arXiv:1301.2381v2 [] 29 Jun 2013

ON DUAL F-SIGNATURE
AKIYOSHI SANNAI

Abstract. We define the dual F-signature of modules, which is
equivalent to the F-signature if the module is the base ring. By using this invariant, we give characterizations of regular, F-regular,
F-rational, and Gorenstein singularities.

1. Introduction
Let R be complete d-dimensional reduced Noetherian local ring
with prime characteristic p > 0 and perfect residue field k = kp . There
is the Frobenius map F : R → R sending r to rp . For e ∈ N the inclue
sion R ⊆ R1/p into the corresponding ring of pe -th roots of elements
of R is naturally identified with the e-th iterate of the Frobenius ene
domorphism. The R-module R1/p has important information about
e
e
the singularity of R. Write R1/p = R⊕a ⊕ Me as R-modules where
Me has no free direct summands. The number ae is called the e-th
Frobenius splitting number o f R. Kunz showed that ae = ped holds
for some e if and only if R is regular [Kun69]. This result also tells
us that the ratio of the rank of the free direct summand aq to the
e
rank of R1/p = ped reflects the distance to the regularity. We define
the F-signature by the asymptotic behavior of the sequence {ae /pde },
namely, s(R) = lime→∞ paede . The F-signature first appeared implicitly
in the work of K. Smith and M. Van den Bergh [SVdB97], and its formal study was started in [HL02]. Though the existence of the limit
had been open for several years, K.Tucker showed the existence in
general [Tuc].
C. Huneke and G. J. Leuschke showed that s(R) ≤ 1 and the equality
holds if and only if R is regular[HL02]. In their paper, they believed that s(R) characterizes F-rationality of R by its positivity. But
I. Aberbach and G. J. Leuschke showed s(R) > 0 if and only if R is
strongly F-regular. In this paper, we prove that what they believe
Date: July 22, 2013.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 14J45; Secondary 13A35, 14B05,
14E30.
Key words and phrases. F-signature, F-regular, F-rational.
1

2

A. SANNAI

is the right idea, namely, F-rationality is characterized by how the
canonical module relates to iterated Frobenius powers. To do this,
we extend this invariant s(R) to modules.
Definition 1.1. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite local ring of characteristic p > 0 and M be an R-module. For each natural number e, put
q = pe , α = logp [k : kp ], and bq = max{ n | ∃ Fe∗ M ։ Mn } and define
s(M) = lim sup

bq

qdimR+α
We call bq the F-sur jective number o f M and call s(M) the dual Fsignature o f M.
e→∞

The point is that though the F-signature depends only on the Rmodule structure of Fe∗ R, the dual F-signature depends not on the
R-module structure of Fe∗ M but on the relative structure of Fe∗ M and
M. It is easy to see the dual F-signature of R is equivalent to Fsignature. By using dual F-signature, we have the characterization
of the singularities of R.
Theorem 1.2. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite Cohen-Macaulay local ring
of characteristic p > 0 and ωR be the canonical module, then the following
hold:
(1) The following are equivalent.
(a) R is regular.
(b) s(R) = 1
(c) s(ωR ) = 1
(2) R is strongly F-regular if and only if s(R) > 0
(3) Assume k is infinite, then R is F-rational if and only if s(ωR ) > 0
(4) s(ωR ) ≥ s(R)
(5) Futhermore, assume s(ωR ) > 0, then
R is Gorenstein if and only if s(ωR ) = s(R)
Remark 1.3. The F-finiteness of R implies the existence of the dualizing complex by Gabber [G04]. Therefore, there always exists a
canonical module under the assumption in the theorem above.
Remark 1.4. Though the theorem is only for absolute version, we can
also generalize F-signature of pair, F-splitting ratio, and s-dimension
in the dual situation. See the section 4.
Acknowledgments. The author would like to express his gratitude to
Professor Mitsuyasu Hashimoto for valuable discussions and helpful
comments. The author would like to thank Professor Vasudevan
Srinivas and Professor Kenichi Yoshida for examples about the dual

ON DUAL F-SIGNATURE

3

F-signature. The author also would like to thank Professor Yujiro
Kawamata for his suggestion about pair of the dual F-signature. The
author is partially supported by JSPS postdoctoral fellow.
2. preliminary
We first review the theory of Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity. Let (R, m, k)
be a local Noetherian ring of prime characteristic p, I an m-primary
ideal and M an finitely generated R-module. The Hilbert–Kunz function of M along I is the function taking an integer n to the length of
n
n
R/I[p ] ⊗ M, where I[p ] is the ideal generated by all the pn th powers of
elements of I. The Hilbert–Kunz multiplicity of M along I, denoted
l(R/I[q] ⊗M)
eHK (I, M), is lim
, where l(M) is the length of M. The limit
qd
n
q=p →∞

always exists by the following theorem .
Theorem 2.1. [Mon83] Suppose (R, m, k) is a local ring of dimension d
and characteristic p > 0. If I is any m-primary ideal and M is a finitely
generated R-module, then the limit
1
[pe ]
⊗ M)
l
(R/I
R
R
e→∞ ped

eHK (I; M) := lim

exists and is called the Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity of M along I.
We need the following result which is special case of Theorem 8.17
of [HH90]:
Theorem 2.2. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced, F-finite local ring of characteristic
p > 0. Let I ⊆ J be two m-primary ideals. Then I∗ = J∗ if and only if
eHK (I, R) = eHK (J, R). (Here I∗ denotes the tight closure of I.)
We note that the assumption concerning test elements in [HH90,
Theorem 8.17] is satisfied in this case since the ring is reduced, local
and F-finiteness implies excellentness . See [HH94, Theorem 6.1].
We also need the following proposition in [Hun96].
Proposition 2.3. Let (R, m, k) be a local Noetherian ring of characteristic
p > 0 and dimension d. Let M, N be finitely generated R-modules, and let
I be an m-primary ideal.
(1) If dimM < d, then l(M/I[q] M) = O(qd−1 ) and thus eHK (I, M) = 0.
(2) Let W be the complement of the set of minimal primes Q such that
dim(R/Q) = d. If MW  NW ,
(M/I[q] M) − l(N/I[q] N) = O(qd−1 )
In paticular, eHK (I, M) = eHK (I, N).

4

A. SANNAI

For the proofs, we need to consider about the minimal difference
of Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity along some ideals. Though the minimal difference of Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity along m-primary ideals
(called minimal relative Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity) is introduced by
K.-i. Watanabe and K. Yoshida [WY04], We need the ”parameter
ideal” version of minimal relative Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity. The
following definition and theorem are due to M. Hochster and Y. Yao
[HY].
Definition 2.4. Let (R, m, k) be a local ring of prime characteristic
p > 0 and M be a finitely generated R-module. Define (here s.o.p.
stands for system of parameters)
rR(M) = inf{eHK ((x), M) − eHK ((x, ∆), M)| x is a s.o.p. and((x) : ∆) = m}
Theorem 2.5. Let (R, m, k) be a Noetherian local ring of characteristic
p. Suppose R is excellent or there exists a common parameter (weak) test
element for R and R̂. Then R is F -rational if and only if rR (R) > 0.
We review the F-signature of modules defined by Y.Yao[Yao06] and
the result by K. Tucker about it [Tuc].
Definition 2.6. Let (R, m, k) be an F-finite local ring and M a finitely
generated R-module. For each e ∈ N, put q = pe , α = logp [k : kp ], and
write Fe∗ M  Raq ⊕ Me as left R-modules such that Me has no non-zero
free direct summand. In other words, the number ae is the maximal
rank of free direct summand of the left R-module Fe∗ M. We define
aq
s′ (M) = lim dimR+α
e→∞ q
Theorem 2.7. Let (R, m, k) be a d-dimensional F-finite characteristic p > 0
local domain and let M be a finitely generated R-module. Denote by ae the
maximal rank of a free R-module appearing in a direct sum decomposition
of Fe∗ M. Then
aq
lim (d+α) = s′ (M) = rank(M) · s(R) .
q→∞ q
3. The dual F-signature
We define the dual F-signature of modules.
Definition 3.1. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite local ring of characteristic p > 0 and M be an R-module. For each natural number e, Put
q = pe , α = logp [k : kp ], and bq = max{ n | ∃ Fe∗ M ։ Mn } and define
s(M) = lim sup
e→∞

bq
qdimR+α

ON DUAL F-SIGNATURE

5

We call bq q-th F-surjective number of M and call s(M) the dual Fsignature of M.
Remark 3.2. Since any homomorphism φ : Fe∗ R ։ Rn splits, We can
easily see that s(R) coincides with the F-signature defined by G. J.
Leuschke and C. Huneke.
Theorem1.2 (2) follows from the following result due to I. M. Aberbach and G. J. Leuschke[AL03].
Theorem 3.3. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced excellent F-finite local ring containing a field of characteristic p, let d =dimR. Then s(R) is positive if and
only if R is strongly F-regular.
Proposition 3.4. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite local ring and M be a
finitely generated R-module . Assume dimM <dimR, then s(M) = 0.
Proof. Assume we have
Fe∗ M −→ Mbq −→ 0
Tensoring R/I, we have
Fe∗ (M/I[q] M) −→ (M/IM)bq −→ 0
Therefore we have
l(Fe∗ (M/I[q] M) ≥ bq · l(M/IM)
Dividing qd+α and taking the limit, we have
eHK (I, M) ≥ s(M) · l(M/IM)
The left hand side is zero by Theorem 2.3 (1).

Proposition 3.5. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite local ring and M be a
finitely generated R-module . Then 0 ≤ s(M) ≤ 1.
Proof. Asuume dim M < dim R, then s(M) = 0 by Proposition 3.4. We
may assume dim M = dim R. Therefore there is a minimal prime p
such that M has rank at p. Since the rank of (Fe∗ M)p is rank M · qd+α
and the rank of (Mbq )p is rank M · bq , we obtain bq ≤ qd+α . This implies
s(M) ≤ 1

Lemma 3.6. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite Cohen-Macaulay local ring
and n be a non negative integer. There is a one to one correspondence
between non-isomorphic surjective homomorphisms from Fe∗ ωR to ωnR and
non-isomorphic injective homomorphisms from Rn to Fe∗ R such that the
cokernel is a maximal Cohen-Macaulay module.

6

A. SANNAI

Proof. Assume we have
b

0 −→ ker( f ) −→ Fe∗ ωR −→ ωRq −→ 0
Since Fe∗ ωR and ωR are maximal Cohen-Macaulay module, the kernel
is maximal Cohen-Macaulay module. Taking ωR -dual, we obtain
0 −→ Rbq −→ Hom(Fe∗ ωR , ωR )  Fe∗ R −→ K −→ 0
where K is the ωR -dual of ker( f ). Therefore K is maximal CohenMacaulay module. Conversely, assume we have
0 −→ Rbq −→ Fe∗ R −→ coker(g) −→ 0
such that coker(g) is a maximal Cohen-Macaulay module. Taking
ωR -dual, we obtain
b

0 −→ L −→ Fe∗ ωR −→ ωRq −→ Ext1R (coker(g), ωR ) = 0
where L is the ωR -dual of coker(g). The last equality follows from
Grothendieck duality.

Remark 3.7. If there is a surjective homomorphism from ker( f ) to ωR ,
b +1
then there is a surjective homomorphism from Fe∗ ωR to ωRq .
Proof. Consider the following diagram
0

0

/

ker( f )

/



ωR

/

Fe∗ ωR
/

L

/

0

b

/

0




/

b

ωRq

/

ωRq

b

where L is the push out of the diagram. Since L is in Ext1 (ωRq , ωR ) = 0,
b +1

the exact sequence splits. L is isomorphic to ωRq .



Proposition 3.8. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite Cohen-Macaulay local
ring. Then s(ωR ) ≥ s(R).
Proof. Assume we have
0 −→ ker( f ) −→ Fe∗ R −→ Raq −→ 0
Since Rbq is projective, this exact sequence splits. Therefore ker( f ) is
maximal Cohen-Macaulay module. We also have
0 −→ Raq −→ Fe∗ R −→ ker( f ) −→ 0
and this implies s(ωR ) ≥ s(R) by Lemma 3.6.


ON DUAL F-SIGNATURE

7

Theorem 3.9. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite Cohen-Macaulay local
ring. Then s(ωR ) = 1 if and only if R is regular.
Proof. If R is regular, then the result follows from Kunz’s theorem.
Therefore It is enough to prove the converse. Let x be a system
of parameters generating a minimal reduction of m, then l(m/x) =
e(m) − 1. By the definition of bq and Lemma 3.6, we have
0 −→ Rbq −→ Fe∗ R −→ K −→ 0
where K is a Cohen-Macaulay module. By tensoring R/m and R/(x),
we have
0

(R/(x))bq
/

Fe∗ (R/(x)[q] )
/



TorR1 (K, R/m)
/

K/(x)K
/


bq

(R/m)

/

Fe∗ (R/m[q] )

0
/


/

K/mK
/

0

The injectivity of the second map of the first line follows from
TorR1 (K, R/(x))  Extd−1
R (R/(x), K) = 0
The vertical maps are surjective. We have
l(Fe∗ (R/(x)[q] ) − l(Fe∗ (R/m[q] ) ≥ bq (l(R/(x) − l(R/m)) + l(K/(x)K) − l(K/mK)
≥ bq (e − 1)
Dividing both side by qd+α and taking the limit, we obtain
eHK ((x), R) − eHK (m, R) ≥ e − 1
Since (x) is minimal reduction for m and R is Cohen-Macaulay,
eHK ((x), R) = e(m, R) = e. This gives eHK (m, R) = 1 and R is regular.

Proposition 3.10. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite local ring such that
s(ωR ) > 0. Then R is Gorenstein if and only if s(R) = s(ωR ).
Proof. It is enough to show the converse. Since s(R) = s(ωR ) > 0, R is
F-regular. Assume R is not Gorenstein. Let
b

Fe∗ ωR  Raq ⊕ ωRq ⊕ M
be a direct summand deconposition of Fe∗ ωR such that M has no direct
aq
summand of R or ωR . We obtain lim d+α = s(R) by Theorem 2.7.
q→∞ q
Taking ωR -dual, we have
a

Fe∗ R  Rbq ⊕ ωRq ⊕ Hom(M, ωR )

8

A. SANNAI

bq

= s(R). Let us denote the number of minimal
qd+α
generaters of ωR by µ(ωR ). There is a surjective homomorphism from
s(R)
+ s(R) > s(R). This is
Rµ(ωR ) to ωR . It follows that s(ωR ) ≥
µ(ωR )
contradiction.

This implies lim

q→∞

Remark 3.11. We remark the assumption in Theorem 3.10 is essential.
Let R be a non-Gorenstein, non-F-injective local ring, then s(R) =
s(ωR ) = 0. But R is not Gorenstein.
Corollary 3.12. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite Cohen-Macaulay local
ring. Then s(R) = 1 if and only if R is regular.
Proof. Assume s(R) = 1, then s(ωR ) = 1 by Proposition 3.8. This

implies that R is regular by Theorem 3.9.
Lemma 3.13. Let (R, m, k) be an Artinian local ring of infinite residue field
and M be an R-module. Let V be a sub k-vector space of soc(R). Assume
l(∆M) ≥ dimV for any ∆ ∈ socR, then there is an R-homomorphism
φ : R → M such that φ is injective on V. In paticular, if V=soc(R), then
there is an injective R-homomorphism φ : R → M.
Proof. We prove the claim by induction on dimV. Assume dimV=1,
then there is an socle element ∆1 which generates V. By the assumption, there is an element m in M such that ∆1 m , 0. This m gives the
map from R to M. Assume dimV=n, then there are socle elements
∆1 , ..., ∆n which generate V. Let W be the k-vector space generated
by ∆1 , ..., ∆n−1. By induction, there is a R-homomorphism φ : R → M
such that φ is injective on W. We put φ(1) = m. If this map is injective
on V, there is nothing to prove. So we may assume φ is not injective
on V. Then there is an element ∆ ∈ V such that ∆m = 0. In this case,
∆1 , ..., ∆n−1, ∆ is a basis of V. Since l(∆M) >dimW, there is an element
m′ in M such that ∆1 m, ..., ∆n−1m, ∆m′ are linearly independent in
soc(R)M. This implies that a minor of the matrix (∆1 m, ..., ∆n−1m, ∆m′)
is not zero. Let us Take c ∈ R and put n = m + cm′ . If c is general, c
gives the map from R to M which satisfy the desired condition. To
confirm this, we denote the corresponding minor of the matrix A by
minorA. With this notation,
minor(∆1n, ..., ∆n−1 n, ∆n) = minor(∆1 m+c∆1m′ , ..., ∆n−1m+c∆n−1 m′, c∆m′)
= c · minor(∆1 m, ..., ∆n−1m, ∆m′) + c2 f (c)
where f is a polynomial with a variable.
Since minor(∆1 m, ..., ∆n−1m, ∆m′) is not zero, minor(∆1 n, ..., ∆n−1n, ∆n)

ON DUAL F-SIGNATURE

9

is non zero polynomial with the variable c. Therefore for general c,
the determinant is not zero. This implies ∆1 n, ..., ∆n−1n, ∆n is linearly
independent and the map induced by n is injective on V.

Lemma 3.14. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M be an R-module
of finite length.Denote the injective hull of the residue field by E. Then
l(xM) = l(Hom(xM, E)) = l(x(Hom(M, E)).
Proof. The first equality follows from the Matlis duality. It is enough
to show Hom(xM, E) is isomorphic to x(Hom(M, E)). From the Rmodule structure of Hom(M, E), we can regard x(Hom(M, E)) as submodule of Hom(xM, E). Conversely, if we take φ ∈ Hom(xM, E), we
e ∈ Hom(M, E) since E is injective module. This
can extend φ to φ
implies that the inclusion is surjective.

Lemma 3.15. Let R be a Noetherian local ring and M be an R-module.
Let x be a system of parameters. There is a natural number c such that
c ≥ l(TorR1 (ωR , R/(x, ∆))) for any ∆ ∈ SocR/(x).
Proof. Let X. be a free resolution of ωR . Then there is a natural surjection from X1 ⊗ R/(x) to X1 ⊗ R/(x, ∆). Since TorR1 (ωR , R/(x, ∆)) is
sub-quotient of X1 ⊗ R/(x, ∆), l(X1 ⊗ R/(x)) ≥ l(TorR1 (ωR , R/(x, ∆)))
holds.

Theorem 3.16. Let (R, m) be a reduced F-finite Cohen-Macaulay local ring.
Then s(ωR ) > 0 if and only if R is F-rational.
Proof. Let x be arbitrary system of parameters and ∆ be a element in
the socle of R/x. By the definition of bq , we have
b

0 −→ K −→ Fe∗ ωR −→ ωRq −→ 0
where K is the kernel of the surjective map. Tensoring R/(x) and
R/(x, ∆), we have
/

0

TorR
(ωR , R/(x, ∆))bq
1

/

/

K/(x)K


K/(x, ∆)K

/

Fe∗ (ωR /(x)[q] ωR )

(ωR /(x)ωR )bq

Fe∗ (ωR /(x, ∆)[q] ωR )

0




/

/

/

(ωR /(x, ∆)ωR )bq

The injectivity of the first map of the first line follows from
TorR1 (ωR , R/(x))  Extd−1
R (R/(x), ωR ) = 0

/

0

10

A. SANNAI

The vertical maps are surjective. We have
l(Fe∗ (ωR /(x)[q] ωR )) − l(Fe∗ (ωR /(x, ∆)[q]ωR )) ≥
bq (l(ωR /(x)ωR ) − l(ωR /(x, ∆)ωR )) + l(K/(x)K) − l(K/(x, ∆)K)) ≥ bq
Dividing both side by qd+α and taking the limit, we obtain
eHK ((x), R) − eHK ((x, ∆), R) ≥ s(ωR )
Assume R is not F-rational, then there exists ∆ such that ∆ is in the
tight closure of (x). This implies s(ωR ) = 0. Conversely, assume R is
F-rational. From the diagram, we have
bq (l(ωR /(x)ωR )−l(ωR /(x, ∆)ωR )+l(TorR1 (ωR , R/(x, ∆)))+l(K/(x)K)−l(K/(x, ∆)K)
≥ l(Fe∗ (ωR /(x)[q] ωR )) − l(Fe∗ (ωR /(x, ∆)[q]ωR ))
If s(ωR ) = 0, then this means the order of bq is less than qd+α . Since R
is F-rational, the order of the right hand side of the inequality is qd+α .
Lemma 3.15 and Theorem 2.5 implies that there is a q such that for
all ∆ ∈ soc(R), l(∆(K/(x)K)) = l(K/(x)K) − l(K/(x, ∆)K) is bigger than
l(soc(R/x)). By Lemma 3.14 and Lemma 3.13, there is an injective
homomorphism φ : R/(x) → Hom(K/(x)K, E(k)). This implies that
there is an surjective homomorphism φ : K → ωR by Lemma 3.6.
This contradicts to the maximality of bq by the Remark 3.7.

Example 3.17. Let R = k[[xn , xn−1 y, . . . , yn ]], the n-th Veronese subring of k[[x, y]], where k is a perfect field of positive characteristic
p. Assume that n ≥ 2 and p6 |n. Then R has finite CM type. The
indecomposable nonfree MCM R-modules are the fractional ideals
I1 = (x, y), I2 = (x2 , xy, y2), . . . , In−1 = (xn−1 , xn−2 y, . . . , yn−1 ). Denote R
also by I0 . Then we can decompose F∗ Il by using these modules.
a

i,l
Fe∗ Il  ⊕n−1
i=0 Ii

We can also show the order of ai,l ’s are same and equal to q2 /n.
Furthermore, we can easily show the following things.
(1) If l < k, then any R-module homomorphism f : Ik → Il factor
through mIl .
(2) If l > k, then there is no surjective homomorphism g: Ik → Il
(3) If l > k, then there exists a surjective homomorphism h: Ik ⊕
Il−k−1 → Il
We compute s(Il ). By (1), there is no contribution from Ik (l < k). Since
there is a natural surjection id : Il → Il , the contribution from Il is one

ON DUAL F-SIGNATURE

11

to one. By (2) and (3), the contribution from Ik (l > k) is two to one.
Therefore,
1 l 1 l+2
s(Il ) = + · =
n 2 n
2n
In paticular, s(R) = s(I0 ) = 1/n, s(ωR ) = s(In−2 ) = 1/2. R is Gorenstein
if and only if n = 2 by Proposition 3.10.
4. Questions
In this section, we define the dual F-signature o f pairs and the Fsur jective ratio to give questions about these.
The F-signature of pairs was introduced by M. Blickle, K. Schwede
and K.Tucker in [BST11] to solve the conjecture about the F-splitting
ratio by M. Aberbach and F. Enescu. Firstly, We define the F-sur jective
ratio which is a generalization of the F-splitting ratio defined by M.
Aberbach and F. Enescu [AE05].
Definition 4.1. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite local ring of characteristic p > 0 and M be an R-module. For each natural number e, Put
q = pe , α = logp [k : kp ], and bq = max{ n | ∃ Fe∗ M ։ Mn } and for each
i ∈ N define
bq
ri (M) = lim sup i+α
e→∞ q
Consider about the set
D = {ri (M)|i ∈ N} ∈ R ∪ {∞}
We define the F-sur jective ratio by
r(M) = max{D − {∞}}
We call the minimal number i such that ri (M) = r(M) holds Fsurjective dimension of M.
Example 4.2. Let Sn = k[[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ]] be a formal power series
ring of n variables. There are natural surjections φi : Sn → Si =
k[[x1 , x2 , . . . , xi ]] for i ≤ n. We regard Si as Sn -module by using these
maps. Then the F-surjective dimension of Si is i and r(Si ) = 1.
We can easliy see that r(R) coincide with the F-splitting ratio defined by M. Aberbach and F. Enescu. M. Blickle, K. Schwede and
K.Tucker proved the positivity of the F-splitting ratio characterize
the F-purity of R in [BST11]. The conjecture is the same thing holds
for the F-surjective ratio.

12

A. SANNAI

Conjecture 4.3. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced Cohen-Macaulay F-finite local
ring of characteristic p > 0 and ωR be a canonical module. Then R is
F-injective if and only if r(ωR ) is positive.
The case of F-splitting ratio was solved by considering about the
pair of F-signature. Not only for this application, it is important to
consider about the dual F-signature o f pairs.
Definition 4.4. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite local ring of characteristic p > 0 and M an R-module. Let DM be a Cartier sub algebra
of M. For each natural number e, Put q = pe , α = logp [k : kp ], and
bq = max{ n | ∃ φ : Fe∗ M ։ Mn , pri · φ ∈ DM for any i } and define
s(M, DM ) = lim sup
e→∞

bq
qdimR+α

We call bq q-th F-surjective number of M along DM and call s(M, DM )
the dual F-signature of the pair M and DM .
Example 4.5. Let (R, m, k) be a reduced F-finite local ring of characteristic p > 0 and M be a finitely generated R-module. We denote
sp
DM as the Cartier multiplicative closed sub set such that all homosp
geneous elements consist of split-surjective maps. Then s(M, DM )
is equivalent to the generalized F-signature of M defined in [HN].
sp
More concretely, in the Example 3.17, s(Il , DIl ) = 1/n.
Remark 4.6. By using the canonical duality, we can easily check
sp
s(R) = s(ωR , DωR ).
Question 4.7. Can we generalize the results in Theorem 1.2 by using the
dual F-signature of pairs?
References
I. M. Aberbach and F. Enescu: The structure of F-pure rings, Math. Z. 250
(2005), no. 4, 791–806. MR2180375
[AL03] I. M. Aberbach and G. J. Leuschke: The F-signature and strong F-regularity,
Math. Res. Lett. 10 (2003), no. 1, 51–56. MR1960123 (2004b:13003)
[BST11] M. Blickle, K. Schwede, and K. Tucker: F-signature of pairs and the asymptotic behavior of Frobenius splittings, preprint, arxiv:1107.1082
[BST11] M. Blickle, K. Schwede, and K. Tucker: F-signature of pairs: Continuity,
p-fractals and minimal log discrepancies, preprint, arxiv:1111. 2762
[G04]
O. Gabber: Notes on some t-structures, Geometric aspects of Dwork theory.
Vol. I, II, Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin, 2004, pp. 711-734.
[HH89] M. Hochster and C. Huneke: Tight closure and strong F-regularity, Mém.
Soc. Math. France (N.S.) (1989), no. 38, 119–133, Colloque en l’honneur
de Pierre Samuel (Orsay, 1987). MR1044348 (91i:13025)
[AE05]

ON DUAL F-SIGNATURE

13

[HH90] M. Hochster and C. Huneke, Tight closure, invariant theory, and the
Briançon-Skoda theorem, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 3 (1990), 31–116.
, F-regularity and smooth base change, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 346
[HH94]
(1994), 1–60.
[HN]
M. Hashimoto and Y. Nakajima: Generalized F-signature of invariant sub
rings , In preparation
[HR74] M. Hochster and J. L. Roberts: Rings of invariants of reductive groups
acting on regular rings are Cohen-Macaulay, Advances in Math. 13 (1974),
115–175. MR0347810 (50 #311)
[HR76] M. Hochster and J. L. Roberts: The purity of the Frobenius and local cohomology, Advances in Math. 21 (1976), no. 2, 117–172. MR0417172 (54
#5230)

M. Hochster and Y. Yao: The F-rational signature and drops in the HilbertKunz multiplicity , preprint
[Hun96] C. Huneke: Tight closure and its applications, CBMS Regional Conference
Series in Mathematics, vol. 88, Published for the Conference Board of
the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC, 1996, With an appendix by
Melvin Hochster. MR1377268 (96m:13001)
[HL02] C. Huneke and G. J. Leuschke: Two theorems about maximal CohenMacaulay modules, Math. Ann. 324 (2002), no. 2, 391–404. MR1933863

[HY]

(2003j:13011)

[Kun69] E. Kunz: Characterizations of regular local rings for characteristic p, Amer. J.
Math. 91 (1969), 772–784. MR0252389 (40 #5609)
[Kun76] E. Kunz: On Noetherian rings of characteristic p, Amer. J. Math. 98 (1976),
no. 4, 999–1013. MR0432625 (55 #5612)
[Mon83] P. Monsky: The Hilbert-Kunz function, Math. Ann. 263 (1983), no. 1, 43–49.
MR697329 (84k:13012)

[Mon08] P. Monsky: Rationality of Hilbert-Kunz multiplicities: a likely counterexample,
Michigan Math. J. 57 (2008), 605–613, Special volume in honor of Melvin
Hochster. 2492471 (2010g:13026)
[Sch08] K. Schwede: Centers of F-purity, arXiv:0807.1654, to appear in Mathematische Zeitschrift.
[SVdB97] K. E. Smith and M. Van den Bergh: Simplicity of rings of differential
operators in prime characteristic, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 75 (1997),
no. 1, 32–62. MR1444312 (98d:16039)
[Tuc]
K. Tucker:
F-signature exists, Inventiones Mathematicae, 1–23,
10.1007/s00222-012-0389-0.
[WY04] K.-i. Watanabe and K.-i. Yoshida: Minimal relative Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity, Illinois J. Math. 48 (2004), no. 1, 273–294. 2048225 (2005b:13033)
[Yao06] Y. Yao: Observations on the F-signature of local rings of characteristic p, J.
Algebra 299 (2006), no. 1, 198–218. MR2225772 (2007k:13007)
Graduate School of Mathematics, Nagoya University Chikusa-ku, Nagoya
4648602 JAPAN.
E-mail address: x12004h@math.nagoya-u.ac.jp

