arXiv:1510.05583v2 [] 29 Aug 2017

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER
COMMUTATIVE DG RINGS AND PERFECT BASE CHANGE
LIRAN SHAUL
A BSTRACT. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, and consider the category of cohomologically noetherian commutative differential graded rings
A over K, such that H 0 (A) is essentially of finite type over K, and A has finite flat dimension over K. We extend Grothendieck’s twisted inverse image pseudofunctor to this
category by generalizing the theory of rigid dualizing complexes to this setup. We prove
functoriality results with respect to cohomologically finite and cohomologically essentially
smooth maps, and prove a perfect base change result for f ! in this setting. As application,
we deduce a perfect derived base change result for the twisted inverse image of a map
between ordinary commutative noetherian rings. Our results generalize and solve some
recent conjectures of Yekutieli.

C ONTENTS
0. Introduction
1. Preliminaries
2. Homological equivalences between DG-rings
3. Rigid dualizing DG-modules and cohomologically finite maps
4. Tensor product of dualizing DG-modules
5. The twisted tensor product symmetric monoidal operation
6. Rigid dualizing DG-modules and cohomologically essentially smooth maps
7. The twisted inverse image pseudofunctor and perfect base change
References

1
6
8
14
19
21
25
33
37

0. I NTRODUCTION
0.1. Motivation: derived base change. At the center of Grothendieck’s coherent duality
theory lies the twisted inverse image pseudofunctor (−)! . One of the most important features of (−)! is that it commutes with flat (and even tor-independent) base change. In the
affine noetherian situation that we work with in this paper, flat (or tor-independent) base
change says the following: given a diagram
A

f

/B

g


C

h


/ B ⊗A C

f′

The author acknowledges the support of the European Union for the ERC grant No 257004-HHNcdMir.
1

2

LIRAN SHAUL

of essentially finite type maps between noetherian rings, such that g is flat (or such that
TorA
i (B, C) = 0 for all i 6= 0), there is an isomorphism
∼ (f ′ )! Lg ∗ (−).
Lh∗ f ! (−) =
+
of functors D+
f (A) → Df (B ⊗A C). It is then natural to ask if one may generalize this
result with respect to more general maps g. Unfortunately, within the usual framework of
noetherian rings and their derived categories, such a question is meaningless. The problem
L
is that if TorA
i (B, C) 6= 0 for some i 6= 0, the formula M 7→ M ⊗A C does not define a
functor D(B) → D(B ⊗A C).
The reason for the failure is that when TorA
i (B, C) 6= 0, the ring B ⊗A C does not
represent the correct homological tensor product between B and C over A. Instead, one
needs to replace it with B ⊗LA C which is no longer a commutative ring. There are various
ways to represent the object B ⊗LA C (for instance, using simplicial commutative rings).
In this paper we will represent it using commutative differential graded rings (also known
as graded-commutative DG-algebras). Thus, we may resolve the map g : A → C as
g̃

c

≃

A−
→ C̃ −
→ C, where g̃ is a flat DG-ring map, and the map C̃ −
→ C is a quasi-isomorphism.
We now obtain a new commutative diagram
A

f

/B

g̃


C̃

h̃

f˜′


/ B ⊗A C̃

in which g̃ and h̃ are flat, so we may consider the functor
Lh̃∗ f ! (−) : D+
f (A) → D(B ⊗A C̃),
and ask whether it is naturally isomorphic to
(f˜′ )! Lg̃ ∗ (−).
Of course, for this to make sense, one needs to define (f˜′ )! . As C̃ and B ⊗A C̃ are both
DG-rings, to have such a result, it becomes necessary to extend the theory of the twisted
inverse image pseudofunctor to such context.
0.2. Rigid dualizing complexes. There are various approaches in the literature concerning how to construct the twisted inverse image pseudofunctor. Grothendieck’s original
strategy, explained by Hartshorne in [10], used dualizing and residue complexes. Deligne
([10, Appendix]) proved the existence of f ! directly as a right adjoint of Rf∗ . The most
general results1 in the area are due to Lipman [14] where such a pseudofunctor is constructed over non-noetherian schemes. (And also, as far as we know, this is the first place
where tor-independent base change was proved). The approach taken in this paper is using
rigid dualizing complexes.
First defined by Van den Bergh [22] in a noncommutative situation, the theory of rigid
dualizing complexes, while slightly less general then Grothendieck’s approach, has the
advantage that it can be developed entirely inside the derived category. In algebraic geometry, this theory was developed by Yekutieli and Zhang [24, 25, 26, 27], and by Avramov,
Iyengar and Lipman [3, 4], building on their work with Nayak [5]. From the point of view
of this work, it is interesting to note that while these papers developed the theory of rigid
1See however the recent paper [18], where duality theory is generalized to the unbounded derived category,
at least over noetherian schemes

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

3

dualizing complexes only over commutative rings, both of them had to make a substantial
use of DG-rings. This is because DG-rings appear already in the definition of rigid dualizing complexes. Underlying this definition, lies the following construction: given a base
commutative ring K, and a commutative noetherian K-algebra A, there is a functor
R HomA⊗LK A (A, − ⊗LK −) : D(A) × D(A) → D(A)
which we refer to as derived Hochschild cohomology. To define it, one replaces K → A
≃
by a flat DG-ring resolution K → Ã −
→ A, and then define
R HomA⊗LK A (A, − ⊗LK −) := R HomÃ⊗K Ã (A, − ⊗LK −).
It can be shown ([5, Theorem 3.2], [24, Theorem 6.15]) that this construction is independent of the chosen resolution. Then, one defines a rigid dualizing complex over A relative
to K, to be a dualizing complex R over A which is of finite flat dimension over K, together
with an isomorphism
≃
R−
→ R HomA⊗LK A (A, R ⊗LK R)
in D(A).
Under suitable assumptions on K, A, one can show that there exists a unique rigid dualizing
complex RA over A relative to K. Then, given an essentially finite type map f : A → B,
one defines
f ! (−) := R HomB (B ⊗LA R HomA (−, RA ), RB ).
0.3. Main results. Let us now describe the contents of this paper. In section 1 we recall
some basic definitions concerning DG-rings, their derived categories, and dualizing DGmodules over them. We also define the notion of a rigid dualizing DG-module over a
commutative DG-ring, and describe the category of DG-rings that we will work with in
this paper, DGReftf /K , which consists of DG-rings which are essentially of finite type (in
a cohomological sense) and of finite flat dimension over a base noetherian ring K.
Section 2 is of technical nature, and in it we describe a framework which allows one
to transfer homological results between derived categories of quasi-isomorphic DG-rings.
We view the results of this section as a technical necessity, forced on us due to the lack of
a model structure on the category of commutative DG-rings.
In section 3 we study functoriality of rigid dualizing DG-modules with respect to cohomologically finite maps. Such maps generalize finite ring maps. The main result of this
section, repeated as Corollary 3.10 below, is the following result.
Theorem 0.1. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension.
(1) For any A ∈ DGReftf /K , there exists a rigid dualizing DG-module over A relative
to K.
(2) Given a cohomologically finite map f : A → B in DGReftf /K , and given a rigid
dualizing DG-module RA over A relative to K,
RB := R HomA (B, RA )
is a rigid dualizing DG-module over B relative to K.
In the short section 4 we discuss the box tensor product (that is, the external tensor
product) of dualizing DG-modules. We show in Theorem 4.4 that:

4

LIRAN SHAUL

Theorem 0.2. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, let
A, B ∈ DGReftf /K ,
and let C be a DG K-ring that represents A ⊗LK B. Given a dualizing DG-module R
over A, and a dualizing DG-module S over B, the DG-module R ⊗LK S is a dualizing
DG-module over C.
In section 5 we make a more detailed study of the behavior of derived Hochschild cohomology for A ∈ DGReftf /K . In Theorem 5.5, we generalize [5, Theorem 4.1], the main
result of that paper, to DGReftf /K , and give a formula for computing derived Hochschild
cohomology using homological operations over A, avoiding the passage to A ⊗LK A. Using
that result, we deduce in Corollary 5.7 the following, which guarantees and explains the
uniqueness of rigid dualizing DG-modules
Theorem 0.3. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension. For any
A ∈ DGReftf /K , denote by DA the set of isomorphism classes of dualizing DG-modules
over A. Then the operation
R HomA⊗LK A (A, − ⊗LK −)
defines a group structure on DA , and any rigid dualizing DG-module (RA , ρ) is a unit of
this group. In particular, the rigid dualizing DG-module is unique up to isomorphism.
Section 6 discusses functoriality of rigid dualizing DG-modules with respect to cohomologically essentially smooth maps. Such maps A → B generalizes the concept of an
essentially smooth map between noetherian rings. We associate to such a map a DGmodule ΩB/A , which, when A and B are rings, is given by a shift of a wedge product of
the module of Kahler differentials Ω1B/A . Then, we show:
Theorem 0.4. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, let f :
A → B be a cohomologically essentially smooth map in DGReftf /K , and let RA be the
rigid dualizing DG-module over A relative to K. Then
RA ⊗LA ΩB/A
has the structure of a rigid dualizing DG-module over B relative to K.
This is repeated as Theorem 6.21 below. To prove this, we first prove that RA ⊗LA ΩB/A
is a dualizing DG-module over B. This is equivalent to showing that a cohomologically
essentially smooth map is Gorenstein, and we prove this fact in Corollary 6.11. Theorems
0.1 and 0.4 solve a generalization of [23, Conjecture 9.8] in the case where all DG-rings
have bounded cohomology.
Finally, in section 7, we arrive to the twisted inverse image pseudofunctor. Denoting by
DerCatK the 2-category of K-linear triangulated categories, the next result is extracted
from Proposition 7.2, Theorem 7.3 and Theorem 7.5.
Theorem 0.5. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension. There
exists a pseudofunctor
(−)! : DGReftf /K → DerCatK
with the following properties:
(1) On the full subcategory of DGReftf /K made of essentially finite type K-algebras
which are of finite flat dimension over K, (−)! is naturally isomorphic to the classical twisted inverse image pseudofunctor.

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

5

(2) Given a cohomologically finite map f : A → B in DGReftf /K , there is an isomorphism
f ! (M ) ∼
= R HomA (B, M )
+
of functors D+
f (A) → Df (B).
(3) Given a cohomologically essentially smooth map f : A → B in DGReftf /K , there
is an isomorphism
∼ M ⊗L ΩB/A
f ! (M ) =
A

of functors

D+
f (A)

→

D+
f (B).

The final result of this paper fulfills the motivation of Section 0.1 by proving a derived
base change result with respect to perfect maps (i.e., maps of finite flat dimension). Thus,
in Theorem 7.6, we show:
Theorem 0.6. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, let f :
A → B be an arbitrary map in DGReftf /K , and let g : A → C be a K-flat map in
DGReftf /K such that C has finite flat dimension over A. Consider the induced base change
commutative diagram
A

f

g


C

/B
h

f′


/ B ⊗A C

Then there is an isomorphism
Lh∗ ◦ f ! (−) ∼
= (f ′ )! ◦ Lg ∗ (−)
of functors
+
D+
f (A) → Df (B ⊗A C).

0.4. Scope of this work. We now discuss the scope of this work, compared to related
papers on rigid dualizing complexes. It was shown in [3, Theorem 8.5.6] that over a
base Gorenstein ring of finite Krull dimension, an essentially of finite type algebra has
a rigid dualizing complex if and only if it has finite flat dimension over the base. Since
by Kawasaki’s solution to Sharp’s conjecture ([12, Corollary 1.4]), every noetherian ring
possessing a dualizing complex is a quotient of such Gorenstein ring, in some sense, this
is the strongest possible existence result. The approach to rigid dualizing complexes taken
in [25, 26, 27] is very different than the one of [3, 4]. The main difference is that the latter presupposes the existence of global Grothendieck duality theory, while the aim of the
former is to develop the theory of rigid dualizing complex, and use it as a self-contained
approach to Grothendieck duality theory.
The approach we take in this paper in some sense combines these two approaches. On
one hand, we work in DGReftf /K , the precise DG generalization of the scope of [3]. In
addition, we assume Grothendieck duality theory over ordinary commutative rings. On
the other hand, we cannot assume the existence of a twisted inverse image pseudofunctor
over the category of DG-rings, because as far as we know, no previous such work on this
pseudofunctor worked in such a great generality as done here. Thus, we will generalize
here the main results of [25, 26] to DGReftf /K , and this will allow us to construct the
twisted inverse image pseudofunctor on DGReftf /K .

6

LIRAN SHAUL

0.5. Related papers. We finish the introduction by discussing some related works concerning duality theory and dualizing DG-modules in derived algebraic geometry. The first
paper we are aware of that defined dualizing DG-modules over DG-rings was [11], where
Hinich defined them over some specific DG-rings associated to a given local ring. In the
generality we work in this paper, dualizing DG-modules were first defined by Frankild,
Iyengar and Jorgensen in [8], where some basic properties of dualizing DG-modules were
established. The recent paper [23] by Yekutieli generalized the definition further, and made
a very detailed study of dualizing DG-modules in a very general commutative setting. We
will use [23] as our main reference for facts about dualizing DG-modules. Finally, dualizing DG-modules were generalized even further to E∞ -rings in the recent work of Lurie
[15].
Regarding duality theory in derived algebraic geometry, we are aware of only one paper that constructed the twisted inverse image pseudofunctor in such a setting, namely, the
recent paper [9] by Gaitsgory. In this paper, Gaitsgory extends duality theory to the category of DG-schemes which are of finite type over a field of characteristic zero. To define
f ! , Gaitsgory generalizes the approach of Deligne, defining f ! as a right adjoint. One the
one hand, his work is more general, as he works with global DG-schemes. On the other
hand, in the affine situation, we of course work in a much more general setting, allowing a
base Gorenstein ring, rather then a field, and also considering essentially finite type maps
instead of maps of finite type. It is our expectation that the greater generality of this paper
will be useful in arithmetic applications.
1. P RELIMINARIES
We shall assume classical Grothendieck duality theory, as developed in [7, 10, 14, 17]
and its extension to essentially finite type maps, explained in [16]. We will mostly follow
the notations of [23] concerning DG-rings and their derived categories. See [1, 6, 13] for
more background on commutative DG-rings. Below is a short summary of the notation we
use here.
A differential graded ring (abbrivated DG-ring), is a Z-graded ring
A=

∞
M

An ,

n=−∞

together with a degree +1 differential d : A → A, such that
d(a · b) = d(a) · b + (−1)i · a · d(b),
for any a ∈ Ai , b ∈ Aj . We say A is commutative if for any a ∈ Ai , b ∈ Aj , we have that
b · a = (−1)i·j · a · b, and a · a = 0 if i is odd. A DG-ring A is said non-positive if Ai = 0
for all i > 0.
In this paper we assume that all DG-rings are commutative and non-positive.
For such a DG-ring A, it is important to note that A0 is an ordinary commutative ring.
In addition, the cohomology H(A) of a DG-ring A is a graded-ring, and moreover, H 0 (A)
is also a commutative ring, as it is a quotient of A0 . We will set Ā := H 0 (A). For any
DG-ring A, there are homomorphisms of DG-rings A0 → A and A → Ā.
Given a DG-ring A, we denote by DGMod A the category of DG-modules over it.
There is a forgetful functor M 7→ M ♮ which forgets the differential, and associates to
a DG-module the underlying graded module. The category DGMod A is an abelian category. By inverting quasi-isomorphisms in it, one obtains its derived category, which we will

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

7

denote by D(A). See [13] for details about this construction. We denote by D+ (A), D− (A)
and Db (A) the full triangulated subcategories of D(A) composed of DG-modules whose
cohomologies are bounded below, bounded above or bounded. Given a DG-module M
and an integer n, Hn (M ) has the structure of a Ā := H 0 (A)-module. Assuming Ā is
noetherian, we say M has finitely generated cohomologies if for each n, Hn (M ) is finitely
generated Ā-module. Again, under this noetherian assumption, we denote by Df (A) the
triangulated subcategory of D(A) made of DG-modules with finitely generated cohomology. As usual, one may combine these two finiteness conditions, and write, for example,
D−
f (A) for the triangulated subcategory made of DG-modules which are bounded above
and have finitely generated cohomology. For any map of DG-rings f : A → B, there is
an associated forgetful functor Forf : DGMod B → DGMod A. Since it is clearly exact,
it also induces a functor D(B) → D(A), which, by abuse of notation, we also denote by
Forf .
We say that a DG-ring A is cohomologically noetherian, if Ā is a noetherian ring, H(A)
is bounded DG-module, and for each i < 0, H i (A) is a finitely generated Ā-module. It is
clear that being cohomologically noetherian is preserved under quasi-isomorphisms.
Following [23, Section 2], we say that a DG-module M ∈ D(A) has finite flat dimension relative to D(A), if there are integers d1 , d2 , such that for any DG-module N with
inf H(N ) = e ≥ −∞, sup H(N ) = f ≤ ∞, we have that inf H(M ⊗LA N ) ≥ e − d1
and sup H(M ⊗LA N ) ≤ f + d2 . One defines similarly the notion of finite injective dimension and finite projective dimension relative to D(A). Given a cohomologically noetherian
DG-ring A, a dualizing DG-module over it is a DG-module R ∈ Dbf (A) which has finite injective dimension relative to D(A), and such that the canonical map A → R HomA (R, R)
is an isomorphism in D(A). A tilting DG-module is a DG-module P ∈ D(A), such that
P ⊗LA Q ∼
= A for some Q ∈ D(A). See [23, Section 6] for a discussion. Given two dualizing DG-modules R1 , R2 over A, by [23, Theorem 7.10], there is some tilting DG-module
P , such that R1 ∼
= R2 ⊗LA P .
Given a commutative ring K, and a K DG-ring A, there is a functor
R HomA⊗LK A (A, − ⊗LK −) : D(A) × D(A) → D(A)
which we refer to as derived Hochschild cohomology. Its existence is shown in [24, Theorem 6.15] (in a much more general setting), where it was denoted by RectA/K (−, −). Our
notation follows [5, Section 3], where a similar result ([5, Theorem 3.2]) was shown in the
particular case where A = A0 .
We now arrive to the main technical definition of this paper. It is an immediate generalization of [25, Definition 4.1].
Definition 1.1. Let K be a noetherian ring, and let A be a cohomologically noetherian DG
K-ring. A pair (R, ρ) is called a rigid DG-module over A relative to K, if R ∈ Dbf (A), R
has finite flat dimension over K, and ρ is an isomorphism
≃

ρ:R−
→ R HomA⊗LK A (A, R ⊗LK R)
in D(A). If in addition, R is a dualizing DG-module over A, then (R, ρ) is called a rigid
dualizing DG-module over A relative to K.
Let K be a noetherian ring, and let A be a DG-ring over K. We say that A is cohomologically essentially of finite type over K if A is cohomologically noetherian, and the
composed map K → A → Ā is essentially of finite type. We denote by DGReftf /K the category of DG-rings A which are cohomologically essentially of finite type over K, and such

8

LIRAN SHAUL

that A has finite flat dimension over K. Maps in this category are K-linear maps of DGrings. Notice that DGReftf /K is closed under K-linear quasi-isomorphisms. Moreover, the
flat dimension assumption is precisely what is needed for DGReftf /K being closed under
derived tensor product. That is, if A, B ∈ DGReftf /K , with one of them being K-flat over
K, then A ⊗K B ∈ DGReftf /K .
In the rest of the paper, we will develop the theory of rigid dualizing DG-modules over
DG-rings in DGReftf /K , where K is a fixed Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull
dimension.
2. H OMOLOGICAL

EQUIVALENCES BETWEEN

DG- RINGS

A major advantage when working with DG-rings compared to ordinary rings is the
existence of non-trivial quasi-isomorphisms. Thus, given a DG-ring A that we wish to
study, we may replace it by a quasi-isomorphic DG-ring B which might have a more
convenient structure. We then use the fact that the derived categories of DG-modules over
A and B are equivalent to transfer homological results from D(B) to D(A). To make the
transfer process, it is convenient to use the following notation: given a map f : A → B
between two DG-rings, we denote by Lf ∗ and f∗ the functors
Lf ∗ (−) := − ⊗LA B : D(A) → D(B),

f∗ (−) := Forf (−) : D(B) → D(A).

Proposition 2.1. Let f : A → B be a quasi-isomorphism between DG rings. Then there
are functorial isomorphisms
B ⊗L Forf (−) = Lf ∗ (f∗ (−)) ∼
= 1D(B) ,
A

Forf (B ⊗LA −) = f∗ (Lf ∗ (−)) ∼
= 1D(A) ,
and
R HomA (B, f∗ (−)) ∼
= 1D(B) .
Proof. This follows from [24, Proposition 2.6].



When constructing the derived category of a ring (or a DG-ring) as a localization at the
class of quasi-isomorphisms, a priori a morphism between two complexes M, N is given
by a zig-zag

M

C1 `❇
❇❇
⑥>
⑥
❇❇
⑥⑥
❇❇
⑥
⑥
❇
⑥
⑥

C3 `❇
...
❇❇
⑤>
⑤
❇❇
⑤⑤
❇❇
⑤⑤
❇❇
⑤⑤
C2
...

Cn ❆
❆❆
❆❆
❆❆
❆
N

in which all maps except possibly Cn → N are quasi-isomorphisms. It is a basic fact in
the theory of derived categories, that one does not need to consider such a long chain, and
that any morphism can be represented as

M

⑥
⑥⑥
⑥⑥
⑥
~⑥
⑥

C❅
❅❅
❅❅
❅❅
❅
N

where C → M is a quasi-isomorphism. Unfortunately, we do not know if such a reduction
of zig-zags exists for maps of DG-rings, so in general, in a multiplicative situation, we will
work with long zig-zags. This motivates the next definitions.

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

9

Definition 2.2.
(1) We say that two DG-rings A and B are homologically equivalent via a sequence
f = (f1 , . . . , fn−1 ), if there is a finite sequence of DG-rings
A = C1 , C2 , . . . , Cn−1 , Cn = B,
and for each 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, fi is either a quasi-isomorphism fi : Ci → Ci+1 or a
quasi-isomorphism fi : Ci+1 → Ci . In this case, we write
h.e

≃

f :A−
→ B.
(2) Moreover, given a ring K, if for each i, Ci is a DG-ring over K, and the maps
fi : Ci → Ci+1 (or fi : Ci+1 → Ci ) are all K-linear, then we say that A and B
are homologically equivalent over K via f .
A bit more generally, we will sometimes want to resolve by zig-zags a map of DG-rings.
Definition 2.3. Let ϕ : A → B be a map between two DG-rings, and let
h.e

h.e

≃

f = (f1 , . . . , fn−1 ) : A −
→ Ã,

≃

g = (g1 , . . . , gn−1 ) : B −
→ B̃

be two homological equivalences of the same length, and such that for each i, the maps fi
and gi are in the same direction. Suppose we are given for 1 ≤ i ≤ n a map of DG-rings
ψi : Ci → Di , with ψ1 = ϕ, such that either there is a commutative diagram
Ci

fi

/ Ci+1
ψi+1

ψi


Di

gi



/ Di+1

or there is a commutative diagram
Ci o

fi

Ci+1
ψi+1

ψi


Di o

gi



Di+1

Then we say that ϕ : A → B and χ := ψn : Ã → B̃ are homologically equivalent via
h.e

≃

ψ = (ψ1 , . . . , ψn ), and write ψ : ϕ −
→ χ.
It is clear from the definitions that if A ∈ DGReftf /K , and if A and B are homologically
equivalent over K, then B ∈ DGReftf /K .
h.e

≃

Given a homological equivalence f : A −
→ B over K, we define an equivalence of
categories
EQf : D(A) → D(B)
as follows: first, if we are given a quasi-isomorphism fi : Ci → Ci+1 , then we define
EQi := L(fi )∗ , while if we are given a quasi-isomorphism fi : Ci+1 → Ci , we define
EQi := (fi )∗ . Now, we set
EQf := EQn−1 ◦ EQn−2 ◦ · · · ◦ EQ2 ◦ EQ1 : D(A) → D(B).

10

LIRAN SHAUL

By Proposition 2.1, we see that for each i, EQi is a K-linear equivalence, so that EQf
is also a K-linear equivalence. It is clear from the definition of EQf that there is an
isomorphism
(2.4)
EQ (A) ∼
=B
f

in D(B).
Note also that if A and B are homologically equivalent via f over K, then B and A are
homologically equivalent via
f −1 := (fn−1 , . . . , f1 )
over K, and using Proposition 2.1 again, we see that EQf and EQf −1 are quasi-inverse
to each other. We now show that all the main constructions of this paper are essentially
invariant with respect to such homological equivalences.
h.e

≃

Proposition 2.5. Let K be a ring, and let f : A −
→ B be an homological equivalence over
K.
(1) There is an isomorphism
R Hom L (A, M ⊗L N ) ∼
= EQ −1 (R Hom L (B, EQ (M ) ⊗L EQ (N )))
A⊗K A

f

K

B⊗K B

f

K

f

of functors
D(A) × D(A) → D(A).
(2) If A (and hence B) is cohomologically noetherian, and RA is a dualizing DGmodule over A, then EQf (RA ) is a dualizing DG-module over B.
(3) If RA has the structure of a rigid DG-module over A relative to K, then EQf (RA )
has the structure of a rigid DG-module over B relative to K.
(4) There is an isomorphism
∼ EQ −1 (R HomB (EQ (M ), EQ (N )))
R HomA (M, N ) =
f

f

f

of functors
D(A) × D(A) → D(A).
Proof.
(1) Let M, N ∈ D(A). Step 1: Suppose first that f : A → B is a single quasig
isomorphism. Let K → Ã −
→ A be a K-flat resolution of K → A. Then since f is
a quasi-isomorphism,
h

K → Ã −
→B
is a K-flat resolution of K → B, where h = f ◦ g. Hence, by [24, Theorem 6.15],
there is a functorial isomorphism
EQf −1 (R HomB⊗LK B (B, EQf (M ) ⊗LK EQf (N ))) =
f∗ (R HomB⊗LK B (B, Lf ∗ (M ) ⊗LK Lf ∗ (N ))) ∼
=
f∗ (R HomÃ⊗K Ã (B, h∗ (Lf ∗ (M )) ⊗LK h∗ (Lf ∗ (N )))).
Note that h∗ = (f ◦ g)∗ ∼
= g∗ ◦ f∗ , so that h∗ (Lf ∗ (−)) ∼
= g∗ (−). Also, it is clear
that
f∗ (R HomÃ⊗K Ã (B, −)) ∼
= R HomÃ⊗K Ã (A, −),
and using [24, Theorem 6.15] again, we see that
R Hom L (A, M ⊗L N ) ∼
(A, g∗ (M ) ⊗L g∗ (N )),
= R Hom
A⊗K A

K

Ã⊗K Ã

K

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

11

so in this case we get the required functorial isomorphism.
Step 2: Assume now that that f : B → A is a single quasi-isomorphism in the
g
other direction. Let K → B̃ −
→ B be a K-flat resolution of K → B. Then,
h

K → B̃ −
→A
is K-flat resolution of K → A, where h = f ◦ g. By [24, Theorem 6.15],
EQf −1 (R HomB⊗LK B (B, EQf (M ) ⊗LK EQf (N ))) =
Lf ∗ (R HomB⊗LK B (B, f∗ (M ) ⊗LK f∗ (N ))) ∼
=
∗
L
Lf (R Hom
(B, g∗ (f∗ (M )) ⊗ g∗ (f∗ (N ))) ∼
=
K

B̃⊗K B̃
∗

Lf (R HomB̃⊗K B̃ (B, h∗ (M ) ⊗LK h∗ (N ))),
On the other hand,
R HomA⊗LK A (A, M ⊗LK N ) ∼
=
R HomB̃⊗K B̃ (A, h∗ (M ) ⊗LK h∗ (N )) ∼
=
Lf ∗ (f∗ (R Hom
(A, h∗ (M ) ⊗L h∗ (N )))) ∼
=
B̃⊗K B̃

K

Lf (R HomB̃⊗K B̃ (B, h∗ (M ) ⊗LK h∗ (N ))),
∗

which proves the claim in this case.
Step 3: The general case is now easy to verify by induction, using steps 1,2, and
using the isomorphisms f∗ Lf ∗ ∼
= 1.
= 1 and Lf ∗ f∗ ∼
(2) Let RA be a dualizing DG-module over A. It is clear that EQf preserves boundedness, finitely generated cohomology, and finite injective dimension. If f : B → A
is a single quasi-isomorphism, the fact that f∗ (RA ) is a dualizing DG-module is
shown in [23, Proposition 7.5(2)]. If f : A → B is a single quasi-isomorphism,
we have that
R HomB (Lf ∗ (RA ), Lf ∗ (RA )) ∼
=
∗
∗
∗
∼
Lf (f∗ (R HomB (Lf (RA ), Lf (RA )))) =
Lf ∗ R HomA (RA , RA ) ∼
= Lf ∗ A = B.
For a general homological equivalence f between A and B, the fact that EQf (RA )
is a dualizing DG-module over B follows now by induction.
(3) Assume that RA has the structure of a rigid DG-module over A relative to K.
Set RB := EQf (RA ). When considered as objects of D(K), RA and RB are
isomorphic, so RB has finite flat dimension over K. Since EQf and EQf −1 are
quasi-inverse to each other, we have that
R HomB⊗LK B (B, RB ⊗LK RB ) ∼
=
EQf (EQf −1 (R HomB⊗LK B (B, EQf (RA ) ⊗LK EQf (RA )))),
and by part (1) of this proposition, this is naturally isomorphic to
EQf (R HomA⊗LK A (A, RA ⊗LK RA )) ∼
= EQf (RA ) = RB ,
where the last isomorphism follows from the rigidity of RA .
(4) Identical to the proof of (2) above.


12

LIRAN SHAUL

Proposition 2.6. Let ϕ : A → B and χ : Ã → B̃ be maps of DG-rings, and let ψ :
h.e

h.e

h.e

≃

≃

≃

ϕ−
→ χ be an homological equivalence, and denote by f : A −
→ Ã and g : B −
→ B̃ the
homological equivalences underlying it. Then there is an isomorphism
∼ R HomA (B, −)
EQ −1 (R Hom (B̃, EQ (−))) =
g

f

Ã

of functors
D(A) → D(B).
≃

≃

Proof. Step 1: Assume first that f : A −
→ Ã and g : B −
→ B̃ are single quasiisomorphisms. Unwrapping the definitions of EQ, we must show that there is a functorial
isomorphism
Forg (R HomÃ (B̃, − ⊗LA Ã)) ∼
= R HomA (B, −).
By the last isomorphism of Proposition 2.1, given M ∈ D(A), we have a natural isomorphism
M ⊗LA Ã ∼
= R HomA (Ã, Forf (M ⊗LA Ã)) ∼
= R HomA (Ã, M )
in D(Ã). Hence, using adjunction,
Forg (R HomÃ (B̃, M ⊗LA Ã)) ∼
=
Forg (R HomÃ (B̃, R HomA (Ã, M ))) ∼
=
Forg (R HomA (B̃, M )) = R HomA (B, M ).
≃

≃

Step 2: Assume now that f : Ã −
→ A and g : B̃ −
→ B are single quasi-isomorphisms in
the other direction. We must show that
∼ R HomA (B, M ).
B ⊗L R Hom (B̃, Forf (M )) =
Ã

B̃

As in step 1, we have a functorial isomorphism
B ⊗LB̃ R HomÃ (B̃, Forf (M )) ∼
=
∼
R Hom (B, R Hom (B̃, Forf (M ))) =
B̃

Ã

R HomÃ (B, Forf (M )).
≃ ˜
≃
Taking K-injective resolutions Forf (M ) −
→ I and M −
→ I, it is thus enough to show that
there is a B-linear quasi-isomorphism

HomA (B, I) → HomÃ (B, Ã),
but as I and I˜ are isomorphic in D(Ã), there is a quasi-isomorphism I → I˜ in D(Ã), so this
follows from [24, Proposition 2.6(2)]. Step 3: again, the general case follows immediately
by induction.

Having established that the main constructions of this paper are preserved along homological equivalences, we now show that objects of DGReftf /K are homologically equivalent to nice objects. More precisely:
Proposition 2.7. Let K be a noetherian ring, and let A ∈ DGReftf /K . Then there is a
DG-ring Ã ∈ DGReftf /K which satisfies the following:
(1) The DG-rings A and Ã are homologically equivalent over K.
(2) One has Ã0 = S −1 (K[x1 , . . . , xn ]), for some n ∈ N, and for some multiplicatively closed set S ⊆ K[x1 , . . . , xn ].
(3) For each i < 0, the Ã0 -module Ãi is finitely generated and free.
(4) In particular, Ã is K-projective over K.

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

13

Proof. In the proof of [23, Lemma 7.8], the author constructs DG-rings Aloc and Aeft with
K-linear quasi-isomorphisms
A → Aloc ← Aeft .
Setting Ã := Aeft , we see that A is homologically equivalent to Ã over K, and it is easy to
see that the DG-ring Ã constructed there satisfies the above.

We end this section with a couple of useful facts that use the above and will be useful in
the sequel. A map f : A → B of DG-rings is called cohomologically finite if the induced
map f¯ : Ā → B̄ is a finite ring map.
Proposition 2.8. Let K be a noetherian ring which has dualizing complexes, and let A ∈
DGReftf /K . Then A has dualizing DG-modules.
Proof. Let Ã be the DG-ring which cohomologically equivalent to A over K, constructed
in Proposition 2.7. By Proposition 2.5, it is enough to show that Ã has dualizing DGmodules. The ring Ã0 is essentially of finite type over K, so it has dualizing complexes.
The map Ã0 → Ã is cohomologically finite. Hence, the result follows from [23, Proposition 7.5(1)].

Proposition 2.9. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, let
A ∈ DGReftf /K , and let R be a dualizing DG-module over A. Then R has finite flat
dimension over K.
Proof. Let Ã be the DG-ring which is cohomologically equivalent to A over K, constructed
in Proposition 2.7. By Proposition 2.5, there is a dualizing DG-module S over Ã, which is
isomorphic to R in D(K), so it is enough to show that S has finite flat dimension over K.
Denote by f the structure map f : K → Ã, and let
ω := (f 0 )! (K),
where f 0 : K → Ã0 is the zero component of f . Since K is a dualizing complex over
itself, ω is a dualizing complex over Ã0 . Moreover, in the terminology of [5, Section 1], it
is the relative dualizing complex of f 0 . By our assumptions, Ã has bounded cohomology,
and for each i, H i (Ã) is finitely generated over H 0 (Ã), so a fortiori, it is finitely generated
over Ã0 . Thus, Ã ∈ Dbf (Ã0 ). Further, we assumed that Ã has finite flat dimension over
K. Hence, in the terminology of [5, Section 1], we have that Ã ∈ P(f 0 ). By [5, Theorem
1.2(1)], this implies that
S ′ := R HomÃ0 (Ã, ω) ∈ P(f 0 ),
and in particular S ′ has finite flat dimension over K. The map Ã0 → Ã is clearly cohomologically finite, so by [23, Proposition 7.5(1)], S ′ is a dualizing DG-module over Ã.
Hence, by [23, Theorem 7.10(2)], there is some tilting DG-module P over Ã, such that
S∼
= S ′ ⊗L P.
Ã

By [23, Theorem 6.5] and [23, Theorem 5.11(iii)], P has finite flat dimension over Ã, so
we get that S (and hence R) also has finite flat dimension over K.


14

LIRAN SHAUL

3. R IGID

DUALIZING

DG- MODULES AND

COHOMOLOGICALLY FINITE MAPS

Recall that a map f : A → B between two DG-rings is called cohomologically finite if
the induced map f¯ : Ā → B̄ is a finite ring map.
3.1. Splitting lemmas. Let K be a ring, let A, B be K-algebras, let P, M ∈ Mod A, and
let Q, N ∈ Mod B. There is a map
HomA (P, M ) ⊗K HomB (Q, N ) → HomA⊗K B (P ⊗K Q, M ⊗K N ),
given by
φ ⊗K ψ 7→ ((p ⊗K q) 7→ (φ(p) ⊗K ψ(q)).
This map is clearly A ⊗K B-linear, and is functorial in P, M, Q, N . If we assume that P
and Q are finitely generated and projective, then it is easy to see that it is an isomorphism.
This short technical subsection is dedicated for studying derived versions of this natural
isomorphism. Such isomorphisms will play an important role in the sequel.
Now, assume that A and B are DG-rings over K (but K is still a ring!), that P, M ∈
DGMod A, and that Q, N ∈ DGMod B. Then it is clear that (up to signs) the same
formula defines a map
HomA (P, M ) ⊗K HomB (Q, N ) → HomA⊗K B (P ⊗K Q, M ⊗K N ),
in DGMod A ⊗K B, which again, is functorial in P, M, Q, N . If P ♮ ∼
= (A♮ )⊕r and
♮ ⊕s
♮ ∼
Q = (B ) , where r, s ∈ N, then this map is an isomorphism.
Lemma 3.1. Let K be a ring, let A, B be cohomologically noetherian DG-rings over K,
and let P, M ∈ D(A) and Q, N ∈ D(B). Assume that the following holds:
(1) For each i ≤ 0, Ai is flat over K.
−
b
b
(2) We have that P ∈ D−
f (A), Q ∈ Df (B), M ∈ D (A), N ∈ D (B).
(3) When considered as objects of D(K), the complexes M and R HomB (Q, N ) have
finite flat dimension over K.
Then there is an isomorphism
R HomA (P, M ) ⊗L R HomB (Q, N ) ∼
= R HomA⊗ B (P ⊗L Q, M ⊗L N )
K

K

K

K

in D(A ⊗K B), functorial in P, M, Q, N .
Proof. Since A and B are cohomologically noetherian, using [23, Proposition 1.18(2)], we
≃
≃
may replace P and Q by pseudo-finite semi-free resolutions Pf −
→ P and Qf −
→ Q. By
[23, Proposition 1.14(1)], we have that
Pf♮

∼
=

i1
M
i=−∞

♮

A [−i]

⊕ri

,

Q♮f

∼
=

j1
M

B ♮ [−j]⊕sj ,

ri , sj < ∞.

j=−∞

This implies that Pf ⊗K Qf is also of this form, so using [23, Proposition 1.14(1)] again,
we see that it is a pseudo-finite semi-free resolution of P ⊗LK Q. In particular, Pf is Kprojective over A, Qf is K-projective over B, and Pf ⊗K Qf is K-projective over A ⊗K B.
≃
Next, replace M by a semi-free resolution M ′ −
→ M over A. Because A is made of flat
′
K-modules, M is a bounded above complex of flat modules, when considered as a complex over K. By assumption, M ′ has finite flat dimension over K. Hence, by [2, Theorem
2.4.F, (i) =⇒ (vi)], for n small enough, the smart truncation map M ′ → smt≥n (M ),
which is A-linear, is a quasi-isomorphism, and M ′′ := smt≥n (M ) is a bounded DGmodule over A, made of flat K-modules.

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

15

Because Pf and Qf are pseudo-finite semi-free and M ′′ and N are bounded, we deduce
that the natural map
HomA (Pf , M ′′ ) ⊗K HomB (Qf , N ) →

(3.2)

HomA⊗K B (Pf ⊗K Qf , M ′′ ⊗K N ).
is an isomorphism.
Finally, notice that, when considered as complexes of K-modules, HomA (Pf , M ′′ ) is a
bounded below complex of flat K-modules, and by assumption HomB (Qf , N ) has finite
flat dimension over K. Hence, by [25, Lemma 5.4], the natural map
HomA (Pf , M ′′ ) ⊗LK HomB (Qf , N ) →

(3.3)

HomA (Pf , M ′′ ) ⊗K HomB (Qf , N )
is a quasi-isomorphism. The result now follows from combining (3.2) and (3.3).



We shall also need the following variation of the above.
Lemma 3.4. Let K be a coherent commutative ring (e.g, a noetherian ring), let A, B, C, D
be cohomologically noetherian DG-rings over K, and let M ∈ Db (A) and N ∈ Db (B).
Let ϕ : A → C and ψ : B → D be two DG K-ring homomorphisms. Assume that the
following holds:
(1) For each i ≤ 0, Ai is flat over K.
(2) The maps ϕ, ψ are semi-free and cohomologically finite.
(3) When considered as objects of D(K), the complexes M and R HomB (D, N ) have
finite flat dimension over K.
Then there is an isomorphism
R HomA (C, M ) ⊗L R HomB (D, N ) ∼
= R HomA⊗ B (C ⊗K D, M ⊗L N )
K

K

K

in D(C ⊗K D), functorial in M, N .
Proof. Replace M by M ′′ as in the proof of Lemma 3.1. Note that since C is semi-free
over A, it is K-projective over A, so that
R HomA (C, M ) ∼
= HomA (C, M ) ∼
= HomA (C, M ′′ ).
Because C is semi-free over A, the complex of K-modules HomA (C, M ′′ ) is a bounded
below complex made of (possibly infinite) direct product of flat K-modules. Since K is
coherent, an arbitrary direct product of flats is flat, so HomA (C, M ′′ ) is a bounded below
complex of flat K-modules. Hence, as in the proof of Lemma 3.1, the canonical C ⊗K Dlinear map
R HomA (C, M ′′ ) ⊗LK R HomB (D, N ) → R HomA (C, M ′′ ) ⊗K R HomB (D, N )
is a quasi-isomorphism.
The cohomological finiteness assumptions on A → C and B → D and the fact that C
−
and D are cohomologically noetherian, imply that C ∈ D−
f (A), and D ∈ Df (B). Using
≃
≃
[23, Proposition 1.18(2)], let A → P −
→ C and B → Q −
→ D be pseudo-finite semi-free
resolutions in D(A) and D(B) respectively.
Consider the following commutative diagram induced by these maps:
/ HomA⊗K B (C ⊗K D, M ′′ ⊗K N)
/ HomA (C, M ′′ ) ⊗K HomB (D, N)
HomA (C, M ′′ ) ⊗L
K HomB (D, N)


HomA (P, M ′′ ) ⊗L
K HomB (Q, N)


/ HomA (P, M ′′ ) ⊗K HomB (Q, N)
/



HomA⊗ B (P ⊗K Q, M ′′ ⊗K N)
K

16

LIRAN SHAUL

The leftmost vertical map is clearly a quasi-isomorphism. Also, we have seen that
the two leftmost horizontal maps are quasi-isomorphisms. Hence, the middle vertical
map is also a quasi-isomorphism. The rightmost vertical map is also clearly a quasiisomorphism, and because of finiteness of P and Q, the right lower horizontal map is also
a quasi-isomorphism. Hence, we deduce that the right upper horizontal map is a quasiisomorphism.
It follows that the two C ⊗K D-linear maps
HomA (C, M ′′ ) ⊗LK HomB (D, N ) →
HomA (C, M ′′ ) ⊗K HomB (D, N ) →
HomA⊗K B (C ⊗K D, M ′′ ⊗K N )
are quasi-isomorphisms. This proves the claim.



Remark 3.5. Let K be a coherent ring, and let A, B, C, D be arbitrary cohomologically
noetherian DG-rings over K. Let A → C and B → D be any cohomologically finite DG
K-ring homomorphisms. Then one can always choose resolutions
≃

K → Ã −
→ A,

≃

Ã → C̃ −
→ C,

≃

B → D̃ −
→ D,

such that Ã, B, C̃, D̃ satisfy the conditions of the above lemma. Hence, the lemma essentially represents the fact that whenever A → C and B → D are cohomologically finite,
under modest finiteness assumptions on M, N , there is a natural isomorphism
R HomA (C, M ) ⊗L R HomB (D, N ) ∼
= R Hom L (C ⊗L D, M ⊗L N )
A⊗K B

K

K

K

as functors
Db (A) × Db (B) → D(C ⊗LK D).
It is an open problem to the author if given a cohomologically finite DG K-ring homomor≃
phism A → C, it can be resolved as A → C̃ −
→ C, where C̃ is pseudo-finite semi-free
over A. This is known if C itself is a ring ([1, Proposition 2.2.8] when both A and C are
rings, and [25, Proposition 1.7(3)] when A is a DG-ring and C is a ring), but the proofs of
this fact fail when C 6= C 0 , thus we needed the workaround of the above lemma.
3.2. Cohomologically finite maps.
Definition 3.6. Given a cohomologically finite map f : A → B between two cohomologically noetherian DG-rings, we denote by f ♭ the functor
f ♭ (−) := R HomA (B, −) : D(A) → D(B).
For our next result, we shall need a technical refinement of Proposition 2.7.
Lemma 3.7. Let K be a noetherian ring, and let A ∈ DGReftf /K . Let A → B be a map
between DG K-rings, and consider the diagram
A → Aloc ← Aeft = Ã
constructed in the proof of Proposition 2.7. Then there is a K-linear quasi-isomorphism
B → Bloc making the diagram
/ Aloc o
Aeft
A

B
commutative.


/ Bloc

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

17

Proof. The DG-ring Aloc was defined in [23, Lemma 7.8] as follows: let πA : A → Ā
be the canonical surjection, and let S be the set of elements s in A0 such that πA (s) is
invertible in Ā. It is clear that S is multiplicatively closed, and one defines
Aloc := A ⊗A0 S −1 A0 .
It is then easy to see that the map A → Aloc induced by the localization map A0 → S −1 A0
is a quasi-isomorphism, simply because S −1 A0 ⊗A0 Ā = Ā. The map A → B is a map
of DG-rings, so in particular, letting πB : B → B̄ be the canonical surjection, we obtain a
commutative diagram
πA
/ Ā
A
 πB 
/ B̄
B
But this implies that S −1 A0 ⊗A0 B̄ = B̄, so letting Bloc := B ⊗A0 S −1 A0 , the map
B → Bloc induced by the localization map A0 → S −1 A0 is again a quasi-isomorphism,
and this proves the claim.

Here is the main result of this section. It is a far reaching generalization of [25, Theorem
5.3].
Theorem 3.8. Let K be a noetherian ring, and let f : A → B be a cohomologically finite
map in DGReftf /K . Let (RA , ρ) be a rigid DG-module over A relative to K, and assume
that
RB := f ♭ (RA )
has finite flat dimension over K. Then RB has the structure of a rigid DG-module over B
relative to K. If moreover (RA , ρ) is a rigid dualizing DG-module over A relative to K,
then RB has the structure of a rigid dualizing DG-module over B relative to K.
Proof. Let Ã be the DG-ring which is homologically equivalent to A constructed in Proposition 2.7. By Lemma 3.7, there is a commutative diagram
(3.9)

A

/ Aloc o


B


/ Bloc

Ã

such that all horizontal maps are quasi-isomorphisms, and for each i ≤ 0, Ãi is flat over
K. Denote by EQϕ the equivalence of categories
EQϕ : D(A) → D(Ã)
induced by this homological equivalence. Then by Proposition 2.5,
RÃ := EQϕ (RA )
has the structure of a rigid DG-module over Ã relative to K. Let us complete the diagram
(3.9) to a commutative diagram
A

/ Aloc o

Ã


B


/ Bloc o


Bloc

18

LIRAN SHAUL

where the right bottom map is the identity. Denoting by ψ the homological equivalence
h.e

≃

ψ:B−
→ Bloc , we see that ϕ and ψ are homological equivalent in the sense of Definition
2.3.
≃
Notice that the map Ã → Bloc in (3.9) is also cohomologically finite. Let Ã → B̃ −
→
Bloc be a semi-free resolution of Ã → Bloc . In particular, the map Ã → B̃ is also
cohomologically finite. Hence, the conditions of Lemma 3.4 are satisfied, and there is a
natural isomorphism
R HomÃ (B̃, RÃ ) ⊗LK R HomÃ (B̃, RÃ ) ∼
= R HomÃ⊗K Ã (B̃ ⊗K B̃, RÃ ⊗LK RÃ )
in D(B̃ ⊗K B̃).
Because Ã is K-flat over K, and B̃ is K-projective over Ã, we see that the sequence of
≃
maps K → B̃ −
→ Bloc is a K-flat resolution of K → Bloc .
Hence, using [24, Theorem 6.15], we may calculate:
∼
R Hom
L
(Bloc , R Hom (Bloc , R ) ⊗L R Hom (Bloc , R )) =
Bloc ⊗K Bloc

Ã

Ã

K

Ã

Ã

R HomÃ (B̃, RÃ )) ∼
=
L
R HomB̃⊗K B̃ (Bloc , R HomÃ⊗K Ã (B̃ ⊗K B̃, RÃ ⊗K RÃ )) ∼
=
L
L
∼ R Hom (Bloc , R Hom
(Bloc , R ⊗ R ) =
(Ã, R ⊗ R )),
R HomB̃⊗K B̃ (Bloc , R HomÃ (B̃, RÃ ) ⊗LK

R HomÃ⊗K Ã

Ã

K

Ã

Ã

Ã⊗K Ã

Ã

K

Ã

where the last two maps are adjunctions. Because RÃ is a rigid DG-module over Ã relative
to K, there is an isomorphism
R HomÃ (Bloc , R HomÃ⊗K Ã (Ã, RÃ ⊗LK RÃ )) ∼
= R HomÃ (Bloc , RÃ ),
and since
RB ∼
= R HomÃ (Bloc , RÃ )
in D(K), so that the latter also has finite flat dimension over K, we deduce that
R HomÃ (Bloc , RÃ )
is a rigid DG-module over Bloc relative to K. Hence, by Proposition 2.5,
EQψ−1 (R HomÃ (Bloc , RÃ ))
is a rigid DG-module over B relative to K, and by Proposition 2.6
EQ −1 (R Hom (Bloc , R )) ∼
= R HomA (B, RA ),
ψ

Ã

Ã

which proves the result. Finally, if in addition RA is a dualizing DG-module over A, then
by [23, Proposition 7.5(1)], RB is a dualizing DG-module over B. This completes the
proof.

Corollary 3.10. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension.
(1) For any A ∈ DGReftf /K , there exists a rigid dualizing DG-module over A relative
to K.
(2) Given a cohomologically finite map f : A → B in DGReftf /K , and given a rigid
dualizing DG-module RA over A relative to K,
RB := f ♭ (RA )
is a rigid dualizing DG-module over B relative to K.
Proof.

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

19

(1) Let A → Aloc ← Aeft be the K-linear homological equivalence between A and
Aeft constructed in Proposition 2.7. By Proposition 2.5, it is enough to show that
there exists a rigid dualizing DG-module over Aeft relative to K. Note that
A0eft = S −1 (K[x1 , . . . , xn ]),
so in particular it is flat and essentially of finite type over K. Hence, by [3, Theorem 8.5.6] (or by [26, Theorem 3.6] if K is regular), there exists a rigid dualizing
complex R over A0eft relative to K. Set
RA := R HomA0eft (Aeft , R).
Because A0eft → Aeft is cohomologically finite, RA is a dualizing DG-module
over Aeft , so by Proposition 2.9, it has finite flat dimension over K. Hence, we
may apply Theorem 3.8 to the map A0eft → Aeft , and deduce that RA is a rigid
dualizing DG-module over Aeft relative to K.
(2) Using Theorem 3.8, all we need to show is that RB has finite flat dimension over
K. But RB is dualizing over B, so this follows from Proposition 2.9.

4. T ENSOR PRODUCT

OF DUALIZING

DG- MODULES

The aim of this section is to show that the property of being a dualizing DG-module is
preserved under the derived tensor product operation. In addition to being an interesting
result on its own, it will be cruical in the proof of Theorem 5.5 below. In accordance with
the general theme of this paper, we avoid making any flatness assumptions. Hence, for
the constructions to make sense, we shall need the following definition, which one might
view as the most general way to define the derived tensor product of two DG-rings over a
DG-ring.
Definition 4.1. Given a DG-ring K, and two DG K-rings A, B, we will say that a DG
K-ring C represents A ⊗LK B if C is homologically equivalent over K to a DG K-ring of
≃
≃
→ A and K → B̃ −
→ B are DG-resolutions of K → A
the form Ã ⊗K B̃, where K → Ã −
and K → B respectively, and at least one of the maps K → Ã or K → B̃ is K-flat.
Remark 4.2. Given a DG-ring K, two DG K-rings A, B, and a DG K-ring C that represents A ⊗LK B, the functor
− ⊗LK − : D(A) × D(B) → D(C)
is well defined. It can be defined as follows. Assume C is homologically equivalent via
some f over K to Ã ⊗K B̃, and without loss of generality suppose that Ã is K-flat over K.
ϕ

ψ

Denote by ϕ and ψ the quasi-isomorphisms Ã −
→ A and B̃ −
→ B. Given M ∈ D(A) and
≃
N ∈ D(B), let P −
→ Forϕ (M ) be a K-flat resolution in D(Ã), and define
D(C) ∋ M ⊗LK N := EQf −1 (P ⊗K Forψ (N )).
Here, EQf −1 is the equivalence of categories D(Ã ⊗K B̃) → D(C) that was defined in the
discussion preceding Proposition 2.5.
Lemma 4.3. Let A → B and A → C be homomorphisms of DG rings, with A → C
being K-flat. Given a tilting DG-module L over B, and a tilting DG-module N over C, the
DG-module L ⊗LA N is a tilting DG-module over B ⊗A C.

20

LIRAN SHAUL

Proof. Letting L′ := R HomB (L, B), and let N ′ := R HomC (N, C). By [23, Corollary
6.6], there are isomorphisms
L ⊗LB L′ ∼
=B
and
N ⊗LC N ′ ∼
= C,
so the result follows from the isomorphism
(L ⊗LA N ) ⊗LB⊗A C (L′ ⊗LA N ′ ) ∼
= (L ⊗LB L′ ) ⊗LA (N ⊗LC N ′ ).

Theorem 4.4. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, let
A, B ∈ DGReftf /K ,
and let C be a DG K-ring that represents A ⊗LK B. Given a dualizing DG-module R
over A, and a dualizing DG-module S over B, the DG-module R ⊗LK S is a dualizing
DG-module over C.
≃

≃

Proof. Let K → Ã −
→ A and K → B̃ −
→ B be resolutions as in Proposition 2.7. It is
clear that C is homologically equivalent over K to Ã ⊗K B̃, so by Proposition 2.5, we may
as well assume that C = Ã ⊗K B̃. In addition, by abuse of notation, we will replace R and
S by their images in D(Ã) and D(B̃) under the corresponding forgetful functors.
Denote by f : K → Ã and g : K → B̃ the structure maps, and set
R0 := (f 0 )! (K),

S 0 := (g 0 )! (K).

These are dualizing complexes over Ã0 and B̃ 0 respectively. Further, recalling that Ã0 and
B̃ 0 are localizations of polynomial rings over K, we see that R0 and S 0 are concretely
given by some shifts of Ã0 and B̃ 0 . The ring Ã0 ⊗K B̃ 0 is also a localization of a polynomial ring over K. Hence, R0 ⊗K S 0 is a dualizing complex over Ã0 ⊗K B̃ 0 . The maps
Ã0 → Ã and B̃ 0 → B̃ are cohomologically finite, so by [23, Proposition 7.5(1)],
R′ := R HomÃ0 (Ã, R0 ),

S ′ := R HomB̃ 0 (B̃, S 0 )

are dualizing DG-modules over Ã and B̃ respectively.
We now claim that by Lemma 3.4, there is a natural isomorphism
(4.5)

R HomÃ0 (Ã, R0 ) ⊗LK R HomB̃ 0 (B̃, S 0 ) →
R HomÃ0 ⊗K B̃ 0 (Ã ⊗K B̃, R0 ⊗LK S 0 )

in D(Ã ⊗K B̃). One may easily see that all the conditions of this lemma are satisfied by
this datum. The only non-trivial thing to check is that S ′ = R HomB̃ 0 (B̃, S 0 ) has finite
flat dimension over K, and this follows from Proposition 2.9.
Thus, (4.5) is an isomorphism. But on its right hand side, because Ã0 ⊗K B̃ 0 → Ã⊗K B̃
is cohomologically finite,
R HomÃ0 ⊗K B̃ 0 (Ã ⊗K B̃, R0 ⊗LK S 0 )
is a dualizing DG-module over Ã ⊗K B̃. Hence, R′ ⊗LK S ′ is also a dualizing DG-module
over Ã ⊗K B̃.
By [23, Theorem 7.10(2)], there is some tilting module L over Ã such that R ∼
= R′ ⊗LÃ L.
Similarly, there is a tilting DG-module N over B̃, such that S ∼
= S ′ ⊗LB̃ N in D(B̃). Hence,
R ⊗LK S ∼
= R′ ⊗LK S ′ ⊗LÃ⊗K B̃ (L ⊗LK N ).

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

21

Since by Lemma 4.3, L ⊗LK N is a tilting DG-module over Ã ⊗K B̃, we deduce from [23,
Theorem 7.10(1)] that R ⊗LK S is a dualizing DG-module over Ã ⊗K B̃.

5. T HE TWISTED TENSOR PRODUCT

SYMMETRIC MONOIDAL OPERATION

Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension. We have seen in
Corollary 3.10 that for any A ∈ DGReftf /K , there exists a rigid dualizing DG-module
over A relative to K. Later in this section we will show that the rigid dualizing DG-module
is unique, up to isomorphism, so given A ∈ DGReftf /K , let us denote by RA its rigid
dualizing DG-module relative to K, and by DA the associated dualizing functor
DA (−) := R HomA (−, RA ).
In [5, Theorem 4.1], the main result of that paper, it is shown that if A = A0 is a ring,
under suitable finiteness conditions on M, N , there is a functorial isomorphism
∼ R HomA (R HomA (M, RA ), N ).
(5.1)
R Hom L (A, M ⊗L N ) =
A⊗K A

K

As we explained in [19], at least when K is Gorenstein of finite Krull dimension, as assumed in this section, the correct way to view this isomorphism is as follows. As N is
assumed to have finitely generated cohomology, there is an isomorphism
N∼
= R HomA (R HomA (N, R), R),
and plugging this into (5.1), using adjunction, we may write its right hand side as
R HomA (R HomA (M, RA ) ⊗LA R HomA (N, RA ), RA ) =
DA (DA (M ) ⊗LA DA (N )).

(5.2)

To understand this expression, we now generalize to the DG-case the following construction from [19]:
Let A, B ∈ DGReftf /K , and let
F : D(A) × D(A) × · · · × D(A) → D(B)
{z
}
|
n

be some functor. We define the twist of F to be the functor
F ! : D(A) × D(A) × · · · × D(A) → D(B)
{z
}
|
n

given by
F ! (M1 , . . . , Mn ) := DB (F (DA (M1 ), . . . , DA (Mn ))).
With this construction in hand, it is clear that (5.2) is simply the twist of the derived tensor
product
− ⊗LA − : D(A) × D(A) → D(A)
Thus, we will denote it by − ⊗!A −, and refer to it as the twisted tensor product bifunctor.
Since − ⊗LA − is a symmetric monoidal product on D−
f (A), and since
−
D A : D+
f (A) → Df (A)

is an equivalence, it follows that − ⊗!A − makes D+
f (A) into a symmetric monoidal category. We will show in this section that (5.1) generalizes to the DG-case. Our proof is
based on a non-trivial adaptation to the commutative DG-case of [20, Theorem 2.6] where
we proved an analogue result for noncommutative algebras over a field which are finite
over their center.

22

LIRAN SHAUL

We begin by recalling a classical result, which is in some sense dual to the main result
of this section.
Proposition 5.3. Let K be a commutative ring, and let A be K-flat DG-ring over K. For
any M, N ∈ D(A). Then there is a natural isomorphism
A ⊗L
(M ⊗L N ) ∼
= M ⊗L N
A⊗K A

A

K

in D(A).
Proof. If A = A0 is a ring, this is a well known classical result, and the same proof works
in this more general situation. See [5, Remark 3.11].

Proposition 5.4. Let f : A → B be a homomorphism of DG rings, with A being cohomologically noetherian, and let R be a dualizing DG-module over A. Let M ∈ D(B), such
that Forf (M ) ∈ Df (A), and let N ∈ Df (A). Then there is a natural isomorphism
R HomA (D(M ), D(N )) ∼
= R HomA (N, M )
in D(B), where D(−) := R HomA (−, R).
≃

≃

Proof. Let R −
→ I be a K-injective resolution over A, and let P −
→ N be a K-projective
resolution over A. Note that the DG-module HomA (P, I) is also K-injective. Hence, we
have that
∼ HomA (HomA (M, I), HomA (P, I)).
R HomA (D(M ), D(N )) =
Using adjunction twice, there are natural isomorphisms in D(B):
∼
HomA (HomA (M, I), HomA (P, I)) =
HomA (HomA (M, I) ⊗A P, I) ∼
=
HomA (P, HomA (HomA (M, I), I)).
By [23, Proposition 7.2(2)], the natural B-linear map M → HomA (HomA (M, I), I) is a
quasi-isomorphism, so the result follows.

Here is the main result of this section, a generalization of [5, Theorem 4.1] to the DGcase.
Theorem 5.5. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, let A ∈
DGReftf /K , and let (RA , ρ) be a rigid dualizing DG-module over A relative to K. Then
there is a functorial isomorphism
R Hom L (A, M ⊗L N ) ∼
=
A⊗K A

K

R HomA (R HomA (M, RA ) ⊗LA R HomA (N, RA ), RA )
Dbf (A) such that R HomA (M, RA ) has finite flat dimension

for any M ∈
any N ∈ D−
f (A).

over K, and for

h.e

≃

Proof. Step 1: Let f : A −
→ Ã be the homological equivalence constructed in Proposition 2.7, and let RÃ := EQf (RA ). By Proposition 2.5, RÃ has the structure of a rigid
dualizing DG-module over Ã relative to K. Also by Proposition 2.5, there are functorial
isomorphisms
R Hom L (A, M ⊗L N ) ∼
= EQ −1 (R Hom L (Ã, EQ (M ) ⊗L EQ (N )))
A⊗K A

and

K

f

Ã⊗K Ã

f

M ⊗!A N ∼
= EQf −1 (EQf (M ) ⊗!Ã EQf (N )),

K

f

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

23

(where the −⊗! − are defined with respect to RA and RÃ respectively). Hence, it is enough
to prove the result for A = Ã.
Step 2: By step 1, we have that A is K-flat over K, so by [24, Theorem 6.15], we have
that
R Hom L (A, M ⊗L N ) ∼
= R HomA⊗ A (A, M ⊗L N ).
A⊗K A

K

K

K

By Theorem 4.4, the DG-module
RA ⊗LK RA
is a dualizing DG-module over A ⊗K A. It is clear that M ⊗LK N and A both belong to
Df (A ⊗K A), so by Proposition 5.4, there is a functorial isomorphism
R HomA⊗K A (A, M ⊗LK N ) ∼
=
(5.6)

R HomA⊗K A (DA⊗K A (M ⊗LK N ), DA⊗K A (A)),

in D(A), where we have set
DA⊗K A (−) := R HomA⊗K A (−, RA ⊗LK RA ).
By rigidity of RA , we know that there is an isomorphism
ρA : RA → DA⊗K A (A)
in D(A), and using this isomorphism, (5.6) is naturally isomorphic to
R HomA⊗K A (R HomA⊗K A (M ⊗LK N, RA ⊗LK RA ), RA ).
By Proposition 2.9, RA has finite flat dimension over K. Hence, by Lemma 3.1, there is a
natural isomorphism
R HomA (M, RA ) ⊗LK R HomA (N, RA ) ∼
= R HomA⊗K A (M ⊗LK N, RA ⊗LK RA )
in D(A ⊗K A). Hence, we have that
R HomA⊗K A (R HomA⊗K A (M ⊗LK N, RA ⊗LK RA ), RA ) ∼
=
L
R HomA⊗ A (R HomA (M, RA ) ⊗ R HomA (N, RA ), RA ) ∼
=
K

K

R HomA (A ⊗LA⊗K A (R HomA (M, RA ) ⊗LK R HomA (N, RA )), RA ),
where the second isomorphism is adjunction. By Proposition 5.3, we get an isomorphism
of functors
R HomA (A ⊗LA⊗K A (R HomA (M, RA ) ⊗LK R HomA (N, RA )), RA ) ∼
=
R HomA (R HomA (M, RA ) ⊗LA R HomA (N, RA ), RA ),
and this completes the proof.



Corollary 5.7. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension. For any
A ∈ DGReftf /K , denote by DA the set of isomorphism classes of dualizing DG-modules
over A. Then the operation
R HomA⊗LK A (A, − ⊗LK −)
defines a group structure on DA , and any rigid dualizing DG-module (RA , ρ) is a unit of
this group. In particular, the rigid dualizing DG-module is unique up to isomorphism.

24

LIRAN SHAUL

Proof. Let (RA , ρ) be some rigid dualizing DG-module over A relative to K (such exists
by Corollary 3.10). Note that for any R ∈ DA , by [23, Theorem 7.10(2)]
P := R HomA (R, RA )
is a tilting DG-module over A. By [23, Theorem 6.5], this implies that P is a perfect DGmodule over A, and by [23, Theorem 5.11], this implies that P has finite flat dimension
relative to D(A), so that P has finite flat dimension over K. It follows that Theorem 5.5
applies to any pair R1 , R2 ∈ DA , so it is enough to show that − ⊗!A − defines a group
structure on DA . But this follows immediately from the fact that the set of isomorphism
classes of tilting DG-modules form a group with respect to − ⊗LA −. Finally, it is clear
from Theorem 5.5 that RA is a unit of this group, so the fact that the rigid dualizing DGmodule is unique up to isomorphism follows from the uniqueness of the identity element
in a group.

Remark 5.8. For a DG-ring A, we denote by DPic(A) its derived Picard group. Its objects are isomorphism classes of tilting DG-modules, and the group operation is given by
the derived tensor product − ⊗LA −. Then it is clear from the above proof that the map
R HomA (−, RA ) defines a group isomorphism between DA , and DPic(A).
Notation 5.9. In the rest of the paper, given a Gorenstein noetherian ring K of finite Krull
dimension, and A ∈ DGReftf /K , we will denote by RA the unique rigid dualizing DGmodule over A relative to K.
Remark 5.10. We could have given an easier proof of the fact that the rigid dualizing DGmodule is unique, imitating [26, Theorem 3.3]. However, we find the above proof more
conceptual: the rigid dualizing DG-module is unique up to isomorphism, because it is the
identity element of a canonical group whose operation is the functor underlying derived
Hochschild cohomology. See also [23, Theorem 9.7] for a similar uniqueness result in the
DG-setting (but with slightly different finiteness assumptions).
We may now obtain a slight improvement of Theorem 5.5.
Proposition 5.11. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension. Given
M ∈ Dbf (A), if M has finite flat dimension over K, then
R HomA (M, RA )
also has finite flat dimension over K. Hence, in Theorem 5.5, it is enough to assume that
M itself has finite flat dimension over K.
Proof. Using Proposition 2.5, it is clear that we may replace A by the homologically equivalent Ã from Proposition 2.7, so we may assume that A0 ∈ DGReftf /K . But then, by
Corollary 3.10,
R HomA0 (A, RA0 )
has the structure of a rigid dualizing DG-module over A relative to K, so by uniqueness of
rigid dualizing DG-modules, we must have an isomorphism
∼ R HomA0 (A, RA0 )
RA =
Now, using adjunction, there is an isomorphism
R HomA (M, RA ) ∼
= R HomA0 (M, RA0 ),
so it is enough to show that the latter has finite flat dimension over K, and this follows
from [5, Theorem 1.2(1)].


THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

25

Remark 5.12. As − ⊗!A − makes D+
f (A) into a symmetric monoidal category, it is tempting to ask if one can extend the isomorphism of Theorem 5.5 to any M, N ∈ D+
f (A).
Unfortunately, the answer to this is negative, for trivial reasons: Let K be a Gorenstein
noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension which is not a regular ring, and let A = K. Since
A has infinite global dimension, one may find finitely generated A-modules M, N , such
that
TorA
n (M, N ) 6= 0
for infinitely many n. It follows that
R HomA⊗LK A (A, M ⊗LK N ) = M ⊗LK N ∈
/ D+
f (A),
so in particular
R HomA⊗LK A (A, M ⊗LK N ) ≇ M ⊗!A N.
6. R IGID

DUALIZING

DG- MODULES AND

COHOMOLOGICALLY ESSENTIALLY

SMOOTH MAPS

Recall that a map f : A → B between two noetherian rings is called essentially smooth,
if f is formally smooth and essentially of finite type. This implies that f is flat, and that
Ω1B/A is a finitely generated projective module. Decomposing Spec B = ⊔ni=1 Spec Bi to
its connected components, the induced map A → Bi is also essentially smooth, and Ω1Bi /A
is a projective module of fixed rank ni . We set
(6.1)

ΩB/A :=

n
M

ΩnBii /A [ni ].

i=1

This is a tilting complex over B, and there is an isomorphism
f ! (−) ∼
= ΩB/A ⊗A −
+
of functors D+
f (A) → Df (B). The goal of this section is to generalize these facts to
DG-rings.
An essentially smooth map A → B between noetherian rings is always flat, so that B
has flat dimension 0 as an object of D(A). Similarly, we define

Definition 6.2. Given a map A → B of DG-rings, we say it has flat dimension 0 if B has
0 flat dimension relative to D(A). Explicitly, this means that given a DG A-module M ,
such that the diameter of H(M ) is d, then the diameter of H(M ⊗LA B) is smaller or equal
to d.
Here is an important implication of this definition.
Lemma 6.3. Let A → B be a DG-ring map of flat dimension 0. Then there is an isomorphism
Ā ⊗LA B ∼
= B̄.
Proof. Note that H0 (Ā ⊗LA B) 6= 0, so the flat dimension assumption implies that
Ā ⊗LA B ∼
= H 0 (Ā ⊗LA B).
Since B is non-positive, the latter is isomorphic by the Kunneth trick to
Ā ⊗A H0 (B) = B̄.


26

LIRAN SHAUL

With this definition in hand, we arrive to the following definition of smoothness. See
[9, 4.5.1] for an equivalent definition in the finite type case, and [21, Section 2.2.2] for a
detailed discussion.
Definition 6.4. Let f : A → B be a DG-ring map between two cohomologically noetherian DG-rings. We say that f is cohomologically essentially smooth if it has flat dimension
0, and the induced map f¯ : Ā → B̄ is essentially smooth.
Remark 6.5. To see why this is a good definition, note that if A → B is smooth in any
reasonable sense, it must remain so after applying base change with respect to A → Ā, and
now the isomorphism of Lemma 6.3 which follows from the flat dimension 0 assumption,
implies that Ā → B̄ is smooth.
One of the most important properties of essentially smooth maps between noetherian
rings is that they are Gorenstein. We will now define a notion of a Gorenstein map in the
DG-setting. See [9, Definition 7.3.2] for an equivalent definition.
Definition 6.6. Let f : A → B be a map between two cohomologically noetherian DGrings, and assume that A has dualizing DG-modules. We say that f is Gorenstein if for any
dualizing DG-module R over A, the DG-module R ⊗LA B is a dualizing DG-module over
B.
The next proposition is a DG generalization of [10, Proposition II.5.14].
Proposition 6.7. Let A be a cohomologically noetherian DG-ring, and let M ∈ D−
f (A),
N ∈ D+ (A), and K ∈ Db (A), such that K has finite flat dimension relative to D(A).
Then there is an isomorphism
≃

R HomA (M, N ) ⊗LA K −
→ R HomA (M, N ⊗LA K)
in D(A), functorial in M, N, K.
Proof. Fixing N, K as above, because of the boundedness assumptions on them, it is clear
that both of the functors R HomA (−, N ) ⊗LA K and R HomA (−, N ⊗LA K) have bounded
above cohomological displacement, in the sense of [23, Definition 2.1(3)]. Denoting by
ηM the natural morphism
ηM : R HomA (M, N ) ⊗LA K → R HomA (M, N ⊗LA K)
in D(A), obtained by replacing M by a K-projective resolution, and K by a K-flat resolution, it is clear that ηA is an isomorphism. Hence, the result follows from [23, Theorem
2.11(1)].

We shall need the next result which is due to Lurie.
Proposition 6.8. Let A be a cohomologically noetherian DG-ring, let R ∈ Dbf (A), and
assume that
R HomA (Ā, R)
is a dualizing complex over Ā. Then R is a dualizing DG-module over A.
Proof. This is a a particular case of [15, Proposition 4.3.8].



Here is the first main result of this section. See [9, Corollary 7.3.6] for a similar result
(with a very different proof).
Theorem 6.9. Let f : A → B be a map between cohomologically noetherian DG-rings
which is of flat dimension 0, and assume that A has dualizing DG-modules, and that the
induced map f¯ : Ā → B̄ is Gorenstein. Then f is also Gorenstein.

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

27

≃

Proof. Let ϕ : B̃ −
→ B be a K-flat resolution of f . Since Ā is a ring which is a finite
H(A)-algebra, it follows by [25, Proposition 1.7(3)], that there exists a (multiplicative!)
≃
pseudo-finite semi-free resolution ψ : Ã −
→ Ā of the canonical map A → Ā. In terms of
these resolutions, the 0-flat dimension assumption on f implies by Lemma 6.3, that there
is a quasi-isomorphism χ : Ã ⊗A B̃ ∼
= B̄. Note further that Ã is K-projective over A, and
Ã ⊗A B̃ is K-projective over B̃.
Let R be a dualizing DG-module over A. Because of cohomological finiteness of A →
Ā,
R HomA (Ā, R)
is a dualizing complex over the ring Ā. Since
Forψ (R HomA (Ā, R)) = R HomA (Ã, R),
by Proposition 2.1, there is an isomorphism
R HomA (Ã, R) ⊗LÃ Ā ∼
= R HomA (Ā, R).

(6.10)

The Gorenstein assumption on f¯ says that
R HomA (Ā, R) ⊗LĀ B̄
is a dualizing complex over B̄, and using (6.10), we see that
R HomA (Ā, R) ⊗LĀ B̄ ∼
= R HomA (Ã, R) ⊗LÃ B̄
so that the latter is also a dualizing complex over B̄. Hence,
Forχ (R HomA (Ã, R) ⊗L B̄) ∼
= HomA (Ã, R) ⊗A B̃
Ã

is a dualizing DG-module over Ã ⊗A B̃.
Because Ã is pseudo-finite semi-free over A, and since by assumption B (and hence B̃)
has finite flat dimension relative to D(A), by the proof of Proposition 6.7, the natural map
HomA (Ã, R) ⊗A B̃ → HomA (Ã, R ⊗A B̃)
which is Ã ⊗A B̃-linear, is a quasi-isomorphism. By adjunction, there is an isomorphism
HomA (Ã, R ⊗A B̃) ∼
= Hom (Ã ⊗A B̃, R ⊗A B̃)
B̃

of DG Ã ⊗A B̃-modules, so we deduce that
HomB̃ (Ã ⊗A B̃, R ⊗A B̃)
is also a dualizing DG-module over Ã ⊗A B̃. It follows by [23, Proposition 7.5(1)] that
(B̄, R Hom (Ã ⊗A B̃, R ⊗A B̃)) ∼
R Hom
= R Hom (B̄, R ⊗A B̃)
Ã⊗A B̃

B̃

B̃

is a dualizing complex over B̄.
Finally note that R ⊗LA B̃ ∈ Dbf (B̃), because B is assumed to have finite flat dimension
relative to D(A). Hence, by Proposition 6.8, R ⊗A B̃ is a dualizing DG-module over B̃,
so that R ⊗LA B is a dualizing DG-module over B. Hence f is Gorenstein.

Recall that if A is any cohomologically noetherian DG-ring, then by [23, Theorem
6.11], the map − ⊗LA Ā induces a bijection between isomorphism classes of tilting DGmodules over A, and tilting complexes over Ā. Given a cohomologically essentially
smooth map f : A → B between cohomologically noetherian DG-rings, the tilting B̄complex ΩB̄/Ā associated to the essentially smooth map f¯ : Ā → B̄ was defined in
(6.1). For such a map f , we define ΩB/A to be the unique tilting DG B-module, such that
ΩB/A ⊗LB B̄ ∼
= ΩB̄/Ā .

28

LIRAN SHAUL

Corollary 6.11. Let A → B be a cohomologically essentially smooth map between cohomologically noetherian DG-rings, and let R be a dualizing DG-module over A. Then
R ⊗LA ΩB/A is a dualizing DG-module over B.
Proof. A cohomologically essentially smooth map satisfies the assumptions of Theorem
6.9, so it is Gorenstein. Hence, R ⊗LA B is a dualizing DG-module over B, and since ΩB/A
is a tilting DG B-module, the result follows from [23, Theorem 7.10(1)].

Example 6.12. If f : A → B is a quasi-isomorphism between cohomologically noetherian
DG-ring, then f is cohomologically essentially smooth. Since ΩB̄/Ā = B̄, we have that
ΩB/A = B.
It is clear that the composition of two cohomologically essentially smooth maps is again
cohomologically essentially smooth. As for the differentials, we have, as in the classical
case:
Proposition 6.13. Let A → B and B → C be two cohomologically essentially smooth
maps between cohomologically noetherian DG-rings. Then the composed map A → C is
also cohomologically essentially smooth, and there is an isomorphism
∼ ΩC/A
ΩB/A ⊗L ΩC/B =
B

in D(C).
Proof. The fact that A → C is cohomologically essentially smooth is clear from the definitions. For the second claim, by the definition of Ω, it is enough to show that these are
isomorphic after applying − ⊗LC C̄. We have that
(ΩB/A ⊗LB ΩC/B ) ⊗LC C̄ ∼
=
L
∼
ΩB/A ⊗ Ω
=
ΩB/A ⊗LB

B̄ ⊗LB̄
ΩB̄/Ā ⊗LB̄

C̄

B
⊗LC̄

ΩC̄/B̄

C̄/B̄

ΩC̄/B̄ ∼
=
∼ Ω Ā ,
=
C̄/

where the last isomorphism follows from [25, Proposition 3.4]. This proves the result. 
≃

Corollary 6.14. Let Ã −
→ A and B̃ → B be quasi-isomorphisms between cohomologically noetherian DG-rings, and let A → B̃ be a cohomologically essentially smooth map.
Then are isomorphisms
ΩB/A ∼
= ΩB/Ã
and
ΩB̃/A ⊗LB̃ B ∼
= ΩB/A
in D(B)
Proof. Combine Example 6.12 with Proposition 6.13.



Proposition 6.15. Let A → B be a cohomologically essentially smooth map between
cohomologically noetherian DG-rings, and let A → C be a K-flat DG-ring map, such that
C and B ⊗A C are also cohomologically noetherian. Then the induced map C → B ⊗A C
is also cohomologically essentially smooth, and there is an isomorphism
ΩB/A ⊗A C ∼
= ΩB⊗ C/C
A

in D(B ⊗A C).

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

29

Proof. Let M ∈ D(C), and assume that the diameter of H(M ) is d. Since
M ⊗LC (C ⊗A B) ∼
= M ⊗LA B,
we see that the diameter of H(M ⊗LC (C ⊗A B)) is ≤ d, so that B ⊗A C has flat dimension
0 over C. Using Lemma 6.3 twice, we have that
(6.16)

H0 (B ⊗A C) ∼
= C̄ ⊗LC (B ⊗A C) ∼
= C̄ ⊗LA B ∼
= C̄ ⊗LĀ Ā ⊗LA B = C̄ ⊗Ā B̄.

Since Ā → B̄ is essentially smooth, by base change C̄ → C̄ ⊗Ā B̄ is essentially smooth,
so we deduce that C → B ⊗A C is cohomologically essentially smooth. To show the
second claim, note first that by Lemma 4.3, ΩB/A ⊗A C is a tilting B ⊗A C DG-module.
Thus, in order to show that the two tilting DG-modules ΩB/A ⊗A C and ΩB⊗A C/C are
isomorphic, it is enough to show that
(6.17)

(ΩB/A ⊗A C) ⊗LB⊗A C H0 (B ⊗A C) ∼
= ΩB⊗A C/C ⊗LB⊗A C H0 (B ⊗A C).

The right hand side of (6.17) satisfies, by definition of Ω and by its base change property
over commutative rings:
ΩB⊗A C/C ⊗LB⊗A C H0 (B ⊗A C) ∼
= ΩH0 (B⊗A C)/C̄ ∼
= ΩB̄/Ā ⊗Ā C̄.
= ΩB̄⊗Ā C̄/C̄ ∼
On the other hand, and using the sequence of isomorphisms (6.16), the left hand side of
(6.17) satisfies:
(ΩB/A ⊗A C) ⊗LB⊗A C H0 (B ⊗A C) ∼
=
L
L
∼
(ΩB/A ⊗A C) ⊗
(B ⊗ C̄) =
B⊗A C

A

ΩB/A ⊗A C̄ ∼
=
= ΩB/A ⊗LB B ⊗A C̄ ∼
L
∼Ω
ΩB/A ⊗B (B̄ ⊗Ā C̄) =
B̄/Ā ⊗Ā C̄,
and this completes the proof.



Lemma 6.18. Let K be a noetherian ring, and let f : A → B be a map in DGReftf /K .
h.e

h.e

≃

≃

Then there are homological equivalences ϕ : A −
→ Ã and ψ : B −
→ B̃ over K, and a
map f˜ : Ã → B̃ in DGReftf /K , such that f and f˜ are homologically equivalent in the
sense of Definition 2.3, and moreover, we have that Ã0 , B̃ 0 ∈ DGReftf /K , and the map
f˜0 : Ã0 → B̃ 0 is a K-algebra map.
Proof. By Lemma 3.7, there is a commutative diagram
A

/ Aloc o


B


/ Bloc

Ã

in which all horizontal maps are quasi-isomorphisms, and Ã0 is a localization of a polynomial ring over K. In particular, Ã0 ∈ DGReftf /K .
We will now make a process similiar to the construction in [23, Lemma 7.8], but in a
slightly more general setting. Let πBloc : Bloc → B̄ be the canonical map, and let T be the
0
set of elements t in Bloc
such that πBloc (t) is invertible in B̄. Set
′
0
0
Bloc
:= Bloc ⊗Bloc
T −1 Bloc
.

30

LIRAN SHAUL

′
The map Bloc → Bloc
induced by localization is clearly a quasi-isomorphism. Since
0
Ã → B̄ is essentially of finite type, there is a map

ϕ : Ã0 [t1 , . . . , tn ] → B̄
which is surjective after localization. Let U be the set of elements u in Ã0 [t1 , . . . , tn ],
such that ϕ(u) is invertible in B̄. By construction, every preimage of a unit in B̄ is a unit
′
′
in (Bloc
)0 . Hence, the map Ã → Bloc
obtained from composing
′
Ã → Aloc → Bloc → Bloc

factors through
′
Ã → Ã ⊗Ã0 U −1 Ã0 [t1 , . . . , tn ] → Bloc
,

and the composed map
′
→ B̄
Ã ⊗Ã0 U −1 Ã0 [t1 , . . . , tn ] → Bloc
′
is surjective. Since Hn (Bloc
) is a finitely generated (Ã ⊗Ã0 U −1 Ã0 [t1 , . . . , tn ])0 -module,
using [25, Proposition 1.7(2)], we may find a semi-free resolution
≃

′
Ã ⊗Ã0 U −1 Ã0 [t1 , . . . , tn ] → B̃ −
→ Bloc

such that B̃ 0 = (Ã ⊗Ã0 U −1 Ã0 [t1 , . . . , tn ])0 . Using all these constructions, we obtain a
commutative diagram
A

/ Aloc

/ Aloc o

Ã


B


/ Bloc


/ B′ o
loc


B̃

in which all horizontal maps are quasi-isomorphisms, and as B̃ 0 ∈ DGReftf /K , we are
done.

Proposition 6.19. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, let
f : A → B be a map in DGReftf /K , and consider the commutative diagram
A

πA

f¯

f


B

/ Ā

πB


/ B̄

Then there is an isomorphism
(f¯)! (R HomA (Ā, RA )) ∼
= R HomB (B̄, RB )
in D(B̄), where (f¯)! is the twisted inverse image pseudofunctor from classical duality
theory.
Proof. If we knew that Ā, B̄ ∈ DGReftf /K , then this will follow immediately from
pseudo-functoriality of (−)! (a fact that will be shown in Proposition 7.2 below), as the
horizontal maps are clearly cohomologically finite. As we do not know if Ā, B̄ have finite
flat dimension over K, we take a different route to prove this. In the general case, let
h.e

≃

ϕ:A−
→ Ã,

h.e

≃

ψ:B−
→ B̃

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

31

be the homological equivalences constructed in Lemma 6.18. Let RÃ := EQϕ (RA ), and
RB̃ := EQψ (RB ). Applying Proposition 2.6 to the diagrams
A

/ Aloc

/ Aloc o

Ã


Ā


/ Ā


/ Ā o


Ā

B

/ Bloc

/ B′ o
loc

B̃

and





/ B̄
/ B̄ o
B̄
B̄
in which the arrows in the bottom rows are identity morphisms, we obtain isomorphisms
R HomA (Ā, RA ) ∼
= R HomÃ (Ā, RÃ ), R HomB (B̄, RB ) ∼
= R HomB̃ (B̄, RB̃ )
in D(Ā) and D(B̄) respectively. Since clearly f¯ = H0 (f˜), it follows that we may assume
without loss of generality that A = Ã, B = B̃ and f = f˜.
Thus, A0 , B 0 ∈ DGReftf /K , so that A0 and B 0 have rigid dualizing complexes RA0
and RB 0 . Moreover, A0 → A and B 0 → B are cohomologically finite maps in DGReftf /K ,
so by Corollary 3.10, and by uniqueness of rigid dualizing DG-modules, there are isomorphisms
RA ∼
= R HomA0 (A, RA0 ), RB ∼
= R HomB 0 (B, RB 0 )
in D(A) and D(B) respectively. Now, consider the commutative diagram
A0

/ Ā
f¯

f0


B0


/ B̄

obtained from composing the canonical maps A0 → A → Ā and B 0 → B → B̄. Since
the horizontal maps in this diagram are finite, and the vertical maps are essentially of finite
type, we deduce from classical duality theory that there is an isomorphism
(f¯)! (R HomA0 (Ā, −) ∼
= R HomB 0 (B̄, (f 0 )! (−))
+
0
of functors D+
f (A ) → Df (B̄). Applying this isomorphism to RA0 , and using the fact
0 !
that (f ) (RA0 ) ∼
= RB 0 , we obtain an isomorphism
(6.20)
(f¯)! (R HomA0 (Ā, RA0 ) ∼
= R HomB 0 (B̄, RB 0 )

in D(B̄). By adjunction,
R HomA0 (Ā, RA0 ) ∼
= R HomA (Ā, R HomA0 (A, RA0 )) ∼
= R HomA (Ā, RA ),
and similarly,
R HomB 0 (B̄, RB 0 ) ∼
= R HomB (B̄, R HomB 0 (B, RB 0 )) ∼
= R HomB (B̄, RB ).
Plugging these two isomorphisms into (6.20), we deduce that
∼ R HomB (B̄, RB )
(f¯)! (R HomA (Ā, RA )) =
as claimed.
Here is the second main result of this section.



32

LIRAN SHAUL

Theorem 6.21. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, and let
f : A → B be a cohomologically essentially smooth map in DGReftf /K . Then
RA ⊗LA ΩB/A
has the structure of a rigid dualizing DG-module over B relative to K.
≃

Proof. As in the proof of Theorem 6.9, let ϕ : B̃ −
→ B be a K-flat resolution of f over A,
≃
and let ψ : Ã −
→ Ā be a pseudo-finite semi-free resolution of the canonical map A → Ā
≃
→ B̄. Again, as in the proof
over A. Denote by χ the quasi-isomorphism χ : Ã ⊗A B̃ −
of Theorem 6.9, Ã is K-projective over A, and Ã ⊗A B̃ is K-projective over B̃. Using
Corollary 6.14, we have that
Forϕ (RA ⊗LA ΩB/A ) ∼
= RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A ,
so by Proposition 2.1, we have an isomorphism
R HomB̃ (B, RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A ) ∼
= RA ⊗LA ΩB/A .
in D(B). Since ϕ is cohomologically finite, it follows by Corollary 3.10 applied to ϕ, that
it is enough to show that there is an isomorphism
RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A ∼
= RB̃
in D(B̃). By Corollary 6.11, RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A is a dualizing DG-module over B̃, and according
to [23, Corollary 7.12], the formula
R 7→ R HomB̃ (B̄, R)
induces a bijection between isomorphism classes of dualizing DG-modules over B̃, and
isomorphism classes of dualizing complexes over B̄. Thus, it is enough to show that there
is an isomorphism
R HomB̃ (B̄, RB̃ ) ∼
= R HomB̃ (B̄, RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A )
in D(B̄). By Proposition 6.19, and using the fact that Ā → B̄ is essentially smooth, there
is an isomorphism
R HomB̃ (B̄, RB̃ ) ∼
= R HomA (Ā, RA ) ⊗LĀ ΩB̄/Ā
in D(B̄). Thus, we need to show that there is an isomorphism
R HomA (Ā, RA ) ⊗LĀ ΩB̄/Ā ∼
= R HomB̃ (B̄, RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A )
in D(B̄). As in the proof of Theorem 6.9, there is an isomorphism
R HomA (Ā, RA ) ∼
= R HomA (Ã, RA ) ⊗LÃ Ā,
so using the fact that ΩB̄/Ā ∼
= B̄ ⊗LB̃ ΩB̃/A , we have an isomorphism
R HomA (Ā, RA ) ⊗LĀ ΩB̄/Ā ∼
= R HomA (Ã, RA ) ⊗LÃ B̄ ⊗LB̃ ΩB̃/A
in D(B̄). Hence,
Forχ (R HomA (Ā, RA ) ⊗LĀ ΩB̄/Ā ) ∼
= R HomA (Ã, RA ) ⊗LA ΩB̃/A .
≃

Let P −
→ ΩB̃/A be a K-flat resolution over B̃. Then P is also K-flat over A. Moreover,
because it is tilting over B̃, by [23, Theorem 5.11] it has finite flat dimension relative to

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

33

D(B̃). Since B̃ has 0 flat dimension relative to D(A), we conclude that P has finite flat
dimension relative to D(A). Hence, by Proposition 6.7, the canonical Ã ⊗A B̃-linear map
R HomA (Ã, RA ) ⊗LA ΩB̃/A ∼
= HomA (Ã, RA ) ⊗A P → HomA (Ã, RA ⊗A P )
is a quasi-isomorphism. Using adjunction, we have isomorphisms in D(Ã ⊗A B̃):
HomA (Ã, RA ) ⊗A P → HomA (Ã, RA ⊗A P ) ∼
=
Hom (Ã ⊗A B̃, RA ⊗A P ) ∼
=
B̃

R HomB̃ (Ã ⊗A B̃, RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A ),
and since
Forχ (R HomB̃ (B̄, RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A )) ∼
= R HomB̃ (Ã ⊗A B̃, RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A ),
we deduce that there is an isomorphism
Forχ (R HomA (Ā, RA ) ⊗LĀ ΩB̄/Ā ) ∼
= Forχ (R HomB̃ (B̄, RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A ))
in D(Ã ⊗A B̃). By Proposition 2.1, this lifts to an isomorphism
R HomA (Ā, RA ) ⊗LĀ ΩB̄/Ā ∼
= R HomB̃ (B̄, RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A )
in D(B̄), and as explained above, this implies that
RB̃ ∼
= RA ⊗LA ΩB̃/A
and this completes the proof.
7. T HE



TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR AND PERFECT BASE CHANGE

In this section we finally arrive to the main construction of this paper: the twisted inverse
image pseudofunctor. We continue to denote, for A ∈ DGReftf /K , its rigid dualizing DGmodule by RA , and the corresponding duality functor R HomA (−, RA ) by DA . Let us
denote by DerCatK the 2-category of K-linear trinagulated categories.
Definition 7.1. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension. The
twisted inverse image pseudofunctor
(−)! : DGReftf /K → DerCatK
is defined as follows:
(1) Given A ∈ DGReftf /K , we associate to it the category D+
f (A).
(2) Given a map f : A → B in DGReftf /K , if A = B and f = 1A , we let f ! be the
+
identity functor D+
f (A) → Df (A). Otherwise, we set
+
f ! (−) := DB (B ⊗LA DA (−)) : D+
f (A) → Df (B).

(3) Given two maps f : A → B and g : B → C in DGReftf /K , we define an
≃
isomorphism of functors φf,g : (g ◦ f )! −
→ g ! ◦ f ! : if at least one of the maps f, g
is the identity, then φf,g is the identity natural transformation. Otherwise, we let
φf,g be the isomorphism
≃

(g ◦ f )! (M ) = DC (C ⊗LA DA (M )) −
→
≃

DC (C ⊗LB B ⊗LA DA (M )) −
→
DC (C ⊗LB DB (DB (B ⊗LA DA (M )))) = g ! (f ! (M ))

34

LIRAN SHAUL

obtained from combining the natural isomorphisms C ⊗LB B ⊗LA − ∼
= C ⊗LA − and
≃
−−
→ DB (DB (−)).
Proposition 7.2. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension. Given
three maps f : A → B, g : B → C and h : C → D in DGReftf /K , there is an equality
φg,h ◦ φf,h◦g = φf,g ◦ φg◦f,h ,
!

so that (−) : DGReftf /K → DerCatK is a pseudofunctor.
Proof. Identical to [26, Proposition 4.4].



Next, we study the behaivor of the twisted inverse image pseudofunctor with respect to
cohomologically finite and cohomologically essentially smooth maps.
Theorem 7.3. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, and let
f : A → B be a cohomologically finite map in DGReftf /K . Then there is an isomorphism
f ! (M ) ∼
= R HomA (B, M )
+
of functors D+
f (A) → Df (B).

Proof. Given M ∈ D+
f (A), we have by Corollary 3.10
f ! (M ) = R HomB (B ⊗LA R HomA (M, RA ), RB ) ∼
=
R HomB (B ⊗LA R HomA (M, RA ), R HomA (B, RA )).
By adjunction, we have isomorphisms
R HomB (B ⊗LA R HomA (M, RA ), R HomA (B, RA )) ∼
=
L
∼
R HomA (B ⊗ R HomA (M, RA ), RA ) =
A

R HomA (B, R HomA (R HomA (M, RA ), RA ),
so the result follows from the fact that RA is a dualizing DG-module.



Corollary 7.4. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, and let
f : A → B be a quasi-isomorphism in DGReftf /K . Then there are isomorphisms
f ! (M ) ∼
= R HomA (B, M ) ∼
= B ⊗LA M
+
of functors D+
f (A) → Df (B).

Proof. The first isomorphism follows from Theorem 7.3, and the second one from Proposition 2.1.

Theorem 7.5. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, and let
f : A → B be a cohomologically essentially smooth map in DGReftf /K . Then there is an
isomorphism
f ! (M ) ∼
= M ⊗LA ΩB/A
+
of functors D+
f (A) → Df (B).
f˜

≃

≃

Proof. Let A −
→ B̃ −
→ B be a K-flat resolution of f , and denote the map B̃ −
→ B by b.
By pseudofunctoriality, we have that f ! = (b ◦ f˜)! ∼
= b! ◦ f˜! . By Corollary 7.4, we have
that
b! ◦ f˜! (M ) ∼
= B ⊗LB̃ f˜! (M ),
and by Corollary 6.14, we have that
∼
B ⊗L Ω
= ΩB/A ,
B̃

B̃/A

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

35

so we see that it is enough to prove the theorem in the case where B̃ = B is K-flat over A.
Using Theorem 6.21, we have a functorial isomorphism
f ! (M ) = R HomB (B ⊗LA R HomA (M, RA ), RB ) ∼
=
∼
R HomB (B ⊗L R HomA (M, RA ), RA ⊗L ΩB/A ) =
A

A

R HomA (R HomA (M, RA ), RA ⊗LA ΩB/A ).
≃

≃

Let P −
→ R HomA (M, RA ) be a K-projective resolution over A, and let Q −
→ ΩB/A be a
K-flat resolution over B. Since A → B is K-flat, Q is also K-flat over A, and we have that
R HomA (R HomA (M, RA ), RA ⊗LA ΩB/A ) ∼
= HomA (P, RA ⊗A Q).
Since Q is tilting over B, it has finite flat dimension relative to D(B), and since A → B
is cohomologically smooth, we deduce that Q has finite flat dimension relative to D(A).
Hence, by Proposition 6.7, the B-linear map
HomA (P, RA ) ⊗A Q → HomA (P, RA ⊗A Q)
is a quasi-isomorphism. Thus, we deduce that
f ! (M ) ∼
= R HomA (R HomA (M, RA ), RA ) ⊗LA ΩB/A ,
so the result follows from the fact that RA is a dualizing DG-module.



Recall that for a map f : A → B of DG-rings, we denote by Lf ∗ (−) the functor
− ⊗LA B. We now arrive to the last main result of this paper: derived base change for
perfect maps.
Theorem 7.6. Let K be a Gorenstein noetherian ring of finite Krull dimension, let f :
A → B be an arbitrary map in DGReftf /K , and let g : A → C be a K-flat map in
DGReftf /K such that C has finite flat dimension relative to D(A). Consider the induced
base change commutative diagram
f

A

/B

g


C

h
f′


/ B ⊗A C

Then there is an isomorphism
Lh∗ ◦ f ! (−) ∼
= (f ′ )! ◦ Lg ∗ (−)
of functors
+
D+
f (A) → Df (B ⊗A C).

Proof. Step 1: assume first f is cohomologically essentially smooth. By Proposition 6.15,
f ′ is also cohomologically essentially smooth, and there is an isomorphism
ΩB⊗A C/C ∼
= ΩB/A ⊗LA C.
Given M ∈ D+
f (A), by Theorem 7.5, we have functorial isomorphisms
Lh∗ ◦ f ! (M ) ∼
=
= (B ⊗A C) ⊗LB (M ⊗LA ΩB/A ) ∼
L
L
∼
(M ⊗ ΩB/A ) ⊗A C = M ⊗ ΩB⊗ C/C ∼
=
A

(M

⊗LA

A

C)

⊗LC

A

ΩB⊗A C/C = (f ′ )! Lg ∗ (M ).

36

LIRAN SHAUL

Step 2: now, let us assume that f is cohomologically finite, and assume in addition that f
is K-projective. Then f ′ is also K-projective and cohomologically finite. Combining the
K-projectivity assumptions with Theorem 7.3, we have that
∼ (B ⊗A C) ⊗L R HomA (B, M ) =
∼ HomA (B, M ) ⊗A C ∼
Lh∗ f ! (M ) =
=♦
B

HomA (B, M ⊗A C) ∼
= HomC (B ⊗A C, M ⊗A C) ∼
= (f ′ )! Lg ∗ (M ).
Here, the isomorphism ♦ follows from Proposition 6.7.
ϕ
Step 3: assume that f : A → B is a map in DGReftf /K that can be factored as A −
→
ψ

D−
→ B where ϕ is cohomologically essentially smooth, and ψ is cohomologically finite.
χ
b
Factor ψ as D −
→ B̃ −
→ B where b is a quasi-isomorphism and χ is K-projective. Then
χ is also cohomologically finite. These factorizations fit into a commutative diagram in
DGReftf /K :
A

ϕ

g


C

χ

/D
g′

ϕ


/ D ⊗A C

′

b

/ B̃

/B

g′′
′

χ

h


/ B̃ ⊗A C


/ B ⊗A C

′

b

Notice that b, being a quasi-isomorphism, is cohomologically essentially smooth. Note
also that by base change, each of the morphisms ϕ′ , χ′ , b′ is of finite flat dimension. Thus,
step 1 and 2 apply to each of the squares in the diagram. Hence, using pseudofunctoriality
of (−)! and the previous steps, we have natural isomorphisms
Lh∗ f ! (M ) = Lh∗ (b ◦ χ ◦ ϕ)! (M ) ∼
= Lh∗ b! χ! ϕ! (M ) ∼
=
′ !
′′ ∗ ! !
′ !
′ !
′ ∗ !
∼
∼
(b ) L(g ) χ ϕ (M ) = (b ) (χ ) L(g ) ϕ (M ) =
(b′ )! (χ′ )! (ϕ′ )! Lg ∗ (M ) ∼
= (b′ ◦ χ′ ◦ ϕ′ )! (Lg ∗ M ) = (f ′ )! Lg ∗ (M ),
and this completes this step.
Step 4: finally, let f : A → B be an arbitrary map in DGReftf /K . Similarly to the proof
of Lemma 6.18, let U be the set of elements u in B 0 such that πB (u) ∈ B̄ is a unit, and let
B̃ := U −1 B 0 ⊗B 0 B. The induced map b : B → B̃ is a quasi-isomorphism. Consider the
map f˜ := b ◦ f : A → B̃. As the map A0 → B̄ is essentially of finite type, and because
every preimage of a unit in B̄ is a unit in B̃ 0 , we see that f˜ may be factored as
ϕ

ψ

A−
→ V −1 A0 [t1 , . . . , tn ] ⊗A0 A −
→ B̃,
where ϕ is cohomologically essentially smooth, and ψ is cohomologically finite. Thus,
step 3 applies to f˜. Consider the commutative diagram
A

f

g


C

/B

b

/ B̃

h
f′


/ B ⊗A C

h̃
b′


/ B̃ ⊗A C

Set f˜′ := b′ ◦ f ′ . Then we have shown that there is a functorial isomorphism
(7.7)

Lh̃∗ (f˜)! (M ) ∼
= (f˜′ )! Lg ∗ (M )

in D(B̃ ⊗A C). Applying the forgetful functor Forb′ to the left hand side of (7.7), we obtain
Forb′ (Lh̃∗ (f˜)! (M )) ∼
= Lh∗ f ! (M ),
= f ! (M ) ⊗A C ∼
= Forb′ ((f ! (M ) ⊗LB B̃) ⊗A C) ∼

THE TWISTED INVERSE IMAGE PSEUDOFUNCTOR OVER DG RINGS

37

while applying Forb′ to the right hand side of (7.7), we get
Forb′ ((f˜′ )! Lg ∗ (M )) ∼
= (f ′ )! Lg ∗ (M ).
= Forb′ ((b′ )! (f ′ )! Lg ∗ (M )) ∼
Hence, we deduce that for any f : A → B in DGReftf /K , and for any M ∈ D+
f (A), there
is a functorial isomorphism
Lh∗ ◦ f ! (M ) ∼
= (f ′ )! ◦ Lg ∗ (M ).

Remark 7.8. While the results of this paper were developed only in an affine derived
setting, it is worth mentioning that at least over ordinary schemes, by [4, Theorem 3.2.9]
rigid dualizing complexes can be glued under the flat topology. We expect that a similar
gluing result will hold in the above derived setting, so that it would be possible to globalize
the results of this paper to derived schemes and derived stacks.
Acknowledgments. The author would like to thank Pieter Belmans, Joseph Lipman
and Amnon Yekutieli for some helpful discussions.
R EFERENCES
[1] Avramov, L. L., Infinite free resolutions, Six lectures on commutative algebra, Bellaterra 1996, Progr. Math.
166, Birkhauser, Basel, 1998; pp. 1-118.
[2] Avramov, L. L., and Foxby, H. B. (1991). Homological dimensions of unbounded complexes. Journal of
Pure and Applied Algebra, 71(2), 129-155.
[3] Avramov, L. L., Iyengar, S. B., and Lipman, J. (2010). Reflexivity and rigidity for complexes, I: Commutative rings. Algebra and Number Theory, 4(1), 47-86.
[4] Avramov, L. L., Iyengar, S. B., and Lipman, J. (2011). Reflexivity and rigidity for complexes, II: Schemes.
Algebra and Number Theory, 5(3), 379-429.
[5] Avramov, L. L., Iyengar, S. B., Lipman, J., and Nayak, S. (2010). Reduction of derived Hochschild functors
over commutative algebras and schemes. Advances in Mathematics, 223(2), 735-772.
[6] Beck, K. A., and Sather-Wagstaff, S. (2014). A somewhat gentle introduction to differential graded commutative algebra. In Connections Between Algebra, Combinatorics, and Geometry (pp. 3-99). Springer New
York.
[7] Conrad, B. (2000). Grothendieck duality and base change. Lecture notes in Mathematics, 1750. Springer
Science and Business Media.
[8] Frankild, A., Iyengar, S. B., and Jørgensen, P. (2003). Dualizing differential graded modules and Gorenstein
differential graded algebras. Journal of the London Mathematical Society, 68(2), 288-306.
[9] Gaitsgory, D. (2013). Ind-coherent sheaves. Moscow Mathematical Journal, 13(3), 399-528.
[10] Hartshorne, R. (1966). Residues and duality, Lecture notes of a seminar on the work of A. Grothendieck,
given at Harvard 1963/64. With an appendix by P. Deligne. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 20.
[11] Hinich, V. (1993). Rings with approximation property admit a dualizing complex. Mathematische
Nachrichten, 163(1), 289-296.
[12] Kawasaki, T. (2002). On arithmetic Macaulayfication of Noetherian rings. Transactions of the American
Mathematical Society, 354(1), 123-149.
[13] Keller, B. (1994). Deriving DG categories. In Annales scientifiques de l’Ecole normale superieure (Vol. 27,
No. 1, pp. 63-102).
[14] Lipman, J. (2009). Notes on Derived Functors and Grothendieck Duality, Foundations of Grothendieck
Duality for Diagrams of Schemes. In Lecture Notes in Math. 1960.
[15] Lurie, J. Derived Algebraic Geometry XIV: Representability Theorems, preprint available at
http://www.math.harvard.edu/~lurie/papers/DAG-XIV.pdf.
[16] Nayak, S. (2009). Compactification for essentially finite-type maps. Advances in Mathematics, 222(2), 527546.
[17] Neeman, A. (1996). The Grothendieck duality theorem via Bousfield’s techniques and Brown representability. Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 9(1), 205-236.
[18] Neeman, A. (2014). An improvement on the base-change theorem and the functor f ! . arXiv preprint
arXiv:1406.7599.

38

LIRAN SHAUL

[19] Shaul, L. (2016). Relations between derived Hochschild functors via twisting. Communications in Algebra
44:7, 2898-2907.
[20] Shaul, L. (2015). Reduction of Hochschild cohomology over algebras finite over their center. Journal of
Pure and Applied Algebra, 219(10), 4368-4377.
[21] Toen, B., and Vezzosi, G. ( 2008) Homotopical Algebraic Geometry II: Geometric Stacks and Applications,
Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., vol. 902.
[22] Van den Bergh, M. (1997). Existence theorems for dualizing complexes over non-commutative graded and
filtered rings. Journal of Algebra, 195(2), 662-679.
[23] Yekutieli, A. (2013). Duality and Tilting for Commutative DG Rings. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6411v3.
[24] Yekutieli, A. (2014). The Squaring Operation for Commutative DG Rings. Journal of Algebra, 449(1), 50107.
[25] Yekutieli, A., and Zhang, J. J. (2008). Rigid complexes via DG algebras. Transactions of the American
Mathematical Society, 360(6), 3211-3248.
[26] Yekutieli, A., and Zhang, J. J. (2009). Rigid dualizing complexes over commutative rings. Algebras and
representation theory, 12(1), 19-52.
[27] Yekutieli, A., and Zhang, J. J. (2004). Rigid dualizing complexes on schemes. arXiv preprint math/0405570.
U NIVERSITEIT A NTWERPEN , D EPARTEMENT W ISKUNDE -I NFORMATICA , M IDDELHEIM CAMPUS , M ID 2020 A NTWERP, B ELGIUM
Current address: Fakultät für Mathematik, Universität Bielefeld, 33501 Bielefeld, Germany.
E-mail address: LShaul@math.uni-bielefeld.de

DELHEIMLAAN 1,

