arXiv:1507.04915v2 [math.GR] 19 Mar 2018

THE BOUNDARY MODEL FOR THE CONTINUOUS
COHOMOLOGY OF ISOM+ (Hn ).
HESTER PIETERS

Abstract. We prove that the continuous cohomology of Isom+ (Hn )
can be measurably realized on the boundary of hyperbolic space. This
implies in particular that for Isom+ (Hn ) the comparison map from
continuous bounded cohomology to continuous cohomology is injective
in degree 3. We furthermore prove a stability result for the continuous
bounded cohomology of Isom(Hn ) and Isom(Hn
C ).

1. Introduction
Let H be a locally compact second countable group. We denote by
∗ (H; R) the measurable cohomology of H with trivial real coefficients
Hm
(see [19], [20], [21] and Section 2). If H acts on a measure space X we de∗ (H y X; R) to be the cohomology of the cocomplex (C ∗ (X; R)H , δ),
fine Hm
where C p (X; R)H is the space of H-invariant measurable maps X p+1 → R
identifying those which agree almost everywhere and δ is the standard
homogeneous differential (see Section 2 for precise definitions). Fix a
basepoint x ∈ X. Given a cocycle α ∈ C p (X; R)H we obtain a cocycle
αx ∈ C(H p+1 ; R)H by
αx (h0 , . . . , hp ) := α(h0 · x, . . . , hp · x).
Since the class of αx does not depend on the chosen basepoint this defines
a map
∗
∗
ιX : Hm
(H y X; R) → Hm
(H; R).

We say that the measurable cohomology of H (with trivial R-coefficients) is
measurably realized on X if this map is an isomorphism. Since measurable
and continuous cohomology coincide for trivial R-coefficients [1, Theorem

Mathematics department, Technion, Haifa 32000, Israel
E-mail address: hester.frede@technion.ac.il.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 20J06, 22E41, 46M20, 53C35.
Key words and phrases. Continuous group cohomology, continuous bounded cohomology, hyperbolic spaces, measurable cohomology.
This research was supported by Swiss National Science Foundation grant number
PP00P2-128309/1.
1

2

A] we will then also say that the continuous cohomology of H is measurably realized on X. Let Isom+ (Hn ) be the group of orientation preserving
isometries of real hyperbolic n-space Hn . Our main result is
Theorem 1.1. Let n ≥ 2. The continuous cohomology of Isom+ (Hn )
is measurably realized on the boundary ∂Hn of real hyperbolic space (with
the natural action). Furthermore, all cohomology classes have essentially
bounded representatives in this boundary resolution.
An immediate consequence of Theorem 1.1 is
Corollary 1.2. The comparison map
3
c : Hc,b
(Isom+ (Hn ); R) → Hc3 (Isom+ (Hn ); R)

is injective for all n ≥ 2.

For n = 3 the above theorem is a result of Bloch. Recall that, by the van
Est isomorphism, Hc∗ (Isom+ (H3 ); R) can be identified with the de Rham
cohomology of the 3-sphere. Thus Hc3 (Isom+ (H3 ); R) is one dimensional
and it is well known that it is generated by the volume function Vol ∈
+
3
L∞ ((∂H3 )4 ; R)Isom (H ) which sends four points in the boundary to the
volume of the ideal simplex they span. Hence Bloch’s result implies that,
up to scalar multiplication, Vol is the only cocycle in degree 3 defined on
the boundary. He used this to show that the Bloch-Wigner dilogarithm is
essentially the only measurable function on P1C that satisfies the five term
relation. Indeed, applying such a function to the cross ratio of 4 points in
∂H3 gives a measurable cocycle and thus a multiple of the volume function.
The main difficulty in the generalization from n = 3 to higher dimensions
comes from the fact that for n ≥ 4 the stabilizer of 3 points in ∂Hn is not
trivial. This prevents a straightforward generalization of Bloch’s proof for
degree p > 3. Below we describe our strategy of proof.
About the proof of Theorem 1.1. Let G = Isom+ (Hn ) and C p =
C((∂Hn )p+1 ; R) the G-module of measurable functions (∂Hn )p+1 → R
identifying those which are equal almost everywhere. We follow Bloch’s
approach by looking at the spectral sequences associated to the double
complex (C(Gq+1 ; C p )G , d, δ) (with differentials d, δ to be defined below in
p,q
∗ (SO(n−2); C p−3 ), with SO(n−2)
Section 3). For p > 2 we have IE1 = Hm
the stabilizer of 3 points in the boundary of hyperbolic space. In the case
p,q
of n = 3 this group is trivial and thus IE1 automatically vanishes for
q > 0. Because of this, in Bloch’s proof for n = 3 the fact that the spectral
sequence degenerates at the second page already follows from looking at
∗ (K; A) vanishes if K is comthe first page. One would expect that Hm
pact no matter what the coefficients A are. However, if the coefficients A
are not locally convex there is no way to integrate over them so it is not

3

possible to construct a coboundary by integration over the first variable.
Since C((∂Hn )p−2 ; R) is a (non-locally convex) F-space it is not clear (how
∗ (SO(n − 2); C p−3 ) vanishes for n > 3. Here we will into prove) that Hm
p,q
stead prove that if a cocycle [α] ∈ IE1 survives to the second page of the
p,q
spectral sequence, i.e. if δα = dλ, then it is cohomologous in IE2 to a
p,q
coboundary in IE1 . As in the proof in [1] of the isomorphism between
measurable and continuous cohomology in the case of Fréchet coefficients
[1, Theorem A], we would like to show by dimension-shifting induction that
each cohomology class has a representative that is locally totally bounded.
In fact, by a double induction argument, we will show that this is the
p,q
case for a cocycle in IE2 . The first step of this dimension-shifting induction argument (Proposition 3.5) implies in particular that all cocycles in
(C p )G are cohomologous to essentially bounded cocycles, which is the second part of Theorem 1.1. It is not known if Theorem 1.1 generalizes to
all semisimple Lie groups G with Furstenberg boundary G/P . Examples
indicate that this might be the case. In [12], [13] Goncharov defines measurable cocycles on the space of flags Fl(Cm ) representing the Borel classes
in Hc2n−1 (SLm (C); R) for n = 2, 3 and m ≥ 2n − 1 using the classical diand trilogarithm. These cocycles are all bounded and therefore give further
evidence for the conjecture ([10], [17]) that the comparison map between
continuous bounded cohomology and continuous cohomology is an isomorphism for all semisimple connected Lie groups with finite center. This has
so far only been established in a few cases. For degree 2 it was proven by
Burger and Monod in [8]. In degree 3 and 4 it has been proven for SL2 (R)
by Burger-Monod [9] and Hartnick-Ott [15] respectively. For Isom+ (Hn ),
injectivity in degree 3 was so far only known for n = 2 by Burger-Monod
[8] and for n = 3 by Bloch’s result.
Corollary 1.2 also follows from a simpler argument which only uses some
basic properties of hyperbolic space and the injectivity in degree 3 for
Isom+ (H3 ). This method of proof also gives a stability result for the isometry group Isom(Hn(C) ) of real (or complex) hyperbolic space.
Theorem 1.3. If k + 1 ≤ n then there exists an injection

k
k
Hc,b
(Isom(Hn(C) ); R) ,→ Hc,b
(Isom(Hn+1
(C) ); R).

Such stability results give a further tool for computing the continuous
bounded cohomology of Lie groups. In [18] Monod proves a similar result for the continuous bounded cohomology of SLn . More precisely, for
any local field k and 0 ≤ q ≤ n − 1 he shows that the standard emq
bedding GLn−1 (k) ,→ SLn (k) induces an isomorphism Hc,b
(SLn (k)) ∼
=
q
Hc,b (GLn−1 (k)). He proves this using nontrivial coefficients of L∞ type
and a spectral sequence argument.

4

Acknowledgement. The author would like to thank her doctoral advisor Michelle Bucher for many useful discussions and for carefully reading
multiple drafts of this paper, Tobias Hartnick for his interest and helpful suggestions and the referee for suggesting many improvements to the
presentation.
2. Preliminaries
2.1. Polish Abelian H-modules. Let H be a locally compact second
countable group. A Polish space is a separable completely metrizable topological space, a Polish group is a topological group which is also a Polish
space in its topology and a Polish Abelian H-module is a triple (A, ρ, T ),
where A is a Polish Abelian group with a translation-invariant metric ρ
compatible with the topology on A and T : H y A an action by continuous automorphisms. It is a F-space if A is furthermore a separable real
topological vector space in its Polish topology. A Fréchet space is a locally
convex F-space.
Definition 2.1. A Borel map f : X → Y from a locally compact space to
a Polish space is locally totally bounded if for any compact subset K ⊂ X
the image f (K) is precompact in Y .
It follows from the Borel selection theorem (see e.g. [11, Section 423]
and [1, Lemma 32]) that
Lemma 2.2. Let A be a Polish Abelian group and let B < A be a closed
subgroup. Then there exists a section s : A/B → A of the natural projection map p : A → A/B that is Borel and locally totally bounded. If A is
furthermore a Fréchet space then there exists a section that is continuous.
For any σ-finite measure space (X, B, µ) and any separable metric space
A let C(X; A) be the set of equivalence classes of measurable functions
X → A, identifying those which agree µ-almost everywhere (a.e.). Any
class of measurable functions contains a Borel function so we could also
define C(X; A) as consisting of equivalence classes of Borel maps X → A
and obtain the same space. We endow this space with the topology of
convergence in measure. When A = R this gives the usual F-space structure
on C(X; R) and this space is often denoted by L0 (X). There holds an
exponential law for these spaces, i.e. if (X1 , B1 , µ1 ) and (X2 , B2 , µ2 ) are
two σ-finite measure spaces then [20, Theorem 1]:
(2.1)

C(X1 × X2 ; A) ∼
= C(X1 ; C(X2 ; A)) ∼
= C(X2 ; C(X1 ; A)).

If A is a Polish Abelian H-module and (X, B, µ) is a σ-finite standard Borel
space on which H acts as a Borel transformation group such that it leaves

5

some finite measure ν that is equivalent to µ quasi-invariant then C(X; A)
is again a Polish Abelian H-module with action given by
(h · f )(x1 , . . . , xp ) := h · (f (h−1 x1 , . . . , h−1 xp )),

for f ∈ C(X; A), h ∈ H and x1 , . . . , xp ∈ X [20, Proposition 12]. Note that
any equality between elements of C(X; A) is understood to hold µ-a.e.
2.2. Cohomology theories. For locally compact second countable groups
H and Polish Abelian H-modules A in [19], [20] and [21] C.C. Moore devel∗ (H; A). Denote by C(H; A)H
oped the measurable cohomology theory Hm
the submodule of C(H; A) consisting of H-invariant maps and let
d : C(H p+1 ; A)H → C(H p+2 ; A)H

be the standard homogeneous coboundary operator, i.e. for a cochain α ∈
C(H p+1 ; A)H and h0 , . . . , hp+1 ∈ H
p+1
X
dα(h0 , . . . , hp+1 ) :=
(−1)i α(h0 , . . . , ĥi , . . . , hp+1 ).
i=0

The measurable cohomology groups for H with coefficients in A are
p
Hm
(H; A) :=

ker(d : C(H p+1 ; A)H → C(H p+2 ; A)H )
.
im(d : C(H p ; A)H → C(H p+1 ; A)H )

Analogously, Cc (H p+1 ; A)H and Cc,b (H p+1 ; A)H are defined to be the Hinvariant cochains H p+1 → A that are respectively continuous and continuous bounded and we obtain the continuous cohomology groups
ker(d : Cc (H p+1 ; A)H → Cc (H p+2 ; A)H )
,
im(d : Cc (H p ; A)H → Cc (H p+1 ; A)H )
and the continuous bounded cohomology groups
Hcp (H; A) :=

p
Hc,b
(H; A) :=

ker(d : Cc,b (H p+1 ; A)H → Cc,b (H p+2 ; A)H )
,
im(d : Cc,b (H p ; A)H → Cc,b (H p+1 ; A)H )

where the appropriate coefficients A for continuous bounded cohomology
are the dual of a separable Banach space on which H acts continuously and
by linear isometries. For more information about this technical requirement
see [16]. For continuous cohomology we allow as coefficients A all Fréchet
spaces with a continuous H-action.
2.3. Buchsbaum’s criterion. Denote by P (H) the category of Polish
Abelian H-modules. A short exact sequence
0

/A

i

/B

j

/C

/0

in P (H) is exact algebraically and such that the maps i and j are continuous
homomorphisms intertwining the action of H. An effaceable cohomological

6

functor H ∗ (H; ·) on P (H) is a a family H n (H; ·), n ≥ 0 of covariant functors
from P (H) to the category of Abelian groups such that the following three
conditions hold
(1) H 0 (H; A) = AH
(2) Every short exact sequence 0 → A → B → C → 0 of Polish Abelian
H-modules induces a long exact sequence in cohomology
0 → H 0 (H; A) → H 0 (H; B) → H 0 (H; C) → H 1 (H; A) → . . .
· · · → H k (H; B) → H k (H; C) → H k+1 (H; A) → . . . ,

(3) H ∗ (H; ·) is effaceable in the category of Polish Abelian H-modules.
That is, for any Polish Abelian H-module A and any a ∈ H k (H; A)
there exists a short exact sequence
0→A→B→C→0
such that the image of a in H k (H; B) vanishes.
By Buchsbaum’s criterion ([7]), an effaceable cohomological functor H ∗ (H; ·)
on P (H) is unique (if it exists). More general,
Lemma 2.3 (Buchsbaum’s criterion, [7]). Let H1n (H; ·) and H2n (H; ·) be
families of covariant functors from an Abelian category A to the category
of Abelian groups such that H10 (H, A) = H20 (H; A) for all A ∈ A and such
that H1n (H; ·) and H2n (H; ·) both satisfy the above conditions (2) and (3)
for the category A. Then
H1n (H; A) ∼
= H2n (H; A),

for all n ∈ N and all A ∈ A.
C.C. Moore proved that measurable cohomology satisfies the above three
requirements in the category P (H) and is therefore the unique effaceable
cohomological functor on P (H) [20, Section 4]. Let us briefly discuss why
∗ . The
the three above conditions hold for the measurable cohomology Hm
0 (H; A) = AH is immediate from the definition. For the third
fact that Hm
condition, Moore proves that H p (H; C(H; A)) = 0 for p > 0 [20, Theorem
k (H; A) is effaced by the inclusion
4]. Then any cohomology class [α] ∈ Hm
ι : A ,→ C(H; A) (sending a ∈ A to the constant function ≡ a). Indeed,
ι∗ (α) = δβ with β : H p → C(H; A) defined by
β(h1 , . . . , hp )(h) := (−1)p α(h1 , . . . , hp , h).

Lastly, the second condition, i.e. the existence of long exact sequences, is
ensured by the existence of Borel sections: Let
0

/A

i

/B

j

/C

/0

7

be a short exact sequence of Polish Abelian H-modules. The induced sequence
0

/ C q (H; A)

i∗

/ C q (H; B)

j∗

/ C q (H; C)

/0

is then also exact: The map i∗ : C q (H; A) → C q (H; B) is clearly injective
and the induced maps i∗ and j ∗ are continuous. Furthermore, by Lemma
2.2 there is a Borel map s : C → B with j◦s = idC and thus if α ∈ C q (H; C)
then s∗ ◦ α ∈ C q (H; B) is mapped to α. Hence j ∗ is surjective and the sequence is exact. Then a long exact sequence as in the second condition can
be constructed in the standard way.
Since in general there exists no continuous cross section B/A → B continuous cohomology has no long exact sequences when we allow all Polish H-modules as coefficients. However, when restricting to Fréchet modules there do exist continuous cross sections and continuous cohomology
is the unique effaceable cohomological functor on this category. In [1] T.
Austin and C.C. Moore prove that measurable cohomology is also effaceable when restricted to Fréchet modules. Hence for Fréchet coefficients
A the natural inclusion Cc∗ (H; A) ,→ C ∗ (H; A) induces an isomorphism
∗ (H; A) ∼ H ∗ (H; A) [1, Theorem A]. The crucial step in the proof is [1,
Hm
= c
∗ (H; A)
Proposition 33] which states that for any cohomology class in Hm
there exists a locally totally bounded representative. The main ingredients
of its proof are dimension shifting and Lemma 2.2 which ensures that a
locally totally bounded measurable cocycle ᾱ : H p → C(H; A)/ι(A) can be
lifted to a locally totally bounded measurable map α : H p → C(H; A).
2.4. Dimension shifting. Let ι : A ,→ C(H; A) be the embedding of
the H-module A into C(H; A) as the closed submodule of constant maps.
Then, since H p (H; C(H; A)) = 0 for p > 0 [20, Theorem 4], the short exact
sequence
0 → A ,→ C(H; A)  C(H; A)/ι(A) → 0
induces isomorphisms
(2.2)

p
p−1
Hm
(H; A) ∼
(H; C(H; A)/ι(A)),
= Hm

for all p > 0. This allows for the technique of dimension shifting, that is
we can rewrite a cohomology group as a cohomology group of lower degree
(but with different coefficients). Then by induction on degree, some algebraic properties that clearly hold in lower degree may be shown to hold in
higher degrees as well. We will use this technique in the proof of Theorem
1.1.

8
p
p−1
The connecting map Hm
(H; A) → Hm
(H; C(H; A)/ι(A)) realizing the
above isomorphism (2.2) is induced by the map

Q : C p (H; A) → C p−1 (H; C(H; A))
given by
(Qα)(h0 , . . . , hp−1 )(h) := (−1)p α(h0 , . . . , hp−1 , h),
for α ∈ C p (H; A) and h, h0 , . . . , hp−1 ∈ H. If α is a cocycle it follows
directly that d(Qα)(h0 , . . . , hp ) is the constant map h 7→ α(h0 , . . . , hp ) and
thus the image of Qα under the quotient map C(H; A)  C(H; A)/ι(A)
p−1
defines a class in Hm
(H; C(H; A)/ι(A)). Furthermore, it can be shown
that this image only depends on the cohomology class of α and that Q
induces the connecting map.
2.5. Eckmann-Shapiro Lemma. Let L < H again be a closed subgroup
and let A be a Polish L-module. Furthermore, let IndH
L (A) be the Polish Hmodule consisting of all equivalence classes of measurable maps f : H → A
such that f (hl) = l−1 · f (h) for almost all pairs (l, h) ∈ L × H with the
action of H given by:
(h · f )(h0 ) = f (h−1 h0 ).
There holds an Eckmann-Shapiro lemma [20, Theorem 6]:
q
∼ q
(H; IndH
Hm
L (A)) = Hm (L; A).

Let s : H/L → H be a locally totally bounded measurable section such
that s(L) = e. For f ∈ C(H/L; A) define f¯ ∈ IndH
L (A) by
f¯(h) = h−1 · s(hL) · f (hL).

This induces an isomorphism C(H/L; A) ∼
= IndH
L (A) [20, Proposition 17].
The action of H on C(H/L; A) becomes (h·F )(h0 L) = λ(h, h0 L)·F (h−1 h0 L),
where
λ(h, h0 L) := s(h0 L)−1 · h · s(h−1 h0 L) ∈ L.
q
If cochains in Hm
(H; IndH
L (A)) are continuous, as for example in degree 1
([20, Theorem 3]), we can give explicit maps on the cochain level which
induce the isomorphism of the Eckmann-Shapiro lemma. Define

un : Cc (H q+1 ; A)H → Cc (Lq+1 ; A)L
by
un (σ)(l0 , . . . , lq ) = σ(l0 , . . . , lq ),
for l0 , . . . , lq ∈ L. Note that this is well defined because σ is continuous in
H q+1 . The map
v n : Cc (H q+1 ; C(H/L; A))H → Cc (H q+1 ; A)L

9

can be defined as follows: Let β ∈ Cc (H q+1 ; C(H/L; A)) and h ∈ H. Define
Fh (β) ∈ Cc (H q+1 ; A) by
Fh (β)(h0 , . . . , hq ) := β(s(hL)h0 , . . . , s(hL)hq )(hL),

for h0 , . . . , hq ∈ G. Then if β is H-invariant, Fh (β) is independent of h and
gives an element in Cc (H q+1 ; A)L . We define v n (β) to be this element and
then we can define
(2.3)

φ = un ◦ v n : Cc (H q+1 ; C(H/L; A))H → Cc (Lq+1 ; A)L .

Its inverse in cohomology is given by
(2.4)

ψ(α)(h0 , . . . , hq )(hL) = α(λ(h0 , hL), . . . , λ(hq , hL)),

where α ∈ Cc (Lp+1 ; A)H and h, h0 , . . . , hq ∈ H.
3. Proof of Theorem 1.1
Let G = Isom+ (Hn ) and let (K p,q , d, δ) be the first quadrant double
complex defined by
K p,q = C(Gq+1 ; C p )G , for p, q ≥ 0,

where C p = C((∂Hn )p+1 ; R), the first differential d : K p,q → K p,q+1 is the
homogeneous coboundary operator and the second differential δ : K p,q →
K p+1,q is induced by the homogeneous coboundary operator δ : C p → C p+1 .
p,q
p,q
To such a complex one can associate two spectral sequences, IEr and IIEr ,
both converging to the cohomology of the total complex (see for example
[4, Chapter III, §14]). If α ∈ C((∂Hn )p+1 ; R)G is a cocycle then
δα(y, x0 , . . . , xp ) = 0,

for almost all (y, x0 , . . . , xp ). By the exponential law, there exists a y ∈ ∂Hn
such that δα(y, x0 , . . . , xp ) = 0 for almost all (x0 , . . . , xp ). Now define
β(x0 , . . . , xp−1 ) := α(y, x0 , . . . , xp−1 ).
Then
δβ(x0 , . . . , xp ) =

X
(−1)j α(y, x0 , . . . , x̂j , . . . , xp ) = α(x0 , . . . , xp ),
j

for almost all (x0 , . . . , xp ). Thus (C ∗ , δ) is an acyclic cocomplex and therefore
(
C(Gq+1 ; R)G , if p = 0;
p,q
II
E1 =
0,
otherwise,
p,q

which implies that the second page of IIEr is
(
q
Hm
(G; R), if p = 0;
II p,q
E2 =
0,
otherwise.

10
p,q

p,q

Hence IIE2 = IIEr for every r ≥ 2 and we obtain on the one hand
p,q
∗ (G; R) which is isomorphic to the continuous
that IIEr converges to Hm
cohomology Hc∗ (G; R) of G. On the other hand, we establish
p,q

Proposition 3.1. The spectral sequence IEr
p
group Hm
(G y ∂Hn ; R).

converges to the cohomology

p,q

q
Proof. By definition the first page IE1 is given by Hd (K p,q ) = Hm
(G; C p ).
n−1
Let G∞ = (R>0 ×SO(n−1))nR
, G∞,0 = R>0 ×SO(n−1) and G∞,0,1 =
SO(n − 2) be the stabilizers of respectively {∞}, {∞, 0} and {∞, 0, 1},
where these are viewed as points in the upper half space model of Hn .
Note that G/G∞ ∼
= ∂Hn , and furthermore G/G∞,0 ,→ ∂Hn × ∂Hn and
n
G/G∞,0,1 ,→ ∂H × ∂Hn × ∂Hn as conull sets. By the Eckmann-Shapiro
Lemma it then directly follows that
I 0,q
E1
I 1,q
E1
I 2,q
E1
I p,q
E1

q
q
= Hm
(G; C 0 ) ∼
(G∞ ; R),
= Hm
q
q
= Hm
(G; C 1 ) ∼
(G∞,0 ; R),
= Hm
q
q
= Hm
(G; C 2 ) ∼
(G∞,0,1 ; R), and
= Hm
q
q
= Hm
(G; C p ) ∼
(G∞,0,1 ; C p−3 ), for p > 2.
= Hm

Since for R-coefficients measurable and continuous cohomology coincide it
0,q
q
follows that IE1 ∼
= Hc (G∞ ; R). By the van Est isomorphism [3, Chapter
IX, Corollary 5.6] for any connected Lie group G we have that Hc∗ (G; R) ∼
=
H ∗ (Ω∗ (G/K)G ), where K is a maximal compact subgroup of G and where
Ωq (G/K)G denotes the set of G-invariant real differential q-forms on G/K.
Note that the van Est isomorphism used here is more general than the best
known version for semisimple Lie groups since here G is not assumed to be
semisimple and therefore the differentials can be non-zero.
Thus, since a maximal compact subgroup of G∞ is SO(n − 1), the cohomology group Hc∗ (G∞ ; R) can be computed using the complex of multi-linear
alternating SO(n − 1)-invariant maps (R × Rn−1 )q → R, where SO(n − 1)
acts on the Rn−1 factor. Let T : R × Rn−1 → R be the projection onto the
first factor and let det : (R × Rn−1 )n−1 → R be the determinant defined on
the second factor, i.e.
T : (t, v) 7→ t,

det : (t1 , v1 ), . . . , (tn−1 , vn−1 ) 7→ det(v1 , . . . , vn−1 ),

where t, t1 , . . . , tn−1 ∈ R and v, v1 , . . . , vn−1 ∈ Rn−1 . Then, up to scalar
multiplication, the only nonzero alternating forms are constant maps in
degree 0, the form T in degree 1, the form det in degree n − 1 and T ∧ det
in degree n. At the end of this section we will prove
Lemma 3.2. Let det ∈ Ωn−1 (G∞ /K)G∞ be the form defined above. Then
d(det) = (1 − n) · T ∧ det .

11

It then follows that
(
R,
Hcq (G∞ ; R) ∼
=
0,

if q = 0, 1;
otherwise.

Furthermore, a maximal compact of G∞,0 is also SO(n − 1) and thus
(


I 1,q ∼
q
∗
SO(n−1) ∼ R, if q = 0, 1;
E1 = H Ω ((R>0 ))
=
0, otherwise,
and, since SO(n − 2) is compact,
I 2,q
E1

(
R,
∼
= Hcq (SO(n − 2); R) ∼
=
0,

if q=0;
otherwise.

p,q

Hence the first page of IE1 is as follows:
q

0

R

R

d1

···

···

···

···

···

/0

/0

2
/ Hm
(G, C 3 )

2
/ Hm
(G, C 4 )

/ ...

/R

/0

1
/ Hm
(G, C 3 )

1
/ Hm
(G, C 4 )

/ ...

/R

/R

/ (C 3 )G

/ (C 4 )G

/ ... p .

We finish the proof of Proposition 3.1 using the two following propositions
which we will prove in the next two sections.
0,1

1,1

Proposition 3.3. The map d1 : IE1 → IE1

is an isomorphism.

p,q

Proposition 3.4. IE2 = 0 for p > 2 and q > 0.
It then follows that the spectral sequence degenerates at the second page,
that is
(
p
Hm
(G y ∂Hn ; R), if q = 0;
I p,q
E2 =
0,
otherwise,
which proves Proposition 3.1.



12
p
Hence Hcp (G; R) is isomorphic to Hm
(G y ∂Hn ; R) and thus measurably
realized on the boundary. This proves the first part of Theorem 1.1. For
the second part, note that a locally totally bounded cocycle (∂Hn )p+1 → R
is essentially bounded. Indeed, since (∂Hn )p+1 is itself compact, a cocycle
that sends compact subsets of (∂Hn )p+1 to precompact subsets of R is
bounded a.e. Thus Proposition 3.5 below finishes the proof of Theorem
1.1.

Proposition 3.5. Let A be a Polish Abelian G-module. Any G-invariant
cocycle α : (∂Hn )p+1 → A is cohomologous to a locally totally bounded
cocycle. That is, there exists a G-invariant cochain σ : (∂Hn )p → A such
that κ = α + δσ is a locally totally bounded cocycle.
Proof. This follows by a dimension-shifting argument. For p = 0 cocycles
correspond to constants in A and are thus bounded. Suppose now that
p > 0 and define Q : C((∂Hn )p+1 ; A)G → C((∂Hn )p ; C(G; A))G by
Qα(x0 , . . . , xp−1 )(g) = (−1)p α(x0 , . . . , xp−1 , gG∞ ).

Then
δ(Qα)(x0 , . . . , xp )(g) = α(x0 , . . . , xp ),
is independent of g. Let ι(A) be the image of the embedding of A into
C(G; A) as the closed submodule of constant maps which we identify with
A. The image Qα of Qα in C((∂Hn )p ; C(G; A)/ι(A))G defines a cocycle.
By the induction hypothesis its cohomology class has a representative that
is locally totally bounded, i.e.
Qα = β + δγ,
with β : (∂Hn )p → C(G; A)/ι(A) a G-invariant locally totally bounded
cocycle and γ : (∂Hn )p−1 → C(G; A)/ι(A) a G-invariant cochain. It follows
from Lemma 2.2 that there exists G-invariant measurable lifts β : (∂Hn )p →
C(G; A) and γ : (∂Hn )p−1 → C(G; A) of β and γ such that β is still locally
totally bounded (but no longer a cocycle). Thus
Qα = β + δγ + σ,
with σ : (∂Hn )p → A a G-invariant measurable cochain. We have δ(Qα) =
α and thus
α = δβ + δσ.
Hence δβ is a cocycle that takes its values in ι(A) ⊂ C(G; A). Therefore
κ := δβ can be seen as a cocycle taking its values in A and κ is a representative for the cohomology class of α. Furthermore, for any compact
L ⊂ ∂Hn :
κ(Lp+1 ) ⊂ β(Lp ) − β(Lp ) + · · · + (−1)p β(Lp ),

13

and thus κ(Lp+1 ) is precompact as a subset of A ⊂ C(G; A). It follows
that κ is a locally totally bounded representative for the cohomology class
of α.

Proof of Lemma 3.2. For ω ∈ Ωn−1 (G∞ /K) and X0 , . . . , Xn−1 ∈ T (G∞ /K)
there is the following formula for dω (see for example [5, V.2])
dω(X0 , . . . , Xn−1 ) =

n−1
X

(−1)i Xi (ω(X0 , . . . , X̂i , . . . , Xn−1 ))

i=0

+

X
(−1)i+j ω([Xi , Xj ], X0 , . . . , X̂i , . . . , X̂j , . . . , Xn−1 ),
i<j

We identify G∞ /K with R>0 × Rn−1 by the map
(λ, v) 7→ (λ, v)K = {(λk, kv) | k ∈ K}
So in particular K is identified with (1, 0) ∈ R>0 ×Rn−1 . Let X0 , . . . , Xn−1 ∈
T (G∞ /K) be the constant vector fields defined by (X0 )p = (1, 0) and
(Xi )p = (0, ei ) for all p ∈ G∞ /K and i = 1, . . . , n − 1. Then
d(det)K ((X0 )K , (X1 )K , . . . , (Xn−1 )K )
d(det)(1,0) ((1, 0), (0, e1 ), . . . , (0, en−1 ))
=
+

d
dt
n−1
X
i=1

=

d
dt

det(1,0)+t(1,0) ((0, e1 ), . . . , (en−1 , 0))
t=0

d
dt



d
det(1,0)+t(0,ei ) (1, 0), (0, e1 ) . . . , (0,
ei ), . . . , (0, en−1 )
t=0

det(1+t,0) ((0, e1 ), . . . , (0, en−1 )) ,
t=0

where the last equality follows from det ((1, 0), ·, . . . , ·) = 0
Since det is G∞ -invariant, i.e. invariant under taking the pullback by the
action of G∞ on G∞ /K, we have

det(1+t,0) (0, e1 ), . . . , (0, en−1 )) = detg·(1+t,0) (g · (0, e1 ), . . . , g · (0, en−1 ) ,
1
for all g ∈ G∞ . Let g = ( 1+t
In−1 , 0) ∈ G∞ . Then

g · (1 + t, 0) = (

1
In−1 · (1 + t), 0) = (1, 0),
1+t

g · (0, ei ) = (0,

1
1
In−1 · ei ) = (0,
ei ).
1+t
1+t

and

14

Hence
det(1+t,0) ((0, e1 ), . . . , (0, en−1 )) =detg·(1+t,0) (g · (0, e1 ), . . . , g · (0, en−1 ))


1
1
=det(1,0) (0,
e1 ), . . . , (0,
en−1 )
1+t
1+t


1
1
e1 , . . . ,
en−1
= det
1+t
1+t
1
=
det(e1 , . . . , en−1 )
(1 + t)n−1
1
=
(1 + t)n−1
It follows that
d
det
((0, e1 ), . . . , (0, en−1 )) =
dt t=0 0+t(1,0)

d
dt

1
=1−n
n−1
t=0 (1 + t)

Since furthermore T ∧det ((1, 0), (0, e1 ), . . . , (0, en−1 )) = 1 the result follows.

3.1. Proof of Proposition 3.3. Recall that G∞ = (R>0 × SO(n − 1)) n
Rn−1 and G∞,0 = R>0 × SO(n − 1). Let
1
1
j ∗ : Hm
(G; C(G/G∞ ; R)) → Hm
(G; C(G/G∞,0 ; R))

be the map induced by the natural surjection G/G0,∞  G/G∞ , i.e. on
cochains
j ∗ (α)(g0 , g1 )(gG∞,0 ) = α(g0 , g1 )(gG∞ ),

(3.1)

for α ∈ C(G2 ; C(G/G∞ ; R))G and g0 , g1 , g ∈ G. By abuse of notation we
1 (G; C(G/G ; R)) to H 1 (G; C(G/G
will denote the map from Hm
∞,0 ; R))
∞
m
1 (G; C 0 ) → H 1 (G; C 1 ) also by d .
that is induced by the differential d1 : Hm
1
m
We will prove
Proposition 3.6. The map
1
1
d1 : Hm
(G; C(G/G∞ ; R)) → Hm
(G; C(G/G∞,0 ; R))

is equal to 2j ∗ .

This proves Proposition 3.3 since it implies in particular that d1 is an
isomorphism. Indeed, measurable cohomology and continuous cohomology
agree in degree 1 and thus
∼R
H 1 (G∞ ; R) = Hom(G∞ ; R) =
m

and a generator is given by the homomorphism f1 : G∞ → R defined by
f1 (kA + v) = ln(k),

15

where we write kA + v for the element ((k, A), v) ∈ G∞ = (R>0 × SO(n −
1)) n Rn−1 . Furthermore,
H 1 (G∞,0 ; R) = Hom(G∞,0 ; R) ∼
= R,
m

and a generator is given by the homomorphism f2 : G∞,0 → R defined by
(3.2)

f2 (kA) = ln(k),

for kA ∈ G∞,0 = R>0 × SO(n − 1). Under the Eckmann-Shapiro Lemma
1 (G ; R) → H 1 (G
j ∗ corresponds to the map i∗ : Hm
∞
∞,0 ; R) induced by the
m
natural inclusion i : G∞,0 ,→ G∞ . This is an isomorphism as it sends f1
to f2 . Let J ∈ Isom+ (Hn ) be a rotation by π centered on a point on the
geodesic between 0 and ∞ so that J(0) = ∞, J(∞) = 0 and J −1 = J. In
the upper half space model a possible formula for J is
1
(3.3)
J : (x1 , . . . , xn ) 7→
(x1 , . . . , xn−2 , −xn−1 , xn ),
|x|2

for x = (x1 , . . . , xn ) ∈ Hn \ {∞}. Let

1
1
J ∗ : Hm
(G; C(G/G∞,0 ; R)) → Hm
(G; C(G/G∞,0 ; R))

be the isomorphism defined on cochains by
(3.4)

J ∗ (α)(g0 , g1 )(gG∞,0 ) = α(g0 , g1 )(gJG∞,0 ),

for α ∈ C(G2 ; C(G/G∞,0 ; R))G and g0 , g1 , g ∈ G. Let

ψ∞ : C(G2 ; C(G/G∞ ; R))G → C(G2 ; C(∂Hn ; R))G

be the isomorphism defined by

ψ∞ (β)(g0 , g1 )(x) = β(g0 , g1 )(gG∞ ),
for β ∈ C(G2 ; C(G/G∞ ; R))G , g0 , g1 ∈ G and x ∈ ∂Hn and with g ∈ G
such that g · ∞ = x. Furthermore, let
ψ∞,0 : C(G2 ; C(∂Hn × ∂Hn ; R))G → C(G2 ; C(G/G∞,0 ; R))G

be the isomorphism defined by

ψ∞,0 (α)(g0 , g1 )(gG∞,0 ) = α(g0 , g1 )(g · 0, g · ∞),

for α ∈ C(G2 ; C(∂Hn × ∂Hn ; R))G and g0 , g1 , g ∈ G. We have the commutative diagram
C(G2 ; C(G/G∞ ; R))G

d1

ψ∞,0

ψ∞

C(G2 ; C 0 )G

C(G2 ; C(G/G∞,0 ; R))G

δ

C(G2 ; C 1 )G ,

and furthermore, with j ∗ and J ∗ the maps defined in equation (3.1) and
equation (3.4) respectively, we obtain

16

Lemma 3.7. d1 = j ∗ − J ∗ ◦ j ∗ .
1 (G; C 0 ) → H 1 (G; C 1 ) is induced by
Proof. By definition the map d1 : Hm
m
0
1
1
0
δ : C → C , i.e. for [σ] ∈ Hm (G; C ), g ∈ G and x0 , x1 ∈ ∂Hn

d1 [σ] = [δ ◦ σ],
where
(δ ◦ σ)(g0 , g1 )(x0 , x1 ) = σ(g0 , g1 )(x1 ) − σ(g0 , g1 )(x0 ).
For σ ∈ C(G2 ; C(G/G∞ ; R>0 )) and g0 , g1 , g ∈ G we have
ψ∞,0 ◦ δ ◦ ψ∞ (σ)(g0 , g1 )(gG∞,0 ) = δ ◦ ψ∞ (σ)(g0 , g1 )(g · 0, g · ∞)
= ψ∞ (σ)(g0 , g1 )(g · ∞)
−ψ∞ (g0 , g1 )(g · 0)
= σ(g0 , g1 )(gG∞ ) − σ(g0 , g1 )(g · JG∞ )
= j ∗ (σ)(g0 , g1 )(gG∞,0 )
−j ∗ (σ)(g0 , g1 )(g · JG∞,0 )
= j ∗ (σ)(g0 , g1 )(gG∞,0 )
−J ∗ ◦ j ∗ (σ)(g0 , g1 )(gG∞,0 ),
and it thus follows that d1 = j ∗ − J ∗ ◦ j ∗ .



Since continuous cohomology and measurable cohomology coincide in
degree 1 we can and will from now on work with continuous cochains. For
such cochains an isomorphism ϕ : Cc (G2∞,0 ; R)G∞,0 → Cc (G∞,0 ; R) between
the homogeneous and inhomogeneous resolution is given by
ϕ(β)(g) = β(e, g), with inverse
ϕ(σ)

−1

(g0 , g1 ) = g0 · σ(g0−1 g1 ).

1 (G
Lemma 3.8. J ∗ acts as −1 on Hm
∞,0 ; R).

Proof. Let s : G/G∞,0 → G be a Borel section such that s(G∞,0 ) = e. Let
α ∈ Hom(G∞,0 ; R>0 ) be a cocycle, h1 ∈ G∞,0 , and g ∈ G. Let φ and ψ be

17

the maps defined in equation (2.3) and equation (2.4) respectively. Then
ϕ ◦ φ ◦ J ∗ ◦ ψ ◦ ϕ−1 (α)(h1 )

= φ ◦ J ∗ ◦ ψ ◦ ϕ−1 (α)(e, h1 )


= J ∗ ◦ ψ ◦ ϕ−1 (α) s(gG∞,0 ), s(gG∞,0 )h1 (gG∞,0 )
= ψ ◦ ϕ−1 (α)(s(gG∞,0 ), s(gG∞,0 )h1 )(gJG∞,0 )

= ϕ−1 (λ(s(gG∞,0 ), gJG∞,0 ), λ(s(gG∞,0 )h1 , gJG∞,0 ))
= α(λ(s(gG∞,0 ), gJG∞,0 )−1 · λ(s(gG∞,0 )h1 , gJG∞,0 ))
−1

= α s s(gG∞,0 )−1 gJG∞,0
· h1 · s (s(gG∞,0 )h1 )−1 gJG∞,0

−1 −1
−1
−1
= α s(h−1
· h1 · s(h−1
2 g gJG∞,0 )
1 h2 g gJG∞,0 )

−1
−1
· h1 · s(h−1
= α s(h−1
1 h2 JG∞,0 )
2 JG∞,0 )
= α(s(JG∞,0 )−1 · h1 · s(JG∞,0 ))

−1
h1 Jh3 )
= α(h−1
3 J
= α(Jh1 J),

where h2 = g −1 s(gG∞,0 ) ∈ G∞,0 , h3 = Js(JG∞,0 ) ∈ G∞,0 and we use that
s(hJG∞,0 ) = s(hG∞,0 ) · (JG∞,0 ) = s(JG∞,0 ) for all h ∈ G∞,0 . Thus J ∗
1 (G
acts by conjugation on Hm
∞,0 ; R>0 ).
Let g ∈ G∞,0 , say g = kA with k > 0 and A ∈ SO(n − 1) and let
x ∈ Hn \ {∞}. Recall the formula for J given in equation (3.3) and note
that J(x) = |x|1 2 r(x) with
r : (x1 , . . . , xn−2 , xn−1 , xn ) 7→ (x1 , . . . , xn−2 , −xn−1 , xn )
the reflection in the hyperplane orthogonal to the (n − 1)th coordinate axis.
Then
JgJ(x) = J ·
=

k
A · r(x)
|x|2
1

k
|x|2

1

=
k
|x|2

=

· |A · r(x)|
· |x|

2

1
rAr(x),
k

·

2

·

k
rAr(x)
|x|2

k
rAr(x)
|x|2

18

Hence for the generator f2 defined above in equation (3.2) we obtain that


 
1
1
f2 (JgJ) = f2
= − ln(k) = −f2 (kA)
rAr = ln
k
k
= −f2 (g).

p,q

3.2. Vanishing of IE2 for p > 2 and q > 0. In this section we give
the proof of Proposition 3.4. Recall that G = Isom+ (Hn ) and that K p,q =
C(Gq+1 ; C((∂Hn )p+1 ; R))G with differentials δ : K p,q → K p+1,q and d :
K p,q → K p,q+1 given by the standard homogeneous coboundary operators. For a Polish Abelian G-module A denote by K p,q (A) the G-module
C(Gq+1 ; C((∂Hn )p+1 ; A))G . We will identify it with the G-module of Ginvariant measurable maps Gq+1 × (∂Hn )p+1 → A. We write [[α]d ]δ ∈
Hδ Hd (K p,q (A)) if a cochain α ∈ C(Gq+1 ; C((∂Hn )p+1 ; A))G satisfies dα = 0
and δα = dγ, where γ : Gq × (∂Hn )p+2 → A.
Proposition 3.9. For all p, q ∈ N, all Polish Abelian G-modules A and all
[[α]d ]δ ∈ Hδ Hd (K p,q (A)) there exists a locally totally bounded representative
κ of [[α]d ]δ . That is, there exist G-invariant measurable maps σ : Gq+1 ×
(∂Hn )p → A and λ : Gq × (∂Hn )p+1 → A such that
κ = α + δσ + dλ : Gq+1 × (∂Hn )p+1 → A
is locally totally bounded. Furthermore, σ can be chosen such that dσ = 0.
Proof. We will prove Proposition 3.9 by induction on q while allowing the
module A to vary, thereby proving it for all Abelian G-modules A. Suppose
q = 0. Then dα = 0 implies that the cocycle α : G → C((∂Hn )p+1 ; R) is a
constant function into C((∂Hn )p+1 ; A)G . We identify α with this element of
C((∂Hn )p+1 ; A)G and it thus follows from Proposition 3.5 that Proposition
3.9 holds in degree q = 0 for all Polish Abelian G-modules A.
Suppose now that q > 0 and that for q 0 < q the proposition is true for all
Polish Abelian G-modules A. Let α ∈ C(Gq+1 ; C((∂Hn )p+1 ; A))G be such
that dα = 0 and δα = dγ, where γ : Gq × (∂Hn )p+2 → A. We can assume
that δα = 0. Indeed, if δα = dγ 6= 0 then for any x ∈ ∂Hn such that
δ 2 α(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp+1 , x) = 0
for almost every ((g0 , . . . , gq ), (x0 , . . . , xp+1 )) ∈ Gq+1 ×(∂Hn )p+2 the cocycle
αx (g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp ) :=α(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp )
+ (−1)p δα(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp , x)

19

is a representative of the class of α (since δα = dγ is a coboundary) and
δαx (g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . ,xp+1 )
:=

p+1
X
(−1)i [α(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , x̂i , . . . , xp+1 )
i=0

+ (−1)p δα(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , x̂i , . . . , xp+1 , x)]
=δα(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp+1 )
+ (−1)p δ 2 α(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp+1 , x)
− (−1)p · (−1)p+2 δα(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp+1 )
=0.
Now define the function Qα in C(Gq ; C((∂Hn )p+1 ; C(G; A)))G by
Qα(g0 , . . . , gq−1 )(x0 , . . . , xp )(g) := (−1)q+1 α(g0 , . . . , gq−1 , g)(x0 , . . . , xp ).
Then
d(Qα)(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . ,xp )(g)
=

q
X
(−1)i Qα(g0 , . . . , ĝi , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp )(g)
i=0

q
X
=
(−1)i+q+1 α(g0 , . . . , ĝi , . . . , gq , g)(x0 , . . . , xp )
i=0

=(−1)q+1 dα(g0 , . . . , gq , g)(x0 , . . . , xp )
− (−1)2q+1 α(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp )

=α(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp ),

and we see that d(Qα) takes its values in ι(A) and therefore the image Qα
of Qα in C(Gq ; C((∂Hn )p+1 ; C(G; A)/ι(A)))G is a cocycle with respect to
the coboundary operator d. Furthermore,
δ(Qα)(g0 , . . . , gq−1 )(x0 , . . . ,xp+1 )(g)
=(−1)q+1 δα(g0 , . . . , gq−1 , g)(x0 , . . . , xp+1 )
=0
Hence Qα ∈ C(Gq ; C((∂Hn )p+1 ; C(G; A)/ι(A)))G represents a cohomology
class in Hδ Hd (K p,q−1 (C(G; A)/ι(A))) and so by the induction hypothesis
Qα = β̄ + δ µ̄ + dν̄,
where β̄ is a locally totally bounded cocycle and dµ̄ = 0. Then, by Lemma
2.2, there exist G-invariant measurable lifts β, µ and ν of these maps such

20

that
Qα = β + δµ + dν + η,
Gq

(∂Hn )p+1

with η :
×
bounded. We obtain

→ ι(A) and such that β is still locally totally

α = d(Qα) = dβ + dδµ + dη = dβ + δ(dµ) + dη.
Note that since α takes values in ι(A) the right-hand side does as well.
Also, since dµ̄ = 0, dµ takes values in ι(A) and hence dδµ = δ(dµ) can
be identified with a coboundary in C(Gq+1 ; C((∂Hn )p+1 ; A))G . The map
η also takes its values in ι(A) and it thus follows that κ := dβ is a locally
totally bounded representative of the class of α in Hδ Hd (K p,q (A)).

Let Kcp,q (A) be the G-module Cc (Gq+1 ; C((∂Hn )p+1 ; A))G where A is
from now on a Fréchet G-module and let Kcp,q = Kcp,q (R). Then
Proposition 3.10. Hδ Hd (Kcp,q (A)) ∼
= Hδ Hd (K p,q (A)).
Proof. By Proposition 3.9 any cohomology class [[κ]d ]δ ∈ Hδ Hd (K p,q (A))
has a locally totally bounded representative κ. Then, as in the proof of T.
Austin and C.C. Moore of the isomorphism between continuous and measurable cohomology for Fréchet coefficients, such a locally totally bounded
cocycle is effaced by the inclusion A ,→ Cc (G; A) and the result will follow by Buchsbaum’s criterion. More precisely, let us check that the three
conditions of Buchsbaum’s criterion (Lemma 2.3) hold for both sides of the
isomorphism. Firstly,
Hδ Hd (K p,0 (A)) = Hδ Hd (Kcp,0 (A)) = Hδ ((C((∂Hn )p+1 ; A))G ),
so both sides agree in degree zero. Furthermore, the existence of continuous
cross sections for Fréchet modules ensures that condition (2) holds for both
sides. For condition (3) we claim that the short sequence
0

ι

/A

/ Cc (G; A)

/ Cc (G; A)/ι(A)

/A

effaces all [[κ]d ]δ ∈ Hδ Hd (K(c) p,q (A)). Indeed, assume that κ is a locally
totally bounded representative of the class [[κ]d ]δ (which is automatic if
[[κ]d ]δ ∈ Hδ Hd (Kc p,q (A))). Then there exists an η : Gq × (∂Hn )p+1 →
Cc (G; A) s.t. dη = κ where κ is viewed as a map Gq+1 × (∂Hn )p+1 →
Cc (G; A) taking values in ι(A) ⊂ Cc (G; A). For example, we can define η
by
η(g0 , . . . , gq−1 )(x0 , . . . , xp )(g) :=
Z
(−1)q
κ(g0 , . . . , gq−1 , gh)(x0 , . . . , xp )ξ(h)dµG (h),
G

21

where g0 , . . . , gq−1 , g ∈ G, x0 , . . . , xp ∈ ∂Hn R and ξ : G → R>0 is a
compactly-supported continuous function with G ξdµG = 1. Then
dη(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp )(g)
Z
q
X
i
q
κ(g0 , . . . , ĝi , . . . , gq , gh)(x0 , . . . , xp )ξ(h)dµG (h)
=
(−1) (−1)
G

i=0

= (−1)q

Z

dκ(g0 , . . . , gq , gh)(x0 , . . . , xp )ξ(h)dµG (h)
Z
q
q+1
κ(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp )ξ(h)dµG (h)
− (−1) (−1)
G

G

= κ(g0 , . . . , gq )(x0 , . . . , xp ),
where the last equality follows from the fact that κ is a cocycle. It follows
that the image of [[κ]d ]δ in Hδ Hd (Kc p,q (Cc (G; A))) is zero.

Let K = SO(n − 2) and let s : G/K → G be a locally totally bounded
Borel section such that s(K) = e. By the Eckmann-Shapiro Lemma we have
q
q
(G; C(G/K; C p−3 )) ∼
the isomorphism Hm
= Hm (K; C p−3 ). From Proposition 3.10 it follows that if we restrict to cocycles in Hδ Hd (K p,q ) we can
assume them to be continuous in Gq+1 . As shown in section 2.5 we then
get an explicit map φ : Cc (Gq+1 ; C(G/K; C p−3 ))G → Cc (K q+1 ; C p−3 )K
that induces the isomorphism
Hδ Hd (C(Gq+1 ; C(G/K; C p−3 ))G ) ∼
= Hδ Hd (C(K q+1 ; C p−3 )K ).
Proof of Proposition 3.4. Let [[α]d ]δ ∈ Hδ Hd (Kcp,q ) = E2p,q . We will show
that in this case α is cohomologous in Hδ Hd (Kcp,q ) to a coboundary in
Hd (K p,q ). By Proposition 3.9, the cohomology class of α has a locally
totally bounded representative
β : Gq+1 × (∂Hn )p+1 → R.
Then φ(β) : K q+1 × (∂Hn )p−2 → R is also a locally totally bounded cocyle
and furthermore we have φ(β) = dη, where η : K q × (∂Hn )p−2 → R is
defined by
η(k0 , . . . , kq−1 )(x0 , . . . , xp−3 ) :=
Z
q
(−1)
φ(β)(k0 , . . . , kq−1 , k)(x0 , . . . , xp−3 )dµK (k).
K
p,q

It follows that IE2 = 0 for p > 2 and q > 0.



22

4. Injectivity of the comparison map in degree 3
Corollary 1.2, i.e. injectivity of the comparison map for real hyperbolic
space Hn in degree 3, is an immediate consequence of Theorem 1.1. By this
theorem, we have
Hc3 (G; R) =

ker(δ : C((∂Hn )4 ; R)G → C((∂Hn )5 ; R)G )
.
im(δ : C((∂Hn )3 ; R)G → C((∂Hn )4 ; R)G )

Furthermore, the continuous bounded cohomology of G can also be computed with maps that are defined on the boundary of hyperbolic space [16,
Theorem 7.5.3]. That is,
3
Hc,b
(G; R) =

ker(δ : L∞ ((∂Hn )4 ; R)G → L∞ ((∂Hn )5 ; R)G )
,
im(δ : L∞ ((∂Hn )3 ; R)G → L∞ ((∂Hn )4 ; R)G )

where L∞ ((∂Hn )p ; R) ⊂ C((∂Hn )p ; R) consists of essentially bounded measurable function classes. By 3-transitivity of the action of G on the boundary of hyperbolic space it then follows that cochains in degree 2 are constant. Since in even degree applying δ to a constant gives zero there are no
3 (G; R) are equal to the
coboundaries in degree 3. Hence Hc3 (G; R) and Hc,b
corresponding spaces of cocycles and it follows that the comparison map is
injective, given as the natural inclusion of cocycles.
Injectivity in degree 3 for Isom+ (Hn ) also follows from a simpler argument which only uses some basic properties of hyperbolic space and the
injectivity in degree 3 for n = 3. Denote by R the Isom(Hn )-module R
with Isom(Hn )-action given by the homomorphism
 : Isom(Hn ) → Isom(Hn )/Isom+ (Hn ) ∼
= {1, −1}.
We have
∗
∗
∗
Hc,(b)
(Isom+ (Hn ); R) ∼
(Isom(Hn ); R) ⊕ Hc,(b)
(Isom(Hn ); R ).
= Hc,(b)
3 (Isom+ (H3 ); R) is generated by the volume cocycle which is
Also, Hc,(b)
3 (Isom(H3 ); R ), and thus H 3 (Isom(H3 ); R) = 0.
equivariant, i.e. in Hc,(b)

c,(b)
3 (Isom(Hn ); R ) = 0 (see [6]).
On the other hand, for n > 3 we have Hc,(b)

3 (Isom+ (Hn ); R) = H 3 (Isom(Hn ); R).
Thus it follows that Hc,(b)
c,(b)
3 (Isom(Hn ); R) = 0.
Lemma 4.1. Let n > 3. Then Hc,b
3 (Isom(Hn ); R). Let i : H3 ,→ Hn be a natural embedProof. Let [β] ∈ Hc,b
ding. We will identify the image i(H3 ) ⊂ Hn with H3 . Since β restricted to
3
3
H3 is a cocycle in Cc,b ((H)3 ; R)Isom(H ) there is an α ∈ Cc,b ((H3 )3 ; R)Isom(H )
n
such that δα = β|H3 . Let x0 , x1 , x2 ∈ H . These points lie in the 2dimensional linear plane H(x0 , x1 , x2 ) spanned by the points x0 , x1 , x2 .

23

Since Isom(Hn ) acts transitively on linear 2-planes there always exists a
g ∈ Isom(Hn ) such that g(H(x0 , x1 , x2 )) ⊂ H3 . Define ᾱ : (Hn )3 → R by
ᾱ(x0 , x1 , x2 ) = α(gx0 , gx1 , gx2 ),
where g ∈ Isom(Hn ) is such that g(H(x0 , x1 , x2 )) ⊂ H3 . One checks easily
n
that this is well defined, ᾱ ∈ Cc,b ((Hn )3 ; R)Isom(H ) and δ ᾱ = β. Hence it
3 (Isom(Hn ); R) = 0.
follows that Hc,b

The proof above only uses the following two facts:
(1) An isometry of Hn can be extended to an isometry of Hn+1 .
(2) If x0 , . . . , xk ∈ Hn+1 where k + 1 ≤ n then there exists a g ∈
Isom(Hn+1 ) such that gH(x0 , . . . , xk ) ⊂ Hn where H(x0 , . . . , xk )
denotes the linear subspace spanned by the points x0 , . . . , xk .
These also hold in complex hyperbolic space HnC . Hence we immediately
obtain the following lemma.
k (Isom(Hn ); R) = 0. Then
Lemma 4.2. Let k ≤ n and suppose that Hc,b
(C)
k
(Isom(Hn+1
Hc,b
(C) ); R) = 0.

Theorem 1.3 is proved similarly. On cochains define
)
Isom(Hn
(C)

j : C((Hn(C) )k+1 ; R)

k+1
→ C((Hn+1
; R)
(C) )

)
Isom(Hn+1
(C)

by
j(β)(x0 , . . . , xk ) := β(gx0 , . . . , gxk ),
where g ∈ Isom(Hn(C) ) is such that g(H(x0 , . . . , xk )) ⊂ Hn(C) . Then
δ(j(β))(x0 , . . . , xk+1 ) = δβ(g 0 x0 , . . . , g 0 xk+1 ),
0
n
with g 0 ∈ Isom(Hn+1
(C) ) such that g (H(x0 , . . . , xk+1 )) ⊂ H(C) . Note that
such a g 0 exists since k + 1 ≤ n. It follows that if β is a cocycle then j(β)
is as well. Let furthermore
Isom(Hn+1
)
(C)

k+1
r : C((Hn+1
; R)
(C) )

Isom(Hn
)
(C)

→ C((Hn(C) )k+1 ; R)

be the map defined by restricting a k-cochain to (Hn(C) )k+1 . Then for a
cocycle β in degree k
r ◦ j(β)(x0 , . . . , xk ) = j(β)(x0 , . . . , xk )
= β(x0 , . . . , xk ),
for all x0 , . . . , xk ∈ Hn(C) . It follows that j induces an injective map on
cohomology.

24

References
[1] Austin, T., Moore, C.C.: Continuity Properties of Measurable Group Cohomology. Math. Ann. 356 (3) (2013),, 885-937.
[2] Bloch, S.J.: Higher Regulators, Algebraic K-Theory, and Zeta Functions
of Elliptic Curves. CRM Monograph Series, vol. 11, Amer. Math. Soc.,
Providence, RI 2000.
[3] Borel, A., Wallach, N.: Continuous Cohomology, Discrete Subgroups, and
Representations of Reductive Groups. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 67. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, second edition 2000.
[4] Bott, R., Tu, L.W.: Differential forms in algebraic topology. Graduate
Texts in Mathematics, vol. 82. Springer-Verlag, New York 1982.
[5] G.E. Bredon, Topology and Geometry, Graduate Texts in Mathematics
139, Springer 1993.
[6] Bucher, M., Burger, M., Iozzi, A.: A dual interpretation of the GromovThurston proof of Mostow rigidity and volume rigidity for representations
of hyperbolic lattices. In: Trends in harmonic analysis, Springer INdAM
Ser. 3, Springer, Milan 2013, 47-76.
[7] Buchsbaum, D.: Satellites and universal functors. Ann. Math. (2) 71
(1960), 199-209.
[8] Burger, M., Monod, N.: Bounded cohomology of lattices in higher rank
Lie groups. J. Eur. Math Soc. 1(2) (1999), 199-235.
[9] Burger, M., Monod, N.: On and around the bounded cohomology of SL2 .
In: Rigidity in dynamics and geometry, pp. 19-37. Springer, Berlin 2002.
[10] Dupont, J. L.: Bounds for characteristic numbers of flat bundles. In: Algebraic topology, Aarhus 1978 Lecture Notes in Mathematics 763 Springer,
Berlin 1979 , 109-119.
[11] Fremlin, D.H.: Measure Theory, Volume 4: Topological Measure Theory.
Torres Fremlin, Colchester 2005.
[12] Goncharov, A.B.: Explicit Construction of Characteristic Classes. Adv. in
Soviet Math. 16(1) (1993), 169-210 .
[13] Goncharov, A.B.: Geometry of configurations, polylogarithms, and motivic cohomology. Adv. Math. 114(2) (1995), 197-318.
[14] Guichardet, A.: Cohomologie des groupes topologiques et des algèbres de
Lie. Textes Mathématiques [Mathematical Texts], vol. 2. CEDIC, Paris
1980.
[15] Hartnick, T., Ott, A.: Bounded cohomology via partial differential equations, I. Geom. Topol. 19(6) (2015), 3603-3643.
[16] Monod, N.: Continuous bounded cohomology of locally compact groups.
Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1758. Springer-Verlag, Berlin 2001
[17] Monod, N.: An invitation to bounded cohomology. International Congress
of Mathematicians, vol. II, Eur. Math. Soc., Zürich 2006, 118-211.
[18] Monod, N.: Stabilization for SLn in bounded cohomology. In Discrete
geometric analysis, Contemp. Math. 347 Amer. Math. Soc., Providence,
RI 2004, 191-202.
[19] Moore, C.C.: Extensions and low dimensional cohomology theory of locally
compact groups. I, II. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 113 (1964), 40-63 .
[20] Moore, C.C.: Group Extensions and Cohomology for Locally Compact
Groups. III. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 221(1) (1976), 1-33.

25

[21] Moore, C.C.: Group Extensions and Cohomology for Locally Compact
Groups. IV. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 221(1) (1976), 35-58.

