KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

arXiv:1507.03329v4 [] 23 Oct 2016

MICHAEL K. BROWN
Abstract. The goal of this article is to explain a precise sense in which Knörrer periodicity in
commutative algebra and Bott periodicity in topological K-theory are compatible phenomena.
Along the way, we prove an 8-periodic version of Knörrer periodicity for real isolated hypersurface
singularities, and we construct a homomorphism from the Grothendieck group of the homotopy
category of matrix factorizations of a complex (real) polynomial f into the topological K-theory of
its Milnor fiber (positive or negative Milnor fiber).

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Knörrer periodicity over R
2.1. Matrix factorization categories
2.2. The tensor product of matrix factorizations
2.3. Matrix factorizations of quadratics
2.4. Periodicity
3. Matrix factorizations and the K-theory of the Milnor fiber
3.1. The real and complex Milnor fibers
3.2. Relative topological K-theory
3.3. A generalized Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction applied to matrix factorizations
3.4. Knörrer periodicity and Bott periodicity
References

1
3
3
8
10
12
13
14
17
21
27
31

1. Introduction
Let k be a field. In this article, we study hypersurface rings of the form k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(f ) from
both an algebraic and topological point of view. An important algebraic invariant of such a ring
is its homotopy category of matrix factorizations, which we denote by [MF(k[x1 , . . . , xn ], f )] (we
recall the definition of this category in Section 2.1.1). Matrix factorizations were introduced by
Eisenbud in [Eis80] as a tool for studying the homological behavior of modules over a hypersurface
ring. More recently, matrix factorizations have begun appearing in a wide variety of contexts, for
instance homological mirror symmetry (e.g. [KKP08], by Katzarkov-Kontsevich-Pantev) and knot
theory (e.g. [KR08], by Khovanov-Rozansky). In the present work, we continue the study of an
interplay between matrix factorizations and topological K-theory that was begun in the inspiring
paper [BvS12] of Buchweitz-van Straten.
A fundamental result in the theory of matrix factorizations is Knörrer’s periodicity theorem:
Date: October 25, 2016
The author was partially supported by NSF Award DMS-0966600 and the University of Nebraska-Lincoln MCTP
grant (NSF Award DMS-0838463).
1

2

MICHAEL K. BROWN

Theorem 1.1 ([Knö87] Theorem 3.1). Suppose k is algebraically closed and char(k) 6= 2. If
f ∈ (x1 , . . . , xn ) ⊆ k[[x1 , . . . , xn ]], there is an equivalence of categories
∼
=

→ [MF(k[[x1 , . . . , xn , u, v]], f + u2 + v 2 )].
[MF(k[[x1 , . . . , xn ]], f )] −
This result plays an important role in the classification of local hypersurface rings of finite
maximal Cohen-Macaulay type; we refer the reader to Chapter 9 of Leuschke-Wiegand’s text [LW12]
for details. Knörrer’s periodicity theorem also demonstrates that one cannot recover f from its
homotopy category of matrix factorizations.
The main goal of this article is explain a precise sense in which Knörrer periodicity is a manifestation of Bott periodicity in topological K-theory. In Section 2, we motivate this project with
a proof of an 8-periodic version of Knörrer periodicity for isolated hypersurface singularities over
the real numbers:
Theorem 1.2. Let f ∈ (x1 , . . . , xn ) ⊆ R[x1 , . . . , xn ], and suppose R[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(f ) has an iso1 ,...,xn ]]
lated singularity at the origin (i.e. dimR R[[x
< ∞). Then there exists an equivalence of
∂f
∂f
( ∂x ,..., ∂x )
n

1

triangulated categories
∼
=

→ [MF(R[[x1 , . . . , xn , u1 , . . . , u8 ]], f − u21 − · · · − u28 )].
[MF(R[[x1 , . . . , xn ]], f )] −
We point out that the “period” here is exactly 8; that is, for 1 6 l < 8, it can happen that
[MF(R[[x1 , . . . , xn ]], f )] ≇ [MF(R[[x1 , . . . , xn , u1 , . . . , ul ]], f − u21 − · · · − u2l )].
Our proof relies heavily on machinery developed by Dyckerhoff and Toën in [Dyc11] and [Toë07].
This result draws a distinction between the maximal Cohen-Macaulay representation theory of
hypersurface rings with ground field R and those whose ground field is algebraically closed and has
characteristic not equal to 2, since the latter exhibit 2-periodic Knörrer periodicity. The maximal
Cohen-Macaulay representation theory of hypersurface rings with ground field R does not seem to
be well-studied, and we hope this work motivates further investigation in this direction.
The presence of 2- and 8-periodic versions of Knörrer periodicity over C and R, respectively,
suggests the possibility of a compatibility between Knörrer periodicity and Bott periodicity. Such
a compatibility statement is formulated and proved in Section 3. We state here the version of this
result over C; a version over R is also proven in Section 3 (Theorems 3.32 and 3.33).
Theorem 1.3. Suppose f ∈ (x1 , . . . , xn ) ⊆ C[x1 , . . . , xn ] and either C[x1 , . . . , xn ]/(f ) has an
1 ,...,xn ]]
< ∞) or f is quasi-homogeneous. Then
isolated singularity at the origin (i.e. dimC C[[x
∂f
∂f
( ∂x ,..., ∂x )

there exists a commutative diagram

n

1

K0 [MF(C[x1 , . . . , xn ], f )]

φC
f

// KU 0 (Bǫ , Ff )
β



KU 0 (Bǫ , Ff ) ⊗ KU 0 (Bǫ′ , Fu2 +v2 )

K

STKU



K0 [MF(C[x1 , . . . , xn , u, v], f + u2 + v 2 )]

φC

f +u2 +v 2



// KU 0 (Bǫ′′ , F
f +u2 +v2 )

where Ff , Fu2 +v2 , and Ff +u2 +v2 denote the Milnor fibers of f , u2 + v 2 , and f + u2 + v 2 ; ǫ, ǫ′ , ǫ′′ > 0;
Bǫ , Bǫ′ , and Bǫ′′ are closed balls of radius ǫ, ǫ′ , and ǫ′′ in Cn , C2 , and Cn+2 , respectively; K
is induced by the Knörrer functor; β is the Bott periodicity isomorphism; and STKU is given by
the product in relative K-theory followed by the inverse of the map induced by pullback along the
Sebastiani-Thom homotopy equivalence.

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

3

The Sebastiani-Thom homotopy equivalence to which we refer in Theorem 1.3 is discussed in
Section 3.1.2.
The key construction in this section yields the horizontal maps above; specifically, given a polyR
nomial f over the complex (real) numbers, we build a map ΦC
f (Φf ) that assigns to a matrix
factorization of a complex (real) polynomial f a class in the topological K-theory of the Milnor
fiber (positive or negative Milnor fiber) of f ; this map first appeared in [BvS12] in the setting of
R
complex isolated hypersurface singularities. We prove that this construction induces a map φC
f (φf )
on the Grothendieck group of the homotopy category of matrix factorizations of f , and we show
that it recovers the Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction when f is a non-degenerate quadratic over
R or C. The Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction, introduced in Part III of [ABS64], provides the
classical link between Z/2Z-graded modules over Clifford algebras and vector bundles over spheres;
R
the maps φC
f and φf we discuss in Section 3 can be thought of as providing a more general link
between algebra and topology.
Acknowledgements. This work is adapted from my Ph.D. thesis at the University of NebraskaLincoln. I must first of all thank my thesis advisor, Mark E. Walker, for his support during my
time as a graduate student at Nebraska. I thank Luchezar Avramov and Brian Harbourne for
their comments on preliminary versions of this paper, and also Ragnar Buchweitz, Jesse Burke,
Michael Hopkins, and Claudia Miller for valuable conversations with regard to this work. I owe
special thanks to Hai Long Dao for pointing out to me that one may use Proposition 3.3 in [Dao13]
to prove Proposition 3.26 below. Finally, I thank the anonymous referee for his or her helpful
suggestions.
2. Knörrer periodicity over R
In this section, we recall some foundational material concerning matrix factorizations in commutative algebra, and we exhibit an 8-periodic version of Knörrer periodicity for matrix factorization
categories associated to isolated hypersurface singularities over the real numbers.
2.1. Matrix factorization categories. We provide some background on matrix factorization
categories. Fix a commutative algebra Q over a field k and an element f of Q. Henceforth, when
we use the term “dg category”, we mean “k-linear differential Z/2Z-graded category”.
We cite results on differential Z-graded categories from [Toë11] several times throughout this
section; we refer the reader to Section 5.1 of [Dyc11] for a discussion as to how one may reformulate
the results in [Toë11] so that they apply to the Z/2Z-graded setting.
2.1.1. Definitions and some properties.
Definition 2.1. The dg category MF(Q, f ) of matrix factorizations of f over Q is given by the
following:
Objects in MF(Q, f ) are pairs (P, d), where P is a finitely generated projective Z/2Z-graded
Q-module, and d is an odd-degree endomorphism of P such that d2 = f · idP . Henceforth, we will
often denote an object (P, d) in MF(Q, f ) by just P .
The morphism complex of a pair of matrix factorizations P, P ′ , which we will denote by
HomMF (P, P ′ ), is the Z/2Z-graded module of Q-linear maps from P to P ′ equipped with the
differential ∂ given by
∂(α) = d′ ◦ α − (−1)|α| α ◦ d
for homogeneous maps α : P → P ′ .
We will often express an object P in MF(Q, f ) with the notation
d
P1 −==1=
− P0 ,
d0

4

MICHAEL K. BROWN

where P1 , P0 are the odd and even degree summands of P , and d1 , d0 are the restrictions of d to P1
and P0 , respectively.
A degree 0 morphism α in MF(Q, f ) can be represented by a diagram of the following form:
d

d

d′

d′

P1 −−−1−→ P0 −−−0−→




α1 y
α0 y

P1

α
y 1

P1′ −−−1−→ P0′ −−−0−→ P1′

It is straightforward to check that α is a cycle if and only if this diagram commutes. In fact, if
f ∈ Q is a non-zero-divisor, it is easy to see that the left square commutes if and only if the right
square commutes.
Remark 2.2. If P1 and P0 are free and f is non-zero-divisor, P1 and P0 must have the same rank.
Define Z 0 MF(Q, f ) to be the category with the same objects as MF(Q, f ) and with morphisms
given by the degree 0 cycles in MF(Q, f ). When Q is regular with finite Krull dimension and f is a
regular element of Q (i.e. f is a non-unit, non-zero-divisor), Z 0 MF(Q, f ) is an exact category with
the evident family of exact sequences ([Orl03] Section 3.1).
The homotopy category, [MF(Q, f )], of the dg category MF(Q, f ) is defined to be the quotient
of Z 0 MF(Q, f ) by morphisms that are boundaries in MF(Q, f ). That is, objects in [MF(Q, f )] are
the same as those of MF(Q, f ), and the morphisms in [MF(Q, f )] between objects P, P ′ are classes
in H 0 HomMF (P, P ′ ).
Definition 2.3. We call a matrix factorization trivial if it is a direct sum of matrix factorizations
that are isomorphic in Z 0 MF(Q, f ) to either
f ·id

E
E −=====
−E

idE

or
id

E −===E==
−E
f ·idE

for some finitely generated projective Q-module E.
The following result gives an alternative characterization for when a morphism in Z 0 MF(Q, f )
is a boundary in MF(Q, f ); the straightforward proof is omitted.
Proposition 2.4. A morphism α : P → P ′ in Z 0 MF(Q, f ) is a boundary in MF(Q, f ) if and only
if it factors through a trivial matrix factorization in Z 0 MF(Q, f ).
We conclude this section with a technical result that will be used in the proof of Proposition 3.19:
d
Proposition 2.5. Let P = (P1 −==1=
− P0 ) be a matrix factorization of f over Q. Assume f is a
d0

non-zero-divisor. Then the following are equivalent:
(1) coker(d1 ) is isomorphic to L/f L for some projective Q-module L.
(2) There exists a trivial matrix factorization E and a matrix factorization E ′ that is isomorphic
in Z 0 MF(Q, f ) to one of the form
id
F −==F=
−F
f

such that P ⊕ E ′ is isomorphic to E in Z 0 MF(Q, f ).
We will use the following general fact about idempotent complete categories. We suspect that
this result is well-known to experts; we omit the purely formal proof.

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

5

Lemma 2.6. Let C be an idempotent complete additive category, and let E be a collection of objects
in C that is
• closed under isomorphisms,
• closed under finite coproducts, and
• closed under taking summands; that is, whenever X is an object in C such that idX factors
through an object in E, X is an object in E.
Denote by L the quotient of C by those morphisms that factor through an object in E. If X and Y
are objects in C, their images in L are isomorphic if and only if there exist objects EX , EY in E
such that
X ⊕ EX ∼
= Y ⊕ EY .
We now prove Proposition 2.5:
Proof. (2) ⇒ (1): Since the cokernel of d1 is isomorphic to the cokernel of
d1 ⊕ idF : P1 ⊕ F → P0 ⊕ F,
we may assume P is trivial. In this case, the result is obvious.
(1) ⇒ (2): Choose a projective Q-module L such that there exists an isomorphism
∼
=

→ L/f L.
coker(d1 ) −
We have Q-projective resolutions
d

1
0 → P1 −→
P0 → coker(d1 ) → 0

f

0→L−
→ L → L/f L → 0
Thus, there exist maps
βi : Pi → L, γi : L → Pi
for i = 0, 1 making the following diagrams commute:
d

0 −−−−→ P1 −−−1−→ P0 −−−−→ coker(d1 ) −−−−→ 0




∼

β1 y
β0 y
y=
f

0 −−−−→ L −−−−→ L −−−−→
f

0 −−−−→ L −−−−→ L −−−−→




γ0 y
γ1 y
d

L/f L

−−−−→ 0

L/f L

∼
y=

−−−−→ 0

0 −−−−→ P1 −−−1−→ P0 −−−−→ coker(d1 ) −−−−→ 0
Hence, we have maps

hP : P0 → P1 , hL : L → L
such that
γ1 ◦ β1 − idP1 = hP ◦ d1 , γ0 ◦ β0 − idP0 = d1 ◦ hP .
β1 ◦ γ1 − idL = f hL , β0 ◦ γ0 − idL = f hL .

6

MICHAEL K. BROWN

We have commutative diagrams
d1

P1

// P0



idP1

P1






// P1

idP1

L


// P0



L

// L
hL

idL


// L
f ·idL

idL

d1

d1

P1

f ·hL

hP

hP ◦d1

f ·idL

L

f ·idL


// L

Denote by E the collection of matrix factorizations of f over Q isomorphic in Z 0 MF(Q, f ) to a
matrix factorization of the form
id
 E.
E −==E=−
f

Z 0 MF(Q, f )

Notice that
is an idempotent complete additive category, and E is closed under
direct sums and direct summands in Z 0 MF(Q, f ). Letting L denote the quotient of Z 0 MF(Q, f )
by those morphisms that factor through an object in E, we have that
f
d
(P1 −==1=
= (L −===
− P0 ) ∼
− L)
d0

idL

in L. The result now follows from Lemma 2.6.

2.1.2. Triangulated structure. Suppose Q is regular with finite Krull dimension and f is a regular
element of Q. A feature of the homotopy category [MF(Q, f )] is that it may be equipped with a
triangulated structure in the following way ([Orl03] Section 3.1):
The shift functor maps the object
d
P = (P1 −==1=
− P0 )
d0

to the object
−d
P [1] = (P0 −===0=
− P1 ).
−d1

d′1

d
Given a morphism α : (P1 −==1=
− P0′ ) in Z 0 MF(Q, f ), the mapping cone of α is
− P0 ) → (P1′ −==′=
d0

defined as follows:

d0

!

d′0 α1
0 −d1
′

cone(α) = (P0′ ⊕ P1 −=========
− P1 ⊕ P0 )
!=
′
d1 α0
0 −d0
There are canonical morphisms P ′ → cone(α) and cone(α) → P [1] in Z 0 MF(Q, f ). Taking the
distinguished triangles in [MF(Q, f )] to be the triangles isomorphic in [MF(Q, f )] to those of the
form
α
P −
→ P ′ → cone(α) → P [1],
[MF(Q, f )] may be equipped with the structure of a triangulated category.

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

7

The Grothendieck group, K0 [MF(Q, f )], of the triangulated category [MF(Q, f )] is defined to
be the free abelian group generated by isomorphism classes of [MF(Q, f )] modulo elements of the
form [P1 ] − [P2 ] + [P3 ], where P1 , P2 , and P3 fit into a distinguished triangle in the following way:
P1 → P2 → P3 → P1 [1].
Remark 2.7. The category MF(Q, f ) is not always triangulated in the dg sense (see Section 4.4 of
[Toë11] for the definition of a triangulated dg category). When MF(Q, f ) is triangulated in the dg
sense, the induced triangulated structure on [MF(Q, f )] agrees with the triangulated structure just
described.
Remark 2.8. When Q is a regular local ring and f is a regular element of Q, one has an equivalence
of triangulated categories
∼
=

→ MCM(Q/(f )),
[MF(Q, f )] −
where MCM(Q/(f )) denotes the stable category of maximal Cohen-Macaulay (MCM) modules
over the ring Q/(f ). The stable category of MCM modules is obtained by taking the quotient of
the category of MCM modules over Q/(f ) by those morphisms that factor through a projective
Q/(f )-module. The above equivalence is given, on objects, by
d
(P1 −==1=
− P0 ) 7→ coker(d1 ).
d0

Matrix factorizations were first defined by Eisenbud in [Eis80]; this interplay between matrix
factorizations and MCM modules over hypersurface rings provided the original motivation for the
study of matrix factorization categories.
2.1.3. Stabilization. Assume now that Q is a regular local ring of Krull dimension n, and suppose
f is a regular element of Q. Denote by Db (Q/(f )) the bounded derived category of Q/(f ), and set
Perf(Q/(f )) to be the full subcategory of Db (Q/(f )) given by perfect complexes. Perf(Q/(f )) is
a thick subcategory of Db (Q/(f )); define Db (Q/(f )) to be the Verdier quotient of Db (Q/(f )) by
Perf(Q/(f )). In [Buc86], Buchweitz calls this quotient the stabilized derived category of Q/(f ).
By [Buc86], the functor
MCM(Q/(f )) → Db (Q/(f ))
that sends an MCM module M to the complex with M concentrated in degree 0 is a triangulated
equivalence. Hence, composing with the equivalence in Remark 2.8, one has an equivalence
[MF(Q, f )] → Db (Q/(f ))
Following [Dyc11], given an object C in Db (Q/(f )), we denote by C stab the isomorphism class
in [MF(Q, f )] corresponding to C under the above equivalence (“stab” stands for “stabilization”).
In particular, thinking of the residue field k of Q/(f ) as a complex concentrated in degree 0, we
may associate to k an isomorphism class kstab in [MF(Q, f )]. We now construct an object Ef in
MF(Q, f ) that represents kstab ; this construction appears in [Dyc11]. Choose a regular system of
parameters x1 , . . . , xn for Q, and consider the Koszul complex
n
M
∧i Qn, s0 )
(
i=0

as a Z/2Z-graded complex of free Q-modules with even (odd) degree piece given by the direct sum
of the even (odd) exterior powers of Qn . Here, s0 denotes the Z/2Z-folding of the Koszul differential
associated to x1 , . . . , xn . Choose an expression of f ∈ Q of the form
f = g1 x1 + · · · + gn xn .

8

MICHAEL K. BROWN

Fix a basis e1 , . . . , en of Qn , and set s1 to be the odd-degree endomorphism of
by exterior multiplication on the left by g1 e1 + · · · + gn en . Define
n
M
∧i Qn , s0 + s1 ).
Ef := (

Ln

i=0

∧ i Qn

given

i=0

It is easy to check that Ef is a matrix factorization of f . By Corollary 2.7 in [Dyc11], Ef
represents kstab in [MF(Q, f )]. In particular, Ef does not depend on the choice of regular system of
parameters x1 , . . . , xn or coefficients g1 , . . . , gn up to homotopy equivalence. Henceforth, we shall
denote the dg algebra EndMF (Ef ) by A(Q,f ) .
2.2. The tensor product of matrix factorizations. Let k be a field. We begin this section
with a technical definition:
Definition 2.9. Suppose Q is a commutative algebra over k and f ∈ Q. If the pair (Q, f ) satisfies
• Q is essentially of finite type over k
• Q is equidimensional of dimension n
• The module Ω1Q/k of Kähler differentials is locally free of rank n
• The zero locus of df ∈ Ω1Q/k is a 0-dimensional scheme supported on a unique closed point
m of Spec(Q) with residue field k and f ∈ m
we shall call the pair Q/(f ) an isolated hypersurface singularity, or IHS.
Remark 2.10. Our IHS condition above is precisely condition (B) in Section 3.2 of [Dyc11]. As
noted in loc. cit., if Q/(f ) and Q′ /(f ′ ) are IHS, Q ⊗k Q′ /(f ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ f ′ ) is as well.
P′

Suppose Q and Q′ are commutative algebras over k, f ∈ Q, and f ′ ∈ Q′ . Given objects P and
in MF(Q, f ), MF(Q′ , f ′ ), one can form their tensor product over k:




d ⊗ idP0′ idP0 ⊗ d′1 
 1
−idP1 ⊗ d′0 d0 ⊗ idP1′
′
′
′ −
′
′

===================
P ⊗MF P := ((P1 ⊗k P0 ) ⊕ (P0 ⊗k P1 ) =
− (P0 ⊗k P0 ) ⊕ (P1 ⊗k P1 )).
=
′
′
d ⊗ idP0 −idP1 ⊗ d1 
 0
idP0 ⊗ d′0 d1 ⊗ idP1′

This construction first appeared in [Yos98]; it can be thought of as a Z/2Z-graded analogue of
the tensor product of complexes. It is straightforward to check that P ⊗MF P ′ is an object in
MF(Q ⊗k Q′ , f ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ f ′ ). In fact, setting f ⊕ f ′ := f ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ f ′ ∈ Q ⊗k Q′ , and noting that
there is a canonical map of complexes
HomMF (P, L) ⊗k HomMF (P ′ , L′ ) → HomMF (P ⊗MF P ′ , L ⊗MF L′ ),
we have the following:
Proposition 2.11. There is a dg functor
STMF : MF(Q, f ) ⊗k MF(Q′ , f ′ ) → MF(Q ⊗k Q′ , f ⊕ f ′ )
that sends an object (P, P ′ ) to P ⊗MF P ′ .
Remark 2.12. It is straightforward to verify that STMF induces a pairing
K0 [MF(Q, f )] ⊗ K0 [MF(Q′ , f ′ )] → K0 [MF(Q ⊗k Q′ , f ⊕ f ′ )].
Remark 2.13. The “ST” in the name STMF stands for “Sebastiani-Thom”, since this tensor product
operation is related to the Sebastiani-Thom homotopy equivalence discussed in Section 3.1.2. A
precise sense in which the tensor product of matrix factorizations is related to the Sebastiani-Thom
homotopy equivalence is illustrated by the proof of Proposition 3.29 below; see Remark 3.31 for
further details.

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

9

b the m-adic
Now, suppose Q/(f ) and Q′ /(f ′ ) are IHS. Set Q′′ := Q ⊗k Q′ . We will denote by Q
c′ and Q
c′′ similarly, and define
completion of Qm , where m is as in the definition of IHS. Define Q
c′ → Q
c′′
b ⊗k Q
φ:Q

to be the canonical ring homomorphism. φ induces a dg functor
c′ , f ⊕ f ′ ) → MF(Q
c′′ , f ⊕ f ′ ).
b ⊗k Q
MF(φ) : MF(Q

c MF to be the composition of MF(φ) with the tensor product functor
Set ST
c′ , f ′ ) → MF(Q
c′ , f ⊕ f ′ ).
b f ) ⊗k MF(Q
b ⊗k Q
MF(Q,

Proposition 2.14. If Q/(f ) and Q′ /(f ′ ) are IHS,

c′ , f ′ ) → MF(Q
c′′ , f ⊕ f ′ )
c MF : MF(Q,
b f ) ⊗k MF(Q
ST

is a Morita equivalence of dg categories.

Remark 2.15. We emphasize that Proposition 2.14 is really a straightforward application of several
results in [Dyc11]; we include a proof for completeness. We refer the reader to Section 4.4 of [Toë11]
for the definition of a Morita equivalence of dg categories.
Proof. Let m and m′ be the maximal ideals of Q and Q′ arising in Definition 2.9. Suppose Qm
and Q′m′ have Krull dimensions n and m, respectively. Qm and Q′m′ are regular local rings; choose
regular systems of parameters x1 , . . . , xn and y1 , . . . , ym in Qm and Q′m′ , and choose expressions
f = g1 x1 + · · · + gn xn
f ′ = h1 y1 + · · · + hm ym
of f and f ′ . Use these expressions to construct the dga’s A(Qm ,f ) and A(Q′ ′ ,f ′ ) , as in Section 2.1.3.
m
c′ as well, so we
b and Q
Note that x1 , . . . , xn and y1 , . . . , ym form regular systems of parameters in Q
may use these expressions to construct A(Q,f
b ) and A(Q
c′ ,f ′ ) . Also, x1 ⊗1, . . . , xn ⊗1, 1⊗y1 , . . . , 1⊗ym
′′
′′
is a regular system of parameters in Qm′′ , where m := m ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ m′ , so we may use the expression
f ⊕ f ′ = (g1 x1 ⊗ 1) + · · · + (gn xn ⊗ 1) + (1 ⊗ h1 y1 ) + · · · + (1 ⊗ hm ym )

to construct A(Q′′ ′′ ,f ⊕f ′ ) and A(Qc′′ ,f ⊕f ′ ) .
m
By Section 6.1 of [Dyc11], we have a quasi-isomorphism
∼
=

→ A(Q′′ ′′ ,f ⊕f ′ ) .
F : A(Qm ,f ) ⊗k A(Q′ ′ ,f ′ ) −
m

m

We also have a canonical map
G : A(Q,f
b ) ⊗k A(Q
c′ ,f ′ ) → A(Q
c′′ ,f ⊕f ′ ) .

By the proof of Theorem 5.7 in [Dyc11], the inclusions

A(Qm ,f ) ֒→ A(Q,f
b )

A(Q′ ′ ,f ′ ) ֒→ A(Q
c′ ,f ′ )
m

A(Q′′ ′′ ,f ⊕f ′ ) ֒→ A(Qc′′ ,f ⊕f ′ )
m

are all quasi-isomorphisms. Since a tensor product of Morita equivalences is again a Morita equivalence ([Toë11] Section 4.4), it follows that the map
A(Qm ,f ) ⊗k A(Q′ ′ ,f ′ ) → A(Q,f
b ) ⊗k A(Q
c′ ,f ′ )
m

is a Morita equivalence.

10

MICHAEL K. BROWN

We have the following commutative square:
A(Qm ,f ) ⊗k A(Q′ ′ ,f ′ )

// A b ⊗ A ′ ′
c ,f )
(Q,f ) k (Q





m

G

A(Q′′ ′′ ,f ⊕f ′ )

// A c′′
(Q ,f ⊕f ′ )

m

It follows that G is a Morita equivalence.
One may think of a dga as a dg category with a single object. Adopting this point of view, we
have inclusion functors
b
i : A(Q,f
b ) ֒→ MF(Q, f )
c′ ′
j : A(Q
c′ ,f ′ ) ֒→ MF(Q , f )

c′′ , f ⊕ f ′ )
l : A(Qc′′ ,f ⊕f ′ ) ֒→ MF(Q

Combining Theorem 5.2 and Lemma 5.6 in [Dyc11], we conclude that i, j, and l are Morita
equivalences. In particular, we have that
c′ ′
b
i ⊗ j : A(Q,f
b ) ⊗k A(Q
c′ ,f ′ ) → MF(Q, f ) ⊗k MF(Q , f )

is a Morita equivalence.
Finally, consider the following commutative diagram:
A(Q,f
b ) ⊗k A(Q
c′ ,f ′ )

i⊗j

G



A(Qc′′ ,f ⊕f ′ )

l

c′ , f ′ )
b f ) ⊗ MF(Q
// MF(Q,
k


c MF
ST

c′′ , f ⊕ f ′ )
// MF(Q

c MF is as
Since the left-most vertical map and both horizontal maps are Morita equivalences, ST
well.

Remark 2.16. Using Theorem 4.11 of [Dyc11] along with a similar argument to the one above, one
may show that, under the assumptions of Proposition 2.14, the functor
MF(Q, f ) ⊗k MF(Q′ , f ′ ) → MF(Q′′ , f ⊕ f ′ )
given by tensor product of matrix factorizations is also a Morita equivalence.
2.3. Matrix factorizations of quadratics. Fix a field k such that char(k) 6= 2 and a finitedimensional vector space V over k. Let q : V → k be a quadratic form, and let Cliff k (q) denote the
Clifford algebra associated to q. Cliff k (q) is a Z/2Z-graded k-algebra; let modZ/2Z (Cliff k (q)) denote
the category of finitely generated Z/2Z-graded left modules over Cliff k (q). Henceforth, when we
refer to a module over a Clifford algebra, we will always mean it to be a left module.
Assume q is non-degenerate, and choose a basis {e1 , . . . , en } of V with respect to which q is
diagonal; that is,
q = a1 x21 + · · · + an x2n ∈ S 2 (V ∗ )
where the xi comprise the dual basis corresponding to the ei , and the ai are nonzero elements of
k. Denote by Q the localization of S(V ∗ ) at the ideal (x1 , . . . , xn ).
The following theorem, due to Buchweitz-Eisenbud-Herzog, yields a relationship between Clifford
modules and matrix factorizations of non-degenerate quadratic forms:

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

11

Theorem 2.17 ([BEH87]). There is an equivalence of k-linear categories
∼
=
b q)].
→ [MF(Q,
modZ/2Z (Cliff k (q)) −

Denote by Θ the explicit construction of this equivalence described in the proof of Theorem 14.7
in [Yos90].
Remark 2.18. The inclusion
b
k[x1 , . . . , xn ] ֒→ Q

induces an equivalence

∼
=
b qn )].
→ [MF(Q,
[MF(k[x1 , . . . , xn ], qn )] −

b is isomorphic in [MF(Q,
b qn )]
To see this, we first recall that every matrix factorization of qn over Q
to one with (linear) polynomial entries ([Yos90] Proposition 14.3); hence, the functor is essentially
surjective.
Also, one has a commutative diagram
[MF(Q, qn )]


b qn )]
[MF(Q,

∼
=

∼
=

// MCM(Q/(qn ))

// MCM(Q/(q
b n ))

The morphism sets in MCM(Q/(qn )) are Artinian modules, and hence complete. Thus, the
functor on the right is fully faithful, and so the functor on the left is as well.
It now follows from Theorem 4.11 in [Dyc11] that the functor

is fully faithful.

b qn )]
[MF(k[x1 , . . . , xn ], qn )] → [MF(Q,

Suppose q ′ : W → k is another non-degenerate quadratic form; choose a basis of W with respect
to which q ′ is diagonal, and let y1 , . . . , ym denote the corresponding basis of W ∗ . As above, we
may think of q ′ as an element of S 2 (W ∗ ). Set Q′ to be the localization of S(W ∗ ) at the ideal
(y1 , . . . , ym ).
It is well-known that the Z/2Z-graded tensor product of Cliff k (q) and Cliff k (q ′ ) over k is canonically isomorphic to Cliff k (q ⊕ q ′ ). Further, by Remark 1.3 in [Yos98], the Z/2Z-graded tensor
product of Clifford modules is compatible, via this canonical isomorphism and the equivalence in
Theorem 2.17, with the tensor product STMF in Proposition 2.11. That is, one has a commutative
diagram of k-linear categories
modZ/2Z (Cliff k (q)) × modZ/2Z (Cliff k (q ′ ))

// modZ/2Z (Cliff k (q ⊕ q ′ ))

Θ×Θ



[MF(Q, q)] × [MF(Q′ , q ′ )]

Θ
STMF



// [MF(Q ⊗k Q′ , q ⊕ q ′ )]

Let C be a rank 1 free Z/2Z-graded Cliff k (q)-module. If dim(V ) = 1 and q = x2 , it is easy
to check that the isomorphism class of Θ(C) is kstab , where kstab is as defined in Section 2.1.3.
Further, Eq ⊗MF Eq′ ∼
= Eq⊕q′ , where Eq , Eq′ , and Eq⊕q′ are as in Section 2.1.3 ([Dyc11] Section
6.1). Thus, we have:
Proposition 2.19. If ai = 1 for 1 6 i 6 n, the isomorphism class of Θ(C) is kstab .

12

MICHAEL K. BROWN

2.4. Periodicity. Following [Dyc11], given a commutative algebra Q over a field k and an element f of Q, we define MF∞ (Q, f ) to be the dg category of possibly infinitely-generated matrix
factorizations; that is, objects of MF∞ (Q, f ) are defined in the same way as MF(Q, f ), except the
projective Z/2Z-graded Q-module P need not be finitely generated.
A version of Knörrer periodicity (Theorem 1.1) for isolated hypersurface singularities may be
deduced from the following proposition:
Proposition 2.20. Suppose Q and Q′ are commutative algebras over a field k. Let f ∈ Q and
f ′ ∈ Q′ , and suppose Q/(f ) and Q′ /(f ′ ) are IHS. If there exists an object X in MF(Q′ , f ′ ) such
that
(a) X is a compact generator of [MF∞ (Q′ , f ′ )], and
(b) the inclusion k ֒→ EndMF(Q
c′ ,f ′ ) (X) is a quasi-isomorphism
then the dg functor

given by

b f ) → MF(Q\
KX : MF(Q,
⊗ k Q′ , f ⊕ f ′ )
P 7→ P ⊗MF X

on objects and
α 7→ α ⊗ idX
on morphisms is a quasi-equivalence.
Proof. By Theorems 4.11, 5.1, and 5.7 in [Dyc11], the inclusion
c′ ′
EndMF(Q
c′ ,f ′ ) (X) ֒→ MF(Q , f )

is a Morita equivalence. We have a chain of Morita equivalences
c′ ′
b f ) ⊗k k ֒→ MF(Q,
b f ) ⊗k End
b
MF(Q,
c′ ′ (X) ֒→ MF(Q, f ) ⊗k MF(Q , f ).
MF(Q ,f )

c MF , Proposition 2.14 yields a Morita equivalence
Composing with ST
b f ) → MF(Q\
MF(Q,
⊗k Q′ , f ⊕ f ′ ).

This composition is clearly the functor KX ; thus, KX is a Morita equivalence. Since both
b f ) and MF(Q\
MF(Q,
⊗k Q′ , f ⊕ f ′ ) are triangulated in the dg sense by Lemma 5.6 in [Dyc11],
we may apply Theorem 3.2.1 in [Toë11] and Theorem 1.2.10 in [Hov07] to conclude that KX is a
quasi-equivalence.

To deduce a version of Knörrer periodicity for isolated hypersurface singularities, assume k to
be an algebraically closed field such that char(k) 6= 2, set Q′ = k[u, v] and f ′ = u2 + v 2 , and take
X to be the matrix factorization
u+iv
k[u, v] −====
− k[u, v].
u−iv

This is the approach taken in Section 5.3 of [Dyc11].
We point out that k is not assumed to be algebraically closed in Proposition 2.20, and no
assumptions on the characteristic of k are made, either. In particular, we may use Proposition 2.20
to prove an 8-periodic version of Knörrer periodicity over R (this result implies Theorem 1.2 from
the introduction):
Theorem 2.21. Suppose Q is an R-algebra. Let f ∈ Q, and suppose Q/(f ) is IHS. Set Q′ :=
R[u1 , . . . , u8 ]. Then there exists a matrix factorization X of −u21 − · · · − u28 over Q′ such that the
dg functor
b f ) → MF(Q\
MF(Q,
⊗R Q′ , f − u21 − · · · − u28 )

given by

P 7→ P ⊗MF X

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

13

on objects and
α 7→ α ⊗ idX
on morphisms is a quasi-equivalence.
Remark 2.22. One may replace −u21 − · · · − u28 with u21 + · · · + u28 and obtain a similar result; the
proof is the same.
Proof. Set q := −u21 − · · · − u28 ∈ Q′ . We equip the matrix algebra Mat16 (R) of 16 × 16 of matrices
over R with a Z/2Z-grading in the following way: A = (aij ) is homogeneous of even degree if
aij = 0 whenever i + j is odd, and A is homogeneous of odd degree if aij = 0 whenever i + j is
even. By Proposition V.4.2 in [Lam05],
Cliff R (q) ∼
= Mat16 (R)
as Z/2Z-graded algebras. In particular, by Theorem 2.17,
c′ , q)] ∼
[MF(Q
= modZ/2Z (Mat16 (R)),

where the right hand side is the category of finitely generated Z/2Z-graded left Mat16 (R)-modules.
Let M ∈ modZ/2Z (Mat16 (R)) be the module consisting of elements of Mat16 (R) with nonzero entries
only in the first column. Recall that, by Remark 2.18, the canonical map
c′ , q)]
[MF(Q′ , q)] → [MF(Q

is an equivalence; let X be an object of [MF(Q′ , q)] corresponding to M .
Let m := (u1 , . . . , u8 ) ⊆ Q′ , and let Eq ∈ MF(Q′m , q) be as in Section 2.1.3. Notice that, by
Proposition 2.19, (X ⊕ X[1])⊕8 ∼
= Eq in [MF(Q′m , q)]. In particular, it follows from Theorems 4.1
and 4.11 of [Dyc11] that X is a compact generator of [MF∞ (Q′ , q)].
Since EndMat16 (R) (M ) ∼
= R as Z/2Z-graded R-algebras, where R is concentrated in even degree,
we have H 0 (EndMF (X)) ∼
= R. We now show H 1 (EndMF (X)) = 0. By Section 5.5 of [Dyc11],
0
1
H (EndMF (Eq )) ⊕ H (EndMF (Eq )) is isomorphic, as a Z/2Z-graded R-vector space, to Cliff R (q),
and so H 1 (EndMF (Eq )) has rank 128. Also, we have isomorphisms
H 1 (EndMF (Eq )) ∼
= H 1 (EndMF ((X ⊕ X[1])⊕8 )) ∼
= H 0 (EndMF (X))128 ⊕ H 1 (EndMF (X))128 .
Thus, H 1 (EndMF (X)) = 0, and so the inclusion
R ֒→ EndMF (X)
is a quasi-isomorphism. Now apply Proposition 2.20.



Remark 2.23. Theorem 2.21 implies the existence of a Knörrer-type periodicity for matrix factorizations over R of period at most 8. We point out that the period is exactly 8, since the Brauer-Wall
group of R is the cyclic group Z/8Z generated by the class of Cliff R (x2 ).
3. Matrix factorizations and the K-theory of the Milnor fiber
We have demonstrated that matrix factorization categories exhibit 2- and 8-periodic versions
of Knörrer periodicity over C and R, respectively. This pattern resembles Bott periodicity in
topological K-theory; the goal of this section is to explain this resemblance.
We give a rough sketch of our approach. The classical link between the periodicity of Clifford
algebras up to Z/2Z-graded Morita equivalence and Bott periodicity in topological K-theory is the
Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction, which first appeared in Part III of [ABS64] (and, in fact, a proof
of Bott periodicity using Clifford algebras is provided by Wood in [Woo66]). Loosely speaking, the
Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction is a way of mapping a finitely generated Z/2Z-graded module
over a real or complex Clifford algebra to a class in the K-theory of a sphere.

14

MICHAEL K. BROWN

Composing the Buchweitz-Eisenbud-Herzog equivalence (Theorem 2.17) with the Atiyah-BottShapiro construction, we have a way of assigning a class in the topological K-theory of a sphere to
a matrix factorization of a non-degenerate quadratic form over R or C:
mf’s of real/complex quadratics

ABS ◦ BEH

K-theory of spheres

The idea is to lift this composition; that is, we wish to associate a space Xf to a real or complex
polynomial f and construct a map from matrix factorizations of f to the topological K-theory of
Xf so that the diagram
mf’s of real/complex quadratics

mf’s of real/complex polynomials

ABS ◦ BEH

K-theory of spheres

K-theory of spaces of the form Xf

commutes.
It turns out that the right choice of Xf is the Milnor fiber (positive or negative Milnor fiber )
associated to the complex (real) polynomial.
We begin this section with discussions of known results concerning the Milnor fiber and relative
topological K-theory. Then, using the work of Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro in [ABS64] as a guide, we will
complete the above diagram, and we will use the bottom arrow to explain a precise sense in which
Knörrer periodicity and Bott periodicity are compatible phenomena.
3.1. The real and complex Milnor fibers. Let f ∈ C[x1 , . . . , xn ], and suppose f (0) = 0. We
begin this section by describing the construction of the Milnor fiber associated to f , following the
exposition in Section 1 of [BvS12]. We then discuss various properties of the Milnor fiber that we
will make use of later on.
3.1.1. Construction of the Milnor fibration and some properties of the Milnor fiber. For ǫ > 0,
define Bǫ to be the closed ball centered at the origin of radius ǫ in Cn , and for δ > 0, set Dδ∗ to be
the open punctured disk centered at the origin in C of radius δ.
Choose ǫ > 0 so that, for 0 < ǫ′ 6 ǫ, ∂Bǫ′ intersects f −1 (0) transversely. Upon choosing such a
number ǫ, choose δ ∈ (0, ǫ) such that f −1 (t) intersects ∂Bǫ transversely for all t ∈ Dδ∗ . Then the
map
ψ : Bǫ ∩ f −1 (Dδ∗ ) → Dδ∗
given by ψ(x) = f (x) is a locally trivial fibration.
The map ψ depends, of course, on our choices of ǫ and δ. However, if ǫ′ , δ′ is another pair
of positive numbers satisfying the above conditions, the fibration associated to these choices is
fiber homotopy equivalent to the one above (see Definition 1.5 in Chapter 3, §1 of [Dim92] for the
definition of a fiber homotopy equivalence). We are thus justified in calling ψ the Milnor fibration
associated to f .
Remark 3.1. The Milnor fibration was originally introduced in [Mil68]. The above construction is
not the same as the construction of the Milnor fibration in [Mil68] and is due to Lê ([Lê76]). The
two constructions yield fiber homotopy equivalent fibrations ([Dim92] Chapter 3, §1).
Choose t ∈ Dδ∗ . The fiber of ψ over t is called the Milnor fiber of f over t; we will denote it by
Ff . Ff is independent of our choices of ǫ, δ, and t up to homotopy equivalence, so we suppress
these choices in the notation, and we will often refer to Ff as just the Milnor fiber of f . However,
these choices will be significant at several points later on.

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

15

If C[x1 , . . . , xn ](x1 ,...,xn ) /(f ) is IHS (see Definition 2.9), set
µ := dimC

C[[x1 , . . . , xn ]]

< ∞.

∂f
∂f
)
, . . . , ∂x
( ∂x
n
1

Theorem 3.2 ([Mil68] Theorem 6.5). If C[x1 , . . . , xn ](x1 ,...,xn ) /(f ) is IHS, Ff is homotopy equivalent to a wedge sum of µ copies of S n−1 .
Remark 3.3. Since ψ restricts to a fibration over a circle, Ff comes equipped with a monodromy
homeomorphism
∼
=

→ Ff .
h : Ff −
3.1.2. The Sebastiani-Thom homotopy equivalence. We recall the definition of the join of two topological spaces:
Definition 3.4. Let X and Y be compact Hausdorff spaces. The join of X and Y , denoted X ∗ Y ,
is the quotient of X × Y × I by the relations
(x1 , y, 0) ∼ (x2 , y, 0)
(x, y1 , 1) ∼ (x, y2 , 1)
equipped with the quotient topology.
Remark 3.5. We express the cone CX over a compact Hausdorff space X explicitly as the quotient
of
X × [0, 1]
by the relation
(x1 , 0) ∼ (x2 , 0)
for all x1 , x2 ∈ X. When X and Y are compact Hausdorff, X ∗ Y is homeomorphic to (CX × Y ) ∪
(X × CY ) ⊆ CX × CY ; here, we identify X and Y with the subsets X × {1} and Y × {1} of CX
and CY , respectively. By [Bro06] 5.7.4, an explicit homeomorphism
∼
=

CX × CY −
→ C(X ∗ Y )
is given by
(x, t, y, t′ ) 7→ ((x, y,

t
), t′ ), if t′ > t, t′ 6= 0
2t′

(x, t, y, t′ ) 7→ ((x, y, 1 −

t′
), t), if t > t′ , t 6= 0
2t

(x, 0, y, 0) 7→ ((x, y, 0), 0),
and this map restricts to a homeomorphism
∼
=

→ X ∗ Y.
w : (CX × Y ) ∪ (X × CY ) −
Now, suppose f ∈ C[x1 , . . . , xn ], f ′ ∈ C[y1 , . . . , ym ], and f (0) = 0 = f ′ (0). Assume
R := C[x1 , . . . , xn ](x1 ,...,xn ) /(f ) and R′ := C[y1 , . . . , ym ](y1 ,...,ym ) /(f ′ ) are IHS (see Definition 2.9).
Let f ⊕ f ′ denote the sum of f and f ′ thought of as an element of C[x1 , . . . , xn , y1 , . . . , ym ]. The
following theorem of Sebastiani-Thom relates the Milnor fibers of f , f ′ , and f ⊕ f ′ :
Theorem 3.6 ([ST71]). There is a homotopy equivalence
ST : Ff ∗ Ff ′ → Ff ⊕f ′

16

MICHAEL K. BROWN

that is compatible with monodromy; that is, the square
ST

Ff ∗ Ff ′ −−−−→ Ff ⊕f ′




h∗hy
hy
ST

Ff ∗ Ff ′ −−−−→ Ff ⊕f ′

commutes up to homotopy.

Remark 3.7. By results of Oka in [Oka73], the assumption in Theorem 3.6 that R and R′ are IHS
is not necessary if f and f ′ are quasi-homogeneous.
We refer the reader to Section 2.7 of [AGZV12] and §3 of Chapter 3 in [Dim92] for discussions
related to Theorem 3.6. We now exhibit an explicit map realizing the homotopy equivalence in
Theorem 3.6, following Section 2.7 of [AGZV12].
Choose real numbers ǫ′′ , δ′′ , such that the map
Bǫ′′ ∩ (f ⊕ f ′ )−1 (Dδ∗′′ ) → Dδ∗′′
given by x 7→ (f ⊕ f ′ )(x) is a locally trivial fibration, as above.
Similarly, choose ǫ, δ and ǫ′ , δ′ , as well as t′′ ∈ Dδ∗′′ , so that the analogous maps
Bǫ ∩ f −1 (Dδ∗ ) → Dδ∗
Bǫ′ ∩ (f ′ )−1 (Dδ∗′ ) → Dδ∗′
are locally trivial fibrations, and also so that
(a) ǫ, ǫ′ are sufficiently small so that Bǫ × Bǫ′ ⊆ Bǫ′′ .
(b) |t′′ | < min{δ, δ′ }.
Set Ff , Ff ′ , and Ff ⊕f ′ to be the Milnor fibers of f , f ′ , and f ⊕ f ′ over t′′ . Applying Lemma 2.10
in [AGZV12], choose a continuous map
H : CFf → Bǫ
such that
• H(x, 1) = x ∈ Ff ⊆ Bǫ ,
• H(−, s) : Ff → Bǫ maps into the Milnor fiber Bǫ ∩ f −1 (st′′ ) for s ∈ (0, 1), and
• H(x, 0) = 0 for all x ∈ Ff
Example 3.8. If f is quasi-homogeneous of degree d with weights w1 , . . . , wd , such a map H may
be given by
w1
wn
(x, s) 7→ (s d x1 , . . . , s d xn ).
Notice our assumption that R is IHS is not needed here.
Choose H ′ similarly for the Milnor fiber Ff ′ . By the discussion on pages 54-55 of [AGZV12] and
Remark 3.5, there is a homotopy equivalence
g : CFf × Ff ′ ∪ Ff × CFf ′ → Ff ⊕f ′
given by

1 − s + s′
1 + s − s′
), H ′ (y,
)).
2
2
Composing, one has a homotopy equivalence
(x, s, y, s′ ) 7→ (H(x,

g ◦ w−1 : Ff ∗ Ff ′ → Ff ⊕f ′ ,
where w is the homeomorphism in Remark 3.5. The homotopy equivalence g ◦ w−1 enjoys the same
properties as the map ST in Theorem 2.14.

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

17

Remark 3.9. g extends to a homotopy equivalence of pairs
G : (CFf × CFf ′ , CFf × Ff ′ ∪ Ff × CFf ′ ) → (Bǫ′′ , Ff ⊕f ′ )
that maps a point (x, s, y, s′ ) to
s
2s′ − s
(H(x, ), H ′ (y,
), if s 6 s′ , s′ 6= 0
2
2
2s − s′
s′
(H(x,
), H ′ (y, ), if s′ 6 s, s 6= 0
2
2
0, if s = 0 = s′ .
Remark 3.10. When f and f ′ are quasi-homogeneous (and R, R′ are not necessarily IHS), we may
use Example 3.8 to build a homotopy equivalence g : CFf × Ff ′ ∪ Ff × CFf ′ → Ff ⊕f ′ in the same
way as above ([Dim92] Chapter 3, Remark 3.19’).
3.1.3. An analogue of the Milnor fibration for polynomials over R. Now, suppose f ∈ R[x1 , . . . , xn ]
and f (0) = 0. One may construct a locally trivial fibration
ψ : Bǫ ∩ f −1 ((−δ, 0) ∪ (0, δ)) → (−δ, 0) ∪ (0, δ)
for some ǫ > 0 and δ such that 0 < δ << ǫ in the same way as above, where Bǫ is now the closed
ball of radius ǫ centered at the origin in Rn .
But now, fibers over (−δ, 0) and (0, δ) need not be homotopy equivalent. For instance, if f =
2
x1 + · · · + x2n , the positive fibers of ψ are homeomorphic to S n−1 , while the negative fibers are
empty.
Choose t ∈ (0, δ) and t′ ∈ (−δ, 0). The fiber of ψ over t is called the positive Milnor fiber of f
over t, denoted by Ff+ , and the fiber of ψ over t′ is called the negative Milnor fiber of f over t′ ,
denoted Ff− . As in the complex case, Ff+ and Ff− are independent of our choices of ǫ, δ, t, and t′
up to homotopy equivalence, so we suppress these choices in our notation, and we will often refer
to Ff+ and Ff− as just the positive and negative Milnor fibers of f .
The topology of the real Milnor fibers is more complicated than that of the complex Milnor fiber.
However, there is a version of Theorem 3.6 for real Milnor fibers of quasi-homogeneous polynomials.
Suppose f ∈ R[x1 , . . . , xn ], f ′ ∈ R[y1 , . . . , ym ] are quasi-homogeneous and nonconstant. If Ff+ and
Ff+′ are nonempty, there is a homotopy equivalence
Ff+ ∗ Ff+′ → Ff+⊕f ′
([DP92] Remark 11). Moreover, the homotopy equivalence may be constructed as in Remark 3.10;
that is, one has a homotopy equivalence of pairs
G : (CFf+ × CFf+′ , CFf+ × Ff+′ ∪ Ff+ × CFf+′ ) → (Bǫ′′ , Ff+⊕f ′ ).
+
Since Ff− = F−f
, one has a similar result for negative Milnor fibers.

3.2. Relative topological K-theory. We introduce some facts concerning relative topological
K-theory. All of the results in this section are essentially due to Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro in [ABS64],
but we modify their exposition at several points to suit our purposes.
Let X be a compact topological space, and let Y be a closed subspace of X such that there exists
a homotopy equivalence of pairs between (X, Y ) and a finite CW pair; we construct a category
C1 (X, Y ) from (X, Y ) in the following way:
• An object of C1 (X, Y ) is a pair of real vector bundles V1 , V0 over X equipped with an isomorphism
σ
V1 |Y −
→ V0 |Y .
Denote objects of C1 (X, Y ) by (V1 , V0 ; σ).

18

MICHAEL K. BROWN

• Morphisms in C1 (X, Y ) are pairs of morphisms of vector bundles over X
α1 : V1 → V1′ , α0 : V0 → V0′
such that the following diagram of maps of vector bundles over Y commutes:
σ

V1 |Y −−−−→ V0 |Y




α0 |Y y
α1 |Y y
σ′

V1′ |Y −−−−→ V0′ |Y

We write morphisms in C1 (X, Y ) as ordered pairs (α1 , α0 ).
Remark 3.11. The reason for the subscript in the notation C1 (X, Y ) is that, for any n > 1, one may
similarly build a category Cn (X, Y ) with objects given by ordered (n + 1)-tuples of vector spaces
on X whose restrictions to Y fit into an exact sequence (cf. [ABS64] §7).
Remark 3.12. We will work with real vector bundles throughout this section; however, there is an
analogous version of every result in this section for complex vector bundles.
The following facts about C1 (X, Y ) are easily verified:
• If (V1 , V0 ; σ) and (V1′ , V0′ ; σ ′ ) are objects in C1 (X, Y ), (V1 ⊕ V1′ , V0 ⊕ V0′ , σ ⊕ σ ′ ) is their
coproduct.
• C1 (X, Y ) is an additive category.
• A map g : (X1 , Y1 ) → (X2 , Y2 ) of pairs of spaces as above induces a functor
g∗ : C1 (X2 , Y2 ) → C1 (X1 , Y1 )
via pullback.
• A morphism (α1 , α0 ) in C1 (X, Y ) is an isomorphism (resp. monomorphism, epimorphism)
if and only if α1 and α0 are isomorphisms (resp. monomorphisms, epimorphisms) of vector
bundles over X.
We shall call an object of C1 (X, Y ) elementary if it is isomorphic to an object of the form
(V, V ; idV |Y ). It is easy to check that (V1 , V0 ; σ) is elementary if and only if σ can be extended to
an isomorphism σ
e : V1 → V0 .
If V and V ′ are objects in C1 (X, Y ), we will say V ∼ V ′ if and only if there exist elementary
objects E, E ′ such that
V ⊕E ∼
= V ′ ⊕ E′.
The relation ∼ is an equivalence relation. Let L1 (X, Y ) denote the commutative monoid of
equivalence classes under ∼ with operation ⊕. We shall denote by [V1 , V0 ; σ] the class in L1 (X, Y )
represented by (V1 , V0 , σ).
Remark 3.13. Let (X1 , Y1 ), (X2 , Y2 ) be pairs of spaces as above, and let g : (X1 , Y1 ) → (X2 , Y2 ) be
a map of pairs. Then the functor
g∗ : C1 (X2 , Y2 ) → C1 (X1 , Y1 )
applied to an elementary object is again elementary. Hence, g ∗ induces a map of monoids
L1 (X2 , Y2 ) → L1 (X1 , Y1 ).
The main reason we are interested in the monoid L1 (X, Y ) is the following result:
Proposition 3.14 (Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro, [ABS64]). There exists a unique natural homomorphism
χ : L1 (X, Y ) → KO 0 (X, Y )
which, when Y = ∅, is given by
χ(E) = [V0 ] − [V1 ].
Moreover, χ is an isomorphism.

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

19

In particular, L1 (X, Y ) is an abelian group.
Let (X, Y ), (X ′ , Y ′ ) be pairs as above. We conclude this section by exhibiting a product map
L1 (X, Y ) ⊗ L1 (X ′ , Y ′ ) → L1 (X × X ′ , X × Y ′ ∪ Y × X ′ )
that agrees, via χ, with the usual product on relative K-theory.
Let V = (V1 , V0 ; σ) ∈ Ob(C1 (X, Y )) and V ′ = (V1′ , V0′ ; σ ′ ) ∈ Ob(C1 (X ′ , Y ′ )). By Proposition 10.1
in [ABS64], we may lift σ, σ ′ to maps σ
e, σ
e′ of bundles over X and X ′ , respectively.
Thinking of
σ
e

0 → V1 −
→ V0 → 0
σ
e′

0 → V1′ −→ V0′ → 0
as complexes of bundles with V1 , V1′ in degree 1 and V0 , V0′ in degree 0, we may take their tensor
product
τ2
τ1
0 → V1 ⊗ V1′ −→
(V1 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V0 ⊗ V1′ ) −→
V0 ⊗ V0′ → 0,
where

e ⊗ idV0′ idV0 ⊗ σ
e′
τ1 = σ


−idV1 ⊗ σ
e′
τ2 =
σ
e ⊗ idV1′

The result is a complex of vector bundles over X × X ′ that is exact upon restriction to X × Y ′ ∪
Y × X ′.
Choose a splitting π of τ2 |X×Y ′ ∪Y ×X ′ . Then,


τ1 |X×Y ′ ∪Y ×X ′
′
′
′
′
]
[(V1 ⊗ V0 ) ⊕ (V0 ⊗ V1 ), (V0 ⊗ V0 ) ⊕ (V1 ⊗ V1 );
π

is an element of L1 (X × X ′ , X × Y ′ ∪ Y × X ′ ).
One may define monoids Ln (X, Y ) involving longer sequences of bundles; see [ABS64] Definition
7.1 for details. Denote elements of Ln (X, Y ) by
[Vn , . . . , V0 ; σn , . . . , σ1 ].
There is a map
jn : L1 (X, Y ) → Ln (X, Y )
given by
[V1 , V0 ; σ] 7→ [0, . . . , 0, V1 , V0 ; 0, . . . , 0, σ],
and, by Proposition 7.4 in [ABS64], jn is an isomorphism for all n.
We will need the following technical lemma:

Lemma 3.15. Let (X, Y ) be a pair as above, and let [V2 , V1 , V0 ; σ2 , σ1 ] ∈ L2 (X, Y ). If π is a
splitting of σ2 ,
 
σ
j2 ([V1 , V0 ⊕ V2 ; 1 ]) = [V2 , V1 , V0 ; σ2 , σ1 ].
π
Proof. First, suppose dim(V1 ) > dim(V2 ) + dim(X). Apply Lemma 7.2 in [ABS64] to construct a
monomorphism
h : V2 → V1
that extends σ2 . By the proof of Lemma 7.3 in [ABS64],
j2 ([coker(h), V0 ; σ1 ]) = [V2 , V1 , V0 ; σ2 , σ1 ],
and so
j2 ([coker(h) ⊕ V2 , V0 ⊕ V2 ; A]) = [V2 , V1 , V0 ; σ2 , σ1 ],

20

MICHAEL K. BROWN

where
A=
Hence, it suffices to show



0
σ1
0 idV2 |Y



.



σ1
[coker(h) ⊕ V2 , V0 ⊕ V2 ; A] = [V1 , V0 ⊕ V2 ;
]
π

Choose a splitting s of h, and let

p : V1 → coker(h)
denote the canonical map. Then we have an isomorphism
 
p
: V1 → coker(h) ⊕ V2 .
s
Since s|Y is a splitting of σ2 , we also have an isomorphism
 
σ1
: V1 |Y → V0 |Y ⊕ V2 |Y .
s|Y

We have a commutative square

σ1
s|Y

V1 |Y
p|Y
s|Y


!

// V0 |Y ⊕ V2 |Y

!

coker(h)|Y ⊕ V2 |Y

idV0 |Y ⊕V2 |Y

A


// V0 |Y ⊕ V2 |Y

Thus,



σ1
[coker(h) ⊕ V2 , V0 ⊕ V2 ; A] = [V1 , V0 ⊕ V2 ;
].
s|Y
Notice that we have an object
 
 
σ1
σ
[V1 × I, (V0 ⊕ V2 ) × I; t
+ (1 − t) 1 ]
s|Y
π




σ1
in C1 (X × I, Y × I) whose restrictions to X × {0} and X × {1} are [V1 , V0 ⊕ V2 ;
] and [V1 , V0 ⊕
π
 
σ1
V2 ;
], respectively. It now follows from Proposition 9.2 in [ABS64] that
s|Y
 
 
σ1
σ
[V1 , V0 ⊕ V2 ;
] = [V1 , V0 ⊕ V2 ; 1 ].
s|Y
π
This finishes the case where dim(V1 ) > dim(V2 ) + dim(X).
For the general case, choose a bundle E such that
dim(E) + dim(V1 ) > dim(V2 ) + dim(X).
Define



 
σ2
σ
U := [V2 , V1 ⊕ E, V0 ⊕ E;
, 1
0
0

0
idE |Y



],

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY



σ1
U ′ := [V1 ⊕ E, V0 ⊕ E ⊕ V2 ;  0
π

Notice that

0

21



idE |Y ]
0

[V2 , V1 , V0 ; σ2 , σ1 ] = U,
and




σ1
[V1 , V0 ⊕ V2 ;
] = U ′,
π


so that it suffices to show that j(U ′ ) = U . Since π 0 is a splitting of

the case we have already considered.




σ2
, this follows from
0


Now, the pairing
L1 (X, Y ) ⊗ L1 (X ′ , Y ′ ) → L1 (X × X ′ , X × Y ′ ∪ Y × X ′ )
described in Proposition 10.4 of [ABS64] is given by sending a simple tensor
[V1 , V0 ; σ] ⊗ [V1′ , V0′ ; σ ′ ]
to
j2−1 ([V1 ⊗ V1′ , (V1 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V0 ⊗ V1′ ), V0 ⊗ V0′ ; τ2 |X×Y ′ ∪Y ×X ′ , τ1 |X×Y ′ ∪Y ×X ′ ]);
this follows from the proof of Proposition 10.4.
Thus, by Lemma 3.15, the map
Ob(C1 (X, Y )) × Ob(C1 (X ′ , Y ′ )) → L1 (X × X ′ , X × Y ′ ∪ Y × X ′ )
given by
′

(V, V ) 7→ [(V1 ⊗

V0′ )

⊕

(V0 ⊗ V1′ ), (V0

⊗

V0′ )

⊕ (V1 ⊗

V1′ );




τ1 |X×Y ′ ∪Y ×X ′
]
π

determines
(a) a well-defined pairing on Ob(C1 (X, Y )) × Ob(C1 (X ′ , Y ′ )) up to our choices of liftings σ
e, σe′
and splitting π, and
(b) a pairing
L1 (X, Y ) ⊗ L1 (X ′ , Y ′ ) → L1 (X × X ′ , X × Y ′ ∪ Y × X ′ )
that coincides with the pairing in Proposition 10.4 of [ABS64].
Let [V ],[V ′ ] denote the classes represented by V and V ′ in L1 (X, Y ) and L1 (X ′ , Y ′ ). Define


τ1 |X×Y ′ ∪Y ×X ′
′
′
′
′
′
[V ] ⊗L1 [V ] := [(V1 ⊗ V0 ) ⊕ (V0 ⊗ V1 ), (V0 ⊗ V0 ) ⊕ (V1 ⊗ V1 );
].
π
Remark 3.16. By Proposition 10.4 in [ABS64] and the above remarks,
χ([V ]) ⊗ χ([V ′ ]) = χ([V ] ⊗L1 [V ′ ]).
3.3. A generalized Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction applied to matrix factorizations.
R
In this section, we construct the maps φC
f and φf described in the introduction. We begin with
a discussion of the Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction ([ABS64] Part III). Following Atiyah-BottShapiro, we work with real Clifford algebras and KO-theory, and we point out that one may perform
a similar construction involving complex Clifford algebras and KU -theory.

22

MICHAEL K. BROWN

3.3.1. The Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction. Define
qn := −x21 − · · · − x2n ∈ R[x1 , . . . , xn ]
for all n > 1, and set Cn := Cliff R (qn ). We also set C0 := R; we will think of C0 as a Z/2Z-graded
algebra concentrated in degree 0.
Let M (Cn ) denote the free abelian group generated by isomorphism classes of finitely-generated,
indecomposable Z/2Z-graded left Cn -modules. There are evident injective maps
in : Cn → Cn+1
for all n > 0; these injections induce homomorphisms
i∗n : M (Cn+1 ) → M (Cn )
via restriction of scalars. Set
An := M (Cn )/i∗n (M (Cn+1 )).
Define D n to be the closed disk of radius 1 in Rn . An important special case of the classical
Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction is the group isomorphism
∼
=

αn : An −
→ L1 (D n , ∂D n )
that appears in [ABS64] Theorem 11.5. αn is defined as follows: let M = M1 ⊕ M0 be a finitely
generated Z/2Z-graded left Cn -module. We use the R-vector spaces M1 and M0 to construct real
vector bundles over D n :
V1 := D n × M1
V0 := D n × M0
and we define a map
σ : V1 → V0
given by (x, m) 7→ (x, x · m), where · denotes the action of Cn on M . Here, we are thinking of
D n ⊆ Rn as a subset of Cn . Notice that σ restricts to an isomorphism of bundles over ∂D n . Thus,
we have constructed an element [V1 , V0 ; σ] ∈ L1 (D n , ∂D n ). Define
αn ([M ]) = [V1 , V0 ; σ].
We refer the reader to [ABS64] for verification that the mapping
[M ] 7→ [V1 , V0 ; σ]
is well-defined on the quotient An and determines an isomorphism.
3.3.2. A more general construction. Let f ∈ (x1 , . . . , xn ) ⊆ Q := R[x1 , . . . , xn ]. Choose real numbers ǫ, δ, and t such that ǫ > 0, 0 < δ << ǫ, and t ∈ (−δ, 0) in such a way that we may construct a
negative Milnor fiber Ff− as in Section 3.1.3.
Denote by Bǫ the closed ball of radius ǫ in Rn centered at the origin. We now construct a map
Ob(MF(Q, f )) → L1 (Bǫ , Ff− )
that
(a) recovers the Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction via the Buchweitz-Eisenbud-Herzog equivalence (Theorem 2.17) when f = qn , and
(b) descends to a group homomorphism
K0 [MF(Q, f )] → L1 (Bǫ , Ff− ).

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

23

We emphasize that a similar construction involving complex polynomials and their Milnor fibers
may be performed mutatis mutandis. One may also perform the following construction using the
positive Milnor fiber Ff+ of f .
d
Let P = (P1 −==1=
− P0 ) be a matrix factorization of f over Q. Denote by C(Bǫ ) the ring of
d0

R-valued continuous functions on Bǫ . Applying extension of scalars along the inclusion
Q ֒→ C(Bǫ ),
we obtain a map
d ⊗id

1
P1 ⊗Q C(Bǫ ) −−
−→ P0 ⊗Q C(Bǫ )
of finitely generated projective C(Bǫ )-modules.
The category of real vector bundles over Bǫ is equivalent to the category of finitely generated
projective C(Bǫ )-modules; on objects, the equivalence sends a bundle to its space of sections. Let

d

1
V1 −→
V0

be a map of real vector bundles over Bǫ corresponding to the above map d1 ⊗ id under this equivalence. Since d1 ◦ d0 = f · idP0 and d0 ◦ d1 = f · idP1 , and since the restriction of the polynomial
f , thought of as a map Rn → R, to Ff− = Bǫ ∩ f −1 (t) is constant with value t 6= 0, d1 |F − is an
f

isomorphism of vector bundles on Ff− . Its inverse is the restriction to Ff− of the map V0 → V1
determined by
1

(d0 ⊗id)

t
−−−−→ P1 ⊗Q C(Bǫ ).
P0 ⊗Q C(Bǫ ) −−

−
− d1 
Define ΦR
− P0 ) = (V1 , V0 ; d1 |F − ) ∈ Ob(C1 (Bǫ , Ff )).
f (P1 ===
d0

f

Remark 3.17. The map analogous to ΦR
f in the setting of polynomials over C and KU -theory
appears in [BvS12]; we discuss this in detail in Section 3.3.3.
A morphism in Z 0 MF(Q, f ) determines a morphism in C1 (Bǫ , Ff− ) in an obvious way (see Section 2.1.1 for the definition of the category Z 0 MF(Q, f )). Hence, we have shown:
Proposition 3.18. There is an additive functor
−
0
ΦR
f : Z MF(Q, f ) → C1 (Bǫ , Ff )

given, on objects, by
d
(P1 −==1=
− P0 ) 7→ [V1 , V0 ; d1 |Ff− ].
d0

In particular, we have a map
Ob(MF(Q, f )) → L1 (Bǫ , Ff− ).
Suppose f = qn . Then ǫ can be chosen to be 1 in the construction of the negative Milnor fiber
and the fiber can be chosen to be exactly S n−1 ⊆ Rn .
Let Iso([MF(Q, f )]) and Iso(modZ/2Z (Cliff R (qn ))) denote the sets of isomorphism classes of objects in [MF(Q, f )] and modZ/2Z (Cliff R (qn )). It is easy to check that one has a commutative triangle

Ff− ,

ABS

// L1 (B1 , F − )
f
s99
ss
s
s
ss
ΦR
f ss
s
s
[Θ]
ss
ss
s
s
ss
 ss

Iso(modZ/2Z (Cliff R (qn )))

Iso([MF(Q, f )])

24

MICHAEL K. BROWN

where [Θ] denotes the bijection on isomorphism classes induced by the explicit construction Θ of the
Buchweitz-Eisenbud-Herzog equivalence (Theorem 2.17) provided in the proof of Theorem 14.7 of
[Yos90], and ABS denotes the Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction. Hence, our construction recovers
the Atiyah-Bott-Shapiro construction via the Buchweitz-Eisenbud-Herzog equivalence when f = qn .
Our next goal is to show that ΦR
f induces a map on K-theory:
Proposition 3.19. ΦR
f induces a group homomorphism
−
φR
f : K0 [MF(Q, f )] → L1 (Bǫ , Ff ).

We will adopt the following notational conventions for the purposes of the proof of Proposition 3.19:
(1) A pair (ǫ, t) is a good pair if ǫ > 0, t < 0, and the map
ψ : Bǫ ∩ f −1 ((−δ, 0) ∪ (0, δ)) → (−δ, 0) ∪ (0, δ)
from Section 3.1.3 is a locally trivial fibration for some δ > 0 such that
0 < |t| < δ << ǫ.
(2) If (ǫ, t) is a good pair, we denote the negative Milnor fiber Bǫ ∩ f −1 (t) by Ft− .
We will need the following technical lemma:
Lemma 3.20. Let (ǫ1 , t1 ), (ǫ2 , t2 ) be good pairs. Then there is an isomorphism
∼
=

→ L1 (Bǫ2 , Ft−2 )
g : L1 (Bǫ1 , Ft−1 ) −
yielding a commutative triangle

ΦR
f



ΦR
f

// L1 (Bǫ , F − )
2
t2
♥77
g ♥♥♥♥
♥
♥♥♥
♥♥♥

Ob(MF(Q, f ))

L1 (Bǫ1 , Ft−1 )

Proof. The case where t1 = t2 is immediate, so we may assume t1 6= t2 . First, suppose ǫ1 = ǫ2 .
Without loss, assume t2 < t1 .
Set F[t−2 ,t1 ] := f −1 ([t2 , t1 ]). Since the inclusions
Ft−1 ֒→ F[t−2 ,t1 ] , Ft−2 ֒→ F[t−2 ,t1 ]
are homotopy equivalences, the pullback maps
L1 (Bǫ1 , F[t2 ,t1 ] ) → L1 (Bǫ1 , Ft1 ), L1 (Bǫ1 , F[t2 ,t1 ] ) → L1 (Bǫ1 , Ft2 )
are isomorphisms.
We have commuting triangles

ΦR
f



ΦR
f

// L1 (Bǫ , F − )
1
t1
♥♥77
∼
=♥♥♥♥
♥♥♥
♥♥♥

Ob(MF(Q, f ))

L1 (Bǫ1 , F[t−2 ,t1 ] )

for i = 1, 2. It follows that the result holds when ǫ1 = ǫ2 .
For the general case, assume, without loss, that |t2 | < |t1 |. Then (ǫ1 , t2 ) is also a good pair. By
the cases we’ve already considered, the result holds for the pairs (ǫ1 , t1 ) and (ǫ1 , t2 ), and also for
the pairs (ǫ1 , t2 ) and (ǫ2 , t2 ). Hence, the result holds for the pairs (ǫ1 , t1 ), (ǫ2 , t2 ).


KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

25

We now prove Proposition 3.19:
′
R
R
′
R
Proof. It is not hard to see that ΦR
f (P ⊕ P ) = Φf (P ) ⊕ Φf (P ); we need only show that φf is
well-defined. First, suppose P ∼
= 0 in [MF(Q, f )]. Then idP is a boundary in MF(Q, f ), and so idP
factors through a trivial matrix factorization, by Proposition 2.4.
d
 P0 ). Since P is a summand of a trivial matrix factorization, coker(d1 ) is
Write P = (P1 −==1=−
d0

a projective Q/(f ) module. Choose g ∈ Q such that g(0) 6= 0 and coker(d1 )g is free over Qg /(f ),
and choose ǫ′ ∈ (0, ǫ) such that Bǫ′ ∩ g−1 (0) = ∅. The inclusion Q ֒→ Qg induces a functor
MF(Q, f ) → MF(Qg , f ). Choose t′ such that (ǫ′ , t′ ) is a good pair. Applying Lemma 3.20, we have
a commutative diagram
// Ob(MF(Qg , f ))
Ob(MF(Q, f ))
❍❍
❍❍
❍❍
❍❍ ΦR
❍❍ f
R
Φf
❍❍
ΦR
f
❍❍
❍❍
❍❍
❍## 

∼
=
−
/
/
L1 (Bǫ , F )
L1 (Bǫ′ , F −′ )
t

t

φR
f

It is easy to see that the
is well-defined when f = 0, so assume f 6= 0. Then f is a non-zerodivisor in Q, so we may apply Proposition 2.5 to conclude that the image of P in Ob(MF(Qg , f ))
−
R
maps to 0 via ΦR
f . Hence, the map Φf : Ob(MF(Q, f )) → L1 (Bǫ , Ft ) sends P to 0, as required.
R
We now show that, if α : P → P ′ is a morphism in Z 0 MF(Q, f ), ΦR
f (P ) ⊕ Φf (cone(α)) and
−
R
′
R
ΦR
f (P ) represent the same class in L1 (Bǫ , Ft ). We start by showing Φf (P [1]) = −Φf (P ) in
−
R
R
L1 (Bǫ , Ft ). Write Φf (P ) = (V1 , V0 ; d1 |F − ), so that Φf (P [1]) = (V0 , V1 ; −d0 |F − ). Since cone(idP )
t
t
is contractible, the class represented by
!
d
|
−
id
0
Ft
)
ΦR
f (cone(idP )) = (V0 ⊕ V1 , V1 ⊕ V0 ;
0
−d1 |F −
t

in

L1 (Bǫ , Ft− )

is 0. The object
d0 |F −
t
((V0 ⊕ V1 ) × I, (V1 ⊕ V0 ) × I;
0

I, Ft−

ΦR
f (cone(idP ))

!
s · id
)
−d1 |F −
t

ΦR
f ((P

⊕ P [1])[1]) at s = 0. Since
at s = 1 and
× I) restricts to
of C1 (Bǫ ×
∼
(P ⊕ P [1])[1] = P ⊕ P [1], we may use Proposition 9.2 in [ABS64] to conclude that ΦR
f (P [1]) =
−
R
−Φf (P ) in L1 (Bǫ , Ft ).
Now, we have
!
d0 |F −
α1
R
t
).
Φf (cone(α)) = (V0 ⊕ V1 , V1 ⊕ V0 ;
0
−d′1 |F −
t

Using Proposition 9.2 in [ABS64] in the same manner as above, we may conclude that ΦR
f (cone(α))
−
′
R
R
and Φf (P ) ⊕ Φf (P [1]) represent the same class in L1 (Bǫ , Ft ).
∼
=

Finally, suppose α : P −
→ P ′ is an isomorphism in [MF(Q, f )]. Then cone(α) is contractible, and
′
R
so the results we just established imply that ΦR
f (P ) = Φf (P ). Since every distinguished triangle
in [MF(Q, f )] is isomorphic to one of the form
α

P −
→ P ′ → cone(α) → P [1],
and we have shown that ΦR
f preserves such triangles, we are done.



26

MICHAEL K. BROWN

3.3.3. The kernel and image of φC
f . Let Q := C[x1 , . . . , xn ], and set m := (x1 , . . . , xn ) ⊆ Q. Fix
f ∈ m, and define R := Q/(f ). Assume the hypersurface R has an isolated singularity at the origin
in the sense of Definition 2.9. Choose ǫ, δ > 0 so that the map
Bǫ ∩ f −1 (Dδ∗ ) → Dδ∗
given by x 7→ f (x) is a locally trivial fibration, as in Section 3.1; let Ff denote the Milnor fiber of
f over some value t ∈ Dδ∗ . We wish to examine the kernel and image of the map
φC
f : K0 [MF(Q, f )] → L1 (Bǫ , Ff ).
Recall that, by Theorem 3.2, Ff is homotopy equivalent to a wedge sum of µ copies of S n−1 ,
where µ is the Milnor number of f . Thus,
 µ
M
Z if n is even
0
−1
−1
n−1 ∼
∼
∼
∼
L1 (Bǫ , Ff ) = KU (Bǫ , Ff ) = KU (Ff ) =
KU (S
)=
0
if n is odd
µ

In particular, when n is odd, φC
f = 0.
As we noted in Section 3.1, Ff is equipped with a monodromy homeomorphism
∼
=

→ Ff .
h : Ff −
Let S ⊆ Dδ∗ denote the circle of radius |t| centered at the origin, and set E := Bǫ ∩ f −1 (S). One
has a long exact sequence, the Wang exact sequence ([Dim92] page 74)
j∗

h∗ −1

· · · → H i (E) −→ H i (Ff ) −−−→ H i (Ff ) → H i+1 (E) → · · ·
∼
=

→ L1 (Bǫ , Ff )
where j : Ff ֒→ E is the inclusion. One also has an automorphism T : L1 (Bǫ , Ff ) −
induced by h.
We have the following result regarding the image of φC
f:
Proposition 3.21. φC
f (K0 [MF(Q, f )]) ⊆ ker(T − 1).
Proof. The result is obvious when n is odd, since L1 (Bǫ , Ff ) = 0 in this case. Suppose n is even.
∗
Notice that φC
f (K0 [MF(Q, f )]) ⊆ l (L1 (Bǫ , E)), where l : (Bǫ , Ff ) ֒→ (Bǫ , E) is the inclusion of
pairs. Thus, the result follows from the commutative diagram
L1 (Bǫ , E) ⊗ Q

l∗

// L1 (Bǫ , Ff ) ⊗ Q

∼
=



KU −1 (E) ⊗ Q

T −1

// L1 (Bǫ , Ff ) ⊗ Q

∼
=
j∗



// KU −1 (Ff ) ⊗ Q

∼
=
h∗ −1



// KU −1 (Ff ) ⊗ Q

∼
=



H n−1 (E; Q)

j∗



// H n−1 (Ff ; Q)

∼
=
h∗ −1



// H n−1 (Ff ; Q)

and the Wang exact sequence. The bottom-most vertical arrows are Chern class maps; the bottommiddle and bottom-right vertical maps are isomorphisms because Ff has nonzero odd cohomology
only in degree n − 1.

The map ΦC
f : Ob(MF(Q, f )) → L1 (Bǫ , Ff ) is used in [BvS12] to study the Hochster theta
pairing. We recall the definition of this pairing:
Definition 3.22. The Hochster theta pairing
θ : K0 [MF(Qm , f )] × K0 [MF(Qm , f )] → Z

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

27

d′

d
1
sends a pair ([P1 −==1=
− P0′ ]) to
− P0 ], [P1′ −==′=
d0

d0

Rm
′
′
m
l(TorR
2 (coker(d1 ), coker(d1 ))) − l(Tor1 (coker(d1 ), coker(d1 ))),

where l denotes length as an Rm -module.
Remark 3.23. Our assumption that R is IHS guarantees that the lengths in Definition 3.22 are finite.
The pairing θ was introduced in [Hoc81]; for more detailed discussions related to this pairing, we
refer the reader to [BvS12], [Dao13], and [MPSW11].
Remark 3.24. Under our assumptions, by Theorem 4.11 of [Dyc11], the map
K0 [MF(Q, f )] → K0 [MF(Qm , f )]
induced by inclusion is an isomorphism, so we may think of θ as a pairing on K0 [MF(Q, f )].
d
Let P = (P1 −==1=
− P0 ) be a matrix factorization of f over Q. We observe that the image of
d0

−1 (F ) coincides with α(coker(d ) )| , where α
∼
φC
1 m Ff
f
f ([P ]) under the isomorphism L1 (Bǫ , Ff ) = KU
is as in Section 4 of [BvS12]. Thus, Proposition 4.1 and Theorem 4.2 of [BvS12] immediately imply:

Proposition 3.25. If X ∈ ker(φC
f ), θ(X, −) : K0 [MF(Q, f )] → Z is the zero map.
Set K0 [MF(Q, f )]tors to be the torsion subgroup of K0 [MF(Q, f )]. We conclude this section with
the following explicit description of ker(φC
f ) when n = 2:
Proposition 3.26. If f ∈ (x1 , x2 ) ⊆ Q = C[x1 , x2 ], and the hypersurface Q/(f ) has an isolated
singularity at the origin in the sense of Definition 2.9, ker(φC
f ) = K0 [MF(Q, f )]tors .
C
Proof. K0 [MF(Q, f )]tors ⊆ ker(φC
f ) is obvious. Suppose [P ] ∈ ker(φf ). By Proposition 3.25, the
map θ([P ], −) : K0 [MF(Q, f )] → Z is the zero map. Set R = Q/(f ). Since K0 [MF(Q(x1 ,x2 ) , f )] ∼
=
G0 (R(x1 ,x2 ) )/[R(x1 ,x2 ) ], an application of Proposition 3.3 in [Dao13] finishes the proof.

C
3.4. Knörrer periodicity and Bott periodicity. We now use our constructions φR
f and φf to
exhibit a compatibility between Knörrer periodicity (Theorem 1.1) and Bott periodicity. Set

Q := R[x1 , . . . , xn ], Q′ := R[y1 , . . . , ym ]
and let
f ∈ (x1 , . . . , xn ) ⊆ Q, f ′ ∈ (y1 , . . . , ym ) ⊆ Q′
be quasi-homogeneous polynomials.
Remark 3.27. We are assuming f and f ′ are quasi-homogeneous so that the version of the SebastianiThom homotopy equivalence for real polynomials is available to us (see Section 3.1.3). Analogous versions of every result in this section hold over C when both f ∈ C[x1 , . . . , xn ] and
f ′ ∈ C[y1 , . . . , ym ] are either quasi-homogeneous or IHS.
We now construct the negative Milnor fibers of f and f ′ . Choose real numbers ǫ′′ , δ′′ , such that
the map
Bǫ′′ ∩ (f ⊕ f ′ )−1 ((−δ′′ , 0)) → (−δ′′ , 0)
given by x 7→ (f ⊕ f ′ )(x) is a locally trivial fibration. Similarly, choose ǫ, δ and ǫ′ , δ′ , as well as
t′′ ∈ (−δ′′ , 0), so that the analogous maps
Bǫ ∩ f −1 ((−δ, 0)) → (−δ, 0)
Bǫ′ ∩ (f ′ )−1 ((−δ′ , 0)) → (−δ′ , 0)
are locally trivial fibrations, and also so that

28

MICHAEL K. BROWN

(a) ǫ, ǫ′ are sufficiently small so that Bǫ × Bǫ′ ⊆ Bǫ′′ .
(b) |t′′ | < min{δ, δ′ }.
Set Ff− , Ff−′ , and Ff−⊕f ′ to be the negative Milnor fibers of f , f ′ , and f ⊕ f ′ over t′′ . Assume
they are nonempty.
Remark 3.28. We could proceed using positive Milnor fibers as well, but we use negative fibers to
stay consistent with Section 3.3.2.
Recall from Remark 2.12 that we have a map
K0 [MF(Q, f )] ⊗ K0 [MF(Q′ , f ′ )] → K0 [MF(Q ⊗R Q′ , f ⊕ f ′ )]
given by [P ] ⊗ [P ′ ] 7→ [P ⊗MF P ′ ]. The following proposition is the key technical result in this
section.
Proposition 3.29. There exists a map
STL1 : L1 (Bǫ , Ff− ) ⊗ L1 (Bǫ′ , Ff−′ ) → L1 (Bǫ′′ , Ff−⊕f ′ )
such that, given matrix factorizations P and P ′ of f and f ′ , respectively,
′
′
R
R
STL1 (φR
f ([P ]) ⊗ φf ′ ([P ])) = φf ⊕f ′ ([P ⊗MF P ]).

Proof. Write
d′

d
1
′
′
′
P = (P1 −==1=
− P0 ), P = (P1 −==′=
− P0 )
d0

and

d0

′
′
′ ′
R
ΦR
f (P ) = [V1 , V0 ; d1 |F − ], Φf ′ (P ) = [V1 , V0 ; d1 |F − ].
f

f′

We note that
′
′
′
′
′
φR
f ⊕f ′ ([P ⊗MF P ]) = [(V1 ⊗ V0 ) ⊕ (V0 ⊗ V1 ), (V0 ⊗ V0 ) ⊕ (V1 ⊗ V1 ); A],

where A is the restriction of the matrix



d1 ⊗ id id ⊗ d′1
−id ⊗ d′0 d0 ⊗ id

to Ff−⊕f ′ .
As in Section 3.1.2, choose a continuous injection H : CFf− → Bǫ such that
• H(x, 1) = x ∈ Ff− ⊆ Bǫ ,
• H(−, s) : Ff− → Bǫ maps into the Milnor fiber Bǫ ∩ f −1 (st′′ ) for s ∈ (0, 1), and
• H(x, 0) = 0 for all x ∈ Ff−
Choose H ′ : CFf−′ → Bǫ′ similarly. The maps of pairs
l : (CFf− , Ff− ) → (Bǫ , Ff− ), l′ : (CFf−′ , Ff−′ ) → (Bǫ′ , Ff−′ )

induced by H and H ′ yield isomorphisms on L1 upon pullback; this is immediate from the long
exact sequence in KO-theory and the naturality of the map χ from Section 3.2 with respect to
maps of pairs.
Recall from Section 3.2 that we have a map
L1 (CFf− , Ff− ) ⊗ L1 (CFf−′ , Ff−′ ) → L1 (CFf− × CFf−′ , CFf− × Ff−′ ∪ Ff− × CFf−′ )
denoted by
[V ] ⊗ [V ′ ] 7→ [V ] ⊗L1 [V ′ ].
Define
STL1 : L1 (Bǫ , Ff− ) ⊗ L1 (Bǫ′ , Ff−′ ) → L1 (Bǫ′′ , Ff−⊕f ′ )

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

29

to be given by
[V ] ⊗ [V ′ ] 7→ (G∗ )−1 (l∗ ([V ]) ⊗L1 (l′ )∗ ([V ′ ])),
where
G : (CFf− × CFf−′ , CFf− × Ff−′ ∪ Ff− × CFf−′ ) → (Bǫ′′ , Ff−⊕f ′ )
is as in Section 3.1.3. Recall that G is an explicit formulation of the Sebastiani-Thom homotopy
equivalence.
′ ∗ R
′
We now compute l∗ (φR
f (P )) ⊗L1 (l ) (φf (P )) explicitly. A splitting of the restriction of


−id ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (d′1 )
H ∗ (d1 ) ⊗ id

to CFf− × Ff−′ ∪ Ff− × CFf−′ is given, on the fiber over (x, s, y, s′ ), by


1
′ )∗ (d′ ) H ∗ (d ) ⊗ id
−id
⊗
(H
0
0
f (H(x, s)) + f ′ (H ′ (y, s′ ))

(notice that f (H(x, s)) + f ′ (H ′ (y, s′ )) = (s + s′ )t′′ 6= 0 when (x, s, y, s′ ) ∈ CFf− × Ff−′ ∪ Ff− × CFf−′ ,
since either s or s′ is equal to 1). Thus, by the discussion at the end of Section 3.2, the product
l∗ ([V1 , V0 ; d|F − ]) ⊗L1 (l′ )∗ ([V1′ , V0′ ; d′ |F − ])
f′

f

is equal to
[(H ∗ (V1 ) ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (V0′ )) ⊕ (H ∗ (V0 ) ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (V1′ )), (H ∗ (V0 ) ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (V0′ )) ⊕ (H ∗ (V1 ) ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (V1′ )); B],
where B is given, on the fiber over (x, s, y, s′ ) ∈ CFf− × Ff−′ ∪ Ff− × CFf−′ , by the matrix


H ∗ (d1 ) ⊗ id
id ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (d′1 )
.
1
1
′ ∗ ′
∗
f (H(x,s))+f ′ (H ′ (y,s′ )) (−id ⊗ (H ) (d0 )) f (H(x,s))+f ′ (H ′ (y,s′ )) (H (d0 ) ⊗ id)
We wish to show that, upon applying (G∗ )−1 to this class, one obtains

[(V1 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V0 ⊗ V1′ ), (V0 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V1 ⊗ V1′ ); C],
where C is the restriction of the matrix

d1 ⊗ id
1
(−id
⊗ d′0 )
t′′

to Ff−⊕f ′ . This will finish the proof, since the class


id ⊗ d′1
1
t′′ (d0 ⊗ id)

[(V1 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V0 ⊗ V1′ ), (V0 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V1 ⊗ V1′ ); C]
is clearly equal to
[(V1 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V0 ⊗ V1′ ), (V0 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V1 ⊗ V1′ ); A].
Observe that we have an object
[((H ∗ (V1 )⊗(H ′ )∗ (V0′ ))⊕(H ∗ (V0 )⊗(H ′ )∗ (V1′ )))×I, ((H ∗ (V0 )⊗(H ′ )∗ (V0′ ))⊕(H ∗ (V1 )⊗(H ′ )∗ (V1′ )))×I; D]
in C1 (CFf− × CFf−′ × I, (CFf− × Ff−′ ∪ Ff− × CFf−′ ) × I), where D is given, on the fiber over
(x, s, y, s′ , T ) ∈ (CFf− × Ff−′ ∪ Ff− × CFf−′ ) × I,
by the matrix



H ∗ (d1 ) ⊗ id
1
′ ∗ ′
f (a(T ))+f ′ (b(T )) (−id ⊗ (H ) (d0 ))


id ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (d′1 )
.
1
∗
f (a(T ))+f ′ (b(T )) (H (d0 ) ⊗ id)

Here, f , f ′ , and the entries of d1 , d′1 , d0 , d′0 are evaluated at the point
(a(T ), b(T )) := (H(x,

T (1 − s′ − s) + 2s
T (1 − s′ − s) + 2s′
), H ′ (y,
)).
2
2

30

MICHAEL K. BROWN

Notice that f (a(T )) + f ′ (b(T )) 6= 0 for all
(x, s, y, s′ , T ) ∈ (CFf− × Ff−′ ∪ Ff− × CFf−′ ) × I,
so this matrix is indeed an isomorphism on every fiber over (CFf− × Ff−′ ∪ Ff− × CFf−′ ) × I.
Restricting to T = 0, one obtains the object
((H ∗ (V1 ) ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (V0′ )) ⊕ (H ∗ (V0 ) ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (V1′ )), (H ∗ (V0 ) ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (V0′ )) ⊕ (H ∗ (V1 ) ⊗ (H ′ )∗ (V1′ )); B).
Restricting to T = 1 and applying (G∗ )−1 , one obtains
((V1 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V0 ⊗ V1′ ), (V0 ⊗ V0′ ) ⊕ (V1 ⊗ V1′ ); C).
Now apply Proposition 9.2 in [ABS64].



Remark 3.30. It follows easily from the naturality of the map χ from Section 3.2 and Remark 3.16
that STL1 induces a map
STKO : KO0 (Bǫ , Ff− ) ⊗ KO 0 (Bǫ′ , Ff−′ ) → KO0 (Bǫ′′ , Ff−⊕f ′ ).
Remark 3.31. We emphasize that the group homomorphism STL1 in Proposition 3.29 is given by
the composition of the product in topological K-theory with the inverse of the pullback along a
specific formulation of the Sebastiani-Thom homotopy equivalence. Hence, Proposition 3.29 yields a
precise sense in which the tensor product of matrix factorizations is related to the Sebastiani-Thom
homotopy equivalence.
Let us now consider the case where Q′ = R[u1 , . . . , u8 ] and f ′ = −u21 − · · · − u28 . By Theorem 2.21
and Remark 2.18, [MF(Q′ , f ′ )] ∼
= [MF(R, 0)]. It follows that K0 [MF(R[u1 , . . . , u8 ], −u21 − · · · − u28 )]
is isomorphic to Z, generated by the class represented by the matrix factorization X constructed
in the proof of Theorem 2.21.
−
−
7
Also, F−u
2 −···−u2 is homeomorphic to S , and so L1 (Bǫ′ , F−u2 −···−u2 ) is isomorphic to Z. This
1

1

8

8

group is generated by φR
(X); thus, φR
([X]) is a Bott element in the group
−u2 −···−u2
−u2 −···−u2
1

8

1

8

g 0 (S 8 ); we shall denote by βR the map
L1 (Bǫ′ , F−u21 −···−u28 ) ∼
= KO

KO 0 (Bǫ , Ff− ) → KO 0 (Bǫ , Ff− ) ⊗ KO0 (Bǫ′ , F−u21 −···−u28 )

([X])) ◦ χ−1 . βR is the Bott periodicity isomorphism.
given by (χ ⊗ χ) ◦ (− ⊗ φR
−u21 −···−u28
Since real Knörrer periodicity may be induced by tensoring with the matrix factorization X, we
will denote by KR the map
K0 [MF(Q, f )] → K0 [MF(Q[u1 , . . . , u8 ], f − u21 − · · · − u28 )]
given by − ⊗MF [X].
The following result gives a precise sense in which Bott periodicity and Knörrer periodicity are
compatible; it follows immediately from Proposition 3.29. We emphasize that a virtually identical
proof yields a similar result involving positive Milnor fibers.

KNÖRRER PERIODICITY AND BOTT PERIODICITY

31

Theorem 3.32. Let f ∈ Q = R[x1 , . . . , xn ] be a quasi-homogeneous polynomial such that Ff− 6= ∅,
and set q = −u21 − · · · − u28 . Then the diagram
χ◦φR
f

K0 [MF(Q, f )]

// KO 0 (Bǫ , F − )
f
βR



KO0 (Bǫ , Ff− ) ⊗ KO0 (Bǫ′ , Fq− )

KR

STKO



K0 [MF(Q[u1 , . . . , u8 ], f + q)]



χ◦φR
f +q

// KO 0 (Bǫ′′ , F − )
f +q

commutes.
We state the analogous version of this result over the complex numbers. Let Y denote the matrix
u+iv
factorization C[u, v] −====
− C[u, v] of u2 + v 2 , and let
u−iv

K : K0 [MF(Q, f )] → K0 [MF(Q[u, v], f + u2 + v 2 )]
be given by − ⊗MF [Y ]. K0 [MF(C[u, v], u2 + v 2 )] ∼
= Z, and the group is generated by [Y ]. Also,
by Theorem 3.2, Fu2 +v2 is homotopy equivalent to S 1 . Thus, L1 (Bǫ′ , Fu−2 +v2 ) is isomorphic to Z,
C
∼ g0 2
′
generated by φC
u2 +v2 ([Y ]). φu2 +v2 ([Y ]) is a Bott element in the group L1 (Bǫ , Fu2 +v2 ) = KU (S );
we shall denote by β the map
KU 0 (Bǫ , Ff ) → KU 0 (Bǫ , Ff ) ⊗ KU 0 (Bǫ′ , Fu2 +v2 )

−1
given by (χ ⊗ χ) ◦ (− ⊗ φC
u2 +v2 ([Y ])) ◦ χ . β is the complex Bott periodicity isomorphism. Let
STKU denote the pairing on relative KU -theory induced by the complex version of the pairing
STL1 . The following is a complex analogue of Theorem 3.32:

Theorem 3.33. Let f ∈ (x1 , . . . , xn ) ⊆ Q = C[x1 , . . . , xn ] and suppose either
• The hypersurface C[x1 , . . . , xn ](x1 ,...,xn ) /(f ) is IHS (see Definition 2.9), or
• f is quasi-homogeneous.
Then the diagram
χ◦φC
f

K0 [MF(Q, f )]

// KU 0 (Bǫ , Ff )
β



KU 0 (Bǫ , Ff ) ⊗ KU 0 (Bǫ′ , Fu2 +v2 )

K

STKU



K0 [MF(Q[u, v], f + u2 + v 2 )]

χ◦φC

f +u2 +v 2



// KU 0 (Bǫ′′ , F
f +u2 +v2 )

commutes.
References
[ABS64]

Michael F. Atiyah, Raoul Bott, and Arnold Shapiro, Clifford modules, Topology 3 (1964), 3–38. 3, 13,
14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 30
[AGZV12] V.I. Arnold, Sabir Medzhidovich Gusein-Zade, and Alexander N Varchenko, Singularities of differentiable
maps, volume 2: Monodromy and asymptotics of integrals, vol. 2, Springer, 2012. 16
[BEH87]
Ragnar-Olaf Buchweitz, David Eisenbud, and Jürgen Herzog, Cohen-Macaulay modules on quadrics,
Singularities, representation of algebras, and vector bundles, Springer, 1987, pp. 58–116. 11

32

[Bro06]
[Buc86]

MICHAEL K. BROWN

Ronald Brown, Topology and groupoids, AMC 10 (2006), 12. 15
Ragnar-Olaf Buchweitz, Maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules and Tate-cohomology over Gorenstein rings,
preprint (1986). 7
[BvS12]
Ragnar-Olaf Buchweitz and Duco van Straten, An index theorem for modules on a hypersurface singularity, Mosc. Math. J 12 (2012), 237–259. 1, 3, 14, 23, 26, 27
[Dao13]
Hailong Dao, Decent intersection and Tor-rigidity for modules over local hypersurfaces, Transactions of
the American Mathematical Society 365 (2013), no. 6, 2803–2821. 3, 27
[Dim92]
Alexandru Dimca, Singularities and topology of hypersurfaces, Springer, 1992. 14, 16, 17, 26
[DP92]
Alexandra Dimca and Laurentiu Paunescu, Real singularities and dihedral representations, School of
Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sydney, 1992. 17
[Dyc11]
Tobias Dyckerhoff, Compact generators in categories of matrix factorizations, Duke Mathematical Journal
159 (2011), no. 2, 223–274. 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 27
[Eis80]
David Eisenbud, Homological algebra on a complete intersection, with an application to group representations, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 260 (1980), no. 1, 35–64. 1, 7
[Hoc81]
Melvin Hochster, The dimension of an intersection in an ambient hypersurface, Algebraic geometry,
Springer, 1981, pp. 93–106. 27
[Hov07]
Mark Hovey, Model categories, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, no. 63, American Mathematical
Soc., 2007. 12
[KKP08] Ludmil Katzarkov, Maxim Kontsevich, and Tony Pantev, Hodge theoretic aspects of mirror symmetry,
arXiv preprint arXiv:0806.0107 1 (2008). 1
[Knö87]
Horst Knörrer, Cohen-Macaulay modules on hypersurface singularities I, Inventiones mathematicae 88
(1987), no. 1, 153–164. 2
[KR08]
Mikhail Khovanov and Lev Rozansky, Matrix factorizations and link homology, Fundamenta Mathematicae 199 (2008), no. 1, 1–91. 1
[Lam05]
Tsit-Yuen Lam, Introduction to quadratic forms over fields, American Mathematical Soc., 2005. 13
[Lê76]
Dũng Tráng Lê, Some remarks on relative monodromy, Centre de mathématiques de l’École polytechnique,
1976. 14
[LW12]
Graham J Leuschke and Roger Wiegand, Cohen-Macaulay representations, vol. 181, American Mathematical Society, 2012. 2
[Mil68]
John W. Milnor, Singular points of complex hypersurfaces, Annals of Mathematics Studies, no. 61, Princeton University Press, 1968. 14, 15
[MPSW11] W Frank Moore, Greg Piepmeyer, Sandra Spiroff, and Mark E Walker, Hochster’s theta invariant and
the Hodge–Riemann bilinear relations, Advances in Mathematics 226 (2011), no. 2, 1692–1714. 27
[Oka73]
Mutsuo Oka, On the homotopy types of hypersurfaces defined by weighted homogeneous polynomials,
Topology 12 (1973), no. 1, 19–32. 16
[Orl03]
Dmitri Orlov, Triangulated categories of singularities and D-branes in Landau-Ginzburg models, arXiv
preprint math/0302304 (2003). 4, 6
[ST71]
M. Sebastiani and René Thom, Un résultat sur la monodromie, Inventiones mathematicae 13 (1971),
no. 1, 90–96. 15
[Toë07]
Bertrand Toën, The homotopy theory of dg-categories and derived Morita theory, Inventiones mathematicae 167 (2007), no. 3, 615–667. 2
[Toë11]
, Lectures on dg-categories, Topics in algebraic and topological K-theory, Springer, 2011, pp. 243–
302. 3, 7, 9, 12
[Woo66]
R. Wood, Banach algebras and Bott periodicity, Topology 4 (1966), no. 4, 371–389. 13
[Yos90]
Yuji Yoshino, Maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules over Cohen-Macaulay rings, vol. 146, Cambridge University Press, 1990. 11, 24
[Yos98]
, Tensor products of matrix factorizations, Nagoya Mathematical Journal 152 (1998), 39–56. 8,
11

