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 locally noetherian regular scheme and $Y$ be a closed subscheme of codimension $d > 0$ in every point. Why does it "immédiatement" (Grothendieck, Groupe de Brauer III, §6, p. 133 f.) follow that the local cohomology sheaves with supports $\mathcal{H}^i_Y(X,\mathbf{G}_m)$ vanish for $0 \leq i \leq 2$ (if $d \neq 1$ for $i=1$)?

(For $i \neq 0$, it would be clear to me if there were no supports: The stalks are zero since the Picard group of a local ring and the Brauer group of a strictly henselian local ring vanish.)

share|cite|improve this question
These vanishing statements are equivalent to the following statements: put $j:Y\hookrightarrow X$ and $U:=X-Y$. Then (i) $\mathbf{G}_m\rightarrow j_{*}(\mathbf{G}_m|_U)$ is an isomorphism (this will give vanishing for $i=0,1$), and (ii) $\mathrm{R}^1j_{*}(\mathbf{G}_m|_U)=0$ (this will give vanishing for $i=2$). – Mahdi Majidi-Zolbanin Jan 31 '12 at 20:06
I don't get it: $\mathbf{G}_m|_U$ is a sheaf on $U = X \setminus Y$, but the domain of $j$ is $Y$, not $U$. – Timo Keller Feb 1 '12 at 14:13
Yes, you are right, $j$ is $U\hookrightarrow X$. – Mahdi Majidi-Zolbanin Feb 1 '12 at 15:25

Let us assume that $X=Spec A$ for $A$ a strictly henselian ring. Since $Y$ has codimension at least $2$ and $X$ is normal, the restriction $H^0(X,\mathbb{G}_m)\rightarrow H^0(X\setminus Y,\mathbb{G}_m)$ is an isomorphism (it is always an embedding, without any restriction on the codimension of $Y$). This implies the vanishing of $H^0$ and $H^1$ with support in $Y$. To see that $H^2$ vanishes (without condition on codimension), it is enough to know that $H^1(U,\mathbb{G}_m)=0$ (where $U=X\setminus Y$). If $Y$ has codimension $1$, this is clear, since $U$ is then affine (This is wrong. See Moret-Bailly's comment below). Otherwise, the restriction functor from the category of line bundles over $X$ to that over $U$ is an equivalence of categories; see SGA 2, XI.3.

share|cite|improve this answer
@Keerthi: are you establishing vanishing of groups $H_Y$ or sheaves $\mathcal{H}_Y$? – Mahdi Majidi-Zolbanin Jan 31 '12 at 20:15
I think the same argument should show that the stalks of the sheaves $\mathcal{H}_Y$ are $0$, though I haven't thought it through. – Keerthi Madapusi Pera Jan 31 '12 at 23:06
In the codimension 1 case, the reason is not that "$U$ is affine" (affine schemes may have nontrivial Picard groups) but that $U$ is a point. – Laurent Moret-Bailly Feb 1 '12 at 7:52
Thanks for the correction. – Keerthi Madapusi Pera Feb 1 '12 at 16:35

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.