In mathematics, more specifically abstract algebra and commutative algebra, Nakayama's lemma — also known as the Krull–Azumaya theorem — governs the interaction between the Jacobson radical of a ring (typically a commutative ring) and its finitely generated modules. Informally, the lemma immediately gives a precise sense in which finitely generated modules over a commutative ring behave like vector spaces over a field. It is an important tool in algebraic geometry, because it allows local data on algebraic varieties, in the form of modules over local rings, to be studied pointwise as vector spaces over the residue field of the ring. The lemma is named after the Japanese mathematician Tadashi Nakayama and introduced in its present form in, although it was first discovered in the special case of ideals in a commutative ring by Wolfgang Krull and then in general by Goro Azumaya (1951). In the commutative case, the lemma is a simple consequence of a generalized form of the Cayley–Hamilton theorem, an observation made by Michael Atiyah (1969). The special case of the noncommutative version of the lemma for right ideals appears in Nathan Jacobson (1945), and so the noncommutative Nakayama lemma is sometimes known as the Jacobson–Azumaya theorem. The latter has various applications in the theory of Jacobson radicals.

Statement

Let R be a commutative ring with identity 1. The following is Nakayama's lemma, as stated in : Statement 1: Let I be an ideal in R, and M a finitely generated module over R. If IM=M, then there exists r \in R with such that rM = 0. This is proven below. A useful mnemonic for Nakayama's lemma is "". This summarizes the following alternative formulation: Statement 2: Let I be an ideal in R, and M a finitely generated module over R. If IM=M, then there exists an i \in I such that im = m for all m \in M. The following corollary is also known as Nakayama's lemma, and it is in this form that it most often appears. Statement 3: If M is a finitely generated module over R, J(R) is the Jacobson radical of R, and J(R)M=M, then M = 0. More generally, one has that J(R)M is a superfluous submodule of M when M is finitely generated. Statement 4: If M is a finitely generated module over R, N is a submodule of M, and M = N + J(R)M, then M = N. The following result manifests Nakayama's lemma in terms of generators. Statement 5: If M is a finitely generated module over R and the images of elements m1,...,mn of M in M/J(R)M generate M/J(R)M as an R/J(R)-module, then m1,...,mn also generate M as an R-module. If one assumes instead that R is complete and M is separated with respect to the I-adic topology for an ideal I in R, this last statement holds with I in place of J(R) and without assuming in advance that M is finitely generated. Here separatedness means that the I-adic topology satisfies the T1 separation axiom, and is equivalent to

Consequences

Local rings

In the special case of a finitely generated module M over a local ring R with maximal ideal, the quotient is a vector space over the field. Statement 5 then implies that a basis of lifts to a minimal set of generators of M. Conversely, every minimal set of generators of M is obtained in this way, and any two such sets of generators are related by an invertible matrix with entries in the ring.

Geometric interpretation

In this form, Nakayama's lemma takes on concrete geometrical significance. Local rings arise in geometry as the germs of functions at a point. Finitely generated modules over local rings arise quite often as germs of sections of vector bundles. Working at the level of germs rather than points, the notion of finite-dimensional vector bundle gives way to that of a coherent sheaf. Informally, Nakayama's lemma says that one can still regard a coherent sheaf as coming from a vector bundle in some sense. More precisely, let \mathcal{M} be a coherent sheaf of -modules over an arbitrary scheme X. The stalk of \mathcal{M} at a point p\in X, denoted by , is a module over the local ring and the fiber of \mathcal{M} at p is the vector space. Nakayama's lemma implies that a basis of the fiber lifts to a minimal set of generators of . That is: Reformulating this geometrically, if \mathcal{M} is a locally free -module representing a vector bundle E \to X, and if we take a basis of the vector bundle at a point in the scheme X, this basis can be lifted to a basis of sections of the vector bundle in some neighborhood of the point. We can organize this data diagrammatically where E|_p is an n-dimensional vector space, to say a basis in E|_p (which is a basis of sections of the bundle E_p \to p) can be lifted to a basis of sections E|_U \to U for some neighborhood U of p.

Going up and going down

The going up theorem is essentially a corollary of Nakayama's lemma. It asserts:

Module epimorphisms

Nakayama's lemma makes precise one sense in which finitely generated modules over a commutative ring are like vector spaces over a field. The following consequence of Nakayama's lemma gives another way in which this is true: Over a local ring, one can say more about module epimorphisms:

Homological versions

Nakayama's lemma also has several versions in homological algebra. The above statement about epimorphisms can be used to show: A geometrical and global counterpart to this is the Serre–Swan theorem, relating projective modules and coherent sheaves. More generally, one has

Inverse function theorem

Nakayama's lemma is used to prove a version of the inverse function theorem in algebraic geometry:

Proof

A standard proof of the Nakayama lemma uses the following technique due to. This assertion is precisely a generalized version of the Cayley–Hamilton theorem, and the proof proceeds along the same lines. On the generators xi of M, one has a relation of the form where aij ∈ I. Thus The required result follows by multiplying by the adjugate of the matrix (φδij − aij) and invoking Cramer's rule. One finds then det(φδij − aij) = 0, so the required polynomial is To prove Nakayama's lemma from the Cayley–Hamilton theorem, assume that IM = M and take φ to be the identity on M. Then define a polynomial p(x) as above. Then has the required property: and rM = 0.

Noncommutative case

A version of the lemma holds for right modules over non-commutative unital rings R. The resulting theorem is sometimes known as the Jacobson–Azumaya theorem. Let J(R) be the Jacobson radical of R. If U is a right module over a ring, R, and I is a right ideal in R, then define U******·I to be the set of all (finite) sums of elements of the form u·****i, where · is simply the action of R on U. Necessarily, U·**I is a submodule of U. If V is a maximal submodule of U, then U/V is simple. So U·J(R) is necessarily a subset of V, by the definition of J(R) and the fact that U/V is simple. Thus, if U contains at least one (proper) maximal submodule, U·J(R) is a proper submodule of U. However, this need not hold for arbitrary modules U over R, for U need not contain any maximal submodules. Naturally, if U is a Noetherian module, this holds. If R is Noetherian, and U is finitely generated, then U is a Noetherian module over R, and the conclusion is satisfied. Somewhat remarkable is that the weaker assumption, namely that U is finitely generated as an R-module (and no finiteness assumption on R), is sufficient to guarantee the conclusion. This is essentially the statement of Nakayama's lemma. Precisely, one has:

Proof

Let X be a finite subset of U, minimal with respect to the property that it generates U. Since U is non-zero, this set X is nonempty. Denote every element of X by x_i for. Since X generates U,. Suppose, to obtain a contradiction. Then every element u \in Ucan be expressed as a finite combination for some. Each u_s can be further decomposed as for some. Therefore, we have . Since is a (two-sided) ideal in R, we have for every, and thus this becomes Putting and applying distributivity, we obtain Choose some. If the right ideal (1-k_j) R were proper, then it would be contained in a maximal right ideal M\neq R and both 1-k_j and k_j would belong to M, leading to a contradiction (note that by the definition of the Jacobson radical). Thus (1-k_j)R=R and 1-k_j has a right inverse in R. We have Therefore, Thus x_j is a linear combination of the elements from. This contradicts the minimality of X and establishes the result.

Graded version

There is also a graded version of Nakayama's lemma. Let R be a ring that is graded by the ordered semigroup of non-negative integers, and let R_+ denote the ideal generated by positively graded elements. Then if M is a graded module over R for which M_i = 0 for i sufficiently negative (in particular, if M is finitely generated and R does not contain elements of negative degree) such that R_+M = M, then M = 0. Of particular importance is the case that R is a polynomial ring with the standard grading, and M is a finitely generated module. The proof is much easier than in the ungraded case: taking i to be the least integer such that M_i \ne 0, we see that M_i does not appear in R_+M, so either M \ne R_+M, or such an i does not exist, i.e., M = 0.

Links