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.
Valuation Rings and Discrete Valuation Rings
1 · Prerequisites
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Chain Conditions, Semisimple Modules and the Wedderburn–Artin Theorem
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Determinants of Matrices over a Commutative Ring
- Divisibility, Euclidean Domains, Principal Ideal Domains and Unique Factorisation
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Group Actions, Orbits, Stabilisers and Cayley's Theorem
- Group Homomorphisms and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Ideals, Quotient Rings and the Isomorphism Theorems for Rings
- Integral Extensions and Going Up
- Modules, Submodules, Quotient Modules and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Noetherian Rings and Hilbert Basis
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Polynomial Rings, the Division Algorithm and Roots
- Prime Spectra and Radicals
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Symmetric Groups, Cycle Decomposition and the Sign Homomorphism
- Tensor Products of Modules
- The Determinant of a Linear Operator, Cofactors and Cramer's Rule
- The Field of Fractions and Localisation
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
2 · Summary
This page fixes the ordered-group conventions behind valuations, then develops valuation rings from their field-theoretic comparability condition to the value-group construction that recovers a valuation from the ring itself. The main discrete block identifies uniformisers, proves the unit-times-power normal form and the classification of ideals, and collapses the prime spectrum of a discrete valuation ring to the two expected primes.
The closing theorems package the standard interfaces used later in the commutative-algebra track: the equivalence between the common DVR characterisations, the criterion that a Noetherian valuation ring is either a field or a DVR, the length computation for principal quotients, and the height-one localisation result for normal Noetherian domains.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
Totally ordered abelian groups
Definition
A totally ordered abelian group is an abelian group together with a total order such that translation preserves the order:
for all .
The positive cone is
and similarly , , and .
Valuations on a field
Definition
Let be a field and let be a totally ordered abelian group (Totally ordered abelian groups). Adjoin a symbol with for every .
A valuation on with value group in is a map
such that for all ,
and
When , the value lies in . The displayed laws imply and for .
Valuation rings
Definition
Let be a field. A subring is a valuation ring of if for every at least one of and belongs to .
Thus a valuation ring decides each nonzero element of the ambient field by membership: either the element itself is in the ring, or its inverse is.
A valuation ring is local
Statement
Let be a valuation ring. Then the nonunits of form an ideal. That ideal is the unique maximal ideal of , so is a local ring.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A valuation ring contained in a field .
For every , at least one of and belongs to (Valuation rings).
If and , then is a unit of the ring .
Proof
Let . By [A1], an element of lies outside exactly when it is a unit, so and is proper.
If and , then : if and , then , contradicting .
Let . If , then is a unit by step 1.1. If or this contradicts , so assume . By [F1], either or ; in the first case , and in the second case , again a contradiction. Thus .
Steps 2.1 and 2.2 show that is an ideal. Every proper ideal contains no unit, so every proper ideal is contained in . Hence is the unique maximal ideal of , and is local.
Characterizations of valuation rings
Statement
Let be a domain with fraction field . The following are equivalent.
- is a valuation ring of .
- For every , one of and divides the other in .
- The ideals of are linearly ordered by inclusion.
When these conditions hold, every finitely generated ideal of is principal.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A domain with fraction field .
A valuation ring is a subring such that for every nonzero at least one of and lies in (Valuation rings).
A valuation ring is local, and its nonunits form the unique maximal ideal (A valuation ring is local).
Every nonzero element of the fraction field can be written as with and .
Proof
Assume condition 1. Let . If or , divisibility is trivial. If , apply [F1] to : if , then , so divides ; if , then divides . Thus condition 2 holds.
Assume condition 2. Let and be ideals of . If , choose . For any , condition 2 says either divides or divides ; the second option would put in , so for some and hence . Therefore . By symmetry, any two ideals are comparable, so condition 3 holds.
Assume condition 3. Let , and choose with and by [A1]. The principal ideals and are comparable. If , then for some , so . If , then for some , so . Thus condition 1 holds.
Under condition 3, a finitely generated ideal is principal: among the finitely many comparable principal ideals , choose a largest one, say . Then every lies in , so . The zero ideal is , and step 1.3 now identifies as a valuation ring, so [L1] records the local consequence for nonunits.
The value group of a valuation ring
Definition
Let be a valuation ring (Valuation rings). Its value group is the quotient abelian group
written additively, where the group law is induced by multiplication in .
For , write for its class in . The intended order is
The next theorem checks that this order is well defined, total, and translation-invariant.
A valuation ring is recovered from its value group
Statement
Let be a valuation ring, and let be its value group. Define an order on by
Then this order is well defined, total, and translation-invariant, so is a totally ordered abelian group.
If is defined by and for , then is a valuation on , and its valuation ring is exactly .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A valuation ring in a field , and the quotient group .
A valuation on a field is a map to a totally ordered abelian group adjoined with satisfying the exact-zero, multiplicative, and ultrametric laws (Valuations on a field).
The value group of is the quotient group , and is intended to mean (The value group of a valuation ring).
If , then for every one has if and only if .
Proof
The order relation of [L2] is well defined on cosets: if and with , then , and [A1] shows that exactly when .
The order is reflexive because . It is antisymmetric because if and , then both and lie in , so is a unit of . Hence and represent the same coset in .
The order is transitive because and imply . It is total because is a valuation ring: for any , the quotient either lies in or has inverse in . It is translation-invariant because is equivalent to . Thus is a totally ordered abelian group.
Define and for . Then exactly when , and for one has . If , then . Otherwise, after swapping and if needed, step 1.3 gives , so and with ; hence . Therefore satisfies the valuation axioms of [L1].
The nonnegative locus of is exactly : for , the condition means , which by [L2] is equivalent to . Since as well, the valuation ring of is precisely .
Valuation rings are integrally closed
Statement
Every valuation ring is an integrally closed domain.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A valuation ring contained in a field .
A domain is integrally closed when every element of its field of fractions integral over it already lies in the domain (Integral closure in an extension ring and integrally closed domains).
A valuation ring is a subring such that for each , at least one of and lies in (Valuation rings).
A valuation ring is local, and its nonunits form the unique maximal ideal (A valuation ring is local).
Any subring of a field is a domain, and its field of fractions embeds in that field.
Proof
Let be an element of the field of fractions of that is integral over . By [A1], regard as an element of . If , then [F1] gives . This element is not a unit of , because a unit inverse would put back in . Hence [L2] places in the maximal ideal of .
Choose a monic equation with . Multiplying by gives . Since and is an ideal, every term except lies in . Therefore , contradicting maximality.
So . By [L1], this proves that is integrally closed; by [A1], it is also a domain.
Discrete valuations
Definition
A discrete valuation on a field is a valuation
in the sense of Valuations on a field such that the restriction is surjective.
The adjective "discrete" refers to the value group with its usual order.
Discrete valuation rings
Definition
Let be a field and let be a discrete valuation on (Discrete valuations). Its valuation ring is
This is a valuation ring in the sense of Valuation rings.
A discrete valuation ring (DVR) is a subring of the form for some discrete valuation on . Because is surjective, there is an element of value , so has a nonunit and is therefore not a field.
Uniformising parameters
Definition
Let be a discrete valuation ring with discrete valuation and maximal ideal . A uniformising parameter or uniformiser is an element with
This is equivalent to requiring that generate the maximal ideal . Indeed, if and is nonzero, then , so and therefore . Conversely, if and , then surjectivity of the valuation gives an element with , and would force , impossible.
Every nonzero fraction is a unit times a power of a uniformiser
Statement
Let be a discrete valuation ring with fraction field , let be its discrete valuation, and let be a uniformiser. Then every nonzero element has a unique expression
with and .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A discrete valuation ring , its discrete valuation , and a uniformiser .
A uniformiser is an element of value in a discrete valuation ring (Uniformising parameters).
A discrete valuation ring is the nonnegative locus of a surjective valuation (Discrete valuation rings).
Proof
Let and put . Since by [F1], one has . Setting , [F2] gives and , hence . Therefore .
Suppose also that with and . Applying gives because units have valuation . Then . So the expression is unique.
Ideals in a DVR are powers of the maximal ideal
Statement
Let be a discrete valuation ring with maximal ideal , where is a uniformiser. Then every nonzero ideal is of the form
for a unique integer .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A discrete valuation ring with maximal ideal , where is a uniformiser.
Every nonzero element of the fraction field of is uniquely with a unit and (Every nonzero fraction is a unit times a power of a uniformiser).
A uniformiser generates the maximal ideal of a DVR (Uniformising parameters).
Proof
Let be an ideal of . Because , every nonzero element of has valuation in . Choose with minimal valuation . By [L1], for a unit , so .
If is nonzero, then [L1] gives for some unit and . Minimality of yields , so . Thus , while step 1.1 gave . Hence . Since [F1] gives , this is also .
If , then and , so and . Therefore , and the exponent is unique.
Prime ideals and dimension of a DVR
Statement
Let be a discrete valuation ring with maximal ideal . Then the only prime ideals of are and . In particular,
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A discrete valuation ring with maximal ideal .
Every nonzero ideal of is for a unique (Ideals in a DVR are powers of the maximal ideal).
The Krull dimension of a nonzero ring is the supremum of the lengths of its strict chains of prime ideals (Krull dimension of a nonzero ring).
A discrete valuation ring is a domain, so is prime.
Proof
Let be a nonzero prime ideal of . Choose . By [L1], for some unit and some , so . Since is prime, . Therefore , and maximality of forces .
By [A1], is prime, and step 1.1 shows there are no other nonzero primes besides . Therefore the prime spectrum has exactly the strict chain . Its length is , and no longer chain exists. Hence [F1] gives .
Equivalent characterizations of a DVR
Statement
Let be a nonfield domain. The following are equivalent.
- is a discrete valuation ring.
- is a Noetherian valuation ring.
- is a one-dimensional Noetherian local integrally closed domain.
- is a local principal ideal domain with nonzero maximal ideal.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A nonfield domain with fraction field .
A local ring is a nonzero commutative ring with a unique maximal ideal (A local ring is a nonzero commutative ring with a unique maximal ideal).
A ring is Noetherian exactly when every ideal is finitely generated (A commutative ring is Noetherian exactly when every ideal is finitely generated, exactly when its ideals satisfy the ascending chain condition, and exactly when every nonempty set of ideals has a maximal member).
A principal ideal domain is an integral domain in which every ideal is principal (Principal ideal domain).
A domain is integrally closed when every element of its fraction field integral over it already lies in the domain (Integral closure in an extension ring and integrally closed domains).
Valuation rings are integrally closed (Valuation rings are integrally closed).
In a valuation ring the ideals are linearly ordered, and every finitely generated ideal is principal (Characterizations of valuation rings).
A valuation ring is local (A valuation ring is local).
In a discrete valuation ring every nonzero ideal is a power of the maximal ideal (Ideals in a DVR are powers of the maximal ideal).
A discrete valuation ring has exactly two prime ideals and dimension (Prime ideals and dimension of a DVR).
Quotients and localisations of Noetherian rings are Noetherian (Every quotient and every localisation of a Noetherian ring is Noetherian).
The nilradical of a Noetherian ring is nilpotent (The nilradical of a Noetherian ring is nilpotent).
For a positive-size square matrix over a commutative ring, (For every positive-sized square matrix over a commutative ring, ).
Krull dimension is the supremum of the lengths of strict chains of prime ideals (Krull dimension of a nonzero ring).
Proof
Assume condition 1. Then [L3] makes local. By [L4], every ideal of is principal, so [F3] shows that is a PID; in particular it is condition 4. Because every ideal is principal, [F2] makes Noetherian, so condition 2 holds as well. By [L1] and [L5], is integrally closed and one-dimensional, so condition 3 also holds.
Assume condition 2. By [L3], the ring is local with maximal ideal . Because is not a field, . By [F2], every ideal of is finitely generated, so choose generators of . By [L2], one of them divides all the others; rename it . Then .
Assume condition 3. Let be the unique maximal ideal. It is nonzero because is not a field. Choose . The quotient is Noetherian by [L6]. Every prime ideal of containing is nonzero, hence equals because . Therefore the nilradical of is , so [L7] yields an integer with .
Assume condition 4. Then the ring is local with nonzero maximal ideal . Because every ideal is principal, [F2] makes Noetherian. Every element outside is a unit: if , then is not contained in the unique maximal ideal, so . Hence every nonunit is a multiple of .
In the situations of steps 1.2 and 1.4, the ring is a Noetherian local domain with nonzero principal maximal ideal . Let . If is not a unit, the maximal-ideal description gives . If is not a unit, write , and continue. This process stops, for otherwise would be a strict ascending chain of ideals, contradicting Noetherianity. Thus every nonzero element has the form with a unit and . If with units , then , for otherwise a positive power of the nonunit would equal a unit.
In the same situations, every nonzero ideal of is for a unique integer : choose whose exponent in step 2.1 is minimal, say . Then . For any nonzero , write by step 2.1; minimality gives , so . Hence . Therefore step 1.2 already yields condition 4.
Under condition 4, let with . By step 2.1, write and . Then . If , then ; if , then . Thus is a valuation ring, and step 1.4 already makes it Noetherian. Therefore condition 2 holds.
Return to condition 3. Choose minimal with . If , then , so steps 1.3 and 3.1 give condition 4. Suppose instead that , and choose . Then , so satisfies while .
Under condition 4, define by and when as in step 3.2. The uniqueness part of step 2.1 makes this well defined. Multiplicativity is immediate from exponents. If , write and with ; then , and the bracket lies in , so . Because , this valuation is surjective, and its nonnegative locus is exactly . Therefore condition 1 holds.
Still under condition 3, suppose also that . Because is Noetherian, [F2] lets us choose generators of . Write with . In matrix form this is . By [L8], . Choose an index with ; since is a domain, the equality forces . This is a monic polynomial equation for with coefficients in , so is integral over . Because and condition 3 says is integrally closed, [F4] then forces , a contradiction. Hence .
By step 5.1, choose with . Since , the element lies in . Being outside the maximal ideal, is a unit. For every , the element lies in , so . Thus , and is principal. Together with step 1.3, step 3.1 now gives condition 4.
Step 1.1 proves ; steps 1.2 and 3.1 prove ; step 3.2 proves ; step 4.2 proves ; and steps 1.3 to 6.1 prove . Therefore all four conditions are equivalent.
A Noetherian valuation ring is a field or a DVR
Statement
Let be a valuation ring. Then is Noetherian if and only if is a field or a discrete valuation ring.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A valuation ring .
A ring is Noetherian by the definition fixed earlier (Left and right Noetherian rings).
In a valuation ring the ideals are linearly ordered and every finitely generated ideal is principal (Characterizations of valuation rings).
For a nonfield domain, being a Noetherian valuation ring is equivalent to being a DVR (Equivalent characterizations of a DVR).
Proof
Suppose is Noetherian. A valuation ring is a domain, so if is not a field then [L2] applies and shows that is a DVR. Thus a Noetherian valuation ring is a field or a DVR.
Conversely, every field is Noetherian because its only ideals are and the whole ring. If is a DVR, then [L2] applied in the forward direction shows that it is a Noetherian valuation ring. Hence is Noetherian exactly in the two stated cases.
Length and valuation in a DVR
Statement
Let be a discrete valuation ring with uniformiser . Then for every integer ,
More generally, if is nonzero and with a unit, then
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A discrete valuation ring with uniformiser .
Every nonzero element of the fraction field of is uniquely with a unit and (Every nonzero fraction is a unit times a power of a uniformiser).
Every nonzero ideal of is for a unique integer (Ideals in a DVR are powers of the maximal ideal).
A composition series has finitely many simple factors, and the length is their number (Composition series and length of a module).
Length is additive in short exact sequences (Module length is additive in short exact sequences).
Proof
The case is , whose length is by [F1]. For , the ideals of correspond to the ideals of containing . By [L2], those are only and , so is simple and has length .
For each there is a short exact sequence . Multiplication by induces an isomorphism , so step 1.1 gives . Therefore [L3] yields .
By induction on , step 1.1 and step 2.1 give for every .
Let be nonzero, and write as in [L1]. Multiplication by the unit identifies the ideals and , so as -modules. Hence .
Height-one localizations of normal Noetherian domains are DVRs
Statement
Let be a Noetherian integrally closed domain, and let be a prime ideal of height . Then the localisation is a discrete valuation ring.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A Noetherian integrally closed domain and a height-one prime ideal .
The height of is (The height of a prime ideal).
Localisation at a prime means inverting (Localisation at a prime ideal: ).
The ring is local with maximal ideal ( is local with unique maximal ideal ).
A domain is integrally closed when every element of its fraction field integral over it already lies in the domain (Integral closure in an extension ring and integrally closed domains).
Localisations of Noetherian rings are Noetherian (Every quotient and every localisation of a Noetherian ring is Noetherian).
A nonfield domain is a DVR exactly when it is a one-dimensional Noetherian local integrally closed domain (Equivalent characterizations of a DVR).
Proof
By [L1] and [L3], the ring is a Noetherian local domain. By [F1], its Krull dimension is .
The localisation remains integrally closed. Let lie in the fraction field of and be integral over . Write a monic equation with each . Put . Then is integral over , so [F3] gives . Since , we conclude . Thus is integrally closed.
The maximal ideal of is nonzero. Choose . If in , then some satisfies , impossible in the domain . Hence is nonzero, so is not a field.
Steps 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 verify condition 3 of [L4] for the ring . Therefore is a discrete valuation ring.
Every DVR is a PID
Statement
Every discrete valuation ring is a principal ideal domain.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A discrete valuation ring .
Every nonzero ideal of a DVR is a power of its maximal ideal, hence principal (Ideals in a DVR are powers of the maximal ideal).
A principal ideal domain is an integral domain in which every ideal is principal (Principal ideal domain).
Proof
A discrete valuation ring is a domain. Its zero ideal is principal, and [L1] shows that every nonzero ideal is principal.
Therefore every ideal of the domain is principal, so [F1] makes a principal ideal domain.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
None yet.
Sources
- Allen B. Altman and Steven L. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., (26.11)
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Definition 8.1
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Definition 8.1 and Remark 8.2
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Definition 8.4
- Allen B. Altman and Steven L. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., Definition (26.1)
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Remark 8.5
- Allen B. Altman and Steven L. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., Proposition (26.2)
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Propositions 8.3-8.6
- Allen B. Altman and Steven L. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., Exercise (26.3) and Exercise (26.15)(1)
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Proposition 8.6
- Allen B. Altman and Steven L. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., Exercise (26.5)
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Section 8.1
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Definition 8.7
- Allen B. Altman and Steven L. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., (23.1)
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Definition 8.8
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Remark 8.9
- J. S. Milne, A Primer of Commutative Algebra, v4.03, Discrete valuation rings after Example 20.1
- Allen B. Altman and Steven L. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., Theorem (23.10)
- J. S. Milne, A Primer of Commutative Algebra, v4.03, Proposition 20.2
- M. Mustata, Commutative Algebra, Proposition 8.13
- Allen B. Altman and Steven L. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., Exercise (26.15)(2)
- Allen B. Altman and Steven L. Kleiman, A Term of Commutative Algebra, 13th ed., §23
- J. S. Milne, A Primer of Commutative Algebra, v4.03, Proposition 20.5 and Corollary 20.6