On Modules Whose Pure Submodules Are Essential in Direct Summands

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.27450
• Title: On Modules Whose Pure Submodules Are Essential in Direct Summands
• Authors: Kaushal Gupta, Theophilus Gera, Amit Sharma, Ashok Ji Gupta
• Classification: math.RA (Rings and Algebras)
• Publication Date: October 31, 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.27450

Abstract

This paper introduces the concept of pure extending modules, a refinement of the classical extending modules that requires only pure submodules to be essential in direct summands. The authors establish fundamental properties and characterizations, proving that on von Neumann regular rings, pure extending modules coincide with extending modules. As applications, they prove that pure extending modules admit decomposition patterns similar to classical theory, including a generalization of the Osofsky-Smith theorem: cyclic modules whose proper quotients are pure extending decompose into finite direct sums of pure uniform submodules. Furthermore, by constructing an example of a centrally quasi-morphic module that is not centrally morphic, they resolve an open problem posed by Dehghani and Sedaghatjoo.

Research Background and Motivation

Problems to be Addressed

This paper aims to resolve three core problems in module theory:

1. Structural Rigidity of Extending Modules: Classical extending modules require all submodules to be essential in direct summands, a condition that is too restrictive in homological pure settings involving flatness, divisibility, or exactness preservation under tensor products.
2. Direct Sum Closure Problem: Long-standing open questions are whether finite direct sums of extending modules remain extending (Question 1.1(1)), and whether modules whose quotients are all extending decompose into finite direct sums of uniform modules (Question 1.1(2)).
3. Centrality Problem for Morphic Modules: An open problem posed by Dehghani and Sedaghatjoo 8: Is every centrally quasi-morphic module necessarily centrally morphic?

Significance of the Problems

1. Theoretical Significance: Extending module theory forms the foundation of module decomposition theory and is closely related to torsion theory, purity, and homological algebra. Purifying this concept makes it more adaptable to homological frameworks.
2. Structural Analysis: von Neumann's foundational work on continuous geometry and Utumi's analysis of rings demonstrate the far-reaching impact of studying essential embeddings and direct summand structures.
3. Applied Value: The connection between morphic modules and Rickart modules provides tools for understanding the regularity of endomorphism rings.

Limitations of Existing Approaches

1. Classical Extending Modules are Too Restrictive: In many algebraic settings, particularly those involving homological purity, requiring all submodules to be essentially embedded in direct summands is unrealistic.
2. Lack of Direct Sum Closure: Although Birkenmeier et al. proved that finite direct sums of extending modules are FI-extending, they are not extending in general.
3. Insufficient Purity Perspective: Existing theory has not fully exploited the special properties of pure submodules (submodules that preserve exactness under tensor products).

Research Motivation

The core motivation of this paper is to weaken the classical C1 condition through the concept of purity, thereby:

• Expanding the class of modules under study while maintaining decomposability
• Establishing homological analogues of pure exact decompositions
• Utilizing the good properties of purity (such as behavior under direct summands) to resolve classical problems

Core Contributions

1. Introduction of Pure Extending Modules: Defines pure extending modules, requiring only pure submodules to be essential in direct summands, which is a natural weakening of classical extending modules.
2. Establishment of Fundamental Theory:
   • Proves that pure extending modules coincide with extending modules on von Neumann regular rings (Proposition 2.8)
   • Proves that the class of pure extending modules is closed under finite direct sums (Theorem 2.10)
   • Provides multiple characterization theorems (Propositions 2.7, 2.14, Theorem 2.15)
3. Introduction of RD-Pure Extending Modules: Defines RD-pure extending modules based on element divisibility, strictly containing the class of pure extending modules and providing a more flexible framework (Example A.1).
4. Generalization of the Osofsky-Smith Theorem: Proves that cyclic modules whose proper quotients are pure extending decompose into finite direct sums of pure uniform submodules (Theorem 3.2), partially answering Question 1.1(2).
5. Resolution of Open Problems:
   • Constructs a counterexample proving that centrally quasi-morphic modules are not necessarily centrally morphic (Example 3.22)
   • Points out errors in several propositions in 8 (Remark 3.23)
   • Proves equivalence in the case of finitely generated, non-singular, pure extending modules (Proposition 3.20)
6. Establishment of Connection with Σ-Rickart Modules: Proves that finitely generated non-singular pure extending modules over Noetherian rings are Σ-Rickart (Theorem 3.19).

Detailed Methodology

Core Concept Definitions

Definition 2.1 (Pure Extending Module): A module $M$ is called pure extending if every pure submodule of $M$ is essential in some direct summand of $M$.

Here, a pure submodule $P \leq M$ is one such that for all ideals $I \subseteq R$, we have $IP = IM \cap P$. A submodule $N$ is essential in $M$ (denoted $N \leq_e M$) if every nonzero submodule of $M$ intersects $N$ nontrivially.

Definition 2.16 (RD-Pure Extending Module): A submodule $P \leq M$ is called relatively divisible pure (RD-pure) if for every $r \in R$, we have $rP = rM \cap P$. A module $M$ is called RD-pure extending if every RD-pure submodule is essential in some direct summand.

Theoretical Framework

1. Hierarchical Structure

The paper establishes the following implication relationships:

Injective ⟹ Quasi-injective ⟹ Extending
    ⇓            ⇓              ⇓
Pure injective ⟹ Quasi-pure injective ⟹ Pure extending

In general, none of these implications are reversible (Example 2.2).

2. Fundamental Properties

Proposition 2.3: Direct summands of pure extending modules are pure extending.

Proof Strategy: Let $M = N \oplus N'$ and $P \leq N$ be a pure submodule of $N$. Since split inclusions are pure, $P$ is pure in $M$. By pure extending property, there exists $D \leq^{\oplus} M$ such that $P \leq_e D$. By standard module-theoretic arguments, $D \cap N$ is a direct summand of $N$ and $P \leq_e (D \cap N)$.

Theorem 2.10 (Finite Direct Sum Closure): $M = M_1 \oplus M_2$ is pure extending if and only if both $M_1$ and $M_2$ are pure extending.

Proof Outline:

• (⇒) Follows immediately from Proposition 2.3
• (⇐) Let $P \leq M$ be pure. Then $\pi_i(P)$ is pure in $M_i$. There exist $D_i \leq^{\oplus} M_i$ such that $\pi_i(P) \leq_e D_i$. Let $D = D_1 \oplus D_2$ and verify $P \leq_e D$: for any $0 \neq (d_1, d_2) \in D$, if $d_1 \neq 0$, by $\pi_1(P) \leq_e D_1$ there exists $r$ such that $0 \neq d_1r \in \pi_1(P)$. Through careful analysis, we show $P \cap (d_1, d_2)R \neq 0$.

Note: This result cannot be generalized to infinite direct sums (Example 2.11).

3. Ring-Theoretic Characterizations

Proposition 2.8: Let $R$ be a von Neumann regular ring. Then a right $R$-module $M$ is pure extending if and only if it is extending.

Justification: On von Neumann regular rings, every module is flat, hence every submodule is pure.

Proposition 2.14: The following are equivalent:

1. $R$ is von Neumann regular
2. Every pure extending right $R$-module is flat

Theorem 2.15: The following are equivalent:

1. $R$ is semisimple
2. Every pure C3 module is projective
3. Every pure C2 module is projective
4. Every quasi-pure injective module is projective
5. Every pure injective module is projective
6. Every pure extending module is projective

Technical Innovations

1. Precise Use of Purity: By distinguishing ideal purity ($IP = IM \cap P$) from element purity ($rP = rM \cap P$), the authors establish a two-level theoretical system.
2. Application of Fieldhouse's Results: Utilizes the classical result that purity coincides with RD-purity on flat modules (Proposition 2.19, Corollary 2.20).
3. Monotonicity of Purification Operator: In decomposition theorem proofs, uses the monotonicity of the purification operator $\text{Pur}(-)$ to control descending chains (Proposition 3.7).
4. Endomorphism Ring Conditions: Connects morphic properties to decomposition properties through strong $\pi$-endomorphic regularity (Proposition 3.12).

Applications: Decomposition Theory

Generalization of the Osofsky-Smith Theorem

Historical Background: Osofsky and Smith 31 proved:

Theorem 3.1: Let $M$ be a cyclic module. If every cyclic submodule of $M$ is completely extending, then $M$ is a direct sum of finitely many uniform modules.

Here, completely extending means all quotient modules are extending, which is much stronger than purity.

Main Results

Theorem 3.2: Let $M$ be a cyclic module. If every cyclic quotient module of $M$ is pure extending, then $M$ is a direct sum of finitely many pure uniform submodules.

Proof Strategy:

1. Endomorphism Artinian Property (Theorem 3.3): Proves that if all quotient modules of a cyclic module are endomorphism Artinian, then the module itself is endomorphism Artinian.
   Proof: Assume $M$ is not endomorphism Artinian. Then there exists a strictly descending chain $M = f_0(M) \supsetneq f_1(M) \supsetneq \cdots$. Let $N = \bigcap_i f_i(M)$. Then $M/N$ inherits the corresponding descending chain, a contradiction.
2. Pure Uniformity (Proposition 3.4): Every nonzero pure submodule of an indecomposable pure extending module is pure essential.
   Proof: Let $P \leq M$ be nonzero and pure, and $X \leq P$ be nonzero and pure. By pure extending property, there exists $D \leq^{\oplus} M$ such that $X \leq_e D$. By indecomposability, $D = M$, hence $X \leq_e M$.
3. Finite Decomposition (Theorem 3.6): Pure extending endomorphism Artinian modules decompose into finite direct sums of pure uniform submodules.
4. Quotient Module Artinian Property (Proposition 3.7): Proves that every cyclic quotient module of a cyclic pure extending module is Artinian, crucially using the finiteness of uniform dimension and properties of the purification operator.

Corollary 3.8: On von Neumann regular rings, if all cyclic quotient modules of a cyclic module are extending, then the module is a direct sum of finitely many uniform modules.

Applications: Morphic Module Theory

Background Concepts

Rickart Module: $M$ is called Rickart if for every $f \in \text{End}(M)$, $\ker(f) = eM$ for some idempotent $e^2 = e$.

Σ-Rickart Module: $M$ is called Σ-Rickart if every direct sum of copies of $M$ is Rickart; equivalently, for any set $I$ and $f \in \text{End}(M^I)$, there exists finite $J \subseteq I$ such that $\ker(f) \leq^{\oplus} M^J$.

Centrally Quasi-Morphic Module: $M$ is called centrally quasi-morphic if for every $f \in \text{End}(M)$, there exist central elements $g, h \in \text{Cent}(\text{End}(M))$ such that $\ker(f) = \text{Im}(g)$ and $\text{Im}(f) = \ker(h)$. If we can take $g = h$, then $M$ is called centrally morphic.

Core Results

Theorem 3.19: Let $R$ be a right Noetherian ring and $M$ a finitely generated, non-singular, pure extending right $R$-module. Then $M$ is Σ-Rickart.

Proof Outline:

1. Let $X = M^{(I)}$, $f \in \text{End}(X)$, $K = \ker f$
2. Let $\overline{K} = \text{Pur}(K)$ be the purification of $K$
3. By pure extending property, $\overline{K} \leq_e D$ for some $D \leq^{\oplus} X$
4. Prove $K = \overline{K}$: If not, there exists a finitely generated submodule $F$ such that $(F \cap \overline{K})/(F \cap K)$ is nonzero and finitely presented. But $X/K$ is non-singular, contradiction.
5. Prove $D = K$: For $y \in D$, choose finitely generated $F \leq D$ containing $y$. $F \cap K$ is pure and essential in $F$. By finite presentability, $F \cap K = F$.

Proposition 3.20: Let $R$ be a Noetherian ring and $M$ a finitely generated, non-singular, pure extending module. Then $M$ is centrally quasi-morphic if and only if it is centrally morphic.

Proof Outline:

1. By Theorem 3.19, $M$ is Σ-Rickart
2. By 22, Proposition 4.3, $\text{End}(M)$ is right hereditary
3. Prove $\text{End}(M)$ is von Neumann regular: every principal right ideal $fS$ is projective, hence generated by an idempotent
4. Therefore $M$ is endomorphism regular
5. By 8's results, endomorphism regular and centrally quasi-morphic imply strong endomorphism regularity, which implies centrally morphic

Counterexample Construction

Example 3.22: Let $k$ be a field and $R = k[x]/(x^2)$, $M = R$ as a right $R$-module.

• $\text{End}_R(M) \cong R$ (via $r \mapsto (s \mapsto sr)$), and $R$ is commutative, so every endomorphism is central
• The ideals of $R$ are $\{0, \overline{x}R, R\}$
• For the endomorphism of multiplication by $a \in R$:
  • If $a$ is a unit: $(\text{Im}(f), \ker(f)) = (R, 0)$
  • If $a = 0$: $(0, R)$
  • If $a = \lambda\overline{x}$, $\lambda \neq 0$: $(\overline{x}R, \overline{x}R)$

Therefore $M$ is centrally quasi-morphic.

However, $M$ is not centrally morphic: The only idempotents in $R$ are 0 and 1, so central idempotent endomorphisms can only give $eM \in \{0, M\}$, not $\overline{x}R$.

Significance: This example proves that several assertions in 8, Proposition 2.2, Corollary 2.3, Proposition 3.11 do not hold in the general case.

Theoretical Verification

Since this is a pure mathematics theory paper, there are no traditional "experiments," but the theory is verified through numerous examples:

Main Verifications

1. Pure Extending Strictly Contains Extending (Example 2.2):
   • $M = \mathbb{Z}_2 \oplus \mathbb{Z}_8$ is pure extending but not extending
   • Examples on matrix rings
2. Non-Hereditariness (Example 2.5):
   • $A = \bigoplus_{n \geq 1} \mathbb{Z}/p^n\mathbb{Z}$ has a pure subgroup $U$ that is not a direct summand, hence not pure extending
   • But $E(A)$ (the injective envelope) is pure extending
3. Infinite Direct Sum Failure (Example 2.11):
   • $M = \bigoplus_{i=1}^{\infty} \mathbb{Z}$
   • $P = \{(n_i) \mid \sum n_i = 0\}$ is pure but not essential in any direct summand
4. RD-Pure Strictly Contains Pure (Example A.1):
   • $M = \mathbb{Z}(p^{\infty}) \oplus \mathbb{Z}/p\mathbb{Z}$
   • $U = \langle(y, x)\rangle$ is pure but not RD-pure extending as required
   • Detailed verification in three cases proves $M$ is RD-pure extending

Significance of Counterexamples

The Construction in Example 3.22 is elegant:

• Chooses $R = k[x]/(x^2)$ so the ring is local but not semisimple or von Neumann regular
• Exploits the fact that $\overline{x}R$ is both a kernel and an image but cannot be generated by central idempotents
• This shows the necessity of the "finitely generated" assumption in Corollary 3.21

Related Work

Historical Development

1. Origins of Extending Modules:
   • von Neumann's foundational work on continuous geometry
   • Utumi 32: Rings where left ideals are essentially contained in projective direct summands
   • Jeremy 17 and Chatters-Hajarnavis 7: CS-modules ("complements are direct summands")
   • Harada: Introduced the term "extending module"
   • Müller 28: Systematized C1, C2, C3 conditions
2. Purity Theory:
   • Fieldhouse 11, 12: Purity theory, PDS rings
   • Azumaya-Facchini 4: Pure injective envelopes
   • Harmanci et al. 15: Pure injective profiles
3. Rickart Modules:
   • Lee-Rizvi-Roman 24-26: Rickart and dual Rickart modules
   • Lee-Bárcenas 22: Σ-Rickart modules
4. Morphic Modules:
   • Nicholson-Campos 29, 30: Morphic modules
   • Camillo-Nicholson 6: Quasi-morphic rings
   • Dehghani-Sedaghatjoo 8: Centrally morphic modules (errors pointed out in this paper)

Innovations of This Paper

1. Conceptual Innovation: First systematic study of pure extending modules, filling the gap between extending modules and pure injective modules.
2. Methodological Innovation:
   • Refined analysis combining purity and essentiality
   • Using Artinian conditions on endomorphism rings to control decompositions
   • Handling descending chains through monotonicity of the purification operator
3. Result Innovation:
   • Generalizes the Osofsky-Smith theorem under weaker assumptions
   • Establishes deep connections between pure extending and Σ-Rickart modules
   • Resolves open problems in 8 and corrects errors

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Pure Extending Modules are Natural Generalizations of Extending Modules: They maintain core decomposition properties while adapting to the homological purity framework.
2. Special Nature of von Neumann Regular Rings: On such rings, pure extending coincides with extending, and the finite direct sum closure problem receives an affirmative answer.
3. Decomposition Theorems: Under purity assumptions, the decomposition behavior of cyclic modules parallels the classical case.
4. Fine Distinctions in Morphic Properties: The distinction between centrally quasi-morphic and centrally morphic modules depends on subtle interactions between finiteness, non-singularity, and pure extending properties.

Limitations

1. Infinite Direct Sums: Pure extending property does not preserve under infinite direct sums (Example 2.11), limiting applications to infinite-dimensional cases.
2. Necessity of von Neumann Regularity: Whether the von Neumann regularity assumption in Corollary 3.8 is necessary remains unclear (Note 3.9).
3. Finitely Generated Assumption: Whether the "finitely generated" assumption in Corollary 3.21 can be removed is unclear (Remark 3.23(1)).
4. Reverse Implications: The converse of Theorem 3.19 (whether finitely generated Σ-Rickart modules over Noetherian rings are pure extending) remains open.
5. Constructivity: Many existence results (e.g., Example 2.13(2)) lack explicit constructions.

Future Directions

Research directions implicitly suggested by the paper:

1. Conditions for Infinite Direct Sums: Find necessary and sufficient conditions for pure extending property to preserve under infinite direct sums.
2. Complete Characterization: On which ring classes do pure extending and extending coincide?
3. RD-Pure Theory: Further study RD-pure extending modules, particularly in non-flat cases.
4. Complete Picture of Morphic Modules: Clarify which results in 8 can be corrected and which are essentially wrong.
5. Computational Methods: Develop algorithms to determine whether a given module is pure extending.
6. Categorical Generalization: Generalize the concept of pure extending modules to Grothendieck categories.

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Naturalness of Concepts: The definition of pure extending modules naturally combines two fundamental concepts (purity and essentiality), with intrinsic reasonableness within the homological algebra framework.
2. Theoretical Completeness:
   • Systematically establishes fundamental properties (Propositions 2.3-2.7)
   • Provides multiple equivalent characterizations (Propositions 2.8, 2.14, Theorem 2.15)
   • Introduces RD-pure variants to enhance flexibility
3. Rigor of Proofs:
   • Every theorem has complete proofs
   • Counterexamples are precisely constructed (Examples 2.2, 2.5, 2.11, 3.22, A.1)
   • Errors in 8 are identified with sufficient justification (Remark 3.23)
4. Applied Value:
   • Generalizes classical decomposition theorems (Theorem 3.2)
   • Resolves open problems (Example 3.22 answers Question 2.14)
   • Establishes new connections (pure extending ↔ Σ-Rickart, Theorem 3.19)
5. Clarity of Exposition:
   • Well-organized structure (properties → characterizations → applications)
   • Clear motivation (Introduction details background thoroughly)
   • Rich examples (13 examples/counterexamples)

Weaknesses

1. Technical Difficulty:
   • Requires deep background in module theory for complete understanding
   • Some proofs (e.g., Theorem 3.19) are highly technical with limited readability
2. Scope of Applications:
   • Main results concentrate on Noetherian rings and von Neumann regular rings
   • Fewer results for general rings
3. Open Problems:
   • Multiple unresolved questions remain (e.g., Note 3.9, Remark 3.23(1))
   • Necessity of some assumptions remains unclear
4. Computational Aspects:
   • Lacks decision algorithms or effective criteria
   • Difficult to verify pure extending property in concrete examples
5. Connections to Other Theories:
   • Connections to tilting theory and derived categories unexplored
   • Relationships to representation theory could be deeper

Impact

Contributions to the Field:

1. Conceptual Contribution: Pure extending modules may become a standard concept in module theory, like extending modules.
2. Methodological Contribution: The application of purification operators in decomposition theory (Proposition 3.7) provides new tools.
3. Corrective Contribution: Identifying errors in 8 is important for healthy development of the field.

Practical Value:

1. Theoretical Tools: Provides new perspectives for studying module decompositions, particularly in cases involving purity.
2. Determination Criteria: Results like Theorem 2.15 provide module-theoretic characterizations for determining ring properties.
3. Counterexample Repository: Constructed counterexamples (particularly Example 3.22) have reference value for future research.

Reproducibility:

• High: All results have complete proofs based on standard module theory knowledge
• Counterexample constructions are explicit and verifiable
• References are comprehensive, facilitating tracing

Applicable Scenarios

1. Theoretical Research:
   • Module decomposition theory
   • Purity studies in homological algebra
   • Structure theory of endomorphism rings
2. Ring Classification:
   • Characterizing ring properties through module properties (e.g., Propositions 2.8, 2.14, Theorem 2.15)
   • Studying special ring classes (von Neumann regular rings, PDS rings, right perfect rings)
3. Representation Theory:
   • Studying module category structures of algebras
   • Purity conditions in tilting theory
4. Category Theory:
   • Purity in Grothendieck categories
   • Invariants under Morita equivalence (Proposition 2.9)
5. Commutative Algebra:
   • Although the paper primarily considers non-commutative cases, commutative examples like Example 3.22 suggest applications in commutative settings

Selected References

Key citations:

• 7 Chatters & Hajarnavis (1977): Original definition of CS-modules
• 8 Dehghani & Sedaghatjoo (2025): Centrally morphic modules (errors identified in this paper)
• 11, 12 Fieldhouse (1969, 1970): Foundations of purity theory
• 20, 21 Lam (1999, 2001): Standard module theory textbooks
• 22 Lee & Bárcenas (2020): Σ-Rickart modules
• 28 Mohamed & Müller (1990): Systematization of C conditions
• 31 Osofsky & Smith (1991): Original decomposition theorem
• 33 Wisbauer (1991): Handbook of modules and ring theory

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality pure mathematics theory paper making substantial contributions to the classical field of module theory. By introducing the concept of pure extending modules, the authors successfully bridge extending module theory and purity theory, generalize classical results, resolve open problems, and correct errors in the literature. The theoretical depth, proof rigor, and applied value all meet the standards of high-level academic journals. Despite some technical difficulty and unresolved problems, these precisely provide directions for future research. For researchers in module and ring theory, this is an important paper worthy of careful study.