The Stacks project

\begin{equation*} \DeclareMathOperator\Coim{Coim} \DeclareMathOperator\Coker{Coker} \DeclareMathOperator\Ext{Ext} \DeclareMathOperator\Hom{Hom} \DeclareMathOperator\Im{Im} \DeclareMathOperator\Ker{Ker} \DeclareMathOperator\Mor{Mor} \DeclareMathOperator\Ob{Ob} \DeclareMathOperator\Sh{Sh} \DeclareMathOperator\SheafExt{\mathcal{E}\mathit{xt}} \DeclareMathOperator\SheafHom{\mathcal{H}\mathit{om}} \DeclareMathOperator\Spec{Spec} \newcommand\colim{\mathop{\mathrm{colim}}\nolimits} \newcommand\lim{\mathop{\mathrm{lim}}\nolimits} \newcommand\Qcoh{\mathit{Qcoh}} \newcommand\Sch{\mathit{Sch}} \newcommand\QCohstack{\mathcal{QC}\!\mathit{oh}} \newcommand\Cohstack{\mathcal{C}\!\mathit{oh}} \newcommand\Spacesstack{\mathcal{S}\!\mathit{paces}} \newcommand\Quotfunctor{\mathrm{Quot}} \newcommand\Hilbfunctor{\mathrm{Hilb}} \newcommand\Curvesstack{\mathcal{C}\!\mathit{urves}} \newcommand\Polarizedstack{\mathcal{P}\!\mathit{olarized}} \newcommand\Complexesstack{\mathcal{C}\!\mathit{omplexes}} \newcommand\Pic{\mathop{\mathrm{Pic}}\nolimits} \newcommand\Picardstack{\mathcal{P}\!\mathit{ic}} \newcommand\Picardfunctor{\mathrm{Pic}} \newcommand\Deformationcategory{\mathcal{D}\!\mathit{ef}} \end{equation*}

29.22 Cohomology and base change, III

In this section we prove the simplest case of a very general phenomenon that will be discussed in Derived Categories of Schemes, Section 35.21. Please see Remark 29.22.2 for a translation of the following lemma into algebra.

Lemma 29.22.1. Let $A$ be a Noetherian ring and set $S = \mathop{\mathrm{Spec}}(A)$. Let $f : X \to S$ be a proper morphism of schemes. Let $\mathcal{F}$ be a coherent $\mathcal{O}_ X$-module flat over $S$. Then

  1. $R\Gamma (X, \mathcal{F})$ is a perfect object of $D(A)$, and

  2. for any ring map $A \to A'$ the base change map

    \[ R\Gamma (X, \mathcal{F}) \otimes _ A^{\mathbf{L}} A' \longrightarrow R\Gamma (X_{A'}, \mathcal{F}_{A'}) \]

    is an isomorphism.

Proof. Choose a finite affine open covering $X = \bigcup _{i = 1, \ldots , n} U_ i$. By Lemmas 29.7.1 and 29.7.2 the Čech complex $K^\bullet = {\check C}^\bullet (\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F})$ satisfies

\[ K^\bullet \otimes _ A A' = R\Gamma (X_{A'}, \mathcal{F}_{A'}) \]

for all ring maps $A \to A'$. Let $K_{alt}^\bullet = {\check C}_{alt}^\bullet (\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{F})$ be the alternating Čech complex. By Cohomology, Lemma 20.24.6 there is a homotopy equivalence $K_{alt}^\bullet \to K^\bullet $ of $A$-modules. In particular, we have

\[ K_{alt}^\bullet \otimes _ A A' = R\Gamma (X_{A'}, \mathcal{F}_{A'}) \]

as well. Since $\mathcal{F}$ is flat over $A$ we see that each $K_{alt}^ n$ is flat over $A$ (see Morphisms, Lemma 28.24.2). Since moreover $K_{alt}^\bullet $ is bounded above (this is why we switched to the alternating Čech complex) $K_{alt}^\bullet \otimes _ A A' = K_{alt}^\bullet \otimes _ A^{\mathbf{L}} A'$ by the definition of derived tensor products (see More on Algebra, Section 15.57). By Lemma 29.19.2 the cohomology groups $H^ i(K_{alt}^\bullet )$ are finite $A$-modules. As $K_{alt}^\bullet $ is bounded, we conclude that $K_{alt}^\bullet $ is pseudo-coherent, see More on Algebra, Lemma 15.62.18. Given any $A$-module $M$ set $A' = A \oplus M$ where $M$ is a square zero ideal, i.e., $(a, m) \cdot (a', m') = (aa', am' + a'm)$. By the above we see that $K_{alt}^\bullet \otimes _ A^\mathbf {L} A'$ has cohomology in degrees $0, \ldots , n$. Hence $K_{alt}^\bullet \otimes _ A^\mathbf {L} M$ has cohomology in degrees $0, \ldots , n$. Hence $K_{alt}^\bullet $ has finite Tor dimension, see More on Algebra, Definition 15.63.1. We win by More on Algebra, Lemma 15.69.2. $\square$

Remark 29.22.2. A consequence of Lemma 29.22.1 is that there exists a finite complex of finite projective $A$-modules $M^\bullet $ such that we have

\[ H^ i(X_{A'}, \mathcal{F}_{A'}) = H^ i(M^\bullet \otimes _ A A') \]

functorially in $A'$. The condition that $\mathcal{F}$ is flat over $A$ is essential, see [Hartshorne].


Comments (2)

Comment #3418 by James on

is flatness of F needed for condition (2)? The proof seems to suggest not but I am probably wrong

Comment #3480 by on

Dear James, please look at Section 29.7 to see that the answer to your question is affirmative. It is the raison d'etre of that section. BUT please be very careful in using this property, because it is something about the particular complex and not a property of the total direct image in the derived category.


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