Lemma 29.6.1. Let f : X \to Y be a morphism of schemes. There exists a closed subscheme Z \subset Y such that f factors through Z and such that for any other closed subscheme Z' \subset Y such that f factors through Z' we have Z \subset Z'.
29.6 Scheme theoretic image
Caution: Some of the material in this section is ultra-general and behaves differently from what you might expect.
Proof. Let \mathcal{I} = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\mathcal{O}_ Y \to f_*\mathcal{O}_ X). If \mathcal{I} is quasi-coherent then we just take Z to be the closed subscheme determined by \mathcal{I}, see Lemma 29.2.3. This works by Lemma 29.2.2. In general the same lemma requires us to show that there exists a largest quasi-coherent sheaf of ideals \mathcal{I}' contained in \mathcal{I}. This follows from Lemma 29.4.2. \square
Definition 29.6.2. Let f : X \to Y be a morphism of schemes. The scheme theoretic image of f is the smallest closed subscheme Z \subset Y through which f factors, see Lemma 29.6.1 above.
For a morphism f : X \to Y of schemes with scheme theoretic image Z we often denote f : X \to Z the factorization of f through its scheme theoretic image. If the morphism f is not quasi-compact, then (in general)
the set theoretic inclusion \overline{f(X)} \subset Z is not an equality, i.e., f(X) \subset Z is not a dense subset, and
the construction of the scheme theoretic image does not commute with restriction to open subschemes to Y.
In Examples, Section 110.24 the reader finds an example for both phenomena. These phenomena can arise even for immersions, see Examples, Section 110.26. However, the next lemma shows that both disasters are avoided when the morphism is quasi-compact.
Lemma 29.6.3. Let f : X \to Y be a morphism of schemes. Let Z \subset Y be the scheme theoretic image of f. If f is quasi-compact then
the sheaf of ideals \mathcal{I} = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\mathcal{O}_ Y \to f_*\mathcal{O}_ X) is quasi-coherent,
the scheme theoretic image Z is the closed subscheme determined by \mathcal{I},
for any open U \subset Y the scheme theoretic image of f|_{f^{-1}(U)} : f^{-1}(U) \to U is equal to Z \cap U, and
the image f(X) \subset Z is a dense subset of Z, in other words the morphism X \to Z is dominant (see Definition 29.8.1).
Proof. Part (4) follows from part (3). To show (3) it suffices to prove (1) since the formation of \mathcal{I} commutes with restriction to open subschemes of Y. And if (1) holds then in the proof of Lemma 29.6.1 we showed (2). Thus it suffices to prove that \mathcal{I} is quasi-coherent. Since the property of being quasi-coherent is local we may assume Y is affine. As f is quasi-compact, we can find a finite affine open covering X = \bigcup _{i = 1, \ldots , n} U_ i. Denote f' the composition
Then f_*\mathcal{O}_ X is a subsheaf of f'_*\mathcal{O}_{X'}, and hence \mathcal{I} = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\mathcal{O}_ Y \to f'_*\mathcal{O}_{X'}). By Schemes, Lemma 26.24.1 the sheaf f'_*\mathcal{O}_{X'} is quasi-coherent on Y. Hence we win. \square
Example 29.6.4. If A \to B is a ring map with kernel I, then the scheme theoretic image of \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(B) \to \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A) is the closed subscheme \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A/I) of \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A). This follows from Lemma 29.6.3.
If the morphism is quasi-compact, then the scheme theoretic image only adds points which are specializations of points in the image.
Lemma 29.6.5. Let f : X \to Y be a quasi-compact morphism. Let Z be the scheme theoretic image of f. Let z \in Z1. There exists a valuation ring A with fraction field K and a commutative diagram
such that the closed point of \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A) maps to z. In particular any point of Z is the specialization of a point of f(X).
Proof. Let z \in \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R) = V \subset Y be an affine open neighbourhood of z. By Lemma 29.6.3 the intersection Z \cap V is the scheme theoretic image of f^{-1}(V) \to V. Hence we may replace Y by V and assume Y = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R) is affine. In this case X is quasi-compact as f is quasi-compact. Say X = U_1 \cup \ldots \cup U_ n is a finite affine open covering. Write U_ i = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A_ i). Let I = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(R \to A_1 \times \ldots \times A_ n). By Lemma 29.6.3 again we see that Z corresponds to the closed subscheme \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(R/I) of Y. If \mathfrak p \subset R is the prime corresponding to z, then we see that I_{\mathfrak p} \subset R_{\mathfrak p} is not an equality. Hence (as localization is exact, see Algebra, Proposition 10.9.12) we see that R_{\mathfrak p} \to (A_1)_{\mathfrak p} \times \ldots \times (A_ n)_{\mathfrak p} is not zero. Hence one of the rings (A_ i)_{\mathfrak p} is not zero. Hence there exists an i and a prime \mathfrak q_ i \subset A_ i lying over a prime \mathfrak p_ i \subset \mathfrak p. By Algebra, Lemma 10.50.2 we can choose a valuation ring A \subset K = \kappa (\mathfrak q_ i) dominating the local ring R_{\mathfrak p}/\mathfrak p_ iR_{\mathfrak p} \subset \kappa (\mathfrak q_ i). This gives the desired diagram. Some details omitted. \square
Lemma 29.6.6. Let
be a commutative diagram of schemes. Let Z_ i \subset Y_ i, i = 1, 2 be the scheme theoretic image of f_ i. Then the morphism Y_1 \to Y_2 induces a morphism Z_1 \to Z_2 and a commutative diagram
Proof. The scheme theoretic inverse image of Z_2 in Y_1 is a closed subscheme of Y_1 through which f_1 factors. Hence Z_1 is contained in this. This proves the lemma. \square
Lemma 29.6.7. Let f : X \to Y be a morphism of schemes. If X is reduced, then the scheme theoretic image of f is the reduced induced scheme structure on \overline{f(X)}.
Proof. This is true because the reduced induced scheme structure on \overline{f(X)} is clearly the smallest closed subscheme of Y through which f factors, see Schemes, Lemma 26.12.7. \square
Lemma 29.6.8. Let f : X \to Y be a separated morphism of schemes. Let V \subset Y be a retrocompact open. Let s : V \to X be a morphism such that f \circ s = \text{id}_ V. Let Y' be the scheme theoretic image of s. Then Y' \to Y is an isomorphism over V.
Proof. The assumption that V is retrocompact in Y (Topology, Definition 5.12.1) means that V \to Y is a quasi-compact morphism. By Schemes, Lemma 26.21.14 the morphism s : V \to X is quasi-compact. Hence the construction of the scheme theoretic image Y' of s commutes with restriction to opens by Lemma 29.6.3. In particular, we see that Y' \cap f^{-1}(V) is the scheme theoretic image of a section of the separated morphism f^{-1}(V) \to V. Since a section of a separated morphism is a closed immersion (Schemes, Lemma 26.21.11), we conclude that Y' \cap f^{-1}(V) \to V is an isomorphism as desired. \square
Comments (9)
Comment #2119 by David Hansen on
Comment #2140 by Johan on
Comment #4288 by Xuande Liu on
Comment #4453 by Johan on
Comment #4734 by Damie Calaque on
Comment #4819 by Johan on
Comment #5947 by Bjorn Poonen on
Comment #5948 by Bjorn Poonen on
Comment #6133 by Johan on