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*}

10.83 Transfinite dévissage of modules

In this section we introduce a dévissage technique for decomposing a module into a direct sum. The main result is that a projective module is a direct sum of countably generated modules (Theorem 10.83.5 below). We follow [Kaplansky].

Definition 10.83.1. Let $M$ be an $R$-module. A direct sum dévissage of $M$ is a family of submodules $(M_{\alpha })_{\alpha \in S}$, indexed by an ordinal $S$ and increasing (with respect to inclusion), such that:

  1. $M_0 = 0$;

  2. $M = \bigcup _{\alpha } M_{\alpha }$;

  3. if $\alpha \in S$ is a limit ordinal, then $M_{\alpha } = \bigcup _{\beta < \alpha } M_{\beta }$;

  4. if $\alpha + 1 \in S$, then $M_{\alpha }$ is a direct summand of $M_{\alpha + 1}$.

If moreover

  1. $M_{\alpha + 1}/M_{\alpha }$ is countably generated for $\alpha + 1 \in S$,

then $(M_{\alpha })_{\alpha \in S}$ is called a Kaplansky dévissage of $M$.

The terminology is justified by the following lemma.

Lemma 10.83.2. Let $M$ be an $R$-module. If $(M_{\alpha })_{\alpha \in S}$ is a direct sum dévissage of $M$, then $M \cong \bigoplus _{\alpha + 1 \in S} M_{\alpha + 1}/M_{\alpha }$.

Proof. By property (3) of a direct sum dévissage, there is an inclusion $M_{\alpha + 1}/M_{\alpha } \to M$ for each $\alpha \in S$. Consider the map

\[ f : \bigoplus \nolimits _{\alpha + 1\in S} M_{\alpha + 1}/M_{\alpha } \to M \]

given by the sum of these inclusions. Further consider the restrictions

\[ f_{\beta } : \bigoplus \nolimits _{\alpha + 1 \leq \beta } M_{\alpha + 1}/M_{\alpha } \longrightarrow M \]

for $\beta \in S$. Transfinite induction on $S$ shows that the image of $f_{\beta }$ is $M_{\beta }$. For $\beta =0$ this is true by $(0)$. If $\beta +1$ is a successor ordinal and it is true for $\beta $, then it is true for $\beta + 1$ by (3). And if $\beta $ is a limit ordinal and it is true for $\alpha < \beta $, then it is true for $\beta $ by (2). Hence $f$ is surjective by (1).

Transfinite induction on $S$ also shows that the restrictions $f_{\beta }$ are injective. For $\beta = 0$ it is true. If $\beta +1$ is a successor ordinal and $f_{\beta }$ is injective, then let $x$ be in the kernel and write $x = (x_{\alpha + 1})_{\alpha + 1 \leq \beta + 1}$ in terms of its components $x_{\alpha + 1} \in M_{\alpha + 1}/M_{\alpha }$. By property (3) and the fact that the image of $f_{\beta }$ is $M_{\beta }$ both $(x_{\alpha + 1})_{\alpha + 1 \leq \beta }$ and $x_{\beta + 1}$ map to $0$. Hence $x_{\beta +1} = 0$ and, by the assumption that the restriction $f_{\beta }$ is injective also $x_{\alpha + 1} = 0$ for every $\alpha + 1 \leq \beta $. So $x = 0$ and $f_{\beta +1}$ is injective. If $\beta $ is a limit ordinal consider an element $x$ of the kernel. Then $x$ is already contained in the domain of $f_{\alpha }$ for some $\alpha <\beta $. Thus $x=0$ which finishes the induction. We conclude that $f$ is injective since $f_{\beta }$ is for each $\beta \in S$. $\square$

Lemma 10.83.3. Let $M$ be an $R$-module. Then $M$ is a direct sum of countably generated $R$-modules if and only if it admits a Kaplansky dévissage.

Proof. The lemma takes care of the “if” direction. Conversely, suppose $M = \bigoplus _{i \in I} N_ i$ where each $N_ i$ is a countably generated $R$-module. Well-order $I$ so that we can think of it as an ordinal. Then setting $M_ i = \bigoplus _{j < i} N_ j$ gives a Kaplansky dévissage $(M_ i)_{i \in I}$ of $M$. $\square$

Theorem 10.83.4. Suppose $M$ is a direct sum of countably generated $R$-modules. If $P$ is a direct summand of $M$, then $P$ is also a direct sum of countably generated $R$-modules.

Proof. Write $M = P \oplus Q$. We are going to construct a Kaplansky dévissage $(M_{\alpha })_{\alpha \in S}$ of $M$ which, in addition to the defining properties (0)-(4), satisfies:

  1. Each $M_{\alpha }$ is a direct summand of $M$;

  2. $M_{\alpha } = P_{\alpha } \oplus Q_{\alpha }$, where $P_{\alpha } =P \cap M_{\alpha }$ and $Q = Q \cap M_{\alpha }$.

(Note: if properties (0)-(2) hold, then in fact property (3) is equivalent to property (5).)

To see how this implies the theorem, it is enough to show that $(P_{\alpha })_{\alpha \in S}$ forms a Kaplansky dévissage of $P$. Properties (0), (1), and (2) are clear. By (5) and (6) for $(M_{\alpha })$, each $P_{\alpha }$ is a direct summand of $M$. Since $P_{\alpha } \subset P_{\alpha + 1}$, this implies $P_{\alpha }$ is a direct summand of $P_{\alpha + 1}$; hence (3) holds for $(P_{\alpha })$. For (4), note that

\[ M_{\alpha + 1}/M_{\alpha } \cong P_{\alpha + 1}/P_{\alpha } \oplus Q_{\alpha + 1}/Q_{\alpha }, \]

so $P_{\alpha + 1}/P_{\alpha }$ is countably generated because this is true of $M_{\alpha + 1}/M_{\alpha }$.

It remains to construct the $M_{\alpha }$. Write $M = \bigoplus _{i \in I} N_ i$ where each $N_ i$ is a countably generated $R$-module. Choose a well-ordering of $I$. By transfinite induction we are going to define an increasing family of submodules $M_{\alpha }$ of $M$, one for each ordinal $\alpha $, such that $M_{\alpha }$ is a direct sum of some subset of the $N_ i$.

For $\alpha = 0$ let $M_{0} = 0$. If $\alpha $ is a limit ordinal and $M_{\beta }$ has been defined for all $\beta < \alpha $, then define $M_{\alpha } = \bigcup _{\beta < \alpha } M_{\beta }$. Since each $M_{\beta }$ for $\beta < \alpha $ is a direct sum of a subset of the $N_ i$, the same will be true of $M_{\alpha }$. If $\alpha + 1$ is a successor ordinal and $M_{\alpha }$ has been defined, then define $M_{\alpha + 1}$ as follows. If $M_{\alpha } = M$, then let $M_{\alpha + 1} = M$. If not, choose the smallest $j \in I$ such that $N_ j$ is not contained in $M_{\alpha }$. We will construct an infinite matrix $(x_{mn}), m, n = 1, 2, 3, \ldots $ such that:

  1. $N_ j$ is contained in the submodule of $M$ generated by the entries $x_{mn}$;

  2. if we write any entry $x_{k\ell }$ in terms of its $P$- and $Q$-components, $x_{k\ell } = y_{k\ell } + z_{k\ell }$, then the matrix $(x_{mn})$ contains a set of generators for each $N_ i$ for which $y_{k\ell }$ or $z_{k\ell }$ has nonzero component.

Then we define $M_{\alpha + 1}$ to be the submodule of $M$ generated by $M_{\alpha }$ and all $x_{mn}$; by property (2) of the matrix $(x_{mn})$, $M_{\alpha + 1}$ will be a direct sum of some subset of the $N_ i$. To construct the matrix $(x_{mn})$, let $x_{11}, x_{12}, x_{13}, \ldots $ be a countable set of generators for $N_ j$. Then if $x_{11} = y_{11} + z_{11}$ is the decomposition into $P$- and $Q$-components, let $x_{21}, x_{22}, x_{23}, \ldots $ be a countable set of generators for the sum of the $N_ i$ for which $y_{11}$ or $z_{11}$ have nonzero component. Repeat this process on $x_{12}$ to get elements $x_{31}, x_{32}, \ldots $, the third row of our matrix. Repeat on $x_{21}$ to get the fourth row, on $x_{13}$ to get the fifth, and so on, going down along successive anti-diagonals as indicated below:

\[ \left( \vcenter { \xymatrix@R=2mm@C=2mm{ x_{11} & x_{12} \ar[dl] & x_{13} \ar[dl] & x_{14} \ar[dl] & \ldots \\ x_{21} & x_{22} \ar[dl] & x_{23} \ar[dl] & \ldots \\ x_{31} & x_{32} \ar[dl] & \ldots \\ x_{41} & \ldots \\ \ldots } } \right). \]

Transfinite induction on $I$ (using the fact that we constructed $M_{\alpha + 1}$ to contain $N_ j$ for the smallest $j$ such that $N_ j$ is not contained in $M_{\alpha }$) shows that for each $i \in I$, $N_ i$ is contained in some $M_{\alpha }$. Thus, there is some large enough ordinal $S$ satisfying: for each $i \in I$ there is $\alpha \in S$ such that $N_ i$ is contained in $M_{\alpha }$. This means $(M_{\alpha })_{\alpha \in S}$ satisfies property (1) of a Kaplansky dévissage of $M$. The family $(M_{\alpha })_{\alpha \in S}$ moreover satisfies the other defining properties, and also (5) and (6) above: properties (0), (2), (4), and (6) are clear by construction; property (5) is true because each $M_{\alpha }$ is by construction a direct sum of some $N_ i$; and (3) is implied by (5) and the fact that $M_{\alpha } \subset M_{\alpha + 1}$. $\square$

As a corollary we get the result for projective modules stated at the beginning of the section.

slogan

Theorem 10.83.5. If $P$ is a projective $R$-module, then $P$ is a direct sum of countably generated projective $R$-modules.

Proof. A module is projective if and only if it is a direct summand of a free module, so this follows from Theorem 10.83.4. $\square$


Comments (2)

Comment #1503 by kollar on

Johan, the citation [K] on line 3 comes up as my Rational curves book. I think it should be some paper of Kaplansky instead.

J\'anos You can type your comment here, use the preview option to see what it will look like.


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 058T. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.