In the article "Categorical resolution of irrational singularities" of Kuzentsov and Lunts is described how one can glue DG-categories. For this let $\mathcal{D}_1$ and $\mathcal{D}_2$ be two small DG-categories. Now consider a bimodule $\phi\in(\mathcal{D}^{op}_2\otimes \mathcal{D}_1)-dgm$. Then the gluing of these two categories along $\phi$ is denoted by $\mathcal{D}=\mathcal{D}_1\times_{\phi}\mathcal{D}_2$ is defined as follows: Objects are triples $M=(M_1,M_2,\mu)$ with $M_i\in\mathcal{D}_i$ and $\mu\in\phi(M_2,M_1)$. Morphism complex is defined via: $\mathrm{Hom}^k_{\mathcal{D}}(M,N)=\mathrm{Hom}^k_{\mathcal{D}_1}(M_1,N_1)\oplus\mathrm{Hom}^k_{\mathcal{D}_2}(M_2,N_2)\oplus \phi^{k-1}(N_2,M_1)$. Now suppose we consider $\phi^{op}\in(\mathcal{D}^{op}_2\otimes\mathcal{D}_1)^{op}-dgm=(\mathcal{D}^{op}_1\otimes\mathcal{D}_2)-dgm$. Now gluing $\mathcal{D}'=\mathcal{D}_2\times_{\phi^{op}}\mathcal{D}_1$. My question is now: Is it possible to get a DG-functor $F:\mathcal{D}\rightarrow \mathcal{D}'$ in the following way: send $M=(M_1,M_2,\mu)$ to $M'=(M_2,M_1,\mu^{op})$ and anagously for the Morphism complex??? The second question is: If we have a DG-functor $F:\mathcal{D}\rightarrow \mathcal{D}'$ this clearly induces a functor between the homotopy-category $F':H^0(\mathcal{D})\rightarrow H^0(\mathcal{D}')$. Does $\mathrm{Hom}_{H^0}(M,N)=0$ imply $\mathrm{Hom}(F'(M),F'(N))=0$?
-
$\begingroup$ How exactly are you defining $\varphi^\mathrm{op}$? $\endgroup$– AAKCommented Jan 1, 2014 at 12:11
-
$\begingroup$ I thought that since $\phi(A,B)$ i a complex of vector spaces there is something like the dual complex... $\endgroup$– AleksaCommented Jan 1, 2014 at 12:32
-
$\begingroup$ You need to be able to identify the dg-categories with their respective opposite categories. For example it would make sense for dg-categories of sheaves on a scheme, where you have duals ($E \mapsto \mathbf{R}\mathrm{Hom}(E, O_X)$). $\endgroup$– AAKCommented Jan 1, 2014 at 12:40
-
$\begingroup$ That was what I had in mind...dg-categories of sheaves. Does the above construction make sense in this cases? $\endgroup$– AleksaCommented Jan 1, 2014 at 12:43
1 Answer
As mentioned in the comments, we need to fix isomorphisms $\newcommand{\D}{\mathscr{D}}\D_1 \xrightarrow{\sim} \D_1^{op}$ and $\D_2 \xrightarrow{\sim} \D_2^{op}$ for the question to make sense. They key point is that in this case, there is a canonical isomorphism $\D_1^{op} \otimes \D_2 \xrightarrow{\sim} \D_2^{op} \otimes \D_1$, inducing equivalences between the categories of $\D_1$-$\D_2$-bimodules and $\D_2$-$\D_1$-bimodules.
Hence one can consider the gluings $\D = \D_1 \times_\varphi \D_2$ and $\D' = \D_2 \times_\psi \D_1$, where $\psi$ is the $\D_2$-$\D_1$-bimodule corresponding to $\varphi$.
Indeed one has a functor $\D \to \D'$ as you described, where $\mu^{op}$ means the element of $\psi^0(M_1, M_2)$ corresponding to $\mu \in \varphi^0(M_2, M_1)$ under the isomorphisms induced by duality. Further this functor $\D \to \D'$ is clearly an equivalence, swapping the first two components and acting by duality on the third.
-
$\begingroup$ In "Categorical Resolution of irrational singularities", Lemma 7.1, we have $(\mathcal D_1 \times_{\varphi} \mathcal D_2)^{\textrm{op}} \cong \mathcal D_2^{\textrm{op}} \times_{\varphi^{\textrm{op}}} \mathcal D_1^{\textrm{op}}$, which should be true in general. Actually, I'm still unable to write down an explicit equivalence: I've got problems with sign conventions. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 23, 2014 at 13:27