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.
Blowups of finite type ideals are locally H-projective, and proper
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice, inherited from the relative Proj construction (The Axiom of Choice). Let be a scheme, let be a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf of finite type on (Quasi-coherent ideal sheaves) and let be the blowup of Blowup of a scheme along an ideal sheaf. Then:
- is locally H-projective on : for every affine open with , the pullback of the graded surjection , , exhibits as a closed subscheme of .
- If is generated as an -module by finitely many global sections (Global generation by the evaluation map), then the same surjection makes a closed subscheme of over ; in particular is H-projective (Projective morphisms before Proj).
- In all cases is proper, since properness is local on the base and each is H-projective hence proper.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A scheme , a quasi-coherent ideal sheaf of finite type, the blowup (Blowup of a scheme along an ideal sheaf), and for an affine open the restricted ideal with affine blowup algebras .
Closed subschemes of projective space and saturated ideals: For a commutative ring and a homogeneous ideal one has as a closed subscheme of , and on the chart it is ; every closed subscheme of arises from a unique saturated homogeneous ideal.
Affine-local graded algebras glue their Proj charts: The relative Proj of a quasi-coherent graded -algebra is obtained by gluing the spectra over affine opens , with canonical restriction and cocycle identifications.
Affine blowup standard charts and overlaps and Affine blowup algebras: normal form, nonzerodivisors, reducedness, domains: For the standard opens cover , and the chart presentations are independent of the chosen generating family; for affine there is a canonical identification (Blowups restrict to open subschemes of the base).
Global generation by the evaluation map: A quasi-coherent sheaf is generated by global sections exactly when the evaluation morphism , , is surjective.
Projective morphisms are proper and Properness is local on the target: An H-projective morphism is proper, and properness is local on an open cover of the base.
Closed immersions of schemes and Quasi-coherent module on a scheme: A morphism is a closed immersion when it is a homeomorphism onto a closed subset and is surjective; both conditions are local on the target, and kernels of morphisms of quasi-coherent modules are quasi-coherent.
Proof
Let be affine and let generate . The graded -algebra homomorphism , , is surjective, because in degree the images of the monomials of degree generate ; hence by [F1] it presents as the closed subscheme over , which is assertion 1.
If is generated by global sections , then the evaluation morphism is surjective by [F4], and consequently the induced morphism of graded -algebras , , is surjective in every degree, because in degree its image is the subsheaf generated by the products of of the global sections, which is by hypothesis.
Assume the global generation of step 1.2. On every affine open the restriction of is the surjection of step 1.1 for the restricted generators, so by step 1.1 the morphisms are closed immersions over ; these affine-local morphisms agree on overlaps because they are induced by the restrictions of the single graded morphism and the identifications of [F2] are canonical, so they glue to a morphism over .
The glued morphism of step 2.1 is a closed immersion: surjectivity of the structure map of sheaves is checked on stalks, and a subset of whose traces on the members of an open cover are closed is closed, so both conditions of [F6] are affine-local and hold because each restriction is a closed immersion; hence is a closed subscheme of over , and is H-projective by Projective morphisms before Proj, which is assertion 2.
For every affine open the restriction is a closed subscheme of over by step 1.1, hence H-projective and therefore proper by [F5]; since properness is local on an open cover of the base by [F5], the morphism itself is proper, which is assertion 3, and it holds whether or not is globally generated.
Remarks
- Assertion 1 holds for an arbitrary finite type ideal sheaf; assertion 2 needs the stronger hypothesis that the ideal is generated by finitely many global sections, and it is this case that produces a globally defined closed immersion into relative projective space.
- The properness in assertion 3 is the only part used in the sequel for valuative arguments and for the direct image computations on an affine base; the local H-projectivity is used to read off charts.
Depends on
- Blowup of a scheme along an ideal sheaf
- Projective morphisms before Proj
- Global generation by the evaluation map
- Closed subschemes of projective space and saturated ideals
- Affine-local graded algebras glue their Proj charts
- Affine blowup standard charts and overlaps
- Affine blowup algebras: normal form, nonzerodivisors, reducedness, domains
- Blowups restrict to open subschemes of the base
- Properness is local on the target
- Projective morphisms are proper
- Closed immersions of schemes
- Quasi-coherent module on a scheme
- The Axiom of Choice
Used by
- Blowing up the base ideal resolves a rational map to projective space Corollary
- Normalization and blowup are different operations Counterexample
- Euler characteristic and normalization defect under a point blowup Lemma
- The blowup of a one-dimensional integral Noetherian scheme at a closed point is finite Lemma
- The intersection matrix of a point blowup of a regular surface Lemma
- Blowing up replaces the center by its projectivized normal directions Remark
- No inference to general resolution of singularities Remark
- Resolution of reduced plane curves by point blowups and the delta recurrence Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
58 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, Divisors, Sections 31.33-31.36 (Blowing up; Strict transform; Admissible blowups; Blowing up and flatness) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Ravi Vakil, Foundations of Algebraic Geometry, June 27, 2011 draft (author-hosted 'Early (out-of-date) version of The Rising Sea') (standard reference, not scraped)
- Roman Bezrukavnikov et al., MIT 18.725 Algebraic Geometry (Fall 2015) consolidated lecture notes (standard reference, not scraped)