Local criterion for flatness: Difference between revisions

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
ย 
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 17:43, 30 January 2025

In algebra, the local criterion for flatness gives conditions one can check to show flatness of a module.[1]

Statement

Given a commutative ring A, an ideal I and an A-module M, suppose either

or

Then the following are equivalent:[2] Template:Ordered list

The assumption that โ€œA is a Noetherian ringโ€ is used to invoke the Artinโ€“Rees lemma and can be weakened; see [3]

Proof

Following SGA 1, Exposรฉ IV, we first prove a few lemmas, which are interesting themselves. (See also this blog post by Akhil Mathew for a proof of a special case.)

Template:Math theorem

Proof: The equivalence of the first two can be seen by studying the Tor spectral sequence. Here is a direct proof: if 1. is valid and NN is an injection of B-modules with cokernel C, then, as A-modules,

Tor1A(C,M)=0NAMNAM.

Since NAMNB(BAN) and the same for N, this proves 2. Conversely, considering 0RFX0 where F is B-free, we get:

Tor1A(F,M)=0Tor1A(X,M)RAMFAM.

Here, the last map is injective by flatness and that gives us 1. To see the "Moreover" part, if 1. is valid, then Tor1A(InX/In+1X,M)=0 and so

Tor1A(In+1X,M)Tor1A(InX,M)0.

By descending induction, this implies 3. The converse is trivial.

Template:Math theorem

Proof: The assumption implies that InM=InM and so, since tensor product commutes with base extension,

grI(A)A0M0=0(In)0A0M0=0(InAM)0=0(InM)0=grIM.

For the second part, let αi denote the exact sequence 0Tor1A(A/Ii,M)IiMIiM0 and γi:00Ii/Ii+1MIiM/Ii+1M0. Consider the exact sequence of complexes:

αi+1αiγi.

Then Tor1A(A/Ii,M)=0,i>0 (it is so for large i and then use descending induction). 3. of Lemma 1 then implies that M is flat.

Proof of the main statement.

2.1.: If I is nilpotent, then, by Lemma 1, Tor1A(,M)=0 and M is flat over A. Thus, assume that the first assumption is valid. Let ๐”žA be an ideal and we shall show ๐”žMM is injective. For an integer k>0, consider the exact sequence

0๐”ž/(Ik๐”ž)A/IkA/(๐”ž+Ik)0.

Since Tor1A(A/(๐”ž+Ik),M)=0 by Lemma 1 (note Ik kills A/(๐”ž+Ik)), tensoring the above with M, we get:

0๐”ž/(Ik๐”ž)MA/IkM=M/IkM.

Tensoring M with 0Ik๐”ž๐”ž๐”ž/(Ik๐”ž)0, we also have:

(Ik๐”ž)Mf๐”žMg๐”ž/(Ik๐”ž)M0.

We combine the two to get the exact sequence:

(Ik๐”ž)Mf๐”žMgM/IkM.

Now, if x is in the kernel of ๐”žMM, then, a fortiori, x is in ker(g)=im(f)=(Ik๐”ž)M. By the Artinโ€“Rees lemma, given n>0, we can find k>0 such that Ik๐”žIn๐”ž. Since n1In(๐”žM)=0, we conclude x=0.

1.4. follows from Lemma 2.

4.3.: Since (An)0=A0, the condition 4. is still valid with M,A replaced by Mn,An. Then Lemma 2 says that Mn is flat over An.

3.2. Tensoring 0IAA/I0 with M, we see Tor1A(A/I,M) is the kernel of IMM. Thus, the implication is established by an argument similar to that of 2.1.

Application: characterization of an รฉtale morphism

The local criterion can be used to prove the following: Template:Math theorem

Proof: Assume that ๐’ชy,Y^๐’ชx,X^ is an isomorphism and we show f is รฉtale. First, since ๐’ชx๐’ชx^ is faithfully flat (in particular is a pure subring), we have:

๐”ชy๐’ชx=๐”ชy๐’ชx^๐’ชx=๐”ชy^๐’ชx^๐’ชx=๐”ชx^๐’ชx=๐”ชx.

Hence, f is unramified (separability is trivial). Now, that ๐’ชy๐’ชx is flat follows from (1) the assumption that the induced map on completion is flat and (2) the fact that flatness descends under faithfully flat base change (it shouldnโ€™t be hard to make sense of (2)).

Next, we show the converse: by the local criterion, for each n, the natural map ๐”ชyn/๐”ชyn+1๐”ชxn/๐”ชxn+1 is an isomorphism. By induction and the five lemma, this implies ๐’ชy/๐”ชyn๐’ชx/๐”ชxn is an isomorphism for each n. Passing to limit, we get the asserted isomorphism.

Mumfordโ€™s Red Book gives an extrinsic proof of the above fact (Ch. III, ยง 5, Theorem 3).

Miracle flatness theorem

B. Conrad calls the next theorem the miracle flatness theorem.[4] Template:Math theorem

Notes

Template:Reflist

References