Semiorthogonal decomposition
In mathematics, a semiorthogonal decomposition is a way to divide a triangulated category into simpler pieces. One way to produce a semiorthogonal decomposition is from an exceptional collection, a special sequence of objects in a triangulated category. For an algebraic variety X, it has been fruitful to study semiorthogonal decompositions of the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves, .
Semiorthogonal decomposition
[edit]Alexei Bondal and Mikhail Kapranov (1989) defined a semiorthogonal decomposition of a triangulated category to be a sequence of strictly full triangulated subcategories such that:[1]
- for all and all objects and , every morphism from to is zero. That is, there are "no morphisms from right to left".
- is generated by . That is, the smallest strictly full triangulated subcategory of containing is equal to .
The notation is used for a semiorthogonal decomposition.
Having a semiorthogonal decomposition implies that every object of has a canonical "filtration" whose graded pieces are (successively) in the subcategories . That is, for each object T of , there is a sequence
of morphisms in such that the cone of is in , for each i. Moreover, this sequence is unique up to a unique isomorphism.[2]
One can also consider "orthogonal" decompositions of a triangulated category, by requiring that there are no morphisms from to for any . However, that property is too strong for most purposes. For example, for an (irreducible) smooth projective variety X over a field, the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves never has a nontrivial orthogonal decomposition, whereas it may have a semiorthogonal decomposition, by the examples below.
A semiorthogonal decomposition of a triangulated category may be considered as analogous to a finite filtration of an abelian group. Alternatively, one may consider a semiorthogonal decomposition as closer to a split exact sequence, because the exact sequence of triangulated categories is split by the subcategory , mapping isomorphically to .
Using that observation, a semiorthogonal decomposition implies a direct sum splitting of Grothendieck groups:
For example, when is the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves on a smooth projective variety X, can be identified with the Grothendieck group of algebraic vector bundles on X. In this geometric situation, using that comes from a dg-category, a semiorthogonal decomposition actually gives a splitting of all the algebraic K-groups of X:
for all i.[3]
Admissible subcategory
[edit]One way to produce a semiorthogonal decomposition is from an admissible subcategory. By definition, a full triangulated subcategory is left admissible if the inclusion functor has a left adjoint functor, written . Likewise, is right admissible if the inclusion has a right adjoint, written , and it is admissible if it is both left and right admissible.
A right admissible subcategory determines a semiorthogonal decomposition
- ,
where
is the right orthogonal of in .[2] Conversely, every semiorthogonal decomposition arises in this way, in the sense that is right admissible and . Likewise, for any semiorthogonal decomposition , the subcategory is left admissible, and , where
is the left orthogonal of .
If is the bounded derived category of a smooth projective variety over a field k, then every left or right admissible subcategory of is in fact admissible.[4] By results of Bondal and Michel Van den Bergh, this holds more generally for any regular proper triangulated category that is idempotent-complete.[5]
Moreover, for a regular proper idempotent-complete triangulated category , a full triangulated subcategory is admissible if and only if it is regular and idempotent-complete. These properties are intrinsic to the subcategory.[6] For example, for X a smooth projective variety and Y a subvariety not equal to X, the subcategory of of objects supported on Y is not admissible.
Exceptional collection
[edit]Let k be a field, and let be a k-linear triangulated category. An object E of is called exceptional if Hom(E,E) = k and Hom(E,E[t]) = 0 for all nonzero integers t, where [t] is the shift functor in . (In the derived category of a smooth complex projective variety X, the first-order deformation space of an object E is , and so an exceptional object is in particular rigid. It follows, for example, that there are at most countably many exceptional objects in , up to isomorphism. That helps to explain the name.)
The triangulated subcategory generated by an exceptional object E is equivalent to the derived category of finite-dimensional k-vector spaces, the simplest triangulated category in this context. (For example, every object of that subcategory is isomorphic to a finite direct sum of shifts of E.)
Alexei Gorodentsev and Alexei Rudakov (1987) defined an exceptional collection to be a sequence of exceptional objects such that for all i < j and all integers t. (That is, there are "no morphisms from right to left".) In a proper triangulated category over k, such as the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves on a smooth projective variety, every exceptional collection generates an admissible subcategory, and so it determines a semiorthogonal decomposition:
where , and denotes the full triangulated subcategory generated by the object .[7] An exceptional collection is called full if the subcategory is zero. (Thus a full exceptional collection breaks the whole triangulated category up into finitely many copies of .)
In particular, if X is a smooth projective variety such that has a full exceptional collection , then the Grothendieck group of algebraic vector bundles on X is the free abelian group on the classes of these objects:
A smooth complex projective variety X with a full exceptional collection must have trivial Hodge theory, in the sense that for all ; moreover, the cycle class map must be an isomorphism.[8]
Examples
[edit]The original example of a full exceptional collection was discovered by Alexander Beilinson (1978): the derived category of projective space over a field has the full exceptional collection
- ,
where O(j) for integers j are the line bundles on projective space.[9] Full exceptional collections have also been constructed on all smooth projective toric varieties, del Pezzo surfaces, many projective homogeneous varieties, and some other Fano varieties.[10]
More generally, if X is a smooth projective variety of positive dimension such that the coherent sheaf cohomology groups are zero for i > 0, then the object in is exceptional, and so it induces a nontrivial semiorthogonal decomposition . This applies to every Fano variety over a field of characteristic zero, for example. It also applies to some other varieties, such as Enriques surfaces and some surfaces of general type.
A source of examples is Orlov's blowup formula concerning the blowup of a scheme at a codimension locally complete intersection subscheme with exceptional locus . There is a semiorthogonal decomposition where is the functor with is the natural map.[11]
While these examples encompass a large number of well-studied derived categories, many naturally occurring triangulated categories are "indecomposable". In particular, for a smooth projective variety X whose canonical bundle is basepoint-free, every semiorthogonal decomposition is trivial in the sense that or must be zero.[12] For example, this applies to every variety which is Calabi–Yau in the sense that its canonical bundle is trivial.
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ Huybrechts 2006, Definition 1.59.
- ^ a b Bondal & Kapranov 1990, Proposition 1.5.
- ^ Orlov 2016, Section 1.2.
- ^ Kuznetsov 2007, Lemmas 2.10, 2.11, and 2.12.
- ^ Orlov 2016, Theorem 3.16.
- ^ Orlov 2016, Propositions 3.17 and 3.20.
- ^ Huybrechts 2006, Lemma 1.58.
- ^ Marcolli & Tabuada 2015, Proposition 1.9.
- ^ Huybrechts 2006, Corollary 8.29.
- ^ Kuznetsov 2014, Section 2.2.
- ^ Orlov, D O (1993-02-28). "PROJECTIVE BUNDLES, MONOIDAL TRANSFORMATIONS, AND DERIVED CATEGORIES OF COHERENT SHEAVES". Russian Academy of Sciences. Izvestiya Mathematics. 41 (1): 133–141. doi:10.1070/im1993v041n01abeh002182. ISSN 1064-5632.
- ^ Kuznetsov 2014, Section 2.5.
References
[edit]- Bondal, Alexei; Kapranov, Mikhail (1990), "Representable functors, Serre functors, and reconstructions", Mathematics of the USSR-Izvestiya, 35: 519–541, doi:10.1070/IM1990v035n03ABEH000716, MR 1039961
- Huybrechts, Daniel (2006), Fourier–Mukai transforms in algebraic geometry, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199296866, MR 2244106
- Kuznetsov, Alexander (2007), "Homological projective duality", Publications Mathématiques de l'IHÉS, 105: 157–220, arXiv:math/0507292, doi:10.1007/s10240-007-0006-8, MR 2354207
- Kuznetsov, Alexander (2014), "Semiorthogonal decompositions in algebraic geometry", Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians (Seoul, 2014), vol. 2, Seoul: Kyung Moon Sa, pp. 635–660, arXiv:1404.3143, MR 3728631
- Marcolli, Matilde; Tabuada, Gonçalo (2015), "From exceptional collections to motivic decompositions via noncommutative motives", Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 701: 153–167, arXiv:1202.6297, doi:10.1515/crelle-2013-0027, MR 3331729
- Orlov, Dmitri (2016), "Smooth and proper noncommutative schemes and gluing of DG categories", Advances in Mathematics, 302: 59–105, arXiv:1402.7364, doi:10.1016/j.aim.2016.07.014, MR 3545926