This paper classifies simple $Z$-graded domains of Gelfand-Kirillov dimension two, linking their module categories to quasicoherent sheaves on quotient stacks and relating them to generalized Weyl algebras and classical translation principles.
Contribution
It establishes an equivalence between module categories of these algebras and quasicoherent sheaves, and introduces a translation principle for their noncommutative schemes, connecting to classical Lie algebra theory.
Findings
01
Category of modules equivalent to quasicoherent sheaves on a quotient stack
02
Translation principle for noncommutative schemes of GWAs
03
Connection to classical translation principle for $U(rak{sl}_2)$
Abstract
Let k be an algebraically closed field and A a Z-graded finitely generated simple k-algebra which is a domain of Gelfand-Kirillov dimension 2. We show that the category of Z-graded right A-modules is equivalent to the category of quasicoherent sheaves on a certain quotient stack. The theory of these simple algebras is closely related to that of a class of generalized Weyl algebras (GWAs). We prove a translation principle for the noncommutative schemes of these GWAs, shedding new light on the classical translation principle for the infinite-dimensional primitive quotients of U(sl2).
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.
Full text
Simple Z-graded domains of Gelfand–Kirillov dimension two
Luigi Ferraro
Wake Forest University, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, P.O. Box 7388, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27109
Let \mathdsk be an algebraically closed field and A a Z-graded finitely generated simple \mathdsk-algebra which is a domain of Gelfand–Kirillov dimension 2. We show that the category of Z-graded right A-modules is equivalent to the category of quasicoherent sheaves on a certain quotient stack.
The theory of these simple algebras is closely related to that of a class of generalized Weyl algebras (GWAs).
We prove a translation principle for the noncommutative schemes of these GWAs, shedding new light on the classical translation principle for the infinite-dimensional primitive quotients of U(sl2).
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
16W50, 16D90, 16S38, 14A22, 14H99, 13A02
1. Introduction
Let \mathdsk denote an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. Throughout this paper, all vector spaces are taken over \mathdsk, all rings are \mathdsk-algebras, and all categories and equivalences of categories are \mathdsk-linear.
Suppose A=⨁i∈NAi is a right noetherian N-graded \mathdsk-algebra. There is a notion of a noncommutative projective scheme of A, defined by Artin and Zhang in [AZ94]. Let GrMod\mathchar45A denote the category of N-graded right A-modules and let grmod\mathchar45A denote its full subcategory of finitely generated modules.
Let Tors\mathchar45A (tors\mathchar45A, respectively) denote the full subcategory of GrMod\mathchar45A (grmod\mathchar45A, respectively) consisting of torsion modules (see Section 2.2).
Let QGrMod\mathchar45A denote the quotient category GrMod\mathchar45A/Tors\mathchar45A, let A denote the image of AA in QGrMod\mathchar45A, and let S denote the shift operator on QGrMod\mathchar45A.
The general noncommutative projective scheme of A is the triple (QGrMod\mathchar45A,A,S).
Similarly, if we let qgrmod\mathchar45A=grmod\mathchar45A/tors\mathchar45A, then the noetherian noncommutative projective scheme of A is the triple (qgrmod\mathchar45A,A,S).
These two categories play the same role as the categories of quasicoherent and coherent sheaves on ProjR for a commutative \mathdsk-algebra R. By abuse of language, we will refer to either of the categories QGrMod\mathchar45A or qgrmod\mathchar45A as the noncommutative projective scheme of A.
If A0=\mathdsk, then A is called connected graded. In [AS95], Artin and Stafford classified the noncommutative projective schemes of connected graded domains of Gelfand–Kirillov (GK) dimension 2. Since a connected graded domain of GK dimension 2 is a generalization of a projective curve, Artin and Stafford’s theorem can be viewed as a classification of noncommutative projective curves.
Theorem** (Artin and Stafford, [AS95, Corollary 0.3]).**
Let A be a connected N-graded domain of GK dimension 2 which is finitely generated in degree 1. Then there exists a projective curve X such that qgrmod\mathchar45A≡coh(X).
The focus of this paper is on Z-graded \mathdsk-algebras. A fundamental example of such a ring is the (first) Weyl algebra, A1=\mathdsk⟨x,y⟩/(yx−xy−1), which does not admit an N-grading but does admit a Z-grading by letting degx=1 and degy=−1. This Z-grading is natural in light of the fact that A1 is isomorphic to the ring of differential operators on the polynomial ring \mathdsk[t], where x corresponds to multiplication by t and y corresponds to differentiation by t. In [Smi11], Smith showed that there exists an abelian group Γ and a commutative Γ-graded ring C such that the category of Γ-graded C-modules is equivalent to GrMod\mathchar45A1. As a corollary, there exists a quotient stack χ such that GrMod\mathchar45A1 is equivalent to the category Qcoh(χ) of quasicoherent sheaves on χ [Smi11, Corollary 5.15].
As the Weyl algebra is a domain of GK dimension 2, Smith’s result can be seen as evidence for a Z-graded version of Artin and Stafford’s classification.
Further evidence is found in [Won18a], in which the third-named author studied the graded module categories over the infinite-dimensional primitive quotients {Rλ∣λ∈\mathdsk} of U(sl2). Each Rλ is a Z-graded domain of GK dimension 2, and for each Rλ, there exists an abelian group Γ and a commutative Γ-graded ring Bλ such that QGrMod\mathchar45Rλ is equivalent to the category of Γ-graded Bλ-modules [Won18a, Theorems 4.2 and 4.10, Corollary 4.20].
In this paper, we prove a Z-graded analogue of Artin and Stafford’s theorem for simple domains of GK dimension 2.
A key ingredient in our result is Bell and Roglaski’s classification of simple Z-graded domains. In [BR16, Theorem 5.8], they
proved that for any simple finitely generated Z-graded domain A of GK dimension 2, there is a generalized Weyl algebra (GWA) A′ satisfying Hypothesis 2.4 such that GrMod\mathchar45A≡GrMod\mathchar45A′. We are therefore able to reduce to studying these GWAs and prove the following theorem.
Let A=⨁i∈ZAi be a simple finitely generated Z-graded domain of GK dimension 2 with Ai=0 for all i∈Z. Then there exists an abelian group Γ and a commutative Γ-graded ring B such that GrMod\mathchar45A is equivalent to the category of Γ-graded B-modules. Hence, if χ is the quotient stack [Spec\mathdskΓSpecB] then QGrMod\mathchar45A≡Qcoh(χ).
We also study properties of the commutative rings B that arise in the above theorem.
For instance, we prove that B is non-noetherian of Krull dimension 1,
and that B is coherent Gorenstein (see Section 5).
In Section 3, we prove a translation principle for GWAs. This builds upon the classical translation principle for U(sl2), which we describe as follows.
Over \mathdsk, the associative algebra U(sl2) is generated by E,F,H subject to the relations [E,F]=H, [H,E]=2E, and [H,F]=−2F.
The Casimir element Ω=4FE+H2+2H generates the center of U(sl2).
The infinite-dimensional primitive factors of U=U(sl2) are given by Rλ=U/(Ω−λ2+1)U for each λ∈\mathdsk.
The classical result states that Rλ is Morita equivalent to Rλ+1 unless λ=−1,0. We refer the reader to [Sta82] for a proof.
The rings Rλ are isomorphic to GWAs with base ring \mathdsk[z], defining automorphism σ(z)=z+1, and quadratic defining polynomial f∈\mathdsk[z]. We study a class of GWAs which includes all of the Rλ (see Hypothesis 2.1).
In particular, we prove that for each GWA A satisfying these hypotheses, if a new GWA A′ is obtained by shifting the factors of the defining polynomial of A by the automorphism σ, then QGrMod\mathchar45A≡QGrMod\mathchar45A′ (Theorem 3.8).
One consequence of this result is that although Mod\mathchar45R−1≡Mod\mathchar45R0≡Mod\mathchar45R1 and GrMod\mathchar45R−1≡GrMod\mathchar45R0≡GrMod\mathchar45R1, nevertheless there is an equivalence
[TABLE]
Hence, for any λ∈\mathdsk, QGrMod\mathchar45Rλ≡QGrMod\mathchar45Rλ+1. We remark that this particular consequence follows from a more specific result proved in [Won18a], and was first observed by Sierra [Sie17].
Acknowledgments**.**
The authors would like to thank Daniel Chan, W. Frank Moore, Daniel Rogalski, and James Zhang for helpful conversations. We particularly thank Susan Sierra for directing us to references on Morita contexts and suggesting the relationship with quotient categories that we prove in Section 3, Calum Spicer for his help on an earlier version of this manuscript, and S. Paul Smith for several suggestions and corrections.
2. Preliminaries
In this section, we fix basic notation, definitions, and terminology which will be in use for the remainder of the paper.
2.1. Graded rings and modules
Let Γ be an abelian semigroup. We say that a \mathdsk-algebra R is Γ-graded if there is a \mathdsk-vector space decomposition R=⨁γ∈ΓRγ
such that Rγ⋅Rδ⊆Rγ+δ for all γ,δ∈Γ. Each Rγ is called the γ-graded component of R and each r∈Rγ is called homogeneous of degree γ.
Similarly, a (right) R-module M is Γ-graded if it has a \mathdsk-vector space decomposition M=⨁γ∈ΓMγ such that Mγ⋅Rδ⊆Mγ+δ for all γ,δ∈Γ. Each Mγ is called the γ-graded component of M.
When the group Γ is clear from context, we will call R and M simply graded.
A homomorphism f:M→N of Γ-graded right R-modules is called a graded homomorphism of degree δ if f(Mγ)⊆Nγ+δ for all γ∈Γ. We denote
[TABLE]
where HomR(M,N)δ is the set of all graded homomorphisms M→N of degree δ. A graded homomorphism is a graded homomorphism of degree [math].
The Γ-graded right R-modules together with the graded right R-module homomorphisms (of degree [math]) form a category which we denote GrMod\mathchar45(R,Γ). Therefore,
[TABLE]
We use lower-case letters to denote full subcategories consisting of finitely-generated objects, so grmod\mathchar45(R,Γ) denotes the category of finitely-generated Γ-graded right R-modules.
When Γ=Z, we omit the group from our notation and refer to these categories as simply GrMod\mathchar45R and grmod\mathchar45R.
We say two algebras R and S are Morita equivalent if there
is an equivalence of categories Mod\mathchar45R≡Mod\mathchar45S.
If R is Γ-graded and S is Λ-graded for some abelian semigroup Λ, then we say that R and S are graded Morita equivalent if there is a Morita equivalence between R and S that is implemented by graded bimodules and so also gives an equivalence between their graded module categories.
The group of autoequivalences of grmod\mathchar45R modulo natural transformation is called the Picard group of grmod\mathchar45R and is denoted Pic(grmod\mathchar45R).
For a Z-graded \mathdsk-algebra R, the shift functor is an autoequivalence of grmod\mathchar45R which sends a graded right module M to the new module M⟨1⟩=⨁j∈ZM⟨1⟩j, defined by M⟨1⟩j=Mj+1. We write this functor as SR. We use the notation M⟨i⟩ for the module SRi(M) and note that M⟨i⟩j=Mj+i. This is the standard convention for shifted modules, although it is the opposite of the convention that is used in [Sie09, Won18a, Won18b].
2.2. Noncommutative projective schemes of Z-graded algebras
Now suppose that A is a noetherian Z-graded \mathdsk-algebra and let M∈GrMod\mathchar45A. As in [Smi00], define the torsion submodule of M by
[TABLE]
The module M is said to be torsion if τ(M)=M and torsion-free if τ(M)=0.
Let Tors\mathchar45A (tors\mathchar45A, respectively) denote the full subcategory of GrMod\mathchar45A (grmod\mathchar45A, respectively) consisting of torsion modules.
This is a Serre subcategory and so we may form the quotient category QGrMod\mathchar45A=GrMod\mathchar45A/Tors\mathchar45A (qgrmod\mathchar45A=grmod\mathchar45A/tors\mathchar45A, respectively).
The shift functor S of GrMod\mathchar45A descends to an autoequivalence of QGrMod\mathchar45A and qgrmod\mathchar45A, which we also denote by S. Let A denote the image of A in the quotient categories. Then (QGrMod\mathchar45A,A,S) ((qgrmod\mathchar45A,A,S), respectively) is the noncommutative projective scheme (noetherian noncommutative projective scheme, respectively) of A.
When A is actually N-graded, this definition coincides with the noncommutative projective scheme ProjA defined by Artin and Zhang [AZ94].
It is clear that tors\mathchar45A=fdim\mathchar45A, the subcategory of grmod\mathchar45A consisting of modules of finite \mathdsk-dimension.
Since every A-module is a union of its finitely generated submodules, Tors\mathchar45A can be described as the subcategory of GrMod\mathchar45A consisting of modules which are unions of their finite-dimensional submodules.
2.3. Generalized Weyl algebras and Z-graded simple rings
Let R be a ring, let σ:R→R an automorphism of R, and fix a central element f∈R.
The generalized Weyl algebra (GWA) of degree oneA=R(σ,f) is the quotient of R⟨x,y⟩ by the relations
[TABLE]
for all r∈R.
We call R the base ring and σ the defining automorphism of A.
Generalized Weyl algebras were so-named by Bavula [Bav93], and many well-studied rings can be realized as GWAs, including the classical Weyl algebras, ambiskew polynomial rings, and generalized down-up algebras.
There is a Z-grading on R(σ,f) given by degx=1, degy=−1, and degr=0 for all r∈R.
We also remark that if R is commutative, then every Z-graded right A-module M has an (R,A)-bimodule structure as follows: if m∈M is homogeneous of degree i, then the left R-action of r∈R is given by
[TABLE]
In this paper, every GWA satisfies the following hypothesis.
Hypothesis 2.1**.**
Let A=R(σ,f) be the GWA with
(1)
base ring R=\mathdsk[z] and defining automorphism σ(z)=z+1, or
2. (2)
base ring R=\mathdsk[z,z−1] and defining automorphism σ(z)=ξz for some nonroot of unity ξ∈\mathdsk×.
Assume that f∈\mathdsk[z] is monic and in case 2 assume that [math] is not a root of f. Let Zer(f) denote the set of roots of f and for α∈Zer(f), let nα denote the multiplicity of α as a root of f.
For any η∈R×, there is an isomorphism A≅R(σ,ηf) mapping x to ηx, y to y, and z to z.
Hence, by adjusting by an appropriate unit in R, every GWA with base ring and defining automorphism as above is isomorphic to one satisfying the additional assumptions in Hypothesis 2.1.
Since we are assuming that R=\mathdsk[z] or \mathdsk[z,z−1], the GWA A is a noetherian domain [Bav93, Proposition 1.3] of Krull dimension one [Bav92, Theorem 2].
Hence, A is an Ore domain. We denote by Q(A) the quotient division ring of A, obtained by localizing A at all nonzero elements. The rank of an A-module M is the dimension of M⊗AQ(A) over the division ring Q(A).
Since A is Z-graded, we also consider Qgr(A), the graded quotient division ring of A, obtained by localizing A at all nonzero homogeneous elements.
The field of fractions of A0=R is \mathdsk(z), so Qgr(A) is a skew Laurent ring over \mathdsk(z):
[TABLE]
We use the notation σ\mathdsk to denote the action of σ on the \mathdsk-points of SpecR; i.e., for λ∈\mathdsk, if σ(z)=z+1 then σ\mathdsk(λ)=λ−1 and if σ(z)=ξz then σ\mathdsk(λ)=ξ−1λ.
We say two roots of f are congruent if they are on the same σ\mathdsk-orbit. For a GWA A satisfying Hypothesis 2.1, by [Hod93, Bav96], the global dimension of A depends only on the roots of f:
[TABLE]
It follows from [Bav92, Theorem 3] that A is simple if and only if no two distinct roots of f are congruent.
In [BR16], Bell and Rogalski showed that simple Z-graded domains are closely related to GWAs satisfying Hypothesis 2.1.
Theorem 2.3** (Bell and Rogalski, [BR16, Theorem 5.8]).**
Let S=⨁i∈ZSi be a simple finitely generated Z-graded domain of GK dimension 2 with Si=0 for all i∈Z. Then S is graded Morita equivalent to a GWA R(σ,f) satisfying Hypothesis 2.1 where additionally no two distinct roots of f∈R are congruent.
Hence, if we are interested only in the category of graded modules over simple Z-graded rings of GK dimension 2, it suffices to restrict our attention to these GWAs. Starting in Section 4, we operate under the following additional hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2.4**.**
Let A=R(σ,f) be a GWA satisfying Hypothesis 2.1. Further assume that f∈\mathdsk[z] has no two distinct roots on the same σ\mathdsk-orbit so that A is simple.
Thus, when we restrict to Hypothesis 2.4,
then it follows that gldimA=2.
3. A translation principle for GWAs
Throughout, suppose A is a GWA satisfying Hypothesis 2.1.
The simple graded right A-modules were described by Bavula in [Bav92] and we adopt his terminology here.
The group ⟨σ⟩ acts on MaxSpecR, the set of maximal ideals of R. Specifically, the orbit of (z−λ)∈MaxSpecR is given by
[TABLE]
If the σ-orbit of (z−λ) contains no factors of f, it is called nondegenerate, otherwise it is called degenerate. If two distinct factors (z−λ) and σi(z−λ) lie on the same σ-orbit, then λ and σ\mathdski(λ) are congruent roots of f and we call Oλ a congruent orbit. Otherwise, a degenerate orbit is called a non-congruent orbit.
Let A=R(σ,f). The simple modules of grmod\mathchar45A are given as follows.
(1)
For each nondegenerate orbit Oλ of MaxSpecR, one has the module
Mλ=(z−λ)AA and its shifts Mλ⟨n⟩ for each n∈Z.
2. (2)
For each degenerate non-congruent orbit Oα, one has
(a)
the module Mα−=(z−α)A+xAA and its shifts Mα−⟨n⟩ for each n∈Z and
2. (b)
the module Mα+=σ−1(z−α)A+yAA⟨−1⟩ and its shifts Mα+⟨n⟩ for each n∈Z.
3. (3)
For each degenerate congruent orbit Oα, label the roots on the orbit so that they are given by α,σ\mathdski1(α),…,σ\mathdskir(α) where 0>i1>⋯>ir. Set i0=0. Then one has
(a)
the module Mα−=(z−α)A+xAA and its shifts Mα−⟨n⟩ for each n∈Z,
2. (b)
for each k=1,…,r, the module
[TABLE]
and its shifts Mα(ik−1,ik]⟨n⟩ for each n∈Z, and
3. (c)
the module Mα+=σir−1(z−α)A+yAA⟨ir−1⟩ and its shifts Mα+⟨n⟩ for each n∈Z.
The notation Mα± is intended to reflect the fact that Mα− is nonzero only in sufficiently negative degree while Mα+ is nonzero only in sufficiently positive degree. The module Mα(ik−1,ik] is nonzero in degrees (ik−1,ik]∩Z.
Example 3.2**.**
If R=\mathdsk[z], σ(z)=z+1, and f=z(z−1)2(z−3), then there is a single degenerate congruent orbit O0 with roots 0,σ\mathdsk−1(0)=1,σ\mathdsk−3(0)=3. In this case, the simple modules are given by the shifts of Mλ=A/(z−λ)A for each λ∈\mathdsk∖Z as well as all shifts of the modules
•
M0−=zA+xAA,
•
M0(0,1]=(z−1)A+xA+yAA⟨−1⟩,
•
M0(1,3]=(z−3)A+xA+y2AA⟨−3⟩, and
•
M0+=(z−4)A+xA+yAA⟨−4⟩.
These modules are exactly the simple modules appearing in the composition series of the module A/zA.
As described in the introduction, Stafford proved a translation principle for the infinite dimensional primitive factors Rλ of U(sl2) [Sta82]. These rings are the GWAs \mathdsk[z](σ,f) of type (1) in Hypothesis 2.1 with quadratic defining polynomial f=z(z−λ)∈\mathdsk[z].
Stafford showed that for λ∈\mathdsk, the rings \mathdsk[z](σ,z(z−λ)) and \mathdsk[z](σ,z(z−λ−1)) are Morita equivalent unless λ=0 or −1.
The cases λ=0,−1 correspond to when the first or second GWA, respectively, has infinite global dimension.
Hodges also studied Morita equivalences between these rings, and used K-theoretic techniques, along with Stafford’s result, to prove that two primitive factors Rλ and Rμ, are Morita equivalent if and only if λ±μ∈Z [Hod92].
Several authors have studied Morita equivalences between GWAs R(σ,f) satisfying Hypothesis 2.1(1) with higher degree defining polynomials f. Jordan gave sufficient conditions on f and f′ for R(σ,f) and R(σ,f′) to be Morita equivalent [Jor92, Lemma 7.3(iv)]. Richard and Solotar gave necessary conditions for the Morita equivalence of R(σ,f) and R(σ,f′) with the additional hypotheses that the GWAs are simple and have finite global dimension [RS10].
Shipman fully classified the equivalence classes of GWAs satisfying Hypothesis 2.1(1) under the stronger notion of strongly graded Morita equivalences [Shi10].
Our treatment builds upon [Sta82]. We extend Stafford’s translation principle to all GWAs satisfying Hypothesis 2.1.
This was essentially done by Jordan [Jor92, Lemma 7.3(iv)]—our contribution is to pay close attention to
those situations in which Stafford’s techniques do not give Morita equivalences.
In these cases, we show that Stafford’s methods still yield a graded Morita context.
Using this Morita context, we prove that there is an equivalence between the quotient categories which play the role of the noncommutative projective schemes for these Z-graded rings. Hence, the results of this section can be viewed as a translation principle for the noncommutative projective schemes of GWAs, which is analogous to Van den Bergh’s translation principle for central quotients of the four-dimensional Sklyanin algebra [VdB96].
Before we proceed, we recall some details on graded Morita contexts and the graded Kato–Müller Theorem in the Z-graded setting.
Recall that a Morita context between two algebras T and S is a 6-tuple (T,S,SMT,TNS,ϕ,ψ) where SMT and TNS are bimodules and ϕ:N⊗SM→T and ψ:M⊗TN→S are bimodule morphisms satisfying
•
ψ(m⊗n)m′=mϕ(n⊗m′)
•
ϕ(n⊗m)n′=nψ(m⊗n′)
for all m,m′∈M, n,n′∈N. We refer to I=imϕ and J=imψ as the trace ideals of the Morita context.
If both ϕ and ψ are surjective, then this Morita context gives a Morita equivalence between T and S and so Mod\mathchar45T≡Mod\mathchar45S.
Let T be an algebra and let M be a right T-module. One important construction of a Morita context is given by (T,S,M,M∗,ϕ,ψ) where M∗=HomT(M,T), S=HomT(M,M), and where ϕ:M∗⊗SM→T and ψ:M⊗TM∗→S are defined by ϕ(f⊗m)=f(m) and ψ(m⊗f)(m′)=mf(m′) for f∈M∗ and m,m′∈M.
This Morita context is a Morita equivalence if and only if M is a progenerator of Mod\mathchar45T.
This theory carries over to the graded setting (see [Haz16, Chapter 2]).
Let Γ be an abelian semigroup.
If T is a Γ-graded algebra and M is a finitely generated graded right A-module, then both M∗=HomT(M,T) and S=HomT(M,M) are, in fact, graded with M∗=HomT(M,T) and S=HomT(M,M). Then (T,S,M,M∗,ϕ,ψ) is a graded Morita context. If M is a graded progenerator then this graded Morita context gives a graded Morita equivalence so Mod\mathchar45T≡Mod\mathchar45S and GrMod\mathchar45T≡GrMod\mathchar45T.
For any two-sided graded ideal I of T, the class
[TABLE]
is a rigid closed subcategory of GrMod\mathchar45T.
Let CI be the smallest localizing subcategory
of GrMod\mathchar45T containing PI.
The following is a graded version of the Kato–Müller Theorem [Kat73, Mül74].
Let (T,S,SMT,TNS,ϕ,ψ) be a Γ-graded Morita context between Γ-graded rings T and S. Set I=imϕ and J=imψ. The graded functors
[TABLE]
induce functors between the quotient categories
[TABLE]
Note that HomT(M,−) intertwines the shift functors of GrMod\mathchar45T and GrMod\mathchar45S. In particular, if X is a graded T-module, then HomT(M,STX)=SSHomT(M,X) [GG82, Lemma 2.2].
This result also descends to the quotient categories: the functor induced by HomT(M,−) commutes with the functors induced by the shift functors of GrMod\mathchar45T and GrMod\mathchar45S.
Let A=R(σ,f) be a GWA satisfying Hypothesis 2.1 with n=deg(f)>0.
Let h∈\mathdsk[z] be a non-constant factor of f and define g=h−1f. Define the graded module
[TABLE]
and construct a graded Morita context
[TABLE]
as discussed above with M∗=HomA(M,A) and B=HomA(M,M).
We make the identification
[TABLE]
where Qgr(A)=\mathdsk(z)[x,x−1;σ] is the graded quotient division ring of A [MR87, Proposition 3.1.15].
Similarly, we make the identification
[TABLE]
Under this identification, the graded bimodule maps
ϕ:M∗⊗BM→A and ψ:M⊗AM∗→B are given by ϕ(m′,m)=m′m and ψ(m,m′)=mm′ for m∈M and m′∈M′.
Since M is not a graded progenerator in general, this graded Morita context is not always a graded Morita equivalence. However, we will show that it induces a graded equivalence between certain quotient categories of GrMod\mathchar45A and GrMod\mathchar45B.
Part (3) of the lemma below recovers [Sta82, Corollary 3.3] when R=\mathdsk[z] and f∈\mathdsk[z] is quadratic.
Lemma 3.5**.**
Retain notation as above.
Suppose β is a root of f of multiplicty one.
Set h=z−β and set d=gcd(σ−1(g),h) in A.
Let A′=R(σ,f′) be the GWA with f′=σ(h)g.
Then
(1)
B≅A′* so († ‣ 3) gives a graded Morita context between A and A′,*
2. (2)
M* is a projective right A-module, and
*
3. (3)
M* is a generator for A if and only if d=1.*
Proof.
(1) It is clear from the identification above that A⊂M∗.
Observe that x−1gx=σ−1(g)∈A and
x−1gh=x−1f=x−1xy=y∈A.
Hence, x−1g∈M∗ and so A+Ax−1g⊂M∗.
Note that MM∗⊂B. Clearly 1,x∈B.
Since zx=xσ−1(z)∈xA, then z∈B.
As x−1g∈M∗, then
x−1σ(h)g=hx−1g∈MM∗⊂B.
Let S be the subalgebra of B⊂Qgr(A) generated by X=x, Y=x−1σ(h)g, and Z=z.
We check that these generators satisfy the relations for A′.
It is clear that XZ=σ(Z)X and XY=f′. A computation shows that
[TABLE]
and so S≅A′.
Given any q∈M, Bq⊂M⊂S.
By [Jor92, Corollary 4.4], S is a maximal order in its quotient ring and by [VdBVO89, Lemma 2], it is also a
graded maximal order in its graded quotient ring, whence B=S≅A′.
(2) By the Dual Basis Lemma, M is projective if and only if 1∈MM∗ [MR87, Lemma 3.5.2].
By the proof of (1), A+Ax−1g⊂M∗.
Thus, it is clear that X,h(Z)∈imψ.
We have x(x−1g)=g(Z)∈imψ, so 1=gcd(g(Z),h(Z))∈imψ.
(3) We claim M∗=A+Ax−1g. Let p∈Qgr(A) such that pM⊂A. By (2.2), we may write p=∑i=nmxipi(z) with pi(z)∈\mathdsk(z). Since px∈A, then n≥−1 and pi(z)∈\mathdsk[z] for all i≥1.
On the other hand, suppose p−1(z)=0. Since xipi(z)h∈A for all i≥0, then x−1p−1(z)h∈A and so g∣p−1(z). The claim follows.
Thus, imϕ is generated by products of generators in M∗ and M. Since A⊂M∗, then x,h∈M∗M.
Furthermore, y=(x−1g)h∈M∗M
and σ−1(g)=(x−1g)x∈M∗M, so d∈imϕ.
Since (xA)0=fR and (yA)0=σ−1(g)R, therefore (M∗M)0 is the ideal of R generated by h and σ−1(g). Hence, 1∈imϕ if and only if d=1.
∎
We are now prepared to prove the translation principle for GWAs which is the main result of this section.
The result in (1) below should also be compared to a result of Shipman [Shi10] in the strongly graded Morita equivalence setting.
Proposition 3.6**.**
Let A=R(σ,f). Choose a root β1 of f, and consider its σ\mathdsk-orbit, O. Write f=(z−β1)⋯(z−βn)⋅f~ where β1,…,βn∈O and f~ has no roots on O.
For each 1≤j≤n,
write βj=σ\mathdsk−ij(β1) for some ij∈Z.
After reordering, assume that ij≥ij−1 for 1<j≤n.
(1)
Suppose that either k=1 or 2≤k≤n and ik−ik−1>1. Suppose further that nβk=1. Let A′=R(σ,f′) where f′ is the same as f except that the factor (z−βk) of f has been replaced by a factor of (z−σ\mathdsk(βk)) in f′.
Then there is an equivalence of categories GrMod\mathchar45A≡GrMod\mathchar45A′.
2. (2)
Suppose that either k=n or 1≤k≤n−1 and ik+1−ik>1. Suppose further that nβk=1.
Let A′=R(σ,f′) where f′ is the same as f except that the factor (z−βk) of f has been replaced by a factor of (z−σ\mathdsk−1(βk)) in f′.
Then there is an equivalence of categories GrMod\mathchar45A≡GrMod\mathchar45A′.
3. (3)
Suppose for some 2≤k≤n that ik−ik−1=1, and that nβk=1.
Let A′=R(σ,f′) where f′ is the same as f except that the factor (z−βk) of f has been replaced by a factor of (z−βk−1) in f′.
Then there is an equivalence of categories GrMod\mathchar45A/CI≡GrMod\mathchar45A′ where I=(x,y,z−βk). Therefore, QGrMod\mathchar45A≡QGrMod\mathchar45A′.
Proof.
(1) Set h(z)=z−βk. Then by hypothesis, gcd(σ−1(g),h)=1 and so Lemma 3.5 (2) and (3) imply that M is a progenerator for A. Thus the Morita context in (1) is an equivalence.
(2) By the hypotheses, σ\mathdsk−1(βk) has multiplicity one as a root of f′ and so we may apply (1) to obtain GrMod\mathchar45A′≡GrMod\mathchar45A.
(3) Again set h(z)=z−βk so that gcd(σ−1(g),h)=h and gcd(g,h)=1. Thus, by Lemma 3.5 (3), I=imϕ=xA+yA+hA is the trace ideal corresponding to ϕ. By Lemma 3.5 (2), 1∈J=imψ, and hence CJ=0.
Then GrMod\mathchar45A/CI≡GrMod\mathchar45A′ by the graded Kato–Müller Theorem [IN05, Theorem 4.2].
Since I is a trace ideal, it is idempotent, so CI=PI by [IN05, Remark 2.5]. To arrive at the intended equivalence, it remains to prove that CI contains only torsion modules.
We apply [IN05, Theorem 4.2] and our description of the finite-dimensional simple modules.
It is clear that I is the annihilator of M(ik−1,ik] (and its shifts) but that annNI={n∈N:nx=0 for all x∈I}=0 for any other simple A-module N, including those corresponding to nondegenerate orbits.
As M is a finitely generated graded right A-module, there is a graded surjection from the graded free module
⨁i=1nA⟨di⟩→M which induces a graded injection
[TABLE]
Thus, HomA(M,N) is isomorphic to a subspace of ⨁i=1nN⟨−di⟩, which is finite-dimensional if and only if N is finite-dimensional.
Therefore, HomA(M,−) maps finite-dimensional modules to finite-dimensional modules.
Since it also preserves submodule inclusion, HomA(M,−) also maps torsion modules to torsion modules.
Finally, let M∈CI and let m∈M. Since mI=0 and A/I is finite-dimensional, then dim\mathdsk(Am)<∞. It follows that M∈Tors\mathchar45A, so CI is a subcategory of Tors\mathchar45A, whence the equivalence GrMod\mathchar45A/CI≡GrMod\mathchar45A′ induces an equivalence QGrMod\mathchar45A≡QGrMod\mathchar45A′.
∎
The following example illustrates our methods from Proposition 3.6.
Example 3.7**.**
Let A=\mathdsk[z,z−1](σ,f) where σ(z)=pz for some nonroot of unity p∈\mathdsk× and f=(z−1)(z−p)2(z−p2).
Let A′=\mathdsk[z,z−1](σ,f′) with σ as before but f′=(z−1)(z−p)(z−p2)(z−p3). Applying Proposition 3.6 (3), we can replace f′ with f′=(z−1)(z−p)2(z−p3) up to equivalence of the quotient category QGrMod\mathchar45A. Then applying Proposition 3.6 (1) to the last factor we have that QGrMod\mathchar45A≡QGrMod\mathchar45A′.
On the other hand, let A′′=\mathdsk[z,z−1](σ,f′′) with σ as before but f′′=(z−1)4. We can collapse f′ to f′′ in the following way, where the labels on the arrows indicate the applicable part of Proposition 3.6:
Translating a root of multiplicity one was accomplished in Proposition 3.6. The general case of translating a multiple root is
our main result below.
Theorem 3.8**.**
Let A=R(σ,f) be a GWA satisfying Hypothesis 2.1. Let A′=R(σ,f′) where f′ is obtained from f by replacing any irreducible factor (z−β) of f by σ(z−β) in f′. Then QGrMod\mathchar45A≡QGrMod\mathchar45A′.
Proof.
Let O⊂\mathdsk be the set of roots of f on the σ-orbit of β. Let f1=∏α∈O(z−α) and let f2=ff1−1. Suppose f1 has degree n. Write
[TABLE]
where ∑ni=n, αi=σ\mathdsk−ji(α1) for i>1, and jk>jk−1>⋯>j2>0.
Assume αℓ=β and write
[TABLE]
where t=n−(n1+⋯+nℓ−1), β1=β, and βi=σ\mathdsk−i(β1) for i>1.
Let A~=R(σ,f~f2).
We claim that both QGrMod\mathchar45A and QGrMod\mathchar45A′ are equivalent to QGrMod\mathchar45A~.
The roots βi all have multiplicity one in f~ and so we can translate them, one at time, using Proposition 3.6.
In what follows, all replacements are up to equivalence in the quotient category QGrMod\mathchar45A~.
First, we use Proposition 3.6 (3) to replace (z−β1)(z−β2) with (z−β1)2. Suppose we have replaced (z−β1)⋯(z−βs) with (z−β1)s for some s<nℓ. Applying Proposition 3.6 (1) s−2 times to the factor (z−βs+1) replaces it with (z−β2). We can then apply Proposition 3.6 (3) again to replace (z−β1)s(z−β2) with (z−β1)s+1.
Hence, by induction, we have
[TABLE]
We apply Proposition 3.6 (1) to replace (z−βnℓ+1) by (z−αℓ+1). Applying Proposition 3.6 (1) and (3) alternatively, we may then collapse the roots βnℓ+2,…,βnℓ+nℓ+1 to αℓ+1. Continuing in this way we obtain QGrMod\mathchar45A~≡QGrMod\mathchar45A.
On the other hand, we can shift or collapse (z−β1) to σ(z−β1) and then repeat as above to shift the remaining βi to their corresponding αj. In this way we obtain QGrMod\mathchar45A~≡QGrMod\mathchar45A′. The result follows.
∎
Theorem 3.8 says, essentially, that the QGrMod-equivalence class of R(σ,f) depends only on the number of roots on the same σ-orbit.
Corollary 3.9**.**
Suppose A=R(σ,f) is a GWA satisfying Hypothesis 2.1. Then QGrMod\mathchar45A≡GrMod\mathchar45A′ for some simple GWA A′=R(σ,f′) satisfying Hypothesis 2.4.
Proof.
Repeatedly apply Theorem 3.8 to each distinct σ-orbit of the irreducible factors of f until the resulting polynomial f′ has no distinct irreducible factors on the same σ-orbit.
Then f′ has no congruent roots so A′ is simple and QGrMod\mathchar45A≡QGrMod\mathchar45A′. Since A′ is simple, GrMod\mathchar45A′ has no finite-dimensional modules, and hence QGrMod\mathchar45A≡QGrMod\mathchar45A′=GrMod\mathchar45A′.
∎
4. Graded modules over simple GWAs
Henceforth we assume Hypothesis 2.4 unless otherwise stated.
In [Won18b, Section 3], the third-named author studied the finite-length modules and projective modules in grmod\mathchar45R(σ,f) when R=\mathdsk[z] and f∈\mathdsk[z] is quadratic. Here, we prove similar results for the simple GWAs of interest, thereby generalizing these results in two directions: first, by considering both base rings R=\mathdsk[z] and R=\mathdsk[z,z−1] and second, by considering polynomials of arbitrary degree with no two distinct roots on the same σ\mathdsk-orbit.
In contrast with the treatment in [Won18b], rather than trying to understand all extensions of simple graded modules, we will focus only on certain indecomposable modules, which we will need in Section 4.4.
4.1. Finite-length indecomposable modules
Recall the description of the simple graded A-modules from Lemma 3.1.
Since we are assuming Hypothesis 2.4, there are no degenerate congruent orbits, so the third case in Lemma 3.1 does not occur. Hence, GrMod\mathchar45A has no modules of finite \mathdsk-dimension, so throughout this section, GrMod\mathchar45A=QGrMod\mathchar45A.
By [Bav96, Lemma 3.6], both Mα− and Mα+ have projective dimension 1 if nα=1 and infinite projective dimension if nα>1. The following lemma shows that there are indecomposable modules of projective dimension 1 and length nαwhose composition factors are all Mα− or all Mα+.
Lemma 4.1**.**
For each α∈Zer(f) and each j=1,…,nα, there is an indecomposable graded right A-module of length j
[TABLE]
whose composition factors are j copies of Mα−. This is the unique indecomposable module of length j whose composition factors are Mα−. Similarly, there is a unique indecomposable graded right A-module of length j
[TABLE]
whose composition factors are j copies of Mα+. Further, both Mα−nα and Mα+nα have projective dimension 1.
Proof.
We prove the statements for Mα−. The proofs of the statements for Mα+ are similar.
We proceed by induction on j. For the base case, Mα−1=Mα−. For 2≤j≤nα, consider the natural projection Mα−j→Mα−(j−1) whose kernel is given by
[TABLE]
There is an isomorphism Mα−≅K given by left multiplication by (z−α)j−1. Hence, Mα−j is a length j module whose composition factors are all isomorphic to Mα−.
To show that Mα−j is indecomposable, it suffices to show that Mα−j has a unique submodule isomorphic to Mα−.
Any homomorphism φ:Mα−→Mα−j is determined by φ(1)∈(Mα−j)0. Since, in Mα−j, (z−α)j=0, every element of (Mα−j)0 can be written as ∑ℓ=0j−1βℓ(z−α)ℓ for some βℓ∈\mathdsk. For φ to be well-defined, we must have φ(1)=β(z−α)j−1 for some β∈\mathdsk, and so HomGrMod\mathchar45A(Mα−,Mα−j)=\mathdsk.
For uniqueness, we show that ExtGrMod\mathchar45A1(Mα−(j−1),Mα−)=\mathdsk. We introduce temporary notation and let I=(z−α)j−1A+xA be the ideal defining Mα−(j−1). Applying the functor HomGrMod\mathchar45A(−,Mα−) to the exact sequence
[TABLE]
yields the exact sequence
[TABLE]
Since Mα− is one-dimensional in degree 0, and there is a natural projection Mα−(j−1)→Mα−, the first two terms in this sequence are both one-dimensional over \mathdsk. Since Mα−j is a nontrivial extension of Mα− by Mα−j, the last term is at least one-dimensional over \mathdsk. Now any morphism ϕ:I→Mα− is determined by ϕ((z−α)j−1) and ϕ(x). Since Mα− is zero in all positive degree, ϕ(x)=0 and so ϕ is determined by the image of (z−α)j−1. Since Mα− is one-dimensional in degree 0, we have HomGrMod\mathchar45A(I,Mα−) is at most one-dimensional over \mathdsk. By considering \mathdsk-dimension, this implies that every term in the exact sequence is one-dimensional.
Finally, to see that Mα−nα has projective dimension one, we use a technique similar to [Bav93, Theorem 5]. Observe that there is an exact sequence
[TABLE]
where ϕ(w)=(w,[σ−1((z−α)nα)]−1yw) and ψ(u,v)=yu−σ−1((z−α)nα)v. Then Mα−nα and Mα+nα will have projective dimension one if this exact sequence splits; i.e., if there is a splitting map ν:A⊕A→(z−α)nαA+xA such that ν∘ϕ=Id. This is equivalent to the existence of a,b∈(z−α)nαA+xA so that 1=a+b[σ−1((z−α)nα)]−1y (if so, we can define the splitting map ν(u,v)=au+bv). But this is true since gcd((z−α)nα,f/(z−α)nα)=1 in R.
∎
The indecomposable modules Mα−nα and Mα+nα will play an important role in constructing autoequivalences of grmod\mathchar45A in section 4.4.
The proof of the following lemma is the same as that of [Won18b, Lemma 3.4].
Lemma 4.2**.**
Let n∈Z. Then for each α∈Zer(f) and each j=1,…,nα,
[TABLE]
and Mα−j⟨n⟩=Mα+j⟨n⟩=0 for i>−n.
As graded left R-modules, we have
[TABLE]
It is easy to see that as a left R-module, Mλ≅⨁j∈ZR/(z−λ)R. This fact, when combined with the previous lemma and Lemma 3.1, means that any finite-length graded A-module is supported at finitely many \mathdsk-points of SpecR when considered as a left R-module.
Definition 4.3**.**
If M is a graded A-module of finite length, define the support of M, SuppM, to be the support of M as a left R-module. If SuppM⊂{σ\mathdski(α)∣i∈Z} for some α∈\mathdsk, we say that M is supported along the σ\mathdsk-orbit of α.
By Lemmas 3.1 and 4.2, for any λ∈\mathdsk∖{σ\mathdski(α)∣α∈Zer(f),i∈Z}, the simple module Mλ is the unique simple supported at λ and for each α∈Zer(f) and n∈Z, Mα−⟨n⟩ and Mα+⟨n⟩ are the unique simple modules supported at σ\mathdsk−n(α).
4.2. Rank one projective modules
In this section, we seek to understand the rank one graded projective right A-modules. We begin by studying the graded submodules of Qgr(A).
Let I be a finitely generated graded right A-submodule of Qgr(A). Since R is a PID, for each i∈Z, there exists ai∈\mathdsk(z) so that as a left R-module,
[TABLE]
For every i∈Z, multiplying Ii on the right by x shows that Rai⊆Rai+1, while multiplying Ii on the right by y shows that Rai+1σi(f)⊆Rai.
Define ci=aiai+1−1. Since Rai⊆Rai+1, therefore ci∈R, and since Rai+1σi(f)⊆Rai, we conclude that ci divides σi(f) in R. By multiplying by an appropriate unit in R, we may assume that ci∈\mathdsk[z] and that ci is monic. Hence, ci actually divides σi(f) in \mathdsk[z].
Definition 4.4**.**
For a finitely generated graded submodule I=⨁i∈ZRaixi of Qgr(A), we call the sequence {ci=aiai+1−1}i∈Z described above the structure constants of I.
Many properties of I can be deduced by examining its structure constants. The proofs of the next two lemmas are immediate generalizations of the proofs of [Won18b, Lemmas 3.8 and 3.9].
Lemma 4.5**.**
Let I and J be finitely generated graded submodules of Qgr(A) with structure constants {ci} and {di}, respectively. Then I≅J as graded right A-modules if and only if ci=di for all i∈Z.
Lemma 4.6**.**
Suppose I=⨁i∈ZRaixi is a finitely generated graded right A-submodule of Qgr(A) with structure constants {ci}. Then for n≫0, cn=1 and c−n=σ−n(f). Further, for any choice {ci}i∈Z satisfying
(1)
for each n∈Z, cn∈\mathdsk[z], cn∣σn(f) and
2. (2)
for n≫0, cn=1 and c−n=σ−n(f),
there is a finitely generated module I with structure constants {ci}.
The structure constants of I also determine which of the indecomposable modules described in Lemma 4.1 are homomorphic images of I.
Lemma 4.7**.**
Let I=⨁i∈ZRaixi be a finitely generated graded right A-submodule of Qgr(A) with structure constants {ci}. For α∈Zer(f) and j=1,…,nα
(1)
there is a surjective graded right R-module homomorphism I→Mα−j⟨n⟩ if and only if σ−n((z−α)nα−j+1)∤c−n,
2. (2)
there is a surjective graded right R-module homomorphism I→Mα+j⟨n⟩ if and only if σ−n((z−α)j)∣c−n.
Moreover, these surjections are unique up to a scalar.
Proof.
We prove statement (1); the proof of statement (2) is similar.
Suppose there is a graded surjective homomorphism I→Mα−j⟨n⟩.
The kernel of this morphism is again a graded submodule of Qgr(A), so we can write the kernel as J=⨁i∈ZRbixi with each bi∈\mathdsk(z). Let {di} denote the structure constants of J.
Since, Mα−j⟨n⟩ is nonzero in precisely degrees i≤−n, it follows that bi=ai for all i>−n.
Further, by Lemma 4.2, for all i≤−n, (Mα−j⟨n⟩)i≅R/σ−n((z−α)j)R as left R-modules.
Therefore, for all i≤−n, Rbi⊇Rσ−n((z−α)j)ai. We also notice that dim\mathdskRai/Rbi=dim\mathdskR/Rσ−n((z−α)j)=j, since Rbi⊆Rai and both ai and bi are monic, we deduce bi=σ−n((z−α)j)ai.
Computing structure constants, we see that when i=−n, ci=di, while d−n=σ−n((z−α)j)c−n.
Since by the discussion before Definition 4.4, d−n∣σ−n(f), we conclude that
[TABLE]
otherwise (z−α)nα+1 would divide f.
Conversely, suppose that σ−n((z−α)nα−j+1)∤c−n. Then
we can construct a finitely generated graded right A-submodule of Qgr(A) by setting J=⨁i∈ZRbixi⊆I and bi=ai for all i>−n
and bi=σ−n((z−α)j)ai for all i≤−n.
By multiplying by a scalar, we may assume that bi is monic for all i.
For all i∈Z, define di=bibi+1−1.
Observe that for i=−n, di=ci, while d−n=σ−n((z−α)j)c−n.
The {di} are the structure constants of J, which is finitely generated by Lemma 4.6.
Now by [Bav92, Theorem 2], I/J has finite length.
Further, I/J is a graded module such that (I/J)i=0 for each i>−n and dim\mathdsk(I/J)i=j for each i≤−n, since in this case Rai/Rbi≅R/σ−n((z−α)j).
Hence, by Lemma 3.1 and by looking at the degrees in which the graded simple modules are nonzero, we deduce that the composition factors of I/J are j copies of Mα−⟨n⟩.
Finally, I/J has a unique submodule which is isomorphic to Mα−⟨n⟩,
corresponding to the module J⊆⨁i∈ZRbi′xi⊆I where bi′=ai for all i>−n
and bi′=σ−n((z−α)j−1)ai for all i≤−n.
Therefore, I/J is indecomposable and so by Lemma 4.1, I/J≅Mα−j⟨n⟩.
We note that we have constructed the unique kernel of a morphism I→Mα−j and so the surjection is unique up to a scalar.
∎
We now focus on the rank one projective modules. Let P be a finitely generated graded projective right A-module of rank one. Since P embeds in Q(A) and is graded it follows that P embeds in Qgr(A), therefore P has a sequence of structure constants. We will be able to detect the projectivity of P from its structure constants.
Lemma 4.8**.**
Let P be a graded projective right A-module. Let α∈Zer(f) and j=1,…,nα. Any graded surjection P→Mα±⟨n⟩ lifts to a graded surjection P→Mα±j⟨n⟩ which is unique up to a scalar.
Proof.
It suffices to prove that for any j=2,…,nα any graded surjection P→Mα−(j−1) lifts to a graded surjection P→Mα−j.
Let π be the projection π:Mα−j→Mα−(j−1). Since P is projective, any graded surjection P→Mα−(j−1) lifts to a graded morphism g:P→Mα−j. Now since the kernel of π is generated by (z−α)j−1, any preimage of 1 under π has the form p=1+(z−α)j−1a for some a∈A0. Observe that p(1−(z−α)j−1a)=1 in Mα−j, so any preimage of 1 generates Mα−j and hence g is an surjection. By Lemma 4.7, g is unique up to a scalar. In the other case, the proof is analogous.
∎
The following lemma generalizes [Won18b, Lemma 3.32].
Lemma 4.9**.**
Let P be a graded submodule of Qgr(A) with structure constants {ci}. Then P is projective if and only if for each n∈Z, cn=∏α∈Iσn((z−α)nα) for some (possibly empty) subset I⊆Zer(f).
Proof.
We first assume that for each n∈Z, cn=∏α∈Iσn((z−α)nα) for some I⊆Zer(f) and prove that P must be projective. As in [Won18b, Lemma 3.32], we prove the projectivity of P by constructing a finitely generated projective module with the same structure constants as P, the claim would then follow by Lemma 4.5.
Note that by Lemma 4.6, there exists N1∈Z such that for all n≥N1, cn=1 and for all n≤−N1, cn=σn(f). An elementary computation shows that if P0=A⟨N1⟩ and the structure constants of P0 are denoted by {di}, then dn=1 for n≥N1 and dn=σn(f) for n<N1. If cn=dn for all n then we are done. Otherwise let i0 be the largest integer such that ci0=di0. By hypothesis, there is some I⊆Zer(f) such that ci0=∏α∈Iσi0((z−α)nα) and by construction, di0=σi0(f). Let J=Zer(f)∖I.
Since σi0((z−α)nα)∣σi0(f)=di0 then, by Lemma 4.7, there is a graded surjection πα:P0→Mα+nα⟨−i0⟩ for each α∈Zer(f). Let P1 be the kernel of the map ⨁α∈Jπα:P0→⨁α∈JMα+nα⟨−i0⟩. By Lemma 4.1, the modules Mα+nα⟨−i0⟩ have projective dimension one, therefore the projectivity of P0 implies the projectivity of P1. Following the same strategy used in the first paragraph of the proof of Lemma 4.7 we see that P1 is a submodule of Qgr(A) and the structure constants of P0 and P1 are equal except in degree i0, where P1 has structure constant ci0. We continue this process for the finitely many indices where ci differs from di until we reach a projective module which has the same structure constants as P.
Conversely suppose that P is projective. Using Lemma 4.7 and the above lemma, it follows that if σn(z−α)∣cn, then σn((z−α)nα)∣cn. Since by the paragraph before Definition 4.4 we know that cn∣σn(f), the assertion follows.
∎
Since projective graded submodules of Qgr(A) have rank one, as a corollary, we see that a graded rank one projective module has a unique simple factor supported at σ\mathdskn(α) for each α∈Z and each n∈Z.
Corollary 4.10**.**
Let P be a rank one graded projective A-module, let α∈Zer(f), and let n∈Z. Then P surjects onto exactly one of Mα−⟨−n⟩ and Mα+⟨−n⟩.
Proof.
By Lemma 4.9 each structure constant cn of P is either relatively prime to σn((z−α)nα) or else has a factor of σn((z−α)nα). By Lemma 4.7, in the first case, P surjects onto Mα−⟨−n⟩ and not Mα+⟨−n⟩, and in the second case P surjects onto Mα+⟨−n⟩ and not Mα−⟨−n⟩.
∎
Corollary 4.11**.**
A rank one graded projective A-module is determined up to isomorphism by its simple factors which are supported at the σ\mathdsk-orbits of the roots α of f.
Proof.
Let P be a rank one graded projective A-module with structure constants {ci}. By Lemma 4.7 and Corollary 4.10, the simple factors of P supported at the σ\mathdsk-orbits of the roots α of f determine the {ci} and by Lemma 4.5 therefore determine P.
∎
We have shown that for a rank one projective P for each α∈Zer(f) and each n∈Z, P has a unique simple factor supported at σ\mathdskn(α)—either Mα−⟨−n⟩ or Mα+⟨−n⟩. The next result show that if for each n∈Z and each α∈Zer(f), we choose one of Mα−⟨−n⟩ and Mα+⟨−n⟩, as long as our choice is consistent with Lemma 4.6, there exists a projective module with the prescribed simple factors.
Lemma 4.12**.**
For each α∈Zer(f) and each n∈Z choose Sα,n∈{Mα−⟨−n⟩,Mα+⟨−n⟩} such that for n≫0, Sα,n=Mα−⟨−n⟩ and Sα,−n=Mα+⟨n⟩. Then there exists a finitely generated rank one graded projective P such that for all n∈Z, the unique simple factor of P supported at σ\mathdskn(α) is Sα,n.
Proof.
We construct P via its structure constants {ci} as follows. For each α∈Zer(f) and i∈Z, let
[TABLE]
and let ci=∏α∈Zer(f)dα,i. By Lemmas 4.6 and 4.9, P is a finitely generated rank one graded projective module.
∎
4.3. Morphisms between rank one projectives
In [Won18b, §3.4.2], the morphisms between the rank one projectives of grmod\mathchar45A were described in the case that A=\mathdsk[z](σ,f) for σ(z)=z+1 and f∈\mathdsk[z] quadratic. The hypotheses used therein were that \mathdsk[z] is a PID and A is 1-critical, i.e., A has Krull dimension 1 and for any proper submodule B⊆A, A/B has Krull dimension [math]. Since both \mathdsk[z] and \mathdsk[z,z−1] are PIDs and all of the simple GWAs in this paper are 1-critical, the results generalize immediately. We briefly review the pertinent results and definitions from [Won18b].
Definition 4.13**.**
Given a graded rank one projective module P with structure constants {ci}, the canonical representation of P is the module
[TABLE]
where
pi=∏j≥icj. We note that P′≅P and call P′ a canonical rank one graded projective module. Every rank one graded projective right A-module is isomorphic to a unique canonical one in this way.
Let P and Q be finitely generated right A-modules. An A-module homomorphism f:P→Q is called a maximal embedding if there does not exist an A-module homomorphism g:P→Q such that f(P)⊊g(P).
In [Won18b], it was proved that if P and Q are finitely generated graded rank one projectives, then there exists a maximal embedding P→Q which is unique up to a scalar. Further, if P and Q are canonical rank one graded projectives, this maximal embedding can be computed explicitly.
Let P and Q be finitely generated graded rank one projective A-modules embedded in Qgr(A). Then every homomorphism P→Q is given by left multiplication by some element of \mathdsk(z) and as a left R-module, Homgrmod\mathchar45A(P,Q) is free of rank one.
Lemma 4.15** ([Won18b, Lemma 3.40 and Corollary 3.41]).**
Let P and Q be rank one graded projective A-modules with structure constants {ci} and {di}, respectively. As above, write
[TABLE]
Then the maximal embedding P→Q is given by multiplication by
[TABLE]
where lcm is the unique monic least common multiple in R. There exists some N∈Z such that
[TABLE]
Finally, we give necessary and sufficient conditions for a set of projective objects in grmod\mathchar45A to generate the category. This is the natural generalization of the conditions in [Won18b] and follows from the same proof.
A set of rank one graded projective A-modules P={Pi}i∈I generates grmod\mathchar45A if and only if for every Mα±⟨n⟩ with α∈Zer(f) and n∈Z, there exists a graded surjection to Mα±⟨n⟩ from a direct sum of modules in P.
4.4. Involutions of grmod\mathchar45A
We now construct autoequivalences of grmod\mathchar45A which are analogous to those constructed in [Sie09, Proposition 5.7] and [Won18b, Propositions 5.13 and 5.14]. Recall that S denotes the shift functor on grmod\mathchar45A.
Proposition 4.17**.**
Let A=R(σ,f) and let Zer(f) be the set of roots of f. For any α∈Zer(f) and any j∈Z, there is an autoequivalence ιjα of grmod\mathchar45A such that ιjα(Mα±⟨j⟩)≅Mα∓⟨j⟩ and ιjα(S)≅S for all other graded simple A-modules S. For any j,k∈Z, SAjιkα≅ιj+kαSAj, and (ιjα)2≅Idgrmod\mathchar45A.
Proof.
For each α∈Zer(f), we will construct ι0α and then define ιjα as SAjι0αSA−j.
Let R denote the full subcategory of grmod\mathchar45A consisting of the canonical rank one graded projective modules. We first define ι0α on R. Consider the set
[TABLE]
and let Dα denote the full subcategory of grmod\mathchar45A whose objects are the elements of Dα.
Let P be an object of R. By Lemma 4.8 and Corollary 4.10, there is an unique (up to a scalar) surjection from P onto Mα−nα or Mα+nα, let N be the kernel of this surjection (which does not depend on the particular choice of the surjection), so P/N∈Dα. As Dα is closed under subobjects, the functor R→grmod\mathchar45A that maps an object P to this unique kernel and acts on morphisms by restriction is a well-defined additive functor by [Won18b, Lemma 4.4]. By [Won18b, Lemma 4.3], this then extends to an additive functor defined over the full subcategory of direct sums of rank one projective modules. By [Won18b, Lemma 4.2] this functor further extends to an additive functor ι0α:grmod\mathchar45A→grmod\mathchar45A.
We now show that ι0α has the claimed properties. We begin by describing the action on structure constants. Suppose P∈R has structure constants {ci} and denote the structure constants of ι0αP by {di}. By Lemma 4.7, P surjects onto exactly one of Mα−nα and Mα+nα. If P surjects onto Mα−nα, then a similar strategy to the one used in the first paragraph of the proof of Lemma 4.7 can be used to show that
[TABLE]
Similarly, if P surjects onto Mα+nα then
[TABLE]
In the first case, d0=c0(z−α)nα while in the second case, d0=c0/(z−α)nα. Therefore by Lemma 4.7 if P surjects onto Mα±nα then ι0αP surjects onto Mα∓nα.
Hence (ι0α)2P=(z−α)nαP, which is isomorphic to P.
Let P′ be another object in R. Consider map induced by (ι0α)2
[TABLE]
given by g↦g∣(z−α)nαP. By Proposition 4.14, every element of Homgrmod\mathchar45A(P,P′) and of Homgrmod\mathchar45A((z−α)nαP,(z−α)nαP′) is given by left multiplication by some element of \mathdsk(z). Therefore the map in the above display must be an isomorphism. If Q is a finite direct sum of rank one graded projective modules then, by the additivity of ι0α, (ι0α)2 is given by multiplication by (z−α)nα in each component of Q. Hence, (ι0α)2 is naturally isomorphic to the identity functor on the full subcategory of finite direct sums of rank one projectives. Therefore, by [Won18b, Lemma 4.2], ι0α is an autoequivalence of grmod\mathchar45A which is its own quasi-inverse.
If ιjα is defined as ιjα=SAjι0αSA−j then
[TABLE]
Because for any P∈R the structure constants for ι0αP differ from those of P only in degree [math], where they differ only by a factor of (z−α)nα, by Lemma 4.7, ι0αP and P have the same simple factors supported along {σ\mathdski(α)∣i∈Z,α∈Zer(f)} except if P has a factor of Mα−⟨j⟩ then ι0αP has a factor of Mα+⟨j⟩ and vice versa. Let S be a simple module not of the form Mα±⟨j⟩, i.e. S is Mβ±⟨j⟩ for some β∈Zer(f)\{α}, or S is Mλ⟨j⟩ for some λ. By looking at the way ι0α is defined on grmod\mathchar45A, in [Won18b, Lemmas 4.2 and 4.3], it follows that ι0α(S)=S.
∎
Remark 4.18*.*
Since we defined ιjα=SAjι0αSA−j, we can construct ιjα by adjusting the construction in the previous proof by shifting all of the modules in D by j. It follows that for a rank one graded projective module P, (ιjα)2P=σ−j((z−α)nα)P.
Lemma 4.19**.**
For any α,β∈Zer(f) and any j,k∈Z, ιjαιkβ=ιkβιjα and so the autoequivalences {ιjα∣α∈Zer(f),j∈Z} generate a subgroup of Pic(grmod\mathchar45A) isomorphic to
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since, for each α∈Zer(f) and j∈Z, (ιjα)2≅Idgrmod\mathchar45A, each ιjα generates a subgroup of Pic(grmod\mathchar45A) isomorphic to Z/2Z. It remains to show that for any β∈Zer(f) and k∈Z that ιjα and ιkβ commute. Tracing through the construction in the proof of Proposition 4.17 shows that (ιkβ)−1(ιjα)−1ιkβιjα≅Idgrmod\mathchar45A.
∎
5. Quotient stacks as noncommutative schemes of GWAs
Let A=R(σ,f) and fix a labeling of the distinct roots of f
[TABLE]
where αi has multiplicity ni in f.
The main aim of this section is to use the autoequivalences constructed in the previous section to construct a Γ-graded commutative ring B whose category of Γ-graded modules is equivalent to GrMod\mathchar45A. We will then study properties of the ring B.
We identify ⨁i∈ZZ/2Z with the group Zfin of finite subsets of the integers.
The operation on Zfin is given by exclusive or, denoted ⊕.
For convenience, we use simply j to denote the singleton set {j}∈Zfin. Throughout, we write the group of autoequivalences described in Lemma 4.19 as
[TABLE]
We note that Zfin⊕Zfin≅Zfin and therefore Γ≅Zfin, but it will be convenient to index this group by the roots of f. We use the notation [1,r] to refer to the set {1,2,…,r}.
For i∈[1,r] and j∈Z, let ei,j={∅,…,j,…,∅}∈Γ, where j is in the ith component.
We denote the identity (∅,…,∅) of Γ by ∅.
For each J=(J1,J2,…,Jr)∈Γ, let
[TABLE]
Since, for each j∈Z, the autoequivalence ιjαi is its own quasi-inverse, therefore ιJ is also its own quasi-inverse.
Lemma 5.1**.**
The set {ιJA∣J∈Γ} generates GrMod\mathchar45A.
Proof.
We remark that by the construction in Proposition 4.17, if P is a rank one projective, then ιJP is a graded submodule of Qgr(A) with the same structure constants as P except in certain degrees, where the structure consants of ιJP differ from those of P by a factor of ∏i∈I(z−αi)ni for some I⊆{1,2,…r}. Hence, by Lemma 4.9, ιJP is also a rank one graded projective module. By Lemma 4.16, it is enough to show that for every i=1,…,r and every n∈Z, there is a surjection from some ιJA to Mαi−⟨n⟩ and similarly for Mαi+⟨n⟩. By Corollary 4.11, A surjects onto exactly one of Mαi−⟨n⟩ and Mαi+⟨n⟩. Then ιei,nA surjects onto the other, so {ιJA∣J∈Γ} generates grmod\mathchar45A and hence generates GrMod\mathchar45A.
∎
For J=(J1,…,Jr),K=(K1,…,Kr)∈Γ, we define
[TABLE]
in the natural way, and similarly define
[TABLE]
For each i=1,…,r and each j∈Z, we define the polynomial hjαi=σ−j((z−αi)ni). If J∈Γ, let
[TABLE]
For completeness, empty products are defined to be 1.
Let I,J∈Γ. Since, in Pic(grmod\mathchar45A), ιIιJ=ιI⊕J, therefore ιIιJ is naturally isomorphic to ιI⊕J and in particular, ιIιJA≅ιI⊕JA. We now explicitly describe this isomorphism.
By Remark 4.18, ιJ2A=hJA.
Denote by τJ the isomorphism ιJ2A→A given by left multiplication by hJ−1.
Define ΘI,J:ιIιJA=ιI⊕JιI∩J2A→ιI⊕JA by
[TABLE]
By a proof that is identical to that of [Won18a, Lemma 4.1], we have that for any I,J,K∈Γ and any φ∈Homgrmod\mathchar45A(A,ιIA),
[TABLE]
Therefore, by [Won18a, Proposition 3.4] we can define the Γ-graded ring
[TABLE]
For a∈BI and b∈BJ multiplication in B is given by a⋅b=ιI⊕J(τI∩J)∘ιJ(a)∘b.
In the remainder of this section, we assume that B=B(R,σ,f) is defined as in (5.2).
Theorem 5.3**.**
There is an equivalence of categories
[TABLE]
Proof.
This is an immediate corollary of Lemma 5.1 and [Won18a, Proposition 3.6].
∎
Theorem 5.4**.**
The ring B is a commutative ring with presentation
[TABLE]
There is a Γ-grading on B, given by R=B∅ and degbi,j=ei,j.
Proof.
By the construction Proposition 4.17, for each α∈Zer(f) and each j∈Z, ιjαA is the kernel of the unique graded surjection from A to Mα−nα⟨j⟩⊕Mα+nα⟨j⟩. Both Mα−nα⟨j⟩ and Mα+nα⟨j⟩ have \mathdsk-dimension nα in all graded components in which they are nonzero. Therefore, (ιjαA)0 has codimension nα in A0.
Further, ((ιjα)2A)0=(hjαA)0 and since ((ιjα)2A)0⊆(ιjαA)0⊆A, by comparing codimensions we conclude that
[TABLE]
Thus, for J∈Γ, (ιJA)0=hJR. We use the isomorphism φJ:(ιJA)0→Homgrmod\mathchar45A(A,ιJA), to identify (ιJA)0=hJR with BJ. Let bJ=φJ(hJ).
Since the autoequivalences {ιJ∣J∈Γ} act on morphisms by restriction, using the definition of multiplication in B, one can check that for I,J∈Γ,
[TABLE]
For each i∈[1,r] and j∈Z, let
[TABLE]
By the above computation, the bi,j commute and bJ=∏i=1r∏j∈Jibi,j.
Since hJ freely generates (ιJA)0 as an R-module, bJ freely generates BJ as a B∅=R-module. Hence, it is clear that the bi,j generate B as an R-module. Again using the definition of multiplication in B, bi,j2=hjαi.
Finally, the proof of [Won18a, Proposition 4.4] shows that the ideal
[TABLE]
contains all of the relations among the bi,j and hence B has the claimed presentation.
∎
Corollary 5.5**.**
Let A=⨁i∈ZAi be a simple Z-graded domain of GK dimension 2 with Ai=0 for all i∈Z. Then there is a commutative Zfin-graded ring B so that
[TABLE]
Proof.
This follows from standard results [Sta19, Tag 06WS], along with Theorems 5.3 and 5.4. The Zfin-grading on B gives an action of Spec\mathdskZfin on SpecB. We can therefore take the quotient stack χ=[Spec\mathdskZfinSpecB]. The category of Zfin-equivariant quasicoherent sheaves on SpecB is equivalent to the category Qcoh(χ) of quasicoherent sheaves on χ. Hence, GrMod\mathchar45A≡GrMod\mathchar45(B,Zfin)≡Qcoh(χ).
∎
Unfortunately, since the ring \mathdskZfin is not locally of finite type, the quotient stack χ is not easy to study. We devote the remainder of the paper to the study of the ring B.
Corollary 5.6**.**
Suppose that A is a GWA satisfying Hypothesis 2.1. Then there exists a quotient stack χ such that QGrMod\mathchar45A≡Qcohχ.
Proof.
This follows immediately from Corollary 3.9 and Corollary 5.5.
∎
Theorem 5.7**.**
The ring B is non-noetherian.
Proof.
It is enough to prove that the quotient of B by the ideal generated by z−1 is non-noetherian. This quotient is of the form
[TABLE]
where the γi,j are elements of \mathdsk depending on αi, j, ni, and on the defining automorphism σ of A. In particular, if R=\mathdsk[z] and σ(z)=z−1 then γi,j=(1−j−αi)ni while if R=\mathdsk[z,z−1] and σ(z)=ξz, then γi,j=(ξ−j−αi)ni. In either case, we claim that the ideals
[TABLE]
form a non-stabilizing ascending chain of ideals in B/(z−1). It suffices to prove that b1,n+γ1,n is not in In. Indeed if we further quotient B/(z−1) by In we get a ring of the form
[TABLE]
We prove that b1,n+γ1,n is not zero in this quotient by proving that it does not belong to the ideal
[TABLE]
of the polynomial ring \mathdsk[bi,j∣i∈[1,r],j∈Z]. Fix a monomial order on the polynomial ring by setting bi,j<bp,q if i<p or if i=p and j<q, and using lexicographic order. With this ordering the generators of the ideal Jn form a Gröbner basis because their leading terms are relatively prime. The reduction of b1,n+γ1,n by this Gröbner basis does not yield zero, showing that In⊊In+1.
∎
Theorem 5.8**.**
The Krull dimension of the ring B is one.
Proof.
We first claim that R⊆B is an integral extension. Indeed, it is clear that for each i∈[1,r] and each j∈Z, that bi,j is integral over R. Since B is generated by the bi,j over R then B is integral over R by [AM69, Corollary 5.3]. Finally, by [Mat89, Exercise 9.2] the Krull dimension of B is the same as the Krull dimension of R, which is one.
∎
Remark 5.9*.*
Let X be the set {(i,j)∣i∈[1,r] and j∈Z}. Since X is countable, we can fix an enumeration X={xm∣m∈N}. If xm=(i,j) then we write bi,j as bxm and σ−j((z−αi)ni) as gm. Denote by Bm the following ring
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
with obvious maps Bm→Bm+1, and we have that
[TABLE]
Definition 5.11**.**
A commutative ring is said to be coherent if every finitely generated ideal is finitely presented.
Proposition 5.12**.**
(1)
If ni is odd for all i∈[1,r], then B is a domain.
2. (2)
The ring B is coherent.
Proof.
(1) Since the direct limit of domains is a domain, by (5.10) it is enough to show that the rings Bm are all domains. We set B−1 to be R (which is a domain) and proceed by induction on m. Since
[TABLE]
and by assumption gm+1∈Bm, it is straightforward to see that bxm12−gm+1 is a prime element in the domain Bm[bxm+1] and therefore Bm+1 is a domain.
(2) By [Gla89, Theorem 2.3.3] it suffices to show that Bm is a flat extension of Bm−1. Indeed Bm=Bm−1⊕bxmBm−1, and hence the extension is free.
∎
Let I⊆[1,r] consist of those i such that ni is even. If I is empty, then the proposition above says that B is a domain. In the following lemma, we classify the minimal prime ideals of B when I is not empty.
Lemma 5.13**.**
Suppose I=∅. An ideal of B is a minimal prime if and only if it is of the form
[TABLE]
for some choice of εi,j∈{0,1} for each i∈I and j∈Z.
Proof.
Let S be the ring R[bi,j∣i∈[1,r],j∈Z] and let S′ be the ring R[bi,j∣i∈[1,r]∖I,j∈Z]. The prime ideals of B correspond to prime ideals of S containing the ideal
[TABLE]
For each i∈I and j∈Z, choose εi,j∈{0,1}. Now define the map
[TABLE]
where the first map is the evaluation map that sends bi,j to (−1)εi,jσ−j((z−αi)2ni) when ni is even and the second map is the canonical projection. The kernel of ρ is generated by the generators of the ideal in (5.14) and by the elements bi,j2−σ−j((z−αi)ni) for i∈[1,r]\I. Since S/Kerρ is isomorphic to B/p and since
[TABLE]
is a domain by Proposition 5.12, we deduce that the ideal p is prime in B. To see that p is a minimal prime we observe that if a prime ideal contains bi,j2−σ−j((z−αi)ni) with ni even then it contains bi,j−σ−j((z−αi)2ni) or bi,j+σ−j((z−αi)2ni).
∎
The proof of the following result is a straightforward generalization of the proof of [Won18a, Proposition 4.6]. We reproduce the argument here for completeness.
Corollary 5.16**.**
The ring B is reduced.
Proof.
Let I⊆[1,r] consist of those i∈[1,r] such that ni is even. If I=∅ then B is a domain so we may assume that I=∅. We show that the intersection of all the minimal prime ideals of B is (0). We first set the following notation: let J=(J1,…,Jr)∈Γ and set B(J) to be the \mathdsk-subalgebra of B generated by {z}∪{bi,j∣i∈[1,r],j∈Ji} if R=\mathdsk[z] or by {z,z−1}∪{bi,j∣i∈[1,r],j∈Ji} if R=\mathdsk[z,z−1]. Hence
[TABLE]
Let a be an element in the intersection of all minimal prime ideals of B. We can write a as a sum of finitely many Γ-homogeneous terms, so a is in an element of B(J) for some J∈Γ. Fix i∈I and suppose j∈Ji. From now on we will work in B(J). Since
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
we can write
[TABLE]
with r,r′∈B(J) and
[TABLE]
Setting bk,ℓ=σ−ℓ((z−αk)2nk) for all k∈I and ℓ∈Jk in (5.17), the right hand side becomes identically 0, and since we are now working in a quotient of B(J) isomorphic to the domain R we can deduce that
[TABLE]
So
[TABLE]
But bi,j2−σ−j((z−αi)ni)=0 in B, hence
[TABLE]
Inducting on the size of Ji and on the size of I, we conclude that a=0. As a result the intersection of the minimal primes of B is (0).
∎
Corollary 5.18**.**
The minimal spectrum of B, MinB, is compact in SpecB with respect to the Zariski topology.
Proof.
This follows from Proposition 5.12, Corollary 5.16, and [Mat85, Proposition 1.1].
∎
We refer the reader to [HM09, Definition 5.1] for the definition of the Gorenstein property for coherent rings.
Proposition 5.19**.**
The ring B is a coherent Gorenstein ring.
Proof.
By [HM09, Proposition 5.11], it suffices to prove that the rings Bm in Remark 5.9 are complete intersections, i.e. if q is a maximal ideal of Bm then the localization (Bm)q is a local complete intersection. To prove this we show that the complete intersection defect of (Bm)q is zero, see [Avr10, Lemma 7.4.1]. If R=\mathdsk[z] then Bm is a polynomial ring in m+1 variables modulo m relations, if R=\mathdsk[z,z−1] then Bm is isomorphic to a polynomial ring in m+2 variables modulo m+1 relations, in both cases the complete intersection defect is dim(Bm)q−1. As in the proof of Theorem 5.8 the rings Bm have Krull dimension one, and therefore dim(Bm)q≤1. Since the complete intersection defect is always nonnegative, it follows that it must be zero.
∎
Bibliography33
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[AM 69] M. F. Atiyah and I. G. Macdonald, Introduction to commutative algebra , Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass.-London-Don Mills, Ont., 1969. MR 0242802
2[AS 95] Michael Artin and J Toby Stafford, Noncommutative graded domains with quadratic growth , Inv. Math. 122 (1995), no. 2, 231–276.
3[Avr 10] Luchezar L. Avramov, Infinite free resolutions , Six lectures on commutative algebra, Mod. Birkhäuser Class., Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2010, pp. 1–118. MR 2641236
4[AZ 94] Michael Artin and James J Zhang, Noncommutative projective schemes , Adv. Math. 109 (1994), no. 2, 228–287.
5[Bav 92] Vladimir V Bavula, Simple D [ X , Y ; σ , a ] 𝐷 𝑋 𝑌 𝜎 𝑎 D[X,Y;\sigma,a] -modules , Ukrainian Math. J. 44 (1992), no. 12, 1500–1511. MR 1215036
6[Bav 93] by same author, Generalized Weyl algebras and their representations , St. Petersburg Math. J. 4 (1993), no. 1, 71–92.
7[Bav 96] by same author, Global dimension of generalized Weyl algebras , Representation theory of algebras (Cocoyoc, 1994), CMS Conf. Proc., vol. 18, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1996, pp. 81–107. MR 1388045
8[BR 16] Jason Bell and Daniel Rogalski, Z-graded simple rings , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 368 (2016), 4461–4496.