Lecture Notes in

Mathematics
Edited by A. Dold and B. Eckmann
Subseries: Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay
Adviser: M.S. Narasimhan

302

Michel Demazure

Lectures
on p-Divisible Groups

Springer-Verlag
Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo
Author

Michel Demazure
Centre de Mathematique, Ecole Polytechnique
91128 Palaiseau Cedex, France

1st Edition 1972

2nd Printing 1986

Mathematics Subject Classification (1970): 14-02, 14L05

ISBN 3-540-06092-8 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokyo

ISBN 0-387-06092-8 Springer-Verlag New York Heidelberg Berlin Tokyo

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material
is concerned, specifically those of translation, reprinting, re-use of illustrations, broadcasting,
reproduction by photocopying machine or similar means, and storage in data banks. Under
§ 64 of the German Copyright Law where copies are made for other than private use, a fee is
payable to 'Verwertungsgesellschaft Wort", Munich.
© by Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1972
Printed in Germany
Printing and binding: Beltz Offsetdruck, Hemsbach/Bergstr.
2146/3140-643210
 Lectures on p-divisible groups

The aim of these lectures, given at the Tats Institute in January -

February 1971, was to explain the contents of chapters 1, 2 and A of

MANIN (I_), The theory of commutative formal groups over fields of finite charac-

teristic, English Trans., Russian Math. Sur. 18.

For general facts about algebraic groups, our reference is

D~24AZURE (M) and GABRIEL (_P), Groupes alg~brlques, Tome 1, North Holland Pub. Co.,

1970, which shall be abbreviated as D.G.

For supplementary material the reader may refer to:

HONDA (T), Isogeny classes of abelian varieties over finite fields, J. Math. Soc.

Jap., 20, 83-95, (1968).

HONDA (_T), On the theory of commutative formal groups, J. Math. Soc. Jap., 22

213-2A6, (1970).

TATE (J), p-divislble groups ; Proceedings of a conference on local fields,

(Driebergen ;966) Springer-Verlag, ;967.

TATE (J_), Classes d'isog6nies de vari6tgs abgliennes sur un corps fini(d'apr~s

T. HONDA), Seminaire Bourbaki, 352, Nov. 1968, Paris multigraph6.

TATE (J), Endomorphisme of abelian varieties over finite fields, Inventiones

Math., --2 13A-IAA (1966)

N.B. The typing of these notes was done by Mr.P.Joseph, of the Tats
Institute. He did a very good job.
 IV

Notational Conventionso If _C t S a c a t e g o r y , and A an object of C, we write

simply A~C; if A, B e C , the set of morphisms in C of A to B is denoted

by ZA, B).

By a ring we always mean, if not otherwise stated, a com~uta%ive ~ing with

unit.

M. Demazure
Table of C o n t e n t s

CHAPTER I

Schemes and Formal Schemes ............................

CHAPTER II

Group-Schemes and F o r m a l Group-Schemes ................ 21

CHAPTER III

Witt Groups and D i e u d o n n e Modules ..................... 5O

CHAPTER IV

Classification of p - D i v i s i b l e Groups ................... 73

CHAPTER V

p-Adic Cohomology of A b e l i a n Varieties ................ 94

 CHAPTER I

sc~s AND m ~ sc~y~s

I. k-functors

Let k be a r i n g and ~k be the category o f k - r i n g s ( i . e . commutative

a s s o c i a t i v e k - a l g e b r a s with u n i t , or simply couples (R,~) where R i s a r i n g and

~:k-->R a morphism). Actually, for set-theoretical reasons, one should not take

the category of all k-rings, but a smaller one (see D.G. page XXV-XXVI) but we shall

not bother about this point.

A k-functor is by definition a covariant functor from to the category

E of sets; the category of k-functors is denoted by ~E_.

Example. The affine llne ~ is defined by O_k(R) = R, R e ~ .

If ~:R ~S is an arrow of Mk, if X~M~, and if xgX(R), we shall

write xS (or sometimes x) instead of X(~)(x)gX(S); if f:X )Y is an arrow

of MkE, if ReM k and xeX(R), we shall write f(x) instead of f(R)(x)gY(R);

with these notations, the fact that f is a morphism of functors amounts to

f(x) S = fCxs).

The category ~E has projective limits, for example:

a) a final object e is defined by eCR) = {~}, K ~ M k ,

b) if X,Y~_k~, +.he.ro~uct X~ ~s ~ef1.ed b~ (X~Y)(R) ~ X(~) x~(R),

c) if X - -f~ z ~ g Y is a diagram of MkE, the fibre product T = XxY is
Z
defined by T(R) = X(R)Xz(R)Y(R ) = {(x,y)~X(R)~Y(R), f(x) = g(y)}; more generally,

one has (~Xi)(R) = ~im Xi(R),

d) f:X---~y is a monomorphism if and only if f(R):X(R) ..... ) Y(R) is inJective

for each R. We say that X is a subfunctor of Y if X(R) C Y ( R ) and f(R) is

the inclusion, for all R.

Let k'E Mk; as any k'-algebra can be viewed as a k-algebra, there is an

obvious functor %,--@ M k and therefore an obvious functor -k-M

E--~%,E; the

latter is denoted by X > X ~k k'. So, if R is a k'-ring and R[k] the underlying

k-rlng, one has

XOkk'(R ) = X(R[~);

the functor X > X~kk' is called the base-change ' f~nctor or scalar-extension

functor. It commutes with projective limits, hence is left-exact.

For instance ~ ® k k' can be (and will be) identified with %,.

2. Affine k-schemes.

~t A~; the k-f~ctor SPkA (or simply Sp A) is defi~ by

SPkA(R ) = ~(A,R)

SPkA(~ ) -- {~, )~ ~ o V } for q : R ~S;

if f:A > B is an arrow of ~ , then SPkf:SPkB ) SPkA is obviously defined.

So A! > SPkA is a contravariant functor from _~ to RE.

An affine k-scheme is a k-functor isomorphic to a SPkA. For instance

is an affine k-scheme because

SPkk[Z](~) = ~(k[T],R)~Z = Ok(R).

Let X be a k-functor and A a k-ring. We h~ve the very simple and very important

Yoneda biJection

_~_E(SPkA,X ) . ~ X(A) •

to f'SPkA > X is associated ~ = f( idA) E X( A) ; conversely, if ~EX(A) and

~eSPk(A)(R ) = ~ ( A , R ) , we put f(~) = X(~)(~); with our notation, the corres-

pondence bet~en f ~ d ~ is ~imply f(~) = 9(~).

As an example, we take X = SPkB; then X(A) = ~(B,A), and we have a

bijection

it means that A > SPkA is f ~ l ~ faithful, or equivalently that it induces an anti-

equivalenc e between the category of k-rings and the category of affine k-schemes.

This fundamental equivalence can also be looked at in the following way~

Let X he any k-functor; define a function on X to be a morphism f:}[ >O_k , i.e.

a functorial system of maps X(R) > R. The set of these functions, say O(X), has

an obvious k-ring structure: if f, g~0(X), )k~k, then

(f+g)(x) =, f(x) ÷ g(x)

(fg)(x) = f(x)g(x)
(Af)(x) ,= ~fCx)

for any REM k and any xEX(R). If x~X(R) is fixed, then by the very definition

of the k-ring structure of O(X), f~-->f(x) is an element of M_k(O(X),R) = Sp O(X);

we therefore have a canonical morphism

~: X---) Sp O(X) .

It is easily seen that o~ is universal with respect to morphisms of X into affine

k-schemes (any such morphism can be uniquely factorized through ~ ). The definition

of affine k-schemes can be rephrased as: X is an affine k-scheme if and only i_~f
 c~ is an isomorphism. For instance 0(~) is the polynomial algebra k[T] generated

by the identity morphism T:~ >-Ok"

The functor A >SPkA commutes with uroJective limits and base-change:

one has the following obvious isomorphisms:

Sp(A) X Sp(C) Sp(B) ~ Sp(A@CB)

nm sp(~)=sp(~ h)

SPk (A) ~ k k' ~ SPk ( A~kk' ),

(the last one explaining the notation ® for base-chanKe) ; as a consequence, the

full subcategory of affine schemes is stable under projective limits and base-change.

3. Closed and open subfunctors; schemes.

Let X be a k-functor and E be a set of functions on X;EcO(X). We

define two subfunctors V(E) and D(E) of X:

v(E)(~) ~ ~ x ( R ) I f(~) ~ o for all f~E}.

O(~.)(R) , ~xcX(R)lf(x) for f~E, ~enerate the =nit ideal or R}.

~'T--~X is a morphism of k-functors and F ~ ~fo u ~ E } c O ( Y ) , then

u-l(V(E)) - V(F), u-I(D(E)) = D(F) [ i f u:Y---~X is a morphism o f k - f u n c t o r s and Z

is a subfunctor of X, then u-1(Z) is defined as the subfunctor of Y such that

~-'(z)(R) ~ { y ~ ( R ) lu(y) ~z(R)3].

If X is an affine k-scheme, then

I) V(E) i s an a f f i n e k-scheme with O(V(E)) = O(X)/E O(X)

2) if E - If} has only one element, then D(E) is an affine k-scheme with

o(o(~r}) ~ o(x) [r'] ~ o(x)[T]I(Tr-,).

Proof. If X ~ Sp A, and E C A ~ O(X), then for all RC~,

 V(E)(R) ={q~e_Mk(A,R) I~(E) =, O~'M_k(A/EA,R)

D({f})(R) ={~pe _Mk(A,R)I~(f) is invertible}~--~(A~f-'],R) .

Definition. The subfunctor Y of X is said to be closed (resp. 9pen) if for any

usT >X where T is an affine scheme, the subfunctor u-1(Y) of T i_ss

of the form V(E) (resp. D(E)).

For instance, if X is affine, then Y is closed (resp. open) if and

only if it is a V(E) (resp. D(E)). As a corollary, a closed subfunctor of an affine

k-scheme is also an affine k-scheme; this need not be true for open subfunctors:

take X = Sp kKT, T']~ k~ and Y = D({T,T'3). In the functorial setting, the precise

definition of a not-necessarily affine k-scheme is a bit complicated. Let us give

it for the sake of completeness:

Definition. The k-functor X is a scheme if:

I) it is a "local" k-functor: for an_~k-ring R and any "partition of unity"

fi of R( = ~ of elements of R such that ~-Rf i = R), ~iven elements

xi~X(R[~']) sUCh that ~h, images 0_~ X i and xj in X(R[f~i'~']) coincide for

all couples (i,j), then there exist___s o_~nean__ddon_~ on_ee xeX(R) whi__
chmaps on to

the x i.

2) There exists a family (Uj) of open subfunctors with t he followin~ properties:

each Uj is an affine k-functor; fo__~rany field K~ ~,X(K) is the union of the Uj(K).

From this definition follows easily:

ProP osition
,
I) an open or closed subfunctor of a k-scheme is a k-scheme, ......

2) any finite p_~/~i_v__ee limit (e.~. fibre product) of k-schemes is a k-scheme,

3) i_~f X i_.saa k-scheme, then X ~ k k' iss a k'-scheme.

 As an illustration of 1), let AEMk and ECA; then D(E) C Sp A

is a k-scheme, because it is local and covered by the affine k-schemes D({f}),

feE. Also note that the limit of a directed projective system of schemes is not

generally a scheme (although it is in the afflne case, as already seen).

&. Th__.£egeometric point of view.

Let X be a k-functor; we want to define a Eeometric space (topological

space with a sheaf of local rings) IX~ associated to X. First, the underlyinK set

of ~X I is defined as follows: a point of iX I is an eouivalence class of elements of

all X(K) where K runs through the fields of ~k! x~X(K) and X'e X(K') being

eouivalent if there exist two morphisms of ~-k' say K-->L, K'--->L, where L is a

Second, the topology. If Y is a subfunctor of X, then IYI can be

identified with a subset of IXl; we define a subset U of IX~ to be o _ ~ if there

exists an open subfunctor Y of X, such that IYI= U; moreover, such a Y can be

proved to be unique, and we write Y = ~.

Third, the she&f is the associated sheaf to the presheaf of rin~s

u ,,,

As an example, take X = Sp A, A~_M k. Then ISp AI is the usual spectrum

~pec A of A: the points of Spec A are the prime ideals of A; the open sets are

the ID(s)l - { p l s C d , SCA the sheaf is associated to the p esheaf

(One basic theorem asserts that the ring of sections of the sheaf over ID({f3) I is

).

In the general case, for all A~Mk, and all ~eX(A), the Yoneda

morphism Sp A - - ~ X associated to ~ defines a ringed-space-morphism Spec A > IXI

and Ix l can be proved to be the inductive limit of the (non-directed) system of the

Spec A. (D.C. I, ~ ~, n%).

 7

One has then the following comparison theorem (D.G.I, §1,A.A.)

Theorem. X---> IX I induces an eq~valence between the catego~ of k-schemes and the

catego~ of geometric spaces ioca!ly isomorphic to a Spec A, ACM_k.

One can give a quasi-inverse functor: there is a functorial biJection

between X(R) and the set of geometric-space-morphisms from Spec R to IXI, as

follows from the theorem and Yoneda's isomorphism.

By this equivalence, one defines geometric objects associated to the

k-scheme X : the local rings 0v and the residue fields ~(x), x ~ ~Xl; all are

k-rings.

5. Finiteness conditions.

Let k be a field. A k-scheme X is said to be finite if it is affine

and if O(X) is a finite dimensional vector space; if X is finite, then [O(X):k]

is called the rank rk(X) of X. A k-scheme X is lqcally al~braic (algebraic)

if it has a covering (a finite covering) by open subfunctors Xi which are affine

k-schemes such that each 0(~) is a finitely generated k-algebra. If X is an

affine k-scheme, then the following conditions are equivalent:

I) X is al~ebraic, 2) X is locally algebraic, 3) O(X) is a finitely

generated k-algebra (D.G.I, §3,1.7).

It follows from the Normalization lemma that X is finite if and only if

X is algebraic and IX] finite. It follows from the Nullstellensatz that if X is

locally algebraic and ~ @ (one defines ~(R) = ~ for all R, or equivalently

[@[ = ~), then X(K) ~ ~ for some finite extension K of k. Let X be a (locally)

algebraic k-scheme, k a~l ebraically ~ then if U is an open subfunctor of

X, U(k) = ~ implies U = ~. This easily implies that if one views X(k) as the

subspace of IXi whose points are the xclxl such that ' ~ ( x ) == k, the open subsets

of IX[ and the open subsets of X(k) are in a biJective correspondence (by IU[-->U(k)).
It is therefore equivalent to know the k-scheme X, or the k-geometric space X(k)-

the only difference between the X(k),s and Serre,s algebraic spaces lies in that

the latter have no nilpotent elements in their local rings, whereas the former may

have. As we shall see later on, this is an important difference. Serre,s algebraic

spaces correspond to "reduced" algebraic k-schemes (i.e. with no nilpotent elements).

A similar discussion can be made in the case of a general field k; one has to
replace X(k) by the set of closed points of IX1 (by the Nullstellensatz, x~IX~

is closed if and only if ~(x) is a finite extension of k).

6. The four definitions of formal schemes.

From now on, k is assumed to be a field.

We denote by M fkf the full subcategory of M_k consisting of finite

(= finite dimensional) k-rings. A k-formal functor is a covariant functor

F:~k--~E; the category of k-formal functors is denoted by M fkE; this category has

finite projective limits. The inclusion functor M~kf >M_k gives a canonical
A
functor M kE_--~Mf_~E called the completion functor: if XeMkE , then XeHf_~kEE is

defined by ~(R) ~ X(R) for R~Mf__k. The completion-functor is obviously left-exact.

If AeMfk, we denote by Spf k A or Spf A the k-formal-functor

R-.--~k(A,R)~ one has ob~ously S ~ A ~ Spf A, and for ~ y F~k~ a Yoneda

isomorphism ~E(Spf A,F)~ F(A), A ~ . In particular, the functor A >Spf A

is fully-faithful, or, what amounts to the same, the functor X-~, X a finite

k-scheme, is fully faithful. We therefore can view the category of finite k-schemes

as a full subcategory of either ~E or ~E (we shall say: "the completion does

not change the finite k-schemes").

a) By definition, a k-formal-scheme is a k-formal functor which is the limit of

a directed inductive s~stem of finite k-schemes: F is a k-formal-scheme if there

exists a directed projective system (~) of finite k-rings and functorial (in R)

isomorphlsms:

F(R) ~ i ~ ~k(AL.,R)~ ~ Spf (~}(~)

For any k-formal functor G, one has a Yoneda isomorphism

~E(~ Spf(~), G) = llm OCt).

There are three equivalent definitions of k-formal-schemes, all of them

very important:

b) Let A be a profinite k-ring, i.e. a topological k-ring whose topology has

a basis of neighbourhoods of zero consisting of ideals of finite codimension; one

also can say that A is the inverse limit (as a topological ring) of discrete

quotients which are finite k-rings. If R~MfkE, we define Spf (A)(R) as the

set of all continuous homomorphisms of the topological k-ring A to the discrete

k-ring R; if (~) is the family of discrete finite quotients of A defining its

topology, then obviously Spf (A)(R) = i~ Spf (~)(R), and" Spf A is a

k-formal-scheme.

If ~ : A - - ~ B is a morphism of profinite k-rings, then S p f ~ :Spf B > S p f ~ is

obviously defined. We have then the

Theorem. A > Spf A iss an anti___-equivalence of the category P~ off profinite

k-ri_ngswit__~hthe category of k-formal-schemes.

Proo__~f. We first prove that Spf is fully faithful: let A and B be two profinite

k-rings and (~) be the family of all finite discrete quotients of A. We have

isomorphisms

M~_~_(Spf A , ~ f B) = ~
-
Spf B(~) = lira
<__ P__~(B,~)= P_~(B,A).

We new prove that any k-formal-scheme F is isomorphic to a Spf A. By definition

there is a directed projective system (~) of ~k such that F is isomorphic to

lim Spf ~ ; let A be the topological k-ring lim ~ ; we shall prove that A is

a profinite k-ring and that lim Spf ~ S p f A.

Let us fix an i; the images of the transition maps fij:Aj--->~,J ~i,

form a directed decreasing set of sub-k-rings in the finite k-ring Ai; it follows
 10

that there is a j(i)>li such that

fij(t)(Aj(i)) = j~~i Aij;

it implies that, if we replace each Ai by A~ = J|~|i Aij' we change neither the

topological k-ring A, nor the functor lim Spf A i. We can hence suppose that

all transition maps Aj > Ai are surjective. It is now sufficient to prove that

the projections A >~ are surJective; this would imply both our assertions

Let now Ci be the k-vector space dual to ~; the Ci form a directed

inductive system with injective transition maps; call C = li~ Ci; each canonical

map Ci )C is inJective. Let C* be the dual space of C. The dual maps

C* >A i are surjective and form a projective system; they factorize through A

and the projections A ~A i are afortiori surjective. In fact, the canonical

mad C*. ) A i sbiject!ve; if v~C* maps to zero on each Ai; then the linear

form v over C vanishes over each Ci, hence is zero; conversely, if a G A,

then the projection of a on each Ai is a k-linear form on Ci; these linear

forms match together, and define a k-linear form on C, which means that a

belongs to the image of C*

c) A k-cogebra is a k-vector space C together with a k-linear map

/~:C ) C@kC. We say that C is a k-coring if /~ is coassociative, cocommutative,

and has a counit ~ ; let us make these three notions precise.

I) Fk is coassociative if (/k~)}C) o /k= (;C•/k) o ~ , in the following

diagram

,c®A
C "C~C ' >) C @ C ® C ,
&@'c
2) /k is cocommutative if the image of /k consists of symmetric tensors;

equivalently, if ~r o ~ = /k where cr (x~y) -- y~x.

 11

3) A counit ~ to A is a k-linear form E :C ~k such that the two maps

c&~c®c'Ce~ C®k~C

C ~.~ C®C E.@ I C~ k@C~-~C

are IC .

If C is a k-cogebra, then the dual k-vector space C* has an algebra

.
structure defined by <x.y,u~ ~ <x®y, A u ~ ,x,y~C ,u~C. If C is a k-coring,

then C* is a ring.

Conversely, if A is a finite k-algebra, the dual space A* has a

natural cogebra structure, which is a coring structure if A is a ring. (If A is

not finite, the dual space of A@A is not A@A .).

The morphisms of k-~orings are defined in an obvious way, and the k-corings

form a category.

Let A and R be two finite k-rings, and A* the dual k-coring of A.

Linear maps A )R correspond bijectively to elements of the tensor product A @R;

the k-linear maps ~ A * and ~A* extend to R-linear maps A*@R" %(A*®R)@R(A*@R )

and A*~R---)R which also we denote by ~ and ~ . We then have the easy

Lemma. The k-linear map A--~R associated to uaA*@R is ~ zing homomgrohism if

and only if Au = u@ u and ~u = I.

We therefore have a functorial isomorphism

Sp A(R) ~ { u e A * ® R [ ~ u ~ u@u, ~u = 1}.

For any k-coring C, we define the k-formal functor Sp*C by

Sp*C(R) ~ { u ~ C @ R I A u ~ u @ u , ~u ~ 1}. We thus have a covariant functor Sp* from

the category of k-corings to the category of k-formal functors.

 12

Theorem. The functor Sp* is an equivalence between the qategory of k-corings and

th__~ecategory of k-formal-schemes.

Proof. As we have already seen Sp* induces an equivalence between the category of

finite k-corings and the category of finite k-schemes by the formula.

Spf A = Sp*A*, Ae_Mf k.

We have already seen that any k-formal-scheme F is an inductive limit of finite

schemes Spf (Ai) , with surJective transition maps Aj--~; the inductive limit

C = lim
__~ IA~ is naturally endowed with a k-coring structure, and, for any R~Mfk,

we have

Sp*C(Z) =n_~ ~*A~(R) = l_~ spf Ai(Z) = zCR).

The only point that remains to be checked is that any k-corlng is a union of finite

dimensional ones:

Lemma. If C is a k-coring, and E a finite dimensional subvector space of C,

there exists a finite-dimensional subvector space F of C with ECF and

AF c F~F.

We need only prove the lemma for [E:k] ~ I, say E = kx. Let ai be a

k-basis of C and write Z~x = ~--xi@ai; put F = ~-kxi; one has

= (,®~)A(x)= 3--~le(ai)ez, and

~axi®a i = (a® ,)a~-- (,@A)A~ = ~ 5 ® a a i ;

ifAa i = ~'-bij®aj, this gives Ax i = ~-xiebjia F®C, hence/kF C F e C .

Since /k is cocommutative, we have AFCC@F, hence A F C F~F.

If C is a k-coring, let C* be the k-dual space of C with the linear

topology defined by the subspaces of C which are orthogonal to the finite-dimensional

subcorings of C. Then, what we have proved already in b) gives: the k-ring C*

is profinite and
SD*C = S~f C*.
 13

Conversely, we can recover C as the set of continuous linear forms on C*:

if A is a profinite k-ring, write A~ for the sat of continuous linear forms on A,

then

Spf A = Sp*A'.

d) The fourth definition of k-formal schemes is from a purely functorial point

o~vlew:

Theorem. A k-formal functor ~ > E is a k-formal scheme if and only if it is a

left exact functor.

We recall that a left exact functor is one which commutes with finite

projective limits (i.e. which commutes with fibre products and with the final objects).

Any Spf (A), A £ ~ is clearly left exact (this is true in any category, and is the

very definition of finite projective limits) hence also any inductive limit of

Spf (Ai) , Ai~Mfk, i.e. any k-formal-scheme, is left exact.

A proof of the converse can be found in D.G. V, ~ 2,3.1. This fourth

definition will not be used in the sequel.

7. Operations on formal schemes.

A finite ~rojective limit of k-formal-schemes is a k-formal-scheme. For

instance let F! > F~--F 2 be a diagram of k-formal-schemes corresponding to a

diagram A;~--A >A 2 of profinite k-rings; then F I X F g2 is a k-formal scheme

corresponding to the profinite k-ring AI~AA 2 where

A,~AA 2 = lira A, II,®A A2112

where I1 (rasp I2) runs through the open ideals of A! (rasp ~ ) defining its

topology; A ~ A A2 can also be defined as the completed ring of the usual tensor

product A,@A A2 for the topology given by the A,®I 2 + I,®A 2. The description
from the coring point of view is a bit more difficult. Let C; ~I; C f 2 C2 be
 lh

the corresponding coring diagram. Then the k-coring D defining the fibre product

is the kernel of the map from CIOC 2 to C which sends xl@x 2 to

~;(xl ) 62(x2) - ~!(x!) ¢~2(x2); the canonical maps D )C! and D >C 2 are

defined by xl@x2: v x I e2(x 2) and x l ~ x 2 t >~l(x,)x2.

More particularly FIXF2 corresponds to the profinite k-ring AI~A 2

and to the k-coring I~A~.

A
Spf A,xSpf h = spf (A, mA2),

Sp*C, ~ Sp*C2 = Sp*(C,@C2),

(note t h a t the maps C1~C2---~Ci, i =, 1,2j are defined by the counite).

We shall need later the following le~as

Lemma. Let f = Spf ~ = S p * ~ b.~ea morphism of k-formal schemes. Then ( f is _a

monomorphis~ is s u r j e c t i v e ) ~ i_~s~ ) .

C l e a r l y , [ ~ is i n J e c t i v e ) ~ is surJective) ~ . f is a monomorphis~.
Conversely, if f:X >Y is a monomorphism, then (general nonsense) the diagonal

morphism X ~ ~ X X y X is an isomorphism. If ~ C - - - > D is the corresponding coring

morphism, then the following sequence

u v
0 ;C >C~C ~ D

is exact, where u(x) = x@x, ~ x ® y ) = Sc(X ) ~ ( y ) - e c ( y ) ~ ( x ) . I f ~ eEer ~ ,

then ~C(O() ~ ~D(~(o()) = O; it follow~ that for any xGC, one has v(x~o() = O;
hence c®(~erq) cu(C). This implies Ker W ~ O, or [C:k] = ', ~ = O; in the
latter case, one has t 0 = ~ o ED = O, and this implies C = 0 (for instance
because 1" = 0 implies C~ ~ 0).
C

The category of k-formal-schemes has infinite direct sums:

spf Ai Spf N A i ;

sp*c i . sp* ci
 15

A formal scheme F is said to be local if it is isomorphic to a Spf A where A

is a local ring; equivalently, Card F(K) must be I for all fields K~. Any

formal scheme is a direct sum of local formal-schemes: if A = limA/I i is a

profinite k-ring, let ~'~be the set of all open maximal ideals of A; the artinian

k-ring A/Ii is a product of local rings, which are the localized rings (A/Ii)m/i.
i

where m runs through the elements of ~ containing li; since (A/Ii)m = (A/li)~I i

if m D I i and {0} otherwise, we have A/Ii = m~e~l(A/Ii)m; defining ~ as the

limit of the (A/Ii)m, we get

A =

(each Am being local, as a directed projective limit of local rings).

Let k' be an extension of k; we define the b a s e - c h a ~ functor by the

following formulas

(Spf A) @ k k' = Spf(AOkk'),

(sp*c)®kk' = Sp*(C®kk').

If k'/k is finite, then this base-change functor is the obvious one,

defined by (F®kk')(R) = F(R[k]).

If X is a k-scheme, then i%s completion ~ is a k-formal scheme: more

precisely, X is the direct sum of the Spf ~X,x where x runs through the points

of X such that [~(x):M]<oo, and where ~X,x is the completion of ~X,x for

the topology defined by the ideals of finite codimension. If X is a (locally)

algebraic k-scheme, then these x are precisely the closed point of X, and ~X
-- , X

is the completion of ~X,x for the usual adic topology. For instance, if

X = Sp A, where A is a finitely generated k-ring, then ~= ~Spf ~, where m

runs through all maximal ideals of A, and % is the completion of the local ring

Am for the m-adic topology. The functor Y~ > ~ is left exact and commutes with

ba~e-cban~e.
 16

8. Constant and etale schemes.

For the moment, let us drop the assumption that k is a field. Given

a set E. we define the constant scheme ~ to be the direct sum (in the category

of k-schemes)

Ek ~ (SPkk)(E);

equivalently, [ ~ I is the direct sum (Spec k) (E). For any scheme X, we have

canonical bijections

_M~(~.X) • ~.E(SPkk,X)(E) --'~*X(k) (E) E(E,X(k)),

so that EJ > Ek is the right adJoint functor to Xt--~X(k). This implies that

E~-.z k commutes with finite projective limits. If k'e~, one has a canonical

isomorphism

~ Ek®kk' .

If X is a scheme, then M kE(X,~) can be identified with the set of

continuous (i.e. locally constant) maps of IX 1 to the discrete space E.

If E is finite, then ~ is affine and Ok(~) is the k-ring kE.

Let now k be again a field. We define the constant formal-scheme %

as the completion of ~, or equivalently, as the direct sum (Spf k) (E). Then

spf kE, ere kE has the product topoio .

A k-scheme (resp k formal-scheme) is called constant if it is isomorphic

to an ~ (resp%), The completion functor induces an equivalence between the

category of constant k-schemes and the category of constant k-formal schemes.

We define now an etale k-scheme (resp an etale k-formal-scheme) to be a

direct sum of Sp (resp Spf) of finite separable extensions of k. Let ~ be an

algebraic closure of k, and ks the subextension consisting of all separable

elements of ~. Then:
 17

P roRositio n. For a k-scheme X (resp, a k-formal scheme X), th_.eefollowing

conditions are equivalent:

X iss etale, X®kk i~s constant, X®kk s is constant.

This proposition is an easy consequence of the following: if A is a

k-ring, then A is a finite product of finite separable extensions of k if and only

if A® 5 is a finite power of k, or A@kk s a finite power of k s-

Let ~ b e the Galois group of ks/k; it is a profinite topological group.

Let X be an etale k-scheme; then 1"[operates on the set X(k s) and the isotropy

group of any x~X(ks) is open in 11 (one calls X(ks) an-set). The fundamental

theorem of Galois theory is equivalent to:

Proposition. X . ~ X(ks) is ann equivalence between the c a t e _ ~ o f etale k-schemes

and the category of lq-sets.

A
Note also that X~---~X is an equivalence between the categories of etale

k-schemes and etale k-formal schemes.

9. The Frobenius morphism.

We suppose now that the characteristic p of the field k is >0. For

any k-ring A, we denote fA:A- > A the map x~-~xP; we denote by A[f] the

k-ring deduced from A by the scalar restriction fk:k---->k, and A(p) = A®k, fkk

the k-ring obtained by the scalar extension fk"

Then fA.-A--->A[~ is a k-ring morphism, and defines a k-ring morphism

FA:A(P) )A, F A ( x ® A ) = xPA.

If X a k-functor, we put X (p) = X@k, fk , so that

x(P)(R) ~ x(R[f]);
 V8

and we define the Frobenius morphism Fx:X X (p) by

FXCR) X(fR),XCR) > X(P)C~) x¢R[f])

= =

For example, if X ~ SPkA , then X (p) = SPkA(P) and Fx = SPk FA. More generally,

if X is a k-scheme, X (p) is a k-scheme. If k =~p, then X (p) = X, but

FX ~ idx in general. If k' is an extension of k, then (XOkk')(P)= x(P)~kk'

and F x ~ k k , = Fx~kk' (obvious from the definitions).

Analogous definitions can be given for formal-functors and formal-schemes

and the completion functor comutes with these constructions.

Proposition. Let X be a k-formal scheme, o_~ra locally al~ebraic k-scheme; then X

is etale if and only if FX i_ssa monomorphism, or if and only if FX is an iso-

morphism.

Let us give the proof in the case of a locally algebraic k-scheme. We

can replace X by X•j, hence suppose k = ~. If X is constant, then Fx is

an isomorphism. Conversely, suppose Fx is a monomorphism; let U = Sp A be an

algebraic open affine subscheme of X; then FU is a monomorphism and we have to

prove that A is a finite power of k. Let m be a maximal ideal of A; write

A/m2 ~ A/m~)m/m2 and look at the two following maps: the first one is the cano-

nical map u,A >Aim% the second one is v:A ~Alm ) A / m e m l m 2. Trivially

u o FA = v o FA; but by hypothesis FA is an epimorphism of M_k, and this implies

u = v i.e. m/m2 = O. For any maximal ideal m of A, we therefore have m = m 2,

and this in turn implies in a well-known manner that A-~-~kn.

;0. Frobenius map and symmetric products.

Suppose again p ~ O. Let V be a k-vector space, ~ P v the p-fold

tensor power of V, TsPv the subspace of symmetric tensors and sz~Pv >T~V

the symmetrlzatio n operator: s(a,~ ... e ~ ) =~-ac~(;)~ ... e ae_(p), wheree-

runs through the symmetric group ~ p . Let C~v:V(P)---> TsPv be the linear map

sending ~ to~.(aO .. @a).

 19

Lemma. Th__eecomposite ~ V(p) c~V ~ TsPv ~TsPv/s(®Pv) "s bijective.

The proof is an easy exercise in linear algebra.

Define the canonical map Av,TSPv >V (p) by A V o s = O, ~ o ~ V - Id.

If A is a k-ring, then TsPA is a ring and ~A a k-ring homomorphism

(because s(®PA) is an ideal in TsPA by the formula s(uv) = us(v) for u

symmetric). If X = Sp A, we denote Sp(TSPA) by sPx (p-fold sy.maetric power of

X) One has then the following commutative diagram

Xp ' can > spx

x Fx > P)

which gives another definition for FX.

Let now C be a k-coring, and consider the Frobenius morphism

F:Sp*C > Sp*C(p ) (it is clear that (Sp*C)(p) = SP*C(p), where C(p) = C@k, fk ).
There exists a unique coring map Vc:C >C(p) Such that F = Sp*VC. The pth
iterate Z~p:C-->~Pc of /X :C ......>~2C
.. (defined inductively by A 2 - A ,
A 3 ~ (,®/X) o/x:, (A@,) oA, ... ) maps C in T~C, and we have the

~p
Theorem. Vc:C )C (p) is the Composite ma.p C , T~C AC'".#C(p).

Proof. Let A be the (profinite) k-ring C*; then A(P)"(c(P)) * = (C*)(p). I f

a£A, x~C, one has by definition <a@1,V(x)> = GaP,x> where

a®1 e(c*) (p) ~ c* ®k,f k and V(x)~C (p). By definition of the multiplication
of A, one also has <aP,x> = < a ® ... ®a,/kpX> in the duality between @ P A

and ®Pc. But a ® ... ® a is symmetric, and /~p(X) = O(c(y ) + s(v) for

y = AC/Xp(X) and a suitable v ~ @ P c . Since ~ a ® ... ® a , s(v)> = O, this

gives

<a®1, V(x)> = < a ® ... ® a , ~ C ( X ) > ~ C a @ , , y>

 20

and V(x) ~ y ~ ~CAp(X), as claimed above.

Corollary. X ~ Sp~C ~ Spf A is etale if and onlz i~f FA is surJective

(resp. biJective) and if and only if VC is inJective (resp. biJective).

 CHAPTER II

GROUP-SCHEMES AND FORMAL GROUP-SCHEMF~

1. Group-functors.

Let k be a ring. A group law on a k-functor GgMk is a family of

group-laws on all the G(R), R ~ , such that each functoriallty map G(R) ) G(S)

is a homomorphism. Equivalently, a group law on G is a morphism

~ :Gx G ----)G

such that

~(R):G(R) ~ G(R)' >G(R)

is a group law for all R; this condition is equivalent to the axioms (Ass),

(Un), (Inv),

(Ass) Th__~et_.~_~morphisms GO (~XIG) an__~d V~o (IGX~) from GxGXG t2 G are

equal.

(Un) There exists an element ;£G(k) (or equivalently a morphism e:Sp k . >G)

such that ~ o (IGX e) and '~,.o (eXIG) ar__~eequal t2 1G.

(Inv) There exists a morphism o-:G ) G such that the two morphisms

C (IG'Cr)~GXG ~>G and G (°-'IG) G x G ~G ar_~eequ.al t_q IG.

We are principally interested in commutative group laws, i.e. such that G(R) is

commutative for all R, i.e.

(Corn) If ~ : G ~ G - - - ~ G x G is the symmetry, then ~ o ~ = q£.

A k-r o ~ f u n c t o r is a pair (G, ~) where G is a k-functor and

a group-law on G. The k-group functors form a category, a homomorphism f:G--~H

hein~ a mornhi,~m such that f(R):G(R) ~ H(R) is a ~roun-homomorDhism for each R,

 22

or equivalently such that (fxf) o ~ G = A H o f. The category of k-group-

functors has projective limits. For instance:

__ The final object ek = Sp k has a unique group law.

-- If G ~H ~ K is a diagram of ~k' the fibre product O x HK has an

obvious group law, for which it is the fibre product in

-- In particular, if f:G----,H is a homomorphism, the kernel Ker f of f is

the sub-functor Gx H ek of G; e qulvale ntly

(Ker f)(R) = Ker(f(R):G(R) ~H(R)).

The homomorphism f is a monomorphism if and only if K e r f = ek.

__ The definition of a subgroup functor is clear.

A k-group-scheme or k-group is a k-group functor whose underlying k-functor is a

scheme.

The base-change functor ~k---* ~k'' for k'e M k is obviously defined.

2. Constant and etale k-groups.

The functor E. >~ from sets to k-schemes commutes with products

and final objects; it follows that ~ has a natural group-law if E is a group.

Such a k-group is called a constant k-~roup. Suppose k is a field and ]I the

Galois group of ks/k; the functor X *X(ks) from etale k-schemes to ~-sets

is an equivalence (1.8); it follows then from the definition of a k-group, and the

fact that a product of etale schemes is also etale:

Proposition. The functor X---~X(ks) is an equivalence between the category of

etale k-groups (resp. commutative etale k-groups ) and the category of R-groups

(resp. commutative ~-groups ~ Galois modules over ~).

Moreover, X is an etale k-group if and only if X~kk s is a constant k-group.

 2~

3. Affine k-groups.

Let G ~ SPkA be an affine k-scheme. The morphisms ~:GX G--~ G

are the SPk/k where ~ :A ~ A®kA is a k-ring morphism. Moreover ~ satis-

fies Ass, Com, Un if and only if /k is coassociative, cocommutative, has a

counit. The condition (Inv) is equivalent to (Coinv): there exists o=:A---->A

such that the ~ ~_~

I~o- product
A~ - ~ A@A- >A~A ~A

A A__~ A • A- cr O +-I ; A @ A product A

are the compos~, map A-~ k-----~.

Such a ~r is called an involutio______nn,or ~ . If one identifies A with

O(G), A @ A with O(GXG), then

(Af)(x,y) = f(xy), a-fCx) = fCx-~), ~f = f ( , ) ,

for x,y~Q(R), S¢~.

We shall be interested in commutative groups. Let us define a k-biting

A as a k-module, together with a structure of k-ring and a structure of k-coring,

which are compatible in either of the two equivalent following senses:

_ _ t h e product A~ A~A is a k-coring morphism.

- - t h e coproduct A---~A~A is a k-ring morphism.

Then, the category of commutative affine k-groups is antiequivalent to the category

of k-birings with antipodism by G~ > O(G) and A: ~Sp A (the morphisms of

birings are defined in the obvious way).

 2~

A very useful remark is the following: let G be an affine k-group and

A = O(G) fA ~ t h e n CA, = for any

I) ~n the group G(A@A) ~ ~ ( A , A @ A ) , ~ A is the product of the two canonical

maps i1:a~----~1@a and i2:a~--@a~1 )

2) in the group G(A) = ~(A,A),o- A is the inverse of IA)

3) ~A is the identity of G(k) = ~(A,k).

These facts are trivial: for instance I) says that if H is a group, the map

(x,y) >xy is the product of (x,y) ....~ x and (x,y). ~y.

Example I. The additive ~ ~k is defined as follows: ~k(R) is the

additive group of R; then, by the above remarks:

(T is the identity ~ k - - - ~ ) / k T = T@I + I@T, O'T = - T, ET = O.

Example 2. The multiplicative group ~ k is defined as follows: ~k(R) is the

multiplicative group of invertible elements of R; hence

(T:~k---~O k is the inclusion) ) A T = T~T,o-T = T-I , ET ~ I.

n
~ . Let n~1 be an integer. We define a group homomorphlsm ~-k--*~-k

by x! )xn. The kernel of this homomorphlsm is denoted by n~k" Hence

0(n~_ k) = k[T]/Tn-1,

with the same formulas as above.

 25

Note that, if k is a field and n is not 0 in k, n ~ k is etal___ee (because

Tn- ; is a separable polynomial) and n~k(ks) is the Galois module of nth

roots of unity,

~a~__a~_~. Let k be a field with characteristic p ~ O. One defines p r ~ k

as the kernel of the homomorphism x ~ - @ x pr of ~ k in itself. Hence

r
pr_k(R) = {x a, . o},

O(prmk) =, k[T]/Tpr.

Note that pr~k(K) : {0} for any fie,!,d K.

!
Remark that ~ k ~ k k = ~k" ~ k ~ k k' ~ ~k' " ' "

The remarks we made about the construction of/~, E can be generalized

in the following way. Let H be any k-group functor, and G = SPkA be an affine

k-group, Let f~Mk_E(O,H)CZH(A); consider the three maps i! , z"2, /~ :A .~- A @ A .

Then:

Lem~a. The element f EH(A) is a Rroup h omomorphism fro._mm 0 t~o H if and only

if in the r o ~ H(A@A), one has/~(f) = i;(f)i2(f ). Because, if H(A@A) is

identified with _~E(GxG,H) , then ~ (f), iT(f) and 12(f) map (x,y) to

f(xy), f(x), f(y) respectively.

 26

As for the latter, remark that the lemma gives: x ~ A = ~E(O,Ok ) is a homomorphism

from G to ~ k if and only if ~ x ~ x@x, and x is invertible. But this

implies 8x = I (because a group homomorphism sends ; to ;); conversely, if

Z~x = x®x and Ex = T, then by (Coinv) xo-(x) = e x = I.

O k(O,n ) ,- xcA, xn :. = x®x, ;}.

A. k-formal-groups, Cartier duality.

Suppose now that k is a field. The definitions of n°1 can be

carried mutatis mutandis to k-formal functors. A k-formal ~ is a k-formal-

group-functor whose underlying k-formal-functor is a k-formal-scheme. For k-formal

o
groups, we can repeat n 3, replacing tensor products, by completed tensor

products: the coproduct maps A to A ~ A, ... If G is a k-group, then ~ has

a natural structure of a k-formal group. For instance, G--->~ is an equivalence

between constant (resp. etale, resp. finite) k-groups and constant (resp. etale,

resp. finite) k-formal groups.

It is more interesting to look at formal-groups from the point of view of

k-corings. Let G = Sp*C be a k-formal-scheme; to give a morphism ~ : G ×G > G

is equivalent to give a k-coring map C®C )C i.e. an algebra structure on C

compatible with the coring structure; moreover, -n~ is a group law (resp. a commu-

tative group law) if and only if this algebra structure is associative, has a unit

element and an antipodism (same axiom as (Coinv)) (resp. and is commutative). In

particular, C ) Sp~C is an equivalence between k-birings with antipodism and

commutative k-formal-groups. It follows that Sp C > Sp*C is an antiequivalence

between commutative affine k-groups and commutative k-formal-groups. This can also

be explained as follows:
 27

For any commutative k-group-functor G, we define the Cartier dual of

G as the commutative k-group-functor D(G) such that, for Re Mk,

0(o)(R) ~ ~(a@kR ,~),

if G and H are two commutative k-group-functors, then it is equivalent either

to give a homomorphism G ~>D(H), or a homomorphi~m H >D(G), or a "bilinear"

morphism GxH- ,/A_k. In particular, there is canonical bidual!ty homomorphism

C~G:G ~ D(D(G)).

If k'e~, then D ( G ® k k ' ) = D(G)@kk' , and O(G®kk, = ~(G~k k'.

Theorem I) Iff G is an affine commutative k-~roup, D(G) is a commutative k-formal

group. Mo_re precisely, i_~f G = Sp A, where A i~s _a k-birin~ wlth antipodism,

then D(~G = Sp*A. The functor G-->D~) is a_nnantiequivalence between affine

commutative k - r ~ and commutative k-formal-~roups.

2) If G is a finite commutative k-group, then D(G) also is; c~G is

an isomorphism, and G--> D(G) induces a duality in the category of finite com-

mutative ~roups. Moreover rk(G) = rk(D(G)).

Let G = Sp A, where A ~ ~ k-b~ing with involution. Then, for R e M _ ~

D~)(R) = ~ ( G @ k R , ~ R ) = {xeA@kR , ~x = x®x, £x = I} = Sp*A(R);

to prove I), it remains only to show that the multiplication in A giving the

group structure of D(G) is the given one; this verification is straightforward.

The proof of 2) is similar.

Zxa~les ,) D~/nZ) k) = ~t~k and conversely (exercise).

 28

2) (Charac (k) = p ~ 0) There is a canonical bilinear morphism

f|p~ k x p ~ k - - * ~ k

given by f(x,y) = exp (xy) = I + xy ÷ ... + (xy)p-1~p_I). ' . It defines an

isomorphism D(pO~_k)"Vp~_k.

A /k
3) D(pk) : ' ~ k ' hence D(pk) ='~k (exercise).

5. The Frobenius and the Verschiebung morphisms.

Suppose charac (k) = p ~ O. The functors G - @ G (p) and the morphism

FG:G > G (p) commute with products. This implies that, if G is a k-group-

functor, then G (p) has a natural structure of a k-group-functor, and FG is a

homomorphism. The same is true for k-formal-group-functors.

We define G(pn) by G(pn) = (G(pn-I ))(p) , and FG,G '>G(pn) by F~-F(p)O

n-1
FG.

Let O be a commutative affine k-group. We have D(G(p)) = D(G) (p). By

Cartier duality, there is therefore a unique homomorphism (the Verschiebun~ morphism)

vG,o(P) , o
/k /k
such that D(VG) =F~(G) . If G-SpA, then D(G) ~ Sp*A, and we see that

vo ~ s p v A (vA has been defined in I, n°tO).

In the same way, we define the Verschiebung homomorphism for commutative

k-formal groups. One defines also ~ . G (pn) > G in the same way as ~G"

If f:G >H is an homomorphism of commutative affine k-groups (or

k-formal groups), then the following diagram is clearly commutative:

 29

a(p) vG ~G
FQ
G(P)

f(P)[
H(p) vH ~(P)
~H

Proposition. If G ~ an affin.____epommutativ~ k-~rouo (resp. a commutative k-formal

~roup), then

VG o FG = p. idG, FG o VG = p. ido(p).

Equivalently, VG(FG(X)) = px, FG(VG(X)) = px (additive notation).

It is sufficient to prove this for the affine case, because the formal

case follows by Cartier duality. Moreover, the first formula (for any G) implies

the second one: by the functoriality of F and V, one has a commutative diagram,

o< vQ o(p)
FC!( IFG(p)
p)~ Vo(P) o(p2)

and FG o VG :- VG(p) o F ( p ) .

To prove vG o FG = p idG, we use I, n°10. One has a commutative diagram

TsPA ; *.PA
 3O

or

Sp TsP< Gp

/
G(p>
I/ FG G ,

with 6(g) = (g .... ,g), and ~p(g1...gp) = gl + "" + gP" Then

% o % = < p ~ ~. p i d G.

Remark. The above diagram gives a direct definition of VG.

Examples. V:~k-----~k is the identity, V:_C~k----,c~_k is zero. This follows

from the facts that F is an epimorphism for ~ k and~k and that

p id~k = F ~ k , p id~k = O.

6. The catego~ of affine k-groups.

Recall that k is supposed to be a field. Let ~ be the category of

all affine commutative k-groups.

Theorem I. (Grothendieck): The category AC k i~s abelian.

a) ~ is an additive category: Clear.

b) Any morphism f:G ,H of ~k has a kernel: one has

Ker f = G x H e ,O(Ker f) = O(G)/m(H)O(G)

 31

(m(H) = Ker EH:O(H) >k). Remark that O(G) > O(Eer f) is surJective.

c) Any morphism f:G .....~...H. of ~ has a cokernel: One takes Coker f such

that

O(Coker f) = O(H) G = {leO(H), f(g+h) = f(h) Vg~G(R), hell(R)}

:: {leo(H), (1®o(f))&H(f) f®,}. :

Remark that O(Coker f) ) O(H) is in~ective.

d) There is only one thing more to prove, and this is the fundamental fact,

that ar~monomorphism is a kernel, and any epimorphism is a cokernel. More

precisely

Theorem 2. Let f:G >H b~e ~ morphlsm of ACk.

I) The following conditions ar__eeequivalent: f is a monomo h ~ , O(f) is

sur~ective (i.e. O is a closed subgroup of H), f is a kernel.

2) The following conditions are equivalent: f is a_nnepimorphism, O(f) is

inject!re, O(f):O(H) >O(G) makes O(G) _a faithfuil,y flat O(H)-module,

O(f) is a cokernel.

For a proof see D.G. III, 3.7.&. The main point is (f mono) >

(f kernel) or equivalently (f mono) ~, (f = Ker(coker f)).

Corollary. I. If
__ k' is an extension of k, then=, G: ~ G @ kk ! is an exact

functor.

Clears It respects kernels snd cokernels.

Corollary 2. Let 0 )K ...~.....G >H >0 be an exact sequence, then the

O(G)- algebra O(G) e^(H)O(G)u is isomorphic to O(O) e O(K).

 32

Clear: The morphism (g,k): ;(g,gk) of GxK )G~ G is an isomorphism.

H

Corollary 3. If 0 > K' ~ G ~H---~ is a exact seouence with K

(resp. finite of rank r); then O(G) iss a finitely Rresented O(H)-ring

(resp. ~ finitely generated projective O(H)-module of rank r).

Because it becomes so after the faithfully flat scalar-extension

O(H)---~O(G) (Corollary 2).

Corollary h. If O---~K ~ G ..>..H - - - ~ O is an exact sequence, then G

i_ssalgebraic (resp. finite) if and 9n~y if H and K are. In the finite case,

one has rk(G) = rk(g).rk(H).

If O(G) is finitely generated or finite, so is the subalgebra O(H)

and the quotient O(K). The converse and the last assertion follow from corollary 3.

Corollary 5. If f:G---~H is an epimorphiem (resp. and if K e r f is _algebraic,

resp. finite) and if R~K , and hCH(R), there exists an R-ring S faithfully

flat (resp. an__~dfinitely presented, resp. finite and projective) and a gee(s)
such that f(g) = h S

Clear from Corollary h: h is given as a map O(H) > R; take s = O(a)~O(M)R-

Corollary 6. If f:G > H is an epimorphism with Ker f algebraic, if Le~

is a field, and hC H(L), there exists a finite extension L' of L and a

geG(L') with f ( g ) = hL,.

Follows from corollary 5 by the Nullstellensatz.

Remark. If f is an epimorphism (without any hypothesis on Ker f), then f(L)

is surJective for any algebraicall.y closed field L (D.G. III, 3.7.6).

By Cartier Duality the category of commutative k-formal-groups also is

abelian, and Spf ~ is a monomorphism (resp. an epimorphism) if and only if ~ is

surJective (resp. inJective).

 33

Theorem 3. a) The abelian category AC k satisfies the axiom (AB 5*): it has

directed DrojectiTe limits, an_~d~ directed projective limit of epimorphiems i_ss

an epimorphism.

b) The artinia B objects of AC k are the alKebraic r o ~ . Any o_~ect of

ACk i~s the directed projecti~ limit of its al~ebraic quotients ,.

a) is clear from Th.2: one has lim

<--- SPCPi = Sp li~qo i and a directed

inductive limit of inJective maps is injective.

b) see D.G. II, 2.3.7.

By Cartier duality, the dual statements hold for the category of com-

mutative k-formal-groups.

From now on we shall mainly speak about commutati~ groups. We say

Kroup instead of commutative ~rou~ unless otherwise stated~ From now on also,

k i_ssa field, p denotes the characteristic of k, and ~= Gal(ks/k). Our

main interest will be the case p ~ O. As we shall see, the case p = O is

rather trivial.

7. Etale and connected formal-groups.

We already defined and studied etale affine (resp. formal) groups.

They are equivalent to finite (resp. all) Galois modules by

E,, >(~®k ks)(ks) ~ K/k~-J~ep.

E(K)"
finite

If p ~ O, then G is etale iff Ker FG = e, and this implies that F is an

isomorphism (I,9). It follows that subgroups, quotients and extensions (direct

limits in the formal case) of etale groups also are etale. The same statement

is true if p = O.
 3~

Recall, that the formal-group G = Spf A is local (We shall also say

connectedl if A is local or equivalently if G(K) = ~0} for any field K. A

morphism from a connected group to an etale group is zero.

Pr0position. Let G be a formal-group.

a) There is an exact sequence (uniqu e ~ t o isomorphism)

0 >C, ° >0 >~o(O)

..... ,o

where, G ° i_ssconnected, and ~o(G) etale. If Re~ and n is the nilradical

of Z then G°(R)= Ker(G(R) • G(R/n)). If p ~ O, then G° is the limit of

the
n
Ker(FG:G
)
) G (pn , n>sO. If k--~k' is an extension then (G®kk')° = G°~kk' ,

~ o ( G ® k k') = ~o(G)®k k'.

b) If k is perfect, there i s a ~niqu~ isomorphism G = G~Ko(G).

Proof. Write G = Spf A : I[Spf Am. Let A° be the local factor ~ cortes-

ponding to the ideal m O = Ker( E :A---~ k). Call G ° = Spf A°; by construction,

G°(R) = Ker(G(R)---~G(R/n)) for RgM_~fk; it follows that G° is a subgroup of G.

If k---~k' is an extension, then A®kk' is local, because the residue field

of A° is k; it follows that ( G ~ k t )o = Go ~ k i. S uppos e p ~ O, then

~er ~G ~ Spf A/m! pn}, where mo~pn} ~s the close~ ideal of A generated by the

x pn, Xemo; hence U er = pf( Ai4Pn ) = Ao = oo. prove a), it

only remains to show that G/G O is e ta!e.

Remark first that G is etale if and only if G ° = e: replacing k

by ~ we can suppose k to be algebraically closed; if G° = e then A ° = k;

but then all the Am are isomorphic (by translation); hence A ~'--kE and G is

etale. To prove that G/G ° is etale is therefore equivalent to prove (G/G°) O = e;

if H is the inverse image of (G/G°) O in G, then H is an extension of two

connected groups; this implies that H is connected (for any field K in Mfk
 35

then

o---->a°(~) >~(K) ~(GIo°)(K)

is an exact sequence, hence H(K) = {0}) hence HC_G ° i.e. H = G° and (O/G°)°= e.

Suppose now k is perfect. Let km be the residue field of Am , and

B =~. Then Spf B is etale and is a subgroup of G (because B is quotient

hiring of A); put G e = Spf B, Then (G~j) e = Ge®~ as is readily checked,

k
and G is the product of G° and Ge, because this becomes true by going to ~.

An affine group O is said to be infinitesimal if it is finite and local,

equivalently, if G is algebraic and G(~) = e. By the preceding proposition, we

see that a finite group is an extension of an etale group by an infinitesimal group

and that this extension splits if k is perfect.

Definition. A (not-necessarily commutative) connected formal grqu~ O = Spf A is

said to be of finite type if A is noetherian; the dimension of G i_ssb~ dell-

nltion the Krull dimension of A.

Let m be the maximal ideal of A; it is well known that A is

noetherian if and only if [m/m2'k] < + oo, and that dim G 4[m/m2:k].

Lemma (p ~ 0). A connected formal ~roup G is of finite t ~ e if and onl~ if

Ker F is finite. If G is of finite type, then Eer ~ is finite for all n.

G

If Ker % is finite, then [A/m {p} :k] ~< co, hence [m/J:k]< + co.

Conversely, if m/m 2 is generated by the classes of X I ,... ,~, then A is a

quotient of k[[X,,...,~]], and A/m ~ n } is a quotient of the finite k-ring

k [IX!,.. ,X~ ] / (Xl ,... ,Xn),{pn} '

 ~6

It follows that if p ~ 0 a connected formal group of finite type is an

inductive limit of finite groups (G = lim) Ker ~G).

If G is an algebraic group-scheme, then the "connected completion"

~o of G is of finite type:

8. Mu!tiplieati~ affine groups.

Lemma. L_~ G b ~ a k-roF~R_~>-functor. Then the followin~g conditions are equivalent:

(i) G is the Cartier dual of a constant ~ .

(il) G is an affine k-group and the k - r i ~ O(G) i_~sgenera%edbythe characters

of G (i.e. homomorphisms from G to ~_k),

If G ~ o(Dk), then G(R) = G~rR(pR,~R) = G(p,R~) = _~(k [p],R),

hence O - Sp k[r], k[V ] is the algebra of the group F (note' that

ZiT= T®7, a~'= 1, ~7- ~-I , YCr), and each "/el" c k[[~]: O(O) is a character

of G.

Conversely, if G is affine and O(G) generated by characters, let r

be the group of all characters of G; then the canonical map k[F]--~O(G) is

surjective. But it is always inJective (Dedekind's lemma on linear independence

of characters), hence k[~] ----O(G).

Such a group is called diagonslizab!e.

Theorem Let G be a k - ~ . Then th___eefollowing conditions are equivalent:

 37

(i) G~kk s i~diagonalizable.

(ii) G~ K is dia~onalizable for a field K~.

k --

(iii) G is the Cartier dual of an etale k-~roup.

(iv) ~(G) is an etale k-formal ~roup.

(v) G__rk(G,~k) = O.

(Vl) (If p ~ 0), VG:G(P) > G is an ~ .

(vii) (If p ~ 0), VG:G(P)-~G is an isomorphism.

The implications (i)~(iv)C--~(vii)-~---~.(vi) are clear.

Proof of (v)< >(iv). We know that ~(G, ~k) is the set of primitive elements

of o(a); let A = 0(0) and let A' be the ring of ~(G) (i.e. the topological
dual of the coring A). By duality, a primitive element of A corresponds to an

algebra morphism

A' ~. k[t]zt 2

compatible with the augmentations of A' and k[t]/t 2. All primitive elements

are zero if and only if A '° has no quotients fsomorphic to k[t]/t2, which

means that A '° ~ k, i.e. D(G) ° = e, i.e. D(G) etale.

End of the proof. If k' is an extension of k, then condition (v) for G is

equivalent to condition (v) for G~k'. This implies the equivalence of all

conditions except (iii). It is clear that (iii) ~ ( i ) (definition); conversely,

A
if D(G) is etale, then let E be the etale k-group such that ~ = ~(G); we

claim that D(E)~G. This is easy if k = ks, because E is constant; the

~eneral case is proved by going to ks (see D.G, IV, 1.3.2).

 38

Such a group is called multiolicative; the multiplicative groups cor-

respond by duality to etale formal groups; they form a thick subcategory ( = stable

by subgroups, quotients, extensions) stable for lim of ACk, called AC~, and

anti-eQuivalent to the category of Galois-modules: to G C A C ~ corresponds the

Galois-module X(G) =~(G@kks)(ks) ~ Gr__ks(G®kks,/~.ks)°

A
Remark. If E is an etale k-group, then D(E) is multiplicative and D(D(E)) = E;

in f a c t , one already has D(D(E)) = E.[D.G., loc. c i t ~ I t implies t h a t the a n t i -

equivalence bet~men multiplicative groups and etale groups can also be given

(without speaking about formal-groups at all) by E )D(E), G--*D(G).

9. Unipotent affine groups. Decomposition of affine groups.

Theorem. Let G be an affine k-freuD. Th_~efollowing conditions are equivalent.

(i) ~(G) is a connected formal grou p .

(ii) ~ multiplicative subgroup of G is zero.

(iii) For any subgroup H of G, H ~ O, we have Gr~(H,~k) ~ O.

(iv) Any algebraic quotient of G is an extension of subgroups of ~k"

(v) (Lf p ~ 0), n l m v~ = e.

The equivalence of (i) and (ii) is clear (the formal group H is con-

nected, iff Vro(H) = e, i.e. iff it has no etale quotients). The equivalence of

(ii) and (iii) follows from the theorem of n°8. The equivalence of (iii) and (iv)

is clear because algebraic groups are artinian. Suppose p ~ O. If G satisfies

(iv), then for any algebraic quotient H of G, one has ~H = O for large n

(recall that V ~ k = 0). It follows that 6~Im ~G has no algebraic quotients,

hence is e. Conversely, if (v) is true for G, G cannot contain a non-zero

multiplicative subgroup H, for ~H:H (pn) ~. H is an epimorphism for all n.

 39

Such a group is called unipotent. The unipotent groups correspond by

duality to connected formal groups. They form a thick subcategory, stable for

~, of A__C
k, called AC~.

By duality, the theorem of n°7 gives:

Theore~ An affine group is i~na unique way an extension of a unipgtent group

by a multiplicative group. This extension splits if k is perfect.

In particular, if k is perfect, any finite group is uniquely the product

of four subgroups which are respectively etale multiplicative, etale unipotent,

infinitesimal multiplicative and infinitesimal unipotent. Therefore the category

~k of finite (commutative) k-groups splits as a product of four subcategories,

called Fe____~,Fe~, Fimk, Fluk. The categories Fe~ and Fimk are dual to each

other, the categories Femk and FiUk are autodual.

Proposition I) Let p = O. Then ~k = Fe~: ar~K finite (co~utative) k-r~

is etale and multiplicative.

2) Let p ~ 0 and k h~e al~ebraically closed. Any (commutative) finite

. . . . .of
k-group is an extension of copies . p~_k,p~ k _and
_ (Zlr ~k' r ~ .

Proof of I). By duality, it suffice to prove that any finite unipotent group is

zero. Such a group is a product of an etale unipotent group and an infinitesimal

unipotent group; by the first theorem, these two groups are extensions respectively

of etale subgroups of ~--k and infinitesimal subgrlps of ~-k" Any etale subgroup

of ~ k must be zero, because ~k(~) = k has no finite subgroups; an infinitesimal

subgroup of ~ k is of the form Sp k[T] / ~ where n must be such that

/k~C_(Tn)~k[T]+ k[T]~(Tn), this means (T + T') n - ~ T n + ~ T 'n and implies

n= I.

Proof of 2). Let G C F k, If G is etale, then G -- ~ k where ~ is a finite

group; but ~ is an extension of groups ~ / r ~, r prime, and G is an extension

 ~0

of ( ~ / r ~ ) k. If G is infinitesimal and multiplicative, then G = D(~k),

where ~ is finite and G r( C,k *) = O; this implies ~ is p-torsion, and G is

an extension of copies of D((~/P~)k) = p/&k" If G is infinitesimal and

unipotent, then G is an extension of infinitesimal subgroups of ~k" These

are the ro(_k, because (T+T')n = ~ T n + ~ T 'n implies n = pr; but pr~k
P
is a p-fold extension of p ~ k (remark that rC~_k/pC~_k= pr_1~k ).
P

Corollary. If m i_~s~ prime, and G a finite (commutative.) k-group then

~ = 0 fo__~rlarge o< if and onl? if rk(G) !~ ~ power of m.

It follows from the multiplicativity of the rank, the fact that

r k ( G @ k ) = rk(G) and the obvious formulas:
k

rkCCZ/rl)k) = r, rkCpC~_k) = rk(p/~k) = p.

length (O~ k k)
In particular, if [ ~ = O, then rk(a) = p , where

length (G) is the length of a Jordan-Holder series of G.

10. Smooth formal-~roups.

A (not-necessarily commutative) connected formal group G = Spf A is

said to be smooth if A is a power-series algebra k [[Xl,...,~]]. In that case,

the coproduct /k :A > A ~A is given by a set of formal power series.

~(X,Y) ~ (~i(Xl,...,Xn, yl,...,yn)), i - I,..,n

and the axioms (Ass) and (Un) give

(Ass)~(x,~(y,z)) = ~(~(x,y),z)
(Us) ~(O,Y) = ~(X,O) = 0
 hl

It is easily proved, using the implicit function theorem, that the existence of an

antipodism is a consequence of (Ass) and (Un). The axiom (Gem) can be written.

(tom) ~(X,Y) = ~(y,x)

Such a set{~i~ is a formal-group-law in the sense of Dieudonn6.

Theorem. Let G = Spf A be a (not-necessarily commutative) connected fore~l group

o_.ff finite type.

I) If p = O, then G is smooth.

2) If p ~ O, th__~efo!lowing conditions are equivalent:

a) G is smooth,

b) A ~ k p-! i_s reduced.

k

c) FGIG----mG(P) i ssanepimorphism.

Remark first that in 2) we have a):::@b); moreover c) is equi-

valent to FA:A(P) ,A being inJective, or to A (p) ~- A®kkP-; being reduced.

-I
We then have to prove that if, either p ~ O, or p ~ 0 and A®kkP is reduced,

Let first m be Ker(E :A--->k) and ~:m/m 2 ~k be a linear form. We

claim that there exists a continuous k-derlvation D o~f A such that for agm,

once ha__~s e D(a) = ~(a mod 2 ) . Define f i r s t ~(a) = $((a- £a) mod m2); then
$(ab) = e(a) g(b) ÷ e(b) $(a); put D = (,~) on: if A n = ~ - a i ~ b i , then

Da = ~ a i ~ b i . One has eDa = ZE(ai) ~(bi) = ~(~-g(ai)bi) = ~a; i t remains

to show that D is a derivation:

D(ab). (,®6)A(ab) = ( ! ® ~ ) ( A a n b ) ~ ( , ® e ) A a . ( , e , ~ ) Ab
÷ (I ~ ) / X b , (1~)Aa = aDb + bDa,
 L2

Let now ~i be elements of m such that their classes modulo m2 form

a basis of m/m2. The canonical map

f,~f[X,,...,,n]] > A, f(Xi): ~'i

is surjective. Suppose it is not inJective. Let ~ e K e r f, ~ O, with minimal

valuation; certainlyl9 ( ~ ) > 0 (because ~ (0) = 8f(~) = 0). By the above

remark, there exists continuous derivations Di of A with Di(~j) ~- ~ij rood m.

Clearly 0 - Dif(~ ) = Z f ( ~ ) D i ( ~ j ) . But the matrix (Di(~j)) is congruent

rood m to the identity matrix, hence is iniei~ible. It follows that ~)~ - O.

~5
If p -- O, then ~ must be O, and f is injective. If p ~ O, then

there exists ~,~k'lP[[~,...~]] ~th 4>= .'P~ extend . to

f',k 'jp [[.,,..,Xn]]--+A-/JP, then ,'(,,)P :, f(<I>) : 0 ~°caus. A~ k I/P

is reduced, this implies fi(%V ) ~ O. But ~ was supposed of minimal valuation,

hence ~ = 0 (if not, decompose kv as a sum ~-Aik~i, A i e k I/p, kvi~Ker f,

~ i ~ O, and note that l~(~)~inf ~(kvi)) and ~ = O.

q.e.d.

The preceding theorem can be strengthened:

I) (Cartier). If p = O, and G = Sp*C is a connected (not-necessarily com-

mutative) formal-group, then C is the universal enveloping al~ebra of the Lie

algebra ~ of G. This implies that the category of all connected formal-groups

is equivalent to the category of all Lie algebras over k. By the Poincare'-

Birkhoff-Witt theorem, this also implies that, if ~ is finite dimensional, then

G is smooth. Moreover, if G is commutative, then ~ is ahelianphence

G ~(~o)(I) ; by duality, any unipotent (commutative) k-group is a power of the

additive group.
 43

2) (Dieudonne/-Cartier-Gabriel). Tf p ~ O, k is perfect, G is any (not-

necessarily commutative) connected formal group of finite type, H a subgroup,

and G/H = Spf A (the quotient which has not been defined in these lectures),
r! r~
then A is of the form k ~XI""'~ [YI''"'Yd]/(YT ''''' YPd )° This applies

for instance to A = ~ G an algebraic k-group.

£2 ,e'

Corollary. Suppose p ~ O, and let G be a connected formal ~roup o_fffinite

type.

I) If k is perfect, there exists a unique exact sequence of connected groups

0 : Gre d , G---*O/Gre d ~ 0,

with Gre d smooth, and G/Gre d infinitesimal ( = finite).

2) For larg e r, th___eegroup G/Ker F~ = Im(O ) G (pr)) is smooth.

Proof I) The uniqueness is clear, because any homomorphism from a smooth group

to an infinitesimal group is zero (look at the algebras). Let G = Spf A, and

G e d = Spf Ared, where Ared ~ A/n is the quotient of A by its nilideal.

Because Ared@ k Ared is reduced (see the appendix, n ° 12),

Lt~A~n + n ~A

and Gre d is a subgroup of G, smooth by the theorem. Moreover G/Gre d = Spf B,

where B = {xeA, A x - x ~ ! ~ A Q n i. If x~B, £(x) = O, then

x = ~! (~x - x~!)en. It implies B ~ k + n, and B is artinian, hence

finite.
 hA

2) It is clear that H : ol~ is smooth if and only if H~k~ is. Replacing

k by k, we can suppose k perfect and apply I). There exist an i with

Fi(C/Gre d) : Oi but ?(Ore d) = G(pi)

red because Gre d is smooth. Hence

?G = P(Gred) = G(pi)
red and zig is smooth.

Corollary. Let G be a connected formal group of finite type, an_dd n ~ dim G.

Then rk(Coker ~ ) is bounded and

tz

rk(Ker ~ G ) = phi rk(Coker ~G).

If G is smooth, then FG is an epimorphism, and Ker ~G ~

Spf k[[X 1..... Xn]]/(X,,... ' ~)[pr% hence rk(Ker ~G)= p h i In the general case,

let r be such that H = FrG is smooth, let K = Ker ~G; we have exact sequencesl

i i
O~Ker
•K , Ker FGi , Ker FHi , Coker FK ;Coker FG ,0,

The second sequence gives rk(Coker ~ ) - rk(Ker FKK) % rk(K) ~co, the first one

gives the claimed formula.

Corollary I) Let 0 ) G' >G >G" ~0 be an exact sequence of connected

formal- rotor. Then dim (G) ~ dim (G') + dim (G").

2) If f:G' • G is a homomorphism of connected formal group, wit h G

smooth, and dim G = dim G', then f is an eoimorohism if and only if Ker f is

finite.

I ) follows from the snake diagram and the preceding corollary.

 A5

2) We have the equivalence (Ker f finite)~=:~ (dim(Ker f) = O)

~ - ~ ( d i m f(G') = dim O') .4"--~-(dim f(a') = dim G). But dim f(G') ~ dim G gives

rk Ker
•f (G') ~ p i dim G rk(Ker ~G) ,

hence Ker i
(G') = Ker FG, and i
G = U Ker F~ = U Xer Ff(G, ) . f(o').

1 I. p-divisible formal ~roups.

Suppose p ~ O.

Definition. A (commutative) formal group G is called p-divisible (or a

Barsotti-Tate group) if it satisfies the three following properties:

1) p,i~zG ~G is ann epimorphism}

2) G is a p-torsion group: G = V Ker(PJ'ido)J

3) Ker(p.lda) is finite.

We know that rk(Ker p idG) = ph, heN. This h is called the height

ht(O) of G. Using I), this gives

j. ht(a)
rk(Ker pJ idG) = p

The multiplicativity of the rank gives the exactness of the sequences

0 > Ker pJ inclusion

,, ~ Ker pj+k PJ > Ker pk ..~..0

Conversely, if we have a diagram

i2
G3----~ ....
 ~6

where the Gi are finite k-groups with the following properties,

a) rk(Gj) ~ phi, h a fixed integer,

ij
b) the sequences 0 >Gj > %+I PJ > %+1 are exact~

then l~(Gn,in) a p-divisible formal group, of height h, and

Ker(p n idG,G > G)~---Gn.

This gives an alternative d~finitionof p - ~ L ~ 9 _ 9 ~ .

The (Serre) dual of a p-divlsible group G is the p-divisible group G'

defined as follows:

Let Gj ~ Ker(pj idG), and let pjiGj+ I ) Gj be induced by p idG.

Put Gj = D(%), and i~ = ~(5>,% > ~j+,, then ~' : ~ (~, i~> is a

p-divisible formal group, with ht(G'), ht(G); it is clear that pl = D(~),

so that (G')' can be identified with G.

Examp!es 1) The constant formal group (~p/2~p) k is a p-divisible group of

height I; conversely, any constant p-divisible group of height h is isomorphic

to ( ti~p/~)kh.

2) Let A be a (commutative) algebraic k-group, such that ~idG:A • A

is an epimorphis~ Then, it can be shown that KerIp,idA) is finite; define

~p) = ~ Ker(pJidA).

Then ~p) is a p-divisible group, containing ~o = ~ Ker (~G). For instance,

J
 &7

If A is an abelia n yariet~ of dimension g, one knows that p idA is an epi-

morphism, with rk(Ker p idG) = p2g It follows that A(p) i_ssa p-divisible

~roup of height 2g (see Chapter V).

Proposition. Le_~t G be a k-formalEF_9_~. The____nnG is p-divisible if and only i_ff

the followin~ conditions are satisfied.

,) ~o(G)(k) = ( ~ p / Z p ) r, r finit e .
@

2) G ° is of finite type, smooth, and Ker(V:G °(p) ) G) is finite.

If G is p-divisible, then G° and "ro(O) are, and conversely ~replace k

by k, then G is the product of G° and ~o(G)). We already know that the etale

group E is p-divisible iff E(~) = ( ~ p / Zp) r • We therefore can suppose G

connected.

Suppose G is p-divisible, then Ker FG ~ Ker(VGF G) = Ker(p idG) is finite,

hence G is of finite type: on the other hand G (p) also is p-divisible, hence

Ker VG C_Eer(FGVG) = ker (p idG(p)) is finite, and FG is an epimorphis1~

because p idG(V ) = % V G is.

Conversely, if G is smooth, and Ker VG finite, FG and VG are epimorphisms

(nO 9), hence also p idG = VGFG; this implies also an exact sequence

o ......~Zer(F a) >Zer(pi%) ~Zer(V o) 70

and Ker (p idG) also is finite. Finally ~JKer (pJ idG) ~ ) K e r (~G) ~ G.

Example. If A is an algebraic unipotent k-group, then AO is never p-divlsible,

unless A is finite.

Remark. The above exact sequence gives for any p-divisible group G the formula

height (G) - dim (G) ÷ dim (G').

 ~8

Proposition. Let G b_~ea connected, finite type, smooth formal group. There

exist two subgroups H,K~G with H p-divisible, pnK = 0 four large n, H N K

finite, and G = H ÷ K.

Let pnG = Im(pn idG:G ~ G); the subgroups pnG of G are smooth

(quotients of G) and form a decreasing sequence. There exist an n such that

pnG f~ Ker FO ~ p2nGnKer FO (Ker FO is finite, hence artinian). This implies

pnG ~ p ~ , because pnG/p2nG is connected, smooth, with monomorphic Frobenius

(or dimension zero). Put H = pnG, K = Ker (pn idG)" Then G = H + K, p i ~ is

epimorphic, and pnK = O. Therefore Ker (p idH) is finite, hence H is p-divisible,

and H6hK~Ker (pn idH) is finite.

;2. Appendix.

Theorem. Le__~t k be perfect field with characteristic p ~ 0] A and B two

complete ncetherian k-rin~s with residue field k. If A and B are reduced,

so is A ~ k B.

I) Let o~ be a positive integer. We say that a k-ring R has property (No<)

if R is local artinian with residue field k, and if xeR, xp ~ 0 implies

x¢ ideal of R)

Lemma 1. If R and S have property (No(), so has R@kS.

r
Let xi be a basis of the k-vector space R such that the xiE ~ are

a basis of ~ for all r. Let z~R~S, with zp = O; we can write z ~--xi~Yi,

hence ~ - ~ i O y ~ = O. This implies the existence of elements ~i,.~k and

sjcS with
 ~9

Because k is perfect, each ~i,J can be written as /~P,j and we have

(~-/~i,j xi)P = O, h e n c e ~ i , j xie~R~ hence / ~ , j = 0 for x i ~ r ~. I f

Xi $ ~ , then /~iJ ~ 0 for all J, hence Yi = O, hence yi e ~ ; in any case

xi®Yie~@S ÷ R@m~ ~(~®S~ , and z~® S.

2) Let A be a local complete noetherian k-ring with residue field k. Put

A~ = A/m~, and let (XA(r) be the greatest c~ such that A has property
(No(): O<A(r) is the greatest integer such that

~A(r)
xeA, xP¢ m A ~ x = m A

Then ~A(t) %~A(2) ~ ... (ocA(r)~ . . . .

L e n a 2. A is reduced iff l~m ~A(r) = +-co.

If xeA with xp = O, x~m~, x ~•m N+I

A , then ~A(r)~N for all r.

Conversely, suppose A is reduced, let Vi = {xeA, ~ a m ~ ) . Then (Vi) is a

decreasing sequence of ideals of A, and ~ V i = O. By definition, ~(r) is the
greatest integer with Vr Q mr(r) , and f~Vi = 0 implies lim~(r)r = oo

(Chevalley's theorem, see Zariski-Samuel, Chapter VIII, ~ 5).

3) Let now A and B be as in the theorem and put C = A~B, then lemma ;

gives

CWC(r) >t inf (~A(r),~B(r)),

and we conclude by Lemma 2.

 CHAPTER III

WITT GROUPS AND DIEUDONNE MODULES

Let p be a fixed prime number.

I. The Artin-Hasse exponential series.

Let k be a ring. We denote by A k the affine k-group which associates

with R~ the multiplicative group I ÷ tR[tt]] of formal power-series in R

with constant term { (as a k-functor, Ak is obviously isomorphic to ~). For

n ~1, let A(n)be the closed subgroup such that

k

A(kn)(R) = , + tnR[[t]]= {I + an tn ÷ ... 3 ;

one has obvious exact sequences

O ) A (n÷{) (n)
k - > Ak > ~k----> 0

where the first morphlsm is the inclusion, the second one being (1+an ~n+...-) > a n,

The k-group Ak hence appears as the inverse limit of the A k / A k(n÷1), each

A k / A k(n+1) being an n-fold extension of the additive group. (If k is a field,

then • k is a unipotent group).

Let F = I - t + ... be a fixed element of A(k) : I + tk [It]] .

Then we have an isomorphism of k-schemes (where ~ + = <1,2,...3 ).

S÷
~: Ok > A k

by ~O((an) ) =' ]'~F(antn).

 51

If k = ~ , then take F(t) = exp(-t); one has F(at)F(bt) = F((a+b)t), so

N~
that ~ is an isomorphism of k-groups from o(k to ~ k " If k is a field with

characteristic p, it is not possible to find F~I ÷ tk [[t]] with

F(t) = 1 - t + ...~ F(at)F(bt) = F(ct);

we find first F(T) = I - t + ... + (-t)P-i/(p-1)2 ÷ ... and for the coefficient

of Tp we find 0 = I and the computation fails. But remark that for any F

one certainly has a formula

(1) FCat)FCbt) = ~ F(~i(a,b)ti);

i 0

where h(X,Y)k[X,Y]

The idea is t o find an F such that most of the 2%i vanish. Actually we shall

find F with ~ki = O if i is not a power of p.

A classical formula asserts

(2) exp(-t) = ~n (! - tn)/~(n)/n

where ~is the Moebius function. Recall first that ~(n) - 0 if n is divisible

by the square of a prime 2 ~ ( p l . . . p k ) = (-I) k if P;'''''Pk are distinct

primes and ~(I) = I; for n >I, one has

5 - ~ ( d ) * o.
din

It follows that

-- 'tny-e(d) 7- I t dm
n>] n dl n d >1 d m

d>1
~(d----!
d
log (,-td),
 52

which gives (2). Let

(3) F(t) =

(nj
p• ~ 1
(1-tn)~(n)/n = l-t+...

if Z(p)= {a/be~, (p,b) = ,}, then

F(t) e A (Z(p)).

I f ~ ( n ) ~ O, then e i t h e r (n,p) =1, or n = pn', ( n ' , p ) = 1. It follows

I

from (2) And (3) that exp(-t) = F(t)/F(tP) I/p, or

F(t) = exp(-t)F(tP) I/p exp(-t- t P / p ) F ( t p 2 ) I / P 2 ~ ..., so that

F(t) ~ exp L ( t ) , with

Cs)

I L(t) = - t - t P / p - t p 2 / p 2 - ... - tpi/p i _ ...

The formula (1) for F can be written L(at) + L(bt) = ~ - L ( ) ~ i ( a , b ) t i )

where X i e ~p)IX,Y]. Going to Q, it follows immediately that ~i = 0 if i

is not a power of p, which give a formula

i
(6) F(at)F(bt) z i>~ 0 F ( ~ i ( a , b ) t P ).

The ArtinDHasse exponential is defined as the morphism

E,o (p) -h
" ~(p)

such that

(7) E((a o, . . . . ) , t ) = n~O F(antpn)"

 53

From (6), it follows easily that there exists formula

(8) E((ai), t). E((hi) ,t) = z( (si( ao,.. ,~,bo,.. ,bi) ,t)

where si ¢ z(p)[Xo,... ,xi, Yo, ....q]. Moreo.r because of (7), a m

PeA(R), Re M__p).~( , can be uniquely written

P(t) = (n •p• -~ n
=! E(an't )'

with ~ n e R ~ . From this and (10), it follows

Proposition. The Z(p)-~roupA~(p) -is isomorphic to the [n/(n,p) = 1}-power

- ,

of the subgroup image of E.

By base-change a similar statement applies to Aip; it shows that the

Artin-Hasse exponential plays over R:p a somewhat similar role as the usual

exponential over ~ .

2. Th___eeWitt rings (over ~).

By (5) and (7), we can write

n
(9) E((ao,...),t) = e x p ( - ~ tp @n/pn),
n~O

with
n n-!
(io) n.ao,..., a~ pa, ... p an .

The formula (8) can also be written

 5&

(,,) ~nCao,...,an),+q~n(bo, .... b n) = ~n(So ..... Sn).

Lemma. We have Sn~ Z[Xo, . . . . x.].

We already know that the coefficients of Si lie in ~ ( p ) C ~ . On the

o~.r hand, it is c~e~rfrom <,0)that the~ ii. in ~[~-'] ButZ(p~n~E~-']~

Theorem. There exists a unique commutative group law on 0 Z with the following

equivalent properties:

(1) ~.o~ ez =(p)--* A~(p) i_,_~hom~o~hism.

(ii) Each ~ n '•-0-~~ is _a homomorphism.

> c~_~ __

Each (i), (ii) is equivalent to the fact that (with $ for the law we
are constructing)

(12) (an) 4, (bn) = ( S n ( a o , . . . , an, b o , . . , bn) ).

Hence the uniqueness; it remains to be shown that the law defined by (12) is a

commutative group law with unit element (0,0,....). The associativity, commutatlvity

and unit element axioms can be expressed by polynomials identities, with coefficients

in ~ , in the coefficients of the S i. These identities are satisfied after

going from 2z to ~Z[p-1], because the ~ n 1A ~ [ p _rl j define an isomorphism

~[ ,]~O~[p ,j BeoauseZC~ p '] we are done. The existence of an

inverse element can be proved if p ~ 2 by the remark that ~n(-Xo,-X I,.. ) =

-(Pn(Xo,XI,.. - )$in the general case, the antipodism over ~[p-'] is given by

polynomials with coefficients in ~ p - l ] ; but these coefficients are also in ~(p),

hence are in Z .

The Z -scheme ~ , together with the above law, is called the

Z - g r o u p of Witt vectors of infinite length relative to p and denoted by W.

 55

If w : (an)e~R) : R~ an is the nth-component of w and ~n(W) the n th

phantom-component of w. The phantom components define a group isomorphism from

Let T:W~ >W be the monomorphism defined by

(13) T((ao,...,an,...) ) = (O, ao,al,...).

Then ~o(TW) : O, ~n(TW) = p~n_1(w), n)1; it follows that T is ~roup-hqmo-

morphism, called the translatio_~n. We define the ~roup Wn of Witt-vectors of

len~h n by the exact sequence of group functore

(,~) o---~w 9>w ~'> ~ ,0

(i.e. by ~ ( R ) = Coker ~(R) for each R). By the definition of the group law

in W, it is clear that
(ao,al,...) = (ao,...,an_1,0,...) ~ ~(an, an+1,...),
n
which means that as a scheme, Wn is ~ , the projection morphism W--~W n

being (ao,...) > (ao,...,an_1). The group law on ~ is (ao,...,an_1) $

(bo, .... bn_1) = (So(ao,bo) ,.... Sn_1(ao,...,an_ I bo,...,bn_1) ) in particular

W I = _c~ . The snake diagram gives from (1&) translation homomorphism T:Wn >Wn+1,

such that T(ao,...,an_1) = (O, ao,...,an_1) , projection homomorphisms RSWn+I---->Wn

such that R(ao,...,an) ~ (ao,...,an_1) and exact sequences

(,5) 0 ~ Tn ~Wn+ m Rm~W n ~O

Moreover, the projections W ~W n give rise t o an isomorphism

W = lie Wn .
n
Let ~ : O ~Z ~ W be the morphism a ~ (a,O,...). have @ , ~ ( a ) - ap ,

E(Z(a),t) = F(at).
 56

Theorem. There exists a unique ring-structure on the ~-group W such that either of

the two following conditions is satisfied.

(i) each ~ n : W - - - ~ Z i s a rlng-homomorphism.

(ii) ~/(ab)~ ~i'(a)~(b), a , b ~ R ¢ ~ , L.

We f i r s t replace Z by P ~.. Z [ p - ~ ] . Then ( Sn):~ .c~_~ i s an isomorphism,

hence the existence and uniqueness of a ring structure on ~ satisfying (i);

n
moreover, because (~n(~(a)) = (ap ), this ring-structure satisfies (ii);
conversely, consider a ring structure on the P-group ~ such that (apn).(b pn) =
pn
~ab) J; the multiplication is given by polynomials of the form (Xn).(yn) =

aiJ
(n) xiYj)' a iJ
(n) ap i b pj = (ab)pn; this gives aiJ
(n) = 0 except
(~ with ~

when i = J = n, and ( X n ) . ( y n) = (XnYn). This ends t h e p r o o f f o r P.

The multiplication in ~ we Just found is given by polynomials

Mn(Xo .... '&' Yo .... 'Yn)~ P [ X o " " ' Y n .... ]:

(a o .... )X(b o .... ) = (Hn(a o, .... to,...));

by definition, ~ i ((~)) = ~" i C C X n ) ) ~iCCZn)), i = O, .... An easy lemma

(D.G.V, ~ 1.2) proves that ~ e Z[X 0 ..... Yo .... , ] ; the above formula defines then
a ~-morphism WxW >W. The fact that it gives a ring structure satisfying (i)

and (ii), with unit element ~1-(I) = (1,O,...) can be expressed by identities

between polynomials with coefficients in Z ; these identities are true over P

and ~ ~ P is inJective.

The Z-ring W is called the Witt ring L each Wn is a quotient ring

of W, the canonical morphisms ~:W-----~W n and R:Wn+I----~W n are ring-

homomorphism (but not T:).
 57

3o The Witt rin_~ (ove_~r k).

From now on, k is a field , with characteristic p. We denote by

Wk, Wnk , the k-rings W ~zk, Wnk ~ z k ; remark that the phantom-components

Wk-"-> ~ k are now (an)~---~aPon (hence the name).

Because Wk = W~p®~p k, we can identi~r ~kp) and ~ and the

Frobenius morphism F:Wk > Wk is given by

P
F(ao,...,an,...) = (aPo, . . . . a n , . . . ) .

It is a ring-homomorphism (because F commutes with products). Similar statements

are true for A k and the Wnk.

P_~ropmmition a). The Verschiebung ~ i s m of A k is q(t)--->q(tP), th__£e

Verschiebung morphiem of Wk is T, the VerschiebunK m orphism of Wnk i_ss

R.T : T.R.

b) If x, y g ~ ( R ) , Re Mk, then V(Fx.y)= xoVy.

a) If ~ I • ~-Cnt n ~ A (R), then F ~ ~ I ÷ ~-cPnt n, and

(F~)(t p) = , + ~-- cPntnp = ~ P = V(F q ) . But F is an epimorphism, hence

V~I ~z(tP), for allku .

On the other hand, the definition of E and T shows that

(t6) E(Tx, t) ~ E(x, tP);

but E(x~t p) : VE (x,t) : E(Vx, t) and E is monomorphism, hence Vx : Tx.

Projecting this formula on Wnk , we find VWn k : R.T = T.R.

 b) Because F:~ >~ is an epimorphism, we can suppose y = Fz. Then

V(Fx.y) = V(Fx.Fz) = VF(x,) = pxz = x.pz = x. VFz = x.Vy.

Corollary. If x,y~Wk(R), then

E(x. Vy,t) = E(Fx.y, tP).

Corollary. If x ~ (ao,...,an,...)~Wk(R), then px = (O,a~ ..... ~ , ..).

Coro!lar7. Suppose k i~s perfect; then W(k) is a discrete valuation ring,

~o~Zet~, an__dd W(k)/pW(k) = k.

One has F~k) = W(k) because k is perfect, hence

pnW(k) = rnPw(k) = TnW(k) and W(k) = ~im W(k)/pnw(k).

Moreover W(k)/pW(k) = WI(k) = c~(k) = k.

Proposition (Witt), Le_~t k be perfect, and let A be complete noetherian local

with residue field k. Let 9r|A • k be the canonical projection. There exist a
unique ring-homomorphism

U: W(k) .... ~ A

compatible with the projections W(k) >k and, ~ . If moreover A i_fisa

discrete valuatio n ring with P';A ~ O, then A is a free finite W(k)-module
of rank [A/pA, k] ; in particular if pA = A, then u is an isomorphism.

Proof. (After Cartier). Consider the ring-morphisms given by the phantom compo-

nents ~n:Wn÷1(A) ) A. If m is the maximal ideal of A, then

n+|
~n((Xn))em if xiem; this gives a co~autative square
 59

n
Wn.,<,A ) ....... ) A

Wn+, (v~) 1 L can.

Wn+ !(k), ~n ~ A/mn+,

Let o-:k >k be given bycr(Pt)= ~tl/P and put un =~nO Wn+1(crn); then,

if ao,...,aneA

n n n n-;
Un(~ ( ),...,~( )) = apO + p ~,o
+ pnan rood. m •

Let

Then u is a ring-morphism and ~u( ~o"" "' °~n) = Go" This gives the existence
of u. Let u' :W(k)--.A be another such homomorphism; then ~' = u'~E :k .~ A
is compatible with multiplication and such that KE' = Id; such a E' is unique,
as is well-known (because ~-'(c< ) must be in /~ (~-1(ocP-n)) pn which has only
one element (Cauchy)); on the other hand, any x~W(k) can be written

x = (~o,,X,,...) . (~o,O,O...) ; (o,o%,o...) $ (o,o,o,2,...)+...

'I., ~ 'In2
= r ( ~x o) + p r ( 0< I" ~)+p~'c( o< 2 " ), ...

I/ p2 , I/p2
and u'(X) must be ~'(O~o) + p~'(O~ I P) + ~ (o~2 )+.-.)hencethe unicity

of u.
 60

The last state[aent follows from the fact that if a1,...,aeeA are a

basis of A modulo pA, then they generate the W(k)-modu]o A, (Bmrbaki, Alg.

Comm. Chap. III, ~ 2, Prop. 12, Cot. 9). Therefore A is finitely generated as

W(k)-module, without torsion because pn.T A ~ O, hence free of rank [A/pA:k ].

A. Duality of finite Witt Eroups

For m, n)1, we put

[a
roWs. Ker (F :Wk ....
~ Wnk).

Between these finite k-groups, we have homomorphisms

mW n .... t Wn+ I

m_lWn, i 'W
)[an,

where i is the canonical inclusion, and f,t,r are induced by F,T,R. Clearly,

i and t are monomorphisms, f and r are epimorphisms, and for the group mWn ,

we have F = if, V = rt.

For any Re_~, let W'(R) be the set of all (~o,°<I"'") e Wk(R )

such that an ~ O for large n, and an nilpotent for all n. It is easy to

check that W'(R) is an idea] in Wk(R ) and that E(w,t) is a po~yn0mial for

weW'(R); in particular E(w, 1) is defined for w~W'(R), and we have a grQuP-

homomorDhism

~:W' ~ ~k
 61

given by w~ ;E(w,,). If XeWk(R), yeW'(R), then xyeW,(R) and E(xy,,)¢R*;

moreover, one has

E(Tnx.y, I) , E(Tn(x. ~y), I) ~- E(x. Py, I).

The morphism (x,y)~----~E(xy,1) from ~ x W' to ~ k is bilinear, hence gives a

group-homomorphism W' * D(Wk) . /-This can be shown to be an isomorphism

(D.G. V § A.A5) but we shall not need this fact 7.

Let O-n:Wnk----~Wk be the section of Ru:Wk-'--~ Wnk defined by

~n(~o"",~r.-1) " ( ~ o ..... ~n-1, 0 .... ) [~n is not a group homomorphism]; it

is clear that o-n sends town in W'.

Theorem. Fo[ XemWn(R), YenWm(R), define

<~,y> . E(o-n(x) O-m(y), ').

Then <x,y> is billnea_._~r,i ~ a ~ isomorphism

town~ D(nWm )

and satisfies

<x, ty> = <fx,y>

<x, ry> - <ix, y>.

Let x,X'emWn(R), Y~nWm(R); then Crn(X÷X') - O'n(X) - O'n(X') is

in Ker ~ , Im Tn, hence

O-n(X*X') = O'n(X) ÷ O-n(X') ÷ ~ ( u ) ,

 62

where u~W'(R). This implies <x + x',y> = <x,y> + <x',y> +

E(Tn(u) • O-m(Y),1) ; but E(Tn(u) • O-m(Y),1) = E ( u . ~ m ( Y ) , 1 ) , and FnO-m(y) =

O-m(~y) = O. This proves the bilinearity of < , > .

On the other hand, Crn(fX) = F~n(X) , O-m+1(tY) = Te~m(y), hence

<fx, y> = E(FO~n(X ). O-m(Y),1 ) =, E( O-n(X).TO-m(y),1 ) = <x, ty > ; also

O n ( i X ) = Crn(X),Crm(rY)~ O-m+1(y) , hence <ix, y > = <x, ry>.

It remains to prove that < , > gives an isomorphism between mWn and

D(nWm) ; but, because of the exact sequences

O__.mWn iq m+qWn > o

and

tq rm
0 > n W m . - - - - . . . ~ nWm+q ". ~' nWq + >O

and the adjointness of t and f, and r and i, we are reduced by induction

on m and n to the case m = n = I. In that case 1W1 =

pO~_k, and < , > is

not zero, hence the given homomorphism p~¢_k-----*D(p~Sk) is not zero; but,

because p~k is simple, it is an isomorphism, and the proof is complete.

5. Dieudonn6 modules (Affine unipotent groups).

From now on, the field k is supposed to be perfect.

Let W be the inductive system of A cu k.

T T T
W:W..
IK
------~W2k------*W~2 k ' ...

The ring W(k) operates on W as follows. First, we denote b_Z ~ : a : ~-a(p)

the Frobenius homomorphism W(k) ~ W(k), and by a~----~a (pn) its n th power,

n~F(a! ,a (p) is biJective, because k is perfect. ) Let a~W(k) and

 63

WeWn(R),R~Mk; then we define

(pl-n)
a*w=a .w,

where a (pl-n) is the image of a (pl-n) in W(R), and b.w~Wn(R ) the product
&
of b~W(R) and w~Wn(R) = W(R)/TnW(R). By this definition, ~(R) becomes

a W(k)-module, and T:Wn(R) ,Wn+I(R) is a homomorphism of W(k)-module,

because

T(a * w) = T ( a ( p l - n ~ . w ) = T(F(a(p-n)C).w) = aP-n. Tw = a * Tw.

For any GeACUk, we define the Dieudonn~ module M(G) of G to

be the W(k)-module

M(G) = lira ACUk(G,Wnk)

(equivalently M(G) = Ind (.A c Uk) (G, _~W)). Of course, G) >M(G) is a contra-

variant functor from A cu k to category Mod W(k) of all W(k)-modules. This

construction obviously commutes with automorphisms k ~a,k , in particular with

fk:k ~k. If M is a W(k)-module, let M (p) = M@w(k),c r W(k) | as a group

M (p) = M, but the external law is (w,m) ) w (p-l) m; if feAc___Uk(G,Wnk) , then

f(P) is a homomorphism from G (p) to W nk
(p) = Wnk. Hence a map f: _-f(P) from

M(G) to M(G(P)); it is clear that (wf)'(p) = w(P)f (p) for weW(k), and this

map induces an isomorphism,

~(G)(P) ~ ~MCG(P)),

by means of which we always identify M(Gp) with M(G) (p)

The two morphisms FG and VG define two morphisms

F = M(FG)|M(G) (p) • M(G), and V ~ M(VG),M(G ) ,M(G) (p) or equivalently

group-homomorphisms F, V:M(G) ,M(G) with F(am) = a(P)Fm, V(a(P)m) = ave,

 64

aeW(k), m~M(G). By construction, if m e Acu___k(G,Wnk) represents meM(G),Fm

and Vm are represented 5y FWnk 0 m and VWnk o m.

The morphism T:Wnk----*Wn+Ik being a monomorphism, the maps

Acuk(G,Wnk)----~ACUk(O, Wn+;k ) are inJective, and Aq~(G, Wr~) can be identified

with a submodule of M(G); more precisely

Ac_~Uk(G,Wnk ) = {meM(G), ~ m = 03.

It follows that any element of M(G) is killed by a power of V.

Let Dk be the (non-commutative) ring generated by W(k) and two

elements F and V subject to the relations

It can be easily seen that any element of ~ can be written uniquely as a finite

sum

y- ÷ • ao • y-- ai?.
i>O i>O

If G~Acuk, then M(G) has a canonical structure of a left D~module; if K is

a perfect extension of k, there is a canonical map of DE-modules

(*) w(z)w~)M(o) ~-M(OQkz)

(remark that DK ~-W(K)@W(k) Ok, and that the left hand side can also be written

DK M(G) )
®Dk •
 6~

Theorem. The functor M induces an anti-equivalence between Acu~ and the

categor~ of all Q-modules of V-torsion. For an~ perfect extension K of k,

(*) is an isomorphism. Moreover

G i_~salgebraic < ~ M(G) i~s a finitely generated ~-mgdule,

G is finite < > M(G) is ~ W(k)-modale of finite length.

Proof in D.G. V, § I, n ° A.

6. Dieudonn6 modules (p-torsion finite k-groups)

Proposition. The functor G.L ~ M(G) induces an anti-equivalence between

Feuk (resp. F i ~ ) and the category, o_ffDk-mOdules , which are W(k)-modules of

finite length, killed by a power of V and on which F i_~sbi.lective (resp. and

killed by _a power of F).

This follows from the theorem, and the fact that if G is finite,

then G is etale (resp, infinitesimal) if and only if FG is an isomorphism

(resp. ~G = 0 for large n).

Examples. If G = (~/p~)k~FeUk, then M(G) = k with F = I, V = O; if

G = pC~_keFiUk, then M(G) = k with F = O, V = O.

Proof. We can suppose k algebraically closed, in either case G is the unique

simple object of Fe__~ (resp: FiUk) ; hence M(G) is the unique simple object of

the corresponding category) and it is clear that the proposed modules are simple.

Corollary. Fo__rr G ~ Fe__~u

k or Firek, we have

rk(G) = plength (M(G))

We can replace k by ~, and it is enough to check the formulas for the simple

groups, in which case it follows from the examples above.

 66

Let m,n be two positive integers; consider the canonical injection

mWn :Wn; it defines an element u~M(mWn) , clearly ~u = Fnu = O, hence a

map of D-modules (D ~ ~ ) :

Am,nID/(DFm + DVn) • M(mWn).

Proposition. Xm, n is bijective.

Using the exact sequences connecting the mWn, we are easily reduced

to the case m = n = I; but D/DF + D V ~ k and M(IWI) = M ( p ~ k ) = k.

Take m = n. Any element in D/(DF n + D ~ ) can be written in a unique

way x = w1_ n
vn-1
+'..+W IV + W 0 * w;F +.'.+ Wn_ I
Fn-1
where wieWn_lil(k);
therefore have a canonical W(k)-linear projection

~n:M(nWn ) ~Wn(k)

defined by ern(An(X)) = w O,

Let Q be the quotient field of W(k), and Woo be the W(k)-module

Q/W(k); it can be identified with the direct limit of the system

W(k)/pW(k) P~ W(k)/2W(k) ~ ... ;

but this system is also

W1(k) T w2(k) T

Hence Woo= ~Wn(k) ~ W(k).

For any DR-mOdule M, we denote by M* the following k-module: as

W(k)-module, M*= M~W(k)(M,Woo); if f~M*, then (Ff)(m) = f(Vm)(p),

(Vf)(m) = f(Fm) (p-;) It is clear (duality of finite length modules over a

principal ideal ring) that M---.M* induces a duality in the category, of

k-modules %&ich are of finite length over W(k).

 67

Let now G e FiUk, then there exists n such that ~G = O, ~G = O; it

follows that M(G) = FiUk(G, nWn); moreover ~D(G) = O, ~D(G) = O, and

M(D(G)) = FiUk(D(G),nWn). Let m:D(G) * nWn be an element of M(D(G)); let

ahn:nWn-----~D(nWn) be the isomorphism given in the n° I, and look at the

composed homomorphism

ahn D(m)
nWn '~ D(nWn).. • D(DG)--~G ]

this gives a D-linear map

~m,M(O) .... ~ M(nWn);

composing this with ~.n:M(nWn)----~Wn(k) and the canonical injection Wn(k)----~co ,
we get a W(k)-linear map M(G) >Woo , i.e. an element of M(G)*. Hence a map

(~) ~(D(G))~M(G)*.

This map is independent of the choice of the integer n: if we replace

m:D(G) ~ nWn by m' = itm = tim: D(G) * n+VWn+l, then D(m)a~ is replaced

by D(m')ahn+ I = D(itm)ahn+ ! = D(m)D(it)ahn+1 = D(m)a~fv; hence W m is replaced

by q)m' = M(D(m)a~ fv) = M(fv)M(D(m)ahn) = M(fv)~ m and ~n ~ m is replaced by

~n+iM(fv) qm. But M(fv),D/(DF n + DVn) ,D/(DFn+l + VTM) is of course

x ~FVx = px, and ~ + I M(fv) = ~n÷1 P -- ~n"

We therefore have a well-defined W(k)-linear map (**).

Theorem. For all G e Fiuk, (**) i_ssa__nnisomorphism of Dk-mOdules.

The proof runs as follows.

a) (**) commutes with F and V.

b) Theorem is true if G = nWn .

c) Any G is a subgroup of a (nWn)r.

 68

For the details, see DoG. V, § A, n° 5.

In short, the autoduality Gl , D(G) of Fluk corresponds, via the

Dieudonn~ functor, to the autoduality M~ ~M* in the category of Dk-module

of finite length killed by a power of V and F.

Let now G a Fi~, we define the Dieudonn'e module M(G) by

MCG) M(D(G))*.
=

It follows from the Cartier duality between Fi~ and Feuk that the functor

G M(G) just defined induces an antiequivalence between Fimk and the category

of all Dk-modules of finite length on which F is nilpotent and V bijectiv e.

We can describe M(G) as follows. Suppose first G is diagonalisable:

G = D(rk). Then D(G) = ~k' and M(D(G)) = li~ ACUk(Pk,Wnk) = lim~ Gr(~_ ,Wn(k))=

-Gr(F',Woo) = MOdw(k)(W(k)e~F' , Woo), hence

~(Q) -= w(k) ®~r.

In general, G is defined by a Oalois module r and M(G) is the set of inva-

riants under the Galois group ~ of M(G~$); hence

M(G) ~ (W(~) ® X r )~.

Moreover, F and V are easily described by duality:

F(A®gt) = ~-(P)®px

Let _FPk be th~ category of all finite k-groups of p-torsion. Any G

in _Fpk decomposes uniquely as H×K, with H~ Fi__~ukxFeUk,KeFim k and we define

M(G) as ~(H) ~M(K).

 69

Theorem a) The functor G; ~M(G) is'an antiequivalence between the category

FDk = Fiu___k~FeUk~Fi_~
~ of all finite k-groups o__f2-torsion, and the category of
all trSples (M, FM, VM) where Mis a finite length W(k)-module and FM and VM

two ~roup endomorphisms of M such that

FM(Am) = ~(P)FM(m )

VM()t(Plm ) = ~VM(m )

FMVM : V~FM -- p. i ~

b) G is etale, infinitesimal, unipotent o rmultiplicative accordinK a__£s

FM i_ssisomorphic, FM nilpotent, VM nilpotent, or VM isomorphic.

C) For ~ GeFPk, o n e h a s

rk(G) = p l e n g t h M(G)

d) If K is a ~rfect extension of k, there exists a functorial isomorphism

M(G®kK) ~W(K)~w(k)M(G).

e) There exists a functorial isomorphism

~(D(a)) - ~(G)*.

Let (M, FM, VM) be as in the theorem. There exists m with

2m m ~M m
FM M - FMH, then M = Ker ( ~ I m FM = Mo e M ! where Mo,M ! are stable by F

and V~ ~ o = 0 and F[M I is biJective; similarly M 0 = M o o Q Ho1,M I = HIoQM11 ,

with rnMoo = O, VnM, o = O, VIMo! is biJective, VIM, is biJective. But

FV = VF = p, hence M11 = O; this implies M = M o o ~ ) M o 1 0 M Io.

 70

The proof is now straight forward and left as an exercise.

8. Dieudonne modules (p-divlsible r o ~ ) .

Let us first prove a lemma.

Lemma. Let ... ' ~+I ~n ~ Mn . . . . ---,M I be a s~vstem of W(k)-modules with

th_~e followi'ng properties.

n ~n
I) The se u e ~ Mn+ I P ~ Mn+ I ------, ~----~ 0 is exact for all n.

2) ~ is of finite length for all n.

Let M = lim M n. Then M is a finitely gener@t#d W( k )-module and the canonical

ma~ M----~M n identifies Mn with M/pnM, for all n.

It follows from I ) that

n
P

is exact for all n and m (where ~ = ~ n O~n+1 o ... o ~m-1)" Taking the

inverse limit over m, we find an exact sequence

pn An
M , ,.M ..... ~. Mn---~O

the lim functor is exact for finite length modules - D.G. V ~ 2, 2.2 a)]

where 2%n is the canonical projection• hence the last assertion. Let now

m I,... ,m r be elements in M generating M/pM = M I; consider the W(k)-module

homomorphism C~-W(k)r------* M such that ~ a I .... ,at) = altoI + ... + attar, It

induces surjective maps W(k)r/pnw(k) r ) M/p n M for all n hence is surJective

as an inverse limit of surjective maps of finite length modules.

~ternative proof. ~p~ Sou~aki, Alg. Com. Ch. 3• § 2, n°.11 Prop. lh and

Cor. I t o Ai =, W ( k ) / p i + l w ( k ) • ~ =, % + I "
 7~

We say that a formal group G is of p-torsion if

1) G = UKer pn idG

2) Ker p idG is finite.

We have exact sequences

pn n+1
O ~ Ker pn ....~...Ker pn+1 Kerp

pn
O- ~ Ker pn ~ Ker pm+n Ker pm

the latter show by induction that Ker pn is finite for all n. Define

M(G) = n m ~(Ker {).

Theorem. G ~M(G) is an antiequivalence between the category, o_~fp-torsion formal

groups and the category o._ff~ s (M,FM,VM) where M i_~sa finitely generated
W(k)-module and FM, VM two r ~ endomgrphism ~ of M

FM(Wm ) ~ JP)FM(m )

vH(JP)m), wry(m)

FHVM = V.FH p

It follows from the lemma that M(G) is finitely generated and that

M n ~M(G)/pnM(G). Conversely if M is as before, then w~ define G as limG n

~e~ ~(G n) ~ ~/pn~.

From the definitions and what was already proved follow immediately:

I) G i~s finite if and onCE i~f M(G) iss finit~e, and in that case M(G) is the

same as defined in § 7.

2) G i~sp-divisible if and on_~E i_~f M(G) is torsion-less (= free), an~d

height (G) - dim M(G),

 72

3) For any perfect extension K/k, there i_~sa functorial isomorphism

H(GekK) ~N(K) W~k) N(G).

~) I_~f G is p-divisible, with Serre dual G', then

~(G) Modw(k)(M(G),W(k)),
=

-I
with (~(G)f)(.) f(Vm)(P), (V(O,)f)Cm) f(~m~(P)
= = .

Proof of A. Let M(G) = M; then M = lim M/pnM, and M/pnM = M(Ker pn idG) ; but

G' is defined as limD(Ker__~ pn i%), hence M(G') = ~lim M(D(Kerp n idG)) =

9. Dieudonn~ modules (connected formal grou~ of finite type).

By a similar discussion (replacing p by F), we have the following

results: if G is a connected finite type formal group, define M(G) =

lim
( M(Ker ~); it is a module over the F-completion ~k of ~ .

Theorem. G-----~M(G) i~s a_2nantiequivalence between the category, of connected

formal groups of finite type and the category, of finite type ~k-mOdules M suc___hh

that M/FM has finite length. Moreover

I) G finite < :? M(G) has finite l e ~ ~--~F~(G) = 0 fo_.zr n large.

2) G smooth <----~.F:M(G) -----~M(G) i__£sinJective; in that case

di~ (G) len~h(~(G)/m(G)).

=
 CHAPTER IV

CLASSIFICATION OF p-DIVISIBLE GROUPS

k is a perfect field (unless otherwise stated)jcharac (k) ~ O; we denote

by B(k) the quotient field of W(k), and extend ~x (p) to an automorphism

of B(k); the set of fixed points of x: ~x (p) in W(k) (resp. B(k)) is

W(~p) = ~ p (resp. B(Fp) = ~)p).

~. Is0genles.

A F-lattice (resp. F-space) over k is a free W(k)-module (resp. a B(k)-

vector space), of finite rank, together with an injective (resp. injective ~ biJective)
group endomorphism F such that F(2%x) = )K(P)Fx. If M is a F-lattice, then

B(k)@w(k)M has a natural F-space structure.

To each p-divlsible group G, we associate the F-lattice M(G), and the

F-space ~G) = B(k)~k)M(G); the functor G .~M(G) is an antiequivalence

between p-divisible groups and those F-lattlces M for which FM DpM.

If E is a perfect extension of k, and M a F-lattice over k, we

define ~ as W(K)•W(k)M , similarly for F-spaces.

Lemma. Let O an_~d H b_eetwo p-divisible groups of the same height an~d f'G ; H
b_~ea h0momorphism. Th___eefollowing conditions are equiva!en Z

a) Ker f I£ ,,finite,

b) f i s a~n e pimorphism,

c) M(f).~(H) ~H(G) i__~~ ,

a) Coker M(f) is_ f i n i t e ,

e) E(f):E(H)-----~ E(G) is a_nn.isomorphism.

 7&

This is clear: (a) < ~ (d), (b)< > (c), and (c)~ > (d) < >(e). Such an
f is called an isogeny.

Prooosition. Let G and H be two p-divisible groups. The n E(G) and E(H)

are isomorphic if and only if there exists an isogeny f:G ) H.

Let (~:E(H) ) E(G) be an isomorphism; there exists m such that

~(M(H)) Cp-mM(G), then pm~:M(H) . , M(G) corresponds to an isogeny f. The

converse is clear.

Two such groups are called isogengu s. The classification of p-divisible

groups upto isogeny is therefore equivalent to classification of F-spaces of the

form E(G).

A F-space E is called effective if it contains a lattice (i.e. a

W(k)-submodule M such that E = B(k)@w(k)M) stable by F, i.e. if it comes

from an F-lattice. It comes from a p-divisible group if and only if it contains

a lattice stable by F and pF-I.

2. The category of F-spaces

It is a ~p-linear category.: an abelian category, such that Hom(EI,E 2)

has a natural (finite dimensional, in fact) ~ -vector space structure, the

P
composition map (f,g) > g o f being ~p-bilinear Enote that ~ p is the

centre of B(k) 3 .

It has tensor products and internal Hom: If El, E 2 are F-spaces, then

E I ~ E2 and Hom(EI,E2) are the usual ~ and Horn of B(k)-v~ctor spaces and

F ( x ® y) = F x ~ F y , (Fu)(x) = u(F-Ix) (p), xeE1,YeE2,ueHom(EI,E2).

We denote by ~ the F-space (B(k), x----~x(P)), b y ~ (n) the F-space

B(k),x ,p-nx(P) The dual { of E is Horn(E, ~ ) , the nth twist E(n) of

is E®~ (.).
 75

We have the usual canonical isomorphisms

Horn(A, Hom(B,C)) = Hom(A®B,C)

Hom('l~,A) ~ A

Hom(A,B) ~ Hom(d~,Hom(A,B))

A®(B@C) = ( A ® B ) @ C ...

In particular

E(m)(n) = E(m+n)

~(m) - E~(-,)

If G is a p-dlvisible group and G' its Serre dual, then

%,
E(G') = H,o m ( E ( G ) / [ ] ( - I ) ) = E(G)(-' )

(because Serre duality sends F to V = pF-!).

These constructions commute with the base-extension functor

oxtonooJ.
3. Th~ F-spaces E 2~, ~ ) 0 .

O Let ~ O be a rational number; write )%= s, with r,s~ ~, r>O,

(r,s) = I. We define the F-lattice Mk over ~p by

Mx = ~rp[T]/(T r - pS),

F acting by multiplication by T, and similarly, the F-space EA over ll:p

by

EX _- @p[T]/(T r _ pS);
 76

If O ~ % ~ I , then r)s; define ~ k = ~rp[F]l(Fr_s _ vS), then M ~ is a

lattice in E 2% and a Dieudonn6 module; actually, let G ;k be the p-divisible

group over ~p defined by the exact sequence

Fr_vs
o >G ~ ~W(p). W(p)

where W(p) = ~ (Ker pn:W~ ----~W~p). It is clear that

P

M(G A ) = ~ A E(GA ) = E A.

Hence height (G 2%) = r, dim (G ~) = s. It is also clear that (Gik)'= GI_ A-

~t ~ ( E ~ 4 = B(k)e% E 2~ . It has a B(k)-basis e I, . . . . e r

[ei = class of ~ - I ] such that, i f x=~--aiei, then

Fx = pSa~P~e, + a ~P~e 2 + "" • a(P~e

n-1 n"

In particular

(Fr- pS)(x) = pS[(a(iP)- a,)e,+....(a(nP)- an)en].

O Let W(k)(p '/r ) and B(k)(p '/r ) be defined by

W(k)(p '/r ) W(k)[X]/(Xr-p),S(k)(p'/r ). B(k)[X]/(Xqp );

denote the class of X by p I/r , then W(k)(p I/r ) is a complete descr~te

valuation ring with residue field k and maximal ideal generated by pl/r . We

extend x, ~x (p) to W(k)(p I/r ) and B(k)(p I/r ) by putting

(p~Ir)(p) ~ p'Ir
 77

Let Fs:W(k)(p I/r ) ~ W(k)(p I/r ) be defined by

FsC~__wipi/r)= ~___w(ip) p(S+i)/r

and similarly for B(k)(p I/r ). Then the F-lattice (W(k)(p I/r ),Fs) i~s isomorphic

two Mk~, the F-space (B(k)(p I/r ),Fs) isomorphic to ~.

Proof. Send pi/r to the class of T i.

@ Let a,be~ be such that ar - bs = I. Consider B(~pr ) ~ i t is the

unique unramified extension of degree r of B(~p) =~)p...7and let K A be the

associative B( ~pr )-algebra with unit generated by an element ~ such that

~r = P, ~Oc =, O((p-b) ~ , o~eB( ~pr )-

It is a left vector space of dimension r over B( ~ r ) with basis I, ,~r-1

P
hence an algebra of degree r2 over ~p. Moreover, because -b is invertible

modulo r, o((p-b) = ~ impliesc<(~p, and K~k has centre ~p. Finally, K2i
r-1
is a division-algebra: let X = ~-- a i ~ i be a right zero divisor. By multi-
i=O

plication by suitable powers of p and ~ , we can suppose that aieW( ~pi),

and ao~PW(~pr). The matrix of the right multiplication by X in the basis

I,..., ~i-I is (write C~ for (p-b))

I aOIr .•, ar--~

pa _
a2
ao ...

, . .

-1 ~-i/
\ pa~_, . . . . . . ao/
 78

r-l
Its determinant is congruent to aoa~" ...' aocr = Norm(a
o ) _. mod p; it therefore

cannot be zero, contradiction.

Supp,ose now k D~ r' and consider

P

= KA .
W(k) @ W ( ~ p r )K#k B(k)~B( ~ p r )

It is a B(k)-vector space with basis ~i - I ~ i, i ~ O,...,r-1 and a right

K;k-vector space; we make it a F-space over k by defining Fi = ~i+s.

.
Proposition. a) Th_~eF-space B(k)~B( ~ p r ) KX i_£sisomorphic t_~o ~ .

b) Its endomorphisms are the right multiplication by elements of K )k .

We send the F-space E ~ B(k)~B(~pr) KA to B(k)(p I/r ) by mapping

~i to pi/r; it is easy to check that this mapping is an isomorphism of F-spaces

hence a). To prove b), we first remark that the F-space structure and the

kA-vector space structure on E commute: each multiplication x----~x~x,~CK P%

is a F-space endomorphism. We use now the following lemma.

Lemma. Let H b__eea__n~ F - s s ~ over k; the map ~--@~(el) i ss ~ bijection from

Hom(~2k,H) to the set of all x inn such that Frx - pSx.

This is clear from the definition of ~2t.

Using this lemma, it is enough to prove that the elements x of E

r
with F x = pSx are the I~@(,o(C K ~ . Let

r-1

i=O
 79

then ~ x = ~ - - p s~ i(pr)e ~ i, and Frx = psx implies ~(Pr)l

. = ~i' i.e.

c~iCB(Fpr), i.e. x ~ 1~i~i~1~K2i.

Q Let )%' = s'/r', with r',s'~,(s',r') = I, be a n o t h e r ~ rational.

_Proposition. a) I_~f }i~ ~ , then Hom(~ , ~ ) = O,

b) let m = g.c.d. (r,r'), then

)iv "m

~®~p KA'~ ~(K A÷ ~').

- -

a) By the above len~na, we have to look to those x E ~ 9%' with (Fr - pS)x = O;

~gk' D(Pr' ) pS'fj

but has a basis fj such that, if x = ~ b j f j , then Fr'x =~-- j ,

s
hence Frr'x =~--bj ( ~ pS'r 5; on the other hand, if Frx ~ p x, then

Frr'x = pS~'x ~ 5--bj psr' ~j. Because s~' ~ s'r, and v < ~ (p)) ~ ~(~)

for JkeB(k), this implies x = O.

b) Let e' e' be the canonical base of ~9k , and ;k+ 2k' = A o = So/ro,
1 ~''" r ~

with so = sr' + r's/m, ro = rr'/m. Then

r -r'r -rr' r's ~'

F O(eiOej)
, = Fm ei ~ Fm ej = pm ei~ p m e'j = PSo(ei®ej).

It follows that, i and j being fixed, and indices running modulo (r,r'), the

vectors ei+k ~ e j + k , k -- O,...,r°

' - {, span a sub-F-space of ~ ® ~ iso-

morphic to E;~+
k A' . This gives m linearly independent subspaces,hence an

isomorphism ¢ @ Ek = (~/k+ )m.

 80

Taking k big enough, this gives a map of the endomorphism algebras

~p

X
this map is inJective because K ® K ~' is simple, hence bijective because
~p
both sides have dimension (rr') 2 over ~p. As a corollary, take 2%' = n~,~ in c)~
we find isomorphisms

~ 7k÷n
Mk2k(_n) -- M k •

(In particular ~ ( - n ) = M~), and

~+n
Kgk~ K

Hence ~k.L - K 9k gives a homomorphism

(~/Z ~ Br((~p),

which is in~ective (because K 2x is a skew-field, hence cannot be split if

r ~ I, i.e. 2 k ¢ ~ , and known to be surJective.

For ~_~,, 2k(O we define ~ to be the dual of Ek ~k (note that E 0 =~]).

From the relations between dual, tensor products, and internal Hom, and using the

twist operation we obtain for a~, )kT~

a) 0 --~ ( ) ) m = g.c.d (r, r ) )

' 2<'-A m
b) ) ) m. g.c.d j

C) F~ (n) =, EkA'-n)(Ek2k)%' = F~.?'~

d) If 2".= _s, r>O, (s,r) = I,

r
then dim ~2~ = r. If ki)~p r then

is a central division algebra over ~p, with invariant ~,mod I# Ek)k is

 ~T

effective if and only if /k~0, ~ A comes from a p-divisible group if and only

if 0~1.

t
e) Hom(Ek~,Ek~ ) = 0 i f 5~ ~ A~.

A. Classification of F-spaces over an algebraically closed field.

!

Lemma ;. If k i_~s algebraically closed, an[ extension of ~ a by

Let 0-----*5"k/k, • E ~'~ EkA >0 be an exact sequence of F-spaces;

for any n, we have an exact sequence

0 ,ES*n E(-n) .~ ~x*n 0

that splits if and only if the first one splits; taking n large enough, we can

therefore suppose A, 2k! ~0. Write • = s/r, 4' = st/r ! as usual. It is suf-

ficient to prove

(.) Fr - Ps '=k
~2~' > ~k ~k' i_~s surjective.

- A'
Indeed, let x~E be such that ~(x) = el; then (F r pS)(x) ~ E k . If (*)
!
is true, there exists a y~EJ with (F r - pS)(y) ~ (F r - pS)(x)" Replacing

x by x - y, we can suppose (F r - pS)(x) = 0, and x gives a splitting.

We have (F r _ pS)(Fr(rt-1) ÷ Fr(r'-2) pS ÷...~pS(r'-l)) = Frr' pSr ',

and it is enough to show that F rr' - pSr':~ k ----~E~ is surJective. If

e{ .....er, is the canonical basis of E~ , we have

, ~--(prS'a(pr ) ~r' ,
(Frr'- P~r')(~ai el) = ,, i - P ai)ei'
 82

it is therefore sufficient to show that, if o < , ~ C ~ Z , the map

x: ~ p~x (p~) - x

from B(k) to B(k) is surjective.

If ~ > 0 then, taking x = ~-

oo pi~ b(p~X ) , we find
i=O

p+Sx(P~ ) - x = - b.

If ~ <0, we write p ~ X (p~) - x = p ~ x (p) - p-O (p~ x (pc~))(p.C< ) and are

reduced to the preceeding case. If ~ = O, we use successive appro~Imation: let

b~B(k) be fixed, and suppose xeB(k) and m ~ 2 are such that

x (p~) - x - bepmw(k); if xI

pm(y (pc<) - y + (x(p) - X - b}/pm), and this belongs to pm+Iw(k) if and only if

Y-PO<- Y + (x (p~) - x - b)/pm = O, denoting+ by z ) "z the residue map

W(k)-----~k. Because k is algebraically closed, this equation has a solution.

Lemma 2. Let ~ ÷ aT
Fno!+... ÷ an~W(k)[F ] (non-commutative polynomial ring)

k algebraically closed. There exists r , s ~ 4 , coprime, and elements

b o , b 1 . . . . ,bn_ 1 , u ~ W ( k ) ( p l / r ) , with u Invert ible , such that, i__nn W(k)(pl/r)[F],

w~ have

(~) Fn+a,Fn-'....+an = (bo Fn-! + biFn-2+...÷bn_~)(F - pS/r)u .

.v(aD,
Let 2k= inf [ - - ~ ) ; write ;k= s/r, s and r coprime, and put

ai = plS/r~i; then ~iCW(k), and ofi is unit for at least one i>O. Let us

look for bi of the form piS/r ~i' ~i ~w(k)

' . Putting v = u"I , we can write

(~3 as:
 83

v(p n) Fn ÷ v(pn-1)a Fn-1

I + "'" + Van':"

boP+(b I - pS/r bo)P-1 ÷.. .+(bn_ ' - pS/r bn_2)F - pS/r br~ I ,

so that ( ~ ) is equivalent to

Jp~) = bo

a v(pn-') s/r
= bI - p bo

e , ,

,,° ,*t

- pS/2
%_,v (p) = bn_. I bn_2

anY -
pS/r bn_ I.

Replacing a i by piS/r ~ i and b i by pis/r~i ' we find the system

v(p n) = bo

o<iv(Pn-1)= b I - b 0

(p)
O(n-1 v = bn-1 - bn-2

°(nV = -bn- I.

and we have a solution if and only if we can find a unit v in W(k)(p ' / r ) such

that

(pn) (pn-,)
V + o~.|U + ,,, + O<nV = O,

This equation, we solve by successive approximation. Modulo pl/r , it gives

 8A

n n-1
-P
-~ ÷~I v +"" ÷ a n ~ " o,

and this has a non-zero solution because one of the ~(i is non-zero and k is

algebraically close~; we can therefore start the induction and suppose we have a

view(k)
n
V( p ) + v(pn-1)÷ +C~nV i 0 mod pi/r.
i ~I i "'" -=

Writing Vi+1 = Vi + pi/r x, and solving

(pn) (on-,)
vi+ I +0( I vi+ I ÷ ... ÷ ~ n vi+1 =-0 sod p (i~l)/r ,

we find an equation
n n-1

which has a solution in k.

Lemma 3. Let k be algebraically closed, and let E be _a no__.~zero F-space.

There exists a A ~ a n d a non-zero morphism E - - - ~ ;k.

Taking a non-zero simple quotient of E, we can suppose E simple,

i.e. a simple B(k)[F]-module. But B(k)[F,] is an (non-commutative) euclidean

ring, and such a module is a quotient B(k)[F]/P = B(k)[F]/B(k)[F]P where

P~B(k)[F I is a sonic polynomial ~ + a1~-1+...+an . Replacing E by an E(-m),m

large, we replace F by pmF, and we can suppose ai~W(k). Hence E is

defined by the F-lattice M = W(k)[F~/P. Then, by lerma 2, we can write

p ~ Q(F-ps/r)u, where Q~W(k)(p'/r)~], uCW(k)(p'/r) *, and (r,s) = ,. Then
-I
x ~xu gives an epimorphism

W(k)(pl/r)@W(k)M "~W(k) (pl/r) IF]/(F_pS/r) ;

 85

but, as a W(k)[F]-module, the right-hand side is ~A, and the induced map

~ ~W(k)(pl/r)®W(k) ~ .... ,~A

is a non-zero F-lattice homomorphism.

Pr__~osition. Each ~2k i_ssa simp!e F - s ~ (i.e. does not contain a n _ ~ p . ~

no__qn-zeroF-subspace).

We can suppose k algebraically closed. If E is a proper F-subspace

of ~;k there exist (lemma 3) a non-zero morphism

E~/E ~.

If ~ ~k, the composite map ~ - - - ~ is zero by section 3, E) e) hence

2k= /~ ; then this composite map must be an isomorphism, because End(~) is a
skew-field; this gives E ~ 0.

Theorem (Manin). If k Iss algebraical~y close_____~d,

the category o__fF - s a _ ~ g y e r k
is semi-sim_~_~, it,s simple objects ~ ~ :~ F-spaceis!somorPhic t o ~
direct sum ~---(~)%) mA~.

By lemma 3 and the above proposition, the simple F-spaces are Juet the
EkA; by the proposition, any F-space is an extension of ~ . By lemma I, such an
extension splits.

Corollar~. l_/f k i ssal~raically closed, any F-space over k is isomor2hic to

an F - ~ ~, E a_nnF-space over the prime fiel__~d.

Co~llary. ~ k i_ss~ closed, a_~ p-divisible E ~ ove_~r k is

to _a ~roduct of
 86

5. Slopes.

Let E be an F-space over k, k algebraically closed. Let A @ ~ . The

component of slope ~ i n E is the sum of the sub F-space$of E isomorphic to

~; the multiplicity of the slope Yk is the B(k)-dimension of this component

(e.g., if ~ = a/r, the multiplicity of ~k in ~ is r).

The slope-sequence of E is the non-decreasing sequence

• ..~k n

(n = [z,s(k)]) of all elopee of E, each one repeated according to its multi-

plicity.

The Newton polygon P of E is the polygon OAI...A n in 0 2, where ~ has

coordinates (i, Y~!+... + hi); the external points of P have integral coordinates

and the slopes of its sides are the ~.

The slope-function co of E is the function o~ | ~ , ~ defined by

n
~ ( A ) ~, [ i n f ( A i , A)
i=,l

.4

Each of these three objects determine the two others and determine E upto iso-

morphism; for instance the set above P is

 87

{(x,y)ly~(x- n) ÷ ~ ( A ) , V A } .

Proposition. Let M b_~ean F-lattlce, and co th_._eeslope function of B(k~w(k)M;

then, for 0( , ~ e m, ~ 0, the difference

lengthw(k)(MIF= M + p ~ M ) -~(@I~ )

i_~sbounded.

We can replace k by k, hence suppose k algebraically closed.

If M and M' are two lattices giving isomorphic F-spaces, there exists

an exact sequence of W(k)[FS-modules

0 ;M > M' -----* N ~0

whe re N has finite length. The snake-lemma, applied to the diagram

0 .... ; M u M ~ M'xM' ~ NxN ; 0

0 ~ ~M - ~ M' ~ N ~0

where ~(x,y) = F ~ x + p~y, gives the inequality

length M / ~ ( ~ ) - length M ' / ~ ( M '2) ~ 2 length N;

therefore, if the proposition is true for M(resp. M'), it is true for M'(resp. M).

c) It is therefore sufficient to prove the proposition for the F-lattices

In that case, M has a basis el,...,e r with Fe I = e2,...,Fer_ I = er,

Fe r = pSel; if 0( = ar ÷ b, O ~ b 4 r - 1 , then
 88

FC~el = paS eb+l,...,Fcx er-b .= p(a+1 )s el"'" ,F~er = p(a+1)s eb,

and Fc~M + p~ H is generated by

pinf(as,~) el' i = b+;,...,r and # n f ( ( a + i ) s , ~ ) e j , j = l,...,b.

The length of the quotient is

= (r - b) inf (as,~) + b inf ((a+,)s, fl ).

If ~.,<as, then ~ = r~;

if as ~< ~<(a÷i)s, then [ = (r - b) as + b~ ;

if ( a + l ) s ~ then ~ = ( r - b) as + b(a÷l)s = Ms.

On t h e o t h e r h a n d ~ ( ~ / ~ ) : r inf (~/~, ~), hence

c~(~/c~) = cx r inf (~/~,s/r) = inf (~r,c<s), and the proposition follows

easily.

The slopes, slope sequence,..., for a p-divisible group G over k

(not necessarily algebraically closed, nor even perfect) are defined as the

corresponding object for the F-space E(G~ k Ng).

The slopes of G are in the interval [0, ;]. The above proposition
givesl

Corollary_. If ~ is the slope function o_~fthe ~-divisible group G, then, for

6, ~e~,~ o

)+A(~, )
rk(Ker ~G (] Ker p~ id G) = po(co ( ~ / ~

whete A(ot,~) is bounded.

 S9

In particular c~(2k) ~ 0 for ;k40,

(?k) = lim ~I lOgp (rk(Ker F~Ker p~idG)), for ~)0,

c< )co

U)(~k) = dim G for ?k~height (G).

6. Th_._eecharacteristic polynomial of an endomorphism.

If M is an F-lattice (resp. E is an F-space) and ~ an endomorphism

of M (resp. E), then the determinant det ((~) of (~ is in ~ p (resp.~p): if

n = dim M (resp. n = dimE), then A n ~ is the multiplication by det ( ~ ) and

commutes with F; this implies det (~)(P) ~ det (~), hence the assertion.

More generally, the characteristic polynomial

det(q)- T id)

of ~0 is in ~p[T](resp. ~p[T]).

If Cp is an endomorphism of M, then it is well-known that

length (M/q)(M)) = v (det(~)).

(Note that 40) : ~)

This applies for instance to the case of the F-lattice of a p-divisible

group G, and gives for any endomorphism q~ of a p-divisible group G

rk(Ker q~) = pv(det M(q) )),

(where, b_/ convention, pOO = 0, and rk(H) = 0 if H is not finite).

If k is a finite field with q ~ pa elements, then Fa is W(k)-linear,

hence is an endomorphism of the F-lattice M (resp. of the F-space E).

 9O

I
Theorem (Manin). Le__~t k be a finite field with q = pa elements, E a__nn

F-space, ~ p the algebraic closure of ~p,W: ~ p - - - - ~ the valuation such

that v(q) = ' (i.e. v(p) : I/a); let

F(T)°det(F Tid) (ri-T)

~i C ~p • Then the slopes of E are the w ( ~ i) (counted with their multiplicities).

By replacing E by E(-n), which replaces ~-i by qn~i-i, and the

slopes ( A i) by ( Ai+n ), we can suppose that E comes from an F-lattice M.

By the above proposition, the slope function co of E is determined by cO(A) = O

if 2k%0, and for ~k~O

(*) ~(~) lim ! length M((Fa~M + q ~ M ) .

~ ~0

Note that B(k) C ~ p . We can find a basis ei of E~B(k) ~ p such that the

matrix of Fa in this basis is triangular with diagonal entries ~i; as remarked

in the proof of the proposition of n° 5, the right hand side of (*) is also
equal to the analogous expression, M being replaced by the lattice N in

E~B(k) 6 p generated by the ei. But Fa~ei = C~i ei' and

length N/(Fa~N + q ~ N ) =~--inf(~w(~), ~).

This gives c o ( 4 ) = ~inf(~ ~i ), A), whence the theorem.

7. SRecialization of p-divisible r ~ s .

If S is a scheme over ~p, a p-divisible group G over S is a

system (Gn,in) of finite locally free commutative group-schemes over S, together

with homomorphisms in:Gn----)Gn+ I with the properties given in Ch. IIi.

 91

For each sc S, the fibres (Gn) give a p-divisible group G s.

Theorem (Grothendieck). Let s,E S be a s_pecialisation of s , ~ (resp o~')

the slojpe-function of Gs(res p. G s ,). The__~n cO' ~ co- Equivalently, the Newton-

polygon o_ff Gs, is above the Newton-polygon of G s.

Each Ker F~ and each Ker p~ idG is a finite locally free commutative

group scheme; moreover

Ker F ~, Ker p~ C Ker pSUp(o(,~)

By the following lemma, it follows that

rk(Ker F~GN Ker p8 idG)s, ) rk(Ker F~Gf~ Ker p8 idG) s.

This gives immediately Oas,(~k) $ ~ s ( 4 ) .

Lemma. Let S be a scheme, Z £ finite local!y free S-scheme, X and Y two

finite locally free closed subschemes of Z. I[ s' ~ S is a special isation o~f

se S, then

rk(Xf~Y)s, >/ rk(Xf~Y)s"

Proof. Take S = Spec R affine, Z = Spec A, X = Spec A/I, Y = Spec A/J; then

X 6~ Y = Spec A(I + J). But A/I and J are locally free R-modules and A/(I + J)

is the cokernel of the R-linear map Q0:J----> A/I. Remark now that the rank of

(Ps does not increase by specialization.

Remark. If G is of height r, then CJs(r ) is the dimension of G s. Hence

Os,(Z) = ~s(Z); equivalently, the extremities of the Newton polygon are invariant
under specialization.
 92

8. Some part lcular case__,___ss,

Let G be a p-divlsible group (k perfect). The slope sequence of G.

'A'I ~ A2 ~ "'" ~ h with 0 ~I, Ak41'

determines G® upto isogeny. We know that G splits as a product G sXGc,

k
where Ge is etale and Gc connected. But G~ is etale (resp. connected) if

and only if R ~ 0 (resp R>0). Hence the slopes of Ge (resp. Gc) are the

~i which are = O (resp. > 0).

The Serre dual G' of G has the slope sequence

I -Zh~ 1 - ~kh_ I ~ ... ~1 - % 1 "

Applying the preceeding decomposition also to G', we find:

Proposition. Th_~eP-divisible r ~ G can be uniquely written as a product

G = %~ ~ , G m,

where the slopes of Ge (resp. ~, resp. Gin) are the slopes of G which are

= 0 (resp ~ 0,1, resp = 1).

In particular, if k = k,

Proposition. I ff G i_£s iso~enous t2o ~/r (resp. o~r-~/r~, th,~ o is is~

morphic to it.

Equivalently: if ~ = I/r, or (r-1)/r, any F-lattice M in ~

is isomorphic to ~2k. By duality, it is enough to prove the statement for

2k= I/r. Then ~?k has a basis e1,...,er, with Fel = e2, Fe2 = e3,...,Fer_ I =

"r' Fer ° P', For e~o~ i, let "i ~ !~f{ml~ s i c k ) ~en

 93

ml~>~ ... ~ m n ~ m I ! l ;

replacing if necessary the basis (ei) by a basis (FC(p ~ el) , we can suppose

that m I = m 2 . . . . . m n = O, i.e. eieM and p-ie i ~ M , for all i. This

implies M D~, Let meM, m ~ ; write

m = ~-aiei, aieB(k ).

There exists ~ with F ~ m ~ M k9k, F O(+Im~Mk~ ; r e p l a c i n g m by F ~m, we can

Fm ~ Pane I + ale2 + ... ÷ an_fen,

hence a I .... ,an_ I ~ W(k), angW(k), Pan~W(k)" This implies

anen = ~m - ale 2 ... - an_len~M,

and a contradiction.

Example. If k = k, then any p-divisible group G of height 0,1,2,3 is isomorphic

to one of the following:

height 0 : 0

height i : Go, G I
2
height 2 : G2, G;, G o n G I, G;/2.

height 3 : G 3, G2xGI, G o X G 2, G~, GI/3, G2/3.

For height &, it is isomorphic to GAo, G o X G I GI,

°°'~al~G'I2' °,2~G,12' °,I~' ~31~' or isogenous to (QI/2)2.

 CHAPTER V

p-ADIC C~OMOLOGY OF ABELIAN VARIETIES

k is a field, p = charac (k).

T. Abelian varieties, known facts.

The following facts are known, see Lang's or Mumford's Abelian Varieties.

a) If A is an abelian variety, of dimension g, over k, and ~I''"' Sr

are endomorphisms of A, then

rk Ker(n I ~i÷...~ nr~r)

is a polynomial in n I ,... ,nr with rational coefficients, homogeneous of degree 2g

(by convention, the rank of a non-finite group is 0).

For instance, rk Ker(n idG) = n 2g rk Ker(idG) = n 2g.

The characteristic pol,Yno~a ! P of the endomorphism $ is defined by

P(n) -- rk K e r ( ~ - n idG) = (-I)2g n2g+...rk(Ker c~ ).

b) There exists an abelian variety A,, the dual of A, with the following

properties:

1) for any n, Ker(n idA) and Ker(n id A ,) are Cartier dual of each other,

this duality being compatible with the inclusion and projection

Ker(n idA) ; Ker(nm idA) n,~Ker(m idA) ,

rn
Ker(n i%, )~ Ker(nm idA)< Ker(m idA, ).
 95

2) There exists an isogeny (epimorphism with finite kernel) of A to A'.

2. Points of finite order and endomorphisms.

Let A be an abelian variety over k, and ~ a prime number. For any

2ng
ng~, Ker( ~n idA) is a finite group of rank . We define

A(~) = l.J ~er(~n idA) -

n

A( ~ )®k ~ = (~I[(2~£)2g"

If ~ ~ p, then A(~ ) is an etale formal-group, and we define

it is a free module of rank 2g over Z [ (and also a Galois module).

If ~ = p, then A(p) is a p-divisible group, of height 2g. We define

HI(A,p) = M(A(p)) = Dieudonn6 module of A(p);

it is an F-lattice over k, and in particular a free module of rank 2g over W(k).

Evidently A~ ~ H;(A, ~ ), ~ any prime, is a functor. In particular,

any endomorphism ~O of the abelian variety A gives rise to an endomorphism

HI(Qo, ~ ) of HI(A, ~ ). We denote by v~ the canonical valuation on

~ (resp. W(k) if ~ = p).

Lemma. If C4) is an endomorphism of A, then for ~ prime ~ , (~ ~ p or ~ = p),

the highest p o ~ r o_ff [ which divides rk(Eer ~0 ) i_ss ~v~(det HI(~, ~))

Equlvalently

v~(rk(Ker (p)) = v~ (det(H'(~,~)).

 96

We can suppose k is algebraically closed. As we have seen jKerq) is the

product of its components of ~ -torsion:

Ker ~ = T~(Ker ~ n A ( ~ ) )

and rk(Ker ( ~ N A ( ~ ) ) is a power of ~ , hence

rk(Kerq~A(~)) = v~ (rk Ker (~)

For each ~ , ~ induces an endomorphism of HI(A,~ ) and we have an exact sequence

HI
HI(A, ~ ) (qm, ~ )) HI(A,~ ) ~N )0,

where N is of length v~ (det R'((p, ( ) ) .

zf ~ p , N is the PontrJagin dual of Kerq~A(~ ), hence the

relation. If ~ : p, N is the Dieudonn~ module of Ker~A(p), and

rk(Kerq~(BA(p)) = plength (N) as we have seen.

Theorem. If ~ is an endomorphism of A, then, for a~Y , (~p, ore=p),

we have

rk(Ker ~ ) = det H1(q),~).

This follows from the preceding lemma, by the method of Mumford, p. 181.

Corollary. If (~ is an endomorphism of A, then the characteristic polynomial

of (4) is also the characteristic polynomial of HI(Qo, e ) for all ~ . It has

integral coefficients.

Because a rational number is integral if it is a ~-adic integer for

all ~ .
 97

3. Structure of the p-divisible group A(p).

We remark first that A'(p) (A' the dual abelian variety to A) is

canonically isomorphic to the Serre dual of A(p). Because A' and A are

isogenous, this implies that A(p) is isogenous to its Serre dual. Equivalently,

if the slope sequence of A(p) is

41 ~ A2~<... ~<~k2g,

then 2ki + A2g_i = I.

Remark. If 2ki = ?,
s then ~%2g-i = -r-s
- and s + (r - s) = r° From these follows
r ~

the ~ll-known fact that the dimension of A(p) is g, i.e. rk(Ker ~A) ~ pig.

For instance, if g = I, then A(p)@ k ~ is isogenous (hence isomorphic)

to either GoX G I or GI/2. More generally:

Proposition. Let A be an abelian variety of dim g, over the algebraically

closed field k. Then A(k) contains at most pg points of order p. Moreover,

the follo~ng conditions are equivalent.

I) A(k) contains pg ~oints of order P.

2) A(p) is isomorphic t2o G gO x G~.

3) Ker(p idG:A > A) i~s isomorphic to ( ~ / P Z)~ x (p~k) g.

We have A(p) = ~°x ( ~ p / ~ p ) ~ ; the slopes of ~o are the A.I >0, the

(Q p / )r
slopes of Zp are the h i = O. Hence r is the multiplicity of the slope

O, hence also the multiplicity of the slope I. This implies r @g, and the

equivalence r = g < > the slopes of A(p) are g times 0 and g times I.

The proposition follows easily.

 98

Such an abelian variety is called ordinary.

The theorems of § 2 and Chapter IV, § 6 give:

a
Theorem (Manin). Let k be a finite field with q = p elements, A an

abelian variety over k,

2g
P(T) = ~--I ('Ci - T) = T2g+"'+q n

[-ie6p, th_~echaracteristic polynomial of the Frobenius endomorphism F~ of A.

Then th___ees!opes of A(p) are ~ ~) where w is the valuation ~p---)Q

such that w(q) = I.

Example. If g = I, i.e. A is an elliptic curve, then

P(T) = ~ - Tr(Fa) ÷ q,

and we find the (easy) statements:

Tr(Fa) = 0 (~od p ) ~ A ( p ) ~ GI/2

Tr(F a) ~ 0 (rood p)< ~A(p) = GoX G I i.e. A is ordinary.