APPROXIMATION OF SUBCATEGORIES BY ABELIAN
SUBCATEGORIES.

arXiv:1006.0048v3 [math.CT] 28 Jun 2016

ANDREW SALCH
Abstract. Let C be an abelian category and let Λ : C → C be an idempotent functor
which is not right exact, so that the zeroth left derived functor L0 Λ does not necessarily
coincide with Λ. In this paper we show that, under mild conditions on Λ, L0 Λ is
also idempotent, and the category of L0 Λ-complete objects of C is the smallest exact
subcategory of C containing the Λ-complete objects. In the main application, where Λ is
the I-adic completion functor on a category of modules, this gives us that the category
of “L-complete modules,” studied by Greenlees-May and Hovey-Strickland, is not an ad
hoc construction but is in fact characterized by a universal property. Generalizations
are also given to the case of relative derived functors, in the sense of relative homological
algebra.

1. Introduction
If R is a Noetherian commutative ring, and I is an ideal in R, then the category of
I-adically complete1 R-modules is not nearly as well-behaved as the category Mod(R)
of all R-modules; for example, the category of I-adically complete R-modules typically
fails to be abelian. For many reasons (e.g. to study homological invariants of modules
over complete local rings, or formal schemes) one wants to work in some abelian category
containing all the I-adically complete R-modules.
Here is a very reasonable list of properties one would like this abelian subcategory
A ⊆ Mod(R) to have:
• A is closed under isomorphisms in Mod(R) (i.e., A is replete),
• the inclusion A ⊆ Mod(R) is full,
• kernels and cokernels in A are the same as those computed in Mod(R) (i.e., the
inclusion A ֒→ Mod(R) is exact), and
• again, A contains all the I-adically complete R-modules.
Let us say that an exact approximation to the category of I-adically complete R-modules
is a full subcategory A of Mod(R) satisfying these assumptions. Clearly, such exact
approximations exist; the entire category Mod(R) is an example. But one naturally
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 18E10.
Key words and phrases: abelian categories, adic completion.
c Andrew Salch, 2016. Permission to copy for private use granted.
1
In this paper we will follow the convention that a module is said to be I-adically complete if the
completion map M → limn M/I n M is an isomorphism, not merely a surjection.

1

2
wants a better, smaller exact approximation; the smaller A is, the closer it is to simply
being the category of I-adically complete R-modules itself. Here is the problem:
1.1. Problem. Does there exist a smallest exact approximation to the category of Iadically complete R-modules, i.e., an exact approximation contained in all other exact
approximations? If so, what is it?
More generally: suppose that C is an abelian category and Λ : C → C is an idempotent
functor (i.e., Λ is equipped with a natural transformation η : id → Λ such that Λη and ηΛ
ηX
are isomorphisms). We will say that an object X of C is Λ-complete if X −→ ΛX is an
isomorphism; and by an “exact approximation to the category of Λ-complete objects” we
will mean an abelian subcategory A of C satisfying all the above assumptions, replacing
“I-adically complete” with “Λ-complete.”
1.2. Problem. Does there exist a smallest exact approximation to the category of Λcomplete objects? If so, what is it?
In this paper we solve Problem 1.2 under mild hypotheses on Λ, and as a consequence,
we solve Problem 1.1. The solution to Problem 1.2 is our Theorem 3.14:
• If Λ sends epimorphisms to epimorphisms and L1 ΛL0 ΛX ∼
= 0 for all X, then L0 Λ :
C → C is also idempotent, and L0 ΛC is the unique smallest exact approximation to
the category of Λ-complete objects.
Here L0 Λ is the zeroth left derived functor of Λ, and L0 ΛC is the full subcategory of C
consisting of all objects X such that the natural map X → L0 ΛX is an isomorphism.
(The assumption that Λ preserves epimorphisms is reasonable; as observed in [20], the
I-adic completion functor ΛM = limn M/I n M fails to be right exact or even half-exact,
and has very few good general properties, but it at least preserves epimorphisms.)
Applied to Problem 1.1 with C = Mod(R) and Λ the I-adic completion functor, we
get our Theorem 4.13: if R is a Noetherian commutative ring and I is an ideal of R, then
L0 Λ : Mod(R) → Mod(R) is idempotent, and L0 ΛMod(R) is the unique smallest exact
approximation to the category of I-adically complete R-modules. (It was already known
that L0 Λ is idempotent; see section A.2 of [9]. But the rest of the statement is new.)
This category L0 ΛMod(R) turns out to be an interesting construction which has already appeared in the literature for entirely other reasons. The category L0 ΛMod(R),
which is a generalization of the “Ext-p-complete groups” of Bousfield and Kan in [3], was
studied by Greenlees and May in [6], and developed further in [9], as a substitute for the
category of I-adically complete R-modules; our Theorem 4.13 tells us that this category
of Greenlees and May is not an isolated or ad hoc construction, but actually enjoys a
universal property, as the solution to Problem 1.1. (Since I-adic completion is in general
not right exact, in fact not even half-exact, Λ in general does not agree with L0 Λ; see
Example 4.12 for an explicit algebraic example.)
In this paper, we often work in a greater level of generality, studying universal properties of the category of LE
0 Λ-complete objects. In relative homological algebra (after [8]

3
and [4]), one specifies an “allowable class” E consisting of some family of short exact sequences in a given abelian category C, and one constructs and studies E-derived functors;
the case in which E is the class of all short exact sequences recovers classical homological algebra and classical derived functors. The last section of this paper is an appendix
covering basic ideas in relative homological algebra, which may be useful to a reader who
has not encountered these ideas before.
Given an abelian category C, an allowable class E in C, and an idempotent functor
E
Λ : C → C, one wants to know if LE
0 Λ : C → C is idempotent, if the category L0 ΛC
E
E
of L0 Λ-complete objects of C enjoys any special properties, and in particular, if L0 ΛC
is universal among those subcategories of C containing ΛC and having some particular
special property. Here are our answers to these questions, assuming throughout that C
has enough E-projectives, and that E has sectile epics (see Definition 5.4 for the definition
of this extremely mild condition):
• In Theorem 2.10, we show that, if Λ sends E-maps to E-maps and LE
1 Λ(ΛP ) vanishes
E
for all E-projective P , then L0 Λ is also idempotent.
• The absolute case of Theorem 2.10 is Corollary 2.11: if L1 Λ(ΛP ) vanishes for all
projective P , then L0 Λ is idempotent. (This is actually a nontrivial statement; as
the anonymous referee for this paper pointed out to us, if a non-right-exact functor
Λ is idempotent, it is not at all clear that L0 Λ is necessarily also idempotent! See
Remark 2.12 for an explicit example in the dual, “coidempotent” case.)
E
E
∼
• In Theorem 3.5, we show that, if LE
0 Λ is idempotent and L1 ΛL0 ΛX = 0 for all
E
E
X, then L0 ΛC, equipped with the class of sequences E ∩ L0 ΛC, is a Quillen-exact
category (in the sense of [12]).

• In Theorem 3.9, we show that, if Λ satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 3.5 and
furthermore Λ sends epimorphisms to epimorphisms (such as, for example, the Iadic completion functor on a category of modules over a commutative ring R, for
any finitely generated ideal I of R), then LE
0 ΛC is an E-relatively Quillen-exact (see
Definition 3.6) replete subcategory of C which contains ΛC. If Λ furthermore sends
E-maps to E-maps, then LE
0 ΛC has a universal property: it is the unique smallest
E-relatively Quillen-exact replete subcategory of C which contains ΛC.
• Our solutions to Problems 1.1 and 1.2 are Theorems 3.14 and 4.13, already described
above.
A few results along the way are perhaps of independent interest; for example, in Theorem 2.8 we construct the Grothendieck spectral sequence for a composite of relative
derived functors, a construction of obvious interest which nevertheless we were unable to
find in the literature.
We are grateful to the anonymous referee of this article, whose comments were indispensable in bringing the paper into its present (much improved) form; and also to the
journal and its editors, for their patience with an author fresh out of school who did not

4
know how to properly write a paper, and who then proceeded to take five years to make
revisions on it. In particular, J. Rosický provided editorial help which was invaluable.
1.3. Warning. To avoid any potential confusion: some results in this paper involve
Quillen-exact categories (as in Definition 3.2), while others involve exact subcategories
(as in Definition 3.11); these are not the same thing, despite similar terminology.

2. Idempotent functors
2.1. Idempotency of the zeroth derived functor of an idempotent functor.
2.2. Definition. Let C be an abelian category, and let Λ : C → C be a functor equipped
with a natural transformation η : id → Λ. We will say that an object X of C is Λ-separated
if the map η(X) : X → ΛX is monic, and we will say that X is Λ-complete if the map
η(X) : X → ΛX is an isomorphism.
By the category of Λ-complete objects, written ΛC, we will mean the full subcategory
of C generated by the Λ-complete objects of C.
Definition 2.3, in any one of several equivalent forms (see Proposition 2.4), is wellknown:
2.3. Definition. Let C be a category. By an idempotent functor of C we mean a functor
Λ : C → C together with a natural transformation η : idC → Λ such that, for each object X
of C, the maps Λη(X) : ΛX → ΛΛX and ηΛ(X) : ΛX → ΛΛX are each isomorphisms.
If Λ : C → C is an idempotent functor of C, by an idempotent functor K over Λ we
mean an idempotent functor K of C together with a natural transformation φ : K → Λ
making the diagram
id ❅
❅❅
❅❅ηΛ
❅❅
❅

// Λ
K

ηK

φ

commute, where ηK , ηΛ are the unit natural transformations on K and on Λ, respectively.
Dually, a coidempotent functor is a functor Λ : C → C together with a natural transformation η : Λ → idC such that, for each object X of C, the maps Λη(X) and ηΛ(X)
are each isomorphisms, and a coidempotent functor K over Λ is a coidempotent functor
K together with natural transformation φ : K → Λ making the obvious diagram commute.
Proposition 2.4 is easy and certainly not new: idempotent functors (sometimes under
other reasonable names, e.g. “idempotent monads”) are well-studied, and there are many
known equivalent characterizations of them, e.g. Proposition 4.2.3 of [2]. We provide
a proof of part of Proposition 2.4, however, because we did not find anywhere in the
literature where these particular characterizing properties of an idempotent functor are
proven equivalent, and these are the ones we will use in this paper:

5
2.4. Proposition. Let C be an abelian category, Λ : C → C an additive functor equipped
with a natural transformation η : id → Λ. Then the following conditions are equivalent:
• Λ is an idempotent functor.
• For every object X of C, the map ΛηX : ΛX → ΛΛX is an isomorphism and the
map ηΛX : ΛX → ΛΛX is monic.
• For every object X of C, the map ΛηX : ΛX → ΛΛX is an isomorphism and the
map ηΛΛX : ΛΛX → ΛΛΛX is monic.
• There exists a natural transformation µ : Λ ◦ Λ → Λ such that (Λ, η, µ) is a monad,
and, for every object X of C, the object ΛX is Λ-complete.
Proof. We will show that the first three conditions are equivalent; equivalence of the
first two is used in Lemma 4.6. Equivalence of the fourth condition with the others is an
easy exercise.
• Clearly, Definition 2.3 immediately implies that, if Λ is an idempotent functor, then
ΛηX : ΛX → ΛΛX is an isomorphism and the map ηΛX : ΛX → ΛΛX is monic,
for all objects X.
• Similarly, if ηΛX : ΛX → ΛΛX is monic for all X, then as a special case, ηΛΛX :
ΛΛX → ΛΛΛX is monic for all X.
• So suppose that, for every object X of C, the map ΛηX : ΛX → ΛΛX is an
isomorphism and the map ηΛΛX : ΛΛX → ΛΛΛX is monic. We show that ΛηX =
ηΛX, as follows:
– Since η is a natural transformation, we have commutative squares:
ΛX

ηΛX

//

ΛΛX

ΛηX

ΛX

ΛΛηX



ΛΛX

ηΛX

// ΛΛX
ΛηΛX

ηΛX





// ΛΛΛX

ΛΛX

ηΛΛX

(1)



//

ηΛΛX

ΛΛΛX.

– Since η is a natural transformation, we have the commutative square
X

ηX

//

ΛX
ΛηX

ηX



ΛX



ηΛX

//

ΛΛX

and, after applying Λ, the equality
(ΛΛηX) ◦ (ΛηX) = (ΛηΛX) ◦ (ΛηX),
and since ΛηX is an isomorphism by assumption,
ΛΛηX = ΛηΛX.

(2)

6
– Putting together equation 2 and the commutativity of the diagrams 1, we have
the chain of equalities
(ηΛΛX) ◦ (ηΛX) = (ΛηΛX) ◦ (ηΛX)
= (ΛΛηX) ◦ (ηΛX)
= (ηΛΛX) ◦ (ΛηX),
and ηΛΛX is monic, i.e., left-cancellable, by assumption.
So ηΛX = ΛηX, as desired. Since ΛηX is assumed an isomorphism, it immediately
follows that ηΛX is an isomorphism as well, i.e., that Λ is idempotent.

In Theorem 2.10 we show that, under suitable conditions, the 0th relative left derived functor of an idempotent functor is again an idempotent functor. This theorem
follows as an easy special case of the Grothendieck spectral sequence for relative derived
functors, constructed in Theorem 2.8. To construct that spectral sequence, we prove
relative-homological analogues of the lemmas—the “horseshoe lemma” and the existence
of Cartan-Eilenberg resolutions—used in the construction of the classical Grothendieck
spectral sequence, as in [7]; good English-language expositions are Theorem 5.8.3 of [19]
and Theorem 10.47 of [15]. Throughout, we also pay close attention to naturality properties of these lemmas and the resulting naturality of the spectral sequence. This naturality
is used in our proof of Theorem 2.10.
We are about to begin using some terminology from relative homological algebra. The
last section of this paper is an appendix which can serve as self-contained introduction
to the subject, and includes definitions of terms like “sectile epics” (Definition 5.4) and
“E-maps” (Definition 5.2).
2.5. Lemma. (The relative “horseshoe lemma.”) Let C be an abelian category and
let E be an allowable class in C. Given a short exact sequence
f

g

0 → M ′ −→ M −→ M ′′ → 0

(3)

in C which is in E, and acyclic chain complexes P•′ and P•′′ in C concentrated in nonnegative degrees, such that the differentials in P•′ and in P•′′ are E-maps, such that each Pn′ and
Pn′′ is E-projective, and such that H0 (P•′ ) ∼
= M ′ and H0 (P•′′) ∼
= M ′′ , there exists an acyclic
chain complex P• in C concentrated in nonnegative degrees, such that the differentials in
P• are E-maps, such that each Pn is E-projective, and such that there exists a short exact
sequence
0 → P•′ → P• → P•′′ → 0
(4)
of chain complexes in C which induces, in H0 , the short exact sequence 3.

7
The chain complex P• is natural in the following sense: if
0

M
//

′

f

M
//

vM ′





0

M′
//

g

//

M

f

M
//

0
//

(5)

vM ′′

vM



′′

g



//

M ′′
//



0
′

′′

is a commutative diagram in C with rows short exact sequences in E, and if P • , P • , P•′ ,
and P•′′ are acyclic chain complexes in C concentrated in nonnegative degrees, whose dif′
′′
ferentials are all E-maps, such that each P n , P n , Pn′ and Pn′′ is E-projective, and such
′
′
′′
′′
that H0 (P • ) ∼
= M and H0 (P • ) ∼
= M and H0 (P•′ ) ∼
= M ′′ , then there
= M ′ and H0 (P•′′ ) ∼
exist acyclic chain complexes P • and P• in C concentrated in nonnegative degrees whose
differentials are all E-maps, such that each P n and Pn are E-projective, and such that
there exists a commutative diagram of chain complexes in C with short exact rows
0
//

′

P•

// P ′



0

•

//

//

P•

// P ′′
•

// 0




// P ′′


// 0

P•

•

(6)

which induces, in H0 , the diagram 5.
′
′′
Proof. We will write δ−1
: P0′ → M ′ and δ−1
: P0′′ → M ′′ for augmentation maps inducing
the isomorphisms H0 (P•′ ) ∼
= M ′′ . Since g is an E-epimorphism and
= M ′ and H0 (P•′′ ) ∼
′′
′′
′′
P ′′ is E-projective, there exists a map δ̃−1
: P0′′ →h M such that
i g ◦ δ̃−1 = δ−1 . Let

′
′′
δ−1 : P0′ ⊕ P0′′ → M be given by the matrix of maps f ◦ δ−1
δ̃−1
.
We claim that δ−1 is E-epic; the proof is as follows. Let P be an E-projective object
′′
and let t : P → M be a map. Then, since δ−1
is an E-epimorphism, there exists a map
′′
′′
h : P → P0 such that δ−1 ◦ h = g ◦ t. We have the split monomorphism [0 id]⊥ : P0′′ →
P0′ ⊕ P0′′ , and equalities
i
h
′′
′
′′
◦h
g ◦ f ◦ δ−1 δ̃−1 ◦ [0 id]⊥ ◦ h = g ◦ δ̃−1

h
′
g◦
f ◦ δ−1

′′
δ̃−1

i

= g ◦ t,


◦ [0 id] ◦ h − t = 0,

and hence

⊥

so there exists a map j : P → M ′ such that
i

h
′
′′
◦ [0 id]⊥ ◦ h − t,
f ◦ j = f ◦ δ−1
δ̃−1
′
′
and since δ−1
is an E-epimorphism, there exists some map j̃ : P → P0′ such that δ−1
◦ j̃ = j.
Finally, we have equalities
i 
 


h


′
′′
′′
′
◦ [0 id]⊥ ◦ h − [id 0]⊥ ◦ j̃
= δ̃−1
f ◦ δ−1
δ̃−1
◦ h − f ◦ δ−1
◦ j̃

8


′′
= δ̃−1 ◦ h − (f ◦ j)
= t,

h
i
′
′′
so t factors through δ−1 = f ◦ δ−1
δ̃−1
. So δ−1 is E-epic, by Theorem 5.5.
Now we have a commutative diagram in C with exact rows and columns
0
//



0
//

//





//

//

0
//

M′

//

f



0

//

M
//

//



P0′′
//

0


0
//

′′
δ−1

δ−1



(7)

′′
ker δ−1

P0′ ⊕ P0′′

′
δ−1

0


ker δ−1


P0′




//



′
ker δ−1

0

0

g



0

//



M ′′
//

//



0



0.

′
′
The inclusion map ker δ−1
→ P0′ is E-monic, since δ−1
is E-epic. The inclusion map
′
′
′′
P0 → P0 ⊕ P0 is a split monomorphism, hence is also E-monic. So, by Proposition 5.7,
′
the map ker δ−1
→ ker δ−1 is also E-monic. Hence the top nonzero row in diagram 7 is in
E. The columns in diagram 7 are also in E. Now we repeat this construction, with the
top nonzero row in diagram 7 in place of short exact sequence 3 and with P1′ and P1′′ in
place of P0′ and P0′′ , to recursively construct P• (whose objects agree with P•′ ⊕ P•′′ ), and
the short exact sequence 4.
′
′′
Now for the claim of naturality: let P • = P • ⊕ P • be the chain complex constructed
′
by the above method, using M in place of M, P • in place of P•′ , and so on. We will now
construct a map P • → P• making diagram 6 commute. Use the lifting property of E′′
′
projective objects over E-epimorphisms to produce maps vP0′′ : P 0 → P0′′ and vP0′ : P 0 →
′′

′

′′

′′

′′
′
◦ vP0′′ = vM ′′ ◦ δ −1
◦ vP0′ = vM ′ ◦ δ −1 and such that δ−1
P0′ and δ̃ −1 : P 0 → M such that δ−1
′′

′′

′

′′

vP

0
and such that g ◦ δ̃ −1 = δ −1 . Then, to specify the map P 0 ⊕ P 0 = P 0 −→
P0 = P0′ ⊕ P0′′ ,
we can give a matrix of maps


vP0′
b



vP0 = 


0
vP0′′

′′

with b : P 0 → P0′ any map in C such that
′′

′
′′
(f ◦ δ−1
◦ b) + (δ̃−1
◦ vP0′′ ) = vM ◦ δ̃ −1 .

(8)

9
(It is routine to check that this condition on b is exactly what is necessary to ensure that
the diagram
0

// P ′ [id





0]⊥

// P 0 [0

0

′

0

δ −1

M
//



f

′

vP ′

//


[id

vM ′



0

M′

⊥

//

P0

vM

′
δ−1

 
//

0]

P0′

f

(9)

δ −1

// M ′′



0
//

vP ′′
0

 [0

id]

//

P0′′

vM ′′

δ−1



0
//

′′
δ−1

 

g

M

0
//

′′

g

 
//

′′

P0


vP0

0

0

//

δ −1

M
//

id]

// M ′′
//



0

commutes.)
Such a map b exists, and can be constructed as follows: since
′′

′′

g ◦ vM ◦ δ̃ −1 = vM ′′ ◦ g ◦ δ̃ −1
′′

= vM ′′ ◦ δ −1
′′
= δ−1
◦ vP0′′
′′
= g ◦ δ̃−1
◦ vP0′′ ,

′′

′′

′′
◦ vP0′′ ) : P 0 → M factors through f : M ′ → M. So there exists
the map (vM ◦ δ̃ −1 ) − (δ̃−1
′′

′′

′
′′
a map j : P 0 → M ′ such that f ◦ j = (vM ◦ δ̃ −1 ) − (δ̃−1
: P0′ → M ′
◦ vP0′′ ), and since δ−1
′′
′′
is an E-epimorphism and P 0 is E-projective, there exists a map b : P 0 → P0′ such that
′
δ−1
◦ b = j and hence

′′

′′
′
◦ vP0′′ ),
f ◦ δ−1
◦ b = f ◦ j = (vM ◦ δ̃ −1 ) − (δ̃−1

i.e., b satisfies equation 8, as desired.
So a map vP0 exists making the diagram 9 commute. We now repeat this same
′
′′
′
′′
construction, with ker δ−1
, ker δ−1 , ker δ−1
, ker δ −1 , ker δ −1 , ker δ −1 in place of M ′ , M, M ′′ ,
′
′′
′
′
′
′
M , M , M and with P1′ , P1 , P1′ , P 1 , P 1 , P 1 in place of P0′ , P0 , P0′ , P 0 , P 0 , P 0 , to recursively
build the desired map of chain complexes P • → P• .
2.6. Definition. Let C be an abelian category, and let E be an allowable class in C. If
C• is a chain complex in C, then by a “Cartan-Eilenberg E-resolution of C• ” we mean a

10
double complex in C of the form
..
.

..
.

...
...
...
...
...



δ2,2

//

P2,2
//

P2,1
//

P2,0



δ2,1

δ2,0

δ2





//

C2
//



δ1,2

//

P1,2
//

P1,1
//

P1,0



δ1,1

δ1,0

δ1





//



0

C1

// 0

..
.


δ0,2

//

P0,2
//

P0,1
//

P0,0

δ0



//

0

//

0

//

0



δ0,1

δ0,0

0







//

C0
//



0





0
//

//



0

such that:
• Pi,j is E-projective for all i and all j,
• δi,j is an E-map for all i and all j,
• if Ci ∼
= 0 for all j,
= 0, then Pi,j ∼
• for each i, each map in the resulting chain complex
. . . → im δi,2 → im δi,1 → im δi,0 → im δi → 0

(10)

is an E-map,
• for each i, each map in the resulting chain complex
. . . → ker δi,2 → ker δi,1 → ker δi,0 → ker δi → 0

(11)

is an E-map,
• for each i, each map in the resulting chain complex
. . . → Hi (P•,2 ) → Hi (P•,1 ) → Hi (P•,0 ) → Hi (C• ) → 0
is an E-map,
• each of the chain complexes 10, 11, and 12 are exact,
• and, for all i and j, im δi,j and ker δi,j and Hi (P•,j ) are all E-projective.

(12)

11
2.7. Lemma. Let C be an abelian category, and let E be an allowable class in C with
sectile epics. Suppose that C has enough E-projectives. Suppose C• is a chain complex in C
whose differentials δn are all E-maps. Then there exists a Cartan-Eilenberg E-resolution
of C• .
Furthermore, Cartan-Eilenberg E-resolutions are natural in the sense that, if we have
a morphism f• : C•′ → C• of chain complexes, then there exist Cartan-Eilenberg E′
′
resolutions P•,•
, P•,• of C•′ and C• and a map of double complexes P•,•
→ P•,• which
induces the map f• in homology.
Proof. This is an easy consequence of Lemma 2.5: choose a resolution of each Hn (C• )
and each im δn by E-maps and E-projectives, then apply the horseshoe lemma to each of
the short exact sequences
0 → im δn → ker δn−1 → Hn−1 (C• ) → 0
(which are in E by Proposition 5.7, since each map im δn → Cn is E-monic) to get a
compatible resolution of each kernel ker δn by E-maps and E-projectives, and finally apply
the horseshoe lemma to each of the short exact sequences
0 → ker δn → Cn → im δn−1 → 0
(which are in E, by assumption) to get a compatible resolution of each Cn by E-maps
and E-projectives, hence a Cartan-Eilenberg E-resolution. The naturality claim follows
from the naturality property proven in Lemma 2.5.
2.8. Theorem. (The Grothendieck spectral sequence for relative derived functors.) Let C0 , C1 , C2 be abelian categories, and let E0 , E1 be allowable classes in C0 and
C1 , respectively. Suppose that E0 and E1 have sectile epics, and suppose that C0 and C1
have enough E0 -projectives and enough E1 -projectives, respectively. Let G : C1 → C2 be an
additive functor, and let F : C0 → C1 be an additive functor that sends E0 -maps between
E0 -projectives to E1 -maps.Let ℓ ∈ {1, 2, . . . , ∞}, and suppose that, for each E0 -projective
∼
1
object P , LE
m G(F (P )) = 0 for all 1 ≤ m < ℓ. (If ℓ = ∞, this is the same as assuming
1
that F sends E0 -projectives to LE
0 G-acyclics.) Then there exists a spectral sequence with
E
2 ∼ E1
0
E 2 -term Es,t
= Ls G(Lt 0 F (X)) and which converges to LE
s+t (G ◦ F )(X) in total degrees
s + t < ℓ.
This spectral sequence is natural in the choice of functor F . More precisely, given
two additive functors F ′ , F : C0 → C1 which each send E0 -maps to E1 -maps, and given a
natural transformation η : F ′ → F , we get a map of spectral sequences
2 ∼ E1
′
0
Es,t
= Ls G(LE
t F (X)) ℓ

′
0
LE
s+t (G ◦ F )(X)

+3



2 ∼ E1
0
Es,t
= Ls G(LE
t F (X))



ℓ

+3

0
LE
s+t (G ◦ F )(X)

12
E0
∞
1
which, on the E 2 -terms, is the map LE
∗ G(L∗ η(X)), and on the E -terms, is the map
E0
induced on associated gradeds by the map L∗ (G ◦ η)(X). (The subscript ℓ is supposed to
indicate that the identification of the E ∞ -term is only valid in total degrees ≤ ℓ.)
This spectral sequence is also natural in the choice of functor G. More precisely, given
two additive functors G′ , G : C0 → C1 which are each right E1 -exact, and given a natural
transformation η : G′ → G, we get a map of spectral sequences
2 ∼ E1 ′
0
Es,t
= Ls G (LE
t F (X)) ℓ

′
0
LE
s+t (G ◦ F )(X)

+3





2 ∼ E1
0
Es,t
= Ls G(LE
t F (X))

ℓ

+3

0
LE
s+t (G ◦ F )(X)

E0
∞
1
which, on the E 2 -terms, is the map LE
∗ η(L∗ F (X)), and on the E -terms, is the map
0
induced on associated gradeds by the map LE
∗ (η ◦ F )(X).

Proof. Choose a resolution P• of X by E0 -maps and E0 -projectives, and then, using
Lemma 2.7, choose a Cartan-Eilenberg E1 -resolution P•,• of F (P• ). There are two spectral sequences associated to the double complex G(P•,• ), both of which converge to the
homology of the total complex Tot(G(P•,• )) (as this is a first-quadrant double complex,
constructing the total complex requires only finite coproducts, so the total complex does
indeed exist): the one in which we take the homology of the columns followed by the hoE1
1 ∼
1
mology of the rows has E 1 -term Es,t
= LE
= Hs (G(Pt,• )) ∼
s G(F (Pt )), and since Ls G
was assumed to vanish on F (P ) for E0 -projective P and for 1 ≤ s < ℓ, we have
2 ∼
0
Es,t
= LE
= Ht (L0E1 G(F (P• ))) when s < ℓ. Hence Hn (Tot(G(P•,• ))) ∼
n (G ◦ F )(X) for
0 ≤ n < ℓ.
Meanwhile, the Grothendieck spectral sequence is the other spectral sequence of the
double complex G(P•,• ), in which we take the homology of the rows followed by the
1 ∼
homology of the columns. This spectral sequence has E 1 -term Es,t
=
= Hs (G(P•,t )) ∼
2
G(Hs (P•,t )), since P•,• is a Cartan-Eilenberg E-resolution. So the E -term of this spectral
2 ∼
sequence is the homology of G applied to the resolution 12 with C• = F (P• ), i.e., Es,t
=
E0
E1
Ls G(Lt F (X)), as desired.
If we have a natural transformation η : G′ → G as in the statement of the theorem,
then we have a map of double complexes η(P•,• ) : G′ (P•,• ) → G(P•,• ) and consequently a
map of spectral sequences, as described.
If we instead have a natural transformation η : F ′ → F as in the statement of the
theorem, then we have a map of chain complexes η(P• ) : F ′ (P• ) → F (P• ) and consequently
a map of their Cartan-Eilenberg E-resolutions using the naturality claim in Lemma 2.7,
hence a map of double complexes and a map of spectral sequences, as described.
2.9. Definition. Let C be an abelian category and let E be an allowable class in C.
Suppose that C has enough E-projectives. Let Λ : C → C be an additive idempotent functor
of C with unit natural transformation η : id → Λ. We define natural transformations
E
η ′ : id → LE
0 Λ and φ : L0 Λ → Λ of functors C → C as follows: given an object X of

13
f

C and an E-map P1 −→ P0 with cokernel X and with P1 , P0 both E-projective and with
P0 → X an E-epimorphism, we have the commutative diagram with exact columns
P1

η(P1 )

//

P0

ΛP1
//

Λf

f



id

ΛP1

η(P0 )



Λf

//



id

ΛP0

//



ΛP0



′



η (X)
φ(X)
❴ ❴ ❴33// ΛX
X ❴ ❴ ❴// LE
0 Λ(X)
η(X)



0
//



0

in which the dotted morphism η ′ (X) : X → LE
0 Λ(X) is given by naturality of cokernels,
and the dotted morphism φ(X) : LE
Λ(X)
→
ΛX
is given by the universal property of the
0
cokernel (of Λf ). It is routine to check that these morphisms are well-defined (not depending on the choice of resolution) and natural in X, and it follows from their definitions
that φ ◦ η ′ = η.
If Λ is instead a coidempotent functor, the same considerations yield natural transforE
′
mations η ′ : LE
0 Λ → id and φ : L0 Λ → Λ such that η ◦ φ = η .
2.10. Theorem. Let C be an abelian category, and let E be an allowable class in C with
sectile epics. Suppose that C has enough E-projectives, and suppose that Λ : C → C is a
functor satisfying the following conditions:
• Λ sends E-maps between E-projectives to E-maps, and
∼
• LE
1 Λ(ΛP ) = 0 for all E-projective objects P of C.
If Λ is idempotent with unit map η : id → Λ, then LE
0 Λ : C → C is an idempotent functor
over Λ, with unit map η ′ : id → LE
Λ
and
whose
map
to Λ is φ : LE
0
0 Λ → Λ.
Similarly, if Λ is coidempotent with counit map η : Λ → id, then LE
0 Λ : C → C is
′
E
a coidempotent functor over Λ, with counit map η : L0 Λ → id and whose map to Λ is
φ : LE
0 Λ → Λ.
Proof. Suppose Λ is idempotent. Consider the map of the spectral sequences of Theorem 2.8 given by ℓ = 2, letting E1 = E = E0 , letting F = Λ = G and F ′ = id. In bidegree
(0, 0), we get a commutative square
LE
0 Λ(X)

∼
=

E
LE
0 Λ(L0 Λ(X))

E
LE
0 (L0 Λ)(X)
∼
= LE
0 (Λ◦η)(X)

E
LE
0 Λ(L0 ηX)



//

∼
= //



E
E
LE
0 (L0 Λ ◦ L0 Λ)(X)

14
′
hence LE
0 Λ(η X) is an isomorphism. A completely analogous argument letting F = Λ = G
′
E
E
E
and G = id gives us that η ′ LE
0 Λ(X) = L0 ηL0 Λ(X) is an isomorphism. Hence L0 Λ
satisfies the conditions of Definition 2.3.
Now suppose that Λ is coidempotent. The argument is essentially the same: the map
of the spectral sequences of Theorem 2.8 given by ℓ = 2, E1 = E = E0 , letting F ′ = Λ = G
E
E
E
and F = id yields that η ′ LE
0 ΛX : L0 ΛL0 ΛX → L0 ΛX is an isomorphism, while letting
′
′
E
G = id and G = Λ = F yields that L0 Λη X is an isomorphism.

2.11. Corollary. Let C be an abelian category with enough projectives. Suppose that
Λ : C → C is a functor such that L1 Λ(ΛP ) ∼
= 0 for all projective objects P of C.
• If Λ is an idempotent functor with unit map η : id → Λ, then L0 Λ : C → C is an
idempotent functor over Λ, with unit map η ′ : id → L0 Λ and whose map to Λ is
φ : L0 Λ → Λ.
• If Λ is instead a coidempotent functor with counit map η : id → Λ, then L0 Λ : C → C
is a coidempotent functor over Λ, with unit map η ′ : L0 Λ → id and whose map to Λ
is φ : L0 Λ → Λ.
2.12. Remark. The condition that L1 Λ(ΛP ) ∼
= 0 for all projective P in Corollary 2.11
(and, more generally, the condition that LE
Λ(ΛP
) ∼
= 0 for all E-projective P , from
1
Theorem 2.10) really is necessary. It is quite possible to construct a coidempotent functor
Λ satisfying all the other assumptions of Corollary 2.11 but such that L0 Λ fails to be
coidempotent.
Here is a good simple example: let k be a field, let C be the category of k[x]/x2 -modules,
and let Λ : C → C be the functor Λ(M) = M/xM. The natural map of k[x]/x2 -modules
M → M/xM yields a natural transformation id → Λ making Λ idempotent. Since k[x]/x2
is a Frobenius algebra, free k[x]/x2 -module are injective, so
x

0 → k → k[x]/x2 −→ k[x]/x2

(13)

is the beginning of an injective resolution of k. Applying the functor M 7→ M/xM, we
have that R0 Λ(k) is the kernel of the multiplication-by-x map from k to k, i.e., R0 Λ(k) ∼
=
2
k, but crucially, the map k → k[x]/x in resolution 13 is zero after applying M 7→ M/xM,
and hence the natural map η ′ : k → R0 Λk is the zero map. Hence η ′ R0 Λk : k ∼
= R0 Λk →
R0 ΛR0 Λk ∼
= k is the zero map, and not an isomorphism. So R0 Λ is not idempotent.
Writing Λop : C op → C op for Λ on the opposite category of C, we then have that Λop is a
coidempotent functor of C op but L0 (Λop ) is not coidempotent.

3. Universal properties of the category of LE
0 Λ-complete objects
3.1. LE
0 Λ-complete objects as the universal relatively Quillen-exact category containing the Λ-complete objects. Recall (from Definition 2.2) that we
E
write LE
0 ΛC for the full subcategory of C generated by the L0 Λ-complete objects. In the

15
special case when C is the category of R-modules for some commutative ring R, E is the
absolute allowable class, and Λ is the I-adic completion functor for some ideal I of R, the
category LE
0 ΛC was studied (under the name “L-complete modules”) by Greenlees and
May in [6] and by Hovey and Strickland in [9]. One would like to know that the category
LE
0 ΛC enjoys a universal property of some kind.
In this section (namely, in Theorem 3.9) we show that LE
0 ΛC indeed has a certain
E
universal property: under reasonable hypotheses on Λ, L0 ΛC is the unique smallest Erelatively Quillen-exact replete subcategory of C which contains ΛC. Part of our task in
this section is to describe what an “E-relatively Quillen-exact subcategory” is; this requires some discussion of Quillen-exact categories. It is worth observing at the outset that
Quillen-exact categories, and E-relatively Quillen-exact subcategories, are not necessarily
abelian categories, and indeed, LE
0 ΛC is itself not necessarily an abelian category (this is
discussed in Remark 3.13: if we let E be the allowable class consisting of all split short
exact sequences, then LE
0 ΛC = ΛC, which of course is not abelian in general, for example
when Λ is an adic completion functor on virtually any category of modules). The reader
who wishes to avoid the whole issue of “relatively Quillen-exact subcategories” can safely
skip to the next subsection of this paper: if one is only interested in ordinary derived functors (i.e., one does not need the additional generality of relative derived functors), then
L0 ΛC is abelian and has an appealing universal property among the abelian subcategories
of ΛC having certain properties; see Theorem 3.14 for this material.
Recall that D. Quillen, in [12], defined a Quillen-exact category:
3.2. Definition. A Quillen-exact category is an additive category C equipped with a
collection D of sequences of the form
i

j

0 → X −→ Y −→ Z → 0

(14)

satisfying the following conditions:
• D is closed under isomorphisms,
• the maps j (“admissible epimorphisms”) are closed under composition and pullback
and the maps i (“admissible monomorphisms”) are closed under composition and
pushout,
• for every map g in C which has a kernel, if there exists a map f such that g ◦ f is
an admissible epimorphism, then g is an admissible epimorphism,
• and for every map f in C which has a cokernel, if there exists a map g such that
g ◦ f is an admissible monomorphism, then f is an admissible monomorphism.
3.3. Remark. A Quillen-exact category is determined by its underlying category and
its collection of admissible monomorphisms, in the following sense: if (C, E) is an exact
category, and if we write Mono(C, E) for the collection of admissible monomorphisms of

16
(C, E), then every map f : X → Y in Mono(C, E) has a cokernel in C, and E is precisely
the collection of sequences of the form
f

0 → X −→ Y → cokerf → 0
for f ∈ Mono(C, E).
3.4.

Lemma. Let C be an abelian category, and let E be an allowable class in C. Suppose
f

g

0 → X −→ Y −→ Z → 0

(15)

is a short exact sequence in C which is contained in E, and suppose that X, Z are both
E
E
∼
LE
0 Λ-complete. If L1 ΛZ = 0, then Y is also L0 Λ-complete.
Proof. Since 15 is in E, applying LE
0 Λ to 15 yields the commutative diagram with exact
rows
f
g
// X
// Y
// Z
// 0
0
∼
= η′ X



LE
1 ΛZ
//



LE
0 ΛX

∼
= η′ Z

η′ Y
LE
0 Λf

//



LE
0 ΛY

LE
0 Λg



//

LE
0 ΛZ
//



0

hence η ′ Y is an isomorphism by the Five Lemma if LE
1 ΛZ vanishes.
Recall that a full subcategory A of a category C is said to be reflective if the inclusion
functor A ֒→ C admits a left adjoint.
3.5. Theorem. Let C be an abelian category and let E be an allowable class in C.
Suppose that E has sectile epics, and that C has enough E-projectives. Let Λ : C → C be
an additive idempotent functor of C satisfying the following conditions:
E
E
• the natural transformations η ′ : id → LE
0 Λ and φ : L0 Λ → Λ make L0 Λ an idempotent functor over Λ (see Theorem 2.10 for a useful set of sufficient conditions which
guarantee that this assumption holds), and
E
∼
• for every object X which is LE
0 Λ-complete, L1 ΛX = 0.
E
Then LE
0 ΛC is a reflective subcategory of C, and L0 ΛC, equipped with the class of sequences
E ∩ LE
0 ΛC, is a Quillen-exact category.

Proof. It is standard (see e.g. Proposition 4.2.3 of [13]) that, if LE
0 Λ is an idempotent
E
functor, then the L0 Λ-complete objects generate a reflective full subcategory of C.
Additivity of Λ implies additivity of LE
0 Λ and hence that the biproduct X ⊕ Y of
two objects X, Y in C is also in LE
ΛC,
hence
that LE
0
0 ΛC has a biproduct and that this
E
biproduct is computed in C. Consequently L0 ΛC is an additive subcategory of C.
Clearly E ∩ LE
0 ΛC is closed under isomorphisms. We handle the remaining axioms in
Definition 3.2:

17
Admissible epimorphisms are closed under composition: Let
f

g

U −→ V −→ W
be a pair of admissible epimorphisms, i.e., U, V, W are LE
0 Λ-complete objects of C,
and f, g are E-epimorphisms with LE
Λ-complete
kernels.
We need to know that
0
g ◦ f is an admissible epimorphism. From Theorem 5.5 it follows very easily that
g ◦ f is an E-epimorphism, so all that remains is to show that the kernel of g ◦ f is
LE
0 Λ-complete. We have the exact sequence
0 → ker f → ker(g ◦ f ) → ker g → cokerf
in C, and since f is epic,
0 → ker f → ker(g ◦ f ) → ker g → 0

(16)

is short exact, and moreover 16 is in E since f is E-epic and hence the inclusion
ker f ֒→ U is E-monic, hence ker f → ker(g ◦ f ) is E-monic by Proposition 5.7.
So applying LE
0 Λ to 16 yields a long exact sequence. We already know that ker f
E
and ker g are LE
0 Λ-complete, so Lemma 3.4, together with the assumption that L1 Λ
E
vanishes on LE
0 Λ-complete objects, implies that ker(g ◦ f ) is L0 Λ-complete.
Admissible monomorphisms are closed under composition: Now instead let
f

g

U −→ V −→ W
be a pair of admissible monomorphisms, i.e., U, V, W are LE
0 Λ-complete objects of C,
E
and f, g are E-monomorphisms with L0 Λ-complete cokernels. We need to know that
g ◦f is an admissible monomorphism. By Lemma 5.10, g ◦f is an E-monomorphism,
so we just need to know that the cokernel of g ◦ f is also LE
0 Λ-complete; but this
E
follows from the same argument (L0 Λ taking short exact sequences in E to long
exact sequences) as in the previous part of this proof.
Admissible epimorphisms are closed under pullback: Let
0 → X −→ Y −→ Z → 0

(17)

E
be in E ∩ LE
0 ΛC, and let T → Z be a map in L0 ΛC. We need to know that:

• the pullback Y ×Z T in C exists in LE
0 ΛC, and
• the pullback map Y ×Z T → T is E-epic.
Given that the first condition holds, the second condition is an immediate consequence of Lemma 5.8. So all that remains is to check that the first condition is
satisfied.

18
Since 17 is short exact in C, we have the commutative diagram in C with exact rows
0

X
//

//

Y ×Z T

p

//

T

0
//

(18)

id





0
//



X
//



Y
//

Z



0.
//

By Lemma 5.8, p is an E-epimorphism. So the top row in diagram 18 is in E, so
applying LE
0 Λ to it yields a commutative diagram with exact rows
0
//

X
//

Y ×Z T

∼
=



LE
1 ΛT

LE
0 ΛX

//

T




//

LE
0 Λ(Y ×Z T )

//

0

∼
=

η′ (Y ×Z T )



//

p

//

LE
0 ΛT
//



0.

E
We assumed that LE
1 ΛT vanishes if T is L0 Λ-complete, which it is. So the Five
′
Lemma now implies that η (Y ×Z T ) is an isomorphism. So Y ×Z T is LE
0 Λ-complete.

Since the pullback Y ×Z T , when computed in C, is contained in LE
0 ΛC, and since
E
L0 ΛC is a full subcategory of C, the pullback Y ×Z T computed in C is also the
E
pullback in LE
0 ΛC. So the pullback Y ×Z T in C exists in L0 ΛC, and we are done.
Admissible epimorphisms are closed under pullback: This is completely parallel
to the proof of its dual, which we gave immediately above; one simply uses Lemma 5.9
in place of Lemma 5.8.
If g ◦ f is an admissible epimorphism, then so is g: We assumed that E has sectile
epics, so this is immediate.
If g ◦ f is an admissible monomorphism, then so is f : By Proposition 5.7, E has
retractile monics, so f is an admissible monomorphism.

Recall, from Remark 3.3, that to specify a Quillen-exact category, one can specify its
underlying category and its collection of admissible monomorphisms. This observation
motivates the following definition:
3.6. Definition. Let C be an abelian category equipped with an allowable class E. Let
A be a full additive subcategory of C, and let M be the set of E-monomorphisms which
are contained in A. We will say that a A is an E-relatively Quillen-exact subcategory
of C if the collection M forms the class of admissible monomorphisms of a (necessarily
unique, by Remark 3.3) Quillen-exact category (A, E ′) satisfying the condition:
• if f ∈ M, then the cokernel of f computed in A (which exists, by the definition of a
Quillen-exact category, Definition 3.2) agrees with the cokernel of f computed in C.

19
If A is an E-relatively Quillen-exact subcategory of C, then since (A, E ∩ A) is exact,
there must exist some full faithful additive functor from A to some abelian category D
such that E ∩ A is the class of sequences in A whose images in D are short exact; but,
unless E is the absolute allowable class (i.e., the class of all short exact sequences in C),
it is not necessarily true that D = C, and indeed, usually D = C cannot hold.
A special case of Lemma 3.7 which we will frequently use is the case where E is the
absolute allowable class, in which case Lemma 3.7 is simply the statement that the image
of a morphism from a Λ-complete object to a Λ-separated object is itself Λ-complete.
3.7. Lemma. Let C be an abelian category, let E be an allowable class in C, let Λ be an
idempotent functor on C, and let f : X → Y be an E-map in C, where X is Λ-complete
and Y is Λ-separated. Suppose that Λ : C → C sends E-epimorphisms to epimorphisms.
Then im f is also Λ-complete.
Proof. We have the commutative diagram in C
X
ηX ∼
=



ΛX

p

//

im f

i

η(im f )
Λp

Y

ηY



//

//

Λim f

Λi


// ΛY,

where p, i are the canonical maps to and from the image of f . Since i and ηY are both
monic, so is ηY ◦ i = Λi ◦ η(im f ), so η(im f ) is monic. Since Λ sends E-epimorphisms to
epimorphisms, Λp and ηX are both epic, so η(im f ) is also epic. So im f is Λ-complete.
3.8. Lemma. Let C be an abelian category and let E be an allowable class in C. Suppose
that E has sectile epics, that C has enough E-projectives, and that Λ : C → C is an
additive functor which sends epimorphisms to epimorphisms. Then LE
0 Λ : C → C also
sends epimorphisms to epimorphisms.
Proof. Note that LE
0 Λ automatically sends E-epimorphisms to epimorphisms; the content of this lemma is that it sends arbitrary epimorphisms to epimorphisms! (Also we
note that this does not necessarily mean that LE
0 Λ is right exact, since it can fail to be
“exact-in-the-middle” on short exact sequences not contained in E.)
f

Let X −→ Y be an epimorphism in C. Choose an E-projective object P0 and an
E-epimorphism P0 → Y . Since E has sectile epics, E-epimorphisms are stable under
pullback (by Lemma 5.8) and composition (an easy consequence of Theorem 5.5). So the
pullback map P0 ×Y X → X is an E-epimorphism, and the pullback map P0 ×Y X → P0 is
an epimorphism. Choose an E-projective object P0′ and an E-epimorphism P0′ → P0 ×Y X.
Then the composite
P0′ → P0 ×Y X → X
is an E-epimorphism, while the composite
P0′ → P0 ×Y X → P0

20
is an epimorphism. We can repeat this same procedure to produce a commutative diagram
with exact columns
// P1
P1′


P0′

g



f

X



P0
//



Y



//

0
//



0

in which the vertical maps are all E-maps, the horizontal maps are all epimorphisms, and
the objects P1′ , P0′ , P1 , P0 are all E-projective. Applying Λ then yields the commutative
diagram with exact columns
// ΛP1
ΛP1′


ΛP0′

Λg



LE
0 Λf



//

ΛP0
p

LE
0 ΛX


0

//



LE
0 ΛY
//



0

and Λg is an epimorphism, since g is an epimorphism and Λ was assumed to send epimorphisms to epimorphisms. Since p is also an epimorphism, LE
0 Λf is an epimorphism,
as desired.
Recall that a subcategory is said to be replete if it is closed under isomorphisms. That
is, if C is a category and A is a subcategory of C, we say that A is a replete subcategory
of C if, for each object X of A and each object Y of C isomorphic to X, the object Y is
also in A.
3.9. Theorem. Let C be an abelian category and let E be an allowable class in C.
Suppose that E has sectile epics, and that C has enough E-projectives. Let Λ : C → C be
an additive idempotent functor of C satisfying the following conditions:
E
E
• the natural transformations η ′ : id → LE
0 Λ and φ : L0 Λ → Λ make L0 Λ an idempotent functor over Λ (see Theorem 2.10 for a useful set of sufficient conditions which
guarantee that this assumption holds),

• Λ sends epimorphisms to epimorphisms, and
E
∼
• for every object X which is LE
0 Λ-complete, L1 ΛX = 0.

21
Then LE
0 ΛC is an E-relatively Quillen-exact replete subcategory of C which contains ΛC.
If we furthermore assume that Λ sends E-maps to E-maps, then LE
0 ΛC is the unique
smallest E-relatively Quillen-exact replete subcategory of C which contains ΛC. That is,
if A is an E-relatively Quillen-exact replete subcategory of C which contains ΛC, then A
E
contains LE
0 ΛC. (See Definition 2.2 for the notations ΛC and L0 ΛC.)
Proof. First, that LE
0 ΛC is replete follows immediately from its definition. We showed
E
E
that (L0 ΛC, E ∩ L0 ΛC) is a Quillen-exact category in Theorem 3.5, i.e., the class of Emonomorphisms in C which are contained in LE
0 ΛC forms the class of admissible monomor′
phisms of a Quillen-exact category (LE
ΛC,
E
), as required by Definition 3.6.
0
f
We now check the other condition required by Definition 3.6: if X −→ Y is an Emonomorphism in C and X, Y are both in LE
0 ΛC, then the cokernel cokerf , computed in
E
E
C, is also L0 Λ-complete, since L0 Λ is right-exact on short exact sequences in E. Since
LE
0 ΛC is a full subcategory of C and since the cokernel of f , computed in C, is contained
E
in LE
0 ΛC, this cokernel has the universal property of a cokernel for f in L0 ΛC. So the
E
cokernel of f computed in LE
0 ΛC agrees with the cokernel of f computed in C. So L0 ΛC
is a replete, E-relatively Quillen-exact subcategory of C.
Now we must show that ΛC is contained in LE
0 ΛC. For any given object X of C,
δ0
choose E-projective objects P0 , P1 in C and an E-map P1 −→
P0 and an E-epimorphism
δ−1
P0 −→ X such that the sequence
δ−1

δ

0
P1 −→
P0 −→ X → 0

(19)

is exact. Since Λ preserves epimorphisms, Λδ−1 is an epimorphism. We have the commutative diagram with exact columns
ηP1

P1

ΛP1
//

Λδ0

δ0



ηP0

P0
δ−1



X

//



ΛP0 ❍

❍❍
❍❍Λδ−1
❍❍
❍❍

##
′
ηX E
// L ΛX φX // ΛX
0





0

0

hence φX is epic. Now since η ′ is a natural transformation, we have the commutative
square
φX

LE
0 ΛX

//

ΛX

∼
= η ′ LE
0 ΛX



η′ ΛX

LE
0 ΛφX

E
LE
0 ΛL0 ΛX

∼
=

//



LE
0 Λ(ΛX)

22
E
with η ′ LE
0 ΛX an isomorphism since we assumed that L0 Λ is idempotent, and with
E
′
L0 ΛφX an epimorphism by Lemma 3.8. Consequently η ΛX is epic.
At the same time, the composite
η′ ΛX

φΛX

ΛX −→ LE
0 Λ(ΛX) −→ ΛΛX
is η(ΛX), which is an isomorphism since we assumed that Λ is an idempotent functor. So
η ′ ΛX is split monic, as well as epic. So η ′ ΛX is an isomorphism. Hence ΛC ⊆ LE
0 ΛC.
Now suppose that Λ sends E-maps to E-maps, suppose that A is a replete E-relatively
Quillen-exact subcategory of C which contains ΛC, and let X be an object of C. Choose
an E-map f : P1 → P0 with cokernel X, and such that P0 and P1 are E-projective;
then LE
0 ΛX is isomorphic to the cokernel of Λf , and by Lemma 3.7, the image of Λf is
Λ-complete. So LE
0 ΛX is (isomorphic to) the cokernel of an E-monomorphism, since Λ
sends E-maps to E-maps and hence Λf is an E-map. Since A is assumed replete and
E-relatively Quillen-exact, A must contain all the cokernels (computed in C) of the Emonomorphisms contained in A. Hence LE
0 ΛX is in A. So, if A is a replete E-relatively
Quillen-exact subcategory of C which contains ΛC, then A contains LE
0 ΛC, as claimed.
3.10. L0 Λ-complete objects as the universal exact category containing
the Λ-complete objects. In this section we show that, in the absolute case (that is,
the allowable class E is the collection of all short exact sequences), L0 ΛC has a universal
property among all the exact subcategories of C containing ΛC. Here we are using the
term “exact subcategory” in the sense of Definition 3.11, which is how the term is used
in e.g. Freyd’s book [5]; this is not equivalent to the notion of a “Quillen-exact category”
as in the previous section of this paper!
Recall the following Definition 3.11 and Theorem 3.12, from [5] (specifically, our Theorem 3.12 appears as Theorem 3.41 in [5]):
3.11. Definition. Let C be an abelian category, and let D be a subcategory of C. We
say that D is an exact subcategory of C if D is also abelian and the inclusion functor
D → C is exact.
3.12. Theorem. Let C be an abelian category, and let D be a nonempty full subcategory
of C. Write G : D → C for the inclusion functor. Then D is an exact subcategory of C if
and only if the following three conditions are satisfied:
• for every morphism f in D, there exists a kernel for Gf in the image of G,
• for every morphism f in D, there exists a cokernel for Gf in the image of G,
• for every pair of objects X, Y in D, there exists a coproduct of GX and GY in the
image of G.

23
3.13. Remark. Let C be an abelian category and let Λ : C → C be an idempotent
functor. Suppose that Λ sends epimorphisms to epimorphisms. Then ΛC, equipped with
the collection of all split exact sequences
0 → X → Y → Z → 0,
is a Quillen-exact category; this can be proven easily from the definition, and also is an
easy corollary of Theorem 3.9.
Since ΛC is not always abelian, e.g. when Λ is I-adic completion on a category C of
modules, Theorem 3.9 cannot be made stronger, into a statement that LE
0 ΛC is not only
Quillen-exact but actually abelian, without making further assumptions on E or C or Λ.
However, in Theorem 3.14 we show that, if E is the absolute allowable class, then LE
0 ΛC
is an exact subcategory of C, and in particular, LE
ΛC
is
abelian.
0
3.14. Theorem. Let C be an abelian category. Suppose that C has enough projectives.
Let Λ : C → C be an additive idempotent functor of C satisfying the following conditions:
• Λ sends epimorphisms to epimorphisms,
• for every object X which is L0 Λ-complete, L1 ΛX ∼
= 0.
Then L0 ΛC is the unique smallest exact full replete subcategory of C which contains ΛC.
That is, if A is an exact full replete subcategory of C which contains ΛC, then A contains
L0 ΛC. (See Definition 2.2 for the notations ΛC and L0 ΛC.)
Proof. First, the condition that L1 ΛX ∼
=
= 0 for all L0 Λ-complete X implies that L1 ΛL0 ΛP ∼
∼
L1 Λ(ΛP ) = 0 for all projective P , so Theorem 2.10 implies that L0 Λ is idempotent.
That L0 ΛC is full and replete follows immediately from its definition, and in Theorem 3.5 we already saw that L0 ΛC is additive and contains ΛC. By Theorem 3.9, we know
that L0 ΛC is an E-relatively Quillen-exact subcategory of C, where E is the absolute
allowable class, i.e., the class of all short exact sequences in C. Consequently (by the
f
definition of an E-relatively Quillen-exact subcategory), if X −→ Y is a monomorphism
in C and X, Y are both in L0 ΛC, then cokerf , computed in C, is also in L0 ΛC. Since
L0 ΛC is a full subcategory of C, this implies that cokerf has the universal property of
the cokernel in L0 ΛC (and not just the cokernel in C). Hence L0 ΛC has cokernels of its
monomorphisms, and they agree with the cokernels computed in C.
f
Now suppose that X −→ Y is a morphism (not necessarily monic) in L0 ΛC. By
Lemma 3.8, L0 Λ preserves epimorphisms, and by assumption L0 Λ is idempotent, so by
Lemma 3.7, the image of a morphism between L0 Λ-complete objects is also L0 Λ-complete.
So im f is in L0 ΛC, and since cokerf (computed in C) agrees with the cokernel (computed
in C) of the canonical map im f ֒→ Y , the computation of cokernels in L0 ΛC reduces
to the case of cokernels of monomorphisms, which we already handled. So L0 ΛC has
cokernels, and they agree with cokernels computed in C.
f
Similarly, the kernel of X −→ Y in C is the kernel of X → im f in C, and by
Lemma 3.7, if X, Y are L0 Λ-complete then im f is also L0 Λ-complete. We assumed that

24
L1 Λ vanishes on L0 Λ-complete objects, so the exactness of the rows in the commutative
diagram in C
0
//

ker f
//

L1 Λim f
//

//

im f

∼
= η′ X

η′ ker f





X

//

L0 ΛX

0

∼
= η′ im f





L0 Λ ker f

//

//

L0 Λim f
//



0

implies that η ′ ker f is also an isomorphism. So the kernel of a map between L0 Λ-complete
objects is also L0 Λ-complete. As already explained for cokernels, this implies the kernel
of f , computed in C, also has the correct universal property to be the kernel of f in L0 ΛC.
So kernels in C coincide with kernels in L0 ΛC. So L0 ΛC is an exact subcategory of C, by
Theorem 3.12.
Now suppose that A is an exact full subcategory of C which contains ΛC. Then A
is E-relatively Quillen-exact, where E is the absolute allowable class in C. Hence, by
Theorem 3.9, A contains L0 ΛC.
Theorem 3.14 tells us, in particular, that L0 ΛC is actually an abelian subcategory of
C. This is in contrast to the results of the previous section, where we showed that, in
the relative setting, LE
0 ΛC is only an E-relatively Quillen-exact subcategory of C, and not
necessarily abelian; see Remark 3.13 for an illustration of this.

4. Applications and special cases
4.1. Limits of idempotent functors. Up to now, our main results—Theorem 2.10,
Theorem 3.9, and Theorem 3.14—have been about an arbitrary idempotent functor Λ
which sends epimorphisms to epimorphisms and whose first (relative) derived functor
satisfies a vanishing condition (given in the statements of those results). These results are
only interesting when Λ is also not right exact, so that Λ does not necessarily agree with
its own (relative) zeroth left derived functor. In this subsection, we will discuss where
examples of such functors Λ actually arise in nature: as limits of sequences of right-exact
idempotent functors, most famously as the limit M 7→ limn→∞ M/I n M of the modulo-I n
reduction functors on the category of modules over a ring in which I is an ideal.
4.2. Definition. We say that a category C is sequentially complete if, for each sequence
of morphisms
f2
f1
f0
. . . −→ X2 −→ X1 −→ X0
in C, the limit limn→∞ Xn exists in C.
4.3. Definition. We will say that a sequentially complete abelian category C has MittagLeffler vanishing if the following two conditions are satisfied:
• For each diagram
f3

f2

f1

f0

. . . −→ X3 −→ X2 −→ X1 −→ X0

25
in C, the ith right derived functor Ri limn Xn of the limit exists for all i, and is
trivial for all i > 1.
• For each diagram
f3

f2

f1

f0

. . . −→ X3 −→ X2 −→ X1 −→ X0
in C such that each map fn is an epimorphism, the first right-derived functor of
limit is trivial, that is, R1 limn Xn ∼
= 0.
Of course the classical example of an abelian category with Mittag-Leffler vanishing
is the category of modules over any ring. More generally, the following is proven in [14]:
4.4. Theorem. Let C be an abelian category which satisfies Grothendieck’s axiom AB3
(i.e., infinite coproducts exist in C) and AB4* (i.e., infinite products exist and preserve
exact sequences in C) and has a generator (i.e., an object X of C such that, for each
nonzero map A → B, the induced map homC (X, A) → homC (X, B) is nonzero). Then C
has Mittag-Leffler vanishing.
Here is an easy (and certainly well-known) lemma on limits in abelian categories with
Mittag-Leffler vanishing:
4.5.

Lemma. Let
f3

f2

f1

f0

. . . −→ X3 −→ X2 −→ X1 −→ X0
be a diagram in a sequentially complete abelian category with Mittag-Leffler vanishing.
Suppose that each map fn is an epimorphism. Then the map limn→∞ Xn → Xi is epic for
each nonnegative integer i.
Proof. Write fij for the composite of the maps
fj−1

fj−2

fi

Xj −→ Xj−1 −→ . . . −→ Xi .
We have the commutative diagram with exact rows
..
.

..
.

..
.







..
.
fn+3

ker fnn+3

0
//

Xn+3
//

fnn+3

id



// Xn

fn+2





0

ker fnn+2



//

Xn+2
//

fnn+2

0
//



ker fnn+1
//



Xn+1

fnn+1


// 0

id



// Xn

fn+1



..
.


// 0

id



// Xn


// 0

26
and the vertical maps ker fnn+i+1 → ker fnn+i are epic by the usual “Four Lemma” from
homological algebra, so we get a short exact sequence
0 → lim ker fnn+i → lim Xn+i → Xn → 0
i→∞

i→∞

in which the epimorphism limi→∞ Xn+i → Xn is the canonical projection from the limit.
Lemma 4.6 is based on (although somewhat more general than) Theorem 1.5 in
A. Yekutieli’s paper [20], which, as Yekutieli points out, is in turn based on ideas in
J. R. Strooker’s book [18].

4.6. Lemma. Let C be an sequentially complete abelian category with Mittag-Leffler vanishing. Let F0 , F1 , F2 , . . . be a set of right-exact idempotent functors C → C, and let
fn : Fn+1 → Fn and ηn : id → Fn be natural transformations, making the diagram
id ❊❊

❊❊ ηn
❊❊
❊❊
❊""

// Fn
Fn+1

ηn+1

fn

commute, for all nonnegative integers n. Let Λ : C → C be the limit functor Λ(X) =
limn→∞ Fn X. Write η : id → Λ for the limit of the unit maps ηn . Suppose that the
following condition is satisfied: the map ηn (X) : X → Fn (X) is an epimorphism for all
objects X of C and for all nonnegative integers n.
Then the following conditions are equivalent:

• Λ admits the structure of an idempotent functor with unit map η.

• The map Fn (ηX) : Fn X → Fn ΛX is an isomorphism for all n and all objects X of
C.

• The map Fn (ηX) : Fn X → Fn ΛX is epic for all n and all objects X of C.

27
Proof. Write πn : Λ → Fn for the natural projection map Λ = limn Fn → Fn . We have
the commutative diagram in C
..
.

..
.


Fn+2 X

..
.



Fn+2 ηX


Fn+2 πn+2 X
// Fn+2 Fn+2 X

Fn+2 ΛX

//

fn+1 ΛX



fn+1 Fn+2 X



Fn+1 πn+2 X
// Fn+1 Fn+2 X

Fn+1 ΛX

fn+1 X

Fn+1 fn+1 X

id



Fn+1 X



Fn+1 ηX

//



Fn+1 πn+1 X
// Fn+1 Fn+1 X

Fn+1 ΛX

fn ΛX



Fn ΛX

fn X

fn Fn+1 X



Fn πn+1 X

Fn Fn+1 X

//

F n fn X

id



Fn X

Fn ηX



//

Fn ΛX



Fn π n X

//

Fn Fn X

fn−1 ΛX



Fn−1 ΛX


..
.



fn−1 Fn X



Fn−1 πn X

//

Fn−1 Fn X

id

..
.



Fn−1 fn−1 X

..
.

and the horizontal composites Fi X → Fi Fi X are isomorphisms, since F0 , F1 , . . . were
assumed to be idempotent functors. So each map Fi ηX is a split monomorphism (hence
is epic if and only if it is an isomorphism, as claimed) and Fi πi X is a split epimorphism.
In particular, Fn πn X is split by (Fn ηX) ◦ (µFn X), where we are writing µFn : Fn Fn → Fn
for the multiplication map of the monad Fn , as in Proposition 2.4. Using the equalities
(Fn−1 fn−1 X) ◦ (fn−1 Fn X) = (fn−1 Fn−1 X) ◦ (Fn fn−1 X) and (Fn−1 fn−1 X) ◦ (ηn−1 Fn X) =
(ηn−1 Fn−1 X) ◦ fn−1 X and (fn−1 ΛX) ◦ (Fn ηX) = (Fn−1 ηX) ◦ fn−1X (which we have, since
fn−1 and ηn−1 are natural transformations), we get equalities
fn−1 ΛX ◦ Fn ηX ◦ µFn X = Fn−1 ηX ◦ fn−1 X ◦ µFn X
= Fn−1 ηX ◦ µFn−1 X ◦ ηn−1 Fn−1 X ◦ fn−1 X ◦ µFn X
= Fn−1 ηX ◦ µFn−1 X ◦ Fn−1 fn−1 X ◦ fn−1 Fn X.
Hence we have splittings of the maps Fn πn X which are compatible with the maps in the
inverse systems
f2 X

f1 X

f0 X

. . . −→ F2 X −→ F1 X −→ F0 X

and

f2 ΛX

f1 ΛX

f0 ΛX

. . . −→ F2 ΛX −→ F1 ΛX −→ F0 ΛX.

28
This compatibility of the splittings is exactly what one needs in order to know that
the natural map
ker fn−1 ΛX → ker (Fn−1 fn−1 X ◦ fn−1 Fn X) ,
(20)
induced by Fn πn X, is also a split epimorphism. So ker Fn πn X is a summand of Fn ΛX,
and the natural map limn→∞ Fn πn X : ΛΛX → ΛX is equal to the composite
ΛΛX

=
∼
=
∼
=

lim Fn ΛX

 

lim Fn X ⊕ lim ker Fn πn X
n→∞
n→∞


(ΛX) ⊕ lim ker Fn πn X

n→∞

n→∞

→ ΛX,

(21)

where map 21 is simply projection to the first summand. Since the cokernel of limn→∞ Fn ηX
is isomorphic to the kernel of limn→∞ Fn πn X, and since the composite (limn→∞ Fn πn X) ◦
(limn→∞ Fn ηX) is equal to the identity on ΛX, the map ΛηX is an isomorphism if and
only if limn→∞ ker Fn πn X vanishes.
Let cn denote the map induced by fn ΛX in the kernel of Fn+1 πn+1 X, so that we have
the commutative diagram with split exact rows
..
.


0

..
.

..
.




//

ker Fn+1 πn+1 X
//

0


..
.





//

ker Fn πn X


..
.

cn

..
.


Fn+1 πn+1 X
// Fn+1 Fn+1 X

Fn+1 ΛX

cn+1



..
.

//

fn ΛX

Fn ΛX


..
.

//



0

Fn fn X◦fn Fn+1 X
Fn π n X

fn−1 ΛX

//



Fn Fn X


//

Fn−1 fn−1 X◦fn−1 Fn X

..
.



0


..
.

and the double-headed arrows are epic. Then, in the exact sequence
0 → ker cn → ker fn ΛX → ker(Fn fn X ◦ fn Fn+1 X) → cokercn → cokerfn ΛX,
the map 20 is split epic, and cokerfn ΛX vanishes since each fn ΛX is epic. So each map cn
is epic. Hence, by Lemma 4.5, the projection map limi→∞ ker Fi πi X → ker Fn πn X is epic
for each nonnegative integer n. Consequently limi→∞ ker Fi πi X vanishes if and only if
ker Fn πn X vanishes for all nonnegative integers n. Consequently ΛηX is an isomorphism
if and only if each map Fn πn X is monic, i.e., if and only if each map Fn η is epic.
Now, by Proposition 2.4, Λ is an idempotent functor if and only if ΛηX is an isomorphism and ηΛX is monic. But ηΛX is the limit of a compatible sequence of split monics,
hence is itself a split monic. Hence Λ is an idempotent functor if and only if each map
Fn η is epic, as claimed.

29
Lemma 4.7 is the famous “Milnor exact sequence” of [11]:
4.7. Lemma. (The Milnor exact sequence.) Let C be an abelian category with
Mittag-Leffler vanishing and let
..
.

..
.
fi−1,j+1

fi,j+1

...

di+1,j



// Ci,j

di,j



// Ci−1,j

fi,j

...

di+1,j−1



// Ci,j


di−1,j

//

...

fi−1,j



di,j−1

d

// Ci−1,j i−1,j−1 //

fi,j−1

...

 fi−1,j−1

..
.

..
.

be a commutative diagram in C whose rows are chain complexes in C and whose vertical
maps are all epimorphisms. Then, for all integers i and j, the natural map Hi (limj C•,j ) →
limj Hi (C•,j ) fits into a short exact sequence


1
0 → R lim Hi+1 (C•,j ) → Hi lim C•,j → lim Hi (C•,j ) → 0
j

j

j

in C.
Proof. Exactly as in Theorem 3.5.8 of [19].
4.8. Theorem. Let C be a sequentially complete abelian category with Mittag-Leffler
vanishing, E an allowable class in C with sectile epics. Let F0 , F1 , F2 , . . . be a set of rightexact functors C → C, and let fn : Fn+1 → Fn and ηn : id → Fn be natural transformations,
making the diagram
id ❊❊
❊❊ fn
❊❊
❊❊
❊""

// Fn
Fn+1

fn+1

fn

commute, for all nonnegative integers n. Let Λ : C → C be the limit functor Λ(X) =
limn→∞ Fn X. Write η : id → Λ for the limit of the unit maps ηn . Suppose that the
following conditions are satisfied:
• The category C has enough E-projectives.
• For each nonnegative integer n, the functor Fn is an idempotent functor, with unit
map ηn .
• The maps ηn (X) : X → Fn (X) are epimorphisms for all objects X of C.

30
• If f is an E-map between E-projectives in C, then Λf is also an E-map.
• For all E-projectives P and all nonnegative integers n,
E
E
E
∼
LE
2 fn (ΛP ) : L2 Fn+1 (ΛP ) → L2 Fn (ΛP ) is epic and L1 Fn (ΛP ) = 0.

the

map

• The map Fn (ηX) : Fn X → Fn ΛX is epic for all nonnegative integers n and all
objects X of C. (Equivalently, by Lemma 4.6: Λ, with unit map η, is an idempotent
functor on C.)
Then C, E, and Λ satisfy all the assumptions of Theorem 2.10. Consequently, LE
0Λ :
C → C is an idempotent functor, with unit map η ′ , over Λ.
Proof. Our assumptions immediately imply all the hypotheses of Theorem 2.10 except
∼
for the assumption that, if P is E-projective, then LE
1 Λ(ΛP ) = 0. Suppose that P is an
E-projective object of C, and choose a resolution
δ

δ

1
0
. . . −→
P1 −→
P0 → 0

of ΛP by E-maps and E-projectives. By Lemma 4.7, we have a commutative diagram
with exact rows
0
//

R1 limn Hi+1 (Fn P• )
//

Hi (limn Fn P• )

∼
=



0

limn Hi (Fn P• )
//

0

∼
=



//

//



R1 limn LE
i+1 Fn (ΛP )
//

LE
i Λ(ΛP )



//

limn LE
i Fn (ΛP )
//



0.

E
∼
∼
We made the assumption that LE
1 Fn (ΛP ) = 0 for all n, and hence limn L1 Fn (ΛP ) = 0. We
1
E
∼
also made the assumption that LE
2 fn (ΛP ) is epic for all n, and hence R limn L2 Fn (ΛP ) =
E
0 by Mittag-Leffler vanishing. Hence L1 Λ(ΛP ) ∼
= 0.

4.9. Theorem. Let C be a sequentially complete abelian category with Mittag-Leffler
vanishing, E an allowable class in C with sectile epics. Let F0 , F1 , F2 , . . . be a set of rightexact functors C → C, and let fn : Fn+1 → Fn and ηn : id → Fn be natural transformations,
making the diagram
id ❊❊
❊❊ ηn
❊❊
❊❊
❊""

// Fn
Fn+1

ηn+1

fn

commute, for all nonnegative integers n. Let Λ : C → C be the limit functor Λ(X) =
limn→∞ Fn X. Write η : id → Λ for the limit of the unit maps ηn . Suppose that the
following conditions are satisfied:
• The category C has enough E-projectives.
• For each nonnegative integer n, the functor Fn is an idempotent functor, with unit
map ηn .

31
• The maps ηn (X) : X → Fn (X) are epimorphisms for all objects X of C.
• If f is an E-map in C, then Λf is also an E-map.
• For all E-projectives P and all nonnegative integers n,
E
E
E
∼
LE
2 fn (ΛP ) : L2 Fn+1 (ΛP ) → L2 Fn (ΛP ) is epic and L1 Fn (ΛP ) = 0.

the

map

• The map Fn (ηX) : Fn X → Fn ΛX is epic for all nonnegative integers n and all
objects X of C. (Equivalently, by Lemma 4.6: Λ, with unit map η, is an idempotent
functor on C.)
Then C, E, and Λ satisfy all the assumptions of Theorem 3.9. Consequently, LE
0 Λ is
E
idempotent, and L0 ΛC is the unique smallest E-relatively Quillen-exact replete subcategory
of C which contains ΛC.
Proof. Immediate from Theorem 2.10 and Theorem 4.8.
4.10. Corollary. Let C be a sequentially complete abelian category with Mittag-Leffler
vanishing. Let F0 , F1 , F2 , . . . be a set of right-exact functors C → C, and let fn : Fn+1 → Fn
and ηn : id → Fn be natural transformations, making the diagram
id ❊❊

❊❊ fn
❊❊
❊❊
❊""

// Fn
Fn+1

fn+1

fn

commute, for all nonnegative integers n. Let Λ : C → C be the limit functor Λ(X) =
limn→∞ Fn X. Write η : id → Λ for the limit of the unit maps ηn . Suppose that the
following conditions are satisfied:
• The category C has enough projectives.
• For each nonnegative integer n, the functor Fn is an idempotent functor, with unit
map ηn .
• The maps fn (X) : Fn+1 (X) → Fn (X) and ηn (X) : X → Fn (X) are epimorphisms
for all objects X of C.
• For all projective objects P , the map L2 fn (ΛP ) : L2 Fn+1 (ΛP ) → L2 Fn (ΛP ) is epic
for all n, and L1 Fn (ΛP ) ∼
= 0 for all n.
• The map Fn (ηX) : Fn X → Fn ΛX is epic for all nonnegative integers n and all
objects X of C. (Equivalently, by Lemma 4.6: Λ, with unit map η, is an idempotent
functor on C.)
Then C and Λ satisfy all the assumptions of Theorem 3.14. Consequently, L0 Λ is
idempotent, and L0 ΛC is the unique smallest exact full replete subcategory of C which
contains ΛC.

32
4.11. Adic completion on categories of modules. Here is a quick and wellknown (the special case R = Z and x = p, for example, appears immediately preceding
section A.2 of [9]) example to indicate the kind of situation in which the zeroth left derived
functor of adic completion differs from the adic completion itself:
4.12. Example. Let R be a commutative ring, and let x ∈ R be a non-zero-divisor
with the property that the chain of ideals
(x) ⊇ (x2 ) ⊇ (x3 ) ⊇ (x4 ) ⊇ . . .
does not stabilize. Let Λ(x)`: Mod(R) → Mod(R)`
denote the(x)-adic completion
functor.

`
n
n
n
Then the natural map φ
: L0 Λ(x)
→ Λ(x)
is not
n≥1 R/x
n≥1 R/x
n≥1 R/x
an isomorphism. We have the short exact sequence of R-modules
0→

a

n≥1

f

R{en } −→

a

R{fn } →

n≥1

a

R/xn → 0,

(22)

n≥1



P
`
`
n
and the element n≥1 xn fn ∈ Λ(x)
R/x
maps
to
zero
in
Λ
R{f
}
, but
n
(x)
n≥1
` n≥1 n 
does not map to zero in L0 Λ(x)
n≥1 R/x . This example also illustrates a failure of
adic completion to be half-exact: specifically, Λ(x) fails to be half-exact on the short exact
sequence 22.
Whenever R is a commutative ring, we will write Mod(R) for the category of Rmodules.
4.13. Theorem. Let R be a Noetherian commutative ring and let I be an ideal of R. Let
Λ : Mod(R) → Mod(R) be the I-adic completion functor, i.e., Λ(M) = limn→∞ M/I n M.
Then the following statements are all true:
• the zeroth left derived functor L0 Λ : Mod(R) → Mod(R) is idempotent,
• the category L0 ΛMod(R) of L0 Λ-complete R-modules is an replete, exact, full subcategory of Mod(R),
• L0 ΛMod(R) is the unique smallest replete exact full subcategory of Mod(R) containing all the I-adically complete modules.
Proof. The first two statements were proven already in [6] and in section A.3 of [9];
the new result here is really that L0 ΛMod(R) has a universal property, that it is the
smallest among all the replete exact full subcategories of Mod(R) containing the I-adically
complete modules. Nevertheless we show how all three claims follow from our general
results. The main tool is Corollary 4.10, as follows:
• let C = Mod(R),
• let Fn : C → C be Fn (M) = M/I n+1 M,

33
• and let fn : Fn+1 → Fn and ηn : id → Fn each be the modulo-I n+1 reduction map.
Then Λ is the I-adic completion functor, as desired. Clearly Mod(R) has enough projectives, Fn is idempotent with unit map ηn , fn and ηn are epic. That the I-adic completion
functor Λ is an idempotent functor when I is a finitely generated ideal is “classical” but
perhaps not as well-known or well-documented as it ought to be; A. Yekutieli provides a
proof in [20] and also cites an earlier proof appearing in [18]. It can also be derived from
our Lemma 4.6. The higher derived functors of Fn also vanish on ΛP for all projective P ,
since projectives are summands of free modules, and the adic completion of a free module
is flat, by e.g. Proposition 10.14 of [1]. Consequently the hypotheses of Corollary 4.10
are satisfied.
The relative cases of Theorem 3.9 are not as easily applied. If R → S is a map
of commutative rings, I an ideal of S, ΛI : Mod(S) → Mod(S) the I-adic completion
functor, and E the allowable class in Mod(S) consisting of the short exact sequences split
over R, then ΛI typically does not send E-maps to E-maps.
4.14. Example. Let k be a field, let R = k[x]/x2 , and let S be the R-algebra S = R[y].
Let E be the allowable class on S-modules consisting of the short exact sequences which
are split over R, and let Λ(y) : Mod(S) → Mod(S) denote the (y)-adic completion functor.
Then Λ(y) does not send E-epimorphisms to E-maps. Specifically, let M be the S-module
with generators a, b0 , b1 , b2 , . . . and relations ya = 0 and xa = b0 and xbi = 0 and ybi = bi−1
for all i, with b−1 = 0. Then S ⊗R M is the direct sum
a
S ⊗R M ∼
S/(x){bi }
= S{a} ⊕
i≥1

with the canonical E-epimorphism ǫM : S ⊗R M → M sending a to a and bi to bi . After
(y)-adic completion, we get the map Λ(y) (ǫM ) : Λ(y) (S ⊗R M) → Λ(y) (M) ∼
= k{a} sending
all bi to 0 and sending a to a; since xa 6= 0 in Λ(y) (S ⊗R M) but xa = 0 in Λ(y) (M), the
map Λ(y) (ǫM ) is an epimorphism but not an E-epimorphism, hence not an E-map.

5. Appendix: basic ideas in relative homological algebra
This appendix is a brief review of basic ideas in relative homological algebra. It is not
logically dependent on anything else in this paper.
5.1. Definition. An allowable class in C consists of a collection E of short exact sequences in C which is closed under isomorphism of short exact sequences, and which
contains every short exact sequence in which at least one object is the zero object of C.
(See section IX.4 of [10] for this definition and basic properties.)
The usual “absolute” homological algebra in an abelian category C is recovered by
letting the allowable class E consist of all short exact sequences in C. We refer to this as
the absolute allowable class.

34
The “E-monomorphisms” and “E-epimorphisms” defined in Definition 5.2 are sometimes (e.g. section IX.4 of [10]) called “allowable monomorphisms” and “allowable epimorphisms,” respectively.
5.2. Definition. Let E be an allowable class in C. A monomorphism f : M → N in C
f
is called an E-monomorphism if the short exact sequence 0 → M −→ N → cokerf → 0
is in E.
Dually, an epimorphism f : M → N is called an E-epimorphism if the short exact
f
sequence 0 → ker f → M −→ N → 0 is in E.
A map f in C is said to be an E-map if f factors as an E-epimorphism followed by an
E-monomorphism. (Equivalently, f : X → Y is an E-map if the canonical epimorphism
X → im f is an E-epimorphism, and the canonical monomorphism im f → Y is an
E-monomorphism.)
In the absolute case, the E-monomorphisms are simply the monomorphisms, the Eepimorphisms are simply the epimorphisms, and all maps are E-maps.
5.3.

Definition. Let E be an allowable class in C.

• An object X of C is said to be an E-projective if, for every diagram
X
M

f



//

N

in which f is an E-epic, there exists a morphism X → M making the above diagram
commute.
• The category C is said to have enough E-projectives if, for every object X of C,
there exists an E-projective object P and an E-epimorphism P → X.
• If C has enough E-projectives, X is an object of C, D is another abelian category,
and F : C → D is some additive functor, then one forms the left E-derived functors
of F by choosing an acyclic complex


f1
f0
P• = . . . −→ P1 −→ P0 −→ 0

in C in which each object Pn is E-projective, each map fn is an E-map, and H0 (P• ) ∼
=
X; then the nth left E-derived functor of F applied to X is defined as
LE
n (F )(X) = Hn (F (P• )).

In the absolute case, the E-projectives are simply the projectives.
The fact that the left E-derived functors do not depend on the choice of resolution
follows by an argument totally analogous to that used in classical homological algebra;
see e.g. Theorem IX.4.3 of [10].
Definition 5.4 is straightforward and useful, but as far as we know, this property of an
allowable class was not given a name until [16].

35
5.4. Definition. An allowable class E is said to have retractile monics if, whenever
g ◦ f is an E-monic, f is also an E-monic.
Dually, an allowable class E is said to have sectile epics if, whenever g ◦f is an E-epic,
g is also an E-epic.
Here is a fundamental theorem of relative homological algebra, due to Heller (see [10];
it also appears as Exercise IX.4.1 in [10]), whose statement is slightly cleaner if one is
willing to use the phrase “having sectile epics.” The consequence of Heller’s theorem is
that, in order to specify a “reasonable” allowable class in an abelian category, it suffices
to specify its associated relatively projective objects.
5.5. Theorem. (Heller.) Let C be an abelian category and E an allowable class in C
with sectile epics. Suppose C has enough E-projectives. Then an epimorphism M → N
in C is an E-epimorphism if and only if the induced map homC (P, M) → homC (P, N) of
abelian groups is an epimorphism for all E-projectives P .
Heller’s theorem suggests the following construction, which is straightforward and unsurprising and probably well-known to those who work with relative homological algebra,
but which, as far as we know, appeared for the first time in [17]: if E is an allowable
class, we can construct a “sectile closure of E” which has the same relative projectives
but which has sectile epics. Here are the specific properties of this construction (we have
neglected to write out proofs of these properties because the proofs are so elementary):
5.6. Proposition. Let C be an abelian category, E an allowable class in C. Suppose
C has enough E-projectives. Let Esc be the allowable class in C consisting of the exact
sequences
0 → X → Y → Y /X → 0
such that the induced map
homC (P, Y ) → homC (P, Y /X)
is a surjection of abelian groups for every E-projective P . We call Esc the sectile closure
of E. The allowable class Esc has the following properties:
• Esc has sectile epics.
• An object of C is an E-projective if and only if it is an Esc -projective.
• (Esc )sc = Esc .
• If E, F are two allowable classes in C and F ⊆ E then Fsc ⊆ Esc .
Of course there is a construction dual to the sectile closure, a retractile closure, with
dual properties.
The upshot of Proposition 5.6 is that it typically does no harm to assume that a
given allowable class E has sectile epics, since, if it does not, we can simply construct Esc
without changing the relative projectives, hence without changing any of the relative left
derived functors. If E had enough relative projectives, then the allowable class Esc then
also has retractile monics, as well as sectile epics:

36
5.7. Proposition. Let C be an abelian category and let E be an allowable class in C
with sectile epics. Suppose that C has enough E-projectives. Then E has retractile monics.
f

g

Proof. Let X −→ Y −→ Z be maps in C such that g ◦ f is an E-monomorphism.
It is immediate that f is then a monomorphism; we need to check that it is an Emonomorphism.
We have the commutative diagram in C with exact rows
0

f

// X
id



0

p′′

Y
//

// cokerf

// X



//

p′

cokerf ×coker(g◦f ) Z


// cokerf

0



0
//

a

id



0

id

h



//



// X

g◦f

//



p

Z

//



coker(g ◦ f )
//



0

where a is the canonical map and p, p′ , p′′ are the canonical projections, and where the
map h given by the universal property of the pullback. The Five Lemma then implies
that h is an isomorphism.
p′′
Now f is an E-monomorphism if and only if the projection Y −→ cokerf is an Eepimorphism. We use Theorem 5.5 to show that p′′ is an E-epimorphism, as follows:
suppose that P is an E-projective object of C, and let j : P → cokerf be a map in
C. Then, since g ◦ f is assumed to be E-monic, the map p is E-epic, so there exists a
map j ′ : P → Z such that p ◦ j ′ = a ◦ j. Then the universal property of the pullback
implies the existence of a map j ′′ : P → cokerf ×coker(g◦f ) Z such that p′ ◦ j ′′ = j. Hence
h−1 ◦ j ′′ : P → Y satisfies
p′′ ◦ h−1 ◦ j ′′ = p′ ◦ h ◦ h−1 ◦ j ′′ = j,
so the map j lifts over p′′ , as desired. So p′′ is E-epic, so f is E-monic.
Here is an easy lemma which we will use in the proof of Theorem 3.5, but which we
state and prove now, because it is a good illustration that some properties are satisfied for
allowable classes with sectile epics but are not satisfied for more general allowable classes.
5.8. Lemma. Let C be an abelian category and let E be an allowable class with sectile
epics. Suppose that C has enough E-projectives. Then the class of E-epimorphisms in C
is stable under pullback. That is, if f : X → Y is an E-epimorphism and g : Z → Y is an
arbitrary map in C, then the pullback map Z ×Y f : Z ×Y X → Z is an E-epimorphism.
Proof. Let P be an E-projective object of C, and let h : P → Z be a map. Since f is
E-epic, there exists a map h̃ : P → X such that f ◦ h̃ = g ◦ h. So the square
h

P

//

Z
g

h̃



X

f

//



Y

37
commutes, so there exists a map ℓ : P → Z ×Y X such that (Z ×Y f ) ◦ ℓ = h by the
universal property of the pullback.
Another easy lemma we use in the proof of Theorem 3.5: the dual of the conclusion to
Lemma 5.8 remains true (that is, E-monomorphisms are stable under pushout) without
dualizing the assumptions. That is,
5.9. Lemma. Let C be an abelian category and let E be an allowable class with sectile
epics. Suppose that C has enough E-projectives. Then the class of E-monomorphisms in
C is stable under pushout.
That is, if f : X → Y is`an E-monomorphism
and g : X → Z is an arbitrary map in
`
C, then the pushout map Z Y f : Z → Z X Y is an E-monomorphism.

Proof. We have the commutative diagram in C with exact rows
0

f

X
//

//

g



0

// cokerf

Z

Z

`

//
Y

Z
f

`

X

// 0

id

i



//

p′

Y
Y



p

// cokerf


// 0

where i is the canonical map to the pushout and p, p′ are the canonical projection maps.
Since f is an E-monomorphism,
p′ is an E-epimorphism; since E has sectile epics, p is an
`
E-epimorphism. Hence Z Y f is an E-monomorphism, as desired.

Finally, this elementary lemma about allowable classes is used in the proof of Theorem 3.5:

5.10. Lemma. Let C be an abelian category, and let E be an allowable class in C with
sectile epics. Suppose that C has enough E-projectives, and suppose that f : U → V and
g : V → W are E-monomorphisms. Then g ◦ f is an E-monomorphism.
Proof. This is a straightforward diagram chase, but we prefer to write out the details:
We have the exact sequence
g◦f

π

0 → U −→ W −→ coker(g ◦ f ) → 0
in C, where π is the canonical projection to the cokernel in C. The map g ◦ f is an
E-monomorphism if and only if π is an E-epimorphism.
By Theorem 5.5, the map π is an E-epimorphism if and only if, for every E-projective
t
object P of C and every function P −→ coker(g ◦ f ), the map t factors through π. So
suppose P is such an object and t such a morphism. We have the exact sequence in C
ι

σ

ker g → cokerf −→ coker(g ◦ f ) −→ cokerg → 0,
and ker g vanishes since g is assumed monic; so, mapping in P , we get the exact sequence
0 → homC (P, cokerf ) → homC (P, coker(g ◦ f )) → homC (P, cokerg).

(23)

38
Then from the commutativity of the diagram
P
t

W

π

//



coker(g ◦ f )

σ

//

cokerg
t′

and the fact that σ ◦π is an E-epimorphism and P is E-projective, we get a map P −→ W
such that σ ◦ π ◦ t′ = σ ◦ t. Consequently t − (π ◦ t′ ) is in the kernel of the compositionwith-σ map homC (P, coker(g ◦ f )) → homC (P, cokerg). Exactness of the sequence 23 then
k
implies that there exists a map P −→ cokerf such that ι ◦ k = t − (π ◦ t′ ). The fact
that π ′ : V → cokerf is an E-epimorphism and P is E-projective then implies that there
k′
exists a map P −→ V such that π ′ ◦ k ′ = k. Finally:
π ◦ (g ◦ k ′ ) =
=
=
t =
=

ι ◦ π′ ◦ k′
ι◦k
t − (π ◦ t′ ), i.e.,
(π ◦ t′ ) + (π ◦ g ◦ k ′ )
π ◦ (t′ + (g ◦ k ′ )).

So t factors through π, as desired.
So π is an E-epimorphism, so g ◦ f is an E-monomorphism, as desired.

References
[1] M. F. Atiyah and I. G. Macdonald. Introduction to commutative algebra. AddisonWesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass.-London-Don Mills, Ont., 1969.
[2] Francis Borceux. Handbook of categorical algebra. 2, volume 51 of Encyclopedia of
Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994.
Categories and structures.
[3] A. K. Bousfield and D. M. Kan. Homotopy limits, completions and localizations.
Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 304. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1972.
[4] Samuel Eilenberg and J. C. Moore. Foundations of relative homological algebra.
Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. No., 55:39, 1965.
[5] Peter J. Freyd. Abelian categories. Repr. Theory Appl. Categ., (3):1–190, 2003.
[6] J. P. C. Greenlees and J. P. May. Derived functors of I-adic completion and local
homology. J. Algebra, 149(2):438–453, 1992.

39
[7] Alexander Grothendieck. Sur quelques points d’algèbre homologique. Tôhoku Math.
J. (2), 9:119–221, 1957.
[8] G. Hochschild. Relative homological algebra. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 82:246–269,
1956.
[9] Mark Hovey and Neil P. Strickland. Morava K-theories and localisation. Mem. Amer.
Math. Soc., 139(666):viii+100, 1999.
[10] Saunders Mac Lane. Homology. Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
1995. Reprint of the 1975 edition.
[11] J. Milnor. On axiomatic homology theory. Pacific J. Math., 12:337–341, 1962.
[12] Daniel Quillen. Higher algebraic K-theory. I. In Algebraic K-theory, I: Higher Ktheories (Proc. Conf., Battelle Memorial Inst., Seattle, Wash., 1972), pages 85–147.
Lecture Notes in Math., Vol. 341. Springer, Berlin, 1973.
[13] Claus Michael Ringel and Hiroyuki Tachikawa. QF −3 rings. J. Reine Angew. Math.,
272:49–72, 1974.
[14] Jan-Erik Roos. Derived functors of inverse limits revisited. J. London Math. Soc.
(2), 73(1):65–83, 2006.
[15] Joseph J. Rotman. An introduction to homological algebra. Universitext. Springer,
New York, second edition, 2009.
[16] Andrew Salch. Homotopy colimits in stable representation theory. available on arXiv.
[17] Andrew Salch. Relative homological algebra, Waldhausen K-theory, and quasiFrobenius conditions. available on arXiv.
[18] Jan R. Strooker. Homological questions in local algebra, volume 145 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990.
[19] Charles A. Weibel. An introduction to homological algebra, volume 38 of Cambridge
Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994.
[20] Amnon Yekutieli. On flatness and completion for infinitely generated modules over
Noetherian rings. Comm. Algebra, 39(11):4221–4245, 2011.
Department of Mathematics, F/AB, Wayne State University
656 W. Kirby, Detroit, MI 48202
Email: asalch@math.wayne.edu

