7
$\begingroup$

I am simply trying to show that $HH^\bullet(A)= HH^\bullet(M_r(A))$ for any matrix ring of $A$.

In Loday's book (Sect 1.5.6) the Morita invariance is explained as follows : it says that if $M$ is an $A$-bimodule, we have $$HH^\bullet(M_r(A),M_r(M))= HH^\bullet(A,M) $$

If I put $M=A^*$, we get $HH^\bullet(A)=HH^\bullet(A,A^*)$ (Hochschild cohomology of $A$)

As per the formula, we get the left hand side to be $HH^\bullet(M_r(A),M_r(A^*))$.

We would expect that the left side should give the Hochschild cohomology of $M_r(A)$. Hochschild cohomology of $M_r(A)$ is $HH^\bullet(M_r(A))=HH^\bullet(M_r(A),M_r(A)^*)$.

So it remains to show that $M_r(A^*)=M_r(A)^*$ as $M_r(A)$-bimodules.

While this seems isomorphic as $k$-vector spaces, the isomorphism does not look like it preserves $M_r(A)$-bimodule structure.

Are we getting something wrong? Is the Morita invariance of Hochschild cohomology to be proved in some other way?

$\endgroup$
1
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ A word on notation: Hochschild cohomology of $A$ usually means $HH^\bullet(A,A)$, while $HH^\bullet(A,A^*)\cong (HH_*(A,A))^*$ is the dual of Hochschild homology (at least if $A$ is finite over the ground field). $\endgroup$ Mar 16, 2020 at 13:09

2 Answers 2

5
$\begingroup$

It is even a derived invariant. Here is a proof in a special case, but Im not sure whether it works more general (with the same proof?) Let $A$ and $B$ two noetherian $K$-algebras for a commutative ring $K$ that are projective as $K$-modules. Then a standard derived equivalence $F=X \otimes_A^L: D^b(A) \rightarrow D^b(B)$ with quasi-inverse $G=Y \otimes_B^L $ induces a derived equivalence between the derived bimodule categories $H=(X \otimes_A^L - ) \otimes_A^L Y : D^b(A^e) \rightarrow D^b(B^e)$ where $A^e=A^{op} \otimes_K A$.

Now the Hochschild cohomology has terms $Ext_{A^e}^l(A,A)$ but $H$ sends $A$ to $B$ and thus preserves Hochschild cohomology. (it also preserves $A^{*}$ in case $A$ is finite dimensional, not sure about the general case)

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

You are right that the ``obvious'' isomorphism $M_r(A^*)\cong M_r(A)^*$ does not preserve the $M_r(A)$-bimodule structure. However, there is another isomorphism that does, essentially given by taking the transpose. It comes from the perfect pairing $$ \langle -,-\rangle :M_r(A^*)\times M_r(A)\to k, f_j^i\otimes a_l^k\mapsto \sum_{i,j} f_j^i(a_i^j) $$ More invariantly, it is given by $\langle F,X\rangle = \operatorname{Tr}(FX)$, where the product is essentially the usual product of matrices, but multiplication of scalars is replaced by evaluation of functions on elements of $A$. Using the cyclic property of the trace, it is straightforward, if tedious, to verify that $$ \langle F,XYZ\rangle = \langle ZFX,Y\rangle $$ (again, the matrix multiplication notation means that multiplications of scalars need to be replaced with the bimodule action of $A$ on $A^*$) which shows that the induced isomorphism $M_r(A^*)\cong M_r(A)^*$ respects the bimodule structure.

The abstract reason for Morita invariance of Hochschild (co-)homology is that these invariants can be defined for any dg-category $\mathcal C$ by the derived coend and end $$ HH_\bullet(\mathcal C) = \left(\int^{\mathcal C}\right)^{\mathbb L}\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal C}(-,-), HH^\bullet(\mathcal C) = \int_{\mathcal C}^{\mathbb R}\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal C}(-,-) $$ Taking for $\mathcal C$ the category with one object whose endomorphisms are $R$ recovers the cyclic bar complex computing Hochschild (co-)homology. However, we may as well use its idempotent completion, the category of projective $R$-modules, and get equivalent complexes. Since the categories of projective $A$- and $M_r(A)$-modules are equivalent, this gives Morita invariance of Hochschild (co-)homology. To get the more general statement involving a bimodule, pass to the square-zero extension $A\oplus M$ of $A$ defined by it, and note again that its category of projective modules is equivalent to that of projective $M_r(A)\oplus M_r(M)$-modules.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.