On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings

In this note we prove that the ring B²n has non-zero irreducible locally nilpotent derivations, which are explicitly presented, and that its ML-invariant is C.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Algebra and Discrete Mathematics
Date:2013
Main Authors: Brumatti, P., Veloso, M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Інститут прикладної математики і механіки НАН України 2013
Online Access:https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/152305
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Journal Title:Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
Cite this:On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings / P. Brumatti, M. Veloso // Algebra and Discrete Mathematics. — 2013. — Vol. 16, № 1. — С. 20–32. — Бібліогр.: 5 назв. — англ.

Institution

Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
_version_ 1859825945959989248
author Brumatti, P.
Veloso, M.
author_facet Brumatti, P.
Veloso, M.
citation_txt On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings / P. Brumatti, M. Veloso // Algebra and Discrete Mathematics. — 2013. — Vol. 16, № 1. — С. 20–32. — Бібліогр.: 5 назв. — англ.
collection DSpace DC
container_title Algebra and Discrete Mathematics
description In this note we prove that the ring B²n has non-zero irreducible locally nilpotent derivations, which are explicitly presented, and that its ML-invariant is C.
first_indexed 2025-12-07T15:29:07Z
format Article
fulltext Algebra and Discrete Mathematics RESEARCH ARTICLE Volume 16 (2013). Number 1. pp. 20 – 32 © Journal “Algebra and Discrete Mathematics” On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings Paulo Roberto Brumatti and Marcelo Oliveira Veloso Communicated by V. V. Kirichenko Abstract. Let Bm n = C[X1,...,Xn] (Xm 1 +···+Xm n ) (Fermat ring), where m ≥ 2 and n ≥ 3. In a recent paper D. Fiston and S. Maubach show that for m ≥ n2 − 2n the unique locally nilpotent derivation of Bm n is the zero derivation. In this note we prove that the ring B2 n has non-zero irreducible locally nilpotent derivations, which are explicitly presented, and that its ML-invariant is C. Introduction Let C[X1, . . . , Xn] be the polynomial ring in n variables over complex numbers C. Define Bm n = C[X1, . . . , Xn] (Xm 1 + · · · + Xm n ) , where m ≥ 2 and n ≥ 3. This ring is known as Fermat ring. In a recent paper [3] D. Fiston and S. Maubach show that for m ≥ n2 − 2n the unique locally nilpotent derivation of Bm n is the zero derivation. Consequently the following question naturally arises: is the unique locally nilpotent derivation of the Fermat ring Bm n for m ≥ 2 and n ≥ 3 the zero derivation? In this work we show that the answer to this question is negative for m = 2 and n ≥ 3. In other words, there exist nontrivial locally nilpotent derivations over B2 n (see examples 1 and 2). Furthemore, we show that 2010 MSC: 14R10, 13N15, 13A50. Key words and phrases: Locally Nilpotente Derivations, ML-invariant, Fermat ring. P. Brumatti, M. Veloso 21 these derivations are irreducible (see Theorem 2). In the general case, we prove that for certain classes of derivations of Bm n the unique locally nilpotent derivation is the zero derivation (see Proposition 2). The material is organized as follows. Section 1 provides the basic definitions, notations and results that are needed in this paper. In section 2 we present some results on the locally nilpotent derivations of the ring of Fermat. In section 3 we show examples of linear derivations in LND(B2 n) and some results on these derivations. 1. Generalities In the following the word "ring" means commutative ring with a unit element and characteristic zero. Furthermore, we denote the group of units of a ring A by A∗ and the polynomial ring A[X1, . . . , Xn] by A[n]. A "domain" is an integral domain. If A is a subring of B (A ≤ B) and B is a domain, then Frac (B) is its field of fractions and trdegA(B) is the transcendence degree of Frac (B) over Frac (A). Let R be a ring. An additive mapping D : R → R is said to be a derivation of R if it satisfies the Leibniz rule: D(ab) = aD(b) + D(a)b, for all a, b ∈ R. If A ≤ R is a subring and D is a derivation of R satisfying D(A) = 0, we call D an A-derivation. We denote the set of all derivations of R by Der(R) and the set of all A-derivations of R by DerA(R). A derivation D is irreducible if it satisfies: given b ∈ R, D(R) ⊆ bR if and only if b ∈ R∗. A derivation D is locally nilpotent if for each r ∈ R there is an integer n ≥ 0 such that Dn(r) = 0. Let us denote by LND(R) the set of all locally nilpotent derivations of R. If A is a subring of B, we will make use of the following notations LNDA(B) = {D ∈ LND(B) | D ∈ DerA(B)} KLND(B) = {A; A = ker D, D ∈ LND(B)}. Given D ∈ LND(B) define νD(b) = min{n ∈ N | Dn+1 = 0}, for 0 6= b ∈ B. In addition, define νD(0) = −∞. The degree function νD induced by a derivation D is a degree function on B (see [2]). In this note x, y, z, . . . will represent residue classes of variables X, Y, Z, . . . module an ideal. Note that since C is algebraically closed given G = ∑n i=1 aiX m i with ai ∈ C ∗ there exists a C-automorphism ϕ of C[X1, . . . , Xn] such that ϕ(Xi) = biXi, bi ∈ C ∗ and ϕ(Xm 1 + · · · + Xm n ) = G. In this case ϕ 22 On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings induces a C-isomorphism of the DerC(Bm n ) in DerC(C[X1,...,Xn] (G) ). Thus all the results obtained in this paper about the module DerC(Bm n ) can be extended to the module DerC(C[X1,...,Xn] (G) ). In this paper, derivation of Fermat ring means C-derivation and therefore we will use the notation Der(Bm n ) to denote DerC(Bm n ). The following facts are well known (see [1] or [4]). Lemma 1. Let B be an integral domain and D1, D2 ∈ LND(B) such that ker D1 = A = ker D2. If there exists s ∈ B such that 0 6= D1(s) ∈ A, then 0 6= D2(s) ∈ A and D2(s)D1 = D1(s)D2. Lemma 2. Let B be a domain satisfying ascending chain condition for principal ideals, let A ∈ KLND(B) and consider the set S = {D ∈ LNDA(B) | D is an irreducible derivation}. Then S 6= ∅ and LNDA(B) = {aD | a ∈ A and D ∈ S}. Proposition 1. Let B be a domain and D ∈ LND(B) a nonzero deriva- tion. Suppose that A = ker D, then: a) A is a factorially closed subring of B. In particular B∗ = A∗. b) If K is any field contained in B then D is a K-derivation. c) If s ∈ B satisfy Ds = 1 then B = A[s] = A[1]. d) Let S = A \ {0}, then S−1B = (Frac A)[1] and trdegAB = 1. e) If A′ ∈ KLND(B) and A′ ⊆ A then A′ = A 2. The set LND(Bm n ) In this section we obtain some results that state that certain classes of derivations of C[X1, . . . , Xn] do not induce derivations of Bm n or are not locally nilpotent if they do. Let K be a field and let S = K[n] I be a finitely generated K-algebra. Consider the K [n]-submodule DI = {D ∈ DerK(K [n]) | D(I) ⊆ I} of the module DerK(K [n]). It is well known that the K [n]-homomorfism ϕ : DI → DerK(S) given by ϕ(D)(g + I) = D(g) + I induces a K [n]-isomorfism of DI IDerK(K[n]) in DerK(S). From this fact we obtain the following result. Proposition 2. Let d be a derivation of the Bm n . If d(x1) = a ∈ C and for each i, 1 < i ≤ n, d(xi) ∈ C[x1, . . . , xi−1] , then d is the zero derivation. P. Brumatti, M. Veloso 23 Proof. Let F be the Fermat polynomial Xm 1 + · · · + Xm n . We know that there exists D ∈ Der(C[n]) such that D(F ) ∈ FC [n] and that d(xi) = D(Xi) + FC [n], ∀i. Thus we have D(X1) − a ∈ FC [n], and for each i > 1 there exists Gi = Gi(X1, . . . , Xi−1) ∈ C[X1, . . . , Xi−1] such that D(Xi) − Gi ∈ FC [n]. Since D(F ) = m n∑ i=1 Xm−1 i D(Xi) ∈ FC [n] and D(F ) = m n∑ i=1 Xm−1 i (D(Xi) − Gi) + m n∑ i=1 Xm−1 i Gi, where G1 = a, we obtain n∑ i=1 Xm−1 i Gi ∈ FC [n] and then obviously Gi = 0 for all i. Thus d is the zero derivation. Corollary 1. Let d be a locally nilpotent derivation of the Fermat ring Bm n . If d(xi) = αix m1 1 · · · xmn n , where αi ∈ C for all i, then d is the zero derivation. Proof. Let νd be a degree function induced by a derivation d. Since the polynomial F is symmetric we can suppose, without loss of generality, that νd(x1) ≤ νd(x2) ≤ · · · ≤ νd(xk) ≤ · · · ≤ νd(xn). Suppose that for some k ∈ {1, . . . , n} we have 0 6= d(xk). Thus νd(xk) − 1 = m1νd(x1) + m2νd(x2) + · · · + mkνd(xk) + · · · + mnνd(xn). This implies that mn = mn−1 = · · · = mk = 0. Thus, as d satisfies the conditions of the Proposition 2, we can conclude that d is the zero derivation. 3. Linear derivations This section is dedicated to the study of the locally nilpotent linear derivation of the Fermat ring. Definition 1. A derivation d of the ring Bm n is called linear if d(xi) = n∑ j=1 aijxj for i = 1, . . . , n, where aij ∈ C. The matrix [aij ] is called the associated matrix of the derivation d. 24 On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings Lemma 3. Let d be a linear derivation of Bm n and [aij ] its associated matrix. Then d is locally nilpotent if and only if [aij ] is nilpotent. Proof. The following equality can be verified by induction over s.   ds(x1) ... ds(xn)   = [aij ]s   x1 ... xn   . (1) We know that d is locally nilpotent if and only if there exists r ∈ N such that dr(xi) = 0 for all i. As {x1, . . . , xn} is linearly independent over C by the equality 1, we can conclude the result. Proposition 3. If d ∈ LND(Bm n ) is linear and m > 2, then d = 0. Proof. Let A = [aij ] be the associated matrix of d. Thus, for all i, d(xi) = n∑ j=1 aijxj . Since xm 1 + · · · + xm n = 0 we infer that xm−1 1 d(x1) + · · · + xm−1 n d(xn) = 0. Then 0 = xm−1 1 ( n∑ j=1 a1jxj) + xm−1 2 ( n∑ j=1 a2jxj) + · · · + xm−1 n ( n∑ j=1 anjxj) and as xm 1 = −xm 2 − · · · − xm n we deduce that 0 = (a22 − a11)xm 2 + · · · + (ann − a11)xm n + ∑n j 6=1 a1jxjxm−1 1 +∑n j 6=2 a2jxjxm−1 2 + · · · + ∑n j 6=n anjxjxm−1 n . (∗) Observe that if m > 2, then the set {xm−1 2 , . . . , xm−1 n }∪{xjxm−1 i ; 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n, }∪{xjxm−1 i ; 1 ≤ j < i ≤ n} is linearly independent over C. Thus, we can conclude that a11 = a22 = · · · = ann = a and aij = 0 if i 6= j. Since d(x1) = ax1 and d is locally nilpotent, we infer that a = 0. Thus, the matrix A = [aij ] is null and d = 0. The next result characterizes the linear derivations of the LND(B2 n). Theorem 1. If d ∈ Der(B2 n) is linear, then d ∈ LND(B2 n) if and only if its associated matrix is nilpotent and anti-symmetric. P. Brumatti, M. Veloso 25 Proof. Let d ∈ Der(B2 n) be a linear derivation and A = [aij ] be the associated matrix of d. Using the same arguments used in Proposition 3 we obtain 0 = (a22 − a11)x2 2 + · · · + (ann − a11)x2 n + ∑ i<j (aij + aji)xixj Since the set {x2 2, . . . , x2 n} ∪ {xixj ; 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n} is linearly independent over C, we know that a11 = a22 = · · · = ann = a and aij = −aji if i < j, but if A is nilpotent then its trace na is null and thus A is also anti- symmetric. Now we can conclude by Lemma 3 that d is locally nilpotent if and only if A is nilpotent and anti-symmetric. The next lemma helps us to find nilpotent and anti-symmetric matri- ces. First, we introduce some notation. Given a natural number n > 1, Mn denotes the ring of matrices n × n with entries in C, In ∈ Mn is the identity matrix and Sn is the group of permutations of {1, . . . , n}. Let σ be an element of Sn, Fσ = {i ∈ N; 1 ≤ i ≤ n and σ(i) = i} and (−1)σ = 1 if σ is even and −1 if σ is odd. Let A = (aij) ∈ Mn. An elementary result involving A and its charac- teristic polynomial is given by the following lemma: Lemma 4. Let A be a matrix in Mn and let f(X) = det(XIn − A) = Xn + bn−1Xn−1 + · · · + b1X + b0 be the characteristic polynomial of A. a) If aii = 0 for every i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n, then for all j, 0 ≤ j ≤ n − 1, bj = ∑ σ∈Fj (−1)σ(−1)n−j( ∏ i6=σ(i) aiσ(i)), where Fj = {σ ∈ Sn; ♯(Fσ) = j}. In particular bn−1 = 0. b) If A is anti-symmetric, then bn−2 = ∑ i<j a2 ij. Proof. a) Just observe that if C = X.In − A = (cij) and σ ∈ Sn, then (−1)σc1σ(1) · · · cnσ(n) = (−1)σ(−1)n−♯(Fσ)( ∏ i6=σ(i) aiσ(i)).X ♯(Fσ). 26 On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings We know that bn−1 = −trace(A) and then bn−1 = 0 . b) If σ ∈ Sn then ♯(Fσ) = n − 2 if and only if σ is a transposition, i.e., σ = (ij), i 6= j. Hence the result is proved as (ij) is odd and aij = −aji. Remark 1. Let R be the field of the real numbers. From Theorem 1 and Lemma 4 we conclude that the zero derivation is the unique derivation of ring B = R[X1,...,Xn] (X2 1 +···+X2 n) that is locally nilpotent and linear. In the following we present explicit examples of locally nilpotent derivations of B2 n that are linear. Example 1. Let n be an odd number and i = √ −1 ∈ C. Let DI be a linear derivation of C[n] defined by the anti-symmetric matrix n × n I =   0 0 . . . 0 0 −1 0 0 . . . 0 0 −i ... ... . . . ... ... ... 0 0 . . . 0 0 −1 0 0 . . . 0 0 −i 1 i . . . 1 i 0   . It is easy to verify that DI(Xn) = X1 + iX2 + · · · + Xn−2 + iXn−1, and for k < n DI(Xk) = { −Xn, if k is odd. −iXn, if k is even. But DI(X2 1 + · · · + X2 n) = 2 ∑n−1 i=1 XiDI(Xi) + 2XnDI(Xn) and then DI(X2 1 + · · · + X2 n) = −2XnDI(Xn) + 2XnDI(Xn) = 0. Thus, DI induces a linear derivation, dI , of B2 n given by dI(xn) = x1 + ix2 + · · · + xn−2 + ixn−1, and for k < n dI(xk) = { −xn, if k is odd. −ixn, if k is even. Now is easy to check that I3 = 0. Thus, dI is a locally nilpotent linear derivation of B2 n by Theorem 1. P. Brumatti, M. Veloso 27 Example 2. Let n be an even number and let ε be a primitive (n − 1)-th root of unity . Let DP be a linear derivation of C [n] defined by the anti-symmetric matrix n × n P =   0 0 . . . 0 . . . 0 −1 0 0 0 . . . 0 0 −ε ... ... . . . ... . . . ... ... 0 0 . . . 0 . . . 0 −εk ... ... . . . ... . . . ... ... 0 0 . . . 0 . . . 0 −εn−2 1 ε . . . εk . . . εn−2 0   It is easy to verify that DP (Xk) = −εk−1Xn, for k < n and DP (Xn) = X1 + εX2 + · · · + εk−1Xk + · · · + εn−2Xn−1. As in example 1 it is easy to check that DP (X2 1 + · · · + X2 n) = 0. Thus, DP induces a linear derivation, dP , of B2 n given by dP (xk) = −εk−1xn, for k < n and dP (xn) = x1 + εx2 + · · · + εk−1xk + · · · + εn−2xn−1. Since 1+ε+ε2 + · · ·+εn−2 = 0 and {1, ε, . . . , εn−2} = {1, ε2, . . . , ε2(n−2)} it is easy to check that P 3 = 0. Thus, dP is a locally nilpotent linear derivation of B2 n by Theorem 1. The next step is to show that the derivations dI and dP are irreducible. But for this we need the following elementary result. Lemma 5. Let h be an element of the Bm n . Then for each k ∈ {1, . . . , n} there exists a unique G ∈ C[X1, . . . , Xn] satisfying h = G(x1, . . . , xn) and degXk (G) < m. Proof. By the Euclidean algorithm for the ring C[X1, . . . , Xn] it is suf- ficient to observe that for all k the polinomial F = Xm 1 + · · · + Xm n is monic in Xk. 28 On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings In the Fermat ring B2 n for each k ∈ {1, . . . , n} define the subring Bk of the ring B2 n by C[x1, . . . , x̂k, . . . , xn] where x̂k signifies that the element xk was omitted in the ring B2 n . Lemma 6. Let h ∈ Bn ⊂ B2 n. Then: 1) dP (h) ∈ xnBn if n is even, dP defined in example 2; 2) dI(h) ∈ xnBn if n is odd, dI defined in example 1. Proof. Suppose that n is even and let h ∈ Bn. Then h = ∑ i=(i1,...,in−1) aix i1 1 · · · x in−1 n−1 , hence dP (h) = ∂h ∂x1 dP (x1) + · · · + ∂h ∂xk dP (xk) + · · · + ∂h ∂xn−1 dP (xn−1) = ∂h ∂x1 (−xn) + · · · + ∂h ∂xk (−εk−1xn) + · · · + ∂h ∂xn−1 (−εn−2xn) then dP (h) ∈ xnBn. The proof of the case n odd is analogous. Lemma 7. Let h ∈ B2 n. Then 1) dP (h) = 0 if and only if dP (h) = 0 and h ∈ Bn , if n is even; 2) dI(h) = 0 if and only if dI(h) = 0 and h ∈ Bn, if n is odd. Proof. Suppose that n is even and let h ∈ B2 n. By Lemma 5 there exists a unique h0, h1 ∈ Bn such that h = h1xn + h0. Assume h1 6= 0. Now note that 0 = dP (h) = dP (h1)xn + h1dP (xn) + dP (h0). (2) From Lemma 6 we have dP (h1), dP (h0) ∈ xnBn. Thus, dP (h1) = bxn for some b ∈ Bn. Hence dP (h1)xn = (bxn)xn = bx2 n = b(−x2 1 − · · · − x2 n−1) ∈ Bn. As dP (xn) = x1 + εx2 + · · · + εi−1xi + · · · + εn−2xn−1 we have h1dP (xn) ∈ Bn. Thus dP (h1)xn + h1dP (xn) ∈ Bn and by Lemma 6 dP (h0) = cxn for some c ∈ Bn, then by Lemma 5 and (2) we infer that 0 = dP (h1)xn + h1dP (xn) = dP (h1xn). As ker dP is factorially closed xn ∈ ker dP , so dP (xn) = 0. But since dP (xn) 6= 0, this is a contradiction. Hence h1 = 0. The proof of the case n odd is analogous. Lemma 8. Let n ≥ 3 be a natural number. Then P. Brumatti, M. Veloso 29 1) ker dP = C[x1 − ε(n−2)x2, . . . , x1 − ε(n−k)xk, . . . , x1 − εxn−1], if n is even. 2) ker dI = C[x1 + ix2, x1 − x3, . . . , x1 − xk−2, x1 − ixk−1], if n is odd. Proof. Suppose that n is even and let A be the subring C[x1 − ε(n−2)x2, . . . , x1 − ε(n−k)xk, . . . , x1 − εxn−1] of Bn 2 . As dP (x1−ε(n−k)xk) = dP x1−ε(n−k)dP (xk) = −xn−ε(n−k)(−ε(k−1)xn) = 0, for every k < n, we deduce that A ⊆ ker dP . Given y2 = x1 − ε(n−2)x2, . . . , yk = x1 − ε(n−k)xk, . . . , yn−1 = x1 − εxn−1 observe that A[x1] = C[x1, y2, . . . , yn−1] = C[x1, . . . , xn−1] = Bn, thus the set {x1, y2, · · · , yn−1} is algebraically independent over C. By Lemma 7 for each h ∈ ker dP , we have dP (h) = 0 and h ∈ Bn, then we may write h = n∑ i=0 aix i 1 where ai ∈ A ⊆ ker dP for all i ∈ {0, . . . , n}. Assume n > 0 and remember that dP (x1) = −xn. So 0 = dP (h) = −[a1 + 2a2x1 + · · · + nanxn−1 1 ]xn. By the uniqueness of Lemma 5 we have a1 + 2a2x1 + · · · + nanxn−1 1 = 0 and hence ai = 0 for i = 1, . . . , n. Therefore h = a0 ∈ A ⊆ ker dP . The proof of the case n odd is analogous.. Theorem 2. Let n ≥ 3 be a natural number. 1) If n is even, then dP ∈ LND(B2 n), where dP was defined in the example 2, is irreducible and LNDA(B2 n) = {adP | a ∈ A}, where A = C[x1 − ε(n−2)x2, . . . , x1 − ε(n−k)xk, . . . , x1 − εxn−1]. 2) If n is odd, then dI ∈ LND(B2 n), where dI was defined in the example 1, is irreducible and LNDS(B2 n) = {sdI | s ∈ S}, where S = C[x1 + ix2, x1 − x3, . . . , x1 − xn−2, x1 − ixn−1]. 30 On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings Proof. Suppose that n is even and d ∈ LNDA(B2 n)\{0}. By Proposition 1 we have ker d = A. Observe that d2 P (xn) = dP ( n−1∑ k=1 εk−1xk) = n−1∑ k=1 εk−1dP (xk) = xn( n−1∑ k=1 ε2(k−1)) = 0 thus dp(xn) ∈ A. Then, by Lemma 1, d(xn) ∈ A and dP (xn)d = d(xn)dP . (3) By definition dP (x1) = −xn, so dP (xn)d(x1) = −d(xn)xn. (4) We know that d(x1) = g1xn + g0 with g0, g1 ∈ Bn. Then, (4) implies that dP (xn)g1xn + dP (xn)g0 = −d(xn)xn. Since dP (xn) ∈ A ⊆ Bn, by the uniqueness of Lemma 5 we obtain d(xn) = −dP (xn)g1. As d(xn) ∈ A we know that dP (d(xn)) = 0. Thus 0 = dP (d(xn)) = dP (−dP (xn)g1) and then dP (g1) = 0, i.e., g1 ∈ A. Since d(xn) = −dP (xn)g1, (3) implies that dP (xn)d = d(xn)dP = −dP (xn)g1dP . Therefore d = −g1dP , where −g1 ∈ A. The Lemma 2 implies that dP = hd0 for some h ∈ A and some irreducible d0 ∈ LND(B2 n). As we saw d0 = h0dP for some h0 ∈ A. So dP = hd0 = h(h0dP ) = (hh0)dP . Thus h ∈ A∗ = C and hence dP is irreducible. The proof of the case n odd is analogous. Let B be a C-domain and θ ∈ AutC(B). It is well known that if D ∈ LND(B), then θDθ−1 ∈ LND(B) and ker θDθ−1 = θ(ker D). Let Sn be the symmetric group and σ ∈ Sn. The permutation σ induces a C-automorphism of C[n] = C[X1, . . . , Xn] which is also called σ and defined by relations σ(Xi) = Xσ(i) for every i. Now since σ(X2 1 + · · · + X2 n) = X2 1 + · · · + X2 n then σ induces a C-automorphism of B2 n which is also called σ and defined by relations σ(xi) = xσ(i) for every i. Suppose that n is even. Given j < n we denote the transposition (j n) ∈ Sn by τj and the derivation τjdP τj −1 by dPj . Hence we have dPj ∈ LND(B2 n) and ker dPj = τj(C[x1 − ε(n−2)x2, . . . , x1 − ε(n−k)xk, . . . , x1 − εxn−1]). P. Brumatti, M. Veloso 31 Observe that τj(x1 − ε(n−k)xk) =    xn − ε(n−k)xk, if j = 1 x1 − ε(n−k)xn, if j = k x1 − ε(n−k)xk, otherwise. This implies that ker dPj ⊂ Bj . Now suppose that n is odd. For each 1 ≤ j ≤ n denote the derivation τjdIτj −1 by dIj . Thus we have ker dIj = τj(C[x1 + ix2, x1 − x3, . . . , x1 − xn−2, x1 − ixn−1]). if k is odd τj(x1 − xk) =    xn − xk, if j = 1 x1 − xn, if j = k x1 − xk, otherwise. If k is even τj(x1 − ixk) =    xn − ixk, if j = 1 x1 − ixn, if j = k x1 − ixk, otherwise. Is follows that ker dIj ⊂ Bj . The concept of ML-invariant of the a ring R was introduced by L. Makar-Limanov. This invariant has proved very useful in studying the group of automorphisms of a ring (see [5]) . Definition 2. Let B be a ring. The intersection of the kernels of all locally nilpotent derivation of B is called the ML-invariant of B. The next result shows that the ML-invariant of B2 n is C. Note that for m ≥ n2 − 2n the ML-invariant of Bm n is Bm n . Theorem 3. The ML-invariant of the ring B2 n is C. Proof. We define dj = dIj if n is odd, and dj = dPj if n is even. In both cases, by previous observations, we have ker dj ⊂ Bj and ∩n j=1ker dj ⊂ ∩n j=1Bj = C. Since C ⊂ ker dj , for all j ∈ {1, . . . , n}, then the result follows. References 32 On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings [1] D. Daigle, Locally nilpotent derivations, Lecture notes for the Setember School of algebraic geometry, Lukȩcin, Poland, Setember 2003, Avaible at http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~ddaigle. [2] M. Ferreiro, Y. Lequain, A. Nowicki, A note on locally nilpotent derivations, J. Pure Appl. Algebra N.79, 1992, pp.45-50. [3] D. Fiston, S. Maubach, Constructing (almost) rigid rings and a UFD having infinitely generated Derksen and Makar-Limanov invariant, Canad. Math. Bull. Vol.53 N.1, 2010, pp.77-86. [4] G. Freudenberg, Algebraic Theory of Locally Nilpotent Derivations, Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences, Vol.136, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006. [5] L. Makar-Limanov, On the group of automorphisms of a surface xny = P (z), Israel J. Math. N.121, 2001, pp.113-123. Contact information P. Brumatti IMECC-Unicamp, Rua Sérgio Buarque de Holanda 651, Cx. P. 6065 13083-859, Campinas-SP, Brazil E-Mail: brumatti@ime.unicamp.br M. Veloso Defim-UFSJ, Rodovia MG 443 Km 7 36420-000, Ouro Branco-MG, Brazil E-Mail: veloso@ufsj.edu.br Received by the editors: 06.09.2010 and in final form 05.04.2013.
id nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-152305
institution Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
issn 1726-3255
language English
last_indexed 2025-12-07T15:29:07Z
publishDate 2013
publisher Інститут прикладної математики і механіки НАН України
record_format dspace
spelling Brumatti, P.
Veloso, M.
2019-06-09T17:05:34Z
2019-06-09T17:05:34Z
2013
On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings / P. Brumatti, M. Veloso // Algebra and Discrete Mathematics. — 2013. — Vol. 16, № 1. — С. 20–32. — Бібліогр.: 5 назв. — англ.
1726-3255
2010 MSC:14R10, 13N15, 13A50.
https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/152305
In this note we prove that the ring B²n has non-zero irreducible locally nilpotent derivations, which are explicitly presented, and that its ML-invariant is C.
en
Інститут прикладної математики і механіки НАН України
Algebra and Discrete Mathematics
On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings
Article
published earlier
spellingShingle On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings
Brumatti, P.
Veloso, M.
title On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings
title_full On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings
title_fullStr On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings
title_full_unstemmed On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings
title_short On locally nilpotent derivations of Fermat rings
title_sort on locally nilpotent derivations of fermat rings
url https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/152305
work_keys_str_mv AT brumattip onlocallynilpotentderivationsoffermatrings
AT velosom onlocallynilpotentderivationsoffermatrings