Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedprecheck passjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-01
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.

The Krull intersection is the (1−a)-torsion submodule, and it vanishes in the Jacobson-radical case

Statement

The first clause below is choice-free; the second uses the published Jacobson-radical unit criterion and therefore inherits its Axiom-of-Choice boundary.

Let R be a Noetherian commutative ring, let I⊂R be an ideal, and let M be a finite R-module. Put K:=⋂n≥0InM. Then:

  1. K is exactly the set of elements m∈M for which (1−a)m=0 for some a∈I;
  2. if I⊆J(R), then K=0.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A Noetherian commutative ring R, an ideal I⊂R, a finite R-module M, and K=⋂n≥0InM.

[L1]

Artin-Rees applies to the submodule K⊆M (Artin-Rees controls intersections of submodules with high ideal powers).

[L2]

If a finite module N satisfies IN=N, then (1−a)N=0 for some a∈I (Determinant trick for Nakayama).

[L3]

Assuming the Axiom of Choice, a∈J(R) exactly when 1−ra is a unit for every r∈R (Assuming the Axiom of Choice, an element lies in the Jacobson radical exactly when one minus any multiple is a unit).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1L1given

Since K⊆InM for every n, Artin-Rees gives some c such that for all n≥c, K=InM∩K=In−c(IcM∩K)=In−cK. In particular IK=K.

1.2givenalgebra

Conversely, if (1−a)m=0 for some a∈I, then m=am∈IM. Iterating gives m=anm∈InM for every n≥0, hence m∈K.

1.3algebra

Steps 2.1 and 1.2 identify K with the set of (1−a)-torsion elements claimed in part 1.

2.1L2L4step 1.1algebra

The submodule K⊆M is finite by [L4]. Applying [L2] to K and the equality IK=K from step 1.1 gives a∈I with (1−a)K=0. So every element of K satisfies the displayed torsion condition.

3.1L3step 2.1algebra

Assume now I⊆J(R). For any m∈K, step 2.1 gives some a∈I⊆J(R) with (1−a)m=0. By [L3], 1−a is a unit, so multiplying by its inverse gives m=0. Thus K=0.

4.1algebra∎

Therefore both stated conclusions hold.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

18 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