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

Let $X$ be a smooth curve over a field. Let $Y$ be the triple product $X \times X \times X$. Let $\gamma$ be a homologically trivial codimension $2$ cycle.

In the text [Zhang, p. 76] that I am currently reading it is concluded that $\pi_{i,*}(\gamma)$ is trivial (rationally). I do not see why this is true, and could not find a proof elsewhere.

In [Zhang] there is more context, but I think that I stated the relevant input for the claim.


[Zhang] Shou-Wu Zhang. “Gross–Schoen Cycles and Dualising Sheaves”. arXiv: .

(I should add a note that I am currently not in the situation to search through a library. So maybe this can be found in any book on algebraic cycles; if so, please give the reference.)

share|cite|improve this question
Actually, I do not fully understand whay is going on from "These imply that ..." (two lines below eq. 5.1.2 on p. 76 of [Zhang]). It seems pretty dense to me. But I think the above question is the most important key to understand the proof of [Zhang, Lemma 5.1.2]. – jmc Nov 5 '12 at 11:43
What is $\pi_i$? – Angelo Nov 5 '12 at 12:56
$\pi_{i}$ is the projection onto the $i$-th factor. I.e., one of the factors $X$. – jmc Nov 5 '12 at 21:07
up vote 4 down vote accepted

If $X$ and $Y$ are smooth complete varieties and $f\colon X \to Y$ is a morphism, there is a pushforward in cohomology, which is Poincaré dual to the pullback. This pushforward is compatible with the pushforward on cycles; that is, the cohomology class of the pushforward of a cycle is the pushforward of the cohomology class of the cycle. Hence, the pushforward of a homologically trivial cycle is homologically trivial.

[Edit:] the poster wants a proof that $\pi_{i*}\gamma$ is trivial as in the Chow ring. If $\pi_i$ is the projection onto the $i^{\rm th}$ factor, then $\pi_{i*}\gamma$ has codimension~0, and the part of the Chow ring in degree 0 is $\mathbb Z$, so any class of cycles of degree 0 that is homologically equivalent to 0 is in fact 0. The alternative is that $\pi_i$ is a projection onto a product of the other two factors, but then the statement would be false, that is, $\pi_{i*}\gamma$ could very well be not rationally equivalent to 0.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks for your answer. However, I interpreted Zhangs claim as if $\pi_{i,*}(\gamma)$ is rationally trivial. I should have been more clear about that in my question. I really need rational equivalence to $0$. – jmc Nov 5 '12 at 11:33
Thanks for the edit. Do you mean that the cycle map is injective on codimension $0$ cycles? That is a fact I did not know yet. – jmc Nov 5 '12 at 21:58
To Johan: Well, if $X$ is a smooth irreducible complete variety, the only cycles in codimension 0 are the multiples of the fundamental class of $X$. Since the top cohomology is also isomorphic to $\mathbb Z$, and is generated by the cohomology class of the fundamental class of $X$, you see that the cycle map is an isomorphism. – Angelo Nov 6 '12 at 4:48
I see, I actually should have been able to think that up myself. Thanks for helping me! – jmc Nov 6 '12 at 8:53

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.