A note on relative dimensions of rings and conductors in function fields (Q1358939)

From MaRDI portal
Revision as of 12:33, 19 July 2023 by Importer (talk | contribs) (‎Created a new Item)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
scientific article
Language Label Description Also known as
English
A note on relative dimensions of rings and conductors in function fields
scientific article

    Statements

    A note on relative dimensions of rings and conductors in function fields (English)
    0 references
    0 references
    25 May 1998
    0 references
    Let \(R\) be the local ring of a curve singularity and let \(K\) denote its field of fractions. Let \(\widetilde R\) denote the integral closure of \(R\) in \(K\) and let \(S\) be a ring between \(R\) and \(\widetilde R\). Let \(C\) denote the conductor ideal of \(S\) in \(R\). Let \(k\) denote the field of constants of \(K\) and put \(c(S)=\dim_k R/C\) and \(d(S)=\dim_k S/R\). In general, one has \(c(\widetilde R)\leq d(\widetilde R)\), with equality if \(R\) is Gorenstein. The author shows that \(c(S)\leq d(S)\) if \(c(S)\leq 4\), but gives an example to show that this inequality may fail when \(c(S)=5\). It is also shown that this inequality is related to a distributivity property for intersection numbers of branches by using arguments from an earlier article by \textit{A. Garcia} and \textit{R. F. Lax} [J. Algebra 178, No. 3, 807-832 (1995; Zbl 0854.14014)]. An example is given of a curve singularity with three branches such that the intersection number of one branch with the union of the other two branches is strictly greater than the sum of the intersection numbers of this branch with each of the other two branches.
    0 references
    0 references
    curve singularity
    0 references
    conductor ideal
    0 references
    intersection number
    0 references

    Identifiers