arXiv++ Combinatorics

We show that the notion of MAT-freeness for hyperplane arrangements depends on the underlying field. In particular, MAT-freeness is not combinatorial.

Let $(\mathscr{A},m)$ be a free multiarrangement, and let $\mathscr{E}$ be an extension of $(\mathscr{A},m)$. It is well known that if $\mathscr{A}$ is the Coxeter arrangement of type $A_2$, then a free extension of $(\mathscr{A},m)$ always exists. In this work, we demonstrate that if $\mathscr{A}$ is the Coxeter arrangement of type $B_2$, there exist infinitely many multiplicities for which no free extension of $(\mathscr{A},m)$ exists. This result has immediate consequences for the existence of free extensions in higher rank.

Let $\mathcal A$ be a free hyperplane arrangement. In 1989, Ziegler showed that the restriction $\mathcal A"$ of $\mathcal A$ to any hyperplane endowed with the natural multiplicity $κ$ is then a free multiarrangement. In 2024, the first two authors proved an analogue of Ziegler's theorem for the stronger notion of inductive freeness: if $\mathcal A$ is inductively free, then so is the free multiarrangement $(\mathcal A'',κ)$. In 2018, all reflection arrangements which admit inductively free Ziegler restrictions were classified by the first two authors. The aim of this paper is an extension of this classification to all restrictions of reflection arrangements utilizing the aforementioned fundamental result from the 2024 paper of the first two authors.

Let $\mathcal A$ be a free hyperplane arrangement. In 1989, Ziegler showed that the restriction $\mathcal A''$ of $\mathcal A$ to any hyperplane endowed with the natural multiplicity $κ$ is then a free multiarrangement $(\mathcal A'',κ)$. The aim of this paper is to prove an analogue of Ziegler's theorem for the stronger notion of inductive freeness: if $\mathcal A$ is inductively free, then so is the multiarrangement $(\mathcal A'',κ)$. In a related result we derive that if a deletion $\mathcal A'$ of $\mathcal A$ is free and the corresponding restriction $\mathcal A''$ is inductively free, then so is $(\mathcal A'',κ)$ -- irrespective of the freeness of $\mathcal A$. In addition, we show counterparts of the latter kind for additive and recursive freeness.

We exhibit a particular free subarrangement of a certain restriction of the Weyl arrangement of type $E_7$ and use it to give an affirmative answer to a recent conjecture by T.~Abe on the nature of additionally free and stair-free arrangements.

Let $A$ be a free hyperplane arrangement. In 1989, Ziegler showed that the restriction $A''$ of $A$ to any hyperplane endowed with the natural multiplicity is then a free multiarrangement. We initiate a study of the stronger freeness property of inductive freeness for these canonical free multiarrangements and investigate them for the underlying class of reflection arrangements. More precisely, let $A = A(W)$ be the reflection arrangement of a complex reflection group $W$. By work of Terao, each such reflection arrangement is free. Thus so is Ziegler's canonical multiplicity on the restriction $A''$ of $A$ to a hyperplane. We show that the latter is inductively free as a multiarrangement if and only if $A''$ itself is inductively free.

In 2002, Terao showed that every reflection multi-arrangement of a real reflection group with constant multiplicity is free by providing a basis of the module of derivations. We first generalize Terao's result to multi-arrangements stemming from well-generated unitary reflection groups, where the multiplicity of a hyperplane depends on the order of its stabilizer. Here the exponents depend on the exponents of the dual reflection representation. We then extend our results further to all imprimitive irreducible unitary reflection groups. In this case the exponents turn out to depend on the exponents of a certain Galois twist of the dual reflection representation that comes from a Beynon-Lusztig type semi-palindromicity of the fake degrees.

The aim of this note is a classification of all nice and all inductively factored reflection arrangements. It turns out that apart from the supersolvable instances only the monomial groups $G(r,r,3)$ for $r \ge 3$ give rise to nice reflection arrangements. As a consequence of this and of the classification of all inductively free reflection arrangements from our earlier work, we deduce that the class of all inductively factored reflection arrangements coincides with the supersolvable reflection arrangements. Moreover, we extend these classifications to hereditarily factored and hereditarily inductively factored reflection arrangements.

The class of free multiarrangements is known to be closed under taking localizations. We extend this result to the stronger notions of inductive and recursive freeness. As an application, we prove that recursively free multiarrangements are compatible with the product construction for multiarrangements. In addition, we show how our results can be used to derive that some canonical classes of free multiarrangements are not inductively free.

In 1989, Ziegler introduced the concept of a multi-arrangement. One natural example is the reflection arrangement of a unitary reflection group with multiplicity given by the number of reflections associated with each hyperplane. For all but three irreducible groups, Ziegler showed that each such multi-reflection arrangement is free. We complete Ziegler's example by confirming these outstanding cases.

We study the notion of a nice partition or factorization of a hyperplane arrangement due to Terao from the early 1990s. The principal aim of this note is an analogue of Terao's celebrated addition-deletion theorem for free arrangements for the class of nice arrangements. This is a natural setting for the stronger property of an inductive factorization of a hyperplane arrangement by Jambu and Paris. In addition, we show that supersolvable arrangements are inductively factored and that inductively factored arrangements are inductively free. Combined with our addition-deletion theorem this leads to the concept of an induction table for inductive factorizations. Finally, we prove that the notions of factored and inductively factored arrangements are compatible with the product construction for arrangements.

Let W be a finite complex reflection group acting on the complex vector space V and let A(W) = (A(W), V) be the associated reflection arrangement. In an earlier paper by the last two authros, we classified all inductively free reflection arrangements A(W). The aim of this note is to extend this work by determining all inductively free restrictions of reflection arrangements.

A Weyl arrangement is the arrangement defined by the root system of a finite Weyl group. When a set of positive roots is an ideal in the root poset, we call the corresponding arrangement an ideal subarrangement. Our main theorem asserts that any ideal subarrangement is a free arrangement and that its exponents are given by the dual partition of the height distribution, which was conjectured by Sommers-Tymoczko. In particular, when an ideal subarrangement is equal to the entire Weyl arrangement, our main theorem yields the celebrated formula by Shapiro, Steinberg, Kostant, and Macdonald. Our proof of the main theorem heavily depends on the theory of free arrangements and thus greatly differs from the earlier proofs of the formula.

We construct counterexamples to the conjecture that every free arrangement is recursively free in characteristic zero. The intersection lattice of our smallest example has a realization over a finite field which is recursively free, thus recursive freeness is not a combinatorial property of the intersection lattice of an arrangement.

Let A = (A,V) be a complex hyperplane arrangement and let L(A) denote its intersection lattice. The arrangement A is called supersolvable, provided its lattice L(A) is supersolvable, a notion due to Stanley. Jambu and Terao showed that every supersolvable arrangement is inductively free, a notion due to Terao. So this is a natural subclass of this particular class of free arrangements. Suppose that W is a finite, unitary reflection group acting on the complex vector space V. Let A = (A(W), V) be the associated hyperplane arrangement of W. In a recent paper, we determined all inductively free reflection arrangements. The aim of this note is to classify all supersolvable reflection arrangements. Moreover, we characterize the irreducible arrangements in this class by the presence of modular elements of rank 2 in their intersection lattice.

Suppose that W is a finite, unitary reflection group acting on the complex vector space V. Let A = A(W) be the associated hyperplane arrangement of W. Terao has shown that each such reflection arrangement A is free. There is the stronger notion of an inductively free arrangement. In 1992, Orlik and Terao conjectured that each reflection arrangement is inductively free. It has been known for quite some time that the braid arrangement as well as the Coxeter arrangements of type B and type D are inductively free. Barakat and Cuntz completed this list only recently by showing that every Coxeter arrangement is inductively free. Nevertheless, Orlik and Terao's conjecture is false in general. In a recent paper, we already gave two counterexamples to this conjecture among the exceptional complex reflection groups. In this paper we classify all inductively free reflection arrangements. In addition, we show that the notions of inductive freeness and that of hereditary inductive freeness coincide for reflection arrangements. As a consequence of our classification, we get an easy, purely combinatorial characterization of inductively free reflection arrangements A in terms of exponents of the restrictions to any hyperplane of A.