arXiv:1608.00926v2 [math.AG] 8 Oct 2017

NONNOETHERIAN COORDINATE RINGS WITH
UNIQUE MAXIMAL DEPICTIONS
CHARLIE BEIL
Abstract. A depiction of a nonnoetherian integral domain R is a special coordinate ring that provides a framework for describing the geometry of R. We show
that if R is noetherian in codimension 1, then R has a unique maximal depiction
T . In this case, the geometric dimensions of the points of Spec R may be computed
directly from T . If in addition R has a normal depiction S, then S is the unique
maximal depiction of R.

1. Introduction
In this article all algebras are assumed to be commutative integral domains over
an algebraically closed base field k. Depictions were introduced in [B3] to provide
a framework for describing the geometry of nonnoetherian algebras with finite Krull
dimension. A depiction of a nonnoetherian algebra R is a finitely generated algebra
S that is as close as possible to R, in a suitable geometric sense (Definition 2.1).
In this framework, the geometry of the maximal spectrum Max R is viewed as the
algebraic variety Max S, together with a collection of algebraic sets of Max S which
are identified as ‘smeared-out’ positive dimensional closed points [B2].
Depictions have played an essential role in understanding the algebraic and representation theoretic properties of a class of quiver algebras called dimer algebras
[B1, B4, B5]. However, there are many open questions regarding the fundamental
nature of depictions; for example, it is not known whether every subalgebra of a finite
type integral domain admits a depiction, or whether every depiction is contained in
a maximal depiction. Here we consider the question: What algebras admit unique
maximal depictions?
In general, maximal depictions need not be unique. Indeed, consider the rings
S = k[x, y, z]

and

R = k + xyS.

Then the overrings
S[x−1 ] and S[y −1 ]
are both depictions of R, whereas their minimal proper overring S[x−1 , y −1 ] is not
[B3, Proposition 3.19]. To identify a class of algebras that admit unique maximal
depictions, we introduce the following definition.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 13C15, 14A20.
Key words and phrases. Non-noetherian rings, foundations of algebraic geometry.
1

2

CHARLIE BEIL

Definition 1.1. We say R is noetherian in codimension 1 if R admits a depiction S
such that each codimension 1 subvariety of Max S intersects the open set
US/R := {n ∈ Max S | Rn∩R = Sn } .
We will show that this definition is independent of the choice of depiction S (Proposition 3.18). Furthermore, if R is noetherian in codimension 1, then for each height
1 prime q ∈ Spec S, the localization Rq∩R is noetherian (Lemma 3.1.3).
Our main theorem is the following.
Theorem 1.2. (Theorems 3.17 and 3.19.) Suppose R is noetherian in codimension
1. Let S be any depiction of R, and consider the global sections ring,
\
T :=
Sn = Γ(US/R ).
n∈US/R

(1) T is the unique maximal depiction of R. In particular, T is independent of
the choice of depiction S.
(2) For each p ∈ Spec R there is some t ∈ Spec T lying over p such that the
geometric dimension of p equals the Krull dimension of T /t,
gdim p = dim T /t.
(3) Let S be the normalization of S. Then
S ⊆ T ⊆ S.
In particular, if S = S is normal, then S is the unique maximal depiction of
R, as well as the unique normal depiction of R.
For example, consider the family of algebras
Sj := k[x, y, xz, yz, xz 2 , yz 2 , . . . , xz j−1 , yz j−1 , z j ]

and

R := k + (x, y)S1 ,

where j ≥ 1, and (x, y)S1 is the ideal of S1 = k[x, y, z] generated by x and y. Each
Sj is a depiction of R, and R is noetherian in codimension 1 (Example 5.1). Since
S1 is normal, Theorem 1.2 implies that S1 is the unique maximal depiction of R.
Claim (2) in Theorem 1.2 provides a means of computing the geometric dimension
of a point of Spec R in the case R is noetherian in codimension 1. If a depiction has
the property given in Claim (2), then we say it is saturated.
In Section 4, we consider the special case where R has the form R = k + I, with I
a nonzero radical ideal of S (and R is not necessarily noetherian in codimension 1).
Using Theorem 1.2, we show that if dim S/I ≥ 1, then S is a saturated depiction of
R (Theorem 4.1).
We conclude with a few examples of maximal depictions in Section 5. Notably,
we show that if R admits a unique maximal depiction S but is not noetherian in
codimension 1, then in general the geometric dimension of a point p ∈ Spec R need
not equal the Krull dimension of S/q, for any q ∈ Spec S over p (Example 5.2).

NONNOETHERIAN COORDINATE RINGS WITH UNIQUE MAXIMAL DEPICTIONS

3

2. Preliminary definitions
Let S be an integral domain and a finitely generated k-algebra, and let R be
a (possibly nonnoetherian) subalgebra of S. Denote by Max S, Spec S, and dim S
the maximal spectrum (or variety), prime spectrum (or affine scheme), and Krull
dimension of S respectively; similarly for R. For a subset I ⊂ S, set ZS (I) :=
{n ∈ Max S | n ⊇ I}.
We will consider the following subsets of Max S and Spec S,
US/R := {n ∈ Max S | Rn∩R = Sn } ,
ŨS/R := {q ∈ Spec S | Rq∩R = Sq } ,

ZS/R := q ∈ Spec S | ZS (q) ∩ US/R 6= ∅ .
Note that if US/R 6= ∅, then R and S have the same fraction field: if n ∈ US/R , then
(1)

Frac R = Frac(Rn∩R ) = Frac(Sn ) = Frac S.

Definition 2.1. [B3, Definition 3.1]
• We say S is a depiction of R if the morphism
ιS/R : Spec S → Spec R,

q 7→ q ∩ R,

is surjective, and
(2)

US/R = {n ∈ Max S | Rn∩R is noetherian} =
6 ∅.
• The geometric height of p ∈ Spec R is the minimum
n
o
ght(p) := min htS (q) | q ∈ ι−1
(p),
S
a
depiction
of
R
.
S/R
The geometric dimension of p is
gdim p := dim R − ght(p).
• A depiction S of R is maximal if S is not properly contained in another
depiction of R.

If R is fixed, then we will often write ιS for ιS/R .
3. Proof of main theorem
Throughout, let S and S 0 be depictions of R. We begin by recalling the following
useful facts from [B3].
Lemma 3.1. We have
(1) dim R = dim S.
(2) The locus US/R is an open dense subset of Max S.
(3) ZS/R ⊆ ŨS/R .
(4) If q ∈ ŨS/R , then
ι−1
S ιS (q) = {q} .

4

CHARLIE BEIL

(5) The images of the loci US/R and US 0 /R in Max R coincide,
ιS (US/R ) = ιS 0 (US 0 /R ).
Proof. The claims are respectively [B3, Theorem 2.5.4; Proposition 2.4.2; Lemma 2.2;
Theorem 2.5.1; Theorem 3.5].

Lemma 3.2. If q ∈ ZS/R , then there is a unique prime q0 ∈ Spec S 0 such that
q0 ∩ R = q ∩ R.
Moreover,
q0 ∈ ZS 0 /R

and

htS 0 (q0 ) = htS (q).

Proof. Suppose the hypotheses hold. Since ZS (q) ∩ US/R 6= ∅, there is some n ∈ US/R
for which n ⊇ q. Whence
(i)

ιS (n) ∈ ιS (US/R ) = ιS 0 (US 0 /R ),
where (i) holds by Lemma 3.1.5. Thus there is some n0 ∈ US 0 /R for which
n0 ∈ ι−1
S 0 ιS (n).
In particular, n0 ∩ R = n ∩ R and
Sn0 0 = Rn0 ∩R = Rn∩R = Sn .
Now qSn is a prime ideal of Sn since q is a prime ideal of S. Thus
qSn0 0 = qSn
is a prime ideal of Sn0 0 = Sn . Whence the intersection
q0 := qSn0 0 ∩ S 0
is a prime ideal of S 0 contained in n0 . Therefore
ZS 0 (q0 ) ∩ US 0 /R 6= ∅,

(3)

that is, q0 ∈ ZS 0 /R . Furthermore,
q0 ∩ R = qSn0 0 ∩ S 0 ∩ R = qSn0 0 ∩ S ∩ R = qSn ∩ S ∩ R = q ∩ R.
Therefore q0 ∩ R = q ∩ R. Uniqueness of q0 ∈ Spec S 0 follows from (3) and Lemmas
3.1.3 and 3.1.4.
Finally, the heights of q and q0 coincide:
(i)

(ii)

htS 0 (q0 ) = dim Sq0 0 = dim Rq0 ∩R = dim Rq∩R = dim Sq = htS (q),
where (i) and (ii) hold by Lemma 3.1.3.



Proposition 3.3. If q ∈ ZS/R , then
ghtR (q ∩ R) = htS (q).
Proof. Follows from Lemma 3.2.



NONNOETHERIAN COORDINATE RINGS WITH UNIQUE MAXIMAL DEPICTIONS

5

Denote by TS/R the global sections ring on US/R ,
\
TS/R := Γ(US/R ) =
Sn .
n∈US/R

Proposition 3.4. The global sections ring TS/R satisfies
\
\
TS/R :=
Sn =
Sq ,
n∈US/R

q∈ZS/R

and contains each depiction of R.
Proof. Given depictions S, S 0 of R, we have
\
\
(i)
(ii) \
(iii) \
(iv) \
Sq0 0 =
Rq0 ∩R =
Rq∩R =
Sq =
Sn = TS/R .
S0 ⊆
q0 ∈ZS 0 /R

q0 ∈ZS 0 /R

q∈ZS/R

q∈ZS/R

n∈US/R

Indeed, (i) and (iii) hold by Lemma 3.1.3, and (ii) holds by Lemma 3.2. (iv) holds
since if q ∈ ZS/R , then there is some n ∈ US/R such that n ⊇ q; in particular,
Sn ⊆ Sq .

Denote by DS the set of height 1 prime ideals of S,
DS := {q ∈ Spec S | ht(q) = 1} .
Note that, by definition, R is noetherian in codimension 1 if R admits a depiction S
for which DS ⊆ ZS/R .
For the remainder of this section, we will assume that R is noetherian in codimension 1 unless stated otherwise.
Lemma 3.5. Suppose DS ⊆ ZS/R . Then TS/R is contained in the normalization S
of S. In particular, TS/R is an integral extension of S.
Proof. Since S is a noetherian domain, its normalization S is given by [M, Theorem
11.5.ii]
\
S=
Sq .
(4)
q∈DS

But DS ⊆ ZS/R by assumption. Therefore TS/R ⊆ S, by Proposition 3.4.



Proposition 3.6. Suppose DS ⊆ ZS/R . Then TS/R is finitely generated as an Smodule and as a k-algebra.
Proof. Set T := TS/R . S is a finitely generated k-algebra since S is a depiction
of R. Thus its normalization S is a finitely generated S-module by the Noether
normalization lemma [E, Corollary 13.13]. Furthermore, T is a submodule of S by
Lemma 3.5. Thus T is a finitely generated S-module since S is noetherian. Therefore
T is a finitely generated k-algebra.


6

CHARLIE BEIL

Lemma 3.7. Suppose DS ⊆ ZS/R , and set T := TS/R . The morphism
ιT /S : Spec T → Spec S,

t 7→ t ∩ S,

is surjective.
Proof. T is an integral extension of S by Lemma 3.5, and therefore ιT /S is surjective
[M, Theorem 9.3.i].

Theorem 3.8. Suppose DS ⊆ ZS/R . Then TS/R is a depiction of R.
Proof. Set T := TS/R .
(i) T is a finitely generated k-algebra by Proposition 3.6.
(ii) We claim that
(5)

UT /R = {t ∈ Max T | Rt∩R is noetherian} .

Consider t ∈ Max T for which Rt∩R is noetherian. Since t ∈ Max T and T is a finitely
generated k-algebra containing S, the intersection n := t ∩ S is a maximal ideal of S.
Furthermore,
t ∩ R = t ∩ S ∩ R = n ∩ R.

(6)

Whence Rt∩R = Rn∩R . Thus Rn∩R is noetherian since Rt∩R is noetherian. Therefore
n ∈ US/R since S 0 is a depiction of R. Consequently,
(7)

Rt∩R = Rn∩R = Sn .

Furthermore,
(8) Sn = St∩S ⊆ Tt = (

\

n0 ∈U

Sn0 )t ⊆

\
n0 ∈U

S/R

(Sn0 )t∩Sn0

S/R

(i)

⊆ (Sn )t∩Sn = (St∩S )t∩(St∩S ) = St∩S ,

where (i) holds since n ∈ US/R . Whence Sn = Tt . Thus together with (7) we obtain
Rt∩R = Sn = Tt .
Therefore t ∈ UT /R . The converse inclusion (⊆) in (5) is clear.
(iii) The morphism ιT /R : Spec T → Spec R is surjective since it factors into surjective maps
ιT /S
ιS/R
Spec T −→ Spec S −→ Spec R.
Indeed, ιT /S is surjective by Lemma 3.7, and ιS/R is surjective since S is a depiction
of R.
(iv) Finally, we claim that UT /R is nonempty. Since S is a depiction of R, there is
some n ∈ US/R . By Lemma 3.7, there is some t ∈ Max T such that t ∩ S = n. Thus
(i)

(ii)

Rt∩R = Rn∩R = Sn = Tt ,
where (i) holds by (6), and (ii) holds by (8). Therefore t ∈ UT /R .



NONNOETHERIAN COORDINATE RINGS WITH UNIQUE MAXIMAL DEPICTIONS

7

Lemma 3.9. Set T := TS/R . If DS ⊆ ZS/R , then DT ⊆ ZT /R .
Proof. Let t ∈ DT , and set q := t ∩ S. By Lemma 3.5, T is an integral extension of
S. Thus htT (t) = 1 implies htS (q) = 1 [K, Theorem 46]. Whence q ∈ ZS/R since S is
noetherian in codimension 1. But t ∩ R = (t ∩ S) ∩ R = q ∩ R. Therefore t ∈ ZT /R
by Lemma 3.2.

Lemma 3.10. Suppose DS 0 ⊆ ZS 0 /R , and set T := TS 0 /R . The morphism
DT → DS ,

t 7→ t ∩ S,

is well-defined and surjective.
Proof. (i) We first claim that the map DT → DS is well-defined. Let t ∈ DT .
Then t ∈ ZT /R by Lemma 3.9. Thus there is a unique prime q0 ∈ Spec S such that
q0 ∩ R = t ∩R, and q0 ∈ DS , by Lemma 3.2. But then
(t ∩ S) ∩ R = t ∩ R = q0 ∩ R.
Therefore, by the uniqueness of q0 , we have
t ∩ S = q0 ∈ DS .
(ii) We now claim that the map DT → DS is surjective. Let q ∈ DS . Set p := q∩R.
By Theorem 3.8, there is a prime t ∈ ι−1
T /R (p); we want to show that t ∈ DT . Indeed,
assume to the contrary that t 6∈ DT , that is, htT (t) ≥ 2. Then there is a prime
t0 ∈ DT properly contained in t. Since htT (t0 ) = 1, we have t0 ∈ ZT /R by Lemma 3.9.
Thus the containment
t0 ∩ R ⊂ t ∩ R = p
is proper, by Lemma 3.2. Consequently, the containment
t0 ∩ S ⊂ q
is also proper. But t0 ∩ S is a nonzero prime of S since t0 is a nonzero prime of T .
Therefore htS (q) ≥ 2, contrary to our choice of q.

Lemma 3.11. Suppose DS 0 ⊆ ZS 0 /R , and set T := TS 0 /R . Then
\
\
Tt =
Sq .
t∈DT

q∈DS

Proof. We have
(9)

(i)

(ii)

DT ⊆ ZT /R ⊆ ŨT /R ,

where (i) holds by Lemma 3.9, and (ii) holds by Lemma 3.1.3.
Let t ∈ DT , and set q := t ∩ S ∈ Spec S. Then, since t ∩ R = q ∩ R, we have
(i)

Tt = Rt∩R = Rq∩R ⊆ Sq ⊆ Tt ,

8

CHARLIE BEIL

where (i) holds by (9) and Lemma 3.1.3. Whence, Tt = St∩S . Therefore
\
\
(i)
(ii) \
Tt =
St∩S =
Sq ,
t∈DT

t∩S∈DS

q∈DS

where (i) holds since DT → DS is well-defined by Lemma 3.10; and (ii) holds since
DT → DS is surjective, again by Lemma 3.10.

Suppose R has a unique maximal depiction T , but is not noetherian in codimension
1. Then in general R may admit a depiction S for which the morphism
ιT /S : Spec T → Spec S,

t 7→ t ∩ S,

is not surjective; see Example 5.2 below. However, if R is noetherian in codimension
1, then we have the following.
Proposition 3.12. Suppose DS 0 ⊆ ZS 0 /R , and set T := TS 0 /R . Then for any depiction
S of R, the morphism ιT /S : Spec T → Spec S is surjective.
Proof. (i) We first claim that for each n ∈ Max S, nT 6= T .
Assume to the contrary that there is some n ∈ Max S for which nT = T . Let Sn
be the normalization of Sn . Then
\
\
\
(iii) \
(i) \
(iv)
(ii)
(10)
Tt =
(Sn )s = Sn .
Sq ⊆
Sq =
(Sn )qSn ⊆
t∈DT

q∈DS

q∈DS :q⊆n

q∈DS :q⊆n

s∈DSn

Indeed, (i) holds by Lemma 3.11. (ii) holds since if q ∈ Spec S is contained in n, then
Sq = (Sn )qSn .
(iii) holds since if s ∈ Spec Sn has height 1, then s ∩ S ∈ Spec S also has height 1, and
s ∩ S ⊆ n. Finally, (iv) holds since Sn is a noetherian domain [M, Theorem 11.5.ii].
By integrality, there is a prime ideal n0 of the normalization Sn lying over n [K,
Theorem 44]. Thus
!
\
(i)
1 ∈ T = nT ⊆ n
Tt ⊆ nSn ⊆ n0 ,
t∈DT

where (i) holds by (10). But then 1 is in n0 , a contradiction.
(ii) We claim that the morphism of maximal spectra
Max T → Max S,

t 7→ t ∩ S,

is surjective. Let n ∈ Spec S. Then there is a maximal ideal t ∈ Max T containing
nT since nT 6= T by Claim (i). Whence
n ⊆ nT ∩ S ⊆ t ∩ S 6= S.
Therefore t ∩ S = n since n is a maximal ideal.

NONNOETHERIAN COORDINATE RINGS WITH UNIQUE MAXIMAL DEPICTIONS

9

(iii) T is a finitely generated k-algebra by Proposition 3.6, and S is a finitely
generated k-algebra since S is a depiction. Therefore ιT /S is also surjective, by [B3,
Lemma 3.6].1

Note that, by the definition of geometric height, each q ∈ Spec S satisfies
ghtR (q ∩ R) ≤ htS (q).
Lemma 3.13. The following are equivalent:
(1) For each p ∈ Spec R there is some q ∈ ι−1
S/R (p) such that
ghtR (p) = htS (q).
(2) For each q ∈ Spec S of minimal height in ι−1
S/R (q ∩ R), we have
ghtR (q ∩ R) = htS (q).
Proof. (1) ⇒ (2): Suppose q ∈ Spec S has minimal height in ι−1
S/R (p), where p := q∩R.
−1
By assumption (1), there is some q0 ∈ ιS/R (p) such that htS (q0 ) = ghtR (p). Therefore
ghtR (p) ≤ htS (q) ≤ htS (q0 ) = ghtR (p).
(2) ⇒ (1): Let p ∈ Spec R. Since S is a depiction of R, we have ι−1
S/R (p) 6= ∅;
−1
choose q ∈ ιS/R (p) of minimal height. Then ghtR (p) = htS (q) by assumption (2). 
Definition 3.14. If either (hence both) of the conditions in Lemma 3.13 are satisfied,
then we call S a saturated depiction of R.
Lemma 3.15. If S is a saturated depiction of R, then each q ∈ Spec S of minimal
height in ι−1
S/R (q ∩ R) satisfies
gdim(q ∩ R) = dim S/q.
Proof. We have
(i)

(ii)

gdim(q ∩ R) := dim R − ghtR (q ∩ R) = dim S − htS (q) = dim S/q,
where (i) holds by Lemma 3.1.1, and (ii) holds since S is a finite type integral domain
[S, Proposition III.15].

Lemma 3.16. Let S be a noetherian integral domain, and let U be a nonempty open
subset of Max S. For each nonzero q ∈ Spec S there is some p ∈ Spec S contained in
q such that
Z(p) ∩ U 6= ∅ and
ht(p) = ht(q) − 1.
1The

assumption in [B3, Lemma 3.6] that k is uncountable is not necessary here since S is a finitely
generated k-algebra, rather than a countably generated k-algebra.

10

CHARLIE BEIL

Proof. Fix q ∈ Spec S. Denote by Q the set of primes p ∈ Spec S that are properly
contained in q and satisfy ht(p) = ht(q) − 1.
Assume to the contrary that Z(p) ∩ U = ∅ for each p ∈ Q. Then
(∪p∈Q Z(p)) ∩ U = ∅.
Whence ∪p∈Q Z(p) ∩ U = ∅ since U is open by Lemma 3.1.2. Thus

c
∅=
6 U ⊆ ∪p∈Q Z(p) = Z(∩p∈Q p)c .
Therefore the ideal I := ∩p∈Q p is nonzero; say 0 6= a ∈ I. In particular, a ∈ q since
for each p ∈ Q, I ⊆ p ⊂ q.
By [F, Lemma 3.2], if C is a noetherian integral domain, t ∈ Spec C, and 0 6= c ∈ t,
then there is a prime s ∈ Spec C such that ht(s) = ht(t) − 1 and s 63 c. In our case
we may take C = Sq , t = qSq , and c = a. Then there is a prime p ∈ Spec Sq such
that
htSq (p) = htSq (qSq ) − 1 = htS (q) − 1 and p 63 a.
Set p := p ∩ S. Then htS (p) = htSq (p) and p ⊂ q. Thus p ∈ Q. But a 6∈ p since
a 6∈ p. Therefore a 6∈ I, contrary to our choice of a.

Theorem 3.17. Suppose DS ⊆ ZS/R . Then TS/R is saturated.
Proof. Set T := TS/R . Let p ∈ Spec R. Then there is a depiction S 0 of R such that
for some q in ι−1
S 0 /R (p), we have
ghtR (p) = htS 0 (q).
−1
By Proposition 3.12, ι−1
T /S 0 (q) 6= ∅; say t ∈ ιT /S 0 (q). Furthermore, UT /R is an open
dense subset of Max T , by Lemma 3.1.2. Thus there is a prime t0 ∈ Spec T properly
contained in t, and maximal with respect to this inclusion, such that ZT (t0 )∩UT /R 6= ∅,
by Lemma 3.16.
Set m := htT (t). Consider a maximal chain of prime ideals of T contained in t0 ,

0 ⊂ t1 ⊂ t2 ⊂ · · · ⊂ tm−1 = t0 ⊂ tm = t,
and the corresponding chain of prime ideals of S 0 ,
(11)

0 ⊂ t1 ∩ S 0 ⊆ t2 ∩ S 0 ⊆ · · · ⊆ tm ∩ S 0 = q.

We claim that the chain (11) is strict. Indeed, assume to the contrary that there is
some 1 ≤ i < m for which ti ∩ S 0 = ti+1 ∩ S 0 . Then ti ∩ R = ti+1 ∩ R. Furthermore,
ZT (ti ) ∩ UT /R 6= ∅ since ZT (tm−1 ) ∩ UT /R 6= ∅. But then ti = ti+1 by Lemmas 3.1.3
and 3.1.4, a contradiction.
It follows that
(i)

(ii)

ghtR (p) ≤ htT (t) = m ≤ htS 0 (q) = ghtR (p),
where (i) holds since t ∩ R = t ∩ S 0 ∩ R = q ∩ R = p, and (ii) holds since the chain
(11) is strict. Therefore ghtR (p) = htT (t).


NONNOETHERIAN COORDINATE RINGS WITH UNIQUE MAXIMAL DEPICTIONS

11

Proposition 3.18. Each codimension 1 subvariety of Max S intersects US/R if and
only if each codimension 1 subvariety of Max S 0 intersects US 0 /R :
DS ⊆ ZS/R

⇐⇒

DS 0 ⊆ ZS 0 /R .

In particular, the definition of ‘noetherian in codimension 1’ is independent of the
choice of depiction.
Proof. Suppose DS ⊆ ZS/R , and consider q ∈ DS 0 ; we want to show that q ∈ ZS 0 /R .
Set T := TS/R and p := q∩R. By Theorems 3.8 and 3.17, T is a saturated depiction
of R. Thus there is some t ∈ ι−1
T /R (p) such that htT (t) = ghtR (p). Therefore
(i)

(ii)

1 ≤ htT (t) = ghtR (p) ≤ htS 0 (q) = 1,
where (i) holds since t 6= 0, and (ii) holds since q ∩ R = p. Whence htT (t) = 1. Thus
t ∈ ZT /R by Lemma 3.9. Therefore there is a unique prime q0 ∈ Spec S 0 such that
q0 ∩ R = t ∩ R, and q0 ∈ ZS 0 /R , by Lemma 3.2. But
q ∩ R = p = t ∩ R = q0 ∩ R.
It follows that q0 = q, by the uniqueness of q0 . Therefore q ∈ ZS 0 /R .



Theorem 3.19. Suppose R is noetherian in codimension 1. Let S and S 0 be arbitrary
depictions of R. Then
T := TS/R = TS 0 /R ,
and T is the unique maximal depiction of R. Furthermore, T is contained in the
normalization of each depiction of R,
S ⊆ T ⊆ S.
In particular, if S = S is normal, then S is the unique maximal depiction of R, as
well as the unique normal depiction of R.
Proof. The overrings TS/R and TS 0 /R are both depictions of R by Proposition 3.18 and
Theorem 3.8. But TS/R and TS 0 /R each contain every depiction of R, by Proposition
3.4. Therefore TS/R = TS 0 /R . Finally, the inclusion T ⊆ S holds by Lemma 3.5. 
4. Saturated depictions of coordinate rings with a unique positive
dimensional closed point
Rings of the form R = k + I, where I is an ideal of a finite type integral domain S,
form a particularly nice class of nonnoetherian rings in the study of nonnoetherian
geometry. It was shown in [B2, Corollary 1.3] that if I is a proper nonzero nonmaximal radical ideal of S, then the following are equivalent:
(1) dim S/I ≥ 1.
(2) R is nonnoetherian.
(3) R is depicted by S.

12

CHARLIE BEIL

Furthermore, if R is nonnoetherian, then
US/R = ZS (I)c .
In the following, we do not assume that R is noetherian in codimension 1.
Theorem 4.1. Let I be a nonzero radical ideal of S such that dim S/I ≥ 1, and set
R := k + I. If S is a unique factorization domain or htS (I) = 1, then S is a saturated
depiction of R.
Proof. By [B2, Corollary 1.3], S is a depiction of R since I is a nonzero radical ideal
of S satisfying dim S/I ≥ 1.
(i) First suppose S is a UFD and htS (I) ≥ 2. Then DS ⊆ ZS/R , since US/R =
ZS (I)c . Furthermore,
(i)

TS/R := Γ(US/R ) = Γ(ZS (I)c ) = S,
where (i) holds since S is a UFD and htS (I) ≥ 2. Therefore S is saturated by
Theorem 3.17.
(ii) Now suppose htS (I) = 1. Consider q ∈ ι−1
S/R (q ∩ R) with minimal height. Then
either q ∈ ZS/R , or q has minimal height such that ZS (q) ⊆ ZS (I).
If q ∈ ZS/R , then by Proposition 3.3,
ghtR (q ∩ R) = htS (q).
So suppose q has minimal height such that ZS (q) ⊆ ZS (I). Then q ⊇ I since q and
I are radical ideals of S. Hence, q ∩ R = I since I is a maximal ideal of R. Thus
(i)

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

1 ≤ ghtR (I) ≤ htS (q) = htS (I) = 1,
where (i) holds since I 6= 0 and S is an integral domain; (ii) holds since q ∩ R = I;
(iii) holds since q is a minimal prime over I of minimal height; and (iv) holds by
assumption. Consequently,
ghtR (I) = htS (q).
Therefore S is saturated.

5. Examples
Example 5.1. Consider the family of algebras
Sj := k[x, y, xz, yz, xz 2 , yz 2 , . . . , xz j−1 , yz j−1 , z j ]

and

R := k + (x, y)S1 ,

where j ≥ 1, and (x, y)S1 is the ideal of S1 = k[x, y, z] generated by x and y. By
Theorem 4.1, S1 is a saturated depiction of R with
US1 /R = ZS1 (x, y)c .
Since each 2-dimensional subvariety of Max S1 = A3k intersects the complement of
the line ZS1 (x, y), R is noetherian in codimension 1. Furthermore, since S1 is a

NONNOETHERIAN COORDINATE RINGS WITH UNIQUE MAXIMAL DEPICTIONS

13

polynomial ring, it is normal. Therefore S1 is the unique maximal depiction of R, as
well as the unique normal depiction of R, by Theorem 3.19.
We will show that each Sj ⊆ S1 is also a depiction of R. Fix j ≥ 1.
We first claim that ιSj /R : Spec Sj → Spec R is surjective. Let p ∈ Spec R. Since
S1 is a depiction of R, there is a prime q ∈ Spec S1 such that q ∩ R = p. But
R ⊂ Sj ⊆ S1 . Therefore the prime q0 := q ∩ Sj ∈ Spec Sj satisfies q0 ∩ R = p, proving
our claim.
We now claim that (2) in Definition 2.1 holds. Let n ∈ Max Sj be such that Rn∩R is
noetherian. S1 is a finitely generated Sj -module with generating set {1, z, z 2 , . . . , z j−1 }.
Thus, by Nakayama’s lemma, nS1 6= S1 . Therefore there is some t ∈ Max S1 such
that t ∩ Sj = n. Furthermore, since S1 is a depiction of R and Rt∩R = Rn∩R is
noetherian, we have (S1 )t = Rt∩R . Thus,
(Sj )n = (Sj )t∩Sj ⊆ (S1 )t = Rt∩R = Rn∩R ⊆ (Sj )n .
Whence (Sj )n = Rn∩R , proving our claim. Sj is therefore a depiction of R.
In the following example, we show that if R is not noetherian in codimension 1, then
R may admit a unique maximal depiction T which is not saturated. This example
demonstrates that unique maximal depictions, when they exist, are not necessarily
the ‘right’ depictions for some nonnoetherian rings.
Example 5.2. Consider the algebras
T := k[x, x−1 , y],

S := k[x, y],

R := k + I,

where I := x(x − 1, y)S. We will show that T is the unique maximal depiction of R,
but is not saturated.
Since dim S/I = 1, S is a saturated depiction of R, by Theorem 4.1. However, since
the localization RxS∩R = RI is not noetherian, R is not noetherian in codimension 1,
by Proposition 3.18. Clearly T is also a depiction of R, with
(12)

UT /R = ZT (t0 )c ,

where t0 := (x − 1, y)T ∈ Max T .
Max R may therefore be viewed either as the plane Max S = A2k where the point
ZS (x − 1, y) and line ZS (x) are together identified as a single closed point; or as the
open subset of the plane
Max T ∼
= ZS (x)c .
From the perspective of T , all the closed points of Max R, including I itself, appear
zero-dimensional.

14

CHARLIE BEIL

We claim that T is the unique maximal depiction of R. Indeed, let S 0 be any
depiction of R. Then
\
\
(i)
(ii) \
(iii) \
S0 ⊆
Sq0 =
Rq∩R =
Rt∩R =
Tt
q∈ZS 0 /R

q∈ZS 0 /R

t∈ZT /R

t∈ZT /R

\

(iv)

=

t∈Spec T \{t0 }

Tt =

\

Tt = T,

t∈Spec T

where (i) and (iii) hold by Lemma 3.1.3; (ii) holds by Lemma 3.2; and (iv) holds by
(12). Therefore S 0 is contained in T .
We now claim that T is not saturated. Set q = xS; then
q ∩ R = t0 ∩ R = I.
Furthermore,
(i)

1 ≤ ghtR (I) ≤ htS (q) = 1 < 2 = htT (t0 ),
where (i) holds since I 6= 0.
Let t ∈ Spec T \ {t0 }. Since t0 is a maximal ideal of T , (12) implies t ∈ ZT /R .
Whence t ∈ ŨT /R by Lemma 3.1.3. Thus t 6∈ ι−1
T /R (I) by Lemma 3.1.4. Therefore
ι−1
T /R (I) = {t0 } .
It follows that there is a prime p ∈ Spec R, namely I, such that for each t ∈ ι−1
T /R (p),
ghtR (p) < htT (t).
In our final example, we show that R need not be noetherian in codimension 1 in
order for R to admit a saturated unique maximal depiction.
Example 5.3. Consider the algebras
S := k[x, y]

and

R := k + xS.

By Theorem 4.1, S is a saturated depiction of R, with
US/R = ZS (x)c .
Furthermore, by Proposition 3.18, R is not noetherian in codimension 1 since the
localization RxS∩R is not noetherian.
We claim that S is the unique maximal depiction of R. Let S 0 be any depiction of
R. Then by Proposition 3.4,
S 0 ⊆ Γ(US/R ) = Γ(ZS (x)c ) = S[x−1 ].
However, ιS[x−1 ]/R is not surjective since the ideal xS ∈ Max R does not have a pre0
image in S[x−1 ]. Furthermore, ι−1
S 0 /R (xS) 6= ∅ since S is a depiction of R. It follows
0
that S ⊆ S. S is therefore a saturated unique maximal depiction of R, even though
R is not noetherian in codimension 1.

NONNOETHERIAN COORDINATE RINGS WITH UNIQUE MAXIMAL DEPICTIONS

15

Acknowledgments. The author would like to thank an anonymous referee for
useful comments. This article was completed while the author was a research fellow
at the Heilbronn Institute for Mathematical Research at the University of Bristol.
References
[B1] C. Beil, Morita equivalences and Azumaya loci from Higgsing dimer algebras, J. Algebra 453
(2016) 429-455.
[B2]
, Nonnoetherian coordinate rings with multiple positive dimensional points,
arXiv:1607.07778.
, Nonnoetherian geometry, J. Algebra Appl. 15 (2016).
[B3]
, Nonnoetherian homotopy dimer algebras and noncommutative crepant resolutions,
[B4]
Glasgow Math. J., to appear.
[B5]
, On the central geometry of nonnoetherian dimer algebras, in preparation.
[E] D. Eisenbud, Commutative algebra with a view toward algebraic geometry, Springer, 2004.
[F] Kazunori Fujita, Some counterexamples related to prime chains in integral domains, Hiroshima
Math. J. 5 (1975) 473-485.
[K] I. Kaplansky, Commutative Rings, Allyn and Bacon, 1970.
[M] H. Matsumura, Commutative ring theory, Cambridge University Press, 1986.
[S] J.-P. Serre, Local algebra, Springer, 2000.
Institut für Mathematik und Wissenschaftliches Rechnen, Universität Graz, Heinrichstrasse 36, 8010 Graz, Austria.
E-mail address: charles.beil@uni-graz.at

