2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.aim.2010.08.005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cohen–Macaulayness of monomial ideals and symbolic powers of Stanley–Reisner ideals

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
63
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(65 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
2
63
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Section 2, we set up notations, terminologies. We quote some fundamental results from [1,8] and [4]. In Section 3, we shall give the proof of the main result.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In Section 2, we set up notations, terminologies. We quote some fundamental results from [1,8] and [4]. In Section 3, we shall give the proof of the main result.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Recently, Terai and Trung [21] showed that ∆ is a complete intersection whenever I m ∆ is Cohen-Macaulay for some m 3. By contrast with this situation we have not known a characterization of ∆ for which I 2 ∆ is Cohen-Macaulay yet (see [8], [12], [16], [21]). On the other hand, Vasconcelos (see [23,Conjecture (B)]) suggests that ∆ must be Gorenstein if I 2 ∆ is Cohen-Macaulay.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(f) ⇒ (b) If Ind(H) is a tight complex, then R/I(H) (2) is Cohen-Macaulay, by [6, Theorem 2.5] (see also [7]), where I(H) (2) is the second symbolic power of I(H). Thus, R/I(H) is also Cohen-Macaulay, by [6, Theorem 2.1].…”
Section: H)mentioning
confidence: 99%