2

Let $f,g \in k[t]$, $k$ is a field of characteristic zero, $\deg(f)=n \geq 2$, $\deg(g)=m \geq 2$.

Is it possible to characterize all such $f$ and $g$ for which $k[f,g]$ is integrally closed in its field of fractions $k(f,g)$?

I do not mind to further assume that $k(f,g)=k(t)$ (but I do not want to assume that $k[f,g]=k[t]$, which makes my question trivial).

Thank you very much!

Edit: (i) This question is relevant.

(ii) If also $k(f,g)=k(t)$, then being integrally closed is equivalent to $k[f,g]=k[t]$. Indeed: (a) If $k[f,g]=k[t]$ then $k[f,g]$ is integrally closed (since $k[t]$ is). (b) If $k[f,g]$ is integrally closed then, in particular, since $t \in k(t)=k(f,g)$ (= the field of fractions of $k[f,g]$) and obviously $t$ is integral over $k[f,g]$ (for example, $t$ is a root of $f(T)-f \in k[f,g][T]$) hence $t \in k[f,g]$, so $k[f,g]=k[t]$.

For example: $f(t)=t^2+1$, $g(t)=t^3-4t$. We have, $t= \frac{t(t^2-4)}{t^2+1-5}=\frac{g}{f-5}$, so $k(f,g)=k(t)$. By Abhyankar-Moh-Suzuki theorem, $k[f,g] \neq k[t]$, so $k[f,g]$ is not integrally closed. Similarly, for every $f,g$ such that $k(f,g)=k(t)$ and one of the degrees does not divides the other, then $k[f,g]$ is not integrally closed.

(iii) If also $k(f,g)=k(t)$ and $k$ is algebraically closed, then being integrally closed is equivalent to $H(t)=(f(t),g(t))$ is injective and $H'(t)=(f'(t),g'(t)) \neq (0,0)$ for every $t \in k$. Indeed, $k[f,g]=k[t]$ is equivalent to the new conditions (it is important that $k$ is algebraically closed!!).

Edit: What if we replace $k$ by an integral domain $D$ (which is a $k$-algebra)? See also this question.

user237522
  • 6,467

1 Answers1

2

Here is an answer in the case where $k$ is algebraically closed. The parametric plane curve $(x,y) = (f(t), g(t))$ can be given implicitly as the vanishing locus of a polynomial $F \in k[x,y]$. Then $k[f,g]$ is integrally closed if and only if the affine plane curve $C: F(x,y) = 0$ is nonsingular. This occurs iff $F$, $F_x$, and $F_y$ don't vanish simultaneously, i.e., there is no $x_0, y_0 \in k$ such that $F(x_0, y_0) = F_x(x_0, y_0) = F_y(x_0, y_0) = 0$, where $F_x$ and $F_y$ denote the partials of $F$.

$k[f,g]$ is the coordinate ring for the plane curve $C: F(x,y) = 0$, and it is a standard result that nonsingularity corresponds to being integrally closed. (Cf., Corollary $13$ of $\S16.2$ of Dummit and Foote or Theorem I.5.1 of Hartshorne.)

Addendum: As you request in the comments, let $f(t) = t^2 +1$ and $g(t) = t^3 - 4t$. We form the ideal $I = (x - f(t), y - g(t))$ in the polynomial ring $k[t,x,y]$ with the elimination ordering $t > x > y$. Computing a Gröbner basis for $I$, we find that the elimination ideal $I \cap k[x,y]$ is generated by the polynomial $$ F = x^3 - 11 x^2 + 35 x - y^2 - 25 \, . $$ To determine if the curve $C: F = 0$ has any singular points, we compute a Gröbner basis for the ideal $(F, F_x, F_y)$ of $k[x,y]$, which produces $\{x - 5, y\}$. Thus the point $(5,0)$ is a singular point of $C$, so $k[f,g]$ is not integrally closed.

I used SageMath to compute all the above using the following code.

R.<t,x,y> = PolynomialRing(QQ,3,order="lex")
I = ideal([x - (t^2+1), y - (t^3-4*t)])
G = I.groebner_basis()
show(G)
F = G[-1]
J = ideal([F, F.derivative(x), F.derivative(y)])
show(J)
J.groebner_basis()

You can try it yourself in this SageMathCell.

Viktor Vaughn
  • 19,278
  • 2
    By the way, the first comment which is implicitization (a basic result in Ellimination theory, see p.128 Cox, Little et al. Ideals, Varieties and Algorithms) will only require that $k$ is infinite. And I think this characterisation of smooth curve and normality need not require algebraic closedeness (at most the field is perfect but we have this for free here) – quantum Jun 05 '18 at 06:33
  • Thank you very much both of you! The answer (together with the comment) is exactly what I was looking for. (I think that once I have asked a somewhat similar question, but with two variables, and got a somewhat similar answer). – user237522 Jun 05 '18 at 12:15
  • Please, to make sure that I understand how to apply the above criterion in practice, could one of you (or someone else) show how to apply it in a specific case, for example, $f(t)=t^2+1$, $g(t)=t^3-4t$. – user237522 Jun 05 '18 at 12:26
  • @quantum I was hoping I wouldn't need the algebraically closed hypothesis, but I'm still a bit worried about rationality. Isn't it possible for a curve defined over $k$ to have a singular point that only appears over an extension of $k$? The Jacobian criterion works regardless of the field over which the point is defined, but the difference between $k[f,g]$ and $\overline{k}[f,g]$ worries me a little... – Viktor Vaughn Jun 05 '18 at 18:47
  • @Quasicoherent, please, could you apply your criterion to my above example? I am a little confused about what is $F$. – user237522 Jun 05 '18 at 19:09
  • @Quasicoherent, thank you very much for your explanation! Is it possible to characterize all $f$ and $g$ such that $k[f,g]$ is integrally closed, in terms of their coefficients and degrees? I guess this is complicated. Perhaps in low degrees something can be done? – user237522 Jun 05 '18 at 19:18
  • Your answer is very helpful! Thanks again. In SageMath: Are the coefficients in $\mathbb{C}$? – user237522 Jun 05 '18 at 19:28
  • @user237522 You're very welcome. I doubt there's a criterion that can be stated in terms of the coefficients of the polynomials, but I could be wrong. I defined the polynomials over $\mathbb{Q}$. – Viktor Vaughn Jun 05 '18 at 19:45
  • @Quasicoherent, please: What if $f$ and $g$ are odd polynomials? Probably this is still too general, and the answer depends on the specific given polynomials? So what if one of ${f,g}$ is of the following form: $f(t)=t^3+at$? (and $g$ is also odd, but of any odd degree). – user237522 Sep 15 '18 at 22:59
  • Well, I played a little with SageMathCell and unfortunately it seems that considering odd polynomials does not help much..even the special case $f(t)=t^3+t$.. – user237522 Sep 16 '18 at 21:31
  • I don't have a counterexample off the top of my head, but as you found, I doubt restricting the parity of the degree of the polynomial will change much. – Viktor Vaughn Sep 16 '18 at 22:08
  • @André3000, please, do you think that your above answer will help to answer the following question or applying it will not be so useful for high derees https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3053506/concerning-the-subalgebra-generated-by-two-elements Thank you – user237522 Dec 27 '18 at 16:35