Maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules that are not locally free on the punctured spectrum
Toshinori Kobayashi, Justin Lyle, Ryo Takahashi

TL;DR
This paper characterizes Gorenstein local rings with finite Cohen-Macaulay modules not free on the punctured spectrum, linking them to hypersurfaces of specific types and exploring their singular locus properties.
Contribution
It establishes a complete classification of Gorenstein local rings with finite -representation type in dimension one, connecting it to hypersurfaces of types (A_) and (D_).
Findings
Gorenstein local rings of finite -representation type are hypersurfaces of types (A_) and (D_).
Finite -representation type relates to the structure of the singular locus.
The paper discusses the closedness and dimension of the singular locus in these rings.
Abstract
We say that a Cohen-Macaulay local ring has finite -representation type if there exist only finitely many isomorphism classes of indecomposable maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules that are not locally free on the punctured spectrum. In this paper, we consider finite -representation type from various points of view, relating it with several conjectures on finite/countable Cohen-Macaulay representation type. We prove in dimension one that the Gorenstein local rings of finite -representation type are exactly the local hypersurfaces of countable -representation type, that is, the hypersurfaces of type and . We also discuss the closedness and dimension of the singular locus of a Cohen-Macaulay local ring of finite…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models · Commutative Algebra and Its Applications · Advanced Topics in Algebra
Maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules that are not locally free on the punctured spectrum
Toshinori Kobayashi
Graduate School of Mathematics, Nagoya University, Furocho, Chikusaku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8602, Japan
,
Justin Lyle
Department of Mathematics, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045-7523, USA
[email protected] http://people.ku.edu/ j830l811/ and
Ryo Takahashi
Graduate School of Mathematics, Nagoya University, Furocho, Chikusaku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8602, Japan/Department of Mathematics, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045-7523, USA
[email protected] https://www.math.nagoya-u.ac.jp/ takahashi/
Abstract.
We say that a Cohen–Macaulay local ring has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type if there exist only finitely many isomorphism classes of indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules that are not locally free on the punctured spectrum. In this paper, we consider finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type from various points of view, relating it with several conjectures on finite/countable Cohen–Macaulay representation type. We prove in dimension one that the Gorenstein local rings of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type are exactly the local hypersurfaces of countable -representation type, that is, the hypersurfaces of type and . We also discuss the closedness and dimension of the singular locus of a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Key words and phrases:
Cohen–Macaulay ring, Gorenstein ring, hypersurface, isolated singularity, maximal Cohen–Macaulay module, punctured spectrum, representation type, singular locus
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
13C60, 13H10, 16G60
TK was partly supported by JSPS Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows 18J20660 and JSPS Overseas Challenge Program for Young Researchers. RT was partly supported by JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research 16K05098 and JSPS Fund for the Promotion of Joint International Research 16KK0099
1. Introduction
Cohen–Macaulay representation theory has been studied widely and deeply for more than four decades. The theorems of Herzog [13] in the 1970s and of Buchweitz, Greuel and Schreyer [9] in the 1980s are recognized as some of the most crucial results in this long history of Cohen–Macaulay representation theory. Both are concerned with Cohen–Macaulay local rings of finite/countable -representation type, that is, Cohen–Macaulay local rings possessing finitely/infinitely-but-countably many nonisomorphic indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules. Herzog proved that quotient singularities of dimension two have finite -representation type and that Gorenstein local rings of finite -representation type are hypersurfaces. Buchweitz, Greuel and Schreyer proved that the local hypersurfaces of finite (resp. countable) -representation type are precisely the local hypersurfaces of type with , with , and with (resp. and ).
At the beginning of this century, Huneke and Leuschke [15] proved that Cohen–Macaulay local rings of finite -representation type have isolated singularities. However, there are ample examples of Cohen–Macaulay local rings not having isolated singularities, including the local hypersurfaces of type and appearing above. Cohen–Macaulay representation theory for non-isolated singularities has been studied by many authors so far; see [2, 10, 14, 19] for instance. It should be remarked that a Cohen–Macaulay local ring with a non-isolated singularity always admits maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules that are not locally free on the punctured spectrum. Focusing on these modules, Araya, Iima and Takahashi [1] found out that the local hypersurfaces of type and have finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, that is, there exist only finitely many isomorphism classes of indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules that are not locally free on the punctured spectrum.
In this paper, we investigate Cohen–Macaulay local rings of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type from various viewpoints. Our basic landmark is the following conjecture, which includes the converse of the result of Araya, Iima and Takahashi stated above. We shall give positive results to this conjecture.
Conjecture 1.1**.**
Let be a complete local Gorenstein ring of dimension not having an isolated singularity. Then the following two conditions are equivalent.
- (1)
The ring has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. 2. (2)
The ring has countable -representation type.
Combining the result of Buchweitz, Greuel and Schreyer, this conjecture says that, when is a hypersurface having an uncountable algebraically closed coefficient field of characteristic not , condition (2) is equivalent to being an or singularity. In this setting, the implication holds by [1, Proposition 2.1].
From now on, we state our main results and the organization of this paper. Section 2 is devoted to a couple of preliminary definitions and lemmas, while Section 3 presents some conjectures and questions on finite/countable -representation type. Our results are stated in the later sections. In what follows, let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring.
In Section 4, we consider the (Zariski-)closedness and (Krull) dimension of the singular locus of in connection with the works of Huneke and Leuschke [15, 16]. As we state above, they proved in [15] that if has finite -representation type, then it has an isolated singularity, i.e., has dimension at most zero. Also, they showed in [16] that if is complete or has uncountable residue field, and has countable -representation type, then has dimension at most one. In relation to these results, we prove the following theorem, whose second assertion extends the result of Huneke and Leuschke [16] from countable -representation type to countable \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type (i.e., having infinitely but countably many nonisomorphic indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules that are not locally free on the punctured spectrum).
Theorem 1.2** (Theorem 4.2 and Corollary 4.3).**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring.
- (1)
Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then the singular locus is a finite set. Equivalently, it is a closed subset of with dimension at most one. 2. (2)
Suppose that has countable \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then the set is at most countable. It has dimension at most one if is either complete or is uncountable.
Furthermore, Huneke and Leuschke [16] proved that if admits a canonical module and has countable -representation type, then the localization at each prime ideal of has at most countable -representation type as well. We prove a result on finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type in the same context.
Theorem 1.3** (Theorem 4.4).**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring with a canonical module. Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then has finite -representation type for all . In particular, has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type for all .
In Section 5 we provide various necessary conditions for a given Cohen–Macaulay local ring to have finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Theorem 1.4** (Theorem 5.5).**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of dimension . Let be an ideal of such that is maximal Cohen–Macaulay over . Then has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type in each of the following cases.
- (1)
The ring has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. 2. (2)
The set is contained in , and either has infinite -representation type or . 3. (3)
The ideal is not -primary, has infinite -representation type, and is either Gorenstein, a domain, or analytically unramified with .
This theorem may look technical, but it actually gives rise to a lot of restrictions which having finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type produces, and is used in the later sections. One concrete example where Theorem 5.5 applies is when and ; see Corollary 5.9. Here we introduce one of the applications of the above theorem. Denote by the category of maximal Cohen–Macaulay -modules, and by the singularity category of .
Theorem 1.5** (Theorem 5.8).**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of dimension . Let be an ideal of with such that is maximal Cohen–Macaulay over . Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then one must have . If for some integer , then has dimension at most in the sense of [18]. If is Gorenstein, then is a hypersurface and has dimension at most in the sense of [23].
There are folklore conjectures that a Gorenstein local ring of countable -representation type is a hypersurface, and that, for a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of countable -representation type, has dimension at most one. The above theorem gives partial answers to the variants of these folklore conjectures for finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
In Section 6, we prove the following, which characterizes the Gorenstein rings or finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type not having an isolated singularity in the dimension case. This theorem has the consequence of answering Conjecture 1.1 in the affirmative when has an uncountable algebraically closed coefficient field of characteristic not equal to .
Theorem 1.6** (Theorem 6.1).**
Let be a homomorphic image of a regular local ring. Suppose that does not have an isolated singularity but is Gorenstein. If , the following are equivalent.
- (1)
The ring has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. 2. (2)
There exist a regular local ring and a regular system of parameters such that is isomorphic to or .
When either of these two conditions holds, the ring has countable -representation type.
In Section 7, we explore the higher-dimensional case, that is, we try to understand the Cohen–Macaulay local rings of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type in the case where . We prove the following two results in this section.
Theorem 1.7** (Corollary 7.9).**
Let be a complete local hypersurface of dimension which is not an integral domain. Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then one has , and there exist a regular local ring and elements with such that and have finite -representation type and is an integral domain of dimension .
Theorem 1.8** (Corollaries 7.11 and 7.12).**
Let be a -dimensional non-normal Cohen–Macaulay complete local domain. Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then the integral closure of has finite -representation type. If is Gorenstein, then is a hypersurface.
The former theorem gives a strong restriction of the structure of a hypersurface of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type which is not an integral domain. The latter theorem supports the conjecture that a Gorenstein local ring of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type is a hypersurface. Note that, under the assumption of the theorem plus the assumption that is equicharacteristic zero, the integral closure is a quotient surface singularity by the theorem of Auslander [3] and Esnault [12].
2. Preliminaries
This section is devoted to stating our conventions, and to recalling the definitions of the notions which repeatedly appear in this paper.
Convention 2.1**.**
Throughout this paper, unless otherwise specified, we adopt the following convention. Rings are commutative and noetherian, and modules are finitely generated. Subcategories are full and strict (i.e., closed under isomorphism). Subscripts and superscripts are often omitted unless there is a risk of confusion. An identity matrix of suitable size is denoted by .
Definition 2.2**.**
Let be a ring.
- (1)
An -module is maximal Cohen–Macaulay if the inequality holds for all . Hence, by definition, the zero module is maximal Cohen–Macaulay. 2. (2)
We denote by the category of (finitely generated) -modules, and by the subcategory of consisting of maximal Cohen–Macaulay -modules. For a subcategory of , we denote by the set of isomorphism classes of indecomposable -modules in , and by the additive closure of , that is, the subcategory of consisting of direct summands of finite direct sums of objects in . 3. (3)
A subset of is called specialization-closed if for all . This is equivalent to saying that is a union of closed subsets of in the Zariski topology. 4. (4)
Let be a subset of . Then it is easy to see that
[TABLE]
and the equality holds if is specialization-closed. The (Krull) dimension of a specialization-closed subset of is defined as this common number and denoted by . 5. (5)
The singular locus of , denoted by , is by definition the set of prime ideals of such that is not a regular local ring. It is clear that is a specialization-closed subset of . If is excellent, then by definition is a closed subset of in the Zariski topology. 6. (6)
For an matrix over , we denote by the cokernel of the map given by , and by the ideal of generated by all the -minors of . 7. (7)
For an -module , we denote by is the th Fitting invariant of , that is, we have if there exists an exact sequence .
Definition 2.3**.**
Let be a local ring.
- (1)
For an -module , we denote by the minimal number of generators of , that is, . 2. (2)
Let an -module and an integer. We denote by (or simply ) the -th syzygy of , i.e., the image of the -th differential map in the minimal free resolution of . This is uniquely determined up to isomorphism. 3. (3)
We denote by the embedding dimension of , and by the codepth of , i.e., . We say that is a hypersurface if . 4. (4)
An -module is called periodic if for some . 5. (5)
The complexity of an -module , denoted by , is defined as the infimum of nonnegative integers such that there exists a real number satisfying the inequality for , where stands for the th Betti number of . 6. (6)
The Loewy length of is defined by . Note that if and only if is artinian.
Definition 2.4**.**
Let be a local ring.
- (1)
For a subcategory of we denote by the smallest subcategory of containing and that is closed under finite direct sums, direct summands and syzygies, i.e., . When consists of a single object , we simply denote it by . 2. (2)
For subcategories of we denote by the subcategory of consisting of objects which fit into an exact sequence in with and . We set . 3. (3)
Let be a subcategory of . Put
[TABLE]
If consists of a single object , then we simply denote it by . 4. (4)
Let be a subcategory of . We define the dimension of , denoted by , as the infimum of the integers such that for some .
3. Conjectures and questions
In this section, we present several conjectures and questions which we deal with in later sections. First of all, let us give several definitions of representation types, including that of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, which is the main subject of this paper.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay ring. By we denote the subcategory of consisting of modules that are locally free on the punctured spectrum of , and set
[TABLE]
For each \mathsf{X}\in\{\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}},\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{0}},\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}\} we say that has finite (resp. countable) -representation type if there exist only finitely (resp. countably) many isomorphism classes of indecomposable modules in . We say that has infinite (resp. uncountable) -representation type if does not have finite (resp. countable) -representation type. Also, is said to have bounded -representation type if there exists an upper bound of the multiplicities of indecomposable modules in , and said to have unbounded -representation type if does not have bounded -representation type.
Let be a complete local hypersurface with uncountable algebraically closed coefficient field of characteristic not two. Buchweitz, Greuel and Schreyer [9, Theorem B] (see also [21, Theorem 14.16]) prove that has countable -representation type if and only if it is either an -singularity or a -singularity. Moreover, when this is the case, they give a complete classification of the indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay -modules. Using this result, Araya, Iima and Takahashi [1, Theorem 1.1 and Corollary 1.3] prove the following theorem (see [18, Proposition 3.5(3)]), which provides examples of a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Theorem 3.2** (Araya–Iima–Takahashi).**
Let be a complete local hypersurface with uncountable algebraically closed coefficient field of characteristic not two. If has countable -representation type, then the following statements hold.
- (1)
The ring has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. 2. (2)
There is an inequality .
By definition, there is a strong connection between finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type and finite -representation type. The first assertion of Theorem 3.2 suggests to us that finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type should also be closely related to countable -representation type. Several conjectures have been presented so far concerning finite/countable -representation type, and we set the following proposal.
Proposal 3.3**.**
One should consider the conjectures on finite/countable -representation type for finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
There has been a folklore conjecture on countable -representation type probably since the 1980s. Recently, this conjecture has been studied by Stone [25].
Conjecture 3.4**.**
A Gorenstein local ring of countable -representation type is a hypersurface.
This conjecture holds true if has finite -representation type; see [28, Theorem (8.15)]. Also, the conjecture holds if is a complete intersection with algebraically closed uncountable residue field; see [6, Existence Theorem 7.8]. The following example shows that the assumption in the conjecture that is Gorenstein is necessary.
Example 3.5**.**
Let . Then is an -singularity of dimension , and has countable -representation type by [9, Theorem B]. Let be the second Veronese subring of , that is, . Then is a Cohen–Macaulay non-Gorenstein local ring of dimension . We claim that has countable -representation type. Indeed, let be the non-isomorphic indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay -modules. Let be an indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. Then is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module, and one can write . Since is a direct summand of , the module is a direct summand of , and hence it is a direct summand of for some . The claim follows from this.
Combining Conjecture 3.4 with Proposal 3.3 gives rise to the following question.
Question 3.6**.**
Let be a Gorenstein local ring which is not an isolated singularity. Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then is a hypersurface?
Here, the assumption that is not an isolated singularity is necessary. Indeed, if is an isolated singularity, then \#\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R)=0<\infty. We shall give answers to Question 3.6 in Sections 5 and 7.
Theorem 3.2(2) leads us to the following conjecture.
Conjecture 3.7**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of countable -representation type. Then there is an inequality .
This conjecture holds true if has finite -representation type; see [18, Proposition 3.7(1)]. Let be a Gorenstein local ring. Then the stable category of is a triangulated category, and one can consider the (Rouquier) dimension of ; we refer the reader to [23] for the details. One has with equality if is a hypersurface; see [18, Proposition 3.5]. There seems to be a folklore conjecture asserting that every (noncommutative) selfinjective algebra of tame representation type satisfies the inequality . So Conjecture 3.7 is thought of as a Cohen–Macaulay version of this folklore conjecture. Combining Conjecture 3.7 with Proposal 3.3 leads us to the following question.
Question 3.8**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then does one have ?
We shall give partial answers to this question in Section 5.
Huneke and Leuschke ([16, Theorem 1.3]) prove the following theorem, which solves a conjecture of Schreyer [24, Conjecture 7.2.3] presented in the 1980s.
Theorem 3.9** (Huneke–Leuschke).**
Let be an excellent Cohen–Macaulay local ring. Assume that is complete or is uncountable. If has countable -representation type, then .
Indeed, the assumption that is excellent is unnecessary; see [26, Theorem 2.4]. This result naturally makes us have the following question.
Question 3.10**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring. Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then does have dimension at most one?
We shall give a complete answer to this question in the next Section 4. In fact, we can even prove a stronger statement.
4. The closedness and dimension of the singular locus
In this section, we discuss the structure of the singular locus of a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. First, we consider what the finiteness of the singular locus means.
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let be a local ring with maximal ideal . The following are equivalent.
- (1)
* is a finite set.* 2. (2)
* is a closed subset of in the Zariski topology, and has dimension at most one.*
Proof.
(2)(1): We find an ideal of such that . As has dimension at most one, so does the local ring . Hence , and this is a finite set.
(1)(2): Write . As is specialization-closed, it coincides with the finite union of closed subsets of . Hence is closed.
To show the other assertion, we claim (or recall) that a local ring of dimension at least two possesses infinitely many prime ideals of height one. Indeed, for any we have by Krull’s principal ideal theorem, that is, is contained in some prime ideal with . This argument shows that . Now suppose that there exist only finitely many prime ideals of having height one. Then, since the number of the minimal primes is finite, so is the number of prime ideals of height at most one. Therefore the above union is finite, and by prime avoidance is contained in some with . This implies , which is a contradiction. Thus the claim follows.
Now, assume that has dimension at least . Then for some . The above claim shows that the ring has infinitely many prime ideals of height one, which have the form with . Then is also in , and hence contains infinitely many prime ideals. This contradiction shows that the dimension of is at most . ∎
The following theorem clarifies a close relationship between finite/countable \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type and finiteness/countablity of the singular locus.
Theorem 4.2**.**
If is a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of finite (resp. countable) \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, then is a finite (resp. countable) set.
Proof.
First, let us consider the case where has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Write \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R)=\{G_{1},\dots,G_{t}\}, and pick . Set . We claim that . Indeed, is isomorphic to , which is killed by . Hence is contained in the annihilator. Also, is isomorphic to , which does not vanish as belongs to the singular locus. Hence is in the support of , and contains the annihilator. Now the claim follows.
Note that is stably isomorphic to , which is not -free since is singular. This means that belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), and we get an isomorphism with and and and . It is easy to see that
[TABLE]
for some -module . Since a prime ideal is irreducible in general, coincides with one of the annihilators in the right-hand side. The module is locally free on the punctured spectrum, and contains a power of . As is a nonmaximal prime ideal, it cannot coincide with . We thus have for some . This shows that we have only finitely many such prime ideals . Consequently, is a finite set, and so is .
We can analogously deal with the case where has countable \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. In this case, we can write \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R)=\{G_{1},G_{2},G_{3},\dots\}, and for each there exist such that . ∎
Theorem 4.2 yields the following corollary, which gives a complete answer to Question 3.10. We should remark that the second assertion of the corollary highly refines Theorem 3.9 due to Huneke and Leuschke.
Corollary 4.3**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring.
- (1)
If has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, then is closed and has dimension at most one. 2. (2)
Suppose that has countable \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
- (a)
If is uncountable, then has dimension at most one. 2. (b)
If is complete, then is closed and has dimension at most one.
Proof.
(1) The assertion follows from Theorem 4.2 and Lemma 4.1.
(2) Theorem 4.2 implies that is a countable set. Note that is specialization-closed. If is complete or is uncountable, then we can apply [26, Lemma 2.2] to deduce that for all . In case is complete, is closed as well since is excellent. ∎
Next we investigate the relationship of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type with localization of the base ring at a prime ideal. In particular, we prove the following theorem, which says that finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type implies finite -representation type on the punctured spectrum. This especially shows that finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type localizes, which should be compared with the result of Huneke and Leuschke [16, Theorem 2.1] asserting that countable -representation type localizes under the same assumption as in this theorem. This is also connected with the conjecture that a Cohen–Macaulay local ring with an isolated singularity having countable -representation type has finite -representation type [16, Page 3006].
Theorem 4.4**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring with a canonical module . Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then has finite -representation type for all .
Proof.
Assume that there exists a prime ideal such that has infinite -representation type. Then the set is infinite, and we can take an infinite subset .
Fix a module . Then we can choose an -module such that . Take a maximal Cohen–Macaulay approximation of over , that is, a short exact sequence
[TABLE]
of -modules such that is maximal Cohen–Macaulay and has finite injective dimension; see [4, Theorem 1.1]. Localization gives an exact sequence . As is maximal Cohen–Macaulay, is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module of finite injective dimension. It follows from [7, Exercise 3.3.28(a)] that for some . The exact sequence splits, and we get an isomorphism . Note that is an indecomposable -module.
Let be a decomposition of into indecomposable -modules. Then there is an isomorphism . For each write with an integer and not containing as a direct summand; then is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. We get an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Since is a local ring, the module does not contain as a direct summand by [21, Lemma 1.2], while is an indecomposable -module with . Further, [21, Lemma 2.1] also implies that and , so we may assume that and . We thus have that .
Suppose that is -free. Then so are and , and we have , which contradicts the choice of . Hence is not -free, which implies that X_{1}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
Thus we have shown that for each integer there exist an integer and a module C_{i}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) such that . Assume that for some . Then , and, appealing again to [21, Lemma 1.2], we see that (and ), contrary to the choice of . Hence for all , and we conclude that has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. This contradiction completes the proof of the theorem. ∎
Remark 4.5**.**
In Corollary 4.3(1) we proved that the singular locus of a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type has dimension at most one. As an application of Theorem 4.4, we can get another proof of this statement under the assumption that admits a canonical module.
Let be a -dimensional Cohen–Macaulay local ring with a canonical module, and suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then has finite -representation type for all nonmaximal prime ideals of by Theorem 4.4. In particular, has an isolated singularity for all such by [15, Corollary 2]. This implies that is a regular local ring in codimension , and therefore .
5. Necessary conditions for finite CM+-representation type
In this section, we explore necessary conditions for a Cohen–Macaulay local ring to have finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. For this purpose we begin with stating and showing a couple of lemmas.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let be a local ring.
- (1)
The subcategory of consisting of periodic modules is closed under finite direct sums: if the -modules are periodic, then so is . 2. (2)
Let be an exact sequence in . Let and be integers. If for all with , then .
Proof.
(1) is obvious so we need only show (2), and it suffices to show the statement when . Suppose that have complexity at most . Then we find such that and for . The induced exact sequence shows that for . Therefore we obtain . The other cases are handled similarly. ∎
The subcategory \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) of is stable under syzygies.
Lemma 5.2**.**
Let be a local ring. Let be an exact sequence in such that is free and is maximal Cohen–Macaulay. Then belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) if and only if so does .
Proof.
Note that all the modules are maximal Cohen–Macaulay. Hence the assertion is equivalent to saying that belongs to if and only if so does . The “if” part follows from the fact that is stable under syzygies. To show the “only if” part, assume that is in . Let be a nonmaximal prime ideal of . Then is -free, and we see that the -module has projective dimension at most . Note that is maximal Cohen–Macaulay over . The Auslander–Buchsbaum formula implies that is free. Hence is in . ∎
We state some containments among indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules over Cohen–Macaulay local rings, one of which is a homomorphic image of the other.
Proposition 5.3**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of dimension . Let be an ideal of such that is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. Then the following statements hold.
- (1)
* is contained in .* 2. (2)
\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R/I)* is contained in \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).* 3. (3)
* is contained in \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), if .*
Proof.
Let be an indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. The definition of indecomposability says . The equalities imply is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. It is directly checked that is indecomposable as an -module. Now (1) follows.
Let be a prime ideal of such that for some . If , then . If , then since , and hence .
Let us consider the case where is in \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R/I). Then there is a prime ideal of with such that is not -free. Letting in the above argument, we observe that is not -free (note that the zero module is free). Thus is in \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), and (2) follows.
Next we consider the case where is in . As , there is a nonmaximal prime ideal of such that . Letting in the above argument, we have . Hence is not in the support of the -module , which is equivalent to saying that does not contain . On the other hand, is in the support of the -module , which implies that contains . Thus is not contained in . We now observe that (3) holds. ∎
The lemma below says finite -representation type is equivalent to finite -representation type.
Lemma 5.4**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring. If has infinite -representation type, then has infinite -representation type.
Proof.
Suppose that has finite -representation type. Then by [18, Corollary 1.2] it is an isolated singularity. Hence , and we have , which is a finite set. This contradicts the assumption that has infinite -representation type. ∎
Now we can prove the first main result of this section, which gives various necessary conditions for a Cohen–Macaulay local ring to have finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Theorem 5.5**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of dimension . Let be an ideal of , and assume that is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. Then has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type in each of the following cases.
- (1)
* has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.* 2. (2)
* and*
- (a)
* has infinite -representation type, or* 2. (b)
. 3. (3)
, has infinite -representation type, and
- (a)
* is a Gorenstein ring, or* 2. (b)
* is a domain, or* 3. (c)
* and is analytically unramified, or* 4. (d)
, is infinite, and is equicharacteristic and reduced.
Proof.
(1)&(2a) These assertions immediately follow from (2) and (3) of Proposition 5.3, respectively.
(2b) In view of (2a), we may assume that has finite -representation type. It follows from [15, Corollary 2] that is an isolated singularity. As , the ring is a (normal) domain. Hence is a prime ideal of . As , the prime ideal is minimal. The assumption implies . Localizing this inclusion at , we get an inclusion , which particularly says that is not a field. Therefore belongs to .
Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then Corollary 4.3(1) implies that has dimension at most one. In particular, we obtain , which is a contradiction. Consequently, has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
(3) We find a nonmaximal prime ideal of that contains the ideal . Then, as contains , the prime ideal of is defined, which is not maximal. Also, since contains as well, we see that is a nonzero proper ideal of .
We establish several claims.
Claim 1**.**
Let with . Then M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
Proof of Claim.
Proposition 5.3(1) implies . There exists an integer such that
[TABLE]
Since is nonzero, we have to have . Since is a nonzero proper ideal of , we have that is not a free -module. We now conclude that belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
∎
Claim 2**.**
When is Gorenstein, for each , either or is in \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
Proof of Claim.
If , then M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) by Claim 1. Assume . There is an exact sequence , where we set and . Localization at gives an isomorphism . As and is a proper ideal, the module is nonzero. Since is Gorenstein, we apply Lemma 5.2 and [28, Lemma (8.17)] to see that belongs to . Using Claim 1 again, we obtain N\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
∎
Claim 3**.**
There is an inclusion
[TABLE]
Proof of Claim.
Take from the left-hand side. Since the -module is maximal Cohen–Macaulay, its annihilator has grade [math]. Hence has positive rank, and we see that . Therefore is nonzero. It follows from Claim 1 that belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
∎
(3a) Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, namely, \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) is a finite set. Lemma 5.4 guarantees that the set is infinite, and hence the set difference
[TABLE]
is infinite as well. Thus we can choose a (countably) infinite subset of . By Claim 2 we see that belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) for all . Note that for all distinct since is Gorenstein and are maximal Cohen–Macaulay over . It follows that \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) is an infinite set, which is a contradiction. Thus has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
(3b) Since is a domain, every -module has a rank. Claim 3 implies that is contained in \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), while is an infinite set by Lemma 5.4. It follows that has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
(3c) Note that . Since is analytically unramified and has infinite -representation type, it follows from [21, Theorem 4.10] that the left-hand side of the inclusion in Claim 3 is infinite, and so is the right-hand side \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), that is, has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-represenation type.
(3d) Since is infinite and is equicharacteristic, we can apply [21, Theorem 17.10] to deduce that if has unbounded -representation type, then the left-hand side of the inclusion in Claim 3 is infinite (as is reduced), and we are done. Hence we may assume that has bounded -representation type. By [21, Theorems 10.1 and 17.10] the completion has infinite and bounded -representation type. According to [21, Theorem 17.9], the ring is isomorphic to one of the following three rings.
[TABLE]
The indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules over these rings are classified; one can find complete lists of those modules in [9, Propositions 4.1 and 4.2] and [21, Example 14.23]. We can check by hand that each of these rings has an infinite family of nonisomorphic indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules of rank . This family of modules is extended from a family of -modules by [20, Corollary 2.2], and these are nonisomorphic indecomposable maximal Cohen–Macaulay -modules of rank . Again, the left-hand side of the inclusion in Claim 3 is infinite, and the proof is completed. ∎
Two irreducible elements of an integral domain are said to be distinct if . Applying our Theorem 5.5, we can obtain the following corollary, which is a basis in the next Section 6 to obtain a stronger result (Theorem 6.1).
Corollary 5.6**.**
Let be a regular local ring of dimension two. Take an element and set . Suppose that is not an isolated singularity equivaently, is not reduced but has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then has one of the following forms:
[TABLE]
Proof.
As is factorial, we can write , where are distinct irreducible elements and are positive integers. If , then is reduced, and hence it is an isolated singularity, which is a contradiction. Thus we may assume .
Put . We have
[TABLE]
and hence . Taking advantage of Theorem 5.5(3a), we observe that has finite -representation type. Also, has multiplicity at least . By [21, Theorem 4.2 and Proposition 4.3] we see that .
Assume either or for some , say . Then put . We have
[TABLE]
and hence . The ring is not reduced, so it is not an isolated singularity. By [15, Corollary 2], it has infinite -representation type. Theorem 5.5(3a) implies that has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, which is a contradiction. Thus and .
Getting together all the above arguments completes the proof of the corollary. ∎
To give applications of Theorem 5.5, we establish a lemma.
Lemma 5.7**.**
Let be a Gorenstein local ring of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then for all M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) one has .
Proof.
As is Gorenstein, \mathrm{\Omega}^{i}M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) for all by Lemma 5.2 and [28, Lemma 8.17]. Since \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) is a finite set, is periodic for some . Hence has complexity at most one. As is in \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), it has to have infinite projective dimension. Thus the complexity of is equal to one. ∎
Let be a ring. We denote by the singularity category of , that is, the Verdier quotient of the bounded derived category of finitely generated -modules by perfect complexes. For an -module , we denote by the nonfree locus of , that is, the set of prime ideals of such that is nonfree as an -module. Now we prove the following result by using Theorem 5.5.
Theorem 5.8**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of dimension . Let be an ideal of with , and assume that is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then:
- (1)
One has . 2. (2)
If , then . 3. (3)
If is Gorenstein, then is a hypersurface and .
Proof.
(1) This is a direct consequence of Theorem 5.5(2b).
(2) It follows from Theorem 5.5(2a) that has finite -representation type. Hence there exists a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module such that . Take any maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module and put . For each integer we have an exact sequence , where is the inclusion map.
Let us show that for all the -module is maximal Cohen–Macaulay and annihilated by . We use induction on . It clearly holds in the case , so let . Applying the functor to the natural exact sequence induces an exact sequence , and hence is identified with a submodule of . The induction hypothesis implies that is maximal Cohen–Macaulay and . Then has positive depth (see [7, Exercise 1.4.19]), and so does . Since by (1), the -module is maximal Cohen–Macaulay. Also, is contained in , which implies that annihilates .
Thus, for each the submodule of is also maximal Cohen–Macaulay (as again). Since it is killed by , it is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. Therefore belongs to for all . Using that fact that and , we easily observe that belongs to . It is concluded that , which means that .
(3) We claim that the -module has complexity at most one. Indeed, we have
[TABLE]
where the first equality follows from [27, Proposition 1.15(4)]. As is not -primary, contains a nonmaximal prime ideal of . Hence is in \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). Since is a local ring, it is an indecomposable -module, and therefore R/I\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). It is seen from Lemma 5.7 that has complexity at most one as an -module. Now the claim follows.
Let be an indecomposable -module which is a direct summand of . Proposition 5.3(3) implies that belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). As in the proof of the first claim, belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) for all , and is periodic for some . Therefore, we find an integer such that is periodic; see Lemma 5.1. This implies that has complexity at most one. There is an exact sequence
[TABLE]
As and , we get . By [5, Theorem 8.1.2] the ring is a hypersurface. The last assertion follows from [8, Theorem 4.4.1] and [18, Proposition 3.5(3)]. ∎
The above theorem gives rise to the two corollaries below. Note that the theorem and the two corollaries all give answers to Questions 3.6 and 3.8.
Corollary 5.9**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of dimension possessing an element with . Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then and . If is Gorenstein, then is a hypersurface and .
Proof.
We have . The sequence is exact, which implies that is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. The assertions follow from Theorem 5.8. ∎
Corollary 5.10**.**
Let be a Gorenstein non-reduced local ring of dimension one. If has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, then is a hypersurface.
Proof.
Since does not have an isolated singularity, contains a nonmaximal prime ideal . It is easy to see that is not -free, and we also have as . Lemma 5.7 implies that the -module has complexity at most , and the local ring is a hypersurface by virtue of Theorem 5.8(3). ∎
6. The one-dimensional hypersurfaces of finite CM+-representation type
The purpose of this section is to prove the following theorem.
Theorem 6.1**.**
Let be a homomorphic image of a regular local ring. Suppose that does not have an isolated singularity but is Gorenstein. If , then the following are equivalent.
- (1)
The ring has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. 2. (2)
There exist a regular local ring and a regular system of parameters such that is isomorphic to or .
When either of these two conditions holds, the ring has countable -representation type.
In fact, the last assertion and the implication follow from [9, Propositions 4.1 and 4.2] and [1, Proposition 2.1], respectively. The implication is an immediate consequence of the combination of Corollaries 5.6, 5.10 with Theorems 6.5, 6.11, 6.12 shown in this section. Note by Theorem 3.2 that the above theorem guarantees that under the assumption that is a complete Gorenstein local ring of dimension one, Question 3.8 has an affirmative answer.
We establish three subsections, whose purposes are to prove Theorems 6.5, 6.11 and 6.12, respectively.
6.1. The hypersurface
For a ring we denote by the set of non-zerodivisors of , and by the total quotient ring of . A ring extension is called birational if .
Lemma 6.2**.**
Let be a birational extension. Let be a -module which is torsion-free as an -module. If is indecomposable as a -module, then is indecomposable as an -module as well.
Proof.
From the proof of [21, Proposition 4.14], we have . The claim then follows from from [21, Proposition 1.1]. ∎
Let be a ring and an -module. We denote by the quotient of by the endomorphisms factoring through projective -modules. For a flat -algebra one has ; this can be shown by using [28, Lemma 3.9].
Lemma 6.3**.**
Let be a finite birational extension of -dimensional Cohen–Macaulay local rings. Then \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(B) is contained in \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(A).
Proof.
Let M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(B). Then , which shows that is maximal Cohen–Macaulay as an -module. Lemma 6.2 implies . Set . Applying the functor to the inclusions yields . Hence we have
[TABLE]
Since is in \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(B), there is a minimal prime of such that is not -free. Note that and . Hence is not -projective, and we obtain . Therefore is nonzero, which means that the -module is not torsion. Thus contains a minimal prime of , which implies that belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(A). Consequently, we obtain M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(A), and the lemma follows. ∎
The following lemma is a consequence of [28, Corollary 7.6], which is used not only now but also later.
Lemma 6.4**.**
Let be a regular local ring and , and set . Then
[TABLE]
In particular, there exist only finitely many nonisomorphic indecomposable cyclic maximal Cohen–Macaulay -modules.
Now we can achieve the purpose of this subsection.
Theorem 6.5**.**
Let be a regular local ring of dimension two, and let be an irreducible element. Then has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Proof.
Take any element that is regular on . We consider the -algebra , where is an indeterminate over . We establish two claims.
Claim 1**.**
The ring is a local complete intersection of dimension and codimension with being a system of parameters.
Proof of Claim.
It is clear that , which shows that is a local ring, and by Krull’s Hauptidealsatz. We have . As is artinian, so is . Hence and is a system of parameters of , and thus is a complete intersection (the equalities and imply , whence is a regular sequence). As , the local ring has codimension .
∎
Claim 2**.**
The ring is naturally embedded in , and this embedding is a finite birational extension.
Proof of Claim.
Let be the natural map and put . As in , we have . Hence the map factors as . It is seen that is an -module generated by and is an -submodule of . Since has positive depth by Claim 1, so does . Thus is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay cyclic module over the hypersurface , and Lemma 6.4 implies that coincides with either or . If , then , which contradicts the fact following from Claim 1 that is -regular. We get , which means the map is injective.
Let be the cokernel of the injection . Then is generated by as an -module. Note that in . Hence is a torsion -module, which means . Thus is an isomorphism, while the natural map is injective as is maximal Cohen–Macaulay over by Claim 1. Thus the embedding is birational.
∎
By Claim 1, the ring is a complete intersection, which implies that the element is regular on the ring and so is . It is easy to check that . Claim 1 also guarantees that is not a hypersurface. It follows from Corollary 5.9 that has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Combining Claim 2 with Lemma 6.3, we obtain the inclusion \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(T)\subseteq\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). We now conclude that has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, and the proof of the theorem is completed. ∎
6.2. The hypersurface
Setup 6.6**.**
Throughout this subsection, let be a -dimensional regular local ring and pairwise distinct irreducible elements of . Let be a local hypersurface of dimension . Setting , , and , one has . For each we define matrices
[TABLE]
over . Put and .
Lemma 6.7**.**
- (1)
For every it holds that M_{i},N_{i}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), and . 2. (2)
For all positive integers , one has and as -modules.
Proof.
(1) It is clear that . Hence give a matrix factorization of over , and we have , and ; see [28, Chapter 7]. Note that are units and in . There are isomorphisms
[TABLE]
where all the cokernels are over . Therefore M_{i}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), and we get N_{i}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) by Lemma 5.2.
(2) Suppose that there is an -isomorphism . It then holds that , which means . This implies that in the integral domain . Since in this ring, we get . If , then by (1), and we get . ∎
Lemma 6.8**.**
There is an equality
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be a cyclic -module with M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). It follows from Lemma 6.4 that is isomorphic to for some element which divides in . The localizations are fields, and hence is not -free. As in , it is observed that . Thus . Conversely, for any we have and get R/gR\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). ∎
Lemma 6.9**.**
Let be an integer. Then neither nor contains as a direct summand.
Proof.
(1) Set and . Consider the sequence
[TABLE]
of homomorphisms of free -modules. Clearly, this is a complex. Let be such that . In we have and for some , and get and . Hence and ; we find with . Then , and . Therefore , and ; we find with and get . In we have . It follows that the above sequence is exact, and the sequence
[TABLE]
gives a minimal free resolution of the -module .
Now, assume that is a direct summand of . Then for some ideal of . There are equalities of Betti numbers
[TABLE]
and we get . This means is a nonzero proper principal ideal of ; we write where is a nonzero nonunit of . The uniqueness of a minimal free resolution yields a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
whose vertical maps are isomorphisms. As are isomorphisms, their determinants and are units of . The commutativity of the diagram shows and in , which imply and . Hence is a nonunit of , and therefore are units of . Again from the commutativity of the diagram we get and in , which give . Hence and . We now get is in , which contradicts the fact that it is a unit of . Consequently, is not a direct summand of .
(2) Put and . We have . Since is not contained in or , it is -primary and has positive grade. Hence the sequence
[TABLE]
is exact, which gives a minimal free resolution of the -module . This implies .
Suppose that is a direct summand of . Then has projective dimension at most one, which contradicts the fact that its minimal free resolution is . It follows that is not a direct summand of . ∎
Lemma 6.10**.**
- (1)
The ring is artinian, and hence the number is finite. 2. (2)
Let be a positive integer.
- (i)
If X\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) is a cyclic direct summand of , then is isomorphic to . 2. (ii)
If Y\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) is a cyclic direct summand of , then is isomorphic to .
Proof.
(1) The factoriality of shows that is a prime ideal of . As , we have . Since has dimension two, the ideal is -primary. Thus is an artinian ring.
(2i) There is an -module such that . According to Lemma 6.8, it holds that for some . There are isomorphisms
[TABLE]
Taking the completions and using the Krull–Schmidt property and [11, Exercise 7.5], we observe that the ideal coincides with either or . Hence . Similarly, there are isomorphisms
[TABLE]
The assumption implies . We observe from this that , and obtain an isomorphism . It follows that coincides with either or , which implies . Finally, consider the isomorphisms
[TABLE]
If , then and we see that this is a direct summand of , which contradicts Lemma 6.9. Thus , and we conclude that .
(2ii) We go along the same lines as the proof of (2i). We have for some , and get for some by Lemma 6.8. The isomorphisms
[TABLE]
show that (resp. ) coincides with either or (resp. either or ), which implies . We also have isomorphisms
[TABLE]
Using Lemma 6.9, we see that , and obtain . ∎
The purpose of this subsection is now fulfilled.
Theorem 6.11**.**
Let be a regular local ring of dimension two. Let be distinct irreducible elements of . Then has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Proof.
We assume that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, and derive a contradiction. It follows from Lemma 6.7(1) that there exists an integer such that both and are decomposable for all ; we write for some -modules with and . In view of Lemmas 6.4 and 6.7(2), we see that there exists an integer such that is indecomposable for all and that for all with . Then, we have to have for all , and hence X_{i}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) for all (by Lemma 6.7(1)). Putting and applying Lemma 6.10(2i), we obtain that is isomorphic to for all . There are isomorphisms
[TABLE]
where the first isomorphism follows from Lemma 6.7(1). Since is in \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), it follows from Lemma 6.10(2ii) that , which is absurd. ∎
6.3. The hypersurface
The goal of this subsection is to prove the following theorem.
Theorem 6.12**.**
Let be a -dimensional regular local ring. Let be distinct irreducible elements of . Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then .
Note that the rings and are local hypersurfaces of dimension one. If , then has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type by Theorem 6.5, and so does by Theorem 5.5(1), which contradicts the assumption of the theorem. Hence , and is a member of a regular system of parameters of . Thus we establish the following setting.
Setup 6.13**.**
Throughout the remainder of this subsection, let be a regular local ring of dimension two. Let be a regular system of parameters of , namely, . Let be an irreducible element, and write with . Let be a local hypersurface of dimension one. One has , where we set , and . For each integer we define matrices
[TABLE]
over . We put and .
In what follows, we argue along similar lines as in the previous subsection.
Lemma 6.14** (cf. Lemma 6.7).**
- (1)
Let be an integer. The modules and belong to \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), and it holds that and . 2. (2)
Let be integers with . One then have and as -modules.
Proof.
(1) We have . The matrices give a matrix factorization of over . We have that are maximal Cohen–Macaulay -modules with and . Note that are units and in . We have
[TABLE]
which shows that M_{i}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), and Lemma 5.2 implies N_{i}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) as well.
(2) If , then , and in the discrete valuation ring with a uniformizer, which implies . As are the first syzygies of by (1), we see that if , then . ∎
Lemma 6.15** (cf. Lemma 6.8).**
It holds that \{M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R)\mid\text{M is cyclic}\}/_{\cong}=\{R/(x),\,R/(xh)\}/_{\cong}.
Proof.
It is easy to see that neither nor is -free. Let M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) be cyclic. As is a field, is not -free. Using Lemma 6.4, we get for some with , and . Hence, either or holds. ∎
Lemma 6.16** (cf. Lemma 6.10).**
Let be an integer. Let be a cyclic -module with C\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). If is a direct summand of either or , then is isomorphic to .
Proof.
(1) First, consider the case where is a direct summand of . Assume that is not isomorphic to . Then by Lemma 6.15. Application of the functor shows that is a direct summand of
[TABLE]
As , we have and hence is a direct summand of . Note that . Put . Applying the functor , we see that is a direct summand of . Write with . It is easy to verify that the sequence
[TABLE]
is exact, and we observe for some . Uniqueness of a minimal free resolution gives rise to a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
with vertical maps being isomorphisms. The elements and are units of . We have and in . Hence , which implies . Also, , which implies . It follows that are units of . The equality implies that in . We obtain isomorphisms
[TABLE]
It follows that in , which is a contradiction. Consequently, is isomorphic to .
(2) Next we consider the case where is a direct summand of . The proof is analogous to that of (1). Again, assume . Then by Lemma 6.15. Set . Applying , we see that is a direct summand of
[TABLE]
which implies that is a direct summand of . There are an isomorphism with and a commutative diagram:
[TABLE]
Note that . We have , which implies and . As and are units, so are . The equalities and imply , which gives . Hence in , which is a contradiction. Thus . ∎
Lemma 6.17** (cf. Theorem 6.11).**
The ring has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Proof.
Assume contrarily that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then, by (1) and (2) of Lemma 6.14, there exists an integer such that is decomposable for all integers .
Suppose that for some the module has a cyclic direct summand C\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). Then is isomorphic to by Lemma 6.16, and is a direct summand of by Lemma 6.14(1). Applying Lemma 6.16 again, we have to have , which is a contradiction.
Thus has no cyclic direct summand belonging to \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) for all . This means that for every the -module has an indecomposable direct summand Y_{i}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) with . This, in turn, contradicts the assumption that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. ∎
Now the purpose of this subsection is readily accomplished:
Proof of Theorem 6.12.
The theorem is an immediate consequence of Lemma 6.17 and what we state just after the theorem. ∎
7. On the higher-dimensional case
In this section, we explore the higher-dimensional case: we consider Cohen–Macaulay local rings with and having finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. In particular, we give various results supporting Conjecture 1.1. We begin with presenting an example by using a result obtained in Section 4.
Example 7.1**.**
Let be a regular local ring with a regular system of parameters . Then has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Proof.
Let be an ideal of . Then in , and . The ring is a -dimensional hypersurface which does not have an isolated singularity. We see by [15, Corollary 2] that has infinite -representation type. It follows from Theorem 5.5(3a) that has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. ∎
Remark 7.2**.**
We remark that the indecomposables in (R) for have been classified by Burban and Drozd (see [10, Theorem 8.6]).
We consider constructing from a given hypersurface of infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type another hypersurface of infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. For this we establish the following lemma, which provides a version of Knörrer’s periodicity theorem for \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
Lemma 7.3**.**
Let be a regular local ring, and let . Let and be hypersurfaces with an indeterminate over . Then the following statements hold.
- (1)
There is an additive functor
[TABLE] 2. (2)
Let M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) and put . Then one has either N\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R^{\sharp}) or for some X,Y\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R^{\sharp}).
Proof.
(1) It holds that . If is a morphism of matrix factorizations of over , then is a morphism of matrix factorizations of over . We observe that defines an additive functor from to .
Fix M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). Let be the corresponding matrix factorization. Set . There is a nonmaximal prime ideal of such that is not -free. Put . We see that is a nonmaximal prime ideal of . Suppose that for some . Then
[TABLE]
which implies that is -free, a contradiction. Therefore is not -free, and we obtain N\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R^{\sharp}). Thus induces an additive functor from \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) to \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R^{\sharp}).
(2) Let be the matrix factorization which gives . Then . Suppose that is decomposable. Then for some nonzero modules . It holds that
[TABLE]
Since is Gorenstein, not only but also is indecomposable; see [28, Lemma 8.17]. Nakayama’s lemma guarantees that and are nonzero, and both and have to be indecomposable. We may assume that and . Take a nonmaximal prime ideal of such that is not -free. Then is a nonmaximal prime ideal of as in the proof of (1). We easily see that the -module is not free. Now it follows that neither nor is free over , which shows that X,Y\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R^{\sharp}). ∎
Infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type ascends from to .
Proposition 7.4**.**
Let be a regular local ring and . Let and be hypersurfaces with an indeterminate. If has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, then so does .
Proof.
Pick any M_{1}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). The set \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R)\setminus\{M_{1},\mathrm{\Omega}M_{1}\} is infinite, and we pick any in this set. The set \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R)\setminus\{M_{1},\mathrm{\Omega}M_{1},M_{2},\mathrm{\Omega}M_{2}\} is infinite, and we pick any in it. Iterating this procedure, we obtain modules in \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) such that and for all . We put for each , where is the functor defined in Lemma 7.3. Then by the lemma is either in \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R^{\sharp}) or isomorphic to for some X_{i},Y_{i}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R^{\sharp}).
Assume for some . Then, as we saw in the proof of the lemma, there are isomorphisms and the modules are indecomposable. This contradicts the choice of these modules. Hence we have for all .
Suppose that there are only a finite number, say , of indecomposable modules in \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). Then it is seen that the set has cardinality at most , which is a contradiction. We now conclude that has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, and the proof of the proposition is completed. ∎
Here is an application of Proposition 7.4.
Corollary 7.5**.**
Let be a -dimensional complete local hypersurface with algebraically closed residue field of characteristic [math] and not having an isolated singularity. Suppose that has multiplicity at most . If has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, then with or , and hence has countable -representation type.
Proof.
If , then is regular, which contradicts the assumption that does not have an isolated singularity. Hence , and the combination of Cohen’s structure theorem and the Weierstrass preparation theorem shows for some ; see [28, Proof of Theorem 8.8]. It follows from Proposition 7.4 that the -dimensional hypersurface has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. By virtue of Theorem 6.1, we obtain or after changing variables (i.e., after applying a -algebra automorphism of ). We observe that is isomorphic to either or . It follows from [21, Propositions 14.17 and 14.19] that has countable -representation type. ∎
Proposition 7.4 can provide a lot of examples of hypersurfaces of infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type of higher dimension. The following example is not covered by this proposition or any other general result given in this paper.
Example 7.6**.**
Let be a regular local ring with a regular system of parameters . Let
[TABLE]
be an irreducible element of with and . Then the hypersurface has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Proof.
Putting , we have . For each integer we define a pair of matrices and , which gives a matrix factorization of over and . Define another pair of matrices and . These form a matrix factorization of over , and hence is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. There are equalities
[TABLE]
of ideals of , where we use .
Suppose that for some . Then and , where is a regular local ring having the regular system of parameters . Hence and where is a discrete valuation ring with a uniformizer. This gives a contradiction, and we see that for all .
Let , and fix an integer . Note that all the entries of are in since . It follows from [28, Remark 7.5] that the -module does not have a nonzero free summand. Since is assumed to be irreducible, is an integral domain. Hence each nonzero direct summand of the maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module has positive rank, and hence has full support. Therefore , and thus all the indecomposable direct summands of belong to \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). Since all the are generated by four elements, it is observed that \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R) is an infinite set. ∎
To prove our next result, we prepare a lemma on unique factorization domains.
Lemma 7.7**.**
Let be a Cohen–Macaulay factorial local ring with . Let be an ideal of generated by two elements. Then .
Proof.
We write and put . Then and for some , and we set . There is an exact sequence of -modules. As is Cohen–Macaulay, we have and . Since is a domain and , we have . If , then is contained in a principal prime ideal, which contradicts the fact that are coprime. Hence , and the sequence is -regular. It follows that , and the depth lemma implies . ∎
Now we can prove the following theorem, which provides the shape of a hypersurface of infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Theorem 7.8**.**
Let be a regular local ring and . Suppose that the ideal of is neither prime nor -primary. Then has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Proof.
Lemma 7.7 guarantees that there exists an -regular element . Take a minimal prime of . Since is not prime, we can choose an element . Set for each . The matrices and with form a matrix factorization of over , and is a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module. Put . Since the are pairwise distinct, the are pairwise nonisomorphic. If is decomposable, it decomposes into two cyclic -modules, while Lemma 6.4 says that there are only finitely many such cyclic modules up to isomorphism. Thus we find infinitely many such that is indecomposable. Since is contained in , each has no nonzero free summand by [28, (7.5.1)]. In particular, we have M_{n}\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). Now it is seen that has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. ∎
Applying the above theorem, we can obtain a couple of restrictions for a hypersurface of dimension at least which is not an integral domain but has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Corollary 7.9**.**
Let be a complete local hypersurface of dimension which is not a domain. Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then one has , and there exist a complete regular local ring of dimension and elements satisfying the following conditions.
- (1)
* is isomorphic to .* 2. (2)
* and have finite -representation type.* 3. (3)
* is a domain of dimension .*
Proof.
Corollary 4.3(1) says that satisfies Serre’s condition . Suppose . Then satisfies , and hence it is normal. In particular, is a domain, contrary to our assumption. Therefore, we have to have . Cohen’s structure theorem yields for some -dimensional complete regular local ring and . As is not a domain, there are elements with . Since , the ideal is not -primary. Hence , and is a domain by Theorem 7.8. We have , and . It follows from Theorem 5.5(3a) that has finite -representation type, and similarly so does . ∎
Proposition 7.4 gives an ascent property of infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Now we presents a descent property of infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Theorem 7.10**.**
Let be a finite local homomorphism of Cohen–Macaulay local rings of dimension such that is a domain. Set and assume the following.
- (a)
The induced embedding is birational. 2. (b)
There exists such that is not a direct summand of .
If has infinite -representation type, then has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type.
Proof.
We prove the theorem by establishing several claims.
Claim 1**.**
Let be an -submodule of a maximal Cohen–Macaulay -module . Then .
Proof of Claim.
Assume . Then there exists an element such that . As , we have , which means . Choose a nonzero element . Since annihilates , we have in . This contradicts the fact that is torsion-free over the domain .
∎
Claim 2**.**
Let . Let be an indecomposable -module which is a direct summand of . Then X\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
Proof of Claim.
As , we have and hence . To show the claim, it suffices to verify that is not -free.
Take an exact sequence . Since belongs to , the -module has finite length. The induced field extension is finite because so is the homomorphism , and hence also has finite length as an -module. As is a nonmaximal prime ideal of , we have , and the exact sequence corresponds to an element in this Ext module. Hence has to split, and is a direct summand of as an -module. (Note that is not necessarily a local ring.) The -module is a direct summand of , and is nonzero by Claim 1.
Suppose that is -free. Then is a direct summand of in . As is a local ring, is a direct summand of . This contradicts the assumption of the theorem, and thus is not -free.
∎
Claim 3**.**
One has the inclusion \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{0}}(S)\subseteq\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
Proof of Claim.
Take . Lemma 6.2 implies that is indecomposable as an -module, and it is indecomposable as an -module. Taking in Claim 2, we have M\in\operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
∎
It follows from Lemma 5.4 that has infinite -representation type. Claim 3 implies that has infinite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, and the proof of the theorem is completed. ∎
We obtain an application of the above theorem, which gives an answer to Question 3.6. For a ring we denote by the integral closure of . Recall that a typical example of a henselian Nagata ring is a complete local ring.
Corollary 7.11**.**
Let be a -dimensional henselian Nagata Cohen–Macaulay non-normal local ring. Suppose that has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type. Then the following statements hold.
- (1)
There exists a minimal prime of such that the integral closure has finite -representation type. In particular, if is a domain, then has finite -representation type. 2. (2)
If is Gorenstein, then is a hypersurface.
Proof.
By Corollary 4.3(1) the singular locus of has dimension at most one, so that satisfies Serre’s condition . As is Cohen–Macaulay, it is reduced. Let be the integral closure of . We have a decomposition as -modules, where (see [17, Corollary 2.1.13]). Since is Nagata, the extension is finite. The ring is normal and has dimension two, so it is Cohen–Macaulay.
We claim that if is a nonmaximal prime ideal of such that is -free, then is a regular local ring. In fact, if , then is a field. Let . The induced map is surjective, and we find a prime ideal of such that . We easily see . As is normal, is regular. The induced map factors as , where is a finite free extension, and is flat since . Hence is a flat local homomorphism. As is regular, so is .
Since does not have an isolated singularity, there exists a nonmaximal prime ideal of such that is not regular. The claim implies that is not -free, whence S\in\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). There exists an integer such that belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R).
Put . The ring is also Nagata, and the extension is finite and birational. The ring is a -dimensional henselian normal local domain, whence it is a Cohen–Macaulay. Choose a nonmaximal prime ideal of such that is not -free. If is not contained in , then and , which particularly says that is -free, a contradiction. Hence .
Suppose that is a direct summand of . Then there is an isomorphism of -modules. Since is annihilated by , so is . We have ring extensions , which especially says that is a domain and that has rank one as an -module. Hence the -module has rank zero, and it is easy to see that . We get , which contradicts the choice of . Consequently, does not have a direct summand isomorphic to .
Now, application of Theorem 7.10 proves the assertion (1). To show (2), we consider the -module . Fix any nonzero direct summand of or in . Note that is a torsion-free module over . Since is a submodule of a nonzero free -module, is also torsion-free over , and so is . We easily see from this that . The module is a direct summand of . As is not a direct summand of , it is not a direct summand of . In particular, belongs to \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R). Thus, all the indecomposable direct summands of and of in belong to \operatorname{\mathsf{ind}}\operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}(R), and it follows from Lemma 5.7 that they have complexity at most one. Hence and have complexity at most one over , and so does . We obtain , and is a hypersurface by [5, Theorem 8.1.2]. ∎
The above result yields a strong restriction for finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type in dimension two.
Corollary 7.12**.**
Let be a -dimensional non-normal Gorenstein complete local ring. If has finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type, then the integral closure has finite -representation type.
Proof.
If is a domain, then the assertion follows from Corollary 7.11(1). Hence let us assume that is not a domain. By Corollary 7.11(2) the ring is a hypersurface. We can apply Corollary 7.9 to see that there exists a -dimensional regular local ring and elements such that is isomorphic to and have finite -representation type. Note by [15, Corollary 2] that are normal. As in the beginning of the proof of Corollary 7.11, the ring is reduced. Hence , and we have an isomorphism ; see [17, Corollary 2.1.13]. There is a natural category equivalence , which induces a category equivalence . It is observed from this that has finite -representation type. ∎
The converse of Corollary 7.12 does not necessarily hold, as the following example says.
Example 7.13**.**
Let be a quotient of the formal power series ring over a field . Then is a -dimensional complete non-normal local hypersurface. The assignment gives an isomorphism from to the subring of the formal power series ring . The integral closure of is the fourth Veronese subring of , which has finite -representation type by [21, Theorem 6.3]. Hence has finite -representation type. However, as , the ring does not have finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type by Example 7.6.
Remark 7.14**.**
The integral closure has to actually be regular (under the assumptions of Corollary 7.12) provided that our conjecture that countable -representation type is equivalent to finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type holds true in this setting.
Acknowledgments
The authors are deeply indebted to Hailong Dao for asking them whether there exists a Cohen–Macaulay local ring of finite \operatorname{\mathsf{CM}_{\scalebox{0.6}{\mbox{\boldmath+}}}}-representation type other than the hypersurfaces of type and . In fact, this question gave the authors a strong motivation for this work. We are also grateful to two anonymous referees whose suggestions greatly improved the paper, and we also thank Tokuji Araya for stimulating discussions. Most of this work was done during the visit of Toshinori Kobayashi to the University of Kansas in 2018–2019. He is grateful to the Department of Mathematics for their hospitality.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] T. Araya; K.-i. Iima; R. Takahashi , On the structure of Cohen–Macaulay modules over hypersurfaces of countable Cohen–Macaulay representation type, J. Algebra 361 (2012), 213–224.
- 2[2] S. Ariki; R. Kase; K. Miyamoto , On components of stable Auslander–Reiten quivers that contain Heller lattices: the case of truncated polynomial rings, Nagoya Math. J. 228 (2017), 72–113.
- 3[3] M. Auslander , Rational singularities and almost split sequences, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 293 (1986), no. 2, 511–531.
- 4[4] M. Auslander; R.-O. Buchweitz , The homological theory of maximal Cohen–Macaulay approximations, Colloque en l’honneur de Pierre Samuel (Orsay, 1987), Mém. Soc. Math. France (N.S.) 38 (1989), 5–37.
- 5[5] L. L. Avramov , Infinite free resolutions, Six lectures on commutative algebra (Bellaterra, 1996) , 1–118, Progr. Math., 166, Birkhäuser, Basel , 1998.
- 6[6] L. L. Avramov; S. B. Iyengar , Constructing modules with prescribed cohomological support, Illinois J. Math. 51 (2007), no. 1, 1–20.
- 7[7] W. Bruns; J. Herzog , Cohen–Macaulay rings, revised edition, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 39 , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge , 1998.
- 8[8] R.-O. Buchweitz , Maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules and Tate-cohomology over Gorenstein rings, unpublished paper (1986), http://hdl.handle.net/1807/16682 .
