LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

arXiv:1210.1799v1 [math.AC] 5 Oct 2012

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO
Abstract. A commutative Rota-Baxter algebra can be regarded as a commutative algebra that
carries an abstraction of the integral operator. With the motivation of generalizing the study of
algebraic geometry to Rota-Baxter algebra, we extend the central concept of localization for commutative algebras to commutative Rota-Baxter algebras. The existence of such a localization is
proved and, under mild conditions, its explicit constructions are obtained. The existence of tensor
products of commutative Rota-Baxter algebras is also proved and the compatibility of localization
and tensor product of Rota-Baxter algebras is established. We further study Rota-Baxter coverings
and show that they form a Gröthendieck topology.

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Localization
2.1. Background on Rota-Baxter algebras
2.2. The existence of localization
3. Constructions of localization
3.1. The general weight case
3.2. The weight zero case
3.3. Localization of Rota-Baxter algebras with the zero Rota-Baxter operator
4. Rota-Baxter tensor product and Rota-Baxter Zariski topology
4.1. Tensor products of Rota-Baxter algebras
4.2. Rota-Baxter Zariski topology
References

1
2
3
4
5
5
9
11
12
12
17
18

1. Introduction
Throughout this paper, all algebras are assumed to be commutative over a commutative unitary
ring k. A well-known concept in mathematics is that of a differential algebra, defined to be a
k-algebra R with a k-linear operator d on R that satisfies the Leibnitz rule:
d(xy) = d(x)y + xd(y),

∀x, y ∈ R.

Differential algebras originated from the algebraic study of differential equations by F. Ritt and
E. Kolchin [18, 17] in the last century. It is a natural yet profound extension of commutative
algebra and the related algebraic geometry. It has also found important applications in arithmetic
geometry, logic and computational algebra, especially in the well-known work of W. T. Wu [20]
on mechanical theorem proving in geometry. The theory of algebraic geometry was formulated
by Kolchin in the language of Weil in the last century. The corresponding theory in the language
of Grothendieck is being studied intensively in recent years [7, 8, 19].
Date: January 3, 2018.
1

2

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO

As an integral analogue of a differential algebra, a Rota-Baxter algebra (of weight zero) is a kalgebra R with a k-linear operator P on R that satisfies the following abstraction of the integration
by parts formula:
P(x)P(y) = P(xP(y)) + P(P(x)y),

∀x, y ∈ R.

In the special case when R is
R t taken to be the algebra of continuous functions on R and P is the
integral operator P( f )(t) = 0 f (s) ds for f (t) ∈ R, the above formula is the integration by parts
formula in calculus. See Definition 2.1 for the definition of a Rota-Baxter algebra in general.
Rota-Baxter algebra started with the probability study of G. Baxter in 1960 and has since found
applications in many areas of mathematics and physics, such as combinatorics (quasi-symmetric
functions), number theory (multiple zeta values), operads (dendriform algebras), Yang-Baxter
equations (after the well-known physicists C. Yang and R. Baxter), especially the profound work
of Connes and Kreimer on renormalization of quantum field theory [1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 10, 13, 14]. Nevertheless, systematic theoretic study of Rota-Baxter algebras was carried out only recently. After
the work of Cartier and Rota in 1970s, free commutative Rota-Baxter algebras were constructed
in terms of variations of shuffles in [9, 11, 12]. These algebras are the analogue of polynomial
algebras in commutative algebra or differential polynomial algebras in differential algebra. However the algebraic structure of free commutative Rota-Baxter algebras is much more involved.
For example, it is a simple and basic fact that free commutative algebras and free differential
commutative algebras are polynomial algebras. Such a statement for a free Rota-Baxter algebra
is either non-trivial to prove (in the zero characteristic case by using Lyndon words) or simply incorrect (in the positive characteristic case). Indeed, establishing a theory of commutative algebra
and algebraic geometry in a sense comparable to differential algebra, not to mention commutative
algebra, is a task that has not even been started.
As a step in this direction, we need to develop a suitable localization theory for commutative
Rota-Baxter algebras. Here, the difficulty in comparison to differential algebras is already evident
from a primitive point of view: while the derivation for a quotient can be easily derived from the
derivations of the numerator and denominator by the quotient rule, there is no general way that
one can derive the integral of a quotient from its numerator and denominator.
Let S be a subset of a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra R. We first prove in Section 2 the existence of the localization of R by S in the category of commutative Rota-Baxter algebras, called
the Rota-Baxter localization at S . Then, under a mild restriction of a suitable decomposition of
S −1 R, the usual localization of a commutative algebra, we gave an explicit construction of RotaBaxter localizations in Section 3. We also note that even if the commutative Rota-Baxter algebra
has zero Rota-Baxter operator, its Rota-Baxter localization is very different from the usual localization. In Section 4, we construct the tensor product of two commutative Rota-Baxter algebras.
We further define a collection of Rota-Baxter coverings and show that it forms a Grothendieck
topology.
Acknowledgements. The authors thank Zongzhu Lin for helpful discussions. Li Guo thanks
NSF grant DMS-1001855 for support.
2. Localization
In this section, we first put together background on Rota-Baxter algebras that we need. We then
define the localization of a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra and prove its existence by concrete
constructions.

LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

3

2.1. Background on Rota-Baxter algebras. Let k be a commutative unitary ring with unit 1k ∈
k.
Definition 2.1.
(a) Let λ ∈ k be given. A Rota-Baxter k-algebra of weight λ is a pair (R, P)
where R is a k-algebra and P : R −→ R is a k-linear map, called a Rota-Baxter operator,
satisfying
(1)

P(x)P(y) = P(xP(y) + P(x)y + λxy) for all x, y ∈ R.
(b) A morphism f : (R, P) → (S , Q) of Rota-Baxter algebras is a k-algebra homomorphism
f : R → S such that
f (P(a)) = Q( f (a)) for all a ∈ R.
(c) A subalgebra (resp. An ideal) of (R, P) is called a Rota-Baxter subalgebra (resp. RotaBaxter ideal) of (R, P) if it is closed under P.
(d) Let I be a Rota-Baxter ideal of (R, P). We let (R/I, P) denote the Rota-Baxter algebra with
the Rota-Baxter operator P defined by P(a) = P(a) for all a ∈ R/I.
(e) Let (R, PR ) be a Rota-Baxter algebra and let S ⊆ R be a subset. A Rota-Baxter subalgebra
(B, PR ) of (R, PR ) is said to be generated by S if it is the smallest Rota-Baxter algebra
containing S , or equivalently, the intersection of all Rota-Baxter subalgebras containing
S.
(f) Let R′ be a subalgebra of R which may not be closed under PR , then (R, PR ) is said to be
finitely generated over R′ as a Rota-Baxter algebra if it is generated by the union of R′ and
some finite subset S ⊆ R.

Let CRB/k denote the category of commutative Rota-Baxter k-algebras and let Comm/k denote the usual category of commutative k-algebras. Clearly, we have the forgetful functor
F : CRB/k −→ Comm/k
by forgetting the Rota-Baxter operators. In [11], a free commutative Rota-Baxter algebra of
weight λ on a commutative k-algebra A is constructed in terms of a generalization of the shuffle
product, called the mixable shuffle product which is a natural generalization of the quasi-shuffle
product [16]. This free commutative Rota-Baxter algebra on A is denoted by X(A). As a kmodule, we have
M
X(A) =
A⊗i = A ⊕ (A ⊗ A) ⊕ (A ⊗ A ⊗ A) ⊕ · · ·
i≥1

where the tensor is defined over k. The multiplication on XA is taken to be the product ⋄ defined
as follows. Let a = a0 ⊗ · · · ⊗ am ∈ A⊗(m+1) and b = b0 ⊗ · · · ⊗ bn ∈ A⊗(n+1) . If mn = 0, define

(2)



(a0 b0 ) ⊗ b1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ bn ,




a⋄b=
(a0 b0 ) ⊗ a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ am ,



a b ,
0 0

m = 0, n > 0,
m > 0, n = 0,
m = n = 0.

If m > 0 and n > 0, then a ⋄ b is inductively, on m and n, defined by
(3)

(a0 b0 )⊗ (a1 ⊗· · ·⊗am )⋄(1⊗b1 ⊗· · · bn )+(1⊗a1 ⊗· · ·⊗am )⋄(b1 ⊗· · · bn )+λ(a1 ⊗· · ·⊗am )⋄(b1 ⊗· · · bn ) .
The Rota-Baxter operator PXA on XA is defined by
(4)

PXA (x0 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn ) = 1A ⊗ x0 ⊗ · · · ⊗ xn .

It is proved in [11, Corollary 4.3] that (X, F) is an adjoint pair.

4

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO

We also display the following statement for later references.
Proposition 2.2. The free Rota-Baxter algebra (XA, PXA ) on A is generated by A as a RotaBaxter algebra.
This follows from general principles of free objects in universal algebra. More precisely, let
(F, P) be the commutative Rota-Baxter subalgebra of (XA, PXA ) generated by A. Then, by
taking restriction, the universal property of (XA, PXA ) gives the universal property of (F, P).
2.2. The existence of localization. We now define the localization of a commutative RotaBaxter algebra.
Definition 2.3. Let (R, P) be a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra. Let S ⊆ R be a multiplicative
subset. The Rota-Baxter localization of R at S is a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra, denoted
−1
−1
by (S RB
R, S −1 P), together with a Rota-Baxter algebra homomorphism iS : R → S RB
R satisfying
the following properties:
−1
(a) The elements in iS (S ) ⊆ S RB
R are invertible;
(b) For any commutative Rota-Baxter algebra (R′ , PR′ ) and Rota-Baxter algebra homomorphism f : R → R′ such that f (S ) ⊆ R′ is a set of invertible elements, there is a unique
−1
fS : S RB
R → R′ such that fS ◦ iS = f .
It follows from the definition that the Rota-Baxter localization of R at a multiplicative subset S
is unique up to isomorphisms, if it exists. We next prove the existence of Rota-Baxter localization.
Let S −1 R be the localization of the commutative algebra R at S . Let (X(S −1 R), PX(S −1 R)) be the
free commutative Rota-Baxter algebra on S −1 R as constructed in [11] and recalled in Section 2.1.
So we have
M
−1
X(S R) =
(S −1 R)⊗k , PX(S −1 R) (a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ak ) = 1 ⊗ a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ak , ∀a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ak ∈ (S −1 R)⊗k .
k≥1

To simplify notations, we also write a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ak ∈ R⊗k for its image in (S −1 R)⊗k .
Theorem 2.4. Let (R, PR ) be a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra and S ⊆ R be a multiplicative
subset. Let IS −1 R be the Rota-Baxter ideal of X(S −1 R) generated by the set
(5)

{PR (a) − 1 ⊗ a | a ∈ R}.

Let (X(S −1 R)/IS −1 R , PX(S −1 R) ) be the corresponding quotient Rota-Baxter algebra. Let
(6)

i : (R, PR ) → (X(S −1 R)/IS −1 R , PX(S −1 R) ), a 7→ a, a ∈ R.

Then the triple (X(S −1 R)/IS −1 R , PX(S −1 R), i) is the localization of (R, PR ) at S .
Because of the theorem, we will use (X(S −1 R)/IS −1 R , PX(S −1 R) , i) to denote the localization

−1
(S RB
R, S −1 P, jS ).

Proof. We just need to verify that the triple (X(S −1 R)/IS −1 R , PX(S −1 R) , i) satisfies the universal
property of Rota-Baxter algebra localization.
Assume that f : (R, PR ) → (R′ , PR′ ) is a morphism of commutative Rota-Baxter algebras over
k. If f (S ) is invertible in R′ , we have a k-algebra morphism S −1 f : S −1 R → R′ . This induces a
morphism of commutative Rota-Baxter algebras XS −1 f : (X(S −1 R), PX(S −1 R) ) → (R′ , PR′ ). Let
PR (a) − 1 ⊗ a be a generator of the Rota-Baxter ideal IS −1 R , then

LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

XS −1 f (PR (a) − 1 ⊗ a)
XS −1 f (PR (a)) − XS −1 f (1 ⊗ a)

=
= PR′ ( f (a)) − PR′ ( f (a)) = 0.

5

= f (PR (a)) − XS −1 f (PX(S −1 R)(a))

So IS −1 R is in the kernel of f and hence we have an induced morphism
−1
−1
S RB
f : (S RB
R, S −1 PR ) −→ (R′ , P′R )
−1
−1
which satisfies f = S RB
f ◦ i. If g : (S RB
R, S −1 PR ) → (R′ , PR′ ) is a Rota-Baxter algebra morphism
which also satisfies f = g ◦ i, then we have a morphism

G = g ◦ π : (X(S −1 R), PX(S −1 R)) −→ (R′ , P′R )
where π is the obvious quotient map. Let j : R → X(S −1 R) be the obvious algebra morphism.
It is easy to see that G ◦ j = f and hence G|S −1 R = S −1 f . By the universal property of free
−1
commutative Rota-Baxter algebras, this further implies that G = XS −1 f , i.e., g ◦ π = S RB
f ◦ π.
−1
Since π is surjective, we have g = S RB f. The proof is completed.

Corollary 2.5. Let (R, PR ) be a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra and S be a finitely generated
−1
multiplicative subset of R. Then the localization (S RB
R, S −1 P) is finitely generated over R as an
Rota-Baxter algebra.
−1
R, S −1 P) is a quotient of the free RotaProof. It follows from the proof of Theorem 2.4 that (S RB
Baxter algebra (XS −1 R, PXS −1 R). The latter is generated by S −1 R as a Rota-Baxter algebra by
Proposition 2.2. Since S is a finitely generated multiplicative subset, S −1 R is a finitely generated
−1
R, S −1 P) is finitely generated over R as a Rota-Baxter algebra.

algebra over R. Thus (S RB

3. Constructions of localization
For further study of algebraic geometry of Rota-Baxter algebras, we need to give explicit constructions of Rota-Baxter algebra localization. We assume that S −1 R = R ⊕ V as k-modules,
where the direct summand R denotes its image in S −1 R in order to simply notations. This is true
for example when k is a field. We also compare the Rota-Baxter algebra localization with the
usual localization of commutative algebras.
3.1. The general weight case.
Theorem 3.1. Let (R, PR ) be a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra of weight λ over k. Assume that
S is a multiplicative subset of R such that S −1 R = R ⊕ V for a nonunitary subring V of R. Then
the Rota-Baxter localization of R at S is given by
M
−1
S RB
R = S −1 R ⊕
(S −1 R ⊗ V ⊗k )
k≥1

with the multiplication given by the mixable shuffle product.
The equation in the theorem can be alternatively stated as the tensor product algebra

M
−1
V ⊗k
S RB
R = S −1 R ⊗
k≥0

where the product in the second tensor factor is given by the mixable shuffle product or quasishuffle product [4, 15].
We also note that the right hand side of the equation in the theorem can be regarded as a subalgebra of X(S −1 R) since we require that V is closed under the multiplication in S −1 R and hence

6

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO

in X(S −1 R). However, this subalgebra is not a Rota-Baxter subalgebra of (X(S −1 R), PX(S −1 R) )
as we will see in the proof that the Rota-Baxter operators are different.
L
−1
⊗k
−1
Proof. Let B denote the subalgebra S −1 R ⊕
k≥1 (S R ⊗ V ) of X(S R). We have a natural
map of algebras
−1
f : B −→ XS −1 R −→ S RB
R.

(7)

We will define a Rota-Baxter operator P := PB of weight λ on B such that f is an isomorphism of
Rota-Baxter algebras, which will prove the theorem. We accomplish this in the following three
steps.
Step 1. Give the definition of P;
Step 2. Verify that P is a Rota-Baxter operator;
Step 3. Show that f is a Rota-Baxter algebra isomorphism.
Step 1. Definition of P. For k = 0, we define a k-linear map P : S −1 R = R ⊕ V → B by assigning
P(a) = PR (a) and P(v) = 1 ⊗ v. For each k ≥ 1, we define a k-linear map by induction on k
P : S −1 R ⊗ V ⊗k = (R ⊗ V ⊗k ) ⊕ V ⊗k+1 → B
by assigning
P(v̄) = PXS −1 R (v̄) = 1 ⊗ v̄ where v̄ ∈ V ⊗k+1
P(a ⊗ ū) = P(a) ⊗ ū − P(P(a)ū) − λP(aū)
= P(a)P(ū) − P(P(a)ū) − λP(aū) where a ∈ R and ū ∈ V ⊗k .
One checks that P extends by linearity to a well defined k-linear map P : B → B.
Step 2. P is a Rota-Baxter operator. Since P is k-linear, it is enough to show that

(8)
P(α)P(β) − P αP(β) + P(α)β + λαβ = 0

for any α = (a + v) ⊗ v ∈ (R ⊕ V) ⊗ V ⊗n , β = (b + u) ⊗ u ∈ (R ⊕ V) ⊗ V ⊗m where

a, b ∈ R; u, v ∈ V; v̄ = v1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ vn ∈ V ⊗n and ū = u1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ um ∈ V ⊗m .
Let
I1
I2
I3
I4

=
=
=
=


P(a ⊗ v)P(b ⊗ u) − P (a ⊗ v)P(b ⊗ u) + P(a ⊗ v)(b ⊗ u) + λ(a ⊗ v)(b ⊗ u)
P(v ⊗ v)P(b ⊗ u) − P (v ⊗ v)P(b ⊗ u) + P(v ⊗ v)(b ⊗ u) + λ(v ⊗ v)(b ⊗ u) 
P(a ⊗ v)P(u ⊗ u) − P (a ⊗ v)P(u ⊗ u) + P(a ⊗ v)(u ⊗ u) + λ(a ⊗ v)(u ⊗ u)
P(v ⊗ v)P(u ⊗ u) − P (v ⊗ v)P(u ⊗ u) + P(v ⊗ v)(u ⊗ u) + λ(v ⊗ v)(u ⊗ u)

Since I4 = 0 because P = PXS −1 A when restricted to V ⊗n for any n ≥ 1, we see that

P(α)P(β) − P αP(β) + P(α)β + λαβ = I1 + I2 + I3 + I4 = I1 + I2 + I3 .
Lemma 3.2. The identity (8) holds when mn = 0.

Proof. Assume that m = n = 0. In this case, I1 = 0 because P = PA when restricted to A ⊆ B.
I2 = I3 = 0 because of the definition of P. So the identity (8) holds when m = n = 0.
By symmetry we now assume that m = 0 and prove the lemma by induction on n. The case
when n = 0 has been checked. In general, we first notice that I2 = 0 because of the definition of
P.

P(a ⊗ v̄)P(b) − P (a ⊗ v̄)P(b) + P(a ⊗ v̄)b + λ(a ⊗ v̄)b






(I)
=
P(a)P(v̄) − P P(a)v̄ − λP(av̄) P(b) − P aP(v̄)P(b) + P aP(v̄) b + λaP(v̄)b

LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

7





P(a)P(v̄)P(b) − λP(av̄)P(b) − P P(a)v̄ P(b) − P aP(v̄)P(b) + P aP(v̄) b + λaP(v̄)b

(II)
= P aP(b) + P(a)b + λab P(v̄)




−λP av̄P(b) + P(av̄)b + λav̄b − P P(a)v̄P(b) + P P(a)v̄ b + λP(a)v̄b



−P aP(v̄)P(b) + P aP(v̄) b + λaP(v̄)b



 
(III)
= P aP(b) + P(a)b + λab P(v̄) + P aP(b) + P(a)b + λab v̄ + λ aP(b) + P(a)b + λab v̄




−λP av̄P(b) + P(av̄)b + λav̄b − P P(a)v̄P(b) + P P(a)v̄ b + λP(a)v̄b



−P aP(v̄)P(b) + P aP(v̄) b + λaP(v̄)b




= P aP(b)P(v̄) + P(a)bP(v̄) + λabP(v̄) + P aP(b) v̄ + P P(a)b v̄ + P λab v̄

+λaP(b)v̄ + λP(a)bv̄ + λ2 abv̄


−P λav̄P(b) + λP(av̄)b + λ2 av̄b + P(a)v̄P(b) + P P(a)v b + λP(a)v̄b


+aP(v̄)P(b) + P aP(v̄) b + λaP(v̄)b



 
= P P(a)bP(v̄) + P aP(b) v̄ + P P(a)b v̄ + P λab v̄


 
−P λP(av̄)b + P(a)v̄P(b) + P P(a)v̄ b + P aP(v̄) b

 i
h


= P P(a)P(v̄) − P λav̄ + P(a)v̄ + aP(v̄) b + P aP(b) + P(a)b + λab − P(a)P(b) v̄
=

(IV)

=

P(b0 + 0v̄) = 0.

In the above calculation, equation (I) follows from the definition of P. Equations (II) follows
from the fact that P = PA on A and the induction hypothesis because both av̄ and P(a)v̄ are
in S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗n−1 . Equations (III) and (IV) follow from the induction hypothesis because v̄ ∈
S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗n−1 . This shows that I1 = 0.
The proof that I3 = 0 goes similarly where equation (II) has to be modified.

(I)

=

=
(II)

=

(III)

=


P(a ⊗ v̄)P(u) − P (a ⊗ v̄)P(u) + P(a ⊗ v̄)u + λ(a ⊗ v̄)u






P(a)P(v̄) − P P(a)v̄ − λP(av̄) P(u) − P aP(v̄)P(u) + P aP(v̄) u + λaP(v̄)u




P(a)P(v̄)P(u) − λP(av̄)P(u) − P P(a)v̄ P(u) − P aP(v̄)P(u) + P aP(v̄) u + λaP(v̄)u

P(a)P v̄P(u) + P(v̄)u + λv̄u




−λP av̄P(u) + P(av̄)u + λav̄u − P P(a)v̄P(u) + P P(a)v̄ u + λP(a)v̄u



−P aP(v̄)P(u) + P aP(v̄) u + λaP(v̄)u




P aP v̄P(u) + P(v̄)u + λv̄u + P(a) v̄P(u) + P(v̄)u + λv̄u + λa v̄P(u) + P(v̄)u + λv̄u




−λP av̄P(u) + P(av̄)u + λav̄u − P P(a)v̄P(u) + P P(a)v̄ u + λP(a)v̄u



−P aP(v̄)P(u) + P aP(v̄) u + λaP(v̄)u

8

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO





P aP v̄P(u) + aP P(v̄)u + λaP v̄u + P(a)v̄P(u) + P(a)P(v̄)u + λP(a)v̄u

+λav̄P(u) + λaP(v̄)u + λ2 av̄u


−P λav̄P(u) + λP(av̄)u + λ2 av̄u + P(a)v̄P(u) + P P(a)v u + λP(a)v̄u


+aP(v̄)P(u) + P aP(v̄) u + λaP(v̄)u





= P aP v̄P(u) + aP P(v̄)u + λaP v̄u + P(a)P(v̄)u


 
−P λP(av̄)u + P P(a)v̄ u + aP(v̄)P(u) + P aP(v̄) u
h 
 

 i
= P a P v̄P(u) + P(v̄)u + λv̄u − P(v̄)P(u) + P(a)P(v̄) − P λav̄ + P(a)v̄ + aP(v̄) u

=

(IV)

=

P(a0 + 0u) = 0.

In the above calculation, equation
L ⊗n(I) follows from the definition of P. Equation (II) follows from
the fact that P = PXS −1 A on
V and the induction hypothesis because both av̄ and P(a)v̄ are in
n≥1
L ⊗n
S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗n−1 . Equation (III) follows from the definition of P since v̄P(u) + P(v̄)u + λv̄u ∈
V .
n≥1

Equation (IV) follows from the induction hypothesis because v̄ ∈ S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗n−1 . This shows that
I3 = 0. The lemma is proved.

We now prove Eq. (8) by induction on m + n. Assume that that Eq. (8) holds when m + n ≤ k for
some integer k ≥ 1. In view of Lemma 3.2, we assume that mn , 0. Recall that β = (b + u) ⊗ ū.
The following calculation shows that I1 = 0 (let u = 0 in β) and I3 = 0 (let b = 0 in β).

P(a ⊗ v̄)P(β) − P (a ⊗ v̄)P(β) + P(a ⊗ v̄)β + λ(a ⊗ v̄)β






(I)
=
P(a)P(v̄) − P P(a)v̄ − λP(av̄) P(β) − P aP(v̄)P(β) + P aP(v̄) β + λaP(v̄)β




= P(a)P(v̄)P(β) − λP(av̄)P(β) − P P(a)v̄ P(β) − P aP(v̄)P(β) + P aP(v̄) β + λaP(v̄)β

(II)
= P(a)P v̄P(β) + P(v̄)β + λv̄β




−λP av̄P(β) + P(av̄)β + λav̄β − P P(a)v̄P(β) + P P(a)v̄ β + λP(a)v̄β



−P aP(v̄)P(β) + P aP(v̄) β + λaP(v̄)β




(III)
= P aP v̄P(β) + P(v̄)β + λv̄β + P(a) v̄P(β) + P(v̄)β + λv̄β + λa v̄P(β) + P(v̄)β + λv̄β




−λP av̄P(β) + P(av̄)β + λav̄β − P P(a)v̄P(β) + P P(a)v̄ β + λP(a)v̄β



−P aP(v̄)P(β) + P aP(v̄) β + λaP(v̄)β




= P aP v̄P(β) + aP P(v̄)β + λaP v̄β + P(a)v̄P(β) + P(a)P(v̄)β + λP(a)v̄β

+λav̄P(β) + λaP(v̄)β + λ2 av̄β


−P λav̄P(β) + λP(av̄)β + λ2 av̄β + P(a)v̄P(β) + P P(a)v β + λP(a)v̄β


+aP(v̄)P(β) + P aP(v̄) β + λaP(v̄)β





= P aP v̄P(β) + aP P(v̄)β + λaP v̄β + P(a)P(v̄)β

LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

9



 
−P λP(av̄)β + P P(a)v̄ β + aP(v̄)P(β) + P aP(v̄) β
h 
 

 i
= P a P v̄P(β) + P(v̄)β + λv̄β − P(v̄)P(β) + P(a)P(v̄) − P λav̄ + P(a)v̄ + aP(v̄) β
(IV)

=

P(a0 + 0β) = 0.

In the above calculation, equation (I) follows from the definition of P. Equation (II) follows
from the induction hypothesis because v̄, av̄ and P(a)v̄ are in S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗(n−1) . Equation (III)
follows from Lemma 3.2 and the fact that P is k-linear. Equation (IV) follows from the induction
hypothesis because v̄ ∈ S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗(n−1) . So I1 = I3 = 0. Now it is easy to see that I2 = 0 because
it is symmetric to I3 = 0.
Thus we have proved that P is a Rota-Baxter operator and hence (B, PB ) is a commutative
Rota-Baxter algebra.
Step 3. f is a Rota-Baxter isomorphism. We first prove a lemma.
Lemma 3.3. B is generated by S −1 A as a Rota-Baxter algebra.
Proof. Let C be the Rota-Baxter subalgebra of B generated by S −1 A. We need to show that for
any k ≥ 0, S −1 A ⊗ V k is contained in C. We proof by induction on k. The case k = 0 is trivial.
For any a ∈ S −1 A and v ∈ V, we have P(v) ∈ C. So a ⊗ v = aP(v) ∈ C. This shows that
S −1 A ⊗ V ⊆ C. Now we assume that S −1 A ⊗ V k ⊆ C, then for any a ∈ S −1 A and v̄ ∈ V k+1 ,
we have v̄ ∈ S −1 A ⊗ V k ⊆ C and hence P(v̄) ∈ C. So a ⊗ v̄ = aP(v̄) ∈ C. This proves that
S −1 A ⊗ V k+1 ⊆ C.

It is easy to check that f defined in Eq. (7) is a morphism of Rota-Baxter algebras. There is
another morphism of Rota-Baxter algebras
g : (A, PA ) −→ (B, PB ); a 7→ a ∈ S −1 A ⊆ B, a ∈ A,
where we identify a ∈ A with its image in S −1 A. Since the image of S ⊆ A in S −1 A and hence in B
−1
A, S −1 PA ), there is a Rota-Baxter algebra morphism
is invertible, by the universal property of (S RB
−1
h : (S RB
A, S −1 PA ) → (B, PB ) which fits into the following commutative diagram.
i

/ (S −1 A, S −1 PA )
RB
❃❃ ◆◆◆◆ g
❃❃ ◆◆◆
h
◆◆◆
❃❃
◆'
❃❃

❃❃
(B, PB )
❃
i ❃❃
❃❃
❃❃
f
❃ 

(A, PA❃)◆

−1
(S RB
A, S −1 PA )

−1
By the universal property of localizations, f ◦ h is the identity map of (S RB
A, S −1 PA ). So h is
injective. By the commutative diagram we see that the image of h is a Rota-Baxter subalgebra
of B containing S −1 A. By Lemma 3.3, (B, PB ) is generated by S −1 A as a Rota-Baxter algebra.
So the image of h coincides with B, i.e., h is also surjective. This proves that both f and h are
isomorphisms and hence the theorem.


3.2. The weight zero case. Let (A, P) be a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra of weight λ as
−1
before. Theorem 3.1 gives concrete algebra structure of the Rota-Baxter localizations S RB
A under
−1
the condition that S A = A ⊕ V where V is closed under multiplication. If the weight λ happens
to be zero, the same result holds without requiring that V is closed under multiplication. Note

10

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO

that, if λ = 0, the shuffle product on S −1 R ⊕
structure on V.

L

k≥1 (S

−1

R ⊗ V ⊗k ) does not require any multiplicative

Theorem 3.4. LetA be a commutative k-algebra and let S be a multiplicative subset of A. Suppose S −1 A = A ⊕ V where V is a k-submodule. Then
M
−1
S RB
A = S −1 A ⊕
(S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗k )
k≥1

with the extended shuffle product. In other words, we have the tensor product algebra

M
−1
S RB
A = S −1 A ⊗
V ⊗k
k≥0

where the second tensor factor is the shuffle product algebra on V.
As in the nonzero weight case, we note that the right hand side is a subalgebra, but not a
Rota-Baxter subalgebra, of X(S −1 A).
Proof. Let B = S −1 A ⊕

L
k≥1


S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗k be the algebra in the theorem. We need to show that the

composition map
−1
f : B ֒→ X(S −1 A) → S RB
A

(9)

is bijective. We proceed by first defining an Rota-Baxter operator P = PB on B such that B is
generated by S −1 A and there is a Rota-Baxter algebra morphism g : (A, PA ) → (B, PB ). By the
−1
universal property of localization, g induces a Rota-Baxter algebra morphism h : (S RB
A, S −1 P) →
(B, PB ). We then check that h is the inverse of f .
We inductively define an operator P = PB : B → B by assigning
P(a) = PA (a) where a ∈ A
P(v̄) = 1 ⊗ v̄ where v̄ ∈ V ⊗n
P(a ⊗ v̄) = PA (a) ⊗ v̄ − P(P(a)v̄) = P(a)P(v̄) − P(P(a)v̄)

where a and v̄ as above.

One checks easily that P is the desired Rota-Baxter operator on B. The proof now goes exactly
as the proof of Theorem 3.1.

Example 3.4.1. Let A = k[x] be the ring of polynomials of one variable over a field k of character
0. Let k(x) be the field of fractions of A. Let P be the integral operator which sends xn to
P(xn ) : L = xn+1 /(n + 1). So P is a Rota-Baxter operator of weight zero. Let S ⊆ A be the
multiplicative subset {xn n ≥ 1}. Clearly S −1 A = k[x, x−1 ] = A ⊕ V ⊆ k(x) where V is the kmodule x−1 k[x−1 ]. By Theorem 3.4, the Rota-Baxter localization of A at S is given as the tensor
algebra
M

k[x, x−1 ] ⊗
(x−1 k[x−1 ])⊗k ,
k≥0

L
where the multiplication in (x−1 k[x−1 ])⊗k is given by the shuffle product X.
k≥0

LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

11

3.3. Localization of Rota-Baxter algebras with the zero Rota-Baxter operator. Let A be an
k−algebra. Then A is naturally a Rota-Baxter algebra with the zero Rota-Baxter operator that
sends elements of A to the zero element of A. In fact, this defines a functor which embeds the
category Comm/k as a full faithful subcategory of CRB/k. In this section, we study the RotaBaxter localization of A when A has the zero Rota-Baxter operator. We assume that the weight of
the operator is zero.
To simplify notations, we identify a ∈ A with its image in the usual localization S −1 A.
Theorem 3.5. Let A be a Rota-Baxter k-algebra with the zero Rota-Baxter operator (of weight
zero). Let S be a multiplicative subset of A and let V be the k-module S −1 A/A. Then the Rota−1
Baxter localization S RB
A of A at S in CRB/k, with weight zero, is given by


M



S −1 A ⊕ 
(S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗k )
k≥1

−1

with the quotient ring structure from X(S A). In other words, we have the tensor product
algebra
M

−1
S RB
A = S −1 A ⊗
V ⊗k
k≥0

where the second tensor factor is the shuffle product algebra on V.
Proof. Consider the following subset of X(S −1 A),
∞
n
L

P
J =
(S −1 A)⊗i ⊗ A ⊗ (S −1 A)⊗(n−i)
k≥1 i=1
L
L  −1 ⊗2
= (S −1 A ⊗ A)
···
(S A) ⊗ A + S −1 A ⊗ A ⊗ S −1 A
Then we have



M



S −1 A ⊕ 
(S −1 A ⊗ V ⊗k ) = X(S −1 A)/J.
k≥1

On the other hand, let I denote the Rota-Baxter ideal generated by {1 ⊗ a|a ∈ A}. Since the
−1
Rota-Baxter operator is zero, by Theorem 2.4, we have S RB
A = X(S −1 A)/I. Thus to prove the
theorem, we only need to prove the following lemma.
Lemma 3.6.
(b) I = J.

(a) J is a Rota-Baxter ideal of X(S −1 A).

Proof. (a). J is obviously a k-module and closed under the Rota-Baxter operator of X(S −1 A). It
remains to check that J is a Rota-Baxter ideal of X(S −1 A). Note that J is k-linearly generated by
pure tensors. Thus to prove that ab ∈ J for any a ∈ J and b ∈ X(S −1 A), we only need to prove it
for pure tensors a := a0 ⊗ a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ am ∈ J and b := b0 ⊗ b1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ bn ∈ X(S −1 A), where ai , b j
are elements in S −1 A and, for some 1 ≤ j0 ≤ m, b j0 is in A. Since the weight of the Rota-Baxter
algebra is zero, we have

a ⋄ b = a0 b0 ⊗ (a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ am )X (b1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ bn ) ,
where X is the shuffle product. Since a shuffle of a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ am and b1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ bn comes from
performing a special permutation on the tensor factors of a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ am ⊗ b1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ bn , one tensor
factor in the shuffle is in A, implying that this shuffle is in J. Hence a ⋄ b is in J.
(b). Since {1 ⊗ a|a ∈ A} is contained in J, we see that I is a subset of J. It remains to show
that J ⊆ I, for which it suffices to show that (S −1 A)⊗i ⊗ A ⊗ (S −1 A)⊗(n−i) ⊆ I for any n ≥ 1 and

12

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO

1 ≤ i ≤ n. We prove this by induction on n. If n = 1, then i = 1. For any a ∈ S −1 R and b ∈ R, we
have
1 ⊗ b ∈ I ⇒ a ⊗ b = a ⋄ (1 ⊗ b) ∈ I.
So the statement holds for n = 1. In general, consider a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ai ⊗ a ⊗ ai+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an ∈
(S −1 A)⊗i ⊗ A ⊗ (S −1 A)⊗(n−i) , where a ∈ A. If i ≥ 2, then we have
a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ai ⊗ a ⊗ ai+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an = a1 ⋄ P(a2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ai ⊗ a ⊗ ai+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an ) ∈ I
because a2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ai ⊗ a ⊗ ai+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an ∈ I by induction assumption. If i = 1, we see that
I ∋ (1 ⊗ a) ⋄ (a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an ) = a1 ⊗ a ⊗ a2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an +

n
X

a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ai ⊗ a ⊗ ai+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an .

i=2

We have just showed that

n
P

a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ ai ⊗ a ⊗ ai+1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an ∈ I, so a1 ⊗ a ⊗ a2 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an ∈ I as

i=2

desired.



This completes the proof of Theorem 3.5.



4. Rota-Baxter tensor product and Rota-Baxter Zariski topology
In this section we study the tensor product of commutative Rota-Baxter algebras. We then
extend the concepts of Zariski coverings and Zariski topology to the category of commutative
Rota-Baxter algebras.
4.1. Tensor products of Rota-Baxter algebras. We construction the tensor product (coproduct)
of two Rota-Baxter algebras in the category of Rota-Baxter algebras. Note that this is different
from the tensor product in the category of algebras.
Let CRB/k denote the category of commutative Rota-Baxter algebras of weight λ over k as
before.
Definition 4.1. Given a diagram of morphisms in CRB/k
f1

f2

(R1 , PR1 ) ←− (R0 , PR0 ) −→ (R2 , PR2 ),
the colimit of the diagram, if exists, is called the Rota-Baxter tensor product of (R1 , PR1 ) and
RB

RB

(R2 , PR2 ) over (R0 , PR0 ) and is denoted by (R1 ⊗ R0 R2 , PR1 ⊗PR0 PR2 ) or simply R1 ⊗ R0 R2 . In
more concrete terms, let fi : (R0 , P0 ) → (Ri , Pi ), i = 1, 2, be homomorphisms of commutative
Rota-Baxter algebras. Their Rota-Baxter tensor product is a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra
RB

RB

(R1 ⊗ R0 R2 , PR1 ⊗PR0 PR2 ) with Rota-Baxter algebra homomorphisms ki : (Ri , PRi ) → (R1 ⊗ R0
R2 , PR1 ⊗PR0 PR2 ), i = 1, 2, such that, for any commutative Rota-Baxter algebra (R, PR ) and RotaBaxter algebra homomorphisms ψi : (R1 , PR1 ) → (R, PR ), i = 1, 2, there is a unique morphism
RB

ψ1,2 : (R1 ⊗ R0 R2 , PR1 ⊗PR0 PR2 ) → (R, PR )
such that ψi = ψ1,2 ◦ ki , i = 1, 2.
Our construction of the Rota-Baxter tensor product will be based on free commutative RotaBaxter algebras. We first give some properties of these algebras.

LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

13

Lemma 4.2.
(a) Let (R, PR ) be a commutative Rota-Baxter algebra and let φR : X(R) → R
be the surjective Rota-Baxter algebra homomorphism induced by the identity map on R
and the freeness of X(R). Let jR be the natural algebra morphism R → X(R). Then
(10)

φR ◦ jR = idR ,

and ker φR is the Rota-Baxter ideal of X(R) generated by the set {PR (r) − 1 ⊗ r | r ∈ R}.
(b) For a homomorphism f : R → S of commutative algebras R and S , let X( f ) : X(R) →
X(S ) denote the Rota-Baxter algebra homomorphism induced by the algebra homomorphism jS ◦ f : R → X(S ). Let Let jS be the natural map S → X(S ). Then jS ◦ f =
X( f ) ◦ jR and, for r0 ⊗ · · · ⊗ rk ∈ X(R), we have
X( f )(r0

⊗ · · · ⊗ rk ) = f (r0) ⊗ · · · ⊗ f (rk ).

Proof. (a). Eq. (10) follows from the freeness of X(R). We next prove the statement on ker φR .
By Eq. (10), we have the splitting X(R) = R ⊕ ker φR , where R is identified with the image of jR .
Let IR denote the ideal of X(R) generated by the set {PR (r) − 1 ⊗ r | r ∈ R}. Since ker φR contains
this set, we have ker φR ⊇ IR . We just need to prove
X(R)

= R + IR .

For this, we just need to show that, any pure tensor r := r0 ⊗ · · · ⊗ rk ∈ X(R) with r0 , · · · , rk ∈ R
is in R + IR . If k = 0, then r is in R and we are done. If k ≥ 1, then we have

r = r0 ⊗ r1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ rk = r0 PR (r1 PR (· · · PR (rk ) · · · )) − r0 PR (r1 PR · · · PR (rk ) · · · ) − r0 ⊗ r1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ rk .
The first term is in R. We next use induction on k ≥ 1 to prove the claim that the second term on
the right hand side of the above equation is in IR .
The claim holds when k = 1 since r0 PR (r1 ) − r0 ⊗ r1 = r0 (PR (r1 ) − 1 ⊗ r1 ) is clearly in IR .
Suppose the claim has been proved for k and consider the case of k + 1. Then
r0 PR (r1 PR (· · · PR (rk+1 ) · · · )) − r0 ⊗ r1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ rk+1
= (r0 PR (r1 PR (· · · PR (rk+1 ) · · · )) − r0 ⊗ (r1 PR (· · · PR (rk+1 ) · · · )))

+r0 ⊗ r1 PR (· · · PR (rk+1 ) · · · ) − r1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ rk+1 .
On the right hand of the equation, the term in the first line is in IR by the case of k = 1 and the
term in the second line is in IR by the induction hypothesis. Hence the induction is completed.
(b). Note that in any free Rota-Baxter algebra (X(A), P), by the definition of multiplication and
P, we have the following important property
P(a0 ⊗ a1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ an ) = a0 P(a1 P(· · · P(an ) · · · ),

ai ∈ A.

Then (b) follows since
X( f )(r0

⊗ · · · ⊗ rk ) = X( f )(r0 PR (· · · PR (rk ) · · · ))
= X( f )(r0 )PS (· · · PS (X( f )(rk ) · · · ))
= f (r0) ⊗ · · · ⊗ f (rk ).


14

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO

We now establish the existence of the Rota-Baxter tensor product. For a given diagram of
morphisms in CRB/k
f1

f2

(R1 , PR1 ) ←− (R0 , PR0 ) −→ (R2 , P2 ),
let R1 ⊗R0 R2 be the tensor product of R1 and R2 as R0 -algebras. Let (X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ), PR1 ⊗R0 R2 ) be
the free commutative Rota-Baxter algebra on R1 ⊗R0 R2 . For distinction, we use ✷ to denote the
tensor product in R1 ⊗R0 R2 and use the usual ⊗ to denote the tensor product in X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ).
Theorem 4.3. Let I be the Rota-Baxter ideal of X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ) generated by the set


PR1 (r1 )✷1 − (1✷1) ⊗ (r1 ✷1) r1 ∈ R1 ∪ 1✷PR2 (r2 ) − (1✷1) ⊗ (1✷r2 ) r2 ∈ R2 .

is the Rota-Baxter tensor prodThen the quotient Rota-Baxter algebra X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 )/I, PR]
1 ⊗R0 R1
uct of (R1 , PR1 ) and (R2 , PR2 ) over (R0 , PR0 ).
Proof. We use the following diagram to organize the notations that will be introduced in the proof.
To simplify the notations, for i = 0, 1, 2, we let Pi denote the Rota-Baxter operator PRi : X(Ri ) →
X(Ri ) and let ji : Ri → X(Ri ) denote the natural embedding. Also denote j1,2 := jR1 ⊗R0 R2 :
R1 ⊗R0 R2 → X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ) for the natural embedding.
f1

R0 ❋
❋

❋❋ j0
❋❋
❋❋
❋#
X(R0 )
❋❋
❋❋ φ0
❋❋
❋❋
❋#

/ R1
♥♥♥
♥
♥
♥♥
♥♥♥
♥
♥
w
♥
j1

X( f1 )

/ X(R1 )
❧❧
❧
❧
❧
❧❧❧
❧❧❧
❧
❧
v ❧❧
❧
φ1

f1

/
q R1
q
q
ψ1 qq
qqq
q
q
k1
q
q
xq
q
f2
R
f2
X( f2 )
h1
X(h1 )
▼
f
η̄
⑧? \ ▼▼▼▼ η̄˜
ψ2 ⑧⑧
▼
▼
⑧
▼▼▼
⑧⑧
▼▼ 
 ⑧⑧
k2
/
X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 )/I
R2
h❘❘❘
②<
❘❘❘φ1,2
φ2 ②②②
❘❘❘
②
❘❘❘
②②
②
❘

 ②
X(h2 )
/ X(R1 ⊗R R2 )
X(R2 )
0
g❖❖❖
①<
❖❖❖j1,2
j2 ①①
η
①
❖❖❖
①①
❖❖❖
①

 ①①
h2
/ R 1 ⊗R R 2
R2

R0

0

Let hi : Ri → R1 ⊗R0 R2 , i = 1, 2, be the algebra homomorphisms to the tensor product algebra
R1 ⊗R0 R2 . By [9, Proposition 3.4], (X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ), PR1 ⊗R0 R2 ) is the tensor product of the Rota-Baxter
(X(R0 ), P0 )-algebras (X(R1 ), PR1 ) and (X(R2 ), PR2 ) in the category of commutative Rota-Baxter
algebras. By Lemma 4.2.(b), all the outer trapezoids in the above diagram are commutative:
(11)

ji ◦ fi = X( fi ) ◦ j0 ,

j1,2 ◦ hi = X(hi ) ◦ ji ,

i = 1, 2.

Let I′ be the Rota-Baxter ideal of X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ) generated by X(h1 )(ker φ1 ) ∪ X(h2 )(ker φ2 ).
Lemma 4.4. I′ equals to the Rota-Baxter ideal I defined in Theorem 4.3.

LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

15

Proof. Since {Pi (ri ) − 1 ⊗ ri | ri ∈ Ri } is the generating set of the ideal Ii of Ri for i = 1, 2, we find
that X(hi )({Pi (ri ) − 1 ⊗ ri | ri ∈ Ri }) is the generating set of the ideal of X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ) generated
by X(hi )(ker φi ). Since h1 (r1 ) = r1 ✷1 with the notation ✷ introduced before Theorem 4.3, by
Lemma 4.2.(b) we have
X(h1 )(P1 (r1 ) − 1 ⊗ r1 )

= h1 (P1 (r1 )) − h1 (1) ⊗ h1 (r1 ) = P1 (r1 )✷1 − (1✷1) ⊗ (r1 ✷1)

and similarly
X(h2 )(P2 (r2 ) − 1 ⊗ r2 )

= 1✷P2 (r2 ) − (1✷1) ⊗ (1✷r2 ).

Hence the lemma follows.



Let φ1,2 : X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ) → X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 )/I be the quotient Rota-Baxter algebra homomorphism.
Then by the definition of I = I′ , there are unique ki : (Ri , Pi ) → (X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 )/I, PR]
), i = 1, 2,
1 ⊗R0 R2
such that
(12)

ki ◦ φi = φ1,2 ◦ X(hi ),

i = 1, 2.

We now show that (X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 )/I, PR]
), together with the homomorphisms of Rota-Baxter
1 ⊗R0 R2
algebras ki : Ri → X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ), i = 1, 2, is the tensor product Rota-Baxter algebra of (R1 , P1 )
and (R2 , P2 ) over (R0 , P0 ). We achieve this by proving the following two lemmas.
Lemma 4.5. k1 ◦ f1 = k2 ◦ f2 .
Proof. By the surjectivity of φ0 , we only need to prove
(13)

k1 ◦ f1 ◦ φ0 = k2 ◦ f2 ◦ φ0 .

By the functorality of the functor X from the category of commutative algebras to the category
of commutative Rota-Baxter algebras, we obtain
(14)

X(h1 ) ◦ X( f1 )

= X(h2 ) ◦ X( f2 ).

Further, by Eq. (10) we trivially have
f i ◦ φ0 ◦ j 0 = φi ◦ j i ◦ f i ,

i = 1, 2.

By Eq. (11), we have
fi ◦ φ0 ◦ j0 = φi ◦ X( fi ) ◦ j0 ,

i = 1, 2.

Thus by the freeness of X(R0 ), we have
(15)

fi ◦ φ0 = φi ◦ X( fi ),

i = 1, 2.

Combining equations (12), (14) and (15) we obtain
k1 ◦ f1 ◦ φ0 =
=
=
=
=
as needed.

k1 ◦ φ1 ◦ X( f1 )
φ1,2 ◦ X(h1 ) ◦ X( f1 )
φ1,2 ◦ X(h2 ) ◦ X( f2 )
k2 ◦ φ2 ◦ X( f2 )
k2 ◦ f2 ◦ φ0 ,


16

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO

Lemma 4.6. Let (R, P) be any (R0 , P0 )-algebra and let ψi : (Ri , Pi ) → (R, P), i = 1, 2 be such that
ψ1 ◦ f1 = ψ2 ◦ f2 . There is unique Rota-Baxter homomorphism ψ1,2 : X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 )/I → R such
that
(16)

ψi = ψ1,2 ◦ ki ,

i = 1, 2.

Proof. From ψ1 ◦ f1 = ψ2 ◦ f2 and Eq. (10), we have
ψ1 ◦ φ1 ◦ j1 ◦ f1 = ψ2 ◦ φ2 ◦ j2 ◦ f2 .
Thus by the universal property of the tensor product R1 ⊗R0 R2 , there is unique η : R1 ⊗R0 R2 → R
such that
(17)

ψi ◦ φi ◦ jRi = η ◦ hi , i = 1, 2.

By the universal property of the free Rota-Baxter algebra (X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ), PR1 ⊗R0 R2 ), there is
unique η̄ : (X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 ), PR1 ⊗R0 R2 ) → (R, P) such that η̄ ◦ j1,2 = η. Combining with Eq. (17) we
get
ψi ◦ φi ◦ ji = η̄ ◦ j1,2 ◦ hi = η̄ ◦ X(hi ) ◦ ji , i = 1, 2.
Thus
ψi ◦ φi = η̄ ◦ X(hi ), i = 1, 2,
by the freeness of X(R1 ) and X(R2 ).
Further,
η̄(X(hi )(ker φi )) = (η̄ ◦ X(hi ))(ker φi ) = (ψi ◦ φi )(ker φi ) = 0,

i = 1, 2.

Thus by the construction of I, there is unique η̄˜ : (X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 )/I, PR]
) → (R, P) such that
1 ⊗R0 R2
η̄ = η̄˜ ◦ φ1,2 . Hence
ψi ◦ φi = η̄ ◦ X(hi ) = η̄˜ ◦ φ1,2 ◦ X(hi ) = η̄˜ ◦ ki ◦ φi ,

i = 1, 2.

Then by the surjectivity of φi , we get
ψi = η̄˜ ◦ ki , i = 1, 2.
So we just need to take ψ1,2 = η̄˜ for the existence of ψ1,2 .
To prove the uniqueness of ψ1,2 , suppose ψ′1,2 : (X(R1 ⊗R0 R2 )/I, PR]
) → (R, P) such that
1 ⊗R0 R2
ψi = ψ′1,2 ◦ ki , i = 1, 2.. Then tracing the above argument back, we obtain
ψ = ψi ◦ φi ◦ ji = ψ′1,2 ◦ φ1,2 ◦ j1,2 ◦ hi ,

i = 1, 2.

By the uniqueness in the universal property of the tensor product R1 ⊗R0 R2 of commutative algebras, we get
ψ′1,2 ◦ φ1,2 ◦ j1,2 = η.
Then by the freeness of X(A1 ⊗A0 A2 ), we obtain
ψ′1,2 ◦ φ1,2 = η̄.
Since we also have η̄ = η̄˜ ◦ φ1,2 , by the surjectivity of φ1,2 , we obtain φ′1,2 ◦ φ1,2 = η̄˜ , proving the
uniqueness of ψ1,2 .

The proof of Theorem 4.3 is obtained by combining Lemma 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6.



LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

17

4.2. Rota-Baxter Zariski topology. We end this paper by discussing a possible way to define
the Zariski topology on the category of commutative Rota-Baxter algebras. The Zariski topology
we want to define is a Grothendieck topology for which we now briefly recall the definition. Let
C be a category. A Grothendieck topology on C is a system of distinguished families of maps
{Ui → U}i∈I in C, called coverings, such that
(a) for any coverings {Ui → U}i∈I and any morphism V → U in C, the fiber product Ui × V
U
exists for any i and {Ui × V}i∈I → V is a covering of V;
U
(b) if {Ui → U}i∈I is a covering of U and, for each i ∈ I, {Vi j → Ui } j∈Ji is a covering of Ui ,
then {Vi j → U} j∈Ji ,i∈I is covering, where Vi j → U is the obvious composition;
=
(c) for any U ∈ C, the family {U → U} consisting only the identity map is a covering.
A site is a category C together with a Grothendieck topology defined on C.
Next, we define the Zariski open coverings in CRB/k.
Definition 4.7. A morphism f : (A, PA ) → (B, PB ) in CRB/k is called principle open if there
exists a multiplicative subset S ⊆ A and an isomorphism τ such that there is a commutative
diagram in CRB/k
f

/ (B, PB )
◆◆◆
◆◆◆i
◆◆◆  τ
◆'


(A, PA )◆

−1
(S RB
A, S −1 PA )

where i is the natural map from (A, PA ) to its localization at S . A morphism g : (A, PA ) → (B, PB )
is called open if g is the composition of finitely many principle open morphisms. A family of
maps {(A, PA ) → (Bi , PBi )}i∈I is called a Rota-Baxter Zariski covering of (A, PA ) if there exists a
multiplicative subset S ∈ A such that
(1) the Rota-Baxter ideal generated by S is A;
(2) for any s ∈ S , there exists i ∈ I such that the image of s under (A, PA ) → (Bi , PBi ) is
invertible.
Before stating the main result, we give the compatibility between localization and tensor product for Rota-Baxter algebras.
Lemma 4.8. Let f : (A, PA ) → (B, PB ) be a morphism in CRB/k and S be a multiplicative subset
in A. Let T be the multiplicative subset f (S ). Then there is a natural isomorphism
RB



−1
−1
(S RB
A ⊗ A B, S −1 PA ⊗PA PB ) −→ (T RB
B, T −1 PB ).

Proof. The proof is a routine exercise in category theory. We start by explaining that there is a
commutative diagram in CRB/k
iA

(A, PA )

/

−1
(S RB
A, S −1 PA )

f



(B, PB )

j1

/

−1
(S RB
A

RB



j2
k
−1

⊗ A B, S PA ⊗PA PB )

iB

❚
i❚ ❚❚ ❚ ❚ g
❚ ❚ ❚ ❚
❚ ❚ ❚ ❚
❚ ❚ ❚)

h
❚
. (T −1 B, T −1 P
RB

B ).

18

CHENGHAO CHU AND LI GUO

Morphisms iA and iB are the natural map into their localizations. The upper left square is the pushRB

−1
out square defining the tensor product (S RB
A ⊗ A B, S −1 PA ⊗PA PB ). k is induced from the map
iB ◦ f . g is the map induced by k and iB since k ◦ iA = iB ◦ f . Since j1 (T ) = j1 ( f (S )) = j2 (iA (S ))
and iA (S ) is a set of invertible elements, j1 (T ) is a set of invertible elements. So j1 induces a
morphism h.
Since g ◦ h ◦ iB = g ◦ j1 = iB , the map g ◦ h is the identity map by the universal property of
localizations. It is easy to see that h ◦ g ◦ j1 = h ◦ iB = j1 . We also have

h ◦ g ◦ j2 ◦ i A = h ◦ g ◦ j1 ◦ f = h ◦ i B ◦ f = j1 ◦ f = j2 ◦ i A ,
which implies by the universal property of localizations that h ◦ g ◦ j2 = j2 . So h ◦ g is the identity
map by the universal property of tensor products. So g and h are isomorphisms as desired.

Theorem 4.9. The collection of Rota-Baxter Zariski coverings forms a Grothendieck topology on
(CRB/k)op , the opposite category of CRB/k.
Proof. We check that this collection of coverings satisfies (a), (b) and (c) in the definition of
Grothendieck topologies. Requirement (c) is trivial because (A, PA ) is the localization of itself at
1. Let f : (A, PA ) → (B, PB ) and g : (B, PB ) → (C, PC ) be open morphisms. It follows from the
definition that g ◦ f is again open. If s ∈ A is an element such that f (s) is invertible in B, then
g( f (s)) is invertible in C. This shows that requirement (b) is satisfied. Fiber product in (CRB/k)op
is the tensor product in CRB/k which always exists by Theorem 4.3. To check requirement (a),
it suffices to check that principle open morphisms are closed under cobase changes in CRB/k,
which is true by Lemma 4.8.

The Grothendieck topology defined by the Rota-Baxter Zariski coverings on (CRB/k)op is
called the Rota-Baxter Zariski topology and we denote the corresponding site by RBZar/k. A
sheaf theory on this site is currently unavailable. It would be interesting to check whether the
category of sheaves on this site is an abelian category with enough injective objects. This property would enable us to discuss Rota-Baxter sheave cohomology on commutative Rota-Baxter
algebras.
References
[1] M. Aguiar, On the associative analog of Lie bialgebras, J. Algebra 244 (2001), 492–532.
[2] C. Bai, A unified algebraic approach to classical Yang-Baxter equation, Jour. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40
(36) (2007), 11073–11082.
[3] A. Connes, D. Kreimer, Hopf algebras, renormalization and noncommutative geometry,
Comm. Math. Phys. 199 (1998), 203–242.
[4] K. Ebrahimi-Fard and L. Guo, Quasi-shuffles, mixable shuffles and Hopf algebras, J. Algebraic Combinatorics, 24 (2006), 83-101, arXiv:math.RA/0506418.
[5] K. Ebrahimi-Fard, L. Guo and D. Kreimer, Spitzer’s Identity and the Algebraic Birkhoff Decomposition
in pQFT, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 37 (2004) 11037-11052. arXiv:hep-th/0407082.
[6] K. Ebrahimi-Fard, L. Guo and D. Manchon, Birkhoff type decompositions and the Baker-CampbellHausdorff recursion, Comm. in Math. Phys. 267 (2006) 821-845, arXiv: math-ph/0602004.
[7] H. Gillet, Differential algebra - a scheme theory approach, in: “Differential Algebra and Related Topics”,
World Scientific, 2002.
[8] O. Golubitsky, M. Kondratieva, A. Ovchinnikov, A. Szanto, A bound for orders in differential Nullstellensatz, J. Algebra 322 (2009), 38523877.
[9] L. Guo, Properties of free Rota-Baxter algerbas, Adv. Math. 151 (2000), 346-374, arXiv:math/0407157.
[10] L. Guo, WHAT IS a Rota-Baxter algebra, Notice of Amer. Math. Soc. 56 (2009) 1436-1437.
[11] L. Guo, W. Keigher, Baxter algebras and shuffle products, Adv. Math., 150, (2000), 117-149.

LOCALIZATION OF ROTA-BAXTER ALGEBRAS

19

[12] L. Guo and W. Keigher, On free Rota-Baxter algebras: completions and the internal construction, Adv.
in Math., 151 (2000), 101-127.
[13] L. Guo, S. Paycha, B. Xie adn B. Zhang, Double shuffle relations and renormalization of multiple zeta
values, In: “Geometry of Algebraic Cycles”, Clay Math. Proc. 9 (2010) 145-187.
[14] L. Guo and B. Zhang, Renormalization of multiple zeta values, J. Algebra, 319 (2008), 3770-3809,
arXiv:math.NT/0606076.
[15] L. Guo and B. Zhang, Differential Algebraic Birkhoff Decomposition and renormalization of multiple
zeta values, J. Number Theory, 128 (2008), 2318-2339, arXiv:0710.0432(math.NT).
[16] M. Hoffman, Quasi-shuffle products, J. Algebraic Combin., 11 (2000), 49-68.
[17] E. Kolchin, Differential algebraic groups, Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, FL, 1985.
[18] J. Ritt, Differential Equations from the Algebraic Standpoint, Amer. Math. Soc. 1932.
[19] M. Singer and M. van der Put, Galois Theory of Linear Differential Equations, Springer, 2003.
[20] W.-T. Wu, Selected works of Wen-Tsun Wu, World Scientific Publishing Co., 2008.
Department of Mathematics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21218
E-mail address: cchu@math.jhu.edu
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ 07102
E-mail address: liguo@rutgers.edu

