COMMUNICATIONS IN ALGEBRA, 23(10), 3741-3752 (1995)

SPECTRA OF MODULES

Chin-Pi Lu

Department of Mathematics
University of Colorado
Denver, Colorado 80217-3364

Introduction
In this p p e r all rings are commutative with identity and all modules
are unitary. By a semi-local (resp. a local) ring, we mean a ring with only
a finite number of maximal ideals (resp. a unique maximal ideal).
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

Let M be a module over a ring R. A proper submodule P of &I with

P : R M = p is said to be prime (or p p r i m e ) if r e E P for r E R and
e E M implies that either e E P or r E p (cf. [B], [9]). The set of all prime
submodules of hf is called the spectrum of M and denoted by Spec(M), and
that of all maximal submodules of hf is denoted by Max(M).
Let S be a multiplicatively closed subset of R. In section 1, we introduce
a useful relationship between Spec(M) and Spec(Ms) (Proposition 1) and
exhibit its applications through the entire paper.
For any ring R , it is known that Spec(R) # 0 if and only if R # (0).
The primary purpose of this paper is to point out that "Spec(M) f 0 if and
only if k I # (0)" is not necessarily true for all modules M. In section 2,
we present an example of a non-zero module M with Spec(M) = 0. It is
proved (Theorem 1) that if Ii is the field of quotients of a n integral domain
R, then the R-module Ii has Max(IC) = 0 and Spec(K) = {(0)). We prove
that if i\/l is a finitely generated R-module, then there exists a surjection d
from Spec(hf) onto Spec(RIAn11( A d ) ) so that Spec(M) # 0. Faithfully flat
modules, faithful modules over integral domains, and multiplication nlodules
are all proved to have non-empty spectra (Theorem 2). Later in section 4,
the above-mentioned mapping $ is shown to be a bijection if and only if the
nodule A$ is a multiplication lnoclule (Theorem 6).

Copyright 0 1995 by Marcel Dekker, Inc.

 In section 3, we characterize maximal submodules of a finitely generated
module over a local ring in terms of minimal generating sets of the module
(Theorem 3).
Section 4 is devoted to an investigation of those modules M each of
whose Max(M) is a non-empty finite set, i.e., semi-local/local modules. We
prove (Corollary 1 to Theorem 4) that an Artinian module M is finitely
generated if and only if M is semi-local and Rad M is finitely generated.
For any nonzero ring R, we know that Rp is a local ring for every p E
Spec(R). In contrast with this, we obtain that if M is a finitely generated
faithful R-module, then M,, is a local Rp-module for every p E Spec(R) if
and only if h.1 is a multiplication module (Corollary to Theorem 6).

1. S p e c ( M ) and Spec(Ms)
Let M be a module over a ring R. The collection of all prime (resp.
maximal) submodules of M is called the spectrum (resp. the maximal spec-
trum) of M and denoted by Spec(M) (resp. Max(M)).
It may happen that Spec(M) = 0 for M # (0). We will study about
this case in section 2.
Assume that R is an integral domain and let K be its field of quotients,
[a,
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

F = Rn, and B a submodule of the free R-module F. In based on the

relationships I< @ R B KB = KF I<g R F and I i B # K F , various
results related to (B : F ) and B being prime are obtained ([l o,
Theorem 1.5,
Theorem 1.6, Theorem 1.7, Lemma 1.8, Theorem 1.91).
Now let M be a module over any ring R and S a multiplicatively closed
subset of R. In this section, we will present two fundamental facts (Propo-
sition 1 and Proposition 2) about i) a relationship between Spec(M) and
Spec(Ms), and ii) those submodules N of M such that N s # Ms. Apply-
ing these propositions to modules over integral domains, we will generalize
the above-mentioned results of [u] for finitely generated free modules over
integral domains.
The following Proposition 1 is a specialization of [u, p. 160, Theo-
rem 101, which will prove useful throughout the paper:
PROPOSITION 1. Let S be a multiplicatively closed subset of R, p a prime
ideal of R such that p n S = 0, and M an R-module. Then there exists
a one-to-one correspondence between the p-prime submodules P of A! and
the p,-prime submodules W of Ms. This is such that when P and W
correspond, W = Ps and P = W n Ad.
PROOF:By [ll,p. 160, Theorem 101, there is a one-to-one correspondence
between the p-primary subnlodules P of M and the p,-primary submod-
ules W of M s , where W = Ps and P = T/V n M . Hence we need to
show that, under this correspondence of primary submodules, P is prime
if and only if W = Ps is prime. According to (8, p. 62, Proposition 1, (a)],
 SPECTRA OF MODULES 3743

a primary submodule N o f any module E is prime i f and only i f N : E

is a prime ideal. Therefore, we prove that P : R M = p i f and only i f
Ps : R hlS~ = p, provided that p = and p, = d m as P and
Ps are, respectively, p-primary and p,-primary. I f P : M = p, then p, =
( P : M ) s C Ps : M s C d m = p, whence Ps : M s = p,. Conversely,
i f Ps : &Is = pa, then p,MS C Ps so that ( x / s ) ( e / t )E Ps for every x E p,
e E M , and s , t E S . Since ( x e / s t ) ( s 2 t 2 / s t=
) ( s 2 t 2 x e ) / ( s 2 t 2E) P S , xe E P
for every e E h l . It follows that x E P : M for every x E p = JP:iZ/I.
Thus, P : IVI = JP:M = p.
COROLLARY1 ( c f . [ll,p. 152, Proposition 8 ) ) . Let S be a multiplicatively
closed subset o f a ring R and &I an R-module. I f P is a prime submodule
o f M , then ( P : = Ps : M s .
P R O O F :In the proof o f Proposition 1 we have seen that i f ( P : M ) n S = 0:
then ( P : = Ps : M s . O n the other hand i f ( P : Ad)n S # 0, then
Ps = Ads by [ll,p. 159, Proposition 161 so that Ps : Ms = ( P : M ) s = R s .
COROLLARY2 . Let R be an integral domain, I i the field of quotients o f R,
and ,\/I a faithful R-module. Then ( 1 ) there exists a one-to-one correspon-
dence between the proper subspaces o f the vector space I< @ R 1Z.I = K M
over I i and the (0)-primesubmodules of M , and (2) i f IV is a submodule o f
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

hf such that ICN # I i M , then P = I i N n M is a (0)-primesubmodule and

I i P = I<N (cf. [a,
p. 1806, Theorern 1.90.
PROOF: ( 1 ) Put S = R - ( 0 ) and apply Proposition 1. Since M is a
faithful module, I<M # (0). Hence there exists a proper subspace of K M
and, consequently, there exists a ( 0 ) - p i m e submodule o f M corresponding
to the subspace. Note that every proper subspace o f a vector space V is a
(0)-prime submodule o f V . ( 2 ) Since ICN # ICM, I<N is a proper subspace
o f the vector space I<M so that P = I<!V n M is a (0)-prime submodule
of by ( 1 ) above. That I<P = I<N follows from the injectivity o f the
correspondence described in ( 1 ) .
Let M be a module over a ring R with S p e c ( M ) # 0 . For each p E
Spec(R), let T ( p ) be the set o f all p-prime submodules o f 211. Then the
set { T ( p ) ;T ( p ) # 0 , p E S p e c ( R ) } forms a partition o f S p e c ( M ) . For each
p E S p e c ( R ) ,we know that there exists a bijection between the set o f prime
ideals of R contained in p and Spec(Rp). Let S = R - p and p' a prime
ideal o f R contained in p. Since p' n S = 0 , there exists a bijection, f p , say,
between T ( p l )and T ( p l R p )C 1% by Proposition 1. It follows that each f p t
can be extended t0.a bijection f : LrplcpT(p')i C$tGpT(p'R,) = Spec(M,),
for T ( p l )fl T ( p l ' ) = 0 whenever p' and p" are distinct prime ideals of R
contained in p.
COROLLARY 3. Let h/I be an R-module and p E Spec(R). Then the prime
submodules o f the Rp-module MP are in a one-to-one cosrespondence with
those prime submodules IV of hl with iV : ibf C: p.
 The next proposition is a combination of [11,p. 158, Proposition 131
and [u,p. 159, Proposition 161 with a slight generalization.
PROPOSITION 2. Let S be a multiplicatively closed subset of a ring R and
N a submodule of an R-module M. If Ns # Ms, then ( N : M) n S = 0.
Conversely, if ( N : M ) n S = 0, then Ns # Ms provided that either i) M is
finitely generated or ii) N is a primary submodule.

PROOF:Suppose that ( N : Ad) n S # 0 and let x E ( N : 11/11 n S. Then

xe E N for each e E M so that e/s = (xe)/(xs) E N s for any s E S, which
proves that Ns = Ms. As for the second statement of the proposition, we
refer to [ll,p. 158, Proposition 131 and [ll,p. 159, Proposition 161. Note
that ( N : M) n S = 0 if and only if d ' m n S = 0 for any submodule N
of A'!!.
COROLLARY. Let Ad be a module over an integral domain R, I<the field of
quotients of R, and B a submodule of M. If K B # I<M, then B : M = (0).
The converse is true if either i) M is finitely generated, or ii) B is primary
(cf. 110, Theorem 1.5, Theorem 1.6, Theorem 1.7, i)]).

PROOF:Take S = R - (0) and apply Proposition 2.

Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

If N is a prime submodule of an R-module M , then N : M is a prime

ideal of R. However the converse is not necessarily true. For example, if M
is the free Z-module Z x Z and N = (a, 0)Z for any integer a > 1, then
N : M = (0) but N is not a (0)-prime submodule of M.
Here we consider those submodules N of a module M such that each
N : M is either a primary ideal or a prime ideal.
PROPOSITION 3. Let N be a submodule of an R-module PI such that N : M
is a p-primary ideal (resp. N : Ad = p) for some prime ideal p of R. Then N
is a p-primary (resp. p-prime) submodule of M if and only if Np n M = N.
PROOF:The necessity is due to [ll,p. 159, Proposition 161 (resp. Proposi-
tion 1). To prove the sufficiency, let ax E N , where x E M - N and a E R.
Suppose that a $ p. Then n: E Np f i M = N , a contradiction. Thus, a E p
so that N is a p-primary (resp. p-prime) submodule of M .
COROLI,AKY. Let -&Ibe a module over an integral domain R, Ii the field of
quotients of R, and P a submodule of M . Then P is (0)-prime if and only
if I i P n IW = P (cf. [lo ,1806, Lemma 1.81).
p.

PROOF:The necessity follows directly from Proposition 3. Assume that

I i P n M = P . Then I<P # I i M , so P :I; M = (0) by Corollary to
Proposition 2. Now applying Proposition 3, we can see that P is a (0)-
prime submodule of M .
 SPECTRA OF MODULES 3745

2. Existence of Spec(M)
For any ring R , it is known that R # (0) if and only if Spec(R) # 0
(or Max(R) # 0). However, as we can see in the following example and
Theorem 1, for a module M it is not always true that if M # (0) then
Spec(M) # 0 (or Max(M) # 0).
EXAMPLE. Let p be a fixed prime integer and No = Z + U (0). Then M =
+
E ( p ) = { a E Q / Z ; a = r / p n Z for some r E Z and n E No) is a nonzero
submodule of the Z-module Q/Z. For each t E No, set G t = { a E Q / Z ;
a = r l p t + Z for some r E 2 ) . The following facts are proved in [l2,p. 126,
7.101:
+
(i) Gt is a cyclic submodule of E(p) generated by llpt Z for each t E No,
(ii) each proper submodule of E ( p ) is equal to G, for some i E No, and
(iii) E ( p ) is a n Artinian, non-Noetherian Z-module with a strictly increasing
sequence of submodules

We claim that Gt :zE ( p ) = (0) for every t E No. Suppose that G t : E ( p ) #

(0) for some t and let 0 # 1. E Gt : E(p). Put r = p k a , where a E Z and k is
the largest integer in No such that pk divides r . Let a' = l/p"*'+Z. Then
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

+
r a ' = (pka)/pk+t+' Z = alpt+' + Z belongs to G t , which is impossible
because p t a . Therefore Gt : E ( p ) = (0) for every t E No. However no Gt
is a prime submodule of E(p), for if i is any positive integer then pi $ Gt :
+ +
E(p) = (0) and p = llpi+' Z @ G t , but p1/3 = llpt Z E G t . Now,
in view of (ii) above, we can conclude that Spec(M) = Spec(E(p)) = 0 =
Max(M).
In the next theorem, we study the spectrum of the field of quotients of
an integral domain.
THEOREM 1. Let R be an integral domain which is not a field and Ii' the
field of quotients of R . Then the R-module Ii has Maxjli) = 0 and Spec(Ii')
= ((0)).
PROOF: Since rIi' = Ii for every non-zero element 1. of R, N : Ii = (0)
for every proper submodule N of M. Consequently Max(Ii) = 0,for if L
is a maximal submodule of Ii, then L : I< = q for some maximal ideal q
of R ([e, p. 63, Proposition 41) whence L : K = q # (0), a contradiction.
Clearly (0) is a (0)-prime submodule of I i . To show that (0) is the only
prime submodule of Ii, we assume the contrary and let P be a nonzero
prime submodule of I<. Then, as we have seen above, P : Ii = (0). Since
P is a nonzero submodule, there exists a = a/b # 0, where a , b E R,
such that a E P and, therefore, ba = w E P. On the other hand, there
exists 0 # x E R such that l / a 6 P because P # I i . Now we have that
 ax @ P : Ii and l / x @ P, but (ax)l/x = a E P. This contradicts the fact
that P is a prime submodule. Thus, Spec(K) = ((0)).
The 2-module Q has Max(Q) = 0 and Spec(Q) = ((0)) (cf
COROLLARY.
[z,p. 36, Ex. 80.
Let M be any R-module and p a maximal ideal of R. If p M # M ,
then p M is a prime submodule. Thus we can say that if pM # M for some
maximal ideal p of R, then Spec(M) # 0. We remark that the converse of
this statement is not true in general in view of the above Theorem 1 and its
corollary.
LEMMA.Let M be a non-zero finitely generated R-module. Then for each
prime (resp. maximal) ideal p of R containing Ann (M), there exists a p-
prime submodule of M (resp. a maximal submodule L of M with L : M =
P).
PROOF:Since M is a non-zero finitely generated R-module and p is a prime
ideal containing Ann (M), Mp is a non-zero finitely generated Rp-module
with Ann (Mp) = (Ann and Ann (Mp) pRp ([3,p. 82, Corollary 2 to
Proposition 41). According to [8,p. 65, Corollary 3 to Proposition 81, pMp #
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

&Ip so that pMp is a pRp-prime submodule of &Ip. Applying Proposition 1,

we can conclude that pMp f l M is a pprirne submodule of M. To prove
the case that p is a maximal ideal of R, let T(p) be the set of all p-prime
submodules of M. In the proof above, we have seen that T(p) # 0. With
the aid of Zorn's lemma, we can see that there exists a maximal element L
in T(p). Since L : M = p is a maximal ideal, L is a maximal submodule.
The above lemma is a generalization of (8, p. 65, Corollary 4 to Propo-
sition 81 where M is assumed to be a finitely generated Laskerian module.
It is also proved in [lO,p. 1811, Theorem 3.31 using a different method.
An R-module M is called a multiplication module provided that for
every submodule .N of M there exists an ideal I of R such that N = I M .
In the next theorem, we list modules with non-empty spectra or non-
empty maximal spectra.
THEOREM 2. Let M be a non-zero R-module, where R # (0).
(1) If M is finitely generated, then there exists a surjection from Spec(M)
to Spec(R/Ann (M)) and, similarly, a surjection from Max(M) to
Max(R/Ann (M)). Consequently, Spec(M) # 0 and Max(M) # 0.
(2) If M is faithfully flat over R, then there exists a surjection from Spec(M)
to Spec(R). Hence, Spec(M) # 0.
(3) If M is a faithful module over an integral domain R, then Spec(h.1) # 0.
(4) If M is a multiplication module, then Max(M) # 0 so that Spec(M) #
0.
 SPECTRA OF MODULES 3747

PROOF: (1) is a direct result of Lemma. If M is faithfully flat over R , then

pM # M for every p E Spec(R) whence ph/l is a p-prime submodule of h.1
by [8, p. 66, Theorem 31. This proves (2). Let K be the field of quotients
of a n integral domain R. Then the vector space K M over I< is not (0)
as M is a faithful R-module. Hence (3) follows from (1) of Corollary 2 to
Proposition 1, and (4) is due to [A,p. 762, Theorem 2.51.
Under the surjection, which is mentioned in (1) and (2) of Theorem 2
respectively, each p E Spec(R/Ann (Ad)) corresponds to a p-prime submod-
ule of M. We remark that in case (3) of Theorem 2, where M is a faithful
module over an integral domain, such a surjection may not exist. For ex-
ample, the 2-module Q has no p-prime submodule for each non-zero prime
ideal p of 2.In case (4) of Theore~n2, where M is a multiplicative module,
we can say that such a surjection exists if and only if M is finitely generated
(cf. [4,p. 768, Theorem 3.1)).

3. Maximal Submodules
Let ,Z.l be a free R-module e t E 1 R a , and m a maximal ideal of R.
If a proper submodule L of M can be expressed in the form that L =
m a ; BjZ,Ra1 for some i E I, then L is a maximal submodule with L : M =
in. We consider a similar characterization of maximal submodules of finitely
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

generated moclules over local rings, which may not be free.

If a module h.1 is generated by a set B of elements of M and if no proper
subset of B generates M , then we call B a minimal generating set of M.
The smallest cardinality of minimal generating sets of M will be denoted by
P(D~).
If R is a local ring with maximal ideal 7n and M is a finitely generated
R-module, then possesses a minimal generating set; any two minimal
generating sets contain the same number 11 of elements so that p ( M ) = n ,
where 11 is the dimension of the vector space Mlnahl over Rlm ([G, p. 1161).
THEOREM 3 . Let R be a local ring with maximal ideal m, and A I a nonzero
finitely generated R-module with p ( M ) = n . Then a submodule L of 1bI is
maximal if and only if there exists a minimal generating set { e l , e z , .. . , e,,)
for h.1 such that L = nae, + Re, for some z E { 1 , 2 , . . . , n). Conse-
quently, there exists at least maximal submodules in M .
PROOF: Suppose that L is a maximal submodule of M. Then L : $1 = in
so that m.ld C L and L,/mM is a maximal subspace of the vector space
M / m M over k = Rlnz. Since p ( i k f ) = dimk hd/nzb!! = n , dimk L/in!l/l =
12 - 1. Hcnce these exists a basis, { E l , E 2 , . . . ,e,,-l) say, for L / m M which
can be extended to a basis {El,E2,.. . , ~ , - 1 , ~ , )for M/mi\I[, where each
-
ei = e; + 172hI for some e; E $1. Consequently, { e l , ez,. . . , e n ) is a minimal
generating set for M ([G, p. 115, Theorem 1581) and, therefore, L = mAI +
 Re; = me, + c:=;' Re;. Conversely, we assume that there exists a
minimal generating set {el, el?,. . . , e n ) for M and let Li = me, f x. I+.
, Rej
for some i. Since i n M = C f = , me, L i , L i / m M = C j + , kej is an
n - 1 dimensional subspace, a maximal subspace of MImA4. It follows
that L; is a maximal submodule of Dl. To prove the last statement of the
theorem, we assume that {el, ez, . . . , e n ) is a minimal generating set for M
and that Li = L j for some i # j . Both 1; = L i / m M and = L j / m M are
subspaces of M / m M over k with bases (el , & , . . . Z;+l,. . . , e n ) and
-
-
{el,E 2 , . . . ,zj-l , ej+l,. . . , en), respectively. L; = L j implies that ei E
- -
z, -
=
L; and, therefore, ei is a linear combination of Zl, F z , . . . , ei-1, e i + l , . . . , e n ,
a contradiction to the fact that {el, &, . . . ,&, . . . ,en) is a basis for M / m M .
Thus, L, # L j if i # j .
We remark that when 12 = 1 in Theorem 3, the expression L = me, f
CjZIRe, is simply L = m e l .
The last statement of Theorem 3 is also proved in (2, p. 10, Proposi-
tion 141 in a different way.
COROLLARY 1. Let R be a local ring and M a finitely generated R-module.
Then
(1) if A4 has at most t maximal submodules, then p ( M ) does not exceed t,
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

and
(2) M has only one maximal submodule if and only if M is cyclic, i.e.,
p ( M ) = 1.
COROLLARY 2 . Let M be a finitely generated module over a ring R, and
nz a maximal ideal of R. Let I be an ideaa of R such that m is a unique
maximal ideal containing I and that I M = (0). Then a submodule L of
M is a maximal submodule with L : 11.1 = m if and only if there exists a
minimal generating set { e l ,e z , . . . , en} for M such that L = me; +El+Rej
for some i E {1,2,. . . ,n ) .
PROOF:The ring R / I is a local ring with maximal ideal m / I , and we can
consider Af as a finitely generated module over R / I . Thus we can apply
Theorem 3.

4. Semi-local Modules
A module Ad is called a semi-local (resp. a local) module if Max(M) is
a non-empty finite (resp. a singleton) set.
Clearly, every cyclic module over a semi-local (resp. a local) ring is a
semi-local (resp. a local) module. The direct product of a finite number
of local R-modules is a semi-local R-module. If M is a finitely generated
semi-local module over a local ring, then M has minimal generating sets.
According to Corollary 1 to Theorem 3, the unique cardinality p ( M ) of
 SPECTRA OF MODULES 3749

minimal generating sets does not exceed the number of maximal submodules
of M.
Local modules play an important role in the theory of finitely presented
modules over serial rings ([GI).Some other studies of local n~oduleshave
been done in [5]and [I]respectively.
PROPOSITION 4. If a finitely generated module M over a ring R is semi-local
(resp. local), then R/Ann ( M ) is a semi-local (resp. a local) ring.
PROOF:This is an immediate result of Lemma in section 2.
If M is a semi-local module with the family {Pi);=l of maximal sub-
modules, then M I R a d M r llr='=, ( M I P ; ) ,where Rad M is the radical of
M, i.e., the intersection of all maximal submodules of M. Applying this, we
can easily see t h e following Proposition 5 which will be needed later:
PROPOSITION [s,
5 (cf. p. 116, Proposition 16)). For any module M with
M a x ( M ) # 8, the following properties are equivalent:
(a) M is a semi-local (resp. a local) module;
(b) M I R a d M is the direct decomposition of a finite number of simple
modules (resp. is a simple module).
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

THEOREM
4. Every finitely generated Artinian module is semi-local.
PROOF: If M is a finitely generated Artinian module, then Max(M) # 0
and = M I R a d M is an Artinian module with Rad % = (0). So % is a
semi-simple
- module of finite length due to (2, p. 69, Theorem 41. Therefore,
M is the direct decon~positionof a finite number of simple modules. It
follows that M is a semi-local module from Proposition 5.
We remark that the assumption made in Theorem 4 that the Artinian
module is finitely generated is essential. In Example of section 2, we have
seen an Artinian, non-Noetherian 2-module M = E ( p ) with Spec(M) = 0 =
Max(M). Hence, M = E ( p ) is a n Artinian module which is not semi-local.
COROLLARY 1. For any Artinian R-module Ad, the following conditions are
equivalent :
(a) M is finitely generated;
(b) M is semi-local and Rad M is finitely generated.
PROOF: If M is a finitely generated Artinian module, then R/Ann (114)
is an Artinian ring so that Al is a Noetherian module. Tllus Rad Ad is
finitely generated. Combining this with Theorem 4, we can see that (a) i
(b). Conversely, if Jd is se~rii-localand Rad &I is finitely generated, then
evidently Ad is finitely generated because M/Rad A4 is the direct decoxm
position of a finite nuniber of simple (cyclic) modules due to Proposition 5.
Thus (b) ==+ ( a ) .
 COROLLARY 2. ([4, p. 764, Corollary 2.91). Every Artinian multiplication
module is semi-local and cyclic.
PROOF:Let M be a non-zero Artinian multiplication module. To show that
M is semi-local, in view of Theorem 4, it suffces to prove that M is finitely
generated. Suppose that M is not finitely generated. Then by [s,
p. 768,
Theorem 3.11, A4 = m M for some maximal ideal m of R containing Ann
(M). Hence, Mm is also a non-zero Artinian multiplication module over R,
such that Adm = nzM,,. According to [4, p. 762, Theorem 2.51, Mm must
contain a maximal submodule E* say. Then E* : R , Mm = mR, so that
E* = inM, = Mm which is a contradiction. Thus we can conclude that M
is finitely generated, so M is semi-local. That M is cyclic follows from that
M is a multiplication module over the semi-local ring RIAnn ( M ) and (1,
p. 175, Proposition 41.
In the rest of this section, we exclusively investigate local modules.
In (2) of Corollary 1 to Theorem 3, we have seen that a finitely generated
module M over a local ring is a local module if and only if M is cyclic. We
remark that this fact can also be proved directly without using Theorem 3
(cf. Proof of [ I ,p. 9, Corollary to Theorem 131).
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

PROPOSITION 6. Let M be a finitely generated local R-module with max-

imal submodule P. If P : M = p, then the canonical homomorphism
M -+ Mp is bijective.
PROOF: Since M is a finitely generated local module over R, R/Ann ( M )
is a local ring by Proposition 4. The unique maximal ideal of RIAnn ( M ) is
p/Ann ( M ) , for p is a maximal ideal of R containing Ann (M). Accordingly,
p is the only maximal ideal of R containing Ann (M). Now the proposition
follows frorn (3, p. 110, Proposition 81.
For any prime ideal p of a ring R, Rp is always a local ring. However,
for an R-module M , M p is not necessarily a local Rp-module. Here, for any
finitely generated R-module M , we consider a condition under which M p is
a local module over R,.
Let M be an R-module and h an ideal of R. Following [a,p. 1810],
we call a submodule N of h.1 h-maximal (or h-max) if i) N : M = h, and
ii) N is maximal in the set of all submodules L of M such that L : M = h.
It is shown in [lo ,1811, Lemma 3.2) that if p is a prime ideal of R and
p.
N is p-max, then AT is a p-prime submodule.
THEOREM 5. Let h/l be an R-module with ap-prime submodule P for some
prime ideal p of R. Then &Ip is a local Rp-module with maximal submodule
P'= PR, if and only if P is a unique p-max prime submodule of Ad.
PROOF:.Applying Proposition 1 again, we can see that P' = PR, is a
maximal submodule of the R,-module Mp P = P'n M is nlaximal
 SPECTRA OF MODULES 375 1

among the p-prime submodules of M P is one of the y-max subrnodules

since all p-mas submodules of M are p-prime as we remarked above. Thus,
we can conclude that Pi is a unique maximal submodule of Mp if and only
if P is a unique p-max prime submodule of Ad.
COROLLARY. Let M be an R-module with Max(h1) = {P, : z 6 I) # 0 and
p u t P, : M = p, for each i E I. Then Mp, is a local module over Rp, for
every i if and only if p, # p, whenever z # 3 .
PROOF: We use the facts that every maximal submodule Pi of M is a p,-
max submodule, ancl that each maximal submodule P, is a unique p,-max
submodule if and only if pi # pj whenever i # 3.
In Theorem 2, ( I ) , we have seen that if M is a finitely generated module
over a ring R , then there exists a surjection from Spec(M) onto Spec(R/Ann
(M)). Here, we consider the case that this surjection is also injective.
THEOREM 6. Let M be a finitely generated R-module, and let $J : Spec(A4)
-+ Spec(R/Ann (Ad)) defined by + ( P ) = ( P : M)+ Ann (M) for every P E
Spec(M). Then the following statements are equivalent:
(a) &Ip is a l o c d RRp-modulefor every p 6 Spec(R/Ann (M));
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

(b) &I is a locally cyclic module over R/Ann (Ad);

(c) M is a multiplication module;
(d) 1C, is bijective.
PROOF: The equivalence of (a) and (b) is a result of Corollary 1 to Theo-
rem 3 and that of (b) and (c) is due to [l,p. 175, Proposition 51. Suppose
that hf is a finitely generated multiplication module. Then 1C, is bijective by
19, p. 216, Property 11, so (c) * (d). To prove (d) ==+(a), we assume that
11, is bijective and let p E Spec(R/Ann (M)). Then = P is a unique
p-prime submodule of M ,whence MP is a local Rp-module with maximal
submodule Pi = P R , by Theorem 5. Hence (cl) * (a) and this completes
the proof of Theorem 6.
COROLLARY. Let AJ be a firlitely generated faithful R-module. Then MI,
is a locaa module over R,,for. every prime ideal 11 of R if ancl only if M is a
multiplication rnocl~ile.

REFERENCES
1. A. B a s n a ~ d Multiplication
, modules, J. Algebra, i;1 (1951), 174-178.
2. N. Bourbaki, Algtbre: Chap. 8 , Hermann, Paris, 1958.
3. N. Bourbaki, Algkbre commutative, Chap. 1, 2, Hermann, Paris, 1961.
4. 2 . A. El-Bast and P. F. Smith, Multiplication modules, Conxn. Algebra,
16(4) (1986), 755-779.
-
 5. R. I<. Jain, Generalized nlultiplication modules, Riv. Mat. Univ. Parma,
-7(4) (1981), 461-472.
6. I. Kaplansky, Commutative rings, Allyn and Bacon Inc., Boston, 1970.
7. S. C. Lee, Finitely generated modules, J. Korean Math. Soc., a ( 1 )
(1991), 1-11.
8. C. P. Lu, Prime submodules of modules, Comment. Math. Univ. St.
Paul, %(I) (1984), 61-69.
9. C. P. Lu, M-radicals of submodules in modules, Math. Japon., a ( 2 )
(1989), 211-219.
10. R. L. McCasland and M. E. Moore, Prime submodules, Comm. Algebra,
20(6) (1992), 1803-1817.
-
11. D. G. Northcott, Lesson on rings, modules, and multiplicities, Cam-
bridge University Press, London, 1968.
12. R. Y. Sharp, Steps in commutative algebra, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 1990.
13. R. B. Warfield, Jr., Serial rings and finitely presented modules, J. Al-
gebra, 37 (1975), 187-222.
Downloaded by [Stanford University Libraries] at 09:00 28 May 2012

Received: April 1994

Revised: February 1995