Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedprecheck pass
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.

Scheme-theoretic preimages do not define a pullback on Chow groups

Statement refuted

Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice) inherited from the smooth-immersion and homological suppliers. Statement refuted. For every morphism f:Y→X of smooth projective k-varieties, the scheme-theoretic preimage recipe — send an integral closed subscheme V⊆X to the cycle [f−1(V)] of its scheme-theoretic preimage (Cycles of coherent sheaves and of closed subschemes, with flat pullback) and extend the assignment linearly to all cycles — descends to a well-defined homomorphism of abelian groups A∗(X)→A∗(Y); that is, preimage cycles of rationally equivalent cycles are rationally equivalent.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: the Axiom of Choice; a field k; the projective plane X=Pk2 with a rational point p, a second rational point q≠p, and the blowup π:Y=Bl⁡pX→X with exceptional curve E=π−1(p).

[F1]

The blowup is proper and birational; projectivity in this example is verified by the incidence model in step 1.1, rather than inferred from local H-projectivity. Its source is smooth by [F2]; the exceptional divisor is π−1(p) (Blowup of a scheme along an ideal sheaf, Exceptional subscheme of a blowup, Blowups of finite type ideals are locally H-projective, and proper, Blowing up a nonzero ideal on an integral scheme is birational).

[F2]

Because p is a rational point of the regular surface X, the blowup Y is a smooth projective surface and E≅Pk1; π restricts to an isomorphism over X∖{p} (Point blowups of regular surfaces stay regular, with rational exceptional fibre over the residue field, The blowup is an isomorphism off the center).

[F3]

In A0(Pk2)≅Z the class of a closed point x is [κ(x):k][P0]; in particular all k-rational points have the same class, and the degree homomorphism is injective (Chow groups of projective space).

[F4]

The scheme-theoretic preimage of an integral subscheme is its cycle under the fundamental-cycle convention; proper pushforward of cycles is defined by the norm-degree formula and descends to rational equivalence (Cycles of coherent sheaves and of closed subschemes, with flat pullback, Proper pushforward of cycles and the norm formula).

[F5]

For a flat morphism of fixed pure relative dimension the preimage recipe is the flat pullback and is well defined on Chow groups; in general the correction is given by the refined Gysin construction (Flat pullback of cycles and of rational equivalence, Refined Gysin pullback for regular embeddings).

Counterexample

1.1F1F2given

The geometric set-up. Choose homogeneous coordinates [x:y:z] with p=[0:0:1]. The incidence subscheme H={xv=yu}⊂Pk2×Pk1, with coordinates [u:v] on the second factor, is the blowup: on z≠0, its u≠0 and v≠0 charts are Spec⁡k[x,v/u] with y=x(v/u) and Spec⁡k[y,u/v] with x=y(u/v), the two Rees charts for (x,y); away from p the incidence projection is an isomorphism. These identifications glue to H≅Y. The Segre embedding The Segre-Veronese map is a closed embedding therefore embeds Y as a closed subscheme of projective space; the incidence embedding also proves that π is projective. By [F2] the blowup π:Y→X at the rational point p is a birational morphism of smooth projective surfaces, its exceptional curve E=π−1(p) is isomorphic to Pk1, and π restricts to an isomorphism π−1(X∖{p})→X∖{p}; in particular for the second rational point q≠p the scheme-theoretic preimage π−1(q)={q′} is a single reduced point.

2.1F3step 1.1

The rationally equivalent cycles. In A0(X)≅Z the classes of k-rational points are all equal because the degree homomorphism sends each to [κ(x):k]=1 and is injective: [p]=[q] in A0(X). The preimage cycles, however, lie in different Chow degrees: π−1(p)=E is a curve, so [E]∈Z1(Y), while π−1(q)={q′} is a point, so [q′]∈Z0(Y).

3.1F3F4F5step 2.1∎

The contradiction. If the preimage recipe descended to a homomorphism φ:A∗(X)→A∗(Y), then [p]=[q] would force φ[p]=φ[q], that is [E]=[q′] in A∗(Y). Apply the proper pushforward π∗, which is well defined on rational equivalence by [F4]. Since π(E)={p} has dimension 0<1=dim⁡E, the norm-degree formula gives π∗[E]=0; and since π is an isomorphism over q, π∗[q′]=[q]. Together with [E]=[q′] this gives [q]=0 in A0(X), contradicting that [q] has degree 1 by [F3]. By contrast the flat case of [F5] is well defined on Chow groups, so the failure is exactly the dimension jump of the non-flat morphism. Hence the preimage cycles of the rationally equivalent cycles [p] and [q] are not rationally equivalent, and the scheme-theoretic preimage recipe is not well defined on Chow groups.

Discussion. The obstruction is the jump of fibre dimension at p; for flat morphisms of fixed pure relative dimension the recipe is the flat pullback of Flat pullback of cycles and of rational equivalence and is well defined, while in general one needs the expected-dimension correction provided by the refined Gysin construction (Refined Gysin pullback for regular embeddings, and the Gysin construction for complete-intersection morphisms beyond the scope of this page). The counterexample refutes only the preimage recipe: it makes no claim about whether some corrected operation can define a pullback for the morphism above.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

100 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources