F -SIGNATURE OF PAIRS AND THE ASYMPTOTIC BEHAVIOR OF
FROBENIUS SPLITTINGS

arXiv:1107.1082v2 [math.AC] 7 Sep 2012

MANUEL BLICKLE, KARL SCHWEDE, KEVIN TUCKER

Abstract. We generalize F -signature to pairs (R, D) where D is a Cartier subalgebra on
R as defined by the first two authors. In particular, we show the existence and positivity
of the F -signature for any strongly F -regular pair. In one application, we answer an open
question of I. Aberbach and F. Enescu by showing that the F -splitting ratio of an arbitrary
F -pure local ring is strictly positive. Furthermore, we derive effective methods for computing
the F -signature and the F -splitting ratio in the spirit of the work of R. Fedder.

1. Introduction
When working with rings or schemes in prime characteristic p > 0, sections of the Frobenius endomorphism are called F -splittings. When such a splitting exists the various iterates
of Frobenius must split as well, and limiting constructions often allow one to conclude numerous desirable algebraic and geometric properties [HR74, BK05]. In this article, we investigate
the following natural question concerning the local asymptotic behavior of the number of
splittings of large iterates of Frobenius.
Question 1.1 (cf. [AE05, Question 4.9]). If R is a local ring of equal characteristic p > 0,
how many splittings does the e-iterated Frobenius map F e : R −
→ R have for e ≫ 0?
We assume for simplicity in the introduction that R is a complete local domain with perfect
e
residue field. In this case, the module-finite inclusion R ⊆ R1/p into the corresponding ring
of pe -th roots of elements of R is naturally identified with the e-iterated Frobenius. One
obtains a precise measure of the number of distinct splittings of F e : R −
→ R by writing
⊕ae
1/pe
= R
R
⊕ Me as R-modules where Me has no free direct summands. The number
ae is independent of the corresponding direct sum decomposition and is called the e-th
F -splitting number of R.
If d equals the dimension of R, a well-known result of E. Kunz gives that ae ≤ ped for all
e > 0 with equality if and only if R is regular. For arbitrary R, this observation motivated
C. Huneke and G. Leuschke [HL02] (cf. [SVdB97]) to consider the F -signature of R
ae
s(R) = lim ed
e−
→∞ p
which asymptotically compares the F -splitting numbers of R to those of a regular ring of the
same dimension. This limit, which has only recently been shown to exist in full generality by
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 13A35, 13D40, 14B05, 13H10.
Key words and phrases. F -signature, Cartier algebra, F -pure, F -regular, splitting prime, F -splitting ratio.
The first author was partially supported by a Heisenberg Fellowship and the SFB/TRR45.
The second author was partially supported by an NSF postdoctoral fellowship and the NSF grant DMS
#1064485.
The third author was partially supported by the NSF postdoctoral fellowship DMS #1004344.
1

the third author [Tuc], detects the severity of the singularities of R. In particular, I. Aberbach
and G. Leuschke [AL03] have shown that s(R) > 0 if and only if R is strongly F -regular.
In other words, if R is strongly F -regular, the answer to Question 1.1 above is that the F splitting numbers ae are (up to a positive constant) on the order of ped for e ≫ 0. However,
if R is not strongly F -regular, then s(R) = 0 and so the F -splitting numbers ae grow at a
rate strictly less than ped for e ≫ 0.
The aim of this article is to vastly generalize the theory of F -signature to so-called pairs.
For example, we shall give definitions for the F -signature of the ideal pairs (R, at ) used in
[HY03] as well as the divisor pairs from [HW02] that appear throughout birational algebraic
geometry. While interesting in its own right, this theory also has a number of powerful applications in the classical setting. In particular, it can be used to give an answer to Question 1.1
in full generality.
In [AE05], I. Aberbach and F. Enescu approached Question 1.1 through the use of a
naturally defined prime ideal P called the F -splitting prime of R. In particular, they showed
that the growth rate of the F -splitting numbers ae is bounded above by pe dim(R/P ) , and they
further proposed to study the limit (shown to exist in [Tuc])
ae
rF (R) = lim e dim(R/P )
e−
→∞ p
called the F -splitting ratio of R. One of the main applications of F -signature of pairs contained herein is the following result.
Corollary 4.3. If R is F -pure (i.e. has an F -splitting), then rF (R) > 0 is strictly positive.
This result gives a complete answer to Question 1.1, as we have that the F -splitting
numbers are either all zero or are (up to a positive constant) on the order of pe dim(R/P )
for e ≫ 0 where P is the F -splitting prime of R. We remark that our result was certainly
anticipated by I. Aberbach and F. Enescu (cf. [AE05, Question 4.9] and Remark 4.6 below).
Let us briefly sketch the proof of the above result as a lead in to further discussion of
F -signature of pairs. In the notation above, one first observes that R/P is strongly F -regular.
Thus, the F -splitting numbers of R/P grow like pe dim(R/P ) for e ≫ 0, suggesting a change
e
of setting to R/P . Indeed, every R-linear map R1/p −
→ R induces an R/P -linear map
e
1/p
(R/P )
−
→ R/P , so that the F -splittings of R induce F -splittings of R/P . However, the
difficulty lies in that a large number of F -splittings of R/P do not arise in this manner (see
Section 4.3.2 for an explicit example). Rather, one needs a way to enumerate only certain
kinds of F -splittings, which is precisely the idea of F -signature of pairs.
e
More generally, one starts with specified collections De of R-linear maps R1/p −
→ R for
each e ≥ 0. Following [Sch11, Bli09], we require that these collections De can be put together
to form a non-commutative N-graded ring D under function composition (after taking the
necessary p-th roots), called a Cartier subalgebra on R. In particular, this ensures that there
is a well-defined notion of F -regularity for the pair (R, D). In Section 3, roughly speaking,
we define the F -splitting number aD
e to be the maximal number of F -splittings contained in
De . The fundamental results of this article, summarized below, completely characterize the
asymptotic growth of the numbers aD
e for e ≫ 0 and readily imply Corollary 4.3 above.
Theorem 1. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on a d-dimensional equal characteristic
p > 0 complete local domain R with perfect residue field. If ΓD = { e | aD
e 6= 0 }, then the
2

limit

aD
e
lim
e∈ΓD −
→∞ ped
exists (Theorem 3.11) and is called the F -signature of (R, D). Furthermore, s(R, D) > 0 is
positive if and only if (R, D) is F -regular (Theorem 3.18).
s(R, D) =

The existence statement in the theorem above generalizes [Tuc] using related methods;
however, it is quite distinct in that we make no appeal to Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity. The
subsequent positivity statement is a substantial generalization of the main result of [AL03].
Section 4 is devoted to various applications and examples of the theory of F -signature of
pairs. In addition to the F -splitting ratio mentioned above, we also describe effective Feddertype methods for computing F -signature. This is done via the formalism of F -graded systems
following [Bli09]. As before, the crucial point is that Cartier subalgebras facilitate changing
settings from one ring to another. In particular, when R is presented as the quotient of a
regular local ring S, we have the ability to translate difficult questions on R to computable
statements on S (see Theorem 4.13). As an immediate consequence one obtains the following, which recovers and extends a result of Aberbach and Enescu [AE05, Discussion after
Theorem 4.2] (see also [EY11, Proposition 3.1]).
Theorem 2. Let S be an n-dimensional complete regular local ring of equal characteristic
p > 0 with maximal ideal n and perfect residue field.
(i) (Corollary 4.14) [AE05, Discussion after Theorem 4.2] If R = S/J for some non-zero
ideal J and d = dim(R), then


1
e
e
s(R) = lim ed ℓS S n[p ] : (J [p ] : J) .
e−
→∞ p

(ii) (Corollary 4.15) If a is a non-zero ideal and t ∈ R>0 , then all ideals of S are at -tightly
closed (see [HY03]) if and only if


1
e
e
s(S, at ) = lim ne S n[p ] : a⌈t(p −1)⌉ > 0 .
e−
→∞ p

Finally, we conclude this article by computing F -signature in a number of interesting
examples. In particular, we exhibit an F -pure local ring R with F -splitting prime P such
that rF (R) 6= s(R/P ) (see Sections 4.3.2 and 4.3.3). We also give a toric formula for the
F -signature of monomial ideal pairs (see Section 4.3.4).
Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Craig Huneke for valuable and inspiring
conversations, as well as Florian Enescu for his comments on a previous draft of this article.
We would also like to thank the referee for numerous helpful comments. Finally, the authors
worked on this paper while visiting the Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz during the
summers of 2010 and 2011. These visits were funded by the SFB/TRR45 Periods, moduli,
and the arithmetic of algebraic varieties.
2. Preliminaries
Unless explicitly stated otherwise, all rings throughout this paper are assumed to be
commutative with a unit, Noetherian, and to have prime characteristic p > 0. A local ring
is denoted by the tuple (R, m) where m is the unique maximal ideal of the ring R, and if
3

needed we denote by k = R/m is the corresponding residue field. The Frobenius or p-th
power endomorphism F : R −
→ R is defined by r 7→ r p for all r ∈ R. Similarly, for e ∈ N, we
e
have F e : R −
→ R given by r 7→ r p .
Let M be an R-module. For any e ∈ N, viewing M as an R-module via restriction of scalars
for F e , yields an R-module we denote by F∗e M. Thus, F∗e M agrees with M as an Abelian
group, and if m ∈ M we set F∗e m to be the corresponding element of F∗e M. Furthermore,
e
for r ∈ R it follows that r(F∗e m) = F∗e (r p m). Note that F∗e R inherits the structure of a ring
abstractly isomorphic to R, and F∗e M is naturally an F∗e R-module for any R-module M. It
is critical to observe that F∗e is in fact a functor, and so maps between modules can also be
pushed forward.
We have that F∗e R is an R-algebra via the homomorphism of R-modules F e : R −
→ F∗e R
e pe
given by r 7→ F∗ r for r ∈ R, which is but another perspective on the e-th iterate of
e
Frobenius. In case R is reduced, we may identify F∗e R with the R-module R1/p of pe -th
e
roots of R by associating F∗e r and r 1/p ; the e-iterated Frobenius homomorphism now takes
e
on the guise of the natural inclusion R ⊆ R1/p . Each point of view has certain advantages,
and we will switch between them as the situation warrants throughout.
Definition 2.1. Suppose (R, m) is a local ring of characteristic p > 0. We say R is F -finite if
F∗ R is finitely generated as an R-module, from which it follows that F∗e R is finitely generated
for all e ∈ N. In this case, we set α(R) = logp [k : k p ].
Note that any local ring which is essentially of finite type over a perfect field is F -finite, as
well as a complete local ring with perfect (or even F -finite) residue field. We shall primarily
restrict our attention to F -finite rings throughout this article.
Denote by ℓR (M) the length of a finitely generated Artinian R-module M. If R is F -finite
and e ∈ N, it is easy to see that
ℓF∗e R (F∗e M) = ℓR (M)

ℓR (F∗e M) = peα(R) ℓR (M)
e

by using that F∗e ( ) is an exact functor and [(F∗e k ≃ k 1/p ) : k] = peα(R) . If I = hx1 , . . . , xt i
e
e
e
e
is an ideal in R, then the corresponding ideal I [p ] = hxp1 , . . . , xpt i satisfies IF∗e R = F∗e (I [p ] )
and is independent of the choice of generators of I. In particular, if I is m-primary, we have
e 
e
ℓR ((R/I) ⊗R F∗e R) = ℓR F∗e R/I [p ] = peα(R) ℓR (R/I [p ] ) .

The following results of Kunz, also treated in the appendix to [Mat80], show how the
Frobenius endomorphism can be used to detect regularity.
Theorem 2.2. [Kun69, Kun76] Let (R, m) be an F -finite Noetherian local ring of dimension
d and characteristic p > 0. Then R is excellent and α(RP ) = α(RQ ) + dim(RQ /P RQ ) for
any two prime ideals P ⊆ Q of R. Furthermore, R is regular if and only if F∗e R is a free
R-module of rank pe(d+α(R)) for some e ∈ Z>0 , in which case F∗e R is a free R-module of rank
pe(d+α(R)) for all e ∈ Z>0 .
More generally, as suggested by Theorem 2.2 above, one expects the R-module structure
of F∗e R to reflect upon the singularities of R. This observation is an essential part of the
underlying motivation for the theory developed in this article.
2.1. The Cartier algebra. In this section, we recall a general framework for the investigation of singularities in positive characteristic commutative algebra. It is in the context of
this framework that we proceed to develop a theory of F -signature of pairs.
4

Definition 2.3. Suppose R is an F -finite ring with prime characteristic p > 0. A p−e -linear
e
map between R-modules M and N is an additive map ϕ : M −
→ N such that ϕ(r p x) = rϕ(x)
for all x ∈ M and r ∈ R. Equivalently, it is simply an R-linear map F∗e M → N, so that the
set of p−e -linear maps from M to N is given by HomR (F∗e M, N). If R is reduced and M is
e
a submodule of the total quotient ring of R, this set is also identified with HomR (M 1/p , N)
e
e
via the R-module isomorphism M 1/p −
→ F∗e M mapping a1/p 7→ F∗e a.
For e ∈ Z≥0 , let CeR = HomR (F∗e R, R) denote the set of all p−e -linear maps. Consider now
the Abelian group
M
M
CR =
CeR =
HomR (F∗e R, R)
e≥0

e≥0

C0R

where we have
= HomR (R, R) = R. In fact, C R carries the structure of a non-commutative
N-graded ring where the multiplication of homogenous elements is given by composition of
additive maps. In the above notation this means that, if ϕ1 ∈ CeR1 and ϕ2 ∈ CeR2 are homogeneous elements, then the multiplication in C R is defined by

ϕ1 · ϕ2 := (ϕ1 ◦ F∗e1 ϕ2 ) : F∗(e1 +e2 ) R −
→ R ∈ C(eR1 +e2 ) .
It is immediately verified that ϕ1 · ϕ2 indeed corresponds to the composition ϕ1 ◦ ϕ2 : R −
→R
if both are viewed as additive maps on R. In particular, the n-fold product of ϕ ∈ CeR is
R
and corresponds simply to the n-fold composition of the additive map
denoted by ϕn ∈ Cne
ϕ with itself. The ring C R is called either the total ring of p−e -linear maps on R or simply
the (total) Cartier algebra on R.
From the fact that there is a natural ring inclusion R = C0R ֒−
→ C R one should not be
tempted to conclude that C R is an R-algebra in the classical sense: It is only an Fp -algebra
since R is generally not central in C R . This remark also applies to the following definition.

Definition 2.4. [Sch11] A ring of p−e -linear maps on an F -finite ring R or simply a Cartier
subalgebra on R is a graded Fp -subalgebra D = ⊕e≥0 De of C R satisfying D0 = C0 =
HomR (R, R) = R and De 6= 0 for some e ∈ Z>0 .
In the context of this paper, this theory was introduced in a paper of the second author,
[Sch11]. Further refinements and generalizations to arbitrary modules were developed in a
paper of the first author [Bli09]. This theory also has roots in [LS01] where the Matlis dual
of the complete Cartier algebra was studied. For a brief survey of these rings, see [ST12,
Section 7].
The advantage of using the formalism of algebras of p−e -linear maps is that they allow
one to treat uniformly several common settings, such as:
(a) The study of pairs (R, ∆) where R is normal and ∆ is an effective R-divisor on Spec R.
(b) The study of pairs (R, at ) where t ∈ R≥0 and a ⊆ R is an ideal not contained in the
union of the minimal primes of R.
(c) Triples (R, ∆, at ) combining the pairs in (a) and (b) above.
See Section 4.3.1 for the precise construction of the Cartier subalgebras appropriate for each
of the above variants.
Example 2.5. Let R be an F -finite ring and ϕ ∈ CeR = HomR (F∗e R, R) a non-zero p−e -linear
map. The Cartier subalgebra generated by C0R = R and ϕ ∈ CeR , i.e. the smallest subring
5

e

of C R containing both R and ϕ, will be denoted by C ϕ . Since (r · ϕ)( ) = ϕ(F∗e r p ·
is easy to see
Ceϕ = { ϕ(F∗e r · ) | r ∈ R }

), it

so that ϕ generates Ceϕ as an F∗e R-module.
Example 2.6. [Sch11, Remark 4.4] (cf. [Sch09, Corollary 3.9] and [LS01]) If R is a Gorenstein local ring with canonical module ωR ≃ R, then we have that HomR (F∗e R, R) ≃
HomR (F∗e R, ωR ) ≃ F∗e ωR ≃ F∗e R can be generated as an F∗e R-module by a single homomorphism Φ ∈ C1R (in fact, one may take Φ to be the canonical dual of Frobenius). Furthermore, in this case, one can show C Φ = C R . While here the (total) Cartier algebra is
finitely generated (over C0R = R), in general C R need not be finitely generated (e.g. see
[Kat10, MBZ11]).
2.2. F -singularities.
Definition 2.7. [HR76, HH89, Sch11] Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite
local ring R.
(a) We say that (R, D) is (sharply) F -pure if there is a surjective homomorphism ϕ ∈ De
for some e ∈ Z>0 . The ring R is called F -pure when (R, C R ) is F -pure.
(b) We say that (R, D) is (strongly) F -regular if it satisfies the following property: for all
c ∈ R not contained in any minimal prime, there exists an e ∈ N and ϕ ∈ De such
that ϕ(F∗e c) = 1. The ring R is called (strongly) F -regular when (R, C R ) is F -regular.
Remark 2.8. The reader is hereby warned that, throughout this article, our terminology
differs in some instances from that which has been used historically. Explicitly, what we call
F -pure has historically been called sharply F -pure and what we call F -regular has historically
been called strongly F -regular. Therefore, by adding the qualifiers sharply and strongly to
F -pure and F -regular, respectively, this discrepancy (which, in any event, does not occur in
a number of cases) is easily rectified. Likewise, whenever the test ideal appears in this paper,
we really mean the big test ideal, which is also known as the non-finitistic test ideal.
Proposition 2.9. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local ring R.
(a) If (R, D) is F -pure (respectively, F -regular) and D ⊆ D ′ for another Cartier subalgebra D ′ , then (R, D ′ ) is also F -pure (respectively, F -regular).
(b) (R, D) is F -pure (respectively, F -regular) if and only if there exists some e ∈ Z>0
and 0 6= ϕ ∈ De such that (R, ϕ) is F -pure (respectively, F -regular).
(c) If (R, D) is F -pure, then R is reduced and weakly normal.
(d) If (R, D) is F -regular, then R is a Cohen-Macaulay normal domain.
Proof. Statement (a) follows immediately from the definitions above. In particular, since D ⊆
C R , then (R, D) being F -pure or F -regular implies the same property for R, respectively.
As a result, (c) and (d) follow from well-known results in the theory of tight closure [Hun96].
For (b), see [SS10, Sch11].

Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite ring R. Viewing the homogenous elements
of D as additive maps on R endows R with the structure of a D-module. Since D0 =
HomR (R, R) = R, every D-submodule of R is necessarily also an R-submodule.
6

Definition 2.10. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite ring R. An ideal J ⊆ R
is said to be D-compatible if it is a D-submodule of R, so that R/J inherits the structure
of a D-module from R. Equivalently, for all e ∈ Z≥0 and ϕ ∈ De , we have that ϕ(F∗e J) ⊆ J
and thus ϕ induces a p−e -linear map ϕJ on R/J fitting into the commutative diagram
F∗e R

ϕ

//



F∗e R/J

R


ϕJ

//

R/J .

In particular, setting (DJ )e = { ϕJ | ϕ ∈ De } for all e ∈ Z≥0 , there is an induced Cartier
subalgebra DJ = ⊕e≥0 (DJ )e on R/J.
Theorem 2.11. [HH90][Sch11, Proposition 3.23] For any Cartier subalgebra D on an F -finite
local domain R, there is a unique smallest non-zero D-compatible ideal τ (R, D). The ideal
τ (R, D) is called the (big) test ideal of (R, D). Furthermore, τ (R, D) = R if and only if
(R, D) is (strongly) F -regular.
Proof. We have omitted a proof as we will not make use of the techniques in what follows,
and refer the reader to the references listed above. The key point is to show there is a single
non-zero element b ∈ R which is contained in every D-compatible ideal; the argument is
essentially the same as that which shows test elements exist in F -finite reduced rings. See
[ST12] for a recent survey of test ideals from the point of view taken in this article.

Proposition 2.12. [AE05, Sch10a] Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local
ring (R, m, k). The ideal
PD = { r ∈ R | ϕ(F∗e r) ∈ m for all e > 0 and all ϕ ∈ De }
is a proper ideal if and only if (R, D) is F -pure, in which case it is a prime ideal and the
largest proper D-compatible ideal. The ideal PD is called the F -splitting prime of (R, D).
Proof. It is clear that (R, D) is F -pure if and only if PD is a proper ideal. Assuming this is
the case, let us show that PD is prime. If c1 , c2 ∈ R \ PD , then for i = 1, 2 there exists ei > 0
and ϕi ∈ Dei with ϕi (F∗ei ci ) = 1. But then ψ ∈ De1 +e2 given by
ψ( ) = (ϕ1 · ϕ2 )(F∗e1 +e2 c1p

e2 −1

·

)

satisfies ψ(F∗e1 +e2 (c1 c2 )) = 1. Thus, c1 c2 ∈ R \ PD , and we have that PD is prime. To see that
PD is D-compatible, suppose we have x ∈ PD and ϕ ∈ De for some e ∈ Z>0 . For all e′ ∈ Z>0
′
′
and ϕ′ ∈ De′ , we must have (ϕ′ · ϕ)(F∗e+e x) = ϕ′ F∗e (ϕ(F∗e x) ∈ m since ϕ′ · ϕ ∈ De+e′ as D
is a Cartier subalgebra of C R . Thus, it follows that ϕ(F∗e x) ∈ PD and so PD is D-compatible.
Since any proper D-compatible ideal of R is automatically contained in PD , we see that PD
is in fact the largest proper D-compatible ideal (cf. [Sch10a]).

Lemma 2.13 (cf. [Sch09, Main Theorem, part (v)]). Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on
an F -finite local ring (R, m, k). If J ⊆ R is a D-compatible ideal and DJ is the induced
Cartier subalgebra on R/J as in Definition 2.10, then the operation
I 7→ I/J
induces a bijection between the D-compatible ideals I of R containing J and the DJ -compatible
ideals of R/J.
7

In particular, PD /J = PDJ . Therefore, (R/J, DJ ) is F -regular if and only if J is the
F -splitting prime.
Proof. Fix ϕ ∈ De with induced ϕJ ∈ (DJ )e . The result is immediate after checking that
ϕJ (F∗e (I/J)) ⊆ I/J if and only if ϕ(F∗e I) ⊆ I. For the second statement, use the maximality
of PD from Proposition 2.12. The last statement follows from the final assertion in Theorem
2.11.

Remark 2.14. The test ideal is the positive characteristic analog of the multiplier ideal from
higher dimensional algebraic geometry. Likewise, the subscheme defined by the splitting
prime is analogous to the minimal LC-center. For additional discussion, see [ST12].
3. F -signature
The F -signature of a local ring R is a numerical invariant which, roughly speaking, asymptotically compares the number of splittings of Frobenius on R to the number of splittings
one expects from a regular local ring with the same dimension. Formally introduced by
C. Huneke and G. Leuschke in [HL02] (cf. [SVdB97]) the existence of the F -signature was
only recently shown in full generality by the third author in [Tuc]. In the subsequent sections,
we present a vast generalization of this invariant which incorporates the additional data of
a Cartier subalgebra D on R. Following the initial definitions, we present two deep results
concerning the existence (Theorem 3.11) and positivity (Theorem 3.18) of the F -signature
in this context.
3.1. F -splitting numbers.
Definition 3.1. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra
L on an F -finite local ring R and e ∈ Z>0 .
e
Within a fixed direct sum decomposition F∗ R ≃ i Mi as an R-module, the summand Mj is
said to be a D-summand if Mj ≃ R and the associated (R-linear) projection homomorphism
→ Mj ≃ R belongs to De . Since D0 = HomR (R, R) = R, this characterization is
F∗e R −
independent of the chosen isomorphism Mj ≃ R.
The e-th F -splitting number of (R, D) is the maximal number aD
e of D-summands appearing in the various direct sum decompositions of F∗e R as an R-module.
Remark 3.2. Any direct sum decomposition F∗e R ≃ R⊕a ⊕ M where the factors R⊕a of
F∗e R are D-summands may be further refined to ensure that M has no D-summands, at
which point it will follow from Proposition 3.5 below that a = aD
e . However, the number of
D-summands in arbitrary direct sum decompositions of F∗e R into indecomposable R-modules
need not equal aD
e in general.
Our next goal is to build towards several alternate characterizations of the F -splitting
numbers in Proposition 3.5.
Definition 3.3. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local ring R with maximal
ideal m. For e ∈ Z>0 , we consider an ideal
IeD = { r ∈ R | ϕ(F∗e r) ∈ m for all ϕ ∈ De }
and a submodule of De
Dens = { ϕ ∈ De | ϕ is not surjective, i.e. ϕ(F∗e R) ⊆ m } .
8

In other words, IeD can be described as those elements of R whose pe -th roots cannot be made
to generate a D-summand of F∗e R. Similarly, Dens is the set of maps in De which cannot serve
as a projection homomorphism onto a D-summand of F∗e R.
Before proceeding, let us first record some elementary properties of the ideals IeD .
Lemma 3.4. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local ring (R, m). If ϕ ∈ De
e′
D
D
for some e ∈ Z>0 , then for all e′ ∈ Z>0 we have m[p ] ⊆ IeD′ and ϕ(F∗e Ie+e
′ ) ⊆ Ie′ . In
D
D
particular, if ϕ is surjective then Ie+e
′ ⊆ Ie ′ .
′

e′

′

Proof. If x ∈ m and ϕ′ ∈ De′ for some e′ ∈ Z>0 , we have ϕ′ (F∗e xp ) = ϕ′ (x · F∗e 1) =
′
e′
D
xϕ′ (F∗e 1) ∈ m. Thus, we conclude m[p ] ⊆ IeD′ . If now y ∈ Ie+e
′ , we must have


′
′
(ϕ′ · ϕ)(F∗e+e y) = ϕ′ F∗e (ϕ(F∗e y)) ∈ m

D
′
by the definition of Ie+e
′ since ϕ · ϕ ∈ De+e′ as D is closed under multiplication inside CR . It
e D
D
′
e+e′
follows that ϕ(F
y) =
∗ Ie+e′ ) ⊆ Ie′ . If additionally ϕ is surjective, we again have (ϕ · ϕ )(F∗
e
′
e′
′
e′
D
D
ϕ F∗ ϕ (F∗ y) ⊆ m and so necessarily ϕ (F∗ y) ∈ m. Therefore y ∈ Ie′ and so Ie+e′ ⊆ IeD′
as desired.


Proposition 3.5. If D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local ring (R, m), then for all
e ∈ Z>0 we have
ns
e
D
eα(R)
(a)
aD
ℓR (R/IeD ) .
e = ℓR (De /De ) = ℓR (F∗ (R/Ie )) = p
Furthermore, the F -splitting number aD
e can alternatively be described as either
(b) the maximal possible number of direct summands isomorphic to R in any direct sum
decomposition of CeR as an R-module which are contained inside De , or
(c) the maximal possible number of direct summands isomorphic to R in any direct
sum decomposition of De as an R-module whose associated projection homomorphism
De −
→ R can be extended to a homomorphism CeR −
→ R.
ns
Roughly speaking, we interpret the equality aD
e = ℓR (De /De ) above to say that the e-th
splitting number of (R, D) counts the number of splittings of the e-th iterate of Frobenius
that are contained in D. In a sense, this gives intuition into why one would expect a Cartier
subalgebra D with smaller splitting numbers to correspond to more severe singularities. The
proof of Proposition 3.5 is immediate from the following more general lemma.

Lemma 3.6. Let (R, m) be a local ring and M a finitely generated reflexive R-module, and
suppose D ⊂ HomR (M, R) is an R-submodule. Then we have
ℓR (M/hm ∈ M | ϕ(m) ∈ m for all ϕ ∈ Di) = ℓR (D/hϕ ∈ D | ϕ(M) ⊆ mi) .
Furthermore, this quantity can be expressed in terms of direct sum decompositions as follows:
(a) The maximal number of direct summands of M isomorphic to R whose associated
projection homomorphisms M −
→ R belong to D.
(b) The maximal number of direct summands of HomR (M, R) isomorphic to R which are
contained in D.
(c) The maximal number of direct summands of D isomorphic to R whose associated
projection homomorphisms D −
→ R extend to a homomorphism HomR (M, R) −
→ R.
9

Proof. Let M = R⊕a ⊕ N be any direct sum decomposition which is maximal with respect to having all of the corresponding projections ϕ1 , . . . , ϕa ∈ HomR (M, R) belong to
D. In other words, N cannot be further decomposed as N = R ⊕ N ′ in such a way
that the additional projection M −
→ R belongs to D. There is a dual direct sum de⊕a
composition HomR (M, R) = R ⊕ HomR (N, R) where ϕ1 , . . . , ϕa form a free basis for
R⊕a ⊆ HomR (M, R). Let e1 , . . . , ea ∈ R be the corresponding dual free basis for R⊕a ⊆ M
in the initial direct sum decomposition of M. Since ϕ1 , . . . , ϕa ∈ D, we also have an induced
direct sum decomposition D = R⊕a ⊕ (HomR (N, R) ∩ D).
If ϕ ∈ D, we claim ϕ(N) ⊆ P
m. Indeed, supposing otherwise there exists n ∈ N with
ϕ(n) = 1. Replacing ϕ by ϕ − ai=1 ϕ(ei )ϕi , we may assume ϕ ∈ HomR (N, R) which we
view as a subset of HomR (M, R) via the projection M = R⊕a ⊕ N −
→ N. Thus, the inclusion
Rn ⊆ N is split and induces a decomposition N = R ⊕ N ′ in such a way that the projection
homomorphism M −
→ R is ϕ itself. Since ϕ ∈ D, this is a contradiction and we conclude
ϕ(N) ⊆ m for all ϕ ∈ D.
Thus, with respect to the direct sum decompositions of M and D above, we have
hm ∈ M | ϕ(m) ∈ m for all ϕ ∈ Di = m⊕a ⊕ N ⊆ R⊕a ⊕ N = M
hϕ ∈ D | ϕ(M) ⊆ mi = m⊕a ⊕ (HomR (N, R) ∩ D) ⊆ R⊕a ⊕ (HomR (N, R) ∩ D) = D .
In particular, both quotients are isomorphic to k ⊕a so that we have
ℓR (M/hm ∈ M | ϕ(m) ∈ m for all ϕ ∈ Di) = ℓR (D/hϕ ∈ D | ϕ(M) ⊆ mi) = a .
This shows the desired equality, as well as the equivalence with (a).
′
To show equivalence with (b), let HomR (M, R) = R⊕a ⊕D ′ be a direct sum decomposition
′
such that R⊕a ⊆ D and D ′ has no direct summand which is isomorphic to R and contained in
′
D. If ϕ′1 , . . . , ϕ′a′ form a free basis for R⊕a ⊆ D ⊆ HomR (M, R), then applying HomR ( , R)
′
and using that M is reflexive gives a direct sum decomposition M = R⊕a ⊕ HomR (D ′ , R)
′
where the projection homomorphisms onto the components of R⊕a are ϕ′1 , . . . , ϕ′a′ and
HomR (D ′ , R) has no direct summand isomorphic to R inducing a projection map M −
→R
′
inside of D. Thus, we must have a = a as desired. The equivalence of (b) and (c) is straightforward.

Corollary 3.7. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local ring (R, m) with madic completion R̂. Let D̂ denote the induced Cartier subalgebra on R̂, i.e. D̂e is the image
D̂
of De under the natural map CeR −
→ R̂ ⊗R CeR = CeR̂ for all e ∈ Z>0 . Then aD
e = ae .
e

Proof. Since D̂e is the image of De , it follows that IeD̂ ∩ R = IeD . As m[p ] ⊆ IeD , we conclude
IeD R̂ = IeD̂ and so the statement follows from Proposition 3.5 (a).

3.2. Existence.
Definition 3.8. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local ring (R, m). The
semigroup of D is the set ΓD = { e ∈ Z≥0 | aD
e 6= 0 }, and the semigroup index of D is
nD = gcd(ΓD ).
Lemma 3.9. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local ring (R, m). Then ΓD is
a subsemigroup of (Z≥0 , +), and nD = #(Z/ZΓD ) is the index in Z of the subgroup generated
by ΓD . Furthermore, if (R, D) is F -regular, then nD = gcd({ e ∈ Z≥0 | De 6= 0 }).
10

Proof. Since D is closed under multiplication and the composition of surjective maps is
surjective, we have that ΓD is a subsemigroup of (Z≥0 , +) and thus also nD = #(Z/ZΓD ).
For the last statement, assume now that (R, D) is F -regular. It suffices to show that nD
divides e whenever De 6= 0. Let 0 6= ψ ∈ De with ψ(F∗e a) = b 6= 0 for some a, b ∈ R. Using
′
F -regularity, there is a ϕ ∈ De′ with ϕ(F∗e b) = 1 for some e′ > 0. In particular, aD
e′ 6= 0 so
′
e+e′
D
that nD divides e . Since (ϕ · ψ)(F∗ a) = 1 it follows that ae+e′ 6= 0 and hence nD divides
e + e′ as well. It now follows that nD divides e as required.

Remark 3.10. If D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local domain (R, m), then { e ∈
Z≥0 | De 6= 0 } is an alternative semigroup naturally associated to D. However, this semigroup is not preserved when passing to quotients by D-compatible ideals (cf. Lemma 4.1).
Furthermore, note that it is straightforward to construct examples where (R, D) is F -pure
but nD 6= gcd({ e ∈ Z≥0 | De 6= 0 }).
Theorem 3.11. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on a d-dimensional F -finite local ring
(R, m). Then the limit
s(R, D) =

lim

e∈ΓD −
→∞

aD
e
pe(d+α(R))

aD
mnD

= lim mn (d+α(R))
m−
→∞ p D

exists and is called the F -signature of (R, D).
e
e(d+α(R))
Remark 3.12. Note that aD
for all e > 0, so that s(R, D) ≤ 1. See
e ≤ rank(F∗ R) = p
also [HL02, Corollary 16] and [Yao06, Theorem 3.1].

The proof of Theorem 3.11 is based on a series of lemmas, the first of which also features
prominently in subsequent sections.
Lemma 3.13. Suppose (R, m) is a d-dimensional F -finite local domain and ϕ ∈ Cn =
n
HomR (R1/p , R) is a non-zero p−n -linear map for some n ∈ Z>0 .
n

n(d+α(R))

(a) There exists 0 6= h ∈ R and an inclusion of R-modules µ : R1/p −
→ R⊕p
such
n(d+α(R))
that cokernel(µ) is annihilated by h and each of the p
(R-linear) component
n
n
functions R1/p −
→ R of µ are R1/p -multiples of ϕ.
(b) Given h and µ as in (a), there exists for each m ∈ Z>0 an inclusion of R-modules
nm
nm(d+α(R))
µm : R1/p −
→ R⊕p
determined by µ such that cokernel(µm ) is annihilated
nm
by g = h2 and each of the pnm(d+α(R)) (R-linear) component functions R1/p −
→R
nm
1/p
m
of µm are R
-multiples of ϕ .
nm
(c) For g as in (b), if ψ ∈ Cnm for some m ∈ Z>0 , then g · ψ is a R1/p -multiple of ϕm .
In other words, there exists r ∈ R with g · ψ( ) = ϕm (F∗nm r · ).
e

Proof. Let δ = d + α(R). The field of fractions K of R has the property that K 1/p is
free over K. Furthermore the map ϕ is a nonzero element, and hence a generator, of the
e
e
one-dimensional K 1/p -vector space HomK (K 1/p , K). This two properties hold also on an
n
sufficiently small open subset of Spec R, hence we can find 0 6= c ∈ R such that (R1/p )c =
n
n
n
(Rc )1/p is a free Rc -module and ϕc generates HomRc ((Rc )1/p , Rc ) as an (Rc )1/p -module.
In particular, for any ψ ∈ Cn , there is a sufficiently large Nψ (depending on ψ) such that
n
n
c(Nψ ) · ψ is an R1/p -multiple of ϕ. Since R1/p is a torsion-free R-module of rank pnδ , one can
n
nδ
further assume that we have an inclusion of R-modules ν : R1/p −
→ R⊕p which becomes
11

an isomorphism after localizing at c. Thus, setting
ν

n

µ : R1/p −−→ R⊕p

nδ

·cM

−−−→ R⊕p

nδ

for M ≫ 0, we may assume that each of the pnδ (R-linear) component functions R1/pn −
→R
1/pn
N
of µ are R
-multiples of ϕ and also that cokernel(µ) is annihilated by h = c for some
N ≫ 0. This gives (a).
mn
nmδ
Let us now show how to iterate µ to get an inclusion µm : R1/p −
→ R⊕p
for all m ∈ Z>0
2N
where cokernel(µm ) is annihilated by g = c and each of the component functions of µm
nm
are R1/p -multiples of ϕm . We begin by setting µ1 := µ and recursively define µm+1 :=
nδ
1/pn
(µ⊕p ) ◦ (µm ), so that we have
R

1/p(m+1)n

1/pn

µm

//

n

(R1/p )⊕p

µ⊕p

nmδ

nδ

//

22 R

⊕pn(m+1)δ

.

µm+1

Arguing inductively, we may assume cokernel(µm ) is killed by c2N and the component funcmn
1/pn
tions of µm are all R1/p -multiples of ϕm . Thus, we have that cokernel(µm ) is killed by
n
n
1/pn
c2N/p (µm is R1/p -linear) and hence also by cN . As cokernel(µ) is annihilated by cN , it
follows immediately that cokernel(µm+1 ) is annihilated by c2N . Furthermore, the component
n(m+1)δ
functions of µm+1 are R1/p
-multiples of ϕm+1 as they are compositions of the compon
n
1/p
nent functions of µm (which are multiples of (ϕm )1/p ) with the component functions of µ.
This gives (b).
nm
Finally, suppose now that ψ ∈ HomR (R1/p , R) for some m > 0. Then g · ψ must factor
through µm as g annihilates cokernel(µm ), and hence g·ψ can be written as an R-linear combinm
nation of the component functions of µm . In particular, we have that g ·ψ is a R1/p -multiple
nm
of ϕm for all ψ ∈ HomR (R1/p , R).

Lemma 3.14. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on a d-dimensional F -finite local domain
aD
e′
(R, m). Set δ = d + α(R) and sD
=
= pe1′ d ℓR (R/IeD′ ) for all e′ ∈ Z>0 . If 0 6= ϕ ∈ De for
′
e
pe′ δ
some e ∈ Z>0 , then there exists a positive constant Cϕ ∈ Z>0 (depending only on ϕ) such
that
D
sD
e′ ≤ se′ +be +

Cϕ
pe ′

for all e′ ∈ Z>0 and all b ∈ Z>0 .
eδ

Proof. By Lemma 3.13 (a), there exists 0 6= h ∈ R and an inclusion µ : F∗e R −
→ R⊕p
of R-modules where h annihilates cokernel(µ) and the component functions of µ are each
F∗e R-multiples of ϕ. In particular, each of these component functions is in De , and it follows
eδ
from Lemma 3.4 that µ(F∗e Ie′ +e ) ⊆ Ie⊕p
for all e′ ∈ Z>0 . Thus, µ induces a homomorphism
′
eδ
of R-modules F∗e (R/IeD′ +e ) −
→ (R/IeD′ )⊕p whose cokernel is once again annihilated by h. In
′
e
e′
eδ
particular, since m[p ] ⊆ IeD′ , this cokernel is a quotient of (R/hh, m[p ] i)⊕p . Let D be a
12

e′

′

positive constant such that ℓR (R/hh, m[p ] i) ≤ Dpe (d−1) for all e′ ∈ Z>0 . It follows that


eδ
D
D ⊕peδ
p ℓR (R/Ie′ ) = ℓR (R/Ie′ )



e′
eδ
≤ ℓR F∗e (R/IeD′ +e ) + ℓR (R/hh, m[p ] i)⊕p
′

≤ peα(R) ℓR (R/IeD′ +e ) + Dpeδ+e (d−1)

′

and dividing through by peδ+e d gives
sD
e′ =

1
1
D
D
D
D
D
.
′ d ℓR (R/Ie′ ) ≤
′ +e)d ℓR (R/Ie′ +e ) +
′ = se′ +e +
e
(e
e
p
p
p
pe ′

Iterating this inequality now gives




D
D
D
1
1
1
D
D
D
D
se′ ≤ se′ +e + e′ ≤ se′ +2e + e′ 1 + e ≤ · · · ≤ se′ +be + e′ 1 + e + · · · + (b−1)e .
p
p
p
p
p
p
Thus, setting Cϕ = 2D, we have
D
D
sD
e′ ≤ se′ +be + e′
p

1
1 − p1e

!

=

sD
e′ +be

D
+ e′
p


1+

1
pe − 1

as desired.



≤ sD
e′ +be +

Cϕ
pe ′


Before proceeding with the proof of the existence theorem we now quickly show that the
F -signature is zero if (R, D) is not F -regular.
Lemma 3.15. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on a d-dimensional F -finite local ring
(R, m). If (R, D) is not F -regular, then there exists a positive constant C ∈ Z>0 such that
aD
e
pe(d+α(R))

=

1
C
ℓR (R/IeD ) ≤ e
ed
p
p

for all e ∈ Z>0 . In particular, s(R, D) = lim

aD
e

e∈ΓD

pe(d+α(R))

= 0.

Proof. As (R, D) is not F -regular, there is some c ∈ R not contained in any minimal prime
e
with c ∈ IeD for all e ∈ Z>0 . In particular, ℓR (R/IeD ) ≤ ℓR (R/hm[p ] , ci) ≤ Cpe(d−1) for some
positive constant C. Dividing through by ped gives the desired inequality, and it follows
aD
e
exists and equals zero.

immediately that the limit s(R, D) = lime∈ΓD pe(d+α(R))
aD

1
′
D
e′
Proof of Theorem 3.11. Set δ = d + α(R) and sD
e′ = pe′ δ = pe′ d ℓR (R/Ie′ ) for all e ∈ Z>0 .
By Lemma 3.15 above, we are free to assume that (R, D) is F -regular so that R is in fact
a domain. Let e1 , . . . , et ∈ Z be a set of generators for ΓD and M ≫ 0 so that mnD ∈ ΓD
for all m ≥ M. For each i = 1, . . . , t, choose a non-zero p−ei -linear map ϕi ∈ Dei . By
Cϕi
′
D
Lemma 3.14, there exists constants Cϕi ∈ Z>0 with sD
e′ ≤ se′ +bei + pe′ for all e , b ∈ Z>0 . Let
P
D = max{Cϕ1 , . . . , Cϕt } and set C = 2D. Consider now any e ∈ ΓD , and write e = ti=1 bi ei

13

for some bi ∈ Z≥0 . We have
D
pe ′

D
sD
e′ ≤ se′ +b1 e1 +

≤

sD
e′ +b1 e1 +b2 e2

..
.

D
+ e′
p

..
.

≤ sD
e′ +b1 e1 +···+bt et


1+

1
pb1 e1



..
.


1
1
D
+ e′ 1 + bi ei + · · · + b1 e1 +···+bt−1 et−1
p
p
p

≤

sD
e+e′ +

C
.
pe ′

In particular, if m1 ∈ Z>0 and m2 ∈ Z≥M , we have
D
sD
m1 nD ≤ s(m1 +m2 )nD +

C
pm1 nD

.

Considering m1 fixed and letting m2 −
→ ∞, we may conclude
C
D
sD
m1 n1 ≤ lim inf smnD + m1 nD
p
m−
→∞
for all m1 ∈ Z>0 . Now, letting m1 −
→ ∞ gives
D
lim sup sD
mnD ≤ lim inf smnD
m−
→∞
m−
→∞

from which it follows that the desired limit
lim

m−
→∞

sD
mnD

aD
mnD

aD
e

= s(R, D)
= lim mn (d+α(R)) = lim
e∈ΓD −
→∞ pe(d+α(R))
m−
→∞ p D

exists.



Remark 3.16. While Theorem 3.11 recovers the existence results of [Tuc] (using similar
methods), the above proof is notable in that it does not make use of Hilbert-Kunz multiplicity.
Nonetheless, a posteriori, the following result follows immediately from [Tuc, Corollary 3.7]
after establishing the existence of the F -signature limit.
Corollary 3.17. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on a d-dimensional F -finite local ring
(R, m). Then
1
s(R, D) = lim
eHK (IeD )
ed
e∈ΓD −
→∞ p
3.3. Positivity. The main result of this section, stated immediately below, is an important
justification of our generalized definition of F -signature.
Theorem 3.18. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on a d-dimensional F -finite local ring
(R, m). Then the F -signature of (R, D) is positive if and only if (R, D) is F -regular.
Remark 3.19. The above Theorem recovers and vastly generalizes the result of I. Aberbach
and G. Leuschke in [AL03] showing that the positivity of the F -signature of a ring is equivalent to F -regularity. Even in this classical setting, however, our proof is inherently quite
different. Nevertheless, many of the ideas to follow are rooted in the arguments they present.
14

If R is a domain, recall that R+ denotes the absolute integral closure of R, i.e. the integral
closure of R inside an algebraic closure of its fraction field. Before proceeding, we first state
a needed result of M. Hochster and C. Huneke, [HH91, Theorem 3.3], whose proof relies
heavily on the use of tight closure techniques. Our formulation varies from their precise
statement only in that we explicitly identify (by tracing through the original argument using
a fixed system of parameters x1 , . . . , xd ) the constant β which is merely stated to exist in
their presentation.
Theorem 3.20. [HH91, Theorem 3.3] Let (R, m) be a complete local domain and ν a Qvalued valuation on R+ non-negative on R (and, hence, on R+ ) and positive on m (and,
hence, on m+ ). Suppose that x1 , . . . , xd is a system of parameters and set β := mini ν(xi ).
Then there exists a positive integer r such that for every element u of R+ with ν(u) < β
there is an R-linear map Θ : R+ −
→ R where Θ(u) 6∈ mr .
The main ingredient in the proof of Theorem 3.18 is the following result, which should be
compared with [Abe01, Proposition 2.4].
Theorem 3.21. Suppose (R, m) is a d-dimensional F -finite complete local domain and ϕ ∈
n
Cn = HomR (R1/p , R) is a non-zero p−n -linear map for some n ∈ Z>0 . Then there exist
mn
r, e0 ∈ Z>0 with the following property: for each m ∈ Z>0 , every ideal J with ϕm (J 1/p ) ⊆ mr
mn−e0 ⌋
satisfies J ⊆ m⌊p
.
Proof. Let 0 6= g ∈ R satisfy the conclusion of Lemma 3.13 (c) for ϕ, so that for all m ∈ Z>0
nm
nm
and ψ ∈ Cnm = HomR (R1/p , R) we have that g · ψ is a R1/p -multiple of ϕm . Following
the argument of [Abe01, Proposition 2.4], set f (x) to be the largest power of m containing
1
n
a given x ∈ R and put f(x) = limn−
→∞ n f (x ). By the valuation theorem of Rees [Ree88,
Theorem 4.16], there exists a finite number of Z-valued valuations ν1 , . . . , νm on R which are
non-negative on R and positive on m together with positive rational numbers N1 , . . . , Nm
such that f(x) = mini νi (x)/Ni . Further applying [Ree88, Theorem 5.32], there is a constant
L ∈ Z≥0 such that f (x) ≤ ⌊f(x)⌋ ≤ f (x) + L for all x ∈ R. In particular, f (x) ≥ f(x) −L−1.
We can find a system of parameters x1 , . . . , xd of R such that βi := minj νi (xj ) > νi (g)
for all i. Indeed, since each νi is positive on m, this can be achieved by taking sufficiently
large powers of any given system of parameters. Now, each νi extends (non-uniquely) to a
Q-valued valuation (also denoted νi ) on R+ which is non-negative on R+ and positive on
m+ . For each νi and βi , we can find ri ∈ N satisfying the conclusion of Theorem 3.20. Set
r := maxi ri .
Claim. If h ∈ R satisfies ϕm ((hR)1/p
νi (h) ≥ (βi − νi (g))pnm.

nm

) ⊆ mr for some m ∈ Z>0 , then for all i we must have

Proof of Claim. Suppose, by way of contradiction, there is some index i for which we have
nm
νi (h) < (βi − νi (g))pnm . Then it follows that νi ((g p )h) < βi pnm , and taking pnm -th roots
nm
yields νi (g(h1/p )) < βi . From Theorem 3.20 above, there is an R-linear map Θ : R+ −
→
nm
nm
R with Θ(g(h1/p )) 6∈ mr (since mr ⊆ mri ). Now, Θ|R1/pnm ∈ HomR (R1/p , R), whence
nm
g · Θ|R1/pnm = ϕm · r 1/p for some r ∈ R (by the construction of g above). However, we then
nm
nm
nm
arrive at the contradiction Θ(g(h1/p )) = ϕm ((hr)1/p ) ∈ ϕm ((hR)1/p ) ⊆ mr .
nm

To conclude the proof of Theorem 3.21, suppose now that J is an ideal with ϕm (J 1/p ) ⊆
i (g)
mr for some m ∈ Z>0 . Let α = mini βi −ν
. For any h ∈ J, it then follows from the above
Ni
15

Claim that
f (h) ≥ f(h) − L − 1 = min
i

νi (h)
− L − 1 ≥ αpnm − L − 1 .
Ni

Choosing e0 ∈ Z>0 sufficiently large, we have ⌊pnm−e0 ⌋ ≤ max{0, αpnm − L − 1} for all
nm−e0 ⌋
for all m ∈ Z>0 .

m ∈ Z>0 . It now follows that J ⊆ m⌊p
Proof of Theorem 3.18. By Lemma 3.15, we need only show s(R, D) > 0 assuming (R, D) is
F -regular. Furthermore, using Corollary 3.7, the statement reduces immediately to the case
where R is a complete local domain.
Since (R, D) is also F -pure, fix a surjective p−n -linear map ϕ ∈ Dn for some n ∈ Z>0 . For
any e ∈ ΓD , we have mn − e ∈ ΓD for some m ≫ 0 (so that Dmn−e contains a surjective
D
D
map). It follows that Imn
⊆ Imn−(mn−e)
= IeD by Lemma 3.4. Now, as (R, D) is F -regular,
we may conclude
\
\
\
D
Inm
.
IeD =
0 = PD =
IeD =
e>0

e∈ΓD

m>0

D
In addition, using that ϕ is surjective, we see the sequence of ideals {Inm
}m∈Z>0 is nonincreasing. Thus, by Chevalley’s Lemma, this sequence is cofinal with the powers of m.
Let r, e0 ∈ Z>0 satisfy the conclusion of Theorem 3.21 for ϕ, and fix m0 ∈ Z>0 with
nm
D
D
D
⊆ mr for all m ∈ Z>0 by Lemma
Inm0 ⊆ mr . This implies that ϕm ((In(m+m
)1/p ) ⊆ Inm
0
0)
mn−e
0⌋
D
3.4, so by Theorem 3.21 we conclude In(m+m
⊆ m⌊p
for all m ∈ Z>0 . Thus, we have
0)

s(R, D) =
≥
=

lim

aD
n(m+m0 )

D
ℓR (R/In(m+m
)
0)

= lim
pn(m+m0 )(d+α(R))
pn(m+m0 )d
m−
→∞
mn−e0 ⌋
⌊pmn−e0 ⌋
1
)
ℓ(R/m⌊p
)
ℓ(R/m
=
lim
lim
p(nm0 +e0 )d m−
p(nm−e0 )d
→∞
m−
→∞ pn(m+m0 )d
1
e(R)
·
> 0
p(nm0 +e0 )d
d!

m−
→∞

where e(R) ≥ 1 denotes the Hilbert-Samuel multiplicity of R.



4. Applications
4.1. F -splitting ratio. Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on a d-dimensional F -finite local
ring (R, m, k). When (R, D) is F -regular, the F -signature precisely characterizes the growth
rate of the F -splitting numbers aD
e . However, when (R, D) is not F -regular, s(R, D) =
aD
e
lime∈ΓD pe(d+α(R)) = 0 merely gives a (crude) upper bound. The aim of this section is to give a
precise characterization of the asymptotic behavior of aD
e for e ≫ 0. The main idea is rather
simple: Cartier subalgebras make it possible to pass to the appropriate quotient ring. We
begin with a Lemma facilitating this transition.
Lemma 4.1 (cf. [Sch09]). Suppose D is a Cartier subalgebra on an F -finite local ring (R, m).
If J ⊆ R is a D-compatible ideal and DJ is the induced Cartier subalgebra on R/J as in
J
Definition 2.10, then IeDJ = IeD /J and aD
= aD
e
e for all e ∈ Z>0 . In particular, we have
ΓDJ = ΓD and nDJ = nD .
16

Proof. Fix e ∈ Z>0 and consider r + J ∈ (R/J). Since we have ϕ(F∗e r) + J = ϕJ (F∗e (r + J))
for all ϕ ∈ De and also (DJ )e = { ϕJ | ϕ ∈ De }, it follows that
r ∈ IeD

⇔
⇔

ϕ(F∗e r) ∈ m for all ϕ ∈ De
ϕJ (F∗e (r + J)) ∈ m/J for all ϕJ ∈ (DJ )e

⇔

(r + J) ∈ IeDJ

and in particular IeDJ = IeD /J (note that IeD contains every proper D-compatible
ideal).
 D
eα(R)
D
eα(R/J)
DJ
Thus, we may conclude that aD
=
p
ℓ
(R/I
)
=
p
ℓ
(R/J
I
/J)
=
a
and
R
R/J
e
e
e
e
so also both ΓDJ = ΓD and nDJ = nD as well.


Theorem 4.2. Consider a Cartier subalgebra D on an F -finite local ring (R, m). Suppose
(R, D) is F -pure with F -splitting prime PD . Then the limit
aD
aD
mnD
e
lim
=
lim
e(dim(R/PD )+α(R))
mnD (dim(R/PD )+α(R))
p
p
e∈ΓD −
→∞
m−
→∞
exists and is called the F -splitting ratio of (R, D). Furthermore, if DPD denotes the Cartier
subalgebra on R/PD induced by D as in Definition 2.10, we have
rF (R, D) =

rF (R, D) = s(R/PD , DPD )
so that, in particular, the F -splitting ratio satisfies 0 < rF (R, D) ≤ 1.
Proof. From Lemma 2.13, we have that (R, D) is F -regular and by Lemma 4.1 we have
rF (R, D) =

aD
aD
e
e
lim
=
lim
= s(R, D) .
e(dim(R+α(R)))
e(dim(R+α(R)))
e∈ΓD −
→∞ p
→∞ p
e∈ΓD −

In particular, Theorem 3.11 gives that the limit under consideration exists and Theorem 3.18

further implies 0 < s(R, D) ≤ 1.
Corollary 4.3. Suppose R is an F -finite local ring. If R is F -pure with F -splitting prime
PR , then
aR
e
rF (R) = lim e(α(R)+dim(R/P
> 0.
R ))
e−
→∞ p
Corollary 4.4. Suppose (R, m) is an F -finite local ring and D is an F -pure Cartier subalgebra on R with F -splitting prime PD . Then the limit
logp aD
e
lim
= dim(R/PD ) + α(R) ∈ Z≥0
e
e∈ΓD −
→∞
exists and is a non-negative integer.
Definition 4.5. Suppose (R, m) is an F -finite local ring and D is an F -pure Cartier subalgebra on R with F -splitting prime PD . The F -splitting dimension of (R, D), denoted
sdim(R, D), is the common value of the following equivalent expressions:


aD
e
(a) sup δ ∈ R
lim inf e(δ+α(R)) > 0
(c)
dim(R/PD )
e∈ΓD −
→∞ p
!


D
D
log
a
ae
p e
>0
(d)
lim
− α(R)
(b) max δ ∈ Z
lim
e(δ+α(R))
e
e∈ΓD −
→∞
e∈ΓD −
→∞ p
Note that the equivalence of (a) - (d) follows immediately from Theorem 4.2, and in particular
the expression in (a) takes only integer values.
17

Remark 4.6. The F -splitting dimension of a local ring R is simply the F -splitting dimension
of (R, C R ) and was first introduced by I. Aberbach and F. Enescu [AE05] using the characterization in (b). The equality of (b) and (c) in this case gives a positive answer to [AE05,
Question 4.9].
4.2. F -graded systems of ideals. In this section, we develop additional tools for the
computation of F -signature. In particular, we develop methods for computing F -splitting
numbers by studying certain colon ideals on regular rings, similar to [Fed83, Lemma 1.6].
This Fedder-type criterion makes use of F -graded systems of ideals as defined in [Bli09].
Definition 4.7. Suppose (S, n is an F -finite local ring. A F -graded system of ideals of S
[pl ]
is a sequence of ideals b• = {be }e∈Z≥0 such that be bl ⊆ be+l for all e, l ∈ Z≥0 . To avoid
pathologies we will assume that b0 = R and be 6= 0 for some e > 0.
Remark 4.8. Recall that a (standard) graded system of ideals (cf. [ELS01, Definition 1.1])
is a sequence of ideals a• = {an }n∈Z≥0 such that an an′ ⊆ an+n′ for all n, n′ ∈ Z≥0 . This
naturally gives rise to a F -graded system by taking be = ape −1 . Roughly speaking, this
F -graded system keeps track of an for large values of n which are not divisible by p.
Lemma 4.9. If (S, n) is an F -finite local ring, then every F -graded system of ideals b• of
S defines a Cartier subalgebra C b• = ⊕e≥0 (C b• )e on S by setting (C b• )e := CeS · F∗e be for all
e ∈ Z≥0 . If in addition S is Gorenstein, then every Cartier subalgebra D arises uniquely in
this manner.
Proof. It is immediate to check that C b• is closed under multiplication in C S , giving the
first statement (cf. [Sch10b, Lemma 4.1]). For the latter statement when S is Gorenstein,
one simply makes use of the fact that CeS = HomS (F∗e S, S) ∼
= F∗e S as F∗e S-modules as in
Example 2.6.

Definition 4.10. If (S, n) is an F -finite local ring and b• is an F -graded system of ideals of
S, the F -splitting numbers of (S, b• ) are simply the F -splitting numbers of the associated
Cartier subalgebra C b• on S as in Lemma 4.9. One defines the F -signature, F -splitting
prime, and F -splitting ratio of (S, b• ) in a similar manner. We shall conflate the pairs (S, b• )
and (S, C b• ) in the notation and terminology appearing throughout.
Example 4.11. The two main examples of F -graded systems we will make use of are the
following.
e
(a) If J is any non-zero ideal of S, set be = (J [p ] : J) for all e > 0. In case S is in fact
regular, as we shall see in Corollary 4.14, studying this F -graded system is essentially
equivalent to studying the F -splitting properties of R = S/J.
e
(b) If a is any non-zero ideal of S and t ∈ R≥0 , we may consider be = a⌈t(p −1)⌉ for all
e > 0. This F -graded system is closely related to the notion of at -tight closure for
ideals in S as in [HY03]; see also [Sch08] and Section 4.3.1 below.
Lemma 4.12 (cf. [Fed83]). Suppose (S, n, l) is an F -finite regular local ring and b• is an F graded system of ideals in S with associated Cartier subalgebra D = C b• as in Proposition 4.9.
Then we have

e
e 
eα(S)
ℓS S/(n[p ] : be ) = peα(S) ℓ be /(be ∩ n[p ] )
abe• = aD
e = p
18

for all e > 0, which also equals the maximal number of copies of S in a direct sum decompoe
e
sition of S 1/p as an S-module that are contained in b1/p . Furthermore, we have
\

e
n[p ] : be
Pb• := PD =
e>0

e

and an ideal J ⊆ S is D-compatible if and only if be ⊆ (J [p ] : J) for all e > 0.

e

Proof. Let Φ be an S 1/p -module generator of HomS (S 1/p , S) = C1S . Since S 1/p is a free
e
e
S-module and Φe is an S 1/p -module generator of HomS (S 1/p , S) = CeS , it follows that for
all ideals I, J ⊆ S one has
e

e

e

Φe (I 1/p ) ⊆ J ⇔ ϕ(I 1/p ) ⊆ J for all ϕ ∈ CeS ⇔ I 1/p ⊆ JS 1/p

e

⇔ I ⊆ J [p

for each e > 0, see [Fed83, Lemma 1.6]. In particular,
e
e
e
x ∈ IeD ⇔ Φe (xbe )1/p ⊆ n ⇔ xbe ⊆ n[p ] ⇔ x ∈ (n[p ] : be )
e

e]

e

so that IeD = (n[p ] : be ) for all e > 0. Thus, we have PD = ∩e>0 IeD = ∩e>0 (n[p ] : be )
e
e
eα(S)
and aD
ℓs (S/IeD ) = peα(S) ℓS S/(n[p ] : be ) . Now, by construction, the S 1/p -linear
e = p
e
≃
1/pe
isomorphism CeS −−→ S 1/p given by sending Φe 7→ 1 identifies De with be . Thus, by
Proposition 3.5 (b), we also have that aD
e equals the maximal number of copies of S in a
e
e
direct sum decomposition of S 1/p as an S-module that are contained in b1/p . Moreover,
e

Φe (x1/p ·

e

) ∈ Dens ⇔ x ∈ be and Φe (hxi1/p ) ⊆ n ⇔ x ∈ be ∩ n[p
e

e]

e

so that the above
identifies
Dens with (be ∩ n[p ] )1/p . It follows that aD
e =
 isomorphism


e
e
e
e
1/p
ℓS (De /Dens ) = ℓS be /(be ∩ n[p ] )1/p = peα(S) ℓ be /(be ∩ n[p ] ) . Lastly, we may conclude
that J is D-compatible if and only if we have
e

Φe ((be J)1/p ) ⊆ J ⇔ be J ⊆ J [p

e]

e

⇔ be ⊆ (J [p ] : J)

for all e > 0.



Theorem 4.13. Suppose (S, n) is an F -finite regular local ring and R = S/J is a quotient
ring for some non-zero ideal J in S. Then every Cartier subalgebra D on R gives rise to an
e
F -graded system b• of ideals in S such that be ⊆ (J [p ] : J) and
 [pe ]



1
1
b•
[pe ]
a
(R,
D)
=
a
=
ℓ
S
(n
:
b
)
=
ℓ
b
(b
∩
n
)
e
S
e
S
e
e
e
peα(R)
peα(S)
for all e ∈ Z>0 . In addition, we have
!
\
e
PD = Pb• · R =
(n[p ] : be ) · R
e>0

so that sdim(R, D) = sdim(S, b• ) and rF (R, D) = rF (S, b• ).
e

Proof. For each e > 0, if we have ϕ ∈ CeS with ϕ(J 1/p ) ⊆ J, we will denote the induced
p−e -linear map on R = S/J as in Definition 2.10 by ϕJ . Letting
e e = { ϕ ∈ C S | ϕ(J 1/pe ) ⊆ J and ϕJ ∈ De } ,
D
e

e = ⊕e≥0 D
e e is a Cartier subalgebra on S by using that D is a Cartier
it is easy to see that D
e comes from an F -graded system of ideals in b• on
subalgebra on R. Using Lemma 4.9, D
19

e
e
S. Note that J is D-compatible,
so that be ⊆ (J [p ] : J) for all e > 0 by Lemma 4.12. By
e
D
b•
Lemma 4.1, we have aD
e · R = Pb• · R, so the remainder of the
e = ae = ae and PD = PD
Theorem follows immediately from the calculations shown in Lemma 4.12.


The following corollary originally appeared in [AE05, Discussion after Theorem 4.2] and in
[EY11, Proposition 3.1] (where it is done in the non-F -finite case). However, since it follows
easily from what is done above we state it here to illustrate the meaning of Theorem 4.13.
Corollary 4.14 (Fedder-type criterion for F -splitting numbers and F -signature). [AE05,
Discussion after Theorem 4.2] [EY11, Proposition 3.1] If (S, n) is an F -finite regular local
ring and R = S/J is a quotient ring of dimension d for some non-zero ideal J, then the
F -splitting numbers of R can be computed on S as
 [pe ]



1
[pe ]
[pe ]
[pe ]
[pe ]
a
(R)
=
ℓ
S
n
:
(J
:
J)
=
ℓ
(J
:
J)
(J
:
J)
∩
n
.
e
S
S
peα(R)
In particular, F -signature of R can be expressed as



1
1
e
e
e
e
e 
s(R) = lim ed ℓS S n[p ] : (J [p ] : J) = lim ed ℓS (J [p ] : J) (J [p ] : J) ∩ n[p ] .
e−
→∞ p
e−
→∞ p
Proof. The Corollary follows at once by taking D = C R in Theorem 4.13.



Corollary 4.15. Suppose (S, n) is an F -finite regular local ring of dimension n. If a is a
non-zero ideal and t ∈ R>0 , then all ideals of S are at -tightly closed (see [HY03]) if and only
if



1
1
e
e
e
e
e 
s(S, at ) = lim ne ℓS S n[p ] : a⌈t(p −1)⌉ = lim ne ℓS a⌈t(p −1)⌉ a⌈t(p −1)⌉ ∩ n[p ] > 0 .
e−
→∞ p
e−
→∞ p
Proof. Using the results of [BSTZ10, Section 3.1], the Corollary follows at once by taking
the F -graded system from Example 4.11 (b).

Remark 4.16. More generally, if a1 , . . . , as ⊆ S are non-zero ideals and t1 , . . . , ts ∈ R≥0 , then
⌈t (pe −1)⌉
⌈t (pe −1)⌉
the sequence of ideals be = (a1 1
) · · · (as s
) forms an F -graded sequence. When S
is regular, the analogous statement to Corollary 4.15 is valid for s(S, at11 · · · atss ).
4.3. Examples.
4.3.1. Divisor pairs and triples (R, ∆, at ). We have repeatedly seen above how Cartier subalgebras arise naturally in the context of a change of rings. Furthermore, in Example 4.11(b),
we have shown how they can be used to study pairs (R, at ) where a ⊆ R is an ideal and
t ∈ R≥0 . Let us now discuss how Cartier subalgebras can also be used to study the divisor
pairs that appear throughout birational algebraic geometry. We refer the reader to [ST12,
Appendix B] for a brief algebraic summary of the divisor notation used below.
Suppose that (R, m) is an F -finite local normal domain and ∆ is an effective R-divisor on
Spec(R). For each e ∈ Z≥0 , we have an inclusion R ⊆ R(⌈(pe − 1)∆⌉) (using ∆ ≥ 0) where
R(⌈(pe − 1)∆⌉) denotes the global sections of OSpec(R) (⌈(pe − 1)∆⌉). In particular, we may
view
HomR (F∗e R(⌈(pe − 1)∆⌉), R) ⊆ HomR (F∗e R, R) = CeR
and define
Ce∆ = HomR (F∗e R(⌈(pe − 1)∆⌉), R) .
20

Again, it is straightforward to check that C ∆ = ⊕e≥0 Ce∆ is indeed a Cartier subalgebra. If in
addition we are given a non-zero ideal a ⊆ R and a coefficient t ∈ R≥0 , we can incorporate
the F -graded system in Example 4.11(b) as well. Specifically, setting
t

Ce∆,a = Ce∆ · F∗e a⌈t(p

e −1)⌉

t

t

gives rise to yet another Cartier subalgebra C ∆,a = ⊕e≥0 Ce∆,a . As before, we shall conflate
t
(R, ∆) and (R, ∆, at ) with corresponding pairs (R, C ∆ ) and (R, C ∆,a ), respectively, in the
notation and terminology appearing throughout.
t
A number of variants on the Cartier subalgebra C ∆,a appear throughout the literature.
e
e
For example, one might consider replacing ⌈(pe − 1)∆⌉ with ⌈pe ∆⌉ and a⌈t(p −1)⌉ with a⌈tp ⌉
in the construction above. The subsequent Cartier subalgebra may in fact be quite different;
it often happens that the former is F -pure while the latter is not. Nevertheless, it follows
from the Lemma below that their F -signatures coincide.
Lemma 4.17. Consider a Cartier subalgebra D on an F -finite local ring (R, m) with dimension d. Suppose that E ⊆ D is another Cartier subalgebra with the property that there
exists c ∈ R not in any minimal prime satisfying De · F∗e c ⊆ Ee for all e > 0. Then
s(R, D) = s(R, E )
Proof. The inclusions De · F∗e c ⊆ Ee ⊆ De immediately give
IeD ⊆ IeE ⊆ { r ∈ R | ϕ(F∗e (cr)) ∈ m for all ϕ ∈ De } = (IeD : c)
for all e > 0. Thus, we have

 


ℓR (IeE /IeD ) ≤ ℓR (IeD : c) IeD = ℓR R hIeD , ci

·c

by noting that the kernel and cokernel of the endomorphism R/IeD −−→ R/IeD have equal
e
length (cf. [Vra08, Page 8]). As m[p ] ⊆ IeD and dim(R/hci) < d, there exists a positive
constant C such that


e
ℓR (IeE /IeD ) ≤ ℓR R hIeD , ci ≤ ℓR (R/hm[p ] , ci) ≤ Cpe(d−1)

for all e > 0. If we set n = nD nE , it follows that
1
1
D
E
s(R, D) = lim nmd ℓR (R/Inm
) = lim nmd ℓR (R/Inm
) = s(R, E )
m−
→∞ p
m−
→∞ p
as desired.



Remark 4.18. We caution the reader that it is not possible to replace the F -signature by the
F -splitting ratio in Lemma 4.17.
Lemma 4.17 is particularly useful when computing the F -signature of the triples (R, ∆, at )
considered above. As mentioned previously, taking a non-zero c ∈ a⌈t⌉ with div(c) ≥ ∆ gives
e
e
e
ca⌈t(p −1)⌉ ⊆ a⌈tp ⌉ ⊆ a⌈t(p −1)⌉ and R(⌈(pe − 1)∆⌉) ⊆ R(⌈pe ∆⌉) ⊆ c · R(⌈(pe − 1)∆⌉), so that
we are free to consider the Cartier subalgebra
⊕e≥0 HomR (F∗e R(⌈pe ∆⌉), R) · F∗e a⌈tp

e⌉

when computing s(R, ∆, at ). Alternatively, recall that the integral closure of a with coefficient
λ ∈ R≥0 is denoted aλ , and we have x ∈ aλ if and only if ν(x) ≥ λ · ν(a) for all valuations
S
ν : Frac(R) \ {0} −
→ Z with ν(R) ≥ 0. It is immediate that aλ = λ<µ∈Q aµ , and the
21

Noetherian property of R implies that this union stabilizes for some µ ∈ Q (see [HS06,
Section 10.6] for a detailed treatment in this setting). The tight-closure Briançon-Skoda
theorem (see [HH90, Theorem 5.4]) implies the existence of a non-zero c ∈ R such that
e
c · at(pe −1) ⊆ a⌈t(p −1)⌉ ⊆ at(pe −1) for all e ≥ 0, so that we might even consider the Cartier
subalgebra


⊕e≥0 HomR (F∗e R(⌈(pe − 1)∆⌉), R) · F∗e at(pe −1)

when computing s(R, ∆, at ).
We conclude this subsection with the computation of the F -signature of a fundamentally
important divisor pair.

Example 4.19. Suppose that R = kJx1 , . . . , xn K where k = k p is a perfect field. Consider the
R-divisor ∆ = t1 div(x1 ) + · · · + tn div(xn ) where ti ∈ [0, 1). It is straightforward to see that
s(R, ∆) = s(R, hx1 it1 · · · hxn itn ). By Remark 4.16, we have
 

1
⌈t1 (pe −1)⌉
pe
pe
⌈tn (pe −1)⌉
· · · xn
) .
s(R, ∆) = lim en ℓR R (hx1 , . . . , xn i : x1
e−
→∞ p

Since pe − ⌈ti (pe − 1)⌉ = ⌊(1 − ti )pe + ti ⌋, we have
e

e

⌈t (pe −1)⌉

(hxp1 , . . . , xpn i : x1 1

· · · xn⌈tn (p

e −1)⌉

⌊(1−t1 )pe +t1 ⌋

) = hx1

n )p
, . . . , x⌊(1−t
n

e +t ⌋
n

i.

Thus, we compute
n
 
 Y
e
e
e
⌈t (pe −1)⌉
⌊(1 − ti )pe + ti ⌋
ℓR R (hxp1 , . . . , xpn i : x1 1
· · · xn⌈tn (p −1)⌉ ) =
i=1

in order to conclude

s(R, ∆) = (1 − t1 ) · · · (1 − tn ).
4.3.2. Whitney’s Umbrella. We show in this example that the F -splitting ratio of a local
ring may be strictly smaller than the F -signature of the quotient by the F -splitting prime.
Assume p 6= 2 and consider the two dimensional local ring
R = Fp Jx, y, zK/hx2 − y 2zi .
If S = Fp Jx, y, zK and R = R/PR , we will show rF (R) = 1/2 while s(R) = 1. Set Φ : F∗ S −
→S
p−1 p−1 p−1
to denote the homomorphism mapping F∗ (x y z ) 7→ 1, and all of the other monomials
in the free basis {F∗ (xi y j z k )}0≤i,j,k≤pe−1 of the free S-module F∗ S to zero. If f = x2 − y 2z,
then Φ(F∗ f p−1 · ) induces a homomorphism ϕ ∈ HomR (F∗ R, R) such that C R = C ϕ . In
other words, ϕe is an F∗e R-module generator for HomR (F∗e R, R) for all e > 0. Since


p − 1 p−1 p−1 (p−1)/2
p−1
x y z
mod hxp , y pi
f
=
2

and p−1
6= 0 mod p, it is easy to see that hx, yi ⊆ R is ϕ-compatible thus inducing a map
2
ϕ ∈ HomR (F∗ R, R). Now, the (total) Cartier algebra of the ring R = kJx, y, zK/hx, yi ∼
= kJzK
p−1
i
is generated by the map which sends F∗ z
to 1 and the lower order monomials F∗ z to zero
for 0 ≤ i < p − 1. It is easy to see that ϕ sends F∗ z (p−1)/2 to 1 and all other F∗ z i to zero for
. Thus, the Cartier subalgebra C 1/2 div(z) ⊆ C kJzK coincides with the
0 ≤ i ≤ p − 1, i 6= p−1
2
Cartier subalgebra generated by ϕ. Since (kJzK, 21 div(z)) is F -regular, it immediately follows
22

that PR = hx, yi · R is the splitting prime by Lemma 2.13, cf. [Sch09]. Furthermore, from
example Example 4.19, we see that
1
1
1
rF (R) = rF (R, C ϕ ) = rF (R, ϕ) = rF (kJzK, div(z)) = s(kJzK, div(z)) = .
2
2
2
In particular, we have rF (R) = 1/2 < 1 = s(kJzK) = s(R).
4.3.3. A ramified cover of the cusp in characteristic three. Consider the ring1
R = F3 Ja, b, c, dK/ha3 c2 − b2 c2 + c3 − d2 i
so that R = S/hhi where S = F3 Ja, b, c, dK and h = a3 c2 − b2 c2 + c3 − d2 . Since
h2 = a6 c4 + a3 b2 c4 + b4 c4 − a3 c5 + b2 c5 + a3 c2 d2 + c6 − b2 c2 d2 + c3 d2 + d4 6∈ (a3 , b3 , c3 , d3 ) ,
we see that R is F -pure using Fedder’s criterion [Fed83]. As in the previous example, F∗ h2
corresponds to a generator ϕ of HomR (F∗ R, R) via [Fed83], so that C R = C ϕ . It is easy to see
that P = hc, di ⊆ R is C R -compatible, and the induced map ϕ ∈ HomR (F∗ R, R) on R = R/P
corresponds on R = F3 Ja, bK to pre-multiplying a generator of HomR (F∗ R, R) by F∗ (a3 − b2 )
1
3
2
(this is the coefficient of c2 d2 in the expression for h2 above). Thus C ϕ = C 2 div(a −b ) . Now, by
[MTW05, Example 4.3], cf. [TW04, Her11], the F -pure threshold of a3 −b2 in characteristic 3
is 23 and so it follows that (F3 Ja, bK, 12 div(a3 −b2 )) is (strongly) F -regular. We conclude that P
is the splitting prime of R, and rF (R) = rF (R, C ϕ ) = rF (R, C ϕ ) = s(F3 Ja, bK, 21 div(a3 − b2 )).
Let us now compute s(F3 Ja, bK, 21 div(a3 − b2 )) = 1/6 by taking a pair of finite covers. First
set A = F3 Ja, bK ⊆ F3 Ja, d = b1/3 K = F3 Ja, dK = B, and notice that a3 − b2 = a3 − d6 =
(a − d2 )3 . Since B is a free A-module of rank 3, we see that
!


1
B
A
= ℓB
.
ℓA
3e
3
ha3e , d3e+1 i : (a − d2 )3(3e +1)/2
ha3e , b3e i : (a3 − b2 )⌈ 2 ⌉
Now consider B ⊆ F3 Ja, d, c = (a − d2 )1/2 K = Fe Jd, cK = C and observe that
!


A
1
C
ℓA
= ℓC
.
3e
6
h(c2 + d2 )3e , d3e+1 i : c3e+1 +3
ha3e , b3e i : (a3 − b2 )⌈ 2 ⌉
e

e

e+1

Writing n = h(c2 + d2 ), d3 i and thus n[3 ] = h(c2 + d2 )3 , d3 i for ease of notation, it is
e+1
e+1
straightforward to check n : c3 = hc, di. Now, note that replacing c3 +3 by c3
in the
formula above gives
e
e+1
e
e
e
n[3 ] : c3 = (n : c3 )[3 ] = hc3 , d3 i .
Thus, we compute
e

e+1 +3

n[3 ] : c3

e

e+1

= (n[3 ] : c3

so that we have
ℓA
1

A
3e

3e

ha , b i : (a3 − b2 )

e
⌈ 32 ⌉

!

e

e

e −3

) : c3 = hc3 , d3 i : c3 = hc3

=

e

, d3 i


1
1 2e
3 − 3e+1 .
((3e − 3)(3e )) =
6
6

Using Macaulay2 [GS], one can check R ∼
= F3 Jx, y, z 2 − x3 + y 2 , z(z 2 − x3 + y 2 )K ⊆ F3 Jx, y, zK.
23

Now, using Corollary 4.15 together with the discussion following Lemma 4.17, we conclude
that
!


1
1
1
A
rF (R) = s A, div(a3 − b2 ) = lim 2e ℓA
= .
3e
e
e
2
6
e−
→∞ 3
ha3 , b3 i : (a3 − b2 )⌈ 2 ⌉
4.3.4. Monomial ideals. In this section, we consider S = kJx1 , . . . , xn K where k is an F -finite
field of characteristic p > 0. If we have u = (u1 , . . . , un ) ∈ Zn , then xu = xu1 1 · · · xunn will
denote the corresponding monomial in the variables x1 , . . . , xn . If a ⊆ S is a monomial
ideal, i.e. is generated by monomials in x1 , . . . , xn , we can consider the Newton polyhedron
Pa ⊆ Rn of a given by the closed convex hull in Rn of the set { u ∈ Zn | xu ∈ a} of lattice
points representing the monomials in a.
It is well known that the integral closure a is also a monomial ideal and is determined
by Pa , so that xu ∈ a if and only if u ∈ Pa ∩ Zn . If λ ∈ R>0 , this is readily generalized to
the statement that aλ is a monomial ideal determined by λPa = { λx | x ∈ Pa }, so that
xu ∈ aλ if and only if u ∈ λPa ∩ Zn . Indeed, the Rees valuations of a are the monomial
valuations obtained from the bounding hyperplanes of Pa [HS06, Proposition 10.3.5] (cf.
[CLS11, Section 11.3]) and determine membership in aλ [HS06, Proposition 10.6.5].
Theorem 4.20. Let S = kJx1 , . . . , xn K where k is an F -finite field of characteristic p > 0.
Suppose a ⊆ S is a monomial ideal with Newton polyhedron Pa ⊆ Rn and t ∈ R>0 . Then the
F -signature of (S, at )
s(S, at ) = volRn (tPa ∩ [0, 1]n )
equals the Euclidean volume of the intersection of tPa with the unit cube [0, 1]n ⊆ Rn .
Proof. Set n = hx1 , . . . , xn i. By Lemma 4.17 and Lemma 4.12, we have that


1
atpe
t
s(S, a ) = lim ne ℓS
.
e−
→∞ p
atpe ∩ n[pe ]
As noted above, atpe is a monomial ideal determined by the property xu ∈ atpe if and only if
e
u ∈ tpe Pa ∩Zn . Likewise, n[pe ] is a monomial ideal, and xu 6∈ n[p ] if and only if u ∈ [0, pe ]n ∩Zn .
In particular, since the lengths appearing in the limit above are a quotient of monomial ideals,
we need only count monomials to compute them. We have


atpe
e
ℓS
= #{ u ∈ Zn | xu ∈ atpe \ n[p ] }
e
e]
tp
[p
a ∩n
= # (Zn ∩ (tpe Pa ) ∩ [0, pe ]n )
= # (Zn ∩ (pe · (tPa ∩ [0, 1]n ))) .
The result now follows from the following elementary identity: if Q ⊆ Rn is any polytope,
#(qQ)
then volRn (Q) = lim
. See [Ful93, Page 111] for further discussion.

q−
→∞ q n
Remark 4.21. Note, in particular, that the formula in Theorem 4.20 above is independent of
both the coefficient field k and even the characteristic p > 0.
24

Example 4.22. Consider now the ideal a = hx3 , y 2i inside kJx, yK where k is an F -finite field
of characteristic p > 0. If t ∈ R≥0 , the intersection tPa ∩ [0, 1]n is non-trivial only if t ≤ 5/6,
in which case it takes on one of the three forms indicated in the diagrams below.
0≤t≤

1
3

1
3

≤t≤

1
2

2t

1
2

≤t≤

5
6

2t
2t
3t

3t

Using Theorem 4.20, one readily computes

1 − 3t2

4
− 2t
s(kJx, yK, hx3 , y 2it ) =
 25 3
− 5t + 3t2
12

3t
0≤t≤
1
≤t≤
3
1
≤t≤
2

1
3
1
2
5
6

.

References

[Abe01]

I. M. Aberbach: Extension of weakly and strongly F-regular rings by flat maps, J. Algebra 241
(2001), no. 2, 799–807. 1843326 (2002f:13008)
[AE05]
I. M. Aberbach and F. Enescu: The structure of F -pure rings, Math. Z. 250 (2005), no. 4,
791–806. MR2180375
[AL03]
I. M. Aberbach and G. J. Leuschke: The F -signature and strong F -regularity, Math. Res.
Lett. 10 (2003), no. 1, 51–56. MR1960123 (2004b:13003)
[Bli09]
M. Blickle: Test ideals via algebras of p−e -liner maps, arXiv:0912.2255, to appear in J. Algebraic
Geom.
[BSTZ10] M. Blickle, K. Schwede, S. Takagi, and W. Zhang: Discreteness and rationality of F jumping numbers on singular varieties, Math. Ann. 347 (2010), no. 4, 917–949. 2658149
[BK05]
M. Brion and S. Kumar: Frobenius splitting methods in geometry and representation theory, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 231, Birkhäuser Boston Inc., Boston, MA, 2005. MR2107324
(2005k:14104)

[CLS11]
[ELS01]
[EY11]
[Fed83]
[Ful93]

D. Cox, J. Little, and H. Schenck: Toric varieties, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol.
124, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2011.
L. Ein, R. Lazarsfeld, and K. E. Smith: Uniform bounds and symbolic powers on smooth
varieties, Invent. Math. 144 (2001), no. 2, 241–252. MR1826369 (2002b:13001)
F. Enescu and Y. Yao: The lower semicontinuity of the Frobenius splitting numbers, Math.
Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 150 (2011), no. 1, 35–46. 2739072
R. Fedder: F -purity and rational singularity, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 278 (1983), no. 2, 461–
480. MR701505 (84h:13031)
W. Fulton: Introduction to toric varieties, Annals of Mathematics Studies, vol. 131, Princeton
University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1993, The William H. Roever Lectures in Geometry. 1234037
(94g:14028)

[GS]
[HW02]
[HY03]

D. R. Grayson and M. E. Stillman: Macaulay2, a software system for research in algebraic
geometry.
N. Hara and K.-I. Watanabe: F-regular and F-pure rings vs. log terminal and log canonical
singularities, J. Algebraic Geom. 11 (2002), no. 2, 363–392. MR1874118 (2002k:13009)
N. Hara and K.-I. Yoshida: A generalization of tight closure and multiplier ideals, Trans.
Amer. Math. Soc. 355 (2003), no. 8, 3143–3174 (electronic). MR1974679 (2004i:13003)
25

[Her11]
[HH89]

D. Hernández: F -purity for hypersurfaces, Ph.D. thesis, University of Michigan, 2011.
M. Hochster and C. Huneke: Tight closure and strong F -regularity, Mém. Soc. Math. France
(N.S.) (1989), no. 38, 119–133, Colloque en l’honneur de Pierre Samuel (Orsay, 1987). MR1044348
(91i:13025)

[HH90]
[HH91]
[HR74]
[HR76]
[Hun96]

[HL02]
[HS06]

M. Hochster and C. Huneke: Tight closure, invariant theory, and the Briançon-Skoda theorem, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 3 (1990), no. 1, 31–116. MR1017784 (91g:13010)
M. Hochster and C. Huneke: Tight closure and elements of small order in integral extensions,
J. Pure Appl. Algebra 71 (1991), no. 2-3, 233–247. 1117636 (92i:13002)
M. Hochster and J. L. Roberts: Rings of invariants of reductive groups acting on regular
rings are Cohen-Macaulay, Advances in Math. 13 (1974), 115–175. MR0347810 (50 #311)
M. Hochster and J. L. Roberts: The purity of the Frobenius and local cohomology, Advances
in Math. 21 (1976), no. 2, 117–172. MR0417172 (54 #5230)
C. Huneke: Tight closure and its applications, CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics,
vol. 88, Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC, 1996,
With an appendix by Melvin Hochster. MR1377268 (96m:13001)
C. Huneke and G. J. Leuschke: Two theorems about maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules, Math.
Ann. 324 (2002), no. 2, 391–404. MR1933863 (2003j:13011)
C. Huneke and I. Swanson: Integral closure of ideals, rings, and modules, London Mathematical
Society Lecture Note Series, vol. 336, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006. MR2266432
(2008m:13013)

[Kat10]
[Kun69]
[Kun76]

M. Katzman: A non-finitely generated algebra of Frobenius maps, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 138
(2010), no. 7, 2381–2383. 2607867
E. Kunz: Characterizations of regular local rings for characteristic p, Amer. J. Math. 91 (1969),
772–784. MR0252389 (40 #5609)
E. Kunz: On Noetherian rings of characteristic p, Amer. J. Math. 98 (1976), no. 4, 999–1013.
MR0432625 (55 #5612)

[LS01]

G. Lyubeznik and K. E. Smith: On the commutation of the test ideal with localization and
completion, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 353 (2001), no. 8, 3149–3180 (electronic). MR1828602
(2002f:13010)

[Mat80]

H. Matsumura: Commutative algebra, second ed., Mathematics Lecture Note Series, vol. 56,
Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co., Inc., Reading, Mass., 1980. MR575344 (82i:13003)
[MBZ11] J. A. Montaner, A. F. Boix, and S. Zarzuela: Frobenius and cartier algebras of stanleyreisner rings, arXiv:1106.5686.
[MTW05] M. Mustaţǎ, S. Takagi, and K.-i. Watanabe: F-thresholds and Bernstein-Sato polynomials, European Congress of Mathematics, Eur. Math. Soc., Zürich, 2005, pp. 341–364. MR2185754
(2007b:13010)

[Ree88]

D. Rees: Lectures on the asymptotic theory of ideals, London Mathematical Society Lecture Note
Series, vol. 113, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988. 988639 (90d:13012)
[Sch08]
K. Schwede: Generalized test ideals, sharp F -purity, and sharp test elements, Math. Res. Lett.
15 (2008), no. 6, 1251–1261. MR2470398
[Sch09]
K. Schwede: F -adjunction, Algebra Number Theory 3 (2009), no. 8, 907–950.
[Sch10a] K. Schwede: Centers of F -purity, Math. Z. 265 (2010), no. 3, 687–714. 2644316
[Sch10b] K. Schwede: A refinement of sharply F -pure and strongly F -regular pairs, J. Commut. Algebra
2 (2010), no. 1, 91–109. 2607103 (2011c:13007)
[Sch11]
K. Schwede: Test ideals in non-Q-Gorenstein rings, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 363 (2011), no. 11,
5925–5941. 2817415 (2012c:13011)
[SS10]
K. Schwede and K. E. Smith: Globally F -regular and log Fano varieties, Adv. Math. 224
(2010), no. 3, 863–894. 2628797 (2011e:14076)
[ST12]
K. Schwede and K. Tucker: A survey of test ideals, Progress in commutative algebra 2, Walter
de Gruyter, Berlin, 2012, pp. 39–99. 2932591
[SVdB97] K. E. Smith and M. Van den Bergh: Simplicity of rings of differential operators in prime
characteristic, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 75 (1997), no. 1, 32–62. MR1444312 (98d:16039)
26

[TW04]

S. Takagi and K.-i. Watanabe: On F-pure thresholds, J. Algebra 282 (2004), no. 1, 278–297.
MR2097584 (2006a:13010)

[Tuc]
[Vra08]

K. Tucker: F -signature exists, Inventiones Mathematicae, 1–23, 10.1007/s00222-012-0389-0.
A. Vraciu: A new version of a-tight closure, Nagoya Math. J. 192 (2008), 1–25. 2477609
(2009k:13007)

[Yao06]

Y. Yao: Observations on the F -signature of local rings of characteristic p, J. Algebra 299 (2006),
no. 1, 198–218. MR2225772 (2007k:13007)

Institut für Mathematik, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, 55099 Mainz, Germany
E-mail address: blicklem@uni-mainz.de
Department of Mathematics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA,
16802, USA
E-mail address: schwede@math.psu.edu
Department of Mathematics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA
E-mail address: kevtuck@math.utah.edu

27

