6
$\begingroup$

Quotient and tensor sheaves are defined by sheafification which is somehow implicit. Is there any easy way to handle these constructions?

Could we ignore the sheafification when we are working in affine open subsets?

For example, let $X$ be a scheme and $\mathcal F$ and $\mathcal G$ be quasicoherent sheaves. Let $U\subseteq X$ be an affine open. Is it true that $(\mathcal F/\mathcal G)(U) = \mathcal F(U)/\mathcal G(U)$ and $\mathcal F\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal G(U) = \mathcal F(U)\otimes_{\mathcal O_X(U)}\mathcal G(U)$?

How about other constructions involving sheafification? (for example, image, cokernel, ann, nil and so on)

Thank you in advance.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Great question about something that I still find confusing to this day. $\endgroup$
    – Tabes Bridges
    Commented Dec 11, 2020 at 19:02
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I tend to just pretend it is what I hope it is, and then pray I can work locally on the stalks where it is what I hope it is. $\endgroup$
    – Mummy the turkey
    Commented Dec 11, 2020 at 19:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ That is a general phenomenon that : constructions involving quasicoherent sheaves that involve sheafification for general sheaves don’t require sheafification when considered on the distinguished affine base. This lies in the fact that many operation commute with localization, therefore the presheaf is already a sheaf on the distinguished open base. $\endgroup$
    – yi li
    Commented Jan 30, 2023 at 2:37

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
8
$\begingroup$

The key statement to verify is whether the thing you're looking at commutes with localization. If it does, then it commutes with sections on affine opens: start by defining the presheaf which takes the naive value on every open set, and then note that on principal affine opens $D(f)$ you get exactly the value you would expect from the quasi-coherent sheaf associated to the operation on the module of global sections. As the principal affine opens form a basis for the topology on an affine scheme and a sheaf can be specified by its values on a basis, the result follows.

In particular, this means that kernels, cokernels, images, and any other "homological" constructions commute with the associate sheaf functor on an affine scheme because localization is exact. Tensor products and nilradicals commute with localization, so they commute with the associated sheaf functor, too. Annihilators don't always commute with localization, so you need to be more careful with them.

Let me just mention one alternate neat proof that tensor products commute with sheafification, which I originally saw at the Stacks Project: consider the morphism of ringed spaces $\pi:(\operatorname{Spec} R,\mathcal{O}_{\operatorname{Spec} R})\to (\{pt\},R)$. Then the associated sheaf functor is $\pi^*$, which means it commutes with tensor products by the standard proof.

$\endgroup$
11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Well, take quotients for example: if $R$ is a ring, $S\subset R$ is a multiplicative subset, and $A$ is an $R$-submodule of an $R$-module $B$, then $S^{-1}(B/A)\cong (S^{-1}B)/(S^{-1}A)$ naturally. "Commutes with localization" means the localization of whatever thing you're doing is the same as doing whatever you're doing to the localization. Secondly, if $\mathcal{F}$ is a quasicoherent sheaf on an affine scheme $X$, then $\mathcal{F}(D(f))=\mathcal{F}(X)_f$, then one applies the fact that you're doing something that commutes with localization. $\endgroup$
    – KReiser
    Commented Dec 13, 2020 at 5:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Say $U=\operatorname{Spec} A$. Then $\mathcal{F}(U)_f/\mathcal{G}(U)_f=(\mathcal{F}(U)/\mathcal{G}(U))_f$, which is exactly the value on $D(f)$ of the sheaf associated to the $A$-module $\mathcal{F}(U)/\mathcal{G}(U)$. $\endgroup$
    – KReiser
    Commented Dec 13, 2020 at 6:21
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Take the sheaf on $U$ associated to that $A$-module $\mathcal{F}(U)/\mathcal{G}(U)$. The sections of this on $U$ are $\mathcal{F}(U)/\mathcal{G}(U)$, and the sections on $D(f)$ are $[\mathcal{F}(U)/\mathcal{G}(U)]_f$, which is exactly the sections of the quotient presheaf $\mathcal{F}/\mathcal{G}$. As principal affine opens form a basis and this specifies a sheaf on that basis, we're done. $\endgroup$
    – KReiser
    Commented Dec 13, 2020 at 20:32
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ They might not be the same, but sheafification won't alter the sections on the principal affine opens: any section of the quotient sheaf on a principal affine open is glued from sections on an open cover, which by refinement we may take to be by smaller principal affine opens, and that already satisfies the sheaf condition. The proof that locality is satisfied is the same. $\endgroup$
    – KReiser
    Commented Dec 14, 2020 at 0:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Ohhhh! I think I got your idea. Do you mean the following statement? Let $\mathcal F$ be a sheaf and $\mathcal G$ be a presheaf and $\mathcal B$ be a topological basis of $X$. If $\mathcal F(U) = \mathcal G(U)$ for all $U\in \mathcal B$, then $\mathcal F = \mathcal G^\dagger$. $\endgroup$
    – Hydrogen
    Commented Dec 14, 2020 at 4:39

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .