Transfers on commutative group schemes
Abstract.
We prove that any commutative group scheme separated over a noetherian normal scheme admits a canonical structure of a presheaf with transfers, which is characterized by a simple condition on radicial transfers.
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 14F42; Secondary 14L15Introduction
Voevodsky’s theory of presheaves with transfers (see for example [MVW06, Part 1]) plays a central role in his theory of motives over a field. Roughly speaking, they are presheaves on the category of smooth schemes equipped with covariant “transfer maps” for finite surjective morphisms, functorial in an appropriate sense. One important example is commutative group schemes, e.g. , , the Witt ring scheme and abelian varieties. In particular, smooth commutative group schemes over a field equipped with transfers are known to give examples of reciprocity sheaves (see [KSY16], [KSY]), for which a nice motivic theory can be applied.
On the other hand, transfer structures on group schemes over a general base scheme has not been studied much yet. In this paper we prove the following general existence result.
Theorem 0.1 (see Theorem 3.8).
Let be a noetherian normal scheme and be a separated commutative group scheme over . Then there exists a canonical structure of a presheaf with transfers over on .
One way to prove that a presheaf has a transfer structure is to show that it is a qfh sheaf. In this way, Ancona-Huber-Lehalleur [AHL14] proved that for any smooth commutative group scheme over a noetherian excellent scheme , the presheaf admits a unique transfer structure. However, being a qfh sheaf is so strong a condition that we cannot expect in general that itself should be so. Also, transfers constructed in this way are comparatively inexplicit and difficult to compute.
Another way is to use the symmetric product and construct transfers geometrically. In this way, Spieß-Szamuely [SS03] and Barbieri-Viale-Kahn [BVK16, Lemma 1.4.4] proved that any commutative group scheme locally of finite type over a field admits a canonical transfer structure. Our proof of Theorem 0.1 is based on this idea. In section 2, we imitate the construction of locally free transfers due to Spieß-Szamuely in a more general setting. In section 3, we define the canonical transfer on group schemes and prove the functoriality to establish Theorem 0.1. In section 4, we characterize the canonical transfer by a simple condition on radicial transfers.
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Shuji Saito for his support in my studies. I also thank Hiroyasu Miyazaki for many interesting discussions.
1. Review of relative cycles
In this section we recall the theory of relative cycles in the style of Cisinski-Déglise [CD19]; nothing in this section is our original. Let be a noetherian scheme. A cycle on is a formal -linear combination of integral closed subschemes of . A component of a cycle is an integral closed subscheme whose coefficient in is non-zero. For a closed subscheme of , we define the associated cycle by
where are the irreducible components of . If is a morphism between noetherian schemes and is a cycle on , then the cycle on is defined by linearly extending
where is the generic point of .
Until the end of this section, we fix a noetherian base scheme and consider only noetherian schemes over .
Definition 1.1.
Let be a noetherian -scheme and a cycle on .
-
•
We say that is finite over if every component of is finite over .
-
•
We say that is flat over if every component of is flat over .
-
•
We say that is pseudo-dominant over if every component of is dominant over some irreducible component of .
Consider the following diagram of noetherian schemes.
(1.5) |
Let (resp. ) be a cycle on (resp. ). If is -universal over in the sense of [CD19], then a cycle on called the pullback of by is defined. The operation is bilinear.
Lemma 1.2.
Let be a noetherian -scheme and be a cycle on . Then is finite and flat over -universal over pseudo-dominant over .
Proof.
This follows directly from the definition of -universal cycles; see [CD19, Definition 8.1.47]. ∎
Lemma 1.3.
Consider the diagram (1.5) of noetherian schemes. Let be a cycle on finite and flat over and write . Then we have
Proof.
See [CD19, 8.1.35 (P3)]. ∎
Lemma 1.4.
Suppose that is reduced. Let be a noetherian -scheme and be a cycle on -universal over S. Then there exists a dominant blow-up such that is flat over .
Proof.
See [CD19, Lemma 8.1.18 and 8.1.35 (P5)]. ∎
Definition 1.5.
For a noetherian -scheme , we define to be the abelian group of cycles on finite and -universal over . An element of is called a relative -cycle on over .
Let be noetherian -schemes. We set and call its elements finite correspondences from to over . For example, the graph of a morphism over gives an element , for which we simply write . For and , we define a cycle on by the formula
where is the canonical projection. By the definition of pullback (cf. [CD19, Theorem 8.1.39]) and [CD19, Corollary 8.2.6], we have . If is separated and of finite type over , then it follows from [CD19, Section 9.1.1] that . This gives a bilinear pairing
Lemma 1.6.
Let be a noetherian scheme and be noetherian -schemes.
-
(1)
Let , and . Suppose that are separated and of finite type over . Then we have
-
(2)
Let be an -morphism and . Suppose that is separated and of finite type over . Then we have
Proof.
See [CD19, Proposition 9.1.7]. In loc.cit., it is assumed that are all separated and of finite type over , but the proof works verbatim. ∎
Let denote the category of smooth separated -schemes of finite type. Using the pairing above as composition, we can define an additive category whose objects are the same as and the morphisms are finite correspondences. The category can be embedded into by the graph construction. A presheaf is called a presheaf with transfers over .
2. Locally free transfers
In this section we construct transfers for finite locally free morphisms.
Let be a ring and a finite -algebra. We write for the -algebra , i.e. the subalgebra of fixed under the canonical action of the symmetric group .
Suppose that is free of rank as an -module. Let be a basis of over and let denote the set of -orbits in . For an orbit , we set
Then is a basis of over . We define an action of on by
This is well-defined since we are taking a sum over all possible permutations of . In this way we obtain a morphism of -algebras
One can easily verify that this does not depend on the choice of the basis.
Lemma 2.1.
Let be a field and be a finite local -algebra of dimension with residue field . Let denote the composition . Then the restriction of to equals .
Proof.
Let denote the maximal ideal of . First note that is a nilpotent ideal since is artinian local. Take a basis of over so that and is spanned by as a -vector space, where . For we have
since is an ideal. For an element of , we define its order to be the maximum value of satisfying (we set ). Let satisfy for all and for some . Then the number of ’s contained in exceeds the dimension of for some , so we get . Using this fact, the action of on can be computed as
This completes the proof. ∎
Lemma 2.2.
Let be a ring and be finite free -algebras of rank . The morphism of -algebras
restricts to a morphism
and fits into the following commutative diagram.
Proof.
Let (resp. ) be a basis of (resp. ) over . For and we define by concatenation. Then for an orbit we have
This proves the first assertion. In the first case we have
In the second case the action of on is trivial. These results imply the commutativity of the diagram. ∎
Let be a scheme. For a finite morphism between -schemes, the symmetric product is defined to be the quotient of ( times) by the canonical action of the symmetric group , i.e.
(see [Gro71, Exposé V, 1] for basic facts about quotients of schemes by finite groups).
Suppose that is a finite locally free morphism of constant rank . The morphism of -algebras (see the preamble to Lemma 2.1) gives rise to a morphism (note that this morphism is considered also in [SV96, Section 6]). Now let be a commutative group scheme over . For any , the morphism
is -invariant, so it descends to a morphism . We define to be the composition
Lemma 2.3.
Let be a scheme, be a field over and be a finite extension. Let be the corresponding morphism. Then we have
Proof.
Let be a basis of over . Let . By definition, the action of on is equal to the scalar multiplication by . On the other hand, we have
so we get . The proof of the second equality is similar. ∎
Lemma 2.4.
Let be a scheme, be a finite locally free morphism of constant degree between -schemes and be a morphism of -schemes. Consider the following Cartesian diagram.
For any commutative group scheme over , we have
Proof.
Since and are finite locally free over , all the constructions we used to define are compatible with base-change, so the claim is obvious. ∎
Lemma 2.5.
Let be a scheme, a field over and a finite morphism of degree . Suppose that is connected and has a section . Then for any commutative group scheme over , we have
Proof.
Let . Consider the following diagram of -schemes.
The left triangle is commutative by Lemma 2.1 and the right square is commutative by the definition of . Therefore the total trapezoid is commutative, which implies . ∎
Lemma 2.6.
Let be a scheme and be finite locally free morphisms of constant degree between -schemes. Let be a commutative group scheme over . For any and , we have
in , where and are morphisms induced by the universal property of coproducts.
Proof.
Corollary 2.7.
Let be a scheme, an algebraically closed field over and a finite morphism. Write and set . Let be the canonical projection and be the canonical closed immersion. Then for any commutative group scheme over , we have
3. The canonical transfer
In this section we fix a noetherian base scheme and a separated commutative group scheme over . First we note the following fact.
Lemma 3.1.
Let be a dominant morphism between -schemes. If is reduced, then is injective.
Proof.
Suppose that are two morphisms over and . Then sends the generic points of to points inside the diagonal . Since is separated over , the diagonal is closed in and hence the image of lies in set-theoretically. Since is reduced, this morphism factors through scheme-theoretically, i.e. . ∎
Let be noetherian integral schemes over and . We construct the canonical transfer in the following two cases:
-
(1)
is flat over .
-
(2)
is normal.
First suppose that is flat over . Write . Then each is finite locally free of constant rank over . Let and be canonical projections. We define
Note that for an -morphism , this definition of coincides with the usual pullback.
Next suppose that is normal. Take a dense open subset such that is flat over . By the next lemma, for any the element lies in the image of . We define by setting ; this does not depend on the choice of .
Lemma 3.2.
Let be a noetherian normal integral scheme, be a dense open subset and a finite morphism. Set and suppose that is finite locally free of constant rank . Then for any , the element lies in the image of .
Proof.
Recall that is defined to be the composition
By construction, we have . Since is noetherian, is finite over . Since is normal, uniquely extends to a morphism . Then is the image of
under . ∎
Example 3.3.
In the following, we will prove that the canonical transfer defined above is functorial, i.e. . We start with a special case.
Lemma 3.4.
Let be noetherian integral schemes over and . Suppose that is flat over and is separated and of finite type over . Let be an algebraically closed field and . Then we have
Proof.
Firstly, is a formal -linear combination of -rational points on . By linearity we may assume that is a morphism from to over . Write . Then each is finite and flat over and hence finite locally free of constant rank over . Consider the following diagram, where the left square is Cartesian.
By Lemma 2.4, we have
On the other hand, since is flat over , we have
by Lemma 1.3. Write . Let be the canonical projection and be the canonical closed immersion. Then we have
Therefore it suffices to show that
holds for each . This follows from Corollary 2.7. ∎
Lemma 3.5.
Let be noetherian integral schemes over and . Suppose that is normal and is separated and of finite type over . Let be an algebraically closed field and be a morphism onto the generic point of . Then we have
Proof.
Let be a dense open subset such that is flat over . Let be the canonical open immersion and be the restriction of . Consider the following diagram.
Let us verify that all faces are commutative. Two triangles on the top and the bottom are clearly commutative. The commutativity of the left square follows from the definition of . The commutativity of the right square follows from Lemma 3.4. Therefore we get . ∎
Lemma 3.6.
Let be noetherian integral schemes over and . Suppose that is normal and is separated and of finite type over . Let be a dominant morphism such that is flat over . Then we have
Proof.
Lemma 3.7.
Let be noetherian integral schemes over and . Suppose that is normal and is separated and of finite type over . Let be an algebraically closed field and . Then we have
Proof.
Theorem 3.8.
Let be noetherian integral schemes over and , . Suppose that are normal and are separated and of finite type over . Then we have
In particular, if is normal then the canonical transfer defines a structure of a presheaf with transfers over on .
Proof.
Let be an algebraic closure of the function field of and let be the canonical morphism. Repeatedly applying Lemma 3.7, we get
Since is injective, this completes the proof. ∎
4. Characterization
In this section we characterize the canonical transfer by a simple condition on radicial transfers. We continue to fix a noetherian base scheme and a separated commutative group scheme over . First we note the following remarkable property of the canonical transfer.
Lemma 4.1.
Let be noetherian integral -schemes and be an integral closed subscheme finite flat radicial of degree over . Suppose that is separated and of finite type over . Let and be the canonical projections. Then for any , the element can be uniquely written as for some . Moreover, this coincides with .
We write for the element appearing in the statement.
Proof.
The uniqueness follows from Lemma 3.1. We prove that the element satisfies the condition . Consider the following diagram, where the left square is Cartesian.
We have by Lemma 2.4, so it suffices to prove that
holds for any . We claim that the diagonal morphism satisfies
If this claim is proved, then evaluating at we get the desired equality.
Actually, the above condition characterizes the canonical transfer.
Theorem 4.2.
Suppose that is normal and we are given a structure of a presheaf with transfers over on ; write for the map induced by a finite correspondence . Assume the following:
For any connected and for any integral closed subscheme finite flat radicial over , we have (see Lemma 4.1).
Then holds for any finite correspondence .
Proof.
Let be connected and . We prove that holds. Write . Let be a separable closure of the function field of . Then each is a disjoint union of finite radicial schemes over , so we can write
where is a finite local -algebra such that the residue field is purely inseparable over . We conclude by limit argument that there is some connected and an étale morphism such that
where is an irreducible closed subscheme of whose reduction is finite flat radicial over . By Lemma 1.6 (2) and Lemma 1.3 we have for some , so we have by our assumption. Since is injective by Lemma 3.1, we get . ∎
References
- [AHL14] Giuseppe Ancona, Annette Huber and Simon Lehalleur “On the relative motive of a commutative group scheme” In Algebraic Geometry 3, 2014 DOI: 10.14231/AG-2016-008
- [BVK16] Luca Barbieri-Viale and Bruno Kahn “On the derived category of 1-motives” 381, Asterisque Societe Mathematique de France, 2016
- [CD19] Denis-Charles Cisinski and Frédéric Déglise “Triangulated Categories of Mixed Motives” Springer International Publishing, 2019 DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-33242-6
- [Gro71] Alexander Grothendieck “Revêtements étales et groupe fondamental (SGA 1)” 224, Lecture notes in mathematics Springer-Verlag, 1971
- [KSY] Bruno Kahn, Shuji Saito and Takao Yamazaki “Reciprocity sheaves, II” arXiv:1707.07398 [math.AG]
- [KSY16] Bruno Kahn, Shuji Saito and Takao Yamazaki “Reciprocity sheaves (with two appendices by Kay Rülling)” In Compositio Mathematica 152.9 London Mathematical Society, 2016, pp. 1851–1898 DOI: 10.1112/S0010437X16007466
- [MVW06] Carlo Mazza, Vladimir Voevodsky and Charles Weibel “Lecture Notes on Motivic Cohomology” 2, Clay Mathematics Monographs, 2006
- [SS03] Michael Spieß and Tamás Szamuely “On the Albanese map for smooth quasi-projective varieties” In Mathematische Annalen 325, 2003, pp. 1–17 DOI: 10.1007/s00208-002-0359-8
- [SV96] Andrei Suslin and Vladimir Voevodsky “Singular homology of abstract algebraic varieties.” In Inventiones mathematicae 123.1, 1996, pp. 61–94 DOI: 10.1007/BF01232367