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.
Generating line-bundle sections define a morphism to projective space
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice as inherited from the projective-space and sheaf constructions (The Axiom of Choice). Let be a scheme, let be an -scheme, let be an invertible -module (Invertible sheaves) and let be global sections which generate : the evaluation morphism , , is surjective (Global generation by the evaluation map). Let be the relative projective space with charts and twisting sheaf with frames (Relative very ampleness in the finite projective-space convention).
Then there is a unique -morphism such that with under this isomorphism, where is the global coordinate section of , and for which more precisely, on the chart with coordinates one has on . No claim that is an immersion is made.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A scheme , an -scheme , an invertible sheaf on , global sections generating , and the Axiom of Choice as inherited from the projective-space constructions.
The Axiom of Choice states that every family of nonempty sets has a choice function. (The Axiom of Choice)
The sections generate if and only if the evaluation map is surjective; equivalently, for every some has nonzero image in the fibre , so the nonvanishing loci cover . (Global generation by the evaluation map, Invertible sheaves)
On the open set the section trivialises : multiplication by is an isomorphism , so a quotient is a well-defined regular function on . (Invertible sheaves)
has standard charts with transition isomorphisms , on ; each is canonically an affine space over with coordinates (); the sheaf is glued from frames on with on overlaps, equivalently . Over an affine base one has , the chart is and corresponds to the coordinate section . (Relative projective space from standard charts, Relative very ampleness in the finite projective-space convention, Projective space is Proj of a polynomial ring, Affine n-space over an arbitrary base)
For an -scheme , -morphisms are determined by global regular functions on . Indeed, over an affine open of , such functions specify the unique -algebra map extending the structure map. The affine-target global-sections correspondence gives the local morphism, and on overlaps these morphisms agree after affine refinement because they have the same coordinates. They glue uniquely by [F5]. (Affine n-space over an arbitrary base, Morphisms to an affine scheme and global sections)
Morphisms of schemes compatible on an open cover of the source glue uniquely; two morphisms out of agree if they agree on an open cover. (Morphisms of schemes are local on compatible open covers)
Proof
The charts of the construction. By [F1] the open sets cover . By [F2] each trivialises over , so for every and every the ratio is a regular function on : under the identification , restricted to .
The local morphisms. Fix and let be the -th chart, an affine space over with coordinates , , by [F3]. By [F4] the regular functions , , on define a morphism over with for every ; this is the unique -morphism with these coordinates. Its image lies in , so ; moreover on the quotient is invertible by [F2], so .
Compatibility on overlaps. On both quotients and are invertible, and for the transition formula of [F3] reads ; substituting and from step 1.2 gives , which is ; likewise corresponds to . Hence and agree on the overlap.
The global morphism. The local morphisms of step 1.2 are compatible on overlaps by step 2.1, and the opens cover by step 1.1; hence they glue to a morphism by [F5], which is a morphism over because each is. Its restrictions satisfy and, on , , so altogether .
The pullback of the twist. On define an isomorphism by sending the pullback of the frame to ; this is an isomorphism of invertible sheaves because both sides are free of rank one there. On the overlap the transition of [F3] pulls back to the scalar : one has with , so corresponds to under the trivialisation on exactly as it does under the trivialisation on ; hence the local isomorphisms glue to an isomorphism under which corresponds to , that is, the universal coordinate section pulls back to .
Uniqueness. Let be an -morphism with carrying the coordinate sections to . Then : a point maps into exactly when the pullback of the coordinate does not vanish there, and that pullback is . On the coordinates satisfy , which agrees with by step 2.1; hence on each , and since these cover , by [F5].
Conclusion. Steps 1.1 to 3.1 construct the -morphism with , step 4.1 identifies with compatibly with the given sections, and step 5.1 proves uniqueness. Nothing in the construction asserts injectivity or immersion: two distinct points may have proportional tuples, and is an immersion only under additional hypotheses. If some then and the corresponding local piece is empty, which the gluing of step 3.1 allows; if all the hypothesis that they generate fails unless , and then the construction is vacuous. The Axiom of Choice [A1] is inherited from the projective-space and associated-sheaf constructions; no choice is made here. [A1, step 3.1, step 4.1, step 5.1, cases: vanishing sections and empty X] \qed
Depends on
- Global generation by the evaluation map
- Projective space is Proj of a polynomial ring
- The Axiom of Choice
- Relative very ampleness in the finite projective-space convention
- Relative projective space from standard charts
- Affine n-space over an arbitrary base
- Morphisms to an affine scheme and global sections
- Morphisms of schemes are local on compatible open covers
- Invertible sheaves
Used by
- Global generation does not imply very ampleness Counterexample
- The conic map from O(2) Example
- Affine finite-type source immerses into relative projective space Lemma
- High powers of an ample line bundle embed a proper scheme Theorem
- Maps to projective space equal generating line-bundle data Theorem
- Projective bundle represents line quotients Theorem
- Segre embedding and its line bundle Theorem
- Veronese embedding pulls O(1) back to O(d) 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, Constructions of Schemes, Sections 27.8-27.21 (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)