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.
Regular antidominant Beilinson–Bernstein localization
Statement
Assume the setup of Global sections and localization at a fixed infinitesimal character. If is regular antidominant, then are inverse equivalences between all left -modules and all quasi-coherent left -modules. The equivalence restricts to finitely generated -modules and coherent -modules. It does not assert that is faithful for a fixed non-antidominant representative of a regular central character. Here a coherent -module means a module locally finitely presented over the sheaf of rings ; its local noetherianity is part of the proof below.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Regular antidominant , the adjunction , and the unit and conservativity results already proved.
is left adjoint to (Localization is left adjoint to global sections).
The unit is an isomorphism for every -module when is antidominant (The unit V to Gamma Loc_kappa(V) is an isomorphism for antidominant twists).
is exact and conservative when is regular antidominant (Antidominant twists are D-affine and regular ones are conservative).
Proof
The unit is an isomorphism by [F2]. For a quasi-coherent -module , let be the counit. The triangular identity for the adjunction says where is the unit. Since is an isomorphism, is an isomorphism.
Exactness of in [F3] implies and . Conservativity in [F3] makes both sheaves zero, so is an isomorphism. The unit and counit are isomorphisms, hence the adjoint functors are inverse equivalences.
By Noetherianity of the enveloping algebra, is left Noetherian, so its quotient is left Noetherian. On a smooth affine chart of , is a polynomial algebra over a finite-type -algebra and hence is Noetherian by If is Noetherian then is Noetherian for every . If a filtered ring has Noetherian associated graded, every left ideal is finitely generated: choose finitely many lifts of homogeneous generators of its graded ideal, subtract their leading terms from an arbitrary ideal element, and induct on its finite filtration degree. This proves that is locally left Noetherian. A finitely generated -module has a finite presentation over the Noetherian ring ; localization presents it locally as a quotient of a finite free -module, hence as a coherent -module.
Conversely, let be coherent over . A finite affine cover of and local finite generation give finitely many local generators. The counit is an isomorphism by step 2.1, so each such generator is locally in the image of the evaluation map . These local image neighborhoods cover ; quasi-compactness gives a finite subcover, hence a finite set whose -span is all of . Thus the map is surjective. Exactness of in [F3] gives a surjection , so is finitely generated over . This is coherence over , not coherence over .
Depends on
- If $R$ is Noetherian then $R[x_1,\ldots,x_n]$ is Noetherian for every $n\in\mathbb N$
- Complex semisimple algebraic group, Borel, and flag variety
- Global sections and localization at a fixed infinitesimal character
- Noetherianity of the enveloping algebra
- The unit V to Gamma Loc_kappa(V) is an isomorphism for antidominant twists
- Localization is left adjoint to global sections
- Antidominant twists are D-affine and regular ones are conservative
- Global sections of twisted differential operators on the flag variety
- PBW gives an ordered monomial basis for the enveloping algebra
- A semisimple flag variety is smooth and projective
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
41 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
- Masaki Kashiwara, Representation theory and D-modules on flag varieties, Astérisque 173–174 (1989) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Yi Sun, D-modules and representation theory (standard reference, not scraped)