Lemma 15.71.6. Let $R$ be a ring. Given complexes $K^\bullet , L^\bullet , M^\bullet $ of $R$-modules there is a canonical morphism

of complexes of $R$-modules functorial in all three complexes.

Lemma 15.71.6. Let $R$ be a ring. Given complexes $K^\bullet , L^\bullet , M^\bullet $ of $R$-modules there is a canonical morphism

\[ \text{Tot}(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^\bullet (L^\bullet , M^\bullet ) \otimes _ R K^\bullet ) \longrightarrow \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^\bullet (\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^\bullet (K^\bullet , L^\bullet ), M^\bullet ) \]

of complexes of $R$-modules functorial in all three complexes.

**Proof.**
Via the discussion in Remark 15.71.2 the existence of such a canonical map follows from Categories, Remark 4.43.12. We also give a direct construction.

Consider an element $\beta $ of degree $n$ of the right hand side. Then

\[ \beta = (\beta ^{p, s}) \in \prod \nolimits _{p + s = n} \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^{-s}(K^\bullet , L^\bullet ), M^ p) \]

Our sign rules tell us that

\begin{align*} \text{d}(\beta ^{p, s}) & = \text{d}_ M \circ \beta ^{p, s} - (-1)^ n \beta ^{p, s} \circ \text{d}_{\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^\bullet (K^\bullet , L^\bullet )} \end{align*}

We can describe the last term as follows

\[ (\beta ^{p, s} \circ \text{d}_{\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^\bullet (K^\bullet , L^\bullet )})(f) = \beta ^{p, s}(\text{d}_ L \circ f - (-1)^{s + 1} f \circ \text{d}_ K) \]

if $f \in \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^{-s - 1}(K^\bullet , L^\bullet )$. We conclude that in some unspecified sense $\text{d}(\beta ^{p, s})$ is a sum of three terms with signs as follows

15.71.6.1

\begin{equation} \label{more-algebra-equation-beta} \text{d}(\beta ^{p, s}) = \text{d}_ M(\beta ^{p, s}) -(-1)^ n\text{d}_ L(\beta ^{p, s}) + (-1)^{p + 1}\text{d}_ K(\beta ^{p, s}) \end{equation}

Next, we consider an element $\alpha $ of degree $n$ of the left hand side. We can write it like so

\[ \alpha = (\alpha ^{t, r}) \in \bigoplus \nolimits _{t + r = n} \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^ t(L^\bullet , M^\bullet ) \otimes K^ r \]

Each $\alpha ^{t, r}$ maps to an element

\[ \alpha ^{t, r} \mapsto (\alpha ^{p, q, r}) \in \prod \nolimits _{p + q = t} \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(L^{-q}, M^ p) \otimes _ R K^ r \]

Our sign rules tell us that

\begin{align*} \text{d}(\alpha ^{p, q, r}) & = \text{d}_{\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^\bullet (L^\bullet , M^\bullet )}(\alpha ^{p, q, r}) + (-1)^{p + q} \text{d}_ K(\alpha ^{p, q, r}) \end{align*}

where if we further write $\alpha ^{p, q, r} = \sum g_ i^{p, q} \otimes k_ i^ r$ then we have

\[ \text{d}_{\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^\bullet (L^\bullet , M^\bullet )}(\alpha ^{p, q, r}) = \sum (\text{d}_ M \circ g_ i^{p, q}) \otimes k_ i^ r - (-1)^{p + q} \sum (g_ i^{p, q} \circ \text{d}_ L) \otimes k_ i^ r \]

We conclude that in some unspecified sense $\text{d}(\alpha ^{p, q, r})$ is a sum of three terms with signs as follows

15.71.6.2

\begin{equation} \label{more-algebra-equation-alpha} \text{d}(\alpha ^{p, q, r}) = \text{d}_ M(\alpha ^{p, q, r}) -(-1)^{p + q}\text{d}_ L(\alpha ^{p, q, r}) + (-1)^{p + q}\text{d}_ K(\alpha ^{p, q, r}) \end{equation}

To define our map we will use the canonical maps

\[ c_{p, q, r} : \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(L^{-q}, M^ p) \otimes _ R K^ r \longrightarrow \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(K^ r, L^{-q}), M^ p) \]

which sends $\varphi \otimes k$ to the map $\psi \mapsto \varphi (\psi (k))$. This is functorial in all three variables. With $s = q + r$ there is an inclusion

\[ \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(K^ r, L^{-q}), M^ p) \subset \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^{-s}(K^\bullet , L^\bullet ), M^ p) \]

coming from the projection $\mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits ^{-s}(K^\bullet , L^\bullet ) \to \mathop{\mathrm{Hom}}\nolimits _ R(K^ r, L^{-q})$. Since $\alpha ^{p, q, r}$ is nonzero only for a finite number of $r$ we see that for a given $s$ there is only a finite number of $q, r$ with $q + r = s$. Thus we can send $\alpha $ to the element $\beta $ with

\[ \beta ^{p, s} = \sum \nolimits _{q + r = s} \epsilon _{p, q, r} c_{p, q, r}(\alpha ^{p, q, r}) \]

where where the sum uses the inclusions given above and where $\epsilon _{p, q, r} \in \{ \pm 1\} $. Comparing signs in the equations (15.71.6.1) and (15.71.6.2) we see that

$\epsilon _{p, q, r} = \epsilon _{p + 1, q, r}$

$-(-1)^ n\epsilon _{p, q, r} = -(-1)^{p + q}\epsilon _{p, q - 1, r}$ or equivalently $\epsilon _{p, q, r} = (-1)^ r\epsilon _{p, q - 1, r}$

$(-1)^{p + 1}\epsilon _{p, q, r} = (-1)^{p + q}\epsilon _{p, q, r + 1}$ or equivalently $(-1)^{q + 1}\epsilon _{p, q, r} = \epsilon _{p, q, r + 1}$.

A good solution is to take

\[ \epsilon _{p, r, s} = (-1)^{r + qr} \]

The choice of this sign is explained in the remark following the proof. $\square$

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.

## Comments (7)

Comment #7131 by Hao Peng on

Comment #7134 by Johan on

Comment #7135 by Hao Peng on

Comment #7136 by Johan on

Comment #7137 by Hao Peng on

Comment #7141 by Hao Peng on

Comment #7289 by Johan on