See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/350853296

Weakly J-submodules of Modules over Commutative Rings

Preprint · April 2021

CITATIONS READS
0 40

2 authors:

Hani A. Khashan Ece Yetkin Çelikel

Al al-Bayt University Hasan Kalyoncu University
25 PUBLICATIONS   62 CITATIONS    37 PUBLICATIONS   268 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

the two View project

NR-Clean Graphs of Rings View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hani A. Khashan on 14 April 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 WEAKLY J-SUBMODULES OF MODULES OVER
COMMUTATIVE RINGS
arXiv:2104.06134v1 [math.AC] 13 Apr 2021

HANI A. KHASHAN AND ECE YETKIN CELIKEL

Abstract. Let R be a commutative ring with identity and M be a unitary

R-module. By J(R), we denote the Jacobson radical of R. The purpose of
this paper is to introduce the concept of weakly J-submodules generalizing
J-submodules. We call a proper submodule N of M a weakly J-submodule
if whenever 0 6= rm ∈ N for r ∈ R and m ∈ M , then r ∈ (J(R)M : M ) or
m ∈ N. Various properties and characterizations of weakly J-submodules are
investigated especially in the case of multiplication modules.

1. Introduction
Throughout, rings will be commutative with identity and modules are unital.
We denote by R a ring, by M a unitary R-module, and by J(R) the Jacobson
radical of R which is the √ intersection of all maximal ideals of R. The radical of an
ideal I of R, denoted by I, is defined to be the set of all a ∈ R for which an ∈ I
for some positive integer n. For a submodule N of M , we mean by (N : M ), the
set of all elements r of R for which rM ⊆ N .
The concept of prime submodules, which is an important subject of module
theory, has been widely studied by various authors. Recall that a proper submodule
N of an R-module M is a (resp. weakly) prime submodule if for r ∈ R and m ∈ M
whenever (resp. 0 6= rm ∈ N ) rm ∈ N , then r ∈ (N : M ) or m ∈ N , [3]. In 2005,
Atani and Farzalipour [4] defined weakly primary submodules as follows: A proper
submodule N of M is said p to be weakly primary if whenever 0 6= rm ∈ N for r ∈ R
and m ∈ M , then r ∈ (N : M ) or m ∈ N . In 2017, ”Tekir et.al.” [12] defined
the concept of n-ideals and n-submodules. The authors call a proper submodule p
N of M an n-submodule if for r ∈ R and m ∈ M , rm ∈ N with r ∈ / (0 : M ),
then m ∈ N . Generalizing these concepts, Khashan and Bani-Ata (2021) recently
introduced and studied the concepts of J-ideals and J-submodules in [7]. According
to [7], a proper ideal I of R is said to be a J-ideal if whenever ab ∈ I for a ∈ R\J(R)
and b ∈ R, then b ∈ I. As extending this structure to the context of J-submodules,
a proper submodule N of M is called a J-submodule if whenever r ∈ R and m ∈ M
such that rm ∈ N and r ∈ / (J(R)M : M ), then m ∈ N . As a very recent paper, in
[8], the notion of weakly J-ideals is presented. A weakly J-ideal of R is a proper
ideal with the property that a, b ∈ R, 0 6= ab ∈ I and a ∈ / J(R) imply b ∈ I.

Date: March, 2021.

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 13A15, 13A18, 13A99.
Key words and phrases. weakly J-submodule, J-submodule, J-ideal, weakly J-ideal.
This paper is in final form and no version of it will be submitted for publication elsewhere.
1
2 HANI A. KHASHAN AND ECE YETKIN CELIKEL

With J-submodules and weakly J-ideals in mind, we define the notion of weakly
J-submodules. We call a proper submodule N of M weakly J-submodule if when-
ever r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that 0 6= rm ∈ N and r ∈ / (J(R)M : M ), then
m ∈ N . We obtain (Proposition 10) that weakly J-submodules and J-submodules
coincide in J-presimplifiable modules. But, we start with some examples to show
that in general, the class of weakly J-submodules is a proper generalization of that
of J-submodules. Among many other results in this paper, in Lemma 1, we give
a condition on a weakly J-submodule N of an R-module M contained in J(R)M
to be a J-submodule. In Theorem 1, we conclude some equivalent statements
characterizing weakly J-submodules of modules. Also, we obtain some other char-
acterizations for weakly J-submodules of finitely generated faithful multiplication
modules (Corollary 1, Theorem 3 and Corollary 3). Moreover, we investigate the
behavior of this structure under module homomorphisms and localizations, (Propo-
sitions 7, 12 and Corollary 4).In Proposition 13, we clarify a condition on weakly
primary submodules to be weakly J-submodules. It is shown in Theorem 2 that a
maximal weakly J-submodule N satisfying (0 :M S) ⊆ N for any S * J(R) of a
finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module M is a J-submodule. Finally,
in Proposition 14, we give a characterization of weakly J-ideals in the idealization
ring R(+)M .
Let us recall that an R-module M is called a multiplication module provided that
for every submodule N of M , there exists an ideal (presentation ideal) I of R such
that N = IM , [6]. If N and K are two submodules of a multiplication module M ,
define the multiplication of N and K as N K = IJM where I and J are the presen-
tation ideals of N and K, respectively. Also, recall that the idealization ring of an R-
module M is the set R(+)M = R⊕M = {(r, m) : r ∈ R, m2 ∈ M } with coordinate-
wise addition and multiplication defined as (r1 , m1 )(r2 m2 ) = (r1 r2 , r1 m2 + r2 m1 ).
If I is an ideal of R and N a submodule of M , then I(+)N is an ideal of R(+)M
if andponly if IM√⊆ N . It is well known that if I(+)N is an ideal of R(+)M ,
then I(+)N = I(+)M . Moreover, we have J(R(+)M ) = J(R)(+)M , [2]. For
undefined notations or terminologies in commutative ring and module theory, we
refer the reader to [5] and [10].

2. Properties of Weakly J-submodules

Definition 1. Let R be a ring and let M be an R-module. A proper submodule
N of M is called a weakly J-submodule if whenever r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that
0 6= rm ∈ N and r ∈
/ (J(R)M : M ), then m ∈ N.
While clearly every J-submodule is a weakly J-submodule, the converse is not
necessarily true. In fact, by the definition, the zero submodule of any module is a
weakly J-submodule. However, N = h0i is not a J-submodule of the Z-module Z6
/ (J(Z)Z6 : Z6 ) = h6i and 3̄ ∈
since 2.3̄ ∈ N but 2 ∈ / N . The following is an example
of a nonzero weakly J-submodule that is not a J-submodule.
Example 1. Consider the Z-module M = Z(+) (Z2 × Z2 ) and let N = 0(+) h(1̄, 0̄)i.
We prove that N is a weakly J-submodule of M . Let r ∈ Z and (r1 , (ā, b̄)) ∈ M
such that (0, (0̄, 0̄)) 6= r.(r1 , (ā, b̄)) ∈ N and r ∈ / (J(Z)M : M ). Then (rr1 , r.(ā, b̄)) ∈
N \(0, (0̄, 0̄)) and rM 6= (0, (0̄, 0̄)). Thus, rr1 = 0, r 6= 0 which implies that r1 = 0
and r.(ā, b̄) ∈ h(1̄, 0̄)i \(0̄, 0̄). If (ā, b̄) = (1̄, 1̄) or (0̄, 1̄), then r.(ā, b̄) ∈ h(1, 0)i only if
r ∈ h2i and so r.(ā, b̄) = (0̄, 0̄), a contradiction. Therefore, (ā, b̄) ∈ h(1̄, 0̄)i and since
 WEAKLY J-SUBMODULES OF MODULES OVER COMMUTATIVE RINGS 3

also r1 = 0, we have (r1 , (ā, b̄)) ∈ N as needed. On the other hand, N is not a J-
submodule of M . For example, 2.(0, (1̄, 1̄)) = (0, (0̄, 0̄)) ∈ N with 2 ∈
/ (J(Z)M : M )
but (0, (1̄, 1̄)) ∈
/ N.
We next give a rather general condition on a weakly J-submodule N of an R-
module M contained in J(R)M to be a J-submodule.
Lemma 1. Let N be a weakly J-submodule of an R-module M such that N ⊆
J(R)M . If N is not a J-submodule, then (N : M )N = 0. In particular, (N :
M )2 ⊆ Ann(M ). Hence a weakly J-submodule N ⊆ J(R)M with (N : M )N 6= 0 is
J-submodule.
Proof. Assume on the contrary (N : M )N 6= 0. We show that N is a J-submodule.
Let r ∈ R and m ∈ M with rm ∈ N . If rm 6= 0, then clearly we are done. So,
assume that rm = 0. We have the following cases:
Case 1. Let rN 6= 0. Then rn 6= 0 for some n ∈ N. Hence, 0 6= rn = r(n + m) ∈
N which implies either r ∈ (J(R)M : M ) or n + m ∈ N . Thus, r ∈ (J(R)M : M )
or m ∈ N .
Case 2. Let (N : M )m 6= 0. Then there exists a ∈ (N : M ) satisfying am 6= 0.
Hence, 0 6= am = (r + a)m ∈ N which follows either r + a ∈ (J(R)M : M ) or
m ∈ N. By assumption, a ∈ (N : M ) ⊆ (J(R)M : M ) and so r ∈ (J(R)M : M ) or
m ∈ N.
Case 3. Let rN = 0 and (N : M )m = 0. Since (N : M )N 6= 0, then bn1 6= 0 for
some b ∈ (N : M ) ⊆ (J(R)M : M ) and n1 ∈ N . So, 0 6= bn1 = (r + b)(n1 + m) ∈ N
which implies r + b ∈ (J(R)M : M ) or n1 + m ∈ N. Thus, r ∈ (J(R)M : M ) or
m ∈ N and we are done.
In particular, (N : M )2 ⊆ ((N : M )N : M ) = (0 : M ) = Ann(M ). 
In the following result, we give several characterizations for weakly J-submodules
of an R-module M .
Theorem 1. For a proper submodule N of an R-module M , the following state-
ments are equivalent:
(1) N is a weakly J-submodule of M .
(2) For m ∈ M \N, (N : Rm) ⊆ (J(R)M : M ) ∪ (0 : Rm).
(3) Whenever I is an ideal of R and m ∈ M with 0 6= Im ⊆ N , then I ⊆
(J(R)M : M ) or m ∈ N .
(4) Whenever I is an ideal of R and K is a submodule of M with 0 6= IK ⊆ N ,
then I ⊆ (J(R)M : M ) or K ⊆ N .
Proof. (1)⇒(2) Suppose N is a weakly J-submodule of M and let m ∈ M \N . Let
r ∈ (N : Rm) so that rm ∈ N . If rm = 0, then r ∈ (0 : Rm). If rm 6= 0,
then r ∈ (J(R)M : M ) since N is a weakly J-submodule and m ∈ / N . Thus,
(N : Rm) ⊆ (J(R)M : M ) ∪ (0 : Rm) as needed.
(2)⇒(3) Suppose I is an ideal of R and m ∈ M with 0 6= Im ⊆ N and m ∈ / N.
Then I ⊆ (N : Rm) with I * (0 : Rm). By assumption, we conclude that
I ⊆ (J(R)M : M ) and we are done.
(3)⇒(4) Assume on the contrary that there are an ideal I of R and a submodule
K of M such that 0 6= IK ⊆ N but I * (J(R)M : M ) and K * N . Then there
exists m ∈ K such that 0 6= Im ⊆ N . Since I * (J(R)M : M ), then by (3), we get
m ∈ N . Now, choose an element m′ ∈ K\N and note that Im′ = 0 since otherwise,
4 HANI A. KHASHAN AND ECE YETKIN CELIKEL

if Im′ 6= 0, then m′ ∈ N , a contradiction. Thus, 0 6= Im = I(m′ + m) ⊆ N and

as I * (J(R)M : M ), we have m′ + m ∈ N . Therefore, again we get m′ ∈ N , a
contradiction.
(4)⇒(1) Suppose 0 6= rm ∈ N for r ∈ R and m ∈ M . By putting I = Rr and
K = Rm in (4), the claim is clear. 

Let M be a finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module, N be a proper

submodule of M and I be an ideal of R. It is known from [11] that (IN : M ) =
I(N : M ) and in particular, (IM : M ) = I.
Proposition 1. Let M be a finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module and
I be an ideal of R. Then I is a weakly J-ideal of R if and only if IM is a weakly
J-submodule of M .
Proof. Let I be a weakly J-ideal of R. If IM = M , then I = (IM : M ) = R,
a contradiction. Thus, IM is proper in M . Now, let r ∈ R and m ∈ M such
that 0 6= rm ∈ IM and r ∈ / (J(R)M : M ) = J(R). If ((rm) : M ) = 0, then
rm = ((rm) : M )M = 0, a contradiction. Thus, 0 6= r((m) : M ) = ((rm) : M ) ⊆
(IM : M ) = I. As I is a weakly J-ideal of R, we conclude that ((m) : M ) ⊆ I and
so m ∈ ((m) : M )M ⊆ IM . Conversely, suppose IM is a weakly J-submodule of
M and let a, b ∈ R such that 0 6= ab ∈ I with a ∈
/ J(R). Then 0 6= abM ⊆ IM (if
abM = 0, then habi = (habi M : M ) = 0, a contradiction). Since also a ∈
/ (J(R)M :
M ), then bM ⊆ IM . It follows that b ∈ (bM : M ) ⊆ (IM : M ) = I as needed. 

As N = (N : M )M for any submodule N of a multiplication R-module M , we

have the following corollary of Proposition 1.
Corollary 1. Let M be a finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module and
N be a submodule of M . The following are equivalent:
(1) N is a weakly J-submodule of M .
(2) (N : M ) is weakly J-ideal of R.
(3) N = IM for some weakly J-ideal I of R.
Lemma 2. [8] If I is a weakly J-ideal of a ring R, then I ⊆ J(R).
If M is a multiplication R-module and N = IM , K = JM are two submodules
of M , then the product N K of N and K is defined as N K = (IM )(JM ) = (IJ)M .
In particular, if m1 , m2 ∈ M , then m1 m2 = hm1 i hm2 i. Recall from [9] that an
R-module M is said to be reduced if whenever a ∈ R, m ∈ M with a2 m = 0 implies
am = 0.
Next, we show that the condition N ⊆ J(R)M in Lemma 1 can be omitted if M
is a finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module.
Corollary 2. Let N be a weakly J-submodule of a finitely generated faithful mul-
tiplication R-module M that is not a J-submodule. Then (N : M )N = 0. In
particular, we have N 2 = 0. Additionally, if M is reduced, then N = 0.
Proof. From Corollary 1, Lemma 1 and Lemma 2, we conclude (N : M )N = 0.
Moreover, N 2 = (N : M )2 M = (N : M )(N : M )M = (N : M )N = 0. Now,
suppose that M is reduced and let a ∈ (N : M ). Then for all m ∈ Ṁ , a2 m ∈ (N :
M )N = 0 which implies am = 0. Thus N = (N : M )M = 0 which completes the
proof. 
 WEAKLY J-SUBMODULES OF MODULES OVER COMMUTATIVE RINGS 5

It follows by Corollary 2 that every non-zero weakly J-submodule of a finitely

generated faithful reduced multiplication module is a J-submodule.
We recall that a submodule N of an R-module M is called pure if IN = N ∩ IM
for every ideal I of R.
Proposition 2. Let M be a finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module and
N be a pure submodule of M . If I is a weakly J-ideal of R and N is a weakly
J-submodule of M , then IN is a weakly J-submodule of M .
Proof. Let r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that 0 6= rm ∈ IN and r ∈ / (J(R)M : M ) =
J(R). Then clearly 0 6= r((m) : M ) = ((rm) : M ) ∈ (IN : M ) = I(N : M ) ⊆
I ∩ (N : M ). Since (N : M ) is a weakly J-ideal by Corollary 1, and I is also a
weakly J-ideal, then ((m) : M ) ⊆ I ∩ (N : M ). As ((m) : M ) ⊆ (N : M ), we
conclude that m ∈ ((m) : M )M ⊆ (N : M )M = N . Moreover, ((m) : M ) ⊆ I
implies that m ∈ IM . Thus, m ∈ IM ∩ N = IN since N is pure in M . 
Lemma 3. [1] Let N is a submodule of a faithful multiplication R-module M . If I
is a finitely generated faithful multiplication ideal of R, then
(1) N = (IN :M I).
(2) If N ⊆ IM , then (JN :M I) = J(N :M I) for any ideal J of R.
Proposition 3. Let I be a finitely generated faithful multiplication ideal of a ring
R and N be a submodule of a faithful multiplication R-module M . If IN is a
weakly J-submodule of M , then either I is a weakly J-ideal of R or N is a weakly
J-submodule of M .
Proof. If N = M , then I = I(N : M ) = (IN : M ) is a weakly J-ideal of R by
Corollary 1. Suppose N M . By Lemma 3, we have N = (IN :M I) and so it
can be easily verified that (N : M ) = ((IN :M I) : M ) = (I(N : M ) : I). Let
a, b ∈ R such that 0 6= ab ∈ (N : M ) and a ∈ / J(R). Since I is faithful, then
0 6= Iab ⊆ I(N : M ) = (IN : M ). Thus, Ib ⊆ I(N : M ) as (IN : M ) is a weakly
J-ideal. It follows again by Lemma 3 that b ∈ (I(N : M ) : I) = (N : M ) and so
(N : M ) is a weakly J-ideal of R. Therefore, N is a weakly J-submodule of M by
Corollary 1. 
Let N be a submodule of an R-module M and I be an ideal of R. The residual
of N by I is the set (N :M I) = {m ∈ M : Im ⊆ N }. It is clear that (N :M I) is a
submodule of M containing N . More generally, for any subset S ⊆ R, (N :M S) is
a submodule of M containing N .
Proposition 4. Let M be a finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module and
I be an ideal of R. Then
(1) If N is a weakly J-submodule of M and (N :M I) 6= M , then (N :M I) is
also a weakly J-submodule of M .
(2) If I is finitely generated faithful multiplication and (N :M I) 6= M , then
N is a weakly J-submodule of IM if and only if (N :M I) is a weakly
J-submodule of M .
Proof. (1) Suppose N is a weakly J-submodule of M and (N :M I) is proper in
M . Let r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that 0 6= rm ∈ (N :M I) and r ∈ / (J(R)M : M ).
Then 0 6= rmI ⊆ N . Indeed, if rmI = 0, then 0 = rmI ⊆ I(hrmi : M )M . Since
M is faithful, then rI(hmi : M ) = I(hrmi : M ) = 0. As I is also faithful, it follows
6 HANI A. KHASHAN AND ECE YETKIN CELIKEL

that rm ∈ (hrmi : M )M ⊆ (0 : I)M = 0, a contradiction. Since N is a weakly

J-submodule, we get mI ⊆ N and so m ∈ (N :M I) as needed.
(2) Suppose N is a weakly J-submodule of IM . Let 0 6= rm ∈ (N :M I) for
r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that r ∈ / (J(R)M : M ). Then similar to the proof of (1),
we have 0 6= rmI ⊆ N . Suppose on the contrary that r ∈ (J(R)IM : IM ). Then
by (1) of Lemma 3, rM = r(IM :M I) ⊆ (rIM :M I) ⊆ (J(R)IM :M I) = J(R)M ,
a contradiction. Thus, r ∈ / (J(R)IM : IM ) and so by assumption mI ⊆ N .
Therefore, m ∈ (N :M I) and (N :M I) is a weakly J-submodule. Conversely,
suppose (N :M I) is a weakly J-submodule of M . Then N is proper in IM since
otherwise Lemma 3 implies (N :M I) = (IM : I) = M , a contradiction. Let r ∈ R
and am ∈ IM (a ∈ I) such that 0 6= ram ∈ N and r ∈ / (J(R)IM : IM ). Then
r(hami :M I) ⊆ (hrami :M I) ⊆ (N :M I). Moreover, r(hami :M I) 6= 0 since
otherwise we have again by (1) of Lemma 3, ram ∈ r(Iam :M I) ⊆ r(hami :M
I) = 0, a contradiction. Since also clearly r ∈
/ (J(R)M : M ), then by Theorem 1,
(hami :M I) ⊆ (N :M I). Thus, am ∈ (hami I :M I) = I((hami :M I)) ⊆ I(N :M
I) = (IN :M I) = N by Lemma 3 and we are done. 

Proposition 5. Let M be a finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module and

S be a subset of R with S * J(R). If N is a weakly J-submodule of M and
(0 :M S) ⊆ N , then (N :M S) is a weakly J-submodule of M
Proof. Suppose N is weakly J-submodule and (0 :M S) ⊆ N . If (N :M S) = M
and m ∈ M , then Sm ⊆ N . If Sm = 0, then m ∈ (0 :M S) ⊆ N . If Sm 6= 0,
then S * J(R) = (J(R)M : M ) implies also that m ∈ N . Thus, M = N which is
a contradiction. Now, let r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that 0 6= rm ∈ (N :M S) and
r ∈
/ (J(R)M : M ). If rSm = 0, then 0 6= rm ∈ N and so m ∈ N ⊆ (N :M S).
Otherwise, we have 0 6= rSm ⊆ N and so Sm ⊆ N . Hence, again m ∈ (N :M S)
and the result follows. 
We call a proper submodule N of an R-module M a maximal weakly J-submodule
if there is no weakly J-submodule which contains N properly.
Theorem 2. Let M be a finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module and N
be a submodule of M satisfying (0 :M S) ⊆ N for any S * J(R). If N is a maximal
weakly J-submodule of M , then N is a J-submodule of M .
Proof. Suppose N is a maximal weakly J-submodule of M satisfying (0 :M S) ⊆ N
for any S * J(R). Let rm ∈ N for r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that r ∈ / J(R) =
(J(R)M : M ). Then (N :M r) is also a weakly J-submodule of M by Proposition
5. By the maximality of N , we get m ∈ (N :M r) = N and so N is a J-submodule
of M . 
Let M be an R-module. By J(M ), we denote the Jacobson radical of M which
is the intersection of all maximal submodules of M . For a finitely generated faithful
multiplication module M , it is well-known that J(M ) = J(R)M , [6].
The next result gives a characterization for weakly J-submodules of finitely gen-
erated faithful multiplication R-modules.
Theorem 3. Let M be a finitely generated faithful multiplication R-module. Then
the following are equivalent:
(1) N is a weakly J-submodule of M .
 WEAKLY J-SUBMODULES OF MODULES OVER COMMUTATIVE RINGS 7

(2) Whenever K, L are submodules of M and 0 6= KL ⊆ N , then K ⊆ J(M )

or L ⊆ N .
Proof. (1)⇒(2) Let N be a weakly J-submodule of M . Suppose that I1 and I2
are the presentation ideals of K and L, respectively. Then 0 6= I1 I2 M ⊆ N which
implies I1 ⊆ (J(R)M : M ) or I2 M ⊆ N by Theorem 1. Thus, K = I1 M ⊆
J(R)M = J(M ) or L = I2 M ⊆ N , as needed.
(2)⇒(1) Suppose that 0 6= IL ⊆ N for some ideal I of R and submodule L of
M . Assume that L * N . By taking K = IM in (2), we conclude that K = IM ⊆
J(M ). Thus, we have I ⊆ (J(R)M : M ) and the result follows by Theorem 1. 
Corollary 3. Let N be a proper submodule of a finitely generated faithful multipli-
cation R-module M . Then N is a weakly J-submodule of M if and only if whenever
m1 , m2 ∈ M with 0 6= m1 m2 ∈ N , then m1 ∈ J(M ) or m2 ∈ N .
Proposition 6. If N is a weakly J-submodule of a finitely generated faithful mul-
tiplication R-module M , then N ⊆ J(M ). Moreover, if K is a weakly J-submodule
of M which is not a J-submodule, then N K = 0.
Proof. Let N be a weakly J-submodule of M . Then (N : M ) is a weakly J-ideal of
R by Corollary 1. Hence, (N : M ) ⊆ J(R) by Lemma 2, and so N = (N : M )M ⊆
J(R)M = J(M ). Now, suppose K is a weakly J-submodule of M which is not a
J-submodule. Since (N : M ) ⊆ J(R), the claim follows from Lemma 1. 
Proposition 7. Let ϕ : M1 −→ M2 be an R-module homomorphism. Then
(1) If ϕ is surjective and N is a weakly J-submodule of M1 with ker (ϕ) ⊆ N ,
then ϕ (N ) is a weakly J-submodule of M2 .
(2) If ϕ is one-to-one and K is a weakly J-submodule of M2 , then ϕ−1 (K) is
a weakly J-submodule of M1 .
Proof. (1) Suppose ϕ (N ) = M2 = ϕ (M1 ) and let m1 ∈ M1 . Then ϕ (m1 ) = ϕ (n)
for some n ∈ N and so m1 − n ∈ ker (ϕ) ⊆ N . So, m1 ∈ N and N = M1
which is a contradiction. Hence, ϕ (N ) is proper in M2 . Let r ∈ R and m2 ∈ M2
such that 0 6= rm2 ∈ ϕ (N ) and r ∈ / (J (R) M2 : M2 ). Choose m1 ∈ M1 such
that ϕ (m1 ) = m2 . Then 0 6= rm2 = rϕ (m1 ) = ϕ (rm1 ) ∈ ϕ (N ) which implies
0 6= rm1 ∈ N as ker (ϕ) ⊆ N . If rM1 ⊆ J (R) M1 , then rM2 = rϕ (M1 ) =
ϕ(rM1 ) ⊆ ϕ (J (R) M1 ) = J (R) ϕ (M1 ) = J (R) M2 which is a contradiction. Thus,
r ∈/ (J (R) M1 : M1 ). Since N is a weakly J-submodule, then m1 ∈ N and so
m2 = ϕ (m1 ) ∈ ϕ(N ) as required.
(2) Let r ∈ R and m1 ∈ M1 such that 0 6= rm1 ∈ ϕ−1 (K) and r ∈ / (J (R) M1 : M1 ).
Since K erf = 0, then 0 6= rϕ (m1 ) = ϕ (rm1 ) ∈ K. Moreover, we have r ∈ /
(J (R) M2 : M2 ). Indeed, if rM2 ⊆ J (R) M2 , then rϕ (M1 ) ⊆ J (R) ϕ (M1 ) and so
ϕ (rM1 ) ⊆ ϕ (J (R) M1 ). Now, if x ∈ rM1 , then ϕ (x) ∈ ϕ (rM1 ) ⊆ ϕ (J (R) M1 )
and so x − y ∈ ker (ϕ) ⊆ J (R) M1 for some y ∈ J (R) M1 . Hence, x ∈ J (R) M1
and rM1 ⊆ J (R) M1 , a contradiction. Since K is a weakly J-submodule of M2 ,
then ϕ (m1 ) ∈ K, and thus m1 ∈ ϕ−1 (K) and we are done. 
Corollary 4. Let N and L be two submodules of an R-module M with L ⊆ N .
(1) If N is a weakly J-submodule of M , then N/L is a weakly J-submodule of
M/L.
(2) If L is a weakly J-submodule of M and N/L is a weakly J-submodule of
M/L, then N is a weakly J-submodule of M .
8 HANI A. KHASHAN AND ECE YETKIN CELIKEL

(3) If L is a J-submodule of M and N/L is a weakly J-submodule of M/L,

then N is a J-submodule of M .
Proof. (1) Clear by Proposition 7.
(2) Suppose that 0 6= rm ∈ N and r ∈ / (J(R)M : M ). If rm ∈ L, then
m ∈ L ⊆ N since L is a weakly J-submodule. So, assume that rm ∈ / L. One can
easily observe that r ∈/ (J(R)M/N : M/N ). Since N/L is a weakly J-submodule
of M/L and L 6= r(m + L) ∈ N/L, then m + L ∈ N/L. Therefore, m ∈ N and N
is a weakly J-submodule of M as needed.
(3) Similar to (2). 
Proposition 8. Let {Ni : T
i ∈ ∆} be a non empty family of weakly J-submodules
of an R-module M . Then Ni is a weakly J-submodule.
i∈∆
T
Proof. Suppose that 0 6= rm ∈ Ni for some r ∈ R\(J(R)M : M ), m ∈ M .
i∈∆
Ni is a weakly J-submodule of M , for all i ∈ ∆, we have m ∈ Ni . Thus,
Since T
m∈ Ni , so we are done. 
i∈∆

We recall that a submodule N of an R-module M is called small (or superfluous)

in M in case whenever N + K = M for a submodule K of M , then K = M .
Lemma 4. Every weakly J-submodule of a finitely generated faithful multiplication
R-module is small.
Proof. Let N be a weakly J-submodule of an R-module M and K be a submodule
of M with N + K = M . Then clearly, (N : M ) + (K : M ) = (N + K : M ) = R.
Since (N : M ) is a weakly J-ideal of R by Corollary 1, then (K : M ) = R by [8,
Lemma 2]. Thus, K = (K : M )M = M as needed. 
Proposition 9. Let N1 and N2 be weakly J-submodules of an R-module M . Then
N1 + N2 is a weakly J-submodule of M .
Proof. Suppose that N1 and N2 are weakly J-submodules of M . If N1 + N2 = M ,
then N1 = N2 = M by Lemma 4, a contradiction. Now, N1 /(N1 ∩ N2 ) is a
weakly J-submodule of M/(N1 ∩ N2 ) by Corollary 4 (1). Hence, by isomorphism
N1 /(N1 ∩ N2 ) ∼
= (N1 + N2 )/N2 , we get (N1 + N2 )/N2 is a weakly J-submodule of
of M/N2 . Again, by Corollary 4 (2), N1 + N2 is a weakly J-submodule of M . 
Following [13], an R-module M is called J-presimplifiable if Z(M ) ⊆ (J(R)M :
M ). In [13, Theorem 1], it is proved that if N is a submodule of M with N ⊆
J(R)M , then N is a J-submodule if and only if M/N is a non-zero J-presimplifiable.
In particular, M is J-presimplifiabe if and only if {0} is a J-submodule of M .
Proposition 10. Every weakly J-submodule of a J-presimplifiable module is a J-
submodule.
Proof. Let N be a weakly J-submodule of an J-presimplifiable R-module M . Since
{0} is a a J-submodule of M , the result follows by (3) of Corollary 4. 
Proposition 11. Let M1 , M2 , ..., Mk be R-modules and consider the R-module
M = M1 × · · · × Mk . If N = N1 × · · · × Nk is a weakly J-submodule of M ,
then Ni is a weakly J-submodule of Mi for all i such that Ni 6= Mi .
 WEAKLY J-SUBMODULES OF MODULES OVER COMMUTATIVE RINGS 9

Proof. Let Ni 6= Mi for some i = 1, ..., k. We show that Ni is a weakly J-submodule

of Mi . Let r ∈ R and mi ∈ Mi such that 0 6= rmi ∈ Ni and r ∈ / (J(R)Mi : Mi ).
Since 0 6= r.(0, ..., 0, mi , 0..., 0) ∈ N and clearly r ∈/ (J(R)M : M ), we conclude
(0, ..., 0, mi , 0..., 0) ∈ N . Thus, mi ∈ Ni and Ni is a weakly J-submodule of Mi . 
If N1 and N2 are weakly J-submodules of R-modules M1 and M2 respectively,
then N1 × N2 need not be a weakly J-submodule of M1 × M2 . For example,
consider the Z-modules M1 = Z6 and M2 = Z(+) (Z2 × Z2 ). Then N1 = h0̄i and
N2 = 0(+) h(1̄, 0̄)i are weakly J-submodules of M1 and M2 respectively. On the
other hand, N1 × N2 is not a weakly J-submodule. Indeed, 3 · (2̄, (0, (1, 0))) =
(0̄, (0, (1, 0))) ∈ N1 × N2 but clearly 3 ∈
/ (J(Z)(M1 × M2 ) : (M1 × M2 )) and
(2̄, (0, (1, 0))) ∈
/ N1 × N2 .
Let I be a proper ideal of R and N be a submodule of an R-module M . In the
following proposition, the notations ZI (R) and ZN (M ) denote the sets {r ∈ R :
rs ∈ I for some s ∈ R\I} and {r ∈ R : rm ∈ N for some m ∈ M \N }.
Proposition 12. Let S be a multiplicatively closed subset of a ring R such that
S −1 (J(R)) = J(S −1 R) and M be an R-module. Then
(1) If N is a weakly J-submodule of M and S −1 N 6= S −1 M , then S −1 N is a
weakly J-submodule of the S −1 R-module S −1 M .
(2) If S −1 N is a weakly J-submodule of S −1 M and S∩Z(M ) = S∩Z(J(R)M:M) (R) =
S ∩ ZN (M ) = ∅, then N is a weakly J-submodule of M .
Proof. (1) Suppose that 0 6= sr1 sm2 ∈ S −1 N for sr1 ∈ S −1 R and sm2 ∈ S −1 M .
Then 0 6= urm ∈ N for some u ∈ S. Since N is a weakly J-submodule, we have
either ur ∈ (J(R)M : M ) or m ∈ N . Hence, we conclude that either sr1 = us ur
1
∈
−1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1 −1
S (J(R)M : M ) = (S J(R) S M : S M ) = (J(S R) S M : S M ) or
m
s2 ∈ S
−1
N as required.
(2) Let r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that 0 6= rm ∈ N . From our assumption
S ∩ Z(M ) = ∅, we have 0 6= 1r m
1 ∈ S
−1
N which implies that 1r ∈ (J(S −1 R)S −1 M :
m
S M ) = S (J(R)M : M ) or 1 ∈ S −1 N. Thus, either ur ∈ (J(R)M : M ) for
−1 −1

some u ∈ S or vm ∈ N for some v ∈ S. Since S ∩Z(J(R)M:M) (R) = S ∩ZN (M ) = ∅,

we conclude that r ∈ (J(R)M : M ) or m ∈ N . Therefore, N is a weakly J-
submodule of M . 
Recall that a proper submodule N of an R-module M is said to p be weakly
primary if whenever , 0 6= rm ∈ N for r ∈ R and m ∈ M , then r ∈ (N : M ) or
m ∈ N , [4]. In the following, we show that every weakly primary submodule N of
M with (N : M ) contained in J(R) is a weakly J-submodule of M .
Proposition 13. Let M be an R-module. If N is a weakly primary submodule of
M such that (N : M ) ⊆ J(R), then N is a weakly J-submodule of M .
Proof. Let r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that
p 0 6= rm ∈ N and r ∈/ (J(R)M : M ). Then
r∈ / (N : M ). It follows that m ∈ N as N is a
/ J(R) and so by assumption, r ∈
weakly primary submodule of M . 
Let M be an R-module. Next, we justify the relation between the weakly J-ideals
of the idealization ring R(+)M and the weakly J-submodules of M .
Proposition 14. Let I be an ideal of a ring R and N a proper submodule of an
R-module M .
 10 HANI A. KHASHAN AND ECE YETKIN CELIKEL

(1) If I(+)N is a weakly J-ideal of R(+)M , then I is a weakly J-ideal of R

and N is a weakly J-submodule of M .
(2) Suppose I is a J-ideal of R and N is a weakly J-submodule of M . If for
r ∈ R, m ∈ M with rm = 0 but r ∈ / J(R) and m ∈ / N , (I : hri) = 0, then
I(+)N is a weakly J-ideal of R(+)M .
Proof. (1)Suppose I(+)N is a weakly J-ideal of R(+)M . Then I is a weakly J-
ideal of R by [8, Theorem 5]. Now, let r ∈ R and m ∈ M such that 0 6= rm ∈ N
and r ∈ / (J(R)M : M ). Then (0, 0) 6= (r, 0)(0, m) = (0, rm) ∈ I(+)N and clearly
(r, 0) ∈
/ J(R(+)M ). Therefore, (0, m) ∈ I(+)N and so m ∈ N as required.
(2) Let (r1 , m1 ), (r2 , m2 ) ∈ R(+)M such that (0, 0) 6= (r1 , m1 )(r2 , m2 ) ∈ I(+)N
and (r1 , m1 ) ∈ / J(R(+)M ). Then r1 r2 ∈ I and so r2 ∈ I as I is a J-ideal and
r1 ∈/ J(R). Moreover, r1 m2 +r2 m1 ∈ N and r2 m1 ∈ IM ⊆ N imply that r1 m2 ∈ N .
Suppose r1 m2 = 0 but m2 ∈ / N . Then by assumption r2 ∈ (I : hr1 i) = 0 and so
(r1 , m1 )(r2 , m2 ) = (0, 0), a contradiction. If r1 m2 6= 0, then m2 ∈ N since clearly
r1 ∈/ (J(R)M : M ) and N is a weakly J-submodule of M . Thus, (r2 , m2 ) ∈ I(+)N
as needed. 

References
[1] M. M. Ali, Residual submodules of multiplication modules, Beitr Algebra Geom, 46 (2)
(2005), 405–422.
[2] D. D. Anderson, M. Winders, Idealization of a Module, Journal of Commutative Algebra, 1
(1) (2009), 3-56.
[3] S. E. Atani, F. Farzalipour, On weakly prime submodules, Tamkang Journal of Mathematics,
38 (3) (2007), 247-252.
[4] S. E. Atani, F. Farzalipour, On weakly primary ideals, Georgian Mathematical Journal, 12
(3) (2005), 423-429.
[5] A. Barnard, Multiplication modules. J. Algebra, 71 (1981), 174–178.
[6] Z. A. El-Bast and P. F. Smith, Multiplication modules, Comm. in Algebra, 16 (1988), 755-779.
[7] H. A. Khashan, A. B. Bani-Ata, J-ideals of commutative rings, International Electronic
Journal of Algebra, 29 (2021), 148-164.
[8] H. A. Khashan, E. Yetkin Celikel, , Weakly J-ideals of commutative rings (submitted).
[9] T. K. Lee, .Y. Zhou, Reduced modules. Rings, modules, algebras and abelian groups, 236
(2004). 365-377.
[10] R. Y. Sharp, Steps in commutative algebra, Second edition, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press. (2000).
[11] P. Smith, Some remarks on multiplication modules, Arch. Math., 50 (1988), 223-235.
[12] U. Tekir, S. Koc, K. H. Oral, n-ideals of Commutative Rings, Filomat, 31 (10) (2017), 2933-
2941.
[13] E. Yetkin Celikel, H. A. Khashan, Quasi J-submodules (submitted).

Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Al al-Bayt University, Al Mafraq,

Jordan.
Email address: hakhashan@aabu.edu.jo.

Department of Electrical-Electronics Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Hasan

Kalyoncu University, Gaziantep, Turkey.
Email address: ece.celikel@hku.edu.tr, yetkinece@gmail.com.

View publication stats