Tjurina spectrum and Hertling conjecture
Seung-Jo Jung
S.-J. Jung : Department of Mathematics Education, and Institute of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju, 54896, Korea
seungjo@jbnu.ac.kr
,
In-Kyun Kim
I.-K. Kim : June E Huh Center for Mathematical Challenges, Korea Institute for Advanced Study, 85 Hoegiro Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 02455, Korea
soulcraw@kias.re.kr
,
Morihiko Saito
M. Saito : RIMS Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8502 Japan
msaito@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp
and
Youngho Yoon
Y. Yoon : Department of Mathematics, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju-si, Chungcheongbuk-do, 28644, Korea
mathyyoon@gmail.com
Abstract.
We present a proof of a conjecture of Q. Shi, Y. Wang and H. Zuo claiming that the maximal spectral number of a hypersurface isolated singularity does not belong to the Tjurina spectrum. This follows from the self-duality of the Jacobian ring, which is compatible with the action of and also with the -filtration. We also provide a sufficient condition for the generalized Hertling conjecture on the variance of Tjurina spectrum to fail, and calculate some examples using some codes in Singular.
This work was partially supported by National Research Foundation of Korea (the first author: NRF-2021R1C1C1004097, the second author: NRF-2023R1A2C1003390 and NRF-2022M3C1C8094326, and the fourth author: RS-2023-00245670).
Let be a convergent power series of variables having an isolated singularity at 0, where is the coordinate system of and . We may assume that is a polynomial by the finite determinacy, see for instance [GLS 07]. The spectrum can be defined to be the Poincaré polynomial of the -filtration on the Jacobian ring , that is,
|
|
|
|
Here with the Milnor number, is the Jacobian ideal, and is the quotient filtration of the -filtration on the Brieskorn lattice (or the microlocal -filtration on ), see [ScSt 85], [Va 82a] (and also [JKSY 22]). We assume that the are weakly increasing.
The Tjurina subspectrum (or spectrum ) with is defined by
|
|
|
|
where , and the are weakly increasing, see [JKY 18], [JKSY 22]. Note that is the Tjurina number of . Set , and
|
|
|
where the are weakly increasing. This is the Poincaré polynomial of the image of
|
|
|
and is called the complemental part of the spectrum. We say that the () and () are the missing spectral numbers. The Tjurina spectrum is a very subtle invariant of a non-weighted-homogeneous polynomial having an isolated singularity at 0, and the relation to the Bernstein-Sato polynomials does not seem very clear, see for instance [Sa 23a].
Remark 1. The Tjurina spectrum is unstable under a -constant deformation, for instance, if (), where , and () with using Remark 1.2d below. (Indeed, in ) for some .) So it does not seem easy to determine the minimal stratification of the base space of a miniversal -constant deformation of such that the Tjurina spectrum is constant on each stratum in general.
Remark 2. It is easy to see that the Tjurina spectrum depends only on the hypersurface germ in the case is semi-weighted-homogeneous or Newton-nondegenerate and convenient (using Remarks 1.2d and 1.2e below) although this seems quite unclear in general.
Remark 3. Some of the missing spectral numbers may belong to the Tjurina spectrum, for instance, if , where and .
Remark 4. The missing spectral numbers () do not have a symmetry even in a semi-weighted-homogeneous case unless , ; for instance if , where with missing spectral numbers , see also Remark 2.3c below. They often have it as a consequence of Theorem 1 just below if the modality is quite small. Here symmetry means that the are independent of .
Theorem 1. If , the minimal and maximal missing spectral numbers and have both multiplicity one in , and
|
|
|
|
with for . Moreover the strict inequality holds in (3) if the monodromy is semisimple or more generally if is annihilated by . Here is the Brieskorn lattice, is the -filtration of Kashiwara and Malgrange indexed by , and , see 1.1 below.
The first assertion for the maximal one is a corollary of Theorem 2 below. For the minimal one and for the last assertion, we apply the following.
Proposition 1. The -filtration on the Jacobian ring is a filtration by -submodules, and its graded pieces are annihilated by the maximal ideal.
Proposition 2. We have the inclusions
|
|
|
|
These two propositions respectively follow from the coincidence of the -filtration with the quotient filtration of the microlocal -filtration on (see [Sa 91, Rem. 3.11], [DiSa 14b, Sect. 4.11], [JKSY 22]) and from the property of the -filtration on the Brieskorn lattice (see [ScSt 85], [Va 82a], [Sa 89]). As for the last part of Theorem 1, note that the last assumption implies that the image of by the action of belongs to . In the Newton non-degenerate case, the latter hypothesis is satisfied if the intersection of the diagonal of with the boundary of the Newton polytope is contained in the interior of the maximal-dimensional compact face of the Newton polytope.
In this paper we explain a proof of the following, which has been conjectured in [SWZ 23].
Theorem 2. In the case , the maximal spectral number is always a missing spectral number, that is, , hence .
This follows from the self-duality of the Jacobian ring which is compatible with the action of and also with the -filtration, see [Sa 89]. Together with Theorem 1, Theorem 2 seems quite useful to simplify some arguments in [SWZ 23].
In this paper we also provide some counterexamples to the generalized Hertling conjecture on the variance of the Tjurina spectrum in [SWZ 23] claiming that the latter is bounded by the width of the Tjurina spectrum (that is, the difference between the maximal and minimal spectral numbers) divided by 12, see 2.3 below. It seems then interesting to consider their difference as an analytic invariant of a non-weighted-homogeneous polynomial having an isolated singularity at 0, which measures the complexity of singularity in some sense.
The simplest example (with respect to ) such that may be with , , and modality 10 (combining [Ga 74] and [Va 82c]). It is interesting that any -constant deformation of with and seems to have non-positive except the case with as far as computed, see Remark 2.3c below. For the moment no counterexample to the generalized Hertling conjecture is known in the non-semi-weighted-homogeneous case (where cannot be very small unless is rather trivial).
In Section 1 we explain the self-duality of the bifiltered Gauss-Manin system associated with , and prove Theorem 2. In Section 2 we show a sufficient condition for the generalized Hertling conjecture on the variance of Tjurina spectrum to fail, and compute some examples.
1. Self-duality of the bifiltered Gauss-Manin system
In this section we explain the self-duality of the bifiltered Gauss-Manin system associated with , and prove Theorem 2.
1.1. Brieskorn lattice and Gauss-Manin system. Let be a convergent power series of variables having an isolated singularity at 0. Here is the coordinate system of and .
The Brieskorn lattice (see [Br 70]) is defined by
|
|
|
This is free of rank over and also over with the Milnor number and
|
|
|
see for instance [Sa 89], [Sa 94]. The action of and is defined respectively by the action of and by
|
|
|
|
Set (the localization by ). The Gauss-Manin system is isomorphic to the localization of the Brieskorn lattice by the action of , that is,
|
|
|
This is a free -module of rank . It has the -filtration indexed by such that the are free -modules of rank and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have the Hodge filtration on defined by
|
|
|
|
see [Sa 89, 2.7] (where is in our paper). This is shifted by compared with the right -module case as in [Sa 88b] (where one has the shift by taking for ). Set
|
|
|
By definition we have the canonical isomorphisms
|
|
|
|
where the last isomorphism is given by the generator of .
1.2. Spectrum. With the notation of 1.1, we have the canonical isomorphisms
|
|
|
|
where is the Milnor fiber of , and λ denotes the -eigenspace for the action of the monodromy (which is the inverse of the Milnor monodromy, see [DiSa 14a]).
Let be the Hodge filtration on the vanishing cohomology (see [St 77]), which is compatible with the decomposition by the eigenvalues of the monodromy. This Hodge filtration coincides with the Hodge filtration on the vanishing cycle Hodge module, which is denoted in this paper by , see [Sa 90]. This can be verified by taking a compactification of as in [ScSt 85] (see also [Sa 84]), since the vanishing cycle functor commutes with the cohomological direct image functor by a projective morphism. Using this, it is easy to show for instance the invariance of the spectrum under a -constant deformation proved in [Va 82b].
It is quite well known that the isomorphism (1.2.1) induces the isomorphisms
|
|
|
|
With the notation of the introduction, the spectrum of is usually defined by
|
|
|
|
This is equivalent to the definition (1) in the introduction by (1.2.2).
We have the symmetry of spectral numbers using Hodge theory (see [St 77]):
|
|
|
|
Remark 1.2a. In some papers, the spectrum is shifted by , see for instance [ScSt 85], [He 00], [DGPS 20]. This comes from the asymptotic expansions of period integrals. It is better to take the unshifted definition when one considers the relation to the multiplier ideals or to the roots of Bernstein-Sato polynomials.
Remark 1.2b. The original definition of spectrum in [St 77, Sect. 5.3] is slightly different, since is used for the integer part (although it is not shifted by as in [ScSt 85]). This comes from a confusion about the monodromy explained in [DiSa 14a, Sect. 2.1].
Remark 1.2c. In the weighted homogeneous case there is an explicit formula for the spectrum
|
|
|
|
where the are the weights of variables such that . This was found by Steenbrink [St 77], see also [JKY 18], [JKSY 22].
Remark 1.2d. We say that is semi-weighted-homogeneous polynomial if with weighted homogenous of degree , that is, (), and has an isolated singularity at 0. In this case we have by [Va 82b]
|
|
|
|
Moreover the -filtration on is generated by the monomials with
|
|
|
|
This can be shown easily in the case using the Euler field, but the argument in the general semi-weighted-homogeneous case does not seem quite trivial, see [Sa 23b, Remark 2.2d] (and also Remark 1.2e below for the convenient weighted-homogeneous case where for any ).
Remark 1.2e. Assume is Newton non-degenerate and convenient (that is, contains for any ). We have the Newton filtration on consisting of ideals generated by monomials and such that
|
|
|
|
where is the Newton polytope with , see for instance [Sa 88a], [JKSY 24]. This filtration is exhaustive since is convenient. As a corollary of the proof of the Steenbrink formula in [JKSY 24], we get that
|
|
|
The quotient filtration of on coincides with the quotient
|
|
|
|
filtration of the -filtration on the Brieskorn lattice via (1.1.4).
|
|
Here [Sa 88a] does not seem quite sufficient. Indeed, it proves only an assertion on the -filtration on the Gauss-Manin system and some additional argument seems to be actually required, strictly speaking, see [JKSY 24, Remark 2.1f] and also [Sa 23b, Remark 2.2d].
Remark 1.2f. Assume and with the projection (similarly for ). Let and be the Milnor and Tjurina numbers of respectively. It is difficult to determine from , see [Al 23]. This is the same for the Tjurina spectrum even though we have the compatibility of the following Thom-Sebastiani type isomorphism with the -filtration (see [ScSt 85], [Va 82a]):
|
|
|
|
This filtered isomorphism however implies the strict compatibility with the -filtration of the canonical surjection
|
|
|
|
So is a subspectrum of , that is, the difference has positive coefficients. We can verify that the monomial whose exponent is the spectral number
|
|
|
always belongs to this difference and the minimum of the above two numbers is a missing spectral number of looking at the maximal number such that the image of in the right hand side of (1.2.10) (that is, ) is contained in . Here and are the minimal (missing) spectral number of , and similarly for . In the simplest case with , the difference consists only of this monomial.
1.3. Self-duality of the bifiltered Gauss-Manin system. We have the following.
Theorem 1.3 ([Sa 89, 2.7]). There is a canonical pairing
|
|
|
such that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for any , , with , and the induced pairing
|
|
|
|
is non-degenerate, where the filtration on is by the order of . Moreover the pairing is strictly compatible with the -filtration so that
|
|
|
|
with , and the induced pairing
|
|
|
|
for is non-degenerate.
Remark 1.3a. For the last part of Theorem 1.3, we use the assertion that the canonical pairing induces a polarization of mixed Hodge structures via the isomorphisms (1.2.1). It does not seem quite clear whether the non-degeneracy of (1.3.4) follows from the remaining part, although it does forgetting . Indeed, by (1.3.1) we get
|
|
|
|
(and also replacing with or with in the middle equality of (1.3.1)). In the case the monodromy is semisimple, this implies that
|
|
|
|
where ().
In general we can use a filtration of such that the graded pieces are simple -modules together with the assertion that is a regular holonomic -module, that is, is generated over by the .
Remark 1.3b. In the case , the induced self-pairing on can be identified with the self-pairing defined by using the Grothendieck residue pairing :
|
|
|
|
for , where and , see [Ha 66, p. 195], [GrHa 78, p. 659].
Remark 1.3c. It has been conjectured by K. Saito that the difference between the maximal and minimal exponents of a hypersurface isolated singularity is at most 1 if and only if the singularity is rational double or simple elliptic or cusp, see [SWZ 23]. Here the exponents are defined by using “good sections”, and do not necessarily coincide with the spectral numbers defined by Steenbrink [St 77] using Hodge theory, see for instance [Sa 18]. The conjecture does not hold with their formulation in general. (They say that a non-standard order of is never used. But this denial never follows from their formulation.)
Assume for instance . There are free generators of over such that and () with , since . Note that (1.2.5) says that the spectral numbers of are given by
|
|
|
|
The Brieskorn lattice is generated over by the () with
|
|
|
|
using the theory of opposite filtrations [Sa 89]. Here are replaced by for some . This gives a very good section, since , see [Sa 89], [Sa 18]. One can however replace with
|
|
|
|
Its image in is unchanged. Setting (), one has up to sign. This gives also a good section, but it is not very good. Indeed, the exponents of the modified section for the -submodule are and , since
|
|
|
|
for some . The minimal and maximal exponents are then and in view of (1.3.8).
1.4. Proof of Theorem 2. Consider the endomorphism defined by the action of on . This is self-dual for the induced perfect self-pairing of in (1.3.2) using (1.3.1). (Note that in .) We thus get the induced perfect pairing
|
|
|
|
This is strictly compatible with the -filtration as a corollary of the non-degeneracy of the induced pairing (1.3.4), where if . So we get the induced perfect pairings
|
|
|
|
The assertion then follows from Proposition 1. Indeed, is contained in the maximal ideal using Nakayama’s lemma if . This finishes the proof of Theorem 2.
2. Generalized Hertling conjecture on variance
In this section we show a sufficient condition for the generalized Hertling conjecture on the variance of Tjurina spectrum to fail, and compute some examples.
2.1. Hertling conjecture on variance. In the notation of the introduction, the variance of the spectrum is defined by
|
|
|
|
since using the symmetry of spectral numbers, see (1.2.4). Hertling’s conjecture asserts the inequality
|
|
|
|
see [He 00]. This has been shown in the curve case, see [Sa 00] for the irreducible case, [Bré 02] for the non-degenerate case, and [Bré 04] for the general curve case. (The last paper does not seem to be published yet.) Note that the equality holds in the weighted homogeneous case, see [He 00].
2.2. Generalized Hertling conjecture. In the notation of the introduction, the variance of the Tjurina spectrum is defined by
|
|
|
|
The generalized Hertling conjecture on the variance of the Tjurina spectrum [SWZ 23] claims the inequality
|
|
|
|
where is the maximal Tjurina spectral number and by Theorem 1.
2.3. Counterexamples. We first prove the proposition below implying that the conjecture fails in certain cases.
Proposition 2.3. Assume is semi-weighted-homogeneous see Remark 1.2d) such that and either or more generally . Then the inequality (2.2.2) does not hold if
|
|
|
|
Proof. Note first that the inequality follows from the condition using the inequality in (3). We have the inequalities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The second inequality follows from the assertion in [He 00] mentioned at the end of 2.1, which implies that the equality holds in (2.1.2) for semi-weighted-homogeneous polynomials (using [Va 82b], see (1.2.6)). So the assertion follows. This finishes the proof of Proposition 2.3.
Remark 2.3a. The condition seems to be always satisfied as far as calculated.
Remark 2.3b. Let be a virtual -constant deformation of such that its Tjurina number coincides with and . Let be the maximal Tjurina spectral number of . In the case and , we have
|
|
|
|
On the other hand, if and , we have
|
|
|
|
These follow from the first equality of (2.3.2), since
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By (2.3.4) the proof of the inequality (2.2.2) is reduced to the case where is consecutive (that is, equal to for some ) assuming .
Example 2.3. Assume defines an ordinary -ple point, that is, the leading term of (see Remark 1.2d) is a homogeneous polynomial of degree having an isolated singularity. We have and . By Proposition 2.3 the inequality (2.2.2) then fails if
|
|
|
|
assuming . In the case is fixed (for instance if ), these conditions are satisfied when is sufficiently large. In the case with , the inequality (2.2.2) fails actually for according to a computation in Remark 2.3c just below.
Remark 2.3c. The situation seems different in the semi-weighted-homogeneous case. Using Singular (see [DGPS 20]), one can examine the inequality (2.2.2) for as follows.
LIB"sing.lib"; ring R=0, (x,y), ds; int a,b,c,d; a=7; b=7; c=1; d=1;
int p, q, i, j, t, N; poly f, Sm, Vt, av, sm, ai, bi, u, Max, X;
u=1; ai=u/a; bi=u/b; p=a-1-c; q=b-1-d; f=x^a+y^b+x^p*y^q;
sm=(a-1)*(b-1)-((2*a-1-c)*ai+(2*b-1-d)*bi)/2*c*d;
Sm=0; Vt=0; N=0; Max=0; t=(a-1)*(b-1)-c*d; av=sm/t;
for(i=1; i<=a-1; i++) {for(j=1; j<=b-1; j++) {if(i<a-c||j<b-d) {
X=i*ai+j*bi; Sm=Sm+X; Vt=Vt+(X-av)^2; N=N+1; if(X>Max) {Max=X;}}}}
if(N!=t || Sm/t!=av || tjurina(f)!=t) {printf("Error!");}
Vt/t - (Max-ai-bi)/12;
One can change the definitions of the positive integers as long as they satisfy the conditions: , , and . These conditions should imply the equality . Here it is insufficient to assume only the last inequality, see also Remark 4. The inequality (2.2.2) seems to hold, that is, the last output is a non-positive number, if except the case with . It may hold for any if are sufficiently large.
Remark 2.3d. In [SWZ 23] the computer program Singular is used for the proof of the inequality (2.2.2) in the case the modality is at most 3. Here one has to take a rational point on each connected stratum of a stratification of the base space of the miniversal -constant deformation of such that the Tjurina spectrum is constant on each stratum. This seems very difficult, since the Tjurina spectrum is not stable by -constant deformations. It may be simpler to try to prove the inequality (2.2.2) for all the possible candidates for the Tjurina spectrum for each possible , and show that it does not occur in the case the inequality does not hold. Here Theorems 1 and 2 are useful. However, this method may have some difficulty if is quite big (see the inclusion in (3) of Theorem 1), since one may get many possibilities of missing spectral numbers. In this case the last part of Remark 2.3b is sometimes helpful, and in the case where the last assumption of Theorem 1 is satisfied, one can consider for instance the following.
LIB"sing.lib"; LIB"gmssing.lib"; ring R=0,(x,y),ds; poly f,Av,Sm,Vt;
list sp; int i,j,k,m,t,s,c,A,r,mu; f=x^7+y^7; A=10; sp=spectrum(f);
s=size(sp[2]); mu=milnor(f); matrix S[1][mu]; m=1; for(i=1; i<=s; i++)
{for(j=1; j<=sp[2][i]; j++) {S[1,m]=sp[1][i]+1; m++;}} m--; if(m!=mu)
{sprintf(" m Error"); exit;} t=tjurina(f); for (k=m-1; S[1,k]>S[1,1]+1;
k--) {;} k++; if (k>t-A+1){A=t-k+1; sprintf(" A replaced by %s !",A);}
sprintf(" mu_f=%s, tau_f=%s, 1+al_1=%s, al_%s=%s, al_%s=%s",m,t,S[1,1]+1,
k-1,S[1,k-1],k,S[1,k]); for (r=0; r<=A; r++) {for (j=m-t; j>0; j--) {if
(j==m-t||t>=k){Sm=0; Vt=0; c=0; for(i=1; i<=m-j; i++){if(i<k||i>=k+m-t-j)
{Sm=Sm+S[1,i]; c++;}} if (c!=t) {sprintf(" c Error %s,%s",c,t);} Av=Sm/t;
for(i=1; i<=m-j; i++){if(i<k||i>=k+m-t-j){Vt=Vt+(S[1,i]-Av)^2;}} sprintf
(" tau_g = %s, T_g = [1,%s] \\cup [%s,%s], delta_g = %s",t,k-1,k+m-t-j,
m-j,Vt/t-(S[1,m-j]-S[1,1])/12);}} t--;}
This computes for any possible -constant deformation of whose Tjurina number is at least . Here is a non-negative number, which can be given effectively if one knows the lower bound of the Tjurina number of all the (possible) -constant deformation of . If one is not very sure about the lower bound, it is better to set very large (for instance ), since it is replaced with a theoretically maximal number by the code. Note that the lower bound is attained on the complement of a closed analytic subset of the -constant stratum, and one may examine the lower bound by calculating the Tjurina number at many points of the -constant stratum. We compute the case at the end if is sufficiently large. (One can see the spectral numbers by typing “S;”.) If the last outputs of all the lines are non-positive with sufficiently large, it would mean a positive answer to the conjecture. In the other case, it says nothing about the conjecture unless one can prove the existence of a -constant deformation satisfying the desired properties. These calculations do not seem to produce a counterexample in the case the modality is at most 3 (or perhaps even 4).
It seems very difficult to prove the conjecture in the case the singularities are parametrized by , since one can prove the conjecture only for each explicitly given , and never for all the in an algebraic way because of the ambiguity of missing spectral numbers.
Remark 2.3e. For Newton non-degenerate convenient polynomials of two variables, we can calculate the spectral numbers as in [St 77], [Ar 80], but it is very difficult to determine the Tjurina spectrum. There is however an exceptional case where is a linear combination of three monomials. Let with and . Set
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
as in a picture written in [Ar 80]. Then the vector space is spanned by the monomials for in a compatible way with the -filtration, where with . This can be proved by an argument similar to the proof of the Steenbrink conjecture in [JKSY 24] using a resolution by a double complex of Koszul complexes as in [Ko 76, Proposition 2.6], see [JKSY 24, Remark 2.1f]. (It is not trivial to generalize this argument using the picture in [Ar 80] to the case , see [JKSY 24].)
We see that the image of the monomial in vanishes if with
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note that mod ) is represented by each of , , up to a nonzero constant multiple using an argument similar to the semi-weighted-homogeneous case (since the number of monomials is three). It is easy to see that .
In the case , we can also verify that the image of in vanishes if with
|
|
|
Indeed, for with can be identified up to a nonzero constant multiple with mod , and it belongs to if .
We can then conclude that the monomials for form a filtered basis of the filtered vector space if
|
|
|
|
Here we use a well known assertion that a filtered surjection is a filtered isomorphism if it is an isomorphism forgetting the filtration. The condition (2.3.7) seems to be always satisfied as far as computed. Using Singular, the above argument can be implemented as follows.
LIB"sing.lib"; ring R=0,(x,y),ds; int a,b,c,d,i,j,p,q,t,tj; a=2;b=4;c=7;d=6;
poly f,Av,Sm,Vt,u; u=1; if(a*d+b*c>=c*d||a>b){printf("Input Error"); exit;}
f=x^a*y^b+x^c+y^d; tj=tjurina(f); matrix S[1][tj]; t=0; for (i=1; i<=a;
i++) {if (i*b%a==0) {t++; S[1,t]=i*u/a;}} for (i=1; i<=c; i++) {for (j=1;
j<b; j++) {if (b*i>a*j && (i<c || j<=d-b)) {t++; S[1,t]=i*u/c+j*(c-a)*
u/b/c;}}} for (j=1; j<b+d; j++) {for (i=1; i<a; i++) {if (a*j>b*i && j<=d)
{t++;S[1,t]=j*u/d+i*(d-b)*u/a/d;}}} p=1; q=1; for (i=2; i<=t; i++) {if
(S[1,i]>S[1,p]) {p=i;} if (S[1,i]<S[1,q]) {q=i;}} if (t!=tj) {printf(
"Serious error!");exit;} Sm=0; for(i=1; i<=t; i++){Sm=Sm+S[1,i];} Av=Sm/t;
Vt=0; for(i=1;i<=t;i++){Vt=Vt+(S[1,i]-Av)^2;} Vt/t-(S[1,p]-S[1,q])/12;
Here the positive integers must satisfy the conditions and . As far as computed, there are no counterexamples to the generalized Hertling conjecture among this type. However this does not imply any information about general -constant deformations where the situation is much more complicated.
In the general Newton non-degenerate case it seems very difficult to determine the Tjurina spectrum. Here one has to take a monomial basis of the Jacobian ring such that it defines a section of the surjection which is compatible with the Newton filtration. The last condition is never satisfied for arbitrary monomial bases. (This can be seen in the case where is a linear combination of three monomials with as in the above code.) It does not seem very clear whether a monomial basis given by a computer always satisfies this condition. The monomial basis given by vfilt in Singular, gmssing.lib seems to be for , and not for , for instance in the irreducible curve case with Puiseux pairs , where the -filtration does not seem to be induced by ideals of .
Remark 2.3f. In the irreducible plane curve singularity case, we can determine the spectral numbers from the Puiseux pairs, see [Sa 00]. (Note that a plane curve singularity with Puiseux pairs in the sense of [Sa 00] has Puiseux pairs with the definition used in Singular.) Assuming the missing spectral numbers are consecutive, one may examine whether the inequality (2.2.2) holds as follows.
LIB"sing.lib"; ring R=0,(x,y),ds; int a,b,c,d,i,j,k,m,p,q,r,t,w,mu;
poly f,Av,Sm,Vt,u,X,Y; a=3; b=2; d=2; q=-1; r=1; c=b*q+a*r; w=a*b*d+c;
u=1; f=(y^b-x^a)^d-x^(a*d+q)*y^r; mu=milnor(f); matrix S[1][mu]; m=0;
for (i=1; i<w; i++) {for (j=1; j<d; j++) {X=i*u/w+j*u/d; if (X<1)
{m++; S[1,m]=X;}}} for (i=1; i<a; i++) {for (j=1; j<b; j++) {for
(k=0; k<d; k++) {Y=i*u/a+j*u/b; X=(Y+k)/d; if (Y<1) {m++; S[1,m]=X;}
}}} for(i=1; i<=m; i++){p=i; for(j=i+1; j<=m; j++){if(S[1,j]<S[1,p])
{p=j;}} X=S[1,p]; for (k=p; k>i; k--) {S[1,k]=S[1,k-1];} S[1,i]=X;}
for (i=1; i<=m; i++) {S[1,2*m+1-i]=2-S[1,i];} m=2*m;
if (m!=mu) {printf("Serious error!"); exit;} t=tjurina(f); Sm=0;
for(i=1; i<=t; i++) {Sm=Sm+S[1,i];} Av=Sm/t; Vt=0;
for(i=1; i<=t; i++) {Vt=Vt+(S[1,i]-Av)^2;} Vt/t-(S[1,t]-S[1,1])/12;
One may replace the positive integers and the integer as long as , , , and , where has Puiseux pairs in the sense of [Sa 00]. (One can see the spectral numbers by typing “S;”.) In the non-consecutive case, one may apply the last part of Remark 2.3b as in Remark 2.3d by replacing the part after “t=tjurina(f);
” if it takes very long to apply the code in Remark 2.3d. It is surprising that seems to be always for any large odd number in the case . It is interesting that no trimodal Newton-degenerate singularity seems to appear in [SWZ 23]; for instance the modality seems to be at least 4 if the Puiseux pairs are with .
References
-
[Al 23]
Almirón, P., The Tjurina number for Sebastiani-Thom type isolated hypersurface singularities, Mediterr. J. Math. (2023) 20:258.
-
[Ar 80]
Arnold, V.I., On some problems in singularity theory, Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. Math. Sci. 90 (1981), 1–9, or in Geometry and analysis, Indian Acad. Sci., Bangalore, 1980, pp. 1–9.
-
[Bré 02]
Brélivet, T., Variance of the spectral numbers and Newton polygons, Bull. Sci. Math. 126 (2002), 333–342.
-
[Bré 04]
Brélivet, T., The Hertling conjecture in dimension 2, arxiv:math/0405489, 2004.
-
[Br 70]
Brieskorn, E., Die Monodromie der isolierten Singularitäten von Hyperflächen, Manuscripta Math., 2 (1970), 103–161.
-
[DGPS 20]
Decker, W., Greuel, G.-M., Pfister, G., Schönemann, H., Singular 4.2.0 — A computer algebra system for polynomial computations, available at http://www.singular.uni-kl.de (2020).
-
[DiSa 14a]
Dimca, A., Saito, M., Some remarks on limit mixed Hodge structures and spectrum, An. Ştiinţ. Univ. “Ovidius” Constanţa Ser. Mat. 22 (2014), 69–78.
-
[DiSa 14b]
Dimca, A., Saito, M., Koszul complexes and spectra of projective hypersurfaces with isolated singularities, arxiv:1212.1081v4, 2014.
-
[Ga 74]
Gabrielov, A.M., Bifurcations, Dynkin diagrams, and modality of isolated singularities, Funct. Ana1. App1., 8 (1974), 94–98.
-
[GLS 07]
Greuel, G.-M., Lossen, C., Shustin, E., Introduction to singularities and deformations, Springer, Berlin, 2007.
-
[GrHa 78]
Griffiths, Ph., Harris, J., Principles of Algebraic Geometry, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1978.
-
[Ha 66]
Hartshorne, R., Residues and Duality, Lect. Notes Math., 20, Springer, New York, 1966.
-
[He 00]
Hertling, C., Variance of the spectral numbers, arxiv:math/0007187, 2000.
-
[JKSY 22]
Jung, S.-J., Kim, I.-K., Saito, M., Yoon, Y., Hodge ideals and spectrum of isolated hypersurface singularities, Ann. Inst. Fourier 72 (2022), no. 2, 465–510 (Proposition and formula numbers are changed by the publisher from arxiv:1904.02453).
-
[JKSY 24]
Jung, S.-J., Kim, I.-K., Saito, M., Yoon, Y., Simple computable formula for spectral pairs of Newton non-degenerate polynomials in three or four variables, arxiv:1911.09465v6, 2024.
-
[JKY 18]
Jung, S.-J., Kim, I.-K., Yoon, Y., Hodge ideal and spectrum of weighted homogeneous isolated singularities, arxiv:1812.07298, 2018.
-
[Ko 76]
Kouchinirenko, A.G., Polyèdres de Newton et nombres de Milnor, Inv. Math. 32 (1976), 1–31.
-
[Sa 84]
Saito, M., Hodge filtrations on Gauss-Manin systems I, J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. IA Math. 30 (1984), 489–498.
-
[Sa 88a]
Saito, M., Exponents and Newton polyhedra of isolated hypersurface singularities, Math. Ann. 281 (1988), 411–417.
-
[Sa 88b]
Saito, M., Modules de Hodge polarisables, Publ. RIMS, Kyoto Univ. 24 (1988), 849–995.
-
[Sa 89]
Saito, M., On the structure of Brieskorn lattice, Ann. Inst. Fourier 39 (1989), 27–72.
-
[Sa 90]
Saito, M., Mixed Hodge modules, Publ. RIMS, Kyoto Univ. 26 (1990), 221–333.
-
[Sa 91]
Saito, M., Period mapping via Brieskorn modules, Bull. Soc. Math. France 119 (1991), 141–171.
-
[Sa 94]
Saito, M., On microlocal -function, Bull. Soc. Math. France 122 (1994), 163–184.
-
[Sa 00]
Saito, M., Exponents of an irreducible plane curve singularity, arxiv:math/0009133, 2000.
-
[Sa 18]
Saito, M., On the structure of Brieskorn lattices II, J. Singularities 18 (2018), 248–271.
-
[Sa 23a]
Saito, M., Bernstein-Sato polynomials of semi-weighted-homogeneous polynomials of nearly Brieskorn-Pham type, arxiv:2210.01028.v8, 2023.
-
[Sa 23b]
Saito, M., Examples of Hirzebruch-Milnor classes of projective hypersurfaces detecting higher du Bois or rational singularities, 2303.04724v5, 2023.
-
[ScSt 85]
Scherk, J., Steenbrink, J.H.M., On the mixed Hodge structure on the cohomology of the Milnor fibre, Math. Ann. 271 (1985), 641–665.
-
[SWZ 23]
Shi, Q., Wang, Y., Zuo, H., Spectrum, Tjurina spectrum, and Hertling conjectures for singularities of modality , preprint, 2023.
-
[St 77]
Steenbrink, J.H.M., Mixed Hodge structure on the vanishing cohomology, in Real and complex singularities, Sijthoff and Noordhoff, Alphen aan den Rijn, 1977, pp. 525–563.
-
[Va 82a]
Varčenko, A.N. Asymptotic Hodge structure in the vanishing cohomology, Math. USSR Izv. 18 (1982), 465–512.
-
[Va 82b]
Varchenko, A.N., The complex singular index does not change along the stratum constant, Funct. Anal. Appl. 16 (1982), 1–9.
-
[Va 82c]
Varchenko, A.N., A lower bound for the codimension of the stratum constant in terms of the mixed Hodge structure, Moscow Univ. Math. Bull. 37 (1982), 30–33.