DYNAMIC CHARACTERIZATIONS OF QUASI-ISOMETRY,
AND APPLICATIONS TO COHOMOLOGY

arXiv:1604.07375v4 [math.GR] 18 Apr 2017

XIN LI

A BSTRACT. We build a bridge between geometric group theory and topological dynamical systems by establishing
a dictionary between coarse equivalence and continuous orbit equivalence. As an application, we give conceptual
explanations for previous results of Shalom and Sauer on coarse invariance of homological and cohomological
dimensions and Shalom’s property HFD . As another application, we show that group homology and cohomology
in a class of coefficients, including all induced and co-induced modules, are coarse invariants. We deduce that being
of type FPn (over arbitrary rings) is a coarse invariant, and that being a (Poincaré) duality group over a ring is a
coarse invariant among all groups which have finite cohomological dimension over that ring. Our results also imply
that every self coarse embedding of a Poincaré duality group over an arbitrary ring must be a coarse equivalence.

1. I NTRODUCTION
The philosophy of geometric group theory is to study groups not merely as algebraic objects but from a geometric point of view. There are two ways of developing a geometric perspective, by viewing groups themselves
as geometric objects (for instance with the help of their Cayley graphs, which leads to the notion of quasiisometry) or by studying groups by means of “nice” group actions on spaces which carry some topology or
geometry. Once a geometric point of view is taken, an immediate question is: How much of the original algebraic structures is still visible from our new perspective? Or more precisely: Which algebraic invariants of
groups are quasi-isometry invariants?
Our goals in this paper are twofold. First, we want to connect the two geometric perspectives mentioned above
by giving dynamic characterizations of quasi-isometry, or more generally, coarse equivalence. It turns out
that for topological dynamical systems, the concept corresponding to coarse equivalence is given by (modified
versions of) continuous orbit equivalence, as introduced in [26, 27]. The latter means that we can identify the
orbit structure of our dynamical systems in a continuous way. The idea of developing dynamic characterizations
of coarse equivalence goes back to Gromov’s notion of topological couplings and has been developed further
in [43, 41]. Recently, independently from the author, a dynamic characterization of bilipschitz equivalence for
finitely generated groups was obtained in [31], which is a special case of our result.
Secondly, we want to study the behaviour of algebraic invariants of groups under coarse equivalence. More
precisely, we consider invariants of (co)homological nature. Using our dynamic characterizations of coarse
equivalence, we give conceptual explanations of the results in [43, 41] on coarse invariance of homological
and cohomological dimensions and Shalom’s property HFD . Moreover, using a refined, more concrete version
of our dynamic characterizations, we produce many new coarse invariants of (co)homological nature. We
generalize the result in [19] that among groups G satisfying the finiteness condition Fn (i.e., there exist models
for Eilenberg-MacLane spaces with finite n-skeleton), the cohomology groups H n (G, RG) are coarse invariants
for all commutative rings R with unit. We show that for a class of coefficients (called res-invariant modules),
including all induced and co-induced modules, group homology and cohomology are coarse invariants. In
particular, H ∗ (G, RG) is always a coarse invariant. This answers a question in [33] (see [33, Questions after
Theorem 2.7]). Our results imply that being of type FPn over R (i.e., the trivial RG-module R admits a projective
resolution which is finitely generated up to level n) is a coarse invariant. This is a partial generalization of [43,
Theorem 1.7]. A different approach is mentioned in [15, Theorem 9.61], and the case R = Z has been treated
in [2]. As a consequence, we obtain that for an arbitrary commutative ring R with unit, the property of being a
duality or Poincaré duality group over R is a coarse invariant among all groups which have finite cohomological
dimension over R. A group G is called a duality group over R if there is a right RG-module C and an integer
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 20F65, 20J06; Secondary 37B99.
Research supported by EPSRC grant EP/M009718/1.
1

n ≥ 0 with natural isomorphisms H k (G, A) ∼
= Hn−k (G,C ⊗R A) for all k ∈ Z and all RG-modules A (see [4,
§ 9.2], [3], and [9, Chapter VIII, § 10]). G is called a Poincaré duality group over R if C ∼
= R as R-modules. C is
called the dualizing module; note that we must have C ∼
= H n (R, RG) as right RG-mdules. Our result generalizes
[19, Corollary 3], as we do not need the finiteness condition F∞ (i.e., Fn for all n) and can work over arbitrary
rings. Examples of groups which are not duality groups over Z but over some other ring can be found in [13],
and examples of (Poincaré) duality groups which are not of type F∞ appear in [13, 25]. Combined with Sauer’s
result [41, Theorem 1.2 (ii)], we obtain that among amenable groups, being a (Poincaré) duality group over a
divisible ring is a coarse invariant. This generalizes [41, Theorem 3.3.2]. We also prove a rigidity result for
coarse embeddings into Poincaré duality groups. If a group G with hdR G < ∞ coarsely embeds into a Poincaré
duality group H, then hdR G < cdR H. In particular, self coarse embeddings of Poincaré duality groups over an
arbitrary ring must be coarse equivalences.
Let us now formulate and explain our main results in more detail. At the same time, we fix some notations.
Throughout this paper, all our groups are countable and discrete. First, we recall the notion of coarse maps (see
[40, Definition 2.21]). Note that coarse embeddings in our sense are called uniform embeddings in [43, 41].
Definition 1.1. A map ϕ : G → H between
groups G and H is
map if ϕ −1 ({y}) is finite for
 two
 called a coarse
−1
−1
: (s,t) ∈ S is finite.
all y ∈ H, and for every S ⊆ G × G with st : (s,t) ∈ S finite, ϕ (s)ϕ (t)
 −1
ϕ : G → H is called a coarse embedding if for every subset S ⊆ G × G, st : (s,t) ∈ S is finite if and only
if ϕ (s)ϕ (t)−1 : (s,t) ∈ S is finite.

Two maps ϕ , φ : G → H are called close if ϕ (x)φ (x)−1 : x ∈ G is finite. We write ϕ ∼ φ in that case.
A coarse map ϕ : G → H is called a coarse equivalence if it is coarsely invertible, i.e., there is a coarse
map ψ : H → G such that ψ ◦ ϕ ∼ idG and ϕ ◦ ψ ∼ idH .
We say that two groups G and H are coarsely equivalent if there is a coarse equivalence G → H.
Clearly, coarse embeddings are coarse maps. Examples of coarse embeddings are subgroup embeddings and
quasi-isometric embeddings. For finitely generated groups, coarse equivalences coincide with quasi-isometries
(see [43]). Note that unlike in [43, 41], in our definition, we use st −1 and not s−1t (see Remark 2.1).
Let us explain our dynamic characterizations of coarse embeddings and equivalences. Let G y X and H y Y
be topological dynamical systems, where the groups act by homeomorphisms on locally compact Hausdorff
spaces. A continuous orbit couple is a pair of continuous maps p : X → Y and q : Y → X which both preserve
orbits in a continuous way, such that p and q are inverses up to orbits (i.e., q(p(x)) lies in the same G-orbit
of x and similarly for p ◦ q). “Preserving orbits in a continuous way” is made precise by continuous maps
a : G × X → H such that p(g.x) = a(g, x).p(x) for all g ∈ G and x ∈ X . If p and q are actual inverses (i.e.,
q ◦ p = idX and p ◦ q = idY ), then our dynamical systems are called continuously orbit equivalent.
Our first main result establishes the following dictionary: The existence of a coarse embedding G → H
corresponds to the existence of a continuous orbit couple for topologically free systems G y X and H y Y ,
where X is compact. The existence of a coarse equivalence G → H corresponds to the existence of a continuous
orbit couple for topologically free systems G y X and H y Y , where both X and Y are compact, and we can
find a bijective coarse equivalence G → H if and only if we can find a continuously orbit equivalence for G y X
and H y Y . We refer to Theorem 2.17 for precise statements.
It turns out that for compact X , the existence of a continuous orbit couple for G y X and H y Y is
equivalent to saying that G y X and H y Y are Kakutani equivalent, i.e., there are clopen subspaces A ⊆ X
and B ⊆ Y which are G- and H-full such that the partial actions G y A and H y B are continuously orbit
equivalent (in the sense of [27]). This implies that the transformation groupoids of G y X and H y Y are
Morita equivalent. Building on this observation, we show that the results in [43, 41] on coarse invariance of
(co)homological dimension and Shalom’s property HFD are immediate consequences of Morita invariance of
groupoid (co)homology. This gives a conceptual explanation for the results in [43, 41], and at the same time,
our work isolates precise conditions on the dynamical systems which are needed to show coarse invariance.
The dynamic characterizations we described so far are abstract as the dynamical systems are not specified. It
is striking that even such abstract characterizations suffice to derive the results in [43, 41]. However, to show
coarse invariance of group (co)homology in particular coefficients, we need more concrete versions of our dynamic characterizations. Inspired by [44], we first observe that in place of abstract dynamical systems, we may
always take the canonical action G y β G of groups G on their Stone-Čech compactifications β G. The appearance of G y β G is not surprising because of its universal property. But now, our crucial observation is that we
can go even further and consider the actions G y G of groups acting on themselves by left multiplication. By
2

doing so, it seems that we are losing all the information as any two actions G y G and H y H are continuously
orbit equivalent as long as G and H have the same cardinality. The problem is that the spaces on which our
groups act are no longer compact. However, we can replace compactness by asking for finiteness conditions on
the maps a, which – as in the definition of continuous orbit couples – make precise that orbits are preserved in
a continuous way: We require that for every g ∈ G, the map a(g, ·) should have finite image. It is this finiteness
condition which singles out “controlled” orbit equivalences which behave well in (co)homology. The point is
that every coarse equivalence G → H gives rise to a “controlled” orbit equivalence between G y G and H y H.
This change of perspective, putting the emphasis on this finiteness condition, turns out to be crucial.
These ideas lead to the following results: Let R be a commutative ring with unit and W an R-module. The
set C(G,W ) of functions G → W carries a natural RG-module structure. An RG-submodule L ⊆ C(G,W ) is
called res-invariant if for every f ∈ L and A ⊆ G, the restriction of f to A (viewed as a function on G by extending it by 0) still lies in L. Examples include C(G,W ), the submodule C f (G,W ) of f ∈ C(G,W ) taking
only finitely many values, RG ⊗R W , and for W = R = R or C, c0 (G,W ) = { f : G → W : limx→∞ | f (x)| = 0},
ℓ p (G,W ) = { f : G → W : ∑x∈G | f (x)| p < ∞} (0 < p ≤ ∞), H s,p (G,W ) = { f : G → W : f · (1 + ℓ)s ∈ ℓ p (G,W )}
(s
∈ R ∪ {∞}, 1 ≤ p < ∞), where G is finitely generated and ℓ is the word length on G, and H ∞,p (G,W ) =
T
s,p
s∈R H (G,W ). We show that a coarse equivalence ϕ : G → H induces a one-to-one correspondence between
res-invariant submodules of C(G,W ) and res-invariant submodules of C(H,W ), denoted by L 7→ ϕ∗ L, together
with isomorphisms H∗ (ϕ ) : H∗ (G, L) ∼
= H∗ (H, ϕ∗ L) for all L. Similarly, ϕ induces a one-to-one correspondence between res-invariant submodules of C(H,W ) and res-invariant submodules of C(G,W ), say M 7→ ϕ ∗ M,
together with isomorphisms H ∗ (ϕ ) : H ∗ (H, M) ∼
= H ∗ (G, ϕ ∗ M) for all M. In particular, we obtain
Theorem (Corollary 4.41). Among all countable discrete groups G, the following (co)homology groups are
coarse invariants: H∗ (G,C(G,W )), H∗ (G,C f (G,W )), H ∗ (G,C f (G,W )), H ∗ (G, RG ⊗R W ) for every commutative ring R with unit and every R-module W;
H∗ (G, c0 (G, R)), H ∗ (G, c0 (G, R)), H̄∗ (G, c0 (G, R)), H̄ ∗ (G, c0 (G, R)); H∗ (G, ℓ p (G, R)), H ∗ (G, ℓ p (G, R)),
H̄∗ (G, ℓ p (G, R)), H̄ ∗ (G, ℓ p (G, R)), for all 0 < p ≤ ∞; and for finitely generated groups G, H∗ (G, H s,p (G, R)),
H ∗ (G, H s,p (G, R)), H̄∗ (G, H s,p (G, R)), H̄ ∗ (G, H s,p (G, R)), for all s ∈ R ∪ {∞}, 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, where R = R or C.
Some of these (co)homology groups can be identified with existing (co)homology theories: H ∗ (G, RG) is
coarse cohomology [40, § 5.1], H∗ (G,C f (G, Z)) and H∗ (G, ℓ∞ (G, R)) coincide with uniformly finite homology
[6, 8, 5], and for ℓ p coefficients, we obtain L p -cohomology [35, 19, 16]. Actually, we show that every coarse
map ϕ : G → H induces a map H∗ (ϕ ) : H∗ (G, L) → H∗ (H, ϕ∗ L) such that H∗ (ϕ ) = H∗ (φ ) if ϕ ∼ φ and
H∗ (ψ ◦ ϕ ) = H∗ (ψ ) ◦ H∗ (ϕ ). It is then evident that coarse equivalences induce isomorphisms as they are
precisely those coarse maps which are invertible modulo ∼. A similar remark applies to cohomology. Thus,
not only these (co)homology groups, but, by functoriality, the actions of the groups of coarse equivalences
(modulo ∼) on these (co)homology groups are coarse invariants as well. We obtain analogous results for coarse
embeddings in the topological setting, i.e., for topological res-invariant modules and reduced (co)homology. It
turns out that coarse embeddings always induce isomorphisms in (co)homology and reduced (co)homology.
The aforementioned results on coarse invariance of type FPn and being a (Poincaré) duality group are immediate consequences, as is our rigidity result for coarse embeddings into Poincaré duality groups. We also
deduce that vanishing of ℓ2 -Betti numbers is a coarse invariant, as observed in [35, 34, 32], and generalized by
Sauer and Schrödl to all unimodular locally compact second countable groups [42].
This is a good point to formulate an interesting and natural question, which we elaborate on in § 4.4:
Question (Question 4.44). Are homological and cohomological dimension over a commutative ring R with unit
always coarse invariants among all countable discrete groups with no R-torsion?
We refer to § 4 for more details. § 3 and § 4 are independent from each other. Thus readers interested in this
last set of results on coarse invariance of group (co)homology may go directly from § 2 to § 4.
As far as our methods are concerned, we use groupoid techniques as in [43, 41, 34], but instead of working with
abstract dynamical systems, we base our work on concrete dynamic characterizations of coarse equivalence.
The difference between our work and [19] is that we do not work with descriptions of group (co)homology in
terms of Eilenberg-MacLane spaces, as these descriptions require finiteness conditions (like Fn or F∞ ) on our
groups and have to be modified whenever we change coefficients. Instead, since coarse embeddings automatically lead to “controlled” orbit equivalences satisfying the finiteness condition mentioned above, we can work
directly with complexes coming from bar resolutions.
3

I thank Andreas Thom for informing me about [31], Roman Sauer for explaining certain parts of his work [41]
to me, and for informing me about [42, 32], and Roman Sauer and Clara Löh for very helpful comments.

2. DYNAMICAL

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF QUASI - ISOMETRY

2.1. Preliminaries. The central notions of coarse maps, embeddings and equivalences have been introduced
in § 1. We remark that it is easy to see that a coarse embedding ϕ : G → H is coarsely invertible ifSand only if H
can be covered by finitely many translates of ϕ (G), i.e., there is a finite set F ⊆ H such that H = h∈F hϕ (G).
Remark 2.1. Note that unlike in [43], our definition of coarse maps is right-invariant, not left-invariant (i.e., we
use st −1 instead of s−1 t). For finitely generated groups, this amounts to considering right-invariant word lengths
and word metrics. We do so because in the following, we will consider left actions of groups, in particular the
action of a group by left multiplication on itself. Of course, this is merely a matter of convention.
The following concept, due to Gromov, builds a bridge between geometric group theory and topological dynamical systems.
Definition 2.2. For two groups G and H, a (G, H) topological coupling consists of a locally compact space
Ω with commuting free and proper left G- and right H-actions which admit clopen H- and G-fundamental
domains X̄ and Ȳ . Our (G, H) topological coupling is called G-cocompact if Ȳ is compact, H-cocompact if
X̄ is compact, and cocompact if it is both G- and H-cocompact. It is called topologically free (or free) if the
combined action G × H y Ω is topologically free (or free).
All our spaces are Hausdorff. Also, being only concerned with the topological setting, we simply write “coupling” (without prefix “topological”). We often write G y Ȳ ΩX̄ x H to keep track of all the relevant data.
The following result goes back to ideas of Gromov and is proven in [43] and [41].
Theorem 2.3. Let G and H be countable discrete groups.
(i) There exists a coarse embedding G → H if and only if there exists a H-cocompact (G, H) coupling.
(ii) There exists a coarse equivalence G → H if and only if there exists a cocompact (G, H) coupling.
(iii) There is a bijective coarse equivalence G → H if and only if there is a cocompact (G, H) coupling
G y Ȳ ΩX̄ x H with X̄ = Ȳ .
Proof. For (i), see [41, Theorem 2.2, (i) ⇔ (ii)]. For (ii), see [41, Theorem 2.2, (iii) ⇔ (iv)]. For (iii), see [43,
Remark after Theorem 2.1.2].

Remark 2.4. The proofs in [41, 43] show that the underlying space Ω of the (G, H) couplings can be chosen
to be second countable and totally disconnected in the above statements.
Let us now isolate an idea from [31] which will be useful later on.
Lemma 2.5. If there exists a (G, H) coupling G y Ω x H, then there exists a topologically free (G, H) coupling
G y Ω′ x H. If G y Ω x H is G-cocompact, H-cocompact or cocompact, G y Ω′ x H may be chosen with
the same property. If Ω is second countable and totally disconnected, we may choose Ω′ with the same property.
Proof. The idea of the proof appears in the proof of [31, Theorem 3.2]. Let G × H y Z be a free action on the
Cantor space Z. It is easy to see that Ω′ = Ω × Z with diagonal G- and H-actions is a (G, H) coupling which is
topologically free (even free). As Z is compact and totally disconnected, our additional claims follow.

2.2. Topological couplings and continuous orbit couples. We explain the connection between topological
couplings and continuous orbit couples. First of all, a topological dynamical system G y X consists of a group
G acting on a locally compact space X via homeomorphisms. We write g.x for the action.
Definition 2.6. Let G y X and H y Y be topological dynamical systems.
A continuous map p : X → Y is called a continuous orbit map if there exists a continuous map a : G × X → H
such that p(g.x) = a(g, x).p(x) for all g ∈ G and x ∈ X .
A continuous orbit couple for G y X and H y Y consists of continuous orbit maps p : X → Y and q : Y → X
such that there exist continuous maps g : X → G and h : Y → H such that q(p(x)) = g(x).x and p(q(y)) = h(y).y
for all x ∈ X and y ∈ Y .
4

Definition 2.7. A (G, H) continuous orbit couple consists of topological dynamical systems G y X and H y Y
and a continuous orbit couple for G y X and H y Y . If G y X and H y Y are topologically free, then the
(G, H) continuous orbit couple is called topologically free. We call X the G-space and Y the H-space of our
(G, H) continuous orbit couple.
Remark 2.8. In this language, a continuous orbit equivalence for G y X and H y Y in the sense of [26] is the
same as a continuous orbit couple for G y X and H y Y with g ≡ e and h ≡ e, i.e., p = q−1 .
Definition 2.9. A (G, H) continuous orbit equivalence consists of topological dynamical systems G y X and
H y Y and a continuous orbit equivalence for G y X and H y Y .
Theorem 2.10. Let G and H be groups. There is a one-to-one correspondence between isomorphism classes
of topologically free (G, H) couplings and isomorphism classes of topologically free (G, H) continuous orbit
couples, with the following additional properties:
(i) A (G, H) coupling G y Ȳ ΩX̄ x H corresponds to a (G, H) continuous orbit couple with G-space
homeomorphic to X̄ and H-space homeomorphic to Ȳ .
(ii) A (G, H) coupling G y Ȳ ΩX̄ x H with X̄ = Ȳ corresponds to a (G, H) continuous orbit equivalence.
Here, the notions of isomorphisms are the obvious ones: Topological couplings G y Ȳ1 Ω1 X̄1 x H and G y
∼
Ȳ2 Ω2 X̄2 x H are isomorphic if there exists a G × H-equivariant homeomorphism Ω1 = Ω2 sending X̄1 to X̄2 and
Ȳ1 to Ȳ2 . Continuous orbit couples (pi , qi ) for G y Xi and H y Yi , i = 1, 2, are isomorphic if there exist G- and
H-equivariant homeomorphisms X1 ∼
= Y2 such that we obtain commutative diagrams
= X2 and Y1 ∼
X1

p1

/ Y1

∼
=

∼
=



X2

p2

Y1

q1

/ X1
∼
=

∼
=




/ Y2

Y2

q2


/ X2

For the proof of Theorem 2.10, we now present explicit constructions of continuous orbit couples out of topological couplings and vice versa. The constructions are really the topological analogues of those in [17, § 3]
(see also [43, 41]). In the following, we write gx (g ∈ G, x ∈ Ω) and xh (x ∈ Ω, h ∈ H) for the left G- and right
H-actions in topological couplings, and g.x, h.y for the actions G y X , H y Y from continuous orbit couples.
2.2.1. From topological couplings to continuous orbit couples. Let G y Ȳ ΩX̄ x H be a (G, H) coupling. Set
X := X̄ and Y := Ȳ . Define a map p : X → Y by requiring Gx ∩ Y = {p(x)} for all x ∈ X . The intersection
Gx ∩Y , taken in Ω, consists of exactly one point because Y is a G-fundamental domain. By construction, there
is a map γ : X → G such that p(x) = γ (x)x. For g ∈ G, γ takes the constant value g on X ∩ g−1Y . As X ∩ g−1Y
is clopen, because X and Y are, γ is continuous. p is continuous as it is so on X ∩ g−1Y for all g ∈ G.
We now define a G-action, denoted by G × X → X , (g, x) 7→ g.x, as follows: For every g ∈ G and x ∈ X , there
exists a unique α (g, x) ∈ H such that gx ∈ X α (g, x). For fixed g ∈ G and h ∈ H, we have α (g, x) = h for all
x ∈ X ∩ g−1 X h. As X ∩ g−1 X h is clopen because X is, α : G × X → H is continuous. Set g.x := gxα (g, x)−1 . It
is easy to check that α satisfies the cocycle identity α (g1 g2 , x) = α (g1 , g2 .x)α (g2 , x). Using this, it is easy to
see that G × X → X , (g, x) 7→ g.x defines a (left) G-action on X by homeomorphisms.
Similarly, we define a continuous map q : Y → X by requiring X ∩ yH = {q(y)} for all y ∈ Y , and let η : Y → H
be the continuous map satisfying q(y) = yη (y). To define an H-action on Y , let β (y, h) ∈ G be such that
yh ∈ β (y, h)Y . Again, β : Y × H → G is continuous. Set h.y := β (y, h−1 )−1 yh−1 . It is easy to check that β
satisfies β (y, h1 h2 ) = β (y, h1 )β (h−1
1 .xh2 ). Using this, it is again easy to see that H ×Y → Y, (h, y) 7→ h.y defines
an H-action on Y by homeomorphisms.
Let us check that (p, q) is a (G, H) continuous orbit couple. We need to identify Ggxα (g, x)−1 ∩ Y in order to
determine p(g.x) = p(gxα (g, x)−1 ). We have
Ggxα (g, x)−1 ∋ β (γ (x)x, α (g, x)−1 )−1 γ (x)xα (g, x)−1 ∈ Y,
so p(g.x) = β (γ (x)x, α (g, x)−1 )−1 γ (x)xα (g, x)−1 = α (g, x).(γ (x)x) = α (g, x).p(x). Similarly, in order to identify q(h.y) = q(β (y, h−1 )−1 yh−1 ), we need to determine X ∩ β (y, h−1 )−1 yh−1 H. As
X ∋ β (y, h−1 )−1 yη (y)α (β (y, h−1 )−1 , yη (y))−1 ∈ β (y, h−1 )−1 yh−1 H,
we deduce q(y.h) = β (y, h−1 )−1 yη (y)α (β (y, h−1 )−1 , yη (y))−1 = β (y, h−1 )−1 .(yη (y)) = β (y, h−1 )−1 .q(y). Finally, qp(x) = q(γ (x)x) = γ (x)xα (γ (x), x)−1 = γ (x).x and pq(y) = p(yη (y)) = β (y, η (y))−1 yη (y) = η (y)−1 .y.
5

All in all, we see that p and q give rise to a continuous orbit couple for G y X and H y Y , with g(x) = γ (x)
and h(y) = η (y)−1 .
Note that our coupling does not need to be topologically free for this construction. However, it is clear that
G y Ω x H is topologically free (i.e., G × H y Ω is topologically free) if and only if G y X and H y Y are
topologically free.
Remark 2.11. Our notation differs slightly from the one in [43] and [41]. Our α (g, x) is α (g−1 , x)−1 in [43,
§ 2.2, Equation (3)] and [41, § 2.2, Equation (2.2)]. This is closely related to Remark 2.1.
Remark 2.12. The dynamical system G y X we constructed above can be canonically identified with G y
Ω/H. Similarly, our system H y Y can be identified with G\Ω x H in a canonical way.
2.2.2. From continuous orbit couples to topological couplings. Let G y X and H y Y be topologically free
systems on locally compact spaces X and Y . Assume that we are given a continuous orbit couple for G y X
and H y Y , and let p, q, a, g and h be as in Definition 2.6, and let b : H × Y → G be a continuous map
with q(h.y) = b(h, y).q(y) for all h ∈ H and y ∈ Y . Define commuting left G- and right H-actions on X × H
by g(x, h) = (g.x, a(g, x)h), (x, h)h′ = (x, hh′ ). Furthermore, define commuting left G- and right H-actions on
G ×Y by g′ (g, y) = (g′ g, y) and (g, y)h = (gb(h−1 , y)−1 , h−1 .y).
A straightforward computation, using the cocycle identities ([26, Lemma 2.8]) for a and b, shows that Θ : X ×
H → G ×Y, (x, h) 7→ (g(x)−1 b(h−1 , p(x))−1 , h−1 .p(x)) is a G- and H-equivariant homeomorphism with inverse
Θ−1 : G ×Y → X × H, (g, y) 7→ (g.q(y), a(g, q(y))h(y)). Thus, the G × H-space Ω = X × H and X̄ = X × {e},
Ȳ = Θ−1 ({e} ×Y ) yield the desired topologically free (G, H) coupling G y Ȳ ΩX̄ x H.
Note that topological freeness of G y X and H y Y ensures that a and b satisfy the cocycle identities (as in
[26, Lemma 2.8]), which are needed in the preceding computations.
2.2.3. One-to-one correspondence.
Proof of Theorem 2.10. It is straightforward to check that the constructions described in § 2.2.1 and § 2.2.2 are
inverse to each other up to isomorphism. If we start with a topologically free (G, H) coupling G y Ȳ ΩX̄ x H,
construct a continuous orbit couple and then again a (G, H) coupling, we end up with a (G, H) coupling of
the form G y Ỹ Ω̃X̃ x H where Ω̃ = X̄ × H ∼
= G × Ȳ , X̃ = X̄ × {e} and Ỹ ∼
= {e} × Ȳ . It is then obvious
that Ω̃ = X̄ × H → Ω, (x, h) 7→ xh is an isomorphism of the couplings G y Ỹ Ω̃X̃ x H and G y Ȳ ΩX̄ x H.
Conversely, if we start with a continuous orbit couple for topologically free systems G y X and H y Y ,
construct a (G, H) coupling and then again a (G, H) continuous orbit couple, we end up with a continuous orbit
couple for G y X̃ and H y Ỹ where X̃ = X × {e} and Ỹ ∼
= X × {e}
= {e} ×Y . The canonical isomorphisms X ∼
∼
and Y = {e} × Y yield an isomorphism between the original (G, H) continuous orbit couple and the one we
obtained at the end.
Additional property (i) is clear from our constructions. For (ii), take X̄ = Ȳ in the construction of § 2.2.2.
Then it is clear that our maps p and q become the identity map on X̄ = Ȳ , that γ becomes the constant function
with value e ∈ G and η the constant function with value e ∈ H. Hence it is obvious that our construction yields
a (G, H) continuous orbit equivalence (see also Remark 2.8).

Remark 2.13. The maps p, q constructed in § 2.2.1 are open. Thus the maps p, q appearing in a continuous
orbit couple (Definition 2.6) are automatically open. This is also easy to see directly from the definition.
2.3. Continuous orbit couples and Kakutani equivalence.
Definition 2.14. (Compare also [30, Definition 4.1].) Topological dynamical systems G y X and H y Y are
Kakutani equivalent if there exist clopen subsets A ⊆ X and B ⊆ Y such that G.A = X , H.B = Y and (X ⋊ G)|A ∼
=
(Y ⋊ H)|B as topological groupoids. Here (X ⋊ G)|A = s−1 (A) ∩ r−1 (A) and (Y ⋊ H)|B = s−1 (B) ∩ r−1 (B).
Remark 2.15. (X ⋊ G)|A is (isomorphic to) the transformation groupoid attached to the partial action G y A
which is obtained by restricting G y X to A. Similarly, (Y ⋊ H)|B is (isomorphic to) the transformation
groupoid attached to the partial action H y B which is obtained by restricting H y Y to B. In view of this, two
topologically free systems G y X and H y Y are Kakutani equivalent if and only if there exist clopen subsets
A ⊆ X and B ⊆ Y with G.A = X , H.B = Y such that the partial actions G y A and H y B are continuously orbit
equivalent in the sense of [27]. This follows from [27, Theorem 2.7].
The reader may find more about partial actions in [27, § 2] and the relevant references in [27].
6

Theorem 2.16. Let G y X and H y Y be topologically free systems. There exists a continuous orbit couple
for G y X and H y Y with p(X ) closed if and only if G y X and H y Y are Kakutani equivalent.
Here p : X → Y is as in Definition 2.6. The assumption that p(X ) is closed always holds if X is compact. This
will be the case of interest later on.
Proof. By Remark 2.15, we have to show that there exists a continuous orbit couple for G y X and H y Y
if and only if there exist clopen subspaces A ⊆ X and B ⊆ Y with X = G.A and Y = H.B such that the partial
actions G y A and H y B are continuously orbit equivalent.
For “⇒”, suppose we are given a continuous orbit couple for G y X and H y Y , and let p, q, a, b, g F
and h be
as in Definition 2.6 and § 2.2.2. For g ∈ G, let Ug = {x ∈ X : g(x) = g}. Then Ug is clopen, and X = g∈G Ug .
For every g ∈ G, Vg := p(Ug ) is clopen, and p : Ug → Vg is a homeomorphism, whose inverse is given by
S
Vg → Ug , y 7→ g−1 .q(y). Set B := p(X ). By assumption, B is closed, hence clopen. We have B = g∈G Vg .
As G is countable, this is a countable union. Hence by inductively choosing compact open subspaces Bg of
F
F
Vg , we can arrange that B is the disjoint union B = g∈G Bg . Let Ag := Ug ∩ p−1 (Bg ) and A := g∈G Ag . As
F
F
F
every Ag is clopen, A = g∈G Ag is clopen in X = g∈G Ug . Set ϕ := p|A = g∈G p|Ag . By construction, ϕ is a
F
F
homeomorphism with inverse ϕ −1 = g∈G (p|Ag )−1 = g∈G (g−1 .q)|Bg .
We have ϕ (g.x) = p(g.x) = a(g, x).p(x) for all x ∈ A, g ∈ G with g.x ∈ A. Moreover, take y ∈ Bg1 and
−1
−1
−1
h ∈ H with h.y ∈ Bg2 . Then ϕ −1 (h.y) = g−1
2 .q(h.y) = g2 b(h, y).q(y) = g2 b(h, y)g1 .ϕ (y). Define a map
−1
′
′
−1
′
b by setting b (h, y) = g2 b(h, y)g1 if y ∈ Bg1 ∩ h .Bg2 . Then b is continuous, and we have ϕ −1 (h.y) =
b′ (h, y).ϕ −1 (y) for all y ∈ B, h ∈ H with h.y ∈ B. This shows that ϕ gives rise to a continuous orbit equivalence
for G y A and H y B. To see that G.A = X , take for x′ ∈ X an x ∈ A such that p(x) = p(x′ ). Then g(x).x =
q(p(x)) = q(p(x′ )) = g(x′ ).x′ , and therefore x′ ∈ G.x. To see H.B = Y , take y ∈ Y arbitrary. Then p(q(y)) =
h(y).y shows that y = h(y)−1 .p(q(y)) ∈ H.B. This shows “⇒”.
For “⇐”, suppose that G y X and H y Y are Kakutani equivalent, i.e., there are clopen subsets A ⊆ X and
B ⊆ Y with X = G.A, Y = H.B and the partial actions G y A and H y B are continuously orbit equivalent via
a homeomorphism ϕ : A ∼
= B. By definition of continuous orbit equivalence (see [27]), there exist continuous
′
′
ϕ −1 (y) whenever this makes sense.
maps a and b satisfying ϕ (g.x) = a′ (g, x).ϕ (x) and ϕ −1 (h.y) = b′ (h, y).
F
As X = G.A, we can find clopen subsets Xγ ⊆ γ .A, γ ∈ G, such that X = γ ∈G Xγ and Xe = A. Define p : X → Y
by setting p(x) := ϕ (γ −1 .x) for x ∈ Xγ . p is continuous, and p(X ) = B is clopen. Similarly, there are clopen
F
subsets Yη ⊆ η .B such that Y = η ∈H Yη and Ye = B. We define q : Y → X by setting q(y) = ϕ −1 (η −1 .y) if
y ∈ Yη . By construction, q is continuous.
We have p(g.x) = ϕ (γ2−1 g.x) = ϕ (γ2−1 gγ1 .(γ1−1 .x)) = a′ (γ2−1 gγ1 , γ1−1 .x).ϕ (γ1−1 .x) = a′ (γ2−1 gγ1 , γ1−1 .x).p(x)
for x ∈ Xγ1 and g ∈ G with g.x ∈ Xγ2 . Set a : G × X → H, a(g, x) = a′ (γ2−1 gγ1 , γ1−1 .x) for x ∈ Xγ1 ∩ g−1 .Xγ2 . Then
a is continuous and ϕ (g.x) = a(g, x).ϕ (x) for all g ∈ G and x ∈ X .
For y ∈ Yη1 and h ∈ H such that h.y ∈ Yη2 , we have
q(h.y) = ϕ −1 (η2−1 h.y) = ϕ −1 (η2−1 hη1 (η1−1 .y)) = b′ (η2−1 hη1 , η1−1 .y).ϕ −1 (η1−1 .y) = b′ (η2−1 hη1 , η1−1 .y).q(y).
Set b : H × Y → G, b(h, y) = b′ (η2−1 hη1 , η1−1 .y) for y ∈ Yη1 ∩ h−1 .Yη2 . Then b is continuous and ϕ −1 (h.y) =
b(h, y).ϕ −1 (y) for all h ∈ H and y ∈ Y .
Moreover, for x ∈ Xγ , q(p(x)) = q(ϕ (γ −1 .x)) = ϕ −1 (ϕ (γ −1 .x)) = γ −1 .x. Set g : X → G, g(x) = γ −1 if
x ∈ Xγ . Then g is continuous and q(p(x)) = g(x).x for all x ∈ X . For y ∈ Yη ∩ η .ϕ (Xγ ), we have p(q(y)) =
p(ϕ −1 (η −1 .y)) = ϕ (γ −1 .ϕ −1 (η −1 .y)) = ϕ (γ −1 b′ (η −1 , y).ϕ −1 (y) = a′ (γ −1 b′ (η −1 , y), ϕ −1 (y)).y. Set h : Y →
H, h(y) := a′ (γ −1 b′ (η −1 , y), ϕ −1 (y)) if y ∈ Yη ∩ η .ϕ (Xγ ). Then h is continuous and p(q(y)) = h(y).y for all
y ∈ Y.
So p and q give a continuous orbit couple for G y X and H y Y . This shows “⇐”.

2.4. Dynamic characterizations of coarse embeddings, equivalences and bijections. Putting together Theorem 2.3, Lemma 2.5, Theorems 2.10 and 2.16, we obtain the following
Theorem 2.17. Let G and H be countable discrete groups.
• The following are equivalent:
- There exists a coarse embedding G → H.
- There exist Kakutani equivalent topologically free G y X and H y Y , with X compact.
- There is a continuous orbit couple for topologically free G y X and H y Y , with X compact.
7

• The following are equivalent:
- There is a coarse equivalence G → H.
- There are Kakutani equivalent topologically free G y X and H y Y on compact spaces X , Y .
- There is a continuous orbit couple for topologically free G y X and H y Y , with X , Y compact.
• There is a bijective coarse equivalence G → H if and only if there exist continuously orbit equivalent
topologically free systems G y X and H y Y on compact spaces X and Y .
In all these statements, the spaces X and Y can be chosen to be totally disconnected and second countable.
This is a generalization of [31, Theorem 3.2], where the authors independently prove the last item of our
theorem in the special case of finitely generated groups.
Remark 2.18. The last observation in Theorem 2.17 says that we can always choose our spaces X , Y to be
totally disconnected. In that case, [10, Theorem 3.2] tells us that we can replace Kakutani equivalence in the
theorem above by stable continuous orbit equivalence. Two topological dynamical systems G y X and H y Y
are called stably continuously orbit equivalent if Z × G y Z × X and Z × H y Z × Y are continuously orbit
equivalent. Here the integers Z act on themselves by translation.
2.5. Dynamic characterizations of coarse embeddings, equivalences and bijections in terms of actions on
Stone-Čech compactifications. Inspired by [44], we characterize coarse embeddings, equivalences and bijections in terms of Kakutani equivalence (or stable continuous orbit equivalence) and continuous orbit equivalence
of actions on Stone-Čech compactifications.
Let G, H be two countable discrete groups. Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse embedding. Consider the Stone-Čech
compactification β G of G. It is homeomorphic to the spectrum Spec (ℓ∞ (G)), and can be identified with the
space of all ultrafilters on G. We will think of elements in β G as ultrafilters on G. Given any subset X ⊆ G, we
obviously have the identification {F ∈ β G: X ∈ F } ∼
= β X , F 7→ F ∩ X := {F ∩ X : F ∈ F }.
Now suppose that X ⊆ G is a subset such that ϕ |X is injective. Setting Y := ϕ (X ) ⊆ H, we obtain a bijection
X∼
= Y, x 7→ ϕ (x), which we again denote by ϕ . Let us consider the topological dynamical systems G y β G and
H y β H. We identify β X and β Y with clopen subsets of β G and β H, respectively, in the way explained above.
ϕ induces a homeomorphism β ϕ : β X ∼
= β Y, F 7→ ϕ (F ). The dynamical systems G y β G and H y β H
restrict to partial dynamical systems G y β X and H y β Y .
Proposition 2.19. β ϕ induces a continuous orbit equivalence between G y β X and H y β Y , in the sense of
[27, Definition 2.6].
Proof. For all g ∈ G, we need to find a continuous map a : {g} ×Ug−1 → H with β ϕ (g.F ) = a(g, F ).β ϕ (F ).

Here Ug−1 = β X ∩ g−1 .β X = {F ∈ β X : g.F ∈ β X } = F ∈ β G: X ∈ F , g−1 X ∈ F ∼
= β (X ∩ g−1 X ). For
x ∈ X ∩ g−1 X , define the ultrafilter Fx by saying that Z ∈ Fx if and only if x ∈ Z. Define a map ã : {g} ×

Fx : x ∈ X ∩ g−1 X → H by setting ã(g, Fx ) := ϕ (gx)ϕ (x)−1 . Then
(1)

ã(g, Fx ).β ϕ (Fx ) = ϕ (gx)ϕ (x)−1 .β ϕ (Fx ) = ϕ (gx)ϕ (x)−1 .Fϕ (x) = Fϕ (gx) = β ϕ (Fgx ) = β ϕ (g.Fx )

−1
for all
fix g ∈ G. Set S = {(gx, x):
ϕ is a coarse embedding
 x ∈ G}. As
 g−1∈ G, x ∈ X ∩ g X . Let us 
−1
−1
and st : (s,t) ∈ S = {g} is finite, ϕ (s)ϕ (t) : (s,t) ∈ S = ϕ (g, x)ϕ (x) : x ∈ G is finite. Hence
im (ã) ⊆ ϕ (gx)ϕ (x)−1 : x ∈ G is finite, hence a compact subset of H. By universal property of β (X ∩ g−1 X ),
there exists a continuous extension of ã to {g} × Ug−1 which we denote by a. We claim that β ϕ (g.F ) =
a(g, F ).β ϕ (F ) for all F ∈ Ug−1 . Let xi ∈ X ∩ g−1 X be a net such that limi Fxi = F . Then a(g, Fxi ) =
ϕ (gxi )ϕ (xi )−1 converges to a(g, F ) by construction. Hence
(1)

a(g, F ).β ϕ (F ) = lim a(g, Fxi ).β ϕ (Fxi ) = lim β ϕ (g.Fxi ) = β ϕ (lim g.Fxi ) = β ϕ (g.F ).
i

i

i



The following observation will be used several times.
Lemma 2.20. Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse embedding. Set Y := ϕ (G). For every y ∈ Y , choose xy ∈ G with
ϕ (xy ) = y. Set X := {xy : y ∈ Y }.
S
Then ϕ restricts to a bijection X ∼
= Y , and there is finite subset F ⊆ G with G = g∈F gX .
Proof. Clearly, the restriction
of ϕ to X is a bijection onto Y . To prove that G can be covered by finitely many

translates of X , set S := (g, xϕ (g) ): g ∈ G . Then ϕ (s)ϕ (t)−1 : (s,t) ∈ S = {e}, where e is the identity in
8

H. Since ϕ is a coarse embedding,
S
subset F ⊆ G with G = g∈F gX .

n
o 
gxϕ−1(g) : g ∈ G = st −1 : (s,t) ∈ S must be finite. Hence there is finite


We now obtain the following characterizations of coarse embeddings, equivalences and bijections.
Corollary 2.21. Let G and H be countable discrete groups.
(i) The following are equivalent:
- There is a coarse embedding G → H.
- There is an open, dense, H-invariant subspace Ỹ ⊆ β H such that G y β G and H y Ỹ are
Kakutani equivalent.
- There is an open, dense, H-invariant subspace Ỹ ⊆ β H such that there is a continuous orbit
couple for G y β G and H y Ỹ .
- There is an open, dense, H-invariant subspace Ỹ ⊆ β H such that G y β G and H y Ỹ are stably
continuously orbit equivalent.
(ii) There is a coarse equivalence G → H if and only if Ỹ = β H works in the statements in (i).
(iii) There is a bijective coarse equivalence G → H if and only if G y β G and H y β H are continuously
orbit equivalent.
Proof. (i): Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse embedding. Let Y and X be as in Lemma 2.20. As the restriction of ϕ
to X is a bijection onto Y , Proposition 2.19Syields that G y β X and H y β Y are continuously orbit equivalent.
As there is finite subset F ⊆ G with G = g∈F gX , we have β G = G.β X . Let Ỹ := H.β Y . Then G y β G and
H y Ỹ are Kakutani equivalent. Ỹ is H-invariant by construction, and it is easy to see that Ỹ is open and dense.
Now (i) follows from Theorem 2.17, Theorem 2.16 and Remark 2.18.
(ii): AScoarse embedding ϕ : G → H is coarsely invertible if and only if there is a finite subset F ⊆ H such
that H = h∈F hϕ (G). This happens if and only if in the proof of (i), we get Ỹ = β H.
(iii): If ϕ : G → H is a bijective coarse equivalence, then we can take X = G, Y = H in the above proof of
(i) and obtain that G y β G and H y β H are continuously orbit equivalent. The reverse implication “⇐” in
(ii) is proven in Theorem 2.17.

Remark 2.22. In combination with [44], Corollary 2.21 implies that nuclear Roe algebras have distinguished
Cartan subalgebras, as explained in [28].
Remark 2.23. Corollary 2.21 shows that quasi-isometry rigidity can be interpreted as a special case of continuous orbit equivalence rigidity (in the sense of [26]), applied to actions on Stone-Čech compactifications. This
points towards an interesting connection between these two types of rigidity phenomena and would be worth
exploring further.

3. A PPLICATIONS

TO ( CO ) HOMOLOGY

I

We now show how the results in [43, 41] on coarse invariance of (co)homological dimensions and property
HFD follow from Morita invariance of groupoid (co)homology. Let us first define groupoid (co)homology. We
do this in a concrete and elementary way which is good enough for our purposes. We refer to [11] for a more
general and more conceptual approach, and for more information about groupoids. Let G be an étale locally
compact groupoid with unit space X = G (0) , and R a commutative ring with unit. A G -sheaf of R-modules is
a sheaf A of R-modules over X , i.e., we have a locally compact space A with an étale continuous surjection
π : A ։ X whose fibres are R-modules, together with the structure of a right G -space on A . In particular, ever
γ ∈ G induces an isomorphism of R-modules Ar(γ ) → As(γ ) , a 7→ a ∗ γ . To pass from right to left actions, we
write γ .a := a ∗ γ −1 if π (a) = s(γ ).
Let G (n) = {(γ1 , . . . , γn ) ∈ G n : s(γi ) = r(γi+1 ) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1}, and set r(γ1 , . . . , γn ) = r(γ1 ). We write ~γ
for elements in G (n) . Given a G -sheaf of R-modules A with projection π : A ։ X , let Γc (G (n) , A ) be the
R-module of continuous functions f : G (n) → A with compact support such that π ( f (~γ )) = r(~γ ). Now we
dn+1

dn−1

d

d

d

n
2
1
define a chain complex . . . −→ Γc (G (n) , A ) −→
Γc (G (n−1) , A ) −→ . . . −→
Γc (G , A ) −→
Γc (X , A ) → 0,
(i)
−1
with d1 ( f )(x) = ∑ γ ∈G γ . f (γ ) − ∑ γ ∈G f (γ ) for f ∈ Γc (G , A ), and for n ≥ 1: dn ( f ) = ∑ni=0 (−1)i dn ( f )

s(γ )=x

r(γ )=x

9

for f ∈ Γc (G (n) , A ), where
(0)

dn ( f )(γ1 , . . . , γn−1 ) =

γ0−1 . f (γ0 , γ1 , . . . , γn−1 ),

∑

γ0 ∈G
s(γ0 )=r(γ1 )
(i)

dn ( f )(γ1 , . . . , γn−1 ) =

∑

f (. . . , γi−1 , η , ξ , γi+1 , . . . )

for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1,

η ,ξ ∈G
ηξ =γi
(n)

dn ( f )(γ1 , . . . , γn−1 ) =

∑

f (γ1 , . . . , γn−1 , γn ).

γn ∈G
r(γn )=s(γn−1 )

We then define the n-th homology group Hn (G , A ) := ker (dn )/im (dn+1 ). In the case R = Z and where A is a
constant sheaf with trivial G -action, we recover [30, Definition 3.1].
Let us also introduce cohomology. Let G , R and A be as above, and let Γ(G (n) , A ) be the R-module of
d0

continuous functions f : G (n) → A with π ( f (~γ )) = r(~γ ). We define a cochain complex 0 → Γ(X , A ) −→
d1

d n−1

dn

d n+1

Γ(G , A ) −→ . . . −→ Γ(G (n) , A ) −→ Γ(G (n+1) , A ) −→ . . . with d 0 ( f )(γ ) = γ . f (s(γ ))− f (r(γ )), and for n ≥ 1:
i n
d n ( f ) = ∑n+1
i=0 (−1) d(i) ( f ), where
n
d(0)
( f )(γ0 , . . . , γn ) = γ0 . f (γ1 , . . . , γn );
n
d(i)
( f )(γ0 , . . . , γn ) = f (γ0 , . . . , γi−1 γi , . . . , γn )

for 1 ≤ i ≤ n;

n
d(n+1)
( f )(γ0 , . . . , γn ) = f (γ0 , . . . , γn−1 ).

We set H n (G , A ) := ker (d n )/im (d n−1 ).
Now let G y X be a topological dynamical system. For notational purposes, and to keep the conventions in
the literature, let us pass to the right action X x G, x.g = g−1 .x, and consider the corresponding transformation
groupoid X ⋊ G with source and range maps given by s(x, g) = x.g, r(x, g) = x. We note that the transformation
groupoid G ⋉ X attached to the original action, as in [26, 27], is isomorphic to X ⋊ G via G ⋉ X → X ⋊
G, (g, x) 7→ (g.x, g). It is easy to see that a (X ⋊ G)-sheaf of R-modules is nothing else but a sheaf A of Rmodules over X , π : A ։ X , together with a left G-action on A via homeomorphisms (denoted by G × A →
A , (g, a) 7→ g.a) such that π becomes G-equivariant, and Ax → Ag.x , a 7→ g.a is an isomorphism of R-modules.
We call these G-sheaves of R-modules over X .
3.1. Isomorphisms in homology and cohomology. First of all, let us prove
Theorem 3.1. Let G y X and H y Y be topologically free systems, where G and H are countable discrete
groups. Suppose that G y X and H y Y are Kakutani equivalent. Then there is an equivalence of categories
between G-sheaves of R-modules over X and H-sheaves of R-modules over Y , denoted by SX 7→ SY on the
level of objects, such that H∗ (G, Γc (X , SX )) ∼
= H∗ (H, Γc (Y, SY )) and H ∗ (G, Γ(X , SX )) ∼
= H ∗ (H, Γ(Y, SY )).
Here Γ stands for continuous sections and Γc for those with compact support.
Proof. It is easy to see that H∗ (G, Γc (X , A )) ∼
= H ∗ (X ⋊ G, A ) for topo= H∗ (X ⋊ G, A ) and H ∗ (G, Γ(X , A )) ∼
logical dynamical systems G y X and G-sheaves A of R-modules over X .
Now, by assumption, there are clopen subspaces A ⊆ X and B ⊆ Y with X = G.A, Y = H.B and an isomorphism of topological groupoids χ : (X ⋊ G)|A ∼
= (Y ⋊ H)|B. Let ιA : (X ⋊ G)|A ֒→ X ⋊ G and ιB : (Y ⋊ H)|B ֒→
Y ⋊ H be the canonical inclusions. As A is G-full and B is H-full, ιA and ιB induce equivalences of categories
of sheaves. So we obtain an equivalence of categories between G-sheaves of R-modules over X and H-sheaves
of R-modules over Y , denoted by SX 7→ SY on the level of objects, such that SY is uniquely determined by

χ ∗ (SY |B) = SX |A. Our theorem now follows from Morita invariance of groupoid (co)homology.

For every topological dynamical system G y X , we have sup n: Hn (G, Γc (X , A )) ≇ {0} ≤ hdR (G) and
sup n: H n (G, Γ(X , A )) ≇ {0} ≤ cdR (G) by the definitions of homological and cohomological dimensions.
Here the suprema are taken over all G-sheaves A of R-modules over X .

Definition 3.2. A (G, H) continuous orbit couple is called H∗,R G-full if sup n: Hn (G, Γc (X , A )) ≇ {0} =
hdR (G) holds for its topological
dynamical system G y X . It is called H ∗,R G-full if its topological dynamical

system G y X satisfies sup n: H n (G, Γ(X , A )) ≇ {0} = cdR (G).
10

The following is an immediate consequence of Theorem 3.1.
Corollary 3.3. If there exists an H∗,R G-full topologically free (G, H) continuous orbit couple, then hdR (G) ≤
hdR (H). If there exists an H ∗,R G-full topologically free (G, H) continuous orbit couple, then cdR (G) ≤ cdR (H).
Remark 3.4. Together with Theorem 2.17, Corollary 3.3 can be viewed as an explanation and generalization
of the results in [43, 41] concerning coarse invariance of (co)homological dimension. In our terminology,
the conditions from [43, 41] that the topological dynamical system G y X of a (G, H) continuous orbit couple
admits a G-invariant probability measure and Q ⊆ R ensure that the (G, H) continuous orbit couple is H∗,R G-full
and H ∗,R G-full (see [43, § 3.3] and [41, § 4]). Existence of a G-invariant probability measure is guaranteed if G
is amenable and the G-space of our continuous orbit couple is compact. Moreover, again in our terminology, it
is shown in [41, § 4] that a (G, H) continuous orbit couple with compact G-space is H∗,R G-full if hdR (G) < ∞
and H ∗,R G-full if cdR (G) < ∞. Once we know this, [43, Theorem 1.5] and [41, Theorem 1.2] are immediate
consequences of Theorem 2.17 and Corollary 3.3. In § 4.4, we present an alternative approach to these results.
3.2. Isomorphisms in reduced cohomology. Let G be an étale locally compact groupoid and L = (µ , H , L)
a (unitary) representation of G as in [39, Chapter II, Definition 1.6]. Here µ is a quasi-invariant measure
on G (0) , H a Hilbert bundle over (G (0) , µ ), and L a representation of G , i.e., for each γ ∈ G , L(γ ) is a
unitary Hs(γ ) ∼
= Hr(γ ) , and the conditions in [39, Chapter II, Definition 1.6] are satisfied (σ in [39, Chapter II,
Definition 1.6] is the trivial cocycle in our case). Let D be the modular function attached to µ , as in [39,
Chapter I, Definition 3.4]. In particular, we are interested in the case G = X ⋊ G of a transformation groupoid
attached to a topological dynamical system G y X on a compact space X . A representation L of X ⋊ G gives
rise – through its integrated form – to a *-representation of C(X ) ⋊ G, which in turn corresponds in a one-to-one
way to a covariant representation (πL , σL ) of G y X (or rather of (C(X ), G)).
Now let G = X ⋊ G be as above and L a representation of G . We define cohomology groups H n (G , L)
and reduced cohomology groups H̄ n (G , L) with coefficients in L. Let us write L = (µ , H , L). Let G (n) =
{(γ1 , . . . , γn ) ∈ G n : s(γi ) = r(γi+1 ) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1}, and set r(γ1 , . . . , γn ) = r(γ1 ). We will write ~γ for elements in G (n) . Let Γ(G (n) , H ) be the set of all Borel functions f : G (n) → H with f (~γ ) ∈ Hr(~γ ) such that
R
for every compact subset K ⊆ G (n) , G (0) ∑ ~γ ∈K k f (~γ )k2 d µ (x) < ∞, divided by the equivalence relation sayr(~γ )=x

ing that f1 ∼ f2 if for every compact subset K ⊆ G (n) ,

R

γ ) − f2 (~γ )k
G (0) ∑ ~γ ∈K k f1 (~
r(~γ )=x

2

d µ (x) = 0. The topology

on Γ(G (n) , H ) is given by the following notion of convergence: A net ( fi )i converges to an element f in
R
Γ(G (n) , H ) if for every compact subset K ⊆ G (0) , limi→∞ G (0) ∑ ~γ ∈K k f (~γ ) − fi (~γ )k2 d µ (x) = 0. We define
r(~γ )=x

d0

d1

1

a cochain complex 0 → Γ(G (0) , H ) −→ Γ(G (1) , H ) −→ . . . with d 0 ( f )(γ ) = D− 2 (γ )L(γ ) f (s(γ )) − f (r(γ )),
i n
and for n ≥ 1: d n = ∑n+1
i=0 (−1) d(i) , where
1

n
d(0)
( f )(γ0 , . . . , γn ) = D− 2 (γ0 )L(γ0 ) f (γ1 , . . . , γn );
n
d(i)
( f )(γ0 , . . . , γn ) = f (γ0 , . . . , γi−1 γi , . . . , γn )

for 1 ≤ i ≤ n;

n
( f )(γ0 , . . . , γn ) = f (γ0 , . . . , γn−1 ).
δ(n+1)

It is easy to check that d n ◦d n−1 = 0 for all n ≥ 1. Thus im (d n−1 ) ⊆ ker (d n ). Since all the d n are continuous, we
also have im (d n−1 ) ⊆ ker (d n ). We set H n (G , L) := ker (d n )/im (d n−1 ) and H̄ n (G , L) := ker (d n )/im (d n−1 ).
Our goal is to prove the following
Theorem 3.5. Suppose there is a continuous orbit couple for topological dynamical systems G y X and H y Y
on compact spaces X and Y . Then there is a one-to-one correspondence between representations of X ⋊ G and
Y ⋊ H, denoted by L ↔ M, with H ∗ (G, σL ) ∼
= H ∗ (H, σM ) and H̄ ∗ (G, σL ) ∼
= H̄ ∗ (H, σM ).
For the definition of reduced cohomology H̄ ∗ , we refer to [21, Chapitre III].
Proof. Clearly, H ∗ (X ⋊ G, L) ∼
= H ∗ (G, σL ) and H̄ ∗ (X ⋊ G, L) ∼
= H̄ ∗ (G, σL ).
Now, if there is a continuous orbit couple for topological dynamical systems G y X and H y Y on compact
spaces X and Y , then by Theorem 2.16, G y X and H y Y are Kakutani equivalent. So there exist clopen
subspaces A ⊆ X and B ⊆ Y with G.A = X , H.B = Y , together with an isomorphism of topological groupoids
11

χ : (X ⋊ G)|A ∼
= (Y ⋊ H)|B. As A is G-full and B is H-full, we get one-to-one correspondences L ↔ L|A
and M ↔ M|B between representations of X ⋊ G and (X ⋊ G)|A, and between representations of Y ⋊ H and
(Y ⋊ H)|B, respectively. Thus we obtain a one-to-one correspondence between representations of X ⋊ G and
Y ⋊ H, denoted by L ↔ M, where M is uniquely determined by χ ∗ (M|B) = L|A. The theorem now follows
from Morita invariance of groupoid (co)homology.

Remark 3.6. If the topological dynamical system G y X is on a second countable space X , then every *representation of Cc (X ⋊ G) on a Hilbert space is the integrated form of a representation of X ⋊ G. Actually, *-representations of Cc (X ⋊ G) and representations of X ⋊ G are in one-to-one correspondence (see [39,
Chapter II, Theorem 1.21 and Corollary 1.23]). Thus we obtain a reformulation of Theorem 3.5: Suppose
there is a continuous orbit couple for topological dynamical systems G y X and H y Y on second countable compact spaces X and Y . By Theorem 2.16, G y X and H y Y are Kakutani equivalent, so there exist
clopen subspaces A ⊆ X and B ⊆ Y with G.A = X , H.B = Y , together with an isomorphism of topological
groupoids χ : (X ⋊ G)|A ∼
= C∗ ((Y ⋊ H)|B) be the corresponding isomor= (Y ⋊ H)|B. Let Φ : C∗ ((X ⋊ G)|A) ∼
phism of groupoid C*-algebras. Then the one-to-one correspondence L ↔ M from Theorem 3.5 translates to
a one-to-one correspondence (π , σ ) ↔ (ρ , τ ) between covariant representations of G y X and H y Y, where
(ρ , τ ) is uniquely determined (up to unitary equivalence) by the requirement that ρ ⋊ τ |C∗ ((Y ⋊H)|B) ◦ Φ =
π ⋊ σ |C∗ ((X⋊G)|A) . Here we view C∗ ((Y ⋊ H)|B) and C∗ ((X ⋊ G)|A) as full corners in C(Y ) ⋊ H and C(X ) ⋊ G.
We write (ρ , τ ) = Ind Φ−1 (π , σ ) and (π , σ ) = Ind Φ (ρ , τ ).
Corollary 3.7. Let G y X and H y Y be topological dynamical systems on second countable compact spaces
X and Y , and assume that there is a continuous orbit couple for G y X and H y Y . Let (π , σ ) ↔ (ρ , τ ) be as
in Remark 3.6. Then we have H ∗ (G, σ ) ∼
= H ∗ (H, τ ) and H̄ ∗ (G, σ ) ∼
= H̄ ∗ (H, τ ).
Remark 3.8. Theorem 3.5 and Corollary 3.7 have natural analogues in homology, i.e., for H∗ and H̄∗ .
3.3. Coarse invariance of property HFD . As a consequence of Theorem 3.5, we discuss coarse invariance of
Shalom’s property HFD from [43]. In this section (§ 3.3), we assume that our spaces are second countable. Let
us start with the following
Lemma 3.9. Let G y Ȳ ΩX̄ x H be a topological coupling, let α and β be as in § 2.2.1, let G y Ȳ , H y X̄
be the actions given by g.x = gxα (g, x)−1 , h.y = β (y, h−1 )−1 xh−1 , and let X̄ ⋊ G, Ȳ ⋊ H be the corresponding
transformation groupoids. Then
X̄ ⋊ G → (Ω ⋊ (G × H))|X̄, (x, g) 7→ (x, g, α (g−1 , x)−1 )
Ȳ ⋊ H → (Ω ⋊ (G × H))|Ȳ , (y, h) 7→ (y, β (y, h), h)
are isomorphisms of topological groupoids.
Proof. As r(x, g) = x = r(x, g, α (g−1 , x)−1 ), s(x, g) = x.g = g−1 .x = g−1 xα (g−1 , x)−1 = s(x, g, α (g−1 , x)−1 ) and
(x, g, α (g−1 , x)−1 )(g−1 xα (g−1 , x)−1 , ḡ, α (ḡ−1 , g−1 xα (g−1 , x)−1 )−1 ) = (x, gḡ, α ((gḡ)−1 , x)−1 ), X̄ ⋊ G → (Ω ⋊
(G × H))|X̄, (x, g) 7→ (x, g, α (g−1 , x)−1 ) is a groupoid homomorphism. It is clearly continuous, and (Ω ⋊ (G ×
H))|X̄ → X̄ ⋊ G, (x, g, h) 7→ (x, g) is its continuous inverse. The proof of the second claim is analogous.

Given a topologically free (G, H) continuous orbit couple which corresponds to the (G, H) coupling G y
x H with compact X and Y , the proof of Theorem 2.17 provides a concrete way to construct Kakutani
equivalent dynamical systems G y X and H y Y together with clopen subspaces A ⊆ X and B ⊆ Y such that
(X ⋊ G)|A ∼
= (Y ⋊ H)|B. We need the following

Y ΩX

Lemma 3.10. We can modify our (G, H) continuous orbit couple above, without changing its topological
dynamical system G y X , so that the described process yields a topological coupling and subspaces A, B with
A = B as subspaces of Ω.
Proof. In the proof of Theorem 2.16, we had constructed A and B as disjoint unions A = g Ag and B = g Bg .
Following the construction of the continuous orbit couple out of our topological coupling in § 2.2.1, we see
that these subspaces Ag and Bg were related by gAg = Bg in Ω. Set Y ′ := (Y \ B) ⊔ A. Then X and Y ′ are still
fundamental domains for the H- and G-actions on Ω. So we obtain a new topologically free (G, H) coupling
G y Y ′ ΩX x H. The construction in § 2.2.1 yields a continuous orbit couple with new continuous orbit map
p′ : X → Y ′ satisfying p′ (X ) = A. Hence our construction in the proof of Theorem 2.16 gives us the subspaces
A ⊆ X and A ⊆ Y ′ implementing the Kakutani equivalence between G y X and H y Y ′ .

F

F

Let G y Y ΩX x H and G y X , H y Y be as above, with a clopen subspace A ⊆ X ∩ Y such that G.A =
X , H.A = Y and (X ⋊ G)|A ∼
= (Y ⋊ H)|A. Let Φ : C∗ ((X ⋊ G)|A) ∼
= C∗ ((Y ⋊ H)|A) be the induced C*isomorphism. Lemma 3.9 yields an isomorphism of C*-algebras C(X ) ⋊ G ∼
= 1X (C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H))1X , and
12

1X is a full projection. Therefore, C(X ) ⋊ G is Morita equivalent to C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H), and a C(X ) ⋊ G −
C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H)-imprimitivity bimodule is given by X = 1X (C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H)) (with respect to the identification C(X ) ⋊ G ∼
= 1X (C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H))1X provided by Lemma 3.9). We obtain (up to unitary equivalence)
bijections between representations of C(X ) ⋊ G and representations of C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H) and also between covariant representations of G y X and G × H y Ω. We denote both of them by Ind X . Also, let Y be the
C(Y ) ⋊ H −C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H)-imprimitivity bimodule given by 1Y (C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H)) with respect to the identification C(Y ) ⋊ H ∼
= 1Y (C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H))1Y provided by Lemma 3.9. We define Ind Y similarly as Ind X .
Now we have two ways to go from covariant representations of G y X to covariant representations of H y Y :
Ind Φ−1 introduced in Remark 3.6, and Ind −1
Y Ind X . It turns out that they coincide.
−1
Proposition 3.11. In the situation described above, Ind Y
Ind X (π , σ ) is unitarily equivalent to Ind Φ−1 (π , σ )
for every covariant representation (π , σ ) of G y X .
′ ′
X
∗
Proof. Let Ind Φ−1 (π , σ ) = (ρ , τ ), and let Ind −1
Y Ind X (π , σ ) = (ρ , τ ). Let i : C ((X ⋊ G)|A) ֒→ C(X ) ⋊ G and
iY : C∗ ((Y ⋊ H)|A) ֒→ C(Y ) ⋊ H be the canonical embeddings. Also, let iX : C(X ) ⋊ G ֒→ C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H)
and iY : C(Y ) ⋊ H ֒→ C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H) be the embeddings obtained with the help of Lemma 3.9. Then (ρ , τ ) is
uniquely determined by (π ⋊ σ ) ◦ iX ◦ Φ−1 ∼u (ρ ⋊ τ ) ◦ iY . We want to show that ρ ′ ⋊ τ ′ has the same property.
(ρ ′ , τ ′ ) is uniquely determined by the existence of a representation Π of C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H) with Π ◦ iX ∼u π ⋊ σ
and Π ◦ iY ∼u ρ ′ ⋊ τ ′ . Hence (ρ ′ ⋊ τ ′ ) ◦ iY ∼u Π ◦ iY ◦ iY . On the groupoid level, iY ◦ iY is given by

Y ⋊ H|B → Y ⋊ H → Ω ⋊ (G × H), (y, h) 7→ (y, β (y, h), h),
where β is defined in § 2.2.1. At the same time, iX ◦ iX ◦ Φ−1 on the groupoid level is given by
(Y ⋊ H)|B → (X ⋊ G)|A → X ⋊ G → Ω ⋊ (G × H)
(y, h) 7→ (y, b(h−1 , y)−1 ) 7→ (y, b(h−1 , y)−1 , α (b(h−1 , y), y)−1 ),
where b comes from the groupoid isomorphism (X ⋊ G)|A ∼
= (Y ⋊ H)|A (see Remark 2.15 and [27, Definition 2.6]) and α is defined in § 2.2.1. We have α (b(h−1 , y), y) = h−1 by [26, Lemma 2.10] (or rather its analogue for partial actions). Hence iY ◦ iY = iX ◦ iX ◦ Φ−1 , so that (ρ ′ ⋊ τ ′ ) ◦ iY ∼u Π ◦ iY ◦ iY = Π ◦ iX ◦ iX ◦ Φ−1 ∼u
(π ⋊ σ ) ◦ iX ◦ Φ−1 . Our claim follows.

Let G y Y ΩX x H and G y X , H y Y be as above. Let A ⊆ X ∩Y be a clopen subspace with G.A = X , H.A = Y
and (X ⋊ G)|A ∼
= (Y ⋊ H)|A. Let Φ : C∗ ((X ⋊ G)|A) ∼
= C∗ ((Y ⋊ H)|A) be the induced C*-isomorphism. Let Π =
X
G
(Π , Π ) be a covariant representation of G y X on the Hilbert space H . Let σ be a unitary representation of G
on Hσ . It is clear that (1 ⊗ ΠX , σ ⊗ ΠG ) is a covariant representation of G y X on Hσ ⊗ H . Let Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π)
be the unitary representation of H which is part of the covariant representation Ind Φ−1 (1 ⊗ ΠX , σ ⊗ ΠG ). Moreover, let τ be a unitary representation of H on Hτ . Let Θ = (ΘY , ΘH ) = Ind Φ−1 (ΠX , ΠG ). Denote by Ind Φ (Θ, τ )
the unitary representation of G which is part of the covariant representation Ind Φ (ΘY ⊗ 1, ΘH ⊗ τ ).
Lemma 3.12. (1 ⊗ ΠX ⊗ 1, σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ )) = Ind Φ (1 ⊗ ΘY ⊗ 1, Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π) ⊗ τ ).
Proof. We have to show that
(1 ⊗ ΠX ⊗ 1) ⋊ (σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ ))|C∗ ((X⋊G)|A) = (1 ⊗ ΘY ⊗ 1) ⋊ (Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π) ⊗ τ )|C∗ ((Y ⋊H)|B) ◦ Φ.
Fix g ∈ G and h ∈ H. Let f be the characteristic function of a compact subset of (X × {g}) ∩ (X ⋊ G)|A whose
image under χ lies in (Y × {h}) ∩ (Y ⋊ H)|B. It suffices to consider such f as they span a dense subset in
C∗ ((X ⋊ G)|A). We have
(1 ⊗ ΘY ⊗ 1) ⋊ (Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π) ⊗ τ )(Φ( f )) = ((1 ⊗ ΘY ) ⋊ Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π))(Φ( f )) ⊗ τ (h)
= ((1 ⊗ ΠX ) ⋊ (σ ⊗ ΠG )( f )) ⊗ τ (h) = σ (g) ⊗ Π( f ) ⊗ τ (h) = σ (g) ⊗ (Θ(Φ( f )) ⊗ τ (h))
= σ (g) ⊗ ((ΠX ⊗ 1) ⋊ Ind Φ (Θ, τ )( f )) = (1 ⊗ ΠX ⊗ 1) ⋊ (σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ ))( f ).



Let Λ be a representation of C(X ) ⋊ G, and set Λ̃ := Ind X Λ. Let

HΛ̃,c := η ∈ HΛ̃ : η = Λ̃(1K )η for some compact K ⊆ Ω ,
and let L be the complex vector space of linear maps HΛ̃,c → C which are bounded whenever restricted to a
subspace of the form Λ̃(1K )HΛ̃ , with K ⊆ Ω compact. Moreover, let ΛG be the unitary representation of G on
HΛ induced by Λ, and denote by Λ̃G and Λ̃H the unitary representations of G and H on HΛ̃ induced by Λ̃. As
HΛ̃,c is obviously invariant under the G- and H-actions, we obtain by restriction G- and H-actions on HΛ̃,c .
Finally, by dualizing, we obtain G- and H-actions on L .
13

Lemma 3.13. There is a G-equivariant linear isomorphism HΛ ∼
= L H.
Proof. Up to unitary equivalence, we have HΛ = Λ̃(1X̄ )HΛ̃ , and ΛG is given by the composite

Λ̃
G ֒→ C(X ) ⋊ G ∼
= 1X̄ C0 (Ω) ⋊ (G × H)1X̄ −→ L Λ̃(1X̄ )HΛ̃ ,

where the first map is given by G ֒→ C(X ) ⋊ G, g 7→ ug .
We define L : HΛ → L by setting L(ξ )(η ) = ∑h∈H Λ̃H (h)ξ , η . Here h·, ·i is the inner product in HΛ̃ ,
and our convention is that it is linear in the second component. Note that in the definition of L(ξ )(η ), the sum
is always finite since η lies in HΛ̃,c . It is clear that L is linear. Moreover, we have
L(ξ )(Λ̃H (h′ )η ) = ∑ Λ̃H (h)ξ , Λ̃H (h′ )η = ∑ Λ̃H ((h′ )−1 h)ξ , η = L(ξ )(η ).
h

h

L H,

Therefore, the image of L lies in
and we obtain a linear map HΛ → L H . We claim that the inverse is
given by R : L H → HΛ∗ ∼
= HΛ , where the first map is given by restriction, l 7→ l|Λ̃(1X̄ )HΛ̃ , and the second map is
the canonical isomorphism, identifying ζ ∈ HΛ with the element hζ , ·i ∈ HΛ∗ . Note that l|Λ̃(1X̄ )H is bounded
Λ̃
because of our definition of HΛ̃,c . Let us show that R is the inverse of L. For l ∈ L H , we have
L(R(l))(η ) = ∑ Λ̃H (h)R(l), η = ∑ R(l), Λ̃H (h−1 )η = ∑ l(Λ̃(1X̄ )Λ̃H (h−1 )η )
h
H

H

h
−1

h

= ∑ l(Λ̃ (h)Λ̃(1X̄ )Λ̃ (h )η ) = ∑ l(Λ̃(1X̄ h η ) = l(η ).
h

h

For ξ ∈ HΛ = Λ̃(1X̄ )HΛ̃ , we have R(L(ξ )) = ξ since
L(ξ )(Λ̃(1X̄ )η ) = ∑ Λ̃H (h)ξ , Λ̃(1X̄ )η = ∑ Λ̃H (h)Λ̃(1X̄ h )ξ , η = hξ , η i
h

h

because Λ̃(1X̄ h )ξ = ξ if h = e and Λ̃(1X̄ h )ξ = 0 if h 6= e.
Finally, let us show that L is G-equivariant:
L(ΛG (g)ξ )(η ) = ∑ Λ̃H (h)(ΛG (g)ξ ), η = ∑ ∑ Λ̃H (h)Λ̃(1g X̄ j−1 ∩X̄ )Λ̃G (g)Λ̃H ( j)ξ , η
h

h

j

−1

= ∑ Λ̃ (h)Λ̃ ( j) Λ̃(1g X̄ j−1 ∩X̄ )Λ̃H ( j)Λ̃G (g)ξ , η
H

H

h, j

= ∑ Λ̃H (h)Λ̃(1g X̄ ∩X̄ j )Λ̃G (g)ξ , η = ∑ Λ̃H (h)Λ̃(1g X̄ )Λ̃G (g)ξ , η
h

h, j

= ∑ Λ̃ (g)Λ̃ (h)Λ̃(1X̄ )ξ , η = ∑ Λ̃H (h)ξ , Λ̃G (g)−1 η = L(ξ )(Λ̃G (g)−1 η ).
G

H



h

h


Corollary 3.14. We have ΛG -invariant vectors = HΛG ∼
= L G×H .
Theorem 3.15. There exists a one-to-one correspondence between (Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π) ⊗ τ )-invariant vectors and
(σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ ))-invariant vectors.
Proof. Obviously, (1 ⊗ ΠX ⊗ 1, σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ )) is a covariant representation of G y X . Let Λ := (1 ⊗ Π ⊗ 1) ⋊
(σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ )). Set Λ̃ := Ind X Λ, and define L as in Lemma 3.13. Then Corollary 3.14 yields a one-to-one
correspondence between (σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ ))-invariant vectors and L G×H .
Let Ind Φ−1 Λ be the representation of C(Y ) ⋊ H corresponding to Ind Φ−1 (1 ⊗ ΠX ⊗ 1, σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ )). By
Proposition 3.11, Ind Y Ind Φ−1 Λ ∼u Λ̃. Hence, together with Lemma 3.12, Corollary 3.14 yields a one-to-one
correspondence between (Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π) ⊗ τ )-invariant vectors and L G×H .
1-1

1-1

Thus {(Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π) ⊗ τ )-invariant vectors} ←→ L G×H ←→ {(σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ ))-invariant vectors}.



Corollary 3.16. Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π) ⊗ τ has an invariant vector if and only if σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ ) has an invariant vector.
We now come to Shalom’s property HFD . Recall that a group G has HFD if for every unitary representation σ
of G, H̄ 1 (G, σ ) ≇ {0} implies that σ contains a finite dimensional subrepresentation.
Definition 3.17. A (G, H) continuous orbit couple is called H̄ 1 G-faithful if its G- and H-spaces are second
countable compact, and its topological dynamical system G y X has the property that for every unitary representation σ of G with H̄ 1 (G, σ ) ≇ {0}, there exists a covariant representation (ΠX , ΠG ) of G y X such that
H̄ 1 (G, σ ⊗ ΠG ) ≇ {0}.
Theorem 3.18. Let G, H be countable discrete groups. Suppose there exists an H̄ 1 G-faithful topologically free
(G, H) continuous orbit couple. If H has property HFD , then G has property HFD .
14

For the proof, let us recall the following observation which is explained in [43, § 3.1]:
Lemma 3.19. A unitary representation σ of a countable discrete group G contains a finite dimensional subrepresentation if and only if there is a unitary representation σ ′ of G such that σ ⊗ σ ′ has an invariant vector.
Proof of Theorem 3.18. By Lemma 3.10, we may assume that our H̄ 1 G-faithful topologically free (G, H) continuous orbit couple corresponds to a topologically free (G, H) coupling G y Y ΩX x H with second countable
compact spaces X and Y , which leads to topological dynamical systems G y X and H y Y together with a
clopen subspace A ⊆ X ∩Y with G.A = X , H.A = Y and (X ⋊ G)|A ∼
= (Y ⋊ H)|A. Now let σ be a unitary representation of G with H̄ 1 (G, σ ) ≇ {0}. By H̄ 1 G-faithfulness, there exists a covariant representation (ΠX , ΠG )
of G y X with H̄ 1 (G, σ ⊗ ΠG ) ≇ {0}. By Corollary 3.7, H̄ 1 (H, Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π)) ∼
= H̄ 1 (G, σ ⊗ ΠG ), so that
1
H̄ (H, Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π)) ≇ {0}. As H has property HFD , Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π) must have a finite dimensional subrepresentation. Thus Lemma 3.19 implies that there is a unitary representation τ of H such that Ind Φ−1 (σ , Π)⊗ τ has
an invariant vector. By Corollary 3.16, σ ⊗ Ind Φ (Θ, τ ) must have an invariant vector. Again by Lemma 3.19,

this implies that σ has a finite dimensional subrepresentation. Hence G has property HFD .
Remark 3.20. A (G, H) continuous orbit couple with second countable compact G- and H-spaces is H̄ 1 Gfaithful if its topological dynamical system G y X admits a G-invariant probability measure. To see this, let
µ be such a measure. Let (ΠX , ΠG ) be the canonical covariant representation of G y X on L2 (µ ). Then ΠG
contains the trivial representation, so that σ ⊗ ΠG contains σ . This shows H̄ 1 G-faithfulness. In particular, this
is the case when G is amenable. Therefore, Theorem 2.17 and Theorem 3.18 imply [43, Theorem 4.3.3]. The
case of amenable groups is not the only situation where invariant probability measures exist. It follows easily
from [12] and Theorem 2.17 that for residually finite groups G and H with coarsely equivalent box spaces,
there exists a (G, H) continuous orbit couple with second countable compact G- and H-spaces such that its
topological dynamical system G y X admits a G-invariant probability measure. A similar statement applies to
sofic groups with coarsely equivalent spaces of graphs (see [1]).

4. A PPLICATIONS

TO ( CO ) HOMOLOGY

II

We now turn to coarse invariants of (co)homological nature.
4.1. Coarse maps and res-invariant modules. Let G be a group, R a commutative ring with unit and W an
R-module. Let C(G,W ) be the set of functions from G to W . The G-action on itself by left multiplication
induces a canonical left RG-module structure on C(G,W ). Explicitly, given g ∈ G and f ∈ C(G,W ), g. f is
the element in C(G,W ) given by (g. f )(x) = f (g−1 x) for all x ∈ G. We are interested in the following class of
RG-submodules of C(G,W ). Given a subset A of G, let 1A be its indicator function, i.e., 1A ∈ C(G, R) is given
by 1A (x) = 1 if x ∈ A and 1A (x) = 0 if x ∈
/ A. Here 1 is the unit of R. Given f ∈ C(G,W ) and A ⊆ G, we form
the pointwise product 1A · f ∈ C(G,W ). This is nothing else but the restriction of f to A, extended by 0 outside
of A to give a function G → W .
Definition 4.1. An RG-submodule L ⊆ C(G,W ) is called res-invariant if 1A · f lies in L for all f ∈ L and A ⊆ G.
Examples 4.2. For arbitrary R and W , C(G,W ), C f (G,W ) = { f ∈ C(G,W ): f takes finitely many values} and
RG ⊗R W ∼
= { f ∈ C(G,W ): supp( f ) is finite} are res-invariant.
If R = R or R = C, W = R, then c0 (G,W ) = { f ∈ C(G,W ): limx→∞ | f (x)| = 0} is res-invariant, and for all
0 < p ≤ ∞, ℓ p (G,W ) = { f ∈ C(G,W ): ∑x∈G | f (x)| p < ∞} is res-invariant.
Let G be a finitely generated discrete group and ℓ the right-invariant word length coming from a finite
symmetric set of generators. Let R = R or R = C and W = R. As in [22], we define for s ∈ R
and 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞
T
the Sobolev space H s,p (G,W ) := { f : G → W : f · (1 + ℓ)s ∈ ℓ p (G,W )}, and H ∞,p (G,W ) := s∈R H s,p (G,W ).
All these Sobolev spaces are res-invariant.
In the last examples (ℓ p , c0 and H s,p ), we can also replace W by any normed space over R.
We are also interested in the following topological setting: Let R be a topological field and W an R-module.
Definition 4.3. A topological res-invariant RG-submodule L of C(G,W ) is a res-invariant RG-submodule of
C(G,W ) together with the structure of a topological R-vector space on L such that
(2)
(3)

for every A ⊆ G, L → L, f 7→ 1A · f is continuous,
for every g ∈ G, L → L, f 7→ g. f is continuous.
15

When we consider topological res-invariant modules, R will always be a topological field, though we might
not mention this explicitly. For instance, in 4.2, ℓ p (G,W ) and c0 (G,W ) are topological res-invariant modules.
Also, H s,p (G,W ) becomes a topological res-invariant module with respect to the topology induced by the norm
k f ks,p = k f · (1 + ℓ)s kℓ p (G,W ) for s ∈ R, and with respect to the projective limit topology for s = ∞.
In the following, we explain how coarse maps interact with res-invariant modules. Recall that all our groups
are countable and discrete, and that a map ϕ : G→ H between groups G and H is a coarse
 map if for every
y ∈ H, ϕ −1 ({y}) is finite, and for all S ⊆ G × G, ϕ (s)ϕ (t)−1 : (s,t) ∈ S must be finite if st −1 : (s,t) ∈ S is
finite (Definition 1.1).

Remark
4.4. Let ϕ: G → H be a coarse map. Given g ∈ G, let S = (g−1 x, x) ∈ G × G: x ∈ G . Then
 −1
st : (s,t) ∈ S = g−1 Fis finite, so that ϕ (g−1 x)ϕ (x)−1 : x ∈ G is finite. In other words, we can find a
finite decomposition G = i∈I Xi, where I is a finite index set, and a finite subset {hi : i ∈ I} ⊆ H such that
ϕ (g−1 x) = h−1
i ϕ (x) for all x ∈ Xi and i ∈ I.

Recall that two maps ϕ , φ : G → H are close (written ϕ ∼ φ ) if ϕ (x)φ (x)−1 : x ∈ G is finite (Definition 1.1).
Remark 4.5. If ϕ , φ : G → H are close, then there is a finite decomposition G = i∈I Xi , where I is a finite
index set, and a finite subset {hi : i ∈ I} ⊆ H such that we have φ (x) = hi ϕ (x) for all x ∈ Xi and i ∈ I.
F

Let R and W be as above, and ϕ : G → H a coarse map. Given f ∈ C(G,W ), define ϕ∗ ( f ) ∈ C(H,W ) by setting
ϕ∗ ( f )(y) = ∑ x∈G f (x). Moreover, given f ∈ C(H,W ), define ϕ ∗ ( f ) = f ◦ ϕ ∈ C(G,W ).
ϕ (x)=y

Definition 4.6. Given a res-invariant RG-submodule L of C(G,W ), let ϕ∗ L be the smallest res-invariant RHsubmodule of C(H,W ) containing {ϕ∗ ( f ): f ∈ L}. Given a res-invariant RH-submodule M of C(G,W ), let
ϕ ∗ M be the smallest res-invariant RG-submodule of C(H,W ) containing {ϕ ∗ ( f ): f ∈ M}.
Lemma 4.7. We have

ϕ∗ L = h{h.ϕ∗ ( f ): h ∈ H, f ∈ L}iR

(4)

ϕ ∗ M = h{1A · ϕ ∗ ( f ): f ∈ M, A ⊆ G}iR .

(5)

Proof. We obviously have “⊇” in (4). To show “⊆”, it suffices to show that the right-hand side is res-invariant
as it is obviously an RH-submodule. Given B ⊆ H, we have for all h ∈ H and f ∈ L that

 
1B · (h.ϕ∗ ( f )) = h. (1h−1 B · ϕ∗ ( f )) = h. ϕ∗ 1ϕ −1 (h−1 B) · f ,
which lies in the right-hand side as L is res-invariant.
For (5), we again have “⊇” by construction. As the right-hand side is res-invariant, it suffices to show that it
is an F
RG-submodule in order to prove “⊆”. Given g ∈ G, by Remark 4.4 we can find a finite decomposition
G = i∈I Xi and a finite subset {hi : i ∈ I} ⊆ H such that ϕ (g−1 x) = h−1
i ϕ (x) for all x ∈ Xi and i ∈ I. Then,
for all A ⊆ G, g. (1A · ϕ ∗ ( f )) = 1gA · (g.ϕ ∗ ( f )) = ∑i∈I 1Xi · 1gA · (g.ϕ ∗ ( f )) = ∑i∈I 1Xi · 1gA · (ϕ ∗ (hi . f )) lies in the
right-hand side of (5) as M is an RH-submodule.

Note that in general, ϕ∗ L is not equal to {ϕ∗ ( f ): f ∈ L}, and ϕ ∗ M is not equal to {ϕ ∗ ( f ): f ∈ M}.
Lemma 4.8. (i) If ϕ , φ : G → H are coarse maps with ϕ ∼ φ , then ϕ∗ L = φ∗ L and ϕ ∗ M = φ ∗ M for all L, M.
(ii) ψ∗ ϕ∗ L = (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ L and ϕ ∗ ψ ∗ N = (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ N for all L, N and coarse maps ϕ : G → H, ψ : H → K.
Proof. (i) Let us show ϕ∗ L = φ∗ L. By Remark 4.5, there is a finite decomposition G =
subset {hi : i ∈ I} ⊆ H such that φ (x) = hi ϕ (x) for all x ∈ Xi and i ∈ I. Then

F

i∈I Xi

and a finite

φ∗ ( f ) = ∑ φ∗ (1Xi · f ) = ∑ hi .ϕ∗ (1Xi · f ) ∈ ϕ∗ L
i∈I

i∈I

for all f ∈ L. Hence φ∗ L ⊆ ϕ∗ L. By symmetry, we have φ∗ L = ϕ∗ L.
Let us show ϕ ∗ M = φ ∗ M. Let I, {Xi : i ∈ I} and {hi : i ∈ I} be as above. We have that

ϕ ∗ ( f ) = ∑ 1Xi · ϕ ∗ ( f ) = ∑ 1Xi · φ ∗ (hi . f ) ∈ φ ∗ M
i∈I

for all f ∈ M. Hence

ϕ ∗M

⊆

φ ∗ M.

i∈I

By symmetry, we have ϕ ∗ M = φ ∗ M.

(ii) Let us show ψ∗ ϕ∗ L = (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ L. Obviously, “⊇” holds as ψ∗ ϕ∗ L ∋ ψ∗ (ϕ∗ ( f )) = (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ ( f ) for all
f ∈ L. Let us show “⊆”. By (4), it suffices to show that ψ∗ (h.ϕ∗ ( f )) ∈ (ψ ◦ φ )∗ L for all h ∈ H and f ∈ L.
16

By Remark 4.4, we can find a finite decomposition H =
ψ (h−1 y) = ki−1 ψ (y) for all y ∈ Yi and i ∈ I. Then

F

i∈I Yi

and a finite subset {ki : i ∈ I} ⊆ K such that




ψ∗ (h.ϕ∗ ( f )) = ∑ ψ∗ (1Yi · (h.ϕ∗ ( f ))) = ∑ ki .ψ∗ 1h−1Yi · (ϕ∗ ( f )) = ∑ ki .(ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ 1ϕ −1 (h−1Yi ) · f
i∈I

i∈I

i∈I

lies in (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ L for all f ∈ L as L is res-invariant. This shows “⊆”.
Let us show ϕ ∗ ψ ∗ N = (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ N. “⊇” holds as ϕ ∗ ψ ∗ N ∋ ϕ ∗ (ψ ∗ ( f )) for all f ∈ N. Let us prove “⊆”. By
(5), it suffices to prove that ϕ ∗ (1B · ψ ∗ ( f )) ∈ (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ N for all B ⊆ H and f ∈ N. We have

ϕ ∗ (1B · ψ ∗ ( f )) = 1ϕ −1 (B) · ϕ ∗ (ψ ∗ ( f )) = 1ϕ −1 (B) · (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ ( f ),
which lies in (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ N as the latter is res-invariant. This shows “⊆”.



groups G and H
4.2. Coarse embeddings and res-invariant modules.
Recall that a map ϕ : G → H between
 −1

is a coarse embedding if for every S ⊆ G × G, st : (s,t) ∈ S is finite if and only if ϕ (s)ϕ (t)−1 : (s,t) ∈ S
is finite (Definition 1.1).
Lemma 4.9. Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse embedding, and let Y := ϕ (G). Then we can find X ⊆ G such that
F
X → Y, x 7→ ϕ (x), is a bijection. In addition, we can find a finite decomposition G = Ii=1 Xi , g(i) ∈ G for
1 ≤ i ≤ I and h(i) ∈ H for 1 ≤ i ≤ I, such that Xi = g(i)−1 X (i) for some X (i) ⊆ X , with g(1) = e (identity in
G), h(1) = e (identity in H), X1 = X (1) = X , and ϕ (x) = h(i)ϕ (g(i)x) for all x ∈ Xi and 1 ≤ i ≤ I.
Proof. By Lemma 2.20, we can find X such that the restriction of ϕ to X is bijective onto its image and that there
S
are finitely many g(i) ∈ G, 1 ≤ i ≤ I, such that G = Ii=1 g(i)−1 X , where we can certainly
arrange g(1) = e. Now

F
define recursively X1 := X and X (i) = X \ g(i) g(1)−1 X1 ∪ . . . ∪ g(i − 1)−1 Xi−1 . Then G = Ii=1 g(i)−1 X (i).
Using Remark 4.4, we can further decompose each X (i) to guarantee that there exist h(i) ∈ H for 1 ≤ i ≤ I such

that ϕ (x) = h(i)ϕ (g(i)x) for all x ∈ g(i)−1 X (i) and 1 ≤ i ≤ I. Setting Xi := g(i)−1 X (i), we are done.
Lemma 4.10. Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse embedding, and fix h ∈ H. There exists a finite subset F ⊆ G such
that for all x, x̃ ∈ G with ϕ (x̃) = h−1 ϕ (x), we must have x̃ ∈ Fx.



Proof. Let S = (s,t) ∈ G: ϕ (s) = h−1 ϕ (t) . Then ϕ (s)ϕ (t)−1 : (s,t) ∈ S = h−1 is finite, so that F =


st −1 : (s,t) ∈ S is finite since ϕ is a coarse embedding.
Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse embedding, and set Y := ϕ (G). Lemma 2.20 yields
a subset X ⊆ G such that the
S
∼
restriction of ϕ to X is a bijection ϕ̃ : X = Y, x 7→ ϕ (x). It is clear that H = h∈H hY . Enumerate H, say H =
{h1 , h2 , . . .}, where h1 = e is the identity. Define recursively Y1 := Y and Y j := Y \ h−1
j (h1Y1 ∪ . . . ∪ h j−1Y j−1 ).
F
By construction, we have a decomposition as a disjoint union H = ∞j=1 h jY j . Clearly, for all h ∈ H,
hY ∩ h jY j = for all but finitely many j.

(6)

Definition 4.11. Define ω : H → G by setting ω (y) = ϕ̃ −1 (h−1
j y) for y ∈ h jY j .
By construction,
(ϕ ◦ ω )(y) = h−1
j y for y ∈ h jY j .

Take F as in Lemma 4.10 for h = e. (ω ◦ ϕ )(x) ∈ Fx for all x ∈ G, so (ω ◦ ϕ )(x)x−1 : x ∈ G is finite, i.e.,
(7)

ω ◦ ϕ ∼ idG .

(8)

In general, pre-images under ω can be infinite, so that for an arbitrary f ∈ C(H,W ), ω∗ ( f ) may not be defined.
However, we can define ω∗ ( f ) for f ∈ ϕ∗ L, where L ⊆ C(G,W ) is a res-invariant RG-submodule. We need
some preparation. The following is an immediate consequence of (4) and (6):
Lemma 4.12. We have ϕ∗ L =

L∞

j=1 1h j Y j

· (ϕ∗ L) as R-modules.

Let F be as in Lemma 4.10 for h = e. For every x ∈ G, define
Fx ⊆ F by {x̃ ∈ G: ϕ (x̃) = ϕ (x)} = Fx x. For every
F
subset Fi ⊆ F, define Xi = {x ∈ G: Fx = Fi }. Then G = Fi ⊆F Xi , and by construction, we have the following

Lemma 4.13. ϕ ∗ (ϕ∗ ( f )) = ∑Fi ⊆F 1Xi · ∑g∈Fi g−1 . f .
Similarly, let F beas in Lemma 4.10 for some fixed h ∈ H. Let X ⊆ G be as above. For all x ∈ X , define
Fx ⊆F
F by setting x̃ ∈ G: ϕ (x̃) = h−1 ϕ (x) = Fx x. For a subset Fi ⊆ F, let Xi = {x ∈ X : Fx = Fi }. We have
X = Fi ⊆F Xi and, by construction,

Lemma 4.14. 1Y · (h.ϕ∗ ( f )) = ϕ∗ ∑Fi ⊆F 1Xi · ∑g∈Fi g−1 . f .
17

Now we are ready for the following
Lemma 4.15. Let L ⊆ C(G,W ) be an res-invariant RG-submodule. Then ϕ∗ L → L, f 7→ ω∗ ( f ) is well-defined,
where ω∗ ( f )(x) = ∑ y∈H f (y).
ω (y)=x

Proof. By Lemma 4.12, it suffices to show that for every j and f ∈ 1h j Y j · ϕ∗ L, ω∗ ( f ) lies in L. For such f , we
−1
know that ω∗ ( f ) = 1X · ϕ ∗ (h−1
j . f ). As f lies in 1h j Y j · ϕ∗ L, h j . f lies in 1Y j · ϕ∗ L ⊆ 1Y · ϕ∗ L. Hence it suffices
to show that 1X · ϕ ∗ (ϕ∗ L) ⊆ L. By (4), it is enough to show that ϕ ∗ (h.ϕ∗ ( f )) ∈ L for all f ∈ L. This follows
immediately from Lemma 4.13 and Lemma 4.14.

Definition 4.16. For ϕ and L as above, set ϕ ∗−1 L := { f ∈ C(H,W ): ϕ ∗ (h. f ) ∈ L for all h ∈ H}.
We collect a few properties of ϕ ∗−1 L:
Lemma 4.17.
a) ϕ ∗−1 L is an res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H,W ).
b) For f ∈ C(H,W ), f ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L if and only if for all h ∈ H, 1hY · f ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L.
c) ϕ ∗−1 L is the biggest res-invariant RH-submodule M of C(G,W ) such that ϕ ∗ ( f ) ∈ L for all f ∈ M.
d) Let ω be as in Definition 4.11. Then ω ∗ ( f ) ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L for all f ∈ L.
e) ϕ ∗ ϕ ∗−1 L = L.
Proof. a) ϕ ∗−1 L is H-invariant by definition. To see that ϕ ∗−1 L is res-invariant, take B ⊆ H and f ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L.
Then, for all h ∈ H, ϕ ∗ (h.(1B · f )) = ϕ ∗ (1hB · (h. f )) = 1ϕ −1 (hB) ϕ ∗ (h. f ) ∈ L, so 1B · f ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L.
b) follows from ϕ ∗ (h. f ) = ϕ ∗ (1Y · (h. f )) = ϕ ∗ (h.(1h−1 Y · f )) for all f ∈ C(H,W ).
c) If M is an res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H,W ), then f ∈ M implies h. f ∈ M for all h ∈ H, and hence,
by b), we conclude that f ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L.
d) By b), it suffices to prove 1hY · ω ∗ ( f ) ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L for all h ∈ H. By (6), it suffices to prove 1h j Y j · ω ∗ ( f ) ∈
−1
ϕ ∗−1 L for all j. For all y ∈ h jY j , 1h j Y j · ω ∗ ( f )(y) = f (ω (y)) = f (ϕ̃ −1 (h−1
j y)) = ϕ∗ (1X · f )(h j y), hence 1h j Y j ·
ω ∗ ( f ) = h j .ϕ∗ (1X · f ). Let h ∈ H be arbitrary. Lemma 4.14 and Lemma 4.13 imply that ϕ ∗ (hh j .ϕ∗ (1X · f )) lies
in L. Hence ω ∗ ( f ) lies in ϕ ∗−1 L.
e) We have ϕ ∗ ( f ) ⊆ L for all f ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L by construction (see also c)). Hence ϕ ∗ ϕ ∗−1 L ⊆ L by minimality
of ϕ ∗ ϕ ∗−1 L. To show L ⊆ ϕ ∗ ϕ ∗−1 L, it suffices to show that 1X · L ⊆ ϕ ∗ ϕ ∗−1 L as L = ∑ j g(i)−1 .(1X · L) by
Lemma 4.9. Let f ∈ 1X · L. Then ω ∗ ( f ) ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L by d), and 1X · ϕ ∗ (ω ∗ ( f )) ∈ ϕ ∗ ϕ ∗−1 L. But we have 1X ·
ϕ ∗ (ω ∗ ( f )) = 1X · (ω ◦ ϕ )∗ ( f ) = 1X · f = f as ω ◦ ϕ = id on X .

Lemma 4.18. If ϕ , φ : G → H are coarse embeddings with ϕ ∼ φ , then ϕ ∗−1 L = φ ∗−1 L.
If ϕ : G → H, ψ : H → K are coarse embeddings, then ψ ∗−1 ϕ ∗−1 L = (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗−1 L.
Proof. By Remark 4.5, we have for f ∈ C(H,W ): ϕ ∗ ( f ) = ∑i 1Xi · φ ∗ (hi . f ). Hence φ ∗−1 L ⊆ ϕ ∗−1 L. By
symmetry, φ ∗−1 L = ϕ ∗−1 L.
If f ∈ ψ ∗−1 ϕ ∗−1 L, then ψ ∗ ( f ) ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L, and thus (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ ( f ) = ϕ ∗ (ψ ∗ ( f )) ∈ L. Lemma 4.17 c) implies
f ∈ (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗−1 L. To show (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗−1 L ⊆ ψ ∗−1 ϕ ∗−1 L, take f ∈ (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗−1 L. To show f ∈ ψ ∗−1 ϕ ∗−1 L,
it suffices to show for all k ∈ K and h ∈ H that ϕ ∗ (h.ψ ∗ (k. f )) ∈ L. By Remark 4.4, we have ψ (h−1 y) =
∗
∗
∗
∗
k−1
j ψ (y) for all y ∈ Y j and j ∈ J, for suitable J, Y j and k j , so that ϕ (h.ψ (k. f )) = ϕ ∑ j 1Y j · ψ (k j k. f ) =
∗
∗−1

∑ j 1ϕ −1 (Y j ) (ψ ◦ ϕ ) (k j k. f ), which lies in L as f lies in (ψ ◦ ϕ ) L.
Our next goal is to define a suitable topology on ϕ∗ L in case L is a topological res-invariant RG-submodule of
C(G,W ) and ϕ is a coarse embedding. We start with some preparations.
Lemma 4.19. Let Ỹ ⊂ Y and X̃ = X ∩ ϕ −1 (Ỹ ). Then 1X̃ · L → 1Ỹ · (ϕ∗ L), f 7→ ϕ∗ ( f ) is bijective.
Proof. Injectivity holds as we can recover f from ϕ∗ ( f ) using

ϕ ∗ (ϕ∗ ( f ))(x̃) = ϕ∗ ( f )(ϕ (x̃)) =

∑

f (x) = f (x̃)

x∈G
ϕ (x)=ϕ (x̃)

for f ∈ 1X̃ · L and x̃ ∈ X̃. For surjectivity, (4) implies that it suffices to show that for all h ∈ H and f ∈ L,

1Ỹ · (h.ϕ∗ ( f )) lies in the image of our map. This follows immediately from Lemma 4.14.

For j ∈ Z, j ≥ 1, set X j := X ∩ ϕ −1 (Y j ). Obviously, for all j ≥ 1, we have 1h j Y j · (ϕ∗ L) = h j . 1Y j · (ϕ∗ L) . Thus
1X j · L → 1h j Y j · (ϕ∗ L), f 7→ h j .ϕ∗ ( f ) is an isomorphism. For J ∈ Z, J ≥ 1, define
ΦJ :

J
M

J

1X j · L → ϕ∗ L, ( f j ) j 7→

∑ h j .ϕ∗ ( f j ).
j=1

j=1

18

Definition 4.20. Let L be a topological res-invariant RG-submodule of C(G,W ). Let τ be the finest topology
on ϕ∗ L such that for all J ∈ Z, J ≥ 1, ΦJ is continuous. Here 1X j · L is given the subspace topology from L, and
LJ
j=1 1X j · L is given the product topology.
The proof of the following lemma is straightforward.
Lemma 4.21. τ is the finest topology on ϕ∗ L satisfying the following properties:
(T1 ) (ϕ∗ L, τ ) is a topological res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H,W ).
(T2 ) L → (ϕ∗ L, τ ), f 7→ ϕ∗ ( f ) is continuous.
Lemma 4.22. Let ω be as in Definition 4.11. Then ω∗ : ϕ∗ L → L is continuous.
Proof. By definition of the topology of ϕ∗ L, it suffices to show that for every j, 1X j · L → 1h j Y j · (ϕ∗ L), f 7→
ω∗ (h j .ϕ∗ ( f )) is continuous. But it is easy to see that for f ∈ 1X j · L, ω∗ (h j .ϕ∗ ( f )) = ϕ ∗ (ϕ∗ ( f )). Continuity
now follows from Lemma 4.13.

Now let us define a suitable topology on ϕ ∗ M in case M is a topological res-invariant RH-submodule of
C(H,W ) and ϕ is a coarse embedding. Again, some preparations are necessary. Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse
embedding and M a res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H,W ).
Lemma 4.23. Let X̃ ⊆ G be such that the restriction of ϕ to X̃ is injective. Let Ỹ := ϕ (X̃). Then 1Ỹ · M →
1X̃ · (ϕ ∗ M), f 7→ 1X̃ · ϕ ∗ ( f ) is a bijection.
Proof. For every f ∈ 1Ỹ · M and y ∈ H, we have

ϕ∗ (1X̃ · ϕ ∗ ( f ))(y) =

∑
x∈X̃
ϕ (x)=y

ϕ ∗ ( f )(x) =

∑

( f )(ϕ (x)) = f (y).

x∈X̃
ϕ (x)=y

Hence ϕ∗ (1X̃ · ϕ ∗ ( f )) = f , and our map is injective. To show surjectivity, it suffices by (5) to show that for
every f ∈ M and A ⊆ G, 1X̃ · (1A · ϕ ∗ ( f )) lies in the image of our map. This follows from 1X̃ · (1A · ϕ ∗ ( f )) =

1A∩X̃ · ϕ ∗ ( f ) = 1X̃ · ϕ ∗ (1ϕ (A∩X̃) · f ).
Now let Y = ϕ (G). Lemma 2.20 gives us X ⊆ G such that ϕ |X is a bijection X ∼
= Y, x 7→ ϕ (x). By Lemma 4.9,
F
we can find a finite decomposition G = Ii=1 Xi and finite subsets {g(i): 1 ≤ i ≤ I} ⊆ G, {h(i): i ≤ i ≤ I} ⊆ H
such that Xi = g(i)−1 X (i) for some X (i) ⊆ X and ϕ (x) = h(i)ϕ (g(i)x) for all x ∈ Xi and 1 ≤ i ≤ I. Let Yi := ϕ (Xi )
L
L
and Φ : Ii=1 1Yi · M → ϕ ∗ M, ( fi )i 7→ ∑Ii=1 1Xi · ϕ ∗ ( fi ). As we obviously have ϕ ∗ M = Ii=1 1Xi · (ϕ ∗ M), Φ is
surjective. And by Lemma 4.23, Φ is injective. Thus Φ is an isomorphism of R-modules.
Definition 4.24. Let M be a topological res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H,W ). Define the topology τ on
L
ϕ ∗ M so that Φ becomes a homeomorphism. Here 1Yi ·M is given the subspace topology from M, and Ii=1 1Yi ·M
is given the product topology.
The following lemma is straightforward to prove.
Lemma 4.25. τ is the finest topology on ϕ ∗ M satisfying the following properties:
(T1 ) (ϕ ∗ M, τ ) is a topological res-invariant RG-submodule of C(G,W ).
(T2 ) M → (ϕ ∗ M, τ ), f 7→ ϕ ∗ ( f ) is continuous.
Now we define a suitable topology on ϕ ∗−1 L for a topological res-invariant RG-submodule L of C(G,W ) and a
coarse embedding ϕ . Lemma 4.17 b) implies that ϕ ∗−1 L = ∏ j 1h j Y j · (ϕ ∗−1 L). The following is easy to verify:
Lemma 4.26. For every j, Φ( j) : 1X j · L → 1h j Y j · (ϕ ∗−1 L), f 7→ h j .ϕ∗ ( f ) is a bijection whose inverse is given
by 1h j Y j · (ϕ ∗−1 L) → 1X j · L, f 7→ 1X j · ϕ ∗ (h−1
j . f ).
Definition 4.27. Let L be a topological res-invariant RG-submodule of C(G,W ). Define the topology τ on
ϕ ∗−1 L so that ∏ j Φ( j) : ∏ j 1X j · L → ∏ j 1h j Y j · (ϕ ∗−1 L) = ϕ ∗−1 L becomes a homeomorphism. Here 1X j · L is
given the subspace topology coming from L, and ∏ j 1X j · L is given the product topology.
The following is straightforward to prove:
Lemma 4.28. τ is the coarsest topology on ϕ ∗−1 L satisfying the following properties:
(T−1 ) (ϕ ∗−1 L, τ ) is a topological res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H,W ).
(T−2 ) (ϕ ∗−1 L, τ ) → L, f 7→ ϕ ∗ ( f ) is continuous.
Lemma 4.29. Let L, ϕ , ω and ϕ ∗−1 L be as above. Then ω ∗ : L → ϕ ∗−1 L is continuous.
19

∗
∗ −1 ∗
Proof. It suffices to show continuity of L → 1X j · L, f 7→ 1X j · ϕ ∗ (h−1
j .ω ( f )) for all j. 1X j · ϕ (h j .ω ( f )) =




∗
= 1X j · ϕ ∗ ϕ∗ (1X j · f ) = 1X j · f , which clearly depends continuously on f . 
1X j · ϕ ∗ h−1
j . 1h j Y j · ω ( f )

Lemma 4.30. Let L, ϕ and ϕ ∗−1 L be as above. We have ϕ ∗ ϕ ∗−1 L = L as topological res-invariant modules.
Proof. Let τ be the topology of L and τ̃ the topology of ϕ ∗ ϕ ∗−1 L. As ϕ ∗ : ϕ ∗−1 L → (L, τ ) is continuous
by (T−2 ), we must have τ ⊆ τ̃ by Lemma 4.25. To prove τ̃ ⊆ τ , we show that id : (L, τ ) → (ϕ ∗ ϕ ∗−1 L, τ̃ ) is
continuous. By construction of τ̃ it suffices to show that L → 1Yi · ϕ ∗−1 L, f 7→ ϕ∗ (1Xi · f ) is continuous for all
i. By construction of the topology on ϕ ∗−1 L, it is enough to show that L → L, f 7→ 1X j · ϕ ∗ (h−1
j .(ϕ∗ (1Xi · f ))) is
continuous. This now follows from Lemma 4.14 and Lemma 4.13.

We have the following topological analogue of Lemma 4.8, which is straightforward to prove.
Lemma 4.31. (i) If ϕ , φ : G → H are coarse embeddings with ϕ ∼ φ , then ϕ∗ L = φ∗ L, ϕ ∗ M = φ ∗ M and
ϕ ∗−1 L = φ ∗−1 L as topological res-invariant modules, for all topological res-invariant RG-submodules L of
C(G,W ) and all topological res-invariant RH-submodules M of C(H,W ).
(ii) If ϕ : G → H and ψ : H → K are coarse embeddings, then ψ∗ ϕ∗ L = (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ L, ϕ ∗ ψ ∗ N = (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗ N
and ψ ∗−1 ϕ ∗−1 L = (ψ ◦ ϕ )∗−1 L as topological res-invariant modules, for all topological res-invariant RGsubmodules L of C(G,W ) and all topological res-invariant RK-submodules N of C(K,W ).
4.3. Coarse maps and (co)homology. Let us explain how coarse maps induce maps in group (co)homology.
We first need to write group (co)homology in terms of groupoids.
Let G be a group, R a commutative ring with unit, L an RG-module. We write g. f for the action of g ∈ G on
f ∈ L. We recall the chain and cochain complexes coming from the bar resolution (see [9, Chapter III, § 1]): Let
∂3
∂2
∂1
C2 (L) −→
C1 (L) −→
C0 (L) with C0 (L) = L and Cn (L) = C f (Gn , L) ∼
(C∗ (L), ∂∗ ) be the chain complex . . . −→
=
(i)

R[Gn ] ⊗R L, where C f stands for maps with finite support, and ∂n = ∑ni=0 (−1)i ∂n , where
(0)

∂n ( f )(g1 , . . . , gn−1 ) =

∑

g−1
0 . f (g0 , g1 , . . . , gn−1 ),

∑

f (g1 , . . . , gi−1 , g, ḡ, gi+1 , . . . , gn−1 ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1,

∑

f (g1 , . . . , gn−1 , gn ).

g0 ∈G
(i)
∂n ( f )(g1 , . . . , gn−1 ) =

g,ḡ∈G
gḡ=gi
(n)

∂n ( f )(g1 , . . . , gn−1 ) =

gn ∈G

∂0

∂1

∂2

Let (C∗ (L), ∂ ∗ ) be the cochain complex C0 (L) −→ C1 (L) −→ C2 (L) −→ . . . where C0 (L) = L, Cn (L) =
i n
C(Gn , L) for n ≥ 1, and ∂ n = ∑n+1
i=0 (−1) ∂(i) , with:
n
∂(0)
( f )(g0 , . . . , gn ) = g0 . f (g1 , . . . , gn ),
n
( f )(g0 , . . . , gn ) = f (g0 , . . . , gi−1 gi , . . . , gn ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
δ(i)
n
δ(n+1)
( f )(g0 , . . . , gn ) = f (g0 , . . . , gn−1 ).

Now let W be an R-module and L ⊆ C(G,W ) be an RG-submodule. Consider the transformation groupoid
G := G ⋊ G attached to the left multiplication action of G on G. By definition, G = {(x, g): x ∈ G, g ∈ G},
and the range and source maps are given by r(x, g) = x, s(x, g) = g−1 x, whereas the multiplication is given by
(0) = G, and for n ≥ 1, set
(x, g1 )(g−1
1 x, g2 ) = (x, g1 g2 ). Define σ : G → G, (x, g) 7→ g. Let G
G (n) := {(γ1 , . . . , γn ) ∈ G n : s(γi ) = r(γi+1 ) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1} ,
and define, for n ≥ 1, σ : G (n) → Gn as the restriction of σ n : G n → Gn to G (n) .

Note that G (n) = ((x1 , g1 ), . . . , (xn , gn )) ∈ G n : g−1
i xi = xi+1 ) for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1 , so that we have a bijection
(9)

G (n) ∼
= G × Gn , ((x1 , g1 ), . . . , (xn , gn )) 7→ (x1 , g1 , . . . , gn ).

−1
This is because for 2 ≤ i ≤ n, xi is determined by the equation xi = g−1
i−1 · · · g1 x1 . We will often use this
identification of G (n) with G × Gn without explicitly mentioning it.
20

Now, given f ∈ C(G (n) ,W ) and ~g ∈ Gn , we view f |σ −1 (~g) as the map in C(G,W ) given by x 7→ f (x,~g). Set
n
o
supp( f ) := ~g ∈ Gn : f |σ −1 (~g) 6= 0 .
Let us define a chain complex (D∗ (L), d∗ ) as follows: For n = 0, 1, 2, . . . , set
o
n
Dn (L) := f ∈ C(G (n) ,W ): supp( f ) is finite, f |σ −1 (~g) ∈ L for all ~g ∈ Gn .
(i)

(i)

(i)

Moreover, for all n ≥ 1, define maps dn : Dn (L) → Dn−1 (L) by setting dn = ∑ni=0 (−1)i dn with dn = (δn )∗ ,
(0)
(1)
where δ1 = s, δ1 = r, and for n ≥ 2,
(0)

δn (γ1 , . . . , γn ) = (γ2 , . . . , γn ),
(i)

δn (γ1 , . . . , γn ) = (γ1 , . . . , γi γi+1 , . . . , γn ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1,
(n)

δn (γ1 , . . . , γn ) = (γ1 , . . . , γn−1 ).
(i)

Here, we use the same notation as in § 4.1, i.e., (δn )∗ ( f )(~η ) = ∑

~γ ∈G (n)
(i)
δn (~γ )=~η

f (~γ ).

Let us define a cochain complex (D∗ (L), d ∗ ) by setting, for all n = 0, 1, 2, . . . ,
n
o
Dn (L) := f ∈ C(G (n) ,W ): f |σ −1 (~g) ∈ L for all ~g ∈ Gn .
i n
n
n ∗
Moreover, for all n, define maps d n : Dn (L) → Dn+1 (L) by setting d n = ∑n+1
i=0 (−1) d(i) , with d(i) = (δ(i) ) (as in
n )∗ ( f ) = f ◦ δ n ), where δ 0 = s, δ 0 = r, and for all n ≥ 1,
§ 4.1, (δ(i)
(i)
(0)
(1)
n
δ(0)
(γ0 , . . . , γn ) = (γ1 , . . . , γn ),
n
(γ0 , . . . , γn ) = (γ0 , . . . , γi−1 γi , . . . , γn ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
δ(i)
n
δ(n+1)
( f )(γ0 , . . . , γn ) = (γ0 , . . . , γn−1 ).

We are also interested in the topological setting, where we assume that R is a topological field, L ⊆ C(G,W )
a RG-submodule together with the structure of a topological R-vector space such that the G-action G y L is
by homeomorphisms. Equip the above chain and cochain complexes C∗ (L) and C∗ (L) with the topologies of
pointwise convergence. We also equip D∗ (L) and D∗ (L) with the topologies of pointwise convergence, i.e.,
fi ∈ C(G (n) ,W ) converges to f ∈ C(G (n) ,W ) if and only if limi fi |σ −1 (~g) = f |σ −1 (~g) in L for all ~g ∈ Gn .
The following is now immediate:
Lemma 4.32. (i) We have isomorphisms χ∗ of chain complexes and χ ∗ of cochain complexes given by χn :
Cn (L) → Dn (L), χn ( f )(x,~g) = f (~g)(x) and χ n : Cn (L) → Dn (L), χ n ( f )(x,~g) = f (~g)(x).
(ii) In the topological setting, χ∗ and χ ∗ from (i) are topological isomorphisms.
By definition of group (co)homology, we have Hn (G, L) = Hn (C∗ (L)) and H n (G, L) = H n (C∗ (L)). By definition
of reduced group (co)homology, we have H̄n (G, L) = H̄n (C∗ (L)) and H̄ n (G, L) = H̄ n (C∗ (L)) in the topological
setting (recall that H̄n (C∗ (L)) = ker (∂n )/im (∂n+1 ) and H̄ n (C∗ (L)) = ker (∂ n )/im (∂ n−1 )). Hence we obtain
Corollary 4.33. (i) χ∗ and χ ∗ from Lemma 4.32 induce isomorphisms Hn (χ∗ ) : Hn (G, L) ∼
= Hn (D∗ (L)) and
n (D∗ (L)) for all n.
H n (χ ∗ ) : H n (G, L) ∼
H
=
(ii) In the topological setting, χ∗ and χ ∗ from Lemma 4.32 induce isomorphisms H̄n (χ∗ ) : H̄n (G, L) ∼
=
H̄n (D∗ (L)) and H̄ n (χ ∗ ) : H̄ n (G, L) ∼
= H̄ n (D∗ (L)) for all n.
In this groupoid picture of group (co)homology, let us now explain how coarse maps induce chain and cochain
maps. Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse map. Let G = G ⋊ G and H = H ⋊ H. Define ϕ 1 : G → H , (x, g) 7→
(ϕ (x), ϕ (x)ϕ (g−1 x)−1 ). It is easy to see that ϕ 1 is a groupoid homomorphism. This means that if γ1 and
γ2 are composable, then so are ϕ 1 (γ1 ) and ϕ 1 (γ2 ), and we have ϕ 1 (γ1 γ2 ) = ϕ 1 (γ1 )ϕ 1 (γ2 ). For all n ≥ 1,
define ϕ n : G (n) → H (n) , (γ1 , . . . , γn ) 7→ (ϕ 1 (γ1 ), . . . , ϕ 1 (γn )). Moreover, if ϕ : G → H is a coarse embedding,
let ω : H → G be as above, and define ω 1 : H → G , (y, h) 7→ (ω (y), ω (y)ω (h−1 y)−1 ), and for all n ≥ 1,
define ω n : H (n) → G (n) , (η1 , . . . , ηn ) 7→ (ω 1 (η1 ), . . . , ω 1 (ηn )). Now let L be a res-invariant RG-submodule
of C(G,W ). For f ∈ Dn (L), consider (ϕ n )∗ ( f )(~η ) = ∑ ~γ ∈G (n) f (~γ ). In case ϕ is a coarse embedding and ω is
ϕ n (~γ )=~η

as above, set for f ∈ Dn (ϕ∗ L) (ω n )∗ ( f )(~γ ) = ∑ ~η ∈H (n) f (~η ).
ω n (~η )=~γ

21

Lemma 4.34. (i) Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse map. For all n, Dn (ϕ ) : Dn (L) → Dn (ϕ∗ L), f 7→ (ϕ n )∗ ( f ) is
well-defined and gives rise to a chain map D∗ (ϕ ) : D∗ (L) → D∗ (ϕ∗ L). If ψ : H → K is another coarse map,
then we have
D∗ (ψ ◦ ϕ ) = D∗ (ψ ) ◦ D∗ (ϕ ).

(10)

If L is a topological res-invariant RG-submodule of C(G,W ) and ϕ is a coarse embedding, then for all n, Dn (ϕ )
is continuous.
(ii) If ϕ is a coarse embedding, then Dn (ω ) : Dn (ϕ∗ L) → Dn (L), f 7→ (ω n )∗ ( f ) is well-defined and gives
rise to a chain map D∗ (ω ) : D∗ (ϕ∗ L) → D∗ (L). If L is a topological res-invariant module, then Dn (ω ) is
continuous for all n.
Note that for (10) to make sense, we implicitly use Lemma 4.8 (ii).
Proof. (i) To show that Dn (ϕ ) is well-defined, we have to show that (ϕ n )∗ ( f ) ∈ Dn (ϕ∗ L) for all f ∈ Dn (L). It
suffices to treat the case that supp( f ) = {~g} for a single ~g = (g1 , . . . , gn ) ∈ Gn , as a general element in Dn (L) is
a finite sum of such f . Let us first show that (ϕ n )∗ ( f ) has finite support. As ϕ is a coarse map,

−1
(11)
F := ϕ (x)ϕ (g−1
i x) : x ∈ G, 1 ≤ i ≤ n is finite.
Clearly, supp ((ϕ n )∗ ( f )) ⊆ F n . To show that for every ~h = (h1 , . . . , hn ) ∈ H n , (ϕ n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~h) lies in ϕ∗ L, define

−1
−1
−1 −1
A := x ∈ G: ϕ (g−1
= hi for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n .
i−1 · · · g1 x)ϕ (gi · · · g1 x)
Then ϕ n (x,~g) ∈ σ −1 (~h) if and only if x ∈ A. Hence
(ϕ n )∗ ( f )(y,~h) =

∑

f (x,~g) =

x∈A
ϕ n (x,~g)=(y,~h)

∑

x∈A
ϕ (x)=y




f (x,~g) = ϕ∗ 1A · f |σ −1 (~g) (y),

so that
(12)




(ϕ n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~h) = ϕ∗ 1A · f |σ −1 (~g) .

As f |σ −1 (~g) lies in L, L is res-invariant and ϕ∗ ( f˜) ∈ ϕ∗ L for all f˜ ∈ L, this shows that (ϕ n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~h) ∈ ϕ∗ L.
Hence Dn (ϕ ) is well-defined for all n. (Dn (ϕ ))n is a chain map because ϕ n is a groupoid homomorphism for
all n. (10) holds because we have (ψ n )∗ ◦ (ϕ n )∗ = ((ψ ◦ ϕ )n )∗ for all n. (12) shows continuity of Dn (ϕ ) for
all n as the right-hand side depends continuously on f . This is because L satisfies (2) and the topology on ϕ∗ L
satisfies (T2 ).
n o
(ii) To show that Dn (ω ) is well-defined, take f ∈ Dn (ϕ∗ L). We may assume supp( f ) = ~h for ~h =
−1
−1
(h̄1 , . . . , h̄n ) and f |σ −1 (~h) ∈ 1hY · (ϕ∗ L). By (6), hY ∪ h̄−1
1 hY ∪ . . . ∪ h̄n · · · h̄1 hY ⊆
−1
ω (h̄−1
i · · · h̄1 y)

ϕ̃ −1 (h−1
j y)

SJ

j=1 h jY j

for some J.

for some 1 ≤ j ≤ J. Now consider S =
=
Thus, for all y ∈ hY and 1 ≤ i ≤ n,
n
o
 −1

(h̄i−1 · · · h̄1−1 y, h̄i−1 · · · h̄1−1 y): y ∈ hY, 1 ≤ i ≤ n . ϕ (ω (s))ϕ (ω (t))−1 : (s,t) ∈ S ⊆ h−1
h
:
1
≤
j,
k
≤
J
is
k
j

−1
n
finite, so that F := ω (s)ω (t) : (s,t) ∈ S is finite as ϕ is a coarse embedding. Hence supp((ω )∗ ( f )) ⊆ F n .

A similar formula as (12) shows that (ω n )∗ is well-defined, and continuous in the topological setting.
Now let M be a res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H,W ). For f ∈ Dn (M), consider (ϕ n )∗ ( f ) = f ◦ ϕ n . If ϕ is
a coarse embedding, L an res-invariant RG-submodule of C(G,W ), set for f ∈ Dn (L): (ω n )∗ ( f ) = f ◦ ω n .
Lemma 4.35. (i) Let ϕ be a coarse map. For all n, Dn (ϕ ) : Dn (M) → Dn (ϕ ∗ M), f 7→ (ϕ n )∗ ( f ) is well-defined
and gives rise to a cochain map D∗ (ϕ ) : D∗ (M) → D∗ (ϕ ∗ M). If ψ : H → K is another coarse map, we have
(13)

D∗ (ψ ◦ ϕ ) = D∗ (ϕ ) ◦ D∗ (ψ ).

If M is a topological res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H,W ) and ϕ is a coarse embedding, then Dn (ϕ ) is
continuous for all n.
(ii) If ϕ is a coarse embedding, then Dn (ω ) : Dn (L) → Dn (ϕ ∗−1 L), f 7→ (ω n )∗ ( f ) is well-defined and gives
rise to a cochain map D∗ (ω ) : D∗ (L) → D∗ (ϕ ∗−1 L). If L is a topological res-invariant module, then Dn (ω ) is
continuous for all n.
For (13) to make sense, we implicitly use (ii) in Lemma 4.8.
22

Proof. (i) To show that Dn (ϕ ) is well-defined, we have to show that for all f ∈ Dn (M), (ϕ n )∗ ( f ) ∈ Dn (ϕ ∗ M),
−1
i.e., (ϕ n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~g) ∈ ϕ ∗ M for all ~g = (g1 , . . . , gn ) ∈ Gn . F = ϕ (x)ϕ (g−1
i x) : x ∈ G, 1 ≤ i ≤ n is finite by
(11). We also know that ϕ n (x,~g) ∈ σ −1 (F n ) for all x ∈ G. For ~h = (h1 , . . . , hn ) ∈ F n , let

−1
−1
−1 −1
A~h := x ∈ G: ϕ (g−1
= hi for all 1 ≤ i ≤ n .
i−1 · · · g1 x)ϕ (gi · · · g1 x)
Then G =

F

~h∈F n A~h ,

and for x ∈ A~h , we have ϕ n (x,~g) = (ϕ (x),~h). Hence


(ϕ n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~g) (x) = f (ϕ n (x,~g)) = ∑ 1A~h (x) · f |σ −1 (~h) (ϕ (x)),
~h∈F n

and thus
(ϕ n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~g) =

(14)

∑

~h∈F n



1A~h · ϕ ∗ f |σ −1 (~h) .

As f |σ −1 (~h) ∈ M, ϕ ∗ ( f˜) ∈ ϕ ∗ M for all f˜ ∈ M and ϕ ∗ M is res-invariant, this shows that (ϕ n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~g) ∈ ϕ ∗ M.
Hence Dn (ϕ ) is well-defined for all n. (Dn (ϕ ))n is a cochain map because ϕ n is a groupoid homomorphism for
all n. (13) holds because we have (ϕ n )∗ ◦ (ψ n )∗ = ((ψ ◦ ϕ )n )∗ for all n. (14) shows that Dn (ϕ ) is continuous for
all n as the right-hand side depends continuously on f because the topology on ϕ ∗ M satisfies (T1 ) and (T2 ).
(ii) Given f ∈ Dn (L) and ~h = (h̄1 , . . . , h̄n ) ∈ H n , we show (ω n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~h) ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L. By Lemma 4.17 b), it


suffices to show 1hY · (ω n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~h) ∈ ϕ ∗−1 L for all h ∈ H. As we saw in the proof of Lemma 4.34 (ii),

−1
−1
−1 −1
n ~
−1
n
F = ω (h̄−1
i−1 · · · h̄1 y)ω (h̄i · · · h̄1 y) : y ∈ hY, 1 ≤ i ≤ n is finite. Thus ω (y, h) ∈ σ (F ) for all y ∈ hY .
−1
−1
−1 −1
= gi for all
For ~g ∈ F n , let B~g = y ∈ hY : ω (h̄−1
i−1 · · · h̄1 y)ω (h̄i · · · h̄
1 y)
 1 ≤ i ≤ n . We then have hY =
F
n ~
g), so that 1hY · (ω n )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~h) = ∑~g∈F n 1B~g · ω ∗ ( f |σ −1 (~g) ), which
~g∈F n B~g , and for y ∈ B~g , ω (y, h) = (ω (y),~
lies in ϕ ∗−1 L by Lemma 4.17 d). This formula also shows continuity in the topological setting.



Our next goal is to show that coarse maps which are close induce the same chain and cochain maps up to
homotopy. Let ϕ , φ : G → H be two coarse embeddings with ϕ ∼ φ . Let L be a res-invariant RG-submodule
of C(G,W ) and M a res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H,W ). Let G = G ⋊ G and H = H ⋊ H. Define
(h)
θ : G → H , x 7→ (ϕ (x), ϕ (x)φ (x)−1 ). For n ≥ 0 and 1 ≤ h ≤ n + 1, let κn : G (n) → H (n+1) be given by
(1)
κ0 = θ , and for n ≥ 1,
(h)

κn (γ1 , . . . , γn ) = (ϕ 1 (γ1 ), . . . , ϕ 1 (γh−1 ), θ (r(γh )), φ 1 (γh ), . . . , φ 1 (γn )) for 1 ≤ h ≤ n,
(n+1)

κn

(γ1 , . . . , γn ) = (φ 1 (γ1 ), . . . , φ 1 (γn ), θ (s(γn ))).

n : G (n−1) → H (n) be given by κ 1 = θ , and for n ≥ 2,
Moreover, for n ≥ 1 and 1 ≤ h ≤ n, let κ(h)
(1)
n
(γ1 , . . . , γn−1 ) = (ϕ 1 (γ1 ), . . . , ϕ 1 (γh−1 ), θ (r(γh )), φ 1 (γh ), . . . , φ 1 (γn−1 )) for 1 ≤ h ≤ n − 1,
κ(h)
n
(γ1 , . . . , γn−1 ) = (φ 1 (γ1 ), . . . , φ 1 (γn−1 ), θ (s(γn−1 ))).
κ(n)
(h)

(h)

Lemma 4.36. (i) kn = (κn )∗ : Dn (L) → Dn+1 (ϕ∗ L) = Dn+1 (φ∗ L) is well-defined for all n and h. kn :=
h+1 k(h) gives a chain homotopy D (ϕ ) ∼ D (φ ).
∑n+1
n
∗
h ∗
h=1 (−1)
n
n
n
∗
n
∗
(ii) k(h) = (κ(h) ) : D (M) → Dn−1 (ϕ M) = Dn−1 (φ ∗ M) is well-defined for all n, h. kn := ∑nh=1 (−1)h+1 k(h)
∗
∗
gives a cochain homotopy D (ϕ ) ∼h D (φ ).
(h)

(h)

Proof. (i) Let us show that kn is well-defined, i.e., (κn )∗ ( f ) ∈ Dn+1 (ϕ∗ L) for all f ∈ Dn (L). We may assume
supp( f ) = {~g} for a single ~g = (g1 , . . . , gn ) ∈ Gn , as a general element in Dn (L) is a finite sum of such f . We
(h)
first show that supp((κn )∗ ( f )) is finite. By (11) and because ϕ ∼ φ , we know that



−1
−1
−1 −1
F := ϕ (x)ϕ (g−1
i x) : x ∈ G, 1 ≤ i ≤ n ∪ ϕ (x)φ (x) : x ∈ G ∪ φ (x)φ (gi x) : x ∈ G, 1 ≤ i ≤ n
(h)

(h)

is finite. As κn (x,~g) lies in σ −1 (F n+1 ) for all x ∈ G, we conclude that supp((κn )∗ ( f )) is contained in F n+1 ,
(h)
which is finite. Let us show that for every ~h = (h1 , . . . , hn+1 ) ∈ H n+1 , (κn )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~h) lies in ϕ∗ M. Define

−1
−1
−1 −1
= hi for all 1 ≤ i ≤ h − 1,
A := x ∈ G : ϕ (g−1
i−1 · · · g1 x)ϕ (gi · · · g1 x)
−1
−1 −1
−1
= hh ,
ϕ (g−1
h−1 · · · g1 x)φ (gh−1 · · · g1 x)

−1
−1
−1 −1
φ (g−1
= hi+1 for all h ≤ i ≤ n .
i−1 · · · g1 x)φ (gi · · · g1 x)
23




(h)
(h)
Then κn (x,~g) ∈ σ −1 (~h) if and only if x ∈ A. Hence (κn )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~h) = ϕ∗ 1A · f |σ −1 (~g) . As f |σ −1 (~g)
(h)
(h)
lies in L, L is res-invariant, and ϕ∗ ( f˜) ∈ ϕ∗ L for all f˜ ∈ L, we see that (κn )∗ ( f )|σ −1 (~h) ∈ ϕ∗ L. Hence kn is
well-defined for all n and h. A straightforward computation shows that kn indeed gives us the desired chain
homotopy.
n is well-defined, i.e., (κ n )∗ ( f )|
∗
(ii) Let us show that k(h)
g = (g1 , . . . , gn−1 ) ∈ Gn−1 and
σ −1 (~g) ∈ ϕ M for all ~
(h)
f ∈ Dn (M). As in the proof of (i), note that

−1
F := ϕ (x)ϕ (g−1
i x) : x ∈ G, 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1

∪ ϕ (x)φ (x)−1 : x ∈ G

−1
∪ φ (x)φ (g−1
i x) : x ∈ G, 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1
n (x,~
is finite, and that κ(h)
g) ∈ σ −1 (F n ). For ~h = (h1 , . . . , hn ) ∈ F n , set

−1
−1
−1 −1
A~h := x ∈ G : ϕ (g−1
= hi for all 1 ≤ i ≤ h − 1,
i−1 · · · g1 x)ϕ (gi · · · g1 x)
−1
−1
−1 −1
ϕ (g−1
= hh ,
h−1 · · · g1 x)φ (gh−1 · · · g1 x)

−1
−1
−1 −1
φ (g−1
= hi+1 for all h ≤ i ≤ n − 1 .
i−1 · · · g1 x)φ (gi · · · g1 x)

Then G =

F

~h∈F n A~h ,

n (x,~
g) = (ϕ (x),~h). Hence
and for x ∈ A~h , κ(h)
n ∗
n
) ( f )|σ −1 (~g) (x) = f (κ(h)
(x,~g)) =
(κ(h)

∑

~h∈F n



1A~h (x) · f |σ −1 (~h) (ϕ (x))

 

n )∗ ( f )|
∗ f|
. Since f |σ −1 (~h) ∈ M, ϕ ∗ ( f˜) ∈ ϕ ∗ M for all f˜ ∈ M and
and thus (κ(h)
−1
~
σ −1 (~g) = ∑~h∈F n 1A~h · ϕ
σ (h)
n )∗ ( f )|
∗
n
ϕ ∗ M is res-invariant, this shows that (κ(h)
σ −1 (~g) ∈ ϕ M. Hence k(h) is well-defined. It is straightforward
n
to check that k indeed gives us the desired cochain homotopy.

Now let ϕ : G → H be a coarse embedding, ω : H → G as above and L an res-invariant RG-submodule of
(h)
C(G,W ). Define ϑ : H → H , y 7→ (y, y(ϕ ◦ ω )(y)−1 ). For n ≥ 0 and 1 ≤ h ≤ n + 1, let λn : H (n) → H (n+1)
(1)
be given by λ0 = ϑ , and for n ≥ 1,
(h)

λn (η1 , . . . , ηn ) = (η1 , . . . , ηh−1 , ϑ (r(ηh )), (ϕ ◦ ω )1 (ηh ), . . . , (ϕ ◦ ω )1 (ηn )) for 1 ≤ h ≤ n,
(n+1)

λn

(η1 , . . . , ηn ) = (η1 , . . . , ηn , ϑ (s(ηn ))).

n : H (n−1) → H (n) be given by λ 1 = ϑ , and for n ≥ 2,
Moreover, for n ≥ 1 and 1 ≤ h ≤ n, let λ(h)
(1)
n
λ(h)
(η1 , . . . , ηn−1 ) = (η1 , . . . , ηh−1 , ϑ (r(ηh )), (ϕ ◦ ω )1 (ηh ), . . . , (ϕ ◦ ω )1 (ηn−1 )) for 1 ≤ h ≤ n − 1,
n
(η1 , . . . , ηn−1 ) = (η1 , . . . , ηn−1 , ϑ (s(ηn−1 ))).
λ(n)
(h)

(h)

Lemma 4.37. (i) We have D∗ (ω ◦ ϕ ) ∼h id. ln = (λn )∗ : Dn (ϕ∗ L) → Dn (ϕ∗ L) is well-defined for all n and
h+1 l (h) gives a chain homotopy D (ϕ ◦ ω ) ∼ id.
h. ln := ∑n+1
n
h
∗
h=1 (−1)
n = (λ n ) : Dn (ϕ ∗−1 L) → D (ϕ ∗−1 L) is well-defined for all n and h.
(ii) We have D∗ (ω ◦ ϕ ) ∼h id. l(h)
n
(h) ∗
n gives a chain homotopy D∗ (ϕ ◦ ω ) ∼ id.
l n := ∑nh=1 (−1)h+1 l(h)
h
(h)

Proof. (i) D∗ (ω ◦ ϕ ) ∼h id follows from Lemma 4.36 (i) and (8). That ln is well-defined can be proven as
Lemma 4.34 (ii). It is straightforward to check that ln gives the desired chain homotopy.
n is well-defined can be proven as
(ii) D∗ (ω ◦ ϕ ) ∼h id follows from Lemma 4.36 (ii) and (8). That l(h)
Lemma 4.35 (ii). It is straightforward to check that l n gives the desired cochain homotopy.

Combining Corollary 4.33 and Lemmas 4.34, 4.35, 4.36 and 4.37, we obtain
Theorem 4.38. Let ϕ : G → H be a coarse map, L a res-invariant RG-submodule of C(G,W ) and M a resinvariant RH-submodule of C(G,W ).
(i) D∗ (ϕ ) induces homomorphisms H∗ (ϕ ) : H∗ (G, L) → H∗ (H, ϕ∗ L). If ϕ is a coarse embedding, H∗ (ϕ ) is
an isomorphism with inverse H∗ (ω ). If in addition L is a topological res-invariant module, D∗ (ϕ ) also induces
topological isomorphisms H̄∗ (ϕ ) : H̄∗ (G, L) ∼
= H̄∗ (H, ϕ∗ L).
If φ : G → H is a coarse map with ϕ ∼ φ , then H∗ (ϕ ) = H∗ (φ ), and H̄∗ (ϕ ) = H̄∗ (φ ) in the topological case.
If ψ : H → K is another coarse map, then H∗ (ψ ◦ ϕ ) = H∗ (ψ ) ◦ H∗ (ϕ ), and H̄∗ (ψ ◦ ϕ ) = H̄∗ (ψ ) ◦ H̄∗ (ϕ ) in
the topological case.
24

(ii) D∗ (ϕ ) induces homomorphisms H ∗ (ϕ ) : H ∗ (H, M) → H ∗ (G, ϕ ∗ M). If ϕ a coarse embedding, then
: H ∗ (H, ϕ ∗−1 L) → H ∗ (G, L) is an isomorphism with inverse H ∗ (ω ). If in addition L and M are topological res-invariant modules, then D∗ (ϕ ) also induces continuous homomorphisms H̄ ∗ (ϕ ) : H̄ ∗ (H, M) →
H̄ ∗ (G, ϕ ∗ M) and topological isomorphisms H̄ ∗ (ϕ ) : H̄ ∗ (H, ϕ ∗−1 L) → H̄ ∗ (G, L).
If φ : G → H is a coarse map with ϕ ∼ φ , then H ∗ (ϕ ) = H ∗ (φ ), and H̄ ∗ (ϕ ) = H̄ ∗ (φ ) in the topological
case.
If ψ : H → K is another coarse map, then H ∗ (ψ ◦ ϕ ) = H ∗ (ϕ ) ◦ H ∗ (ψ ), and H̄ ∗ (ψ ◦ ϕ ) = H̄ ∗ (ϕ ) ◦ H̄ ∗ (ψ )
in the topological case.
H ∗ (ϕ )

In particular, for coarse equivalences, i.e., coarse embeddings which are invertible modulo ∼, we get
Corollary 4.39. If ϕ : G → H is a coarse equivalence, then we obtain isomorphisms
∼ H∗ (H, ϕ∗ L), H ∗ (ϕ ) : H ∗ (H, M) ∼
H∗ (ϕ ) : H∗ (G, L) =
= H ∗ (G, ϕ ∗ M),
and, in the topological case, H̄∗ (ϕ ) : H̄∗ (G, L) ∼
= H̄∗ (H, ϕ∗ L), H̄ ∗ (ϕ ) : H̄ ∗ (H, M) ∼
= H̄ ∗ (G, ϕ ∗ M).
Remark 4.40. Our constructions are functorial in W : Let L1 ⊆ C(G,W1 ) and L2 ⊆ C(G,W2 ) be res-invariant
RG-submodules, and assume that an R-linear map ω : W1 → W2 induces an RG-linear map λ : L1 → L2 . Then
we also obtain an induced map ϕ∗ λ : ϕ∗ L1 → ϕ∗ L2 , and we get commutative diagrams
D∗ (L1 )

D∗ ( ϕ )

/ D∗ (ϕ∗ L1 )

D∗ ( λ )



D∗ (L2 )

H∗ (G, L1 )

D∗ (ϕ∗ λ )

/ H∗ (H, ϕ∗ L1 )

H∗ (λ )





/ D∗ (ϕ∗ L2 )

H∗ (G, L2 )

D∗ ( ϕ )

H∗ (ϕ )

H∗ (ϕ∗ λ )
H∗ (ϕ )



/ H∗ (H, ϕ∗ L2 )

A similar statement applies to reduced homology in the topological setting, and to (reduced) cohomology.
4.4. Consequences. Let us apply our results to the Examples in 4.2. Corollary 4.41 (i) (c) below generalizes
the result in [19] that H n (G, RG) is a coarse invariant for groups with property Fn . The reader may also consult
[40, Example 5.21]. Corollary 4.41 (ii) (1) was known in special cases. For instance, in [16], group cohomology
with ℓ p coefficients has been identified with nonreduced L p -cohomology, and in [38, 7, 29], reduced group
cohomology in degree 1 (i.e., H̄ 1 ) with ℓ p coefficients has been identified with L p -cohomology, as studied in
[20, 35]. Since L p -cohomology is known to be a coarse invariant, this gives the special case of (ii) (1) where
p ∈ [1, ∞[ and our groups are finitely generated. Also, the case p = ∞ in (ii) (1) was known since H∗ (G, ℓ∞ G)
can be identified with uniformly finite homology (see [5, 8]).
Corollary 4.41. Let G and H be countable discrete groups and ϕ : G → H a coarse equivalence.
(i) For every commutative ring R with unit and every R-module W , ϕ induces isomorphisms
(a) H∗ (G,C(G,W )) ∼
= H∗ (H,C(H,W )),
(b) H∗ (G,C f (G,W )) ∼
= H∗ (H,C f (H,W )) and H ∗ (G,C f (G,W )) ∼
= H ∗ (H,C f (H,W )),
(c) H ∗ (H, RH ⊗R W ) ∼
= H ∗ (G, RG ⊗R W ).
(ii) Let R = R or R = C and W = R.
(1) For all 0 < p ≤ ∞, ϕ induces isomorphisms
H∗ (G, ℓ p (G,W )) ∼
= H∗ (H, ℓ p (H,W )), H ∗ (H, ℓ p (H,W )) ∼
= H ∗ (G, ℓ p (G,W )),
H̄∗ (G, ℓ p (G,W )) ∼
= H̄∗ (H, ℓ p (H,W )), H̄ ∗ (H, ℓ p (H,W )) ∼
= H̄ ∗ (G, ℓ p (G,W )),
(2) ϕ induces isomorphisms
H∗ (G, c0 (G,W )) ∼
= H∗ (H, c0 (H,W )), H ∗ (H, c0 (H,W )) ∼
= H ∗ (G, c0 (G,W )),
H̄∗ (G, c0 (G,W )) ∼
= H̄∗ (H, c0 (H,W )), H̄ ∗ (H, c0 (H,W )) ∼
= H̄ ∗ (G, c0 (G,W )).
(3) Let G and H be a finitely generated discrete groups. Then, for all s ∈ R ∪ {∞} and 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, ϕ
induces isomorphisms
H∗ (G, H s,p (G,W )) ∼
= H∗ (H, H s,p (H,W )), H ∗ (H, H s,p (H,W )) ∼
= H ∗ (G, H s,p (G,W )),
H̄∗ (G, H s,p (G,W )) ∼
= H̄∗ (H, H s,p (H,W )), H̄ ∗ (H, H s,p (H,W )) ∼
= H̄ ∗ (G, H s,p (G,W )).
Proof. The point is that L(G) = C(G,W ), C f (G,W ), RG ⊗R W , ℓ p (G,W ), c0 (G,W ) or H s,p (G,W ) have the
property that for every coarse equivalence ϕ : G → H, we have ϕ∗ L(G) = L(H) (and also topologically in the
topological setting). Our claim now follows from Corollary 4.39.

25

As an immediate consequence, we obtain a new proof of the result in [41] that homological and cohomological
dimensions over R are preserved by coarse embeddings as long as these dimensions are finite.
Corollary 4.42. Let R be a commutative ring with unit. Let G and H be countable discrete groups, and assume
that there is a coarse embedding ϕ : G → H.
If G has finite homological dimension over R, i.e., hdR G < ∞, then hdR G ≤ hdR H.
If G has finite cohomological dimension over R, i.e., cdR G < ∞, then cdR G ≤ cdR H.
Proof. Assume that hdR G = n < ∞. Let W be an RG-module such that Hn (G,W ) ≇ {0}. Define W ֒→
C(G,W ), w 7→ fw , where fw (x) = x−1 .w. It is easy to see that this is an embedding of RG-modules when we view
W as an R-module to construct C(G,W ) (i.e., we define the RG-module structure by setting (g. f )(x) = f (g−1 .x)
for f ∈ C(G,W )). The long exact sequence in homology gives us 0 → Hn (G,W ) → Hn (G,C(G,W )) → . . . because the (n+ 1)-th group homology of G vanishes for all coefficients by assumption. Hence Hn (G,C(G,W )) ≇
{0}. By Theorem 4.38 (i), we have Hn (H, ϕ∗C(G,W )) ∼
= Hn (G,C(G,W )) ≇ {0}. Thus hdR H ≥ n.
Now assume cdR G = n < ∞. By [9, Proposition (2.3)], we know that H n (G, RG ⊗R W ) ≇ {0} for some
R-module W . By Theorem 4.38 (ii), H n (H, ϕ ∗−1 (RG ⊗R W )) ∼
= H n (G, RG ⊗R W ) ≇ {0}. Thus cdR H ≥ n. 
We also obtain a new proof for the following result, first proven in [41]:
Corollary 4.43. Let R, G and H be as above. Assume that ϕ : G → H is a coarse embedding. If G is amenable
and Q ⊆ R, then hdR G ≤ hdR H and cdR G ≤ cdR H.
Proof. As explained in [41, § 4], it was observed in [43] that our assumptions on G and R imply the existence
of an RG-linear split C f (G, R) → R for the canonical homomorphism R → C f (G, R) embedding R as constant
functions. Hence, given an arbitrary RG-module V , we obtain by tensoring with V over R that the canonical
homomorphism V → C f (G,V ) splits. Note that G acts on C f (G,V ) diagonally, so that C f (G,V ) is not a
res-invariant module in our sense. But C f (G,V ) ∼
= C
f (G,Vtriv ), where Vtriv is the R-module V viewed as a RGmodule with trivial G-action. Hence hdR G = supn n: Hn (G,C f (G,W )) ≇ {0} for some R-module W . As
Hn (H, ϕ∗C f (G,W )) ∼
= Hn (G,W ) by Theorem 4.38 (i), we conclude that hdR G ≤ hdR H. The proof for cdR is
analogous.

At this point, the following interesting question arises naturally:
Question 4.44. Let R be a commutative ring with unit, G and H countable discrete groups with no R-torsion.
If G and H are coarsely equivalent, do we always have hdR G = hdR H and cdR G = cdR H?
Having no R-torsion means that orders of finite subgroups must be invertible in R, and this is certainly a
hypothesis we have to include. For instance, [36, Theorem 1.4] implies that the answer to Question 4.44 is
affirmative if our groups lie in the class HF . This class HF has been introduced by Kropholler in [24] and
is defined as the smallest class of groups containing all finite groups and every group G which acts cellularly
on a finite dimensional contractible CW-complex with all isotropy subgroups already in HF . All countable
elementary amenable groups and all countable linear groups lie in HF , and it is closed under subgroups,
extensions, and countable direct unions.
Corollary 4.45 (to Theorem 1.4 in [37]). If G and H are in HF , then the answer to Question 4.44 is affirmative.
Proof. [37, Theorem 1.4] implies that

(15)
cdR G = sup cdR G′ : G′ coarsely embeds into G and cdR G′ < ∞ .

Similarly for H. Now Corollary 4.42 implies cdR G = cdR H. Equality for hdR follows because for countable
groups, cdR is infinite if and only if hdR is infinite by [4, Theorem 4.6].

Remark 4.46. The proof of Corollary 4.45 shows that Question 4.44 has an affirmative answer among all
groups satisfying (15). In particular, for groups satisfying [37, Conjecture 1.6], Question 4.44 has an affirmative
answer. While counterexamples to [37, Conjecture 1.6] are presented in [18], these examples still satisfy (15),
as becomes clear in [18]. Hence also for them, Question 4.44 has an affirmative answer.
Let us now show that being of type FPn over a ring R is a coarse invariant. An alternative approach, based on
[23], has been sketched in [15, Theorem 9.61]. The case R = Z is treated in [2]. Recall that for a commutative
ring R with unit, a group G is of type FPn over R if the trivial RG-module R has a projective resolution . . . →
P1 → P0 → R → 0 where Pi is finitely generated for all 0 ≤ i ≤ n.
Corollary 4.47. Let G and H be two countable discrete groups. Assume that G and H are coarsely equivalent.
Then G is a of type FPn over R if and only if H is of type FPn over R.
26

Proof. By [4, Proposition 2.3], G is of type FPn over R if and only if G is finitely generated and Hk (G, ∏I RG) ∼
=
{0} for all 1 ≤ k ≤ n, where I is an index set with |I| = max(ℵ0 , |R|). The map ∏I RG → C(G, ∏I R), ( fi )i 7→
f , where ( f (x))i = fi (x), identifies ∏I RG with the RG-submodule L(G) of C(G, ∏I R) consisting of those
functions f with the property that for every i ∈ I, ( f (x))i = 0 for all but finitely many x ∈ G. Clearly, L(G)
is res-invariant. Denote the analogous res-invariant RH-submodule of C(H, ∏I R) by L(H). It is easy to see
that given a coarse equivalence ϕ : G → H, we have ϕ∗ L(G) = L(H). Hence, by Theorem 4.38 (i), we have

Hk (G, ∏I RG) ∼
= Hk (H, ∏I RH).
= Hk (H, L(H)) ∼
= Hk (G, L(G)) ∼
As another consequence, we generalize the result in [19] that for groups of type F∞ , being a (Poincaré) duality
group over Z is a coarse invariant. We obtain an improvement since we can work over arbitrary rings R and do
not need the F∞ assumption. We only need our groups to have finite cohomological dimension over R. Recall
that a group G is called a duality group over R if there is a right RG-module C and an integer n ≥ 0 with natural
isomorphisms H k (G, A) ∼
= Hn−k (G,C ⊗R A) for all k ∈ Z and all RG-modules A (see [4, § 9.2], [3], and [9,
Chapter VIII, § 10]). G is called a Poincaré duality group over R if C ∼
= R as R-modules. The class of duality
groups is closed under extensions and under taking graphs of groups, with certain hypotheses (see [4, 14]).
Examples of groups which are not duality groups over Z but over some other ring can be found in [13], and
examples of (Poincaré) duality groups which are not of type F∞ appear in [13, 25]. The second part of the
following corollary generalizes [43, Theorem 3.3.2].
Corollary 4.48. Let R be a commutative ring with unit. Let G and H be countable discrete groups with finite
cohomological dimension over R. If G and H are coarsely equivalent, then G is a (Poincaré) duality group over
R if and only if H is a (Poincaré) duality group over R.
If G and H are amenable and Q ⊆ R, then G is a (Poincaré) duality group over R if and only if H is a
(Poincaré) duality group over R.
Proof. By [3, Theorem 5.5.1 and Remark 5.5.2], we know that a group G is a duality group if and only if it
has finite cohomological dimension, there is n such that H k (G, A) ∼
= {0} for all k 6= n and all induced RGmodules A, and G is of type FPn over R. The second property is a coarse invariant by Corollary 4.41 (i) (c).
The third property is a coarse invariant by Corollary 4.47. Hence being a duality group is a coarse invariant.
Being a Poincaré duality group means being a duality group and having dualizing module isomorphic to R. By
Corollary 4.41 (i) (c), the dualizing module is a coarse invariant. Thus being a Poincaré duality group is also a
coarse invariant. The second part follows from the first part of the corollary and Corollary 4.43.

If Question 4.44 has an affirmative answer, then we can replace the assumption of finite cohomological dimension by having no R-torsion in the first part of Corollary 4.48.
As another consequence, we obtain the following rigidity result for coarse embeddings into Poincaré duality
groups. The proof follows the one of [4, Proposition 9.22].
Corollary 4.49. Let G and H be countable discrete groups. Let H be a Poincaré duality group over a commutative ring R with unit. Assume that there is a coarse embedding ϕ : G → H which is not a coarse equivalence.
If hdR G < ∞, then hdR G < cdR H. If, in addition, G is of type FP∞ (i.e, FPn for all n), then cdR G < cdR H.
In particular, every self coarse embedding of a Poincaré duality group over R must be a coarse equivalence.
Proof. Let n = cdR H. Let D = H n (R, RH). As H is a Poincaré duality group over R, D ∼
= R as R-modules, and
the RH-module structure of D is given by a group homomorphism H → R∗ , h 7→ uh . We know that hdR G ≤
cdR G ≤ n by [4, Theorem 4.6] and Corollary 4.42. Now let L be a res-invariant RG-submodule of C(G,W ).
H
Then, by Theorem 4.38 (i), Hn (G, L) ∼
= H 0 (H, Hom R (D, ϕ∗ L)) ∼
= (Hom R (D, ϕ∗ L)) , where we
= Hn (H, ϕ∗ L) ∼
used that H is a Poincaré duality group over R. Clearly, Hom R (D, ϕ∗ L) ∼
= ϕ∗ L as R-modules, and the H-action
of Hom R (D, ϕ∗ L) becomes h• f = uh · (h. f ) for f ∈ ϕ∗ L. Now take f ∈ (ϕ∗ L)H . If f 6= 0, then f (y) 6= 0 for
some y ∈ H, and it follows from h• f = f for all h ∈ H that f (y) 6= 0 for all y ∈ H. This, however, contradicts
Lemma 4.12 as H cannot be contained in a finite union of h jY j s if ϕ is not a coarse equivalence. Hence
Hn (G, L) ∼
= (ϕ∗ L)H ∼
= {0}. This implies hdR G < n (compare also the proof of Corollary 4.42). The rest follows
from [4, Theorem 4.6 (c)] and that Poincaré duality groups are of type FP∞ .

Question 4.50. In Corollary 4.49, do we always get cdR G < cdR H, even without the FP∞ assumption? In other
words, is the analogue of the main theorem in [45] true for coarse embeddings?
We present one more application: Vanishing of ℓ2 -Betti numbers is a coarse invariant. This was shown in [35]
for groups of type F∞ , for more general groups in [34] (as explained in [42]), and for all countable discrete
groups in [32, Corollary 6.3]. Recently, Sauer and Schrödl were even able to cover all unimodular locally
27

compact second countable groups [42]. As vanishing of the n-th ℓ2 -Betti number is equivalent to H̄ n (G, ℓ2 G) ∼
=
{0} by [36, Proposition 3.8], Corollary 4.41 (ii) (1) gives another approach to the aforementioned result.
Corollary 4.51. Let G and H be countable discrete groups which are coarsely equivalent. Then, for all n, the
n-th ℓ2 -Betti number of G vanishes if and only if the n-th ℓ2 -Betti number of H vanishes.
R EFERENCES
[1] V. A LEKSEEV and M. F INN -S ELL , Sofic boundaries of groups and coarse geometry of sofic approximations, preprint,
arXiv:1608.02242v2.
[2] J.M. A LONSO, Finiteness conditions on groups and quasi-isometries, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 95 (1994), 121–129.
[3] R. B IERI, On groups of finite cohomological dimension and duality groups over a ring, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 6 (1975), 83–110.
[4] R. B IERI, Homological dimension of discrete groups, Queen Mary College Mathematics Notes, Mathematics Department, Queen
Mary College, London, 1976.
[5] M. B LANK and F. D IANA, Uniformly finite homology and amenable groups, Algebr. Geom. Topol. 15 (2015), 467–492.
[6] J. B LOCK and S. W EINBERGER, Aperiodic tilings, positive scalar curvature and amenability of spaces, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 5
(1992), 907–918.
[7] M. B OURDON, F. Martin and A. VALETTE , Vanishing and non-vanishing for the first L p -cohomology of groups, Comment. Math.
Helv. 80 (2005), 377–389.
[8] J. B RODZKI, G.A. N IBLO and N. W RIGHT , Pairings, duality, amenability and bounded cohomology, J. Eur. Math. Soc. 14 (2012),
1513–1518.
[9] K.S. B ROWN, Cohomology of groups, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 87, Springer, 1982.
[10] T.M. C ARLSEN, E. RUIZ and A. S IMS, Equivalence and stable isomorphism of groupoids, and diagonal-preserving stable isomorphisms of graph C∗ -algebras and Leavitt path algebras, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 145 (2017), 1581–1592.
[11] M. C RAINIC and I. M OERDIJK, A homology theory for étale groupoids, J. reine angew. Math. 521 (2000), 25–46.
[12] C. DAS, From the geometry of box spaces to the geometry and measured couplings of groups, to appear in J. Topol. Anal.,
arXiv:1512.08828v2.
[13] M. DAVIS, Poincaré duality groups, Surveys on surgery theory, Vol. 1, 167–193, Ann. of Math. Stud., 145, Princeton Univ. Press,
Princeton, NJ, 2000.
[14] F. D EMBEGIOTI and O. TALELLI, On some examples of duality groups, Arch. Math. (Basel) 90 (2008), 304–310.
[15] C. D RUTU and M. K APOVICH, Lectures on geometric group theory, to be published in the AMS series “Colloquium Publications”,
available at https://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~ kapovich/papers.html, retrieved on 18 January 2017.
[16] G. E LEK, Coarse cohomology and l p -cohomology, K-Theory 13 (1998), 1–22.
[17] A. F URMAN, Orbit equivalence rigidity, Ann. of Math. (2) 150 (1999), 1083–1108.
[18] G. G ANDINI, Cohomological invariants and the classifying space for proper actions, Groups Geom. Dyn. 6 (2012), 659–675.
[19] S.M. G ERSTEN, Quasi-isometry invariance of cohomological dimension, C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math. 316 (1993), 411–416.
[20] M. G ROMOV, Asymptotic invariants of infinite groups, Geometric group theory, Vol. 2 (Sussex, 1991), 1–295, London Math. Soc.
Lecture Note Ser., 182, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1993.
[21] A. G UICHARDET , Cohomologie des groupes topologiques et des algèbre de Lie, Textes Mathématiques, 2. CEDIC, Paris, 1980.
[22] P. J OLISSAINT , Rapidly decreasing functions in reduced C*-algebras of groups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 317 (1990), 167–196.
[23] M. K APOVICH and B. K LEINER, Coarse Alexander duality and duality groups, J. Differential Geom. 69 (2005), 279–352.
[24] P.H. K ROPHOLLER, On groups of type (FP)∞ , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 90 (1993), 55–67.
[25] I.J. L EARY, Uncountably many groups of type FP, preprint, arXiv:1512.06609v3.
[26] X. L I, Continuous orbit equivalence rigidity, to appear in Ergod. Th. Dyn. Sys., arXiv:1503.01704.
[27] X. L I, Partial transformation groupoids attached to graphs and semigroups, to appear in Int. Math. Res. Not., arXiv:1603.09165.
[28] X. L I and J. R ENAULT , Cartan subalgebras in C*-algebras. Existence and uniqueness, preprint, arXiv:1703.10505.
[29] F. M ARTIN and A. VALETTE , On the first L p -cohomology of discrete groups, Groups Geom. Dyn. 1 (2007), 81–100.
[30] H. M ATUI, Homology and topological full groups of étale groupoids on totally disconnected spaces, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 104
(2012), 27–56.
[31] K. M EDYNETS, R. S AUER and A. T HOM, Cantor systems and quasi-isometry of groups, preprint, arXiv:1508.07578.
[32] M. M IMURA, N. O ZAWA, H. S AKO and Y. S UZUKI, Group approximation in Cayley topology and coarse geometry, III: Geometric
property (T), Algebr. Geom. Topol. 15 (2015), 1067–1091.
[33] L. M OSHER, M. S AGEEV and K. W HYTE , Quasi-actions on trees II: Finite depth Bass-Serre trees, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 214
(2011).
[34] S.-I. O GUNI, l 2 -invariants of discrete groups under coarse equivalence and l 2 -invariants of cocompact étale groupoids, preprint.
[35] P.
PANSU,
Cohomologie
Lp:
invariance
sous
quasiisométries,
preprint,
available
at
https://www.math.u-psud.fr/~ pansu/liste-prepub.html
[36] H.D. P ETERSEN, L2 -Betti Numbers of Locally Compact Groups, preprint, arXiv:1104.3294v3.
[37] N. P ETROSYAN, Jumps in cohomology and free group actions, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 210 (2007), 695–703.
[38] M.J. P ULS, Group cohomology and L p -cohomology of finitely generated groups, Canad. Math. Bull. 46 (2003), 268–276.
[39] J. R ENAULT , A Groupoid Approach to C*-Algebras, Lecture Notes in Math. 793, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1980.
[40] J. ROE , Lectures on coarse geometry, University Lecture Series, 31, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2003.
[41] R. S AUER, Homological invariants and quasi-isometry, Geom. Funct. Anal. 16 (2006), 476–515.
[42] R. S AUER and M. S CHR ÖDL , Quasi-isometry invariance of vanishing of l 2 -Betti numbers of locally compact groups, preprint,
arXiv:1702.01685v2.
[43] Y. S HALOM, Harmonic analysis, cohomology, and the large-scale geometry of amenable groups, Acta Math. 192 (2004), 119–
185.
[44] J. S PAKULA and R. W ILLETT , On rigidity of Roe algebras, Adv. Math. 249 (2013), 289–310.

28

[45] R. S TREBEL , A remark on subgroups of infinite index in Poincaré duality groups, Comment. Math. Helv. 52 (1977), 317–324.
X IN L I , S CHOOL OF M ATHEMATICAL S CIENCES , Q UEEN M ARY U NIVERSITY OF L ONDON , M ILE E ND ROAD , L ONDON E1 4NS,
U NITED K INGDOM
E-mail address: xin.li@qmul.ac.uk

29

