## ON FUNCTORS THAT DETECT S n

## TONY J. PUTHENPURAKAL

Abstract. Let A be a Noetherian ring. For each k where 0 ≤ k ≤ dim A we construct left exact functors D k on Mod( A ). Let D i k be the i th -right derived functor of D k . Let M be a finitely generated A -module. Under mild conditions on A and M we prove that vanishing of some finitely many D i k ( M ) is equivalent to M satisfying S n .

## 1. introduction

Let A be a Noetherian ring and let M be a finitely generated A -module. Let n ≥ 0 be a non-negative integer. Recall that M satisfies S n if

$$\text{depth} \, M _ { \mathfrak { p } } \geq \min \{ n, \dim M _ { \mathfrak { p } } \} \text{ \ for all primes } \mathfrak { p } \text{ in } A.$$

Note that by convention the zero module has depth + ∞ and dimension -1. In this paper we construct functors which (under mild conditions) detect whether M satisfies S n .

Let E be a not-necessarily finitely generated A -module. By dim E we mean dimension of the support of E considered as a subspace of Spec A . Let k ≥ 0 be an integer. Set

$$D _ { k } ( E ) = \sum _ { \substack { N \text{ submodule of } E \\ \dim N \leq k \\ \epsilon \cap \cdots \epsilon \epsilon \epsilon \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilen \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots. \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilor \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots  \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilent \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots \epsilon \cdots$$

Clearly D k ( E ) is a submodule of E . Also if φ : E → F is A -linear then it is easy to verify that φ D ( k ( E )) ⊆ D k ( F ). Set D k ( φ ): D k ( E ) → D k ( F ) to be the restriction of φ on D k ( E ). Clearly we have an additive functor D k on Mod( A ). It can be shown that D k is left exact; see section 2. Let D i k be the i th -right derived functor of D k .

To prove our results we need to assume that the ring A satisfies certain conditions.

## 1.1. We assume that A satisfies the following properties:

- (1) dim A is finite.
- (2) A is catenary.
- (3) A is equi-dimensional, i.e., dim A/ p = dim A for all minimal primes p of A .
- (4) If m is a maximal ideal in A and p is a minimal prime of A then height( m p / ) = dim A .

We now give examples of rings which satisfy the hypotheses in 1.1:

- (i) A = R/I where R = K X , [ 1 · · · , X n ] and I is an equi-dimensional ideal in R , i.e., height p = height I for all minimal primes p of I .

Date : August 5, 2014.

1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. 13C14, 13D02, 13F20 .

Key words and phrases. S n -property, equidimensional modules.

- (ii) A = R/I where R = O [ X ,. . . , X 1 n ]; O is the ring of integers in a number field (i.e., a finite extension of Q ) and I is an unmixed ideal of R .
- (iii) A = R/I where R is a Cohen-Macaulay local ring and I is an equi-dimensional ideal.
- (iv) A is a catenary local domain.

Recall a finitely generated A -module M is said to be equi-dimensional if dim M is finite and dim A/ p = dim M for all minimal primes of M . Our main result is

Theorem 1.2. Let A be a Noetherian ring satisfying the hypotheses in 1.1 and let M be a finitely generated equi-dimensional A -module of dimension ≥ 1 . Let n be an integer between 1 and dim M . Then the following conditions are equivalent:

- (i) M satisfies S n .
- (ii) D i k ( M ) = 0 for i = 0 1 , , . . . , n -1 and 0 ≤ k &lt; dim M -i .

Here is an overview of the contents of the paper. In section two we define our functors D k and prove a few basic properties. In section three we prove a crucial result regarding localization of our functors D k . Finally in section four we prove Theorem 1.2.

## 2. The functors D k

In this section we define the functors D k and prove some of its basic properties. Throughout A is a Noetherian ring. The A -modules considered in this section need not be finitely generated .

2.1. Let E be a A -module. Let Supp E denote the support of E . Set dim E = dimSupp E . The following result is well-known

Proposition 2.2. Let 0 → E 1 → E 2 → E 3 → 0 be an exact sequence of A -modules. Then

- (a) Supp E 2 = Supp E 1 ∪ Supp E 3 .
- (b) dim E 2 = max dim { E , 1 dim E 3 } .

2.3. We now define our functors D k . Let k ≥ 0 be an integer. Let E be an A -module. Set

$$D _ { k, A } ( E ) = \sum _ { \substack { N \text{ submodule of } E \\ \dim N \leq k } } N.$$

We suppress A in D k,A ( E ) if it is clear from the context. Clearly D k ( E ) is a submodule of E . The following Lemma is useful.

Lemma 2.4. Let ξ ∈ D k ( E ) . Then there exists a finitely generated A -submodule M of E with ξ ∈ M and dim M ≤ k .

Proof. There exists A -submodules N , 1 · · · , N s of E with dim N i ≤ k and ξ = n 1 + n 2 + · · · + n s where n i ∈ N i .

Set M = Aξ ⊆ N . By 2.2 it follows that dim M ≤ k . Also ξ ∈ M

Set N = N 1 + N 2 + · · · + N s . There is a natural surjective map ⊕ s i =1 N i → N . By 2.2 it follows that dim N ≤ k . Also ξ ∈ N .

$$M. \quad \begin{smallmatrix} & & \Box \end{smallmatrix}$$

Proposition 2.5. Let φ : E → F be A -linear. Then φ D ( k ( E )) ⊆ D k ( F ) .

Proof. Let ξ ∈ D k ( E ). Then by Lemma 2.4 there exists a finitely generated A -submodule N of E with dim N ≤ k and ξ ∈ N . Then φ ξ ( ) ∈ φ N ( ). Clearly φ N ( ) is an A -submodule of F . Furthermore φ induces a surjective map N → φ N ( ). By 2.2 we get that dim φ N ( ) ≤ k . Thus φ ξ ( ) ∈ D k ( F ). /square

2.6. Set D k ( φ ): D k ( E ) → D k ( F ) to be the restriction of φ on D k ( E ). Clearly we have an additive functor D k on Mod( A ). We show

Proposition 2.7. D k is left exact.

Proof. Let 0 → E α - → F β - → G be an exact sequence. We want to prove that the sequence

$$0 \to D _ { k } ( E ) \xrightarrow { D _ { k } ( \alpha ) } D _ { k } ( F ) \xrightarrow { D _ { k } ( \beta ) } D _ { k } ( G ),$$

is exact.

Clearly D k ( α ) is injective. Also

$$D _ { k } ( \beta ) \circ D _ { k } ( \alpha ) = D _ { k } ( \beta \circ \alpha ) = D _ { k } ( 0 ) = 0,$$

as D k is an additive functor. Therefore image D k ( α ) ⊆ ker D k ( β ).

Let ξ ∈ ker D k ( β ). In particular ξ ∈ ker β . So there exists e ∈ E with α e ( ) = ξ . As ξ ∈ D k ( F ), by Lemma 2.4 there exists a finitely generated A -submodule N of F with dim N ≤ k and ξ ∈ N . Note that α induces an exact sequence

$$0 \rightarrow \alpha ^ { - 1 } ( N ) \rightarrow N.$$

By 2.2 we get that dim α -1 ( N ) ≤ k . Also e ∈ α -1 ( N ). It follows that e ∈ D k ( E ). Thus D k is left exact. /square

We need the following two properties of D k .

Proposition 2.8. (a) Let E be an A -module and let L be an A -submodule of E . Then D k ( L ) = D k ( E ) ∩ L .

- (b) Let E α be a family of A -modules with α ∈ Γ . Then

$$\psi _ { \ } \psi _ { \ } \left ( \bigoplus _ { \alpha \in \Gamma } E _ { \alpha } \right ) & = \bigoplus _ { \alpha \in \Gamma } D _ { k } ( E _ { \alpha } ). \\. ( I \lambda \subset \mathcal { C } \ D _ { \L } ( E \lambda \cap I, \ \Gamma e t \ \varepsilon \ \in \ D _ { \L } ( E \lambda \cap I.$$

Proof. (a) Clearly D k ( L ) ⊆ D k ( E ) ∩ L . Let ξ ∈ D k ( E ) ∩ L . By 2.4 there exists a finitely generated A -submodule N of E with dim N ≤ k and ξ ∈ N . So ξ ∈ N ∩ L . By 2.2, dim N ∩ L ≤ dim N ≤ k . So ξ ∈ D k ( L ).

(b) As D k is an additive functor the result holds if Γ is a finite set.

It is clear that

Let ξ ∈ D k (⊕ α ∈ Γ E α ) . By 2.4 there exists a finitely generated A -submodule N of ⊕ α ∈ Γ E α with dim N ≤ k and ξ ∈ N . Say

$$\bigoplus _ { \alpha \in \Gamma } D _ { k } ( E _ { \alpha } ) & \subseteq D _ { k } \left ( \bigoplus _ { \alpha \in \Gamma } E _ { \alpha } \right ). \\ _ { x } ). \ B y \, 2. 4 \, \text{there exists a finitely generate}$$

$$- \quad & \xi = \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { \eta } \xi _ { \alpha _ { i } } \quad \text{with } \xi _ { \alpha _ { i } } \in M _ { \alpha _ { i } }. \\ T ^ { \prime } = N \cap ( \bigoplus _ { i = 1 } ^ { s } M _ { \alpha _ { i } } ). \ B v { 2. 2 \dim N ^ { \prime } } <$$

Then ξ ∈ N ′ where N ′ = N ∩ ( s i =1 M α i ). By 2.2 dim N ′ ≤ k . So

$$\in N ^ { \prime } \text{ where } N ^ { \prime } = N \cap ( \bigoplus _ { i = 1 } ^ { s } M _ { \alpha _ { i } } ). \text{ By } 2. 2 \dim N ^ { \prime } \leq k. \text{ So} \\ \xi \in D _ { k } \left ( \bigoplus _ { i = 1 } ^ { s } M _ { \alpha _ { i } } \right ) = \bigoplus _ { i = 1 } ^ { s } D _ { k } ( M _ { \alpha _ { i } } ) \subseteq \bigoplus _ { \alpha \in \Gamma } D _ { k } ( E _ { \alpha } ).$$

/square

We will also need the following computation.

Lemma 2.9. Assume dim A is finite. Let q be a prime ideal in A and let E A/ ( q ) is the injective hull of A/ q . Then

$$D _ { k } ( E ( A / \mathfrak { q } ) ) = \begin{cases} E ( A / \mathfrak { q } ), & \text{if $\dim A/\mathfrak{q} \leq k$} \\ 0, & \text{otherwise.} \end{cases}$$

Proof. Let N be a non-zero finitely generated A -submodule of E A/ ( q ). Let p be a minimal prime of N with dim A/ p = dim N . Note p ∈ Ass N ⊆ Ass E A/ ( q ) = { } q . So p = q . It follows that dim N = dim A/ q . As a consequence we have that D k ( E A/ ( q )) = 0 if dim A/ q &gt; k .

Now assume dim A/ q ≤ k . Let ξ ∈ E A/ ( q ) be non-zero. Set N = Aξ . Then dim N = dim A/ q ≤ k . So ξ ∈ D k ( E A/ ( q )). It follows that D k ( E A/ ( q )) = E A/ ( q ) if dim A/ q ≤ k . /square

## 3. Localization

In this section we assume that A satisfies our assumptions 1.1. The goal of this section is to prove the following:

Theorem 3.1. Assume A satisfies 1.1. Let M be an A -module and let p be a prime ideal in A . Set r = dim A/ p . Then for all k ≥ 0 we have

$$D ^ { i } _ { k + r, A } ( M ) _ { \mathfrak { p } } \cong D ^ { i } _ { k, A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( M _ { \mathfrak { p } } ) \ \ f o r \ a l l \ i \geq 0.$$

To prove Theorem 3.1 we need several preparatory results. We first prove:

Lemma 3.2. Assume A satisfies 1.1. Let p q , be prime ideals in A with q ⊆ p . Then dim A/ q = height( p / q ) + dim A/ p = dim A / A p q p +dim A/ . p

Proof. It is easy to see that if m is a maximal ideal of A then A m satisfies the conditions of 1.1. We also get

$$\dim A / \mathfrak { p } + \text{height} \mathfrak { p } = \dim A.$$

We first note the following: if p 0 ⊆ p 1 ⊆ ·· · p r = p is a saturated chain of prime ideals with p 0 a minimal prime then r = height p . To see this extend it to a maximal chain p 0 ⊆ p 1 ⊆ · · · ⊆ p s = m where m is a maximal ideal in A . Then by assumption on A we get s = dim A . Localize at m . Then by [1, Lemma 2, p. 250] we get that height m = height p m +height( m p / ). Note height p m = height p ≥ r and height( m p / ) ≥ s -r . As height m = dim A = s we get that r = height p and s -r = height( m p / ). It is now elementary to see that height( p / q ) = height p -height q .

Note that by ( ) we get dim † A/ q -dim A/ p = height p -height q . The result follows.

/square

Lemma 3.3. Assume A satisfies 1.1. Let p be a prime ideal in A . Set r = dim A/ p . Let q be a prime ideal in A with q ⊆ p . Let k ≥ 0 . Then

$$D _ { k + r, A } ( E _ { A } ( A / \mathfrak { q } ) ) \cong D _ { k + r, A } ( E ( A / \mathfrak { q } ) ) _ { \mathfrak { p } } \cong D _ { k, A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( E _ { A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( A _ { \mathfrak { p } } / \mathfrak { q } A _ { \mathfrak { p } } ) ).$$

Proof. As A satisfies 1.1, by 3.2 we get

$$( ^ { * } ) \quad \dim A / \mathfrak { q } = \text{height} ( \mathfrak { p } / \mathfrak { q } ) + \dim A / \mathfrak { p } = \dim A _ { \mathfrak { p } } / \mathfrak { q } A _ { \mathfrak { p } } + r.$$

To prove our result we consider two cases.

Case 1: dim A/ q ≤ k + . r

By ( ∗ ) this holds if and only if dim A / A p q p ≤ k . By Lemma 2.9 we have

$$D _ { k + r, A } ( E _ { A } ( A / \mathfrak { q } ) ) = E _ { A } ( A / \mathfrak { q } ) \text{ \ and \ } D _ { k, A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( E _ { A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( A _ { \mathfrak { p } } / \mathfrak { q } A _ { \mathfrak { p } } ) ) = E _ { A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( A _ { \mathfrak { p } } / \mathfrak { q } A _ { \mathfrak { p } } ).$$

The result follows since E A ( A/ q ) = ∼ E A ( A/ q ) p ∼ = E A p ( A / A p q p ).

Case 2. dim A/ q &gt; k + . r

By ( ∗ ) this holds if and only if dim A / A p q p &gt; k . By Lemma 2.9 we have

$$D _ { k + r, A } ( E _ { A } ( A / \mathfrak { q } ) ) = 0 \text{ \ and \ } D _ { k, A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( E _ { A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( A _ { \mathfrak { p } } / \mathfrak { q } A _ { \mathfrak { p } } ) ) = 0.$$

The result follows.

/square

We now show:

Proposition 3.4. Assume A satisfies 1.1. Let p be a prime ideal in A . Set r = dim A/ p . Let M be an A -module. Let k ≥ 0 . Then

$$D _ { k + r, A } ( M ) _ { \mathfrak { p } } \cong D _ { k, A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( M _ { \mathfrak { p } } ).$$

Proof. We consider two cases.

Case 1: M is an injective A -module. By Matlis theory, cf. [1, 18.5]

$$M & = \bigoplus _ { q \in \text{Spec} \, A } E _ { A } ( A / \mathfrak { q } ) ^ { \mu _ { q } }. \\ \mathfrak { m } \,. & \, \iota \iota \sigma \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \quad \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \mathfrak { m } \, \cdots$$

Notice µ q = dim κ ( q ) Hom A q ( κ ( q ) , M q ) (here κ ( q ) is the residue field of A q ). By Proposition 2.8 we have

Now note that

$$D _ { k + r, A } ( M ) = \bigoplus _ { q \in \text{Spec} \, A } D _ { k + r, A } ( E _ { A } ( A / \mathfrak { q } ) ) ^ { \mu _ { \mathfrak { q } } }.$$

$$M _ { p } = \bigoplus _ { q \subseteq p } E _ { A _ { p } } ( A _ { p } / q A _ { p } ) ^ { \mu _ { q } }. \\ \text{on } 2. 8 \text{ we get that}$$

Therefore by Proposition 2.8 we get that

$$D _ { k, A _ { p } } ( M _ { p } ) = \bigoplus _ { q \subseteq p } D _ { k, A _ { p } } ( E _ { A _ { p } } ( A _ { p } / \mathfrak { q } A _ { p } ) ) ^ { \mu _ { q } }. \\ \text{ow follows from Punposition 3 3}$$

The result now follows from Proposition 3.3.

Case 2: M is an arbitrary A -module.

Embed M into an injective A -module I . Then note that M p is a submodule of

By Proposition 2.8 we get D k + r,A ( M ) = D k + r,A ( I ) ∩ M . So we get

$$D _ { k + r, A } ( M ) _ { \mathfrak { p } } = ( D _ { k + r, A } ( I ) \cap M ) _ { \mathfrak { p } },$$

$$\iota \langle \nu _ { 0 } / p & = \langle \mathcal { U } _ { k + r, A } \langle \nu _ { 1 } + \nu _ { 2 } / p, \\ & \cong D _ { k + r, A } ( I ) _ { \mathfrak { p } } \cap M _ { \mathfrak { p } } ; \quad \text{by} \ [ 1, 7. 4 ( i ) ], \\ & \cong D _ { k, A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( I _ { \mathfrak { p } } ) \cap M _ { \mathfrak { p } } ; \quad \text{by} \ Case 1, \\ & = D _ { k, A _ { \mathfrak { p } } } ( M _ { \mathfrak { p } } ) ; \quad \text{by Proposition 2.8.}$$

I p .

/square

Proof of Theorem 3.1. Let I be a minimal injective resolution of M . Then note that I p is a minimal injective resolution of M p , [1, Lemma 6, p. 149]. Consider the complex D = D k + r,A ( ). I By 3.4 we get that D p = D k,A p ( I p ). As D is a complex of injectives, the map D → D p is a surjective map of complexes. So we have an exact sequence of complexes 0 → K → D → D p → 0. Observe that by 2.9,

$$\mathbb { K } ^ { i } = \bigoplus _ { \substack { q \not \subseteq p \\ \dim A / q \leq r + k } } E _ { A } ( A / q ) ^ { \mu _ { i } ( M, q ) }.$$

It follows that K p = 0.

The short exact sequence of complexes 0 → K → D → D p → 0 yields a long exact sequence

$$\cdots \rightarrow H ^ { i } ( \mathbb { K } ) \rightarrow H ^ { i } ( \mathbb { D } ) \rightarrow H ^ { i } ( \mathbb { D } _ { \mathfrak { p } } ) \rightarrow H ^ { i + 1 } ( \mathbb { K } ) \cdots$$

As K p = 0 we get that H i ( K ) p = 0 for all i . Thus H i ( D ) p ∼ = H i ( D p ) p = H i ( D p ). The result follows. /square

## 4. Proof of Theorem 1.2

In this section we prove Theorem 1.2 by induction on n . We prove the base case n = 1 separately.

Proposition 4.1. Assume A satisfies 1.1. Let M be a finitely generated equidimensional A -module of dimension ≥ 1 . The following conditions are equivalent:

- (i) M satisfies S 1 .
- (ii) D k ( M ) = 0 for all k &lt; dim M .

Proof. We first assume M satisfies S 1 . Then dim M p ≥ 1 if and only if p / ∈ Ass M . Suppose ξ ∈ D k ( M ) is non-zero. Then by 2.4 there exists a finitely generated submodule N of M with dim N ≤ k and ξ ∈ N . Let p ∈ Ass N be such that dim A/ p = dim N . Note p ∈ Ass M . It follows that p ∈ Min M . So dim N = dim M . It follows that k ≥ dim M . Thus D k ( M ) = 0 for k &lt; dim M .

/negationslash

Conversely assume that D k ( M ) = 0 for all k &lt; dim M . Suppose if possible M does not satisfy S 1 . Then there exists p with dim M p ≥ 1 and depth M p = 0. Thus p ∈ Ass M . So we have an injection A/ p → M . Notice c = dim A/ p &lt; dim M . Thus D M c ( ) = 0, a contradiction. /square

We now give

Proof of Theorem 1.2. We prove the result by induction on n . We have proved the result for n = 1, see 4.1. We assume the result for n -1 ≥ 1 and prove it for n .

We first assume that M satisfies S n -property. As M also satisfies S n -1 we get by induction hypothesis that D j k ( M ) = 0 for k &lt; dim M -j and j = 0 1 , , · · · , n -2 Let I be a minimal injective resolution for M . As M satisfies S n we get that for i ≤ n -1,

$$\mathbb { I } ^ { i } = \bigoplus _ { \dim M _ { \mathfrak { p } } \leq i } E ( A / \mathfrak { p } ) ^ { \mu ( \mathfrak { p }, M ) }. \\ \vdots \dots \dots \dots \cdots \cdots \cdots.$$

Suppose ξ ∈ D k ( I n -1 ) is non-zero. Then by 2.4 there exists a finitely generated A -submodule N of I n -1 with dim N ≤ k and ξ ∈ N . Let p be a minimal prime of

N with dim A/ p = dim N ≤ k . Then p ∈ Ass I n -1 . So dim M p ≤ n -1. Let q be a minimal prime of M contained in p . Then by 3.2 we get dim M = dim A/ q = dim A / A p q p +dim A/ p ≤ dim M p +dim N ≤ n -1 + dim N. So dim N ≥ dim M -n +1. It follows that D k ( I n -1 ) = 0 for k &lt; dim M -n +1. Thus D n -1 k ( M ) = 0 for k &lt; dim M -n +1.

/negationslash

/negationslash

We now assume that D i k ( M ) = 0 for i = 0 1 , , . . . , n -1 and 0 ≤ k &lt; dim M -i . By induction hypotheses it follows that M satisfies S n -1 . Suppose if possible M does not satisfy S n . Then there exists a prime ideal p with dim M p ≥ n and depth M p = n -1. We localize at p . We get that D n -1 0 ,A p ( M p ) = 0. By Theorem 3.1 it follows that D n -1 r ( M ) = 0 where r = dim A/ p .

Claim: dim M = dim M p + . r

/negationslash

Assume the claim for the moment. Then r = dim M -dim M p ≤ dim M -n &lt; dim M -n +1. Also D n -1 r ( M ) = 0. This contradicts our assumption.

Proof of claim . Let q be a minimal prime of M contained in p and let m be an arbitrary maximal ideal of A containing p . By 3.2 we get that dim M = dim A/ q = height( m q / ). As A is catenary we get that height( m q / ) = height( m p / )+height( p / q ). We take q with height( p / q ) = dim M p . Also note that again by 3.2, height( m p / ) = dim A/ p = . r /square

## References

- [1] H. Matsumura, Commutative ring theory , Translated from the Japanese by M. Reid. Second edition. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 8. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989.

Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai 400 076, India

E-mail address : tputhen@math.iitb.ac.in
Tony J. Puthenpurakal
On functors that detect $S_n$
Let $A$ be a Noetherian ring. For each $k$ where $0 \leq k \leq \dim A$ we
construct left exact functors $D_k$ on $Mod(A)$. Let $D^i_k$ be the
$i^{th}$-right derived functor of $D_k$. Let $M$ be a finitely generated
$A$-module. Under mild conditions on $A$ and $M$ we prove that vanishing of
some finitely many $D^i_k(M)$ is equivalent to $M$ satisfying $S_n$.