Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passaudited 2026-08-28
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.

Chinese remainder theorem for pairwise comaximal ideals

Statement

Let R be a commutative ring and let I1,…,Ir be pairwise comaximal ideals, where r≥1. Then the canonical map R⟶∏i=1rR/Ii,x⟼(x+I1,…,x+Ir) is surjective, its kernel is ⋂i=1rIi, and ⋂i=1rIi=∏i=1rIi. Equivalently, R/∏i=1rIi≅∏i=1rR/Ii.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A commutative ring R and pairwise comaximal ideals I1,…,Ir with r≥1.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1givenchoosealgebra

First take r=2. Choose u∈I1 and v∈I2 with u+v=1. If x∈I1∩I2, then x=xu+xv∈I1I2, so I1∩I2=I1I2. For classes a+I1 and b+I2, the element av+bu satisfies av+bu≡a(modI1) and av+bu≡b(modI2), so the canonical map R→R/I1×R/I2 is surjective with kernel I1∩I2=I1I2.

2.1step 1.1givenchoosealgebra

Now assume r≥2. Fix i and put Ji=∏j≠iIj. For each j≠i, choose uj∈Ii and vj∈Ij with uj+vj=1. Expanding ∏j≠i(uj+vj)=1 shows that 1−∏j≠ivj∈Ii and ∏j≠ivj∈Ji, so Ii+Ji=R. Choose ei∈Ji with ei≡1(modIi). Then ei∈Ij for every j≠i. Given residue classes ai+Ii, the element x:=∑i=1raiei satisfies x≡ai(modIi) for every i. Hence the canonical map R→∏i=1rR/Ii is surjective.

3.1step 1.1step 2.1giveninduction∎

The kernel of the canonical map is plainly ⋂i=1rIi. To compare this with the product, induct on r. The case r=1 is tautological and the case r=2 is step 1.1. For r>2, let K=⋂i=2rIi. By the induction hypothesis, K=∏i=2rIi. Step 2.1 with i=1 gives I1+K=R, so applying the two-ideal case to I1 and K yields ⋂i=1rIi=I1∩K=I1K=∏i=1rIi. Therefore R/∏i=1rIi≅∏i=1rR/Ii.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

23 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