Local cohomology

Last updated

In algebraic geometry, local cohomology is an algebraic analogue of relative cohomology. Alexander Grothendieck introduced it in seminars in Harvard in 1961 written up by Hartshorne (1967), and in 1961-2 at IHES written up as SGA2 - Grothendieck (1968), republished as Grothendieck (2005). Given a function (more generally, a section of a quasicoherent sheaf) defined on an open subset of an algebraic variety (or scheme), local cohomology measures the obstruction to extending that function to a larger domain. The rational function , for example, is defined only on the complement of on the affine line over a field , and cannot be extended to a function on the entire space. The local cohomology module (where is the coordinate ring of ) detects this in the nonvanishing of a cohomology class . In a similar manner, is defined away from the and axes in the affine plane, but cannot be extended to either the complement of the -axis or the complement of the -axis alone (nor can it be expressed as a sum of such functions); this obstruction corresponds precisely to a nonzero class in the local cohomology module . [1]

Contents

Outside of algebraic geometry, local cohomology has found applications in commutative algebra, [2] [3] [4] combinatorics, [5] [6] [7] and certain kinds of partial differential equations. [8]

Definition

In the most general geometric form of the theory, sections are considered of a sheaf of abelian groups, on a topological space , with support in a closed subset , The derived functors of form local cohomology groups

In the theory's algebraic form, the space X is the spectrum Spec(R) of a commutative ring R (assumed to be Noetherian throughout this article) and the sheaf F is the quasicoherent sheaf associated to an R-module M, denoted by . The closed subscheme Y is defined by an ideal I. In this situation, the functor ΓY(F) corresponds to the I-torsion functor, a union of annihilators

i.e., the elements of M which are annihilated by some power of I. As a right derived functor, the ithlocal cohomology module with respect to I is the ith cohomology group of the chain complex obtained from taking the I-torsion part of an injective resolution of the module . [9] Because consists of R-modules and R-module homomorphisms, the local cohomology groups each have the natural structure of an R-module.

The I-torsion part may alternatively be described as

and for this reason, the local cohomology of an R-module M agrees [10] with a direct limit of Ext modules,

It follows from either of these definitions that would be unchanged if were replaced by another ideal having the same radical. [11] It also follows that local cohomology does not depend on any choice of generators for I, a fact which becomes relevant in the following definition involving the Čech complex.

Using Koszul and Čech complexes

The derived functor definition of local cohomology requires an injective resolution of the module , which can make it inaccessible for use in explicit computations. The Čech complex is seen as more practical in certain contexts. Iyengar et al. (2007), for example, state that they "essentially ignore" the "problem of actually producing any one of these [injective] kinds of resolutions for a given module" [12] prior to presenting the Čech complex definition of local cohomology, and Hartshorne (1977) describes Čech cohomology as "giv[ing] a practical method for computing cohomology of quasi-coherent sheaves on a scheme." [13] and as being "well suited for computations." [14]

The Čech complex can be defined as a colimit of Koszul complexes where generate . The local cohomology modules can be described [15] as:

Koszul complexes have the property that multiplication by induces a chain complex morphism that is homotopic to zero, [16] meaning is annihilated by the . A non-zero map in the colimit of the sets contains maps from the all but finitely many Koszul complexes, and which are not annihilated by some element in the ideal.

This colimit of Koszul complexes is isomorphic to [17] the Čech complex, denoted , below.

where the ith local cohomology module of with respect to is isomorphic to [18] the ith cohomology group of the above chain complex,

The broader issue of computing local cohomology modules (in characteristic zero) is discussed in Leykin (2002) and Iyengar et al. (2007 , Lecture 23).

Basic properties

Since local cohomology is defined as derived functor, for any short exact sequence of R-modules , there is, by definition, a natural long exact sequence in local cohomology

There is also a long exact sequence of sheaf cohomology linking the ordinary sheaf cohomology of X and of the open set U = X \Y, with the local cohomology modules. For a quasicoherent sheaf F defined on X, this has the form

In the setting where X is an affine scheme and Y is the vanishing set of an ideal I, the cohomology groups vanish for . [19] If , this leads to an exact sequence

where the middle map is the restriction of sections. The target of this restriction map is also referred to as the ideal transform. For n 1, there are isomorphisms

Because of the above isomorphism with sheaf cohomology, local cohomology can be used to express a number of meaningful topological constructions on the scheme in purely algebraic terms. For example, there is a natural analogue in local cohomology of the Mayer–Vietoris sequence with respect to a pair of open sets U and V in X, given by the complements of the closed subschemes corresponding to a pair of ideal I and J, respectively. [20] This sequence has the form

for any -module .

The vanishing of local cohomology can be used to bound the least number of equations (referred to as the arithmetic rank) needed to (set theoretically) define the algebraic set in . If has the same radical as , and is generated by elements, then the Čech complex on the generators of has no terms in degree . The least number of generators among all ideals such that is the arithmetic rank of , denoted . [21] Since the local cohomology with respect to may be computed using any such ideal, it follows that for . [22]

Graded local cohomology and projective geometry

When is graded by , is generated by homogeneous elements, and is a graded module, there is a natural grading on the local cohomology module that is compatible with the gradings of and . [23] All of the basic properties of local cohomology expressed in this article are compatible with the graded structure. [24] If is finitely generated and is the ideal generated by the elements of having positive degree, then the graded components are finitely generated over and vanish for sufficiently large . [25]

The case where is the ideal generated by all elements of positive degree (sometimes called the irrelevant ideal) is particularly special, due to its relationship with projective geometry. [26] In this case, there is an isomorphism

where is the projective scheme associated to , and denotes the Serre twist. This isomorphism is graded, giving

in all degrees . [27]

This isomorphism relates local cohomology with the global cohomology of projective schemes. For example, the Castelnuovo–Mumford regularity can be formulated using local cohomology [28] as

where denotes the highest degree such that . Local cohomology can be used to prove certain upper bound results concerning the regularity. [29]

Examples

Top local cohomology

Using the Čech complex, if the local cohomology module is generated over by the images of the formal fractions

for and . [30] This fraction corresponds to a nonzero element of if and only if there is no such that . [31] For example, if , then

Examples of H1

If is known (where ), the module can sometimes be computed explicitly using the sequence

In the following examples, is any field.

Relation to invariants of modules

The dimension dimR(M) of a module (defined as the Krull dimension of its support) provides an upper bound for local cohomology modules: [35]

If R is local and M finitely generated, then this bound is sharp, i.e., .

The depth (defined as the maximal length of a regular M-sequence; also referred to as the grade of M) provides a sharp lower bound, i.e., it is the smallest integer n such that [36]

These two bounds together yield a characterisation of Cohen–Macaulay modules over local rings: they are precisely those modules where vanishes for all but one n.

Local duality

The local duality theorem is a local analogue of Serre duality. For a Cohen-Macaulay local ring of dimension that is a homomorphic image of a Gorenstein local ring [37] (for example, if is complete [38] ), it states that the natural pairing

is a perfect pairing, where is a dualizing module for . [39] In terms of the Matlis duality functor , the local duality theorem may be expressed as the following isomorphism. [40]

The statement is simpler when , which is equivalent [41] to the hypothesis that is Gorenstein. This is the case, for example, if is regular.

Applications

The initial applications were to analogues of the Lefschetz hyperplane theorems. In general such theorems state that homology or cohomology is supported on a hyperplane section of an algebraic variety, except for some 'loss' that can be controlled. These results applied to the algebraic fundamental group and to the Picard group.

Another type of application are connectedness theorems such as Grothendieck's connectedness theorem (a local analogue of the Bertini theorem) or the Fulton–Hansen connectedness theorem due to Fulton & Hansen (1979) and Faltings (1979). The latter asserts that for two projective varieties V and W in Pr over an algebraically closed field, the connectedness dimension of Z = VW (i.e., the minimal dimension of a closed subset T of Z that has to be removed from Z so that the complement Z \ T is disconnected) is bound by

c(Z) dim V + dim Wr 1.

For example, Z is connected if dim V + dim W > r. [42]

In polyhedral geometry, a key ingredient of Stanley’s 1975 proof of the simplicial form of McMullen’s Upper bound theorem involves showing that the Stanley-Reisner ring of the corresponding simplicial complex is Cohen-Macaulay, and local cohomology is an important tool in this computation, via Hochster’s formula. [43] [6] [44]

See also

Notes

  1. Hartshorne (1977 , Exercise 4.3)
  2. Eisenbud (2005 , Chapter 4, Castelnuovo-Mumford Regularity)
  3. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Chapter 17, Hilbert Polynomials)
  4. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Chapter 18, Applications to reductions of ideals)
  5. Huang (2002 , Chapter 10, Residue Methods in Combinatorial Analysis)
  6. 1 2 Stanley, Richard (1996). Combinatorics and commutative algebra. Boston, MA: Birkhäuser Boston, Inc. p. 164. ISBN   0-8176-3836-9.
  7. Iyengar et al. (2007 , Lecture 16, Polyhedral Geometry)
  8. Iyengar et al. (2007 , Lecture 24, Holonomic Rank and Hypergeometric Systems)
  9. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , 1.2.2)
  10. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Theorem 1.3.8)
  11. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Remark 1.2.3)
  12. Iyengar et al. (2007)
  13. Hartshorne (1977 , p. 218)
  14. Hartshorne (1977 , p. 219)
  15. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Theorem 5.2.9)
  16. "Lemma 15.28.6 (0663)—The Stacks project". stacks.math.columbia.edu. Retrieved 2020-05-01.
  17. "Lemma 15.28.13 (0913)—The Stacks project". stacks.math.columbia.edu. Retrieved 2020-05-01.
  18. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Theorem 5.1.19)
  19. Hartshorne (1977 , Theorem 3.7)
  20. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Theorem 3.2.3)
  21. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Definition 3.3.2)
  22. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Remark 5.1.20)
  23. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Corollary 12.3.3)
  24. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Chapter 13)
  25. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Proposition 15.1.5)
  26. Eisenbud (1995 , §A.4)
  27. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Theorem 20.4.4)
  28. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Definition 15.2.9)
  29. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Chapter 16)
  30. Iyengar et al. (2007 , Corollary 7.14)
  31. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Exercise 5.1.21)
  32. Iyengar et al. (2007 , Exercise 7.16)
  33. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Exercise 2.3.6(v))
  34. Eisenbud (2005 , Example A1.10)
  35. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Theorem 6.1.2)
  36. Hartshorne (1967 , Theorem 3.8), Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Theorem 6.2.7), M is finitely generated, IMM
  37. Bruns & Herzog (1998 , Theorem 3.3.6)
  38. Bruns & Herzog (1998 , Corollary 3.3.8)
  39. Hartshorne (1967 , Theorem 6.7)
  40. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , Theorem 11.2.8)
  41. Bruns & Herzog (1998 , Theorem 3.3.7)
  42. Brodmann & Sharp (1998 , §19.6)
  43. Stanley, Richard (2014). "How the Upper Bound Conjecture Was Proved". Annals of Combinatorics . 18 (3): 533–539. doi:10.1007/s00026-014-0238-5. S2CID   253585250.
  44. Iyengar et al. (2007 , Lecture 16)

Introductory Reference

Related Research Articles

In commutative algebra, the prime spectrum of a ring R is the set of all prime ideals of R, and is usually denoted by ; in algebraic geometry it is simultaneously a topological space equipped with the sheaf of rings .

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ring (mathematics)</span> Algebraic structure with addition and multiplication

In mathematics, rings are algebraic structures that generalize fields: multiplication need not be commutative and multiplicative inverses need not exist. Informally, a ring is a set equipped with two binary operations satisfying properties analogous to those of addition and multiplication of integers. Ring elements may be numbers such as integers or complex numbers, but they may also be non-numerical objects such as polynomials, square matrices, functions, and power series.

In commutative algebra, the Krull dimension of a commutative ring R, named after Wolfgang Krull, is the supremum of the lengths of all chains of prime ideals. The Krull dimension need not be finite even for a Noetherian ring. More generally the Krull dimension can be defined for modules over possibly non-commutative rings as the deviation of the poset of submodules.

In mathematics, Hilbert's Nullstellensatz is a theorem that establishes a fundamental relationship between geometry and algebra. This relationship is the basis of algebraic geometry. It relates algebraic sets to ideals in polynomial rings over algebraically closed fields. This relationship was discovered by David Hilbert, who proved the Nullstellensatz in his second major paper on invariant theory in 1893.

In mathematics, specifically in homology theory and algebraic topology, cohomology is a general term for a sequence of abelian groups, usually one associated with a topological space, often defined from a cochain complex. Cohomology can be viewed as a method of assigning richer algebraic invariants to a space than homology. Some versions of cohomology arise by dualizing the construction of homology. In other words, cochains are functions on the group of chains in homology theory.

In algebra, flat modules include free modules, projective modules, and, over a principal ideal domain, torsion free modules. Formally, a module M over a ring R is flat if taking the tensor product over R with M preserves exact sequences. A module is faithfully flat if taking the tensor product with a sequence produces an exact sequence if and only if the original sequence is exact.

In mathematics, especially in algebraic geometry and the theory of complex manifolds, coherent sheaves are a class of sheaves closely linked to the geometric properties of the underlying space. The definition of coherent sheaves is made with reference to a sheaf of rings that codifies this geometric information.

In mathematics, Kähler differentials provide an adaptation of differential forms to arbitrary commutative rings or schemes. The notion was introduced by Erich Kähler in the 1930s. It was adopted as standard in commutative algebra and algebraic geometry somewhat later, once the need was felt to adapt methods from calculus and geometry over the complex numbers to contexts where such methods are not available.

In mathematics, deformation theory is the study of infinitesimal conditions associated with varying a solution P of a problem to slightly different solutions Pε, where ε is a small number, or a vector of small quantities. The infinitesimal conditions are the result of applying the approach of differential calculus to solving a problem with constraints. The name is an analogy to non-rigid structures that deform slightly to accommodate external forces.

In mathematics, the Ext functors are the derived functors of the Hom functor. Along with the Tor functor, Ext is one of the core concepts of homological algebra, in which ideas from algebraic topology are used to define invariants of algebraic structures. The cohomology of groups, Lie algebras, and associative algebras can all be defined in terms of Ext. The name comes from the fact that the first Ext group Ext1 classifies extensions of one module by another.

In mathematics, the Lasker–Noether theorem states that every Noetherian ring is a Lasker ring, which means that every ideal can be decomposed as an intersection, called primary decomposition, of finitely many primary ideals. The theorem was first proven by Emanuel Lasker (1905) for the special case of polynomial rings and convergent power series rings, and was proven in its full generality by Emmy Noether (1921).

In mathematics, Lie algebra cohomology is a cohomology theory for Lie algebras. It was first introduced in 1929 by Élie Cartan to study the topology of Lie groups and homogeneous spaces by relating cohomological methods of Georges de Rham to properties of the Lie algebra. It was later extended by Claude Chevalley and Samuel Eilenberg (1948) to coefficients in an arbitrary Lie module.

Verma modules, named after Daya-Nand Verma, are objects in the representation theory of Lie algebras, a branch of mathematics.

In mathematics, specifically the theory of Lie algebras, Lie's theorem states that, over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero, if is a finite-dimensional representation of a solvable Lie algebra, then there's a flag of invariant subspaces of with , meaning that for each and i.

In commutative algebra, an element b of a commutative ring B is said to be integral overA, a subring of B, if there are n ≥ 1 and aj in A such that

In mathematics, Hochschild homology (and cohomology) is a homology theory for associative algebras over rings. There is also a theory for Hochschild homology of certain functors. Hochschild cohomology was introduced by Gerhard Hochschild (1945) for algebras over a field, and extended to algebras over more general rings by Henri Cartan and Samuel Eilenberg (1956).

In mathematics, especially in algebraic geometry and the theory of complex manifolds, coherent sheaf cohomology is a technique for producing functions with specified properties. Many geometric questions can be formulated as questions about the existence of sections of line bundles or of more general coherent sheaves; such sections can be viewed as generalized functions. Cohomology provides computable tools for producing sections, or explaining why they do not exist. It also provides invariants to distinguish one algebraic variety from another.

In mathematics, a sheaf of O-modules or simply an O-module over a ringed space (X, O) is a sheaf F such that, for any open subset U of X, F(U) is an O(U)-module and the restriction maps F(U) → F(V) are compatible with the restriction maps O(U) → O(V): the restriction of fs is the restriction of f times that of s for any f in O(U) and s in F(U).

In mathematics, especially algebraic geometry, the decomposition theorem of Beilinson, Bernstein and Deligne or BBD decomposition theorem is a set of results concerning the cohomology of algebraic varieties. It was originally conjectured by Gelfand and MacPherson.

In algebraic geometry, the dimension of a scheme is a generalization of a dimension of an algebraic variety. Scheme theory emphasizes the relative point of view and, accordingly, the relative dimension of a morphism of schemes is also important.

References