The following “completion” of the category \mathcal{C}_\Lambda will serve as the base category of the completion of a category cofibered in groupoids over \mathcal{C}_\Lambda (Section 90.7).
Definition 90.4.1. Let \Lambda be a Noetherian ring and let \Lambda \to k be a finite ring map where k is a field. We define \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda to be the category with
objects are pairs (R, \varphi ) where R is a Noetherian complete local \Lambda -algebra and where \varphi : R/\mathfrak m_ R \to k is a \Lambda -algebra isomorphism, and
morphisms f : (S, \psi ) \to (R, \varphi ) are local \Lambda -algebra homomorphisms such that \varphi \circ (f \bmod \mathfrak m) = \psi .
As in the discussion following Definition 90.3.1 we will usually denote an object of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda simply R, with the identification R/\mathfrak m_ R = k understood. In this section we discuss some basic properties of objects and morphisms of the category \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda paralleling our discussion of the category \mathcal{C}_\Lambda in the previous section.
Our first observation is that any object A \in \mathcal{C}_\Lambda is an object of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda as an Artinian local ring is always Noetherian and complete with respect to its maximal ideal (which is after all a nilpotent ideal). Moreover, it is clear from the definitions that \mathcal{C}_\Lambda \subset \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda is the strictly full subcategory consisting of all Artinian rings. As it turns out, conversely every object of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda is a limit of objects of \mathcal{C}_\Lambda .
Suppose that R is an object of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . Consider the rings R_ n = R/\mathfrak m_ R^ n for n \in \mathbf{N}. These are Noetherian local rings with a unique nilpotent prime ideal, hence Artinian, see Algebra, Proposition 10.60.7. The ring maps
\ldots \to R_{n + 1} \to R_ n \to \ldots \to R_2 \to R_1 = k
are all surjective. Completeness of R by definition means that R = \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits R_ n. If f : R \to S is a ring map in \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda then we obtain a system of ring maps f_ n : R_ n \to S_ n whose limit is the given map.
Lemma 90.4.2. Let f: R \to S be a ring map in \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . The following are equivalent
f is surjective,
the map \mathfrak m_ R/\mathfrak m_ R^2 \to \mathfrak m_ S/\mathfrak m_ S^2 is surjective, and
the map \mathfrak m_ R/(\mathfrak m_\Lambda R + \mathfrak m_ R^2) \to \mathfrak m_ S/(\mathfrak m_\Lambda S + \mathfrak m_ S^2) is surjective.
Proof.
Note that for n \geq 2 we have the equality of relative cotangent spaces
\mathfrak m_ R/(\mathfrak m_\Lambda R + \mathfrak m_ R^2) = \mathfrak m_{R_ n}/(\mathfrak m_\Lambda R_ n + \mathfrak m_{R_ n}^2)
and similarly for S. Hence by Lemma 90.3.5 we see that R_ n \to S_ n is surjective for all n. Now let K_ n be the kernel of R_ n \to S_ n. Then the sequences
0 \to K_ n \to R_ n \to S_ n \to 0
form an exact sequence of directed inverse systems. The system (K_ n) is Mittag-Leffler since each K_ n is Artinian. Hence by Algebra, Lemma 10.86.4 taking limits preserves exactness. So \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits R_ n \to \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits S_ n is surjective, i.e., f is surjective.
\square
Lemma 90.4.3. The category \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda admits pushouts.
Proof.
Let R \to S_1 and R \to S_2 be morphisms of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . Consider the ring C = S_1 \otimes _ R S_2. This ring has a finitely generated maximal ideal \mathfrak m = \mathfrak m_{S_1} \otimes S_2 + S_1 \otimes \mathfrak m_{S_2} with residue field k. Set C^\wedge equal to the completion of C with respect to \mathfrak m. Then C^\wedge is a Noetherian ring complete with respect to the maximal ideal \mathfrak m^\wedge = \mathfrak mC^\wedge whose residue field is identified with k, see Algebra, Lemma 10.97.5. Hence C^\wedge is an object of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . Then S_1 \to C^\wedge and S_2 \to C^\wedge turn C^\wedge into a pushout over R in \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda (details omitted).
\square
We will not need the following lemma.
Lemma 90.4.4. The category \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda admits coproducts of pairs of objects.
Proof.
Let R and S be objects of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . Consider the ring C = R \otimes _\Lambda S. There is a canonical surjective map C \to R \otimes _\Lambda S \to k \otimes _\Lambda k \to k where the last map is the multiplication map. The kernel of C \to k is a maximal ideal \mathfrak m. Note that \mathfrak m is generated by \mathfrak m_ R C, \mathfrak m_ S C and finitely many elements of C which map to generators of the kernel of k \otimes _\Lambda k \to k. Hence \mathfrak m is a finitely generated ideal. Set C^\wedge equal to the completion of C with respect to \mathfrak m. Then C^\wedge is a Noetherian ring complete with respect to the maximal ideal \mathfrak m^\wedge = \mathfrak mC^\wedge with residue field k, see Algebra, Lemma 10.97.5. Hence C^\wedge is an object of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . Then R \to C^\wedge and S \to C^\wedge turn C^\wedge into a coproduct in \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda (details omitted).
\square
An empty coproduct in a category is an initial object of the category. In the classical case \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda has an initial object, namely \Lambda itself. More generally, if k' = k, then the completion \Lambda ^\wedge of \Lambda with respect to \mathfrak m_\Lambda is an initial object. More generally still, if k' \subset k is separable, then \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda has an initial object too. Namely, choose a monic polynomial P \in \Lambda [T] such that k \cong k'[T]/(P') where p' \in k'[T] is the image of P. Then R = \Lambda ^\wedge [T]/(P) is an initial object, see proof of Lemma 90.3.8.
If R is an initial object as above, then we have \mathcal{C}_\Lambda = \mathcal{C}_ R and \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda = \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_ R which effectively brings the whole discussion in this chapter back to the classical case. But, if k' \subset k is inseparable, then an initial object does not exist.
Lemma 90.4.5. Let S be an object of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . Then \dim _ k \text{Der}_\Lambda (S, k) < \infty .
Proof.
Let x_1, \ldots , x_ n \in \mathfrak m_ S map to a k-basis for the relative cotangent space \mathfrak m_ S/(\mathfrak m_\Lambda S + \mathfrak m_ S^2). Choose y_1, \ldots , y_ m \in S whose images in k generate k over k'. We claim that \dim _ k \text{Der}_\Lambda (S, k) \leq n + m. To see this it suffices to prove that if D(x_ i) = 0 and D(y_ j) = 0, then D = 0. Let a \in S. We can find a polynomial P = \sum \lambda _ J y^ J with \lambda _ J \in \Lambda whose image in k is the same as the image of a in k. Then we see that D(a - P) = D(a) - D(P) = D(a) by our assumption that D(y_ j) = 0 for all j. Thus we may assume a \in \mathfrak m_ S. Write a = \sum a_ i x_ i with a_ i \in S. By the Leibniz rule
D(a) = \sum x_ iD(a_ i) + \sum a_ iD(x_ i) = \sum x_ iD(a_ i)
as we assumed D(x_ i) = 0. We have \sum x_ iD(a_ i) = 0 as multiplication by x_ i is zero on k.
\square
Lemma 90.4.6. Let f : R \to S be a morphism of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . If \text{Der}_\Lambda (S, k) \to \text{Der}_\Lambda (R, k) is injective, then f is surjective.
Proof.
If f is not surjective, then \mathfrak m_ S/(\mathfrak m_ R S + \mathfrak m_ S^2) is nonzero by Lemma 90.4.2. Then also Q = S/(f(R) + \mathfrak m_ R S + \mathfrak m_ S^2) is nonzero. Note that Q is a k = R/\mathfrak m_ R-vector space via f. We turn Q into an S-module via S \to k. The quotient map D : S \to Q is an R-derivation: if a_1, a_2 \in S, we can write a_1 = f(b_1) + a_1' and a_2 = f(b_2) + a_2' for some b_1, b_2 \in R and a_1', a_2' \in \mathfrak m_ S. Then b_ i and a_ i have the same image in k for i = 1, 2 and
\begin{align*} a_1a_2 & = (f(b_1) + a_1')(f(b_2) + a_2') \\ & = f(b_1)a_2' + f(b_2)a_1' \\ & = f(b_1)(f(b_2) + a_2') + f(b_2)(f(b_1) + a_1') \\ & = f(b_1)a_2 + f(b_2)a_1 \end{align*}
in Q which proves the Leibniz rule. Hence D : S \to Q is a \Lambda -derivation which is zero on composing with R \to S. Since Q \not= 0 there also exist derivations D : S \to k which are zero on composing with R \to S, i.e., \text{Der}_\Lambda (S, k) \to \text{Der}_\Lambda (R, k) is not injective.
\square
Lemma 90.4.7. Let R be an object of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . Let (J_ n) be a decreasing sequence of ideals such that \mathfrak m_ R^ n \subset J_ n. Set J = \bigcap J_ n. Then the sequence (J_ n/J) defines the \mathfrak m_{R/J}-adic topology on R/J.
Proof.
It is clear that \mathfrak m_{R/J}^ n \subset J_ n/J. Thus it suffices to show that for every n there exists an N such that J_ N/J \subset \mathfrak m_{R/J}^ n. This is equivalent to J_ N \subset \mathfrak m_ R^ n + J. For each n the ring R/\mathfrak m_ R^ n is Artinian, hence there exists a N_ n such that
J_{N_ n} + \mathfrak m_ R^ n = J_{N_ n + 1} + \mathfrak m_ R^ n = \ldots
Set E_ n = (J_{N_ n} + \mathfrak m_ R^ n)/\mathfrak m_ R^ n. Set E = \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits E_ n \subset \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits R/\mathfrak m_ R^ n = R. Note that E \subset J as for any f \in E and any m we have f \in J_ m + \mathfrak m_ R^ n for all n \gg 0, so f \in J_ m by Krull's intersection theorem, see Algebra, Lemma 10.51.4. Since the transition maps E_ n \to E_{n - 1} are all surjective, we see that J surjects onto E_ n. Hence for N = N_ n works.
\square
Lemma 90.4.8. Let \ldots \to A_3 \to A_2 \to A_1 be a sequence of surjective ring maps in \mathcal{C}_\Lambda . If \dim _ k (\mathfrak m_{A_ n}/\mathfrak m_{A_ n}^2) is bounded, then S = \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits A_ n is an object in \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda and the ideals I_ n = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(S \to A_ n) define the \mathfrak m_ S-adic topology on S.
Proof.
We will use freely that the maps S \to A_ n are surjective for all n. Note that the maps \mathfrak m_{A_{n + 1}}/\mathfrak m_{A_{n + 1}}^2 \to \mathfrak m_{A_ n}/\mathfrak m_{A_ n}^2 are surjective, see Lemma 90.4.2. Hence for n sufficiently large the dimension \dim _ k (\mathfrak m_{A_ n}/\mathfrak m_{A_ n}^2) stabilizes to an integer, say r. Thus we can find x_1, \ldots , x_ r \in \mathfrak m_ S whose images in A_ n generate \mathfrak m_{A_ n}. Moreover, pick y_1, \ldots , y_ t \in S whose images in k generate k over \Lambda . Then we get a ring map P = \Lambda [z_1, \ldots , z_{r + t}] \to S, z_ i \mapsto x_ i and z_{r + j} \mapsto y_ j such that the composition P \to S \to A_ n is surjective for all n. Let \mathfrak m \subset P be the kernel of P \to k. Let R = P^\wedge be the \mathfrak m-adic completion of P; this is an object of \widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda . Since we still have the compatible system of (surjective) maps R \to A_ n we get a map R \to S. Set J_ n = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(R \to A_ n). Set J = \bigcap J_ n. By Lemma 90.4.7 we see that R/J = \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits R/J_ n = \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits A_ n = S and that the ideals J_ n/J = I_ n define the \mathfrak m-adic topology. (Note that for each n we have \mathfrak m_ R^{N_ n} \subset J_ n for some N_ n and not necessarily N_ n = n, so a renumbering of the ideals J_ n may be necessary before applying the lemma.)
\square
Lemma 90.4.9. Let R', R \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda ). Suppose that R = R' \oplus I for some ideal I of R. Let x_1, \ldots , x_ r \in I map to a basis of I/\mathfrak m_ R I. Set S = R'[[X_1, \ldots , X_ r]] and consider the R'-algebra map S \to R mapping X_ i to x_ i. Assume that for every n \gg 0 the map S/\mathfrak m_ S^ n \to R/\mathfrak m_ R^ n has a left inverse in \mathcal{C}_\Lambda . Then S \to R is an isomorphism.
Proof.
As R = R' \oplus I we have
\mathfrak m_ R/\mathfrak m_ R^2 = \mathfrak m_{R'}/\mathfrak m_{R'}^2 \oplus I/\mathfrak m_ RI
and similarly
\mathfrak m_ S/\mathfrak m_ S^2 = \mathfrak m_{R'}/\mathfrak m_{R'}^2 \oplus \bigoplus kX_ i
Hence for n > 1 the map S/\mathfrak m_ S^ n \to R/\mathfrak m_ R^ n induces an isomorphism on cotangent spaces. Thus a left inverse h_ n : R/\mathfrak m_ R^ n \to S/\mathfrak m_ S^ n is surjective by Lemma 90.4.2. Since h_ n is injective as a left inverse it is an isomorphism. Thus the canonical surjections S/\mathfrak m_ S^ n \to R/\mathfrak m_ R^ n are all isomorphisms and we win.
\square
Comments (0)