The Stacks project

Lemma 21.29.1. With $\epsilon : (\mathcal{C}_\tau , \mathcal{O}_\tau ) \to (\mathcal{C}_{\tau '}, \mathcal{O}_{\tau '})$ as above. Let $\mathcal{B} \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\mathcal{C})$ be a subset. Let $\mathcal{A} \subset \textit{PMod}(\mathcal{O})$ be a full subcategory. Assume

  1. every object of $\mathcal{A}$ is a sheaf for the $\tau $-topology,

  2. $\mathcal{A}$ is a weak Serre subcategory of $\textit{Mod}(\mathcal{O}_\tau )$,

  3. every object of $\mathcal{C}$ has a $\tau '$-covering whose members are elements of $\mathcal{B}$, and

  4. for every $U \in \mathcal{B}$ we have $H^ p_\tau (U, \mathcal{F}) = 0$, $p > 0$ for all $\mathcal{F} \in \mathcal{A}$.

Then $\mathcal{A}$ is a weak Serre subcategory of $\textit{Mod}(\mathcal{O}_{\tau '})$ and there is an equivalence of triangulated categories $D_\mathcal {A}(\mathcal{O}_\tau ) = D_\mathcal {A}(\mathcal{O}_{\tau '})$ given by $\epsilon ^*$ and $R\epsilon _*$.

Proof. Since $\epsilon ^{-1}\mathcal{O}_{\tau '} = \mathcal{O}_\tau $ we see that $\epsilon $ is a flat morphism of ringed sites and that in fact $\epsilon ^{-1} = \epsilon ^*$ on sheaves of modules. By property (1) we can think of every object of $\mathcal{A}$ as a sheaf of $\mathcal{O}_\tau $-modules and as a sheaf of $\mathcal{O}_{\tau '}$-modules. In other words, we have fully faithful inclusion functors

\[ \mathcal{A} \to \textit{Mod}(\mathcal{O}_\tau ) \to \textit{Mod}(\mathcal{O}_{\tau '}) \]

To avoid confusion we will denote $\mathcal{A}' \subset \textit{Mod}(\mathcal{O}_{\tau '})$ the image of $\mathcal{A}$. Then it is clear that $\epsilon _* : \mathcal{A} \to \mathcal{A}'$ and $\epsilon ^* : \mathcal{A}' \to \mathcal{A}$ are quasi-inverse equivalences (see discussion preceding the lemma and use that objects of $\mathcal{A}'$ are sheaves in the $\tau $ topology).

Conditions (3) and (4) imply that $R^ p\epsilon _*\mathcal{F} = 0$ for $p > 0$ and $\mathcal{F} \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\mathcal{A})$. This is true because $R^ p\epsilon _*$ is the sheaf associated to the presheave $U \mapsto H^ p_\tau (U, \mathcal{F})$, see Lemma 21.8.4. Thus any exact complex in $\mathcal{A}$ (which is the same thing as an exact complex in $\textit{Mod}(\mathcal{O}_\tau )$ whose terms are in $\mathcal{A}$, see Homology, Lemma 12.9.3) remains exact upon applying the functor $\epsilon _*$.

Consider an exact sequence

\[ \mathcal{F}'_0 \to \mathcal{F}'_1 \to \mathcal{F}'_2 \to \mathcal{F}'_3 \to \mathcal{F}'_4 \]

in $\textit{Mod}(\mathcal{O}_{\tau '})$ with $\mathcal{F}'_0, \mathcal{F}'_1, \mathcal{F}'_3, \mathcal{F}'_4$ in $\mathcal{A}'$. Apply the exact functor $\epsilon ^*$ to get an exact sequence

\[ \epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_0 \to \epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_1 \to \epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_2 \to \epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_3 \to \epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_4 \]

in $\textit{Mod}(\mathcal{O}_\tau )$. Since $\mathcal{A}$ is a weak Serre subcategory and since $\epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_0, \epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_1, \epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_3, \epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_4$ are in $\mathcal{A}$, we conclude that $\epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}_2$ is in $\mathcal{A}$ by Homology, Definition 12.9.1. Consider the map of sequences

\[ \xymatrix{ \mathcal{F}'_0 \ar[r] \ar[d] & \mathcal{F}'_1 \ar[r] \ar[d] & \mathcal{F}'_2 \ar[r] \ar[d] & \mathcal{F}'_3 \ar[r] \ar[d] & \mathcal{F}'_4 \ar[d] \\ \epsilon _*\epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_0 \ar[r] & \epsilon _*\epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_1 \ar[r] & \epsilon _*\epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_2 \ar[r] & \epsilon _*\epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_3 \ar[r] & \epsilon _*\epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_4 } \]

The lower row is exact by the discussion in the preceding paragraph. The vertical arrows with index $0$, $1$, $3$, $4$ are isomorphisms by the discussion in the first paragraph. By the $5$ lemma (Homology, Lemma 12.5.20) we find that $\mathcal{F}'_2 \cong \epsilon _*\epsilon ^*\mathcal{F}'_2$ and hence $\mathcal{F}'_2$ is in $\mathcal{A}'$. In this way we see that $\mathcal{A}'$ is a weak Serre subcategory of $\textit{Mod}(\mathcal{O}_{\tau '})$, see Homology, Definition 12.9.1.

At this point it makes sense to talk about the derived categories $D_\mathcal {A}(\mathcal{O}_\tau )$ and $D_{\mathcal{A}'}(\mathcal{O}_{\tau '})$, see Derived Categories, Section 13.13. To finish the proof we show that conditions (1) – (5) of Lemma 21.28.7 apply. We have already seen (1), (2), (3) above. Note that since every object has a $\tau '$-covering by objects of $\mathcal{B}$, a fortiori every object has a $\tau $-covering by objects of $\mathcal{B}$. Hence condition (4) of Lemma 21.28.7 is satisfied. Similarly, condition (5) is satisfied as well. $\square$


Comments (0)


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 07A8. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.