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

Depth two gives Hartogs extension on a punctured affine spectrum

Statement

Assume AC. Let (A,m) be a Noetherian local ring and U=Spec⁡A∖{m}. If a finite A-module M admits a regular sequence x,y∈m, restriction gives M→∼Γ(U,M~). In particular if A has depth at least two then Γ(U,OU)=A. Under the same hypothesis depth⁡A≥2, if C is any flat A-algebra and P is finite projective over C, then P=Γ(UC,P~), where UC=U×ASpec⁡C. Under that hypothesis, restriction of finite projective C-modules to UC is fully faithful.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: AC, the ring, punctured spectrum and modules in the Statement.

[F1]

A finite-module regular sequence in the maximal ideal is permutable (Regular Sequences Permutable Local). Tensor products have their usual associative identifications (Associativity of tensor products for compatible bimodules). AC is inherited from [F1] (The Axiom of Choice).

Proof

1.1F1algebra

By [F1], both x and y act injectively on M. Moreover y acts injectively on M/xrM for every r≥1: its filtration by the powers of x has successive quotients isomorphic to M/xM, on which y is injective. Thus, inside Mxy, the intersection Mx∩My is M. Indeed if a/xr=b/yt, injectivity of xy gives yta=xrb after clearing denominators. Injectivity of yt on M/xrM gives a=xrc, so the common element is c∈M.

2.1step 1.1algebra

A section of M~ on U restricts to elements of Mx and My agreeing in Mxy, hence comes from some c∈M by step 1.1. The difference from the section defined by c vanishes on D(x). On any affine principal open contained in U, an element whose localization at x is zero is killed by a power of x; injectivity of x on the localized module forces it to vanish. Thus the difference vanishes on all of U. Conversely M→Mx is injective, so restriction is injective. This proves the Hartogs assertion.

3.1F1step 2.1algebra∎

Assume depth⁡A≥2 for these remaining assertions. Generate m by a1,…,as, so that U is covered by the finitely many affine opens D(ai). Sections of M~ are the kernel of the difference of the two maps ∏iMai⇉∏i,jMaiaj. A flat base change commutes with this finite kernel and these localizations. For M=A, step 2.1 therefore gives Γ(UC,O)=C. A finite projective P is an idempotent summand of Cr, so applying that idempotent to the equality of sections gives Γ(UC,P~)=P. The module Hom⁡C(P,Q) for two finite projectives is again finite projective (it is P∗⊗CQ); its sections on UC are therefore exactly its module elements. This proves full faithfulness.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

8 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