Timeline for Pullback/pushforward of bivariant intersection classes
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Sep 16, 2015 at 17:10 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S Sep 16, 2015 at 17:10 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| S Sep 8, 2015 at 16:06 | history | bounty started | CommunityBot | ||
| S Sep 8, 2015 at 16:06 | history | notice added | user61522 | Authoritative reference needed | |
| Sep 6, 2015 at 6:22 | history | edited | peterx | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
explain
|
| Sep 6, 2015 at 6:16 | comment | added | peterx | I even see a sense in which we "prefer" the pullback definition given, and the format of the pushforward is kind of awkward - the extension of the diagram along the direction of $f$ necessitates that the initial bivariant group be for a composite $gf$, and makes the commuting with, e.g., the product on bivariant classes kind of strange-looking. But this is pretty vague. | |
| Sep 6, 2015 at 5:47 | history | asked | peterx | CC BY-SA 3.0 |