Lemma 69.14.3. Let S be a scheme. Let X be a Noetherian algebraic space over S. Let \mathcal{F} be a coherent sheaf on X. There exists a filtration
0 = \mathcal{F}_0 \subset \mathcal{F}_1 \subset \ldots \subset \mathcal{F}_ m = \mathcal{F}
by coherent subsheaves such that for each j = 1, \ldots , m there exists a reduced closed subspace Z_ j \subset X with |Z_ j| irreducible and a sheaf of ideals \mathcal{I}_ j \subset \mathcal{O}_{Z_ j} such that
\mathcal{F}_ j/\mathcal{F}_{j - 1} \cong (Z_ j \to X)_* \mathcal{I}_ j
Proof.
Consider the collection
\mathcal{T} = \left\{ \begin{matrix} T \subset |X| \text{ closed such that there exists a coherent sheaf } \mathcal{F}
\\ \text{ with } \text{Supp}(\mathcal{F}) = T \text{ for which the lemma is wrong}
\end{matrix} \right\}
We are trying to show that \mathcal{T} is empty. If not, then because |X| is Noetherian (Properties of Spaces, Lemma 66.24.2) we can choose a minimal element T \in \mathcal{T}. This means that there exists a coherent sheaf \mathcal{F} on X whose support is T and for which the lemma does not hold. Clearly T \not= \emptyset since the only sheaf whose support is empty is the zero sheaf for which the lemma does hold (with m = 0).
If T is not irreducible, then we can write T = Z_1 \cup Z_2 with Z_1, Z_2 closed and strictly smaller than T. Then we can apply Lemma 69.14.1 to get a short exact sequence of coherent sheaves
0 \to \mathcal{G}_1 \to \mathcal{F} \to \mathcal{G}_2 \to 0
with \text{Supp}(\mathcal{G}_ i) \subset Z_ i. By minimality of T each of \mathcal{G}_ i has a filtration as in the statement of the lemma. By considering the induced filtration on \mathcal{F} we arrive at a contradiction. Hence we conclude that T is irreducible.
Suppose T is irreducible. Let \mathcal{J} be the sheaf of ideals defining the reduced induced closed subspace structure on T, see Properties of Spaces, Lemma 66.12.3. By Lemma 69.13.2 we see there exists an n \geq 0 such that \mathcal{J}^ n\mathcal{F} = 0. Hence we obtain a filtration
0 = \mathcal{I}^ n\mathcal{F} \subset \mathcal{I}^{n - 1}\mathcal{F} \subset \ldots \subset \mathcal{I}\mathcal{F} \subset \mathcal{F}
each of whose successive subquotients is annihilated by \mathcal{J}. Hence if each of these subquotients has a filtration as in the statement of the lemma then also \mathcal{F} does. In other words we may assume that \mathcal{J} does annihilate \mathcal{F}.
Assume T is irreducible and \mathcal{J}\mathcal{F} = 0 where \mathcal{J} is as above. Then the scheme theoretic support of \mathcal{F} is T, see Morphisms of Spaces, Lemma 67.14.1. Hence we can apply Lemma 69.14.2. This gives a short exact sequence
0 \to i_*(\mathcal{I}^{\oplus r}) \to \mathcal{F} \to \mathcal{Q} \to 0
where the support of \mathcal{Q} is a proper closed subset of T. Hence we see that \mathcal{Q} has a filtration of the desired type by minimality of T. But then clearly \mathcal{F} does too, which is our final contradiction.
\square
Comments (0)