arXiv:1603.07696v2 [math.AG] 16 Feb 2018

Cartier crystals
and perverse constructible étale
p-torsion sheaves

Dissertation
zur Erlangung des Grades
„Doktor der Naturwissenschaften“
am Fachbereich Physik, Mathematik und Informatik
der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität
in Mainz

vorgelegt von

Tobias Daniel Schedlmeier
geboren in Deggendorf

Mainz, im August 2016

Contents
Introduction

3

1 Review of Cartier crystals and locally finitely generated unit modules
10
1.1 Cartier modules and Cartier crystals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.2 Cartier crystals and morphisms of schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.3 Review of locally finitely generated unit modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2 From Cartier crystals to locally finitely generated unit modules
2.1 Cartier modules and γ-sheaves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2 Compatibility with pull-back . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3 Compatibility with push-forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4 Cartier crystals and locally finitely generated unit modules

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.

18
18
27
32
37

3 Adjunction for morphisms with proper support
43
3.1 Local cohomology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
3.2 Adjunction for quasi-coherent sheaves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4 Locally finitely generated unit modules on singular schemes
62
4.1 Generalization of Emerton-Kisin’s adjunction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
4.2 Definition of lfgu modules on singular schemes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
5 The
5.1
5.2
5.3

Riemann-Hilbert correspondence for Cartier crystals
74
Review of Emerton and Kisin’s Riemann-Hilbert correspondence . . . . . 74
Cartier crystals and lfgu modules on singular schemes . . . . . . . . . . . 76
A Riemann-Hilbert correspondence on singular schemes . . . . . . . . . . 77

6 Intermediate extensions
6.1 Review of the intermediate extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2 The intermediate extension of Cartier crystals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3 Intermediate extensions of Cartier crystals and perverse sheaves . . . . . .

85
85
91
94

2

Introduction
At the International Congress of Mathematicians in 1900, David Hilbert formulated 10
of his famous 23 problems. The 21st problem grew out of Riemann’s work on linear
differential equations. Hilbert’s formulation was the following: “Aus der Theorie der
linearen Differentialgleichungen mit einer unabhängigen Veränderlichen z möchte ich auf
ein wichtiges Problem hinweisen, welches wohl bereits Riemann im Sinne gehabt hat, und
welches darin besteht, zu zeigen, daß es stets eine lineare Differentialgleichung der Fuchsschen Klasse mit gegebenen singulären Stellen und einer gegebenen Monodromiegruppe
giebt. Die Aufgabe verlangt also die Auffindung von n Functionen der Variabeln z, die
sich überall in der complexen z-Ebene regulär verhalten, außer etwa in den gegebenen
singulären Stellen: in diesen dürfen sie nur von endlich hoher Ordnung unendlich werden
und beim Umlauf der Variabeln z um dieselben erfahren sie die gegebenen linearen
Substitutionen. [...]” ([Hil00])
After removing the set S of singular points, a linear differential equation
dY
= A(z)Y,
dz
with A(z) ∈ GLn (C(z)) for some integer n, defines a representation of the fundamental
group of P1 (C)\S by monodromy: For a fixed point a ∈ P1 (C)\S there is a fundamental
solution matrix Z of functions which are analytic in a neighborhood of a by existence
theorems. Continuing Z analytically along a closed path γ in P1 (C)\S yields another
fundamental matrix Z ′ such that Z ′ = ZMγ for a matrix Mγ ∈ GLn (C). The assignment γ 7→ Mγ defines a homomorphism from the fundamental group π1 (P1 (C)\S; a) to
GLn (C). Hilbert’s 21st problem asks whether every representation of the fundamental group of P1 (C) without given singular points occurs as the monodromy of a linear
differential equation.
The solution of the original problem has a history of its own, lasting almost the
entire 20th century. Here we are interested in generalizations in the context of algebraic
geometry. Following the introduction of [HTT08], we explain the connection between
linear differential equations and D-modules. Every linear differential equation on an open
subset X of Cn with coordinates (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ) can be written in the form P u = 0,
where P is an operator of the form
X
i1 ,...,in

fi1 ,...,in (

∂ in
∂ i1 ∂ i2
) (
) ···(
)
∂x1
∂x2
∂xn

for coefficients fi1 ,...,in in the sheaf OX of holomorphic functions. In other words, we
have to study the action of the sheaf DX of the non-commutative rings of linear partial
differential operators with coefficients in OX given by differentiation. This action turns
OX into a left DX -module. One immediately checks that the set of solutions of P u = 0
is naturally identified with the sheaf HomDX (DX /DX P, OX ) by the assignment
HomDX (DX /DX P, OX ) −
→ OX
ϕ 7→ ϕ(1).

3

More generally, systems of linear differential equations
l
X

Pij uj = 0

j=1

with Pij ∈ DX for all 1 ≤ i ≤ k correspond to coherent left DX -module M defined as
k −
l with
the cokernel of the map ϕ : DX
→ DX
ϕ(Q1 , Q2 , . . . , Qk )l =

k
X

Qi Pij .

i=1

The sheaf of solutions of such a system is HomDX (M, OX ). This shows how the study
of solutions of partial linear differential equations is connected with the theory of Dmodules.
We turn to the more general situation where X is a smooth variety over the complex
numbers. A fundamental step to the modern version of the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence was the result by Pierre Deligne in 1970 ([Del70]), which states that there is an
equivalence
Connreg −
→ Loc(X an )
between the categories of regular integrable connections on X and local systems on X an ,
i.e. CX -modules which are locally free of finite rank for the analytic topology. Here
an integrable connection is a DX -module M which is locally free of finite rank as an
OX -module. This is nothing but a locally free OX -module of finite rank together with
a C-linear map ∇ : M −
→ Ω1X ⊗OX M . For the above equivalence, we have to pass to
a certain subcategory, namely the regular integrable connections, and the underlying
functor of the equivalence is given by taking the kernel of ∇. Note that if dX denotes
the dimension of X, this is the cohomology in degree −dX of the de Rham complex
0 −→ Ω1X ⊗OX M −→ Ω2X ⊗OX M −→ · · · −→ ΩdXX ⊗OX M −→ 0
located between the degrees −dX and 0 and whose differentials are induced by ∇. Let
DRX (M ) denote this complex.
Both categories Connreg and Loc(X an ) are not closed under push-forwards. For instance, the push-forward of a local system on the origin to the affine line is obviously
not a local system. The correct extensions are (regular holonomic) DX -modules on the
left and constructible CX -sheaves on the right. However, the functor H −dX (DRX ( ))
does not yield an equivalence between these larger categories. Again considering the
example of the inclusion i : {0} −
→ A1C , we see that H −1 (DRA1 (i∗ C)) = 0. This is due
to the fact that we loose to much information by only taking into account the −dX th cohomology of DRX ( ). To avoid this problem, one considers the derived functor
L

DRX ( ) = ΩX ⊗OX between the derived categories of DX -modules and constructible
CX -sheaves. In the context of complex manifolds, Kashiwara ([Kas80] and [Kas84])
passed to a suitable subcategory called regular holonomic D-modules – more precisely
the full subcategory of the bounded derived category D b (DX ) consisting of complexes

4

whose cohomology sheaves are regular holonomic – and proved that the de Rham functor
is an equivalence
b
Drh
(DX ) −
→ Dcb (CX ),
L

which is compatible with the six operations f∗ , f! , f ∗ , f ! , RHom• and ⊗. Here Dcb (CX )
denotes the full subcategory of D(CX ) of bounded complexes with constructible cohomology sheaves. This result from 1980 and 1984 is known as the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence. Around the same time, Mebkhout ([Meb84b] and [Meb84a]) gave a proof,
which is independent of Kashiwara’s work. Later on, Beilinson and Bernstein developed
the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence for algebraic D-modules on complex algebraic varieties. Their work is explained in the unpublished notes ([Ber]). The Riemann-Hilbert
correspondence is a very general answer to Hilberts 21st problem, because DRX ( )
is closely related to the so-called solution functor SolX = RHom•DX ( , OX ): for every
bounded complex M • of DX -modules, we have
DRX (M • ) ∼
= SolX (DX M • )[dX ],
where DX is a certain duality. As explained above, for a coherent DX -module M , the
sheaf HomDX (M, OX ) can be identified with the solutions of the system of differential
equations corresponding to M . Furthermore, there is an equivalence between representations of the fundamental group of X and locally constant CX -sheaves.
Of course the essential image of the abelian category of regular holonomic DX -modules
under the equivalence DRX is an abelian category inside Dcb (CX ), but it turns out that
this category differs from the category of constructible CX -sheaves. The example of
the immersion of the origin into the affine line from above already is a first sign of
this phenomenon. The abelian subcategory of Dcb (CX ) given by the essential image of
regular holonomic DX -modules under the de Rham functor is called perverse sheaves.
There is a general tool for describing abelian subcategories of triangulated categories:
the theory of t-structures. A t-structure on a triangulated category D consists of two
subcategories D≤0 and D≥0 with certain properties. The intersection D≤0 ∩ D≥0 is
called the heart of the t-structure. It is an abelian category. For example, the sob (D ) is given by the two subcategories D ≤0 (D ) and
called canonical t-structure of Drh
X
X
rh
≥0
Drh
(DX ) of complexes whose cohomology is zero in positive or negative degrees. In the
same way, the category of perverse sheaves on X is obtained as the heart of a t-structure
on Dcb (CX ) which is called the perverse t-structure. Indeed, the development of the
theory of perverse sheaves by Beilinson, Bernstein, Deligne and Gabber was motivated
by the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence. A standard reference for this is [BBD82].
At the beginning of the 21st century, the time was right for a positive characteristic
version of the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence. The de Rham theory for varieties over
a field of positive characteristic p differs strongly from the one on complex varieties.
Instead of the Poincaré lemma, we have the Cartier isomorphism and as a consequence,
for a smooth variety X, the kernel of the map OX −
→ Ω1X is not a locally constant
p
Z/pZ-sheaf but given by the p-th powers (OX ) . Therefore, one has to find a different
approach. The Frobenius endomorphism F is a major tool in characteristic p. Especially

5

sheaves with an action of the Frobenius turned out to be very useful. The starting point
of these objects is the sheaf OF,X = OX [F ] of non-commutative rings given on an affine
open subset U ⊆ X by the polynomial ring OX (U )[F ] with the relation F r = r p F
for local sections r ∈ OX (U ). A simple calculation shows that left OX [F ]-modules
are identified with OX -modules F together with a morphism F ∗ F −
→ F. In [Kat73,
Proposition 4.1.1], Katz proved that there is an equivalence between the category of
locally free étale Fp -sheaves and the category of coherent, locally free OX -modules E
together with an isomorphism FE∗ −
→ E of OX -modules. This may be considered as an
analogue of Deligne’s result that there is a natural equivalence Connreg −
→ Loc(X an ).
It is this result of Katz that motivated Emerton and Kisin to consider left OF,X modules for establishing an analogue of the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence for smooth
varieties over a field k of positive characteristic p. As Katz’ work already suggested,
certain unit left OF,X -modules, i.e. OF,X -modules F whose structural morphism F ∗ F −
→
F is an isomorphism together with some finiteness condition, is the subcategory to look
at. In 2004, Emerton and Kisin published [EK04], where they proved that the functor
Sol = RHom•OF,X ( ét , OXét )[dX ] yields an anti-equivalence
ét

b
Dlfgu
(OF,X ) −
→ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)

between the bounded derived categories of locally finitely generated unit (lfgu for short)
left OF,X -modules on the one hand, and the bounded derived category of constructible
Z/pZ-sheaves on the étale site Xét of X on the other hand. Their correspondence is
shown to be compatible with half of the six cohomological operations, namely f ! , f+
L

and ⊗. They also prove that under the correspondence the abelian category µlfgu (X) of
locally finitely generated unit modules corresponds to the category of perverse sheaves
Perv(Xét , Z/pZ) defined by Gabber in [Gab04] on Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ). In this RiemannHilbert type correspondence, the sheaf of partial differential operators is substituted
by the sheaf OF,X . Every OF,X -module naturally has the structure of a DX -module.
The crucial point is that the ring DX of arithmetic differential operators introduced by
S
Berthelot equals the union EndOX pe (OX ) ([Ber96], [Ber00]). The details of the DX module structure of an OF,X -module are explained in [Bli03]. It follows that the category
considered by Emerton and Kisin is a subcategory of the category of left modules over
the sheaf of rings of differential operators.
The sequence
1−F
0 −→ OXét −−−→ OXét −→ 0
in some sense plays the role of the de Rham complex for varieties over C. For instance,
we can compute Sol(OX ) = RHom•OF,X (OXét , OXét )[dX ] using the resolution
ét

1−F

0 −→ OF,Xét −−−→ OF,Xét
of OXét by free left OF,Xét -modules. As a consequence of Artin-Schreier theory, the
sequence
1−F
0 −→ (Z/pZ)X −→ OXét −−−→ OXét −→ 0

6

∼ (Z/pZ)X [dX ]. This observation is fundamental in the
is exact and therefore Solκ (OX ) =
proof of Emerton and Kisin’s Riemann-Hilbert correspondence.
In [BB11], Blickle and Böckle show that if X is smooth and F -finite (i.e. the Frobenius
morphism is a finite map), then Emerton-Kisin’s category µlfgu (X) is equivalent to their
category Crysκ (X) of Cartier crystals on X. This category is obtained by localizing the
category of coherent sheaves M on X equipped with a right action by Frobenius, i.e. a
map F∗ M −
→ M , at the Serre subcategory consisting of those M where the structural
map is nilpotent.
The category of Cartier crystals is also defined on singular schemes, and a Kashiwara
type equivalence holds in this context [BB13, Theorem 4.1.2], showing that Cartier
crystals on a closed subscheme Z ⊆ X are “the same” as Cartier crystals on X supported
in Z. This suggests that for singular schemes, the category of Cartier crystals should be
a reasonable replacement for Emerton-Kisin’s theory, which was only developed for X
smooth. Hence one expects a natural equivalence of categories
Crysκ (X) −
→ Perv(Xét , Z/pZ)
for any F -finite scheme X. In this paper we show this result under the assumption
that X is embeddable into a smooth F -finite variety. The closed immersion of X into
a smooth, F -finite scheme Y enables us to employ the Kashiwara equivalence to show
that the category of Cartier crystals on X is equivalent to the category of lfgu modules
on Y supported in X. This equivalence on the level of abelian categories then extends
to a derived equivalence
b
b
Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)) ∼
(OF,Y )X .
= Dlfgu

The details of this equivalence are worked out in Section 2 and involve showing that
the equivalence sketched by Blickle and Böckle between Cartier crystals and µlfgu (X)
alluded to above is compatible with pull-back functors for immersions of smooth, F -finite
schemes and push-forward functors for arbitrary morphisms between smooth, F -finite
schemes.
b (O
In Section 4 we give an intrinsic proof of the fact that the category Dlfgu
F,Y )X is
independent of the embedding of X into a smooth scheme Y . If one had resolution
of singularities in characteristic p, one would have natural isomorphisms of functors
Sol f+ ∼
= f! Sol for every morphism f between smooth k-schemes [EK04, Theorem 9.7.1].
This would enable us to work with derived categories of constructible étale sheaves,
which are defined on singular schemes as well. Consequently, the independence of a
chosen embedding is an easy exercise. As resolution of singularities is an open problem
in higher dimensions, we are required to extend the adjunction between the functors f !
and f+ for proper f from Emerton-Kisin to the case that f is proper over some closed
subset, which is somewhat technical. The source of this is a general adjunction statement
for quasi-coherent sheaves, which we show in section 3, and which we believe to be of
independent interest:
Theorem. Let f : X −→ Y be a separated and finite type morphism of Noetherian

7

schemes and let i : Z −→ Y and i′ : Z ′ −→ X be closed immersions with a proper morphism f ′ : Z ′ −→ Z such that the diagram
Z′

i′

/X

f′



Z

f
i



/Y

commutes. Then there is a natural transformation trf : Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! −→ id such that, for
− (O ) ′ and G • ∈ D + (O ) , the composition
all F • ∈ Dqc
Y Z
X Z
qc
Rf∗ RHom•OX (F • , RΓZ ′ f ! G • )

/ RHom• (Rf∗ F • , Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! G • )
OY
trf



RHom•OY (Rf∗ F • , G • )
is an isomorphism. Here the first arrow is the natural map. In particular, taking global
sections, the functor Rf∗ is left adjoint to the functor RΓZ ′ f ! .
Combining these steps, the following theorem summarizes the main results in this
paper:
Theorem. Let X be a k-scheme embeddable into a smooth, F -finite k-scheme. Then
there are natural equivalences of categories
∼

∼

b
b
Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)) −→ Dlfgu
(OF,Y )X −→ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ),

where Y is a smooth, F -finite k-scheme with a closed immersion X −→ Y . Here the middle category is independent of the embedding. These equivalences are compatible with the
respectively defined push-forward and pull-back functors for immersions. Furthermore,
the standard t-structure on the left corresponds to Gabber’s perverse t-structure on the
right.
Corollary. The abelian category Crysκ (X) of Cartier crystals on a variety X embeddable
into a smooth, F -finite variety is naturally equivalent to the category Perv(Xét , Z/pZ)
of perverse constructible étale p-torsion sheaves.
While in the final stages of writing up these results, the preprint [Ohk16] appeared.
Therein the author shows that Emerton-Kisin’s Riemann-Hilbert correspondence can be
extended to the case that X is embeddable into a proper smooth Wn -scheme. The case
n = 1 hence also implies the right half of the just stated theorem in the case that X is
embeddable into a proper smooth scheme.
Finally, in section 6 we define the intermediate extension functor j!∗ : Crysκ (U ) −
→
Crysκ (C) of Cartier crystals for a non-empty open subset U ⊆ X. For a Cartier crystal
M on U , its intermediate extension j!∗ M is the smallest subcrystal N of j∗ M such that
the restriction of N to U is naturally isomorphic to M. This is equivalent to being

8

an extension of M to X without non-trivial subobjects or quotients supported on the
complement of U . The latter property is a characterization of the intermediate extension
defined in [BBD82] for a recollement situation. In fact, we show that j!∗ M is naturally
isomorphic to the intermediate extension of Solκ (M) in the context of perverse sheaves.
To illustrate the importance of the intermediate extension in general, we turn back to
algebraic varieties over C. In order to recover Poincaré duality for singular projective
complex algebraic varieties, Goresky and MacPherson considered the cohomology groups
IH i (X) = H i (X, j!∗ CXreg [−dX ]) instead of H i (X, CX ) for the inclusion j : Xreg ֒−
→ X of
the regular locus of X ([GM83]). For 0 ≤ i ≤ 2dX , there is an isomorphism
IH i (X) = [IH 2dX −i (X)]∗ ,
which generalizes the Poincaré duality
H i (X, CX ) = [H 2dX −i (X, CX )]∗
for smooth projective varieties.

Acknowledgments
I cordially thank my supervisor, Manuel Blickle, for his excellent guidance and various
inspiring conversations. I also thank Kay Rülling, who explained to us how the trace
map of section 3 could be constructed. Moreover, I thank Gebhard Böckle for many
useful comments, Axel Stäbler for advancing discussions and Sachio Ohkawa for a careful
reading and commenting on an earlier draft of parts of this thesis. The author was
partially supported by SFB / Transregio 45 Bonn-Essen-Mainz financed by Deutsche
Forschungsgemeinschaft.

Notation and conventions
Unless otherwise stated, all schemes are locally Noetherian and separated over the field
Fp for some fixed prime number p > 0. For such a scheme X, we let FX or F , if no
ambiguity is possible, denote the Frobenius endomorphism X −
→ X which is the identity
on the underlying topological space and which is given by r 7→ r p on local sections. Often
we will assume that our scheme is F -finite, i.e. that F is a finite morphism.
Working with Emerton and Kisin’s category of locally finitely generated unit modules
forces us at some points to restrict to varieties, i.e. to schemes which are of finite type
over a field k containing Fp . With “schemes over k” or “k-scheme” we always mean
schemes which are separated and of finite over k and we will assume that k is perfect.
For a smooth scheme X over a perfect field k, the sheaf of top differential forms ωX
is an invertible sheaf with a canonical morphism ωX −
→ F ! ωX of OX -modules given
by the Cartier operator, see Example 1.2 for the affine space. One can check that it
is an isomorphism. In general, if X is regular and F -finite, we will assume that there
is a dualizing sheaf ωX with an isomorphism κX : ωX −
→ F ! ωX . For example, this

9

assumption holds if X is a scheme over a local Gorenstein scheme S = Spec R ([BB11,
Proposition 2.20]). Moreover, we assume that ωX is invertible.
As in [EK04], for a smooth k-scheme X, we let dX denote the function
x 7→ dimension of the component of X containing x.
If f : X −
→ Y is a morphism of smooth k-schemes, the relative dimension dX/Y is given
by dX/Y = dX − dY ◦ f .

1 Review of Cartier crystals and locally finitely generated unit
modules
We begin by reviewing the definitions and results from the theory of Cartier crystals
as developed by Blickle and Böckle in [BB11] and [BB13]. In short, a coherent Cartier
module M on X is a coherent OX -module together with a right action of the Frobenius
F . These form an abelian category and the category of Cartier crystals is obtained by
localizing at the full Serre subcategory of those M on which F acts nilpotently. The
resulting localized category is an abelian category, which has been shown in [BB11] to
enjoy strong finiteness properties: All objects have finite length and all endomorphism
sets are finite dimensional Fp -vector spaces.

1.1 Cartier modules and Cartier crystals
Definition 1.1. A Cartier module on X is a quasi-coherent OX -module M together
with a morphism of OX -modules
κ : F∗ M −
→ M.
Equivalently, a Cartier module M is a sheaf of right OF,X -modules whose underlying
sheaf of OX -modules is quasi-coherent. Here OF,X is the sheaf of (non-commutative)
rings OX [F ], defined affine locally on Spec R as the ring
R[F ] := R{F }/hF r − r p F | r ∈ Ri.
On the level of abelian sheaves, M and F∗ M are equal, hence we may view the structural
map κ of a Cartier module M as an additive map κ : M −
→ M which satisfies κ(r p · m) =
rκ(m) for all local sections r ∈ OX and m ∈ M . In this way it is clear that defining
the right action of F on M via κ defines a right action of OX [F ] on M , and vice versa.
Iterations of κ are defined inductively: κn := κ ◦ F∗ κn−1 . Considering κ as an additive
map of abelian sheaves, κn is the usual n-th iteration.
For a finite morphism f : X −
→ Y of schemes, the functor f∗ is left adjoint to the
∗
functor f ♭ := f HomOY (f∗ OX , ), where f is the flat morphism of ringed spaces
(X, OX ) −
→ (Y, f∗ OX ), see [Har66, III. 6]. Hence the structural morphism of a Cartier
module M on an F -finite scheme may also be given in the form κ̃ : M −
→ F ♭M .

10

Example 1.2. The prototypical example of a Cartier module is the sheaf ωX of top
differential forms on a smooth variety over a perfect field k. If X = Spec k[x1 , . . . , xn ],
then ωX is the free k[x1 , . . . , xn ]-module of rank 1 generated by dx1 ∧ · · · ∧ dxn . This
module has a natural homomorphism κ : F∗ ωX −
→ ωX called the Cartier operator given
by the formula
xi11

· ··· ·

xinn dx1

(i1 +1)
−1
p

∧ · · · ∧ dxn 7→ x1

(in +1)
−1
p

· · · · · xn

dx1 ∧ · · · ∧ dxn

where a non-integral exponent anywhere renders the whole expression zero.
A morphism ϕ : M −
→ N of Cartier modules is a morphism of the underlying quasicoherent sheaves making the following diagram commutative:
F∗ M

F∗ ϕ

/ F∗ N
κN

κM



M

ϕ



/ N.

As F∗ is exact, one immediately verifies that Cartier modules form an abelian category,
the kernels and cokernels being just the underlying kernels and cokernels in OX -modules
with the induced structural morphism. We denote the category of Cartier modules on
X by QCohκ (X). The full subcategory of coherent Cartier modules Cohκ (X) consists
of those Cartier modules whose underlying OX -module is coherent. A Cartier module
(M, κ) is called nilpotent if some power of κ is zero; (M, κ) is called locally nilpotent
if it is the union of its nilpotent Cartier submodules. By LNilκ (X) we denote the full
subcategory of QCohκ (X) consisting of locally nilpotent Cartier modules, and Nilκ (X)
denotes the intersection Cohκ (X) ∩ LNilκ (X). The full subcategory of QCohκ (X) consisting of extensions of coherent and locally nilpotent Cartier modules (in either order)
we denote by LNilCohκ (X). One has the following inclusions
{
$  ❡❡❡2 LNilκ (X)  ❩❩❩
❞
# ❞❞1 LNilCohκ (X)

Nilκ (X)  z❨❨❨,

Cohκ (X)

/ QCoh (X),
κ

and each of the full subcategories are Serre subcategories in their ambient category1 .
This leads us to our key construction.
Definition 1.3. The category of Cartier quasi-crystals is the localization of the category
of quasi-coherent Cartier modules QCohκ (X) at its Serre subcategory LNilκ (X). It is
an abelian category, which we denote by QCrysκ (X).
Similarly, the category of Cartier crystals on X is the localization of the category
Cohκ (X) of coherent Cartier modules at its Serre subcategory Nilκ (X). It is an abelian
category, which we denote by Crysκ (X). Cartier crystals also can be obtained by localizing LNilCohκ (X) at the subcategory LNilκ (X).
1

A Serre subcategory is a full abelian subcategory which is closed under extensions.

11

In order to define derived functors we have to make sure that the considered categories
have enough injectives.
Proposition 1.4. The category QCohκ (X) is a Grothendieck category with enough injectives whose underlying OX -module is injective. Its Serre subcategory LNilκ (X) is
localizing and hence QCrysκ (X) has enough injectives.
Proof. The first statements were shown in [BB13, Theorem 2.0.9 and Proposition 3.3.17].
That LNilκ (X) is localizing now follows from Corollaire 1 on p. 375 of [Gab62] and from
the fact that each M ∈ QCohκ (X) has a maximal locally nilpotent κ-subsheaf Mnil , see
[BB13, Lemma 2.1.3]. Then Corollaire 2 of [Gab62] shows that the associated quotient
category QCrysκ (X) has enough injectives.
Concretely, if T : QCohκ (X) −
→ QCrysκ (X) denotes the exact localization functor, then the fact that LNilκ (X) is localizing asserts the existence of a right adjoint
V : QCrysκ (X) −
→ QCohκ (X). If M/Mnil ֒−
→ I is an injective hull in QCohκ (X), then
it is shown in op. cit. that T I is an injective hull of T (M/Mnil ).
The following finiteness statements are the main results of [BB11]:
Theorem 1.5 ([BB11, Corollary 4.7, Theorem 4.17]). Let X be a locally Noetherian,
F -finite scheme of positive characteristic p.
(a) Every object in the category of Cartier crystals Crysκ (X) satisfies the ascending
and descending chain condition on its subobjects.
(b) The Hom-sets in Crysκ (X) are finite dimensional Fp -vector spaces.
These finiteness properties are precisely the ones one expects from a category of perverse constructible sheaves in the topological context. It is this result (and the related
statement [EK04, Theorem 11.5.4] in the smooth case) that prompted our investigation
of a connection between Cartier crystals and Gabber’s category of perverse constructible
Z/pZ-sheaves on Xét , which is the content of this article.

1.2 Cartier crystals and morphisms of schemes
Up to now, we studied different categories stemming from quasi-coherent sheaves on a
single scheme X. In this subsection, we consider morphisms f : X −
→ Y of schemes
and construct functors between the categories of Cartier (quasi-)crystals on X and on
Y . With the notation D∗ (A) for an abelian category A and ∗ ∈ {+, −, b}, we mean the
subcategory of the derived category D(A) of bounded below, bounded above or bounded
complexes.
The first result is concerned with the derived functor Rf∗ for quasi-coherent OX modules. For a large class of morphisms it behaves well with the additional structure of
Cartier modules and with localization at nilpotent objects. In principle, to any quasicoherent Cartier module M with structural map κM , we assign the quasi-coherent OY module f∗ M together with the composition
f∗ κ

∼

FY ∗ f∗ M −→ f∗ FX∗ M −−−M
→ f∗ M.

12

This is the underived functor f∗ : QCohκ (X) −
→ QCohκ (Y ).
Theorem 1.6 ([BB13, Corollary 3.2.12]). Let f : X −→ Y be a morphism of F -finite
schemes. Suppose ∗ ∈ {+, −, b}. The functor Rf∗ on quasi-coherent sheaves induces a
functor
Rf∗ : D ∗ (QCohκ (X)) −→ D ∗ (QCohκ (Y )).
It preserves local nilpotence and hence induces a functor
Rf∗ : D ∗ (QCrysκ (X)) −→ D ∗ (QCrysκ (Y )).
If f is of finite type (but not necessarily proper!) then it restricts to a functor
∗
∗
Rf∗ : Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)) −→ Dcrys
(QCrysκ (Y ))

where the subscript crys indicates that the cohomology lies in LNilCrysκ .
For essentially étale morphisms and for closed immersions there are pull-back functors.
Theorem 1.7. Let f : X −→ Y be a morphism of schemes.
(a) Suppose ∗ ∈ {+, −, b}. If f is essentially étale, the exact functor f ∗ induces a
functor
∗
∗
f ! : Dcrys
(QCrysκ (Y )) −→ Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)),
which is left adjoint to Rf∗ .
(b) Suppose ∗ ∈ {+, b}. If f is a closed immersion of F -finite schemes, the functor f ♭ =
∗
f HomOY (f∗ OX , ), where f denotes the flat morphism (X, OX ) −→ (Y, f∗ OX ) of
ringed spaces, induces a functor
∗
∗
f ! : Dcrys
(QCrysκ (Y )) −→ Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)),

which is right adjoint to Rf∗ .
Proof. Let M be a quasi-coherent Cartier module on Y . For essentially étale f , there
∼
is a canonical isomorphism bc : FX∗ f ∗ −→ f ∗ FY ∗ . Hence we may equip f ∗ M with the
structural morphism given by the composition
f ∗κ

bc

FX∗ f ∗ M −→ f ∗ FY ∗ M −−−M
→ f ∗ M.
As f ∗ preserves coherence, we obtain a functor Cohκ (Y ) −
→ Cohκ (X). It is easy to see
that f ∗ preserves nilpotency. Therefore, and by exactness of f ∗ , we obtain the desired
b (QCrys (Y )).
b (QCrys (Y )) −
→ Dcrys
functor Dcrys
κ
κ
In the case of a closed immersion f , the composition
f ♭ κ̃

∼

f ♭ M −−→ f ♭ FY♭ M −→ FX♭ f ♭M,
where κ̃ is the adjoint of κ, is a natural Cartier structure for the OX -module f ♭ M .
b (QCrys (Y )) −
→
Once again it remains to check that it gives rise to a functor f ! Dcrys
κ
∗
!
b
Dcrys (QCrysκ (X)). The adjunctions of Rf∗ and f or f follow from the corresponding
adjunctions for quasi-coherent sheaves. For more details see [BB13, Proposition 3.3.19]
and [BB13, Corollary 3.3.24].

13

Now let i : Z −
→ X be a closed immersion and j : U −
→ X the open immersion
of the complement X\Z. Note that for a closed immersion i, the functor i∗ is exact
and therefore we drop the R indicating derived functors. The units and counits of the
adjunctions between i∗ and i! and between Rj∗ and j ∗ lead to a familiar distinguished
triangle.
+ (QCrys (X)) there is a distinguished
Theorem 1.8 ([BB13, Theorem 4.1.1]). In Dcrys
κ
triangle
i∗ i! −→ id −→ Rj∗ j ∗ −→ i∗ i! [1].

This theorem shows the equivalence mentioned in the following definition.
b (QCrys (X)) is supported on Z if j ! M• = 0
Definition 1.9. A complex M• of Dcrys
κ
or, equivalently, if the natural morphism i∗ i! M• −
→ M• is an isomorphism. We let
b (QCrys (X))
Dcrys
Z denote the full triangulated subcategory consisting of complexes
κ
supported in Z.

For Cartier crystals, there is a natural isomorphism of functors i∗ i! ∼
= RΓZ where
RΓZ is the local cohomology functor, see [BB11, Proposition 2.5] for the basic result
concerning the abelian categories of Cartier modules and the proof of [BB13, Theorem
4.1.1]. This isomorphism identifies the distinguished triangle of Theorem 1.8 with the
fundamental triangle of local cohomology. The following theorem is a formal consequence
of Theorem 1.8:
Theorem 1.10 ([BB13, Theorem 4.1.2]). Let i : Z ֒−
→ X be a closed immersion. The
!
functors i∗ and i are a pair of inverse equivalences
b (QCrys (Z))) o
Dcrys
κ

i∗
i!

/

b (QCrys (X)) .
Dcrys
Z
κ

We call this equivalence the Kashiwara equivalence. If Z is a singular scheme which
is embeddable into a smooth scheme X, the Kashiwara equivalence enables us to work
b (QCrys(X)) instead of D b (QCrys(Z)).
with objects in Dcrys
crys

1.3 Review of locally finitely generated unit modules
In [EK04], Emerton and Kisin consider left OF,X -modules, i.e. OX -modules M with a
structural morphism F ∗ M −
→ M. Instead of localizing, they pass to a certain subcategory. If we speak of OF,X -modules we mean left OF,X -modules. In this subsection, all
schemes are separated and of finite type over a field k containing Fp .
Definition 1.11. Let X be a variety over k. A quasi-coherent OF,X -module is an OF,X module whose underlying OX -module is quasi-coherent. If the structural morphism
F ∗M −
→ M of a quasi-coherent OF,X -module M is an isomorphism, then M is called
unit. We let µ(X) and µu (X) denote the abelian categories of quasi-coherent and quasicoherent unit OF,X -modules.

14

The term “locally finitely generated” for an OF,X -module M means that M is locally
finitely generated as a left OF,X -module. Emerton and Kisin’s focus is on locally finitely
generated unit modules, lfgu for short, on smooth schemes, where they form an abelian
category.
Definition 1.12. We let µlfgu (X) denote the abelian category of locally finitely generated unit OF,X -modules. We let Dlfgu (OF,X ) denote the derived category of complexes
of OF,X -modules whose cohomology sheaves are lfgu.
Proposition 1.13. Let f : X −→ Y be a morphism of smooth k-schemes. The functor
f ! : D(OF,Y ) −→ D(OF,X ) defined by
L

f ! M• = OF,X→Y ⊗f −1 OF,Y f −1 M• [dX/Y ]
restricts to a functor
b
b
f ! : Dlfgu
(OF,Y ) −→ Dlfgu
(OF,X ).

Here OF,X→Y denotes OF,X with the natural (OF,X , f −1 OF,Y )-bimodule structure.
Proof. This is Lemma 2.3.2 and Proposition 6.7 of [EK04].
Example 1.14. Let f : U −
→ X be an open immersion of smooth k-schemes. Then we
have dU/X = 0 and the inverse image of OF,X is the restriction to U :
f −1 OF,X = OF,X |U = OF,U .
Hence we regard OF,U →X as OF,U with the usual (OF,U , OF,U )-bimodule structure. It
follows that f ! M = f ∗ M with the natural structure as a left OF,U -module for every left
OF,X -module M.
The construction of the push-forward is more involved. Emerton and Kisin first
show that OF,Y ←X = f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ωX/Y is naturally an (f −1 OF,Y , OF,X )-bimodule.
We summarize the construction of the right OF,X -module structure from PropositionDefinition 1.10.1, Proposition-Definition 3.3.1 and Appendix A.2 of [EK04]: The relative
Frobenius diagram is the diagram
FX/Y

X❇

/ X′

❇❇
❇❇
❇
f ❇❇ 

FY′

/X

f′

Y

(1)

f
FY



/ Y.

Here X ′ is the fiber product of X and Y considered as a Y -scheme via the Frobenius
and FX/Y is the map obtained from the Frobenius FX : X −
→ X and the morphism
f . We call FX/Y the relative Frobenius. Unlike FX , it is a morphism of Y -schemes.
Locally, for X = Spec S and Y = Spec R, the structure sheaf of X ′ is given by the tensor
product R ⊗R S, where R is viewed as an R-module via the Frobenius FR . Globally we
have an isomorphism OX ′ ∼
= f −1 OX F ⊗f −1 OY OY where OX F denotes the submodule of

15

OX [F ] = OF,X generated as a left OX -module by F . Consequently, for any OX -module
M , FY′∗ M may be viewed as f −1 OX F ⊗f −1 OY M .
Let γ : OY −
→ FY∗ OY be the canonical isomorphism. The adjoint of the composition
∼

!
FX/Y
f ′! γ

∼

!
!
!
f ! OY −→ FX/Y
f ′! OY −−−−−−→ FX/Y
f ′! FY∗ OY −→ FX/Y
FY′∗ f ! OY

yields a morphism CX/Y : FX/Y ∗ ωX/Y −
→ FY′∗ ωX/Y called the relative Cartier operator. Note that FX/Y is the identity on the underlying topological spaces of X and X ′ .
Therefore CX/Y defines a map of abelian sheaves ωX/Y −
→ FY′∗ ωX/Y . Together with
the identification FY′∗ ωX/Y ∼
= f −1 OX F ⊗f −1 OY ωX/Y and the inclusion OX F ⊂ OF,X
the relative Cartier defines a map ωX/Y −
→ f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ωX/Y . Now we can state
−1
the structure of f OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ωX/Y as a right OF,X -module. The endomorphism on
f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ωX/Y induced by multiplication with F ∈ OF,X on the right is given
by the composition
CX/Y

f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ωX/Y −−−→ f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ωX/Y
m

−→ f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ωX/Y ,
where m is the the multiplication a ⊗ b 7→ ab in the sheaf of rings f −1 OF,Y .
The functor f+ : D(OF,X ) −
→ D(OF,Y ) is defined by
L

f+ M• = Rf∗ (OF,Y ←X ⊗OF,X M• ).
Proposition 1.15. The functor f+ : D(OF,X ) −→ D(OF,Y ) restricts to a functor
b
b
f+ : Dlfgu
(OF,X ) −→ Dlfgu
(OF,Y ).

Proof. This is Theorem 3.5.3 and Proposition 6.8.2 of [EK04].
Example 1.16. Once again, let f : U −
→ X be an open immersion. Then FU/X is an
′
isomorphism, identifying X with the open subset U of X, and ωU/X = f ! OX = f ∗ OX =
OU . Therefore we have
OF,X←U = f −1 OF,X ⊗f −1 OX OU = OF,U ⊗OU OU .
The left OF,U -module structures of OF,U ⊗OU OU and OF,U are obviously compatible
with the natural isomorphism OF,U ⊗OU OU ∼
= OF,U . We verify that this isomorphism
identifies the right OF,U -module structure on OF,U ⊗OU OU with the natural one on
OF,U . Identifying X ′ with U via FU/X , the relative Frobenius diagram reads as follows:
id /
U
❅❅
❅❅
j
❅
j ❅❅ 

U❅

X

16

FU

/U
j

FX



/ X.

The relative Cartier operator id∗ OU = OU −
→ FX∗ OU is just the usual isomorphism.
On global sections R = OV (V ) of an affine open V = Spec R of U , its inverse is the
map R′ ⊗R R −
→ R given by r ⊗ s 7→ rsp . Here R′ denotes R viewed as an R-module
via the Frobenius. Locally on V , the right action of F on OF,U ⊗OU OU is given by the
composition
σ ⊗ r 7→ σ ⊗ rF 7→ σrF ⊗ 1
∼

since, under the isomorphism FU∗ OU −→ OU F ⊗OU OU , an element r ⊗ s ∈ R′ ⊗R R
corresponds to rF ⊗ s ∈ OU F ⊗OU OU . On the other hand, the natural isomorphism
OF,U ⊗OU OU ∼
= OF,U maps σ ⊗ r to σr. Multiplication by F on the right yields σrF ,
which corresponds to σrF ⊗ 1 in OF,U ⊗OU OU ∼
= OF,U . This shows that the diagram
OF,U ⊗OU OU

∼

/ OF,U

∼



F

F



OF,U ⊗OU OU

/ OF,U

commutes, where F denotes multiplication by F on the right.
Depending on f , there are adjunction relations between f ! and f+ . If f is a closed
immersion, a Kashiwara-type equivalence for unit modules holds.
Lemma 1.17 ([EK04, Lemma 4.3.1.]). If f : X −→ Y is an open immersion of smooth
k-schemes, then, for any M• ∈ D − (OF,Y ) and any N • ∈ D + (OF,X ), there is a natural
isomorphism
∼

RHom•OF,Y (M• , f+ N • ) −→ Rf∗ RHom•OF,X (f ! M• , N • )
in D + (X, Z/pZ).
Theorem 1.18 ([EK04, Theorem 4.4.1]). Let f : X −→ Y be a proper morphism of
b (O
•
b
smooth k-schemes. For every M• in Dqc
F,X ) and every N in Dqc (OF,Y ), there is a
+
natural isomorphism in D (X, Z/pZ):
∼

RHom•OF,Y (f+ M• , N • ) −→ Rf∗ RHom•OF,X (M• , f ! N • ).
b (O
b
Here Dqc
F,X ) denotes the subcategory of D (OF,X ) of complexes whose cohomology
b (O
sheaves are quasi-coherent and analogously for Dqc
F,Y ).

For the proof, Emerton and Kisin show that the trace map f∗ f ∆ E • −
→ E • for the
residual complex E • of OX is compatible with the natural map E • −
→ FX∗ E • . Here
∆
!
f denotes the functor f for residual complexes, see [Har66, VI.3]. Thus it induces a
morphism f+ OF,X [dX/Y ] −
→ OF,Y , and with the isomorphisms
L

f+ f ! F • −
→ f+ (OF,X ⊗OF,X f ! F • ) −
→ f+ OF,X [dX/Y ] ⊗OF,Y F • ,
the second one being a projection formula ([EK04, Lemma 4.4.7]), we obtain a trace map
b (O
tr : f+ f ! F • −
→ F • for every F • ∈ Dlfgu
F,Y ). Similarly, as in the case of the adjunction

17

between Rf∗ and f ! in Grothendieck-Serre duality, the natural transformation of the
theorem is obtained by the composition
Rf∗ RHom•OF,X (M• , f ! N • )

/ RHom•

OF,Y

(f+ M• , f+ f ! N • )
tr



RHom•OF,Y (f+ M• , N • ),
where the horizontal arrow is a natural transformation constructed in [EK04, Proposition
4.4.2]. It is this adjunction between f+ and f ! that we want to extend to morphisms
which are only proper over the support of the considered complexes. This will be done
in section 4.
Finally, for a closed immersion of smooth varieties, we have a Kashiwara type equivalence.
Theorem 1.19 ([EK04, Theorem 5.10.1]). If f : X −→ Y is a closed immersion of
smooth k-schemes, then the adjunction of Theorem 1.18 provides an equivalence between
the category of unit OF,X -modules and the category of unit OF,Y -modules supported on X.
The fact that the natural map f+ f ! M −→ M is an isomorphism implies that H 0 (f ! )M ∼
=
f ! M.

2 From Cartier crystals to locally finitely generated unit
modules
In order to construct an equivalence between Cartier crystals and locally finitely generated unit modules, one uses an equivalence between Cartier modules and so-called
γ-sheaves. It will induce an equivalence between Cartier crystals and γ-crystals. The
latter in turn are known to be equivalent to lfgu modules.

2.1 Cartier modules and γ-sheaves
We note that for a regular scheme X, the Frobenius FX : X −
→ X is a flat morphism
and hence FX∗ is exact ([Kun69, Theorem 2.1]).
Definition 2.1. A γ-sheaf on a regular, F -finite scheme X is a quasi-coherent OX → F ∗N .
module N together with a morphism γN : N −
The theory of γ-sheaves is very similar to that of Cartier modules. With the obvious
morphisms, γ-sheaves form an abelian category with the nilpotent γ-sheaves being a
Serre subcategory. We obtain γ-crystals in the same way as we obtained Cartier crystals
and so forth. In this section we revisit the connection between Cartier modules and
γ-sheaves as explained in section 5.2.1 of [BB11] and give some details of the proof.
Definition 2.2. For any isomorphism ϕ : E1 −
→ E2 of invertible OX -modules, while
−1
∨
ϕ : E2 −
→ E1 denotes the inverse, let ϕ denote the induced isomorphism E2−1 −
→ E1−1
between the duals.

18

If we speak of the γ-sheaf OX we mean the structure sheaf of X together with the
natural isomorphism γX : OX −
→ F ∗ OX . By abuse of notation we call this isomorphism
the Frobenius.
For a regular, F -finite scheme X, let κX , or κR if X = Spec R is affine, denote the
∼
natural isomorphism ωX −→ F ♭ ωX , which is the adjoint of the Cartier operator if X is
a smooth variety.
The next lemma makes explicit a fundamental isomorphism, which will be used repeatedly.
Lemma 2.3 ([BB11, Lemma 5.7]). Let f : X −→ Y be a finite and flat morphism of
schemes. For every quasi-coherent OY -module F, there is a natural isomorphism
∼

can : f ♭ OX ⊗OX f ∗ G −→ f ♭ G.
Proof. It suffices to construct a natural isomorphism locally and therefore we can identify f with a ring homomorphism R −
→ S and F with an R-module M . Define the
homomorphism
can : HomR (S, R) ⊗S (M ⊗R S) −
→ HomR (S, M )
of S-modules by mapping α ⊗ (m ⊗ t) to the homomorphism s 7→ α(st)m. Since f is
finite flat, we can assume that S is a free R-module and choose a basis s1 , s2 , . . . , sn . Let
ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn be the dual basis, i.e. ϕi ∈ HomR (S, R) and ϕi (j) = δij . One easily checks
that the map
HomR (S, M ) −
→ HomR (S, R) ⊗S (M ⊗R S)
ϕ 7→

n
X

ϕi ⊗ ϕ(si ).

i=1

is inverse to can.
The following definition is extracted from [BB11, Theorem 5.9].
Definition 2.4. Let X be a regular, F -finite scheme.
−1
has
(a) For every Cartier module M with structural morphism κ, the sheaf M ⊗ ωX
a natural γ-structure given by the composition
−1
M ⊗ ωX
−1
κM ⊗(κ∨
X)



F ♭ M ⊗ (F ♭ ωX )−1

can−1 ⊗ can∨

/ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ M ⊗ (F ♭ OX )−1 ⊗ F ∗ ω −1
X

∼

∼





−1 o
)
F ∗ (M ⊗ ωX

ev

−1
,
F ♭ OX ⊗ (F ♭ OX )−1 ⊗ F ∗ M ⊗ F ∗ ωX
∼

where the vertical arrow on the right is the permutation and evL : L ⊗OX L−1 −→
OX is the evaluation map l ⊗ ϕ 7→ ϕ(l). This morphism is called the γ-structure
−1
of M ⊗ ωX
induced by κM .

19

(b) For every γ-module N with structural morphism γN , the sheaf N ⊗ ωX has a
natural Cartier structure given by the composition
N ⊗ ωX
γN ⊗κX



id⊗can−1

F ∗ N ⊗ F ♭ ωX

/ F ∗ N ⊗ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ ωX
∼

∼





F ♭ (N ⊗ ωX ) o

F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ N ⊗ F ∗ ωX ,

can

where the vertical arrow on the right is the permutation. This morphism is called
the Cartier structure of N ⊗ ωX induced by γN .
Remark 2.5. Thanks to the fact that the proof of Lemma 2.3 contains explicit formulas
for the isomorphism can and its inverse, we can concretely describe the induced Cartier
structure of N ⊗ ωR for a γ-module N over a regular ring R such that F∗ R is free with
basis s1 , . . . , sr . For m ∈ ωR set ϕm := κR (m) and let ϕ1 , . . . , ϕr ∈ HomR (F∗ R, R) be the
dual basis of s1 , . . . , sr , this means ϕi (sj ) = δij . Following the arrows of Definition 2.4,
we see that the Cartier structure N ⊗ ωX −
→ F ♭ (N ⊗ ωX ) is given by
n ⊗ m 7→ γ(n) ⊗ ϕm
7→

X

γ(n) ⊗ ϕi ⊗ ϕm (si )

i

7→ (s 7→

X

γ(n) ⊗ ϕi (s) ⊗ ϕm (si )).

i

We will need this concrete version later on to prove that, for affine schemes, assigning
a Cartier module to a γ-sheaf commutes with certain pullbacks, see Lemma 2.17. The
use of the isomorphism F ♭ OX ⊗ (F ♭ OX )−1 ∼
= OX involves the concrete formula for the
structural morphism of the γ-sheaf associated to a Cartier module.
Lemma 2.6. Let (N, γN ) be a γ-sheaf on a regular, F -finite scheme X. The adjoint
F∗ (N ⊗ ωX ) −→ N ⊗ ωX of the structural morphism of the Cartier module N ⊗ ωX is
given by the composition
γ

κ̃

∼

F∗ (N ⊗ ωX ) −−N
→ F∗ (F ∗ N ⊗ ωX ) −→ N ⊗ F∗ ωX −−X
→ N ⊗ ωX ,
where the isomorphism in the middle is given by the projection formula.
Proof. By construction, the structural morphism of N ⊗ ωX is the composition of the
upper horizontal and the rightmost vertical arrow of the following diagram:
N ⊗ ωX

γN

/ F ∗ N ⊗ ωX

γN



adj



F ♭ F∗ (N ⊗ ωX )

adj

/ F ∗ N ⊗ F ♭ F∗ ωX

/ F ∗ N ⊗ F ♭ ωX

κ̃X



∼

adj

/ F ♭ F∗ (F ∗ N ⊗ ωX )

κ̃X

proj−1

20



/ F ♭ (N ⊗ F∗ ωX )

∼

/ F ♭ (N ⊗ ωX ).

Here adj denotes the respective adjunction morphism and proj is the isomorphism from
the projection formula. The third and the fourth vertical morphism are isomorphisms
stemming from can. For example, the morphism F ∗ N ⊗ F ♭ ωX −
→ F ♭ (N ⊗ F∗ ωX ) is the
composition
id ⊗ can−1

can

F ∗ N ⊗ F ♭ ωX −−−−−−→ F ∗ N ⊗ F ∗ ωX ⊗ F ♭ OX −−→ F ♭ (N ⊗ ωX ).
Following the leftmost vertical and the lower horizontal arrows we obtain the adjoint of
the morphism which is claimed to be the adjoint of the Cartier structure of N ⊗ ωX .
Hence it suffices to show that the diagram above is commutative.
The first and the last square commute by functoriality. The commutativity of the
square in the middle can be checked locally on affine open subsets of X because F is an
affine morphism.
−1 ∼
For the proof of Proposition 2.10, we need the isomorphism ωX ⊗ ωX
= OX of γsheaves, which is a consequence of the following general lemma.

Lemma 2.7. Let f : X −→ Y be a morphism of schemes and L an invertible OY -module.
∼

(a) If ρ : L −→ L1 ⊗OX L2 is an isomorphism with invertible OX -modules L1 and L2 ,
then the diagram

evL



OX

id ⊗ ev

ρ⊗(ρ∨ )−1

L1
−1
/
/ L1 ⊗ L2 ⊗ L−1 ⊗ L−1
❡ L2 ⊗ L2
1
2
❡
❡
❡
❡
❡
❡❡
❡❡❡❡❡❡
❡❡❡❡❡❡
❡
❡
❡
❡
❡
❡❡❡❡❡❡ evL2
❡❡❡❡❡❡
❡
❡
❡
❡
❡
r ❡❡
❡

L ⊗ L−1

commutes.
(b) The diagram of canonical isomorphisms
f ∗ (L ⊗OY L−1 )

/ f ∗ L ⊗O (f ∗ L)−1
X




/ OY

f ∗ OX
commutes.

Proof. It suffices to verify the claims for an affine scheme X = Spec R and, for (b), for
a morphism of affine schemes Spec S −
→ Spec R and an R-module M .
−1
(a) Let l1 , l2 , ϕ1 , ϕ2 be elements of L2 (X), L2 (X), L−1
1 (X), L2 (X). For l :=
−1
∨
ρ (l1 ⊗ l2 ) and Φ := ρ (ϕ1 ⊗ ϕ2 ) we have
(evL ◦(ρ ⊗ (ρ∨ )−1 )−1 )(l1 ⊗ l2 ⊗ ϕ1 ⊗ ϕ2 ) = evL (l ⊗ Φ) = Φ(l) = ϕ1 (l1 ) · ϕ2 (l2 )
because Φ is given by the composition
ϕ1 ·ϕ2

ρ

L−
→ L1 ⊗ L2 −−−→ R.

21

On the other hand
(evL2 ◦(id ⊗ evL1 ))(l1 ⊗ l2 ⊗ ϕ1 ⊗ ϕ2 ) = evL2 (ϕ1 (l1 ) · (l2 ⊗ ϕ2 )) = ϕ1 (l1 ) · ϕ2 (l2 ).
(b) We have to show that the diagram
(M ⊗R HomR (M, R)) ⊗R S

α

/ (M ⊗R S) ⊗S HomS (M ⊗R S, S)
γ

β





δ

R ⊗R S

/S

with the maps
α : (m ⊗ ϕ) ⊗ s 7→ (m ⊗ s) ⊗ (n ⊗ t 7→ t · ϕ(n))
β : (m ⊗ ϕ) ⊗ s 7→ ϕ(m) ⊗ s
γ : (m ⊗ s) ⊗ ψ 7→ ψ(m ⊗ s)
δ : r ⊗ s 7→ rs
commutes. This follows from
(γ ◦ α)((m ⊗ ϕ) ⊗ s) = γ((m ⊗ s) ⊗ (n ⊗ t 7→ tϕ(n))) = sϕ(m)
and
(δ ◦ β)((m ⊗ ϕ) ⊗ s) = δ(ϕ(m) ⊗ s) = sϕ(m).

−1
Example 2.8. The γ-sheaf ω := ωX ⊗ ωX
on a regular, F -finite scheme X is canonically
isomorphic to the structure sheaf OX equipped with the natural morphism OX −
→
F ∗ OX . We have to show that the diagram
−1
ωX ⊗ ωX

evωX

/ OX

−1 )
(can−1 ◦κX )⊗(can−1 ◦(κ∨
X)



−1
F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ ωX ⊗ (F ♭ OX )−1 ⊗ F ∗ ωX
evF ♭ O

X

id

⊗ id ∼



−1
F ∗ ωX ⊗ F ∗ ωX

∼
evF ∗ ωX


/ OX
γX

∼



−1
F ∗ (ωX ⊗ ωX
)

∼
F ∗ evωX



/ F ∗ OX

commutes. The commutativity of both the top and the bottom rectangle follows from
Lemma 2.7. Note that the horizontal isomorphisms of the lower square are the inverses
of the natural isomorphisms of part (b) of Lemma 2.7. By definition, the γ-structure

22

−1
of ωX ⊗ ωX
is given by the composition of the vertical arrows on the right. Hence the
ev−1
ω

−1
γ-structure of OX with respect to the natural isomorphism OX −−−X
→ ωX ⊗ ωX
is the
Frobenius.
Similarly, starting with the γ-module OX , the induced Cartier structure of OX ⊗ ωX
is compatible with κX with respect to the isomorphism OX ⊗ ωX ∼
= ωX .

Definition 2.9. Let QCohγ (X) denote the category of γ-sheaves and let Cohγ (X)
denote the category of γ-sheaves whose underlying OX -module is coherent. We let
QCrysγ (X) and Crysγ (X) denote the corresponding categories of crystals, see Definition 1.3.
Proposition 2.10. If X is a regular, F -finite scheme, then tensoring with ωX and its
inverse induces inverse equivalences of categories between Cartier modules and γ-sheaves
on X:
QCohκ (X) o

−1
⊗OX ωX

/

⊗OX ωX

QCohγ (X)

and
Cohκ (X) o

−1
⊗OX ωX

⊗OX ωX

/

Cohγ (X).

In terms of this equivalence, the Cartier module (ωX , κX ) corresponds to the γ-sheaf
(OX , γX ).
−1
⊗ ωX and γω its structural morphism. (Note that
Proof. Let ω denote the γ-sheaf ωX
−1
−1
there is no considerable difference between ωX ⊗ ωX
and ωX
⊗ ωX .) We start with a
Cartier module (M, κM ). Consider the diagram Equation 3 on page 26. Passing through
−1
the top arrow we follow the construction of the structural morphism of M ⊗ ωX
⊗ ωX
while the structural morphism of κM is given by the composition of the horizontal arrows
on the bottom: κM = can ◦(can−1 ◦κM ). Hence we have to show that Equation 3 is
commutative. Here µ denotes a permutation of the tensor product followed by the
evaluation map, similar to the top most horizontal arrow. More precisely, it is the
composition
−1
⊗ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ ωX
F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ M ⊗ (F ♭ OX )−1 ⊗ F ∗ ωX
∼



−1
F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ M ⊗ F ∗ ωX
⊗ ((F ♭ OX )−1 ⊗ F ♭ OX ) ⊗ F ∗ ωX
ev



−1
F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ M ⊗ F ∗ ωX
⊗ F ∗ ωX
∼



−1
F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ (M ⊗ ωX
⊗ ωX )

23

of natural isomorphisms and ev. For simplicity, we will not distinguish between F ∗ (M ⊗
−1
−1
ωX
⊗ ωX ) and F ∗ M ⊗ F ∗ ωX
⊗ F ∗ ωX . Consider the upper square. The map through
the top arrow is given by
a ⊗ m ⊗ β ⊗ σ ⊗ b ⊗ t 7→ β(a) · (b ⊗ m ⊗ σ ⊗ t)
and µ is the map
a ⊗ m ⊗ β ⊗ σ ⊗ b ⊗ t 7→ β(b) · (a ⊗ m ⊗ σ ⊗ t).
Because
β(a) · b = β(ab) = β(b) · a,
−1
to
these two maps are equal. In the lower left square the map from M ⊗ ωX ⊗ ωX
−1
♭
∗
F OX ⊗ F (M ⊗ ωX ⊗ ωX ) is the composition
can−1 ◦κ

id ⊗γω

M
−1
−1
−1
M ⊗ ωX ⊗ ωX
−−−−−−−
→ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ M ⊗ ωX
⊗ ωX −−−−→ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ (M ⊗ ωX
⊗ ωX ).

Hence it suffices to show that
id ⊗δ
∼

−1
⊗ ωX o
F ∗ M ⊗ ωX

F ∗ M ⊗ OX

F ∗ M ⊗γω



∼

−1
F ∗ M ⊗ F ∗ (ωX
⊗ ωX ) o

∼

(2)

∼

id ⊗F
id ⊗F ∗ δ

/ F ∗M



F ∗ M ⊗ F ∗ OX

∼


/ F ∗ (M ⊗ OX )

is commutative. The commutativity of the left square is Example 2.8 tensored with
F ∗ M . That the right square commutes can easily be checked by hand: For an arbitrary
commutative ring R, an R-algebra S and an R-module M , the diagram
(M ⊗R S) ⊗S S

/ M ⊗R S




/ (M ⊗R R) ⊗R S

(M ⊗R S) ⊗S (R ⊗R S)

of natural homomorphisms is commutative. Along both ways an element (m ⊗ s1 ) ⊗ s2
is mapped to (m ⊗ 1) ⊗ s1 s2 . Locally the right square of Equation 2 is just a special case
of this diagram.
′ of N ⊗
Now let (N, γN ) be a γ-sheaf. By definition, the structural morphism γN
−1
ωX ⊗ ωX is the line in the middle of the diagram Equation 4. The upper squares of
this diagram commute by construction. Here the horizontal morphism to the top right
corner is given by id ⊗(can−1 ◦κ̃X ) and the horizontal morphism below is the unique
′ is the
morphism making the upper right square commute. Therefore we see that γN
tensor product of γN and γω , i.e. the bottom rectangle of Equation 4 is commutative.

24

Now consider the diagram
N⊗
O ω

id ⊗γω

γN ⊗id

id ⊗F ∗ δ

id ⊗δ

N ⊗O OX

/ N ⊗ F ∗ω
O

id ⊗γX

∼

/ N ⊗ F ∗ OX

γN ⊗id

/ F ∗ N ⊗ F ∗ OX
O

∼

/ F ∗ (N ⊗ OX )
O
∼

id ⊗γX
γN

/ F ∗ (N ⊗ ω)
O
F ∗ (id ⊗δ)

id ⊗F ∗ δ

∼

N

/ F ∗N ⊗ F ∗ω
O

/ F ∗ N ⊗ OX

∼

/ F ∗ N.

The upper left square is the commutative diagram of Example 2.8 tensored with N .
The upper square in the middle and the bottom left rectangle are clearly commutative.
The square to the left of it commutes because of the naturality of the isomorphism
∼
F ∗ N ⊗ F ∗ ( ) −→ F ∗ (N ⊗ ). We already have seen that the bottom right square
commutes: It is the same square as the left one of diagram Equation 2 with M replaced
by N . Moreover, the composition of the leftmost arrow is N ⊗ δ and the composition of
the rightmost arrow is F ∗ (N ⊗ δ).
Hence the structural morphism of N is compatible with γN ⊗ γω , which turned out to
be compatible with the structural morphism induced from the Cartier module N ⊗ ωX .
Thus we can extract the commutative diagram
−1
N ⊗ ωX ⊗ ωX

′
γN

/ F ∗ (N ⊗ ωX ⊗ ω −1 )
X
O

O

F ∗ (id ⊗δ)

id ⊗δ

N

γN

/ F ∗ N.

−1
It follows that the functors
⊗ ωX
and
⊗ ωX are inverse equivalences. From
−1
Example 2.8 we know that ⊗ ωX maps ωX with the structural morphism κX to OX
with the structural morphism γX . Consequently, ⊗ ωX maps the γ-sheaf (OX , γX ) to
the Cartier module (ωX , κX ).
−1
Corollary 2.11. Tensoring with ωX and with ωX
induces equivalences of categories

QCrysκ (X) o

−1
⊗OX ωX

QCrysγ (X)

/

Crysγ (X)

⊗OX ωX

/

and
Crysκ (X) o

−1
⊗OX ωX

⊗OX ωX

for every regular, F -finite scheme X.
Corollary 2.12. If X is regular and F -finite, the categories QCohγ (X) and QCrysγ (X)
have enough injectives.
Proof. This follows from Proposition 1.4 and Corollary 2.11.

25

−1
⊗ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ ωX
(F ♭ OX ⊗ (F ♭ OX )−1 ) ⊗ F ∗ M ⊗ F ∗ ωX

ev

O

/ F ∗ M ⊗ F ∗ ω −1 ⊗ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ ωX
X

∼

∼

−1
⊗ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ ωX
F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ M ⊗ (F ♭ OX )−1 ⊗ F ∗ ωX

µ

O


/ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ (M ⊗ ω −1 ⊗ ωX )
X
O

can

/ F ♭ (M ⊗ ω −1 ⊗ ωX )
OX

−1 ⊗κ )
can−1 (κM ⊗(κ∨
X
X)

−1
M ⊗ ωX
⊗ ωX

F ♭ OX ⊗F ∗ (id ⊗δ)

F ♭ϕ

O

id ⊗δ ∼
can−1 ◦κM

M

/ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ M

can

/ F ♭M

(3)
26
−1
F ∗ N ⊗ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ ωX ⊗ ωX

∼

O

γN ⊗(can−1 ◦κX )⊗id

N ⊗ ωX ⊗

/ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ N ⊗ F ∗ ω −1 ⊗ ω −1
X
X

/ F ♭ OX ⊗ F ∗ N ⊗ F ∗ ω −1 ⊗ (F ♭ OX )−1 ⊗ F ∗ ω −1
X
X
∼ evF ♭ OX ⊗ id

can ∼
−1
ωX

−1
N ⊗ ωX ⊗ ωX

κN⊗ωX

γN ⊗γω




/ F ∗ (N ⊗ ωX ⊗ ω −1 )
X

/ F ♭ (N ⊗ ωX ) ⊗ ω −1
X

/ F ∗ N ⊗ F ∗ (ωX ⊗ ω −1 )
X

∼

/ F ∗ (N ⊗ ωX ⊗ ω −1 )
X

(4)

2.2 Compatibility with pull-back
The pull-back of quasi-coherent sheaves defines a pull-back functor on γ-sheaves:
Definition 2.13. Let f : X −
→ Y be a morphism of regular schemes and N a γ-sheaf on
Y with structural morphism γN . The γ-structure for f ∗ N is defined as the composition
f ∗γ

∼

f ∗ N −−−N
→ f ∗ FY∗ N −→ FY∗ f ∗ N.
First we consider a closed immersion i : X −
→ Y of regular F -finite schemes. The aim
is to prove the following theorem:
Theorem 2.14. Let i : X −→ Y be a closed immersion of regular, F -finite schemes with
codimension n. Then there is a canonical isomorphism of functors
−1
◦ Rn i♭ ∼
⊗ ωX
= i∗ ◦

⊗ ωY−1

inducing a corresponding isomorphism of functors of crystals, i.e. the diagram
Crysκ (Y ) o

−1
⊗OY ωY

/

⊗OY ωY

Crysγ (Y )
i∗

Rn i♭



Crysκ (X) o

−1
⊗OX ωX

/

⊗OX ωX



Crysγ (X)

is commutative.
We begin with the affine case. Noting that any closed immersion of regular schemes
is a local complete intersection morphism, it suffices to consider the case of a complete
intersection, where the pull-back of a Cartier module can be computed by using the
Koszul complex.
Lemma 2.15. Let f = f1 , f2 , . . . , fn be a regular sequence of elements of a commutative
ring R. Let I be the ideal generated by the fi . Then for every Cartier module M with
structural map κ, there is an isomorphism
∼

ϕf : ExtnR (R/I, M ) −→ M/IM
where M/IM is viewed as an R/I-module with the Cartier structure
κM/IM : F∗ M/IM −→ M/IM
m + IM 7→ κM ((f1 · f2 · · · fn )p−1 m) + IM.
Proof. By definition we have to compute RHomR (R/I, M ). The structural morphism
κi♭ M : F∗ i♭ M −
→ i♭ M equals the composition
F∗ RHomR (R/I, M ) −
→ RHomR (F∗ R/I, F∗ M ) −
→ RHomR (R/I, M ),

27

where the first morphism is the canonical one and the second is induced by F : R/I −
→
F∗ R/I in the first and κ : F∗ M −
→ M in the second argument. A free resolution of the
R-module R/I is given by the Koszul chain complex K(f ). It is the total tensor product
complex in the sense of [Wei94, 2.7.1] of the following complexes K(fi )
fi

0 −→ R −→ R −→ 0
concentrated in degrees −1 and 0. Each complex K(fi ) admits a lift of the Frobenius
F: R−
→ F∗ R in degree 0 by mapping r to r p fip−1 . This means the diagrams
0

/R

fi

fip−1 F



0

/ F∗ R

fi

/0

/R
F



/0

/ F∗ R

f p−1

i
commute. The maps R −−
−→ F∗ R give rise to a map of complexes F : K(f ) −
→ F∗ K(f )
lifting the Frobenius in degree zero: In general, if ϕ : M −
→ F∗ M and ψ : N −
→ F∗ N are
R-linear maps, it is easy to check that the map

M ⊗R N −
→ M ⊗R N
m ⊗ n 7→ ϕ(n) ⊗ ψ(n)
of abelian groups is p-linear, i.e. it is an R-linear map M ⊗ N −
→ F∗ (M ⊗ N ). Thus we
→ F∗ K(f ). Unwinding
inductively obtain an R-linear morphism of complexes F : K(f ) −
the definition of the tensor product of complexes, we see that the left end of this map is
the square
0

((−1)i+1 fi )i

/R

/ Rn
Q

Qn

f p−1
i=1 i

0

(


/ F∗ R

((−1)i+1 fi )i

/ ···
f p−1 )i
j6=i j


/ F∗ Rn

/ ···

Consequently, the n-th degree of the composition
F ◦ ◦κ

canonical

F∗ HomR (K(f ), M ) −−−−−→ HomR (F∗ K(f ), F∗ M ) −−−−→ HomR (K(f ), M )
Q
maps m to κ(( fip−1 )m) by the identification HomR (R, M ) ∼
= M via ϕ 7→ ϕ(1). The
→ HomR (Kn (f ), M ) corresponds to the map
differential HomR (Kn−1 (f ), M ) −

Mn −
→M
(mi )i 7→

X

f i mi .

The image is the submodule IM and thus the n-th cohomology of HomR (K(f ), M ) is
isomorphic to M/IM , equipped with the claimed Cartier structure.

28

Remark 2.16. The isomorphism ExtnR (R/I, M ) −
→ M/IM of the underlying sheaves is
not canonical. It depends on the choice of the regular sequence f . From the construction
of this isomorphism we see that if g = g1 , . . . , gn is another regular sequence of R
P
generating I and gi = cij fj , the automorphism τ on M/IM making the diagram
M/IM

7
♦♦♦
♦
♦
♦♦♦
♦♦♦
ϕf

ExtnR (R/I, M )

τ

❖❖❖
❖❖❖
❖
ϕg ❖❖❖❖
'



M/IM

commutative is given by multiplication with det(cij ).
Nevertheless, interpreting the top-Ext-groups as quotient modules in the case we are
interested in, namely ExtnR (R/I, M ) ⊗ ExtnR (R/I, ωR )−1 , leads to isomorphisms, which
are independent of the regular sequence generating I, since the correcting factors from
both terms cancel.
Lemma 2.17. Let R be a commutative ring such that F∗ R is finite free, N a γ-module
over R and I ⊆ R an ideal which is generated by a regular sequence of length n. There
is a canonical isomorphism between Cartier modules
ExtnR (R/I, N ⊗ ωR ) ∼
= N/IN ⊗ ωR/I .
Proof. Choose a regular sequence f = f1 , . . . , fn such that I is generated by the fi . Also
choose a basis r1 , . . . , rt of R viewed as a free R-module via the Frobenius. The dual
basis ϕ1 , . . . , ϕt is given by ϕi (rj ) = δij . Let κ denote the intrinsic Cartier structure of
ExtnR (R/I, N ⊗ ωR ) and κ̃ denote the Cartier structure of N/IN ⊗ ωR/I as explained
in Proposition 2.10. Identifying ExtnR (R/I, N ⊗ ωR ) with (N ⊗ ωR )/I(N ⊗ ωR ) via the
isomorphism ϕf from Lemma 2.15, we obtain the map
κ′ : F∗ ((N ⊗ ωR )/I(N ⊗ ωR )) −
→ (N ⊗ ωR )/I(N ⊗ ωR )
n ⊗ m + I(N ⊗ ωR ) 7→

t
X

ϕi (1)γN (n) ⊗ κR (ri f p−1 m) + I(N ⊗ ωR )

i=1

as the induced Cartier structure on (N ⊗ ωR )/I(N ⊗ ωR ). Here γN is the γ-structure of
N.
Also identifying ωR/I ∼
= ExtnR (R/I, ωR ) with ωR /IωR via f , its Cartier structure κR/I
is given by m + IωY 7→ κR (f p−1 m) + I(ωY ). From this perspective, the Cartier structure

29

of κ̃ of N/IN ⊗ ωR/I induces the structural morphism
κ̃′ : F∗ (N/IN ⊗ ωR /IωR ) −
→ (N/IN ⊗ ωR /IωR )
n
X

n ⊗ m 7→
=

ϕi (1) · γN (n) ⊗ κR (ri f p−1 m)

i=1
t
X

ϕi (1)γN (n) ⊗ κR (ri f p−1 m) + I(N ⊗ ωR )

i=1

on N/IN ⊗ ωR /IωR . Finally, there is a natural isomorphism
∼

τ : (N ⊗R ωR )/I(N ⊗R ωR ) −→ N/IN ⊗R/I ωR /IωR
of R-modules, mapping n ⊗ m to n ⊗ m. The explicit formulas for κ′ and κ̃′ show that
τ makes the square in the middle of the diagram
ExtnR (R/I, N ⊗R ωR )

κ

/ F ♭ Extn (R/I, N ⊗R ωR )
R

κ′



/ F ♭ ((N ⊗ ωR )/I(N ⊗ ωR ))

κ̃′



ϕf

F ♭ ϕf



(N ⊗ ωR )/I(N ⊗ ωR )
τ

F ♭τ



N/IN ⊗ ωR /IωR

/ F ♭ (N/IN ⊗ ωR /IωR )
O

O

F ♭ (id ⊗ϕf )

id ⊗ϕf
κ̃

i∗ N ⊗R ωR/I

/ F ♭ (i∗ N ⊗R ω
R/I )

commutative. The squares above and below commute by construction. Let Φ be the
⊗ωR
. We have just seen that the diagram
composition (id ⊗ϕωf R )−1 ◦ τ ◦ ϕN
f
ExtnR (R/I, N ⊗R ωR )

κ

/ F ♭ Extn (R/I, N ⊗R ωR )
R
F ♭Φ

Φ



i∗ N ⊗R ωR/I



κ̃

/ F ♭ (i∗ N ⊗R ω
R/I )

commutes. Furthermore, Φ is natural: Let g = g1 , . . . , gn be another regular sequence
P
generating I with gi = cij fj . Then, by Remark 2.16,
⊗ωR
⊗ωR
(id ⊗ϕωg R )−1 ◦ τ ◦ ϕN
= det(cij )−1 (id ⊗ϕωf R )−1 ◦ τ ◦ det(cij )ϕN
g
f
⊗ωR
= (id ⊗ϕωf R )−1 ◦ τ ◦ ϕN
.
f

30

Proposition 2.18. Let i : X ֒−
→ Y be a closed immersion of regular, F -finite schemes
and let N be a γ-sheaf on Y . There is a canonical isomorphism
∗

∼

Φ : i ExtnOY (i∗ OX , N ⊗OY ωY ) −→ i∗ N ⊗OX ωX
of Cartier modules, which is functorial in N . Here i denotes the flat morphism of ringed
spaces (X, OX ) −→ (Y, i∗ OX ).
Proof. Choose an affine open covering {Uk }k = Spec Rk of Y such that iUk : i−1 (Uk ) ֒−
→
Uk is a complete intersection. By refining the covering we can assume that F∗ Rk is
free. Let Ik ⊆ Rk be the ideal such that i|Uk corresponds to the ring homomorphism
Rk −
→ Rk /Ik . By Lemma 2.17, we have an isomorphism ExtnR (Rk /Ik , N |Uk ⊗ ωRk ) ∼
=
∗
i N |Uk ⊗ ωRk /Ik , which is natural and therefore, we can glue the local isomorphisms to
the desired global map Φ.
Proposition 2.18 shows that there is a natural isomorphism of functors Rn i♭ ◦ ⊗OY
⊗OY ωY and
ωY ∼
= ⊗OX ωX ◦ i∗ . This enables us to prove Theorem 2.14 because
⊗OX ωX are equivalences of categories.
Proof of Theorem 2.14. For every γ-sheaf N on Y , there is an isomorphism
Rn i♭ (N ⊗OY ωY ) ∼
= i−1 ExtnOY (i∗ OX , N ⊗OY ωY )
∼
= i∗ N ⊗O ωX
X

by Proposition 2.18, which is functorial in N . As
alences of categories, even the diagram
Cohκ (Y ) o

−1
⊗OY ωY

⊗OY ωY and

⊗OY ωY

/

Cohγ (Y )
i∗

Rn i!



Cohκ (X) o

⊗OX ωX are equiv-

−1
⊗OX ωX

⊗OX ωX

/



Cohγ (X)

commutes. Passing to crystals finishes the proof.
Now we turn to open immersions.
Proposition 2.19. Let j : U −→ X be an open immersion of regular, F -finite schemes
and M a Cartier module on X. Then there is a natural isomorphism of γ-sheaves
−1
).
j ! M ⊗OU ωU−1 ∼
= j ∗ (M ⊗ ωX

Proof. One easily checks that, for a Cartier module M on X with structural morphism
κ̃ : M −
→ FX♭ M , the Cartier structure on j ∗ M is the composition
j ∗ κ̃

∼

j ∗ M −−→ j ∗ F ♭ M −→ FU♭ j ∗ M.

31

The dualizing sheaf ωU of U is given by j ∗ ωX . Therefore we have j ! M ⊗ ωU−1 ∼
= j ∗ (M ⊗
−1
ωX
) and the diagram
−1
j ∗ M ⊗ j ∗ ωX

/ F ♭ j ∗ M ⊗ F ♭ j ∗ ω −1
X

∼



−1
j ∗ (M ⊗ ωX
)

∼

/ F ∗ (j ∗ M ⊗ j ∗ ω −1 )
X

∼



/ j ∗ (F ♭ M ⊗ F ♭ ω −1 )
X

∼
∼



/ j ∗ F ∗ (M ⊗ ω −1 )
X

commutes. Here the horizontal arrows are the γ-structures of j ∗ M ⊗OU ωU−1 and j ∗ (M ⊗
−1
ωX
).

2.3 Compatibility with push-forward
For the construction of a push-forward for γ-sheaves, we follow the construction given in
subsection 6.3 of [BB]. Then we show that the equivalence between Cartier modules and
γ-sheaves given by tensoring with the dualizing sheaf is compatible with push-forward
for morphisms of regular schemes. This proof is also mainly the one given in ibid. By
abuse of notation, let κX : FX∗ ωX −
→ ωX be the adjoint of the Cartier structure of ωX .
Definition 2.20 ([BB, Definition 6.3.1]). Let f : X −
→ Y be a morphism of smooth,
F -finite k-schemes. Let N be a γ-sheaf on X. Then we define the push-forward f+ N as
the twist of the push-forward f∗ of Cartier modules, i.e.
f+ N = f∗ (N ⊗OX ωX ) ⊗OY ωY−1 .
The push-forward for γ-crystals is the one induced by the just given push-forward of
γ-sheaves.
By construction, the push-forward for γ-sheaves is compatible with the push-forward
for Cartier modules. In order to show that f+ is compatible with the equivalence between
γ-crystals and lfgu modules, we need a different description of f+ for γ-sheaves based
on the relative Cartier operator.
We recall two general constructions, which are repeatedly used in this subsection. For
this we consider a morphism f : X −
→ Y of arbitrary schemes over Spec Z. Let F be
a quasi-coherent OX -module and E a quasi-coherent OY -module. The adjoint of the
composition
e f ⊗id
ad

f ∗ (f∗ F ⊗OX E) ∼
= f ∗ f∗ F ⊗ f ∗ E −−−−→ F ⊗ f ∗ E
f : f ∗ f∗ −
where ad
→ id is the counit of the adjunction, yields a natural morphism
f

proj : f∗ F ⊗OX E −
→ f∗ (F ⊗ f ∗ E).
As a consequence of the projection formula ([Har77, Exercise III.8.3]), it is an isomorphism if f is quasi-compact and separated and if E is locally free.

32

For two morphisms f : X −
→ S and g : Y −
→ S, let f ′ : X×S Y −
→ Y and g′ : X×S Y −
→
X be the projections such that the square
f′

X ×S Y

/Y
g

g′



f

X



/S

is cartesian. There is a canonical morphism of functors
bc: f ∗ g∗ −
→ g∗′ f ′∗
of quasi-coherent sheaves given by the adjoint of the composition
g∗ adf ′
g∗ −−−−→ g∗ f∗′ f ′∗ ∼
= f∗ g∗′ f ′∗ ,

→ f∗′ f ′∗ is the unit of the adjunction. If g is affine, bc is an isomorphism.
where adf ′ : id −
To see this, we can assume that S, X and Y are affine, because g and therefore g′ is
an affine morphism. Then the claim is a well known property of the tensor product.
The morphism bc is also an isomorphism if X and Y are Noetherian, f is flat and g is
separated of finite type ([Har77, Proposition III.9.3]). The next lemma relates these two
isomorphisms.
Lemma 2.21. Let f : X −→ S and g : Y −→ S be morphisms of schemes and let f ′ : X ×S
X −→ Y and g′ : X ×S Y −→ X be the projections. Then, for every quasi-coherent OX module F and every quasi-coherent OS -module E, the diagram
f∗ F ⊗ g∗ E

f∗ F ⊗ g∗ E

proj

proj





f∗ (F ⊗ f ∗ g∗ E)

g∗ (g∗ f∗ F ⊗ E)

bc

bc





f∗ (F ⊗ g∗′ f ′∗ E)

g∗ (f∗′ g′∗ F ⊗ E)

proj



f∗ g∗′ (g′∗ F ⊗ f ′∗ E)

proj
∼



/ g∗ f ′ (g ′∗ F ⊗ f ′∗ E)
∗

commutes.
f denote the counit of adjunction h∗ h∗ −
Proof. For a morphism h of schemes, let ad
→ id.
h
The diagram of which we want to prove the commutativity is obtained by adjunction

33

from the diagram
g′∗ f ∗ f∗ F ⊗ g′∗ f ∗ g∗ E

∼

/ f ′∗ g ∗ f∗ F ⊗ f ′∗ g ∗ g∗ E
bc ⊗ id



f ′∗ f∗′ g′∗ F ⊗ f ′∗ g∗ g∗ E

e f ⊗id
ad


g′∗ F ⊗ g′∗ f ∗ g∗ E

∼



e f ′ ⊗id
ad

/ g ′∗ F ⊗ f ′∗ g ∗ g∗ E

id ⊗ bc



g′∗ F ⊗ g′∗ g∗′ f ′∗ E
e g′
id ⊗ad

eg
id ⊗ad





g′∗ F ⊗ f ′∗ E

g′∗ F ⊗ f ′∗ E.

Both parts of the diagram are commutative by construction of the morphism bc.
We turn back to the situation of a morphism f : X −
→ Y of smooth schemes over a field
k containing Fp . For simplicity, let ωf denote the relative dualizing sheaf ωX/Y = f ! OY .
Lemma 2.22. Let f : X −→ Y be a morphism of smooth, F -finite schemes. For every
γ-sheaf N on X, there is a natural isomorphism
f∗ (N ⊗OX ωX ) ⊗OY ωY−1 −→ f∗ (N ⊗OX ωf )
of quasi-coherent sheaves.
Proof. Since X and Y are smooth, any morphism X −
→ Y is regular, i.e. it is a composition of a closed immersion X −
→ W such that X is a local complete intersection in
W , followed by a smooth morphism W −
→ Y . (For a smooth morphism f , the graph
factorization
prY
(id,f )
X −−−→ X ×k Y −−→
Y,
where prY denotes the projection, satisfies this requirement.) For a closed immersion i
we have the isomorphism
i♭ (ωY ) ∼
= Li∗ ωY ⊗ ωf [−n]
of [Har66, Corollary III.7.3] and a smooth morphism is quasi-perfect, see Definition 3.29
later on. Overall, we see that there are natural isomorphisms
∼
∼
ωX ∼
= f ! ωY −→ f ! OY ⊗ Lf ∗ ωY −→ ωf ⊗ f ∗ ωY .

Now we obtain the desired isomorphism as the composition
proj
f∗ (N ⊗ ωX ) ⊗ ωY−1 −−→ f∗ (N ⊗ ωX ⊗ f ∗ ωY−1 ) ∼
= f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ).

34

With the relative Frobenius diagram
FX
FX/Y

/ X′
X ▲▲
▲▲▲
▲▲▲
f′
▲
f ▲▲▲ 
▲&
Y

FY′

%
/X
f

FY



/ Y,

see diagram Equation 1 for the notation, we can define a γ-structure γN,f for f∗ (N ⊗ ωf )
by the composition
∼

f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) −→ f∗′ FX/Y ∗ (N ⊗ ωf )
γ

N
∗
−→
f∗′ FX/Y ∗ (FX/Y
FY′∗ N ⊗ ωf )

proj−1

−−−−→ f∗′ (FY′∗ N ⊗ FX/Y ∗ ωf )
CX/Y

−−−→ f∗′ (FY′∗ N ⊗ FY′∗ ωf )
bc

−→ FY∗ f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ).
We will show that γN,f is the structural morphism of f+ N via the isomorphism of
Lemma 2.22. But first, we clarify how the relative Cartier operator is related to κX and
κY .
Lemma 2.23. With the notation of the preceding lemma, the composition
∼

∗
FY ∗ (ωf ⊗ f ∗ ωY ) −→ FY′ ∗ FX/Y ∗ (ωf ⊗ FX/Y
f ′∗ ωY )
proj−1

−−−−→ FY′ ∗ (FX/Y ∗ ωf ⊗ f ′∗ ωY )
CX/Y

−−−→ FY′ ∗ (FY′∗ ωf ⊗ f ′∗ ωY )
proj

−−→ ωf ⊗ FY′ ∗ f ′∗ ωY
bc

−→ ωf ⊗ f ∗ FY ∗ ωY
κ

Y
−→
ωf ⊗ f ∗ ωY

is compatible with the Cartier structure of ωX under the canonical isomorphism ωX ∼
=
ωf ⊗ f ∗ ωY .
Proof. In the appendix A.2.3. (iii) of [EK04], Emerton and Kisin explain how the relative
f

g

Cartier operators CX/Y , CY /Z and CX/Z are related for a composition X −→ Y −→ Z
of morphisms. Our lemma is the special case where Z = Spec k and g is the structural
morphism of the k-scheme Y .
Proposition 2.24. Let f : X −→ Y be a morphism of smooth, F -finite schemes over k.
Let N be a γ-sheaf on X. The canonical isomorphism
∼

f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) −→ f∗ (N ⊗ ωX ) ⊗ ωY−1

35

of quasi-coherent OY -modules from Lemma 2.22 is an isomorphism of γ-sheaves.
Proof. As
⊗ ωX and
⊗ ωY−1 are equivalences between the categories of γ-sheaves
and Cartier modules on X and on Y , it suffices to show that the canonical isomorphism
∼
f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY −→ f∗ (N ⊗ ωX ) is an isomorphism of Cartier modules on Y . The left
hand side of the diagram
FY ∗ (f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY )

proj

/ FY ∗ f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ⊗ f ∗ ωY )

proj



γN

γN



FY ∗ (f∗ (FY∗ N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY )

/ FY ∗ f∗ (F ∗ N ⊗ ωf ⊗ f ∗ ωY )
X
∼

∼



∗
FY′∗ N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY )
FY ∗ (f∗′ FX/Y ∗ (FX/Y



∗
∗
FY′∗ N ⊗ FX/Y
f ′∗ ωY ⊗ ωf )
FY ∗ f∗′ FX/Y ∗ (FX/Y
∼



∗
FY ∗ (f∗′ FX/Y ∗ (FX/Y
FY′∗ N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY )

∗
FY ∗ f∗′ FX/Y ∗ (FX/Y
(FY′∗ N ⊗ f ′∗ ωY ) ⊗ ωf )

proj−1



FY ∗ (f∗′ (FY′∗ N ⊗ FX/Y ∗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY )

proj−1



proj

/ FY ∗ f ′ (F ′∗ N ⊗ f ′∗ ωY ⊗ FX/Y ∗ ωf )
∗ Y

proj



CX/Y



FY ∗ (f∗′ FY′∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY )

CX/Y

/ FY ∗ f ′ (F ′∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ f ′∗ ωY )
∗ Y
∼

bc−1





FY ∗ (FY∗ f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY )

f∗ FY′ ∗ (FY′∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ f ′∗ ωY )
proj−1



f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ⊗ FY′ ∗ f ′∗ ωY )

proj−1

bc−1



f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ FY ∗ ωY



proj

/ f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ⊗ f ∗ FY ∗ ωY )

proj



κY



f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY

κY

/ f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ⊗ f ∗ ωY )

is the structural morphism of the Cartier module f∗ (N ⊗ ωf ) ⊗ ωY . It is easy to see
that the right hand side is the structural morphism of the Cartier module f∗ (N ⊗ ωX ) ∼
=
∗
f∗ (N ⊗ωF ⊗f ωY ). Hence we have to show that the diagram above commutes. The three
upper squares and the bottom square commute by the functoriality and the compatibility
of the projection formula with compositions of morphisms. The commutativity of the
fourth square from above follows from Lemma 2.21.

36

2.4 Cartier crystals and locally finitely generated unit modules
The category of γ-sheaves was just an intermediate step on the way to locally finitely
generated unit modules. Recall that there is a functorial way of associating a unit
OX [F ]-module to a γ-sheaf N on X.
Definition 2.25. Let µu (X) denote the category of unit left OF,X -modules whose underlying OX -module is quasi-coherent. For a smooth k-scheme X, let Gen be the functor
QCohγ (X) −
→ µu (X)
which assigns to any quasi-coherent γ-sheaf N with structural morphism γ : N −
→ F ∗N
the direct limit N of
γ
F ∗γ
F 2∗γ
N −→ F ∗ N −−→ F 2∗ N −−−→ · · ·
∼

together with the inverse of the induced isomorphism N −→ F ∗ N .
Lemma 2.26. Let X be a smooth, F -finite k-scheme. The functor Gen is essentially
surjective and induces an equivalence of categories
∼

QCrysγ (X) −→ µu (X).
Proof. Let Neg : µu (X) −
→ QCohγ (X) be the functor which assigns to a quasi-coherent
unit OF,X -module M with structural morphism u : F ∗ M −
→ M the quasi-coherent γsheaf M whose structural morphism is given by the inverse of u. Obviously there is a
natural isomorphism
∼
Gen ◦ Neg −→ id,
whence the surjectivity of Gen.
For a quasi-coherent γ-sheaf N , the corresponding crystals N is nil-isomorphic to
the corresponding crystal of Neg ◦ Gen(N ). The reason for this is the fact that the
structural morphism γ : N −
→ F ∗ N of a quasi-coherent γ-sheaf N is a nil-isomorphism:
It is immediate that the structural map of the kernel and the cokernel of γ, interpreted
as a morphism of γ-sheaves, is the zero map.
The image of Gen of the subcategory Cohγ (X) of coherent γ-sheaves on X is the
category µlfgu (X). Indeed, after localizing at nilpotent γ-sheaves and considering γcrystals, Gen induces an equivalence of categories.
Proposition 2.27 ([BB11, Proposition 5.12]). For a smooth, F -finite k-scheme X, the
functor
GenX : Cohγ (X) −→ µlfgu (X)
factors through Crysγ (X), inducing an equivalence of categories:
Cohγ (X)

▼▼▼
▼▼Gen
▼▼▼
▼▼&

∼ /
Crysγ (X)
µlfgu (X).

37

Theorem 2.28. Let X be an F -finite, smooth k-scheme. Let G denote the composition
−1
of the exact functors ⊗ ωX
and Gen. It induces an equivalence of derived categories
b
b
G : Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)) −→ Dlfgu
(OF,X ).

Proof. Combining Corollary 2.11 and Lemma 2.26, we see that G induces an equivalence
of abelian categories QCrysκ (X) −
→ µu (X) and therefore an equivalence of derived
categories Db (QCrys(X)) −
→ D b (µu (X)). Since G is exact and restricts to an equivalence
b (QCrys (X)) −
→ Dlfgu (µu (X)).
Crysκ (X) −
→ µlfgu (X), we obtain an equivalence Dcrys
κ
b
b (O
It remains to show that Dlfgu (µu (X)) is naturally equivalent to Dlfgu
F,X ). The
b
b
inclusion µlfgu (X) −
→ µ(X) induces an equivalence D (µlfgu ) −
→ Dlfgu (OF,X ) ([EK04,
11.6]). As the inclusion µlfgu (X) −
→ µ(X) factors through µu (X), this implies an equivb (µ (X)) −
b (O
alence Dlfgu
→ Dlfgu
u
F,X ).
Finally, we prove that the equivalence G of derived functors is compatible with pullbacks. Note that for a morphism f : X −
→ Y of smooth schemes, the functor
b
b
f ! : Dlfgu
(OF,Y ) −
→ Dlfgu
(OF,X )

is obtained from a right-exact functor of abelian categories.
Definition 2.29. Let f : X −
→ Y be a morphism of smooth k-schemes. The (underived)
∗
pull-back f M of an OF,Y -module M is given by
f ∗ M = OF,X→Y ⊗f −1 OF,Y f −1 M
= OF,X ⊗f −1 OF,Y f −1 M,
cf. Proposition 1.13. The pull-back f ! for complexes M• of OF,Y -modules from Definition 2.3.1 of [EK04] is the left derived functor of f ∗ , shifted by dX/Y :
L

f ! M• = OF,X→Y ⊗f −1 OF,Y f −1 M• [dX/Y ].
Corollary 2.30. Let f : X −→ Y be a closed immersion of smooth, F -finite k-schemes
of relative dimension dX/Y = n. There is a natural equivalence of functors Crysκ (Y ) −→
µlfgu (X):
f ∗ ◦ GY ∼
= GX ◦Rn f ♭ .
Proof. Consider the following diagram of functors:
Crysκ (Y )

−1
⊗ωY

/ Crys (Y )
γ

Crysκ (X)

/ µlfgu (Y )

GenX



f∗

Rn f ♭



GenY

−1
⊗ωX



/ Crys (X)
γ

f∗

/ µlfgu (X).

The left square commutes by Theorem 2.14. The right square also commutes because
there is a natural isomorphism GenX ◦f ∗ ∼
= f ∗ ◦ GenY . For a γ-sheaf N on Y , let N

38

denote GenY (N ), which is the direct limit lim FYi∗ N . As direct limits commute with
−→
pull-back of quasi-coherent sheaves, we have a natural isomorphism
GenX f ∗ (N ) = lim(OX ⊗f −1 OY f −1 FYi∗ N )
−→
∼
−→ OX ⊗f −1 OY f −1 (lim FYi∗ N )
−→
= OX ⊗f −1 OY f −1 (N ).
One checks that for a left OF,Y -module M, the underived pullback f ∗ M = OF,X ⊗f −1 OF,Y
f −1 M is the quasi-coherent sheaf f ∗ M = OX ⊗f −1 OY f −1 M with the natural morphism FX∗ f ∗ M −
→ f ∗ M induced by the structural morphism FY∗ M −
→ M. Hence
−1
OX ⊗f −1 OY f (N ) is isomorphic to f ∗ GenY (N ).
Lemma 2.31. Let i : X −→ Y be a closed immersion of smooth, F -finite schemes over
k. Let P be a locally free left OF,Y -module. Then
Rn ((
where (

−1
⊗ ωX
) ◦ i! ◦ (

−1
⊗ ωX
) ◦ i! ◦ (

⊗ ωY ))P = 0 for all n 6= −dX/Y ,

⊗ ωY ) is understood as the composition of functors

⊗ωY

i!

⊗ω −1

X
b
b
b
b
(QCrysκ (Y )) −
→ Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)) −−−−−
→ Dlfgu
(OF,X ).
Dlfgu
(OF,Y ) −−−−→ Dcrys

Proof. Locally free left OF,Y -modules are in particular locally free as quasi-coherent
OY -modules. Thus we have
Rn ((

−1
) ◦ i! ◦ (
⊗ ωX

−1
) ◦ Rn i! ◦ ( ⊗ ωY )) ⊕j∈J OY
⊗ ωY ))P ∼
= (( ⊗ ωX
−1
∼
) ◦ Rn i! ⊕j∈J ωY
= ( ⊗ ωX
∼
=0

locally for all n 6= −dX/Y on the underlying quasi-coherent sheaves.
Theorem 2.32. For closed immersions i : X −→ Y of smooth, F -finite k-schemes, the
b (O
b (O
b
b (QCrys (X)) −
→ Dlfgu
→ Dlfgu
equivalences Dcrys
F,Y )
F,X ) and Dcrys (QCrysκ (Y )) −
κ
!
of derived categories induced by GX and GY are compatible with the pull-backs i , i.e.
we have a canonical isomorphism
GX ◦i! ∼
= i! ◦ GY
b (QCrys (Y )) to D b (O
of functors from Dcrys
F,X ).
κ
lfgu

Proof. This is an application of the following general result concerning derived functors:
Proposition 2.33 ([Har66, Proposition I.7.4]). Lat A and B be abelian categories, where
A has enough injectives, and let F1 : A −→ B be an additive functor which has cohomological dimension ≤ n on A. Let P be the set of objects X of A such that Ri F1 (X) = 0
for all i 6= n, and assume that every object of A is a quotient of an element of P . Let
F2 = Rn F1 . Then RF1 and LF2 exist, and there is a functorial isomorphism
∼

RF1 −→ LF2 [−n].

39

−1
First we have to check the requirements. Let F denote the functor ( ⊗ ωX
)◦
0
♭
0
♭
R i ◦ ( ⊗ ωY ). As done in the proof of Lemma 2.15, the derived functors of R i =
∗
i HomOY (i∗ OX , ) may be computed locally by resolving i∗ OX by the Koszul complex.
Since this complex has length −dX/Y , the cohomological dimension of F is smaller or
equal −dX/Y . As Y is smooth, every left OF,Y -module is the quotient of a locally free
left OF,Y -module ([EK04, Lemma 1.6.2]). Finally, for every locally free left OF,Y -module
P , Lemma 2.31 states that Rn F (P ) = 0 for all n 6= −dX/Y .
It follows from [Har66, Proposition I.7.4] that RF ∼
=
= Li∗ [dX/Y ] = i! because i∗ ∼
−dX/Y
R
F (Theorem 2.14). Thus
−1
⊗ ωX
) ◦ i! ◦ (

(

⊗ ωY ) ∼
= i! ,

i.e. the diagram
−1
⊗ωY

b (QCrys (Y ))
Dcrys
o
κ

/

⊗ωY

b (O
Dlfgu
F,Y )
i!

i!
−1
⊗ωX



b (QCrys (X))
Dcrys
o
κ

⊗ωX



/

b (O
Dlfgu
F,X )

is commutative.
Corollary 2.34. For every closed immersion of smooth, F -finite k-schemes i : X −→ Y ,
there is a canonical isomorphism
GY ◦i∗ ∼
= i∗ ◦ GX .
Proof. This follows formally as GX and GY are equivalences of categories and since i∗
is uniquely determined as a left adjoint functor of i! .
Proposition 2.35. Let j : X −→ Y be an open immersion of smooth, F -finite schemes.
Then there are natural isomorphisms
GX ◦j ∗ ∼
= j ! ◦ GY and GY ◦Rj∗ ∼
= j+ ◦ GX .
⊗ ωX −1 ◦ j ∗ ∼
Proof. We already have seen that
= j ∗ ◦ ⊗ ωY−1 (Proposition 2.19)
!
∗
∼
and that GenX ◦j = j ◦ GenY (see the proof of Corollary 2.30, this part holds for an
arbitrary flat morphism of smooth k-schemes). Therefore GX ◦j ∗ ∼
= j ! ◦ GY . The rest
∗
!
follows from the adjunction of Rj∗ or j+ and j or j .
Up to now, we have seen that the equivalence G between Cartier crystals and lfgu
modules is compatible with the (derived) push-forward for open and closed immersions
by showing the compatibility for the adjoint pull-back functors. In fact, G is compatible

40

with push-forward for arbitrary morphisms of smooth schemes, but we can give a proof
only up to the following theorem2 , which is a result of Lurie, see [Lur16, Theorem 1.3.3.2].
Theorem 2.36. Let F : D(A) −→ D(B) be a functor between derived categories of
abelian categories A and B, which is a morphism of triangulated categories. If F lifts to
an exact functor of the stable ∞-categories whose homotopy categories are the cohomologically bounded below derived categories D + (A) and D+ (B), if F is t-left exact for the
canonical t-structure, i.e. F maps D≥0 (A) to D≥0 (B), and if the cohomology of F (I)
is concentrated in degree 0 for every injective object I of A, then F arises as a right
derived functor between the abelian categories A and B.
Proposition 2.37. Let f : X −→ Y be a morphism of smooth, F -finite k-schemes. There
is a natural isomorphism
GY ◦Rf∗ −→ f+ ◦ GX
b (QCrys (X)) to D b (O
from Dcrys
F,Y ).
κ
lfgu
−1
by construction, it suffices to show that there
Proof. As ⊗ ωY−1 ◦ Rf∗ ∼
= Rf+ ◦ ⊗ ωX
b (QCrys (X)) to
is a natural isomorphism of functors Gen Rf+ −
→ f+ Gen from Dcrys
γ
b (O
•
•
Dlfgu
F,Y ). For every complex N of γ-sheaves, the complex Gen N of quasi-coherent
unit OF,X -modules has a two-term resolution by induced modules, namely the short
exact sequence
1−β ′

0 −→ OF,X ⊗OX N • −−−→ OF,X ⊗OX N • −→ Gen N • −→ 0
→ OF,X ⊗OX N • denotes the
of [EK04, Proposition 5.3.3]. Here β ′ : OF,X ⊗OX N • −
morphism corresponding to β via the identification
∼

r ∗
HomOF,X (OF,X ⊗OX A, OF,X ⊗OX B) −→ HomOX (A, ⊕∞
n=0 (FX ) B)

for OX -modules A and B described in 1.7.3 of ibid.
First we verify that the requirements of Theorem 2.36 are satisfied. Let I • be a
bounded below complex of injective γ-sheaves with H i (I • ) = 0 for i < 0. Let β : I • −
→
∗
•
i
FX I be the morphism of complexes induced by the structural morphisms of the I .
The complex f+ I • represents Rf+ I • and, as explained above, we have a short exact
sequence
1−f+ β ′

0 −→ OF,X ⊗OX f+ I • −−−−−→ OF,X ⊗OX f+ I • −→ Gen f+ I • −→ 0.
Applying f+ to the two-term resolution of Gen I • yields a distinguished triangle
f+ (1−β ′ )

f+ (OF,X ⊗OX I • ) −−−−−−→ f+ (OF,X ⊗OX I • ) −→ f+ (Gen I • ) −→ f+ (OF,X ⊗OX I • )[1].
2

We will not discuss this theorem here as its theoretical background, for example ∞-categories, goes
beyond the scope of this work. We just note that the requirement that f+ Gen lifts to a functor of the
corresponding stable ∞-categories is satisfied, because f+ is a composition of left and right derived
functors, which have this property ([Lur16, Example 1.3.3.4]).

41

The sheaf OF,Y ←X is locally free as an OX -module. It follows that locally OF,Y ←X ⊗OX I •
is a direct sum of flasque sheaves and hence flasque. We have
L

f+ (OF,X ⊗OX I • ) = Rf∗ (OF,Y ←X ⊗OF,X (OF,X ⊗OX I • ))
∼

−→ Rf∗ (OF,Y ←X ⊗OX I • )
∼

−→ f∗ (OF,Y ←X ⊗OX I • ),
see also [EK04, Lemma 3.5.1] and its proof. In particular, the complex f+ (OF,X ⊗OX I • )
is represented by the complex whose i-th degree equals the sheaf f+ (OF,X ⊗OX I i ).
∼
The canonical isomorphism OF,X ⊗OX f+ I • −→ f+ (OF,X ⊗OX I • ) of the proof of
[EK04, Theorem 3.5.3] makes the left hand square of the diagram
OF,X ⊗OX f+ I •

1−f+ β ′

/ OF,X ⊗O f+ I •
X

∼



f+ (OF,X ⊗OX I • )

/ Gen f+ I •
∼

∼
f+ (1−β ′ )



/ f+ (OF,X ⊗O I • )
X

(5)



/ f+ (Gen I • )

commutative ([EK04, Proposition 3.6.1]). This shows that the cohomology sheaves of
f+ (Gen I • ) vanish in negative degrees, i.e. f+ Gen is left t-exact for the canonical tstructure of the bounded derived category of γ-sheaves on X. Furthermore, for a single
injective γ-sheaf I on X, the upper row of the commutative diagram
OF,X ⊗OX f+ I

1−f+ β ′

/ OF,X ⊗O f+ I
X

∼



f+ (OF,X ⊗OX I)

/ Gen f+ I
∼

∼
f+ (1−β ′ )



/ f+ (OF,X ⊗O I)
X



/ f+ (Gen I)

is a short exact sequence when adding 0 at the ends. Consequently, the cohomology of
f+ Gen I is concentrated in degree 0.
To see that there is an isomorphism of functors Gen f+ ∼
= H 0 (f+ ) Gen, let M be
a γ-sheaf on X. Choose a resolution I • of M by injective γ-sheaves. The long exact cohomology sequences for the triangles of the diagram Equation 5 yield a unique
isomorphism
∼
Gen f+ M ∼
= H 0 (Gen Rf+ M ) = H 0 (Gen f+ I • ) −→ H 0 (f+ Gen I • ) ∼
= H 0 (f+ Gen M ).

By Theorem 2.36, the functor f+ Gen is the right derived functor of H 0 (f+ ) Gen. Furthermore, as Gen is exact, Gen Rf+ is the right derived functor of Gen f+ . Thus, there
is a natural equivalence Gen Rf+ ∼
= f+ Gen of functors from the bounded derived category of γ-sheaves on X to the bounded derived category of quasi-coherent unit left
b (QCrys (X)) and
OF,Y -modules. It induces an isomorphism of functors between Dcrys
γ
∼
b (O
b (µ (Y )) −→
b (O
Corollary
17.2.5]).
Dlfgu
)
because
D
D
)
([EK04,
F,Y
u
F,Y
lfgu

42

3 Adjunction for morphisms with proper support
This section is largely independent from the rest of the paper. We establish an extension
of the adjunction between Rf∗ and f ! for proper morphisms from Grothendieck-Serre
duality to the case where f is only proper over the support of the complexes considered.
We do not assume that the schemes are of characteristic p. However, all schemes
∗ (X) or D ∗ (X)
we consider are assumed to be Noetherian. For a scheme X, we let Dqc
c
with ∗ ∈ {+, −, b} denote the derived category of OX -modules with quasi-coherent or
coherent cohomology. Here ∗ = + or ∗ = − or ∗ = b means that we require that the
cohomology sheaves are bounded below or bounded above or bounded in both directions.
Recall the classical adjunction:
Theorem 3.1 ([Har66, VII, 3.4(c)]). Let f : X −→ Y be a proper morphism between
−
Noetherian schemes with Y admitting a dualizing complex. For F • ∈ Dcoh
(X) and
+
•
G ∈ Dcoh (Y ) the composition
Rf∗ RHom•OX (F • , f ! G • )

/ RHom• (Rf∗ F • , Rf∗ f ! G • )
OY
trf



RHom•OY (Rf∗ F • , G • )
is an isomorphism. Here the first morphism is the canonical one and the second is the
trace map.
In [Lip09], Lipman proves this theorem with weaker assumptions. For example, by
[Lip09, Corollary 4.4.2], Theorem 3.1 holds even if F • and G • only have quasi-coherent
cohomology.
In this section we relax the properness assumption and show the following:
Theorem 3.2. Let f : X −→ Y be a separated and finite type morphism of schemes and
let i : Z −→ Y and i′ : Z ′ −→ X be closed immersions with a proper morphism f ′ : Z ′ −→ Z
such that the diagram
Z′

i′

/X

f′



Z

f



i

/Y

commutes. Then there is a natural transformation trf : Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! −→ id such that, for
− (O ) and G • ∈ D + (O ) (see Definition 3.4), the composition
all F • ∈ Dqc
X Z
Y Z
qc
Rf∗ RHom•OX (F • , RΓZ ′ f ! G • )

/ RHom• (Rf∗ F • , Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! G • )
OY
trf



RHom•OY (Rf∗ F • , G • )
is an isomorphism. In particular, taking global sections, the functor Rf∗ is left adjoint
to the functor RΓZ ′ f ! .
Note that the properness of f ′ is equivalent to the properness of i ◦ f ′ .

43

3.1 Local cohomology
Let X be a topological space, Z a closed subset and F a sheaf of abelian groups on X.
The subsheaf ΓZ (F) of F is given by
U 7→ {s ∈ F(U ) | The support of s is contained in Z ∩ U },
see the beginning of Section 1 of [Har67]. The functor ΓZ is left exact, its right derived
functors are called local cohomology sheaves. Now we consider the more specific situation
where X is a Noetherian scheme. Let i : Z ֒−
→ X be a closed immersion and j : U ֒−
→X
the open immersion of the complement U = X\Z:
j

i

Z ֒→ X ←֓ U.
Let I be a sheaf of ideals defining Z. A priori, Γ′Z (F) := lim HomOX (OX /I n , F) is a
−→
n∈N

subsheaf of ΓZ (F) for an OX -module F. If F is quasi-coherent, we have Γ′Z (F) = ΓZ (F)
([Har67, Theorem 2.8]). In what follows, we consider local cohomology in the context
of derived categories and we restrict to quasi-coherent cohomology. Therefore we make
the following
Definition 3.3. The local cohomology functor RΓZ : Dqc (X) −
→ Dqc (X) is the derived
functor of the left exact functor
ΓZ := lim HomOX (OX /I n ,
−→

),

n∈N

where I is any sheaf of ideals defining Z.
A reference for this point of view is [ATJLL97]. For example, Definition 3.3 is equation
(0.1) of ibid.
Definition 3.4. We say that a complex F • of OX -modules has support in or on Z or
that F • is supported in or on Z if j ∗ F • = 0 in D(X). We write D(X)Z , Dqc (X)Z etc.
for the subcategory of objects of D(X), Dqc (X) etc. whose cohomology is supported on
Z.
The natural inclusion ΓZ −
→ id induces a transformation RΓZ −
→ id. As pointed out
in the proof of [ATJLL97, Lemma (0.4.2)], one has the following triangle:
Proposition 3.5. For every F • ∈ Dqc (X), there is a fundamental distinguished triangle
RΓZ F • −→ F • −→ Rj∗ j ∗ F • −→ RΓZ F • [1],
where the second map is the natural one from the adjunction of Rj∗ and j ∗ . This triangle
+ (X) and D b (X) because j ∗ is exact and Rj : D + (U ) −
restricts to the subcategories Dqc
→
∗
qc
qc
+
Dqc (X) has finite cohomological amplitude.
In particular, RΓZ only depends on the closed subset i(Z) and not on the scheme
structure of Z. The fundamental triangle allows another characterization of Dqc (X)Z :

44

Corollary 3.6. The subcategory Dqc (X)Z consists of all complexes F • ∈ Dqc (X) such
that the natural map RΓZ F • −→ F • is an isomorphism.
Lemma 3.7. If I is an injective quasi-coherent sheaf, then also the quasi-coherent sheaf
ΓZ (I) is injective.
Proof. It suffices to check the injectivity of ΓZ (I) locally. Thus the assertion follows
from ([BS13, Proposition 2.1.4]).
As RΓZ ◦ RΓZ ∼
= RΓZ , the image of RΓZ is exactly the subcategory Dqc (X)Z . Furthermore, the functor RΓZ is right adjoint to the inclusion Dqc (X)Z ֒−
→ Dqc (X). This
is a consequence of the following proposition, see the proof of Theorem 3.2.
Proposition 3.8. Let G • be a complex in Dqc (X)Z . Then there is a functorial isomorphism
RHom•OX (G • , RΓZ F • ) ∼
= RHom•OX (G • , F • )
for every F • ∈ Dqc (X).
Proof. This is [ATJLL97, Lemma (0.4.2)]. We even do not have to assume that the
cohomology sheaves of F • and G • are quasi-coherent.
L

Next we verify the compatibility of RΓZ with the derived functors Rf∗ , f ! and ⊗.
Lemma 3.9. Let f : X −→ Y be a morphism of finite type and i : Z −→ Y a closed
immersion. Let i′ : Z ′ −→ X denote the projection Z ′ := Z ×Y X −→ X.
(a) There is a natural isomorphism of functors
Rf∗ RΓZ ′ ∼
= RΓZ Rf∗ .
(b) If f is flat, then there is a natural isomorphism of functors
f ∗ RΓZ ∼
= RΓZ ′ f ∗ .
→ Y and v : V ֒−
→X
Proof. First we show that Rf∗ RΓZ ′ is supported on Z. Let u : U ֒−
be the open immersions of the complements of Z and Z ′ in Y and X. Let f ′ denote the
restriction of f to V . We obtain a cartesian square
V

v

/X

u



f′



U

f

/ Y.

Hence u∗ Rf∗ RΓZ ′ ∼
= Rf∗′ v ∗ RΓZ ′ = 0. From Proposition 3.8 we know that the canonical
→ Rf∗ factors through RΓZ Rf∗ . Let α denote the corresponding
morphism Rf∗ RΓZ ′ −
→ RΓZ Rf∗ .
morphism Rf∗ RΓZ ′ −

45

∼

Recall that the natural isomorphism bc: u∗ Rf∗ −→ Rf∗′ v ∗ is the adjoint of the composition
Rf∗ adv
∼
Rf∗ −−−−−→ Rf∗ Rv∗ v ∗ −→ Ru∗ Rf∗′ v ∗ .
Here adv is the unit of the adjunction between Rv∗ and v ∗ . The square
Ru∗ uO ∗ Rf∗

Ru∗ bc

/ Ru∗ Rf ′ v ∗
O ∗
∼

adu Rf∗

Rf∗

Rf∗ adv

/ Rf∗ Rv∗ v ∗

commutes because Ru∗ bc ◦ adu Rf∗ is the adjoint of bc and hence equals the original
morphism Rf∗ −
→ Ru∗ Rf∗′ v ∗ . Let β be the composition of the natural isomorphism
∗
Rf∗ Rv∗ v ≃ Ru∗ Rf∗′ v ∗ with the inverse of Ru∗ bc. We have just seen that the right
square of the diagram
Rf∗ RΓZ ′

/ Rf∗

/ Rf∗ Rv∗ v ∗
∼ β

α



RΓZ Rf∗

/ Rf∗


/ Ru∗ u∗ Rf∗

commutes. The left square commutes by construction. As the lines are distinguished
triangles, α is an isomorphism. This shows (a).
For (b) we proceed similarly. The cartesian square above gives rise to the isomorphism
f ∗ RΓZ

/ f∗

∼

∼



/ f ∗ Ru∗ u∗

RΓZ ′ f ∗

/ f∗


/ Rv∗ v ∗ f ∗

of distinguished triangles.
Remark 3.10. With the notation of part (b) of the preceding lemma, for every quasicoherent sheaf F, we even have a natural isomorphism
f ∗ ΓZ F ∼
= ΓZ ′ f ∗ F,
see [BS13, Lemma 4.3.1].
b (X). There are natural isomorphisms
Lemma 3.11. Let F • and G • be complexes in Dqc
L
L
L
(RΓZ F • ) ⊗OX G • ∼
= F • ⊗OX (RΓZ G • ) ∼
= RΓZ (F • ⊗OX G • )

in Dqc (X).

46

L

L

L

Proof. The natural map F • ⊗ RΓZ G • −
→ F • ⊗ G • factors through RΓZ (F • ⊗ RΓZ G • )
because
L
L
j ∗ (F • ⊗ RΓZ G • ) ∼
= j ∗ F • ⊗ j ∗ RΓZ G • ∼
= 0.
Let ρ denote the composition of the natural isomorphism
L
L
Rj∗ j ∗ (F • ⊗OX G • ) ∼
= Rj∗ (j ∗ F • ⊗OX j ∗ G • )

and the isomorphism from the projection formula
L
L
Rj∗ (j ∗ F • ⊗OX j ∗ G • ) ∼
= F • ⊗OX Rj∗ j ∗ G • .

We obtain a morphism of distinguished triangles
L

F • ⊗ RΓZ G •

L

L

/ F • ⊗ G•

/ F • ⊗ Rj∗ j ∗ G •
∼ ρ



RΓZ

(F •


L

⊗

G•)

L

L

/ F • ⊗ G•

/ Rj∗ j ∗ (F • ⊗ G • ).

Therefore, the left vertical arrow is an isomorphism. Analogously, one shows that
L
L
RΓZ F • ⊗ G • ∼
= RΓZ (F • ⊗ G • ).

Finally, for an open immersion j : X −
→ X, we study the connection between RΓZ
and RΓZ , where Z is the closure of Z in X.
Definition 3.12. Let Z and Z ′ be be closed subsets of a scheme X. We let Dqc (X)Z
Z
denote the full subcategory of Dqc (X)Z of complexes F • with RΓZ ′ ∼
=0

′

Proposition 3.13. Let j : X −→ X be an open immersion of schemes, Z ⊆ X a closed
subset and Z the closure of Z in X. The functors Rj∗ and j ∗ are inverse equivalences
Rj∗

Dqc (X)Z o

/

j∗

Z\X

Dqc (X)Z

.

Proof. Let u : U −
→ X and u′ : U ′ −
→ X denote the open immersions of the complements
U of Z in X and U ′ of Z in X. Let j ′ be the restriction of j to U . We obtain a cartesian
square
u /
U
X
j′



U′

j
u′

47


/ X.

bc

The natural isomorphism u′∗ Rj∗ −→ Rj∗′ u∗ shows that the essential image of Dqc (X)Z
under Rj∗ is a subcategory of Dqc (X)Z . The inclusion j factors through the open
immersions σ : X −
→ U ′ ∪ X and τ : U ′ ∪ X −
→ X. In particular, we have a natural
∼
isomorphism Rj∗ = Rτ∗ Rσ∗ . Since the composition
id−
→Rτ τ ∗
τ ∗ Rτ −
→id
Rτ∗ Rσ∗ −−−−−−∗−→ Rτ∗ τ ∗ Rτ∗ Rσ∗ −−−−∗−−−→ Rτ∗ Rσ∗

is the identity and the second morphism is an isomorphism, the first map is an isomorphism too. As τ is the open immersion of the complement of Z\X into X, it follows
from the distinguished triangle
RΓZ\X −→ id −→ Rτ∗ τ ∗ −→ RΓZ\X [1]
that RΓZ\X Rj∗ j ∗ = 0.
The adjunction morphism j ∗ Rj∗ −
→ id is always an isomorphism. It remains to show
Z\X
that the natural map id −
→ Rj∗ j ∗ is an isomorphism. For every F • in Dqc (X)Z , we
have F • ∼
= 0. It follows that
= RΓZ F • and RΓZ\X F • ∼
RΓX\X F • ∼
= RΓX\X RΓZ F •
∼
F•
= RΓ
Z\X

∼
= 0.
Thus the second morphism in the fundamental triangle
RΓX\X F • −→ F • −→ Rj∗ j ∗ F • −→ RΓX\X F • [1]
is an isomorphism.
Remark 3.14. In the standard reference [Har66, Corollary II.5.11], Hartshorne proves
that for a morphism f : X −
→ Y of schemes, the functor Lf ∗ from Dc− (Y ) to Dc− (X)
is left adjoint to the functor Rf∗ from D + (X) to D + (Y ). One the one hand, we can
relax the coherence assumption because in the case of an open immersion, which is a
flat morphism, f ∗ is exact. On the other hand, Proposition (3.2.1) of the more recent
reference [Lip09] shows this adjunction generally for ringed spaces and without any
boundedness or (quasi-)coherence assumptions on the complexes.
Corollary 3.15. If Z is a closed subset of a scheme X and j : X −→ X is an open
immersion such that the image of Z in X is closed, then there is a natural isomorphism
of functors
∼
ε : RΓZ −→ Rj∗ RΓZ j ∗ .
Proof. We define ε as the composition of the natural map RΓZ −
→ Rj∗ j ∗ RΓZ , which
∼
is an isomorphism by Proposition 3.13, and the natural isomorphism Rj∗ j ∗ RΓZ −→
Rj∗ RΓZ j ∗ .

48

For example, the condition that Z is also closed in X is satisfied if j : X −
→ X is
an open immersion of Y -schemes and i : Z −
→ X is a closed immersion of Y -schemes
over some base scheme Y such that the structural morphisms Z −
→ Y and X −
→ Y
are proper, see Lemma 3.23. When constructing the generalized trace map, we will be
exactly in this situation.
Lemma 3.16. Let j : X −→ X be an open immersion. Let Z ⊂ X be a closed subset
− (X) and G • ∈ D + (X), the natural
such that j(Z) is closed in Z. Then for F • ∈ Dqc
Z
qc
transformation
τ : Rj∗ RHom•OX (F • , G • ) −→ RHom•O (Rj∗ F • , Rj∗ G • )
X

is a functorial isomorphism.
Proof. Consider the following diagram
Rj∗ RHom•OX (F • , G • )

∼

/ Rj∗ RHom• (j ∗ Rj∗ F • , G • )
OX

τ



τ



∼ /
RHom•O (Rj∗ j ∗ Rj∗ F • , Rj∗ G • )
X
❱❱❱
❱❱❱❱❱
❱❱❱❱ ❱
❱ ❱❱❱❱
❱


RHom•O (Rj∗ F • , Rj∗ G • )
X

RHom•O (Rj∗ F • , Rj∗ G • ),
X

where the horizontal arrows are induced by the counit j ∗ Rj∗ −
→ id of adjunction –
these maps are isomorphisms by Corollary 3.15 since F • is supported in Z – and the
arrow to the bottom right corner stems from the unit id −
→ Rj∗ j ∗ of adjunction. The
upper square commutes because of the functoriality of τ . The triangle on the bottom
commutes because the composition of the unit and counit of an adjunction in the manner
of the diagram is canonically isomorphic to the identity. Hence the whole diagram is
commutative. Finally, the composition of the two vertical arrows on the right is an
isomorphism ([Lip09, Proposition (3.2.3)]. It follows that the vertical arrow on the left
is an isomorphism.

3.2 Adjunction for quasi-coherent sheaves
As pointed out in the introduction of this section, the adjunction between Rf∗ and
f ! for a proper morphism f : X −
→ Y is based on the trace map, which is a natural
transformation of functors
trf : Rf∗ f ! −
→ id .
The classical way to construct the trace is to define it for residual complexes and then
“pull ourselves up by our bootstraps”: As Y is regular, the structure sheaf OY is a dualizing sheaf, and hence in particular a pointwise dualizing complex. Its Cousin complex
K • := E • (OY ), see [Har66, IV.2], is an injective resolution of OX and an example for a
residual complex. We recall the basic facts from chapter 3.2 of [Con00].

49

Definition 3.17. For every x ∈ X, let ix denote the canonical morphism Spec(OX,x ) −
→
X. We set J (x) = ix∗ J(x), where J(x) is an injective hull of the residue field k(x)
considered as a module over OX,x . A residual complex K • on X is a complex in Dc+ (X)
of quasi-coherent injectives such that there is an isomorphism of OX -modules
M
n∈Z

Kn ∼
=

M

J (x).

x∈X

One can show that, given a residual complex K • , there is a unique function dK • : X −
→
N such that
M
Kn ∼
J (x).
=
dK • (x)=n

Restricting to residual complexes one can construct a functor g∆ : Res(Y ) −
→ Res(X)
♭
for every morphism g : X −
→ Y of finite type by gluing the functors g for finite g and g♯
for separated and smooth g. This gives rise to the twisted or exceptional inverse image
functor:
Definition 3.18. Let g : X −
→ Y be a morphism of finite type. We define the functor
+
+
!
→ Dcoh (X) by
g : Dcoh (Y ) −
g! = Dg∆ K • ◦ Lg∗ ◦ DK • ,
where D is the duality.
For proper f , we can define a map of complexes trf (K • ) : f∗ f ∆ K • −
→ K • ([Har66,
∆
!
VII, Theorem 2.1]), where f is the functor f for residual complexes, see [Har66, VI.3.].
With this map in hand one defines the natural transformation trf : Rf∗ f ! −
→ id in the
+
category Dcoh (Y ) as the unique map making the diagram
Rf∗ RHom•OX (Lf ∗ ◦ DK • ( ), f ∆ K • )

Rf∗ f !

∼



RHom•OY (DK • ( ), f∗ f ∆ K • )

trf

trf (K • )



id

∼


/ RHom• (DK • ( ), K • )
OY

commutative. Here the first vertical isomorphism on the right is the natural isomorphism
from the adjunction of Rf∗ and Lf ∗ . Note that f ∆ (K • ) is injective, hence f∗ f ∆ (K • )
computes Rf∗ f ∆ (K • ).
Instead of constructing the twisted inverse image functor f ! by pasting it from special
situations such as smooth and proper maps, Lipman uses a more abstract method,
the Special Adjoint Functor Theorem, to obtain a right adjoint of Rf∗ under weak
assumptions on the morphism f . Then he extends this result to a “sheafified duality”,
+ (Y ) and quasi-proper f , a natural isomorphism
i.e. for F • ∈ Dqc (X), G • ∈ Dqc
→ RHom•OY (Rf∗ F • , G • ).
Rf∗ RHom•OX (F • , f ! G • ) −

50

The compatibility of the approaches of [Har66] and [Lip09] is involved, as pointed out
in the introduction of [Lip09].
Let us recall some results of the trace for proper morphisms.
→ Y of schemes is called residuDefinition 3.19 ([Har66, VI. 5.]). A morphism f : X −
ally stable if it is flat, integral and the fibers of f are Gorenstein.
Lemma 3.20 ([Lip09, Corollary 4.4.3]). Let f : X −→ Y be proper and let g : Y ′ −→ Y
be flat. Let f ′ and g′ be the projections of X ×Y Y ′ such that the square
g′

Y ′ ×Y X

/X

f′

f





g

Y′

/Y

∼

is cartesian. The morphism β : g′∗ f ! −→ f ′! g∗ , defined as the adjoint of the composition
g ∗ trf

bc−1 f !

Rf∗′ g′∗ f ! −−−−→ g∗ Rf∗ f ! −−−→ g∗ ,
is an isomorphism.
Let us recall two compatibilities of the trace, which usually are known as “TRA 1”
and “TRA 4”.
Lemma 3.21. Let f : X −→ Y be a proper morphism of schemes.
(a) (TRA 1) If g : Y −→ Z is another proper morphism, then there is a commutative
diagram
R(gf )∗ (gf )!

trg◦f

∼

/ id
O
trg



Rg∗ Rf∗ f ! g!

trf

/ Rg∗ g !

where the first vertical arrow is the natural isomorphism.
(b) (TRA 4) For a flat morphism g : Y ′ −→ Y , there is a commutative diagram
g ∗ trf

g∗ Rf∗ f !

trf ′ g ∗

∼ bc



Rf∗′ g′∗ f !

/ g∗
O

Rf∗′ β
∼

/ Rf ′ f ′! g ∗ ,
∗

where g′ and f ′ are the two projections of X ×Y Y ′ .
Proof. (a) is [Har66, Corollary VII.3.4]. The diagram in (b) commutes by construction
of β: The composition trf ′ g∗ ◦ Rf∗′ β is the adjoint of the adjoint of the composition
u∗ trf ◦ bc−1 , see Lemma 3.20.

51

Remark 3.22. Part (b) of the preceding lemma holds under the milder assumption that
f is of finite Tor-dimension, see [Lip09, Corollary 4.4.3]. In this more general case one
considers the left derived functors Lf ∗ and Lf ′∗ . However, we will need the compatibility
of the trace with pullback only for flat morphisms.
From now on we do not assume that f is proper. We are interested in the case where
f: X −
→ Y is a separated morphism of finite type of smooth Noetherian schemes and
i: Z −
→ Y and i′ : Z ′ −
→ X are closed immersions with a proper morphism f ′ : Z ′ −
→Z
′
such that f ◦ i = i ◦ f ′ . The compactification theorem of Nagata ([Nag62], see also
[Lüt93] for a more recent proof) states that there exists a factorization of f into an open
immersion j : X −
→ X and a proper morphism f : X −
→Y.
Lemma 3.23. Let f : X −→ Y be a morphism of schemes that factors through an open
immersion j : X −→ X followed by a proper morphism f : X −→ Y . Then for every
closed immersion i : Z −→ X such that f ◦ i is proper, the composition j ◦ i is also a
closed immersion.
Proof. We have to show that j(i(Z)) is closed in X (which is a special case of the first
part of exercise II.4.4 of [Har77]). By assumption the composition f ◦ j ◦ i = f ◦ i is
proper and f is proper, in particular f is separated. Hence by [Har77, Corollary II.4.8],
j ◦ i is proper, which implies that the image j(i(Z)) is closed.
The following generalization of the trace map stems from [CR12]. Our construction
is similar to the morphism Trf from Corollary 1.7.6 of ibid.
Definition 3.24. For a morphism f : X −
→ Y of finite type and closed immersions
′
′
i: Z −
→ Y and i : Z −
→ X with a proper morphism f ′ : Z ′ −
→ Z such that f ◦ i′ = i ◦ f ′ ,
choose a compactification, i.e. an open immersion j : X −
→ X and a proper morphism
f: X −
→ X with f ◦ j = f . We obtain the following commutative diagram:
Z′



i′

f′

 

Z

i

/X

j

/X
⑦
⑦
⑦
f ⑦⑦
⑦f
⑦
 ~⑦

/Y

We define the trace of f as the morphism of functors
→ id
trf,Z = trf : Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! −
+ (O ) given by the composition
on Dqc
Y
!
→id
! Rf ε−1 f
! RΓ ′ −
! trf
∼
Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! −→ Rf ∗ Rj∗ RΓZ ′ j ∗ f −−−∗−−−→ Rf ∗ RΓZ ′ f −−−Z−−−−→ Rf ∗ f −−→ id,

where ε is the isomorphism of Corollary 3.15 and the last morphism is the classical
Grothendieck-Serre trace for the proper map f .

52

∼ RΓZ Rf∗ f ! (Lemma 3.9), the complex Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! is supported
Because Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! =
on Z. By Proposition 3.8, trf factors through RΓZ , i.e. there is a commutative diagram
trf

Rf∗ RΓZ▲′ f !

▲▲▲
▲▲▲
▲▲▲
e
trf
%

/ id,
③=
③
③③
③③
③
③

RΓZ

e f is induced by trf and the map RΓZ −
where tr
→ id is the natural one. We will not
e
distinguish between trf and trf . For a residual complex E • , the trace is a morphism of
∆

complexes because f ∆ E • and f E • are residual complexes and ΓZ preserves injectives.
Of course we have to show that trf is well-defined, i.e. it does not depend on the choice
of a compactification. The next lemma prepares the proof of this independence.

Lemma 3.25. Let f : X −→ Y be an open immersion. Let Z ⊆ X be a closed subset
j

f

→ Y , the map
such that f (Z) is closed in Y . Then for every compactification X −
→X−
trf equals the inverse Rf∗ RΓZ f ∗ ∼
= RΓZ of the isomorphism of Corollary 3.15 followed
by the natural morphism RΓZ −→ id.
Proof. Let α : RΓZ −
→ id denote the canonical morphism of functors. The claim of the
lemma is the commutativity of the diagram
Rf∗ RΓZ f ∗

∼

/ Rf Rj∗ RΓZ j ∗ f !
∗
∼ Rf ε−1 f !
∗

∼ ε−1





RΓZ

Rf ∗ RΓZ f

α

!

Rf ∗ αf



trf



id o

∗

!

Rf ∗ f ,

where ε is the isomorphism of Corollary 3.15. Let Z ′ be the closed subset f
contains Z. Let ϕ denote the composition
!

!

−1

(Z), which

! trf

∼

Rf ∗ RΓZ f −
→ Rf ∗ RΓZ ′ f −→ RΓZ Rf ∗ f −−→ RΓZ
of canonical transformations obtained from the natural transformation RΓZ −
→ RΓZ ′ ,
the isomorphism of Lemma 3.9 and the trace. It fits into the commutative diagram
RΓZ o

ϕ

Rf ∗ RΓZ f

α



id o

!

Rf ∗ αf



trf

!

Rf ∗ f .

53

!

Hence it suffices to show that
∼

Rf∗ RΓZ f ∗

/ Rf Rj∗ RΓZ j ∗ f !
∗
∼ Rf ε−1 f !
∗

∼ ε−1





ϕ

RΓZ o

Rf ∗ RΓZ f

!

commutes. This diagram can be extracted from the following bigger diagram:
Rf∗ RΓZ f ∗

∼

∼



RΓZ Rf
f∗
O ∗

∼

/ Rf Rj∗ RΓZ j ∗ f !
∗
❘❘❘
❘❘❘
❘❘∼❘
∼
❘❘❘
❘)

!
!
∼
∗
/ RΓZ Rf Rj∗ j f o
Rf ∗ RΓZ ′ Rj∗ j ∗ f
∗O
O

∼ adf

RΓZ o

∼ adj

∼ adj
!
RΓZ Rf ∗ f o

tr

∼

!

Rf ∗ RΓZ ′ f .

Here adf and adj denote the units of adjunction as in the proof of Lemma 3.9. The only
part whose commutativity is not obvious is the bottom left square. For this it is enough
to show that the diagram
Rf ∗ f

!

✇✇
✇✇
✇
adf
✇
✇✇

✇
adj ✇✇
!
✇
Rf∗ f ∗ Rf ∗ f
✇✇
✇
✇✇
✇✇
✇
bc
✇

{✇✇
!
!
∼
Rf ∗ Rj∗ j ∗ f o
Rf∗ Rf∗′ j ∗ f
∼



Rf ∗ Rj∗ f ′∗ f ∗ o

tr

/ id

Rf∗ f ∗ trf



(6)

adf

/ Rf∗ f ∗

∼



∼

Rf∗ Rf∗′ f ′∗ f ∗

Rf∗ trf ′ f ∗

/ Rf∗ f ∗

commutes. Here the morphism bc is the base change morphism with respect to the
cartesian square
X′

j

/X

f′



X

f
f



/ Y.

The commutativity of the upper left triangle of the diagram Equation 6 was part of
the proof of Lemma 3.9. The upper square of this diagram commutes by naturality of
adf and the commutativity of the square below follows from Lemma 3.20. Finally, the
→ Rf ∗ Rj∗ .
bottom left square commutes by naturality of the transformation Rf∗ Rf∗′ −

54

Lemma 3.26. The map trf is well-defined, i.e. it is independent of the choice of the
compactification j : X ֒−
→ X.
→ X 2 be two open immersions with proper morProof. Let j1 : X −
→ X 1 and j2 : X −
phisms f1 : X 1 −
→ Y and f2 : X 2 −
→ Y such that f = f1 ◦ j1 = f2 ◦ j2 . By considering
X 1 ×Y X 2 we can reduce to the case that there is a proper morphism g : X 1 −
→ X 2 such
that g ◦ j1 = j2 , i.e. the diagram
X❆

❆❆
❆❆j2
❆❆
❆

⑤⑤
⑤⑤
⑤
⑤ f
}⑤
⑤
j1

X1 ❈
❈

/ X2
g
⑥
❈❈
⑥
⑥
❈❈
⑥⑥
f1 ❈❈  ⑥⑥ f2
! ~⑥

Y

commutes. That trf is well-defined means exactly that the following diagram of functors
is commutative:
Rf RΓ f !

∗
Z ❚
❚❚❚❚
✐✐✐
❚❚❚∼
∼✐✐✐✐✐
❚❚❚❚
∼
✐
✐
✐
❚❚❚❚
✐
*

t✐✐✐✐
∼
∼
/ Rf2 j2 RΓZ j ! f !
Rf1 ∗ Rj1 ∗ RΓZ j1! f1! o
Rf2 ∗ Rg∗ Rj1 ∗ RΓZ j1! g! f2!
∗ ∗
2 2



Rf1 ∗ RΓZ f1! o


∼





Rf2 ∗ Rg∗ RΓZ g! f2!


Rf2 ∗ RΓZ f2!
Rf

tr f !



2∗ g 2
∼
/ Rf2 Rf !
Rf1 ∗ f1! o❯❯
Rf2 ∗ Rg∗ g! f2!
∗
2
❯❯❯❯
✐
✐
✐
✐
❯❯❯❯
✐
✐
✐
✐
❯❯❯❯
✐
trf2 ◦g
✐
✐✐✐✐
trf1 ❯❯❯❯❯❯
❯❯*  t✐✐✐✐✐✐ trf2
id .

Here the six vertical arrows in the middle are the natural maps occurring in the definition
of trf . The only part of which the commutativity is not obvious is the bigger rectangle
on the right hand side, which follows from Lemma 3.25 after canceling Rf2 ∗ and f2! from
the edges of the terms.
Note that the independence of trf of the chosen compactification implies that trf
equals the classical trace map whenever f is proper.
Proposition 3.27. The map trf is compatible with residually stable base change: For
a residually stable morphism g : S −→ Y , let f ′ and g′ be the projections of S ×Y X.
Furthermore, let ZS and ZS′ be the preimages of Z and Z ′ in S and S ×Y X. Then the

55

diagram
g ∗ trf

g∗ Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f !

/ g∗
O

bc ∼



Rf∗′ g′∗ RΓZ ′ f !

trf ′ g ∗

∼



Rf∗′ RΓZS′ g′∗ f !

Rf∗′ RΓZ ′ β
S

/ Rf ′ RΓ ′ f ′! g ∗
Z
∗
S

commutes. Here β is the isomorphism of Lemma 3.20.
Proof. First we treat the case of an open immersion u : U −
→ Y . Let h : S −
→ Y be a
residually stable morphism and let u′ and h′ denote the projections of S ×Y U . Again, we
let adu , adu′ , adh′ and adh◦u′ denote the units of adjunction. The natural isomorphisms
Ru∗ Rh′∗ ∼
= u′∗ h∗ are compatible with the adjunction of (u ◦ h′ )∗
= Rh∗ Ru′∗ and h′∗ u∗ ∼
and R(u ◦ h′ )∗ , i.e. the diagram
id

adh◦u′

/ Rh∗ Ru′ u′∗ h∗

∼

/ Rh∗ Ru′ h′∗ u∗
∗

/ Ru∗ Rh′ h′∗ u∗

∼

/ Rh∗ Ru′ h′∗ u∗
∗

∗

adu



Ru∗ u∗

adh′

∗

of natural maps commutes. Passing to the adjoint maps we see that the square
adu′

h∗

/ Ru′ u′∗ h∗
∗O

adu

∼



h∗ Ru∗ u∗

bc

/ Ru′ h′∗ u∗
∗

is commutative. Applying the derived local cohomology functor and taking the inverse
of the now invertible units of adjunction (Corollary 3.15), we obtain the commutative
diagram
h∗ tru

h∗ Ru∗ RΓZ ′ u∗

d

bc



Ru′∗ h′∗ RΓZ ′ u∗

∼

/ h∗
O
tru′ h∗

(
/ Ru′ RΓ ′ u′∗ h∗ ,
Z
∗
U

bc

∼

where d denote the composition h∗ Ru∗ RΓZ ′ u∗ −→ Ru′∗ h′∗ RΓZ ′ u∗ −→ Ru′∗ RΓZU′ u′∗ h∗ .
f

j

j′

f′

→ Y of f . Then S ×Y X −
→ S ×Y X −→ S is
Now we choose a compactification X −
→X −
′
′
′
→X
a compactification of f where j := id ×j and f is the projection. Let g′ : S ×Y X −

56

denote the projection onto X. The three squares in the commutative diagram
g′

S8 ×Y X

rr
rrr
r
rr
rr
j′

g′

S ×Y X

/X

/X
⑧?
⑧
j ⑧⑧
⑧⑧
⑧⑧
f

f′

f′

f

 }

 
/Y

g

S

are cartesian. It suffices to show the commutativity of
g∗ f ∗ j∗ ΓZ ′ j ∗ f

!

bc

/ f ′ g ′ ∗ j∗ ΓZ ′ j ∗ f !
∗

∼ trj

∼ trj





g ∗ f ∗ ΓZ ′ f

!

bc

/ f ′ j ′ Γ ′ j ′∗ g ′ ∗ f !
∗ ∗ Z

d

β

S

/ f ′ j ′ Γ ′ j ′∗ f ′ ! g ∗
∗ ∗ Z
S

∼ trj ′

∼ trj ′

/ f ′ g ′ ∗ ΓZ ′ f !
∗



/ f ′ Γ ′ g′ ∗ f !
∗ Z

∼

β

S


/ f ′ Γ ′ f ′ ! g∗
∗ Z
S

tr

trf



id

g∗

f′



/ g∗ ,

where we left out the R indicating derived functors to streamline the notation. The
first and the third upper square commute because of the naturality of trj and trj ′ . The
commutativity of the upper square in the middle is the case of an open immersion, which
we have already seen. Finally, the commutativity of the bottom rectangle is the case of
a proper morphism (Lemma 3.21).
Proposition 3.28. Let f : X −→ Y and g : Y −→ S be separated and finite type morphisms of schemes. Assume that i : Z −→ S, i′ : Z ′ −→ Y and i′′ : Z ′′ −→ X are closed
immersions with proper morphisms f ′ : Z ′′ −→ Z ′ and g′ : Z ′ −→ Z making the diagram
Z ′′

i′′

/X

f′



Z′

f
i′



/Y
g

g′



Z

i



/S

commutative. Then there is a commutative diagram:
R(g ◦ f )∗ RΓZ ′′ (g ◦ f )!
∼



❲❲❲❲❲
❲❲❲❲❲
❲❲❲❲❲trg◦f
❲❲❲❲❲
❲❲❲❲❲
❲❲❲❲❲
❲❲❲+
!
!
/
/
′

Rg∗ Rf∗ RΓZ ′′ f ! g

Rg∗ trf g !

57

Rg∗ RΓZ g

trg

id .

g

j

Y
→ S of g, then choose a compactification
Proof. Choose a compactification Y −→
Y −

j

f′

X −X
→ X −→ Y of the composition jY ◦ f . The morphisms f and jX induce a morphism
→ Y is proper because it is the base
h: X −
→ Y ×Y X. The projection prY : Y ×Y X −
′
change of the proper morphism f . The projection prX : X ×Y X −
→ X is a base change
of jY and hence an open immersion. We obtain the following commutative diagram:
pr

h

X
/Y × X
/X
Y
✇✇
✇
✇
✇
✇✇
✇✇
f
✇✇f ′
✇✇prY
✇
✇
 {✇✇
{✇✇
/Y
Y
jY ✈✈
✈✈
g
✈✈
✈
 z✈✈✈ g

X

S.

Because prX ◦h equals the open immersion jX , it follows that h is an open immersion
too. Applying the compatibility of the classical trace with compositions to the proper
morphisms f ′ and g and using Proposition 3.27 for f ′ and the open immersion jY , we
see that the following diagram commutes:
∼

(g ◦ f )∗ ΓZ ′′ (g ◦ f )!

/ (g ◦ f ′ ◦ pr ◦h)∗ ΓZ ′′ (g ◦ f ′ ◦ pr ◦h)!
X
X

∼

∼



∼

g ∗ jY ∗ prY ∗ h∗ ΓZ ′′ h∗ pr!Y jY∗ g !
ε−1
h


/ g f ′ pr h∗ ΓZ ′′ h∗ pr∗ f ′! g !
∗ ∗
X∗
X

∼

∼

ε−1
h


∼
′ pr
∗ f ′! g !
/ g jY ∗ j ∗ f ′ ΓZ ′′ f ′! g ! o
′′ pr
g
f
Γ
Z
∗
∗
∗
∗
Y
X∗
X
❯❯❯❯
❯❯❯❯ ∼
−1
❯
❯
trf ′
trprY
❯❯❯❯
∼ εpr
X
❯❯❯❯
ε−1



*
jY
∼
/ g jY ∗ j ∗ ΓZ ′ g !
g∗ jY ∗ ΓZ ′ jY∗ g !
g f ′ ΓZ ′′ f ′! g !
∗
Y
❚❚❚❚
✐ ∗rr∗
✐
✐
✐
❚❚❚❚∼
trf ′ ✐✐✐✐
r
❚❚❚❚
∼ ε−1
rrr
✐✐✐✐
jY
r
✐
✐
r
❚
−1
✐
❚
✐
❚❚)
εj

rr
t✐✐✐✐
Y
rrr
r
r
g ∗ ΓZ ′ g !
rrtr ′
rrr (g◦f )
r
r
trg
rrr
 xrrr


g∗ jY ∗ prY ∗ ΓZ ′′ pr!Y jY∗ g !

∼
ψ

id .

Again we left out the R for derived functors to streamline the notation. Here, for an
open immersion s, εs denotes the isomorphism of Corollary 3.15 or simple modifications,
εjY
such as a canonical isomorphism RΓZ ′ −→
RjY ∗ j ∗ RΓZ ′ , and ψ is obtained from the
composition
β −1

bc−1

prY ∗ pr!Y jY∗ −−→ prY ∗ pr∗X f ′! −−−→ jY∗ f∗′ f ′! .
The morphism trg ◦(Rg∗ trf g! ) is obtained by following the vertical and diagonal arrows
on the left, while trg◦f is the composition of the outer right morphisms.

58

Proof of Theorem 3.2. Consider the commutative diagram
Rf∗ RHom•OX (F • , RΓZ ′ f ! G • )

Rf ∗ RHom•O

X

❳❳❳❳❳
❳❳❳❳❳
❳❳❳❳❳
❳❳❳❳❳
❳❳❳,

! •
∗
•
/ RHom• (Rf∗ F • , Rf Rj∗ RΓZ ′ j ∗ f ! G • )
(Rj∗ F , Rj∗ RΓZ ′ j f G )
∗
OY
ε−1




/ RHom• (Rf∗ F • , Rf RΓZ ′ f ! G • )
∗
OY

!

Rf ∗ RHom•O (Rj∗ F • , RΓZ ′ f G • )
X




/ RHom• (Rf∗ F • , Rf f ! G • )
OY
∗

!

Rf ∗ RHom•O (Rj∗ F • , f G • )
X

❳❳❳❳❳❳
❳❳❳❳❳
❳❳❳❳❳❳
❳❳❳❳❳❳
❳❳,



RHom•OY (Rf∗ F • , G • )

of natural morphisms. The vertical arrows on the left are isomorphisms by Lemma 3.16,
Corollary 3.15 and Proposition 3.8. The diagonal morphism to the lower right corner is
the well-known isomorphism from the adjunction for the proper morphism f . Hence the
composition of the first diagonal morphism and the vertical morphisms on the right is
an isomorphism.
Finally, for the adjunction of Rf∗ and RΓZ ′ f ! , we apply the degree zero cohomology
of the right derived functor of global sections H 0 RΓ to both sides of the just proven
isomorphism
∼

RHom•OY (Rf∗ F • , G • ) −→ Rf∗ RHom•OX (F • , RΓZ ′ f ! G • ).
Then we use the natural isomorphisms
∼

H 0 RΓRHom•OY (Rf∗ F • , G • ) −→ H 0 RHom•OY (Rf∗ F • , G • )
∼

−→ HomD(OY ) (Rf∗ F • , G • )
of Proposition II.5.3 and Theorem I.6.4 of [Har66] and similarly for
H 0 RΓRf∗ RHom•OX (F • , RΓZ ′ f ! G • ),
where we additionally use the isomorphism RΓ(X,
II.5.2 of ibid.

∼

) −→ RΓ(Y, Rf∗ ( )) of Proposition

We conclude this section with a statement which, under certain hypothesis, allows us
to recover the trace trf by its application to the structure sheaf OY .

59

Definition 3.29. For a separated morphism f : X −
→ Y of finite type, a compactificaj

f

+ (Y ), let
tion X −
→X −
→ Y and F • ∈ Dqc
L

→ f !F •
χfF • : f ! OY ⊗OX Lf ∗ F • −
L

!

∗

!

→ f F • is the adjoint of the compobe the morphism j ∗ ϕ, where ϕ : f OY ⊗OX Lf F • −
sition
!

L

ρ

∗

!

trf

L

→ Rf ∗ (f OY ) ⊗OY F • −−→ OY ⊗OY F • .
Rf ∗ (f OY ⊗OX Lf F • ) −
Here ρ denotes the isomorphism of the projection formula. The morphism χfF • is independent of the choice of the compactification [Nay09, Proposition 5.8]. If χf is an
isomorphism of functors, then the morphism f is called essentially perfect.
Theorem 5.9 of [Nay09] Nayak gives various characterizations of essentially perfect
morphisms. For example, smooth morphisms between smooth schemes are essentially
perfect.
Proposition 3.30. Let f be an essentially perfect map. Under the assumptions and
with the notation of Theorem 3.2, there is a commutative diagram
L

Rf∗ RΓZ ′ (f ! OY ⊗OX Lf ∗ F • )

χfF •

/ Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! F •

ρ

trf


L

Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! OY ⊗OY F •

trf ⊗ id


/ F•

+ (Y ). Here ρ denotes the isomorphism of the projection formula and
for every F • ∈ Dqc
Lemma 3.11.

60

Proof. We have to verify that the diagram
Rf∗ RΓZ ′ (f ! OY

L

χfF •

Lf ∗ F • )

⊗ OX

/ Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! F •

∼

(7)

∼


L

!
Rf ∗ Rj∗ RΓZ ′ (j ∗ f OY

⊗



∗
j ∗ Lf F • )

!

Rf ∗ Rj∗ RΓZ ′ j ∗ f F •

ρ


L

!

∗

Rf ∗ (Rj∗ RΓZ ′ j ∗ f OY ⊗ Lf F • )

∼ ε−1

ε−1 ∼


L

!


/ Rf RΓZ ′ f ! F •
∗

ϕ

∗

Rf ∗ (RΓZ ′ f OY ⊗ Lf F • )
ρ


L

trf

Rf∗ RΓZ ′ f ! OY ⊗OY F •
trf ⊗ id




/ F•

∼

OY ⊗ F •

commutes. The upper rectangle commutes because the projection formula is compatible
with the unit id −
→ Rj∗ j ∗ of adjunction, which we denote by adj . More precisely, it
follows from the commutativity of the diagram
!

L

L

∗

/ Rj∗ j ∗ (f ! OY ⊗ Lf ∗ F • )

f OY ⊗ Lf F •




!
(Rj∗ j ∗ f OY

L

∗

) ⊗ Lf F •
/

!
Rj∗ j ∗ ((Rj∗ j ∗ f OY

L

⊗

∗

∼

proj


!
Rj∗ (j ∗ f OY

L

) ⊗ Lf F • )

∗
j ∗ Lf F • )

ej
ad
o


!
Rj∗ (j ∗ (Rj∗ j ∗ f OY

L

∗

) ⊗ j ∗ Lf F • ),

where the maps of the upper square stem from adj – this square commutes by the naturality of the unit of adjunction –, where proj is the isomorphism from the projection
formula and where the lower horizontal arrow is obtained from the counit of adjuncf j : j ∗ Rj∗ −
tion ad
→ id. The lower rectangle commutes by construction of proj. The
composition
e j j∗
ad

j ∗ adj

j ∗ −−−→ j ∗ Rj∗ j ∗ −−−→ j ∗
is the identity. Therefore, the composition of the vertical arrows on the right hand side
and the lower horizontal arrow equals Rj∗ applied to the natural isomorphism
!

L

∗

!

L

∗

→ j ∗ f OY ⊗ j ∗ Lf F • .
j ∗ (f OY ⊗ Lf F • ) −

61

The bottom rectangle of the diagram Equation 7 commutes by construction of χfF • .

4 Locally finitely generated unit modules on singular schemes
For a proper map f : X −
→ Y of smooth k-schemes, Emerton and Kisin proved that
there is a natural isomorphism
∼

RHom•OF,Y (f+ M• , N • ) −→ Rf∗ RHom•OF,X (M• , f ! N • )
•
b
b (O
for M• ∈ Dqc
F,X ) and N ∈ Dqc (OF,Y ) ([EK04, Theorem 4.4.1]) by constructing
a trace map acting as the counit of adjunction. We generalize this trace map to separated and finite type morphisms f : X −
→ Y between smooth k-schemes sitting in a
commutative diagram

Z′

i′

/X

f′



Z

f
i



/ Y,

where i and i′ are closed immersions and f ′ is proper. This generalized trace map
induces an adjunction between f+ and RΓZ ′ f ! considered as functors between the derived
b
b (O
categories Dlfgu
F,X )Z ′ and Dlfgu (OF,Y )Z of complexes whose cohomology sheaves are
′
supported in Z or Z.

4.1 Generalization of Emerton-Kisin’s adjunction
Proposition 4.1. Let f : X −→ Y be a separated and finite type morphism of smooth
k-schemes and let i : Z −→ Y and i′ : Z ′ −→ X be closed immersions with a proper
morphism f ′ : Z ′ −→ Z such that f ◦ i′ = i ◦ f ′ .
(a) There is a natural morphism
trF,f : f+ RΓZ ′ OF,X [dX/Y ] −→ OF,Y
of (OF,Y , OF,Y )-bimodules which, as a morphism of left OF,Y -modules, is the trace
OF,Y ⊗OY Rf∗ RΓZ ′ ωX/Y [dX/Y ] −→ OF,Y
of Definition 3.24.
b (O
(b) For every M• ∈ Dqc
F,Y ), the trace map trF,f induces a morphism

trF,f (M• ) : f+ RΓZ ′ f ! M• −→ M•
b (O
in Dqc
F,Y ).

62

Proof. (a) This is an analogue of [EK04, Proposition 4.4.9 (i)]. A careful reading of the
proof shows that we can adopt it. Consider the relative Frobenius diagram (diagram
Equation 1 on page 15):
FX/Y

X❇

/ X′

❇❇
❇❇
❇
f ❇❇ 

FY′

/X

f′

Y

f
FY



/ Y.

Since X and Y are assumed to be smooth k-schemes, we still have flatness of the Frobenius FY and therefore of FY′ because flatness is stable under base change. Note that
FX/Y is finite ([EK04, A.2]). First Emerton and Kisin explain how the relative Cartier
operator
CX/Y : FX/Y ∗ ωX/Y −
→ FY′∗ ωX/Y
is realized for the residual complex f ∆ E • . Here E • denotes the Cousin complex E • (OX ).
For our result we replace f ∆ E • by the subcomplex ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • of flasque sheaves which
computes RΓZ ′ ωX/Y . We obtain the relative Cartier operator with support on Z ′ :
Z
→ FY′∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • .
CX/Y
: FX/Y ∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • −

By Proposition-Definition 1.10.1 of [EK04], f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • is equipped with
a (f −1 OF,Y , OF,X )-bimodule structure or, after restricting scalars via the natural map
f −1 OY [F ] −
→ OX [F ], with a (f −1 OF,Y , f −1 OF,Y )-bimodule structure. Finally this endows f∗ (f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • ) with the structure of a (OF,Y , OF,Y )-bimodule, the
one from the definition of f+ RΓZ ′ OF,X .
Z
But there is another way to look at this bimodule: The map CX/Y
gives rise to a
morphism
→ FY∗ f∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E •
σ : f ∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • −
by the composition
∼

Z
CX/Y

bc−1

f∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • −→ f∗′ FX/Y ∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • −−−→ f∗′ FY′∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • −→ FY∗ f∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • ,
where the first isomorphism is deduced from f = f ′ ◦ FX/Y and the last isomorphism
is flat base change. Now Proposition-Definition 1.10.1 of ibid. in the special case of the
morphism idY yields a (OF,Y , OF,Y )-bimodule structure on OF,Y ⊗OY f∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • . The
isomorphism
f∗ (f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • ) ∼
= OF,Y ⊗OY f∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E •
stemming from the projection formula is compatible with the constructed bimodule
structure for both complexes by Lemma 1.10.6 of ibid. Hence it suffices to show that trF,f
induces a morphism between the (OF,Y , OF,Y )-bimodule OF,Y ⊗OY f∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E • and E •
equipped with the structure of a (OF,Y , OF,Y )-bimodule via the canonical isomorphism

63

∼

E • −→ FY∗ E • induced from the Frobenius OY −
→ FY∗ OY . Lemma 1.10.2 of ibid. applied
to the identity morphism on Y reduces to the commutativity of the diagram
trF,f

f ∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E •

/ E•
∼

σ



FY∗

FY∗ f∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E •

trF,f



/ F ∗ E•
Y

of complexes. For this we have to see that the following bigger diagram commutes:
trf

f ∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E •

/ E•

∼



∆ f ′∆ E •
f∗′ FX/Y ∗ ΓZ ′ FX/Y

trFX/Y

/ f ′ ΓZ ′ f ′∆ E •
∗

∼



∆ f ′∆ F ∗ E •
f∗′ FX/Y ∗ ΓZ ′ FX/Y
Y

∆ F ′∗ f ∆ E •
f∗′ FX/Y ∗ ΓZ ′ FX/Y
Y

/ E•
∼

∼
trFX/Y

β ∼



trf ′



/ f ′ ΓZ ′ f ′∆ F ∗ E •
∗
Y

trf ′



/ F ∗ E•
Y

β ∼
trFX/Y


/ f ′ ΓZ ′ F ′∗ f ∆ E •
∗
Y
∼



f∗′ FY′∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E •
bc−1 ∼



FY∗ f∗ ΓZ ′ f ∆ E •

trf

/ F ∗ E•.
Y

The commutativity of the top rectangle follows from Proposition 3.28. The two squares
below it and the lower left square commute by functoriality of the trace maps trFX/Y
and trf ′ . The commutativity of the bottom right rectangle is the compatibility of the
trace with base change by the residually stable map FY (Proposition 3.27). 3
•
b (O
(b) Once we know that trf is a morphism in Dqc
F,Y ), we can define trf (M ) as the

3

Here we have to show that we have commutative diagrams of complexes, which is not exactly the claim
of Proposition 3.28 and Proposition 3.27. However, one can check that the diagrams in the proofs of
these propositions commute as diagrams of complexes when applied to residual complexes. For this
one should keep in mind that for a complex K • , ΓZ ′ K • is a subcomplex of K • and that there is a
∼
natural isomorphism of functors ΓZ ′ FY′∗ −→ FY′∗ ΓZ ′ between abelian categories because FY′ is flat,
see Remark 3.10.

64

following composition:
∼

f+ RΓZ ′ f ! M• −→ f+ (OF,X ⊗OF,X RΓZ ′ f ! M• )
L

−→ f+ (RΓZ ′ OF,X ⊗OF,X f ! M• )
L

−→ f+ RΓZ ′ OF,X [dX/Y ] ⊗OF,Y M•
trf ⊗ id

−−−−→ OF,Y ⊗OF,Y M•
∼

−→ M• .
Here the second morphism is the one of Lemma 3.11 and the third morphism is the one
of [EK04, Lemma 4.4.7].
Lemma 4.2. We keep the notation of the preceding proposition. For an open immersion
j : U −→ Y , let f ′ and j ′ denote the projections of U ′ = U ×Y X. Assume that Z and Z ′
are the closures of the locally closed subsets ZU = Z ∩ U and ZU′ ′ = Z ′ ∩ U ′ in Y and in
X.
∼

(a) There is a functorial isomorphism ej,f : f+ RΓZ f ! j+ −→ j+ f+′ RΓZ ′ f ′! such that the
diagram
e

j,f
/ j+ f ′ RΓZ ′ f ′!
+
PPP
PPP
PPP
j+ trf ′
P
trf j+ PPP
P' 

f+ RΓZ f ! j+

j+

commutes.
(b) Let ctrf denote the unit id −→ RΓZ f ! f+ of the adjunction. Then there is a func∼
′ RΓ ′ f ′! f ′ such that the diagram
′ −→
j+
torial isomorphism e′j,f : RΓZ f ! f+ j+
Z
+
′
RΓZ f ! f+ j+

ej,f

/ j ′ RΓZ ′ f ′! f ′
+
+
O
gPPP
PPP
′
PPP
j+ ctrf ′
′ PPP
ctrf j+
PP
′
j+

commutes.
Proof. Let ZU and ZU′ ′ denote the closed subsets U ∩ Z and U ′ ∩ Z ′ of U and U ′ . From
′ are equivalences
Proposition 3.13 we know that the functors j+ and j+
∼

Z\U

b
b
Dlfgu
(OF,U )ZU −→ Dlfgu
(OF,Y )Z

∼

Z ′ \U ′

b
b
(OF,X )Z ′
and Dlfgu
(OF,U ′ )Z ′ ′ −→ Dlfgu
U

Furthermore, there are natural isomorphisms
∼

∼

′
′
RΓZ ′ ′ f ′! ,
f+ j+
−→ j+ f+′ and RΓZ ′ f ! j+ −→ j+
U

65

.

where the second one is obtained from the composition
∼

∼

j ′! RΓZ ′ f ! −→ RΓZ ′ ′ j ′! f ! −→ RΓZ ′ ′ f ′! j !
U

U

of natural isomorphisms. Moreover, together with the canonical isomorphism f+′ j ′! ∼
=
j ! f+ of [EK04, Proposition 3.8], this composition yields a canonical isomorphism
→ j ! f+ RΓZ f ! .
ẽj,f : f+′ RΓZ ′ f ′! j ! −
b (O
For M• ∈ Dqc
F,Y ), the diagram
ẽj,f

f+′ RΓZ ′ f ′! j ! M•

/ j ! f+ RΓZ f ! M•
∼

∼



∼

f+′ (OF,U ′ ⊗OF,U ′ RΓZ ′ f ′! j ! M• )



/ j ! f+ (OF,X ⊗O
RΓZ f ! M• )
F,X
∼

∼



L

trf ′



j ! M•

ẽj,f

L

/ j ! f+ RΓZ f ! OF,X ⊗O
j ! M•
F,U
❣
❣
❣
❣❣❣❣
❣❣❣❣❣
❣
❣
❣
❣
❣ trf
❣❣❣❣
❣
s ❣❣❣

f+′ RΓZ ′ f ′! OF,U ′ ⊗OF,U j ! M•

of natural isomorphisms and the trace commutes: While the first square commutes simply by functoriality, the commutativity of the second square follows from [EK04, Lemma
4.4.7 (ii)]. For the triangle on the bottom we apply Proposition 3.27. In summary the
diagram
f+′ RΓZ ′ f ′! j !
trf ′ j !

ẽj,f

/ j ! f+ RΓZ f !
♦♦
♦♦♦
♦
♦
♦
 ♦♦♦♦♦ j ! trf
w
! ♦

j

′ and f and RΓ ′ f !
is commutative. Since j ! and j ′! are quasi-inverses of j+ and j+
+
Z
′!
b
b (O
′
′
′
with
)
restrict to the functors f+ and RΓZ ′ ′ f between Dlfgu (OF,U )ZU and Dlfgu
F,U Z ′
U

U

respect to the equivalences j ! and j ′! , the claims of the lemma are formal consequences.
Theorem 4.3. Let f : X −→ Y be a separated and finite type morphism of smooth
schemes and let i : Z −→ Y and i′ : Z ′ −→ X be closed immersions with a morphism
f ′ : Z ′ −→ Z such that the diagram
Z′

i′

/X

f′



Z

f
i

66



/Y

•
b
b (O
commutes. Then, for any M• ∈ Dqc
F,X )Z ′ and any N ∈ Dqc (OF,Y )Z , there is a
natural isomorphism
∼

RHom•OF,Y (f+ M• , N • ) −→ Rf∗ RHom•OF,X (M• , RΓZ ′ f ! N • ).
!
b (O
b (O
→ Dqc
In particular, f+ : Dqc
F,Y )Z is left adjoint to RΓZ ′ f .
F,X )Z ′ −

Proof. The morphism f factors through the graph morphism X ×k Y , which is a closed
immersion, followed by the projection X ×k Y −
→ Y , which is smooth. Therefore,
we may assume that f is an essentially perfect morphism. We show that the natural
transformation τ given by the composition
Rf∗ RHom•OF,X (M• , RΓZ ′ f ! N • )

/ RHom•

OF,Y

(f+ M• , f+ RΓZ ′ f ! N • )
trF,f



RHom•OF,Y (f+ M• , N • )
is an isomorphism in D + (X, Z/pZ). Here the horizontal arrow is the natural morphism
of [EK04, Proposition 4.4.2]. Let OF,f denote the (f −1 OF,Y , OF,X )-bimodule OF,Y ←X
and let ωf denote the OX -module ωX/Y . We set d = dX/Y . First we replace M• by
a bounded above complex of quasi-coherent induced left OF,X -modules, i.e. left OF,X modules of the form OF,X ⊗OX M with quasi-coherent OX -modules M , see Definition
1.7 and Lemma 1.7.1 of [EK04]. Now by the Lemma on Way-out Functors ([Har66,
Proposition I.7.1]), we reduce to the case of a single sheaf M• = OF,X ⊗OX M . For such
an induced module we have an isomorphism
∼

f+ M −→ OF,Y ⊗OY Rf∗ (ωX/Y ⊗OX M ),

(8)

which is based on the projection formula, see the proof of [EK04, Theorem 3.5.3]. Note
that in this proof f ! always denotes Emerton-Kisin’s pull-back of left OF,Y -modules,
sometimes considered as an OY -module. It is connected to the functor f ! for quasicoherent sheaves by the canonical isomorphisms
∼

∼

−1
f ! N • −→ Lf ∗ N • [d] −→ ωX/Y
⊗OX ‘f ! ’N •

in Dqc (X), where ‘f ! ’ denotes the classical f ! as in section 3. We will show that there is
a commutative diagram
Rf∗ RHom•OX (M, RΓZ ′ f ! N • )

∼

/ Rf∗ RHom•

OF,X (M, RΓZ ′ f

!N •)

τ

t



∼

RHom•OY (Rf∗ (ωX/Y ⊗OX M ), N • )



•
/ RHom•
OF,Y (f+ M, N )

with an isomorphism t and where the horizontal arrows are the natural isomorphisms
induced by the isomorphism
HomOX (M,

∼

) −→ HomOF,X (OF,X ⊗OX M,

67

)

of [EK04, 1.7.2] and Equation 8. For this we consider the bigger diagram of natural maps
on page 70. Let t be the composition of the left vertical arrows. It is an isomorphism
by Proposition 3.30 and Theorem 3.2. Recall that OF,Y ←X is locally free as a right OX L
M∼
module and that OF,Y ←X ⊗O
= OF,Y ←X ⊗O M , which is computed in the proof
F,X

X

of Lemma 3.5.1 of [EK04]. In particular, induced modules are acyclic for the functor
OF,Y ←X ⊗OF,X . For the first square, we consider the diagram without the outer Rf∗ ,
resolve M by a complex P • of locally free OX -modules and RΓZ ′ f ! N • by a complex
L

J • of left OX,F -modules which are acyclic for the functor OF,Y ←X ⊗OF,X , as in the
proof of Proposition 4.4.2 of ibid. Now P • = OF,X ⊗OX P • is a complex of locally free
OF,X -modules. We obtain a commutative diagram
RHom•OX (P • , J • )

∼

•
•
/ RHom•
OF,X (P , J )

∼



∼

∼



Hom•OX (P • , J • )

•
•
/ Hom•
OF,X (P , J )

∼

Hom•OX (ωf

⊗ OX





P •, ω

f

⊗ OX

J •)
/

Hom•f −1 OF,Y

L

(OF,f ⊗OF,X P • , OF,f ⊗OF,X J • )

∼





RHom•OX (ωf ⊗OX P • , ωf ⊗OX J • )

L

•
•
/ RHom• −1
f OF,Y (OF,f ⊗OF,X P , OF,f ⊗OF,X J )

of canonical maps. The last two vertical arrows are the canonical morphisms from
a functor to its right derived functor. Here the left one is an isomorphism because
ωX/Y ⊗ P • is a locally free OX -module.
For the second square, we check that the natural map
RHom•OX (ωf ⊗OX M, ωf ⊗OX RΓZ ′ N • )

L

RHom•f −1 OF,Y (OF,f ⊗OX M, OF,f ⊗OF,X RΓZ ′ N • )
factors through RHom•f −1 OY (ωf ⊗OX M, ωf ⊗OX RΓZ ′ N • ). For this we replace ωf ⊗OX
L

RΓZ ′ f ! N • by a complex I • of injective f −1 OY -modules and OF,f ⊗OF,X RΓZ ′ f ! N • by
a complex Ĩ • of injective f −1 OF,Y -modules. The functor f −1 OF,Y ⊗f −1 OY
is exact
because the right OY -module OF,Y is free ([EK04, Lemma 1.3.1]). Furthermore, it is left
adjoint to the forgetful functor from f −1 OF,Y -modules to f −1 OY -modules. Hence the
latter functor preserves injectives. This implies that Ĩ • is a complex of injective f −1 OY L

→ OF,f ⊗OF,X RΓZ ′ f ! N • yields
modules and the canonical morphism ωf ⊗OX RΓZ ′ f ! N • −
a map I • −
→ Ĩ • . After replacing M by a complex P • of locally free OX -modules as
above we have reduced the three RHom to Hom and the claimed factorization is trivial.

68

We return to the second square of the diagram on page 70, where we replace M by
a complex F • of flasque OX -sheaves. The complexes ωf ⊗OX F • and OF,f ⊗OX F • are
also flasque because locally they are direct sums of flasque sheaves. Hence f∗ (ωf ⊗ F • )
and f∗ (OF,f ⊗ F • ) represent Rf∗ (ωf ⊗ F • ) and Rf∗ (OF,f ⊗ F • ). As above, we resolve
L

ωf ⊗OX RΓZ ′ f ! N • by I • and OF,f ⊗OF,X RΓZ ′ f ! N • by Ĩ • . The injectivity of I • and Ĩ •
implies that Hom•f −1 OY (ωf ⊗OX F • , I • ) and Hom•f −1 OF,Y (OF,f ⊗OX F • , Ĩ • ) are flasque
([God58, Lemme II.7.3.2]) and hence may be used to compute Rf∗ . As f∗ is right adjoint
to the exact functor f −1 , the complex f∗ I • is a complex of injective OY -modules and
f∗ Ĩ • is a complex of injective OF,Y -modules. Therefore
RHom•OX ( , f∗ I • ) ∼
= Hom•OX ( , f∗ I • )
and

RHom•OF,X ( , f∗ Ĩ • ) ∼
= Hom•OF,X ( , f∗ Ĩ • ).

This finishes the proof of the commutativity of the second square because the diagram
f∗ Hom•f −1 OY (ωf ⊗OX F • , I • )

•
•
/ f∗ Hom• −1
f OF,Y (OF,f ⊗OX F , Ĩ )



Hom•OF,Y (f∗ (OF,f ⊗OX F • ), f∗ Ĩ • )


Hom•OY (f∗ (ωf ⊗OX F • ), f∗ I • )

/ Hom•



•
•
OF,Y (OF,Y ⊗OY f∗ (ωf ⊗OX F ), f∗ Ĩ )

of natural morphisms commutes.
The commutativity of the third and the fifth square can be shown similarly. The fourth
square commutes by the functoriality of the corresponding horizontal isomorphisms.
For the adjunction of f+ and RΓZ ′ f ! we proceed as in the proof of Theorem 3.2.

69

Rf∗ RHom•OX (M, RΓZ ′ f ! N • )

/ Rf∗ RHom•O (M, RΓZ ′ f ! N • )
F,X

∼

Rf∗ RHom•OX (ωX/Y

⊗OX




M, ωX/Y ⊗OX RΓZ ′ f ! N • )
/

Rf∗ RHom•f −1 OF,Y

L

L

(OF,Y ←X ⊗OF,X M, OF,Y ←X ⊗OF,X RΓZ ′ f ! N • )


RHom•OF,Y

RHom•OY

(Rf∗ (ωX/Y

L

L

(Rf∗ (OF,Y ←X ⊗ M), Rf∗ (OF,Y ←X ⊗ RΓZ ′ f ! N • ))



⊗ M ), Rf∗ (ωX/Y ⊗ RΓZ ′ f ! N • ))
/

RHom•OF,Y

L

(OF,Y ⊗OY Rf∗ (ωX/Y ⊗OX M ), Rf∗ (OF,Y ←X ⊗ RΓZ ′ f ! N • ))

70




RHom•OY

L

L

(Rf∗ (ωX/Y ⊗OX M ), Rf∗ RΓZ ′ ωX/Y [d] ⊗OY N )
•

/

RHom•OF,Y

L

L

(OF,Y ⊗OY Rf∗ (ωX/Y ⊗OX M ), f+ RΓZ ′ OF,X [d] ⊗OF,Y N • )

tr

tr




L

RHom•OY (Rf∗ (ωX/Y ⊗OX M ), OY ⊗OY N • )
∼

/ RHom•

OF,Y

L

(OF,Y ⊗OY Rf∗ (ωX/Y ⊗OX M ), OF,Y ⊗OF,Y N • )
∼


L

RHom•OY (Rf∗ (ωX/Y ⊗OX M ), N • )


•
/ RHom•
OF,Y (f+ M, N )

4.2 Definition of lfgu modules on singular schemes
As mentioned earlier, for a regular scheme X, the Frobenius FX : X −
→ X is a flat
∗
morphism and hence FX is exact ([Kun69, Theorem 2.1]). For varieties, the exactness
of FX∗ plays an important role in the definition of (locally finitely generated) unit OF,X modules. For example, it implies that the category of unit OF,X -modules is abelian.
In this section we define the abelian category µlfgu (X) of locally finitely generated unit
OF,X -modules for schemes X which admit a closed immersion i : X −
→ Y into a smooth
k-scheme as a certain subcategory of µlfgu (Y ). Note that this definition generally works
for unit OF,X -modules. We restrict to locally finitely generated modules due to our
application to Cartier crystals and perverse constructible étale p-torsion sheaves. For
the rest of this section we assume that the base field k is perfect.
For the motivation of our approach to µlfgu (X) for embeddable X, recall the Kashiwara
equivalence:
Theorem 4.4. Let i : Z −→ X be a closed immersion of smooth k-schemes. If M is
a unit OF,X -module supported on Z, the adjunction i+ i! M −→ M is an isomorphism.
∼
Consequently, H 0 (i! M) −→ i! M and the functors i+ and i! are equivalences between the
categories of unit OF,Z -modules and unit OF,X -modules supported on Z.
Proof. This is Theorem 5.10.1 of [EK04].
Hence, keeping the notation of the preceding theorem, we can canonically interpret
unit OF,Z -modules as a certain subcategory of unit OF,X -modules, namely the subcategory of unit OF,X -modules with support on (the image of) Z. If Z is not smooth this
subcategory still exists because it may be characterized as the subcategory of unit OF,X modules M with j ! M ∼
= 0, where j is the immersion of the open complement of Z in
X. This motivates the definition of unit OF,Z -modules for Z possibly not smooth but
embeddable into a smooth scheme. But first we introduce some notation.
Definition 4.5. We call a k-scheme X embeddable if there is a closed immersion i : X −
→
Y of k-schemes where Y is smooth. We call X F -finite embeddable if there is a closed
immersion i : X −
→ Y of k-schemes where Y is smooth and F -finite.
Example 4.6. Let X = Spec k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/I be an affine variety. Then X is embeddable into the affine space Ank by the closed immersion corresponding to the canonical
projection
k[x1 , . . . , xn ] −
→ k[x1 , . . . , xn ]/I.
Example 4.7. Let X be a quasi-projective k-scheme. By definition, there exists an open
immersion j : X −
→ Z and a projective morphism p : Z −
→ Spec k such that f = p ◦ j. In
turn, the morphism p factors into a closed immersion i : Z −
→ Pnk followed by the natural
n
n
morphism Pk −
→ Spec k. Let U be an open subset of Pk such that U ∩ i(Z) = i(j(X)).
∼
→ U is a closed immersion of X into an open
Then X = U ×Pkn Z and the projection X −
subset of the projective space. Thus X is embeddable.

71

Definition 4.8. Assume that k is perfect. Let X be an embeddable k-scheme. Let
i: X −
→ Y be a closed immersion into a smooth k-scheme Y . The category of lfgu
OF,X -modules is defined as the full subcategory of lfgu OF,Y -modules M supported
on the image of X, i.e. j ! M ∼
→ X is the open immersion of the
= 0, where j : Y \X −
complement of X.
b (O
b
The category Dlfgu
F,X ) is the full subcategory Dlfgu (OF,Y )X of those objects in
b (O
Dlfgu
F,Y ) whose cohomology sheaves are supported on X.
Remark 4.9. With the notation of the preceding definition, let M be an lfgu module on
Y . Whether M is supported in X only depends on the closed subset i(X) in Y . For exb (O
ample, the preceding definition does not distinguish between the categories Dlfgu
F,X )
b
and Dlfgu (OF,Xred ), where Xred is the unique closed subscheme of X whose underlying
topological space equals the one of X and which is reduced.
By Theorem 4.4, it is clear that this definition generalizes the already existing notion
of lfgu OF,X -modules for smooth X. Of course the crucial point is to see that the
definition for not-necessarily smooth X is – up to natural equivalence – independent of
a chosen embedding into a smooth scheme.
Theorem 4.10. Assume that k is a perfect field. Let f : X −→ Y be a flat morphism
between smooth k-schemes and let iX : Z −→ X and iY : Z −→ Y be closed immersions
of k-schemes such that the diagram
iX
/X
❅❅
❅❅
f
❅
iY ❅❅ 

Z❅

Y

commutes. Then there are natural isomorphisms of functors
(i) f+ ◦ RΓZ f ! ∼
= idDb

(OF,Y )Z ,

(ii) RΓZ f ! ◦ f+ ∼
= idDb

(OF,X )Z .

lfgu

lfgu

Proof. The proof proceeds by an excision argument, in a similar way as the proof of
[Ohk16, Theorem 4.5]. In the case of a smooth scheme Z we can use the isomorphism
b (O
b
!
∼
of functors RΓZ ∼
= iX+ i!X from Dlfgu
F,X ) to Dlfgu (OF,X )Z and RΓZ = iY + iY from
b
b
Dlfgu (OF,Y ) to Dlfgu (OF,Y )Z ([EK04, Proposition 5.11.5]):
f+ RΓZ f ! ∼
= RΓZ ∼
= id .
= iY + i!Y ∼
= f+ iX+ i!X f ! ∼
We may assume that Z is reduced, see Remark 4.9. Since a finite set of closed points
with the reduced scheme structure is always smooth, this verifies the claim if Z is 0dimensional. For the general case, i.e. Z is not necessarily smooth, let V be a smooth and
dense4 open subscheme of Z and assume that the claim holds for all closed subschemes
4

In order to guarantee the existence of a smooth, dense subset, we assumed that k is perfect.

72

Z ′ with dim Z ′ < dim Z . Let g denote the immersion V ֒−
→ Y . After choosing an
open subset U ⊆ Y with U ∩ Z = V , we can factor g as g = u ◦ i′ where u is the open
immersion of U into Y and i′ is the closed immersion of V into U , i.e. the base change
of iY .
b (O
• → g g ! M•
For an object M• of Dlfgu
F,Y ), there is a natural morphism ϕ : M −
+
•
whose cone N is supported on Z\U ([EK04, Proposition 5.12.1]). This means that
there is a distinguished triangle
ϕ

N • −→ M• −→ g+ g! M• −→ N • [1]
b (O
!
in Dlfgu
F,Y ). Applying f+ RΓZ f , the trace yields a morphism of triangles

f+ RΓZ f ! N •

/ f+ RΓZ f ! M•

trf (N • )

ϕ

/ f+ RΓZ f ! g+ g ! M•

ϕ



trf (M• )





N•

/ M•

trf (g+ g ! M• )

/ g+ g ! M• .

Since f is the identity on Z, i.e. iY = f ◦ iX , we have Z ∩ f −1 (Z\U ) = Z\U . Therefore,
RΓZ f ! N • ∼
= RΓZ\U f ! N • and trf (N • ) factors through f+ RΓZ\U f ! N • . This means that
the diagram
f+ RΓZ f ! N •

trf,Z (N • )

◗◗◗
◗◗◗ ∼
◗◗◗
◗◗◗
◗(

/ N•
8
r
r
∼ rrr
rrr trf,Z\U (N • )
rrr

f+ RΓZ\U f ! N •

is commutative. The dimension of the support Z\U of N • is less than that of Z as
V is dense in Z. By induction hypothesis, trf,Z\U (N • ) is an isomorphism and hence
trf,Z (N • ) is an isomorphism.
It remains to show that trf (g+ g! M• ) ∼
= trf (u+ i′+ i′! u! M• ) is an isomorphism. By the
b (O
•
Kashiwara equivalence, the object MU := i′+ i′! u! M• of Dlfgu
F,U ) is supported on V .
′
Let f denote the projection U ×Y X −
→ U . The map trf (u+ M•U ) equals the composition
u+ trf ′ (M•U )

∼

f+ RΓZ f ! u+ M•U −→ u+ f+′ RΓV f ′! M•U −−−−−−−−→ u+ M•U
(Lemma 4.2 (a)). Here the second map is an isomorphism because V is smooth. Consequently, the map trf (M• ) is an isomorphism. This proves (i). The isomorphism of (ii)
can be constructed similarly, using the unit of the adjunction between f+ and RΓZ f !
(i.e. the cotrace) instead of the trace map, and applying Lemma 4.2 (b).
b (O
The next corollary shows that the definition of Dlfgu
F,X ) for embeddable varieties
X is independent of the chosen embedding.

Corollary 4.11. If i1 : X −→ Y1 and i2 : X −→ Y2 are two embeddings of a k-scheme
X into smooth k-schemes Y1 and Y2 , where k is perfect, then there exists a natural
equivalence
∼
b
b
(OF,Y2 )X .
(OF,Y1 )X −→ Dlfgu
Dlfgu

73

Proof. The universal property of Y1 ×k Y2 yields a morphism (i1 , i2 ) : X −
→ Y1 ×k Y2 . It
equals the composition
(id,id)

(i1 ,id)

(id,i2 )

X −−−−→ X ×k X −−−−→ Y1 ×k X −−−−→ Y1 ×k Y2 ,
where all maps are closed immersions, the first one because X is assumed to be separated
over k. Hence (i1 , i2 ) is a closed immersion. We obtain a commutative diagram
7 Y1
♥♥♥ O

i1 ♥♥♥♥

p1
♥♥
♥♥♥
♥
♥
(i1 ,i2 )
♥
/ Y1 × k Y2
X ❖❖❖
❖❖❖
❖❖❖
p2
❖
i2 ❖❖❖❖
❖' 

Y2 ,

where p1 and p2 are the projections. By Theorem 4.10, the compositions p2+ RΓZ p!1 and
b (O
b
p1+ RΓZ p!2 are inverse equivalences between Dlfgu
F,Y1 )X and Dlfgu (OF,Y2 )X .

5 The Riemann-Hilbert correspondence for Cartier crystals
As its title suggests, one of the main results of Emerton and Kisins “The RiemannHilbert correspondence for unit F-crystals” ([EK04]) is a characteristic p-analogue of
the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence for D-modules. More precisely, for a smooth kscheme X, the authors construct inverse equivalences of categories
b (O
Dlfgu
F,X ) o

Sol

/

M

Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ) .

≤0
≥0
Furthermore, Sol(Dlfgu
(OF,X )) ⊆ p D≥0 and Sol(Dlfgu
(OF,X )) ⊆ p D≤0 where p D≥0
and p D≥0 are two subcategories of Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ) defining the perverse t-structure of
[Gab04]. Hence Sol establishes an equivalence between the hearts of the corresponding
t-structures, namely the locally finitely generated unit OF,X -modules and the so-called
perverse constructible p-torsion sheaves.
Using this correspondence of Emerton and Kisin, we will establish a Riemann-Hilbert
correspondence between Cartier crystals and perverse constructible étale Z/pZ-sheaves
on a scheme which admits an embedding into a smooth scheme. In the following
b (O
b (QCrys (X)) −
→ Dlfgu
two subsections we extend the equivalences G : Dcrys
F,X ) and
κ
b
b
Sol : Dlfgu (OF,X ) −
→ Dc (Xét , Z/pZ) to singular varieties embeddable into a smooth variety. Throughout the whole section, k denotes a perfect field of characteristic p.

5.1 Review of Emerton and Kisin’s Riemann-Hilbert correspondence
Let Xét denote the small étale site of a scheme X. A reference for the étale topology is,
for example, [Mil80, Chapter II]. A Z/pZ-sheaf on Xét is an étale sheaf of modules over

74

the constant sheaf Z/pZ. Let Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ) denote the derived category of complexes
of Z/pZ-sheaves on Xét whose cohomology sheaves are constructible.
Definition 5.1. A sheaf L of Z/pZ-modules on Xét is called constructible if there is a
`
stratification X = i∈I Si such that the restrictions of L to the Si are locally constant
sheaves of Z/pZ-modules for the étale topology with finite stalks.
For x ∈ X, let ix : x −
→ X be the inclusion, which is the composition of the inclusion
of the closed point of Spec OXét ,x followed by the canonical morphism Spec OXét ,x −
→ X.
In [Gab04], Gabber showed that the two subcategories
p

D ≤0 = {L• ∈ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ) | H i (i∗x L• ) = 0 for i > − dim {x}},

p

D ≥0 = {L• ∈ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ) | H i (i!x L• ) = 0 for i < − dim {x}}

define a t-structure on Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ).
Remark 5.2. Indeed, Gabber shows that these subcategories define a t-structure on the
ambient category Db (Xét , Z/pZ). For a closed immersion i : Z −
→ X and the open
immersion j : U −
→ X of the complement U of Z, it is obtained from the perverse
t-structures on Db (Uét , Z/pZ) and D b (Zét , Z/pZ) by recollement:
p

D ≤0 = {L• ∈ D b (Xét , Z/pZ) | i∗ L• ∈ p D ≤0 (Zét , Z/pZ) and j ∗ L• ∈ p D≤0 (Uét , Z/pZ)},

p

D ≥0 = {L• ∈ D b (Xét , Z/pZ) | i! L• ∈ p D ≥0 (Zét , Z/pZ) and j ∗ L• ∈ p D≥0 (Uét , Z/pZ)}.

This follows directly from the construction of the perverse t-structure on Db (Xét , Z/pZ).
In this subsection let X be a smooth k-scheme. The Riemann-Hilbert correspondence
b (O
b
between Dlfgu
F,X ) and Dc (Xét , Z/pZ) is realized in two steps: first passing to the
étale site and then applying a certain duality functor.
Theorem 5.3.

(a) For every smooth k-scheme X, the functor

Sol = RHom•OF,X (
ét

ét , OXét )[dX ] :

b
Dlfgu
(OF,X ) −→ Dcb (Xét , Fp )

is an equivalence of categories. A quasi-inverse is given by
M = RHom•Z/pZ ( , OXét )[dX ].
(b) For a morphism f : X −→ Y of smooth k-schemes, there is a natural isomorphism
of functors
Sol ◦f ! ∼
= f ∗ ◦ Sol .
For an allowable morphism f : X −→ Y , i.e. a morphism f which factors as g ◦ h,
where h is an immersion and g is a proper smooth morphism, there is also a natural
isomorphism of functors
Sol ◦f+ ∼
= f! ◦ Sol .
≥0
(OF,X ) is equal to the full subcat(c) The essential image of the full subcategory Dlfgu
≤0
p
≤0
b
egory D of Dc (Xét , Z/pZ) while the essential image of Dlfgu
(OF,X ) is equal to
p
≥0
b
the full subcategory D of Dc (Xét , Z/pZ).

Proof. This is [EK04, Theorem 11.4.2 and Theorem 11.5.4].

75

5.2 Cartier crystals and lfgu modules on singular schemes
We show that the equivalence
∼

b
b
G : Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)) −→ Dlfgu
(OF,X )

for smooth X extends to an equivalence for embeddable X. As a consequence, for a
morphism f between smooth schemes, the inverse equivalences f+ and RΓZ f ! between
the subcategories of complexes supported on a closed subscheme are t-exact.
Proposition 5.4. Let X be an F -finite embeddable k-scheme. The functor G induces
an equivalence of categories
b
b
(OF,X ).
G : Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)) −→ Dlfgu

Proof. Choose a closed immersion i : X −
→ Y into a smooth, F -finite k-scheme Y and let
j denote the open immersion of the complement of X in Y . The Kashiwara equivalence
b (QCrys (X)) with the subcategory D b (QCrys (Y ))
(Theorem 1.10) identifies Dcrys
X
κ
crys
κ
b (QCrys (Y )). For M• ∈ D b (QCrys (Y )) we have
of Dcrys
X
κ
crys
κ
(j ! ◦ GY )M• ∼
=0
= (GU ◦j ∗ )M• ∼
by Proposition 2.35. As G is an equivalence of categories, there is also a natural isomor−1
∼ −1 !
of G. It follows that G induces
phism of functors j ∗ ◦ G−1
Y = GU ◦j for the inverse G
an equivalence of subcategories
b
b
G : Dcrys
(QCrysκ (Y ))X −
→ Dlfgu
(OF,Y )X .

It remains to show that this equivalence is independent of the choice of the embedding.
In the same way as in the proof of Corollary 4.11 we can reduce to the case of two closed
immersions i1 : X −
→ Y1 and i2 : X −
→ Y2 into smooth, F -finite k-schemes Y1 and Y2
together with a morphism f : Y1 −
→ Y2 such that i2 = f ◦ i1 . The composition i2∗ ◦ i!1 is
b (QCrys (Y )) and D b (QCrys (Y )) . Note that
a natural equivalence between Dcrys
κ 2 X
κ 1 X
crys
i2∗ i!1 M• ∼
= Rf∗ i1∗ i!1 M• ∼
= Rf∗ M•
b (QCrys (Y )) . Hence Rf is a natural equivalence of categories
for M• ∈ Dcrys
∗
κ 1 X
b
b
Rf∗ : Dcrys
(QCrysκ (Y1 ))X −
→ Dcrys
(QCrysκ (Y2 ))X

which is compatible with G, i.e.
f + ◦ G Y1 ∼
= GY2 ◦Rf∗
by Proposition 2.37.
Remark 5.5. This also implies that f+ provides a natural equivalence
b
b
f+ : Dlfgu
(OF,Y1 )X −
→ Dlfgu
(OF,Y2 )X

because f+ ∼
= GY2 ◦Rf∗ ◦ G−1
Y1 .

76

Keeping the notation of the proof of Proposition 5.4, the canonical t-structure of
b (O
) obviously induces a t-structure on the subcategory Dlfgu
F,Y )X defined by
the two subcategories

b (O
Dlfgu
F,Y

≤0
≥0
b
b
(OF,Y ).
(OF,Y ) and Dlfgu
(OF,Y )X ∩ Dlfgu
Dlfgu
(OF,Y )X ∩ Dlfgu

Corollary 5.6. Let f : Y1 −→ Y2 be a morphism between smooth, F -finite k-schemes.
Let i1 : X −→ Y1 and i2 : X −→ Y2 be closed immersions such that i2 = f ◦ i1 . The
b (O
b
equivalence f+ of Corollary 4.11 between Dlfgu
F,Y1 )X and Dlfgu (OF,Y2 )X is t-exact
for the canonical t-structures of both derived categories. In particular, by taking 0-th
cohomology, it gives rise to an equivalence of abelian categories
∼

{µlfgu (Y1 )X } −→ {µlfgu (Y2 )X }.
Proof. The functor f+ is a composition of t-exact functors:
!
−1
∼
f+ ∼
= GY2 ◦Rf∗ ◦ G−1
Y1 = GY2 ◦i2∗ ◦ i1 ◦ GY1 ,
b (QCrys (Y )) −
b
where Rf∗ denotes the restricted functor Dcrys
κ 1 X → Dcrys (QCrysκ (Y2 ))X .
It is exact because Rf∗ ∼
= i2∗ i!1 .
= Rf∗ i1∗ i!1 ∼

5.3 A Riemann-Hilbert correspondence on singular schemes
Now we extend the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence between lfgu modules and constructible étale Z/pZ-sheaves to embeddable schemes. The corresponding equivalence of
categories
∼
b
Dlfgu
(OF,X ) −→ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)
b (O
for embeddable X will be t-exact for the canonical t-structure on Dlfgu
F,X ) and Gabb
ber’s perverse t-structure on Dc (Xét , Z/pZ). Again, for a closed subscheme Z of X, let
j: U −
→ X denote the open immersion of the complement of Z into X.
Recall that there are distinguished triangles

j! j ∗ −→ id −→ i∗ i∗ −→ j! j ∗ [1]
and
i∗ i! −→ id −→ j∗ j ∗ −→ i∗ i! [1]
→ D(Xét (Z/pZ) as
in D + (Xét , Z/pZ) ([BBD82, 1.4.1.1]). Defining ΓZ : D(Xét (Z/pZ) −
the composition i∗ i∗ of exact functors we obtain a fundamental triangle of local cohomology
j! j ∗ −→ id −→ ΓZ −
→ j! j ∗ [1].
Note that i! = i∗ because i is a closed immersion.
Lemma 5.7. Let Z be a closed subscheme of a smooth k-scheme X. Then there is a
natural isomorphism of functors
∼

Sol ◦RΓZ −→ ΓZ ◦ Sol .

77

Proof. We show that there is a natural isomorphism
∼

M ◦ΓZ −→ RΓZ ◦ M,
where M is the quasi-inverse of Sol, see Theorem 5.3. The natural isomorphism j ! ◦MX ∼
=
MU ◦j ∗ implies that M(ΓZ L• ) is supported on Z for every complex L• . Consequently, the
morphism M(ΓZ L• ) −
→ M(L• ) induced by the natural map L• −
→ ΓZ L• , which is defined
by the fundamental triangle of local cohomology above, factors through RΓZ M(L• ).
This gives rise to a morphism of distinguished triangles
M(ΓZ L• )

/ M(L• )

/ M (j! j ∗ L• )
∼



RΓZ M(L• )

/ M(L• )



/ j+ j ! M(L• ),

where the horizontal arrows are the natural morphisms and the second and third vertical
arrow is an isomorphism. Hence the vertical arrow on the left is an isomorphism.
Lemma 5.8. For a closed subscheme Z of a scheme X, Gabber’s perverse t-structure
on Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ) induces a t-structure on Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)Z given by
p

D ≥0 (Xét )Z = Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)Z ∩ p D ≥0 (Xét ),

p

D ≤0 (Xét )Z = Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)Z ∩ p D ≤0 (Xét ).

Proof. We consider the construction of the perverse truncation functor p τ≤0 in [Gab04] in
more detail. It will turn out that p τ≤0 L• is supported on Z for all L• ∈ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)Z .
For simplicity we write τ≤p for p τ≤0 where p is a perversity function, see the first section
of [Gab04]. For a complex F • , C(F • ) denotes the total complex of the double complex
C • (F • ), where C • (F n ) is the Godement resolution of F n .
Let c = − dim X. It is a lower bound for the perversity function p(x) = − dim {x}.
For a complex L• , d ≥ c and pd (x) = min(d, p(x)), Gabber iteratively constructs a direct
system τ≤pd L• and defines τ≤p L• as the direct limit. We start with pc = c and the usual
truncation τpc L• = τ≤c L• . Clearly, if L• is supported on Z, then so is τpc L• . Now for
τ≤pd F • of some complex F • , we construct τ≤ pd+1 F • as a subcomplex of C(F • ). By the
construction of the Godement resolution, C(F • ) is supported on Z if F • is supported on
Z. It follows that for every d ≥ c, the complex τ≤pd L• is supported on Z and therefore
the direct limit τ≤p L• is supported on Z.
Proposition 5.9. Let i : Z −→ X be a closed immersion of schemes.
(a) The exact functors i∗ and i∗ are inverse equivalences of categories
Dcb (Zét , Z/pZ) o

i∗
i∗

/

Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)Z .

(b) These functors i∗ : Dcb (Zét , Z/pZ) −→ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)Z and i∗ : Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)Z −→
Dcb (Zét , Z/pZ) are also t-exact with respect to the perverse t-structures of both
categories.

78

Proof. (a) This is a formal consequence of the distinguished triangle
j! j ∗ −→ id −→ i∗ i∗ −→ j! j ∗ [1]
in D b (Xét , Z/pZ) and the fact that the natural map id −
→ i∗ i∗ is always an isomorphism.
(b) It suffices to show that i∗ is t-exact with respect to the perverse t-structures, i.e.
the essential image of p D ≤0 (Zét ) under i∗ is contained in p D≤0 and the essential image
of p D ≥0 (Zét ) under i∗ is contained in p D≥0 . For x ∈ Z let ĩx denote the composition
{x} −
→ Spec OZét ,x −
→Z
of canonical morphisms. For L• in p D ≤0 (Zét ), i.e. H n (ĩ∗x L• ) = 0 for every x ∈ Z and
every n > − dim {x}, we have
H n (i∗x i∗ L• ) ∼
= H n (ĩ∗x i∗ i∗ L• )
∼
= H n (ĩ∗ L• )
x

∼
=0
∼0
for every x ∈ Z and every n > − dim {x}. For x ∈ U = X\Z, we even have i∗x i∗ L• =
∗
•
∗
•
∼
∼
because j i∗ L = 0 and hence τ i∗ L = 0, where τ : Spec OXét ,x −
→ X is the natural
morphism.
Now let L• be in p D ≥0 (Zét ), i.e. H n (ĩ!x L• ) = 0 for every x ∈ Z and every n <
− dim {x}. There is a natural isomorphism of functors
i! i∗ ∼
= i∗ i∗
given by the composition of the natural isomorphisms i! i∗ −
→ id and id −
→ i∗ i∗ of
[BBD82, 1.4.1.2]. Whence
H n (i!x i∗ L• ) ∼
= H n (ĩ!x i! i∗ L• )
∼
= H n (ĩ! i∗ i∗ L• )
x

∼
= H n (ĩ!x L• )
∼
=0
for every x ∈ Z and every n < − dim {x}. We have already seen that there is nothing
to show for x ∈ U .
Definition 5.10. For a k-scheme X which admits an embedding into a smooth scheme
Y , we define
≥0
≥0
b
Dlfgu
(OF,X ) = Dlfgu
(OF,Y )X ∩ Dlfgu
(OF,Y ),
≤0
≤0
b
Dlfgu
(OF,X ) = Dlfgu
(OF,Y )X ∩ Dlfgu
(OF,Y ).
b (O
These subcategories of Dlfgu
F,X ) form a natural t-structure.

79

The independence of these subcategories of the embedding into a smooth scheme
follows from the fact that for a morphism f : Y1 −
→ Y2 between two smooth schemes
over k, together with closed immersions i1 : X −
→ Y1 and i2 : X −
→ Y2 with i2 = f ◦ i1 ,
the equivalence
RΓX f ! ∼
= M ◦ Solκ ◦RΓX f !
∼
= M ◦ΓX f ∗ ◦ Solκ
∼
= M ◦i1∗ i∗1 f ∗ i2∗ i∗2 ◦ Solκ
∼
= M ◦i1∗ i∗2 ◦ Solκ
is a composition of t-exact functors, where Dcb (Y1,ét , Z/pZ) and Dcb (Y2,ét , Z/pZ) are
equipped with the perverse t-structures (Theorem 5.3 and Proposition 5.9). Therefore,
RΓX f ! is t-exact.
Theorem 5.11. Let X be an embeddable k-scheme.
(a) The equivalence Sol for smooth schemes induces an anti-equivalence of categories
b
Sol : Dlfgu
(OF,X ) −→ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)
≥0
(OF,X ) under this equivalence equals p D≤0 and the
(b) The essential image of Dlfgu
≤0
(OF,X ) equals p D≥0 .
essential image of Dlfgu

Proof. After choosing a closed immersion i : X −
→ Y into a smooth k-scheme Y , we see
that Sol restricts to an anti-equivalence
b
Sol : Dlfgu
(OF,Y )X −
→ Dcb (Yét , Z/pZ)X

in the same way as in the proof of Proposition 5.4. For the proof of the independence of
the choice of an embedding we again reduce to the situation of two closed immersions
i1 : X −
→ Y1 and i2 : X −
→ Y2 together with a morphism f : Y1 −
→ Y2 such that i2 = f ◦i1 .
We obtain natural equivalences of categories
b
b
RΓX f ! : Dlfgu
(OF,Y2 )X −
→ Dlfgu
(OF,Y1 )X

and
f −1 ΓX : Dcb (Y2,ét , Z/pZ)X −
→ Dcb (Y1,ét , Z/pZ)X ,
which are compatible with Sol because
∼

∼

Sol ◦RΓX f ! −→ ΓX ◦ Sol ◦f ! −→ ΓX f ∗ ◦ Sol
by Theorem 5.3 and Lemma 5.7. This proves (a).
b (O
The equivalence Sol not only restricts to an equivalence between Dlfgu
F,Y )X and
≥0
p
≤0
b
Dc (Yét , Z/pZ)X but also between Dlfgu (OF,Y ) and D (Yét ) (Theorem 5.3). Therefore,
Sol induces an equivalence
∼

≥0
b
Dlfgu
(OF,Y )X ∩ Dlfgu
(OF,Y ) −→ Dcb (Yét , Z/pZ)X ∩ p D ≤0 (Yét ).

By Proposition 5.9, Dcb (Yét , Z/pZ)X ∩ p D ≤0 (Yét ) is canonically equivalent to p D ≤0 (Xét ).
≤0
Analogously, one can show that the essential image of Dlfgu
(OF,X ) equals p D ≥0 .

80

Theorem 5.12. Let X be an F -finite embeddable k-scheme.
(a) The equivalences G and Sol for smooth schemes induce equivalences
b
b
b
G : Dcrys
(QCrysκ (X)) −→ Dlfgu
(OF,X ) and Sol : Dlfgu
(OF,X ) −→ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ).

This means that for a closed immersion i : X −→ Y with Y smooth, there is a
commutative diagram
Dcb (Yét , Z/pZ) o
O

? _ D b (Xét , Z/pZ)
c
O

SolY
b (QCrys (Y ))
Dcrys
κ

O

?

b (QCrys (X))
Dcrys
κ

GY

/ D b (OF,Y )
SolX
lfgu
h◗◗◗
◗◗◗
◗◗◗
◗◗◗ U
5
GX
/ D b (OF,X ).
lfgu

≥0 (QCrys (X)) un(b) Let Solκ be the composition Sol ◦ G. The essential image of Dcrys
κ
p
≤0
≤0 (QCrys (X))
der Solκ equals the subcategory D , while the essential image of Dcrys
κ
equals the subcategory p D ≥0 .

(c) If h : W −→ X is an open or a closed immersion, then there are natural isomorphisms of functors
∼

∼

Solκ ◦Rh∗ −→ h! ◦ Solκ and Solκ ◦h! −→ h∗ ◦ Solκ
where h! denotes the functor h∗ if h is an open immersion and Rh∗ = h∗ for a
closed immersion.
Proof. (a) and (b) follow from Proposition 5.4 and Theorem 5.11.
It remains to prove (c). Let h : W −
→ X be an open immersion. We will construct
the natural transformations by choosing embeddings of X. Since we have to make sure
that this construction is independent of the embedding, we will consider two closed immersions i1 : X −
→ Y1 and i2 : X −
→ Y2 of X into F -finite, smooth k-schemes ab initio.
We may assume that there is a morphism f : Y1 −
→ Y2 with i2 = f ◦ i1 , see the proof
→ Y2 be an open immersion such that (i2 ◦ h)(W ) =
of Corollary 4.11. Let h′2 : V2 −
h′2 (V2 ) ∩ i2 (X) and hence W ∼
→ V2 be the closed immersion in= X ×Y2 V2 . Let i′2 : W −
duced by i2 , i.e. the projection X ×Y2 V2 −
→ V2 . We have a natural equivalence Rh′2∗ i′2∗ ∼
=
b
b
i2∗ Rh∗ of functors from Dcrys (QCrysκ (W )) to Dcrys (QCrysκ (Y2 ))X . Moreover, we have
b (QCrys (V ))
a natural equivalence h′2+ GV2 ∼
= GY2 Rh′2∗ of functors from Dcrys
κ 2 W to
b
b
b
Dlfgu (OF,Y2 )X . Therefore, Rh∗ : Dcrys (QCrysκ (W )) −
→ Dcrys (QCrysκ (X)) induces a
b
b
functor h+ : Dlfgu (OF,W ) −
→ Dlfgu (OF,X ) such that GX h∗ ∼
= h+ GW . Note that this
functor h+ does not depend on the choice of V2 . In particular, to show the inde→ Y1
pendence of the embedding of X, we may choose an open immersion h′1 : V1 −
with (i1 ◦ h)(W ) = h′1 (V1 ) ∩ i1 (X) and such that (f ◦ h′1 )(V1 ) ⊆ h′2 (V2 ). Here we set

81

V1 = f −1 (V2 ), which means V1 ∼
→ V2 be the projection and
= Y1 ×Y2 V2 . Let f ′ : V1 −
′
∼
∼
let i1 be the projection of W = X ×Y2 V2 = X ×Y1 (Y1 ×Y2 V2 ) to V1 ∼
= Y1 ×Y2 V2 . It
is a closed immersion because it is the base change of the morphism i1 . We obtain the
following commutative diagram:
i′1

W

/ V1

f′

/ V2

h′1

h



i1

X



/ Y1

h′2
f



/ Y2 .

The following cube demonstrates the natural equivalences, which we have by Proposition 2.37:
b (QCrys (V ))
Dcrys
κ 2 W

❦5
Rf∗′ ❦❦❦❦❦
❦
❦
❦
❦❦
❦❦❦❦

GV1

b (QCrys (V ))
Dcrys
κ 1 W

GV2

/ D b (OF,V )W
2
lfgu
′
♦♦7
f+
♦
♦
♦
♦♦♦
♦♦♦

/ D b (OF,V )W
1
lfgu

h′2+

Rh′2∗



❦❦5

Rf∗❦❦❦❦❦



❦❦❦❦
❦❦❦❦

b (QCrys (Y ))
Dcrys
κ 1 X


/ D b (OF,Y )X
2
lfgu
♦7
f+ ♦♦♦♦
♦♦♦
♦♦♦
GY2

b (QCrys (Y ))
Dcrys
κ 2 X

Rh′1∗

h′1+


/ D b (OF,Y )X
1
lfgu

GY1

Here every cube face indicates a natural equivalence, for example, the front refers to
the isomorphism of functors GY1 ◦Rh′1∗ ∼
= h′1+ ◦ GV1 . This shows the independence of
the isomorphism of functors GX h∗ ∼
= h+ GW from the chosen embedding of X. By
adjunction, we obtain a canonical isomorphism GW h∗ ∼
= h! GX as well.
Similarly, one shows that we have a natural isomorphism Sol h! ∼
= h∗ Sol, using the
fact that Sol commutes with the local cohomology functors (Lemma 5.7) and with pullbacks for morphisms between smooth schemes (Theorem 5.3). Again, by adjunction,
we obtain a natural isomorphism Sol h+ ∼
= h! Sol. Composing these isomorphisms of
functors yields the desired one:
Solκ ◦Rh∗ ∼
= Sol ◦ GX ◦Rh∗ ∼
= Sol ◦h+ ◦ GW ∼
= h! ◦ Sol ◦ GW ∼
= h! ◦ Solκ
and analogously for Solκ ◦h∗ ∼
= h∗ ◦ Solκ .
If h : W −
→ X is a closed immersion, we proceed similarly, but the proof is simpler
because a closed immersion i : X −
→ Y of X into a smooth, F -finite k-scheme Y yields
a closed immersion of W into Y by composing h and i.
Definition 5.13. The abelian category Pervc (Xét , Z/pZ) of perverse constructible étale
p-torsion sheaves is the heart p D ≤0 ∩ p D≥0 of the perverse t-structure on Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ).

82

Corollary 5.14. For an F -finite embeddable k-scheme X, the functor Solκ induces an
anti-equivalence
Crysκ (X) −→ Pervc (Xét , Z/pZ)
between the abelian categories of Cartier crystals on X and perverse constructible Z/pZsheaves on Xét .
We conclude this section with an explanation, how resolution of singularities would
simplify the establishment of lfgu modules on singular schemes. If one had resolution of
singularities in positive characteristic, then any morphism f : X −
→ Y between smooth
k-schemes would admit a factorization into an open immersion X −
→ X into a smooth
scheme X followed by a proper morphism f : X −
→Y.
b (O
One possibility would be to define Dlfgu
F,Z ) for embeddable schemes Z in a slightly
different way. Choose a closed immersion of Z into a smooth k-scheme X and an open
immersion j : X −
→ X into a smooth complete variety, this means a smooth scheme
X whose structural morphism X −
→ Spec k is proper. This is possible by Nagata’s
compactification theorem applied to the structural morphism of the k-scheme Z and,
of course, the assumption of resolution of singularities. Let Z̃ be a closed subset of X
b (O
b
such that Z̃ ∩ j(X) = Z. Then define Dlfgu
F,Z ) as the subcategory of Dlfgu (OF,X )
given by those complexes M• that are supported in Z̃ and with RΓX\X M• ∼
= 0. For
the independence of the chosen immersion we could proceed as in section 4 of [Ohk16],
!
where the adjunction between f + and f for proper morphisms of [EK04, Theorem 4.4.1]
is used.
Another way to prove Theorem 4.10 would be to use the equivalence Sol and work with
the derived categories of constructible sheaves. First we show that (under the assumption
of resolution of singularities) every morphism f : X −
→ Y between smooth schemes is
allowable, see Theorem 5.3 for the definition of allowable. Choose a compactification
j
s
→ Spec k of the structural morphism sX : X −
→ Spec k with a smooth scheme
X−
→ X −−X
X. Then f factors through (j, f ) : X −
→ X ×k Y and the projection prY : X ×k Y −
→
Y . Furthermore, (j, f ) is an immersion because it is the composition of the closed
immersion (id, f ) : X −
→ X ×k Y (i.e. the graph embedding) and the open immersion
j × id : X ×k Y −
→ X ×k Y . The projection prY is a proper smooth morphism since these
properties are stable under base change and the morphism sX is proper and smooth.
Thus f is allowable.
Let iX : Z −
→ X and iY : Z −
→ Y be closed immersions with iY = f ◦ iX . Roughly
b (O
speaking, the functors f+ and RΓZ f ! are inverse equivalences between Dlfgu
F,X )Z and
b
∗
Dlfgu (OF,Y )Z because the corresponding functors f! and ΓZ f are inverse equivalences
between Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)Z and Dcb (Yét , Z/pZ)Z . The following diagram illustrates the

83

categories and functors that we work with.
Sol

b (O
Dlfgu
F,X )Z o

Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ)
◗ Z
/

M

O

i∗Y



b (O
Dlfgu
F,Y )Z

b

Dc6 (Zét , Z/pZ)
♠♠♠♠♠♠
♠
♠
♠♠ ♠♠
♠♠♠♠♠♠
♠v♠♠♠♠♠♠♠ iY ∗

ΓZ f ∗

f!

RΓZ f !

f+

h◗◗◗◗◗◗◗ i∗
◗◗◗◗◗X
◗◗◗◗◗◗◗
iX∗ ◗◗◗◗◗◗(

O



Sol

o

/

M

Dcb (Yét , Z/pZ)Z

b (O
We have a natural equivalence f+ RΓZ f ! −
→ id of endofunctors on Dlfgu
F,Y )Z by the
composition of the natural equivalences
∼

f+ RΓZ f ! −→ M ◦ Sol ◦f+ RΓZ f !
∼

−→ M ◦ f! ΓZ f ∗ ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ f! iX∗ i∗X f ∗ ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ iY ∗ i∗Y ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ idDcb (Yét ,Z/pZ)Z ◦ Sol
∼

−→ idDb

lfgu

(OF,Y )Z ,
∼

∼

where the second one is obtained from the isomorphisms Sol f+ −→ f! Sol and Sol f ! −→
∼
f ∗ Sol of Theorem 5.3 and the isomorphism Sol RΓZ −→ ΓZ Sol of Lemma 5.7.
b (O
Moreover, there is a natural equivalence id −
→ RΓZ f ! f+ of endofunctors on Dlfgu
F,X )Z
by the composition of the natural equivalences
idDb

lfgu

∼

(OF,X )Z

−→ M ◦ idDcb (Xét ,Z/pZ)Z ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ iX∗ i∗X ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ iX∗ i∗Y iY ∗ i∗X ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ iX∗ i∗Y f! iX∗ i∗X ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ iX∗ i∗Y f! ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ iX∗ i∗X f ∗ f! ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ ΓZ f ∗ f! ◦ Sol
∼

−→ M ◦ Sol ◦RΓZ f ! f+
∼

−→ RΓZ f ! f+ ,
where the last but one isomorphism is obtained from the inverses of the isomorphisms
∼
∼
∼
Sol f+ −→ f! Sol and Sol f ! −→ f ∗ Sol of Theorem 5.3 and Sol RΓZ −→ ΓZ Sol of
Lemma 5.7.

84

6 Intermediate extensions
In this last section we define the intermediate extension for Cartier crystals. First we
recall the general definition of the intermediate extension j!∗ for an open immersion j
in [BBD82]. This definition uses the extension by zero functor j! , which we do not have
defined for Cartier crystals. However, there are characterizations which also make sense
for the categories of Cartier crystals and which will be used for our definition of the
intermediate extension in the context of these categories. In the last part of the section
we show that the equivalence between Cartier crystals and perverse constructible étale
p-torsion sheaves established in the previous section is compatible with the intermediate
extension functors of both categories.

6.1 Review of the intermediate extension
Suppose that D, DU and DZ are triangulated categories and i∗ : DZ −
→ D and j ∗ : D −
→
DU are exact functors fulfilling the following axioms:
(1) The functor i∗ admits a left adjoint i∗ and a right adjoint i! . Likewise j ∗ admits a
left adjoint j! and a right adjoint j∗ .
(2) We have j ∗ i∗ = 0. By adjunction, this is equivalent to i∗ j! = 0 or equivalent to
i! j∗ = 0.
(3) The functors i∗ , j∗ and j! are full and faithful. Hence the adjunction morphisms
i∗ i∗ −
→ id −
→ i! i∗ and j ∗ j∗ −
→ id −
→ j ∗ j! are isomorphisms.
(4) For every F ∈ D, there are distinguished triangles i∗ i! F −→ F −→ j∗ j ∗ F −→
i∗ i! F [1] and j! j ∗ F −→ F −→ i∗ i∗ F −→ j! j ∗ F [1].
Furthermore, let (DZ≤0 , DZ≥0 ) and (DU≤0 , DU≥0 ) be t-structures on DZ and DU . Then the
subcategories
D≤0 = {F ∈ D | i∗ F ∈ DZ≤0 and j ∗ F ∈ DU≤0 },
D≥0 = {F ∈ D | i! F ∈ DZ≥0 and j ∗ F ∈ DU≥0 }
define a t-structure on D ([BBD82, Théorème 1.4.10]). We say that this t-structure on
D is obtained from the t-structures on DZ and DU by recollement. The functors j ∗ and
i∗ remain exact with respect to this t-structure. Let C, CZ and CU be the hearts of this
t-structures on D, DZ and DU , i.e. for example C = D ≤0 ∩ D≥0 . By Théorème 1.3.6 of
ibid., we know that the heart of a t-structure is an abelian category.
Recall that for any triangulated category T which is equipped with a t-structure, the
inclusion T ≤0 −
→ T admits a right adjoint τ≤0 and the inclusion T ≥0 −
→ T admits a left
→ T ≤0 ∩ T ≥0 be the composition
adjoint τ≥0 ([BBD82, Proposition 1.3.3]). Let H 0 : T −
τ≥0 τ≤0 as in Théorème 1.3.6 of ibid. If T is one of the functors j! , j ∗ , j∗ , i∗ , i∗ , i! ,
we write p T for the composition H 0 ◦ T ◦ ε, where ε denotes the respective inclusion
C −
→ D, CZ −
→ DZ or CU −
→ DU . By [BBD82, Proposition 1.4.16 (ii)], there are

85

the same adjunction relations for the functors p T as there are for the original functors
T . A functor T : A −
→ B between triangulated categories with t-structures is called left
t-exact if it restricts to a functor A≥0 −
→ B ≥0 , right t-exact if it restricts to a functor
≤0
≤0
A −
→ B and t-exact if it is left and right t-exact. We have the following
Proposition 6.1. [BBD82, Proposition 1.4.16, Proposition 1.4.17] The functors j! and
i∗ are right t-exact, the functors j ∗ and i∗ are t-exact and the functors j∗ and i! are left
t-exact. The compositions p j ∗p i∗ , p i∗p j! and p i!p j∗ are isomorphic to the zero functor.
Furthermore, the functors p i∗ , p j! and p j∗ are full and faithful, the adjunction morphisms
p i∗p i −
→ p i!p i∗ and p j ∗p j∗ −→ id −→ p j ∗p j! are isomorphisms.
∗ → id −
The functor i∗ identifies DZ with a thick subcategory of D and j ∗ identifies the quotient
category D/DZ with DU ([BBD82, Remarque 1.4.8]). Furthermore, p i∗ identifies CZ
with a thick subcategory of C, which has the following characterization: An object
M of C is contained in the essential image of p i∗ if and only if p j ∗ M = 0 ([BBD82,
Amplification 1.4.17.1]). Following the situation of sheaves, we will say that an object
M of C is supported on Z if and only if p j ∗ M = 0.
An extension of an object B ∈ DU to D is an object A of D together with an isomorphism j ∗ A ≃ B. Let a : p j ∗p j∗ −
→ id and b̃ : p j! p j ∗ −
→ id denote the adjunction
morphisms. The composition
p

pj

a−1

b̃ p j∗

!
−→ p j! p j ∗p j∗ −−−→ p j∗
j! −−−

yields a natural transformation η : p j! −
→ p j∗ .
Definition 6.2. [BBD82, Definition 1.4.22] For an object B ∈ CU , the intermediate
extension j!∗ B is the image of the natural morphism η(B) : p j! B −
→ p j∗ B.
Let f : A −
→ B be a morphism of objects in CU . The natural transformation η : p j! −
→
yields a commutative diagram

pj
∗

pj A
!

pj

!f

/ p j! B

η(A)



pj A
∗

pj

η(B)



∗f

/ p j∗ B.

It follows that j!∗ is a functor between the abelian categories CU and C.
Lemma 6.3. The natural transformation p j ∗ η is an isomorphism of functors. (In the
situation of derived categories of sheaves on a ringed space X with an open immersion
j : U ֒−
→ X, this means that the restriction of η to U is an isomorphism of functors.)
Proof. As the adjunction morphisms a : p j ∗p j∗ −
→ id and b : id −
→ p j ∗p j! are isomorphisms, it suffices to show that the diagram
a

id o

p j ∗p j
∗

/ id
O

b(p j ∗p j∗ )

b



p j ∗p j
!

a

o

(p j ∗p j

! )a



p j ∗p j p j ∗p j
!
∗

86

a
p j ∗ b̃ p j

∗

/ p j ∗p j∗

commutes. Here b̃ denotes the adjunction map p j! p j ∗ −
→ id. The commutativity of the
left hand square follows from the naturality of b. For the second square, we note that
p j ∗ b̃ p j ◦ b(p j ∗p j ) ∼ id, because for an adjunction, it is required that the composition
∗
∗ =
p ∗
p ∗ b j p ∗p p ∗
j −−−→ j j! j

p j ∗ b̃

−−→ p j ∗

is the identity.
Lemma 6.4. Let B ∈ DU . There are no non-trivial subobjects of p j∗ B supported on Z
and no non-trivial quotients of p j! B supported on Z.
Proof. Let β : A −
→ p j∗ B be a monomorphism with A supported on Z. Applying the
left exact functor p i! and then the exact functor p i∗ yields a monomorphism
p

i∗ p i! β : i∗ p i! A −
→ p i∗ p i!p j∗ B.

But p i∗ p i! A is isomorphic to A because A is in the essential image of p i∗ . Moreover,
p i p i!p j B ∼ 0 because p i!p j ∼ 0 (Proposition 6.1). It follows that A ∼ 0.
=
=
∗
∗
∗ =
For an epimorphism p j! B −
→ C with C supported on Z, we apply p i∗ p i∗ and obtain
an exact sequence
p p ∗p
i∗ i j! B −→ p i∗ p i∗ C −→ 0.
Since p i∗p j! ∼
= p i∗ p i∗ C ∼
= 0.
= 0 (Proposition 6.1), we have C ∼
Lemma 6.5. An object A ∈ C is an extension of an object B ∈ CU to D if and only if
there are morphisms f : p j! B −→ A and g : A −→ p j∗ B making the diagram
η

pj B
! ❈

❈❈
❈❈
❈
f ❈❈!

A

/ p j∗ B
③=
③③
③
③③ g
③③

commutative and p j ∗ f is epic or p j ∗ g is monic.
Proof. Let A be an extension of B, i.e. there is an isomorphism τ : p j ∗ A −
→ B. With
the notation from Lemma 6.3, we consider the following diagram:
pj B
!O

pj

−1
!a

τ
pj pj∗A
!

/ p j! p j ∗p j∗ B
O

b̃ p j∗

τ

τ
pj

−1 p j ∗
!a

b̃

/ p j! p j ∗p j∗ p j ∗ A

- A.

/ p j∗ B
O

b̃ p j∗ p j ∗

/ p j∗ p j ∗ A
9

ã

Here ã : id −
→ p j∗ p j ∗ denotes the unit of adjunction. The three squares at the top
commute by functoriality. We show that the lower part of the diagram is commutative. Then we may define f as the composition of p j! τ −1 and the adjunction morphism

87

pj pj∗A −
→ A and g as the composition
!
p j τ . We have a commutative square
∗

of the adjunction morphism A −
→ p j∗ p j ∗ A and
b̃ p j∗ p j ∗

p j p j ∗p j p j ∗ A
!
O ∗

/ p j∗ p j ∗ A
O

p j p j ∗ ã
!

ã
b̃

pj pj ∗ A
!

/ A.

Therefore, it suffices to show that the two morphisms p j! p j ∗ ã and p j! a p j ∗ are equal. This
is nothing but the requirement that the composition
p ∗

p j ∗ ã

a pj∗

j −−−→ p j ∗p j∗ p j ∗ −−−→ p j ∗

of the adjunction morphisms is the identity. Another consequence of this requirement is
the commutativity of the diagram
pj∗A

p ∗

b j
/ p j ∗p j! p j ∗ A
❙❙❙ ∼
❙❙❙
❙❙❙
p j ∗ b̃
❙❙❙
❙❙❙
id

❙)
p ∗

j A.

Hence the adjunction morphism p j! p j ∗ −
→ id applied to p j ∗ A and thus, also p j ∗ f is an
p
∗
isomorphism. It follows that j g is an isomorphism since p j ∗ η(B) is an isomorphism
(Lemma 6.3) and p j ∗ η(B) = p j ∗ g ◦ p j ∗ f .
Conversely, let f : p j! B −
→ A and g : A −
→ p j∗ B be morphisms with g ◦ f = η(B).
Recall that the adjunction morphisms a and b are isomorphisms. By a similar reasoning
as above, we see that the diagram
id

B

a−1
∼

b ∼



p j ∗p j B
!

/ p j ∗p j∗ B

a
∼

*/

∼ b(p j ∗p j∗ )
(p j ∗p j

!

)a−1

∼

pj ∗f



/ p j ∗p j! p j ∗p j∗ B

- pj ∗ A

B

∼ a−1
p j ∗ b̃ p j

∗


/ p j ∗p j∗ B
:

p j ∗g

is commutative. In fact, we have already encountered the two squares in the middle in
the proof of Lemma 6.3. Therefore, p j ∗ f is monic and p j ∗ g is epic. If in addition p j ∗ f
is epic or p j ∗ g is monic, then p j ∗ f and p j ∗ g are isomorphisms, inverse to each other.
Consequently, A is an extension of B to D.
Definition 6.6. Let A be an abelian category, let A be an object of A and let A1 , . . . , An
be a finite set of subobjects of A. The intersection A1 ∩ A2 ∩ · · · ∩ An is the kernel of
the map
A−
→

n
Y

i=1

88

A/Ai

given by the projections A −
→ A/Ai for 1 ≤ i ≤ n.
Lemma 6.7. Let A be an object of C. Let A1 , . . . , An be subobjects of A such that
∼
= B for some object B of CU and every 1 ≤ i ≤ n. Then p j ∗ (A1 ∩ · · · ∩ An ) ∼
= B.

pj∗A
i

Proof. As an exact functor, p j ∗ commutes with finite products. Hence the exact sequence
0 −→ p j ∗

n
\

Ai −→ p j ∗ A −→ p j ∗

i=1

n
Y

A/Ai

i=1

yields an exact sequence
0 −→ p j ∗

n
\

Ai −→ p j ∗ A −→

i=1

This
pj∗A

T
shows that p j ∗ ni=1 Ai is isomorphic
Q
−
→ ni=1 p j ∗ A/B equals the kernel of

n
Y

p ∗

j A/B.

i=1

to B because the kernel of the natural map
the projection p j ∗ A −
→ p j ∗ A/B.

There are different characterizations of the intermediate extension summarized in the
next proposition.
Proposition 6.8. Let B be an object of CU . For A ∈ C, the following characterizations
(up to isomorphism) are equivalent:
(i) The object A is the image of the natural morphism p j! B −→ p j∗ B, in other words,
A = j!∗ B.
(ii) The object A is an extension of B to D without non-trivial subobjects or quotients
in the essential image of i∗ .
(iii) The object A is the smallest subobject of p j∗ B such that the canonical morphism
pj∗A −
→ B is an isomorphism. Here the canonical morphism p j ∗ A −→ B is the
morphism obtained from the inclusion A ֒−
→ p j∗ B by the adjunction between p j ∗
and p j∗ .
In particular, an object A of D satisfying (ii) is unique.
Proof. We will proof (i) ⇔ (ii) and (ii) ⇔ (iii). The reason for this seemingly pedestrian
approach is that later on the proof of (ii) ⇔ (iii) can be directly transferred to Cartier
crystals, where we do not have the extension by zero j! .
(i) ⇒ (ii). Let f : p j! B −
→ A be the natural epimorphism and let g : A −
→ p j∗ B be
p
∗
p
the natural monomorphism. By definition, g ◦ f = η(B). Since j is exact, j ∗ f is epic
and p j ∗ g is monic. It follows from Lemma 6.5 that A is an extension of B to D. By
construction, j!∗ B is a subobject of p j∗ B and a subquotient of p j! B. This implies that
j!∗ B does not have any non-trivial subobjects or quotients supported on Z (Lemma 6.4).
(ii) ⇒ (i). Let f : p j! B −
→ A and g : A −
→ p j∗ B be the adjoint morphisms of the given
∼
p
∗
isomorphism τ : j A −→ B. By Lemma 6.5 we have g ◦ f = η(B). Applying the exact
functor p j ∗ to the exact sequence
g

0 −→ ker g −→ A −→ p j∗ B,

89

we see that p j ∗ ker g ≃ 0: By construction the composition of p j ∗ g and the natural
isomorphism p j ∗p j∗ B −
→ B equals τ . Therefore p j ∗ g is an isomorphism. By assumption,
p j ∗ ker g ∼ 0 implies ker g ∼ 0. Similarly, we see that f is epic. This means that A is
=
=
the image of η(B).
(ii) ⇒ (iii). In the proof of (ii) ⇒ (i) we have already seen that A is a subobject of
p j B. It remains to show that it is the smallest subobject of p j B such that the natural
∗
∗
morphism p j ∗ A −
→ B is an isomorphism. Suppose that E is a subobject of p j∗ B with
p j ∗ E ∼ B. By Lemma 6.7 we may assume that E is a subobject of A. It follows that
=
j (A/E) ∼
= p j ∗ A/p j ∗ E ∼
= 0,

p ∗

which means that the quotient A/E is in the essential image of the functor p i∗ . By
assumption, this quotient is trivial, in other words E ∼
= A.
(iii) ⇒ (ii). By assumption, A is an extension of B to D. Every subobject of A is a
subobject of p j∗ B and p j∗ B has no non-trivial subobjects supported on Z (Lemma 6.4).
Now let F be a subobject of A such that the quotient A/F is in the essential image of
p i . This implies p j ∗ (A/F ) ∼ 0 and, because of p j ∗ (A/F ) ∼ p j ∗ A/p j ∗ F , it follows that
=
=
∗
p j ∗ A ∼ p j ∗ F and hence p j ∗ F ∼ B. This contradicts the minimality of A.
=
=
Remark 6.9. Similar to the characterization (iii) of the preceding proposition, the intermediate extension j!∗ B is a quotient of p j! B such that the adjoint map B −
→ p j ∗ j!∗ B
is an isomorphism and with the following universal property: For every epimorphism
pj B −
→ Q such that the adjoint B −
→ p j ∗ Q is an isomorphism, the canonical epimor!
phism p j! B −
→ j!∗ B factors uniquely through Q. In other words, j!∗ B is the quotient of
p j B by the maximal subobject supported on Z.
!
For the proof, let p : p j! B −
→ Q be an epimorphism such that the adjoint B −
→ pj∗Q
p
is an isomorphism. Then there is a morphism q : Q −
→ j∗ B making the diagram

p

η

/ p j∗ B
✇;
✇
✇✇
✇
✇
 ✇✇✇ q

pj B
!

Q

→ j!∗ B such that the
commutative (Lemma 6.5). Thus q induces an epimorphism q ′ : Q −
p
′
canonical epimorphism j! B −
→ j!∗ B equals the composition q ◦ p.
With the intermediate extension functor we can describe the simple objects of C in
dependence of the simple objects of CU and CZ .
Proposition 6.10 ([BBD82, Proposition 1.4.26]). An object of C is simple if and only
if it is of the form i∗ T for some simple object of CZ or if it is of the form j!∗ T for some
simple object T in CU .
Proof. If an object S is contained in the essential image of i∗ , then S is a simple object
of C if and only if S is simple in i∗ CZ because this subcategory is thick in C.
Now we suppose that T = p j ∗ S ≇ 0. Let S be a simple object of C. It follows that T is
a simple object of CU : if there would exist a proper subobject T ′ of T , then p j∗ T ′ would

90

∼ id. By definition, S
be a proper subobject of p j∗ T because p j∗ is left exact and p j ∗p j∗ =
is an extension of T to D and S has no non-trivial subobjects, in particular no non-trivial
subobjects or quotients supported on Z. Hence S = j!∗ T (Proposition 6.8).
Conversely, let T be a simple object of CU . To see that S = j!∗ T is a simple object,
consider an arbitrary short exact sequence
β

α

0 −→ A −→ S −→ B −→ 0
in C. The sequence

pj ∗α

p j ∗β

0 −→ p j ∗ A −−−→ T −−−→ p j ∗ B −→ 0
is also exact and by assumption p j ∗ A ∼
= 0 or p j ∗ B ∼
= 0. But S neither has non-trivial
subobjects nor non-trivial quotients supported on Z. Therefore, A ∼
= 0 or B ∼
= 0.
Lemma 6.11. We have the following exactness properties of the intermediate extension:
j!∗ (i)

i

(i) Let 0 −→ A −→ B be an exact sequence in CU . Then the sequence 0 −→ j!∗ A −−−→
j!∗ B is also exact.
j!∗ (p)

p

(ii) Let B −→ C −→ 0 be an exact sequence in CU . Then the sequence j!∗ B −−−→
j!∗ C −→ 0 is also exact.
Proof. We have p j ∗ j!∗ (i) ∼
= i and p j ∗ j!∗ (p) ∼
= p. This implies that the kernel of j!∗ (i)
and the cokernel of j!∗ (p) are supported on Z. Hence ker j!∗ (i) ∼
= 0 and coker j!∗ (p) ∼
=0
because ker j!∗ (i) is a subobject of j!∗ A and coker j!∗ (p) is a quotient of j!∗ C.

6.2 The intermediate extension of Cartier crystals
For the rest of this section let X be an F -finite, locally Noetherian scheme of characteristic p. Furthermore, let j : U −
→ X be an open immersion and let i : Z −
→ X be a closed
immersion such that j(U ) is the complement of i(Z). If one had a left adjoint j! for
the exact functor j ∗ : Crysκ (X) −
→ Crysκ (U ), one could directly apply the formalism of
Beilinson, Bernstein and Deligne from the previous subsection to define the intermediate
extension of Cartier crystals. However, we can draw inspiration from Proposition 6.8
and define the intermediate extension of Cartier crystals by a universal property. Then
we show the existence.
Definition 6.12. Let M be a Cartier crystal on U . The intermediate extension j!∗ M
of M is the smallest subcrystal N of j∗ M such that j ! N ∼
→ j∗ M is
= M, i.e. Φ : j!∗ M ֒−
!
∼
a subcrystal with j j!∗ M = M and the following universal property: For every inclusion
α : N ֒−
→ j∗ M with j ∗ N ∼
→ N such that
= M, there is a unique inclusion α̃ : j!∗ M ֒−
Φ = α ◦ α̃.
Theorem 6.13. Let M be a Cartier crystal on U . Then the intermediate extension
j!∗ M exists and it is unique up to unique isomorphism.

91

Proof. We can construct a descending sequence of Cartier crystals
j∗ M =: N0 ) N1 ) N2 ) . . .
such that j ∗ Ni ∼
= M by iteratively choosing proper subcrystals. The descending chain
condition for Cartier crystals on F -finite schemes ([BB11, Corollary 4.7]) ensures that
this sequence stabilizes at some crystal Nm .
We claim that Nm satisfies the universal porperty of j!∗ M. Let N ⊆ j∗ M be a Cartier
crystal such that j ∗ N ∼
= M. But then j ∗ (Nm ∩ N ) ∼
= M (Lemma 6.7) and by construction of Nm it follows that Nm ∩ N = Nm . Hence there is a monomorphism Nm ֒−
→ N.
The uniqueness of j!∗ M is an immediate consequence of its universal property.
Definition 6.14. Let A be an abelian category. Let g : A −
→ B be a morphism in A.
−1
For a subobject C of B, the preimage g C is the kernel of the composition
g

pr

A −→ B −→ B/C,
where pr is the natural projection.
Proposition 6.15. The assignment
M 7→ j!∗ M
defines a functor j!∗ : Crysκ (U ) −→ Crysκ (X).
Proof. Let ϕ : M −
→ N be a morphism of Cartier crystals on U . We claim that j∗ ϕ
restricts to a morphism on the subcrystals j!∗ ϕ : j!∗ M −
→ j!∗ N . For this we have to
show that ϕ(j!∗ M) ⊆ j!∗ N , which is equivalent to ϕ−1 (j!∗ N ) ⊇ j!∗ M. By definition of
j!∗ M, it suffices to show that j ∗ ϕ−1 (j!∗ N ) ∼
= M. This is clear after applying the exact
functor j ∗ to the exact sequence
i

α

0 −→ ϕ−1 (j!∗ N ) −→ j∗ M −→ j∗ N /j!∗ N ,
where i is the natural inclusion and α is the composition of j∗ ϕ and the projection
j∗ N −
→ j∗ N /j!∗ N .
By construction, it is clear that j!∗ (idM ) = idj!∗ M for every Cartier crystal M on U .
For two morphisms ϕ : M1 −
→ M2 and ψ : M2 −
→ M3 , we have j!∗ (ψ ◦ ϕ) = j!∗ ψ ◦ j!∗ ϕ
because the diagram
j∗ (ψ◦ϕ)

j∗ M
O 1
?

j!∗ M1

j∗ ϕ

/ j∗ M2
O

j!∗ ϕ

?
/ j!∗ M2

)
j∗ ψ
j!∗ ψ

/ j∗ M3
O

?
/ j!∗ M3 .
5

j!∗ (ψ◦ϕ)

commutes. Here the vertical maps are the natural monomorphisms.

92

Now we show that the intermediate extension of Cartier crystals is compatible with
compositions of open immersions. In a recollement situation, this follows from the
natural isomorphisms p (v ◦ u)! ∼
= p v! ◦ p u! and p (v ◦ u)∗ ∼
= p v∗ ◦ p u∗ .
Lemma 6.16. Let u : U −→ V and v : V −→ X be open immersions. Then there is a
natural isomorphism of functors
v!∗ ◦ u!∗ ∼
= (v ◦ u)!∗ .
Proof. Let M be a Cartier crystal on U . By the left exactness of v∗ , we have natural
inclusions
v!∗ u!∗ M ⊆ v∗ u!∗ M ⊆ v∗ u∗ M ∼
= (v ◦ u)∗ M.
This means that v!∗ u!∗ M is a subcrystal of (v ◦ u)∗ M. Moreover,
(v ◦ u)∗ (v!∗ u!∗ M) ∼
= u∗ v ∗ v!∗ u!∗ M ∼
= u∗ u!∗ M ∼
= M.
It remains to show that v!∗ u!∗ M is the smallest subcrystal of (v◦u)∗ M with this property.
Let i : N −
→ v!∗ u!∗ M be an injective morphism of Cartier crystals on X such that (v◦u)∗ i
is an isomorphism. We obtain an inclusion v ∗ i : v ∗ N −
→ u!∗ M. Since u∗ v ∗ N ∼
= M, the
∗
universal property of u!∗ M implies that v i is an isomorphism. By the defining property
of v!∗ (u!∗ M), the inclusion i must be an isomorphism.
Further properties of the intermediate extension in a recollement situation remain
valid in the situation of Cartier crystals, even with the same proofs if we replace p j ∗
and p j∗ by the functors j ∗ and j∗ of Cartier crystals. By an extension of a Cartier
crystal M on U to X we mean a Cartier crystal N on X together with an isomorphism
+ (QCrys (U )), D = D + (QCrys (Z))
j∗N ∼
= M. In other words, we set DU = Dcrys
Z
κ
crys
κ
+ (QCrys (X)), each equipped with the canonical t-structure.
and D = Dcrys
κ
Proposition 6.17. Let M be a Cartier crystal on U . The intermediate extension j!∗ M
is the unique extension of M to X which neither has non-trivial subcrystals nor quotients
supported on Z.
Proof. The proof of the equivalence (ii) ⇔ (iii) of Proposition 6.8 can be adopted.
Proposition 6.18. A Cartier crystal on X is simple if and only if
(i) it is of the form i∗ N for some simple Cartier crystal N on Z or
(ii) it is of the form j!∗ N for some simple Cartier crystal N on U .
Proof. We proceed as in the proof of Proposition 6.10. Recall that i∗ Crysκ (Z) is a thick
subcategory because a Cartier crystal M on X is contained in the essential image of i∗
if and only if j ∗ M = 0 (see Definition 1.9) and the functor j ∗ is exact.
Lemma 6.19. The intermediate extension of Cartier crystals preserves injections and
surjections, i.e. we have the following properties:

93

i

(i) Let 0 −→ A −→ B be an exact sequence in Crysκ (U ). Then the sequence 0 −→
j!∗ (i)

j!∗ A −−−→ j!∗ B is also exact.
j!∗ (p)

p

(ii) Let B −→ C −→ 0 be an exact sequence in Crysκ (U ). Then the sequence j!∗ B −−−→
j!∗ C −→ 0 is also exact.
Proof. We can adopt the proof of Lemma 6.11.

6.3 Intermediate extensions of Cartier crystals and perverse sheaves
As mentioned in Remark 5.2, the perverse t-structure of D b (Xét , Z/pZ) is obtained by
recollement from the perverse t-structures on Db (Uét , Z/pZ) and D b (Zét , Z/pZ). Moreover, the functors j! , j∗ , j ∗ , i∗ , i∗ and i! have finite cohomological amplitude. Hence the
formalism of recollement applies for these categories.
Proposition 6.20. The intermediate extension j!∗ , defined as the image of the canonical
morphism p j! −→ p j∗ , restricts to a functor Pervc (Uét , Z/pZ) −→ Pervc (Xét , Z/pZ).
Proof. Let L be an object of Pervc (Uét , Z/pZ). The functor j! restricts to a functor
→ Dcb (Xét , Z/pZ) ([EK04, 8.3]). Thus p j! L ∈ Pervc (Xét , Z/pZ). Let K
Dcb (Uét , Z/pZ) −
be the kernel of the natural surjection p j! L −
→ j!∗ L. Since j!∗ L is a perverse sheaf, we
know that K is an object of Perv(Xét , Z/pZ). Moreover, by [Gab04, Corollary 12.4],
K has constructible cohomology sheaves because as a perverse sheaf it is a subobject
of an object in the subcategory Pervc (Xét , Z/pZ). It follows that p j! L/K ∼
= j!∗ L ∈
Pervc (Xét , Z/pZ).
Corollary 6.21. Assume that k is a perfect field of characteristic p. Let X be an F finite embeddable k-scheme. Let j : U −→ X be an open immersion. There is a natural
isomorphism of functors
j!∗ ◦ Solκ −→ Solκ ◦j!∗ .
Proof. Let M be a Cartier crystal on U . Let L denote the perverse constructible étale
sheaf Solκ (M). Let ϕ : j!∗ M −
→ j∗ M be the natural monomorphism. Applying Solκ
to ϕ, we obtain an epimorphism ψ : p j! L −
→ Solκ (j!∗ M) because, by Theorem 5.12, we
have natural isomorphisms
Solκ (j∗ M) ∼
= Solκ (H 0 Rj∗ M) ∼
= p H 0 Solκ (Rj∗ M) ∼
= p H 0 j! Solκ (M) = p j! Solκ (M).
It suffices to show that Solκ (j!∗ M) verifies the universal property of Remark 6.9. Let
q : p j! L −
→ Q be an epimorphism in Pervc (Xét , Z/pZ) such that the adjoint L −
→ pj ∗ Q
is an isomorphism. Under the equivalence Solκ , the epimorphism q corresponds to a
monomorphism p : N −
→ j∗ M for a Cartier crystal N on U with Solκ (N ) ∼
= Q. Further∗
more, the adjoint p̃ : j N −
→ M is an isomorphism. For this we consider the following

94

diagram:
Solκ (M)

Solκ (a)
∼

/ Solκ (j ∗ j∗ M)

Solκ (j ∗ p)

/ Solκ (j ∗ N )

∼



j ∗ Solκ (j∗ M)

∼
j∗

Solκ (p)



/ j ∗ Solκ (N )

∼

Solκ (M)



b
∼

/ j ∗p j! Solκ (M)

j ∗q

/ j ∗ Solκ (N ),

where a : j ∗ j∗ −
→ id and b : id −
→ j ∗p j! are the adjunction morphisms. The rectangle
on the left commutes because Solκ is an equivalence of categories and the counit and
unit of adjunction are unique. The naturality of the isomorphism Solκ ◦j ∗ ∼
= j ∗ ◦ Solκ
implies the commutativity of the upper right square and the square below commutes
by construction of the morphism p. The composition of the lower horizontal morphisms
is the adjoint of q and therefore an isomorphism by assumption. It follows that the
composition of the morphisms of the top row is an isomorphism. But this composition
equals Solκ (p̃). Hence p̃ is an isomorphism.
The universal property of j!∗ M yields a unique monomorphism p′ : j!∗ M −
→ N such
that ϕ = p ◦ p′ . Applying Solκ we obtain a unique epimorphism q ′ : Q −
→ Solκ (j!∗ M)
making the diagram
pj L
!
q

ψ

/ Solκ (j!∗ M)
9
rrr
r
r
rr
 rrrr q ′

Q
commutative.

References
[ATJLL97] L. Alonso Tarrío, A. Jeremías López, and J. Lipman, Local homology and
cohomology on schemes, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4) 30 (1997), no. 1,
1–39.
[BB]

M. Blickle and G. Böckle, Cartier crystals and unit OF,X -modules, uncirculated preprint.

[BB11]

M. Blickle and G. Böckle, Cartier modules: Finiteness results, J. Reine
Angew. Math. 661 (2011), 85–123.

[BB13]

M. Blickle and G. Böckle, Cartier Crystals, arXiv:1309.1035 (2013).

[BBD82]

A. A. Beı̆linson, J. Bernstein, and P. Deligne, Faisceaux pervers, Astérisque,
vol. 100, Soc. Math. France, Paris, 1982.

[Ber]

J. Bernstein, Algebraic Theory of D-modules, unpublished notes.

95

[Ber96]

P. Berthelot, D-modules arithmétiques. I. Opérateurs différentiels de niveau
fini, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4) 29 (1996), no. 2, 185–272.

[Ber00]

, D-modules arithmétiques. II. Descente par Frobenius, Mém. Soc.
Math. Fr. (N.S.) (2000), no. 81, vi+136.

[Bli03]

M. Blickle, The D-Module structure of R[F ]-modules, Trans. Amer. Math.
Soc. 355 (2003), no. 4, 1647–1668.

[BS13]

M. P. Brodmann and R. Y. Sharp, Local Cohomology, second ed., Cambridge
Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 136, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 2013, An algebraic introduction with geometric applications.

[Con00]

B. Conrad, Grothendieck Duality and Base Change, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1750, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2000.

[CR12]

A. Chatzistamatiou and K. Rülling, Hodge-Witt Cohomology and WittRational Singularities, Doc. Math. 17 (2012), 663–781.

[Del70]

P. Deligne, Équations différentielles à points singuliers réguliers, Lecture
Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 163, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1970.

[EK04]

M. Emerton and M. Kisin, Riemann–Hilbert correspondence for unit Fcrystals, Astérisque 293 (2004), vi+257 pp.

[Gab62]

P. Gabriel, Des catégories abéliennes, Bull. Soc. Math. France 90 (1962),
323–448.

[Gab04]

O. Gabber, Notes on some t-structures, Geometric aspects of Dwork theory.
Vol. I, II, Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin, 2004, pp. 711–734.

[GM83]

M. Goresky and R. MacPherson, Intersection Homology. II, Invent. Math.
72 (1983), no. 1, 77–129.

[God58]

R. Godement, Topologie algébrique et théorie des faisceaux, Actualit’es Sci.
Ind. No. 1252. Publ. Math. Univ. Strasbourg. No. 13, Hermann, Paris, 1958.

[Har66]

R. Hartshorne, 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, No. 20, Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
1966.

[Har67]

, Local Cohomology, A seminar given by A. Grothendieck, Harvard
University, Fall, vol. 1961, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1967.

[Har77]

, Algebraic Geometry, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1977, Graduate
Texts in Mathematics, No. 52.

96

[Hil00]

D. Hilbert, Mathematische Probleme, Nachrichten von der Königl.
Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen. Mathematisch-Physikalische
Klasse, Band Heft 3 (1900), Vortrag, gehalten auf dem internationalen
Mathematiker-Kongreß zu Paris 1900.

[HTT08]

R. Hotta, K. Takeuchi, and T. Tanisaki, D-Modules, Perverse Sheaves,
and Representation Theory, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 236, Birkhäuser
Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2008, Translated from the 1995 Japanese edition
by Takeuchi.

[Kas80]

M. Kashiwara, Faisceaux constructibles et systèmes holonômes d’équations
aux dérivées partielles linéaires à points singuliers réguliers, Séminaire
Goulaouic-Schwartz, 1979–1980 (French), École Polytech., Palaiseau, 1980,
pp. Exp. No. 19, 7.

[Kas84]

, The Riemann-Hilbert Problem for Holonomic Systems, Publ. Res.
Inst. Math. Sci. 20 (1984), no. 2, 319–365.

[Kat73]

N. M. Katz, p-adic properties of modular schemes and modular forms, Modular functions of one variable, III (Proc. Internat. Summer School, Univ.
Antwerp, Antwerp, 1972), Springer, Berlin, 1973, pp. 69–190. Lecture Notes
in Mathematics, Vol. 350.

[Kun69]

E. Kunz, Characterizations of Regular Local Rings of Characteristic p, Amer.
J. Math. 91 (1969), 772–784.

[Lip09]

J. Lipman, Notes on Derived Functors and Grothendieck Duality, Foundations of Grothendieck duality for diagrams of schemes, Lecture Notes in
Math., vol. 1960, Springer, Berlin, 2009, pp. 1–259.

[Lur16]

J.
Lurie,
Higher
Algebra,
Available
at:
http://www.math.harvard.edu/ lurie/papers/HA.pdf [Accessed 7 August 2016] (2016).

[Lüt93]

W. Lütkebohmert, On compactification of schemes, Manuscripta Math. 80
(1993), no. 1, 95–111.

[Meb84a]

Z. Mebkhout, Une autre équivalence de catégories, Compositio Math. 51
(1984), no. 1, 63–88.

[Meb84b]

, Une équivalence de catégories, Compositio Math. 51 (1984), no. 1,
51–62.

[Mil80]

J. S. Milne, Étale Cohomology, Princeton Mathematical Series, vol. 33,
Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1980.

[Nag62]

Masayoshi Nagata, Imbedding of an abstract variety in a complete variety,
J. Math. Kyoto Univ. 2 (1962), 1–10.

97

[Nay09]

S. Nayak, Compactification for essentially finite-type maps, Adv. Math. 222
(2009), no. 2, 527–546.

[Ohk16]

S. Ohkawa, Riemann-Hilbert correspondence for unit F-crystals on embeddable algebraic varieties, arXiv:1601.01525 (2016).

[Wei94]

C. A. Weibel, An introduction to homological algebra, Cambridge Studies in
Advanced Mathematics, vol. 38, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
1994.

98

