Over which commutative rings do we have Smith normal form?












1












$begingroup$


It is well-known that matrices over a PID
always have Smith normal form as in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_normal_form. What about general rings which may not even be noetherian?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    see here also mathoverflow.net/questions/31275/…
    $endgroup$
    – Badam Baplan
    Dec 5 '18 at 1:33
















1












$begingroup$


It is well-known that matrices over a PID
always have Smith normal form as in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_normal_form. What about general rings which may not even be noetherian?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    see here also mathoverflow.net/questions/31275/…
    $endgroup$
    – Badam Baplan
    Dec 5 '18 at 1:33














1












1








1





$begingroup$


It is well-known that matrices over a PID
always have Smith normal form as in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_normal_form. What about general rings which may not even be noetherian?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




It is well-known that matrices over a PID
always have Smith normal form as in https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_normal_form. What about general rings which may not even be noetherian?







abstract-algebra commutative-algebra






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Dec 4 '18 at 19:02









zzyzzy

2,6111420




2,6111420












  • $begingroup$
    see here also mathoverflow.net/questions/31275/…
    $endgroup$
    – Badam Baplan
    Dec 5 '18 at 1:33


















  • $begingroup$
    see here also mathoverflow.net/questions/31275/…
    $endgroup$
    – Badam Baplan
    Dec 5 '18 at 1:33
















$begingroup$
see here also mathoverflow.net/questions/31275/…
$endgroup$
– Badam Baplan
Dec 5 '18 at 1:33




$begingroup$
see here also mathoverflow.net/questions/31275/…
$endgroup$
– Badam Baplan
Dec 5 '18 at 1:33










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

The algorithm requires at least a Bézout domain to express GCDs as linear combinations, and I think it requires some sort of bound on factorizations to prevent chasing some infinite factorizations forever.



The safest thing to do to control factorizations would be to assume it is a UFD, but a Bézout UFD is already a PID.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3025972%2fover-which-commutative-rings-do-we-have-smith-normal-form%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1












    $begingroup$

    The algorithm requires at least a Bézout domain to express GCDs as linear combinations, and I think it requires some sort of bound on factorizations to prevent chasing some infinite factorizations forever.



    The safest thing to do to control factorizations would be to assume it is a UFD, but a Bézout UFD is already a PID.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      1












      $begingroup$

      The algorithm requires at least a Bézout domain to express GCDs as linear combinations, and I think it requires some sort of bound on factorizations to prevent chasing some infinite factorizations forever.



      The safest thing to do to control factorizations would be to assume it is a UFD, but a Bézout UFD is already a PID.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        The algorithm requires at least a Bézout domain to express GCDs as linear combinations, and I think it requires some sort of bound on factorizations to prevent chasing some infinite factorizations forever.



        The safest thing to do to control factorizations would be to assume it is a UFD, but a Bézout UFD is already a PID.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        The algorithm requires at least a Bézout domain to express GCDs as linear combinations, and I think it requires some sort of bound on factorizations to prevent chasing some infinite factorizations forever.



        The safest thing to do to control factorizations would be to assume it is a UFD, but a Bézout UFD is already a PID.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Dec 4 '18 at 19:20









        rschwiebrschwieb

        107k12102251




        107k12102251






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3025972%2fover-which-commutative-rings-do-we-have-smith-normal-form%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Biblatex bibliography style without URLs when DOI exists (in Overleaf with Zotero bibliography)

            ComboBox Display Member on multiple fields

            Is it possible to collect Nectar points via Trainline?