For every valuation ring with fraction field , consider compatible morphisms of schemes
An extension is a morphism of schemes satisfying and . The valuative criterion for universal closedness states
Equivalently, among quasi-compact morphisms, the existence condition characterizes universal closedness. A universally closed morphism is automatically a quasi-compact morphism; the converse direction of the criterion needs this compactness condition. All valuation rings are allowed, with arbitrary fraction fields; there is no Noetherian ring hypothesis and one cannot replace them by discrete valuation rings without additional assumptions.[ref][ref]
Use the compatible pair and the notion of extension from (i). The valuative criterion for separatedness is
A quasi-separated morphism means one whose diagonal morphism is a quasi-compact morphism. A separated morphism automatically has this property because its diagonal morphism is a closed immersion. The quasi-separated morphism hypothesis is needed in the converse valuative test for arbitrary schemes. Existence is not demanded.[ref]
With the same compatible pair , the valuative criterion for properness is
Equivalently, one can replace finite type by being a quasi-compact morphism and locally of finite type. Necessity follows from the definition of a proper morphism and the existence and uniqueness criteria in (i) and (ii). Conversely, finite type supplies the compactness needed in (i), while being a quasi-separated morphism supplies the compactness of the diagonal morphism needed in (ii). Thus the extension condition gives both universal closedness and separatedness, and these together with finite type give a proper morphism. These hypotheses are part of the criteria, even though the question is phrased for unrestricted morphisms of schemes.[ref]
Let be a morphism of schemes and set , with projection . Given compatible morphisms of schemes and , compose them with the projections to obtain a valuative problem for . An extension for that problem and the prescribed determine a unique morphism of schemes
The universal property of a fibre product shows that extends and lies over . Conversely, every extension has such a first component . Thus the sets of extensions in the two problems are in bijection.
If is a universally closed morphism, it is a quasi-compact morphism and satisfies existence. The allowed stability of quasi-compact morphisms under base change and (a)(i) prove that is a universally closed morphism. If is a separated morphism, it is a quasi-separated morphism and satisfies uniqueness. Stability of quasi-separated morphisms under base change and (a)(ii) prove that is a separated morphism.
If is a proper morphism, the same bijection supplies existence and uniqueness. The permitted stability under base change of quasi-compact morphisms, quasi-separated morphisms and locally of finite type supplies all remaining hypotheses of (a)(iii). Hence
Let be morphisms of schemes. Start with and satisfying .
For existence, first apply the extension condition for to and , obtaining . Then apply the extension condition for to , obtaining . This solves the problem for . If both are universally closed morphisms, both are quasi-compact morphisms; their composite is a quasi-compact morphism by the allowed stability fact. Part (a)(i) therefore proves that is a universally closed morphism.
For uniqueness, suppose are extensions for . Uniqueness for gives , and uniqueness for , now over this same , gives . If are separated morphisms, their composite is a quasi-separated morphism by the allowed stability fact. Part (a)(ii) proves that is a separated morphism.
Finally, if are proper morphisms, these arguments give both existence and uniqueness. Stability under composition of quasi-compact morphisms, quasi-separated morphisms and locally of finite type gives the other hypotheses of (a)(iii). Consequently
Let satisfy a monic polynomial equation
If , there is nothing to prove. Suppose . The defining property of a valuation ring gives . Multiplying the equation by yields
a contradiction. Therefore
This proof uses only the comparison of an element with its inverse; no discreteness or finite generation of the valuation is needed.
Let be a valuation ring, its fraction field, and let , be a compatible pair. Since is a local ring, every open subset of containing its unique closed point is the whole space: a principal open subset containing the maximal ideal is defined by a unit. Choose an affine open subscheme containing the image under of that closed point. The entire factors through .
Because is a finite morphism, with a finite -module. The valuative problem is the compatible ring homomorphisms
Every is an integral element over . Mapping its monic polynomial equation to proves that is an integral element over . Part (c) gives . Thus factors uniquely as a ring homomorphism , producing the unique extension .
For completeness, a finite morphism is a quasi-compact morphism and of finite type: over its inverse image is an affine scheme, and finite -module generators also generate it as an -algebra. It is also a separated morphism. Affine-locally its diagonal morphism corresponds to the surjective multiplication ring homomorphism
and hence is a closed immersion. In particular it is a quasi-separated morphism. The valuative criterion for properness now applies, giving
Write , with integral domains, let be the ring homomorphism, and put . We do not assume that is injective. Write .
Let be any valuation ring containing , with fraction field . The canonical morphism of schemes and the ring homomorphism form a valuative problem for . Since is a proper morphism, there is an extension. On coordinate rings it is a ring homomorphism such that
is the original inclusion of into . Therefore every element of lies in . Since was arbitrary, the stated description of integral closure as an intersection of valuation rings gives
Thus every element of is an integral element over , and hence over : lift the coefficients of its monic polynomial along the surjection . The ring homomorphism is therefore an integral extension in the sense of the question.
A proper morphism is of finite type, so in this affine situation . If satisfies a monic polynomial of degree , repeatedly reducing its powers shows that the finitely many monomials
generate as an -module. Equivalently, apply the allowed equivalence between finite and integral plus finite type. Hence

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.