Loading web-font TeX/Caligraphic/Regular

The Stacks project

Lemma 13.5.10. Let \mathcal{D} be a pre-triangulated category. Let S be a saturated multiplicative system in \mathcal{D} that is compatible with the triangulated structure. Let (X, Y, Z, f, g, h) be a distinguished triangle in \mathcal{D}. Consider the category of morphisms of triangles

\mathcal{I} = \{ (s, s', s'') : (X, Y, Z, f, g, h) \to (X', Y', Z', f', g', h') \mid s, s', s'' \in S\}

Then \mathcal{I} is a filtered category and the functors \mathcal{I} \to X/S, \mathcal{I} \to Y/S, and \mathcal{I} \to Z/S are cofinal.

Proof. We strongly suggest the reader skip the proof of this lemma and instead work it out on a napkin.

The first remark is that using rotation of distinguished triangles (TR2) gives an equivalence of categories between \mathcal{I} and the corresponding category for the distinguished triangle (Y, Z, X[1], g, h, -f[1]). Using this we see for example that if we prove the functor \mathcal{I} \to X/S is cofinal, then the same thing is true for the functors \mathcal{I} \to Y/S and \mathcal{I} \to Z/S.

Note that if s : X \to X' is a morphism of S, then using MS2 we can find s' : Y \to Y' and f' : X' \to Y' such that f' \circ s = s' \circ f, whereupon we can use MS6 to complete this into an object of \mathcal{I}. Hence the functor \mathcal{I} \to X/S is surjective on objects. Using rotation as above this implies the same thing is true for the functors \mathcal{I} \to Y/S and \mathcal{I} \to Z/S.

Suppose given objects s_1 : X \to X_1 and s_2 : X \to X_2 in X/S and a morphism a : X_1 \to X_2 in X/S. Since S is saturated, we see that a \in S, see Categories, Lemma 4.27.21. By the argument of the previous paragraph we can complete s_1 : X \to X_1 to an object (s_1, s'_1, s''_1) : (X, Y, Z, f, g, h) \to (X_1, Y_1, Z_1, f_1, g_1, h_1) in \mathcal{I}. Then we can repeat and find (a, b, c) : (X_1, Y_1, Z_1, f_1, g_1, h_1) \to (X_2, Y_2, Z_2, f_2, g_2, h_2) with a, b, c \in S completing the given a : X_1 \to X_2. But then (a, b, c) is a morphism in \mathcal{I}. In this way we conclude that the functor \mathcal{I} \to X/S is also surjective on arrows. Using rotation as above, this implies the same thing is true for the functors \mathcal{I} \to Y/S and \mathcal{I} \to Z/S.

The category \mathcal{I} is nonempty as the identity provides an object. This proves the condition (1) of the definition of a filtered category, see Categories, Definition 4.19.1.

We check condition (2) of Categories, Definition 4.19.1 for the category \mathcal{I}. Suppose given objects (s_1, s'_1, s''_1) : (X, Y, Z, f, g, h) \to (X_1, Y_1, Z_1, f_1, g_1, h_1) and (s_2, s'_2, s''_2) : (X, Y, Z, f, g, h) \to (X_2, Y_2, Z_2, f_2, g_2, h_2) in \mathcal{I}. We want to find an object of \mathcal{I} which is the target of an arrow from both (X_1, Y_1, Z_1, f_1, g_1, h_1) and (X_2, Y_2, Z_2, f_2, g_2, h_2). By Categories, Remark 4.27.7 the categories X/S, Y/S, Z/S are filtered. Thus we can find X \to X_3 in X/S and morphisms s : X_2 \to X_3 and a : X_1 \to X_3. By the above we can find a morphism (s, s', s'') : (X_2, Y_2, Z_2, f_2, g_2, h_2) \to (X_3, Y_3, Z_3, f_3, g_3, h_3) with s', s'' \in S. After replacing (X_2, Y_2, Z_2) by (X_3, Y_3, Z_3) we may assume that there exists a morphism a : X_1 \to X_2 in X/S. Repeating the argument for Y and Z (by rotating as above) we may assume there is a morphism a : X_1 \to X_2 in X/S, b : Y_1 \to Y_2 in Y/S, and c : Z_1 \to Z_2 in Z/S. However, these morphisms do not necessarily give rise to a morphism of distinguished triangles. On the other hand, the necessary diagrams do commute in S^{-1}\mathcal{D}. Hence we see (for example) that there exists a morphism s'_2 : Y_2 \to Y_3 in S such that s'_2 \circ f_2 \circ a = s'_2 \circ b \circ f_1. Another replacement of (X_2, Y_2, Z_2) as above then gets us to the situation where f_2 \circ a = b \circ f_1. Rotating and applying the same argument two more times we see that we may assume (a, b, c) is a morphism of triangles. This proves condition (2).

Next we check condition (3) of Categories, Definition 4.19.1. Suppose (s_1, s_1', s_1'') : (X, Y, Z) \to (X_1, Y_1, Z_1) and (s_2, s_2', s_2'') : (X, Y, Z) \to (X_2, Y_2, Z_2) are objects of \mathcal{I}, and suppose (a, b, c), (a', b', c') are two morphisms between them. Since a \circ s_1 = a' \circ s_1 there exists a morphism s_3 : X_2 \to X_3 such that s_3 \circ a = s_3 \circ a'. Using the surjectivity statement we can complete this to a morphism of triangles (s_3, s_3', s_3'') : (X_2, Y_2, Z_2) \to (X_3, Y_3, Z_3) with s_3, s_3', s_3'' \in S. Thus (s_3 \circ s_2, s_3' \circ s_2', s_3'' \circ s_2'') : (X, Y, Z) \to (X_3, Y_3, Z_3) is also an object of \mathcal{I} and after composing the maps (a, b, c), (a', b', c') with (s_3, s_3', s_3'') we obtain a = a'. By rotating we may do the same to get b = b' and c = c'.

Finally, we check that \mathcal{I} \to X/S is cofinal, see Categories, Definition 4.17.1. The first condition is true as the functor is surjective. Suppose that we have an object s : X \to X' in X/S and two objects (s_1, s'_1, s''_1) : (X, Y, Z, f, g, h) \to (X_1, Y_1, Z_1, f_1, g_1, h_1) and (s_2, s'_2, s''_2) : (X, Y, Z, f, g, h) \to (X_2, Y_2, Z_2, f_2, g_2, h_2) in \mathcal{I} as well as morphisms t_1 : X' \to X_1 and t_2 : X' \to X_2 in X/S. By property (2) of \mathcal{I} proved above we can find morphisms (s_3, s'_3, s''_3) : (X_1, Y_1, Z_1, f_1, g_1, h_1) \to (X_3, Y_3, Z_3, f_3, g_3, h_3) and (s_4, s'_4, s''_4) : (X_2, Y_2, Z_2, f_2, g_2, h_2) \to (X_3, Y_3, Z_3, f_3, g_3, h_3) in \mathcal{I}. We would be done if the compositions X' \to X_1 \to X_3 and X' \to X_2 \to X_3 were equal (see displayed equation in Categories, Definition 4.17.1). If not, then, because X/S is filtered, we can choose a morphism X_3 \to X_4 in X/S such that the compositions X' \to X_1 \to X_3 \to X_4 and X' \to X_2 \to X_3 \to X_4 are equal. Then we finally complete X_3 \to X_4 to a morphism (X_3, Y_3, Z_3) \to (X_4, Y_4, Z_4) in \mathcal{I} and compose with that morphism to see that the result is true. \square


Comments (6)

Comment #1042 by JuanPablo on

In the statement of the lemma should be a saturated multiplicative system that is compatible with the triangulated structure.

Comment #8102 by Et on

In the last paragraph, of the 2 compositions that need to be equal one should have X_2 in it instead of X_1

Comment #8380 by on

Minor typos in the last paragraph: instead of "where equal" it should be "were equal", and in "we can choose a morphism in ", I think it should be instead of . Also, in the statement maybe we could write "consider the category of morphisms of distinguished triangles", to be more precise; and since the proof never invokes TR4 (directly or indirectly) I think one could simply write "let be a pre-triangulated category".

There are also:

  • 4 comment(s) on Section 13.5: Localization of triangulated categories

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.