2 we may assume that irredundantly spans q. Since , there is and such that contains B. Since and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, . Thus, the residual exact sequence of H and ([33], Lemma 5.1) give . This is true for all whose union contains B. Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, spans . Thus, . We obtain that spans . Thus, we obtain that the lines of spanned by degree 2 subschemes of A and B are the same. We also obtain that is an embedding and then we get that is an embedding. Since , ([33], Lemma 5.1) and the residual exact sequence of gives . Please note that is a degree 2 reduced scheme, one of its 2 points being in , while the other one is an element of . Since and are embeddings with the same set-theoretic image, B is the union of an arrow and a point, say with . Taking containing we obtain for all . Using and in the same way we obtain for all , contradicting the assumption . □
Lemma 5.
Take , . Theorem 3 is true for Y and all B such that and .
Proof.
Assume the existence of such that B is either the union of an arrow and a point or the union of 3 distinct points, and . Set . By Propositions 1 and 2 we may assume that irredundantly spans q. Fix . Mimicking the proof of Lemma 4 using and instead of and and doing it for all i we obtain that B is the union of a point and an arrow that each and are embeddings with the same images, that spans and that and for all . Set . We proved that for all . Take containing and . Please note that . Since , ([33], Lemma 5.1) and the residual exact sequence of give . Thus, , a contradiction. □
Remark 12.
Assume that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing , , and that . Fix and assume that is not an embedding. Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A, we obtain , for all and that is an embedding. Since is an embedding, we obtain that is an embedding for all .
- (a)
- Assume . In this case . We obtain that is a line contained in Y. Thus, all points of have tensor rank at most 2. This is Example 7.
- (b)
- Assume . In this case for all . Thus, is a line contained in the i-th ruling of the Segre , say . For each we have . In particular uniqueness fails for each q irredundantly spanned by . This case obviously occurs both with and with . This is Example 8.
- (c)
- Fix a set such that and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing Y. Assume the existence of such that is not injective. By ([26], Remark 1.10) each point of has tensor rank at most 2.
Since is linearly independent, there is such that is linearly dependent and is minimal with this property. If we obtain From now on
Lemma 6.
Take , . Theorem 3 is true for Y and all B such that and .
Proof.
Assume the existence of such that B is either the union of an arrow and a point or the union of 3 distinct points, and . Set . By Propositions 1 and 2 we may assume that irredundantly spans q. If B contains an arrow, then . If B is formed by 3 distinct points, then .
- (a)
- Assume for the moment that Y is not the minimal multiprojective space containing B. Thus, there is and such that and hence . Since , ([33], Lemma 5.1) gives . Since , either is not an embedding or and for indices j, contradicting the minimality of Y. Thus, Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing B. If there is such that is not an embedding, we apply Remark 12 to B.
- (b)
- By assumption we are not as in Example 7 or 8 for A or B. Thus, we may assume that all and all are embeddings. There are 4 degree 2 schemes formed by one point of and one point of . Since , there is such that is an embedding. With no loss of generality we may assume .
- (b1)
- Assume that is an embedding. Take containing a reduced connected component a of B. Please note that . Since and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing Y, is the minimal multiprojective space containing and is linearly independent by Remark 7. Since is an embedding, is an embedding. Thus, . Since and is an embedding, ([33], Lemma 5.1) gives . Since and Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing Y, is linearly independent by ([26], Lemma 4.4). Let the minimal subscheme of containing A such that . If (resp. ), Proposition 1 (resp. Proposition 2) gives that depends on at most 2 (resp. 3) factors of . Thus, A depends on at most 4 factors of Y, a contradiction.
- (b2)
- Assume that is not an embedding. If there is such that and , then we may repeat the proof of step (b1). Since Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing B by step (a), we conclude if there is such that and . Thus, we may assume . Since and , ([33], Lemma 5.1) gives . Since is an embedding, is an embedding. Thus, . Let be a minimal subscheme of such that . If , then Proposition 2 gives that depends on at most 3 factors of Y, one of them being the first one.
□
Example 9.
Assume , that Y is the minimal multiprojective space containing A. Fix with tensor rank . If q has tensor rank 3, then its tensor rank is evinced by sets with , because is defective ([34,35,36]).
Observation 1:
Assume that is an embedding for all . There are morphisms such that and . Thus, we obtain different morphism such that and and the linear spans of the images of by these morphisms covert= the projective tangent space except its 4 hyperplanes tangents to the hypersurfaces . Hence for some f. Thus, is contained in the rational normal curve of the 4-dimensional space . The point q has cactus rank with respect to C. By Sylvester’s theorem and the C-rank is achieved by subsets of C with cardinality 3.
Now assume that is not an embedding for some i, say for . We extend taking instead of the open subset U of the irreducible component of the Hilbert scheme of containing and formed by degree 3 linearly independent schemes. Please note that and that A is limit of elements such that each is a union of an arrow and a point and is an embedding for all and all . Use Observation 1 and ([32], Ex. II.3.22) to see that in this case q is spanned by infinitely many . Since A has 2 connected components, each nearby has at least 2 connected components, i.e., it is the union of either 3 points or a point and an arrow.
Proof of Theorem 3.
If , then we are in the set-up of Propositions 1 and 2. Thus, we may assume .
If we use Remark 10. Thus, we may assume .
If we use Proposition 2 and the examples listed in case (7) of the theorem. Thus, we may assume .
If we use Lemma 4.
If and we use Lemma 5.
Example 9 consider the case .
Lemma 6 exclude the case , . □
6. Speculations on the Higher Derivatives and Uniqueness
Fix integral and non-degenerate varieties and . Set and . Fix a finite set , , and . Set . Suppose that (resp. ), i.e., assume that S is in the k-Terracini locus of S (resp. the pair is in the Terracini locus of the join of X and W). Thus, the differential of a certain map, call it f, is not injective at S (resp. at ). It is natural to ask if this is due that the fact that the fiber of f containing S (resp. ) has a positive-dimensional component passing through S (resp. ). Easy examples shows that this is not always the case (Examples 10 and 11).
Example 10.
Fix integer . We claim the existence of a smooth, rational and non-degenerate curve and such that , and , i.e., and . In this case the fiber of the abstract 2-secant map of X at is finite. Fix an integer . Let be the rational normal curve. Fix such that . Since C is a rational normal curve and , the degree 6 scheme is linearly independent. Thus, . Fix a general line and a general linear subspace such that and . Since and M is general, .
Claim 1:
and the linear projection from M induces an isomorphism between C and the degree d curve .
Proof of Claim 1:
Since C is smooth, each point of is contained in a tangent line or a secant line of C. Since is a rational normal curve, every closed subscheme of C of degree at most is linearly independent. Thus, the assumption implies . Since L is general in and M has codimension at least 3 in , and hence and induces an isomorphism between C and the degree d non-degenerate curve X. □
Claim 1 shows that and . Since , the fibers of the map have dimension 0.
Example 11.
Fix integer . We claim the existence of a smooth, rational and non-degenerate curve and such that , is a point not in X and , i.e., and . In this case the fiber of the abstract 2-secant map of X at is finite. Fix an integer . Let be the rational normal curve. We adapt Example 10. Instead of L we take a general and take as M a general linear subspace of codimension containing c.
Fix an integral and non-degenerate n-dimensional variety and a positive integer s such that . Let denote the set of all with X-rank r. Let denote the set of all which are in the linear span of a unique subset of X with cardinality. The sets and are constructible and the first one contains a non-empty open subset of . Assume that has the expected dimension, , to hope to have . There are criterion which guarantee that is dense in , (for any X weak nondefectivity and tangential nondefectivity ([10,11,12]), for tensors and partially symmetric tensors the famous Kruskal criterion and its modifications; up to now for tensors the best results are in [37]).
Question 4.
Assume dense in . Describe in specific cases the non-uniqueness set .
There are examples with , containing a general , and very small (linearly normal embeddings of elliptic curves). If , say with and , q is in the linear span of all , , but none of these sets irredundantly spans q. For tensors a general tensor of each rank s is irredundantly spanned by sets of t points if in infinitely many ways ([38], Theorem 3.8). The following example with z any positive integer shows that sometimes above its rank a point q may be irredundantly spanned by a unique set of cardinality .
Example 12.
We first construct a smooth curve , , and such that there is a unique with and . Let be a rational normal curve of degree . Fix 3 distinct points a, b and c of C and let o be a general element of . Let denote the linear projection from o. By Sylvester theorem (or because any subscheme of C of degree is linearly independent) there is no such that and . Thus, and induces an embedding of C into . Set , and . Thus, and the set S irredundantly spans q. Assume the existence of a set such that and irredundantly spans q, i.e., and . Set and . Since ℓ is an embedding, . Since , . Thus, contradicting the fact that the lines and meets at q. Now we fix an integer and modify the previous example to obtain one for z. Fix an integer . Let be a rational normal curve. Fix general points and a general . Since , any closed subscheme of C of degree is linearly independent. Let denote the linear projection from o. The map induces an embedding . Set . By construction the -dimensional space meets the z-dimensional space at a unique point, q. Since any points of C are linearly independent, we first see that q has X-rank z, then that is the unique set evincing the X-rank of q and then that is the unique subset of X with cardinality irredundantly spanning q.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
- Ådlandsvik, B. Joins and higher secant varieties. Math. Scan. 1987, 61, 213–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A.; Santarsiero, P. Terracini loci for 3 points on a Segre variety. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2012.00574. [Google Scholar]
- Ballico, E.; Chiantini, L. On the Terracini locus of projective varieties. Milan J. Math. 2021, 89, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chandler, K. Hilbert functions of dots in linear general position. In Proceedings of the Conference on Zero-Dimensional Schemes, Ravello, Italy, 7 June 1992; pp. 65–79. [Google Scholar]
- Chandler, K.A. Geometry of dots and ropes. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1995, 347, 767–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chandler, K.A. A brief proof of a maximal rank theorem for generic double points in projective space. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 2000, 353, 1907–1920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ballico, E. On the irreducibility of the Severi variety of nodal curves in a smooth surface. Arch. Math. 2019, 113, 483–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dedieu, T. Comment on: On the irreducibility of the Severi variety of nodal curves in a smooth surface, by E. Ballico. Arch. Math. 2020, 114, 171–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eastwood, A. Collision the biais et application à l’interpolation. Manuscripta Math. 1990, 67, 227–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiantini, L.; Ciliberto, C. Weakly defective varieties. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 2002, 454, 151–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiantini, L.; Ciliberto, C. On the concept of k-secant order of a variety. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 2006, 73, 436–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiantini, L.; Ciliberto, C. On the dimension of secant varieties. J. Eur. Math. Soc. 2006, 73, 436–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chiantini, L.; Ottaviani, G.; Vanniuwenhoven, N. On identifiability of symmetric tensors of subgeneric rank. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 2017, 369, 4021–4042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alexander, J.; Hirschowitz, A. Un lemme d’Horace différentiel: Application aux singularité hyperquartiques de P5. J. Algebr. Geom. 1992, 1, 411–426. [Google Scholar]
- Alexander, J.; Hirschowitz, A. La méthode d’Horace éclaté: Application à l’interpolation en degré quatre. Invent. Math. 1992, 107, 585–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexander, J.; Hirschowitz, A. Polynomial interpolation in several variables. J. Algebr. Geom. 1995, 4, 201–222. [Google Scholar]
- Brambilla, M.C.; Ottaviani, G. On the Alexander-Hirschowitz Theorem. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 2008, 212, 1229–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hirschowitz, A. Le mèthod d’Horace. Manuscripta Math. 1985, 50, 337–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ciliberto, C.; Miranda, R. Interpolations on curvilinear schemes. J. Algebra 1998, 203, 677–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- González, S.; Mallavibarrena, R. Osculating degeneration of curves. Comm. Algebra 2003, 31, 3829–3845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ohno, M. An affirmative answer to a question of Ciliberto. Manuscripta Math. 1993, 81, 437–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolognesi, M.; Pirola, G. Osculating spaces and diophantine equations (with an Appendix by P. Corvaja and U. Zannier). Math. Nachr. 2011, 284, 960–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kaji, H. On the tangentially degenerate curves, II. Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. 2014, 45, 745–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaji, H. On the tangentially degenerate curves. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 1986, 33, 430–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Landsberg, J.M. Tensors: Geometry and Applications. 2012, Volume 128. Available online: http://213.230.96.51:8090/files/ebooks/Matematika/Landsberg%20J.M.%20Tensors..%20geometry%20and%20applications%20(GSM128,%20AMS,%202012)(ISBN%209780821869079)(O)(464s)%20MAl%20.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2021).
- Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A.; Santarsiero, P. Dentifiability of rank-3 tensors, Mediterranean. J. Math. 2021, 18, 1–26. [Google Scholar]
- Buczyński, J.; Landsberg, J.M. Ranks of tensors and a generalization of secant varieties. Linear Algebra Appl. 2013, 438, 668–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buczyński, J.; Landsberg, J.M. On the third secant variety. J. Algebr. Comb. 2014, 40, 475–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ballico, E. Linear dependent subsets of Segre varieties. J. Geom. 2020, 111, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballico, E. Linearly dependent and concise subsets of a Segre variety depending on k factors. Bull. Korean Math. Soc. 2021, 58, 253–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ballico, E. Curvilinear subschemes of Segre varieties and the cactus rank. Gulf. J. Math. 2022, in press. [Google Scholar]
- Hartshorne, R. Algebraic Geometry; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
- Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A. Stratification of the fourth secant variety of Veronese variety via the symmetric rank. Adv. Pure Appl. Math. 2013, 4, 215–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Abo, G. Ottaviani and C. Peterson, Induction for secant varieties of Segre varieties. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 2006, 361, 767–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- 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]
- Catalisano, M.V.; Geramita, A.V.; Gimigliano, A. Higher secant varieties of the Segre varieties × ⋯ × . J. Pure Appl. Algebra 2005, 201, 367–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lovitz, B.; Petrov, F. A generalization of Kruskal’s theorem on tensor decomposition. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2103.15633. [Google Scholar]
- Ballico, E.; Bernardi, A.; Chiantini, L.; Guardo, E. Bounds on the tensor rank. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 2018, 197, 1771–1785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).