Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $f: X \rightarrow X'$ be a morphism of schemes, and let $\mathcal{I}^{\bullet}$ be a complex of $\mathcal{O}_X$-modules. There are two spectral sequences (well, more than that, but these are the two I care about) abutting to the hypercohomology $\mathbb{H}^n(X, \mathcal{I}^{\bullet})$. The first is the second spectral sequence of hypercohomology, which has $E_2$-term

$E_2^{p,q} = H^p(X, H^q(\mathcal{I}^{\bullet}))$

(where $H^q(\mathcal{I}^{\bullet})$ just means the $q^{th}$ cohomology object of the complex $\mathcal{I}^{\bullet}$)

and the second is the Leray spectral sequence associated with $f$, which has $E_2$-term

$E_2^{p,q} = H^p(X', R^q f_* \mathcal{I}^{\bullet})$

(Here, since the terms in the spectral sequence are $\Gamma(X', \mathcal{O}_{X'})$-modules, the abutment $\mathbb{H}^n(X, \mathcal{I}^{\bullet})$ must be viewed as a $\Gamma(X', \mathcal{O}_{X'})$-module by restricting scalars.)

Are there conditions on $X, X', f$, and/or $\mathcal{I}^{\bullet}$ under which we can say that these $E_2$-terms are the same, that is, that $H^p(X, H^q(\mathcal{I}^{\bullet})) \simeq H^p(X', R^q f_* \mathcal{I}^{\bullet})$ as $\Gamma(X', \mathcal{O}_{X'})$-modules.

In this (non-degenerate) case, it's not really a spectral sequence question at all, but a question of somehow comparing two iterated cohomology objects. In the case I care about, in which I suspect for other reasons that there will be such an isomorphism but the spectral sequences will almost surely not degenerate at $E_2$, there are lots of nice properties that can be assumed: $X$ and $X'$ are smooth and projective over a field, $f$ is smooth and projective (hence, in particular, proper and flat), and the complex $\mathcal{I}^{\bullet}$ is a complex of injective $\mathcal{O}_X$-modules (but not, however, an injective resolution of any single $\mathcal{O}_X$-module).

(Edited 7/2: as Karl Schwede points out, even if both degenerate at the $E_2$-term there's no reason to assume all the terms are the same.)

share|improve this question
1  
Shouldn't some significant hypothesis be put on the dynamics of $f$?: One s.s. does not depend on $f$ while the other does. –  Mariano Suárez-Alvarez Jul 2 '13 at 0:00
1  
Even if they both degenerate at the E2 page (meaning the maps of the spectral sequence are zero), I don't see why two spectral sequences have the same terms. –  Karl Schwede Jul 2 '13 at 1:58
    
@Mariano: indeed, appropriately restrictive hypotheses on $f$ making these $E_2$-terms isomorphic are exactly what I'm trying to find. –  Nick Switala Jul 2 '13 at 20:34
    
@Karl: thanks, I've edited the question. –  Nick Switala Jul 2 '13 at 20:35
1  
Ok, as Dan Peterson points out below, there probably isn't much hope unless one knows more. Is there any chance that the complex $I^{\bullet}$ is made up of sheaves of differentials, or pushed down from some other scheme made up of sheaves of differentials from some other scheme (ie, a dualizing complex, or something similar even from a simplicial scheme). That's one general case where there are lots of vanishing theorems like the kind you need. Alternately, if you know a lot more about the fibers of your morphism $f$ (are they all Fano?), there might be other things you can try. –  Karl Schwede Jul 3 '13 at 15:56

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

In the second spectral sequence you write $R^q f_\ast I^\bullet$. This is correct but $R^qf_\ast$ must be considered as the $q$th hyper-derived functor applied to the complex $I^\bullet$, it is not the ordinary derived functor $R^qf_\ast$ applied termwise. See my answer to Construction of the spectral sequence of Katz/Oda for more details.

Once you observe this, then you find that the hypercohomology spectral sequence is just the special case of the Leray spectral sequence when $f = \mathrm{id}$. Indeed the hyper-derived functor $R^q \mathrm{id}_\ast$ is just the functor $\mathcal H^q$.

Addendum: One situation where what you want is actually true (and which is more general than $f=\mathrm{id}$) is if all cohomology sheaves $\mathcal H^q(I^\bullet)$ are $f_\ast$-acyclic, i.e. if they vanish under $R^qf_\ast$ for $q> 0$. This implies that $$ R^qf_\ast I^\bullet \cong f_\ast \mathcal H^q I^\bullet$$ (where again on the left hand side I mean the hyper-derived functor), and also that $$ H^p(X,\mathcal H^q I^\bullet) \cong H^p(X',f_\ast\mathcal H^q I^\bullet).$$It's not hard to show that there is even an isomorphism between the two spectral sequences.

But this is a very restrictive condition. What you're asking for is not very natural -- in general there is not even a map between the two spectral sequences.

share|improve this answer
    
But if $f \neq id$, we'll have two a priori different $E_2$-terms, since we're looking at two different compositions of functors; will there be any conditions (on $f$, say) under which we can say these are isomorphic? –  Nick Switala Jul 2 '13 at 20:37

Your Answer

 
discard

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.