Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

13 results · all verified · 13 also independently AI-judged
Every result on this page is machine-checked by a proof checker and read in full and owner-audited; the judge is an additional, independent cross-model AI review of the proofs; all 13 also cleared it.

Depth and Cohen Macaulay Modules — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

These concrete examples compute the depth convention, show sharpness of the Depth Lemma, test parameter regularity and completion, and distinguish Cohen--Macaulayness from being a domain.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

A zero-dimensional local ring is Cohen--Macaulay

Example

Let A=k[ε]/(ε2). This nonreduced local Artinian ring is Cohen--Macaulay of dimension 0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the unique prime and maximal ideal of A is (ε).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

Since Spec(A) has one point, dimA=0. The element ε is a zero divisor, so no positive-length regular sequence lies in the maximal ideal and depthA=0.

given
2.1

Thus depth equals dimension. Equivalently, apply the general zero-dimensional corollary to the finite A-module A.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Polynomial rings are Cohen--Macaulay

Example

For every field k and every integer n0, the polynomial ring k[X1,,Xn] is a Cohen--Macaulay ring. At the homogeneous maximal ideal m=(X1,,Xn), the variables form a regular system of parameters of the local ring.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: a field is a zero-dimensional Cohen--Macaulay ring.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

Iterating thm-polynomial-extension-of-cohen-macaulay-rings shows that k[X1,,Xn] is globally Cohen--Macaulay.

given
2.1

In the localization at m, multiplication by Xi remains injective after quotienting by the preceding variables, and the terminal quotient is k. Thus the displayed variables are a regular parameter system of length n.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

A non-Cohen--Macaulay local quotient

Example

Let k be a field and let A=kx,y/(x2,xy),m=(x,y)A. Then A is a one-dimensional Noetherian local ring of depth 0, so it is not Cohen--Macaulay.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the radical of (x2,xy) is (x).

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

Hence dimA=dimky=1. The nonzero class of x is annihilated by both x and y, so annA(x)=m and mAssA(A).

given
2.1

The depth-zero criterion gives depthA=0. Since 0<1=dimA, the ring is not Cohen--Macaulay.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

A Cohen--Macaulay ring with zero divisors

Example

For a field k, the ring A=kx,y/(xy) is a one-dimensional Cohen--Macaulay local ring with nonzero zero divisors.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: kx,y is a two-dimensional regular local domain and xy is nonzero.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

Put Q=kx,y. The sequence x,y is a regular system of parameters of Q, so cor-one-regular-system-of-parameters-implies-cohen-macaulay makes Q Cohen--Macaulay. The nonzero element xy is Q-regular, and (xy,x+y) is a system of parameters because Q/(xy,x+y)kx/(x2) has finite length. Therefore thm-regular-quotients-and-cohen-macaulayness makes A=Q/(xy) Cohen--Macaulay of dimension one.

givenalgebra
2.1

The classes of x and y are nonzero but their product is zero. Hence A is Cohen--Macaulay although it is not a domain.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

A nonfree maximal Cohen--Macaulay module

Example

Let A=kx,y/(xy) and M=A/(x)ky. Then M is a nonfree maximal Cohen--Macaulay A-module.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: dimA=1 and M0 is finite.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

Multiplication by y is injective on Mky, and M/yMk is nonzero. Thus depthA(M)1, while the dimension bound gives equality.

given
2.1

Hence depthA(M)=dimA=1, so M is maximal Cohen--Macaulay. It is not free: the nonzero element xA annihilates all of M, whereas a nonzero free A-module has zero annihilator.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Depth of a hypersurface quotient

Example

Let (Q,n) be a regular local domain of dimension d>0 and let 0fn. Then depth(Q/(f))=d1=dim(Q/(f)).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Q is Cohen--Macaulay of depth d, and f is a nonzerodivisor.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

The depth quotient formula gives depth(Q/(f))=depth(Q)1=d1.

given
2.1

The principal ideal theorem and regularity of f give dim(Q/(f))=d1. Thus the hypersurface quotient is Cohen--Macaulay.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Depth of a union of planes

Example

Let S=k[x,y,z,w](x,y,z,w), I=(x,y), J=(z,w), and A=S/(IJ). The union of the two coordinate planes has dimA=2 but depthA=1, so it is not Cohen--Macaulay.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: I+J is the maximal ideal and IJ=IJ.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

The standard fibre-product sequence is 0AS/IS/JS/(I+J)0. The middle term has depth 2, while the last term is k and has depth 0.

given
2.1

Since the middle depth is strictly greater than the quotient depth, the unequal-depth consequence of the Depth Lemma gives depthA=0+1=1. Both irreducible components have dimension 2, so dimA=2.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07Open item page →

The zero-module and surjective-ideal depth conventions

Example

For every commutative ring R and ideal I, depthI(0)=+. There are also nonzero examples with IM=M: for R=k×k, I=k×0, and M=I, one has IM=M and hence depthI(M)=+.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: M=I is generated by the idempotent (1,0) and is nonzero.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

The exceptional clause in the definition applies to the zero module because I0=0. In the product-ring example, I2=I, so IM=I2=M.

given
2.1

lem-depth-infinity-when-ideal-acts-surjectively therefore assigns + in both cases. This does not conflict with Nakayama: the ideal in the nonzero example is not contained in the Jacobson radical.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Three sharp Depth Lemma inequalities

Example

Let R=kt and k=R/(t). The three Depth Lemma lower bounds are sharp:

  1. in 0kkRR0, the middle bound is 0=min{0,1};
  2. in 0RtRk0, the left bound is 1=min{1,0+1};
  3. in the same nonsplit sequence, the right bound is 0=min{11,1}.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: depthR=1 and depthk=0.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

The first sequence is split exact. The second and third sequences are exact because t is a nonzerodivisor and its cokernel is k.

given
2.1

Substitution of the depth triples (0,0,1) and (1,1,0) gives the three equalities displayed above, so no lower bound can be increased in general.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

A parameter sequence regular in a hypersurface

Example

In A=kx,y,z/(xy), the pair x+y,z is a system of parameters and a regular sequence.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A is a two-dimensional hypersurface, hence Cohen--Macaulay.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

The quotient by x+y and z is A/(x+y,z)kx/(x2), which is nonzero and zero-dimensional. Thus x+y,z is a system of parameters.

given
2.1

Every system of parameters on a Cohen--Macaulay module is regular, so x+y is a nonzerodivisor on A and z is a nonzerodivisor on A/(x+y).

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

A parameter sequence that fails in a non-Cohen--Macaulay ring

Example

In the one-dimensional local ring A=kx,y/(x2,xy), the one-element sequence y is a system of parameters but is not regular.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: ex-non-cohen-macaulay-local-ring computes dimA=1 and depthA=0.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

The quotient A/yAkx/(x2) has dimension 0, so y is a parameter.

given
2.1

But the nonzero class of x satisfies yx=0. Thus y is a zero divisor and the parameter sequence is not regular, matching the depth gap 0<1.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Associated primes are unmixed in a Cohen--Macaulay example

Example

For A=kx,y/(xy), AssA(A)={(x)A,(y)A}. Both associated-prime quotients have dimension 1=dimA.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A is the Cohen--Macaulay hypersurface from ex-cohen-macaulay-ring-with-zero-divisors.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

In A, the annihilator of x is (y) and the annihilator of y is (x), so both primes are associated. The hypersurface is reduced with these two minimal primes; the Cohen--Macaulay associated-prime theorem rules out embedded primes.

given
2.1

Finally A/(x)ky and A/(y)kx, each of dimension 1. This verifies unmixedness directly.

step 1.1algebra
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

A depth computation before and after completion

Example

Let A=k[x,y](x,y)/(xy),A^kx,y/(xy). Then x+y is regular on both rings and depthA=depthA^=1.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: both rings have dimension 1.

Verification

technique · direct
1.1

If (x+y)g=0 modulo (xy), reduction modulo (x) and modulo (y) shows that g lies in both (x) and (y), hence in (xy); thus x+y is regular in A. Flat base change preserves its regularity in A^.

given
2.1

The regular element gives depth at least 1, and the dimension bound gives depth at most 1, on both sides. This also illustrates the general completion depth equality.

step 1.1algebra

Sources