CLASSIFICATION OF PLETHORIES IN
CHARACTERISTIC ZERO

arXiv:1701.01314v1 [] 5 Jan 2017

MAGNUS CARLSON
Abstract. We classify plethories over fields of characteristic zero,
thus answering a question of Borger-Wieland and Bergman. All
plethories over characteristic zero fields are linear, in the sense that
they are free plethories on a bialgebra. For the proof we need some
facts from the theory of ring schemes where we extend previously
known results. We also classify plethories with trivial Verschiebung
over a perfect field of non-zero characteristic and indicate future
work.

Contents
1. Introduction
1
Notation and conventions
3
Acknowledgements
4
2. Ring schemes
4
3. Plethories and k − k-birings.
8
4. Classification of plethories over a field of characteristic zero. 11
5. Some classification results in characteristic p > 0.
13
References
17

1. Introduction
Plethories, first introduced by Tall-Wraith [13], and then studied by
Borger-Wieland [3], are precisely the objects which act on k-algebras,
for k a commutative ring. There are many fundamental questions regarding plethories which remain unanswered. One such question is,
given a ring k, whether one can classify plethories over k, in this paper
we will take a first step towards a classification.
For some motivation, let us start by looking at the category of modules Modk over a commutative ring k. If we consider the category of
representable functors Modk → Modk , there is a monoidal structure
given by composition of functors. Then one defines a k-algebra R as
a k-module R together with a comonad structure on the representable
endofunctor Modk (R, −) ∶ Modk → Modk with respect to composition
Date: January 6, 2017.
1

2

MAGNUS CARLSON

of functors. Heuristically, this says that a k-algebra is precisely the
kind of object which knows how to act on k-modules. This can be extended to a non-linear setting, so that instead of looking at k-modules
we look at k-algebras Algk and consider representable endofunctors
Algk → Algk . A comonoid with respect to composition of functors is
then called a plethory and analogously, a plethory is what knows how
to act on k-algebras. One particular important example of a plethory
is the Z-algebra Λ which consist of the ring of symmetric functions in
infinitely many variables with a certain biring structure. The functor
Algk (Λ, −) ∶ Algk → Algk represents the functor taking a ring R to its
ring of Witt vectors. Using plethories one gets a very conceptual view
of Witt vectors and in [2] James Borger develops the geometry of Witt
vectors using the plethystic perspective.
Let now k be a field. If we let P k denote the category of plethories over
k, there is a forgetful functor
F ∶ P k → Bialgk
into the category of cocommutative counital bialgebras over k. This
functor has a left adjoint S(−) ∶ Bialgk → P and we say that a plethory
P is linear if P ≅ S(Q) for some cocommutative, counital bialgebra Q.
Heuristically, a plethory P is linear if every action of P on an algebra
A comes from an action of a bialgebra on A. The main theorem of this
paper is:
Theorem 1.1. Let k be a field of characteristic zero. Then any kplethory is linear.
This answers a question of Bergman-Hausknecht [1, p.336] and BorgerWieland [3] in the positive. The theorem is proved by studying the
category of affine ring schemes. We have the following results, extending those of Greenberg [8] to arbitrary fields and not necesarily reduced
schemes:
Theorem 1.2. Let k be a field. Then any connected ring scheme of
finite type is unipotent.
Theorem 1.3. Let P be a connected ring scheme of finite type over
k. Then P is affine.
For the case of characteristic p > 0 our classification results on plethories
are not as complete and further work is needed to have a complete
classification. To explain our classification results here we need some
definitions. Let Fk be the Frobenius homomorphism of k and k⟨F ⟩
be the non-commutative ring which as underlying set is k[F ] and has
multiplication given by
F i F j = F i+j

CLASSIFICATION OF PLETHORIES IN CHARACTERISTIC ZERO

3

and
F a = Fk (a)F.
We define
to be the category of cocommutative, counital bialgebras over k which also are modules over k⟨F ⟩. Once again, for a
plethory over a perfect field k of char k > 0 there is a forgetful functor
Bialgkp

P k → Bialgkp
which has a left adjoint S[p] . Call a plethory P p-linear if P ≅ S[p] (Q)
for some Q ∈ Bialgkp . We have then the following classification result:
Theorem 1.4. Let k be a perfect field of characteristic p > 0. Assume
that P is a plethory over k such that the Verschiebung VP = 0. Then
P is p-linear.
The structure of this paper is as follows. In section 2 we study ring
schemes and prove some results which we will need for our classification theorem. The main theorems of this section that are needed for
later purposes are Theorem 2.6 and Theorem 2.7. In section 3 we introduce plethories and k − k-birings and provide some examples. This
section contains no new results and gives just a brief introduction to
the relevant objects as defined in Borger-Wieland [3]. In section 4 we
prove that all plethories over a field k of characteristic zero is linear
using the results from section 2. We also show that any k − k-biring
is connected. In section 5 we prove some initial classification results
regarding plethories in characteristic p > 0.
Notation and conventions
Ring
BRk,k
Pk
Bialgk
Bialgkp
⊙
Algk
+
∆A , ∆×A
ǫ+A , ǫ×A
βA
+
∆2 , ∆×2

category of commutative and unital rings.
category of k − k-birings.
category of k-plethories.
category of cocommutative k-bialgebras.
category of cocommutative k-p-bialgebras.
composition product of k − k-birings, Def. 3.2.
category of commutative algebras over the ring k.
coaddition resp. comultiplication map for a biring A.
counit for coaddition resp. comultiplication for a biring A.
co-k-algebra strucutre on a k − k-biring A.
abbreviation for the composite (1 ⊗ ∆+ ) ○ ∆+ resp. (1 ⊗ ∆× ) ○
∆× .
P primitive elements functor
OX structure sheaf of a scheme X.
Schk category of k-schemes for k a commutative ring.
Ga the affine line viewed as a group scheme, see Ex. 3.1
Gm the multiplicative group scheme, after Def. 2.5.

4

MAGNUS CARLSON

µp the p-th root of unity group scheme, Ex. 5.2
αp see Ex. 3.3
π0 (G) the group scheme of connected components of a group scheme
G over the field k, Def. 4.2
S free plethory functor on a cocommutative bialgebra. Def. 4.1
[p]
S
free plethory functor on a cocommutative p-bialgebra, after
Def. 5.1.
○
G the identity component of a group scheme G.
FG , VG the Frobenius resp. Verschiebung morphism of a group scheme
G over a perfect field of characteristic p > 0.
k⟨F ⟩ the twisted polynomial algebra.
For us, all rings are commutative and unital. We will use Sweedler
(1)
(2)
notation for coaddition ∆+ and ∆× , so that ∆+ (x) = ∑i xi ⊗ xi and
[1]
[2]
∆× (x) = ∑i xi ⊗ xi if x ∈ A where A is a biring. For concepts from
the theory of group schemes not introduced properly here, we refer to
[11] or [6] .
Acknowledgements. I am very grateful to James Borger who supplied me with the conjecture for characteristic zero and the idea of
”weakly linear” plethories. He has been more than generous with his
knowledge and many of the ideas in this paper come from conversations
with him. I also thank David Rydh and Lars Hesselholt for the many
useful comments they gave which helped improve the quality of this
article. I would also like to thank my advisor Tilman Bauer for his
support and for his many thoughtful suggestions on this article.
2. Ring schemes
Let k be a commutative ring. Recall that R is a ring scheme over k if
R is a scheme together with a lift of the functor
Schk (−, R) ∶ Schk → Set
to Ring. We say that a ring scheme is a k-algebra scheme if the lift
factors through the category of k-algebras. We will mostly be concerned
with affine ring schemes. Ring schemes were studied by Greenberg in [8]
and he showed that for connected, reduced ring schemes of finite type
over an algebraically closed field k, the underlying scheme is always
affine. Further, he shows that the underlying group variety is always
unipotent. We improve on these results by showing that any connected
ring schemes of finite type over an arbitrary field is affine, and that the
underlying group scheme is always unipotent. From now on, in this
section, k is always a field.
Definition 2.1. A k-scheme X is anti-affine if OX (X) = k. We say
that a group scheme is anti-affine if its underlying scheme is anti-affine

CLASSIFICATION OF PLETHORIES IN CHARACTERISTIC ZERO

5

For example, abelian varieties are all anti-affine group schemes. An
anti-affine group scheme has the property that any morphism from
it into an affine group scheme is trivial. Anti-affine groups are very
important for the structure of group schemes as the following theorem
shows:
Theorem 2.2 ([4, Theorem 1]). If G is a group scheme of finite type
over a field k there is an exact sequence of group schemes
0 → Gant → G → G/Gant → 0
such that Gant is anti-affine and G/Gant is affine.
We will now want to show that all connected finite type ring schemes
are affine, i.e that in the above exact sequence Gant = Spec k. For this,
we will need the following lemma.
Lemma 2.1. Let X, Y, Z be k-schemes with X quasi-compact and antiaffine and Y locally noetherian and irreducible.Suppose that f ∶ X ×Y →
Z is a morphism such that there exist k-rational points x0 ∈ X, y0 ∈ Y
such that f (x, y0 ) = f (x0 , y0 ) for all x. Then f (x, y) = f (x0 , y) for all
x, y.
Proof. see [4, Lemma 3.3.3.].



Theorem 2.3. Let R be a connected ring scheme of finite type over
k. Then R is affine.
Proof. We know by Theorem 2.2 that R sits in the middle of an extension of an affine group scheme by an anti-affine group. Let
0 → Rant → R → Raf f → 0
be the corresponding extension where Rant is anti-affine and Raf f the
affine quotient. Since R is of finite type, Raf f is a ring scheme. This
follows from the fact that if X, Y are quasi-compact k-schemes, then
the obvious map OX (X)⊗k OY (Y ) → OX×k Y (X ×k Y ) is an isomorphism
(see [4, Lemma 2.3.3.]). This implies that Rant defines an ideal scheme
in R, i.e for all rings S over k, Rant (S) is an ideal of R(S). Now, we will
apply the above lemma with Y = R (note that R is irreducible) and
X = Z = Rant . Taking x0 = eRant and y0 = eR to be the rational points
corresponding to the additive identity of Rant (k) and R(k) respectively,
we have that m(x, y0 ) = m(x0 , y0 ) is identically equal to zero. Thus, we
have that m(x, y) = m(x0 , y) is identically zero. But, letting 1R be the
rational point corresponding to the multiplicative identity of R(k) we
have that m(x, 1R ) is zero. But multiplication by 1 is always injective,
and thus, Rant is trivial and R is affine.

We don’t know if the condition for R to be of finite type is necessary in
2.3. Let us recall the following definition from the theory of algebraic
groups.

6

MAGNUS CARLSON

Definition 2.4. Let G be a commutative group scheme over k. We say
that G is unipotent if it is affine and if every non-zero closed subgroup
H of G admits a non-zero homomorphism H → Ga .
The data of a homomorphism G → Ga is the same as specifying an
element x ∈ AG in the underlying Hopf algebra of G that satisfies
∆G (x) = x⊗1 +1 ⊗x, i.e specifying a primitive element. If G = Spec AG
is an affine group scheme and AG the Hopf algebra associated to G,
then saying that G is unipotent is the same as saying that it is coconnected (or conilpotent). The following definition will be useful for the
proof of Theorem 2.6.
Definition 2.5. Let G be a commutative affine group scheme over a
field. We say that G is multiplicative if every homomorphism G → Ga
is zero.
An example of a multiplicative group is Gm = Spec k[x, x−1 ]. There
can in general be no homomorphism from a multiplicative group into
a unipotent group and no morphisms from a unipotent group to a
multiplicative group (for a proof, see [11, Corollary 15.19-15.20]).
The following theorem was shown for reduced ring varieties over an
algebraically closed fields by Greenberg, but the results carry over for
perfect fields without any modification. We improve on this by carrying
through the proof when R is not necesarily reduced and over any field
k. Further,the theorem can be extended to ring schemes not necesarily
of finite type if the ring scheme is already known to be affine.
Theorem 2.6. Over a field k, all connected ring schemes R of finite
type are unipotent.
Proof. By Theorem 2.3, a connected ring scheme is affine. We know
that R contains a greatest multiplicative subgroup Rm that has the
property that for all endomorphisms α of RS , (where RS is the base
change of R to S) for S a k-algebra, that α((Rm )S ) ⊂ (Rm )S ([11,
Theorem 17.16]). Thus, since any x ∈ R(k) defines an endomorphism
of R (as a group scheme) through multiplication by x, we have that Rm
is an ideal of R. It is known that any action of a connected algebraic
group on a multiplicative group must be trivial, i.e for G connected and
H multiplicative, a map G → Aut(H, H) must have image the identity.
We will need the following, which says that any map G → End(H, H)
where G is any connected group scheme and H is multiplicative is
trivial. This is basically just deduced, mutatis mutandis, from the
proof of [11, Theorem 14.28]. So, we see that 0 and 1 defines the same
endomorphisms on the ideal scheme Rm . But this is only the case if
Rm = 0.

To extend this to all connected ring schemes, we need the following:
Theorem 2.7. Let k be a field and R be an affine ring scheme over k.
Then R is a filtered limit of ring schemes of finite type.

CLASSIFICATION OF PLETHORIES IN CHARACTERISTIC ZERO

7

Proof. The following proof is inspired by the analogue theorem for Hopf
algebras over a field, as occurs in for example Milne [11, Prop. 11.32].
Write R = Spec AR . We know that AR is a bialgebra and we see that we
can reduce to proving that any a ∈ AR is contained in a sub-bialgebra of
finite type. Let ∆+ ∶ AR → AR ⊗ AR be the coaddition giving the additive group structure on R and ∆× ∶ AR → AR ⊗AR the comultiplication
defining the multiplication on R. Consider
∆+2 (a) = ∑ ci ⊗ xij ⊗ dj
i,j

with ci and dj linearly independent. Now, by the fundamental theorem
of coalgebras, we know that if we take X to be the subspace of AR
generated by {xij }, then this is a subcoalgebra, i.e that ∆+ (xij ) ⊂
X ⊗ X. Now, for each xij in this system, consider
∆×2 (xij ) = ∑ ei ⊗ ykl ⊗ fl
k,l

with ei and fl linearly independent. With the same arguments, one sees
that for the subspace Y generated by {ykl } we have ∆× (ykl ) ⊂ Y ⊗ Y.
Let now Z be subalgebra generated by the finite-dimensional subspace
spanned by {xij , ykl }. We claim that Z actually is closed under both
the operation ∆+ and ∆× . It is clear that
∆× (xij ) ⊂ Z ⊗ Z
and the same holds for coaddition. It is also easy to verify that
∆× (ykl ) ⊂ Z ⊗ Z. We will now prove that ∆+ (ykl ) ⊂ Z ⊗ Z and for
this, consider the following diagram which is easily verified if we reverse all arrows and think of it in terms of rings.
∆×
AR
AR ⊗ AR
∆+

AR ⊗ AR

AR ⊗ AR

∆× ⊗∆×

AR ⊗ AR ⊗ AR ⊗ AR

AR ⊗ AR

1⊗T ⊗1

AR ⊗ AR ⊗ AR ⊗ AR

AR ⊗ AR

∆× ⊗1⊗1⊗∆×

AR ⊗ (AR ⊗ AR ) ⊗ (AR ⊗ AR ) ⊗ AR
1⊗T ⊗T ⊗1

(AR ⊗ AR ) ⊗ AR ⊗ AR ⊗ (AR ⊗ AR )
M ⊗1⊗1⊗M

AR ⊗ AR ⊗ AR ⊗ AR

AR ⊗ AR
∆× ⊗1

(AR ⊗ AR ) ⊗ AR
1⊗∆+ ⊗1

AR ⊗ AR ⊗ AR ⊗ A

8

MAGNUS CARLSON

Here M is the multiplication map and T swithces the factors. What
the diagram is saying, is just relating different ways of forming
abd + acd
for a, b, c, d in a ring. So this says, that
(1 ⊗ ∆+ ⊗ 1)(∆×2 (xij ) = ∑ ek ⊗ ∆+ (ykl ) ⊗ fl ∈ Z ⊗ Z ⊗ Z ⊗ Z.
k,l

Now, since ek are independent, this means that
∑ ∆+ (ykl ) ⊗ fl ∈ Z ⊗ Z ⊗ Z
l

and by linear independence of each fl this means that
∆+ (ykl ) ∈ Z ⊗ Z.
Now, let W be the sub-algebra generated by Z ∪ S(Z) where S ∶ AR →
AR is the antipode. It is easily verified that
∆+ ○ S = (S ⊗ S) ○ ∆+
and that
∆× (S(Z)) ⊂ W
follows from the identity
∆× ○ S = (1 ⊗ S) ○ ∆× .
We thus see that W is a bialgebra and we are done.



Corollary 2.2. Any affine connected ring scheme over a field is unipotent.
Proof. Indeed, we know that we can write P = lim Pi where Pi ranges
←Ð
over ring schemes of finite type. Now, unipotence is stable under inverse
limits and this immediately gives that P is unipotent.

3. Plethories and k − k-birings.
Let k be an arbitrary commutative ring. In this section we will recall
the definition of a plethory as defined in [3].
Definition 3.1. A k-biring A is a coring object in the category of
k-algebras. Explicitly, A is a k-algebra together with maps
∆+ ∶ A → A ⊗k A,
∆× ∶ A → A ⊗k A,
S ∶ A → A,
ǫ+ ∶ A → k
and ǫ× ∶ A → k such that:

CLASSIFICATION OF PLETHORIES IN CHARACTERISTIC ZERO

9

● The triple (∆+ , ǫ+ , S) defines a cocommutative Hopf algebra
structure on A with S the antipode and ǫ+ the counit.
● ∆× is cocommutative coassociative and codistributes over ∆+
and ǫ× ∶ A → k is a counit for ∆× .
We say that A is a k − k-biring if, in addition to the above data, it has
a map
β ∶ k → Ringk (A, k)
of rings, where we endow Ringk (A, k) with the ring structure induced
from the coring structure on A.
Equivalently, a k − k-biring A is just an affine scheme together with a
lift of the functor Ringk (A, −) to the category of k-algebras, i.e it is an
affine k-algebra scheme.
Example 3.1. Let define the k-algebra scheme which we will call Ga .
Ga will represent the identity functor Ringk → Ringk . The underlying
scheme of Ga is Spec k[e]. The coaddition and comultiplication is given
by ∆+ (e) = e ⊗ 1 + e ⊗ 1, ∆× (e) = e ⊗ e, the additive resp. multiplicative
counit by ǫ+ (e) = 0, ǫ× (e) = 1 the antipode by S(e) = −e and the co-klinear structure by β(c)(e) = c for all c ∈ k.
Example 3.2. Consider Z[e, x]. On e, we define all the structure maps
as in the previous example. We then define
∆+ (x) = x ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ x,
∆× (x) = x ⊗ e + e ⊗ x
and ǫ× (x) = ǫ+ (x) = 0, S(x) = −x. This Z-ring scheme represents the
functor taking a ring R to R[ǫ]/(ǫ2 ) , the ring of dual numbers over
that ring.
Example 3.3. Let k = Fq be a finite field of characteristic p and consider
αp = Spec k[e]/(ep )
as a group scheme where the group structure is induced from Spec k[e].
Define a multiplication
αp × αp → αp
by saying that xy = 0 for any x, y ∈ αp (R) for R a k-algebra. Consider
now the constant group scheme
Fq = ∐ k.
x∈k

Then we can define a structure of a ring scheme on Fq × αp by defining
the multiplication to be (x, y)(z, w) = (xz, xw + yz) for (x, y), (z, w) ∈
(Fq × αp )(R). This is a non-reduced ring scheme.

10

MAGNUS CARLSON

A famous example is also that the functor taking a ring R to W (R),
its ring of big Witt vectors, is also representable by a ring scheme.
Let us note that we can form the category of k − k-birings, with morphisms between objects those morphism of k-algebras respecting the
biring structure. We let BRk,k be the category of k − k-birings. Let us
recall the following definition from [3].
Definition 3.2. Let A be a k − k-biring. Then the functor
Ringk (A, −) ∶ Algk → Algk
has a left adjoint,
A ⊙k − ∶ Algk → Algk .
Explicitly, for a k-algebra R, A ⊙ R is the k-algebra generated by all
symbols a ⊙ r subject to the conditions that:
●
●
●
●
●
●

∀a, a′ ∈ A, r ∈ R, aa′ ⊙ r = (a ⊙ r)(a′ ⊙ r).
∀a, a′ ∈ A, r ∈ R, (a + a′ ) ⊙ r = (a ⊙ r) + (a′ ⊙ r).
∀c ∈ k, c ⊙ r = c.
(1)
(2)
∀a ∈ A, r, r ′ ∈ R, a ⊙ (r + r ′ ) = ∑i (ai ⊙ r)(ai ⊙ r ′ ).
[1]
[2]
∀a ∈ A, r, r ′ ∈ R, a ⊙ rr ′ = ∑i (ai ⊙ r)(ai ⊙ r ′ ).
∀a ∈ A, c ∈ k, a ⊙ c = β(c)(a).

It is easy to see that (⊗i Ai ) ⊙ R ≅ ⊗i (Ai ⊙ R) and that A ⊙ (⊗i Ri ) ≅
⊗i (A⊙Ri ). If further, R is a k−k-bialgebra, we note that A⊙R is a k−kbialgebra. Indeed, we have that Ringk (A⊙R, S) ≅ Ringk (R, Ringk (A, S))
and since the latter set has a ring structure, so does the former. One
then verifies that ⊙k gives a monoidal structure to BRk,k . The unit
of this monoidal structure is k[e]. BRk,k is a monoidal category, but
it is not symmetric. Now, the Yoneda embedding sets up an equivalence of categories between the category of representable endofunctors
Algk → Algk and BRk,k and under this equivalence, ⊙ corresponds to
○, composition of representable endofunctors as given in the introduction. Denote the category of representable endofunctors Algk k → Algk
by Algkend .
Definition 3.3. A k-plethory is a comonoid in Algkend where the monoidal
structure is composition of endofunctors. Explicitly, on the level of representing objects, a k-plethory P is a monoid in BRk,k . This means that
P is a biring together with an associative map of birings P ⊙ P → P
and a unit k[e] → P.
Remark 3.4. For a plethory P one can define an action of P on a
k-ring R to be a map ○ ∶ P ⊙ R → R such that (p1 ⊙ p2 ) ○ r = p1 ⊙ (p2 ○ r)
and e ○ r = r, ∀p1 , p2 ∈ P, r ∈ R. A ring R together with an action of P
on R is called a P -ring.
Example 3.5. If k is a finite ring, then k k , the set of functions k → k
is a plethory where ○ is given by composition of functions.

CLASSIFICATION OF PLETHORIES IN CHARACTERISTIC ZERO

11

4. Classification of plethories over a field of
characteristic zero.
In this section we will prove that all plethories over a field of characteristic zero are linear. This question was asked by Bergman-Hausknecht
[1] and Borger-Wieland [3]. To understand what it means for a plethory
to be linear, we will introduce some terminology.
Definition 4.1. Let A be a cocommutative bialgebra (not necesarily
commutative) over k with comultiplication ∆. Then there is a free kplethory on A over k. The underlying algebra structure is S(A), the
symmetric algebra on A, and the coaddition
∆+ ∶ S(A) → S(A) ⊗ S(A)
is induced from the map
A → S(A) ⊗ S(A)
sending a to a ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ a. The comultiplication ∆× is similarily induced
from ∆. The plethysm
○ ∶ S(A) ⊙ S(A) → S(A)
is given by
S(m)

S(A) ⊙ S(A) ≅ S(A ⊗ A) ÐÐ→ S(A)
where m is the multiplication on A. Among the pairs consisting of a
plethory P and a morphism of bialgebras f ∶ A → P the pair S(A) and
j ∶ A → S(A) is initial with this property.
Call a plethory P linear if P ≅ S(A) for some bialgebra A. The reason
for calling it linear is that if P ≅ S(A) for some bialgebra A then
Ringk (S(A), −) = Modk (A, −).
Let us note now that by Theorem 2.6 any connected ring scheme of
finite type is unipotent. Over Q (or more generally any field of characteristic zero) all group schemes are reduced by a theorem of Cartier.
We say that a group scheme G is étale if G is a finite scheme and geometrically reduced. This is equivalent to asking for the underlying
Hopf algebra AG to be an étale algebra. Let us recall the following
definition from the theory of group schemes (see for example [6, II, §5,
Proposition 1.8] or [11, Definition 9.4])
Definition 4.2. Let G be a group scheme of finite type over k. Let
AG be the underlying Hopf algebra of G and consider the largest étale
k-subalgebra π0 (AG ) of AG . π0 (AG ) then has a Hopf algebra structure
induced from the one on AG and we let π0 (G) = Spec π0 (AG ) be the
group scheme associated to this Hopf algebra.
Note that there is a canonical map G → π0 (G). It is easy to see that
if π0 (G) = Spec k, then G is geometrically connected since in that case
AG has no nontrivial idempotents.

12

MAGNUS CARLSON

Lemma 4.1. Any k-algebra scheme R of finite type over any infinite
field k is geometrically connected.
Proof. Consider the connected-étale exact sequence
0 → R○ → R → π0 (R) → 0
of group schemes where R○ is the identity component of R. We will first
show that π0 (R) has a natural k-algebra scheme structure. Indeed, for
this it is enough to show that R○ is a k-ideal scheme in R. Let us start
by proving that m(R○ × R) ⊂ R○ . We know that the multiplication
m ∶ R○ × R → R
takes the additive identity e ∈ R(k) to itself, i.e m(e, x) = e for any
x ∈ R(k). Further, the k-algebra structure on R○ is induced from the kalgebra structure on R. This clearly implies that R○ is a k-ideal scheme.
Thus, the quotient R/R○ ≅ π0 (R) is a k-algebra scheme. Let us see that
π0 (R) is isomorphic to Spec k. One knows that the underlying algebra
of π0 (R) is a product of finite separable k-extensions. We consider
Schk (π0 (R), π0 (R)), this is a k-algebra (since π0 (R) is a ring scheme).
Because the underlying algebra of π0 (R) is a finite product of finite
separable field extensions, Schk (π0 (R), π0 (R)) is a finite set. However,
for a finite set to have a k-algebra structure it must just contain one
element, i.e it has to be the zero ring. This implies that π0 (R) = Spec k
so R is geometrically connected.

Now, let us consider a Hopf algebra H and denote the primitive elements of H by P(H). We say that a Hopf algebra is primitively generated if P(H) generates H as an algebra. Over characteristic zero
all unipotent affine group schemes are primitively generated. We then
have the classical Milnor-Moore theorem [12].
Theorem 4.3. For any commutative connected affine unipotent group
scheme H over a field of characteristic zero, the canonical map
Spec H → Spec S(P(H))
is an isomorphism of group schemes. In particular, the underlying
scheme is affine space.
Remark 4.2. Let us note that we can view P(H) as a Lie algebra
with trivial commutator. Then the construction S(P(H)) is the same
as the universal enveloping Lie algebra of P(H).
In [3] it is shown that if Q is a plethory over a field k, then P(Q). the
+
primitives with respect to δQ
, is a cocommutative k-bialgebra. Briefly,
the multiplication in P(Q) is given by the plethysm ○ and the maps
∆× ∶ Q → Q ⊗ Q,
ǫ× ∶ Q → k induces a comultiplication respectively a counit on P(Q)
making it a cocommutative counital bialgebra.

CLASSIFICATION OF PLETHORIES IN CHARACTERISTIC ZERO

13

Theorem 4.4. Let Q be a plethory over a field of characteristic zero
k. Then Q is linear, i.e
Q ≅ S(P(Q))
where S(P(Q)) has the plethory structure as given in Definition 3.1.
Proof. Suppose that Q is a plethory over k. P(Q) naturally has a
bialgebra structure as explained above. Given this, we can form the
free plethory on P(Q), S(P(Q)). We always have a natural map
v ∶ S(P(Q)) → Q
of Hopf algebras, and this is bijective by Milnor-Moore. Thus to show
that any plethory is linear, it suffices to show that this is actually a
morphism of plethories. But this is clear: the pair S(P(Q)) and
j ∶ P(Q) → S(P(Q))
is initial in the category of pairs consisting of a plethory P and a morphism f ∶ P(Q) → P of bialgebras. It is immediate that the canonical
map v is induced by this universal property, when we note that there
clearly is a map P(Q) → Q of bialgebras. We will of course need to
show that v is an isomorphism in the category of plethories. This follows easily from the fact that v is an isomorphism of affine schemes and
thus has an inverse in the category of affine schemes. What remains to
be checked is that this inverse is a morphism of plethories, but this is
immediate since v is.

Corollary 4.3. Let k be a field of characteristic zero. Then the category of plethories over k is equivalent to the category of cocommutative
k-bialgebras.
Proof. By the above theorem, the counit map is an isomorphism and
it is immediate to see that the unit map is an isomorphism as well. 
Remark 4.4. If k is a field of characteristic zero and Q a plethory over
k, this shows that the category of Q-rings is equivalent to the category
of rings with an action of the bialgebra P (Q).
5. Some classification results in characteristic p > 0.
In this section we will start a classification for plethories over a perfect field k of characteristic p. Our classification results here only apply to a certain class of plethories. We state future research directions, as well as give some ”pathological” examples which a complete
classification must take into account. For any scheme X over k with
structure map f ∶ X → Spec k we let Gp be the pullback of f along
F ∶ Spec k → Spec k, the Frobenius.

14

MAGNUS CARLSON

Let us briefly recall that for perfect fields k, group schemes over k
have two especially important maps, the (relative) Frobenius
FG ∶ G → Gp ≅ G
and the Verschiebung
VG ∶ G ≅ Gp → G.
These satisfy the property that FG VG = VG FG = p. A ring scheme R is
called elementary unipotent if VR = 0, i.e the Verschiebung is zero. Call
a plethory Q weakly linear if there is a map of plethories f ∶ P → Q
where P is a linear plethory (as defined in the previous section) such
that f when viewed as a map of algebras is surjective. This will, in
particular, imply that Q is primitively generated and is a quotient of
P by a P − P -ideal as defined in [3]. Not all plethories over a perfect
field k are primitively generated, as the following example shows (built
on an example from [10], Remark 1.6.2).
Example 5.1. Let G be the group scheme
Ga ×f αp
which as a scheme, is just Ga × αp . We let the the group structure be
given by
(g1 , h1 )(g2 , h2 ) = (g1 g2 , h1 + h2 + f (g1 , g2 ))
for
g1 , g2 , h1 , h2 ∈ Ga (R) × αp (R)
where f (x, y) = ((x+y)p −xp −y p )/p. This is a p-torsion group scheme but
is not elementary unipotent. One can define a non-unital ring scheme
structure on G be definining the multiplication to be trivial and then,
when k is finte, i.e k ≅ Fq ”unitalize” this by taking the direct product
with
Fq = ∐ Fq
a∈Fq

to get a ring scheme, as we did in Example 3.3. The underlying group
scheme of this ring scheme is clearly not elementary unipotent, since the
Verschiebung acts on each factor separately. Taking the free plethory
on a biring (see [3] 2.1 ) will then give us a plethory with its underlying
group scheme not elementary unipotent.
Another feature which differs from the case over a field of characteristic
zero is that there are plethories which have a non-trivial multiplicative
subgroups. This stems from the fact that there are ring schemes with
non-trivial multiplicative subgroups.
Example 5.2. Consider µp = Spec k[x, x−1 ]/(x − 1)p with comultiplication ∆ ∶ x → x ⊗ x and counit ǫ(x) = 1. This is an example of a multiplicative group scheme which is p-torsion and we can as before define
a trivial multiplication on µp , making it a non-unital ring scheme. We

CLASSIFICATION OF PLETHORIES IN CHARACTERISTIC ZERO

15

can then as previously stated, for finite fields, unitalize it to get a ring
scheme by taking the direct product with
Fq
and after that we can form the free plethory to get a plethory Q with
a non-trivial multiplicative subgroup.The fact that it has a non-trivial
multiplicative subgroup comes from , for example, the fact that there
is a non-zero homomorphism of group schemes µp → Q.
These two examples are rather artificial, but they show that plethories
behave wildly different in characteristic p > 0 than in characteristic 0.
We know that for any group scheme G over a perfect field k of characteristic p > 0, the group P(G) of primitive elements has a natural action
of the Frobenius, taking x ∈ P(G) to xp . In fact, P(G) becomes a module over a certain ring. As we previously stated, P(G) = Hom(G, Ga ).
We thus have that P(G) is naturally a module over the endomorphism
ring End(Ga , Ga ).
Definition 5.1. Let k⟨F ⟩ be the non-commutative polynomial ring
over k in one variable F with multplication given by, for a ∈ k aF =
Fk (a)a where Fk is the Frobenius endomorphism of k.
It is a quick calculation to show that End(Ga , Ga ) ≅ k⟨F ⟩. We now see
that P(G) is a module over k⟨F ⟩. Let us denote the category of modules
over k⟨F ⟩ by Modk⟨F ⟩ . Given a k⟨F ⟩-module M one can construct an
elementary unipotent group scheme S[p] (M) as follows (for details we
refer the reader to [11]) . Form S(M), the symmetric algebra on M,
with its obvious Hopf algebra structure and consider the map j ∶ M →
S(M). We then quotient out by the ideal generated by the elements
j(F x) − j(x)p
to get S[p] (M). One notes that for any commutative algebraic group G
one always has a map G → S[p] (P(G)). We have the following classical
theorem (see [6, IV,§3, Proposition 6.6])
Theorem 5.2. Let G be an affine group scheme. The following are
equivalent:
(i) The Verschiebung VG is zero.
(ii) G is a closed subgroup of Gra for some r.
(iii) The canonical homomorphism G → S[p] (P(G)) is an isomorphism.
Remark 5.3. What we call S[p] (P(Q)) is the same as the enveloping
p-algebra (also called the restricted universal enveloping algebra) on
the p-Lie algebra P(Q) where P(Q) has trivial commutator.
Lemma 5.4. When Q is a plethory, then S[p] (P(Q)) has the structure
of a plethory.

16

MAGNUS CARLSON

Proof. We know that P(Q) has a k⟨F ⟩ module structure where the
action of F is just taking the pth power. Further, S[p] (P(Q)) is the
quotient of S(P(Q)), which we know is a plethory, by the ideal J
generated by j(x)p − j(xp ), where j ∶ P(Q) → S(P(Q)) is the inclusion
in degree 1. It now suffices to show that this is a Q−Q-ideal (see [3] 6.1)
for U [p] (P(Q)) to be a plethory. This is equivalent to showing that for
a generating set S of J that
∆+Q (S) ⊂ Q ⊗ J + J ⊗ Q,
∆×Q (X) ⊂ Q ⊗ J + J ⊗ Q,
and
βQ (c)(S) = 0
∀c ∈ k and that
P(Q) ⊙ X ⊙ Q ⊂ J.
The first is immediate, since taking S to be the set of all j(x)p − j(xp ),
we have
∆+ (j(x)p ) − ∆+ (j(xp )) = ∆+ (j(x))p − (j(xp ) ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ j(xp ))
which is equal to
j(x)p ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ j(x)p − j(xp ) ⊗ 1 − 1 ⊗ j(xp ) ⊂ J ⊗ Q + Q ⊗ J.
Further,
[1]

[2]

[1]

[2]

∆× (j(x)p )−∆× (j(xp )) = ∑ j(xi )p ⊗j(xi )p − ∑ j((xi )p )⊗j((xi )p )
i

i

and this is equal to
[1]

[2]

[2]

[1]

[1]

[2]

∑ j(xi )p ⊗(j(xi )p −j((xi )p ))+∑((j((xi )p )−j(xi )p )⊗j((xi )p ))
i

but this is in J ⊗ P + P ⊗ J. We also need to show that βQ (c)(S) = 0,
this is clear. The last containment is similarily easy to verify.

Theorem 5.3. When Q is a plethory over a perfect field such that
VQ = 0, then S[p] (P(Q)) ≅ Q. We then say that Q is a p-linear plethory.
Proof. All one has to verify is that the canonical map f ∶ Q → S[p] (P(Q))
is a map of plethories. But this is obvious since this map is just the
composition of the two plethory maps Q → S(P(Q)) and S(P(Q)) →
S[p] (P(Q)).

Remark 5.5. We have seen that plethories need not be elementary
unipotent and not purely unipotent either (i.e it can have a non-trivial
multiplicative subgroup) Let us note that there can be no non-trivial
finite plethories over an infinite perfect field k. Indeed, from what we
have seen all plethories Q are connected over an infinite field. By
classical Dieudonné theory we can then decompose Q as Q = Qloc,red ×
Qloc,loc . This would imply that the Frobenius is nilpotent, but this can
never happen: the Frobenius is always a map of ring schemes.

CLASSIFICATION OF PLETHORIES IN CHARACTERISTIC ZERO

17

It seems to us that to classify plethories over a perfect field one should
establish an extension of ordinary Dieudonné theory to account for ring
schemes, which has been done to some extent by Hedayatzadeh in [9]
and for Hopf rings by Goerss [7] and Buchstaber-Lazarev [5]. Note that
Hedayatzadeh work with finite / profinite group schemes and with local
group schemes, which limits their applications to ring schemes since we
have seen that there are no non-trivial finite connected ring schemes
over a perfect field.
References
[1] George M. Bergman and Adam O. Hausknecht. Co-groups and co-rings in categories of associative rings, volume 45 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs.
American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1996.
[2] James Borger. The basic geometry of Witt vectors, I: The affine case. Algebra
Number Theory, 5(2):231–285, 2011.
[3] James Borger and Ben Wieland. Plethystic algebra. Adv. Math., 194(2):246–
283, 2005.
[4] M. Brion. Some structure theorems for algebraic groups. 2015.
[5] Victor Buchstaber and Andrey Lazarev. Dieudonné modules and p-divisible
groups associated with Morava K-theory of Eilenberg-Mac Lane spaces. Algebr.
Geom. Topol., 7:529–564, 2007.
[6] Michel Demazure and Pierre Gabriel. Groupes algébriques. Tome I: Géométrie
algébrique, généralités, groupes commutatifs. Masson & Cie, Éditeur, Paris;
North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, 1970. Avec un appendice ıt Corps
de classes local par Michiel Hazewinkel.
[7] Paul G. Goerss. Hopf rings, Dieudonné modules, and E∗ Ω2 S 3 . In Homotopy
invariant algebraic structures (Baltimore, MD, 1998), volume 239 of Contemp.
Math., pages 115–174. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1999.
[8] Marvin J. Greenberg. Algebraic rings. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 111:472–481,
1964.
[9] Mohammad Hadi Hedayatzadeh. Exterior powers of Barsotti-Tate groups. PhD
thesis, ETH Zürich, 2010.
[10] Tatsuji Kambayashi, Masayoshi Miyanishi, and Mitsuhiro Takeuchi. Unipotent algebraic groups. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 414. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin-New York, 1974.
[11] J. S Milne. Algebraic groups (algebraic group schemes over fields) v1.20. 2015.
[12] John W. Milnor and John C. Moore. On the structure of Hopf algebras. Ann.
of Math. (2), 81:211–264, 1965.
[13] D. O. Tall and G. C. Wraith. Representable functors and operations on rings.
Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 20:619–643, 1970.
E-mail address: macarlso@math.kth.se

