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.
The stalk of an associated sheaf is the localisation
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the existence theorem for the associated sheaf. Let be a commutative ring, an -module, and a prime. Then the canonical map where is the stalk of the associated sheaf at and the localisation of at the prime , is an isomorphism of -modules. It is natural in : an -linear induces a commuting square with on the left and on the right. No Noetherian or finiteness hypothesis on is made.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The Axiom of Choice; a commutative ring ; an -module ; a prime ; the associated sheaf .
is a sheaf of -modules with and restriction maps (The associated module sheaf exists).
The stalk of a sheaf at a point is the filtered colimit of the section modules over a cofinal system of open neighbourhoods; the distinguished opens containing are cofinal among the neighbourhoods of (The stalk of a presheaf at a point, The underlying space of an affine spectrum).
In the localisation of a module, if and only if for some ; the canonical map is , and (Localisation of a module at a multiplicative subset, The stalk of the affine structure sheaf at a prime is A_p).
The restriction maps are canonical localisations and commutes with them (Module sheaf on an affine scheme).
Proof technique: direct comparison of the cofinal system of distinguished neighborhoods with the localisation.
Proof
Define on germs by choosing a distinguished open , that is , and an element representing the germ; send it to the image of under the canonical localisation of [F3], the element written . This is well defined: a germ has a representative on some distinguished by [F2], any two such open sets may be compared after passing to , and on the compatibility law of [F4], , together with the factorisation of localisations, shows that both choices give the same image in .
The map is -linear: the stalk is a module over , which is by [F3], and the localisation maps are -linear, hence -linear on the colimit. Naturality in holds because has components on distinguished opens by [F1] and [F4], and is the localisation of , so it commutes with the maps and .
is surjective: every element of is of the form with , hence lies in the image of the canonical map by the fraction criterion of [F3]; the element has a germ at that sends to .
is injective: let with have image in . Write by [F3]; its image in is , so by the fraction criterion there is with . In the localization the element is invertible, so there and hence there. Since , is a distinguished neighbourhood of on which restricts to zero; therefore its germ is zero.
Thus is a bijective -linear map, hence an isomorphism of -modules, and by step 1.2 it is natural in . The Axiom of Choice is inherited from the existence theorem [F1], which supplies ; the remaining argument makes only finitely many choices of elements and exponents.
Depends on
Used by
- Euler characteristic in a proper flat family is locally constant Corollary
- Upper semicontinuity of fibre cohomology dimensions Corollary
- Finite type need not be locally free Counterexample
- Proper cohomology need not be finite for noncoherent sheaves Counterexample
- Stalk and fibre are different Counterexample
- A coherent closed-point skyscraper Example
- Fitting ideals of a diagonal two-by-two presentation Example
- Quotient module sheaf and its support Example
- Finite twisted locally free resolutions on projective space Lemma
- Geometric Nakayama for finite-type sheaves Lemma
- Higher direct images localize over an affine base Lemma
- Hypersurface cohomology sequence 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
- Support dimension under field extension Lemma
- Tensor product preserves quasi-coherence Lemma
- Affine quasi-coherent sheaves are modules Theorem
- Cohomology and base change for proper flat coherent families Theorem
- Kernels and cokernels of quasi-coherent modules Theorem
- Quasi-coherent ideals and closed subschemes Theorem
- Quasi-coherent ideals and closed subschemes, complete route Theorem
- Support of a finite-type quasi-coherent sheaf is closed Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
25 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)