Flat maps and Zariski tangent spacesUniversal definition of tangent spaces (for schemes and manifolds)Generalizing miracle flatness (Matsumura 23.1) via finite Tor-dimensiona question about flatnessFlatness on the fiberStructure theorem for etale mapsNormality and fiber productDescent of regularity under a faithfully flat morphism: Where does my proof fail?Formally smooth map from a regular ringFlatness and Cohen-Macaulay ringsWhen does completion preserve injectivity?
Flat maps and Zariski tangent spaces
Universal definition of tangent spaces (for schemes and manifolds)Generalizing miracle flatness (Matsumura 23.1) via finite Tor-dimensiona question about flatnessFlatness on the fiberStructure theorem for etale mapsNormality and fiber productDescent of regularity under a faithfully flat morphism: Where does my proof fail?Formally smooth map from a regular ringFlatness and Cohen-Macaulay ringsWhen does completion preserve injectivity?
$begingroup$
Let $f:A to B$ be a finite flat local homomorphism of noetherian local rings.
Are there some nice conditions on $A$ and $B$ which guarantee that the dimension
of the Zariski tangent space of $A$ (at its maximal ideal) is smaller or
equal to the dimension of the Zariski tangent space of $B$ (at its maximal ideal)?
For example, if $B$ is regular then $A$ is regular, so the above would hold, but I don't want to assume something so strong.
I know no example where it fails, but I am particularly interested in the case that $A$ and $B$ are both lci and Artin.
ag.algebraic-geometry ac.commutative-algebra
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Let $f:A to B$ be a finite flat local homomorphism of noetherian local rings.
Are there some nice conditions on $A$ and $B$ which guarantee that the dimension
of the Zariski tangent space of $A$ (at its maximal ideal) is smaller or
equal to the dimension of the Zariski tangent space of $B$ (at its maximal ideal)?
For example, if $B$ is regular then $A$ is regular, so the above would hold, but I don't want to assume something so strong.
I know no example where it fails, but I am particularly interested in the case that $A$ and $B$ are both lci and Artin.
ag.algebraic-geometry ac.commutative-algebra
$endgroup$
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Let $f:A to B$ be a finite flat local homomorphism of noetherian local rings.
Are there some nice conditions on $A$ and $B$ which guarantee that the dimension
of the Zariski tangent space of $A$ (at its maximal ideal) is smaller or
equal to the dimension of the Zariski tangent space of $B$ (at its maximal ideal)?
For example, if $B$ is regular then $A$ is regular, so the above would hold, but I don't want to assume something so strong.
I know no example where it fails, but I am particularly interested in the case that $A$ and $B$ are both lci and Artin.
ag.algebraic-geometry ac.commutative-algebra
$endgroup$
Let $f:A to B$ be a finite flat local homomorphism of noetherian local rings.
Are there some nice conditions on $A$ and $B$ which guarantee that the dimension
of the Zariski tangent space of $A$ (at its maximal ideal) is smaller or
equal to the dimension of the Zariski tangent space of $B$ (at its maximal ideal)?
For example, if $B$ is regular then $A$ is regular, so the above would hold, but I don't want to assume something so strong.
I know no example where it fails, but I am particularly interested in the case that $A$ and $B$ are both lci and Artin.
ag.algebraic-geometry ac.commutative-algebra
ag.algebraic-geometry ac.commutative-algebra
asked Aug 3 at 8:32
ulrichulrich
8,6451 gold badge33 silver badges47 bronze badges
8,6451 gold badge33 silver badges47 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Lemma. Let $A to B$ be a flat local homomorphism of Noetherian local rings with the same residue field $k$ such that $A$ and $B$ are both (local) complete intersections. Then
$$
dim(B) - dim(A) + dim_k mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 leq dim_k mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2
$$
provided $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$.
Proof. By a theorem of Avramov, the ring map $A to B$ is a local complete intersection homomorphism! Consider the distinguished triangle
$$
L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k to L_k/A to L_k/B to
(L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k)[1]
$$
of cotangent complexes associated to the ring maps $A to B to k$. Observe that $H^0(L_k/A) = 0$ and $H^-1(L_k/A) = mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2$ and similarly for $B$. Since $A to B$ is a flat local complete intersection of relative dimension $dim(B) - dim(A)$, the complex $L_B/A$ is isomorphic in $D(B)$ to a complex of the form
$$
B^oplus r to B^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A)
$$
for some integer $r geq 0$ with the two terms sitting in degrees $-1$ and $0$ and the map given by a matrix whose coefficients are in $mathfrak m_B$. To see this we use that $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$ and hence a localization of an algebra of the form $A[x_1, ldots, x_r + dim(B) - dim(A)]/(f_1, ldots, f_r)$ which is a relative global complete intersection. Putting everything together we see that we get an exact sequence
$$
k^oplus r to mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 to
mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2 to k^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A) to 0
$$
of $k$-vector spaces. We conclude by dimension theory for finite dimensional vector spaces.
Remark. The assumption of $B$ being essentially of finite type over $A$ can be removed, but it becomes a bit technical if you want to do this. Conversely, you can spell out what Avramov's theorem means in nontechnical terms and prove the lemma without using the cotangent complex (but since Avramov's theorem is kind of hard you don't gain a lot in doing so I think).
Note. I haven't considered what happens if the residue fields aren't the same (for example if the residue field extension is inseparable). I haven't tried to make a counter example if the rings aren't lci.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! The assumption that the residue fields are the same is good enough for me, but knowing the limits of the statement would of course be nice.
$endgroup$
– ulrich
Aug 4 at 2:45
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "504"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f337537%2fflat-maps-and-zariski-tangent-spaces%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Lemma. Let $A to B$ be a flat local homomorphism of Noetherian local rings with the same residue field $k$ such that $A$ and $B$ are both (local) complete intersections. Then
$$
dim(B) - dim(A) + dim_k mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 leq dim_k mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2
$$
provided $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$.
Proof. By a theorem of Avramov, the ring map $A to B$ is a local complete intersection homomorphism! Consider the distinguished triangle
$$
L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k to L_k/A to L_k/B to
(L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k)[1]
$$
of cotangent complexes associated to the ring maps $A to B to k$. Observe that $H^0(L_k/A) = 0$ and $H^-1(L_k/A) = mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2$ and similarly for $B$. Since $A to B$ is a flat local complete intersection of relative dimension $dim(B) - dim(A)$, the complex $L_B/A$ is isomorphic in $D(B)$ to a complex of the form
$$
B^oplus r to B^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A)
$$
for some integer $r geq 0$ with the two terms sitting in degrees $-1$ and $0$ and the map given by a matrix whose coefficients are in $mathfrak m_B$. To see this we use that $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$ and hence a localization of an algebra of the form $A[x_1, ldots, x_r + dim(B) - dim(A)]/(f_1, ldots, f_r)$ which is a relative global complete intersection. Putting everything together we see that we get an exact sequence
$$
k^oplus r to mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 to
mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2 to k^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A) to 0
$$
of $k$-vector spaces. We conclude by dimension theory for finite dimensional vector spaces.
Remark. The assumption of $B$ being essentially of finite type over $A$ can be removed, but it becomes a bit technical if you want to do this. Conversely, you can spell out what Avramov's theorem means in nontechnical terms and prove the lemma without using the cotangent complex (but since Avramov's theorem is kind of hard you don't gain a lot in doing so I think).
Note. I haven't considered what happens if the residue fields aren't the same (for example if the residue field extension is inseparable). I haven't tried to make a counter example if the rings aren't lci.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! The assumption that the residue fields are the same is good enough for me, but knowing the limits of the statement would of course be nice.
$endgroup$
– ulrich
Aug 4 at 2:45
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Lemma. Let $A to B$ be a flat local homomorphism of Noetherian local rings with the same residue field $k$ such that $A$ and $B$ are both (local) complete intersections. Then
$$
dim(B) - dim(A) + dim_k mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 leq dim_k mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2
$$
provided $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$.
Proof. By a theorem of Avramov, the ring map $A to B$ is a local complete intersection homomorphism! Consider the distinguished triangle
$$
L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k to L_k/A to L_k/B to
(L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k)[1]
$$
of cotangent complexes associated to the ring maps $A to B to k$. Observe that $H^0(L_k/A) = 0$ and $H^-1(L_k/A) = mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2$ and similarly for $B$. Since $A to B$ is a flat local complete intersection of relative dimension $dim(B) - dim(A)$, the complex $L_B/A$ is isomorphic in $D(B)$ to a complex of the form
$$
B^oplus r to B^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A)
$$
for some integer $r geq 0$ with the two terms sitting in degrees $-1$ and $0$ and the map given by a matrix whose coefficients are in $mathfrak m_B$. To see this we use that $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$ and hence a localization of an algebra of the form $A[x_1, ldots, x_r + dim(B) - dim(A)]/(f_1, ldots, f_r)$ which is a relative global complete intersection. Putting everything together we see that we get an exact sequence
$$
k^oplus r to mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 to
mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2 to k^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A) to 0
$$
of $k$-vector spaces. We conclude by dimension theory for finite dimensional vector spaces.
Remark. The assumption of $B$ being essentially of finite type over $A$ can be removed, but it becomes a bit technical if you want to do this. Conversely, you can spell out what Avramov's theorem means in nontechnical terms and prove the lemma without using the cotangent complex (but since Avramov's theorem is kind of hard you don't gain a lot in doing so I think).
Note. I haven't considered what happens if the residue fields aren't the same (for example if the residue field extension is inseparable). I haven't tried to make a counter example if the rings aren't lci.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! The assumption that the residue fields are the same is good enough for me, but knowing the limits of the statement would of course be nice.
$endgroup$
– ulrich
Aug 4 at 2:45
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Lemma. Let $A to B$ be a flat local homomorphism of Noetherian local rings with the same residue field $k$ such that $A$ and $B$ are both (local) complete intersections. Then
$$
dim(B) - dim(A) + dim_k mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 leq dim_k mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2
$$
provided $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$.
Proof. By a theorem of Avramov, the ring map $A to B$ is a local complete intersection homomorphism! Consider the distinguished triangle
$$
L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k to L_k/A to L_k/B to
(L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k)[1]
$$
of cotangent complexes associated to the ring maps $A to B to k$. Observe that $H^0(L_k/A) = 0$ and $H^-1(L_k/A) = mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2$ and similarly for $B$. Since $A to B$ is a flat local complete intersection of relative dimension $dim(B) - dim(A)$, the complex $L_B/A$ is isomorphic in $D(B)$ to a complex of the form
$$
B^oplus r to B^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A)
$$
for some integer $r geq 0$ with the two terms sitting in degrees $-1$ and $0$ and the map given by a matrix whose coefficients are in $mathfrak m_B$. To see this we use that $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$ and hence a localization of an algebra of the form $A[x_1, ldots, x_r + dim(B) - dim(A)]/(f_1, ldots, f_r)$ which is a relative global complete intersection. Putting everything together we see that we get an exact sequence
$$
k^oplus r to mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 to
mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2 to k^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A) to 0
$$
of $k$-vector spaces. We conclude by dimension theory for finite dimensional vector spaces.
Remark. The assumption of $B$ being essentially of finite type over $A$ can be removed, but it becomes a bit technical if you want to do this. Conversely, you can spell out what Avramov's theorem means in nontechnical terms and prove the lemma without using the cotangent complex (but since Avramov's theorem is kind of hard you don't gain a lot in doing so I think).
Note. I haven't considered what happens if the residue fields aren't the same (for example if the residue field extension is inseparable). I haven't tried to make a counter example if the rings aren't lci.
$endgroup$
Lemma. Let $A to B$ be a flat local homomorphism of Noetherian local rings with the same residue field $k$ such that $A$ and $B$ are both (local) complete intersections. Then
$$
dim(B) - dim(A) + dim_k mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 leq dim_k mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2
$$
provided $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$.
Proof. By a theorem of Avramov, the ring map $A to B$ is a local complete intersection homomorphism! Consider the distinguished triangle
$$
L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k to L_k/A to L_k/B to
(L_B/A otimes_B^mathbfL k)[1]
$$
of cotangent complexes associated to the ring maps $A to B to k$. Observe that $H^0(L_k/A) = 0$ and $H^-1(L_k/A) = mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2$ and similarly for $B$. Since $A to B$ is a flat local complete intersection of relative dimension $dim(B) - dim(A)$, the complex $L_B/A$ is isomorphic in $D(B)$ to a complex of the form
$$
B^oplus r to B^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A)
$$
for some integer $r geq 0$ with the two terms sitting in degrees $-1$ and $0$ and the map given by a matrix whose coefficients are in $mathfrak m_B$. To see this we use that $B$ is essentially of finite type over $A$ and hence a localization of an algebra of the form $A[x_1, ldots, x_r + dim(B) - dim(A)]/(f_1, ldots, f_r)$ which is a relative global complete intersection. Putting everything together we see that we get an exact sequence
$$
k^oplus r to mathfrak m_A/mathfrak m_A^2 to
mathfrak m_B/mathfrak m_B^2 to k^oplus r + dim(B) - dim(A) to 0
$$
of $k$-vector spaces. We conclude by dimension theory for finite dimensional vector spaces.
Remark. The assumption of $B$ being essentially of finite type over $A$ can be removed, but it becomes a bit technical if you want to do this. Conversely, you can spell out what Avramov's theorem means in nontechnical terms and prove the lemma without using the cotangent complex (but since Avramov's theorem is kind of hard you don't gain a lot in doing so I think).
Note. I haven't considered what happens if the residue fields aren't the same (for example if the residue field extension is inseparable). I haven't tried to make a counter example if the rings aren't lci.
answered Aug 3 at 11:59
darxdarx
1161 silver badge2 bronze badges
1161 silver badge2 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! The assumption that the residue fields are the same is good enough for me, but knowing the limits of the statement would of course be nice.
$endgroup$
– ulrich
Aug 4 at 2:45
add a comment
|
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! The assumption that the residue fields are the same is good enough for me, but knowing the limits of the statement would of course be nice.
$endgroup$
– ulrich
Aug 4 at 2:45
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! The assumption that the residue fields are the same is good enough for me, but knowing the limits of the statement would of course be nice.
$endgroup$
– ulrich
Aug 4 at 2:45
$begingroup$
Thanks a lot! The assumption that the residue fields are the same is good enough for me, but knowing the limits of the statement would of course be nice.
$endgroup$
– ulrich
Aug 4 at 2:45
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f337537%2fflat-maps-and-zariski-tangent-spaces%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown