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.
Module sheaf on an affine scheme
Definition
Let be a commutative ring with , let be an -module, and put with its distinguished-open basis (The underlying space of an affine spectrum). For write for the localisation of at the multiplicative subset , as in Localisation of a module at a multiplicative subset. The distinguished-open data of assign
Restriction maps. Suppose . Then , so for some and some ; hence the image of in is a unit and is an -module. The localisation map is -linear, so the universal property of module localisation (Universal property of localisation for modules) gives a unique -linear map with .
Well-definedness. The map depends only on the pair of open sets: it is characterised as the unique -linear map compatible with the canonical maps from . Consequently , and for distinguished opens one has , because both sides are -linear maps that agree after composition with . Moreover, if then the maps and are mutually inverse; the two inclusions and are available, and the composition rule gives and . Thus the data are functorial on distinguished opens, canonically up to these identifications.
Module structure. On the structure sheaf has and the ring restriction for is the canonical localisation (Sections and restrictions on distinguished opens of an affine scheme). The map is -linear by construction, so the data form an -module on the distinguished-open basis: sections on are the -modules and restrictions are compatible with the ring restrictions.
Completion to a sheaf. A later result on this page proves that these distinguished-open data satisfy the sheaf conditions on the basis and extend uniquely to an -module, still denoted , whose sections on are the given modules ; the notation always refers to that -module.
Degenerate cases. For one has and , the localisation in which is inverted; this is the zero module. For a unit one has and . If then and is the zero sheaf on the empty space, whose module of sections on is . The construction is functorial in : an -linear map induces -linear maps commuting with all restriction maps.
Depends on
Used by
- Affine quasi-coherent sheaf determined by sections Corollary
- Euler characteristic in a proper flat family is locally constant Corollary
- Upper semicontinuity of fibre cohomology dimensions Corollary
- A non-quasi-coherent module with H1 on an affine scheme Counterexample
- Finite type need not be locally free Counterexample
- Global sections do not determine a sheaf on P1 Counterexample
- Proper cohomology need not be finite for noncoherent sheaves Counterexample
- Associated sheaf of a graded module on Proj Definition
- Cohomology and base-change map Definition
- Finite type and finitely presented module sheaves Definition
- Fitting ideal sheaves Definition
- Quasi-coherent ideal sheaves Definition
- Quasi-coherent module on a scheme Definition
- Symmetric algebra of a quasi-coherent module Definition
- A coherent closed-point skyscraper Example
- Fitting ideals of a diagonal two-by-two presentation Example
- Projective zero-space over an affine base Example
- Quotient module sheaf and its support Example
- Closed immersion preserves cohomology and coherent pushforward Lemma
- Finite projective complex for proper flat coherent cohomology Lemma
- Flat field extension commutes with coherent cohomology Lemma
- Higher direct images localize over an affine base Lemma
- Hypersurface cohomology sequence Lemma
- Internal Hom from a finitely presented sheaf is quasi-coherent Lemma
- Regular hyperplane step for coherent support induction Lemma
- Schematic closure and agreement on a dense open Lemma
- Scheme pullback preserves quasi-coherence Lemma
- Sections of a sheaf flat over the base are flat over affine opens Lemma
- Sections of the associated sheaf on basic opens Lemma
- Symmetric algebras are quasi-coherent and commute with pullback Lemma
- Tensor product preserves quasi-coherence Lemma
- The stalk of an associated sheaf is the localisation Lemma
- Affine acyclicity of quasi-coherent sheaves Theorem
- Affine quasi-coherent sheaves are modules Theorem
- Checking quasi-coherence on an affine cover Theorem
- Coherent higher direct images under proper morphisms Theorem
- Coherent sheaves on a locally Noetherian scheme Theorem
- Cohomology and base change for proper flat coherent families Theorem
- Finite coherent cohomology for proper schemes Theorem
- Kernels and cokernels of quasi-coherent modules Theorem
…and 4 more results.
Dependency tree · two levels
15 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
- The Stacks Project, Schemes, §§26.5, 26.7, 26.24 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Ravi Vakil, The Rising Sea, 29 August 2022, Chapters 6, 14, 17 (standard reference, not scraped)