Skip to main content
added 204 characters in body
Source Link
Mare
  • 26.5k
  • 6
  • 25
  • 104

For which commutative rings k is the following true:

A k-algebra $A$ that is flat over $k$ and derived equivalent to a $k$-algebra $B$ implies that also $B$ is flat over $k$.

The motivation is this: Many results on derived equivalences start with two k-algebras A and B that are assumed to be flat and derived equivalent. Maybe it is often enough to just assume one is flat?

For which commutative rings k is the following true:

A k-algebra $A$ that is flat over $k$ and derived equivalent to a $k$-algebra $B$ implies that also $B$ is flat over $k$.

For which commutative rings k is the following true:

A k-algebra $A$ that is flat over $k$ and derived equivalent to a $k$-algebra $B$ implies that also $B$ is flat over $k$.

The motivation is this: Many results on derived equivalences start with two k-algebras A and B that are assumed to be flat and derived equivalent. Maybe it is often enough to just assume one is flat?

edited title
Link
Mare
  • 26.5k
  • 6
  • 25
  • 104

When is being flat a derived invariant?

Source Link
Mare
  • 26.5k
  • 6
  • 25
  • 104

When is flat a derived invariant?

For which commutative rings k is the following true:

A k-algebra $A$ that is flat over $k$ and derived equivalent to a $k$-algebra $B$ implies that also $B$ is flat over $k$.