Links

In our joint paper with Alexei Stepanov it was established that for any two comaximal ideals A and B of a commutative ring R, A+B = R, and any n > 3 one has [E(n, R, A), E(n, R, B)] = E(n, R, AB). Alec Mason and Wilson Stothers constructed counterexamples that show that the above equality may fail when A and B are not comaximal, even for such nice rings as Z[i]. In the present note, we establish a rather striking result that this equality, and thus also the stronger equality [GL(n, R, A), GL(n, R, B)] = E(n, R, AB), do hold when R is a Dedekind ring of arithmetic type with infinite multiplicative group. The proof is a blend of elementary calculations in the spirit of the previous papers by Wilberd van der Kallen, Roozbeh Hazrat, Zuhong Zhang, Alexei Stepanov, and the author, and an explicit computation of multirelative SK1 from my 1982 paper, which in turn relied on very deep arithmetical results by Jean-Pierre Serre, and Leonid Vaserstein (as corrected by Armin Leutbecher and Bernhard Liehl).
Translated title of the contributionКоммутаторы конгруэнц-подгрупп в арифметическом случае
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)5-22
JournalЗАПИСКИ НАУЧНЫХ СЕМИНАРОВ САНКТ-ПЕТЕРБУРГСКОГО ОТДЕЛЕНИЯ МАТЕМАТИЧЕСКОГО ИНСТИТУТА ИМ. В.А. СТЕКЛОВА РАН
Volume479
StatePublished - 2019

    Scopus subject areas

  • Mathematics(all)

    Research areas

  • General linear group, congruence subgroups, elementary subgroups, standard commutator formulae, Dedekind rings of arithmetic type

ID: 51601744