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.

Purely inseparable subgroup descent by Frobenius power ideals

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let G be a separated finite-type k-group scheme, and K/k a finite purely inseparable extension of characteristic p>0. Let H′⊂GK be a closed subgroup scheme. Choose q=pr with Kq⊂k. There is a closed k-subgroup scheme H⊂G such that HK contains H′ as a nilpotent closed subscheme. If H′ is normal, affine, or connected, then H has the respective property. Neither H nor HK is asserted smooth.

Facts & Assumptions

[F1]

Relative Frobenius is a group homomorphism; on coordinate rings its formula is a⊗c↦caq. (High relative Frobenius has smooth scheme-theoretic image)

[F2]

Nilpotent thickenings of affine Noetherian separated schemes are affine, and affineness descends under finite purely inseparable field extension. (A nilpotent thickening of an affine scheme is affine, Affineness and properness descend under finite purely inseparable scalar extension)

Proof

Given: AC, G, K/k, H′, and q as above.

1.1F1givenconstructalgebra

On an affine open U=Spec⁡A of G, let J⊂A⊗kK be the ideal of H′∩UK. If j=∑iai⊗λi∈J, then jq=∑iaiqλiq lies in the copy of A inside A⊗kK. Let IU⊂A be the ideal generated by all these jq. Its scalar extension is the ideal J[q] generated by q-th powers of sections of J. These ideals are the inverse images of the ideal of the Frobenius twist H′(r) under FGK/Kr, by [F1]. Hence they agree on overlaps after scalar extension; faithfulness of scalar extension shows that the ideals IU agree on overlaps before extension. They define a quasi-coherent ideal on G and a closed k-subscheme H with HK=F−1(H′(r)).

2.1F1step 1.1algebra

By [F1] the inverse image of a subgroup under relative Frobenius is a subgroup; if H′ is normal, its twist and this inverse image are normal. These group and conjugation factorization identities descend to H over k: their defining ideal sections are zero after tensoring by the faithful field extension K, so are zero already. Thus H is a subgroup and is normal whenever H′ is normal.

3.1F1F2step 1.1step 2.1algebra∎

Since J[q]⊂J, H′ is a closed subscheme of HK. Every j∈J has jq∈J[q], so J and J[q] have the same radical. The ideal J/J[q] of H′ in HK is nilpotent: it is finite over the Noetherian coordinate ring, is generated by nilpotent elements, and a product of sufficiently many generators must contain a sufficiently large power of one of them. A finite affine cover supplies one uniform exponent. If H′ is affine, [F2] makes its nilpotent thickening HK affine, and then makes H affine by inseparable descent. If H′ is connected, so is HK because the thickening has the same underlying space; HK→H is a homeomorphism by the scalar-extension calculation in [F2], so H is connected. This is the power-ideal descent used in the arbitrary-field structure reduction; it retains nonsmooth thickening rather than replacing it with a smooth reduced subgroup.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

24 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