arXiv:2002.10424v2 [math.AG] 25 Jul 2021 fvroslc nteGohnic ibr cee[ scheme Hilbert Grothendieck the in loci various of of eue ooti emti n leri nomto nteHlets Hilbert the on information algebraic lexicogra [ and the connectedness about geometric Often, example obtain point. to lexicographic used unique be a possess algebra, of ssot if smooth is emnsacnnclcmoeto Hilb fa the of is component theorem canonical Reeves–Stillman a the termines of consequence important An [ forms of ranks of study the recently, more Hilb Then applications. several and theory general the for of subschemes closed the n tlmn[ Stillman and [ gies classe notable Several [ polynomials. Macaulay Hilb Hilbert by including schemes, and introduced functions were ideals Hilbert Lexicographic sify them. on points Hilb lsi xml steGohnic ibr ceeHilb scheme Hilbert Grothendieck the is example classic oet h hoe sueu nvrosstain,eg nquestion in e.g. situations, various in useful [ is ness theorem The ponent. rpi da;rdcbeshm;etro algebra. exterior scheme; reducible ideal; graphic h ooeeu daswt xdHletfunction Hilbert fixed a with ideals homogeneous the ocnie h oegnrlsadr rddHletscheme Hilbert graded standard general more the consider to oadi h td fHletshms ti eeca oietf disting identify to beneficial is it schemes, Hilbert of study the in aid To e od n phrases. and words Key ibr cee r udmna aaee pcsi leri ge algebraic in spaces parameter fundamental are schemes Hilbert p H NTESOTNS FLXCGAHCPIT ON POINTS LEXICOGRAPHIC OF SMOOTHNESS THE ON 2020 yia plctoso tnadgae ibr cee nld th include schemes Hilbert graded standard of applications Typical . p h GMP11 p SS20 p P R ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics n Abstract. h eiorpi on a esnua,adi a i nmul in Ma lie of can and Peeva–Stillman it of and questions singular, answer e We be and components. can rings point polynomial of lexicographic schemes the cont Hilbert By graded H smooth. standard Grothendieck is point in the lexicographic for the that Stillman investigation states and which Our Reeves of algebras. theorem exterior famous and rings polynomial q q where , , sawy moh h euti atclrysrn,sneHilb since strong, particularly is result The smooth. always is R21 , n MP12 RS97 ď , S20 IVKRMUA N LSI SAMMARTANO ALESSIO AND RAMKUMAR RITVIK [ 2 R esuytegoer fsadr rddHletshmsof schemes Hilbert graded standard of geometry the study We :telxcgahcpito h rtedekHletscheme Hilbert Grothendieck the on point lexicographic the ]: .Afnaetlrsl nti otx a rvdb Reeves by proved was context this in result fundamental A ]. ,rtoaiy[ rationality ], F68 saplnma igand ring polynomial a is p p ,btohriei a aeabtaysnuaiis[ singularities arbitrary have can it otherwise but ], tnadgae ibr cee eiorpi component; lexicographic scheme; Hilbert graded Standard P P n n q IBR SCHEMES HILBERT ihafie ibr polynomial Hilbert fixed a with and PS05 1. H LR11 Introduction h , H66 p R rmr:1C5 eodr:1F0 35,15A75. 13F55, 13F20, Secondary: 14C05; Primary: q ,adi xlctcntutos[ constructions explicit in and ], ,irdcbecmoet [ components irreducible ], 1 where p p P BB20 n q nw stelxcgahccom- lexicographic the as known , R h , saplnma igo nexterior an or ring polynomial a is sasffiinl ag truncation large sufficiently a is HMV20 h CEVV09 nagae ring graded a in p p P ]. at eso that, show we rast, smtvtdb a by motivated is n p p q tro algebras, xterior p H il irreducible tiple oee,i suseful is it However, . P , [ clagan–Smith. letscheme, ilbert DJNT17 G61 h n p q R saseilcase special a is q ,parametrizing ], R95 parametrizing , hcpitcan point phic tta tde- it that ct M27 R mty The ometry. fsmooth- of s fHilbert of s ,adsyzy- and ], , e [ see ; hm,for cheme, G08 E12 oclas- to ] study e ,and, ], uished , HS04 p lexico- V06 R21 p P n ]. ]. q ] 2 R.RAMKUMAR,A.SAMMARTANO

In some sense, the Reeves–Stillman theorem and Hartshorne’s connectedness the- orem are the main general tools available in the complicated study of the geog- raphy of Hilbp Pn . A version of the Reeves–Stillman theorem holds for toric Hilbert schemes,p whereq the role of the lexicographic point is played by the toric point [PS02], and for multigraded Hilbert schemes in two variables, where the role of the lexicographic point is played by lex-most points [MS10]. It is natural to ask whether the Reeves–Stillman theorem holds for standard graded Hilbert schemes Hh R , see [GMP11, p. 157]. The most prominent cases of interest are that of the polynomialp q ring R S, which provides the most natural generalization of Hilbp Pn , and the case of“ the exterior algebra R E, where the tangent space enjoysp extraq structure in terms of Gr¨obner flips [PS07“ ]. More generally, one would like to know whether the lexicographic point establishes a canonical component of Hh R . In this paper we answer these questions negatively. For the polynomial ring, wep proveq in Section 3 the following result, which settles a question of [MS10, p. 1610]. Theorem 1. Let S k x,y,z and h 1, 3, 4, 4, 3, 3, 3,... . The standard graded Hilbert scheme Hh S“ isr the unions of“ two p irreducible componentsq of dimension 8, and the lexicographicp q point lies in their intersection; in particular, the lexicographic point is singular. Moreover, in Section 4 we show the existence of standard graded Hilbert schemes whose lexicographic point is not even Cohen–Macaulay, and we also show that this pathological behavior may occur even when the lexicographic point is a limit of points parametrizing reduced subschemes. For the exterior algebra, we prove in Section 5 the following result, which settles a question of [PS07, p. 546]. Theorem 2. Let E k5 and h 1, 5, 7, 2 . The standard graded Hilbert h “ “ p q scheme H E is the unionŹ of two irreducible components of dimension 14 and 15, and the lexicographicp q point lies in their intersection; in particular, the lexicographic point is singular.

2. Preliminaries In this section we fix some notation and terminology. Throughout the paper k denotes an algebraically closed field with char k 2. All rings and ideals in this paper are N-graded k-vector spaces, and we willp q omit ‰ the word “graded”. We only consider algebras R that are finitely generated in degree 1, mainly the polynomial ring S and the exterior algebra E, and their quotients. We denote by Vd the graded component of degree d Z of a vector space V . We P use f1,...,fm to denote the k-linear span of elements f1,...,fm. x y The Hilbert function of an algebra R is the sequence dimk Rd : d N . We only consider Hilbert functions of algebras, therefore, by abusep of terminology,P q when I is an ideal, the phrase “Hilbert function of I” refers to the Hilbert function of the quotient algebra by I. We denote by Hh R the standard graded Hilbert scheme parametriz- ing ideals of R withp Hilbertq function h [HS04]. We denote by Hilbp Pn the Grothendieck Hilbert scheme parametrizing closed subschemes of pPn qwith Hilbert polynomial p, equivalently, saturated ideals with Hilbert polynomial p. ON THE SMOOTHNESS OF LEXICOGRAPHIC POINTS ON HILBERT SCHEMES 3

When R is a quotient of S, the h-vector h0,h1,...,hs of R is the list of co- efficients of the numerator of the Hilbert seriesp of R in itsq reduced rational form. s We have deg R hi. Since the Hilbert function of R is determined by its p q “ i“0 h-vector and Krull dimension,ř h-vectors provide a convenient notation to deal with non-Artinian algebras. We fix the lexicographic order among monomials of S or E. A lexicographic ideal is a monomial ideal L such that each Ld is spanned by the dimk Ld largest monomials of degree d. Classical results of Macaulay and Kruskal–Katona state that, for all h such that Hh R , there exists a unique lexicographic ideal L Hh R , for both R S andp qR ‰ HE. See [GMP11] for more details. P p q “ “ We let inlex I denote the initial ideal of an ideal I. There is a one-parameter p q family whose general fiber is I and whose special fiber is inlex I ; this phenomenon is known as Gr¨obner degeneration. p q We denote by Gr r, V , respectively Gr r, n , the Grassmannian variety parametriz- ing r-dimensional subspacesp q of V , respectivelyp q of kn. Recall that dim Gr r, n r n r . p q “ p ´ q A pencil of quadrics of R is a 2-dimensional subspace V R2. Ď 3. The standard graded Hilbert scheme of the polynomial ring This section is devoted to the proof of Theorem 1. Let S k x,y,z be the polynomial ring in 3 variables over k. We consider the standard“ gradedr s Hilbert scheme H Hh S , parametrizing the ideals of S with Hilbert function “ p q h 1, 3, 4, 4, 3, 3, 3,... “ p q in other words ideals I S such that Ď d 2 I0 I1 0, dimk I2 2, dimk I3 6, dimk Id ` 3 for d 4. “ “ “ “ “ ˆ 2 ˙ ´ ě Since the ideals parametrized by H are not saturated, taking saturation defines a non-trivial map sat : H Hilb3 P2 . The main idea of the proof is to understand H by studying the fibersÑ of thisp map,q and induce a stratification of H from one of Hilb3 P2 . We begin by collecting basic facts about Hilb3 P2 . p q p q Lemma 3.1. The Hilbert scheme Hilb3 P2 is a smooth irreducible 6-fold. It is stratified by h-vectors into locally closed subschemesp q 3 2 (3.1) Hilb P H 1 2 H 1 1 1 p q“ p , q p , , q š where Hp1,2q is open and Hp1,1,1q is an irreducible divisor. The subscheme Hp1,1,1q is the locus of complete intersections of degrees 1, 3 , while Hp1,2q is the locus of codimension 2 ideals of minors of 2 3 matricest of linearu forms. ˆ Proof. The first statement is [F68, Theorem 2.4]. Every J Hilb3 P2 is saturated, hence Cohen–Macaulay, of codimension 2 and degree 3. TheP only posp sibleq h-vectors are 1, 2 and 1, 1, 1 , and this yields the stratification (3.1). The ideals J Hp1,1,1q p q p q 2 P 3 are of the form J ℓ,c where ℓ Gr 1,S1 P and c Gr 1,S3 ℓS2 P . “ p q x yP p 3q– x yP2 p { q– It follows that Hp1,1,1q is isomorphic to a P -bundle on a P , and therefore it is a closed irreducible 5-dimensional subscheme of Hilb3 P2 . The last statement follows from the Hilbert–Burch theorem. p q  We define three loci in the Hilbert scheme H, refining the stratification of Hilb3 P2 by taking into account the codimension of the quadratic part of an ideal. p q 4 R.RAMKUMAR,A.SAMMARTANO

Definitions 3.2. Let X be the closure in H of the locus X ˝ consisting of ideals I such that the ideal I2 has codimension 2. Let X 1 be the locusp q of ideals I H such that sat I has h-vector 1, 2 and the P p q p q ideal I2 has codimension 1. Letp Yqbe the locus of ideals I H such that sat I has h-vector 1, 1, 1 . P p q p q Proposition 3.3. The locus X H is irreducible of dimension 8. Ď ˝ ˝ Proof. We consider the saturation map X H 1 2 . Let I X and denote Ñ p , q P sat I J. By definition, the ideal I2 has codimension 2, hence it is a complete p q“ p q intersection of 2 quadrics. Comparing the Hilbert functions of I and I2 , we deduce 2 p q that I I2,J4 , with I2 Gr 2,J2 P . By Lemma 3.1, every ideal J Hp1,2q is generated“ p byq quadrics.P Moreover,p q– by lower semicontinuity of codimension,P a general V Gr 2,J2 generates an ideal of codimension 2. Thus, the fiber over P p q 2 ˝ each J Hp1,2q is an open subset of a P . By Lemma 3.1 we conclude that X , and thereforeP also X , are irreducible of dimension 8. 

Lemma 3.4. Every ideal J H 1 2 is in the GL3-orbit of one of the following P p , q (1) xy,xz,yz , (2) px2,xy,yzq, (3) px2, xy, xzq y2 , (4) px2,xy,y2 `. q p q Proof. The subscheme V J P2 has dimension 0 and degree 3, so it is supported p qĎ s at 1, 2, or 3 points. More specifically, J i“1qi where each qi is primary and “X s V qi is supported at an isolated point, s 3, and deg V qi 3. If s 3 and p q ď i“1 p q“ “ the points are non-collinear, then we may change coordinatesř to have J x, y x, z y,z xy,xz,yz . On the other hand, if the points are collinear,“ p thenqX p q X p q “ p q J ℓ,c with ℓ S1,c S3, thus J has h-vector 1, 1, 1 . If s 2, then we may “ p q P P p q “ assume deg V q1 1 and deg V q2 2. Up to changes of coordinates, we have p q “ 2 p q “ 2 q1 x, y and either q2 x, z or q2 x ,z . However, the former case cannot occur,“ p sinceq J contains no“ linear p q form, therefore“ p q J x, y x2,z x2,xy,yz . Finally, the cases with s 1 follow e.g. from [MM18“, p Theoremq X p 2.1].q “ p q “ Lemma 3.5. We have X 1 X . Ď 1 1 Proof. The saturation map X Hp1,2q stratifies X by the GL3-orbits of satu- XÑ1 X 1 X 1 X 1 rations. There are four strata p1q, p2q, p3q, p4q, corresponding to the orbits of Lemma 3.4, and it suffices to show that X 1 X for each i. Equivalently, it suffices piq Ď to show that, for each of the four ideals J of Lemma 3.4 and every I X 1 with sat I J, we have I X . We also point out that for all I X 1, sinceP the ideal p q “ P P I2 has codimension 1, I2 is spanned by two reducible quadrics with a common p q factor, i.e., I2 is a pencil of reducible quadrics. Stratum X 1 : Let I X 1 with sat I J xy,xz,yz . There are 3 pencils p1q P p q “ “ p q of reducible quadrics in J2, namely xy, xz , xy,yz , and xz,yz , so we may x y x y x y assume I2 xy, xz . Comparing the Hilbert functions of I and J we deduce that I xy,xz,yz“x αy y βz ,y3z,y2z2,yz3 for some α, β k. In order to show that “ p ` q P X 1 ` X , it suffices to show that I is a˘ limit of ideals of X ˝ when α, β 0, since p1q Ď ‰ X is closed. We claim that a desired limit is I t xy ty αy βz ,xz,y3z,y2z2,yz3 xz,xy,yz αy βz ,y3z,y2z2,yz3 . p q“ ` p ` q ÝÑ p p ` q q ` ˘ ON THE SMOOTHNESS OF LEXICOGRAPHIC POINTS ON HILBERT SCHEMES 5

In fact, the saturation of I t is sat I t xy tαy2,xz,yz , which is the ideal of minors of the matrix p q p p qq “ p ` q x y 0 ˆ tαy y z˙ ´ and therefore has Hilbert function 1, 3, 3, 3,... . Comparing I t and sat I t p q p q p p qq we see that I t has Hilbert function h. Moreover, the ideal I t 2 clearly has codimension 2,p thusq I t X ˝. p p q q X 1 p qPX 1 2 Stratum p2q: Let I with sat I J x ,xy,yz . The pencils of reducible 2 P p q“ “ p q quadrics in J2 are x , xy and xy,yz . If I2 xy,yz then we conclude that I xy,yz,x2 αx x βz , xy4, x3z,x x2z2 yfor some“α, x β k.y When α, β 0, we have “ p ` q P ‰ I X` since, as in the previous paragraph,˘ it is a limit of ideals in X ˝: P I t yz tx αx βz , xy, x4, x3z, x2z2 yz,xy,x2 αx βz , x4, x3z, x2z2 . p q“ ` p ` q ÝÑ p ` q ` 2 2 ˘ ` 3 2 2 3 ˘ If I2 x , xy then I x ,xy,yz αy βz ,y z,y z ,yz , and the following “ x y “ p ` q limit for α, β 0 shows that` I X ˘ ‰ P I t x2 t αy βz z,xy,y3z,y2z2,yz3 x2,xy,yz αy βz ,y3z,y2z2,yz3 . p q“ ` p ` q ÝÑ p ` q ` X 1 X 1 ˘ ` 2 2 ˘2 Stratum p3q: Let I with sat I J x , xy, xz y . Since xz y P p q “ “ p ` 2 q ` is irreducible, the only pencil of reducible quadrics in J2 is x , xy . We get I x2, xy, xz y2 αy βz xz y2 y,z 2 and, as in thex previousy paragraphs,“ p ` qp ` q ` p ` q q `the following limit for α, β ˘ 0 shows that` I X ‰ P 2 I t x2 t αy2 βzy , xy t αyz βz2 y2 xz x,y,z p q “ ` p ` q ´ p ` q ` p ` q 2 `x2, xy, y2 xz αy βz y2 xz˘ y,z . ` ˘ Ñ p ` qp ` q ` p ` q X 1 ` X 1 ˘ 2 2` ˘ Stratum p4q: Let I with sat I J x ,xy,y . Up to changes of coor- P 2 p q“ “ p 2 2q 4 3 2 2 dinates, we may assume I2 x , xy , then I x ,xy,y αy βz ,y ,y z,y z , and the following limit for α,“x β 0 showsy that“I p X p ` q q ‰ P I t x2 ty αy βz ,xy,y4,y3z,y2z2 x2,xy,y2 αy βz ,y4,y3z,y2z2 . p q“ ` p ` q ÝÑ p ` q ` ˘ ` ˘

Proposition 3.6. The locus Y H is closed and irreducible of dimension 8. Ď Proof. We have a map Y H 1 1 1 defined by I sat I . An ideal J H 1 1 1 is Ñ p , , q ÞÑ p q P p , , q of the form J ℓ1,c1 with ℓ1 S1,c1 S3 ℓ1 . For every I Y with sat I J, “ p q P P zp q P p q“ by comparing Hilbert functions, we must have I ℓ1ℓ2,ℓ1ℓ3,c2,J4 where “ p q 2 J3 1 ℓ2,ℓ3 Gr 2,S1 P , c2 Gr 1, Gr 1, 2 P . x yP p q– x yP ˆ ℓ1ℓ2,ℓ1ℓ3 S1 ˙ “ p q– x y 1 2 Thus, the fiber over each J Hp1,1,1q is a P -bundle over a P , and by Lemma 3.1 we conclude that Y is irreducibleP of dimension 8. Note that Y H is closed, since 3 2 Ď it is the preimage of the closed subset H 1 1 1 Hilb P .  p , , q Ď p q We are ready to state the main result of this section. Theorem 1. The standard graded Hilbert scheme H Hh S is a union of two irreducible components of dimension 8. The lexicographic“ pointp q of H lies in the intersection of the two components, and is a singular point. 6 R.RAMKUMAR,A.SAMMARTANO

Proof. By Definitions 3.2 and Lemma 3.5 we have H X Y, and it follows from Propositions 3.3 and 3.6 that X and Y are distinct irreducible“ Y components. The lexicographic ideal of H is L x2, xy, xz2,y4,y3z . Since sat L x, y3 , we have L Y. Now consider J x“2, p xy xz y2 xyq x,y,z 2. Itsp q saturation “ p q sat J xP2, xy xz y2, xy is“ the p ideal` of minors´ q` of p q p q “ p ` ´ q x y y z ` ˆ0 x y ˙ and this shows that J has Hilbert function h. Moreover, J X ˝ because the two P quadrics in J form a regular sequence. We have L inlex J , so by Gr¨obner degeneration we obtain L X as desired. “ p q  P 4. A second construction of a singular lexicographic point for the polynomial ring In the previous section we constructed a singular standard graded Hilbert scheme starting from the Grothendieck Hilbert scheme of points which contains the first infinitesimal neighborhood of the origin in P2. In this section, by analyzing an analogous situation for P3, we present a second construction of a standard graded Hilbert scheme that is even more pathological, since it shows that singular lexico- graphic points may lie on components whose general points parametrize (saturated ideals of) reduced schemes, and that lexicographic points may have non-Cohen– Macaulay singularities. Let S k x,y,z,w be the polynomial ring in 4 variables over k, and consider the standard“ r graded Hilberts scheme H Hh S , parametrizing the ideals of S with Hilbert function h 1, 4, 4, 4,... . The“ lexicographicp q ideal of H is “ p q L x2,xy,xz,xw,y2,yz,yw2,z4 . “ p q As before, we consider the saturation map sat : H Hilb4 P3 . It is well-known 4 Ñ p q that Hilb P3 is irreducible of dimension 12, and it contains an open smooth p q 3 subscheme U1 parametrizing reduced collections of 4 points in P . Moreover, h is the “generic” Hilbert function in Hilb4 P3 , that is, there is an open subscheme 4 3 p q U2 Hilb P such that every I U2 has Hilbert function h. The restriction of Ď p q P ´1 the saturation map to the open subscheme sat U2 H is the identity map, and p qĎ ´1 therefore an isomorphism. Denote by X the closure in H of sat U2 . By the discussion above, X is an irreducible component of H of dimension 12.p q Lemma 4.1. The lexicographic ideal L belongs to the component X .

Proof. By [CS05, Theorem 1.2] we have inlex I L for general I U1, hence also p q“ P for general I U2, and this implies the desired statement.  P We now adopt the strategy of [I72]: we describe a locus too large to fit in the (smoothable) component X , yielding that H is reducible and non-equidimensional. As a byproduct of this description, we also see that the lexicographic ideal must belong to the intersection of at least two components. Proposition 4.2. There exists a component Y of H which contains the lexico- graphic ideal L and has dim Y 14. ě Proof. We describe a construction of ideals I H. Let ℓ1,ℓ2 S1 be linearly 1 P1 P1 independent and set I ℓ1,ℓ2 ; we have dimk I 7. Let V I be a subspace “ p q 2 “ Ď 2 ON THE SMOOTHNESS OF LEXICOGRAPHIC POINTS ON HILBERT SCHEMES 7

2 1 such that dimk V 6 and the ideal V has codimension 2, and set I V, I3 . “ p q 1 2 “ p q Finally, let q S4 be a quartic that is regular on S I , and set I I q . The P { 1 “ ` p q graded components of I are I0 I1 0, I2 V , and Id I , q d ℓ1,ℓ2, q d for “ “ “ “ p 3 q “ p q d 3. Since dimk S2 10 and ℓ1,ℓ2, q has Hilbert function 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4,... , it followsě that I has Hilbert“ functionp h, soq I H. p q Denote by Z H be the locus of idealsP of this form. Thus, ideals I Z are Ď P parametrized by choosing a subspace ℓ1,ℓ2 Gr 2,S1 Gr 2, 4 , a general sub- 1 6 x yP p q– p q1 4 space V Gr 6, I P , and a general subspace q Gr 1,S4 I P . More- P p 2q– x yP p { 4q– over, all the choices are unique since ℓ1,ℓ2 ?I, V I2, and q I4 ℓ1,ℓ2 4. This shows that the locus Z is irreduciblep ofq“ dimension“ 4 6 4x y“14. Finally,{p weq `2 ` “ 2 observe that L Z by choosing ℓ1,ℓ2 x, y , V x ,xy,xz,xw,y ,yz and q z4. This concludesP the proof.x y“x y “ x y  “ We obtain the main result of this section. Theorem 4.3. Let S k x,y,z,w and let h 1, 4, 4, 4,... . The standard graded Hilbert scheme Hh S “is reducible.r s There exists“ p a 12-dimensionalq irreducible com- ponent X , whose generalp q point parametrizes radical ideals, and an irreducible com- ponent Y, which parametrizes non-saturated ideals and has dimension at least 14. The lexicographic point lies in their intersection; in particular, the lexicographic point is singular and not Cohen–Macaulay.

5. The standard graded Hilbert scheme of the exterior algebra

This section is devoted to the proof of Theorem 2. Let E E1 be the exterior “ algebra of a 5-dimensional vector space E1 e1,e2,e3,e4,e5 Źover k. We consider “x y the standard graded Hilbert scheme H Hp1,5,7,2q E , parametrizing the ideals of E with Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 , in other“ wordsp idealsq I E such that p q Ď I0 I1 0, dimk I2 3, dimk I3 8, I4 E4, I5 E5. “ “ “ “ “ “ We begin by reviewing some basic facts about exterior algebras. A quadric q E2 can be identified with a 5 5 skew-symmetric matrix, and thus it has P ˆ even rank. More specifically, we have rank q 2 if and only if q ℓ1 ℓ2 p q “ “ ^ for some ℓi E1 such that ℓ1,ℓ2 ker q : E1 E3 Gr 2, E1 . Likewise, P x y “ p Ñ q P p q we have rank q 4 if and only if q ℓ1 ℓ2 ℓ3 ℓ4 for some ℓi E1 with p q “ 2 “ ^ ` ^ P ℓ1,ℓ2,ℓ3,ℓ4 ker q : E1 E5 Gr 4, E1 . x y“ p Ñ qP p q Lemma 5.1. Let ℓ1,...,ℓ5 E1, let q, q1, q2 E2, and let V E1 be a subspace. P P Ď (1) q1, q2 is a pencil of rank 2 quadrics q1, q2 ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3 for some x y ôx y“x ^ ^ y ℓi E1 such that dimk ℓ1,ℓ2,ℓ3 3. (2) rankP q 2 q2 0. x y“ p qď ô “ 2 (3) Let q ℓ1 ℓ2 be of rank 2, then q V ℓ1,ℓ2 V . “ ^ P ô 2 P (4) Let q ℓ1 ℓ2 ℓ3 ℓ4 be of rank 4,Ź then q V ℓ1,ℓ2,ℓ3,ℓ4 V . “ ^ ` ^ P 2 ô P (5) Let q ℓ1 ℓ2 ℓ3 ℓ4 be of rank 4, then ℓ5 qŹ 0 ℓ5 ℓ1,ℓ2,ℓ3,ℓ4 . “ ^ ` ^ ^ “ ô Px y Proof. The statements follow from the classification of quadrics discussed above. For instance, (1) follows by inspecting the possible intersections of two subspaces V1, V2 Gr 2, E1 . For item (4), the backward direction is obvious, while the P p q 2 2 4 forward direction follows since if q V then q ℓ1 ℓ2 ℓ3 ℓ4 V .  P “ ^ ^ ^ P A central theme in this section is theŹ classification of ideals based on theŹ existence of pencils of rank 2 quadrics. 8 R.RAMKUMAR,A.SAMMARTANO

Lemma 5.2. Let I E be an ideal with Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 . If I contains no Ď 2 p q pencil of rank 2 quadrics, then I2 V E2 for some subspace V Gr 4, E1 . Ď Ď P p q Proof. Let I2 q1, q2, q3 . The idealŹ I contains rank 4 quadrics, hence we may “ x y 2 assume q1 e1 e2 e3 e4. We claim that I2 V where V e1,e2,e3,e4 . “ ^ ` ^ Ď 2 “x y We write q2 p2 ℓ2 e5, q3 p3 ℓ3 e5 whereŹ p2,p3 V and ℓ2,ℓ3 V . “ ` ^3 “ ` ^ P 3 P Observe that q1 V V I3. Taking the image of I3 EŹ3 modulo V we ^ “ 2Ď 2 Ď obtain a subspace U e5Ź V e5 such that U V and dimk U dimŹ k I3 3 ^ Ď ^ Ď “ ´ dimk V 8 4 4. SinceŹI3 contains e5 q1, q2, qŹ3 and V q2, q3 , computing “ ´ 3“ ^x y ^x y imagesŹ modulo V we see that U contains q1,p2,p3 and V ℓ2,ℓ3 . We claim x y ^x y that ℓ2 ℓ3 Ź0. The linear forms ℓ2,ℓ3 V cannot be linearly independent, “ “ P otherwise U would contain the 5-dimensional subspace V ℓ2,ℓ3 . Thus ℓ2,ℓ3 are ^x y linearly dependent and, up to subtracting a multiple of q2 from q3 or viceversa, we may assume that ℓ3 0. Assume by contradiction ℓ2 0. Then V ℓ2 has “ ‰ ^ dimension 3. Moreover, q1 V ℓ2 since q1 has rank 4 and thus it is not reducible. R ^ Since dimk U 4, we conclude that U q1 V ℓ2, hence p2,p3 q1 V ℓ2. “ “x y` ^ Px y` ^ We may subtract multiples of q1 from q2, q3 and assume that p2,p3 V ℓ2. But P ^ this means that p2,p3 are divisible by ℓ2, hence the same is true for q2, q3, and they form a pencil of quadrics, contradiction. 2 We have proved that ℓ2 ℓ3 0, which implies q2, q3 V as claimed.  “ “ P Inspired by Lemma 5.2, we define the following two lociŹ in the Hilbert scheme. Definitions 5.3. Let X be the closure in H of the locus X ˝ consisting of ideals

I ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3, q “ p ^ ^ q where ℓ1,ℓ2,ℓ3 E1, q E2. Let Y be theP closureP in H of the locus Y˝ consisting of ideals

I q1, q2, q3,c “ p q 2 where q1, q2, q3 E2, c E3 are such that I2 V for some V Gr 4, E1 , but 2 P P Ď P p q I2 W for all W Gr 3, E1 . Ź Ę P p q Ź 2 Lemma 5.4. Let U Gr 3, E2 be such that dimk U E1 7. Then U W P p q 2 p ^ qě Ď for some W Gr 3, E1 if and only if U 0. Ź P p q “ 2 Proof. One direction is obvious: if U W for some W Gr 3, E1 , then 2 4 Ď 2 P p q U W 0. Conversely, assume U Ź W for all W Gr 3, E1 , it suffices Ď “ Ę P p 2 q to showŹ that U contains a quadric q with rankŹ q 4, since then q 0. Assume by contradiction rank q 2 for all q U. Thenp q“ any 2 quadrics in‰ U share a p q ď P common factor, and without loss of generality U e1 e2,e1 e3, q . Since q 2 “ x ^ ^ y R e1,e2,e3 , we may assume q ℓ1 e4. If ℓ1 e1 , then dimk U E1 6, x y “ ^ x y“x y p ^ q“ Źwhereas if ℓ1 e1 , then rank e1 ℓ2 ℓ1 e4 4 for suitable ℓ2 e2,e3 , yielding a contradictionx y‰x y in eitherp case.^ ` ^ q “ P x y Lemma 5.5. Let I E be an ideal with Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 containing a pencil of rank 2 quadrics.Ď Then I lies in X Y. p q Y Proof. Up to changing coordinates, we may assume that I2 e1 e2,e1 e3, q , 1 1 2 “x ^ ^ y q e1 ℓ1 q , ℓ1 0,e4 and q V with V e2,e3,e4,e5 . Observe that “ ^ ` Pt u P “x y the following subspaces of I3 are disjointŹ 1 1 1 1 U e1 e2,e1 e3 E1,U e2 q ,e3 q ,e4 q ,e5 q . “x ^ ^ y^ “x ^ ^ ^ ^ y ON THE SMOOTHNESS OF LEXICOGRAPHIC POINTS ON HILBERT SCHEMES 9

1 Since dimk U 5, dimk I3 8, we deduce dimk U 3. Modulo e1 this yields 1 “ “ 1 ď 1 dimk q V 3, which in turn implies rank q 2. Write q ℓ2 ℓ3 where p ^ q ď p q ď “ ^ ℓ2,ℓ3 V . We distinguish three cases. P 1 Case 1: Suppose first that ℓ1 0. Then q 0, and consider the subspace “ ‰ W e1,e2,e3,ℓ2,ℓ3 E1. If dimk W 5, then we may assume ℓ2 e4,ℓ3 e5. “x yĎ “ “ ˝ “ In this case the ideal I2 has Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 , so I I2 X X . p q p q “ p q P Ď If dimk W 4, then we may assume W e1,e2,e3,e4 . Thus ℓ2,ℓ3 e2,e3,e4 , ď Ďx y Px y and we may assume ℓ2 e2,e3 . Changing coordinates in e2,e3 , we may further Px1 y x y assume ℓ2 e2, so that q e2 αe3 βe4 for some α, β k with α, β 0, 0 . “ “ ^ p ` q P p q ‰ p q The ideal I2 has Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 3 for every α, β, so I I2,c for some p q p q “˝ p q c E3. If β 0, then, using Lemma 5.1 (3), we see that I Y Y. Taking a limitP β 0, we‰ deduce that I Y also when β 0. P Ď Ñ P 1 “ 1 Case 2: Suppose now that ℓ1 e4 and q 0. If e5 appears in q , then it follows 1 “ 1 ‰ that dimk U 3, forcing I3 U U , so I I2 has Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 ˝ ě “ ‘ “1 p q 1 2 p q and I X X . If e5 does not appear in q , then q e2,e3,e4 . We get P Ď P x y I2 E1 q E1 e2 e3 e4, q e5 mod U , so I2Źhas Hilbert function ^ ” ^ ” x ^ ^ ^ y p q p q 1, 5, 7, 3 , and I I2,c for some c E3. Using Lemma 5.1 (3), (4), we verify pthat I qY˝ Y. “ p q P P Ď 1 Case 3: Suppose, finally, that q 0, so ℓ1 e4 and I2 e1 e2,e1 e3,e1 e4 . “ “ “x ^ ^ ^ y Since I2 has Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 4, 1 , it follows that I I2,c1,c2 with p q p q “ p q c1,c2 E3. We may assume c1 e2 e3 e5,e2 e4 e5,e3 e4 e5 , by P P x ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ y possibly using c2 to cancel e2 e3 e4. Hence, c1 is the product of e5 and a 2 ^ ^ (reducible) quadric in e2,e3,e4 , and we may assume c1 e2 e3 e5. By x y “ ^ ^ the same argument, weŹ can choose c2 e4 ℓ4 ℓ5 with ℓ4,ℓ5 e2,e3,e5 . If “ ^ ^ P x y ℓ4,ℓ5 e2,e3 then c2 e2 e3 e4 . Otherwise, we may assume ℓ5 e5 ℓ6 x y“x y x y“x ^ ^ y “ ` with ℓ4,ℓ6 e2,e3 . Applying the change of coordinates e5 e5 ℓ6, and then an Px y ÞÑ ´ appropriate change of coordinates in e2,e3 , we can fix I2 and c1, while reducing x y 1 ℓ4 ℓ5 to e2 e5, so that c2 e2 e4 e5 . To summarize, when q 0 we may change^ coordinates^ to transformx y“xI to^ one^ ofy the two ideals “

K e1 e2,e1 e3,e1 e4,e2 e3 e5,e2 e4 e5 , “ p ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ q L e1 e2,e1 e3,e1 e4,e2 e3 e4,e2 e3 e5 . “ p ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ q In order to conclude, it suffices to show that K X and L Y. They are initial 1 1 P P ideals K inlex K and L inlex L of the ideals “ p q “ p q 1 K e1 e2,e1 e3,e1 e4 e2 e5 , 1 “ p ^ ^ ^ ` ^ q L e1 e2,e1 e3,e1 e4 e2 e3,e2 e3 e5 , “ p ^ ^ ^ ` ^ ^ ^ q Since K1 X ˝ and L1 Y˝, we obtain K X and L Y as desired.  P P P P Lemma 5.6. Let I E be an ideal with Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 such that 2 Ď p q I2 V for some V Gr 4, E1 . Then I lies in X Y. Ď P p q Y Ź Proof. If I2 contains no rank 4 quadric, then it contains a pencil of rank 2 quadrics and the conclusion follows from Lemma 5.5. Without loss of generality, we may 2 assume V e1,e2,e3,e4 and I2 e1 e2 e3 e4, q1, q2 with q1, q2 V . “ x y “ x ^ ` ^ y P Observe that Ź 3 I2 E1 V I2 e5 ^ “ ‘ ^ ´ Ź ¯ ´ ¯ has dimension 7. Since dimk I3 8, it follows that I I2,c for some c E3, and we conclude I Y˝ Y. “ “ p q P  P Ď 10 R.RAMKUMAR,A.SAMMARTANO

Now we turn to parametrizing the loci X and Y. Proposition 5.7. The locus X H is irreducible and 14-dimensional. Ď Proof. Consider the general member I X , that is, an ideal I X ˝, which satisfies P P I ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3, q “ p ^ ^ q with Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 , such that ℓ1,ℓ2,ℓ3 E1, q E2. We observe that 2 p 2q P P ℓ1 q 0. In fact, if ℓ1 q 0, then by Lemma 5.1 (2), (5), rank q 4 and ^ 2 “ ^ ‰ p q “ q V for some V Gr 4, E1 with ℓ1 V . However, the discussion in the first P P p q R paragraphŹ of the proof of Lemma 5.5 now generates a contradiction. We parametrize I by choosing subspaces 4 (5.1) ℓ1 Gr 1, E1 P , x y P p q– E1 (5.2) ℓ2,ℓ3 Gr 2, Gr 2, 4 , x y P ˆ ℓ1 ˙ – p q x y E (5.3) q Z Gr 1, 2 P7, x y P Ď ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3 – ´ x ^ ^ y¯ 7 2 where Z P is the locus of points q such that ℓ1 q 0 and Ď x y ^ “ (5.4) dimk ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3, q E1 8. x ^ ^ y^ “ Extending ℓ1,ℓ2,ℓ3 to a basis` ℓ1,ℓ2,ℓ3,ℓ4,ℓ5 of E˘1, a system of projective co- t 7u t u ordinates in this P is given by the coefficients λi,j of the non-zero basis vectors 2 ℓi ℓj . It is easy to see that the condition ℓ1 q 0 defines an irreducible quadric hypersurface^ Q P7 with (Pl¨ucker) equation^ “ Ď λ2,3λ4,5 λ2,4λ3,5 λ2,5λ3,4 0, ´ ` “ and Z Q is the subset where (5.4) holds. We claim that condition (5.4) is open in Q, equivalently,Ď that 8 is the largest possible dimension for the vector space in (5.4) when q Q. If q2 0, then q is reducible, and, up to changing coordinates, x yP “ the space ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3, q is generated by monomials; it is easy then to conclude x ^ ^ y 2 2 that dimk ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3, q E1 8. If q 0, then, since ℓ1 q 0, we have x ^ ^ y^ ď ‰ ^ “ q ℓ1 ℓ6` ℓ7 ℓ8 for some ℓ6,ℓ7˘,ℓ8 E1 by Lemma 5.1 (5), and “ ^ ` ^ P ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3, q E1 ℓ1 E2 ℓ7 ℓ8 E1 ℓ1 E2 dimk px ^ ^ y^ q ` p ^ q dimk p ^ ^ q ` p ^ q 2 ℓ1 E2 “ ℓ1 E2 “ p ^ q p ^ q which implies the desired statement, since dimk ℓ1 E2 6. We conclude that p ^ q “ Z Q is an open subset. It is also non-empty, since e.g. ℓ1 ℓ4 ℓ2 ℓ5 Z, thereforeĎ Z is irreducible of dimension 6. x ^ ` ^ y P By definition, all ideals I X ˝ arise in this way. Conversely, any such choices (5.1), (5.2), (5.3) determineP an ideal in X ˝, since, by construction, the resulting ideal ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3, q has the correct Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 . Moreover, we claimp that^ each^ ideal Iq X ˝ is obtained for a unique choicep ofq subspaces (5.1), P (5.2), (5.3). First, since I I2 , we observe that I contains a unique pencil of rank 2 quadrics: otherwise,“ upp q to changes of coordinates, we would have I “ ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3,ℓ1 ℓ4 or I ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 ℓ3,ℓ2 ℓ4 , and neither ideal has Hilbert functionp ^ 1^, 5, 7, 2^. Givenq the“ p uniqueness^ ^ of the^ rankq 2 pencil, the subspaces (5.1) and (5.2)p are uniquelyq determined by I. In turn, it is obvious that the subspace (5.3) is uniquely determined by I. We have thus constructed an irreducible parametrization of X ˝ of dimension 4 2 4 2 6 14, so its closure X is also irreducible and 14-dimensional.  ` p ´ q` “ ON THE SMOOTHNESS OF LEXICOGRAPHIC POINTS ON HILBERT SCHEMES 11

Proposition 5.8. The locus Y H is irreducible and 15-dimensional. Ď Proof. Consider the general member I Y, that is, an ideal I Y˝, which satisfies P P I q1, q2, q3,c “ p q 2 with Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 , such that q1, q2, q3 E2, c E3, I2 V for p q 2 P P Ď some V Gr 4, E1 , and I2 W for any W Gr 3, E1 . We observeŹ that c is P p q Ę P p q a minimal generator, since, writingŹ E1 V ℓ5 , we have “ ‘x y 3 (5.5) dimk I2 E1 dimk V dimk I2 ℓ5 4 3 7. p ^ qď ` p ^ q“ ` “ ´ Ź ¯ We parametrize I by choosing subspaces 4 (5.6) V Gr 4, E1 P , P p q– 2 (5.7) q1, q2, q3 U Gr 3, V Gr 3, 6 , x y P Ď ´ ¯ – p q ŹE (5.8) c Gr 1, 3 Gr 1, 3 P2, x y P q1, q2, q3 E1 – p q– ´ x y^ ¯ 2 where U is the locus of points q1, q2, q3 Gr 3, 6 such that q1, q2, q3 W x y P p q x y Ę for every W Gr 3, E1 , and such that dimk q1, q2, q3 E1 7. We claimŹ that U Gr 3, 6P is anp openq subset. We have alreadypx observedy^ inq“ (5.5) that 7 is the Ď p q largest dimension for q1, q2, q3 E1 when q1, q2, q3 Gr 3, 6 , so the equation x y^ x y P p q dimk q1, q2, q3 E1 7 is an open condition. By Lemma 5.4, the condition px y^2 q “ q1, q2, q3 W for every W Gr 3, E1 is also open. Finally, U since e.g. x yĘ P p q ‰ H ℓ1 ℓ2,ℓ1 Źℓ3,ℓ2 ℓ4 U where V ℓ1,ℓ2,ℓ3,ℓ4 . Therefore, U is irreducible ofx dimension^ ^ 3 6 ^3 yP9. “ x y By definition,p ´ allq“ ideals I Y˝ arise in this way. Conversely, any such choices P ˝ (5.6), (5.7), (5.8) determine an ideal in Y , since the resulting ideal q1, q2, q3,c has the correct Hilbert function 1, 5, 7, 2 and the conditions of Y˝ arep satisfied.q Moreover, each ideal I Y˝ is obtainedp q for a unique choice of subspaces: it is obvious that the subspacesP (5.7), (5.8) are uniquely determined by I, whereas for 2 (5.6) this follows from the requirement that I2 W for any W Gr 3, E1 . Ę P p q We have thus constructed an irreducible parametrizationŹ of Y˝ of dimension 4 9 2 15, so its closure Y is also irreducible and 15-dimensional.  ` ` “ We are ready to state the main theorem of this section. Theorem 2. The standard graded Hilbert scheme H Hp1,5,7,2q E is a union of two irreducible components of dimensions 14 and 15. The“ lexicographp q ic point of H lies in the intersection of the two components, and is a singular point. Proof. The classification of ideals in Lemmas 5.2, 5.5, 5.6 proves that H X Y, whereas the parametrizations of Propositions 5.7, 5.8 show that X , Y are irreducible“ Y subschemes of the claimed dimensions. Obviously Y is not contained in X . Com- paring the minimal number of generators of the general member we deduce, by lower semicontinuity, that X is not contained in Y either. Thus, X and Y are two distinct irreducible components of H. The lexicographic ideal of H is L e1 e2,e1 e3,e1 e4,e2 e3 e4,e2 e3 e5 . We saw in the proof of Lemma 5.5“that p ^L lies in^ Y. On^ the other^ ^ hand,^ we^ haveq 2 L inlex L where “ p q 2 L e1 e2,e1 e3,e1 e4,e2 e3 e5,e2 e4 e3 e5 . “ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ p ` q ` ˘ 12 R.RAMKUMAR,A.SAMMARTANO

2 The change of coordinates e5 e5 e3 shows that L lies in the same GL5-orbit as the ideal K X of the proofÞÑ of Lemma´ 5.5, so L2 X , and by Gr¨obner degen- eration L X Pas well. Thus, L belongs to the intersectionP of the two irreducible components,P and in particular it is a singular point. 

Remark 5.9. It is possible to show that n 5 is the least value of n dimk E1 for “ “ which reducible standard graded Hilbert schemes of E E1 exist. Intuitively, “ this is due to the fact that non-trivial parametrizations doŹ not involve very low or very high degrees in E. In fact, from the point of view of parametrizations, interesting ideals I E will typically have I0 I1 0, In En, and no minimal generators in degreeĎn 1. For this reason, when“ n“ 4 there“ is not enough room for complicated families,´ and all Hh E are projectiveď spaces, Grassmannians, or bundles over them, with the exceptionp ofq n 4, h 1, 4, 5, 2 , where Hh E is the locus of reducible quadrics. “ “ p q p q Acknowledgments. The authors are grateful to the referees for carefully reading the manuscript and for several helpful comments and suggestions. Computations using Macaulay2 [M2] were helpful in the preparation of this paper.

References [BB20] Weronika Buczy´nska and Jaroslaw Buczy´nski, Apolarity, border rank and multigraded Hilbert scheme, to appear in Duke Math. J. (2020). [CEVV09] Dustin A. Cartwright, Daniel Erman, Mauricio Velasco, and Bianca Viray, Hilbert schemes of 8 points, Algebra Number Theory 3 (2009), 763–795. [CS05] Aldo Conca and Jessica Sidman, Generic initial ideals of points and curves, J. Symb. Comput. 40 (2005), 1023–1038. [DJNT17] Theodosios Douvropoulos, Joachim Jelisiejew, Bernt Ivar Utstøl Nødland, and Zach Teitler, The Hilbert Scheme of 11 Points in A3 Is Irreducible, in: Smith G., Sturmfels B. (eds) Combinatorial Algebraic Geometry. Fields Institute Communications 80, Springer (2017). [E12] Daniel Erman, Murphy’s law for Hilbert function strata in the Hilbert scheme of points, Math. Res. Lett. 19 (2012), 1277–1281. [F68] John Fogarty, Algebraic families on an Algebraic Surface, Amer. J. Math. 90 (1968), 511– 521. [GMP11] Vesselin Gasharov, Satoshi Murai, and Irena Peeva, Hilbert schemes and maximal Betti numbers over Veronese rings, Math. Z. 267 (2011), 155–172. [G08] Gerd Gotzmann, The irreducible components of Hilb4npP3q, arXiv preprint (2008). [M2] Daniel R. Grayson and Michael E. Stillman, Macaulay 2, a software system for research in algebraic geometry, available at http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2/ . [G61] Alexander Grothendieck, Techniques de construction et th´eor`emes d’existence en g´eom´etrie alg´ebrique IV , S´eminaire Bourbaki 6 (1995), 249–276, Soc. Math. France, Paris. [HS04] Mark Haiman and Bernd Sturmfels, Multigraded Hilbert schemes, J. Alg. Geom. 13 (2004), 725–769. [H66] Robin Hartshorne, Connectedness of the Hilbert scheme, Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Etudes´ Sci. 29 (1966), 5–48. [HMV20] Hang Huang, Mateusz Micha lek, and Emanuele Ventura, Vanishing Hessian, wild forms and their border VSP, Math. Ann. 378 (2020), 1505-–1532. [I72] Anthony Iarrobino, Reducibility of the families of 0-dimensional schemes on a variety In- vent. Math. 15 (1972), 72—77. [LR11] Paolo Lella and Margherita Roggero, Rational components of Hilbert schemes, Rend. Semin. Mat. Univ. Padova 126 (2011), 11–45. [M27] Francis Macaulay, Some properties of enumeration in the theory of modular systems, Proc. Lon. Math. Soc. 2 (1927), 531–555. [MS10] Diane Maclagan and Gregory G. Smith, Smooth and irreducible multigraded Hilbert schemes, Adv. Math. 223 (2010), 1608–1631. ON THE SMOOTHNESS OF LEXICOGRAPHIC POINTS ON HILBERT SCHEMES 13

[MM18] Paolo Mantero and Jason McCullough, A finite classification of px,yq-primary ideals of low multiplicity, Collect. Math. 69 (2018), 107–130. [MP12] Satoshi Murai and Irena Peeva, Hilbert schemes and Betti numbers over Clements- Lindstr¨om rings, Comp. Math. 148 (2012), 1337–1364. [PS02] Irena Peeva and Mike Stillman, Toric Hilbert schemes, Duke Math. J. 111 (2002), 419– 449. [PS05] Irena Peeva and Mike Stillman, Connectedness of Hilbert schemes, J. Alg. Geom. 14 (2005), 193–212. [PS07] Irena Peeva and Mike Stillman, Flips and the Hilbert scheme over an exterior algebra, Math. Ann. 339 (2007), 545–557. [R21] Ritvik Ramkumar, The Hilbert scheme of a pair of linear spaces, Math. Z. to appear (2021). [R21] Ritvik Ramkumar, Hilbert schemes with few Borel fixed points, arXiv preprint (2021). [R95] Alyson Reeves, The radius of the Hilbert scheme, J. Alg. Geom. 4 (1995), 639–658. [RS97] Alyson Reeves and Mike Stillman, Smoothness of the lexicographic point, J. Alg. Geom. 6 (1997), 235–246. [SS20] Roy Skjelnes and Gregory G. Smith, Smooth Hilbert schemes: their classification and geometry, arXiv preprint (2020). [S20] Andrew Staal, The ubiquity of smooth Hilbert schemes, Math. Z. 296 (2020) 1593-–1611. [V06] Ravi Vakil, Murphy’s law in algebraic geometry: badly-behaved deformation spaces, Inv. Math. 164 (2006), 569–590.

(Ritvik Ramkumar) Department of Mathematics, University of California at Berke- ley, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA Email address: [email protected]

(Alessio Sammartano) Dipartimento di Matematica, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy Email address: [email protected]