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.

A rank-one surface module is principalized by an ideal blowup

Statement

Assume AC and DC. For a finite torsion-free rank-one module M over a Noetherian domain A, there is a nonzero ideal J and a blowup b:Y=Bl⁡JSpec⁡A→Spec⁡A such that b∗M modulo torsion is invertible; the same holds on every integral model dominating Y.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite torsion-free rank-one module M over a Noetherian domain A, with an identification M⊗AFrac⁡(A)=Frac⁡(A).

[F1]

def-axiom-of-choice. The Axiom of Choice (AC) is the following statement. > Every family of nonempty sets has a choice function > (def-choice-function). Written out: for every set F all of whose members are nonempty, there exists a function g with domain F satisfying g(S)∈S for all S∈F. (The Axiom of Choice)

[F2]

def-dependent-choice. Let X be a set and let R⊆X×X be a binary relation on X. Call R entire on X when for every x∈X there is y∈X with xRy. The Axiom of Dependent Choice, written DC, is the following statement. (The axiom of dependent choice: a relation in which every element is related to something admits an N-indexed chain)

[F3]

def-blowup-scheme-along-ideal. Assume the Axiom of Choice as inherited from the relative Proj construction (The Axiom of Choice). Let X be a scheme and let I⊆OX be a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf of finite type (def-quasi-coherent-ideal-sheaf), with zero scheme Z=V(I), the closed subscheme of X cut out by I. (Blowup of a scheme along an ideal sheaf)

[F4]

thm-blowup-projective. Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the relative Proj construction (The Axiom of Choice). Let X be a scheme, let I be a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf of finite type on X (def-quasi-coherent-ideal-sheaf) and let π ⁣:Bl⁡IX→X be the blowup of Blowup of a scheme along an ideal sheaf. Then: 1. (Blowups of finite type ideals are locally H-projective, and proper)

[F5]

thm-pullback-center-ideal-invertible. Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the relative Proj construction (The Axiom of Choice). Let I be a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf of finite type on a scheme X (def-quasi-coherent-ideal-sheaf), let π ⁣:Bl⁡IX→X be its blowup and let E=π−1(Z) be the exceptional subscheme, with the convention that O(1) (The pulled-back center ideal is the relative twist; the exceptional divisor is Cartier)

Proof

1.1F1given

Torsion-freeness makes the natural map M→M⊗AFrac⁡(A)=Frac⁡(A) injective, so M is identified with a nonzero A-submodule of the fraction field; choose a finite generating family m1,…,mn of M over A.

2.1givenstep 1.1

Write mi=ei/di with ei∈A and 0≠di∈A, put D=d1⋯dn≠0, and let J:=D⋅M⊆A. Then J is a nonzero ideal of A and multiplication by D is an isomorphism of A-modules M→J with inverse division by D, which is well defined because D⋅M=J and M is torsion-free.

3.1F3F4F5step 2.1

Let b ⁣:Y=Bl⁡JSpec⁡A→Spec⁡A be the blowup of A along J; the scheme Y is integral because A is a domain and J≠0, the morphism b is projective, and the pullback ideal JOY is invertible on Y.

4.1F5step 3.1

The inclusion J↪A of step 2.1 pulls back to a map b∗J→OY of OY-modules whose image is the invertible ideal JOY; the map is an isomorphism at the generic point, so its kernel T has zero generic stalk, that is, T is a torsion OY-module. Since b∗M≅b∗J, the module b∗M/T is isomorphic to the invertible sheaf JOY, so b∗M modulo torsion is invertible.

5.1F3step 3.1step 4.1

On an integral affine chart Spec⁡B⊆Y with fraction field L, an element of the kernel of b∗M→JOY is an element of the finite B-module M⊗AB killed after multiplying by some element clearing its zero generic germ, so it is annihilated by a nonzero element of B; conversely an element annihilated by a nonzero scalar maps to zero in the torsion-free invertible module JOY. Hence the kernel is exactly the torsion submodule of b∗M and the quotient by it is invertible.

6.1F3F5step 5.1

If g ⁣:Z→Y is an integral model dominating Y, then g∗JOY=JOZ is invertible as the pullback of an invertible sheaf, the pullback of the identification b∗M/T≅JOY presents g∗b∗M modulo torsion as the invertible sheaf JOZ, and the same argument on integral affine charts applies verbatim.

7.1F1F2step 3.1step 6.1∎

The Axiom of Choice and the Axiom of Dependent Choice are inherited from the blowup and resolution suppliers; no general flattening or Fitting theorem is used.

Remarks

  • The ideal J produced here is a fractional-ideal representative of the rank-one module; the normalisation by the denominator D is unique only up to a nonzero scalar, which does not affect the blowup.
  • The statement is intrinsic: the torsion of the pullback vanishes exactly when the pullback is already invertible, and the quotient by torsion is the maximal torsion-free quotient.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

30 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