The Stacks project

Lemma 66.27.3. Let $S$ be a scheme and let $Y$ be an algebraic space over $S$. Let $\mathcal{F}$ be a sheaf of sets on $Y_{\acute{e}tale}$. Provided a set theoretic condition is satisfied (see proof) we have

  1. the functor $X$ associated to $\mathcal{F}$ above is an algebraic space,

  2. the map $X \to Y$ is an étale morphism of algebraic spaces,

  3. via the identification $\mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (Y_{\acute{e}tale}) = \mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (Y_{spaces, {\acute{e}tale}})$ we have $\mathcal{F} \cong h_ X$,

  4. we have $\mathcal{F} \cong f_{small, !}*$. Here $*$ is the final object of the category $\mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (X_{\acute{e}tale})$ and $f_{small, !}$ exists by Lemma 66.18.11.

Proof. Let us prove that $X$ is a sheaf for the fppf topology. Namely, suppose that $\{ g_ i : T_ i \to T\} $ is a covering of $(\mathit{Sch}/S)_{fppf}$ and $(y_ i, s_ i) \in X(T_ i)$ satisfy the glueing condition, i.e., the restriction of $(y_ i, s_ i)$ and $(y_ j, s_ j)$ to $T_ i \times _ T T_ j$ agree. Then since $Y$ is a sheaf for the fppf topology, we see that the $y_ i$ give rise to a unique morphism $y : T \to Y$ such that $y_ i = y \circ g_ i$. Then we see that $y_{i, small}^{-1}\mathcal{F} = g_{i, small}^{-1}y_{small}^{-1}\mathcal{F}$. Hence the sections $s_ i$ glue uniquely to a section of $y_{small}^{-1}\mathcal{F}$ by Étale Cohomology, Lemma 59.39.2.

The construction that sends $\mathcal{F} \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (Y_{\acute{e}tale}))$ to $X \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits ((\mathit{Sch}/S)_{fppf})$ preserves finite limits and all colimits since each of the functors $y_{small}^{-1}$ have this property. Of course, if $V \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (Y_{\acute{e}tale})$, then the construction sends the representable sheaf $h_ V$ on $Y_{\acute{e}tale}$ to the representable functor represented by $V$.

By Sites, Lemma 7.12.5 we can find a set $I$, for each $i \in I$ an object $V_ i$ of $Y_{\acute{e}tale}$ and a surjective map of sheaves

\[ \coprod h_{V_ i} \longrightarrow \mathcal{F} \]

on $Y_{\acute{e}tale}$. The set theoretic condition we need is that the index set $I$ is not too large1. Then $V = \coprod V_ i$ is an object of $(\mathit{Sch}/S)_{fppf}$ and therefore an object of $Y_{\acute{e}tale}$ and we have a surjective map $h_ V \to \mathcal{F}$.

Observe that the product of $h_ V$ with itself in $\mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (Y_{\acute{e}tale})$ is $h_{V \times _ Y V}$. Consider the fibre product

\[ h_ V \times _\mathcal {F} h_ V \subset h_{V \times _ Y V} \]

There is an open subscheme $R$ of $V \times _ Y V$ such that $h_ V \times _\mathcal {F} h_ V = h_ R$, see Lemma 66.20.1 (small detail omitted). By the Yoneda lemma we obtain two morphisms $s, t : R \to V$ in $Y_{\acute{e}tale}$ and we find a coequalizer diagram

\[ \xymatrix{ h_ R \ar@<1ex>[r] \ar@<-1ex>[r] & h_ V \ar[r] & \mathcal{F} } \]

in $\mathop{\mathit{Sh}}\nolimits (Y_{\acute{e}tale})$. Of course the morphisms $s, t$ are étale and define an étale equivalence relation $(t, s) : R \to V \times _ S V$.

By the discussion in the preceding two paragraphs we find a coequalizer diagram

\[ \xymatrix{ R \ar@<1ex>[r] \ar@<-1ex>[r] & V \ar[r] & X } \]

in $(\mathit{Sch}/S)_{fppf}$. Thus $X = V/R$ is an algebraic space by Spaces, Theorem 65.10.5. This proves (1). Part (2) follows because $V \to Y$ is étale. Part (3) is immediate from the definition of $X$ and $h_ X$. We omit the proof of part (4); it follows by matching the morphism associated to the cocontinuous functor $j$ of Lemma 66.18.11 with the description of $X_{spaces, {\acute{e}tale}}$ as the localization of $Y_{spaces, {\acute{e}tale}}$ at $X$ discussed above and Sites, Lemma 7.25.3. $\square$

[1] It suffices if the supremum of the cardinalities of the stalks of $\mathcal{F}$ at geometric points of $Y$ is bounded by the size of some object of $(\mathit{Sch}/S)_{fppf}$.

Comments (2)

Comment #8459 by ZL on

A typo: in the fourth line, "" should be .

Here is identified with the localization morphism in 66.18.11

Comment #9076 by on

Excellent catch! I would say this was a bit worse than just a typo. I improved the statement and proof of this lemma a little bit here.


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.




In order to prevent bots from posting comments, we would like you to prove that you are human. You can do this by filling in the name of the current tag in the following input field. As a reminder, this is tag 0GF6. Beware of the difference between the letter 'O' and the digit '0'.