Lemma 15.94.1. In Situation 15.91.15. If $A$ is Noetherian, then the pro-objects $\{ K_ n^\bullet \} $ and $\{ A/(f_1^ n, \ldots , f_ r^ n)\} $ of $D(A)$ are isomorphic^{1}.

**Proof.**
We have an inverse system of distinguished triangles

See Derived Categories, Remark 13.12.4. By Derived Categories, Lemma 13.42.4 it suffices to show that the inverse system $\tau _{\leq -1}K_ n^\bullet $ is pro-zero. Recall that $K_ n^\bullet $ has nonzero terms only in degrees $i$ with $-r \leq i \leq 0$. Thus by Derived Categories, Lemma 13.42.3 it suffices to show that $H^ p(K_ n^\bullet )$ is pro-zero for $p \leq -1$. In other words, for every $n \in \mathbf{N}$ we have to show there exists an $m \geq n$ such that $H^ p(K_ m^\bullet ) \to H^ p(K_ n^\bullet )$ is zero. Since $A$ is Noetherian, we see that

is a finite $A$-module. Moreover, the map $K_ m^ p \to K_ n^ p$ is given by a diagonal matrix whose entries are in the ideal $(f_1^{m - n}, \ldots , f_ r^{m - n})$ as $p < 0$. Note that $H^ p(K_ n^\bullet )$ is annihilated by $J = (f_1^ n, \ldots , f_ r^ n)$, see Lemma 15.28.6. Now $(f_1^{m - n}, \ldots , f_ r^{m - n}) \subset J^ t$ for $m - n \geq tn$. Thus by Algebra, Lemma 10.51.2 (Artin-Rees) applied to the ideal $J$ and the module $M = K_ n^ p$ with submodule $N = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(K_ n^ p \to K_ n^{p + 1})$ for $m$ large enough the image of $K_ m^ p \to K_ n^ p$ intersected with $\mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(K_ n^ p \to K_ n^{p + 1})$ is contained in $J \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(K_ n^ p \to K_ n^{p + 1})$. For such $m$ we get the zero map. $\square$

## 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Your email address will not be published.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.

## Comments (2)

Comment #6235 by Owen on

Comment #6362 by Johan on