The Stacks project

Filtered colimits are exact. Directed colimits are exact.

Lemma 10.8.8. Let $I$ be a directed set. Let $(L_ i, \lambda _{ij})$, $(M_ i, \mu _{ij})$, and $(N_ i, \nu _{ij})$ be systems of $R$-modules over $I$. Let $\varphi _ i : L_ i \to M_ i$ and $\psi _ i : M_ i \to N_ i$ be morphisms of systems over $I$. Assume that for all $i \in I$ the sequence of $R$-modules

\[ \xymatrix{ L_ i \ar[r]^{\varphi _ i} & M_ i \ar[r]^{\psi _ i} & N_ i } \]

is a complex with homology $H_ i$. Then the $R$-modules $H_ i$ form a system over $I$, the sequence of $R$-modules

\[ \xymatrix{ \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i L_ i \ar[r]^\varphi & \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i M_ i \ar[r]^\psi & \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i N_ i } \]

is a complex as well, and denoting $H$ its homology we have

\[ H = \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i H_ i. \]

Proof. It is clear that $ \xymatrix{ \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i L_ i \ar[r]^\varphi & \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i M_ i \ar[r]^\psi & \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i N_ i } $ is a complex. For each $i \in I$, there is a canonical $R$-module morphism $H_ i \to H$ (sending each $[m] \in H_ i = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\psi _ i) / \mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(\varphi _ i)$ to the residue class in $H = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\psi ) / \mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(\varphi )$ of the image of $m$ in $\mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i M_ i$). These give rise to a morphism $\mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i H_ i \to H$. It remains to show that this morphism is surjective and injective.

We are going to repeatedly use the description of colimits over $I$ as in Lemma 10.8.3 without further mention. Let $h \in H$. Since $H = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\psi )/\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(\varphi )$ we see that $h$ is the class mod $\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(\varphi )$ of an element $[m]$ in $\mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\psi ) \subset \mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i M_ i$. Choose an $i$ such that $[m]$ comes from an element $m \in M_ i$. Choose a $j \geq i$ such that $\nu _{ij}(\psi _ i(m)) = 0$ which is possible since $[m] \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\psi )$. After replacing $i$ by $j$ and $m$ by $\mu _{ij}(m)$ we see that we may assume $m \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\psi _ i)$. This shows that the map $\mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i H_ i \to H$ is surjective.

Suppose that $h_ i \in H_ i$ has image zero on $H$. Since $H_ i = \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\psi _ i)/\mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(\varphi _ i)$ we may represent $h_ i$ by an element $m \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ker}}(\psi _ i) \subset M_ i$. The assumption on the vanishing of $h_ i$ in $H$ means that the class of $m$ in $\mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i M_ i$ lies in the image of $\varphi $. Hence there exists a $j \geq i$ and an $l \in L_ j$ such that $\varphi _ j(l) = \mu _{ij}(m)$. Clearly this shows that the image of $h_ i$ in $H_ j$ is zero. This proves the injectivity of $\mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits _ i H_ i \to H$. $\square$

Comments (5)

Comment #895 by Kestutis Cesnavicius on

Suggested slogan: Formation of homology of complexes of modules commutes with filtered direct limits

Comment #907 by on

My slogan for this is: Filtered colimits are exact. This is mathematically imprecise, but it is really kind of a slogan and gets used over and over again and this lemma is a good example of it.

Comment #8341 by on

Should this lemma maybe be stated for any filtered (small) category? If the result is true for a directed index set, then it must be true for a filtered index category, for the skeleton ( of a filtered category is a directed set. On the other hand, the inclusion of the skeleton into the ambient category is an equivalence and, thus, a cofinal functor. So Lemma 4.17.2 applies.

Comment #8951 by on

It could be stated for any filtered category. Look at Lemma 4.21.5 to see that this isn't essentially stronger.

Comment #9426 by on

Side comment: the result "homology commutes with filtered colimits" holds over any abelian category that is AB5 (as is). I wish I knew a reference in the literature (does anybody know some?). In the meantime, I wrote the proof here, see Corollary 4.

Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.

In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 00DB. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.