Assassins and torsion functors

From MaRDI portal
Publication:1696183



Abstract: Let R be a ring, let mathfrakasubseteqR be an ideal, and let M be an R-module. Let Gammamathfraka denote the mathfraka-torsion functor. Conditions are given for the (weakly) associated primes of Gammamathfraka(M) to be the (weakly) associated primes of M containing mathfraka, and for the (weakly) associated primes of M/Gammamathfraka(M) to be the (weakly) associated primes of M not containing mathfraka.


In the paper under review, the author studies the set of associated primes of torsion functors. Let \(R\) be a Noetherian ring and let \(M\) be an \(R\)-module. Let \(a\) be an ideal of \(R\). Then the following equalities are known: {\parindent=0.7cm\begin{itemize}\item[(A)] \(\mathrm{Ass}_R(\Gamma_a(M)) = \mathrm{Ass}_R(M)\cap\mathrm{Var}(a)\); \item[(B)] \(\mathrm{Ass}_R(M/ \Gamma_a(M)) = \mathrm{Ass}_R(M)-\mathrm{Var}(a)\). \end{itemize}} Here, the author studies the above equalities for non-Noetherian ring. It is shown that the statement (A) and the inclusion ``\(\supseteq\) in (B) hold without any hypothesis. In addition the statement (B) need not hold in general. Finally, the author investigates the analogues to (A) and (B) for weakly associated primes. Among the others, it is shown that, for weakly associated primes the inclusion ``\(\subseteq\) in (A) and the inclusion ``\(\supseteq\) in (B) hold without any hypothesis, and (B) implies (A). In addition, neither (A) nor (B) holds in general.











This page was built for publication: Assassins and torsion functors

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q1696183)