
TL;DR
This paper constructs a general coarse assembly map for strong coarse homology theories, providing conditions for it to be an equivalence and explicitly calculating its domain, thus generalizing known results in coarse geometry.
Contribution
It introduces a universal construction of coarse assembly maps for broad classes of coarse homology theories and extends known equivalence results.
Findings
Conditions under which the assembly map is an equivalence
Explicit calculation of the domain of the assembly map
Generalization of analytic coarse assembly map results
Abstract
For every strong coarse homology theory we construct a coarse assembly map as a natural transformation between coarse homology theories. We provide various conditions implying that this assembly map is an equivalence. These results generalize known results for the analytic coarse assembly map for K-homology to general coarse homology theories. Furthermore, we calculate the domain of the coarse assembly map explicitly in terms of locally finite homology theory.
Click any figure to enlarge with its caption.
Figure 1Peer 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.
footnotesection
Coarse assembly maps
Ulrich Bunke Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Regensburg, 93040 Regensburg, GERMANY
Alexander Engel Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Regensburg, 93040 Regensburg, GERMANY
Abstract
For every strong coarse homology theory we construct a coarse assembly map as a natural transformation between coarse homology theories. We provide various conditions implying that this assembly map is an equivalence. These results generalize known results for the analytic coarse assembly map for -homology to general coarse homology theories. Furthermore, we calculate the domain of the coarse assembly map explicitly in terms of locally finite homology theory.
Contents
1 Introduction
In this paper we propose a construction of a coarse assembly map as a natural transformation between coarse homology theories and study conditions under which it is an equivalence.
The classical instance of the coarse assembly map is the coarse analytic assembly map featuring in the coarse Baum–Connes conjecture (Higson–Roe [HR95]). For a proper metric space it is constructed as a homomorphisms of -graded groups from the coarsification of the locally finite -homology groups of this space to the coarse -homology groups of the same space.
In [BE20] we refined the domain and the target of the coarse analytic assembly map to spectrum-valued coarse homology theories defined on the category of bornological coarse spaces. We then tried to understand the coarse analytic assembly map as a transformation between coarse homology theories. We observed that the solution of this task would imply the coarse Baum-Connes conjecture in the case of finite asymptotic dimension as a formal consequence of comparison theorems [BE20, Thm. 6.115]. More generally, given a general coarse homology theory one can define the coarsification of an associated locally finite homology theory and ask for an analogue of the coarse analytic assembly map. In this case we would obtain an analogue of the coarse Baum–Connes conjecture for the coarse homology in question.
As we shall observe in the present paper the successful solution of these problems involves modifying the domain of the coarse assembly map. Instead of coarsifying locally finite homology theories we coarsify local homology theories. The first goal of the present paper is to introduce this notion and to develop a motivic picture of the coarsification process. We then define the assembly map using the forget-control map of the cone sequence. For more details we refer to Subsection 1.1. The second goal of the paper explained in greater detail in Subsection 1.2 is to provide various conditions implying that the coarse assembly map is an equivalence. Furthermore, under suitable assumptions, we can calculate the domain of the coarse assembly map in terms of locally finite homology. These calculations show that the construction of the present paper solves the original problem in many cases. In a separate paper [BEL] we consider the case of coarse -homology theory. We will show that for nice spaces the new assembly map is equivalent to the classical coarse analytic assembly map.
1.1 Construction of the coarse assembly maps
In the following we describe the set-up in which we will construct the coarse assembly map. The basic category is the category of bornological coarse spaces introduced in [BE20]. Let be a cocomplete, stable -category, e.g., the -category of spectra . A -valued coarse homology theory is a functor
[TABLE]
which is coarsely invariant, coarsely excisive, -continuous, and vanishes on flasques. We refer to [BE20] for a detailed description of these properties. In order to study properties of coarse homology theories in general we constructed in [BE20] a universal coarse homology theory
[TABLE]
with values in the stable -category of motivic coarse spectra . A -valued coarse homology theory as above is then equivalently described as a colimit preserving functor
[TABLE]
Locally finite homology theories are defined on the category of topological bornological spaces and proper continuous maps [BE20, Sec. 7.1]. The target of a locally finite homology theory will in addition be assumed to be complete. A functor
[TABLE]
is a locally finite homology theory if, in addition to the usual homological conditions of excision and homotopy invariance, it satisfies the local finiteness condition. It requires that the natural map
[TABLE]
is an equivalence for every bornological topological space , where the limit runs over the bounded subsets of . Every homology theory has a corresponding locally finite version [BE20, Def. 7.15 and Prop. 7.37].
A particular class of coarse homology theories are coarsifications of locally finite homology theories [BE20, Def. 7.44 and Prop. 7.46]. In contrast to general coarse homology theories, coarsifications of locally finite homology theories seem to be much more tractable because they can be studied by well-established methods of homotopy theory.
Analytic -homology is an example of a locally finite homology theory [BE20, Sec. 7.66]. For a bornological coarse space of locally bounded geometry in [BE20, Def. 8.139] we constructed a version of the coarse analytic assembly map
[TABLE]
where is the coarse -homology. We were not able to construct such a morphism for arbitrary spaces . In particular, we do not have a natural transformation between coarse homology theories.
The construction of uses specialities of topological -theory. One could ask whether there are other pairs of a coarse homology theory and a locally finite homology theory which are related by a version of a coarse assembly map . In the present paper we will see that, if interpreted in the appropriate sense, such pairs exist in abundance. One of the difficulties seems to be the fact that locally finite homology theories are characterized by a limit condition (1.1). It is therefore complicated to construct maps out of locally finite homology theories. The main novelty of the present paper is to introduce the notion of a local homology theory, essentially by replacing the condition of being locally finite by the weaker condition of vanishing on flasques, see Definition 3.12.
In the following we explain this in greater detail. We introduce the category of uniform bornological coarse spaces . A local homology theory is then a functor
[TABLE]
which is homotopy invariant, excisive, -continuous, and vanishes on flasques. We will construct a universal local homology theory
[TABLE]
with values in motivic uniform bornological coarse spectra (Corollary 4.16). In fact, we will consider two versions of local homology theories distinguished by the condition that the descent axiom involves open or closed decompositions. The open version will be indicated by adding a superscript “”. Similarly as in the case of coarse homology theories, a -valued local homology theory is equivalently described as a colimit preserving functor
[TABLE]
The nature of the local finiteness condition (1.1) makes it impossible to construct a universal locally finite homology theory in a similar manner.
Any locally finite homology theory gives rise to a local homology theory which in the notation of the present paper appears as in Lemma 3.16.
A uniform bornological coarse space has an underlying bornological coarse space. But if we simply forget the uniform structure, then we completely lose the local topological structure of the space. A more interesting transition from uniform bornological coarse spaces to bornological coarse spaces keeping the local structure is given by the cone construction. Indeed, with the help of the cone one can encode the uniform structure into a suitable coarse structure.
The cone construction will be investigated in various versions in Section 8; the main version is the one in Definition 8.1, [BE20, Ex. 5.16] and [BEKW20, Def. 9.24]. It provides a functor
[TABLE]
The cone and the germs at infinity
[TABLE]
of the cone (see Definition 8.2, [BE20, Sec. 5.2.3] and [BEKW20, Sec. 9.5]) can be used to pull-back coarse homology theories to functors defined on .
Let be a coarse homology theory. It is strong [BEKW20, Def. 4.19] if it annihilates not only flasque but also weakly flasque bornological coarse spaces. We interpret as a colimit preserving functor on and consider the composition
[TABLE]
Lemma 1.1** (Lemma 9.6).**
If is strong, then is a local homology theory.
The idea to use some version of cones in order to pull-back coarse homology theories has some history. We refer to Higson–Pederson–Roe [HPR96, Prop. 12.1] (coarse -homology), Mitchener [Mit10, Thm. 4.9] (coarsely excisive theories), Bartels–Farrell–Jones–Reich [BFJR04, Sec. 5] (equivariant coarse algebraic -homology), [HP04] (coarse topological and algebraic -theory and -theory), or Weiss [Wei02] (algebraic -theory of additive categories and retractive spaces) as entry points to the literature.
Given an entourage of a bornological coarse space we can form the Rips complex at scale , see Example 2.6. It is a simplicial complex which will be equipped with the path quasi metric induced by the spherical metric on its simplices. The metric induces a coarse and a uniform structure on , and the family of subsets (where denotes the bornology of ) generates the bornology of the uniform bornological coarse space . There is a canonical embedding of into the zero skeleton of which induces an equivalence of bornological coarse spaces , where forgets the uniform structure.
On the one hand the family (where denotes the coarse structure of ) of underlying bornological coarse spaces of the Rips complexes is coarsely equivalent to the constant family on . One the other hand, forming the colimit of the motivic uniform bornological coarse spectra represented by the Rips complexes, we obtain a functor
[TABLE]
called the universal coarsification, see Definition 5.1. In detail,
[TABLE]
By Proposition 5.2 the functor is a -valued coarse homology theory and can therefore be interpreted as a colimit preserving functor
[TABLE]
Pull-back along associates to every -valued local homology theory a -valued coarse homology theory , see Definition 5.3.
For a locally finite homology theory the coarsification of the local homology theory induced from coincides with the coarsification from [BE20, Def. 7.44] which we have discussed earlier, i.e., we have an equivalence
[TABLE]
We now state the main construction of this paper. Let be a strong coarse homology theory. The cone construction gives rise to a fibre sequence
[TABLE]
of local homology theories . For the following definition we interpret (1.3) as a fibre sequence of colimit preserving functors .
Definition 1.2** (Definition 9.7).**
The coarse assembly map for is the natural transformation between coarse homology theories
[TABLE]
derived from the boundary map of the cone sequence (1.3) by precomposition with and using the identification (see Proposition 6.2).
1.2 Isomorphism results and computations
In Section 10 we study various conditions on the strong coarse homology theory and the bornological coarse space which imply that the coarse assembly map
[TABLE]
is an equivalence. Let us mention three results which are analogues of instances of the coarse Baum–Connes and the coarse Farrell–Jones conjecture. We refer to Section 10 for a detailed description of the assumptions occuring in the following theorems.
Let be a bornological coarse space and let be a strong coarse homology theory.
Theorem 1.3** (Theorem 10.4).**
If admits a cofinal set of entourages such that has finite asymptotic dimension, then the coarse assembly map is an equivalence.
Theorem 1.4** (Theorem 10.11).**
Assume:
* is compactly generated.* 2. 2.
* is weakly additive.* 3. 3.
* admits transfers.* 4. 4.
* admits a cofinal set of entourages such that has finite decomposition complexity.*
Then the coarse assembly map is an equivalence.
Let be a simplicial complex, and let be the corresponding uniform bornological coarse space whose structures are induced from the path quasi-metric induced by the spherical metric on the simplices. We say that is obtained from by equipping this complex with the metric structures. The symbol denotes the underlying bornological coarse space of .
Theorem 1.5** (Corollary 10.24).**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* is additive and admits transfers.* 3. 3.
* has bounded geometry.* 4. 4.
* is equicontinuously contractible.* 5. 5.
* admits a coarse scaling.*
Then the coarse assembly map is an equivalence.
Let be a strong coarse homology theory. Then is a local homology theory, but in general it seems to be difficult to understand its values. Fortunately, if is in addition additive, then on nice spaces it behaves like a locally finite homology theory. Concretely, we have the following result.
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space.
Proposition 1.6** (Proposition 11.23).**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* is additive.* 3. 3.
* is homotopy equivalent in to a countable, locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complex equipped with the metric structures.*
Then we have a natural equivalence
[TABLE]
The left-hand side of (1.4) is the value on the underlying topological bornological space of of the locally finite version of the homology represented by the object , see Definition 11.1.
The next proposition is a consequence of Proposition 11.23 applied to Rips complexes. It provides, under appropriate conditions, a calculation of the domain of the coarse assembly map.
Let be a strong coarse homology theory and be a bornological coarse space.
Proposition 1.7** (Proposition 12.2).**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* is countably additive.* 3. 3.
* has bounded geometry.*
Then we have a natural equivalence
[TABLE]
Note that denotes the open version of the universal coarsification.
Assume that is a natural transformation of strong coarse homology theories such that is an equivalence. Then we can use Proposition 1.7 to show for a bornological coarse space that is an equivalence if the assembly maps and are equivalences, see Theorem 12.3. The precise statement is the following:
Theorem 1.8** (Theorem 12.3).**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* and are additive.* 3. 3.
* is an equivalence.* 4. 4.
* has bounded geometry.* 5. 5.
The assembly maps and are equivalences.
Then is an equivalence.
It is tempting to apply Theorem 1.8 to the transformation in order to show that is an equivalence. But in view of Assumption 1.8.5 this would lead to a circular argument.
Acknowledgements
The authors were supported by the SFB 1085 “Higher Invariants” funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG. The second named author was also supported by the Research Fellowship EN 1163/1-1 “Mapping Analysis to Homology” of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG.
The first named author profited from many critical remarks by Denis-Charles Cisinski, Markus Land and the participants of the course on “Coarse Geometry” held in Regensburg in the years 2016/17, where parts of this material were first presented.
2 Uniform bornological coarse spaces
In this section we introduce the category of uniform bornological coarse spaces and then discuss some basic constructions and examples.
Let be a set. A bornology on is a subset of the power set which is closed under forming finite unions, taking subsets, and which contains all one-point sets. The elements of are called the bounded subsets of . A map between sets equipped with bornologies is said to be proper if preimages of bounded subsets are bounded.
A coarse structure on is a subset of which contains the diagonal, is closed under forming finite unions and compositions (in the sense of correspondences), the symmetry, and taking subsets. The elements of are called coarse entourages of . A map between sets equipped with coarse structures is said to be controlled if it sends coarse entourages to coarse entourages.
A bornology and a coarse structure on the same set are said to be compatible if is stable under forming thickenings by coarse entourages in (see [BE20, Def. 2.6]).
A set equipped with compatible bornological and coarse structures is an object of the category of bornological coarse spaces. A morphism between bornological coarse spaces is a proper and controlled map. We refer to [BE20, Ch. 2] for a detailed study of the category .
Finally, a uniform structure on a set is a subset of which is closed under forming finite intersections, compositions, the symmetry, and taking supersets. In addition we require that every element of contains the diagonal and admits a subset in such that ( denotes the composition of with itself). The elements of are called uniform entourages. A uniform space is a set equipped with a uniform structure. A map between the underlying sets of uniform spaces is called uniformly continuous if preimages of uniform entourages are uniform entourages.
A uniform structure and a coarse structure on the same set are said to be compatible if (see [BE20, Def. 5.4]). For more details we refer to [BE20, Ch. 5.1] and [BEKW20, Sec. 9.1].
A bornological coarse space with an additional compatible uniform structure is called a uniform bornological coarse space. We let denote the category of uniform bornological coarse spaces and proper, controlled and uniformly continuous maps.
A bornology and a topology on the same set are called compatible if is cofinal in , and is closed under forming closures ([BE20, Def. 7.1]). A set with a bornology and a compatible topology is called a topological bornological space. We let be the category of topological bornological spaces and continuous and proper maps, see [BE20, Sec. 7.1.1].
A uniform structure on a set naturally induces a topology generated by the -thickenings of the one-points sets for all in and in . We have a forgetful functor
[TABLE]
which forgets the coarse structure and only remembers the bornology and the topology induced from the uniform structure.
Let be a uniform space.
Definition 2.1**.**
The coarse structure associated to the uniform structure is defined by
[TABLE]
*Here denotes the coarse structure generated by ([BE20, Ex. 2.12]). *
Example 2.2**.**
The coarse structure is not necessarily compatible with the uniform structure , as the following example shows. We let . We further define the uniform structure of to be the one induced from the metric on induced from the canonical inclusion . This uniform structure is generated by the uniform entourages for all given by . We now observe that is the minimal coarse structure consisting of all subsets of the diagonal. It is not compatible with . ∎
Example 2.3**.**
The notion of a quasi-metric on a set is defined similary as the notion of a metric where one in addition allows that points have infinite distance. For example, a disjoint union of metric spaces is naturally a quasi-metric space. The definition of a coarse structure associated to a metric [BE20, Ex. 2.18] generalizes immediately to the case of quasi-metric spaces. Similarly, a quasi-metric also induces a uniform structure.
We consider a quasi-metric space with the induced coarse and uniform structures and . They are compatible. If the space is in addition a path quasi-metric space (i.e. each path component is a path metric space, and different path components have infinite distance to each other), then we have the equality . In particular, in this case is compatible with . ∎
Remark 2.4**.**
A map between metric spaces is called uniformly continuous if for every in there exists an in such that for all pairs of points of with we have . A uniformly continuous map between metric spaces in this sense is uniformly continuous as a map between the associated uniform spaces. ∎
Example 2.5**.**
Let be a simplicial complex. Then has a canonical spherical path quasi metric which induces a coarse structure and a compatible uniform structure .
A choice of a set of sub-complexes generates a bornology . It is compatible with the coarse structure if for every entourage in and every sub-complex in there exists another sub-complex in with . The triple is a uniform bornological coarse space.
If is a second simplicial complex with a choice of a set of sub-complexes and is a simplicial map such that for every in we have , then is a morphism of uniform bornological coarse spaces. ∎
Example 2.6**.**
If is a bornological coarse space and is a coarse entourage of , then we consider the simplicial complex of probability measures on which have finite, -bounded support. For a subset of we let denote the sub-complex of of measures supported on . We let be the set of sub-complexes for all bounded subsets of . The constructions explained in Example 2.5 turn into a uniform bornological coarse space.
Let be a morphism between bornological coarse spaces. Then there exists a coarse entourage of such that . The push-forward of measures provides a morphism between uniform bornological coarse spaces in a functorial way. ∎
Example 2.7**.**
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space. If is a subset of , then has an induced uniform bornological coarse structure. If not said differently, we will always consider subsets with the induced structures. The inclusion is then a morphism between uniform bornological coarse spaces. ∎
3 Local homology theories
In this section we introduce the notion of a local homology theory. We will actually consider two variants which are distinguished by the details of the excision axiom which involves closed or open decompositions.
Remark 3.1**.**
The reason for considering two variants is that we want to apply the theory to two examples with different properties. On the one hand, analytic -homology naturally satisfies excision for closed decompositions [BE20, Prop. 7.62] (applied to ). On the other hand, the suspension spectrum functor naturally satisfies open excision [BE20, Ex. 7.40]. ∎
Let be a uniform space, and let and be subsets of with .
Definition 3.2**.**
* is called a closed (or open) decomposition, if and are closed (resp. open).*
For an entourage let denote the set of elements of (the power set of ) which are contained in . The following is taken from [BE20, Def. 5.19]:
Definition 3.3**.**
The pair is a uniformly excisive decomposition of if there exists a uniform entourage and a function such that:
The restriction of to is -admissible (see Remark 3.4). 2. 2.
For every in we have .
Remark 3.4**.**
Note that in Definition 3.3 we consider and as partially ordered sets with the order relation given by the opposite of the inclusion relation. By definition, a function between partially ordered sets is order preserving.
Condition 3.3.1 means that for every in there exists in such that . ∎
For a coarse space the notion of a coarsely excisive decomposition [BE20, Def. 3.40] is defined similarly. We again consider two subsets and of such that .
Definition 3.5**.**
The pair is a coarsely excisive decomposition of the space if for every in there exists a in such that we have .
Let be a uniform space.
Lemma 3.6**.**
If is compatible with , then any uniformly excisive decomposition of is coarsely excisive for the coarse structure .
Proof.
Let and be as in Definition 3.3. Since is compatible with , after replacing by a smaller uniform entourage if necessary, we can assume that is also a coarse entourage, and that is a coarse entourage for every in .
Let be an entourage in . Then there exists an integer such that . We claim that
[TABLE]
Let be a point in . Then there exists integers and with and and a sequence of points in such that , , and for all . There exists in such that and . But then , i.e., . Since is uniformly excisive by assumption there exists a point in such that . This now implies that as asserted. ∎
Example 3.7**.**
On a path quasi-metric space every closed decomposition is coarsely and uniformly excisive [BE20, Ex. 5.21]. ∎
Let be a cocomplete stable -category and consider a functor .
Definition 3.8**.**
We say that satisfies closed (open) excision if and for every uniform bornological coarse space and uniformly and coarsely excisive closed (open) decomposition of the square
[TABLE]
is cocartesian.
The categories and have symmetric monoidal structures denoted by (see [BE20, Ex. 2.32] for the latter) such that the forgetful functor has a symmetric monoidal refinement and the underlying uniform space of a tensor product is a cartesian product of the underlying uniform space of the factors.
The unit interval has a canonical uniform bornological coarse structure (the maximal coarse and bornological structure, and the metric uniform structure). The product is now defined, and the projection is a morphism of uniform bornological coarse spaces since is bounded.
Let be a functor.
Definition 3.9**.**
We say that is homotopy invariant if for every uniform bornological coarse space the morphism induced by the projection is an equivalence.
A homotopy between morphisms of uniform bornological coarse spaces is a morphism which restricts to at the endpoints of the interval. If is homotopy invariant, then for homotopic morphisms we have .
A uniform bornological coarse space is called flasque with flasqueness implemented by a morphism if implements flasqueness in the sense of bornological coarse spaces [BE20, Def. 3.21] and is in addition homotopic to the identity.
Let be a functor.
Definition 3.10**.**
We say that vanishes on flasques if for every flasque uniform bornological coarse space .
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space and be an entourage which is both coarse and uniform. Then for every coarse entourage such that we can replace the coarse structure by the coarse structure generated by and obtain a uniform bornological coarse space . Hence, for a uniform bornological coarse space the uniform bornological coarse space is well-defined for sufficiently large coarse entourages . We have a canonical morphism given by the identity of the underlying sets. Hence the colimit and the canonical morphism in the following definition have a well-defined interpretation.
Let be a functor.
Definition 3.11**.**
We say that is -continuous if for every uniform bornological coarse space the canonical morphism is an equivalence.
Let be a cocomplete stable -category, and let be a functor.
Definition 3.12**.**
* is called a closed (open) local homology theory if the following conditions are satisfied:*
* satisfies closed (open) excision.* 2. 2.
* is homotopy invariant.* 3. 3.
* vanishes on flasques.* 4. 4.
* is -continuous.*
We have a forgetful functor
[TABLE]
which forgets the uniform structure.
Let be a functor.
Lemma 3.13**.**
If is a coarse homology theory, then is a closed and open local homology theory.
Proof.
It follows from the definition of a coarse homology theory [BE20, Def. 4.22] that is homotopy invariant, -continuous, and vanishes on flasques. The functor sends uniformly and coarsely excisive closed or open decompositions to coarsely excisive ones. Hence by [BE20, Cor. 4.28] the composition is excisive. ∎
Remark 3.14**.**
The reason that the proof of the Lemma 3.13 is not completely trivial is that excision for coarse homology theories was not defined in terms of coarsely excisive decompositions but with complementary pairs, see [BE20, Def. 4.22.1]. Our main reason for doing this was that the intersection of a coarsely excisive decomposition with a subset needs not to be coarsely excisive, while the intersection with subsets preserves complementary pairs. ∎
A locally finite homology theory in the sense of [BE20, Def. 7.27] is a functor with a complete and cocomplete stable target which is homotopy invariant, locally finite and satisfies weak excision [BE20, Def. 7.26]. It will will be called closed or open if it satisfies excision for closed or open, respectively, decompositions.
Example 3.15**.**
An example of a closed spectrum-valued locally finite homology theory is the analytic -homology constructed in [BE20, Def. 7.66].
An example of a locally finite homology theory satisfying open excision is the locally finite version of stable homotopy , see [BE20, Ex. 7.40]. ∎
We assume that is a complete and cocomplete stable -category. Let be a locally finite homology theory.
Lemma 3.16**.**
If is closed (open), then is a closed (open) local homology theory.
Proof.
Homotopy invariance of implies homotopy invariance of . The functor sends uniformly and coarsely excisive closed (open) decompositions to closed (open) decompositions. Since we assume that is closed (open) the composition satisfies closed (open) excision. Since forgets the coarse structure, the composition is -continuous.
The functor sends flasque uniform bornological coarse space to topological bornological spaces which are flasque in the sense of [BE20, Def. 7.19]. Since vanishes on flasque topological bornological spaces by [BE20, Lem. 7.21] we conclude that vanishes on flasques. ∎
4 Motives and the universal local homology theory
In this section we construct the universal closed and open local homology theories. We will write out the details for the closed case. The open case is completely analogous and is obtained by replacing the word “closed” by the word “open” at the appropriate places.
The construction of the universal local homology theories is completely analogous to the construction of the universal coarse homology theory carried out in [BE20, Sec. 3 & 4]. We keep the present section as short as possible and refer to [BE20] for more background and references to the -category literature.
Remark 4.1**.**
In order to fix set-theoretic size issues we fix a sequence of three Grothendieck universes whose elements will be called very small sets, small sets, and large sets, respectively. The geometric objects in , or , and the indexing families of big familes, etc. are assumed to belong to the very small universe. The three categories themselves are small.
For a small -category we use the standard notation
[TABLE]
for the presentable -category of space-valued presheaves, where is the large category of small spaces. The -category is large. If is an ordinary category, then we consider it as an -category using the nerve.
If not said differently, completeness or cocompleteness requires the existence of all limits or colimits indexed by very small index categories, respectively. ∎
Let be in .
Definition 4.2**.**
* satisfies closed descent if and for any uniform bornological coarse space and uniformly and coarsely excisive closed decomposition of the square*
[TABLE]
is cartesian.
Definition 4.3**.**
We let be the full subcategory of of presheaves which satisfy closed descent. Its objects will be called sheaves.
Lemma 4.4**.**
We have a localization
[TABLE]
Proof.
We use the theory developed in [Lur09, 5.5.4]. We let denote the Yoneda embedding. For every in and uniformly and coarsely excisive closed decomposition of we consider the morphism
[TABLE]
in . Furthermore we consider . Then by definition is the full subcategory of of objects which are local with respect to the small set of all such maps. The existence of the localization now follows from [Lur09, 5.5.4.15]. ∎
Lemma 4.5**.**
For every uniform bornological coarse space the presheaf satisfies descent.
Proof.
See [BE20, Lem. 3.12] for a similar argument. ∎
Let be in .
Definition 4.6**.**
* is homotopy invariant if for any uniform bornological coarse space the morphism induced by the projection is an equivalence.*
We let denote the full subcategory of of homotopy invariant sheaves.
Lemma 4.7**.**
We have a localization
[TABLE]
Proof.
For every in we consider the map in (using Lemma 4.5). Then is the full subcategory of of all objects which are local with respect to the small set of all such maps. The existence of the localization now follows from [Lur09, 5.5.4.15]. ∎
We call the homotopification.
Let be in and let denote a final object of .
Definition 4.8**.**
We say that vanishes on flasques if for every flasque uniform bornological coarse space we have an equivalence .
We let denote the full subcategory of of homotopy invariant sheaves which vanish on flasques.
Lemma 4.9**.**
We have a localization
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let denote an initial object of . For every flasque in we consider the morphism in . Then by definition is the full subcategory of of objects which are local with respect to the small set of all such maps. The existence of the localization now follows from [Lur09, 5.5.4.15]. ∎
For a uniform bornological coarse space let denote the subset of coarse entourages which are also uniform. Note that this subset is cofinal in .
Let be in .
Definition 4.10**.**
We say that is -continuous if for every uniform bornological coarse space the natural morphism is an equivalence.
We let denote the full subcategory of of homotopy invariant sheaves which vanish on flasques and are -continuous.
Lemma 4.11**.**
We have an adjunction
[TABLE]
Proof.
For every in we consider the morphism
[TABLE]
in . Then by definition is the full subcategory of objects which are local with respect to the small set of all maps as above. The existence of the localization now follows from [Lur09, 5.5.4.15]. ∎
Corollary 4.12**.**
The -categories from above, i.e., , , and are all presentable.
Definition 4.13**.**
We call the category of closed motivic uniform bornological coarse spaces and use the notation .
The following process of stabilization is analogous to the one described in [BE20, Sec. 4.1].
Definition 4.14**.**
We define the stable -category of closed motivic uniform bornological coarse spectra as the stabilization of in the world of the presentable stable -categories and left-adjoint functors.
We have a canonical functor
[TABLE]
By construction the category is a presentable stable -category.
We have a functor
[TABLE]
In view of Lemma 4.5 we could omit in this composition. For a uniform bornological coarse space we call the closed motive of .
By construction the functor is a -valued closed local homology theory. It is in fact the universal closed local homology theory.
Remark 4.15**.**
In order to distinguish the open case (constructed in an analogous manner using open decompositions in Definition 4.3) from the closed case we will use the notation
[TABLE]
for the corresponding functor in the open case. ∎
Corollary 4.16**.**
If is a stable, small cocomplete -category, then precomposition with induces an equivalence between the -categories of -valued closed local homology theories and small colimit preserving functors .
Remark 4.17**.**
If is presentable, then the assertion of Corollary 4.16 is immediate from the universal properties of the localizations leading to and the process of stabilization. For the general case see [BE20, Lem. 4.4] and the discussion before. ∎
For a closed local homology theory we use the notation also to denote the corresponding colimit preserving functor .
Remark 4.18**.**
The existence of non-trivial closed local homology theories (see Lemma 3.13 and Lemma 3.16) shows that the category is non-trivial. ∎
5 The universal coarsification functor
In this section we extend the construction given in Example 2.6 to a coarse homology theory called the universal coarsification.
Let be the category of pairs of bornological coarse spaces and coarse entourages of . A morphisms is a morphism of bornological coarse spaces such that . By Example 2.6 we have a functor
[TABLE]
which sends to the uniform bornological coarse space associated to the simplical complex and the family of sub-complexes for all bounded subsets of . We furthermore have a forgetful functor
[TABLE]
which sends the pair to .
Definition 5.1**.**
We define the universal coarsification functor as the left Kan-extension
[TABLE]
By the following proposition we can interpret also as a colimit preserving functor
[TABLE]
Proposition 5.2**.**
The universal coarsification functor is a -valued coarse homology theory.
Proof.
We verify the axioms for a coarse homology theory [BE20, Def. 4.22]. If is a bornological coarse space with coarse structure , then by the point-wise formula for the left Kan extension
[TABLE]
We have equivalences
[TABLE]
where for the second equivalence we use a cofinality consideration. Hence is -continuous.
Consider two morphisms in . If and are -close to each other, i.e., , then and are homotopic and by the homotopy invariance of . This implies that is coarsely invariant.
Note that . Let be an object of such that contains the diagonal of . For a subset of note that is a closed subset of . If with is a complementary pair, then for every in such that and the pair is a closed decomposition of the path quasi-metric space and hence uniformly and coarsely excisive (see Example 3.7). For sufficiently large in and since is excisive in the sense of Definition 3.8 for closed uniformly and coarsely excisive decompositions we get a cocartesian square
[TABLE]
We form the colimit over in and over in the coarse structure of . The lower right corner yields . For the lower left corner we first take the -colimit and then the -colimit. Then we obtain the object . In the upper right corner we get . For the upper left corner we note that and finally get . Since we have exhibited the square
[TABLE]
as a colimit of cocartesian squares it is cocartesian itself. In view of [BE20, Rem. 4.23] we can conclude that the functor satisfies excision.
Finally, assume that a bornological coarse space is flasque with flasqueness implemented by . Let be an entourage of such that and are -close to each other. Then is again an entourage of which contains . Now note that . Therefore is defined. This map implements flasqueness of , hence . In view of (5.2) by cofinality we see that vanishes on flasques. ∎
If be a closed -valued local homology theory, then we can define the coarse homology theory
[TABLE]
Definition 5.3**.**
The coarse homology theory will be called the coarsification of .
Example 5.4**.**
In Example 3.16 we have seen that for any closed locally finite homology theory we get a closed local homology theory . The coarsification is equivalent to the coarse homology theory , which is the coarsification of from [BE20, Def. 7.44]. ∎
Remark 5.5**.**
Proposition 5.2 is also true (with a slightly different argument for excision using open tubular neighbourhoods of the subsets and in addition homotopy invariance) if we work with instead of . ∎
Using the open version we can define the coarsification
[TABLE]
for open local homology theories .
Lemma 5.6**.**
If is a closed and open local homology theory, then we have an equivalence .
Proof.
Let be in with coarse structure . We can view as a colimit preserving functor and also . The chain
[TABLE]
gives now the desired equivalence. ∎
6 From coarse to local homology theories via
In this section we refine the forgetful functor from (3.1) to a local homology theory. We define
[TABLE]
Lemma 6.1**.**
* is a closed and open local homology theory.*
Proof.
The proof is straightforward and similar to the one of Lemma 3.13. ∎
We get a colimit-preserving functor
[TABLE]
For a -valued coarse homology theory we write
[TABLE]
for the associated local homology theory (compare with Lemma 3.13 where the notation was used).
Proposition 6.2**.**
We have a canonical equivalence
[TABLE]
Proof.
We have a functor
[TABLE]
that is defined on objects by . By -continuity of the left Kan extension of along (see (5.1) for the definition of ) is equivalent to . Let be in . Dirac measures provide a canonical inclusion of sets. This map is an equivalence
[TABLE]
of bornological coarse spaces. Hence we get an equivalence of functors from to
[TABLE]
Since is colimit preserving, the equivalence (6.5) induces an equivalence of left Kan extensions along :
[TABLE]
We finally interpret as a colimit preserving functor to get the desired equivalence. ∎
Corollary 6.3**.**
Every coarse homology theory is equivalent to the coarsification of the closed local homology theory . Similarly, every morphism between coarse homology theories is induced by coarsification from a morphism between the associated closed local homology theories.
7 Coarsifying spaces
Under certain finiteness conditions on the uniform bornological coarse space we can construct a morphism
[TABLE]
called the comparison morphism. We will furthermore show that it is an equivalence for simplicial complexes of bounded geometry which are uniformly contractible. Part of the material here is inspired by Roe [Roe96, Ch. 2, Part “Coarse algebraic topology”].
Let be a coarse space with a uniform structure.
Definition 7.1**.**
We say that the uniform structure is numerable if there is an entourage which is both coarse and uniform, and an equicontinuous and uniformly point-wise locally finite partition of unity such that is -bounded for all in .
Remark 7.2**.**
Here uniform point-wise local finiteness means that
[TABLE]
The condition of equicontinuity requires that for every positive real number there exists a uniform entourage of such that for all in and in we have the inequality . ∎
Let be a simplicial complex with the coarse and uniform structures both induced from the spherical path quasi metric.
Lemma 7.3**.**
If is finite-dimensional, then is numerable.
Proof.
We consider the entourage of width . We define the equicontinuous partition of unity using the baricentric coordinates of the simplices, where is the set of vertices of . If is a simplex in and is a point in the interior of , then exactly if is a vertex of . Hence for every point the number of vertices of with is bounded by .
The support of is -bounded for every vertex of . ∎
Let be a numerable uniform bornological coarse space. By numerability of the uniform structure we can choose an entourage which is coarse and uniform such that there exists an equicontinuous and uniformly point-wise locally finite partition of unity on such that is -bounded for every in . We choose a family of points in such that for all in . We can then define a map (not necessarily controlled)
[TABLE]
This map is uniform. Note that at this point we use the uniformity of the point-wise local finiteness condition, because we measure distances in the simplices of in the spherical metric and not in the maximum metric with respect to baricentric coordinates, cf. [BE20, Ex. 5.37].
The map defined in (7.1) can also be regarded as a morphism of uniform bornological coarse spaces . It induces a compatible system of morphisms
[TABLE]
for all sufficiently large entourages of , and by -continuity of , a morphism
[TABLE]
Definition 7.4**.**
For a numerable uniform bornological coarse space the morphism is called the comparison map. ∎
Remark 7.5**.**
We must assume that is numerable in order to produce a uniform map by (7.1).
In the classical approach to the coarsification of locally finite homology theories (see, e.g., Higson–Roe [HR95, Sec. 3]) one only needs a coarse and continuous map. In this case the same formula works, and we only have to assume that the members of the partition of unity have uniformly controlled support. The existence of such a partition of unity follows from the compatibility of the uniform and the coarse structure if we in addition assume that the underlying topological space of is paracompact.
In our approach we must work with uniform maps since this is required by functoriality of the cone functor which we employ below in order to construct the assembly map. ∎
Lemma 7.6**.**
Up to equivalence the comparison map does not depend on the choice of the partition of unity.
Proof.
We consider a second choice of partition of unity (without loss of generality for the same entourage ) and denote the associated morphism by . Then and are -close to each other and is a uniform homotopy between and . We now use that is homotopy invariant. ∎
Let be a morphism of uniform bornological coarse spaces which are assumed to be numerable.
Lemma 7.7**.**
We have an equivalence
[TABLE]
Proof.
After choosing partitions of unity for and with bounds and such that we have a square (not necessarily commuting) of morphisms of uniform bornological coarse spaces
[TABLE]
We now observe that the compositions and are close to each other and (linearly) homotopic. Hence they become equivalent after application of . ∎
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space.
Definition 7.8**.**
We say that is coarsifying if it is numerable and the comparison map is an equivalence.
Let be a local homology theory. If is coarsifying, then the comparison map induces an equivalence
[TABLE]
Let be a numerable uniform bornological coarse space.
Definition 7.9**.**
A morphism in is called a coarsifying approximation if is coarsifying and is an equivalence.
Let be a local homology theory. If is a coarsifying approximation, then by construction we have an equivalence
[TABLE]
In the following we discuss an important class of examples of coarsifying spaces, see also [BE20, Sec. 7.4].
Below is the unit ball in and is its boundary.
Definition 7.10**.**
A simplicial complex has bounded geometry if the number of vertices in the stars of its vertices is uniformly bounded. 2. 2.
A metric space is equicontinuously contractible, if for every in and for every equicontinuous family of maps there exists an equicontinuous family of maps with .111This is a slight strengthening of the notion of uniform contractibility which is commonly used in the coarse geometry literature.
Let be a simplicial complex. We get a uniform bornological coarse space by equipping with the bornology of bounded subsets and the metric coarse and uniform structures.
Let be a subcomplex of , be a metric space and be a morphism of bornological coarse spaces such that is uniformly continuous.
Lemma 7.11**.**
If is finite-dimensional and is equicontinuously contractible, then is close to a morphism of uniform bornological coarse spaces which extends , and which is in addition uniformly continuous.
Proof.
The proof given in [BE20, Lem. 7.72] (which covers the non-uniform version of this lemma) also works literally here. ∎
Let and be two simplicial complexes and be a morphism between the underlying bornological coarse spaces.
Lemma 7.12**.**
If and are equicontinuously contractible and is a coarse equivalence, then is close to a homotopy equivalence in and any two such homotopy equivalences are homotopic to each other.
Proof.
The proof is the same as for [BE20, Lem. 7.73] where we use Lemma 7.11 instead of Lemma [BE20, Lem. 7.72] in order to get the additional uniformity. ∎
Proposition 7.13**.**
If is a simplicial complex of bounded geometry which is equicontinuously contractible as a metric space, then the uniform bornological coarse space is coarsifying.
Proof.
Note that is finite-dimensional and hence is numerable by Lemma 7.3. The verification that the comparison map for is an equivalence is the core of the argument of [BE20, Prop. 7.80], which is itself taken from Nowak–Yu [NY12, Proof of Thm. 7.6.2].
As in the beginning of the proof of [BE20, Prop. 7.80] we construct a diagram of maps
[TABLE]
with being homotopic in to , and being homotopic to in . Here we use the Lemmas 7.11 and 7.12 instead of [BE20, Lem. 7.72 and 7.73]. The stronger assumption that is equicontinuously contractible (instead of just uniformly contractible as in [BE20]) implies that the resulting maps are uniformly continuous (instead of just continuous as in [BE20]).
We claim that the induced comparison map
[TABLE]
is an equivalence. This is in fact an instance of the following general fact222We thank the referee for suggesting this simple argument.. Assume that we have a diagram
[TABLE]
in a stable -category such that the maps admit retracts for all in and such that is equivalent to . Since in a stable -category retracts split as sums the diagram is equivalent to a sum of a constant diagram build from and identity maps and a diagram with zero transition maps. This implies that is an equivalence.
The inclusion is an equivalence of the underlying bornological coarse spaces and therefore induces the second equivalence in
[TABLE]
Example 7.14**.**
The following is taken from [BE20, Ex. 7.71] and originally goes back to Gromov [Gro93, Ex. 1.D1]:
Let be a finitely generated group admitting a model for its classifying space which is a finite simplicial complex. Then the universal cover of is a simplicial complex of bounded geometry which is equicontinuously contractible, i.e., is coarsifying by the above Proposition 7.13.
The group quipped with a word-metric becomes a metric space and hence a uniform bornological coarse space . The action of on provides a morphism in which depends on the choice of a base-point in . The morphism is an equivalence since is a coarse equivalence between the underlying bornological coarse spaces and hence is an equivalence. Therefore we have shown that is a coarsifying approximation. ∎
8 Cone functors
In this section we describe the cone functor and its germs at infinity . These functors play a crucial role in the construction of the coarse assembly map. After the introduction of the cone functor, we compare it with variants which occur in the literature on coarse geometry and which are useful in certain arguments.
In short, the cone of a uniform bornological coarse space is the bornological coarse space obtained from the bornological coarse space by replacing the coarse structure by the hybrid structure (cf. [BE20, Sec. 5.1]) associated to the family of subsets and the uniform structure on .
In the following we spell out the definition of the cone explicitly. Let denote the uniform structure of . We consider and its subset with the opposite of the inclusion relation. By [BE20, Def. 5.9] a function (i.e., an order preserving map) is called -admissible if for every uniform entourage in there exists an element in such that for all in .
Definition 8.1**.**
We let be the bornological coarse space defined as follows:
The underlying set of is . 2. 2.
The bornology of is generated by the subsets for all in and bounded subsets of . 3. 3.
The coarse structure of is generated by the entourages of the form , where is a coarse entourage of and
[TABLE]
for all -admissible functions and functions satisfying .
If is a morphism of uniform bornological coarse spaces, then the map
[TABLE]
is a morphism of bornological coarse spaces
[TABLE]
We thus have described the cone functor
[TABLE]
The maps of sets for in induce a natural transformation of functors
[TABLE]
We apply and take the cofibre in order to get a cofibre sequence (called the cone sequence)
[TABLE]
in which is functorial for in , where, by definiton
[TABLE]
Definition 8.2**.**
We call the resulting functor the germs at infinity of the cone.
In order to connect with [BE20, Sec. 5.2.3] note the following. Let be a uniform bornological coarse space. Then is a big family in . For every in the inclusion induces a coarse equivalence, and hence an equivalence in , where the subscript indicates that the structures on the subset are induced from . The collection of these equivalences for all in induces an equivalence
[TABLE]
in . The pair sequence of is therefore equivalent to the cone sequence (8.1), in particular we have an equivalence
[TABLE]
where the right-hand side is interpreted as in [BE20, (4.5)].
We refer to [BE20, Ex. 5.16] and [BEKW20, Sec. 9] for more details. In particular, in [BEKW20, Prop. 9.31] we show that is represented by the bornological coarse space
[TABLE]
where the push-out is interpreted in .
In the proof of Proposition 10.15 below it is useful to use a modified version of the cone over a uniform bornological coarse space which we will denote by .
Definition 8.3**.**
We let be the bornological coarse space defined as follows:
The underlying set of is . 2. 2.
The bornology of is generated by the subsets for all in and bounded subsets of 3. 3.
The coarse structure of is generated by the entourages of the form , where is a coarse entourage of and
[TABLE]
for all -admissible functions .
Note that the underlying bornological spaces of , and coincide. The identity map of the underlying sets induces a morphism
[TABLE]
which is natural in .
Lemma 8.4**.**
The morphism (8.3) induces an equivalence
[TABLE]
Proof.
We define a map of sets
[TABLE]
The map induces a morphism of bornological coarse spaces . Note that the compositions and are both given on the level of sets by the map . It suffices to show that the morphisms on or , respectively, induced by are equivalent to the respective identities.
We first consider the case of the modified cone . In this case we shall see that is coarsely homotopic to the identity (see [BE20, Defn. 4.17]). In order to define the homotopy we let the map be given by
[TABLE]
and set . Note that is bornological and controlled. Then we define the coarse homotopy
[TABLE]
(see [BE20, Defn. 4.14] for notation of coarse cylinders). One easily checks that this map is proper and controlled. Since is invariant under coarse homotopies (in particular using [BE20, Cor. 4.18]) we conclude that
[TABLE]
is equivalent to the identity.
The case of the cone is more involved. By Definition 8.1 the hybrid structure on is generated by entourages of the form . We fix the pair and . We can now choose a differentiable function such that and given by
[TABLE]
is controlled. To this end we must make sure that and are both uniformly bounded. Note that is also bornological. We then define the coarse homotopy
[TABLE]
between the maps induced by and by the same formula as in (8.4) as above. Indeed one checks that this map is proper and controlled. Hence we have an equivalence of morphisms
[TABLE]
We now perform the colimit of these equivalences over the poset of data . By -continuity we get the desired equivalence of
[TABLE]
with the identity. ∎
Note that in the definition of the modified cone we have not fixed the decay rate (encoded in the function in Definition 8.3.3) of the entourages in the -direction as and tend to . Let us fix a -admissible function which we assume to be monotone and such that . Note that here we assume that takes values in (instead of ), and therefore -admissibility is the same as cofinality.
Definition 8.5**.**
We let be the bornological coarse space defined as follows:
The underlying set of is . 2. 2.
The bornology of is generated by the subsets for all in and bounded subsets of . 3. 3.
The coarse structure of is generated by entourages of the form , where is a coarse entourage of .
Example 8.6**.**
Let be a metric space. Recall that its coarse structure is generated by the collection of entourages for all . If we set , then is the open cone over as considered at many places in the coarse geometry literature and usually called the Euclidean cone over . ∎
We have a canonical morphism
[TABLE]
given by the identity of the underlying sets.
Lemma 8.7**.**
If is monotone and satisfies , then the map (8.5) induces an equivalence
[TABLE]
Proof.
If is a second monotone function as in 8.3.3 such that for all in , then . Therefore the identity of the underlying maps induces a morphism
[TABLE]
By -continuity we have an equivalence
[TABLE]
It therefore suffices to show that
[TABLE]
is an equivalence for all pairs such that for all in .
We will show now that there exists a controlled function such that and . To this end set
[TABLE]
This function is monotonically increasing and satisfies . The idea is now to define to be . But to ensure that is controlled, we have to modify this idea slightly. We choose such that . We can find for all in by solving the equation
[TABLE]
where is a function with and
[TABLE]
More concretely, we can take
[TABLE]
where we set . Note that if , then the interval in the domain of integration yields the estimate
[TABLE]
For we set . The Lipschitz constant of on is bounded by . It follows that is controlled.
We consider the map of sets
[TABLE]
By construction it induces a morphism
[TABLE]
We now note that the compositions
[TABLE]
are both induced by .
It suffices to show that these morphisms are both coarsely homotopic to the identity.
We set and observe that the map
[TABLE]
is a suitable homotopy (i.e., proper and controlled) that does the job. The same construction also works in the case of . ∎
Remark 8.8**.**
The cone has a big family and we can define a modified version of the germs at infinity
[TABLE]
Similarly we can define
[TABLE]
The inclusion is a coarse equivalence for every in and the structure induced by or , respectively. In the latter case this is granted by the condition that . Therefore we get fibre sequences
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
respectively. By a comparison with the cone sequence (8.1) and by Lemmas 8.4 and 8.7 we get induced equivalences
[TABLE]
So we could have defined the germs at infinity of the cone using a modified version of the cone. But since the modified cones do not come from a hybrid structure construction we can not apply the general theorems (Homotopy Theorem and Decomposition Theorem) for hybrid spaces shown in [BE20, Sec. 5.2 & 5.3] in order to deduce the properties of this functor, see e.g. Lemma 9.2 below. For this reason we prefer to work with instead of or . ∎
Example 8.9**.**
Let be a geodesic, locally compact hyperbolic metric space. One can construct a nice compactification of by attaching the Gromov boundary . Note that is a compact metric space. Higson–Roe [HR95] showed that is coarsely homotopy equivalent to the Euclidean cone over its Gromov boundary . Together with the results of the present section we therefore get the equivalence
[TABLE]
Fukaya–Oguni [FO17] generalized the result of Higson–Roe to all proper coarsely convex spaces (examples are hyperbolic spaces, spaces and systolic complexes). Especially, we have the equivalence (8.6) where is a suitable version of Gromov’s boundary. ∎
9 The coarse assembly map
In this section we define the coarse assembly map.
Taking the functoriality of the cone sequence (8.1) into account and using the notation (6.1) we get a fibre sequence of functors from to
[TABLE]
which we call the cone sequence.
Remark 9.1**.**
The cone boundary map in the cone sequence (9.1) has a very nice interpretation as a forget-control map. For in the identity of the underlying sets induces a map
[TABLE]
see (8.2) for the domain. The difference between the domain and the target is that the domain has a smaller coarse structure. By [BEKW20, Prop. 9.31] the induced map
[TABLE]
is equivalent to the cone boundary. ∎
Lemma 9.2**.**
The functors satisfy excision for uniformly and coarsely excisive decompositions, and they are homotopy invariant.
Proof.
This is shown in [BEKW20, Sec. 9.4 & 9.5]. ∎
Remark 9.3**.**
Since we consider excision for decompositions which are uniform and coarse at the same time it is not necessary to assume that our uniform spaces are Hausdorff, see [BEKW20, Rem. 9.28].
Note further that we do not have to add adjectives like open or closed in the assumptions of Lemma 9.2. ∎
By Lemma 6.1 the functor vanishes on flasque spaces, but we do not expect that vanishes on them. Assume that is a flasque uniform bornological coarse space with flasqueness witnessed by the self-map . Then in general is not close to the identity, nevertheless is equivalent to [BE20, Cor. 5.31]. In fact, the map exhibits the cone as a weakly flasque bornological coarse space in the sense of [BEKW20, Def. 4.18], see [BEKW20, Proof of Prop. 11.22].
Definition 9.4** ([BEKW20, Def. 4.19]).**
A coarse homology theory is called strong if it vanishes on weakly flasque bornological coarse spaces.
Example 9.5**.**
Here is a list of examples of coarse homology theories which are strong:
Coarse ordinary homology [BEKW20]. 2. 2.
Coarse algebraic -homology with coefficients in an additive category [BEKW20]. 3. 3.
Coarse Waldhausen -homology of spaces with coefficients in a space [BKW]. 4. 4.
Coarse algebraic -homology with coefficients in a left-exact -category [BCKW]. 5. 5.
Coarse topological -homology with coefficients in a -category [BE].
In these references we actually consider the equivariant case for a group . For the present application we just need the case of the trivial group . ∎
Let be a cocomplete stable -category, and let be a coarse homology theory. We consider the compositions
[TABLE]
where for we interpret as a colimit preserving functor , see [BE20, Cor. 4.24].
Lemma 9.6**.**
If is strong, then the functors
[TABLE]
are closed and open local homology theories.
Proof.
For a uniform bornological coarse space we have a natural fibre sequence
[TABLE]
By Lemma 9.2 both functors and are homotopy invariant and satisfy excision. It remains to show that and are -continuous and vanish on flasques.
By Lemma 3.13 the functor is a closed and open local homology theory. In particular it is -continuous and vanishes on flasques.
The functor is invariant under coarsenings ([BEKW20, Prop. 9.33] and Definition 11.8) which implies the equivalence for sufficiently large entourages of . In particular, the functor is -continuous. It follows from the fibre sequence (9.2) that is -continuous.
If is flasque, then is weakly flasque. Since and also due to strongness of , we conclude, using the fibre sequence (9.2), that . ∎
Let be a strong coarse homology theory. We first post-compose the cone sequence (9.1) with . In view of the Lemmas 9.6 and 3.13 we get a fibre sequence of closed and open local homology theories
[TABLE]
We now pre-compose this fibre sequence with the the universal coarsification functor from Definition 5.1 and get a fibre sequence of coarse homology theories
[TABLE]
Let be a strong coarse homology theory.
Definition 9.7**.**
The coarse assembly map is the natural transformation between coarse homology theories
[TABLE]
defined as the composition of with the identification from (6.3).
Remark 9.8**.**
Note that the universal coarsification functor takes values in . Therefore, in order to ensure that the domain of the coarse assembly map is well-defined, we need that is a closed local homology theory, interpreted here as a colimit preserving functor , Corollary 4.16. For this reason we have to assume that is strong, because this is an assumption in Lemma 9.6. ∎
Remark 9.9**.**
It is easy to see by inspecting the constructions that the coarse assembly map is natural in the strong coarse homology theory . If is a natural transformation between strong coarse homology theories, then
[TABLE]
is a natural commuting square. ∎
Remark 9.10**.**
By Lemma 9.6 we know that is a closed and open local homology theory. In view of Lemma 5.6 we can replace by the open variant without changing the assembly map. ∎
Remark 9.11**.**
It follows from the above fibre sequence (9.1) that for a bornological coarse space the coarse assembly map
[TABLE]
is an equivalence if and only if . Therefore we have identified as the coarse homology theory which detects the obstructions to being an equivalence. ∎
Remark 9.12**.**
At the moment the local homology theory appearing in the domain of the coarse assembly map might appear mysterious. In Proposition 11.23 we calculate the evaluation of this homology theory on finite-dimensional, locally finite simplicial complexes under the assumption that is additive. ∎
Remark 9.13**.**
In the case of coarse -homology there is the analytic coarse assembly map [HR95]. It is only defined for in presented by a proper metric space. It is a homomorphism from the locally finite -homology groups of to its coarse -homology groups. It is a non-trivial matter to compare our proposed version of the assembly map with the one in [HR95]. We will discuss this problem in [BEL].333This comparison is also considered in Section 16 of the arXiv-preprint version v2 of the present paper.
The analytic coarse assembly map is closely related with index theory. In contrast, the coarse assembly map introduced in Definition 9.7 is of geometric and homotopy theoretic nature. In contrast to the analytic coarse assembly map it is a natural transformation between coarse homology theories. This fact allows to apply the comparison theorems shown in [BE20], see e.g. Theorem 10.4. ∎
10 Isomorphism results
In this section we discuss conditions which imply that the coarse assembly map in (9.4) is an equivalence. We will discuss the cases of finite asymptotic dimension, finite decomposition complexity, and scaleable spaces. Our goal is to show that in many cases the reasons for the validity of the coarse Baum–Connes or Farrell–Jones conjectures for in fact imply in greater generality that the coarse assembly map is an equivalence for suitable coarse homology theories .
Note that the coarse assembly map (Definition 9.7) is a morphism between coarse homology theories. So it is clear from the outset that the property of of being an equivalence only depends on the coarse motivic spectrum .
10.1 Finite asymptotic dimension
Let be a bornological coarse space with bornology and coarse structure , see Section 2. Recall that is called discrete as a coarse space if is the minimal coarse structure consisting of all subsets of the diagonal.
Let be a bornological coarse space, and let be a strong coarse homology theory.
Proposition 10.1**.**
If is discrete as a coarse space, then the coarse assembly map is an equivalence.
Proof.
Since is discrete as a coarse space we have as uniform bornological coarse spaces if we equip with the discrete uniform structure. By [BEKW20, Prop. 9.35] the boundary map of the cone sequence (9.1) induces an equivalence
[TABLE]
Let denote the cocomplete stable full subcategory of generated by the motives of all discrete bornological coarse spaces. Let be a strong coarse homology theory. Proposition 10.1 has the following immediate consequence.
Corollary 10.2**.**
The coarse assembly map is an equivalence for all bornological coarse spaces such that .
Let be a coarse space with coarse structure .
Definition 10.3**.**
* has weakly finite asymptotic dimension if there exists a cofinal set of entourages in such that has finite asymptotic dimension.*
Let be a bornological coarse space. We apply Definition 10.3 to its underlying coarse space. Let be a strong coarse homology theory.
Theorem 10.4**.**
If has weakly finite asymptotic dimension, then the coarse assembly map is an equivalence.
Proof.
Since the coarse assembly map is a natural transformation between coarse homology theories, it extends to a natural transformation between colimit preserving functors defined on (see [BE20, Cor. 4.24 and Rem. 4.27 ] for a precise interpretation of this statement). As a consequence of Corollary 10.2 this extension is an equivalence on motives in .
The assumptions on the space imply by [BE20, Thm. 5.59] that the motive belongs to . ∎
In the following we use Corollary 10.2 in order to show that the homology theory inherits some pleasant additional properties from .
Let be a coarse homology theory and assume in addition that is complete. If is a set and is a point in , then we can define by excision a projection
[TABLE]
The family of these projections for all in induces a map
[TABLE]
Definition 10.5** ([BE20, Def. 6.4]).**
* is called additive if (10.2) is an equivalence for every set .*
Let be a strong coarse homology theory.
Proposition 10.6**.**
If is additive, then is additive.
Proof.
Since and are discrete, the coarse assembly maps and are equivalences. We have the following diagram
[TABLE]
which commmutes by the naturality of the assembly map. For the right vertical equivalence we use that is additive, and that preserves products by stability of . We conclude that the morphism marked by is an equivalence and hence the additivity of . ∎
In [BE20, Lem. 2.25] we observed that admits (very small) coproducts. If is a coarse homology theory, then implicitly is cocomplete and therefore admits (very small) coproducts as well. We can consider the property that preserves coproducts [BE20, Def. 6.9].
Let be a strong coarse homology theory.
Proposition 10.7**.**
If preserves coproducts, then preserves coproducts.
Proof.
Let be a family in . In [BE20, Lem. 4.12] it is shown that the fibre of the canonical map
[TABLE]
belongs to . We apply the extension of the assembly map to the corresponding fibre sequence and obtain the following commuting diagram:
[TABLE]
The left vertical morphism is an equivalence since belongs to . This implies that the right square is a pull-back square. The lower right horizontal morphism is an equivalence since preserves coproducts. We conclude that the morphism marked by is an equivalence. Hence preserves coproducts. ∎
Remark 10.8**.**
If is a set, then we have an isomorphism , where the coproduct is taken in . In particular, if is infinite, then the natural morphism (given by the identity map of ) is not an isomorphism. Additivity of a coarse homology theory is a condition which differs from the condition of being coproduct preserving. A coarse homology theory may have both properties at the same time, and in this case is equivalent to the natural inclusion
[TABLE]
10.2 Finite decomposition complexity
Guentner, Tessera and Yu [GTY12] introduced a weaker condition than finite asymptotic dimension called finite decomposition complexity (FDC). In [BEKW19] we investigated under which assumptions on the condition that a bornological coarse space has FDC implies that (even in the equivariant case).
The results in [BEKW19] require the additional assumptions that is weakly additive and admits transfers. In the following we explain these conditions.
In [BEKW] we introduced the category of bornological coarse spaces with transfers. It is an enlargement of the category by adding transfer morphisms.
Given a set and a bornological coarse space we can form the bornological coarse space (see [BEKW20, Ex. 2.17]). Let denote the inclusion of the component with index which is a morphism in . By design contains a transfer morphism
[TABLE]
which morally is the sum of the inclusion morphisms.
If is a coarse homology theory, then the construction of an extension to the category should be guided by the idea that the morphism
[TABLE]
places identical copies of a cycle for on each copy of in .
A coarse homology theory with transfers is a functor such that its restriction along the inclusion is a coarse homology theory. We say that extends .
One can show that for every in the composition
[TABLE]
is equivalent to
[TABLE]
Let be a coarse homology theory.
Definition 10.9** ([BEKW, Def. 1.2]).**
* admits transfers if it has an extension to a coarse cohomology theory with transfers.*
A coarse homology theory is called strongly additive [BEKW20, Def. 3.12] if admits products and sends free unions to products, i.e., if
[TABLE]
for every family of bornological coarse spaces, where the map is induced by the family of projections given by excision. For the definition of weak additivity (appearing in the assumptions of Theorem 10.11 below) we refer to [BEKW19, Def. 2.23]. Note that strong additivity implies weak additivity and additivity in the sense of Definition 10.5.
Example 10.10**.**
The coarse homology theories listed in the Example 9.5 are all strongly additive and admit transfers:
Coarse ordinary homology [BEKW]. 2. 2.
Coarse algebraic -homology with coefficients in an additive category [BEKW]. 3. 3.
Coarse Waldhausen -homology of spaces with coefficients in a space [BKW]. 4. 4.
Coarse algebraic -homology with coefficients in a left-exact -category [BCKW]. 5. 5.
Coarse topological -homology with coefficients in a -category [BE].
Let be a bornological coarse space, and let be a strong coarse homology theory.
Theorem 10.11**.**
Assume:
* is compactly generated.* 2. 2.
* is weakly additive.* 3. 3.
* admits transfers.* 4. 4.
* has FDC for a cofinal set of entourages of .*
Then the coarse assembly map is an equivalence.
Proof.
This follows from [BEKW19, Thm. 1.3] and Remark 9.11. ∎
Remark 10.12**.**
Finite asymptotic dimension implies FDC. Therefore the above Theorem 10.11 generalizes Theorem 10.4 provided has the required additional properties. ∎
10.3 Scaleable spaces
In the literature on the coarse Baum–Connes conjecture it is an important observation that the existence of a suitable scaling implies that the analytic coarse assembly map in coarse -homology is an isomorphism [HR95]. In the following we show analogous results for general coarse homology theories.
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space, and let be a morphism of uniform bornological coarse spaces. We assume that the uniform structure of is induced by a metric.
Definition 10.13**.**
The morphism is a scaling if it satisfies the following conditions:
* is -Lipschitz.* 2. 2.
*For every coarse entourage and uniform entourage of there exists in such that . * 3. 3.
For every coarse entourage of the union is also a coarse entourage of .
Example 10.14**.**
Assume that is a proper metric space whose structures are induced from the metric. If is a map which is -Lipschitz and proper, then is a scaling in the sense of Definition 10.13. Note that in order to be a scaling in the sense of [HR95, Def. 7.1] one must in addition assume that is coarsely and properly homotopic to the identity. These conditions will be added in Definition 10.18 which characterizes coarse scalings. ∎
Using the existence of a scaling for we want to deduce that for suitable coarse homology theories . Similarly as in the proof of [HR95, Thm. 7.2] the argument is based on an Eilenberg swindle. In order to make this work in our abstract setting we need to assume that the homology theory admits transfers (Definition 10.9).
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space, and let be a morphism. Furthermore let be a coarse homology theory.
Proposition 10.15**.**
Assume:
* is a scaling.* 2. 2.
. 3. 3.
* admits transfers.* 4. 4.
.
Then .
Before starting with the proof of the above proposition, let us first prove the following statement. Recall Definition 8.3 of the modified cone . Let be a scaling. We define the map of sets
[TABLE]
Lemma 10.16**.**
The map is a morphism of bornological coarse spaces
[TABLE]
Proof.
First we show that is proper. Let be a bounded subset in and be in and consider the bounded subset in . Then is contained in . The restriction of to is proper for every in since the maps and are proper. Therefore we can conclude that is bounded.
We now show that is controlled. It is easy to check using 10.13.3 and the fact that is -Lipschitz that is a morphism of bornological coarse spaces
[TABLE]
Let be a function such that . For simplicity we can assume that is monotonously decreasing. It determines a function by as used in Definition 8.3.3. Let be a coarse entourage of and be a coarse entourage of for in . Then we must show that
[TABLE]
for for some function having the same properties as . This boils down to the assertion that for all in we have for all in with and with (here we use the monotonicity of ). Here we set for negative .
We define the monotonously decreasing function
[TABLE]
By 10.13.2 we have . We define
[TABLE]
In view of 10.13.1 this function would do the job if . Let in be given. Then we choose in so large that for all in with . Let furthermore in be so large that for all in . If in satisfies , then . ∎
Proof of Proposition 10.15.
Let be an extension of to a coarse homology theory with transfers. An application of the relation (10.4) yields a decomposition
[TABLE]
where is the restriction of to . We consider the following commuting diagram in :
[TABLE]
where is given by . Note that the morphism is close to the identity.
Since is close to the identity the commutativity of the above diagram implies
[TABLE]
from which we get, using (10.5),
[TABLE]
We now consider the diagram (note that we are now using the cone instead of the modified cone as above)
[TABLE]
whose horizontal sequences are two copies of the cone sequence and the non-labeled vertical maps are induced by the identity. The diagram is a picture of two morphisms between fibre sequences (one is the identity) which we want to compare. The Condition 4 yields a morphism such that
[TABLE]
We then have
[TABLE]
where the equivalence marked by follows from the commutativity of the left squares in (10.7), and the last equivalence is a consequence of Condition 2.
In view of Lemma 8.4 we get the same relations if we replace the cone by the modified cone. The equivalence (10.6) implies that (using in the second line (10.8) for the modified cone)
[TABLE]
If we compose this equivalence from the right with and use (10.9), then we get
[TABLE]
From (10.10) we conclude that
[TABLE]
which in view of Lemma 8.4 implies . ∎
Our next concern are the conditions 10.15.2 and 10.15.4. Condition 10.15.2 is satisfied, e.g., if is coarsely homotopic to the identity map. In the literature this is a standard assumption on a scaling; see, e.g., Higson–Roe [HR95].
Condition 10.15.4 is more problematic. If is homotopic to the identity in the sense of , then 10.15.4 is satisfied by the homotopy invariance of the functor , Unfortunately, in applications is rarely homotopic to the identity in the sense of . The standard assumption made e.g. in Higson–Roe [HR95] is that is homotopic to the identity map, i.e., that is homotopic to the identity in the sense of (i.e., after forgetting the coarse and the uniform structures, but the homotopies are still required to be proper). If is additive, then has better homotopy invariance properties on nice spaces which we will use in the following to make the standard assumption of Higson–Roe also work in our situation.
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space, and let be a coarse homology theory. Note that this implicitly implies that is stable and cocomplete.
Lemma 10.17**.**
Assume:
* is homotopy equivalent (in ) to a locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complex equipped with the metric structures.* 2. 2.
* is complete.* 3. 3.
* is additive.* 4. 4.
* is homotopic to .*
Then .
Proof.
This is an immediate consequence of Corollary 11.24 which will be shown below. ∎
In the following definition of a coarse scaling we introduce a class of scalings with additional properties ensuring that Proposition 10.15 is applicable.
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space whose uniform structure is induced by a metric, and let be a scaling.
Definition 10.18**.**
The scaling is a coarse scaling if it satisfies in addition:
* is coarsely homotopic to the identity.* 2. 2.
* is properly homotopic to the identity.*
Remark 10.19**.**
A scaling in the sense of [HR95, Def. 7.1] is a coarse scaling; see also Example 10.14. ∎
The following corollary is an analog of Higson–Roe [HR95, Thm. 7.2]. Assumption 10.20.4 does not occur in [HR95] because the analogue of our is the functor in the notation of [HR95] which has good homotopy invariance properties replacing the application of our Lemma 10.17.
Corollary 10.20**.**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* is additive and admits transfers.* 3. 3.
The uniform structure of is induced by a metric. 4. 4.
* is homotopy equivalent (in ) to a locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complex equipped with the metric structures.* 5. 5.
* admits a coarse scaling (see Definition 10.18). *
Then and the cone boundary is an equivalence.
Proof.
This follows from Proposition 10.15. Lemma 10.17 verifies Assumption 10.15.4. ∎
Example 10.21**.**
A typical example of a uniform bornological coarse space which admits a coarse scaling is a Euclidean cone. Let be a subset of the unit sphere in a Hilbert space, and let be the cone over with the metric induced from the Hilbert space. We consider as a uniform bornological coarse space with all structures induced from the metric. Then the map
[TABLE]
is a coarse scaling.
If has a finite-dimensional, locally finite triangulation with a uniform bound on the size of its simplices, then so does . In this case Corollary 10.20 can be applied to . ∎
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space, and let be a strong coarse homology theory.
Theorem 10.22**.**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* is additive and admits transfers.* 3. 3.
The uniform structure of is induced by a metric. 4. 4.
* is homotopy equivalent (in ) to a locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complex equipped with the metric structures.* 5. 5.
* admits a coarse scaling (see Definition 10.18).* 6. 6.
* is coarsifying (Definition 7.8).*
Then and therefore the coarse assembly map is an equivalence.
Proof.
Since is coarsifying and is a local homology theory (Lemma 9.6) we have an equivalence . We now apply Corollary 10.20 in order to conclude that . ∎
Example 10.23**.**
Let and be as in Example 10.21. In general we can not expect to be coarsifying even if is compact and the Hilbert space is finite-dimensional. Especially, we do not know if the analogue of [HR95, Prop. 4.3] is true in our generality. By using Proposition 7.13 one can prove that is coarsifying if is a finite simplicial complex. Hence one can apply Theorem 10.22 to Euclidean cones over finite complexes.
Therefore we get the analogue of [HR95, Cor. 7.3] under the additional assumption of being a finite simplicial complex (instead of a finite-dimensional compact metric space).
Every complete, simply-connected, non-positively curved Riemannian manifold is coarsely homotopy equivalent to the Euclidean cone over a finite-dimensional sphere. Since a finite-dimensional sphere has a finite triangulation, Theorem 10.22 provides a generalization of [HR95, Cor. 7.4].
Because of the Assumptions 10.22.4 and 10.22.6 we are not able to apply Theorem 10.22 to cones over arbitrary compact metric spaces. In particular, we do not obtain the analogue of [HR95, Cor. 8.2] asserting the coarse Baum–Connes conjecture for all hyperbolic (proper) metric spaces.
We do not know whether we should expect that the assmbly map is an equivalence for all hyperbolic (proper) metric spaces or Euclidean cones over finite-dimensional compact metric spaces and arbitrary coarse homology theories satisfying the Assumptions 10.22.2 and 10.22.1. ∎
The next corollary specializes Theorem 10.22 by utilizing a convenient condition on the space to be coarsifying. Let be a strong coarse homology theory. Let be a simplicial complex, and let be the associated uniform bornological coarse space.
Corollary 10.24**.**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* is additive and admits transfers.* 3. 3.
* has bounded geometry.* 4. 4.
* is equicontinuously contractible.* 5. 5.
* admits a coarse scaling.*
Then the coarse assembly map is an equivalence.
Proof.
Combine Proposition 7.13 with Proposition 10.22. ∎
Example 10.25**.**
If is a tree or an affine Bruhat–Tits building of bounded geometry, then Corollary 10.24 applies to . Hence we obtain the analogue of [HR95, Cor. 7.5]. ∎
Example 10.26**.**
All coarse homology theories listed in Example 10.10 are strong, additive, and admit transfers. Moreover, their target categories are complete. Therefore the above theorems apply to them.
Examples of spaces admitting coarse scalings and which are homotopy equivalent (in ) to uniformly contractible simplicial complexes of bounded geometry are simply-connected complete Riemannian manifolds with sectional curvatures satisfying for a positive constant . The coarse scaling is in this case given by, e.g., , where we have fixed a base point in , is the Riemannian exponential map, and is its inverse. ∎
11 Calculation of
The goal of this section is to provide a computation of in terms of the value of at the one-point space (see Proposition 11.23). For this calculation we must require that is additive
In this section we assume that is a stable and complete -category. For the moment this suffices to construct the locally finite evaluation. Later we will in addition assume that is cocomplete.
Let be a functor and a small uniform bornological coarse space.
Definition 11.1**.**
We define the locally finite evaluation of at by
[TABLE]
where runs over all bounded subsets of .
Similary as in [BE20, Rem. 7.16] one can turn the above definition into a construction of a functor .
Remark 11.2**.**
Here are the details. We consider the category of pairs , where is in and is a bounded subset of . A morphism is a morphism in with . We have the functors
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
We then define the functor as the right Kan extension of along :
[TABLE]
This right Kan extension exists by our assumption on , and the formula (11.1) follows from the pointwise formula for the evaluation of the right Kan extension. ∎
Remark 11.3**.**
If is induced from a functor by , then we have an equivalence
[TABLE]
where is exactly the locally finite evaluation as defined in [BE20, Def. 7.15]. ∎
We have a natural morphism .
Lemma 11.4**.**
If is homotopy invariant, then so is .
Proof.
The proof is the same as the one of [BE20, Lem. 7.35]. One has just to observe that the subsets of the form of are cofinal in the bounded subsets of . ∎
Lemma 11.5**.**
If satisfies excision for decompositions into closed or open subsets, then so does .
Proof.
The argument is the same as for [BE20, Lem. 7.36]. ∎
Remark 11.6**.**
Note that open or closed excision in the sense of Definition 3.8 involves additional assumptions on the subsets. If satisfies excision in the sense of this Definition, then it is not clear what kind of excision properties has. The problem is that the intersection with does not necessarily preserve coarsely or uniformly excisive pairs.
In Lemma 11.11 below we show that under the additional assumption that is invariant under coarsening the functor at least satisfies excision for decompositions of simplicial complexes into closed subsets. ∎
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space.
Definition 11.7**.**
A coarsening of is a uniform bornological coarse space obtained from by replacing the coarse structure by a larger one which is still compatible with the bornology.
Note that the identity of the underlying sets is a morphism of uniform bornological coarse spaces.
Let be a functor.
Definition 11.8**.**
We say that is invariant under coarsening if for every uniform bornological coarse space and coarsening the induced morphism is an equivalence.
Example 11.9**.**
The functor is invariant under coarsening, see [BEKW20, Prop. 9.33]. ∎
Lemma 11.10**.**
If is invariant under coarsening, then so is .
Proof.
The assertion follows immediately from the defining formula (11.1). ∎
A simplicial complex has a spherical path quasi metric which induces a metric uniform, a metric coarse, and a metric bornological structure. If we consider a simplicial complex as an object of equipped with these structures, then we say that it has the metric structures.
Let be a simplicial complex with the metric uniform and coarse structures, a compatible bornology (not necessarily the metric one), and with a decomposition into closed subsets.
Lemma 11.11**.**
If satisfies closed excision in the sense of Definition 3.8 and is invariant under coarsening, then we have a push-out square
[TABLE]
Proof.
We use that the cofibre of a map of cocartesian squares is a cocartesian square.
In the limit (11.1) we can restrict to run only over the interiors of subcomplexes. Then is again a simplicial complex and is a decomposition of into closed subsets.
Note that in the terms in (11.1) we must equip the set with the uniform bornological coarse structures induced from . The uniform structure on is also induced from the path-metric of , but this is in general not true for the coarse structure. Since is invariant under coarsening, we can, without changing the value of on the spaces , equip these spaces with the smaller coarse structures associated to the intrinsic path metrics.
Using Example 3.7 we now see that excisiveness of in the sense of Definition 3.8 can be applied to the decompositions of the complexes occuring in the limit (11.1). We therefore have expressed the square (11.2) as a limit of cofibres of maps of cocartesian squares, i.e., as a limit of cocartesian squares. Since is stable, cartesian and cocartesian squares in are the same. Hence (11.2) itself is a cocartesian square. ∎
Remark 11.12**.**
If is homotopy invariant, is invariant under coarsening, and satisfies open excision in the sense of Definition 3.8, then a modified argument shows that also in this case the square (11.2) is a push-out provided we restrict to decompositions of into subcomplexes. ∎
Let be a functor and assume that is excisive (in any of the senses discussed above). If is a uniform bornological coarse space with the discrete uniform and coarse structures and is a point in , then analogously as in (10.1) we have a natural projection morphism .
Definition 11.13**.**
* is called additive if for every uniform bornological coarse space with the discrete uniform and coarse structures and the minimal bornology the natural morphism*
[TABLE]
induced by the projections is an equivalence.
The product exists by our standing assumption for in this section.
Let be a functor.
Lemma 11.14**.**
If is excisive (in any of the senses discussed above), then is additive.
Proof.
The argument is completely analogous to the proof of [BE20, Lem. 7.30]. ∎
Let be a functor.
Lemma 11.15**.**
Assume:
* satisfies closed excision in the sense of Definition 3.8.* 2. 2.
* is homotopy invariant.* 3. 3.
* invariant under coarsening.* 4. 4.
* is additive.*
Then for every locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complex equipped with the metric structures the natural morphism is an equivalence.
Proof.
We argue by a finite induction over the dimension.
Assume that is zero-dimensional. Then is discrete as a uniform and coarse space and has the minimal bornology. The functor is additive by assumption, and the functor is additive by Lemma 11.14. Since we can conclude that .
In the higher-dimensional case we use that local finiteness of implies that its bornology is generated by the finite subcomplexes.
Assume now that the assertion is true for complexes of dimension . If the complex is -dimensional, then we can decompose into a closed tubular neighbourhood of thickness of its -skeleton and a disjoint union of -simplices of size (see the picture on Page 11). The intersection is then a disjoint union of tubular neighbourhoods of thickness of the boundaries of simplices of size .
This closed decomposition is coarsely and uniformly excisive. Hence we can apply excision for in the sense of Definition 3.8. For we use Lemma 11.11.
We use homotopy invariance in order to replace the evaluation on by the evaluation on the -skeleton itself. Furthermore, we can contract the -simplices of size in to the set of their centers. Finally, we contract to the set of the boundaries of these simplices of size .
We use invariance under coarsening (note that is also invariant under coarsening by Lemma 11.10) in order to replace the induced coarse structures by the coarse structures induced by the intrinsic path-quasi-metric on the -skeleton and on and the discrete coarse structure on the set of centers of -simplices. The bornology on induced from is the minimal one.
Then we can apply the induction assumption to , (which is also -dimensional) and . ∎
Remark 11.16**.**
In Assumption 1 of Lemma 11.15 one could replace “closed” by “open” without changing the conclusion. The argument must be slightly modified by using the corresponding open versions of the decompositions in the induction steps. ∎
Let be a coarse homology theory such that is complete. Recall Definition 10.5 of the notion of additivity and note that additivity follows from strong additivity [BEKW20, Def. 3.12].
Proposition 11.17**.**
If is additive and is a locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complex equipped with the metric structures, then the natural morphism
[TABLE]
is an equivalence.
Proof.
We will check that the assumptions of Lemma 11.15 are satisfied. By Lemma 9.2 the functor satisfies excision in the sense of Definition 3.8 and is homotopy invariant. Hence has these properties. Further, by Example 11.9 the functor is invariant under coarsening.
Let be a uniform bornological coarse space which is discrete both as a uniform and as a coarse space. Then
[TABLE]
by [BEKW20, Prop. 9.33]. Using that is additive at the marked equivalence in the following chain of equivalences, we have for a uniform bornological coarse space with the discrete uniform and coarse structures and the minimal bornology
[TABLE]
showing that is additive. ∎
Following Weiss–Williams [WW95], for a homotopy invariant functor we can construct a best approximation of by a homology theory. It is given by the Kan extension procedure described in the proof of [BE20, Prop. 7.43] which produces a functor and a natural transformation
[TABLE]
Here are the details. We assume that is stable, complete and cocomplete. Let be the category of pairs , where is in and is a continuous map. On we consider the uniform bornological coarse structure induced by the spherical metric. Then is automatically a morphism in . A morphism is a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
where is a morphism in and is induced by a morphism in the category . We have functors
[TABLE]
Definition 11.18**.**
Then we define by a left Kan-extension of along :
[TABLE]
The objectwise formula for the left Kan extension yields the following formula for the values of :
[TABLE]
where the colimit runs over the category of simplices of .
Since is stable and cocomplete, it is tensored over the small category of very small spectra. We have a suspension spectrum functor , and we denote by the canonical forgetful functor.
Lemma 11.19**.**
We have an equivalence of functors
[TABLE]
from to . In particular, is homotopy invariant and satisfies open excision.
Proof.
Since is homotopy invariant, the projection induces an equivalence
[TABLE]
Using the equivalence (which is natural in ) and the fact that commutes with colimits, we get the equivalence (11.3).
The functor is homotopy invariant and satisfies open excision. This implies that the functor is homotopy invariant and satisfies open excision. ∎
Corollary 11.20**.**
*The functor is an open local homology theory, it is additive, and it is invariant under coarsening. *
Proof.
We let be the open local homology theory associated to the object of [BE20, Ex. 7.40]. By Lemma 11.19 we have
[TABLE]
The right-hand side is an open local homology theory by Lemma 3.16. Additivity of follows from Lemma 11.14 since satisfies excision by Lemma 11.19. Finally, by (11.4) the functor is completely independent of the coarse structure and hence in particular invariant under coarsening. ∎
Lemma 11.21**.**
If satisfies the assumptions stated in Lemma 11.15, and is a countable, locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complex equipped with the metric structures, then the natural morphism
[TABLE]
is an equivalence.
Proof.
The argument is the same as for Lemma 11.15. It is an induction over the dimension of . In the zero-dimensional case we just need additivity of and . Additivity of follows from Lemma 11.14 and additivity of was shown in Corollary 11.20.
For the induction step we need that the functors and are homotopy invariant, invariant under coarsenings and excisive for the decompositions of simplicial complexes as depicted on Page 11. That has these properties was already explained in the proof of Lemma 11.15.
Homotopy invariance and invariance under coarsening of is shown in Corollary 11.20. Only the required excisiveness of is not completely obvious: here we have to use homotopy invariance of to transform the closed decompositions into open ones. ∎
Remark 11.22**.**
The conclusion of Lemma 11.21 is also true if we assume that satisfies open excision instead of closed excision. In this case we have to slightly modify the proof similarly as in Remark 11.16. ∎
Let be a coarse homology theory, and let be a uniform bornological coarse space. In the following we omit to write the forgetful functor in front of in order to simplify the notation.
Proposition 11.23**.**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* is additive.* 3. 3.
* is homotopy equivalent in to a locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complex equipped with the metric structures.*
Then we have an equivalence
[TABLE]
Proof.
We first observe that . Then we just combine Proposition 11.17, Lemma 11.21 with , and (11.3). ∎
Note that the functor is naturally defined on and is locally finite, homotopy invariant (in the sense of , i.e., for proper homotopies which are not necessarily uniform), and satisfies open excision. Therefore the functor for spaces in (which are homotopy equivalent in the sense of to a locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complexes equipped with the metric structures), also has these stronger homological properties. In particular:
Let be a coarse homology theory. Furthermore, let be in and be morphisms in .
Corollary 11.24**.**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* is additive.* 3. 3.
* and are homotopy equivalent in to locally finite and finite-dimensional simplicial complexes equipped with the metric structures.* 4. 4.
* and are properly homotopic (there is a homotopy which is continuous and proper after forgetting the coarse and uniform structures).*
Then is equivalent to .
12 Comparison of coarse homology theories
In ordinary homotopy theory a transformation between spectrum-valued homology theories which induces an equivalence on a point is an equivalence at least on all -complexes. In the present section we consider an analogous statement for coarse homology theories.
Assume that we have a transformation of -valued coarse homology theories which induces an equivalence . In this section we provide sufficient conditions on a bornological coarse space and on the theories and which imply that is an equivalence. The main result is formulated in Theorem 12.3.
Let be a bornological coarse space. The following definitions are from [BE20, Def. 7.75], [BE20, Def. 7.77].
Definition 12.1**.**
**
* has strongly bounded geometry if it has the minimal bornology compatible with the coarse structure and for every coarse entourage of the number of points in -bounded subsets of is uniformly bounded.* 2. 2.
* has bounded geometry if it is equivalent to a bornological coarse space with strongly bounded geometry.*
Let be a bornological coarse space, and let be a strong coarse homology theory.
Proposition 12.2**.**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* is additive.* 3. 3.
* has bounded geometry.*
Then we have an equivalence
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since is by Lemma 3.16 an open local homology theory, it can be composed with the open version . Since both sides of the equivalence are coarsely invariant we can assume that is a bornological coarse space of strongly bounded geometry. Then for every entourage of the complex is a locally finite, finite-dimensional simplicial complex. Hence by Proposition 11.23 we get an equivalence
[TABLE]
Forming the colimit over the entourages of and using (5.2) and its open version we get the claimed equivalence
[TABLE]
In the second equivalence Lemma 5.6 can be applied (with in place of ) since is a closed and open local homology theory by Lemma 9.6 and since is strong.∎
Let be a transformation between strong -valued coarse homology theories, and let be a bornological coarse space.
Theorem 12.3**.**
Assume:
* is complete.* 2. 2.
* and are additive.* 3. 3.
* is an equivalence.* 4. 4.
* is of bounded geometry.* 5. 5.
The coarse assembly maps and are equivalences (Definition 9.7).
Then is an equivalence.
Proof.
By an inspection of the arguments going into the proof of Proposition 12.2 one checks that the asserted equivalence is natural in . This gives the left commuting square in the following diagram. Similarly for the right square we use that the coarse assembly map is natural in .
[TABLE]
The left vertical morphism is an equivalence by Condition 3. We conclude that the right vertical morphism is an equivalence, too. ∎
We can use Theorems 10.4, 10.11 and 10.22 in order to check Condition 5 in the statement of Theorem 12.3.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[BCKW] U. Bunke, D.-Ch. Cisinski, D. Kasprowski, and Ch. Winges. Controlled objects in left-exact ∞ \infty -categories and the Novikov conjecture. ar Xiv:1911.02338 .
- 2[BE] U. Bunke and A. Engel. Topological equivariant coarse K 𝐾 K -homology and injectivity of assembly maps. In preparation.
- 3[BE 20] U. Bunke and A. Engel. Homotopy theory with bornological coarse spaces , volume 2269 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics . Springer, 2020.
- 4[BEKW] U. Bunke, A. Engel, D. Kasprowski, and C. Winges. Transfers in coarse homology. To appear in Münster J. Math., ar Xiv:1809.08300 .
- 5[BEKW 19] U. Bunke, A. Engel, D. Kasprowski, and Ch. Winges. Coarse homology theories and finite decomposition complexity. Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 19(6):3033–3074, 2019. ar Xiv:1712.06932 .
- 6[BEKW 20] U. Bunke, A. Engel, D. Kasprowski, and Ch. Winges. Equivariant coarse homotopy theory and coarse algebraic K 𝐾 K -homology. In K 𝐾 K -Theory in Algebra, Analysis and Topology , volume 749 of Contemp. Math. , pages 13–104, 2020.
- 7[BEL] U. Bunke, A. Engel, and M. Land. Spectrum-valued K K G 𝐾 superscript 𝐾 𝐺 K\!K^{G} , Paschke duality and assembly maps. In preparation.
- 8[BFJR 04] A. Bartels, T. Farrell, L. Jones, and H. Reich. On the isomorphism conjecture in algebraic K 𝐾 K -theory. Topology , 43(1):157–213, 2004.
