Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Dear All, I have a doubt about a specific definition, but I cannot find any help on the web or on the books that I have. Talking about $\mathbb{Z}G$-modules, what does one intend saying "take a free resolution $K\to F\to A$ of the module $A$"? First of all, it is clear that every module is the quotient of a free module but, can we say that every module is the quotient of a free module over another free module (i.e. is $K$ free as well?)? Also, it's not clear to me if $K\to F\to A$ has to be intended like a short exact sequence (but in this case I would have written $0\to K\to F\to A\to 0$) or not. The paper where I've found that is the Bieri and Eckmann's one "Groups with homological duality generalizing Poincaré duality", Invent. Math., 20, 103-124, (1973).

Thanks in advance, bye!

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

On page 109 of Bieri–Eckmann (1973), the follow appears:

For any $G$-module $A$ and $G$-free presentation $K \rightarrowtail F \twoheadrightarrow A$ the exact coefficient sequence yields $$H^k(G;A) \cong H^{k+1}(G;K)$$

The context is that $H^k(G;F) = H^{k+1}(G;F) = 0$.

This follows whenever $0 \to K \to F \to A \to 0$ is exact and $F$ is $G$-free (so that the context holds). In particular, there is no need for $K$ to be free, and the sequence is short exact.

You can tell this because (1) the $\rightarrowtail$ has a weird tail meaning monomorphism and (2) the projective dimension of a module is not bounded by 2 (I believe take $G$ to be any polycyclic group of Hirsch Length 3, such as $G=\mathbb{Z}^3$).

Be careful that a free presentation $K \to F \twoheadrightarrow A$ may mean both $K$ and $F$ are free, $F \twoheadrightarrow A$ is surjective, and the sequence is exact. In other words, $K$ is not the kernel, but rather a free group projecting onto the kernel. This is not the meaning in this paper, but I believe is commonplace when talking about the relations module.

Bieri, Robert; Eckmann, Beno. "Groups with homological duality generalizing Poincaré duality." Invent. Math. 20 (1973), 103–124. MR340449 DOI:10.1007/BF01404060

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks a lot: very clear explanation! – fatoddsun Jun 2 '11 at 16:42

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.