The homology of digraphs as a generalisation of Hochschild homology

Abstract: J. Przytycki has established a connection between the Hochschild homology of an algebra $A$ and the chromatic graph homology of a polygon graph with coefficients in $A$. In general the chromatic graph homology is not defined in the case where the coefficient ring is a non-commutative algebra. In this paper we define a new homology theory for directed graphs which takes coefficients in an arbitrary $A-A$ bimodule, for $A$ possibly non-commutative, which on polygons agrees with Hochschild homology through a range of dimensions.

\section*{Introduction}
This paper addresses a question of J. Przytycki. When defining the
Hochschild homology of an algebra with coefficients in a bimodule, the differential displays a
certain cyclical feature which makes it sometimes convenient to write the
tensor factors of $n$-chain generators, not linearly, but instead as
the vertices of an $(n+1)$-sided polygon. Przytycki
has a beautiful interpretation of this appearance of $n$-gons in terms of the
chromatic homology of graphs developed by  of Helme-Guizon and Rong (\cite{HeGuRo}): a variant of this theory constructed using an algebra $A$ and an $A\!\!-\!\! A$-bimodule $M$ applied to the $n$-gon
is the Hochschild homology of $A$ with coefficients in $M$ through a range of dimensions
increasing with $n$. In general chromatic homology of a graph is only defined when the algebra is
commutative, but in the case of the $n$-gon or a line graph, the
non-commutative case also makes sense. In speculating about possible generalisations
of Hochschild homology in \cite{Pr} Przytycki writes that he believes
``graph homology is the proper generalization of Hochschild homology:
from a polygon to any graph''. The remaining problem being, however,
that one does not know in general how to define chromatic graph homology
involving non-commutative algebras. To paraphrase, Przytycki's question
is:
\begin{quotation}
{\em Given a (possibly non-commutative) algebra $A$ and an $A\!\!-\!\! A$ bimodule $M$, can one construct
a functor from some category of graphs to graded modules such that on $n$-gons this functor agrees with  Hochschild homology
through a range of dimensions ?}
\end{quotation}

In this paper we consider finite based directed graphs, that is
digraphs whose vertex set is finite and for which there is a
distinguished vertex, the {\em base vertex}. Given a triple $(\Gamma,
A, M)$ consisting of a based digraph $\Gamma$, an $R$-algebra $A$ and
an $A\!\!-\!\! A$ bimodule $M$ our main purpose is to define homology groups
$\cH_*(\Gamma, A, M)$ with nice functorial properties.
There are two key ideas necessary to embrace
non-commutative algebras: firstly one must give up on having ``cube''
(as seen in the construction of chromatic graph homology) and secondly one
needs directed edges in order to be able to multiply non-commuting
elements (the head and tail providing information on which element
comes first).  The base vertex is necessitated by the appearance of the
bimodule $M$. In order to obtain a functor it is essential that we use the approach initiated in \cite{EvTu} relating Khovanov-type homology to the homology of posets with coefficients in a presheaf.

The construction goes roughly as follows. We
replace a digraph $\Gamma$ by its poset of directed multipaths $P(\Gamma)$
and then define the homology groups $H_*(\Gamma, \cF)$ as the homology of the poset $P(\Gamma)$ with
coefficients in an arbitrary coefficient system (pre-sheaf) $\cF$. Armed with these generalities we
construct from a pair $(A,M)$ where $A$ is an algebra and $M$ an $A\!\!-\!\! A$ bimodule, a particular coefficient system
$\cF_{A,M}$. This coefficient system generalises the
construction of the chromatic homology of graphs. The homology groups we are after are then defined by
$$
\cH_*(\Gamma, A,M) = H_*(\Gamma, \cF_{A,M}).
$$

These homology groups satisfy some nice properties and give one
possible answer to Przytycki's question. Let $\text{{\bf DirGr}}_b$ denote the
category of finite based digraphs with base vertex preserving
inclusions of digraphs as morphisms and let $\text{{\bf GrMod}}$ denote the
category of $\bZ$-graded $R$-modules. We then have:

\vspace{5mm}

\noindent
{\bf Theorem \ref{thm:main}} {\em Let $A$ be an $R$-algebra  and $M$ an $A\!\!-\!\! A$ bimodule. Then
$$
\cH_*(- ,A,M) \colon \text{{\bf DirGr}}_b \ra \text{{\bf GrMod}}
$$
is a functor with the property that if  $\Gamma$ is a consistently directed $n$-gon then for $0\leq i \leq n-2$
$$
\cH_i(\Gamma, A, M ) \cong H\!H_i (A;M)
$$
where on the right hand side we have the Hochschild homology of the algebra $A$ with coefficients in the bimodule $M$.
}

\vspace{5mm}

An interesting special case arises when $M=A$. In this case unbased digraphs suffice and we write
$\cH_*(\Gamma, A) = \cH_*(\Gamma, A,A)$. This is functorial in both variables:

\vspace{5mm}

\noindent
{\bf Theorem \ref{thm:restricted}}{\em
$
\;\; \cH_*(- , -) \colon \text{{\bf DirGr}} \times \text{{\bf Alg}}  \ra \text{{\bf GrMod}}
$
is a  bifunctor.
}
 \vspace{5mm}

By the previous theorem this bifunctor has the property  if  $\Gamma$ is a consistently directed $n$-gon then  for $0\leq i \leq n-2$,
$$
\cH_i(\Gamma ,A ) \cong H\!H_i (A).
$$

\section{The homology of directed graphs}

In this section we will be dealing with the category $\text{{\bf DirGr}}$ whose
objects are finite directed graphs (unbased) and whose morphisms are
inclusions of directed graphs. Our interest will be to construct
homology of directed graphs for an arbitrary coefficient system.
Note that a
directed graph $\Gamma$ comes with {\em tail} and {\em head }
functions
$$ t,h\colon Edge(\Gamma) \ra Vert(\Gamma) $$
taking a
directed edge $e$ to its tail and its head respectively.

We will assume familiarity with the basics of posets. As usual we will
denote a partial ordering by $\leq$ with $x<y$ meaning $x\leq y$ and
$x\neq y$. We recall that an element $y$ is said to {\em cover}
another element $x$ if $x<y$ and there is no $z$ such that $x<z<y$. In
such a circumstance we write $x\prec y$.  The {\em Hasse diagram} of a
poset $P$ is the directed graph with one vertex for each element of
$P$ and an oriented arc from $x$ to $y$ if and only if $x\prec y$. The
{\em Boolean lattice} on a set is the poset of subsets partially
ordered by inclusion and its Hasse diagram is a hypercube. A poset may
be regarded as a category with one object for each element and a
unique morphism from $x$ to $y$ whenever $x\leq y$. Such morphisms
compose in the obvious way.

Let $\Gamma$ be a finite digraph and let $\bB (\Gamma)$ be the
Boolean lattice on its edge set $Edge(\Gamma)$.

\begin{definition}
A {\em simple path} in $\Gamma$ is a sequence of edges $e_1, \ldots
, e_n$ such that $h(e_i) = t(e_{i+1})$ and no vertex is encountered
twice. A {\em multipath} in $\Gamma$ is a collection of disjoint
simple paths.
\end{definition}

Let $P(\Gamma)$ be the subposet of $\bB(\Gamma)$ consisting of
multipaths in $\Gamma$. We will refer to it as the {\em path poset} of
$\Gamma$. By convention
there is one empty path $\emptyset$ and this is a (global) minimal
element for $P(\Gamma)$ which we will denote by 0. There may be several
(local) maxima. As mentioned in  the previous paragraph we may choose to  view $P(\Gamma)$ as a
category with a unique morphism between any two related elements.

\begin{example}
In Figure \ref{fig:poset} we see a digraph $\Gamma$ along with an illustration of its path poset.
\end{example}

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=-90, scale = 0.5]{pathposet.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{A digraph and its path poset}\label{fig:poset}
\end{figure}

The assignment of a digraph to its path poset gives a covariant
functor $$ P(-) \colon \text{{\bf DirGr}} \ra \text{{\bf Posets}} .  $$
Given an inclusion
$f\colon \Gamma^\prime \ra \Gamma$ we write $\tilde {f}\colon
P(\Gamma^\prime) \ra P(\Gamma)$ for $P(f)$. Note that this is an
injective map  of posets with the property that if $x\prec y$ in
$P(\Gamma^\prime)$ then $\tilde {f}(x)\prec \tilde {f}(y)$ in $P(\Gamma)$.

We note for later use the following lemma concerning such path posets.

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:diamond}$~$\\\vspace*{-5mm}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] For $x \in P(\Gamma)$, the interval $[0,x]=\{y\in P(\Gamma) \mid y\leq x\}$  is a Boolean lattice of rank $\gr x$.
\item[(ii)] If $x\prec y \prec z$ in $P(\Gamma)$ then there exists a unique $y^\prime\neq y$ such that $x\prec y^\prime \prec z$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
For (i) we simply note that given a multipath then each subset of its
edges is again a multipath. For (ii), the stated property is true for
Boolean lattices and so the result follows by considering the interval
$[0,z]$. \qed
\end{proof}

In general the homology of posets only becomes interesting (especially in the presence of a global minimum) if one allows local systems of coefficients.
Let $R$ be a commutative ring and let $\text{{\bf Mod}}$ be the category of $R$-modules.

\begin{definition}
A {\em coefficient system} for a digraph $\Gamma$ consists of a covariant functor $P(\Gamma) \ra \text{{\bf Mod}}$. These form the objects of a category $\text{Coeff} (\Gamma)$ whose morphisms are natural transformations of functors.
\end{definition}

One can take the homology of any small category with coefficients in a
functor and we now recall this construction restricted to our
particular setting i.e. where the category is a path category of a
digraph $\Gamma$ and the functor $\cF\colon P(\Gamma) \ra \text{{\bf Mod}}$ is a
coefficient system.  We will define a chain complex $\cS_*(\Gamma,
\cF)$ whose homology, by definition, is the homology of $\Gamma$
with coefficients in $\cF$.

We set
$$
\cS_k(\Gamma ; \cF) = \bigoplus_{x_0x_1\ldots x_k} \cF(x_0)
$$
where the sum is over all sequences $x_0 \leq x_1 \leq \cdots \leq x_k$ in $P(\Gamma)$ of length $k+1$. A typical element is therefore a sum of elements of the form $\lambda x_0x_1\ldots x_k$ where $\lambda\in \cF(x_0)$. To turn this into a complex we define $d\colon \cS_k(\Gamma ; \cF) \ra \cS_{k-1}(\Gamma ; \cF) $ by
$$
d(\lambda x_0x_1\ldots x_k) = \cF(x_0\leq x_1)(\lambda)x_1\ldots x_k
+ \sum_{i=1}^k (-1)^i\lambda x_0 \ldots \hat{x_i}\ldots x_k.
$$
It is a standard fact (easily checked) that $d^2=0$ and so
$(\cS_*( \Gamma ; \cF), d)$ is a chain complex. We are now free to take
homology and we define the {\em homology of the directed graph}
$\Gamma$ {\em with coefficients in } $\cF$ to be the graded $R$-module
$$
H_*(\Gamma ;\cF) = H(\cS_*(\Gamma ; \cF), d).
$$

Homology has nice functorial properties as we see in the next proposition.

\begin{proposition}\label{prop:nat}$~$\\\vspace*{-5mm}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] Let $\Gamma$ be a finite directed graph. Then
$$
H_*(\Gamma; -)\colon \text{Coeff} (\Gamma)\ra \text{{\bf Mod}}
$$
is a covariant functor.
\item [(ii)] Let $f\colon \Gamma^\prime \ra \Gamma$ be an inclusion and let $\cF\colon P(\Gamma) \ra \text{{\bf Mod}}$ be a coefficient system for $\Gamma$.
Then there is an induced homomorphism
$$ f_* \colon H_*(\Gamma^\prime ; \cF \circ \tilde {f}) \ra H_*(\Gamma ; \cF). $$
Such induced homomorphisms are well behaved under
composition of inclusions.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}

\begin{proof}
(i) Let $\cF$ and $\cG$ be coefficient systems and let $\tau$ be a
morphism from $\cF$ to $\cG$. That is, $\cF$ and $\cG$ are functors
$P(\Gamma) \ra \text{{\bf Mod}}$ and $\tau$ is a natural transformation $\cF \stackrel{\bullet}{\longrightarrow} \cG$ consisting
of a map $\tau_x\colon \cF(x) \ra \cG(x)$ for each $x\in P(\Gamma)$
satisfying the usual naturality requirements. We now define a
homomorphism
$$
\tau^\prime \colon \cS_k(\Gamma ; \cF) \ra \cS_k(\Gamma ; \cG)
$$
by setting
$$
\tau^\prime (\lambda x_0 \ldots x_k) = \tau_{x_0}(\lambda) x_0 \ldots x_k.
$$
The naturality of $\tau$ guarantees that this is a chain map and thus induces
$$
\tau_*\colon H_*(\Gamma ; \cF) \ra H_*(\Gamma ; \cG)
$$
as required.

Furthermore, given another natural transformation $\sigma\colon \cG \stackrel{\bullet}{\longrightarrow} \cK$ one has $(\sigma\tau)^\prime = \sigma^\prime \circ \tau^\prime$ from which it follows that $(\sigma\tau)_* = \sigma_* \circ \tau_*$.

(ii) Recalling that $\tilde{f}$ is the induced map on path posets, there is a homomorphism
$$
f^\prime\colon \cS_k(\Gamma^\prime ; \cF \circ \tilde {f}) \ra \cS_k(\Gamma ; \cF)
$$
defined by
$$
f^\prime(\lambda x_0 \ldots x_k) = \lambda \tilde {f} (x_0) \ldots \tilde {f}(x_k).
$$
This is a chain map since, by definition, $\cF \circ \tilde {f}(x\leq y) = \cF (\tilde {f}(x) \leq \tilde{f}(y))$. In homology this defines $f_*$.

Given $g\colon \Gamma^{\prime \prime}\ra \Gamma^\prime$ we have $\widetilde{fg}= \tilde{f} \circ \tilde{g}$ from which it follows immediately that $(fg)_*=f_*\circ g_*$.
\qed
\end{proof}

Similar calculations to those in the above proof show that the maps $f_*$ are natural with respect to morphisms of coefficient systems. Spelt out more clearly this means the following.
Let $f\colon \Gamma^\prime \ra \Gamma$ be an inclusion of finite
 digraphs and let $\cF_1, \cF_2 \colon P(\Gamma) \ra \text{{\bf Mod}}$ be
 coefficient systems. Given a natural transformation $\tau\colon \cF_1\stackrel{\bullet}{\longrightarrow} \cF_2$, define a natural transformation $\tilde{\tau}$ from
 $\cF_1\circ \tilde{f}$ to $\cF_2\circ \tilde{f}$ by $ \tilde{\tau}_x
 = \tau_{\tilde{f}(x)}$. Under such circumstances the following diagram commutes.

\[\xymatrix{
H_*(\Gamma^\prime ; \cF_1 \circ \tilde {f}) \ar[d]_{\tilde{\tau}_*}\ar[rr]^{f_{1*}} & & H_*(\Gamma ; \cF_1) \ar[d]^{\tau_*}\\
H_*(\Gamma^\prime ; \cF_2 \circ \tilde {f})  \ar[rr]^{f_{2*}}& & H_*(\Gamma ; \cF_2)
}\]

\section{The homology groups $\cH_*(\Gamma, A, M)$}

The category $\text{{\bf DirGr}}_b$ has as objects finite digraphs that are
equipped with a preferred {\em base vertex}. Morphisms are inclusions
that take base vertex to base vertex. There is a forgetful functor
$\text{{\bf DirGr}}_b \ra \text{{\bf DirGr}}$ and we can take homology by first applying this
functor and then proceeding as in the previous section.

Our task in this section is to construct a coefficient system $\cF_{A,M} \colon
P(\Gamma) \ra \text{{\bf Mod}}$, given a based digraph $\Gamma$, a (possibly non-commutative) unital $R$-algebra $A$ and
an $A\!\!-\!\! A$ bimodule $M$. Once achieved the main definition of the paper will be
$$
\cH_*(\Gamma, A,M) = H_*(\Gamma, \cF_{A,M}).
$$

We will take the tensor product of modules over
unordered sets so we recall here what this means. Let $S$ be a finite
set and suppose we have a family of $R$-modules indexed by $S$, that
is for each $\alpha\in S$ we have an $R$-module $M_\alpha$. The {\em unordered
tensor product} of this family, denoted
$$
\bigotimes_{\alpha\in S} M_\alpha
$$
is formed by considering all possible orderings of the set $S$,
taking the direct sum of the ordered tensor product for each and then
identifying these via the obvious canonical isomorphisms induced from
permutations.

We now proceed with the construction of $\cF_{A,M}\colon P(\Gamma) \ra \text{{\bf Mod}}
$. For $x\in P(\Gamma)$ let $\Gamma_x$ be the directed graph with the same
vertex set as $\Gamma$ and with edge set consisting of the edges in
the multipath $x$ (along with their directions). We will write
$\pi_0(\Gamma_x)$ for the set of connected components of $\Gamma_x$.
We note that if $x\prec y$ then $\Gamma_y$ contains all the edges of
$\Gamma_x$ with one addition. Since all paths are simple this
additional edge clearly joins two separate components of
$\Gamma_x$. There is evidently a canonical identification of the
components of $\Gamma_x$ and $\Gamma_y$ not involved in this fusion.

For $x\in P(\Gamma)$ consider the following family of $R$-modules $\{M_\alpha \}$
indexed by the set $\pi_0(\Gamma_x)$. If the component indexed by
$\alpha$ contains the base vertex then $M_\alpha=M$ otherwise
$M_\alpha=A$. Now we define $\cF_{A,M}(x)$ to be the unordered tensor product
$$
\cF_{A,M} (x) = \bigotimes_{\alpha \in \pi_0(\Gamma_x)} M_\alpha.
$$

To define the homomorphisms $\cF_{A,M}(x\leq y)$ we first consider
what happens in the case $x\prec y$. Here $\Gamma_y$ consists of
$\Gamma_x$ with an additional edge $e$ and as noted above two distinct
components in $\Gamma_x$ become one in $\Gamma_y$. The idea is to
define a homomorphisms using the canonical identification between
components away from those that fuse, and multiplication or the
actions of $A$ on $M$ for those that fuse. The key point is that the
order of multiplication is determined by the head and tail of $e$.

For temporary purposes let $I$ be an ordering of $\pi_0(\Gamma_x)$ and
$J$ be an ordering of $\pi_0(\Gamma_y)$. With respect to these
orderings suppose the two components of $\Gamma_x$ that fuse are
indexed by $i$ and $i^\prime$ and the new fused component in $\Gamma_y$ is
indexed by $j$. We now define a homomorphism (here we use the ordered
tensor product)

$$
\mu\colon M_{i} \otimes M_{i^\prime} \longrightarrow M_{j}
$$
by
$$
\mu(a\otimes b) = \begin{cases}
	ab & \text{ if $i$ indexes the component containing $t(e)$}\\
	ba & \text{ if $i$ indexes the component containing $h(e)$}
		\end{cases}
$$
Here the expression $ab$ has several
possible meanings: if the base vertex is not involved in the fusion of
components then it means the multiplication in the algebra $A$; if
$M_i=M$ (i.e. $i$ indexes the component containing the base vertex)
then $M_j=A$ and $M_k=M$ and $ab$ means the right action of $A$ on
$M$; if $M_j=M$ (i.e. $j$ indexes the component containing the base
vertex) then $M_i=A$ and $M_k=M$ and $ab$ means the left action of $A$
on $M$. One similarly interprets $ba$. By combining this map with the
canonical permutation identification on the remaining tensor factors
this gives a homomorphism of ordered tensor products $\bigotimes_I M_i
\ra \bigotimes_J M_j$.

\begin{lemma}
The above defines a homomorphism
$$
\cF_{A,M}(x\prec y) \colon \cF_{A,M}(x) \ra \cF_{A,M}(y).
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\sigma$ be a permutation taking an ordering $I$ to another $I^\prime$. In the above construction the maps $\mu$ depend on the tensor factors corresponding to $t(e)$ and $h(e)$ not on the factors position in any ordering. It follows that there is a commutative diagram
$$
\xymatrix{
\bigotimes_I M_i \ar[r]^\mu \ar[d]_{\sigma} & \bigotimes_J M_j\\
\bigotimes_{I^\prime} M_{i^\prime} \ar[ru]^\mu
}
$$
and so the maps $\mu$ are compatible with the symmetric group action.
\qed
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:seqlengthtwo}
If $x\prec y \prec z$ and $x\prec y^\prime \prec z$ then
$$
\cF_{A,M}( y \prec z) \circ  \cF_{A,M}( x \prec y) = \cF_{A,M}( y^\prime \prec z) \circ \cF_{A,M}( x \prec y^\prime).
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lem:diamond} (ii) we know that $y$ and $y^\prime$ are
the only two elements lying between $x$ and $z$ in this way. Suppose
$\Gamma_y=\Gamma_x \cup \{e\}$ and $\Gamma_{y^\prime}=\Gamma_x \cup \{e^\prime\}$. If $e$ and $e^\prime$ are not both contained in a single simple path of $\Gamma_z$ then the result is clear. If they are both contained in the same simple path of $\Gamma_z$ then without loss of generality we may suppose that $e$ comes before $e^\prime$. Now choose an ordering on the components of $\Gamma_x$ so that the simple path before $e$ is labelled 1, the simple path between $e$ and $e^\prime$ is labelled 2 and the simple path after $e^\prime$ is labelled 3 (see Figure \ref{fig:paths}).

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=-90, scale = 0.4]{paths.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Path ordering}\label{fig:paths}
\end{figure}

Now suppose we have ordering of the components of $\Gamma_y$
such that $1$ indexes the component of $\Gamma_y$ containing $e$ and 2
indexes the component at the head of $e^\prime$. Similarly, suppose we
have ordering of the components of $\Gamma_{y^\prime}$ such that $1$
indexes the component at the tail of $e$ and 2 indexes the component
containing $e^\prime$. In $\Gamma_z$ the simple path containing $e$
and $e^\prime$ is indexed by $1$. Then by the associativity of $\mu$
the following diagram commutes
$$
\xymatrix{
M_1\otimes M_2 \otimes M_3 \ar[r]^{\mu \otimes 1} \ar[d]^{1 \otimes \mu }&
M_1\otimes M_2  \ar[d]^{\mu } \\
M_1\otimes M_2  \ar[r]^{\mu } & M_1
}
$$
from which the result easily follows.
\qed
\end{proof}

We now extend this to define a map $\cF_{A,M}(x\leq y)\colon \cF_{A,M}(x) \ra \cF_{A,M}(y)$ for any $x\leq y$. Pick a sequence $x\prec x_1 \prec \cdots \prec x_l \prec y$ and set
$$
\cF_{A,M}(x\leq y) = \cF_{A,M}( x_l \prec y) \circ \cdots \circ \cF_{A,M}( x \prec x_1).
$$
Courtesy of Lemma \ref{lem:seqlengthtwo} we immediately see that this does not depend on the particular choice of sequence. We have thus shown that

\begin{proposition}
$\cF_{A,M}\colon P(\Gamma) \ra \text{{\bf Mod}} $ as defined above is a covariant functor,
i.e. $\cF_{A,M}$ is a coefficient system for $\Gamma$.
\end{proposition}

We finally arrive at the principal definition of this section.

\begin{definition}
Let $A$ be a unital $R$-algebra, $M$ an $A\!\!-\!\! A$ bimodule and $\Gamma$ a
finite based digraph. Using the coefficient system $\cF_{A,M}$ above we
define
 $$
\cH_*(\Gamma, A,M) = H_*(\Gamma, \cF_{A,M}).
$$
\end{definition}

The following theorem provides one possible answer to Przytycki's question.

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
Let $A$ be an $R$-algebra  and $M$ an $A\!\!-\!\! A$ bimodule. Then
$$
\cH_*(- ,A,M) \colon \text{{\bf DirGr}}_b \ra \text{{\bf GrMod}}
$$
is a functor with the property that if  $\Gamma$ is a consistently directed $n$-gon then for $0\leq i \leq n-2$
$$
\cH_i(\Gamma, A, M ) \cong H\!H_i (A;M)
$$
where on the right hand side we have the Hochschild homology of the algebra $A$ with coefficients in the bimodule $M$.
\end{theorem}

Before proving this Theorem let us recall Przytycki's result relating
the chromatic homology of graphs to Hochschild homology
\cite{Pr}. We will state the results using homological grading
conventions. Firstly recall that (homologically graded) chromatic
homology of a graph $G$ is defined as follows. Let $A$ be a {\em
commutative} $R$-algebra. Let $\bB$ be the Boolean lattice (the
``cube'' as it is usually referred to) on the edges of
$G$. An element of $\bB$ is a subgraph of $G$ with the same
vertex set as $V$ and will typically contain some isolated
vertices. To each such subgraph $x$ associate the module $\cF(x)$
being a tensor product of copies of $A$, one for each connected
component. To each edge $\zeta$ of the cube (covering relation in
the Boolean lattice) associate a map $d_\zeta$ being given by the algebra
multiplication if two connected components fuse, or the identity map otherwise.
 Letting $N$ be the number of edges in $G$, one defines, for $i=0,1, \ldots , N$
$$
\cC_i (\Gamma) = \bigoplus_{x\in P(\Gamma), \gr x = N-i} \cF (x).
$$
A differential  $d\colon \cC_i( \Gamma) \ra \cC_{i-1}( \Gamma)$ can be defined for $a\in \cF(x)$ by
$$
d(a) = \bigoplus_{\zeta} \epsilon(\zeta) d_\zeta (a),
$$
where $\epsilon(\zeta)=\pm 1$. This gives a complex, whose homology is the chromatic graph homology of $G$ using the algebra $A$. All this is well documented elsewhere (see \cite{HeGuRo,HeGuPrRo} for details).

Przytycki extends the above in the following way (see \cite{Pr} for details). Suppose $M$ is an
$A\!\!-\!\! A$-bimodule (where as above $A$ is commutative) and suppose $v_1$ is a chosen
 base vertex of $G$. Modify the above construction by replacing $A$ by $M$
whenever associating a module to a component containing
$v_1$. Moreover, in the definition of the differential, partial
derivatives between subgraphs having the same number of components are
set to zero. Denote the result $\hat{H}_*^{A,M}(G)$.

If we take $G=P_n$, an $n$-sided polygon, then taking coherent
directions on each edge (so that the whole polygon is oriented
clockwise or anti-clockwise) then Przytycki argues the above may be
extended to the case where $A$ is non-commutative. (From our point of
view, the existence of this global orientation, means that each
subgraph is again consistently directed and is thus a multipath in our
set up).

Przytycki's main result (with homological grading conventions) is:

\vspace{3mm}

\noindent
{\bf Theorem}(Przytycki)
$$
\hat{H}_i^{A,M}(P_n) \cong H\!H_{i-1} (A;M)\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; \text{for $1\leq i \leq n-1$}.
$$

Thus, modified chromatic homology of polygons agrees with Hochschild homology through a range of dimensions. We are now ready to prove Theorem \ref{thm:main} above.

\begin{proof} (of Theorem \ref{thm:main})
Let $f\colon \Gamma^\prime \ra \Gamma$ be a (basepoint preserving) inclusion. We wish to define a chain map
$$
f^\prime\colon \cS_*(\Gamma^\prime, \cF^\prime_{A,M})\ra \cS_*(\Gamma, \cF_{A,M})
$$
Here we are writing $\cF^\prime_{A,M}$ for the coefficient system constructed above for the graph $\Gamma^\prime$.

Firstly, we construct a morphism of coefficient systems $\tau\colon \cF^\prime_{A,M}\stackrel{\bullet}{\longrightarrow} \cF_{A,M}\circ \tilde{f}$. For $x\in
P(\Gamma)$ the graph $\Gamma_{\tilde{f}(x)}$ is isomorphic
to the graph $\Gamma^\prime_x \cup W $ where $W$  consists of the
vertices in $\Gamma$ which are not in (the image of) $\Gamma^\prime$. We can thus make the identification
$$
\cF_{A,M}(\tilde{f}(x)) \cong  \cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes \bigotimes_{W}A.
$$
Moreover, if $x\prec y$ in $\Gamma^\prime$  then these identifications make the following diagram commute.
\begin{equation*}
\xymatrix{\cF_{A,M}(\tilde{f}(x)) \;\;\;\;\;\; \cong  \ar[d]_{\cF_{A,M}\circ \tilde{f}(x\prec y)}& \cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes \bigotimes A \ar[d]^{\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x\prec y)} \\
\cF_{A,M}(\tilde{f}(y)) \;\;\;\;\;\; \cong  & \cF^\prime_{A,M}(y) \otimes \bigotimes A
}
\end{equation*}

We now define $\tau_x$ to be the composition
$$
\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \cong
\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes_{R} \bigotimes R \ra
\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes_{R} \bigotimes A \cong
\cF_{A,M}(\tilde{f}(x))
$$
where the map shown is just the identity on $\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) $ and the unit map of the algebra $R\ra A$ on the remaining tensor factors.

For $x\prec y$ in $\Gamma^\prime$, the diagram above shows that
$$
\xymatrix{\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x)  \ar[d]_{\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x\prec y)}  \ar[r]^(.4){\tau_x} & \cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes \bigotimes A \ar[d]^{\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x\prec y)\otimes Id} \\
\cF^\prime_{A,M}(y)  \ar[r]_(.4){\tau_y} & \cF^\prime_{A,M}(y) \otimes \bigotimes A
}
$$
Now suppose $x\leq y$ in $\Gamma^\prime$.
We may choose a sequence $x\prec x_1 \prec \cdots \prec x_m \prec y$ and noting that $\tilde{f}(x)\prec \tilde{f}(x_1) \prec \cdots \prec \tilde{f}(x_m) \prec \tilde{f}(y)$ we see $\tau$ is natural by repeated use of the  above diagram. Thus it is thus a morphism of coefficient systems as desired.

From Proposition \ref{prop:nat} (i) we now get a homomorphism
$$
\tau_* \colon H_*(\Gamma^\prime , \cF^\prime_{A,M}) \ra H_*(\Gamma^\prime , \cF_{A,M}\circ \tilde{f}).
$$

Invoking part (ii) of  Proposition \ref{prop:nat} we also have a homomorphism
$$
f_* \colon H_*(\Gamma^\prime , \cF_{A,M}\circ \tilde{f}) \ra H_*(\Gamma , \cF_{A,M}).
$$

The composition $f_*\circ \tau_*$ gives a homomorphism
$$
f_\bullet \colon \cH_*(\Gamma^\prime, A, M) \ra \cH_*(\Gamma, A, M)
$$
which is the map in homology induced by $f$.

It remains to show that if $g\colon \Gamma^{\prime\prime} \ra
\Gamma^\prime$ is an inclusion then $(fg)_\bullet = f_\bullet \circ
g_\bullet$. This amounts to showing that the top and bottom routes around the
following diagram are the same (where we have omitted the subscripts $A,M$ and are
being a little liberal in our multiple uses of the letter $\tau$).

{\small
$$
\xymatrix{
 & H_*(\Gamma^{\prime\prime}, \cF^{\prime}\circ \tilde{g}) \ar[r]^{g_*} \ar[rdd]_{\tilde{\tau}_*} &
H_*(\Gamma^{\prime}, \cF^{\prime}) \ar[r]^{\tau_*} &
H_*(\Gamma^{\prime}, \cF\circ \tilde{f}) \ar[rd]^{f_*}& \\
H_*(\Gamma^{\prime\prime}, \cF^{\prime\prime}) \ar[ru]^{\tau_*} \ar[rrd]_{\tau_*}&
&&&
H_*(\Gamma, \cF)\\
&& H_*(\Gamma^{\prime\prime}, \cF\circ \widetilde{fg}) \ar[uur]_{g_*} \ar[urr]_{(fg)_*} &&
}
$$
}

The left-hand triangle commutes directly from the definition of the maps $\tau$, and the right-hand triangle commutes from the statement in Proposition \ref{prop:nat} (ii) that the induced maps behave well under composition. The middle square commutes by the comments immediately after the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:nat}.

In order to make the connection with Hochschild homology we combine
Przytycki's result with the work of Everitt and the first author
\cite{EvTu}. It is clear that if $\Gamma= P_n$ with consistent
directions, then $P(\Gamma)$ is the Boolean lattice on the edges of $P_n$  minus its
maximum element.

Moreover the functor $\cF_{A,M}$ constructed on $P(\Gamma)$ agrees with the
(implicit) functor used in the construction of $\hat{H}_{i+1}^{A,M}$ in this case. Since the
graph is a polygon, the only partial derivative in Przytycki's set-up
that are set to zero are those from corank $1$ elements to the maximal
element and this corresponds to the absence of the maximum element of
the Boolean lattice in $P(\Gamma)$.

It now follows from the main result of \cite{EvTu} that the
homology of the path category of category $P_n$ with coefficients in $\cF_{A,M}$ is
isomorphic to $ \hat{H}_{i+1}^{A,M}(P_n)$ with a grading shift:
$$
\cH_i(P_n, A,M) \cong H_i(P_n , \cF_{A,m}) \cong \hat{H}_{i+1}^{A,M}(P_n).
$$
Combining this with Przytycki's result gives the desired isomorphism.
\qed
\end{proof}

When $M=A$ the base vertex become irrelevant and we may define for an
(unbased) digraph $\Gamma$ the homology groups $\cH_*(\Gamma, A) =
\cH_*(\Gamma, A,A)$, where on the right-hand side any base vertex for
$\Gamma$ will do. Letting $\text{{\bf Alg}}$ denote the category of $R$-algebras we have:

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:restricted}
$
\cH_*(- , -) \colon \text{{\bf DirGr}} \times \text{{\bf Alg}}  \ra \text{{\bf GrMod}}
$
is a  bifunctor.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Functoriality in the first variable follows from the previous theorem.
For the second variable, let $f\colon A \ra B$ be an algebra homomorphism. For $x\in P(\Gamma)$ we have
$$\cF_{A,A}(x) = \bigotimes A  \;\;\;\; \text{   and    } \;\;\;\; \cF_{B,B}(x) = \bigotimes B
$$ where the tensor product is over the same indexing set in both
 cases. We can therefore define a homomorphism $\sigma_x\colon
 \cF_{A,A}(x) \ra \cF_{B,B}(x)$ by $\sigma_x=\bigotimes f$. Since $f$
 is a homomorphism of algebras, the $\sigma_x$ define a natural
 transformation $\sigma \colon \cF_{A,A}
 \stackrel{\bullet}{\longrightarrow} \cF_{B,B}$. By Proposition
 \ref{prop:nat} (i) this induces a map $H_*(\Gamma, \cF_{A,A} ) \ra
 H_*(\Gamma, \cF_{B,B} )$ as required. Composition of algebra
 homomorphisms is easily seen to give a well defined composition of
 these induced maps.  \qed
\end{proof}

If one fixes the directed graph $\Gamma$ the above gives a functor
$$
\cH^{\Gamma}_*(-)\colon \text{{\bf Alg}}  \ra \text{{\bf GrMod}} .
$$
One is tempted to call $\cH^{\Gamma}_*(A)$ the {\em homology of the
algebra $A$ with coefficients in the digraph $\Gamma$}. Such homology
theories of algebras are probably worthy of study in their own
right. We limit ourselves here to the observation that if $\gamma$ is
an oriented cycle of length $n$ in $\Gamma$ then there is an inclusion
of digraphs $\gamma \ra \Gamma$ which by functoriality and Theorem \ref{thm:main} gives a map
$$
\gamma_*\colon H\!H_{i}(A) \ra \cH^{\Gamma}_*(A)
$$
for $i=0,1,\ldots , n-2$.

\section*{References}

\begin{biblist}

\bib{EvTu}{article}{
   author={Everitt, Brent},
   author={Turner, Paul},
   title={Homology of coloured posets: a generalization of Khovanov's cube construction},
journal={J. Alg.},
   volume={322},
   date={2009},
   pages={429--448}
}

\bib{HeGuPrRo}{article}{
   author={Helme-Guizon, Laure},
author={Przytycki, Jozef},
   author={Rong, Yongwu},
   title={Torsion in graph homology},
   journal={Fund. Math.},
   volume={190},
   date={2006},
   pages={139--177}
}

\bib{HeGuRo}{article}{
   author={Helme-Guizon, Laure},
   author={Rong, Yongwu},
   title={A categorification for the chromatic polynomial},
   journal={Algebr. Geom. Topol.},
   volume={5},
   date={2005},
   pages={1365--1388}
}

\bib{Pr}{article}{
author={Przytycki, Jozef},
   title={When the theories meet: Khovanov homology as Hochschild homology of links},
   journal={Quantum Topology},
   date={to appear},
eprint={arXiv:0509334 [math.GT]}
}

\end{biblist}

\end{document}

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:seqlengthtwo}
If $x\prec y \prec z$ and $x\prec y^\prime \prec z$ then
$$
\cF_{A,M}( y \prec z) \circ  \cF_{A,M}( x \prec y) = \cF_{A,M}( y^\prime \prec z) \circ \cF_{A,M}( x \prec y^\prime).
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lem:diamond} (ii) we know that $y$ and $y^\prime$ are
the only two elements lying between $x$ and $z$ in this way. Suppose
$\Gamma_y=\Gamma_x \cup \{e\}$ and $\Gamma_{y^\prime}=\Gamma_x \cup \{e^\prime\}$. If $e$ and $e^\prime$ are not both contained in a single simple path of $\Gamma_z$ then the result is clear. If they are both contained in the same simple path of $\Gamma_z$ then without loss of generality we may suppose that $e$ comes before $e^\prime$. Now choose an ordering on the components of $\Gamma_x$ so that the simple path before $e$ is labelled 1, the simple path between $e$ and $e^\prime$ is labelled 2 and the simple path after $e^\prime$ is labelled 3 (see Figure \ref{fig:paths}).

\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=-90, scale = 0.4]{paths.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Path ordering}\label{fig:paths}
\end{figure}

Now suppose we have ordering of the components of $\Gamma_y$
such that $1$ indexes the component of $\Gamma_y$ containing $e$ and 2 indexes the component at the head of $e^\prime$. Similarly, suppose we have ordering of the components of $\Gamma_{y^\prime}$ such that  $1$ indexes the component at the tail of  $e$ and 2 indexes the component containing  $e^\prime$. In $\Gamma_z$ the simple path containing $e$ and $e^\prime$ is indexed by $1$. Then by the definition of $\mu$ the following diagram commutes
$$
\xymatrix{
M_1\otimes M_2 \otimes M_3 \ar[r]^{\mu \otimes 1} \ar[d]^{1 \otimes \mu }&
M_1\otimes M_2  \ar[d]^{\mu } \\
M_1\otimes M_2  \ar[r]^{\mu } & M_1
}
$$
from which the result easily follows.
\qed
\end{proof}

We now extend this to define a map $\cF_{A,M}(x\leq y)\colon \cF_{A,M}(x) \ra \cF_{A,M}(y)$ for any $x\leq y$. Pick a sequence $x\prec x_1 \prec \cdots \prec x_l \prec y$ and set
$$
\cF_{A,M}(x\leq y) = \cF_{A,M}( x_l \prec y) \circ \cdots \circ \cF_{A,M}( x \prec x_1).
$$
Courtesy of Lemma \ref{lem:seqlengthtwo} we immediately see that this does not depend on the particular choice of sequence. We have thus shown that

\begin{proposition}
$\cF_{A,M}\colon P(\Gamma) \ra \text{{\bf Mod}} $ as defined above is a covariant functor,
i.e. $\cF_{A,M}$ is a coefficient system for $\Gamma$.
\end{proposition}

We finally arrive at the principal definition of this section.

\begin{definition}
Let $A$ be a unital $R$-algebra, $M$ an $A\!\!-\!\! A$ bimodule and $\Gamma$ a
finite based digraph. Using the coefficient system $\cF_{A,M}$ above we
define
 $$
\cH_*(\Gamma, A,M) = H_*(\Gamma, \cF_{A,M}).
$$
\end{definition}

The following theorem provides one possible answer to Przytycki's question.

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
Let $A$ be an $R$-algebra  and $M$ an $A\!\!-\!\! A$ bimodule. Then
$$
\cH_*(- ,A,M) \colon \text{{\bf DirGr}}_b \ra \text{{\bf GrMod}}
$$
is a functor with the property that if  $\Gamma$ is a consistently directed $n$-gon then for $0\leq i \leq n-2$
$$
\cH_i(\Gamma, A, M ) \cong H\!H_i (A;M)
$$
where on the right hand side we have the Hochschild homology of the algebra $A$ with coefficients in the bimodule $M$.
\end{theorem}

Before proving this Theorem let us recall Przytycki's result relating
the chromatic homology of graphs to Hochschild homology
\cite{Pr}. We will state the results using homological grading
conventions. Firstly recall that (homologically graded) chromatic
homology of a graph $G$ is defined as follows. Let $A$ be a {\em
commutative} $R$-algebra. Let $\bB$ be the Boolean lattice (the
``cube'' as it is usually referred to) on the edges of
$G$. An element of $\bB$ is a subgraph of $G$ with the same
vertex set as $V$ and will typically contain some isolated
vertices. To each such subgraph $x$ associate the module $\cF(x)$
being a tensor product of copies of $A$, one for each connected
component. To each edge $\zeta$ of the cube (covering relation in
the Boolean lattice) associate a map $d_\zeta$ being given by the algebra
multiplication if two connected components fuse, or the identity map otherwise.
 Letting $N$ be the number of edges in $G$, one defines, for $i=0,1, \ldots , N$
$$
\cC_i (\Gamma) = \bigoplus_{x\in P(\Gamma), \gr x = N-i} \cF (x).
$$
A differential  $d\colon \cC_i( \Gamma) \ra \cC_{i-1}( \Gamma)$ can be defined for $a\in \cF(x)$ by
$$
d(a) = \bigoplus_{\zeta} \epsilon(\zeta) d_\zeta (a),
$$
where $\epsilon(\zeta)=\pm 1$. This gives a complex, whose homology is the chromatic graph homology of $G$ using the algebra $A$. All this is well documented elsewhere (see \cite{HeGuRo,HeGuPrRo} for details).

Przytycki extends the above in the following way (see \cite{Pr} for details). Suppose $M$ is an
$A\!\!-\!\! A$-bimodule (where as above $A$ is commutative) and suppose $v_1$ is a choosen
 base vertex of $G$. Modify the above construction by replacing $A$ by $M$
whenever associating a module to a component containing
$v_1$. Moreover, in the definition of the differential, partial
derivatives between subgraphs having the same number of components are
set to zero. Denote the result $\hat{H}_*^{A,M}(G)$.

If we take $G=P_n$, an $n$-sided polygon, then taking coherent
directions on each edge (so that the whole polygon is oriented
clockwise or anti-clockwise) then Przytycki argues the above may be
extended to the case where $A$ is non-commutative. (From our point of
view, the existence of this global orientation, means that each
subgraph is again consistently directed and is thus a multipath in our
set up).

Przytycki's main result (with homological grading conventions) is:

\vspace{3mm}

\noindent
{\bf Theorem}(Przytycki)
$$
\hat{H}_i^{A,M}(P_n) \cong H\!H_{i-1} (A;M)\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; \text{for $1\leq i \leq n-1$}.
$$

Thus, modified chromatic homology of polygons agrees with Hochschild homology through a range of dimensions. We are now ready to prove Theorem \ref{thm:main} above.

\begin{proof} (of Theorem \ref{thm:main})
Let $\Gamma^\prime \ra \Gamma$ be a (basepoint preserving) inclusion. We wish to define a chain map
$$
f^\prime\colon \cS_*(\Gamma^\prime, \cF^\prime_{A,M})\ra \cS_*(\Gamma, \cF_{A,M})
$$
Here we are writing $\cF^\prime_{A,M}$ for the coefficient system constructed above for the graph $\Gamma^\prime$.

Firstly, we construct a morphism of coefficient systems $\tau\colon \cF^\prime_{A,M}\stackrel{\bullet}{\longrightarrow} \cF_{A,M}\circ \tilde{f}$. For $x\in
P(\Gamma)$ the graph $\Gamma_{\tilde{f}(x)}$ is isomorphic
to the graph $\Gamma^\prime_x \cup W $ where $W$  consists of the
vertices in $\Gamma$ which are not in (the image of) $\Gamma^\prime$. We can thus make the identification
$$
\cF_{A,M}(\tilde{f}(x)) \cong  \cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes \bigotimes_{W}A.
$$
Moreover, if $x\prec y$ in $\Gamma^\prime$  then these identifications make the following diagram commute.
\begin{equation*}
\xymatrix{\cF_{A,M}(\tilde{f}(x)) \;\;\;\;\;\; \cong  \ar[d]_{\cF_{A,M}\circ \tilde{f}(x\prec y)}& \cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes \bigotimes A \ar[d]^{\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x\prec y)} \\
\cF_{A,M}(\tilde{f}(y)) \;\;\;\;\;\; \cong  & \cF^\prime_{A,M}(y) \otimes \bigotimes A
}
\end{equation*}

We now define $\tau_x$ to be the composition
$$
\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \cong
\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes_{R} \bigotimes R \ra
\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes_{R} \bigotimes A \cong
\cF_{A,M}(\tilde{f}(x))
$$
where the map shown is just the identity on $\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) $ and the unit map of the algebra $R\ra A$ on the remaining tensor factors.

For $x\prec y$ in $\Gamma^\prime$, the diagram above shows that
$$
\xymatrix{\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x)  \ar[d]_{\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x\prec y)}  \ar[r]^{\tau_x} & \cF^\prime_{A,M}(x) \otimes \bigotimes A \ar[d]^{\cF^\prime_{A,M}(x\prec y)\otimes Id} \\
\cF^\prime_{A,M}(y)  \ar[r]_{\tau_y} & \cF^\prime_{A,M}(y) \otimes \bigotimes A
}
$$
Now suppose $x\leq y$ in $\Gamma^\prime$.
We may choose a sequence $x\prec x_1 \prec \cdots \prec x_m \prec y$ and noting that $\tilde{f}(x)\prec \tilde{f}(x_1) \prec \cdots \prec \tilde{f}(x_m) \prec \tilde{f}(y)$ we see $\tau$ is natural by repeated use of the  above diagram. Thus it is thus a morphism of coefficient systems as desired.

From Proposition \ref{prop:nat} (i) we now get a homomorphism
$$
\tau_* \colon H_*(\Gamma^\prime , \cF^\prime_{A,M}) \ra H_*(\Gamma^\prime , \cF_{A,M}\circ \tilde{f}).
$$

Invoking part (ii) of  Proposition \ref{prop:nat} we also have a homomorphism
$$
f_* \colon H_*(\Gamma^\prime , \cF_{A,M}\circ \tilde{f}) \ra H_*(\Gamma , \cF_{A,M}).
$$

The composition $f_*\circ \tau_*$ gives a homomorphism
$$
f_\bullet \colon \cH_*(\Gamma^\prime, A, M) \ra \cH_*(\Gamma, A, M)
$$
which is the map in homology induced by $f$.

It remains to show that if $g\colon \Gamma^{\prime\prime} \ra
\Gamma^\prime$ is an inclusion then $(fg)_\bullet = f_\bullet \circ
g_\bullet$. This amounts to showing that the top and bottom routes around the
following diagram are the same (where we have omitted the subscripts $A,M$ and are
being a little liberal in our multiple uses of the letter $\tau$).

{\small
$$
\xymatrix{
 & H_*(\Gamma^{\prime\prime}, \cF^{\prime}\circ \tilde{g}) \ar[r]^{g_*} \ar[rdd]_{\tilde{\tau}_*} &
H_*(\Gamma^{\prime}, \cF^{\prime}) \ar[r]^{\tau_*} &
H_*(\Gamma^{\prime}, \cF\circ \tilde{f}) \ar[rd]^{f_*}& \\
H_*(\Gamma^{\prime\prime}, \cF^{\prime\prime}) \ar[ru]^{\tau_*} \ar[rrd]_{\tau_*}&
&&&
H_*(\Gamma, \cF)\\
&& H_*(\Gamma^{\prime\prime}, \cF\circ \tilde{fg}) \ar[uur]_{g_*} \ar[urr]_{(fg)_*} &&
}
$$
}

The left-hand triangle commutes directly from the definition of the maps $\tau$, and the right-hand triangle commutes from the statement in Proposition \ref{prop:nat} (ii) that the induced maps behave well under composition. The middle square commutes by the comments immediately after the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:nat}.

In order to make the connection with Hochschild homology we combine
Przytycki's result with the work of Everitt and the first author
\cite{EvTu}. It is clear that if $\Gamma= P_n$ with consistent
directions, then $P(\Gamma)$ is the Boolean lattice on the edges of $P_n$  minus its
maximum element.

Moreover the functor $\cF_{A,M}$ constructed on $P(\Gamma)$ agrees with the
(implicit) functor used in the construction of $\hat{H}_{i+1}^{A,M}$ in this case. Since the
graph is a polygon, the only paritial derivative in Przytycki's set-up
that are set to zero are those from corank $1$ elements to the maximal
element and this corresponds to the absence of the maximum element of
the Boolean lattice in $P(\Gamma)$.

It now follows from the main result of \cite{EvTu} that the
homology of the path category of category $P_n$ with coefficients in $\cF_{A,M}$ is
isomorphic to $ \hat{H}_{i+1}^{A,M}(P_n)$ with a grading shift:
$$
\cH_i(P_n, A,M) \cong H_i(P_n , \cF_{A,m}) \cong \hat{H}_{i+1}^{A,M}(P_n).
$$
Combining this with Przytycki's result gives the desired isomorphism.
\qed
\end{proof}

When $M=A$ the base vertex become irrelevant and we may define for an
(unbased) digraph $\Gamma$ the homlogy groups $\cH_*(\Gamma, A) =
\cH_*(\Gamma, A,A)$, where on the right-hand side any base vertex for
$\Gamma$ will do. Letting $\text{{\bf Alg}}$ denote the category of $R$-algebras we have:

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:restricted}
$
\cH_*(- , -) \colon \text{{\bf DirGr}} \times \text{{\bf Alg}}  \ra \text{{\bf GrMod}}
$
is a  bifunctor.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Functoriality in the first variable follows from the previous theorem.
For the second variable, let $f\colon A \ra B$ be an algebra homomorphism. For $x\in P(\Gamma)$ we have
$$\cF_{A,A}(x) = \bigotimes A  \;\;\;\; \text{   and    } \;\;\;\; \cF_{B,B}(x) = \bigotimes B
$$ where the tensor product is over the same indexing set in both
 cases. We can therefore define a homomorphism $\sigma_x\colon
 \cF_{A,A}(x) \ra \cF_{B,B}(x)$ by $\sigma_x=\bigotimes f$. Since $f$
 is a homomorphism of algebras, the $\sigma_x$ define a natural
 transformation $\sigma \colon \cF_{A,A}
 \stackrel{\bullet}{\longrightarrow} \cF_{B,B}$. By Proposition
 \ref{prop:nat} (i) this induces a map $H_*(\Gamma, \cF_{A,A} ) \ra
 H_*(\Gamma, \cF_{B,B} )$ as required. Composition of algebra
 homomorphisms is easily seen to give a well defined composition of
 these induced maps.  \qed
\end{proof}

If one fixes the directed graph $\Gamma$ the above gives a functor
$$
\cH^{\Gamma}_*(-)\colon \text{{\bf Alg}}  \ra \text{{\bf GrMod}} .
$$
One is tempted to call $\cH^{\Gamma}_*(A)$ the {\em homology of the
algebra $A$ with coefficients in the digraph $\Gamma$}. Such homology
theories of algebras are probably worthy of study in their own
right. We limit ourselves here to the observation that if $\gamma$ is
an oriented cycle of length $n$ in $\Gamma$ then there is an inclusion
of digraphs $\gamma \ra \Gamma$ which by functoriality and Theorem \ref{thm:main} gives a map
$$
\gamma_*\colon H\!H_{i}(A) \ra \cH^{\Gamma}_*(A)
$$
for $i=0,1,\ldots , n-2$.

\section*{References}

\begin{biblist}

\bib{EvTu}{article}{
   author={Everitt, Brent},
   author={Turner, Paul},
   title={Homology of coloured posets: a generalization of Khovanov's cube construction},
journal={J. Alg.},
   volume={322},
   date={2009},
   pages={429--448}
}

\bib{HeGuPrRo}{article}{
   author={Helme-Guizon, Laure},
author={Przytycki, Jozef},
   author={Rong, Yongwu},
   title={Torsion in graph homology},
   journal={Fund. Math.},
   volume={190},
   date={2006},
   pages={139--177}
}

\bib{HeGuRo}{article}{
   author={Helme-Guizon, Laure},
   author={Rong, Yongwu},
   title={A categorification for the chromatic polynomial},
   journal={Algebr. Geom. Topol.},
   volume={5},
   date={2005},
   pages={1365--1388}
}

\bib{Pr}{article}{
author={Przytycki, Jozef},
   title={When the theories meet: Khovanov homology as Hochschild homology of links},
   journal={Quantum Topology},
   date={to appear},
eprint={arXiv:0509334 [math.GT]}
}

\end{biblist}

\end{document}

\section{A smaller complex}
The reader familiar with chromatic graph homolgy may ask why one
cannot use a Khovanov ``cube'' type construction above. The simple
answer is that once we consider directed graphs we no longer have
Boolean lattices as the underlying objects. A closer examination of
path posets however reveals that they do posess the essential features
of Boolean lattices allowing a Khovanov-type definition which we
explain in this section. Such a construction fails however to be
functorial, which should be viewed as a major drawback.

We begin with several remarks about  path posets. Let $\Gamma$ be a digraph and recall that $\bB(\Gamma)$ denotes the Boolean lattice on the edges of $\Gamma$. There is a grading on $P(\Gamma)$ induced from that on
$\bB(\Gamma)$. That is, there is a function $\gr - \colon P(\Gamma) \ra \bN$
defined on a multipath $x$ by
$$
\gr x = \text{ number of edges in }x.
$$
Since $P(\Gamma)$ is finite there occurs a maximum possible grading which
we will refer to as the {\em rank} of $P(\Gamma)$ and write $rk(P(\Gamma))$.

Path posets have some very nice properties which we now state. Let
$\cov P(\Gamma)$ be the set $\{ (x,y) \in P(\Gamma) \times P(\Gamma) \mid x \prec y \}
$.

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:diamond}$~$\\\vspace*{-5mm}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] For $x \in P(\Gamma)$, the interval $[0,x]=\{y\in P(\Gamma) \mid y\leq x\}$  is a Boolean lattice of rank $\gr x$.
\item[(ii)] If $x\prec y \prec z$ in $P(\Gamma)$ then there exists a unique $y^\prime\neq y$ such that $x\prec y^\prime \prec z$.
\item[(iii)] There exits a {\em signage function} $\epsilon \colon \cov {P(\Gamma)}  \ra \{ \pm 1\}$ with the property that for $x \prec y \prec z$ we have
$$
\epsilon(x\prec y)\epsilon(y\prec z)=-\epsilon(x\prec y^\prime)\epsilon(y^\prime \prec z)
$$
where $y^\prime$ is as above.
\end{enumerate}
 \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For (i) we simply note that given a multipath then each subset of its
edges is again a multipath. For (ii), the stated property is true for
Boolean lattices and so the result follows by considering the interval
$[0,z]$. For (iii), we observe that $P(\Gamma)$ is a subposet of the Boolean
lattice $\bB (\Gamma)$ for which the existence of such a signage
function is well known. Moreover, $x\prec y$ in $P$ implies that
$x\prec y$ in $\bB(E)$ so the signage passes to
$P(\Gamma)$. \qed
\end{proof}

We now define a chain complex more in the spirit of
the construction given by Khovanov for his link homology theory and
that of Heleme-Guizon-Rong for their graph homology. Whereas in
those two cases the underlying poset was a Boolean lattice, here we
are dealing with the path poset of a directed graph which in general
will not be a Boolean lattice. However, the properties of Lemma
\ref{lem:diamond} guarantee that the construction is still
possible. Here we again remind the reader we use homological grading
conventions, possible at odds with the more familiar cohomological ones.

Let $N= rk(P(\Gamma))$. For $i=0,1, \ldots , N$ we now set
$$
\cC_i (\Gamma ; \cF) = \bigoplus_{x\in P(\Gamma), \gr x = N-i} \cF (x).
$$
To turn this into a complex we let  $d\colon \cC_i( \Gamma ; \cF) \ra \cC_{i-1}( \Gamma ;\cF)$ be defined for $a\in \cF(x)$ by
$$
d(a) = \bigoplus_{x\prec y} \epsilon(x\prec y) \cF(x\prec y)(a).
$$

By Lemma \ref{lem:diamond} (ii), any length two path completes uniquely to a square, and furthermore by combining Lemma \ref{lem:diamond} (iii) and the fact that $\cF$ is a functor we see that each such square anti-commutes on applying $\cF$. This immediately gives the following result.
\begin{proposition}
$(\cC_*( \Gamma ; \cF), d)$ is a complex.
\end{proposition}

Taking homology and we define
$$
\bH_*(\Gamma ;\cF) = H(\cC_*(\Gamma ; \cF), d).
$$

In the above we may have a number of choices of signage function, but any choice will give isomorphic homology groups.

\begin{lemma}
Up to isomorphism the above homology groups do not depend on the particular choice of signage function $\epsilon$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
FILL IN - not altogether trivial ....
\qed
\end{proof}

We remark that the complex $\cC_*$ is much smaller that the complex $\cS_*$. We conjecture however that they yield the same in homology.

\begin{conjecture}
$$
\bH_*(\Gamma ;\cF) \cong H_*(\Gamma ;\cF)
$$
\end{conjecture}

\end{document}

Geometric Topology (math.GT); Combinatorics (math.CO); K-Theory and Homology (math.KT)


The number of bar{3}bar{1}542-avoiding permutations

Abstract: We confirm a conjecture of Lara Pudwell and show that permutations of [n] that avoid the barred pattern bar{3}bar{1}542 are counted by OEIS sequence A047970. In fact, we show bijectively that the number of bar{3}bar{1}542 avoiders of length n with j+k left-to-right maxima, of which j initiate a descent in the permutation and k do not, is {n}-choose-{k} j! StirlingPartition{n-j-k}{j}, where StirlingPartition{n}{j} is the Stirling partition number.

\section{Introduction} \vspace*{-3mm}
A permutation $\pi$ avoids the barred pattern $\overline{3}\overline{1}542$
if each instance of a not-necessarily-consecutive 542 pattern in $\pi$
is part of a 31542 pattern in $\pi$.
Lara Pudwell \cite{schemes} introduces an automated method to produce ``prefix enumeration
schemes'' for permutations avoiding a set of one or more barred patterns. Such a scheme, if found,
translates to a recurrence to count the corresponding avoiders. For single patterns of length
5 with 2 bars, she notes a success rate of $136/172\ (79.1\%)$. The title pattern is
among the failures but Pudwell observes \cite{comment1} that the counting sequence
for this pattern appears to be \seqnum{A047970} in The On-Line Encyclopedia of
Integer Sequences \cite{oeis}. Here we confirm this conjecture. The definition of
A047970 is $a(n)=\sum_{i=0}^{n} \big((i + 1)^{n - i} - i^{n - i}\big)$,
which is equivalent to $a(n)=\sum_{j,k\ge 0}\binom{n}{k}\,j!\,
\StirlingPartition{n-j-k}{j}$, where
$\StirlingPartition{n}{j}$ is the Stirling partition number. (This
equivalence is not entirely obvious and a proof is outlined in the
Appendix.) Our result is the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm1}
  The  number of $\overline{3}\overline{1}542$
avoiders of length $n$ with $j+k$ left-to-right maxima, of which $j$
initiate a descent in the permutation and $k$ do not, is
$\binom{n}{k}\,j!\,\StirlingPartition{n-j-k}{j}$.
\end{theorem}
Section 2 explains the $\binom{n}{k}$ factor, and reduces the problem to the case $k=0$. Section 3 looks at the structure of the avoiders with $k=0$ and presents a bijection to complete the proof.
To standardize a permutation means to replace its smallest entry by 1, next smallest by 2, and so on.
\vspace*{-5mm}
\section{Reduction} \vspace*{-3mm}
We begin with a reduction of the problem. Deleting the left-to-right maxima\xspace that do not
initiate a descent and
standardizing the remaining permutation does not affect the avoider status
because a left-to-right maximum\xspace can serve only as the 5 of a 542 pattern or as the 3
in the 31 of a 31542 pattern, and each
deleted left-to-right maximum\xspace is immediately followed (in the original permutation) by another left-to-right maximum\xspace or ends the path and so ``it won't be missed''.
Furthermore, the original permutation can be recovered from knowledge
of the deleted entries and the standardized permutation. These observations
account for the $\binom{n}{k}$ factor (choose $k$ entries from $[n]$
to serve as the left-to-right maxima\xspace that do not initiate a descent), and it
means that Theorem \ref{thm1} will follow from
\begin{theorem}\label{thm2}
    The number of $\overline{3}\overline{1}542$-avoiding permutations
    with $j$ left-to-right maxima\xspace, all of which initiate a descent, is $j!\,\StirlingPartition{n-j}{j}$.
\end{theorem}
\vspace*{-5mm}
\section{Proof of Theorem 2} \vspace*{-3mm}
To characterize $\overline{3}\overline{1}542$-avoiders in
which  each left-to-right maximum\xspace initiates a descent, it is
convenient to represent a permutation $\pi$ as the usual matrix diagram, as in Figure 1,
with  a bullet in the $(a,b)$ position (measuring from lower left) if and only
if $\pi(a)=b$.

\begin{figure}
\vspace{-.6in}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=0, scale = 1]{diagram1.pdf}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The  left-to-right maxima\xspace determine the upper left staircase boundary
and the yellow lines through the left-to-right maxima\xspace delineate a collection of
$1+2+\ldots+j$ cells (the white rectangles), where $j$ is the number of left-to-right maxima\xspace.
Some cells may be empty (contain no bullets) or even vacuous (contain no area).
The cells in turn split into horizontal strips and also into vertical strips:
the $i$-th horizontal (resp.\ vertical) strip contains  $j+1-i$ (resp.\:$i$)
cells. The condition that  each left-to-right maximum\xspace initiates a descent means
that no vertical strip consists entirely of empty cells.
\begin{prop}
  Suppose each left-to-right maximum\xspace in a permutation $\pi$ initiates a descent. Then
  $\pi$ is $\overline{3}\overline{1}542$-avoiding if and only if the
  bullets in each horizontal strip are rising
  from left to right.
\end{prop}

\vspace*{-2mm}
Proof.
Two falling bullets correspond to an inversion
$ba$ in the permutation.
If they lie in the same horizontal strip, let $c$ denote the left-to-right maximum\xspace associated with
this strip. Then $cba$ is a 542 with no available 3 let alone 31.

On the
other hand, neither the 4 nor 2 of a 542 pattern can be a left-to-right maximum\xspace and, if
the rising bullet condition holds, the 4 and 2 lie in \emph{different}
horizontal strips. The left-to-right maximum\xspace $m$ associated with the horizontal
strip containing the 2 serves as the 3. The vertical strip associated
with $m$ is nonempty (since all vertical strips are nonempty) and any
bullet in it serves as the 1.  \qed

Let $\ensuremath{\mathcal T}\xspace_{j}=[1]\times [2]\times \ldots \times [j]$ (which may conveniently be referred to as
the set of inversion codes for permutations of $[j]$),
and let $\ensuremath{\mathcal P}\xspace_{n,j}$ denote the set of partitions of $[n]$
into $j$ blocks in a canonical form: the smallest entry of each block
is last, the remaining entries increase left to right, and the blocks
are arranged in order of increasing smallest entry. For example, $1\,/\,
5\,7\,2\,/\,4\,8\,9\,3\,/\,6 \in \ensuremath{\mathcal P}\xspace_{9,4}$. Clearly, $\vert\,\ensuremath{\mathcal T}\xspace_{j}\,\vert =
j!$ and  $\vert\,\ensuremath{\mathcal P}\xspace_{n,j}\,\vert = \StirlingPartition{n}{j}$.

The \emph{successors} in
$\pi$ are the entries immediately following the left-to-right maxima\xspace, that is, the
terminators of the descents which the left-to-right maxima\xspace initiate.
Here is a bijection from the set $\ensuremath{\mathcal A}\xspace_{n,j}$ of
$\overline{3}\overline{1}542$-avoiding permutations of $[n]$ with $j$
left-to-right maxima\xspace, all of which initiate descents, to $\ensuremath{\mathcal T}\xspace_{j}\times \ensuremath{\mathcal P}\xspace_{n-j,\,j}$.

Given $\pi \in \ensuremath{\mathcal A}\xspace_{n,j}$, draw its diagram. Record the horizontal strips
(numbered bottom to top) of
the successors in $\pi$. In the example of Figure 1, the successors are $(1,2,4,9)$ and
their horizontal strips are $(1,1,2,3)$. This is the desired
inversion code.

\begin{figure}
\vspace{-.6in}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[angle=0, scale = 1]{diagram2.pdf}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Erase the bullets of the successors (Figure 2a), ``prettify''
the diagram (Figure 2b), record the
position of each bullet, bottom to top, among all the
bullets and place a divider to the  right of each right-to-left minimum.
This is the desired partition in
$\ensuremath{\mathcal P}\xspace_{n-j,\,j}$ and it is already in canonical form.
The example yields
$1\,/\,5\,7\,2\,/\,4\,8\,9\,3\,/\,6$.

The map is reversible because the diagram of Figure 2b can be recovered from the partition, the inversion code determines the cell
of each missing bullet and, within the cell, the bullet's horizontal position
is the extreme left (since it lies immediately after a left-to-right maximum\xspace) and its vertical
position is determined by the rising bullet condition.
\vspace*{-5mm}

\section{Appendix} \vspace*{-3mm}
\begin{prop}
\begin{equation}
  \sum_{i=0}^{n} \big((i + 1)^{n - i} - i^{n - i}\big)=
 \sum_{j,k\ge 0}\binom{n}{k}\,j!\,\StirlingPartition{n-j-k}{j}.
    \label{identity}
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
Proof. Let $A_{n}= \sum_{i=0}^{n}  i^{n - i}$. Then
$\sum_{i=0}^{n}  (i+1)^{n - i}=A_{n+1}$, and the left hand side of
(\ref{identity}) is $A_{n+1}-A_{n}$.
The binomial theorem says
$A_{n+1}=\sum_{i=0}^{n}\sum_{\ell=0}^{n-i}\binom{n-i}{\ell}i^{\ell}$,
leading to
\[
A_{n+1}-A_{n}=\sum_{\ell=0}^{n}\sum_{i=0}^{n-\ell}\left(\binom{n-i}{\ell}-
\binom{n-i-1}{\ell}\right)i^{\ell} =
\sum_{\ell=0}^{n}\sum_{i=0}^{n-\ell}\binom{n-i-1}{\ell-1}i^{\ell}.
\]

On the other hand, the right side of (\ref{identity}) is
\begin{eqnarray*}
    \sum_{j,k\ge 0}\binom{n}{k}\,j!\,
\StirlingPartition{n-j-k}{j} & \overset{\textrm{(i)}}{=} &
\sum_{k=0}^{n}\sum_{j=0}^{n-k}\sum_{i=0}^{j}\binom{n}{k}(-1)^{j-i}\binom{j}{i}i^{n-j-k}  \\
     & \overset{\textrm{(ii)}}{=} &
     \sum_{\ell=0}^{n}\sum_{i=0}^{\ell}i^{n-\ell}\sum_{k=0}^{\ell-i}
     \binom{n}{k}(-1)^{\ell-i-k}\binom{\ell-k}{i}  \\
     & \overset{\textrm{(iii)}}{=} &   \sum_{\ell=0}^{n}\sum_{i=0}^{\ell}i^{n-\ell}
     \binom{n-i-1}{n-\ell-1} \\
     & \overset{\textrm{(iv)}}{=} &
     \sum_{\ell=0}^{n}\sum_{i=0}^{n-\ell}i^{\ell}\binom{n-i-1}{\ell-1},
\end{eqnarray*}
agreeing with the left side.

\noindent Notes on equalities:
\vspace*{-1mm}
\begin{enumerate}

\item Expand Stirling partition number.
\vspace*{-2mm}
\item Change summation index from $j$ to $\ell$  with $\ell=j+k$.
\vspace*{-2mm}
\item  Evaluate inner sum; this is the essential content of identity
(5.25) in \cite{gkp}. The identity (5.25) in \cite{gkp} ostensibly
has 4 parameters, but a change of summation index from $ k$ to
$j=k-n$ in (5.25) leaves only 3 independent parameters, as here.
\vspace*{-2mm}
\item Reverse order of outer summation.

\end{enumerate}