Timeline for Modern versions of Verdier's hypercovering theorem?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 26, 2014 at 10:46 | comment | added | Zhen Lin | Thanks for your answer! It took a long time to check all the details, but now I understand what's going on. There is indeed a formula in terms of the simplicial hom spaces, as you said. | |
| Aug 26, 2014 at 9:51 | vote | accept | Zhen Lin | ||
| May 6, 2014 at 20:58 | history | edited | Charles Rezk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1758 characters in body
|
| May 6, 2014 at 17:53 | comment | added | Zhen Lin | There are seem to be statements to that effect in [Cisinski, Invariance de la $K$-Théorie par équivalences dérivées, §3], but my French is too feeble to see what's really going on. | |
| May 6, 2014 at 17:30 | comment | added | Charles Rezk | It's not said anywhere in the paper. But I think it is true, by the same ideas. I'll try to say more when i have time. | |
| May 6, 2014 at 16:38 | comment | added | Zhen Lin | ... hmmm, and now I'm confused: where is it suggested that $N H (X, Y)$ has the weak homotopy type of $\mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom} (X, Y)$? I have seen the same claim somewhere on the nLab before. I have no idea how such a proof would go, really. | |
| May 6, 2014 at 16:23 | comment | added | Zhen Lin | Yes, I think I saw this paper once but forgot about it. Thanks for reminding me! My definition of "hypercover" is more restrictive than "local trivial fibration", though: it has to be degreewise a coproduct of representable presheaves. | |
| May 6, 2014 at 15:01 | history | answered | Charles Rezk | CC BY-SA 3.0 |