This paper establishes a correspondence between skew inverse semigroup rings and convolution algebras of ample groupoids with sheaf coefficients, generalizing known results for Steinberg algebras over fields.
Contribution
It introduces a new framework linking skew inverse semigroup rings with groupoid convolution algebras with sheaf coefficients, extending existing algebraic structures.
Findings
01
Skew inverse semigroup rings can be realized as groupoid convolution algebras with sheaf coefficients.
02
Convolution algebras of ample groupoids are isomorphic to certain skew inverse semigroup rings.
03
Known results for Steinberg algebras over fields are recovered as special cases.
Abstract
Given an action φ of of inverse semigroup S on a ring A (with domain of φ(s) denoted by Ds∗) we show that if the ideals De, with e an idempotent, are unital, then the skew inverse semigroup ring A⋊S can be realized as the convolution algebra of an ample groupoid with coefficients in a sheaf of rings. Conversely, we show that the convolution algebra of an ample groupoid with coefficients in a sheaf of rings is isomorphic to a skew inverse semigroup ring of this sort. We recover known results in the literature for Steinberg algebras over a field as special cases.
Equations191
BC={bc∈G∣b∈B,c∈C, and d(b)=r(c)}
BC={bc∈G∣b∈B,c∈C, and d(b)=r(c)}
X×f,gY={(x,y)∣f(x)=g(y)}
X×f,gY={(x,y)∣f(x)=g(y)}
G(1)={(s,x)∈S×X∣x∈Ds∗}/∼
G(1)={(s,x)∈S×X∣x∈Ds∗}/∼
(s,U)={[s,x]∣x∈U}.
(s,U)={[s,x]∣x∈U}.
e∈E(S)∑De=A,
e∈E(S)∑De=A,
L={s∈S∑finiteasδs∣as∈Ds}≅s∈S⨁Ds
L={s∈S∑finiteasδs∣as∈Ds}≅s∈S⨁Ds
(asδs)(btδt)=αs(αs∗(as)bt)δst.
(asδs)(btδt)=αs(αs∗(as)bt)δst.
N=⟨aδr−aδs∣r,s∈S,r≤s and a∈Dr⟩,
N=⟨aδr−aδs∣r,s∈S,r≤s and a∈Dr⟩,
αs(f)(x)={f(θs∗(x)),0ifx∈Xselse.
αs(f)(x)={f(θs∗(x)),0ifx∈Xselse.
(aδs)(bδt)
(aδs)(bδt)
=aαs(b1s∗s)δst
Θ(a)=a1δe1+⋯+anδen+N
Θ(a)=a1δe1+⋯+anδen+N
Φ(s)=1ss∗δs+N.
Φ(s)=1ss∗δs+N.
Φ(s)Φ(t)
Φ(s)Φ(t)
=αs(1s∗s1tt∗)δst+N=αs(1s∗stt∗)δst+N
=1stt∗s∗δst+N=Φ(st).
Φ(s)Θ(a)Φ(s∗)
Φ(s)Θ(a)Φ(s∗)
=(αs(αs∗(1ss∗)a)δs)(1s∗sδs∗)+N
=(αs(a)δs)(1s∗sδs∗)+N
=αs(αs∗s(a)1s∗s)δss∗+N
=αs(a)δss∗+N=Θ(αs(a)).
A
A
θ(a)φ(s)θ(b)φ(t)
θ(a)φ(s)θ(b)φ(t)
=φ(s)θ(αs∗(a)b)φ(t).
φ(s)θ(αs∗(a)b)φ(t)
φ(s)θ(αs∗(a)b)φ(t)
=φ(s)θ(αs∗(a)b)φ(s∗)φ(st)=θ(αs(αs∗(a)b))φ(st)
E
E
(sχU)(γ)={s(r(γ)),0r(γ),ifγ∈Uelse.
(sχU)(γ)={s(r(γ)),0r(γ),ifγ∈Uelse.
χU(γ)={1r(γ),0r(γ),ifγ∈Uelse.
χU(γ)={1r(γ),0r(γ),ifγ∈Uelse.
f∗g(γ)=βρ=γ∑f(β)αβ(g(ρ)).
f∗g(γ)=βρ=γ∑f(β)αβ(g(ρ)).
g∈G∑agδgg∈G∑bgδg=hk=g∑ahαh(bk)δg
g∈G∑agδgg∈G∑bgδg=hk=g∑ahαh(bk)δg
(f∗(g∗h))(γ)
(f∗(g∗h))(γ)
=λνρ=γ∑f(λ)αλ(g(ν))αλν(h(ρ))
=((f∗g)∗h)(γ).
χG(0)∗f(γ)
χG(0)∗f(γ)
f∗χG(0)(γ)
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Full text
Étale groupoid algebras with coefficients in a sheaf and skew inverse semigroup rings
Given an action φ of of inverse semigroup S on a ring A (with domain of φ(s) denoted by Ds∗) we show that if the ideals De, with e an idempotent, are unital, then the skew inverse semigroup ring A⋊S can be realized as the convolution algebra of an ample groupoid with coefficients in a sheaf of rings. Conversely, we show that the convolution algebra of an ample groupoid with coefficients in a sheaf of rings is isomorphic to a skew inverse semigroup ring of this sort. We recover known results in the literature for Steinberg algebras over a field as special cases.
Key words and phrases:
étale groupoids, inverse semigroups, rings
The second author thanks the Fulbright commission for its support in visiting the Federal University of Santa Catarina in Brazil. The first author was partially supported by CNPq and Capes-PrInt, Brazil.
1. Introduction
Convolution algebras associated to groupoids and skew rings associated to actions are driving forces in ring theory. For example, the convolution algebra associated to an ample groupoid, also known as the Steinberg algebra [26], has been used in the study of combinatorial algebras such as Leavitt path algebras [1], Kumijian-Pask algebras [12], separated graph algebras [3], among others, see for example [2, 11]. Skew inverse semigroup rings are also useful tools in the study of algebras arising from combinatorial objects, see for example [18, 19, 22]. Furthermore, both skew inverse semigroup rings and Steinberg algebras have deep connections with topological dynamics and C∗-algebra theory, see for example [8, 9, 10, 5, 7, 17].
Although both theories are intimately connected, it is safe to state that the theory of groupoid algebras is further developed than the theory of inverse semigroup skew rings. Therefore, connections between the two theories, that allow one to pass results from one setting to the other, present an immediate advance in the theory of inverse semigroup skew rings, all the while offering a new point of view and direction of development for groupoid algebras.
In the purely algebraic setting, the first connections between the theories was established in [6] where, motivated by Exel’s results in C∗-algebra theory (see [17]), the authors realize certain partial skew group rings as Steinberg algebras and show that Steinberg algebras associated to Hausdorff ample groupoids can be seen as skew inverse semigroup rings (this latter result is implicit in the arxiv version of [26], see [25, Section 4.3], where it is proved in
the language of covariant representations rather than that of skew inverse
semigroup rings). These results are generalized to graded ample Hausdorff groupoids in [20]. The description of Steinberg algebras as skew inverse semigroup rings is generalized to not necessarily Hausdorff groupoids in [15]. In [27] the interplay between partial skew inverse semigroup rings and Steinberg algebras is studied and it is proved that skew inverse semigroup rings of the form Cc(X,R)⋊S, where Cc(X,R) is the ring of compactly supported locally constant R-valued mappings on a locally compact Hausdorff and zero-dimensional space X, can be seen as Steinberg algebras of appropriate groupoids of germs. Finally, in [5] it is shown that the category of unitary AR(G)-modules, where AR(G) denotes the Steinberg algebra over R associated to an etale groupoid G with locally compact totally disconnected unit space, is equivalent to the category of sheaves of R-modules over G. This is an algebraic analogue of Renault’s disintegration theorem [24] for representations of groupoid C∗-algebras.
Our goal is to deepen the above results, obtaining a description of skew inverse semigroup rings in terms of groupoid convolution algebras. For this we pass to sheaf theory and define a convolution algebra of an ample groupoid with coefficients in a sheaf of rings (see Section 4). To make the interplay between groupoid algebras and skew inverse semigroup rings complete we then show that this newly defined groupoid convolution algebra can be seen as a skew inverse semigroup ring, and vice versa. We describe more precisely our work below.
In Sections 2 and 3 we discuss inverse semigroups, ample groupoids and skew inverse semigroup rings, setting up notation and key definitions that will be used throughout the paper. We introduce a convolution algebra Γc(G,O), associated to a sheaf of rings O over an ample groupoid G, in Section 4. When the sheaf in question is a constant sheaf of commutative rings, we recover the Steinberg algebra introduced by the second author in [26]. In Section 5, we show that if G is an ample groupoid, O is a G-sheaf of rings and S≤Ga (where Ga is the inverse semigroup of compact open bisections) is an inverse subsemigroup satisfying G(1)=⋃S (G1), then Γc(G,O) is a quotient of Γc(G(0),O)⋊S for an appropriate action of S on the “diagonal” subalgebra Γc(G(0),O) of compactly supported sections of O over G(0) with pointwise operations.
We develop the tools to prove that the quotient map of Section 5 is an isormorphism (under the mild hypothesis (G2), see Section 2) in Section 6. To describe our key result in this section, let R=Γc(G,O), where G is an ample groupoid and O is a G-sheaf of rings. We prove that R-mod can be identified with the category of G-sheaves of O-modules, where R-mod is the category of unitary (left) R-modules (this generalizes the disintegration theorem of [27]). In Section 7 we show that unitary Γc(G(0),O)⋊S-modules also can be represented as modules of global sections of G-sheaves of O-modules, where S≤Ga is an inverse subsemigroup satisfying the germ conditions (G1) and (G2). With this we show that the quotient map of Section 5 is an isomorphism; see Theorem 7.1.
In Section 8 we generalize the Pierce representation of a ring [23] as global sections of a sheaf of rings over a Stone space in two ways: we consider rings with local units and we allow smaller generalized Boolean algebras. Finally we finish the paper in Section 9, where we prove the converse of Theorem 7.1 by showing that every skew inverse semigroup ring (with respect to a sufficiently nice action) is isomorphic to an ample groupoid convolution algebra with coefficients in a sheaf of rings.
2. Inverse semigroups and ample groupoids
In this section, we recall some basic notions concerning inverse semigroups and ample groupoids.
2.1. Inverse semigroups
An inverse semigroup is a semigroup S such that, for all s∈S, there is a unique element s∗∈S with ss∗s=s and s∗ss∗=s∗. Note that s∗s and ss∗ are idempotents. The set E(S) of idempotents of S is a commutative subsemigroup and is a meet semilattice via the partial ordering e≤f if ef=e. This partial order extends to a compatible partial order on S by putting s≤t if ss∗t=s or, equivalently, ts∗s=s. One can show that (st)∗=t∗s∗ using that idempotents commute. See [21] for a detailed introduction to inverse semigroups.
Homomorphisms between inverse semigroups automatically preserve the involution and send idempotents to idempotents. They also preserve the natural partial order discussed above. A mapping φ:S→T of inverse semigroups is a homomorphism if and only if it is order preserving, restricts to a homomorphism on idempotents and satisfies φ(st)=φ(s)φ(t) whenever s∗s=tt∗; see [21, Chapter 3, Theorem 5].
The prototypical example of an inverse semigroup is the semigroup of all partial bijections of a set X under composition of partial mappings. The natural partial order in this case is just the restriction ordering: f≤g if f is a restriction of g. Every inverse semigroup S can be faithfully represented as an inverse semigroup of partial bijections of itself.
2.2. Ample groupoids
An étale groupoid is a topological groupoid G such that its unit space G(0) is locally compact and Hausdorff and its range map r is a local homeomorphism (this implies that the domain map d and the multiplication map are also local homeomorphisms). A bisection of G is a subset B⊆G such that the restriction of the range and source maps to B are injective. An étale groupoid is ample if its unit space has a basis of compact open sets or, equivalently, if the arrow space G(1) has a basis of compact open bisections.
We denote by Ga the set of all compact open bisection of G. It is an inverse semigroup with operations given by
[TABLE]
and B∗={b−1∣b∈B}. We often write B−1 instead of B∗ in the inverse semigroup Ga.
We remark for future use that, for every open bisection B, of an ample groupoid G, the range and source maps are homeomorphisms from B to d(B) and r(B), respectively.
From now on, following Bourbaki, the term “compact” will include the Hausdorff axiom. However, a space can be locally compact without being Hausdorff.
If f:X→Z and g:Y→Z are maps of spaces, then their pullback is
[TABLE]
(with the subspace topology of the product space).
Let X be a topological space. Then IX denotes the inverse monoid of all homeomorphisms between open subsets of X. An action of an inverse semigroup S on X is a homomorphism ρ:S→IX. To be consistent with notation in the literature, we put ρ(s)=ρs and write ρs:Ds∗→Ds. We say the action is non-degenerate if X=⋃e∈E(S)De. We shall always assume that all our actions are non-degenerate. A non-degenerate action is called Boolean if X is Hausdorff, has a basis of compact open sets and De is compact open for all e∈E(S) (i.e., each Ds is compact open). Sometimes this is also referred to as an ample system in the literature.
For example, if G is an ample groupoid, then Ga, the inverse semigroup of compact open bisections, has a Boolean action on G(0) defined as follows. To each U∈Ga, we associate the homeomorphism ρU=r∘(d∣U)−1:d(U)→r(U). The mapping U↦ρU is a Boolean action.
Let S≤Ga be an inverse subsemigroup. We define two conditions on S as follows.
(G1)
G(1)=⋃S.
2. (G2)
If γ∈U∩V with U,V∈S, then there is W∈S with γ∈W⊆U,V.
We shall say that S≤Ga satisfies the germ conditions if it satisfies (G1) and (G2). Obviously Ga satisfies the germ conditions, being a basis for the topology on G(1).
Given a Boolean action ρ of an inverse semigroup S on a space X, we can form an ample groupoid G=S⋉X, called the groupoid of germs of the action. Details can be found in [17, 26], we just provide the definitions. One has G(0)=X and
[TABLE]
where (s,x)∼(t,y) if and only if x=y and there exists u≤s,t with x∈Du∗. We write [s,x] for the class of (s,x). The groupoid structure is defined as follows. We put d([s,x])=x and r([s,x])=ρs(x) (which is independent of the choice of s). The product is defined by [s,ρt(x)][t,x]=[st,x] and the inverse is given by [s,x]−1=[s∗,ρs(x)]. The topology on G(0) is that of X, whereas a basis of neighborhoods for G(1) is given by the sets (s,U), where U⊆Ds∗ is compact open, and
[TABLE]
Note that the above sets (s,U) are compact open bisections and the compact open bisections of the form U(s)=(s,Ds∗) satisfy U(s)U(t)=U(st) and hence form an inverse semigroup S≤Ga, which is a homomorphic image of S. Note that S satisfies the germ conditions. Indeed, if x∈Ds∗, then [s,x]∈(s,Ds∗) and so (G1) holds. If γ∈(s,Ds∗)∩(t,Dt∗), then γ=[s,x]=[t,x] for some x∈Ds∗∩Dt∗. Then, by definition of the germ equivalence relation ∼, we have u∈S with u≤s,t and x∈Du∗. Thus γ=[u,x]∈(u,Du∗)⊆(s,Ds∗)∩(t,Dt∗), yielding (G2).
Conversely, if G is an ample groupoid and S≤Ga satisfies the germ conditions, then Exel showed that G≅S⋉G(0) with respect to the natural Boolean action defined above; see [17]. This explains the name “germ conditions.”
3. Skew inverse semigroup rings
By a partial automorphism of a ring A, we mean a ring isomorphism φ:I→J between two-sided ideals I,J of A. The collection of all partial automorphisms of A forms an inverse monoid that we denote IA. If S is an inverse semigroup, then an action of S on A is a homomorphism α:S→IA, usually written s↦αs. The domain of α(s) is denoted Ds∗ and the range is then Ds. We say that the action is non-degenerate if
[TABLE]
a condition that we shall assume from here on out. Notice that if S has an identity, then non-degeneracy is just the assumption that the identity acts as the identity morphism.
To ensure associativity of the skew inverse semigroup ring, we assume that each Ds is a ring with local units (although weaker conditions suffice). Recall that a ring R has local units if R=⋃e∈EeRe, where E is a set of idempotents, and the union is directed. We call E a set of local units for R. Some authors require the set E to commute, but that is not necessary although it will usually be the case in this paper. Note that R=lime∈EeRe in the category of rings, but the inclusions are not unit preserving. We shall say that R has central local units if it has a set of local units consisting of central idempotents. Of course every unital ring has central local units.
Given an action α of S on a ring A,
the construction of the corresponding skew inverse semigroup ring is done in three steps.
(1)
First we consider the set
[TABLE]
where δs, for s∈S, is a formal symbol (and 0δs=0).
We equip L with component-wise addition and with multiplication
defined as the linear extension of the rule
[TABLE]
(The reader will easily verify that αs(αs∗(as)bt)∈Dst.)
2. (2)
Then, we consider the ideal
[TABLE]
i.e., N is the ideal of L generated by all elements of the form aδr−aδs, where r≤s and a∈Dr. It is shown in [7, Lemma 2.3], that these elements already generate N as an additive group.
3. (3)
Finally, we define the corresponding
skew inverse semigroup ring, which we denote by A⋊S, as the quotient ring L/N.
If S is a group, then the ideal N is the zero ideal and the multiplication simplifies to the rule aδs⋅bδt=aαs(b)δst, and so A⋊S is the familiar skew group ring.
Recall that an ideal I of a ring A is a unital ring, in its own right, if and only if I=Ae with e a central idempotent of A. Indeed, if e is a central idempotent, then trivially Ae=eAe=AeA=eA is a two-sided ideal with identity e. Conversely, if I is a two-sided ideal with identity e, then for all a∈A, we have that ae,ea∈I and so ae=e(ae)=(ea)e=ea. Thus e is a central idempotent. Trivially, we then have I=Ae. Later on we shall use, without comment, that any central idempotent of I is also a central idempotent of A. Indeed, if f∈I is a central idempotent and a∈A, then using that f=fe=ef and ea∈I, we have that fa=(fe)a=f(ea)=(ea)f=(ae)f=a(ef)=af.
A key class of inverse semigroups actions is that of spectral actions, as defined below.
Definition 3.1** (Spectral action).**
We call an action α of an inverse semigroup S on Aspectral if it is non-degenerate and De has a unit element 1e for each e∈E(S).
The term “spectral” is used because it turns out that such actions give a Boolean action of S on the Pierce spectrum of A. Note that Def=De∩Df implies that 1ef=1e1f and so e↦1e is a homomorphism from E(S) into the central idempotents of A. Also, if e≤s∗s, and so De⊆Ds∗s=Ds∗, then αs(De)=αse(De)=αse(D(se)∗)=Dse=Dses∗ and so αs(1e)=1ses∗.
For example, if S is an inverse semigroup with a Boolean action on a generalized Stone space X and if R is a commutative ring with unit, then we can define an action of S on the ring A=Cc(X,R) of compactly supported locally constant mappings f:X→R with pointwise operations as follows. If θ:S→IX is the homomorphism, say θs:Xs∗→Xs, we let Ds be the the set of mappings f∈A supported on Xs. Note that Ds=AχXs and χXs is a central idempotent. The action is given by
[TABLE]
The skew inverse semigroup ring A⋊S turns out to be isomorphic to the Steinberg algebra of the groupoid of germs S⋉X with coefficients in R [15, 5].
If A is an algebra, then E(A) will denote the idempotents of A. Note that E(Z(A)) is a generalized Boolean algebra with e∧f=ef, e∖f=e−ef and e∨f=e+f−ef=e∖f+f∖e+e∧f. Let B be the generalized Boolean algebra generated by the {1e∣e∈E(S)}. Then our assumption that α is non-degenerate implies A=lime∈BeAe=⋃e∈BeAe and, hence, has local units belonging to the center of A. This follows since D(e1)+⋯+D(en)=A(e1∨⋯∨en).
Remark 3.2*.*
In the case of a spectral action, we note that if a∈Ds and b∈Dt, then
[TABLE]
which may look a bit more like the familiar formula for a skew group ring.
The theory of covariant representations for partial inverse semigroup rings was first developed in [4] and [14]. For completeness we present the main results (and some proofs) below, already adapted to our context. We retain the notation of (3.1) and (3.2).
Proposition 3.3**.**
Let S have a spectral action α on the ring A. Then there is an embedding Θ:A→A⋊S and a homomorphism Φ:S→A⋊S given by
[TABLE]
where a=a1+⋯+an with ai∈Dei and
[TABLE]
Moreover, A⋊S has a set of local units contained in Θ(B) where B is the generalized Boolean algebra generated by {1e∣e∈E(S)}. Furthermore, Θ(αs(a))=Φ(s)Θ(a)Φ(s∗) for all s∈S and a∈Ds∗ and, for e∈E(S), we have that Θ(1e)=Φ(e).
Proof.
It is easy to see that Φ is a homomorphism as
[TABLE]
The fact that Θ is an embedding is proved in [7, Proposition 3.1].
We compute that if a∈Ds∗, then
[TABLE]
If e∈E(S), then Θ(1e)=1eδe+N=Φ(e).
Since B admits joins to show that θ(B) is a set of local units, it suffices to show that each element of the form aδs+N belongs to Θ(e)(A⋊S)Θ(e) for some e∈B. First note that Θ(1ss∗)(aδs+N)=(1ss∗δss∗)(aδs)+N=aδs+N and (aδs+N)Θ(1s∗s)=(aδs)(1s∗sδs∗s)+N=aδs+N. It now follows that if e=1s∗s∨1ss∗, then Θ(e)(aδs+N)Θ(e)=aδs+N.
∎
The properties of the mappings Θ and Φ above are sufficiently important to give them a name.
Definition 3.4** (Covariant system).**
Let S be an inverse semigroup with a spectral action α on a ring A. Then a covariant system for (S,A,α) consists of a triple (R,θ,φ) where R is a ring and θ:A→R, φ:S→R are homomorphisms such that:
(C1)
θ(αs(a))=φ(s)θ(a)φ(s∗) for all a∈Ds∗;
(C2)
θ(1e)=φ(e) for e∈E(S).
For example, (A×S,Θ,Φ) is a covariant system. It turns out to be the universal covariant system.
Theorem 3.5**.**
Let S be an inverse semigroup with a spectral action α on a ring A. Let R be a ring. Then there is a bijection between ring homomorphisms π:A⋊S→R and covariant systems (R,θ,φ). More precisely, if π:A⋊S→R is a ring homomorphism, then (R,π∘Θ,π∘Φ) is a covariant system. Conversely, if (R,θ,φ) is a covariant system, then there is a unique homomorphism π=θ⋊φ:A⋊S→R such that
[TABLE]
commute.
Proof.
It is clear from Proposition 3.3 that if π:A⋊S→R is a homomorphism, then (R,π∘Θ,π∘Φ) is a covariant system. Suppose next that (R,θ,φ) is a covariant system. Note that if a∈Ds, then aδs+N=(aδss∗)(1ss∗δs)+N=Θ(a)Φ(s). It follows that if π:A⋊S→R is a homomorphism with π∘Θ=θ and π∘Φ=φ, then we must define π(aδs+N)=θ(a)φ(s) for a∈Ds. We need to show that this, in fact, gives a well defined ring homomorphism.
First we show that ρ:L→R given by ρ(aδs)=θ(a)φ(s) for a∈Ds is a ring homomorphism. Indeed, we have that (aδs)(bδt)=αs(αs∗(a)b)δst so we need to check that θ(a)φ(s)θ(b)φ(t)=θ(αs(αs∗(a)b))φ(st). First we observe that θ(a)=θ(1ss∗a)=θ(1ss∗)θ(a)=φ(ss∗)θ(a)=φ(s)φ(s∗)θ(a). Thus we have
[TABLE]
Since αs∗(a)b∈Ds∗∩Dt⊆Ds∗=Ds∗s, we have that αs∗(a)b=αs∗(a)b1s∗s and so θ(a)φ(s)θ(b)φ(t) equals
[TABLE]
as required.
Now we must show that N⊆kerρ. Let a∈Ds with s≤r in S. Then s=ss∗r and we need to show that ρ(aδs)=ρ(aδr). But then ρ(aδs)=θ(a)φ(s)=θ(a)φ(ss∗r)=θ(a)φ(ss∗)φ(r)=θ(a)θ(1ss∗)φ(r)=θ(a1ss∗)φ(r)=θ(a)φ(r)=ρ(aδr) as a∈Ds=Dss∗. This completes the proof.
∎
Remark 3.6*.*
The proof of the above result in the context of partial inverse semigroup actions can be found in [4, Theorem 1.6.19] and [14, Theorem 4.3.15].
4. Ample groupoid convolution algebras with coefficients in a sheaf of rings
In this section we introduce a convolution algebra associated to a sheaf of rings over an ample groupoid. When the sheaf in question is a constant sheaf of commutative rings, we recover the so-called Steinberg algebra introduced by the second author in [26]. We shall see later that such convolution algebras are skew inverse semigroup rings and that, conversely, a large class of skew inverse semigroup rings are of this form. We will show that modules for the skew inverse semigroup ring can be identified with sheaves of modules over the sheaf of rings. This will allow the geometric approach to modules initiated in [27], and further studied in [28, 13, 29], to be applied to skew inverse semigroup rings.
Let G be an ample groupoid. Then a G-sheafE consists of a topological space E, a local homeomorphism p:E→G(0) and a continuous map α:G(1)×d,pE→E (written (γ,e)↦αγ(e)) satisfying the following axioms:
(S1)
αp(e)(e)=e;
(S2)
p(αγ(e))=r(γ) if d(γ)=p(e);
(S3)
αβ(αγ(e))=αβγ(e) whenever d(β)=r(γ) and d(γ)=p(e).
If x∈G(0), then Ex=p−1(x) is called the stalk of E at x. Notice that αγ:Ed(γ)→Er(γ) is a bijection with inverse αγ−1. The assignment x→Ex is a functor from G to the category of sets, and so a G-sheaf is the topological analogue of such a functor.
A morphism of G-sheaves E=(E,p,α) and F=(F,q,β) is a continuous mapping h:E→F such that
[TABLE]
commutes and h(αγ(e))=βγ(h(e)) for all e∈E and γ∈G(1) with d(γ)=p(e). Note that h is automatically a local homeomorphism.
We shall be interested in sheaves with extra structure. A G-sheaf of (unital) rings is a G-sheaf O=(E,p,α) equipped with a unital ring structure on each stalk Ox such that the following axioms hold:
(SR1)
+:E×p,pE→E is continuous;
(SR2)
⋅:E×p,pE→E is continuous;
(SR3)
the unit section x↦1x is a continuous mapping G(0)→E;
(SR4)
αγ:Od(γ)→Or(γ) is a ring homomorphism for all γ∈G(1).
Notice that x↦Ox is a functor from G to the category of unital rings, so a G-sheaf is a topological analogue of such a functor. Note that each αγ is a ring isomorphism. One can prove that the zero section x↦0x is continuous and that the negation map is continuous (these are standard facts about sheaves of abelian groups, and hence rings, over spaces, cf. [16]).
Example 4.1*.*
A key example is the following. Let R be any unital ring, which we view as a space with the discrete topology. We define the constant sheaf of rings Δ(R) to be the G-sheaf of rings with E=R×G(0) and with p:R×G(0)→G(0) the projection. The addition and multiplication are pointwise, that is, (r,x)+(r′,x)=(r+r′,x) and (r,x)(r′,x)=(rr′,x). The mapping α is given by α(γ)(r,d(γ))=(r,r(γ)). It will turn out that the convolution algebra we associate to Δ(R) will be the usual algebra of G over R, from [26], without the restriction on R being commutative. Viewed as a functor to the category of rings, Δ(R) takes each object of G to R and each arrow to the identity map on R.
Example 4.2*.*
If G is a discrete group, viewed as a one-object ample groupoid, then a G-sheaf of rings is nothing more than a unital ring A together with an action of G on A by automorphisms. The convolution algebra that we shall define reduces in this case to the skew group ring A⋊G.
We now aim to define the ring of global sections of O with compact support, which we shall also call the convolution algebra of G with coefficients in the sheaf of rings O. Because we do not assume that G is Hausdorff, defining the algebra correctly involves some subtleties. Since our groupoids are ample, we can take some short cuts.
Let O=(E,p,α,+,⋅) be a G-sheaf of rings. Let A(G,O) be the set of all mappings f:G(1)→E such that p∘f=r, that is, f(γ)∈Or(γ) for all γ∈G(1). We can define a binary operation on A(G,O) by putting (f+g)(γ)=f(γ)+g(γ), which we refer to as pointwise addition. We shall denote by [math] the mapping 0(γ)=0r(γ) for all γ∈Γ. We can identify A(G,O) with ∏γ∈G(1)Or(γ) and with this identification, pointwise addition becomes the usual addition in a direct product. Hence we may conclude the following.
Proposition 4.3**.**
The set A(G,O) is an abelian group with respect to pointwise addition with [math] as the identity and (−f)(γ)=−f(γ) for γ∈G(1).
We define, as an abelian group, Γc(G,O) to be the subgroup generated by all mappings f∈A(G,O) such that there is a compact open bisection U with f∣U continuous and f∣G(1)∖U=0. In this case, we say that f is supported on U. If U is a compact open bisection and s:r(U)→E is any (continuous) section of p, then we can define an element sχU∈Γc(G,O), supported on U, by
[TABLE]
In the special case that s is the unit section x↦1x over U, we denote sχU by simply χU. In other words,
[TABLE]
Notice that if f∈Γc(G,O) is supported on a compact open bisection U, then f=sχU where s=f∘(r∣U)−1. Thus Γc(G,O) can also be described as the abelian group generated by all elements of the form sχU where s:r(U)→E is a section, and U is a compact open bisection.
The reader should verify that if G is Hausdorff, then Γc(G,O) consists of all continuous mappings f:G(1)→E such that p∘f=r and f has compact support (i.e., {γ∣f(γ)=0r(γ)} is compact).
Example 4.4*.*
Let R be a unital ring. Then A(G,Δ(R)) can be identified with RG(1) by sending f∈RG(1) to the mapping in A(G,Δ(R)) given by F(γ)=(f(γ),r(γ)). Under this identification, Γc(G,Δ(R)) corresponds to the R-submodule of RG(1) spanned by the characteristic functions χU with U a compact open bisection. In particular, if G is Hausdorff, it can be identified with the locally constant functions G(1)→R with compact support.
Example 4.5*.*
If G is a discrete group, viewed as a one-object ample groupoid, acting on a unital ring A (viewed as a sheaf of rings), then the additive group Γc(G,A) is the group of finitely supported functions G→A with pointwise addition.
A crucial property of elements of Γc(G,O) is that they can only be non-zero on finitely many points of any fiber of d or r.
Proposition 4.6**.**
Let f∈Γc(G,O) and x∈G(0). Then there are only finitely many γ∈d−1(x) such that f(γ)=0 and, similarly, for r−1(x).
Proof.
If U is a compact open bisection and s:r(U)→E is a section, then sχU is non-zero on at most one element of d−1(x) (respectively, r−1(x)). Since any element of Γc(G,O) is a finite sum of such elements, the proposition follows.
∎
We now define convolution of elements of Γc(G,O). The reader can then perform the straightforward verification that convolution on Γc(G,Δ(R)) is the familiar convolution from [26].
If f,g∈Γc(G,O) and γ∈G(1), we define their convolution by
[TABLE]
For example, if G is a discrete group (viewed as a one-object ample groupoid) acting on a unital ring A (which we view as a sheaf), then an element f∈Γc(G,A) can be written as a finite formal sum ∑g∈Gf(g)δg. With this notation, the convolution product (4.1) becomes
Suppose first that βρ=γ. Then note that g(ρ)∈Or(ρ)=Od(β) and so
αβ(g(ρ))∈Or(β). Thus f(β)αβ(g(ρ))∈Or(β)=Or(γ). The sum in (4.1) is finite by Proposition 4.6 as we must have r(β)=r(γ) and d(ρ)=d(γ).
It remains to verify that f∗g∈Γc(G,O). Using that αβ is an additive homomorphism, for each β∈G(1), and that Or(γ) is a ring and hence satisfies the distributive law, it suffices to show that if U,V are compact open bisections and f,g∈Γc(G,O) are supported on U,V, respectively, then f∗g∈Γc(G,O).
First note that (f∗g)(γ)=0 unless γ∈UV by (4.1) and that UV is a compact open bisection. Thus f∗g is supported on UV. Next note that the multiplication mapping μ:U×d,rV→UV is a homeomorphism in an ample groupoid, when U,V are compact open bisections. The mapping (f∗g)∣UV is the composition of (μ∣U×d,rV)−1 with the continuous mapping U×d,rV→E given by (β,ρ)↦f∣U(β)α(β,g∣V(ρ)) and hence is continuous. This completes the proof.
∎
Remark 4.8*.*
The proof of Proposition 4.7 shows that if f is supported on U and g is supported on V, with U,V compact open bisections, then f∗g is supported on UV, a fact that shall be used later.
Note that if x∈G(0), then αx is an identity map. It follows that if f,g are supported on G(0), then so is f∗g and, moreover, (f∗g)(x)=f(x)g(x). In other words, we have a subring Γc(G(0),O) consisting of the compactly supported global sections of O, viewed as a sheaf of rings over the space G(0), with pointwise operations. Notice that the idempotents χU with U⊆G(0) compact open are central in the subring Γc(G(0),O). We can view Γc(G,O) as a left Γc(G(0),O)-module via left multiplication, and the characteristic functions χU with U compact open bisections span Γc(G,O) as a left Γc(G(0),O)-module.
Proposition 4.9**.**
Let U,V be compact open bisections. Then χU∗χV=χUV.
Proof.
Indeed, (χU∗χV)(γ)=∑βρ=γχU(β)αβ(χV(ρ)). If γ∈/UV, then this resulting summation is zero. Otherwise, γ=βρ for a unique β∈U and ρ∈V. Then χU(β)αβ(χV(ρ))=1r(β)αβ(1r(ρ))=1r(β)=1r(γ) and so χU∗χV=χUV.
∎
Proposition 4.10**.**
Let G be an ample groupoid and O a G-sheaf of rings. Then Γc(G,O) is a ring and Γc(G(0),O) is a subring (the latter with pointwise operations).
Proof.
We will verify the associative law for ∗.
Let f,g,h∈Γc(G,O). We then compute
[TABLE]
The remaining verifications are left to the reader.
∎
It turns out, as was the case for Steinberg algebras over rings, that having a multiplicative identity is equivalent to compactness of the unit space.
Proposition 4.11**.**
The ring Γc(G,O) is unital if and only if G(0) is compact, in which case the identity is given by the unit section χG(0).
Proof.
Assume first that G(0) is compact. Then χG(0)∈Γc(G,O) and
[TABLE]
Conversely, suppose that Γc(G,O) has a unit u. We show that u=χG(0) (i.e., sends x to 1x for a unit x and sends a non-unit γ to 0r(γ)). Indeed, let γ∈G(1) and choose U⊆G(0) compact open with d(γ)∈U. Then if γ=d(γ), we have that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, if γ∈G(0), then
[TABLE]
But if χG(0)∈Γc(G,O), then
[TABLE]
with U1,…,Un compact open bisections and si a section over r(Ui). But then G(0)⊆U1∪⋯∪Un and so G(0)=d(U1)∪⋯∪d(Un). As each d(Ui) is compact, we deduce that G(0) is compact.
∎
As a corollary, we deduce that Γc(G,O) has local units.
Corollary 4.12**.**
Let G be an ample groupoid and O a G-sheaf of rings. Then Γc(G,O) has local units contained in the center of Γc(G(0),O).
Proof.
Let U⊆G(0) be compact open. Let G∣U be the open subgroupoid with object set U and all arrows between elements of U. Let OU be the restriction of O to U. So if O=(E,p,α,+,⋅), then OU=(p−1(U),p,α,+,⋅) (where the structure maps are appropriately restricted). It is immediate from the definitions that Γc(G∣U,OU) is a subring of Γc(G,O) and that Γc(G,O)=limUΓc(G∣U,OU) since G(0) has a basis of compact opens. Each of the rings Γc(G∣U,OU) is unital by Proposition 4.11 with identity χU∈Γc(G(0),O), whence Γc(G∣U,O) has local units contained in the center of Γc(G(0),O), as required.
∎
We now aim to generalize the characterization of the center of an ample groupoid algebra from [26] to the current setting.
Definition 4.13** (Class function).**
Let O be a G-sheaf of rings for an ample groupoid G. An element f∈Γc(G,O) is a class function if the following hold.
(1)
f(γ)=0 implies d(γ)=r(γ) and af(γ)=f(γ)αγ(a) for all a∈Od(γ)=Or(γ).
2. (2)
ασ(f(σ−1γσ))=f(γ) for all σ,τ with r(σ)=d(γ)=r(γ).
This definition reduces to the one in [26] when O is a constant sheaf of commutative rings.
Theorem 4.14**.**
Let G be an ample groupoid and O be a G-sheaf of rings. Then f∈Z(Γc(G,O)) if and only if f is a class function.
Proof.
Assume first that f is a class function and let g∈Γc(G,O). Then we have
[TABLE]
Any non-zero term in the summand in (4.2) must have d(σ)=r(σ) and f(σ)ασ(g(τ))=g(τ)f(σ) by the first condition in the definition of a class function. By the second condition in the definition of a class function, f(σ)=ατ(f(τ−1στ)). Thus if we fix τ and perform the invertible change of variables ν=τ−1στ, we obtain that
[TABLE]
But the right hand side of (4.4) is the same as the right hand side of (4.3) as g(λ)αλ(f(ν))=0 unless d(ν)=r(ν).
Conversely, suppose that f∈Z(Γc(G,O)). We show that f is a class function. Suppose γ∈G(1) with d(γ)=r(γ). Let U⊆G(0) be compact open with d(γ)∈U and r(γ)∈/U (using that G(0) is Hausdorff). Then χU∗f(γ)=0 and f∗χU(γ)=f(γ)αγ(1d(γ))=f(γ). Thus f(γ)=0. Next suppose that d(γ)=r(γ)=x and a∈Ox. Then by sheaf theory over Hausdorff spaces with a basis of compact open sets, we can find a section s∈Γc(G(0),O) with s(x)=a (see, for instance, Proposition 6.1 below or [23]). Then s∗f(γ)=s(x)f(γ)=af(γ) and f∗s(γ)=f(γ)αγ(s(x))=f(γ)αγ(a). This shows that f satisfies the first condition in the definition of a class function.
Suppose now that r(σ)=d(γ)=r(γ). Choose a compact open bisection U with σ∈U. Then f∗χU(γσ)=f(γ)αγ(χU(σ))=f(γ). On the other hand, since σ is the only element of U with r(σ)=r(γ), we have that χU∗f(γσ)=χU(σ)ασ(f(σ−1γσ))=ασ(f(σ−1γσ)). This shows that f(γ)=ασ(f(σ−1γσ), as required. Thus f is a class function.
∎
Our next result will be to show that Γc(G,O) can be generated as a left Γc(G(0),O)-module by characteristic functions belonging to a sufficiently large inverse semigroup of compact open bisections.
Proposition 4.15**.**
Let G be an ample groupoid and O a sheaf of rings on G.
Let S⊆Ga be an inverse semigroup satisfying (G1).
Then Γc(G,O) is spanned by the functions supported on elements of S.
Proof.
Set
[TABLE]
We claim that D is a basis for the topology on G(1). Let γ∈G(1). Then a basis of neighborhoods of γ is given by the compact open bisections U with γ∈U. There is V∈S with γ∈V by (G1). As U∩V is a neighborhood of γ and Ga is a basis for the topology, there is W∈Ga with γ∈W and W⊆U∩V. But then W∈D, so we conclude that D is a basis for the topology on G(1).
Let R be the span of the functions supported on S. Note that R is a subring of Γc(G,O) by Remark 4.8.
Suppose that f∈Γc(G,O) is supported on U∈D. If U⊆V with V∈S, then U is clopen in V (as V is Hausdorff and U is compact). We may then view f as supported on V since f∣V is continuous (because U is clopen in V) and f vanishes outside V. Thus f∈R.
Next suppose that U∈Ga and f is supported on U. Since D is a basis for the topology and U is compact open, we have that U=U1∪⋯∪Un with U1,…,Un∈D. The Ui are compact open and hence, since U is Hausdorff, clopen in U. Thus any finite intersection V of the Ui is compact open and belongs to D, as D is a lower set. Also V is clopen in U. Let fV be the mapping which agrees with f on V and is [math] elsewhere. Then fV∈Γc(G,O) and is supported on V. Hence fV∈R by what we have already observed.
It follows from the principle of inclusion-exclusion that
[TABLE]
This completes the proof.
∎
An important special case will be when G is a groupoid of germs of a Boolean action of an inverse semigroup S. The proposition will imply that the functions supported on compact open bisections coming from S span the ring. This will be useful in expressing Γc(G,O) as a skew inverse semigroup ring.
5. Convolution algebras as quotients of skew inverse semigroup rings
In this section, we show that if G is an ample groupoid, O is a G-sheaf of rings and S≤Ga is an inverse subsemigroup satisfying (G1), then Γc(G,O) is a quotient of Γc(G(0),O)⋊S for an appropriate spectral action of S on Γc(G(0),O). We shall later show that the quotient map is, in fact, an isomorphism if S satisfies, in addition, (G2). This occurs precisely when G is the groupoid of germs of the action of S on G(0) (see [17]). In particular, if O is a constant sheaf Δ(G,R) for a commutative ring R and S=Ga, then we recover the “Steinberg” algebra AR(G) [26] as the skew inverse semigroup ring Cc(G(0),R)⋊Ga where Cc(G(0),R) is the ring of locally constant mappings G(0)→R with compact support. In a later section, we shall realize skew inverse semigroup rings coming from spectral actions as convolution algebras for a sheaf of rings on an ample groupoid.
Let O=(E,p,α) be a G-sheaf of rings, which we fix for the rest of the section. We shall continue to denote the stalk at x∈G(0) by Ox. Let S≤Ga be an inverse semigroup satisfying (G1). Put A=Γc(G(0),O), which we view as the ring of compactly supported continuous sections of O over G(0) with pointwise operations. We wish to define an action of S on A. If U⊆G(0) is open, we put O∣U=(p−1(U),+,⋅); it is a sheaf of rings on U. Then A(U)=Γc(U,O∣U) can be identified with the subring of A consisting of sections supported on U. It is trivial to see that A(U) is a two-sided ideal of A, for every open subset of G(0), as supp(fg)⊆supp(f)∩supp(g). For s∈S, put Ds=A(r(s)). Note that since r(s) is compact open, Ds has an identity, the mapping χr(s). We define an isomorphism αs:Ds∗→Ds by
[TABLE]
for γ∈s and f∈Ds∗.
Proposition 5.1**.**
The mapping αs:Ds∗→Ds is an isomorphism of rings.
Proof.
First notice that, since s is a bisection, there are no two γ,γ′ in s with r(γ)=r(γ′). So the choice of γ in the definition of αs is unique. Next we check the continuity of αs(f). Clearly, γ↦α(γ,f(d(γ)))=αs(f)(r(γ)) is continuous from s to E. As r∣s:s→r(s) is a homeomorphism, it follows that αs is continuous. Note that p(αs(f)(r(γ)))=p(αγ(d(γ)))=r(γ) and so αs(f) is a section. Thus αs:Ds∗→Ds is well defined.
Observe next that
[TABLE]
for γ∈s and so αs∗∘αs is the identity on Ds∗. Interchanging the roles of s∗ and s shows that αs and αs∗ are inverse bijections.
Finally, we verify that αs is a ring homomorphism. Indeed, if f,g∈Ds∗ and γ∈s, then we have αs(f+g)(r(γ))=αγ(f(d(γ))+g(d(γ)))=αγ(f(d(γ)))+αγ(g(d(γ)))=αs(f)(r(γ))+αs(g)(r(γ)). Similarly, we have that αs(fg)(r(γ))=αs(f)(r(γ))αs(g)(r(γ)) and so αs is a ring homomorphism.
∎
Next we check that α:S→IA given by α(s)=αs is a homomorphism of inverse semigroups.
Proposition 5.2**.**
The mapping α:S→IA is a homomorphism. Moreover, the action of S on A is non-degenerate and spectral.
Proof.
To check that α is a homomorphism it suffices to check that α is order preserving, α(ef)=α(e)α(f) for e,f∈E(S) and α(st)=α(s)α(t) whenever s∗s=tt∗. If s≤t, then Ds⊆Dt and Ds∗⊆Dt∗ by definition. If f∈Ds∗ and γ∈s, then γ∈t and αs(f)(r(γ))=αγ(f(d(γ)))=αt(f)(r(γ)). Thus α(s)≤α(t).
If e∈E(S), then De=A(e) and if f:e→E is a section, then αe(f)(x)=αx(f(x))=f(x) and so αe is the identity on De. Similarly, Df=A(f) and αf is the identity on Df. So αeαf is the identity on De∩Df, which consists of those functions supported on e∩f=ef. Thus De∩Df=Def and αef=αeαf. Finally, if s∗s=tt∗=e, then αs:De→Ds and αt:Dt∗→De. But (st)∗(st)=t∗t and (st)(st)∗=ss∗ and so αst:Dt∗→Ds. If f∈Dt∗ and x∈r(s)=r(st), then we can find a unique γ∈t and β∈s with r(β)=x and d(β)=r(γ). Then αst(f)(x)=αβγ(f(d(γ)))=αβ(αγ(f(d(γ)))=αβ(αt(f)(r(γ)))=αs(αt(f))(x) and so αst=αsαt.
Since each De with e∈E(S) is unital, it remains to show that the action is non-degenerate. By Proposition 4.15 applied to G(0), viewed as an ample groupoid of identity arrows, we just need to show that each x∈G(0) belongs to some e∈E(S). By (G1), we have that x∈s for some s∈S. But then x∈s∗s∈E(S), as was required.
This completes the proof.
∎
We can now form the skew inverse semigroup ring A⋊S. In this section, we shall define a natural quotient map A⋊S→Γc(G,O). For convenience, let us put R=Γc(G,O) for the remainder of this section. We define a covariant system (R,θ,φ). The mapping θ will just be the inclusion of A=Γc(G(0),O) into R=Γc(G,O). Define φ(s)=χs for s∈S.
Proposition 5.3**.**
The triple (R,θ,φ) is a covariant system where R=Γc(G,O). Moreover, the induced homomorphism θ⋊φ:A⋊S→R is surjective.
Proof.
We first check the covariance axioms. Clearly, θ is a ring homomorphism. Also φ(s)φ(t)=χs∗χt=χst by Proposition 4.9. Let f:G(0)→E be a section supported on d(s) with s∈S. Then we compute χs∗f∗χs∗. It will be supported on units x in sd(s)s∗=r(s). For x∈r(s), let γ∈s with r(γ)=x. Then we have that
[TABLE]
as required. Finally, if e∈E(S), then χe is the identity of A(e) and so φ(e)=χe=θ(1e).
Let us verify that θ⋊φ:A⋊S→R is onto. By Proposition 4.15, R is generated by mappings f supported on an element of S. As observed earlier, any such function can be written in the form gχs where g=f∘(r∣s)−1:r(s)→E is a continuous section, i.e., g∈A(r(s))=Ds. Then we have (θ⋊φ)(gδs+N)=g∗χs. But
[TABLE]
Thus g∗χs=gχs=f. This completes the proof.
∎
6. The disintegration theorem
Let G be an ample groupoid and O=(E,p,α) a G-sheaf of rings. Put R=Γc(G,O); it is a ring with local units. A (left) R-module M is unitary if RM=M. We denote by R-mod the category of unitary (left) R-modules. Our goal in this section is to generalize the disintegration theorem of [27] and prove that R-mod can be identified with the category of G-sheaves of O-modules. In the next section we will show that these categories correspond to unitary covariant systems for A=Γc(G(0),O) and S, where S≤Ga satisfies the germ conditions. This will then be used to complete the proof that A⋊S≅R.
A G-sheaf of O-modulesM=(F,q,β) is a G-sheaf such that each stalk Mx has a (unitary) left Ox-module structure such that:
(SM1)
addition +:F×q,qF→F is continuous;
2. (SM2)
the module action E×p,qF→F is continuous;
3. (SM3)
βγ(rm)=αγ(r)βγ(m) for all r∈Od(γ) and m∈Md(γ).
The condition (SM3) basically says that βγ:Md(γ)→Mr(γ) is a module homomorphism once we identify Od(γ) and Or(γ) via the isomorphism αγ. One can again prove that the zero section and negation are continuous [16]. Note that M is a sheaf of O-modules on G(0) in the classical sense of sheaf theory. A morphism of G-sheaves of O-modules is a morphism of G-sheaves h:M→N that restricts to an Ox-module homomorphism Mx→Nx for all x∈G(0).
We shall use the following proposition without comment.
Proposition 6.1**.**
Let X be a Hausdorff space with a basis of compact open sets and let A=(F,q) be a sheaf of abelian groups on X (i.e., a sheaf of Δ(Z)-modules). Then, for each f∈Ax, there is a section s:X→F with compact support such that s(x)=f.
Proof.
Since q is a local homeomorphism and X has a basis of compact open sets, so does F. Choose a compact open neighborhood W of f such that q∣W:W→q(W) is a homeomorphism. Define s:X→F by
[TABLE]
Note that q(W) is compact open and hence clopen since X is Hausdorff. Thus s is continuous as its restriction to the open set q(W) is (q∣W)−1 and its restriction to the disjoint open set X∖q(W) is the zero section, which is continuous. Since x=q(f)∈q(W), we deduce that s(x)=(q∣W)−1(q(f))=f. The support of s is contained in the compact set q(W) and hence is compact (being closed). This completes the proof.
∎
If M is a G-sheaf of O-modules, then we can look at the set M=Γc(G,M) of continuous sections s:G(0)→F with compact support. This is an abelian group with pointwise operations. We define an R-module structure on it by putting, for f∈R and m∈M,
[TABLE]
Since f is non-zero on only finitely many elements of r−1(x) by Proposition 4.6, this sum is finite. To check that fm is continuous with compact support it suffices to consider the case when f=sχU with U∈Ga and s:r(U)→E a section, as these generate Γc(G,O). Let h=(r∣U)−1:r(U)→U. Then
[TABLE]
which is continuous with compact support as r(U) is compact open, G(0) is Hausdorff and s, β, m, h, and d are continuous.
If r:M→N is a morphism of sheaves of O-modules, then s↦r∘s is an R-module homomorphism Γc(G,M)→Γc(G,N).
Proposition 6.2**.**
The construction M⟼Γc(G,M) is a functor from the category of G-sheaves of O-modules to the category of Γc(G,O)-mod.
Proof.
Most of the proof is a straightforward adaptation of the arguments in [27] for the case where O is a constant sheaf of commutative rings. We check here that Γc(G,M) is a unitary R-module; functoriality is easy to check. The most difficult detail is that f(gm)=(f∗g)m for f,g∈Γc(G,O) and m∈Γc(G,M), the remaining tedious details that Γc(G,M) is an R-module are left to the reader. We compute that
[TABLE]
We briefly check that Γc(G,M) is unitary. Let m∈Γc(G,M). Then since m has compact support, we can find a compact open set U⊆G(0) containing the support of m. Then χUm=m, as one immediately verifies. Thus Γc(G,M) is unitary.
∎
Now we present a functor from R-mod to the category of G-sheaves of O-modules that will be quasi-inverse to the functor M↦Γc(G,M). The details are very similar to those in [27] and so we highlight what is different.
If M is a unitary R-module and x∈G(0), put
[TABLE]
where the direct limit runs over all compact open neighborhoods U of x in G(0). Here, if U⊆V, then χV∗χU=χU=χU∗χV and so we have a restriction homomorphism ρUV:χVM→χUM of abelian groups given by ρUV(m)=χUm. The homomorphisms ρUV, as U,V vary, clearly form a directed system. Thus Mx is an abelian group. We provide an alternative description that is convenient for computations. Let
[TABLE]
Then Nx is an additive subgroup of M for if χUm=0 and χVn=0 with x∈U,V, then χU∩V(m+n)=χU∩V∗χUm+χU∩V∗χVn=0 and x∈U∩V.
We claim that M/Nx≅Mx.
The isomorphism is induced by sending m+Nx to the class of χUm in Mx, where x∈U⊆G(0) compact open. We write [m]x for the class of m∈M in Mx, which we identify with M/Nx from now on. Note that if m∈M and U⊆G(0) is compact open neighborhood of x, then m−χUm∈Nx and so [m]x=[χUm]x. Moreover, [m]x=[n]x if and only if there is a compact open neighborhood U of x in G(0) with χUm=χUn.
Define
[TABLE]
and q:F→G(0) by q([m]x)=x. Put a topology on F by taking as a basis all sets of the form
[TABLE]
where m∈M and U⊆G(0) is compact open. It is easy to check that q:D(m,U)→U is a homeomorphism. To define the G-sheaf structure, for γ∈G, put
[TABLE]
where U is any compact open bisection containing γ. It is a straightforward adaptation of the proof in [27] that β:G(1)×d,qF→F is well defined and continuous, and turns
[TABLE]
into a G-sheaf. For instance, to see that βγ is independent of the choice of U, suppose that γ∈U,V with U,V∈Ga. Then, as Ga is a basis for the topology on G(1), we can find W∈Ga with γ∈W⊆U∩V. Then WW−1U=W=WW−1V and r(γ)∈WW−1. Thus we have that
[χUm]r(γ)=[χWW−1(χUm)]r(γ)=[χWm]r(γ)=[χWW−1(χVm)]r(γ)=[χVm]r(γ). Similarly, if we fix U∈Ga with γ∈U and if [m]d(γ)=[n]d(γ), then we can find V⊆G(0) compact open with d(γ)∈V and χVm=χVn. Then we have that γ∈UV and so, by the previous verification, we have that [χUm]r(γ)=[χUVm]r(γ)=[χU(χVm)]r(γ)=[χU(χVn)]r(γ)=[χUVn]r(γ)=[χUn]r(γ) and so βγ is well defined.
Let us verify that Sh(M) is a G-sheaf of O-modules. It is clearly a G-sheaf of abelian groups with respect to the fiberwise addition [m]x+[n]x=[m+n]x (i.e., addition is fiberwise continuous and each βγ is an additive homomorphism).
To define the Ox-module structure on Mx, let r∈Ox. We can choose a section t∈Γc(G(0),O) with t(x)=r (using Proposition 6.1). We define r[m]x=[tm]x. This is independent of the choice of t and m. Let us first consider the case of m. If [m]x=[n]x, then there is a compact open neighborhood W of x with χWm=χWn. Also t∗χW=χW∗t, as both sections agree with t on W and are zero outside of W. Then [tm]x=[χW∗tmX]x=[t∗χWm]x=[t∗χWn]x=[χW∗tn]x=[tn]x, yielding independence of the choice of m.
If s is a section with s(x)=r=t(x), then since the zero section has open image, the set of points where t−s is zero is open and contains x. Hence there is a compact open neighborhood U of x with t∣U=s∣U. Consequently, χU∗s=χU∗t and so [tm]x=[χU∗tm]x=[χU∗sm]x=[sm]x.
Now let γ∈G(1) and r∈Od(γ). Let U be a compact open bisection containing γ and t a compactly supported section with t(d(γ))=r. Then d(γ)∈d(U) and so [m]d(γ)=[χU−1∗χUm]d(γ) for any m∈M. Thus we have that
[TABLE]
Now χU∗t∗χU−1∈Γc(G(0),O) and satisfies χU∗t∗χU−1(r(γ))=αγ(t(d(γ)))=αγ(r). We thus obtain that
[TABLE]
as required. The remaining verifications that Sh(M) is a G-sheaf of O-modules are analogous to the special case in [27]. If f:M→N is a homomorphism of unitary R-modules, then it is straightforward that [m]x↦[f(m)]x is a morphism of G-sheaves of O-modules.
We summarize in the following proposition.
Proposition 6.3**.**
The construction M⟼Sh(M) is a functor from the category Γc(G,O)-mod to the category of G-sheaves of O-modules.
Most of the rest of this section is concerned with proving that there are natural isomorphisms M≅Γc(G,Sh(M)) and M≅Sh(Γc(G,M)). The proofs are again very similar to those in [27] and so we skip many of the tedious details.
Theorem 6.4** (Disintegration theorem).**
The functors M⟼Sh(M) and M⟼Γc(G,O) provide an equivalence between the category Γc(G,O)-mod of unitary Γc(G,O)-modules and the category of G-sheaves of O-modules.
Proof.
Put R=Γc(G,O). First we start with a unitary R-module M and define the isomorphism η:M→Γc(G,Sh(M)), which the reader can verify is natural in M. If m∈M, then we define a section m:G(0)→∐x∈G(0)Mx by m(x)=[m]x. Let us check continuity. Let (n,U) with n∈M and U a compact open neighborhood of x be a basic neighborhood of m(x). Then [m]x=m(x)=[n]x and so we can find W a compact open neighborhood of x with χWm=χWn. Then x∈U∩W and if y∈U∩W, then m(y)=[m]y=[χWm]y=[χWn]y=[n]y and so m(U∩W)⊆(n,U). Thus m is continuous. Since M is unitary, we can find U⊆G(0) compact open with χUm=m. Suppose that y∈/U. Then since G(0) is Hausdorff and U is compact, we can find a neighborhood V of y disjoint from U. Since G(0) has a basis of compact open sets, we may assume that V is compact open. Then [m]y=[χVm]y=[χV∗χUm]y=[χU∩Vm]y=[0]y as χ∅ is the zero of R. Thus m has support contained in the compact open set U and hence m has compact support (as the support of a section is always closed).
It is straightforward to verify that m↦m is an abelian group homomorphism η:M→Γc(G,Sh(M)). To show that it is an R-module homomorphism, it is enough to verify η(fm)=fη(m) (i.e., fm=fm) on additive generators f=gχU of R, where U is a compact open bisection and g is a section of O supported on r(U). Since χr(U)f=f, it follows that fm is supported on r(U). Also, it follows from the proof in the previous paragraph that the support of fm is contained in r(U) as χr(U)fm=fm. Let x∈r(U) and let γ∈U with r(γ)=x. Recall that f=gχU=g∗χU (cf., the proof of Proposition 5.3). Then fm(x)=[fm]x=[g∗χUm]x=g(x)[χUm]x=g(x)βγ([m]d(γ)). On the other hand
[TABLE]
as required.
To see that η is injective, suppose that η(m)=m is the zero section. We show that m=0. Let U⊆G(0) compact open be arbitrary. We show that χUm=0. Since M is unitary, it will then follow that m=0. For each x∈U, we have that [0]x=m(x)=[m]x and so we can find a compact open neighborhood Vx of x in G(0) with χVxm=0. Since U is compact, we can cover it with a finite set V1,…,Vn of compact open sets with χVim=0 for i=1,…,n. Then V=V1∪⋯∪Vn is compact open and χV is an integral linear combination of χV1,…,χVn by the principle of inclusion-exclusion. Thus χVm=0. Therefore, χUm=χU∩Vm=χU∗χVm=0. We conclude that m=0 and so η is injective.
Finally, we must prove that η is surjective. Let t∈Γc(G,Sh(M)). For each x∈G(0), let (mx,Ux) be a basic neighborhood of t(x). Then, by continuity, we can find a compact open neighborhood Wx of x with t(Wx)⊆(mx,Ux). It then follows that t(y)=[mx]y for all y∈Wx. Using that the support of t is compact, we can obtain a finite collection of compact open neighborhoods W1,…,Wn and m1,…,mn∈M such that supp(t)⊆W1∪⋯∪Wn and t(y)=[mi]y for all y∈Wi. Put V1=W1 and, more generally, Vi=Wi∖(V1∪⋯∪Vi−1). Then Vi⊆Wi, for all i, the Vi are pairwise disjoint and V1∪⋯∪Vn=W1∪⋯∪Wn. Consequently, t(y)=[mi]y for all y∈Vi. Put
[TABLE]
We claim that t=m=η(m). Let V=V1∪⋯∪Vn. Note that supp(t)⊆V and χVm=m. Therefore, supp(m)⊆V by the first paragraph of the proof. Thus it remains to show that t(x)=m(x) for all x∈V. There is a unique index i with x∈Vi and t(x)=[mi]x. On the other hand
[TABLE]
as χVi∗χVj=0 whenever i=j. Thus η is surjective. This completes the proof that M≅Γc(G,Sh(M)).
Now we prove that if M=(F,q,β) is a G-sheaf of O-modules, then M≅Sh(Γc(G,M)). We leave the reader to check naturality. We define v:Sh(Γc(G,M))→M by v([t]x)=t(x) for t∈Γc(G,M). This is well defined because if [s]x=[t]x, then there exists a compact open neighborhood U of x in G(0) with χUs=χUt and so s(x)=(χUs)(x)=(χUt)(x)=t(x). It is a straightforward adaptation of the argument in [27] to check that v is continuous and a morphism of G-sheaves. For example, to check continuity of v, let U be a neighborhood of v([t]x)=t(x). Then we can find a compact open neighborhood W of x with t(W)⊆U. Then (t,W) is a neighborhood of [t]x and if [t]y∈(t,W), then y∈W and so v([t]y)=t(y)∈U. Thus v((t,W))⊆U, yielding continuity. To see that it is a G-sheaf morphism let γ:x→y be an arrow of G and let U∈Ga with γ∈U. Write β′ for the action of G on Sh(Γc(G,M)). Then if t∈Γc(G,M), we have βγ′([t]x)=[χUt]y. Therefore, v(βγ′([t]x))=v([χUt]y)=(χUt)(y)=χU(γ)βγ(t(x))=βγ(v([t]X)), as required.
We check that v is an isomorphism of G-sheaves of O-modules. First, let r∈Ox and choose a section f∈Γc(G(0),O) with f(x)=r. Then v(r[t]x)=v([ft]x)=(ft)(x)=f(x)t(x)=rv([t]x) and so v is a morphism. Since morphisms of G-sheaves are automatically local homeomorphisms, it remains to show that v is bijective. Let m∈Mx. Let t∈Γc(G,M) be a section with t(x)=m (such exists by Proposition 6.1). Then v([t]x)=t(x)=m and so v is onto. Suppose that v([t]x)=0x, that is, t(x)=0x. Then since the image of the zero section is open, we can find a compact open neighborhood U of x with t(U)=0. Then [t]x=[χUt]x=[0]x as χUt is zero on G(0). This completes the proof that v is an isomorphism.
∎
Note that in applications we shall mostly use the isomorphism M≅Γc(G,Sh(M)) since we want to disintegrate representations of R to representations of G.
7. Groupoid algebras as skew inverse semigroup rings
Our next goal is to show that unitary A⋊S-modules also can be represented as modules of global sections of G-sheaves of O-modules, where A=Γc(G(0),O) and S≤Ga is an inverse subsemigroup satisfying the germ conditions.
This will allow us to prove that the surjective homomorphism in Proposition 5.3 is, in fact, an isomorphism in this case. Here, we form the skew inverse semigroup ring via the action in Proposition 5.2. So from now on assume that S≤Ga is an inverse semigroup satisfying the germ conditions.
By Theorem 3.5, a unitary A⋊S-module M is the same thing as an abelian group M and a covariant system (EndZ(M),θ,φ) with the extra condition that M is a unitary A-module under the module action am=θa(m), where we put θ(a)=θa and φ(s)=φs. This latter condition is equivalent to asking that, for each m∈M, there is a compact open U⊆G(0) with χUm=m.
Let us recall that if ψ:R→S is a surjective ring homomorphism, then each S-module N becomes an R-module, called the inflation of N along ψ, by putting rn=ψ(r)n for r∈R and n∈N; inflation embeds the category of S-modules as a full subcategory of the category of R-modules.
To each unitary A⋊S-module M, we will associate a G-sheaf M=(F,q,β) of O-modules such that M≅Γc(G,M) as A⋊S-modules, where we view Γc(G,M) as an A⋊S-module via inflation along the surjective homomorphism
[TABLE]
from Proposition 5.3. In other words, we shall show that every unitary A⋊S-module action factors through θ⋊φ. Applying this to the regular module, which is unitary and faithful, will allow us to prove that θ⋊p is an isomorphism.
Since M is an A-module, applying Theorem 6.4 to G(0), we obtain a G(0)-sheaf of O-modules M with underlying space F=∐x∈G(0)Mx and M≅Γc(G(0),M) as an A-module, as in the construction of Sh(M) in the previous section. Note that the action of r∈Ox on [m]x is given by [θa(m)]x, where a∈A is a section with a(x)=r.
We now add a G-sheaf structure as follows. Let γ∈G(1) and choose s∈S with γ∈s; such exists by (G1). Put
[TABLE]
to define β. Let us check that βγ is well defined. First fix m and suppose that γ∈t with t∈S. By (G2), there exists u∈S with γ∈u and u≤s,t. Put U=r(u)=uu∗ and note that Us=u=Ut and r(γ)∈U. Then, using that (EndZ(M),θ,φ) is a covariant system, we have that
[TABLE]
A similar argument shows that [φt(m)]r(γ)=[φu(m)]r(γ) and so βγ does not depend on the choice of s.
On the other hand, if [m]d(γ)=[n]d(γ) and γ∈s, then we can find a compact open neighborhood W of d(γ) with θχW(m)=θχW(n). Moreover, we may shrink W so that W⊆d(s). Then χW∈Ds∗ and so, by covariance, we have that φsθχWφs∗=θαs(χW)=θχr(sW) where the last equality follows because if τ∈s, then
[TABLE]
Therefore, since r(γ)∈r(sW), we have that
[TABLE]
Similarly, we have [φs(n)]r(γ)=[φsθχW(n)]r(γ). As θχW(m)=θχW(n), it follows that [φs(m)]r(γ)=[φs(n)]r(γ), as required.
It is straightforward to verify that β makes M into a G-sheaf. To check continuity of β, let γ:x→y, m∈M and let s∈S with γ∈s. Then βγ([m]x)=[φs(m)]y and so a basic neighborhood of βγ([m]x) is of the form (φs(m),W) with y∈W compact open and W⊆r(s). Consider the neighborhood Z=(Ws×(m,d(Ws)))∩(G(1)×d,qF). Firstly, (γ,[m]x)∈Z. A typical element of Z is of the form (γ′,[m]z) with γ′∈Ws and d(γ′)=z. Then γ′∈s and so βγ′([m]z)=[φs(m)]r(γ′) and r(γ′)∈r(Ws)=W. Thus β(Z)⊆(φs(m),W), yielding continuity of β. If x∈G(0), then we can choose s∈S with x∈s. Then x∈s∗s and so without loss of generality we may assume that s=U with U⊆G(0) compact open. Then, by convariance, we have that [m]x=[θχUm]x=[φχUm]x=βx([m]x), demonstrating (S1). Suppose that d(σ)=r(τ) and σ∈s and τ∈t with s,t∈S. Then στ∈st∈S and so βστ([m]d(τ))=[φst(m)]r(σ)=[φs(φt(m))]r(σ)=βσ([φt(m)]d(σ))=βσ(βτ([m]d(τ))), establishing (S3) and so M is a G-sheaf.
Let us check that β makes M into a G-sheaf of O-modules. We need to verify that if r∈Od(γ), then βγ(r[m]d(γ))=αγ(r)βγ([m]d(γ)). Choose s∈S with γ∈S. As d(γ)∈d(s), we can find a section t supported on d(s) with t(d(γ))=r. Then t∈Ds∗ and αs(t)(r(γ))=αγ(t(d(γ)))=αγ(r). Thus αγ(r)βγ([m]d(γ))=[θαs(t)φs(m)]r(γ). On the other hand, using covariance,
βγ(r[m]d(γ))=βγ(r[θχd(s)(m)]d(γ))=[φsθtφs∗φs(m)]r(γ)=[θαs(t)φs(m)]r(γ), as required.
It follows that Γc(G,M) is a unitary Γc(G,O)-module. It is therefore an A⋊S-module via θ⋊φ. Our goal is to show that M≅Γc(G,M) as an A⋊S-module via ψ:M→Γc(G,M) where ψ(m)=m is given by m(x)=[m]x. It follows from Theorem 6.4 applied to G(0) that ψ is an isomorphism of A-modules. If a∈Ds, then (θ⋊φ)(aδs+N)=aχs and hence, since ψ is an A-module isomorphism and aδs+N=(aδss∗+N)(χss∗δs+N), it remains to show that ψ((χss∗δsm+N)m)=χsψ(m) or, equivalently, ψ(φs(m))=χsψ(m). First note that φs(m)=φss∗φs(m)=θχr(s)φs(m) and hence ψ(φs(m))=φs(m) is supported on r(s) by the proof of Theorem 6.4. Since χr(s)∗χs=χs, clearly χsm=χsψ(m) is also supported on r(s). Let x∈r(s) and let γ be the unique arrow of s with r(γ)=x. Then
[TABLE]
and so χsm=φs(m), as required. We have now essentially proved the following theorem.
Theorem 7.1**.**
Let O be a G-sheaf of rings on an ample groupoid G and let S≤Ga be an inverse subsemigroup satisfying the germ conditions. Then each unitary Γc(G(0),O)⋊S-module is an inflation of a unitary Γc(G,O)-module along the canonical surjection θ⋊φ:Γc(G(0),O)⋊S→Γc(G,O). Consequently, θ⋊φ is an isomorphism. In particular,
[TABLE]
holds.
Proof.
Everything except that θ⋊φ is an isomorphism has been proved. Put R=Γc(G(0),O)⋊S and π=θ⋊φ. Then R is a unitary left R-module via the regular action (by left multiplication). Moreover, this is a faithful module since R has local units and hence if 0=r∈R, then there is an idempotent e∈R with re=r=0. As the module action of R on R factors through π, we have that π(r)=0 implies rR=0 and hence r=0. Thus π is injective and hence an isomorphism.
∎
Applying this to the case of a constant sheaf, we obtain the following extension of results in [6, 15], generalized to an arbitrary base ring (not necessarily commutative, let alone a field).
Corollary 7.2**.**
Let G be an ample groupoid and R a unital ring. Then AR(G)≅Cc(G(0),R)⋊Ga, where AR(G) is the Steinberg algebra of G with coefficients in R (i.e., Γc(G,Δ(R))) and Cc(G(0),R) is the ring of compactly supported, locally constant functions f:G(0)→R with pointwise operations.
8. Sheaf representations of rings with local units
In this section, we generalize the Pierce representation of a ring [23] as global sections of a sheaf of rings over a Stone space in two ways: we consider rings with local units and we allow smaller generalized Boolean algebras. First we recall the generalized Stone space of a generalized Boolean algebra B. A character of B is a non-zero homomorphism λ:B→{0,1} to the two-element Boolean algebra. So a character λ satisfies:
•
λ(0)=0;
•
λ(B)=0;
•
λ(a∨b)=λ(a)∨λ(v);
•
λ(ab)=λ(a)λ(b);
•
λ(a∖b)=λ(a)∖λ(b)
where we denoted the meet in a semilattice by product.
The (generalized) Stone space of B is the space B of characters of B topologized by taking as a basis the sets
[TABLE]
with a∈B. The sets D(a) constitute the compact open subsets of B and a↦D(a) is an isomorphism of generalized Boolean algebras (this follows easily from Lemma 8.1 below). The space B is compact if and only if B has a maximum, i.e., is a Boolean algebra.
Recall that a filter in a poset is a proper non-empty subset which is upward closed and downward directed. For a generalized Boolean algebra, F=∅ will be a filter if 0∈/F, it is closed under meets and it is upward closed.
Note that if λ is a character, then λ−1(1) is an ultrafilter (i.e., maximal proper filter) on B and the characteristic function of an ultrafilter is a character. Since this is not so familiar for non-unital Boolean algebras, we include a proof.
The following lemma is standard.
Lemma 8.1**.**
Let B be a generalized Boolean algebra.
(1)
Let F be a filter on B and a∈/F such that ab=0 for all b∈F. Then there is an ultrafilter containing F and a.
2. (2)
A filter F is an ultrafilter if, and only if, for all a∈B∖F, there exists b∈F with ab=0.
3. (3)
If a,b∈B and a≰b, then there is an ultrafilter F with a∈F and b∈/F.
Proof.
For the first item, let
[TABLE]
Then 0∈/F′ by hypothesis and clearly F′ is a filter containing F and a. By Zorn’s lemma, there is an ultrafilter U containing F′.
For the second item, suppose first that F is an ultrafilter. If there exists a∈/F such ab=0 for all b∈F, then by the first item there is an ultrafilter containing F and a, contradicting that F is an ultrafilter. Conversely, suppose that F has the desired property. Let F′ be a filter properly containing F, and let a∈F′∖F. Then there exists b∈F with ab=0 and so 0∈F′, a contradiction. Thus F′ is an ultrafilter.
For the third item, note that a∖b=0. The set F′={c∈B∣c≥a∖b} is a filter containing a∖b. Hence, by the first item, it is contained in an ultrafilter F. As a≥a∖b, we have that a∈F′⊆F. Since b(a∖b)=0, we must have b∈/F.
∎
Corollary 8.2**.**
A mapping λ:B→{0,1} is a character if and only if λ−1(1) is an ultrafilter.
Proof.
Suppose first that λ is a character. To verify that λ−1(1) is an ultrafilter, we must show by Lemma 8.1 that if λ(a)=0, then there is b with λ(b)=1 and ab=0. Indeed, let c∈λ−1(1). Put b=c∖a. Then λ(b)=λ(c)∖λ(a)=1 and so b∈λ−1(1). Also ba=0.
Conversely, assume that λ−1(1) is an ultrafilter. Since λ−1(1) is non-empty, we have that λ=0. As λ−1(1) is proper, we have that λ(0)=0. Since λ−1(1) is upward closed, to show that λ preserves joins, we must show that if a,b∈λ−1(0), then a∨b∈λ−1(0). Indeed, by Lemma 8.1 we can find a′,b′∈λ−1(1) with aa′=0 and bb′=0. Then a′b′∈λ−1(1) and (a∨b)a′b′=aa′b′∨ba′b′=0. Thus a∨b∈λ−1(0). If λ(a)=1=λ(b), then since λ−1(1) is a filter λ(ab)=1. If a or b is not in λ−1(1), then since λ−1(1) is upward closed, it follows that ab∈/λ−1(1) and so λ preserves meets. To see that λ preserves relative complements, if a∈/λ−1(1), then a∖b≤a implies a∖b∈/λ−1(1). If a,b∈λ−1(1), then b(a∖b)=0 implies a∖b∈/λ−1(1) and so λ(a∖b)=0=λ(a)∖λ(b). If λ(a)=1 and λ(b)=0, then be=0 for some e∈λ−1(1) by Lemma 8.1. Then a∖b≥(a∖b)e=ae∖be=ae∈λ−1(1) and so a∖b∈λ−1(1). Thus λ(a∖b)=1=λ(a)∖λ(b). We conclude that λ is a character.
∎
Our standing assumption now is that R is a ring and B⊆E(Z(R)) is a sub-generalized Boolean algebra of the generalized Boolean algebra of central idempotents of R that is also a set of local units for R, i.e., R=⋃e∈BeRe. Note that since e is central, eRe=Re=eR. For example, if R is unital then we can take B=E(Z(R)) (and, in fact, any choice of B will have to contain [math] and 1). We will show that R can be identified with the ring of global sections with compact support Γc(B,OB) for a certain sheaf of rings OB on B. When R is unital and B=E(Z(R)), this will recover the Pierce representation [23].
If e,f∈B with f≤e, then there is a natural restriction ρfe:eR→fR given by r↦fr satisfying the usual axioms for a directed system. Thus, if λ∈B, then we can define
[TABLE]
The following description of Rλ is often more convenient.
Let
[TABLE]
Observe that Iλ is an ideal. Indeed, if er=0=fs with r,s∈R and e,f∈λ−1(1), then ef∈λ−1(1) and ef(r−s)=fer−efs=0 and, also, etr=ter=0 and ert=0, for any t∈R. Here we have used that B consists of central idempotents. Note that, by construction, if e∈λ−1(1), then r+Iλ=er+Iλ as e(r−er)=0. It is then straightforward to verify that R/Iλ≅Rλ via the map sending r+Iλ to the class of er where e∈λ−1(1). From now on we put [r]λ=r+Iλ and identify Rλ with R/Iλ. Note that the ring Rλ is unital with identity [e]λ with e∈λ−1(1). Indeed, we already observed that [r]λ=[er]λ and, since e is central, also [r]λ=[re]λ. We have that [r]λ=[s]λ if and only if er=es some e∈λ−1(1).
The underlying space of OB is defined to be E=∐λ∈BRλ. If r∈R and e∈B, then we put
[TABLE]
The reader will easily verify that the sets of the form (r,D(e)) form a basis for a topology on E and that p:E→B defined by p([r]λ)=λ maps (r,D(e)) homeomorphically to D(e), whence p is a local homeomorphism. The reader will also check that the ring structures on the Rλ turn OB=(E,p,+,⋅) into a sheaf of unital rings on B.
Since B is Hausdorff, we can identify Γc(B,OB) with the ring of continuous sections with compact support of O (under pointwise operations). Note that since the image of the zero section is open, the support of a section is always closed. Thus to show that a section has compact support it is enough to show that its support is contained in a compact set.
To each r∈R, we define a mapping r:B→E by r(λ)=[r]λ.
Proposition 8.3**.**
Let r∈R. Then r∈Γc(B,OB).
Proof.
Clearly, the mapping r is a section of p. Let us check continuity. Let (s,D(e)) with s∈R and e∈B be a basic neighborhood in E of r(λ). Then λ(e)=1 and [s]λ=[r]λ. Thus we can find f∈λ−1(1) with fs=fr. Then efs=efr and ef∈λ−1(1). Thus λ∈D(ef) and if τ∈D(ef), then τ∈D(e) and r(τ)=[r]τ=[s]τ∈(s,D(e)). Thus r is continuous. We need to check that r has compact support. Since B is a set of local units for R, we can find e∈B with er=r. We claim that the support of r is contained in the compact set D(e), whence r has compact support. Suppose that λ∈/D(e). Then e∈/λ−1(1) and so, by Lemma 8.1, there exists f∈λ−1(1) with fe=0. Then fr=fer=0 and so [r]λ=[0]λ. This completes the proof.
∎
Remark 8.4*.*
The above proof shows that if er=r with e∈B, then r has support contained in D(e).
Theorem 8.5**.**
Let R be a ring and B⊆E(Z(A)) a sub-generalized boolean algebra that is a set of local units for R. Then R≅Γc(B,OB) via the mapping r↦r with r(λ)=[r]λ.
Proof.
Define Ψ:R→Γc(B,OB) by Ψ(r)=r.
If r,s∈R and λ∈B, then (r+s)(λ)=[r]λ+[s]λ=[r+s]λ=r+s(λ) and similarly, rs=rs. Thus Ψ is a homomorphism. Suppose 0=r∈R. Let F={e∈B∣er=r}. Since B is a set of local units, F=∅ and 0∈/F as r=0. Trivially, F is a filter. Thus we can find a character λ with F⊆λ−1(1) by Lemma 8.1. We claim that 0=r(λ)=[r]λ. Indeed, suppose that f∈λ−1(1) with fr=0. Let e∈F. Then (e∖ef)r=(e−ef)r=r and so e∖ef∈F⊆λ−1(1). But then 0=f(e−ef)=f(e∖ef)∈λ−1(1), a contradiction. Thus r(λ)=0 and so r=0. We conclude that Ψ is injective.
The most difficult part of the proof is to show that Ψ is surjective. Let f:B→E be a continuous section with compact support supp(f). For each λ∈supp(f), choose rλ∈R with f(λ)=[rλ]λ and eλ∈λ−1(1). Then f(λ)∈(rλ,D(eλ)) and so we can find a compact open set D(bλ) with bλ∈B and f(D(bλ))⊆(rλ,D(eλ)). Since supp(f) is compact, we can find λ1,…,λn such that supp(f)⊆D(bλ1)∪⋯∪D(bλn). Note that f(λ)=[rλi]λ for all λ∈D(bλi). By putting b1=bλ1 and, inductively, bi=bλi∖(b1∨b2∨⋯∨bi−1), we can find mutually orthogonal b1,…,bn with bi≤bλi and b1∨⋯∨bn=bλ1∨⋯∨bλn. In particular, D(bi)⊆D(bλi) for i=1,…,n and supp(f)⊆D(b1)∪⋯∪D(bn) and this union is disjoint. Putting ri=birλi we have that f(λ)=[rλi]λ=[ri]λ for all λ∈D(bi). Put r=r1+⋯+rn. We claim that r=f. Let b=⋁i=1nbi=b1+⋯+bn. Then
[TABLE]
by orthogonality of b1,…,bn. Remark 8.4 shows that supp(r)⊆D(b). On the other hand, supp(f)⊆D(b1)∪⋯∪D(bn)=D(b), as well. Suppose that λ∈D(b). Then there is a unique i with λ∈D(bi). Then we compute that
[TABLE]
This completes the proof that Ψ(r)=f.
∎
The most important special case of Theorem 8.5 is when B=E(Z(A)), in which case B is known as the Pierce spectrum of A [23]. Since we shall need it a lot in the next section, we denote by A the Pierce spectrum of A and OA the sheaf of unital rings constructed above for B=E(Z(A)) (assuming that A has a set of central local units). If A is a commutative ring, then each stalk OA,λ is an indecomposable ring, that is, has no (central) idempotents except [math] and 1. Indeed, if [a]λ is idempotent, then there exists e∈λ−1(1) with ea=ea2=(ea)2 and so [a]λ=[f]λ with f=ea an idempotent of A. If f∈λ−1(1), then [f]λ is the identity of OA,x, whereas if f∈/λ−1(1), then fe′=0 for some e′∈λ−1(1) by Lemma 8.1 and so [f]λ=[e′f]λ=[0]λ. Thus we have the following corollary, generalizing Pierce’s sheaf representation theorem from the unital case to the case of rings with local units.
Corollary 8.6**.**
Let A be a ring with central local units. Then A≅Γc(A,OA) where A is the Pierce spectrum of A. If A is commutative, then OA is a sheaf of indecomposable unital rings and hence every commutative ring with local units is the ring of global sections with compact support of a sheaf of indecomposable unital rings on a generalized Stone space.
It follows from Theorem 6.4 that we can identify the category of unitary A-modules with the category of sheaves of OA-modules in the context of Corollary 8.6.
Note that if X is a Hausdorff space with a basis of compact open sets and K is an indecomposable commutative ring, then it is easy to verify that X is homeomorphic to the Pierce spectrum of the ring Cc(X,K) of locally constant K-valued functions with compact support.
9. Skew inverse semigroup rings as groupoid convolution algebras
We now aim to prove the converse of Theorem 7.1 by showing that every skew inverse semigroup ring (with respect to a spectral action) is isomorphic to a groupoid convolution algebra.
Let α be a spectral action of an inverse semigroup S on a ring A. We want to define a Boolean action of S on the Pierce spectrum A of A. For s∈S, let us put
[TABLE]
The reader should verify that Ds is compact open (it is the basic compact open associated to 1ss∗∈E(Z(A))) and can be identified with the Pierce spectrum of Ds. Note that Ds=∅ if and only if 1ss∗=0, in which case 1s∗s=αs∗(1ss∗)=0 and so Ds∗=∅, as well. Define αs:Ds∗→Ds by
[TABLE]
for e∈Z(E(A)).
Proposition 9.1**.**
For each s∈S and λ∈Ds∗, we have that αs(λ)∈Ds.
Proof.
Note that if λ∈Ds∗, then λ(1s∗s)=1 and so
[TABLE]
We check that αs(λ) is a generalized Boolean algebra homomorphism.
It is clearly non-zero as αs(λ)(1ss∗)=1. Since 1ss∗ is a central idempotent, the mapping A→Ds∗ given by a↦αs∗(a1ss∗) is a surjective ring homomorphism and hence induces a generalized Boolean algebra homomorphism on central idempotents. Composing with λ shows that αs(λ) is a homomorphism of generalized Boolean algebras, and so αs(λ)∈Ds, as required.
∎
Proposition 9.2**.**
αs:Ds∗→Ds* is a homeomorphism.*
Proof.
This is clear if Ds∗=∅=Ds. So assume this is not the case.
To see that αs is bijection, we note that for λ∈Ds∗
[TABLE]
A dual verification shows that αs and αs∗ are inverses.
We now check continuity of αs. Continuity of αs∗ will then imply that αs is a homeomorphism. A basic neighborhood V of αs(λ), with λ∈Ds∗, is of the form V={μ∈A∣μ(f)=1} where f∈E(Z(A)) with αs(λ)(f)=1. As αs(λ)∈Ds, we may assume that f1ss∗=f, i.e., f∈Ds. Let f′=αs∗(f); it is a central idempotent of Ds∗ and hence of A. The set U={μ∈Ds∗∣μ(f′)=1} is an open set. Also λ(f′)=λ(αs∗(f))=αs(λ)(f)=1 and so λ∈U. If μ∈U, then αs(μ)(f)=μ(αs∗(f))=μ(f′)=1 and so αs(U)⊆V. This establishes the continuity of αs.
∎
We now need to verify that s↦αs is a homomorphism of inverse semigroups S→IA.
Proposition 9.3**.**
The mapping α:S→IA given by α(s)=αs is a homomorphism.
Proof.
As usual, it suffices to prove that α is order preserving, α(ef)=α(e)α(f) for idempotents e,f∈E(S), α(st)=α(s)α(t) whenever s∗s=tt∗. If s≤t, then 1ss∗≤1tt∗ and 1s∗s≤1t∗t and so Ds⊆Dt and Ds∗⊆Dt∗. Moreover, if λ∈Ds∗, then αs(λ)(e)=λ(αs∗(e1ss∗))=λ(αs∗(e1ss∗1tt∗))=λ(αt∗(e1ss∗1tt∗))=λ(1t∗ss∗t)λ(αt∗(e1tt∗))=λ(1s∗s)αt(e)=αt(e) and so α(s)≤α(t).
If e∈E(S), then for λ∈De, we have that λ(1e)=1 and so, for f∈E(Z(A)), it follows that αe(λ)(f)=λ(αe(f1e))=λ(f1e)=λ(f)λ(1e)=λ(f). Thus αe(λ)=λ, i.e., αe is the identity on De. We conclude that if e,f∈E(S), then αeαf is the identity on De∩Df. But λ∈De∩Df if and only if λ(1e)=1=λ(1f), which occurs if and only if λ(1e1f)=1, that is, λ(1ef)=1. So De∩Df=Def, whence αeαf=αef. Thus α∣E(S) is a homomorphism.
If s∗s=tt∗, then Dt=Ds∗, Dst=Ds and D(st)∗=Dt∗. Thus αsαt,αst:Dt∗→Ds. If λ∈Dt∗, then we compute, using 1tt∗=1s∗s, that
[TABLE]
On the other hand,
[TABLE]
and so αst(λ)=αs(αt(λ)), as required.
∎
Let G=S⋉A be the corresponding groupoid of germs. It is ample as A has a basis of compact open sets. Moreover, since the action is Boolean, the compact open subsets of G(1) of the form U(s)=(s,Ds∗) form an inverse semigroup S of compact open bisections which is a quotient of S (via s↦U(s)) satisfying the germ conditions. Our goal is to extend the sheaf of rings structure on OA to a G-sheaf of rings structure so that A⋊S≅Γc(G,OA).
Let us recall that the stalk OA,λ=A/Iλ where
[TABLE]
and that the class a+Iλ is denoted [a]λ. The unit is the class [e]λ where λ(e)=1. We now define a G-sheaf structure on OA by putting
[TABLE]
for [s,λ]∈G(1). (We hope the reader will forgive our abuse of the notation α.) Here, of course, we must have λ∈Ds∗ and we need to show independence of the choice of a and s.
Indeed, first suppose that [a]λ=[b]λ. Then there is e∈λ−1(1) with ea=eb. Then, as λ(1s∗s)=1, we have that
[TABLE]
and so
[TABLE]
establishing independence of the choice of a. If [s,λ]=[t,λ], then we can find u≤s,t with λ∈Du∗. By symmetry, it is enough to show that [αs(1s∗sa)]αs(λ)=[αu(1u∗ua)]αu(λ). Note that αu(λ)=αs(λ)
and so we just need to prove that [αs(1s∗sa)]αs(λ)=[αu(1u∗ua)]αs(λ). Since λ(1u∗u)=1, we have that [a]λ=[1u∗ua]λ. Hence, by what we just proved, and the equality u=su∗u, we conclude that
[αs(1s∗sa)]αs(λ)=[αs(1s∗s1u∗ua)]αs(λ)=[αs(1u∗ua)]αs(λ)=[αsαu∗u(1u∗ua)]αs(λ)=[αu(1u∗ua)]αs(λ), as required.
Note that α[s,λ]:OA,λ→OA,αs(λ) is clearly a homomorphism of unital rings since a↦αs(1s∗sa) a ring homomorphism A→Ds sending 1s∗s∈λ−1(1) to 1ss∗∈αs(λ)−1(1).
We check that α:G(1)×d,pE→E is continuous. A basic neighborhood of α[s,λ]([a]λ)=[αs(1s∗sa)]αs(λ) is of the form (αs(1s∗sa),W) where W is a compact open neighborhood of αs(λ) contained in Ds. Then V=αs∗(W) is a compact open neighborhood of λ contained in Ds∗ with αs(V)⊆W. Moreover, (s,V) is a compact open bisection containing γ=[s,λ] and (a,V) is a compact open subset of E containing [a]λ. We claim that U=((s,V)×(a,V))∩(G(1)×d,pE) is a neighborhood of (γ,[a]λ) with α(U)⊆(αs(1s∗sa),W). Indeed, a typical element of U is of the form ([s,τ],[a]τ) with τ∈V, whence αs(τ)∈W. Then α[s,τ]([a]τ)=[αs(1s∗sa)]αs(τ)∈(αs(1s∗sa),W).
To finish we verify (S3) and leave (S1) and (S2) to the reader. Let β=[s,λ′′] and γ=[t,λ′]. We have to check that αβ(αγ([a]λ))=αβγ([a]λ) whenever d(β)=r(γ) and d(γ)=p([a]λ)=λ. From d(β)=r(γ) we get that λ′′=αt(λ′) and from d(γ)=p([a]λ) we get that λ=λ′. Now, notice that αβ(αγ([a]λ))=α[s,αt(λ′)]([αt(1t∗ta)]αt(λ′))=[αs(1s∗sαt(1t∗ta))]αs(αt(λ′)). On the other hand, since βγ=[st,λ′] we have that
[TABLE]
(S3) now follows from the calculation below:
[TABLE]
where we used that 1tt∗ is the identity on the range of αt, and if e≤t∗t then αt(1e)=1tet∗.
Proposition 9.4**.**
Let s,t∈S and suppose that U(s)=U(t). Then 1ss∗δs+N=1tt∗δt+N in A⋊S.
Proof.
First note that U(s)=U(t) implies Ds=Dt and Ds∗=Dt∗, and hence 1ss∗=1tt∗; let’s call this latter idempotent e. Also note that U(s∗)=U(t∗). Let λ∈Ds=Dt. Then since U(s∗)=U(t∗), we have that [s∗,λ]=[t∗,λ]. Thus we can find wλ∈S with λ∈Dwλ and wλ∗≤s∗,t∗. By compactness of Ds, we can find λ1,…,λn such that Ds=Dwλ1∪⋯∪Dwλn. Let U1=Dwλ1 and Ui+1=Dwλi+1∖(U1∪⋯∪Ui) for 1≤i<n. Then Ds=U1∪⋯∪Un with the Ui compact open and pairwise disjoint and Ui⊆Dwλi. Then there are pairwise orthogonal idempotents e1,…,en∈E(Z(Ae)) with e=e1+⋯+en and Ui={λ∈A∣λ(ei)=1}. Note that ei∈A1wλiwλi∗=Dwλi from Ui⊆Dwλi. Thus eiδs+N=eiδwλi+N=eiδt+N, for i=1,…,n, as wλi≤s,t. Then, recalling that 1ss∗=e=1tt∗, we have that 1ss∗δs+N=e1δs+⋯+enδs+N=e1δt+⋯+enδt+N=1tt∗δt+N as required.
∎
Theorem 9.5**.**
If S is an inverse semigroup with a spectral action α on a ring A, then A⋊S≅Γc(S⋉A,OA) with the S⋉A-sheaf structure on OA coming from (9.1) and the usual sheaf of rings structure on OA over the Pierce spectrum A.
Proof.
We already have an isomorphism A≅Γc(A,OA) given by a↦a by Theorem 8.5. Theorem 7.1 then gives an isomorphism Γc(S×A,OA)≅A⋊S where S acts on Γc(A,OA)≅A via the action α from Section 5. Put R=A⋊S and R′=Γc(A,OA)⋊S. We use N for the ideal used in the definition of A⋊S and N′ for the ideal in the definition of Γc(A,OA)⋊S. We want to define inverse covariant systems.
Define θ:A→R′ by the composition of a↦a with the embedding Γc(A,OA)↪R′. Define φ:S→R′ by φ(s)=χU(ss∗)δU(s)+N′. Clearly θ is a homomorphism. Also φ is a homomorphism, as it is the composition of s↦U(s) with the canonical homomorphism of S into R′. We check the covariance conditions. If e∈E(S), then U(e)=De and so φ(e)=χDeδU(e)+N′. On the other hand, 1e(λ)=[1e]λ. If λ(1e)=1, then [1e]λ=1λ. If λ(1e)=0, then f1e=0 for some f∈λ−1(1) by Lemma 8.1 and so [1e]λ=[f1e]λ=[0]λ. Thus 1e=χDe and so θ(1e)=χDeδU(e)+N′=φ(e).
Now suppose that a∈Ds∗. Note that d(U(s))=Ds∗. Since 1s∗sa=a, it follows that a is supported on Ds∗s=Ds∗ (see the proof of Theorem 8.5). Now we check that θ(αs(a))=φ(s)θ(a)φ(s∗). Note that
[TABLE]
as αs(a)∈Ds=A1ss∗ implies that αs(a) is supported on Ds=U(ss∗). On the other hand,
[TABLE]
and so we must show αs(a)=αU(s)(a).
Both αs(a) and αU(s)(a) are supported on Ds. If λ∈Ds=r(U(s)), then λ=αs(ν) for a unique ν∈Ds∗ with [s,ν]∈U(s). Then we have
[TABLE]
We conclude that
[TABLE]
as required.
It follows that we have a homomorphism π=θ⋊φ:R→R′ given by π(aδs+N)=θ(a)φ(s).
Now we define θ′:Γc(A,OA)→R and φ′:S→R by setting θ′ to be the composition of the mapping a↦a with the inclusion of A and putting φ′(U(s))=1ss∗δs+N. Note that φ′ is well defined by Proposition 9.4. Clearly θ′ is a homomorphism. Since U(s)U(t)=U(st), it also follows that φ′ is a homomorphism. We now check the covariance conditions. The idempotents of S are of the form U(e) with e∈E(S). The identity of the domain of αU(e) is χU(e)=1e. Thus θ′(χU(e))=1eδe+N. On the other hand, φ′(U(e))=1eδe+N by definition. Next suppose that a, with a∈A, is supported on Ds∗=d(U(s)), that is, a∈Γc(A,Oa)χDs∗=Γc(A,Oa)1s∗s. Then a=a1s∗s=a1s∗s and so a=a1s∗s, i.e., a∈Ds∗.
We compute that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, by (9.2), we have that θ′(αU(s)(a))=θ′(αs(a))=αs(a)δss∗+N. Thus (R,θ′,φ′) is covariant and induces a homomorphism π′=θ′⋊φ′:R′→R given by π′(aδU(s)+N′)=θ′(a)φ′(U(s)).
Let us verify that π and π′ are inverse homomorphisms. Let a∈Ds. Then 1ss∗a=a implies that a is supported on Ds=U(ss∗). First note that if a∈Ds, then
[TABLE]
If a is supported on r(U(s))=Ds, then a=a1ss∗=a1ss∗ and so a=a1ss∗. Thus a∈Ds. Therefore,
[TABLE]
It follows immediately that π,π′ are inverse homomorphisms. This completes the proof.
∎
Putting together Theorems 7.1 and 9.5 we see that skew inverse semigroup rings with respect to spectral actions and convolution algebras of sheaves of rings over ample groupoids are essentially one and the same. Future work will show that groupoid convolution algebras
play a role in understanding skew inverse semigroup rings.
Remark 9.6*.*
We note that the ample groupoid S⋉A was not the unique possible choice. If we took any generalized Boolean algebra B in E(Z(A)) containing the set {1e∣e∈E(S)}, then we could have used Theorem 8.5 to represent A as the global sections with compact support of a sheaf of rings on B, defined an analogous action of S on B and proceeded with an identical proof to extend the sheaf of rings structure over B to one over S⋉B to realize the skew inverse semigroup ring as a convolution algebra over S⋉B. Each such generalized Boolean algebra gives a quotient space of A, and hence a smaller unit space for our groupoid, but it has the property that the stalks of the sheaf of rings become in a sense bigger. Still, it might be reasonable to work with the generalized Boolean algebra generated by {1e∣e∈E(S)}, which gives the smallest unit space and the largest stalks. Then it would have the advantage that the domains of the elements of S generate the generalized boolean algebra of compact open subsets of the unit space.
Bibliography29
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] G. Abrams, P. Ara, and M. Siles Molina. Leavitt path algebras . Number 2191 in Lecture Notes in Mathematics. London: Springer, 2017.
2[2] P. Ara, J. Bosa, R. Hazrat, A. Sims. Reconstruction of graded groupoids from graded Steinberg algebras Forum Math. , 29(5):1023–1037, 2017.
3[3] P. Ara and K. R. Goodearl. Leavitt path algebras of separated graphs. J. Reine Angew. Math. , 669:165–224, 2012.
4[4] V. Beuter Partial actions of inverse semigroups and their associated algebras Ph.D. Thesis , Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, 2018. http://ppgmtm.posgrad.ufsc.br/files/2017/09/Tese_Viviane.pdf
5[5] V. Beuter, L. G. Cordeiro. The dynamics of partial inverse semigroup actions. Ar Xiv e-prints , Dec 2018.
6[6] V. Beuter, D. Gonçalves. The interplay between Steinberg algebras and skew rings. J. Algebra , 497:337–362, 2018.
7[7] V. Beuter, D. Gonçalves, J. Öinert, and D. Royer. Simplicity of skew inverse semigroups with applications to Steinberg algebras and topological dynamics. To appear in Forum Math. , ar Xiv:1708.04973
8[8] J. Brown, L.O. Clark, C. Farthing, A. Sims. Simplicity of algebras associated to étale groupoids Semigroup Forum , 88(2):433–452, 2014.