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

Hello,

I am trying to understand Orlov: Remarks on generators of triangulated categories.

Let E be a full subcategory of D^b(coh(P^1)). Let [E] be the smallest full subcategory of D^b(coh(P^1)) such that [E] is closed under direct summands, finite direct sums and shifts.

Now, let [E]x[E] be the full subcategory consisting of all objects C such that there is a dt

A->B->C with A,B in [E]. Identify an object F of D^b(coh(P^1)) with the subcategory consisting of that object alone. The claim is that if F contains two different line bundles as direct summands, [[F]x[F]] is equivalent to coh(P^1), in which case F is said to be a strong generator and the number of iterations gives the dimension of D^b(coh(P^1)), as dimension is defined to be the minimal numbers of iterations for E= object of D^b(coh(P^1)).

this is supposedly trivial but I fail to see it. Thank you very much.

Carsten

share|improve this question
    
Do you mean Orlov instead of Bondal? –  ulrich Oct 23 '11 at 14:49
    
yes, thanks. I corrected this. –  Carsten Oct 23 '11 at 16:07
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Let me give a name to notion. If $T$ is a triangulated category and $G$ is an object, the minimal number of cones required to generate any object of $T$ starting with $G$ (and allowing for arbitrary finite sums, shifts, and splitting of summands) is called the generation time of $G$. So we want to check that the generation time of $\mathcal O(i) \oplus \mathcal O(l)$ is $1$ if $i \not = l$.

For specificity, assume $i < l$. As $- \otimes \mathcal O(-l)$ is an autoequivalence and generation time is invariant under autoequivalences, we can reduce to the case of $\mathcal O(-a)$ and $\mathcal O$ with $a > 0$. As ulrich mentioned, any object of $D^b(\operatorname{coh } \mathbb{P}^1)$ is isomorphic to a sum of shifts of twists, $\mathcal O(l)$, and torsion sheaves. Let us deal with getting $\mathcal O(j)$ first. We break it into two cases: $1-a \leq j \leq -1$ and $j < -a$ or $j > 0$. If $1-a \leq j \leq -1$, then we have an exact sequence $$ 0 \to \mathcal O(-a) \overset{( -y^{a-j} \ x^j)}{\to} \mathcal O(j) \oplus \mathcal O(-j+a) \overset{(x^j \ y^{a-j})}{\to} \mathcal O \to 0 $$ showing that $\mathcal O(j)$ is a summand of the cone of a map $\mathcal O \to \mathcal O(-a)[1]$.

If $j < -a$ or $j > 0$, we use a resolution of the diagonal. On $\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$ we have an exact sequence $$ 0 \to \mathcal O(-a-1,-1)^{\oplus a-1} \to \mathcal O(-a,-1)^{\oplus a} \to \mathcal O \to \mathcal O_{\Delta} \to 0$$ Coming from the exact sequence $$ 0 \to \mathcal O(-1,-1) \to \mathcal O \to \mathcal O_{\Delta} \to 0$$ and the exact sequence $$ 0 \to \mathcal O(-a-1,-1)^{\oplus a-1} \to \mathcal O(-a,-1)^{\oplus a} \to \mathcal O(-1,-1) \to 0 $$ The last exact sequence is obtained from the exact sequence $$ 0 \to \mathcal O(-a-1)^{\oplus a-1} \to \mathcal O(-a)^{\oplus a} \overset{(x^{a-1} \ x^{a-2}y \ \cdots \ y^{a-1})}{\to} \mathcal O(-1) \to 0 $$ by pulling back along the first factor of $\mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1$ and tensoring with $\mathcal O(0,-1)$. Let us denote the projections, $\pi_1: \mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1 \to \mathbb{P}^1$ and $\pi_2: \mathbb{P}^1 \times \mathbb{P}^1 \to \mathbb{P}^1$. We can apply the functor $\mathbf{R}\pi_{1*}(\pi_2^*\mathcal O(j) \otimes -)$ to exact sequence $$ 0 \to \mathcal O(-a-1,-1)^{\oplus a-1} \to \mathcal O(-a,-1)^{\oplus a} \to \mathcal O \to \mathcal O_{\Delta} \to 0$$ giving a triangle $$ \mathcal E \to \mathcal O(j) \to H^*(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal O(j-1)) \otimes_k \mathcal O(-a-1)[2]$$ where $\mathcal E$ is a cone over a map of sums of shifts of $\mathcal O$ and $\mathcal O(-a)$. $$H^*(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal O(j-1)) \otimes_k \mathcal O(-a-1)[2] = $$ $$ H^0(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal O(j-1)) \otimes_k \mathcal O(-a-1)[2] \oplus H^1(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal O(j-1)) \otimes_k \mathcal O(-a-1)[1]$$ As there are no extensions of degree two or more, we only have to worry about a possible map to $H^1(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal O(j-1)) \otimes_k \mathcal O(-a-1)[1]$. There is no nonzero maps $$ \mathcal O(j) \to H^1(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal O(j-1)) \otimes_k \mathcal O(-a-1)[1]$$ if $j < -a$ or $j > 0$. Thus, in the derived category, $$ \mathcal E \cong \mathcal O(j) \oplus H^*(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal O(j-1)) \otimes_k \mathcal O(-a-1)[1] $$ So, in this case too, $\mathcal O(j)$ is a summand of a cone over a map between sums of shifts of $\mathcal O(-a)$ and $ \mathcal O$. This gives any $\mathcal F$.

Next, we deal with the case of a torsion sheaf, $\mathcal T$. We can use the same method as in the case of $\mathcal O(j)$ with $j < -a$ or $j > 0$ as the map $$\mathcal T \to H^*(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal T(-1)) \otimes_k \mathcal O(-a-1)[2] = H^0(\mathbb{P}^1,\mathcal T(-1)) \otimes_k \mathcal O(-a-1)[2]$$ is zero.

share|improve this answer
    
ok, thank you. I ll work through that. –  Carsten Oct 24 '11 at 6:55
add comment

I will give the proof of a special case; presumably one can modify the proof to work in general but I have not thought about it much. I also work over an algebraically closed field.

Firstly, since $\mathbb{P}^1$ is a smooth curve, $Ext^i(F,G) = 0$ for all $i>1$ and all coherent sheaves $F$ and $G$. It follows that any $\mathcal{F}$ in the derived category is isomorphic to $\oplus H^i(\mathcal{F})[-i]$ (where $H^i$ denotes the cohomology sheaves). Thus, it suffices to consider $\mathcal{F} = F$ where $F$ is a coherent sheaf (in degree 0).

Any sheaf $F$ on a smooth curve is isomorphic to $F_1 + F_2$, where $F_1$ is locally free and $F_2$ is torsion. Any locally free sheaf on $\mathbb{P}^1$ is a direct sum of line bundles so it suffices to consider the case $F = \mathcal{O}(n)$, for $n \in \mathbb{Z}$, and $F = \mathcal{O}/\mathcal{I}^n$, where $\mathcal{I}$ is the ideal sheaf of a point and $n>0$.

I will now consider the special case $E = \mathcal{O} \oplus \mathcal{O}(1)$.

For any integer $n>0$ we have an exact sequence $$ 0 \to K \to \mathcal{O}^{n+1} \to \mathcal{O}(n) \to 0 $$ where the second map is given by the global sections. A cohomology computation shows that $K \cong \mathcal{O}(-1)^n$. Tensoring this sequence with $\mathcal{O}(1)$ shows that $\mathcal{O}(n)$ is in the category for $n\geq 0$. Dualising the sequence gives us all $n<0$ as well.

Now consider $F = \mathcal{O}/\mathcal{I}^n$. We have an obvious surjection from $\mathcal{O}$ onto $F$. Consider the exact sequence $$ 0 \to K \to \mathcal{O}^n \to F \to 0 $$ where the second map is the sum of the obvious surjection. A cohomology computation shows that $K \cong \mathcal{O}(-1)^n$. Tensoring this sequence by $\mathcal{O}(1)$ shows that $F$ is in the category as well, completing the proof.

share|improve this answer
    
thanks! I'll think about your argument. –  Carsten Oct 23 '11 at 19:47
add comment

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.