Krull ring

From testwiki
Revision as of 17:30, 24 February 2025 by imported>Joyous! (Reverted 1 edit by Marcettone (talk) to last revision by David Eppstein)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision β†’ (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

In commutative algebra, a Krull ring, or Krull domain, is a commutative ring with a well behaved theory of prime factorization. They were introduced by Wolfgang Krull in 1931.[1] They are a higher-dimensional generalization of Dedekind domains, which are exactly the Krull domains of dimension at most 1.

In this article, a ring is commutative and has unity.

Formal definition

Let A be an integral domain and let P be the set of all prime ideals of A of height one, that is, the set of all prime ideals properly containing no nonzero prime ideal. Then A is a Krull ring if

  1. A𝔭 is a discrete valuation ring for all 𝔭P,
  2. A is the intersection of these discrete valuation rings (considered as subrings of the quotient field of A),
  3. any nonzero element of A is contained in only a finite number of height 1 prime ideals.

It is also possible to characterize Krull rings by mean of valuations only:[2]

An integral domain A is a Krull ring if there exists a family {vi}iI of discrete valuations on the field of fractions K of A such that:

  1. for any xK{0} and all i, except possibly a finite number of them, vi(x)=0,
  2. for any xK{0}, x belongs to A if and only if vi(x)0 for all iI.

The valuations vi are called essential valuations of A.

The link between the two definitions is as follows: for every 𝔭P, one can associate a unique normalized valuation v𝔭 of K whose valuation ring is A𝔭.[3] Then the set 𝒱={v𝔭} satisfies the conditions of the equivalent definition. Conversely, if the set 𝒱={vi} is as above, and the vi have been normalized, then 𝒱 may be bigger than 𝒱, but it must contain 𝒱. In other words, 𝒱 is the minimal set of normalized valuations satisfying the equivalent definition.

Properties

With the notations above, let v𝔭 denote the normalized valuation corresponding to the valuation ring A𝔭, U denote the set of units of A, and K its quotient field.

  • An element xK belongs to U if, and only if, v𝔭(x)=0 for every 𝔭P. Indeed, in this case, x∉A𝔭𝔭 for every 𝔭P, hence x1A𝔭; by the intersection property, x1A. Conversely, if x and x1 are in A, then v𝔭(xx1)=v𝔭(1)=0=v𝔭(x)+v𝔭(x1), hence v𝔭(x)=v𝔭(x1)=0, since both numbers must be 0.
  • An element xA is uniquely determined, up to a unit of A, by the values v𝔭(x), 𝔭P. Indeed, if v𝔭(x)=v𝔭(y) for every 𝔭P, then v𝔭(xy1)=0, hence xy1U by the above property (q.e.d). This shows that the application x mod U(v𝔭(x))𝔭P is well defined, and since v𝔭(x)=0 for only finitely many 𝔭, it is an embedding of A×/U into the free Abelian group generated by the elements of P. Thus, using the multiplicative notation "" for the later group, there holds, for every xA×, x=1𝔭1α1𝔭2α2𝔭nαn mod U, where the 𝔭i are the elements of P containing x, and αi=v𝔭i(x).
  • The valuations v𝔭 are pairwise independent.[4] As a consequence, there holds the so-called weak approximation theorem,[5] an homologue of the Chinese remainder theorem: if 𝔭1,𝔭n are distinct elements of P, x1,xn belong to K (resp. A𝔭), and a1,an are n natural numbers, then there exist xK (resp. xA𝔭) such that v𝔭i(xxi)=ni for every i.
  • A consequence of the weak approximation theorem is a characterization of when Krull rings are noetherian; namely, a Krull ring A is noetherian if and only if all of its quotients A/𝔭 by height-1 primes are noetherian.
  • Two elements x and y of A are coprime if v𝔭(x) and v𝔭(y) are not both >0 for every 𝔭P. The basic properties of valuations imply that a good theory of coprimality holds in A.
  • Every prime ideal of A contains an element of P.[6]
  • Any finite intersection of Krull domains whose quotient fields are the same is again a Krull domain.[7]
  • If L is a subfield of K, then AL is a Krull domain.[8]
  • If SA is a multiplicatively closed set not containing 0, the ring of quotients S1A is again a Krull domain. In fact, the essential valuations of S1A are those valuation v𝔭 (of K) for which 𝔭S=.[9]
  • If L is a finite algebraic extension of K, and B is the integral closure of A in L, then B is a Krull domain.[10]

Examples

  1. Any unique factorization domain is a Krull domain. Conversely, a Krull domain is a unique factorization domain if (and only if) every prime ideal of height one is principal.[11][12]
  2. Every integrally closed noetherian domain is a Krull domain.[13] In particular, Dedekind domains are Krull domains. Conversely, Krull domains are integrally closed, so a Noetherian domain is Krull if and only if it is integrally closed.
  3. If A is a Krull domain then so is the polynomial ring A[x] and the formal power series ring A[[x]].[14]
  4. The polynomial ring R[x1,x2,x3,] in infinitely many variables over a unique factorization domain R is a Krull domain which is not noetherian.
  5. Let A be a Noetherian domain with quotient field K, and L be a finite algebraic extension of K. Then the integral closure of A in L is a Krull domain (Mori–Nagata theorem).[15]
  6. Let A be a Zariski ring (e.g., a local noetherian ring). If the completion A^ is a Krull domain, then A is a Krull domain (Mori).[16][17]
  7. Let A be a Krull domain, and V be the multiplicatively closed set consisting in the powers of a prime element pA. Then S1A is a Krull domain (Nagata).[18]

The divisor class group of a Krull ring

Assume that A is a Krull domain and K is its quotient field. A prime divisor of A is a height 1 prime ideal of A. The set of prime divisors of A will be denoted P(A) in the sequel. A (Weil) divisor of A is a formal integral linear combination of prime divisors. They form an Abelian group, noted D(A). A divisor of the form div(x)=pPvp(x)p, for some non-zero x in K, is called a principal divisor. The principal divisors of A form a subgroup of the group of divisors (it has been shown above that this group is isomorphic to A×/U, where U is the group of unities of A). The quotient of the group of divisors by the subgroup of principal divisors is called the divisor class group of A; it is usually denoted C(A).

Assume that B is a Krull domain containing A. As usual, we say that a prime ideal 𝔓 of B lies above a prime ideal 𝔭 of A if 𝔓A=𝔭; this is abbreviated in 𝔓|𝔭.

Denote the ramification index of v𝔓 over v𝔭 by e(𝔓,𝔭), and by P(B) the set of prime divisors of B. Define the application P(A)D(B) by

j(𝔭)=𝔓|𝔭, π”“P(B)e(𝔓,𝔭)𝔓

(the above sum is finite since every x𝔭 is contained in at most finitely many elements of P(B)). Let extend the application j by linearity to a linear application D(A)D(B). One can now ask in what cases j induces a morphism jΒ―:C(A)C(B). This leads to several results.[19] For example, the following generalizes a theorem of Gauss:

The application jΒ―:C(A)C(A[X]) is bijective. In particular, if A is a unique factorization domain, then so is A[X].[20]

The divisor class group of a Krull rings are also used to set up powerful descent methods, and in particular the Galoisian descent.[21]

Cartier divisor

A Cartier divisor of a Krull ring is a locally principal (Weil) divisor. The Cartier divisors form a subgroup of the group of divisors containing the principal divisors. The quotient of the Cartier divisors by the principal divisors is a subgroup of the divisor class group, isomorphic to the Picard group of invertible sheaves on Spec(A).

Example: in the ring k[x,y,z]/(xy–z2) the divisor class group has order 2, generated by the divisor y=z, but the Picard subgroup is the trivial group.[22]

References

Template:Reflist

  1. ↑ Template:Harvs.
  2. ↑ P. Samuel, Lectures on Unique Factorization Domain, Theorem 3.5.
  3. ↑ A discrete valuation v is said to be normalized if v(Ov)=β„•, where Ov is the valuation ring of v. So, every class of equivalent discrete valuations contains a unique normalized valuation.
  4. ↑ If v𝔭1 and v𝔭2were both finer than a common valuation w of K, the ideals A𝔭1𝔭1 and A𝔭2𝔭2 of their corresponding valuation rings would contain properly the prime ideal 𝔭w={xK: w(x)>0}, hence 𝔭1 and 𝔭2 would contain the prime ideal 𝔭wA of A, which is forbidden by definition.
  5. ↑ See Moshe Jarden, Intersections of local algebraic extensions of a Hilbertian field , in A. Barlotti et al., Generators and Relations in Groups and Geometries, Dordrecht, Kluwer, coll., NATO ASI Series C (no 333), 1991, p. 343-405. Read online: archive, p. 17, Prop. 4.4, 4.5 and Rmk 4.6.
  6. ↑ P. Samuel, Lectures on Unique Factorization Domains, Lemma 3.3.
  7. ↑ Idem, Prop 4.1 and Corollary (a).
  8. ↑ Idem, Prop 4.1 and Corollary (b).
  9. ↑ Idem, Prop. 4.2.
  10. ↑ Idem, Prop 4.5.
  11. ↑ P. Samuel, Lectures on Factorial Rings, Thm. 5.3.
  12. ↑ Template:SpringerEOM
  13. ↑ P. Samuel, Lectures on Unique Factorization Domains, Theorem 3.2.
  14. ↑ Idem, Proposition 4.3 and 4.4.
  15. ↑ Template:Cite book
  16. ↑ Bourbaki, 7.1, no 10, Proposition 16.
  17. ↑ P. Samuel, Lectures on Unique Factorization Domains, Thm. 6.5.
  18. ↑ P. Samuel, Lectures on Unique Factorization Domains, Thm. 6.3.
  19. ↑ P. Samuel, Lectures on Unique Factorization Domains, p. 14-25.
  20. ↑ Idem, Thm. 6.4.
  21. ↑ See P. Samuel, Lectures on Unique Factorization Domains, P. 45-64.
  22. ↑ Hartshorne, GTM52, Example 6.5.2, p.133 and Example 6.11.3, p.142.