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 be a Noetherian local ring and . If a finite -module admits a regular sequence , restriction gives In particular if has depth at least two then . Under the same hypothesis , if is any flat -algebra and is finite projective over , then , where . Under that hypothesis, restriction of finite projective -modules to is fully faithful.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC, the ring, punctured spectrum and modules in the Statement.
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
By [F1], both and act injectively on . Moreover acts injectively on for every : its filtration by the powers of has successive quotients isomorphic to , on which is injective. Thus, inside , the intersection is . Indeed if , injectivity of gives after clearing denominators. Injectivity of on gives , so the common element is .
A section of on restricts to elements of and agreeing in , hence comes from some by step 1.1. The difference from the section defined by vanishes on . On any affine principal open contained in , an element whose localization at is zero is killed by a power of ; injectivity of on the localized module forces it to vanish. Thus the difference vanishes on all of . Conversely is injective, so restriction is injective. This proves the Hartogs assertion.
Assume for these remaining assertions. Generate by , so that is covered by the finitely many affine opens . Sections of are the kernel of the difference of the two maps . A flat base change commutes with this finite kernel and these localizations. For , step 2.1 therefore gives . A finite projective is an idempotent summand of , so applying that idempotent to the equality of sections gives . The module for two finite projectives is again finite projective (it is ); its sections on 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
- SGA 1, Exposé X §3, purity and its dimension-two discriminant proof (standard reference, not scraped)
- Stacks Project, Fundamental Groups §§19–21, especially Lemmas 20.7 and 21.3–21.4 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Stacks Project, Algebraic and Formal Geometry §15, Lemmas 15.1 and 15.5; regular-case argument expanded here (standard reference, not scraped)