7.8 Families of morphisms with fixed target
This section is meant to introduce some notions regarding families of morphisms with the same target.
Definition 7.8.1. Let \mathcal{C} be a category. Let \mathcal{U} = \{ U_ i \to U\} _{i\in I} be a family of morphisms of \mathcal{C} with fixed target. Let \mathcal{V} = \{ V_ j \to V\} _{j\in J} be another.
A morphism of families of maps with fixed target of \mathcal{C} from \mathcal{U} to \mathcal{V}, or simply a morphism from \mathcal{U} to \mathcal{V} is given by a morphism U \to V, a map of sets \alpha : I \to J and for each i\in I a morphism U_ i \to V_{\alpha (i)} such that the diagram
\xymatrix{ U_ i \ar[r] \ar[d] & V_{\alpha (i)} \ar[d] \\ U \ar[r] & V }
is commutative.
In the special case that U = V and U \to V is the identity we call \mathcal{U} a refinement of the family \mathcal{V}.
A trivial but important remark is that if \mathcal{V} = \{ V_ j \to V\} _{j \in J} is the empty family of maps, i.e., if J = \emptyset , then no family \mathcal{U} = \{ U_ i \to V\} _{i \in I} with I \not= \emptyset can refine \mathcal{V}!
Definition 7.8.2. Let \mathcal{C} be a category. Let \mathcal{U} = \{ \varphi _ i : U_ i \to U\} _{i\in I}, and \mathcal{V} = \{ \psi _ j : V_ j \to U\} _{j\in J} be two families of morphisms with fixed target.
We say \mathcal{U} and \mathcal{V} are combinatorially equivalent if there exist maps \alpha : I \to J and \beta : J\to I such that \varphi _ i = \psi _{\alpha (i)} and \psi _ j = \varphi _{\beta (j)}.
We say \mathcal{U} and \mathcal{V} are tautologically equivalent if there exist maps \alpha : I \to J and \beta : J\to I and for all i\in I and j \in J commutative diagrams
\xymatrix{ U_ i \ar[rd] \ar[rr] & & V_{\alpha (i)} \ar[ld] & & V_ j \ar[rd] \ar[rr] & & U_{\beta (j)} \ar[ld] \\ & U & & & & U & }
with isomorphisms as horizontal arrows.
Lemma 7.8.3. Let \mathcal{C} be a category. Let \mathcal{U} = \{ \varphi _ i : U_ i \to U\} _{i\in I}, and \mathcal{V} = \{ \psi _ j : V_ j \to U\} _{j\in J} be two families of morphisms with the same fixed target.
If \mathcal{U} and \mathcal{V} are combinatorially equivalent then they are tautologically equivalent.
If \mathcal{U} and \mathcal{V} are tautologically equivalent then \mathcal{U} is a refinement of \mathcal{V} and \mathcal{V} is a refinement of \mathcal{U}.
The relation “being combinatorially equivalent” is an equivalence relation on all families of morphisms with fixed target.
The relation “being tautologically equivalent” is an equivalence relation on all families of morphisms with fixed target.
The relation “\mathcal{U} refines \mathcal{V} and \mathcal{V} refines \mathcal{U}” is an equivalence relation on all families of morphisms with fixed target.
Proof.
Omitted.
\square
In the following lemma, given a category \mathcal{C}, a presheaf \mathcal{F} on \mathcal{C}, a family \mathcal{U} = \{ U_ i \to U\} _{i\in I} such that all fibre products U_ i \times _ U U_{i'} exist, we say that the sheaf condition for \mathcal{F} with respect to \mathcal{U} holds if the diagram (7.7.1.1) is an equalizer diagram.
Lemma 7.8.4. Let \mathcal{C} be a category. Let \mathcal{U} = \{ \varphi _ i : U_ i \to U\} _{i\in I}, and \mathcal{V} = \{ \psi _ j : V_ j \to U\} _{j\in J} be two families of morphisms with the same fixed target. Assume that the fibre products U_ i \times _ U U_{i'} and V_ j \times _ U V_{j'} exist. If \mathcal{U} and \mathcal{V} are tautologically equivalent, then for any presheaf \mathcal{F} on \mathcal{C} the sheaf condition for \mathcal{F} with respect to \mathcal{U} is equivalent to the sheaf condition for \mathcal{F} with respect to \mathcal{V}.
Proof.
First, note that if \varphi : A \to B is an isomorphism in the category \mathcal{C}, then \varphi ^* : \mathcal{F}(B) \to \mathcal{F}(A) is an isomorphism. Let \beta : J \to I be a map and let \chi _ j : V_ j \to U_{\beta (j)} be isomorphisms over U which are assumed to exist by hypothesis. Let us show that the sheaf condition for \mathcal{V} implies the sheaf condition for \mathcal{U}. Suppose given sections s_ i \in \mathcal{F}(U_ i) such that
s_ i|_{U_ i \times _ U U_{i'}} = s_{i'}|_{U_ i \times _ U U_{i'}}
in \mathcal{F}(U_ i \times _ U U_{i'}) for all pairs (i, i') \in I \times I. Then we can define s_ j = \chi _ j^*s_{\beta (j)}. For any pair (j, j') \in J \times J the morphism \chi _ j \times _{\text{id}_ U} \chi _{j'} : V_ j \times _ U V_{j'} \to U_{\beta (j)} \times _ U U_{\beta (j')} is an isomorphism as well. Hence by transport of structure we see that
s_ j|_{V_ j \times _ U V_{j'}} = s_{j'}|_{V_ j \times _ U V_{j'}}
as well. The sheaf condition w.r.t. \mathcal{V} implies there exists a unique s such that s|_{V_ j} = s_ j for all j \in J. By the first remark of the proof this implies that s|_{U_ i} = s_ i for all i \in \mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(\beta ) as well. Suppose that i \in I, i \not\in \mathop{\mathrm{Im}}(\beta ). For such an i we have isomorphisms U_ i \to V_{\alpha (i)} \to U_{\beta (\alpha (i))} over U. This gives a morphism U_ i \to U_ i \times _ U U_{\beta (\alpha (i))} which is a section of the projection. Because s_ i and s_{\beta (\alpha (i))} restrict to the same element on the fibre product we conclude that s_{\beta (\alpha (i))} pulls back to s_ i via U_ i \to U_{\beta (\alpha (i))}. Thus we see that also s_ i = s|_{U_ i} as desired.
\square
Lemma 7.8.5. Let \mathcal{C} be a category. Let \mathcal{V} = \{ V_ j \to U\} _{j \in J} \to \mathcal{U} = \{ U_ i \to U\} _{i \in I} be a morphism of families of maps with fixed target of \mathcal{C} given by \text{id} : U \to U, \alpha : J \to I and f_ j : V_ j \to U_{\alpha (j)}. Let \mathcal{F} be a presheaf on \mathcal{C}. If \mathcal{F}(U) \to \prod _{j \in J} \mathcal{F}(V_ j) is injective then \mathcal{F}(U) \to \prod _{i \in I} \mathcal{F}(U_ i) is injective.
Proof.
Omitted.
\square
Lemma 7.8.6. Let \mathcal{C} be a category. Let \mathcal{V} = \{ V_ j \to U\} _{j \in J} \to \mathcal{U} = \{ U_ i \to U\} _{i \in I} be a morphism of families of maps with fixed target of \mathcal{C} given by \text{id} : U \to U, \alpha : J \to I and f_ j : V_ j \to U_{\alpha (j)}. Let \mathcal{F} be a presheaf on \mathcal{C}. If
the fibre products U_ i \times _ U U_{i'}, U_ i \times _ U V_ j, V_ j \times _ U V_{j'} exist,
\mathcal{F} satisfies the sheaf condition with respect to \mathcal{V}, and
for every i \in I the map \mathcal{F}(U_ i) \to \prod _{j \in J} \mathcal{F}(V_ j \times _ U U_ i) is injective.
Then \mathcal{F} satisfies the sheaf condition with respect to \mathcal{U}.
Proof.
By Lemma 7.8.5 the map \mathcal{F}(U) \to \prod \mathcal{F}(U_ i) is injective. Suppose given s_ i \in \mathcal{F}(U_ i) such that s_ i|_{U_ i \times _ U U_{i'}} = s_{i'}|_{U_ i \times _ U U_{i'}} for all i, i' \in I. Set s_ j = f_ j^*(s_{\alpha (j)}) \in \mathcal{F}(V_ j). Since the morphisms f_ j are morphisms over U we obtain induced morphisms f_{jj'} : V_ j \times _ U V_{j'} \to U_{\alpha (i)} \times _ U U_{\alpha (i')} compatible with the f_ j, f_{j'} via the projection maps. It follows that
s_ j|_{V_ j \times _ U V_{j'}} = f_{jj'}^*(s_{\alpha (j)}|_{U_{\alpha (j)} \times _ U U_{\alpha (j')}}) = f_{jj'}^*(s_{\alpha (j')}|_{U_{\alpha (j)} \times _ U U_{\alpha (j')}}) = s_{j'}|_{V_ j \times _ U V_{j'}}
for all j, j' \in J. Hence, by the sheaf condition for \mathcal{F} with respect to \mathcal{V}, we get a section s \in \mathcal{F}(U) which restricts to s_ j on each V_ j. We are done if we show s restricts to s_ i on U_ i for any i \in I. Since \mathcal{F} satisfies (3) it suffices to show that s and s_ i restrict to the same element over U_ i \times _ U V_ j for all j \in J. To see this we use
s|_{U_ i \times _ U V_ j} = s_ j|_{U_ i \times _ U V_ j} = (\text{id} \times f_ j)^*s_{\alpha (j)}|_{U_ i \times _ U U_{\alpha (j)}} = (\text{id} \times f_ j)^*s_ i|_{U_ i \times _ U U_{\alpha (j)}} = s_ i|_{U_ i \times _ U V_ j}
as desired.
\square
Lemma 7.8.7. Let \mathcal{C} be a category. Let \text{Cov}_ i, i = 1, 2 be two sets of families of morphisms with fixed target which each define the structure of a site on \mathcal{C}.
If every \mathcal{U} \in \text{Cov}_1 is tautologically equivalent to some \mathcal{V} \in \text{Cov}_2, then \mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (\mathcal{C}, \text{Cov}_2) \subset \mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (\mathcal{C}, \text{Cov}_1). If also, every \mathcal{U} \in \text{Cov}_2 is tautologically equivalent to some \mathcal{V} \in \text{Cov}_1 then the category of sheaves are equal.
Suppose that for each \mathcal{U} \in \text{Cov}_1 there exists a \mathcal{V} \in \text{Cov}_2 such that \mathcal{V} refines \mathcal{U}. In this case \mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (\mathcal{C}, \text{Cov}_2) \subset \mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (\mathcal{C}, \text{Cov}_1). If also for every \mathcal{U} \in \text{Cov}_2 there exists a \mathcal{V} \in \text{Cov}_1 such that \mathcal{V} refines \mathcal{U}, then the categories of sheaves are equal.
Proof.
Part (1) follows directly from Lemma 7.8.4 and the definitions.
Proof of (2). Let \mathcal{F} be a sheaf of sets for the site (\mathcal{C}, \text{Cov}_2). Let \mathcal{U} \in \text{Cov}_1, say \mathcal{U} = \{ U_ i \to U\} _{i \in I}. By assumption we may choose a refinement \mathcal{V} \in \text{Cov}_2 of \mathcal{U}, say \mathcal{V} = \{ V_ j \to U\} _{j \in J} and refinement given by \alpha : J \to I and f_ j : V_ j \to U_{\alpha (j)}. Observe that \mathcal{F} satisfies the sheaf condition for \mathcal{V} and for the coverings \{ V_ j \times _ U U_ i \to U_ i\} _{j \in J} as these are in \text{Cov}_2. Hence \mathcal{F} satisfies the sheaf condition for \mathcal{U} by Lemma 7.8.6.
\square
Lemma 7.8.8. Let \mathcal{C} be a category. Let \text{Cov}(\mathcal{C}) be a proper class of coverings satisfying conditions (1), (2) and (3) of Definition 7.6.2. Let \text{Cov}_1, \text{Cov}_2 \subset \text{Cov}(\mathcal{C}) be two subsets of \text{Cov}(\mathcal{C}) which endow \mathcal{C} with the structure of a site. If every covering \mathcal{U} \in \text{Cov}(\mathcal{C}) is combinatorially equivalent to a covering in \text{Cov}_1 and combinatorially equivalent to a covering in \text{Cov}_2, then \mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (\mathcal{C}, \text{Cov}_1) = \mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (\mathcal{C}, \text{Cov}_2).
Proof.
This is clear from Lemmas 7.8.7 and 7.8.3 above as the hypothesis implies that every covering \mathcal{U} \in \text{Cov}_1 \subset \text{Cov}(\mathcal{C}) is combinatorially equivalent to an element of \text{Cov}_2, and similarly with the roles of \text{Cov}_1 and \text{Cov}_2 reversed.
\square
Comments (6)
Comment #862 by Amit Hogadi on
Comment #863 by Johan on
Comment #2308 by Dominic Wynter on
Comment #2386 by Johan on
Comment #5801 by Bryan Shih on
Comment #5809 by Johan on