Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:04:44.020Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

FROBENIUS ACTIONS ON LOCAL COHOMOLOGY MODULES AND DEFORMATION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 September 2017

LINQUAN MA
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84102, USA email [email protected]
PHAM HUNG QUY
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, FPT University, and Thang Long Institute of Mathematics and Applied Sciences, Ha Noi, Vietnam email [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a Noetherian local ring of characteristic $p>0$. We introduce and study $F$-full and $F$-anti-nilpotent singularities, both are defined in terms of the Frobenius actions on the local cohomology modules of $R$ supported at the maximal ideal. We prove that if $R/(x)$ is $F$-full or $F$-anti-nilpotent for a nonzero divisor $x\in R$, then so is $R$. We use these results to obtain new cases on the deformation of $F$-injectivity.

Type
Article
Copyright
© 2017 Foundation Nagoya Mathematical Journal  

1 Introduction

Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a Noetherian local ring of prime characteristic $p>0$ . We have the Frobenius endomorphism $F:R\rightarrow R$ , $x\mapsto x^{p}$ . The $F$ -singularities are certain singularities defined via this Frobenius map. They appear in the theory of tight closure (cf. [Reference Huneke13] for its introduction), which was systematically introduced by Hochster and Huneke [Reference Hochster and Huneke9] and developed by many researchers, including Hara, Schwede, Smith, Takagi, Watanabe, Yoshida and others. A recent active research of $F$ -singularities is centered around the correspondence with the singularities of the minimal model program. We recommend [Reference Takagi and Watanabe25] as an excellent survey for recent developments.

In this paper we study the deformation of $F$ -singularities. That is, we consider the problem: if $R/(x)$ has certain property P for a regular element $x\in R$ , then does $R$ has the property P? The classical objects of $F$ -singularities are $F$ -regularity, $F$ -rationality, $F$ -purity and $F$ -injectivity (cf. [Reference Huneke13, Reference Takagi and Watanabe25]). It is well known that $F$ -rationality always deforms while $F$ -regularity and $F$ -purity do not deform in general [Reference Singh22, Reference Singh23]. Whether $F$ -injectivity deforms is a long- standing open problem [Reference Fedder6] (for recent developments, we refer to [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18]). Recall that the Frobenius endomorphism induces a natural Frobenius action on every local cohomology module, $F$ : $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ . The ring $R$ is called $F$ -injective if this Frobenius action $F$ is injective for every $i\geqslant 0$ . The class of $F$ -injective singularities contains other classes of $F$ -singularities. For an ideal-theoretic characterization of $F$ -injectivity, see [Reference Quy and Shimomoto20, Main Theorem D]. We consider this paper as a step toward a solution of the deformation of $F$ -injectivity.

We introduce two conditions: $F$ -full and $F$ -anti-nilpotent singularities, in terms of the Frobenius actions on local cohomology modules of $R$ (we refer to Section 2 for detailed definitions). The first condition is motivated by recent results on Du Bois singularities [Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18]. The second condition has been studied in [Reference Enescu and Hochster5, Reference Ma16], and is known to be equivalent to stably FH-finite, which means all local cohomology modules of $R$ and $R[[x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n}]]$ supported at the maximal ideals have only finitely many Frobenius stable submodules. We prove that $F$ -fullness and $F$ -anti-nilpotency both deform, and we obtain more evidence on deformation of $F$ -injectivity. Our results largely generalize earlier results of [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11] in this direction. We list some of our main results here:

Theorem 1.1. (Theorem 4.2, Corollary 5.16)

$(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a Noetherian local ring of characteristic $p>0$ and $x$ a regular element of $R$ . Then we have:

  1. (1) if $R/(x)$ is $F$ -anti-nilpotent, then so is $R$ ;

  2. (2) if $R/(x)$ is $F$ -full, then so is $R$ ;

  3. (3) if $R/(x)$ is $F$ -full and $F$ -injective, then so is $R$ .

Theorem 1.2. (Theorem 5.11)

Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a Noetherian local ring of characteristic $p>0$ . Suppose the residue field $k=R/\mathfrak{m}$ is perfect. Let $x$ be a regular element of $R$ such that $\operatorname{Coker}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R))$ has finite length for every $i$ . If $R/(x)$ is $F$ -injective, then the map $x^{p-1}F$ : $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is injective for every $i$ , in particular $R$ is $F$ -injective.

2 Definitions and basic properties

2.1 Modules with Frobenius structure

Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a local ring of characteristic $p>0$ . A Frobenius action on an $R$ -module $M$ , $F$ : $M\rightarrow M$ , is an additive map such that for all $u\in M$ and $r\in R$ , $F(ru)=r^{p}u$ . Such an action induces a natural $R$ -linear map $\mathscr{F}_{R}(M)\rightarrow M$ ,Footnote 1 where $\mathscr{F}_{R}(-)$ denotes the Peskine–Szpiro’s Frobenius functor. We say $N$ is an $F$ -stable submodule of $M$ if $F(N)\subseteq N$ . We say the Frobenius action on $M$ is nilpotent if $F^{e}(M)=0$ for some $e$ .

We note that having a Frobenius action on $M$ is the same as saying that $M$ is a left module over the ring $R\{F\}$ , which may be viewed as a noncommutative ring generated over $R$ by the symbols $1,F,F^{2},\ldots \,$ by requiring that $Fr=r^{p}F$ for $r\in R$ . Moreover, $N$ is an $F$ -stable submodule of $M$ equivalent to requiring that $N$ is an $R\{F\}$ -submodule of $M$ . We will not use this viewpoint in this article though.

Let $M$ be an (typically Artinian) $R$ -module with a Frobenius action $F$ . We say the Frobenius action on $M$ is full (or simply $M$ is full), if the map $\mathscr{F}_{R}^{e}(M)\rightarrow M$ is surjective for some (equivalently, every) $e\geqslant 1$ . This is the same as saying that the $R$ -span of all the elements of the form $F^{e}(u)$ is the whole $M$ for some (equivalently, every) $e\geqslant 1$ . We say the Frobenius action on $M$ is anti-nilpotent (or simply $M$ is anti-nilpotent), if for any $F$ -stable submodule $N\subseteq M$ , the induced Frobenius action $F$ on $M/N$ is injective (note that this in particular implies that $F$ acts injectively on $M$ ).

Lemma 2.1. The Frobenius action on $M$ is anti-nilpotent if and only if every $F$ -stable submodule $N\subseteq M$ is full. In particular, if $M$ anti-nilpotent, then $M$ is full.

Proof. Suppose $M$ is anti-nilpotent. Let $N\subseteq M$ be an $F$ -stable submodule. Consider the $R$ -span of $F(N)$ , call it $N^{\prime }$ . Clearly, $N^{\prime }\subseteq N$ is another $F$ -stable submodule of $M$ and $F(N)\subseteq N^{\prime }$ . But since $M$ is anti-nilpotent, $F$ acts injectively on $M/N^{\prime }$ . Thus we have $N=N^{\prime }$ and hence $N$ is full.

Conversely, suppose every $F$ -stable submodule of $M$ is full. Suppose there exists an $F$ -stable submodule $N\subseteq M$ such that the Frobenius action on $M/N$ is not injective. Pick $y\notin N$ such that $F(y)\in N$ . Let $N^{\prime \prime }=N+Ry$ . It is clear that $N^{\prime \prime }$ is an $F$ -stable submodule of $M$ and the $R$ -span of $F(N^{\prime \prime })$ is contained in $N\subsetneq N^{\prime \prime }$ . This shows $N^{\prime \prime }$ is not full, a contradiction.◻

We also mention that whenever $M$ is endowed with a Frobenius action $F$ , then $\widetilde{F}=rF$ defines another Frobenius action on $M$ for every $r\in R$ . It is easy to check that if the action $\widetilde{F}$ is full or anti-nilpotent, then so is $F$ .

2.2 $F$ -singularities

We collect some definitions about singularities in positive characteristic. Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a Noetherian local ring of characteristic $p>0$ with the Frobenius endomorphism $F:R\rightarrow R;x\mapsto x^{p}$ . $R$ is called $F$ -finite if $R$ is a finitely generated as an $R$ -module via the homomorphism $F$ . $R$ is called $F$ -pure if the Frobenius endomorphism is pure.Footnote 2 It is worth to note that if $R$ is either $F$ -finite or complete, then $R$ being $F$ -pure is equivalent to the condition that the Frobenius endomorphism $F:R\rightarrow R$ is split [Reference Hochster and Roberts12]. Let $I=(x_{1},\ldots ,x_{t})$ be an ideal of $R$ . Then we denote by $H_{I}^{i}(R)$ the $i$ th local cohomology module with support at $I$ (we refer to [Reference Brodmann and Sharp3] for the general theory of local cohomology modules). Recall that local cohomology may be computed as the cohomology of the Čech complex

$$\begin{eqnarray}0\rightarrow R\rightarrow \bigoplus _{i=1}^{t}R_{x_{i}}\rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow \bigoplus _{i=1}^{t}R_{x_{1}\cdots \widehat{x}_{i}\cdots x_{t}}\rightarrow R_{x_{1}\cdots x_{t}}\rightarrow 0.\end{eqnarray}$$

The Frobenius endomorphism $F:R\rightarrow R$ induces a natural Frobenius action $F:H_{I}^{i}(R)\rightarrow H_{I^{[p]}}^{i}(R)\cong H_{I}^{i}(R)$ . A local ring $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ is called $F$ -injective if the Frobenius action on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is injective for all $i\geqslant 0$ . This is the case if $R$ is $F$ -pure [Reference Hochster and Roberts12, Lemma 2.2]. One can also characterize $F$ -injectivity using certain ideal closure operations (see [Reference Ma17, Reference Quy and Shimomoto20] for more details).

Example 2.2. Let $I=(x_{1},\ldots ,x_{t})\subseteq R$ be an ideal generated by $t$ elements. By the above discussion we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}H_{I}^{t}(R)\cong R_{x_{1}\cdots x_{t}}\bigg/\text{Im}\biggl(\bigoplus _{i=1}^{t}R_{x_{1}\cdots \widehat{x}_{i}\cdots x_{t}}\rightarrow R_{x_{1}\cdots x_{t}}\biggr)\end{eqnarray}$$

and the natural Frobenius action on $H_{I}^{t}(R)$ sends $1/(x_{1}\cdots x_{t})$ to $1/(x_{1}^{p}\cdots x_{t}^{p})$ . Therefore, it is easy to see the Frobenius action on $H_{I}^{t}(R)$ is full (in fact, $\mathscr{F}_{R}(H_{I}^{t}(R))\rightarrow H_{I}^{t}(R)$ is an isomorphism). On the other hand, one cannot expect $H_{I}^{t}(R)$ is always anti-nilpotent even when $R$ is regular. For example, let $R=k[[x,y]]$ be a formal power series ring in two variables and $I=(x)$ . We have

$$\begin{eqnarray}H_{(x)}^{1}(R)\cong k[[y]]x^{-1}\oplus \cdots \oplus k[[y]]x^{-n}\oplus \cdots \,.\end{eqnarray}$$

Let $N$ be the submodule of $H_{(x)}^{1}(R)$ generated by $\{y^{2}x^{-n}\}_{n=1}^{\infty }$ , then it is easy to see $N$ is an $F$ -stable submodule of $H_{(x)}^{1}(R)$ . However, $F(yx^{-1})=y^{p}x^{-p}\in N$ while $yx^{-1}\notin N$ . So the Frobenius action on $H_{(x)}^{1}(R)/N$ is not injective and hence $H_{(x)}^{1}(R)$ is not anti-nilpotent.

We are mostly interested in the Frobenius actions on local cohomology modules of $R$ supported at the maximal ideal. We introduce two notions of $F$ -singularities.

Definition 2.3.

  1. (1) We say that $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ is $F$ -full, if the Frobenius action on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is full for every $i\geqslant 0$ . This means $\mathscr{F}_{R}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is surjective for every $i\geqslant 0$ .

  2. (2) We say that $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ is $F$ -anti-nilpotent, if the Frobenius action on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is anti-nilpotent for every $i\geqslant 0$ .

The concept of $F$ -anti-nilpotency is not new, it was introduced and studied in [Reference Enescu and Hochster5] and [Reference Ma16] under the name stably FH-finite: that is, all local cohomology modules of $R$ and $R[[x_{1},\ldots ,x_{n}]]$ supported at their maximal ideals have only finitely many $F$ -stable submodules. It is a nontrivial result [Reference Enescu and Hochster5, Theorem 4.15] that this is equivalent to $R$ being $F$ -anti-nilpotent.

Remark 2.4.

  1. (1) It is clear that $F$ -anti-nilpotent implies $F$ -injective and $F$ -full (see Lemma 2.1). Moreover, $F$ -pure local rings are $F$ -anti-nilpotent [Reference Ma16, Theorem 1.1]. In particular, $F$ -pure local rings are $F$ -full.

  2. (2) We can construct many $F$ -anti-nilpotent (equivalently, stably FH-finite) rings that are not $F$ -pure [Reference Quy and Shimomoto20, Sections 5 and 6].

  3. (3) Cohen–Macaulay rings are automatically $F$ -full, since $\mathscr{F}_{R}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{d}(R))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{d}(R)$ is an isomorphism. But even $F$ -injective Cohen–Macaulay rings are not necessarily $F$ -anti-nilpotent [Reference Enescu and Hochster5, Example 2.16].

We give some simple examples of rings that are not $F$ -full, we see a family of such rings in Example 3.6.

Example 2.5.

  1. (1) Let $R=k[s^{4},s^{3}t,st^{3},t^{4}]$ where $k$ is a field of characteristic $p>0$ . Then $R$ is a graded ring with $s^{4},t^{4}$ a homogeneous system of parameters. A simple computation shows that the class

    $$\begin{eqnarray}\left[\frac{(s^{3}t)^{2}}{s^{4}},-\frac{(st^{3})^{2}}{t^{4}}\right]\in R_{s^{4}}\oplus R_{t^{4}}\end{eqnarray}$$
    spans the local cohomology module $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{1}(R)$ . In particular, $[H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{1}(R)]$ sits only in degree 2 and thus the natural Frobenius map kills $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{1}(R)$ . $R$ is not $F$ -full.
  2. (2) Let $R=(k[x,y,z]/(x^{3}+y^{3}+z^{3}))\#k[s,t]$ be the Segre product of $A=(k[x,y,z]/(x^{3}+y^{3}+z^{3}))$ and $B=k[s,t]$ , where $k$ is a field of characteristic $p>0$ with $p\equiv 2$ mod $3$ . Then $R$ is a normal domain, since it is a direct summand of $A\otimes _{k}B=A[s,t]$ . Moreover, a direct computation (for example see [Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18, Examples 4.11 and 4.16]) shows that

    $$\begin{eqnarray}H_{\mathfrak{m}_{R}}^{2}(R)=[H_{\mathfrak{ m}_{R}}^{2}(R)]_{0}\cong [H_{\mathfrak{m}_{A}}^{2}(A)]_{0}=k.\end{eqnarray}$$
    Since $p\equiv 2$ mod 3, we know the natural Frobenius map kills $[H_{\mathfrak{m}_{A}}^{2}(A)]_{0}$ . Hence $R$ is not $F$ -full. On the other hand, if $p\equiv 1$ mod $3$ , then it is well known that $R$ is $F$ -pure (since $A$ is) and hence $F$ -anti-nilpotent [Reference Ma16, Theorem 1.1].

Remark 2.6.

  1. (1) When $R$ is a homomorphic image of a regular ring $A$ , say $R=A/I$ , $R$ is $F$ -full if and only if $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(A/J)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(A/I)$ is surjective for every $J\subseteq I\subseteq \sqrt{J}$ . This is because by [Reference Lyubeznik15, Lemma 2.2], the $R$ -span of $F^{e}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R))$ is the same as the image $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(A/I^{[p^{e}]})\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(A/I)$ , and for every $J\subseteq I\subseteq \sqrt{J}$ , $I^{[p^{e}]}\subseteq J$ for $e\gg 0$ . As an application, when $R=A/I$ is $F$ -full, we have $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(A/I)=0$ provided $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(A/J)=0$ . Hence $\operatorname{depth}A/I\geqslant \operatorname{depth}A/J$ for every $J\subseteq I\subseteq \sqrt{J}$ .

  2. (2) Suppose $R$ is a local ring essentially of finite type over $\mathbb{C}$ and $R$ is Du Bois (we refer to [Reference Schwede21] or [Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18] for the definition and basic properties of Du Bois singularities). In this case we do have $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(A/J)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(A/I)$ is surjective for every $J\subseteq I=\sqrt{J}$  [Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18, Lemma 3.3]. This is the main ingredient in proving singularities of dense $F$ -injective type deform [Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18, Theorem C].

  3. (3) Since $F$ -injective singularity is the conjectured characteristic $p>0$ analog of Du Bois singularity [Reference Bhatt, Schwede and Takagi1, Reference Schwede21], it is thus quite natural to ask whether $F$ -injective local rings are always $F$ -full. It turns out that this is false in general [Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18, Example 3.5]. However, constructing such examples seems hard. In fact, [Reference Enescu and Hochster5, Example 2.16] (or its variants like [Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18, Example 3.5]) is the only example we know that is $F$ -injective but not $F$ -anti-nilpotent.

The above remarks motivate us to introduce and study $F$ -fullness and a stronger notion of $F$ -injectivity (see Section 5).

We end this subsection by proving that $F$ -full rings localize. Note that it is proved in [Reference Ma16, Theorem 5.10] that $F$ -anti-nilpotent rings localize.

For convenience, we use $R^{(1)}$ to denote the target ring of the Frobenius map $R\overset{F}{\rightarrow }R^{(1)}$ . If $M$ is an $R$ -module, then $\operatorname{Hom}_{R}(R^{(1)},M)$ has a structure of an $R^{(1)}$ -module. We can then identify $R^{(1)}$ with $R$ , and $\operatorname{Hom}_{R}(R^{(1)},M)$ corresponds to an $R$ -module which we call $F^{\flat }(M)$ (we refer to [Reference Blickle and Böckle2, Section 2.3] for more details on this). When $R$ is $F$ -finite, we have $\operatorname{Hom}_{R}(R^{(1)},E_{R})\cong E_{R^{(1)}}$ and $F^{\flat }(E)\cong E_{R}$ , where $E_{R}$ denotes the injective hull of the residue field of $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ .

Proposition 2.7. Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be an $F$ -finite and $F$ -full local ring. Then $R_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is also $F$ -full for every $\mathfrak{p}\in \operatorname{Spec}R$ .

Proof. By a result of Gabber [Reference Gabber7, Remark 13.6], $R$ is a homomorphic image of a regular ring $A$ . Let $n=\dim A$ . We have

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle & & \displaystyle \operatorname{Hom}_{R^{(1)}}(\operatorname{Hom}_{R}(R^{(1)},\operatorname{Ext}_{A}^{n-i}(R,A)),E_{R^{(1)}})\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & & \displaystyle \quad \cong \operatorname{Hom}_{R^{(1)}}(\operatorname{Hom}_{R}(R^{(1)},\operatorname{Ext}_{A}^{n-i}(R,A)),\operatorname{Hom}_{R}(R^{(1)},E_{R}))\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & & \displaystyle \quad \cong \operatorname{Hom}_{R}(\operatorname{Hom}_{R}(R^{(1)},\operatorname{Ext}_{A}^{n-i}(R,A)),E_{R})\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & & \displaystyle \quad \cong R^{(1)}\otimes \operatorname{Hom}_{R}(\operatorname{Ext}_{A}^{n-i}(R,A),E_{R})\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & & \displaystyle \quad \cong R^{(1)}\otimes H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

where the last isomorphism is by local duality. Thus after identifying $R^{(1)}$ with $R$ , we have $\mathscr{F}_{R}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R))$ is the Matlis dual of $F^{\flat }(\operatorname{Ext}_{A}^{n-i}(R,A))$ . So $\mathscr{F}_{R}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is surjective for every $i$ if and only if $\operatorname{Ext}_{A}^{n-i}(R,A)\rightarrow F^{\flat }(\operatorname{Ext}_{A}^{n-i}(R,A))$ is injective for every $i$ . The latter condition clearly localizes. So $R$ is $F$ -full implies $R_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is $F$ -full for every $\mathfrak{p}\in \operatorname{Spec}R$ .◻

3 On surjective elements

The following definition was introduced in [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11] and was the key tool in [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11].

Definition 3.1. Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a Noetherian local ring and $x$ a regular element of $R$ . $x$ is called a surjective element if the natural map on the local cohomology module $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{n}))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x))$ induced by $R/(x^{n})\rightarrow R/(x)$ is surjective for all $n>0$ and $i\geqslant 0$ .

The next proposition is a restatement of [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Lemma 3.2], so we omit the proof.

Proposition 3.2. The following are equivalent:

  1. (i) $x$ is a surjective element.

  2. (ii) For all $0<h\leqslant k$ the multiplication map

    $$\begin{eqnarray}R/(x^{h})\overset{x^{k-h}}{\rightarrow }R/(x^{k})\end{eqnarray}$$
    induces an injection
    $$\begin{eqnarray}H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{h}))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i}(R/(x^{k}))\end{eqnarray}$$
    for each $i\geqslant 0$ .
  3. (iii) For all $0<h\leqslant k$ the short exact sequence

    $$\begin{eqnarray}0\rightarrow R/(x^{h})\overset{x^{k-h}}{\rightarrow }R/(x^{k})\rightarrow R/(x^{k-h})\rightarrow 0\end{eqnarray}$$
    induces a short exact sequence
    $$\begin{eqnarray}0\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{h}))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i}(R/(x^{k}))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i}(R/(x^{k-h}))\rightarrow 0\end{eqnarray}$$
    for each $i\geqslant 0$ .

Proposition 3.3. The following are equivalent:

  1. (i) $x$ is a surjective element.

  2. (ii) The multiplication map $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is surjective for all $i\geqslant 0$ .

Proof. By Proposition 3.2, $x$ is a surjective element if and only if all maps in the direct limit system $\{H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{h}))\}_{h\geqslant 1}$ are injective. This is equivalent to the condition

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}_{h}:H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{h}))\rightarrow \mathop{\varinjlim }\nolimits_{h}H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{h}))\cong H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i}(H_{(x)}^{1}(R))\cong H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i+1}(R)\end{eqnarray}$$

is injective for all $h\geqslant 1$ and all $i\geqslant 0$ (the last isomorphism comes from an easy computation using local cohomology spectral sequences and noting that $x$ is a nonzero divisor on $R$ , see also [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Lemma 2.2]).

Claim 3.4. $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}_{h}$ is exactly the connection maps in the long exact sequence of local cohomology induced by $0\rightarrow R\xrightarrow[{}]{\cdot x^{h}}R\rightarrow R/(x^{h})\rightarrow 0$ :

$$\begin{eqnarray}\cdots \rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{h}))\overset{\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}_{h}}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i+1}(R)\overset{x^{h}}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i+1}(R)\rightarrow \cdots \,.\end{eqnarray}$$

Proof of claim.

Observe that by definition, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}_{h}$ is the natural map in the long exact sequence of local cohomology

$$\begin{eqnarray}\cdots \rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{h}))\xrightarrow[{}]{\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}_{h}}H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R_{x}/R)\xrightarrow[{}]{\cdot x}H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R_{x}/R)\rightarrow \cdots\end{eqnarray}$$

which is induced by $0\rightarrow R/(x^{h})\rightarrow R_{x}/R\xrightarrow[{}]{\cdot x^{h}}R_{x}/R\rightarrow 0$ (note that $x^{h}$ is a nonzero divisor on $R$ and $H_{x}^{1}(R)\cong R_{x}/R$ ). However, it is easy to see that the multiplication by $x^{h}$ map $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R_{x}/R)\xrightarrow[{}]{\cdot x^{h}}H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R_{x}/R)$ can be identified with the multiplication by $x^{h}$ map $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i+1}(R)\xrightarrow[{}]{\cdot x^{h}}H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i+1}(R)$ because we have a natural identification $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R_{x}/R)\cong H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(H_{x}^{1}(R))\cong H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i+1}(R)$ (see for example [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Lemma 2.2]). This finishes the proof of the claim.◻

From the claim it is immediate that $x$ is a surjective element if and only if the long exact sequence splits into short exact sequences:

$$\begin{eqnarray}0\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{h}))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i+1}(R)\overset{x^{h}}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i+1}(R)\rightarrow 0.\end{eqnarray}$$

But this is equivalent to saying that the multiplication map $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x^{h}}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is surjective for all $h\geqslant 1$ and $i\geqslant 0$ , and also equivalent to $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is surjective for all $i\geqslant 0$ .◻

We next link the notion of surjective element with $F$ -fullness. This is inspired by [Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18, Reference Singh and Walther24].

Proposition 3.5. Let $x$ be a regular element of $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ . If $R/(x)$ is $F$ -full, then $x$ is a surjective element. In particular, if $R/(x)$ is $F$ -anti-nilpotent, then $x$ is a surjective element.

Proof. We have natural maps:

$$\begin{eqnarray}\displaystyle \mathscr{F}_{R}^{e}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x))) & \xrightarrow[{}]{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{e}} & \displaystyle R/(x)\otimes _{R}\mathscr{F}_{R}^{e}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x)))\cong \mathscr{F}_{R/(x)}^{e}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x)))\nonumber\\ \displaystyle & \xrightarrow[{}]{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FD}_{e}} & \displaystyle H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x)).\nonumber\end{eqnarray}$$

If $R/(x)$ is $F$ -full, then $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FD}_{e}$ is surjective for every $e$ . Since $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}_{e}$ is always surjective, the natural map $\mathscr{F}_{R}^{e}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x)))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x))$ is surjective for every $e$ . Now simply notice that for every $e>0$ , the map $\mathscr{F}_{R}^{e}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x)))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x))$ factors through $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{p^{e}}))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x))$ , so $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x^{p^{e}}))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x))$ is surjective for every $e>0$ . This clearly implies that $x$ is a surjective element.◻

The above propositions allow us to construct a family of non $F$ -full local rings:

Example 3.6. Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a local ring with finite length cohomology, that is, $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ has finite length for every $i<\dim R$ (under mild conditions, this is equivalent to saying that $R$ is Cohen–Macaulay on the punctured spectrum). Let $x$ be an arbitrary regular element in $R$ . If $R$ is not Cohen–Macaulay, then we claim that $R/(x)$ is not $F$ -full (and hence not $F$ -anti-nilpotent). For suppose it is, then $x$ is a surjective element by Proposition 3.5, hence $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is surjective for every $i$ by Proposition 3.3. But since $R$ has finite length cohomology, we also know that a power of $x$ annihilates $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ for every $i<\dim R$ . This implies $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)=0$ for every $i<\dim R$ . So $R$ is Cohen–Macaulay, a contradiction.

We learned the following argument from [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Lemma A.1]. Since it is a crucial technique of this paper, we provide a detailed proof.

Proposition 3.7. Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a local ring of prime characteristic $p$ and $x$ a regular element of $R$ . Let $s$ be a positive integer such that the map $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s-1}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s-1}(R)$ is surjective and the Frobenius action on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s-1}(R/(x))$ is injective, then the map

$$\begin{eqnarray}H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)\overset{x^{p-1}F}{\longrightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{s}(R)\end{eqnarray}$$

is injective.

Proof. The natural commutative diagram

induces the following commutative diagram (the left most $0$ comes from our hypothesis that the map $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s-1}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s-1}(R)$ is surjective):

Suppose $y\in \operatorname{Ker}(x^{p-1}F)\cap \text{Soc}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R))$ . Then we have $x\cdot y=0$ so there exists $z\in H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s-1}(R/(x))$ such that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}(z)=y$ . Following the above commutative diagram we have

$$\begin{eqnarray}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}\circ F)(z)=x^{p-1}F(\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}(z))=x^{p-1}F(y)=0.\end{eqnarray}$$

However, since both $F$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}$ are injective, we have $z=0$ and hence $y=0$ . This shows $x^{p-1}F$ is injective and hence completes the proof.◻

Proposition 3.7 immediately generalizes the main result of [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11]:

Corollary 3.8. (Compare with [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11], Main Theorem)

Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a local ring of prime characteristic $p$ and $x$ a regular element of $R$ . Suppose $R/(x)$ is $F$ -injective. Then we have

  1. (i) The map $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{t}(R)\overset{x^{p-1}F}{\longrightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{t}(R)$ is injective where $t=\operatorname{depth}R$ . In particular, the natural Frobenius action on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{t}(R)$ is injective.

  2. (ii) Suppose $x$ is a surjective element. Then the map $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x^{p-1}F}{\longrightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is injective for all $i\geqslant 0$ . In particular, $R$ is $F$ -injective.

  3. (iii) If $R/(x)$ is $F$ -full (e.g., $R$ is $F$ -anti-nilpotent or $R$ is $F$ -pure), then $R$ is $F$ -injective.

Proof. (i) Follows from Proposition 3.7 applied to $s=t$ , (ii) also follows from Proposition 3.7 (because $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is surjective for every $i\geqslant 0$ by Proposition 3.3), (iii) follows from (ii), because we know $x$ is a surjective element by Proposition 3.5.◻

In the next two sections, we show that $F$ -full and $F$ -anti-nilpotent singularities both deform. We also prove new cases of deformation of $F$ -injectivity. These results are generalizations of Proposition 3.7 and Corollary 3.8.

4 Deformation of $F$ -full and $F$ -anti-nilpotent singularities

In this section we prove that the condition $F$ -full and $F$ -anti-nilpotent both deform. Throughout this section we assume that $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ is a local ring of prime characteristic $p$ . We begin with a crucial lemma.

Lemma 4.1. Let $x$ be a surjective element of $R$ . Let $N\subseteq H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ be an $F$ -stable submodule. Let $L=\bigcap _{t}x^{t}N$ . Then $L$ is an $F$ -stable submodule of $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ and we have the following commutative diagram (for every $e\geqslant 1$ ):

where $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}$ is the map $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ .

Proof. Since $x$ is a surjective element, by Proposition 3.3 we know that the map

$$\begin{eqnarray}H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i}(R)\text{ is surjective for every }i>0.\quad (\star )\end{eqnarray}$$

Applying the local cohomology functor to the following commutative diagram:

we have the following commutative diagram:

for all $i\geqslant 1$ and $e\geqslant 1$ , where the rows are short exact sequences by $(\star )$ .

Therefore, to prove the lemma, it suffices to show that $L$ is $F$ -stable and

$$\begin{eqnarray}0\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))/\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)\overset{\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i}(R)/L\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i}(R)/L\rightarrow 0\end{eqnarray}$$

is exact. It is clear that $L$ is $F$ -stable since it is an intersection of $F$ -stable submodules of $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ . To see the exactness of the above sequence, first note that $\operatorname{Im}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D719})=0:_{H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)}x$ , so $L+\operatorname{Im}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D719})\subseteq L:_{H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)}x$ . Thus it is enough to check that $L:_{H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)}x\subseteq L+\operatorname{Im}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D719})$ . Let $y$ be an element such that $xy\in L$ . Since $L=xL$ by the construction of $L$ , there exists $z\in L$ such that $xy=xz$ . So $y-z\in \operatorname{Im}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D719})$ and hence $y\in L+\operatorname{Im}(\unicode[STIX]{x1D719})$ , as desired.◻

We are ready to prove the main result of this section. This answers [Reference Quy and Shimomoto20, Problem 4] for stably FH-finiteness.

Theorem 4.2. $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a local ring of positive characteristic $p$ and $x$ a regular element of $R$ . Then we have:

  1. (i) if $R/(x)$ is $F$ -anti-nilpotent, then so is $R$ ;

  2. (ii) if $R/(x)$ is $F$ -full, then so is $R$ .

Proof. We first prove (i). Let $N$ be an $F$ -stable submodule of $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ . We want to show that the induced Frobenius action on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/N$ is injective. Since $R/(x)$ is $F$ -anti-nilpotent, $x$ is a surjective element by Proposition 3.5. Let $L=\bigcap _{t}x^{t}N$ . By Lemma 4.1, we have the following commutative diagram:

We first claim that the middle map $x^{p^{e}-1}F^{e}:H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L$ is injective. Let $y\in \operatorname{Ker}(x^{p^{e}-1}F^{e})\cap \text{Soc}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L)$ . We have $x\cdot y=0$ , so $y=\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}(z)$ for some $z\in H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))/\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)$ . It is easy to see that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)$ is an $F$ -stable submodule of $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))$ and $F^{e}(z)=0$ . Since $R/(x)$ is $F$ -anti-nilpotent, we know the Frobenius action $F$ , and hence its iterate $F^{e}$ , on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))/\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)$ is injective. Therefore, $z=0$ and hence $y=0$ . This proves that $x^{p^{e}-1}F^{e}$ and hence $F$ acts injectively on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L$ .

Note that we have a descending chain $N\supseteq xN\supseteq x^{2}N\supseteq \cdots \,.$ Since $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is Artinian, $L=\bigcap _{t}x^{t}N=x^{n}N$ for all $n\gg 0$ . We next claim that $L=N$ , this will finish the proof because we already showed $F$ acts injectively on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L$ . We have $x^{p^{e}-1}F^{e}(N)\subseteq x^{p^{e}-1}N=L$ for $e\gg 0$ , but the map $x^{p^{e}-1}F^{e}:H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L$ is injective by the above paragraph. So we must have $N\subseteq L$ and thus $L=N$ . This completes the proof of (1).

Next we prove (ii). The method is similar to that of (i). Let $N$ be the $R$ -span of $F(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R))$ in $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ , this is the same as the image of $\mathscr{F}_{R}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ . It is clear that $N$ is an $F$ -stable submodule. We want to show $N=H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ . Since $R/(x)$ is $F$ -full, $x$ is a surjective element by Proposition 3.5. Let $L=\bigcap _{t}x^{t}N$ . By Lemma 4.1, we have the following commutative diagram:

The descending chain $N\supseteq xN\supseteq x^{2}N\supseteq \cdots \,$ stabilizes because $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is Artinian. So $L=\bigcap _{t}x^{t}N=x^{n}N$ for $n\gg 0$ . The key point is that in the above diagram, the middle Frobenius action $x^{p^{e}-1}F^{e}$ is the zero map on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L$ for $e\gg 0$ , because for any $y\in H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ , $F^{e}(y)\in N$ and thus $x^{p^{e}-1}F^{e}(y)\in L$ for $e\gg 0$ . But then since $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))/\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)$ can be viewed as a submodule of $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L$ by the above commutative diagram, the natural Frobenius action $F^{e}$ on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))/\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)$ is zero, that is, $F$ is nilpotent on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))/\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)$ .

Since $F$ is nilpotent on $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))/\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)$ , we know that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)$ must contain all elements $F^{e}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x)))$ , hence it contains the $R$ -span of $F^{e}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R/(x)))$ . But $R/(x)$ is $F$ -full, so we must have $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}^{-1}(L)=H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))$ . But this means the map

$$\begin{eqnarray}H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L\xrightarrow[{}]{x}H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i}(R)/L\end{eqnarray}$$

is an isomorphism, which is impossible unless $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)=L$ (since otherwise any nonzero socle element of $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)/L$ maps to zero). Therefore, we have $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)=N=L$ . This proves $R$ is $F$ -full and hence finished the proof of (2).◻

The following is a well-known counter-example of Fedder [Reference Fedder6] and Singh [Reference Singh22] for the deformation of $F$ -purity.

Example 4.3. (Compare with [Reference Quy and Shimomoto20, Lemma 6.1])

Let $K$ be a perfect field of characteristic $p>0$ and let

$$\begin{eqnarray}R:=K[[U,V,Y,Z]]/(UV,UZ,Z(V-Y^{2})).\end{eqnarray}$$

Let $u,v,y$ and $z$ denote the image of $U,V,Y$ and $Z$ in $R$ (and its quotients), respectively. Then $y$ is a regular element of $R$ and $R/(y)\cong K[[U,V,Z]]/(UV,UZ,VZ)$ is $F$ -pure by [Reference Hochster and Roberts12, Proposition 5.38]. So $R/(y)$ is $F$ -anti-nilpotent by [Reference Ma16, Theorem 1.1]. By Theorem 4.2 we have $R$ is also $F$ -anti-nilpotent, or equivalently, $R$ is stably $FH$ -finite.

5 $F$ -injectivity

5.1 $F$ -injectivity and depth

We start with the following definition.

Definition 5.1. (Cf. [Reference Brodmann and Sharp3, Definition 9.1.3]) Let $M$ be a finitely generated module over a local ring $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ . The finiteness dimension $f_{\mathfrak{m}}(M)$ of $M$ with respect to $\mathfrak{m}$ is defined as follows:

$$\begin{eqnarray}f_{\mathfrak{m}}(M):=\text{inf}\{i\,|\,H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(M)~\text{is not finitely generated}\}\in \mathbb{Z}_{{\geqslant}0}\cup \{\infty \}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Remark 5.2.

  1. (i) Assume that $\dim M=0$ or $M=0$ (recall that a trivial module has dimension $-1$ ). In this case, $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(M)$ is finitely generated for all $i$ and $f_{\mathfrak{m}}(M)$ is equal to $\infty$ . It will be essential to know when the finiteness dimension is a positive integer. We mention the following result. Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a local ring and let $M$ be a finitely generated $R$ -module. If $d=\dim M>0$ , then the local cohomology module $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{d}(M)$ is not finitely generated. For the proof of this result, see [Reference Brodmann and Sharp3, Corollary 7.3.3].

  2. (ii) Suppose $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ is an image of a Cohen–Macaulay local ring. By the Grothendieck finiteness theorem (cf. [Reference Brodmann and Sharp3, Theorem 9.5.2]) we have

    $$\begin{eqnarray}f_{\mathfrak{m}}(M)=\min \{\operatorname{depth}M_{\mathfrak{p}}+\dim R/\mathfrak{p}\,:\,\mathfrak{p}\in \text{Supp}(M)\setminus \{\mathfrak{m}\}\}.\end{eqnarray}$$
  3. (iii) $M$ is generalized Cohen–Macaulay if and only if $\dim M=f_{\mathfrak{m}}(M)$ .

It is clear that $\operatorname{depth}R\leqslant f_{\mathfrak{m}}(R)\leqslant \dim R$ . The following result says that if $R/(x)$ is $F$ -injective, then $R$ has ‘good’ depth.

Theorem 5.3. If $R/(x)$ is $F$ -injective, then $\operatorname{depth}R=f_{\mathfrak{m}}(R)$ .

Proof. Suppose $t=\operatorname{depth}R<f_{\mathfrak{m}}(R)$ . The commutative diagram

induces the following commutative diagram

where both $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}$ and the left vertical map are injective. But $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{t}(R)$ has finite length, $x^{p^{e}-1}F^{e}:H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{t}(R)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{t}(R)$ vanishes for $e\gg 0$ , which is a contradiction.◻

Remark 5.4. The assertion of Theorem 5.3 also holds true if $R/(x)$ is $F$ -full. Indeed, by Proposition 3.5 we have $x$ is a surjective element. Hence there is no nonzero $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ of finite length. Thus $\operatorname{depth}R=f_{\mathfrak{m}}(R)$ .

Remark 5.5. The above result is closely related to the work of Schwede and Singh in [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Appendix]. In the proof of [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Lemma A.2, Theorem A.3], it is claimed that if $R_{\mathfrak{p}}$ satisfies the Serre condition $(S_{k})$ for all $\mathfrak{p}$ in $\text{Spec}^{\circ }(R)$ , the punctured spectrum of $R$ , and $\operatorname{depth}R=t<k$ , then $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{t}(R)$ is finitely generated. But this fact may not be true if $R$ is not equidimensional. For instance, let $R=K[[a,b,c,d]]/(a)\cap (b,c,d)$ with $K$ a field. We have $\operatorname{depth}R=1$ and $R_{\mathfrak{p}}$ satisfies $(S_{2})$ for all $\mathfrak{p}\in \text{Spec}^{\circ }(R)$ . However, $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{1}(R)$ is not finitely generated.

The assertion of [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Lemma A.2] (and hence [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Theorem A.3]) is still true. In fact, we can reduce it to the case that $R$ is equidimensional. We fill this gap below.

Corollary 5.6. [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Lemma A.2]

Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be an $F$ -finite local ring. Suppose there exists a regular element $x$ such that $R/(x)$ is $F$ -injective. If $R_{\mathfrak{p}}$ satisfies the Serre condition $(S_{k})$ for all $\mathfrak{p}\in \text{Spec}^{\circ }(R)$ , then $R$ is $(S_{k})$ .

Proof. We can assume that $k\leqslant d=\dim R$ . In fact, we need only to prove that $t:=\operatorname{depth}R\geqslant k$ . The case $k=1$ is trivial since $R$ contains a regular element $x$ . For $k\geqslant 2$ , since $R/(x)$ is $F$ -injective we have $R/(x)$ is reduced (cf. [Reference Schwede21, Proposition 4.3]). Hence $\operatorname{depth}(R/(x))\geqslant 1$ , so $\operatorname{depth}R\geqslant 2$ . Thus $R$ satisfies the Serre condition $(S_{2})$ . On the other hand, since $R$ is $F$ -finite, $R$ is a homomorphic image of a regular ring by a result of Gabber [Reference Gabber7, Remark 13.6]. In particular, $R$ is universally catenary.Footnote 3 But if a universally catenary ring satisfies $(S_{2})$ , then it is equidimensional (see [Reference Hochster and Huneke10, Remark 2.2(h)]). By Theorem 5.3 and Remark 5.2(ii), there exists a prime ideal $\mathfrak{p}\in \text{Spec}^{\circ }(R)$ such that $\operatorname{depth}R=\operatorname{depth}R_{\mathfrak{p}}+\dim R/\mathfrak{p}$ . It is then easy to see that $\operatorname{depth}R\geqslant \min \{d,k+1\}\geqslant k$ . The proof is complete.◻

Remark 5.7. In the above argument, we actually proved that if $k<d$ , then $\operatorname{depth}R\geqslant k+1$ .

5.2 Deformation of $F$ -injectivity

We begin with the following generalization of the notion of surjective elements.

Definition 5.8. (Cf. [Reference Cuong, Morales and Nhan4])

A regular element $x$ is called a strictly filter regular element if

$$\begin{eqnarray}\operatorname{Coker}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{i}(R))\end{eqnarray}$$

has finite length for all $i\geqslant 0$ .

Lemma 5.9. Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a local ring of characteristic $p>0$ . Suppose the residue field $k=R/\mathfrak{m}$ is perfect. Let $M$ be an $R$ -module with an injective Frobenius action $F$ . Suppose $L$ is an $F$ -stable submodule of $M$ of finite length. Then the induced Frobenius action on $M/L$ is injective.

Proof. First we note that $L$ is killed by $\mathfrak{m}$ : suppose $x\in L$ , then $F^{e}(\mathfrak{m}\cdot x)=\mathfrak{m}^{[p^{e}]}\cdot x=0$ for $e\gg 0$ since $L$ has finite length. But then $\mathfrak{m}\cdot x=0$ since $F$ acts injectively. Now we have a Frobenius action $F$ on a $k$ -vector space $L$ . Call the image of $L^{\prime }\subseteq L$ (which is a $k^{p}$ -vector subspace of $L$ ). Since $F$ is injective, the $k^{p}$ -vector space dimension of $L^{\prime }$ is equal to the $k$ -vector space dimension of $L$ . But since $k^{p}=k$ , this implies $L^{\prime }=L$ and thus $F$ is surjective, hence $F$ is bijective. Now by the injectivity of $F$ again we have $F(x)\notin L$ for all $x\notin L$ . Thus $F:M/L\rightarrow M/L$ is injective.◻

Example 5.10. The perfectness of the residue field in Lemma 5.9 is necessary. Let $A=\mathbb{F}_{p}[t]$ and $R=k=\mathbb{F}_{p}(t)$ , where $t$ is an indeterminate. We consider the Frobenius action on the $A$ -module $Ae_{1}\oplus Ae_{2}$ defined by

$$\begin{eqnarray}F(f(t),g(t))=(f(t)^{p}+tg(t)^{p},0).\end{eqnarray}$$

It is clear that $F$ is injective. Moreover, $Ae_{1}\oplus 0$ is an $F$ -stable submodule of $Ae_{1}\oplus Ae_{2}$ . Since $F(Ae_{1}\oplus Ae_{2})\subseteq Ae_{1}\oplus 0$ , the induced Frobenius action on $(Ae_{1}\oplus Ae_{2})/(Ae_{1}\oplus 0)$ is the zero map. By localizing, we obtain an injective Frobenius action on $M=k\cdot e_{1}\oplus k\cdot e_{2}$ with $L=k\cdot e_{1}\oplus 0$ is an $F$ -stable submodule of finite length, but the induced Frobenius action on $M/L$ is not injective.

The following is a generalization of the main result of [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11] when $R/\mathfrak{m}$ is perfect.

Theorem 5.11. Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a Noetherian local ring of characteristic $p>0$ . Suppose the residue field $k=R/\mathfrak{m}$ is perfect. Let $x$ be a strictly filter regular element. If $R/(x)$ is $F$ -injective, then the map $x^{p-1}F$ : $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is injective for every $i$ , in particular $R$ is $F$ -injective.

Proof. Let $L_{i}:=\operatorname{Coker}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R))$ , we have $L_{i}$ has finite length for all $i\geqslant 0$ . The commutative diagram

induces the following commutative diagram

Therefore, we have the following commutative diagram

with the Frobenius action $F:H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))/L_{i-1}\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i-1}(R/(x))/L_{i-1}$ is injective by Lemma 5.9. Now by the same method as in the proof of Proposition 3.7 or Theorem 4.2(i), we conclude that the map $x^{p-1}F:H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is injective for all $i\geqslant 0$ .◻

Similarly, we have the following:

Proposition 5.12. Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a Noetherian local ring of characteristic $p>0$ . Suppose the residue field $k=R/\mathfrak{m}$ is perfect. Let $x$ be a regular element such that $R/(x)$ is $F$ -injective. Let $s$ be a positive integer such that $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s-1}(R/(x))$ has finite length. Then the map $x^{p-1}F:H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s+1}(R)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s+1}(R)$ is injective.

Proof. The short exact sequence

$$\begin{eqnarray}0\rightarrow R\overset{x}{\rightarrow }R\rightarrow R/(x)\rightarrow 0\end{eqnarray}$$

induces the exact sequence

$$\begin{eqnarray}\cdots \rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s-1}(R/(x))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{s}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{s}(R)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{s}(R/(x))\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{s+1}(R)\rightarrow \cdots \,.\end{eqnarray}$$

Since $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s-1}(R/(x))$ has finite length, so is $\operatorname{Ker}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R))$ . We claim that

$$\begin{eqnarray}L_{s}:=\operatorname{Coker}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{ m}}^{s}(R))\end{eqnarray}$$

also has finite length: to see this we may assume $R$ is complete, since $\operatorname{Ker}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R))$ has finite length, this means $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)^{\vee }\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)^{\vee }$ is surjective when localizing at any $\mathfrak{p}\neq \mathfrak{m}$ . But by [Reference Matsumura19, Theorem 2.4] this implies $H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)^{\vee }\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)^{\vee }$ is an isomorphism when localizing at any $\mathfrak{p}\neq \mathfrak{m}$ . Thus $\operatorname{Ker}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)^{\vee }\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)^{\vee })$ has finite length which, after dualizing, shows that $\operatorname{Coker}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R))$ has finite length.

We have proved $L_{s}=\operatorname{Coker}(H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R)\overset{x}{\rightarrow }H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s}(R))$ has finite length. Now the map $x^{p-1}F:H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s+1}(R)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{s+1}(R)$ is injective by the same argument as in Theorem 5.11.◻

The following immediate corollary of the above proposition recovers (and in fact generalizes) results in [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11].

Corollary 5.13. [Reference Horiuchi, Miller and Shimomoto11, Corollary 4.7]

Let $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ be a Noetherian local ring of characteristic $p>0$ . Suppose the residue field $k=R/\mathfrak{m}$ is perfect. Let $x$ be a regular element such that $R/(x)$ is $F$ -injective. Then the map $x^{p-1}F:H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)\rightarrow H_{\mathfrak{m}}^{i}(R)$ is injective for all $i\leqslant f_{\mathfrak{m}}(R/(x))+1$ . In particular, if $R/(x)$ is generalized Cohen–Macaulay, then $R$ is $F$ -injective.

Because of the deep connections between $F$ -injective and Du Bois singularities [Reference Bhatt, Schwede and Takagi1, Reference Schwede21] and Remark 2.6, we believe that it is rarely the case that an $F$ -injective ring fails to be $F$ -full (again, the only example we know this happens is [Reference Ma, Schwede and Shimomoto18, Example 3.5], which is based on the construction of [Reference Enescu and Hochster5, Example 2.16]). Therefore, we introduce:

Definition 5.14. We say $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ is strongly $F$ -injective if $R$ is $F$ -injective and $F$ -full.

Remark 5.15. In general we have: $F$ -anti-nilpotent $\Rightarrow$ strongly $F$ -injective $\Rightarrow$ $F$ -injective. Moreover, when $R$ is Cohen–Macaulay, strongly $F$ -injective is equivalent to $F$ -injective.

We can prove that strong $F$ -injectivity deform.

Corollary 5.16. Let $x$ be a regular element on $(R,\mathfrak{m})$ . If $R/(x)$ is strongly $F$ -injective, then $R$ is strongly $F$ -injective.

Proof. We know $R$ is $F$ -injective by Corollary 3.8(iii). But we also know $R$ is $F$ -full by Theorem 4.2(ii). This shows that $R$ is strongly $F$ -injective.◻

Footnotes

L. Ma is supported in part by the NSF grant DMS #1600198 and NSF CAREER grant DMS #1252860/1501102, and was partially supported by a Simons Travel grant when preparing this article. P. H. Quy is partially supported by a fund of Vietnam National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED) under grant number 101.04-2017.10. This paper was written while Pham Hung Quy was visiting Vietnam Institute for Advanced Study in Mathematics. He would like to thank the VIASM for hospitality and financial support.

1 It is not hard to see that an $R$ -linear map $\mathscr{F}_{R}(M)\rightarrow M$ also determines a Frobenius action on $M$ .

2 A map of $R$ -modules $N\rightarrow N^{\prime }$ is pure if for every $R$ -module $M$ the map $N\otimes _{R}M\rightarrow N^{\prime }\otimes _{R}M$ is injective for every $R$ -module $M$ .

3 Another way to see this is to use the fact that $F$ -finite rings are excellent [Reference Kunz14] and hence universally catenary.

References

Bhatt, B., Schwede, K. and Takagi, S., The weak ordinarity conjecture and F-singularities , Adv. Stud. Pure Math. (Kawamata’s 60th volume) (to appear).Google Scholar
Blickle, M. and Böckle, G., Cartier modules: finiteness results , J. Reine Angew. Math. 661 (2011), 85123.Google Scholar
Brodmann, M. and Sharp, R. Y., Local Cohomology: An Algebraic Introduction with Geometric Applications, Vol. 60, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998.Google Scholar
Cuong, N. T., Morales, M. and Nhan, L. T., The finiteness of certain sets of attached prime ideals and the length of generalized fractions , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 189 (2004), 109121.Google Scholar
Enescu, F. and Hochster, M., The Frobenius structure of local cohomology , Algebra Number Theory 2 (2008), 721754.Google Scholar
Fedder, R., F-purity and rational singularity , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 278 (1983), 461480.Google Scholar
Gabber, O., Notes on Some t-Structures, Geometric Aspects of Dwork Theory II , 711734. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co, KG, Berlin, 2004.Google Scholar
Hochster, M., Cyclic purity versus purity in excellent Noetherian rings , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 231 (1977), 463488.Google Scholar
Hochster, M. and Huneke, C., Tight closure, invariant theory, and the Briançon–Skoda theorem , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 3 (1990), 31116.Google Scholar
Hochster, M. and Huneke, C., “ Indecomposable canonical modules and connectedness ”, in Commutative Algebra: Syzygies, Multiplicities and Birational Algebra, Contemporary Mathematics 159 , 1994, 197208.Google Scholar
Horiuchi, J., Miller, L. E. and Shimomoto, K., Deformation of F-injectivity and local cohomology , Indiana Univ. Math. J. 63 (2014), 11391157; appendix by Karl Schwede and Anurag K. Singh.Google Scholar
Hochster, M. and Roberts, J., The purity of the Frobenius and local cohomology , Adv. Math. 21 (1976), 117172.Google Scholar
Huneke, C., Tight Closure and its Applications, CBMS Lecture Notes in Mathematics 88 , American Mathematical Society, Providence, 1996.Google Scholar
Kunz, E., On Noetherian rings of characteristic p , Amer. J. Math. 98(4) (1976), 9991013.Google Scholar
Lyubeznik, G., On the vanishing of local cohomology in characteristic p > 0 , Compos. Math. 142 (2006), 207221.+0+,+Compos.+Math.+142+(2006),+207–221.>Google Scholar
Ma, L., Finiteness property of local cohomology for F-pure local rings , Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 20 (2014), 54895509.Google Scholar
Ma, L., F-injectivity and Buchsbaum singularities , Math. Ann. 362 (2015), 2542.Google Scholar
Ma, L., Schwede, K. and Shimomoto, K., Local cohomology of Du Bois singularities and applications to families, preprint, 2014, arXiv:1605.02755.Google Scholar
Matsumura, H., Commutative Ring Theory, Vol. 8, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986.Google Scholar
Quy, P. H. and Shimomoto, K., F-injectivity and Frobenius closure of ideals in Noetherian rings of characteristic p > 0 , Adv. Math. 313 (2017), 127166.+0+,+Adv.+Math.+313+(2017),+127–166.>Google Scholar
Schwede, K., F-injective singularities are Du Bois , Amer. J. Math. 131 (2009), 445473.Google Scholar
Singh, A. K., Deformation of F-purity and F-regularity , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 140 (1999), 137148.Google Scholar
Singh, A. K., F-regularity does not deform , Amer. J. Math. 121 (1999), 919929.Google Scholar
Singh, A. K. and Walther, U., Local cohomology and pure morphisms , Illinos J. Math. 51 (2007), 287298.Google Scholar
Takagi, S. and Watanabe, K., F-singularities: applications of characteristic p methods to singularity theory , Sugaku Exposition (2014).Google Scholar