i
Lommutdtive Rings
IRVING KAPLANSKY
Revised Edition
_ I 
The University of Chicago Press Chicago and London
Lontents
To Chellie
Preface Chapter 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 Chapter 2 21 22 23 24 Chapter 3 31 32 33 Chapter 4 41 42 43 44 45 46 ix xi Prime Ideals and Integral Extensions 1 Prime Ideals 1 Integral Elements, I 8 Gideals, Hilbert Rings, and the Nullstellensatz Localization 22 Prime Ideals in Polynomial Rings 25 Integral Elements, I1 27 Noetherian Rings 47 The Ascending Chain Condition 47 Zerodivisors 54 Integral Elements, I11 66 Intersections of Quasilocal Domains 75 Macaulay Rings and Regular Rings 84 Rsequences and Macaulay Rings 84 The Principal Ideal Theorem 104 Regular Rings 115 Homological Aspects of Ring Theory 123 Homology 123 Unique Factorization 130 The Euler Characteristic 137 Change of Rings for Injective Dimension 149 Gorenstein Rings 156 Duality 165 Preface to the Revised Edition
IRVING KAPLANSKY is George Herbert Mead Distinguished Service Professor in the Department of Mathematics, the University of Chicago. H e is the author of numerous books and articles and is the general editor of the Chicago Lectures in Mathematics series published by the University of Chicago Press. [1974]
12
The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London
@ 1970, 1974 by The University of Chicago
All rights reserved. Revised edition published I974 Printed in the United States of America International Standard Book Number: 0226424543 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 71102759
Notes 169 Bibliography 171 174 Index of Theorems Index of Topics 181
V
PreFdce
This account of commutative rings has grown over the years through
various stages. The first version was an appendix to the notes on homological dimension issued in 1959 (these notes, without the appendix, have now appeared as Part I11 of [26]). The second was a crude 49 page dittoed manuscript written in 1961. This account was expanded in the 19656 course presented at Queen Mary College. I owe an enormous debt to Professor Paul M. Cohn of Bedford College for his expert job in writing up the course; large parts are incorporated here with only small changes. A draft of the book was prepared during the summer of 1968, and was used for a course at Chicago during 19689. No attempt has been made to achieve scholarly completeness. References to sources have been made only in scattered instances where it seemed particularly desirable, and the bibliography contains only items to which there is an actual reference. My intention is to give an account of some topics in the theory of commutative rings in a way that is accessible to a reader with a modest background in modern algebra; I assume only an acquaintance with the definitions and most elementary properties of rings, ideals, and modules. More exactly, this is true till $41, where I presuppose the theory of homological dimension as developed in [26], and 544 where use of the long exact sequence for Ext begins. I hope that readers will find it feasible to go on from this book to a deeper study of the literature. It would be most urgent to learn the theory of completion and the Cohen structure theorems. I have inserted numerous exercises, partly to cover additional material of lesser importance, and partly to give the reader a chance to test his growing skill. There is occasional reliance on the exercises as part of the exposition, and I hope no r ader will find this inconvenient. In the style of Landau, or Hard ,and Wright, I have presented the
s
vii
they are too numerous to list. Marshall Fraser. I am very grateful to Joel Cohen. I admit that this way the lowliest lemma gets elevated to the same eminence as the most awesome theorem. Judith Sally.. so impressive that I felt the need to add an index of theorems. Ross Hamsher. I am indebted to many students and colleagues. the adjective tive” is occasionally inserted. 22 of $22. but I am none the less appreciative. I prefer this to the nplace decimal system favored by some authors. and I have also grown tired of seeing a barrage of lemmas. IRVING UPLANSKY
~~~~~~~~~
Preface to the Revised Edition
In this reprinting of Commutative Rings minor slips have been corrected and several more substantial changes have been made (largely in the exercises). Stanley Kochman. and Wolmer Vasconcelos for numerous valuable suggestions. All rings are commutative except in several (not quite so fleeting) isolated passages. except for a fleeting instant in Ex. All rings have a unit element. Peter Kohn. Stephen McAdam. Martin Isaacs. Gerald Curtis.
PREFACE
material as an Unbroken series of theorems. If fully credited. and Mary Johnson of Allyn and Bacon.. Final thanks go to Joyce Bolden and Diane Moore for a splendid job of typing. and scholia (whatever they are). and to Sylvia Clark. Robert Gilmer was especially generous in reading the manuscript critically and enlightening me on many points. Graham Evans. William Heinzer. for their fine cooperation. their names would be everywhere dense. Somewhat erratically.Vlll
. propositions. In a brief new section entitled “Notes” I have added some comments which are in the nature of afterthoughts rather than a revision of the text. the number of theorems becomes impressive. corollaries.
. David Eisenbud. Inc. Also. merely for emphasis.
Let S be the settheoretic complement of an ideal I. The convention that R itself is not regarded as a prime ideal is fairly universally accepted now.S. Krull discovered a very useful converse. a) generated by I and a is strictly larger
1
. Then I is prime. Then the ideal (I.
“1
I
Theorem 1. Given ab e I we must show that a or b lies in I. the ideal I is prime if ab e I implies a e I or b E I . Alternatively: I is prime if R / I is an integral domain.
Proof. and it is appropriate to devote the first section to a collection of observations concerning them. for occasional sllps). We recall the definition: in a commutative ring R . In the ring of integers there is an analogous convention that 1 is not a prime. Let S be a multiplicatively closed set in a ring R and let I be an ideal in R maximal with respect to the exclusion of S. and we shall adhere to it (except.CHAPTER
1
Prime Ideals md Integral Extensions
11’ PRIME IDEALS
I
>
r
Prime ideals pl$ a central role in the theory of commutative rings. Then the definition of a prime ideal can be recast as follows: I is prime if and only if S is multiplicatively closed. no doubt. Now it goes without saying that I is maximal with respect to the exclusion of . Suppose the contrary.
The prime ideals maximal in the complement are just the ordinary maximal ideals. Let R be any commutative ring. It is not any old multiplicatively closed set. (2) the complement o S is a settheoretic union o prime ideals in R. proving (2). which is vaquously . Let S be the set o all elements in R expressible as a product of principal primes.
~
I
Definition. So: the. In Theorem 2 it would have been reasonable to exclude the possibility 0 e S.” j . . Before proceeding. This second case is important enough to merit a definition.
Remarks.
# ! . we can by Zorn’s lemma expand J to an ideal Z maximal with respect to disjointness from S. f f
Proof.e maximal ones. The following statements on a set S in a ring R are equivalent: ( 1 ) S is a saturated multiplicatively closed set. p n of principal primes. 2.3. s2 = iz yb. 2. S is a saturated multiplicatively closed set. A saturated multiplicatively closed set containing 0 is the whole ring.zergdivisors in R are a union of prime ideals. When we express the complement of S as a union of prime ideals we can of course d:sca d any prime ideals not maximal within the complement in favor of t . By Theorem 1.
n
1..
I/PRIMEIDEALS
AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. given any ideal J disjoint from a multiplicatively closed set S. Let S be the set of all nonzerodivisors in R. In the course of the discussion we encounter an instructive example of a saturated multiplicatively closed set. . but not very convincingly a union of prime ideals. Thus every x not in S has been inserted in a prime ideal disjoint from S.
Theorem 2. Similarly we have s2 e S. I an ideal in R. %’ b At this point we shall briefly discuss unique factorization domains (UFD’s). The prime ideals maximal within the zerodivisors on A are called the maximal primes of A . 1..
PRIME
IDEALS
3
than I and therefore intersects S. If an element in an integral domain is expressible as a product plp2 . up to a permutation o the p’s. since S is saturated. rather than of R/Z. factor lies in Z and the fourth because ab e Z. let us examine more closely the complement of a prime ideal. A any nonzero Rmodule. Then S is a saturated multiplicatively closed set. They can be characterized by a suitable interplay between prime ideals and principal ideals (Theorem 5). We are led to the following tLeorem. Let R be an integral domain. and a typical application of Theorem 1.
6
.2
CH. p must have the following property: p I ab implies p a or p I b (the vertical line means “divides”). we say maximal primes of I . it has the further property of being saturated in the sense that along with an element x it containsLan the divisors of x . in the second case take all nonzerodivisors on the module. Let us for brevity call p a principal prime if the principal ideal (p) is prime and nonzero.
0
k
. Then the principal ideal (x) is disjoint from S. and multiplication of them by unit factors. Expand ( x ) to an ideal Z maximal with respect to disjointness from S (Zorn).
f Theorem 4. Notice that for a principal ideal ( p ) to be prime. The prime ideals‘maximal among these might be called ‘the “maximal primes of zerodivisors. f
We leave the standard proof to the reader. Let us give two illustraqons. The set consisting of 1 is multiplicatively closed.
I
Theorem. Hence s1s2e Z a contradiction.*. I is prime. . . But then
+
(1)
s1s2
=
(il
+ xa)(i2 + y b )
and all four terms on the right of (1) lie in Z (the first three because a ) . the danger of ambiguity is slight. and its complement is the null set. Thus we have a method of constructing prime ideals.
C’
We note that. in essence a sharpenin6 of Theorem 1. x e R). To prove that (1) implies (2) take x in the complement of S. That (2) implies (1) is immediate from the definitions. ”: Both of these illustrations admit appropriate generalizations to modules: in the first case take all elements of R that act onetoone and onto as multiplications of the given Rmodule. Thus there exists an element s1 e S of the form s1 = il + xa (il e I . then that expression is unique. When A has the form R / I . Its saturation is the set of all units.

Theorem 7. Now b annihilates a x . . Then Z is prime. Then alb = pz ... 1I/PRIME.. Cohen [12]. i. assuming abeZ with neither
a nor b in I.. As generators for it we may pick elements of the form il xla. . A commutative ring R is Noetherian if every ideal in R is finitely generated.. .i‘
1
Theorem 6.
. Assume a F I. a) is properly larger than Z and consequently is finitely generated. not a unit. P contains a principal prime. basic structure. It suffices for us to show that S contains every element in R that is neither 0 nor a unit. Then ax # 0. Now let J be the set of all y in R with ya e I. \ (b) Assume that every nonzero prime ideal in R contains a principal prime. When a is written as a product of principal primes. By hypothesis. p. . Let Z be an ideal in R that is maximal among all annihilators of nonzero elements of A . IDEALS
5
Proof. p. We have verified Z = (il. . and hence a. .
1 . so we have an expression

as required. So suppose ab = p 1 . and is maximal among all ideals in R that are not finitely generated. Obviously S is multiplicatively closed... Say Z is the annihilator of x e A (notation: Z = ann(x)). .
We conclude this section with some remarks on the set S of prime ideals in a ring R. Hence z e (il. Then p1 must divide a or b. hence b e I.Ju). . . I/PRIME IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. in. By hypothesis it cannot be properly larger. a product of principal primes.x. i. the principal ideal (c) is disjoint from S. Then J contains both I and b. Theorem 8. denote by S the set of all products of principal primes. if the ideals in R satisfy the ascending chain condition. We claim that
Theorem 5. but first we introduce the most basic definition of all.a (il. . in e I ) .a) Here we see that uIxl+ ..(i. Let Z be an ideal in R . (a) Assume R is a UFD and P a nonzero prime ideal in R.
z
=
ul(il
In the next two theorems we exhibit two ways of constructing prime ideals without using a multiplicatively closed set. Ja). As in Theorem 4. . then R is Noetherian. hence is finitely generated. . + x.p I . Given ab E Z we must prove that ‘a or b lies in I. If every prime ideal in a ring R is finitely generated. x. To prove that S is saturated we assume ab e S and have to prove that a and b lie in S. . are due to I.. Suppose on the contrary that c is an element of R that is not 0. Then all the more so z lies in (I. P will contain an element a that is neither 0 nor a unit. Since S is saturated. for Theorem 3 will then complete the proof. It seems reasonable to think of the partial ordering on S as its first.
1
Proof. one of the factors p i must be contained in P . lies in J. in.
Z = (h. Let R be a ring and A an Rmodule. Theorem 6 is due to Herstein.+ u. .
Take an arbitrary element z in I. Expand (c) to a prime ideal P disjoint from S (Theorem 1). a). We make an indirect proof. . hence is properly larger than I. . . Ja).. Now any ideal that is not finitely generated can be enlarged to one that is maximal with this property (this is a good illustration for children cutting their teeth on Zorn’s lemma). By induction on n we have that both al and b are in S.
+ xla) + .are ready for the next theorem. and not in S.
Proof.. . Unless R is a field ( a trivial case we are tacitly ignoring). Theorem 7 and its immediate corollary.. a contradiction. We note that ann(ax) 3 I. + u. . . Then Z is prime. whose revolutionary paper [38] inpugurated the use of chain conditions in algebra. S. An integral domain is a UFD if and only if every nonzero prime ideal in R contains a principal prime. which implies that Z is finitely generated. Say a = plal.
Definition. Question: can an arbitrary partially
. The designation honors Emmy Noether. a = p1 . We..
I
.4
CH. a contradiction.
+
+
Proof. or equivalently.
Theorem 8. Then the ideal (I. Hence ann(ax) = I. . Remark. Suppose Z is notfinitely generated. b e S.
(c) The number of prime ideals between two given ones is zero or infinite. 3 we cannot drop the requirement that P is prime.@& elements we can find a pair of “immediate neighbors. (a) The ascending chain condition. P I the union of all P.
such that there is no prime ideal properly between Pi and
el. Let us say that a saturated multiplicatively closed set S is generated by { x . Prove that R is a field. Let I be any ideal in a ring R. Prove: x5I I. p B Q. the first of which is of course immediate. Let P be a finitely generated prime ideal with annihilator 0. 2. . .
* a : ”. n P . Insert (Zorn) . Prove that if S is finitely generated in this sense.
Proof..a.
7 . P I and Ql are prime. Continue.’s can be properly betwee*P1 and for if x e P. None of the P.
. write q = pql.
PRIME
IDEALS
7
/ .. write j = p x .x i m a l W P J of prime ideals between a m_a _P and Q .. (a) If Q is a prime ideal properly contained in P.unusual opportunity to use Zorn’s lemma going down. is prime and it is clearly minimal. for a moment. The fact that Theorem 9 works for intersections gives us an. . It does have another (perhaps slightly unexpected) property: between any.) Let K be a field. Prove that the annihilator of the module PIP2is P . (d) There are a finite number of mipimalprime ideals. so q1 e Q. Let P = ( p ) be a principal prime ideal and J = n P n . (Hint: ifp.
EXERCl SES
. and n P . and US.) 4.
I
Theorem 10. Let us peek ahead.
I do not know of any further conditions that S has to satisfy. ideal at all can lie properly between P1 and
1 
el. Take any element x that is in Q but not ‘In P . Let R be the ring of polynomials in x over K.
7 :
Proof. This follows from Theorem 9. (Hint: for j E J. Let R be a ring. it is conceivable that if a partially ordered set satisfies the conclusions of Theorems 9 and 11 then it is isomorphic to the partially ordered set of prime ideals in some commutative ring.)
. Let P C Q be distinct prime ideals in a ring R . Here pql e Q. are multiplicatively closed.
. then it can be generated by a single element . l/PRIME IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. = Zaljp. e P .
ordered set be the partially ordered set of prime ideals in a ring? There is a first negative answer. 5 ..”
II

<
S for
Again we can speculate on whether we have found all conditions on R Noetherian. In other words. (b) The descending chain condition in the strong sense that there is a uniform bound on the lengths of chains descending from a fixed prime ideal. (The purpose of this exercise is to show that in Ex. which is fairly immediate: in S every chain has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound.then P .

$’
.
1. By Theorem 9. Prove: J = p J . Let ( P .p . prove that Q C J . Define Ql to be the intersection of all P.
el. Embed P in a maximal chain { P i } of prime ideals containing I (Zorn). Our task becomes even easier when we pass to the complements S. Then there exist distinct prime ideals Pi. subject to the condition that they contain no terms in x or x2. Obviously (2) holds.)s containing x . Then both U P . We shall find four further restrictions on S. 3 . Suppose that every ideal in R (other than R) is prime.) (b) Assume further that p is a nonzerodivisor. By Theorem 9. and x51C P . Then l Q primeideal minimal among all prime a igeals contaiEing I. From j e Pn for all n deduce x e J. then P.
Proof.6
CH. } be a chain of prime ideals in a ring R . P a prime ideal containing I . ) if S is the smallest such set containing the x’s. Take determinant.’s not containing x . (Hint: for q e Q.then xp. are prime ideals in R . By the maximality of [ P a } no prime .
We return to the partially ordered set S of prime ideals.3 Ql and if x f P. generate P and x annihilates P / P 2 . b
Theorem 11. at facts we shall learn later in the Noetherian case.. it being quite evident that AS. Ql with
(2)
P C P i C QiC Q
> . Let I be the ideal in R generated by x3 and 9. C Pi.
<< :
Theorem 9.
We have (I. Say A is spanned over R by al.
(4)
ua. Perhaps the most important example is a ring T containing R in its center. .. Prove that Z is prime.e.jaj (Aii a R.8
CH. . Prove that the coefficients of f g also generate R.A. (Hint: if the coefficients of f g lie in a maximal ideal Myconsider the highest coefficients o f f and g that do not lie in M. y E T.u) = u2. By hypothesis. ( b ) there exigts a finitely generated Rsubmodule A of T such that uA C A and the left annihilator of A in T is 0. Prove that Z is prime.. The next theorem provides a criterion that is often easier to use. bl + P . Let (p) and (q) be nonzero principal prime ideals in a ring. (Hint: suppose ab e J with neither a nor b in J.
*
A.) (e) Assume merely that J is finitely generated.A11 An u ... Prove that there cannot exist a distinct chain P 3 Ql 3 Qz of prime ideals.
.
Proof: (a) implies (b).) 7. The following statements are equivalent: (a) u is integral over R .) 6 . There exists an idempotentf in Zsuch thatf(u2 . take A to be the Rsubmodule spanned by 1. Let R be a commlitative ring. .u.
I/PRIME IDEALS
AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC.) + to' (d) Assume that R is a domain and that J is finitely generated. a.unl. .n u is an idempotent in P. 9.. Isaacs) In a ring R let Z be maximal among nonprincipal ideals. u e T . .. I
I
L
. Suppose that (p) C (q) and that p is a nonzerodivisor. .A22 A21
* * * *
XI. This time take J = all x with xc e I.) Prove that an infinite integral domain with with a finite number of units has an infinite number of maxim& ideals. Use ab E Pm+n+l get a contradiction.) 11. Let P be a prime ideal in R. n)
Bring all the terms in (4) to the lefthand side.hence in Z. b).. 3.
We introduce the concept of an Ralgebra over a commutative ring R : a ring T that is an Rmodule and satisfies the standard axioms. and that the same is true for g . 12/lNTEGRAL ELEMENTS.
annihilates al. j = 1. We have equations. We say that T is integral if all its elements are integral.
Definition. . In a ring R let Z be maximal among ideals that are not countably generated.
. (Hint: from J = pJ. 8. This result is due to D. Argue that Z = Jc and so is principal. (Hint: pass to R/Qz and quote part (d). Get the final statement from part (a). T a n Ralgebra..+ a. u. i.
A2n
12 INTEGRAL ELEMENTS. (b) implies (a). (Hint: if e is an idempotent in R/Z.a ) = (c). An element u e T is said to be integral over R if it satisfies an equation of the form
(3)
U"
+ alu"' + .. (Hint: adapt the proof of Theorem 7.u) E I C P. We are allowing T to be noncommutative.) 10. Since J 3 (I. e = 0. Prove that R/Z has no nontrivial idempotents. A = 0. Exwe find that A panding A gives us an equation that shows that u is integral. = 0
(ai E R)
i. deduce J = 0 by a determinant argument as in Ex. Suppose that the ideal generated by the coefficients off is R. notably
4v)= (axly = x(ay)
for a e R and x.We can assume u € P. . (M. Z the ideal generated by all the idempotents in P . If u satisfies an equation ( 3 ) of degree n.1
An2
* * *
u . Write a = p w l . a polynomial equation with coefficients in R and highest coefficient 1. . Lazard. Prove that J = 0 and that there is no prime ideal properly between P and 0. prove that J is prime. Let R be a commutative ring and T an Ralgebra. I
9
(c) Again assuming that p is a nonzerodivisor. (This exercise is offered as a modernization of Euclid's theorem on the infinitude of primes.) Let f and g be polynomials in an indeterminate over a ring R. Then u(1 .
. b = pnbl with al. .
Theorem 12. = CA. J is principal. Prove: ( p ) = (4). . (This exercise is a naive version of Gauss's lemma.. pick u + e.. The theory of linear equations applies. . Then (1 . a. and if A is the determinant
u .
This brief section is devoted to developing the theory of integral elements up to the point needed in $13. hence u E Z.
. as the proof of Theorem 12 showed. Prove that u satisfies an equation (3) with a. . For u # 0 in R we have that r 1 integral over R.
The following theorem will be used in proving Theorem 16. and satisfies both (u v)AB C A B and (uv)AB C AB.10
CH.. and assume u e JT.
Ukrk
where ri ranges from 0 to ni . Let T be a commutative algebra over the commutative ring R.
Proof. then. For instance. Note that by Theorem 12. eP h r all r.. Then u v and uv are integral. assume that T is generated as a ring over R by ul. Let R be an integral domain contained in a jield L. Let T be a commutative algebra over the commutative ring R. Let R C T be commutative rings with T integral ever R. which in turn will be used in $13. r1 R[u]= R.
+
Proof. .
Theorem 17. Theorem 15 will also be applied in $16. Take.. We have already noted that (1) implies (2). (2) T is a finitely generated ring over R and is integral over R. Then the elements
UlrlUZrZ
. 1/PRIME IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. we have
(5)
ZT"
EXERCISES
+ u~c("') + . 12/INTEGRAL ELEMENTS. We apply Theorem 12 again.
is Proof. v e T are commuting integral elements. by Theorem 12. If L is integral over R then R is afield. Let A be the equation (3) with a.
1. The exact connection is given in Theorem 17. u an invertible element of a ring containing R. if T = R[x]with x an indeterminate. is i
Proof.. By Theorem 15. and suppose that the equation showing ui to be integral has degree ni.
+
t
The next theorem is an immediate corollary. finitely generated modules. uk.tn.
Theorem 16. Let T be an algebra over the commutative ring R. contains 1. T is generated by one element. I
11
Remark. Hence R is a field. = 0
* *
(a. Let R be a commutative ring. Note that. and suppose that u. as a ring over R.
Theorem 13. We say that T is a finitely generated ring over R if there exists a finite set of elements generating T as a ring over R. Then the elements of T integral over R form a subring of T.
Theorem 14.
Theorem 15. This does not at all imply that T is a finitely generated Rmodule. In the setup of Theorem 12. It makes life a little easier to arrange (as we can) 1 e A . Then the product A B is finitely generated. e P. In practice the condition that the left annihilator of A is 0 is usually assured by having 1 e A . then T is integral over R. . If u' is integral over R. e R)
Multiply ( 5 ) through by un and rearrange to get
. We can work within the subalgebra generated by u and v.u(a1+ a2u + + a. Prove that u satisfies an j.
We put Theorem 12 to work at once.1. span T over R. we can always pick A to contain 1. e We conclude this section with a remark on finitely generated rings vs.(Hint: say u = jltl
+. Let T be a commutative Ralgebra.+
. B. if T is a finitely generated Rmodule. so T might as well be commutative. Conversely. 2. + a.unl)
* *
=
1
*
showing that u'
e
R[u]. Then r1 integral over R f and only i f r l e R[u]. assume uA C JA where J is an arbitrary ideal of R. modules A and B working for u and v. The followiizg statements are equivalent: (1) T is a finitely generated Rmodule. Let J be an arbitrary ideal of R. but T is not a finitely generated Rmodule.The argument is reversible.
and we seem to lack even a reasonable conjecture concerning the structure of general Gdomains.. . Observe that A is finitely generated as an Rmodule and that uA C JA. To prove that (1) implies (2). prove that vA C A where A is of the module spanned by 1. At any rate.
4
. Of course any field is a Gdomain. and Hilbert ring. HILBERT RINGS. and u an invertible element of a ring containing R . Later we shall determine exactly which Noetherian domains are Gdomains. The next two theorems are simple but useful. This being true for any nonzero b.) 3. .
Theorem 19. the precise condition being that there are only a finite number of nonzero prime ideals. and a polynomial in r 1 degree n.bexamples show that the Noetherian facts do not a t all generalize. . .
AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. (Hint: if v is a polynomial in u of degree m. and Z an ideal in R properly containing P.) Let R be a ring. but we wish it were a maximal ideal (for instance. Take any b # 0 in R . K can be generated over R by one element. we examine principal ideal domains. . so that an inductive procedure will work smoothly). If Z contains no power of u. Some remarks will precede the development of the theory of Gdomains.
I/PRIME IDEALS.'x. For a nonzero dement u in R the following three statements are equivalent: ( I ) Any nonzero prime ideal contains u. (Hint: observe that ZxP C P and deduce xP C P. (3) K = R[u']. we have R[u'] = K . Then b' = c r n E R[u']. a contradiction. It is easy to exhibit a valuation domain that is a Gdomain but nevertheless possesses comparable nonzero prime ideals. . (2) as a ring. His paper [20] appeared at vir. in a Gdomain the intersection of all nonzero prime ideals is nonzero.a. that is. Gdomains were also considered by Artin and Tate in [ 11. A close examination of the facts leads to the sequence of ideas: Gdomain. An integral domain satisfying either (hence'both) of the statements in Theorem 18 is called a Gdomain. note also that as a corollary of Theorem 19. say u" = bc. For nonNoetherian domains the facts are more complex. Let R be an integral domain. Let R be an integral domain with quotient3eld K. Let R be an. AND THE
NULLSTELLENSATZ
Our main objective in this section is the Nullstellensatz. .. The first thing to do with a maximal ideal M in R[x] is to contract it back to the ideal M n R in R .) 4 (This exercise generalizes half of Theorem 15. When we do this we certainly get a prime ideal. 1. tually the same time as a similar paper by Krull [27]. Then with c = b1 * b.

. (1) implies (2).
A
Theorem 18. Use Ex. Let x be an element in the quotient field of R satisfying xZ C R . we suppose K = R[al/bl.
HILBERT RINGS. ( 2 ) implies (3). u.
Proof. Prove that x is integral over R . We see immediately that a principal ideal domain is a Gdomain if and only if it has only a finite number of primes (up to units).
1 3/GIDEALS. Thus we seek information on the maximal ideals of K[xl.. Theorems 32 and 33.)
13 GIDEALS. Of course (2) implies (1). . (2) Any nonzero ideal contains a power of u. it seems advisable not to attempt to honor Krull in this connection. Also (this is more difficult)' there exist Gdomains in which all nonzero prime ideals are maximal and there are an infinite number of them. Prove that R[u] nR [ t r l ]is integral over R . To get more examples.12
CH.]. The following two statements are equivdent: ( I ) K is a$nitely generated ring over R. Now the modern style is to study the problem one variable at a time. Gideal. AND THE NULLSl'ILLENSATZ
13
subring of T generated over R by the t's. P a finitely generated nonzero prime ideal in R. we look at the maximal ideals of R[x] with R a more or less arbitrary commutative ring. From ( 2 ) we have that (b)contains some un.integral domain with quotientfield K ./b.]. all of which are maximal. we have K = R[l/c]. Let Z be a nonzero ideal..
The name honors Oscar Goldman.
Proof.. where K is a field. Note that any Gdomain has an element u of the type occurring in Theorem 19. then (Theorem 1) Z can be expanded to a prime ideal P disjoint from { un).
DeJinition. . . Further results concerning the material in this section appear in Gilmer's paper [18]. Since Krull already has a class of rings named after him.
Let R be a Gdomain with quotient field K and let T be a ring lying between R and K . 'give fairly complete information. The next two theorems.between R and K . By Theorem 16.. .
Theorem 23. are integral. L is integral over R1. . If R[x] is a Gdomain.which is immediate from Theorems 21 and 22. necessarily K. 13/GIDEALS. for there is a pleasant opportunity here for Euclid's trick to enjoy a repeat performance. u an element of a larger domain.. The image is all of K . wk]. . We can map R[x] homomorphically into K by sending x into ul. hence is itself a field. . If K is finite. so is a x ] . say avm + . then R[x] is never a Gdomain. . . But this is unduly sophisticated. Take a nonzero prime ideal P and any nonzero element b in it. Suppose that p l . we can cite from field theory the existence of extensions of K of arbitrarily large degree.
Proof.

If R[u] is a Gdomain.So K is a finitely generated ring over R and R is a Gdomain.
So far there has been no sign that Gdomains have anything to do with maximal ideals in polynomial rings. The T.
HILBERT RINGS. Since R [ r l ]= K we have bI = c r n for suitable c E R and n. l/PRIME IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. say K = R[u'].
%
Theorem 22.then K
=
r [ l t l ] all the more so. The elements v. L be the quotient fields of R . wl. Then u" = bc E P.
To use the notion of a Gdomain effectively. 1. T . Suppose first that R is a Gdomain. . A fortiori these elements vl generate L over R. In saying that T is algebraic over R we mean that every element of T satisfies a polynomial equation with coefficients in R . we need to know how it behaves under ring extensions. so the kernel M is maximal. obtaining a ring R."
i
Proof. So we will achieve our goal if we show that K [ x ] has an infinite number of primes. = 0 biwini + . Now. . necessarily equal to L. T might even be the quotient field of R . Let R C T be integral domains and suppose that T is algebraic over R and finitely generated as a ring over R .v. this is clear. Thus T is a Gdomain. .
I
Proof. An integral domain R is a Gdomain if and only if there exists in the polynomial ring R[x] an ideal M which is maximal and satis$es M f l R = 0. then u is algebraic over R and R is a Gdomain.) We assume that T is a Gdomain. and is a Gdomain no matter what R is. Let K.
. Let K be the quotient field of R . together with EX. a contradiction. If K
=
R [ r l ] ... .a as a runs over K . . R1 is a field. ThenR is a Gdomain if and only i f T is a Gdomain. for instance. bkl to R .. Let R be a domain.this is. .14
CH. I R is an integral domain and x is an indeterminate f over R. . say K = R[ul]where K is the quotient field of R . L = T[V'] and T = R[wl. . .. which is algebraic over R by default. Hence (Theorem 13 or Theorem 14)..
Adjoin C' blI..
.. k )

Theorem 21. . ..
Theorem 24. Then T is a Gdomain. Then q is divisible by none of the pi's. The next theorem exhibits the connection.
t
'
For convenience we add a theorem. .
.. wk.equivalent to saying that the quotient field of T is algebraic over the quotient field of R. (Note that this half of the proof did not require T to be a finitely generated ring. field L is generated over R by wl. over R1 we have arranged that w.
Remark. Suppose that R is a Gdomain. Now if K is infinite. wk. as required. . AND THE NULLSTELLENSATZ
15
(3) implies (1).. .. . wk are algebraic over K and consequently satisfy equations with coefficients in R which lead off. Then T[ul] is a domain algebraic over the field K. But K[x] is a principal ideal domain. yielding irreducible polynomials of arbitrarily large degree.
kt
Proof. no attempt being made to have the highest coefficient 1 . = 0 ( i = 1. But the second half does.
Theorem 20.pk are all the irreducible monk polynomials and form 1 Ip1 P k = q. . just take all x . . whence u E P.
but we delayed it to this point in order to sharpen it a little. From the present point of view these multiplicatively closed sets get a place of honor because they are inextricably linked with Gideals. Note also Ex. let u* denote the image of u.
4
I
Remark. Then M can be generated by N and one more element f. On tracing the sequence of arguments.
f
is one consisting of the powers of an element u (with u preferably nonnilpotent to avoid degeneracy).
Next we discuss how to generate a' maximal ideal of a polynomial ring in the favorable case when the contraction is maximal.
1
I
Proof. In treating many problems. a fact we leave as Ex. By Theorem 19. An ideal I in a ring R is a Gideal ifand only ifit is the cyntraction of a maximal ideal in the polynomial ring R[x]. the following definition is pertinent.l). (Remark: M can be identified as the principal ideal (ux . Remark. If we pass to the ring R / I . we can in this way reduce to the case I = 0. Let I be any ideal in a ring R. R a field. Then the f f radical o I is the intersection o all Gideals containing I. a second application of Theorem 23 lies ahead in the proof of Theorem 31. Clearly a nilpotent element lies inevery prime ideal. R* is a Gdomain. suppose u # N. Let M be a maximal ideal in a x ] and suppose that the contraction M r\ R = N is maximal in R. Themaximality of P tells us that every nonzero prime ideal in R* contains u*. For this purpose we define the radical J of an ideal I to be the set of all elements in R having some power in I. An attentive reader might note that in this application of Theorem 23 (really Theorem 22) only one element was involved. However. 2. By Theorem 23. The nilradical N o any commutative ring R is the inf tersection o all Gideals in R .
This is immediate from Theorem 25 and the definitions.
t. AND THE NULLSTELLENSATZ
17
Since the homomorphism is onetoone on R . We write R* for the quotient ring R / I . HILBERT RINGS.
I/PRIME IDEALS
AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. As a first sample we generalize Theorem 24 (no further proof is needed). Recall that in a commutative ring the set of all nilpotent elements forms an ideal called the nilradical of R . hence Theorem 13 was not needed. i.
In order to discuss maximal ideals of R[x] that do not contract to 0 in R .
We wish to apply Theorem 25 to the homomorphic images of R as well as to R itself.
I
i
. This is a good point at which to make the belated observation that the most frequently encountered multiplicatively closed set
Theorem 28. 13/GIDEALS. We can select f to be a monic polynomial which maps mod N into an irreducible polynomial over the j e l d R / N . f
Theorem 27. This is immediately deducible from Theorem 1. . Denote the image of x in the natural homomorphism R[x] R [ x ] / Mby Y . 
Theorem 26. we can expand it to an ideal P maximal with respect to disjointness from { u " ) . We call I a radical ideal if it is equal t o its radical. we have M r\ R = 0.
Proof. In the domain R* = R / P . The quotient ring R[x]/IR[x]is in a natural way isomorphic to R*[x]. Then R[v] is a field.
Dejinition.
We insert at this point a celebrated theorem of Krull. and we shall often do so.We can reduce to the case N = 0.
Theorem 25. Let I be any ideal in a commutative ring R. we find that Theorem 13 for two elements (which means essentially the full force of Theorem 13) is needed for Theorem 3 1. A prime ideal P in a commutative ring R is a Gideal if RIP is a Gdomain. We know that P is prime (Theorem 1). We show further that P is a Gideal. e. let M be maximal in R[x] and satisfy M n R = 0. R is a Gdomain. Conversely. The ideal 0 is disjoint from { u n ]. and P is a Gideal.
. and then the statement is immediate.. then J / I is the nilradical. 2 in Q 1. In the polynomial ring R[x] there is a smallest extension ZR[x] of I . Krull's theorem asserts that the nilradical is equal to the intersection of all prime ideals.16
CH. A
When the field R / N is algebraically closed we get a still simpler result. We must construct a Gideal excluding u.) Conversely.
. By Theorem 23.. Then Some power o f f lies in the ideal (gl. makes R a domain. Suppose. %hypothesis says that f lies in the intersection of all maximal ideals containing (gl. . N is a Gideal in R . (Hint: argue that the intersection of the nonzero prime ideals is nonzero.). In this case an irreducible polynomial over R / N must be linear. .) Let K be an algebraically closedfield and let xl. (Full Nullstellensatz. . assume that R is a Hilbert ring.. Later.. Prove that T is not a Gdomain.) Let R be a domain with quotient field K .R is a Hilbert ring by iterated use of Theorem 31. . M = ( N . 19. Conversely. By Theorem 29. Prove: J = (ux .
that R / N is algebraically closed. .)
We note the trivial fact that any homomorphic image of a Hilbert ring is a Hilbert ring.). A commutative ring R is a Hilbert ring if every Gideal in R is maximal.
Proof.
Proof. . a Hilbert ring must have an infinite number of maximal ideals. incidentally. A commutative ring R is a Hilbert ring f and only i the polynomial ring R[x]is a Hilbert ring. Since R is both a Gdomain and a Hilbert ring. Then any maximal ideal in K[xl. This shows that R / N is in a natural way isomorphic to K and thus is algebraically closed.. hence maximal. (Krull’s designation was Jacobson ring. (Hint: pass from R to T by a sequence of transcendental elements..a.a ) f o r some a E R.g. . .
EXERCISES
1.at all~commonzeros of gl. .. . must prove that Q is maximal. .) 3. x . By Theorem 27. e. Since (ThGrem 31) K[xl. we shall be able t o describe exactly which Noetherian rings are Hilbert rings. 13/GIDEALS.
4~
.) 2.
Theorem 33. Let R C T be domains with T finitely generated as a ring over R . gr). and Bourbaki has followed this terminology. (This exercise arose in connection with the proof of Theorem 24. followed by an algebraic extension. .. x. x. Let R = a x l .]. We note (Ex. E K. . The best examples of Hilbert rings are those that arise from Theorem 31 below. (Hint: say f = axn . Then R[u]is a Gdomain.] is of the form ( X I .
e 
Theorem 32. In the light of Theorem 32. . Assume thatfianishes. a.~]. assuming N = (xl . . (Nullstellensatz.anl). Let u be the image of x in the natural homomorphism R[x]3 R [ x ] / Q . 4) that. We are given a maximal ideal M in R[x.
Any maximal ideal is a Gideal. and use Theorem 19.
Definition. it consists of all polynomials vanishing at a point. which.
HILBERT RINGS. b E J . Take a Gideal Q in R[x]. x. But this makes R[u]= R [ x ] / Q a field.). . . Let P = Q A R . Let N be its contraction to R . and u a nonzero element of R . . Let R be an integral domain having only a finite number of prime ideals. g.. except for the trivial case where all prime ideals are maximal. we can reduce we the problem to the case P = 0.. We make an induction on n. .
if
ProoJ If R [ x ]is a Hilbert ring.. Prove that I? is a G.1). Then xg E J. . . . x.domain. . .. . . Theorem 30is applicable and shows that f is in the radical of (gl. . be indeterminates over K. Write f b(ux . x.. AND THE NULLSTELLENSATZ
19
Theorem 29.. From the definition and Theorem 26 we derive:
Proof.g.] is a Hilbert ring. x. in addition to the hypothesis of Theorem 28.1) = xg. after we acquire the principal ideal theorem.) Let K be an algebraically closed field and f.al.
Theorem 30.a..)
Theorem 31.g .f
f
18
CH. The nice class of rings is where the reverse holds. In a Hilbert ring the radical of any ideal I is the intersection of the maximal ideals containing I. .+
. x F J. . Then M
=
( N . x .
+
+ . and not algebraic over R.
PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
i &
3
SEC. polynomials in n variables with coeficients in K.
. first version. proving Q to be maximal. so is its homomorphic image R.al. .). g E J since J is prime. i. Let J be the kernel of the homomorphism from R [ x ]into K given by x + u1. u is algebraic over R and R is a Gdomain.~ . Use induction. R is a field. as required. Use Theorems 21 and 22.
20
CH. Prove that R is a Gdomain if and only if K cannot be expressed as the union o h properly ascending sequence of subrings containing R..] can be generated by k n elements. R = K[xl. Call an ideal Z in R homogeneous if along with a polynomialf. Prove: an element x in a ring R is nilpotent if and only if it is a zerodivisor on every Rmodule.. . x. x. we sketch the facts in that language. tan)e V for all t e K. 17.. 12. L a field containing K . .) (d) In the lattice of varieties of part (c). . . but the union is the smallest object containing the radical ideals or varieties in question. . Let R1 C RZC R . . k fixed. Given a subset S of A.x. fm = 0 have a simultaneous solution if and only if there do not exist gl. (Hint: by switching to R1/Pl reduce to the case where R1 is a field.] can be generated by n elements.] satisfying M n R = 0.] we write V(Z) for the subset of Anconsistingof all points in A . fm B R . Let fi. . . K = R[u’1. Let R be an integral domain with quotient field K. (e) Prove that in the correspondence of part (b) an ideal is prime if and only if the corresponding variety is irreducible. 10.)
1
+ +
.) 14. .. (b) Every radical ideal in R is an intersection of maximal ideals.) (For a reader familiar with projective geometry. Assume K algebraically closed. which is finitely generated as a ring over K. Prove: if P1 and P . Prove that any maximal ideal in T contracts to a maximal ideal in R . . .. (b) Prove that the map S J(S) sets up a onetoone correspondence between all varieties and all radical ideals.). . which contains a copy of K.. (Hint: use Theorem 25. (This exercise sketches the transition to the language of algebraic geometry.. . AND THE NULLSTELLENSATZ
21
4. (a) Prove that J(V(r)) is the radical of Z . and K is infinite...and argue thus that n more generators will suffice for M . . . (Remark: in each case the intersection is merely the settheoretic intersection. points correspond to “submaximal” homogeneous prime ideals. From a homogeneous ideal Z we pass toea projective variety V in (n . and we call such a set a variety. (c) Thus. prove that J(v> is homogeneous. 8 . Pass to the ring T/(ug . in the sense that it cannot be exhibited as the union of two properly smaller varieties. x. . Let K be any field (not necessarily algebraically closed). where all the polynomials in Ivanish.. be rings with R 3 finitely gznerated as a ring over R l . ) 11. 6. Prove that any maximal ideal in R[xl. 13/GIDEALS.. (Hint: let K be the quotient field of R . If we rule out this case the passage
f
V ( 0 J( UZ)) leads to the radical of I. Let R be a Hilbert ring in which every maximal ideal is finitely generated.]. x. Given an ideal Z CK[xl. 16. however. V is the null set if and only if Icontains a power of the ideal (xl. Assume that K is countably generated as a ring over R . the extra information in part (d). (Generalization of Ex.l). . (The homogeneous Nullstellensatz. the radical of a homogeneous ideal is homogeneous. Call a variety V a cone if (al. Prove that the same is true for R[x]. Then the equationsfl = 0. (Hint: by Theorem 30 every prime ideal is an intersection of maximal ideals. Prove further that the correspondence of part (b) is order
+
+
inverting. .
PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. Prove that any maximal ideal in K[xl.) e V implies (tal..) Let R be a Hilbert ring such that every maximal ideal in R can be generated by k elements. Let K be a field. for the vector space of nples over K.) 5. . Prove that M can be generated by n 1 elements. 13.) Let K be a field and write A .
HILBERT RINGS. i. . Give an example to show that we need to assume K infinite. Let K be algebraically closed and R = K[xl. (b) If V is a cone. homogeneous prime ideals direcJly below (Xl.) Kis a field. .g.. x. . (This is actually true for any field. .. (c) Every prime ideal in R is an intersection of maximal ideals. 6. (d) Every Gideal in R is an intersection of maximal ideals.. or otherwise. Prove that these are the only prime ideals in R . . Assume K algebraically closed. Pz its contractions to R1. e. . so is Pz. Note. e R with Zgifi = 1. . . x. . There exists g e T with ug = 1 (mod M ) .]. In particular. Prove that L is finitedimensional over K . Let R C T be rings with R a Hilbert ring and T finitely generated as a ring over R . Let R be a Hilbert ring having only a finite number of maximal ideals. . (c) Prove that under settheoretic inclusion the set of radical ideals is a complete lattice and that the set of varieties likewise is a complete lattice. Prime homogeneous ideals correspond to irreducible varieties.. we write J(S) for the ideal of polynomials vanishing on S. (a) If Z is homogeneous. 9. . Rz.x.1)dimensional projective space.. prove that when K is algebraically closed. . . prove that V(Z)is a cone.. a.) 15. Let M be a maximal ideal in T = R[xl. (Hint: use Theorems 28 and 31 .) 7. . Let P3 be an ideal in ROand P I . Z contains the homogeneous constituents off. . . are maximal. . . Prove that the following statements are equivalent: (a) R is a Hilbert ring.). R is a Gdomain. prove that the union of a finite number of varieties is just the settheoretic union. .
a handier way to think of it is to write a typical j E J as j = y / s with y e R. Rs.
. but it would be ludicrous to take this seriously. Let S be a multiplicatively closed set in R. and it is at any rate convenient to assume that I e S. s2 e S. SSd. so be generous and take all possible representations. (For instance. the equivalence relation being: (a. For use in a Noetherian setup we shall need the
Note that the maximal ideals in Rs are exactly the maximal primes disjoint from S discussed in $11. Rmodule. When the construction is carried out on R itself the resulting object Rs carries a ring structure:
(x. nothing new happens: (A. and then mechanically verify a flock of axioms.
SS1)
and then into an Rmodule by
S)
= (xu. We define As to be the set of equivalence classes of pairs (a. The special case of Rp is so important that it deserves to have the theorem stated all over again. on returning I will have grown to R.) Let A be an . for 0 E P . We then. Hence s2slxE P and x E P.j mutative ring theory that we shall be brief about it.
Sl) =
(s1a
+ . otherwise everything in sight will collapse to 0. s e S. s1e s. we generally get a larger ideal. IS = Rs) if and only if I contains an element of S. In each case the kernel is the set of elements annihilated by some member of S. sl) if there exists s2 in S with s2(sla.
Proof.
SXXl. (It is true that P itself is also a multiplicatively closed set. This has as a result the following useful observation: any Rsmodule has the form A s for a suitable Rmodule A (for instance take A to be A S itself).w. The ideal I “explodes” to Rs (i. Especially important is the case where S is the complement of a prime ideal P.
(xx1. It is harmless to assume that S is saturated. (It is a good idea to assume that 0 Q S. if I contains an element of S. That is.
i
Theorem 34.. and see that PS returns to P . There is a natural Rmodule homomorphism from A into A S and a natural ring homomorphism from R into Rs. However. ’ This says s&x . Given an ideal I in R it maps to the ideal IS in Rs. S ) = (xu. Now we are given x / s = p/sl for some p e P. s) will be a/s.sp) = 0. If we go from J to I and then back to IS. further facts will be developed as needed. Sl) =
further easy observation: if B is finitely generated over Rs. Given an ideal J in Rs there is a welldefined complete inverse image I in R . e. given x E R. ) We proceed to discuss the connection between ideals in R and Rs. We leave to the reader the routine steps of the proof except for thefollowing: start with P prime in R and disjoint from S. Then collect all numerators that arise. S is multiplicatively closed.
and then As becomes an Rsmodule:
(x. s e S. We identify a with a l l when there is no danger (but sometimes there is). it consists of all x with x/l e J. pass to Is.) The correspondence improves if we stick to prime ideals.sal) = 0.
x(a. and P n S is void. Our notation for the equivalence class of (a.
14/LOCALIZATION
23
14 LOCA I ZAT I ON
The technique of localization is by now such a standard part of com. Rp instead of As. sxa.& is identifiable with A S . and then return to an ideal of R. since P is prime.
If the operation is iterated. and it collapses to 0 if every element of I is annihilated by some element of S. s) (al. s) with a e A . then we can arrange to have B = A s with A finitely generated over R. s t S with x/s c Ps we mustprove that x E P . S)
+ (a1. l
SSl). The representation is not unique. We note again that Is consists of all i / s with i E I. Remark. In this section we give the basic definitions and properties . by “abuse of notation. The mappings described above implement a onetOone orderpreserving correspondence between all the prime ideals in Rs and those prime ideals in R disjoint from S. S)
In both cases we have to check that the definitions are independent of the choice of representatives.” write Ap. But if we start with I C R. this is the same ideal I.
I/PFUME IDEALS
AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. This is indeed an equivalence relation.n
22
CH.we find IS = J. We make A s into an abelian group by

(a.
The procedure has the effect of making the selected prime ideal P the “big daddy” in Rp.Let P be prime and S multiplicatively closed in R . Prove that T has the form R p with P a prime ideal in R . Let R be an integral domain with quotient field K . The mappings described above implement a onetoone orderpreserving correspondence between all the prime ideals in Rp and all the prime ideals in R contained in P . Let R be an integral domain with quotient field K . Prove that R S is a . T be multiplicatively closed in R . 8.> P. Let R be an integral domain. R # K . f
We introduce at this point one of the basic concepts in the subjec.. Our notation for the unique maximal ideal of Rp is. prove that R = Rs. one with exactly one maximal ideal) quasilocal.
EXERCISES
1. For any prime ideal P in a general ring R . Compare (Rs)T*and RST. Then there is a onetoone correspondence between prime ideals in R[x] that contract to 0 in R and prime ideals in
K[Xl. . (b) the only localizations of R are R and K .. UFD.Y (a) Let A be an Rmodule. If x maps to zero in AM for every maximal ideal M in R .
In this short section we derive some preliminary results concerning the nature of the prime ideals in a polynomial ring R[x]. (Hint: if the annihilator I of x is not R . 10. IS/PRIME IDEALS I POLYNOMIAL RINGS N
25
Theorem 35. take A 3 I. One corollary of this is important enough to warrant an explicit theorem.
Proof.) 4 (b) If A M = 0 for every M . So we ask: with R a domain. 4 to the module ( B C)/C.
3
$
1
Now the prime ideals in K[x] are insthntly surveyed: we have 0. Let T be a localization of R .
+
. 5. prove that x = 0. even though n 1 prime ideals appear in (6). Nearly always. There cannot exist in R[x] a chain o three distinct prime ideals with the same contraction in R . and let x be an indeterminate. Prove: B C C. If a localization Rs is integral over R.) 8. Such a prime ideal contracts to a prime ideal in R . 2 Let S be multiplicatively closed in a UFD. we say that a chain of distinct prime ideals
(6)
P = Po> PI 3
is of length n. 9.
/ .24
CH.: the rank of a prime ideal. Then R S = K and R[x]s is. We quote Theorem 34. what are the prime ideals in R [ x ]that contract to O? Theorem 36 provides the answer. and let P be a minimal prime ideal in R . e. d. we can reduce the latter to 0. Prove that the following two statements are equivalent: (a) R has exactly one nonzero prime ideal. prove that A = 0. Assume that BMCCM for every maximal ideal M in R . Prove that Rp is a field. a x ] . write T* for the image of T in Rs. Counting as the Romans did. and an infinite number of maximal ideals corresponding to irreducible polynomials over K . Prove that a ring has an infinite number of distinct localizations if and only if it has an infinite number of prime ideals. We say that P has rank n if there exists a chain of length n descending from P.and an infinite number of prime ideals sitting directly above PR[x]. if there exist arbitrarily long chains descending from P. Let R be a ring with no nonzero nilpotent elements. sadly enough. in a natural way. but no longer chain. We say that P has rank a. We are going to call such a ring (i. Let S.
. x an element of A . Let By C be submodules of an Rmodule A . we then derive a picture of the prime ideals in R[x] contracting to P : we have the expansion PR[x]. 1/PRIME IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. (Hint: apply Ex.
15 PRIME IDEALS IN POLYNOMIAL RINGS
In particular: R p has exactly one maximal ideal..
Theorem 36. Is the second a suitable localization of the first? Note especially the relation between the integral domain RIP and the field RplPp. Pp. Compare the integral domains RIP and R s / P s . Let S be the set of nonzero elements in R . 2.
z
+
Theorem 37. Let R be any ring. Thus a minimal prime ideal has rank 0. and assume that T is quasilocal.
R / N is an Sdomain.)Call a ring R a strong Sring if for every prime ideal N in R . n + 1 5 rank(Q) 5 2n+ 1. xn]contracting to P in R . For Noetherian rings it is possible to sharpen Theorem 38. Let P be a prime ideal of rank n in R .
f
EXERClSES
1.
+
+
16
INTEGRAL ELEMENTS. I t is now easy to prove rank(Q) = n 1. It is called the integral closure of R in T. whence rank(Q) 5 n 1.
+
There is a considerable amount of choice in the order of presentation of topics in commutative rings. Say the chain (6) descends from P . Then (by induction) the only possible way to have Po of rank n is to have rank(P.) that there are no prime ideals properly between P* and P. P* is the expansion PR[x] of P to the polynomial ring R[x]. etc.contracting to P in R . Prove that Q is a Gideal if and only if P is a Gideal and Q properly contains PR[x]. then rank(Ql) 6 n.
PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. Only P* can contract to P . This completes the proof of (a). Let Q be a Gideal in R[xl. but we abandon the extra generality that was briefly in evidence in 812. Let n. Frdm one point of view the theory of integral elements in this section is more advanced than a good deal of later material. and by Theorem 37 the others collapse at most two to one. We work with a pair of commutative rings R C T. . . by induction. See Seidenberg [46]. Then rank(P*) = n and mnk( Q ) = n 1. 3. If it contracts to P.) = n .
Proof. Let Q be a prime ideal in R[x]. In the polynomial ring R[x]. Examples show that the bounds in Theorem 38 can be attained. .This contradiction proves rank(P*) = n. and Po properly larger than PIR[x].1 . P* again has rank 1 . 16/1NTEGRAL
ELEMENTS. In either case. I I
Theorem 39. I1
i
27
a prime ideal of rank 1 is not minimal but sits directly above a minimal prime ideal. But we have preferred to delay till the last moment the introduction of chain conditions. Take a prime ideal Q1 properly contained in Q. Take a chain descending from P* and contract it to R . So in a domain it is customary to call a rank 1 prime minimal. then (Theorem 37) Ql = P*. Clearly P1is properly contained in P. Prove: rank(Q) 2 n rank(P).26
CH. We continue with the theory of integral elements where $12 left off. rank(@ 5 n 1. write P* = PR[x].
Remark. If it contracts to a smaller prime. 2.
+
Proof. In the notation of Theorem 38. We abstract a portion of the argument at this point in order to exhibit the fact that it is quite elementary. Then (a)
Let P1be the contraction of Po to R . Call a domain R an Sdomain if for every prime ideal P of rank 1. In view of Theorem 38. we need only prove the inequalities rank(P*) 5 n.However. Then we have P* 3 Po with Po of rank n.
3 Pn*
This proves the first inequality in both (a) and (b). Assume that R is a strong Sring.
. and the handling of (b) is similar. Suppose rank(P*) > n. rank(Ql) 6 n. Using * for the expansion of an ideal to R[x] we exhibit the chain of prime ideals
i .
+
+
(b)
n 5 rank(P*) 9 2n. Other terminology in use in place of “rank” includes “height” or “altitude. P. We recall (Theorem 14) that the elements of T integral over R form a subring of T . Note that in a domain the only truly minimal prime ideal is 0. [47]. and Q be as in Theorem 38. it follows from our hypothesis (by the usual passage to the ring RIP. (As above. shaw that we have rank(Q) = 1 rank(P*). We prove next the transitivity of the integral property.and let Q be a prime ideal in R[x] that contracts to P in R and contains P* properly..R[x].”
Theorem 38. and because of the possible usefulness of the generalization. and so rank(P1) < n.
Granted GU. and G U permits us to expand Q to a prime ideal Ql lying over P. Expand it to Q. in the notation of that theorem. a E T). . proving GU. Given primes P C Po in R and Q in T with Q n R = P .
* #
r
Theorem 44.
The proof of the next theorem is immediate.
The following two statements are equivalent f o r rings
. Going down (GD).and those of T where R C T.
(b) I f P is a prime ideal in R. Q lies over the prime ideal Q A R. We are interested in relations between the prime ideals of R. Suppose that u is integral over T and that T is integral over R. Lying over (LO). 2. but we formulate definitions and some minor results in greater generality. and let P be a prime ideal in R. the complement of P in R. and is left to the reader.
*
Theorem 42. I6/INTEGRAL ELEMENTS.
Proof. Let Q be maximal with respect to the exclusion of S. u I Q n R. Q n R = P. so we may expand 0 to a prime ideal Q in T that is maximal with respect to the exclusion of S. . Let rings R C T be given. For any pair of rings.
P PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC.28
CH. We make use of Theorem 41 . It turns out we can characterize G U and INC in this way.
Theorem 43. The maximality of Q then tells us Q = Ql. Then Qois disjoint from s. Two different primes in T with the same contraction in R cannot be comparable. Thenthe pair R. then Q is maximal with respect to the exclusion of S. and Q is an ideal (necessarily prime) in T maximal with respect to the exclusion of S. For any prime P in R there exists a prime Q in T with Q A R = P. T. (b) I f P is a prime ideal in R.Qo A R = Po. we must prove Q A R = P. GU implies LO. Then S may equally well be regarded ag a multiplicatively closed set in T. We first prove GU. We easily argue that R1 is a finitely generated Rmodule. The same with C replaced by 3. (b) (a). I1
. u ) is properly larger than Q. Then of course u B Q and the ideal (Q.
Proof. By hypothesis. Going up (GU). S is the complement of P in R. say in the elements where s = q au (q E Q. Incomparable (INC). and Q is a prime ideal in T contracting to P in R. and Q is maximal among prime ideals in T having this property. Let Po C P be given. It must therefore intersect S. and 16. and so (Theorem 12) u is integral over R. Let R C T be rings and u an element o a ring conf taining T. Some of the simpler facts concerning these four properties appear in Exs. E T )
exhibits the fact that u is integral over T.
Since (as we noted above) we can always construct a prime ideal maximal with resgect to the exclusion of S . Thefollowing statements are equivalent f o r rings R C T: ( a ) INC holds.
R
C T:
( a ) GU holds. then Q A R = P. there exists Qo in T satisfying Q C Qo. (a) * (b). Let R C T be rings with T integral over R. If equality does not hold. so. Of course Q A R C P. Let R1 = R[al. T satisfies INC and GU (and thus also.
=
0
(a. Then u is integral over R. 3.. u]. by Theorem 42.a. Does Q actually contract to P? This question is evidently crucial. It is still disjoint from 0.
+
I
.
We now turn to integral extensions. and suppose Qo in T contracts to Po. Let S denote the settheoretic complement of P in R. . we have to prove Q A R = P. LO).
Proof. We list four properties that might hold for a pair R. + a. In any attempt to study the relation between P and the prime ideals of T. maximal with respect to the exclusion of S. take u E P . Say
un
+ alunl + . the following construction is quite natural. The ideal Q A R is a prime ideal contained in P. In any event.the complement of P in R.\
29
Theorem 40. Theorem 41 has the following corollary.
Theorem 41. We are principally concerned with the case where T is integral over R.
Hence a. a contradiction. but neither factor is in Q . Hence
3
Theorem 46.
+ clu(au)nI + . GD gives equality. hence in Q n R .)
Remark. u f Q . We shall in due course prove that in a Noetherian ring the
. which is con.. Multiply (7) by u”.
+ alun2+ . Thus
u(unl
lies in Q . 25).
. By hypothesis u is integral over R . of course by axiom we have in a Noetherian ring the ‘ ascending chain condition on all ideals.
Now au = s . William Heinzer has constructed an example showing that Theorem 46 can fail for n = a. Manifestly this is a strong descending
chain condition on prime ideals (“strong” meaning that we get a uniform bound on chains descending from a fixed P). tained in J. By INC. then by INC.. = 0
*
(ci e R )
be an equation showing that a is integral over R .. Together. Ift further.3 P.. a contradiction. Thus rank(@ 2 n. any chain ascending from Q contracts to a distinct chain ascending from P. in a manner dual to Theorem 47 below. i. see the first of the “bad” examples at the end of [37].l)
Necessarily n 2 1. let alone prime ideals. T with Q A R = P .30
CH. Assume that the rings R C T satisfy ZNC. Given a chain
0 (mod Q )
P = P 3 P13 o
’
. However.
PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. Then there exists in T a prime ideal f Q lying over P and having rank(Q) 2 n. To prove INC we make use of Theorem 43 in a similar way. As for chains ascending from P. in T lying over P. E J. Assume that the rings R C T satisfy GU and ZNC.
C QO
Q
we construct Q . we have :
+
sn
+ clusnl + .” Precisely: among all monic polynomialsf with coefficients in R such that f(u) e Q we pick one of least degree. This tinie we assume Q n R = P and have to show that Q is maximal with respect to the exclusion of S.
Remark. We proceed to pick for u a “polynomial of least degree mod Q. Since u t P we get sn e P. these two ’ statements prove the theorem. hence in P.un = 0
= s (mod Q).Let P. .
Proof. (since LO holds by Theorem 42) and build up a chain
’
Qn
C Qn1 C
* * *
=
with Qi contracting to Pi by iterated use of GU..+ a. By repeated use of GU any chain ascending from P can be matched by one ascending from Q .
* *
Qn
Proof. . Hence rank(P) 1 rank(Q). Q be prime ideals in R .. Then corank(P) = corank(Q)..
Equality may fail here. say
(9)
un
+ UIU”’ + .+ c. Then rank(@ 5 rank(P). s E P. * >
is a chain of length n descending from Q. then rank(Q) = n. rank of any prime ideal is finite. I1
31
Let
(7)
an
+ clan’ + . Let P be a prime ideal in R o rank n (n < a). even if T is integral over R (see Ex. (Alternative terminology: dimension. the contractions * Qi A R are all distinct.+ c. Suppose on the contrary that Q is properly contained in an ideal J with J n S void.+ c. The final statement follows from Theorem 45.
Theorem 47.
r
Theorem 45.
(au). we deduce that a. Since the expression in (9) lies in Q . INC holds.Let Q be a prime ideal in T and P = Q n R . Pick u t J.q. However the corank can still be infinite.+ a. .un
Proof.
Define the corank of a prime ideal P to be the sup of the lengths of chains of prime ideals ascending from P . If
Q = Q o Q I~> * . e. We proceed to deduce some consequences concerning the ranks of prime ideals in R and T . au
(8)
But the left side of (8) lies in R . E J A R C P C Q . 16/INTEGRAL ELEMENTS. Assume that the rings R C T satisfy GU.
(In particular. Let R be the given GCDdomain. . or the sup of all ranks of maximal ideals.
and then from (1 1) we see that t divides sn. t R) (10) Write u = s / t . we have to prove that u t Rs. then az divides ab and ac. b/h] = 1 ( c ) v[a. a. . Sometimes we shall call this the Krull dimension if there is danger of confusion with other dimensions. U C ] = a[b.
See Exs. If R is an integrally closed domain and i f S a multiplicatively closed set in R. From (10) we get
(1 1)
+
+. = 0 (a. a divides x. or the sup of coranks of prime ideals. 16/INTEGRAL ELEMENTS. Since x divides ab and ac. ac] = x./s. t]. 11
33
We also introduce at this point the dimension of R itself as the sup of all lengths of chains of prime ideals (or equivalently. Assume that the rings R C T satisfy GU and INC. (c) Suppose that t divides a and bc. Hence t is a unit.) Then the dimension of T equals the dimension of R. On the affirmativeside of the ledger.
Proof. K its quotient field. = [a. So t divides a and b. b] is determined only up to a unit. assuming u = s / t with [s. then [a. An integral domain R is a GCDdomain if any two elements in R have a greatest common divisor. Hence su t R.
+
.+
sn
+ alsnlf + . If z divides b and c.
Theorem 50. this applies if T is integral over R. which is b by part (a). t] = 1. and these domains have been called Btzout domains. We can divide s and t by [s. then [a/d. This stronger assumption can be recast as saying that all finitely generated ideals are principal. then Rs is integrally closed. Suppose that the element u in the quotient field is integral over R s .32
CH. 4 and 5 for perhaps the simplest examples of domains that are not integrally closed. So we can start again. as required. Theorem 48 is immediate from Theorem 47 or Theorem 46.
Theorem 51. Of course [a. + (a. t = 1. Then since a divides ab and ac. ideas going back to Gauss show that any unique factorization domain is integrally closed. = s/si. u E Rs. A GCDdomain is integrally closed.+ ant. Then a fortiori t divides ab and bc. But [sn. An integral domain is said to be integrally closed if it is integrally closed in its quotient field. C] (b) Zf[a. hence divides [ab. . We proceed to investigate how integral closire behaves relative to localization. b] = d.
Examples of GCDdomains include unique factorization domains and valuation domains (defined below).s .
Theorem 48. say
un (al/sl)unl
Theorem 49. We are given. z divides y. b] for the greatest common divisor of a and b. (a) Say [ab. the resulting elements have greatest common divisor 1 by part (b) of Theorem 49.
Proof. s. t S. = 0
* *
Definition.
P PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC.
Dejinition. y divides b and c. After we do so.
Proof. Put s = s1
. In a GCDdomain: (a) [ab.t] = 1 by part (c) of Theorem 49. u t R. t t R . E R . Hence [b.+
=
0
with a. c] = 1.
and t . az divides x = ay. We adopt the ad hoc notation [a. or the sup of coranks of minimal prime ideals). s. To get a little more mileage from this method we introduce the concept of a GCDdomain (Bourbaki's term is "pseudoBtzout"). Then
sun tlalu"'+ * * tnan= 0 (12) If we multiply (12) by sn1 we get an equation asserting that su is integral over R. c] = y . the sup of all ranks of prime ideals. bc] = 1 bj
+
+ . (b) This is immediate from (a).)
. It should be carefully noted that we are not assuming that the greatest common divisor is a linear combination of the two elements. say x = ay. We suppose that u t K and that u satisfies an equation
un alunl * . bc]. and we can allow this ambiguity in our discussion.
a c (b). by symmetry.
I/PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. and an attempt to do as well as possible leads us to use maximal primes of principal ideals. e I )
Here we may.
Proof.” In that case. so u = a / b
. Then R = n R p . in the firm belief that no danger of confusion exists. an integrally closed R will be an intersection of discrete valyation rings. R = n R M . In the present context we are dealing with domains and so the designation ‘‘valuation domain” seems appropriate.. An integral domain R is integrally closed if and only f RP is integrally closedfor every maximal prime P of a principal ideal. i. We recall further that <(A) is the complement of a saturated multiplicatively closed set.
(c E R. These we named(i11) the maximal primes of A . a contradiction.+ bmum= 1
*
(ai e I ) (b.+ anun= 1 + blu’+ . A commutative ring R is said to be a valuation ring if for any a and b in R either a divides b or b divides a. If I = R then a e (b). Definition.34
CH.
Proof. by hypothesis. Suppose the conclusion fails. 52. u e Rp. try to talk about zerodivisors on the zero module.
= c/s
C P. Let R be any integral domain. then the result will hold for any integrally closed domain. Let I = the set of all y in R with ya e (b). Two theorems will precede Theorem 57.bo) and substitute for (1 . We recall that the zerodivisors on A are the elements of R that annihilate some nonzero element of A . the f intersection ranging over all maximal primes o principal ideals. we have the prime ideals to be used in Theorem 53. It is perhaps treacherous to. We have I C <‘R/(b)). Multiplying (1 4)by un we get
(1 5 )
(1 . a con
Theorems 5 1. then I survives in T if IT # T . Note. Then. We shall recall again what these are. 16/INTEGRAL ELEMENTS.. I # R. if I is principal. the intersection ranging over the maximal ideals of R. and consequently is the settheoretic union of prime ideals.
Theorem 55. We can expand I to a maximal prime P of (b). Then n R i is integrally closed. We write <(A) for the set of zerodivisors on A . Finally. I1
35
Theorem 52. so (except no doubt for occasional forgetfulness) we shall not do so. Using Theorems 51 and 52 we deduce the following: R is integrally closed if and only if each RM is integrally closed.
We shall later make use of Theorem 54 in a context where it will be known that every Rp is a “discrete valuation ring. easily proved. in the first we use the term “survives” in the following sense: if R C T are rings. The equation sa = bc shows that s e I tradiction. and 53 together yield:
Theorem 54. u e R. and let I be an ideal in R. Let u e n R p . which are unique if they are confined to those maximal inside<(A). assume that n 2 m.bo)un= blun’+
* * *
+ bmunm
\r I
Now multiply (1 3) by (1 . and if I is an ideal in R . The result is an equation of the same type with smaller n. i
The proof is quite obvious. So assume that I f R . and all is done.bo)unfrom (1 5). and we may further assume that n has been chosen as small as possible. Then I survives either in R[u] or in R[ul]. and suppose that each Ri is integrally closed. We introduce the concept of a valuation ring. We get a stronger result if we use smaller prime ideals. Let R i ) be a family o integral domains all contained f in one large domain. A an Rmodule # 0. For an integral do
L
Theorem 53. and at the same time introduce the notation for zerodivisors that we shall be using henceforth. Let R be a commutative ring. s c P ) . and write u = a / b (a. that for any integral domain R. Let R C T be rings. If A = R / I we call them the maximal primes of I. . However the use of maximal ideals in this statement is unnecessarily extravagant. Now it is a fact. But a useful theorem due to Krull (Theorem 57) shows that if we allow ourselves to use arbitrary valuation rings. b e R). let u be a unit in T. Then we have equations (13) (14) bo
a0 + alu + . e.
Let R be an integrally closed integral domain with quotient field K. 10 how to prove that if R is integrally closed. the polynomial ring R[x]is also integrally closed. bi e I'. The proof is an application of Theorem 55.By Theorem 56 we i. . this will prove both that V is a valuation domain and that K is the quotient field of V. Hence we can find an ele
. e. For if x E I we have x
=
xCaibi
=
C(xbi)a.
J
hi
As an application of Theorem 57 we show in Ex. (u) survives in R[u]. Consider all pairs R. . M . The elements a. J. . We claim that the ai's generate I..
Definitions. then I' = (al) and I F 1 = (a)(al) = R. Zorn's lemma is applicable to yield a maximal pair V . Then any invertible ideal in R is principal. I. and we have our contradiction. Then R = A V . uI E V . and by Theorem 52 an intersection of integrally closed domains is integrally closed. Any invertible ideal in a quasilocal domain is principal.
Theorem 57. and let I be invertible. and I an ideal in R.'s are valuation domains be
Proof.. Note that M consists precisely of all nonunits. The proof of Theorem 59 is so easy that we record it separately. Recall that a quasilocal ring is one with exactly one maximal M . lie in R and their sum is 1. I1
37
main R with quotient field K we have the following obviously equivalent way of defining R to be a valuation domain: for any u # 0 in K either u or u' lies in R. say albl. When there is no danger of misunderstanding we may drop the adjective "fractional.
:
tween R and K. We deduce that I = (a l ). Let R be an integral domain with quotient field K . We shall prove the following: if u E K then either u or uI is in V . I. By Theorem 15. E I and b. R a subring of K . where the V. p M.. By a fractional ideal I we mean an Rsubmodule of K .36
CH. J survives in V[u]or V[ul]. can enlarge R[u]to a valuation domain V inside K in such a way that (u) survives in V. I' is again a fractional ideal. is an ideal in R. and write u = yl. the intersection ranging over all valuation domains between R and K . is a ring between R and K . plus a good exercise on Zorn's lemma.
Theorem 58.
I/PRIME IDEALS
AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. i.") By I' (the inverse of I ) we mean the set of all x in K with X I C R . 16/1NTEGRAL ELEMENTS. Proof. We proceed to discuss domains that are locally valuation domains. I C I.. and I. 3 RB and I. Suppose not.
Theorem 56. Let K be afield. e I' such that a. Hence one of them. we can.
~
. We say that I is invertible if II' = R (note that IIl C R is automatic). for by Theorem 50 any valuation domain is integrally closed. We use the notation of the proof of Theorem 58. # R.
Theorem 60. Let Y E A V . Since ZIP1 = R. . But by hypothesis y E V . Let M l .. for' if I = (a). M . It suffices to show that y is integral over R.. Any invertible ideal is finitely generated. Conversely any such intersection is integrally closed.b. We first need the concept of the invertibility of an ideal. is a unit. I # R. Moreover.
i
i
I
!
1
I
Proof.
and the elements xbi lie in R. From IF' = R we get Zaibi = 1. find a. 3 I. where R. R C V C K .
Theorem 59. Either way we have contradicted the maximality of the pair V . cannot contain the intersection of the remaining maximal ideals. such that K is the quotientfield of V and I survives in V. Suppose not.. Remark.
I
Proof. We partially order the pairs by decreeing inclusion to mean both R. u is not invertible in R[u]. Any nonzero principal deal is invertible. Let R be an integral domain with a finite number of maximal ideals. that X I C R for some x # 0 in R. e.. then by Theorem 55. for each i from 1 to n. ai E I .b. Then there exists a valuation domain V . as is sometimes done.. a # 0 ( a need not be in R but is in the quotient field). J.
Proof. although we promptly supersede it in Theorem 60. (We do not insist. denote the maximal ideals in R . we must show y e R.
IM is by hypothesis principal.
Definition. We claim that vZ lies in no maximal ideal.
Theorem 61. s # P . v v
. Thus xu + yb = 1. that vZ C Ml. . The generator can be selected to be an element i of I. But now
. Let I be a nonzero finitely generated ideal in R . (2) implies ( 3 ) .. M
The proof is routine and is left to the reader. sj f M. If J is generated by al/sl. and let S be a multiplicatively closed set in R . We proceed to the behavior of invertibility under localization. Then a is a unit and divides b. 16/INTEGRAL ELEMENTS. s e R .say r = a/s. In RM. b) = R . .
h
Theorem 64.
'
Theorem 62.an be generators of I. If IF' # R .
I/PRIME IDEALS
AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. .Note that v e I' so that vl is an ideal in R . Here a e P for otherwise a / s would be a unit in ' Rp and v E R p . Let I be an invertible ideal in an integral domain R . so (Theorem 62) I is invertible. then J = IP where I = (al.. Let I be a finitely generated ideal in an integral domain R.By hypothesis I is invertible. (Recall that a Bizout domain is slightly more special in that every finitely generated ideal is required to be principal.. If I is invertible then IM is invertible (Theorem 61) and hence principal (Theorem 59). So if we take v e V and find v f R p we must have vl e RP. say a and b. an/sn(a$.
s = si'i e P
ICM
a contradiction.)
'
Proof.) To prove that V C Rp we note (Theorem 64) that Rp is a valuation domain..

Proof. which we assumed is not the case.38
CH. I1
39
ment ui that is not in M but does lie in all the other maximal ideals. We have proved vl = R and I = (vl) is principal. Then V = Rp for some prime ideal P in R .s. a. A quasilocal domain is a valuation domain f and only i if it is a Bhout domain. say xu. By Theorem 63. (So far R could have been arbitrary and V merely quasilocal. Conversely let R be quasilocal and Btzout. again a contradiction. Conversely assume that each IM is principal. hence (Theorems 61 and 59). R is a valuation domain. Trivial. We can divide a and b by their greatest common divisor. Thus R p C V . so we may assume that (a. .
Theorem 65 has a corollary. yb must be a unit. (3) For every maximal ideal M . s. Then I is invertible f and only f ZM is principal for every maxii i mal ideal M . whence si' e I'. Let M be the unique maximal ideal of V and set P = M A R . .for otherwise s e M e and so s E P. A Pruyer domain is an integral domain in which every nonzero finitely generated ideal is invertible. Let J be a finitely generated nonzero ideal in Rp. we must show that one divides the other.
Proof.
Theorem 63. Given two elements in R. However
+
V l = (ulbl+ uzbz a
+ + unbn)al
* * *
and in this expression ulblal c Ml while all other terms lie in Ml. Let R be a Prufer domain with quotientfield K . an). Hence vl C M I is impossible. Suppose. R is a valuation domain. One of xu. Hence a E M and a e M . The following statements are equivalent for an integral domain R : ( 1 ) R is Prufer. and let V be a valuation domain between R and K . . (1) implies (2). (2) For every prime ideal P. i Set v = ulbl+ * unbn. Proof. . Rp is a valuation domain. That valuation domains are BCzout is trivial. s = a e M A R = P . Then Val e M I .

Theorem 65. . for instance. e R . # P ) . embed it in a maximal ideal M . Let al. ( 3 ) implies (1). Write s = s1 * * s Then si' throws all the a i s into R. Then every ZM is principal. Then I S is invertible in Rs. . J is principal.
. For any s in R but not in P we must have s1 V. We have sjaj E ( i ) for suitable elements sj e R. which can be taken as the starting point of the theory of algebraic functions of one variable.
e. Let K be any field and R the ring of all formal power series in x with coefficients in K and no term in x . We are to prove that P*. then z l E R.) Prove that there exists in T a prime ideal contracting to P. all series
Theorem 67. a] = 1 and u divides ab. Any valuation ring is a strong Sring. and S a multiplicatively closed set in R. Prove that LO and G D hold but that INC does not. observe that (1 p x ) is prime in R[x]and contracts to 0. I1
41
Theorem 66. (We mean truly minimal.. Then g has 1 for one of its coefficients. and K(x) the field of rational functions in x with coeflcients in K. 16/1NTEGRAL ELEMENTS.
Theorem 68. the expansion of P to R[x]. say ai.= 0
’!
we have. The final theorem in this section (also due to Seidenberg [46]) relates valuation rings to the strong Srings defined just prior to Theorem 39.
Proof. Since
(au)”
+
+ b(au)”’ + . Thus we may assume that R is a valuation domain.. Suppose on the contrary that N is a prime ideal in R[x]lying properly between 0 and P*. One coefficient off. Either x or r1 must lie in V. a and b integers. . If x B V . and lef u be an element of the quotient field of R. au E R. Let V be a valuation domain between K and K(x).. 3. ai I N since N A R = 0. V = K[x]P.P = (f).)
. The first will be used in i23. and that we are given a rank 1 prime ideal P in R. Prove that the integral closure of RS is Ts. Assume that u satisfies a polynomial equation with coeficients in R having at least one coeficient a unit in R. Since x f V . Observe that G U and G D hold vacuously.40
CH. e
K)
If b is a unit then.
+
Prove that R is not integrally closed. there is a unit coefficient later in the equation.
We conclude this section with two additional theorems. What is its integral closure? 6. We have
(UU
F
+ b)un’
4*
* *
=
0
‘
a. In any event some coefficient is a unit. i. take p # 0 in P.
+ a2x2+ a3x3+ . u e R. 7. try to go up from it to a prime‘over P.
EXERCISES
1.
Proof. What is its integral closure? 5 . If X E V then V > K[x]and the form of V is given by Theorem 65. Let K be afield. (Hint: for the last point it can be assumed that R is a domain. Any homomorphic image of a valuation ring is a valuation ring. Let R C T be rings with R zerodimensional. r1 lie in Q and Q = (xl). then V 3 K[x?] and must has the form K [ r 1 I Qagain by Theorem 65. Then V is either a localization of K[x]with respect to a nonzero prime ideal (i. Let T = R[x]with x an indeterminate.. Prove that R is not integrally closed. e.. i. g I N . Necessarily N A R = 0. It is in essence due to Seidenberg [46]. Let R be an integral domain with.
(a.
PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. x an indeterminate over K . Let R be a quasilocal integrally closed domain. all a + 2bi. V # K(x). Prove that u divides b. Say the equation for u is
+ bun1 + . au b is a unit. If au is a unit.again has rank 1.) 4 Let R be the ring of all Gaussian integers with even imaginary . Prove that LO holds. 0 if R is a domain. b = [ub. . Say 0 # f e N . i2 = 1. i. hence g f P* and. irreducible). This contradiction concludes the proof. Prove that GU fails if R is at least onedimensional. = 0
If a is a unit then u is integral over R. in a GCDdomain..integral closure T.g. e. Let R C T be rings and P a minimal prime ideal in R.. Also. Then: either u or uI lies in R. part. again by the integral closure. Suppose. or V = K[x*]lof calized at (xl). since R is quasilocal. Write f = a. can be selected so as to divide all the others. If P is a nonzero prime ideal in R. So we may assume a unit coefficient occurs further down the equation. that [u. If b is not a unit. 2. V having quotient field K(x). (Hint: by Theorem 49. c We assume au a nonunit. ab].
Proof. all the more so. and induction on n concludes the proof. e.
(Hint: use Ex.) 19. T. u or u1 lies in R by Theorem 67. Prove that P is principal. J. (Hint: use Ex. Prove that the contraction of a maximal ideal in T is maximal in R . let [t. (This is a sharpening of Theorem 53. 27. Assume that LO and INC hold for the pair R . prove that N is contained in M*. Shrink P to Q. If N C M*. let M be a maximal ideal of rank k . Prove that R is Priifer. any radical ideal is prime. If R is a GCDdomain. and IJ is invertible. 15. 14. b. Alternatively. Use Theorem 67. Prove that in a GCDdomain any invertible ideal is principal. Let R be an integral domain with quotient field K . Let R be a GCDdomain and P a prime ideal in R[x] contracting to 0 in R .
PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC. similarly d.42
CH. Let R C R[u] be rings with R quasilocal and integrally closed in R[u]. Prove that rank(M*) = 2. Regard R as embedded in T by sending a e R into (a. prove that R[x] is a GCDdomain. hence their GCD. Then u divides bc and bd. If Q # P. K in a ring prove (I
+ J + K W K + KI + IJ) = ( J + J W K + I)(I + J )
i
. 21 and 22. In the ring R . (Hint: pick u in the quotient field with neither u nor uI in R . Let R be an integral domain with quotient field K . a*). Assume that u satisfies a polynomial equation such that the ideal generated by the coefficients is invertible. Suppose that every ring between R and K is integrally closed. Assume G U holds for R C T. 9. prove that P is minimal over a suitable principal ideal. If t divides ac. Let P be a prime ideal in .) 27. Prove that R is Priifer. where M* = MR[x] is the expansion of M to the polynomial ring R[x]. Prove that (a. By Ex. Let T = R[u]with u in the quotient field of R . Using Theorem 67. Let k be a fixed integer. b) is invertible. 8.) Let R be a onedimensional quasilocal integrally closed domain that is not a valuation domain. (b) there are no rings properly between R and K .. 10 in $14 and Ex. 10. b) be contained in some prime ideal of the set. Let J be an ideal generated by alk. any finitely generated nonzero prime ideal is maximal. (a) Suppose that u satisfies an equation with coefficients in R
‘
. (Hint: form N as in the preceding exercise. (This can be done by a variant on the usual proof. (Hint: use Exs. But note that Ex. and that they have ranks 0 and k . (pP. localize. Prove that the ideal (a. and bd.) 29. If R is integrally closed.a] = u.a domain. ankand any additional number of products of k of the a ’ s .bn). If PPI # P. Let R be an h e g r a l domain with quotient field K. 13. (Hint: after localizing. (Use Theorem 57 to reduce to the case where R is a valuation domain.) 12. Cf. Let R be a onedimensional integrally closed quasilocal domain. If 1 and J are ideals in a domain. For u e K we have u e R[u2]. . Let R be a domain in which every ideal generated by two elements is invertible. If N Q M*. 21. . minimal over (p). 30.) Let R be an integral domain. Let R be a GCDdomain.
t
i
23. Suppose that (a. INC is violated. For each a and b with a p ( 6 ) let I(a. Show that for a set of prime ideals to satisfy n R p = R it is necessary and sufficient that every I(a. Assume that any ring between R and K is a localization of R . .) 28. a. Prove that R is Priifer. Let T be the ring R 0 R I M . b) denote the set of all x in R
+
+
+
with xu e (b). . b)n = (an. and let S be multiplicatively closed in R .) 25. I6/1NTEGRAL ELEMENTS. Prove that in a valuation ring. Prove that J is invertible. Then use Ex.’)P C Q yields the contradiction pP’ C Q. We say that a polynomial in the variable x with coefficients in R is primitive if the GCD of the coefficients is 1. 8 is a good deal easier when R is a valuation domain. Hence u = 1. .) 11. 22. Rule out ul by LO. prove that I is invertible. . 26. and n a positive integer. Ex. t divides c. (Hint: pickp t P withpP’ Q P. Let N be the kernel of the homomorphism on R[x] given by x + u. Let u = a / b be an element of the quotient field of R.) 20. Theorem 142 will enable us to conclude that P has rank 1. prove that R[x] is integrally closed.) Let R be integrally closed.”) 24. b) is an invertible ideal in a domain. We illustrate with a bx and c dx. Let (al. argue that one of the at’s divides all the others and hence one of the terms atkdivides all the generators of J . (This is a step in the direction of showing that Theorem 68 is the best possible. Let R C T be domains with R integrally closed in T.) be an invertible ideal in a domain. Prove Gauss’s lemma: the product of two primitive polynomials is primitive. Prove: T = R . 31. Remark: if R is Noetherian. Prove that T contains two prime ideals lying over M . (Hint: it can be assumed that R is quasilocal. (This is a globalization of Theorem 67. where a* is the ’image of a in R I M . Prove that in a Priifer domain. Prove that Rs is integrally closed in Ts. 16..) 9. Let M be its maximal ideal. ad bc. Prove that the following are equivalent: (a) R is a valuation domain of dimension 6 1. after which “invertible” can be replaced by “principal. 18. Prove that T is integral over R . For any ideals I . 12. I1
43
8. 7. 17.
Q). Then u e Q.P)(T . Let u* be the image of u in T/PT. but both R . Prove that (ZZF1)l = R. (Hint: J = ZIP1is also finitely generated.) 38. Let R C T be domains with T integral over R. Lower Ql to a prime minimal over PT. By part (a). (iii) =+ (iv). 35. Prove that there exists in T a prime ideal contracting to P . 33. u e T .P. and K a field containing R. Prove that any nonzero ideal in R contains a nonzero contracted ideal.t. that is.
Prove that (ZJ)l = R. Enlarge PT to Qo. By the onedimensionality of R.Q are disjoint from Q. Let R C T be a pair of rings satisfying GD. (This exercise is adapted from the paper. PT is disjoint from (R . Prove that there exists a nonzero element a E R such that any maximal ideal in R not containing a survives in T. Qo = Q. By part (b). as an (R/P)module. Pick any x which is not zero or a unit. Call an ideal Z in R contracted if it has the form Z = J R with J an ideal in T. and then take a to be any coefficient of the resulting polynomial.) Let R C T be rings. Given x e R .P and T . take a to be the product of leading coefficients of polynomials for a set of generators of T. note that au is integral over R. Prove that there exists a valuation domain V with quotient field K and maximal ideal N .. we have to prove y E J. (Hint: review the proof of Theorem 67.) (b) Suppose that u satisfies no such equation.) of R. McAdam) Let the ideal Z in an integral domain be maximal among all noninvertible ideals. (This exercise is devoted to a partial analysis of GD.P)(T . provided T is a finitely generated Rmodule. and let Z be an ideal in R such that I' is finitely generated. (Hint: modify appropriately the hint for Ex. (Jk)l = R for every k. xl' C ZP. Let R C T be domains with T finitely generated as a ring over R.44
CH.) (b) Let Z and J be ideals in a domain R.) State and prove the analogous strengthening of Theorem 57. we are to prove that Q A R = P .) (Hint: we sketch the proofs of six implications. Prove that T is contained in the quotient field . Let N be a minimal over PT.Q). Let x = Zp. we must show that y lies in every prime Q minimal over PT. then the torsion submodule of T/PT. Let R be a domain.P . (S. (iii) * (i). and are sketched in (b)(f). s e R . Let R C T be domains such that T is algebraic over R and R is integrally closed in T. (c) Let R be a onedimensional quasilocal integrally closed domain. Suppose u E PT A (R . Then u* lies in the torsion submodule of T/PT. we can shrink Ql to a prime contracting to P . That is. (The torsion submodule of a module over an integral domain is the set of all elements with a nonzero annihilator. In the general case. Prove that R is a valuation domain. (a) Let R be an integrally closed integral domain. and a prime Ql in T contracting to P I . (i) =+ (iii).) (Hint: a number of steps are needed. and go down. (Hint: if T'is algebraic over R.) 34. 10 in $11. M a maximal ideal in R. (Hint: review the proof of Theorem 56. 27882. y e T with xy e PT. Prove that the map Q + Q n R induces a onetoone correspondence between the prime ideals of T and those of R. Eakin. (Hint: use the implication (ii) + (i) of the preceding exercise. (Hint: if x e (ZZl)I. (Hint: if u e T and oun 36. Qo n R C P. If M is the maximal ideal of R. = 0. u E J C Q. some power of Jlies in (x) if J # R. Math. P a prime ideal in R. (iii) For any prime Q minimal over PT. u* e J/PT.) 40.PXT. UP" t R. But y e Q means xy e (R . thkn xZZP C R. Let T be a domain containing R and purely inseparable over R: for any U E T some . e PT. insert Ro between R and T with T algebraic over Ro and Ro purely transcendental over R. such that N A R = M and V / N is algebraic over RIM. Assume that I' is finitely generated for every finitely generated ideal in R. (ii) * (i). 16/INTEGRAL ELEMENTS. Jr.) 37.Q. LO holds for all primes surviving in T. A reader familiar with flatness will recognize (iv) as a weakened version of flatness of T as an Rmodule. a contradiction. (ii) ("Going down to P") Given a prime P1 3 P . M. "The converse to a well known theorem on Noetherian rings" by P.) 39. (a) Remark: the hypothesis that T is a finitely generated Rmodule
. Let P be a prime ideal in R with PT # T. Treat the pair Ro C T as above. Prove that Z is prime. By the minimality of Q.Q). is contained in J/PT. I1
45
and one coefficient a unit. (iv) If J is the radical of PT. Let R be an integral domain of characteristicp. 32. Prove that the following four statements are equivalent: (i) Any prime ideal in T minimal over PT contracts to P . and suppose that
11 = J1
*
+
=
R. Prove that u or ul lies in R.
(i) (ii). a contradiction. Given Q minimal over PT. Jl = R. Annalen 177 (1968). observing that T[a'1 is integral over R[a']. prove that R[u]/MR[u] 2 (R/M)[x] where x is an indeterminate. Then Qo C Q.PXT. set N A R = P1. maximal with respect to disjointness from (R . x = su. (iv) =+ (iii).
P PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
SEC.Q).
b
be the irreducible equation for u over K. Then I . Then one easily sees that t h e f s and g’s together generate J.
* * *
8
Let Z = UI.
=
0 We recall that a commutative ring R is Noetherian if every ideal in R is finitely generated. (a) If R is Noetherian and . I 3 I D # 0 and I D is an ideal in both R and T. .
P PRIME
IDEALS AND INTEGRAL EXTENSIONS
cannot be omitted.J whose leading coefficients generate Z. Hence R C T is good. and D the conductor of T relative to R. Let P be a prime ideal in R.
Proof. and therefore the conductor of R* relative to R is nonzero. So R* is a finitely generated Rmodule. Let R* = R[al. Justly celebrated though this proof is.) 41. It is routine to see that goodness is transitive. .46
CH.fk be polynomials in. coefficients of. We prove the following slight sharpening of the theorem: if Z and all the In’s are finitely generated. Let R be an integral domain. . (b) Temporarily call the pair R C T ‘‘good” if it satisfies the conclusion of the exercise (every nonzero ideal contains a nonzero contracted ideal). (b) Let P be a prime ideal in R not containing D and let Q be a prime ideal in T contracting to P. Prove that RP = TQ.]. prove that T is a finitely generated Rmodule. where K is the quotient field of R. being polynomials in the conjugates of u. D. T a ring between R and its quotient field. Furthermore if R C T C U and R C U is good. The ai’s are integral over R. By part (b) we get in succession that R C Tr is good and that R C T is good. 15 in 523.. (c) By (b) we can reduce to the case T = k[u]. for given I # 0 in R. .gj2. Let P be a prime ideal in R with complement S. Part (d) is applicable to show that R* C T* is good. (e) Suppose that T C K and let D be the conductor: the set of all x in R with xT C R. let
un
CHAPTER
2
etherian Rings
21 THE ASCENDING CHAIN CONDITION
+
a1un’+
* * *
+ a. unl. (f) To handle the general case T = R[u]. whose leading .1 similarly pick a finite number of polynomials gjl. . is an ideal
Jn R = Z C Z C Z C o i . (Hint: for u in T4and z in D but not in P. ... (d) Assume that T is the integral closure of R and is a finitely generated Rmodule. since the condition that I and the In’sbe finitely generated is by no means necessary for J to be finitely generated. For each j from 0 to N . Tr = R*[u]. If D # 0 then R C T is good. and we state and prove at once the Hilbert basis theorem. (d) Suppose that T r \ K = R. a. coefficients generate Zi. Say N is the maximum of the degrees of thef’s. Remark. if the ideals in R satisfy the ascending chain condition.
R is Noetherian so is R[x]. Prove that RP is integrally closed if and only if P Z. . If RP = TS prove that P p D . polynomials of degree 5 n in J. then R C T is good. be adapted from Ex. for instance.
41
. u.. An example showing this can.
<
Theorem 69. Let J be an ideal in R[x] and let Z be the set of leading . Then every principal ideal in R is the contraction of its extension to T. . it leaves one somewhat dissatisfied. since Tr r\ K = R* is easily verified from the fact that Tc is a free R*module with basis 1. then so is J.. or equivalently.) (c) AsSume that T is a finitely generated Rmodule.D # 0. multiply the numerator and denominator of u by z.. Letfi. . It follows from (e) that R C R* is good.
the submodules of A satisfy the ascending chain condition. Then ZB = B.
. We assume that the reader knows the following: if R is Noetherian and A is a finitely generated Rmodule. a. By the last statement in Theorem 70.
with the natural operations of addition and multiplication. We have proved (16).. so is R[[x]]. h..
+ + +
+. and B a submodule of A . . say'at r = m.
The argument we gave in proving Theorem 70 can yield an extra bonus. . Then ZnA C Cf o r some n. x). anxn . (The KruN intersection theorem. Suppose that P* = (al. . Conversely.
Proof.
Theorem 73.48
CH. Hence P+'a e C. a. Nowadays it is usually proved via the ArtinRees Lemma.. suppose that t is an element of the left side. we
Theorem 70.. .Thenxt e xB C ZB C C.
Theorem 74. . E P be series leading off with al..). Let P be a prime ideal in R[[x]] let P* be the image and of P in the natural homomorphism R[[x]] R obtained by mapping x to 0. . and by r i f x 6 P. and B = n Z n A . The submodules D . Since I is finitely generated it evidently suffices !o prove that for any x in I there exists an integer m with PA C C. In the same way we write g = Zcif. say t = P a + c ( a e A .
Remark. and for prime ideals in R[[x]] are able to pinpoint exactly what is needed. Then t e B and also 1 E PA+ C.). If g leads off with b then b = Zbia. Let fi. modules enter the picture. then P can be generated by r 1 elements.
+
Proof. By the choice of m we have p a E C. . + Then P is finitely generated if and only i P* is finitely generated.
Theorem 72.f. .) Let R be a Noetherian ring. 21/THE ASCENDING CHAIN CONDITION
49
The ring of formal power series R[[x]] a variable x is the set of all in expressions a.. then every submodule of A is finitely generated. Continuation of l the process leads us to hl. whence t e C. and t e C n B = IB..+h. Let R be a Noetherian ring. 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS
SEC. r f P* f is generated by r elements. form an ascending chain that must become stable.f. We distinguish two cases. Now if prime ideal P in R[[x]] x E P. We claim that P = cfl. . A a finitely generated Rmodule. Krull proved this using primary decomposition and related technical devices. . I f R is a principal ideal domain then R[[x]] a unique is factorization domain.
That ZB is contained in the left side of (16) is clear since IB = C n B.
In the next theorem.
Remark. P itself is principal. The analogue of the Hilbert basis theorem holds (Theorem 71). But we note [45]that the theorem one would really like is not true: it is possible for R to be a unique factorization domain is while R[[x]] not. c e C). Here xgl E P and therefore gl e P since we are assuming that x P.there is our principal prime. . The present still more elementary proof (really embodied in Theorem 73) is due to Herstein. which reduces our problem to the case of prime ideals.f .Zbifi can be written xgl. . or equivalently.. this gives PA C C. xg2 with g2 E P. . E R[[x]]. . We choose to prove it by making use of Cohen's theorem (Theorem 8). A afinitely generated Rmodule.. .. I f R is Noetherian. If P is finitely generated so is its image P*. If x I P we note that (in the notation of Theorem 70) P* is principal. We claim that
1
hi = bi
satisfying g
= hdl
+ . I an ideal in R. a.
+
Proof. Let C be a submodule of A which contains IB and is maximal with respect to the property C n B = IB. By the maximal property of C. D e h e D .. . Assume that x P P. alx . to be the submodule of A consisting of all a e A with xra e C. and g . . For take any g e P. . Using Theorem 5 we only need to prove that any nonzero contains a nonzero principal prime. If x e P then P = (al. We shall later (Theorem 188) prove a much stronger result than Theorem 72. Zan ideal in R.
+C ~ X +
* *
(16)
(PA
+ CnB = I B )
Theorem 71.
the key additional hypothesis is the absence of zerodivisors. or
( 1 . and A a finitely generated torsionfree Rmodule. we have P A C C for some n.) Let R be a (no1 necessarily commutative) ring.an = 0 .h a 1 .
+
Theorem 78.y21al+ ( x . We first prepare the ground.
+
We shall now apply Theorem 76 in two contexts that enable us to prove that n I n A = 0. But B C P A .+
=
ai)s.* * . We have xu. We have al = jlal * * * +j. a e A ) implies x = 0 or a = 0.
+ y = 0.. .
Theorem 79. I # R .. But note that the theorem gets its maximal force when the hypothesis is J A = A ..y&y12a2 . or it can be taken in the stronger sense that A cannot be generated by fewer than r elements. (The Nakayama lemma. but it is instructive to use the Nakayama lemma (which will. and A a finitely generated Rmodule. This determinant has the form xn
Hence the determinant of the coefficients in (17) annihilates all the y .j1h j2a2 =
+ . . By Theorem 76. (Note: we could do this by Zorn's lemma. +jrar
Since 1 jl is invertible.
Theorem 77. a. we call it the Jacobson radical. By Theorem 74.. Interesting conclusions can be drawn from Theorem 74. But y = 1 is
=
IB. e J. generate A. have lots of later applications). A ajnitely generated Rmodule satisfying I A = A. Theorem 78 is sometimes stated with a subset of J allowed instead of J.t
50
B
CH.y2.. Let R be a ring. Among all submodules of A containing ZB. See pp. hence B C C and B = IB. 2123 of [37] for the history of this lemma. .
. in I. Then (1 y ) A = 0 f o r some y e I. Then: (x" y ) A = 0 for some y e I. We assume the reader to be familiar with a little ring theory. . Let R be a ring. Then n J n A = 0. h
Remark.yn2a2. and assume that J A = A where J is the Jacobson radical of R.) By Theorem 73. a.
Theorem 75. = Zyijaj for suitable elements yi. .
1
1
i
'
Proof. For any x in J.y24a2 (17) . We say that A is torsionfree if xu = 0 ( x e R. The intersection of the maximal left ideals of R turns out to coincide with the intersection of the maximal right ideals of R and thus is a twosided ideal J . Let R be an integral domain... In the first. i. e. Let R be a Noetherian integral domain. .. . let A be a finitely generated left Rmodule. I an ideal in R . I an ideal in R. . Let R be any (not necessarily commutative) ring with unit element. a contradiction. Then: n I " A = 0. in any case. We can quote Theorem 76 again. this enables us to express al in terms of the remaining a's.
+
Proof.) We assume that r > 0 and shall reach a contradiction.
+
for jl. 1 x is invertible (has a twosided inverse).j. Let al. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring with Jacobson radica? J. and x an element of R satisfying x A C ZA.. A an Rmodule generated by n elements. Then A = 0.yinan = 0 . 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS SEC. 21/THE ASCENDING CHAIN CONDITION
51
t
Proof. (Here "minimal" can be taken to mean that none of the a. Proof. Definition. Hence either B = 0 or 1 ruled out since I # R. but the ascending chain condition on submodules makes this unnecessary. Bringing everything to the left. y e I. I an ideal in R . be a minimal generating set of A. we get the system of equations (X .
+
.
In the second application the conclusion that something vanishes will come from assumptions concerning the Jacobson radical.
If we apply Theorem 75 with x
1 *weobtain:
Theorem 76. pick C maximal with respect to the property C n B = IB. .Ynn)an = 0
.'s can be omitted. Write B = n Z n A .. ( x .a. Say al. B (1 + y ) B = 0 for y e I. annihilates A . A an Rmodule.
prove that K = IJ. ) (b) If B and A / B satisfy the ascending chain condition on submodules. Observe that R / I is Noetherian. K the ideals generated by the coefficients off.13
A.) (e) If R is an integrally closed domain. (b) An example where K # IJ: take R as in Ex. Then. Isaacs) Give an alternative proof of.. Prove that R is Noetherian. 3.) 5. (Hint: (Kl)l = ((1J)Fl 3 IJ 3 K . 18 in $16. If

.
A
= A0
3 A1 3 
*
. prove that Kl = (IJ)l. for P. Let R be a commutative ring. prove that I A = A . 9.3 A. (a) Prove that K C IJ. B = ( I . *If a ring R admits a faithful module (one with annihilator 0) that satisfies the ascending chain condition on submodules. (c) If I = R. For instance.) 4. prove that A is finitely generated. = 0 and each R/Zj is Noetherian.
+
. then so doe2 ![XI.) 7.
=
0
+
. (Hint: obviously IIl C R. knowing that this holds for B and A / B .) 12. and let f = 2 + 2ix.1. prove that the same is true for R[x]. (Hint: get K' 3 (IJ)+ by quoting part (a) and taking inverses. (This is a relatively trivial converse of Theorem 76.) Let K C L be fields with K algebraically closed in L. be ideals in R . See pp. .2ix. for a and u in K with a # 0. prove that K = IJ. B a submodule. Let R be a ring. but not a valuation domain.) 8.+l is isomorphic to RIP. aun E R for all n implies utR. prove that R is Noetherian. . prove that R is integrally closed. Prove that there exists a series of submodules
EXERClSES 1. (This exercise is concerned with Gauss's lemma in the version that refers to the ideals generated by the coefficients. 8 of 516.
such that each A. (Hint: use Theorem 6 to get A. (The purpose of this exercise is to provide an illustrative example for Ex. Compare Ex.52
CH. the equality coming from part (el. and hence so is its submodule I / A B . If R satisfies the ascending chain condition on radical ideals./A. 6. Note that L is infinitedimensional over K . Then argue that K M J = J . If R satisfies the ascending chain condition on finitely generated ideals. (Hint: this can be reduced to the quasilocal case. we can take L to be a simple transcendental extension of K . so is I.) 10. R can be assumed to be a valuation domain. For an alternative discussion see Theorem 3. Since A B is finitely generated. and integrally closed.) (d) If R is a domain and I is invertible. (This is not easy. (Hint: reduce the problem to Ex. Prove that (1IPI = R.. 21/THE
ASCENDING CHAIN CONDITION
53
Proof. using the ascending chain condition on submodules of A to get the procedure to terminate. b).) Notalion: polynomials f. (Hint: localize and use part (c).) 11. a). (Hint: embed R in R/Il @ . by Theorem 57. for any ideal I containing y . @ R/I. K f L. (Hint: combine generators for B with lifted generators for A I B .Theorem 7 as follows (using the notation of its proof). prove that R is Noetherian. Let R be a Noetherian ring. A an Rmodule. g . I. 2. a prime ideal in R. and fg respectively. (c) Prove that a valuation domain is completely integrally closed if and only if it has dimension 5 1. I. A an Rmodule. . The question can be reduced to part (a). Write A = ( I . (b) Prove that the converse of (a) holds if R is Noetherian. Note that A / A B is a finitely generated (R/Z)module. 4 of $16. With B = A J A we have B Theorem 78 yields B = 0. 458 of [24]. quasilocal. (Hint: the problem is to prove that every submodule of A is finitely generated. and that R is nonNoetherian. (a) If B and A / B are finitely generated.) 9. g with coefficients in R .
=
JB. (ZI')l 3 R. f7 I. An integral domain R with quotient field K is completely integrally closed if. Prove that R is onedimensional. J . prove that the same is true for A . g = 2 . (a) If R is completely integrally closed. 8.. A a finitely generated Rmodule.)
. 2/NOETHERIAN
RINGS
SEC. Either Theorem 76 or
(f) If R is an integrally closed domain and K = (Kl)I. (d) Let R be completely integrally closed and I a nonzero ideal in R. rather than GCD's as in Ex. prove that K = J . y an element of R such that 1 y annihilates A . Let R be any (not necessarily commutative) ring. Let R be the subring of L[[x]]consisting of those power series with constant term in K . 9 in $11.16 on page 11 of [37]. and let 11. In getting the other inclusion argue that. Prove: if R satisfies the ascending or descending chain condition on prime ideals. and use Ex. (M. Pass to etc. such that Il n .
a)/J is a cyclic Tmodule annihilated by (J.2 o the J’s are prime.. By Ex.+i
=
xlal
+ .We abstract the argument for this. say. 8( 1968).
(the notation j k means that Jk is omitted). n) must be contained in P. xZl C Zl. Z contains a nonzero contracted ideal.. Then T / ( J .

22
ZEROD lVl SORS
Remark. Let R be a commutative ring. Thus Z/N is finitely generated. Since . R/(ZA J ) is Noetherian. E R)
From (18) we deduce
. Then: there are only a jinite number o maximal primes f o A . 22/ZERODlVISORS
55
x 6 (ZZl)l. and N satisfying the following conditions: R/Z and R / J are Noetherian. b))module.54
CH.. hence so is its submodule (IAJ)/N.
* *
(x.)
13. By Ex.) 14. 9. a j n i t e number of ideals in R. For a general ring R (not necessarily Noetherian) call an Rmodule Noetherian if.) 15.xnZP C I’ for all n . . . each of them is prime. Prove that Z is finitely generated. and Z J C N C In J.. J.+ x. <(A). 40 in $16.
contradicting the maximality of P. and (19) implies that some Pi ( j = 1.)
Theorem 80. Let R C T be rings with T Noetherian and T a finitely generated Rmodule. c P. T / J is a Noetherian R .n P. Kyoto Univ. 40 of $16. since it will be useful several times in the future. f union J1 V Then S is contained in some J k . The submodule spanned by the at’s is finitely generated and therefore spanned. 14 reduce to the case where T is a domain and T / J is a Noetherian Rmodule for every nonzero ideal J in T. and S a subring o R that is contained in the settheoretic f V J. For every k we may assume
The results thus far derived concerning the zerodivisors on a module A. J. Math. xnZZlC R. If any further a’s exist we have an equation
(18) (19) a. Evidently <(‘(A) is the settheoretic union of these maximal ones. have been relatively shallow. Denote them by {PI) and let P... x E R by complete integral closure. By Ex. R/Z is a Noetherian ring. . so Z/(ZA J ) is finitely generated. a) is a Noetherian Rmodule. . Each annihilator is contained in a maximal one (by the ascending chain condition. To complete the proof of Theorem 80 it will suffice to prove that any ideal contained in*<(A) is contained in one of P 1 .
P n 1
. The module (J. and therefore it is a Noetherian Rmodule. (Hint: assume that ab c J with neither a nor b in J. .b) is a faithful Noetherian (R/Z)module.. 4657. then xZZl C R. by al.. Let (J.+. J1. We are momentarily violating (here and in Theorems 82 and 83) the widely respected convention that a subring has to contain the unit element of the big ring. (Hint: by Ex. hence it is a finitely generated (R/Z)module.
(20)
S Q3 V 1
*

*
V jk V

* *
V J. Let Z be a nonzero ideal in R.b). . 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS
SEC. We next show that there are only finitely many. Prove that J is prime. f
Proof. .” J. Assume that at least n .+l.m o m contradiction. not by Zorn’s lemma!). David Eisenbud discovered still another proof. Hence there are no further a’s or P’s.a.. Proof: We argue by induction on n. be the annihilator of a. Noetherian assumptions make deeper theorems possible. 8 . which makes use of injective modules and yields a noncommutative generalization.. Consider the set of all annihilators of nonzero elements of A . and each is the annihilator of a nonzero element of A . Note that when we delete Jk we preserve and perhaps strengthen the hypothesis that at most two of
. it satisfies the ascending . hence it is a cyclic (T/(J. and the maximal primes of A. chain condition on submodules. . a.. This proof is a modification of the proof given by Eakin in the paper cited in Ex... 10. J / N is a finitely generated (R/Z)module. Let R C T be rings and let J be an ideal in T maximal with respect to the property that T / J is not a Noetherian Rmodule. this is true for every nonzero Z it follows that R is Noetherian. Nagata has another proof in ‘‘A type of subrings of a Noetherian ring. Let R be a Noetherian ring. P. (Hint: by Ex. By Theorem 6 . b) A R = I. Hence R/Z is Noetherian. as in E X ~ 8 and 10. Then T/(J. Prove that R is Noetherian. A ajnitely generated nonzero Rmodule. J and N are finitely generated. Let R be a ring containing ideals I.
Theorem 81. The sharp formulation we give in Theorem 81 is due to McCoy [35].
We know that any ideal in R S has the form IS with Z a suitable ideal in R. and so we seize this moment to record a nearly obvious theorem that we need. P. However. Again y e S but y lies in none of the J’s. If we insist that I be finitely generated. Zp is the annihilator of A p (see Ex. Now (since A is finitely generated) the meaning of the vanishing of Ap is sA = 0 where s e S. We note that the theorem is trivial for n = 1. nevertheless we have proved that a suitable element of A can do this uniformly. . b p <(A).
In the Noetherian case we can strengthen Theorem 84. then i l l . The first such theorem needs no finiteness assumptions. It suffices for us to verify that PP is minimal over ZP and hence.
Theorem 86.u P. but counterexamples still exist (see Ex. Now I p A p = 0.Zdenotes the settheoretic complement o j I in S. This gives us s’(si . For suppose containing Zp and properly contained there exists a prime ideal in Rp.. Suppose that I # S and that
where PI. with Q a prime ideal in R properly contained in P. the matter is not so simple. Any localization R s of a Noetherian ring is Noetherian. S is clearly a multiplicatively closed set. .I c PI u . so that Zp is contained in the annihilator of Ap. we deduce that S is contained in some Pi. The proof is a good illustration of the use of localization. and A P . and we can assume it to be J1. We claim that it is disjoint from I . For if i e Z.
+
Proof. Proof. which is again Noetherian (Theorem 85). a priori. If Z is not assumed to be finitely generated.which is again finitely generated. in P P . and S ..
5. Since S C I is ruled out. We pass to R p . since it lies in S but does not lie in any of the other J’s. a p P.Set y = x1 x2x3 x. Can Theorem 82 be generalized? To discuss this. the annihilator Z of A is disjoint from S. We record it because it will be convenient to quote it in this form. I the annihilator of A . The following theorem is an immediate corollary of Theorem 81. each element of S needs a different element of A to exhibit the fact that it is a zerodivisor. A ajnitely generated nonzero Rmodule.
s .
xk
We move to the other extreme and give some attention to minimal prime ideals.56
CH.
+
. 10). Then there exists a single nonzero element a in A with Sa = 0. For n = 2. As a matter of fact. for suppose that baA = 0. we have Q = P and so P C <(A). Then P is the annihilator of a nonzero element of A. as an element of Ip.
We rephrase this: although. Then P C <(A). maximal with respect to disjointness from S.. We claim I C Q. Pick xk e S but not in the right side of (20). Then must lie in Jk. Let R be a commutative ring. By the minimality of P. S a subring of R . 7). Then S C Pi f o r some i. Let R be Noetherian and let A be a$nitely generated nonzero Rmodule with annihilator I. Then a A = 0. are prime ideals in R . Then Q C <(A) and I C Q C P.
+
By combining Theorems 80 and 81 we obtain a result that is among the most useful in the theory of commutative rings. we set y = x1 x2 and obtain the contradiction that y lies in S but in none of the J’s.v P. Since I is finitely generated. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring. all the mork so. this case is really a piece of group theory.
Proof. I consisting of zerodivisors. and I an ideal of R contained in S.lies in Qp. and P a prime ideal in R minimal over I. Necessarily (Theorem 35) it has the form Q p .
8.. We need first to check A P # 0. Let S denote the set of all elements ab in R where a p P and b p <(A).q) = 0 for suitable
.
Theorem 84. . Let A be a nonzero Rmodule. a E I C P. minimal over the annihilator of Ap.Let P be a prjme ideal in R minimal over I. For n > 2 at least one of the J’s must be prime. and S a subring contained in <(A).
Proof. a contradiction. we drop the module and just consider an ideal I in a commutative ring R . We do not need this. 22/ZERODIVISORS
57
the J’s are nonprime. however.
Theorem 82. Enlarge I to a prime ideal Q .
Theorem 83. We observe that
We quote Theorem 81. the complement of P. examples abound to show that I need not be annihilated by a single element. so‘is IS.
s cI
V PI
v
* *
. 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS
SEC.
Since I is maximal. all its prime ideals are both minimal and maximal.
Proof. that is. For if x b = 0 we have that x/l annihilates a / l . and hence x E P . Of course.
This is as far as we shall go in the direction of primary decomposition and the primes associated with a module.
'
confined to the prime ideals minimal over the radical ideal. 22/ZERODIVlSOl7S
59
q e Q and s. M. a 6 I . We shall also need the JordanHolder theorem.. We then say that A hasfinite length. We '
have upheld the claim I C Q. Let R be a commutative' ring satiflying the ascending chain condition on radical ideals. . but we are ignoring the intermediate ones. a module A is a chain
\
Theorem 87. We wish next to show that above an ideal I in a Noetherian ring R there are only finitely many minimal prime ideals. If not.58
CH. b). Let R be a commutative ring satisfving the ascending chain condition on radical ideals. for some s P P. We phrase it in terms of composition series.
A
=
Ao 3 A1 3

*
2 A. y e R). . ..
Theorem 89. A ring is Odimensional if all prime ideals are maximal (and we really mean all.) It turns out that this is demonstrable with a weaker chain condition.. the intersection in Theorem 87 might as well be
Proof. say M1.
x = il
Similarly xn = i2 zb (i2 I. A composition series for. beginning at A and ending in 0. The statement that a / l is annihilated by P p translates to spa = 0.
Theorem 88. . . We have
M ~ . e
+
+ ya (il e I . a) and K the radical of ( I . 489 of [24]) we present the result in this greater generality. . then any chain of submodulesof A can b6 refined to a composition series. and let I be an ideal in R. This leads us to the next theorem. Thus P P is minimal over I P and we can apply Theorem 84 to get Pp C ~ ( A P ) . let I be a radical ideal maximal among those for which the assertion fails (the existence of a maximal one following. An integral domain is 1dimensional if all non. x e I .
=
0
Proof. Theorem: f A has a i composition series. e. By Theorem 88 there are only a finite number of them. Then any radical ideal in R is the intersection of a finite number of prime ideals. Write b = sa. . (2) Any finitely generated Rmodule has finite length.
Remark. Let x e J A K. a Odimensional i tegral domain is a field). z e R). say
of submodules. Let R be a commutative ring. and that the prime ideals that occur are exactly all the minimal primes over the radical ideal. slx e P for s1f P. If R is Odimensional. J and K are each expressible as a finite intersection of prime ideals. and hence x/l e P P . Then by Theorem 80 there exists a nonzero element of A p annihilated by P P . Then there are only a jinite number of prime ideals minimal over I. Then some power x lies in ( I . + l is irreducible (i. s' P P . Since any prime ideal above a given ideal contains a minimal one (Theorem lo). has no proper submodule). but from the postulated ascending chain condition on radical ideals). A prime ideal contains I if and only if it contains the radical of I. Theorem 88 now follows from the remark made justpreceding it. We have identified the maximal and minimal ones. I is not prime. C M ~ ~ . we mean (by way of exception) truly minimal prime ideals. We recall that the dimension (or Krull dimension if there is danger of ambiguity) is the sup of lengths of chains of prime ideals. (3) R as an Rmodule hasjnite length. M .
We conclude this section with some useful results on Odimensional and ldimensional rings. s P Q and hence i e Q . Let J be the radical of ( I . 0. The following three statements are equivalent: (1) R is Noetherian and Odimensional. (Note: if I = 0 and R is a domain. = J
. 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS
SEC. ~ M .ro prime ideals are maxima1. Take a and b with ab e I . (1) implies (2). a). Since Q C P we get s.. not from Zorn's lemma.. Since the ideas are useful in differential algebra (see pp. We claim that P is exactly the annihilator of b. as required. an element that can be taken to be of the form a l l with a e A . and any two composition series have the same length. In that case one readily sees that the expression is unique. such that each A i / A . and have thereby violated the assumption that P is minimal over I. b 6 I. By multiplying these two equations e we get x+"I. We shall reach a contradiction by proving that I = J n K .
Our problem is to rule out the existence of distinct prime ideals P 2 Q. a) = R..
bj
c
bjah R
~ a h ' >
.B 3 * * * 3 0
where B is the result of multiplying A by a product of Mi's (repetition allowed). formally weaker than (3): that R satisfies the descending chain condition on ideals. let a and c be nonzero elements of R . Then XI I and must equal I. We can interpolate between A and 0 a string of nk submodules. (We might note that it would be hopeless to try to prove that T itself is a finitely generated Rmodule. c E R . VII. It follows that a* is a unit in R/& (J. By Theorem 25. a) = R. For these elements' a and c we cite Theorem 92. (J. so R must be a field. for any nonzero ideal irj T contains a nonzero element of R. it is actually nilpotent. Since we can switch to the domain R/Q. Thus J # 0 and hence. so
+
+
_=. J is a nil ideal. Let R be a onedimensional Noetherian domain with quotient field K . jah e (c) for some h. Theorem 91. Our plan is to prove that T / a T is a finitely generated Rmodule. I = R.60
CH. all of them containing aR. If R has finite length it is certainly Noetherian. 22/2ERODIVISORS
/ '
61
J the Jacobson radical of R. M. for instance T might be K itself.
Proof.B until all quotients are irreducible. and let J be the set of x in R satisfying xan E (c) for some n. Alternatively. Two theorems will precede it. Let a* be the image of a in R/J.
Proof. In a zerodimensional ring. z e R): Then t = bj/c tza. 29. e. a typical intermediate step being A 3 * * * 2 B 3 M.B is a finitely generated module over the field RIM. (2)f o r any nonzero ideal I in R. aR).
Theorem 92. R / I has finite length. Now. Then T is again Noetherian and its dimension is at most 1. .
Proof. every nonzerodivisor in R/J has an inverse. It remains to be seen that R is Odimensional. Ch. In particular x = x i for some i E I. for an alternative proof see [9]. Let I be a minimal ideal in R and pick x # 0 in I. We assert that a* is not a zerodivisor. and so it is a finitedimensional vector space. We can thus interpolate a finite number of further submodules between B and M. we recast the problem as follows: prove that a domain R of finite length is a field. So ( M I . For if a*y* = 0 for y* c R/J. b. We note that(I m ) is a descending chain of ideals in R. We conclude this section with a useful theorem concerning rings between a onedimensional Noetherian domain and its quotient field.e. One of these is c itself. The proof we give is essentially the one in [12]. Since J is finitely generated. ) This will prove the theorem. That the descending chain condition implies the ascending chain condition works even in the noncommutative case (Hopkins' Theorem). we may describe J as the set of elements which throw some power of a into (c). by Theorem 91. and K is a finitely generated Rmodule only when R = K . som a'"aye (c). and therefore we have omitted it. i. We can write 1 = j za ( j t J . The maximal ideals are also minimal prime ideals and hence (Theorem 84) consist of zerodivisors. There is a fourth equivalent statement. . 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS
SEC. we have ay E J where y maps on y*.
Remark. Now let A be a finitely generated Rmodule. i. say at I. (3) implies (1). Then (J. By Theorem 89 or Theorem 90 the chain becomes stable. and T any ring between R and K. We shall not use this refinement. C This gives i = 1. y E J . p. by the definition of J. Trivial. We obtain a composition series for A .
Theorem 93.
Theorem 90. An immediate corollary of Theorem 89 is worth a separate statement. y* = 0. Write I. Let a be an arbitrary nonzero element of R.. and we then apply Theorem 90. For this n we assert that
R TCz+aT To prove (22) we take t E T and write t = b/c. The following statements are equivalent f o r an integral domain R: ( I ) R is Noetherian and of dimension 5 1. Let R be a onedimensional integral domain. = (amT n R. Now BIM.)k = 0 for some k. (2) implies (3). a) = R where J is the ideal defined there. any nonzerodivisor is a unit.
(Hint: use Theorem 84. finitely n) 0 A. Prove:
<(A)
c
c <(’(A) u Z(’(BI4)

4. The hypothesis of the present exercise is used in the “going down theorem” of Cohen and Seidenberg [13].) 13. prove that J C <(T). x A # A . S a subring of R. b in Twith ab = 0.
EXERClSES
1. 2. Prove that there exist elements a and b with ab = 0. Assume that no prime ideal of R is contained in both P and Q.. respectively.. Let R be Noetherian. A = A1 0 S C <(A. 11. We have proved (22). (Hint: pass to Rp and observe that its maximal ideal PP is nil. Let B be a nonzero Rmodule.
ti E
T)
(11
+ al)(r~ ad +
=
rlrz
+ (rlaz + rzad
Equation (24) gives us u = ah(t .‘ Prove: <(R) = UP. but that the annihilator of I in A is 0. the union being taken over all minimal prime ideals. 6 so as to “absorb” the module into the ring. Prove that Ps is a maximal prime of As. Prove that the contraction of a minimal prime ideal in T is necessarily equal to 0 in R. Let R be any ring. b in P but not in Q . prove that generated Rmodules.) 14. R can be the ring of polynomials in two variables over a field. Let R be Noetherian. Let us suppose that (23) has been arranged with the smallest possible value of h. 16. If S C <(A). Prove that <(A) = the set of all nonunits in R. but that no nonzero element of T annihilates J . Since
+ aui
(tz E T. Assume that every element in R is either a unit or a zerodivisor. q) # R. A a nonzero finitely generated Rmodule. Let R be a domain.) 12. where J = IT. (Hint: let S a n d T be the settheoretic complements of P and Q. and let T be a ring containing R such that every nonzero element of R is a nonzerodivisor in T (in other words. A i (i = 1. 3. then b I some P. and a in Q but not in P . Let A . Note that the conclusion is a piece of the G D condition on R. So we have a in S . The result is
contradicting our minimal choice of h. ~1
E
R)
Substitute (25) in (24). Let P and Q be prime idealsin a commutative ring R. Let p . 6 . With the same Z as in Ex. Prove that I annihilates a nonzero element of R. 22/ZERODIVISORS
63
whence R te++T
a h
for some h. Prove: <(A/xA) = <(A/PA) for any r. Prove: <(A) = U<(Ai). prove that UP. Let R be a UFD.) for some i. it has dimension 0.) Let the
where r. but not a principal ideal domain. $16. and the rule of multiplication is
+
U
+ at1
(U
E
R. We write out (23) explicitly: n (24)
t
=a h
Rmodule A be the direct sum of all R/(p). 10. Prove that the annihilator of A S is IS.
. q be distinct primes such that I = ( p . means that we can write This (25) u = ah+’tz
C I h . (22) follows from (23). Let A be the direct sum of all A. T and observe the dual version in Ex. a. = <(A) for a suitable Rmodule A . 5. Prove that I C <(A). Let R be a ring with no nonzero nilpotent elements. and the conclusion can advantageously replace it. (Hint: if ah = 0 with b # 0. A a finitely generated Rmodule with annihilator I.. T = R A is an additite direct sum. Given a settheoretic union UPi of prime ideals in a commutative ring R. hence a finitely generated Rmodule. . This is done by a semidirect sum T of R and A .. and A a submodule different from 0 or B. So u E ahT n R h > n we have I h = Ihfl. S a multiplicatively closed set disjoint from P. Prove that if R has finitely many minimal prime ideals. (For instance. be a nonzero Rmodule for each i ranging over an index set.I
62
CH. It shows T/aT to be a submodule of a cyclic Rmodule. 6. p ranging over the primes of R. Let I be a finitely generated ideal contained in a minimal prime ideal of a ring R. e A . Argue that 0 must lie in ST. T is torsionfree as an Rmodule). for otherwise a prime ideal could be constructed excluding ST.) 9. 8. We shall prove that h Idoes hold.atl) E ahT. x an element with x p <(A). Let S be multiplicatively closed in R. Suppose h > n. = 0. 7. Z/NOETHERIAN
RINGS
SEC. since n P . We modify the example in Ex. Let A be a nonzero module. and it would be contained in both P and Q. P a maximal prime of A . Let R be a ring with no nonzero nilpotent elements. E R . If h 5 n.
= a suitable power uh we get uk = y .). let B be the submodule generated by a. For each k there exists a maximal ideal M kcontaining Z k but not Ik+l. take x # 0. a contradiction. (Hint: say Q is the annihilator of a . Let the ideal Z in the ring R be such that every prime ideal containing Z is finitely generated.on of the proof of Theorem 87. 0 is not in the multiplicatively If closed set S .) 19. 12 in 513. Observe that the annihilator of any nonzero element of B is again Q. = rad(Z1+ PI)
c rad(Z2 + P. (Hint: one can derive this directly from the ascending chain condition in K[xl. I the ideal in T they generate. . where S is the complement of the union of the J’s.azy is nilpotent. (Hint: see the proof of Theorem 87. Prove that R is zerodimensional. Prove that R is von Neumann regular. then a2z . c P . Prove that in T there are only a finite number of prime ideals lying over P. Writing rad for the radical of an ideal. Prove that R satisfies the ascending be a chain condition on radical ideals. Apply Theorem 7 to get the desired contradiction. and let T be a ring lying between R and its quotient field. Prove the theorem by the technique of localization. = 0 such that each A. (Hint: that (a) implies (b) can be proved by a minor modificati. Let R be a onedimensional Noetherian domain. let ZlC Z2 C Z3 properly ascending sequence of radical ideals. . x. (Hint: for given
a. where y is not a member of any prime minimal over x. Let R be an integral domain with quotient field K. Prove that Q equals one of the P.) 24. z .
. The process can thus be iterated to yield a properly ascending sequence of prime ideals.64
CH. 16 and Ex. Suppose that for every i this sequence ultimately becomes constant. it can be enlarged by Zorn’s lemma so as to be maximal with respect to this failure. 3 To prove that (b) implies (a) assume on the contrary that ZlC Z2 C 1 is a strictly ascending sequence of Jideals. with y . c 11
c I. Let R be any ring. we have
. (Hint: pass to Rs.) c rad(Z3 + P.) 22. for P.) Prove that any variety is expressible as a finite union of irreducible varieties.) In Theorem 81 assume that all the J’s are prime. Prove that Z is prime if and only if it is not expressible as an intersection of two properly larger radical ideals.) A ring is von Neumann regular if for any a there exists an x with axa = a. . construct P maximal with respect to exclusion of S..) 26. let S be the set of all an .
whence ueZ.) 17. Hence some an . Note the connection with part (e) of Ex. (Hint: if not./A. 2/NOETHERIAN
RINGS
SEC.) +
* *
‘
for each i from 1 to r. .’s. Combine Ex. Then Z is contained in all the M’s.. (Hint: if not.+l is isomorphic to RIP. 22/ZERODIVISORS
/
65
15. M1M2Z3. P. . Let T be the ring generated over R by all xy*.. prove that Q = Po. (b) every Jideal in R is the intersection of a finite number of prime Jideals.a prime ideal in R. Suppose that every ring between R and K is Noetherian. The hypothesis of zerodimensionality implies that RIP is a field. (This exercise comes from an unpublished manuscript of A. Note that this exercise is a converse to Theorem 93.
A
= A0
*
3 A1 3 
Let Q be a prime ideal in R such that Q is the annihilator of a nonzero element in A . use induction.y. Prove that the dimension of R is at most 1. let P be a prime ideal in R. Then
+
(uk
. Then we get the contradiction We have u c rad(1. (In this exercise we waive the requirement of a unit element.afL+ly. pass to RIP.. 18.

P. any element is either a zerodivisor or a unit. Let Z be the ideal generated by I. Let R be a ring such that in every homomorphic image of R.) = z1

*
z . (Hint: combine Theorems 93 and 88.) 16.) 21. (Hint: if some ideal containing Z fails to be finitely generated. and a . z . Prove that the following conditions on a ring R are equivalent: (a) the ascending chain condition on Jideals. and let A be an Rmodule possessing a series of submodules
’
3 A. x e Q C P. Derive a contradiction. Brumer and P. Prove that every ideal containing Z is finitely generated..1 3 A . (Hint: if P C Q are different prime ideals. Call an ideal a Jideal if it is an intersection of maximal ideals. 7 in 521 to give alternative proofs of the finiteness of the number of maximal or minimal prime ideals attached to a finitely generated module over a Noetherian ring. 12 in 513 left off. For For let u be an element of I. say at the nth term. Then take y E P. it is generated by some xyi. If z is an inverse of Q mod P .y1) 
*

(uk
. If Z is finitely generated. Let Zl= P1n A P. or from Theorem 87. .. Let Z be a radical ideal in an arbitrary ring. (This exercise continues the transition to the geometric language where Ex. Sally.MJz. If B A A1 = 0.) 20.. e I.anfly = 0. Let R be a zerodimensional commutative ring with no nonzero nilpotent elements.a is in P . . Let R be a ring satisfying the ascending chain condition on prime ideals and having the property that any radical ideal is the intersection of a finite number of prime ideals. We

.) 23. If B A A1 # 0.) 25. Q and P distinct primes.].
and of dimension 5 1 . where the GCD of the elements of J is 1. Let R be a UFD and I an ideal in R . Prove that the following are equivalent: (a) I is principal. is contained in P we get ZL+. (c) if a prime ideal P is contained in <(R/I) then P is principal. Ann(sa) is contained in P and contains ( I . a contradiction. (b) <(R/I) is a finite union of principal prime ideals. and then the contradiction C Mk. Prove: Z'(R/J) C . I # R. 29 and 30 are due to S.) 27. and to mesh with later work on grade. Now MMI contains M . Let I be maximal among those annihilators of nonzero elements of A which lie inside P. An ideal I in a ring R has grade 1 if it contains a nonzerodivisor x such that I C <(R/(x)).
i. integrally closed. If J # R. This contradiction proves that M is invertible. (Hint: deduce from the assumption that A is finitely generated. But if MMI = M then M' is integral over R (Theorem 12). is contained in R. By Theorem 94.
. Deduce that xau E d and au p d.) 30. hence is contained in R since R is integrally closed. Use hypothesis (c) and the preceding exercise. Let P be a fixed prime ideal in the ring R and let A be an Rmodule. Exs. sxa = 0. and hence (Theorem 59) principal. the fact that P contains the annihilator of some element of A .) 29. 2/NOETHERIAN
RINGS
SEC. Remark. 1 and 2 in $31. This proof is due to William Heinzer. Then ann(xa) contains I and y . observe that any prime ideal minimal over J has rank at least 2. Since
M1M2
* * *
CM k
Dejinition. Assume that R is integrally closed and that M has grade 1.
. We begin with the local case . Let R be a local domain with maximal ideal M . (Hint: suppose on the contrary that x y E I . 23/INTEGRAL ELEMENTS. so can not be contained in P. (Hint: only (c) =+(a) offers any difficulty. 
' '
Proof. y p I. and f o r each maximal ideal M . A ring is local if it is Noetherian and has exactly one maximal ideal.
Proof. Then M is principal. Theorem 94.
Theorem 96.but first we have to define a local ring. (2) R is Noetherian. C P .
I
23
INTEGRAL ELEMENTS. It is also a valuation domain. Let a be a nonzerodivisor in a ring R . Note that sa # 0.66
CH. For a converse see Exs.
Dejinition.) 28. Let I be an ideal of grade 1 in a Noetherian domain R. . I l l
Ic
Et
We discuss a little further the properties of the domain R of Theorem 95. Write I = d. For an integral domain R the following statements are equivalent: ( 1 ) Every nonzero ideal of R is invertible. Since there are infinitely many minimal primes over Y . thits R is a principal ideal domain with just one prime. and let J be any ideal in R. MI properly contains R. Then I' properly contains R. By Theorems 80 and 81 there e C (x). Take s c P. Y cannot be the intersection of a finite number of prime ideals.
Theorem 95. This kind of valuation domain is called a discrete valuation ring (DVR). (3) R is Noetherian. x). A very easy argument shows that every ideal is principal.?"R/d).
We have I
y p ( x ) with I y
C <(R/(x)).
Mklk+l
C 2C P
and no M . (Hint: if x c Z ( R / J ) then x u E J for u pJ. Prove Theorem 86 by using the preceding exercise.)
Ik+l
To shorten the statements of the next theorems.Let Y be the Jideal AMt. This exercise is a strengthened form of Theorem 6. Prove that I is prime. we define grade 1. and prove that the Dedekind property is preserved in suitable integral extensions. McAdam. Enlarge the latter to a maximal annihilator inside P.
cc
P r
.Then y / x is in I' but not in R. and therefore equals M or R. 111
67
claim that M is a minimal prime over 2. For suppose that 2 C P k with P a prime ideal properly contained in M k . R M is a DVR.
The main purpose of this section is to establish the basic properties of Dedekind rings. x 6 I.
let R be a principal ideal domain and [L:K]finite.] o is Noetherian. and the ordering is total if and only if R is a valuation domain. etc.. Divisibility (relative to R) induces on K*/U the structure of a partially ordered group. K. Given I . Continuation of the process proves uniqueness. We present. We head for statement (2) of Theorem 96. u.. . Since nonzero prime ideals are Since PI is invertible we can cancel it maximal we must have Q. 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS
SEC. one can prove that R is Dedekind. It was a great discovery of the 19th century that T need not be a principal ideal domain.. Say ul. Schmidt (Theorem 100). We leave the routine verification of these statements to the reader. 23/INTEGRAL
ELEMENTS. = P1. So we start with an integral domain T . Another method of proof is available if L is separable over K. and L a finite algebraic extension of K (i. un is the basis. It is an easy exercise that T has quotient field L. . (3) implies (1) follows from Theorem 62. Let L be a jield jnitedimensional over K. Let R be a Dedekind ring with quotient field K. so some Qi C PI. and has dimension 5 1 by Theorem 48. This theorem is due to Matusita. At present we place no restri’ctions on the pair of fields K C L. . and shows that T is a finitely generated Rmodule. Having gone that far. R is integrally closed by Theorem 54. Since P is invertible we have I = ( Z F ) P . R C T
’
. We can in fact define it for any integral domain R. e. on both sides. The main change from Schmidt is to switch the point of view (2 la Artin’s Galois theory)*from going up to going down. its quotient field L ...
I I
KCL
. but that it is a Dedekind ring. we might as well let R be a Dedekind ring. An integral domain satisfying any (hence all) of the conditions in Theorem 96 is called a Dedekind ring. if a domain R has the property that every ideal is a product of prime ideals (no further assumptions are needed). For a number of facts that hold in this context. Let U be the group of units in R. L is an algebraic extension of K.
Theorem 97. . More generally. In each RM all ideals are principal (Theorem 59).
Remark. (A little more is true: any element of L is expressible as a quotient with numerator in T and denominator in R. so RM is a DVR. (1) implies (2). It remains to argue that T is Noetherian. we define R = T A K. the process terminating since I is properly contained in I F ’ . T is Noetherian by Theorem 93.) The following little picture may help visualize the relationships. dim(To) = 1. We can find a vector space basis of L over K consisting of elements of T (first take any basis. Then T = R[ul.
Proof. Conversely. We introduce at this point the value group of a valuation domain.68
CH. We consider the following setup: R is an integrally closed domain with quotient field K. We call K*/U the value group of R. a pertinent example of F.
Theorem 98. This factorization can be continued till we reach a product of prime ideals. = Ql * * Qn (all P’s and Q’s prime ideals) then Ql QnC P I . See [ 121. (2) implies (3) is covered by Theorem 95. I11
69
Proof. Another property of Dedekind rings appears as Theorem 97. In a Dedekind ring any nonzero ideal is uniquely a product of prime ideals. T is integrally closed by Theorem 40. But it is not always true that T is a finitely generated Rmodule. K the field of rational numbers. indeed it is a finitely generated Rmodule. and a subfield K of L .

Proof. If I = P1 * . P. By another application of Theorem 48. see Exs. in a slightly recast version.
The classical version of the problem is the case where R is the ring of integers. Then T is a Dedekind ring. and let T be the integral closure o f R in L. it is contained in some prime ideal P. see [51]. R is Noetherian by Theorem 58. an algebraic number field). then multiply by suitable elements of R to throw the basis into T). 15. and T is the integral closure of R in L (the “ring of Rintegers” in L). This totally ordered group is cyclic if and only if R is a DVR. and let K* be the multiplicative group of nonzero elements in the quotient field K. Since T lies between To and its quotient field L . .
17 in $16. /3.' S = T A L. R = T A K. 0. R and S are discrete valuation rings with quotient fields K and L.. r) where a. we could use the globalized version: Ex. (In fact. It is possible to arrange [L:K]= 2. for Rp C TN. has quotient field L.
Proof. Its value group is in a natural way a subgroup of that of T. 111
71
Theorem 99. Thus. . So xmv E R Ru. The statement [L:K]5 2 is obvious.amxm)rml
and note that v is again an element of T . Since 21 is also in L . it follows that S is the integral closure of R.If N A R = P . = (u . Suppose on the contrary that it is.
RCSC T
k C K C L C M
1 1 1
where M is the quotient field of T. we must prove that u or ul lies in T N . Then T is a Priifer domain. by Theorem 64. u ) (jield adjunction). Let T be a valuation domain with quotient field L . Z~/INTEGRAL.
. this is clear since r1T A K = R. by taking
x and u to be algebraically independent over k . With u E T..)x~' +
ZI E
making it apparent that u lies in T. let K be any subfield of L . Let L be an algebraic extension of K (possibly infinitedimensional). We have a choice of a cardinal number argument when k is countable (then T has the power of the continuum) or the use of suitable gaps. e K. with quotient fields K and L . But the unique expression for xmz. for which we need a
There is a Priifer analogue of Theorem 98. is integrally closed. We now assume [L:K]= 2 and shall prove that S is not a finitely generated Rmodule. Given a f 0 in K we have that a or c1 in T and therefore in R. 1. We can equally well regard the coefficients as lying in T N . given u E L . Then [ L : K ]5 2. The inclusion R C T induces a homomorphism from the value group of R into the value group of T. Saying that this is an isomorphism amounts to the following: if x E R is a unit in T. i la Liouville. Let k be a field of characteristic 2. Let R be a Priifer domain with quotient field K. in the form R Ru has to have x' for its coefficient of u...e R for all i. and is integral over R (by characteristic 2). a contradiction since x .
+
+
Remark.+1xm+'

+ am+2xm+2 . since L is obtained from K by adjoining a square root of an element of K. then Rp is a valuation domain.
~
transcendental power series u. let K = k ( x .
Theorem 100. If we pick xm to satisfy p a . 2. Then R is a valuation domain with quotient field K. prove that x is a unit E in R . and we can normalize so that one coefficient is a unit. we see that S.70
CH.. Since S contains R. I f [ L : K ]= 2. and S is the integral closure of R in L.. then S is not a finitely generated Rmodule.. however we thought the reader's eye would this way more easily catch the cancellation of all powers of x up to xm.) We note that any element of M can be thrown into T by multiplication by a sufficiently high power of x. and let T be the integral closure of R in L. This proof is taken from [ 191. Let N be a typical maximal ideal in T. We quote Theorem 67. It will suffice. e R and xmp.
+ u = a.u (i = 1. Remarks.
over R by elements a .l is not in R (it is not even in T). This proves that R is a valuation domain with quotient field K.alx . Theorem 99 tells us that both R and S are DVR's. . Then S is spanned
Proof. u2)and L = k ( x . since a subgroup of a cyclic group is cyclic. (The minus signs might as well be plus signs since the characteristic is 2. Now u satisfies a polynoh$al equation with coefficients that can be taken to be in Rp.)Thus the expression for the element 2' takes the form
v = (a. for instance. and T = k[[x]]. I f T is a DVR. we get xmS C R Ru. Suppose We set
+
I
lies Proof.
Z/NOETHERIAN
RINGS
SEC. respectively. to prove that TN is a valuation domain..a. the power series ring in an indeterminate. ELEMENTS. We illustrate the various rings and fields in the figure:
Theorem 101. but there is no need for us to insist on this. and set R = T A K. It follows that any element of K can be thrown into R by multiplication by a suitable power of x. + alx + a2x2 + z. so is R. r can be 2. . Instead of quoting Theorem 67. The final statement of the theorem is immediate.
Then use Ex. . (Hint: Ex. say Zok= bTo. There is. Prove that T = Rs for a suitable S. Prove that R is a UFD. Let R be a onedimensional Noetherian domain. An alternative proof of Theorem 98 would begin by quoting Theorem 101. (a) Suppose that R contains a principal prime p such that R[p'] = K. 6.. is 9. prove that R is quasilocal. For instance. 23/INTEGRAL ELEMENTS.. Hence the ideal I in T is also principal. Ex. prove that R is integrally closed. BCzout. Assume that R M is Noetherian for every maximal ideal M in R . and that any nonzero element of R lies in only a finite number of maximal ideals. Robson. Prove: if every maximal ideal in a Noetherian domain R is invertible then R is Dedekind. Let R be any integral domain. generated say by al. In the ring Tl of integers in Lo(c) we have (IoTJk= (c". The a's generate a finitedimensional extension Lo of K . however. 4. In the hope of getting away from the Btzout property.
EXERCISES
In exercises 15. Let R be a onedimensional local domain. Set K = k(x).b E To. Prove that R is a DVR. Ill
73
3. one might try.. . Prove that R is Noetherian. an example due to Helmer [22].) 13. 2/NOETHERIAN
RINGS
SEC. it is possible to construct a valuation domain with any preassigned value group. and let x and y be indeterminates over k. (b) Suppose that R contains a set ( p % ) principal primes such that of adjoining all the elements p. (2) The ring of entire functions.) 1 1. (This problem was suggested by J . Prove that the integral closure of R is a Dedekind domain. 3. as is mentioned in passing in [ 151. Q a prime ideal in R[x]that contracts to 0 in R. and let T be the integral closure of R in L. ( 3 ) Examples obtained from a given Priifer domain by the use of Theorem 101. 2. Prove that R = k . Prove: Rs = TS n K. C. . and thus does not have quotient field K.) We recall that the class group of a Dedekind domain is the group of invertible ideals modulo principal ideals. presumably exactly as was done in the proof of Theorem 98. let Tobe the ring of integers in Loand I.) Let k be any field. or valuation domain. the ideal generated by al. 5. . see p. . Prove that the integral closure of R is a principal ideal domain with a finite number of primes.) 14. 12.a.I to R yields K. What examples are there of nonDedekind Priifer domains? The main ones are as follows. a more elementary proof due to John Thompson. Then T is a Bkzout. Prove that R[x]Q a DVR.
. 1. 5 in $14. K C L are fields. T has quotient field L. Let R be a Dedekind domain with quotient jield K.By hypothesis some power of lo principal. let L be the algebraic closure of K. Let I be a finitely generated ideal in T. and Theorem 60. (For another proof. It follows from unique factorization into prime ideals (Theorem 97) that IoTl = (c). If T is quasilocal.)
=
Theorem 102. (Hint: Theorems 93 and 96. 86 of [33]. 13. 8. in To. Assume that f o r any jinite algebraic extension of K the ring of integers has a torsion class group.
1
Proof. a. under the heading (3). . the ring of algebraic integers. This follows from the existence of socalled class fields in algebraic number theory. Let R be Btzout with quotient field K and let T be a ring between R and K. (Hint: argue that for an ascending chain of ideals Il C ZZ C . (1) Valuation domains. But this too is Btzout. y ) . Examples (1) and (2) are in fact Btzout domains (all finitely generated ideals are principal). This is a good example to keep in mind if you are looking for a Priifer domain with unusual properties. T = k b . and it works in more general circumstances. and that for the ring of integers in an algebraic number field the class group is finite.prove that M survives in T. . Let R be a given integral domain. then R is Dedekind. domain. It would then remain to prove T Noetherian. and S is multiplicatively closed in R. Prove: if every prime ideal in a domain R is invertible. If R is a valuation domain with maximal ideal M. 7. 21 in $22. (This exercise is intended to give a reasonably simple example in which the quotient field of R is not K. and R T n K. is Let c e L be a kth root of b. If T is integrally closed. ylx]. L = k(x. Let R be a domain' with quotient field K. Prove that Rs has the same property. Suppose that R is a Priifer. Let S be a multiplicatively closed subset of R. there exists n such that from n on the chain is stable in each RM. 10.72
CH.
74
CH. 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS
I
:
SEC. 24/1NTERSECTIONS OF QUASILOCAL DOMAINS
75
15. Let R , ( i = 0, I , 2 , . . .) be a sequence of rings with each R, properly contained in R,+l. Let T be the set of polynomials in an indeterminate x with the coefficient of x” allowed to range over R,. Prdve that T is a ring and is not Noetherian. (Hint: pick a, in R,+l but not in R , , and use the a’s to build a strictly ascending sequence of ideals in T.This exercise can be applied to a onedimensional Noetherian domain with integral closure not a finitely generated module (Theorem 100). It yields a twodimensional Noetherian domain with a nmNoetherian ring between it and its Noetherian integral closure.) 16. Let R be any ring. Let S be the set of all polynomials in R[x] with the property that their coefficients generate R. (a) Prove that S is multiplicatively closed. (Hint: see Ex. 9 in $11.) Write T = R[xIs. (b) Exhibit a natural onetoone correspondence between the maximal ideals of R and those of T.In particular, verify that T is quasilocal if R is; if M , N are the unique maximal ideals of R, T,prove that TIN is isomorphic to rational functions in one variable over RIM. (c) If R is a valuation ring, prove that T is a valuation ring. (d) If R is a valuation domain, prove that the value groups of R and Tare isomorphic (more precisely, the map discussed in connection with Theorem 99 is an isomorphism). (e) Let R be a domain, and letf, g be polynomials with I, J the ideals generated by their coefficients. Assume that I C J and that J is invertible. Prove thatflg e T. (Hint: let h be a polynomial whose coefficients generate JI. Writef/g =fh/gh and use Ex. 6(d) in $21.) (f) If R is a Priifer domain, prove that T is a Btzout domain. (Remark: it is immediate from part (c) that T is Priifer; the subtler fact that T is BCzout is deducible from part (e).) (g) If R is a Dedekind domain, prove that T is a principal ideal domain.
Exs. 1719 are due to M. Isaacs. They provide an alternative proof of Theorem 98. 17. Let R be a ring, A an Rmodule. Call an ideal I in R pleasant if B / I B is a Noetherian Rmodule for every submodule B of A . Otherwise, I is unpleasant. Prove: if I is maximal among unpleasant ideals then I is prime. (Hint: if not, suppose that ab E I with neither a nor b in I. Then (I,a ) and (I,b) are pleasant. Let B be a submodule of A . The Rmodule B/(Z, a)B is Noetherian. From the pleasantness of ( I , b) relative to the submodule (I,a)B we see that (I,a)B/(I, b)(I, a)B is a Noetherian Rmodule. By Ex. 8 of 521, B / ( I , b)(Z, a)B is a Noetherian Rmodule and so is its homomorphic image BIIB, a contradiction.)
I
1
1
18. Let R be a Priifer domain and let A be a torsionfree Rmodule of finite rank n. (This means that any n 1 elements of A are linearly dependent over R.) Prove that for any maximal ideal M in R, A / M A is finitedimensional over RIM, with dimension at most n. (Hint: we have to prove that n 1 elements al*, . . ., unT1 in A / M A must be linearly dependent. With a, in A mapping on at* we have Zu,a, = 0 with u, elements in R that are not all 0. Let I = (ti1, . . ., u , + ~ )We can . find x e I’ with XI M . From the fact that A is torsionfree we deduce Q Z(xu,)a, = 0. Since at least one xu, is not in M we get the required linear dependence of the al*’s.) 19. Let R be a Dedekind domain with quotient field K , let L be a finitedimensional extension of K , and let T be the integral closure of R in L. Prove that T is Noetherian. (Hint: apply Ex. 17 with T playing the role of the module A . By Ex. 18 every maximal ideal in R is pleasant. Hence the only possible unpleasant ideal is 0. It suffices to prove T/J Noetherian for J a nonzero ideal in T. Since J A R = I is nonzero, T/IT is a Noetherian Rmodule, and so is its homomorphic image T/J.) 20. Let R be an integral domain and Q a maximal ideal in R[x] that satisfies Q () R = 0. Prove that Q is invertible. (Hint: use Ex. 8, Ex. 10 in $13, and Theorem 62.) 21. Let R be a local onedimensional domain with maximal ideal M , and let T be the integral closure of R. Let u be an element of T that lies in the radical of M T but not in M . Let Q be the kernel of the natural homomorphism R[x] + R[lr’]. Prove that Q is invertible but not principal. (Hint: deduce from Ex. 2 in $12 that u satisfies an equation un alunl . . a, = 0 with a, 6 M . Thus Q contains a,xn ... alx 1. It follows that Q is maximal, for any prime ideal properly containing Q must contain M . By Ex. 20, Q is invertible. If Q is principal its generator must be a linear polynomial bx c. Here c e M for otherwise u = bc’ E R, a contradiction since the radical of M T contracts to M . )
+
+
+
+
+
+ +
+
+
24
R:
INTERSECTIONS OF QUASILOCAL DOMAINS
I
We begin this section with two theorems on integrally closed Noetherian domains. These theorems are fairly immediate corollaries of earlier results.
76
CH. 2/NOETHERIAN
RINGS
SEC. 24/INTERSECTIONS OF QUASILOCAL DOMAINS
77
Theorem 103. In an integrally c.,sed Noetherian domain R every prime ideal P o grade 1 has rank 1, and Rp is a DVR. f
any Noetherian domain admits a representation as a locally finite intersection of quasilocal domains. This is not true for every domain, but there do not seem to exist easy examples to show this. The simplest locally finite intersection is one where there are only a finite number of Vi’s all together. In this context our first theorem treats the case where the Vi’s are already known to be localizations.
Theorem 105. Let R be a domain, and P I , . . ,, P, prime ideals in R , no two o which are comparable. Assume that f
,
Proof. The idea of the proof is to localize and then use Theorem 95. However, there is a technical difficulty that needs to be circumvented, for we must localize so as to preserve the grade 1 property. We ha\ e 0 # x eF and P C <(R/(x)). Enlarge P to a maximal prime Q of ( x ) . Then (Theorem 80) Q is the annihilator of a nonzero element in R/(x). Otherwise stated, we have an element y p ( x ) such that Qy C (x). We pass to RQ and note that it is Noetherian and integrally closed. Furthermore, QQhas grade 1, the same element x working. The key point is that y p ( x ) still holds in R Q , for if y = (a/s)x with a, s E R and s Q Q then sy = ax whence s t Q , a contradiction. By Theorem 95, RQ is a DVR, and in particular Q has rank 1. This forces Q = P, and proves all the statements of the theorem.
The next theorem follows directly from Theorems 53 and 103.
Theorem 104.
R
=
R ~n R ~n . . . n R~~ , ,
Then PI, . . ., P, are exactly the maximal ideals of R. Proof. Let x be a nonunit in R. We claim x e PI U * . U P,. If not, then x‘ e Rp, for all i, whence x‘t R, which is nonsense. If M is a maximal ideal, then M C PI U . . UP,, from which it follows that M is contained in some P,, i. e., M = P,. From this the theorem easily follows.


If R is an integrally closed Noetherian domain, then
/
R
=
n R p where P ranges over the prime ideals o rank 1. f
With this as motivation we proceed to investigate representations of R of the form R = n V i , where the Vi’s are quasilocal domains lying between a domain R and its quotient field K. Mostly, the Vi’s are assumed to be valuation domains (as the letter “V” suggests), but as far as possible we allow them to be quasilocal. The mere existence of such a representation does not say much. By Theorem 53, any domain is an intersection of quasilocal domains. To say that R = n V i with the Vi’s valuation domains merely says that R is integrally closed (Theorem 57). It is when we assume ‘‘local finiteness” of the intersection that interesting things follow.
Theorem 105 enhances the interest in proving that the quasilocal domains occurring in a finite decomposition are .localizations. For valuation domains we get a decisive result (Theorem 107). The next theorem is a prelude.
Theorem 106. Let x be a unit in a quasilocal ring R. There exists an integer k (depending on x ) such that for any integer m prime to k , 1 + x + . f xml is a unit in R.

Definition. Let R be an integral domain with quotient field K. Let
Vibe quasilocal domains between R and K. Let Q; be the maximal ideal of V,. Assume R = n Vi. say that this representation is locally We
finite if any nonzero element of R lies in only a finite number of the Qi’s (i.e., is a unit in all but a finite number of the Vi’s). Remark. The representation given by Theorem 104 is locally finite, as follows from Theorem 88. We shall prove below (Theorem 123) that
Proof.. Let M be the maximal ideal of R, and write L = R / M ( L is called the residue class field). Write x* for the image of x in L. Our problem is to ensure 1 x* . . (x*>”’ # 0. We distinguish two cases. Case I. x* = 1. k = the characteristic of L will do (meaning k = \ if L has characteristic 0). Case 11. x* z 1. Since 1 + x* + . . . + (x*)m1 = 1  (x*)m 1  x*
+ +  +
we need to ensure (x*)m # 1. If x* is not a root of unity, take k Otherwise take k to be the order of x*.
=
I
78
CH. 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS
SEC. 24/INTERSECTIONS OF QUASILOCAL DOMAINS
79
Theorem 107. Let a domain R be the intersection Vl A . * . n V,,, where the V:s are valuation domains between R and its quotient field. Then each Vi has the form Rpdf o r a suitable prime ideal Pi in R. R is a Bhout domain. If no two V,’s are comparable, then P I , . . ., P , are precisely the maximal ideals of R.
larger than R ; and Vl A V2= R. Of course Vl, Vzare not localizations of R. However, there are still some affirmative statements that can be made, and the full facts remain to be explored; Theorem 109 is a sample. We need Theorem 108 as a prelude (and it will be used again later in this section).
Proof. Let Qi be the maximal ideal of V i , and set Pi = Qi A R. We shall show that P; does what is required. To prove, for instance, that V , = RP,,we take x E Vl and have to find s c R, s f P1, such that sx E R. For each V i such that x is a unit in Vi we find a corresponding ki as in Theorem 106. Take m 2 2 prime to all the k,’s, and = 2 if there are no k,’s. Then s (1 x X ” ~  ~ )  I will do. We note the behavior of s at a given Vi, distinguishing the three possibilities. (a) If x e Q;, then s is a unit in Vi. (b) If x is a unit in V;, we have arranged that s is a unit in V;. (c) If x is not in Vi, then x = y’ with y e Qi (this is the crucial place we use the hypothesis that V; is B valuation domain). Then
Theorem 108. Let a, b be nonzero, noninvertible elements in a onedimensional quasilocal domain R. Then some power of a is divisible by b.
+ +  +
Proof. The ring R / ( b ) has exactly. one prime ideal, which is consequently nil (Theorem 25). The image of a in R / ( b ) is therefore nilpotent, i. e., some power of a is divisible by b.
Theorem 109. Let the domain R b,e equal to V , n V2, where the V’s lie between R and its quotient Jield. Assume that each Vi is quasilocal, has maximal ideal Pi, and that Qi A R = Pi. Assume further that PI and Pz are incomparable, and that each V , is onedimensional. Then Vi = Rpd.
s = ym1/(1
+ y + + ym1)
* * *
/
so that s e Qi. Thus in all cases s e V;. Hence s e R. Since x e Vl we have (see (a) and (b) above) that s is a unit in V,, whence s p P1. Finally, we have to see that sx E R, i. e., that sx e every V;. Only in case (c) above do we need to argue further. Then
sx = ym2/(1
+y + +
* * *
ym1) E
v;
We have proved that each Vi = Rpi. Now the representation R = A Vi can be shortened to be irredundant in the sense that no two Vi’s are comparable. Let us suppose this has already been done. Then it follows that no two Pi)s are comparable. We can quote Theorem 105 t o deduce that PI, . .,P , are exactly the maximal ideals of R. That R is BCzout follows from Theorems 64 and 60.
Proof. Given x E Vl, we must prove x E RP,,i. e., we must find s c R , s f P I , such that sx c R . We have an element t that lies in Pzbut not in P I . Write x = y / z with y and z in V2.Since Vz is onedimensional and t lies in its maximal ideal, we have (Theorem 108) that in Vz, z divides some power of t , say tn = zzl. Then x = yzl/tn, t”x = yzl. The element s = t” does the trick. For s, like t, lies in Pz but not in P1. We have sx E V1 since s e R and x e V,. Finally, sx = yzl lies in V2 since y and z1 both do.
We turn to what can be said for infinite intersections. The notation set forth in Theorem 110 will be used in the next four theorems as well.
.
’
Theorem 107 fails if we assume the V,’s merely to be quasilocal. Let F C G be fields and let F,, F2 be intermediate fields properly larger \ than F and satisfying Fl r Fz = F. Let R, Vl, V, be the subrings of G[[x]] obtained by insisting that the constant term lie in F, F,, and Fz, respectively. Then R, V,, Vz are all quasilocal and onedimensional ; V,, Vz lie between R and its quotient field; V , and V2 are properly
Theorem 110. Let the domain R be a locally finite intersection A V , of onedimensional quasilocal domains lying between R and its quotient field. Let Ql be the maximal ideal of V,, and P, = Q , A R. Let N be a nonzero prime ideal of R . Then N 3 some P,.
be the finite number of P’s containing t. Note that Rp.’s. Let N be a minimal prime ideal in R.)
. that each V . Since R has only
.
Theorem 111. We apply Theorem 112 to R N . Let P I .. P = Q A R. Since rank(P) 2 2. Suppose the contrary. V . that each V iis a valuation domain and that R itself is quasilocal and onedimensional. but in any case our hypothesis that V . Let us use the subscript j for a typical V.80
CH. be the finite number of V. Then we have an element x. We can assume that the rank of P is at least 2..
Remark.. n such
Proof. . So let W be inessential.” We begin by showing that one inessential component can be deleted.’s and. RN is a locally finite intersection of the Vj’s that contain it. Then R s is a locallyjnite intersection of the Vi’s that contain Rs.
Theorem 113.. then (Theorem 113) RI. but need not be equal to it. by the local finiteness.
Theorem 114.
Proof.’s. each P. is necessarily contained in V . which we fix for the argument that follows. moreover. Proof. is a rational valuation domain.’s. Let us call a valuation domain rational if its value group is isomorphic to a subgroup of the additive group of rational numbers. So each P. containing Rs... which we could have ruled out in advance . left when we make the intersection irredundant. there can be only one V . in addition to the hypotheses of Theorem 110.) We proceed to prove that the V. in addition to the hypotheses of Theorem 110. = M . see the analogous remark in the proof of Theorem 112. and write Q for its maximal ideal. contains a Pk.Thus sh is a nonh k unit in wk. by Theorem 110. is not in N .’s of the form RN “essential”. is again locally finite is immediate.N a minimal prime ideal in R.. in addition to the hypotheses of Theorem 110. Suppose. Let t be a nonzero element of N . is onedimensional dismisses it. in addition to the hypotheses of Theorem 110. discovered independently by Ohm [41] and Griffin [21] show that we cannot delete “rational” in Theorem 114. r). and so certainly can be deleted. Pick any nonzero y in PA.) Then there exists sk E S with Sk’ 6 wk.
Theorem 112. and is also a multiple of t in all other Vi’s since t is a unit there. . Then R N is one o the V. Suppose. by construction. This is an uninteresting possibility. Suppose. . Now if Pi = 0. That the representation R s = A V .’s with W deleted still intersect in R. that a n~ultiplicativelyclosed set in R is given: let it be denoted by S. Proof.’s. The hypothesis that W is a rational valuation domain allows us to find positive integers m. any element of the quotient field of R lies in all but a finite number of the V. Examples. = one of the V. is a valuation domain. and R must equal that V. 2/NOETHERIAN
RINGS
SEC. . . Then u = ulnl . Pick u j in P j but not in N ( j = 1. as follows from the easily proved fact that there are no rings properly between a onedimensional valuation domain and its quotient field. Hence u is a multiple of t in R. a contradiction since each u. present. u E N . 24/1NTERSECTIONS
OF QUASILOCAL DOMAINS
81
Remark. Then R where the intersection is taken over those Vi’s that have the form RN. Suppose. (Actually. . . that each V . . is a unit in all but a finite number of the V. W . f
Proof. there can be only one V . Then with s = E k we have sx E R and so x E Rs. Because of the onedimensionality of V j we have (Theorem 108) that is a multiple of t (in Vj) for sufficiently large nj. If M is the maximal ideal of R. since RIJC W this tells us that W contains an essential V . u T R r is a multiple of t in V l .. Assume the contrary. For if P is minimal. By Theorem 1 1 1.
a. (Observe that. interested in the possibility of proving equality from suitable hypotheses. sknlx w for some nr. . P properly contains a nonzero prime ideal which in turn. . Then R is one of the Vi’s. and have to prove x E Rs. By Theorem 108. (As a matter of fact.’s not containing x. and the others “inessential. for otherwise RS C w and w would be one of the VJ’s. . of course. we take x E AV. Local finiteness then tells us that there are only a finite number of V. Let us (hopefully) call the V. the corresponding V . To prove RS = A V . Let W. This makes Theorem 107 applicable. . W itself would be essential. other than W but not in W . We are. P . = M or 0.
’
I
one maximal ideal. is the quotient field of R.that lies in every V .
. 24 in 522. Note further that N C J and that J Q P by Ex.) 6 . see the paper . The troublesome components.
EXERCISES
1. the given DVR’s must include every Rp. [41] by Ohm. In a Noetherian integrally closed domain. Let R be a Krull domain in which all prime ideals of rank 2 2 are finitely generated. UP C ( p ) . By adding 1 if necessary.. (a) Under the hypotheses of Theorem 110. Prove also that every prime ideal of grade 1 has rank 1. 5 . Let us call a domain R a Krull domain if it satisfies the three following conditions: (1) For every minimal prime ideal P . 13 in $21 are now fulfilled.82
CH. However. It is evident that any UFD is a Krull domain. . Then Theorem 72 is applicable. Prove that R is Noetherian. Prove that there exists an element u with u p P . .y both lie in Viand hence so does z. R p is a DVR. (Hint: use Theorems 84 and 103. Pick p e P generating P p . P minimal. By Ex. Since x e Vk and y e Qk. Also significant is the following fact (its proof is beyond the scope of this book): the integral closure of a Noetherian domain need not be Noetherian. Since neither of these classes of domains includes the other. let R = Vl n V2 with Vl a onedimensional valuation domain. Hence every Ijrime ideal containing J has rank 2 2. P. and let P be a prime ideal minimal over (x). adjust x to be a unit in V2.This contradicts the inclusion Pk C P . have to prove u E R . Prove that a onedimensional Krull domain is a Dedekind domain.) 7. From the ability to suppress one inessential component we pass stepwise to the suppression of a finite number. Prove that for any a # 0 in R we have <(R/(a)) = P1 U
. (Hint: see Ex. 4. 2/NOETHERIAN RINGS
SEC.) 3. We have just seen that they can be omitted. We can state the following corollary of Theorem 114: if a domain R is a locally finite intersection of DVR’s within its quotient field. V2 quasilocal. (Hint: review the proof of Theorem 110. .)
. 12 in $21) so is R [ [ x ] ]For a thoroiIgffstudy of this circle of ideas.UP.)
where P1. are the minimal prime ideals containing a.x p Vl. the intersection being taken over all minimal prime ideals.. then R[[x]] is integrally closed. . Prove that P has rank 1. and the point is that the integrally closed case admits this alternative proof. local finiteness enables us to complete the job simply and swiftly. Prove that V2is a localization of R . z is a unit in W . let N = ( p .. u). prove that every nonzero prime ideal contains a minimal prime ideal. Let p be an element of P that generates P p in R p .
.P . pick u in P but in no other minimal prime containing p . Krull domains are useful as a unifying concept. This is a special case of the principal ideal theorem. 7. In sum: z lies in every V i(hence z E R ) . Suppose the element u lies in every essential Vi. The hypotheses of Ex.. (Hint: use Theorem 104 to reduce to the case where R is a DVR. Prove: if R is a Noetherian integrally closed domain. and let J be the set of all x with X P C N . For any u E V2.. The stronger result can be proved: that if R is completely integrally closed (cf. with P playing the role of I. . be the remaining minimal prime ideals containing p . (Hint: let Pz. . which do not contain u.) (b) Assume in addition that each Pi is of rank 1. Hence u e R . (Hint: it must be proved that a typical minimal prime ideal P is finitely generated. but it is a Krull domain.n a sufficiently high power of P2. Ex. In the notation used throughout this section. then R is a Krull domain. e At any Vi other than W or Vk we have that x and. Moreover. and z is a nonunit in Vk.. P. let x be neither 0 nor a unit. Note that P is the only minimal prime containing N .
2. Under the hypotheses of Theorem 114. (Hint: take x e Vz. Now in any event. 24/INTERSECTIONS OF QUASILOCAL DOMAINS
83
that z = xmyn is a unit in W . and V2 V. Observe that RIP is Noetherian. Theorems 103 and 104 show that any integrally closed Noetherian domain is a Krull domain. u r n E R for sufficiently large n. (3) Any nonzero element of R lies in only a finite number of minimal prime ideals. Ordinarily this would be as far as one could go. Let R be a Krull domain and P a minimal prime ideal in R . (2) R = n R p .. u lies in all but a finite we number of the Vi’s. are of course inessential...) 8. 10 in $23. R/J is Noetherian and J is finitely generated. W have Z E Qk. prove that any nonzero element of R lies in only a finite number of minimal prime ideals. Take u i.
xi+%). (b) says that x1 is not a zerodivisor on A .. Let R be a commutative ring containing a field F.. elements in R. The property can be restated in a suggestive way: x1 is neither a unit nor a zerodivisor in R. As a partial motivation we give one example.9 xnl)A. Let A be an Rmodule. Then B / J B is isomorphic to A/(Z+ J ) A . . .... which is reassuring in case further work with zerodivisors is needed.. . . The (ordered sequence of) elements xl. x. . . . x i ) and J successively replaced by (X. we note that Theorem 121 is an analogue of the invariance of the transcendence degree of a field extension.
Theorem 116. .x. then x maps into JB in the map A + B. is an Rsequence on A / ( x l . . . . . be an Rsequence in R. For the Rmodule we take R itself. is an Rsequence.. . A any Rmodule. ( b ) xl. .. x. write B = A/ZA. . . ( a ) X I . .
84
Proof. . . . .. of R is said to be an Rsequence on A if
(a) (XI.CHAPTER
3
SEC. Let S be any commutative ring and let
P
i
'
R
=
XI. . Then it is evident that the elements xl. .)A is nonzero.
xl. .
Proof. Apply Theorem 115 with Z = (xl. x J A . . Conversely if x belongs to the kernel. In the first place.
A / ( X I . x.. . A / x l A . We begin our discussion by handling a number of technical points. . Let i be an integer less than n. .?". .. etc. Let R be any commutative ring. is an Rsequence on A . . xz). and . xi t. A an Rmodule. xn)A # A . The assumption (a) in the definition of an Rsequence is a mere matter of technical convenience. hence ( I + J)A. . hence differs from an element of JA by an element of ZA. Consider the natural homomorphisms A + B + B/JB. the resemblance between Rsequences and independent indeterminates can be pursued. a. x. . To push the analogy further. .. .]
The theory of Rsequences is a comparatively recent addition to the theory of commutative rings. is not a zerodivisor on
Theorem 115. x. . The kernel of the induced map from A to B/JB contains ZA and JA.. It is assumption (b) that really matters. the proof is sketched in [25]. xnPl)A are all nonzero so that we are entitled to discuss their zerodivisors. (x. . . Thus x e ( I + J)A.+I. . x. . x. ... ..
. The equivalent form given in Theorem 76 should be noted. . . and let al. The case A = R is of special importance. In this section we develop the basic properties of Rsequences and the related topic of Macaulay rings.. A / ( x l . To some extent. . . the image of x2is neither a unit nor a zerodivisor in the ring R/(xl). . . . x i is an Rsequence on A and xifl. the image of x 3 is neither a unit nor a zerodivisor in the ring R/(xl. . (b) For i = 1. it guarantees that
. Then the following statements are equivalent. . but there seems to be no doubt that it will have a permanent place in the subject. Then it can be shown that the a's are independent indeterminates over F . 31/RSEQUENCES
AND MACAULAY RINGS
85
M~c~U(~Y Rinss
31 RSEQUENCES AND MACAULAY RINGS
the modules A .+I>. We then simply say that the sequence xl. xil)A). And further..
be the polynomial ring over S in n indeterminates. . x. Let Z J be ideals in a ring R.. it tells us that the module A / ( x l . . ..
.
Definition. n.4/(xl. x2 is not a zerodivisor on A / x l A . .. . Stated more completely. constitute an Rsequence in R..
This is settled in the next theorem. . xt)A. Then x. .) form a properly ascending chain. t* = 0. Let xl. But. . See Ex. the condition ( x . .. is maximal. they are nonzerodivisors on A . and the element x constitutes a maximal Rsequence on A. xz). .
. or even that there is a fixed upper bound to their lengths.+~). and if in R every permutation o f an Rsequence is an Rsequence. ( x l .. We change notation for the Rsequence to x . we can cancel x in the equation xt = xyul. . then the ideals (xl).. . and y. . then R is local. Remark 1.
Theorem 120. . . 7 for a simple example showing that the radical assumption in Theorem 119 cannot be deleted. The vital information is provided by
. We do this by induction on n. n = 1..
is an Rsequence on A
if
This shows that x % + ~ annihilates the module A / ( x l . t is an Rsequence on A . x . i. then yl. . Then any permutation of the x’s is also an Rsequence on A. After a change of notation we have the following setup: x and y are in I . . Then: any two maximal Rsequences on A contained in I have the same length. E Z. If we assume y 6 <(A) outright then we can make the interchange of x and y . x. e. the conclusion y p <(A) fails. as required. Theorem 120 shows that if R is Noetherian and A is a nonzero Rmodule. getting t = yul. Since y p <(A/xA).. . Hence s1E S.. We shall prove S = 0. . Let R be a Noetherian ring.
Proof. . . Diana Taylor (Chicago thesis.1 elements. x.. we do not yet know that any two such maximal Rsequences have the same length. t)A # A being fulfilled in view of the hypothesis IA # A . Now ys = 0 gives us xysl = 0 and then ysl = 0 since x 6 <(A). Suppose on the contrary that ( x l . . this implies u c xA. .. . Let R be Noetherian.. Pick any t in A mapping on t*. xip1)A).. say xt = yu. and x l . Let S be the submodule of A annihilated by y... x . y c R be an Rsequence on the Rmodule A. x . . It evidently suffices to prove the following: if x. Take s e S. is a maximal Rsequence on A . x is an Rsequence.
sequence obtained by interchanging xi and and only if xi+l p <(A/(xl.+.. . Since y p <(A/xA). x . is an Rsequence on a module A . .
Remark 2..
Theorem 118. . x. By Theorem 118 it therefore suffices to do the case n = 2. .. S = 0. is a linear combination of x. . say s = xsl. I f x l . Suppose that t* c A / y A and xt* = 0. .
Proof. and A a Jinitely generated Rmodule. y.. . 3/MACAULAY
RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
i
8
SEC.
With Noetherian and radical assumptions the interchange can be effected.
Theorem 121. y . This is immediate from Theorems 116 and 117. y and (by Theorem 117 or 118) it suffices to prove y p <(A). Let x . (x. in the next theorem we extend this remark to longer sequences. x . . say u = xu1... is an Rsequence on A . elements in the Jacobson radical of R constituting an Rsequence on A. then maximal Rsequences on A exist. .
Examples show that in Theorem 117 we cannot conclude that y .) = (xl.Since x 6 <(A). . Inspection of the proof shows that in Theorem 119 we need not assume that x . Assume that I A # A . Proof.
Proof.. . then the sequence x . . . the case n = 1 requiring separate discussion. 1966) has proved a partial converse to Theorem 119: if a Noetherian ring R possesses an R
Proof. . .. Any permutation on n things can be achieved by successive interchanges of neighboring elements. x J A . whereas it is supposed to be a nonzerodivisor.b
f
86
CH. . for if t E I is a nonzerodivisor on A/xA. Then the
sequence of length 3. be an Rsequence on A. Our task is to prove that I consists of zerodivisors on A / y A . By the Nakayama lemma (Theorem 78). x.
Then x 6 <(A/yA). y . we have s e x A . Then xt e yA.
Theorem 119. A a$nitely generated Rmodule. 3I/RSEQUENCES
AND MACAULAY RINGS
87
’
I
Theorem 117. I an ideal in R. It then follows that I consists of zerodivisors on A/xA . . so that xt+1A C
(XI. . of course.X Z . is in the radical. . it suffices to know this for the remaining n . We have proved S = xS. .
General n. R) simply the grade of Z and write it G(Z). Two cases are specially important. A). The factor y can be cancelled. it should however always be clear from the context which is intended... But there are so few theorems on nonNoetherian grade available as yet that introduction of the general notion does not seem to be warranted. we have that z. to think of grade as complementary to dimension. the “grade” terminology (due to Rees) seems preferable. Restating this in A .). For brevity let us write B.. constitutes a maximal Rsequence on B. and we would have to cope with the possible existence of maximal Rsequences of different lengths. 2.1: xl. Note that this is defined for any ideal Z different from R and that C(Z) is the maximal length of an Rsequence in Z. . y. observe that it is a finite union of prime ideals by Theorem 80. . The existence of the elements x. (There is a possible ambiguity in the notation G(Z) since we might mean G(Z. ‘) In any event the resulting element z is a nonzerodivisor on B. For the second point. Y . From this we can deduce the existence of an element z lying in Z but in none of <(B. .. Perhaps a neater alternative is to form the direct sum D
=
Dejnition. the designation was “codimension” of Z on A . Now the fact that z is not a member of any of <(&.. The sense in which grade is complementary to some kind of dimension can only be revealed later when the homological invasion is in full swing (see Theorem 173). sometimes misleading. . 31/RSEQUENCES AND MACAULAY RINGS
89
Theorem 82. which in turn implies that yl.. . It is sometimes suggestive. y. By the case n = 1.. y. We claim v Q y A and Zv C y A . By our inductive assumption we deduce that yl.. A ) simply the grade of A and write it G(A). . and A is any nonzero finitely generated Rmodule. y. By another application of the case n = 1. . B1 = Cl = A . ynPl. is a maximal Rsequence on A / z A . On the whole. allows us to push z ahead of the x’s one step at a time till we reach the conclusion that z .. .. Z an ideal in R. is a maximal Rsequence on A . if R is a local ring with maximal ideal M . which tells us that a single nonzero element u* of A / x A is annihilated by Z. in agreement with the present definition.. . . <(C. while x . I ) .. This proof is due to Northcott and Rees [ 0 . . On the other hand. In exactly the same way. is an Rsequence on A but we do not yet know it to be maximal.). R) or G(M. we have u in A but not in x A such that Zu C xA. Then Z can be embedded in a prime ideal P satisfying G(P. and employ Theorem 81 to get the desired element z. A ) could at least be defined without finiteness assumptions. <@I). y . but we shall avoid using the symbol G(R) if R is not local. x. . .. yu E x A . . = A / ( x l . . . In particular. together with Theorem 118.)A for i = 1.)A. x. . If v* denotes the image of v in A / y A . It then suffices to take z e Z. 0 C 1 0
* * *
0 C.) 4 When R is local it is reasonable to write G(R) for G(M. One way to see this is to form the settheoretic union of all the sets <(B. . call it simply the grade of the ring.
and deduce Z Q < D from Theorem 82. we have xZv = yZu C yxA. For ease of reference we record explicitly a simple result. . Let R be a Noetherian ring. we call G(M. In the original terminology of Auslander and Buchsbaum. R) and .. and y. <(Bn2). It might be infinite. This concludes the proof of Theorem 121. .. 1. Note that the “grade one” terminology used in $23 is.
6. first of which we know to the be maximal. we reach the desired conclusion that y. Let Z be an ideal in a Noetherian ring R.” 3.). n.
Remark. shows that Z c f <(&). A ) . Note: the French school has introduced “profondeur. as required. if v = yw then yu = xyw. A ) = G(Z. A afinitely generated Rmodule with I A # A . The common length of all maximal Rsequences in Z on A is called the grade of Z on A and written GU.
zf
/
. <(C.
. If A = R we call G(Z. = A/@. y . .. In this inclusion the factor x is cancellable. . yl. appendix 4 ] The to this section presents an alternative homological proof.. For the first point.
Theorem 122. .). . . yielding Zv C y A .. In particular.. x l . r
B10
* *
0 B. is an Rsequence on A . We shall do so systematically.. due in essence to Rees [43]. Note that G(A) is defined since M A # A by the Nakayama lemma. z is also a maximal Rsequence on B.. x.. 3/MACAULAY RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC. then v* # 0 and Zv* = 0.88
CH. say yu = xv. .. Z cf <(CJ for any i. A a finitely generated Rmodule satisfying ZA # A .~ ..z is a maximal Rsequence on A . . ... Remarks. C.” translated as “depth. for Noetherian rings.). Now we pass to the module A / z A on which we have two Rsequences of length n . Evidently it is a maximal Rsequence on A . . G(Z.. . leaving the contradiction u = xw. . .
Proof. xk). but not in P1 V U P.A). P C <(R/(x)). Let xl. J C <(A/ulA). . (The extreme cases r = 0 and r = n are admitted.+l r\ . and Pk C P j ( r + I S k 5 n) for some k .. U P.A ) S k . e. . .. A ) = 1. . . = z ( A / u l A ) .
Theorem 124. and write J = ( x l . say of (y).” Actually we prove two such theorems. but not in any of Pr+l. xk). The next preparatory theorem is due to E. e.. There exists an element ioE I not lying in any of PI. and it follows from Theorem 121 (just the case n = 1 is needed) that x is a maximal Rsequence in P. which is valid globally. E R)
i
I
alul
+ bzxz+ . P . . this proves the present theorem. . I = ( x p ... I ) Q P1 V * V P. A ) = 0. U P. If G ( J .. n P. I ) C P1 U .) We have I Q P1 U . . J an ideal in R that can be generated by k elements.. E R) (b. Now a typical ideal P is a maximal prime... i. P ranging over
if r = 0..
. .. Let R be a Noetherian domain. contrary to hypothesis. for otherwise P. . . we assume k > 0. . Let R be Noetherian.. . Then I C <(A/JA). The element i = yio then fulfills our requirements. P. A ) is defined. u2 = x2+ (linear combination of x3. x k )and P1 U . Davis. By Theorem 80 there are only a finite number of maximal primes of ( x ) . . . not 0 and not a unit.. . With i the element furnished by Theorem 124.
Theorem 123. and PI U .. I = (x2. Write J
. . it follows further that P is a maximal prime of ( x ) . the expression R = n R p .From this it follows that ( x z . x k ) Q <(A/ulA). i = 0 will do..Such a selection is possible.
=
(xl. . If G(J. Then P contains the annihilator of A . since the same argument is applicable to any prime ideal containing P.. . be prime ideals in a commutative ring R. . i.. x k ) Q /?(A/ulA). and if r = n the following proof applies with the simplification that y can be taken as 1. We do this by repeated applications of Theorem 124.90
CH. C Pi for some j (1 6 j 6 r). and it follows readily from Theorem 76 that PA # A.. . The theorem being presumably vacuous for k = 0. x k ) . . r\ P.
We proceed to a result we call the ‘‘generalized unmixedness theorem. U P . P.

constituting a sort of triangular change of basis. a contradiction.. x k be a maximal Rsequence in I on A . This contradiction shows that (x2. .
I
Theorem 125. bnxkis a zerodivisor on A/ulA. U P. Then the representation given in Theorem 53 (i. Then: (a) G(J.



the maximal primes of nonzero principal ideals) is locally jinite. .
Proof... . A ) = k. and evidently it is equal to k .+l n . We apply Theorem 124 with x = xl... n P. . Suppose for definiteness that x lies in P1.. whence by Theorem 81. P. Let P1. Assume JA # A .. . . Next we select y in P. . which only holds locally but is slightly stronger.. A afinitely generated Rmodule. such that the u’s form an Rsequence on A . P. We enlarge I to a maximal prime ideal P of the module A/JA. . (b) If G(J. Thus G(P.. then J can be generated by k elements forming an Rsequence on A. we must show that x lies in only a finite number of the P’s in question. = Z(A). let I be an ideal in R.. . Moreover. We continue in this fashion as long
+
t
. So we assume J Q / ? ( A ) . An ‘ arbitrary element j of J can be written as
+


+
!
I
j = alxl azx2 and this can be rewritten as
j
=
+
+ . for any Pk contained in another can simply be deleted without changing the problem.. For suppose the contrary. we set u2 = xz i. . and x an element of R such that ( x .
Since alul annihilates A/ulA and b2xz .+l n . 3/MACAULAY
RINGS A N D REGULAR RINGS
SEC. + bkxl
Proof. We now apply Theorem 124 with x = X Z . . C P1 U . We may assume that no two of the P’s are comparable. So we assume J Q /?(A/ulA). 31/RSEQUENCES
AND MACAULAY RINGS
91
Proof.. Then y is a maximal Rsequence in P.&
+ +
J
(a. a first (Theorem 125). X k ) . e. no further proof is needed. . we set u1 = x1 i. We shall find elements u1 = x1+ (linear combination of xz.
. + a!. and if i is the resulting element. Given an element x in R. and a second (Theorem 129). we are through. for otherwise ( x . we get j E <(A/u. . . Then there exists an element i E I such that x i $PI V V P. x k ) . .. ..
We interpolate at this point a theorem that was promised in the preceding section. U P.
this implies l a = 0.
Proof. G(J. constitute an Rsequence on A .1. A a finitely generated nonzero Rmodule.
Proof. . . A ) = n .To see that G(J. .. Let xl. A ) = 1 it remains to verify
Proof. x an element in the radical of R but not in <(A). x an element of R. x .. . . x. and J = (I. A ) = k . Assume that J is contained in the radical of R. then the hypotheses of Theorem 124 are fulfilled. Then: (Z. and we have to prove that G(J. Let Z be an ideal in R contained in <(A). and now we have to prove that G(J. By Theorem 82. If S Q x A .. . . Z C M .
+
Proof. The “if” part is obvious.. Assume G(Z.. a e S. Let Z be an ideal in R. Suppose I is generated by an Rsequence x l . for the image of S in A / x A will be nonzero and annihilated by I . Let R be a local ring with maximal ideal M . . A ) < n.. A ) = 1.) where the x’s lie in the radical of R. . Let A be a nonzero jnitely generated Rmodule. The process terminates in one of two ways: either G(J. Let R be a Noetherian ring. . So suppose on the contrary that S is contained in x A . A ) S 1. Since x F<(A). <(R/Z) = P1 U * . let Z = ( x l . Since x annihilates A / x A . A).
This is asserted by Theorem 126. G(Z. A ) = m and let x l . and the P. A ) . in contradiction to G(Z.. S # 0.see Ex. and we have that x i I <(A) for some i e I. V P.
Theorem 126. Then G(Z. We prove the “only if” part by induction on n.
. A ) < k . x . After a change of notation we may thus assume G(Z. y ) to the desired prime ideal P . B 2‘(A/JA). . we can prove the following useful result. . Hence G(J.’s can indeed have a grade exceeding k . . . . . Now we have x F .Any ideal containing I has grade z k . Any s e S can then be written s = xa. Simple examples show that some or all of the P. . . x). then by If Theorem 127.
G(J.1. By a slight variant of the proof of Theorem 127. 3/MACAULAY
RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
r
SEC. . So we assume that J contains a nonzerodivisor on A .)
#
92
CH.’s. . Let Z be an ideal in a Noetherian ring R . In the favorable case where they all have grade k .
Theorem 127.~is an Rsequence on A . x. xk be a maximal Rsequence on A contained in I . and let A be a finitely generated nonzero i f Rmodule. UP. A ) 2 k 1 . A ) = 1 G(I. Then there exists a prime ideal P with G(P. y ) . A ) and such that P 3 I.)A.
The strengthened form we obtained in passing from Theorem 125 to Theorem 129 really requires that the x’s be in the radical . . xk. . . Write J = ( x l . . If <(A) = P1 V . By Theorem 126 or Theorem 127. we are through. or if G(J. A ) = k 1. Then for a

+
+
J
C <(AIxA). A ) = 0. be the maximal primes of I . . G((Z. Hence S = x S .x ) C Z ( A / x A ) . . if J C <(A) there is nothing to prove. It remains to see that x. We have referred to Theorems 125 and 129 as “generalized unmixedness theorems” but there is no sign yet of anything being unmixed... the elements ul.. x . Of course. uk exhaust J.?“‘A). there exists in M an element y with y F <(A/JA). the conclusion really just states
Z C <(A/xA). be a maximal Rsequence in Zon A . By our inductive assumption. Z has axcertain grade. We quote Theorem 122 to enlarge (I. y). Z an ideal in R. We have Zxa = Is = 0.~ is a maximal Rsequence in Z on A .. . . say k . so that x l . . xnP1).
+
+
Remark. xl. . This proof is really the same as that of Theorem 119.. We switch the scene of action to the module A / ( x l . . Then G((Z. A ) S 1
+ G(Z. a e A . Let R be a Noetherian ring. Let G(Z. Since G(M. P . 7. . Let P1. This completes the proof of Theorem 125. But the contrary assumption leads to Z C <(A/JA). Let R be a Noetherian ring. Xk). We might as well replace x i by x . A ) = n f and only i the elements x l . A ) < G(M. x. this is in particular true of the P. that is. 3I/RSEQUENCES
AND MACAULAY RINGS
93
as possible. we call Zgradeunmixed. We have given it twice for expository reasons. . An explanation is overdue.. and write J = (xl .. A ) < n . . Let S be the submodule of A annihilated by I. Then:
Theorem 129.’s are maximal within <(R/Z). A ) > k . Note also that in proving Theorem 129 we have furnished an alternative proof of Theorem 119.. and let A be a finitely generated nonzero Rmodule. a contradiction. . A ) = n. But then S = 0 by the Nakayama lemma (Theorem 78).
1
Theorem 128.
.
Z in a Noetherian ring have grade k and be generated by k elements. e. the chain (26) can be extended at least one more step. . 31/RSEQUENCES
AND MACAULAY RINGS
95
maximal prime Pi belonging to I we have that X I . Observe that the hypothesis on x is fulfilled if x is not a zerodivisor (Theorem 84). and by Theorem 131.
+
’
I. . then rank(Z) 2 n.” Ideals with rank equal to the number of generators corresponded to varieties defined by the “right number of equations. . In any commutative ring R the rank of an ideal Z is the minimum of rank(P). but it should be noted that the gist of it is that localization preserves exact sequences. anddenote by xl* the image o x . Let the rank o P* in R* be k. namely the images of xz. . rank(P) L n. i. The condition that rank and grade coincide is a significant restriction.. The first result connecting grade and rank (Theorem 132) is quite easy. 8. in Rs.94
CH. see Ex. For a Macaulay ring. By induction. A a nonzero Rmodule. We give a direct proof of Theorem 133..
Theorem 131. 821 this is a locally Macaulay ring. It is evidently harmless to assume that Z is prime. If R is a domain. . Let P be a prime ideal in a commutative ring R . Nagata requires in addition that all maximal ideals have the same rank. the word “minima1~’ meant literally. We return to Theorem 125. For an analogue for modules. and simplify the discussion by dropping the module A .
Remark. f Then: xl*.
. by replacing it by R . rank(P*) 2 n . P* = P/(x). 3/MACAULAY RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC. . Write R* = R/(x). Then the rank o f f P in R is at least k 1. An equally easy theorem serves as a prelude. . x. Thus rank 2 grade holds under very general conditions. . p.
. for perhaps as simple a counterexample as any. Equivalently.. . is x # 0 is all that is assumed. Since x lies in no minimal prime ideal. Assume (xl*.1. Let S be a multiplicatively closed set in R . we can let P range over the minimal prime ideals over Z. Let the ideal
Theorem 132. Then P* contains an Rsequence of length n .. 22.x..
Proof. and we accordingly change notation to P. see Ex. We assume k finite (the case k infinite is quite evident). A Macaulay ring is a Noetherian ring in which G ( M ) rank(M) for every maximal ideal M . it is very useful to know that the assumption of equality of grade and rank for maximal ideals implies equality for all ideals.” and the unmixedness of such ideals was a significant simplification. We lift the chain P* = Po* 3
Remark. “rank” played the role of “grade. Write R* = R / ( x l ) . Some needed facts about the behavior of grade under localization are presented in the next three theorems. and in Theorem 136 pass to the strong property. and xl. Proof. Hence G(PJ = k and Z is gradeunmixed. Then Z is gradeunmixed.

*
‘
3 Pk*
to a chain
(26)
P=P 3 o
* ’ *
3Pk
Theorem 133. So we define Macaulay rings by the weak property.
In the classical theorem that foreshadowed Theorem 130. x k is a maximal Rsequence in Pi. P* = P / ( x l ) .. In Nagata’s terminology [37. If an ideal Z in a commutative ring contains an Rsequence of length n. The first thing that needs to be done is to define the rank of a general ideal (so far we have defined it only for prime ideals). P ranging over the prime ideals containing Z. The two need not be equal..1. . . xn* is an Rsequence on A S . Definition. . We may state:
of length k descending from P (Pi is the complete inverse image of Pi*). an Rsequence on A . Moreover.
Theorem 130. . We proceed to build a bridge between the grade and rank versions of unmixedness.*)As # A S . as is attested by the fact that it is valid without any chain conditions.
=
Note. Definition. Let R be any ring. and f let x e P be an element lying in no minimal prime ideal o R . or more precisely. x. .
. . be a maximal Rsequence in I. we have IMu* C J M . x.. x . So we now assume R to be local with maximal ideal M . and the same is true for grade. P and PMhave the same rank.. . remains to prove the maximality of this RIt sequence. By Theorem 135 there is a maximal ideal M containing P such that G(P) = G(PM). aj* = aj/sj. Change notation by replacing the a’s by suitable c’s. Let R be a Noetherian ring and I an ideal in R. x t ? & f s . . . we have G ( M ) > G(P).. Then the localized module RP is not 0. for the grade of M cannot rise in the passage from R to RM since it must not exceed the rank. . Suppose that
i1
(27)
xi*b*
=
C xj*aj*
G(ZM)= n. We note next that it is possible to localize to preserve the grade of a given ideal. Say b* = b / s . . Let the module be R. by assuming (xi*.Zxici = 0 with soE S. Grade and rank coincide f o r every ideal in a Macaulay ring.
Theorem 136. P a prime ideal in R. We must show that xi* is a nonzerodivisor on Asl(xi*. we have rank(Q) > G(Q). . . x. . . . Then all maximal primes belonging to I have rank n and are minimal over I . Theorem 134 asserts that G(IM) 2 n . x i & I . Embed K in a maximal ideal M. We deduce :
Theorem 134. ai* E A S . Let K denote the set of all elements y in R such that yu e J. for u* e JM implies su e J for s p M . x. In the language of primary decomposition. .
Proof. If u* is the image of u in RM. .
31 /RSEQUENCES
AND MACAULAY RINGS
97
Proof. But let us note a useful case where degeneration is impossible.
Theorem 135.. a contradiction.. We must have P # M .96
CH. and assume xl.Hence b* E (xi*. . . as simple examples show. Then G(I) S G(Zp). 3/MACAULAY
RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC.. map into an Rsequence in RM contained in IM. Further u* p J M . . . Furthermore. Hence the condition needed in Theorem 133 is fulfilled and xi*. . which can be generated by n elements. Since rank(Q) necessarily exceeds rank(P). whereas s E K C M by the definition of K. choose P to be maximal among such. indeed the observations above show that the elements xi. If there exists a prime ideal P with grade less than rank. By hypothesis sob E ( x l . I # R. P can be enlarged to a prime ideal Q with G(Q) = 1 G(P). Since the grade and rank of M coincide. xjll1)As. . Next we reduce the problem to the local case. The result: sOx.. By Theorem 128. and set J = (xl. We claim that
Theorem 137.
+
We are in a position to state what might be called the “classical unmixedness theorem.
. we must show IM C <(RM/JM).. by Theorem 122. x.
3=1
where b*. .. e.* are nonunits in the local ring Rp. E P. Then I C <(R/J) so that (Theorem 82) there exists an element u pJ with Zu C J. We multiply (27) through by ssl. i.).*)As
f
As. Thus rank(M) > rank(P). . . . In a Macaulay ring let I be an ideal of rank n. We first note that it is sufficient to prove the theorem for prime ideals. Let R be a Noetherian ring. let the localization take place with respect to a prime ideal P.
is really needed. . sil and then return to an equation in A itself (which calls for a further multiplication by an element of S).* is an Rsequence. Then there exists a maximal ideal M such that G(Z) = G(IM). x. . . and the elements xi*. . as required. . . Let P be a prime ideal for which we hope to prove grade and rank to be equal. x . For by the definition of rank we have rank(Z) = min rank(P) taken over all prime ideals containing I . since two comparable prime ideals can have the same rank only if they are equal. I an
ideal in R contained in P. Suppose G(I) = n.” Note that the final statement in Theorem 137 concerning minimality is an immediate consequence.
Proof. the ideal I of Theorem 137 has no “embedded” primes. . . The precaution we exercised in Theorem 133. Then K is an ideal in R containing I a n d different from R.b. So it suffices to prove the equality of grade and rank for PM. . let xl.Note that our hypothesis is preserved in the ring RM.
the case of little rank 0 being immediate. it is equivalent to the saturated chain condition in the stronger form referred to above: all saturated chains descending from a fixed prime to the bottom have the same length. In discussing this we shall find it convenient to introduce a variant of the notion of rank. and the bottom prime ideal is 0. trapping the little rank between them. M its maximal ideal. 3/MACAULAY RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC. Then Nagata exhibited an example to show that it could. 2. say. Three others (Theorems 151.
We wind up this section with three theorems concerning the stability of the Macaulay property.
!
Theorem 138. On the assumption that there are no longer chains descending from P. such behavior is easily exhibited in a suitable homomorphic image of a polynomial ring over a field.1. assuming again that there are no longer chains descending from P. We can harmlessly pass from R to R p . We can find a prime ideal Q directly underneath M with little rank(Q) = n . So we have G(Q) 5 n . The first possible instance is illustrated in Fig. The advantage we gain in introducing the little rank is that we are able to prove that
(28)
grade(P) 6 little rank(P)
b
FIGURE 1
holds for any prime ideal in any Noetherian ring. For many years it was an open question whether this could happen in a Noetherian ring or. and G ( M ) > little rank(M) = n. We shall shortly see that this possibility is excluded in Macaulay rings.1. So we can start over with R local. while the grade can only go up.
The first instance where we observe a difference between little rank and rank is illustrated in Fig. and the bottom prime ideals are minimal. The little rank of a prime ideal P is the length of the shortest saturated chain of prime ideals descending from P to a minimal prime ideal. If this is false. we have little rank(P) = 1. rank(P) = 3. 1. G(P) 5 little rank(P). for the little rank of P will remain the same. and 157) have to await the principal ideal theorem. but it should be noted that it is not to be regarded as at all pathological. We make an induction on the little rank.
P
grade(P) 5 little rank(P) 5 rank(P)
~
Now in a Macaulay ring the two end members of (29) are equal. for instance.
FIGURE 2
.
Definition. increasing the offense. it appears among his examples of bad behavior at the end of [37].98
CH. in any commutative ring. A chain is said to be saturated if no further prime ideals can be inserted. rank(P) = 2. We shall say that a commutative ring satisfies the saturated chain condition if any two saturated chains of prime ideals between two fixed ones have the same length. It is a more penetrating question to ask if little rank and rank can differ in a domain. More exactly. For any prime ideal P in any Noetherian ring R.
indicated chains are saturated. We can of course lengthen (28) to (29)
. where it is to be understood that the
P
Here the chains are again to be saturated. 31/RSEQUENCES
AND MACAULAY RINGS
99
In Macaulay rings we can prove that chains of prime ideals behave well. But then there is a jump of at least two from G(Q) to G(M).
Proof. we have little rank(P) = 2. take P to be an offender. We leave it to the reader to see that equality of little rank and rank implies the saturated chain condition. for that matter. contrary to Theorem 128. 156.
As for rank. Now N has the form Ps with P maximal within the complement of S. the last map in (30) is zero. for by Theorem 135.100
CH. Proof.
Proof. for it would make the rank of M* fall below its grade. Hence they are equal. by Theorem 82. A / ( x l . . and so is G(M)... .. This yields the exact sequence (30) Ext:'(B. . A ) # 0.
1
D. say to n.'(B. but G(Ps) cannot exceed rank(Ps). If is Macaulay and S a multiplicatively closed set in R. Now M* has the form M / ( x ) with M maximal in R. . . Then for any c e C
Theorem.1 . A ) z HOmR(B... x . .)B = 0. . In going from P to PS the grade can only go up. Our hypothesis tells us that the grade and rank of MM are equal. and this completes the proof.(B. (31) Ext. but inequality cannot be tolerated here.> xn)A)
In the presence of IA # A .
Lemma. I # R.(R/I. We have G(P) = rank(P) by Theorem 136 and we know rank(P) = rank(Ps). A / ( x l . A )
2 Ext. x.
A ) + Ext.+ A . playing the role of x .
is equivalent to the statement that there is a nonzero element of A / ( x l .(B. We now apply the theorem to the case where B = R / I . We make a second application of our inductive assumption of the truth of the theorem for n .
* *
. In summary. Theorem 140. We first note a trivial lemma. Furthermore. x. element x in R satisfying xC = 0 and x f <(0).(B. Let A and B be Rmodules. applied with x. .. . Furthermore G ( M ) = 1 G(M*). on A is maximal within I. is equivalent to the assertion (33) I
In this appendix we outline the proof of Theorem 121 that uses homological algebra. A ) : it is the smallest integer n such that Ext. then Rs is Macaulay.
A)
Since xlB = 0.)A) z
Proof. by induction on n. . x. where R is Noetherian and I is an ideal in R. Rank(M) is this same number n. Given a maximal ideal N in Rs we must show that its grade and rank are equal. whence f ( c ) = 0. thus obtaining the isomorphism of the two inner terms.. Let R be Noetherian and assume Rnr Macaulay for every maximal ideal M. Proof. D ) = 0. . G ( M ) = G(MM). .. A / x l A ) + Ext. Then Ext. (33) says that the Rsequence x l . xn)A) # 0
APPENDIX 31.
C <(A/(xl.)A)
+
+
The right side of (31) vanishes by the lemma. . The condition (32) HomR(R/I. Since x1 is a nonzerodivisor on A we have the exact sequence
0 .for we may begin a maximal Rsequence in M with x. . . Hence in (30) we can replace both end terms by 0. . . we have rank(M) L 1 rank(M*) by Theorem 131 . x. A ) Horn(& A / ( x l . Then R is Macaulay. Then R* = R/@) is a Macaulay ring. 31/RSEQUENCES
AND MACAULAY RINGS
101
Theorem 139.
. Let f be a homomorphism from C we have 0 =f(xc) = xf(c). Let x be a nonzerodivisor in a Macaulay ring R. we arrive at the following homological characterization of G(I. . we must prove its grade and rank to be equal.J'(B. Let C and D be Rmodules.)A annihilated by I. Theorem 141. Given a maximal ideal M* in R*.+ A . in R constitute an Rsequence on A and that (xl. Assume that the elements x l . and suppose there exists an Then HomR(C. x.+ A / x l A + 0
21
where the indicated map is multiplication by x l . 3/MACAULAY
RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC. and (32). . Proof. and we know the grade and rank of M to be equal. . .
I
+
+
(a) Prove that z(A/ZnA)= <(A/ZA) for any n.. . y ) in R. (2) If G(Z. . ZB # B. 31/RSEQUENCES AND MACAULAY RINGS
103
EXERCISES
1. . B ) > G(Z. (This exercise shows that Theorem 124 cannot be extended to an infinite union of prime ideals. Show that x. Prove that T is a Macaulay ring. x. (x. . the sequence
0 + A / x A + B / x B + C / x C + 0
~
+
+
A
9
9
(xi. then G(Z. K a field. B ) < G(Z. . . B ) = G(Z. 3. and the same sequence with b in place of a are Rsequences on A . Let R be a DVR with maximal ideal ( p ) .p x is also a maximal Rsequence in T. Let . . prove that xl.Prove that a. so do its homomorphic images. . rank(Q) = 1 rank(P). x..) 5 . Zc = 0. B ) . . * . xm). but Zxb C x A . . 2..K be a field. . z(l .. prove that G(Z) = 1.. .
is still exact and all grades are down by 1. but in the order y(l . xi+l. Let a. . be an Rsequence on A . C ) . C). and suppose that as an Rmodule it is free and finitely generated. . . .
+
. . * * *. be elements of R. B) or G(Z. . (This shows that radical assumptions cannot be omitted in Theorem 127. xn)A). 12.. . If G(Z. Prove that (x. .a / b . .... C) are both positive we can find in Z a nonzerodivisor x on both B and C. Prove: (1) If G(Z. b be an Rsequence in a ring R . G(Z. z(l . and write
z = ( X i . . G(Z. . xi. If G(Z. If xi. Z a nonzero ideal in R. ZC # C . is an Rsequence on A and
(c) Deduce from (a) and (b) the following: for any integers kl.x). So assume G(Z. (a) Let R = K [ x . C). A ) = G(Z. . (Hint: consider the homomorphism x + .) In the ring of integers let x = 3.. y ] / ( x 2 xy). . Z = ( 5 ) and let P . x. b be an Rsequence in a domain R. Let P C Q be prime ideals in a Macaulay ring.. Let Z be an ideal in a domain R. Let A be a nonzero module over a commutative ring R. Let a.. x. k . b) has grade 5 2. (b) If Z is the ideal generated by y(1 . . Let T be a ring containing R... 3/MACAULAY RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC. x they do not.) 17. . but that for every i E Z. 13. Zb = 0. Prove that b maps into a nonzerodivisor in the ring R/(Y).. (a) If X I . Suppose there is no prime ideal properly between them. then G(Z.. For this exercise and the next two we waive the requirement ( a . 14. . Then xb B x A . is an Rsequence on A .. falling under (1) or (3). range over all prime ideals. Suppose x i = ab.kn is an Rsequence on A . x. and let xl. .102
CH. x.x) form an Rsequence. Let R be a Noetherian ring.x). b ) # R. 18.. I ) Q UP.) 8. b be elements in a domain R such that ( a bx) is prime in R[x].) 15. Prove that ( a bx) is a prime ideal in R[x]. the sequence x l .. (a. is an Rsequence on the module A .
. Let xl. . a . Let R be a Noetherian domain. (Hint: if sa = tb with t not a multiple of a. . . B ) = 0. xil. R = K [ x . O+A+B+C+O a short exact sequence of Rmodules. B). Let Zbe an ideal in R with ZA # A . pick b + c. b be elements in a Noetherian UFD. x i e UP. A an Rmodule. X. Let T = R[x]. (b) If xl. 9. A ) = 1. . x) = 3. (3) If G(Z.
. 7.
+
+
+
+
(Hint: if G(Z. . a. then G(Z. x .. Prove that the elements x. y . rank(M) = 1.. C) = 0. Prove: Il = R if and only if G(Z) L 2. x i . Let a. prove that I' = R. Let a. B) and G(Z. . and x in Z not a zerodivisor on B. Y(l . 16. . U . Prove that G(M) = 0. Let M be the image of .. . C ) zero.. Prove: if a ring satisfies the saturated chain condition for prime ideals. (This example shows that the condition ZA # A cannot be omitted in Theorem 121. .)A # A . Let R be a commutative ring (not necessarily Noetherian). Prove that any maximal prime of ( a . z]. x an indeterminate. A ) = G(Z. b) # R. Prove: in a GCDdomain two elements form an Rsequence if and only if they are relatively prime. x .x).. . If Z contains an Rsequence of length 2.

*
prove that xl. Prove: G(Q) = 1 G(P). 6. * x . is an Rsequence on A . Let R be a Macaulay ring. is an Rsequence on A if and only if xlk1. b is an Rsequence.x ) and z(l . . and let y = a bx where x is any element in R. 11. observe that b(t sx) is divisible by a bx. prove that xi t <(A/(xI. and that the single element 1 . either b E A or b maps onto a nonzero element of C.) 4.x). 10. C) 1 . (b) Prove that ZnA/Zn+lA is isomorphic to a direct sum of copies of AIZA. A ) 2 G(Z. p is a maximal Rsequence in T . x. .
Let R be an ndimensional ring (not necessarily Noetherian). x) can be generated by n elements that form an Rsequence in any order.. successively.x) ) to a maximal prime of A / x A and use induction on G(A). y ) / ( u ) and (u2.) 22. Let xl. (Hint: deduce this from the theorem in the appendix. let x be any element not in P such that (x. then x is not in any minimal prime ideal. and we find k E (u). Then: ( a ) The modules (u. . y ) onto (u’. . Prove that any integrally closed Noetherian domain of dimension 6 2 is Macaulay. This is the note that introduced the ArtinRees lemma. as required. that the module (u. under the stated hypothesis. as a vector space over RIM..x C <(A(AIxA).1) implies tu E 0 .y)/(uz. we isolate a preparatory result. x be an Rsequence in a Noetherian ring. By Theorem 126. Let R be a valuation ring. Let R be local. Deduce that there are no prime ideals properly between P and Q . Prove that R cannot contain an Rsequence of length 2 on A . so au E b). using the underlying idea but not the ArtinRees lemma itself. Pass to R/(x) and A / x A . . (Hint: change x2. y)/(uz) and its submodule (u2. ) 23. As a prelude to Theorem 142.
+
v
FIGURE 3
Theorem 143. is independent of the choice of I . uy)/(u2)are isomorphic. . prime ideal minimal over () Then the rank of P is at most 1. 21. Let R be a local Macaulay ring with maximal ideal M . 20. 3/MACAULAY
RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC.y ) / ( u 2 . and let Q be a minimal prime ideal over (x.uy) are isomorphic. from
32 THE PRINCIPAL IDEAL THEOREM
k
The principal ideal theorem of Krull is probably the most important single theorem in the theory of Noetherian rings.) 25. Prove that rank(Q) = 1 rank(P). instead of minimal over a principal
. (Hint: we can assume A faithful. let P be a maximal prime of A . The module (ue. and let I be an ideal generated by a maximal Rsequence. Its effect is to show. ( b ) Assume further that tu2 E 0. It remains to prove that the annihilator is exactly (u). We are. Prove: G(A) 6 k . Let u. uy). . Prove that R cannot contain an Rsequence on A of length n 1.” as illustrated are in Fig. P). Enlarge (P. Let J be the set of all x in R with M x C I. )Then the modules (u)/(u2) and (u2. .. Prove that . y be nonzero elements in an integral domain. . so to speak. 3. Let A be an Amodule. For G(A) > 0 take x Q <(A).
Before presenting the proof of Theorem 142. If x starts an Rsequence on A . sending the kernel (u) onto the kernel (u’). we remark that if we assume P to be actually principal.
Proof.y)/(u2) “piecewise isomorphic. (P. Let x be a nonunit in a Noetherian ring and P a x.uy) is also cyclic. making appropriate use of Theorems 118 and 124. let A be a finitely generated nonzero module. x. Its statement is as follows :
i
1b
I
(34)
ky
=
au2
+ buy
+ buy
we must deduce k E (u).say au = cy. (b) The module (u)/(u2)is of course caclic.) 24. . Prove that the dimension of J / I . the ideal (xl. (a) Multiplication by u induces a module isomorphism of (u.
THE THE
PRINCIPAL IDEAL THEOREM
105
19. Let P be a prime ideal in a Macaulay ring R. Now (34) gives us au2 E 0) that by hypothesis. for the generator u2 is superfluous. P) # R. Then (34) can be rewritten (35) ky
= CUY
3
In (35) we can cancel y . That is. at about the same time as unpublished lectures of Artin.104
CH. A an Rmodule.
+
The proof we give is adapted from a brilliant note of Rees [42]. Moreover the annihilator contains u. (Hint: the case G(A) = 0 is trivial. and write k for the Krull dimension of RIP.
Theorem 142. . with annihilating ideal (u). .
106
CH. P . so that there are only a finite number of prime ideals in all.y ) .again minimality and rank are preserved. We have a local domain R with maximal ideal M . We assume that. This contradiction completes the proof of Theorem 142. Then their intersection is 0. 4). This is possible only has if (u.
Theorem 144. . We make two
Very shortly we shall subject the principal ideal theorem to two successive improvements. If x is a nonzero element lying in all prime ideals Pi of rank 1. First we pass to the integral domain RIP2. y ) = (u2. It is so easy in fact that we were able to place it as Ex. A Noetherian domain R is a Gdomain f and only if i dim(R) 5 1 and R has only afinite number of maximal ideals (or equivalently. Proof of Theorem 142.
Proof. the image of P is still minimal over the image of ( x ) and has rank >= 2. u E (u2. 5 in $11 (note also the refinement in Theorem 163).
. Theorem 142 now furnishes a contradiction. prime ideals). Let Zk denote the ideal of all elements t with txk e (y). It is harmless to pass to RIP. This applies in particular to the module (u. there is a chain P 3 P1 3 P2of distinct prime ideals (see Fig... Let R be an integral domain satiflying the ascending chain condition on radical ideals. Then we localize the integral domain RIP2 with respect to the image prime ideal P / P 2 . Then Q is minimal over ( x ) . and Theorem 144 then tells us dim(R) 5 1.
Theorem 145. which must become stable. Set u = x n . y)/(u2). By Theorem 81 we cannot have Q C P1 U . Since 1 . We determine which Gdomains are Noetherian. .cu is a unit (u is a nonunit in the local ring R) we deduce u E (y) C Q. for the existence of at least one prime ideal between 0 and Q makes rank(Q) 2 2.
THE THE
PRINCIPAL IDEAL THEOREM
107
ideal. . the result is a good deal easier. Hence (Theorem 89) any finitely generated Tmodule has finite length. Suppose that P1. contradicting Theorem 88. Suppose R has an infinite number of minimal prime ideals (i. If there exists a prime ideal properly between them. so we assume P = 0. The ring T = R/(u2) has exactly one prime ideal.
+
Proof..
FIGURE 4
successive reductions. are the sole prime ideals properly between 0 and Q. Let P
CQ
Proof. then we have tu2 E (y) implies tu e (y). We shall find this setup to be impossible. e.y)/(uz) the same length.. First we prove the theorem on prime ideals that was promised in $11. Evidently Z C Z2 C . To get ready for Theorem 146 we note an easy application of Theorem 88. But M is minimal over (x) and hence also minimal over (u) = (x"). e. then each Pi is minimal over x . U P. on the contrary. 3/MACAULAY RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC. Then txZn ( y implies txn e (y).
Theorem 146. Let us start the notation fresh after these reductions.
. Conversely. Then (Theorem 19) the intersection of the nonzero prime ideals in R is nonzero. and a nonzero prime ideal Q properly contained in M. But we pause at this point to give a number of immediate applications. is an ascending chain of ~ ) ideals. Half the theorem is covered by Ex.which is an Rmodule annihilated by u2. Hence (Theorem 145) R has only a finite number of minimal prime ideals. and thus at our pleasure a Tmodule. prime ideals of rank I). say u = cu2 dy.y ) . x f any Pi. Select a nonzero element y in Q. then there are infinitely many. say at I. suppose that R is a Gdomain. It follows from Theorem 143 that its submodule (u2. 3 in $13. i. be prime ideals in a Noetherian ring. a nonzero element x such that M is a minimal prime ideal w e r ( x ) . So we may pick x E Q.
we may assume rank(N) = n . . Theorem 147 deflates the significance for Noetherian rings of the Hilbert ring axiom down to the mere distinction between finite and infinite. and there are only finitely many maximal ideals containing P. We know that M # PR[x]. P a prime ideal in R. 32/THE
PRINCIPAL IDEAL THEOREM
109
=
We can also determine when a Noetherian ring R is a Hilbert ring. i.

Theorem 150. This condition is in fact sufficient for Noetherian rings.
P.. x.. rank(P) = n. and M a maximal ideal in the polynomial ring R[x].] has rank n. We shall prove G(M) 2 n 1. Let M A R = P. say. but obviously equivalent. Let c be any nonzero element in P.
Theorem 149.very prime ideal P such that dim(R/P) = 1. We proceed to the Noetherian improvement on Theorem 38. so by Theorem 146 the dimension of RIP is at most 1.108
CH. But then our hypothesis tells us that P must be maximal. Then P is minimal over cR. . Hence ( x .. M ) = R [ x ] and we may write 1 = xf g with f E R[x]and g c M . Our problem now is to show G(M) L I . in the language used in Theorem 39.if sustained.Then M cannot consist entirely of zerodivisors. 3/MACAULAY RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC. and that M lies properly above NR.
Theorem 148. By Theorem 149. Let R be any commutative ring. We quote Theorem 150. Shamash. x. this is a special case of Theorem 141.. 4 in 513) it is necessary.
Theorem 147. By induction. Let P* = PR[x]be the expansion of P to the polynomial ring R[x].
As Krull remarks in [27]. Assume the contrary. . But clearly g = 1 . that every homomorphic image of R of dimension 2 1 have an infinite number of maximal ideals. there must exist injinitely many maximal ideals containing P. We know that the contraction N of M to K[xl. Then: rank(P*) = n. Let K be any field.~]is maximal. xn).
Proof. Then Q n R is a prime ideal in R containing c and contained in P.
Proof.I . hence (Theorem 149) rank(M) = n 1. In Theorem 147 we prefer to state it in a form that is formally weaker. 3 and 4. we are proving that Noetherian rings are Srings (and hence also strong Srings). Let R be a Noetherian domain and P a minimal prime
We note at this point an application to polynomial rings. Let R be a Noetherian ring.) The next application we make of Theorem 142 is to show that the Macaulay property is inherited by polynomial rings. Thus: every maximal ideal in K[xl. e. and let R = K[xl.. Denote by P* = PR[x] the expansion o P to R[x]. In the first place (Ex. For M a maximal ideal in R [ x ]we must show the equality of the grade and rank of M . Let x l . be a maximal Rsequence in P.Then P* is a minimal prime ideal in R[x]. see Exs. since the grade can never exceed the rank this will prove the theorem. A necessary and suficient condition for a Noetherian ring R to be a Hilbert ring is the following: for e. Our problem is to show that any Gideal P is maximal. . Suppose R is Macaulay. . Let M be a maximal ideal in R. R is a Macaulay ring ifand only i f R [ x ]is a Macaulay
ideal in R. . G(P) = rank(P) = n.] where the x’s are indeterminates. that M does not consist entirely of zerodivisors. Conversely.. Now RIP is a Gdomain. Suppose that P* 3 Q 3 cR[x]. It is evident that it remains an Rsequence when considered in the ring R[x].
For convenience of reference we record the result of combining Theorems 148 and 39. x. Proof. (For generalizations. We claim that P* is likewise minimal over cR[x].
1
i
I
i
Q # P* be a prime ideal in R[x] with Q A R rank(Q) = n + 1. Then x B Msince x is not a zerodivisor.We employ the usual device of dividing both rings by the ideal (xl. . rank(M) = n.. Hence Q n R = P and Q = P*. x. since R is a Macaulay ring. We first need a remark about polynomial rings.and let f
ring. whether or not R is Noetherian. . Proof. this claim and Theorem 142 finish the proof. so is R .xf cannot be a zerodivisor.
+
+
. . Then.this depresses the grade of M by n. its very simple proof was shown me by J. .
+
Theorem 151. if R[x] is Macaulay. .. .
namely P* 3 P1* 0. E P1. Say for definiteness that al e P1. we obtain a very satisfactory picture of the prime ideals in R : every saturated chain of prime ideals running from the top to the bottom has length n. of Krull's original proof. Here we may assume that there is no prime for ideal properly between P1and P. Let P be a prime ideal in R minimal over Z Then: rank(P) 5 n. . If we combine the resulting equal chain condition with the fact that any maximal ideal in R has rank n. using * for the homomorphic images of elements or ideals. . with P as its unique maximal ideal. 6). Algebraic geometers call n .
i (c. .x.
R / Q . A naive proof.r the corank of P.+l of length n 1.P l ) the image of P is the unique prime ideal and hence (Theorem 25) is nilpotent. (Generalizedprincipal ideal theorem. .r.1 we have. The proof of Theorem 152 embodies a simplification. . By choosing t sufficiently large we can arrange
a: = c. In $16 we called n .f) R .
THE
PRINCIPAL IDEAL THEOREM
111
Of course we can iterate Theorem 151 to obtain the same resujt with several indeterminates. a. . . Suppose that V n W is nonempty W . simply iterating Theorem 142. But as a matter of fact. one passes to the full intersection theorem.
p"
+
FIGURE 5
some power of each of the a's.P l ) . that P1properly contains a prime ideal Q that contains J (see Fig. and any saturated chain ascending from P to a maximal ideal has length n . due to Akizuki. but there is a chain of length 2.
=
2. by the minimality of P.. . Let K be algebraically closed and let us pass to the geometric language. We have that P* is minimal over (al*).that P is the only prime ideal containing (al. . a small rearrangement of the proof of Theorem 152 gives the full result from the weaker hypothesis (see Ex. . (See. 5). and let W be an irreducible variety of codimension 1 (a hypersurface). Q).
Proof. by induction on n. Theorem 152 provides the first of two successive improvements on Theorem 142. the principal ideal theorem. principal ideal theorem tells us that Q lies directly above P. . P l ) contains P1properly and P is therefore the only prime ideal containing (al.] and letf be an # element in R . by the device of introducing the product of the two varieties and intersecting it with the diagonal. Let Q be a prime ideal minimal above (P...) and note that J is contained in P1.Pl).) Let R be a Noetherian ring and let Z # R be an ideal generated by n elements al. b.f). Q) contains
. Let P again have rank r in R = K[xl. then any saturated chain descending from P to 0 has length r. If the prime ideal P has rank r.We cannot have Z C P1..
in R . This means that some power of P lies in (al. The preceding result may be stated as follows: let V be an irreducible variety of dimension d. for instance. b. . In this context it is worth noting a corollary of the principal ideal theorem. Then every component of V n W has dimension and that V d .110
CH. leads to the result that the little rank of P is at most n .
Remarks. in the ring R/(al. The Because of the equal chain condition. f c P . .. It follows. 1. 5). So this is valid if we weaken the Noetherian assumption on R to the hypothesis that every homomorphic image of R satisfies the principal ideal theorem. n)
'
Let J = (b2. We now pass to the ring
Theorem 152. Theorem 11 on page 36 of [28].] with the x's indeterminates. In particular: i f K is afield. By the device of passing to RP we may assume that R is local.Since the rank of P I exceeds n .. (P. x.r the dimension of the variety attached to P. descending from P*. The ideal (al. 3/MACAULAY RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC.1. Suppose on the contrary that there exists a chain P = Po 3 P13 3 P. E R . and they identify it with the transcendence degree of RIP over K (for a generalization see Ex. In other words. then R is a Macaulay ring. and R = K[xl. we can state rank(Q) = r 1. given in the corollary on page 38 of [28].
+

. this would contradict the minimality of P over Z..) From this. . This contradicts Theo3 rem 142.al
'
*
+ b.
Then (al.
= 0 is dismissed as trivial. .1. and the conclusion we have is that there exist infinitely many nontrivial ones. We are ready for the ultimate generalization of the principal ideal theorem. By Theorem 88.
el.112
CH.f n P 1 having no constant terms. and we do so with a supplement.
Theorem 154. By Theorem 131.) Let R be a Noetherian ring. I f R is Noetherian. e. Hence P is contained in an infinite number of maximal ideals (see Theorem 147 and recall that R is a Hilbert ring).. y p P1 U U P. in particular i x is a nonzerodivisor) the rank o f f P / ( x ) in R/(x) is k .] with the x’s indeterminates.. Since every maximal ideal has rank n. the equationsfi = 0. Now pass to R* = R/(al). Then there exist elenients al. .. Now G ( M ) = 1 G(M*)..
+
Theorem 157. denote all the prime ideals minimal over I (they are finite in number by Theorem 88). rank(P*) 5 n . Let J = (I. .
Theorem 156. . Assume that the rank of P / I in the ring R / I is k . y).1.. By induction P* is minimal over (az*. . assuming k > 0. the rank of P in R is at most ( k . Then P is not minimal over I. which is covered by Theorem 131. P* = P/(al). we must prove that its grade and rank are equal. . .1. 32/THE
PRINCIPAL IDEAL THEOREM
113
2.. Since rank(P) 2 1.fnl. . Let M be a maximal ideal of R . Let K be algebraically closed. U Qk. so we assume n > 0 and use induction on n. 0 if R is a domain). x. . By hypothesis..*).. the grade and rank of M* in R* are equal. .. al t any pi. I # R.1) ( n 1) = k n. We argue by induction on k . . . There is an interesting application of Theorem 152 to polynomial equations. A useful alternative way of putting this is to take polynomials fi.
We are ready for still another theorem on the stability of the Macaulay property. . say . therefore (Theorem 81) P Q QlU .
Remark. I an ideal in R generated by n elements. for a chain of prime ideals from P to J terminates at a prime not yet minimal over I. ..
Proof. P. Let P1. . . . . Let P be aprime ideal in a Noetherian ring R and let x be an element in P. hence by Theorem 81 we can find y e P . a. P is not maximal. Then by Theorem 152 any prime ideal P minimal over I has rank n . and let R = K[xl.1 polynomials f l . . . .). and Pick al e P. n) we find P to be minimal over (al. The case k = 0 is Theorem 152. Hence G ( M ) = rank(M).. .
Theorem 153. rank(M) = 1 rank(M*). . Let I # R be generated by n . and R* = R/(x) is Macaulay then R is Macaulay. The technique is similar to that used in Theorem 153. I f x is not contained in any minimal prime ideal of R (and so. . generalized still further. Q k (we mean truly minimal.

+ +
+
.
The case n = I o f Theorem 154 is important enough to be repeated. 3/MACAULAY
RINGS AND REGULAR R l N b S
SEC. . We have x E M and we write M* = M/(x).fnl = 0 have an infinite number of solutions if they have any. Suppose the rank of P in R is k . for x can be the beginning of a maximal Rsequence in M . . a. P is not contained in any Qi. such that P is minimal over (al. R has only a finite number of minimal prime ideals. Theorem 153 is not at all of the same depth as the principal ideal theorem. If we pick any ai mapping on ai* ( i = 2. the proof really used just the ascending chain condition on radical ideals and was available right after Theorems 81 and 88.
Theorem 155. By induction.1.
Proof. . Let R be Noetherian and P a prime ideal in R of rank n. . P is not contained in any Pi. Then the rank of P in R is a f most n k. . a2. a.. R is a Macaulay ring caulay ring. Let P be a prime ideal containing I. The solution x1 = x. i. x is a nonzerodivisor in the Jacobson radical of R. In fact. .1. By Theorem 155. an). The rank of P / J in R / J is at most k . Then the rank of P / ( x ) in R/(x) is k or k . In other words. For n = 0 the assertion is vacuous. .
..
+
We record a corollary of Theorems 156 and 141.
+
Proof. (Principal ideal theorem. .
if and only if
R[[x]] is a Ma
. Theorem 152 has a useful converse.
and T generated over R by n elements. Show that for the elements a]. . every prime ideal minimal over (al. (a) Prove: rank(Q) 5 rank(P) . i < m . . 1 1 . shows that the ascending chain condition on principal ideals is too weak to imply the principal ideal theorem.) (b) With the notation of part (a). (a) Let R C T be any rings. Drop down to the ring R[vl. noting that part (a) covers k = 0. Prove that P has rank 1.] and quote Ex. .. Pass to the rings R/(xT A R) and TlxT.Then once more P is the only prime ideal containing (al. A cannot consist of zero4 divisors on R/I.subject to the condition that no terms in a power of x only are permitted. 4. (This example. in QzPlbut not in Ql. 5. observe that R I P can be regarded as a subdomain of TlQ. x. 33/REGULAR
RINGS
115
EXERCISES
1. Among all chains P 3 PI 3 * * 3 P. (Hint: observe that any prime ideal contained in Q must contain PT.]. Let Q be a prime ideal in T. and for any i (1 5 i S n). . . Compare with Ex. Let Q* denote the image of

Q in TIPT. 8. PI). Then f a. The transcendence degree of an integral domain over a subdomain is defined to be the transcendence degree of the big quotient field over the little one. be elements o A . . a.. Prove: rank((?) 5 rank(P) rank(Q*).. assume that R and T are Noetherian. . . . Let R C T be domains with R Noetherian. Let R be a local ring with maximal ideal M . T algebraic over R.) 10. and use Theorem 155. Let x be nilpotent in R (not necessarily Noetherian) and let P be minimal over (x). If Z is generated by an Rsequence of length i in M . (Hint: proceed by induction on the rank k of P.. 3/MACAULAY RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC. Show that Theorem 152 is valid for R. . 3. If R is Noetherian. and the additivity of transcendence degrees in a tower of extensions. . . Prove that every maximal ideal in R[x. Theorem 158. (b) M is minimal over @). . Thus the construction can continue. argue that.)
+

33
REGULAR RINGS
We need to examine minimal sets of generators for the maximal ideal M of a local ring R.
(ig)
=
(Hint: use Theorem 149. deg. a. Let R be a Noetherian Hilbert ring where every maximal ideal has rank k . i
. (Hint: the problem is to construct an Rsequence of length m inside a given maximal ideal M of rank m. x. due to Graham Evans. Prove: rank(@ = rank(Q*). let Q A R = P. prove that
+
+
rank(Q) .rank(P)
+ tr. .) 9.] and P = Q A R. . (c) rank(M) 2 2. Say al $ P1. .+1 pick one so that P1contains as many as possible of the a’s.. P a prime ideal minimal over (x).) 7.) 6 . Pick x t P not in any minimal prime ideal. and P = Q A R. and in particular if it is a maximal ideal. . x and y indeterminates.] has rank k n. .) (b) Show that equality holds in (a) if the polynomial ring in n indeterminates over R satisfies the saturated chain condition. . The rest is unchanged. (Hint: reduce to n = 1 and use Theorem 149. Q a Gideal in R[xl. Let R be the ring of polynomials in x and y over K. v. Let R be a ring such that every domain that is a homomorphic image of R satisfies the principal ideal theorem. ai) has rank i. and drop the assumption that P is minimal. and let A be ajnitely generated Rmodule.114
CH. Let M be the ideal in R consisting of all polynomials with constant term 0..d. .) 12.+. (Hint: modify the proof as follows. . Let R be Noetherian. . Prove: rank(Q) 5 rank(P). by the rankunmixedness of I. 3 en+. Prove: (a) R satisfies the ascending chain condition on principal ideals.. 2.. . x.. (Hint: if Q = Qo 3 Ql 3 . and assume P is minimal. Let a. . Prove that rank(Q) = n rank(P). (c) Observe that d = 0 if Q is a Gideal. constructed in Theorem 153. We do it more generally for a module. If Q is a prime ideal in T = R[xl.. Let R be a Noetherian ring in which the classical unmixedness theorem holds : if an ideal I generated by n elements has rank n then I is rankunmixed. Let Q be prime in T and P = Q A R. 10. Let Q be prime in T and P = Q A R. Let d be the transcendence degree of T/Q over RIP. Let R C T be domains with R Noetherian and T algebraic over R (but not necessarily a finitely generated ring over R). . 5. Let K be a field. pick D. a. Prove that P has rank 0. Let x be a nonzerodivisor in a Noetherian ring. Prove that R is Macaulay. generate A f and only if their images generate A I M A ...
Let R be a local ring with m'aximal ideal M and x an element in M . This gives us dx e M2.
Theorem 159. we must prove B = A .
Here the first inequality follows from Theorem 132. V(R*) = V(R) . Pick any yi e M mapping on y * .1. and the last is immediate since V(R) is the smallest number of elements that can generate M.116
CH. y. a. the number of elements in a minimal basis will be called the Vdimension of R written V(R). Then V(R*) = V(R) . yl.M 2 .and write R* = R / ( x ) . We pass to R* and find Cl*Yl*
+ . By the Nakayama lemma. y.1 = V(R*). Then any principal prime ideal P in R is minimal. in other words a vector space over the field RIM. Hence R is regular.
.* be a minimal basis of M* = M / ( x ) . Let yl*. . We claim that x. .and we must prove that each coefficient lies in M. which implies d e M since x 6 M2.M 2 that does not lie in any minimal prime ideal of R.
Theorem 163.. We show at once that there is a connection with Rsequences. The collapse of all thc integers in (36) to equality gives us both conclusions of the theorem. form a minimal basis of M . The local ring R is called regular if we have equality. whence M ( A / B ) = A / B . . .
i
Proof.* e b4* by the minimality of yl*. Let k be the length of the Rsequence in question.. Hence ci E M. y . By Theorem 159. the second (as noted tbove) from Theorem 152. We proceed in the next two theorems to investigate the behavior of regularity in the passage from R to R / ( x ) . By Theorem 159. Before doing so. Remark. The two theorems are not quite symmetric. . since we shall shortly prove that a regular local ring is an integral domain. Let R be a local ring that is not a domain. Let R be a local ring with maximal ideal M . .. Then R* = R/(x) is regular. Moreover. By Theorem 155 dim(R*) = dim(R) . We have (36)
k
=
+
G(R) 5 rank(M) 5 V(R) =( k
Note that A / M A is an Rmodule annihilated by M . .
E
which lies in M2. We have B M A = A .
Proof. Let R be a regular local ring with maximal ideal M . Let R be a local ring with maximal ideal M.. . We shall call such a minimal generating set a minimal basis for A. .
Proof. Let B denote the submodule of A generated by al.*.
Theorem 160.
Proof.1.1. Suppose that M can be generated by an Rsequence.*
(M*)2
Theorem 162.
whence c. Let x be any element in M . the maximal ideal of R*. . By Theorem 152 we have dim(R) 5 V(R).
+ clyl+
* *
* * *
+ cry.+ cr*y. A / B = 0. . we need a result that could have been done a good deal earlier (indeed right after Theorem 79). In the important case A = M . generate A / M A . V(R*) = V(R) .M2. We note again that V(R) is the dimension of M / M 2 as a vector space over the field RIM. 33/REGULAR
RINGS
117
Proof. . Then R is regular. 3/MACAULAY RINGS A N D REGULAR RINGS
iI
E
SEC.1. Assume that R* = R / ( x ) is regular. But in fact the hypothesis of Theorem 161 implies that x lies in no minimal prime ideal. a. . But we must have dim(R*) 5 V(R*). the length of the Rsequence is equal to the common value of dim(R) and V(R). To prove the minimality we take a linear combination dx
Theorem 161. but we are not quite ready to prove it.. and x an element in M . The converse of Theorem 160 is also valid (Theorem 169below).1. Since the "only if" part is obvious. . By Theorem 155 dim(R*) = dim(R) or dim(R) . Then R is regular. It is immediate that they span M. . we assume that the images of al.. Hence dim(R*) = dim(R) . It follows that minimal generating sets for A correspond to vector space bases of A / M A .
J . Then I ( J n K ) = R. Let Q be a prime ideal properly contained in P.
+
+
+
Theorem 168. w *
*
w PI.
+
+
+ Jn. where J = P2 n .
+
+
+
Proof. Thus Q = 0. A Noetherian ring R is regular if R is regular for every maximal ideal M in R. Hence M . R can be any regular Noetherian ring. We have Pi Pi = R for i # j .M 2 .
Proof.
Theorem 167. the desired contradiction. Then 1 =(i+j)(i'+k)eI+JKC
I + ( J n K). j c J . J be ideals in a commutative ring R. We know this to be true for any x E M . Then R is the direct sum of a jinite number of rings. Let R be a Noetherian ring in which every maximal ideal contains a unique minimal prime ideal.
. In particular. R* = R / ( x ) is regular.
+
+
Theorem 164. Assume I J = R.
Proof. By Theorem 79.
Proof. i E I . contradicting our hypothesis that R is not a domain. and let N be their intersection. for otherwise Pi Pi can be enlarged to a maximal ideal containing two distinct minimal prime ideals.M 2 . Let R be a Noetherian ring such that R is an inM tegral domain f o r every maximal ideal M. then a maps into 0 in each RM. Now we assume R is not a domain and seek a contradiction. i. e. We assume dim(R) > 0 and then have M # 0. Now apply Theorem 167. By Theorem 163. By Ex. Sooner or later everything in the subject of Noetherian rings gets globalized. starting with the Chinese remainder theorem. dim(R*) < dim(R) (in fact it is smaller exactly by 1). If a e R is nilpotent. (I@ = 0. Let I . Q C A P n . N is the nilradical of R (Theorem 25). Hence (Ex. We have 1 = i j . 3/MACAULAY
RINGS A N D REGULAR RINGS
1
SEC. and we develop them in some detail. K be ideals in a commutative ring R. ( x )is prime. where M is the maximal ideal of R. P . Our next objective is to generalize Theorem 164 by proving that any regular ring is a direct sum of integral domains. 4 in $14) R has no nonzero nilpotent elements. R* is a domain. In Jn = R. By induction.) Then R is the direct sum of afinite number of integral domains. By Theorem 161. R i the dis rect s u m of In and Jn. . so that M # M 2 . (In particular. n P. then R by definition is a field. We argue by induction on the dimension of the regular local ring R. i ' e I . E A Jn = (In + Jn)(InA Jn) = 0. By Theorem 166. Each R is an integral M domain by Theorem 164. . Pick x e M . The ideas involved have a broader scope.'and we use this as the hypothesis of the next theorem. Let I. Say i + j = 1. 5 in $11. A P " = 0. each of which has a unique minimal prime ideal.
where the Pi's are the minimal prime ideals (finite in number by Theorem 88). Thus N n = 0 for a suitable n. 33/REGULAR
RINGS
119
I
Proof. From Theorem 83 we deduce M C some Pi. We proceed to prove the converse of Theorem 160. By repeated use of Theorem 165 we get P1 J = R. ( x ) is a minimal prime ideal. R = Pln 0 Jn. M Dejinition.. A regular local ring is an integral domain.
Theorem 169. Then In A Jn = 0. Also (Pip C Nn = 0. Suppose that I J = R and I K = R.
I
Theorem 166. k c K. If dim(R) = 0. e.i
118
CH. i. Iteration of the procedure yields the desired result. Then 1 = ( i j)2n1E In Further. Then M can be generated by an Rsequence of length
Theorem 165. each RM has a unique minimal prime ideal (namely 0).
c P.
Proof. But this means dim(R) = 0. j E J. This can be formulated in R itself as the statement that each M contains a unique minimal prime idea1. Let us globalize the definition of regularity. Let R be an ndimensional regular local ring with maximal ideal M . denote the minimal prime ideals of R.M2
Now let R be a regular Noetherian ring. Let P1. By Theorem 159. . it+ k = 1 with i..
We know that Rp is regular.From pna = sb get pnlb:) (b) Assume further that A P n = 0 and that Rs is integrally closed. . a DVR. 9. (Hint: if x lies in the intersection. Prove that R is regular if and only if R[[x]] is regular. . . a . (b) Suppose that V(R) = 2 G(R) and that R is not Macaulay. Remark. Start the Rsequence with any element x E M . . If R is superregular. A superregular ring is a Noetherian ring R such that RP is regular for every prime ideal in R. By Theorem 140 this globalizes:
Theorem 170. 3/MACAULAY
RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
SEC. Let R be a Noetherian ring. Prove that dim(R) = 1 G(R). Prove that R is the direct sum of a finite number of rings. e. Let R be a regular ring. prove that every localization RS is superregular. which can be augmented by using Ex.120
CH. M is generated by an Rsequence. Prove that any superregular local ring is integrally closed.. Any Dedekind domain is obviously superregular. 4. Proof.M2. There are two cases. I R is a superregular ring so is R[x]. Prove that R is regular if and only if it is a Dedekind domain. After this we may start over with R regular local.. N is generated by M and a suitable f(Theorem 28). Let R be a regular local ring and let I be an ideal in R such that
+
+
+
The relation between the regularity of R and that of R[[x]] is manageable. f form an Rsequence.. As a way of putting off the homological invasion just a little longer. Prove that R/(x) is regular. the maximal ideal of Rw is principal (note that this is in particular true if every ideal in R is principal). 5 . we invent a definition that will be obsolete as soon as the next chapter begins. Our problem is to prove TN regular. . N prime in T with N n R = M . Let R be a Noetherian integral domain.
f Theorem 171. .and let x be an element that is in the Jacobson radical of R but not in the square of any maximal ideal of R. and let x be an element not lying in the square of any maximal ideal of R.. . Prove that R is integrally closed. for every maximal ideal M. . then R is a principal ideal domain with (up to associates) exactly one prime. Theorem 169 makes it clear that any regular local ring is Macaulay. observe that ( p ) is prime. 9. Let R be a local ring in which the maximal ideal is principal. 11. use Ex. We leave it as Ex. 5. i.. Let R be a Noetherian ring in which. Let R be a Hilbert regular ring. We take a prime ideal Q in R[x] and its contraction P = Q nR. (Hint: pick p P M2. 6 . Dejnition. and write R* = R/(x). N is generated by a. a. a. Iterated use of Theorem 171 thus gives us a fairsized collection of superregular rings. In fact. (a) In a domain R let P = ( p ) be a principal prime ideal. Prove that R[x] is regular. Prove that V(R*) = V(R). . and that R* is not regular. 2. say a]. use Theorem 161 and induction. Let S be the complement of P in R. Prove : (a) If R is an integral domain. each of which is either a Dedekind domain or a zerodimensional local ring with a principal maximal ideal. Let R be a local ring with maximal ideal M . 11 and induction. 7. If N = MR[x]. any minimal basis of M will do. let x # 0 be an element of M2.. then dim(R) = 0 and furthermore every ideal is a power of the maximal ideal.
Proof. We localize both R and R[x] with respect to S as a harmless adjustment. The elements al.
. in R[x] and this sequence remains an Rsequence in T.
EXERCISES
1. Suppose that R/(x) is regular. dim(R) 5 1. (a) Suppose that V(R) = 1 G(R).) 13.) 12. Let R be a local ring with maximal ideal M . Any regular ring is Macaulay. 33/REGULAR
RINGS
121
n consisting of elements not in M 2 .. 3. x = a/s = b/pn with s 6P. (Hint: observe that Rp is a DVR. Let R be a Noetherian domain. 10. The relation between the regularity of R and that of R[x] cannot be treated by the tools available up to this point it runs into the stumbling block that we need to know that regularity of R implies regularity of Rp. (b) If R is not an integral domain. . By Theorem 160 it will suffice to prove that Ncan be generated by an Rsequence. If S = ( p n ] prove that R = RP A Rs. If N properly contains MR[x]. M its maximal ideal. T = R[x]. 8. By Theorem 169. Prove: R is regular. Prove that R is Macaulay.
. and select a k accordingly. Prove that Z = (x. The projective equivalence class of K does not depend on the choice of the resolution and is denoted by @ A . . If there is no such n. a k . . Kochman) Let R be any Noetherian ring.. 14. .. The operation of forming @ A can be iterated. These theorems will be designated by letters. .1 . x. . .
123
. a k . a k . (Hint: if there exist any maximal ideals of rank 0. ..J is not contained in the union of the minimal primes over (al. P*)for some s f P . Prove that R is the direct sum of a zerodimensional ring and a ring in which every maximal ideal has rank at least 1. . . Use Theorem 83 to see that P . We shall build on the account of homological dimension given in Part I11 of [26]. .. Our notation for homological dimension is d(A).1 are already chosen. The homological dimension of A is the smallest n such that RnA is the class of projective modules.l ) . Let J = all x with sx E (al. Modules A and B are projectively equivalent if there exist projective modules P and Q such that A 0 P is isomorphic to B 0 Q.. . use a Chinese remainder procedure. a k in P whose images in RP generate Pp. For convenience of reference we summarize the pertinent definitions and list the theorems we shall use. . the homological dimension of A is infinite. or &(A) if it is urgent to call attention to the ring. (Hint: suppose suitable elements al. ( S . 3/MACAULAY
RINGS AND REGULAR RINGS
R/Z is regular.) 15. Observe that J is an ideal properly contained in P .. A module is projectice if it is a direct summand of a free module. ak)= k. Instead of homological dimension we sometimes say projective dimension. Prove that there exist elements al. and such that rank(al. . especially when we wish to emphasize the contrast with injective dimension.)
CHAPTER
4

Homological Aspects OF Ring Theory
41
HOMOLOGY
This chapter will present a number of results concerning the area in which homological algebra has greatly changed the subject of Noetherian rings. .) where the x’s form part of a minimal generating set for the maximal ideal of R.122
CH. Let R be Noetherian and P a prime ideal of rank k such that R p is regular. An exact sequence
O+K+P+A+O
with P projective is a short projective resolution of A.
8 . We have xu E K.
the first equality following from Theorem E. Let R be a local ring. Write R* = R / ( x ) . B.
with F free. so is the third. Assume that x is a nonzerodivisor on both R and A . write R* = R / ( x ) . a result which we shall generalize in Theorem 191.Then x p <(K). Now assume G(A) > 0. M <(A). Let x be a nonunit in R. x B <(R). Mxu C xK. 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC.
Theorem A. 9 of Part I11 of [26]. xu p xK. then d(C) =( d(A) 1. We have M Q <(R). and is annihilated by M .t KItP1+ A+O
I
1 f
Theorem 173.
+
be shortprojective resolutions of A . d(C) arefinite. x a central element in R . (3) I f d ( A ) < d(B). Pick u in F mapping on a. then d(C) = d(B) 1. C. Next we note that if G(R) = 0 then d(A) = 0. Let A be an Rmodule and suppose that x is a nonzerodivisor on both R and A . ( I ) I f t w o o the dimensions d(A). Let A be a nonzero R*module with dR*(A)= n < m . so we can pick x E M not in <(R) or <(A) (use Theorem 81 to avoid all the prime ideals involved). We begin by noting that the result is evident if A is free. then d(C) = d(A). Since (40)
G(R*) = G(R) . Let B be a submodule of A and write. Then u p K and Mu C K. E are Theorems 1. Resolve A :
(37)
v
O+K+F+AtO
Theorem C.
Theorem B. We make an induction on G(R). D. and the second from (37). Hence
(38)
We have
(39)
G ( K / x K )= 0
dR*(k/Xiy)= dB(K) = dR(A) . not a zerodivisor on either R or A . Then: dR*(A/xA)= dR(A).”
By combining equations (38)(41) we get G(R) = d(A). (Schanuel’s lemma) Let
O+ K + P +
AtO. as required. since we may assume that A is not free.1
we can apply induction to get
(41)
dR*(K/xK) G ( K / x K )= G(R*)
+
+
We prove at once an important ‘connection between the grade of a module and its homological dimension.1
The following theorem is an immediate consequence of Theorems C and E. for then d(A) = 0 and G(A) = G(R). x a central element in the Jacobson radical of R . 41/HOMOLOGY
125
Theorems A. This theorem explains the use by Auslander and Buchsbaum of the term “codimension. Then d ( A / x A ) = 1 d(A). Then: dR*(A/xA) 5 dR(A).
+
*
Theorem D. Then K 0 PI is isomorphic to Kl 0 P. Theorem E. 3. (4) I f d ( A ) = d(B). Then G(R) = G(A) d(A). 2. By Theorem 82. we have an element a # 0 in A with Ma = 0.
’
I
I
+ +
Proof. Let R be a left Noetherian ring. Then (42)
dR(A/xA) = 1
+ddA)
. Then dR(A) = n 1. This means that the image of xu in K / x K is nonzero. Let R be a local ring with maximal ideal M . A a finitely generated nonzero Rmodule with d(A) < m . Let R be a ring with unit.
O . since K is a submodule of a free module. and then the image of xu is annihilated by the maximal ideal M* of R*. Let A be a finitely generated Rmodule. write R* = R/(x). C = A / B . In particular we have dR*(K/XK) < w . A a finitely generated nonzero Rmodule with d(A) < m . where R* = R / ( x ) . Since M <(R) we can pick x E M . Thus we assume G(R) > 0 and proceed to treat the case G(A) = 0. f (2) I f d ( A ) > d(B).
Theorem 172. d(B). Let R be a ring with unit and x a central element of R which is a nonzerodivisor. and for a given G(R) we make a secondary induction on G(A). this follows from Lemma 4 on page 182 of [26].124
CH. We may look at K / x K as an R*module.
1966).126
CH. This is a kind of deflation of homological dimension in favor of the “shallower” concept of grade. 4I/HOhfOLOGY
127
=
by Theorem 172. uk) where the elements
form an Rsequence.
Then by our secondary induction
(44)
G(R) = G(A/xA)
+ dR(A/xA)
+ dR(A)
By combining (42)(44) we get G(R) = G(A)
Theorem 173 can be regarded as asserting that when d(A) < a.. . and d(R/J) = k by iterated use of Theorem C. In the transition.1
J is perfect. 9 in $22) that Pp is a maximal prime ideal belonging to Ap. If d(A) is finite then d(A) = G(R) by Theorem 173. So we may start over with R local. We still have (Ex. I its annihilator.1. We switch the problem to Rp. . then any power of I is perfect. e. If G(I) = d(A) we have equality throughout. it is not a new invariant. the proof that follows.
Proof. meaning strictly speaking that R/J is perfect. Let R be any ring and I an ideal in R generated by an Rsequence of length n. As an application of Theorems 173 and 174 we determine the homological dimension in a regular local ring of a prime ideal lying directly beneath the maximal ideal. A a nonzero jinitely generated Rmodule.. we let I be the annihilator of A. We proceed to a second connection between grade and homological dimension. Prove: d(I) = n . We have I C P and so G(r> 5 G(P) Id(A). We say A is perfect if G(I) = d(A). Since x can start an Rsequence on A.G(A). f
rank(P)
0 1 2 3
&RIP) 0 1 2 3
rank(P) 0 1 2 3 4
d(R/P) 0 1 2 or 3 3 4
EXERCISES
1.1 by Theorem 174 (R is Macaulay. except that the “deep” property then becomes whether d(A) is finite or infinite. The remark above proves Theorem 175. We record this along with two extreme cases in Theorem 176.
.1. A perfect module A is gradeunmixed in the sense that all maximal primes o A have grade equal to the grade o the annif f hilator o A. . so grade = rank). An example of a perfect ideal is furnished by J = (al.
Theorem 175. What other perfect ideals are known? A result essentially going back to Macaulay asserts that if I is generated by an Rsequence. Dejnition. we have d(R/P) < n by Theorem 173. we say that
G(A) . Theorem 174 is due to Rees [44]. for we have G(J) = k. to Chase. G may increase and d may decrease. but luckily both work in our favor. Then for any maximal prime P o A we have G(P) f I d(A). In [25] this was generalized to certain ideals generated by monomials in an Rsequence. it is defined in terms of grades by G(R) . If d(A) is infinite.
Theorem 174. M C <(A). Let R be a Noetheriun ring. Let R be ndimensional regular local. We have to prove G(R) 5 d(A). an investigation carried further by Diana Taylor in her thesis (Chicago. Since M Q <(R/P). and P a prime ideal of rank n .. 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. M its maximal ideal. we have (43) G(A/xA)
=
In the important special case where A is cyclic. i. To investigate the situation further. A
R/J. We have d(R/P) 2 n . This motivates the next definition. Let A be a nonzero finitely generated module over a Noetherian ring. we never had a problem. A a nonzero Rmodule and it4 belonging to A.
R) f 0 if and only if i = n. A an Rmodule such that Ext(R/M. 41/HOMOLOGY
129
2. .
. From this and K C MF deduce K = 0. or .) 5 . a.1.k .) 12. or m . 8. for i. Write K* for K intersected with the submodule spanned by u l .. Resolve Z as in Ex.1. (a) Show that for a finitely generated Rmodule A . or co .1. whether computed as a Tmodule or as an Rmodule. Assume that d(A) < m . Prove that T is Rfree. 4/HOMOLOGICAL
ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. and let
by sending ui into a. .aiuj. u. Let R be local.
1

. Let R be a Noetherian ring. . Prove that the a’s form an Rsequence. gkR/M) = 0.1.. (Hint: apply Theorem 174.u. be an Rsequence in a ring R.) 14. Note that fmakes T a n Rmodule. . d(Z) is an integer from 0 to k . (Hint: note that d ( M ) = n . If the injective dimension of R I M is finite. (Hint: this can be reduced to two cases: where T is a homomorphic image of R. . and that dR(T) is finite.) 15. the annihilator I of A satisfies d(1) < m . or . unPl. Let R be a regular local ring. and that some maximal prime P of A satisfies G(P) = k . . Suppose that Ext(A.and that all the integers 0. (Hint: form a minimal resolution 0 K . 2. be an Rsequence and let I = (al. j 5 n . x. We must prove H* = K*. prove that &(A) is their sum. Ext(akA. let G(R) = k. Let R be local with maximal ideal M . we assume this module to be finitely generated. 9. Let R and T be local rings. and let A be a finitely generated nonzero Rmodule. Suppose that T is a finitely generated Rmodule. Prove: d(R/P) = k . . Prove: d(A) = k .) 13. (Hint: apply Theorem 173 to T. (Hint: use Ex. Prove that A is injective.) 16. Hamsher) Let R be an integral domain such that for every finitely generated Rmodule A with d(A) < m .1 and use Theorem 173.). or m . . e (al. . RIM) = 0.128
CH. Resolve Z O+K+F+I+O
f
i
I
1. Let H* be the submodule spanned by u. Prove that R is regular. Prove that A is free.1. 11. Prove: G(M. A ) = 0 for every prime ideal P. Any homomorphism from K to R I M is extendible to F.) 4. A ) = 0 for every maximal ideal M . y)/Q).) 7. Let R be local with G(R) = k.). 7 of $21.) 11. M ) = 1.2.2.

0 .. Assume that T is regular. . . and let P be a prime ideal lying directly beneath M . be elements in the Jacobson radical of R. Let xl. T a Macaulay local ring containing R. note that (x) A Q) is the annihilator of R / ( x ) 0 RIQ). Divide by a maximal Rsequence on A contained in M. . . (Hint: see the appendix to $31. let al. Prove that d(J) < m for every finitely generated ideal J in R..) 10. Prove that K is spanned by the elements uju. (c) Show that for a prime ideal P in R. or where R C T. .
. a. Let R be local with maximal ideal M . note that M C N and that MT contains some power of N . a. Let A be a finitely generated Tmodule (thereby a finitely generated Rmodule).aj
.. The first is immediate. It remains to make an inductive reduction. Let F be a free Rmodule with basis ul. y ) < CO. . RIM) = 0. d(P) = k .) (b) If ddA) and dR(T)are finite.1 are eligible.u p . In an arbitrary ring R let al. d(A)is an integer from 0 to k. (b) Show that for an ideal Z in R. (R.aiuj. Assume that K is spanned by the elements ajui . Let R be a onedimensional Noetherian domain.. Continue stepwise. a. Prove that A is injective.l) implies t c (al. . See [53] for a discussion of the case where T is not local. k are eligible. 6. . This looks after grade 0.second. Do this by verifying K* C H* + a.K* and applying the Nakayama lemma. A an Rmodule such that Ext(R/P.+ F+ A + 0. (Hint: observe that T I N is a direct 5um of a finite number of copies of RIM. (Hint: reduce this to part (a) by using Theorem 173. that T is a finitely generated Rmodule. For any Rmodule A we have Ext(A. . . . For the. and that all the integers 0. . .. Let R C T be local rings with the maximal ideal M of R contained in the maximal ideal N of T. prove that R is regular. (Hint: from the hypotheses one can easily deduce that fa. and that (x)/(x) A Q) E (x. let G(R) = k . . .) 3. Compare Ex. (Hint: to prove d(x. ..fa homomorphism of R into T carrying the maximal ideal M of R into the maximal ideal N of T. Let R be an ndimensional regular local ring with maximal ideal M . 8. For A finitely generated deduce @ A = 0 from Ex. . Let R be a Noetherian ring. . anl). (a) Prove that the grade of A is the same. P not maximal. and let A be a finitely generated Rmodule. d(P) is an integer from 0 to k . Let R be local with maximal ideal M . (Hint: let the injective dimension of R I M be k. and let Z = (al...

Prove that Exti(R/Z.
made important use of earlier work. Now we claim that (4) is prime. For if q is divisible by p z . the elements xu1. Now Qs must contain some principal prime of Rs. this reduces the problem to the case dR(A)= 1.) 18. .
42
UNIQUE FACTORIZATION
We prove in this section that any regular local ring is a UFD. the third of the four proofs just mentioned. E Q. . The theorem has the merit of characterizing UFD’s (even nonNoetherian ones). The key idea is the same as that in (3). and this entails q E Q . and this completes the proof of Theorem 177. in turn. This gives us an equation sa = cq.
(45)
p E . We have thus proved that q is a principal prime. . we can pass to q / p z and we still have q / p . since p . In that case form a minimal resolution O+K+F+A+O over R. xu. The proof I give here was announced at the Varenna conference on rings in August.. Auslander and D. (1) The original proof of Auslander and Buchsbaum [3] which. He makes important use of an idea found
Proof. Let then Q be a nonzero prime ideal in R . Furthermore we can choose a q not divisi6le by any p . that is. argue that x F / x K is a direct summand of K / x K with complementary summand K / x F . The second preliminary theorem might be described as a local characterization of UFD’s. and let S be the multiplicatively closed set they generate. is divisible by q. There is no difficulty in a direct assault: assembling the primes (roughly speaking. since x p M 2 and K C MF.. are linearly independent mod M K . . we have to show that Q contains a principal prime. Hence they can form part of a free basis of K . The first embodies a useful device. It is reproduced by Samuel on page 88 of [45]. If somep.p Z y cq =

Since each p z is prime and does not divide q. we are finished. Then: f RS is i a UFD.. We need two preliminary theorems. and allows zerodivisors in the ring. Write R* = R / ( x ) . Since dR(F*) = 1. . 1965 and is sketched in the notes issued after that conference. where F is free on ul. In Ex. In this way. u. and showing the possibility and uniqueness of factorization. Observe that. let us say. 14 of $31.. Let A be a finitely generated Rmodule annihilated by x (thereby an R*module). 42/UNIQUE
FACTORIZATION
131
17. . We keep dividing by pi's.
0 + K/xFt F/xF+ A +0
splits. We have xF C K . s E S . a procedure that the ascending chain condition on principal ideals will terminate in a finite number of steps. For an integral domain.I
130
CH. (3) A proof that I discovered in early 1960. especially results of Zariski and Nagata. Thus the R*resolution of A
independently by M. We can therefore cancel the pz’s in (45) one after another. But since we have Theorem 5 available. thep. Let R be local with maximal ideal M . The literature contains at least four proofs that may be considered reasonably different. let us use it.
Theorem 177. So we assume the contrary. . and let x be a nonzerodivisor in R that is not contained in M 2 . . till we get a divisible by q. MacRae’s theorem is proved a lot more simply in [31]. so is R. Mumford. p Q. Let ( p i ) be a set of principal primes. 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. (4) The paper [32] of MacRae proves a good deal more.’s together with those of Rs). but it is supplemented by the old trick of adjoining an indeterminate. (Hint: resolve
O + K* + F* + A + 0
with FY free over R*.
. which Nagata introduced in [36]. For suppose ab E (4). We pass to the ring RS and there we find that a. E Q. If dR(A)< a . Give an alternative proof by using Theorem 173 and Theorem B. Let R be an integral domain mtisfving the ascending chain condition on principal ideals. Thus we may normalize q so as not to be divisible by any p . and we do it in a slightly generalized form. We can choose it to be an element q of R.prove that dR*(A) < 03. assume that R is local and that the modules involved have finite projective dimension. it must divide c. and K is free. . (2) The proof that Auslander and Goldman found as a byproduct of their work in [5]. .
The necessity needs little attention.) We shall prove U to be a UFD by verifying that it satisfies the three conditions in Theorem 178. of which the first is obvious and the second standard: any UFD satisfies the ascending chain condition on principal ideals. (3) Every invertible ideal in R is principal. it is standard and easy that then R is a UFD. hence principal by hypothesis. (3) For any prime ideal P of grade one in R. Let R be an integral domain. Now for any maximal ideal M 3 P. We use Theorem 5 .
+.
!
Proof. (3) is covered by Ex. Ifaprojective module A has an FFR. If R is Noetherian we can forget about (1) and (2). for an ideal I to have grade 1 : I must contain a nonzerodivisor a such that I Z(R/(a))*
+
+
c
Theorem 179.
+
A
+ 0
. (This is the only localization of T to which we shall apply our fourth hypothesis. The following three conditions are necessary and suficient for R to be a UFD: ( I ) RM is a UFD for every maximal ideal M . a contradiction. 42/UNIQUE
FACTORIZATION
133
Theorem 178. then every integrally closed Noetherian domain would be a UFD. We abbreviate R[x]to T.
Proof. Now for each maximal ideal M . DeJinition. 4/HOMOLOGICAL
ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. Let S be the set of all finite products of principal primes in T(ac1ually we only need the primes a b x discussed below). Now (2) is obviously transmitted from T to U . It remains to check that UM is a UFD for every maximal ideal M in U . If it were true (of course it is not) that all invertible ideals are principal.a localization of TQ. We claim that P = 0 or has grade 1. (4) In any localization of R[x]all invertible ideals are principal. Necessity. So is TQ. that is. Rp is a localization of RM and is therefore a UFD. 15 in $16. It is also easy (much easier than Hilbert’s basis theorem) that the ascending chain condition on principal ideals is inherited by T. We now present our main characterization of UFD’s. QM maps either into all of RM or into a minimal prime ideal in RM.
Theorem 180. It follows from Theorem 62 that Q is invertible. The remarks made in connection with Theorem 178 need two supplements. The following four con
Comment. Let P = Q n R. We say that a module is FFR if it possesses an FFR. (2) In the polynomial ring R[x] all minimal prime ideals are finitely generated. all we are assuming is that certain invertible ideals are principal. + Fi + Fo . (3) becomes equivalent to integral closure (Theorem 95). RP is a UFD. (2) Every minimal prime ideal in R is finitely generated. Let R be an integral domain.
+
ditions are necessary and suficient f o r R to be a UFD: ( I ) R satisfies the ascending chain condition on principal ideals. then it has a free complement. and therefore take a nonzero prime ideal P and seek to prove that P contains a principal prime. there exists a finitely generated free module G such that A 0 G is free. Now by hypothesis Rp is a UFD. Every localization of a UFD is a UFD (Ex. By Theorem 177 it suffices to prove that TS = U is a UFD. We recall that we have defined what it means.Theorem 179 is proved. Note that M has the form Qs for Q a suitable prime ideal in T disjoint from S. For otherwise P contains an Rsequence a. We introduce finite free resolutions.and U M . if R is a UFD so is R[x]. in a UFD every minimal prime ideal is in fact principal. For this we have some spade work to do. Suppose R satisfies (1)(3).a localization of RP[X].
It still remains to be seen whether Theorem 179 is applicable to regular local rings. So for a Noetherian integrally closed domain. We shall actually prove that R[x]is a UFD. 3 in 514). and (3) is fulfilled by hypothesis.
where each Fi is finitely generated and free. if P Q x ( R / ( a ) )we get the desired b. (Take any a # 0 in P .) But then Q contains the principal prime a b x (Ex.In either case QMis principal. Afinite free resolution (FFR) of a module A is an exact sequence 0 + F. From this we deduce that P contains a minimal prime ideal Q (take one in Rp and transfer it back to R). Suficiency. and develop some material concerning them. 3 in §31). b of length 2.132
CH. even in nonNoetherian rings.
Then the set of modules A @ & where A ranges over allfinitely
Proof. Let R be a Noetherian domain with the property that every finitely generated module has an FFR.
Theorem 186. Proof. and R = T / x . generates the family of all finitely generated Smodules. Thus Rp is a onedimensional regular local ring. x an element in the Jacobson radical of T. if P is a prime ideal of grade 1. K 0 G is free with G free and finitely generated. are isomorphic. Write S for the family generated by the A@RS’S. all modules of finite homological dimension. 42/UNIQUE
FACTORIZATION
135
Proof.
Theorem 184. Since we may assume that the annihilator of SIP in R is 0. if Zl0 . We check off the hypotheses of Theorem 179. Z and . i. e.
. This proof actually yields a more general result. Theorem 181 now looks 4. Then the principal ideal generated by f is isomorphic to S and is of course in S.
By combining Theorem 184 with Theorem ‘178 we can sharpen the result a little.
Theorem 185. Let R be a regular Noetherian domain in which every invertible ideal is principal. all torsion modules over an integral domain. this is clear since projective modules over local rings are free.
In concluding this section we prove a theorem of Samuel. When R is Noetherian we have the further example of all finitely generated modules. Examples of families: all modules. J1. we may speak of the family generated by a set of modules. the present formulation was given by Swan. Then the same is true f o r the polynomial ring R[x]. 7 in $21 it will suffice for us to treat Smodules having the form SIP where P is a prime ideal in S. Z is projective. By Ex. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring with the
property that any finitely generated Rmodule has an FFR. and let S = R[x]. 0 Z and J1 0 . which We states that if R is a regular U F D so is R[[x]]. J1 . then rank(P) = 1 since R is regular and hence Macaulay..
Theorem 181.J . we have that R is an integral domain. The FFR hypothesis is inherited by R[x](Theorem 182) and by its localizations (since localization preserves exact sequences and freedom). Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring. a domain with every invertible
. One sees readily that Theorem 182 is a consequence of Theorem 183.. We sketch a proof due to Bore1 and Serre (Prop. 0 J . Over a regular local ring every finitely generated module has an F F R . and finally the pertinent example of all FFR modules. If an invertible ideal Z in an integral domain has an FFR. . .
Proof. are isomorphic. after () As for (3). in stating it. The Noetherian hypothesis looks after (1) and (2). Then R is a UFD. we find it convenient to introduce the notion of a family of modules: a collection S of modules with the property that when two members of a short exact sequence lie in S so does the third. Since A is projective. 116 of [S]). J. . (46) splits: A 0 K Ei F. in an integral domain. Then
A @ K OG z F O G
proves the theorem. generalize a little.In.. then Z is principal. It follows that the ideal Z is principal. . Now Lemma 1 in [23]asserts that for any ideals Zl.. a DVR. Then R is a UFD.By an induction based on the ascending chain condition we can assume that all Smodules with a nonzero annihilator in R lie in S. so we have Z 0 free = free.
Theorem 183. Thus Theorem 184 is applicable to regular local rings. while P / (f ) has a nonzero annihilator in R and therefore also lies in S. Let f be a polynomial of least degree in P. 8 on p. Let T be an integral domain.


Theorem 182. . . We prove this by induction on the length of the resolution. 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC.
By induction. .134
CH. Say the resolution starts by mapping F onto A with kernel K: (46) O+K+F+A+O
i
generated Rmodules. Since any intersection of families is again a family. then Zl. .
It is a wellknown and easy consequence of x being in the Jacobson radical that such a matrix is invertible. Hence we have :
Theorem 188. We have that P 0 Q = F with F free and finitely generated over T.
a. and R = T / ( x ) . Apply Theorem 185. we must have equality between the rank of P and the rank of P l x P . The first step will be to extend Schanuel’s lemma (Theorem A) to long projective resolutions. Proof.

Proof. Here F/xF is a free Rmodule. and it is understood that all modules are left. and pick ul. e. i. unless every a. For let ul. But since the possibly depressed ranks of P l x P and Q / x Q add up to the dimension of F/xF. to the rank. and have the desired dependence of the u’s over R.. Since N is projective we can lift it to f : N +P. which is the identity mod xF.1+ * + * O+ L + Qn +
* * * *
+Pi + A +0 + Q l + A + 0
Likewise we get g : P’+ N. Assume that x does not lie in the square of any maximal ideal o T . Take P 0 Q = F with F free. By Ex. Suppose given two exact sequences
l
P/xP
Z
N/xN
FIGURE 6
0 + K + P . By the hypothesis the latter is principal. By Theorem 186 every invertible ideal in T is principal (the needed hypothesis A P T = 0 is supplied by Theorem 79). We first investigate more generally the nature of a finitely generated projective Tmodule P . 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC.
I
The hypotheses of Theorem 187 are fulfilled if T = R[[x]]. In matrix terms we have a matrix that is the identity mod x . The same argument. Then P / x P 0 Q / x Q = F/xF. is divisible by x . which equals the dimension of F. We map this equation mod x . Let T be a Noetherian domain.) In the diagram we have a map from N to PIxP. not all 0. prove that P and N are isomorphic. and the hypothesis A P T = 0 guarantees that it ends in a finite number of steps. Now we have a map on F to itself. so is R[[x]]. . We need to prove the products f g and gfto be automorphisms. A an Rmodule. Then every invertible ideal in T is principal. isomorphic to R = T/(x). let x be an element in f the Jacobson radical o T . In particular it is torsionfree and has a welldefined rank.
If R is a regular UFD. f
. + P. where the a’s are elements of T. of course.1 0
* * *
E L 0 P. We continue the procedure. applies to the ranks of Q and Q / x Q .136
CH. Thus P / x P is Rprojective. then P / x P is isomorphic to an invertible ideal in R. so is T . Commutativity is irrelevant for this theorem.
Theorem 187.
Theorem 189. 0
*
. This concludes the proof of Theorem 186. T is regular. 4 in 933. of P .
43 THE EULER CHARACTERISTIC
In this section we shall define the Euler characteristic of an FFR module and study some of its properties. of the same dimension over R as the dimension of F over T . Then
i
t
(47)
K 0 Qn 0 P. We are faced now with the following problem: given that P and N are finitely generated projective modules over T and that P / x P and N / x N are isomorphic. we have that if P is an invertible ideal in T . 43/THE
EULER CHARACTERISTIC
137
ideal in R principal. say k . Suppose further that n x n T = 0. (This part of the argument works with ( x ) generalized to any ideal in the Jacobson radical.1. v k E P mapping on the u’s. We have Za& = 0. Nowf g : P * P is a map that induces the identity on PIxP. and combine f g on P with the
where the P’s and Q’s are projective. Then: ifR is a regular UFD. We claim that this rank is at most equal uk e P / x P .
identity on Q . Let R be any ring. In that case we can cancel x in Zam = 0. Since an invertible ideal is the same thing as a projective module of rank 1. 0
en.. and the rings can be noncommutative.
. Let S be multiplicatively closed in R. On the othef hand. which allows projective modules in the resolutions.
Theorem 191. is the rank of Gi. Then A s is FFR over R s . Then we have the short exact sequences
0 + K O Pi + A + 0 O+Lo+Ql+A+O
+
Theorem 189 tells us that
fn
+ gnl+
fn2
+
* * *
=
gn
+
fni+
gnz
+
* * *
where g . and let S be a multiplicatively closed set in R. s Proof. taking the mapping on Ql to be the identity. Alternatively. f Then every FFR Rmodule is free. Remark. independent of the particular FFR. For this purpose we formulate the next theorem. the direct sums in (47)terminate in Ql and Pi respectively.t K o O Q10
Rs.*. after a suitable decomposition of the ring into a direct sum. Let the ring R be commutative (see Appendix 43(a) for a discussion of the noncommutative case). and A is free. these are annihilated by a nonzero element z. some problems can simply be treated by localization (see Ex. we obtain by localization a precisely analogous FFR of A S over
By Schanuel's lemma. From (51) we see that x ( A ) is indeed an invariant of A . 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
'
'
SEC. 7). and the result is the statement to be proved. the final terms in (49) and (50) may be identified. We now have (49) O+K+Pn+. Hence:
Theorem 190. Let R be a quasilocal ring with maximal ideal M . we can (by inserting harmless zeros) assume it to have the same length:
O + G. which we denote by fi. Let A be an FFR module over the ring R. Minimality tells us that Fz C MFl. It suffices for us to treat a module with a short FFR:
(52)
+f3'
O + Fz + F1+ A + 0
* *

()+f "'n
If we have a second FFR.1
+
* * *
+ GI
+A
+
0
for then we merely iterate this result. Let A be an FFR module with the resolution
Our basic method will be to take advantage of Theorem 190 by forming suitable localizations.+P3+P~O Q i . (48) KO0
Qi
E Lo 0 Pi
Now there is a truncated exact sequence
0 + K+P. If we think of Fl and F2 with fixed bases.. and x(As) = X U ) . a finitely generated projective module has a welldefined constant rank in each summand. We can assume the resolution (52) t o be minimal.i
+
*
+Fi+ A
+
0
The rank of Fi (number of elements in a free basis) is an invariant. Hence zFz = 0. +F. which is possible only if Fz = 0.
O + F.
+
* *
'
+ Pz
+
K + 0 O
It is harmless to add a direct summand Ql to the terms PZ and KO. By hypothesis. Let KObe the kernel of the homomorphism from Pi to A and let Lo be similarly defined. Suppose that every finite subset o M possesses a nonzero annihilator.We define the Euler characteristic x(A) of A to be
x(A) =fi . then only a finite number of elements of M are involved. Given an FFR of an Rmodule
A..f i
Proof.+Q3+QzoP1+LoOP1+0
By (48). It is possible to develop a more general theory. We can now apply induction to the sequences (49) and (50). + G. the Euler characteristic could be allowed to take values in an appropriately defined Grothendieck group. i f n i even they terminate in P1 and Ql.
and in the same way
(50)
o+L+Qn+.138
CH. 43/THE
EULER CHARACTERBTIC
139
Here. This can be done by using the theorem that. i f n is odd.
We first prove a preliminary result. If x(A) = 0. .. 43/THE
EULER CHARACTERISTIC
141
Remarks. As we noted above.
Theorems 194 and 195 were implicit in the discussion to be found in [2].
!
:
I
Proof.
Theorem 196. Thus I p = 0. is a nonzero free module. Let A be an FFR module with x(A) # 0. and each Pi is the annihilator of a nonzero element. Let R be a Noetherian ring. The conclusion now follows from the preceding theorem.
Proof. whence x(Ap) L 0.. we have x(A) 2 0. then by Theorem 8 1.
We observe that the last sentence in Theorem 196 is obtained by nating that R/J is FFR and that its annihilator is J. Theorem 191. Then either I = 0 or I contains a nonzerodivisor. 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. the following corollary of these two theorems was given explicitly.

Theorem 195. For R Noetherian we are simply saying (Theorem 82) that M consists of zerodivisors. We see this by picking bases for Fl. . Fz. Let P be a typical minimal prime ideal in R. Let R be a Noetherian ring. In particular. A an FFR module with annihilator I. The ring Rp is quasilocal with a nil maximal ideal. from x(A) # 0 we conclude that each A p . = 0. f the ideal J in R is an FFR module. P. Let A be a finitely generated module and let
I be its annihilator.
Theorem 193. We make use of this in proving the next theorem. We can offer three pieces of evidence on the affirmative side. Let R be a Noetherian ring. The first is that for a module A with a short resolution
0 + Fz + F1+ A
+0
Proof. be the maximal primes of 0 in R. Hence Ips = 0 for all i. A p is a free Rpmodule. i. Now we can apply Theorem 193. A an FFR module with annihilator I. we deduce AP. We proceed as in the last theorem. of prime ideals. This being true for every P..
Theorem 1%. Let P be a minimal prime ideal in R. 2. If this is true for every i. The module A is fully determined by the resulting matrix.V P. x(A) = ~ ( A P )By .is free. It seems conceivable that Theorems 194 and 195 are actually valid verbatim without the Noetherian hypothesis. Then A is faithful. we deduce that I is nil. The ring Ro is Noetherian. This yields x e P. By Theorem 190. Let I be the annihilator of A . Then Api = 0 f o r all i f and only i f Z contains a noni zerodivisor. 1 .
L
Proof. In view of x(A) = x(Api) = 0. then either J = 0 or J coni tains a nonzerodivisor. We drop down to the subring ROgenerated by the entries of the matrix. Hence(Theorem 191) AP. and its annihilator is 0. Let I be the annihilator of A .. I contains a nonzerodivisor. The conclusion that J contains a nonzerodivisor tells us that I must be 0. then I contains a nonzerodivisor. . Then <(R) = PI U U P . the hypothesis of Theorem 191 is fulfilled if M is nil. with I and J playing the roles of A and I respectively. the maximal ideal consists of zerodivisors. For any FFR module A over a commutative ring R.
both theorems hold. e.
Theorem 197. I Q Pi. Then the annihilator of A is nil. I C P. The statement APi = 0 is equivalent to the annihilation of A by an element not in Pi. It follows readily that in RP..
Proof.
.
The major theorems of this section are Theorems 194 and 195 below. In the ring R assume <(R) is a finite union Pl U
. and J the annihilator of I(in R). where a weaker conclusion than that of Theorem 195 is derived without chain conditions. Whether or not R is Noetherian. A an FFR module satisfying x(A) # 0. A p is free. The second piece of evidence is the following theorem. necessarily nonzero. . we have sx = 0 for s p P. and we readily see that the problem can be switched to Ro. This time.
Theorem 192. For every x e I .140
CH. Let P1.
We insert at this point an interesting theorem due to Vasconcelos [52].. and ri : Fi + Fiis multiplication by y . Then I can be generated by an Rsequence. Our final theorem in this section is a generalization of the commutative case of a theorem of Swan [49] (see Appendix 43(a) for the noncommutative case). cannot be omitted in the theorem: take I = M in a nonregular local ring.y l .

a. g =fi fi +fn.
+
FIGURE 7
where a. =fi fo. Define go =h. . y.as indicated. we obviously have that M / M 2 is free over the field RIM..
Theorem 199. . In Fig. so as to satisfy so = 0 and
(53)
sif.
Theorem 198. we deduce a e I.bly. which we leave to the reader. For if M is the maximal ideal. bi e R and z e XI. . The converse is also true.If y e ( x ) nJ we get an equation
Proof.
+fi+ls. note that by strengthening the hypothesis x(A) # 0 to the assumption that x ( A ) is a nonzerodivisor in R. as required. the
i
.
Proof. Hence d(M) < m implies that M can be generated by an Rsequence.142
CH. we quote Theorem E to get dR*(Z/xZ)< a. We need ( x ) r\ J = XI. 4/HOMOLOGICAL
ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. as required. Evidently ( x ) J = I . Then ax .. . we prove the following theorem. .
Remarks. Let y be an element in the annihilator of A .M I contains a nonzerodivisor x .+l = ri
( i = 0. and that dR*(Z*) is finite. yk map into a free (R/I)basis of Z / Z 2 . Then by Theorem 196. Let I be an ideal in a Iccal ring R. The theorem concerns what‘we might call “partial” Euler characteristics. For any FFR module A with annihilator I we have x(A)I = 0. Theorem 199 gives us a fresh proof that a local ring of finite global dimension is regular. yk). It will therefore suffice to see that I / ( x ) is a direct summand of I/xZ. 13 in $31 and Ex. Assume that d(Z) is finite and that Z/Z2 is a free (R/I)module. For the second. It is possible (see p. The first of these is a routine verification.
2. The plan of the proof is to pass to the ideal I* = Z/(x) in the ring R* = R / ( x ) and use induction. 1. We see also from this that the condition d(Z) < a.bkyk E 1 ’ Since the elements x. 43/THE
EULER CHARACTERISTIC
143
Lastly. . so that y E X I . due to Stallings [48].
We now admit the possibility that the resolution never terminates. whence (Theorem 160) R is regular. yl. I contains a nonzerodivisor. 81 of Ill]) to construct contracting homotopies si. We dismiss the case I = 0. 7. In comparing it with Theorem 195. . See Ex.
*
)
We take the trace of the endomorphisms in (53) and then form the alternating sum. All terms on the left side cancel in pairs and we get x(A)y = 0. . The element x can be completed to a set x . we get the desired conclusion I = 0. We have two things to verify: that Z*/(Z*)2 is a free R*/I*module.yk of elements of I that map into a free basis of the free (R/I)module Z / P . Note that the diagram commutes. Let A be a module admitting a resolution by finitely generated free modules:
vertical map A + A is 0.. gl 2 Write fiagain for the rank of Fi. . 1 in $41. and in general
. Let J = ( X I . 1. . By Theorem 83 we can sharpen this to the statement that I . ..
. The annihilator of A is the augmentation ideal IG (the set of all elements Zn.ba. On the other hand... 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
145
Of course the g’s are not at all invariant. Hence
(1) The first question that arises when we generalize to a noncommutative ring R is the invariance of the number of basis elements in a free Rmodule.
THE NONCOMMUTATIVE CASE
1
i
1
Theorem 200.. We could transact some business without IBN (for example in the Grothendieck style) but we shall take the easy way out and assume IBN outright. Hence
We shall sketch the definition and properties of the Fitting invariants. taken over all resolutions. Let F be a free Rmodule with basis u1. asserting the positivity of the Euler characteristic. (Let C be the set of all sums of additive commutators ab . Let R be any ring and let A be a finitely generated Rmodule. and enlarge Fl by throwing in superfluous generators. fails in the noncommutative case. 2 hnl+
An2
+
* *
a
Think of the Hresolution as fixed. . it is reasonable that there is a lower bound forfl fo. one would takefo large. Pick generators al.) In Stallings’s application. and let T be the natural mapping R + R/C.l elements. (2) Theorem 192.
IJ
+
+. By the long Schanuel lemma (Theorem 189) we have
f
Now K can be generated by f. there is no upper bound forfl fo (or if we used fofi. as easy examples show. but it is plausible that this would force us to take fi correspondingly large. Dejine x.. Then the right side of (55) provides us with a fixed lower bound to the variable expression on the left. and in fact xo(A) is simply the smallest number of elements that can generate A . Let K denote the kernel of FnPl+ FnP2. negative In and numerically large). . and A is Z . (3) Stallings’s result (Theorem 198) survives in the form x(A)T(y) = 0 where y is a central element in the annihilator of A . has rank f. There is a lower bound forfo. Resolve A :
O+K+F+A+O
. But if we define x.*
Proof. an attempt to make it very small (that is.
APPENDIX 43(b)..144
CH. an for A . R is the integral group ring ZG of a group G.
APPENDIX 43(a)
. Then x ( A ) is well defined for any FFR module. and exhibit an extension of Theorems 19496 in which the exact value of the Euler characteristic plays a role.. while the Fresolution is variable.: we can generate A extravagantly by an arbitrarily large number of elements. then G has no finite conjugate classes # 1.(A) = inf g. Similarly. . As regards xo. Then Xn(A) > . = 0). A general ring R need not satisfy IBN. Let A be an Rmodule admitting a resolution (54) by jinitely generated free modules. and T is the trace that is definable in an arbitrary ring R. (4) Swan’s result (Theorem 200) works in the noncommutative case provided we strengthen IBN to the following statement: a free Rmodule on n basis elements cannot be spanned by fewer than n elements (see [ 141for a full discussion of these two conditions and a still stronger IBN). is defined in this way (by inf rather than sup). and we deduce
(55)
f n fn1+
fn2
THE FITTING INVARIANTS
+
* *
. elements. . there would be no lower bound): we can hold Fofixed.Given a second resolution by modules Hi. . Make R / C into an additive group. . We make a comment on why x.(A) as above. The free module FnP10 Hn2 and cannot be generated by fewer 0 . we are able to prove the result stated in Theorem 200. made into a module by having G act trivially. One concludes easily: if A is FFR. Call this condition IBN.g. u. we note that there is no upper bound forf. in ZG with Zn.. let L be the kernel of Hnl HA.
. with those obtained when an additional generator b is added.m. We do not discuss the virtually trivial “only if” part. More generally.. we could equally well restrict ourselves to a set of rows spanning K. a. . . Prove: x(Z) = 1 .. . .k subdeterminants of the matrices (ctj). a. We define the first Fitting invariant Fl(A) of A to be the ideal in R generated by all n X n determinants whose rows are elements of K .. . We have that A is FFR with x(A) = n . But this is a contradiction. . In detail: we form matrices (c. n 2 m. for each integer k from 1 to n. .
.146
CH. clnuneK.+l(A) is the ideal generated by the m X m subdeterminants. Fl(A) is closely connected with the annihilator J of A : it is easily seen that Jn C Fl C J. 1
Routine facts about determinants then show that the F’s are the same for both generating sets of A . Prove x(B) = x(A) Generalize to long exact sequences. In all three. . strictly speaking. . since F. Let A be an FFR module over a Noetherian ring. for each i. bl. Then Fk(A) = 0 for k 5 m and Fk(A) contains a nonzerodivisor for k > m. 4/HOMOLOGICAL
ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. We can maintain the point of view of annihilators by switching to the invariants proposed by Auslander and Buchsbaum in [4]: the annihilators of the exterior powers of A . together with the one additional relation
We close by noting that there is a connection between the above theorem and a theorem of McCoy. It is clear that instead of using all possible rows of K. for k > n. Fk(As)= Fk(A)s. Then as a spanning set of relations on al. It suffices to compare the F’s obtained from the generating set al. with the big set al.
The next three exercises are the analogues.
This theorem is. then K ( A ) = 0 for k 5 m and Fk(A)= R if k > m. t n . . I. for FFR modules. 4. since we have replaced the annihilator of A by the (slightly different) first Fitting invariant of A . and let Fl(A) be the ideal generated by the determinants I ci. and R* = R/(x). +
+
+
McCoy’s Theorem. F. This says that the m columns of the coefficient matrix are linearly independent. and suppose that x(A) = m. of the three change of ring theorems of [26]. b.. By the previous theorem. For them the theorem under discussion is likewise true. Finally. b = 0..a.. If A is an FFR Rmodule and x is a nonzerodivisor on A . .. into a. prove that A is an FFR Rmodule.) where. Let there be given n linear homogeneous equations in m variables over a ring R.m+l(A) contains a nonzerodivisor. define Fk(A)to be the ideal generated by all n 1 . If A is an FFR R*module. a. since we may drop down to the subring generated over the integers by the finite number of elements involved. In proving the ‘‘if’’ part we may assume that R is Noetherian.... Since Euler characteristics are nonnegative. See [I71 for a thorough study of McCoy’s theorem in the language of multilinear algebra. . We may take them as the relations for a module A with n generators. cllul . . 43/THE
EULER CHARACTERISTIC
147
by sending u. Further facts we need are: (1) the Fitting invariants behave perfectly under localization. R is not necessarily commutative. . a.
be an exact sequence of FFR modules. x is a central nonzerodivisor. b.k X n 1 . that is. We outline the proof that the F’s are indeed invariant. . b. Then the methods of Theorems 19495 lead to the following result.. augmented with a zero at the end.( 2 ) if A is free on m generators. Let O+A+B+C+O
Theorem.
EXERCISES
1. . 2. we can take a spanning set on al. for by successive steps of this kind we can compare two generating sets al.. . . not a generalization of Theorems 19495. t.. . . Let I # 0 be an FFR ideal. . 3. . Now assume there is no nontrivial solution. prove that A / x A is an FFR R*module. x ( R / I ) = 0.
+. . .
+ x(C). Then there is a nontrivial solution f i and only if there exists a nonzero element of R annihilating all m x m subdeterminants of the matrix of coefficients.
+
+
+ 
tl.. Fk(A)is defined to be R. a. and bl. Suppose tlal .
7. We first summarize the relevant definitions and record two theorems which we shall use.. .
Theorem G. Pick bases in F and G. and E. (Hint: localize. Suppose that for every maximal ideal M . . Prove that r is a multiple of s. id(C) are jnite. The following result is Theorem 19 in Part I11 of [26]. the law of diminishing returns sets in.148
CH. . so is the third. Ext(@A. Let R be a Noetherian ring with no idempotents other than 0 and 1... then id(C) = id(B) 1.) (b) Suppose given elements r. uai = dib. 6. s E R such that rdi E (s) for all i and r is a nonzerodivisor. With b = Ztiai. .
We proceed to prove three theorems concerning change of rings for injective dimension.1 generators respectively. . Use Theorem 196 to deduce that the annihilator of A / x A in R* must be 0. ( 2 ) Ifid(A) > id(B). Z = eR with e an idempotent). Let C be a submodule of A and write B = A / C . 4/HOMOLOGICAL
ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. x in the Jacobson radical. The following theorem is the injective dual of Theorem B. .)
with Q injective is a short injective resolution of A .
+
Toward the end of the proof of Theorem 202. (Hint: with R* = R / ( x ) we have &*(A/xA) < by Theorem D.
@
. then A is FFR over R. prove that if A / x A is FFR over R*. Pass to the ring R/(s) and use McCoy’s theorem to get a nontrivial solution of the resulting h e a r equations. Modules A and B are injectively equivalent if there exist injective modules P and Q such that A @ P is isomorphic to B @ Q. Prove that Z is a M direct summand of R (that is. and the method comes from the paper [50] of Towber. Assume . use Theorem 196. By a determinant argument.) 6. . to achieve a contradiction. Prove that A = t(dl. Our notation for it is id(A) or idR(A). B ) = 0 f and only i ifExt(A. Let R be local and A a finitely generated faithful Rmodule with d(A) < a . be the minors of order n . Let d. . Let Z be a finitely generated ideal in a ring R..1.) 9. (Note: the following companion statement does not seem to yield to these methods.?(A) C z(R). From that point on. Before proving the first we need a preliminary theorem. . id(B). A module is injective if it is a direct summand of any module containing it. Suppose that x E R is a nonzerodivisor on both R and A . then id(C) 5 id(A)+ 1. We drop the ring subscript when there is no danger of ambiguity. . The injective equivalence class of L does not depend on the resolution and is denoted by $A. ( I ) I f two of the dimensions id(A). Prove that the annihilator of A / x A is (x). any y in R annihilating A / x A has a power yn divisible by x . Let A be a finitely generated Rmodule with d(A) < a. Let R be any Noetherian ring and let A be an Rmodule with a resolution
1
44
CHANGE OF RINGS FOR INJECTIVE DIMENSION
In this section we turn to the study of injective dimension. we shall do so freely. then id(C) = id(A).) (c) Assume that A is an ideal in R. (a) Prove that A is moduleisomorphic to the ideal ( d l . d.. Z M is either all of R or 0. This exercise is taken from the paper [lo] of Burch.
Theorem F. a. be the indicated generators of A . An exact sequence O+A+Q+L+O
O+G+F+A+O
where F and G are free on n. (Hint: note that s must also be a nonzerodivisor. and then use Ex. and use the fact that we have all relations on al. (Hint: let al. Argue indirectly. d. . . ( 4 ) I f i d ( A ) = id(B).) for some nonzerodivisor t. a. then A is FFR over R.1 matrix. With the ring R left Noetherian. thereby getting an n X n . and A a finitely generated Rmodule on which x is a nonzerodivisor. . and it becomes economical to use the Ext machinery. 44/CHANGE
OF RINGS FOR INJECTIVE DIMENSION
149
5.).. Verify diaj = djai by elementary linear algebra. g B ) = 0. For any modules A and B. They are the injective duals of Theorems C. D. and we write Ext for Ext’ where appropriate. (Hint: combine parts (a) and (b). Its dual proof is left to the reader. d. . Prove that the annihilator of A is either zero or contains a nonzerodivisor. Move the result back to R. Injective dimension is now defined in precisely the same way as homological (or projective) dimension. . Observe that there is a nonzero divisor u = 2tidi. n .) 8. and we leave it as an open question: if A / x A is FFR over R. (3) Zfid(A) < id(B).
R*/Z* E R/Z. and write R* = R/(x). idR(A) 5 1 and achieve the contradiction that A is R*injective. A ) = 0. It suffices to verify ExtRI(R*/I*.) Let R be any ring (not necessarily commutative). We are to prove that A is a direct summand of E. We argue by induction on n.. A ) + Exth*((x)/xZ. A ) = 0. We can derive (Theorem 16 [26]) ExtR*(I/xZ.150
CH.
+
Proof. A ) = 0. We attack the problem directly by proving that the extensions in question split. Hence e e A . The right member vanishes since idR*(A)= 1. But x is a nonzerodivisor on E/A. we may look at A as a submodule of E/xE. except that when n = 1 we only get the inequality idR(A) 3 2. Next we prove that ExtR*(Z/xZ.+C+O
be an exact sequence. Let x be a central nonzerodivisor in R. A ) = 0. and write R* = R/(x). S A ) = 0 holds since idR(A) P 1. Form an R*injective resolution of A :
O+A+Q+D+O
Proof. and we have seen that this suffices to finish the proof of Theorem 202. e E E. The proof of Theorem 202 can now be quickly concluded by an application of the homology sequence for Ext. for if a E A n xE. Let R be any ring (not necessarily commutative). So it suffices to prove idR(A) P 1. so that idR(D) = n by induction. Let A be an Rmodule which is injective as an R*module. Induction on n works quite simply. A ) = 0 for any left ideal I* in R*. By Theorem G it is equivalent to prove Ext(@B. In view of A A xE = 0. So we let
O+A + E . ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. and this is compatible with xA = 0 only if A = 0. Then the image of a in E/A is 0. A ) = 0. The homomorphism from R to T enables us to look at A as an Rmodule. As such (since A is R*injective). Let A be a left Tmodule.1. We have finished the case n = 0. From Theorem 201 we deduce ExtR(@B. This requires us to prove that g A is injective. A ) . Let R and T be rings and let a ring homomorphism R + T be given. Since I* has the form I/(x) with Z a left ideal in R containing x. Let x be a central nonzerodivisor in R. 5 on page 360 of [I 13. Take a free resolution of Z over R:
+
Theorem 202. In view of the exact sequence o+++o 1 (4 1 xz xz ( x ) we have
(56)
+
Remark. This appears as the second part of Ex. for which we need to know that Ext(B. Then: ExtR(C. From this it is routine to see that A is a direct summand of E. Now any module representing RB is a submodule of a projective Rmodule. and so it is equivalent to check EXtR*(R/I.A ) = 0 implies that any homomorphism from K into A can be extended to F. 4 A ) = 0 for every Rmodule B. A ) + Exti*(Z/(x). and
Exti*(Z/xZ. Also idR(Q)= 1. it is a direct summand. Since x A = 0. and begin by treating the case n = 0. Let A be a nonzero R*module with idR*(A)= n < a.
O+K+F+Z+O Note that since x c <Z. this is exactly the same as saying that any homomorphism from K/xK can be extended to F/xF.A ) = 0. a e x A = 0. it would be divisible by x (any homomorphism from (x) into A could be extended to R). We first note that A is not Rinjective. Let C be an Rmodule with x # <(C). Hence the middle member vanishes. A ) = 0 for such an I. Hence ExtR(@R/I. except when we run into the “ambiguous” case at n = 1. For if it were. and we have idR(A) P idT(A) (weak right dimension of T over R). 44/CHANGE
OF RINGS FOR INJECTIVE DIMENSION
151
Theorem 201. A proof of the exercise can be given by an appropriate extension of the idea in Theorem 201. To complete the proof we assume idR*(A)= 1. We note that A r\ xE = 0.
We have idR*(D)= n . 4/HOMOLOGICAL. ExtR(Z. There is an inequality that is valid under very general circumstances. write a = xe. we have an induced free resolution of Z/xZ () over R*: 0 + K/xK +F/xF +Z/xZ + 0 ExtR(Z. By Theorem F we conclude idR(A)= n 1.
. (First theorem on injective change of rings. Then idR(A) = n I . Here in place of R/Z we can take the isomorphic module (x)/xZ. To do this we begin by noting that ExtR(R/I.A ) = 0. e. i.
We have just proved that the left member of (56) vanishes.
so has the property that x is not a zerodivisor on it.
D) 5 n . Then:
except when A is Rinjective (in which case A the composite map C + A extends to g : D + A since A is Rinjective.1. We may assume idR(A) = n with 1 5 n < OD. the image of g has to lie in B. The proof is exactly dual to that of Theorem D. An attractive proof of (59) can be based on the exact sequence
0 3.Q in .1 and 6. . In thediagram. we derive idR*(. Proof. Here . as an (R/I)module.A
. rem 203.1 by Theorem 204. If n = 0. (What we have just done amounts to a part of the snake diagram mentioned below. but we give it for completeness. Our real objective is Theorem 205. Assume idR(A) = n < 03. Then xq lies in the kernel A . The exactness of (58) is routine except for the verification that Q + D is onto.1 is a consequence of (59).
. Then: idR*(J) 6 idR(A). idR*(A/xA) 5 n . Since Q is R*injective by Theo. a proof of (59) will suffice. by x. since Q = xQ. Then. We claim that
(59)
. So let d e D satisfy xd = 0.
Theorem 205. q1 + d.D.la on page 30 of [ll]. and make an injective resolution of A :
(57)
Since idR*(.)
From this we get the exact sequence
Theorem 203.152
CH. We have .1. idR&D) 5 n .a. 44/CHANGE
OF RINGS FOR INJECTIVE DIMENSION
153
We proceed to dualize Theorem D. Perform the injective resolution (57). there is nothing to prove. B is injective. we must extendfto D. We make an induction on n. But since D is annihilated by I . Since A = x A we can write xq = xa with a E A. Write R* = R / ( x ) .DO
obtained from the snake diagram. By induction. as required. Proof. but we prove it by first proving the dual version given by Theorem 204. This induces an isomorphism of A / x A into D and the image is a complementary direct summand of E. from (57). Write R* = R/(x). Let R be a (not necessarily commutative) ring and x a central nonzerodivisor in R. For any a E A we can write a = xq (q E Q). Note that the dual of Theorem 203 is the assertion that A / I A is projective if A is projective.Q
f
. If idR(A) = m. and let B be the submodule of A annihilared by I.
.
‘%/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. then send q into its image in D. D
.
=
xA). X D = D since xQ = Q. some q E Q mapping into d. Let I be a twosided ideal in a (not necessarily commutative) ring R. We thereupon correct q to q1 = q . and’. To test R/Iinjectivity of B. Theorem 203 is a preliminary one that will also be used below in proving Theorem 207.Q is R*injective by Theorem 203. = 0 since x f! <(A). Thus. let A be an injective Rmodule. We sketch a direct alternative discussion. Assume n > 0.) Now idR(D) = n . and let A be the submodule of A annihilated . Let E be the image of . D
+
A / x A + Q/xQ
+
D/xD
+
0
O+A+Q. we quote Theorem 203. so that idR(D) = n .
the subscript x preceding each module denoting passage to the submodule annihilated by x. and have xql = 0.) Let R be a (not necessarily commutative) ring and x a central element in R. Furthermore. . Let A be an Rmodule satisfying A = x A .1. we take R/Imodules C C D and a homomorphism f : C + B .
Proof. Q/xQ A = 0 since Q is injective and x <(R). Let A be an Rmodule and suppose x is a nonzerodivisor on both R and A . (Second theorem on injective change of rings. We deduce (59).A) 5 n from (58). There are in fact two duals. (Compare Propositions 6.Q 0 A / x A
Theorem 204.
xB = 0. then idR*(A/XA) is finite by Theorem 205. B) Ext. shows that idR(A) and idR(A/xA) are equal. B )
0 +A + A
+ A / x A + 0
where the x above the arrow identifies the map as multiplication by x . we derive
z
(60)
Extl(B.
+
Proof. Then the second and fourth terms of (60) vanish. A ) z Ext. B). Special arguments are needed for n = 0.1. B) Ext.J) (See [39] for more on theorems of this type. assume idR(A) In . and x is a nonzerodivisor in R with xA = A . If B is finitely generated. Then idR(A) = idR(A/xA).A. With R .(B. (Hint: deduce this from Theorem C just as Theorem 205 was deduced from Theorem 204. A ) = 0.t*(B. and write R* = R / ( x ) .154
CH.1 < a. We rely therefore on the alternative method outlined on p. 44/CHANGE
OF RINGS FOR INJECTIVE DIMENSION
155
For Theorem 206 we do not have an analogue of the method used in proving Theorem E. We deduce idR(A/xA) 6 n . Ext”. 3.*(A/xA. Ext. x . By (60) and the Nakayama lemma.) Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring. Theorem 202 then yields the final statement of the theorem.B. 1. R* = R / ( x ) . A / x A ) z . B) z Ext. f idR(A) = 1 idR*(A/XA).i’(. I further x p <(R). (Third theorem on injective change of rings. Assume idR(A/xA) = n . Note: this identity (for n = 1) can replace the portion of the argument in Theorem 202 that deduced ExtR*(I/xI.l(B. R* = R/(x). so is Ext. A ) + Extl(B. A ) = 0. Use Rees’s theorem to give a brief proof of Theorem 205. Prove the following dual of Rees’s theorem: with the notation of Ex. the facts follow from the identification with grade to be given in Theorem 214. The following theorem was proved by Rees in [43]: if x is a central element in R. then idR(A/xA) = a as we have just seen. then
Theorem 206.f*(A/xA. then dR&A) = &(A) . and x is a nonzerodivisor on both R and A .) 4. A is an Rmodule that is not projective.. together with the result in the preceding paragraph. Conversely.(A. 2 Exti(A.) Now assume x e <(R) as well. A = x A and x B = 0. If idR(A)= a. Prove the following fourth version of the second change of rings theorem: if x is a central element in R. A ) = 0 from EXtR(I.
(Hint: one method is to use a short free resolution O+K+F+A+O and the induced resolution 0 + K/xK
+ F/xF + A / x A + 0
Assuming the result for n . Then by Theorem 202. B ) = ExtXK/xK. When the injective dimensions occurring in Theorem 206 are finite.Then the second to last term of (60) vanishes. (Note: the reasoning in this paragraph can be replaced by a reference to the injective dual of Theorem B. Let A be a finitely generated nonzero Rmodule with x p <(A).’(K.) 2. we think it useful to give both proofs.1 . R* as usual. and this forces us to assume that the underlying ring is commutative. A and B are Rmodules. A / x A )
f
Ex@’(& A )
where B is any Rmodule.If idR(A) = is finite. Hence the third vanishes as well. A). idR*(A/xA) a. B)SExt.l(B.) However. so this reasoning is not circular. B ) Ext. x an element in the Jacobson radical o f R.1. This.
i
EXERCISES
1. The knowledge that this holds for every finitely generated B is sufficient for us to conclude idR(A) In . A ) iExtli’(B.)
.1. (The proof of Theorem 214 will not use Theorem 206. Prove the two remaining duals of the Rees theorem. 4/HOMOLOGICAL
ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. we have Extl(A. From the exact sequence
z
Ext. Remark. A ) + Extl(B. 179 of [26].1 .
Let x be a nonunit not contained in P. By the essentiality of E over A.
Theorem 207.
F IGURE 8 Q in Figure 8 exists since Q is injective. and C is an essential extension of B. B E = Q.Q / B is essential over A. To see this.) be a chain of modules lying between modules A and C. Proofs that are not routine are sketched. We say that B is an essential extension of A if for any nonzero submodule of S of B. first instance we assume the module to be injective. In Figure 9 for any f: B + A the dotted map g exists since A is injective. By (9. see also pages 1023 of [30]. as such. i. e. To see this. we treat E as a submodule of Q/B. (6) Let A C Q be modules with Q injective. A). Its kernel is 0 by the essentiality of Q / B over E. suppose R is zerodimensional. The map from Q / B to
(7) Thus any module admits an essential injective extension. The base ring is allowed to be noncommutative. B is R*injective. Hom(B. then x is a nonzerodivisor on B. The image is thus a direct summand of El. If each B. Hence. Then E is a direct summand of Q. B is an essential extension of A. and therefore is injective. 4/HOMOLOGICAL
ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
1
L
SEC. C / B is essential over A. We claim that A E(R/M) is finitely generated. Take such a prime ideal P. while if Q = M . Let R be a local ring. (1) Let A C B be modules. We claim that for some prime ideal P different from the maximal ideal. any RIP admits a homomorphism onto R I M .156
CH..
. We proceed to the uniqueness. Our notation will be E(A). then C is an essential extension of A. Evidently B = E(R*/M*)
=
. Hence we may regard the chain of modules A C E C Q / B as being placed inside Q. If Q # M . and Q is the direct sum of E and B. 4S/GORENSTEIN
RINGS
157
1
45 GORENSTEIN RINGS
We begin this section with a summary of essential extensions and injective envelopes. (2) If A C B C C. R admits a jhitely generated nonzero injective module if and only if R is zerodimensional.
’
Proof. as required. a theory due to Eckmann and Schopf [16].1/’
A
F IGURE 9
+
Conversely. we are done. Then A may be regarded as a submodule of C / B . By Theorem 203. A) = 0 by the Nakayama lemma. we prove this by induction on n. If hP = 0. Then any essential extension of A within C can be enlarged to a maximal essential extension of A. a contradiction. (3) Let { B. (8) Let E and El be essential injective extensions of A. note that the map A + El can be extended to E since El is injective. The uniqueness justifies our calling an essential injective extension of A an injective envelope of A. and must be all of El since El is essential over A. the extended map has kernel 0. Suppose A # 0 is finitely generated and injective. (5) Let A be a submodule of C and let B be a submodule of C maximal with respect to disjointness from A. R I P admits a nonzero homomorphism into A. and Hom(B.The maximality of E therefore forces Q / B = E. supposing dim(R) 2 1 . We proceed to the study of local rings which admit a nonzero finitely generated module of finite injective dimension. We make an indirect proof. and write B = R/P. so is U B . which is the identity on A. where R* = R/WI. From (3) we deduce: (4) Let A C C be modules. I n the. and let E be an intermediate module that is a maximal essential extension of A. is an essential extension of A. In fact. Then there exists an isomorphism of E onto El. A) = x Hom(B. For we know that A contains a submodule isomorphic to R / Q for some prime ideal Q. S A A # 0. any submodule B of Q that is maximal with respect to disjointness from E forms a complementary summand. Let B be the submodule of A annihilated by Mn’. .
Assume Exti(R/M. . Proof. Hence so is MA. A) = 0 we deduce that any homomorphism from K to A can be extended to F. Then x z <(B) and the exact sequence
2
0
B+B+
B/xB+O
induces
z
(61)
Ext%(B. and A another Rmodule. In the homomorphism A + x i A CB . let A be afinitely generated Rmodule. From Theorem 209 and the Nakayama lemma we deduce at once:
Theorem 213. 7 in $21) we deduce that Exti(C. Write B = R/P. + Extl(B. Ext$(B. A) = 0. 7 in $21 to the module B/xB. By induction. x). There exists a finitely generated Rmodule B with d(B) = n. Z noting that the modules that occur in the resulting series are of the form R/Q with Q a prime ideal properly containing P. . Let R be local with maximal ideal M . not necessarily finitely generated. be a set of generators of M. x. possibly this will be useful in future investigations. and let A be a finitely generated nonzero Rmodule. Let
O+C.+ D + D/C+O be an exact sequence o Rmodules. . so that K C MF and K is free and nonzero. Let R be local with maximal ideal M . 4/HOMOLOGICAL
ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
where M* is the maximal ideal of R*. Then: A = MA. Theorem 209. A)
Theorem 210.A) + Extk+'(D/C. Then: id(A) 1 G(R). Then: A = MA. Theorem 208. and this implies id(A) < n. By the Nakayama lemma. Form a minimal resolution
t
L
SEC. We quote Theorem 208. Proof. By iterated use of Theorem 21 1 we get that Exti(R/P. B is finitely generated. Let R be local with maximal ideal M . A) = 0. . A) = 0 for every finitely generated Rmodule C. then Extk(C. From this (Ex.A obtained by mapping a E A into the mple xla. . . Then d(mc"'B) = 1. Let R be local with maximal ideal M. Pick x in M but not in P. and let P be a prime ideal diflerent from M. Assume that Ext+'(R/Q. Then: Exta(R/P. Theorem 21 2. CB x. Let A be an Rmodule.
O+K+F+
B+O
of B. Since id(A) < n we have Ext(mn'B. A)
Now B/xB G R/(P. 45/GORENSTEIN
RINGS
159
!
Theorem 211. Let R be local with maximal ideal M .158
CH. hence A = MA. The next theorem is a simple property of Ext. Then: id(A) < n. x. This is immediate from the exact sequence Extk(D. Let G(R) = n. In the next two theorems we allow the module A to be nonfinitelygenerated . A). Proof. A) = 0 and Extk+'(D/C. Let A be a finitely generated Rmodule. and let n be an integer L 1. From Ext(B.a. A) +Extk(C.. not necessarily finitely generated. Any element of A is eligible to be in the range of such a homomorphism. A) = Ofor all i >= n. A) = 0. . since MA C B. By the "additivity" of the vanishing of Ext. for instance we may take R divided by an Rsequence of length n.
Our first main objective is Theorem 214. we will need three preliminary theorems.A) = 0.. satisfying Ext(B. Proof. Now let x l . Assume id(A) < G(R). the image is finitely generated and the kernel is isomorphic to R I M (since A is essential over RIM). . Let B be a finitely generated Rmodule satisfying d(B) = I. and let A be an Rmodule. we deduce that the last term of (61) vanishes. Hence A is finitely generated. A) = 0 for every prime ideal P. valid over arbitrary rings. I for f f some integer k we have Extk(D. Proof. it is explicitly recorded for the reader's convenience. A) = 0.
. A) = 0 for every prime ideal Q properly containing P. We apply Ex. A) + Extz+'(B/xB. A) = 0.
Then: Extr(B. R* is Gorenstein. . However. Since G(B) = 0. Theorem 210 gives us id(A) 2 n and it remains to prove id(A) I Assume on the contrary that id(A) = k > n. A ) = 0. . . Since Exti(C. Then.G(B). i..A ) = 0. Let A and B be finitely generated nomzero Rmodules with id(A) < m .
Proof. Assume G(B) 5 n. Then id(A) = G(R). we have idR(K) < m . Suppose. By Theorem 214. G(R) = n. the conclusion is immediate. of contradiction. We argue by induction on n. since id(A) = n by Theorem 214. . A ) + Extr+'(B. A ) also vanishes for i > k . There exists in M a nonzerodivisor x. x. A ) = 0 for r > n . We proceed by induction on G(B).
Proof.
D
=
R/(xi. and (as we noted in the proof of Theorem 215). since finitely generated free Rmodules have finite injective dimension. By Theorem 213. We have Extk+'(D/C. idR8(K/xK)< 0 3 . n. . We shall see in a moment (Theorem 219) that the hypothesis G(B) 6 n is redundant. Let xl. A and
Remark. Then A has finite projective dimension f and only f i i it has finite injective dimension.. Let R be local with maximal ideal M and let A be a nonZerofinitelygeneratedRmodule with id(A) < m . since G(B/xB) = G(B) . Since idR(F) < m . R* is a Gorenstein ring. Exti(R/M. R E E(R/M).G(B). A ) We have Ext+'(B/xB. 4/HOMOLOGICtU ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. If G(B) = 0. e. A ) = 0 from (62) and the Nakayama lemma.. k
Definition.
Proof.160
CH. with k replaced we get Extn(R/M.1. isomorphic copy by n and D by B.1 and ( r 1) G(B/xB) > n. If n = 0.). Pick x p <(R). This is the first time in the present section that we have made use of the change of rings theorems of 544. A ) = 0 by induction. x..2 in [29]. By induction R* is Macaulay. A local ring R is called a Gorenstein ring if id(R) <
Theorem 215. Then R is injective and we quote Theorem 207. an obvious induction on d(A) shows that id(A) < m . By Theorem 205.
Since M C <(D ) we have that R I M is isomorphic to a submodule C of D. the proof of Theorem 219 uses Theorem 2 18. One easily sees that any finitely generated injective Rmodule is a direct sum of copies of E(R/M). A a finitely generated Rmodule. A ) = 0 since d(D) = n and k > n. Write R* = R / ( x ) . we have d w ( K / x K ) < a. Furthermore. A ) = 0 since id(A) = k. (As a matter of fact. Thus Theorems 207214 could have preceded 544. 4S/GORENSTEIN RINGS
161
Theorem 214.
Theorem 216. and set r = n . n.
+ +
Theorem 218. Let G(R) = n. Since G(R*) is smaller than n.
*
2
0 + B + B + B / x B + 0
n = 0. So we assume n > 0. First assume G(B) = 0.
Theorem 217. by Theorem E. Suppose id(A) < 03. A local Gorenstein ring R is Macaulay. Remark. by way that Extr(B. A ) # 0. B contains an (say C ) of RIM. and by Theorem 156. dR(K) < a. From Theorem 213.
we get the exact sequence
2
(62) Extr(B. and write
R are injective. A ) + Extr+'(B/xB. Furthermore.and dR(A)< 00 is a consequence.) Hence A is free. A and B be as in Theorem 217. Then. Let R be a local ring with G(R) = n. A ) + Extr(B. we deduce from Theorem 212 the contradiction id(A) I . We make an induction on n = G(R). Suppose d(A) < a. Then Extr(B.
m
. By Theorem 205. Let id(R) = n. We form the resolution O+K+F+A+O
with F free. and write R* = R/(x). From the exact sequence
Proof. idR8(R*)< m . Let R be a local Gorenstein ring. Extk(C. The next result is Theorem 2. n > 0. R is Macaulay. be a maximal Rsequence in R. A ) = 0. A ) = 0 for i > n
. Let R.
Proof. We have Extk(D. . then (Theorem 215 or 207) R is zerodimensional. We deduce Extr(B. Assume G(B) > 0 and take x t! <(B).
By Theorem 218. and so what we have done is to "factor" that implication into two parts of independent interest. R is Macaulay. S a multiplicatively closed set in R. These facts. Then any finitely generated nonzero Rmodule B has grade at most G(R). l(a) in $33.
Theorem 219. (b) If A is finitely presented. A )
2 Hom(C. Then. and Ext'(C/xC. A ) # 0. Furthermore. 1. (Note: the converse also is true. However. indeed any injective Rsmodule is also Rinjective. 4. prove that Extn(R/M. G(C/xC) = n .) 10. where n = G(R). by dividing B by a suitable Rsequence. A ) # 0. A ) # 0. A ) + Extl(C/xC. and these implications cannot be reversed. prove that Extz(R/M. A ) = 0 by Theorem 217 (with r = 1 and B replaced by C/xC).
= )
+
OtK+F+A+O with F free and finitely generated. Prove that R is a Gorenstein ring. and that Exta(R/M. Prove that R is Gorenstein. Then Theorem 212 gives us the contradiction id(A) < n. If id(M) < 00 prove that R is regular. Then. Applying our induction to B/xB we get Extr+l(B/xB. yield Ext'(B. the exact injective analogue of Theorem 196. I. Extr+'(B.)
I
I
i
.
+
Hom(C. and came up in the proofs of Theorems 215 and 216. prove that id(A) S n. 8. (a) If A is finitely generated. We now exhibit a chain of five successive statements that can be made about a local ring R. Also noteworthy is their proof that if id(A) < m then the annihilator of A is zero or contains a nonzerodivisor. We assume G(B) > 0 and proceed by induction on G(B). A ) # 0. you can reduce successively down to the case where M is principal. Suppose that R is Noetherian. A ) Ext%+'(R/M. Construct a natural map f from (HomR(A. R is regular. We have I I1 and I1 3 111. If xr. R admits a finitely generated nonzero module with finite injective dimension. R is Gorenstein. Let R be any ring. IV => V by Theorem 219. 5. (Hint: for x c M 2 use the fact that M / ( x ) ts a direct summand of M / x M to make a reduction to Rl(x). by Theorem 217. 11. for if J is an ideal generated by a maximal Rsequence in R. (A module A is finitely presented if it is finitely generated. Prove that A s is Rsinjective for any multiplicatively closed set S.) 6. In [29] Levin and Vasconcelos prove IV I11 for rings of grade 1. This contradicts the Nakayama lemma. V. Suppose the contrary. 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC. If id(A) = n. Bs). IV. A ) # 0. Examples can be found in which property V holds but not IV. Let B be a finitely generated Rmodule.162
CH. 4S/GORENSTEIN
RINGS
163
since id(A) = n by Theorem 214. with x f.?"'R). Assume that id(A) = k < m .) 7. R) vanishes for k 1 consecutive values of i. Hence Hom(C. Let R be a local ring that admits a nonzero finitely generated module A with finite injective dimension. and that A is an injective Rmodule. Note that I11 3 V follows from Ex. with C/xC playing the role of B. Note that by Schanuel's lemma this does not depend on the choice of the resolution. in conjunction with (62). 9. A ) = 0 for all i 2 n. R is local with maximal ideal M . A )
is exact. (Remark: it is furthermore true that A s is Rinjective. B))s to HomR. we need only take a nonzero finitely generated injective (R/J)module (Theorems 207 and 202). prove that f is onto. 22 in $31. I11 * IV. The grade of any finitely generated module is at most G(R). prove that R is Gorenstein if R/(x) is Gorenstein. prove that f is onetoone. If Extt(M. and when it is resolved
+
Proof.?(C). A and B Rmodules. A). (Hint: Extt(M. If id(A) = 0 0 . A ) # 0. Note that this is an improvement on Ex.) 2. A ) = 0. we have Hom(C/xC. and A is a finitely generated Rmodule. then K is finitely generated. we can reach a module C with G(C) = n 1. A ) # 0 for infinitely many i. (Hint: by dividing by an element x that is not a zerodivisor and not in M 2 . Suppose that M can be generated by 1 G(R) elements. Prove that G(B) equals the largest integer m such that Extk"(B. Let x be a nonzerodivisor on B.) 3 . 111. Suppose R is kdimensional.(As.
EXERCISES
In exercises 18.
Pick c c B mapping on the numerator of c*. Prove that for any multiplicatively closed set S. Ext&l(M/xM.C Bnl C B n = B
We shall prove that the vector space B. and use Ex. For we have ( A . Let B. 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC.1 . In the zerodimensional case the decisive argument is given in Theorem 220.+') is annihilated by M .) 17. prove that R/(x) is Gorenstein. We denote by El the submodule of E annihilated by M and note that El is isomorphic to R I M (since E is an injective envelope of R I M ) . We insert the'intermediate submodules
0 C B1 C B 2
C
* *
. is paired to MaA/M+'A in nonsingular fashion. 17 in $41 itself by the method of the preceding exercise. A) = 0 for large n. By the dual Rees theorem of Ex. 17 in $41. let x be a nonzerodivisor not contained in M2. Then B also has j k i t e length.) Hence Ext:r'(R*/M*. let E denote an injective envelope of RIM. (b) If x c M A and (x. B.For suppose on the contrary that x p M + ' A . we have to prove that A S meets the submodule spanned by c*. then x E M a f l A .
Proof. Let R be Noetherian. (Hint: localize an essential injective resolution of A. let A be an Rmodule of pnite length. this will evidently prove that the length of B is finite and equal to the length of A . 18. But M/xM E M* 0 R*/M*. prove that R s is Gorenstein. Prove that Rp is Gorenstein. It is routine to proceed from Theorem 220 to the full duality of modules of finite length (see Ex. 1). Let x* denote the image of x in MA/Ma+'A. and A an Rmodule such that AM is RMinjective for every maximal ideal M. Prove that A is injective. Let R be Noetherian. (b) R is Gorenstein and has Krull dimension n. RP) = 0. Write R* = R/(x). say d. y ) = 0. We obtain in this way a pairing of MzA/M%+'Aand B. and let A C B be Rmodules with B an essential extension of A.+' and (MA. R ) is either R or has rank 2 n. we shall use the inner product notation (a. (Hint: for P a prime ideal with rank ( P ) < n. Suppose that R is Noetherian. Prove that for any n. Prove: if idR(A)< a. 2 in $44) and Ex. we have MnA = 0 for some power Mn.
DUALITY
165
1 1 . the annihilator J of Ext"(A.(M. (This exercise is the injective dual of Ex. with maximal annihilator.) 16. b) to denote the value of the homomorphism b at the element a. If R is Gorenstein and x is a nonzerodivisor in R.164
CH. and A a finitely generated Rmodule. M y ) = 0 and hence M y = 0. (Hint: given a nonzero element c* in Bs. Use the fact that A n Rd # 0. This is equivalent to Extn(Ap.. where M* is the maximal ideal of R* (see the proof of Theorem 13 [26].+'/B. and let P be a prime ideal in R.+l) = 0. Use Theorem 212. Let R be a Gorenstein ring. If R is Gorenstein and S multiplicatively closed. 3 in $44. 12. (a) If y c B.
. and that R/(x) is Gorenstein. B. Let R be a Gorenstein local ring. and its length is equal to that of A . (Hint: we have Ext. (Hint: use the Rees theorem (Ex.. it suffices to prove J (L P .) Let R be local with maximal ideal M .then idR*(A>< 03. Prove that the following statements are equivalent: (a) id(R) = n < 03. Bs is an essential extension of A S .) 19.
46
DUALITY
We define a global Gorenstein ring R by the assumptions that R is Noetherian and that the localization R M is Gorenstein for any maximal ideal M. Treat Ex. E).)
In this section we shall show that for dimension 5 1 the Gorenstein property is equivalent to an appropriately formulated duality. and write B = Homx(A. 14. A) = 0. The module B is likewise annihilated by M". then y e B.3 Mn'A 3 MnA = 0
Each quotient M A / M + ' A is a finitedimensional vector space over the field R I M .+l/B. 2 in $4. To emphasize the potential du_ality between A and B.
Theorem 220. pick one. We insert between A and 0 the chain of submodules
A 3 MA 3 M2A3 *
*
. Since A has finite length. that x is a nonzerodivisor in the Jacobsoil radical of R. 13. A) = 0 for large n. Among all elements sc(s e S). 15.) 20. Let R be a Noetherian ring. and let A be a finitely generated Rmodule annihilated by x . Prove that R is Gorenstein. 15. In order to see that this pairing is nonsingular we have two things to prove. be the submodule of B annihilated by Mz. We have that ( M A . Let R be local with maximal ideal M .
166
CH. 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
SEC.
46/DUmIn
167
note that Mx* = 0. We can start a homomorphism of M I A / M i f l Ainto E by sending x* into a nonzero element of El, and then we can extend by the injectivity of E. In this way we get a homomorphism of MIA into E that annihilates Mi+‘A but not x , a contradiction to ( x , Bi+J = 0. This concludes the proof of Theorem 220.
Theorem 221. Let R be a zerodimensional local ring with maximal i i ideal M . Then R is Gorenstein f and only f the annihilator of M is onedimensional (as a vector space over RIM).
Proof. Suppose that R is Gorenstein, and that consequently R is injective as an Rmodule. Let Z denote the annihilator of M , let Zo be a onedimensional subspace of I , and let J be an injective envelope of I, within R. Then J is a direct summand of R. Since R is local, this entails J = R. Hence R is an essential extension of lo,and therefore I must coincide with I,,. Conversely, suppose that I is onedimensional. We note that every nonzero ideal of R contains a nonzero element annihilated by M , and hence contains I . Let E be an injective envelope of I. The isomorphism of I into E extends to a homomorphism of R into E which, by what we have just remarked, is necessarily onetoone. By Theorem 220, R and E have the same length. Hence R E and R is injective, as required.
or G closed if it is equal to its double prime, and we observe that priming sets up a onetoone correspondence between the closed submodules of F and those of G. In the present context we can define a pure submodule of F or G to be one such that the quotient module is torsionfree. One can easily see that for any A , A’ is pure. Furthermore, any pure submodule is closed, as follows from the fact that a finitely generated torsionfree module admits a complete set of homomorphisms into R. Thus we can restate the remarks of the preceding paragraph as follows: priming induces a onetoone correspondence between the pure submodules of F and those of G. For any submodule of A of F, A’ is, by definition, the module of all homomorphisms from F to R that vanish on A . In other words, A’ g (F/A)*. To complete the usual picture of duality, we would like to identify A* with G / A ’ . W w by restricting homomorphisms F + R to A we get a mapping from G into A*. The kernel is precisely A’. Thus, G/A’ is isomorphic to a submodule of A*, n’amely the submodule consisting of all homomorphisms from A to R that are extendible to F. In Theorem 222 we shall, for onedimensional local Gorenstein domains, supply the crucial point that these homomorphisms extend.
Theorem 222. Let R be a onedimensional local domain. The following three statements are equivalent: ( a ) R is Gorenstein, ( b ) all Jinitely generated torsionfree Rmodules are reflexive, (c)for any nonzero ideal I in R, = I.
Remark. In the literature zerodimensional Gorenstein rings are usually called quasiFrobenius, and the noncommutative generalization has been thoroughly studied.
We proceed, in Theorem 222, to a characterization of onedimensional local Gorenstein domains. As a prelude, it will be useful to discuss duality for an arbitrary integral domain R. Given any Rmodule A , we think of Hom(A, R) as a dual of A , and write A* for it. There is a natural homomorphism from A to A**, and we call A reflexive if this homomorphism is both onetoone and onto. Let F be a free Rmodule on a finite number of basis elements. We write G for Fr to emphasize the potentially symmetric roles of F and G, and we use an inner product notation cf,g ) for the value of g at f . This is equally well the value off at g, for F is in a natural way G*. For any submodule A of F we write A’ for the set of all g in G with ( A , g ) = 0. A similar definition is made for submodules of G . As usual in such a setup, we have A C A”, A’ = A”‘. We call a submodule of F
Proof. (a) implies (b). We continue the discussion of duality where it left off above. Let B be a finitely generated torsionfree module. We resolve O+A+F+B+O and use F for the free module of the above discussion. Note that A is a pure submodule of F and thus is closed ( A = A”). Since idR(R) = 1, and B can be embedded into a free. module, we have Ext(B, R) = 0, which says that every homomorphism from A to R can be extended to F. This supplies what was needed above in order to see that A* Z G/A’. Now recall that we saw that A’ (F/A)* = B* holds for any integral domain. Apply what was proved in the preceding paragraph to get (A’)* Z ,/A” = F / A = B. This proves the required reflexivity of B. (b) implies (c). For a nonzero ideal I we have I* = Hom(Z, R ) I’. (c) implies (a). Let M be the maximal ideal of R. We first show that
168
CH. 4/HOMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RING THEORY
M’/R, which can be regarded as a vector space over RIM, is onedimensional. Otherwise there would exist a (fractional) ideal J lying properly between R and Ml. Take inverses in the inclusions R C J C MI, obtaining R 3 Jl 3 M.Hence Jl = R or M. On taking the inverse again, we find J = R or Ml, contradiction. a Now pick x to be an element of R, not 0 or a unit. It suffices for us to prove that R/(x) is Gorenstein. Let I be the set of ally with My C ( x ) . By Theorem 221, our task is to prove that I / ( x ) is a onedimensional vector space over RIM. We observe that I = xMl. Since xM‘/(x) M‘/R, the proof is finished.
Theorem 222 can be improved. It is valid for R Noetherian (that is, not necessarily local). With suitable precautions, zerodivisors can be allowed. Moreover, hypothesis (b) or (c) implies that R is at most onedimensional. For these results and others, and for the historical background, Bass’s paper [7] should be consulted. Many aspects are pushed further in the paper [34] of Matlis.
Notes
Page 7. There are indeed further restrictions on the partially ordered set of prime ideals of a ring. It is helpful to view this question in conjunction with the standard topology that is placed on the set of prime ideals, making it a topological space called Spec. For a thorough study see M. Hochster, “Prime ideal structure in commutative rings,” Trans. Amer. Math. SOC.142(1969), 4360. Two of Hochster’s results are noteworthy assertions which do not refer to the topology. (1) Any finite partially ordered set is eligible to be the partially ordered set of prime ideals of a ring. (2) If a partially ordered set P is eligible, so is the one obtained from P by reversing its order. The list of four properties which hold in the Noetherian case can also be substantially enlarged. Probably the augmented list will in turn soon be obsolete. Page 54. The paper of Eisenbud referred to at the end of Exercise 15 has appeared : “Subrings of Artinian and Noetherian rings”, Math. Annalen 185(1970), 247249. Page 66. McAdam’s paper (Exercises 29 and 30) has appeared: “Primes and annihilators,” Bull. Amer. Math. SOC.76( 1970), 92. Section 31 (pages 84104). This section should be amplified by including a treatment of Macaulay modules. Here is a sketch. First let R be Noetherian, P a prime ideal in R, and A a faithful finitely generated Rmodule satisfying PA # A ; then G(P, A ) is at most the little rank of P. This generalizes Theorem 138, and the proof needs only small changes. With R local, call a finitely generated Rmodule A Macaulay if G(A) equals the dimension of R/(annihilator of A). If R admits a faithful Macaulay module, we deduce the saturated chain condition on the prime ideals of R.
169
EXERCISES
I . Let R be a local ring with maximal ideal M , and let E be an injective envelope of RIM. Let A be an Rmodule of finite length, and let B be its dual Hom(A, E). Prove that A is in a natural way the dual of B. Let C be any submodule of A , and C’ its annihilator in B. Prove that this mapping sets up a onetoone correspondence between all submodules of A and all submodulesbf B, and that C and B/C’ are duals of each other. 2. Let R be a local Macaulay ring. Prove that the following statements are equivalent: (a) R is Gorenstein, (b) for any maximal Rsequence xl,, ., x,, the annihilator of M in R/(x,, . ., x,) is one. . dimensional. (Hint: use Ex. 24 in 531.) 3. Let R be a local onedimensional Gorenstein domain. Let I and J be ideals in R with I 3 J. Prove that I/J and Jl/I’ have the same length. 4. Let R be a twodimensional regular local ring, and let x and y be y”), a minimal basis for the maximal ideal M . Let T = R/(x2, and let N be the maximal ideal of T. Prove that T is Gorenstein. Prove further that N4 = 0 and that the vector spaces T / N , N / N 2 ,N 2 / N 3 ,and N 3 have dimensions 1, 2, 2, 1.
170
NOTES
Here is an instructive example. Let T be the ring of all formal power series in two variables over a field, R the subring of those power series with no linear terms. Then R is a twodimensional local domain of grade 1, while Tis an Rmodule of grade 2. Thus R admits a faithful Macaulay module but is not Macaulay. Page 110. An attractive alternative proof of Theorem 152 is provided by the lemma on page 240 of Volume I of [54]. Pages 127 and 135. Rather abruptly, on both of these pages, the finiteness of the global dimension of a regular local ring is used without explanation. Reference: Theorem 12 on page 183 of [26]. Page 134, sixth line from the bottom. The assertion that FFR modules form a family is a bit abrupt. One way to prove this is to follow the plan of the proof of Theorem B. Pages 140141. The hope that Theorems 194 and 195 might survive without the Noetherian hypothesis was promptly fulfilled in a paper by Vasconcelos : ‘‘Annihilators of modules with a finite free resolution”, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 29(1971), 440442. However, the conclusion in Theorem 194 that I contains a nonzerodivisor must (as an example shows) be weakened to the statement that the annihilator of I is 0.
1. E. ARTIN J. T. TATE, “A note on finite ring extensions,” J. of Math. and SOC.o f J a p m 3(1951), 7477. 2. M. AUSLANDER and D. BUCHSBAUM, “Codimension and multiplicity,” Ann. of Math. 68(1958), 625657. 3. “Unique factorization in regular local rings,” Proc. Nut. Acad. , Sci. U.S.A. 45(1959), 733734. 4. “Invariant factors and two criteria for projectivity of modules,” , Trans. Amer. Math. SOC.104(1962), 516522. 5. M. AUSLANDER and 0. GOLDMAN, “Maximal orders,” Trans. Amer. Math. SOC.97(1960), 124. 6. H. BASS, “Injective dimension in Noetherian rings,” Trans. Amer. SOC.102(1962), 1829. 7.  “On the ubiquity of Gorenstein rings,” Math. Zeit. 82(1963), , 828. 8. A. BOREL and J.P. SERRE, “Le thiorkme de RiemannRoch,” Bull. SOC. Math. France 86(1958), 97136. 9. N. BOURBAKI, Algt?bre Commutative, Paris: Hermann, 196165. 10. L. BURCH, ‘‘On ideals of fin& homological dimension in local rings,” 64(1968), 941948. Proc. Camb. Phil. SOC. 11. H. CARTAN S. EILENBERG, Homological Algebra, Princeton: Princeand ton University Press, 1956. 12. I. S. COHEN, “Rings with restricted minimum condition,” Duke Math. J. 17(1950), 2742. 13. I. S . COHEN and A. SEIDENBERG, “Prime ideals and integral dependence,” Bull. Amer. Math. SOC.52(1946), 252261. 14. P. M. COHN, ‘‘Some remarks on the invariant basis property,” Topology 5(1966), 21 5228. 15.  “Bizout rings and their subrings.” Proc. Cumb. Phil. SOC. , 64(1968), 251264. 16. B. ECKMANN and A. SCHOPF, “Uber injektive Moduln,” Arch. Math. 4(1953), 7578.
171
Bibliography
t
I
I
1
299309. W.I72
J. J. Bras. 83(1921). Amer..” Of Alg. 39(1967). 54( 1951). 19(1966). Kingston. Phil. 52.14(1963). R. SOC. ‘‘Complete reducibility in exterior algebras over free IT modules. 44. . 32. Zntroduction to Algebraic Geometry. SOC. Vol. “Divisibility properties of integral functions. 25(1968). 29.” An. Math. HELMER. “Extensions of Macaulay rings. M. A. of Chicago Press. 35. 1960. SOC. 34.” Proc. 124. 6(1940).122(1966). 54(1951). ‘‘On the dimension theory of rings. Lon. Amer. 53. “Idealtheorie in Ringbereichen. 20. ‘‘On the homological dimension of certain ideals. H. Phil. KAPLANSKY.” Nagoya Math. ‘‘A remark on the unique factorization theorem. Paris: Hermann. “A note on finite unions of ideals and subgroups. Japan 9(1957). 23. ZARISKI P. 0. . . Math. Columbus.” Proc. SAMUEL. 52(1956). 1969. GOLDMAN. 38. 129134. J. Hilbertscher Nullstellensatz. 1957.” J. New York: Interscience.” Math. J. 31. OHM.” Duke Math.130(1968). SOC. “Two classical theorems of ideal theory. P. SOC. of Alg. D. . S.” Trans. 27. 45. 46. M. of Math.” P ~ cJ. MANN. “Families of finite character and essential valuations. “Extensions and simplifications of the and theory of regular local rings. McCoy. 33. Z. 24.‘‘On an application of the Fitting invariants. Camb. 26. SEIDENBERG. GILMER.” Pac. 8(1968). 367374. New York: Springer. 2842. B.an algebraic formulation of Gottlieb’s theorem. 7585.
42. Ontario. OWBER. 31 5323. Ann. 354387. 6( 1967). FLANDERS. Ohio.” Topology 4(1965). 195199. 25. G. REES. SOC.” Topology 4(1965). 47. 36. JR. J. 40. 54. of Alg. 133. 483488. Camb. Commutative Algebra. 1968. VASCONCELOS.” Proc. R. I. . D. 1963. Phil.72(1952). “A note on the dimension theory of rings.” Pac. 30. 3(1953). 345356. 11.” Proc. 43. NORTHCOTT D. 51. 49. 505512. L. 39. NORTHCOIT. . 0. SWAN. MACRAE. 28.” Math. I. KRULL.” J. GRIFFIN. 605610. J. D. Phil. ‘‘Minimal resolutions for finite groups. 746750.” Trans.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
173
17. Van and Nostrand. da Acad. Math. R. 10(1968). of Alg. 37. “Systems of linear equations and exterior powers. 20(1962). LEVINand W. Math.” Trans. ..‘‘A theorem of homological algebra. Sao Paulo. VAN DER WAERDEN. “Ideals generated by Rsequences. 7(1967). . 153169. 19. 11. 136140. Math. “Simple reduction theorems for extension and torsion functors. 327340. 2114. 2. 12. B. 633637. J.“Rsequences and homological dimension. 18. SOC. Vol.. 48. Math. . N. Math. Mathematics no. Local Rings. 21.” J. . “Jacobsonsche Ringe. SOC.52( 1956).57(1961). 41. Dimensionstheorie. W. Moderne Algebra. SOC. VASCONCELOS. 0 . 2466. STALLINGS. MATLIS. . E. H. W. Zntroduction to Algebraic Number Theory. G.32(1957).” Proc. 53(1957). J. . 143145. Amer. Homology. Camb. Math. “Modules over Dedekind rings and valuation rings. Numerous editions and English translation.” J. 8(1957). “Centerless groups . An Introduction to Differential Algebra. 1955. ‘‘Homological dimensions and Macaulay rings. Amer. 50. SOC. Chicago: Univ. 11. 603614. “Hilbert rings and the Hilbert Nullstellensatz. NAGATA. ‘‘The pseudoradical of a commutative ring. 4(1954). Camb.” Proc.” Math. Math. New York : Interscience. New York: D. 193208. . 1963. SAMUEL. 22. ‘‘Some counterexamples related to integral closure in D[[X]].
~
.‘‘The grade of an ideal or module. . MAC LANE.’’ Pac. 3093 16. SOC. 275284. 155157.Multiplicative Ideal Theory. Math. REES. vol. Fields and Rings. 1958. 1962. LANG. 321333. of Alg. NOETHER. H. .” J. Queen’s University Papers on .” J. 1958. Anneaux Factoriels. S. Amer. E. ‘‘Reflexive domains. 2(1965).
quasilocal principal Invertible. 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63
18 18 18 19 23 24 25 25 26 26 28 28 29 29 29 30 31 31 32 32 33 33 34 34 35 35 36 36 37 37 37 38 38 38 39 39
Index
THEOREM
1 2 3 4
5
OF
Theorems
BRIEF DESCRIPTION
PAGE
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
174
1 2 3 3 4 4
5 5
6 6 6 9 10 10 10 11 11 12 13 14 14 14 15 15 16 17 17 17
Exclusion of multiplicatively closed set Complement of union of prime ideals Uniqueness of prime factorization Products of primes are saturated Characterization of UFD Maximal annihilator is prime Maximal nonfinitelygenerated ideal is prime Primes finitely generated Noetherian Union and intersection of primes Existence of minimal primes Next neighboring primes Characterization of integral Sum and product are integral Integral elements form a subring U P integral over R o ul E R[u] Field integral over R + R field When a ring is a finitely generated module Two definitions of Gdomain Three forms of K = R[u'I Intermediate ring a Gdomain R[x] never a Gdomain Stability of Gdomain property R[u] a Gdomain* R a Gdomain and u algebraic Gdomain o existence of a maximal contracting to 0 Nilradical = n of Gideals Radical of I = r\ of Gideals containing I I is a Gideal o Z is contraction of a maximal ideal Structure of a maximal ideal
*
*
64 65
66
*
40
. finite number of maximal ideals* principal Preservation of invertibility under localization Local characterization of invertibility Quasilocal BCzout domains are valuation Local characterization of Priifer Priifer intermediate valuation domains are localizations Valuation domains inside K(x)
29 30 31 32. a radical ideal = n of maximals R is Hilbert o R[x] is Two versions of the Nullstellensatz Primes in R and Rs Special case of R p Primes in R[x] contracting to 0 No chain of 3 primes in R[x] with same contraction Rank of primes in R[x] Improvement of Theorem 38 for Srings Integral property is transitive Characterization of G U G U implies LO Characterization of INC Integral GU and INC INC ranks decrease GU =) existence of a prime over P with rank >= rank(P) GU.SNC 3 preservation of dimension Properties of a GCDdomain GCD domain is integrally closed Preservation of integral closure under localization Intersections are integrally closed Representation of R as n R p Characterization of integral closure Survival of an ideal in R[u] or R[u'] Existence of a valuation domain in which an ideal survives An integrally closed domain is an intersection of valuation domains Invertible 3 finitely generated Invertible.INDEX OF THEOREMS
175
THEOREM
PAGE
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Improvement of Theorem 28 when field is algebraically closed In a Hilbert ring. INC 3 equality of coranks GU.
P ranging over rank1 primes Intersection of a finite number of localizations
THEOREM 106 107 108
PAGE 77 78 79
*
56 56 57 57 57 58 59 59 60 60 61 61 67 67 67 68 69 70 70 71 72 76 76 77
1
. Lifting Macaulay mod a nonzerodivisor 100 141 Principal ideal theorem 104 142 105 Lemma for the principal ideal theorem 143 Existence of infinitely many intermediate primes 107 144 Lemma for Theorem 146 107 145 Determination of Noetherian Gdomains 107 146 Determination of Noetherian Hilbert rings 108 147 108109 Ranks of prime ideals in a . R = n R p .&4) is a finite union of primes S C union of ideals.'136 Unmixedness in a Macaulay ring 97 137 Grade 5 little rank 99 138 Localization of Macaulay is Macaulay 100 139 Local Macaulay global Macaulay 100 140 . A ) 89 122 Local finiteness of n R p 90 123 Avoiding a union of prime ideals with a specified 90 124 element Global unmixednesi 91 125 Preliminaries for Theorem 129 9293 1268 Local unmixedness 93 129 Grade unmixedness 94 130 Comparison of rank of P and its image in R/(x) 94 131 Grade S rank 95 432 Behavior of grade under localization 9596 1135 Grade = rank in a Macaulay ring 97 . u or ul lies in R Valuation ring is strong S Hilbert basis theorem Power series ring case R principal ideal domain R[[x]] UFD Krull intersection theorem Theorems connected with the Krull intersection theorem Nakayama lemma Noetherian .Noetherian polynomial 1489 ring A maximal ideal in R[x] cannot consist of zero109 150 divisors Stability of Macaulay for polynomial rings 109 151 Generalized principal ideal theorem 110 152
~
*
. nonzerodivisors are units Lemma for Theorem 93 Rings between a 1dimensional Noetherian domain and its quotient field Z grade 1 properly contains R Characterization of DVR Characterization of Dedekind ring A Dedekind ring has unique factorization of ideals Preservation of Dedekind property Descent for valuation domains Integral closure need not be a finitely generated module Stability of Priifer Ring of all algebraic integers is BCzout In integrally closed Noetheriah domain. 79 78 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105
PAGE 40 41 47 48 48 49 5051 51 55
55
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Under suitable hypotheses on u and R. any per86 119 mutation of an Rsequence is an Rsequence Partial ideals of an Rsequence form an ascending 87 8120 chain Maximal Rsequences have the same length 87 121 Can enlarge Z to P .176
INDEX OF THEOREMS
INDEX OF THEOREMS
I77 BRIEF DESCRIPTION
THEOREM
67 68 69 701 72 734 757. maintaining G(Z. all but 2 prime+ S C one of them Existence of an annihilator for an ideal of zerodivisors Sharpening of Theorem 81 Minimal primes consist of zerodivisors Localization of Noetherian is Noetherian Noetherian improvement on Theorem 84 ACC on radical ideals=+ finite intersection of primes ACC on radical ideals* finite number of minimal primes Characterization of 0dimensional rings Characterization of 1dimensional domains In a 0dimensional ring.
1
*
Lemma for Theorem 107 Intersection of a finite number of valuation domains Divisibility of powers in a quasilocal onedimensional domain Intersection of two quasilocal onedimensional 79 109 domains Properties of locally finite intersections of quasilocal 7981 1104 domains Technicalities on Rsequences 8586 1158 With Noetherian and radical assumptions. grade 1=+ rank 1 In integrally closed Noetherian domain.
invertibles principal + UFD Lemma for Theorem 187 Stability of regular U F D Long Schanuel lemma Localization of FFR modules Grade 0 =) FFR modules free Nonnegativity of Euler characteristic Theorems on the annihilator of an FFR module Characterization of ideals generated by Rsequences Finiteness of partial Euler characteristics Lemma for Theorem 202 First injective change of rings
THEOREM 203 204 205 206 207 2089 210 2113 214 215 216 2178 219 220 221 222
PAGE 152 152 153 154 157 158 158 159 160 160 160 161 162 165 166 167
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Injective modules over a quotient ring Dual of second projective change of rings Second injective change of rings Third injective change of rings Only 0dimensional rings admit finitely generated injectives Lemmas for Theorem 210 Injective dimension is at least the grade of the ring Theorems preliminary to Theorem 214 Injective dimension equals grade of the ring Gorenstein Macaulay In a Gorenstein ring. finiteness of projective dimension coincides with finiteness of injective dimension Characterization of grade by vanishing of Ext Existence of module with finite injective dimension grades bounded by grade of ring Duality of modules of finite length Characterization of 0dimensional Gorenstein Characterization of 1dimensional Gorenstein
*
*
+
*
. and n are perfect Nagata’s lemma for UFD’s Local characterization of UFD’s Global characterization of U F D s Projective FFR =+free complement Invertible FFR principal Stability of FFR Lemma for Theorem 182 Noetherian domain with FFR is UFD Regular. n .1.I78
INDEX OF THEOREMS
INDEX OF THEOREMS
179
THEOREM 153 1’54 155 156 157 158 159 160 1612 163 164 165 166 1678 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 1878 189 190 191 192 1938 199 200 201 202
PAGE 112 112 113 113 113 115 116 116 117 117 118 118 119 119 119 120 120 124 125 126 26 27 31 32 32 33 34 134 134 135 135 135 137 137 139 139 140 140142 142 144 150 151
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Converse of Theorem 152 Ultimate principal ideal theorem Case n = 1 of Theorem 154 Lifting of Macaulay property mod a radical element Stability of Macaulay for power series rings Minimal generation of a module over a local ring Stability of minimal generation of maximal ideals Generation of M by an Rsequence* regularity Stability of regularity Lemma for Theorem 164 A regular local ring is a domain Chinese remainder theorem Lemma for Theorem 167 Decomposition of Noetherian rings Converse of Theorem 160 Regular + Macaulay Stability of superregularity d ( A / x A ) = 1 d(A) under suitable hypotheses Grade and projective dimension are complementary Rees’s inequality connecting grade and projective dimension Perfect gradeunmixed Ranks 0.
32. 28 Gorenstein ring.44 Going up (GU). 149 envelope. 123. 32. 123 Essential extension. 12. 59 Local ring. 134 Fitting invariants. 49 Length (of module). 37 Jacobson radical. 9 Annihilator. 59 Conductor. 118 Class group. 31 Dedekind ring. 72 Closed submodule. 38 Lying over (LO). 4. 12 maximal of zerodivisors. 27 element. 164 Grade. 137 partial. 9 Integrally closed. 167 r. 107 Gideal. 65 JordanHolder theorem. 72. 12. 32. 135

GCDdomain. 149 resolution. 145 Formal power series. 156 equivalence. 93. 143 Family (of modules). 33. 156 Euler characteristic. 17. 53 Inverse (of ideal). 59 of variety. 12 Going down (GD). 55
OF
I
I oprcs
Hilbert ring. 22. 160. 132 Gradeunmixed. 1 radical. 82 Krull intersection theorem. 110 projective. 149 Krull. 126
. 66. 68. 46 Corank. Composition series. 75 completely. 17 Incomparable (INC).Index
Algebra. 67. 32 Gdomain. 58 radical of. 48. 67 Localization. 51 Jideal. 89. 37 invertible. 37 maximal. 44 fractional. 3 prime. 28. 149 module. 59 Krull domain. 149 Integral closure. 108 Ideal contracted. 123. 28 Injective dimension. 3. 124. 9. 28
181
Bkzout domain. 83. 123 injective. 78 Chinese remainder theorem. 120 Dimension homological.
54. 67. 126 Valuation ring. 93. 40. 118. 12. 116. 51 Rank. 123 resolution. 3. 32. 98. 34.95. 26. 3. 35. 116. 24. 130 super. 7. 166 Quasilocal. 126 Principal ideal theorem. 130 Unmixedness. 82. 34 Nakayama lemma. 76 domain. 3. 64 Residue class field. 160 Maximal prime (of module). 84. 22 saturated. 123 equivalence. 26. 22. 90. 116 Zerodivisor. 99 multiplicatively closed set. 98 chain condition. 51 Nilradical. 69 Variety. 2. 131 Projective dimension. 16 Noet herian ring. 123 Rsequence. 113. 76 Radical (of ideal). 108 Strong Sring. 93. 57 Multiplicatively closed set. 19 homogeneous. 167 QuasiFrobenius. 149 projective. 111 Reflexive.110. 22. 112 Principal prime. 81 Value group.182
Macaulay ring. 109. 34 Schanuel’s lemma.104. 166
INDEX OF TOPICS
Regular. 21 Perfect. 25. 123 Prufer domain. 20. 77 Resolution finite free (FFR).108 Torsionfree. 35. 6. 64 Vdimension. 3. 54
. 50 Unique factorization domain (UFD).97 grade. 71 Pure submodule. 120. 5. 25. 3. 135 local. 2. 84. 76 rational. 1. 74 Nullstellensatz. 54 Minimal basis. 35 discrete (DVR). 34. 47 module. 37. 137 injective. 16. 38. 137 Sdomain.94 little. 124. 133. 13. 3. 116 prime.99. 119 Saturated chain. 119 von Neumann. 123 module. 82. 17 Jacobson. 48.