text:
# The structure of the core of idealsThe second and third authors were partially supported by the NSF

## 1 Introduction

To study properties of an ideal $`I`$ of a Noetherian local ring $`R`$ one often passes to a different ideal, either larger or smaller, which carries most of the information about the original ideal, but has better features. The radical $`\sqrt{I}`$ of $`I`$, and the importance the Nullstellensatz assigns to it, is the most notorious example. The integral closure $`\overline{I}`$ or a reduction $`J`$ of $`I`$ are also very familiar instances.

We recall that the radical $`\sqrt{I}`$ of $`I`$ consists of all solutions in $`R`$ of equations of the form $`X^ma=0`$, with $`aI`$ and $`m`$ a non negative integer. The integral closure $`\overline{I}`$ of $`I`$ consists instead of all solutions in $`R`$ of equations of the form $`X^n+b_1X^{n1}+b_2X^{n2}+\mathrm{}+b_{n1}X+b_n=0`$, with $`b_jI^j`$ and $`n`$ a non negative integer. We clearly have $`I\overline{I}\sqrt{I}`$, with, in general, strict inclusions. Finally, a reduction $`J`$ of $`I`$ is a subideal of $`I`$ such that $`\overline{J}=\overline{I}`$. Equivalently, $`JI`$ is a reduction of $`I`$ if $`I^{r+1}=JI^r`$ for some non negative integer $`r`$. Minimal reductions are reductions which are minimal with respect to containment. If the residue field of the ring $`R`$ is infinite, then minimal reductions have the same number of generators, namely the analytic spread $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(I)`$ of $`I`$.

A more familiar description is the one of $`\sqrt{I}`$ as the intersection of all prime ideals containing $`I`$ or, equivalently, as the intersection of all minimal primes over $`I`$. It is well known that this intersection is finite. Also, by work of D. Eisenbud, C. Huneke and W.V. Vasconcelos EHV , it is now easy to give an algorithmic approach to $`\sqrt{I}`$ suitable for effective computer calculations.

On the other hand, reductions of an ideal are highly non unique. Their intersection, dubbed core of the ideal $`I`$, comes from a more recent vintage. It was studied for the first time by D. Rees and J. Sally RS  and later by C. Huneke and I. Swanson HS , who also showed a connection with work of J. Lipman on the adjoint of an ideal L . Being the intersection of an a priori infinite number of ideals, this object is difficult to describe in terms of explicit data attached to the ideal. It is known though that $`\sqrt{\mathrm{core}(I)}=\sqrt{I}`$, see Vas  for instance.

The core of an ideal appears naturally in the context of the Briançon–Skoda theorem LS . In one of its simplest formulations, this theorem says that if $`R`$ is a regular local ring of dimension $`d`$ and $`I`$ is an ideal then $`\overline{I^d}J`$ for every reduction $`J`$ of $`I`$, or equivalently, $`\overline{I^d}\mathrm{core}(I)`$.

The issues we address in this paper and to which we give fairly general affirmative answers are: Is the core a finite intersection of minimal reductions of $`I`$? Is the core a finite intersection of general minimal reductions of $`I`$? Is the core the contraction to $`R`$ of a ‘universal $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideal’? Does the core behave well under flat extensions? The last question has already been raised by C. Huneke and I. Swanson in HS .

Our results are based on general multiplicity estimates for certain modules $`(`$Lemmas 23 and 4$`)`$, and their proofs use techniques coming from the theory of residual intersections. We are required to introduce and base our constructions on the notions of generic, universal and general ideals. To be more specific, let $`(R,𝔪)`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring with infinite residue field and $`I=(f_1,\mathrm{},f_n)`$ an $`R`$-ideal of height $`g`$ and analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$. Let $`X_{jl}`$, $`1jn`$, $`1l\mathrm{}`$, be variables, write $`S=R(\{X_{jl}\})=R[\{X_{jl}\}]_{𝔪[\{X_{jl}\}]}`$, and consider the $`S`$-ideal $`𝒜`$ generated by $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}X_{jl}f_j`$, $`1l\mathrm{}`$. This ideal, which we dub a universal $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideal in $`IS`$, is a minimal reduction of $`IS`$. In RS , D. Rees and J. Sally prove that if $`I`$ is $`𝔪`$-primary, then $`𝒜R\mathrm{core}(I)`$. One of the main results of the present paper says that this containment is actually an equality $`(`$Theorem 4.2.b$`)`$, which remains valid if $`R`$ is merely Buchsbaum $`(`$Remark 3$`)`$. Most notably however, we are able to treat ideals that are not necessarily $`𝔪`$-primary, such as ideals with $`\mathrm{}=g`$ $`(`$called equimultiple ideals$`)`$, generically complete intersection Cohen–Macaulay ideals in a Gorenstein ring with $`\mathrm{}=g+1`$, or two-dimensional Cohen–Macaulay ideals in a Gorenstein ring which are complete intersections locally on the punctured spectrum. All these ideals fall into the class of universally weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$ ideals satisfying $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$, a class that provides the framework for this article $`(`$see Sect. 2 for the definition$`)`$. This assumption is fairly general, it essentially requires the vanishing of $`\mathrm{}g`$ local cohomology modules. For such ideals we are able to prove that

$`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ is the intersection of finitely many general minimal reductions of $`I`$ $`(`$Theorem 4.1$`)`$;

$`\mathrm{core}(I)=𝒜R`$ $`(`$Theorem 4.2.b$`)`$;

$`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=\mathrm{core}(I)R^{}`$ for every flat $`(`$not necessarily local$`)`$ homomorphism $`RR^{}`$ of local Cohen–Macaulay rings so that $`IR^{}`$ is universally weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$ $`(`$Theorem 4.3$`)`$.

The main technical result is the fact that $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ can be obtained by intersecting general minimal reductions of $`I`$. It immediately implies the flat ascent asserted in $`(`$3$`)`$, provided the map is local $`(`$Lemma 5$`)`$. This yields $`(`$2$`)`$, which in turn leads to the general case of $`(`$3$`)`$. From the equality in $`(`$2$`)`$ we also deduce an expression for $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ as a colon ideal in a polynomial ring over $`R`$ that allows – at least in principle – for an explicit computation of the core $`(`$Proposition 1 and Remark 6$`)`$.

The assertions $`(`$1$`)`$ and $`(`$2$`)`$ above are no longer true for arbitrary ideals in Cohen–Macaulay rings $`(`$Example 1$`)`$. On the other hand, we are able to prove under fairly weak assumptions that $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ is still an intersection of finitely many minimal reductions of $`I`$, which is far from being obvious for non $`𝔪`$-primary ideals $`(`$Theorem 3.1$`)`$. In fact we do not know of any examples where this finiteness assertion or the flat ascent as in $`(`$3$`)`$ fail to hold. Thus we are led to ask the following questions, where $`I`$ is an arbitrary $`R`$-ideal and $`(I)`$ the set of its minimal reductions:

Is $`{\displaystyle \underset{J(I)}{}}\mathrm{Ass}_R(I/J)`$ finite?

Is $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ an intersection of finitely many minimal reductions of $`I`$?

Is $`\mathrm{core}(I)𝒜R`$?

Is $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}`$ for every flat local homomorphism $`RR^{}`$ of local Cohen–Macaulay rings?

Notice that an affirmative answer to $`(iv)`$ would imply that $`(iii)`$ holds, and that $`(ii)`$ and $`(iv)`$, if valid, would yield the equality $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}`$ in the setting of $`(iv)`$.

We end by remarking that effective ‘closed formulas’ for the computation of $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ will appear in another article of ours CPU , extending earlier work by C. Huneke and I. Swanson HS . However, the assumptions on $`I`$ will be more restrictive than the ones used here and the techniques will be different.

## 2 Definitions and preliminaries

We begin by reviewing some facts from CEU  about residually $`S_2`$ ideals. Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian ring, $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal of height $`g`$, and $`s`$ an integer. Recall that $`I`$ satisfies the condition $`G_s`$ if for each prime ideal $`𝔭`$ containing $`I`$ with $`\mathrm{dim}R_𝔭s1`$, the minimal number of generators $`\mu (I_𝔭)`$ is at most $`\mathrm{dim}R_𝔭`$. A proper $`R`$-ideal $`K`$ is called an $`s`$-residual intersection of $`I`$ if there exists an $`s`$-generated ideal $`JI`$ so that $`K=J:I`$ and $`\mathrm{ht}Ksg`$. If in addition $`\mathrm{ht}I+Ks+1`$ we say that $`K`$ is a geometric $`s`$-residual intersection of $`I`$. The ideal $`I`$ is called $`s`$-residually $`S_2`$ $`(`$weakly $`s`$-residually $`S_2)`$ if $`R/K`$ satisfies Serre’s condition $`S_2`$ for every $`i`$-residual intersection $`(`$geometric $`i`$-residual intersection, respectively$`)`$ $`K`$ of $`I`$ and every $`is`$. Finally, whenever $`R`$ is local, we say $`I`$ is universally $`s`$-residually $`S_2`$ $`(`$universally weakly $`s`$-residually $`S_2)`$ if $`IS`$ is residually $`S_2`$ $`(`$weakly $`s`$-residually $`S_2`$, respectively$`)`$ for every ring $`S=R(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)`$ with $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_n`$ variables over $`R`$.

If $`(R,𝔪)`$ is a local Cohen–Macaulay ring of dimension $`d`$ and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal satisfying $`G_s`$, then $`I`$ is universally $`s`$-residually $`S_2`$ in the following cases:

$`I`$ has sliding depth, which means that the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ Koszul homology modules $`H_i`$ of a generating set $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_n`$ of $`I`$ satisfy $`\mathrm{depth}H_idn+i`$ for every $`i`$ $`(`$see (HVV, , 3.3)$`)`$.

$`R`$ is Gorenstein, and the local cohomology modules $`H_𝔪^{dgj}(R/I^j)`$ vanish for $`1jsg+1`$ or, equivalently, $`\mathrm{Ext}_R^{g+j}(R/I^j,R)=0`$ for $`1jsg+1`$ $`(`$see (CEU, , 4.1 and 4.3)$`)`$. The latter condition holds whenever $`\mathrm{depth}R/I^j\mathrm{dim}R/Ij+1`$ for $`1jsg+1`$.

The depth inequalities in $`(`$1$`)`$ and $`(`$2$`)`$ are satisfied by strongly Cohen–Macaulay ideals, i.e., ideals whose Koszul homology modules are Cohen–Macaulay. The latter condition always holds if $`I`$ is a Cohen–Macaulay almost complete intersection or a Cohen–Macaulay deviation two ideal of a Gorenstein ring (AH, , p. 259). It is also satisfied for any ideal in the linkage class of a complete intersection (H1, , 1.11): standard examples include perfect ideals of grade $`2`$ and perfect Gorenstein ideals of grade $`3`$.

Finally, $`I`$ is universally $`s`$-residually $`S_2`$ if $`s<g`$ or if one of the following conditions holds:

$`R`$ is Gorenstein, $`R/I`$ is Cohen–Macaulay, and $`s=g`$ $`(`$see $`(`$2$`))`$.

$`R`$ is Gorenstein, $`R/I`$ is Cohen–Macaulay, and $`\mathrm{dim}R/I2`$ $`(`$see $`(`$3$`)`$ and Lemma 1.b below$`)`$.

###### Lemma 1

Let $`R`$ be a Cohen–Macaulay ring, $`s`$ an integer, and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal satisfying $`G_s`$.

If $`I`$ is weakly $`(s1)`$-residually $`S_2`$, then for every $`𝔭V(I)`$, $`I_𝔭`$ is weakly $`(s1)`$-residually $`S_2`$.

If $`I`$ is weakly $`(s1)`$-residually $`S_2`$, then every $`s`$-residual intersection of $`I`$ is unmixed of height $`s`$.

If $`I`$ is weakly $`(s1)`$-residually $`S_2`$, then for every $`s`$-residual intersection $`J:I`$ of $`I`$ with $`JI`$ and $`\mu (J)s`$, every associated prime of $`J`$ has height at most $`s`$.

If $`I`$ is weakly $`(s1)`$-residually $`S_2`$, then for every geometric $`s`$-residual intersection $`K=J:I`$ of $`I`$ with $`JI`$ and $`\mu (J)s`$, $`IK=J`$.

If $`I`$ is weakly $`(s2)`$-residually $`S_2`$, then for every flat homomorphism of Noetherian rings $`RR^{}`$ and every $`s`$-generated reduction $`J`$ of $`IR^{}`$, $`\mathrm{Supp}_R^{}(IR^{}/J)=V(\mathrm{Fitt}_s(I)R^{})`$.

If $`I`$ is weakly $`(s1)`$-residually $`S_2`$, then for every $`s`$-generated reduction $`J`$ of $`I`$, $`\mathrm{Ass}_R(I/J)`$ is empty or consists only of primes of height $`s`$.

If $`I`$ is weakly $`(s2)`$-residually $`S_2`$, then $`I=J`$ for every $`(s1)`$-generated reduction $`J`$ of $`I`$.

###### Proof

Part $`(`$a$`)`$ follows as in (AN, , the proof of 1.10.a), whereas parts $`(`$b$`)`$, $`(`$c$`)`$ and $`(`$d$`)`$ are identical to (CEU, , 3.4.a, b, c).

To prove part $`(`$e$`)`$ it suffices to show that if $`𝔮V(IR^{})`$ and $`\mu (IR_𝔮^{})s`$, then $`IR_𝔮^{}=J_𝔮^{}`$. So let $`𝔭=𝔮R`$. Now $`\mu (I_𝔭)s`$ and by part $`(`$a$`)`$, $`I_𝔭`$ is still weakly $`(s2)`$-residually $`S_2`$. Thus according to (CEU, , 3.6.b), $`I_𝔭`$ can be generated by a $`d`$-sequence. Therefore $`\mu (I_𝔭)=\mathrm{}(I_𝔭)`$ by (Huneke, , 3.1) or (Valla, , 3.15), and hence $`\mu (IR_𝔮^{})=\mathrm{}(IR_𝔮^{})`$. Since $`J_𝔮`$ is a reduction of $`IR_𝔮^{}`$, we conclude that $`IR_𝔮^{}=J_𝔮`$.

As to part $`(`$f$`)`$ we may assume that $`IJ`$. By $`(`$e$`)`$, $`\mathrm{codim}\mathrm{Supp}_R(I/J)s`$. In particular $`J:I`$ is an $`s`$-residual intersection of $`I`$, which according to $`(`$c$`)`$ implies that every prime in $`\mathrm{Ass}_R(R/J)`$ has height at most $`s`$. Now our assertion follows since $`\mathrm{Ass}_R(I/J)\mathrm{Supp}_R(I/J)\mathrm{Ass}_R(R/J)`$.

Finally we show part $`(`$g$`)`$. Applying $`(`$e$`)`$ with $`s`$ replaced by $`s1`$, we deduce that $`\mathrm{codim}\mathrm{Supp}_R(I/J)>s1`$, which implies $`I=J`$ by $`(`$f$`)`$.

We are now going to introduce the notions of generic, universal, and general subideals, that will play a crucial role in the sequel. To this end, let $`R`$ be a Noetherian ring, $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal, $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_n`$ a generating sequence of $`I`$, and $`t`$, $`s`$ integers. Let $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}=X_{ijl}`$, $`1it`$, $`1jn`$, $`1ls`$, be variables, $`T=R[\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}]=R[\{X_{ijl}\}]`$, and $`_i`$, $`1it`$, the $`T`$-ideal generated by $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}X_{ijl}f_j`$, $`1ls`$. We call $`_1,\mathrm{},_t`$ generic $`s`$-generated ideals in $`IT`$. Notice that up to adjoining variables and applying an $`R`$-automorphism, this definition does not depend on the choice of $`n`$ and $`f_1,\mathrm{},f_n`$.

Now assume $`(R,𝔪)`$ is local with residue field $`k`$. We set $`S=T_{𝔪T}`$ and $`𝒜_i=_iS`$, and call $`𝒜_1,\mathrm{},𝒜_t`$ universal $`s`$-generated ideals in $`IS`$. Furthermore we say that $`𝔞_1,\mathrm{},𝔞_t`$ are general $`s`$-generated ideals in $`I`$ if $`𝔞_iI`$ are ideals with $`\mu (𝔞_i)=s`$, $`𝔞_i_RkI_Rk`$, and the point $`(𝔞_1_Rk,\mathrm{},𝔞_t_Rk)`$ lies in some dense open subset of the product of Grassmannians $`\stackrel{t}{\times }𝔾(s,I_Rk)`$.

Now let $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}=\lambda _{ijl}`$, $`1it`$, $`1jn`$, $`1ls`$ be elements of $`R`$, and consider the maximal ideal $`M=(𝔪,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})=(𝔪,\{X_{ijl}\lambda _{ijl}\})`$ of $`T`$. We will identify the set $`\{M=(𝔪,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})|\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}R^{tns}\}`$ with the set of $`k`$-rational points of the affine space $`𝔸_k^{tns}`$. Write $`\pi =\pi _{\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}}:TR`$ for the homomorphism of $`R`$-algebras with $`\pi (X_{ijl})=\lambda _{ijl}`$. The kernel of $`\pi `$ is generated by the $`T`$-regular sequence $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}`$. Now $`\pi (_1),\mathrm{},\pi (_t)`$ is a sequence of $`s`$-generated ideals in $`I`$, whose images in $`I_Rk`$ only depend on $`M`$. Conversely, every sequence of $`s`$-generated ideals in $`I`$ is obtained in this way. As $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}`$ form a regular sequence modulo every power of $`IT`$, Nakayama’s Lemma shows that $`\pi (_i)`$ is a reduction of $`I`$ if and only if $`(_i)_M`$ is a reduction of $`IT_M`$. Since the latter condition is equivalent to $`M{\displaystyle \underset{r0}{}}\mathrm{Supp}_T(I^{r+1}T/_iI^r)`$, the set of all $`M`$ for which $`(_i)_M`$ is a reduction of $`IT_M`$ is open in $`𝔸_k^{tns}`$.

Finally, we write $`(I)`$ for the set of all minimal reductions of $`I`$, and we define

$$𝒫(I)=\underset{J(I)}{}\mathrm{Ass}_R(I/J)$$

and

$$\gamma (I)=\mathrm{inf}\{t|\mathrm{core}(I)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{t}{}}J_i\mathrm{with}J_i(I)\}.$$

## 3 Finiteness

If $`I`$ is $`𝔪`$-primary, then $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ is $`𝔪`$-primary and $`\gamma (I)\mathrm{type}(R/\mathrm{core}(I))`$. In particular $`\gamma (I)`$ is finite. The next result establishes this finiteness in a much broader setting.

###### Theorem 3.1

Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian local ring with infinite residue field and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal. Assume that $`𝒫(I)`$ is finite, every element of $`𝒫(I)`$ is minimal in this set, and $`\mu (I_𝔮)=\mathrm{}(I_𝔮)`$ for every $`𝔮\mathrm{Spec}(R)\overline{𝒫(I)}`$. Then $`\gamma (I)<\mathrm{}`$.

###### Proof

Let $`K`$ be the intersection of the prime ideals in $`𝒫=𝒫(I)`$. We first prove that $`K\sqrt{\mathrm{core}(I):I}`$, or equivalently that there exists a fixed integer $`r`$ so that $`K^rIJ`$ for every $`J=(I)`$.

Let $`𝔪`$ be the maximal ideal of $`R`$, $`k=R/𝔪`$, $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(I)`$, $``$ a generic $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideal in $`IT`$, and $`U𝔸_k^n\mathrm{}`$ the open set consisting of all $`M=(𝔪,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})T`$ such that $`_M`$ is a reduction of $`IT_M`$. Fix $`MU`$ and let $`Q`$ be any prime ideal of $`T`$ with $`KQM`$. Writing $`𝔮=QR`$ we have $`𝔮\mathrm{Spec}(R)\overline{𝒫}`$. Thus $`\mu (I_𝔮)=\mathrm{}(I_𝔮)`$ and hence $`\mu (IT_Q)=\mathrm{}(IT_Q)`$. Since $`_Q`$ is a reduction of $`IT_Q`$ we conclude that $`IT_Q=_Q`$. Therefore $`K^nIT_M_M`$ for some integer $`n`$. Now $`K^nIT_N_N`$ for every $`N`$ in some open neighborhood of $`M`$ in $`U`$. As $`U`$ is quasicompact there exists an integer $`r`$ so that $`K^rIT_N_N`$ for every $`NU`$. Specializing we conclude that $`K^rIJ`$ for every $`J`$.

Now for every $`𝔭𝒫`$, since $`𝔭`$ is minimal in the finite set $`𝒫`$, $`𝔭^rI_𝔭=K^rI_𝔭(\mathrm{core}(I))_𝔭`$ and hence $`\mathrm{length}_{R_𝔭}((I/\mathrm{core}(I))_𝔭)<\mathrm{}`$. Again as $`𝒫`$ is finite there exist finitely many minimal reductions $`J_1,\mathrm{},J_t`$ so that for every $`𝔭𝒫`$, $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{t}{}}}(J_i/\mathrm{core}(I))_𝔭={\displaystyle \underset{J}{}}(J/\mathrm{core}(I))_𝔭`$. Thus $`({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{t}{}}}J_i)_𝔭J_𝔭`$ for every $`J`$ and every $`𝔭𝒫`$. Hence by the definition of $`𝒫`$, $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{t}{}}}J_iJ`$, which gives $`\mathrm{core}(I)={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{t}{}}}J_i`$.

###### Remark 1

The assumptions on $`𝒫(I)`$ in Theorem 3.1 are automatically satisfied in any of the following cases, where $`g=\mathrm{ht}(I)`$ and $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(I)`$:

Locally on the punctured spectrum of $`R`$, $`I`$ is generated by analytically independent elements.

$`R`$ satisfies $`S_{g+1}`$ and $`I`$ is equimultiple.

$`R`$ is Cohen–Macaulay and $`I`$ is $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ and weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$ $`(`$see Lemma 1.a, e, f$`)`$.

In either case $`𝒫(I)=\mathrm{Min}(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I))=\mathrm{Ass}_R(I/J)`$, where $`J`$ is any minimal reduction of $`I`$.

## 4 Genericity and the shape of the core

The crucial result of this section is Theorem 4.1, which describes the core as a finite intersection of general minimal reductions. To prove it we compare the multiplicities of modules defined by intersecting reduction ideals, universal ideals, and general ideals, respectively. This is done in Lemma 4, which in turn is based on Lemmas 2 and 3. There we deal with modules defined by a single universal ideal $`(`$Lemma 2$`)`$ and a single minimal reduction $`(`$Lemma 3$`)`$, respectively. For the latter we prove that under suitable assumptions, the multiplicity of $`I/J`$ is independent of the choice of a minimal reduction $`J`$ of $`I`$, a fact reminiscent of the theme of CEU .

If $`R`$ is a Noetherian local ring and $`E`$ a finitely generated $`R`$-module, we denote by $`e(E)`$ the multiplicity of $`E`$, by $`e_I(E)`$ the multiplicity with respect to an ideal of definition $`I`$ of $`E`$, and by $`e(\underset{¯}{y};E)`$ the multiplicity with respect to a system of parameters $`\underset{¯}{y}`$ of $`E`$.

###### Lemma 2

Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian local ring, $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal, and $`s`$ an integer. Let $`JI`$ be an $`s`$-generated ideal and $`𝒜`$ a universal $`s`$-generated ideal in $`IS`$. One has $`\mathrm{dim}I/J\mathrm{dim}IS/𝒜`$, and if equality holds then $`e(I/J)e(IS/𝒜)`$.

###### Proof

We may assume that the residue field of $`R`$ is infinite. Let $`𝔪`$ be the maximal ideal of $`R`$, and $``$ a generic $`s`$-generated ideal in $`IT`$ so that $`𝒜=S=_{𝔪T}`$. Using the notation introduced in Sect. 2 we have $`J=\pi _{\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}}()`$ for some $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}R^{ns}`$. Write $`M=(𝔪,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})T`$. First notice that $`I/J(IT/+(\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})IT)_M`$ as $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}`$ form a regular sequence on $`(T/IT)_M`$. In particular $`\mathrm{dim}I/J\mathrm{dim}(IT/)_Mns`$. On the other hand $`\mathrm{dim}(IT/)_Mns=\mathrm{dim}(IT/)_M\mathrm{dim}(T/𝔪T)_M\mathrm{dim}(IT/)_{𝔪T}`$. Now the inequality $`\mathrm{dim}I/J\mathrm{dim}IS/𝒜`$ follows.

Moreover if equality holds then $`\mathrm{dim}I/J=\mathrm{dim}(IT/)_Mns=\mathrm{dim}(IT/)_{𝔪T}`$. Hence there exists a sequence $`\underset{¯}{y}`$ in $`𝔪`$ so that $`\underset{¯}{y}`$ is a system of parameters of $`I/J`$ and of $`(IT/)_{𝔪T}`$, $`\underset{¯}{y}`$ generates a minimal reduction of $`𝔪/J:I`$, and $`\underset{¯}{y},\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}`$ form a system of parameters of $`(IT/)_M`$. Therefore $`e(I/J)=e(\underset{¯}{y};I/J)e(\underset{¯}{y},\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }};(IT/)_M)e(\underset{¯}{y};(IT/)_{𝔪T})`$ where the last inequality holds by the associativity formula for multiplicities as $`\mathrm{dim}(T/𝔪T)_M=ns`$ $`(`$see (Nagata, , 24.7)$`)`$. Finally $`e(\underset{¯}{y};(IT/)_{𝔪T})e(IS/𝒜)`$.

###### Lemma 3

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring with infinite residue field and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal of analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$. Assume that $`I`$ satisfies $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$, but not $`G_{\mathrm{}+1}`$, and $`I`$ is weakly $`(\mathrm{}2)`$-residually $`S_2`$. Then $`e(I/J)`$ and $`e(R/J:I)`$ are independent of the minimal reduction $`J`$ of $`I`$.

###### Proof

Let $`J`$ be any minimal reduction of $`I`$. By Lemma 1.e, $`\mathrm{Supp}(I/J)=V(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I))`$, and by our assumption the latter set has codimension $`\mathrm{}`$. According to the associativity formula for multiplicities we may localize at any minimal prime in $`\mathrm{Supp}(I/J)=V(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I))`$ of codimension $`\mathrm{}`$ to assume that $`\mathrm{dim}R=\mathrm{}`$. By Lemma 1.a, $`I`$ is still weakly $`(\mathrm{}2)`$-residually $`S_2`$. Notice that now $`\mathrm{dim}I/J=\mathrm{dim}R/J:I=0`$.

We may suppose $`\mathrm{}>0`$. Let $`𝔞`$ and $`𝔟`$ be minimal reductions of $`I`$. By a general position argument $`(`$see, e.g., (AN, , the proof of 1.4)$`)`$ there are generating sequences $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`𝔞`$ and $`b_1,\mathrm{},b_{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`𝔟`$ so that for every $`1i\mathrm{}`$ the ideal $`(a_1,\mathrm{},a_i,b_{i+1},\mathrm{},b_{\mathrm{}})`$ is a minimal reduction of $`I`$ and

$$K=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_{i1},b_{i+1},\mathrm{},b_{\mathrm{}}):I$$

is a geometric $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residual intersection of $`I`$. Write $`𝔠=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_{i1},b_{i+1},`$ $`\mathrm{},b_{\mathrm{}})`$. It suffices to prove that

$$e(I/(𝔠,a_i))=e(I/(𝔠,b_i))\mathrm{and}e(R/(𝔠,a_i):I)=e(R/(𝔠,b_i):I).$$

To this end let ‘$`^{\text{ }\text{ }}`$’ denote images in $`\overline{R}=R/K`$. Since $`IK=𝔠`$ by Lemma 1.d, it follows that $`\overline{I}/(\overline{a}_i)=I/(IK,a_i)=I/(𝔠,a_i)`$ and hence $`(\overline{a}_i):\overline{I}=\overline{(𝔠,a_i):I}`$. The same holds for $`b_i`$ in place of $`a_i`$. Thus it suffices to show $`e(\overline{I}/(\overline{a}_i))=e(\overline{I}/(\overline{b}_i))`$ and $`e(\overline{R}/(\overline{a}_i):\overline{I})=e(\overline{R}/(\overline{b}_i):\overline{I})`$. Obviously, $`(\overline{a}_i)`$ and $`(\overline{b}_i)`$ are reductions of $`\overline{I}`$, and by Lemma 1.b, $`\overline{a}_i`$ and $`\overline{b}_i`$ are non zerodivisors on $`\overline{R}`$ and $`\mathrm{dim}\overline{R}=1`$.

After changing notation, we are reduced to proving that if $`(R,𝔪)`$ is a one-dimensional local Cohen–Macaulay ring with infinite residue field and $`I`$ is an $`𝔪`$-primary ideal, then $`\mathrm{length}(I/J)`$ and $`\mathrm{length}(R/J:I)`$ do not depend on the minimal reduction $`J`$ of $`I`$. Notice that $`\mathrm{length}(R/J)=e_J(R)=e_I(R)`$. This gives $`\mathrm{length}(I/J)=e_I(R)\mathrm{length}(R/I)`$. If $`a`$ is an $`R`$-regular element generating $`J`$, we have $`I^1/RaI^1/(a)`$ and $`aI^1=J:I`$. This yields an exact sequence

$$0I^1/RR/JR/J:I0,$$

which shows that $`\mathrm{length}(R/J:I)=e_I(R)\mathrm{length}(I^1/R)`$.

###### Lemma 4

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring with infinite residue field, $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal of analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$, and $`J_1,\mathrm{},J_t`$ minimal reductions of $`I`$. Assume that $`I`$ is $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$, but not $`G_{\mathrm{}+1}`$, and $`I`$ is weakly $`(\mathrm{}2)`$-residually $`S_2`$. Then

$$e(I/J_1\mathrm{}J_t)e(IS/𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t)=e(I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t)$$

and $`𝔞_1,\mathrm{},𝔞_t`$ are minimal reductions of $`I`$, for $`𝒜_1,\mathrm{},𝒜_t`$ universal $`\mathrm{}`$\-  generated ideals in $`IS`$ and $`𝔞_1,\mathrm{},𝔞_t`$ general $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideals in $`I`$.

###### Proof

We may assume that $`n=\mu (I)>\mathrm{}>0`$. Write $`d=\mathrm{dim}(R/\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I))`$. By Lemma 1.e,

$$\mathrm{Supp}_R^{}(IR^{}/J)=V(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I)R^{})$$
(1)
for any flat homomorphism of rings $`RR^{}`$ and any $`\mathrm{}`$-generated reduction $`J`$ of $`IR^{}`$. Let $`_1,\mathrm{},_t`$ be generic $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideals in $`IT`$, defined using a minimal generating sequence of $`I`$. We may suppose that $`𝒜_i=_iS`$.

We first prove the equality $`e(IS/𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t)=e(I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t)`$. We may pass from $`R`$ to $`\widehat{R}`$ and assume that $`(R,𝔪,k)`$ is complete. Although the residually $`S_2`$ assumption may not be preserved by completion, Lemma 1.e shows that $`(`$1$`)`$ still holds. Let $`𝔭_1,\mathrm{},𝔭_s`$ be the minimal primes of $`\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I)`$ having maximal dimension, namely $`d`$. Let $`C`$ be a coefficient ring of $`R`$ and write $`C_j=C/𝔭_jC`$, $`k_j=\mathrm{Quot}(C_j)`$ for $`1js`$.

For $`1it`$ consider the $`T`$-modules $`E_i=IT/_1\mathrm{}_i+_{i+1}`$, where $`_{t+1}=0`$. One has $`\mathrm{dim}(E_i)_{𝔭_jT}0`$ by $`(`$1$`)`$. Thus the set of all maximal ideals $`(𝔭_j,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})`$ of $`T_{𝔭_j}`$ with $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}C_{𝔭_jC}^{tn\mathrm{}}`$, so that the modules $`(E_i)_{(𝔭_j,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})}`$ are zero or Cohen–Macaulay of dimension $`tn\mathrm{}`$ for $`1it`$, form a dense open subset of $`𝔸_{k_j}^{tn\mathrm{}}`$. Let $`H_j`$ be the largest ideal of $`k_j[\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}]`$ defining the complement of this subset, and let $`\overline{H}_j`$ denote the image of $`H_jC_j[\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}]`$ in $`k[\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}]`$. Since $`C_j`$ is either a field or a discrete valuation ring, it follows that $`\overline{H}_j0`$ and hence $`U_j=D(\overline{H}_j)`$ is a dense open subset of $`𝔸_k^{tn\mathrm{}}`$. Let $`M`$ be a maximal ideal in $`T`$ of the form $`M=(𝔪,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})`$ with $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}R^{tn\mathrm{}}`$. As $`C`$ is a coefficient ring of $`R`$ we may assume that $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}C^{tn\mathrm{}}`$. If the image of $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}`$ in $`𝔸_k^{tn\mathrm{}}`$ lies in $`U_j=D(\overline{H}_j)`$, then the image of $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}`$ in $`𝔸_{k_j}^{tn\mathrm{}}`$ belongs to $`D(H_j)`$ since $`C_j`$ maps onto $`k`$. Thus the modules $`(E_i)_{(𝔭_j,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})}`$ are zero or Cohen–Macaulay of dimension $`tn\mathrm{}`$ for $`1it`$, whenever $`M=(𝔪,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})`$ lies in $`U_j`$. Finally, let $`U_0`$ be the dense open subset of $`𝔸_k^{tn\mathrm{}}`$ consisting of all $`M=(𝔪,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})`$ so that $`\pi _{\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}}(_i)`$ are reductions of $`I`$ for $`1it`$. Define $`U`$ to be the dense open subset $`U_0\mathrm{}U_s`$ of $`𝔸_k^{tn\mathrm{}}`$. The natural action of $`\stackrel{t}{\times }GL_{\mathrm{}}(k)`$ on $`𝔸_k^{tn\mathrm{}}=\stackrel{t}{\times }\mathrm{Hom}_k(k^{\mathrm{}},k^n)`$ induces an action on $`U`$, and so the image $`V`$ of $`U`$ in the product of Grassmannians $`\stackrel{t}{\times }𝔾(\mathrm{},k^n)`$ is open and dense. It remains to show that $`e(IS/𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t)=e(I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t)`$ whenever $`(𝔞_1_Rk,\mathrm{},𝔞_t_Rk)V`$.

So let $`(𝔞_1_Rk,\mathrm{},𝔞_t_Rk)V`$. Write $`𝔞_i=\pi _{\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}}(_i)`$ where $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}C^{tn\mathrm{}}`$, $`M=(𝔪,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})T`$, and $`Q_j=(𝔭_j,\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})T`$. By the above $`𝔞_i`$ are reductions of $`I`$, $`(_i)_M`$ are reductions of $`IT_M`$, and $`(E_i)_{Q_j}`$ are zero or Cohen–Macaulay of dimension $`tn\mathrm{}`$ for $`1it`$, $`1js`$. Since the modules $`(E_i)_{Q_j}`$ are annihilated by a power of $`𝔭_j`$ according to $`(`$1$`)`$, it then follows that these modules vanish or that $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}`$ form a regular sequence on them. Notice that $`(E_t)_{Q_j}0`$ by $`(`$1$`)`$. Now an induction on $`i`$, $`1it`$ yields $`(I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t)_{𝔭_j}(IT/_1\mathrm{}_t+(\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }})IT)_{Q_j}`$. Furthermore, the latter module has length equal to $`e(\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }};(IT/_1\mathrm{}_t)_{Q_j})`$. Since $`\mathrm{Supp}(I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t)=V(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I))`$ by $`(`$1$`)`$, the associativity formula for multiplicities then yields

$`e(I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{s}{}}}\lambda _{R_{𝔭_j}}((I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t)_{𝔭_j})e(R/𝔭_j)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{s}{}}}e(\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }};(IT/_1\mathrm{}_t)_{Q_j})e((T/Q_j)_M).`$
To further evaluate this sum, write $`E=E_t=IT/_1\mathrm{}_t`$. By $`(`$1$`)`$, $`\mathrm{Supp}(E_M)=V(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I)T_M)`$, which has dimension $`d+tn\mathrm{}`$. For $`r`$ an integer with $`\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I)^r\mathrm{ann}(E_M)`$, let $`\underset{¯}{y}=y_1,\mathrm{},y_d`$ be a sequence of elements generating a minimal reduction of $`𝔪/\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I)^r`$. Now $`\underset{¯}{y},\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}`$ form a system of parameters of $`E_M`$. Furthermore in the ring $`(T/\mathrm{ann}(E))_M`$, $`\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }}`$ generate an ideal of height $`tn\mathrm{}`$ and dimension $`d`$, and $`\underset{¯}{y}`$ generate an ideal of height $`d`$ and dimension $`tn\mathrm{}`$. The minimal primes of maximal dimension of the first ideal are $`Q_1T_M,\mathrm{},Q_sT_M`$, whereas the second ideal has only one minimal prime, $`𝔪T_M`$. Thus the associativity formula $`(`$see (Nagata, , 24.7)$`)`$ yields

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{s}{}}}e(\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }};E_{Q_j})`$ $``$ $`e((T/Q_j)_M)={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{s}{}}}e(\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }};E_{Q_j})e(\underset{¯}{y};(T/Q_j)_M)`$
$`=`$ $`e(\underset{¯}{y},\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }};E_M)=e(\underset{¯}{y};E_{𝔪T})e(\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{X}}\underset{¯}{\underset{¯}{\lambda }};(T/𝔪T)_M)`$
$`=`$ $`e(E_{𝔪T})1=e(IS/𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t).`$
This completes the proof of the equality $`e(IS/𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t)=e(I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t)`$.

We now show the inequality $`e(I/J_1\mathrm{}J_t)e(IS/𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t)`$. Writing $`𝒥=J_1S\mathrm{}J_{i1}S𝒜_{i+1}\mathrm{}𝒜_t`$ with $`1it`$, it suffices to show that $`e(IS/𝒥J_iS)e(IS/𝒥𝒜_i)`$. Consider the two exact sequences

$$0IS/𝒥J_iSIS/𝒥IS/J_iSIS/𝒥+J_iS0$$

$$0IS/𝒥𝒜_iIS/𝒥IS/𝒜_iIS/𝒥+𝒜_i0.$$

By Lemma 2, $`\mathrm{dim}IS/𝒥+J_iS\mathrm{dim}IS/𝒥+𝒜_i`$, and by $`(`$1$`)`$, all the other $`S`$-modules occurring in the two exact sequences have the same dimension, namely $`d`$. Applying the equality just proved with $`t=1`$, gives $`e(IS/𝒜_i)=e(I/𝔞_i)`$, whereas Lemma 3 yields $`e(I/𝔞_i)=e(I/J_i)`$. Thus $`e(IS/𝒜_i)=e(IS/J_iS)`$. Now if $`d>\mathrm{dim}IS/𝒥+J_iS`$ or if $`\mathrm{dim}IS/𝒥+J_iS>\mathrm{dim}IS/𝒥+𝒜_i`$, then the asserted inequality follows from the above exact sequences. If on the other hand $`d=\mathrm{dim}IS/𝒥+J_iS=\mathrm{dim}IS/𝒥+𝒜_i`$ then $`e(IS/𝒥+J_iS)e(IS/𝒥+𝒜_i)`$ by Lemma 2, and again our claim can be deduced from the two exact sequences.

###### Remark 2

The assumption of $`I`$ not satisfying $`G_{\mathrm{}+1}`$ in Lemmas 3 and 4 can be omitted if $`I`$ is weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$; for otherwise $`J=I`$, $`J_i=𝔞_i=I`$ and $`𝒜_i=IS`$ by Lemma 1.e,g.

###### Theorem 4.1

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring with infinite residue field and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal of analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$. Assume that $`I`$ is $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ and weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$, and write $`t=\gamma (I)`$. Then $`\mathrm{core}(I)=𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t`$ for $`𝔞_1,\mathrm{},𝔞_t`$ general $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideals in $`I`$ which are reductions of $`I`$.

###### Proof

According to Theorem 3.1 and Remark 1, $`\gamma (I)<\mathrm{}`$. Hence by Lemma 1.f every associated prime of the $`R`$-module $`I/\mathrm{core}(I)`$ has height $`\mathrm{}`$, and the same holds for $`I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t`$. On the other hand Lemma 4 and Remark 2 show that $`e(I/\mathrm{core}(I))e(I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t)`$. Now as $`I/\mathrm{core}(I)`$ maps onto $`I/𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t`$, these two modules are equal.

Using Theorem 4.1, we can now prove that the formation of the core is compatible with flat local maps:

###### Lemma 5

Let $`RR^{}`$ be a flat local extension of local rings with infinite residue fields. Assume $`R^{}`$ is Cohen–Macaulay. Let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal of analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$ such that $`IR^{}`$ is $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ and weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$. Then $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}`$ and $`\gamma (IR^{})=\gamma (I)`$.

###### Proof

Notice that $`R`$ is Cohen–Macaulay and $`I`$ is $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ and weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$. By Theorem 3.1, $`\mathrm{core}(I)={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}}J_i`$ for finitely many reductions $`J_1,\mathrm{},J_s`$ of $`I`$. Thus $`(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}}(J_iR^{})`$. As $`J_iR^{}`$ are reductions of $`IR^{}`$, it follows that $`(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}\mathrm{core}(IR^{})`$.

To show the other inclusion, let $`kK`$ be the residue field extension of $`RR^{}`$. By Theorem 4.1, $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})`$ is the intersection of $`t=\gamma (IR^{})`$ general $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideals in $`IR^{}`$ which are reductions of $`IR^{}`$. On the other hand every dense open subset of $`\stackrel{t}{\times }𝔾(\mathrm{},IR^{}_R^{}K)=\stackrel{t}{\times }𝔾(\mathrm{},K^n)`$ intersects with $`\stackrel{t}{\times }𝔾(\mathrm{},I_Rk)=\stackrel{t}{\times }𝔾(\mathrm{},k^n)`$, since $`k`$ is infinite. Thus $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t`$ where $`𝔞_i`$ are minimal reductions of $`IR^{}`$ extended from $`R`$-ideals $`𝔟_i`$. Now $`𝔟_i`$ are minimal reductions of $`I`$, which gives $`\mathrm{core}(I)𝔟_1\mathrm{}𝔟_t`$. Hence $`(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}𝔟_1R^{}\mathrm{}𝔟_tR^{}=\mathrm{core}(IR^{})`$ and thus $`(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}=𝔟_1R^{}\mathrm{}𝔟_tR^{}=\mathrm{core}(IR^{})`$. In particular $`(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}=(𝔟_1\mathrm{}𝔟_t)R^{}`$, hence $`\mathrm{core}(I)=𝔟_1\mathrm{}𝔟_t`$, showing $`\gamma (I)\gamma (IR^{})`$. The inequality $`\gamma (I)\gamma (IR^{})`$ is obvious since $`(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}=\mathrm{core}(IR^{})`$.

Lemmas 4 and 5 allow us to prove one of our main results:

###### Theorem 4.2

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring with infinite residue field and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal of analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$. Assume that $`I`$ is $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ and universally weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$.

Let $`𝒜_1,\mathrm{},𝒜_t`$ be universal $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideals in $`IS`$. Then $`(\mathrm{core}(I))S=\mathrm{core}(IS)=𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t`$ if and only if $`t\gamma (I)=\gamma (IS)`$.

Let $`𝒜`$ be a universal $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideal in $`IR(X)`$. Then $`\mathrm{core}(I)=𝒜R`$.

###### Proof

$`(`$a$`)`$ If $`\mathrm{core}(IS)=𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t`$ then $`\gamma (IS)t`$ and so by Lemma 5, $`t\gamma (I)=\gamma (IS)`$. Conversely, assume $`t\gamma (I)`$. The equality $`(\mathrm{core}(I))S=\mathrm{core}(IS)`$ holds by Lemma 5. As to the second equality, Lemma 4 gives $`e(IS/\mathrm{core}(IS))=e(IS/(\mathrm{core}(I))S)e(IS/𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t)`$. Now proceed as in the proof of Theorem 4.1.

$`(`$b$`)`$ In the setting of part $`(`$a$`)`$, a subgroup of $`\mathrm{Aut}_R(S)`$ acts transitively on $`\{𝒜_1,\mathrm{},𝒜_t\}`$. Hence $`𝒜_1R=\mathrm{}=𝒜_tR`$. Now $`(`$a$`)`$ implies that $`\mathrm{core}(I)=𝒜_1R`$. We may assume that $`R(X)S`$ is a flat local extension and $`𝒜_1=𝒜S`$, thus $`𝒜_1R=𝒜R`$.

Using Theorem 4.2.b we can in turn generalize Lemma 5 to the case when the map is not necessarily local:

###### Theorem 4.3

Let $`RR^{}`$ be a flat map of local Cohen–Macaulay rings with infinite residue fields. Let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal of analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$ such that $`I`$ and $`IR^{}`$ are $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ and universally weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$. Then $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}`$.

###### Proof

The containment $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}`$ is obvious, because $`\gamma (I)<\mathrm{}`$ by Theorem 3.1. If $`\mathrm{}(IR^{})<\mathrm{}`$ then $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=IR^{}(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}`$ by Lemma 1.g. Thus we may assume that $`\mathrm{}(IR^{})=\mathrm{}`$. Let $`𝒜`$ be a universal $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideal in $`IR(X)`$, $`S=R(X)`$, and $`S^{}=R^{}(X)`$. Notice that $`𝒜S^{}`$ is a universal $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideal in $`IS^{}`$. Thus by Theorem 4.2.b, $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=𝒜S^{}R^{}`$. Therefore $`(\mathrm{core}(IR^{}))R=𝒜S^{}R^{}R=𝒜S^{}R=𝒜S^{}SR𝒜R=\mathrm{core}(I)`$, where the last equality follows again from Theorem 4.2.b. Hence $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}`$.

###### Corollary 1

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring with infinite residue field and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal of analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$. Assume that $`I`$ is $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ and universally weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$. Then

$$\gamma (I)=\mathrm{max}(\{\gamma (I_𝔭)|𝔭\mathrm{Min}(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I))\}\{1\}).$$

###### Proof

According to Lemma 1.a, every localization of $`I`$ is universally weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$. Write $`t=\mathrm{max}(\{\gamma (I_𝔭)|𝔭\mathrm{Min}(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I))\}\{1\})`$, and notice that $`t`$ and $`\gamma (I)`$ are finite by Theorem 3.1. For $`𝔭\mathrm{Spec}(R)`$, $`(\mathrm{core}(I))_𝔭=\mathrm{core}(I_𝔭)`$ by Theorem 4.3 and hence $`\gamma (I)\gamma (I_𝔭)`$. Thus $`\gamma (I)t`$. To prove the reverse inequality, let $`𝒜_1,\mathrm{},𝒜_t`$ be universal $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideals in $`IS`$ and recall that $`\gamma (IS)`$ is finite by Theorem 4.2.a. If $`𝔭\mathrm{Min}(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I))`$ then $`\mathrm{}(I_𝔭)=\mathrm{}`$ by Lemma 1.g, and $`(𝒜_1)_{𝔭S},\mathrm{},(𝒜_t)_{𝔭S}`$ are universal $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideals in $`I_𝔭S_{𝔭S}`$. Thus by Theorem 4.2.a, $`\mathrm{core}(I_𝔭S_{𝔭S})=(𝒜_1)_{𝔭S}\mathrm{}(𝒜_t)_{𝔭S}`$, and hence by Theorem 4.3, $`(\mathrm{core}(IS))_{𝔭S}=(𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t)_{𝔭S}`$ for every $`𝔭\mathrm{Min}(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I))`$. Since furthermore $`\mathrm{core}(IS)𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_tIS`$ and $`\mathrm{Ass}_S(IS/\mathrm{core}(IS))\mathrm{Min}(\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(IS))`$ by Lemma 1.e, f, we conclude that $`\mathrm{core}(IS)=𝒜_1\mathrm{}𝒜_t`$. Now $`\gamma (I)t`$ by Theorem 4.2.a.

###### Remark 3

Except for the second assertion in Lemma 3, the results of this section remain true for ideals $`I`$ and $`IR^{}`$ primary to the maximal ideals, if $`R`$ and $`R^{}`$ are merely Buchsbaum instead of Cohen–Macaulay. Notice that the first part of Lemma 3 still holds in this case, because $`\mathrm{length}(I/J)`$ is independent of the minimal reduction of $`I`$ by definition of the Buchsbaum property.

However, even for an $`𝔪`$-primary ideal $`I`$ the inclusion $`𝒜R\mathrm{core}(I)`$ of Theorem 4.2.b may fail to hold if $`(R,𝔪)`$ is not Buchsbaum, as can be seen from (RS, , p. 246). We observe a similar failure for Cohen–Macaulay rings provided the ideal $`I`$ does not satisfy the assumptions of Theorem 4.2.

Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian local ring with infinite residue field and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal. If $`J`$ is a reduction of $`I`$ we denote by $`r_J(I)`$ the least integer $`r0`$ with $`I^{r+1}=JI^r`$. Recall that the reduction number of $`I`$ is defined as $`r(I)=\mathrm{min}\{r_J(I)|J(I)\}`$.

###### Example 1

Let $`R=k[U,V,W]_{(U,V,W)}/(U^2+V^2,VW)`$, where $`k`$ is an infinite field and $`U,V,W`$ are variables. Denote the images of $`U,V,W`$ in $`R`$ by $`u,v,w`$. Consider the $`R`$-ideal $`I=(u,v)`$, and let $`𝒜=(Xu+Yv)S=R(X,Y)`$ be a universal one-generated ideal in $`IS`$.

Notice that $`R`$ is Gorenstein, $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(I)=1`$, and $`I`$ does not satisfy $`G_1`$, but is universally $`0`$-residually $`S_2`$. In this case $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ is the intersection of finitely many minimal reductions of $`I`$, $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}`$ for every flat map $`RR^{}`$ to a local Cohen–Macaulay ring $`R^{}`$, but $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ is not an intersection of general one-generated ideals in $`I`$ which are reductions of $`I`$, and $`\mathrm{core}(I)𝒜R`$.

Indeed, $`(u)`$ and $`(v)`$ are minimal reductions of $`I`$, hence $`\mathrm{core}(I)(u)(v)=I^2`$. On the other hand the special fiber ring $`\mathrm{gr}_I(R)_Rk`$ is defined by a single quadric; hence $`r_J(I)=1`$ for every minimal reduction $`J`$ of $`I`$. Thus $`I^2\mathrm{core}(I)`$. Therefore

$$\mathrm{core}(I)=I^2=(u)(v).$$

If the map $`RR^{}`$ is local then the same argument gives $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=(IR^{})^2`$. Otherwise either $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=0=(IR^{})^2`$ or $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=R^{}=(IR^{})^2`$. Hence in any case $`\mathrm{core}(IR^{})=(\mathrm{core}(I))R^{}`$.

A general one-generated ideal $`(\lambda u+\mu v)`$ in $`I`$ contains $`uw=(\lambda u+\mu v)\lambda ^1w`$, whereas $`uwI^2`$. Thus $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$ cannot be the intersection of general one-generated ideals in $`I`$. Likewise $`I^2+(uw)𝒜`$, hence $`\mathrm{core}(I)𝒜R`$.

## 5 Computational remarks

Individual minimal reductions of homogeneous ideals tend to be inhomogeneous – for instance, the monomial ideal $`I=(U^2,UV,V^3)k[U,V]_{(U,V)}`$ has no minimal reduction generated by homogeneous polynomials in $`U`$ and $`V`$. Nevertheless the core of this ideal is monomial due to the following general fact:

###### Remark 4

Let $`R`$ be a Noetherian local ring with infinite residue field. Assume that $`R=R_𝔪^{}^{}`$ for $`R^{}`$ an $`_0^n`$-graded ring over a local ring and $`𝔪^{}`$ its homogeneous maximal ideal. Let $`I`$ be an $`R`$-ideal. If $`I`$ is generated by homogeneous elements of $`R^{}`$ then so is $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$.

###### Proof

$`(`$This proof was suggested to us by D. Eisenbud.$`)`$ Let $`U`$ be the group of units of $`[R^{}]_{(0,\mathrm{},0)}`$ and $`G`$ the direct product $`U^n`$. If $`\alpha =(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _n)G`$ and $`x[R^{}]_{(i_1,\mathrm{},i_n)}`$ we define $`\alpha x`$ to be $`\alpha _1^{i_1}\mathrm{}\alpha _n^{i_n}x[R^{}]_{(i_1,\mathrm{},i_n)}`$. This induces an action of $`G`$ on the ring $`R`$. As is well known, an $`R`$-ideal is $`G`$-stable if and only if it is extended from a homogeneous $`R^{}`$-ideal. To finish the proof, notice that $`G`$ acts on the set $`(I)`$, which implies the $`G`$-stability of $`\mathrm{core}(I)`$.

The next remark gives a fairly efficient probabilistic algorithm for computing the core. In light of Theorem 4.1 it suffices to bound $`\gamma (I)`$:

###### Remark 5

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring with infinite residue field and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal of analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$. Assume that $`I`$ is $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ and weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$. If $`𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t=𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_{t+1}`$ for $`𝔞_1,\mathrm{},𝔞_{t+1}`$ general $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideals in $`I`$, then $`\gamma (I)t`$.

###### Proof

Let $`k`$ be the residue field of $`R`$. By Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 4.1 there exists an integer $`s>t`$ so that $`\mathrm{core}(I)=𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_s`$ with $`𝔞_1,\mathrm{},𝔞_s`$ general $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideals in $`I`$. After passing to a smaller dense open subset of $`\stackrel{s}{\times }𝔾(\mathrm{},I_Rk)`$, we deduce from our assumption that $`𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t=𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t𝔞_i`$ for every $`t+1is`$. Thus $`𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_t=𝔞_1\mathrm{}𝔞_s=\mathrm{core}(I)`$.

As before, it suffices to assume in Remark 5 that $`R`$ is Buchsbaum if $`I`$ is primary to the maximal ideal.

###### Lemma 6

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring, $`s`$ an integer, $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal satisfying $`G_s`$, $``$ a generic $`s`$-generated ideal in $`IT`$, $`K=:_TIT`$, and $`𝔮V(K)`$ with $`\mathrm{dim}T_𝔮s`$.

If $`I𝔮`$ then $`𝔮`$ is extended from a minimal prime of $`\mathrm{Fitt}_s(I)`$.

If $`I𝔮`$ then $`𝔮R`$ is a minimal prime of $`R`$.

###### Proof

We write $`𝔭=𝔮R`$ and replace $`R`$ by $`R_𝔭`$.

$`(`$a$`)`$ Notice that $`\mathrm{dim}R\mathrm{dim}T_𝔮s\mathrm{ht}\mathrm{Fitt}_s(I)`$, where the last inequality is a consequence of the $`G_s`$ assumption. Thus it suffices to prove that $`\mathrm{Fitt}_s(I)R`$, since then $`\mathrm{dim}T_𝔮=\mathrm{ht}\mathrm{Fitt}_s(I)`$. Suppose $`\mathrm{Fitt}_s(I)=R`$. In this case $`I`$ satisfies $`G_{s+1}`$, and hence $`\mathrm{ht}(IT+K)s+1`$ by (HU, , 3.2). But this is impossible because $`IT+K𝔮`$ and $`\mathrm{dim}T_𝔮s`$.

$`(`$b$`)`$ One has $`𝔮`$ since $`𝔮V(K)`$, and $`I=R`$ since $`I𝔮`$. Now after adjoining variables to $`T`$ and applying an $`R`$-automorphism we may suppose that $``$ is defined using $`1`$ as a generator of $`I`$. Hence $``$ is generated by $`s`$ variables $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_s`$ of $`T`$, and thus $`(𝔭,X_1,\mathrm{},X_s)𝔮`$. As $`\mathrm{dim}T_𝔮s`$, $`𝔭`$ must be a minimal prime of $`R`$.

###### Proposition 1

Let $`R`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring with infinite residue field and $`I`$ an $`R`$-ideal of analytic spread $`\mathrm{}`$ and reduction number $`r`$. Let $`fI`$ and $`h\sqrt{\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I)}`$ be non zerodivisors on $`R`$, and $``$ a generic $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideal in $`IT`$. Assume that $`I`$ is $`G_{\mathrm{}}`$ and universally weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$, and $`IT`$ is weakly $`(\mathrm{}1)`$-residually $`S_2`$. Then

$$\mathrm{core}(I)=[:_T(:_Th^{\mathrm{}}I)]_0=[:_T(:_Tf^{r+1})]_0.$$

###### Proof

Write $`𝔪`$ for the maximal ideal of $`R`$, $`S=T_{𝔪T}`$ and $`𝒜=S`$. By Theorem 4.2.b, $`\mathrm{core}(I)=𝒜R`$. Now $`𝒜R=𝒜TR=[_{𝔪T}T]_0`$. Write $`H=:(:h^{\mathrm{}}I)`$ and $`F=:(:f^{r+1})`$. It remains to prove that $`_{𝔪T}T=H=F`$. This will follow once we have shown that $`H_{𝔪T}=F_{𝔪T}=_{𝔪T}`$ and that every associated prime of $`H`$ or $`F`$ is contained in $`𝔪T`$.

First, notice that $`_{𝔪T}`$ is an $`\mathrm{}`$-generated reduction of $`IT_{𝔪T}`$. Hence by Lemma 1.e, $`(:IT)_{𝔪T}`$ contains some power of $`\mathrm{Fitt}_{\mathrm{}}(I)`$ and hence of $`h`$. This gives $`(:h^{\mathrm{}}I)_{𝔪T}=((:IT):h^{\mathrm{}})_{𝔪T}=T_{𝔪T}`$. Therefore $`H_{𝔪T}=_{𝔪T}`$. Since $`_{𝔪T}`$ is a universal $`\mathrm{}`$-generated ideal in $`IT_{𝔪T}`$ we have $`I^{r+1}_{𝔪T}`$ by (SUV, , 3.4), and hence $`f^{r+1}_{𝔪T}`$. This gives $`(:f^{r+1})_{𝔪T}=T_{𝔪T}`$, thus $`F_{𝔪T}=_{𝔪T}`$.

Finally let $`𝔮`$ be an associated prime of $`H`$ or $`F`$. Notice that $`𝔮`$ is also an associated prime of $``$. Since $`\mathrm{ht}:IT\mathrm{}`$ by (HU, , the proof of 3.2), Lemma 1.c then gives $`\mathrm{dim}T_𝔮\mathrm{}`$. We claim that $`𝔮𝔪T`$. We may assume that $`:IT𝔮`$ since otherwise $`IT_𝔮=_𝔮`$, thus $`𝔮`$ is an associated prime of $`IT`$ and hence contained in $`𝔪T`$. Now if $`I𝔮`$ then $`𝔮𝔪T`$ by Lemma 6.a. If on the other hand $`I𝔮`$ then part $`(`$b$`)`$ of the same lemma gives $`h𝔮`$ and $`f𝔮`$. Therefore $`(:h^{\mathrm{}}I)_𝔮=_𝔮`$ and $`(:f^{r+1})_𝔮=_𝔮`$. Thus $`H_𝔮=F_𝔮=T_𝔮`$, which is impossible.

###### Remark 6

Let $`(R,𝔪)`$ be a local Cohen–Macaulay ring of dimension $`d`$ with infinite residue field, $`I`$ an $`𝔪`$-primary ideal of multiplicity $`e`$, $`f`$ an $`R`$-regular element, and $``$ a generic $`d`$-generated ideal in $`IT`$. Then

$$\mathrm{core}(I)=[:_T(:_Tf^e)]_0.$$

###### Proof

The assertion follows from the proof of Proposition 1 and the fact that $`\lambda ((T/)_{𝔪T})=e`$.

The equality of Proposition 1 gives a method for computing the core of a broad class of ideals generated by homogeneous polynomials not necessarily of the same degree: by giving suitable degrees to the variables $`X_{jl}`$ of $`T`$, the ideal $``$ becomes homogeneous and the computation stays in the graded category. As an illustration, taking $`I=(U^3,UV^3,V^4)k[U,V]_{(U,V)}`$, we obtain $`\mathrm{core}(I)=(U^2,UV,V^2)I`$ and taking $`I=(U^3,UV^2W^2,V^3W^3)k[U,V,W]_{(U,V,W)}`$, we obtain $`\mathrm{core}(I)=(U^2,UVW,V^2W^2)I`$. The outcome of neither computation could have been predicted by the results of CPU  or HS .


format: text

text:
# Phenomenological and Cosmological Implications of Neutrino Oscillations

## 1 Introduction

Recent SNO results  when combined with other solar neutrino data especially that of Super-Kamiokande strongly favour the large mixing angle (LMA) MSW solar solution  with three active light neutrino states, and $`\theta _{12}\pi /6`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^25\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$. The atmospheric neutrino data  is consistent with maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ neutrino mixing $`\theta _{23}\pi /4`$ with $`|\mathrm{\Delta }m_{32}^2|2.5\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2`$ and the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{32}^2`$ undetermined. The CHOOZ experiment limits $`\theta _{13}\stackrel{<}{_{}}0.2`$ over the favoured atmospheric range .

In this talk I shall briefly discuss some of the phenomenological and cosmological implications of these results.

## 2 Phenomenological Implications

### 2.1 Neutrino Masses and Mixing Angles

The minimal neutrino sector required to account for the atmospheric and solar neutrino oscillation data consists of three light physical neutrinos with left-handed flavour eigenstates, $`\nu _e`$, $`\nu _\mu `$, and $`\nu _\tau `$, defined to be those states that share the same electroweak doublet as the left-handed charged lepton mass eigenstates. Within the framework of three–neutrino oscillations, the neutrino flavor eigenstates $`\nu _e`$, $`\nu _\mu `$, and $`\nu _\tau `$ are related to the neutrino mass eigenstates $`\nu _1`$, $`\nu _2`$, and $`\nu _3`$ with mass $`m_1`$, $`m_2`$, and $`m_3`$, respectively, by a $`3\times 3`$ unitary matrix called the MNS matrix $`U_{MNS}`$

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu _e\\ \nu _\mu \\ \nu _\tau \end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}U_{e1}& U_{e2}& U_{e3}\\ U_{\mu 1}& U_{\mu 2}& U_{\mu 3}\\ U_{\tau 1}& U_{\tau 2}& U_{\tau 3}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu _1\\ \nu _2\\ \nu _3\end{array}\right).$$
(1)
Assuming the light neutrinos are Majorana, $`U_{MNS}`$ can be parameterized in terms of three mixing angles $`\theta _{ij}`$ and three complex phases $`\delta _{ij}`$. A unitary matrix has six phases but three of them are removed by the phase symmetry of the charged lepton Dirac masses. Since the neutrino masses are Majorana there is no additional phase symmetry associated with them, unlike the case of quark mixing where a further two phases may be removed.

There are basically two patterns of neutrino mass squared orderings consistent with the atmospheric and solar data as shown in Fig.1.

### 2.2 Neutrino Mass Matrices

In the flavour basis (in which the charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal), for a given assumed form of $`U_{MNS}`$ and set of neutrino masses $`m_i`$ one may “derive” the form of the neutrino mass matrix $`m_{LL}`$, and this results in the candidate mass matrices in Table 1 . In Table 1 the mass matrices are classified into two types:

Type I - small neutrinoless double beta decay

Type II - large neutrinoless double beta decay

They are also classified into the limiting cases consistent with the mass squared orderings in Fig.1:

A - Normal hierarchy $`m_1^2,m_2^2m_3^2`$

B - Inverted hierarchy $`m_1^2m_2^2m_3^2`$

C - Approximate degeneracy $`m_1^2m_2^2m_3^2`$

Thus according to our classification there is only one neutrino mass matrix consistent with the normal neutrino mass hierarchy which we call Type IA, corresponding to the leading order neutrino masses of the form $`m_i=(0,0,m)`$. For the inverted hierarchy there are two cases, Type IB corresponding to $`m_i=(m,m,0)`$ or Type IIB corresponding to $`m_i=(m,m,0)`$. For the approximate degeneracy cases there are three cases, Type IC correponding to $`m_i=(m,m,m)`$ and two examples of Type IIC corresponding to either $`m_i=(m,m,m)`$ or $`m_i=(m,m,m)`$.

At present experiment allows any of the matrices in Table 1. In future it will be possible to uniquely specify the neutrino matrix in the following way:

1. Neutrinoless double beta effectively measures the 11 element of the mass matrix $`m_{LL}`$ corresponding to

$$\beta \beta _{0\nu }\underset{i}{}U_{ei}^2m_i$$
(2)
and is clearly capable of resolving Type I from Type II cases according to the bounds given in Table 1 . There has been a recent claim of a signal in neutrinoless double beta decay correponding to $`\beta \beta _{0\nu }=0.110.56`$ eV at 95% C.L. . However this claim has been criticised by two groups ,  and in turn this criticism has been refuted . Since the Heidelberg-Moscow experiment has almost reached its full sensitivity, we may have to wait for a next generation experiment such as GENIUS which is capable of pushing down the sensitivity to 0.01 eV to resolve this question.

2. A neutrino factory will measure the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{32}^2`$ and resolve A from B.

3. Tritium beta decay experiments are sensitive to C since they measure the “electron neutrino mass” defined by

$$|m_{\nu _e}|\underset{i}{}|U_{ei}|^2|m_i|2.2\mathrm{eV}(95\%C.L.)$$
(3)
where the current laboratory limit is shown . The prospects for improving on this bound are good: for example the KATRIN experiment has a proposed sensitivity of 0.35 eV.

Model building based on the different neutrino mass matrices in Table 1 was discussed separately at this meeting  and will not be considered further here.

## 3 Cosmological Implications

### 3.1 Cosmological relic density and dark matter

In the early universe neutrinos were in thermal equilibrium with photons, electrons and positrons. When the universe cooled to temperatures of order 1 MeV the neutrinos decoupled, leading to a present day number density similar to photons. If neutrinos have mass they contribute to the mass density of the universe, leading to the constraint

$$\underset{i}{}m_i28\mathrm{eV}$$
(4)
corresponding to

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu h^20.3$$
(5)
in the standard notation where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu `$ is the ratio of the energy density in neutrinos to the critical energy density of the universe (corresponding to a flat universe), and $`h=H/100\mathrm{k}\mathrm{m}/\mathrm{Mpc}/\mathrm{s}`$ is the scaled Hubble parameter.

From the current tritium limit on the elctron neutrino mass in Eq.3 together with the atmospheric and solar mass splittings we have a stronger constraint

$$0.05\mathrm{eV}\underset{i}{}m_i6.6\mathrm{eV}$$
(6)
corresponding to the range

$$0.0005\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu h^20.07$$
(7)
which implies that neutrinos cannot be regarded as the dominant component of dark matter, but make up between 0.1% and 14% of the mass-energy of the universe.

### 3.2 Galaxy structure limits on neutrino mass

Recent results from the 2df galaxy redshift survey indicate that

$$\underset{i}{}m_i<1.8\mathrm{eV}(95\%C.L.)$$
(8)
under certain mild assumptions . This bound arises from the fact that the galaxy power spectrum is reduced on small distance scales (large wavenumber) as the amount of hot dark matter increases. Thus excessive amounts of free-streaming hot dark matter would lead to galaxies being less clumped than they appear to be on small distance scales.

However as discussed in  such bounds suffer from parameter degeneracies due to a restricted parameter space, and a more robust bound is

$$\underset{i}{}m_i<3\mathrm{eV}(95\%C.L.)$$
(9)
Combined with the solar and atmospheric oscillation data this brackets the heaviest neutrino mass to be in the approximate range 0.04-1 eV. The fact that the mass of the heaviest neutrino is known to within an order of magnitude represents remarkable progress in neutrino physics over recent years. This implies that neutrinos make up less than about 7% of the total mass-energy of the universe, which is a stronger limit than that quoted in the previous sub-section.

### 3.3 Nucleosynthesis

The number of light “neutrino species” $`N_\nu `$ (or any light species) affects the freeze-out temperature of weak processes which determine the neutron to proton ratio, and successful nucleosynthesis leads to the constraints on $`N_\nu `$ as shown in Figure 2.

The limit on $`N_\nu `$ applies also to sterile neutrinos, but they need to be produced during the time when nucleosynthesis was taking place, and the only way to produce them is via neutrino oscillations. This leads to strong limits on sterile-active neutrino mixing angles which tend to disfavour the LSND region, as shown in Figure 3. Note that these limits assume that the lepton asymmetry is not anomalously large .

### 3.4 Supernovae

It is well known that 99% of the energy of a supernova is emitted in the form of neutrinos, so one might hope that by studying supernovae one can learn something about neutrino physics. Indeed studies of the neutrino arrival times over a 10s interval from SN1987A in the Small Magellanic Cloud have led to the mass bound

$$m_{\nu _e}620\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V}$$
(10)
The LMA MSW parameter range may also have some observable consequences for SN1987A .

However it should be remarked that Supernova physics has difficulties simulating explosions, and understanding how the spinning neutron star remnant is kick-started.

### 3.5 Cosmic Rays

It has been a long standing puzzle why ultra high energy (UHE) cosmic rays are apparently observed beyond the Greisen-Zatsepin-Kuzmin (GZK) cutoff of $`5\times 10^{19}`$ GeV. The problem is that such cosmic rays appear to arrive isotropically, which would imply an extragalactic origin, whereas neither protons nor neutrons of such energies could have originated from more than 50 Mpc away due to their scattering off the cosmic background photons which would excite a delta resonance if the energy exceeds $`5\times 10^{19}`$ GeV. Yet despite this, several groups have reported handfuls of events above the GZK cut-off, for example the AGASA data shown in Figure 4. Also shown in this figure is the prediction of a Z-burst model which was invented to explain how the GZK cut-off could be overcome . The basic idea of the Z-burst model is that UHE neutrinos can travel much further, and scatter off the relic background neutrinos to produce Z bosons within 50 Mpc. Neutrino mass is required to increase the Z production rate, so UHE cosmic rays and neutrino mass are linked in this model.

Reecently data from Fly’s Eye, Yakutsk and expecially HiRes have brought into question whether the GZK cut-off is being exceeded at all. A recent analysis based on these data suggests that there might be no problem with the GZK cut-off . On the other hand Fly’s Eye and HiRes establish the cosmic ray energy from observing the fluorescence of Nitrogen molecules using a rather dated technique. The issue should be resolved soon by the Pierre Auger Observatory, which can both measure the shower’s pattern on the Earth’s surface, and the fluorescence of the shower in the air.

### 3.6 Gamma Ray Bursts (GRBs)

GRBs are distant ($`z1`$), energetic and enigmatic. According to the fireball model (for a review see ) GRBs may result from the core collapse of a very massive supernova to a compact, rotating black hole. The energy is emitted in beamed relativistic fireball jets which are expected to contain copious neutrino fluxes. GRBs can thus be regarded as a high intensity, high energy neutrino beam with a cosmological baseline.

In some models of quantum gravity  neutrinos of mass $`m`$ obey the dispersion relation

$$p^2c^2E^2(1\xi \frac{E}{E_{QG}})m^2c^4$$
(11)
where $`E_{QG}`$ is the scale of quantum gravity. A consequence of this dispersion relation is that the effects of both quantum gravity and neutrino mass will cause time delays in the arrival times of neutrinos compared to low energy massless photons, as shown in Figure 6. Using the millisecond time structure of GRBs it may be possible to measure neutrino masses from time of flight delays, in principle down to 0.001 eV . However this estimate assumes complete understanding of GRBs, and large enough event rates, and in practice there are many theoretical and experimental challenges to be overcome.

## 4 Conclusions

Future neutrino oscillation experiments, will give precious information about the mass squared splittings $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{ij}^2m_i^2m_j^2`$, mixing angles, and CP violating phase. KATRIN and GENIUS will tell us about the absolute scale and nature of neutrino mass. We have seen that cosmology and astrophysics is also sensitive to the absolute values of neutrino masses. In the coming years there should be a fascinating interplay between neutrino physics on Earth and in the Heavens.

## References