Definition 15.23.1. Let R be a domain. We say an R-module M is reflexive if the natural map
which sends m \in M to the map sending \varphi \in \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R) to \varphi (m) \in R is an isomorphism.
Here is our definition.
Definition 15.23.1. Let R be a domain. We say an R-module M is reflexive if the natural map
which sends m \in M to the map sending \varphi \in \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R) to \varphi (m) \in R is an isomorphism.
We can make this definition for more general rings, but already the definition above has drawbacks. It would be wise to restrict to Noetherian domains and finite torsion free modules and (perhaps) impose some regularity conditions on R (e.g., R is normal).
Lemma 15.23.2. Let R be a domain and let M be an R-module.
If M is reflexive, then M is torsion free.
If M is finite, then j : M \to \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R), R) is injective if and only if M is torsion free
Proof. Follows immediately from Lemmas 15.22.12 and 15.22.7. \square
Lemma 15.23.3. Let R be a discrete valuation ring and let M be a finite R-module. Then the map j : M \to \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R), R) is surjective.
Proof. Let M_{tors} \subset M be the torsion submodule. Then we have \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R) = \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M/M_{tors}, R) (holds over any domain). Hence we may assume that M is torsion free. Then M is free by Lemma 15.22.11 and the lemma is clear. \square
Lemma 15.23.4. Let R be a Noetherian domain. Let M be a finite R-module. The following are equivalent:
M is reflexive,
M_\mathfrak p is a reflexive R_\mathfrak p-module for all primes \mathfrak p \subset R, and
M_\mathfrak m is a reflexive R_\mathfrak m-module for all maximal ideals \mathfrak m of R.
Proof. The localization of j : M \to \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R), R) at a prime \mathfrak p is the corresponding map for the module M_\mathfrak p over the Noetherian local domain R_\mathfrak p. See Algebra, Lemma 10.10.2. Thus the lemma holds by Algebra, Lemma 10.23.1. \square
Lemma 15.23.5. Let R be a Noetherian domain. Let 0 \to M \to M' \to M'' an exact sequence of finite R-modules. If M' is reflexive and M'' is torsion free, then M is reflexive.
Proof. We will use without further mention that \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(N, N') is a finite R-module for any finite R-modules N and N', see Algebra, Lemma 10.71.9. We take duals to get a sequence
Dualizing again we obtain a commutative diagram
We do not know the top row is exact. But, by assumption the middle vertical arrow is an isomorphism and the right vertical arrow is injective (Lemma 15.23.2). We claim j is injective. Assuming the claim a diagram chase shows that the left vertical arrow is an isomorphism, i.e., M is reflexive.
Proof of the claim. Consider the exact sequence \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M',R)\to \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M,R)\to Q \to 0 defining Q. One applies Algebra, Lemma 10.10.2 to obtain
But M \otimes _ R K \to M' \otimes _ R K is an injective map of vector spaces, hence split injective, so Q \otimes _ R K = 0, that is, Q is torsion. Then one gets the exact sequence
and \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(Q,R)=0 because Q is torsion. \square
Lemma 15.23.6. Let R be a Noetherian domain. Let M be a finite R-module. The following are equivalent
M is reflexive,
there exists a short exact sequence 0 \to M \to F \to N \to 0 with F finite free and N torsion free.
Proof. Observe that a finite free module is reflexive. By Lemma 15.23.5 we see that (2) implies (1). Assume M is reflexive. Choose a presentation R^{\oplus m} \to R^{\oplus n} \to \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R) \to 0. Dualizing we get an exact sequence
with N = \mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(R^{\oplus n} \to R^{\oplus m}) a torsion free module. As M = \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R), R) we get an exact sequence as in (2). \square
Lemma 15.23.7. Let R \to R' be a flat homomorphism of Noetherian domains. If M is a finite reflexive R-module, then M \otimes _ R R' is a finite reflexive R'-module.
Proof. Choose a short exact sequence 0 \to M \to F \to N \to 0 with F finite free and N torsion free, see Lemma 15.23.6. Since R \to R' is flat we obtain a short exact sequence 0 \to M \otimes _ R R' \to F \otimes _ R R' \to N \otimes _ R R' \to 0 with F \otimes _ R R' finite free and N \otimes _ R R' torsion free (Lemma 15.22.4). Thus M \otimes _ R R' is reflexive by Lemma 15.23.6. \square
Lemma 15.23.8. Let R be a Noetherian domain. Let M be a finite R-module. Let N be a finite reflexive R-module. Then \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, N) is reflexive.
Proof. Choose a presentation R^{\oplus m} \to R^{\oplus n} \to M \to 0. Then we obtain
with N' = \mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(N^{\oplus n} \to N^{\oplus m}) torsion free. We conclude by Lemma 15.23.5. \square
Definition 15.23.9. Let R be a Noetherian domain. Let M be a finite R-module. The module M^{**} = \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R), R) is called the reflexive hull of M.
This makes sense because the reflexive hull is reflexive by Lemma 15.23.8. The assignment M \mapsto M^{**} is a functor. If \varphi : M \to N is an R-module map into a reflexive R-module N, then \varphi factors M \to M^{**} \to N through the reflexive hull of M. Another way to say this is that taking the reflexive hull is the left adjoint to the inclusion functor
over a Noetherian domain R.
Lemma 15.23.10. Let R be a Noetherian local ring. Let M, N be finite R-modules.
If N has depth \geq 1, then \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, N) has depth \geq 1.
If N has depth \geq 2, then \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, N) has depth \geq 2.
Proof. Choose a presentation R^{\oplus m} \to R^{\oplus n} \to M \to 0. Dualizing we get an exact sequence
with N' = \mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(N^{\oplus n} \to N^{\oplus m}). A submodule of a module with depth \geq 1 has depth \geq 1; this follows immediately from the definition. Thus part (1) is clear. For (2) note that here the assumption and the previous remark implies N' has depth \geq 1. The module N^{\oplus n} has depth \geq 2. From Algebra, Lemma 10.72.6 we conclude \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, N) has depth \geq 2. \square
Lemma 15.23.11. Let R be a Noetherian ring. Let M, N be finite R-modules.
If N has property (S_1), then \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, N) has property (S_1).
If N has property (S_2), then \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, N) has property (S_2).
If R is a domain, N is torsion free and (S_2), then \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, N) is torsion free and has property (S_2).
Proof. Since localizing at primes commutes with taking \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R for finite R-modules (Algebra, Lemma 10.71.9) parts (1) and (2) follow immediately from Lemma 15.23.10. Part (3) follows from (2) and Lemma 15.22.12. \square
Lemma 15.23.12. Let R be a Noetherian ring. Let \varphi : M \to N be a map of R-modules. Assume that for every prime \mathfrak p of R at least one of the following happens
M_\mathfrak p \to N_\mathfrak p is injective, or
\mathfrak p \not\in \text{Ass}(M).
Then \varphi is injective.
Proof. Let \mathfrak p be an associated prime of \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\varphi ). Then there exists an element x \in M_\mathfrak p which is in the kernel of M_\mathfrak p \to N_\mathfrak p and whose annihilator is \mathfrak pR_\mathfrak p (Algebra, Lemma 10.63.15). This is impossible in both cases. Hence \text{Ass}(\mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\varphi )) = \emptyset and we conclude \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\varphi ) = 0 by Algebra, Lemma 10.63.7. \square
Lemma 15.23.13. Let R be a Noetherian ring. Let \varphi : M \to N be a map of R-modules. Assume M is finite and that for every prime \mathfrak p of R one of the following happens
M_\mathfrak p \to N_\mathfrak p is an isomorphism, or
\text{depth}(M_\mathfrak p) \geq 2 and \mathfrak p \not\in \text{Ass}(N).
Then \varphi is an isomorphism.
Proof. By Lemma 15.23.12 we see that \varphi is injective. Let N' \subset N be an finitely generated R-module containing the image of M. Then \text{Ass}(N_\mathfrak p) = \emptyset implies \text{Ass}(N'_\mathfrak p) = \emptyset . Hence the assumptions of the lemma hold for M \to N'. In order to prove that \varphi is an isomorphism, it suffices to prove the same thing for every such N' \subset N. Thus we may assume N is a finite R-module. In this case, \mathfrak p \not\in \text{Ass}(N) \Rightarrow \text{depth}(N_\mathfrak p) \geq 1, see Algebra, Lemma 10.63.18. Consider the short exact sequence
defining Q. Looking at the conditions we see that either Q_\mathfrak p = 0 in case (1) or \text{depth}(Q_\mathfrak p) \geq 1 in case (2) by Algebra, Lemma 10.72.6. This implies that Q does not have any associated primes, hence Q = 0 by Algebra, Lemma 10.63.7. \square
Lemma 15.23.14. Let R be a Noetherian domain. Let \varphi : M \to N be a map of R-modules. Assume M is finite, N is torsion free, and that for every prime \mathfrak p of R one of the following happens
M_\mathfrak p \to N_\mathfrak p is an isomorphism, or
\text{depth}(M_\mathfrak p) \geq 2.
Then \varphi is an isomorphism.
Proof. This is a special case of Lemma 15.23.13. \square
Lemma 15.23.15. Let R be a Noetherian domain. Let M be a finite R-module. The following are equivalent
M is reflexive,
for every prime \mathfrak p of R one of the following happens
M_\mathfrak p is a reflexive R_\mathfrak p-module, or
\text{depth}(M_\mathfrak p) \geq 2.
Proof. If (1) is true, then M_\mathfrak p is a reflexive module for all primes of \mathfrak p by Lemma 15.23.4. Thus (1) \Rightarrow (2). Assume (2). Set N = \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R), R) so that
for every prime \mathfrak p of R. See Algebra, Lemma 10.10.2. We apply Lemma 15.23.14 to the map j : M \to N. This is allowed because M is finite and N is torsion free by Lemma 15.22.12. In case (2)(a) the map M_\mathfrak p \to N_\mathfrak p is an isomorphism and in case (2)(b) we have \text{depth}(M_\mathfrak p) \geq 2. \square
Lemma 15.23.16. Let R be a Noetherian domain. Let M be a finite reflexive R-module. Let \mathfrak p \subset R be a prime ideal.
If \text{depth}(R_\mathfrak p) \geq 2, then \text{depth}(M_\mathfrak p) \geq 2.
If R is (S_2), then M is (S_2).
Proof. Since formation of reflexive hull \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(M, R), R) commutes with localization (Algebra, Lemma 10.10.2) part (1) follows from Lemma 15.23.10. Part (2) is immediate from Lemma 15.23.11. \square
Example 15.23.17. The results above and below suggest reflexivity is related to the (S_2) condition; here is an example to prevent too optimistic conjectures. Let k be a field. Let R be the k-subalgebra of k[x, y] generated by 1, y, x^2, xy, x^3. Then R is not (S_2). So R as an R-module is an example of a reflexive R-module which is not (S_2). Let M = k[x, y] viewed as an R-module. Then M is a reflexive R-module because
and M is (S_2) as an R-module (computations omitted). Thus R is a Noetherian domain possessing a reflexive (S_2) module but R is not (S_2) itself.
Lemma 15.23.18. Let R be a Noetherian normal domain with fraction field K. Let M be a finite R-module. The following are equivalent
M is reflexive,
M is torsion free and has property (S_2),
M is torsion free and M = \bigcap _{\text{height}(\mathfrak p) = 1} M_{\mathfrak p} where the intersection happens in M_ K = M \otimes _ R K.
Proof. By Algebra, Lemma 10.157.4 we see that R satisfies (R_1) and (S_2).
Assume (1). Then M is torsion free by Lemma 15.23.2 and satisfies (S_2) by Lemma 15.23.16. Thus (2) holds.
Assume (2). By definition M' = \bigcap _{\text{height}(\mathfrak p) = 1} M_{\mathfrak p} is the kernel of the map
Observe that our map indeed factors through the direct sum as indicated since given a/b \in K there are at most finitely many height 1 primes \mathfrak p with b \in \mathfrak p. Let \mathfrak p_0 be a prime of height 1. Then (M_ K/M_\mathfrak p)_{\mathfrak p_0} = 0 unless \mathfrak p = \mathfrak p_0 in which case we get (M_ K/M_\mathfrak p)_{\mathfrak p_0} = M_ K/M_{\mathfrak p_0}. Thus by exactness of localization and the fact that localization commutes with direct sums, we see that M'_{\mathfrak p_0} = M_{\mathfrak p_0}. Since M has depth \geq 2 at primes of height > 1, we see that M \to M' is an isomorphism by Lemma 15.23.14. Hence (3) holds.
Assume (3). Let \mathfrak p be a prime of height 1. Then R_\mathfrak p is a discrete valuation ring by (R_1). By Lemma 15.22.11 we see that M_\mathfrak p is finite free, in particular reflexive. Hence the map M \to M^{**} induces an isomorphism at all the primes \mathfrak p of height 1. Thus the condition M = \bigcap _{\text{height}(\mathfrak p) = 1} M_{\mathfrak p} implies that M = M^{**} and (1) holds. \square
Lemma 15.23.19. Let R be a Noetherian normal domain. Let M be a finite R-module. Then the reflexive hull of M is the intersection
taken in M \otimes _ R K.
Proof. Let \mathfrak p be a prime of height 1. The kernel of M_\mathfrak p \to M \otimes _ R K is the torsion submodule (M_\mathfrak p)_{tors} of M_\mathfrak p. Moreover, we have (M/M_{tors})_\mathfrak p = M_\mathfrak p/(M_\mathfrak p)_{tors} and this is a finite free module over the discrete valuation ring R_\mathfrak p (Lemma 15.22.11). Then M_\mathfrak p/(M_\mathfrak p)_{tors} \to (M_\mathfrak p)^{**} = (M^{**})_\mathfrak p is an isomorphism, hence the lemma is a consequence of Lemma 15.23.18. \square
Lemma 15.23.20. Let A be a Noetherian normal domain with fraction field K. Let L be a finite extension of K. If the integral closure B of A in L is finite over A, then B is reflexive as an A-module.
Proof. It suffices to show that B = \bigcap B_\mathfrak p where the intersection is over height 1 primes \mathfrak p \subset A, see Lemma 15.23.18. Let b \in \bigcap B_\mathfrak p. Let x^ d + a_1x^{d - 1} + \ldots + a_ d be the minimal polynomial of b over K. We want to show a_ i \in A. By Algebra, Lemma 10.38.6 we see that a_ i \in A_\mathfrak p for all i and all height one primes \mathfrak p. Hence we get what we want from Algebra, Lemma 10.157.6 (or the lemma already cited as A is a reflexive module over itself). \square
Comments (1)
Comment #9794 by Chen Xu-Yang on