1. Introduction
In the first part of the introduction, and in
Section 2,
Section 3 and
Section 4, we work over an algebraically closed field
(the reader looses nothing taking
instead of
, but with the Zariski topology), while in
Section 5, we work over
or
and use the Euclidean topology. In
Section 5, we discuss the case of the Euclidean topology with
semialgebraic cost functions and
generalized cost functions (
Section 5). In
Section 4, we discuss the
solution set, a well-study notion for tensor decompositions and additive decompositions of forms. See [
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7] for background on these topics with a strong bent toward applications, different applications in different books or papers.
Fix an integral and non-degenerate variety
over
. For each
the
X-rank
of
q is the minimal cardinality of a subset
such that
, where
denotes the linear span. The notion of
X-rank unifies several important notions: tensor rank, partially symmetric tensor rank, additive decompositions of forms [
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7].
Our contribution is to add a cost function w, i.e., a function so that is the minimal for all finite , such that . We assume that is a proper closed algebraic subset of X. Since spans , without the other assumptions we will soon see that is a finite real number (Theorems 1 and 2). We assume for all . With this assumption, for all q. The main assumption is that w is upper semicontinuous for the Zariski topology of . We explain what it means since the Zariski topology is quite strange (not Hausdorff), but it has several key features. First of all, there is a finite decomposition of , i.e., and for all , with each locally closed and w is constant on each . Moreover, the boundary condition is satisfied, i.e., for all the set is a union of some . Semicontinuity with respect to such partition is equivalent to for all and all . Since X is irreducible, there is a unique such that is a non-empty open subset of and all points of have the minimum weight. We normalize w so that for all , but this is not a key requirement. With this requirement, we see that for almost all .
The
X-rank function
is not semicontinuous in most interesting cases [
8,
9], but nevertheless, there is a non-empty Zariski open subset
of
such that all
have the same rank,
, called the
generic rank of
X (Remark 2). If
, the cost-function
w is also semicontinuous for the Euclidean topology, but remember that we are assuming that
is finite (finitely many prices). Our first result is the following theorem.
Theorem 1. Let w be any normalized cost-function. Then for all .
Note that Theorem 1 works for every normalized cost-function.
Now instead of a single normalized cost-function, we take infinitely many unknown normalized cost functions
, one different for different points
q. If we only take cost-functions with value 1 or
we get the following notion of open rank introduced for affine spaces (a more difficult case that projective spaces, affine geometry instead of linear algebra) by A. Białynicki-Birula and A. Schinzel [
10,
11] and considered for projective spaces in [
12].
The
open X-rank for a point
is defined in the following way. The integer
is the minimal integer
t such that for any closed set
there is
such that
and
[
12].
The open-cost X-rank of is the minimal integer t such that for all normalized cost-functions w.
The following result shows that is finite for all q.
Theorem 2. We have for all
Theorem 1 shows that for an arbitrary normalized cost function, there is an upper bound for all
,
, in terms usually well-known for each important
X [
1,
4].
Obviously, Theorem 2 implies Theorem 1 and hence we only prove Theorem 2. The proof is an adaptation of [
13].
We show that Theorems 1 and 2 are optimal for some cost-function (Example 1).
We explain now a very particular case of normalized cost-function w, the one with as values only 1 and . For these w, the set is a closed subset of X for the Zariski topology and . Conversely, for any closed set , , the function w with if and if is a normalized cost-function. For any is an integer, the minimal cardinality of a finite set such that . For , the closed set B depends on q, i.e., (as we will see in the proof of Theorem 2), is the minimal integer t such that for all closed sets there is such that and .
In
Section 3, we discuss the well-known notion of the
solution set (for the usual
X-rank): it is the set
of all finite sets
such that
and
.
In the next observation, we explain the motivation for semialgebraic cost-function and, in general, the use of semialgebraic sets for real tensors.
Remark 1. Suppose you consider real tensors. Often it is necessary/useful to consider the Euclidean topology and look at the ranks of “ general ” tensors with a certain format and to study their ranks. Over there is a unique general rank and it is achieved by all complex tensors outside a family with lower dimension ([4,7] [§6.2]). Over there may be several different real ranks achieved by non-empty open subsets (for the Euclidean topology) of and the corresponding ranks are said to be typical ([7] [§6.2]). These open subsets are semialgebraic (a very restrictive property), and the complement of the union of these open semialgebraic sets is a lower dimensional real semialgebraic set. In general, the partition of given by the rank is a semialgebraic partition. The same occurs for additive decompositions of real forms and in general for the set of real points , where X is a real algebraic variety. Thus, semialgebraic partitions occur in nature. In the applications, one often does not look at solutions in some Euclidean space , but in the closed semi-algebraic set ([9]). We allow these semialgebraic sets as for normalized semialgebraic sets, but they are not algebraic. Thus, semialgebraic cost-functions are essential for several problems over the real numbers. Take again a real
X with the Euclidean topology. In
Section 5, we define arbitrary semicontinuous normalized cost-function
w without assuming that
w has finitely many values. In this way, one can take, for instance, a cost proportional to the square of a Euclidean distance from some
.
The last part of
Section 5 and
Section 5.1 adapts the idea of cost-function to expansions of a real
q into complex addenda, but in which we prescribe that the non-real addenda appear as complex conjugate pairs. We explain here the case of rank 1 decompositions of real tensors. Take an integer
and
k finite-dimensional real vector spaces
and set
.
V is the vector space of all real tensors of format
. Set
and
. The complex vector space
is the space of all complex tensors of format
. Note that
. Fix any real tensor
. A rank 1 decomposition of
T with
e addenda is a finite expansion
with
for all
. Let
denote the complex conjugate. A
σ-invariant decomposition of
T with
e addenda is a finite expansion
with
for all
in which for any non-real addenda its complex conjugate appears in the expansion with the same coefficient. In the last part of
Section 5 we discus this known concept. We apply the cost function not to the points of
(real points of the variety
X) or
(complex points of the variety
X) but to the set
of all finite subsets
such that
and
. We may prefer the real solutions, but allow, if necessary, the non-real
-invariant solutions, just giving cost 1 to a real point of
S and cost
,
, to a pair
with
. We say that
S has label
with
non-negative integers and
if
and
. Set
. For any fixed label
,
, the set of all
-invariant subsets of
with cardinality
e has real dimension
, the same dimension of the totally real ones, the ones with label
. Thus, each solution with label
“ costs ” in principle as the totally real ones. This framework is promising for a substitution of typical ranks [
7].
3. Examples
We recall that a non-degenerate curve
,
, is said to be
strange if there is
(called the strange point of
X) such that a general tangent line of
X contains
o. Such curves exist only in positive characteristics [
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20,
21] and they are always singular, except the smooth conic in characteristic 2 ([
14,
21] [Theorem IV.3.9]). Since two different lines have at most one common point, a strange curve has a unique strange point. In the positive characteristic it is easy to produce all strange curves [
15].
Proposition 1. Let , , be an integral and non-degenerate m-dimensional variety.
(a) If and q is not a strange point of X, then .
(b) If and either or q is not a strange point of X, then .
Proof. Fix a normalized cost-function w. Assume and that q is not a strange point of X. These assumptions imply that the scheme is a finite set, where V is a general codimension m linear subspace of containing q. Varying V, we see that we may also assume that for all p in the finite set . Since and , to prove part (a) it is sufficient to prove that spans V.
First assume
. We have an exact sequence of coherent sheaves on
:
for any coherent sheaf
on
let
denote its
i-th chomology group (it is a finite dimensional vector space over
). Set
. Since
X spans
,
. Since
X is integral, it is reduced and connected. Thus,
. Hence,
. The long cohomology exact Sequence of (
1) gives
, i.e., the finite set
spans
V. Thus,
r points of
span
V. Now, assume
. We use induction on the integer
m. To use the case
and the inductive assumption, it is sufficient to prove that
is integral for a general hyperplane
passing through
q and that
spans
H. Since
, the second assertion follows from the long cohomology exact sequence of (
1) with
H instead of
V.
Obviously,
. Since
q is not a strange point of
X,
has no multiple component. Since
q is not a strange point of
X, the restriction to
X of the linear projection
from
q is separable. We use the second Bertini theorem as stated in ([
22] [part 4) of Th. I.6.3]).
Now we prove part (b). If
it is sufficient to use that
general points of
X. Now assume
and that (b) is true for
-dimensional non-degenerate varieties in
. Since
q is not a strange point of
X, the restriction to
of the linear projection is separable and we conclude using the second Bertini theorem ([
22][part 4) of Th. I.6.3]). □
Proposition 2. Let , , be an integral and non-degenerate curve. Assume that X is strange with strange point q. Let s be the separable degree of the restriction to of the linear projection from q. We have if and only if .
Proof. Fix a normalized cost-function w. If assume . We have if and only if there are infinitely many lines through q containing at least two points of (indeed these lines form algebraic variety of dimension 1). Thus, if , then for all cost-functions w with . If , there is a cost-function w such that , because giving weight to a suitable finite subset F of X, we need at least three points of to span q. □
Remark 3. Let , , be an integral and non-degenerate curve. Obviously, for all . Assume that X is strange with point . Let denote the linear projection from q. The curve X is called flat if for each set such that and S is linearly independent of the set . By ([23] [Theorem 2]), a pair , , satisfies if and only if X is flat. Call s the separable degree of . By Proposition 2, if , then . Assume . If is a rational normal curve of , then X is flat ([23] [Proposition 2]) and hence . Flat curves such that is not a rational normal curve are very strange in the sense of [20,23] ([Proposition 1]). Note that if and only if for each finite set and any linearly independent set such that the set is linearly independent. Proposition 3. Let , , be an integral and non-degenerate strange curve with strange point . Assume . The integer is the minimal integer α such that there are infinitely many linearly independent sets such that , is linearly dependent and no proper subset of is linearly dependent.
Proof. It is sufficient to test the normalized cost-functions, which have only values 1 and . Thus, is the minimal integer b such that for every finite set there is , which is linearly independent, but is linearly dependent. Since B is an arbitrary finite subset, the minimality of the integer b is the same as the minimality of the integer in the statement of Proposition 3. □
In the following example, we work over
and the answer is the same for the Euclidean topology and the Zariski topology (for the real additive decompositions of real binary forms and their typical ranks with respect to the Euclidean topology, see [
24]).
Example 1. Let , , be a rational normal curve. Fix a normalized cost function w and set , and . Note that and B are finite. Fix q and set . The following facts are known [4,25]: - (i)
All ranks between 1 and r are achieved by some .
- (ii)
If , then ([25] Equation (9)). - (iii)
If , then is a constructible algebraic set of dimension ([25] Equation (9)).
Less well-known but easy to check are the following statements:
(v) If , then for each finite set , there is such that ;
(vi) Assume and set . Then the first integer such that is the integer and for any finite set there is such that .
(a) Assume and set (part (ii)). If , then . If , then (part (vi)). If , then (by (vi)), while if , then .
(b) Assume . Part (v) gives .
Thus, if the maximum of all is and it is achieved exactly by the points . If , then the maximum is r. Thus, for all , while for all . Since , this example shows that Theorems 1 and 2 are sharp for all odd r.
4. Mild Cost-Functions
Let be an integral and non-degenerate variety. Since (Theorem 2) to get the upper bounds on is sufficient to use the more extremes normalized cost-functions, i.e., the ones who only take the values 1 and . In this section, we take the mildest cost-functions in the following sense. Let denote the maximum of all , . For any , let denote the set of all such that and . The definition of X-rank shows that the solution set of q with respect to X is non-empty for all . For any normalized cost-function w, let denote the set of all finite sets , such that and . The definition of shows that the solution set of q with respect to is non-empty for all .
The normalized cost-function w is said to be mild if for all .
Proposition 4. Let w be a mild normalized cost-function. Then, for all .
Proof. Fix . We have . Since , we get . Fix such that and , i.e., assume . We have . □
Remark 4. In characteristic zero or in positive characteristic if to define mildness and get Proposition 4 it is sufficient to assume for all , because in these cases [23]. The normalized cost-function w is said to be X-mild if for all . Proposition 4 for a fixed X only requires that w is X-mild. Remark 5. Take any cost-function w such that for all , e.g., a mild one by Proposition 4. To give an optimal additive decomposition of q, one always takes some . If w is not the constant function 1, then some of the sets may be more expensive with respect to w. The search of the solutions, at least until the very end, does not require the knowledge of w, and hence, one first uses the known algorithms/softwares and then decides the total cost.
5. Semialgebraic Cost-Functions and Generalized Cost-Functions for the Euclidean Topology
In this section, we take algebraic varieties defined over
or
and use the Euclidean topology. Obviously, we assume
. We assume that
is a finite set and that for all
the set
is semialgebraic in the sense of [
26]. We call them semialgebraic cost-functions. One could normalize
w assuming that 1 is the minimum of the finite set
. Note that
is a proper closed semialgebraic subset of
X, but we do not assume that
has empty interior, although sometimes this may be a useful assumption. These assumption may be stated in the following way (assuming
for all
). We get the existence of a finite decomposition
of
X, i.e.,
and
for all
, with each
semialgebraic and
w is constant on each
. Moreover, the boundary condition is satisfied, i.e., for all
the set
is a union of some
. Semicontinuity with respect to such partition is equivalent to
for all
and all
. Note that
is a closed semialgebraic subset of
X. Non-triviality means
. If
w is normalized, then
is a non-empty open semialgebraic subset of
X. An element
is said to be
typical if
contains a non-empty open subset of
X. Easy examples with
of dimension 1 show that all elements of
may be typical. For any
X, it is easy to find a normalized cost-function with
and only typical values: just take as
any closed semialgebraic set
. For the usual
-rank and the notion of real typical rank, see [
13,
24,
27,
28].
Let
be an integral and non-degenerate variety defined over
. We also assume that the embedding
is defined over
. For any variety
Y defined over
call
the set of its complex points and
the set of its real point. Thus,
and
. Since the embedding of
X in
is defined over
,
. Fix
. It is defined the
-rank
of
q and the
-rank
of
q. The paper [
29] and other papers quoted therein study another type of rank (called the weight of
q in [
29]). Let
denote the complex conjugation. We defined the weight of
as the minimal cardinality of a set
such that
and
. The interested reader may extend the definition of
(
w any algebraic or semialgebraic cost-function) to the notion of weight, just taking only finite sets
such that
.
Now assume that X is defined over or and use the Euclidean topology. We define the generalized cost-functionw in the following way. Fix a closed subset B of X, and set for all . Let be an upper semicontinuos function such that has a no-empty interior. For instance, if is isomorphic to an open subset of a Euclidean space we may take and take as the square of the distance from p.
Remark 6. The definition of mildness and X-mildeness is the same for semialgebraic normalized cost-functions and generalized cost-function (with for all ) and Proposition 4 is true in the semialgebraic and generalized case (its proof require no modification in these cases). Proposition 1 works for semialgebraic cost-functions and generalized cost-functions because any non-empty open subset U of X for the Euclidean topology is dense in X for the Zariski topology and we may use the inducting proof taking a hyperplane H such that . The other results and examples of Section 3 are not related to this section because in the characteristic zero, no non-linear variety is strange. 5.1. Labels, i.e., Partially Complex Solutions
Let
be an integral and non-degenerate variety defined over
. Let
(resp.
) denote the set of all real (resp. complex) points of
X. The complex conjugation
is an order two involution with
as the fixed set. Note that
is the set of all
-invariant points of
. Fix
. We have defined two different ranks of
q, the one,
, with respect to
and the one,
, with respect to the set
. The first one is called the complex rank of
q, while the second one is called the real rank of
q. We always have
, but quite often
. For instance, if
X is as in Example 1 for any
there are
with
and
. Thus, real additive decompositions may be much more expensive than the complex ones. The same is true for “ generic ”
(one single integer for complex rank, several for the real one, the minimum being the generic complex rank
); these ranks are called the
typical ranks of
with respect to
[
7,
24,
27,
28]. See [
7] (Ch 6) for the typical ranks of tensors. For any positive integer
t, let
denote the set of all
such that
. Since the complex conjugation
acts on
, it acts on
. Let
denote the set of all its fixed points, i.e., the set of all
such that
and
. The label of
S is the pair
, where
and
. Note that
. Fix
. Taking the linear span over
we get a linear subspace
of
such that
is a real vector space such that
. The weight of
q is the minimal cardinality of a
-invariant subset
S of
such that
. There is a notion of typical weight, and it may be a string of integers, the minimum one being the generic rank
. However, under mild assumptions, there are only two typical weights,
and
[
29] (Remark 3.3, Theorem 3.4 and 3.5), while many more are the typical ranks (see [
7] (Ch 6)). Set
. For any fixed label
,
, the set of all
-invariant subsets of
with cardinality
e has real dimensions
, the same dimension of the totally real ones, the ones with label
. Thus, each solution with label
“ costs ” in principle as the totally real ones.