A NEW OUTLOOK ON COFINITENESS
KAMRAN DIVAANI-AAZAR, HOSSEIN FARIDIAN AND MASSOUD TOUSI

Abstract. Let a be an ideal of a commutative noetherian (not necessarily local) ring

arXiv:1701.07716v2 [math.AC] 15 Nov 2017

R. In the case cd(a, R) ≤ 1, we show that the subcategory of a-cofinite R-modules is
abelian. Using this and the technique of way-out functors, we show that if cd(a, R) ≤ 1,
or dim(R/a) ≤ 1, or dim(R) ≤ 2, then the local cohomology module Hai (X) is a-cofinite
for every R-complex X with finitely generated homology modules and every i ∈ Z. We
further answer Question 1.3 in the three aforementioned cases, and reveal a correlation
between Questions 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3.

1. Introduction
Throughout this paper, R denotes a commutative noetherian ring with identity and M(R)
flags the category of R-modules.
In 1969, Hartshorne introduced the notion of cofiniteness for modules and complexes; see
[Ha1]. He defined an R-module M to be a-cofinite if SuppR (M ) ⊆ V(a) and ExtiR (R/a, M )
is finitely generated for every i ≥ 0. Moreover, in the case where R is an a-adically complete
regular ring of finite Krull dimension, he defined an R-complex X to be a-cofinite if X ≃

R HomR Y, RΓa (R) for some R-complex Y with finitely generated homology modules. He
then proceeded to pose three questions in this direction which we paraphrase as follows.

Question 1.1. Is the local cohomology module Hai (M ), a-cofinite for every finitely generated
R-module M and every i ≥ 0?
Question 1.2. Is the category M(R, a)cof consisting of a-cofinite R-modules an abelian
subcategory of M(R)?
Question 1.3. Is it true that an R-complex X is a-cofinite if and only the homology module
Hi (X) is a-cofinite for every i ∈ Z?
By providing a counterexample, Hartshorne showed that the answers to these questions
are negative in general; see [Ha1, Section 3]. However, he established affirmative answers
to these questions in the case where a is a principal ideal generated by a nonzerodivisor
and R is an a-adically complete regular ring of finite Krull dimension, and also in the case
where a is a prime ideal with dim(R/a) = 1 and R is a complete regular local ring; see [Ha1,
Propositions 6.1 and 6.2, Corollary 6.3, Theorem 7.5, Proposition 7.6 and Corollary 7.7].
Since then many papers are devoted to study his first two questions; see for example [HK],
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 13D45; 13D07; 13D09.
Key words and phrases. Abelian category; cofinite module; cohomological dimension; derived category;
dualizing complex; local cohomology module; local homology module.
The research of the first author is supported by a grant from IPM (No. 95130212).
1

2

K. DIVAANI-AAZAR, H. FARIDIAN AND M. TOUSI

[DM], [Ka1], [Ka2], [Me1], [Me2]. These results were extended in several stages to take the
following form:
Theorem 1.4. Let a be an ideal of R such that either ara(a) ≤ 1, or dim(R/a) ≤ 1, or
dim(R) ≤ 2. Then Hai (M ) is a-cofinite for every finitely generated R-module M and every
i ≥ 0, and M(R, a)cof is an abelian subcategory of M(R).
For the case ara(a) ≤ 1, refer to [Ka2, Theorem 1] and [Ka1, Theorem 2.1]. For the case
dim(R/a) ≤ 1, see [Me1, Theorem 2.6 and Corollary 2.12], [BNS, Corollary 2.8], and [BN,
Corollary 2.7]. For the case dim(R) ≤ 2, observe [Me2, Theorem 7.10] and [Me2, Theorem
7.4].
The significance of cofiniteness of the local cohomology modules mainly stems from the
fact that if an R-module M is a-cofinite, then its set of associated primes is finite as well as
all its Bass numbers and Betti numbers with respect to every prime ideal of R. It is worth
mentioning that the investigation of such finiteness properties is a long-sought problem in
commutative and homological algebra; see e.g. [HS] and [Ly].
In this paper, we deal with the above three questions. Theorems 2.2, 3.3, 3.5 and 4.3 are
our main results.
In [PAB, Question 1], the authors asked: Is M(R, a)cof an abelian subcategory of M(R)
for every ideal a of R with cd(a, R) ≤ 1? We answer this question affirmatively by deploying the theory of local homology; see Theorem 2.2. Note that there exists an inequality
cd(a, R) ≤ ara(a) that can be strict; see Example 2.3.
It turns out that to establish the cofiniteness of Hai (X) for any R-complex X with finitely
generated homology modules, all we need to know is the cofiniteness of Hai (M ) for any
finitely generated R-module M and the abelianness of M(R, a)cof ; see Theorem 3.3. The
crucial step to achieve this is to recruit the technique of way-out functors.
To be consistent in both module and complex cases, we define an R-complex X to be
a-cofinite if SuppR (X) ⊆ V(a) and R HomR (R/a, X) has finitely generated homology modules. Corollary 4.2 indicates that, for homologically bounded R-complexes, this definition
coincides with that of Hartshorne.
Questions 1.1 and 1.2 have been high-profile among researchers, whereas not much attention has been brought to Question 1.3. The most striking result on this question is [EK, Theorem 1] which confines itself to complete Gorenstein local domains and the case dim(R/a) = 1.
We answer Hartshorne’s third question in the cases cd(a, R) ≤ 1, dim(R/a) ≤ 1, and
dim(R) ≤ 2 with no extra assumptions on R; see Corollary 3.6 (ii). Having the results
thus far obtained at our disposal, we show that the answers to Questions 1.1 and 1.2 are
affirmative if and only if the answer to Question 1.3 is affirmative for all homologically
bounded R-complexes; see Theorem 4.3.

2. Question 1.2
We need to work in the framework of the derived category D(R). For more information,
refer to [AF], [Ha2], [Fo], [Li], and [Sp].
We let D❁ (R) (res. D❂ (R)) denote the full subcategory of D(R) consisting of R-complexes
X with Hi (X) = 0 for i ≫ 0 (res. i ≪ 0), and let D (R) := D❁ (R) ∩ D❂ (R). We further

A NEW OUTLOOK ON COFINITENESS

3

let Df (R) denote the full subcategory of D(R) consisting of R-complexes X with finitely
generated homology modules. We also feel free to use any combination of the subscripts
f
and the superscript as in D
(R), with the obvious meaning of the intersection of the two

subcategories involved.
Lemma 2.1. Let a be an ideal of R and X ∈ D (R). Then the following conditions are
equivalent:
f
(i) R HomR (R/a, X)
 ∈ D (R).
ba .
(ii) LΛa (X) ∈ Df R


Proof. See [WW, Propositions 7.4].



In this section, we show that given an ideal a of R with cd(a, R) ≤ 1, the subcategory
M(R, a)cof of M(R) is abelian. This fact is proved in [PAB, Theorem 2.4], under the
extra assumption that R is local. Here we relax this assumption. The tool here is the local
homology functors.
Recall that the local homology functors are the left derived functors of the completion

ca =
functor. More precisely, Hia (−) := Li Λa (−) for every i ≥ 0, where Λa (M ) := M

lim(M/an M ) for any R-module M . Further, we remind the cohomological dimension of M
←
−
n
with respect to a as
n
o
cd(a, M ) := sup i ∈ Z Hai (M ) 6= 0 .
Theorem 2.2. Let a be an ideal of R. Then the following assertions hold:

(i) An R-module M with SuppR (M ) ⊆ V (a) is a-cofinite if and only if Hia (M ) is a
ba -module for every 0 ≤ i ≤ cd(a, R).
finitely generated R

(ii) If cd(a, R) ≤ 1, then M(R, a)cof is an abelian subcategory of M(R).

Proof. (i): By [GM, Theorem 2.5 and Corollary 3.2], Hia (M ) = 0 for every i > cd(a, R).
Therefore, the assertion follows from Lemma 2.1.
(ii): Let M and N be two a-cofinite R-modules and f : M → N an R-homomorphism.
The short exact sequence
(2.2.1)

0 → ker f → M → im f → 0,

gives the exact sequence
H0a (M ) → H0a (im f ) → 0,
ba -module since H a (M ) is so. The
which in turn implies that H0a (im f ) is finitely generated R
0
short exact sequence
(2.2.2)

0 → im f → N → coker f → 0,

gives the exact sequence
(2.2.3)

H1a (N ) → H1a (coker f ) → H0a (im f ) → H0a (N ) → H0a (coker f ) → 0.

ba -modules, the exact sequence
As H0a (N ), H0a (im f ), and H1a (N ) are finitely generated R
a
a
b a -modules, and
(2.2.3) shows that H (coker f ) and H (coker f ) are finitely generated R
0

1

thus coker f is a-cofinite by (i). From the short exact sequence (2.2.2), we conclude that

4

K. DIVAANI-AAZAR, H. FARIDIAN AND M. TOUSI

im f is a-cofinite, and from the short exact sequence (2.2.1), we infer that ker f is a-cofinite.
It follows that M(R, a)cof is an abelian subcategory of M(R).



It is well-known that cd(a, R) ≤ ara(a). On the other hand, the following example shows
that an ideal a of R with cd(a, R) = 1 need not have ara(a) = 1. Hence Theorem 2.2 (ii)
genuinely generalizes Theorem 1.4.
Example 2.3. Let k be a field and S = k[[X, Y, Z, W ]]. Consider the elements f = XW −
Y Z, g = Y 3 − X 2 Z, and h = Z 3 − Y 2 W of S. Let R = S/f S, and a = (f, g, h)S/f S. Then
R is a noetherian local ring of dimension 3, cd(a, R) = 1, and ara(a) ≥ 2. See [HeSt, Remark
2.1 (ii)].

3. Question 1.3
In this section, we exploit the technique of way-out functors as the main tool to depart
from modules to complexes.
Definition 3.1. Let R and S be two rings, and F : D(R) → D(S) a covariant functor. We
say that
(i) F is way-out left if for every n ∈ Z, there is an m ∈ Z, such that for any R-complex
X with sup X ≤ m, we have sup F (X) ≤ n.
(ii) F is way-out right if for every n ∈ Z, there is an m ∈ Z, such that for any R-complex
X with inf X ≥ m, we have inf F (X) ≥ n.
(iii) F is way-out if it is both way-out left and way-out right.
The Way-out Lemma appears in [Ha2, Ch. I, Proposition 7.3]. However, we need a
refined version which is tailored to our needs. Since the proof of the original result in [Ha2,
Ch. I, Proposition 7.3] is left to the reader, we deem it appropriate to include a proof of our
refined version for the convenience of the reader as well as bookkeeping.
Lemma 3.2. Let R and S be two rings, and F : D(R) → D(S) a triangulated covariant
functor. Let A be an additive subcategory of M(R), and B an abelian subcategory of M(S)

which is closed under extensions. Suppose that Hi F (M ) ∈ B for every M ∈ A and every
i ∈ Z. Then the following assertions hold:


(i) If X ∈ D (R) with Hi (X) ∈ A for every i ∈ Z, then Hi F (X) ∈ B for every
i ∈ Z.

(ii) If F is way-out left and X ∈ D❁ (R) with Hi (X) ∈ A for every i ∈ Z, then

Hi F (X) ∈ B for every i ∈ Z.

(iii) If F is way-out right and X ∈ D❂ (R) with Hi (X) ∈ A for every i ∈ Z, then

Hi F (X) ∈ B for every i ∈ Z.

(iv) If F is way-out and X ∈ D(R) with Hi (X) ∈ A for every i ∈ Z, then Hi F (X) ∈ B
for every i ∈ Z.

Proof. (i): Let s = sup(X). Since amp(X) < ∞, we argue by induction on n = amp(X).
If n = 0, then X ≃ Σs Hs (X). Therefore,





Hi F (X) ∼
= Hi−s F Hs (X) ∈ B,
= Hi F Σs Hs (X) ∼

A NEW OUTLOOK ON COFINITENESS

5

as Hs (X) ∈ A. Now, let n ≥ 1 and assume that the result holds for amplitude less than n.
Since X ≃ Xs⊂ , there is a distinguished triangle
(3.2.1)

Σs Hs (X) → X → Xs−1⊂ → .

It is clear that the two R-complexes Σs Hs (X) and Xs−1⊂ have all their homology modules
in A
are less
the induction hypothesis implies that
 than n. Therefore,
 and their amplitudes


s
Hi F Σ Hs (X) ∈ B and Hi F Xs−1⊂ ∈ B for every i ∈ Z. Applying the functor F

to the distinguished triangle (3.2.1), we get the distinguished triangle

F Σs Hs (X) → F (X) → F (Xs−1⊂ ) →,

which in turn yields the long exact homology sequence




· · · → Hi+1 F (Xs−1⊂ ) → Hi F Σs Hs (X) → Hi F (X) →



Hi F (Xs−1⊂ ) → Hi−1 F Σs Hs (X) → · · · .

We break the displayed part of the above exact sequence into the following exact sequences



Hi+1 F (Xs−1⊂ ) → Hi F Σs Hs (X) → K → 0,

0 → K → Hi F (X) → L → 0,



0 → L → Hi F (Xs−1⊂ ) → Hi−1 F Σs Hs (X) .
Since the subcategory B is abelian, we conclude from the first and the third exact sequences

above that K, L ∈ B. Since B is closed under extensions, the second exact sequence above

implies that Hi F (X) ∈ B for every i ∈ Z.
(ii): Let i ∈ Z. Since F is way-out left, we can choose an integer j ∈ Z corresponding to

i − 1. Apply the functor F to the distinguished triangle
X⊃j+1 → X → Xj⊂ →,
to get the distinguished triangle
F (X⊃j+1 ) → F (X) → F (Xj⊂ ) → .
From the associated long exact homology sequence, we get




0 = Hi+1 F (Xj⊂ ) → Hi F (X⊃j+1 ) → Hi F (X) → Hi F (Xj⊂ ) = 0,

where the vanishing is due to the choice of j. Since X⊃j+1 ∈ D (R) with Hi (X⊃j+1 ) ∈ A

for every i ∈ Z, it follows from (i) that Hi F (X⊃j+1 ) ∈ B for every i ∈ Z, and as a

consequence, Hi F (X) ∈ B for every i ∈ Z.
(iii): Given i ∈ Z, choose the integer j corresponding to i + 1. The rest of the proof is

similar to (ii) using the distinguished triangle
X⊃j → X → Xj−1⊂ → .
(iv): Apply the functor F to the distinguished triangle
X⊃1 → X → X0⊂ →,
to get the distinguished triangle
F (X⊃1 ) → F (X) → F (X0⊂ ) → .

6

K. DIVAANI-AAZAR, H. FARIDIAN AND M. TOUSI

Since X0⊂ ∈ D❁ (R) and X⊃1 ∈ D❂ (R) with Hi (X0⊂ ), Hi (X⊃1 ) ∈ A for every i ∈ Z, we


deduce from (ii) and (iii) that Hi F (X0⊂ ) , Hi F (X⊃1 ) ∈ B for every i ∈ Z. Using the

associated long exact homology sequence, an argument similar to (i) yields that Hi F (X) ∈

B for every i ∈ Z.



The next result provides us with a suitable transition device from modules to complexes
when dealing with cofiniteness.
Theorem 3.3. If a is an ideal of R, then the functor RΓa (−) : D(R) → D(R) is triangulated
and way-out. As a consequence, if Hai (M ) is a-cofinite for every finitely generated R-module
M and every i ≥ 0, and M(R, a)cof is an abelian category, then Hai (X) is a-cofinite for
every X ∈ Df (R) and every i ∈ Z.
Proof. By [Li, Corollary 3.1.4], the functor RΓa (−) : D(R) → D(R) is triangulated and
way-out. Now, let A be the subcategory of finitely generated R-modules, and let B :=
M(R, a)cof . It can be easily seen that B is closed under extensions. It now follows from


Lemma 3.2 that Hai (X) = H−i RΓa (X) ∈ B for every X ∈ Df (R) and every i ∈ Z.
Lemma 3.4. Suppose that R admits a dualizing complex D, and a is an ideal of R. Further,
f
f
suppose that Hai (Z) is a-cofinite for every Z ∈ D❁
(R) and every i ∈ Z. Let Y ∈ D❂
(R),

and X := R HomR Y, RΓa (D) . Then Hi (X) is a-cofinite for every i ∈ Z.
f
Proof. Set Z := R HomR (Y, D). Then clearly, Z ∈ D❁
(R). Let Č(a) denote the Čech

complex on a sequence of elements a = a1 , ..., an ∈ R that generates a. For any R-complex
W , [Li, Proposition 3.1.2] yields that RΓa (W ) ≃ Č(a) ⊗L
R W . Now, by applying the Tensor
Evaluation Isomorphism, we get the following display:

X = R HomR Y, RΓa (D)

≃ Č(a) ⊗L
R R HomR (Y, D)

≃ Č(a) ⊗L
RZ
≃ RΓa (Z).
Hence Hi (X) ∼
= Ha−i (Z) for every i ∈ Z, and so and the conclusion follows.



The next result answers Hartshorne’s third question.
Theorem 3.5. Let a be an ideal of R and X ∈ D❁ (R). Then the following assertions hold:
(i) If Hi (X) is a-cofinite for every i ∈ Z, then X is a-cofinite.
(ii) Assume that R admits a dualizing complex D, a is contained in the Jacobson radical
f
of R, and Hai (Z) is a-cofinite for every Z ∈ D❁
(R) and every i ∈ Z. If X is

a-cofinite in the sense of Hartshorne, then Hi (X) is a-cofinite for all i ∈ Z.
Proof. (i) Suppose that Hi (X) is a-cofinite for all i ∈ Z. The spectral sequence

2
Ep,q
= ExtpR R/a, H−q (X) ⇒ Extp+q
R (R/a, X)
p

2
from the proof of [Ha1, Proposition 6.2], together with the assumption that Ep,q
is finitely

generated for every p, q ∈ Z, conspire to imply that Extp+q
R (R/a, X) is finitely generated.

A NEW OUTLOOK ON COFINITENESS

7

On the other hand, one has
SuppR (X) ⊆

[

SuppR (Hi (X)) ⊆ V(a).

i∈Z

Thus X is a-cofinite.
(ii) Suppose that X is a-cofinite in the sense of Hartshorne. Then by definition, there

is Y ∈ Df (R) such that X ≃ R HomR Y, RΓa (D) . Now, the Affine Duality Theorem [Li,

Theorem 4.3.1] implies that


ba
Y ⊗L
R R ≃ R HomR X, RΓa (D) .


Since idR (RΓa (D)) < ∞ and X ∈ D❁ (R), we conclude that R HomR X, RΓa (D) ∈
b a : M(R) −→ M(R) is faithfully flat, it turns out that
D❂ (R). As the functor − ⊗R R
f
Y ∈ D❂
(R). Now, the claim follows by Lemma 3.4.



Corollary 3.6. Let a be an ideal of R such that either cd(a, R) ≤ 1, or dim R/a ≤ 1, or
dim(R) ≤ 2. Then the following assertions hold:
(i) Hai (X) is a-cofinite for every X ∈ Df (R) and every i ∈ Z.
(ii) Assume that R admits a dualizing complex D and a is contained in the Jacobson
radical of R. If X ∈ D❁ (R) is a-cofinite in the sense of Hartshorne, then Hi (X) is
a-cofinite for all i ∈ Z.
Proof. (i) Follows from Theorem 1.4, [Me2, Corollary 3.14], Theorem 2.2 (ii) and Theorem
3.3.
(ii) Follows by (i) and Theorem 3.5 (ii).



4. Correlation between Questions 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3
In this section, we probe the connection between Hartshorne’s questions as highlighted
in the Introduction.
Some special cases of the following result is more or less proved in [PSY, Theorem 3.10
and Proposition 3.13]. However, we include it here with a different and shorter proof due
to its pivotal role in the theory of cofiniteness.
Lemma 4.1. Let a be an ideal of R and X ∈ D (R). Then the following assertions are
equivalent:
(i) R HomR (R/a, X) ∈ Df (R).

 
f
ba .
(ii) RΓa (X) ≃ RΓa (Z) for some Z ∈ D
R
 

f
b a , provided that R
ba enjoys
(iii) RΓa (X) ≃ R HomRba Y, RΓa (D) for some Y ∈ D
R
a dualizing complex D.

 
f
ba . Then by [AJL, Corollary
Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii): By Lemma 2.1, Z := LΛa (X) ∈ D
R
after (0.3)∗ ], we have


RΓa (Z) ≃ RΓa LΛa (X) ≃ RΓa (X).

(ii) ⇒ (iii): Set Y := R HomRba (Z, D). If idRba (D) = n, then there is a semi-injective
≃

resolution D −
→ I of D such that Ii = 0 for every i > sup D or i < −n. In particular, I

8

K. DIVAANI-AAZAR, H. FARIDIAN AND M. TOUSI

 
f
ba -complex Z ′ such
ba , so there is a bounded R
is bounded. On the other hand, Z ∈ D
R
that Z ≃ Z ′ . Therefore,

Y = R HomRba (Z, D) ≃ R HomRba (Z ′ , D) ≃ HomRba (Z ′ , I).
 
f
ba .
But it is obvious that HomRba (Z ′ , I) is bounded, so Y ∈ D
R

Now, let Č(a) denote the Čech complex on a sequence of elements a = a1 , ..., an ∈ R that

generates a. We have
RΓa (X) ≃ RΓa (Z)



≃ RΓa R HomRba R HomRba (Z, D), D


≃ RΓa R HomRba (Y, D)
≃ Č(a) ⊗L
ba (Y, D)
R R HomR


≃ R HomRba Y, Č(a) ⊗L
D
R

≃ R HomRba Y, RΓa (D) .

ba -module, and the fifth
The second isomorphism is due to the fact that D is a dualizing R

isomorphism follows from the application of the Tensor Evaluation Isomorphism. The other
isomorphisms are straightforward.
(iii) ⇒ (i): Similarto 
the argument of the implication (ii) ⇒ (iii), we conclude that
f
a
b
R HomRba (Y, D) ∈ D R . We further have

LΛa (X) ≃ LΛa RΓa (X)


≃ LΛa R HomRba Y, RΓa (D)



≃ LΛa RΓa R HomRba (Y, D)


≃ LΛa R HomRba (Y, D)
 
f
ba .
≃ R HomRba (Y, D) ∈ D
R

The first and the fourth isomorphisms use [AJL, Corollary after (0.3)∗ ], the third isomorphism follows from the application of the Tensor Evaluation Isomorphism just as in the previous paragraph, and the fifthisomorphism follows from [PSY, Theorem 1.21], noting that
f
b a -modules.
ba , its homology modules are a-adically complete R
as R HomRba (Y, D) ∈ D
R
Now, the results follows from Lemma 2.1.



Corollary 4.2. Let a be an ideal of R for which R is a-adically complete and X ∈ D (R).
Then the following assertions are equivalent:
(i) X is a-cofinite.
f
(ii) X ≃ RΓa (Z) for some Z ∈ D
(R).

f
(R), provided that R enjoys a dualizing
(iii) X ≃ R HomR Y, RΓa (D) for some Y ∈ D

complex D.

A NEW OUTLOOK ON COFINITENESS

9

f
Proof. For any two R-complexes V ∈ D
(R) and W ∈ D (R), one may easily see that


SuppR R HomR V, RΓa (W ) ⊆ V (a).

Also, for any U ∈ D(R), [Li, Corollary 3.2.1] yields that SuppR (U ) ⊆ V (a) if and only if
RΓa (U ) ≃ U . Hence the assertions follow from Lemma 4.1.



The next result reveals the correlation between Hartshorne’s questions.
Theorem 4.3. Let a be an ideal of R. Consider the following assertions:
(i) Hai (M ) is a-cofinite for every finitely generated R-module M and every i ≥ 0, and
M(R, a)cof is an abelian subcategory of M(R).
(ii) Hai (X) is a-cofinite for every X ∈ Df (R) and every i ∈ Z.
(iii) An R-complex X ∈ D (R) is a-cofinite if and only if Hi (X) is a-cofinite for every
i ∈ Z.
Then the implications (i) ⇒ (ii) and (iii) ⇒ (i) hold. Furthermore, if R is a-adically
complete, then all three assertions are equivalent.
Proof. (i) ⇒ (ii): Follows from Theorem 3.3.
(iii) ⇒ (i): Let M be a finitely generated R-module. Since Hai (M ) = 0 for every i < 0 or
i > ara(a), we have RΓa (M ) ∈ D (R). However, [Li, Proposition 3.2.2] implies that

R HomR R/a, RΓa(M ) ≃ R HomR (R/a, M ),

showing that RΓa (M ) is a-cofinite.
The hypothesis now implies that Hai (M ) =

H−i (RΓa M ) is a-cofinite for every i ≥ 0.

Now, let M and N be two a-cofinite R-modules and f : M → N an R-homomorphism.
1M

f

Let ϕ : M → N be the morphism in D(R) represented by the roof diagram M ←−− M −
→ N.
From the long exact homology sequence associated to the distinguished triangle
ϕ

(4.3.1)
we deduce that SuppR

M−
→ N → Cone(f ) →,

Cone(f )
⊆ V(a).
In addition, applying the functor

R HomR (R/a, −) to (4.3.1), gives the distinguished triangle


R HomR (R/a, M ) → R HomR (R/a, N ) → R HomR R/a, Cone(f ) →,

whose associated long exact homology sequence shows that

R HomR R/a, Cone(f ) ∈ Df (R).
Hence, the R-complex Cone(f ) is a-cofinite. However, we have
f

Cone(f ) = · · · → 0 → M −
→ N → 0 → ··· ,

so Cone(f ) ∈ D (R). Thus the hypothesis implies that Hi Cone(f ) is a-cofinite for every
i ∈ Z. It follows that ker f and coker f are a-cofinite, and as a consequence M(R, a)cof is
an abelian subcategory of M(R).
Now, suppose that R is a-adically complete.
(ii) ⇒ (iii): Let X ∈ D (R). Suppose that Hi (X) is a-cofinite for every i ∈ Z. Then
Theorem 3.5 (i) yields that X is a-cofinite.

10

K. DIVAANI-AAZAR, H. FARIDIAN AND M. TOUSI

Conversely, assume that X is a-cofinite. Then by Corollary 4.2, X ≃ RΓa (Z) for some
f
Z ∈ D
(R). Thus the hypothesis implies that

is a-cofinite for every i ∈ Z.


Hi (X) ∼
= Hi RΓa (Z) = Ha−i (Z)



In view of Corollary 4.2, the next result answers Hartshorne’s third question for homologically bounded R-complexes.
Corollary 4.4. Let a be an ideal of R for which R is a-adically complete. Suppose that
either cd(a, R) ≤ 1, or dim(R/a) ≤ 1, or dim(R) ≤ 2. Then an R-complex X ∈ D (R) is
a-cofinite if and only if Hi (X) is a-cofinite for every i ∈ Z.
Proof. Obvious in light of Corollary 3.4 and Theorem 4.3.



Acknowledgement . The authors are deeply grateful to Professor Robin Hartshorne for
his invaluable comments on an earlier draft of this paper.

References
[AJL] L. Alonso Tarrı́o, A. Jeremı́as López and J. Lipman, Local homology and cohomology on schemes,
Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup., (4), 30(1), (1997), 1-39.
[AF] L. Avramov and H-B. Foxby, Homological dimensions of unbounded complexes, J. Pure Appl. Algebra,
71(2-3), (1991), 129-155.
[BNS] K. Bahmanpour, R. Naghipour and M. Sedghi, On the category of cofinite modules which is abelian,
Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 142(4), (2014), 1101-1107.
[BN] K. Bahmanpour and R. Naghipour, Cofiniteness of local cohomology modules for ideals of small dimension, J. Algebra, 321(7), (2009), 1997-2011.
[DM] D. Delfino and T. Marley, Cofinite modules and local cohomology, J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 121(1),
(1997), 45-52.
[EK] K. Eto and K. Kawasaki, A characterization of cofinite complexes over complete Gorenstein domains,
J. Commut. Algebra, 3(4), (2011), 537-550.
[Fo] H-B. Foxby, Hyperhomological algebra and commutative rings, notes in preparation.
[GM] J. P. C. Greenlees and J. P. May, Derived functors of I-adic completion and local homology, J. Algebra,
149(2), (1992), 438-453.
[Ha1] R. Hartshorne, Affine duality and cofiniteness, Invent. Math., 9, (1969/1970), 145-164.
[Ha2] R. Hartshorne, Residues and duality, Lecture notes in mathematics, 20, (1966).
[HeSt] M. Hellus and J. Strükard, Local cohomology and Matlis duality, Univ. Iagel. Acta Math., 45, (2007),
63-70.
[HK] G. Huneke and J. Koh, Cofiniteness and vanishing of local cohomology modules, Math. Proc. Camb.
Phil. Soc., 110(3), (1991), 421-429.
[HS] G. Huneke and R.Y. Sharp, Bass numbers of local cohomology modules, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.,
339(2), (1993), 765-779.
[Ka1] K. Kawasaki, On the category of cofinite modules for principal ideals, Nihonkai Math. J., 22(2),
(2011), 67-71.
[Ka2] K. Kawasaki, Cofiniteness of local cohomology modules for principal ideals, Bull. London Math. Soc.,
30(3), (1998), 241-246.
[Li] J. Lipman, Lectures on local cohomology and duality, Local cohomology and its applications, Lecture
notes in pure and applied mathematics, 226, (2012), Marcel Dekker, Inc.
[Ly] G. Lyubeznik, Finiteness properties of local cohomology modules (an application of D-modules to commutative algebra), Invent. Math., 113(1), (1993), 41-55.

A NEW OUTLOOK ON COFINITENESS

11

[Me1] L. Melkersson, Cofiniteness with respect to ideals of dimension one, J. Algebra, 372, (2012), 459-462.
[Me2] L. Melkersson, Modules cofinite with respect to an ideal, J. Algebra, 285(2), (2005), 649-668.
[PAB] G. Pirmohammadi, K. Ahmadi Amoli and K. Bahmanpour, Some homological properties of ideals
with cohomological dimension one, Colloq. Math., to appear.
[PSY] M. Porta, L. Shaul and A. Yekutieli, Cohomologically cofinite complexes, Comm. Algebra, 43(2),
(2015), 597-615.
[Sp] N. Spaltenstein, Resolutions of unbounded complexes, Compositio Math., 65(2), (1988), 121-154.
[WW] S. Sather-Wagstaff and R. Wicklein, Support and adic finiteness for complexes, Comm. Algebra,
45(6), (2017), 2569-2592.
K. Divaani-Aazar, Department of Mathematics, Alzahra University, Vanak, Post Code 19834,
Tehran, Iran-and-School of Mathematics, Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM),
P.O. Box 19395-5746, Tehran, Iran.
E-mail address: kdivaani@ipm.ir
H. Faridian, Department of Mathematics, Shahid Beheshti University, G.C., Evin, Tehran, Iran,
Zip Code 1983963113.
E-mail address: h.faridian@yahoo.com
M. Tousi, Department of Mathematics, Shahid Beheshti University, G.C., Evin, Tehran, Iran,
P.O. Box 19395-5746.
E-mail address: mtousi@ipm.ir

