Definition 13.3.1. Let $\mathcal{D}$ be an additive category. Let $[1] : \mathcal{D} \to \mathcal{D}$, $E \mapsto E[1]$ be an additive functor which is an auto-equivalence of $\mathcal{D}$.

1. A triangle is a sextuple $(X, Y, Z, f, g, h)$ where $X, Y, Z \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\mathcal{D})$ and $f : X \to Y$, $g : Y \to Z$ and $h : Z \to X[1]$ are morphisms of $\mathcal{D}$.

2. A morphism of triangles $(X, Y, Z, f, g, h) \to (X', Y', Z', f', g', h')$ is given by morphisms $a : X \to X'$, $b : Y \to Y'$ and $c : Z \to Z'$ of $\mathcal{D}$ such that $b \circ f = f' \circ a$, $c \circ g = g' \circ b$ and $a[1] \circ h = h' \circ c$.

Comment #1392 by sdf on

The second line is badly phrased. Also, the correct word to use is "sextuple" rather than "sixtuple". May I suggest instead

"In this situation we define a {\it triangle } to be a sextuple..."

Comment #1409 by on

Dear sdf, many thanks for this and your other comments. See here.

Comment #4327 by Christian Q. on

I just want to remark, that this definition is not stable under equivalence, i.e. given an equivalence between a triangulated category and an additive category does not necessarily induce a triangulated structure on the additive category. This is because the strict equality requirement implies, that the translations are invertible as maps. I would prefer a unique isomorphism instead of an equality here, but it may not make any difference in practice, since passing to a skeleton resolves the issue.

Comment #4483 by on

Well, the usual practice when doing what you say is to have a comment after the definition saying something like "using our chosen isomorphisms we are going to identify $X[n][m]$ with $X[n + m]$ from now on". So there is practically no difference. If more people agree with making this change then we will do so.

There are also:

• 3 comment(s) on Section 13.3: The definition of a triangulated category

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 0144. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.