1
$\begingroup$

I am a bit confused about a notation I am seeing while reading a paper. So basically I have a continuous map between topological spaces $f:X\to Y$, and I know that this induces a map on cohomology $f^*: H^*(Y;R)\to H^*(X;R)$ for some chosen coefficient ring $R$. But the author of the paper I am reading tends to write $f^*:H^*(Y;R)\to H^*(X;f^*R)$ and I am not sure what to make of this (is this the same map $f^*$ that I know??) What does $f^*R$ exactly mean? I know that this is not a typographical error because there are more than one occasions where the author uses this. Could someone please explain this map to me? Is this notation usual? I haven't seen them so far in algebraic topology textbooks that I read.

Edit: As requested, I cite the paper (version 1): https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.06023. See Proposition 7.3 and 7.4.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ That is odd. My best guess is that the author is emphasizing $f^*H^*(Y;R)$ has the same coefficient ring $R$. $\endgroup$ – Elliot G Sep 28 '20 at 6:25
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Could $R$ be a sheaf of rings rather than just a ring? $\endgroup$ – Zhen Lin Sep 28 '20 at 6:27
  • $\begingroup$ I guess this is odd also for topologists.. I don't know if it helps, but so far I have seen the author uses this notation for diagonal maps. I don't know if this extra information changes anything. So if $f:E\to E\times_B E$ is the diagonal map where the fiber product is from a fibration $\pi:E\to B$. Would it come out as unusual or rude if I ask the author personally what this really means? $\endgroup$ – quantum Sep 28 '20 at 6:40
  • $\begingroup$ @Zhen Lin: I don't think so. The paper has nothing on sheaves. I understand that you think that in this case $f$ is a map of affine schemes and $f^*$ its corresponding ring homomorphism. $\endgroup$ – quantum Sep 28 '20 at 6:43
  • $\begingroup$ Could you please add a reference to the paper to your question? $\endgroup$ – Christoph Sep 28 '20 at 10:01
1
$\begingroup$

The paper states "where $R$ is an arbitrary system of coefficients on $E\times_B E$." This is local system cohomology.

Hence, $R$ is indeed a (locally constant) sheaf on $E\times_B E$ and $\Delta^* R$ is the pullback along $\Delta$ to a sheaf on $E$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Oh. So I misunderstood this. But maybe not completely. Can we regard this as a general statement? It will take a while for me to understand local system of cohomology, but is it safe to assume that if my sheaf is a constant sheaf associated to a ring $R$ then I can assume $R$ is a ring (and not a sheaf) and $\Delta^*R$ is also $R$? I ask this because I could follow the proof and succeeding texts assuming this. $\endgroup$ – quantum Oct 9 '20 at 7:20
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that is correct. $\endgroup$ – Christoph Oct 9 '20 at 7:38

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.