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.
Relative very ampleness implies relative ampleness
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice as inherited from the Proj and associated-sheaf constructions (The Axiom of Choice). Let be a quasi-compact morphism of schemes (Quasi-compact and quasi-separated morphisms) and let be an invertible -module which is H-very ample relative to (Relative very ampleness in the finite projective-space convention), witnessed by an -immersion with (Relative projective space from standard charts).
Then is -ample (Relative ampleness over an arbitrary base). If is affine, is ample in the absolute sense (Absolute ampleness by affine section opens); if in addition is a closed immersion, the same conclusion follows directly from the affine charts of . The empty cases are included: if , or if , the ampleness conditions are vacuous.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A quasi-compact morphism , an invertible sheaf with for an -immersion , and the Axiom of Choice as inherited from the Proj constructions.
The Axiom of Choice states that every family of nonempty sets has a choice function. (The Axiom of Choice)
H-very ampleness of relative to means that there is and a quasi-compact -immersion with ; the sheaf is glued from frames on the standard charts with transitions on overlaps, equivalently , and for . (Relative very ampleness in the finite projective-space convention)
A morphism is quasi-compact precisely when the inverse image of every affine open is quasi-compact, and quasi-compactness is stable under arbitrary base change; immersions are stable under arbitrary base change. (Quasi-compact and quasi-separated morphisms, Quasi-compactness is local on the target and survives base change, Base change of immersions, Base change of objects, morphisms and properties)
For an affine base one has , the standard charts are affine, and the standard opens with homogeneous of positive degree form a basis of the topology. (Projective space is Proj of a polynomial ring, Standard opens of Proj)
For an affine open subscheme of a scheme , an invertible sheaf on and a global section the intersection is an affine open subscheme of , where is the nonvanishing locus of . (A line-bundle section cuts an affine open inside an affine scheme)
An invertible sheaf on a quasi-compact scheme is ample if for every there are and with and affine. (Absolute ampleness by affine section opens)
Proof
Forms give sections with the same nonvanishing locus. Let be an affine open of and let be homogeneous of degree . On the chart put , and define . On an overlap the coordinates satisfy , so , and the frame transition gives ; hence the local sections glue to a global section . Since each is a frame, the nonvanishing locus is computed on charts as , so .
The restricted situation. Put with structure morphism and . By [F2] the morphism is quasi-compact, so is quasi-compact, and the base change of along is a quasi-compact immersion with ; this is the situation of [F1] over the affine base .
Shrinking a neighbourhood to a standard open. Let and let be an affine open subscheme containing ; write . Since is an immersion, it is a homeomorphism onto the locally closed subset , so is open in and there is an open with and . By [F3] the standard opens with homogeneous of positive degree form a basis of the topology, so choose such an with . Then .
Pulling back the sections. For homogeneous of positive degree , the pullback is a global section of , and its nonvanishing locus is : the pullback of a section of an invertible sheaf has nonvanishing locus the preimage of the original nonvanishing locus, because a local trivialisation of pulls back to one of and the corresponding function is the pullback function.
Ampleness at a point. With as in step 1.3 and , let , a section of a positive power of the invertible sheaf . Then by step 2.1, and since is an affine open subscheme of , [F4] gives that is an affine open subscheme of . So every point of admits a positive power of with a global section whose nonvanishing locus is affine and contains the point.
Ampleness over an affine base open. The scheme is quasi-compact by step 1.2, so the criterion [F5] applies to the invertible sheaf on with the sections produced in step 3.1: is ample on .
Conclusion. Every affine open has ample on , so is -ample by definition; if is affine this is absolute ampleness of on . If in addition the immersion is a closed immersion, the same argument applies verbatim; the only simplification in that case is that the image is closed, so the shrinking step 1.3 may be replaced by choosing a chart containing , whose preimage is affine as a closed subscheme of the affine scheme . If or there is no point to test and the conditions of [F5] and of -ampleness are vacuous, so the conclusion holds. The Axiom of Choice [A1] is inherited from the Proj and associated-sheaf constructions; no choice is made here. [A1, F1, F5, step 4.1, cases: empty and affine base] \qed
Depends on
- Relative very ampleness in the finite projective-space convention
- Relative ampleness over an arbitrary base
- Projective space is Proj of a polynomial ring
- A line-bundle section cuts an affine open inside an affine scheme
- The Axiom of Choice
- Absolute ampleness by affine section opens
- Standard opens of Proj
- Quasi-compact and quasi-separated morphisms
- Quasi-compactness is local on the target and survives base change
- Base change of immersions
- Base change of objects, morphisms and properties
Used by
- High-degree section module is finite graded Lemma
- Projective coherent finiteness and large twist vanishing Lemma
- Coherent higher direct images under proper morphisms Theorem
- Degree of the coherent Hilbert polynomial Theorem
- Euler characteristic is a Hilbert polynomial Theorem
- Serre duality for coherent sheaves on projective space Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
31 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
- The Stacks Project, Properties of Schemes, Sections 28.18, 28.27 (standard reference, not scraped)
- The Stacks Project, Morphisms of Schemes, Sections 29.38, 29.40 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Ravi Vakil, The Rising Sea, 29 August 2022, Sections 4.5, 7.4, 9.3, 10.6, 17.4, 17.6, 18.2 (standard reference, not scraped)