## 48.19 A duality theory

In this section we spell out what kind of a duality theory our very general results above give for finite type separated schemes over a fixed Noetherian base scheme.

Recall that a dualizing complex on a Noetherian scheme $X$, is an object of $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ which affine locally gives a dualizing complex for the corresponding rings, see Definition 48.2.2.

Given a Noetherian scheme $S$ denote $\textit{FTS}_ S$ the category of schemes which are of finite type and separated over $S$. Then:

the functors $f^!$ turn $D_\mathit{QCoh}^+$ into a pseudo functor on $\textit{FTS}_ S$,

if $f : X \to Y$ is a proper morphism in $\textit{FTS}_ S$, then $f^!$ is the restriction of the right adjoint of $Rf_* : D_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ X) \to D_\mathit{QCoh}(\mathcal{O}_ Y)$ to $D_\mathit{QCoh}^+(\mathcal{O}_ Y)$ and there is a canonical isomorphism

\[ Rf_*R\mathop{\mathcal{H}\! \mathit{om}}\nolimits _{\mathcal{O}_ X}(K, f^!M) \to R\mathop{\mathcal{H}\! \mathit{om}}\nolimits _{\mathcal{O}_ Y}(Rf_*K, M) \]for all $K \in D_{\textit{Coh}}^-(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ and $M \in D_\mathit{QCoh}^+(\mathcal{O}_ Y)$,

if an object $X$ of $\textit{FTS}_ S$ has a dualizing complex $\omega _ X^\bullet $, then the functor $D_ X = R\mathop{\mathcal{H}\! \mathit{om}}\nolimits _{\mathcal{O}_ X}(-, \omega _ X^\bullet )$ defines an involution of $D_{\textit{Coh}}(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ switching $D_{\textit{Coh}}^+(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ and $D_{\textit{Coh}}^-(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ and fixing $D_{\textit{Coh}}^ b(\mathcal{O}_ X)$,

if $f : X \to Y$ is a morphism of $\textit{FTS}_ S$ and $\omega _ Y^\bullet $ is a dualizing complex on $Y$, then

$\omega _ X^\bullet = f^!\omega _ Y^\bullet $ is a dualizing complex for $X$,

$f^!M = D_ X(Lf^*D_ Y(M))$ canonically for $M \in D_{\textit{Coh}}^+(\mathcal{O}_ Y)$, and

if in addition $f$ is proper then

\[ Rf_*R\mathop{\mathcal{H}\! \mathit{om}}\nolimits _{\mathcal{O}_ X}(K, \omega _ X^\bullet ) = R\mathop{\mathcal{H}\! \mathit{om}}\nolimits _{\mathcal{O}_ Y}(Rf_*K, \omega _ Y^\bullet ) \]for $K$ in $D^-_{\textit{Coh}}(\mathcal{O}_ Y)$,

if $f : X \to Y$ is a closed immersion in $\textit{FTS}_ S$, then $f^!(-) = R\mathop{\mathcal{H}\! \mathit{om}}\nolimits (\mathcal{O}_ X, -)$,

if $f : Y \to X$ is a finite morphism in $\textit{FTS}_ S$, then $f_*f^!(-) = R\mathop{\mathcal{H}\! \mathit{om}}\nolimits _{\mathcal{O}_ X}(f_*\mathcal{O}_ Y, -)$,

if $f : X \to Y$ is the inclusion of an effective Cartier divisor into an object of $\textit{FTS}_ S$, then $f^!(-) = Lf^*(-) \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_ X} \mathcal{O}_ Y(-X)[-1]$,

if $f : X \to Y$ is a Koszul regular immersion of codimension $c$ into an object of $\textit{FTS}_ S$, then $f^!(-) \cong Lf^*(-) \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_ X} \wedge ^ c\mathcal{N}[-c]$, and

if $f : X \to Y$ is a smooth proper morphism of relative dimension $d$ in $\textit{FTS}_ S$, then $f^!(-) \cong Lf^*(-) \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_ X} \Omega ^ d_{X/Y}[d]$.

This follows from Lemmas 48.2.5, 48.3.6, 48.9.7, 48.11.4, 48.14.2, 48.15.6, 48.15.7, 48.16.3, 48.16.4, 48.17.4, 48.17.7, 48.17.8, and 48.17.9 and Example 48.3.9. We have obtained our functors by a very abstract procedure which finally rests on invoking an existence theorem (Derived Categories, Proposition 13.38.2). This means we have, in general, no explicit description of the functors $f^!$. This can sometimes be a problem. But in fact, it is often enough to know the existence of a dualizing complex and the duality isomorphism to pin down $f^!$.

## 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.

## Comments (5)

Comment #5471 by Derek Khu on

Comment #5689 by Johan on

Comment #7478 by Hao Peng on

Comment #7626 by Stacks Project on

Comment #7773 by Yuchen Liu on