Processing math: 100%

The Stacks project

Lemma 15.115.17. Let A \subset B \subset C be extensions of discrete valuation rings with fraction fields K \subset L \subset M. Assume

  1. the residue field k of A is algebraically closed of characteristic p > 0,

  2. A and B are complete,

  3. A \to B is weakly unramified,

  4. M is a finite extension of L,

  5. k = \bigcap \nolimits _{n \geq 1} \kappa _ B^{p^ n}

Then there exists a finite extension K_1/K which is a weak solution for A \to C.

Proof. Let M' be any finite extension of L and consider the integral closure C' of B in M'. Then C' is finite over B as B is Nagata by Algebra, Lemma 10.162.8. Moreover, C' is a discrete valuation ring, see discussion in Remark 15.114.1. Moreover C' is complete as a B-module, hence complete as a discrete valuation ring, see Algebra, Section 10.96. It follows in particular that C is the integral closure of B in M (by definition of valuation rings as maximal for the relation of domination).

Let M \subset M' be a finite extension and let C' \subset M' be the integral closure of B as above. By Lemma 15.115.4 it suffices to prove the result for A \to B \to C'. Hence we may assume that M/L is normal, see Fields, Lemma 9.16.3.

If M / L is normal, we can find a chain of finite extensions

L = L^0 \subset L^1 \subset L^2 \subset \ldots \subset L^ r = M

such that each extension L^{j + 1}/L^ j is either:

  1. purely inseparable of degree p,

  2. totally ramified with respect to B^ j and Galois of degree p,

  3. totally ramified with respect to B^ j and Galois cyclic of order prime to p,

  4. Galois and unramified with respect to B^ j.

Here B^ j is the integral closure of B in L^ j. Namely, since M/L is normal we can write it as a compositum of a Galois extension and a purely inseparable extension (Fields, Lemma 9.27.3). For the purely inseparable extension the existence of the filtration is clear. In the Galois case, note that G is “the” decomposition group and let I \subset G be the inertia group. Then on the one hand I is solvable by Lemma 15.112.5 and on the other hand the extension M^ I/L is unramified with respect to B by Lemma 15.112.8. This proves we have a filtration as stated.

We are going to argue by induction on the integer r. Suppose that we can find a finite extension K_1/K which is a weak solution for A \to B^1 where B^1 is the integral closure of B in L^1. Let K'_1 be the normal closure of K_1/K (Fields, Lemma 9.16.3). Since A is complete and the residue field of A is algebraically closed we see that K'_1/K_1 is separable and totally ramified with respect to A_1 (some details omitted). Hence K'_1/K is a weak solution for A \to B^1 as well by Lemma 15.115.3. In other words, we may and do assume that K_1 is a normal extension of K. Having done so we consider the sequence

L^0_1 = (L^0 \otimes _ K K_1)_{red} \subset L^1_1 = (L^1 \otimes _ K K_1)_{red} \subset \ldots \subset L^ r_1 = (L^ r \otimes _ K K_1)_{red}

and the corresponding integral closures B^ i_1. Note that C_1 = B^ r_1 is a product of discrete valuation rings which are transitively permuted by G = \text{Aut}(K_1/K) by Lemma 15.115.6. In particular all the extensions of discrete valuation rings A_1 \to (C_1)_\mathfrak m are isomorphic and a weak solution for one will be a weak solution for all of them. We can apply the induction hypothesis to the sequence

A_1 \to (B^1_1)_{B^1_1 \cap \mathfrak m} \to (B^2_1)_{B^2_1 \cap \mathfrak m} \to \ldots \to (B^ r_1)_{B^ r_1 \cap \mathfrak m} = (C_1)_\mathfrak m

to get a weak solution K_2/K_1 for A_1 \to (C_1)_\mathfrak m. The extension K_2/K will then be a weak solution for A \to C by what we said before. Note that the induction hypothesis applies: the ring map A_1 \to (B^1_1)_{B^1_1 \cap \mathfrak m} is weakly unramified by our choice of K_1 and the sequence of fraction field extensions each still have one of the properties (a), (b), (c), or (d) listed above. Moreover, observe that for any finite extension \kappa _ B \subset \kappa we still have k = \bigcap \kappa ^{p^ n}.

Thus everything boils down to finding a weak solution for A \subset C when the field extension M/L satisfies one of the properties (a), (b), (c), or (d).

Case (d). This case is trivial as here B \to C is unramified already.

Case (c). Say M/L is cyclic of order n prime to p. Because M/L is totally ramified with respect to B we see that the ramification index of B \subset C is n and hence the ramification index of A \subset C is n as well. Choose a uniformizer \pi \in A and set K_1 = K[\pi ^{1/n}]. Then K_1/K is a solution for A \subset C by Abhyankar's lemma (Lemma 15.114.4).

Case (b). We divide this case into the mixed characteristic case and the equicharacteristic case. In the equicharacteristic case this is Lemma 15.115.12. In the mixed characteristic case, we first replace K by a finite extension to get to the situation where M/L is a degree p extension of finite level using Lemma 15.115.15. Then the level is a rational number l \in [0, p), see discussion preceding Lemma 15.115.16. If the level is 0, then B \to C is weakly unramified and we're done. If not, then we can replacing the field K by a finite extension to obtain a new situation with level l' \leq \max (0, l - 1, 2l - p) by Lemma 15.115.16. If l = p - \epsilon for \epsilon < 1 then we see that l' \leq p - 2\epsilon . Hence after a finite number of replacements we obtain a case with level \leq p - 1. Then after at most p - 1 more such replacements we reach the situation where the level is zero.

Case (a) is Lemma 15.115.9. This is the only case where we possibly need a purely inseparable extension of K, namely, in case (2) of the statement of the lemma we win by adjoining a pth power of the element \pi . This finishes the proof of the lemma. \square


Comments (0)

There are also:

  • 2 comment(s) on Section 15.115: Eliminating ramification

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.