27.2 Relative glueing
The following lemma is relevant in case we are trying to construct a scheme X over S, and we already know how to construct the restriction of X to the affine opens of S. The actual result is completely general and works in the setting of (locally) ringed spaces, although our proof is written in the language of schemes.
Lemma 27.2.1. Let S be a scheme. Let \mathcal{B} be a basis for the topology of S. Suppose given the following data:
For every U \in \mathcal{B} a scheme f_ U : X_ U \to U over U.
For U, V \in \mathcal{B} with V \subset U a morphism \rho ^ U_ V : X_ V \to X_ U over U.
Assume that
each \rho ^ U_ V induces an isomorphism X_ V \to f_ U^{-1}(V) of schemes over V,
whenever W, V, U \in \mathcal{B}, with W \subset V \subset U we have \rho ^ U_ W = \rho ^ U_ V \circ \rho ^ V_ W.
Then there exists a morphism f : X \to S of schemes and isomorphisms i_ U : f^{-1}(U) \to X_ U over U \in \mathcal{B} such that for V, U \in \mathcal{B} with V \subset U the composition
\xymatrix{ X_ V \ar[r]^{i_ V^{-1}} & f^{-1}(V) \ar[rr]^{inclusion} & & f^{-1}(U) \ar[r]^{i_ U} & X_ U }
is the morphism \rho ^ U_ V. Moreover X is unique up to unique isomorphism over S.
Proof.
To prove this we will use Schemes, Lemma 26.15.4. First we define a contravariant functor F from the category of schemes to the category of sets. Namely, for a scheme T we set
F(T) = \left\{ \begin{matrix} (g, \{ h_ U\} _{U \in \mathcal{B}}), \ g : T \to S, \ h_ U : g^{-1}(U) \to X_ U,
\\ f_ U \circ h_ U = g|_{g^{-1}(U)}, \ h_ U|_{g^{-1}(V)} = \rho ^ U_ V \circ h_ V \ \forall \ V, U \in \mathcal{B}, V \subset U
\end{matrix} \right\} .
The restriction mapping F(T) \to F(T') given a morphism T' \to T is just gotten by composition. For any W \in \mathcal{B} we consider the subfunctor F_ W \subset F consisting of those systems (g, \{ h_ U\} ) such that g(T) \subset W.
First we show F satisfies the sheaf property for the Zariski topology. Suppose that T is a scheme, T = \bigcup V_ i is an open covering, and \xi _ i \in F(V_ i) is an element such that \xi _ i|_{V_ i \cap V_ j} = \xi _ j|_{V_ i \cap V_ j}. Say \xi _ i = (g_ i, \{ h_{i, U}\} ). Then we immediately see that the morphisms g_ i glue to a unique global morphism g : T \to S. Moreover, it is clear that g^{-1}(U) = \bigcup g_ i^{-1}(U). Hence the morphisms h_{i, U} : g_ i^{-1}(U) \to X_ U glue to a unique morphism h_ U : g^{-1}(U) \to X_ U. It is easy to verify that the system (g, \{ h_ U\} ) is an element of F(T). Hence F satisfies the sheaf property for the Zariski topology.
Next we verify that each F_ W, W \in \mathcal{B} is representable. Namely, we claim that the transformation of functors
F_ W \longrightarrow \mathop{\mathrm{Mor}}\nolimits (-, X_ W), \ (g, \{ h_ U\} ) \longmapsto h_ W
is an isomorphism. To see this suppose that T is a scheme and \alpha : T \to X_ W is a morphism. Set g = f_ W \circ \alpha . For any U \in \mathcal{B} such that U \subset W we can define h_ U : g^{-1}(U) \to X_ U be the composition (\rho ^ W_ U)^{-1} \circ \alpha |_{g^{-1}(U)}. This works because the image \alpha (g^{-1}(U)) is contained in f_ W^{-1}(U) and condition (a) of the lemma. It is clear that f_ U \circ h_ U = g|_{g^{-1}(U)} for such a U. Moreover, if also V \in \mathcal{B} and V \subset U \subset W, then \rho ^ U_ V \circ h_ V = h_ U|_{g^{-1}(V)} by property (b) of the lemma. We still have to define h_ U for an arbitrary element U \in \mathcal{B}. Since \mathcal{B} is a basis for the topology on S we can find an open covering U \cap W = \bigcup U_ i with U_ i \in \mathcal{B}. Since g maps into W we have g^{-1}(U) = g^{-1}(U \cap W) = \bigcup g^{-1}(U_ i). Consider the morphisms h_ i = \rho ^ U_{U_ i} \circ h_{U_ i} : g^{-1}(U_ i) \to X_ U. It is a simple matter to use condition (b) of the lemma to prove that h_ i|_{g^{-1}(U_ i) \cap g^{-1}(U_ j)} = h_ j|_{g^{-1}(U_ i) \cap g^{-1}(U_ j)}. Hence these morphisms glue to give the desired morphism h_ U : g^{-1}(U) \to X_ U. We omit the (easy) verification that the system (g, \{ h_ U\} ) is an element of F_ W(T) which maps to \alpha under the displayed arrow above.
Next, we verify each F_ W \subset F is representable by open immersions. This is clear from the definitions.
Finally we have to verify the collection (F_ W)_{W \in \mathcal{B}} covers F. This is clear by construction and the fact that \mathcal{B} is a basis for the topology of S.
Let X be a scheme representing the functor F. Let (f, \{ i_ U\} ) \in F(X) be a “universal family”. Since each F_ W is representable by X_ W (via the morphism of functors displayed above) we see that i_ W : f^{-1}(W) \to X_ W is an isomorphism as desired. The lemma is proved.
\square
Lemma 27.2.2. Let S be a scheme. Let \mathcal{B} be a basis for the topology of S. Suppose given the following data:
For every U \in \mathcal{B} a scheme f_ U : X_ U \to U over U.
For every U \in \mathcal{B} a quasi-coherent sheaf \mathcal{F}_ U over X_ U.
For every pair U, V \in \mathcal{B} such that V \subset U a morphism \rho ^ U_ V : X_ V \to X_ U.
For every pair U, V \in \mathcal{B} such that V \subset U a morphism \theta ^ U_ V : (\rho ^ U_ V)^*\mathcal{F}_ U \to \mathcal{F}_ V.
Assume that
each \rho ^ U_ V induces an isomorphism X_ V \to f_ U^{-1}(V) of schemes over V,
each \theta ^ U_ V is an isomorphism,
whenever W, V, U \in \mathcal{B}, with W \subset V \subset U we have \rho ^ U_ W = \rho ^ U_ V \circ \rho ^ V_ W,
whenever W, V, U \in \mathcal{B}, with W \subset V \subset U we have \theta ^ U_ W = \theta ^ V_ W \circ (\rho ^ V_ W)^*\theta ^ U_ V.
Then there exists a morphism of schemes f : X \to S together with a quasi-coherent sheaf \mathcal{F} on X and isomorphisms i_ U : f^{-1}(U) \to X_ U and \theta _ U : i_ U^*\mathcal{F}_ U \to \mathcal{F}|_{f^{-1}(U)} over U \in \mathcal{B} such that for V, U \in \mathcal{B} with V \subset U the composition
\xymatrix{ X_ V \ar[r]^{i_ V^{-1}} & f^{-1}(V) \ar[rr]^{inclusion} & & f^{-1}(U) \ar[r]^{i_ U} & X_ U }
is the morphism \rho ^ U_ V, and the composition
27.2.2.1
\begin{equation} \label{constructions-equation-glue} (\rho ^ U_ V)^*\mathcal{F}_ U = (i_ V^{-1})^*((i_ U^*\mathcal{F}_ U)|_{f^{-1}(V)}) \xrightarrow {\theta _ U|_{f^{-1}(V)}} (i_ V^{-1})^*(\mathcal{F}|_{f^{-1}(V)}) \xrightarrow {\theta _ V^{-1}} \mathcal{F}_ V \end{equation}
is equal to \theta ^ U_ V. Moreover (X, \mathcal{F}) is unique up to unique isomorphism over S.
Proof.
By Lemma 27.2.1 we get the scheme X over S and the isomorphisms i_ U. Set \mathcal{F}'_ U = i_ U^*\mathcal{F}_ U for U \in \mathcal{B}. This is a quasi-coherent \mathcal{O}_{f^{-1}(U)}-module. The maps
\mathcal{F}'_ U|_{f^{-1}(V)} = i_ U^*\mathcal{F}_ U|_{f^{-1}(V)} = i_ V^*(\rho ^ U_ V)^*\mathcal{F}_ U \xrightarrow {i_ V^*\theta ^ U_ V} i_ V^*\mathcal{F}_ V = \mathcal{F}'_ V
define isomorphisms (\theta ')^ U_ V : \mathcal{F}'_ U|_{f^{-1}(V)} \to \mathcal{F}'_ V whenever V \subset U are elements of \mathcal{B}. Condition (d) says exactly that this is compatible in case we have a triple of elements W \subset V \subset U of \mathcal{B}. This allows us to get well defined isomorphisms
\varphi _{12} : \mathcal{F}'_{U_1}|_{f^{-1}(U_1 \cap U_2)} \longrightarrow \mathcal{F}'_{U_2}|_{f^{-1}(U_1 \cap U_2)}
whenever U_1, U_2 \in \mathcal{B} by covering the intersection U_1 \cap U_2 = \bigcup V_ j by elements V_ j of \mathcal{B} and taking
\varphi _{12}|_{V_ j} = \left((\theta ')^{U_2}_{V_ j}\right)^{-1} \circ (\theta ')^{U_1}_{V_ j}.
We omit the verification that these maps do indeed glue to a \varphi _{12} and we omit the verification of the cocycle condition of a glueing datum for sheaves (as in Sheaves, Section 6.33). By Sheaves, Lemma 6.33.2 we get our \mathcal{F} on X. We omit the verification of (27.2.2.1).
\square
Comments (3)
Comment #2540 by Noah Olander on
Comment #2548 by Dario Weißmann on
Comment #2573 by Johan on