7
$\begingroup$

Is every local ring a valuation ring?

I know the answer is no and the first example comes to my mind was as following (I started with smallest fields, as $\mathbb{Z}_2$ and $\mathbb{Z}_3$ are not interesting so I came to next possible one, means the field with 4 elements.

Let $F=\dfrac{\mathbb{Z}_2[T]}{\langle T^2+T+1\rangle}$ and $\alpha=\bar{T}\in F$, so $F=\{0,1,\alpha,\alpha+1\}$. The set $\{0,1\}$ forms a subring of $F$ which is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}_2$ so a field and a local ring but doesn't contain $\alpha$ or $\alpha+1$ while $\alpha^{-1}=\alpha+1$.

In fact finite fields have no nontrivial valuation ring because their multiplicative groups are cyclic. So every subring of a finite field which is local is a suitable example.

I would to know other kind of examples so if someone knows already other examples different than mine I will be pleased if he shares them here with me.

As this question has no unique answer I only upvote persons who are giving me new classes of examples.

By the answer of "user26857" we have the second type of examples. Let $A$ be a domain and $F=frac(A)$, its field of fractions. For every prime ideal of $A$ which can't be generated by less than 2 elements say $\mathfrak{p}$ we can make an example. Let $B$ be a generator for $\mathfrak{p}$ and $x,y\in B$ two elements that their greatest common divisor is not in $\mathfrak{p}$ (otherwise we can replace them both with their g.c.d.). Assume $d=\text{g.c.d.}(x,y)$ then $\exists x_1,y_1\in A\;:\;x=dx_1,y=dy_1$ and $x_1,y_1$ are prime to each other. Since $\mathfrak{p}$ is prime and $d\notin\mathfrak{p}$ we have $x_1,y_1\in\mathfrak{p}$. Now none of $\dfrac{x_1}{y_1}$ and $\dfrac{y_1}{x_1}$ are in $A_\mathfrak{p}$ so it is not a valuation ring of $F$ while it's local.\ Thanks to "user26857".

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ But, $F$ isn't the field of fractions of $\{0,1\}\subseteq F$? $\endgroup$ – Yai0Phah Sep 11 '14 at 16:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ What about $\mathbb C[X,Y]_{(X,Y)}$? (In a valuation ring the ideals are linearly ordered; in our example the ideals $(X)$ and $(Y)$ are not contained one in another.) Btw, fields are valuation rings. $\endgroup$ – user26857 Sep 11 '14 at 16:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user26857 Yes, you're right I've seen this field is not a valuation 3 days ago in a lecture of Pro. Teissier but when I was thinking to this question as sometimes I like to start from smallest objects and then coming up I wasn't taking care! Very very thank you for this nice example. Please write it as an answer. $\endgroup$ – AmirHosein Sadeghimanesh Sep 11 '14 at 16:35
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @FrankScience You are right but I don't see why $F$ should be field of fraction of $\{0,1\}$! In fact I think you were thinking to this statement "If $V$ be a valuation ring of a field $F$ then $F=frac(V)$" but the examples which we are looking for are not valuation so their field of fraction can be different than $F$. $\endgroup$ – AmirHosein Sadeghimanesh Sep 11 '14 at 16:40
  • $\begingroup$ Could you perhaps say why it is you want more examples? What is your motivation? Otherwise I think this question is too broad. $\endgroup$ – RghtHndSd Sep 11 '14 at 16:44
8
$\begingroup$

$\mathbb C[X,Y]_{(X,Y)}$ is a local ring which is not a valuation ring. (In a valuation ring the ideals are linearly ordered; in our example the ideals $(X)$ and $(Y)$ are not contained one in another.)

Btw, fields are valuation rings.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ What exactly is the expression $\mathbb{C}[X,Y]_{(X,Y)}$? Is it something like a localization (I suppose $(X,Y)$ is a prime, even a maximal, ideal)? $\endgroup$ – Diglett Jul 5 '19 at 2:23
  • $\begingroup$ Yes. Standard notation, btw. $\endgroup$ – user26857 Jul 5 '19 at 6:26
3
$\begingroup$

Valuation rings are integral domains (by definition). Not every local ring is an integral domain (for example $\mathbb{Z}/p^2$).

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes you are right but in definition of a valuation ring I've seen so far like this "Let $F$ be a field. A subring $R\subseteq F$ is called a valuation ring of $F$ if for every nonzero element of $F$ say $x$ we have $x\in R$ or $x^{-1}\in R$." Thus by this definition we don't discuss about rings wich we can't sit them in a field. If you have seen another definition please introduce the source. But thank you too. $\endgroup$ – AmirHosein Sadeghimanesh Sep 11 '14 at 17:59
  • $\begingroup$ There is no other definition. And on Wikipedia, it is also explicitly stated that valuation rings are special integral domains. $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Sep 11 '14 at 19:17

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.