1. Introduction
Let $(X,\,0)$ be a germ of complex analytic set in $\mathbb {C}^{n}$
and $f:(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C},\,0)$
a holomorphic function germ. The Bruce–Roberts number of $f$
with respect to $(X,\,0)$
was introduced by Bruce and Roberts in [Reference Bruce and Roberts4] and is defined as
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU1.png?pub-status=live)
where $\mathcal {O}_n$ is the local ring of holomorphic functions $(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to \mathbb {C}$
, $\textrm {d}f$
is the differential of $f$
and $\Theta _X$
is the $\mathcal {O}_n$
-submodule of $\Theta _n$
of vector fields on $(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)$
which are tangent to $(X,\,0)$
at its regular points. If $I_X$
is the ideal of $\mathcal {O}_n$
of functions vanishing on $(X,\,0)$
, then
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU2.png?pub-status=live)
In particular, when $X=\mathbb {C}^{n}$, $\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})$
is the Jacobian ideal of $f$
and thus, $\mu _{\textrm {BR}}(f,\,X)$
coincides with the classical Milnor number $\mu (f)$
. We remark that $\Theta _X$
is also denoted in some papers by $\mbox {Der}(-\log X)$
, following Saito's notation [Reference Saito11]. The main properties of $\mu _{\textrm {BR}}(f,\,X)$
are the following (see [Reference Bruce and Roberts4]):
(a) $\mu _{\textrm {BR}}(f,\,X)$
is invariant under the action of the group $\mathcal {R}_X$
of diffeomorphisms $\phi :(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)$
which preserve $(X,\,0)$
;
(b) $\mu _{\textrm {BR}}(f,\,X)<\infty$
if and only if $f$
is finitely determined with respect to the $\mathcal {R}_X$
-equivalence;
(c) $\mu _{\textrm {BR}}(f,\,X)<\infty$
if and only if $f$
restricted to each logarithmic stratum is a submersion in a punctured neighbourhood of the origin.
In general, $\mu _{\textrm {BR}}(f,\,X)$ is not so easy to compute as the classical Milnor number. The main difficulty comes from the computation of the module $\Theta _X$
and most of the times, it is necessary to use a symbolic computer system like Singular [Reference Decker, Greuel, Pfister and Schönemann6]. If $(X,\,0)$
is an isolated complete intersection singularity (ICIS) and $\mu _{\textrm {BR}}(f,\,X)$
is finite, then $(f^{-1}(0)\cap X,\,0)$
is an ICIS [Reference Biviá-Ausina and Ruas2, Proposition 2.8], therefore it has well-defined Milnor number. In a previous paper, [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto, Lima-Pereira and Tomazella9] we considered the case that $(X,\,0)$
is an isolated hypersurface singularity (IHS). We showed that
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqn1.png?pub-status=live)
where $\mu$ and $\tau$
are the Milnor and the Tjurina numbers, respectively. Thus, (1) gives an easy way to compute $\mu _{\textrm {BR}}(f,\,X)$
in terms of well-known invariants. The formula (1) was also obtained independently in [Reference Kourliouros8] and previously in [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto and Tomazella10] when $(X,\,0)$
is weighted homogeneous.
An important application of (1) allowed us to conclude in [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto, Lima-Pereira and Tomazella9] that the logarithmic characteristic variety $LC(X)$ is Cohen–Macaulay. We recall that $LC(X)$
is the subvariety of the cotangent bundle $T^{*}\mathbb {C}^{n}$
of pairs $(x,\,\alpha )$
such that $\alpha (\xi _x)=0$
, for all $\xi \in \Theta _X$
and for all $x$
in a neighbourhood of $0$
. When $(X,\,0)$
is holonomic, $LC(X)$
is Cohen–Macaulay if and only if for any Morsification $f_{t}$
of $f$
we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU3.png?pub-status=live)
where $n_\alpha$ is the number of critical points of $f_t$
restricted to each logarithmic stratum $X_\alpha$
and $m_\alpha$
is the multiplicity of $LC(X)$
along the irreducible component $Y_\alpha$
associated with $X_\alpha$
(see [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Corollary 5.8]). When $(X,\,0)$
is an IHS, it always has a finite number of logarithmic strata (i.e., it is holonomic in Saito's terminology) given by $X_0=\mathbb {C}^{n}\setminus X$
, $X_i\setminus \{0\}$
, with $i=1,\,\ldots ,\,k$
and $X_{k+1}=\{0\}$
, where $X_1,\,\ldots ,\,X_k$
are the irreducible components of $X$
at $0$
.
In this paper, we are interested in another important invariant introduced in [Reference Bruce and Roberts4],
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU4.png?pub-status=live)
which we call here the relative Bruce–Roberts number. This is an invariant of the restricted function $f:(X,\,0)\to (\mathbb {C},\,0)$ under the induced $\mathcal {R}_X$
-action. In fact, as commented in [Reference Bruce and Roberts4], it is equal to the codimension of the $\mathcal {R}_X$
-orbit. Moreover, $\mu _{\textrm {BR}}^{-}(f,\,X)$
is finite if and only if $f$
restricted to each logarithmic stratum (excluding $X_0$
) is a submersion in a punctured neighbourhood of the origin.
A natural question is about the relationship between $\mu _{BR}(f,\,X)$ and $\mu _{BR}^{-}(f,\,X)$
. It is shown in [Reference Bruce and Roberts4] that if $(X,\,0)$
is a weighted homogeneous ICIS then
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU5.png?pub-status=live)
This, combined with (1) when $(X,\,0)$ is a weighted homogeneous IHS, gives that
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqn2.png?pub-status=live)
Our main result in § 2 is that if $(X,\,0)$ is any IHS and $\mu _{BR}^{-}(f,\,X)$
is finite, then
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqn3.png?pub-status=live)
In particular, (2) also holds when $\mu _{BR}(f,\,X)$ is finite, even when $(X,\,0)$
is not weighted homogeneous. We also show in Example 3.1 that (2) is not true for higher codimension ICIS.
The relative logarithmic characteristic variety $LC(X)^{-}$ is obtained from $LC(X)$
by eliminating the component $Y_0$
associated with the stratum $X_0=\mathbb {C}^{n}\setminus X$
. In [Reference Bruce and Roberts4], they showed that $LC(X)$
is never Cohen–Macaulay when $(X,\,0)$
has codimension $>1$
along the points on $X_0$
, but $LC(X)^{-}$
is always Cohen–Macaulay when $(X,\,0)$
is a weighted homogeneous ICIS (of any codimension). Again, Cohen–Macaulayness of $LC(X)^{-}$
is interesting since it implies that
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU6.png?pub-status=live)
for any Morsification $f_t$ of $f$
. As an application of (3), we show in § 3 that $LC(X)^{-}$
is also Cohen–Macaulay for any IHS $(X,\,0)$
(not necessarily weighted homogeneous).
In § 4, we consider any holonomic variety $(X,\,0)$ and study characterizations of Cohen–Macaulayness of $LC(X)$
and $LC(X)^{-}$
in terms of the relative polar curve associated with a Morsification $f_t$
of $f$
. Finally, in § 5, we give a formula which generalizes the classical Thom–Sebastiani formula for the Milnor number of a function defined as a sum of functions with separated variables.
2. The relative Bruce–Roberts number
The main goal of this section is to prove the equality (3). The next lemma is inspired by [Reference Biviá-Ausina and Ruas2, Proposition 2.8].
Lemma 2.1 Let $(X,\,0)$ be an IHS determined by $\phi :(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C},\,0)$
and $f\in \mathcal {O}_{n}$
. The map $(\phi ,\,f):(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C}^{2},\,0)$
defines an ICIS if and only if $\mu _{BR}^{-}(f,\,X)<\infty$
.
Proof. If $(\phi ,\,f):(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C}^{2},\,0)$ defines an ICIS then $\mu _{BR}^{-}(f,\,X)$
is finite because
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU7.png?pub-status=live)
For the converse, if $\mu _{BR}^{-}(f,\,X)<\infty$ then the restriction of $f$
to each logarithmic stratum, excluding $\mathbb {C}^{n}\setminus X$
is non-singular. The proof is now the same of Proposition 2.8 in [Reference Biviá-Ausina and Ruas2].
The following technical lemma will be used in the proof of the next theorem. Given a matrix $A$ with entries in a ring $R$
, we denote by $I_k(A)$
the ideal in $R$
generated the $k\times k$
minors of $A$
.
Lemma 2.2 Let $f,\,g\in \mathcal {O}_n$ be such that $\operatorname {dim} V(J(f,\,g))=1$
and $V(Jf)=\{0\},$
and consider the following matrices
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU8.png?pub-status=live)
where $\lambda ,\,\mu \in \mathcal {O}_n$. Let $M,\,M'$
be the submodules of $\mathcal {O}_n^{2}$
generated by the columns of $A,\,A'$
respectively. If $I_2(A)=I_2(A')$
then $M=M'$
.
Proof. We see $A$ and $A'$
as homomorphims of modules over $R:=\mathcal {O}_n$
:
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU9.png?pub-status=live)
We consider the $R$-module $R^{2}/M=\operatorname {coker}(A)$
, which has support $V(I_2(A))=V(J(f,\,g))$
. Therefore, $\operatorname {dim}(R^{2}/M)=1=n-(n-2+1)$
and hence it is Cohen–Macaulay (see [Reference Buchsbaum and Rim5]). In particular, it is unmixed. Now, $M'/M$
is a submodule of $R^{2}/M$
, so the associated primes $\operatorname {Ass} (M'/M)$
are included in $\operatorname {Ass}(R^{2}/M)$
. If $M'/M\ne 0$
then $\operatorname {Ass} (M'/M)\ne \emptyset$
and it follows that $\operatorname {dim}(M'/M)=1$
.
Let $U$ be a neighbourhood of $0$
in $\mathbb {C}^{n}$
such that $0$
is the only critical point of $f$
. For all $x\in U\setminus \{0\}$
, there exist $i_{0}\in \{1,\,\ldots ,\,n\}$
, such that $\partial f/\partial x_{i_{0}}(x)\neq 0$
. We may suppose $i_{0}=1$
. Making elementary column operations in the matrices $A$
and $A'$
, we obtain
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU10.png?pub-status=live)
such that
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU11.png?pub-status=live)
By hypothesis $I_{2}(A)=I_{2}(A')$ and consequently $\langle c_{2},\,\ldots ,\,c_{n}\rangle =\langle \mu c_{1}-\lambda ,\,c_{2},\,\ldots ,\,c_{n}\rangle .$
This implies $\lambda =\mu c_{1}+\alpha _{2}c_{2}+\cdots +\alpha _{n}c_{n}$
, for some $\alpha _{2},\,\cdots ,\,\alpha _{n}\in R$
. Thus,
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU12.png?pub-status=live)
and hence $(M'/M)_{x}=0$. This shows that $\operatorname {Supp}(M'/M)\subset \{0\}$
and hence, $M'=M$
.
Given an IHS $(X,\,0)$ defined by a holomorphic function germ $\phi :(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C},\,0),$
we consider the $\mathcal {O}_{n}$
-submodule of the trivial vectors fields, denoted by $\Theta _{X}^{T}$
, generated by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU13.png?pub-status=live)
This module was related to the Tjurina number of $(X,\,0)$ in [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto, Lima-Pereira and Tomazella9, Reference Tajima13]. By using different approaches, it is shown that $\tau (X,\,0)=\operatorname {dim}_{\mathbb {C}}\Theta _{X}/\Theta _{X}^{T}$
. Moreover, in [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto, Lima-Pereira and Tomazella9], we also proved that $\tau (X,\,0)=\operatorname {dim}_{\mathbb {C}}\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})/\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{T})$
where $f$
is any $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined function germ. The following result generalizes this equality with a weaker hypothesis on $f$
.
Theorem 2.3 Let $(X,\,0)$ be an IHS determined by $\phi :(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C},\,0)$
and $f\in \mathcal {O}_{n}$
such that $\mu _{BR}^{-}(f,\,X)<\infty ,$
then:
(i) $\frac {\Theta _{X}}{\Theta _{X}^{T}}\approx \frac {\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})+I_{X}}{\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{T})+I_{X}};$
(ii) $\frac {\Theta _{X}}{\Theta _{X}^{T}}\approx \frac {\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})}{\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{T})};$
(iii) $\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})\cap I_{X}=JfI_{X};$
(iv) $\frac {\mathcal {O}_{n}}{Jf}\approx \frac {\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{-})}{\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})};$
(v) $\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}):I_{X}=Jf;$
(vi) $\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{T}):I_{X}=Jf,$
where $I_{X}$ is the ideal generated by $\phi$
.
Proof.
(i) The homomorphism $\Psi :\Theta _{X}\to \textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})+I_{X}$
defined by $\Psi (\xi )=\textrm {d}f(\xi )$
induces the isomorphism
\[ \overline{\Psi}:\frac{\Theta_{X}}{\Theta_{X}^{T}}\to\frac{\textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X})+I_{X}}{\textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X}^{T})+I_{X}}. \]In fact, it is enough to show that $\Psi ^{-1}(\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{T})+I_{X})\subset \Theta _{X}^{T}.$Let $\xi \in \Psi ^{-1}(\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{T})+I_{X})$
then $\Psi (\xi )\in \textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{T})+I_{X}$
, that is, there exist $\eta \in \Theta _{X}^{T}$
and $\mu ,\, \lambda \in \mathcal {O}_{n}$
, such that
\[ \begin{cases} \textrm{d}f(\xi-\eta)=\mu\phi\\ \textrm{d}\phi(\xi-\eta)=\lambda\phi \end{cases}, \]then\[ \left(\begin{array}{@{}c@{}} \mu\phi\\ \lambda\phi \end{array}\right)\in \left\langle \left(\begin{array}{@{}c@{}} \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_{i}}\\ \dfrac{\partial \phi}{\partial x_{i}} \end{array}\right) \quad i=1,\ldots,n \right\rangle \]and\[ I_{2}\begin{pmatrix}\mu\phi & \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_{1}} & \cdots & \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_{n}}\\ \lambda\phi & \dfrac{\partial \phi}{\partial x_{1}} & \cdots & \dfrac{\partial \phi}{\partial x_{n}} \end{pmatrix}=I_{2}\begin{pmatrix}\dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_{1}} & \cdots & \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_{n}}\\ \dfrac{\partial \phi}{\partial x_{1}} & \cdots & \dfrac{\partial \phi}{\partial x_{n}} \end{pmatrix}=J(f,\phi). \]Therefore\[ \left|\begin{array}{cc} \mu & \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_{i}} \\ \lambda & \dfrac{\partial \phi}{\partial x_{i}} \end{array}\right|\phi\in J(f,\phi) \]and since $\phi$is regular in $\frac {\mathcal {O}_{n}}{J(f,\,\phi )}$
then
\[ \left|\begin{array}{cc} \mu & \dfrac{\partial f}{\partial x_{i}}\\ \lambda & \dfrac{\partial \phi}{\partial x_{i}} \end{array}\right|\in J(f,\phi),\quad i=1,\ldots,n. \]By Lemma 2.2, $\lambda \in J\phi$and using [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto, Lima-Pereira and Tomazella9, Lemma 3.1], $\xi \in \Theta _{X}^{T}.$
(ii) This equality also was proved in [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto, Lima-Pereira and Tomazella9] with the additional hypothesis that $f$
is $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined.
The epimorphism $\psi :\Theta _{X}\to \textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})$
defined by $\psi (\xi )=\textrm {d}f(\xi )$
induces the isomorphism
\[ \overline{\psi}:\frac{\Theta_{X}}{\Theta_{X}^{T}}\to \frac{\textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X})}{\textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X}^{T})}. \]In fact, let $\xi \in \ker (\psi )$, then there exist $\lambda \in \mathcal {O}_{n}$
, such that
\[ \begin{cases} \textrm{d}f(\xi)=0\\ \textrm{d}\phi(\xi)=\lambda\phi \end{cases} \]The rest is similar to the proof of (i).(iii) Let $\xi \in \Theta _{X}$
be such that $\textrm {d}f(\xi )\in I_{X}$
, then there exist $\mu ,\,\lambda \in \mathcal {O}_{n}$
, such that
\[ \begin{cases} \textrm{d}f(\xi)=\mu\phi\\ \textrm{d}\phi(\xi)=\lambda\phi \end{cases} \]Using the same techniques of the proof of (i), we have\[ \textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X})\cap I_{X}\subset Jf I_{X}. \]The other inclusion is immediate.(iv) It follows from the isomorphisms
\[ \frac{\textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X}^{-})}{\textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X})}=\frac{\textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X})+I_{X}}{\textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X})}\approx \frac{I_{X}}{\textrm{d}f(\Theta_{X})\cap I_{X}}\stackrel{(iii)}{=}\frac{I_{X}}{JfI_{X} }\approx\frac{\mathcal{O}_{n}}{Jf}. \](v) It follows from (iii).
(vi) It follows from (v) and $Jf\subset \textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{T}):I_{X}$
.
Remark 2.4 The items (ii) and (iv) of Theorem 2.3 seem a bit peculiar since from (iv) the quotient $\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{-})/\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})$ does not depend on $(X,\,0)$
while from (ii), $\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})/\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{T})$
does not depend on $f$
. Moreover by [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto, Lima-Pereira and Tomazella9, Reference Tajima13] if $(X,\,0)$
is an IHS determined by $\phi :(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C},\,0)$
, then $\operatorname {dim}_{\mathbb {C}}\dfrac {\Theta _{X}}{\Theta _{X}^{T}}=\tau (X,\,0),$
therefore
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU25.png?pub-status=live)
The next theorem is one of the main results of this work.
Theorem 2.5 Let $(X,\,0)$ is an IHS determined by $\phi :(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C},\,0)$
and $f\in \mathcal {O}_{n}$
be a function germ such that $\mu _{BR}^{-}(f,\,X)<\infty$
. Then $(\phi ,\,f)$
defines an ICIS and
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU26.png?pub-status=live)
Proof. We consider the exact sequence
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU27.png?pub-status=live)
Since $(X,\,0)$ is an IHS
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU28.png?pub-status=live)
hence
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU29.png?pub-status=live)
The last equality is a consequence of the Lê-Greuel formula [Reference Brieskorn and Greuel3] and Theorem 2.3 (i).
3. The relative Bruce–Roberts number of a function with isolated singularity
In this section, $(X,\,0)$ is an IHS and $f\in \mathcal {O}_{n}$
is a function germ $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined, then all the results in the previous section are true in this case. In particular from (iv) of Theorem 2.3
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqn4.png?pub-status=live)
Therefore, by the exact sequence
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU30.png?pub-status=live)
we conclude that
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU31.png?pub-status=live)
The following example shows that the characterization of the Milnor number (4) is not true anymore when $(X,\,0)$ is an ICIS with codimension higher than one.
Example 3.1 Let $(X,\,0)$ be an ICIS determined by $\phi (x,\,y,\,z)=(x^{3}+x^{2}y^{2}+y^{7}+z^{3},\,xyz)$
, and $f(x,\,y,\,z)=xy-z^{4}$
, $f$
is a $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined and
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU32.png?pub-status=live)
As a consequence of the characterization of the Milnor number (4), we prove that $LC(X)^{-}$ is Cohen–Macaulay when $(X,\,0)$
is an IHS.
The logarithmic characteristic variety, $LC(X)$, is defined as follows. Suppose the vector fields $\delta _1,\,\ldots ,\,\delta _m$
generate $\Theta _X$
on some neighbourhood $U$
of $0$
in $\mathbb {C}^{n}$
. Let $T^{*}_U\mathbb {C}^{n}$
be the restriction of the cotangent bundle of $\mathbb {C}^{n}$
to $U$
. We define $LC_U(X)$
to be
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU33.png?pub-status=live)
Then $LC(X)$ is the germ of $LC_U(X)$
in $T^{*}\mathbb {C}^{n}$
along $T^{*}_0\mathbb {C}^{n}$
, the cotangent space to $\mathbb {C}^{n}$
at $0$
. As $LC(X)$
is independent of the choice of the vector fields $\delta _i$
then it is a well-defined germ of analytic subvariety in $T^{*}\mathbb {C}^{n}$
(see [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Reference Saito11]).
If $(X,\,0)$ is holonomic with logarithmic strata $X_0,\,\ldots ,\,X_k$
then $LC(X)$
has dimension $n$
, and its irreducible components are $Y_0,\,\ldots ,\,Y_k$
, with $Y_i=\overline {N^{*}X_i}$
as set-germs, where $\overline {N^{*}X_i}$
is the closure of the conormal bundle $N^{*}X_i$
of $X_i$
in $\mathbb {C}^{n}$
(see [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Proposition 1.14]).
When $(X,\,0)$ has codimension higher than one, Bruce and Roberts proved that $LC(X)$
is not Cohen–Macaulay. Then they consider the subspace of $LC(X)$
obtained by deleting the component $Y_{0}$
that corresponds to the stratum $X_0= \mathbb {C}^{n}\setminus X$
, that is
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU34.png?pub-status=live)
and as set-germs,
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU35.png?pub-status=live)
An interesting fact about $LC(X)^{-}$ is that it may be Cohen–Macaulay even when $LC(X)$
is not Cohen–Macaulay, for example, if $(X,\,0)$
is a weighted homogeneous ICIS, then $LC(X)^{-}$
is Cohen–Macaulay, [Reference Bruce and Roberts4].
Proposition 3.2 Let $(X,\,0)$ be an IHS, then $LC(X)^{-}$
is Cohen–Macaulay.
Proof. We consider $(0,\,p)\in LC(X)^{-}$, then $(0,\,p)\in LC(X)$
and there exists $f\in \mathcal {O}_{n}$
such that $\textrm {d}f(0)=p$
. In [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto, Lima-Pereira and Tomazella9], we proved that $LC(X)$
is Cohen–Macaulay. Therefore, by [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Proposition 5.8],
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU36.png?pub-status=live)
where $n_{i}$ is the number of critical points of a Morsification of $f$
in $X_{i}$
and $m_{i}$
is the multiplicity of irreducible component $Y_{i}$
. Thus,
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU37.png?pub-status=live)
and by [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Proposition 5.11], we obtain that $LC(X)^{-}$ is Cohen–Macaulay.
Remark 3.3 We remark that in the proof of the previous proposition, we just used that if $(X,\,0)\subset (\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)$ is a hypersurface such that $\operatorname {dim}_{\mathbb {C}}\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X}^{-})/\textrm {d}f(\Theta _{X})=\mu (f)$
for all $f$
$\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined then $LC(X)^{-}$
is Cohen–Macaulay if and only if $LC(X)$
is Cohen–Macaulay.
4. Polar curves and logarithmic characteristic varieties
It is important to know whether the logarithmic characteristic variety of an analytic variety is Cohen–Macaulay. In [Reference Nuño-Ballesteros, Oréfice-Okamoto, Lima-Pereira and Tomazella9], we showed that this is the case for IHS. For non-isolated singularities, it is an open problem. In this section, we give one more step in order to solve it: we study the polar curve and the relative polar curve of a holomorphic function germ over a holonomic analytic variety. We show that these curves are Cohen–Macaulay if and only if the logarithmic characteristic variety and the relative logarithmic characteristic variety (respectively) are Cohen–Macaulay. As a consequence, we have the principle of conservation for the Bruce–Roberts number.
Definition 4.1 Let $f\in \mathcal {O}_{n}$ be a $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined function germ and $F:(\mathbb {C}^{n}\times \mathbb {C},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C},\,0)$
, $F(t,\,x)=f_t(x)$
,
a 1-parameter deformation of $f$. The polar curve of $F$
in $(X,\,0)$
is
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU38.png?pub-status=live)
where $\Theta _{X}=\langle \delta _{1},\,\ldots ,\,\delta _{m}\rangle$.
In [Reference Ahmed, Ruas and Tomazella1], it was proved that if $LC(X)$ is Cohen–Macaulay then the polar curve $C$
is Cohen–Macaulay.
Proposition 4.2 Let $(X,\,0)$ be a holonomic analytic variety. If any $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined function germ has a Morsification whose polar curve is Cohen–Macaulay then $LC(X)$
is Cohen–Macaulay.
Proof. Let $(0,\,p)\in LC(X)$, then there exists an $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined function germ $f\in \mathcal {O}_{n},$
such that $\textrm {d}f(0)=p$
. Let $F:(\mathbb {C}^{n}\times \mathbb {C})\to (\mathbb {C},\,0)$
, $F(x,\,t)=f_{t}(x)$
,
be a Morsification of $f$. By hypothesis $\mathcal {O}_{n+1}/\textrm {d}f_{t}(\Theta _{X})$
is Cohen–Macaulay of dimension 1, then by the principle of conservation of number
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU39.png?pub-status=live)
because if $x\in X_{i}$ is a Morse critical point of $f_{t}$
, then $\mu _{BR}(f_{t},\,X)_{x}=m_{i}$
, and by [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Proposition 5.8], $LC(X)$
is Cohen–Macaulay.
When $LC(X)$ is Cohen–Macaulay, we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU40.png?pub-status=live)
where $f_{t}$ is any 1-parameter deformation of $f$
.
Our purpose now is to prove similar results for $LC(X)^{-}$. We define the relative polar curve by
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU41.png?pub-status=live)
where $C$ is the polar curve of $F$
in $(X,\,0).$
The proof of the next proposition is similar to the one of [Reference Ahmed, Ruas and Tomazella1, Theorem 3.7].
Proposition 4.3 Let $(X,\,0)$ be a holonomic analytic variety. If $LC(X)^{-}$
is Cohen–Macaulay then the relative polar curve of every 1-parameter deformation of any $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined function germ is Cohen–Macaulay.
For the converse, we need the following lemma, which is the analogous of [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Proposition 5.12] for the relative Bruce–Roberts number.
Lemma 4.4 Let $(X,\,0)$ be a holonomic analytic variety and $f\in \mathcal {O}_{n}$
. We assume that $f$
restricted to $(X,\,0)$
is a Morse function. If $x\in X$
is a critical point of $f$
then $\mu _{BR}(f,\,X)_{x}^{-}=m_{\alpha },$
where $m_{\alpha }$
is the multiplicity of the irreducible component $Y_\alpha$
corresponding to the logarithmic stratum $X_\alpha$
which contains $x$
.
Proof. Let $Z_{i}=Y_{i}\setminus \bigcup _{j\neq i}Y_{j}$ where $Y_{i}$
are the irreducible components of $LC(X)$
. We know from [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Proposition 5.12] that $LC(X)$
is Cohen–Macaulay at points in $Z_{i}$
, $i=1,\,\ldots ,\,k+1$
. We see that $LC(X)^{-}$
coincides locally with $LC(X)$
and hence, $LC(X)^{-}$
is also Cohen–Macaulay at points in $Z_{i}$
, $i=1,\,\ldots ,\,k+1$
.
In fact, let $(0,\,p)\in Z_{i}$ with $i\neq 0$
, then $(x,\,p)\not \in Y_{0}$
. Let $V:= T^{*}\mathbb {C}^{n}\setminus Y_{0}$
, which is an open neighbourhood of $(x,\,p)$
. Obviously, we have the equality of sets
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU42.png?pub-status=live)
Moreover, let $I,\,\;I^{-}$ and $I_{j}$
be the ideals which define $LC(X)$
, $LC(X)^{-}$
and $Y_{j}$
, $j=0,\,\ldots ,\,k+1$
, respectively. Then,
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU43.png?pub-status=live)
Since $p\neq 0$, $I_{0}$
is the total ring at $(x,\,p)$
, so we have an equality between germs of complex spaces.
Finally, we have
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU44.png?pub-status=live)
The equalities $(*)$ and $(**)$
are consequences of [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Propositions 5.11 and 5.2], respectively.
We are ready now to prove the converse of Proposition 4.3.
Proposition 4.5 Let $(X,\,0)$ be a holonomic analytic variety. If the relative polar curve of every 1-parameter deformation of any $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined function germ is Cohen–Macaulay then $LC(X)^{-}$
is Cohen–Macaulay.
Proof. Let $(0,\,p)\in LC(X)^{-}$, then there exists an $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined function germ $f\in \mathcal {O}_{n},$
such that $\textrm {d}f(0)=p$
. Let $F:(\mathbb {C}^{n}\times \mathbb {C},\,0)\to (\mathbb {C},\,0)$
be a Morsification of $f$
and set $f_{t}(x)=F(x,\,t)$
.
By hypothesis $\mathcal {O}_{n+1}/\textrm {d}f_{t}(\Theta _{X}^{-})$ is Cohen–Macaulay of dimension 1. By the principle of the conservation of the multiplicity,
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU45.png?pub-status=live)
because if $x\in X_{i}$ is a Morse critical point of $f_{t}$
, then $\mu _{BR}(f_{t},\,X)^{-}_{x}=m_{i}$
by Lemma 4.4. By [Reference Bruce and Roberts4, Proposition 5.11], $LC(X)^{-}$
is Cohen–Macaulay.
As a consequence of the previous result,
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU46.png?pub-status=live)
where $f_{t}$ is any 1-parameter deformation of $f$
.
5. An example with non-isolated singularities
Given natural numbers $0< k\leq n$, we can see $\mathcal {O}_k$
as a subring of $\mathcal {O}_n$
and $\Theta _{k}$
as a subset of $\Theta _{n}$
. We fix $(x_1,\,\ldots ,\,x_n)$
as the system of coordinates in $\mathcal {O}_n$
and we use $(x_1,\,\ldots ,\, x_k)$
as the coordinate system of $\mathcal {O}_k$
and $(x_{k+1},\,\ldots ,\,x_n)$
as the one in $\mathcal {O}_{n-k}$
.
Let $(X,\,0)\subset (\mathbb {C}^{k},\,0)$ be an analytic variety. We denote by $(\tilde {X},\,0)\subset (\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0)$
the inclusion of $(X,\,0)$
in $(\mathbb {C}^{n},\,0).$
Then $\Theta _{\tilde {X}}=\mathcal {O}_{n}\Theta _{X}+\langle \tfrac {\partial }{\partial x_{k+1}},\ldots ,\tfrac {\partial }{\partial x_{n}}\rangle$
and $LC(\tilde {X})=LC(X)\times \mathbb {C}^{n-t}.$
Consequently, if $LC(X)$ is Cohen–Macaulay then $LC(\tilde {X})$
is Cohen–Macaulay.
In particular, if $(X,\,0)$ is an IHS then $LC(\tilde {X})$
is Cohen–Macaulay.
Let $F\in \mathcal {O}_{n}$ a function germ with isolated singularity such that $F=f+g$
with $f\in \mathcal {O}_{k}$
and $g\in \mathcal {O}_{n-k}$
. It is known by Sebastiani and Thom [Reference Sebastiani and Thom12] that $\mu (F)=\mu (f)\mu (g)$
. We prove a similar result for the Bruce–Roberts number,
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU47.png?pub-status=live)
Proposition 5.1 Let $I$ and $J$
be ideals in $\mathcal {O}_{k}$
and $\mathcal {O}_{n-k}$
, respectively. If we denote by $I'=I\mathcal {O}_n$
and $J'=J\mathcal {O}_n$
the respective induced ideals in $\mathcal {O}_n$
, then
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU48.png?pub-status=live)
Moreover, if these dimensions are finite then
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU49.png?pub-status=live)
Proof. The equivalence follows from
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU50.png?pub-status=live)
For the equality, by hypothesis there exist positive integer numbers $k',\,\;k_{i}$ and $k_{j}$
such that
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU51.png?pub-status=live)
where $\mathcal {M}_\ell$ is the maximal ideal of $\mathcal {O}_\ell$
. Let $r=\max \{k',\,\ k_{i},\, \ k_{j}\}$
, then
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU52.png?pub-status=live)
where $z_1=(x_1,\,\ldots ,\,x_k)$, $z_2=(x_{k+1},\,\ldots ,\,x_n)$
and $I''$
and $J''$
are the ideals in $\mathbb {C}[z_1,\,z_2]$
generated by the $r-1$
-jets of the generators of $I$
and $J$
, respectively. Analogously,
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU53.png?pub-status=live)
where $I'''$ and $J'''$
are the ideals in $\mathbb {C}[z_1]$
and $\mathbb {C}[z_2]$
generated by the $r-1$
-jets of the generators of $I$
and $J$
, respectively. Finally, the equality follows from
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU54.png?pub-status=live)
where $\otimes _{\mathbb {C}}$ denotes the tensor product, see [Reference Greuel and Pfister7, Proposition 2.7.13].
We observe that the previous result gives a simpler proof to the equality of [Reference Sebastiani and Thom12] about the Milnor numbers. Finally, we relate the Bruce–Roberts numbers $\mu _{BR}(F,\,\tilde {X})$ and $\mu _{BR}(f,\,X)$
.
Corollary 5.2 Let $(\tilde {X},\,0),$ and $(X,\,0)$
as before, and
![](https://static.cambridge.org/binary/version/id/urn:cambridge.org:id:binary:20220812133604977-0848:S0013091521000432:S0013091521000432_eqnU55.png?pub-status=live)
then:
(a) $F$
is $\mathcal {R}_{\tilde {X}}$
-finitely determined if, and only if, $f$
is $\mathcal {R}_{X}$
-finitely determined and $g$
has isolated singularity.
(b) If $F$
is $\mathcal {R}_{\tilde {X}}$
-finitely determined, $\mu _{BR}(F,\,\tilde {X})=\mu (g)\mu _{BR}(f,\,X)$
.
Proof. It is a consequence of the characterization of $\Theta _{\tilde {X}}$ and the previous theorem.
Acknowledgements
The first author was partially supported by CAPES. The second author was partially supported by MICINN Grant PGC2018–094889–B–I00 and by GVA Grant AICO/2019/024. The third and fourth authors were partially supported by FAPESP Grant 2019/07316-0.