4
$\begingroup$

Let $R$ be a commutative ring with identiy, then the following are equivalent:

  1. $R$ is a DVR
  2. $R$ is a local Euclidean domain that is not a field.
  3. $R$ is a local PID that is not a field.
  4. $R$ is a local Dedekind domain that is not a field.
  5. $R$ is a UFD with a unique irreducible element up to a unit.
  6. There is a non-nilpotent non-unit element $\pi \in R$ such that every $a \in R \setminus\{0\}$ has a unique expression $a = u \pi^n$, where $u \in R^\times$ and $n\in \mathbb{N}$.
  7. $R$ is a Noetherian valuation ring and not a field.
  8. $R$ is a Noetherian local ring with a principal maximal ideal generated by a non-nilpotent element.
  9. $R$ is a regular local Noetherian ring of dimension $1$.
  10. $R$ is a local Noetherian domain that is not a field such that every non-zero ideal is a power of the maximal ideal.

Here is what I tried so far:

$(1.) \Rightarrow (2.)$ Every valuation ring is local. Suppose $v$ is a discrete valuation on the fraction field of $R$ such that $v^{-1}(\mathbb{N}) \cup \{0\} = R$. We claim that $v$ is actually also a Euclidean function for $R$. Let $x,y \in R$, $y \neq 0$, if $\frac{x}{y} \in R$, we have $x = y \frac{x}{y} + 0$, so we are done. If $\frac{x}{y} \notin R$, then $0 > v(\frac{x}{y}) = v(x)- v(y)$, so $v(y) > v(x)$. Now we have $v(x) = v(y + (x - y)) \geq \min(v(y), v(x - y))$, but as $v(y) > v(x)$, it must be the case that $v(x) \geq v(x-y)$. Now we write $x = 1\cdot y + (x - y)$ and $v(y) > v(x) \geq v(x-y)$.

$(2.) \Rightarrow (3.)$ Every Euclidean domain is a PID.

$(3.) \Rightarrow (4.)$ Every PID is a Dedekind domain.

$(3.) \Rightarrow (5)$ Every PID is a UFD and every irreducible element generates a maximal ideal in a PID and every ideal is generated by an irreducible element (As $R$ is not a field, the maximal ideals are non-zero). As all these maximal ideals must coincide, there is exactly one irreducible element up to a unit.

$(5.) \Rightarrow (6.)$ A domain does not contain nontrivial nilpotents. So we can take $\pi$ to be the unique irreducible element.

$(1.) \land (3.) \Rightarrow (7.)$ Every PID is Noetherian.

$(7.) \Rightarrow (3.)$ Every valuation ring is a local Bezout domain. Noetherian Bezout domains are PIDs.

$(4.) \Rightarrow (10.)$ Let $R$ be a local Dedekind domain that is not a field. Then $R$ is one-dimensional, so every nonzero prime ideal is maximal, but there is only one maximal ideal as $R$ is local, so there is only one non-zero prime ideal. As $R$ is Dedekind, every non-zero ideal is a product of prime ideals, thus every non-zero ideal is a power of the maximal ideal.

$(8.) \Rightarrow (9.)$ Let the maximal ideal $m$ be generated by $x$, then the image of $x$ generates $m/m^2$. If $m/m^2 = 0$, $m = m^2$, but then $m = 0$ by Nakayama's lemma, so $m/m^2 \neq 0$, thus $\operatorname{dim}_{R/m}m/m^2 = 1$. It follows from Krull's principal ideal theorem that $\operatorname{dim}R= 1$.

$(9.) \Rightarrow (8.)$ Let $m$ be the maximal ideal and $\bar{x}$ be a generator of $m/m^2$ and let $x$ be a preimage of $\bar{x}$ under the natural quotient map. We then have $m = m^2 + (x)$, so $m = (x)$ by a corollary to Nakayama's lemma. Now we need to show that $x$ is not nilpotent. As $\operatorname{dim}R = 1$, $m$ properly contains a minimal prime ideal $p$. If $x$ was nilpotent, then $x \in p$, but this implies $m \subset p$, which is impossible.

$(10.) \Rightarrow (8.)$ Let $m$ be the maximal ideal. Note that we cannot have $m^2 = m$ or else $m = 0$ by Nakayama's lemma, but $R$ is not a field. Choose $x \in m \setminus m^2$, then $(x)$ is a power of $m$, but by our choice of $x$ the only possibility is that $m = (x)$. As $R$ is a domain, $(x)$ is not nilpotent.

$(8.) \Rightarrow (6.)$ Let $m = (\pi)$ be the maximal ideal. We first show that every nonzero $x_0 \in R$ has an expression of the required form. First, if $x_0$ is a unit, then we are done. If $x_0$ is not a unit, then $x_0 \in m$, so $x_0 = x_1 \cdot \pi$. Then, do the same for $x_1$. If $x_1$ is a unit, then we are done, if $x_1$ is not a unit $x_1 \in m$, so we can write $x_1 = x_2 \cdot \pi$ etc. To see that this process must terminate, we note that if it doesn't, we have $x \in m^n$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N}$ which contradicts Krull's intersection theorem. Now that every nonzero element is of the form $u\pi^n$ we have to show uniqueness. If we take two non-zero elements write them as $u_{1}\pi^n$ and $u_{2}\pi^k$, then their product $u_{1}u_{2}\pi^{n+k}$ is non-zero, as $\pi$ is not nilpotent. This shows that $R$ is an integral domain, thus the multiplicative monoid is cancellative, from this, the uniqueness follows easily, if we have $u_1 \pi^n = u_2 \pi^k$ Assume wlog that $n \geq k$, then we have $u_1 = u_2 \pi^{n-k}$. Now if $n > k$, the LHS is a unit while the RHS is not, which is absurd. Thus $n = k$ and $u_1 = u_2$.

$(6.) \Rightarrow (1.)$ $R$ is an integral domain by the same argument as in $(8.) \Rightarrow(6.)$ Now define a valuation on $R$ via $v(u\pi^n)=n$ We have $v(u_1\pi^n\cdot u_2 \pi^k) = n+k = v(u_1\pi^n)+v(u_2\pi^k)$ Assume wlog that $k \leq n$, then $v(u_1\pi^k+u_2\pi^n)=v( (u_1+u_2\pi^{n-k})\pi^k) \geq k = \min(v(u_1\pi^k),v(u_2\pi^n))$. Extend $v$ to the fraction field of $R$ by setting $v(\frac{a}{b})=v(a)-v(b)$, then it is obvious that $R$ is the valuation ring of $v$.

My question is, is this all correct? Do you know any other characterization of DVRs? If so, why is it equivalent? For example, wikipedia has the following

$R$ is a (edit: Noetherian) domain that is not a field, and every nonzero fractional ideal of $R$ is irreducible in the sense that it cannot be written as finite intersection of fractional ideals properly containing it.

But I have no idea how to show that it is equivalent.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Depending on your definition of a Dedekind domain, you have not included 'one-dimensional normal local domain. $\endgroup$ – MooS Mar 22 '17 at 16:26
1
$\begingroup$

I think you will forgive me that I will not have a close look on all your arguments, but I can focus on the last statement from wikiepdia.

One direction is clear: If $(R, \pi)$ is a DVR, every fractional ideal is of the form $R\pi^{n}$ with $n \in \mathbb Z$, thus they are linearly ordered and in particular the intersection of two of those will always be the smaller one.

For the other direction, the property clearly implies that $R$ is local, because the intersection of two maximal ideals is a proper subset of both maximal ideals. More generally, the set of all fractional ideals is linearly ordered, because $I \cap J \in \{I,J\}$. In particular the set of all sub-vectorspaces of $\mathfrak m/\mathfrak m^2$ is linearly ordered, this of course enforces it to be one-dimensional. Hence $\mathfrak m$ is principal.


Summarizing, a DVR is a noetherian domain which is not a field and whose set of fractional ideals is linearly ordered. The statement on wikipedia with the intersections is just a reformulation.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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