Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-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.

Derivative ideals under a multiple test blow-up

Statement

Let (I,μ) be a marked ideal on a smooth K-scheme and let (Xi)0≤i≤k be a multiple test blow-up with controlled transforms (Ii,μ) (Multiple test blow-ups, controlled transforms and resolutions of marked ideals). Then (Xi) is also a multiple test blow-up of the marked ideal Dj(I,μ) for every 0≤j≤μ, and for all i [Dj(I,μ)]i⊆Dj(Ii,μ). Indeed the centers of (Xi) lie in the derivative supports by the all-characteristic forward inclusion in Iterated derivative ideals preserve support in the safe characteristic range, and the transform inclusion follows by induction on i using Controlled derivative transforms are contained in derivatives of the controlled transform.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A marked ideal (I,μ) on a smooth K-scheme and a multiple test blow-up (Xi)0≤i≤k with controlled transforms (Ii,μ), and 0≤j≤μ.

[F1]

Multiple test blow-ups, controlled transforms and resolutions of marked ideals: each step blows up a regular center Ci⊆supp⁡(Ii,μ) in SNC position with Ei, or is an isomorphism; the controlled transform is σc(A,ν)=(I(D)−νσ∗A,ν).

[F2]

Iterated derivative ideals preserve support in the safe characteristic range: in every characteristic, supp⁡(Ii,μ)⊆supp⁡(Dj(Ii),μ−j) for 0≤j<μ; for j=μ the target marking is zero and its support is all of Xi.

[F3]

Controlled derivative transforms are contained in derivatives of the controlled transform: for the single blow-up σi+1 with center in the support, σi+1c(Dj(A),μA−j)⊆Dj(σi+1c(A,μA)), and Dj is monotone on inclusions.

[F4]

Controlled transforms are well defined, Derivative ideals of an ideal sheaf and of a marked ideal: the controlled transform and the derivative ideal are well-defined ideal sheaves, so inclusions can be checked locally.

Proof

1.1F1F2

The centers are admissible for the derivative ideal. Let 0≤j≤μ and let (Dj(I,μ))i denote the i-th controlled transform of the marked ideal Dj(I,μ) along the same sequence. We prove by induction on i that the sequence (Xi) is a multiple test blow-up of Dj(I,μ) and that (Dj(I,μ))i⊆Dj(Ii,μ). For i=0 this is equality. Assume it for i. By [F2] applied at stage i, Ci⊆supp⁡(Ii,μ)⊆supp⁡(Dj(Ii),μ−j), and the latter is contained in supp⁡((Dj(I,μ))i,μ−j) by the induction inclusion (a smaller ideal has a larger order-superlevel support), so Ci is an admissible center for the derivative marked ideal and step i+1 is defined for it.

2.1F3F4step 1.1∎

The transform inclusion. With the notation of step 1.1, (Dj(I,μ))i+1=σi+1c((Dj(I,μ))i)⊆σi+1c(Dj(Ii,μ))⊆Dj(σi+1c(Ii,μ))=Dj(Ii+1,μ), using the induction inclusion and the monotonicity of the controlled transform in step 1, and [F3] in step 2. This completes the induction and proves both assertions.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

40 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