How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Contractible cosimplicial evaluation computes diagram derived colimits
Statement
Assume the Axiom of Choice (AC) (The Axiom of Choice). Let be a small category, a commutative ring, and a cosimplicial object. Suppose that for every the simplicial set is contractible (Simplicial sets, homotopies and trivial Kan fibrations). Then for every contravariant -module diagram on the simplicial module chain complex is canonically isomorphic to in . The isomorphism is functorial in , and it is a canonical derived-category roof built from projective resolutions; the contraction choices are used only to prove that the arrows of the roof are quasi-isomorphisms.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: AC; a small category ; a commutative ring ; a cosimplicial with contractible for every ; a contravariant -module diagram .
The representable diagrams are projective, evaluation is exact, and admits a bounded-above projective resolution whose terms are direct sums of representables; is the bar complex and is computed by (Module diagrams have projective representables and computable derived colimits).
A homotopy of simplicial sets induces a chain homotopy on free chains, and a homomorphism of simplicial abelian groups which is a homotopy equivalence of underlying simplicial sets induces a quasi-isomorphism of associated complexes (Normalized simplicial chains, prism homotopies and the abelian trivial-fibration criterion).
The direct-sum total complex of a double complex has and differential (Direct sum total complex of a double complex).
Two supplied projective replacement systems for the same additive functor give a natural isomorphism of left total derived functors, unique among natural comparisons commuting with the augmentations (Left total derived functor is independent up to a unique augmentation-compatible natural isomorphism).
Proof
The double complex. Choose the supplied representable-sum projective resolution of [F1], with for . Form the first-quadrant double complex for , with horizontal differential induced by the resolution and vertical differential induced by the cosimplicial operators of , one of the two signed so that the total differential squares to zero; let be the direct-sum total complex of [F3]. Each is an -module and each bidegree with contributes to a finite direct sum in total degree .
Exact rows. For fixed the evaluation functor at is exact by [F1], so the row is an exact augmented complex with augmentation in degree zero. Hence the rows of are exact except for the augmentation to the degree-zero row .
Exact columns. For fixed the term is a direct sum of representables , and is the free -module on the simplicial set . By hypothesis that simplicial set is contractible, so by the prism argument of [F2] its free chain complex is chain homotopy equivalent to . The latter has in every nonnegative degree, differential zero in odd degrees and identity in positive even degrees; its augmentation to induces an isomorphism on , and its positive homology vanishes. The augmentation of therefore induces , and the augmented column is acyclic. Summing over the direct summands, the column is acyclic in positive degrees, with .
The roof and its quasi-isomorphisms. The augmentations of steps 2.1 and 2.2 give maps of complexes , hence a roof in . Both maps are quasi-isomorphisms by finite-diagonal elimination: the cone of the map to is, up to shift and sign, the total of the horizontally augmented rows. In a total cycle, the component of largest is a horizontal cycle; exactness of the row in step 2.1 supplies a horizontal lift. Subtract its total boundary, eliminating that component and introducing terms only at , and repeat down to . This proves the cone acyclic. For the second map use the vertically augmented columns and eliminate the component of largest by step 2.2, introducing terms only at . The augmented indices have lower bound , and each degree has finitely many bidegrees, so both eliminations terminate.
Identification with the derived colimit, canonically. By [F1] the complex computes . Composing the two quasi-isomorphisms of step 3.1 identifies with it in . Two choices of projective resolution are compared by comparison chain maps lifting the identity, and the resulting roofs agree by [F4] and its uniqueness statement, so the identification is canonical: it does not depend on the supplied replacement, and it is natural in because comparison lifts are natural and unique up to homotopy. The contraction choices of step 2.2 were used only to obtain the quasi-isomorphisms and do not enter the resulting canonical isomorphism.
Depends on
- The Axiom of Choice
- Simplicial sets, homotopies and trivial Kan fibrations
- Normalized simplicial chains, prism homotopies and the abelian trivial-fibration criterion
- Module diagrams have projective representables and computable derived colimits
- Direct sum total complex of a double complex
- Left total derived functor is independent up to a unique augmentation-compatible natural isomorphism
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
21 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- The Stacks Project, Cohomology on Sites, Section 39 (standard reference, not scraped)