Proof.
Proof of (1). Let K \in D_\mathit{QCoh}^+(\mathcal{O}_ Y). Choose a distinguished triangle
K \to Rj_*K|_ V \to Q \to K[1]
Observe that Q is in D_\mathit{QCoh}^+(\mathcal{O}_ Y) (Derived Categories of Schemes, Lemma 36.4.1) and is supported on Y \setminus V (Derived Categories of Schemes, Definition 36.6.1). Applying a we obtain a distinguished triangle
a(K) \to a(Rj_*K|_ V) \to a(Q) \to a(K)[1]
on X. If a(Q) is supported on X \setminus U, then restricting to U the map a(K)|_ U \to a(Rj_*K|_ V)|_ U is an isomorphism, i.e., (48.4.1.1) is an isomorphism on K. The converse is immediate.
The proof of (2) is exactly the same as the proof of (1).
Proof of (3). Assume the equivalent conditions of (1) hold. Set T = Y \setminus V. We will use the notation D_{\mathit{QCoh}, T}(\mathcal{O}_ Y) and D_{\mathit{QCoh}, f^{-1}(T)}(\mathcal{O}_ X) to denote complexes whose cohomology sheaves are supported on T and f^{-1}(T). Since a commutes with direct sums, the strictly full, saturated, triangulated subcategory \mathcal{D} with objects
\{ Q \in D_{\mathit{QCoh}, T}(\mathcal{O}_ Y) \mid a(Q) \in D_{\mathit{QCoh}, f^{-1}(T)}(\mathcal{O}_ X)\}
is preserved by direct sums and hence derived colimits. On the other hand, the category D_{\mathit{QCoh}, T}(\mathcal{O}_ Y) is generated by a perfect object E (see Derived Categories of Schemes, Lemma 36.15.4). By assumption we see that E \in \mathcal{D}. By Derived Categories, Lemma 13.37.3 every object Q of D_{\mathit{QCoh}, T}(\mathcal{O}_ Y) is a derived colimit of a system Q_1 \to Q_2 \to Q_3 \to \ldots such that the cones of the transition maps are direct sums of shifts of E. Arguing by induction we see that Q_ n \in \mathcal{D} for all n and finally that Q is in \mathcal{D}. Thus the equivalent conditions of (2) hold.
\square
Comments (0)
There are also: