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.
Maps to projective space equal generating line-bundle data
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice as inherited from the projective-space and sheaf constructions (The Axiom of Choice). Let be a scheme, an -scheme and . For an -morphism put where are the universal coordinate sections (Relative projective space from standard charts, Relative very ampleness in the finite projective-space convention). Then this assignment is a natural bijection between
- the set of -morphisms , and
- the set of isomorphism classes of pairs consisting of an invertible -module together with global sections which generate (Global generation by the evaluation map),
where means an isomorphism carrying to for all . Naturality means compatibility with base change and with morphisms . The case is included: both sides are singletons over each -component, corresponding to the trivial line bundle with its unit section.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A scheme , an -scheme , an integer , the relative projective space with its standard charts , and the Axiom of Choice as inherited.
The Axiom of Choice states that every family of nonempty sets has a choice function. (The Axiom of Choice)
The sheaf on has global sections , the universal coordinate sections: on the chart with frame one has and for , and these local sections glue by the transition formulas , equivalently ; they generate because is a frame on . (Relative projective space from standard charts, Relative very ampleness in the finite projective-space convention)
(Universal property.) For an -scheme , an invertible -module and generating sections , there is a unique -morphism with under an isomorphism carrying to , and with ; on the ratios satisfy . (Generating line-bundle sections define a morphism to projective space)
Two -morphisms agree if they agree on an open cover of , and a morphism is determined by its restrictions. (Morphisms of schemes are local on compatible open covers)
over , with no chart variables. (Projective space is Proj of a polynomial ring, Relative projective space from standard charts)
Pullback of sections is functorial: for , sections and an open one has , and pullback of invertible sheaves is invertible. (Relative projective space from standard charts)
Proof
Data attached to a morphism. Let be an -morphism. Then is an invertible -module and the pullbacks , , generate : on the section is the pullback of the frame , hence a frame there, and the sets cover .
The universal property in the reverse direction. Conversely, given an invertible and generating sections , [F2] supplies an -morphism with corresponding to under an isomorphism and with . The construction depends only on the isomorphism class of : an isomorphism with transports a trivialisation of by into one by .
The case . Here by [F4], so the left side is the singleton structure morphism . On the right side, a pair with generating has a global frame: the evaluation map is an isomorphism. Mapping to the isomorphism class of the trivialisation it defines identifies all such pairs with the single class of , so both sides are singletons; the unique morphism corresponds to the unit section of .
The two constructions are inverse: data-to-morphism-to-data. Start with data and let . Then the data attached to in step 1.1 are , which by [F2] is isomorphic to under the very isomorphism used to define ; hence the composite data morphism data is the identity on isomorphism classes.
The two constructions are inverse: morphism-to-data-to-morphism. Let be an -morphism and let be its data as in step 1.1. Let be the morphism supplied by step 1.2. Then and on the chart coordinates agree: by [F2] and the definitions. Since the open sets cover , [F3] gives .
Naturality. For a morphism the data of are the pullbacks along of the data of , and is compatible with this operation because the universal property [F2] is: the morphism associated to the pulled-back data is , by uniqueness in [F2]. The same uniqueness gives compatibility with base change .
Conclusion. Step 1.1 attaches generating line-bundle data to every morphism, step 1.2 produces a morphism from data, steps 2.1 and 2.2 show the two operations are mutually inverse on isomorphism classes, step 2.3 gives naturality, and step 1.3 covers . The Axiom of Choice [A1] is inherited from the projective-space and sheaf constructions; no choice is made here. [A1, step 1.2, step 2.1, step 2.2, step 2.3, step 1.3] \qed
Depends on
- Generating line-bundle sections define a morphism to projective space
- 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
- Morphisms of schemes are local on compatible open covers
- Global generation by the evaluation map
Used by
- Global generation does not imply very ampleness Counterexample
- Projective bundle represents line quotients Theorem
Dependency tree · two levels
27 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)