The Stacks project

Lemma 14.19.2. If the category $\mathcal{C}$ has finite limits, then $\text{cosk}_ m$ functors exist for all $m$. Moreover, for any $m$-truncated simplicial object $U$ the simplicial object $\text{cosk}_ mU$ is described by the formula

\[ (\text{cosk}_ mU)_ n = \mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits _{(\Delta /[n])_{\leq m}^{opp}} U(n) \]

and for $\varphi : [n] \to [n']$ the map $\text{cosk}_ mU(\varphi )$ comes from the identification $U(n') \circ \overline{\varphi } = U(n)$ above via Categories, Lemma 4.14.9.

Proof. During the proof of this lemma we denote $\text{cosk}_ mU$ the simplicial object with $(\text{cosk}_ mU)_ n$ equal to $\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits _{(\Delta /[n])_{\leq m}^{opp}} U(n)$. We will conclude at the end of the proof that it does satisfy the required mapping property.

Suppose that $V$ is a simplicial object. A morphism $\gamma : V \to \text{cosk}_ mU$ is given by a sequence of morphisms $\gamma _ n : V_ n \to (\text{cosk}_ mU)_ n$. By definition of a limit, this is given by a collection of morphisms $\gamma (\alpha ) : V_ n \to U_ k$ where $\alpha $ ranges over all $\alpha : [k] \to [n]$ with $k \leq m$. These morphisms then also satisfy the rules that

\[ \xymatrix{ V_ n \ar[r]_{\gamma (\alpha )} & U_ k \\ V_{n'} \ar[r]^{\gamma (\alpha ')} \ar[u]^{V(\varphi )} & U_{k'} \ar[u]_{U(\psi )} } \]

are commutative, given any $0 \leq k, k' \leq m$, $0 \leq n, n'$ and any $\psi : [k] \to [k']$, $\varphi : [n] \to [n']$, $\alpha : [k] \to [n]$ and $\alpha ' : [k'] \to [n']$ in $\Delta $ such that $\varphi \circ \alpha = \alpha ' \circ \psi $. Taking $n = k$, $\varphi = \alpha '$, and $\alpha = \psi = \text{id}_{[k]}$ we deduce that $\gamma (\alpha ') = \gamma (\text{id}_{[k]}) \circ V(\alpha ')$. In other words, the morphisms $\gamma (\text{id}_{[k]})$, $k \leq m$ determine the morphism $\gamma $. And it is easy to see that these morphisms form a morphism $\text{sk}_ m V \to U$.

Conversely, given a morphism $\gamma : \text{sk}_ m V \to U$, we obtain a family of morphisms $\gamma (\alpha )$ where $\alpha $ ranges over all $\alpha : [k] \to [n]$ with $k \leq m$ by setting $\gamma (\alpha ) = \gamma (\text{id}_{[k]}) \circ V(\alpha )$. These morphisms satisfy all the displayed commutativity restraints pictured above, and hence give rise to a morphism $V \to \text{cosk}_ m U$. $\square$

Comments (4)

Comment #4272 by comment_bot on

It would be useful to stress that in the limit one can restrict to the subdiagram in which the arrows are injective. Relatedly, the assumptions of the lemma seem too strict. For example, the small fppf site of a scheme does not satisfy them: the site has no fiber products (same issue that obstructs the functoriality of the small fppf topos). Yet one can still use this lemma to construct hypercovers in the small fppf site: once one restricts to the smaller diagram I've mentioned all the transition maps become fppf and the limit exists.

Comment #4438 by on

Dear comment_bot, I somewhat agree, but I am going to skip changing this for now. Personally, I try to avoid working with the small fppf site or with the lisse-etale or the flat-fppf sites we introduce in Section 102.14. The way we deal with constructing hypercoverings (not using this lemma) is explained in Section 25.12. So that kind of statement should be added there if it isn't already there.

Comment #4456 by comment_bot on

OK, I agree with what you say about those sites, but I still think that changing to at least say that one can restrict to a subdiagram indexed by injective would be very useful. For instance, how else does one see that for any hypercover of the maps are actually coverings? I couldn't find this standard result in the Stacks Project (or in any other "down to earth" reference that would be convenient to cite).

Comment #4457 by on

The reference for the result you want is Lemma 25.8.3 in the case the site has fibre products (and the proof is actually a little bit involved --- I am interpreting your comment that that particular result could be proven starting with a change to this lemma). Note that the Stacks project doesn't define hypercoverings of objects unless the site has fibre products, see Definition 25.3.3 so this covers all cases we allow the definition for. Interesingly, even though there is a lot of material using hypercoverings in the Stacks project, we never needed to use the result of Lemma 25.8.3. Psychologically it seems necessary to have it, but in actuality one doesn't seem to need it a lot.

There are also:

  • 3 comment(s) on Section 14.19: Coskeleton functors

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 0183. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.