arXiv:1610.07715v2 [math.AC] 10 Sep 2017

A LOCAL DUALITY PRINCIPLE IN DERIVED CATEGORIES
OF COMMUTATIVE NOETHERIAN RINGS
TSUTOMU NAKAMURA AND YUJI YOSHINO
Abstract. Let R be a commutative Noetherian ring. We introduce the notion
of colocalization functors γW with supports in arbitrary subsets W of Spec R.
If W is a specialization-closed subset, then γW coincides with the right derived
functor RΓW of the section functor ΓW with support in W . We prove that the
local duality theorem and the vanishing theorem of Grothendieck type hold
for γW with W being an arbitrary subset.

1. Introduction
Throughout this paper, we assume that R is a commutative Noetherian ring. We
denote by D = D(Mod R) the derived category of complexes of R-modules, by which
we mean that D is the unbounded derived category. Neeman [14] proved that there
is a natural one-one correspondence between the set of subsets of Spec R and the
set of localizing subcategories of D. We denote by LW the localizing subcategory
corresponding to a subset W of Spec R. The localization theory of triangulated
categories [11] yields a right adjoint γW to the inclusion functor LW ֒→ D, and
such an adjoint is unique. This functor γW : D → LW (֒→ D) is our main target of
this paper, and we call it the colocalization functor with support in W .
If V is a specialization-closed subset of Spec R, then γV is nothing but the
right derived functor RΓV of the section functor ΓV with support in V , whose ith
right derived functor HVi (−) = H i (RΓV (−)) is known as the ith local cohomology
functor. For a general subset W of Spec R, the colocalization functor γW is not
necessarily a right derived functor of an additive functor defined on the category
Mod R of R-modules.
In this paper, we establish several results concerning the colocalization functor
γW , where W is an arbitrary subset of Spec R. Notable are extensions of the local
duality theorem and Grothendieck type vanishing theorem of local cohomology.
The local duality can be viewed as an isomorphism
RΓV RHomR (X, Y ) ∼
= RHomR (X, RΓV Y ),
−
where V is a specialization-closed subset of Spec R, X ∈ Dfg
and Y ∈ D+ ; see [5,
Proposition 6.1]. The following theorem generalizes this isomorphism to the case
of colocalization functors γW .

Theorem 1.1 (Theorem 4.1). Let W be a subset of Spec R and let X, Y ∈ D.
We denote by dim W the supremum of the lengths of chains of prime ideals in W .
Suppose that one of the following conditions holds:
−
(1) X ∈ Dfg
, Y ∈ D+ and dim W is finite;
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 13D09, 13D45, 14B15.
Key words and phrases. local cohomology, colocalization, localizing subcategory.
1

2

T. NAKAMURA AND Y. YOSHINO

(2) X ∈ Dfg , Y is a bounded complex of injective R-modules and dim W is
finite;
(3) W is generalization-closed.
Then there exist a natural isomorphism
γW RHomR (X, Y ) ∼
= RHomR (X, γW Y ).
We shall call Theorem 1.1 the Local Duality Principle, which naturally implies
the following corollary.
Corollary 1.2 (Corollary 4.5). Assume that R admits a dualizing complex DR . Let
W be an arbitrary subset of Spec R and X ∈ Dfg . We write X † = RHomR (X, DR ).
Then we have a natural isomorphism
γW X ∼
= RHomR (X † , γW DR ).
The local duality theorem states the validity of this isomorphism in the case that
W is specialization-closed, see [8, Chapter V; Theorem 6.2] and [5, Corollary 6.2].
As an application of the Local Duality Principle, we can prove the vanishing
theorem of Grothendieck type for the colocalization functor γW with support in an
arbitrary subset W . Let a be an ideal of R and X ∈D. The a-depth of X, which
we denote by depth(a, X), is the infimum of the set i ∈ Z ExtiR (R/a, X) 6= 0 .
More generally, for a specialization-closed subset W , the W -depth of X, which we
denote by depth(W, X), is defined as the infimum of the set of values depth(a, X)
for all ideals
 a with V (a) ⊆ W . When X ∈ Dfg , we denote by dim X the supremum
of the set dim H i (X) + i i ∈ Z .
For a finitely generated R-module M , the Grothendieck vanishing theorem says
i
that the ith local cohomology module HW
(M ) = H i (RΓW M ) of M with support
in W is zero for i < depth(W, M ) and i > dim M .
We are able to generalize this theorem to the following result in §6.
Theorem 1.3 (Theorem 6.5). Assume that R admits a dualizing complex. Let W
s
be an arbitrary subset of Spec R with the specialization closure W . If X ∈ Dfg ,
s
then H i (γW X) = 0 unless depth(W , X) ≤ i ≤ dim X.
In §3, we give an explicit description of γW for subsets W of certain special type,
see Theorem 3.12. For example, if W is a one-point set {p}, then it is proved the
colocalization functor γ{p} equals RΓV (p) RHomR (Rp , −), see Corollary 3.3. This
is one of the rare cases that we know the explicit form of γW , while for a general
subset W we give in Theorem 3.13 the way how we calculate γW by the induction
on dim W .
In §4, we give a complete proof of the Local Duality Principle (Theorem 1.1).
The subsequent section §5 is devoted to the relationship between γW and left
derived functors of completion functors. In particular, we see that there is a subset
W such that H i (γW I) 6= 0 for an injective module I and some i < 0. This
observation shows that γW is not a right derived functor of an additive functor
defined on Mod R in general.
In the last section §6, we present a precise and complete proof for Theorem 1.3
above.
Acknowledgements. This work was finished during the first author’s visit to the
Department of Mathematics at the University of Utah supported by a research

A LOCAL DUALITY PRINCIPLE

3

grant from Research Institute for Interdisciplinary Science at Okayama University.
We are grateful to Srikanth Iyengar for his helpful comments, which improve many
parts of this paper. We would also like to thank the referee for his/her careful
reading. The second author was supported by JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific
Research 26287008.
2. Colocalization functors
In this section, we summarize some notion and basic facts used later in this paper.
As in the introduction, R denotes a commutative Noetherian ring and we work in
the derived category D = D(Mod R). Note that complexes X are cohomologically
indexed;
X = (· · · → X i−1 → X i → X i+1 → · · · ).
We denote by D+ (resp. D− ) the full subcategory of D consisting of complexes
X such that H i (X) = 0 for i ≪ 0 (resp. i ≫ 0). We write Dfg for the full subcategory of D consisting of complexes with finitely generated cohomology modules.
−
Furthermore we write Dfg
= D− ∩ Dfg .
For a complex X in D, the (small) support of X is a subset of Spec R defined as

supp X = p ∈ Spec R X ⊗LR κ(p) 6= 0 ,
where κ(p) = Rp /pRp . It is well-known that for X ∈ D, supp X 6= ∅ if and only
if X 6= 0, see [5, Lemma 2.6] or [14, Lemma 2.12]. In order to compare with the
ordinary support, recall that the (big) support Supp X is the set of primes p of R
satisfying Xp 6= 0 in D. In general, we have supp X ⊆ Supp X and equality holds
−
if X ∈ Dfg
, see [5, p. 158].
A full subcategory L of D is said to be localizing if L is triangulated and closed
under arbitrary direct sums. If we are given a subset W of Spec R, then, since the
tensor product commutes with taking direct sums, it is easy to see that the full
subcategory LW = { X ∈ D | supp X ⊆ W } is localizing. A theorem of Neeman
[14, Theorem 2.8] ensures that any localizing subcategory of D is obtained in this
way from a subset W of Spec R.
If A is a set of objects in D, then Loc A denotes the smallest localizing subcategory of D containing all objects of A. We write ER (R/p) for the injective envelope
of the R-module R/p for p ∈ Spec R. It is easy to see supp κ(p) = supp ER (R/p) =
{p}. Moreover, Neeman [14, Theorem 2.8] shows the equalities
LW = Loc { κ(p) | p ∈ W } = Loc { ER (R/p) | p ∈ W } .
For a localizing subcategory L of D, its right orthogonal subcategory is defined
as
L⊥ = { Y ∈ D | HomD (X, Y ) = 0 for all X ∈ L } .
Note that L⊥ is a triangulated subcategory of D that is closed under arbitrary direct
products. In other words, L⊥ is a colocalizing subcategory of D. The following
equalities hold for any subset W of Spec R;
L⊥
W

= { Y ∈ D | HomD (κ(p)[i], Y ) = 0 for all p ∈ W and i ∈ Z }
= { Y ∈ D | RHomR (κ(p), Y ) = 0 for all p ∈ W } .

Let W be an arbitrary subset of Spec R. We denote by iW (resp. jW ) the natural
inclusion functor LW ֒→ D (resp. L⊥
W ֒→ D). Then there exist a couple of adjoint

4

T. NAKAMURA AND Y. YOSHINO

pairs (iW , γW ) and (λW , jW ) as it is indicated in the following diagram:
LW o

iW
/

γW

D o

λW
/

jW

L⊥
W

L⊥
W

Moreover, it holds that Ker γW =
and Ker λW = LW . See [11, §4.9, §5.1, §7.2]
for details. See also Remark 3.14 (ii).
In the following lemma, we identify γW and λW with iW · γW and jW · λW
respectively.
Lemma 2.1. Let W be any subset of Spec R. For any object X of D, there is a
triangle
γW X −−−−→ X −−−−→ λW X −−−−→ γW X[1],
where γW X → X and X → λW X are the natural morphisms. Furthermore, if
X ′ −−−−→ X −−−−→ X ′′ −−−−→ X ′ [1]
is a triangle with X ′ ∈ LW and X ′′ ∈ L⊥
W , then there exist unique isomorphisms
a : γW X → X ′ and b : λW X → X ′′ such that the following diagram is commutative:
γW X −−−−→ X −−−−→ λW X −−−−→ γW X[1]




a[1]
a
yb
y
y
X′

−−−−→ X −−−−→ X ′′

−−−−→

X ′ [1]

See [11, §4.11] for the proof of this lemma.
Let W be a subset of Spec R. Then λW is a localization functor. In other words,
writing η : idD → λW for the natural morphism, it follows that λW η : λW → λ2W
is invertible and λW η = ηλW . Conversely, γW is a colocalization functor, that
2
is, for the natural morphism ε : γW → idD , it follows that γW ε : γW
→ γW is
invertible and γW ε = εγW . Note that we uniquely obtain the localization (resp.
colocalization) functor λW (resp. γW ) for a subset W of Spec R.
Definition 2.2. Let W be a subset of Spec R. We call γW the colocalization
functor with support in W .
Recall that a subset W of Spec R is called specialization-closed (resp. generalizationclosed) if the following condition holds:
(*) Let p, q ∈ Spec R. If p ∈ W and p ⊆ q (resp. p ⊇ q), then q belongs to W .
If V is a specialization-closed subset, then the colocalization functor γV coincides
with the right derived functor RΓV of the section functor ΓV with support in V ,
see [12, Appendix 3.5].
3. Auxiliary results on colocalization functors
Let W be a subset of Spec R and let γW be the colocalization functor with
support in W . In general, it is hard to describe the functor γW explicitly. However there are some cases in which the colocalization functor γW is the form of
composition of known functors.
Let S be a multiplicatively closed subset of R. We denote by US the generalizationclosed subset { q ∈ Spec R | q ∩ S = ∅ }. Note that US is naturally identified with

A LOCAL DUALITY PRINCIPLE

5

Spec S −1 R. Following [3], we also write U (p) = { q ∈ Spec R | q ⊆ p } for a prime
ideal p of R. Then, setting S = R\p, we have U (p) = US .
Proposition 3.1. Let S be a multiplicatively closed subset of R and V be a specializationclosed subset of Spec R. We set W = V ∩ US . Then we have an isomorphism
γW ∼
= RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, −).
Proof. The ring homomorphism R → S −1 R induces a morphism RHomR (S −1 R, X) →
X for X ∈ D. Write f : RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X) → X for the composition of the
natural morphism RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X) → RHomR (S −1 R, X) with this morphism, and we consider the triangle
f

RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X) −−−−→ X −−−−→ C −−−−→ RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X)[1].
Since the complex RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X) can be regarded as a complex of S −1 Rmodules, it follows that supp RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X) ⊆ US . At the same time,
it follows from the definition that supp RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X) ⊆ V . Therefore
supp RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X) must be contained in W .
On the other hand, if p ∈ W , then there are isomorphisms
RHomR (κ(p), RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X)) ∼
= RHomR (κ(p), RHomR (S −1 R, X))
∼
= RHomR (κ(p), X).
It implies that RHomR (κ(p), f ) is an isomorphism, and thus RHomR (κ(p), C) = 0.
Since we have shown that RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X) ∈ LW and C ∈ L⊥
W , we can
use Lemma 2.1 to deduce γW X ∼

= RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X).
In the following lemma we show that the colocalization functor considered in
Proposition 3.1 is a right derived functor of a left exact functor defined on Mod R.
We say that a complex I of R-modules is K-injective if HomR (−, I) preserves quasiisomorphisms.
Lemma 3.2. Let S, V and W be the same as in Proposition 3.1. Then the colocalization functor γW is the right derived functor of the functor ΓV HomR (S −1 R, −)
defined on Mod R.
Proof. Let X ∈ D and take a K-injective resolution I of X that consists of injective
R-modules. Then RHomR (S −1 R, X) ∼
= HomR (S −1 R, I), and the right-hand complex consists of injective R-modules, too. It is known by [12, Lemma 3.5.1] that for
any complex J of injective R-modules (that is not necessarily K-injective), RΓV J
is naturally isomorphic to ΓV J. Therefore we have RΓV RHomR (S −1 R, X) ∼
=

ΓV HomR (S −1 R, I) ∼
= R(ΓV HomR (S −1 R, −))(X).
Henceforth, for a subset W of Spec R, we write W c = Spec R\W . By Proposition
3.1, we have an isomorphism
γU ∼
= RHomR (S −1 R, −).
S

We should mention that the isomorphism γU(p) ∼
= RHomR (Rp , −) already appeared
in [4, §4; P175], in which the authors use the notation V Z(p) , where Z(p) = U (p)c ,
see also Remark 5.2.
Corollary 3.3. Let p ∈ Spec R. Then we have an isomorphism
γ{p} ∼
= RΓV (p) RHomR (Rp , −),

6

T. NAKAMURA AND Y. YOSHINO

the right-hand side of which is the right derived functor of ΓV (p) HomR (Rp , −) defined on Mod R.
By the corollary, if I is an injective R-module, then γ{p} I ∼
= ΓV (p) HomR (Rp , I)
is also an injective R-module. We can describe how this injective R-module is
decomposed into a sum of indecomposable ones.
Corollary 3.4. Let p be a prime idealLof R and I be an injective R-module. Then
γ{p} I is isomorphic to the direct sum B ER (R/p) of B-copies of ER (R/p), where
B = dimκ(p) HomR (κ(p), I).
Proof. Since γ{p} I is an injective
R-module with support in {p}, there is a cardinal
L
∼
E
number B with γ{p} IL∼
=
B R (R/p). On the other hand, HomR (κ(p), I) =
κ(p),
hence
B
=
dim
Hom
(κ(p),
I).

HomR (κ(p), γ{p} I) ∼
= B
R
κ(p)
Remark 3.5. Let I be an injective
L R-module such that supp I = {q} for q ∈
Spec R, that is, I is of the form
A ER (R/q) for some index set A. Then it is
easily seen that HomR (κ(p), I) 6= 0 if and only if p ⊆ q. Therefore, it follows from
Corollary 3.4 that γ{p} I 6= 0 if and only if p ⊆ q.
If p is a prime ideal of R which is not maximal, then the colocalization functor
γ{p} is distinct from RΓV (p) ((−) ⊗R Rp ), which is written as Γp by Benson, Iyengar
and Krause in [3]. In fact, for a prime ideal q such that p ( q, it follows that
Γp ER (R/q) = 0, while γ{p} ER (R/q) 6= 0 by Reamrk 3.5.
Definition 3.6. For a subset W of Spec R, we denote by dim W the supremum of
the lengths of chains of prime ideals belonging to W , i.e.,
dim W = sup { n | there are p0 , . . . , pn in W with p0 ( p1 ( · · · ( pn } .
Thus dim W = 0 means that two distinct prime ideals taken from W have no
inclusion relation. Moreover, if W = ∅, then dim W = −∞ by the definition.
We now want to extend Corollary 3.3 to the case where dim W = 0. For this
purpose we need some preparatory observations. Compare the next remark with
[3, Lemma 3.4 (1)].
Remark 3.7. (i) Let W0 and W be subsets of Spec R with inclusion relation
⊥
W0 ⊆ W . In this case, we should note that LW0 ⊆ LW and L⊥
W ⊆ LW0 . Then it is
clear from the uniqueness of adjoint functors that
γW γW ∼
= λW λW .
= λW ∼
= γW γW , λW λW ∼
= γW ∼
0

0

0

0

0

(ii) Let W1 and W2 be subsets of Spec R. In general, γW1 γW2 need not be isomorphic to γW2 γW1 . For example, if p, q ∈ Spec R with p ( q, then it is seen from
Corollary 3.4 and Reamrk 3.5 that γ{p} γ{q} ER (R/q) 6= 0 and γ{q} γ{p} ER (R/q) =
0. Similarly, λW1 λW2 need not be isomorphic to λW2 λW1 . Moreover, for a general
subset W , γW dose not necessarily commute with the localization (−) ⊗R S −1 R
with respect to a multiplicatively closed subset S.
The following lemma will be used in the later sections.
Lemma 3.8 (Foxby-Iyengar [6]). Let (R, m, k) be a commutative Noetherian local
ring. Then the following conditions are equivalent for any X ∈ D:
(1) X ⊗LR k 6= 0;
(2) RHomR (k, X) 6= 0;

A LOCAL DUALITY PRINCIPLE

7

(3) RΓV (m) X 6= 0.
Proof. See [6, Theorem 2.1, Theorem 4.1].



This is implicitly used by Benson, Iyengar and Krause [3] to prove the following
lemma.
Lemma 3.9 ([3, Theorem 5.6]). Let V be a specialization-closed subset of Spec R.
Then, for each X in D, the following equalities hold;
supp γV X = V ∩ supp X,

supp λV X = V c ∩ supp X.

Notice that Lemma 3.9 applies only to specialization-closed subsets, and the
equalities do not necessarily hold for general subsets, see Corollary 3.4 and Reamrk
3.5.
Definition 3.10. Let W0 ⊆ W be subsets of Spec R. We say that W0 is specializationclosed in W if V (p) ∩ W ⊆ W0 for any p ∈ W0 .
s
Moreover we denote by W the specialization closure of W , which is defined to
be the smallest specialization-closed subset of Spec R containing W .
Lemma 3.11. Let W0 ⊆ W ⊆ Spec R be sets. Suppose W0 is specialization-closed
in W . Setting W1 = W \W0 , we have LW1 ⊆ L⊥
W0 .
s

Proof. It is obvious from the definition that W0 ∩ W1 = ∅. Assume that X ∈ LW1 .
s
Then supp γW0 s X = W0 ∩supp X = ∅ by Lemma 3.9. Therefore we have γW0 s X =
0. It then follows from Remark 3.7 (i) that γW0 X ∼
= γW0 γW0 s X = 0. Thus we have
X∼
as
desired.

= λW0 X ∈ L⊥
W0
The following theorem is one of the main results in this section; it extends
Corollary 3.3.
Theorem 3.12. Let W be a subset of Spec R with dim W = 0. Then we have the
following isomorphisms of functors
M
M
γW ∼
γ{p} ∼
RΓV (p) RHomR (Rp , −).
=
=
p∈W

p∈W

Furthermore, γW is the right derived functor of the left exact functor
M
ΓV (p) HomR (Rp , −)
p∈W

defined on Mod R.
Proof. Let X ∈ D. Summing
L up all the natural morphisms γ{p} X → X for p ∈ W ,
we obtain a morphism f : p∈W γ{p} X → X, from which we obtain a triangle
M
M
f
γ{p} X −−−−→ X −−−−→ C −−−−→
γ{p} X[1].
p∈W

p∈W

L

It is clear that p∈W γ{p} X ∈ LW .
Now let p be a primeLin W . Since {p} is specialization-closed in W , it follows
from Lemma 3.11 that q∈W \{p} γ{q} X ∈ L⊥
{p} . Hence we have
M
RHomR (κ(p),
γ{q} X) ∼
= RHomR (κ(p), γ{p} X) ∼
= RHomR (κ(p), X).
q∈W

8

T. NAKAMURA AND Y. YOSHINO

This implies that RHomR (κ(p), f ) is an isomorphism for p ∈ W . Therefore it
follows that RHomR (κ(p), C) = 0 for allLp ∈ W , equivalently C ∈ L⊥
W . Hence we
γ
X
as
desired.
The
rest of the
conclude by Lemma 2.1 that γW X ∼
=
{p}
p∈W
theorem follows from Lemma 3.2 and Corollary 3.3.

We denote by Inj R the full subcategory of Mod R consisting of all injective Rmodules. When dim W > 0, even for I ∈ Inj R, it may happen that there is a
negative integer i with H i (γW I) 6= 0, see Example 5.3. Therefore, for a general
subset W of Spec R, γW is not necessarily a right derived functor of an additive
functors defined on Mod R.
The following theorem enables us to compute γW X by using induction on dim W .
Theorem 3.13. Let W0 ⊆ W ⊆ Spec R be sets. Assume that W0 is specializationclosed in W , and set W1 = W \ W0 . For any X ∈ D, there is a triangle of the
following form;
γW0 X −−−−→ γW X −−−−→ γW1 λW0 X −−−−→ γW0 X[1].
Proof. By virtue of Lemma 2.1, we have triangles;
γW0 X −−−−→ X −−−−→ λW0 X −−−−→ γW0 X[1],
γW1 λW0 X −−−−→ λW0 X −−−−→ λW1 λW0 X −−−−→ γW1 λW0 X[1].
It then follows from the octahedron axiom that there is a commutative diagram
whose rows and columns are triangles:
X[−1]
X[−1]




y
y
γW1 λW0 X[−1] −−−−→ λW0 X[−1] −−−−→ λW1 λW0 X[−1] −−−−→ γW1 λW0 X




y
y

γW1 λW0 X[−1] −−−−→

γW0 X


y

−−−−→

C


y

−−−−→ γW1 λW0 X

X
X
Focusing on the triangle in the second row, we notice from Lemma 3.11 that
⊥
both γW1 λW0 X and λW0 X belong to L⊥
W0 . Hence we have λW1 λW0 X ∈ LW0 . Then
⊥
⊥
⊥
it follows that λW1 λW0 X ∈ LW1 ∩ LW0 = LW .
On the other hand, in the third row above, we know γW1 λW0 X ∈ LW1 ⊆ LW
and γW0 X ∈ LW0 ⊆ LW . Consequently we have C ∈ LW .
Taking a look at the third column above, since C ∈ LW and λW1 λW0 X ∈ L⊥
W,
we deduce from Lemma 2.1 that γW X ∼
= C. Thus the third row is a required
triangle.

The reader should compare Theorem 3.13 with [3, Lemma 3.4 (4)].
Remark 3.14. (i) Let W , W0 and W1 be as in the theorem. In its proof, we have
shown an isomorphism λW1 λW0 ∼
= λW .
(ii) Let W be a subset of Spec R, and assume that dim W = n is finite. Then we
can give an alternative proof of the existence of γW and λW . In fact, in the case
that n = 0, γW can be given explicitly by Theorem 3.12. Note that λW exists at

A LOCAL DUALITY PRINCIPLE

9

the same time. Furthermore, if n > 0, we can show the existence of γW and λW
inductively by the formula in (i).
Let X be a complex of R-modules. We say that X is left (resp. right) bounded
if X i = 0 for i ≪ 0 (resp. i ≫ 0). When X is left and rignt bounded, X is called
bounded. We denote by K = K(Inj R) the homotopy category of complexes of
injective R-modules. Moreover, we write K+ for the full subcategory of K consisting
of left bounded complexes. Let a and b be taken from Z ∪ {+∞}, and assume that
a ≤ b. We denote by K[a,b] the full subcategory of K+ consisting of complexes I
such that I i = 0 for i ∈
/ [a, b] (cf. [10, Notations 11.3.7 (ii)]).
∼
Recall that the canonical functor K → D induces an equivalence K+ −
→ D+
+
of triangulated categories, whose quasi-inverse sends a complex X ∈ D to its
minimal injective resolution I ∈ K+ . In the following corollary, we identify K+
with D+ in this way.
Corollary 3.15. Let W be a subset of Spec R, and assume that n = dim W is
finite. Let a, b ∈ Z ∪ {+∞} with a ≤ b and I ∈ K[a,b] . Then γW I is belongs to
K[a−n,b] under the equivalence K+ ∼
= D+ . Therefore, γW maps objects of D+ to
+
objects of D .
Proof. We prove the corollary by induction on n. If n = 0, then it follows from
Theorem 3.12 that γW I ∈ K[a,b] .
Suppose that n > 0. Let W0 be the set of all prime ideals in W that are maximal
with respect to the inclusion relation in W , and we set W1 = W \ W0 . Notice that
dim W0 = 0 and dim W1 = n − 1. Since there is a triangle γW0 I → I → λW0 I →
γW0 I[1], and since both I and γW0 I belong to K[a,b] , we see that λW0 I ∈ K[a−1,b] .
Hence γW1 λW0 I ∈ K[a−n,b] by the inductive hypothesis.
On the other hand, we have from Theorem 3.13 a triangle
γW0 I → γW I → γW1 λW0 I → γW0 I[1].
by Theorem 3.12, and since γW1 λW0 I ∈ K[a−n,b] as shown in
Since γW0 I ∈ K
above, it follows that γW I ∈ K[a−n,b] as desired.

[a,b]

If dim W is infinite, then it may happen that γW X ∈
/ D+ for a complex X ∈ D+ ,
see Example 5.5.
4. Local Duality Principle
Local duality theorem is a duality concerning local cohomology modules with
supports in closed subsets in schemes, which was presented in [8] and [9]. Dualizing complexes or dualizing modules play a significant role there. However, Foxby
[5, Proposition 6.1] discovered a general principle that underlies local duality, which
does not require dualizing complexes. He considered such duality only for the right
derived functor RΓV of the section functor ΓV with support in a specializationclosed subset V of Spec R. We propose the local duality principle as generalization
of Foxby’s theorem.
Theorem 4.1 (Local Duality Principle). Let W be a subset of Spec R and let
X, Y ∈ D. Suppose that one of the following conditions holds:
−
(1) X ∈ Dfg
, Y ∈ D+ and dim W < +∞;
(2) X ∈ Dfg , Y is a bounded complex of injective R-modules and dim W < +∞;
(3) W is generalization-closed.

10

T. NAKAMURA AND Y. YOSHINO

Then there exist natural isomorphisms
γW RHomR (X, Y ) ∼
= RHomR (X, γW Y ),
λW RHomR (X, Y ) ∼
= RHomR (X, λW Y ).
Note that Foxby’s theorem states the validity of the first isomorphism when,
added to the condition (1), W is a specialization-closed subset of Spec R.
⊥
Lemma 4.2. Let W be a subset of Spec R. If Z ∈ L⊥
W , then RHomR (X, Z) ∈ LW
for any X ∈ D.

Proof. The lemma is clear from
RHomR (Y, RHomR (X, Z)) ∼
= RHomR (X, RHomR (Y, Z)) = 0
for Y ∈ LW .



Lemma 4.3. Let W be a generalization-closed subset of Spec R. Then it holds that
LW = L⊥
Wc.
Proof. We note that W c is specialization-closed. The equality LW = L⊥
W c is deduced from Lemma 3.9 as follows: If X ∈ LW , then supp γW c X = W c ∩supp X = ∅
⊥
hence γW c X = 0 equivalently X = λW c X ∈ L⊥
W c . On the contrary, if X ∈ LW c
then supp λW c X = W ∩ supp X therefore X = λW c X has small support in W thus
X ∈ LW .

Let X be a complex of R-modules and n be an integer. The cohomological
truncations σ≤n X and σ>n X are defined as follows:
σ≤n X = (· · · → X n−2 → X n−1 → Ker dnX → 0 → · · · )
σ>n X = (· · · → 0 → Im dnX → X n+1 → X n+2 → · · · )
See [8, Chapter I; §7] for details.
Proof of Theorem 4.1. Applying the functor RHomR (X, −) to the triangle γW Y →
Y → λW Y → γW Y [1], we obtain a triangle of the form;
RHomR (X, γW Y ) → RHomR (X, Y ) → RHomR (X, λW Y ) → RHomR (X, γW Y )[1].
It follows from Lemma 2.1 that, to prove the desired isomorphisms, we only have
to show that
RHomR (X, γW Y ) ∈ LW and RHomR (X, λW Y ) ∈ L⊥
W.
⊥
Since λW Y ∈ L⊥
W , we see from Lemma 4.2 that RHomR (X, λW Y ) ∈ LW . Thus it
remains to show that RHomR (X, γW Y ) ∈ LW .
Case (1): Let p ∈ W c . We want to show that RHomR (X, γW Y ) ⊗LR κ(p) = 0.
−
Since X ∈ Dfg
and Y ∈ D+ , Corollary 3.15 implies γW Y ∈ D+ , so it follows that

RHomR (X, γW Y ) ⊗LR κ(p) ∼
= RHomRp (Xp , (γW Y )p ) ⊗LRp κ(p).
Now thanks to Lemma 3.8 together with this
 isomorphism, it is sufficient to show
that RHomRp κ(p), RHomRp (Xp , (γW Y )p ) = 0. Noting that


RHomR κ(p), RHomR (Xp , (γW Y )p ) ∼
= RHomR Xp , RHomR (κ(p), (γW Y )p ) ,
p

p

p

p

we have sufficiently to show that RHomRp (κ(p), (γW Y )p ) = 0. However, by using
Lemma 3.8 again, we see that this is equivalent to show that (γW Y ) ⊗LR κ(p) = 0,
i.e., p 6∈ supp γW Y . The last is clear, since supp γW Y ⊆ W and p 6∈ W .

A LOCAL DUALITY PRINCIPLE

11

Case (2): As in the case (1), taking p ∈ W c , we show RHomR (X, γW Y ) ⊗LR κ(p) =
0. We consider the triangle σ≤n X → X → σ>n X → (σ≤n X)[1] for an integer n.
−
Since σ≤n X ∈ Dfg
, we have RHomR (σ≤n X, γW Y ) ∈ LW by the case (1). Hence,
applying RHomR (−, γW Y ) ⊗LR κ(p) to the triangle, we obtain an isomorphism
RHomR (X, γW Y ) ⊗LR κ(p) ∼
= RHomR (σ>n X, γW Y ) ⊗LR κ(p).
Let i be any integer. It suffices to show that

H 0 RHomR (σ>n X, γW Y [i]) ⊗LR κ(p) = 0
for some n. By Corollary 3.15, γW Y is isomorphic to a bounded complex I of
injective R-modules, so that there is an integer m with I j = 0 for j > m. Moreover,
any element of H 0 (RHomR (σ>n X, γW Y [i])) ∼
= HomD (σ>n X, I[i]) is represented
by a chain map σ>n X → I[i]. Thus, taking n with
 n > m − i, we see that
H j (RHomR (σ>n X, γW Y [i])) ∼
= HomD (σ>n X, I[i + j]) = 0 for all j ≥ 0. Then it
is easily seen that H 0 RHomR (σ>n X, γW Y [i]) ⊗LR κ(p) = 0.
Case (3): By Lemma 4.3, we have γW Y ∈ LW = L⊥
W c , thus it follows from

Lemma 4.2 that RHomR (X, γW Y ) ∈ L⊥
W c = LW as desired.
Remark 4.4. In the case (3), the isomorphisms in the theorem are also proved by
[2, Theorem 5.14].
When R admits a dualizing complex DR , we write X † = RHomR (X, DR ) for
X ∈ D. Then we have X ∼
= X †† for X ∈ Dfg , see [8, Chapter V; §2]. The following
result is the generalized form of the local duality theorem [8, Chapter V; Theorem
6.2].
Corollary 4.5. Assume that R admits a dualizing complex DR . Let W be a subset
of Spec R and X ∈ Dfg . Then we have a natural isomorphism
γW X ∼
= RHomR (X † , γW DR ).
The second author and Maiko Ono had proved the following theorem when W is
specialization-closed, and had asked if it holds for an arbitrary subset W , see [15,
Theorem 2.3, Question 2.5].
Theorem 4.6 (AR Principle). Let X, I ∈ D. Suppose that a subset W of Spec R
satisfies the condition dim W < +∞. We assume furthermore that the following
conditions hold for an integer n:
(1) I is a bounded complex of injective R-modules with I i = 0 for i > n;
(2) σ≤−1 X ∈ LW .
Then there exists a natural isomorphism
σ>n RHomR (X, γW I) ∼
= σ>n RHomR (X, I).
We are now able to prove that this theorem holds in general. As we have shown
in Corollary 3.15, γW I is isomorphic to a bounded complex J of injective R-modules
with J i = 0 for i > n. Then one can observe that the proof of [15, Theorem 2.3]
works well.
The AR Principle is a version of classical Auslander-Reiten duality theorem in
terms of complexes, see [15, Corollary 3.2].

12

T. NAKAMURA AND Y. YOSHINO

5. Relation with completion
In this section, we shall explain the relationship between λW and left derived
functors of completion functors. Furthermore, we give some nontrivial examples
of colocalization functors γW , for which γW I has a non-zero negative cohomology
module even for an injective R-module I.
Let a be an ideal of R which defines a closed subset V (a) of Spec R. We denote
by ΛV (a) the a-adic completion functor lim(− ⊗R R/an ) defined on Mod R. It is
←−
known that the left derived functor LΛV (a) of ΛV (a) is a right adjoint to RΓV (a)
by Greenlees and May [7] and Alonso Tarrı́o, Jeremı́as López and Lipman [1]. One
also finds an outline of the proof of this fact in [12, §4; p. 69].
Recall that λV (a)c is a left adjoint to the inclusion functor jV (a)c : LV (a)c ֒→ D.
Now we shall prove that LΛV (a) coincides with λV (a)c . By the universality of derived
functors, there is a natural morphism X → LΛV (a) X for any X ∈ D , from which
we have a triangle of the form
C −−−−→ X −−−−→ LΛV (a) X −−−−→ C[1].
Applying RΓV (a) to this triangle, we have the following triangle
RΓV (a) C −−−−→ RΓV (a) X −−−−→ RΓV (a) LΛV (a) X −−−−→ RΓV (a) C[1].
By [1, Corollary 5.1.1 (ii)], RΓV (a) X → RΓV (a) LΛV (a) X is an isomorphism. Hence
RΓV (a) C = 0, and thus we have C ∈ L⊥
V (a) = LV (a)c by Lemma 4.3. On the other
hand, since LΛV (a) is a right adjoint to RΓV (a) , we have
RHomR (κ(p), LΛV (a) X) ∼
= RHomR (RΓV (a) κ(p), X) = 0
∼
for any p ∈ V (a)c . This implies LΛV (a) X ∈ L⊥
V (a)c . Thus it follows that γV (a)c X =
V
(a)
∼ LΛ
C and λV (a)c X =
X by Lemma 2.1.
We summarize this fact in the following.
Proposition 5.1. Let a be an ideal of R. Then λV (a)c is isomorphic to the left
derived functor LΛV (a) of the a-adic completion functor ΛV (a) .
Remark 5.2. Let a be an ideal of R and W be a specialization-closed subset of
Spec R. Note that it is also proved that LΛV (a) is isomorphic to RHomR (RΓV (a) R, −)
in [7] and [1]. More generally, we see that RHomR (RΓW R, −) is a right adjoint to
RΓW . Furthermore, by using Lemma 4.3, it is not hard to see that λW c is a right
adjoint to γW . Thus it follows from the uniqueness of adjoint functors that there
is an isomorphism
λW c ∼
= RHomR (RΓW R, −).
This fact and Proposition 5.1 is essentially stated in [4], where γW c and λW c appear
as V W and ΛW respectively.
Now we are ready to give an example as we have previously announced.
b be the m-adic
Example 5.3. Let (R, m, k) be a local ring of dimension d and R
b
completion of R. Let DRb be a dualizing complex of R with ExtdRb (k, DRb ) ∼
= k.
We regard DRb as a complex of R-modules in a natural way. Using the isomorphism LΛV (m) RΓV (m) ∼
= LΛV (m) by [1, Corollary 5.1.1 (i)], we can show that

A LOCAL DUALITY PRINCIPLE

13

LΛV (m) ER (k) ∼
= DRb [d]. Hence it follows from Proposition 5.1 that λV (m)c ER (k) ∼
=
DRb [d]. Now we suppose that d > 1. Then, considering the triangle
γV (m)c ER (k) −−−−→ ER (k) −−−−→ λV (m)c ER (k) −−−−→ γV (m)c ER (k)[1],
we have H −d+1 (γV (m)c ER (k)) 6= 0 and −d + 1 < 0.



Remark 5.4. Let X ∈ D. If W is specialization-closed, then it holds that
supp H i (γW X) ⊆ W for all i ∈ Z, since γW ∼
= RΓW . However we see from Example 5.3 that the inclusion relation supp H i (γW X) ⊆ W dose not necessarily hold in
general.
We now give an example such that γW I ∈
/ D+ even for an injective R-module I.
Example 5.5. We assume that dim
the set of maximal ideals
LR = +∞. Let W be +
c(
E
(R/m))
∈
/
D
. In fact, it is clear that
of R. Then
we
can
show
that
γ
R
W
m∈W
L
RΓW ∼
= m∈W RΓV (m) . Thus it follows from Remark 5.2 that
Y
Y
λW c ∼
RHomR (RΓV (m) R, −) ∼
LΛV (m) .
= RHomR (RΓW R, −) ∼
=
=
m∈W

Then, by Example 5.3, we see that λ
L
/ D+ .
γW c ( m∈W ER (R/m)) ∈

Wc

m∈W

L
/ D+ . Hence we have
( m∈W ER (R/m)) ∈


Remark 5.6. More generally, we can prove that λW c is isomorphic to
Y
LΛV (p) (− ⊗R Rp )
p∈W

for an arbitrary subset W of Spec R with dim W = 0. The proof of this fact will
be given in our subsequent work [13].
6. Vanishing for cohomology modules
Let V be a specialization-closed subset of Spec R. In such a classical case,
Grothendieck showed that if M is a finitely generated R-module, then HVi (M ) =
H i (RΓV M ) = 0 for i < 0 and i > dim M .
Our aim in this section is to prove the same type of vanishing theorem holds
for the colocalization functor γW with support in W , where W is not necessarily
specialization-closed.
Notice from Example 5.3 that it is truly nontrivial even to prove that H i (γW M ) =
0 for i < 0.
Proposition 6.1. Let W be a subset of Spec R and suppose that dim W is finite.
Then we have H i (γW M ) = 0 for any i < 0 and for any finitely generated R-module
M.
Proof. First of all we note the following: Let 0 → N ′ → N → N ′′ → 0 be an exact
sequence of finitely generated R-modules. If N is a counterexample to the theorem,
then so is one of N ′ and N ′′ .
Secondly we note that a finitely generated R-module M has a filtration
0 = M0 ( M1 ( · · · ( Mn = M
∼
such that Mi+1 /Mi = R/pi and pi ∈ Spec R for 0 ≤ i < n. It thus follows that we
have sufficiently to prove that H i (γW R/p) = 0 for i < 0 and p ∈ Spec R.
Now supposed that there would exist p ∈ Spec R with H i (γW R/p) 6= 0 for some
i < 0, and take a maximal p among such prime ideals. Then it is easy to see from

14

T. NAKAMURA AND Y. YOSHINO

the remark made in the first part of this proof that the theorem is true for M = R/I
for all I ) p.
The key for the proof is Corollary 3.15 which states that γW R/p ∈ D+ . This
exactly means there is the least integer ℓ < 0 with H ℓ (γW R/p) 6= 0. Let x be an
arbitrary element of R with x 6∈ p. Apply the functor γW to the exact sequence
x

0 → R/p −
→ R/p → R/(p + (x)) → 0,
x

and we obtain an isomorphism H ℓ (γW R/p) −
→ H ℓ (γW R/p). Since every element
from R \ p acts bijectively on H ℓ (γW R/p), consequently H ℓ (γW R/p) is a κ(p)vector space. Now let I be a minimal injective resolution of γW R/p. By our choice
of integer ℓ, we see that I starts from the ℓth term, being of the form
∂ℓ

∂ ℓ+1

∂ ℓ+2

0 −−−−→ I ℓ −−−−→ I ℓ+1 −−−−→ I ℓ+2 −−−−→ · · · .
Note that Ker ∂ ℓ = H ℓ (γW R/p). Since I is a minimal injective resolution, I ℓ is
an essential extension of H ℓ (γW R/p) that is a κ(p)-module. Therefore I ℓ must
be isomorphic to a direct sum of copies of ER (R/p). This forces that ΓV (p) (Ip )
has a nontrivial cohomology in degree ℓ, thus it follows from Lemma 3.8 that
p ∈ supp I = supp γW R/p ⊆ W . Since we have shown that p ∈ W , the following
isomorphisms hold;
0 6= HomD (κ(p), γW R/p[ℓ]) ∼
= HomD (κ(p), R/p[ℓ]) ∼
= Extℓ (κ(p), R/p),
R

the last of which must be zero since ℓ < 0. By this contradiction we complete the
proof.

Let a, b ∈ Z ∪ {±∞} with a ≤ b. We denote by D[a,b] for the full subcateogy of
D consisting of complexes X such that H i (X) = 0 for i ∈
/ [a, b] (cf. [10, Notation
[a,b]
[a,b]
13.1.11]). Moreover, we write Dfg = D
∩ Dfg . For X ∈ D, we denote by inf X

the infimum of the set i ∈ Z H i (X) 6= 0 .
Corollary 6.2. Let X ∈ Dfg and W be a subset of Spec R. We assume that dim W
is finite. Then we have inf X ≤ inf γW X.
Proof. We may assume that inf X > −∞. Thus it is enough to show that if
[0,+∞]
X ∈ Dfg
, then γW X ∈ D[0,+∞] . To see this, setting n = dim W , we consider the
[0,n]

triangle σ≤n X → X → σ>n X → (σ≤n X)[1]. Since σ≤n X ∈ Dfg , by Proposition
6.1, we can show that γW (σ≤n X) ∈ D[0,+∞] . Furthermore, it follows from Corollary
3.15 that γW (σ>n X) ∈ D[0,+∞] . Thus we can conclude that γW X ∈ D[0,+∞] by
the triangle.

Let X ∈ D. For an ideal a of R, we define the a-depth of X as depth(a, X) =
inf RHomR (R/a, X). Let x = {x1 , . . . , xn } be a system of generators of a. For each
xi
R → 0) concentrated in degrees −1 and
xi , K(xi ) denotes the complex (0 → R −→
0. The Koszul complex with respect to x is the complex K(x) = K(x1 ) ⊗R · · · ⊗R
K(xn ). By [6, Theorem 2.1], it holds that depth(a, X) = inf HomR (K(x), X) =
inf RΓV (a) X.
If W is a specialization-closed subset of Spec R, then we define the W -depth of
X, which we denote by depth(W, X), as the infimum of the set of values depth(a, X)
for all ideals a with V (a) ⊆ W . It is easily seen that depth(W, X) = inf RΓW X.
Proposition 6.3. Let W be a subset of Spec R, and assume that dim W is finite.
s
Let X ∈ Dfg . Then we have depth(W , X) ≤ inf γW X.

A LOCAL DUALITY PRINCIPLE

15

Proof. By Remark 3.7 (i), it holds that γW X ∼
= RΓW s (γW X). Therefore we have
s

inf γW X = inf RΓW s (γW X) = depth(W , γW X).
s

s

Hence it remains to show that depth(W , X) ≤ depth(W , γW X). Let a be an
s
ideal of R with V (a) ⊆ W and x = {x1 , . . . , xn } be a system of generators of a.
Since K(x) is a bounded complex of finitely generated free R-modules, it follows
from Corollary 6.2 that
inf HomR (K(x), X) ≤ inf γW HomR (K(x), X) = inf HomR (K(x), γW X).
s

Thus we have depth(a, X) ≤ depth(a, γW X). Hence it holds that depth(W , X) ≤
s

depth(W , γW X) by definition.
This proposition states that an inequality
inf RΓW s X ≤ inf γW X.
holds for a subset W of Spec R with dim W < +∞ and X ∈ Dfg .

Let X ∈ Dfg . We denote by dim X the supremum of the set dim H i (X) + i i ∈ Z ,
see [5, §3]. Note that dim X[1] = dim X − 1. Let DR be a dualizing complex of R
[0,d]
with DR ∈ Dfg , where d = dim R. In the proof of the next proposition, we use a
[d−n,+∞]

basic fact that X † ∈ Dfg
, where n = dim X. To show this, we first suppose
that X is a finitely generated R-module. Then it is straightforward to see that
[d−n,d]
[d−n,+∞]
X † ∈ Dfg
⊂ Dfg
. Next, supppse that X is any complex of Dfg . Notice
that it suffices to treat the case that n = dim X = 0. Then, using the triangle
[d,+∞]
σ≤−d X → X → σ>−d X → (σ≤−d X)[1], one can deduce that X † ∈ Dfg
as
desired. This fact is essentially proved in [5, Proposition 3.14 (d)].
Proposition 6.4. Assume that R admits a dualizing complex. Let W be a subset
of Spec R and X ∈ Dfg . Then H i (γW X) = 0 for all i > dim X.
[0,d]

Proof. Let DR be a dualizing complex with DR ∈ Dfg , where d = dim R. By
Corollary 3.15, γW DR is isomorphic to a bounded complex I of injective R-modules
with I i = 0 for i > d. Then, by Corollary 4.5, there are isomrophisms
γW X ∼
= HomR (X † , I).
= RHomR (X † , γW DR ) ∼
Therefore each element of H i (γW X) ∼
= HomD (X † , I[i]) is represented by a chain
[d−n,+∞]
map from X † to I[i]. Moreover, setting n = dim X, we have X † ∈ Dfg
by the
i
above-mentioned fact. Hence it holds that H (γW X) = 0 for all i > n = dim X. 
We sum up Proposition 6.3 and Proposition 6.4 in the following theorem.
Theorem 6.5. Assume that R admits a dualizing complex. Let W be a subset of
s
Spec R. If X ∈ Dfg , then H i (γW X) = 0 unless depth(W , X) ≤ i ≤ dim X.
References
1. L. Alonso Tarrı́o, A. Jeremı́as López and J. Lipman, Local homology and cohomology on schemes, Ann. Scient. Éc. Norm. Sup. 30 (1997), 1–39. Correction, available at
https://www.math.purdue.edu/~lipman/papers/homologyfix.pdf
2. L. Alonso Tarrı́o, A. Jeremı́as López and M. José Souto Salorio, Bousfield localization on
formal schemes, J. Algebra 278 (2004), 585–610.

16

T. NAKAMURA AND Y. YOSHINO

3. D. Benson, S. Iyengar, and H. Krause, Local cohomology and support for triangulated categories, Ann. Scient. Éc. Norm. Sup. (4) 41 (2008), 1–47.
4. D. Benson, S. Iyengar, and H. Krause, Colocalizing subcategories and cosupport, J. reine
angew. Math. 673 (2012), 161–207.
5. H.-B. Foxby, Bounded complexes of flat modules, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 15 (1979), 149–172.
6. H.-B. Foxby and S. Iyengar, Depth and amplitude for unbounded complexes, Commutative
algebra and its interactions with algebraic geometry (Grenoble-Lyon 2001), Contemp. Math.
331, American Math. Soc. Providence, RI (2003), 119–137.
7. J. P. C. Greenlees and J. P. May, Derived functors of I-adic completion and local homology,
J. Algebra 149 (1992), 438–453.
8. R. Hartshorne, Residues and Duality: Lecture Notes of a Seminar on the Work of A.
Grothendieck (Harvard, 1963/64), Lecture Notes in Math. 20, Springer- Verlag, Berlin-New
York (1966).
9. R. Hartshorne, Local cohomology: A seminar given by A. Grothendieck (Harvard, 1961),
Lecture Notes in Math. 41, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York (1967).
10. M. Kashiwara and P. Schapira, Categories and sheaves, Grundlehren der Mathematischen
Wissenschaften 332, Springer-Verlag (2006).
11. H. Krause Localization theory for triangulated categories, Triangulated categories, London
Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. 375, Cambridge Univ. Press (2010), 161–235.
12. J. Lipman, Lectures on local cohomology and duality, Local cohomology and its applications,
Lect. Notes Pure Appl. Math. 226, Dekker, New York (2002), 39–89.
13. T. Nakamura and Y. Yoshino, Localization functors and cosupport in derived categories of
commutative Noetherian rings, in preparation.
14. A. Neeman, The chromatic tower of D(R), Topology 31 (1992), 519–532.
15. M. Ono and Y. Yoshino, An Auslander-Reiten principle in derived categories, J. Pure Appl.
Algebra 221 (2017), 1268–1278.
(T. Nakamura) Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology Okayama University, Okayama, 700-8530 Japan
E-mail address: t.nakamura@s.okayama-u.ac.jp
(Y. Yoshino) Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology Okayama University, Okayama, 700-8530 Japan
E-mail address: yoshino@math.okayama-u.ac.jp

