Lemma 20.49.1. Let $(X, \mathcal{O}_ X)$ be a ringed space. Set $R = \Gamma (X, \mathcal{O}_ X)$. The category of $\mathcal{O}_ X$-modules which are summands of finite free $\mathcal{O}_ X$-modules is equivalent to the category of finite projective $R$-modules.

## 20.49 Invertible objects in the derived category

We characterize invertible objects in the derived category of a ringed space (both in the case where the stalks of the structure sheaf are local and where not).

**Proof.**
Observe that a finite projective $R$-module is the same thing as a summand of a finite free $R$-module. The equivalence is given by the functor $\mathcal{E} \mapsto \Gamma (X, \mathcal{E})$. The inverse functor is given by the construction of Modules, Lemma 17.10.5.
$\square$

Lemma 20.49.2. Let $(X, \mathcal{O}_ X)$ be a ringed space. Let $M$ be an object of $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$. The following are equivalent

$M$ is invertible in $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$, see Categories, Definition 4.42.4, and

there is a locally finite direct product decomposition

\[ \mathcal{O}_ X = \prod \nolimits _{n \in \mathbf{Z}} \mathcal{O}_ n \]and for each $n$ there is an invertible $\mathcal{O}_ n$-module $\mathcal{H}^ n$ (Modules, Definition 17.24.1) and $M = \bigoplus \mathcal{H}^ n[-n]$ in $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$.

If (1) and (2) hold, then $M$ is a perfect object of $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$. If $\mathcal{O}_{X, x}$ is a local ring for all $x \in X$ these condition are also equivalent to

there exists an open covering $X = \bigcup U_ i$ and for each $i$ an integer $n_ i$ such that $M|_{U_ i}$ is represented by an invertible $\mathcal{O}_{U_ i}$-module placed in degree $n_ i$.

**Proof.**
Assume (2). Consider the object $R\mathop{\mathcal{H}\! \mathit{om}}\nolimits (M, \mathcal{O}_ X)$ and the composition map

To prove this is an isomorphism, we may work locally. Thus we may assume $\mathcal{O}_ X = \prod _{a \leq n \leq b} \mathcal{O}_ n$ and $M = \bigoplus _{a \leq n \leq b} \mathcal{H}^ n[-n]$. Then it suffices to show that

is zero if $n \not= m$ and equal to $\mathcal{O}_ n$ if $n = m$. The case $n \not= m$ follows from the fact that $\mathcal{O}_ n$ and $\mathcal{O}_ m$ are flat $\mathcal{O}_ X$-algebras with $\mathcal{O}_ n \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_ X} \mathcal{O}_ m = 0$. Using the local structure of invertible $\mathcal{O}_ X$-modules (Modules, Lemma 17.24.2) and working locally the isomorphism in case $n = m$ follows in a straightforward manner; we omit the details. Because $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ is symmetric monoidal, we conclude that $M$ is invertible.

Assume (1). The description in (2) shows that we have a candidate for $\mathcal{O}_ n$, namely, $\mathop{\mathcal{H}\! \mathit{om}}\nolimits _{\mathcal{O}_ X}(H^ n(M), H^ n(M))$. If this is a locally finite family of sheaves of rings and if $\mathcal{O}_ X = \prod \mathcal{O}_ n$, then we immediately obtain the direct sum decomposition $M = \bigoplus H^ n(M)[-n]$ using the idempotents in $\mathcal{O}_ X$ coming from the product decomposition. This shows that in order to prove (2) we may work locally on $X$.

Choose an object $N$ of $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ and an isomorphism $M \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_ X}^\mathbf {L} N \cong \mathcal{O}_ X$. Let $x \in X$. Then $N$ is a left dual for $M$ in the monoidal category $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$ and we conclude that $M$ is perfect by Lemma 20.47.8. By symmetry we see that $N$ is perfect. After replacing $X$ by an open neighbourhood of $x$, we may assume $M$ and $N$ are represented by a strictly perfect complexes $\mathcal{E}^\bullet $ and $\mathcal{F}^\bullet $. Then $M \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_ X}^\mathbf {L} N$ is represented by $\text{Tot}(\mathcal{E}^\bullet \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_ X} \mathcal{F}^\bullet )$. After another shinking of $X$ we may assume the mutually inverse isomorphisms $\mathcal{O}_ X \to M \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_ X}^\mathbf {L} N$ and $M \otimes _{\mathcal{O}_ X}^\mathbf {L} N \to \mathcal{O}_ X$ are given by maps of complexes

See Lemma 20.43.8. Then $\beta \circ \alpha = 1$ as maps of complexes and $\alpha \circ \beta = 1$ as a morphism in $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$. After shrinking $X$ we may assume the composition $\alpha \circ \beta $ is homotopic to $1$ by some homotopy $\theta $ with components

by the same lemma as before. Set $R = \Gamma (X, \mathcal{O}_ X)$. By Lemma 20.49.1 we find that we obtain

$M^\bullet = \Gamma (X, \mathcal{E}^\bullet )$ is a bounded complex of finite projective $R$-modules,

$N^\bullet = \Gamma (X, \mathcal{F}^\bullet )$ is a bounded complex of finite projective $R$-modules,

$\alpha $ and $\beta $ correspond to maps of complexes $a : R \to \text{Tot}(M^\bullet \otimes _ R N^\bullet )$ and $b : \text{Tot}(M^\bullet \otimes _ R N^\bullet ) \to R$,

$\theta ^ n$ corresponds to a map $h^ n : \text{Tot}^ n(M^\bullet \otimes _ R N^\bullet ) \to \text{Tot}^{n - 1}(M^\bullet \otimes _ R N^\bullet )$, and

$b \circ a = 1$ and $b \circ a - 1 = dh + hd$,

It follows that $M^\bullet $ and $N^\bullet $ define mutually inverse objects of $D(R)$. By More on Algebra, Lemma 15.123.4 we find a product decomposition $R = \prod _{a \leq n \leq b} R_ n$ and invertible $R_ n$-modules $H^ n$ such that $M^\bullet \cong \bigoplus _{a \leq n \leq b} H^ n[-n]$. This isomorphism in $D(R)$ can be lifted to an morphism

of complexes because each $H^ n$ is projective as an $R$-module. Correspondingly, using Lemma 20.49.1 again, we obtain an morphism

which is an isomorphism in $D(\mathcal{O}_ X)$. Setting $\mathcal{O}_ n = R_ n \otimes _ R \mathcal{O}_ X$ we conclude (2) is true.

If all stalks of $\mathcal{O}_ X$ are local, then it is straightforward to prove the equivalence of (2) and (3). We omit the details. $\square$

## 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 (0)