The Stacks project

Proposition 64.14.1. Let $S$ be a scheme. Let $(U, R, s, t, c)$ be a groupoid scheme over $S$. Assume

  1. $s, t : R \to U$ finite locally free,

  2. $j = (t, s)$ is an equivalence, and

  3. for a dense set of points $u \in U$ the $R$-equivalence class $t(s^{-1}(\{ u\} ))$ is contained in an affine open of $U$.

Then there exists a finite locally free morphism $U \to M$ of schemes over $S$ such that $R = U \times _ M U$ and such that $M$ represents the quotient sheaf $U/R$ in the fppf topology.

Proof. By assumption (3) and Groupoids, Lemma 39.24.1 we can find an open covering $U = \bigcup U_ i$ such that each $U_ i$ is an $R$-invariant affine open of $U$. Set $R_ i = R|_{U_ i}$. Consider the fppf sheaves $F = U/R$ and $F_ i = U_ i/R_ i$. By Spaces, Lemma 63.10.2 the morphisms $F_ i \to F$ are representable and open immersions. By Groupoids, Proposition 39.23.9 the sheaves $F_ i$ are representable by affine schemes. If $T$ is a scheme and $T \to F$ is a morphism, then $V_ i = F_ i \times _ F T$ is open in $T$ and we claim that $T = \bigcup V_ i$. Namely, fppf locally on $T$ we can lift $T \to F$ to a morphism $f : T \to U$ and in that case $f^{-1}(U_ i) \subset V_ i$. Hence we conclude that $F$ is representable by a scheme, see Schemes, Lemma 26.15.4. $\square$


Comments (3)

Comment #1521 by jojo on

Is it really ovious that the sheaves cover ? I think that copying the arguments used in 02WU I can see why it is true but if that's the way to do it then maybe it would deserve a proof (or at least a sentence indicating how to proceed). But it wouldn't surprise me if I were missing something :)

Comment #1525 by jojo on

In fact I wonder ... can we not bypass the use of 01JJ and thus of 02WU by invoking 03C5 ? I mean I think that the conditions of 03C5 can be tested locally for a cover that's -invariant? Sadly I don't have enough self-confidence in algebraic geometry to be really sure but it feels like it might be true.

I would be really nice because the proof of 02WU is kind of hard while 03C5 is easy.

Also maybe it would be nice to state proposition 3.4.6 in http://arxiv.org/pdf/1210.0431.pdf which says when 03C5 is an equivalence.

Comment #1532 by on

OK, I sort of agree with you that being a covering needs a argument. I added a small argument. I can make it longer by choosing coverings and writing everything out, but if we do that, then we should move this propositions to the chapter on groupoids. Here is the commit.

If you want to write out your suggestion, you are welcome to do so and submit it by email. Thanks!


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 07S6. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.