Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $X$ be a smooth variety (over an algebraically closed field, if it makes a difference), and $\mathscr{F}$ a coherent sheaf on $X$. I have heard it claimed that $\mathscr{F}$ is locally free if and only if for all morphisms $f : C \to X$ with $C$ a smooth curve, the pullback $f^*\mathscr{F}$ is locally free. How does one prove such a thing?

It is enough to show something like the following: if $M$ is a finitely generated module over a regular local ring $A$, and for every $A$-algebra $B$ which is a discrete valuation ring the tensor product $B \otimes_A M$ is free, then $M$ is free. But that's as far as I can see.

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 1 down vote accepted

(I read incorrectly the statement at a first time).

  1. If $F$ is locally free on $X$, then for any morphism $f : C\to X$ for any scheme $C$, the pull-back $f^*F$ is locally free. Indeed, this is a local question, so you can suppose $F$ is free. Then $F$ is a direct sum of copies of $O_X$, hence $f^*F$ is a direct sum of copies of $f^*O_X=O_C$.

  2. As $X$ is reduced, it is enough to show that the map $x\mapsto d(x)=\dim F\otimes k(x)$ is locally constant on $X$. We can suppose $X$ is connected. Then it is known that through any pair of points $x_1, x_2$ of $X$ it passes a smooth curve $C$. As $F|_C$ is flat, $\dim F\otimes k(t)=d(t)$ is locally constant (hence constant) on $C$. Therefore $d(x_1)=d(x_2)$ and $d$ is constant.

EDIT 2'. I didn't find a reference for the fact stated above (existence of a smooth curve $C$ passing through $x_1, x_2$). However, in Mumford, Abelian Varieties, Lemma p. 56, it is proved that it passes an irreducible curve $D$ through $x_1, x_2$. Now consider the normalization map $\pi : C\to D$ of $D$. Then $\pi^*F$ is locally free by hypothesis. So $d(t)=\dim \pi^*F\otimes k(t)=\dim F\otimes k(\pi(t))$ is constant on $C$. This implies that $d(x_1)=d(x_2)$.

Well, the existence of a smooth curve $C$ inside $X$ is a consequence of Bertini. This is in a paper of Kleiman and Altman "Bertini theorems for hypersurface sections containing a subschemes" (over infinite fields), an in a paper of Poonen "Smooth hypersurface sections containing a given subscheme over a finite field" over finite fields. But as we saw above, we don't need such strong results. The one in Mumford is pretty easy.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.