Let $G$ be a finite group.

In their paper Some Remarks On the Structure of Mackey functors , Greenlees and May define a functor:

$R: GMod \rightarrow M[G]$ where $GMod$ is the category of finite left $G$-modules and $M[G]$ is the category of $G$ Mackey functors by:

$RV(G/H) = V^H$ where $V^H= \{v\in V| h(v) = v \hspace{.2cm} \forall h\in H\}$ and $V$ is a $G$ module.

Question: In Theorem 12, why are $coker(\eta)$ and $ker(\eta)$ in $\mathcal{A}$?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'm fairly sure this question would be ok for MO. You may get better access to experts in this stuff over there. $\endgroup$ Sep 16, 2012 at 6:59

1 Answer 1


You should think of the lexicographic ordering on pairs $(j,k)$ as giving an ordering on Mackey functors (called type) as well as on the subgroups $H \leq G$ (which I'll also call type, even though they don't). In this language, a Mackey functor has type $(j,k)$ exactly when it vanishes on all subgroups of type less than $(j,k)$, but it doesn't vanish on subgroups of type $(j,k)$.

Now, suppose that $type(M)=(j,k)$. We have a canonical Mackey functor $R(M(G/H_{j,k}))$ of type $(j,k)$ [see footnote] and with the same value on $G/H_{j,k}$, and this receives a map $\eta$ from $M$ which is the identity on $G/H_{j,k}$. Neither the source nor the target of $\eta$ ever evaluated nontrivially on subgroups of type less than $(j,k)$, and because of the above bolded fact, the kernel and cokernel of $\eta$ also evaluate trivially on $G/H_{j,k}$. Thus, they have type strictly greater than $(j,k)$, so they are in $\mathscr{A}$ by assumption.

footnote: This is where we use the assumption that if $type(H)=(j,k)$, then $type(J)_1<j$ for all $J \lneq H$.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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