A note on fixed points of endofunctors
Aleksandr Luzhenkov

TL;DR
This paper explores fixed points of endofunctors in category theory, introducing three classes, analyzing their properties, and relating fixed points to sheaf cohomology in categories with pretopology.
Contribution
It introduces three classes of fixed points for endofunctors and characterizes them using sheaf cohomology in categories with pretopology.
Findings
Existence of induced structures on fixed point categories
Characterization of fixed points via sheaf cohomology
Analysis of fixed points in categories with pretopology
Abstract
In this note, we deal with the fixed points of an endofunctor . Three classes of fixed points are introduced, and the case when is an endomorphism of a category with pretopology is investigated. We show existence of induced structures on the category of fixed points, and, when a pretopology is defined, give a characterization of fixed points in terms of sheaf cohomology on .
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsSpacecraft Dynamics and Control · Advanced Differential Geometry Research · Geophysics and Gravity Measurements
A note on fixed points of endofunctors
Aleksandr Luzhenkov
Abstract
In this note, we deal with the fixed points of an endofunctor . Three classes of fixed points are introduced, and the case when is an endomorphism of a category with pretopology is investigated. We show existence of induced structures on the category of fixed points, and, when a pretopology is defined, give a characterization of fixed points in terms of sheaf cohomology on .
1 Introduction
Let be a category, a functor. An object is called a fixed point of if there is an isomorphism . For the first time, fixed points of a functor appeared in [1], where, among other things, an existence theorem was established and morphism of fixed points was introduced.
In this note, we give a few results concerning fixed points of a functor. We deal with three types of fixed points; the strict ones, the usual fixed points, and the cohomological fixed points. While the first and the second type are defined in terms of an identity morphism and an isomorphism, respectively, the third type is defined for a site morphism in terms of sheaf cohomology functors . Every strict fixed point is a fixed point, and (when we are working with a site morphism) every fixed point is the cohomological one.
In chapter 2, we deal with fixed points and strict fixed points. We introduce connection between strict fixed points of a functor and the nerve of a category. In chapter 3, we show that the category of fixed points of an additive endofunctor of an additive category is an additive category; if a functor is a site morphism, its category of fixed points may be endowed with the structure of a site. In chapter 4, using (co)slice categories, we give a criterion for a pair to be a fixed point. In chapter 5, we give characterization of fixed points in terms of sheaf cohomology on a site, and introduce cohomological fixed points of a site endomorphism.
Convention. Throughout the text, we suppose that a universe is fixed. An element of is called a -small set (or just a small set). Category is called small if is a small set and is a small set for every pair of objects . A “category ” is always meant to be a “small category ”.
2 Fixed points of endofunctor
Let be a category, a functor.
Definition 2.1**.**
A pair of an object and an isomorphism in is called a fixed point of a functor .
A morphism between fixed points and is a morphism in such that the diagram
[TABLE]
is commutative. We will denote it as .
Definition 2.2**.**
A category of fixed points of a functor has fixed points as objects and morphisms between objects given by the diagram (2.1).
For every there is a faithful functor which is defined by the rule
,
.
A category of fixed points is determined by the functor . It might be the case that is an empty category — a category without objects and without morphisms, or it may be equivalent to . In some cases, there is always at least one fixed point, as happens when is abelian and is additive. It’s also clear that if is a fixed point of then for every object from the isomorphism class of objects there is an isomorphism
Proposition 2.3**.**
Let be isomorphic functors. Then categories and are isomorphic.
Proof.
Since and are isomorphic functors, there are natural transformations
,
,
such that .
Assume that is a fixed point of . Then we have an isomorphism
.
Therefore, for each fixed point of we have a fixed point of .
Suppose there is a morphism of fixed points in that is given by the diagram
[TABLE]
Then we have the morphism between and , since the diagram
[TABLE]
is commutative. We have a well-defined functor , given by
,
.
Functor has the inverse functor, namely .
∎
Let us define a presheaf on by the rule
[TABLE]
Proposition 2.4**.**
Let be a full functor, a fixed point of . There is a bijection
[TABLE]
where is a one-point set.
Proof.
Take an arbitrary morphism in . We are going to demonstrate that for a morphism there is always a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
for some . Indeed, there is always a morphism that makes the diagram above a commutative one. Since functor is full, for some .
On the other hand, existence of the diagram (2.4) is equivalent to the identity
[TABLE]
for some . Therefore, the inductive limit is in bijection with a one-point set.
∎
Now we introduce a subclass of fixed points of the functor .
Definition 2.5**.**
An object is called a strict fixed point of the functor if .
A strict fixed point of the functor is a fixed point of the form . In order to establish connection between strict fixed points of a functor and fixed points of continuous maps between topological spaces, we briefly recall the construction of the nerve of a small category (we follow [2]; all the details may be found there).
Let be the category of finite sets and nondecreasing maps between them. A simplicial set is a functor . We denote . A simplicial map between two simplicial sets and is just a morphism of functors. The category of simplicial sets is denoted as .
With every we associate the set
[TABLE]
where is usual topological -simplex and if and only if , for some nondecreasing map . Here, is the linear map that maps the vertex to the vertex . The geometric realization of a simplicial set is the set (2.6) endowed with the weakest topology for which the factorization by is continuous.
A simplicial map induces a continuous map . We introduce the map by the rule . Since maps equivalent points to equivalent ones, it induces a continuous map .
We define to be a simplicial set such that
[TABLE]
The map which corresponds to is defined by the rule , where if and otherwise. If is a functor then is the morphism of simplicial sets that maps a simplex into the simplex . The geometric realization of simplicial set is called the nerve of the category . Along with triangulable topological space , there is a continuous map as soon as there is a functor .
Proposition 2.6**.**
Let be a functor. If has a fixed point then functor has a strict fixed point.
Proof.
Points of topological space have the form , where and equivalence classes are given by the relation , for some .
If then, in particular, . It means that , which, in turn, means that there is a nondecreasing map such that . But there is only one map from to and it’s . Since , we arrive to the equality .
∎
Suppose that is compact category, i.e. is compact space. In this case, we may transfer some basic facts from topology.
Proposition 2.7**.**
If has the initial object there is a strict fixed point of .
Proof.
Since has the initial object, the space is contractible. By Lefschetz Fixed Point Theorem, has a fixed point. Therefore, by the Proposition 2.6., there is a strict fixed point of . ∎
Proposition 2.8**.**
Let be two functors, a natural transformation. If has a fixed point, then has a strict fixed point.
Proof.
Since there is a natural transformation between functors, maps and are homotopic. From the hypothesis and Lefschetz Fixed Point Theorem follows that has a fixed point. Therefore, by Proposition 2.6., has a strict fixed point. ∎
3 Induced structures on the category of fixed points
If a category has a certain structure, then, in some cases, the same structure may be defined on by using the functor .
If is additive, or a site, then the same structures may be defined on .
Proposition 3.1**.**
Let be an additive category and an additive functor. Then, category of fixed points is additive.
Proof.
-
A functor is additive if and the canonical map is an isomorphism for all . It means that contains zero object111Although, existence of zero object would follow from the statements 2-4 below. , where is an isomorphism .
-
We should verify that is an abelian group. Suppose that are morphisms of fixed points
[TABLE]
Since category is additive and so is the functor , we have equalities
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Taking into account that and are morphisms of fixed points, we see from (3.2) and (3.3) that the diagram
[TABLE]
commutes. Hence, is a morphism of fixed points. This sum is bilinear and associative, since so is the sum of morphisms in .
- We have to show that for every there exists that is the inverse element for .
First, there is always a zero morphism between fixed points and . Indeed, the identity obviously holds. We take to be inverse to in . It remains to show that is a morphism of fixed points.
Since is inverse to in , there are two identities . Therefore
[TABLE]
Morphism is a fixed points morphism, which means that (3.5) is equivalent to the identity
[TABLE]
After all, we arrive to the relation , and is a fixed points morphism. Hence, is an abelian group.
- It remains to demonstrate that admits sums . Since is an additive functor, the canonical map is an isomorphism. On the other hand, the canonical morphism , which is the universal morphism for the coproduct in , is an isomorphism. Then, we set
[TABLE]
Defined sum is indeed a coproduct in ; universal property holds, and all morphisms are fixed points morphisms (for the details, see below the construction of pullback in ; arguments here and there are the same).
∎
We’re going to show that category of fixed points of a site222What we call a site was originally called a category with pretopology. morphism has the induced structure of a site. Before doing so, we have to set two definitions.
Definition 3.2**.**
A category 333Hereinafter, we suppose that has pullbacks. is called a site if for every object there is family of sets of morphisms into , which is denoted as . Three axioms should hold.
- (i)
For every isomorphism , the set is in . 2. (ii)
Suppose that is an arbitrary arrow in , and a set is in . Then, the set of morphisms is in . 3. (iii)
If and , for all , then the set is an element of .
Definition 3.3**.**
Let be a site. A functor is called a morphism of sites if two axioms hold.
- (i)
For every the set is the element of , for all . 2. (ii)
Functor commutes with pullbacks, i.e. the canonical map
[TABLE]
is an isomorphism, for all .
First of all, we define pullbacks in . Suppose that are fixed points of and are fixed points morphisms. Since has pullbacks, there is a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
We’ll show that A) there exists isomorphism such that is a fixed point, B) morphism is actually a fixed points morphism and morphism is also a fixed points morphism, C) universal property holds.
A. Let us consider the pullback diagram
[TABLE]
From the universal property for , there is the unique morphism, which we denote , that makes the diagram
[TABLE]
commute (note that are fixed points morphisms and diagram (3.7) is commutative). From the universal property for follows the existence of the unique morphism that makes the appropriate diagram commute. Exploiting again universal property of pullback, we see that and .
Composing with canonical isomorphism , we get the desired isomorphism .
B. Here, we’re going to demonstrate that and are morphisms of fixed points. Indeed, from the above constructions and the definition of canonical morphism follows that the diagram
[TABLE]
is a commutative one. Therefore, is a fixed points morphism.
From the same reasons follows that is also a morphism of fixed points.
C. It remains to prove the universal property. Suppose that we are given a fixed point and two morphisms of fixed points such that . By the universal property of pullback in , there is the morphism , such that and . We need to show that is a morphism of fixed points; in other words, the rectangular in the diagram
[TABLE]
should be commutative. To demonstrate that this is the case, we’ll use universal property of pullback in . There is the unique morphism that makes the diagram below a commutative one
[TABLE]
First, we’ll demonstrate that makes the diagram (3.11) a commutative one. Indeed, we have the sequence of identities . The last implication holds since is the morphism of fixed points. By the same reasons, noting that is the morphism of fixed points, we have the identity . Hence, .
Now, we’re going to show that makes the diagram (3.11) commute. We have the sequence of identities . The last implication holds since is the morphism of fixed points. Again, noting that is the morphism of fixed points and repeating the same arguments, we arrive to the equality . Therefore, by the uniqueness of the universal morphism, .
After all, we have that , and is the morphism of fixed points.
By using functor it’s possible to define the structure of a site on . A set of fixed points morphisms is in if is in . It’s clear that all three axioms hold.
4 Fixed points and (co)slice categories
In this section, we want to give conditions under which a pair is a fixed point by using comma categories and ; in particular, we’ll give a criterion for to be a fixed point. Throughout this section, we suppose that has pullbacks and pushouts.
If we are given a morphism in then it’s possible to associate with it the functor
,
where . Let us briefly recall this construction.
For every there is a commutative square
[TABLE]
Then, assuming the axiom of choice, we define the map by the rule
.
Let be a morphism between and that is given by the commutative triangle
[TABLE]
We have to define a morphism such that the diagram
[TABLE]
is commutative.
Morphism will be extracted from the universal property of pullback. Indeed, we have the commutative diagram
[TABLE]
where is the universal morphism. We take .
Functor , therefore, is defined on objects and morphisms by the rule
,
\begin{gathered}\lx@xy@svg{\hbox{\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\kern 13.47571pt\hbox{\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\hbox{\vtop{\kern 0.0pt\offinterlineskip\halign{\entry@#!@&&\entry@@#!@\cr&\\&\crcr}}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern-8.4139pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\textstyle{Y_{1}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}}}}}}}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern-13.47571pt\raise-25.31888pt\hbox{{}\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise-0.8264pt\hbox{\scriptstyle{\eta_{12}}}}}\kern 3.0pt}}}}}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise-40.80444pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\lx@xy@tip{1}\lx@xy@tip{-1}}}}}}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 19.91893pt\raise 5.1875pt\hbox{{}\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise-0.8264pt\hbox{\scriptstyle{g_{1}}}}}\kern 3.0pt}}}}}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 44.4139pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\lx@xy@tip{1}\lx@xy@tip{-1}}}}}}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}{\hbox{\kern 44.4139pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\textstyle{Y}}}}}}}}{\hbox{\kern-8.4139pt\raise-50.63776pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\textstyle{Y_{2}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}}}}}}}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\lx@xy@drawline@}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 25.62334pt\raise-30.50636pt\hbox{{}\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise-0.8264pt\hbox{\scriptstyle{g_{2}}}}}\kern 3.0pt}}}}}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 48.3809pt\raise-3.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\lx@xy@tip{1}\lx@xy@tip{-1}}}}}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\lx@xy@drawline@}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\lx@xy@drawline@}}{\hbox{\kern 48.42778pt\raise-50.63776pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\textstyle{}}}}}}}}\ignorespaces}}}}\ignorespaces\end{gathered} \begin{gathered}\lx@xy@svg{\hbox{\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\kern 20.19637pt\hbox{\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\hbox{\vtop{\kern 0.0pt\offinterlineskip\halign{\entry@#!@&&\entry@@#!@\cr&\\&\crcr}}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern-20.19637pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\textstyle{X\times_{Y}Y_{1}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}}}}}}}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern-13.47571pt\raise-25.37332pt\hbox{{}\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise-1.29167pt\hbox{\scriptstyle{\eta_{12}^{}}}}}\kern 3.0pt}}}}}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise-40.91333pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\lx@xy@tip{1}\lx@xy@tip{-1}}}}}}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 26.91824pt\raise 6.5pt\hbox{{}\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise-1.75pt\hbox{\scriptstyle{p^{}{\sigma}(g{1})}}}}\kern 3.0pt}}}}}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 56.19637pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\lx@xy@tip{1}\lx@xy@tip{-1}}}}}}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}{\hbox{\lx@xy@droprule}}{\hbox{\kern 56.19637pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\textstyle{X}}}}}}}}{\hbox{\kern-20.19637pt\raise-50.74664pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\textstyle{X\times_{Y}Y_{2}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces}}}}}}}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\lx@xy@drawline@}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 29.55264pt\raise-31.87332pt\hbox{{}\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise-1.75pt\hbox{\scriptstyle{p^{*}{\sigma}(g{2})}}}}\kern 3.0pt}}}}}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\kern 59.9635pt\raise-3.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\lx@xy@tip{1}\lx@xy@tip{-1}}}}}}\ignorespaces\ignorespaces{\hbox{\lx@xy@drawline@}}\ignorespaces{\hbox{\lx@xy@drawline@}}{\hbox{\kern 60.73108pt\raise-50.74664pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 0.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\hbox{\kern 3.0pt\raise 0.0pt\hbox{\textstyle{}}}}}}}}\ignorespaces}}}}\ignorespaces\end{gathered}
Axioms of an identity morphism and composition are verified by the universal property of pullback; here, we omit details.
Of course, there is a dual construction: over-categories are replaced by under categories , pullbacks are replaced by pushouts. Hence, for every morphism in there is a well-defined functor , where .
Proposition 4.1**.**
If is an isomorphism, functors
are equivalences of categories
Proof.
Since pullbacks preserve isomorphisms (but not identities) and pasting-lemma holds, functor has the quasi-inverse, namely the functor . The same argument applies to pushouts and functor .
∎
Besides functors and , there are also two functors for every morphism in . The first one is , which is defined on objects by the post-composition
,
and the second one is , which is defined on objects by the pre-composition
.
The following result is well-known.
Proposition 4.2**.**
Let be a morphism in .
- (i)
Functor is right adjoint to the functor . 2. (ii)
Functor is left adjoint to the functor .
Proof.
(i). Let be an object of , an object of . We are going to construct maps between -sets. First, we construct
[TABLE]
Suppose that is an element of . Then is defined by the post-composition
[TABLE]
It’s straightforward to see that all necessary triangles commute and the map is correctly defined.
Now, a map , that goes in the converse direction, will be defined. Suppose we are given a morphism that is an element of
.
Then, we have the universal morphism and the commutative diagram
[TABLE]
The map is defined by the rule
[TABLE]
It’s easy to see that and are identity maps. It’s also quite straightforward to show that defined maps are natural: one should just keep in mind the uniqueness of the universal morphism.
(ii). The proof goes as in (i). ∎
Proposition 4.3**.**
Suppose that is a balanced category444Recall that a category is called balanced if every morphism that is an epimorphism and monomorphism is also an isomorphism. Among examples of balanced categories are categories of groups, -modules, rings, abelian categories.. Then is a fixed point if and only if functors and are equivalences of categories.
Proof.
- If is an isomorphism, functors and are equivalences by Proposition 4.1.
2.1. Suppose that is quasi-inverse to , i.e. there are isomorphisms of functors
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Since is right adjoint to , we have a unit morphism
[TABLE]
From (4.8) follows that there is a morphism , and from (4.6) we have a morphism . Hence, the morphism from to is defined, and we denote it as
[TABLE]
Now, suppose that is a quasi-inverse to . We have two isomorphisms of functors
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Since is left adjoint to , there is a counit morphism
[TABLE]
From (4.10) follows that the morphism is defined. Using (4.12), we build the morphism . Finally, there is the morphism of functors
[TABLE]
2.2. Since is quasi-inverse to , there is an isomorphism for arbitrary
[TABLE]
By definition of , we have that . Then we apply and denote the resulting image of under as .
From (4.14) we see that there is an isomorphism in such that the triangle
[TABLE]
is commutative.
Since morphism of functors is defined (see (4.9)), there is a component of associated with object of , and, therefore, we have a morphism in that makes the diagram
[TABLE]
a commutative one.
We’re going to exploit universal property of pullback by using morphisms and . Indeed, from (4.15) and (4.16) it’s clear that there is a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
where is universal morphism. From the right triangle in the diagram (4.17) we get the relation
,
where is an isomorphism as follows from (4.15). Hence, is a split epimorphism.
Since is an arbitrary object of we may choose and the diagram (4.17) still commutes. In this case, morphism is an isomorphism. Then, from the commutativity of the pullback square follows that is a split epimorphism.
2.3. The same arguments apply to the dual construction of under-categories and . We only give the diagram that follows from the universal property of pushout
[TABLE]
where isomorphism is a component of the natural transformation (4.10) and is a component of the natural transformation (4.13). From the same reasons as in dual construction, is a split monomorphism.
Since category is balanced according to the hypothesis, is an isomorphism.
∎
5 Fixed points of a site morphism
In this section, we examine situation when category is a site555We note again that what we call a site was originally called a category with pretopology; see the definitions in chapter 3. and functor is a morphism of sites. Throughout this section we suppose that category has pullbacks, and we also note that is supposed to be small.
Hereinafter, a sheaf on is always a sheaf of abelian groups.
Proposition 5.1**.**
Suppose that is a morphism of sites. If is a sheaf on then is a sheaf on .
Proof.
It’s clear that if is a presheaf on then so is . Since is a sheaf, the sequence
[TABLE]
is an equalizer for all and all sets of indexes such that . We should verify the same property for every sequence
[TABLE]
Since in the category of abelian groups direct product of isomorphisms is an isomorphism, and functor , being a morphism of sites, commutes with pullbacks, we have an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Composing sequence (5.1) on the right with (5.2), we get the sequence
[TABLE]
which is an equalizer for all and all sets of indexes . Indeed, is a sheaf and for all . Since (5.3) is an equalizer, the sequence (5.1) is always an equalizer. ∎
We define functor by the pre-composition
[TABLE]
Proposition 5.2**.**
Functor is exact.
Proof.
Functor between additive categories is additive if and the canonical map is an isomorphism. It’s clear that is the additive one; we have equalities , if , and . Suppose that the sequence of sheaves
[TABLE]
is exact. Then, we have to show that the sequence of sheaves
[TABLE]
is also exact. But this follows immediately, since is nothing else but the restriction of to the subcategory of . ∎
Recall that a sheaf on is called flabby if
[TABLE]
for all , , . Here, is given by , where
[TABLE]
Every injective sheaf is flabby, but the converse doesn’t hold in general.
Remark 5.3**.**
Groups , where , may be computed as cohomology groups of the Cech complex (see [3]). By definition,
[TABLE]
while differential is defined by
[TABLE]
where is projection
[TABLE]
Proposition 5.4**.**
If is a flabby sheaf, then is also a flabby sheaf.
Proof.
For every there is an isomorphism
[TABLE]
where . Indeed, functor is a site morphism; therefore, it commutes with pullbacks and for all . For each the diagram
[TABLE]
is a commutative one. Hence,
[TABLE]
for all .
From this isomorphism follows that if is a flabby sheaf then so is .
∎
Proposition 5.5**.**
Suppose that is a fixed point of F, a sheaf on . For all , there is an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be an injective resolution of . From Proposition 5.2 and Proposition 5.4 follows that is a flabby resolution of
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Applying left exact functor to these sequences we get two complexes of abelian groups
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Note that . Since is a fixed point and is a morphism of sheaves, we have, for each , a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
Therefore, there is an isomorphism for each .
∎
In chapter 2, we introduced two classes of fixed points using an identity and an isomorphism. Now, we’re going to set one more class of fixed points of a site morphism, using a relation that is weaker than an identity and an isomorphism.
Definition 5.6**.**
A pair , where and is the set of natural transformations , is called a cohomological fixed point of a site morphism if is a natural isomorphism for all .
Proposition 5.7**.**
- (i)
If is a cohomological fixed point of then
[TABLE]
for all . 2. (ii)
If for some there is an isomorphism , natural in for all and for all , then there is a cohomological fixed point of .
Proof.
(i). By hypothesis, for each there is an isomorphism , natural in . But from Proposition 5.2 and Proposition 5.4 follows that , for all .
(ii). Again there is an isomorphism , natural in for each , as follows from Proposition 5.2 and Proposition 5.4. Since , for each , by the hypothesis, there is a family of isomorphisms , for every , that are natural in . Therefore, we have a cohomological fixed point of , namely .
∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] J. Lambek. A fixpoint theorem for complete category . Math. Z., 103 (1968), pp. 151-161.
- 2[2] S.I. Gelfand and Yu.I. Manin. Methods of homological algebra . Springer (1996).
- 3[3] G. Tamme. Introduction to e ´ ´ 𝑒 \acute{e} tale cohomology . Universitex Springer (1994).
