Loading web-font TeX/Main/Regular

The Stacks project

Lemma 42.48.1. Let (S, \delta ) be as in Situation 42.7.1. Let X be locally of finite type over S. Let b : W \to \mathbf{P}^1_ X be a proper morphism of schemes which is an isomorphism over \mathbf{A}^1_ X. Denote i_\infty : W_\infty \to W the inverse image of the divisor D_\infty \subset \mathbf{P}^1_ X with complement \mathbf{A}^1_ X. Then there is a canonical bivariant class

C \in A^0(W_\infty \to X)

with the property that i_{\infty , *}(C \cap \alpha ) = i_{0, *}\alpha for \alpha \in \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _ k(X) and similarly after any base change by X' \to X locally of finite type.

Proof. Given \alpha \in \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _ k(X) there exists a \beta \in \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _{k + 1}(W) restricting to the flat pullback of \alpha on b^{-1}(\mathbf{A}^1_ X), see Lemma 42.14.2. A second choice of \beta differs from \beta by a cycle supported on W_\infty , see Lemma 42.19.3. Since the normal bundle of the effective Cartier divisor D_\infty \subset \mathbf{P}^1_ X of (42.18.1.1) is trivial, the gysin homomorphism i_\infty ^* kills cycle classes supported on W_\infty , see Remark 42.29.6. Hence setting C \cap \alpha = i_\infty ^*\beta is well defined.

Since W_\infty and W_0 = X \times \{ 0\} are the pullbacks of the rationally equivalent effective Cartier divisors D_0, D_\infty in \mathbf{P}^1_ X, we see that i_\infty ^*\beta and i_0^*\beta map to the same cycle class on W; namely, both represent the class c_1(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbf{P}^1_ X}(1)) \cap \beta by Lemma 42.29.4. By our choice of \beta we have i_0^*\beta = \alpha as cycles on W_0 = X \times \{ 0\} , see for example Lemma 42.31.1. Thus we see that i_{\infty , *}(C \cap \alpha ) = i_{0, *}\alpha as stated in the lemma.

Observe that the assumptions on b are preserved by any base change by X' \to X locally of finite type. Hence we get an operation C \cap - : \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _ k(X') \to \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _ k(W'_\infty ) by the same construction as above. To see that this family of operations defines a bivariant class, we consider the diagram

\xymatrix{ & & & \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _*(X) \ar[d]^{\text{flat pullback}} \\ \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _{* + 1}(W_\infty ) \ar[r] \ar[rd]^0 & \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _{* + 1}(W) \ar[d]^{i_\infty ^*} \ar[rr]^{\text{flat pullback}} & & \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _{* + 1}(\mathbf{A}^1_ X) \ar[r] \ar@{..>}[lld]^{C \cap -} & 0 \\ & \mathop{\mathrm{CH}}\nolimits _*(W_\infty ) }

for X as indicated and the base change of this diagram for any X' \to X. We know that flat pullback and i_\infty ^* are bivariant operations, see Lemmas 42.33.2 and 42.33.3. Then a formal argument (involving huge diagrams of schemes and their chow groups) shows that the dotted arrow is a bivariant operation. \square


Comments (0)


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.