A ZARISKI-LOCAL NOTION OF F-TOTAL ACYCLICITY
FOR COMPLEXES OF SHEAVES

arXiv:1510.08102v2 [math.AC] 23 Jun 2016

LARS WINTHER CHRISTENSEN, SERGIO ESTRADA, AND ALINA IACOB
Abstract. We study a notion of total acyclicity for complexes of flat sheaves
over a scheme. It is Zariski-local—i.e. it can be verified on any open affine
covering of the scheme—and for sheaves over a quasi-compact semi-separated
scheme it agrees with the categorical notion. In particular, it agrees, in their
setting, with the notion studied by Murfet and Salarian for sheaves over a
noetherian semi-separated scheme. As part of the study we recover, and in
several cases extend the validity of, recent results on existence of covers and
precovers in categories of sheaves. One consequence is the existence of an
adjoint to the inclusion of these totally acyclic complexes into the homotopy
category of complexes of flat sheaves.

Introduction
This paper is part of a thrust to extend Gorenstein homological algebra to schemes.
The first major advance was made by Murfet and Salarian [21], who introduced an
operational notion of total acyclicity over noetherian semi-separated schemes. Total
acyclicity has its origin in Tate cohomology of finite group representations, which
is computed via, what we now call, totally acyclic complexes of projectives. The
contemporary terminology was introduced in works of Avramov and Martsinkovsky
[3] and Veliche [27]: Given a commutative ring R, a chain complex P• of projective
R-modules is called totally acyclic if it is acyclic and HomR (P• , Q) is acyclic for
every projective R-module Q.
Categories of sheaves do not, in general, have enough projectives, so it is not
obvious how to define an interesting notion of total acyclicity in this setting. Murfet
and Salarian’s approach was to focus on flat sheaves: They say that a complex F• of
flat quasi-coherent sheaves over a noetherian semi-separated scheme X is F-totally
acyclic if it is acyclic and I ⊗ F• is acyclic for every injective quasi-coherent sheaf
I on X. This notion has its origin in the work of Enochs, Jenda, and Torrecillas,
who in [11] introduced it for complexes of modules. The assumptions on X ensure
that a quasi-coherent sheaf on X is (categorically) injective if and only if every
section of the sheaf is an injective module. In fact, F-total acyclicity as defined in
[21] is a Zariski-local property. That is, a complex F• of flat quasi-coherent sheaves
on X is F-totally acyclic if there is an open affine covering U of X such that F• (U )
is an F-totally acyclic complex of flat modules for every U ∈ U.
In this paper we give a definition of F-total acyclicity for complexes of flat quasicoherent sheaves without placing any assumptions on the underlying scheme. Our
Date: January 8, 2018.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 18F20; 18G25; 18G35.
Key words and phrases. F-total acyclicity, ascent–descent property, Gorenstein flat precover.
This research was conducted in spring 2015 during visits to the Centre de Recerca Matemàtica,
and during visits by L.W.C. and A.I. to the University of Murcia. The hospitality and support
of both institutions is acknowledged with gratitude. L.W.C. was partly supported by NSA grant
H98230-14-0140, and S.E. was partly supported by grant MTM2013-46837-P and FEDER funds.
S.E. and A.I. are also supported by the grant 18394/JLI/13 by the Fundación Séneca-Agencia de
Ciencia y Tecnologı́a de la Región de Murcia in the framework of III PCTRM 2011-2014.
1

2

L.W. CHRISTENSEN, S. ESTRADA, AND A. IACOB

definition is Zariski-local, and it agrees with the one from [21] when the latter
applies. In fact we prove more, namely (Proposition 2.10) that over any quasicompact semi-separated scheme X, an acyclic complex F• of flat quasi-coherent
sheaves is F-totally acyclic per our definition if and only if I ⊗ F• is acyclic for
every injective quasi-coherent sheaf I on X.
The key to the proof of Zariski-localness (Corollary 2.8) is the next result (Proposition 2.7), which says that F-total acyclicity for complexes of modules is a so-called
ascent–descent property. By a standard argument (Lemma 2.4), this implies that
the corresponding property of complexes of quasi-coherent sheaves is Zariski-local.
Proposition. Let ϕ : R → S be a flat homomorphism of commutative rings.
(1) If F• is an F-totally acyclic complex of flat R-modules, then S ⊗R F• is an
F-totally acyclic complex of flat S-modules.
(2) If ϕ is faithfully flat and F• is a complex of R-modules such that S ⊗R F•
is an F-totally acyclic complex of flat S-modules, then F• is an F-totally
acyclic complex of flat R-modules.
In lieu of projective sheaves one can focus on vector bundles—not necessarily
finite dimensional. In Section 3 we touch on a notion of total acyclicity for complexes of vector bundles. By comparing it to F-total acyclicity we prove that it is
Zariski-local for locally coherent locally d-perfect schemes (Theorems 3.8–3.9).
The keystone result of Section 4 is Theorem 4.2, which says that for any scheme
X, the class of F-totally acyclic complexes is covering in the category of chain
complexes of quasi-coherent sheaves on X. It has several interesting consequences.
The homotopy category of chain complexes of flat quasi-coherent sheaves over
X is denoted K(Flat X). It is a triangulated category, and the full subcategory
Ktac (Flat X) of F-totally acyclic complexes in K(Flat X) is a triangulated subcategory. Theorem 4.2 allows us to remove assumptions on the scheme in [21, Corollary
4.26] and obtain (Corollary 4.6):
Corollary. For any scheme X, the inclusion Ktac (Flat X) → K(Flat X) has a
right adjoint.
A Gorenstein flat quasi-coherent sheaf is defined as a cycle sheaf in an F-totally
acyclic complex of flat quasi-coherent sheaves. Enochs and Estrada [9] prove that
every quasi-coherent sheaf over any scheme has a flat precover. As another consequence (Corollary 4.8) of Theorem 4.2 we obtain a Gorenstein version of this result;
the affine case was already proved by Yang and Liang [29].
Corollary. Let X be a scheme. Every quasi-coherent sheaf on X has a Gorenstein
flat precover. If X is quasi-compact and semi-separated, then the Gorenstein flat
precover is an epimorphism.
Finally, Theorem 4.2 combines with Theorem 3.8 to yield (Corollary 4.9):
Corollary. Let R be a commutative coherent d-perfect ring. Every R-module has
a Gorenstein projective precover.
This partly recovers results of Estrada, Iacob, and Odabaşı [14, Corollary 2] and of
Bravo, Gillespie, and Hovey [6, Proposition 8.10].
1. Preliminaries
Let κ be a cardinal, by which we shall always mean a regular cardinal. An object
A in a category C is called κ-presentable if the functor HomC (A, −) preserves κdirected colimits. A category C is called locally κ-presentable if it is cocomplete
and there is a set S of κ-presentable objects in C such that every object in C is a
κ-directed colimit of objects in S.

A ZARISKI-LOCAL NOTION OF F-TOTAL ACYCLICITY

3

An ℵ0 -directed colimit is for short called a direct limit.
1.1. κ-pure morphisms. Let κ be a cardinal and C be a category. We recall from
the book of Adámek and J. Rosický [1, Definition 2.27] that a morphism ϕ : A → B
in C is called κ-pure if for every commutative square
A′

ϕ′

// B ′

α


A

ϕ


// B

where the objects A′ and B ′ are κ-presentable, there exits a morphism γ : B ′ → A
with γ ◦ ϕ′ = α. A subobject A ⊆ B is called κ-pure if the monomorphism A → B
is κ-pure.
1.2. Complexes. In the balance of this section, G denotes a Grothendieck category,
and Ch(G) denotes the category of chain complexes over G. It is elementary to
verify that Ch(G) is also a Grothendieck category. We use homological notation,
so a complex M• in Ch(G) looks like this
∂i+1

∂

i
Mi−1 −→ · · ·
M• = · · · −→ Mi+1 −−−−→ Mi −−→

We denote by Zn (M• ) and Bn (M• ) the nth cycle and nth boundary object of M• .
Let M be an object in G. We denote by Sn (M ) the complex with M in degree
n and 0 elsewhere. By Dn (M ) we denote the complex with M in degrees n and
n − 1, differential ∂n = IdM , the identity map, and 0 elsewhere.
1.3. (Pre)covers. Let F be a class of objects in G. A morphism φ : F → M in G
is called an F -precover if F is in F and
HomG (F ′ , F ) −→ HomG (F ′ , M ) −→ 0
is exact for every F ′ ∈ F . Further, if φ : F → M is a precover and every morphism
σ : F → F with φσ = φ is an automorphism, then φ is called an F -cover. If every
object in G has an F -(pre)cover, then the class F is called (pre)covering.
The dual notions are (pre)envelope and (pre)enveloping.
1.4. Orthogonal classes and cotorsion pairs. Let F be a class of objects in G
and consider the orthogonal classes
F ⊥ = {G ∈ G | Ext1G (F, G) = 0 for all F ∈ F } and
⊥

F = {G ∈ G | Ext1G (G, F ) = 0 for all F ∈ F } .

Let S ⊆ F be a set. The pair (F , F ⊥ ) is said to be cogenerated by the set S if an
object G belongs to F ⊥ if and only if Ext1G (F, G) = 0 holds for all F ∈ S.
A pair (F , C) of classes in G with F ⊥ = C and ⊥ C = F is called a cotorsion pair.
A cotorsion pair (F , C) in G is called complete provided that for every M ∈ G there
are short exact sequences 0 → C → F → M → 0 and 0 → M → C ′ → F ′ → 0 with
F, F ′ ∈ F and C, C ′ ∈ C. Notice that for every complete cotorsion pair (F , C), the
class F is precovering and the class C is preenveloping.
1.5. Kaplansky classes. Let F be a class of objects in G and κ be a cardinal.
One says that F is a κ-Kaplansky class if for every inclusion Z ⊆ F of objects in
G such that F is in F and Z is κ-presentable, there exists a κ-presentable object
W in F with Z ⊆ W ⊆ F and such that F/W belongs to F . We say that F is a
Kaplansky class if it is a κ-Kaplansky for some cardinal κ.
Proposition 1.6. Every Kaplansky class in G that is closed under extensions and
direct limits is covering.

4

L.W. CHRISTENSEN, S. ESTRADA, AND A. IACOB

Proof. Let κ be a cardinal; let F be a κ-Kaplansky class in G and assume that it
is closed under extensions and direct limits. It now follows from Eklof’s lemma [8,
Lemma 1] that the pair (F , F ⊥ ) is cogenerated by a set.
f the sum of all images in M of morphisms
Let M be an object in G. Denote by M
P
f
with domain in F . That is, M = ϕ∈Hom(F,M), F ∈F Im(ϕ); as G is well-powered
the sum is well-defined. Since F is closed under coproducts, there exists a short
f → 0, with E ∈ F . By a result of Enochs,
exact sequence 0 → L → E → M
Estrada, Garcı́a Rozas, and Oyonarte [10, Theorem 2.5] there is a short exact
sequence 0 → L → C → F → 0 with C ∈ F ⊥ and F ∈ F . Consider the push-out
diagram,
0

0

0


// L


// E

// M
f

// 0

0


// C


// D

// M
f

// 0


F


F


0


0

Since F is closed under extensions, one has D ∈ F , and since C ∈ F ⊥ it follows
f is an F -precover. By the definition of M
f, it immediately follows that
that D → M
M has an F -precover, so the class F is precovering. Finally, any precovering class
that is closed under direct limits is covering; see Xu [28, Theorem 2.2.12] for an
argument in a module category that carries over to Grothendieck categories.

1.7. Kaplansky classes and filtrations. Recall that a well ordered direct system,
{Mα | α ≤ λ}, of objects in G is called continuous if one has M0 = 0 and, for each
limit ordinal β ≤ λ, one has Mβ = limα<β Mα . If all morphisms in the system are
−→
monomorphisms, then the system is called a continuous directed union.
Let S be a class of objects in G. An object M in G is called S-filtered if there is
a continuous directed union {Mα | α ≤ λ} of subobjects of M such that M = Mλ
and for every α < λ the quotient Mα+1 /Mα is isomorphic to an object in S. We
denote by Filt(S) the class of all S-filtered objects in G.
Let κ be a cardinal and F be a κ-Kaplansky class in G that is closed under direct
limits. It is standard to verify that there exists a set S of κ-presentable objects
in F with F ⊆ Filt(S); see for example the proof of [15, Lemma 4.3]. In general
the classes F and Filt(S) need not be equal, but if F is closed under extensions,
then equality holds. An explicit example of strict containment is provided by
the (Kaplansky) class of phantom morphisms in the (Grothendieck) category of
representations of the A2 quiver; see Estrada, Guil Asensio, and Ozbek [12].
’
Štovı́ček
proves in [26, Corollary 2.7(2)] that every Kaplansky class F that is
closed under direct limits (and extensions) is deconstructible, which per [26, Definition 1.4] means precisely that there exists a set S with F = Filt(S). However, the
assumption about closedness under extensions is not stated explicitly.

A ZARISKI-LOCAL NOTION OF F-TOTAL ACYCLICITY

5

2. Faithfully flat descent for F-total acyclicity
Definition 2.1. Let X be a scheme with structure sheaf OX , and let P be a
property of modules over commutative rings.
(1) A quasi-coherent sheaf M on X is said to locally have property P if for every
open affine subset U ⊆ X, the OX (U )-module M (U ) has property P.
(2) As a (local) property of quasi-coherent sheaves on X, the property P is called
Zariski-local if the following conditions are equivalent for every quasi-coherent sheaf
M on X.
• The sheaf M locally has property P.
• There exists an open affine covering U of X such that for every U ∈ U the
OX (U )-module M (U ) has property P.
That is, Zariski-localness of a property of sheaves means that it can be verified
on any open affine covering. A useful classic tool for verifying Zariski-localness is
based on flat ascent and descent of the underlying module property. We make it
explicit in Lemma 2.4; see also [20, §34.11].
Definition 2.2. Let P be a property of modules over commutative rings and let
R be a class of commutative rings.
(1) P is said to ascend in R, if for every flat epimorphism R → S of rings in
R and for every R-module M with property P, the S-module S ⊗R M has
property P.
(2) P is said to descend in R if an R-module M has property P whenever there
exists a faithfully flat homomorphism R → S of rings in R such that the
S-module S ⊗R M has property P.
If P ascends and descends in R, then it is called an ascent–descent property, for
short an AD-property, in R.
Definition 2.3. A property P of modules over commutative rings is said to be
compatible with finite products if the following conditions are equivalent for all
commutative rings R1 and R2 , all R1 -modules M1 , and all R2 -modules M2 .
• M1 and M2 have property P.
• The R1 × R2 -module M1 × M2 has property P.
Lemma 2.4. Let X be a scheme with structure sheaf OX and let P be a property
of modules over commutative rings. If P is compatible with finite products and
an AD–property in the class R = {OX (U ) | U ⊆ X is an open affine subset} of
commutative rings, then P as a property of quasi-coherent sheaves on X is Zariskilocal.
Proof. Let U = {Ui | i ∈ I } be an open affine covering of X such that for every
i ∈ I the OX (Ui )-module M (Ui ) has property P. Let U beSan arbitrary open affine
subset of X. There exists a standard open covering U = nj=1 D(fj ) such that for
every j there is a Uj ∈ U with the property that D(fj ) is a standard open subset
of Uj ; that is, fj ∈ OX (Uj ) and D(fj ) = Spec(OX (Uj )fj ); see [20, Lemma 25.11.5].
In particular, one has M (D(fj )) ∼
= M (Uj ) ⊗OX (Uj ) OX (Uj )fj , and it follows that
M (D(fj )) has property P as it ascendsQin R. The compatibility
Qn of P with direct
n
products now ensures that the module j=1 M (D(fj )) over j=1 OX (D(fj )) has
Q
property P. As the canonical morphism OX (U ) → nj=1 OX (D(fj )) is faithfully
flat, it follows that the OX (U )-module M (U ) has property P.

While ascent of a module property is usually easy to prove, it can be more
involved to prove descent. For instance, it is easy to see that flatness is an ADproperty. Also the flat Mittag-Leffler property is known to be an AD-property:

6

L.W. CHRISTENSEN, S. ESTRADA, AND A. IACOB

Ascent is easy to prove, while descent follows from Raynaud and Gruson [25, II.5.2];
see also Perry [24, §9] for correction of an error in [25]. The AD-property is also satisfied by the κ-restricted flat Mittag-Leffler modules, where κ is an infinite cardinal
(see Estrada, Guil Asensio, and Trlifaj [13]).
We are also concerned with properties of complexes of sheaves and modules; it
is straightforward to extend Definitions 2.1–2.3 and Lemma 2.4 to the case where
P is a property of complexes.
Next we introduce the property for which we will study Zariski-localness.
Definition 2.5. A complex of flat R-modules F• = · · · → Fi+1 → Fi → Fi−1 → · · ·
is called F-totally acyclic if it is acyclic and I ⊗R F• is acyclic for every injective
R-module I.
Definition 2.6. Let X be a scheme with structure sheaf OX . A complex F• =
· · · → Fi+1 → Fi → Fi−1 → · · · of flat quasi-coherent sheaves on X is called
F-totally acyclic if for every open affine subset U ⊆ X the complex F• (U ) of flat
OX (U )-modules is F-totally acyclic.
The next lemma shows, in particular, that F-total acyclicity is an AD-property.
Proposition 2.7. Let ϕ : R → S be a flat homomorphism of commutative rings.
(1) If F• is an F-totally acyclic complex of flat R-modules, then S ⊗R F• is an
F-totally acyclic complex of flat S-modules.
(2) If ϕ is faithfully flat and F• is a complex of R-modules such that S ⊗R F•
is an F-totally acyclic complex of flat S-modules, then F• is an F-totally
acyclic complex of flat R-modules.
Proof. (1) Since ϕ is flat and F• is an acyclic complex of flat R-modules, it follows
that S ⊗R F• is an acyclic complex of flat S-modules. Now, let E be an injective
S-module, by flatness of ϕ it is also injective as an R-module. Indeed, there are isomorphisms HomR (−, E) ∼
= HomR (−, HomS (S, E)) ∼
= HomS (S ⊗R −, E). It follows
∼
that E ⊗S (S ⊗R F• ) = E ⊗R F• is acyclic.
(2) Since ϕ is faithfully flat and S ⊗R F• is an F-totally acyclic complex of flat
S-modules, it follows that F• is an acyclic complex of flat R-modules. Let I be
an injective R-module; it must be shown that I ⊗R F• is acyclic. The S-module
HomR (S, I) is injective, so it follows from the next chain of isomorphisms that
HomR (S, I) ⊗R F• is acyclic:
HomR (S, I) ⊗R F• ∼
= HomR (S, I) ⊗S (S ⊗R F• ) ;
= (HomR (S, I) ⊗S S) ⊗R F• ∼
here the last complex is acyclic by the assumption that S ⊗R F• is F-totally acyclic.
As ϕ is faithfully flat, the exact sequence of R-modules 0 → R → S → S/R → 0
is pure. Hence the induced sequence
0 −→ HomR (S/R, I) −→ HomR (S, I) −→ HomR (R, I) −→ 0
is split exact. It follows that HomR (R, I) ∼
= I is a direct summand of HomR (S, I)
as an R-module. Hence the complex I ⊗R F• is a direct summand of the acyclic
complex HomR (S, I) ⊗R F• and, therefore, acyclic.

The proposition above together with (the complex version of) Lemma 2.4 ensure that the property of being F-totally acyclic is Zariski-local as a property of
complexes of quasi-coherent sheaves.
Corollary 2.8. Let X be a scheme with structure sheaf OX . A complex F• of
flat quasi-coherent sheaves on X is F-totally acyclic if there exists an affine open
covering U of X such that the complex F• (U ) of flat OX (U )-modules is F-totally
acyclic for every U ∈ U.


A ZARISKI-LOCAL NOTION OF F-TOTAL ACYCLICITY

7

Remark 2.9. Our definition 2.6 is different from [21, Definition 4.1], but as shown
in [21, Lemma 4.5] the two are equivalent if X is Noetherian and semi-separated,
which is the blanket assumption in [21]. In the next proposition we substantially
relax the hypothesis on X and show that our definition coincides with the one from
[21] if X is quasi-compact and semi-separated.
Proposition 2.10. Let X be a quasi-compact and semi-separated scheme and let
F• be an acyclic complex of flat quasi-coherent sheaves on X. Conditions (i) and
(ii) below are equivalent and imply (iii).
(i) The complex J ⊗OX F• is acyclic for every injective object J in Qcoh(X).
(ii) There exists a semi-separating open affine covering U of X such that for every U ∈ U, the complex F• (U ) of flat OX (U )-modules is F-totally acyclic.
(iii) For every x ∈ X the complex (F• )x of flat OX,x -modules is F-totally
acyclic.
Proof. Let U be a semi-separating open affine covering of X. For every U ∈ U, the
inclusion U → X gives an adjoint pair (jU∗ , j∗U ), where jU∗ : Qcoh(X) → Qcoh(U )
and j∗U : Qcoh(U ) → Qcoh(X) are the inverse and direct image functor respectively.
Since jU∗ is an exact functor and j∗U is a right adjoint of jU∗ , it follows that j∗U
preserves injective objects. Now the implication (i) ⇒ (ii) follows.
(ii) ⇒ (i): Let U be a semi-separating affine covering of X, such that F• (U ) is
F-totally acyclic for every U ∈ U. Without loss of generality, assume that U is finite.
Given a quasi-coherent sheaf J there exists, since the scheme is semi-separated, a
monomorphism
Y
fU ) ,
0 −→ J −→
j∗U (E
U∈U

where EU denotes the injective hull of J (U ) in the category of OX (U )-modules,
fU ∈ Qcoh(U ) is the corresponding sheaf. Recall that each quasi-coherent
and E
fU ) is injective per the argument above. We assume that J is injective
sheaf j∗U (E
Q
fU ). It is thus
in Qcoh(X), so it is a direct summand of the finite product U j∗U (E
U f
sufficient to prove that j∗ (EU )⊗OX F• is acyclic for every U ∈ U, as that will imply
that J ⊗OX F• is a direct summand of an acyclic complex and hence acyclic. Fix
U ∈ U; for every W ∈ U there are isomorphisms
fU )(W ) ⊗O (W ) F• (W )
fU ) ⊗OX F• )(W ) ∼
(j∗U (E
= j∗U (E
X

= (EU ⊗OX (U) OX (U ∩ W )) ⊗OX (W ) F• (W )
∼
= EU ⊗OX (U) (OX (U ∩ W ) ⊗OX (W ) F• (W ))
∼
= EU ⊗O (U) F• (U ∩ W )
X

∼
= EU ⊗OX (U) (OX (W ∩ U ) ⊗OX (U) F• (U ))
∼
= (EU ⊗OX (U) OX (W ∩ U )) ⊗OX (U) F• (U )
∼
= (OX (W ∩ U ) ⊗O (U) EU ) ⊗O (U) F• (U )
X

X

∼
= OX (W ∩ U ) ⊗OX (U) (EU ⊗OX (U) F• (U )) .
The last complex is acyclic as OX (W ∩ U ) is a flat OX (U )-module and the complex
EU ⊗OX (U) F• (U ) is acyclic by the assumption that F• (U ) is F-totally acyclic.
(i) ⇒ (iii): Given an x ∈ X consider a subset U ∈ U with x ∈ U . Let E be
an injective OX,x -module; it is injective over OX (U ) as well as one has OX,x ∼
=
e ⊗OX F• is acyclic, and hence so is
(OX (U ))x . By (i) the complex j∗U (E)
e ⊗OX F• )x ∼
(j∗U (E)
= (E ⊗OX,x F• )x .

Thus, the OX,x -complex (F• )x is F-totally acyclic.



8

L.W. CHRISTENSEN, S. ESTRADA, AND A. IACOB

If the scheme is noetherian and semi-separated, then all three conditions in
Proposition 2.10 are equivalent; see [21, Lemma 4.4] for the remaining implication.
3. Total acyclicity vs. F-total acyclicity
Let X be a scheme with structure sheaf OX . Recall from Drinfeld [7, Section 2]
that a not necessarily finite dimensional vector bundle on X is a quasi-coherent
sheaf P such that the OX (U )-module P(U ) is projective for every open affine
subset U ⊆ X; i.e. it is locally projective per Definition 2.1. This is a Zariski-local
notion because projectivity of modules is an AD-property and compatible with
finite products; see [24]. We take a special interest in F-totally acyclic complexes
of infinite dimensional vector bundles; to this end we recall:
Definition 3.1. A complex P• = · · · → Pi+1 → Pi → Pi−1 → · · · of projective
R-modules is called totally acyclic if it is acyclic, and Hom(P• , Q) is acyclic for
every projective R-module Q.
As opposed to F-total acyclicity, it is not clear to us that total acyclicity leads
to a Zariski-local property of complexes of quasi-coherent sheaves on an arbitrary
scheme. The purpose of this section is to identify conditions on schemes that
ensure that total acyclicity coincides with F-total acyclicity for complexes of vector
bundles.
We need a few definitions parallel to those in Section 2.
Definition 3.2. Let P be a property of commutative rings.
(1) A scheme X with structure sheaf OX is said to locally have property P if for
every open affine subset U ⊆ X the ring OX (U ) has property P.
(2) As a (local) property of schemes, the property P is called Zariski-local if the
following conditions are equivalent for every scheme X.
• X locally has property P.
• There exists an open affine covering U of X such that for every U ∈ U the
ring OX (U ) has property P.
Recall that a commutative ring R is called d-perfect if every flat R-module has
projective dimension at most d. Bass [4, Theorem P] described the 0-perfect rings.
Example 3.3. Every locally Noetherian scheme of Krull dimension d is locally
coherent and locally d-perfect.
If R is a commutative coherent ring of global dimension 2, then the polynomial
ring in n variables over R is coherent of global dimension n + 2; see Glaz [17,
Theorem 7.3.14]. Thus, the scheme PnR is locally coherent and locally (n + 2)perfect.
Definition 3.4. Let P a property of commutative rings and let R be a class of
commutative rings.
(1) P is said to ascend in R, if for every flat epimorphism R → S of rings in
R, the ring S has property P if R has property P.
(2) P is said to descend in R if for every faithfully flat homomorphism R → S
of rings in R, the ring S has property P only if R has property P.
If P ascends and descends in R, then it is called an ascent–descent property, for
short an AD-property, in R.
Definition 3.5. A property P of commutative rings is said to be compatible with
finite products if for all commutative rings R1 and R2 , the product ring R1 × R2
has property P if and only if R1 and R2 have property P.
The proof of the next lemma is parallel to that of Lemma 2.4.

A ZARISKI-LOCAL NOTION OF F-TOTAL ACYCLICITY

9

Lemma 3.6. Let X be a scheme with structure sheaf OX and let P be a property
of commutative rings. If P is compatible with finite products and an AD-property
in the class of commutative rings {OX (U ) | U ⊆ X is an open affine subset}, then
P as a property of schemes is Zariski-local.

Proposition 3.7. The properties local coherence and local d-perfectness of schemes
are Zariski-local.
Proof. Coherence and d-perfectness are properties of rings that are compatible with
finite products, so by Lemma 3.6 it is enough to prove that they are AD-properties.
Harris [18, Corollary 2.1] proves that coherence descends along faithfully flat
homomorphisms of rings. To prove ascent, let R → S be a flat epimorphism and
assume that R is coherent. Let {Fi | i ∈ I } be a family of flat S-modules. As
S is flat over
Q the
Q R, every flat S-module is a flat R-module. Since R is coherent
R-module i∈I Fi is flat, and as flatness ascends so is the S-module S ⊗R i∈I Fi .
There are isomorphisms of S-modules
Y
Y
Y
Y
S ⊗R
Fi ∼
(S ⊗S Fi ) ∼
Fi ∼
Fi ,
= S ⊗R
= (S ⊗R S) ⊗S
=
i∈I

i∈I

i∈I

i∈I

where the last isomorphism holds as R → S is an epimorphism of rings. Thus,
Q
i∈I Fi , is a flat S-module, and it follows that S is coherent; see [17, Theorem
2.3.2].
To see that d-perfectness ascends, let R → S be a flat epimorphism and assume
that R is d-perfect. Let F be a flat S-module; it is also flat over R, so there is an
exact sequence of R-modules 0 → Pd → · · · → P1 → P0 → F → 0 with each Pi
projective. As S is flat over R, it induces an exact sequence of S-modules
0 −→ S ⊗R Pd −→ · · · −→ S ⊗R P1 −→ S ⊗R P0 −→ S ⊗R F −→ 0 .
Each S-module S ⊗R Pi is projective, so one has pdS (S ⊗R F ) ≤ d. Finally, as
R → S is an epimorphism one has S ⊗R F ∼
= F , so d-perfectness ascends. To prove
descent, let R → S be a faithfully flat ring homomorphism where S is d-perfect. Let
F be a flat R-module, and consider a projective resolution · · · → P1 → P0 → F → 0
over R. As above it yields a projective resolution over S,
· · · −→ S ⊗R Pd −→ · · · −→ S ⊗R P1 −→ S ⊗R P0 −→ S ⊗R F −→ 0 .
The inequality pdS (S ⊗R F ) ≤ d implies that the S-module
Coker(S ⊗R Pd+1 −→ S ⊗R Pd ) ∼
= S ⊗R Coker(Pd+1 → Pd )
is projective, and it follows from [24] that the R-module Coker(Pd+1 → Pd ) is projective, whence one has pdR F ≤ d.

Theorem 3.8. Let X be locally coherent and locally d-perfect scheme, and let P•
be a complex of vector bundles on X. If there exists an open affine covering U of
X such that P• (U ) is totally acyclic in Ch(R(U )) for every U ∈ U, then P• is
F-totally acyclic.
Proof. Over a coherent d-perfect ring, every totally acyclic complex is F-totally
acyclic; see Holm [19, Proposition 3.4]. Thus, every complex P• (U ) is F-totally
acyclic and the result follows as that is a Zariski-local property by Corollary 2.8. 
Theorem 3.9. Let X be locally coherent and P• be a complex of possibly infinite
dimensional vector bundles. If P• is F-totally acyclic then P• (U ) is totally acyclic
for every open affine subset U ⊆ X.

10

L.W. CHRISTENSEN, S. ESTRADA, AND A. IACOB

Proof. Let U ⊆ X be an open affine subset. The complex P• (U ) is an F-totally
acyclic complex of projective OX (U )-modules. Since OX (U ) is a coherent ring,
P• (U ) is totally acyclic by a result of Bravo, Gillespie, and Hovey [6, Theorem 6.7].

For a different proof of the theorem, one could verify that the proof of [21,
Lemma 4.20(ii)] extends to coherent rings.
Remark 3.10. Let X be a scheme with structure sheaf OX . A complex P• of
vector bundles on X would be called totally acyclic if for every open affine subset
U ⊆ X the OX (U )-complex P• (U ) is totally acyclic as defined in 3.1. We have
not explicitly addressed that property, because we do not know if it is Zariski-local.
However, if X is locally coherent and locally d-perfect, then the property is Zariskilocal. Indeed, assume that there exists an open affine covering U of X such that
P• (U ) is a totally acyclic complex of projective OX (U )-modules for every U ∈ U.
It follows from Theorem 3.8 that P• is F-totally acyclic, and then for every open
affine subset U ⊆ X the complex P• (U ) is totally acyclic by Theorem 3.9.
4. Existence of adjoints
Definition 4.1. Let X be a scheme; by Ftac (Flat X) we denote the class of Ftotally acyclic complexes of quasi-coherent sheaves on X.
Theorem 4.2. Let X be a scheme. The class Ftac (Flat X) is covering in the
category Ch(Qcoh(X)), and if Qcoh(X) has a flat generator, then every such cover
is an epimorphism.
The assumption about existence of a flat generator for Qcoh(X) is satisfied if
the scheme X is quasi-compact and semi-separated; see Alonso Tarrı́o, Jeremı́as
López, and Lipman [2, (1.2)]. We prepare for the proof with a couple of lemmas.
Lemma 4.3. Let X be a scheme, M• be a complex in Ftac (Flat X), and M•′ be a
subcomplex of M• . If conditions (1) and (2) below are satisfied, then the complexes
M•′ and M• /M•′ belong to Ftac (Flat X).
(1) M•′ is acyclic.
(2) There exists an open covering U of X such that the OX (U )-submodules
Mn′ (U ) ⊆ Mn (U ) and Zn (M•′ (U )) ⊆ Zn (M• (U )) are pure for every U ∈ U
and all n ∈ Z.
Proof. Fix U ∈ U. For every n ∈ Z the submodule Mn′ (U ) ⊆ Mn (U ) is pure and
Mn (U ) is flat, so the modules Mn′ (U ) and (Mn /Mn′ )(U ) are flat. By assumption,
there is for every n ∈ Z a commutative diagram with exact rows
0

// Zn (M•′ (U ))

// Mn′ (U )

// Zn−1 (M•′ (U ))

// 0

0


// Zn (M• (U ))


// Mn (U )


// Zn−1 (M• (U ))

// 0 ,

(∗)

where the vertical homomorphisms are pure embeddings. Let I be an injective
OX (U )-module. In the commutative diagram obtained by applying I ⊗OX (U) −
to (∗), the vertical homomorphisms are pure embeddings, and the bottom row
is exact as the complex M• (U ) is F-totally acyclic. By commutativity it follows that the homomorphism I ⊗R Zn (M•′ (U )) → I ⊗R M•′ (U ) is injective, whence
I ⊗OX (U) M•′ (U ) is acyclic; i.e. M•′ (U ) is F-totally acyclic. Now, as (M• /M•′ )(U )
is a complex of flat OX (U )-modules, the sequence
0 −→ I ⊗OX (U) M•′ (U ) −→ I ⊗OX (U) M• (U ) −→ I ⊗OX (U) (M• /M•′ )(U ) −→ 0

A ZARISKI-LOCAL NOTION OF F-TOTAL ACYCLICITY

11

is exact for every injective OX (U )-module I; since the left-hand and middle complexes are acyclic, so is the right-hand complex, that is, (M• /M•′ )(U ) is F-totally
acyclic. Finally, since U ∈ U is arbitrary, it follows that M•′ and M• /M•′ are complexes of flat quasi-coherent sheaves and F-totally acyclic per Corollary 2.8.

For the next lemma, recall from 1.1 the notion of a κ-pure morphism.
Lemma 4.4. Let X be a scheme and κ be a cardinal. If τ : F → G is a κ-pure morphism in Qcoh(X), then τ (U ) : F (U ) → G (U ) is pure monomorphism of OX (U )modules for every open affine subset U ⊆ X.
Proof. The category Qcoh(X) is a Grothendieck category; see [9, Corollary 3.5].
By a result of Beke [5, Proposition 3] there exists an infinite cardinal κ, such that
Qcoh(X) is locally κ-presentable. The pure morphism τ is by [1, Proposition 2.29]
a monomorphism, so it yields a κ-pure exact sequence
E = 0 −→ F −→ G −→ H −→ 0 .
By [1, Proposition 2.30] it is the colimit of a κ-directed system (Eα ) of splitting
short exact sequences in Qcoh(X). For every open affine subset U ⊆ X, one gets
a κ-directed system (Eα (U )) of split exact sequences of OX (U )-modules. Since κ
is infinite, every κ-directed system is an ℵ0 -directed system; see for example [15,
Fact A.2]. Therefore, E(U ) is a direct limit of splitting short exact sequences of
OX (U )-modules. Hence, the sequence E(U ) of OX (U )-modules is pure.

Lemma 4.5. For every scheme X, the class Ftac (Flat X) is a Kaplansky class.
Proof. Let κ be a cardinal such that the categories Qcoh(X) and Ch(Qcoh(X))
are locally κ-presentable; see [9, Corollary 3.5], [5, Proposition 3], and 1.2. Let
M• 6= 0 be a complex in Ch(Qcoh(X)); by [1, Theorem 2.33] there is a cardinal
γ such that every γ-presentable subcomplex M•′′ ⊆ M• can be embedded in a
γ-presentable κ-pure subcomplex M•′ ⊆ M• . To prove that Ftac (Flat X) is a
Kaplansky class, it is enough to verify that M•′ satisfies conditions (1) and (2)
in Lemma 4.3. Now, for any κ-presentable sheaf L ∈ Qcoh(X), the complexes
Sn (L ) and Dn (L ) are κ-presentable. It follows that the κ-pure exact sequence
0 → M•′ → M• → M• /M•′ → 0 induces exact sequences
0 → Mor(Sn (L ), M•′ ) → Mor(Sn (L ), M• ) → Mor(Sn (L ), M• /M•′ ) → 0
and
0 → Mor(Dn (L ), M•′ ) → Mor(Dn (L ), M• ) → Mor(Dn (L ), M• /M•′ ) → 0 ,
where Mor is short for HomCh(Qcoh(X)) . For every N• ∈ Ch(Qcoh(X)) and n ∈ Z
there are standard isomorphisms
Mor(L , Zn (N• )) ∼
= Mor(Dn (L ), N• ) ,
= Mor(Sn (L ), N• ) and Mor(L , Nn ) ∼
which allow us to rewrite the exact sequences above as
0 → Mor(L , Zn (M•′ )) → Mor(L , Zn (M• )) → Mor(L , Zn (M• /M•′ )) → 0
and
0 → Mor(L , Mn′ ) → Mor(L , Mn ) → Mor(L , Mn /Mn′ ) → 0 .
As the category Qcoh(X) is locally κ-presentable, it has a generating set of κpresentable objects; it follows that 0 → Zn (M•′ ) → Zn (M• ) → Zn (M• /M•′ ) → 0
and 0 → Mn′ → Mn → Mn /Mn′ → 0 are exact, even κ-pure exact, sequences in
Qcoh(X). Let U ⊆ X be an open affine subset; by Lemma 4.4, the sequences of
OX (U )-modules 0 → Zn (M•′ (U )) → Zn (M• (U )) → Zn ((M• /M•′ )(U )) → 0 and
0 → Mn′ (U ) → Mn (U ) → (Mn /Mn′ )(U ) → 0 are pure exact. Thus, condition (2)

12

L.W. CHRISTENSEN, S. ESTRADA, AND A. IACOB

in Lemma 4.3 is satisfied. It remains to show that the subcomplex M•′ is acyclic.
To this end, apply the snake lemma to the canonical diagram
0

// Zn (M ′ )
•

// Zn (M• )

// Zn (M• /M ′ )
•

// 0

0


// M ′
n


// Mn


// Mn /M ′
n

// 0

to get an exact sequence 0 → Bn−1 (M•′ ) → Bn−1 (M• ) → Bn−1 (M• /M•′ ) → 0 for
every n ∈ Z. Now apply the snake lemma to
0

// Bn (M•′ )

// Bn (M• )

// Bn (M• /M•′ )

// 0

0


// Zn (M ′ )
•


// Zn (M• )


// Zn (M• /M ′ )
•

// 0

One has Bn (M• ) = Zn (M• ) for every n ∈ Z as M• is acyclic. It follows that
Bn (M•′ ) = Zn (M•′ ) holds for all n ∈ Z, so M•′ is acyclic.

We can prove now Theorem 4.2.
Proof of Theorem 4.2. The goal is to apply Proposition 1.6. The class Ftac (Flat X)
is Kaplansky by Lemma 4.5, and it remains to prove that it is closed under extensions and direct limits. Let 0 → M•′ → M• → M•′′ → 0 be an exact sequence
in Ch(Qcoh(X)) with M•′ and M•′′ in Ftac (Flat X). For every open affine subset
U ⊆ X, there is an exact sequence 0 → M•′ (U ) → M• (U ) → M•′′ (U ) → 0 of
complexes of OX (U )-modules. As M•′ and M•′′ are complexes of flat modules, so
is M• . The sequence remains exact when tensored by an injective OX (U )-module,
and since M•′ (U ) and M•′′ (U ) are F-totally acyclic, so is M• (U ). It follows that
M• belongs to Ftac (Flat X); that is, Ftac (Flat X) is closed under extensions.
Let {F•i | i ∈ I } be a direct system of complexes in Ftac (Flat X). For every
open affine subset U ⊆ X one then has a direct system {F•i (U ) | i ∈ I } of F-totally
acyclic complexes of OX (U )-modules. Now, limi∈I F•i (U ) is an acyclic complex of
−→
flat OX (U )-modules, and since direct limits commute with tensor products and
homology, it is F-totally acyclic. The quasi-coherent sheaf F• = limi∈I F•i satisfies
−→
F• (U ) = limi∈I F•i (U ), so we conclude that F• belongs to Ftac (Flat X). Now it
−→
follows from Proposition 1.6 that Ftac (Flat X) is covering.
Now assume that the category Qcoh(X) has a flat generator F . It follows that
the complexes of flat sheaves Dn (F ), n ∈ Z, generate the category Ch(Qcoh(X)).
Evidently, each complex Dn (F ) is F-totally acyclic, so every Ftac (Flat X)-cover is
an epimorphism.

For any scheme X, one can consider the homotopy category of flat quasi-coherent
sheaves, which we denote K(Flat X). It is a triangulated category, and the full subcategory Ktac (Flat X) of F-totally acyclic complexes in K(Flat X) is a triangulated
subcategory. The next result generalizes [21, Corollary 4.26] to arbitrary schemes.
Corollary 4.6. For any scheme X, the inclusion Ktac (Flat X) → K(Flat X) has
a right adjoint.
Proof. The full subcategory Ktac (Flat X) is closed under retracts, so per Neeman
[22, Definition 1.1] it is a thick subcategory of K(Flat X). By Theorem 4.2 every
complex in K(Flat X) has a Ktac (Flat X)-precover; now [22, Proposition 1.4] yields
the existence of a right adjoint to the inclusion Ktac (Flat X) → K(Flat X).


A ZARISKI-LOCAL NOTION OF F-TOTAL ACYCLICITY

13

Definition 4.7. Let X be a scheme. A quasi-coherent sheaf G on X is called
Gorenstein flat if there exists an F-totally acyclic complex F• of flat quasi-coherent
sheaves on X with G ∼
= Zn (F• ) for some n ∈ Z.
The affine case of the next result was proved by Yang and Liang [29, Theorem A].
Recall from [2, (1.2)] that Qcoh(X) has a flat generator—in particular, a Gorenstein
flat generator—if the scheme X is quasi-compact and semi-separated.
Corollary 4.8. Let X be a scheme. Every quasi-coherent sheaf on X has a Gorenstein flat precover. Moreover, if the category Qcoh(X) has a Gorenstein flat generator, then the Gorenstein flat precover is an epimorphism.
Proof. Let M ∈ Qcoh(X); by Theorem 4.2 there exists an F-totally acyclic cover
ϕ : F• → S1 (M ) in Ch(Qcoh(X)). For every acyclic complex A• in Ch(Qcoh(X))
there is an isomorphism
(∗)

HomCh(Qcoh(X)) (A• , S1 (M )) ∼
= HomQcoh(X) (Z0 (A• ), M ) .

Thus, the cover induces a morphism φ : Z0 (F• ) → M , where Z0 (F• ) is Gorenstein
flat. We now argue that φ is a Gorenstein flat precover. Consider a morphism
θ : G → M in Qcoh(X) with G Gorenstein flat. There exists an F-totally acyclic
complex F•′ of flat quasi-coherent sheaves with Z0 (F•′ ) ∼
= G . The morphism θ
corresponds by (∗) to a morphism ϑ : F•′ → S1 (M ) in Ch(Qcoh(X)). Since ϕ
is an F-totally acyclic cover, there exists a morphism κ : F•′ → F• such that
ϕ ◦ κ = ϑ holds. It is now straightforward to verify that the induced morphism
κ : Z0 (F•′ ) → Z0 (F• ) satisfies φ ◦ κ = θ. Thus φ is a Gorenstein flat precover of
M . Finally, a flat generator of Qcoh(X) is trivially Gorenstein flat, so if such a
generator exists, then every Gorenstein flat precover is surjective.

The next corollary partly recovers [6, Proposition 8.10] and [14, Corollary 2]; the
argument is quite different from the one given in [6] and [14].
Corollary 4.9. Let R be a coherent and d-perfect ring. Every R-module has a
Gorenstein projective precover.
Proof. Let Proj R denote the class of projective R-modules. In the category of
complexes of R-modules, (Ch(Proj R), Ch(Proj R)⊥ ) is a complete cotorsion pair;
see Gillespie [16, Section 5.2]. Let F be a complex in Ch(Flat R); there is an exact
sequence
(∗)

0 −→ E −→ P −→ F −→ 0

with P is in Ch(Proj R) and E in Ch(Proj R)⊥ . As the class of flat R-modules
is resolving, E belongs to the intersection Ch(Proj R)⊥ ∩ Ch(Flat R), which by
Neeman [23, 2.14] is the class of pure acyclic complexes of flat R-modules. Notice
that P is F-totally acyclic if and only if F is F-totally acyclic. It thus follows from
Theorem 3.9 that every F-totally acyclic complex has a totally acyclic precover.
Let M be any complex of R-modules. By Theorem 4.2 it has an F-totally acyclic
cover φ : F → M , and as noted above F has a totally acyclic precover ψ : P → F .
We argue that the composite φ ◦ ψ is a totally acyclic precover of M . To this end,
let δ : P ′ → M be a morphism, where P ′ is a totally acyclic complex; by Theorem
3.8 it is F-totally acyclic. Since φ is an F-totally acyclic cover of M , there exists a
morphism θ : P ′ → F with φ ◦ θ = δ. Now, since ψ is a totally acyclic precover of F ,
there exists γ : P ′ → P such that ψ ◦ γ = θ. Finally, one has (φ ◦ ψ) ◦ γ = φ ◦ θ = δ.
So φ ◦ ψ is a totally acyclic precover of M . Finally, arguing as in the proof of
Corollary 4.8, we infer that every module has a Gorenstein projective precover. 

14

L.W. CHRISTENSEN, S. ESTRADA, AND A. IACOB

Acknowledgments
We thank the anonymous referees for numerous comments and suggestions that
helped us clarify the exposition. We are particularly grateful to one referee for a
correspondence that led to Proposition 2.10.
References
[1] J. Adámek and J. Rosický, Locally presentable and accessible categories, London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, vol. 189, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994.
[2] L. Alonso Tarrı́o, A. Jeremı́as López, and J. Lipman, Local homology and cohomology
on schemes, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. 30 (1997), 1–39.
[3] L.L. Avramov and A. Martsinkovsky, Absolute, relative, and Tate cohomology of modules
of finite Gorenstein dimension, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 85 (2002), 393–440.
[4] H. Bass, Finitistic dimension and a homological generalization of semi-primary rings, Trans.
Amer. Math. Soc. 95 (1960), 466–488.
[5] T. Beke, Sheafifiable homotopy model categories, Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 129 (2000),
447-475.
[6] D. Bravo, J. Gillespie, and M. Hovey, The stable module category of a general ring,
preprint (2014), arXiv:1405.5768v1; 38 pp.
[7] V. Drinfeld, Infinite–dimensional vector bundles in algebraic geometry: an introduction, in
The Unity of Mathematics, Birkhäuser, Boston 2006, pp. 263–304.
[8] P. Eklof and J. Trlifaj, How to make Ext vanish, Bull. London Math. Soc. 33 (2001),
41-51.
[9] E.E. Enochs and S. Estrada, Relative homological algebra in the category of quasi–coherent
sheaves, Adv. Math. 194 (2005), 284–295.
[10] E.E. Enochs, S. Estrada, J.R. Garcı́a Rozas, and L. Oyonarte, Flat covers in the
category of quasi-coherent sheaves over the projective line, Comm. Algebra. 32 (2004), 1497–
1508.
[11] E.E. Enochs, O. Jenda and B. Torrecillas, Gorenstein flat modules, Nanjing Daxue
Xuebao Shuxue Bannian Kan 10 (1993), 1–9.
[12] S. Estrada, P.A. Guil Asensio, and F. Ozbek, Covering ideals of morphisms and module
representations of the quiver A2 , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 218 (2005), 1983–1963.
[13] S. Estrada, P.A. Guil Asensio, and J. Trlifaj, Descent of restricted flat Mittag-Leffler
modules and locality for generalized vector bundles, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 142 (2014),
2973–2981.
[14] S. Estrada, A. Iacob, and S. Odabaşı, Gorenstein flat and projective (pre)covers, preprint
(2015), arXiv:1508.04173v1, 11 pp.
[15] J. Gillespie, Kaplansky classes and derived categories, Math. Z. 257 (2007), 811–843.
[16] J. Gillespie, Cotorsion pairs and degreewise homological model structures, Homology Homotopy Appl. 10(1) (2008), 283–304.
[17] S. Glaz, Commutative coherent rings, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1371, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, 1989.
[18] M.E. Harris, Some results on coherent rings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 17 (1966), 474–479.
[19] H. Holm, Gorenstein homological dimensions, J. Pure and Appl. Alg. 189 (2004), 167–193.
[20] J. de Jong et al., The Stacks Project, Version 7016ab5. Available at
http://stacks.math.columbia.edu/download/book.pdf
[21] D. Murfet and S. Salarian, Totally acyclic complexes over noetherian schemes, Adv. Math.
226 (2011), 1096–1133.
[22] A. Neeman, Some adjoints in homotopy categories, Ann. of Math. 171 (2010), 2143–2155.
[23] A. Neeman, The homotopy category of flat modules, and Grothendieck duality, Invent. Math.
174 (2008), 255–308.
[24] A. Perry, Faithfully flat descent for projectivity of modules, arXiv:1011.0038v1.
[25] M. Raynaud and L. Gruson, Critères de platitude et de projectivité, Invent. Math. 13
(1971), 1–89.
’ ı́ček, Deconstructibility and the Hill lemma in Grothendieck categories, Forum Math.
[26] J. Štov
25 (2013), 193–219.
[27] O. Veliche, Gorenstein projective dimension for complexes, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 358
(2006), 1257–1283.
[28] J. Xu, Flat covers of modules, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1634, Springer-Verlag,
1996.
[29] G. Yang and L. Liang, All modules have Gorenstein flat precovers, Comm. Alg. 42 (2014),
3078–3085.

A ZARISKI-LOCAL NOTION OF F-TOTAL ACYCLICITY

L.W.C. Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, U.S.A.
E-mail address: lars.w.christensen@ttu.edu
URL: http://www.math.ttu.edu/~ lchriste
S.E. Universidad de Murcia, Murcia 30100, Spain
E-mail address: sestrada@um.es
A.I. Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, GA 30460, U.S.A.
E-mail address: aiacob@georgiasouthern.edu

15

