# On nonnil-coherent modules and nonnil-Noetherian modules

• Younes El Haddaoui , Hwankoo Kim and Najib Mahdou
From the journal Open Mathematics

## Abstract

In this article, we introduce two new classes of modules over a ϕ -ring that generalize the classes of coherent modules and Noetherian modules. We next study the possible transfer of the properties of being nonnil-Noetherian rings, ϕ -coherent rings, and nonnil-coherent rings in the amalgamated algebra along an ideal.

MSC 2010: 13A15; 13C05; 13E15; 13F05

## 1 Introduction

All rings considered in this article are assumed to be commutative with non-zero identity and prime nilradical. We use Nil ( R ) to denote the set of nilpotent elements of R and Z ( R ) , the set of zero-divisors of R . A ring with Nil ( R ) being divided prime (i.e., Nil ( R ) x R for all x R Nil ( R ) ) is called a ϕ -ring. El Khalfi et al. [1], and Chhiti et al. [2] studied when the amalgamation algebra along an ideal is a ϕ -ring. Let be the set of all rings with divided prime nilradical. A ring R is called a strongly ϕ -ring if R and Z ( R ) = Nil ( R ) . Let R be a ring and M be an R -module; we define

ϕ - tor ( M ) = { x M s x = 0 for some s R Nil ( R ) } .

If ϕ - tor ( M ) = M , then M is called a ϕ -torsion module, and if ϕ - tor ( M ) = 0 , then M is called a ϕ -torsion-free module. It is worth noting that in the language of torsion theory, the class T of all ϕ -torsion modules is a (hereditary) torsion class, whereas T is closed under (submodules,) direct sums, epimorphic images, and extensions. An ideal I of R is said to be nonnil if I Nil ( R ) . An R -module M is said to be ϕ -divisible if M = s M for all s R Nil ( R ) .

Among the many recent generalizations of the concept of a coherent ring in the literature, we can find the following: due to Bacem and Ali [3], a ϕ -ring R is called ϕ -coherent if R / Nil ( R ) is a coherent domain [3, Corollary 3.1]. A ϕ -ring R is said to be nonnil-coherent if every finitely generated nonnil ideal is finitely presented, which is equivalent to saying that R is ϕ -coherent and ( 0 : r ) is a finitely generated ideal of R for each r R Nil ( R ) , where ( 0 : r ) = { x R r x = 0 } [4, Proposition 1.3]. In [5], an R -module M is said to be coherent if M is a finitely generated R -module and every finitely generated submodule of M is a finitely presented R -module. In [6], an R -module M is said to be Noetherian if every submodule of M is finitely generated. In [7], Badawi introduced and studied a new class of ϕ -rings, which are said to be nonnil-Noetherian. A ϕ -ring R is said to be nonnil-Noetherian if every nonnil ideal of R is finitely generated, which is equivalent to saying that R / Nil ( R ) is a Noetherian domain ([7, Theorem 2.4]). In 2015, Yousefian Darani [8] introduced a new class of modules that is closely related to the class of Noetherian modules. An R -module M with Nil ( M ) Nil ( R ) M , a divided prime submodule (i.e., Nil ( M ) , is a prime submodule of M and comparable with each submodule of M ) is said to be nonnil-Noetherian if every nonnil submodule N of M (i.e., N Nil ( M ) ) is finitely generated. In 2020, Yousefian Darani and Rahmatinia [9] introduced and studied ϕ -Noetherian modules as a new class of Noetherian modules. A module M is said to be ϕ -Noetherian if Nil ( M ) is divided prime and each submodule that properly contains Nil ( M ) is finitely generated.

Let R be a ring and E an R -module. Then R E , the trivial ring extension of R by E , is the ring whose additive structure is that of the external direct sum R E and whose multiplication is defined by ( a , e ) ( b , f ) ( a b , a f + b e ) for all a , b R and all e , f E (this construction is also known by other terminologies and other notations, such as the idealization R ( + ) E ) (see [5,10, 11,12]).

Let A and B be two rings, let J be an ideal of B and let f : A B be a ring homomorphism. In this setting, we can consider the following subring of A × B :

A f J = { ( a , f ( a ) + j ) a A , j J } ,

called the amalgamation of A with B along J with respect to f (introduced and studied by D’Anna et al. [13,14]). This construction is a generalization of the amalgamated duplication of a ring along an ideal (introduced and studied by D’Anna and Fontana [15] and denoted by A I ).

This article consists of five sections including an Introduction. In Section 2, we introduce and study a new class of modules over a ϕ -ring R which are called nonnil-coherent modules. Let M be an R -module and N be a submodule of M . Then, N is said to be a ϕ -submodule of M if M / N is a ϕ -torsion module (see Definition 2.1). Using Definition 2.1, an R -module M is said to be nonnil-coherent if M is finitely generated and each finitely generated ϕ -submodule of M is finitely presented (see Definition 2.4). We give some properties that characterize these modules. In Section 3, we introduce and study another definition of nonnil-Noetherian modules that is different from the definition of [8,9]. An R -module M is said to be nonnil-Noetherian if M is a finitely generated module and every ϕ -submodule of M is finitely generated (see Definition 3.1). Next, we give some properties that characterize these modules. In Section 4, we study the possible transfer of the properties of nonnil-coherent rings and nonnil-Noetherian rings in trivial ring extensions. In the last section, we study the possible transfer of the properties of being ϕ -coherent rings and nonnil-Noetherian rings in an amalgamation algebra along an ideal.

For any undefined terminology and notation, the reader is referred to [5,6,16,17]. Throughout this article, if S is a multiplicative subset of a ring R , then we assume that S Nil ( R ) = .

## 2 On nonnil-coherent modules

In this section, we introduce and study a new class of modules over a ϕ -ring R , which are called nonnil-coherent modules. Recall that in [5], an R -module M is said to be coherent if M is finitely generated and every finitely generated submodule is finitely presented.

Recall that an R -module M is said to be ϕ -torsion if, for all x M , there exists s R Nil ( R ) such that s x = 0 .

## Definition 2.1

Let R and M be an R -module. A submodule N of M is said to be a ϕ -submodule if M / N is a ϕ -torsion module.

## Example 2.2

A nonnil submodule is not in general a ϕ -submodule. For example, set R Z , which is a ϕ -ring, and M = C [ X ] as an R -module. It is easy to see that every nonzero subgroup N of M is a nonnil submodule, in particular, the subgroup N = Q [ X ] is a nonnil submodule of M . But for any nonzero s Z , we obtain s i N . Hence, N is never a ϕ -submodule of M . Therefore, we deduce that the class of nonnil-submodules of an R -module is different from the class of ϕ -submodules of that R -module.

There is a natural question: If R is a ϕ -ring, then is every submodule N of an R -module M (with Nil ( M ) being prime divided) such that N contains properly Nil ( M ) a ϕ -submodule of M ? The following example shows that the answer to this question is negative.

## Example 2.3

Let R = Z , M = C , and N = Q . Then, Nil ( M ) = 0 is a divided prime submodule of M and N properly contains Nil ( M ) , but C / Q is never a torsion abelian group. Therefore, Q is not a ϕ -subgroup of C .

Definition 2.4 allows us to generalize the definition of coherent modules over a ϕ -ring.

## Definition 2.4

Let R . An R -module M is said to be nonnil-coherent if M is finitely generated and every finitely generated ϕ -submodule of M is finitely presented. In particular, every coherent module over a ϕ -ring is nonnil-coherent.

## Remark 2.5

Note that for a ϕ -torsion R -module M , we have

M  is nonnil-coherent M  is coherent .

Recall from [18] that an R -module F is said to be ϕ -flat if f R F is an R -monomorphism for any R -monomorphism f , where Coker ( f ) is a ϕ -torsion R -module. Recall in [3] that a ϕ -ring is said to be nonnil-coherent if every finitely generated nonnil ideal is finitely presented.

Now, we are able to give a new characterization of nonnil-coherent rings.

## Theorem 2.6

The following are equivalent for a ϕ -ring R:

1. R is a nonnil-coherent ring.

2. R is a nonnil-coherent R-module.

3. Every finitely generated free R-module is nonnil-coherent.

4. Every finitely presented module is nonnil-coherent.

5. Every finitely generated ϕ -submodule of a finitely presented R-module is finitely presented.

6. Any direct product of ϕ -flat R-modules is ϕ -flat.

7. R I is ϕ -flat for any index set I.

## Proof

( 6 ) ( 7 ) ( 1 ) This follows from [3, Theorem 2.4].

( 4 ) ( 5 ) Straightforward.

( 5 ) ( 1 ) This follows immediately from the fact that every nonnil ideal of R is a ϕ -submodule of R .

( 1 ) ( 2 ) Assume that R is a nonnil-coherent ring and let I be a finitely generated ideal of R such that R / I is ϕ -torsion. If I Nil ( R ) , then, for any r R Nil ( R ) , there exists s R Nil ( R ) such that s r I Nil ( R ) since R / I is a ϕ -torsion R -module, a desired contradiction since Nil ( R ) is a prime ideal of R . Therefore, I is a nonnil ideal. As R is a nonnil-coherent ring, I is a finitely presented ideal. Therefore, R is a nonnil-coherent R -module.

( 2 ) ( 1 ) Let I be a finitely generated nonnil ideal of R . Since R is a nonnil-coherent module and R / I is ϕ -torsion, I is finitely presented. Therefore, R is a nonnil-coherent ring.

( 6 ) ( 3 ) Let F be a finitely generated free R -module and N be a finitely generated ϕ -submodule of F . Then, F and F / N are finitely presented R -modules. Since R I is a ϕ -flat module for any index set I , by [18, Theorem 3.2] we obtain the following commutative diagram with exact rows:

Since the two right vertical arrows are isomorphisms by [17, Lemma I.13.2], we obtain N R R I N I , and so N is a finitely presented R -module by [17, Lemma I.13.2]. Therefore, F is a nonnil-coherent R -module.

( 3 ) ( 4 ) Let M be a finitely presented R -module. Then, M F / N , where F is a finitely generated free R -module and N is a finitely generated submodule of F . Let X be a finitely generated ϕ -submodule of M . Then, X L / N such that L is a finitely generated submodule of F with N L . Since F is a nonnil-coherent module and M / X F / L is ϕ -torsion, L is a finitely presented R -module. Now, it follows immediately from [19, (4.54) Lemma] that X is finitely presented. Therefore, M is a nonnil-coherent module.□

The following theorem characterizes when a finitely generated submodule of a nonnil-coherent module is nonnil-coherent.

## Theorem 2.7

Let R and M be a nonnil-coherent R -module. If N is a finitely generated ϕ -submodule of M , then N is a nonnil-coherent module.

Before proving Theorem 2.7, we need the following lemma.

## Lemma 2.8

[20, Proposition 2.4] Let R and 0 M f M g M 0 be an exact sequence of R -modules and R -homomorphisms. Then, M is ϕ -torsion if and only if M and M are ϕ -torsion modules.

## Proof of Theorem 2.7

Let M be a nonnil-coherent R -module and N be a finitely generated ϕ -submodule of of M . We claim that N is a nonnil-coherent R -module. Let X be a finitely generated ϕ -submodule of N . Then, the following sequence 0 N / X M / X M / N 0 is exact. Since M / N and N / X are ϕ -torsion modules, so is M / X by Lemma 2.8. Therefore, X is finitely presented, and so N is a nonnil-coherent module.□

## Corollary 2.9

If R is a nonnil-coherent ring, then any finitely generated nonnil ideal of R is a nonnil-coherent R-module.

## Proof

This follows from Theorem 2.7.□

## Theorem 2.10

Let R and 0 P N M 0 be an exact sequence of R-modules and R-homomorphisms, where P is a finitely generated R -module. If N is a nonnil-coherent module, then so is M .

## Proof

We can set M = N / P . Let X / P be a finitely generated ϕ -submodule of M . Since N is a nonnil-coherent module and X is a finitely generated ϕ -submodule of N , it follows that X is finitely presented. We claim that X / P is a finitely presented R -module. Actually it follows from [19, (4.54) Lemma] that X / P is finitely presented, and so M is a nonnil-coherent module.□

Corollary 2.11 is a consequence of Theorem 2.10.

## Corollary 2.11

Every factor module M / N of a nonnil-coherent module M by a finitely generated submodule N is also a nonnil-coherent module. In particular, every factor module of a nonnil-coherent ring R by a finitely generated ideal I of R is a nonnil-coherent R-module.

## Proof

Straightforward.□

## Corollary 2.12

Let R and M and N be nonnil-coherent modules. Let f : M N be an R -homomorphism. Then:

1. If Im ( f ) is a ϕ -torsion R-module and ker ( f ) is finitely generated, then ker ( f ) is a nonnil-coherent module.

2. If ker ( f ) is finitely generated, then Im ( f ) is a nonnil-coherent module.

3. If Coker ( f ) is a ϕ -torsion R-module and Im ( f ) is finitely generated, then Im ( f ) is a nonnil-coherent module.

4. If Im ( f ) is finitely generated, then Coker ( f ) is a nonnil-coherent module.

## Proof

By the following two exact sequences 0 ker ( f ) M Im ( f ) 0 and 0 Im ( f ) N Coker ( f ) 0 , the proof is finished using Theorems 2.7 and 2.10.□

## Theorem 2.13

Let R and 0 P f N g M 0 be an exact sequence of R -modules and R -homomorphisms. If P and M are nonnil-coherent modules, then so is N.

## Proof

Let X be a finitely generated ϕ -submodule of N . Then, we have the following commutative diagram with exact rows:

Since X is a finitely generated module, so is g ( X ) . Let x M . Then, g ( n ) = x for some n N . Since N / X is a ϕ -torsion module, s n X for some s R Nil ( R ) , and so s x g ( X ) . Therefore, M / g ( X ) is ϕ -torsion. As M is nonnil-coherent, g ( X ) is a finitely presented R -module. Therefore, ker ( g X ) is a finitely generated R -module since X is finitely generated. Let x P . Then, there exists t R Nil ( R ) such that t f ( x ) X , and so t f ( x ) ker ( g X ) since g ( t f ( x ) ) = 0 . We can consider f as an embedding, and so P / ker ( g X ) is a ϕ -torsion module. Then, ker ( g X ) is finitely presented since P is a nonnil-coherent module, and so X is a finitely presented R -module. Therefore, N is a nonnil-coherent module.□

## Corollary 2.14

Let R and { M i } i = 1 n be a family of nonnil-coherent modules. Then, i = 1 n M i is a nonnil-coherent module.

## Proof

We prove this by induction on n . Consider the following exact sequence 0 M 1 i = 1 n M i i = 2 n M i 0 and apply Theorem 2.13.□

## Corollary 2.15

Let R and let M and N be nonnil-coherent submodules of a nonnil-coherent R-module L. If M + N is a ϕ -torsion R-module and M N is finitely generated, then M + N and M N are nonnil-coherent modules.

## Proof

We use the exact sequence 0 M N M N M + N 0 and Theorems 2.7 and 2.10.□

## Corollary 2.16

Let R and I be a finitely generated nonnil ideal of R. Then, R is a nonnil-coherent ring if and only if I and R / I are nonnil-coherent R-modules.

## Proof

Assume that R is a nonnil-coherent ring and let I be a finitely generated nonnil ideal of R . By Corollary 2.11, R / I is a nonnil-coherent R -module, and so I is a nonnil-coherent R -module by Theorem 2.7.

Conversely, assume that I and R / I are nonnil-coherent R -modules for any finitely generated nonnil ideal I of R . Then, R is a nonnil-coherent ring by Theorem 2.13.□

Next, Theorem 2.17 gives an analog of the well-known behavior of [5, Theorem 2.2.6].

## Theorem 2.17

Let R and S be a multiplicative subset of R . If M is a nonnil-coherent R-module, then S 1 M is a nonnil-coherent ( S 1 R ) -module.

## Proof

It is clear that S 1 R and S 1 M is a finitely generated ( S 1 R ) -module. Let N be an R -module such that S 1 N is a ϕ -torsion ( S 1 R ) -module. Then, N is a ϕ -torsion R -module. Indeed, let n N . Then, there exist a R Nil ( R ) and s S such that a s n 1 = 0 1 . Thus, ( t a ) n = 0 for some t R Nil ( R ) , and so N is a ϕ -torsion R -module. Let X be a finitely generated ( S 1 R ) -submodule of S 1 M such that S 1 M X is ϕ -torsion. Then, we can set X = S 1 K , where K is a finitely generated submodule of M . Therefore, S 1 ( M / K ) is ϕ -torsion, and so M / K is a ϕ -torsion R -module. Hence, K is a finitely presented R -module. Thus, X is a finitely presented ( S 1 R ) -module. Therefore, S 1 M is a nonnil-coherent ( S 1 R ) -module.□

Next, we pay attention to the localization of nonnil-coherent rings. Using Theorem 2.17, we obtain immediately:

## Corollary 2.18

If R is a nonnil-coherent ring and S is a multiplicative subset of R, then S 1 R is a nonnil-coherent ring.

## Proof

Straightforward.□

## Theorem 2.19

Let f : R T be a finite surjective homomorphism of ϕ -rings (i.e., T is a finitely generated R -module). Let M be a finitely generated T-module which is a nonnil-coherent R-module. Then, M is a nonnil-coherent T-module.

## Proof

Let X be a finitely generated T -submodule of M . Then, X is a finitely generated R -module since f is finite. If M / X is a ϕ -torsion T -module, then M / X is a ϕ -torsion R -module, and so X is a finitely presented R -module. Therefore, X is a finitely presented T -module since X T R X . Hence, M is a nonnil-coherent T -module.□

## Theorem 2.20

Let R and I be a finitely generated nil ideal of R. Let M be an ( R / I ) -module. Then, M is a nonnil-coherent R-module if and only if M is a nonnil-coherent ( R / I ) -module.

In order to prove Theorem 2.20, we need the following lemmas.

## Lemma 2.21

[5, Theorem 2.1.8] Let R be a ring and I be a finitely generated ideal of R . Let M be an ( R / I ) -module. Then, M is a finitely presented R-module if and only if M is a finitely presented ( R / I ) -module.

## Lemma 2.22

Let R and I be a nil ideal of R . Then, R / I .

## Proof

Note that Nil ( R / I ) = Nil ( R ) / I and R / I Nil ( R / I ) R / Nil ( R ) is an integral domain, and so Nil ( R / I ) is a prime ideal of R / I . If x ¯ ( R / I ) Nil ( R / I ) , then x R Nil ( R ) , and so Nil ( R ) R x . Therefore, Nil ( R / I ) ( R / I ) x ¯ , as desired.□

## Proof of Theorem 2.20

Assume that M is a nonnil-coherent R -module. Since R / I by Lemma 2.22, M is a nonnil-coherent ( R / I ) -module by Theorem 2.19.

Conversely, assume that M is a nonnil-coherent ( R / I ) -module. Then, M is a finitely generated ( R / I ) -module, and so M is a finitely generated R -module. Let X be a finitely generated R -submodule of M such that M / X is a ϕ -torsion R -module. Thus, M / X is a ϕ -torsion ( R / I ) -module, and so X is a finitely presented ( R / I ) -module. By Lemma 2.21, X is a finitely presented R -module. Therefore, M is a nonnil-coherent R -module.□

## Corollary 2.23

Let R and I be a finitely generated nil ideal of R. Then, R / I is a nonnil-coherent ring if and only if R / I is a nonnil-coherent R-module.

## Proof

Straightforward.□

## Corollary 2.24

Let R be a nonnil-coherent ring and I be a finitely generated nil ideal of R. Then, R / I is a nonnil-coherent ring.

## Proof

This follows immediately from Corollaries 2.11 and 2.23.□

## Corollary 2.25

Let R and I be a finitely generated nil ideal of R. If R / I is a nonnil-coherent ring and I is a nonnil-coherent R-module, then R is a nonnil-coherent ring.

## Proof

This follows directly from Theorem 2.13 and Corollary 2.23.□

## 3 On nonnil-Noetherian modules

We introduce a new definition of nonnil-Noetherian modules which is different from that in [8]. In [6], an R -module M is said to be Noetherian if every submodule of M is finitely generated.

## Definition 3.1

Let R . An R -module M is said to be nonnil-Noetherian if every ϕ -submodule of M is finitely generated. In particular, every Noetherian module over a ϕ -ring is nonnil-Noetherian.

## Remark 3.2

1. Note that for a ϕ -torsion R -module M , we have

M  is nonnil-Noetherian M  is Noetherian .

2. The definition of nonnil-Noetherian modules in Definition 3.1 is different from that of nonnil-Noetherian modules in [8] by Example 2.2 and that of ϕ -Noetherian modules in [9] by Example 2.3. Although the term “non-Noetherian module” used in [8] is the same as in Definition 3.1, we will still use it in the spirit of [7] and following Theorem 3.3.

Recall that in [7], a ϕ -ring R is said to be nonnil-Noetherian if every nonnil ideal of R is finitely generated, equivalently R / Nil ( R ) is a Noetherian domain. The following theorem allows us to see that each nonnil-Noetherian ring is a nonnil-Noetherian module over itself.

## Theorem 3.3

Let R be a ϕ -ring. Then, R is a nonnil-Noetherian ring if and only if R is a nonnil-Noetherian module over itself.

## Proof

Assume that R is a nonnil-Noetherian ring and let I be an ideal of R such that R / I is ϕ -torsion. Then, I is a nonnil ideal of R , and so I is finitely generated since R is nonnil-Noetherian. Therefore, R is a nonnil-Noetherian module over itself.

Conversely, assume that R is a nonnil-Noetherian module over itself and let I be a nonnil ideal of R . Then, R / I is ϕ -torsion, and so I is finitely generated. Therefore, R is a nonnil-Noetherian ring.□

According to [3, Corollary 3.1], a ϕ -ring R is said to be ϕ -coherent if R / Nil ( R ) is a coherent domain. From [7, Theorem 2.4], a ϕ -ring R is nonnil-Noetherian if and only if R / Nil ( R ) is a Noetherian domain. Therefore, every nonnil-Noetherian ring is ϕ -coherent. The following theorem characterizes when a nonnil-Noetherian ring is nonnil-coherent.

## Theorem 3.4

The following statements are equivalent for a nonnil-Noetherian ring R:

1. R is nonnil-coherent.

2. R s is a finitely presented ideal of R for any s R Nil ( R ) .

3. Every nonnil ideal of R is finitely presented.

## Proof

( 1 ) ( 3 ) ( 2 ) They are straightforward.

( 2 ) ( 1 ) Assume that R s is finitely presented for every s R Nil ( R ) . Using the exact sequence 0 ( 0 : s ) R R s 0 , we obtain that ( 0 : s ) is a finitely generated ideal of R . Since R is assumed to be nonnil-Noetherian, and so ϕ -coherent, R is a nonnil-coherent ring by [4, Proposition 1.3].□

Recall that a ϕ -ring R is called a strongly ϕ -ring if Z ( R ) = Nil ( R ) . Strongly ϕ -rings are abundant. Indeed, these rings can be generated from the following pullback introduced by Chang and Kim recently [21]. Let D be a domain with K as its quotient field. Let K [ X ] be the polynomial ring over K , n 2 be an integer and K [ θ ] = K [ X ] / X n , where θ X + X n . Denote by i : D K the natural embedding map and π : K [ θ ] K a ring homomorphism satisfying π ( f ) = f ( 0 ) . Consider the pullback of i and π as follows:

Then, R n = D + θ K [ θ ] = { f K [ θ ] f ( 0 ) D } is a strongly ϕ -ring.

## Corollary 3.5

If R is a nonnil-Noetherian strongly ϕ -ring, then R is a nonnil-coherent ring.

## Proof

If R is a strongly ϕ -ring, then every principal nonnil ideal is free. Therefore, R is a nonnil-coherent ring if it is nonnil-Noetherian by Theorem 3.4.□

## Theorem 3.6

Let 0 M f M g M 0 be an exact sequence. If M and M are nonnil-Noetherian modules, then so is M. In addition, if M is a ϕ -submodule of M , then the converse holds.

## Proof

Assume that M and M are nonnil-Noetherian. Let N be a ϕ -submodule of M . Then, g ( N ) is a ϕ -submodule of M . Indeed, if x M , then g ( m ) = x for some m M , and so there exists s R Nil ( R ) such that s m N . Thus, s x g ( N ) . Therefore, g ( N ) is a finitely generated submodule of M . Set g ( N ) = i = 1 t R g ( n i ) , where each n i N . Let n N . Then, g ( n ) = i = 1 t r i g ( n i ) with r i R . Thus, n i = 1 t r i n i ker ( g ) = Im ( f ) , and so n = f ( y ) + i = 1 t r i n i for some y M . In addition, M is finitely generated since it is nonnil-Noetherian. Thus, M = i = t + 1 t + l R n i for some n t + 1 , n t + 2 , , n t + l M , and so there exists r t + 1 , r t + 2 , , r t + l R such that f ( y ) = i = t + 1 t + l r i n i . Hence, n = i = 1 t + l r i n i . Therefore, N is finitely generated, and so M is a nonnil-Noetherian module.

Assume that M is a nonnil-Noetherian module and M is a ϕ -submodule of M . Let X be a ϕ -submodule of M . Then, 0 M / X M / X M 0 is exact with M / X and M ϕ -torsion, and so X is a ϕ -submodule of M . Thus, X is a finitely generated submodule of M . Therefore, M is a nonnil-Noetherian module. Let N be a submodule of M such that M N and N / M is a ϕ -submodule of M M / M . We claim that N is a ϕ -submodule of M . If x M , then s ( x + M ) = M for some s R Nil ( R ) since M / M is ϕ -torsion, and so s x M N . Thus, N is a ϕ -submodule of M . Therefore, N is a finitely generated submodule of M , and so N / M is a finitely generated submodule of M . Therefore, M is a nonnil-Noetherian module.□

## Corollary 3.7

Let R and M be a nonnil-Noetherian R-module. Then, every ϕ -submodule of M is nonnil-Noetherian.

## Proof

This follows immediately from Theorem 3.6.□

## Corollary 3.8

Let R and { M i } 1 i n be a family of nonnil-Noetherian modules. Then, i = 1 n M i is a nonnil-Noetherian module.

## Proof

We prove this by induction on n . Consider the following exact sequence 0 M 1 i = 1 n M i i = 2 n M i 0 and apply Theorem 3.6.□

## Corollary 3.9

If R is a nonnil-Noetherian ring, then every finitely generated ϕ -torsion module is nonnil-Noetherian (and so is Noetherian).

## Proof

If M is a finitely generated ϕ -torsion R -module, then M R ( n ) / N , where n N and N is a submodule of R ( n ) . Since M is ϕ -torsion, N is a ϕ -submodule of R ( n ) . Using the exact sequence 0 N R ( n ) M 0 and Theorem 3.6, we can deduce that M is nonnil-Noetherian.□

## Corollary 3.10

Let R and I be a finitely generated nonnil ideal of R. Then, R is a nonnil-Noetherian ring if and only if I and R / I are nonnil-Noetherian R-modules.

## Proof

This follows immediately from Theorem 3.6.□

## Theorem 3.11

Let R . If M is a nonnil-Noetherian R-module, then every factor module of M is nonnil-Noetherian.

## Proof

Let M be a nonnil-Noetherian module and N be a submodule of M . We claim that M / N is a nonnil-Noetherian module. Let P / N be a ϕ -submodule of M / N , where P is a submodule of M containing N . Since M / N P / N M P is a ϕ -torsion R -module, P is finitely generated, and so P / N is a finitely generated submodule of M / N . Therefore, M / N is nonnil-Noetherian.□

## Corollary 3.12

If R is a nonnil-Noetherian ring and I is an ideal of R, then R / I is a nonnil-Noetherian R-module.

## Proof

This follows immediately from Theorem 3.11.□

## Corollary 3.13

Let R be a nonnil-Noetherian ring and M be an R-module. Then, M is a nonnil-Noetherian module if and only if M is a finitely generated R-module.

## Proof

If M is a nonnil-Noetherian module, then it is easy to see that M is a finitely generated module. Conversely, if M is a finitely generated module, then M is a factor of R ( n ) , where n N . Since R ( n ) is a nonnil-Noetherian module by Corollary 3.8, M is a nonnil-Noetherian module by Theorem 3.11.□

## Corollary 3.14

A ring R is nonnil-Noetherian if and only if every ϕ -submodule of a finitely generated R-module is finitely generated.

## Proof

Straightforward.□

Theorem 3.15 establishes that every finitely generated ϕ -torsion module over a nonnil-Noetherian ring is finitely presented.

## Theorem 3.15

Let R be a nonnil-Noetherian ring and M be a finitely generated ϕ -torsion R-module. Then, M is finitely presented.

## Proof

Let M be a finitely generated ϕ -torsion R -module. Then, there exist n N and a sequence 0 N R ( n ) M 0 . Since R ( n ) is a nonnil-Noetherian R -module by Corollary 3.8 and M is a ϕ -torsion module, N is a finitely generated module. Therefore, M is a finitely presented module.□

Theorem 3.16 establishes that the class of nonnil-Noetherian modules is closed under localizations.

## Theorem 3.16

Let R be a ϕ -ring and S be a multiplicative subset of R. If M is a nonnil-Noetherian R-module, then S 1 M is a nonnil-Noetherian ( S 1 R ) -module.

## Proof

Let M be a nonnil-Noetherian R -module and S 1 N be a ϕ -submodule of S 1 M , where N is a submodule of M . Then, N is a ϕ -submodule of M , and so N is a finitely generated R -module. Thus, S 1 N is a finitely generated ( S 1 R ) -module. Therefore, S 1 M is a nonnil-Noetherian ( S 1 R ) -module.□

## Corollary 3.17

If R is a nonnil-Noetherian ring and S is a multiplicative subset of R, then S 1 R is a nonnil-Noetherian ring.

## Proof

This follows immediately from Theorem 3.16.□

We end this section by the following theorem.

## Theorem 3.18

Let R be a nonnil-Noetherian ring and I be a nil ideal of R. Then, R/I is a nonnil-Noetherian ring.

## Proof

Let J / I be a nonnil ideal of R / I . Then, R / I J / I R / J is a ϕ -torsion R -module, and so J is a nonnil ideal of R . As R is nonnil-Noetherian, J is a finitely generated ideal of R , and so J / I is a finitely generated ideal of R / I . Therefore, R / I is nonnil-Noetherian.□

## 4 Transfer of nonnil-coherence and nonnil-Noetherianity in trivial ring extensions

Now, we study the transfer of nonnil-coherent rings in the trivial ring extensions. From [1, Corollary 2.4], a trivial ring extension R M is a ϕ -ring if and only if R is a ϕ -ring and M is a ϕ -divisible module (i.e., s M = M for all s R Nil ( R ) ).

Let M be an R -module and r R . Set ( 0 : M r ) { m M r m = 0 } . It is easy to verify that ( 0 : M r ) is a submodule of M such that ( 0 : r ) M ( 0 : M r ) . Therefore, ( 0 : r ) ( 0 : M r ) is an ideal of R M by [22, Theorem 3.1].

The following theorem characterizes when a trivial ring extension is a nonnil-coherent ring.

## Theorem 4.1

Let A , M be a ϕ -divisible A-module, and set R A M . Then, the following statements are equivalent:

1. R is a nonnil-coherent ring.

2. A is a nonnil-coherent ring and ( 0 : r ) ( 0 : M r ) is a finitely generated ideal of R for each r A Nil ( A ) .

3. A is a nonnil-coherent ring and R ( r , 0 ) is finitely presented for all r A Nil ( A ) .

Before proving Theorem 4.1, we need the following lemmas:

## Lemma 4.2

Let A and M be a ϕ -divisible A-module. Let J be an ideal of R A M . Then, J is a nonnil ideal of R if and only if there exists a unique nonnil ideal I of A such that J = I M .

## Proof

Assume that J is a nonnil ideal of R . Then, 0 M Nil ( R M ) J , and so J = I M for a unique nonnil ideal I of R by [22, Theorem 3.1].

Conversely, assume that J = I M for a unique nonnil ideal I of A . Then, it is clear that J is a nonnil ideal of R .□

## Lemma 4.3

Let A and M be a ϕ -divisible A-module. Let J = I M be a nonnil ideal of R = A M . Then, J is a finitely generated nonnil ideal of R if and only if I is a finitely generated nonnil ideal of A.

## Proof

Assume that I is a finitely generated nonnil ideal of A . Then, I = i = 1 n A a i , where each a i A , and we may assume that a 1 A Nil ( A ) . First, it is easy to see that i = 1 n R ( a i , 0 ) J . Conversely, let ( α , β ) J . Then α = i = 1 n r i a i for some r i A . Since M is ϕ -divisible, β = a 1 v 1 for some v 1 M , and so ( α , β ) = i = 1 n ( a i , 0 ) ( r i , v i ) , where v i = 0 for all 2 i n . Therefore, J i = 1 n R ( a i , 0 ) , and so J = i = 1 n R ( a i , 0 ) is a finitely generated nonnil ideal. The converse is straightforward.□

## Lemma 4.4

Let A and M be a ϕ -divisible A-module. Let r be a non-nilpotent element of A and u M . Then,

( ( 0 , 0 ) : ( r , u ) ) = ( 0 : r ) ( 0 : M r ) .

## Proof

Let ( r , u ) A Nil ( A ) M and ( α , β ) ( ( 0 , 0 ) : ( r , u ) ) . Since M is ϕ -divisible, u = r v for some v M , and so ( r , u ) = ( r , 0 ) ( 1 , v )

( α , β ) ( ( 0 , 0 ) : ( r , u ) ) ( α , β ) ( r , u ) = ( 0 , 0 ) ( α , β ) ( r , 0 ) ( 1 , v ) = ( 0 , 0 ) ( α r , α r v + β r ) = ( 0 , 0 ) ( α , β ) ( 0 : r ) ( 0 : M r ) .

Therefore, ( ( 0 , 0 ) : ( r , u ) ) = ( 0 : r ) ( 0 : M r ) .

## Lemma 4.5

[3, Theorem 2.1] A ϕ -ring R is nonnil-coherent if and only if ( 0 : r ) is a finitely generated ideal for every non-nilpotent element r R , and the intersection of two finitely generated nonnil ideals of R is a finitely generated nonnil ideal of R.

## Proof of Theorem 4.1

( 1 ) ( 2 ) Assume that R is a nonnil-coherent ring. Let I and J be finitely generated nonnil ideals of A . Then, I M and J M are finitely generated nonnil ideals of R by Lemma 4.3. Since R is a nonnil-coherent ring, ( I M ) ( J M ) = ( I J ) M is a finitely generated nonnil ideal of R by Lemma 4.5. Therefore, I J is a finitely generated nonnil ideal of A by Lemma 4.3. Let r A Nil ( A ) . Then, ( 0 : r ) ( 0 : M r ) is a finitely generated ideal of R by Lemma 4.4, and so ( 0 : r ) is a finitely generated ideal of A . Therefore, A is a nonnil-coherent ring by Lemma 4.5.

( 2 ) ( 1 ) Assume that A is a nonnil-coherent ring and ( 0 : r ) ( 0 : M r ) is a finitely generated ideal of R for each r A Nil ( A ) . Let I M and J M be finitely generated nonnil ideals of R . Then, I and J are finitely generated nonnil ideals of A . Since A is a nonnil-coherent ring, I J is a finitely generated nonnil ideal of A , and so ( I M ) ( J M ) = ( I J ) M is a finitely generated nonnil ideal of R by Lemma 4.3. Let ( r , u ) R Nil ( R ) . Then, ( ( 0 , 0 ) : ( r , u ) ) = ( 0 : r ) ( 0 : M r ) is a finitely generated ideal of R by hypothesis. Therefore, R is a nonnil-coherent ring by Lemma 4.5.

( 2 ) ( 3 ) Let r A Nil ( A ) and u M . Then, the following sequence 0 ( ( 0 , 0 ) : ( r , u ) ) R R ( r , 0 ) 0 is exact. Therefore, by Lemma 4.4, ( 0 : r ) ( 0 : M r ) is a finitely generated ideal of R if and only if R ( r , 0 ) is finitely presented.□

## Corollary 4.6

Let R = A M be a ϕ -ring such that Z ( A ) = Nil ( A ) . Then, R is a nonnil-coherent ring if and only if A is a nonnil-coherent ring and ( 0 : M r ) is a finitely generated A -submodule of M for every r A Nil ( A ) .

## Proof

Let r A Nil ( A ) . Since Z ( A ) = Nil ( A ) , it follows that ( 0 : r ) = 0 . Therefore, ( ( 0 , 0 ) : ( r , u ) ) = 0 ( 0 : M r ) . Now the assertion follows immediately from Theorem 4.1.□

## Corollary 4.7

Let R = A M be a ϕ -ring such that Z ( A ) = Nil ( A ) and M is a Noetherian A-module. Then, R is a nonnil-coherent ring if and only if A is a nonnil-coherent ring.

## Proof

This follows immediately from Theorem 4.1.□

For a ring R and an R -module M , set Z R ( M ) { r R r m = 0 for some nonzero m M } .

## Corollary 4.8

Let R = A M be a ϕ -ring such that Z ( A ) = Nil ( A ) = Z A ( M ) . Then, R is a nonnil-coherent ring if and only if A is a nonnil-coherent ring.

## Proof

It is easy to see that ( 0 : r ) = 0 and ( 0 : M r ) = 0 for each r A Nil ( A ) . Now the proof follows directly from Theorem 4.1.□

## Example 4.9

1. Z Q is a nonnil-coherent ring.

2. Z / 4 Z Z / 2 Z is a nonnil-coherent ring.

The following theorem studies the transfer of being a ϕ -coherent ring in trivial extensions.

## Theorem 4.10

Let A and M be a ϕ -divisible A-module. Then, A M is a ϕ -coherent ring if and only if A is a ϕ -coherent ring.

## Proof

First, note that Nil ( A M ) = Nil ( A ) M , and so A M Nil ( A M ) A / Nil ( A ) . Therefore, A M is a ϕ -coherent ring if and only if A is a ϕ -coherent ring.□

Recently, Qi and Zhang [4] provided for the first time an example of a ϕ -coherent ring, which is not nonnil-coherent. Now, we give a concrete example by using Corollary 4.6 and Theorem 4.10.

## Example 4.11

Let E = i = 1 Q / Z . Then, E is a divisible abelian group. Therefore, R = Z E is a ϕ -ring. Since

( 0 : E 2 ) = a i b i + Z i N a i Z and g c d ( a i , b i ) = 1 , b i { 1 , 2 } i N ,

which is an infinitely generated abelian group. Therefore, R is not a nonnil-coherent ring by Corollary 4.6. Note that R is an example of a ϕ -coherent ring, which is not nonnil-coherent by Theorem 4.10.

Now, we study the transfer of nonnil-Noetherian rings in the trivial ring extensions.

## Theorem 4.12

Let A and M be a ϕ -divisible R-module. Then, A M is a nonnil-Noetherian ring if and only if A is a nonnil-Noetherian ring.

## Proof

A M is nonnil-Noetherian ring if and only if A M Nil ( A ) M A Nil ( A ) is a Noetherian domain and A is a nonnil-Noetherian ring.□

We give some examples of nonnil-Noetherian extension rings A M that are nonnil-coherent.

## Example 4.13

If R = A M is a ϕ -ring such that Z ( A ) = Nil ( A ) = Z A ( M ) , then for all r A Nil ( A ) , we obtain ( 0 : r ) = 0 and ( 0 : M r ) = 0 , and so ( A M ) ( r , 0 ) A M . Therefore, it follows from Theorem 3.4 that A M is nonnil-coherent if it is nonnil-Noetherian.

## Example 4.14

Let A be a strongly ϕ -ring and M be a ϕ -torsion-free A -module. If A M is a nonnil-Noetherian ring, then A M is a nonnil-coherent ring.

## Proof

Let ( α , m ) A M such that ( α , m ) ( r , 0 ) = ( 0 , 0 ) . Then, α r = 0 , and r m = 0 and so ( α , m ) = ( 0 , 0 ) . Thus, ( A M ) ( r , 0 ) is a finitely generated free ideal. Hence, if A M is a nonnil-Noetherian ring, then A M is a nonnil-coherent ring by Theorem 3.4.□

Recall that every nonnil-Noetherian ring is ϕ -coherent. The following Example 4.15 gives a ϕ -coherent ring that is not nonnil-Noetherian.

## Example 4.15

Let R ( Z + X Q [ [ X ] ] ) q f ( Q [ [ X ] ] ) . Then, R is a ϕ -coherent ring that is not nonnil-Noetherian.

## Proof

First, it is easy to see that R is a ϕ -ring by [1, Corollary 2.4]. By [23, Theorem 3], Z + X Q [ [ X ] ] is a coherent domain, and so R is a ϕ -coherent ring by Theorem 4.10. By [23, Theorem 3], Z + X Q [ [ X ] ] is not a Noetherian domain, and so is not nonnil-Noetherian. Therefore, R is never a nonnil-Noetherian ring by Theorem 4.12.□

## Remark 4.16

Note that the ring R in Example 4.15 is nonnil-coherent since R is a strongly ϕ -ring, and a ϕ -ring A is nonnil-coherent if and only if A is ϕ -coherent and ( 0 : a ) is a finitely generated ideal of A for each a A Nil ( A ) ([4, Proposition 1.3]). Using Examples 4.11 and 4.15, we can deduce that the converse of the following implications are not true in general:

nonnil-Noetherian nonnil-coherent ϕ -coherent .

## 5 On transfer nonnil-Noetherian and ϕ -coherent rings in the amalgamation algebra along an ideal

In this section, we study the transfer of nonnil-Noetherian rings in the amalgamation algebra along an ideal. El Khalfi et al. [1] studied when the amalgamation algebra along an ideal is a ϕ -ring, a ϕ -chained ring, and a ϕ -pseudo-valuation ring.

Our next result characterizes when the amalgamation of a ring is a nonnil-Noetherian ring. Before starting this section, we need the following theorems.

## Theorem 5.1

[1, Proposition 2.20] Let f : A B be a ring homomorphism and J be an ideal of B . Then,

Nil ( A f J ) = { ( a , f ( a ) + j ) a Nil ( A ) and j J Nil ( B ) } .

## Theorem 5.2

[1, Theorem 2.1] Let f : A B be a ring homomorphism and J be a nonnil ideal of B. Set N ( J ) J Nil ( B ) . The following statements are equivalent:

1. R = A f J .

2. A is an integral domain, f 1 ( J ) = 0 , and N ( J ) is a divided prime ideal of f ( A ) + J .

Theorem 5.3 studies the transfer of being a nonnil-Noetherian ring between a ϕ -ring A and an amalgamation algebra A f J along a nonnil ideal J .

## Theorem 5.3

Let A and B be two rings and f : A B be a ring homomorphism. Let J be a nonnil ideal of B. Define f ¯ : A B / N ( J ) by f ¯ ( a ) = f ( a ) + N ( J ) for all a A . If A f J is a ϕ -ring, then the following statements are equivalent:

1. A f J is a nonnil-Noetherian ring.

2. A f ¯ J N ( J ) is a Noetherian domain.

3. f 1 ( J ) = { 0 } , A , and f ¯ ( A ) + J / N ( J ) are Noetherian domains.

Before proving Theorem 5.3, we establish the following lemmas.

## Lemma 5.4

With the notations of Theorem 5.3, we obtain f ¯ 1 ( J / N ( J ) ) = f 1 ( J ) .

## Proof

Straightforward.□

## Lemma 5.5

Let f : A B be a ring homomorphism and J be a nonzero ideal of B. Let J be a subideal of J and I be an ideal of A such that f ( I ) J . Define f ¯ ¯ : A / I B / J by f ¯ ¯ ( a ¯ ) = f ( a ) ¯ , where a ¯ a + I and f ( a ) ¯ f ( a ) + J . Then, we have the following ring isomorphism:

A f J I f J A I f ¯ ¯ J J .

## Proof

Define

φ : A f J A I f ¯ ¯ J J ( a , f ( a ) + j ) ( a ¯ , f ( a ) ¯ + j ¯ ) .

It is easy to see that φ is a surjective ring homomorphism and for all ( a , f ( a ) + j ) A f J , ( a ¯ , f ( a ) ¯ + j ¯ ) = ( 0 ¯ , 0 ¯ ) if and only if a I and j J and ( a , f ( a ) + j ) I f J . Therefore A f J I f J A I f ¯ ¯ J J .□

## Proof of Theorem 5.3

( 1 ) ( 2 ) Assume that A f J is a nonnil-Noetherian ring. Since A f J , A is an integral domain by Theorem 5.2. Therefore, Nil ( A f J ) = 0 × N ( J ) . As A f J is a nonnil-Noetherian ring, A f J 0 × N ( J ) is a Noetherian domain. Therefore, A f ¯ J N ( J ) is a Noetherian domain by Lemma 5.5.

( 2 ) ( 1 ) This follows immediately from Lemma 5.5.

( 2 ) ( 3 ) Assume that A f ¯ J / N ( J ) is a Noetherian domain. By [13, Proposition 5.2] and Lemma 5.4, f 1 ( J ) = 0 and f ¯ ( A ) + J / N ( J ) is an integral domain. By [13, Proposition 5.6], A and f ¯ ( A ) + J / N ( J ) are Noetherian domains, as desired.

( 3 ) ( 2 ) By Lemma 5.4, we have f ¯ 1 ( J / N ( J ) ) = 0 . By [13, Proposition 5.1], f ¯ ( A ) + J / N ( J ) A f ¯ J / N ( J ) , which is a Noetherian domain, as desired.□

Recall from [1, Corollary 2.6] that a polynomial ring R [ X ] is a ϕ -ring if and only if R is an integral domain.

## Theorem 5.6

Let R be an integral domain. Then, R [ X ] is a nonnil-Noetherian ring if and only if R [ X ] is a Noetherian domain.

## Proof

By [1, Corollary 2.6], R [ X ] is a ϕ -ring and R [ X ] R j J , where J = X R [ X ] and j : R R [ X ] . Since J Nil ( R [ X ] ) , it follows that R [ X ] is a nonnil-Noetherian ring if and only if R j J is a Noetherian domain by Theorem 5.3.□

## Corollary 5.7

Let A be a ring and J be a nonnil ideal of A. Assume that A J . Then, A J is never a nonnil-Noetherian ring.

## Proof

Assume, on the contrary, that A J is a nonnil-Noetherian ring. Then, A J / N ( J ) is a Noetherian domain, and so A is a Noetherian domain with J = N ( J ) by [13, Remark 5.3]. Therefore, J Nil ( A ) , a desired contradiction.□

Theorem 5.8 studies the transfer of being a nonnil-Noetherian ring between a ϕ -ring A and an amalgamation algebra A f J along a nil ideal J .

## Theorem 5.8

Let A and B be two rings and f : A B be a ring homomorphism. Let J be a nil ideal of B. Assume that A f J is a ϕ -ring. Then, A f J is a nonnil-Noetherian ring if and only if A is a nonnil-Noetherian ring.

## Proof

Note that J Nil ( B ) , and thus N ( J ) = J . So Nil ( A f J ) = Nil ( A ) f J . Therefore, A f J is a nonnil-Noetherian ring if and only if A f J Nil ( A ) f J is a Noetherian domain, and A Nil ( A ) is a Noetherian domain, and A is a nonnil-Noetherian ring.□

## Example 5.9

R = Z [ X ] q f ( Z [ X ] ) is a nonnil-Noetherian ring that is not a Noetherian ring.

Now, we study the transfer of being ϕ -coherent rings in the amalgamation algebra along an ideal.

## Theorem 5.10

Let A and B be two rings and f : A B be a ring homomorphism. Let J be a nonnil ideal of B. Define f ¯ : A B / N ( J ) by f ¯ ( a ) = f ( a ) + N ( J ) for any a A . Assume that A f J is a ϕ -ring. Then, the following statements are equivalent:

1. A f J is a ϕ -coherent ring.

2. A f ¯ J N ( J ) is a coherent domain.

3. f 1 ( J ) = { 0 } and f ¯ ( A ) + J / N ( J ) is a coherent domain.

## Proof

( 1 ) ( 2 ) Assume that A f J is a ϕ -coherent ring. Since A f J , it follows that A is an integral domain by Theorem 5.2, and so Nil ( A f J ) = 0 × N ( J ) . As A f J is a ϕ -coherent ring, A f J 0 × N ( J ) is a coherent domain. Therefore, A f ¯ J N ( J ) is a coherent domain by Lemma 5.5.

( 2 ) ( 1 ) This follows directly from Lemma 5.5.

( 2 ) ( 3 ) Assume that A f ¯ J / N ( J ) is a coherent domain. From [13, Proposition 5.2] and Lemma 5.4, f 1 ( J ) = 0 and f ¯ ( A ) + J / N ( J ) is an integral domain. From [13, Proposition 5.1], f ¯ ( A ) + J / N ( J ) A f ¯ J / N ( J ) , as desired.

( 3 ) ( 2 ) By Lemma 5.4 we have f ¯ 1 ( J / N ( J ) ) = 0 and from [13, Proposition 5.1], we obtain f ¯ ( A ) + J / N ( J ) A f ¯ J / N ( J ) , which is a coherent domain, as desired.□

## Corollary 5.11

Let R be an integral domain. Then, R [ X ] is a ϕ -coherent ring if and only if R [ X ] is a coherent domain.

## Proof

By [1, Corollary 2.6], we have that R [ X ] is a ϕ -ring and R [ X ] R j J , where J = X R [ X ] and j : R R [ X ] . Since J Nil ( R [ X ] ) , it follows that R [ X ] is a ϕ -coherent ring if and only if R j J is a coherent domain by Theorem 5.10.□

Corollary 5.12 studies the transfer of being a nonnil-coherent ring between a ϕ -ring A and an amalgamation algebra A f J along a nonnil ideal J .

## Corollary 5.12

Let A and B be two rings and f : A B be a ring homomorphism. Let J be a nonnil ideal of B . Define f ¯ : A B / N ( J ) by f ¯ ( a ) = f ( a ) + N ( J ) for any a A . Assume A f J is a ϕ -ring. Then, the following statements are equivalent:

1. A f J is a nonnil-coherent ring,

2. The following conditions hold:

1. f 1 ( J ) = { 0 } .

2. f ¯ ( A ) + J / N ( J ) is a coherent domain.

3. ( A f J ) ( r , f ( r ) + j ) is a finitely presented ideal for any non-nilpotent element ( r , f ( r ) + j ) of A f J .

## Proof

This follows immediately from [4, Proposition 1.3] and Theorem 5.10

Theorem 5.13 studies the transfer of being a ϕ -coherent ring between a ϕ -ring A and an amalgamation algebra A f J along a nil ideal J .

## Theorem 5.13

Let A and B be two rings and f : A B be a ring homomorphism. Let J be a nil ideal of B. Assume that A f J is a ϕ -ring. Then, A f J is a ϕ -coherent ring if and only if A is a ϕ -coherent ring.

## Proof

Since J Nil ( B ) , we have N ( J ) = J . It is easy to see that Nil ( A f J ) = Nil ( A ) f J . Therefore, A f J is a ϕ -coherent ring, A f J Nil ( A ) f J is a coherent domain, A Nil ( A ) is a coherent domain, and A is a ϕ -coherent ring.□

Corollary 5.14 studies the transfer of being a nonnil-coherent ring between a ϕ -ring A and an amalgamation algebra A f J along a nil ideal J .

## Corollary 5.14

Let A and B be two rings and f : A B be a ring homomorphism. Let J be a nil ideal of B. Assume that A f J is a ϕ -ring. Then, the following are equivalent:

1. A f J is a nonnil-coherent ring.

2. A is a ϕ -coherent ring and ( A f J ) ( r , f ( r ) + j ) is a finitely presented ideal for any non-nilpotent element ( r , f ( r ) + j ) of A f J .

## Proof

This follows immediately from [4, Proposition 1.3] and Theorem 5.13.□

## Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions that significantly improved our manuscript.

1. Funding information: H.K. was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (2021R1I1A3047469).

2. Author contributions: Y.E.H. and N.M. conceived of the presented idea. All authors developed the theory, discussed the results, contributed to the final manuscript.

3. Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.

4. Data availability statement: Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

## References

[1] A. El Khalfi, H. Kim, and N. Mahdou, Amalgamated algebras issued from ϕ-chained rings and ϕ-pseudo-valuation rings, Bull. Iranian Math. Soc. 47 (2021), no. 5, 1599–1609, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41980-020-00461-y. Search in Google Scholar

[2] M. Tamekkante, K. Louartiti, and M. Chhiti, Chain conditions in amalgamated algebras along an ideal, Arab. J. Math. 2 (2013), no. 4, 403–408, https://doi.org/10.1007/s40065-013-0075-0. Search in Google Scholar

[3] K. Bacem and B. Ali, Nonnil-coherent rings, Beitr. Algebra Geom. 57 (2016), no. 2, 297–305, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13366-015-0260-8. Search in Google Scholar

[4] W. Qi and X. Zhang, Some remarks on nonnil-coherent rings and ϕ-IF rings, J. Algebra Appl. 21 (2022), no. 11, 2250211, https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219498822502115. Search in Google Scholar

[5] S. Glaz, Commutative coherent rings, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 1371, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1989, https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0084570. Search in Google Scholar

[6] F. Wang and H. Kim, Foundations of Commutative Rings and Their Modules, Algebra and Applications, Springer, Singapore, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3337-7. Search in Google Scholar

[7] A. Badawi, On Nonnil-Noetherian rings, Comm. Algebra 31 (2003), no. 4, 1669–1677, https://doi.org/10.1081/AGB-120018502. Search in Google Scholar

[8] A. Yousefian Darani, Nonnil-Noetherian modules over commutative rings, J. Algebr. Syst. 3 (2015), no. 2, 201–210, https://doi.org/10.22044/jas.2015.618. Search in Google Scholar

[9] M. Rahmatinia and A. Yousefian Darani, Noetherian modules with prime nilradical, Palest. J. Math. 9 (2020), no. 1, 112–117. Search in Google Scholar

[10] J. A. Huckaba, Commutative rings with zero divisors, Pure and Applied Mathematics: A Series of Monographs and Textbooks, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1988. Search in Google Scholar

[11] C. Bakkari, S. Kabbaj, and N. Mahdou, Trivial extensions defined by Prüfer conditions, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 214 (2010), no. 1, 53–60, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpaa.2009.04.011. Search in Google Scholar

[12] S. E. Kabbaj, Matlis’ semi-regularity and semi-coherence in trivial ring extensions: a survey, Moroccan J. Algebra Geometry Appl. 1 (2022), no. 1, 1–17. Search in Google Scholar

[13] M. D’Anna, C. A. Finocchiaro, and M. Fontana, Amalgamated algebras along an ideal, In: M. Fontana, S. Kabbaj, B. Olberding, and I. Swanson (eds.) Commutative Algebra and Applications: Proceedings of the Fifth International Fez Conference on Commutative Algebra and Applications, De Gruyter, Berlin, New York, 2009, pp. 155–172, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110213188.155. Search in Google Scholar

[14] M. D’Anna, C. A. Finocchiaro, and M. Fontana, Properties of chains of prime ideals in amalgamated algebras along an ideal, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 214 (2010), no. 9, 1633–1641, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpaa.2009.12.008. Search in Google Scholar

[15] M. D’Anna and M. Fontana, An amalgamated duplication of a ring along an ideal: the basic properties, J. Algebra Appl. 6 (2007), no. 3, 443–459, https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219498807002326. Search in Google Scholar

[16] R. Gilmer, Multiplicative Ideal Theory, Vol. 90, Queen’s University, Kingston, 1992. Search in Google Scholar

[17] B. Stenström, Rings of quotients: An introduction to methods of ring theory, Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 217, Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg, 1975, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-66066-5. Search in Google Scholar

[18] W. Zhao, F. Wang, and G. Tang, On ϕ-von Neumann regular rings, J. Korean Math. Soc. 50 (2013), no. 1, 219–229, https://doi.org/10.4134/JKMS.2013.50.1.219. Search in Google Scholar

[19] T. Y. Lam, Lectures on modules and rings, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 189, Springer New York, NY, 1999, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0525-8. Search in Google Scholar

[20] W. Zhao, On ϕ-flat modules and ϕ-Prüfer rings, J. Korean Math. Soc. 55 (2018), no. 5, 1221–1233, https://doi.org/10.4134/JKMS.j170667. Search in Google Scholar

[21] G. W. Chang and H. Kim, Prüfer rings in a certain pullback, Comm. Algebra, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00927872.2022.2149766.https://doi.org/10.1080/00927872.2022.2149766Search in Google Scholar

[22] D. D. Anderson and W. Winders, Idealization of a module, J. Commut. Algebra, 1 (2009), no. 1, 3–56, https://doi.org/10.1216/JCA-2009-1-1-3. Search in Google Scholar

[23] J. W. Brewer and E. A. Rutter, D+M constructions with general overrings, Michigan Math. J. 23 (1976), no. 1, 33–42, https://doi.org/10.1307/mmj/1029001619. Search in Google Scholar