arXiv:1508.06287v2 [math.RT] 2 Oct 2015

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA
LADDERS
BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS
Abstract. This paper deals with computing the global dimension of endomorphism rings of
maximal Cohen–Macaulay (=MCM) modules over commutative rings. Several examples are
computed. In particular, we determine the global spectra, that is, the sets of all possible finite
global dimensions of endomorphism rings of MCM-modules, of the curve singularities of type
An for all n, Dn for n ≤ 13 and E6,7,8 and compute the global dimensions of Leuschke’s
normalization chains for all ADE curves, as announced in [DFI15]. Moreover, we determine
the centre of an endomorphism ring of a MCM-module over any curve singularity of finite
MCM-type.
In general, we describe a method for the computation of the global dimension of an endomorphism ring EndR M , where R is a Henselian local ring, using add(M )-approximations.
When M 6= 0 is a MCM-module over R and R is Henselian local of Krull dimension ≤ 2 with
a canonical module and of finite MCM-type, we use Auslander–Reiten theory and Iyama’s
ladder method to explicitly construct these approximations.

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Setting and generalities
2.1. Global dimension and projective modules
2.2. Right approximations and right almost split maps
2.3. Construction of projective resolutions of the simples of an endomorphism ring
3. Constructing minimal approximations and almost split maps via ladders
4. Examples
4.1. Leuschke’s endomorphism rings for ADE curve singularities
4.2. Global spectrum of An -curves
4.3. Global spectra of the ADE curves
4.4. Global spectra of some surface singularities
4.5. Inifinite MCM-type
5. Centres of endomorphism rings
5.1. Irreducible ADE curves
5.2. Reducible ADE curves
6. Acknowledgements
References

2
3
5
5
8
9
16
17
19
21
23
25
27
28
29
33
33

Date: January 1, 2018.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification: 16G30, 13C14, 16E10, 16G70, 14B05
B.D. was partially supported by an NSERC Undergraduate Summer Research Award. E.F. was partially supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) in frame of project J3326 and gratefully acknowledges support by
the Institut Mittag-Leffler (Djursholm, Sweden). C.I. was partially supported by an NSERC Discovery Grant.
1

2

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

1. Introduction
Let R be a commutative noetherian ring, M 6= 0 be a MCM-module over R and set A = EndR M .
This article is concerned with the problem of computing the global dimension of A, that is, the
smallest number n such that any A-module has a projective resolution of length ≤ n. In most
cases, n will be infinity: for example, if A itself is commutative, then gl. dim A < ∞ if and
only if A is a regular ring, by Serre’s well-known theorem. But if A is noncommutative, the
situation is much more involved and one is precisely interested in this case: in recent years the
study of endomorphism rings of finite global dimension has become increasingly popular, since
they appear as analogues of resolutions of singularities of Spec(R), namely as so-called noncommutative (crepant) resolutions of singularities (=NC(C)Rs). In the original treatment of van
den Bergh [VdB04] NCCRs over Gorenstein normal domains R were defined as homologically
homogeneous endomorphism rings of finitely generated reflexive R-modules, which implies that
their global dimension is automatically equal to the Krull dimension of R. NCCRs were further
studied in, e.g., [BLvdB10, IW14] and see [Leu12] for an overview. In [DITV15] and [DFI15],
more general NCRs of any commutative ring R were defined as endomorphism rings of finitely
generated modules of full support and of finite global dimension. In [DFI15] the global spectrum
of R was introduced as the set of all possible finite global dimensions of endomorphism rings of
MCM-modules1. The global spectrum is a quite mysterious object and so far there have only
been very few explicit examples computed. Thus, obtaining more examples of global spectra
was one of the main motivations for the present work.
It is supposed that the global spectrum is strongly related to categorical invariants, like the
Orlov spectrum, which appears in birational geometry [BFK12]. Moreover, knowing more about
possible values of global dimensions of endomorphism rings also can be helpful in understanding
more classical topics in commutative algebra, in particular, the Grauert–Remmert normalization algorithm for curves, see [Leu07] and [Iya03], where endomorphism rings appearing in this
algorithm are studied.
In this paper we present a method to compute gl. dim A, which uses combinatorics on a particular
quiver related to R, the Auslander–Reiten (=AR) quiver. We will use ladders, which have originally been introduced by Igusa and Todorov in order to prove the radical layers theorem for Artin
algebras [IT84]. In 2005, Iyama generalized their methods to orders [Iya05a, Iya05b, Iya05c].
More recently Iyama and Wemyss used ladders to compute syzygies of MCM-modules over twodimensional quotient singularities, see [IW10] and also Wemyss in [Wem11]. In these papers, the
authors used ladders to compute add(R)-approximations in order to compute syzygies. On the
other hand, Quarles used ladders implicitly in order to compute NCRs of some two-dimensional
quotient singularities in his thesis [Qua05].
The present paper grew out of trying to understand their methods and applying them in order to
explicitly compute add(M )-approximations of MCM-modules and from these global dimensions
of endomorphism rings. We follow the treatment of Iyama and Wemyss closely but consider
ladders in a slightly different context, in particular for 1-dimensional Cohen–Macaulay-rings.
Moreover, we try to formulate the theorems in the most general context, so instead of complete
local rings, we consider Henselian local rings. We also study the boundaries of generalizing this
method. In particular, requirements on the dimension of R and finite MCM-type.
Let us comment on the specific results: We give an algorithm to compute the global dimension
of EndR M . The input data for the algorithm are M and the AR-quiver of R. The algorithm
1We only consider MCM-modules because there is a rich structure theory which also features representation

theoretic methods, having their origin in representation theory of Artin algebras, see [LW12, Yos90].

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

3

enables us to compute the global spectrum of R, namely the set of all possible finite global dimensions of endomorphism rings of MCM(R)-modules. Here we will compute the global spectrum
of the An for all n, E6,7,8 and Dn for n ≤ 13, curve singularities (Thm. 4.6) and give conjectural
global spectra for the remaining Dn curve singularities. The evidence for these conjectures are
based on computations of a SAGE program written by B. Doherty. We also prove the claimed
global dimension of Leuschke’s [Leu07] endomorphism rings of [DFI15, Section 3.1.1] in Section
4.1. Moreover, we give a few examples of computations of global spectra of some two dimensional
singularities, using the SAGE program.
In noncommutative algebra, the centre Z(A) of a noncommutative algebra A, is a fundamental invariant. For endomorphism rings A = EndR M over a reduced noetherian commutative
ring and M a faithful torsion free module, we show that Z(A) is the largest finite extension
R ⊆ R′ ⊆ Q(R) such that M is still defined over R′ , i.e., R′ M = M , where multiplication is induced by the multiplication of Q(R) on Q(R)M (see Theorem 5.3). In the case of endomorphism
rings over curves R of finite MCM-type we are able (by a case by case analysis) to determine the
centres explicitly. This also shows how the AR-quivers of overrings of R sit in the AR-quiver of
R. Knowing the centres of the endormorphism ring allows a significant decrease in running time
of the computation of global dimension.
An outline of the paper is as follows: in Section 2 and 3 the necessary notions and techniques
for computing the global dimension of endomorphism rings using ladders are recalled. We show
that they work in our Henselian setting and give complete statements rather than to refering
to the literature. In particular, we revisit the Iyama–Wemyss theorem about the existence of
ladders in our Henselian setting, see Theorem 3.8.
The main examples are computed in Section 4: in 4.1 we prove the claimed global dimensions
for the ADE curve singularities from [DFI15]. In Theorem 4.4 we prove using ladders that the
global spectrum of An curves is {1, 2} for even n and {1, 2, 3} for odd n. In 4.3 the global spectra
of ADE curves of types An , Dn (n ≤ 13), E6,7,8 are computed with the help of a SAGE program,
which is explained there. We also compute some global spectra of surfaces of finite MCM type.
Then we discuss examples and the case of infinite MCM-type in Section 4.5. In particular, we
show in Prop. 4.12 that for a normal 2-dimensional Gorenstein Henselian local ring, ladders will
not yield an add(M )-approximation in general.
In Section 5 we determine centres of endomorphism rings of torsion free modules over reduced
noetherian rings, Theorem 5.3. In the following the centres of endomorphism rings of all MCM
modules over one dimensional local rings of finite MCM-type are explicitly determined.

2. Setting and generalities
In this section we recall several notions and discuss how to construct minimal projective resolutions of simple modules of endomorphism rings of MCM-modules over certain rings R, using
approximations of modules over R.
In this paper R will always denote a commutative noetherian ring. We will assume that R is
either artinian or local Henselian of positive Krull dimension. In the latter case we will try to
state the theorems for R as general as possible, but all theorems work if one assumes R complete
local (plus additional hypotheses on dimension etc.). Any full subcategory of MCM(R) should
be closed under direct summands and finite direct sums and will be called additive.

4

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

We denote by mod(R) the category of finitely generated modules and by MCM(R) the full
subcategory of maximal Cohen–Macaulay modules. Let M ∈ mod(R) and denote by add(M )
the additive closure of M , that is, the full subcategory of mod(R) consisting of direct summands
of finite direct sums of M .
Let C be a full subcategory of mod(R), then morphisms between two objects X, Y ∈ C are
denoted by HomC (X, Y ) = C(X, Y ). Note that, since C is full, C(X, Y ) = HomR (X, Y ). The
Jacobson radical of a (not necessarily commutative) ring Λ, i.e., the intersection of all right
maximal ideals of Λ, is denoted by JΛ . We will also need some more general notions concerning
categories: Let C be an additive category, then an ideal I in C is a selection of a subgroup
I(X, Y ) ⊆ HomC (X, Y ) for any X, Y ∈ Ob(C) such that for any h ∈ C(X, Y ), f ∈ I(Y, Z) and
g ∈ C(Z, W ) one has gf h ∈ I(X, W ) (cf. [Kel64]). We define the Jacobson radical, an ideal
of C by JC (X, Y ) = {f ∈ HomC (X, Y ) : hf g is not an isomorphism for any g : A → X and
h : Y → A for any indecomposable A ∈ C}. The higher radicals JnC (X, Y ) for n ≥ 2 are defined
to be {f ∈ HomC (X, Y ): there exist an A ∈ C and morphisms g ∈ JC (X, A) and h ∈ JCn−1 (A, Y )
with f = hg}. For a full subcategory D of C one denotes by [D] the ideal of C of all morphisms
in C which factor through an object in D. The factor category C/[D] consists of the same objects
as C and the morphisms between two objects X, Y are HomR (X, Y ) modulo those factoring
through an object of D. An object X in C is called (strongly) indecomposable if EndC X is
local. A category C is called Krull-Schmidt if any object is isomorphic to a finite direct sum of
indecomposable objects.
Let Λ be a noetherian semi-perfect ring. Then any finitely generated Λ-module X has a minimal
projective resolution:
f0
f1
f2
··· −
→ P2 −→ P1 −→ P0 −→ X −→ 0,
fi

that is, any Pi −→ ker(fi−1 ) −→ 0 and P0 −→ X −→ 0 are projective covers.
Remark 2.1. In order to compute global dimension of endomorphism rings, we will compute
minimal projective resolutions over EndR M . Thus, we assume R to be artinian or Henselian
local for EndR M to be semi-perfect, see [Rei75, section 6]. For such rings, mod(R) (and hence
MCM(R)) is a Krull–Schmidt category. In Section 3 we will consider generalized AR-theory over
R, in the sense of [Iya05a] and see which additional assumptions on R are necessary to apply
this theory.
The next lemma shows that it is enough to consider basic endomorphism rings of MCM-modules,
that is, endomorphism rings of modules where every direct summand appears with multiplicity
1.
Ln
Li ∈ MCM(R) are indecomposables
Lemma 2.2. Let A = EndR (L), where L = i=1 Lai i , whereL
n
and ai ≥ 1. Then A is Morita-equivalent to Ared = EndR ( i=1 Li ). In particular gl. dim A =
gl. dim Ared .

The proof is straightforward, e.g., by applying the criterion for Morita equivalence [MR01, Prop.
3.5.6].
Lemma 2.3. Let M, N be contained in mod(R). Then Jmod(R) (M, N ) = Hom
L) if and
LR (M, N
only if M and N do not have any direct summand in common. Moreover, J( i Xi , j Yj ) =
L
i , Yj ) for indecomposable Xi , Yi . This decomposition also holds for the higher radicals,
ij J(XL
L
L
k
i.e., J ( i Xi , j Yj ) = ij Jk (Xi , Yj ) for k ≥ 0.

Proof. The first two assertions are straightforward computations, see
[Qua05] Prop. 2.1.4,
L e.g., L
(b) and (f). The last assertion is easy to verify, using that f ∈ J2 ( i Xi , j Yj ) if and only if
f is a composition of radical morphisms, and induction.


COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

5

2.1. Global dimension and projective modules. Let Λ be a noetherian ring with 1. The
(left or right) global dimension of a ring Λ with 1 is defined to be
gl. dim(Λ) = sup{proj. dim(M ) : M ∈ Mod(Λ)}.
As explained in more detail e.g. in Section 5 of [DFI15], if Λ is a finitely generated algebra over
a noetherian ring, then
gl. dim Λ = max{proj. dim S : S a simple Λ-module}.
If mod(Λ) is Krull-Schmidt, then Λ is semi-perfect, i.e., every finitely generated Λ-module has
a projective cover. Supposing Λ = EndR M , over R as above, one knows from the structure
theorem of projective modules
L for Λ that each indecomposable projective Pi is of the form
HomR (M, Mi ), where M = i Mi . For each projective there is a simple Si = Pi /JΛ ∩ Pi , and
these are all the simples. In particular, one has an equivalence of categories:
add(M ) ≃ P(Λ),

where P(Λ) denotes the fully faithful subcategory of projective modules of mod(Λ), via the
projectivization functor HomR (M, −) (see e.g. [ARS97]).
Remark 2.4. In the situation Λ = EndR M with R a local Henselian ring and M ∈ mod(R),
with the additional assumption that the residue field is separably closed, one can use the method
for computation of the simples as outlined in [DFI15, Section 5.3.1], following the exposition of
[HGK04]. However, in order to use this method, one not only has to know the indecomposable
summands Mi of M but should moreover have an explicit knowledge of HomR (Mi , Mj ) and
J(EndR Mi ) for any i, j.
2.2. Right approximations and right almost split maps. Right approximations and right
almost split maps by full subcategories of MCM(R) will provide the framework for constructing projective resolutions over endomorphism rings. In other words, we reduce the problem of
constructing projective resolutions of modules over EndR (M ) to that of constructing approximations by the subcategory add(M ) over R. The approximations will be constructed in Section
3, under some conditions on R, using almost split maps over R and the ladder technique.
f

Definition 2.5. Let C be a full subcategory of MCM(R). Let 0 → Z → Y → X be an exact
sequence in MCM(R). We say that f is a right C-approximation if Y ∈ C and all g : Y ′ → X ∈ C
factor through f , that is,
HomR (f )

C(−, Y ) −−−−−−→ C(−, X) −→ 0.
In other words: for any g : Y ′ −→ X with Y ′ ∈ C there exists an h : Y ′ −→ Y such that
f h = g. We say that f is a right almost split map in C (or right C-almost split map) if Y ∈ C,
f ∈ JC (Y, X) and for any Y ′ ∈ C and g ∈ JC (Y ′ , X) there exists a h : Y ′ −→ Y such that
f h = g, that is, the sequence
HomR (f )

C(−, Y ) −−−−−−→ JC (−, X) −→ 0
is exact.
A right C-approximation (or right C-almost split map) f : Y −→ X is (right) minimal if every
morphism α : Y −→ Y such that f α = f is an isomorphism. It can be easily seen that this is
equivalent to saying that f is right minimal if there does not exist a non-zero direct summand
of Y that is mapped to zero under f .
f0
f1
f2
An exact sequence ξ : · · · −→ Y1 −→ Y0 −→ X is called a C-resolution of X if each Yi ∈ C
Hom(f2 )

HomR (f1 )

Hom(f0 )

and C(−, ξ) : · · · −−−−−→ C(−, Y1 ) −−−−−−→ C(−, Y0 ) −−−−−→ C(−, X) −
→ 0 is exact on C. A
C-resolution is minimal if each fi is right minimal.

6

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

By definition the direct sum of right C-split morphisms (C-approximations) of some X, X ′ is
again a right C-almost split morphism (C-approximation) of the direct sum X ⊕ X ′ .
Dually, one can also define left C-approximations, left C-almost split maps and left C-resolutions.
Id

Z
Z → 0 is the right minimal C-approximation.
Example 2.6. (1) If Z is in C, then 0 → Z −−→
(2) Let R be a local Henselian CM ring with canonical module that is an isolated singularity.
Then any indecomposable M ∈ MCM(R), which does not contain R as a factor, has a unique
minimal right MCM(R)-almost split map, coming from its AR-sequence, see e.g. [LW12, Chapter
13].

A full subcategory C ⊆ MCM(R) is called contravariantly (covariantly) ﬁnite in MCM(R) if
there exist right (left) C-approximations for all objects in MCM(R). Moreover, C is called
functorially ﬁnite if C is both co- and contravariantly finite. By Auslander–Buchweitz [AB89]
for any functorially finite subcategory C of MCM(R), any X ∈ mod(R) has a minimal right (left)
C-resolution.
In general it is not clear whether a subcategory C ⊆ MCM(R) is contravariantly finite, for more
properties and examples see e.g., [AS80] for Artin algebras, [Iya07] for maximally orthogonal
subcategories (=cluster tilting subcategories) and [Tak11] for resolving subcategories.
In our case we have the following:
Lemma 2.7. Let C = add(L) for some L ∈ MCM(R). Then C is contravariantly ﬁnite.
Proof. The proof is the same as in the artinian case, see [AS80, Prop.4.2]. The facts needed are
that HomR (L, N ) of two noetherian finitely generated modules is finitely generated as EndR Lmodule and that C has only finitely many indecomposables.

The following lemma gives another useful characterization of minimal right C-almost split maps
and -approximations:
Lemma 2.8. Let C be a full subcategory of MCM(R) and let f : Y −→ X with Y ∈ C be either
a right C-approximation or C almost split map.
(1) Then f is right-minimal if and only if in in exact sequence
g

f

0 −→ ker(f ) −
→Y −
→X
the morphism g ∈ J(ker(f ), Y ). Moreover if a C-resolution is minimal, then each fi ∈ JC for
i ≥ 1.
(2) If X has a right C-approximation (-almost split map) f : Y −→ X, then there exists a
minimal right C-approximation (-almost split map). Moreover, if C is contravariantly ﬁnite, any
X has a minimal C-resolution.
Proof. (1) Let Z := ker(f ). First suppose that f is minimal. Suppose that
Lmthere exists a
gLnot in J(Z, Y ). Since mod(R) is Krull–Schmidt, we may decompose Z = i=1 Zi and Y =
n
j=1 Yj into indecomposables. Then g can be decomposed into gij : Zi −→ Yj , and HomR (Z, Y )
(resp. the radical J(Z, Y )) decomposes into direct summands HomR (Zi , Yj ) (resp. J(Zi , Yj ) by
Lemma 2.3). So if g is not in the radical, then at least one gij 6∈ J(Zi , Yj ). But gij 6∈ J(Zi , Yj )
means that gij is an isomorphism, since Yj , Zi are indecomposable. Thus w.l.o.g. i = j = 1, so
that Z1 ∼
= Y1 . However, this implies that Y1 lies in the kernel of f and hence f |Y1 = 0, which
contradicts the minimality of f .
f0
f1
f2
Now suppose that · · · −→ M1 −→ M0 −→ X is a minimal C-resolution of X. Suppose that
some fi : Mi → Mi−1 is not in JC . This means that fi is an isomorphism on at least one
indecomposable summand Mij of Mi . Thus Mij ⊆ Im(fi ) = ker(fi−1 ), which implies f |Mij = 0.

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

7

By definition fi−1 is not minimal.
(2) The first assertion simply follows from splitting off the direct summands of Y lying in the
kernel of f . The second assertion can be seen similarly.

It follows that a right minimal C-almost split map (-approximation) of a direct sum X1 ⊕ X2
is given by the direct sum of the right minimal C-almost split maps (-approximations) of the
factors.
The next lemma follows immediately from the definition of C-approximation:
f

Lemma 2.9. Let C ⊆ MCM(R) be a full subcategory, M ∈ C, and let Y → Z be a right
C-approximation with kernel X. Then
0 → C(M, X) → C(M, Y ) → C(M, Z) → 0
is exact.
Lemma 2.10. Let C = add(M ) for some M ∈ MCM(R) and X ∈ mod(R) and suppose that
f1

f0

ξ : ··· −
→ M1 −→ M0 −→ X
is a C-minimal resolution, i.e., Mi ∈ C, fi right minimal and
HomR (M,f1 )

HomR (M,f0 )

C(M, ξ) : · · · −
→ CR (M, M1 ) −−−−−−−−→ (M, M0 ) −−−−−−−−→ C(M, X) −
→0
is exact. Then C(M, ξ) is a minimal projective EndR (M )-resolution of C(M, X) = HomR (M, X).
Thus, in particular, the length of C(M, ξ) is equal to proj. dimEndR M HomR (M, X).
Proof. Clearly C(M, ξ) is a projective resolution of HomR (M, X) over EndR M . We have to
HomR (M,fi )

show its minimality, i.e., that each C(M, Mi ) −−−−−−−−→ C(M, ker fi−1 ) is a projective cover.
This is equivalent to showing that each HomR (M, fi ) is a right minimal epimorphism onto its
image, see [ARS97, Prop. I.4.1] Suppose therefore that C(M, fi ) is not right minimal, that is,
there exists a direct summand C(M, Miα ) of C(M, Mi ) such that HomR (M, fi )|C(M,Miα ) ≡ 0.
Without loss of generality assume that α = 1. Take now the projection πi1 : Mi −→ Mi1 .
Then HomR (M, f )(πi1 ) = 0 in C(M, Mj ). But this means that for any (mi1 , . . . , mik ) ∈ Mi =
Lk
α=1 Miα one has HomR (M, fi )(πi1 )(mi ) = fi πi1 (mi ) = 0, so that it follows that Mi1 lies in
the kernel of fi . This contradicts minimality of fi .

f

Lemma 2.11. Let C = add(M ) for a M ∈ MCM(R) and let ξ : 0 → X → Y → Z be a
(minimal) right C-almost split map (in particular: Y ∈ C). If Z ∈ C is indecomposable, then
C(M, ξ) yields the beginning of a (minimal) projective resolution of the corresponding simple SZ
in mod(EndR (M )):
HomR (M,f )

0 → C(M, X) → C(M, Y ) −−−−−−−−→ C(M, Z) → SZ → 0.
Here C(M, Y ) and C(M, Z) are projective over EndR M and SZ ∼
= HomR (M, Z)/JR (M, Z).
Proof. From the definition of right C-almost split map it follows that the sequence 0 → HomR (M, X) →
HomR (M, Y ) → JR (M, Z) → 0 is exact. Splicing this sequence together with the obvious exact
sequence 0 → JR (M, Z) → HomR (M, Z) → SZ → 0 yields the claim.

Lemma 2.12. Let R be an isolated singularity with dim R ≤ 2. If C is contravariantly ﬁnite in
MCM(R), then each X ∈ MCM(R) has a right C-almost split map.

8

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

Proof. From the assumptions on R it follows that MCM(R) is a right τ -category (see definition
f

3.1). Take the (right) τ -sequence 0 −→ τ X −→ ϑX −
→ X of X. Since C is contravariantly finite,
a
ϑX has a C-approximation Y −
→ ϑX with Y ∈ C. Using the definitions of C-approximation
and τ -sequence, it follows that any α : Y ′ −→ X, Y ′ ∈ C and α ∈ JC (Y ′ , X) factors through
fa

Y −→ X. From the depth lemma and the assumptions on dim R it follows that the kernel of f a
is in MCM(R) and thus f a is a right C-almost split map.

Remark 2.13. This lemma shows that for the existence of a right C-almost split map it is needed
that the Krull dimension of R is less than or equal to 2. For rings of higher Krull dimension
Iyama has developed higher AR-theory, see [Iya07].
2.3. Construction of projective resolutions of the simples of an endomorphism ring.
Let R be a commutative local noetherian Henselian ring and let C be a full contravariantly finite
subcategory in MCM(R). Suppose that any X ∈ C has a right C-almost split map. Here we
show how to construct a (minimal) C-resolution out of C-approximations and how this will yield
minimal resolutions of the simple modules of an endomorphism ring of M ∈ C = add(M ). We
will formulate the construction for contravariantly finite subcategory C = add(M ) (cf. Lemma
2.7) and resolutions of the simples of EndR M . But one can more generally compute minimal
C-resolutions for C with the assumptions above.
Remark 2.14. The assumptions are satisfied if R as above is an isolated singularity, that is, Rp
is regular for any non-maximal prime ideal p of R, and dim R ≤ 2 and C a contravariantly finite
subcategory of MCM(R): then MCM(R) is a right τ -category, see Def. 3.1 and by Lemma 2.12
right C-almost split sequences exist.
If R is additionally of finite MCM-type, then Theorem 3.8 explicitly computes such minimal
C-approximations and minimal C-almost split maps.
Construction 2.15. Let M ∈ MCM(R) and A = EndR M and set C = add(M ), D = MCM(R)/[C].
We may suppose that A is basic. As discussed in 2.1 there are only finitely many simple Amodules, namely, for each indecomposable Z ∈ C one has SZ = HomR (M, Z)/JR (M, Z). By
Lemma 2.11 one obtains the beginning of the projective resolution of SZ from a right C-almost
split map of Z: by assumption there exists an exact sequence with a minimal right C-almost
split map f0
(1)

f0

g0

ξ0 : 0 −
→ K0 −→ M0 −→ Z,

which yields C(M, ξ0 ) = HomR (M, ξ0 ):
0 → C(M, K0 ) → C(M, M0 ) → C(M, Z) → SZ → 0.
Now decompose K0 = M0′ ⊕ C0 , where C0 ∈ D and M0′ ∈ C. This decomposition is unique. This
(g01 ,g02 )

means that g0 is also decomposed into M0′ ⊕ C0 −−−−−→ M0 with g0i ∈ JMCM(R) (by Lemma
2.8). Then take a minimal C-approximation of C0 , i.e., an exact sequence
g1

f1

0−
→ K1 −→ M1 −→ C0
with f1 right minimal. Then by Lemma 2.9 HomR (M, −) makes this sequence also exact on the
right, i.e.,
HomR (M,g1 )

HomR (M,f1 )

0−
→ HomR (M, K1 ) −−−−−−−−→ HomR (M, M1 ) −−−−−−−−→ HomR (M, C0 ) −
→ 0.
Then a minimal right C-approximation of K0 is given as

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

9

(2)
(M,

0

(M, K1 )




0
)
g1

(M, (g01 , g02 ◦ f1 ))

(M, M0′ ⊕ M1 )

(M,


IdM ′
0
0

(M, M0 )

(M, f0 )

(M, Z)

SZ

(M, (g01 , g02 ))


0
)
f1

(M, M0′ ⊕ C0 )

where we just write (·, ·) instead of C(·, ·). Note here that the map from M0′ ⊕ M1 −→ M0 is
minimal and that by construction of (2) one gets an exact sequence
(3)


0 

(M, g1 )
(M,g01 )⊕(M,g02 ◦f1 )
(M,f0 )
0−
→ (M, K1 ) −−−−−−−−→ (M, M0′ ⊕ M1 ) −−−−−−−−−−−−−→ (M, M0 ) −−−−→ (M, Z) → SZ → 0.
Here all maps are minimal. Now continue by decomposing K1 = M1′ ⊕ C1 and constructing a
minimal C-approximation ξ2 of C1 . Then one splices C(M, ξ2 ) together with (3) to get the next
part of the minimal projective resolution. This method yields a minimal projective resolution of
SZ (cf. Lemma 2.10).
Example 2.16. Let R be a commutative complete local Cohen–Macaulay ring and consider M :=
R. Then the construction above gives a minimal free resolution of the residue field k. The
constructed minimal resolution is of finite length equal to dim R if and only if R is regular.
3. Constructing minimal approximations and almost split maps via ladders
In this section R will always be a noetherian commutative Henselian CM local ring with canonical
module and with dim R ≤ 2 and C = add(M ) for some MCM(R)-module M . We will refer to
these conditions as the Henselian setting. We will use Iyama’s notion of ladders to construct
right C-approximations and right C-almost split maps, in a similar context as in [IW10], section 4.
There, the special MCM-modules over two-dimensional quotient singularities are computed, that
is, the (duals of) syzygies of MCM-modules. Therefore they construct an add(R)-approximation
via ladders in the factor category D = MCM(R)/[add(R)] = MCM(R) in Theorems 4.7 and
4.8 of loc.cit. In our case, in order to construct an add(M )-approximation, we will consider the
category D = MCM(R)/[add(M )]. Here we are not only interested in syzygies, but also in the
actual “approximation” terms in add(M ), since the goal is to explicitly construct a minimal
projective resolution of a module over A = EndR M . In [IW10], only the dual version of the
result we need is proven, thus we will revisit the proof. We will work in the setting of τ -categories,
which were introduced and studied by Iyama in [Iya05a].
Definition 3.1. Let C be an additive category. Consider the properties:
(a) C is Krull-Schmidt.
(b) For any object X ∈ C there exists a complex
(4)

ν

µX

→ ϑX −−→ X,
τ X −−X

such that µX , νX ∈ JC are right minimal morphisms and such that the sequences
C(νX )

C(µX )

C(−, τ X) −−−−→ C(−, ϑX) −−−−→ JC (−, X) −→ 0
and
C(νX )

C(ϑX, −) −−−−→ JC (τ X, −) −→ 0

0

10

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

are exact.
(c) For any object X ∈ C there exists a complex
(5)

µ−

ν−

→ τ − X,
X −−X
→ ϑ− X −−X

−
such that µ−
X , νX ∈ JC are left minimal morphisms and such that the sequences
C(ν − )

C(µ− )

X
C(τ − X, −) −−−X
−→ C(ϑ− X, −) −−−−
→ JC (X, −) −→ 0

and
C(ν − )

C(−, ϑ− X) −−−X
−→ JC (−, τ − X) −→ 0
are exact.
Then (4) (resp. (5)) is called a right τ -sequence (resp. left τ -sequence). C is called a right
(resp. left) τ -category if it satisfies conditions (a) and (b) (resp. (a) and (c)). The category C is
called a τ -category if it satisfies (a)–(c).
Remark 3.2. If C is a (right) τ -category and D is a full subcategory of C, then by [Iya05b,
1.4] the factor category C/[D] is also a (right) τ -category. Note that we only make use of
right τ -sequences, so for right τ -categories the same proof as in [Iya05b, 1.4] for τ -categories
holds. The τ -sequence of an object X ∈ C\D is then given by its image in C/[D], meaning,
that if τ X −→ ϑX −→ X is a right τ -sequence in D, then if ϑX is not contained in D,
τ X −→ ϑX −→ X is the corresponding τ -sequence in the factor category, where means that
one removes direct summands contained in D. If ϑX = 0, then the corresponding τ -sequence is
0 −→ 0 −→ X. Similar for left τ -sequences.
Example 3.3. If R is an isolated singularity and complete local, then MCM(R) for dim R ≤ 2 is
a τ -category, see [Iya05a, 2.2]: such an R can be seen as order over its Noether normalization,
which is a complete regular local ring.
In our Henselian setting, we only assume that dim R ≤ 2 and that R is an isolated singularity,
CM Henselian local with canonical module, so need not be an order over a complete regular
local ring. But then MCM(R) is still a right τ -category: for any indecomposable non-projective
X ∈ MCM(R) there exists an almost split sequence, see [Aus86b] or [LW12, Cor. 13.9] for the
Henselian setting,
0 −→ τ X −→ ϑX −→ X −→ 0,
which plays the role of a right τ -sequence. Any non-injective module X has a left τ -sequence.
For the only projective indecomposable module in MCM(R), that is, R itself, one has
• If dim R = 0 then the fundamental sequence of R is of the form
0 −→ 0 −→ m −→ R −→ k −→ 0.
This gives a right τ -sequence for R:
0 −→ m −→ R,
thus τ R = 0.
• If dim R = 1 (R local and Henselian) then one has the same fundamental sequence, and
τ R = 0. Note here that from the depth lemma it follows that m is a MCM-module over
R, which might not be indecomposable.
• If dim R = 2, then the fundamental sequence of R is of the form (cf. [Yos90, (11.5)])
0 −→ ωR −→ ϑR −→ R −→ k −→ 0,
which gives the right τ -sequence
ωR −→ ϑR −→ R

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

11

for R. Thus in this case τ R = ωR holds.
Definition 3.4. Let D be a (right) τ -category and X ∈ D. A right ladder for X is a diagram
g3

· · · −→
(6)
f

3
· · · −→

g2

Z3
↓ a3

−→

Y3

2
−→

f

g

Z2
↓ a2

1
−→

Y2

1
−→

f

Z1
↓ a1
Y1

g

0
−→

Z0 = 0
↓ a0

f

0
−→
Y0 = X,

such that each square commutes in D, and moreover there exist objects Un+1 ∈ D and morphisms
hn ∈ D(Un+1 , Zn ) such that


Zn+1 ⊕ Un+1



−gn hn 


an+1 0
an f n
−−−−−−−−−−→ Zn ⊕ Yn+1 −−−−−−−→ Yn


is a right τ -sequence for any n ≥ 0. We say that the ladder terminates if Yn = 0 for some n ≫ 0.
In order to construct the terms of the ladder, one has a recursion formula in K0 (D), cf. Thm. 4.8
(c) of [IW10] and [Iya05a], 7.1. Here K0 (A) denotes the Grothendieck group of an additive caterory A. This group is a free abelian group generated by the isomorphism classes
of the indecomposable objects in A, when A has the Krull-Schmidt property, and the relation [A′ ⊕ A′ ]′ = [A] + [A′′ ], where [A] denotes the class of an object A ∈ A. However,
the terms in the formula come from modules in MCM(R), so one can also consider them
in K0 (MCM(R)) = K0 (mod(R)) (the last equality holds for (R, m, k) Henselian and Cohen–
Macaulay, see e.g. [Yos90, 13.2]).
Let now D ⊆ MCM(R) be a full subcategory. Note that each X ∈ K0 (D) can be written uniquely
in K0 (D) or K0 (MCM(R)) as X = X+ − X− for X+ , X− ∈ D (and thus in MCM(R)) not having
a common direct summand.
In our context C = add(M ) and D will be the factor category MCM(R)/[add(M )].
Start with X ∈ MCM(R) and its τ -sequence 0 → τ X → ϑX → X. Set
Y0 = X, Y1 = ϑX − MC (ϑX), P1 = MC (ϑX),
where MC (L) denotes the maximal direct summand of L ∈ MCM(R) contained in C. In order
to get the terms in K0 (D) one just kills all terms contained in C. Thus in K0 (D) one just has
Y1 = ϑX and P1 = 0, when one has to consider the τ -sequence in D. Now set
Z0 = 0, U0 = 0, P0 = 0 and Z1′ = τ X.
In this first step one also sets U1 = 0 and Z1 = Z1′ . Now we may define recursively for n ≥ 1:
(7)

Yn+1 = (ϑYn − Zn′ )+ − MC ((ϑYn − Zn′ )+ ),

Pn+1 = MC ((ϑYn − Zn′ )+ )

And moreover:
(8)

′
Zn+1
= τ Yn ,

′
Un+1 = (ϑYn − Zn+1
)− ,

′
Zn+1 = Zn+1
− Un+1 .

Every expression is equivalent to one with only positive terms hence each equivalence class in
′
K0 is represented by an actual module in MCM(R). Note that Zn+1
= Zn+1 ⊕ Un+1 just means
that we decompose each τ Yn into two direct summands such that for a map (f1 , f2 ) : τ Yn =
Zn+1 ⊕ Un+1 → ϑYn the image of the component f2 : Un+1 → ϑYn = Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1 ⊕ Zn lies in
Pn+1 ⊕ Zn .
This can be easily deduced from the AR sequence: Un+1 does not have a common summand (by
construction) with ϑYn . Thus there is no irreducible map from Un+1 to Yn+1 . But since there
is a map from Un+1 to ϑYn , its image has to lie in Pn+1 ⊕ Zn .

12

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

Remark 3.5. If dim R ≥ 3, then there is no right τ -sequence for R, so one cannot easily write
down a recursion formula for the terms in the ladder as above. One might use higher AR-theory,
as in [Iya07] in order to find similar formulas.
The next lemma is a slight generalization of the well known-fact about the finite length of the
Hom in the stable category Hom = HomR /[add(R)] between CM-modules of isolated singularities. This is the key observation to show that ladders terminate for rings of finite CM -type.
Lemma 3.6. Let R be a noetherian commutative local ring with an isolated singularity. Let
M ∈ MCM(R) and X ∈ MCM(R) and Y ∈ mod(R). Then (HomR /[add(M )])(X, Y ) is a
module of ﬁnite length over R.
This is Lemma 7.6 of [Aus78] with Hom substituted by HomR /[add(M )]. However, since it is
not clear that all steps work in our setting, we will give the proof here:
Proof. First note that N is a module of finite length over R if and only if Np = 0 for all nonmaximal prime ideals p . Secondly, Ext localizes, that is ExtiR (X, Y )p ∼
= ExtiRp (Xp , Yp ) for all
p ∈ Spec(R) and all i ≥ 0. The second fact implies that
∼ HomR (Xp , Yp )/[add(Mp )](Xp , Yp ).
((HomR /[add(M )])(X, Y ))p =
p

Since R is an isolated singularity, all localizations Rp with p ∈ Spec(R) non-maximal are regular local rings. Thus, since X and M are MCM-modules, Xp and Mp are Rp -projective,
that is, Xp ∼
= Rpl for some k, l ∈ N. Hence any morphism f : Xp −→
= Rpk and Mp ∼
f
id
→ Yp ) and
Yp can be factored through add(Mp ) = add(Rp ) (by e.g., Xp ∼
= Rk −→ Rk −
p

p

thus HomRp (Xp , Yp )/[add(Mp )](Xp , Yp ) = 0 = (HomR /[add(M )](X, Y ))p for any non-maximal
prime ideal p. Then the general fact about finite length modules implies that HomR /[add(M )](X, Y )
is a module of finite length over R.

Proposition 3.7. Let R be a local CM Henselian ring with an isolated singularity, M ∈
MCM(R) and assume that D = MCM(R)/[add(M )] is ﬁnite, that is, there is only a ﬁnite
number of indecomposable objects in D. Then there exists an m ∈ N such that Jm
D = 0.
Proof. We have to show that there exists an integer m such that Jm
D (X, Y ) = 0 for any
X, Y ∈ MCM(R). Since Jm
(X,
Y
)
is
a
submodule
of
Hom
/[add(M
)](X, Y ), it has finite
R
D
length by Lemma 3.6. Moreover, one has a chain JD (X, Y ) ⊃ J2D (X, Y ) ⊃ · · · of submodules of
XY
HomD (X, Y ). Because of finite length, this chain has to stabilize, i.e., Jm
(X,L
Y ) = 0L
for some
D
mXY ≫ 0. Since there are only finitely many indecomposables in D and Jk ( i Xi , j Yj ) =
L k
m
ij J (Xi , Yj ) for Xi , Yj indecomposable (see Lemma 2.3), there exists an m such that JD =
0.

Essentially, the next theorem is Thm. 4.8 of [IW10] - however, Iyama and Wemyss work in
the factor category, and they prove the theorem for left ladders. Therefore, we are stating
the theorem in our context and show that a similar proof works. Moreover we prove that the
constructed maps are indeed minimal right C-approximations and -almost split maps.
Theorem 3.8. Let R be a local Henselian CM ring with canonical module and suppose that R
is an isolated singularity with dim R ≤ 2. Let C be a full subcategory of MCM(R) and let D be
the factor category MCM(R)/[C]. Take any X ∈ MCM(R). Then there exists a commutative
diagram (a ladder of X in D) such that
g31

· · · −−→
(9)
f

31
· · · −−
→

g21

Z3
↓b3

−−→

Y3

21
−−
→

f

g

Z2
↓b2

11
−−
→

Y2

11
−−
→

f

g

Z1
↓b1

01
−−
→

Y1

01
−−
→ Y0 = X,

f

Z0 = 0
↓b0

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

13

where the objects Yn ∈ D, Pn ∈ C and Zn , Un ∈ MCM(R) and Zn′ = Zn ⊕ Un and Yn′ = Yn ⊕ Pn
are determined by the recursion formula in (7) and (8). Then there exist morphisms bn , gn , fn ∈
JMCM(R) with bn : Zn −→ Yn , gn := (gn1 , gn2 ) : Zn+1 ⊕ Un+1 −→ Zn , fn := (fn1 , fn2 ) :
Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1 −→ Yn , cn := (cn1 , cn2 ) : Zn ⊕ Un −→ Pn , such that
βn

α

n
′
′
−−→
Zn ⊕ Yn+1
Zn+1
−−→ Yn

(10)

are right τ -sequences of Yn in MCM(R) for any n ≥ 0. The morphisms here are
−gn,1 −gn,2


 b
0 
 n+1

cn+1,1 cn+1,2
−−−−−−−−−−−−−−→ Zn ⊕ Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1


αn : Zn+1 ⊕ Un+1



and
βn : Zn ⊕ Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1





bn fn,1 fn,2
−−−−−−−−−−−−−→ Yn .

If MCM(R) is of ﬁnite MCM-type and X 6= 0 ∈ D (resp. X 6= 0 ∈ C), then the ladder computes
a minimal right C-approximation of X (resp. minimal right C-almost split map). Namely, for
some n ≫ 0 there are maps f, a with a ∈ JMCM(R) such that
(11)

0 −→ Zn ⊕

n
M

a

→
Ui −

n
M

f

→X
Pi −

i=1

i=1

is exact and any other morphism (resp. any other morphism in JMCM(R) ) from some T ∈ C to
X factors through f .
Remark 3.9. For the proof of this theorem an extended ladder in MCM(R) will be constructed.
Then the statement of Theorem 3.8 can be given as follows: Let R have the same properties as in
Theorem 3.8, then there exists a commutative diagram (an extended ladder of X in MCM(R))
such that
g3 ⊕1U ⊕1U ⊕1U

1
2
−−−→
· · · −−−−−3−−−−

(12)

A3
↓ a3

f3 ⊕1P ⊕1P ⊕1P

g2 ⊕1U ⊕1U

1
−−−−−2−−−→

g1 ⊕1U

1
−−−−−→

A2
↓ an

A1
↓ a1

f1 ⊕1P

f2 ⊕1P ⊕1P

g

0
−→

A0 = 0
↓ a0

f

0
1
1
1
2
Y0 = X,
B1 −→
B2 −−−−−→
−−−→
B3 −−−−−2−−−→
· · · −−−−−3−−−−
Ln
Ln
where An = Zn ⊕ i=1 Un and Bn = Yn ⊕ i=1 Pi and the maps an are explained below, and
the remaining maps are defined as in theorem 3.8.
In addition, there is also the extended ladder of X in D, i.e., the extended ladder of X ∈ MCM(R)
with the Pi -terms killed:

(13)

···

/ Z3 ⊕ U3 ⊕ U2 ⊕ U1

···


/ Y3

g2 ⊕1U2 ⊕1U1

b3 ⊕0⊕0⊕0
f3

/ Z2 ⊕ U2 ⊕ U1

g1 ⊕1U1

/ Z1 ⊕ U1

b2 ⊕0⊕0
f2


/ Y2

g0

b0

b1 ⊕0
f1


/ Y1

/ Z0 = 0

f0


/ Y0 = X.

Proof. We will construct the extended
The maps an in (12) are given
 ladder of X ∈ MCM(R).

bn
0 01×(n−1)
by diagonal matrices of the form cn,1 cn2 01×(n−1) , where the maps dn : Zn ⊕ Un ⊕
dn
Ln−1
Ln−1
k=1 Pk can be inductively determined via d1 = 0, d2 = (c11 g11 , c11 g12 , c12 ) and
k=1 Uk −→

14

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS


cn−1 01×(n−1)
◦ (gn ⊕ 1Un−1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ 1U1 ) for n ≥ 3. This means simply that dn is the
dn−1
composition of the maps from the ladder

dn =



gn ⊕1Un−1 ⊕···⊕1U1

an

An −−−−−−−−−−−−−→ An−1 −−→ Bn−1 = Yn−1 ⊕

n−1
M

Pk

k=1

Ln−1
restricted to k=1 Pk . The image of (12) in D is given by deleting the direct summands Pi and
the respective maps. The extended ladder (in accordance with the notation of Iyama–Wemyss)
in D is (13).
Here we start the actual proof: in (i) we show that (10) is a right τ -sequence, in (ii) that the
squares in the extended ladder commutes in MCM(R), which implies that the images in D commute. Moreover it is shown that each square is the direct sum of a right τ -sequence and a split
exact sequence. In (iii) we show that (11) is an exact sequence and in (iv) that it gives a minimal
right C-approximation of X 6= 0 ∈ D (resp. a minimal right C-almost split map of X ∈ C).
(i) The sequence (10) is a right τ -sequence: Let Yn , Pn , Zn , Un be defined as in the recursion
formula in (7) and (8). A right τ -sequence of Yn is given as
0−
→ τ Yn −
→ ϑYn −
→ Yn .
′
Then since τ Yn = Zn+1
= Zn+1 ⊕ Un+1 and ϑYn = Zn ⊕ Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1 there exist maps in
JMCM(R) such that the sequence

−gn1 −gn2

bn+1
0 



bn fn,1 fn,2
cn+1,1 cn+1,2
−−−−−−−−−−−−−−→ Zn ⊕ Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1 −−−−−−−−−−−−−→ Yn


(14)

Zn+1 ⊕ Un+1







is a τ -sequence.
(ii) The maps in the ladder: from the definitions of Yn and Zn , it is clear that each square in
the ladder commutes in D, more concretely, from (14) it follows by deleting the Pi and Ui that
bn gn1 = fn1 bn+1 . In the extended ladder in MCM(R) we have chosen the dn so that the diagram
commutes.
(iii) In order to see that (11) is exact, we follow the lines of the proof of Thm. 4.5 of [IW10]. Since
we consider the dual situation, all arrows have to be reversed and instead of injective summands
Ii one has to consider Pi ∈ MCM(R)/[D] = C.
Ln−1
Ln−1
The construction
is similar: 
let Bn := Yn ⊕ Pn ⊕ k=1
Pk and An := Zn ⊕ Un ⊕ k=1
Uk , so

bn
0
01×(n−1)
an ≃ cn,1 cn,2 01×(n−1) .
dn
Claim: The sequences An+1 −→ Bn+1 ⊕ An −→ Bn obtained from (12) are isomorphic to the
direct sum (as complexes) of a right τ -sequence of Yn and a split exact sequence of the form
 

1
0
(01)
0 → Un′ −−−→ Un′ ⊕ Pn′ −−→ Pn′ → 0,
Ln
Ln
where Pn′ = k=1 Pk and Un′ = k=1 Uk for any n.
 

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

15

Proof of claim: This can be carried out by an explicit calculation, which consists in writing the
square of the ladder
An+1

gn

an+1

/ An

′
Zn+1
⊕ Un′

/ Zn ⊕ Un′


Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1 ⊕ Pn′


/ Yn ⊕ Pn′

=

an



Bn+1

fn


/ Bn

in form of an exact sequence and then comparing it to the direct sum of the right τ -sequence
for Yn and the above split exact sequence, which is of the form
(15)

′
Zn+1
⊕ Un′ −−−→ Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1 ⊕ Zn ⊕ Un′ ⊕ Pn′ −−−→ Yn ⊕ Pn′ .

Now one can construct an explicit isomorphism between theL
two.
Ln
n
(iv) Using (i)-(iii) and induction, we see that An ≃ Zn ⊕ j=1 Uj and Bn ≃ Yn ⊕ j=0 Pj
Ln
in MCM(R). In D, one has An ≃ Zn ⊕ j=1 MD (Uj ), where MD (Uj ) denotes the maximal
summand of Uj contained in D, and Bn ≃ Yn . Since all the squares in the ladder (12) commute
and the first square forms an exact sequence 0 −→ Z1 −→ Y1 ⊕ P1 −→ X (the τ -sequence of
X), the sequence
f =f0 f1 ···fn−1

a

n
Bn −−−−−−−−−→ X,
0 −→ An −−→

(16)

where fi = (fi1 , fi2 ) ⊕ 1Pi−1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ 1P1 , is exact by a diagram chase. Clearly f |Yn lies in
Jn (Yn , X) ⊆ JnMCM(R) . If R is of MCM-finite type, it follows from Prop. 3.7 that Yn = 0 for
n ≫ 0. In this case we have an exact sequence in MCM(R)
0−
→

n
M
j=1

a

n
Uj −−→

n
M

f

→ X,
Pj −

j=1

with Pj ∈ C and an ∈ JMCM(R) , which shows that f is minimal, cf. Lemma 2.8.
(v) From the extended ladder in MCM(R) we also get that (11) has the desired approximation
properties. First note that any morphism γ : T −→ N for some module N ∈ MCM(R) and
T ∈ C is contained in J(T, N ) if N is not isomorphic to a (sum of) direct summand(s) of T .
Thus any morphism γ : T −→ Yi , for any Yi 6= 0 as above, i ≥ 1, in the ladder will always be
contained in JMCM(R) , since Yi 6∈ C by construction.
Suppose now that θ : T → X is in J(T, X). We will show inductively that there exists an
h : T −→ Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ P1 such that θ = f0 · · · fn h. It is clear that there exists an
h1 : T −→ Y1 ⊕ P1 such that h = f0 ◦ h1 by the τL
-sequence property of f0 . Suppose we have
n
constructed a hn = (hn1 , . . . , hn,n+1 ) : T → Yn ⊕ i=1 Pi such that f0 · · · fn−1 hn = θ. Here
hn1 : T → Yn is in J(T, Yn ) by the remark in the previous paragraph. Using that the τ -sequence
of Yn is given by (14), we obtain a morphism ϕ = (ϕ1 , ϕ2 , ϕ3 ) : T → Zn ⊕ Yn+1 ⊕ Pn+1 such
that
(17)

bn ϕ1 + fn1 ϕ2 + fn2 ϕ3 = hn1 .

Claim: (ϕ2 , ϕ3 , hn2 , . . . , hn,n+1 ) can be taken as h.
To see this, compute
f0 · · · fn (ϕ2 , ϕ3 , hn2 , . . . , hn,n+1 ) = f0 · · · fn−1 (fn1 ϕ2 + fn2 ϕ3 , hn2 , · · · , hn,n+1 ).
Plugging in (17) yields f0 · · · fn−1 (hn1 − bn ϕ1 , hn2 , · · · , hn,n+1 ), which is equal to
f0 · · · fn−1 (hn1 , hn2 , . . . , hn,n+1 ) − f0 · · · fn−1 (bn ϕ1 , 0, . . . 0).

16

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

Moreover one has (bn ϕ1 , 0, . . . , 0) = an (ϕ1 , 0, . . . , 0). Using that (16) is exact in the middle, one
finds that f0 · · · fn−1 an (ϕ1 , 0, . . . 0) = 0 and thus by induction hypothesis h = (ϕ2 , ϕ3 , hn2 , . . . , hn,n+1 )
satisfies f0 · · · fn h = f0 · · · fn−1 hn = θ.

Remark 3.10. Note that for this proof M does not have to be a generator, that is, we do not
require R ∈ add(M ). The only thing needed is that the beginning of the ladder is a right τ sequence. If X 6= R and R ∈ add(M ), then (16) will be exact on the right and all squares in the
ladder are pullback/pushout squares.
4. Examples
First we illustrate the ladder method for two endomorphism rings over the E6 -curve. In Section
4.1 we compute the global dimension of Leuschke’s NCRs [Leu07], as announced in [DFI15]. In
4.2 we prove the formula for the global spectra of An -curves. In 4.3 the results of the computation
of global spectra for the ADE curve singularities are given together with a short description of
our SAGE program.
Throughout this section we use Yoshino’s [Yos90] notation for the indecomposable MCM-modules
over ADE curve singularities and refer to loc. cit. for the corresponding AR-quivers.
Example 4.1. (The E6 -curve, Leuschke’s NCR): Let R = k[[x, y]]/(x3 +y 4 ). Let M = R⊕M1 ⊕B
and let D = MCM(R)/[add(M )] and C = add(M ). Note that gl. dim EndR M has been computed with other methods in [DFI15, Example 5.12]. In order to determine the global dimension
of A = EndR M with ladders, let us compute the C-almost split maps of the direct summands
of M and consequently the C-resolutions of the appearing kernels:
(i) R: The fundamental sequence is
0 −→ N1 ∼
= m −→ R,
and R is the projective cover of the simple k. The C-approximation of N1 is given by the ladder:
(18)

B
↓
M1 ⊕ M1

→
−

X
↓
− A ⊕ M1
→

→
−

B ⊕ M2
↓
− X ⊕ M1
→

→
−

X
↓
− A ⊕ M2
→

→
−

B
↓
− X
→

→ M1
−
↓
→ A
−

→
−

0
↓
− N1 .
→

In terms of the recursion formula this reads as Y0 = N1 , U0 = P0 = Z0 = 0. Then Y1 = A,
P1 = U1 = 0, Z1 = M1 . Further Y2 = X, P2 = 0, Z2 = B and U2 = 0. Then Y3 = A ⊕ M2 ,
Z3 = X and U3 = P3 = 0. In the fourth step: Y4 = X, P4 = M1 , Z4 = B ⊕ M2 and U4 = 0. For
Y5 = A, P5 = 0, Z5 = X and U5 = 0, and the ladder finally terminates with Y6 = 0, P6 = M1 ,
Z6 = B and U6 = 0. The right C-almost split map of R is thus
0 −→ B −→ M1 ⊕ M1 −→ R,
which shows that proj. dim SR = proj. dimEndR M (HomR (M, R)/J(M, R)) = 2.
(ii) M1 : the AR-sequence of M1 is a C-almost split map with kernel N1 . Since we have already
computed the C-approximation of N1 in (i), the sequence
0 −→ B −→ M1 ⊕ M1 −→ R ⊕ B −→ M1
yields that proj. dim SM1 = 3.
(iii) B: the extended ladder of B looks as follows:
(19)

B
↓
M1 ⊕ B

→
−

X
↓
− A⊕B
→

→ B ⊕ M2
−
↓
→ X ⊕B
−

→
−
→
−

M1 ⊕ X
↓
A ⊕ M2 ⊕ B

→
−

A
↓
− N1 ⊕ X
→

→
−

0
↓
− B.
→

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

17

The minimal C-right almost split map of B is thus
0 −→ B −→ B ⊕ M1 −→ B.
So proj. dim SB = 2. In total, gl. dim EndR M = 3.
Example 4.2. (E6 – infinite global dimension) Let again R = k[[x, y]]/(x3 + y 4 ). This time
let M = R ⊕ B ⊕ X and C = add(M ). Using ladders, one sees that proj. dimA SR = 2 and
proj. dimA SB = 4. However, SX is of infinite projective dimension: again with ladders, one can
show that the C-almost split map of X is
0 −→ N1 ⊕ M2 −→ B ⊕ X ⊕ R −→ X.
The C-approximation of N1 is
0 −→ B −→ X −→ N1 −→ 0,
and for M2 it is just the AR sequence
0 −→ M2 −→ X −→ M2 −→ 0.
Hence the minimal C-approximation of N1 ⊕ M2 is
0 −→ B ⊕ M2 −→ X ⊕ X −→ N1 ⊕ M2 −→ 0.
But here we see that the C-resolution will be periodic: B is contained in C, so it doesn’t have
to approximated further, but the kernel of the C-approximation of M2 will be again M2 . Thus
proj. dimA SX = ∞ and A is not of finite global dimension.
4.1. Leuschke’s endomorphism rings for ADE curve singularities.
Theorem 4.3. Let R be a 1-dimensional ADE curve singularity, that is, a reduced complete
local ring of type An with n ≥ 1, Dn with n ≥ 4, E6 , E7 or E8 . Consider the family of rings
(1)
(n )
(j )
(j )
{Ri i }, where R0 = R, R1 = R1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ R1 1 := EndR m, and the Ri i are the direct
(j )
(j )
e and set
factors of all EndR(l) mR(l) . Consider the longest chain R0 ⊆ R1 1 ⊆ · · · Rmm = R
i−1
i−1
Lm
(j )
A = EndR i=0 Ri i . Then
(
2 if R is of type An ,
gl. dim A =
3 else.
Proof. The proof consists of a case by case analysis:
(1) R ∼
= k[[x, y]]/(xn+1 + y 2 ), the An -case: see Section 4.2.
(2) Dn : start with the odd n: in [DFI15] it was computed that Leuschke’s chain is given by
M = R ⊕ X1 ⊕ A ⊕ M1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ M n−3 . In order to compute gl. dim EndR M , we compute
2
the minimal projective resolutions of the simples as above. Set again C := add(M ). The
following exact sequences yield minimal EndR M -projective resolutions of the corresponding
simples:
(i) R:
0 −→ M1 ⊕ A −→ X1 ⊕ X1 −→ R −→ k −→ 0.
(ii) X1 :
0 −→ M1 ⊕ A −→ X1 ⊕ X1 −→ M1 ⊕ R ⊕ A −→ X1 −→ 0.
(iii) A:
0 −→ M1 −→ X1 −→ A −→ 0.
(iv) Mi : here one has to look at several cases: computing the ladder for M1 yields C-almost
split map
0 −→ A ⊕ M1 −→ X1 ⊕ M2 −→ M1 −→ 0.

18

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

Note here that for n = 5 the approximation is slightly different: 0 −→ A ⊕ M1 −→ M1 ⊕
X1 −→ M1 −→ 0. For 1 < i < n−3
2 one gets
0 −→ Mi −→ Mi−1 ⊕ Mi+1 −→ Mi −→ 0,
and for M n−3 one obtains
2

0 −→ M n−3 −→ M n−3 ⊕ M n−5 −→ M n−3 −→ 0.
2

2

2

2

In all cases proj. dimEndR M SMi = 2.
Thus the maximum of the projective dimension of the simples is 3 and hence gl. dim EndR M =
3.
The even Dn ’s are similar: here M = R ⊕ X1 ⊕ M1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ M n−4 ⊕ D− ⊕ D+ and the
2
C-approximations are either the same as for the n odd case or as listed below for n > 4:
(i) M n−4 : here a ladder yields the C-approximation
2

0 −→ M n−4 −→ M n−6 ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− −→ M n−4 −→ 0.
2

2

2

(ii) D+ : here the approximation is
0 −→ D− −→ M n−4 −→ D+ −→ 0.
2

(iii) D− is similar:
0 −→ D+ −→ M n−4 −→ D− −→ 0.
2

Again one sees that gl. dim EndR M = 3.
For n = 4, M = R ⊕ X1 ⊕ A ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− and the approximations slightly differ but the
global dimension of EndR M is again 3. One has the following C-approximations: 0 −→
D+ ⊕ D− −→ X12 −→ R −→ k −→ 0, 0 −→ D+ ⊕ D− −→ X12 −→ A ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− −→
X1 −→ 0, 0 −→ D+ ⊕ D− −→ X1 −→ A −→ 0, 0 −→ D+ ⊕ A −→ X1 −→ D+ −→ 0 and
0 −→ D− ⊕ A −→ X1 −→ D− −→ 0.
(3) E6 : see Example 4.1.
(4) E7 : here M = R ⊕ M1 ⊕ Y1 ⊕ A ⊕ D. The following exact sequences yield minimal EndR M projective resolutions of the corresponding simples:
0
0
0
0

−→
−→
−→
−→

Y1
Y1
Y1
Y1
0

−→
M12
−→
M12
−→ D ⊕ A
−→
M13
−→
A

−→
R
−→ Y1 ⊕ R
−→
M1
−→
Y1
−→
Y1

−→ k
−→ M1
−→ Y1
−→ A
−→ D

−→
−→
−→
−→
−→

0.
0.
0.
0.
0.

Again gl. dim EndR M = 3.
(5) E8 : here M = R ⊕ M1 ⊕ A1 ⊕ A2 and the approximations of the direct summands are as
follows:
0
0

−→ A1
−→ A1
0
0

−→ M12
−→ M12
−→ A1
−→ A2

−→
R
−→
A1
−→ A2 ⊕ M1
−→ A1 ⊕ A2

−→ k
−→ M1
−→ A1
−→ A2

−→
−→
−→
−→

0.
0.
0.
0.

Again gl. dim EndR M = 3.


COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

19

4.2. Global spectrum of An -curves. In [DF14] the global spectrum of An -curve singularities
is computed by a general fact about triangulated categories. Here we give a computational proof
using ladders:
Theorem 4.4. (1) n odd: Let R = k[[x, y]]/(y 2 +xn ), where n = 2k+1. Then the global spectrum
gsMCM(R) (R) = {1, 2}. In particular the endomorphism rings of ﬁnite global dimension are of
Lk
the form Ai0 = EndR ( i=i0 Ii ), where Ii = (y, xi ) are the indecomposable MCM(R)-modules
(note: I0 = R!) and i0 ≥ 0. Here
(
1 if i0 = k
gl. dim Ai0 =
2 else.
(2) n even: Let R = k[[x, y]]/(y 2 + xn ), where n = 2k. Then the global spectrum gsMCM(R) (R) is
{1, 2, 3}. The indecomposables in MCM(R) are the Ii , i = 0, . . . , k and the two smooth irreducible
components D+ and D− . There are three types of endomorphism rings A = EndR M of ﬁnite
global dimension:
(i) add(M ) ⊆ add(D− , D+ ), then gl. dim A = 1.
Lk
(ii) M = i=i0 Ii ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− , with 0 ≤ i0 ≤ k then gl. dim A = 2.
Li1
(iii) M =
i=i0 Ii ⊕ D+ , with i0 ≤ i1 ≤ k (or symmetrically with D− instead of D+ ), then
gl. dim A = 3.
Proof. (1) Note that we can always assume that M is a generator, that is, R ∈ add(M ). This
follows from the observation that EndR (I1 ) = EndR (m) ∼
= k{x, y}/(y 2 + xn−2 ) and that all Ii
with i ≥ 1 are modules over EndR (m). So one can just substitute R with EndR (m). Inductively
it follows that if i0 is that smallest index such that Ii0 is a direct summand of M , then one
may consider M as an Ii0 ∼
= k{x, y}/(y 2 + xn−2i0 )-module such that M is then a
= EndR (Ii0 ) ∼
generator.
Ll
Ll′
Suppose now that M = i=0 Ii ⊕ j=m Ij for some 0 ≤ l < m − 1 ≤ k − 1. We compute the
projective resolution of the simple for Il : the AR-sequence for Il is

(20)

0 −→ Il −→ Il−1 ⊕ Il+1 −→ Il −→ 0.

So for the ladder we get Y0 = Il , Y1 = Il+2 , P1 = Il−1 , Z1 = Il , U1 = 0. The next terms are
Y2 = Il+2 , P2 = 0, Z2 = Il+1 , U2 = 0. Iterating this process, until we reach m gives: Ym−l = 0,
Pm−l = Im , Zm−l = 0 and Um−l = Im−1 . So a right almost add(M )-split sequence of Il is given
as:
0 −→ Im−1 −→ Il ⊕ Im −→ Il −→ 0.
Now construct an add(M )-approximation of Im−1 : In the ladder we have Y0 = Im−1 , Y1 =
Im−2 , P1 = Im and Z1 = Im−1 , U1 = 0. One easily sees the structure of the ladder from the
next step: Y2 = Im−3 , P2 = 0 and Z2 = Im−2 , U2 = 0. Thus we get Ym−l−1 = 0, Pm−l−1 = Il
and Um−l−1 = Il+1 and Zm−l−1 = 0. Hence
0 −→ Il+1 −→ Il ⊕ Im −→ Im−1 −→ 0
is the desired add(M )-approximation. Now the ladder for the kernel Il+1 has a very similar
structure and one gets its add(M )-approximation
0 −→ Im−1 −→ Im ⊕ Il −→ Il+1 .
But here we already constructed the approximation of the kernel. The minimal projective
resolution of the simple SIl = HomR (M, Il )/J(M, Il ) is thus given as
· · · −→ PIm ⊕ PIl −→ PIm ⊕ PIl −→ PIl −→ SIl −→ 0.

20

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

Hence gl. dim EndR M = ∞.
It remains to show that the only possibility for finite global dimension is l′ = k. Therefore
L l′
suppose that l′ < k, that is, M is of the form
i=0 Ii . Compute the minimal projective
resolution of the simple SIl′ similarly as before: the right add(M )-almost split sequence of Il′ is
0 −→ Il′ +1 −→ Il′ ⊕ Il′ −1 −→ Il′ −→ 0.
The add(M )-approximation of the kernel Il′ +1 is
0 −→ Il′ +1 −→ Il′ ⊕ Il′ −→ Il′ +1 −→ 0.
Thus the (infinite) minimal projective resolution of SIl′ is
· · · −→ PIl′ ⊕ PIl′ −→ PIl′ ⊕ PIl′ −→ PIl′ ⊕ PIl′ −1 −→ PIl′ −→ SIl′ −→ 0.
Lk
Hence we have shown that the only possibility that gl. dim EndR M < ∞ is M =
i=i0 Ii .
Here, if i0 < k, then M is a representation generator of the An−2i0 singularity and thus
gl. dim EndR M = 2 (either by the Iyama–Leuschke theorem or by direct calculation with lade This yields gs EndR M = 1.
ders). If i0 = k, then R is regular and M = Ik ∼
= R.

(2) The proof for the odd An -curves is similar. Here we will not compute all the steps in the
ladders, only show which steps are necessary. The reader is invited to compute the ladders
himself.
(1) It is easy to see that if M = D+ , M = D− or M = D+ ⊕ D− , then gl. dim A = 1. This
covers all modules M such that no Ii is contained in add(M ).
(2) If at least one Ii ∈ add(M ), we may assume that I0 = R ∈ add(M ): choose Ii0 with i0
minimal. Since Ii0 ∼
= R/(y 2 + xn+1−2i0 ) an An−2i0 -singularity, all other modules in add(M )
will be modules over Ii0 . Thus we can consider the endomorphism ring over the finite
extension Ii0 of R.
(3) There is no gap between the Ii ’s: using ladders show that if M is of the form R ⊕ · · · ⊕
Ii1 ⊕ Ii2 ⊕ · · · with i1 < i2 − 1, then gl. dim EndR M = ∞. This implies, that if A has finite
Li1
dimension and one is not in the case (i), then M is of the form i=0
Ii , 0 ≤ i1 ≤ k direct
sum with possibly summands in {D+ , D− }.
Li1
Li1
(4) If M is of the form M =
i=0 Ii with 0 ≤ i1 ≤ k or M =
i=0 Ii ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− , with
0 ≤ i1 < k, then gl. dim A = ∞. This can again be shown using ladders.
L1
(5) Now assume wlog D+ ∈ add(M ). If M is of the form M = ii=0
Ii ⊕ D+ , with 0 ≤ i1 ≤ k,
then gl. dim A = 3. Using ladders, one can show that the simples SIi have projective
dimension 2, whereas the simple SD+ has projective dimension 3.
(6) Finally, if add(M ) = MCM(R), then M is a representation generator and the Iyama–
Leuschke theorem shows that gl. dim A = 2.

It is possible to determine the number of endomorphism rings of torsion-free modules of finite
global dimension of An -singularities (up to Morita-equivalence):
Corollary 4.5. For an A2k -singularity R there is one endomorphism ring A with global dimene the normalization. There are k endomorphism rings A with global
e ∼
sion 1: A = EndR (R)
= R,
Lk
dimension 2: A = EndR ( i=i0 Ii ), 0 ≤ i0 ≤ k, where I0 = R.
For an A2k+1 -singularity R there are three endomorphism rings A with global dimension 1:
A∼
= D+ , A ∼
= D− and A ∼
= D+ ⊕ D− . There are k + 1 endomorphism rings with global dimenLk
∼
sion 2: A = EndR ( i=i0 Ii ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− ), 0 ≤ i0 ≤ k, where I0 = R. There are k 2 + 3k + 2

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

21

Li1
endomorphism rings with global dimension 3: A = EndR ( i=i
Ii ⊕ D+ ), with i0 ≤ i1 ≤ k (or
0
symmetrically with D− instead of D+ )
Proof. The numbers are obvious, except for the global dimension 3 case for A2k+1 -singularities.
This case is a counting argument: by Theorem 4.4 (2) (iii) we have to count the number of
Li1
modules of the form
i=i0 Ii ⊕ D+ , i0 ≤ i1 ≤ k. For k = 0 there is 1 such module, namely
R ⊕ D+ . Because of the symmetry D+ / D− there are in total a0 = 2 endomorphism rings of
global dimension 3 for the A1 -curve. For k = 1 there are 2 modules of the form Ii0 ⊕ D+ and
one of the form R ⊕ I1 ⊕ D+ , thus in total one gets a1 = 2(2 + 1) = 6. The same counting
can be done for A2k+1 : there are k + 1 modules of the form Ii0 ⊕ D+ , k modules of the form
Li0 +l
Ii ⊕ D+ , for 0 ≤ l ≤ k. This yields
Ii0 ⊕ Ii0 +1 ⊕ D+ , thus k − l + 1 modules of the form i=i
0
ak = 2(1 + · · · + (k + 1)) = (k + 1)(k + 2).


4.3. Global spectra of the ADE curves.
Theorem 4.6. Let R be a 1-dimensional ADE curve singularity, i.e., a reduced complete local
ring of type An , Dn , E6 , E7 or E8 . Then


{1, 2} if R is of type A2n , n ≥ 1,





{1, 2, 3} if R is of type A2n+1 , n ≥ 1,
gs(R) = {1, 2, 3, 4} if R is of type D4 , D5 or E6 ,



{1, 2, 3, 4, 5} if R is of type Dn , 6 ≤ n ≤ 13,



{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6} if R is of type E or E .
7
8

If R is of type Dn , n ≥ 14, then {1, . . . , 5} ⊆ gs(R).

Proof. The assertions for type An are the content of Theorem 4.4. For the other cases we
used a SAGE program, which will be described below. It computes, for a given MCM-module
M, the length of the projective resolutions of the simples of EndR M using Theorem 3.8 and
Construction 2.15. Here it is sufficient to take only basic endomorphism rings, since any other
endomorphism ring is Morita equivalent to a basic one, see Lemma 2.2. Since any ADE curve is
of finite MCM-type, one can compute all possibilities.
It is easy to see that {1, . . . , 5} is contained in gs(R) for R of type Dn , n ≥ 14: the curve
singularities A3 ∨ L and A4 ∨ L (see [FK99] for notation) both have global spectrum {1, . . . , 5}.
Since any curve singularity An−2i−1 ∨L with coordinate ring R′ is an overring of R (see Examples
5.8 and 5.9) and gs(R′ ) ⊆ gs(R) by Lemma 5.2, the assertion follows.

Conjecture 4.7. Let R be of type Dn , n ≥ 14. Then gs(R) = {1, . . . , 5}.
4.3.1. The Program. In this section we describe the implementation in Sage. The code is available at: http://kappa.math.unb.ca/research/brandoncode.html
The input consists of the AR-quiver of a ring R of finite MCM-type and of dim R ≤ 2 and a
module M ∈ MCM(R). For curves, one adds a formal zero-module which is treated as τ R and
τ (0) = R to ensure τ is defined on every module so we obtain a translation quiver (cf. Example
3.3). The AR-quiver is encoded as a directed graph. The translation τ is encoded as an adjecency
matrix and M as a list of integers, called S, which represent the indecomposables of M . The
program computes a list of the projective modules in the minimal projective resolutions of the
simples of EndR M and thus the global dimension of EndR M as the maximum length of these
resolutions.

22

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

The construction follows the description of the algorithm in section 4 of [Wem11]. We indicate
the notions of Theorem 3.8. Of central importance for this program is a directed graph which
constitutes a finite portion of the universal cover of the AR quiver for the ring. The graph will
be broken up into levels, with the vertices in level n being the predecessors of those in level
n − 1. To keep track of the correspondences between the modules of the AR quiver and the
vertices of the universal cover, we use a list which contains the number in the quiver of the
module corresponding to the vertex numbered v in the universal cover in position v. This graph
is constructed step-by-step, starting with level 0, as the ladder proceeds.
Moreover, the following is used by the program:
• Various lists to keep track of data concerning the vertices of the graph, such as their
associated numbers and the level of the graph at which they are found.
• A number to keep track of the current level of the graph (the level whose vertices are
being numbered).
• A vector representing the kernel of the approximation, with the multiplicity in the kernel
of the module numbered n in the nth position (initially these are all set to zero).
• A vector representing the middle term of the approximation, similar to the above.
The algorithm consists of the following steps:
(1) Constructing a right add(M )-almost split map resp. right add(M )-approximation: We describe the process of associating numbers to the vertices of the graph. To start with, the initial
vertex, that is, the module to be approximated, (Y0 in Thm. 3.8) of the graph is numbered 1, and
a new level is added to the graph, consisting of that vertex’s predecessors. When a new vertex
is first added to the graph, its number is set as zero. After a new level is added, it becomes the
current level, and all vertices at that level are numbered. The number of a vertex v is calculated
by adding up the numbers of the successors of v in the universal cover, and subtracting the
number associated to τ −1 v. If any of these vertices are not in the finite part of the graph which
is constructed by the program, their numbers are assumed to be zero, since the only vertices
that can have nonzero numbers are those from which there exists an edge to the initial vertex,
and these are also the only vertices that can be included in the finite graph. For the purpose
of this computation, vertices corresponding to modules in the set S or the zero module and
vertices whose numbers are negative are treated as if their numbers were zero. After a vertex is
numbered (say its number is k), we first check to see if k is negative; if so, the multiplicity of
the corresponding module in the kernel is increased by −k (this corresponds to the Un in Thm.
3.8). If k is non-negative, we then check to see if v corresponds to a module in the set S; if so,
the multiplicity of the corresponding module in the middle term is increased by k (corresponds
to Pn in Thm. 3.8).
After all vertices at the current level are numbered, we check whether all vertices at both the
current and previous levels are either numbered zero, or satisfy the criteria to have their numbers
treated as zero when numbering other vertices. If this is the case, the step is finished (since any
further vertices would always be numbered zero) and the program returns a list consisting of the
vector representing the kernel, followed by the vector representing the middle term and goes to
step (2). If not, a new level consisting of the current level’s predecessors is added to the graph,
which becomes the current level, and we start with step (1) again.
(2) Approximating the kernel: We examine the kernel K computed in (1). The algorithm
terminates under two conditions:
• If all the indecomposable summands of K are in the set S, then the approximation
sequence is complete, and a list of vectors representing all terms in the sequence is
returned.

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

23

• If the set of indecomposable summands of K which are not in S is the same as the
set of indecomposable summands for the kernel of another approximation in the same
sequence, then we know the sequence will ultimately turn out to be infinite, so a null
value is returned.
If one of the two conditions is met, the program returns either a list of terms in the sequence,
or a null value yielding to an infinite resolution as above.
Otherwise follow construction 2.15: each module in the kernel which is not in S is removed from
the kernel (i.e. has its multiplicity changed to zero) and approximated with step (1). These
approximations are then added together, with the same multiplicities as the modules had in the
kernel, to produce an approximation for the part of the kernel which is not in S. This increases
the length of the approximation sequence by one. We then examine the kernel of this new approximation sequence, and repeat step (2) until one of the two stopping conditions listed above
is satisfied.
Now repeat the above procedure for all members of S. The global dimension of the endomorphism ring is equal to the length of the longest such sequence (which may be infinite).
We include a table of the occurring global dimensions and the involved modules of Thm. 4.6, so
that the complexity of the algorithm is more visible (see Table 1).
Singularity
E6
E7
E8
Dn , n even
D4
D6
D8
D10
D12
Dn , n odd
D5
D7
D9
D11
D13
A2k+1
A2k

# of subsets with gl. dim
3
4
5
34
4
0
7, 638
6, 933
486
24, 614
26, 479
2, 500

1
1
3
1

2
13
80
94

7
7
7
7
7

28
73
146
253
400

207
2, 416
25, 601
265, 602
2, 745, 634

90
1, 713
26, 743
389, 942
5, 449, 152

3
3
3
3
3
3
1

20
58
122
218
352
k+1
k

95
1, 164
12, 541
130, 672
1, 352, 109
k2 + 3k + 2
0

26
555
9, 527
146, 418
2, 113, 324
0
0

Finite gl. dim

Infinite

Total

6
0
8
48

52
15, 148
53, 736

75
17, 619
77, 335

27 − 1
215 − 1
217 − 1

0
66
1, 458
23, 422
353, 644

0
0
0
0
0

332
4, 275
53, 955
679, 226
8, 548, 837

179
3, 916
77, 116
1, 417, 925
25, 005, 594

29 − 1
213 − 1
217 − 1
221 − 1
225 − 1

0
16
382
6, 778
109, 690
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0

144
1, 796
22, 575
284, 089
3, 575, 478
k2 + 4k + 6
k+1

111
2, 299
42, 960
764, 486
13, 201, 737

28 − 1
212 − 1
216 − 1
220 − 1
224 − 1
2k+3 − 1
2k+1 − 1

Table 1. Number of endomorphism rings of certain global dimensions

Recall that we exclude the case M = 0.
4.4. Global spectra of some surface singularities. In this section we give examples of
the computation of the global spectra for some surface singularities of finite MCM type. The
method and algorithms are essentially the same as for the case of curves, but somewhat simpler
since τ (R) = ωR and so the Auslander-Reiten translate is 6= 0 for all MCM modules. The

24

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

surface singularities of finite MCM type are of the form k[x, y]G where G ⊂ GL2 (k), with the
characteristic of k not dividing |G|. We use Brieskorn’s classification of these singularities with
the notation of Riemenschneider [Rie77]. We compute the global spectra for four examples. We
list the groups G and the invariant rings k[x, y]G for each example. We also show the AR quiver
for two of the examples, which is equal to the MacKay graph. The AR translate is indicated by
a dashed arrow. The results for the global spectra are summarized in a table.
(1) C8,5 :
G=



ζ8
0

0
−ζ8



k[x, y]G = k[x8 , x3 y, xy 3 , y 8 ]

,

/
@ ✏G0 ^❃◆❃ ◆♣ ♣ 1O W✳❃❃
❃
❃
◆
✏ ♣ ♣ ❃❃❃ ◆ ◆✳ ✳❃❃❃❃
♣
❃❃
◆ ❃
❃❃ ✳ ◆'
w♣ ♣ ✏
7O ✳❃o ✏
❃❃ ✳ @ 2
❃
❃❃ ✏
✳ ❃✏ ❃❃
❃❃ ✳✏
✏✳ ❃
❃
✏❃❃✳ 
✏ ✳ ❃❃
❃
✏ ♣7/ 3
6 ^❃g◆ ✳ ❃❃
❃❃◆ ◆
♣
❃
✏
❃❃ ✳ ◆ ❃❃ ♣ ♣
❃❃ ✳ ◆ ❃❃♣ ✏
❃   ♣◆ ◆❃ ✏
♣
5o
4
(2) C16,9 :
G=



ζ16
0

0
−ζ16



(3) D5,3 :
G=

k[x, y]G = k[x16 , x7 y, x5 y 3 , x3 y 5 , xy 7 , y 16 ]

,



ζ32
0

0
ζ3

 
0
,
ζ8

ζ8
0



,

k[x, y]G = k[x4 y 4 , x12 − y 12 , x7 y + xy 7 , x9 y 3 − x3 y 9 ]
4✤
✤
✤
✤
✤
✤
✤
✤
✤
✤

5

i❙
f▼❍❙▼❙❙
❥5 6
❍
❍❍▼❙❙❙❙❙
❥q❥❥q✈❥✈q✈ O✤
❥
❥
✤
❍❍▼ ❙❙❙
❥❥❥ ✈✈
❍❍▼ ▼ ❙❙❙❙
❥❥❥ q✈q✈✈
❥
✤
❥
❍❍ ▼
❙❙❙❙
❥
q
✈
xq ✈✈
❍❍
❥❥❥
✤
/
/
o
9
10
1 ✈
❍❍2O✤ ^❃
❍❍ ❃❃ ✈✈✈; ✤O _❅❅❅ ⑦⑦ ✤O ❅d❍❅❍❅❍ ⑦⑦? ✈✈✤ ✈✈
✤
✤ ❍❍
❅⑦❅❍⑦❍✈✈ ✤
❅⑦❅⑦ ✤
✈✈❃❃ ✤
✤
✤✈✈✈ ❍❍❃❍❃❍❃ ✤ ⑦⑦⑦ ❅❅ ✤ ⑦⑦✈⑦✈✈❅❅❍❅❍❍✤ ❍
✤
✈
z✈
⑦
 ❍❍
#
✈
/ 11 o❚❚
/
✈
❍
✤
✈✈q q8 3 ❦❦❦❦❦ 8
❚❚❚❚7 ▼ ▼❍❍❍
✈
✈q ❦❦❦❦
▼ ▼❍❍
❚
✤
❚
✈
❚
❚❚❚❚ ▼❍❍
✈✈q ❦❦
❚❚❚ ▼❍❍ ✤
✈q❦✈❦q❦❦❦❦❦
❚
✈
❚❚▼❍)&
✈
q❦
u❦
0

(4) D7,5 :
G=



ζ5
0

0
ζ5−1

 
0
,
ζ8

ζ8
0



,

k[x, y]G = k[x4 y 4 , x20 − y 20 , x11 y − xy 11 , x13 y 3 + x3 y 13 ]

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

Singularity
C8,5
C16,9
D5,3
D7,5

1
0
0
0
0

25

# of subsets with gl. dim
Finite (total) Infinite
Total
2
3
4
5
6
7 8 9
1
72
8
8
0
0 0 0
89
166 28 − 1
1 10,488 23,032 10,144 2,304 336 16 16
46,337 19,198 216 − 1
1
732
340
280
0
0 0 0
1,353
2,742 212 − 1
1 7,568 5,968 3,548
0
0 0 0
17,085 48,450 216 − 1

4.5. Inifinite MCM-type. It is natural to ask whether ladders can also be used to compute
global dimensions of endomorphism rings if R is not of finite MCM-type. We give two examples
before we study the question more generally.
Example 4.8. Let R = C[[x, y]]/(y(y − x2 )(y − ax2 )) with a 6= 0, 1 be the coordinate ring of an
e8 -singularity. Then the AR-quiver is completely known, see [Kah88, Thm. 7.9 and Cor. 7.11]
E
and also [Die91] - we use the notation of [Kah88] here: it consists of a disjoint union of so-called
tubes Tr,d of type D4 , where (r, d) 6= (1, 1) and r, d ∈ Z and 1 ≤ r ≤ d ≤ 2r and the tube T(1,1)
containing R. Below is a picture of T(1,1) :
N3

N2

N1

N

···

R
τ N3

τ N2

τ N1

τN

Since R is complete, MCM(R) is a τ -category and the τ -sequences are just the AR-sequences
and we can apply Theorem 3.8 to compute ladders. Consider M = R ⊕ N ⊕ τ N . Since τ N ∼
= m,
the τ -sequence for R is 0 −→ τ N −→ R, which is already a right add(M )-almost split map. The
τ -sequence for τ N is 0 −→ N −→ N1 −→ τ N −→ 0. The ladder for τ N looks as follows:
(21)
··· −
→ Z2i = τ N2i−1 −
→ Z2i = τ N2i−1 −
→ ··· −
→ τ N1 −
→ N −
→
0
↓
↓
↓
↓
↓
··· −
→ Y2i+1 = N2i+1 −
→
Y2i = τ N2i
→ ··· −
−
→ τ N2 −
→ N1 −
→ τ N.
Here any Yi , Zi 6= 0 and thus the ladder does not compute a right add(M )-almost split map for
τN.
Remark 4.9. Note that the underlying AR quivers of the previous examples are of type A∞
which is the case for most of curves with infinite MCM-type, as explained in [Die87].
Example 4.10. (Nonisolated singularity) Let R = C[[x, y]]/(x2 ), then R is of countable MCMtype (cf. [BGS87]): the indecomposables are ideals of the form Mj = (x, y j ), j = 0, 1, . . . and
M∞ ∼
= k[[y]]. The AR-quiver is well-known of type A∞ and looks as follows:
R∼
= M0

M1

M2

M3

···

M∞−1

M∞

.

The fundamental sequence of R is 0 −→ M1 −→ R, the AR-sequences are Mj −→ Mj−1 ⊕
Mj+1 −→ Mj for j ≥ 1, and M∞ does not have an AR-sequence. Take now M = M0 ⊕ M3 .
Then one can use ladders to compute a minimal resolution of SM0 over EndR M : the minimal
right add(M )-almost split map of R ∼
= M0 is the fundamental sequence. A ladder yields the

26

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

add(M )-approximation of M1 : 0 −→ M2 −→ M0 ⊕ M3 −→ M1 −→ 0. Similar the add(M )approximation of M2 is given as 0 −→ M1 −→ M0 ⊕ M3 −→ M2 −→ 0. Thus we see that
HomR (M, −) into the resulting long exact sequence
· · · −→ M0 ⊕ M3 −→ M0 ⊕ M3 −→ M0
yields that SM0 has infinite projective dimension over EndR M . This example shows that one
can sometimes use ladders to compute add(M )-resolutions even though MCM(R) is not a τ category. However, as in Example 4.8 a ladder will not compute a right add(M )- almost split
Lj
map of M3 . Moreover, if one computes the ladder for Mi , i ≥ 4, then Zj = k=0 Mi−j−1+2k
Li−4
Li−4
Lj
and Yj = k=0 Mi−j+2k for j ≤ i − 2 and Zj = k=0 Mj−i+7+2k and Yj = k=0 Mj−i+8+2k
for j ≥ i − 3. Since any Mj 6= 0, it follows that Yj 6= 0 and the ladder does not terminate.
Let now R be as in Thm. 3.8, that is, R is a local Henselian CM ring with canonical module and
dim R ≤ 2 and R is an isolated singularity. If R is of finite MCM-type and M ∈ MCM(R), then
this theorem shows that a ladder computes an add(M )-approximation/add(M )-almost split map
for any X ∈ MCM(R), i.e., in the recursion formula there is some index N such that Yn and Zn
are 0 for n ≥ N . However, as we have seen in in Examples 4.8 and 4.10, this need not hold for
infinite MCM-type. So an evident question is:
Question 4.11. Let R be as in Thm. 3.8 and let M ∈ MCM(R). Does a ladder compute an
add(M )-approximation for any N ∈ MCM(R) if and only if R is of ﬁnite MCM-type?
`
It is easy to see that if the AR quiver Γ of MCM(R) has at least two components Γ1 Γ2 then the
question has a positive answer: take e.g. any indecomposable M ∈ MCM(R) such that [M ] ∈ Γ1 .
Then the recursion formula of Theorem 3.8 applied to any indecomposable N ∈ MCM(R), such
that [N ] ∈ Γ2 , does not compute an add(M )-approximation for N .
For infinite type AR quivers, there are structure theorems, see [Die87] and [HPR80] for the case
of Artin algebras. However, in general it is not clear, whether the AR-quiver consists of more
than one component and how the AR translation acts on the quiver. But we can determine a
special case:
Proposition 4.12. Let R be as in Thm. 3.8 and also assume that R is Gorenstein of Krulldimension 2 and of inﬁnite MCM-type. Let M ∈ MCM(R). Then the ladder construction of
Thm. 3.8 will not yield an add(M )-approximation (add(M )-split map) for some X ∈ MCM(R)/[add(M )]
(X ∈ add(M )).
Proof. We show that there always exists a component of the stable AR-quiver of type A∞ .
Similar to Example 4.10, one sees that if a component of the stable AR-quiver of R is of A∞ type, one can find a direct summand of M such that its ladder does not terminate.
If R is Gorenstein of Krull-dimension d, then the AR-translation τ of any M ∈ MCM(R) is given
by τ M = HomR (syzd (trM ), R), where trM denotes the Auslander-transpose of M . For d = 2 it
follows that τ M ∼
= M (from e.g., [Aus86a], Cor. 6.2.).
The ranks of MCM(R)-modules are unbounded by the Brauer–Thrall theorem (see [Yos87],
Prop. 4.1). Then arguing as in the proof of loc. cit, Prop. 4.1 or from Theorem 3 of [Die87], it
follows that the stable AR-quiver is of type A∞ .

Remark 4.13. For dim R = 1 the translation τ is in general not the identity, even in the Gorenstein case: one has τ M ∼
= syz1 M (see Lemma (9.8) of [Yos90]). Moreover, in order to apply
structure theorems as Dieterich’s [Die87], one needs the existence of a periodic τ -orbit. It would
be interesting to study questions about existence and cardinality of periodic τ -orbits for nonGorenstein rings.

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

27

5. Centres of endomorphism rings
Here we determine the centres of the endomorphism rings of MCM (i.e., torsion free) modules
over curve singularities of finite MCM-type. This helps to speed up the determination of global
spectra: if the centre of an endomorphism ring of an R-module is an overring of R, then in
some cases one already knows the global spectrum of this ring and does not have to compute
projective resolutions again.
Definition 5.1. (see [Yos90]) Let (R, m, k) be a one-dimensional local analytic k-algebra, with
e the integral closure of R in its
k of characteristic 0 and suppose that R is reduced. Denote by R
quotient ring. A ring R′ (birationally) dominates R if
e
R ⊆ R′ ⊆ R.

Lemma 5.2. Let R ⊆ R′ be a ring birationally dominating R. Then gs R′ ⊆ gs R.
Proof. Take any MCM(R′ )-module M . Then EndR′ M ∼
= EndR M and thus if gl. dim EndR′ M =
d, it follows that d ∈ gs R.

Theorem 5.3. Let R be reduced noetherian ring, and M be a faithful torsion free module over
R. Then the centre of EndR M is the largest ﬁnite extension of R, which is an R-algebra and
over which M is a module (i.e., the largest ring S such that R ⊆ S ⊆ Q(R) and SM = M ).
Proof. Let Q = Q(R) be the quotient ring of R. Suppose that M is torsion free. We have the
following diagram:
R

EndR M

Q

EndR (M ) ⊗R Q = EndQ (M ⊗ Q)

From this it follows that
Z(EndR (M )) = Q ∩ EndR (M ).
Consider R′ = Q ∩ EndR M . Then R′ is clearly contained in EndR M , and since the latter is
finitely generated as an R-module, also R′ is finitely generated. From this and the fact that
e Thus Z(EndR M ) is contained in R.
e
R′ ⊆ Q it follows that R′ ⊆ R.
e
Let R ⊂ S ⊂ R be a ring such that M is a module over S. Then there is a map from S
to EndR M = EndS M and S ⊆ Z(EndR M ) = Z, so also the largest S with this property is
contained in Z. On the other hand, M is a module over the centre of its endomorphism ring, so
Z has to be contained in the largest integral extension S such that M is an S-module.

e
R.
If R is irreducible, then the rings dominating R are totally ordered: R ⊆ R1 ⊆ · · · ⊆ Rn ∼
Lk =
The maximal element of this chain is always the normalization. In this case, if M = i=1 Mi
is a direct sum of indecomposable torsion-free R-modules, then Z(EndR (M )) = maxi {Ri :
each Mj is a module over Ri }. If R is reducible one only
Q has a partial order with index set I so
R ⊆ Ri ⊆ Rj , for i ≤ j ∈ I, then still Z(EndR (M )) = max{Ri : each Mj is a module over Ri }.

Before we compute the centres for the curve singularities of finite MCM-type, a few general
observations: First we have to determine the rings dominating R, that is, the rings R′ , satisfying
e If R is a ADE curve singularity, then by [GK85, Satz 1] there are only finitely
R ⊆ R′ ⊆ R.
many such R′ . Moreover, an indecomposable MCM(R)-module can only be isomorphic to an
overring of R if it has rank 1 on R. If R = k{x, y}/f1 · · · fk is reducible, one has to consider a

28

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

rank vector (a1 , . . . , ak ), where ai denotes the rank of a module N on the component R/(fi ). So
by rank 1 module N in this case we mean rank vector with ai = 0 or 1 for all i and at least one
ai 6= 0. If we have a ring R′ dominating R so R ⊆ R′ ⊂ Q(R), then since the rank vectors of both
R and Q(R) are (1, . . . , 1) we can can conclude that the rank of R′ is also (1, . . . , 1). One can
compute the rank of a MCM-module N by using that the rank of N on each component R/(fi )
is equal to the power with which fi appears in the determinant of the matrix factorization of N ,
see [Eis80].
If R′ ⊇ R is a ring dominating R, then one can use trace ideals to determine whether a MCM(R)module N is still defined over R′ : by definition, the trace ideal TR (N ) of an R-module N is
given as the image of T : N ∗ ⊗EndR N N → R, where T(f ⊗ n) = f (n), see e.g., [AG60]. One can
show that TR (N ) is the ideal generated by the entries of the matrix factorization belonging to
syz(N ), see [Vas98]. One can show that if TR (N ) 6⊆ TR (R′ ) ∼
= CR′ /R , then N is not a module
over R′ . Here CR′ /R denotes the conductor of R′ into R.
If M does not have full support, then one can still determine the centre of EndR M with the
following lemma, whose proof is straightforward:
Lemma 5.4. Let R be a commutative ring, let M, N be R-modules and let I be an ideal in R
satisfying I ⊆ AnnR (M ) and I ⊆ AnnR (N ). Then HomR (M, N ) = HomR/I (M, N ).
In particular, if R = k{x, y}/(f1 · · · fk ) and M is an R-module annihilated by f1 · · · fl for some
l < k, then EndR M = EndR/(f1 ···fl ) (M ).
5.1. Irreducible ADE curves.
2
n+1
Example
). Any basic MCM-module is of the
L 5.5. An , n even: Here R = k{x, y}/(y + x
form
i∈I Ii , where I ⊆ {1, . . . , n}. Denote by i0 the minimal integer contained in I. Since
extension
Ii0 ∼
= k{x, y}/(y 2 +xn−2i0 ) is dominating
= EndR (Ii0 ) ∼
L R and is also∼the largest integral
over which Ii0 is a module, it follows that Z(EndR i∈I Ii ) ∼
= Ii0 = k{x, y}/(y 2 + xn−2i0 ).

Example 5.6. E6 : Here R = k{x, y}/(x3 +y 4 ). We first compute the ranks of the indecomposable
torsion-free modules over R from Yoshino’s list of matrix factorizations, see [Yos90], p.79: the
indecomposable MCM modules of rank one over R are R, M1 , N1 , M2 , B Since for an overring
R ⊆ R′ one must have EndR R′ ∼
= M1 that N1 is not isomorphic
= R′ it follows from EndR N1 ∼
to an overring of R. Thus there are two rings dominating R:
e∼
R ⊆ M1 ⊆ M2 ⊆ R
= B.

The following table shows a list of the indecomposables, their trace ideals, the largest ring over
which they are defined and their singularity type (if they are isomorphic to a ring – see [FK99]
for classification of space curve singularities):
Module rank
trace
largest ring singularity type
R
1
(1)
R
Dn
M1
1
(x, y)
M1
E6 (1)
N1
1
(x, y)
M1
A
2
(x, y)
M1
B
1
(x2 , y 2 , xy)
B
smooth
X
2
(x, y)
M1
M2
1
(x, y 2 )
M2
A2
Table 2. Indecomposable MCM-modules over R of type E6 .

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

29

From the trace ideals we get the following list of modules living over each ring:
(1) R: all modules live over R.
(2) M1 : all indecomposables but R are modules over M1 .
(3) M2 (i.e., the A2 -singularity): M2 , B.
(4) B (i.e., the normalization, a line): B.
Example 5.7. E8 : Let us first determine the rings dominating R = k{x, y}/(x3 + y 5 ). Since R is
irreducible, one can determine the overrings from the semigroup of R and then compare ranks
with the indecomposable MCM-modules in Yoshino’s list: the semigroup of R is generated by
1, t3 , t5 . Thus monomial rings between R and its normalization are the ones with semigroup
generated by 1, t3 , t5 , t7 (this is E8 (1) in the notation of [FK99], the endomorphism ring of the
maximal ideal), by 1, t3 , t4 , t5 (this is E6 (1), which has already appeared in the previous example),
by 1, t2 , t3 (this is the A2 -singularity) and finally by 1, t, corresponding to the normalization.
Claim. These are all possible rings dominating R:
Proof of claim: If R′ is dominating R, it has to have rank one over R. Moreover one has
EndR R′ ∼
= R′ . From Yoshino’s list one sees that the rank one modules over R are: M1 ,
N1 , M2 , N2 and A2 . In the normalization chain we have seen that EndR m ∼
= M1 . Taking
the endomorphism ring of the maximal ideal of M1 , the second ring is a cusp, isomorphic to
the module A1 and the third ring in the chain is the normalization, isomorphic to A2 . By
computing endomorphism rings, we find that EndR N1 ∼
= M2 , so N1 and
= M1 and EndR N2 ∼
N2 are not isomorphic to overrings of R. In order to see that M2 is isomorphic to the ring
R′ = k{t3 , t4 , t5 }, one can compute its minimal projective resolution and compare it to the
projective resolution of the ideal (x, y 3 ) in R, which is isomorphic to R′ (as an R-module). This
exhausts all possibilities.

So we obtain the following list of rings dominating E8 :
R ⊆ M1 ⊆ M2 ⊆ A1 ⊆ A2
Now from the trace ideals we get a list of the modules defined over the rings dominating R:
(1) R: all modules live over R.
(2) M1 (i.e., E8 (1), the singular space curve k{t3 , t5 , t7 }): all modules but R.
(3) M2 (i.e., E6 (1), the singular cubic k{t3 , t4 , t5 }): M2 , N2 , C2 , Y2 , A1 , A2 (look at trace ideals!)
(4) A1 (i.e., the cusp k{t2 , t3 }): A1 , A2 .
(5) A2 (i.e., the normalization k{t}): A2 .
5.2. Reducible ADE curves.
Example 5.8. Dn , n odd: The Dn singularity has coordinate ring R = k{x, y}/(x2 y + y n−1 ).
Geometrically, it is the union of the An−1 -singularity x2 + y n−2 = 0 with the line y = 0. The
module B and all the Mi are of rank (0, 1) and the rank of the smooth component A is (1, 0).
The ranks of Xi and Yi are (1, 1). Geometrically, Mi is isomorphic to an An−2i−3 -singularity
(including M n−3 , which is smooth) and the Xi are An−2i−1 ∨ L singularities, whereas the Yi
2
are isomorphic to the respective canonical modules of the curves Xi . Here is a table showing
the ranks of the modules, their trace ideals, the largest overring dominating R and (if they are
isomorphic to a ring) the type of singularity:
Thus the overrings of R are:
R, A ⊕ B, A ⊕ Mi for 1 ≤ i ≤

n−1
n−3
, Xi for 1 ≤ i ≤
.
2
2

30

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

Module
rank
trace
largest ring singularity type
R
(1, 1)
(1)
R
Dn
i
Xi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n−1
(1,
1)
(x,
y
)
X
A
i
n−2i−1 ∨ L
2
i
Yi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n−3
(1,
1)
(x,
y
)
X
i
2
i+1
Mi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n−3
(0,
1)
(xy,
y
)
A
⊕
M
A
i
n−2i−3
2
Ni , 1 ≤ i ≤ n−3
(2, 1)
(x, y i )
Xi
2
A
(1, 0) (x2 + y n−2 ) A ⊕ M n−3
smooth
2
B
(0, 1)
(y)
A⊕B
An−3
Table 3. Indecomposable MCM-modules over R of type Dn , n odd.

By computing the trace ideals, one obtains the partial orders for the overrings:

R

X1

X2

X3

···

X n−1

A⊕B

A ⊕ M1

A ⊕ M2

···

A ⊕ M n−3

2

2

The list of modules living over the rings dominating R is as follows:
(1) R: all modules.
(2) X1 (i.e., the An−3 ∨ L-space curve singularity): all modules but R.
(3) Xi , 2 ≤ i ≤ n−1
(i.e., the An−2i−1 ∨ L-space curve singularity, including X n−1 , the A1 2
2
n−3
n−1
singularity): A, Mj for i − 1 ≤ j ≤ n−3
,
N
,
i
≤
j
≤
,
X
,
i
≤
j
≤
and
Y
,
i
≤ j ≤ n−3
j
j
j
2
2
2
2 .
(see inductively)
(4) A ⊕ B (i.e., disjoint union of a line and an An−3 -singularity): A, B, Mj , j ≥ 1.
(5) A ⊕ Mi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n−3
(i.e., disjoint union of a line and an An−2i−3 -singularity): A, Mj ,
2
.
i ≤ j ≤ n−3
2
The only modules not having full support on R are A, B and Mi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n−3
2 . The centres of
endomorphism rings of modules only supported on one of the two components are as follows:
EndR (A) = A is commutative, thus equal to itsLcentre. Any
L module supported only on the
singular component x2 + y n−2 is of the form B ⊕ i∈I Mi or i∈I Mi , where I ⊆ {1, . . . , n−3
2 }.
The centre is B in the first case and mini {Mi : i ∈ I} in the second case.
Example 5.9. Dn , n ≥ 4 even: The coordinate ring is R = k{x, y}/(y(x2 + y n−2 )). As in the
previous examples, the rings dominating R can be computed by rank considerations. We obtain
the following list:

R, Xi for 1 ≤ i ≤

n−4
n−2
, A ⊕ B, A ⊕ Mi for 1 ≤ i ≤
, C− ⊕ D− , C+ ⊕ D+ , A ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− .
2
2

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

31

They fit together in the partial order:
C− ⊕ D−

R

X1

X2

···

X n−2

A⊕B

A ⊕ M1

···

A ⊕ M n−4

2

C+ ⊕ D+

A ⊕ D+ ⊕ D−

2

(If n = 4, the module M n−4 has to be replaced by B). Here is a table showing the ranks of
2
the indecomposable MCM(R)-modules, their trace ideals, the largest ring dominating R over
which the respective module is still defined and (if they are isomorphic to a ring) the type of
singularity:
Module
rank
trace
largest ring
singularity type
R
(1, 1, 1)
(1)
R
Dn
i
Xi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n−2
(1,
1,
1)
(x,
y
)
X
A
∨L
i
n−2i−1
2
i
Yi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n−2
(1,
1,
1)
(x,
y
)
X
i
2
Mi , 1 ≤ i ≤ n−4
(0, 1, 1)
(xy, y i+1 )
A ⊕ Mi
An−2i−3
2
n−4
Ni , 1 ≤ i ≤ 2
(2, 1, 1)
(x, y i )
Xi
A
(1, 0, 0)
(x2 + y n−2 )
A ⊕ D− ⊕ D+
smooth
B
(0, 1, 1)
(y)
A⊕B
An−3
n−2
C+
(1, 0, 1)
(x − iy 2 )
C+ ⊕ D+
A1
n−2
C−
(1, 1, 0)
(x + iy 2 )
C− ⊕ D−
A1
n−2
D+
(0, 0, 1) (y(x + iy 2 )) A ⊕ D− ⊕ D+
smooth
n−2
D−
(0, 1, 0) (y(x − iy 2 )) A ⊕ D− ⊕ D+
smooth
Table 4. Indecomposable MCM-modules over R of type Dn , n even.
The list of modules living on the rings dominating R is:
(1) R: all modules.
(2) X1 (i.e., the space curve singularity An−3 ∨ L): all but R.
n−2
(3) Xi , 2 ≤ i ≤ n−2
2 , (i.e., the space curve singularity An−2i−1 ∨ L): Xj for i ≤ j ≤ 2 , Yj for
n−2
n−4
n−4
i ≤ j ≤ 2 , Mj for i − 1 ≤ j ≤ 2 , Nj for i ≤ j ≤ 2 , A, C+ , D+ , C− , D− .
(4) A ⊕ B (i.e., the disjoint union of a line and an An−3 -singularity): A, B, Mj for 1 ≤ j ≤ n−4
2 ,
D+ , D− .
(5) A ⊕ Mi (i.e., the disjoint union of a line and an An−2i−3 -singularity): A, Mj for i ≤ j ≤ n−4
2 ,
D+ , D− .
(6) C+ ⊕ D+ (i.e., the disjoint union of a line and an A1 -singularity): C+ , D+ , A.
(7) C− ⊕ D− (i.e., the disjoint union of a line and an A1 -singularity): C− , D− , A.
(8) A ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− (i.e., the disjoint union of three lines, the normalization): A, D+ , D− .
Again one can analyze the centres of the endomorphism rings which are are not of full support:
these are the endomorphism rings of the modules: A ⊕ C+/− , A ⊕ D+/− , Mi ⊕ B, Mi ⊕ D+/− ,
B ⊕ D+/− , A ⊕ C+ ⊕ D− , A ⊕ C− ⊕ D+ , B ⊕ D− ⊕ D+ , Mi ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− .

32

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

Using Lemma 5.4, we can easily compute the centres of the other rings: EndR (A ⊕ C+/− ) =
n−2
n−2
(A ⊕ C+/− ). Since C+/− ∼
End
= R/(y(x ± iy 2 )) is an A1 singularity, it follows
R/(y(x±iy 2 ))
that the global dimension of this ring is 3 and its centre is C+/− . Moreover, EndR (A ⊕ D+/− ) ∼
=
A ⊕ D+/− is commutative and EndR (Mi ⊕ B) = EndB (Mi ⊕ B) (gl. dim of this ring is infinite!)
has centre B, which is isomorphic to an An−3 -singularity. Similarly EndR (Mi ⊕ D+/− ) =
EndMi (Mi ⊕ D+/− ), resp. EndR (B ⊕ D+/− ) = EndB (B ⊕ D+/− ) have centre isomorphic to Mi
resp. B (and gl. dim in all cases is 3, since the modules are cluster tilting objects over the An−2i−3 singularities Mi resp. the An−3 -singularity B). The two modules A ⊕ C+ ⊕ D− , A ⊕ C− ⊕ D+
n−2
n−2
are supported on the A1 -singularities C+ ∼
= R/(y(x − iy 2 )),
= R/(y(x + iy 2 )) and C− ∼
so their centres are C+ and C− and their global dimension is 2 (representation generator for
A1 -singularities). The module B ⊕ D+ ⊕ D− is supported on the An−3 -singularity B, thus by
Lemma 5.4 its centre is B and the global dimension is infinite.
Example 5.10. E7 : Again we first determine the rings dominating R = k{x, y}/(x3 + xy 3 ), i.e.,
e We compute again the ranks of the indecomposable from
the rings R′ , satisfying R ⊆ R′ ⊆ R.
Yoshino’s list, see Table 5 for the list of rank 1 modules. Here possible rings dominating R are
the (1, 1)-modules and A ⊕ B and A ⊕ D and M2 , N2 , Y1 , M1 , N1 . A Singular computation
shows that the overrings Ri appearing in Leuschke’s normalization chain are: R1 ∼
= M1 (this
is the singularity E7 (1), again cf. Frühbis-Krüger’s table for the notation), R2 ∼
= Y1 (this is
an A1 -singularity) and the normalization R3 ∼
= A ⊕ D. Again from computing endomorphism
rings of the remaining candidates, it follows that N1 and N2 are not isomorphic to rings (they
are isomorphic to the canonical modules of the non-Gorenstein rings M1 and M2 ). The only
missing module is M2 : it is as ring isomorphic to the singularity A2 ∨ L, which also appears as
an overring of the D5 -singularity. As we have seen in Example 5.8, A2 ∨ L is dominated by the
A1 -singularity, the disjoint union of a line and the A2 -singularity and the normalization of R.
But one can also see that A2 ∨ L dominates E7 (1) (from the description of the MCM-modules
in [GK85, p. 424, (2.3) (i)]): here E7 (1) corresponds to R + (t4 , 0)R and A2 ∨ L to R + (t2 , 0)R
, which are contained in each other. Thus for E7 the poset of overrings is:
Y1

R

M1

M2

A⊕D

A⊕B
Below is a table showing the ranks of the modules, their trace ideals, the largest overring and
(if they are isomorphic to a ring) the type of singularity.
So we also can get the list of modules over each ring:
(1) R: all modules live over R.
(2) M1 (i.e., the space curve singularity E7 (1)): all indecomposables except R are modules over
M1 .
(3) M2 (i.e., the space curve singularity A2 ∨ L): clearly Y1 and A, D are modules over M2 , N2
corresponds to the canonical module of M2 . There are only two modules left, (this can be seen
by comparing the AR-quivers of A2 ∨ L, which is just the stable quiver of the D5 -singularity,
and the E7 quiver). One has to be of rank (0, 1), which singles out B. The last one has to be

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

Module
R
M1
N1
X1
X2
X3
Y3
C
M2
Y2
N2
Y1
B
D
A
Table 5.

33

rank
trace
largest ring singularity type
(1, 1)
(1)
R
E7
(1, 1)
m
M1
E7 (1)
(1, 1)
m
M1
(2, 2)
m
M1
(1, 2)
m
M1
(2, 2)
m
M1
(2, 2)
m
M1
(2, 1)
m
M1
(1, 1)
(x, y 2 )
M2
A2 ∨ L
(2, 1)
(x, y 2 )
M2
(1, 1)
(x, y 2 )
M2
(1, 1) (x2 , xy, y 2 )
Y1
A1
(0, 1)
(x)
A⊕B
A2
(0, 1)
(x2 , xy)
A⊕D
smooth
(1, 0) (x2 + y 3 )
A⊕D
smooth
Indecomposable MCM-modules over R of type E7 .

rank (2, 1). There are two candidates: C or Y2 .
From comparison of the trace ideals, it follows that Y2 is a module over M2 . (Here abuse of
notation: M2 is seen here as a ring!)
Thus the modules living over M2 are: M2 , Y1 , A, D, N2 , B and Y2 .
(4) Y1 (i.e., an A1 -singularity): Y1 , A, D.
(5) A ⊕ B (i.e., disjoint union of a line and an A2 -singularity): A, B, D.
(6) A ⊕ D (i.e., the normalization, the disjoint union of two lines): A, D.
Here one sees that the only modules which are not supported on the whole Spec R, are B, D, A.
For endomorphism rings involving only these modules, one can compute the centres individually:
Z(EndR (B, B)) = Z(B) = B, Z(EndR (D, D) = D, Z(EndR (A, A)) = A [direct computation
·(x2 +y 3 )

via exact sequences, e.g. R −−−−−−→ R −→ B −→ 0. Apply HomR (−, B) and obtain 0 −→
·(x2 +y 3 )
HomR (B, B) −→ B −−−−−−→ B. Since multiplication by (x2 + y 3 ) is 0 on B ∼
= R/(x2 + y 3 ),
∼
it follows that HomR (B, B) = B.] Since B ⊕ D is isomorphic to a representation generator
for an A2 -singularity, it follows from Lemma 5.4 that EndR (B ⊕ D) ∼
= EndB (B ⊕ D) and so
gl. dim EndR (D ⊕ B) = 2 and Z(EndR (D ⊕ B)) = B.
6. Acknowledgements
The authors want to thank Hailong Dao, Osamu Iyama and Michael Wemyss for very helpful
discussions. Moreover, thanks to Ragnar Buchweitz for his support. E.F. wants to thank the
Mittag-Leffler Institute for its warm hospitality and for providing excellent work conditions.
References
[AB89]

M. Auslander and R.-O. Buchweitz. The homological theory of maximal Cohen-Macaulay approximations. Mém. Soc. Math. France (N.S.), (38):5–37, 1989. Colloque en l’honneur de Pierre Samuel
(Orsay, 1987). 6

34

[AG60]

BRANDON DOHERTY, ELEONORE FABER, AND COLIN INGALLS

Maurice Auslander and Oscar Goldman. Maximal orders. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 97:1–24, 1960.
28
[ARS97]
M. Auslander, I. Reiten, and S. O. Smalø. Representation theory of Artin algebras, volume 36 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997. Corrected
reprint of the 1995 original. 5, 7
[AS80]
M. Auslander and S. O. Smalø. Preprojective modules over Artin algebras. J. Algebra, 66(1):61–122,
1980. 6
[Aus55]
M. Auslander. On the dimension of modules and algebras. III. Global dimension. Nagoya Math. J.,
9:67–77, 1955.
[Aus78]
Maurice Auslander. Functors and morphisms determined by objects. In Representation theory of
algebras (Proc. Conf., Temple Univ., Philadelphia, Pa., 1976), pages 1–244. Lecture Notes in Pure
Appl. Math., Vol. 37. Dekker, New York, 1978. 12
[Aus86a]
M. Auslander. Rational singularities and almost split sequences. Transactions of the AMS, 293(2):511–
531, 1986. 26
[Aus86b] Maurice Auslander. Isolated singularities and existence of almost split sequences. In Representation
theory, II (Ottawa, Ont., 1984), volume 1178 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages 194–242. Springer,
Berlin, 1986. 10
[BFK12]
M. Ballard, D. Favero, and L. Katzarkov. Orlov spectra: bounds and gaps. Invent. Math., 189(2):359–
430, 2012. 2
[BGS87]
R.-O. Buchweitz, G.-M. Greuel, and F.-O. Schreyer. Cohen-Macaulay modules on hypersurface singularities. II. Invent. Math., 88(1):165–182, 1987. 25
[BLvdB10] R.-O. Buchweitz, G. J. Leuschke, and M. van den Bergh. Non-commutative desingularization of
determinantal varieties I. Invent. Math., 182(1):47–115, 2010. 2
[DF14]
H. Dao and E. Faber. On global dimension of endomorphism rings. 2014. in preparation. 19
[DFI15]
H. Dao, E. Faber, and C. Ingalls. Noncommutative (crepant) desingularizations and the global spectrum of commutative rings. Algebr. Represent. Theory, 18(3):633–664, 2015. 1, 2, 3, 5, 16, 17
[Die87]
E. Dieterich. The Auslander-Reiten quiver of an isolated singularity. In Singularities, representation
of algebras, and vector bundles (Lambrecht, 1985), volume 1273 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages
244–264. Springer, Berlin, 1987. 25, 26
[Die91]
E. Dieterich. Solution of a nondomestic tame classification problem from integral representation theory
of finite groups (Λ = RC3 , v(3) = 4). Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 92(450):xx+140, 1991. 25
[DITV15] H. Dao, O. Iyama, R. Takahashi, and C. Vial. Non-commutative resolutions and Grothendieck groups.
J. Noncommut. Geom., 9(1):21–34, 2015. 2
[Eis80]
D. Eisenbud. Homological algebra on a complete intersection, with an application to group representations. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 260(1):35–64, 1980. 28
[FK99]
A. Frühbis-Krüger. Classification of simple space curve singularities. Comm. Algebra, 27(8):3993–
4013, 1999. 21, 28, 29
[GK85]
G.-M. Greuel and H. Knörrer. Einfache Kurvensingularitäten und torsionsfreie Moduln. Math. Ann.,
270:417–425, 1985. 27, 32
[HGK04] M. Hazewinkel, N. Gubareni, and V. V. Kirichenko. Algebras, rings and modules. Vol. 1, volume 575
of Mathematics and its Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2004. 5
[HPR80]
D. Happel, U. Preiser, and C. Ringel. Vinberg’s characterization of Dynkin diagrams using subadditive functions with application to DTr-periodic modules. In Representation theory, II (Proc. Second
Internat. Conf., Carleton Univ., Ottawa, Ont., 1979), volume 832 of Lecture Notes in Math., pages
280–294. Springer, Berlin, 1980. 26
[IT84]
Kiyoshi Igusa and Gordana Todorov. Radical layers of representable functors. J. Algebra, 89(1):105–
147, 1984. 2
[IW10]
O. Iyama and M. Wemyss. The Classification of Special Cohen-Macaulay Modules. Math. Z.,
265(1):41–83, 2010. 2, 9, 11, 12, 14
[IW14]
O. Iyama and M. Wemyss. Maximal modifications and Auslander-Reiten duality for non-isolated
singularities. Invent. Math., 197(3):521–586, 2014. 2
[Iya03]
O. Iyama. Rejective subcategories of artin algebras and orders. 2003. arXiv:0311281v1. 2
[Iya05a]
O. Iyama. τ -categories. I. Ladders. Algebr. Represent. Theory, 8(3):297–321, 2005. 2, 4, 9, 10, 11
[Iya05b]
O. Iyama. τ -categories. II. Nakayama pairs and rejective subcategories. Algebr. Represent. Theory,
8(4):449–477, 2005. 2, 10
[Iya05c]
Osamu Iyama. τ -categories. III. Auslander orders and Auslander-Reiten quivers. Algebr. Represent.
Theory, 8(5):601–619, 2005. 2

COMPUTING GLOBAL DIMENSION OF ENDOMORPHISM RINGS VIA LADDERS

[Iya07]
[Kah88]

[Kel64]
[Leu07]
[Leu12]
[LW12]
[MR01]

[Qua05]
[Rei75]
[Rie77]
[Tak11]
[Vas98]

[VdB04]
[Wem11]
[Yos87]
[Yos90]

35

O. Iyama. Higher-dimensional Auslander-Reiten theory on maximal orthogonal subcategories. Adv.
Math., 210(1):22–50, 2007. 6, 8, 12
C. P. M. Kahn. Reflexive Moduln auf einfach-elliptischen Flächensingularitäten. Bonner Mathematische Schriften [Bonn Mathematical Publications], 188. Universität Bonn, Mathematisches Institut,
Bonn, 1988. Dissertation, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, Bonn, 1988. 25
G. M. Kelly. On the radical of a category. J. Austral. Math. Soc., 4:299–307, 1964. 4
G. J. Leuschke. Endomorphism rings of finite global dimension. Canad. J. Math., 59(2):332–342,
2007. 2, 3, 16
G. J. Leuschke. Non-commutative crepant resolutions: scenes from categorical geometry. In Progress
in commutative algebra 1, pages 293–361. de Gruyter, Berlin, 2012. 2
G. J. Leuschke and R. Wiegand. Cohen-Macaulay representations, volume 181 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2012. 2, 6, 10
J. C. McConnell and J. C. Robson. Noncommutative Noetherian rings, volume 30 of Graduate Studies
in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, revised edition, 2001. With the
cooperation of L. W. Small. 4
C. Quarles. Krull–Schmidt rings and noncommutative resolutions of singularities. Master’s thesis,
University of Washington, 2005. 2, 4
I. Reiner. Maximal orders. Academic Press [A subsidiary of Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers],
London-New York, 1975. London Mathematical Society Monographs, No. 5. 4
O. Riemenschneider. Die Invarianten der endlichen Untergruppen von GL(2, C). Math. Z., 153(1),
1977. 24
R. Takahashi. Contravariantly finite resolving subcategories over commutative rings. Amer. J. Math.,
133(2):417–436, 2011. 6
W. V. Vasconcelos. Computational methods in commutative algebra and algebraic geometry, volume 2
of Algorithms and Computation in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1998. With chapters by
David Eisenbud, Daniel R. Grayson, Jürgen Herzog and Michael Stillman. 28
M. Van den Bergh. Non-commutative crepant resolutions. In The legacy of Niels Henrik Abel, pages
749–770. Springer, Berlin, 2004. 2
M. Wemyss. The GL(2, C) McKay correspondence. Math. Ann., 350(3):631–659, 2011. 2, 22
Y. Yoshino. Brauer-Thrall type theorem for maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules. J. Math. Soc. Japan,
39(4):719–739, 1987. 26
Y. Yoshino. Cohen–Macaulay modules over Cohen–Macaulay rings, volume 146 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990. 2, 10, 11, 16, 26,
27, 28

Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB. E3B 5A3,
Canada
E-mail address: Brandon.Doherty@unb.ca
Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Wien, Oskar-Morgenstern-Platz 1, A-1090 Wien, Austria
Current address: Department of Mathematics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
E-mail address: eleonore.faber@univie.ac.at
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB. E3B 5A3,
Canada
E-mail address: cingalls@unb.ca

