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.
Presheaves Sheaves Stalks and Sheafification
1 · Prerequisites
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Cardinal Arithmetic, Cofinality and the Alephs
- Categories, Functors and Natural Transformations
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Limits and Colimits
- Modules, Submodules, Quotient Modules and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Ordinal Arithmetic and the First Uncountable Ordinal
- Ordinals, Cardinals, and Transfinite Recursion
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Set Theory Beyond Choice: Recorded, Not Proved Here
- Suprema and Infima
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Topological Spaces and Continuity
2 · Summary
This page fixes the standard sheaf vocabulary on a topological space and keeps the route deliberately concrete. Opens form the indexing category, presheaves and sheaves are written in restriction notation, stalks are built from actual neighbourhood sections, and the first local tests are phrased in germs.
The second half keeps sheafification explicit rather than hiding it behind an abstract adjoint. The plus construction separates uniqueness from existence, double-plus gives the sheaf, stalks survive unchanged, and the universal property explains why image presheaves have to be sheafified before they become image sheaves.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
The category of open subsets of a topological space
Definition
Let be a topological space (Topology on a set, open and closed sets, clopen sets, the closed-set axiomatisation, and the coarser/finer comparison).
The open-set category has:
- objects: the open subsets ;
- morphisms: for opens , a unique morphism when , and no morphism otherwise.
Composition is forced by transitivity of inclusion, and identity morphisms are the inclusions . Thus is a category (Category, object, morphism, domain, codomain, identity, composition, and hom-collection).
The arrows point in the same direction as inclusion. Therefore a contravariant functor on sends an inclusion to a restriction map from the larger open set to the smaller one.
A presheaf on a topological space
Definition
Let be a topological space. A presheaf of sets on is a contravariant functor (Covariant functor, identity functor, composite functor, and contravariant functor, Sets and functions form the large locally small category ).
Equivalently, a presheaf of sets on consists of:
- a set for every open set ;
- for every inclusion , a restriction map
such that and, whenever ,
Because the arrows of are the inclusions with , contravariance is exactly the rule that sections over a larger open set restrict to sections over a smaller one.
Sections, restrictions, and global sections of a presheaf
Definition
Let be a presheaf on a topological space .
An element of is called a section of over . We also write
If and , its restriction to is
A global section of is a section over the whole space:
The presheaf identities imply
Morphisms of presheaves
Definition
Let and be presheaves on a topological space . A morphism of presheaves is a natural transformation (Natural transformation and its components) between the two contravariant functors on .
Equivalently, it is a family of maps for every open , such that for every inclusion the square commutes, that is,
Composition and identities are taken componentwise.
Separated presheaves
Definition
Let be a presheaf on a topological space .
The presheaf is separated when uniqueness of gluing holds: for every open set , every open cover , and every pair of sections ,
Thus a separated presheaf has the locality part of the sheaf axiom, but it may still fail existence of gluing.
A sheaf on a topological space
Definition
Let be a presheaf on a topological space . We say that is a sheaf if for every open set and every open cover , including the empty cover of , the following two conditions hold.
Locality. If satisfy then .
Gluing. If sections satisfy then there exists such that
By locality, such a section is automatically unique. Thus a sheaf is exactly a presheaf whose compatible local sections glue uniquely.
A set-valued sheaf has a unique section over the empty open set
Statement
Let be a sheaf of sets on a topological space . Then is a singleton.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A sheaf on .
A sheaf satisfies locality and gluing for every open cover, including the empty cover of (A sheaf on a topological space).
Proof
Apply [L1] to the empty cover of . The empty family of local sections is vacuously compatible, so gluing produces at least one section .
Let . Then also restricts to the same empty family on the empty cover. By the uniqueness part of [L1], one has . Therefore .
The sheaf axiom is the equalizer condition on a cover
Statement
Let be a presheaf of sets on a topological space . Then is a sheaf if and only if, for every open set and every open cover , the restriction map is an equalizer of the two maps defined by
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A presheaf , an open set , and an open cover .
A sheaf is exactly a presheaf satisfying locality and unique gluing for every open cover (A sheaf on a topological space).
The notation and is the presheaf restriction notation (Sections, restrictions, and global sections of a presheaf).
An equalizer of parallel maps is a morphism with such that any with factors uniquely through (Equalizers and coequalizers as limits and colimits of a parallel pair).
Proof
Assume is a sheaf. For any , the two families and are equal because both entries on are the common restriction by [F1]. Thus .
Let satisfy . Unwinding the definitions, this says exactly that for all . By the gluing clause of [L1], there exists a unique with for all . Hence every equalizing family factors uniquely through , so [L2] shows that is an equalizer.
Conversely, assume is an equalizer for every open set and cover. If satisfy for all , then . Let be a singleton and define by . Then , so [L2] gives a unique with . The two maps sending to and to both satisfy this condition, hence are equal and therefore . So locality holds. If is a compatible family on the cover, then , so [L2] yields a unique with . That is exactly unique gluing. Therefore [L1] implies that is a sheaf.
The sheaf condition can be checked on a basis with basis-refinable intersections
Statement
Let be a topological space and let be a basis for its topology such that whenever and , there exists with . Let be a presheaf on . Then is a sheaf if and only if the following condition holds:
for every open set , every cover by basis elements , and every family such that for every basis element with , there exists a unique section with for all .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A basis as in the statement and a presheaf on .
A basis means that every open set and every point of it admit a containing basis element inside that open set (Basis and subbasis for a topology, and the topology generated by a family of sets).
A sheaf is a presheaf with locality and unique gluing on every open cover (A sheaf on a topological space).
Proof
Assume is a sheaf. Let be a basis cover and let satisfy the basis-overlap hypothesis. Fix . The sets with cover by [L1] and the intersection hypothesis on . On each such the restrictions of and agree, so locality from [L2] gives . Gluing in [L2] then produces a unique with .
Assume the displayed basis condition. Let be an arbitrary open cover and let be compatible on overlaps. For each , choose with , and then choose with by [L1]. Put .
By the assumed basis condition, there is a unique with for every .
Let satisfy . Then , so compatibility of the original family gives . Therefore the family satisfies the displayed basis condition for the basis cover .
Fix . For each , choose with by [L1] and the basis-refinement hypothesis. Then the form a basis cover of . Since , step 2.1 gives Because by step 1.3, the two sections and restrict to the same family on the basis cover . By the uniqueness part of the assumed basis condition, . Since this holds for every , the arbitrary compatible family glues uniquely, so [L2] implies that is a sheaf.
Presheaves and sheaves of groups, rings, and modules
Definition
Let be a topological space. Fix a ring when modules are under discussion.
A presheaf of groups on is a presheaf such that every is a group and every restriction map is a group homomorphism (Groups and group homomorphisms form the large locally small category ).
A presheaf of rings on is defined the same way with rings and ring homomorphisms (Unital rings and unit-preserving ring homomorphisms form the large locally small category ).
A presheaf of left -modules on is defined the same way with left -modules and -linear maps (Left modules over a fixed ring and module homomorphisms form the large locally small category ).
A sheaf of groups, sheaf of rings, or sheaf of left -modules is such a presheaf whose underlying set-valued presheaf is a sheaf.
In particular, each sheaf of groups has a distinguished identity section on every open set; in additive notation this section is written , and all restrictions preserve the algebraic operations.
Sheafhood of algebraic-structure valued presheaves is detected on underlying sets
Statement
Let be a ring, and let be a presheaf of groups, rings, or left -modules on a topological space . Then is a sheaf in the corresponding algebraic category if and only if its underlying presheaf of sets is a sheaf.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A ring and a presheaf of groups, rings, or left -modules on .
Such a presheaf is, by definition, a set-valued presheaf together with objectwise algebraic operations preserved by restriction maps; it is called a sheaf exactly when the underlying set-valued presheaf is a sheaf (Presheaves and sheaves of groups, rings, and modules).
The sheaf condition itself is the locality and unique-gluing condition for the underlying sets of sections (A sheaf on a topological space).
Proof
If is a sheaf of groups, rings, or left -modules, then [F1] already says that its underlying set-valued presheaf is a sheaf.
Conversely, assume the underlying set-valued presheaf is a sheaf. The sets already carry the given group, ring, or left -module structures, and the restriction maps already preserve those structures by [F1]. Since [L1] tests only locality and gluing of the underlying sections, the assumed setwise sheaf condition is exactly the required algebra-valued sheaf condition.
The stalk of a presheaf at a point
Definition
Let be a presheaf on a topological space , and let .
The neighbourhood category of is the full subcategory whose objects are the open neighbourhoods of . Its opposite category is filtered in the sense of Filtered categories and filtered colimits: it is nonempty because itself is a neighbourhood of , and for neighbourhoods the intersection is again a neighbourhood of with arrows in the opposite category.
Because is contravariant, its restriction to the neighbourhood category determines a covariant diagram on that opposite category. The stalk of at is the filtered colimit
Concretely, may be described as equivalence classes of pairs with an open neighbourhood of and , where when and agree on some smaller open neighbourhood of . The next lemma verifies that this is an equivalence relation.
Equality on a smaller neighbourhood defines the germ equivalence relation
Statement
Let be a presheaf on a topological space and let . For pairs and with , define when there exists an open neighbourhood of with and Then is an equivalence relation.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A presheaf on and a point .
The stalk is built from pairs modulo equality on a smaller neighbourhood of (The stalk of a presheaf at a point).
An equivalence relation is one that is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive (Equivalence relation, equivalence class, and the quotient set ).
Proof
Reflexivity holds because if is any pair, then , so . Symmetry holds because implies on the same neighbourhood .
Suppose and . Choose neighbourhoods and with and . Then is an open neighbourhood of contained in , and on one has . Hence .
Steps 1.1 and 1.2 show that is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive. By [F2], it is an equivalence relation.
Germs of sections
Definition
Let be a presheaf on , let , and let for some open set containing .
The class of the pair in the stalk is called the germ of at , and it is denoted by
For every open set containing , this gives a canonical map
If is open and also contains , then , because the two pairs and agree on the smaller open neighbourhood .
A section of a sheaf of groups is zero exactly when all of its germs are zero
Statement
Let be a sheaf of groups on a topological space , let be open, and let . Then
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A sheaf of groups , an open set , and a section .
A sheaf of groups has an identity section on every open set; when the group law is written additively, this section is denoted by , and all restrictions preserve it (Presheaves and sheaves of groups, rings, and modules).
A sheaf is determined by local agreement of sections on an open cover (A sheaf on a topological space).
The germ is the class of in the stalk at (Germs of sections).
Proof
If in , then for every the induced germ is because the stalk map respects restriction and the zero section by [F1] and [F2].
Assume for every . Fix . By [F2], equality of germs means that there exists an open neighbourhood of such that . The sets cover .
On the open cover , the sections and have the same restriction by step 1.2. Locality in [L1] therefore gives in . Together with step 1.1, this proves both directions.
Morphisms of sheaves are determined by their maps on stalks
Statement
Let be morphisms of sheaves of sets on a topological space . If the induced maps on stalks are equal for every , then .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Two morphisms of sheaves .
A morphism of presheaves is given by component maps compatible with restriction (Morphisms of presheaves).
The stalk construction sends a morphism of presheaves to induced maps on stalks, and for every and one has (Morphisms of presheaves, The stalk of a presheaf at a point, Germs of sections).
Two germs at are equal exactly when their representing sections agree on some smaller neighbourhood of (The stalk of a presheaf at a point).
Sections of a sheaf are equal once they agree on an open cover (A sheaf on a topological space).
Proof
Fix an open set and a section . For every , the hypothesis and [F2] give
By [F3], equality of the germs in step 1.1 means that for each there exists an open neighbourhood such that The sets cover .
By [L1], the two sections and are equal on . Since and were arbitrary, the component maps and agree for every open . Therefore by [F1].
A morphism of sheaves is an isomorphism exactly when it is an isomorphism on every stalk
Statement
Let be a morphism of sheaves of sets on a topological space . Then is an isomorphism if and only if, for every , the induced map on stalks is a bijection.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A morphism of sheaves .
A morphism of presheaves is an isomorphism when it has a two-sided inverse whose components commute with restriction (Morphisms of presheaves).
The stalk construction sends morphisms of presheaves to induced stalk maps, and for every and one has (Morphisms of presheaves, The stalk of a presheaf at a point, Germs of sections).
Two germs at are equal exactly when their representing sections agree on some smaller neighbourhood of (The stalk of a presheaf at a point).
A sheaf is glued from local sections that agree on overlaps (A sheaf on a topological space).
Proof
If is an isomorphism with inverse , then for every the induced maps and are inverse because taking stalks preserves composition and identities by [F2]. Hence each is a bijection.
Assume now that every is a bijection. Fix an open set and a section . For each , choose with . Pick a representative of on some open neighbourhood of . Then , so [F3] lets us shrink and assume .
If satisfy , then for every one has by [F2]. Injectivity of gives . By [F3], for each there exists an open neighbourhood with . The sets cover , so [L2] gives . Thus each is injective.
Let . For any , the two sections and have images under whose germs at both equal . Since is injective, the germs of and at are equal. By [F3], there is a neighbourhood of on which . The sets cover , so [L2] gives Therefore the family is compatible on the cover of .
By [L2], the compatible family of step 2.1 glues to a unique section satisfying . Thus is surjective for every .
Let and . Then Step 1.3 gives injectivity of , so . Hence the maps commute with restriction and define a morphism of sheaves . By steps 3.1 and 1.3, is a two-sided inverse to , so [F1] shows that is an isomorphism. Together with step 1.1 this proves both directions.
The etale space of a sheaf of sets
Definition
Let be a sheaf of sets on a topological space .
Its etale space is the disjoint union of stalks equipped with the projection
For every open set and every section , define the subset
The topology on is the topology generated by the family of all such subsets (Basis and subbasis for a topology, and the topology generated by a family of sets).
On each set , the projection restricts to a bijection onto with inverse The next theorem shows that this bijection is in fact a homeomorphism.
Sheaves of sets are equivalent to local homeomorphisms over the base space
Statement
Let be a topological space. A continuous map is called a local homeomorphism if every point has an open neighbourhood such that is open in and is a homeomorphism.
- For every sheaf of sets on , the projection of The etale space of a sheaf of sets is a local homeomorphism.
- For every local homeomorphism , the assignment is a sheaf of sets on .
- These two constructions are inverse up to natural isomorphism, so they give an equivalence between sheaves of sets on and spaces over whose structure map is a local homeomorphism.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A sheaf on , or a local homeomorphism .
The etale space is the disjoint union of the stalks with basic open sets , and is a bijection (The etale space of a sheaf of sets).
A sheaf is glued uniquely from compatible local sections on any open cover (A sheaf on a topological space).
Morphisms of presheaves are given by restriction-compatible component maps (Morphisms of presheaves).
Proof
For a sheaf , let be as in [F1]. If , then for some section . By construction is bijective. Its inverse is continuous because for any smaller basic open , the preimage is the open set , which is open by the sheaf locality encoded in [L1]. Hence is a homeomorphism onto the open set . Since every point of lies in some , is a local homeomorphism.
Let be a local homeomorphism, and let denote its continuous sections over an open set . Restriction of a section is again a section, so is a presheaf. If two sections of agree on an open cover, they are equal pointwise, so locality holds. If are compatible on an open cover , define for . Compatibility makes this well defined, and continuity is local on the cover because each is continuous. Thus [L1] holds, so is a sheaf.
A sheaf morphism induces a map over This is well defined by restriction compatibility. It is continuous: if lies in a basic open , equality of the two germs lets us shrink to an open on which ; then is a neighbourhood of mapped into . Identities and compositions are preserved. Conversely, a map over between local homeomorphisms sends a section to , naturally in the open set, and hence induces a sheaf morphism .
For a sheaf and an open set , send to the section By step 1.1 this is continuous. If , then for all , so [L1] gives . Conversely, let be a continuous section. For each , choose a basic open containing . Continuity makes an open neighbourhood of . Since is injective on and , the restriction equals . These local sections agree on overlaps because they induce the same map . By [L1], they glue to a unique with . Thus is a bijection, natural in .
For a local homeomorphism , define by sending to the germ at of any local section through . Such a local section exists because is a local homeomorphism, and two choices have the same germ because on a smaller common chart they are both the inverse of . On a chart , the map is a homeomorphism from onto the basic open defined by the inverse section. Hence is an isomorphism over . The formula makes the bijections of step 2.1 natural in , while the formula makes natural in . Thus the two functors constructed in steps 1.2 and 1.3 are quasi-inverse equivalences.
The plus construction for a presheaf
Definition
Let be a presheaf on a topological space , and let be open.
A germ-compatible local presentation of a section over consists of:
- an open cover ;
- sections ;
such that for every the germs agree:
Two germ-compatible local presentations and over are called equivalent if for every and every choice of indices with , one has
The plus construction is the presheaf defined by letting be the set of equivalence classes of germ-compatible local presentations over . Restriction to an open subset is obtained by replacing the cover with and restricting each section to .
There is a canonical morphism of presheaves whose component on sends a section to the class of the single-chart presentation .
The first plus construction is separated and preserves stalks
Statement
Let be a presheaf on a topological space , and let be the canonical map of The plus construction for a presheaf. Then:
- is a separated presheaf.
- For every , the induced map on stalks is a bijection.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A presheaf on and its plus construction .
A section of is an equivalence class of germ-compatible local presentations over , and is represented by the single-chart presentation (The plus construction for a presheaf).
A separated presheaf is one in which equality of sections can be checked on an open cover (Separated presheaves).
Equality in a filtered colimit of sets is eventual at some smaller common stage (Two representatives in a filtered colimit of sets are equal exactly when they become equal at one common later stage).
Proof
Let and suppose there is an open cover such that for every . Fix , and choose with . Equality on means that the two restricted presentations determine the same germ at , so and have the same germ at . Since this holds for every , the two global presentations are equivalent by [F1]. Therefore , and is separated by [F2].
To prove surjectivity of , let . Choose an open neighbourhood of and a section representing . Pick a local presentation of with for some index . Then on the neighbourhood the section equals by [F1], so the germ is the image of the germ of at . Hence is surjective.
Now suppose in , where and . Represent and by sections and on neighbourhoods of . By [L1], equality of their images in the stalk of means that there exists an open neighbourhood of such that By [F1], equality of these two single-chart classes says exactly that and have the same germ at every point of , in particular at . Thus in , so is injective.
Steps 1.2 and 1.3 prove that every is bijective, and step 1.1 proves that is separated.
The second plus construction is a sheaf
Statement
For every presheaf on a topological space , the double plus construction is a sheaf.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A presheaf on .
The plus construction records germ-compatible local presentations and single-chart classes (The plus construction for a presheaf).
The first plus construction is separated (The first plus construction is separated and preserves stalks).
A sheaf is exactly a presheaf satisfying locality and unique gluing on every open cover (A sheaf on a topological space).
Proof
Let be an open cover and let be compatible on overlaps. For each , choose a presentation of by sections on an open cover .
The family of all pairs covers . Presentations belonging to one fixed are germ-compatible by definition. If , compatibility of and says that their restrictions to are equal; the definition of equality of plus presentations therefore gives Thus the combined family is a germ-compatible presentation by -sections and defines . On each , its restricted presentation is equivalent to the chosen presentation of , so .
Apply [L1] to the presheaf . It says that is separated. Hence sections of whose restrictions agree on the cover are equal, so locality and uniqueness of the gluing from step 2.1 hold.
Steps 2.1 and 3.1 give gluing and locality for every open cover. Therefore [F2] shows that is a sheaf.
Sheafification of a presheaf
Definition
Let be a presheaf on a topological space .
Its sheafification is the sheaf
The canonical morphism is the composite where each is the single-chart map of The plus construction for a presheaf.
By The second plus construction is a sheaf, is indeed a sheaf.
Sheafification is left adjoint to the inclusion of sheaves into presheaves
Statement
Let be a presheaf on a topological space , let be its sheafification map, and let be a sheaf on . Then every morphism of presheaves factors uniquely through : there is a unique morphism of sheaves such that
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A presheaf , a sheaf , and a morphism .
Sheafification is the double plus construction with unit (Sheafification of a presheaf).
The first plus construction is separated (The first plus construction is separated and preserves stalks).
The second plus construction is a sheaf (The second plus construction is a sheaf).
Proof
Let be represented by sections on an open cover . The sections have equal germs on overlaps because the do. Since is a sheaf, they glue uniquely to a section . This is independent of the chosen presentation because equivalent presentations have the same germs at every point, and a sheaf is separated. Thus extends uniquely to a morphism .
Apply the same construction again to the morphism . Because is already a sheaf, this yields a morphism whose restriction along the second unit map is . Composing with the first unit map gives .
To prove uniqueness, let satisfy . Fix an open set and a section . By [F1], is represented locally by sections of , and each such local -section is itself locally represented by sections of . Therefore admits an open cover and sections such that for every . On each the hypothesis gives Since is a sheaf, locality forces . Thus .
Steps 2.1 and 3.1 prove that every morphism factors uniquely through . This is the stated adjoint universal property.
Sheafification preserves stalks
Statement
Let be a presheaf on a topological space . For every , the sheafification map induces a bijection
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A presheaf on and a point .
Sheafification is with unit (Sheafification of a presheaf).
For any presheaf, the first plus construction preserves stalks (The first plus construction is separated and preserves stalks).
Equality in a filtered-colimit stalk is eventual on a smaller neighbourhood (Two representatives in a filtered colimit of sets are equal exactly when they become equal at one common later stage).
Proof
Apply [L1] to the presheaf . This gives a bijection
Apply [L1] again, now to the presheaf . Since [L1] holds for every presheaf, it yields a bijection The reference to [F2] is the same eventual-equality argument used inside [L1] to prove injectivity on stalks.
Composing the bijections of steps 1.1 and 2.1 gives the required isomorphism By [F1], this composite is exactly the map induced by .
Sheafification is idempotent
Statement
For every presheaf on a topological space , the canonical map is an isomorphism. Equivalently, sheafification is idempotent:
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A presheaf on .
The object is the sheafification of (Sheafification of a presheaf).
Any map from a presheaf to a sheaf factors uniquely through its sheafification (Sheafification is left adjoint to the inclusion of sheaves into presheaves).
Proof
Since is already a sheaf by [F1], apply [L1] to the identity map . There is a unique morphism such that
Apply [L1] again to the map , whose target is also a sheaf. The identity map on is one factorization through . The composite is another, because step 1.1 gives . By uniqueness in [L1], .
Steps 1.1 and 2.1 show that and are two-sided inverses. Therefore is an isomorphism, so .
Subsheaves
Definition
Let be a sheaf of sets on a topological space .
A subsheaf of is a sheaf on together with a morphism of presheaves (Morphisms of presheaves) such that for every open set , the component is injective.
Equivalently, one may identify with a subset of for every open , with restriction maps inherited from , and then require that these subsets define a sheaf. A subpresheaf of a sheaf need not be a subsheaf, because it may fail gluing.
The image sheaf is the sheafification of the presheaf image
Statement
Let be a morphism of sheaves of sets on a topological space , and let be the presheaf image Define the image sheaf by Then is a subsheaf of , factors through , and the canonical map is an isomorphism. In particular, the image sheaf is the sheafification of the objectwise image presheaf.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A morphism of sheaves .
A subsheaf is a sheaf whose sections embed objectwise into the ambient sheaf (Subsheaves).
A morphism of presheaves is a compatible family of component maps (Morphisms of presheaves).
Maps from a presheaf to a sheaf factor uniquely through sheafification (Sheafification is left adjoint to the inclusion of sheaves into presheaves).
Proof
The assignment is a subpresheaf of : if and , then by [F2].
The assignment is a subsheaf of . Indeed, restriction clearly preserves local representability. If sections on an open cover of agree on overlaps, then because is a sheaf they glue to a unique . The local witnesses for each also witness that lies in . Thus is a sheaf, and [F1] makes it a subsheaf. The factorization is immediate from the definition of .
Since maps into the sheaf , [L1] gives a unique morphism extending the inclusion .
Conversely, let . Choose an open cover and sections with . Then the sections are compatible on overlaps because they all come from . Hence they define a section by the very construction of sheafification. These assignments are compatible with restriction, so they define a morphism .
The composites and are identities, because both are identities locally on the chosen image sections that generate and , and both targets are sheaves. Therefore is an isomorphism.
A single stalk does not determine a global section
If two sections have the same germ at one point, they only agree on some possibly tiny neighbourhood of that point. Nothing in The stalk of a presheaf at a point or Germs of sections lets one recover the values of either section away from that neighbourhood.
For example, on the sheaf of continuous real-valued functions on , a function supported near and the zero function have the same germ at but are different global sections. Stalkwise arguments therefore need either all points at once or a neighbourhoodwise statement that can be glued.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
None yet.
Sources
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Section 2
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Definition 3.1
- Ravi Vakil, Foundations of Algebraic Geometry, Class 3
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Section 3
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Section 17
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Definition 7.1
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Remark 7.2
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Lemma 4.2
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Lemmas 30.3 and 30.4
- Ravi Vakil, Foundations of Algebraic Geometry, Class 4
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Sections 4-6 and 8-10
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Sections 5, 9, and 10
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Section 11
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Section 15
- Ravi Vakil, Foundations of Algebraic Geometry, Class 3, Exercise 4.4
- Ravi Vakil, Foundations of Algebraic Geometry, Class 4, Exercise 4.5
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Section 16
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Sections 17 and 21
- Ravi Vakil, Foundations of Algebraic Geometry, Class 3, Section 4.7
- Ravi Vakil, Foundations of Algebraic Geometry, Class 3, Section 4.8
- The Stacks Project, Sheaves on Spaces, Section 29