MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Regarding Gregory Berhuy's book "An Introduction to Galois Cohomology and its Applications":

The book defined a cohomology sets for non-abelian $G$-groups. Let $A$ be a $G$-group, we define a 1-cocycle as follows: it is a map $$ \alpha : G \to A \quad , \quad \sigma \mapsto \alpha_\sigma$$ such that for all $\alpha \in A $: $\alpha_1 = 1$ (1 is the unit element of each group) and it satisfies the following relation for all $\sigma , \tau \in G$: $$ \alpha_{\sigma \tau} = \alpha_\sigma \sigma \cdot \alpha_\tau \ . $$

In page 52, Berhuy's uses that fact to deduce that for an exact sequence of groups $$ 1 \to A \stackrel{f}{\to} B \stackrel{g}{\to} C \to 1 $$ where $f(A)$ is a central subgroup of $b$, that $$ g( \beta_\sigma (\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau) \beta_{\sigma \tau}^{-1}) = \gamma_\sigma \sigma \cdot \gamma_\tau \gamma_{\sigma \tau}^{-1} = 1 $$ however, in page 53, he writes $$ f(\alpha_{\sigma, \tau}) = \beta_\sigma (\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau) \beta_{\sigma \tau}^{-1} $$ (notice the brackets on $\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau$) but he doesn't say it is equal to 1, why? If we use the 1-cocycle definition (the equation with the $\alpha$'s) then $$\beta_\sigma (\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau) = \beta_{\sigma \tau} $$

Where is the difference and why?

share|cite|improve this question
It seems to me like he's using the fact that $g(\beta_\sigma(\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau)\beta_{\sigma\tau}^{-1}) =1$ to say that \beta_\sigma(\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau)\beta_{\sigma\tau}^{-1} is in the image of $f$, which is of course true by the assumption that we have a short exact sequence of $G$-groups. – stankewicz Jun 24 '12 at 11:36
I'm not sure. He first states that $$g( \beta_\sigma (\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau ) \beta_{\sigma \tau}^{-1}) = \gamma_\sigma \sigma \cdot \gamma_\tau \gamma_{\sigma \tau}^{-1} = 1 $$ and then deduces from that, that $$ \beta_\sigma (\sigma \cdot \beta_\tau ) \beta_{\sigma \tau}^{-1} = f( \alpha_{\sigma , \tau})$$ (I'm quoting: " = 1, so $\beta ... = f( \alpha_{\sigma , \tau})$ for some unique $\alpha_{\sigma , \tau} \in A$). However, what about the general case? Why it is not =1 regardless the $f,g$ homomorphisms? – Zachi Evenor Jun 24 '12 at 12:05
@stankewicz See my last comment, it may help. – Zachi Evenor Jun 24 '12 at 17:15
In this book on page 52, $\beta_\sigma$ is SOME preimage of $\gamma_\sigma$. Although $\gamma$ is a cocycle, $\beta$ in general is NOT a cocycle, and this is the point! It is a cochain, whose coboundary lives in $f(A)$ (because $\gamma$ is a cocycle), which gives us a 2-cocycle in $A$. The cohomology class of this cocycle is, by definition, $\delta^1(\gamma)$. – Mikhail Borovoi Jun 24 '12 at 20:23
Thanks. Now that this understood, I got the rest (I recall the since the sequence is exact $g \circ f = 1$ the trivial map. – Zachi Evenor Jun 25 '12 at 10:00

Without answering your question in particular, you might like to look at the paper

R. Brown, ``Fibrations of groupoids'', J. Algebra 15 (1970) 103-132.

which uses semidirect products to turn derivations (or crossed morphisms, as the term is used there) into sections and also uses exact sequences of a fibration of groupoids to deal with exact sequences: see Theorem 5.7 of that paper.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.