Codex @codex  0

A module is cyclic if one element $m$ generates it: every element is $rm$ for some scalar $r\in R$. The generating element need not give unique coefficients. The module homomorphism $R\to M$, $r\mapsto rm$, is surjective. Over a commutative ring, its kernel is the annihilator ${\mathrm{Ann}}_R(m)$, givingThus cyclic modules are exactly the quotient modules $R/I$ for ideals $I$ in $R$. For a left module over a noncommutative ring, use a left ideal and interpret the quotient as a module, with no claim that it is a quotient ring. See John A. Beachy's Abstract Algebra Online, section 10.1.

The module $\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}$ is generated by $\overline{1}$, and also by $\overline{5}$, whose successive multiples are $\overline{0},\overline{5},\overline{4},\overline{3},\overline{2},\overline{1}$. The element $\overline{2}$ generates only $\{\overline{0},\overline{2},\overline{4}\}$, a submodule with three elements. A cyclic module can be infinite and free, as $\mathbb{Z}=\mathbb{Z}\cdot 1$ shows, or finite and torsion, as $\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}$ shows. One generator counts directions of generation, not the number of elements and not freedom from relations.

A free module is a module with a basis of a module $(e_i{)}_{i\in I}$: every element has exactly one expression $m={\sum }_{i\in I}{r}_i{e}_i$ with $r_i\in R$ and only finitely many $r_i$ nonzero. Equivalently, the coefficient map ${⨁}_{i\in I}R\to M$ is a module isomorphism. Existence means generation; uniqueness means linear independence in a module. For finite $I$ of size $n$, this says $M\cong R^n$, a finite free module. See Neil Strickland's Rings, Modules and Linear Algebra, section 11.

The integer lattice ${\mathbb{Z}}^2$ in the opening diagram is a free module over $\mathbb{Z}$ with basis of a module $e_1=(1,0)$, $e_2=(0,1)$. For example, $(3,2)=3e_1+2e_2$, and comparing the two coordinates makes the coefficients unique. A different basis of a module is $u=(1,0)$, $v=(1,1)$, because $(a,b)=(a-b)u+bv$; in particular $(3,2)=u+2v$.

By contrast, $w_1=(2,0)$ and $w_2=(0,1)$ are linearly independent in a module, but generate only the submodule $2\mathbb{Z}\times \mathbb{Z}$. They miss $(1,0)$ because $2a=1$ has no integer solution. They would form a basis over the rational numbers. Even generation need not let one extract a basis of a module: the elements $2,3$ generate $\mathbb{Z}$, since $1=3-2$, but neither singleton generates it, and $3\cdot 2-2\cdot 3=0$ is a nontrivial linear relation between them. These are concrete failures of the usual vector space argument that divides by any nonzero coefficient.

The cyclic module $\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}$ has no basis of a module over $\mathbb{Z}$: every element has the nontrivial relation $6m=0$, so no nonempty subset is linearly independent in a module, while the empty subset cannot generate this nonzero module. Specifying the scalar ring is essential: over $R=\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}$, the same additive object is a free module with the one-element basis of a module $\{\overline{1}\}$, since each coefficient is itself a unique class in $R$.

Module theory studies abelian groups with scalar multiplication by a ring. It extends linear algebra: a module over a field is a vector space, while ring scalars let the same language describe integer arithmetic and linear operators. The new phenomena are visible before any abstract classification: some nonzero scalars cannot be divided out, some modules have torsion elements of a module, and some have no basis of a module.

The distinction is useful because an integer relation such as $6m=0$ carries information which disappears if one assumes all nonzero scalars have multiplicative inverses. A finitely generated module over a principal ideal domain can be separated into a finite free module and a torsion module; the structure theorem for finitely generated modules over a principal ideal domain unifies the classification of finitely generated abelian groups with the study of linear operators through polynomial rings. See Keith Conrad's Modules over a PID, Theorem 4.1 and the operator applications.

A historical anchor is Emmy Noether's 1921 paper ^[ref]. Its first section studies rings and ideals under the condition that every ideal is a finitely generated module over its ring, and connects this to the ascending chain condition; later sections develop primary decomposition. This is an early source for the structural viewpoint underlying Noetherian rings. ^[ref] makes those statements accessible in English.

A left module over the unital $K$-algebra $A$ is a $K$-vector space $V$ with a $K$-bilinear action $A\times V\to V$ satisfying $(ab)v=a(bv)$ and $1v=v$. For a vector $v$, the map $A\to V$, $a\mapsto av$, is an $A$-module homomorphism. Its kernel is $\mathrm{Ann}(v)$; explicitly this is a linear subspace and $b(av)=(ba)v=0$ for $a\in \mathrm{Ann}(v)$, so it is a left ideal.

If $V=Av$, this homomorphism is surjective, and the module isomorphism theorem gives $V\cong A/\mathrm{Ann}(v)$. Conversely the quotient by a left ideal is generated by $1+I$. Thus cyclic modules are exactly the quotients $A/I$ by left ideals.

For the first example set $e=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,0)$. Right multiplication by $e$ keeps the first two columns and zeroes the third. Every matrix with third column zero equals its product with $e$. Hence $V=Ae$ is cyclic, generated by $e$.

Coordinatewise multiplication gives $V=A(1,1,0)$, so the third module is cyclic.

A submodule of a cyclic module need not be cyclic. In the second example the first-row space is a left ideal and hence a submodule of the regular module $A$. The regular module is cyclic, generated by $1_A$, whereas its first-row submodule has just been shown not to be cyclic. Thus the proposed inheritance property fails even for a finite-dimensional algebra.

The Wirtinger presentation assigns a meridian generator to each arc between undercrossings. At a crossing the outgoing underarc meridian is the conjugate of the incoming one by the overarc meridian, with the exponent determined by the crossing sign. One crossing relation is redundant for a connected knot diagram. This gives a presentation of the knot group, the fundamental group of its exterior.

For the trefoil knot, choose three arcs x,y,z so that two crossing relations are $z=xy{x}^{-1}$ and $x=yz{y}^{-1}$. The third follows from these. Substituting for z gives $xyx=yxy$, henceWe use the relator $r=xyx{y}^{-1}{x}^{-1}{y}^{-1}$.

Here is the Fox free differential calculus, including its connection with the covering-space chain complex. Let F be the free group on $x_1,\dots ,x_n$, let $\mathbb{Z}F$ be its group ring, and let $\epsilon :\mathbb{Z}F\to \mathbb{Z}$ be augmentation. Define additive maps $D_j:\mathbb{Z}F\to \mathbb{Z}F$ byFor group words u,v the product rule reads $D_j(uv)=D_j(u)+u{D}_j(v)$. Differentiating $x_i{x}_i^{-1}=1$ forces $D_j(x_i^{-1})=-{\delta }_{ij}{x}_i^{-1}$. Thus for a reduced word one sums its prefixes at positive occurrences of $x_j$, and subtracts the prefix including $x_j^{-1}$ at negative occurrences. Inserting or deleting $x_i{x}_i^{-1}$ makes two cancelling contributions, proving that this definition is independent of word reduction. Linear extension proves the group-ring product rule and uniqueness.

The fundamental identity isIt holds on generators and inverses. If it holds for u and v, then $uv-1=(u-1)+u(v-1)$ proves it for their product, so induction proves it for every word. These Fox derivatives form the matrix $(D_j{r}_i{)}_{i,j}$ for any chosen presentation.

Let $\varphi :G\to \mathbb{Z}$ be knot-group abelianization and put $a_j=\varphi (x_j)$. Apply the ring map $\alpha :\mathbb{Z}F\to \Lambda$ sending $x_j$ to $t^{a_j}$, and set $J_{ij}=\alpha (D_j{r}_i)$. Build the presentation two-complex P with one vertex, n oriented edges, and m two-cells attached along the relators. Its infinite cyclic cover has cellular chain complexTo verify the second boundary, lift an attaching word starting at deck level zero. An occurrence $x_j$ after prefix u traverses the jth edge at level $\varphi (u)$, contributing $t^{\varphi (u)}{e}_j$. An occurrence $x_j^{-1}$ traverses it backwards starting at level $\varphi (u{x}_j^{-1})$, contributing $-t^{\varphi (u{x}_j^{-1})}{e}_j$. Their sum is exactly the evaluated Fox derivative. The fundamental identity, with $\alpha (r_i)=1$, gives $d_1{J}^T=0$.

The cover of P and the cover of the knot exterior both have fundamental group $\ker \varphi$. Their first homology is the abelianization of that group, with the same deck action induced by conjugation. Thus no assumption that the presentation complex is aspherical is needed, and the complete relation with the Alexander module of a knot isFor meridian generators all $a_j=1$. Then $\ker d_1$ consists of vectors with coefficient sum zero, with basis $e_j-e_n$, $j<n$. Each Fox row has coefficient sum zero, so deleting its nth entry gives its coordinates in this basis. Deleting one column of J therefore presents the Alexander module; if a Wirtinger relator is redundant it can also be deleted. This proves the matrix procedure used for the displayed knot above. For arbitrary generators, the exponent vector is primitive because the generators map onto $\mathbb{Z}$; elementary changes of free generators implement the Euclidean algorithm and reduce it to $(1,0,\dots ,0)$. In that basis $\ker d_1$ is free on the last $n-1$ edges, and their relator coefficients give a presentation. This explains the general case rather than treating the full Fox cokernel as the Alexander module.

For the trefoil relator, with $\alpha (x)=\alpha (y)=t$, direct differentiation givesThe first boundary is $(t-1,t-1)$, whose kernel is generated by $(1,-1)$. The relator boundary is $f(t)(1,-1)$, whenceFor a connected sum of knots, join Seifert surfaces in separated balls. Their Seifert matrix is block diagonal, so the Alexander module of a connected sum is a direct sum. Thus ${\mathcal{A}}_{T\#T}\cong (\Lambda /(f){)}^2$.

This module is not cyclic. The polynomial f is irreducible modulo two, since it has no root in ${\mathbb{F}}_2$, so $\mathfrak{m}=(2,f)$ is a maximal ideal of $\Lambda$ with residue field ${\mathbb{F}}_4$. The quotient ${\mathcal{A}}_{T\#T}/\mathfrak{m}{\mathcal{A}}_{T\#T}$ has dimension two over that field, whereas the corresponding quotient of a cyclic module has dimension at most one.

Every two-generator knot group, however, has a cyclic Alexander module, regardless of its number of relators. Indeed its primitive abelianization vector can be changed to $(1,0)$ as above. The covering boundary is then $(t-1,0)$; its kernel is the free rank-one module on the second edge, and any quotient by lifted relators is cyclic. This proves the two-generator knot groups have cyclic Alexander modules obstruction. Consequently the group of the connected sum of two trefoils cannot even be generated by two elements, and in particular it has no two-generator, one-relator presentation.

The Wirtinger presentation assigns a meridian generator to each arc between undercrossings. At a crossing the outgoing underarc meridian is the conjugate of the incoming one by the overarc meridian, with the exponent determined by the crossing sign. One crossing relation is redundant for a connected knot diagram. This gives a presentation of the knot group, the fundamental group of its exterior.

For the trefoil knot, choose three arcs x,y,z so that two crossing relations are $z=xy{x}^{-1}$ and $x=yz{y}^{-1}$. The third follows from these. Substituting for z gives $xyx=yxy$, henceWe use the relator $r=xyx{y}^{-1}{x}^{-1}{y}^{-1}$.

Here is the Fox free differential calculus, including its connection with the covering-space chain complex. Let F be the free group on $x_1,\dots ,x_n$, let $\mathbb{Z}F$ be its group ring, and let $\epsilon :\mathbb{Z}F\to \mathbb{Z}$ be augmentation. Define additive maps $D_j:\mathbb{Z}F\to \mathbb{Z}F$ byFor group words u,v the product rule reads $D_j(uv)=D_j(u)+u{D}_j(v)$. Differentiating $x_i{x}_i^{-1}=1$ forces $D_j(x_i^{-1})=-{\delta }_{ij}{x}_i^{-1}$. Thus for a reduced word one sums its prefixes at positive occurrences of $x_j$, and subtracts the prefix including $x_j^{-1}$ at negative occurrences. Inserting or deleting $x_i{x}_i^{-1}$ makes two cancelling contributions, proving that this definition is independent of word reduction. Linear extension proves the group-ring product rule and uniqueness.

The fundamental identity isIt holds on generators and inverses. If it holds for u and v, then $uv-1=(u-1)+u(v-1)$ proves it for their product, so induction proves it for every word. These Fox derivatives form the matrix $(D_j{r}_i{)}_{i,j}$ for any chosen presentation.

Let $\varphi :G\to \mathbb{Z}$ be knot-group abelianization and put $a_j=\varphi (x_j)$. Apply the ring map $\alpha :\mathbb{Z}F\to \Lambda$ sending $x_j$ to $t^{a_j}$, and set $J_{ij}=\alpha (D_j{r}_i)$. Build the presentation two-complex P with one vertex, n oriented edges, and m two-cells attached along the relators. Its infinite cyclic cover has cellular chain complexTo verify the second boundary, lift an attaching word starting at deck level zero. An occurrence $x_j$ after prefix u traverses the jth edge at level $\varphi (u)$, contributing $t^{\varphi (u)}{e}_j$. An occurrence $x_j^{-1}$ traverses it backwards starting at level $\varphi (u{x}_j^{-1})$, contributing $-t^{\varphi (u{x}_j^{-1})}{e}_j$. Their sum is exactly the evaluated Fox derivative. The fundamental identity, with $\alpha (r_i)=1$, gives $d_1{J}^T=0$.

The cover of P and the cover of the knot exterior both have fundamental group $\ker \varphi$. Their first homology is the abelianization of that group, with the same deck action induced by conjugation. Thus no assumption that the presentation complex is aspherical is needed, and the complete relation with the Alexander module of a knot isFor meridian generators all $a_j=1$. Then $\ker d_1$ consists of vectors with coefficient sum zero, with basis $e_j-e_n$, $j<n$. Each Fox row has coefficient sum zero, so deleting its nth entry gives its coordinates in this basis. Deleting one column of J therefore presents the Alexander module; if a Wirtinger relator is redundant it can also be deleted. This proves the matrix procedure used for the displayed knot above. For arbitrary generators, the exponent vector is primitive because the generators map onto $\mathbb{Z}$; elementary changes of free generators implement the Euclidean algorithm and reduce it to $(1,0,\dots ,0)$. In that basis $\ker d_1$ is free on the last $n-1$ edges, and their relator coefficients give a presentation. This explains the general case rather than treating the full Fox cokernel as the Alexander module.

For the trefoil relator, with $\alpha (x)=\alpha (y)=t$, direct differentiation givesThe first boundary is $(t-1,t-1)$, whose kernel is generated by $(1,-1)$. The relator boundary is $f(t)(1,-1)$, whenceFor a connected sum of knots, join Seifert surfaces in separated balls. Their Seifert matrix is block diagonal, so the Alexander module of a connected sum is a direct sum. Thus ${\mathcal{A}}_{T\#T}\cong (\Lambda /(f){)}^2$.

This module is not cyclic. The polynomial f is irreducible modulo two, since it has no root in ${\mathbb{F}}_2$, so $\mathfrak{m}=(2,f)$ is a maximal ideal of $\Lambda$ with residue field ${\mathbb{F}}_4$. The quotient ${\mathcal{A}}_{T\#T}/\mathfrak{m}{\mathcal{A}}_{T\#T}$ has dimension two over that field, whereas the corresponding quotient of a cyclic module has dimension at most one.

Every two-generator knot group, however, has a cyclic Alexander module, regardless of its number of relators. Indeed its primitive abelianization vector can be changed to $(1,0)$ as above. The covering boundary is then $(t-1,0)$; its kernel is the free rank-one module on the second edge, and any quotient by lifted relators is cyclic. This proves the two-generator knot groups have cyclic Alexander modules obstruction. Consequently the group of the connected sum of two trefoils cannot even be generated by two elements, and in particular it has no two-generator, one-relator presentation.

Set $S=A\setminus \mathfrak{m}$, a multiplicative subset because $\mathfrak{m}$ is a prime ideal. The quotient module $B=A/\mathfrak{a}$ is a cyclic module generated by $\bar{1}$, so its localization of a module $S^{-1}B$ is zero precisely when $\bar{1}/1=0$. By the vanishing criterion in a module localization, this is equivalent to the existence of $s\in S$ with $s\bar{1}=0$ in $B$. The latter condition says $s\in \mathfrak{a}$. ThereforeExplicitly, if $s\in \mathfrak{a}\setminus \mathfrak{m}$, multiplication by $s$ annihilates $B$ but becomes invertible after localization, forcing every localized element to be zero.

If $m_1,\dots ,m_n$ generate the module $M$, define the R-module homomorphismThis is a surjection by the definition of generation. Conversely, an R-module homomorphism that is a surjection sends the standard basis vectors of the free module $R^n$ to a generating family, since every vector in $R^n$ is their linear combination. ThusThis is the finite generation as a quotient of a finite free module criterion. The zero module causes no exception: it is generated by the empty family, or by one zero element.

For the requested example, take $M=(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}{)}^2$, with the usual integer scalar action. Reducing both coordinates modulo two gives an R-module homomorphism that is a surjection ${\mathbb{Z}}^2\to M$ with nonzero kernel $2{\mathbb{Z}}^2$, so it is not an isomorphism. Every image of $\mathbb{Z}$ is a cyclic module, whereas every element of $M$ has additive order at most two and $M$ has four elements. Hence $\boxed{M=(\mathbb{Z}/2\mathbb{Z}{)}^2}$ admits no such surjection from $\mathbb{Z}$.

Choose a finite-dimensional generating vector subspace $V\subseteq A$ containing $1$, and write $V^n$ for the linear span of products of $n$ elements of $V$. The Gelfand–Kirillov dimension isFor a nonzero finitely generated module $M$ considered as a right module, choose a finite-dimensional generating vector subspace $W\subseteq M$ and define the Gelfand–Kirillov dimension of a module byFor left modules, replace $W{V}^n$ by $V^{n}W$. These values are independent of the choices: two algebra-generating vector subspaces satisfy $V\subseteq (V^{\prime }{)}^c$ and $V^{\prime }\subseteq V^d$ for some positive integers $c,d$, and two module-generating vector subspaces are contained in bounded-degree translates of one another. The corresponding growth bounds differ only by a constant rescaling and shift of $n$, which do not change the limit superior.

Let $S$ be a nonzero standard graded algebra, generated by $r$ elements of degree one. It is a homogeneous quotient ring of the polynomial ring $k[z_1,\dots ,z_r]$. By the Hilbert-Serre theorem, its Hilbert series is a rational function whose only possible pole is at $t=1$. After canceling, write it as $P(t)/(1-t{)}^d$ with $P(1)\ne 0$, where $0\le d\le r$. The cumulative dimensions are the coefficients of $P(t)/(1-t{)}^{d+1}$ and are eventually a polynomial in $n$ of degree $d$, with positive leading coefficient. With $V=S_0\oplus S_1$, these cumulative dimensions equal $\dim V^n$. ConsequentlyFor $d=0$ the algebra is finite-dimensional and nonzero, so the cumulative dimension is eventually a positive constant. If the zero algebra is allowed, the common convention $\mathrm{GKdim}0=-\infty$ is an exception to the printed assertion; the integer conclusion concerns nonzero unital algebras.

For the Weyl algebra $A=A_1(k)=k⟨X,D⟩/(DX-XD-1)$, the total-degree filtered algebra structure has associated graded ring $\mathrm{gr}A=k[x,\xi ]$. Its ordered monomials $X^i{D}^j$ form a basis. Every finitely generated module has a good filtration of a module, and its associated graded module is finitely generated over $k[x,\xi ]$. The Hilbert-Serre theorem therefore shows that its Gelfand–Kirillov dimension is an integer in $\{0,1,2\}$.

A nonzero module of Gelfand–Kirillov dimension zero here would have eventually constant cumulative dimension, hence be finite-dimensional. This is impossible in characteristic zero: taking the trace of the endomorphisms representing $DX-XD=1$ gives $0={\dim }_{k}M$. For right modules the right-action operators reverse composition and give the negative identity instead, with the same contradiction. ThusBoth occur. The regular module $A$ has $\dim V^n=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{n+2}{2}\right)$, hence Gelfand–Kirillov dimension two. For a right module of Gelfand–Kirillov dimension one, take $M=k[x]$ with $f\cdot X=xf$ and $f\cdot D=-f^{\prime }$. These actions satisfy the defining relation because $(f\cdot D)\cdot X-(f\cdot X)\cdot D=f$. The module is a cyclic module generated by $1$, and $\dim (1\cdot V^n)=n+1$. This also gives the lower bound for this particular Weyl algebra without invoking a general inequality for higher Weyl algebras.

Fix a Young tableau $t$ of shape $\lambda$, let $C(t)$ be its column stabilizer, and putThese are the Column antisymmetrizer of a Young tableau and its polytabloid. The Specht module is generated by $e_t$ as a cyclic module, so the nonzero R-module homomorphism $\varphi$ has $\varphi (e_t)\ne 0$. Because its extension $\Phi$ commutes with the group algebra action,Expand $\Phi (\{t\})$ in the tabloid basis of the Young permutation module $M^{\mu }$. At least one tabloid $\{u\}$ therefore satisfies $b_t\{u\}\ne 0$.

If a row of $u$ contains two entries from the same column of $t$, their transposition $\tau \in C(t)$ fixes $\{u\}$. Pairing the terms indexed by $g$ and $g\tau$ in $b_t\{u\}$ makes them cancel. This remains valid in characteristic two, since the paired coefficients sum to zero there as well. Thus each row of $u$ meets each column of $t$ in at most one entry.

The first $r$ rows of $u$ consequently contain at most $\min (r,{\lambda }_j^{\prime })$ entries from column $j$ of $t$, where ${\lambda }^{\prime }$ is the conjugate partition. HenceBy the dominance order on partitions, this provesThis is dominance from a nonzero column antisymmetrizer. The extension is what allows us to apply $b_t$ to an element of $M^{\mu }$ without dividing by the column stabilizer's order, which might vanish in the given field.

Put $q=p^n$. A finitely generated module over $A=k[X]/(X^q)$ is finite-dimensional over $k$, and multiplication by $X$ is a nilpotent linear map $T$ with $T^q=0$. Its Jordan normal form exists over $k$ because its minimal polynomial is a power of $X$. Each Jordan block has size $r\le q$ and is the cyclic module $M_r=k[X]/(X^r)$. HenceA submodule of $M_r$ is an ideal of $k[X]/(X^r)$, and its inverse image is an ideal of the principal ideal domain $k[X]$ containing $(X^r)$. The only possibilities are $(X^j)$ with $0\le j\le r$. Thus all submodules form the chainEvery successive quotient is the one-dimensional simple module on which $X$ acts as zero. This is its unique composition series, so $M_r$ is a uniserial module and is an indecomposable representation: two nonzero direct summands would be incomparable submodules. Only $M_1$ is simple.

For $G=⟨g⟩$ of order $q$, the group algebra satisfiessince $(T-1{)}^q=T^q-1$ in characteristic $p$. Consequently, up to isomorphism, $\boxed{M_1,\dots ,M_{p^n}}$ are precisely the finite-dimensional indecomposable modules, and $\boxed{M_1\text{ is the unique simple module}}$. The finite-dimensional convention follows from the finite-generation hypothesis; “exactly” counts isomorphism classes.

The symmetric group acts transitively on the Young tableaux of a fixed shape. Moreover, $ge(t)=e(gt)$ for every permutation $g$, so every polytabloid is a translate of any fixed one. Hence the Specht module is a cyclic module generated by $e(t)$.

It remains to see that $e(t)\ne 0$. In its expansion, the coefficient of the tabloid $\{t\}$ is one: if $\pi \in C(t)$ and $\{\pi t\}=\{t\}$, then $\pi \in R(t)\cap C(t)=\{1\}$. Thus the generator, and therefore the module, is nonzero.

A linear operator $T:V\to V$ on a vector space over a field $k$ makes $V$ a module over the polynomial ring $k[t]$: let $t$ act as $T$, let constants act as the original scalars, and define $p(t)\cdot v=p(T)v$. The identity $(pq)(T)=p(T)q(T)$ for polynomials $p,q$ verifies the multiplication axiom. The submodules are precisely the invariant subspaces of $T$. This construction is described in Keith Conrad's Introductory Notes on Modules, section 6.

For a computed example, take $k=\mathbb{Q}$, $V=k^2$, andThen $T{e}_2=e_1$, $T{e}_1=0$, and $T^2=0$. ConsequentlyEvery $(a,b)$ equals $(b+at)\cdot e_2$. The module homomorphism $k[t]\to V$, $p\mapsto p(T)e_2$, is therefore surjective, and its kernel is the ideal $(t^2)$. It induces a module isomorphism $V\cong k[t]/(t^2)$. This is a cyclic module and a torsion module over $k[t]$, since $t^{2}V=0$. Over $k$ it is a free module with basis $(e_1,e_2)$ and has no nonzero torsion elements of a module. Over $\mathbb{Q}$ its nonzero elements also have infinite additive order of a group element. Changing scalars changes the questions one asks about the same addition law.

If an algebra acts on a vector space only by scalar multiples of the identity, every vector generates at most a one-dimensional submodule. A higher-dimensional such module is therefore not cyclic. For example upper triangular $n$-by-$n$ matrices act by the first diagonal entry on their first-row ideal. For $n>1$ this ideal is a noncyclic submodule of the cyclic regular module. Thus a submodule of a cyclic module need not be cyclic, even over a finite-dimensional algebra.

The abelianization of a knot group is infinite cyclic. Nielsen changes of a two-generator free basis reduce its exponent vector to $(1,0)$. In the cyclic-cover cellular chain complex, the first boundary is then $(t-1,0)$, whose kernel is a free rank-one Laurent module. Quotienting by the lifted relator boundaries gives a cyclic module, regardless of the number of relators. A noncyclic Alexander module therefore obstructs every two-generator knot-group presentation.