The Stacks project

Lemma 34.4.19. Let $S$ be a scheme contained in a big étale site $\mathit{Sch}_{\acute{e}tale}$. A sheaf $\mathcal{F}$ on the big étale site $(\mathit{Sch}/S)_{\acute{e}tale}$ is given by the following data:

  1. for every $T/S \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits ((\mathit{Sch}/S)_{\acute{e}tale})$ a sheaf $\mathcal{F}_ T$ on $T_{\acute{e}tale}$,

  2. for every $f : T' \to T$ in $(\mathit{Sch}/S)_{\acute{e}tale}$ a map $c_ f : f_{small}^{-1}\mathcal{F}_ T \to \mathcal{F}_{T'}$.

These data are subject to the following conditions:

  1. given any $f : T' \to T$ and $g : T'' \to T'$ in $(\mathit{Sch}/S)_{\acute{e}tale}$ the composition $c_ g \circ g_{small}^{-1}c_ f$ is equal to $c_{f \circ g}$, and

  2. if $f : T' \to T$ in $(\mathit{Sch}/S)_{\acute{e}tale}$ is étale then $c_ f$ is an isomorphism.

Proof. Given a sheaf $\mathcal{F}$ on $\mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits ((\mathit{Sch}/S)_{\acute{e}tale})$ we set $\mathcal{F}_ T = i_ p^{-1}\mathcal{F}$ where $p : T \to S$ is the structure morphism. Note that $\mathcal{F}_ T(U) = \mathcal{F}(U/S)$ for any $U \to T$ in $T_{\acute{e}tale}$ see Lemma 34.4.12. Hence given $f : T' \to T$ over $S$ and $U \to T$ we get a canonical map $\mathcal{F}_ T(U) = \mathcal{F}(U/S) \to \mathcal{F}(U \times _ T T'/S) = \mathcal{F}_{T'}(U \times _ T T')$ where the middle is the restriction map of $\mathcal{F}$ with respect to the morphism $U \times _ T T' \to U$ over $S$. The collection of these maps are compatible with restrictions, and hence define a map $c'_ f : \mathcal{F}_ T \to f_{small, *}\mathcal{F}_{T'}$ where $u : T_{\acute{e}tale}\to T'_{\acute{e}tale}$ is the base change functor associated to $f$. By adjunction of $f_{small, *}$ (see Sites, Section 7.13) with $f_{small}^{-1}$ this is the same as a map $c_ f : f_{small}^{-1}\mathcal{F}_ T \to \mathcal{F}_{T'}$. It is clear that $c'_{f \circ g}$ is the composition of $c'_ f$ and $f_{small, *}c'_ g$, since composition of restriction maps of $\mathcal{F}$ gives restriction maps, and this gives the desired relationship among $c_ f$, $c_ g$ and $c_{f \circ g}$.

Conversely, given a system $(\mathcal{F}_ T, c_ f)$ as in the lemma we may define a presheaf $\mathcal{F}$ on $\mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits ((\mathit{Sch}/S)_{\acute{e}tale})$ by simply setting $\mathcal{F}(T/S) = \mathcal{F}_ T(T)$. As restriction mapping, given $f : T' \to T$ we set for $s \in \mathcal{F}(T)$ the pullback $f^*(s)$ equal to $c_ f(s)$ where we think of $c_ f$ as a map $\mathcal{F}_ T \to f_{small, *}\mathcal{F}_{T'}$ again. The condition on the $c_ f$ guarantees that pullbacks satisfy the required functoriality property. We omit the verification that this is a sheaf. It is clear that the constructions so defined are mutually inverse. $\square$


Comments (2)

Comment #1237 by Antoine Chambert-Loir on

In the lemma, there are a strange (\rommannumeral1) and (\romannumeral2) which should maybe be replaced by (i) and (ii).

Comment #1250 by on

Yeah, this is really an artifact of the parsing we do on the site and not a mistake in the LaTeX. I have changed this here, because in this case there is no benefit to using roman numberals. But in a few places in more-morphisms.tex there we use them and I do not see immediately how to do better. Anyway, the change is here.


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 021K. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.