Reduction of some homological conjectures to excellent unique factorization domains

arXiv:1607.00025v2 [math.AC] 28 Jul 2016

E HSAN TAVANFAR∗
I N THE MEMORY OF MY FATHER , M ANOUCHEHR TAVANFAR ,
WHO PASSED AWAY AT THE TIME OF WRITING THIS PAPER

A BSTRACT. In this article, applying the quasi-Gorenstein analogous of the Ulrich’s
deformation of certain Gorenstein rings we show that some homological conjectures,
including the Monomial Conjecture, Big Cohen-Macaulay Algebra Conjecture as well as
the Small Cohen-Macaulay Conjecture reduce to the excellent unique factorization domains. Some other reductions of the Monomial Conjecture are also proved. We, moreover, show that certain almost complete intersections adhere the Monomial Conjecture.

1 Introduction
Throughout this article, (R, m) denotes a commutative Noetherian local ring of dimension d
with identity where m denotes the unique maximal ideal of R.
In the early seventies, in [29], Hochster proposed the following two equivalent conjectures and proved them for the equicharacteristic rings.
Monomial Conjecture: Suppose that x1 , . . . , xd is a system of parameters for R. Then,
t
x1 · · · xdt ∉ (x1t+1 , . . . , xdt+1 ) for each t ≥ 1.
Direct Summand Conjecture: Suppose that A is a regular local ring and R is a module
finite extension of A. Then the inclusion A → R splits, in the category of A-modules.
The foregoing conjectures have been around for decades in the mixed characteristic case.
In the sequel we succinctly review certain substantial advances in the study of the aforementioned conjectures. In the eighties, in his extraordinary paper [28], among other things,
Hochster introduced the following further equivalent forms of the Monomial Conjecture.
Canonical Element Conjecture: Suppose that (F• , ∂• ) is a free resolution of R/m and consider the natural projection π : Fd → syzdR (R/m) which defines an element,

∗

¢
¡
ǫR := [π] ∈ ExtdR R/m, syzdR (R/m) .

This research was in part supported by a grant from IPM and supported in part by NSF grant DMS 1162585.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 13D22, 13H10.
Key words and phrases. Almost complete intersections, big Cohen-Macaulay algebra, homological conjectures, linkage, Monomial Conjecture, quasi-Gorenstein rings, unique factorization domains.

1

2

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

Set, ηR := φ(ǫR ), wherein,
¡
¢
¡
¢
¡ d
¢
d
n
d
d
φ : ExtdR R/m, syzdR (R/m) → lim
Ext
R/
m
,
syz
(R/
m
)
=
H
syz
(R/
m
)
,
m
R
R
R
−→
n∈N

is the natural map. Then ηR 6= 0.
CE Property, also known as the Canonical Element Conjecture: Assume that F• is minimal resolution of R/m. Consider the Koszul complex K• (x, R) of a system of parameters x of R.
Then for any lifting, φ : K• (x, R) → F• , of the natural surjection R/(x) → R/m, we have φd 6= 0.
In [28], Hochster, moreover shows that the mentioned equivalent forms of the Monomial
Conjecture imply the following conjecture:
Improved New Intersection Conjecture: Suppose
¡
¢that F• : 0 → Fs → Fs−1 → · · · → F0 → 0
is a complex of finite free modules such that ℓ Hi (F• ) < ∞ for each i > 1 and H0 (F• ) has a
minimal generator whose generated R-module has finite length. Then s ≥ d .
The important point here is that a slightly stronger version of the Improved New Intersection Conjecture, wherein H0 (F0 ) has finite length as well, has been settled in full generality
by Roberts (see,[47]). The validity of this stronger form, which is called the New Intersection
Theorem, itself established a bunch of other old conjectures, most notably the Bass’s question regarding the Cohen-Macaulayness of rings having a non-zero finite module of finite
injective dimension (see, [10, Chapter 9.] and [44]). Originally the Improved New Intersect
Conjecture is, implicitly, stated in [16] among the proof of [16, Theorem 1.1]. Subsequently,
miraculously, in [12] Dutta showed that the improved new intersection is, in fact, an another
equivalent form of the Monomial Conjecture. Recently, in [14] Dutta also proved that all of
the equivalent forms of the Monomial Conjecture are in addition equivalent to the following
conjecture which has its origin, again, in [16] (see, [16, Proposition 1.6.]).
Order Ideal Conjecture: Assume that R is a regular ring and M is an R-module. Suppose
that x is a minimal generator of the i th-syzygy of M for some i > 0. Then the ideal,
¡
¢
O syzi (M) (x) = { f (x) : f ∈ HomR syzi (M), R },
has height greater than or equal to i .
An R-module M (algebra A) is said to be a balanced big Cohen-Macaulay module ( big
Cohen-Macaulay algebra) if mM 6= M (mA 6= A) and any system of parameters x of R is a regular sequence on M (on A). The existence of balanced big Cohen-Macaulay module (big
Cohen-Macaulay algebra), which is a long standing conjecture, settles the Monomial Conjecture affirmatively. In [32] Hochster showed that any equicharacteristic ring has a balanced
big Cohen-Macaualy module. Moreover, in [35] Hochster and Huneke proved that if R is an
excellent domain of prime characteristic, then, R+ , the integral closure of R in the algebraic
closure of its fraction field is a big Cohen-Macaulay algebra. Unfortunately, using the trace
map, we can deduce that the analogous statement about R+ in equal characteristic zero does
not hold provided dim(R) ≥ 3. In spite of this obstruction, in [33] Hochster and Huneke established the existence of big Cohen-Macaulay algebras in the equicharacteristic case.
Although the Monomial Conjecture is quite easy in dimension less than or equal to two,
but not in dimension three. In [24] Heitmann provided a very complicated proof of the validity of Monomial Conjecture in dimension three of mixed characteristic. In fact he proved
more, that is, if R is a mixed characteristic excellent normal domain of dimension three then

E HSAN TAVANFAR

3

H2m (R+ ) is almost zero, i.e. R+ is an almost Cohen-Macaulay R-algebra1. Quite obviously, the
existence of almost Cohen-Macaulay algebra is stronger than the existence of big CohenMacaulay algebras. In general the Monomial Conjecture follows from the existence of almost Cohen-Macaulay algebra(see, e.g. [49, Proposition 1.3]). In [27] when R has dimension three and mixed characteristic Hochster constructed a big Cohen-Macaulay algebra using the Heitmann’s result regarding the almost Cohen-Macaulayness of R+ . Recently, in [8],
Bhattacharyya showed that the Big Cohen-Macaulay Algebra Conjecture follows from the existence of almost big Cohen-Macaulay algebras. The question whether R+ is always almost
Cohen-Macaulay in mixed characteristic is open in dimension greater than or equal to 4. Although the Monomial Conjecture, has been proved in equal characteristic zero but the question whether R+ is almost Cohen-Macaulay in equal characteristic zero is of self interest and
is open in dimension greater than or equal to 3. But the three dimensional equal characteristic zero case for the Segre product of Cohen-Macaulay N-graded rings has been investigated
in [49], where the authors apply the Albanese varieties to deduce that the image of non-top
local cohomologies of R are almost zero in R+ . Recently, in [48] Roberts showed that the image of non-top local cohomologies of R in R+ are almost zero provided R is a Segre product
of N-graded Cohen-Macaulay rings of mixed characteristic. Moreover, recently, applying the
Almost Purity Theorem, in [52] Shimomoto proved that R has a big Cohen-Macaulay algebra
provided R has mixed characteristic p > 0 such that R[1/p] is an étale extension of A[1/p]
wherein A is a Noether normalization of R.
A finitely generated big Cohen-Macaulay R-module is said to be a small Cohen-Macaulay
module or maximal Cohen-Macaulay module. Hochster’s Small Cohen-Macaulay Conjecture states that every complete ring has a small Cohen-Macaulay Module. This conjecture is
even open in three dimensional equicharacteristic rings.
In Section 2 we prove that for the validity of the Monomial Conjecture it suffices to take
into account only systems of parameters of R which form a part of a minimal basis of m.
This fact will be used in Section 4 to deduce the main result of that section. Here, it is worth
to point out that, since for proving this reduction we descend to a finite free extension of
R with complete intersection fibers, we can merge some of other known reductions of the
Monomial Conjecture with our reduction. For instance, it suffices to confine our attention
only on such system of parameters x := x1 , . . . , xd for almost complete intersections. In view
of [13] the Monomial Conjecture reduces to the almost complete intersections.
In Section 3 we show that the aforementioned homological conjectures reduce to the
class of excellent (homomorphic image of regular) unique factorization domains. The main
idea of the proof is the fact that the Ulrich’s deformation of certain Gorenstein rings to the
class of unique factorization domains, developed in [55], has a quasi-Gorenstein counterpart. But prior to applying this reduction, for a normal domain R with canonical ideal ωR , we
L
endow R ωR with a ring structure such that it is a quasi-Gorenstein domain which is a complete intersection in codimension 1 (recall that the trivial extension is never a domain). For
the Monomial Conjecture with the aid of Hochster’s first general grade reduction technique
developed in [31], we deduce that the reduction to excellent unique factorization domains
is dimensionwise in the sense that the Monomial Conjecture for d -dimensional local rings
1

Here, almost zero means that each element of H2m (R+ ) is killed by elements of arbitrary small valuation,
with respect to a fixed rank one valuation which is non-negative on R and positive on m.

4

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

descends to d -dimensional excellent unique factorization local domains. It is noteworthy to
mention that in the light of Heitmann’s remarkable paper, [23], loosely speaking, any complete ring with depth at least 2 is a completion of a unique factorization domain! But, unfortunately, Heitmann’s unique factorization domains are neither excellent nor catenary 2 .
For instance, his unique factorization domains are not supposed to have a maximal CohenMacaulay module or even a canonical module. So the excellence property can be important
from this point of view. Besides the known good properties of unique factorization domains,
they may have even more tacit important properties as we will point out them in the sequel.
The first example of a non-Cohen-Macaulay unique factorization domain was constructed
by virtue of the invariant theory, in Bertin’s paper [7]. In fact at that time, Bertin’s counterexample settled negatively Samuel’s conjecture regarding the Cohen-Macaulayness of unique
factorization domains. In spite of the existence of this counterexample, complete unique
factorization domains at least in equal characteristic zero, have very good properties. For
instance, as stated in [42, Page 539] (see, also [21]), if R is a complete equicharacteristic zero
unique factorization domain of depth ≥ 3, then R satisfies S 3 . Moreover, if the residue field
is algebraically closed (char 0), then the depth condition is superfluous. Furthermore, in
view of [42, Page 540], any complete unique factorization domain with algebraically closed
residue field of characteristic zero is Cohen-Macaulay provided dim(R) ≤ 4. So it might be,
fairly, more helpful, if we can take more steps and reduce any of the homological conjectures
to the class of complete unique factorization domains.
In Section 4, we investigate the homological conjectures for almost complete intersections satisfying m2 ⊆ (x) for some system of parameters x of R. In mixed characteristic we
furthermore assume that x1 = p, the residual characteristic of R. We will see that in this
case R has a balanced big Cohen-Macaulay algebra. In the sequel, we explain our motivation behind this investigation. As we mentioned before, the Monomial Conjecture is proved
for equicharacteristic rings of arbitrary dimension and for (at most) 3-dimensional rings of
any characteristic. Due to the Goto’s paper [20], another subclass of rings which adhere the
Monomial Conjecture ¡is Buchsbaum
rings. In fact any system
of parameters x of¢ a Buchs¢
S ¡ t+1
lim
lim
(x1 , . . . , xdt+1 ) : x1t · · · xdt . This inbaum ring satisfies, m {x}R ⊆ (x), wherein {x}R =
t∈N

clusion immediately settles the Monomial Conjecture. Now set A to be the class of rings
consisting of rings R satisfying,
¡
¢
m2 {x}lim
⊆ (x),
R
for some system of parameters x of R. Note that A contains, properly, the class of Buchsbaum rings (see, [54, Theorem 5.12(ii)]). In order to see why this inclusion is proper, note
that in the light of [19], there exists a non-Buchsbaum quasi-Buchsbaum ring R such that
there are exactly two non-zero non-top local cohomologies of R which both of them are R/mvector spaces. Then applying the argument of the proof of [46, Proposition 1.] we can conclude that R belongs to the class A . Note also that by [54, Theorem 5.12.(i)], roughly speaking, A is a subclass of generalized Cohen-Macaulay rings. Quite obviously, if the Monomial Conjecture is valid for any system of parameters x of any ring R with m2 ⊆ (x), then
2

In fact Heitmann’s construction of such unique factorization domains provided us with an example of a
non-catenary local unique factorization domain. Prior to this counterexample, it was conjectured that any
local unique factorization domain is catenary.

5

E HSAN TAVANFAR

any member of A satisfies the Monomial Conjecture. Although, at this time, we could not
prove the validity of the Monomial Conjecture in this general setting, but we succeeded to
deduce our desired statement for almost complete intersections satisfying m2 ⊆ (x) with the
extra assumption that x1 = p in the mixed characteristic p > 0. For justifying our investigation in this restricted case, from another point of view, recall that in the light of Dutta’s
result [13, 1.2 Proposition] in conjunction with [28, (6.1) Theorem] Monomial Conjecture reduces to the case where R is an almost complete intersection of mixed characteristic p > 0
and x1 , . . . , xd is a system of parameters for R with x1 = p. The key ingredient of our proof is
the fact that those almost complete intersections have multiplicities up to two in the nonCohen-Macaulay case. We give an example of a non-Cohen-Macaulay ring R ∈ A such that
its multiplicity is strictly greater than two (so, R is not an almost complete intersection).
In view of the Monomial Conjecture, we end the paper with a question regarding existence of a particular non-commutative R-algebra.

2 Reduction of the Monomial Conjecture to systems of parameters which
are part of a minimal basis of m
This section is devoted to prove that for the validity of the Monomial Conjecture it suffices
only to check systems of parameters of the ring which can be extended to a minimal set of
generators of the maximal ideal. This result will be used in the Section 4 to prove that certain
almost complete intersections satisfy the Monomial Conjecture.
L
Remark 2.1. Let a ∈ R. Then the free R-module R R acquires a ring structure via the following rule,
(r, s)(r ′ , s ′ ) = (r r ′ + ss ′ a, r s ′ + r ′ s).

L
We use the notation R(a 1/2 ) to denote the forgoing ring structure of R R. In fact it is easily
seen that the map, R(a 1/2 ) → R[X]/(X 2 − a), which takes (r, s) to (sX + r ) + (X 2 − a)R[X] is an
isomorphism of R-algebras. We are given the extension map R → R(a 1/2 ) by the rule r 7→
(r, 0) which turns R(a 1/2 ) into a free R-module with the basis {(1, 0), (0, 1)}. Consequently this
extension is an integral extension of R and it is subject to the following properties which all
are easy to verify.
¡
¢
(i) dim(R) = dim R(a 1/2 ) and a has a square root in R(a 1/2 ), namely (0, 1).

(ii) If a ∈ m then R(a 1/2 ) is a local ring with unique maximal ideal m

L

R.

(iii) If a, x2 , . . . , xd is a system of parameters of R then a 1/2 , x2 , . . . , xd is a system of parameters for R(a 1/2 ).
(iv) If ϕ : R → S is an R-algebra wherein, ϕ(a) has a square root in S, then there exists a
natural induced R-algebra homomorphism Ψ : R(a 1/2 ) → S defined by (r, s) 7→ ϕ(r ) +
ϕ(s)ϕ(a)1/2 , extending ϕ. Moreover, assuming that R and S are domains, Ψ is injective
if and only if ϕ is injective and a does not have a square root in Frac(R).

6

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

(v) If R is a domain, then R(a 1/2 ) is a domain if and only if a does not have a square
root in Frac(R). For one implication we note that if a does not have a square root in
K := Frac(R), then K[x]/(x 2 −a) is a field extension of R. Therefore, by applying the preceding part we get an embedding R(a 1/2 ) → K[x]/(x 2 − a) which shows that R(a 1/2 )
is an integral domain. For the reverse implication note that if a has a square root
r /s ∈ Frac(R) then the identity (r, s)(r, −s) = 0 shows that R(a 1/2 ) is not a domain.
The following remark is in fact the proof of Corollary 2.3(i).
Remark 2.2. Let x1 , . . . , xl be a sequence of elements of R contained in the maximal ideal of
R. We, inductively, construct the local ring (Ri , mi ) by taking a square root of xi in Ri −1 . Then
in Rl we have,
),
xi1/2 = (
0
, 0, . . . , 0, 1, 0, . . .,
0
|{z}
|{z}
0-th coordinate

(2l −1)-th coordinate

whose 2(i −1) -th coordinate is 1 and others are zero.

(i) Let 1 ≤ j ≤ l and 0 ≤ k ≤ 2l − 1. We denote the element (0, . . . , 0,

1
|{z}

, 0, . . . , 0) of Rl

k−th coordinate

by e k . Then we have,
e k x 1/2
j =

(

e k+2 j −1 ,

( j − 1)- th digit of k in base 2 is 0

x j e k−2 j −1 , ( j − 1)- th digit of k in base 2 is 1.

In order to see why this is the case we induct on the least natural number s ≥ j such that
k ≤ 2s − 1. In the case where s = j it is easily seen that the ( j − 1)-th digit of k in its 2-th
base representation is 0 (is 1) if and only if k ≤ 2 j −1 − 1 (k ≥ 2 j −1 ). So an easy use of the
L
multiplication rule of the ring R j := R j −1 R j −1 proves the claim (Recall that R j is subring of
Rl ). Now assume that s > j . Then we have,
³
¢ 1/2 ´
¡
,
0,
.
.
.
,
0
xj .
e k x 1/2
=
0,
.
.
.
,
0
,
0,
.
.
.
,
0,
1
j
|{z}
|{z}
2s−1 −1-th coordinate

(k−2s−1 )-th coordinate

Now set k ′ := k − 2s−1 . Note that the ( j − 1)-th digit of the base 2 representation of k and
k are equal. Consequently the statement follows from our inductive hypothesis.
′

(ii) We are going to show that for each 1 ≤ i ≤ l the projection map τ2(i −1) : m2l → R, which is
the projection to the (2(i −1) )-th coordinate, is not surjective. In the case where l = 1 we have
L
m2l = (m2 + x1 R) m. So, we assume that l ≥ 2 and the statement is true for smaller values of
l . Then,
¡
¢M
m2l = m2l −1 + xl Rl −1
ml −1 .
(1)
Now, if i = l then 2l −1 -th coordinate of m2l is just the first coordinate of,
M M M
ml −1 = m R · · · R.

Hence, clearly, τ2(l −1) is not surjective. On the other hand if i l then by our inductive hypothesis τ2(i −1) : m2l −1 → R is not surjective which, in the light of the equality (1), implies the
statement immediately.

7

E HSAN TAVANFAR

(iii) In continuation of our investigation in the previous part, we need to show, also, that the
projection map τ2(i −1) : x 1/2
Rl −1 → R is not surjective unless i = j (1 ≤ i ≤ l − 1 and 1 ≤ j ≤
j
l − 1). Let (r k )0≤k≤2l −1 −1 ∈ Rl −1 . Then we have,
(r k )0≤k≤2l −1 −1 x 1/2
j
2l −1
P−1

k=0
( j −1)−th digit of k in base 2 is 0

r k e k+2 j −1 +

=

2l −1
P−1
k=0

r k e k x 1/2
=
j
2l −1
P−1

k=0
( j −1)−th digit of k in base 2 is 1

r k x j e k−2 j −1 .

Thus if i < j then evidently τ2i −1 is not surjective. On the other hand if i > j and there
exits 0 ≤ k ≤ 2l −1 − 1 with k + 2 j −1 = 2i −1 then k = 2i −1 − 2 j −1 which after a straightforward
computation shows that the ( j −1)-th digit of k in base 2 is 1. This proves the non-surjectivity
of τ2i −1 .
(iv) By means of the arguments of the forgoing part we can, directly, conclude that,
1/2
xi1/2 ∉ m2l −1 + (x11/2 , . . . , xd
, . . . , xl1/2
−1 , x l )Rl −1 , (i
i

l)

otherwise we must have τ2(i −1) : (x 1/2
)Rl −1 → R for some 1 ≤ j ≤ l − 1 and j 6= i or τ2(i −1) :
j

m2l −1 → R is surjective.

The above remark yields the following corollary, as claimed before. In the second part
of the subsequent corollary the important point is the equality embdim(R) = d + u which
equals to the embedding dimension of the regular local ring V[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Y1 , . . . , Yu ]].
Corollary 2.3.
(i) The Monomial Conjecture holds if and only if every system of parameters
x1 , . . . , xd which is a part of a minimal basis for the maximal ideal satisfies the Monomial
Conjecture.
(ii) For the Monomial Conjecture, without loss of generality, we can assume that,
³
´
1/2
R = (V, p )[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Y1 , . . . , Yu ]] /I,

and the system of parameters x1 , . . . , xd is the image of p 1/2 , X 2 , . . . , X d in R where the
discrete valuation ring (V, p 1/2 ) is a subring of R and embdim(R) = d + u.

Proof. (i) Let x1 , . . . , xd be a system of parameters for R. Consider the ring Rd as in Remark
2.2. It suffices to show that x11/2 , . . . , xd1/2 is a part of a minimal basis for the unique maximal
L
ideal md of Rd . Let (α1 , β1 ), . . . , (αd , βd ) ∈ Rd = Rd−1 Rd−1 be such that,
¢M
¡
md−1 .
(αk , βk )xk1/2 + (αd , βd )(0Rd −1 , 1Rd −1 ) ∈ m2d = m2d−1 + (xd )Rd−1
{z
}
|
k=1

d−1
X

=xd1/2

Then by a simple computation we get
d−1
X
k=1

αk xk1/2 + βd xd ∈ m2d−1 + xd Rd−1 ,

(2)

8

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

and,
d−1
X
k=1

βk xk1/2 + αd ∈ md−1 .

(3)

So the identity (3) yields αd ∈ md−1 and thence (αd , βd ) ∈ md . Moreover, for each 1 ≤ k ≤
L
d − 1 we must have (αk , βk ) ∈ md = md−1 Rd−1 , otherwise we get αi ∉ md−1 for some 1 ≤
1/2
i ≤ d − 1 which in view of the identity (2) yields x 1/2 ∈ m2 + (x 1/2 , . . . , xd
, . . . , x 1/2 , x )R
i

d−1

1

i

d−1

d

d−1

violating Remark 2.2 (iv). Consequently, (αk , βk ) ∈ md for each 1 ≤ k ≤ d . This implies that
x11/2 + m2d , . . . , xd1/2 + m2d is a linearly independent subset of md /m2d over Rd /md and thence
x11/2 , . . . , xd1/2 is part of a minimal basis for md .
(ii) By [28, (6.1) Theorem], for the validity of the Monomial Conjecture it suffices to verify
it only for systems of parameters x1 , . . . , xd of R wherein x1 = p is the residual characteristic
and (V, pV) is a coefficient ring of the complete local ring R. So the statement follows from
the argument in the proof of the preceding part.

3 Reduction to excellent unique factorization domains
In this section we show that some homological conjectures reduce to excellent unique factorization domains. Here, by homological conjectures we mean one of the Small CohenMacaulay Conjecture, Big-Cohen-Macaulay Algebra Conjecture as well as the Monomial Conjecture.
Lemma 3.1. Suppose that R is a Noetherian local domain which is not a field. Then there
exists a ∈ m such that a does not have a square root in F := Frac(R).
Proof. We first claim that there exists a ∈ R without a square root in Frac(R). Assume to the
contrary that each element of R has a square root in F. Then F is square root closed. Let
p be a height one prime ideal of the integral closure R of R which is a Krull domain (see,
[39, Theorem 4.10.5]). Since Rp is an integrally closed domain, so the discrete valuation ring
(Rp , xRp ) is square root closed in Frac(R). But then x has a square root in Rp . This observation
violates x ∉ p2 Rp .
Hence there exists an element a ∈ R without a square root in Frac(R). If a ∈ m then we are
done, so suppose that a is an invertible element of R. Then for any 0 6= t ∈ m we have, t , or,
t a, does not have a square root in Frac(R).
Remark 3.2. Suppose that R is a domain. Since the trivial extension R ⋉ ωR R by its canonical module (even the amalgamated duplication ring of R with its canonical ideal3) is not a
L
domain we will use a different multiplication on R ωR . To be more precise, since R is a
domain so [4, (3.1)] implies that ωR is an ideal of R. By applying the preceding lemma we can
L
choose a ∈ m such that a does not have a square root in Frac(R). We may endow S := R ωR
with a ring structure such that,
(r, x)(r ′ , x ′ ) = (r r ′ + xx ′ a, r x ′ + r ′ x),
3

See, [6].

9

E HSAN TAVANFAR

L
for each (r, x), (r ′ , x ′ ) ∈ R ωR . In particular, S is a subring of R(a 1/2 ) and it is a domain by
Remark 2.1(v). Furthermore, ηR : R → S which maps an element r ∈ R to (r, 0) is an R-algebra
L
homomorphism. Note that S is a local ring with the maximal ideal n := m ωR and η is a local
monomorphism. As we will see in the following remark, S endowed with the aforementioned
multiplication is an integral domain which is a complete intersection in low dimension, provided R is a normal ring. The fact that it is a complete intersection in the low dimension is
essential for reducing the homological conjectures to the subclass of unique factorization
domains.
Lemma 3.3. Suppose that R is a normal domain and that ωR is the canonical ideal of R. Let
a ∈ Frac(R) be an element of m without a square root in Frac(R). Then the following statements
hold.
(i) R(a 1/2 ) is locally complete intersection at codimension ≤ 1.
L
(ii) The subring R ωR of R(a 1/2 ) is locally complete intersection at codimension ≤ 1.
¡
¢
T
Proof. (i) Let p ∈ Spec R(a 1/2 ) be a height one prime ideal and set q := p R. Firstly note
that ht¡R (q) = htR(a
¢ 1/2 ) p, as we have going down, going up and incomparability. In particular,
1/2
p ∈ ass qR(a ) . Since R is normal, Rq is a regular local ring. Consequently, Rq [x] is a regular domain. Hence Rq [x]/(x 2 − a)Rq [x] ∼
= Rq (a 1/2 ) is locally complete intersection. An easy
verification shows that,

l∈ass

Note that qR(a 1/2 ) = q

L

¢

l = {(r, s) ∈ R(a 1/2 ) : r 2 − s 2 a ∈ q}.

(4)

qR(a 1/2 )

q. Set, S := R(a 1/2 )\
l∈ass

¡

S

¢ l. Then there exists the natural em-

qR(a 1/2 )

¢
bedding ϕ : Rq → S R(a ) defined by a/s → (a, 0)/(s, 0). On the other hand a does not
have a square root in Frac(Rq ) = Frac(R). Thus by Remark 2.1(iv) ϕ induces the injection
¡
¢
Ψ : Rq (a 1/2 ) → S −1 R(a 1/2 ) ,
−1

¡

¡

[

1/2

such that maps any
(a/b, a ′ /b ′ ) ∈ Rq (a 1/2 ) to (ab ′ , a ′ b)/(bb ′ , 0). For each element
¡ element
¢
′ ′
−1
1/2
(r, s)/(r , s ) ∈ S R(a ) we have, by(4) , r ′2 − s ′2 a ∉ q and,
¡
¢
Ψ (r r ′ − ss ′ a)/(r ′2 − s ′2 a), (r ′ s − r s ′ )/(r ′2 − s ′2 a) = (r, s)/(r ′ , s ′ ).
¡
¢
−1
1/2
Hence, Ψ is an isomorphism.
So,
S
R(a
)
, is¡ locally ¢complete intersection. Conse¡
¢
quently, as p ∈ ass qR(a 1/2 ) , we have R(a 1/2 )p ∼
= S −1 R(a 1/2 ) S −1 p is a complete intersection.
L
(ii) Let p′ ∈ Spec(R ωR ) be a height¡ one prime
ideal. Since R(a 1/2 ) is an integral exten¢
L
sion of R ωR , so there exists p ∈ Spec R(a 1/2 ) lying over p′ . Let q be the contraction of p′
in R. Note that htR (q) = htR(a 1/2 ) (p), because R(a 1/2 ) is an integral flat extension of R. On
L
the other hand, because R is integrally closed so R → R ωR has the going down property.
Hence, htR(a 1/2 ) (p) = htR (q) ≤ htR L ωR (p′ ). This shows that htR(a 1/2 ) (p) = 1, as well.
L
If ωR * q, then it is easily verified that the natural map (R ωR )p′ → R(a 1/2 )p is an isomorphism.

10

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

L
L
Now, we deal with the case where ωR ⊆ q. Note that (R ωR )p′ is a localization of (R ωR )q .
L
So, it suffices to show that the latter is (locally) complete intersection. Moreover, (R ωR )q is
L
an Rq -algebra by the map r /t 7→ (r, 0)/t and this underlying Rq -module structure of (R ωR )q
L
L
L
is the same Rq module (R ωR )q ∼
= Rq Rq . In particular, (R ωR )q is a flat Rq -algebra. So it
L
is sufficient to show that the closed fiber of Rq → (R ωR )q is a complete intersection. Since
(ωR )q ⊆ qRq so it is easily seen that there exists a natural ring isomorphism,
M
M
(R
ωR )q /(q
qωR )q → Rq /qRq ⋉ (ωR )q /q(ωR )q ,
such that maps an element (r, s)/t to (r /t , s/t). Now from the fact that (ωR )q ∼
= Rq , we can
deduce that Rq /qRq ⋉ (ωR )q /q(ωR )q is isomorphic to to the complete intersection ring,
(Rq /qRq )[X]/(X 2 ).

In [55] the author proves that any Gorenstein ring which is a homomorphic image of
a regular ring and it is a complete intersection at codimension ≤ 1 is a specialization of a
unique factorization domain. The first part of the proof of the following proposition is more
or less repeating the proof of the Ulrich’s result, and is stated here for the convenience of the
reader and also for the sake of completeness.
Proposition 3.4. Suppose that P is a regular ring and R := P/a is a quasi-Gorenstein ring.
Assume, furthermore, that R is locally complete intersection at codimension ≤ 1. Then there
exists a unique factorization domain S (which is of finite type over P) and a regular sequence
y of S such that R ∼
= S/(y).
Proof. The general idea, here, is similar as given in [55, Proposition 1]. Firstly, we are going
to use the idea of generic linkage presented in [40] to be sure that the almost complete intersection linked to a is a prime ideal which is a complete intersection at codimension ≤ 1. To
be more precise, let a1 , . . . , an be a system of generators for a and assume that grade(a) = g .
n
P
Yi ,j a j . Then, in the light of, [40, ProposiSet, Q = P[Yi ,j : 1 ≤ i ≤ g , 1 ≤ j ≤ n] and ci =
j =1

tion 2.9.(b)] and [40, Proposition 2.6], the linked ideal b = (c1 , . . . , c g ) :Q aQ, to aQ, is a prime
almost complete intersection which is a complete intersection at codimension ≤ 1. In particular, in the light of [38, (5), page 268] one can deduce that b is generated by a d-sequence
and thence [38, Theorem 3.1.] implies that sym(b) ∼
= R(b) wherein R(b) denotes the Rees algebra of b and sym(b) stands for the symmetric algebra of b. Suppose that, b = (c1 , . . . , c g , h).
Now, in the light of [37, Theorem 2.2] in conjunction with [30, Thoerem 1], the extended Rees
algebra Q[t −1 , bt ] is a unique factorization domain and whence so is
U := Q[t −1 , bt ]ht = Q[bt ]ht = sym(b)ht = (Q[Z 0 , . . . , Z g ]/d)Z0 ,
wherein, d =< {

g
P

i =0

r i Z i |r 0 h +

g
P

i =1

r i ci = 0} >. Now, as stated in [55, Proposition 1], U has an

Z-grading structure such that,

V := Q[Z 0 , Z 1 , . . . , Z g ]/(d + (Z 0 − 1)),

11

E HSAN TAVANFAR

is its degree zero subring and since the unique factorization domain U has an invertible
element of degree one it is easily seen that V is also a unique factorization domain.
The reminder of the proof differs with [55, Proposition 1]. Note that if we localize V at its
maximal ideal n := (m, Y1 , . . . , Yng , Z 1 , . . . , Z g , Z 0 −1) then R = Vn /(Y1 , . . . , Yng , Z 1 , . . . , Z g ). Hence
in order to deduce the statement it suffices to show that Z 1, . . . , Z g forms a regular sequence of
V, i.e. Z 0 −1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g is a regular sequence on sym(b). We achieve this with the aid of theory
of Z -complexes which is introduced and investigated in [26]. We use the notation Z i to denote the i -th cycles of the Koszul complex of Q with respect to the sequence c := h, c1 , . . . , c g .
Let S = Q[Z 0 , . . . , Z g ], be the polynomial ring over Q. Then the Z -complex associated to the
sequence c is the complex,
Z := 0 → Z g

O

S(−g ) → · · · → Z 2

Q

O
Q

whose differential is defined by the rule,

S(−2) → Z 1

O

S(−1) → S → 0,

Q

i
O
O ¢ X ¡X
¡X
¢
∂ ( q j e j1 ∧ · · · ∧ e ji )
Zk f .
f = qj
(−1)k e j 1 ∧ · · · ∧ ec
jk ∧ · · · ∧ e ji
j

j

k=1

It is easily seen that H0 (Z ) = sym(b) = S/d. Moreover, Z is acyclic by virtue of [26, Theorem
12.5] because any d -sequence is a proper sequence(see, [26, Definition 6.1.]). Using these
two facts and by considering the spectral sequence arising from the double complex,
O
Z
K• (Z 0 − 1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g ; S),
S

we can deduce that Z 0 − 1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g is a regular sequence on sym(b) if and only if,
O
S/(Z 0 − 1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g ),
Z
S

remains acyclic. Let e 0 denotes the basis of K1 (h, c1 , . . . , c g ; Q) = Qg +1 corresponding to the
element h. Then each element ζi of Z i can be represented as ζi = z i + z i′ ∧ e 0 such that z i ∈
L
L
′
j 1 6=0 Qe j 1 ∧···∧e j i −1 ( Ki −1 (h, c 1 , . . . , c g ; Q). Note
j 1 6=0 Qe j 1 ∧···∧e j i ( Ki (h, c 1 , . . . , c g ; Q) and z i ∈
that,
O¡
¢
Z
S/(Z 0 − 1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g ) =
S

0 → Zg

O
Q

→ Z1

O

Q[Z 0 ]/(Z 0 − 1) → · · · → Z 2

O

Q[Z 0 ]/(Z 0 − 1) →

Q[Z 0 ]/(Z 0 − 1) → Q[Z 0 ]/(Z 0 − 1) → 0,

Q

¡
N ¢
N
whose differentials satisfy, ∂ (z i + z i′ ∧ e 0 ) f = (−1)i −1 z i′ f ,4 , for each z i + z i′ ∧ e 0 ∈ Z i .
N
Let, α, be a cycle in Z i . Without loss of generality we can say, α = (z i + z i′ ∧ e 0 ) 1. Thus,
N
More precisely, note that Z S S/(Z 0 − 1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g ) is a subcomplex of the complex,
O
O
O
K := 0 → Kg +1
S/(Z 0 − 1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g ) → Kg
S/(Z 0 − 1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g ) → · · · → K0
S/(Z 0 − 1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g ) → 0,
4

Q

Q

Q

12

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

N
N
z i′ 1 = 0 which implies that, z i′ = 0. Hence, α = z i 1. In particular, z i ∈ Z i (c1 , . . . , c g ; Q).
Now the exactness of K• (c1 , . . . , c g ; Q) implies that there exists ζi ∈ Ki +1 (c1 , . . . , c g ; Q) such that
∂(ζi ) = z i . In particular, −hζi + (−1)i z i ∧ e 0 ∈ Z i +1 . Now using the algebra structure we get,
α = zi

O

³¡
¢O ´
1 = ∂ − hζi + (−1)i z i ∧ e 0
1 .

This observation concludes the proof.

Recall that by homological conjectures we mean one of the Small Cohen-Macaulay Conjecture, Big-Cohen-Macaulay Algebra Conjecture as well as the Monomial Conjecture. The
first part of the subsequent theorem reduces the homological conjectures to the class of
quasi-Gorenstein domains. As pointed out in the introduction, as the main result of this
section, the second part of the subsequent theorem gives the promised descent to excellent unique factorization domains. The integral closure of a complete quasi-Gorenstein ring
is not necessarily quasi-Gorenstein. Therefore, we could not reduce to the normal complete quasi-Gorenstein domains directly by taking integral closure in the first part. But by
virtue of the second part this is achievable which is stated separately in the third part. Note
that, as stated in [55], the completion of the unique factorization domains in [55] are not
unique factorization domain necessarily. However any possible reduction of the homological conjectures to the complete unique factorization domains would be fairly helpful as the
complete unique factorization domains have even more interesting properties at least in
the equal characteristic zero. More precisely, any equal characteristic zero complete unique
factorization domain with algebraically closed residue field of dimension up to 4 is CohenMacaulay. Furthermore, with mild conditions, any complete unique factorization domain of
equal characteristic zero with algebraically closed residue field satisfies the Serre-condition
S 3 (see, [42, page 540] or [21] for both of the aforementioned results).
Theorem 3.5. The following statements holds.
(i) If each complete quasi-Gorenstein domain, which is locally complete intersection at
codimension ≤ 1, satisfies the homological conjectures then, each local ring satisfies homological conjectures. This reduction is dimensionwise, in the sense that homological
conjectures for d -dimensional local rings reduce to the d -dimensional complete quasiGorenstein domains.
(ii) The homological conjectures reduce to the excellent (and homomorphic image of regular) unique factorization domains. This reduction is dimensionwise for the Monomial
Conjecture.
wherein Ki denotes the i -th component of the Koszul complex K• (h, c 1 , . . . , c g ; Q). The differential of K is dei
N
P
N
fined by, ∂(e j 1 ∧· · ·∧e j i f ) =
(−1)k e j 1 ∧· · ·∧ ec
Z k f . The complex K has a DG-algebra structure.
j k ∧· · ·∧e j i
k=1

Using this DG-algebra structure of K the identity can be easily verified because in view of the definition of ∂
in conjunction with the fact Z i has zero image in S/(Z 0 − 1, Z 1 , . . . , Z g ) for each 1 ≤ i ≤ g we can conclude that
∂(zi ) = ∂(zi′ ) = 0. This DG-algebra technique is used in the proof of [22, Lemma 4.3].

13

E HSAN TAVANFAR

(iii) The homological conjectures reduce to quasi-Gorenstein normal complete domains. This
reduction is dimensionwise for the Monomial Conjecture.
(iv) For the Canonical Element Conjecture it suffices only to consider mixed characteristic
complete normal quasi-Gorenstein rings of minimum possible depth, i.e. depth 2.
Proof. (i) We may suppose that R is a complete normal domain. In particular R satisfies the
L
S 2 -condition. Let ωR be the canonical ideal of R and set S := R ωR as stated in the Remark
3.2. Note that S is a complete local ring. By [4, Proposition 1.2] we have,
M d
¡ d
¢
¡
¢
Hm (R), E(R/m)
HomR Hdn (S), E(R/m) ∼
= HomR Hm (ωR )
O
¡ d
¡
¢
¢M
∼
ωR , E(R/m)
HomR Hd (R), E(R/m)
= HomR H (R)
m

m

R

∼
= HomR (ωR , ωR )
M
∼
ωR = S.
=R

M

ωR

¡
¢
Hence we get an isomorphism, S → HomR Hdn (S), E(R/m) , of R-modules which is an Sisomorphism too5 . In particular, Hdn (S) ∼
= HomR (S, E(R/m)), as S-modules because on the
category of S-modules two functors HomR (−, E(R/m)) and HomS (−, E(S/n)) are naturally
equivalent . So,
³
O
¡
¢
¡
¢´
¢
¡
HomS S/n, Hdn (S) ∼
S, E(R/m)
= HomS S/n, HomR S, E(R/m) ∼
= HomR S/n
S

¡
¢
∼
= HomR R/m, E(R/m)
∼
= R/m

∼
= S/n.
This observation implies that Hdn (S) has one dimensional socle. Since a does not have a
square root in Frac(R), so Remark 2.1 (v) implies that R(a 1/2 ) and whence its subring S is an
integral domain. Thus, by [54, Theorem 5.7], S is a quasi-Gorenstein domain. Since S is a
finitely generated (as R-module) complete quasi-Gorenstein extension domain of R so the
statement follows.
(ii) Using the previous part in conjunction with Lemma 3.3 and Proposition 3.4 we may
assume that R is a complete quasi-Gorenstein domain such that R = S/yS wherein (S, n) is a
5

In order to see why this is also an S-isomorphism, we fix an R-isomorphism,
¡
¢
ϕ : ωR → HomR Hdm (R), E(R/m) .

Then ¡the composition
of the above isomorphisms which is the mentioned R-isomorphism S →
¢
L
HomR Hdn (S), E(R/m) maps an element (r, α) ∈ R ωR = S to the R-homomorphism defined by the rule,
[(r ′ , α′ ) + (xn )] ∈ Hdn (R

wherein x is a system of parameters for R.
homomorphism.

M

¡
¢¡
¢
ωR ) 7→ ϕ(r α′ + r ′ α) [1 + (xn )] ,

Then it is easily verified that the map is, moreover, an S-

14

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

unique factorization domain and y := y 1 , . . . , y n is a regular sequence contained in S. Clearly,
if S satisfies the homological conjectures then so does R. This proves the first claim. For
proving the second claim we invoke the Hochster’s first general grade reduction technique
developed in [31]. Let a1 , . . . , ad be a system of parameters for R. Assume that the Monomial
Conjecture is valid for every d -dimensional unique factorization domain but, to the contrary,
a1t · · · adt ∈ (a1t+1 , . . . , adt+1 ),
for some t ∈ N. So we get the system of parameters y 1 , . . . , y n , y n+1 , . . . , y n+d for S such that
y i +n is a lift of ai in S for each 1 ≤ i ≤ d and
t
t
t+1
t+1
y n+1
· · · y n+d
∈ (y 1 , . . . , y n , y n+1
, . . . , y n+d
).
t+1
t+1
Since R satisfies the S 2 -condition so y 1 , . . . , y n , y n+1
, y n+2
is a regular sequence of S. As n +2 ≥
3 so [31, Theorem. c)] implies that the first general grade reduction,

T = S[X 1 , . . . , X n+2 ]/(

n
X

t+1
t+1
y k X k + y n+1
X n+1 + y n+2
X n+2 ),

k=1

of S is again a (non-local) unique factorization domain and so is its localization at nT. We
have, dim(TnT ) = dim(S)−1. Furthermore, as X 1 is invertible in TnT so y 2 , . . . , y n+d is a system
t+1
t+1
of parameters for TnT , y 2 , . . . , y n , y n+1
, y n+2
is a regular sequence of TnT and
t
t
t+1
t+1
y n+1
· · · y n+d
∈ (y 2 , . . . , y n , y n+1
, . . . , y n+d
)TnT .

Proceeding in this way, we get a unique factorization domain U with dim(U) = dim(R) = d
such that the image of y n+1 , . . . , y n+d in U is a system of parameters for U which does not
satisfy the Monomial Conjecture. This is a contradiction.
(iii) This is followed by taking the completion of the unique factorizations of the second
part, because by [17, Lemma (2.4)] any unique factorization domain with a canonical module is quasi-Gorenstein. Note also that the completion remains normal, as the formal fibers
of an excellent ring are regular.
(iv) In order to see why this is the case firstly note that by [28] the Canonical Element
Conjecture for all local rings is valid if and only if all local rings satisfies the Monomial Conjecture. Therefore in view of Theorem 3.5 (iii) the Canonical Element Conjecture reduces
to the mixed characteristic normal quasi-Gorenstein complete domains. So let R be such
a quasi-Gorenstein normal domain. Without loss of generality we may assume that R has
infinite residue field. If Depth(R) 2 then applying [43, Theorem 4.4(Local Bertini Theorem)] there exist x ∈ R such that R/xR is a normal domain. In particular R/xR satisfies the
S 2 -condition and thence R/xR is a quasi-Gorenstein normal domain in view of [54, CorolS
lary 3.4.(i)]. Consequently, [54, Proposition 3.1.] implies that x ∉
¡
¢ p. In particular,
p∈Att Hdm−1 (R)

if R/xR satisfies the Canonical Element Conjecture then so does R in the light of [28, (5.3)
Theorem]. Proceeding in this fashion the claim follows.

The theory of generic linkage had an important role in the reduction of the homological
conjectures to unique factorization domains. In the second part of the subsequent remark

15

E HSAN TAVANFAR

we, again, observe that how the linkage theory is related to the homological conjectures. In
the first part we show that the validity of the Canonical Element Conjecture in an open subset
implies the validity in general.
Remark 3.6. (i) The following approach to the Monomial Conjecture might be helpful: The
Canonical Element Conjecture is valid if it is valid, in some sense, in an open dense subset. More precisely, in view of the first part of Theorem 3.5(iii), we can assume that R is a
complete normal quasi-Gorenstein domain of mixed characteristic with Depth(R) ≥ 3. Let
(V, πV , k) be a coefficient ring of R. Let x0 , . . . , xn be a minimal generating set of m. If there exists a dense Zariski open subset O ⊆ Pd (k) such that for any a = (a0 : · · · : an ) in the preimage
n
P
ai xi satisfies the Canonical
of O in Pn (V), as described in [43, Definition 2.1.], we have R/
i =0

Element Conjecture then the Canonical Element Conjecture holds. Indeed, if this is the case
then we can apply [43, Theorem 4.4(Local Bertini Theorem)] to find an element a ∈ R such
that R/aR is a normal domain satisfying the Canonical Element Conjecture. Then [54, Theorem 3.4(i)] and [54, Propositino 3.1.] in conjunction with [28, (5.3) Theorem] imply that R
satisfies the Canonical Element Conjecture.
(ii) In [53, page 158] the following question is proposed. Suppose a and b are ideals in
a d -dimensional Gorenstein ring R which are geometrically linked w.r.t. the empty regular
sequence. Suppose R possess a maximal Cohen-Macaulay module M with 0 :R M = a. Does R
possess a maximal Cohen-Macaulay module N with 0 :R N = b? We show that if this question
has an affirmative answer then Small Cohen-Macaulay Conjecture is true in dimension 3.
Furthermore if Monomial Conjecture analogous of this question has an affirmative answer
then the Monomial Conjecture holds in any dimension.
By Theorem3.5(i) the Small Cohen-Macaulay Conjecture reduces, dimensionwise, to the
class of complete quasi-Gorenstein domains. Let P be a regular local ring and a be a quasiGorenstein prime ideal of P. As in the proof of [13, 1.2. Proposition] Choose a maximal regular sequence x1 , . . . , xh contained in a such that aPa = (x1 , . . . , xh )Pa . Then, a and (x1 , . . . , xh ) :P
a are geometrically linked and since a is a quasi-Gorenstein ideal so b := (x1 , . . . , xh ) :P a is
an unmixed almost complete intersection. Therefore P/b has positive depth and whence
Lemma 4.1(ii) implies that Depth(ωP/b ) ≥ 3. In particular, in the case of dimension three we
have ωP/b is a maximal Cohen-Macaulay P/b-module and therefore an affirmative answer
to the mentioned question implies the validity of the Small Cohen-Macaulay Conjecture in
dimension 3.
For the Monomial Conjecture analogous of the Strooker and Stückrad’s question assume
in addition that a is a normal quasi-Gorenstein prime ideal of P. Then the claim follows by
[15, step 2., page 238]. In spite of this observation, it is by no means clear for us that how the
theory of linkage can be helpful for this type of problems, in this point of view.

Any successful proof of the Monomial Conjecture for the class of generalized CohenMacaulay domains will settle the Monomial Conjecture in dimension three (by means of
a new proof). Although we do not know how to prove the Monomial Conjecture for this
type of rings but we show that again the problem reduces to the class of quasi-Gorenstein
generalized Cohen-Macaulay rings.
Proposition 3.7. The following statements hold.

16

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

(i) If every complete quasi-Gorenstein generalized Cohen-Macaulay ring satisfies the Monomial Conjecture then so does every generalized Cohen-Macaulay ring.
(ii) Monomial Conjecture holds for every complete generalized Cohen-Macaulay domain if
and only if every complete generalized Cohen-Macaualy quasi-Gorenstein domain satisfies Monomial Conjecture.
Proof. (i) Let R be a complete generalized Cohen-Macaulay ring. Denote by S the S 2-ification
of R. By [3, Corollary 4.3] ωRp , for each p ∈ Spec(R), is either the canonical module of the
∼
Cohen-Macaulay
ring
¡
¢ Rp or is zero. Hence, for every p ∈ Spec(R)\m either S p is zero or S p =
∼
∼
HomRp (ωR )p , (ωR )p = HomRp (ωRp , ωRp ) = Rp . On the other hand we have,
\
¡
¢
AssR (S) = AssR HomR (ωR , ωR ) = SuppR (ωR ) AssR (ωR ) = AsshR (R).

Therefore, by [9, 9.5.7 Exercise] S is a generalized Cohen-Macaulay R-module. Let n ∈ Max(S)
such that dim(S) = dim(S n ). Now, we show that S n is a generalized Cohen-Macaulay ring.
Denote the natural map R → S by η. We know that S is a finitely generated R-module. So
S
p and whence
dim(R/ker η) = dim(S). By [28, (4.2) Lemma] we have a := ker(η) ⊆
p
∈Assht(R)
T
dim(S) = dim(R). Since S is integral over R/a so m/a = n R/a and thereby mS n is an nS n primary ideal by the incomparability property of R/a → S. There exists l ≥ 0 such that
ml Him (S) = 0 (0 ≤ i ≤ dim(S) − 1). So that ml HimS n (S n ) = 0 (0 ≤ i ≤ dim(S) − 1) for some l ≥ 0.

Thus, (nS n )k HinS n (S n ) = 0 (0 ≤ i ≤ dim(S n ) − 1). Hence S n is a generalized Cohen-Macaulay
ring. We have S n is S 2 . Hence by passing to the completion if necessary, we can assume that
R is an S 2 -complete generalized Cohen-Macaulay ring. Therefore, in view of [3, Theorem
2.11.] the trivial extension T of R by its canonical module is a complete quasi-Gorenstein
ring. We prove that T is a generalized Cohen-Macaulay ring. Clearly if T satisfies the Monomial Conjecture then so does R.
Let q ∈ Spec(T)\{m ⋉ ω}. Then there exists p ∈ Spec(R)\{m} such that q = p ⋉ ωR . So
∼
Tq = (R ⋉ ωR )p⋉ωR ∼
= Rp ⋉ (ωR )p ∼
= Rp ⋉ ωRp . Hence, Tq is a Cohen-Macaulay ring. As T is
equidimensional, [9, 9.5.7 Exercise] implies that T is generalized Cohen-Macaulay.
(ii) Let R be a complete generalized Cohen-Macaulay domain. Set, S := HomR (ωR , ωR ).
Then, by virtue of [34, (3.6)] S is local6 . Also we know that S is complete and domain. By
a similar argument as in the preceding part, S is generalized Cohen-Macaulay. Hence, as
L
stated in the proof of Theorem 3.5(i), T = S ωS ⊆ S(a 1/2 ), is a local quasi-Gorenstein complete domain wherein a is an element of S without a square root in Frac(S). It is enough to
show that T is a generalized Cohen-Macaulay ring.
L
L
L
Let p ∈ Spec(S)\{m}. Then (S ωS )p ∼
= S p (ωS )p ∼
= S p ωS p , is a Cohen-Macaulay S p L
S
module. On the other hand, AssS (S ωS ) = AssS (S) AsshS (ωS ) = AssS (S) = {0}. Hence T is
a generalized Cohen-Macaulay S-module. Now, a similar argument as in the preceding part
shows that T is a generalized Cohen-Macaulay domain.
6

Since S is local so we do not need to localize S. This is important because the completion of a domain is
not necessarily a domain.

17

E HSAN TAVANFAR

4 A class of rings satisfying the Monomial Conjecture
As stated in the introduction for the validity of the Monomial Conjecture it suffices only to
check the almost complete intersections and system of parameters of the form p, x2 , . . . , xd
where p is the residual characteristic. This section is devoted to prove either the Small
Cohen-Macaulay Conjecture or the Big Cohen-Macaulay Algebra Conjecture for an almost
complete intersection R satisfying the extra assumption that,

m2 ⊆ (x)R,

(5)

for some system of parameters x1 , . . . , xd of R. In the mixed characteristic case we moreover
assume that x1 = p.
A motivation behind this consideration is that this case seems to be the most simple
non-trivial case of the Monomial Conjecture. For another motivation see the introduction.
But, parallel, to this aim, several other interesting facts about this class of almost complete
intersections are also given. The following lemma is not required for the next theorem which
is the main result of the section but it is needed for its subsequent remark.
Lemma 4.1. Assume that (A, n) is a regular local ring. Let a = (x1 , . . . , xd ) (resp. b = (y 1 , . . . , y s ))
be a complete intersection (resp. an almost complete intersection) ideal of A. Suppose furthermore that, x1 , . . . , xd , y 1 , . . . , y s−1 , forms a regular sequence of A and that ht(a) + ht(b) =
d + s − 1 = dim(A). Set, R := A/b. Then the following statements hold.
(i) There exists an exact sequence,
0 → H2 (x, R) → ωR /aωR → ωR/a → H1 (x, R) → 0.
(ii) We have Hi (x, R) ∼
= Hi −2 (x, ωR ) for each i ≥ 3. In particular,
(
Depth(ωR ) = Depth(R) + 2, Depth(R) ≤ d − 2
Depth(ωR ) = d ,

Depth(R) ≥ d − 1.

(iii) The system of parameters x of R satisfies the Monomial Conjecture if and only if,
¡
¢
¡
¢
ℓ H2 (x, R)
ℓ ωR /aωR .

Definitely, this is equivalent to say that, ωR → ωR/a , is non-zero in the above exact sequence.

Proof. (i) and (ii): We have,
´
³ ¡
¢O
H1 (x1 , . . . , xd ; R) ∼
(A/y s A) .
= Hi K• x1 , . . . , xd ; A/(y 1 , . . . , y s−1 )
A

¡
¢N
¡
¢
′
This encouraged us to consider the spectral sequence, K• x; A/(y′ )
A K• y s ; A , where y denotes
y 1 , . . . , y s−1 . So we take into account the bicomplex Mp,q :=
¡ the ′truncated
¢N
¡ sequence
¢
Kp x; A/(y )
A Kq y s ; A in which here, as usual, p stands for the column p. Note that,
( ¡
¢
¡
¢
¡
¢
Hi Tot(M) ∼
i ≥ 2.
= Hi x, y s ; A/(y′ ) ∼
= Hi y s ; A/(x, y′ ) = 0,
¡
¢
¡
¢
¡
¢
(6)
′ ∼
′ ∼
∼
Hi Tot(M) = Hi x, y s ; A/(y ) = Hi y s ; A/(x, y ) = ωR/a , i = 1.

18

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

Furthermore we have,

II 2
Ep,q



Hq (x; R),
p =0


 µ ³¡
´¶
¢
= Hq x; (y′ ) : y s /(y′ ) = Hq (x; ωR ), p = 1




0,
p 6= 0, 1.

Now the desired exact sequence is just the five term exact sequence of this spectral sequence
(see, [50, Theorem 10.31 (Homology of Five-Term Exact Sequence)]).
For the second part note that according to the vanishings of (6) for i ≥ 2, all of the maps,
d 2 : Hi +2 (x; R) → Hi (x; ωR ), (i ≥ 1)
arising from the second page of the spectral sequence are isomorphisms.
¡
¢
(iii): By [13, 1.3. Proposition] our statement is equivalent to the assertion that ℓ H1 (x; R)
ℓ(R/a). Hence in the light of the exact sequence of the first part we are done once we can
show that,
³¡
´
¢
ℓ(R/a) = ℓ(ωR/a ) = ℓ (x, y′ ) : y s /(x, y′ ) .

But this is clear from the following exact sequence,

¡
¢
ys
0 → (x, y′ ) : y s /(x, y′ ) → R/(x, y′ ) → R/(x, y′ ) → R/a → 0.
In the following example we consider a subclass of almost complete intersections satisfying (5) and we show that they satisfy the Small Cohen-Macaulay Conjecture. The main idea
behind this observation is that this class of almost complete intersections are the same free
square root extensions R(a 1/2 ) of Remark 2.1. This is not the case for the more general setting
of Theorem 4.4. However, in Theorem 4.4, with aid of the multiplicity theory we will again
descend to a similar case of quadratic extensions.
Example 4.2. Suppose that R = (V, pV)[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Z 1 , Z 2 ]]/I, such that I = (g 1 −Z21 , g 2 −Z22 , g 3 −
Z 1 Z 2 ) wherein g 1 , g 2 , g 3 ∈ V[[X 2 , . . . , X d ]] are non-zero. Set, (A, n) := V[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Z 1 , Z 2 ]]. Presume that R is an almost complete intersection, i.e. ht(I) = 2. Note that,
p, x2 := X 2 + I, . . . , xd := X d + I,
forms a system of parameters for R satisfying (5). In this example we show that R has a maximal Cohen-Macaulay module. Setting,
S := V[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Z 1 ]]/(g 1 − Z21 ),
then S is a free extension of B := V[[X 2 , . . . , X d ]] wherein Z 1 is the square root of g 1 , i.e. S =
B(g 11/2 ). If g 1 has a square root in B then the polynomials g 1 −Z21 is reducible and therefore any
p ∈ assht(I) contains an element a ∈ n\n2 . In particular, then, p/aA is a height one prime ideal
of the regular local ring A/aA which implies that p is generated by two elements and thence

19

E HSAN TAVANFAR

A/p is a complete intersection and a maximal Cohen-Macaulay R-module. So without loss
of generality we can assume that g 1 does not have a square root in B and whence in Frac(B).
Consequently, S is a domain hypersurface by Remark 2.1(v). Next set,
T := V[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Z 1 , Z 2 ]]/(g 1 − Z21 , g 2 − Z22 ).
Therefore, T is the free extension of S wherein Z 2 is a square root of g 2 , i.e. T = S(g 21/2 ). In
particular, T is a domain if and only if g 2 does not have a square root Frac(S). But since our
almost complete intersection I is an ideal of height two generated by three elements so indeed
g 2 has a square root in Frac(S). Therefore by Remark 2.1(iv) there exists an induced map from T
to the integral closure S of S, denoted by Ψ. Since the kernel of this map is an associated prime
of the defining ideal of T so, as will be seen later, without loss of generality we can presume
that the kernel of Ψ contains the ideal, I, and thence we get an induced map R → S. Hence it is
enough to prove the statement for S (recall that S is finitely generated as S-module). Note that,
[Frac(S) : Frac(B)] = [Frac(S) : Frac(B)] = 2.
Here the residual characteristic of B is either two or p > 2. In the first case [41, Theorem 3.8.]
implies that R has a maximal Cohen-Macaulay module, while in the second case S is a CohenMacaulay ring in the light of [45]7 .
It remains to show that why we can assume that, I ⊆ ker Ψ. We claim that T has at most
two associated primes. In order to see why this is the case note that, in the light of [18, TheN
orem 1.], E S T is an injective T-module provided E is an injective S-module. In particular,
N
E(S) S T, is an injective T-module which contains T and thence contains ET (T). Therefore,
L
ET (T), as S-module, is an injective submodule of E(S) E(S). Since S is a domain so E(S) is an
indecomposable injective module. This observation shows that ET (T) has at most two direct
summands and, as an immediate consequence, T has at most two associated primes. Now
if α1 and α2 are distinct square roots of g 2 in Frac(S)8 then it is easily verified that the rules
(r, s) 7→ r + sαi , (1 ≤ i ≤ 2) define distinct ring homomorphisms, Ψi : T → S, with distinct
kernels, p1 , p2 ∈ Ass(T). Now the claim, easily, follows from the fact that T has at most two
associated primes.
Example 4.3. It is worth to give a concrete and explicit non-Cohen-Macaulay example of the
class of the rings of the previous example. We do this, but in the equal characteristic case,
where we can use the Macaulay2 system for computations. Set,
R = K[[Y1 , . . . , Y6 , Z 1 , Z 2 ]]/I,
such that,

I = (Y26 Y35 + Z22 , Y33 Y48 + Z21 , Y23 Y34 Y44 + Z 1 Z 2 ).

Then we have, Depth(R) = 4 and dim(R) = 6. In particular, Lemma 4.1 implies that ωR is, also,
a maximal Cohen-Macaulay R-module.
7

By an argument as in the proof of Theorem 4.4 we can deduce that S is necessarily Cohen-Macaulay regardless of the residual characteristic, because we have a quadratic extension. This fact is asserted in Theorem
4.5.
8
Recall that S has mixed characteristic and therefore Frac(S) has characteristic zero. So we have two distinct
roots.

20

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

Theorem 4.4. Suppose that R is an almost complete intersection satisfying (5). Then R has a
b has a maximal Cohen-Macaulay module which is
big Cohen-Macaulay algebra. A fortiori, R
b
an R-algebra.

Proof. If R is a Cohen-Macaulay then there is nothing to prove, so assume that R is not
Cohen-Macaulay (and is complete). The multiplicity theory plays a pivotal role in the proof.
The same idea of the proof of Corollary 2.3 can be applied to impose the extra assumption
that x is a part of minimal
generating
set¡ of m9¢. Consider a minimal Cohen-presentation
¡
¢
R = A/I of R so embdim (A, n) = embdim (R, m) and I ⊆ n2 . Firstly, we have,
³ ¡
¡
¢
¢´
ℓ R/(x) = ℓ A/ (x) + I) = ℓ(A/I),

wherein the notation, , means modulo (x). But, I = n2 , as n2 ⊆ I + (x) and I ⊆ n2 simultaneously. It turns out that,
¡
¢
ℓ R/(x) = ℓ(A/n2 ) = embdim(A) + 1 = embdim(R) − dim(R) + 1.

We claim that, embdim(R) − dim(R) ≤ 2, but before proving this claim let us conclude
the
¡
¢
statement from it. The above inequality in conjunction with our claim implies that ℓ R/(x) ≤
3. Now, in the light of [51, Theorem 1, page. 57] together with [51, Corollary , page 90] we
can deduce a very strong implication that e(x, R) ≤ 3. But if e(x, R) = 3 then R is CohenMacaulay by [25, (1.5) Proposition]. Thus we have even stronger condition that e(x, R) ≤ 2.
In the case where e(x, R) = 1 using [25, (1.10.1)] and [25, (6.8) Theorem] there exists a prime
ideal p ∈ Assht(R) such that R/p is regular, hence is s a maximal Cohen-Macaulay R-module.
It remains to deal with the case where e(x, R) = 2. In this case by a similar argument as above
without loss of generality we can assume that there exists p ∈ Assht(R) for which R/p satisfies
e(x, R/p) = 2. There exists a regular local subring B of R/p, containing a coefficient field (in
the mixed characteristic case, containing a complete discrete valuation ring whose maximal
ideal is generated by the element p 1/2 of R/p and with the same residue field of R), wherein
x forms a minimal basis for its maximal ideal and R/p is module finite over B. Therefore,
[Frac(R/p) : Frac(B)] = 2, in the light of [25, (6.5) Corollary]. Let S be the integral closure
of B in Frac(R/p). Since B is a complete local ring so by [39, Theorem 4.3.4] S is finitely
generated over B. Moreover, by virtue of, [36] the inclusion B → S splits10. Consequently, we
L
may assume that S = B I for some finitely generated B-module I. Since we have quadratic
extension of fraction fields so we can deduce that I has rank 1. In particular, we may presume
that, I is an ideal of B (since S is a domain so I is torsion-free). Using the S 2 -property of R for
each prime ideal p of B we conclude that Ip ∼
= Bp provided Depth(Bp ) = dim(Bp ) ≤ 1 and
Depth(Ip ) ≥ 2 provided Depth(Bp ) = dim(Bp ) ≥ 2. Consequently, I is a reflexive ideal of B in
the light of [10, Proposition 1.4.1]. Now the result follows from the fact that reflexive ideals of
unique factorization domains are principal.
9

Here it is important to point out that the extensions used in the proof of Corollary 2.3 preserves the condition (5) as well as the almost complete intersection property.
10
Hence, the Monomial Conjecture for the system or parameters x of R follows from [36].

21

E HSAN TAVANFAR

Now we are going to prove the above claim, i.e., embdim(R)−dim(R) ≤ 2. Let us use a presentation p 1/2 , X 2 , . . . , X d for the sequence x in R where R = (V, p 1/2 )[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Z 1 , . . . , Z u ]]/I11
is a homomorphic image of the regular local ring (A, n) = (V, p 1/2 )[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Z 1 , . . . , Z u ]]. So,
n2 ⊆ (p 1/2 , Y2 , . . . , Yd ) + I. Set, I = ( f 1 , . . . , f l ) where l = µ(I). We denote by f iX the sum of those
monomials of f i whose power of X i is non-zero for some 2 ≤ i ≤ d . Subsequently, we set,
p 1/2

fi

, to be the sum of those monomials of f i − f iX whose coefficients are multiple of p 1/2 . It
p 1/2

follows that, f iZ := f i − f iX − f i
∈ V[[Z 1 , . . . , Z u ]], and that the coefficients of the monomials
Z
of f i are all invertible. Now, set ≥3fiZ (resp., ≤2fiZ ) to be the sum of the monomials of f iZ of
total degree greater than or equal to 3 (resp., less than or equal to 2). Since, I ⊆ n2 , so it turns
out that, ≤2fiZ , is an V-linear combination of the elements of the form {Z i Z i : 1 ≤ i , j ≤ u}
with invertible coefficients in V. Otherwise, ≤2fiZ and thence f i , would have a summand of
the form kZαj where, α ∈ {0, 1}, 1 ≤ j ≤ u and k ∈ V\p 1/2 V. But this contradicts with f i ∈ n2 . In

particular, ≤2fiZ ∈ (Z 1 , . . . , Z u )2 .
On the other hand the fact that, Z i Z j ∈ (p 1/2 , X 2 , . . . , X d ) + ( f 1 , . . . , f l ) yields,
Z k Z s = g 1 p 1/2 +

d
X

i =2

g i Xi +

l
X

i =1

hi

≥3 Z
fi +

l
X

i =1

hi

≤2 Z
fi ,

for each 1 ≤ k, s ≤ u and power series h i , g i . Thus an elementary, quite easy, computation
shows that (Z 1 , . . . , Z u )2 ⊆ ( ≤2f1Z , . . . , ≤2flZ ). This in conjunction with the concluding assertion
of the preceding paragraph yields (Z 1 , . . . , Z u )2 = ( ≤2f1Z , . . . , ≤2flZ ).
Since R is an almost complete intersection, so we have, l = µ(I) = ht(I) + 1 = dim(A) −
dim(R) + 1 = u + 1. Consequently, we get,
³X
´
l
¡
¢
u +1 = l ≥ µ
( ≤2fiZ )V[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Z 1 , . . . , Z u ]] = µ (Z 1 , . . . , Z u )2 = u(u + 1)/2,
i =1

i.e. u ≤ 2.
The proof of the above theorem implies also the following result which is worth stating it
separately as a theorem. Recall that by [45] the integral closure of a regular local ring A in a
finite Galois extension L of K := Frac(A) with Abelian Galois group GalL/K is Cohen-Macaulay
provided the order of GalL/K is not divisible by the characteristic of the residue field of A. In
view of the following theorem for the quadratic extension case there is no restriction on the
characteristic of the residue field, provided A is a complete regular local ring.
Theorem 4.5. Suppose that A is a complete regular local ring and L is a quadratic field extension of Frac(A). Then the integral closure of A in L is Cohen-Macaulay.
11

We choose a presentation of A in the mixed characteristic, because the Monomial Conjecture is open in the
mixed characteristic. But the proof is characteristic free and someone can use presentation of A in equicharacteristic zero. Furthermore, we write p 1/2 instead of p, because we applied our square root technique, developed
in the proof of Corollary 2.3, to have the extra assumption that x1 , . . . , xd is a part of a minimal generating set of
m.

22

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

Remark 4.6. In this remark we will state some nice properties as well as several questions
about the class of rings of Theorem 4.4. So we are in the case of the Theorem 4.4 with an
extra assumption that the system of parameters x of (5) is a part of a minimal basis of m
whence embdim(R) − dim(R) ≤ 2.
(i) All of the examples of such almost complete intersections that we have computed in
Macaulay2 system had Depth ≥ d − 2. So we guess Depth(R) ≥ d − 2 whence ωR is a
maximal Cohen-Macaulay module by Lemma 4.1 (ii). This observation leads us to the
following question.
Question 4.7. Suppose that U is an almost complete intersection. Then do we have,
Depth(U) ≥ dim(U) − e(U)?

(7)

Question 4.7 is certainly true in dimension ≤ 1. But even in dimension two we need to
use the validity of the Monomial Conjecture for the confirmation of the inequality (7).
Namely, in dimension two we only need to show that if Depth(U) = 0 then e(U) ≥ 2.
But if Depth(U) = 0 then we have H2 (y, U) 6= 0, wherein y is a system of parameters for
U. Hence,
¡
¢ ¡
¢ ¡
¢
e(U) = ℓ U/(y) − ℓ H1 (y, U) + ℓ H2 (y, U) ≥ 2,
¡
¢ ¡
¢
as the validity of the Monomial Conjecture implies that, ℓ U/(y) − ℓ H1 (y, U)
0 by
[13, 1.3. Proposition].
For another case where inequality (7) holds, consider an almost complete intersection
ideal a of an equicharacteristic complete regular local ring A with infinite residue field
such that Assh(A/a) = {p/a}. Set, U := A/a. Suppose, furthermore, that dim(U) = 3
and S := A/p is an integrally closed domain12. If the inequality (7) fails for U then we
must have Depth(U) = 0 and e(U) ≤ 2. It is easily seen that ωU = ωS . On the other
hand, Lemma 4.1(ii) implies that Depth(ωU ) = 2 and thence ωU = ωS is not a maximal
Cohen-Macaulay module. In particular, S is not a Cohen-Macaulay ring. By [25, (4.15)
Remark.] there exists a system of parameters x of U such that e(x, U) = 2. Since we
are in the equicharacteristic case so there exists a complete regular local subring B of
S with the same residue field as S such that x forms a minimal basis of the maximal
ideal of B. Consequently, in view of [25, (1.10.1.)], e(x, S) ≤ 2. If e(x, S) = 1 then [25, (6.8)
Theorem] implies that S is regular, a contradiction. On the other hand if e(x, S) = 2,
then [25, (6.5) Corollary] implies that [Frac(S) : Frac(B)] = 2. Now S is Cohen-Macaulay
by Theorem 4.5, again, a contradiction.
Note that the inequality (7) does not hold if we relax the almost complete intersection
condition. More precisely, taking into account the Abhyankar’s local domains [1, (3)],
we can construct local domains with multiplicity two and depth 1 of arbitrary dimension.
12

In each prime ideal q of A we can find an almost complete intersection ideal a ⊆ q such that Assh(A/a) =
{q/a} (see, the proof of [13, 1.2 Proposition]). So, indeed, there exists concrete examples of such almost complete intersections.

23

E HSAN TAVANFAR

(ii) In view of [13, 1.3. Proposition] the Monomial Conjecture for the system of parameters
x := p 1/2 , X 2 , . . . , X d of R is equivalent to the assertion that,
¡
¢
¡
¢
¡
¢
ℓ H1 (x, R)
ℓ R/(x) = ℓ K[[Z 1 , Z 2 ]]/(Z21 , Z22 , Z 1 Z 2 ) = 3.

On the other hand in the light of Lemma 4.1(i) the Monomial Conjecture holds for x if
and only if H1 (x, R) is a quotient of (Z 1 , Z 2 )/(Z21 , Z22 ) by a non-zero submodule. It is easily seen that this is equivalent to the assertion that mH1 (x, R) = 0. Accordingly, in the
light
4.4.], there exists a complex, denoted by, 0 Z •+ (x, Z 1 ), such that
¡ of+[22, Theorem
¢
H0 0 Z • (x, Z 1 ) = R/m and H1 (0 Z •+ (x, Z 1 )) = 0 if and only if the Monomial Conjecture
holds for R. Consequently, using Theorem
¡ +4.4, we¢ have H1 (x, R) is a non-zero at most
two dimensional vector space and H1 0 Z • (x, Z 1 ) = 0. Here it is noteworthy to mention that, we strongly, guess more, i.e. Z •+ (x, Z 1 ) is an acyclic finite complex consisting
of Koszul cycles of x1 , . . . , xd , Z 1 which resolves the residue field of R (This is equivalent
to say that mHi (x, R) = 0 for each i ≥ 1).

(iii) We claim that the parameter ideal a = (p 1/2 , x2 , . . . , xd ) of R is a Lech ideal in the sense
that a/a2 is a free R/a-module. Before proving, we wish to clear why this claim sounds
interesting to us. This fact in conjunction with the exact sequence in the paragraph
prior to [11, Proposition 2.6] shows that H1 (x, R) ∼
= δ1 (a) wherein,
\
¡
¢
¡
¢
δ1 (a) = Z1 (x, R) (aRd ) /B1 (x, R) ∼
= ker sym2 (a) → a2 ,
by [26, Corollary 2.6.]. So [2, XV., Proposition 12] implies that H1 (x, R) is the second
André-Quillen homology D2(R, R/a, R/a). Hence, in view of the preceding part, it would
be highly desirable to give a proof of the validity of the Monomial Conjecture for the
sequence x of R with aid of the André-Quillen homology avoiding, [36]. The fact that a
is Lech ideal follows from the following two steps.

Step 1: Bearing in mind the notations of the proof of Theorem 4.4, this step is devoted
to prove that, without loss of generality, we can assume that f 1Z = Z21 , f 2Z = Z22 and f 3Z =
Z 1 Z 2 . Recall that R is a homomorphic image of (A, n) = (V, p 1/2 V)[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Z 1 , Z 2 ]], by
the ideal ( f 1 , f 2 , f 3 ). As we have seen in the proof of Theorem 4.4, ( f 1Z , . . . , f 3Z ) ⊆ (Z 1 , Z 2 )2 .
d
3
P
P
On the other hand, by our hypothesis, Z i Z j =
X k g k + p 1/2 h +
f kZ l k , for some,
k=2

k=1

g 2 , . . . , g d , h, l 1 , l 2 , l 3 ∈ A.

We use a similar method as in the case of f i and write h = h X +h Z,p
for each 1 ≤ s ≤ 3, so that h Z,p
Z i Z j − p 1/2 h Z,p

1/2

1/2

−

Z,p 1/2

, l1

3
X

k=1

which implies that,

Z i Z j = p 1/2 h Z,p

Z,p 1/2

, . . . , l3

Z,p 1/2

lk

1/2

+

3
X

k=1

f kZ =

Z,p 1/2

and l s = l sX +l s

∈ V[[Z 1 , Z 2 ]]. Therefore,

d
X

k=2

Z,p 1/2

lk

1/2

X k g k + p 1/2 h X +

3
X

k=1

f kZ ∈ ( f 1Z , f 2Z , f 3Z , p 1/2 ).

f kZ l kX ,

24

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

Set, B := A/p 1/2 = k[[X 2 , . . . , X d , Z 1 , Z u ]] where k is the residue field of V. By the above
argument we have ( f 1Z , f 2Z , f 3Z ) = (Z 1 , Z 2 )2 in B. Thus there exists a square matrix H =
[h st ] such that H[ f 1Z , f 2Z , f 3Z ]τ = [Z21 , Z22 , Z 1 Z 2 ]τ , in B. Let us to denote the maximal ideal
of B by nB . In particular, H := [h st ], is the change of basis matrix with respect to the two
basis { f 1Z , f 2Z , f 3Z } and {Z21 , Z22 , Z 1 Z 2 } of the K-vector space (Z 1 , Z 2 )2 /nB (Z 1 , Z 2 )2 . Whence,
det(H) 6= 0, in K. Let Y = [y i j ] be a square matrix which lifts the matrix H. Then det(Y) ∉
n. So Y is invertible. Hence, if we put, Y[ f 1 , f 2 , f 3 ]τ = [ f 1′ , f 2′ , f 3′ ]τ , then I = ( f 1′ , f 2′ , f 3′ ).
Moreover for each 1 ≤ i ≤ 3 we have the identity,
f i′ =

3
X

j =1

y i j f jX +

3
X

j =1

p 1/2

yi j f j

+

3
X

j =1

y i j f jZ .

(8)

On the other hand, since H[ f 1Z , f 2Z , f 3Z ]τ = [Z21 , Z22 , Z 1 Z 2 ] in B, so we get
3
X

j =1

y 1j f jZ ≡ Z21 ,

3
X

j =1

y 2j f jZ ≡ Z22 and

3
X

j =1

y 3j f jZ ≡ Z 1 Z 2 , mod p 1/2 A.

(9)

So our claim follows from (8) and (9).
Step 2: In this step we assume that

d
P

i =1

r i xi = 0 ∈ R and we prove that,

r i ∈ a = (p 1/2 , x2 , . . . , xd ),
for each 1 ≤ i ≤ d (x1 = p 1/2 )13 . If so, then there are s 1 , . . . , s d ∈ (A, n) such that,
d
X

(r i + s i )X i = Z21 h 1 + Z22 h 2 + Z 1 Z 2 h 3 ,

(10)

i =1

because f 1Z = Z21 , f 2Z = Z22 , and f 3Z = Z 1 Z 2 . Clearly, we must have, h i ∈ n, for each 1 ≤
p 1/2

i ≤ 3. Hence, s i ∈ n2 , for every 1 ≤ i ≤ d , because f jX + f j
other hand, (10) shows that,

d
P

i =1

∈ n2 (1 ≤ j ≤ 3). On the

(r i + s i )X i + (Z21 , Z22 , Z 1 Z 2 ) = 0 in the Cohen-Macaulay

ring A/(Z21 , Z22 , Z 1 Z 2 ) whence r i + s i ∈ (X 1 , . . . , X d , Z21 , Z22 , Z 1 Z 2 ), for each 1 ≤ i ≤ d . Consequently,
r i ∈ (X 1 , . . . , X d , Z21 , Z22 , Z 1 Z 2 ) = (X 1 , . . . , X d , f 1 , f 2 , f 3 ),
for each 1 ≤ i ≤ d , because s i ∈ n2 .
Example 4.8. We give an example to show that, in general, the inclusion m2 ⊆ (x) in conjunction with the non-Cohen-Macaulayness does not imply that e(x, R) = 2 (without assuming that
R is an almost complete intersection). Set,
R = Q[X 1 , . . . , X 4 , Z 1 , Z 2 , Z 3 ],
13

This, immediately, shows that a is a Lech ideal.

25

E HSAN TAVANFAR

wherein X 1 , X 2 , X 3 have degree 1 and X 4 , Z 1 , Z 2 , Z 3 have degree 2. Let,
I := (Z21 + X 23 Z 2 + X 4 Z 2 , Z22 − X 1 X 2 Z 3 + X 4 Z 3 , Z23 , Z 1 Z 2 , Z 1 Z 3 , Z 2 Z 3 ).
Then, in S = R/I the image of the sequence x := X 1 , X 2 , X 3 , X 4 forms a system of parameters
satisfying (5) while e(x, R) = 3. Note that Depth(R) = 3 and R is not Cohen-Macaulay.

5 A question
We end the paper with the following question.
Question 5.1. In prime characteristic, Hdm (R) = lim R/(xn ), is a cyclic module over the Frobe−→

n∈N

nius Skew Polynomial ring R[x; f ], which is generated by [1/(x)]. This shows, in particular,
that, [1/(x)] 6= 0, by the Grothendieck’s non-vanishing theorem, i.e. the Monomial Conjecture
holds. In characteristic zero also the Frobenius-like endomorphism exists in a faithfully flat
extension with aid of the Schoutens’s Lefschetz extensions (see, [5]). Hence probably the same
strategy works in the equal characteristic zero. Here it seems to be natural to ask whether in
the mixed characteristic there exists an R-algebra S such that Hdm (R) is a cyclic S-module generated by [1/(x)]? It is worth to point out that if this question has an affirmative answer then
S is necessarily a non-commutative ring. To be more precise suppose that there exists such
an R-algebra S, but to the contrary S is commutative. Then since Hdm (R) is a cyclic S-module
by our assumption so Hdm (R) carries a commutative R-algebra structure. In particular there
N d
Hdm (R) induced by the multiplication. But on the
exists a surjective map Hdm (R) R H
m (R) →
¢
¡
N
other hand Hdm (R) R Hdm (R) ∼
= Hdm Hdm (R) = 0 which contradicts with the Grothendieck’s nonvanishing theorem (here, we assume that d > 0).

Acknowledgement
We would like to express our deepest gratitude to Massoud Tousi, Anurag K. Singh, Linquan
Ma, S. H. Hassanzadeh as well as Kazuma Shimomoto for their helpful comments and valuable suggestions. We also would like to thank the University of Utah for its hospitality during
our visit in the academic year 2015-2016 as well as for its support for this research.

References
[1] S. S. Abhyankar, Local rings of high embedding dimension, Amer. J. Math. 89 (1967), 1073–1077.
[2] M. André, Homologie des algèbres commutatives, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1974. Die Grundlehren
der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 206.
[3] Y. Aoyama, Some basic results on canonical modules, J. Math. Kyoto Univ. 23 (1983), no. 1, 85–94.
[4] Y. Aoyama and S. Goto, On the endomorphism ring of the canonical module, J. Math. Kyoto Univ. 25 (1985),
no. 1, 21–30.

26

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

[5] M. Aschenbrenner and H. Schoutens, Lefschetz extensions, tight closure and big Cohen-Macaulay algebras,
Israel J. Math. 161 (2007), 221–310.
[6] A. Bagheri, M. Salimi, E. Tavasoli and S. Yassemi, A construction of quasi-Gorenstein rings, J. Algebra Appl.,
11, (2012), no. 1, 9 pages.
[7] M. -J. Bertin, Anneaux d’invariants d’anneaux de polynomes, en caractéristique p, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér.
A-B 264 (1967), A653–A656.
[8] R. Bhattacharyya, Existence of almost Cohen-Macaulay algebras implies the existence of big CohenMacaulay algebras., J. Algebra 457 (2016), 1–6.
[9] M. P. Brodmann and R. Y. Sharp, Local cohomology, Second, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics,
vol. 136, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013. An algebraic introduction with geometric applications.
[10] W. Bruns and J. Herzog, Cohen-Macaulay rings, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 39,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993.
[11] A. Corso, C. Huneke, D. Katz and W. V. Vasconcelos, Integral closure of ideals and annihilators of homology.,
Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2006.
[12] S.P. Dutta, On the canonical element conjecture, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 299 (1987), no. 2, 803–811.
[13]

, The monomial conjecture and order ideals, J. Algebra 383 (2013), 232–241.

[14]

, The monomial conjecture and order ideals II, J. Algebra 454 (2016), 123–138.

[15] S.P. Dutta and P. Griffith, Intersection multiplicity, canonical element conjecture and the syzygy problem.,
Mich. Math. J. 57 (2008), 227–247.
[16] E. G. Evans and P. Griffith, The syzygy problem, Ann. of Math. (2) 114 (1981), no. 2, 323–333.
[17] R. Fossum, H. -B. Foxby, P. Griffith and I. Reiten, Minimal injective resolutions with applications to dualizing modules and Gorenstein modules., Publ. Math., Inst. Hautes Étud. Sci. 45 (1975), 193–215.
[18] H. -B. Foxby, Injective modules under flat base change., Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 50 (1975), 23–27.
[19] S. Goto, A note on quasi-Buchsbaum rings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 90 (1984), no. 4, 511–516.
[20]

, On the associated graded rings of parameter ideals in Buchsbaum rings, J. Algebra 85 (1983), no. 2,
490–534.

[21] R. Hartshorne and A. Ogus, On the factoriality of local rings of small embedding codimension, Comm.
Algebra 1 (1974), 415–437.
[22] S. H. Hassanzade and J. Naéliton, Residual Intersections and the Annihilator of Koszul Homologies, Algebra
Number Theory 10 (2016), no. 4, 737–770.
[23] R. C. Heitmann, Characterization of completions of unique factorization domains, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.
337 (1993), no. 1, 379–387.
[24]

, The direct summand conjecture in dimension three, Ann. of Math. (2) 156 (2002), no. 2, 695–712.

[25] M. Herrmann, S. Ikeda and U. Orbanz, Equimultiplicity and blowing up, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988. An
algebraic study, With an appendix by B. Moonen.
[26] J. Herzog, A. Simis and W. V. Vasconcelos, Koszul homology and blowing-up rings, Commutative algebra
(Trento, 1981), pp. 79–169.
[27] M. Hochster, Big Cohen-Macaulay algebras in dimension three via Heitmann’s theorem, J. Algebra 254
(2002), no. 2, 395–408.
[28]

, Canonical elements in local cohomology modules and the direct summand conjecture, J. Algebra 84
(1983), no. 2, 503–553.

E HSAN TAVANFAR

[29]

, Contracted ideals from integral extensions of regular rings, Nagoya Math. J. 51 (1973), 25–43.

[30]

, Criteria for equality of ordinary and symbolic powers of primes, Math. Z. 133 (1973), 53–65.

[31]

27

, Properties of Noetherian rings stable under general grade reduction., Arch. Math. 24 (1973), 393–
396.

[32]

, The equicharacteristic case of some homological conjectures on local rings, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.
80 (1974), 683–686.

[33] M. Hochster and C. Huneke, Applications of the existence of big Cohen-Macaulay algebras, Adv. Math. 113
(1995), no. 1, 45–117.
[34]

, Indecomposable canonical modules and connectedness, Contemp. Math., vol. 159, Amer. Math.
Soc., Providence, RI, 1994.

[35]

, Infinite integral extensions and big Cohen-Macaulay algebras, Ann. of Math. (2) 135 (1992), no. 1,
53–89.

[36] M. Hochster and J. E. McLaughlin, Splitting theorems for quadratic ring extensions, Illinois J. Math. 27
(1983), no. 1, 94–103.
[37] C. Huneke, Almost complete intersections and factorial rings, J. Algebra 71 (1981), no. 1, 179–188.
[38]

, On the symmetric and Rees algebra of an ideal generated by a d-sequence., J. Algebra 62 (1980),
268–275.

[39] C. Huneke and I. Swanson, Integral closure of ideals, rings, and modules. (2006), xiv + 431.
[40] C. Huneke and B. Ulrich, Divisor class groups and deformations, Amer. J. Math. 107 (1985), no. 6, 1265–1303
(1986).
[41] D. Katz, On the existence of maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules over pth root extensions, Proc. Amer. Math.
Soc. 127 (1999), no. 9, 2601–2609.
[42] J. Lipman, Unique factorization in complete local rings, Algebraic geometry (Proc. Sympos. Pure Math.,
Vol. 29, Humboldt State Univ., Arcata, Calif., 1974), 1975, pp. 531–546.
[43] T. Ochiai and K. Shimomoto, Bertini theorem for normality on local rings in mixed characteristic (applications to characteristic ideals)., Nagoya Math. J. 218 (2015), 125–173.
[44] C. Peskine and L. Szpiro, Dimension projective finie et cohomologie locale. Applications à la démonstration
de conjectures de M. Auslander, H. Bass et A. Grothendieck, Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math. 42 (1973),
47–119.
[45] P. C. Roberts, Abelian extensions of regular local rings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 78 (1980), no. 3, 307–310.
[46]

, Fontaine rings and local cohomology, J. Algebra 323 (2010), no. 8, 2257–2269.

[47]

, Le théorème d’intersection, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math. 304 (1987), no. 7, 177–180.

[48]

, Local cohomology of Segre product type rings, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 219 (2015), no. 3, 652–665.

[49] P. C. Roberts, A. K. Singh and V. Srinivas, Annihilators of local cohomology in characteristic zero, Illinois J.
Math. 51 (2007), no. 1, 237–254 (electronic).
[50] J. J. Rotman, An introduction to homological algebra, Second, Universitext, Springer, New York, 2009.
[51] J. -P. Serre, Local algebra, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2000. Translated
from the French by CheeWhye Chin and revised by the author.
[52] K. Shimomoto, An application of the almost purity theorem to the homological conjectures, J. Pure Appl.
Algebra 220 (2016), no. 2, 621–632.
[53] J. R. Strooker and J. Stückrad, Monomial conjecture and complete intersections., Manuscr. Math. 79 (1993),
no. 2, 153–159.

28

R EDUCTION

OF SOME HOMOLOGICAL CONJECTURES TO

...

[54] E. Tavanfar and M. Tousi, A Study of Quasi-Gorenstein Rings, arXiv:1508.04597 [math.AC].
[55] B. Ulrich, Gorenstein rings as specializations of unique factorization domains, J. Algebra 86 (1984), no. 1,
129–140.

E HSAN TAVNAFAR , D EPARTMENT OF M ATHEMATICS , S HAHID B EHESHTI U NIVERSITY, G.C., T EHRAN ,
I RAN .
E-mail address: tavanfar@ipm.ir

