Local criterion for flatness

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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 “A is a Noetherian ring” is used to invoke the Artin–Rees lemma and can be weakened; see [3]

Proof

Following SGA 1, Exposé 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 𝔞A be an ideal and we shall show 𝔞MM is injective. For an integer k>0, consider the exact sequence

0𝔞/(Ik𝔞)A/IkA/(𝔞+Ik)0.

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

0𝔞/(Ik𝔞)MA/IkM=M/IkM.

Tensoring M with 0Ik𝔞𝔞𝔞/(Ik𝔞)0, we also have:

(Ik𝔞)Mf𝔞Mg𝔞/(Ik𝔞)M0.

We combine the two to get the exact sequence:

(Ik𝔞)Mf𝔞MgM/IkM.

Now, if x is in the kernel of 𝔞MM, then, a fortiori, x is in ker(g)=im(f)=(Ik𝔞)M. By the Artin–Rees lemma, given n>0, we can find k>0 such that Ik𝔞In𝔞. Since n1In(𝔞M)=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 étale morphism

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

Proof: Assume that 𝒪y,Y^𝒪x,X^ is an isomorphism and we show f is étale. First, since 𝒪x𝒪x^ is faithfully flat (in particular is a pure subring), we have:

𝔪y𝒪x=𝔪y𝒪x^𝒪x=𝔪y^𝒪x^𝒪x=𝔪x^𝒪x=𝔪x.

Hence, f is unramified (separability is trivial). Now, that 𝒪y𝒪x 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 shouldn’t be hard to make sense of (2)).

Next, we show the converse: by the local criterion, for each n, the natural map 𝔪yn/𝔪yn+1𝔪xn/𝔪xn+1 is an isomorphism. By induction and the five lemma, this implies 𝒪y/𝔪yn𝒪x/𝔪xn is an isomorphism for each n. Passing to limit, we get the asserted isomorphism.

Mumford’s Red Book gives an extrinsic proof of the above fact (Ch. III, § 5, Theorem 3).

Miracle flatness theorem

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

Notes

Template:Reflist

References