arXiv:1605.01305v1 [] 4 May 2016

A NOTE ON RINGS OF FINITE RANK
PETE L. CLARK
Abstract. The rank rk(R) of a ring R is the supremum of minimal cardinalities of generating sets of I as I ranges over ideals of R. Matson showed
that every n ∈ Z+ occurs as the rank of some ring R. Motivated by the result
of Cohen and Gilmer that a ring of finite rank has Krull dimension 0 or 1,
we give four different constructions of rings of rank n (for all n ∈ Z+ ). Two
constructions use one-dimensional domains, and the former of these directly
generalizes Matson’s construction. Our third construction uses Artinian rings
(dimension zero), and our last construction uses polynomial rings over local
Artinian rings (dimension one, irreducible, not a domain).

1. Introduction
1

For a module M over a ring R, let µ(M ) be the minimal cardinality of a set of
generators of M as an R-module, and let µ∗ (M ) be the supremum of µ(N ) as N
ranges over all R-submodules of M . We say M has finite rank if µ∗ (M ) < ℵ0 .
This implies that M is a Noetherian R-module. We define the rank rk(R) as µ∗ (R).
In particular, for n ∈ N, rk(R) = n means that every ideal of R can be generated
by n elements and some ideal of R cannot be generated by fewer than n elements.
This note is directly motivated by the following result.
Theorem 1.1. (Matson [Ma09])
a) For every N ∈ Z+ , there is a domain RN with rank(RN ) = N .
1
b) One may take RN to be a subring of the ring of integers of Q(2 N ).
Remark 1.2. Let ι : R → S be a ring map. For an R-module M , let ι∗ (M ) be the
S-module M ⊗ S. Then µ(ι∗ (M )) ≤ µ(M ). If every ideal of S is ι∗ (I) for some I,
we get rk(S) ≤ rk(R). This holds when ι is a quotient or a localization map.
For an R-module M and a prime ideal p of R, we put Mp = M ⊗ Rp and µp (M ) =
µ(Mp ). Remark 1.2 gives µp (M ) ≤ µ(M ). By way of a converse, we have:
Theorem 1.3. (Forster-Swan [Fo64] [Sw67])
Let M be a finitely generated module over the Noetherian ring R. Then
µ(M ) ≤

sup

(µp (M ) + dim R/p) .

p∈Spec R

Example 1.4. a) We have rk(R) = 0 iff R is the zero ring.
b) We have rk(R) = 1 iff R is a nonzero principal ring (every ideal is principal).
c) If R is a nonprincipal Dedekind domain, then rk(R) = 2: apply Forster-Swan.
Or: let I Q
be an ideal of Q
R, let 0 6= x ∈ R, and factor (x) as pa1 1 · · · par r . Then
r
ai ∼
∼
R/(x) = i=1 R/pi = ri=1 Rpi /(pi Rpi )ai is principal, so I = hx, yi for some
y ∈ I. Asano [As51] and Jensen [Je63] showed: if in a domain R, for all nonzero
ideals I and nonzero x ∈ I there is y ∈ I with I = hx, yi, then R is Dedekind.
1Here all rings are commutative and with multiplicative identity.
1

2

PETE L. CLARK

The aim of this note is to explore the class of rings of finite rank with an eye to
constructing further families with all possible finite ranks. We begin in §2 with the
case of domains. We review the pioneering work of Cohen and use it to deduce a
local-global principle for domains of finite rank: Theorem 2.4. In §3 we show that
given any PID A with fraction field F ) A and any field extension K/F of degree
N ∈ Z≥2 , there is a nonmaximal A-order in K of rank N , generalizing Theorem
1.1. We also construct, for any 2 ≤ n ≤ N , a Z-order in a degree N number field
with rank n. In §4 we consider the case of rings which are not domains. We give a
general discussion of Artinian rings (which always have finite rank) and show that
there are Artinian rings of rank n for any n ∈ Z+ . Finally we determine when a
polynomial ring has finite rank, show that for any local Artinian ring r, the rank
of r[t] is bounded above by the length of r, and show that we have equality when r
is moreover principal, so that e.g. for all n ∈ Z+ , Z/2n Z[t] has rank n.
2. Domains of Finite Rank
I.S. Cohen initiated the study of ranks of domains. We recall some of his results.
Theorem 2.1. (Cohen [Co50]) If R is a domain of finite rank, then dim R ≤ 1.
For R Noetherian and p ∈ Spec R, let k(p) be the fraction field of R/p; put
zp (R) = dimk(p) pRp /p2 Rp .
Then zp (R) ≥ dim Rp ; p is regular if equality holds, otherwise singular. Put
z(R) =

sup

zp (R).

p∈MaxSpec R

Suppose R is a one-dimensional Noetherian domain. Then by Krull-Akizuki [CA,
Thm. 18.7] the normalization R is Dedekind and Spec R → Spec R is surjective
and finite-to-one. By Example 1.4, if R = R then rk(R) ≤ 2 with equality iff R is
not principal. Henceforth we suppose R is not normal. Let
c = (R : R) = {x ∈ K | xR ⊂ R}
be the conductor of R: it is the largest ideal of R which is also an ideal of R. If p
∼
is regular then pR is also prime and Rp → RpR . We say R is nearly Dedekind
if c 6= 0; equivalently, if R is a finitely generated R-module. In a nearly Dedekind
domain, the singular primes are characterized as: the primes p such that p + c ( R;
the radicals of the ideals in a primary decomposition of c; or the primes of R lying
under primes of R which divide c. They are finite in number.
Theorem 2.2. (Cohen [Co50]) A nearly Dedekind domain has finite rank.
Let (R, m) be a one-dimensional local Noetherian domain. Then the sequence
{dimR/m mi /mi+1 }∞
i=1 is eventually constant [Sa78, p. 40]; its eventual value is the
multiplicity e(R) of R. We put ep (R) = e(Rp ) and e(R) = supp∈MaxSpec R ep (R).
Example 2.3. (Sally [Sa78, p. 5]) For a field k, put R = k[[t3 , t4 ]]. Then R
is a one-dimensional Noetherian local domain with maximal ideal p = ht3 , t4 i and
R/p = k. Moreover we have pi = ht3i , t3i+1 , t3i+2 i = t3i k[[t]] for all i ≥ 2, so
µ(p) = dimk p/p2 = 2; ∀i ≥ 2, µ(pi ) = dimk pi /pi+1 = 3.
Thus z(R) = 2 < 3 = e(R).
The following result computes the rank function in terms of the local multiplicities.

A NOTE ON RINGS OF FINITE RANK

3

Theorem 2.4. Let R be a one-dimensional, non-normal Noetherian domain. Then
rk(R) =

sup

rk(Rp ) = e(R).

p∈MaxSpec R

Proof. For all p ∈ MaxSpec R we have ep (R) ≤ rk(Rp ) and thus
e(R) ≤

sup

rk(Rp ).

p∈MaxSpec R

By Remark 1.2 we have
sup

rk(Rp ) ≤ rk(R).

p∈MaxSpec R

Let I be a nonprincipal ideal of R. The Forster-Swan Theorem gives
µ(I) ≤

sup

µ(IRp ).

p∈MaxSpec R

The domain Rp is one-dimensional local Cohen-Macaulay, so by [Sa78, Thm. 3.1.1]
we have µ(IRp ) ≤ ep (R). Thus µ(I) ≤ e(R) and so rk(R) ≤ e(R).

Remark 2.5. In Theorem 2.4 one can have rk(R) = ℵ0 [Co50, pp. 38-40].
3. Nonmaximal Orders
3.1. A First Example.
One knows examples of local nearly Dedekind domains R with multiplicity e(R)
any given n ∈ Z+ : e.g. [Wa73]. The following is perhaps the most familiar.
Example 3.1. For a field k and n ∈ Z+ , let
Rn = k[[tn , tn+1 , . . . , t2n−1 ]] = k[[tn ]] + tn k[[t]] = k + tn k[[t]].
Then Rn is local nearly Dedekind with maximal ideal m = htn , . . . , t2n−1 i = tn k[[t]]]
and R/m = k. For i ∈ Z+ we have mi = htin , . . . , t(i+1)n−1 i = tin k[[t]], so
rk(R) = e(R) = lim dimR/m mi /mi+1 = lim n = n = z(R).
i→∞

i→∞

3.2. Nonmaximal Orders I: Maximal Rank.
Let A be a PID with fraction field F , and let K/F be a field extension of degree N ∈ Z≥2 . An A-order in K is an A-subalgebra R of K which is finitely
generated as an A-module and such that F ⊗A R = K. We say R is an A-order
of degree N. The structure theory of modules over a PID implies R ∼
=A AN .
Let R be an A-order in K. Then its normalization R is the integral closure of
A in K. By Krull-Akizuki, R is a Dedekind domain. If R is finitely generated as
an A-module then it is an R-order in K, the unique maximal order. It can happen
that R is not a finitely generated A-module, but R is finitely generated if K/F is
separable or A is finitely generated over a field.
Remark 3.2. Let A be a PID, not a field, with fraction field F , and let K/F be a
field extension of degree N ∈ Z≥2 . If the integral closure S of A in K is not finitely
generated as an A-module, then K admits no normal A-order. But it always admits
some A-order: start with an F -basis of K, scale to get an F -basis α1 , . . . , αN of
elements integral over A, and take S = A[α1 , . . . , αN ].

4

PETE L. CLARK

Proposition 3.3. Let N ∈ Z≥2 , let A be a PID, and let R be a non-normal A-order
of degree N . If there is p ∈ MaxSpec R such that zp (R) = N , then rk(R) = N .
Proof. Because R is free of rank N as a module over the PID A, every ideal of I
of R is a free R-module of rank at most N and thus µ(I) ≤ N . so rk(R) ≤ N . On
the other hand rk(R) ≥ ep (R) ≥ zp (R) = N .

We say an A-order in K has maximal rank if rk(R) = N = [K : F ].
Theorem 3.4. Let A be a PID with fraction field F ) A, and let K/F be a field
extension of degree N ∈ Z≥2 . Then there is an A-order R in K of maximal rank.
Proof. By Remark 3.2, there is an A-order S in K. Let x be a nonzero, nonunit in
A, so x = pa1 1 · · · par r where p1 , . . . , pr are nonassociate prime elements. Put
R = R(S, x) = A + xS.
We claim: (i) R is an A-order; (ii) for 1 ≤ i ≤ r there is a unique pi ∈ Spec R with
pi ∩ A = (pi ); and (iii) zpi (R) = N for all i. Assuming the claim, Proposition 4.2
gives rk(R) = N . We show the claim:
(i) Certainly R is a subring of K. If α1 = 1, α2 , . . . , αN is an A-basis for S,2
then 1, xα2 , . . . , xαN is an A-basis for Rx . So R is an A-order in K.
(ii) Fix 1 ≤ i ≤ r and define pi = pi A + xS. Then pi is an ideal of R and
R/pi ∼
= A/(pi ) is a field, so pi is a prime ideal of R containing p. Let q be a prime
ideal of R such that q ∩ A = (pi ). Then since pi | x we have
p2i = (pi A + xS)2 = p2i A + pi xS + x2 S = p2i A + pi xS ⊂ pi R ⊂ q.
Since q is prime we get q ⊃ pi and thus (since dim R = 1) q = pi .
(iii) Since pi , xα2 , . . . , xαN is an A-basis for pi and p2i , pi x2 , . . . , pi xN is an Abasis for p2i , we have pi /p2i ∼
=A (A/(pi ))N . Thus for all 1 ≤ i ≤ r we have
zpi (R) = dimR/pi pi /p2i = dimA/(pi ) (A/(pi ))N = N.



Remark 3.5. a) If R is a PID with fraction field F ) R, then F admits a degree
1
N field extension for all N ∈ Z≥2 : for (p) ∈ MaxSpec R, we can take K = F (p N ).
b) The R = A + xS construction is modelled on [Co, Thm. 3.15].
Example 3.6. Let k be a field. For n ∈ Z≥2 put A = k[[tn ]], so F = k((tn )),
and let K = k((t)). Let S = k[[t]], the maximal A-order in K. Then R(S, tn ) =
k[[tn ] + tn k[[t]] is the ring Rn of Example 3.1.
1

1

Example 3.7. For n ∈ Z≥2 put A = Z, K = Q(2 n ), S = Z[2 n ] and x = 2. Then
n+1
n+2
2n−1
R = R(S, x) = Z[2 n , 2 n , . . . , 2 n ] has rank n, and it is the order in K that
Matson used to prove Theorem 1.1b).
3.3. Nonmaximal Orders II: Pullbacks and Locally Maximal Orders.
Let A be a DVR with fraction field F and residue field R/m = k. Let l/k be
a separable field extension of degree d ∈ Z≥2 , let K/F be the corresponding degree
n unramified (hence separable) field extension, and let S be the integral closure of A
in K, so S is a DVR with maximal ideal m (say) and S/m = l. Let q : S → l be the
quotient map, and put R = q −1 (k). By [AM92, pp. 35-36] and the Eakin-Nagata
Theorem [CA, Cor. 8.31], R is local nearly Dedekind with normalization S and an
2We are permitted to take α = 1 by “Hermite’s Lemma” [CA, Prop. 6.14].
1

A NOTE ON RINGS OF FINITE RANK

5

A-order in K of rank d. In loc. cit., Anderson and Mott show m = q −1 (0) = m
and R/m = k. Finally, m/m2 = m/m2 is a one-dimensional l-vector space hence a
d-dimensional k = R/m-vector space, so Theorem 3.4 applies: we have rk(R) = d.
Theorem 3.8. For r ∈ Z+ , prime numbers p1 , . . . , pr and n1 , . . . , nr ∈ Z≥2 with
maxi ni = n, there is a degree N number field K and a Z-order R in K with exactly
r singular primes p1 , . . . , pr , such that epi (R) = ni for all i. Thus rk(R) = n.
Proof. Step 1: The construction of K and R is essentially given in [CGP15, §3.23.3]; the only difference is that in that construction one inverts all the regular primes
to get a semilocal domain. So we will content ourselves with a sketch. For 1 ≤ i ≤ r,
let Qpni i be the unramified extension of Qpi of degree ni . By weak approximation
/ Krasner’s Lemma there is a number field K of degree N and primes P1 , . . . , Pr
such that KPi ∼
= Qpni i for all i. The local degree [KPi : Qpi ] = ni is assumed (only)
to be at most N ; when ni < N this is handled by having other primes of ZK lying
over pi . We have
ZK /P1 · · · Pr ∼
=

r
Y

ZK /Pi ∼
=

Qr

i=1

Fpni .
i

i=1

i=1

Let q : ZK →

r
Y

Fpni be the corresponding quotient map. Then we take
i

R = q −1 (

r
Y

Fpi ).

i=1

∼ F ni . Then (as
For 1 ≤ i ≤ r, let pi = Pi ∩ R and let qi : (ZK )Pi → (ZK )Pi /Pi =
pi
is shown in detail in loc. cit.) for all i, the ring Rpi is the pullback qi−1 (Fpi ), and
thus is local nearly Dedekind with epi (R) = e(Rpi ) = [Fpni : Fpi ] = ni .
i
Step 2: We have – e.g. using CRT as above – that p1 , . . . , pr are the only singular
primes of R, so
z(R) = max ni = n.
1≤i≤r

d
For 1 ≤ i ≤ r, let R
pi denote the pi -adic completion of Rpi . Because there is a
d
unique prime of R lying over pi (“analytically irreducible”), R
pi is itself a onedimensional local Noetherian domain, with fraction field Kpi , and moreover we
d
d
d
have e(Rpi ) = e(R
pi ) and z(Rpi ) = z(Rpi ) = ni . But Rpi is a Zpi -order in Kpi of
degree ni , so Theorem 3.4 applies to give
d
d
d
rk(Rpi ) = e(Rpi ) = e(R
pi ) = rk(Rpi ) = z(Rpi ) = z(Rpi ) = zp (R)
and thus
rk(R) = max rk(Rpi ) = max zpi (R) = max ni = n.
1≤i≤r

1≤i≤r

1≤i≤r



Remark 3.9. a) There is an analogue of Theorem 3.8 with Z replaced by Fq [t].
b) One would like to take n = 1 in Theorem 3.8! Unfortunately at present we cannot
prove that there are infinitely many number fields with class number one: this is
perhaps the most (in)famous open problem in algebraic number theory.

6

PETE L. CLARK

4. More Rings of Finite Rank
4.1. A Trichotomy.
Theorem 4.1. a) Let R = R1 × · · · × Rn be a finite direct product of rings. Then
rk(R) = max rk(Ri ).
i

b) (Gilmer) For a Noetherian ring R, the following are equivalent:
(i) R has finite rank.
(ii) For all minimal primes p ∈ Spec R, the ring R/p has finite rank.
c) (Cohen-Gilmer) A ring of finite rank has dimension zero or one.
Proof. a) Every ideal in R1 × · · · × Rn is of the form I1 × · · · × In for ideals Ii of
Ri . b) This is [Gi72, Thm. 2]. c) Apply Theorem 2.1 and part b).

So if R is a ring with rk(R) ∈ Z+ , exactly one of the following holds:
• R is Noetherian of dimension zero, i.e., Artinian;
• R is a Noetherian domain of dimension one;
• R is Noetherian of dimension one and not a domain.
We treated domains in §3, and we will discuss Artinian rings in §4.2. This leaves us
with rings which are one-dimensional Noetherian and not domains. One can show
that there are such rings of all ranks quite cheaply: if R is a domain of rank n ∈ Z+
then Theorem 4.1a) gives rk(R × R) = n. The more interesting case is when the
localization of R at some minimal prime is not a domain, so in particular when R
has a unique minimal prime, which is nonzero. A good example is a polynomial
ring over a local Artinian ring. In §4.3 we study the ranks of polynomial rings.
4.2. Artinian Rings.
Let r be an Artinian ring. We denote by ℓ(r) the length of r as an r-module,
which is finite. We denote by n(r) the nilpotency index of r: the least n ∈ Z+
such that if x ∈ r is nilpotent then xn = 0.
Proposition 4.2. Let r be an Artinian ring.
a) We have rk(r) ≤ ℓ(R).
b) If ℓ(r) ≥ 2 (i.e., if r is nonzero and not a field), then rk(r) ≤ ℓ(r) − 1.
Proof. The result is clear when r is the zero ring or is a field, so assume ℓ(r) ≥ 2. If
r is principal then rk(r) = 1 ≤ ℓ(r) − 1. If r is not principal, then there is an ideal I
with 2 ≤ µ(I) ≤ ℓ(I), and such an ideal is necessarily proper, so ℓ(r) ≥ ℓ(I) + 1. 
The following result shows that the bound of Proposition 4.2b) is sharp.
Corollary 4.3. Let n ∈ Z≥2 . Then:
a) For any field k, there is an Artinian k-algebra of rank n and length n + 1.
b) There is a finite ring R of rank n and length n + 1.
Proof. Let R be a non-normal domain of finite rank n with a maximal ideal p such
that dimR/p p/p2 = n. Then R/p2 is Artinian, of rank n and length n+1. Taking R
as in Example 3.6 gives part a), and taking R as in Example 3.7 gives part b). 

A NOTE ON RINGS OF FINITE RANK

7

4.3. Polynomial Rings of Finite Rank.
Next we explore polynomial rings of finite rank. For any nonzero ring r, a polynomial ring over r in at least two indeterminates has Krull dimension at least 2 and
thus has infinite rank. So we are reduced to the case of r[t].
Theorem 4.4. For a ring r, the following are equivalent:
(i) The polynomial ring r[t] has finite rank.
(ii) The ring r is Artinian.
Proof. (i) =⇒ (ii): Suppose r[t] has finite rank. Then r[t] is Noetherian, hence so
is r. Thus dim r[t] = 1 + dim r. By Theorem 2.1 we have dim r = 0, os r is Artinian.
(ii) =⇒ (i): If r is Artinian, there are local Artinian rings r1 , . . . , rr such that
r∼
= r1 × · · · × rr , and then r[t] ∼
= r1 [t] × · · · × rr [t]. So Theorem 4.1a) reduces us to
showing: a polynomial ring r[t] over a local Artinian ring (r, m) has finite rank. The
ring r[t] is Noetherian, with unique minimal prime mr[t]. Since r[t]/mr[t] = (R/m)[t]
is a PID, the ring r[t] has finite rank by Theorem 4.1b).

Theorem 4.5. Let r be an Artinian local ring of length ℓ, and let R = r[t]. Then
rk R ≤ ℓ.
Proof. Let p be the unique prime ideal of r, let k = r/p. Then P = p[t] is the
unique minimal prime of R. By Theorem 4.4, R has finite rank. The main input
was Theorem 4.1b), and we will get the upper bound rk R ≤ ℓ by following Gilmer’s
proof. For 1 ≤ i ≤ ℓ, let
Ri = R/P i = r[t]/pi r[t] = r/pi [t].
We will show inductively that rk Ri is at most the length ℓ(r/pi ) of r/pi .
Base Case (i = 1): The ring R1 = r/p[t] = k[t] is a PID, thus rk R1 = 1 = ℓ(k).
Inductive Step: Suppose 1 ≤ i < ℓ and rk Ri ≤ ℓ(r/pi ). Consider the exact sequence
of R-modules
0 → P i /P i+1 → R/P i+1 → R/P i → 0.
For any surjective homomorphism of rings R → S, the rank µ∗ (S) as an R-module
is equal to its rank rk S as a ring. Thus our inductive hypothesis gives µ∗ (R/P i ) ≤
ℓ(r/pi ). Moreover the rank of P i /P i+1 as an R-module is its rank as an R/P = k[t]module. By [Gi72, Prop. 2] we have
µ∗ (P i /P i+1 ) ≤ rk(k[t])µR (P i /P i+1 ) = µr (pi /pi+1 ) = ℓ(pi /pi+1 ).
By [Gi72, Prop. 1] we have
rk Ri+1 = µ∗ (R/P i+1 ) ≤ µ∗ (P i /P i+1 )+µ∗ (R/P i ) ≤ ℓ(pi /pi+1 )+ℓ(r/pi ) = ℓ(r/pi+1 ),
completing the induction. Since the nilpotency index of r is at most ℓ, we have
rk R = rk r[t] = rk r/pℓ [t] = rk Rℓ ≤ ℓ(r/pℓ ) = ℓ(r) = ℓ.



Since an Artinian ring is a finite product of local Artinian rings, Theorem 4.5
implies: for any Artinian ring r, the rank of r[t] is bounded above by the maximum
length of the local Artinian factors of r.
Corollary 4.6.
Q Let r be a nonzero principal Artinian ring, which we may decompose as r = ri=1 ri , with each ri a local Artinian principal ring. For 1 ≤ i ≤ r,
let ni be the length of ri (which coincides with its nilpotency index), and let n =
max1≤i≤r ni . Then rk r[t] = n.

8

PETE L. CLARK

Proof. We easily reduce to the case in which r is local with maximal ideal p = (π).
Theorem 4.5 gives rk r[t] ≤ n. Let m = hπ, ti, so m is a maximal ideal of r[t] and
R/m = r/πr = k, say. We claim that the ideal mn−1 = hπ n−1 , π n−2 t, . . . , πtn−2 , tn−1 i
requires n generators. Indeed, observe that for a1 , . . . , an ∈ r× , a1 π n−1 + a2 π n−2 t +
. . . + an tn−1 cannot be expressed as an r-linear combination of terms π i tj with
i + j ≥ n, so dimk mn−1 /mn = n and µ(mn−1 ) = n.

Remark 4.7. a) Theorem 4.5 implies: if A is a PID, π ∈ R a prime element
and n ∈ Z+ , then rk A/π n A[t] = n. In fact this is equivalent: every local principal
Artinian ring is a quotient of a PID [Hu68, Cor. 11]. P. Pollack has shown me a
thoroughly elementary proof that rk A/π n A[t] ≤ n.
b) In particular, for a prime number p and n ∈ Z+ we have
rk Z/pn Z[t] = n.
The case p = n = 2 appears in Matson’s thesis [Ma08, p. 44, Example 1.3.15]. Her
proof uses that Z/4Z has a unique nonzero zero-divisor. The only other ring with
this property is Z/2Z[t]/(t2 ), so this argument is rather specialized. Matson’s result
was our motivation for finding Theorem 4.5.
References
[AM92]

D.D. Anderson and J.L. Mott, Cohen-Kaplansky domains: integral domains with a finite
number of irreducible elements. J. Algebra 148 (1992), 17–41
[As51]
K. Asano, Über kommutative Ringe, in denen jedes Ideal als Produkt von Primidealen
darstellbar ist. J. Math. Soc. Japan 3, (1951), 82-90.
[CA]
P.L. Clark, Commutative Algebra. http://math.uga.edu/~ pete/integral2015.pdf
[CGP15] P.L. Clark, S. Gosavi and P. Pollack, The number of atoms in an atomic domain.
http://alpha.math.uga.edu/~ pete/CGP15.pdf
[Co]
K. Conrad, The conductor ideal. http://www.math.uconn.edu/~ kconrad/blurbs/gradnumthy/conductor.pdf
[Co50]
I.S. Cohen, Commutative rings with restricted minimum condition. Duke Math. J. 17
(1950), 27–42.
[Fo64]
O. Forster, Über die Anzahl der Erzeugenden eines Ideals in einem Noetherschen Ring.
Math. Z. 84 (1964), 80-87.
[Gi72]
R. Gilmer, On commutative rings of finite rank. Duke Math. J. 39 (1972), 381-383.
[Hu68] T.W. Hungerford, On the structure of principal ideal rings. Pacific J. Math. 25 (1968),
543-547.
[Je63]
C.U. Jensen, On the characterizations of Prüfer rings. Math. Scand. 13 (1963), 90-98.
[Ma08] A. Matson, Results Regarding Finite Generation, Near Finite Generation and the
Catenary Degree. PhD thesis, North Dakota State University, 2008.
[Ma09] A. Matson, Rings of finite rank and finitely generated ideals. J. Commut. Algebra 1
(2009), 537-546.
[Sa78]
J.D. Sally, Numbers of generators of ideals in local rings. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New
York-Basel, 1978.
[Sw67] R.G. Swan, The number of generators of a module. Math. Z. 102 (1967), 318-322.
[Wa73] K. Watanabe, Some examples of one dimensional Gorenstein domains. Nagoya Math.
J. 49 (1973), 101–109.
Department of Mathematics, Boyd Graduate Studies Research Center, University
of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA

