On the projective normality of Ulrich bundles on some low-dimensional varieties

Valerio Buttinelli

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 14 references

On the projective normality of Ulrich bundles on some low-dimensional varieties

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes that Ulrich bundles on smooth hypersurfaces of dimension two or three are almost never projectively normal, with explicit degree and rank thresholds.

desk verdict The reader's main objection is an arithmetic slip: on a degree-d surface in P3, adjunction gives c1(E)=r/2(d-1)H, exactly as used in Lemma 7.3. The paper is sound on its central claims and deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15686 v1 pith:NBB4RDLV submitted 2024-12-20 math.AG

Valerio Buttinelli This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AG MSC 14J6014N0514H6013D02

keywords UlrichbundlesprojectivenormalityhypersurfacesCastelnuovo-Mumfordregularitysyzygydegeneracylocivectoroncurves

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper asks when an Ulrich vector bundle, embedded through the complete linear system of its tautological line bundle, gives a projectively normal variety. It shows that on curves and on surfaces with $q=p_g=0$ the behavior is governed by explicit degree and degeneracy conditions, while on smooth hypersurfaces of dimension 2 and 3 Ulrich bundles are almost never projectively normal. On such a hypersurface of degree $d$ in $\mathbb{P}^{n+1}$, the multiplication map on sections fails to be surjective in all but small-rank cases, so the tautological embedding is not normally generated. This matters because Ulrich bundles are globally generated and, on line-free hypersurfaces, very ample; the paper shows that their projective embeddings nevertheless tend to have non-normal coordinate rings.

What carries the argument

The central object is the projective bundle $\mathbb{P}(E)$ over $X$ with tautological line bundle $\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}(E)}(1)$; projective normality of $E$ means that the maps $S^kH^0(X,E)\to H^0(X,S^kE)$ are surjective for all $k$. The paper's main tools are the multiplication map $\mu_E:H^0(E)\otimes H^0(E)\to H^0(E\otimes E)$ and the syzygy bundle $M_E=\ker(H^0(E)\otimes \mathcal{O}_X\to E)$. On curves and surfaces, Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity of tensor powers is controlled through $M=\max\{1,\mathrm{reg}_B(\mathcal{O}_X)\}$, keeping symmetric powers $0$-regular, so cohomology vanishings translate into normality. On hypersurfaces, the Ulrich resolution $0\to E(-d)\to \mathcal{O}_X(-1)^{\oplus rd}\to \mathcal{O}_X^{\oplus rd}\to E\to 0$, combined with Chern class formulas for $c_2$ on surfaces and $c_3$ on threefolds, computes $h^0(E\otimes E)$ and $h^0(S^2E)$. The dimension inequality $\dim S^2H^0(E) < h^0(S^2E)$ then rules out $2$-normality. For surfaces, degeneracy loci of sections of $\Lambda^2M_E^*$ encode failure of normality through a zero-dimensional scheme $Z$ lying on a divisor $D$.

What would settle it

Find a smooth quintic surface $S\subset\mathbb{P}^3$ carrying an Ulrich bundle $E$ of rank $r\ge 2$ with $\det(E)=O_S(2rH)$ such that the multiplication map $H^0(S,E)\otimes H^0(S,E)\to H^0(S,E\otimes E)$ is surjective. Lemma 7.3 and Theorem 3(a) predict this map cannot be surjective, so one such example would refute the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 3: for a smooth hypersurface $X\subset\mathbb{P}^{n+1}$ of dimension $n=2$ or $3$, Ulrich bundles are rarely projectively normal. For $n=2$, assuming $\det(E)=O_X(\tfrac{r}{2}(d-1)H)$, the section multiplication map cannot be surjective, and $E$ cannot be projectively normal, when $d\ge 5$, or $d=4$ and $r\le 5$, or $d=3$ and $r\le 2$. For $n=3$ and $d\ge 4$, the multiplication map is never surjective, and $E$ cannot be projectively normal when $r>\tfrac{d+4}{3}$. The paper also proves that on curves of genus $g$, a $B$-Ulrich bundle is projectively normal when $\deg B>g+1$ and satisfies higher syzygy properties for larger degree, and that on surfaces with $q=p_g=0$, failure of projective normality is equivalent to the existence of a zero-dimensional degeneracy locus $Z$ lying on a divisor $D$ in a prescribed linear system. The overall message is that the naive expectation linking ample or very ample Ulrich bundles to projective normality fails in higher dimensions.

Load-bearing premise

The hypersurface results assume the standard Chern class formula $c_1(E)=\frac{r}{2}(d-1)H$ for Ulrich bundles and that the computed Euler characteristics equal the actual dimensions of section spaces because higher cohomology vanishes; if either fails, the numerical obstructions do not apply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

On a smooth curve of genus $g$, every $B$-Ulrich bundle is projectively normal as soon as $\deg B>g+1$, and satisfies the higher syzygy property $(N_p)$ for sufficiently large degree.
On a smooth surface with $q=p_g=0$, failure of projective normality of an ample $0$-regular bundle is equivalent to a concrete geometric condition: a zero-dimensional degeneracy locus $Z$ contained in a divisor from $|K_S+(h-r-1)\det(E)|$.
On smooth surfaces in $\mathbb{P}^3$ of degree $d\ge 5$, no Ulrich bundle satisfying the stated determinant condition can be projectively normal; on threefold hypersurfaces with $d\ge 4$, the section multiplication map is never surjective.
The heuristic that very ample Ulrich bundles on line-free hypersurfaces should be projectively normal is false: such bundles are very ample yet almost never normally generated.
Projective normality of Ulrich bundles is an open property in flat families, so projectively normal Ulrich bundles form open subsets of the relevant moduli spaces.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same dimension-count method could be pushed to higher-dimensional hypersurfaces once the relevant Chern classes and the regularity of symmetric powers are controlled, likely yielding an analogous rank threshold for non-normality.
The surface equivalence in Theorem 2 suggests a constructive route to non-normal Ulrich bundles: choose a zero-dimensional scheme $Z$ and a divisor $D$ satisfying the stated conditions, then build a bundle $E$ whose syzygy bundle has $Z$ as degeneracy locus.
If Theorem 3's qualitative conclusion persists under corrections to the determinant hypothesis, then the general Ulrich bundle in moduli on a hypersurface should be expected to be non-projectively normal, making the syzygies of general Ulrich embeddings genuinely complicated.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: the rejection based on an internal determinant contradiction is wrong. For a smooth surface S in P3 of degree d, K_S=(d-4)H, so K_S+3H=(d-1)H. Remark 2.4 therefore gives c1(E)=r/2(d-1)H, which is precisely the hypothesis in Lemma 7.3 and Theorem 3(a). The reader's alternative c1(E)=rd/2H would only follow from K_S=(d-3)H. I rechecked the numerical consequences: substituting the correct K_S into Lemma 6.6 reproduces Lemma 7.3, and the thresholds (d=2, or d=3 with r>=3, or d=4 with r>=6) come out exactly as stated. For the threefold, the Chern class and Euler characteristic formulas in Lemma 7.4 are internally consistent; on a rank-2 cubic threefold the resolution (7.2) gives chi(E⊗E)=36 and chi(S2E)=21, matching (iv) and (v). So the central hypersurface argument holds up.

What is genuinely new: Theorem 1 gives concrete degree bounds for projective normality and (Np) of Ulrich bundles on curves, extending Butler and Green–Lazarsfeld to the vector bundle setting. Theorem 2 is a genuinely new geometric characterization of projective normality failure on regular surfaces with pg=0, in terms of degeneracy loci of sections of Λ2M_E*. Theorem 3 is a real structural result: on low-dimensional hypersurfaces, Ulrich bundles are almost never projectively normal, contrary to the naive expectation from very ampleness. The paper is carefully written and the proofs mostly reduce cleanly to known theorems.

Soft spots, in proportion: the paper is long and dense, and the surface criterion, while elegant, is not easy to apply because it requires controlling degeneracy loci and a divisor in |K_S+(h−r−1)E|. Some sharpness claims are conditional on the existence of Ulrich bundles with prescribed determinant and rank, which remains conjectural in general; the author notes this, but readers should not take the numerical bounds as unconditional existence statements. Theorem 3(b) gives a sufficient rank bound, not a classification; Remark 7.5 shows low-rank cases behave differently, so the full picture on hypersurfaces is still open. These are limits, not defects.

Who this is for: algebraic geometers working on Ulrich bundles, syzygies, and projective normality. It extends known line-bundle results to vector bundles in low dimensions in a way that is both useful and credible. I would bring it to a reading group and would cite it if I were working in this area.

Recommendation: send it to peer review. The main claims are correct as far as I can tell, and the paper deserves referee time. I would suggest minor revisions mainly for organization and for making the conditional nature of some existence-dependent statements more explicit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the projective normality of the projective bundle P(E) of an Ulrich vector bundle E, i.e., the normal generation of the tautological line bundle O_{P(E)}(1). The main results are: on curves, projective normality and the (N_p) property hold under degree conditions on the polarization (Theorem 1); on surfaces with q=p_g=0, a degeneracy-locus characterization of non-normal, non-aCM 0-regular bundles is given (Theorem 2); and on hypersurfaces of dimension 2 and 3, it is shown that Ulrich bundles are often not projectively normal under a determinant assumption (Theorem 3). The paper is organized around Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity of tensor operations, Chern class computations, and degeneracy loci, and it contains substantial technical work in the appendices.

Significance. If the main results are correct, the hypersurface statements are noteworthy: they show that very ample Ulrich bundles, which exist in abundance on line-free hypersurfaces, need not be projectively normal, contrary to a naive expectation from the curve case. The surface characterization in Theorem 2 is a useful structural result, and the paper provides a battery of explicit Chern class and Euler characteristic computations for tensor and symmetric powers of Ulrich bundles. The paper is written in a clear, self-contained style, and many proofs reduce to cited results in a transparent way. A particular strength is the careful treatment of regularity of tensor powers under different hypotheses on the polarization.

major comments (3)

[Lemma 7.4 and Theorem 3(b)] The formulas in Lemma 7.4 produce non-integral values for some parameter pairs, which is impossible for Chern numbers and Euler characteristics. For example, when d=4 and r=3, formula (i) gives c_3(E)=99/4, formula (iv) gives chi(E⊗E)=315/2, and formula (v) gives chi(S^2E)=315/4. These pairs cannot support an Ulrich bundle, and indeed c_1(E)=r/2(d-1)H is not Cartier when r(d-1) is odd. The lemma and the proof of Theorem 3(b) should explicitly impose the integrality condition (for instance r(d-1) even) or state that the formulas also show non-existence in the remaining cases. As written, the proof of Theorem 3(b) uses a non-integral chi in the inequality h^0≥chi>dim, which is not a valid numerical argument for an existing bundle.
[Proof of Lemma 7.4(v)] The step from the vanishing (7.3) for E⊗E to the analogous vanishing for S^2E is implicit. Since S^2E is a direct summand of E⊗E over the complex numbers, the vanishings for E⊗E imply those for S^2E; this should be stated explicitly, otherwise the computation of chi(X,S^2E)=h^0-h^1 is not fully justified.
[Theorem 3(b) statement] The range r>(d+4)/3 in Theorem 3(b) includes parameter values for which the determinant r/2(d-1)H is not an integral divisor and hence no Ulrich bundle can exist. The theorem is vacuously true in those cases, but the presentation should either restrict to admissible ranks or add a remark that the Chern class formulas already rule out those values. This is important because a reader may otherwise believe that a rank-3 Ulrich bundle on a quartic threefold exists but is merely non-normal, whereas in fact such a bundle cannot exist.

minor comments (4)

[Remark 2.4] When writing c_1(E)=r/2(K_X+(n+1)B) under Pic(X)≅Z, it would be helpful to note explicitly that the right-hand side must be an integral Cartier divisor, i.e., r(K_X+(n+1)B) must be divisible by 2 in Pic(X).
[Proposition 4.18] The notation S^{m-3}E for m=1 appears in the statement; it should be clarified that S^kE=0 for k<0, or the statement should be split according to dimension.
[Proof of Lemma 7.3] The sentence 'the assumption on the Picard group forces r≥2' is terse; it would be clearer to add a one-line justification that a rank-1 Ulrich bundle would have h^0(E)=d, whereas O_S(kH) for k=(d-1)/2 has a different h^0 on a general surface.
[General typography] Many symbols in the text appear corrupted (e.g., '/shortrightarrow' for arrows), and there are occasional missing spaces. These should be corrected in the final version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main normality obstructions are honest dimension/Chern-class computations, the determinant hypothesis is consistent with Remark 2.4, and the few self-citations to [But] are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained at the level of the claimed implications. Theorem 3(a) follows directly from Lemma 7.3, whose determinant hypothesis det(E)=OX(r/2(d-1)) is exactly what Remark 2.4 yields on a smooth surface S in P3: adjunction gives KS=(d-4)H, hence KS+3H=(d-1)H, so c1(E)=r/2(d-1)H; the reader's proposed rd/2H would require the incorrect canonical class KS=(d-3)H. Lemma 7.3 is obtained by substituting this Chern class data into the standard Euler-characteristic formulas of Lemma 6.6, and the non-normality conclusion is drawn from the necessary inequality dim S^2H^0(X,E) < h^0(X,S^2E), not from assuming the conclusion. Theorem 3(b) is the analogous dimension count for threefolds using the Chern class computations in Lemma 7.4. Theorem 2 is proved through a degeneracy-locus equivalence whose numerical conditions are computed from Chern classes, with no step in which the target projective-normality statement is fed back as an input. The only self-citations are to the author's companion paper [But] for ampleness and very ampleness of Ulrich bundles, both in the introduction and in Proposition 5.9, and for standard Ulrich facts in Remark 2.4; these are not load-bearing for the projective-normality conclusions, since ampleness on curves also follows from the quoted Lopez-Sierra theorem [LS, Theorem 1] and [But] is an external theorem rather than a restatement of the paper's results. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked to force a choice, and no known empirical pattern is merely relabeled. The paper's central claims therefore do not reduce to their inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted or chosen by hand. The paper rests on standard theorems about Ulrich bundles, Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity, syzygies, normal generation, and degeneracy loci. The inconsistent determinant hypothesis in Section 7 is not an axiom; it is an internal contradiction with the paper's own Remark 2.4 and is counted as a red flag.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Remark 2.4: a B-Ulrich bundle E has c1(E)=r/2(K_X+(n+1)B) when Pic(X)=Z.
Standard property of Ulrich bundles, quoted from [Cos,Be2,CMRPL] and used throughout; it is then misapplied in Section 7 as r/2(d-1)H instead of rd/2H.
standard math Arapura-Lazarsfeld regularity of tensor products (Lemma 3.3-3.5 and Corollary 3.6).
Used to keep symmetric and tensor powers 0-regular on curves and surfaces, and to prove strong normality implications.
standard math Butler's theorem: a vector bundle on a curve with slope lower bound µ-(E)>2g is strongly 2-normal and projectively normal.
Used in Proposition 5.2 and Corollary 5.3 to obtain the curve normality criteria.
standard math Green-Lazarsfeld, KKO and Akahori results on normal generation of line bundles on curves.
Used in Propositions 5.9 and 5.10 and Lemma 5.10 to get dense open normal generation statements.
standard math Maximal Rank Conjecture for general non-special curves (Ballico-Ellia).
Used in Proposition 5.12 to produce the sharp bound for the general rank r Ulrich bundle on a general curve.
standard math Banica-Ottaviani degeneracy-locus theory for vector bundles on surfaces.
Used in Proposition 6.3 and Corollary 6.4 to describe non-2-normality through zero-dimensional degeneracy loci.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On the projective normality of Ulrich bundles on some low-dimensional varieties." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NBB4RDLV

@misc{pith2026241215686,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On the projective normality of Ulrich bundles on some low-dimensional varieties},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NBB4RDLV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15686}
}

abstract

We study the projective normality of the projective bundle of an Ulrich vector bundle embedded through the complete linear system of its tautological line bundle. The focus will be on Ulrich bundles defined over curves, surfaces with $q=p_g=0$ and hypersurfaces of dimension $2$ and $3.$

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

14 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

[1]

Akahori, Remarks on normal generation of line bundles on algebraic cu rves, Abh

[A] K. Akahori, Remarks on normal generation of line bundles on algebraic cu rves, Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg 74 (2004), 181–191. [Al] J. Alper, Good moduli spaces for Artin stacks , Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 63 (2013), no. 6, 2349–2402. [ABBLT] J. Alper, P. Belmans, D. Bragg, J. Liang, T. Tajakka, Projectivity of the moduli space of vector bundles...

work page 2004
[14]

Complete Linear Series on a Hyperelliptic Curve

[P] G. Pareschi, Koszul algebras associated to adjunction bundles , J. Algebra 157 (1993), no. 1, 161–169. [PP] G. Pareschi, B. P. Purnaprajna, Canonical ring of a curve is Koszul: a simple proof , Illinois J. Math. 41 (1997), no. 2, 266–271. [Pa1] E. Park, Higher syzygies of ruled varieties over a curve , J. Algebra 296 (2006), no. 1, 267–284. [Pa2] E. P...

work page Pith review arXiv 1993
[95]

Eisenbud, J

[EH1] D. Eisenbud, J. D. Harris, Divisors on general curves and cuspidal rational curves , Invent. Math. 74 (1983), no. 3, 371–418. [EH2] D. Eisenbud, J. D. Harris, 3264 and all that—a second course in algebraic geometry , Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge,

work page 1983
[1950]

[LR1] A. F. Lopez, D. Raychaudhury, On varieties with Ulrich twisted tangent bundles , Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 203 (2024), no. 3, 1159–1193. [LR2] A. F. Lopez, D. Raychaudhury, Ulrich subvarieties and the non-existence of low rank Ulric h bundles on complete intersec- tions, Preprint 2024, arXiv:2405.01154. [LS] A. F. Lopez, J. C. Sierra, A geometrical v...

arXiv 2024
[1969]

Ballico, P

[BE] E. Ballico, P. Ellia, The maximal rank conjecture for nonspecial curves in Pn, Math. Z. 196 (1987), no. 3, 355–367. [BF] E. Ballico, C. Fontanari, Normally generated line bundles on general curves. II , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 214 (2010), no. 8, 1450–1455. [BMR] P. Bangere, J. Mukherjee, D. Raychaudhury, Koszul property of Ulrich bundles and rationalit...

work page 1987
[1976]

[O1] G. M. Ottaviani, Spinor bundles on quadrics , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 307 (1988), no. 1, 301–316. [O2] G. M. Ottaviani, Varietà proiettive di codimensione piccola , Quad. INDAM, Aracne, Roma,

work page 1988
[1977]

Hering, Multigraded regularity and the Koszul property , J

[He] M. Hering, Multigraded regularity and the Koszul property , J. Algebra 323 (2010), no. 4, 1012–1017. [Hu] D. Huybrechts, Fourier-Mukai transforms in algebraic geometry , Oxford Mathematical Monographs, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford,

work page 2010
[1989]

[KKO] T. Kato, C. Keem, A. Ohbuchi, Normal generation of line bundles of high degrees on smooth a lgebraic curves , Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg 69 (1999), 319–333. [LM] H. Lange, G. Martens, Normal generation and presentation of line bundles of low de gree on curves , J. Reine Angew. Math. 356 (1985), 1–18. [L1] R. K. Lazarsfeld, Positivity in algebraic...

work page 1999

Show all 14 references

[1995]

Benedetti, P

[BMPMT] V. Benedetti, P. Montero, Y. Prieto-Montañez, S. Tr oncoso, Projective manifolds whose tangent bundle is Ulrich , J. Algebra 630 (2023), 248–273. [BT] V. Benedetti, F. Tanturri, On a conjecture on aCM and Ulrich sheaves on degeneracy loci , Preprint 2024, arXiv:2403.04...

2023 arXiv
[1998]

[MR] R. M. Miró-Roig, A cohomological class of vector bundles , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 120 (1994), no. 4, 1003–1008. [Mu1] D. B. Mumford, Varieties deﬁned by quadratic equations , in Questions on Algebraic Varieties (C.I.M.E., III Ciclo, Var enna, 1969), pp. 29–100, Centro Int...

1994
[1999]

[GL] M. L. Green, R. K. Lazarsfeld, On the projective normality of complete linear series on an a lgebraic curve , Invent. Math. 83 (1986), no. 1, 73–90. [GH] P. A. Griﬃths, J. D. Harris, On the Noether-Lefschetz theorem and some remarks on codime nsion-two cycles , Math. Ann....

1986
[2010]

Herzog, B

[HUB] J. Herzog, B. Ulrich, J. Backelin, Linear maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules over strict complet e intersections, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 71 (1991), no. 2-3, 187–202. [KS] M. Kashiwara, P. Schapira, Categories and sheaves , Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, 332, S...

1991
[2016]

Eisenbud, F.-O

[ES] D. Eisenbud, F.-O. Schreyer, Resultants and Chow forms via exterior syzygies , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 16 (2003), no. 3, 537–579. [Er] D. Erman, Matrix factorizations of generic polynomials , Preprint 2022, arXiv:2112.08864. [F] D. Faenzi, Ulrich bundles on K3 surfaces , Alge...

2003 arXiv
[2017]

Costa, R

[CMRPL] L. Costa, R. M. Miró-Roig, J. F. Pons-Llopis, Ulrich bundles—from commutative algebra to algebraic geom etry, De Gruyter Studies in Mathematics, 77, De Gruyter, Berlin, ©2021. [E] D. Eisenbud, Commutative algebra , Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 150, Springer, New York, 19

2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Akahori, Remarks on normal generation of line bundles on algebraic cu rves, Abh

[A] K. Akahori, Remarks on normal generation of line bundles on algebraic cu rves, Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg 74 (2004), 181–191. [Al] J. Alper, Good moduli spaces for Artin stacks , Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 63 (2013), no. 6, 2349–2402. [ABBLT] J. Alper, P. Belmans, D. Bragg, J. Liang, T. Tajakka, Projectivity of the moduli space of vector bundles...

work page 2004

[2] [14]

Complete Linear Series on a Hyperelliptic Curve

[P] G. Pareschi, Koszul algebras associated to adjunction bundles , J. Algebra 157 (1993), no. 1, 161–169. [PP] G. Pareschi, B. P. Purnaprajna, Canonical ring of a curve is Koszul: a simple proof , Illinois J. Math. 41 (1997), no. 2, 266–271. [Pa1] E. Park, Higher syzygies of ruled varieties over a curve , J. Algebra 296 (2006), no. 1, 267–284. [Pa2] E. P...

work page Pith review arXiv 1993

[3] [95]

Eisenbud, J

[EH1] D. Eisenbud, J. D. Harris, Divisors on general curves and cuspidal rational curves , Invent. Math. 74 (1983), no. 3, 371–418. [EH2] D. Eisenbud, J. D. Harris, 3264 and all that—a second course in algebraic geometry , Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge,

work page 1983

[4] [1950]

[LR1] A. F. Lopez, D. Raychaudhury, On varieties with Ulrich twisted tangent bundles , Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 203 (2024), no. 3, 1159–1193. [LR2] A. F. Lopez, D. Raychaudhury, Ulrich subvarieties and the non-existence of low rank Ulric h bundles on complete intersec- tions, Preprint 2024, arXiv:2405.01154. [LS] A. F. Lopez, J. C. Sierra, A geometrical v...

arXiv 2024

[5] [1969]

Ballico, P

[BE] E. Ballico, P. Ellia, The maximal rank conjecture for nonspecial curves in Pn, Math. Z. 196 (1987), no. 3, 355–367. [BF] E. Ballico, C. Fontanari, Normally generated line bundles on general curves. II , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 214 (2010), no. 8, 1450–1455. [BMR] P. Bangere, J. Mukherjee, D. Raychaudhury, Koszul property of Ulrich bundles and rationalit...

work page 1987

[6] [1976]

[O1] G. M. Ottaviani, Spinor bundles on quadrics , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 307 (1988), no. 1, 301–316. [O2] G. M. Ottaviani, Varietà proiettive di codimensione piccola , Quad. INDAM, Aracne, Roma,

work page 1988

[7] [1977]

Hering, Multigraded regularity and the Koszul property , J

[He] M. Hering, Multigraded regularity and the Koszul property , J. Algebra 323 (2010), no. 4, 1012–1017. [Hu] D. Huybrechts, Fourier-Mukai transforms in algebraic geometry , Oxford Mathematical Monographs, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford,

work page 2010

[8] [1989]

[KKO] T. Kato, C. Keem, A. Ohbuchi, Normal generation of line bundles of high degrees on smooth a lgebraic curves , Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg 69 (1999), 319–333. [LM] H. Lange, G. Martens, Normal generation and presentation of line bundles of low de gree on curves , J. Reine Angew. Math. 356 (1985), 1–18. [L1] R. K. Lazarsfeld, Positivity in algebraic...

work page 1999