The Stacks project

\begin{equation*} \DeclareMathOperator\Coim{Coim} \DeclareMathOperator\Coker{Coker} \DeclareMathOperator\Ext{Ext} \DeclareMathOperator\Hom{Hom} \DeclareMathOperator\Im{Im} \DeclareMathOperator\Ker{Ker} \DeclareMathOperator\Mor{Mor} \DeclareMathOperator\Ob{Ob} \DeclareMathOperator\Sh{Sh} \DeclareMathOperator\SheafExt{\mathcal{E}\mathit{xt}} \DeclareMathOperator\SheafHom{\mathcal{H}\mathit{om}} \DeclareMathOperator\Spec{Spec} \newcommand\colim{\mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits} \newcommand\lim{\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits} \newcommand\Qcoh{\mathit{Qcoh}} \newcommand\Sch{\mathit{Sch}} \newcommand\QCohstack{\mathcal{QC}\!\mathit{oh}} \newcommand\Cohstack{\mathcal{C}\!\mathit{oh}} \newcommand\Spacesstack{\mathcal{S}\!\mathit{paces}} \newcommand\Quotfunctor{\mathrm{Quot}} \newcommand\Hilbfunctor{\mathrm{Hilb}} \newcommand\Curvesstack{\mathcal{C}\!\mathit{urves}} \newcommand\Polarizedstack{\mathcal{P}\!\mathit{olarized}} \newcommand\Complexesstack{\mathcal{C}\!\mathit{omplexes}} \newcommand\Pic{\mathop{\mathrm{Pic}}\nolimits} \newcommand\Picardstack{\mathcal{P}\!\mathit{ic}} \newcommand\Picardfunctor{\mathrm{Pic}} \newcommand\Deformationcategory{\mathcal{D}\!\mathit{ef}} \end{equation*}

Lemma 10.109.3. Suppose that $R$ is a Noetherian local ring with maximal ideal $\mathfrak m$ and residue field $\kappa $. In this case the projective dimension of $\kappa $ is $\geq \dim _\kappa \mathfrak m / \mathfrak m^2$.

Proof. Let $x_1 , \ldots , x_ n$ be elements of $\mathfrak m$ whose images in $\mathfrak m / \mathfrak m^2$ form a basis. Consider the Koszul complex on $x_1, \ldots , x_ n$. This is the complex

\[ 0 \to \wedge ^ n R^ n \to \wedge ^{n-1} R^ n \to \wedge ^{n-2} R^ n \to \ldots \to \wedge ^ i R^ n \to \ldots \to R^ n \to R \]

with maps given by

\[ e_{j_1} \wedge \ldots \wedge e_{j_ i} \longmapsto \sum _{a = 1}^ i (-1)^{i + 1} x_{j_ a} e_{j_1} \wedge \ldots \wedge \hat e_{j_ a} \wedge \ldots \wedge e_{j_ i} \]

It is easy to see that this is a complex $K_{\bullet }(R, x_{\bullet })$. Note that the cokernel of the last map of $K_{\bullet }(R, x_{\bullet })$ is $\kappa $ by Lemma 10.19.1 part (8).

If $\kappa $ has finite projective dimension $d$, then we can find a resolution $F_{\bullet } \to \kappa $ by finite free $R$-modules of length $d$ (Lemma 10.108.7). By Lemma 10.101.2 we may assume all the maps in the complex $F_{\bullet }$ have the property that $\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(F_ i \to F_{i-1}) \subset \mathfrak m F_{i-1}$, because removing a trivial summand from the resolution can at worst shorten the resolution. By Lemma 10.70.4 we can find a map of complexes $\alpha : K_{\bullet }(R, x_{\bullet }) \to F_{\bullet }$ inducing the identity on $\kappa $. We will prove by induction that the maps $\alpha _ i : \wedge ^ i R^ n = K_ i(R, x_{\bullet }) \to F_ i$ have the property that $\alpha _ i \otimes \kappa : \wedge ^ i \kappa ^ n \to F_ i \otimes \kappa $ are injective. This shows that $F_ n \not= 0$ and hence $d \geq n$ as desired.

The result is clear for $i = 0$ because the composition $R \xrightarrow {\alpha _0} F_0 \to \kappa $ is nonzero. Note that $F_0$ must have rank $1$ since otherwise the map $F_1 \to F_0$ whose cokernel is a single copy of $\kappa $ cannot have image contained in $\mathfrak m F_0$.

Next we check the case $i = 1$ as we feel that it is instructive; the reader can skip this as the induction step will deduce the $i = 1$ case from the case $i = 0$. We saw above that $F_0 = R$ and $F_1 \to F_0 = R$ has image $\mathfrak m$. We have a commutative diagram

\[ \begin{matrix} R^ n & = & K_1(R, x_{\bullet }) & \to & K_0(R, x_{\bullet }) & = & R \\ & & \downarrow & & \downarrow & & \downarrow \\ & & F_1 & \to & F_0 & = & R \end{matrix} \]

where the rightmost vertical arrow is given by multiplication by a unit. Hence we see that the image of the composition $R^ n \to F_1 \to F_0 = R$ is also equal to $\mathfrak m$. Thus the map $R^ n \otimes \kappa \to F_1 \otimes \kappa $ has to be injective since $\dim _\kappa (\mathfrak m / \mathfrak m^2) = n$.

Let $i \geq 1$ and assume injectivity of $\alpha _ j \otimes \kappa $ has been proved for all $j \leq i - 1$. Consider the commutative diagram

\[ \begin{matrix} \wedge ^ i R^ n & = & K_ i(R, x_{\bullet }) & \to & K_{i-1}(R, x_{\bullet }) & = & \wedge ^{i-1} R^ n \\ & & \downarrow & & \downarrow & & \\ & & F_ i & \to & F_{i-1} & & \end{matrix} \]

We know that $\wedge ^{i-1} \kappa ^ n \to F_{i-1} \otimes \kappa $ is injective. This proves that $\wedge ^{i-1} \kappa ^ n \otimes _{\kappa } \mathfrak m/\mathfrak m^2 \to F_{i-1} \otimes \mathfrak m/\mathfrak m^2$ is injective. Also, by our choice of the complex, $F_ i$ maps into $\mathfrak mF_{i-1}$, and similarly for the Koszul complex. Hence we get a commutative diagram

\[ \begin{matrix} \wedge ^ i \kappa ^ n & \to & \wedge ^{i-1} \kappa ^ n \otimes \mathfrak m/\mathfrak m^2 \\ \downarrow & & \downarrow \\ F_ i \otimes \kappa & \to & F_{i-1} \otimes \mathfrak m/\mathfrak m^2 \end{matrix} \]

At this point it suffices to verify the map $\wedge ^ i \kappa ^ n \to \wedge ^{i-1} \kappa ^ n \otimes \mathfrak m/\mathfrak m^2$ is injective, which can be done by hand. $\square$

Comments (2)

Comment #2771 by on

Sorry for a trivial nitpick, but on the first line of the proof, a comma is missing before "x_n", and some explanation for the "clearly" might be useful (why do the x_i generate the maximal ideal? it follows from Tag 00DV part (8), but this perhaps should be said).

Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 00OA. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.