Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6.1-sol)
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.

A marked ideal is equivalent to its powers

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. For every marked ideal (I,E,μ) on a smooth K-scheme and every integer k≥1,

(I,E,μ)≃(Ik,E,kμ)

in the sense of Equivalence of marked ideals.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A marked ideal (I,E,μ) on a smooth K-scheme and an integer k≥1. We use AC only through the associated-graded theorem in [F3].

[A1]

The Axiom of Choice: assume AC for applying the associated-graded theorem to the regular local rings OX,x.

[F1]

Order of an ideal sheaf at a point and Marked ideals and their support: ord⁡x(I) is the largest n with Ix⊆mxn, and the support of (I,E,μ) is {x:ord⁡x(I)≥μ}; the zero ideal has order +∞.

[F2]

Smooth morphism of schemes, Geometrically regular algebras and geometrically regular fibres: since X→Spec⁡K is smooth, every OX,x is regular local.

[F3]

Under AC, associated graded ring of a regular local ring identifies gr⁡mx(OX,x) with a polynomial algebra over the residue field, so it is a domain.

[F4]

Addition and multiplication of marked ideals, clause (2): controlled transforms commute with products of marked ideals, including products with equal factors.

[F5]

Equivalence of marked ideals: equivalence means equality of the initial supports, of the multiple test blow-ups, and of their induced supports, with the same ordered boundary.

Proof

1.1A1F1F2F3

Exact order of powers. Fix x∈X, put R=OX,x and let m be its maximal ideal. If Ix=0, then every positive power is zero and both orders are +∞. Otherwise a=ord⁡x(I) is finite and attained by [F1]. Choose f∈Ix∖ma+1; its initial class in gr⁡mR is nonzero. By [A1], [F2] and [F3], this associated-graded ring is a domain, so the initial class of fk is nonzero in degree ka. Thus ord⁡x(Ik)≤ka, while Ix⊆ma gives the reverse inequality. Hence ord⁡x(Ik)=kord⁡x(I).

2.1F1step 1.1

Equal supports. By step 1.1, ord⁡x(I)≥μ if and only if ord⁡x(Ik)=kord⁡x(I)≥kμ. Therefore supp⁡(I,E,μ)=supp⁡(Ik,E,kμ), including μ=0.

3.1F3F4step 1.1step 2.1∎

Equal multiple test blow-ups. Induct on the sequence length. At each stage i, assume the two transforms are (Ii,Ei,μ) and (Iik,Ei,kμ). Step 1.1 gives equal supports for these marked ideals, so their admissible regular centers meeting Ei with SNC agree. If y is the exceptional equation for such a center, the controlled-transform product identity [F4] gives y−kμσ∗(Iik)=(y−μσ∗Ii)k, so the next transforms again have this form and their supports agree. The base case is step 2.1; induction works in both directions, so the test sequences and all induced supports coincide. By [F5], the marked ideals are equivalent.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

32 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