Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-07 rests on unproved material (inherited)
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.

Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

regular element reduction preserves minimal resolution

Statement

Let (R,m,k) be nonzero Noetherian local, let M be a nonzero finite module, and let xm be a nonzerodivisor on both R and M. Reducing a minimal free resolution of M modulo x gives a minimal free resolution of M/xM over S=R/(x). Moreover pdS(M/xM)=pdRM, including infinity. For M=0 the zero-complex assertion also holds, with both projective dimensions zero.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The objects and hypotheses in the statement. We work with the Axiom of Choice; cited dependent-choice and resolution-existence hypotheses are retained.

[F1]

finite local modules admit minimal free resolutions: Every finite module M over a nonzero Noetherian local ring (R,m,k) has an augmented resolution F1F0M0 by finite-rank free modules, with di(Fi)mFi1 for i>0. Such a resolution is called minimal; it need not be bounded. This extends the bounded terminology without changing it.

[F2]

projective dimension from last nonzero betti number: For a nonzero finite module M over a nonzero Noetherian local ring, pdRM=sup{i0:βiR(M)0}, allowing infinity. For each integer q0, pdRMq if and only if Torq+1R(k,M)=0.

[F3]

The balanced Tor bifunctor: For a right R-module N, a left R-module M, and i0, define ToriR(N,M) to be either Hi(NRP) for a projective resolution of M or Hi(QRM) for a projective resolution of N, identified by the preceding natural balance isomorphism. On maps it uses the homology maps induced by comparison maps; coherence makes this a well-defined covariant bifunctor.

[F4]

Tor is symmetric over a commutative ring: If R is commutative and M,N are R-modules, then ToriR(M,N)ToriR(N,M) naturally.

[F5]

Assuming the Axiom of Choice, Nakayama's lemma: Assume the Axiom of Choice. Let R be a commutative ring, let IR satisfy IJ(R), and let M be a finitely generated left R-module. If IM=M, then M=0.

Proof

1.1

The complex 0RxRS0 resolves S. Tensoring it with M has no positive homology since multiplication by x is injective on M. Balance and symmetry of Tor show that reducing any free resolution of M modulo x has no positive homology and degree-zero homology M/xM.

F3F4
2.1

A minimal degreewise finite resolution exists, and its matrices reduce to entries in m/(x). Its finite ranks do not change on reduction to the nonzero local ring S. Nakayama gives M/xM0, so the last-nonzero-Betti criterion identifies both projective dimensions with the same last nonzero rank, or infinity if ranks persist arbitrarily far. For M=0 choose the zero complex on both sides.

F1F2F5step 1.1

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

22 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