GENERALIZING SERRE’S SPLITTING THEOREM AND BASS’S
CANCELLATION THEOREM VIA FREE-BASIC ELEMENTS

arXiv:1608.08591v1 [] 30 Aug 2016

ALESSANDRO DE STEFANI, THOMAS POLSTRA, AND YONGWEI YAO

Abstract. We give new proofs of two results of Stafford from [Sta81], which generalize
two famous Theorems of Serre and Bass regarding projective modules. Our techniques are
inspired by the theory of basic elements. Using these methods we further generalize Serre’s
Splitting Theorem by imposing a condition to the splitting maps, which has an application
to the case of Cartier algebras.

1. Introduction
Throughout this section, R denotes a commutative Noetherian ring with unity. The
existence of unimodular elements has always played a crucial role in algebraic K-theory. An
element of a projective module is called unimodular if it generates a free summand. Note that
unimodular elements are basic elements, a notion introduced by Swan [Swa67]: an element of
an module is called basic if remains a minimal generator after localization at every prime of
the ring. In a fundamental paper from 1971, Eisenbud and Evans make use of basic elements
for modules that are not necessarily projective. Using basic element theory, Eisenbud and
Evans generalize and greatly improve several theorems about projective modules, as well as
about general finitely generated modules [EE73]. Two such theorems are Serre’s Splitting
Theorem and Bass’s Cancellation Theorem on projective modules.
Theorem 1.1 ([Ser58], Theorem 1 and [Bas64], Theorem 8.2). Let R be a commutative
Noetherian ring of Krull dimension d. Let P be a finitely generated projective R-module
whose rank at each localization at a prime ideal is at least d + 1. Then P contains a free
R-summand.
Theorem 1.2 ([Bas64], Theorem 9.1). Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring of finite
Krull dimension d, and P be a finitely generated projective R-module whose rank at each
localization at a prime ideal is at least d + 1. Let Q be a finitely generated projective Rmodule, and assume that Q ⊕ P ∼
= Q ⊕ N for some R-module N. Then P ∼
= N.
Given a projective module P , an equivalent way of saying that Pp has rank at least d + 1
for all p ∈ Spec(R) is to say that, locally at each prime, it contains a free summand of rank
at least d + 1. In this article, we present new methods to extend Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 to all
finitely generated modules, not necessarily projective, that contain a free summand of large
enough rank at each localization at a prime.
Theorem A. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, and M a finitely generated Rmodule. Assume that Mp contains a free Rp summand of rank at least dim(R/p) + 1 for each
p ∈ Spec(R). Then M contains a free R-summand.
1

Theorem B. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring and M a finitely generated R-module
such that, for each p ∈ Spec(R), Mp contains a free Rp summand of rank at least dim(R/p)+
1. For any finitely generated projective R-module Q and any finitely generated R-module N,
if Q ⊕ M ∼
= Q ⊕ N, then M ∼
= N.
Stafford proved analogue results in [Sta81, Corollaries 5.9 and 5.11] where, instead of
looking at local number of free summands, he used the notion of r-rank. Stafford’s results
are actually very general in that he proved analogues of Theorem A and Theorem B for rings
that are not necessarily commutative.
Let M be a finitely generated R-module. Observe that the conclusion of Theorem A
can be viewed as a statement about the existence of a surjective homomorphism inside
HomR (M, R). For several applications, it is useful to restrict the selection of homomorphisms
M → R to those belonging to a given R-submodule E of HomR (M, R). This is the scenario
arising, for instance, from the study of the F-signature of Cartier subalgebras of C R =
⊕e HomR (F∗e R, R), where R is an F-finite local ring of prime characteristic [BST12]. We can
naturally generalize the definitions in this paper and results about free-basic elements to the
setup of R-submodules E of HomR (M, R). The main achievement in this direction is a new
generalization of Theorem A.
Theorem C. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
and E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R). Assume that, for each p ∈ Spec(R), Mp contains a
free Ep -summand of rank at least dim(R/p) + 1. Then M contains a free E -summand.
As the main application of Theorem C, the authors establish in [DSPY16] the existence of
a global F-signature with respect to Cartier subalgebras of C R , where R is an F-finite ring
of prime characteristic, not necessarily local.
The statements of Theorems A, B and C can actually be strengthen by just requiring that
Mp has a free summand (free Ep -summand for Theorem C) of rank at least 1+dimj- Spec(R) (p),
for each p ∈ j-Spec(R). Here, dimj - Spec(R) (p) denotes the supremum over the lengths of
increasing chains of primes in j-Spec(R) that start with p. In addition, in Theorem A
(respectively, Theorem C), we can get even stronger conclusions, provided some additional
assumptions hold. For instance, assume that there exists a fixed R-submodule N of M such
that, for all p ∈ Spec(R), Mp has a free Rp -summand (respectively, free Ep -summand) of
rank at least dim(R/p) + 1 that is contained in Np . Then, the global free R-summand of M
can be realized inside N as well. Furthermore, if for all p ∈ Spec(R) the rank of the free
summand of Mp is at least dim(R/p) + i for some fixed positive integer i, then the global
free summand of M can be realized of rank at least i.
This article is structured as follows: in Section 2, we present a version of Theorem A via
rather direct and elementary techniques. However, the methods we employ are not effective
enough to prove the result in its full generality. In Section 3, we introduce the notion of freebasic element, which allows us to prove Theorem A and Theorem B in their full generality.
We believe that free-basic elements are worth exploring and interesting on their own, as
they share many good properties both with basic elements and unimodular elements. In
Section 4, we generalize free-basic elements to the setup of R-submodules of HomR (M, R),
and prove Theorem C.
2

2. An elementary approach to Theorem A
Throughout this section, R is a commutative Noetherian ring with identity, and of finite
Krull dimension d. Given an ideal I of R, we denote by V (I) the closed set of Spec(R)
consisting of all prime ideals that contain I. Given s ∈ R, we denote by D(s) the open set
consisting of all prime ideals that do not contain s. Recall that {D(s) | s ∈ R} is a basis
for the Zariski topology on Spec(R), and that D(s) can be identified with Spec(Rs ). We
present an elementary approach to Theorem A, which will lead to a proof in the case when
R has infinite residue fields. We first need to recall some facts about the symmetric algebra
of a module. If M is a non-zero finitely generated R-module, we denote by SymR (M) the
symmetric algebra of M over R. Given a presentation
R n2

(aij )

/

R n1
/

M
/

0

then we can describe SymR (M), as an R-algebra, in the following way:
SymR (M) ∼
= R[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn1 ]/J,

where J =

n1
X

!

aij xi | 1 6 j 6 n2 .

i=1

When M is free of rank n, then SymR (M) is just a polynomial ring over R, in n indeterminates. Huneke and Rossi give a formula for the Krull dimension of a symmetric algebra.
Theorem 2.1 ([HR86], Theorem 2.6 (ii)). Let R be a ring which is the homomorphic image of
a Noetherian universally catenary domain of finite dimension. Let M be a finitely generated
R-module, then dim(SymR (M)) = max {dim(R/p) + µ(Mp )}.
p∈Spec(R)

Now, suppose that P is a finitely generated projective R-module, and suppose we have a
surjection Rn → P → 0. Let Q be its kernel. Applying (−)∗ := HomR (−, R) to the split
short exact sequence 0 → Q → Rn → P → 0 gives another short exact sequence
0
/

P∗
/

(Rn )∗ ∼
= Rn
/

Q∗
/

0.

This provides a natural way to view SymR (Q∗ ) as the homomorphic image of R[x1 , . . . , xn ] ∼
=
n
∗ ∼
SymR (R ). Moreover, as Q is projective, if m ∈ Max(R) is a maximal ideal, then (Q/mQ) =
Q∗ ⊗R R/m, where the first (−)∗ is over R/m while the second is over R. In addition, we have
SymR/m (Q∗ ⊗R R/m) ∼
= SymR (Q∗ ) ⊗R R/m. In fact, for any finitely generated R-module
M, we have SymR/m (M ⊗R R/m) ∼
= SymR (M) ⊗R R/m. To see this, one only needs to
n2
n1
notice that if R → R → M → 0 is a presentation of M as an R-module, then applying
− ⊗R R/m gives a presentation of M ⊗R R/m as an R/m-vector space. The following lemma
shows how the symmetric algebra can detect whether an element of a projective module is
locally a minimal generator or not.
Lemma 2.2. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, P be a finitely generated projective
R-module with generators η1 , . . . , ηn , and Q be the kernel of the surjective map Rn → P which
sends ei 7→ ηi . For any r1 , . . . , rn ∈ R and m ∈ Spec(R), we have r1 η1 + · · · + rn ηn ∈ mPm if
and only if (m, x1 − r1 , . . . , xn − rn ) is a maximal ideal of SymR (Q∗ ).
Proof. Checking that r1 η1 + · · · + rn ηn ∈ mPm is equivalent to checking that r1 η1 + · · · +
rn ηn = 0 in Pm /mPm ∼
= P/mP . Let κ := R/m. As P is projective, tensoring with κ
gives a short exact sequence 0 → Q/mQ → κn → P/mP → 0 of κ-vector spaces. Let
3

t = dimκ (P/mP ), and choose a basis for P/mP ∼
= κt . Let (aij ) be the t × n matrix
n
representing the onto map κ → P/mP . After dualizing, we see that Symκ ((Q/mQ)∗ ) ∼
=
P
κ[x1 , . . . , xn ]/J where J = ( ni=1 aji xi | 1 6 j 6 t). Furthermore, observe that the maximal
P
ideal (x1 − r1 , . . . , xn − rn ) ∈ Max(κ[x1 , . . . , xn ]) contains J if and only if ni=1 aji ri = 0 for
each 1 6 j 6 t. This happens if and only if (r1 , . . . , rn )(aij )T = 0, which in turn is equivalent
to (aij )(r1 , . . . , rn )T = 0. Finally, since (aij ) is the matrix representing κn → P/mP , this
happens if and only if r1 η1 + · · · + rn ηn = 0 in P/mP . Therefore, r1 η1 + . . . + rn ηn ∈ mPm if
and only if (x1 − r1 , . . . , xn − rn ) ∈ Max(Symκ (Q/mQ)∗ ) = Max(SymR (Q∗ ) ⊗ R/m), if and
only if (m, x1 − r1 , . . . , xn − rn ) ∈ Max(SymR (Q∗ )).

Using Lemma 2.2, we can give a proof of Serre’s Splitting Theorem 1.1 [Ser58, Theorem 1]
for algebras of finite type over an algebraically closed field. The main purpose of showing
this argument here is for the reader to get more familiar with the techniques that will be
employed and generalized later in this section. We thank Mohan Kumar for suggesting this
proof to us, and for pointing out how to generalize it to any finitely generated module in the
case when R is an affine algebra over an algebraically closed field.
Theorem 2.3. Let R be a d-dimensional ring of finite type over an algebraically closed field
k, and P be a finitely generated projective R-module whose rank at each localization at a
prime ideal is at least d + 1. Then P contains a free R-summand.
Proof. Let η1 , . . . , ηn be generators of P and Q be the kernel of the natural surjection Rn →
P . Then dim(SymR (Q∗ )) = max {dim(R/p) + µ((Q∗ )p )} by Theorem 2.1. Observe that
p∈Spec(R)

Q is a locally free R-module of rank equal to n − rank(P ). Therefore Q∗ is locally free
of the same rank, and thus dim(SymR (Q∗ )) 6 d + n − d − 1 = n − 1. Let I be the
ideal of k[x1 , . . . , xn ] defining the kernel of the composition k[x1 , . . . , xn ] ⊆ R[x1 , . . . , xn ] →
SymR (Q∗ ). As dim(k[x1 , . . . , xn ]) = n > dim(SymR (Q∗ )) it must be the case that I 6= 0 and,
by the Nullstellensatz, there must be a maximal ideal (x1 −r1 , . . . , xn −rn ) of k[x1 , . . . , xn ] not
containing I. In particular, for each m ∈ Max(R), the ideal (m, x1 −r1 , . . . , xn −rn ) cannot be
a maximal ideal of SymR (Q∗ ). By Lemma 2.2, r1 η1 + . . . + rn ηn is then a minimal generator
of Pm for each m ∈ Max(R). Therefore, the map R → P sending 1 7→ r1 η1 + · · · + rn ηn splits
locally at each m ∈ Max(R), and hence it splits globally.

We now present a generalization of the techniques just employed. This allows us to prove
Theorem A for rings R of which all the residue fields R/m, for m ∈ Max(R), are infinite.
This includes rings that contain an infinite field. We first prove an auxiliary Lemma.
Lemma 2.4. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring of finite dimension d such that all
residue fields R/m, for m ∈ Max(R), are infinite. Let R[x1 , . . . , xn ] be a polynomial algebra
over R, and let J ⊆ R[x1 , . . . , xn ] be an ideal with ht(J) > d + 1. For all integers 0 6
ℓ 6 n, there exist r1 , . . . , rℓ ∈ R such that either J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ − rℓ ) = R[x1 , . . . , xn ],
or ht(J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ − rℓ )) > d + ℓ + 1 (when ℓ = 0, the reader should think of
J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ − rℓ ) as being equal to J).
Proof. We proceed by induction on ℓ, where the case ℓ = 0 follows from our assumptions.
Let 1 6 ℓ 6 n. By inductive hypothesis, we can find r1 , . . . , rℓ−1 such that either J + (x1 −
r1 , . . . , xℓ−1 − rℓ−1 ) = R[x1 , . . . , xn ], or ht(J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ−1 − rℓ−1 )) > d + ℓ. In the first
case, any choice of rℓ will yield J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ − rℓ ) = R[x1 , . . . , xn ]. In the second case,
4

we have that J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ−1 − rℓ−1 ) is a proper ideal of height at least d + ℓ. Let
p1 , . . . , pt be the minimal primes over J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ−1 − rℓ−1 ). For each 1 6 j 6 t, let
S
qj = pj ∩ R, and let Hj := {r ∈ R | xℓ − r ∈ pj }. We want to show that tj=1 Hj 6= R. For
this matter, from now on we can deal only with those indices 1 6 j 6 t for which Hj 6= ∅.
In this case, we see that Hj = aj + qj , i.e., Hj is a coset determined by some aj ∈ R. For
each qj , choose a maximal ideal mj of R such that mj contains qj . We then have a finite
set Y = {mj ∈ Max(R) | Hj 6= ∅} of maximal ideals of R. For each m ∈ Y , since R/m is
infinite, there exists bm ∈ R such that bm + m ∈
/ {aj + mj | mj = m, 1 6 j 6 t}. By the
Chinese Remainder Theorem, there exists rℓ ∈ R such that rℓ + m = bm + m for all m ∈ Y .
In particular, rℓ avoids all cosets Hj , for 1 6 j 6 t. By definition of Hj , it follows that
S
xℓ − rℓ ∈
/ tj=1 pj , and this implies either that J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ − rℓ ) = R[x1 , . . . , xn ], or
that ht(J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ − rℓ )) > d + ℓ + 1, as desired.

Remark 2.5. In Lemma 2.4, if R contains an infinite field k, we can actually choose r1 , . . . , rℓ
to be any generic elements inside k. In fact, given any proper ideal I of R[x1 , . . . , xn ] and
any fixed f ∈ R[x1 , . . . , xn ], no two distinct r, s ∈ k ⊆ R can be such that both f − r ∈ I
and f − s ∈ I, otherwise the unit r − s would be inside I. Therefore, with the same notation
as in the inductive step in the proof of the Lemma, a generic choice rℓ ∈ k ⊆ R is such that
xℓ − rℓ avoids all the minimal primes p1 , . . . , pt over J + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xℓ−1 − rℓ−1 ).
We are now ready to present the main result of this section: Theorem A in the case
when R has infinite residue fields. As already pointed out in the introduction, we will prove
Theorem A in its full generality in Section 3, using different methods.
Theorem 2.6. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring of dimension d such that all residue
fields R/m, where m ∈ Max(R), are infinite. Let M be a finitely generated R-module such
that Mp has a free summand of rank at least d + 1 locally at every p ∈ Spec(R). Then M
has a free summand.
Proof. Suppose that M can be generated by n elements, and fix a surjective map π : Rn →
M. Our assumptions about local number of free summands of M guarantee that we can
cover Spec(R) with open sets D(s1 ), . . . , D(st ), such that for all 1 6 i 6 t the module
Msi has an Rsi -free summand of rank at least d + 1. In particular, for all i, we can find
maps Msi → Rsd+1
such that the compositions Rsni → Msi → Rsd+1
are split surjections.
i
i
n
d+1
Let Qi be the kernel of Rsi → Rsi → 0, so that we have a surjection Rsi [x1 , . . . , xn ] →
SymRsi (Q∗i ) → 0 at the level of symmetric algebras. For each i, consider the composition
R[x1 , . . . , xn ] → Rsi [x1 , . . . , xn ] → SymRsi (Q∗i ), and let ai ⊆ R[x1 , . . . , xn ] be its kernel. We
claim that ai is an ideal of height at least d + 1. In fact, let SymRsi (Q∗i ) ∼
= Rsi [x1 , . . . , xn ]/Ji
∗
be a presentation of the symmetric algebra of Qi over Rsi . Then Ji can be generated by
d + 1 linear forms that, possibly after a change of variables, can be regarded as d + 1 distinct
variables. Therefore Ji has height d + 1 in Rsi [x1 , . . . , xn ]. Let Ii ⊆ R[x1 , . . . , xn ] be any
ideal such that (Ii )si = Ji . Note that the ideal ai is just the saturation Ii : s∞
i = {f ∈
m
R[x1 , . . . , xn ] | si f ∈ Ii for some m ∈ N}, and this implies that ht(ai ) > ht(Ji ) = d + 1,
since no minimal primes of ai contain si .
Now consider the intersection a = a1 ∩ . . . ∩ an , which is then an ideal of height at least
d + 1 inside R[x1 , . . . , xn ]. Applying Lemma 2.4 to the ideal a with ℓ = n, we obtain
elements r1 , . . . , rn ∈ R such that either a + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xn − rn ) = R[x1 , . . . , xn ], or
5

ht(a + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xn − rn )) > d + n + 1. Since dim(R[x1 , . . . , xn ]) = d + n, the latter
cannot happen. This implies that the ideals ai + (x1 − r1 , . . . , xn − rn ) cannot be contained in
(m, x1 − r1 , . . . , xn − rn ), for any 1 6 i 6 t and any m ∈ Max(R) ∩ D(si). As a consequence,
(m, x1 − r1 , . . . , xn − rn ) is not a maximal ideal of SymRsi (Q∗i ) for any m ∈ Max(R) ∩ D(si ),
for 1 6 i 6 t. Now, Lemma 2.2 implies that the the image of (r1 , . . . , rn ) under Rn → M
generates a non-trivial free Rsi -summand locally on D(si ), for each i. Since the open sets
D(si ) cover Spec(R), it generates a global free summand of M.

3. Free-basic elements
Throughout this section, R denotes a commutative Noetherian ring with identity. The
purpose of this section is to prove Theorem A and Theorem B in full generality. We first
recall the notion of a basic set. We refer the reader to [EG85] for a more general and detailed
treatment of basic sets and basic elements. We also want to mention [Hun11] as a possible
source for references.
Definition 3.1. A subset X ⊆ Spec(R) is said to be basic if it is closed under intersections.
In other words, for any indexing set Λ and any family {pα }α∈Λ ⊆ X, whenever the intersection
T
I := α∈Λ pα is a prime ideal, then I is still an element of X.

Examples 3.2. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring.
(1) Spec(R) is trivially a basic set.
(2) Min(R) is a basic set. More generally, for an integer n ∈ N, the set X (n) = {p ∈
Spec(R) | ht(p) 6 n} is basic.
(3) The set j-Spec(R) = {p ∈ Spec(R) | p is an intersection of maximal ideals of R} is
basic.
Below is a list of properties about basic sets, which we leave as an exercise to the reader.
Proposition 3.3. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, and X be a basic set.
(1) If Y ⊆ X is closed, then Y is a basic set.
(2) Every closed set Y ⊆ X is a finite union of irreducible closed sets in X.
(3) If Y ⊆ X is an irreducible closed set then Y = V (p) ∩ X for some p ∈ X, i.e., Y has
a generic point.

Let X be a basic set, and M be a finitely generated R-module. An element x ∈ M is
called X-basic if x ∈
/ pMp , for all p ∈ X. Equivalently, x is a minimal generator of Mp , for
all p ∈ X. The notion of basic element was introduced by Swan in [Swa67], and later used
by Eisenbud and Evans for proving Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2. When P is a projective
R-module, any X-basic element x ∈ P produces a free summand hxip of Mp , for all p ∈ X.
In particular, when X = Spec(R) or just X = j-Spec(R), and P is projective, any X-basic
element produces a free summand hxi of P . In fact, in such case, the inclusion hxi ⊆ P splits
for all m ∈ Max(R) ⊆ X, hence it splits globally. When M is not necessarily projective,
an X-basic element x ∈ M may not generate a free summand, in general. In what follows,
given an R-module M and an element x ∈ M, we will denote hxi := (R · x). Similarly, given
a subset S ⊆ M, we will denote hSi := (R · S). We now introduce an invariant that keeps
track of the size of the local free summands of a module, rather than its local number of
generators, as in the theory of basic elements. Some of the arguments that we present have
a similar flavor as the treatment given for basic elements in [Hun11].
6

Definition 3.4. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
and S a subset of M. For a prime p ∈ Spec(R), we denote by δp (S, M) the largest integer n
satisfying one of the following equivalent conditions:
(1) There exists an Rp -free direct summand F of Mp such that the image of S under the
natural map Mp → F → F/pF generates a Rp /pRp -vector subspace of rank n.
(2) There exists an Rp -free submodule G of hSip of rank n such that G splits off Mp , i.e.,
there exists a surjective map Mp → G such that the composition G ⊆ hSip ⊆ Mp → G
is the identity.
When the module M is clear from the context, we will write δp (S) for δp (S, M).
Let p ∈ Spec(R) be a prime, M a finitely generated R-module, and x ∈ M. It follows
from our definition that δp ({x}) = 1 if and only if hxip ∼
= Rp , and the natural inclusion
hxip ⊆ Mp splits. Also, observe that if q ⊆ p, then δq (S) > δp (S). In fact, if Gp ⊆ hSip is a
free summand of Mp of rank δp (S), then Gq ⊆ hSiq is a free summand of Mq of rank δp (S).
Since δq (S) is defined as the maximum rank of any such modules, we have δq (S) > δp (S).
Lemma 3.5. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module, and
X a basic set. For any subset S of M and any integer t ∈ N, the set Yt := {p ∈ X | δp (S) 6 t}
is closed.
Proof. Observe that Yt = {p ∈ Spec(R) | δp (S) 6 t} ∩ X, so it is enough to show that
{p ∈ Spec(R) | δp (S) 6 t} is a closed set, i.e., that {p ∈ Spec(R) | δp (S) > t} is open. Let
δ (S)
δ (S)
p ∈ Spec(R) be such that δp (S) > t. By definition of δp (S), the identity map Rpp → Rpp
δ (S)
δ (S)
δ (S)
factors as Rpp
⊆ hSip ⊆ Mp → Rpp . The inclusion Rpp
⊆ hSip and the surjection
δp (S)
δp (S)
δp (S)
Mp → Rp
lift to maps R
→ hSi and M → R
, respectively. Let K be the kernel
δp (S)
and C be the cokernel of the composition R
→ hSi ⊆ M → Rδp (S) . As Kp = Cp = 0 and
both these modules are finitely generated, there is an element s ∈ R r p such that Kq = Cq
for all q ∈ D(s). Thus D(s) is an open neighborhood of p such that δq (S) > δp (S) > t for
all q ∈ D(s), which shows that {p ∈ Spec(R) | δp (S) > t} is indeed open.

Lemma 3.6. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
and X a basic set. For any subset S of M there exists a finite set of primes Λ ⊆ X such
that if p ∈ X r Λ, there exists q ∈ Λ such that q ( p, and δp (S) = δq (S).
Proof. For each t ∈ N the sets Yt := {p ∈ X | δp (S) 6 t} are closed by Lemma 3.5. Also,
observe that Yt = X for all t ≫ 0. The sets Yt are finite unions of irreducible closed subsets
by Proposition 3.3, and irreducible closed sets of X are of the form V (p) ∩X for some p ∈ X.
Let Λ be the finite collection of generic points of the finitely many irreducible components of
the finite collection of closed sets Yt , as t varies through N. Let p ∈ X r Λ and let t = δp (S),
so that p ∈ Yt by definition. Let q be the generic point of an irreducible component of Yt
which contains p. Then q ( p because q ∈ Λ. Also, t > δq (S) > δp (S) = t, which implies
the equality δq (S) = δp (S).

We now make the key definition of free-basic element.
Definition 3.7. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
and X a basic set. For a prime p ∈ X, we say that x ∈ M is a p-free-basic element for M
if hxip ∼
= Rp is free, and the inclusion hxip ⊆ Mp splits. We say that x is an X-free-basic
7

element for M if x is a p-free-basic element for all p ∈ X. If the module M is clear from the
context, we will just say that x is an X-free basic element.
Let X be a basic set, and p ∈ X be a prime. Let M be a finitely generated R-module,
and x ∈ M. Observe that the element x is p-free-basic if and only if δp ({x}) = 1. More
generally, for a prime p ∈ Spec(R), we will say that a finite subset S = {x1 , . . . , xn } of M
is a p-free-basic set (for M) if δp (S) > min{n, 1 + dimX (p)}. Here, dimX (p) denotes the
supremum of the length of a chain p = p0 ( p1 ( · · · ( pn with pi ∈ X for each i. Note
that, when X = Spec(R), we simply have dimX (p) = dim(R/p). We will say that S is an
X-free-basic set (for M) if S is a p-free-basic set (for M), for all p ∈ X.
Lemma 3.8. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
and X a basic set. Let S = {x1 , . . . , xn } ⊆ M be an X-free-basic set and (a, x1 ) ∈ R ⊕ M be
an X-free-basic element. Then there exist a1 , . . . , an−1 ∈ R such that
S ′ = {x′1 , x′2 , . . . , x′n−1 } = {x1 + aa1 xn , x2 + a2 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn }
is X-free-basic, and (a, x′1 ) ∈ R ⊕ M is still an X-free-basic element.
Proof. Let Λ be as in Lemma 3.6, we claim that for any choice of a1 , a2 . . . , an−1 ∈ R and
p ∈ X r Λ the set {x1 + aa1 xn , x2 + a2 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn } is p-free-basic. Indeed, let
a1 , . . . , an−1 ∈ R and S ′ = {x1 + aa1 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn }. Let F be a free Rp -module such
that the dimension of the subspace spanned by the image of the composition hS ′ ∪ {xn }ip =
hSip ⊆ Mp → F → F/pF generates a Rp /pRp -vector subspace of rank δp (S). Then the
image of hS ′ ip under this composition is an Rp /pRp -vector subspace of dimension at least
δp (S) − 1. Therefore δp (S ′ ) > δp (S) − 1. If p ∈ X r Λ then by Lemma 3.6 there is a q ∈ Λ
such that q ( p and δq (S) = δp (S). Hence
δp (S ′ ) > δp (S) − 1 = δq (S) − 1 > min{n, 1 + dimX (q)} − 1 > min{n − 1, 1 + dimX (p)}.
Suppose that Λ = {q1 , . . . , qm }, and arrange the primes qi in such a way that, for each
1 6 ℓ 6 m, qℓ is a minimal element of {q1 , . . . , ql }. We prove, by induction on ℓ > 0, that
there exist a1 , a2 , . . . , an−1 such that {x1 + aa1 xn , x2 + a2 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn } is qi -free
basic for all 1 6 i 6 ℓ. Note that, for ℓ = m, we get the desired claim for the lemma. When
ℓ = 0 we are done.
Note that, since (a, x1 ) is X-free-basic by assumption, any element of the form (a, x1 +az),
with z ∈ M, is X-free-basic as well. In fact, let p ∈ X. If a ∈
/ p, then (a, x1 + az) · Rp ⊆
(R ⊕ M)p splits, since a generates Rp . If a ∈ p, then (a, x1 + az) ∈ (R ⊕ M)p generates a
free summand if and only if (a, x1 ) does, since (a, x1 + az) ≡ (a, x1 ) modulo p(R ⊕ M)p . But
(a, x1 ) is p-free basic by assumption. Either way, (a, x1 + az) is p-free-basic for all p ∈ X.
By induction on ℓ, there exist a1 , . . . , an−1 ∈ R such that the set T := {x1 + aa1 xn , x2 +
a2 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn } is q-free-basic for each q ∈ {q1 , . . . , qℓ−1 }. If T happens to be qℓ free-basic as well, we set S ′ = T , and we are done. Else, δqℓ (T ) < min{n − 1, 1 + dimX (qℓ )}.
Let F be a free direct summand of Mqℓ such that the Rqℓ /qℓ Rqℓ -vector space spanned by
the image of T under the natural map Mqℓ → F → F/qℓ F has dimension δqℓ (T ). We may
assume, without loss of generality, that F ⊆ hT iqℓ . For each x ∈ M let x denote the image
of x in F/qℓ F . The condition that δqℓ (T ) < min{n − 1, 1 + dimX (qℓ )} implies that the
Rqℓ /qℓ Rqℓ -vector space spanned by {x1 + aa1 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn } has dimension strictly
smaller than n − 1. Thus for some 1 6 i 6 n − 1, the i-th element in the above set is in the
span of the the previous i − 1 elements. We distinguish two cases.
8

• Assume i 6= 1. Let r ∈ (q1 ∩ · · · ∩ qℓ−1 ) r qℓ and define
S ′ := {x1 + aa1 xn , . . . , xi + (ai + r)xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn }.
Since r ∈ Rrqℓ , and because xi + ai xn is in the span of the previous i−1 elements, the
set {x1 + aa1 xn , . . . , xi + (ai + r)xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn } spans the same Rqℓ /qℓ Rqℓ vector space as {x1 + aa1 xn , . . . , rxn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn } which, in turn, spans the
same Rqℓ /qℓ Rqℓ -vector space as {x1 , . . . , xn }.
• Now assume i = 1, which means that x1 + aa1 xn = 0 in F/qℓ F . We claim that the
element a is not inside qℓ . In fact assume, by way of contradiction, that a ∈ qℓ .
Then (0, x1 + aa1 x1 ) is qℓ -free-basic, because (a, x1 ) is qℓ -free-basic and (a, x1 ) ≡
(0, x1 + aa1 xn ) modulo qℓ (R ⊕ M)qℓ . Recall that F ⊆ hT iqℓ is a free summand of Mqℓ
of rank δqℓ (T ), and that the image of T under Mqℓ → F → F/qℓ F has Rqℓ /qℓ Rqℓ vector space dimension equal to δqℓ (T ). Set x′1 := x1 +aa1 xn ∈ T , and let ι : F → Mqℓ
and π : Mqℓ → F denote the natural inclusion and projection, respectively. The fact
that x′1 = 0 simply means that π(x′1 ) ∈ qℓ F . If x′1 ∈ F , then x′1 = πι(x′1 ) ∈ qℓ F , so
that (0, x′1 ) ∈ qℓ (R ⊕ M)qℓ , contradicting the fact that (0, x′1 ) is qℓ -free-basic. Thus,
we necessarily have x′1 ∈
/ F . Let y := x′1 − ιπ(x′1 ), and note that y ∈ ker(π). Since
(0, x′1 ) − (0, y) = (0, ιπ(x′1 )) ∈ qℓ (R ⊕ M)qℓ , we have that (0, y) is qℓ -free-basic as well.
This means that hyiqℓ ⊆ Mqℓ splits, and that hyiqℓ ∼
= Rqℓ . Because Mqℓ ∼
= ker(π) ⊕ F ,
′
and because y ∈ ker(π) splits out of Mqℓ , we have that F = hyiqℓ ⊕ F is a free direct
summand of Mqℓ . In addition, because x′1 ∈ T and ιπ(x′1 ) ∈ F ⊆ hT iqℓ , we conclude
that y ∈ hT iqℓ . Therefore F ′ ⊆ hT iqℓ is a free direct summand of Mqℓ , and F ′ has
rank δqℓ (T )+1, a contradiction. This shows that a ∈
/ qℓ . Let r ∈ (q1 ∩ . . . ∩ qℓ−1)rqℓ ,
and define
S ′ := {x1 + a(a1 + r)xn , x2 + a2 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn }.
Since ar ∈
/ qℓ and x1 + aa1 xn = 0, the set
{x1 + a(a1 + r)xn , . . . , xi + ai xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn }
spans the same Rqℓ /qℓ Rqℓ -vector space as {x1 , . . . , xn } inside F/qℓ F .
Either way, we obtain that δqℓ (S ′ ) > δqℓ (S). Since S is qℓ -free-basic, we have that δqℓ (S) >
min{n, 1 + dimX (qℓ )} > min{n − 1, 1 + dimX (qℓ )}. Moreover, r ∈ qi for each 1 6 i 6 ℓ − 1,
therefore we also have that δqi (S ′ ) = δqi (T ) > min{n−1, 1+dimX (qi)} for each 1 6 i 6 ℓ−1.
This completes the proof of the inductive step. As previously mentioned, the lemma now
follows from choosing ℓ = m.

Theorem 3.9. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, N ⊆ M finitely generated Rmodules, and X a basic set. Assume that, for each p ∈ X, Np contains a free Rp -module of
rank at least 1 + dimX (p) that splits off of Mp . Then there exists x ∈ N that is X-free-basic
for M. Moreover, if an element (a, y) ∈ R ⊕ N is X-free-basic for R ⊕ M, then x can be
chosen to be of the form x = y + az for some z ∈ N.
Proof. Assume that (a, y) ∈ R ⊕ N is X-free-basic for R ⊕ M. Complete y to a generating
set S = {y, y1, . . . , yn } for N, which is easily verified to be X-free-basic for M, given our
assumptions. Continued use of Lemma 3.8 implies that there exist a1 , . . . , an ∈ R such that
x = y + a(a1 y1 + . . . + an yn ) is X-free-basic for M, proving the last claim. As for the first
9

claim, notice that (1, y) ∈ R ⊕ N is always X-free-basic for R ⊕ M, for any y ∈ N. Thus
existence follows from the last claim.

Lemma 3.10. Let (R, m) be a local ring, M a finitely generated R-module, and S ⊆ M a
subset. Consider I(S, M) := {y ∈ hSi | f (y) ∈ m for all f ∈ HomR (M, R)} which is an
R-submodule of hSi. If λR (−) denotes the length as an R-module, then
!

hSi
δm (S, M) = λR
.
I(S, M)
Proof. Let δ := δm (S, M), and F ⊆ hSi be such that F ∼
= Rδ and M = F ⊕ T for some
R-module T ⊆ M. By a slight modification of the argument in [Hun13, Discussion 6.7],
we see that I(S, M) = mF ⊕ (T ∩ hSi) ∼
= mδ ⊕ (T ∩ hSi). Since hSi = (F ⊕ T ) ∩ hSi =
δ
∼
F ⊕ (T ∩ hSi) = R ⊕ (T ∩ hSi), we finally have
δ = λR

Rδ ⊕ (T ∩ hSi)
mδ ⊕ (T ∩ hSi)

!

= λR

F ⊕ (T ∩ hSi)
mF ⊕ (T ∩ hSi)

!

= λR

!

hSi
.
I(S, M)



Lemma 3.11. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
S a subset of M, and F ⊆ hSi a free R-module of rank i such that M = F ⊕ M ′ for
some M ′ ⊆ M. Let S ′ be the projection of S to M ′ along the internal direct sum. For all
p ∈ Spec(R), we have δp (S ′ , M ′ ) = δp (S, M) − i.
Proof. After localizing at p, we can assume that (R, m) is a local ring, with p = m. Let
I(S, M) be as in Lemma 3.10, and similarly define I(F, F ) and I(S ′ , M ′ ). Given that hSi =
F ⊕ hS ′ i ⊆ F ⊕ M ′ = M, it is straightforward to see that I(S, M) = I(F, F ) ⊕ I(S ′ , M ′ ),
which gives rise the following (actually splitting) short exact sequence
0
/

F
I(F, F )
/

hSi
I(S, M)
/

hS ′ i
I(S ′ , M ′ )
/

0.

Since F is a free R-module we have I(F, F ) = mF , because every minimal generator of F is
sent to a unit by some element of HomR (F, R). Therefore, Lemma 3.10 and the short exact
sequence above give
′

′

δm (S , M ) = λR

hS ′ i
I(S ′ , M ′ )

!

= λR

!

hSi
F
− λR
I(S, M)
mF




= δm (S, M) − i.



Theorem A is a first consequence of the existence of free-basic elements for modules that,
locally at every prime, have enough free summands.
Theorem 3.12. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, N ⊆ M finitely generated Rmodules, X = j-Spec(R), and let i be a positive integer. Assume that, for each p ∈ X, Mp
contains a free Rp -summand F (p) of rank at least i + dimX (p). Then M contains a free
R-summand F of rank at least i. In addition, if F (p) ⊆ Np for all p ∈ X, then F can be
realized inside N.
Proof. It suffices to prove the statement involving N, since the first part of the theorem is
nothing but the case N = M. We proceed by induction on i > 1. Let i = 1, and assume
that F (p) ⊆ Np is a free summand of Mp of rank at least 1 + dimX (p) for all p ∈ X. Let S
be a generating set for N. Our assumptions guarantee that δp (S, M) > 1 + dimX (p) for all
p ∈ X. Thus, there exists an element x ∈ N that is X-free-basic for M, by Theorem 3.9. In
10

particular, this means that hxim ∼
= Rm and the inclusion hxim ⊆ Mm splits for each maximal
ideal m ∈ Max(R). Hence F := hxi is a free R-submodule of N, and the inclusion F ⊆ M
splits globally. Now let i > 1. By the base case i = 1, there exists x ∈ N such that hxi ∼
=R
and M = hxi ⊕ M ′ for some R-module M ′ ⊆ M. Let S ′ = S ∩ M ′ . By Lemma 3.11, we have
that δp (S ′ , M ′ ) = δp (S, M) − 1 > i − 1 + dimX (p) for all p ∈ X, and by induction we conclude
that M ′ has a free summand F ′ ⊆ hS ′i ⊆ N of rank at least i − 1. Therefore F := hxi ⊕ F ′
is a free submodule of N of rank at least i, and it splits off of M.

Note that Theorem 3.12 recovers the classical version of Serre’s Splitting Theorem 1.1
[Ser58, Theorem 1]. Another consequence of Lemma 3.8 is Theorem B. That is, a cancellation
result for modules that, locally at each prime, have enough free summands.
Theorem 3.13. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
and X = j-Spec(R). Assume that, for each p ∈ X, the module Mp contains a free Rp summand of rank at least 1 + dimX (p). Let Q be a finitely generated projective R-module,
and N a finitely generated R-module such that Q ⊕ M ∼
= Q ⊕ N. Then M ∼
= N.
Proof. Since Q is projective, we can find another projective module Q′ such that Q⊕Q′ ∼
= Ra ,
for some integer a. We then obtain that Ra ⊕ M ∼
= Ra ⊕ N and, by induction on a, we
∼
may assume that R ⊕ M = R ⊕ N. Let α : R ⊕ N → R ⊕ M be an isomorphism, and set
α((1, 0)) = (a, x1 ). We want to show that the composition
R⊕N
(1, 0)

α

R⊕M
/
/

β

/

γ

R⊕M

(a, x1 )

/

R⊕M
/

(1, x)

η

/

R⊕M
/

(1, 0)

is an isomorphism, with β, γ and η to be defined later. Note that, since (1, 0) is X-free-basic in
R⊕M, and α is an isomorphism by assumption, we have that (a, x1 ) is X-free-basic in R⊕M.
Let {x1 , . . . , xn } be a set of generators of M, and recall that δp ({x1 , . . . , xn }) > 1 + dimX (p)
for all p ∈ X, by assumption. By Theorem 3.9, there exists an X-free-basic element x ∈ M
of the form x = x1 + az, for some z ∈ M. Define a map ϕ : R → M, by setting ϕ(1) = z.
Define β : R ⊕ M → R ⊕ M via the following matrix
"

1R 0
ϕ 1M

#

.

It is easy to check that β is an isomorphism. Note that β((a, x1 )) = (a, ϕ(a) + x1 ) =
(a, az + x1 ) = (a, x). Since x ∈ M is X-free-basic, we have that M ∼
= Rx ⊕ M ′ , for some
′
R-module M . Therefore, we may define an R-module map ψ : M → R as ψ(x) = 1 − a.
Define γ : R ⊕ M → R ⊕ M via the following matrix:
"

1R ψ
0 1M

#

.

The map γ is an isomorphism, and it is such that γ((a, x)) = (a + ψ(x), x) = (1, x). Finally,
consider the map θ : R → M, defined as θ(1) = −x. Define η : R ⊕ M → R ⊕ M via the
matrix:
"

1R 0
θ 1M
11

#

.

The map η is an isomorphism, and η(1, x) = (1, x + θ(1)) = (1, 0). Consider the composition
ǫ = η ◦ γ ◦ β ◦ α : R ⊕ N → R ⊕ M, which is an isomorphism such that ǫ((1, 0)) = (1, 0). We
then have a commutative diagram
0

R
/

/

∼
= idR

0

/

N✤

R

R⊕M

0

✤
✤


/

/

✤

∼
= ǫ


/

R⊕N

/

M
/

0

that forces the induced map N → M to be an isomorphism.



Bass’s Cancellation Theorem for projective modules, Theorem 1.2 [Bas64, Theorem 9.1],
now follows immediately from Theorem 3.13.
4. Free summands with respect to R-submodules of HomR (M, R)
Throughout this section, R denotes a commutative Noetherian ring with identity. Let M
be a finitely generated R-module. Theorem 3.12 provides a criterion for when M has a free
summand. Another way of saying this, it is a criterion that establishes when a surjective
R-linear map M → R exists. The purpose of this section is to establish Theorem C, which is
a generalization of Theorem A, and provides a criterion for when a surjective map M → R
exists, and can be chosen to be inside a given R-submodule E of HomR (M, R). The authors
use this results in [DSPY16] to establish the existence of a global F-signature of a Cartier
L
subalgebra of C R = e HomR (F∗e R, R).
We now describe the setup and the notions that we will work with. Let M be a finitely
generated R-module, and E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R). We say that a summand F
of M is a free E -summand if F ∼
= Rn is free and the projection ϕ : M → F ∼
= Rn is a direct
sum of elements of E . Observe that the choice of an isomorphism F ∼
= Rn does not affect
n
∼
whether or not the projection M → F = R is a direct sum of elements of E .
We now aim at defining free-basic elements with respect to R-submodules of HomR (M, R).
Following the approach of Section 3, given a subset S ⊆ M and a prime p ∈ Spec(R), we
denote by δpE (S, M) the largest integer n satisfying one of the following equivalent conditions:
(1) There exists a free Ep -summand F of Mp such that the image of S under the natural
map Mp → F → F/pF generates a Rp /pRp -vector subspace of rank n.
(2) There exists a free Ep -summand G of Mp of rank n which is contained in hSip .
Whenever M is clear from the context, we denote δpE (S, M) simply by δpE (S).
Lemma 4.1. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module, X
a basic set, and E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R). For any subset S of M and any integer
t ∈ N, the set Yt := {p ∈ X | δpE (S) 6 t} is closed.
Proof. As in the proof of Lemma 3.5, it is enough to show {p ∈ Spec(R) | δpE (S) > t} is open.
δ (S)
δ (S)
Let p ∈ X be such that δpE (S) > t. By definition of δpE (S), the identity map Rpp → Rpp
δ (S)

factors as Rpp

δE (S)

⊆ hSip ⊆ Mp → Rpp

δE (S)

where Mp → Rpp

δE (S)
i.e., Rpp
δpE (S)

δE (S)
Rpp

is a direct sum of elements

of Ep ,
is an Ep -summand. The map Mp →
is the localization of a map
M → R
, which is also a direct sum of elements in E . One may now proceed as in

Lemma 3.5.
12

Lemma 4.2. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
X a basic set, E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R), and S a subset of M. There exists a
finite set of primes Λ ⊆ X such that if p ∈ X r Λ, there exists q ∈ Λ such that q ( p and
δpE (S) = δqE (S).
Proof. Let Yt be as in Lemma 4.1. Take Λ to be the collection of the finitely many generic
points of the finitely many closed sets Yt as t varies in N. The rest of the proof is identical

to that of Lemma 3.6.
Definition 4.3. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
X a basic set, and E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R). We say that x ∈ M is a p-free-basic
element for M with respect to E if Rp ∼
= hxip and the natural inclusion hxi ⊆ M splits via
an element of Ep , when localized at p ∈ X. We say that x ∈ M is X-free-basic for M with
respect to E if x is p-free-basic for all p ∈ X. Whenever no confusion may arise, we will just
say that an element x ∈ M is X-free-basic with respect to E .
Observe that, if M is a finitely generated R-module, X is a basic set and p ∈ X is a prime,
then x ∈ M is p-free-basic with respect to E if and only if δpE ({x}) = 1. More generally, for
p ∈ Spec(R), we will say that a finite subset S = {x1 , . . . , xn } of M is a p-free-basic set (for
M) with respect to E if δpE (S) > min{n, 1 + dimX (p)}. We will say that S is an X-free-basic
set (for M) with respect to E if S is p-free-basic with respect to E for all p ∈ X.
The proofs of the following two lemmas are similar to those of the corresponding results
in Section 3. We include a sketch of the arguments for sake of completeness. Note that,
given an R-submodule E of HomR (M, R), we can view R ⊕ E ∼
= HomR (R, R) ⊕ E as an
∼
R-submodule of R ⊕ HomR (M, R) = HomR (R ⊕ M, R).
Lemma 4.4. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module, X
a basic set, E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R). Let S = {x1 , . . . , xn } ⊆ M be an X-freebasic set with respect to E and (a, x1 ) ∈ R ⊕ M be an X-free-basic element with respect to
R ⊕ E . There exist a1 , . . . , an−1 such that
S ′ = {x′1 , x′2 , . . . , x′n−1 } = {x1 + aa1 xn , x2 + a2 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn }
is X-free-basic with respect to E , and (a, x′1 ) is an X-free-basic element with respect to R⊕E .
Proof. Let Λ be as in Lemma 4.2. For any choice of a1 , . . . , an−1 ∈ R and p ∈ X r Λ, the
set {x1 + aa1 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn } is p-free-basic. In fact, it is enough to notice that, if we
let S ′ = {x1 + aa1 xn , . . . , xn−1 + an−1 xn }, then δpE (S ′ ) > δpE (S) − 1. If p ∈ X r Λ then by
Lemma 4.2 there exists q ∈ Λ such that q ( p and δqE (S) = δpE (S). Hence
δpE (S ′ ) > δpE (S) − 1 = δqE (S) − 1 > min{n, 1 + dimX (q)} − 1 > min{n − 1, 1 + dimX (p)}.
The rest of the proof is done by induction, and it is along the same lines as the proof of
Lemma 3.8 in Section 3. The only main difference is that δp (−) has to be replaced with
δpE (−), and all the maps Mp → Rp involved have to be elements of Ep . It is also worth noting
that if (a, x1 ) ∈ R ⊕ M is a p-free-basic element with respect to R ⊕ E , then for any z ∈ pM,
the element (a, x1 + z) is still p-free-basic with respect to R ⊕ E .

As an application of Lemma 4.4, we obtain the existence of free-basic elements with respect
to R-submodules E of HomR (M, R).
13

Theorem 4.5. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, N ⊆ M finitely generated Rmodules, X a basic set, and E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R). Assume that, for each
p ∈ X, Np contains a free Rp -submodule F (p) of rank at least 1 + dimX (p) that is a free
Ep -summand of Mp . Then there exists x ∈ N that is X-free-basic for M with respect to E .
Moreover, if an element (a, y) ∈ R ⊕ N is X-free-basic for R ⊕ M with respect to R ⊕ E ,
then x can be chosen to be of the form x = y + az, for some z ∈ N.
Proof. As for Theorem 3.9, the last claim follows from a repeated use of Lemma 4.4 on a
generating set S = {y, y1, . . . , yn } of N. For existence, note that the element (1, y) ∈ R ⊕ N
is X-free-basic for R ⊕ M with respect to R ⊕ E for all y ∈ N. Then use the last claim. 
We now state two lemmas that will allow us to set up an induction process in Theorem 4.8.
We do not include proofs, as the arguments are completely analogous to those of Lemma 3.10
and Lemma 3.11 from Section 3.
Lemma 4.6. Let (R, m) be a local ring, M a finitely generated R-module, S a subset of M,
and E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R). Consider I E (S, M) := {y ∈ hSi | f (y) ∈ m for all
f ∈ E }, which is an R-submodule of hSi. Then
δmE (S, M)

= λR

!

hSi
.
E
I (S, M)

Lemma 4.7. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, M a finitely generated R-module,
E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R), and S a subset of M. Suppose that F ⊆ hSi is a free
E -summand of M of rank i, so that we have a split surjection ϕ : M → F ∼
= Ri which is a
direct sum of elements in E . Define M ′ = ker(ϕ), so that we can write M = F ⊕ M ′ . Let
S ′ be the projection of S to M ′ along the internal direct sum, and E ′ be the projection of E
′
to HomR (M ′ , R). For all p ∈ Spec(R), we have δpE (S ′ , M ′ ) = δpE (S, M) − i.
Theorem C now follows from the existence of free-basic elements with respect to E .
Theorem 4.8. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring, N ⊆ M finitely generated Rmodules, E an R-submodule of HomR (M, R), and X = j-Spec(R). Assume that, for each
p ∈ X, Mp contains a free Ep -summand F (p) of rank at least i + dimX (p), for some positive
integer i. Then M contains a free E -summand F of rank at least i. Furthermore, if F (p) ⊆
Np for all p ∈ X, then F can be realized inside N.
Proof. It suffices to prove the statement involving N. We proceed by induction on i > 1.
If i = 1, then our assumptions guarantee that there exists x ∈ N that is X-free-basic for
M with respect to E , by Theorem 4.5. Thus, the inclusion Rm ∼
= hxim ⊆ Mm splits via
an element of Em , for all maximal ideals m ∈ Max(R). In particular, F := hxi is a free
R-submodule of N such that the inclusion F ⊆ M splits. We claim that the splitting map
M →F ∼
= R can be chosen to be inside E . In fact, consider the inclusion R ∼
= hxi ⊆ M
and apply the functor HomR (−, R). We get an induced map h : E ⊆ HomR (M, R) →
HomR (R, R) ∼
= R, and it suffices to show that h is surjective. This follows from the fact
that, for each m ∈ Max(R), the map hm : Em → Rm is surjective, because the element x is
m-free basic for M with respect to E . Now assume that i > 1. By the base case i = 1, there
exists an element x ∈ N with a splitting map ϕ : M → hxi ∼
= R that belongs to E . Define
M ′ = ker(ϕ), so that M = hxi ⊕ M ′ . Let S ′ be the projection of S to M ′ along the internal
direct sum, and E ′ be the projection of E to HomR (M ′ , R). By Lemma 4.7 we have that
14

′

δpE (S ′ , M ′ ) = δpE (S, M) − 1 > i − 1 + dimX (p), and by induction M ′ has a free E ′ -summand
F ′ ⊆ hS ′ i ⊆ N of rank at least i − 1. It follows that F := hxi ⊕ F ′ is a free E -summand of
M of rank at least i, that is also contained in N.

As a concluding remark we point out that, choosing E = HomR (M, R), we recover the
theory developed in Section 3. Therefore, the techniques introduced in Section 4 are indeed
a generalization of the theory developed in Section 3.
Acknowledgments
We thank Mohan Kumar for many helpful suggestions and ideas regarding the methods
used in Section 2. We also thank Craig Huneke for very useful discussions.
References
H. Bass. K-theory and stable algebra. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (22):5–60, 1964. 1,
12
[BST12] Manuel Blickle, Karl Schwede, and Kevin Tucker. F -signature of pairs and the asymptotic behavior of Frobenius splittings. Adv. Math., 231(6):3232–3258, 2012. 2
[DSPY16] Alessandro De Stefani, Thomas Polstra, and Yongwei Yao. Globalizing F-invariants. preprint,
2016. 2, 12
[EE73]
David Eisenbud and E. Graham Evans, Jr. Generating modules efficiently: theorems from algebraic K-theory. J. Algebra, 27:278–305, 1973. 1
[EG85]
E. Graham Evans and Phillip Griffith. Syzygies, volume 106 of London Mathematical Society
Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985. 6
[HR86]
C. Huneke and M. Rossi. The dimension and components of symmetric algebras. J. Algebra,
98(1):200–210, 1986. 3
[Hun11] Craig
Huneke.
Commutative
algebra
notes.
2011.
Available
at
http:// people.kth.se/ ~ads/ commalg-notes/ notes_3.pdf . 6
[Hun13] Craig Huneke. Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity and the F-signature. In Commutative algebra, pages
485–525. Springer, New York, 2013. 10
[Ser58]
J.-P. Serre. Modules projectifs et espaces fibrés à fibre vectorielle. In Séminaire P. Dubreil, M.-L.
Dubreil-Jacotin et C. Pisot, 1957/58, Fasc. 2, Exposé 23, page 18. Secrétariat mathématique,
Paris, 1958. 1, 4, 11
[Sta81]
J. T. Stafford. Generating modules efficiently: algebraic K-theory for noncommutative Noetherian
rings. J. Algebra, 69(2):312–346, 1981. 1, 2
[Swa67] Richard G. Swan. The number of generators of a module. Math. Z., 102:318–322, 1967. 1, 6
[Bas64]

Department of Mathematics, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm, 100 44,
Sweden
E-mail address: ads@kth.se
Department of Mathematics, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211
E-mail address: tmpxv3@mail.missouri.edu
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Georgia State University, 30 Pryor Street,
Atlanta, GA 30303
E-mail address: yyao@gsu.edu

15

