format: text

text:
# Some Examples of Gorenstein Liaison in Codimension Three

## 1 Basic Results and Questions

Let $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ be two equidimensional closed subschemes without embedded components, of the same dimension $`r`$ in $`_k^n`$, the $`n`$-dimensional projective space over an algebraically closed field $`k`$. We say $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ are linked by a complete intersection scheme $`X`$, if $`X`$ is a complete intersection scheme of dimension $`r`$ containing $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$, and if

$`_{V_2,X}`$ $``$ $`Hom(𝒪_{V_1},𝒪_X),\text{ and}`$
$`_{V_1,X}`$ $``$ $`Hom(𝒪_{V_2},𝒪_X).`$
Using the language of generalized divisors on Gorenstein schemes \[13, $`4.1`$\] we can say equivalently $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ are linked by a complete intersection $`X`$ if and only if there is a complete intersection scheme $`S`$ of dimension $`r+1`$ containing $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$, such that $`X`$ is an effective divisor in the linear system $`|mH|`$ on $`S`$ for some $`m>0`$, where $`H`$ is the hyperplane section of $`S`$, and $`V_2=XV_1`$ as generalized divisors on $`S`$.

The equivalence relation generated by complete intersection linkage is called $`CI`$-liaison. If the equivalence can be accomplished by an even number of links, we speak of even $`CI`$-liaison.

A scheme $`X`$ in $`^n`$ is called arithmetically Gorenstein (AG) if its homogeneous coordinate ring $`R/I_X`$ is a Gorenstein ring, where $`R=k[x_0,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ is the homogeneous coordinate ring of $`^n`$, and $`I_X`$ is the (saturated) homogeneous ideal of $`X`$. If, in the first definition above, we require that $`X`$ be an arithmetically Gorenstein scheme, instead of a complete intersection, then we say that $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ are linked by an AG scheme. The equivalence relation generated by this kind of linkage is called Gorenstein liaison (or $`G`$-liaison for short); if the equivalence can be accomplished by an even number of $`G`$-links, then we speak of even Gorenstein liaison.

One way of obtaining AG schemes is as follows. Let $`S`$ be an arithmetically Cohen–Macaulay (ACM) scheme in $`^n`$ (this means that the homogeneous coordinate ring $`R/I_S`$ is a Cohen–Macaulay ring). Assume also that $`S`$ satisfies the property $`G_1`$ (Gorenstein in codimension $`1`$ \[13, p. 291\]), so that we can use the language of generalized divisors. Then any effective divisor $`X`$ in the linear system $`|mHK|`$ on $`S`$, where $`m`$, $`H`$ is the hyperplane section, and $`K`$ is the canonical divisor, is an arithmetically Gorenstein scheme \[22, $`\mathrm{4.2.8}`$\].

Suppose now that $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ are divisors on an ACM scheme $`S`$ of dimension $`r+1`$ satisfying $`G_1`$, let $`X`$ be an effective divisor in the linear system $`|mHK|`$ for some $`m`$, and suppose that $`V_2=XV_1`$ as generalized divisors on $`S`$. Then it is easy to see that $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ are linked by the AG scheme $`X`$ (cf. proof of \[13, $`4.1`$\] and note that since $`S`$ satisfies $`G_1`$, $`X`$ is an almost Cartier divisor on $`S`$ \[13, p. 301\]). In this case we will say that $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ are strictly $`G`$-linked. We do not know whether the equivalence relation generated by strict $`G`$-linkages is equivalent to the $`G`$-liaison defined above, so we will call it strict $`G`$-liaison, and if it is accomplished in an even number of steps, strict even $`G`$-liaison.

Combining two strict $`G`$-linkages gives the following result.

Proposition 1.1 \[16, $`5.14`$\], \[22, $`\mathrm{5.2.27}`$\]. Let $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ be effective divisors on an ACM scheme $`S`$ satisfying $`G_1`$. Suppose that $`V_2|V_1+hH|`$ for some $`h`$. Then $`V_1`$ and $`V_2`$ can be strictly $`G`$-linked in two steps.

Note that even though the statement in \[22, $`\mathrm{5.2.27}`$\] requires $`S`$ smooth, the proof given there works for $`S`$ ACM satisfying $`G_1`$ if one takes into account that any divisor $`X|mHK|`$ is almost Cartier \[13, $`2.5`$\].

The proposition above motivates the following definition. In the situation of $`(1.1)`$, we say that $`V_2`$ is obtained by an elementary Gorenstein biliaison of height $`h`$ from $`V_1`$ \[22, $`\mathrm{5.4.7}`$\]. Because of the proposition, an elementary $`G`$-biliaison is a strict even $`G`$-liaison. If $`h0`$, we call the biliaison ascending.

Now we can state some of the main questions raised by trying to generalize codimension $`2`$ results to higher codimension.

Question 1.2. a) Does strict Gorenstein liaison generate the same equivalence relation ($`G`$-liaison) as Gorenstein liaison?

b) Do the elementary Gorenstein biliaisons generate the same equivalence relation as even $`G`$-liaison?

In codimension 2, both questions reduce to $`CI`$-liaison, for which the answers to parts a) and b) are both yes \[13, $`4.1`$, $`4.4`$\].

Question 1.3. a) Is every ACM subscheme of $`^n`$ in the $`G`$-liaison class of a complete intersection (in which case we say it is glicci)?

b) Can every glicci scheme be obtained by a finite sequence of ascending elementary $`G`$-biliaisons from a scheme (of the same dimension) of degree $`1`$?

In codimension $`2`$, part a) is the classical theorem of Gaeta , , $`\mathrm{}`$. Part b) seems likely to be true, though I do not know a reference. Note in b) it would be equivalent to ask for ascending elementary $`G`$-biliaisons starting with any complete intersection scheme. In higher codimension, many special cases of a) have been shown to be true , , , . Closely related is the theorem of Migliore and Nagel  that every ACM subscheme $`X`$ of $`^n`$ has a flat deformation to a glicci scheme, and there is also a glicci scheme with the same Hilbert function as $`X`$.

For the following questions we limit the discussion to curves (locally Cohen–Macaulay schemes of dimension $`1`$) for simplicity. For a curve $`C^n`$ we define its Rao module to be the finite length graded $`R`$-module $`M=_lH^1(_C(l))`$, where $`_C`$ is the ideal sheaf of $`C`$. It is easy to see that even $`G`$-liaison preserves the Rao module, up to shift of degrees \[22, $`\mathrm{5.3.3}`$\].

Question 1.4. Does the Rao module characterize the even $`G`$-liaison class of a curve? In other words, if $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ are two curves with $`M_C^{}M_C(h)`$ for some $`h`$, are $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ in the same even $`G`$-liaison class? (In codimension $`2`$, this is the well-known theorem of Rao .)

Now we come to the problem of the structure of an even $`G`$-liaison class. Let $`C^n`$ be a curve, and let $``$ be the class of all curves $`C^{}`$ in the even $`G`$-liaison class of $`C`$. The Rao modules of curves in $``$ are all isomorphic up to shift. As long as the Rao module is not zero (which is equivalent to saying the curves are not ACM), one knows that there is a minimal leftward shift of $`M`$ that can occur \[22, $`\mathrm{1.2.8}`$\]. We denote by $`_0`$ the subset of $``$ consisting of those curves with the leftmost possible shift of the Rao module, and we call these minimal curves. Let $`_h`$ denote the set of curves with Rao module shifted $`h`$ places to the right from $`_0`$, for each $`h0`$. Then $`=_h`$ for $`h0`$, and each one of these $`_h`$ for $`h0`$ is nonempty \[22, $`\mathrm{1.2.8}`$\].

In codimension $`2`$ a biliaison class $``$ satisfies the Lazarsfeld–Rao property \[22, $`\mathrm{5.4.2}`$\]. It says that a) $`_0`$ is a single irreducible family of curves, and b) any curve $`C_h`$ can be obtained by a finite sequence of ascending biliaisons from a minimal curve, plus if necessary a deformation with constant cohomology within the class $`_h`$. (But even for curves in $`^3`$ it is not known if these deformations are necessary \[21, IV, $`5.4`$, p. 93\].) Easy examples show that in codimension $`3`$, $`_0`$ need not consist of a single irreducible family of curves \[22, $`\mathrm{5.4.8}`$\]. So we rephrase the question somewhat.

Question 1.5. a) Describe the set $`_0`$ of minimal curves in an even $`G`$-liaison class.

b) Can every curve in $`_h`$ for $`h>0`$ be obtained from a minimal curve by a finite sequence of ascending elementary $`G`$-biliaisons, followed possibly by a flat deformation within the family $`_h`$?

An optimist might hope for positive answers to all these questions. However, the examples we give below suggest that many of the answers may be no.

## 2 Points in $`^3`$

Any scheme of dimension zero is ACM, so in this section we will address Question $`1.3`$. The study of arbitrary zero-schemes, even in $`^3`$, becomes quite complicated, so we will direct our attention to sets of reduced points in general position. In this section the phrase “a general $`X`$ has property $`Y`$” will mean that there is a nonempty Zariski open subset of the family of all $`X`$’s having the property $`Y`$.

We begin with points in $`^2`$. In this case it is known from the theorem of Gaeta \[22, $`\mathrm{6.1.4}`$\] that any zero scheme in $`^2`$ is licci (in the liaison class of a complete intersection), but we give a slightly more precise statement for a general set of points and at the same time we illustrate in a simple case the technique we will use in the later propositions.

Proposition 2.1. A set of $`n`$ general points in $`^2`$ can be obtained from a single point by a sequence of ascending elementary biliaisons.

Proof. By induction on $`n`$. For $`n=1`$ there is nothing to prove. For $`n=2`$, any $`2`$ points lie on a line $`L`$. A single biliaison of height $`1`$ on $`L`$ reduces $`2`$ points to $`1`$ point. For $`n=3,4,5`$, a set of $`n`$ reduced points, no three on a line, lies on a nonsingular conic. These points can be obtained by an elementary biliaison of height $`1`$ or $`2`$ from a set of $`1`$ or $`2`$ points, and we are done by induction.

In general, let $`n3`$. Then there is an integer $`d2`$ such that $`\frac{1}{2}(d1)(d+2)<n\frac{1}{2}d(d+3)`$. Since curves of degree $`d`$ in $`^2`$ form a linear system of dimension $`\frac{1}{2}d(d+3)`$, any set of $`n`$ points will lie on a curve of degree $`d`$. Since the nonsingular curves form a Zariski open subset of the family of all curves, a set of $`n`$ general points in $`^2`$ (in the sense mentioned above) will lie on a nonsingular curve $`C`$ of degree $`d`$, and will form a set of $`n`$ general points on $`C`$. The genus of $`C`$ is $`g=\frac{1}{2}(d1)(d2)`$. We use the fact that on a nonsingular curve of genus $`g`$, any divisor of degree $`g`$ is effective. Let $`D`$ be the divisor of $`n`$ general points on $`C`$, and let $`H`$ be the hyperplane class on $`C`$. We define a divisor $`D^{}`$ as follows.

$$D^{}=\{\begin{array}{cc}DH\hfill & \text{if }n=\frac{1}{2}(d1)(d+2)+1\hfill \\ D2H\hfill & \text{if }\frac{1}{2}(d1)(d+2)+2n\frac{1}{2}d(d+3)\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Then we verify that in either case, the degree of $`D^{}`$ is $`g`$, so that the divisor $`D^{}`$ is effective, and secondly that $`n^{}=degD^{}\frac{1}{2}(d1)(d+2)`$.

Now, by induction on $`d`$, a general set of $`n^{}`$ points can be obtained from a single point by ascending biliaisons. Since any $`D`$ as above bilinks down to a $`D^{}`$, it follows that by bilinking up $`n^{}`$ general points on $`C`$, we obtain $`n`$ general points on $`C`$, as required.

Proposition 2.2. A set of $`n`$ general points on a (fixed) nonsingular quadric surface $`Q^3`$ can be obtained from a single point by a finite number of ascending elementary $`G`$-biliaisons on $`Q`$.

Proof. The method is analogous to the proof of $`(2.1)`$, except that now we use both types of ACM curves on $`Q`$. For $`n=1`$, there is nothing to prove. For $`n=2`$, we put $`2`$ points on a twisted cubic curve, and then move them by linear equivalence (a biliaison of height $`0`$) until they lie on a line on $`Q`$. On that line, we obtain $`2`$ points by a biliaison of height $`1`$ from $`1`$ point. For $`n=3`$, the points lie on a conic, and come from $`1`$ point by biliaison. For $`n=4,5`$, the points lie on a twisted cubic curve, and reduce by biliaison to $`1`$ or $`2`$ points.

Now suppose $`n6`$. Then there is an integer $`a2`$ such that either

* $`a^2+ana^2+2a`$, or
* $`a^2+2a+1na^2+3a+1`$.

In case i) we consider the complete intersection curve $`C`$ of bidegree $`(a,a)`$ on $`Q`$. It has degree $`2a`$ and genus $`g=(a1)^2`$ and moves in a linear system of dimension $`a^2+2a`$. Hence $`n`$ general points lie on a smooth such curve $`C`$, forming a divisor $`D`$. The divisor $`D^{}=DH`$ on $`C`$ has degree $`n^{}=n2a`$. Since $`n^{}a^2a>g`$, the divisor $`D^{}`$ is effective. On the other hand $`n^{}a^2`$, so $`n^{}`$ falls in the range i) for $`a1`$ unless $`n^{}=a^2`$, in which case it falls in range ii) for $`a1`$. By induction on $`a`$, a set of $`n^{}`$ general points can be obtained by ascending elementary $`G`$-biliaisons from a point, so also can $`n`$ points.

In case ii), we consider the ACM curve $`C`$ of bidegree $`(a,a+1)`$ on $`Q`$. It has degree $`d=2a+1`$, genus $`g=a(a1)`$, and moves in a linear system of dimension $`a^2+3a+1`$ on $`Q`$. So $`n`$ general points form a divisor $`D`$ on a nonsingular such curve $`C`$. The divisor $`D^{}=DH`$ has degree $`n^{}=n2a1a^2>g`$, so $`D^{}`$ is effective. On the other hand $`a^2n^{}a^2+a+1`$, which is range ii) for $`a1`$. So by induction on $`a`$ again, we can obtain $`D^{}`$ by biliaisons from a point, and $`D`$ by a single elementary $`G`$-biliaison for $`D^{}`$ on $`C`$.

Corollary 2.3. A set of $`n`$ general points on a nonsingular quadric surface $`Q`$ in $`^3`$ is in the strict even $`G`$-liaison class of a point. In particular, it is glicci.

Proposition 2.4. A set of $`n`$ general points on a (fixed) nonsingular cubic surface $`S`$ in $`^3`$ is in the same strict Gorenstein liaison class as a point on $`S`$.

Proof. A curve $`C`$ of degree $`d`$ and genus $`g`$ on $`S`$ moves in a linear system of dimension $`d+g1`$. If a set of $`n`$ general points is to form a divisor $`D`$ on $`C`$, we need $`nd+g1`$. In that case the linear system $`DH`$ on $`C`$ has degree $`g1`$, and hence may not be effective. Thus we cannot use Gorenstein biliaisons on the cubic surface. Instead, we will use strict Gorenstein liaison by AG divisors in the linear systems $`|mHK|`$ on ACM curves $`C`$ on $`S`$.

There are four types of smooth ACM curves on $`S`$, obtained by biliaison (of curves) on $`S`$ from the line, the conic, the twisted cubic, and the hyperplane class $`H`$, which is a plane cubic curve. For $`a1`$ the four types are

* $`d=3a2`$, $`g=\frac{1}{2}(3a^27a+4)`$
* $`d=3a1`$, $`g=\frac{1}{2}(3a^25a+2)`$
* $`d=3a`$, $`g=\frac{1}{2}(3a^23a)`$
* $`d=3a`$, $`g=\frac{1}{2}(3a^23a+2)`$.

In each case, one of these curves $`C`$ with degree $`d`$ and genus $`g`$ (we say type $`(d,g)`$) moves in a linear system of dimension $`d+g1`$. On an ACM curve $`C`$ of type $`(d,g)`$, we will consider only divisors of degree $`n`$, where $`gnd+g1`$. If $`n`$ and $`n^{}`$ are both in this range, and if $`n+n^{}=deg(mHK)`$ for some $`m`$, then a strict Gorenstein liaison by AG divisors in the linear system $`|mHK|`$ will transform general divisors of degree $`n`$ to general divisors of degree $`n^{}`$ and vice versa. To explain this in more detail, let $`Z`$ be a set of $`n`$ general points on $`S`$. If $`nd+g1`$, then $`Z`$ is contained in a curve $`C`$ as above. If $`n^{}=deg(mHK)ng`$, then there is an effective divisor $`Z^{}`$ of degree $`n^{}`$ such that $`Z+Z^{}|mHK|`$. Thus $`Z`$ and $`Z^{}`$ are linked. The same arguments work in reverse, starting with $`Z^{}`$, assuming $`n^{}d+g1`$ and $`ng`$. Hence there are Zariski open subsets $`U`$ (resp. $`U^{}`$) of the set of all subsets of $`n`$ (resp. $`n^{}`$) points of $`S`$ such that each $`ZU`$ is linked to a $`Z^{}U^{}`$ and vice versa. If one of these is already known to be in the strict $`G`$-liaison class of a point, we conclude so is the other. We will write $`nn^{}`$ by $`mHK`$ on $`(d,g)`$.

For $`n8`$, we use the following liaisons.

* $`13`$ by $`HK`$ on $`(4,1)`$
* $`26`$ and $`35`$ by $`2HK`$ on $`(5,2)`$
* $`68`$ by $`3HK`$ on $`(6,3)`$
* $`48`$ and $`57`$ by $`3HK`$ on $`(6,4)`$
* $`67`$ by $`3HK`$ on $`(7,5)`$.

These liaisons show that any set of $`n8`$ general points on $`S`$ is in the strict $`G`$-liaison class of a point. Note that we must use ascending and descending liaisons to accomplish this. For example, if $`n=2`$, the links go $`267531`$.

For $`9n17`$, we use the following links.

* $`911`$ by $`4HK`$ on $`(7,5)`$
* $`713`$ and $`812`$ by $`4HK`$ on $`(8,7)`$
* $`1217`$ and $`1316`$ by $`5HK`$ on $`(9,9)`$
* $`1017`$; $`1116`$; $`1215`$; and $`1314`$ by $`5HK`$ on $`(9,10)`$.

Using these links a general set of $`9n17`$ points is linked down to a set of $`7`$ or $`8`$ points treated above.

For $`n18`$, we find an integer $`a`$ such that $`n_0=\frac{3}{2}a(a1)n<n_1=\frac{3}{2}(a+1)a`$. We divide these $`n`$’s into six ranges.

* $`n_0nn_0+2`$
* $`n_0+3nn_0+a1`$
* $`n_0+a`$, $`n_0+a+1`$
* $`n_0+a+2nn_0+2a2`$
* $`n_0+2a1`$, $`n_0+2a`$
* $`n_0+2a+1nn_0+3a1`$.

In range $`A`$, we do

* $`n_0n_0+2`$ by $`(2a2)HK`$ on type (i) curve.
* $`n_0+1n_0+3a1`$ and $`n_0+2n_0+3a2`$ by $`(2a1)HK`$ on type (iv).

In range $`B`$, we do

* $`n_0+tn^{}<n_0`$ by $`(2a2)HK`$ on (i).

In range $`C`$, we do

* $`n_0+tn^{}<n_0`$ by $`(2a2)HK`$ on (ii).

In range $`D`$, we do links by $`(2a1)HK`$ on types (ii) and (iv). If $`a`$ is odd, $`a=2k+1`$, start with $`m=n_0+3k+2`$, link on type (iv). Then alternate linkages on type (ii) and (iv). This covers all values of $`n`$ in range $`D`$, starting in the middle and spiraling outward, until finally we land in range $`E`$. If $`a`$ is even, $`a=2k`$, start with $`m=n_0+3k`$, and do a link on type (ii) first, then alternate (iv) and (ii).

In range $`E`$, link by $`(2a1)HK`$ on type (iv), to land in range $`C`$.

In range $`F`$, link by $`(2a1)HK`$ on type (iii) to land in range $`B`$ or $`C`$.

In summary, ranges $`B`$ and $`C`$ link down to $`n^{}<n_0`$ so are ok by induction. Ranges $`E`$ and $`F`$ link down to ranges $`B`$ and $`C`$. Range $`D`$ spirals up and down until it lands in range $`E`$; and finally range $`A`$ links up to range $`F`$. So for example, if $`n=18`$ (range $`A`$), the links go $`1820282216137`$, which we did earlier. If $`n=54`$ (range $`D`$), the links go $`545553565240352723151286`$, treated above.

Corollary 2.5. A set of $`n`$ general points on a smooth cubic surface in $`^3`$ is glicci.

Corollary 2.6. A set of $`n19`$ general points in $`^3`$ is glicci.

Proof. Indeed, since the cubic surfaces in $`^3`$ form a linear system of dimension $`19`$, a set of $`n19`$ general points lie on a smooth cubic surface, and we can apply $`(2.4)`$. Using $`(2.2)`$ we can also see that a set of $`n9`$ general points can be obtained from a single point by ascending elementary $`G`$-biliaisons. However, we can get a stronger result, and another proof of $`(2.6)`$ by another method.

Proposition 2.7. A set of $`n19`$ general points in $`^3`$ is in the strict Gorenstein liaison class of a point. Furthermore, if $`n17,19`$, it can be obtained by a sequence of ascending elementary $`G`$-biliaisons from a point.

Proof. Again we use ACM curves $`(d,g)`$ in $`^3`$, but now we need to know how many general points of $`^3`$ lie on such a curve. Call this number $`m(d,g)`$. This is no longer an elementary question, because the families of these curves form a Hilbert scheme, not a linear system. The question was studied in Perrin’s thesis , and depends on semi-stability of the normal bundle. Here are his results, for the ACM curves we need:

| $`(d,g)`$ | $`m`$ | reference in  |
| --- | --- | --- |
| (1,0) | 2 |  |
| (2,0) | 3 |  |
| (3,0) | 6 |  |
| (4,1) | 8 |  |
| (5,2) | 9 |  |
| (6,3) | 12 | p. 66 |
| (7,5) | 14 | p. 87 |
| (8,7) | 16 | p. 10; p. 116 |
| (9,9) | 18 | p. 87 |
| (10,11) | 20 | p. 66 |

In this table $`m`$ has the naive value $`2d`$, except for $`(2,0)`$, a conic, which lies in a plane, so can pass through at most $`3`$ general points, and $`(5,2)`$, which lies on a quadric surface, so can pass through at most $`9`$ general points.

To prove our result, we use the following biliaisons and liaisons.

* $`12`$ biliaison on $`(1,0)`$
* $`13`$ biliaison on $`(2,0)`$
* $`1,2,34,5,6`$ biliaison on $`(3,0)`$
* $`3,47,8`$ biliaison on $`(4,1)`$
* $`49`$ biliaison on $`(5,2)`$
* $`4,5,610,11,12`$ biliaison on $`(6,3)`$
* $`6,713,14`$ biliaison on $`(7,5)`$
* $`8,915,16`$ biliaison on $`(8,7)`$
* $`918`$ biliaison on $`(9,9)`$
* $`1217`$ liaison by $`5HK`$ on $`(9,9)`$
* $`1119`$ liaison by $`5HK`$ on $`(10,11)`$.

Remark 2.8. If we consider a set of 20 general points in $`^3`$, none of the above methods works. They do not lie on a cubic surface, so we cannot apply $`(2.4)`$. They do form a divisor $`D`$ on an ACM curve $`(10,11)`$, but $`DH`$ has degree $`10`$, less than the genus, so it may not be effective. Liaison by $`5HK`$ would give a divisor of degree $`10`$, which may not be effective. Liaison by $`6HK`$ gives another general divisor of degree $`20`$, so we get nowhere.

It is conceivable that some upward liaison may eventually lead to a zero-scheme that can then be linked back down to a point. Or perhaps there are other AG schemes in $`^3`$ besides the ones of the form $`mHK`$ on ACM curves that we have been using.

On the other hand, it may simply be that 20 general points in $`^3`$ are not in the $`G`$-liaison class of a point, so we propose this as a potential counterexample to Question $`1.3`$. If this is so, the cone over these 20 points would be an ACM curve in $`^4`$ that is not glicci.

Remark 2.9. In \[16, $`3.1`$\], the authors prove that any standard determinantal scheme is glicci. Taking the $`t\times t`$ minors of a $`t\times (t+2)`$ matrix of linear forms in $`^3`$ gives a zero-dimensional determinantal scheme of degree $`\frac{1}{6}(t+2)(t+1)t`$, which is glicci by the above result. For $`t=1,2`$, any set of $`1`$ or $`4`$ points in $`^3`$ is determinantal. However, for $`t=3,4`$, the dimension calculation in \[16, $`10.3`$\] show that determinantal sets of $`10`$ points have codimension $`3`$ in zero-schemes of degree $`10`$, and determinantal sets of $`20`$ points have codimension $`15`$ among zero-schemes of degree $`20`$.

## 3 ACM curves in $`^4`$

In the literature, a number of special cases of ACM curves have been shown to be glicci , . In this section we begin a systematic study of ACM curves of small degree in $`^4`$. We show that any general ACM curve of degree $`9`$, or a general ACM curve of degree $`10`$ and genus $`6`$ can be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from a line. On the other hand, we show that there is an irreducible component of the Hilbert scheme of curves of degree $`20`$ and genus $`26`$ whose general member is a smooth ACM curve that cannot be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from a line. We propose this curve as a candidate for a possible counterexample to the question whether every ACM curve is glicci.

We start by finding a lower bound on the genus of an ACM curve in $`^4`$.

Proposition 3.1. Let $`C`$ be a nondegenerate (i.e., not contained in a hyperplane) ACM curve in $`^4`$, of degree $`d`$ and arithmetic genus $`g`$. Then $`d4`$ and $`gG_{\text{min}}(d)`$, where

$$G_{\text{min}}(d)=(s1)d\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s+2}{3}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s+2}{4}\right)+1,$$

and $`s2`$ is the unique integer for which $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s+2}{3}\right)d<\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{s+3}{3}\right)`$. Furthermore, if $`g=G_{\text{min}}(d)`$, then $`s=s_0(c)`$, the least degree of a hypersurface containing $`C`$.

Proof. The simplest way to see this is to consider the $`h`$-vector of the curve \[22, §$`1.4`$\]. This is a sequence of positive integers $`c_0=1`$, $`c_1,c_2,\mathrm{},c_r`$, which determine the degree and genus of the curve according to the formulae

$$d=\underset{i=0}{\overset{r}{}}c_i,g=\underset{i=2}{\overset{r}{}}(i1)c_i.$$

The $`c_i`$ measure the Hilbert function of a graded ring $`R=k[x_0,x_1,x_2]/J`$ of finite length, since $`C`$ has codimension $`3`$. Since $`R`$ is a quotient of a polynomial ring in three variables, we have $`c_i\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i+2}{2}\right)`$ for $`i1`$. The hypothesis $`C`$ nondegenerate implies $`c_1=3`$. Thus $`d4`$. For a given value of $`d`$,, the genus will be minimized by making each $`c_i`$ as large as possible for $`i=2,3,\mathrm{}`$. Thus for $`4d<10`$ the minimum $`g`$ is attained by the $`h`$-vector $`1,3,d4`$, with genus $`g=d4`$. For $`10d<20`$, the minimum genus comes from the $`h`$-vector $`1,3,6,d10`$, with $`g=2d14`$. For the general case, a short calculation with binomial coefficients gives the formula above.

The least degree $`s_0(c)`$ of a hypersurface containing $`C`$ can be read from the $`h`$-vector as the least $`i`$ for which $`c_i<\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i+2}{2}\right)`$. For the $`h`$-vectors giving the minimum genus, this is just the number $`s`$ defined above.

Remark 3.2. It seems reasonable to expect that for each $`d4`$ and $`g=G_{\text{min}}(d)`$, the set of ACM curves of degree $`d`$ and genus $`g`$ in $`^4`$ should form an open subset of an irreducible component of the Hilbert scheme of curves in $`^4`$, and that a general such curve should be nonsingular, but we do not know how to prove this.

Notation 3.3. We will be dealing with curves on certain rational ACM surfaces in $`^4`$, so here we fix some terminology and notation.

The smooth cubic scroll $`S`$ is obtained by blowing up one point $`P^2`$, and embedding in $`^4`$ by the complete linear system $`H=2le`$, where $`l`$ is the total transform of a line in $`^2`$, and $`e`$ is the class of the exceptional divisor $`E`$. One knows that $`\text{Pic }S=`$, generated by $`l,e`$. We denote the divisor class $`albe`$ by $`(a;b)`$.

The Del Pezzo surface $`S`$ is obtained by blowing up five points $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_5`$, no three collinear in $`^2`$, and embedding in $`^4`$ by $`H=3l\mathrm{\Sigma }e_i`$. In this case $`\text{Pic }S=^6`$, and we denote the divisor class $`al\mathrm{\Sigma }b_ie_i`$ by $`(a;b_1,\mathrm{},b_5)`$. If some $`b`$’s are repeated, we denote that with an exponent. Thus in the discussion of $`(8,4)`$ curves below, the divisor class $`(5;2^2,1^3)`$ means $`(5;2,2,1,1,1)`$.

A Castelnuovo surface $`S`$ in $`^4`$ is a smooth surface of degree $`5`$ and sectional genus $`2`$. It can be obtained by blowing up $`8`$ points $`P_0,P_1,\mathrm{},P_7`$ in $`^2`$ and embedding by the linear system $`H=(4;2,1^7)`$ (see ). If the points $`P_i`$ are no three collinear and no $`6`$ on a conic, we call it a general Castelnuovo surface. Here $`\text{Pic }S=^9`$, and we denote the divisor class $`al\mathrm{\Sigma }b_ie_i`$ by $`(a;b_i)`$.

A Bordiga surface is a smooth surface of degree $`6`$ and sectional genus $`3`$. It can be obtained by blowing up ten points $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_{10}`$ in $`^2`$ and embedding by the linear system $`H=(4;1^{10})`$ . If the points $`P_i`$ are such that no three are collinear, no $`6`$ on a conic, and no $`10`$ on a cubic curve, we call it a general Bordiga surface.

Proposition 3.4. a) If $`C`$ is an integral nondegenerate ACM curve of degree $`d9`$ in $`^4`$, the degree-genus pair $`(d,g)`$ must be one of the following: $`(4,0)`$, $`(5,1)`$, $`(6,2)`$, $`(7,3)`$, $`(8,4)`$, $`(8,5)`$, $`(9,5)`$, $`(9,6)`$, $`(9,7)`$.

b) For each $`(d,g)`$ pair in a), the set of nonsingular nondegenerate curves in $`^4`$ forms an open subset of an irreducible component of the Hilbert scheme, and

c) For each $`(d,g)`$ pair as above, the general such curve is ACM and can be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from a line.

Proof. a) A lower bound on $`g`$ is given by $`(3.1)`$; an upper bound is given by the Castelnuovo bound for the genus of an integral curve (see, e.g., Rathmann ). This list gives all possible values of $`g`$ between the lower and upper bounds.

b) For $`g=d4`$, the irreducibility is given by a theorem of Ein . For $`(d,g)=(8,5)`$, $`C`$ is the canonical embedding of a non-hyperelliptic curve of genus $`5`$, so the family is irreducible. For $`(d,g)=(9,6)`$ th curve is a non-trigonal curve of genus $`6`$, embedded by a linear system $`D=KP`$, so the family is irreducible (I am indebted to E. Drozd for this observation). For $`(d,g)=(9,7)`$, the family is irreducible by a theorem of Harris .

c) We do a case-by-case analysis.

For $`(d,g)=(4,0)`$, up to automorphisms of $`^4`$, there is just one rational normal curve $`C`$ of degree $`4`$. It lies on a smooth cubic scroll $`S`$, having divisor class $`(2;0)`$. If $`H`$ denotes the hyperplane class $`(2;1)`$, then $`CH=(0;1)`$, which is a line. Thus $`C`$ is obtained by an ascending Gorenstein biliaison from a line on the surface $`S`$.

For $`(d,g)=(5,1)`$, suppose given a smooth nondegenerate $`(5,1)`$ curve $`C`$ in $`^4`$. Let $`C_0`$ be the abstract elliptic curve, and let $`D_0`$ be the divisor corresponding to $`𝒪_C(1)`$. Then $`C`$ is obtained by embedding $`C_0`$ with the complete linear system $`|D_0|`$. Choose $`F`$ a divisor of degree $`3`$ on $`C_0`$, and use $`|F|`$ to embed $`C_0`$ as a nonsingular cubic curve $`C_1`$ in $`^2`$. Choose a point $`PC_1`$. Blow up $`P`$ in $`^2`$ and embed by the linear system $`H=2le`$ to get a nonsingular cubic scroll $`S`$ in $`^4`$. The image of $`C_1`$ will be a $`(5,1)`$ curve $`C_2^4`$, obtained by embedding $`C_0`$ with the linear system $`|2FP|`$. By adjusting the choice of $`P`$, we may arrange that $`D_02FP`$. Then $`C`$ and $`C_2`$ will differ by an automorphism of $`^4`$. We conclude that $`C`$ lies on a smooth cubic scroll $`S^{}`$, and has divisor class $`(3;1)`$ on $`S^{}`$. Then $`CH=(1;0)`$ is a conic. The conic in turn can be obtained ascending Gorenstein biliaison from a line on a plane. Thus $`C`$ is obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from a line.

A similar argument shows that every smooth nondegenerate $`(6,2)`$ curve $`C`$ in $`^4`$ appears as a divisor of type $`(4;2)`$ on a smooth cubic scroll. Then $`CH=(2;1)`$ is a twisted cubic curve, which can in turn be obtained by an ascending Gorenstein biliaison on a quadric surface in $`^3`$.

The case $`(d,g)=(7,3)`$ is a little more complicated. We will consider only a smooth nondegenerate non-hyperelliptic $`(7,3)`$ curve $`C`$ in $`^4`$. Let $`C_0`$ be the abstract curve of genus $`3`$, and $`D_0`$ the divisor giving the embedding $`C`$. Let $`C_1`$ be the canonical embedding of the non-hyperelliptic curve $`C_0`$ as a smooth plane quartic curve in $`^2`$. Choose five points $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_5`$ on $`C_1`$ with no $`3`$ collinear. Blow up $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_5`$ and embed by $`3l\mathrm{\Sigma }e_i`$ to get a Del Pezzo surface $`S`$ in $`^4`$. The image of $`C_1`$ is then a smooth $`(7,3)`$ curve $`C_2S`$ with divisor class $`(4;1^5)`$, which is an embedding of $`C_0`$ by the divisor $`3K\mathrm{\Sigma }P_i`$. We would like to choose the $`P_i`$ so that $`3K\mathrm{\Sigma }P_iD_0`$, i.e., $`\mathrm{\Sigma }P_i3KD_0`$.

Case 1. The divisor $`3KD_0`$ can be represented by $`5`$ points, no three collinear. In this case we find that $`C`$ is contained in a Del Pezzo surface $`S^{}`$, with divisor class $`(4;1^5)`$. Then $`CH=(1;0^5)`$, which is a twisted cubic curve, so $`C`$ can be obtained from a line by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons.

Case 2. If Case 1 does not occur, one sees easily that $`3KD_0K+P`$ for some point $`P`$. In this case we take $`S`$ to be the smooth cubic scroll obtained by blowing up $`P`$. Then $`C_2`$ is a divisor of type $`(4;1)`$ on $`S`$, and is an embedding of $`C_0`$ by $`2KPD_0`$. So $`C`$ lies on a cubic scroll, and $`C2H=(0;1)`$ is a line.

Note the two types of non-hyperelliptic $`(7,3)`$ curves can be distinguished by the property that the Case 1 curves have only finitely many trisecants, while the Case 2 curves have infinitely many trisecants.

For a smooth $`(8,4)`$ curve $`C`$ we use a different technique. For this curve, $`h^0(_C(2))=2`$, so $`C`$ is contained in a unique complete intersection surface $`S=F_2F_2^{}`$. Since the family of $`(8,4)`$ curves is irreducible, and since a general complete intersection surface $`S=F_2F_2^{}`$ is a smooth Del Pezzo surface containing a smooth $`(8,4)`$ curve $`C`$ in the divisor class $`(5;2^2,1^3)`$, we conclude that a general such $`C`$ lies on a smooth Del Pezzo surface $`S`$, with divisor class $`(5;2^2,1^3)`$. Then $`CH=(2;1^2,0^3)`$, which is a nondegenerate smooth $`(4,0)`$ curve in $`^4`$. Thus using the case of $`(4,0)`$ above, we conclude that $`C`$ can be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from a line.

The case $`(9,6)`$ is similar to $`(8,4)`$, because again $`h^0(_C(2))=2`$, we conclude that a general smooth $`(9,6)`$ curve $`C`$ lies on a Del Pezzo surface $`S`$ with divisor class $`(6;2^4,1)`$. In this case $`C2H=(0;0^4,1)`$ which is a line.

A smooth nondegenerate $`(8,5)`$ curve $`C`$ in $`^4`$ is the canonical embedding of a non-hyperelliptic genus $`5`$ curve. According to the theorem of Petri  if the curve is not trigonal, then $`C`$ is the complete intersection of three quadric hypersurfaces $`C=F_2F_2^{}F_2^{\prime \prime }`$. Let $`S=F_2F_2^{}`$. Then $`C`$ is the divisor $`2H`$ on $`S`$, and $`CH`$ is an elliptic quartic curve in $`^3`$, which can be obtained from a conic by biliaison on a quadric surface. Thus $`C`$ is obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from a line.

If the curve is trigonal, then $`C`$ lies on a smooth cubic scroll $`S=F_2F_2^{}F_2^{\prime \prime }`$. It has divisor class $`(5;2)`$, so $`C2H`$ is $`(1;0)`$, a conic, and we conclude again. Note in this case $`C=HK`$ is arithmetically Gorenstein, even though it is not a complete intersection.

For $`(d,g)=(9,5)`$, arguments like the ones above show that we can embed the general genus $`5`$ curve as a plane quintic with a double point, and thus obtain a general $`(9,5)`$ curve $`C`$ on a Castelnuovo surface with divisor class $`(5;2,1^7)`$. Then $`CH=(1,0^8)`$ is a $`(4,0)`$ curve and we use our earlier result.

Finally, every smooth $`(9,7)`$ curve $`C`$, as a curve of maximal genus, lies on a cubic surface $`S`$ as the divisor $`3H`$, by a theorem of Harris . Then $`C2H`$ is a twisted cubic curve, and we are done.

Corollary 3.5. A general smooth ACM curve of degree $`d9`$ in $`^4`$ is glicci.

Remark 3.6. The glicciness of ACM curves lying on general ACM surfaces in $`^4`$ and of integral ACM curves of degree $`7`$ was already proven in \[16, §8\]. Our contribution is to show that a general smooth ACM curve of degree $`9`$ actually does lie on a smooth rational ACM surface, and to check the possibly stronger property that they can be obtained from a line by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons (cf. Question $`1.3`$b).

Note that our proof actually shows every smooth curve with $`(d,g)=(4,0),(5,1),(6,2)`$ is ACM and can be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from a line. The same can be said for $`(7,3)`$ curves, by extending the analysis above: one can show that a hyperelliptic $`(7,3)`$ cuve lies on a cubic scroll or the cone over a twisted cubic curve, and in both cases is obtained from a smooth $`(4,0)`$ curve by biliaison.

For the next case of $`(8,4)`$ curves, the situation is more complicated. There are smooth hyperelliptic $`(8,4)`$ curves on a cubic scroll, but they are not ACM. Since an ACM $`(8,4)`$ curve lies on a unique complete intersection surface $`S=F_2F_2^{}`$, to study all smooth $`(8,4)`$ curves, one would presumably have to study the possible singular surfaces $`S`$. One approach is to use Riemann–Roch on the surface to show that the divisor $`CH`$ is effective, but then one has to deal with not necessarily irreducible $`(4,0)`$ curves.

The analysis becomes increasingly complex for the remaining cases, so we do not know if c) holds for all smooth ACM curves of the given degree and genus.

Remark 3.7. For $`d10`$, the family of smooth non-degenerate ACM curves of given $`(d,g)`$ in $`^4`$ may not be irreducible. The first example is $`(d,g)=(10,9)`$, for which there are two different families of such curves lying on smooth cubic scrolls.

Example 3.8. We consider smooth $`(10,6)`$ curves in $`^4`$. Note that all the curves in Proposition $`3.4`$, being ACM of degree $`9`$, are contained in quadric hypersurfaces, since their hyperplane section is $`9`$ points and is contained in a quadric surface of $`^3`$. The case $`(d,g)=(10,6)`$ is the first case where there are smooth ACM curves not contained in a quadric hypersurface.

By the theorem of Ein , the family of smooth $`(10,6)`$ curves in $`^4`$ is irreducible. To show that a general $`(10,6)`$ curve is ACM, it suffices, by semicontinuity, to exhibit one. A divisor of type $`(5;1^{10})`$ on a general Bordiga surface $`S`$ is the transform of a plane quintic curve, which can be taken to be smooth, so we get a smooth $`(10,6)`$ curve $`C`$ on $`S`$. For this curve $`CH=(1;0^{10})`$ is a smooth $`(4,0)`$ curve, which is ACM, so $`C`$ is also ACM. Note however that the curve just described is not general in the variety of moduli of curves of genus $`6`$, because it has a $`g_5^2`$: a representation as a plane quintic curve.

Next, let $`C_0`$ be an abstract curve of genus $`6`$, with general moduli. Then $`C_0`$ admits a birational representation as a plane curve $`C_1^2`$ with four nodes $`P_1,P_2,P_3,P_4`$, no three collinear . Choose six additional points $`P_5,\mathrm{},P_{10}`$ on $`C_1`$ in general position. Blow up $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_{10}`$ to obtain a Bordiga surface $`S`$, containing the proper transform $`C_2S`$ of $`C_1`$. Then $`C_2`$ is a smooth $`(10,6)`$ curve in $`^4`$ with general moduli. Since the curve has genus $`6`$, by varying the choice of the six points $`P_5,\mathrm{},P_{10}`$, we can obtain any general divisor class on $`C_2`$ as its hyperplane section. We conclude that the general $`(10,6)`$ curve $`C`$ in $`^4`$ is contained in a general Bordiga surface $`S`$ with divisor class $`(6;2^4,1^6)`$. Then $`CH=(2;1^4,0^6)`$, which is a smooth $`(4,0)`$ curve, so $`C`$ can be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from a line.

To study the $`(10,6)`$ curves in more detail, we note that as a general Bordiga surface $`S`$, there are eight divisor classes (up to permutation of the $`P_i`$) containing $`(10,6)`$ curves. They are

$`D_1`$ $`=`$ $`(5;1^{10})`$
$`D_2`$ $`=`$ $`(6;2^4,1^6)`$
$`D_3`$ $`=`$ $`(7;2^9,0)`$
$`D_4`$ $`=`$ $`(7;3,2^6,1^3)`$
$`D_5`$ $`=`$ $`(8;3^3,2^6,1)`$
$`D_6`$ $`=`$ $`(8;4,2^9)`$
$`D_7`$ $`=`$ $`(9;3^6,2^4)`$
$`D_8`$ $`=`$ $`(10;3^{10}).`$
Of these $`D_3`$ and $`D_6`$ have Rao module $`k`$. They will be discussed in the next section. The remaining $`6`$ cases are ACM. The first three of these, $`D_1`$, $`D_2`$, and $`D_4`$, can be obtained by Gorenstein biliaison from $`(4,0)`$ curves on $`S`$. However, $`D_5H`$, $`D_7H`$, and $`D_8H`$ are not effective divisors so these curves cannot be obtained by Gorenstein biliaison on this surface $`S`$.

Using the arithmetically Gorenstein divisor $`3HK`$ on $`S`$, of degree $`20`$, the divisor class $`D_i`$ is Gorenstein-linked to $`D_{8i}`$. It follows that $`D_5`$, $`D_7`$, $`D_8`$ are glicci (as observed in \[16, §8\]). However, we do not know whether or not these curves may be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaison on some other surface.

Example 3.9. For our last example, we will study ACM $`(20,26)`$ curves in $`^4`$. Note that all the curves in the earlier part of this section, plus all the ACM curves lying on rational ACM surfaces in $`^4`$, which were proved to be glicci in \[16, §8\], lie on cubic hypersurfaces in $`^4`$. So by analogy with our findings for points in $`^3`$ in §2 above, we might expect that all ACM curves contained in cubic hypersurfaces in $`^4`$ would be glicci. This also suggests that in looking for counterexamples to ACM $``$ glicci (Question $`1.3`$), we should look at curves not contained in a cubic hypersurface.

The first example of an ACM curve in $`^4`$ not contained in a cubic hypersurface will have $`h`$-vector $`1,3,6,10`$ (cf. proof of $`3.1`$). It has degree $`20`$ and genus $`26`$. For existence of such curves, we let $`C`$ be the determinantal curve defined by the $`4\times 4`$ minors of a $`4\times 6`$ matrix of general linear forms. A general such curve will be smooth, ACM, of degree $`20`$ and genus $`26`$. The family of such determinantal curves has dimension $`69`$, by \[16, 10.3\].

The method of \[17, 3.7\] shows that $`C`$ is linearly equivalent to $`H+K`$ on an ACM surface $`S`$ in $`^4`$, of degree $`10`$ and sectional genus $`11`$, defined by the $`4\times 4`$ minors of a $`4\times 5`$ matrix of general linear forms, where $`H`$ denotes the hyperplane section of $`S`$, and $`K`$ denotes the canonical class of $`S`$. Furthermore, a similar argument using \[17, 3.1\] shows that the curve $`C_0`$ defined by the $`3\times 3`$ minors of a $`3\times 5`$ matrix of linear forms will be linearly equivalent to $`K`$ on $`S`$. This latter curve $`C_0`$ also appears in the divisor class $`2H_0+K_0`$ on the surface $`S_0`$ defined by $`3\times 3`$ minors of a $`3\times 4`$ matrix of linear forms. (I am grateful to J. Migliore for pointing out the paper  and explaining to me how to obtain these linear equivalences.)

Now $`S_0`$ is just the Bordiga surface, and $`C_0`$ is an ACM $`(10,6)`$ curve, discussed earlier. By the linear equivalence $`C_02H_0+K_0`$ on $`S_0`$ we recognize that $`C_0`$ is in the class $`(5;1^{10})`$, which we called $`D_1`$ in $`(3.8)`$ above. These are isomorphic to plane curves of degree $`5`$ and thus are not general in the moduli of curves of genus $`6`$.

Since $`C_0`$ can be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaison from a line, and since $`CC_0+H=K+H`$ as the ACM surface $`S`$, we conclude that the determinantal $`(20,26)`$ curve $`C`$ can also be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaison from a line.

Next, I claim that the only way to obtain an ACM $`(20,26)`$ curve $`D`$ in $`^4`$ by ascending Gorenstein biliaison is from an ACM $`(10,6)`$ curve $`C_1`$ on an ACM surface $`S_1`$ of degree $`10`$ and sectional genus $`11`$, as $`DC_1+H`$ on $`S_1`$. Indeed, suppose that $`DC_1+H`$ on some ACM surface $`S_1`$. Then $`C_1`$ is an ACM curve of type $`(d_1,g_1)`$ in $`^4`$, while $`H`$ is an ACM curve of type $`(d_2,g_2)`$ in $`^3`$. From this we get $`(20,26)=(d_1+d_2,g_1+g_2+d_11)`$. For each $`d_1`$ (resp. $`d_2`$) we know the minimum possible genus of an ACM curve in $`^4`$ (resp. $`^3`$)—cf. $`3.1`$. Looking at these, we find that $`g_1+g_2+d_11>26`$ in all cases except $`(d_1,g_1)=(10,6)`$ and $`(d_2,g_2)=(10,11)`$. Thus any $`(20,26)`$ curve $`D`$ that can be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaison must lie on a surface $`S_1`$ of degree $`10`$ and sectional genus $`11`$.

Now we look at the dimensions of some families of $`(20,26)`$ curves. By \[16, $`10.3`$\], the family of determinantal curves $`C`$ as above has dimension $`69`$. On the other hand, each component of the Hilbert scheme of $`(20,26)`$ curves in $`^4`$ has dimension $`5d+1g=75`$. So we see immediately that a general element of an irreducible component of $`H_{20,26}`$ cannot be determinantal. However, there may be other $`(20,26)`$ curves $`C^{}`$ on $`S`$, not determinantal themselves, but linearly equivalent to $`C`$, obtainable by ascending Gorenstein biliaison on $`S`$.

So let us find the dimension of the complete linear system $`|C|`$ on $`S`$. From the exact sequence

$$𝒪𝒪_S𝒪_S(C)𝒪_C(C)0$$

we see that $`dim_S|C|=h^0(𝒪_C(C))=C^2+1g+h^1(𝒪_C(C))`$. We also have a resolution of $`𝒪_S`$

$$0𝒪_^4(5)^4𝒪_^4(4)^5𝒪_S0$$

coming from its matrix representation. From this we find $`h^2(𝒪_S)=4`$ and $`p_a(S)=4`$. On the surface $`S`$ we have $`H^2=degS=10`$. From the adjunction formula for $`H`$, which is a $`(10,11)`$ curve, we find $`HK=10`$. And from the formula \[14, p. 434\] for surfaces in $`^4`$, we find $`K^2=5`$. Now $`C=H+K`$, so we get $`C^2=35`$. Also, since $`C=H+K`$, from the Kodaira Vanishing Theorem we have $`H^1(𝒪_S(C))=H^2(𝒪_S(C))=0`$. Thus $`h^1(𝒪_C(C))h^2(𝒪_S)=4`$. So we find

$$dim_S|C|=35+126+4=14.$$

The family of ACM surface $`S`$ has dimension $`60`$ (for example by the formula of Ellingsrud ), so we find that the family of $`(20,26)`$ curves in $`^4`$ that can be linearly equivalent to $`C`$ on such a surface $`S`$ has dimension $`74`$. In particular, a general curve in an irreducible component of $`H_{20,26}`$ does not arise in this way.

There may also be other linear equivalence classes of $`(20,26)`$ curves on $`S`$ of larger dimension. Indeed, this is what does happen with the $`(10,6)`$ curves studied in $`(3.8)`$ above: the curves linearly equivalent to the determinantal curves were all of type $`D_1`$ on the Bordiga surface, and these curves are not general in the moduli of genus $`6`$ curves, while a general genus $`6`$ curve appears as an ACM curve in a different linear system $`D_2`$ on the Bordiga surface. So we must see if something analogous happens with the $`(20,26)`$ curves.

First, we look on a general ACM surface $`S`$ of degree $`10`$ and sectional genus $`11`$. According to a theorem of Lopez \[19, III.4.2\], $`\text{Pic }S=`$ generated by $`H`$ and $`K`$. We look for divisors $`mH+nK`$ with degree $`20`$ and genus $`26`$. There are only two possibilities: $`C=H+K`$ or $`C^{}=4H2K`$. In the latter case we compute $`C^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=20`$. Therefore, by Clifford’s theorem, $`h^0(𝒪_C^{}(C^{}))110`$, so $`dim_S|C^{}|11`$. Thus the family of such curves $`C^{}`$ in $`^4`$ has dimension $`71`$. So we see that a general ACM $`(20,26)`$ curve in $`^4`$ cannot lie on a general ACM surface $`S`$ of degree $`10`$ and sectional genus $`11`$.

Now let us estimate the dimension of a family of smooth $`(20,26)`$ curves $`D`$, general in an irreducible component of $`H_{20,26}`$ containing the determinantal curves $`C`$ above, and lying on a non-general ACM surface $`X`$ of degree $`10`$ and sectional genus $`11`$. We will make use of the Clifford index of a curve.

Recall that the gonality of a curve $`C`$ is the least $`d`$ for which there exists a linear system $`g_d^1`$ on the curve. The Clifford index of the curve is the minimum of $`d2r`$, taken over all linear systems $`g_d^r`$ with $`r1`$ and $`0<dg1`$. For most curves, the Clifford index is equal to $`\text{gon}(C)2`$, computed by a $`g_d^1`$. Curves for which this is not so are Clifford exceptional curves, and have been studied by Martens  and Eisenbud et al. .

If $`C`$ is the determinantal $`(20,26)`$ curve studied above, then $`CH+K`$ on the surface $`S`$. The hyperplane section $`H`$ is a $`(10,11)`$ curve in $`^3`$, obtained as $`C_0+H_0`$ on a nonsingular quartic surface in $`^3`$. Here $`C_0`$ is a nonhyperelliptic $`(6,3)`$ curve having gonality $`3`$; $`H_0`$ is a plane quartic curve, also having gonality $`3`$. Hence, by , $`H`$ has gonality $`6`$. (In fact the gonality is equal to $`6`$ because $`H`$ must have a $`4`$-secant.) The curve $`K`$ on $`S`$ is the determinantal $`(10,6)`$ curve discussed above, isomorphic to a plane quintic curve, with gonality $`4`$. So applying  again, we find the gonality of $`C`$ is $`10`$. It follows from the study of Clifford exceptional curves in  and  that $`C`$ is not exceptional, so we conclude $`\text{Cliff }C8`$. (On the other hand, the linear system $`|K|`$ on $`S`$ cuts out a $`g_{15}^3`$ on $`C`$, so $`\text{Cliff }C9`$. I suspect $`\text{Cliff }C=9`$, but don’t know how to prove that.) Since we are considering a curve $`D`$ that is general in an irreducible component of $`H_{20,26}`$ containing $`C`$, we may assume also that $`\text{Cliff }D8`$.

Now we consider a smooth $`(20,26)`$ curve $`D`$ with $`\text{Cliff }D8`$, contained in a smooth ACM surface of degree $`10`$ and sectional genus $`11`$ in $`^4`$, and we want to estimate the dimension of the linear system $`|D|`$ on $`S`$. As above, we find

$$dim_S|D|=D^2+1g+h^1(𝒪_D(D)).$$

Since $`D`$ is a $`(20,26)`$ curve, the adjunction formula gives

$$D^2+DK=50.$$

Let us denote $`DK`$ by $`b`$. Then $`D^2=50b`$. On the other hand, let us consider the linear system $`|DK|`$ on $`D`$. It has dimension $`a1`$, where $`a=h^0(𝒪_D(K))`$. Since $`K_D=(D+K)D`$, we also have $`h^1(𝒪_D(D))=a`$. The linear system $`|DK|`$ thus has dimension $`a1`$ and degree $`b`$. Our hypothesis $`\text{Cliff }D8`$ thus implies $`b2a+28`$, or $`b2a+6`$.

Now we can compute

$`dim_S|D|`$ $`=`$ $`D^2+1g+h^1(𝒪_D(D))`$
$`=`$ $`50b+126+a`$
$`=`$ $`25+ab.`$
Since $`b2a+6`$, we find

$$dim_S|D|19a.$$

Now from the exact sequence

$$0𝒪_X(KD)𝒪_X(K)𝒪_D(K)0,$$

we find $`a=h^0(𝒪_D(K))h^0(𝒪_X(K))=h^2(𝒪_X)=4`$. Thus

$$dim_S|D|15.$$

On the other hand, our surface $`S`$ is not general, so it moves in a family of dimension at most $`59`$, so the dimension of the family of curves that arise in this way is at most $`74`$.

In conclusion, we see that there exists an irreducible component of the Hilbert scheme $`H_{20,26}`$ of smooth $`(20,26)`$ curves in $`^4`$ (namely one containing the determinantal curves) whose general member is an ACM curve that does not lie on an ACM surface $`S`$ of degree $`10`$ and sectional genus $`11`$, and so cannot be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaison from a line. We propose this curve as a possible candidate for a counterexample to ACM $``$ glicci (Question $`1.3`$).

## 4 Curves in $`^4`$ with Rao module $`k`$

Let $``$ be the set of all locally CM curves in $`^4`$ with Rao module $`k`$ (i.e., of dimension one in one degree only). One knows that the Rao module must occur in a nonnegative degree \[22, $`\mathrm{1.3.11}`$(b)\], and that there are curves with Rao module $`k`$ in degree $`0`$ (e.g., two skew lines). So we denote by $`_h`$ the set of curves with Rao module $`k`$ in degree $`h`$, and note that $`=_{h0}_h`$.

Let $``$ be the subset of those curves in the $`G`$-liaison class of two skew lines, and let $`_h=_h`$. Then $`=_{h0}_h`$, and the curves in $`_0`$ are the minimal curves defined in §1 above.

In this section we will study the curves in $``$, with a view to elucidating Questions $`1.4`$ and $`1.5`$ above.

Proposition 4.1. a) $`_0`$ contains curves of every degree $`d2`$.

b) For each $`d2`$, the set of curves in $`_0`$ of degree $`d`$ forms an irreducible family, whose general member is the disjoint union $`C=C^{}L`$ of a plane curve $`C^{}`$ of degree $`d1`$ and a line $`L`$, not meeting the plane of $`C^{}`$.

c) Every curve in $`_0`$ is in the $`G`$-liaison class of two skew lines, i.e. $`_0=_0`$.

Proof. a) The case of two skew lines in $`^3`$ is well-known \[21, Example $`6.2`$, p. 34\]. For $`d3`$, let $`C=C^{}L`$ as described in b). Clearly $`h^0(𝒪_C)=2`$, so $`h^1(_C)=1`$. On the other hand, since $`C^{}`$ and $`L`$ are contained in disjoint sublinear spaces of $`^4`$, it is clear that $`H^0(𝒪_^4(n))H^0(𝒪_C(n))`$ is surjective for $`n1`$, so $`C_0`$.

b) I claim any degree $`2`$ curve $`C`$ in $`^4`$ with $`M=k`$ lies in $`^3`$. If the curve is reduced, it is two lines, hence in a $`^3`$. If it is not reduced, then it is a double structure on a line $`L`$, and we have an exact sequence

$$0𝒪_C𝒪_L0$$

where $``$ is an invertible sheaf on $`L`$. Then there is a surjective map $`u:_L/_L^20`$, and $`𝒪_L(a)`$ for some $`a`$. Since $`_L/_L^2𝒪_L(1)^3`$, the map $`u`$ is given by three sections of $`𝒪_L(a+1)`$. If $`a=1`$, we get a double line in a plane. If $`a=0`$, there is a linear form $`x`$ killed by $`u`$, so $`C`$ lies in the $`^3`$ defined by $`x=0`$. If $`a>0`$, then the exact sequence

$$H^0(𝒪_L(1))^3H^0(𝒪_L(a))H^1(_C)0$$

shows the Rao module is bigger than $`k`$.

Thus a curve of degree $`2`$ with $`M=k`$ lies in a $`^3`$, so these form an irreducible family whose general member is two skew lines.

So now let $`d3`$. Then $`C`$ cannot be contained in $`^3`$, because of the Lazarsfeld–Rao property for curves in $`^3`$, so $`h^0(𝒪_C)=2`$, because of the Rao module, and $`h^0(𝒪_C(1))=5`$. Let $`A=H_{}^0(𝒪_C)`$. This is a graded $`S`$-algebra, where $`S=k[x_0,x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4]`$, and in particular $`A_0`$ is a $`2`$-dimensional $`k`$-algebra. We consider two cases.

Case 1. $`A_0`$ is reduced, hence isomorphic to $`k\times k`$ as a $`k`$-algebra. Then $`A_0`$ contains two orthogonal idempotents $`e^{},e^{\prime \prime }`$, such that $`e^{}+e^{\prime \prime }=1`$, $`e^{}{}_{}{}^{2}=e^{}`$, $`e^{\prime \prime }{}_{}{}^{2}=e^{\prime \prime }`$, and $`e^{}e^{\prime \prime }=0`$. Hence $`C`$ is the disjoint union of two curves $`C^{},C^{\prime \prime }`$, defined by the vanishing of $`e^{},e^{\prime \prime }`$, respectively. Let $`H^{},H^{\prime \prime }`$ be the linear spans of the curves $`C^{},C^{\prime \prime }`$. Then $`h^0(𝒪_C(1))=h^0(𝒪_H^{}(1))+h^0(𝒪_{H^{\prime \prime }}(1))=5`$. So one of these, say $`H^{}`$, is a plane, and the other, $`H^{\prime \prime }`$ is a line $`L`$. Thus $`C^{}`$ is a plane curve in $`H^{}`$, and $`C=C^{}L`$ as required. Note that $`H^{},H^{\prime \prime }`$ do not meet since $`h^0(𝒪_^4(1))=h^0(𝒪_H^{}(1))+h^0(𝒪_{H^{\prime \prime }}(1))`$.

Case 2. $`A_0`$ is non-reduced, in which case it is isomorphic to the ring $`k[ϵ]/(ϵ^2)`$. Let $`fA_0`$ be a nonzero element with $`f^2=0`$. Now $`A_1S_1`$ is the $`k`$-vector space generated by $`x_0,x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4`$. Multiplication by $`f`$ on $`A_1`$ is a nilpotent linear map with $`f^2=0`$. Furthermore, since $`C`$ is locally CM, the kernel of $`f`$ acting on $`A_1`$ must have dimension $`3`$. Otherwise $`f`$ would be supported at a point. So $`f`$ has rank $`2`$. Now from the structure of nilpotent transformations it follows (after a linear change of coordinates) that $`fx_0=x_2`$, $`fx_1=x_3`$, $`fx_2=fx_3=fx_4=0`$. Hence we can identify the $`S`$-algebra $`A`$ as

$$AS[f]/((f^2,fx_0x_2,fx_1x_3,fx_2,fx_3,fx_4)+I_C)$$

where $`I_CS`$ is the homogeneous ideal of $`C`$.

Now let $`H^{}`$ be the plane $`x_2=x_3=0`$, and let $`C^{}`$ be the curve obtained from $`CH`$ by removing its embedded points, if any. Then there is an exact sequence

$$0𝒪_C𝒪_C^{}0.$$

Since $`C^{}`$ is a plane curve, $`h^0(𝒪_C^{})=1`$, and so $`h^0()=1`$. Furthermore note that the image of $`f`$ in $`𝒪_C^{}`$ is annihilated by $`x_0,x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4`$, hence is $`0`$. So $`f`$ generates $`h^0()`$. Now $`f`$ is annihilated by $`x_2,x_3,x_4`$, so it has support on the line $`L:x_2=x_3=x_4=0`$. Thus $``$ is an $`𝒪_L`$-module, it is torsion-free since $`C`$ is locally CM, and contains the submodule $`𝒪_L`$ generated by $`f`$. Hence $`𝒪_L`$, generated by $`f`$.

Now it is clear that $`C`$ consists of the plane curve $`C^{}`$ of degree $`d1`$, containing the line $`L`$, plus a multiplicity two structure on $`L`$ with $`p_a=1`$. This is the limit of a flat deformation of the disjoint unions $`C^{}L`$ described above, as the skew line $`L`$ approaches a line in the curve $`C^{}`$.

So the curves in $`_0`$ of any degree $`d2`$ form an irreducible family.

c) Let $`C_0`$ have degree $`d`$. The case $`d=2`$ in $`^3`$ is well-known, so we may assume $`d3`$. First consider the disjoint union $`C=C^{}L`$ as in b). Take a hyperplane $`^3`$ containing $`L`$ and meeting the plane $`H^{}`$ of $`C^{}`$ in a line $`L^{}`$, skew to $`L`$, and not a component of $`C^{}`$. Let $`Q`$ be a nonsingular quadric surface in that $`^3`$ containing $`L`$ and $`L^{}`$. Then $`S=H^{}Q`$ is an ACM surface of degree $`3`$ in $`^4`$. Note that its negative canonical divisor $`K`$ consists of a conic in $`H^{}`$ plus a divisor of bidegree $`(1,2)`$ on $`Q`$, meeting $`L^{}`$ in the same two points as the conic, where $`(1,0)`$ is the class of $`L`$. (Here we leave some details to the reader.) Now given $`C`$, there is an AG divisor $`X`$ in the linear system $`(d3)HK`$ on $`S`$ containing $`C`$ \[22, $`\mathrm{4.2.8}`$\]. The linked curve $`D`$ is a divisor of bidegree $`(d3,d1)`$ on $`Q`$, which is in the biliaison class of two skew lines on $`Q`$. Thus $`C`$ is in $`_0`$.

In the special case where $`C`$ is a plane curve $`C^{}`$ containing a line $`L`$, plus a double structure on $`L`$ as above, we use exactly the same construction, except that now the hyperplane $`^3`$ meets $`H^{}`$ in $`L`$, and the quadric surface $`Q`$ contains the double structure on $`L`$. The same liaison works, using the theory of generalized divisors .

Remark 4.2. The fact that $`_0`$ is not a single irreducible family was observed by Migliore \[22, $`\mathrm{5.4.8}`$\], who gave the example of a curve of degree $`3`$ in $`_0`$. His student Lesperance  has independently proved $`3.1`$a), c) in the case of reduced curves. Lesperance has also shown \[18, $`4.5`$\] that for other Rao modules, the set of minimal curves of given degree need not be irreducible. Thus $`(4.1b)`$ is special to the case of Rao module $`M=k`$.

Example 4.3. Let $`C`$ be a smooth curve of degree $`5`$ and genus $`0`$ in $`^4`$, not contained in any $`^3`$. It is the projection of the rational normal curve $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in $`^5`$ from a point not lying on any secant line of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. A little elementary geometry shows that $`C`$ has a unique trisecant $`E`$. If $`C`$ meets $`E`$ in three distinct points, then the three points of intersection of $`C`$ and $`E`$ determine a unique isomorphism (of abstract $`^1`$’s) from $`C`$ to $`E`$ fixing those three points. Let $`S`$ be the surface formed as the closure of the set of lines joining corresponding points of $`C`$ and $`E`$. Then $`S`$ is a rational cubic scroll in $`^4`$.

On $`S`$, our rational quintic $`C`$ has divisor class $`(4;3)`$. The linear system $`CH=(2;2)`$ contains a disjoint union of two rulings of the surface $`S`$. Hence $`C`$ is obtained by one elementary $`G`$-biliaison from two skew lines. In particular, $`C_1`$.

If $`E`$ is a degenerate trisecant, i.e., a tangent line meeting the curve again, or an inflectional tangent, we can still show $`C_1`$ as follows. The smooth $`(5,0)`$ curves in $`^4`$ form an irreducible family, so $`C`$ is a specialization of the general type described above. Hence $`C`$ must lie on a cubic surface in $`^4`$. It cannot lie on a reducible surface, since $`C`$ is not in $`^3`$. The only other irreducible cubic surface is the cone over a twisted cubic curve, and that surface contains no smooth $`(5,0)`$ curves. Hence $`C`$ is on a smooth rational cubic scroll, and the previous argument applies.

Example 4.4. We consider smooth curves of type $`(6,1)`$ (degree $`6`$ and genus $`1`$) in $`^4`$, not contained in any $`^3`$. Then $`h^1(_C(1))=1`$ and $`h^0(_C(2))3`$.

Case 1. If three quadric hypersurfaces containing $`C`$ intersect in a surface, then that surface must be a cubic rational scroll $`S`$ (reason: the degree of $`S`$ must be $`3`$; $`C`$ is not contained in a plane or a quadric surface, and there is no $`(6,1)`$ curve on the cone over a twisted cubic curve). In this case $`C=(3;0)`$ on $`S`$ and $`CH=(1;1)`$, which contains the disjoint union of a conic and a line. Thus $`C`$ is in $`_1`$ and is obtained by a single elementary $`G`$-biliaison from a curve of degree $`3`$ in $`_0`$. This curve $`C`$ has infinitely many trisecants, formed by the rulings of $`S`$.

Case 2. Three quadric hypersurfaces containing $`C`$ will intersect in a complete intersection curve $`X`$ of degree $`8`$ and genus $`5`$. The residual intersection $`D`$ will be a curve of degree $`2`$. $`D`$ cannot be a plane curve, because then it would meet $`C`$ in $`5`$ points, and projection from the plane of $`D`$ would be a birational map of $`C`$ to a line, which is impossible. Hence $`D`$ is two skew lines or a nonplanar double structure on a line. By reason of the genus of $`X`$, $`D`$ will be either two trisecants of $`C`$ or a single trisecant. Note also that these are all the trisecants of $`C`$, because any trisecant of $`C`$ must be contained in each quadric hypersurface containing $`C`$, hence in $`X`$.

Case 2a. An example of a $`(6,1)`$ curve with two trisecants can be obtained on a Del Pezzo surface, as a divisor of type $`(3;1^3,0^2)`$. In this case $`CH=(0;0^3,1^2)`$, which is a disjoint union of two lines, so $`C`$ is in $`_1`$ and is obtained by one elementary $`G`$-biliaison from the minimal curve of degree $`2`$ in $`_0`$. This curve $`C`$ has two trisecants, the lines $`F_{45}=(1;0^3,1^2)`$ and $`G=(2;1^5)`$.

Case 2b. An example of a $`(6,1)`$ curve with one trisecant can be obtained as follows. We project the Veronese surface $`V`$ in $`^5`$ from a point in a plane containing a conic of $`V`$, so as to obtain a quartic surface $`S`$ in $`^4`$ with a double line $`L`$. A general cubic curve in $`^2`$ gives a $`(6,1)`$ curve in $`V`$ meeting the conic in three points that project to distinct points of the line $`L`$ in $`S`$. Thus the image $`CS`$ of this curve will be a smooth $`(6,1)`$ curve having $`L`$ as a trisecant. Now the surface $`S`$ is smooth except for a double line and two pinch points, hence locally $`CM`$. Its general hyperplane section is an integral curve in $`^3`$ of degree $`4`$, arithmetic genus $`1`$, with one node. This is a complete intersection in $`^3`$, hence $`S`$ is a complete intersection of two quadric hypersurfaces in $`^4`$ \[22, $`\mathrm{1.3.3}`$\], so it must contain every trisecant of $`C`$. But $`S`$ contains no lines except $`L`$, so $`C`$ has a unique trisecant. Since $`C`$ is linked to a double structure on $`L`$, $`C`$ is in the $`CI`$-liaison class of two skew lines, so $`C`$ is in $`_1`$. Note that $`CH`$ is not effective on $`S`$, so $`C`$ cannot be obtained by an elementary Gorenstein biliaison on $`S`$. However, it seems likely that $`C`$ also lies on a normal singular Del Pezzo surface on which it can be obtained by an elementary Gorenstein biliaison from two skew lines.

Thus we see that any smooth nondegenerate $`(6,1)`$ curve in $`^4`$ is in $`_1`$. The family of all such curves in $`^4`$ is irreducible . The general type with two trisecants (Case 2a) is obtained by an elementary Gorenstein biliaison from a curve of degree $`2`$ in $`_0`$, while the special type (Case 1) with infinitely many trisecants is obtained by Gorenstein biliaison from a curve of degree $`3`$ in $`_0`$.

Example 4.5. We consider nonsingular degree $`7`$ genus $`2`$ curves in $`^4`$, not contained in any $`^3`$. The family $`H_{7,2}`$ of all of these curves is irreducible, by Ein . We see $`h^1(_C(1))=1`$, and there exist such curves with Rao module $`k`$ on a Del Pezzo surface (see below), so by semicontinuity, the general such curve has Rao module $`k`$, i.e., it is in $`_1`$.

Next, note that $`h^0(_C(2))2`$. If $`h^0(_C(2))>2`$, then the intersection of three quadric surfaces would either be a curve of degree $`8`$, and then $`C`$ would be linked to a line, hence ACM, which is impossible; or it would be a surface of degree $`3`$, but there are no $`(7,2)`$ curves on surfaces of degree $`3`$ in $`^4`$. Hence $`h^0(_C(2))=2`$, and $`h^1(_C(2))=0`$, so by Castelnuovo–Mumford regularity, $`C_1`$. Thus all curves of $`H_{7,2}`$ are in $`_1`$.

Now look on a Del Pezzo surface $`S`$, and let $`C=(4;2,1^3,0)`$. Then $`C`$ is a smooth $`(7,2)`$ curve, and $`CH=(1;1,0^3,1)`$ is a disjoint union of a conic and a line. Thus $`C_1`$, and $`C`$ is obtained by an elementary Gorenstein biliaison from a curve of degree $`3`$ in $`_0`$. Note that $`C`$ has exactly four mutually skew trisecants, namely the lines $`F_{25}`$, $`F_{35}`$, $`F_{45}`$, and $`G`$ on $`S`$.

If $`C`$ is any smooth $`(7,2)`$ curve, we have seen that $`h^0(_C(2))=2`$. Let $`S`$ be the complete intersection surface $`F_2F_2^{}`$ of two quadric surfaces containing $`C`$. Then $`S`$ is uniquely determined by $`C`$. It is a surface of degree $`4`$, with sectional genus $`1`$, but it may be singular. However, it must be irreducible, and hence has at most a line of singular points. Therefore $`C`$ is an almost Cartier divisor on $`S`$, and we can apply the theory of generalized divisors. There is an exact sequence

$$0𝒪_S(C)\omega _C(1)0$$

\[13, $`2.1`$\], making use of the fact that $`\omega _S=𝒪_S(1)`$. Twisting by $`1`$, and taking cohomology, we obtain

$$0H^0(𝒪_S(1))H^0((CH))H^0(\omega _C)H^1(𝒪_S(1)),$$

where $`H`$ denotes the hyperplane class on $`S`$. The two outside groups are $`0`$, and $`H^0(\omega _C)`$ has dimension $`2`$, so $`H^0((CH))0`$. This shows that $`CH`$ is effective on $`S`$. It is a divisor of degree $`3`$, and must be in $`_0`$, so we see that any $`C`$ in $`_1`$ is in $`_1`$, and is obtained by an elementary Gorenstein biliaison from a curve of degree $`3`$ in $`_0`$.

For an example of a special $`(7,2)`$ curve, let $`S_0=^1\times ^1`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a line of bidegree $`(1,0)`$, and fix an involution $`\sigma `$ on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Take $`\vartheta `$ to be the linear system of those curves of bidegree $`(1,2)`$ on $`S_0`$ meeting $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in a pair of the involution $`\sigma `$. Then $`\vartheta `$ maps $`S_0`$ to a surface $`S`$ of degree $`4`$ in $`^4`$ with a double line $`L_0`$ (the image of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$). If $`C_0`$ is a general curve of bidegree $`(2,3)`$ on $`S_0`$, then the image $`C`$ of $`C_0`$ in $`S`$ is a smooth $`(7,2)`$ curve meeting $`L_0`$ in three points. It has four trisecants, namely the double line $`L_0`$ and the three rulings (images of $`(0,1)`$ curves in $`S_0`$) that meet $`L_0`$ at the points where $`C`$ meets $`L_0`$. This curve is different from the general ones described above, because three of the trisecants meet the fourth one. Because of the general result above, $`C`$ must arise by an elementary Gorenstein biliaison on $`S`$, but in this case the curve of degree $`3`$ in $`_0`$ will be a nonreduced curve containing a double structure on the line $`L_0`$.

Next we look at a general Castelnuovo surface $`S^{}`$. On this surface, there are three different kinds of smooth $`(7,2)`$ curves, distinguished by their self-intersections, namely

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill C_1& =\hfill & (4;2,1^5,0^2)\hfill \\ \hfill C_2& =\hfill & (5;2^4,1^3,0)\hfill \\ \hfill C_3& =\hfill & (5;1^4,2^4)\hfill \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill C_1^2& =\hfill & 7\hfill \\ \hfill C_2^2& =\hfill & 6\hfill \\ \hfill C_3^2& =\hfill & 5.\hfill \end{array}$$

Of these $`C_1`$ is obtained by an elementary Gorenstein biliaison on $`S^{}`$ from two skew lines, while $`C_2H`$ and $`C_3H`$ are not effective. Since we have seen above that every smooth $`(7,2)`$ curve arises by elementary Gorenstein biliaisons from a degree $`3`$ curve in $`_0`$, this gives examples of curves that may be obtained by two different routes by elementary Gorenstein biliaisons from curves of two different degrees in $`_0`$.

In fact, I claim that every general $`(7,2)`$ curve arises also as a curve of type $`C_1`$ on a smooth Castelnuovo surface. To prove this in detail is rather long, so I will just give a sketch. Start with a smooth $`(7,2)`$ curve $`C`$ on a smooth Del Pezzo surface $`S`$, say $`C=(4;2,1^3,0)`$ as before. Choose a twisted cubic curve $`D`$ and a conic $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ so that $`C+D+\mathrm{\Gamma }=3H`$. (For example $`D=(3;1^4,2)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(2;0,1^4)`$.) Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ be the plane containing $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then the two quadric hypersurfaces containing $`C`$ meet $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, so a linear combination of them contains $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. So we may assume $`S=F_2F_2^{}`$ where $`F_2`$ contains $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. By construction, there are cubic hypersurfaces $`F_3`$ containing $`C+D+\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Such an $`F_3`$ will meet $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ plus a line. Adjusting $`F_3`$ by a linear form times $`F_2^{}`$, we may assume that $`F_3`$ contains $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$. Now $`F_2F_3=\mathrm{\Pi }S^{}`$, where $`S^{}`$ is an ACM surface of degree $`5`$, hence a Castelnuovo surface. Now one can verify that $`C`$ on $`S^{}`$ is a curve with self-intersection $`7`$, like $`C_1`$ above, and that $`C_1H`$ is effective and represented by a curve of degree $`2`$ in $`_0`$.

In conclusion, we see that every smooth $`(7,2)`$ curve is in $`_1`$, and can be obtained by elementary Gorenstein biliaison from $`_0`$, in general by two different routes. This is in contrast to the $`(6,1)`$ case above, where the curves are divided into two types, distinguished by which component of $`_0`$ they arise from.

Example 4.6. We consider smooth $`(10,6)`$ curves in $`^4`$ (cf. Example $`3.8`$ above).

By Riemann–Roch applied to $`𝒪_C(1)`$ we see that an ACM $`(10,6)`$ curve is nonspecial. Also we see that $`𝒪_C(1)`$ is special if and only if $`𝒪_C(1)`$ is a canonical divisor, and this is equivalent to $`h^1(_C(1))=1`$. The $`(10,6)`$ curves in $`^4`$ with $`𝒪_C(1)`$ special are all projections of the canonical curves of genus $`6`$ in $`^5`$. Since these form an irreducible family, we see that their projections, the canonical $`(10,6)`$ curves in $`^4`$, form an irreducible family, and they all have $`h^1(_C(1))=1`$. A general such curve has Rao module $`k`$ in degree $`1`$, i.e., it is in $`_1`$. To see this, by semicontinuity, it is sufficient to exhibit one such. Let $`C=(7;2^9,0)`$ on a general Bordiga surface. This curve is the image of a plane septic curve with $`9`$ double points, embedded in $`^4`$ by the linear system of quartics passing through the double points (and one further point). These are adjoint curves to $`C`$ and so cut out the canonical linear series. Hence $`C`$ is a canonical curve. Now $`CH=(3;1^9,1)`$ is the disjoint union of a plane cubic curve and a line, which is a degree $`4`$ curve in $`_0`$. Hence $`C_1`$ is obtained by an elementary Gorenstein biliaison from $`_0`$.

Now let us consider $`(10,6)`$ curves in $`_2`$, i.e., with Rao module $`k`$ in degree $`2`$. Examples of such can be found on a general Castelnuovo surface $`S`$, for example $`C_1=(6;3,2,1^6)`$ and $`C_2=(6;2^4,1^4)`$. Note that the curves $`C_1`$ are trigonal, while the curves $`C_2`$ can have general moduli. Both types can be obtained by Gorenstein biliaison on $`S`$, since $`C_1H=(2;1^2,0^6)`$ and $`C_2H=(2;0,1^3,0^4)`$ are both $`(5,0)`$ curves, hence in $`_1`$.

An examination of curves of minimal genus in $`_1`$ and ACM curves of minimal genus in $`^3`$ shows that the only way to obtain a $`(10,6)`$ curve in $`_2`$ by Gorenstein biliaison is from a $`(5,0)`$ curve in $`_1`$ on a surface of degree $`5`$ and sectional genus $`2`$ in $`^4`$, like the Castelnuovo surfaces.

Another example of a $`(10,6)`$ curve in $`_2`$ is obtained by the curve $`C`$ formed by the intersection of a smooth quintic elliptic scroll $`V`$ with a hypersurface $`F`$ of degree $`2`$. If we take $`F`$ to be a smooth quadric hypersurface, then by Klein’s theorem \[14, II.Ex. $`6.5`$d\] it contains no surfaces of odd degree, so $`C`$ cannot be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaison from a curve in $`_1`$.

However one can show that $`C`$ is in the $`G`$-liaison class of two skew lines by the following method, suggested by the referee. First note that two general cubic hypersurfaces $`F_3,F_3^{}`$ containing $`V`$ will link $`V`$ to be a Veronese surface $`W`$ in $`^4`$. Thus $`C`$ is linked by the complete intersection $`F_2F_3F_3^{}`$ to a curve $`C^{}W`$, which is $`WF_2`$. The curve $`C^{}`$ is an $`(8,3)`$ curve, obtained from a plane curve of degree $`4`$ by the $`2`$-uple embedding of $`^2`$ and projection to $`^4`$.

Now $`W`$ is not an ACM surface, but if we take a hyperplane section $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=W^3`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a $`(4,0)`$ curve in $`^3`$. It is contained in a unique nonsingular quadric surface $`Q^3`$, and the union $`WQ`$, meeting along $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, will be an ACM surface of degree $`6`$ in $`^4`$. We regard $`C^{}W`$ as a curve on the surface $`WQ`$. Now one can show (I leave some details to the reader) that $`2HKC^{}`$ on the surface $`WQ`$ (where $`H,K`$ denote the hyperplane section and canonical divisor) is a curve $`D\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is a $`(4,0)`$ curve in $`^3`$, and $`D`$ is a conic, not in $`^3`$, meeting $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ in two points. Since $`2HK`$ is an arithmetically Gorenstein curve on $`WQ`$, we have thus linked $`C`$ to $`C^{}`$ and then to $`D\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$.

For the last step, we take a quadric surface $`Q^{}`$ containing $`D`$ and meeting the quadric $`Q`$ (which contains $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$) in a conic. Then $`QQ^{}`$ is a complete intersection quartic surface in $`^4`$, and on $`QQ^{}`$, $`D\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}H`$ is $`2`$ skew lines.

Thus $`C`$ is an example of a curve with Rao module $`k`$, that cannot be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaison from a minimal curve, and yet is in the $`G`$-liaison class of $`2`$ skew lines.

Example 4.7. For our last example, we consider smooth $`(11,7)`$ curves in $`_2`$. To construct such curves on a general Bordiga surface $`S`$, take $`C=(6;2^3,1^7)`$. This is an $`(11,7)`$ curve, and $`CH=(2;1^3,0^7)`$ is a smooth $`(5,0)`$ curve on $`S`$. Since $`(5,0)_1`$ by $`(4.3)`$ above, we see that $`C_2`$, and is obtained from a minimal curve by two elementary Gorenstein biliaisons.

Next, I claim the only way to obtain an $`(11,7)`$ curve in $`_2`$ by two elementary $`G`$-biliaisons is the one just described. Indeed, the curves of minimal genus in $`_1`$ of degrees $`4`$ to $`7`$ are $`(4,0)`$, $`(5,0)`$, $`(6,1)`$, $`(7,2)`$. The minimal genus of ACM curves in $`^3`$ of complementary degree are $`(7,5)`$, $`(6,3)`$, $`(5,2)`$, $`(4,1)`$, which will give rise respectively to curves $`(11,8)`$, $`(11,7)`$, $`(11,8)`$, $`(11,9)`$ in $`_2`$. So an $`(11,7)`$ curve obtained by elementary $`G`$-biliaisons must be on the Bordiga surface or its specialization.

Since $`h^0(𝒪_C(1))=5`$, we see that $`𝒪_C(1)`$ is nonspecial, so we can compute the dimension of the Hilbert scheme of $`(11,7)`$ curves in $`^4`$ (which is irreducible by Ein ), by the usual formula $`5d+1g`$. Thus the Hilbert scheme has dimension $`49`$.

Now let us count the curves obtained by the construction above. The Bordiga surface moves in a family of dimension $`36`$ (use, for example, the formula of Ellingsrud ). To find the dimension of the linear system $`|C|`$ on $`S`$, we use the exact sequence

$$0𝒪_S𝒪_S(C)𝒪_C(C)0.$$

Thus $`dim_S|C|=h^0(𝒪_C(C))`$. For the curve $`C`$ of type $`(6;2^3,1^7)`$ mentioned above, we find $`C^2=17`$, so the divisor $`C^2`$ is nonspecial on $`C`$, and by Riemann–Roch, $`h^0(𝒪_C(C))=C^2+1g=11`$. Thus the dimension of the family of all curves of this type on Bordiga surfaces is $`11+36=47`$. In particular, these curves are not general among all $`(11,7)`$ curves.

But we wish to show more, namely that a general $`(11,7)`$ curve does not lie on a Bordiga surface. So suppose now that $`C`$ is any $`(11,7)`$ curve on a Bordiga surface. I claim $`C^217`$. Indeed, we have $`2g2=C^2+C.K`$. On the Bordiga surface let $`C=(a;b_1,\mathrm{},b_{10})`$. The canonical divisor $`K`$ can be written $`K=(1;0^{10})H`$. So $`2g2=C^2+ad`$, and $`C^2=2g2+da=23a`$. But in order to get a curve of genus $`7`$, we must have $`a6`$. Thus $`C^217`$. Then the same argument as above shows that $`h^0(𝒪_C(C))11`$, and we get the same dimension count, unless $`𝒪_C(C)`$ is a special divisor. But in that case $`C^212`$, and by Clifford’s theorem $`h^0(𝒪_C(C))7`$. Thus a general $`(11,7)`$ curve does not lie on a Bordiga surface.

Next, observe that for any $`(11,7)`$ curve in $`^4`$, $`h^0(𝒪_C(2))=16`$, so necessarily $`h^1(_C(2))1`$. Since we have constructed curves $`C`$ with $`h^1(_C(2))=1`$ and the other $`h^1(_C(n))=0`$ for $`n2`$, we conclude by semicontinuity that the general $`(11,7)`$ curve in $`^4`$ has Rao module $`k`$ in degree $`2`$, i.e., it lies in $`_2`$. Since the general such curve does not lie on a Bordiga surface, by the above remarks, it cannot be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from $`_0`$.

It is conceivable that the general $`(11,7)`$ curve is linked by some ascending and descending $`G`$-liaisons to two skew lines, but this seems unlikely, so we propose the general $`(11,7)`$ curve in $`^4`$ as a possible curve with Rao module $`k`$, not in the $`G`$-liaison class of two skew lines.

## 5 Conclusion

The examples presented in this paper would lead me to expect that for ACM schemes of codimension $`3`$, some may be obtained by elementary Gorenstein biliaisons from a scheme of degree one; a broader class may be obtained by ascending and descending $`G`$-liaisons from a scheme of degree one; but that a general ACM scheme of high degree may not be in the $`G`$-liaison class of a complete intersection. Example $`3.9`$ shows that at least one of the Questions $`1.3`$a, $`1.3`$b has no for an answer. Namely, for the general ACM $`(20,26)`$ curve in $`^4`$, we must have either

* it is ACM and not glicci, or
* it is glicci, but cannot be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons from a curve.

For curves in $`^n`$, $`n4`$, with a given Rao module $`M`$, I would expect that the minimal curves form an infinite union of irreducible families; some curves in the family may be obtained by a sequence of ascending elementary Gorenstein biliaisons from a minimal curve; a larger class may be obtained by ascending and descending Gorenstein liaisons from a minimal curve; but that a general curve of high degree and genus with Rao module $`M`$ is not in the $`G`$-liaison class of a minimal curve. Example $`4.6`$ gives an example of a smooth $`(10,6)`$ curve with Rao module $`k`$, that is in the Gorenstein liaison class of a minimal curve, but cannot be obtained by ascending Gorenstein biliaison from a minimal curve. Example $`4.7`$ shows that either Question $`1.4`$ has no for an answer, or the deformation is necessary in Question $`1.5`$b. Indeed, for the general $`(11,7)`$ curve in $`^4`$ we must have either

* it has Rao module $`k`$, but is not in the $`G`$-liaison class of two skew lines, or
* it is in the liaison class of two skew lines, but cannot be obtained from a minimal curve by ascending Gorenstein biliaisons.

Based on this evidence, I would expect a no answer to Questions $`1.3`$, $`1.4`$, $`1.5b`$. I have no idea about Question $`1.2`$ since in this paper I used only strict Gorenstein liaisons and biliaisons. Also the question of even or odd liaison has not been addressed here, since it is irrelevant for ACM schemes and curves with Rao module $`k`$. This is a question that merits further study.