Let $A$ be a graded, connected, locally finite, quadratic algebra over a field $k$; that is, $A$ may be presented as $T(V)/I$, where $V = A_1$ is a finite dimensional $k$ vector space, and the ideal $I$ of relations is generated in $T(V)_2 = V \otimes V$. Let $A^!$ be the quadratic dual of $A$; $A^!$ is defined $T(V^*)/I^{\perp}$, where $I$ is the ideal generated by the complementary relations to those in $I$.

We may form the Koszul complex $K(A) = A \otimes (A^!)^*$, equipped with differential

$$d(x \otimes \phi)= \sum_i v_i x \otimes v_i^* \phi$$

where $v_1$, ..., $v_n$ form a basis for $V$.

When $A$ is Koszul, $K(A)$ is exact. If $A$ is not Koszul, is there any reasonable or natural description of the homology of $K(A)$?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ A reasonable general description would yield an alternative definition of koszulness, right? $\endgroup$ – Fernando Muro Nov 21 '15 at 4:46
  • $\begingroup$ Sure, fair enough. $\endgroup$ – Craig Westerland Nov 21 '15 at 5:27
  • $\begingroup$ A reference that might be useful for some purposes: arxiv.org/abs/1512.00183 $\endgroup$ – Vladimir Dotsenko Dec 16 '15 at 8:48

OK, I think I worked this out on my own; I'm leaving the answer here in case others need it.

Let me write $B_*(A)$ for the bar complex of $A$, and $B^*(A) = Hom(B_*(A), k)$ for the cobar complex. The latter is a differential (bi)graded algebra; its cohomology is $Ext_A^{*, *}(k, k)$. The quadratic dual $A^!$ is isomorphic to the diagonal part $\sum Ext_A^{n, n}(k, k)$.

In fact, there is a map $B^*(A) \to A^!$ of dgas (equipping $A^!$ with the trivial differential) which in cohomology induces the projection of the Ext algebra onto its diagonal part. This makes $A^!$ a module for $B^*(A)$. I claim that if we dualize the Koszul complex $K(A)$, we have

$$H^*(K(A)^*) \cong Tor_{B^*(A)}(k, A^!)$$

When $A$ is Koszul, the projection $B^*(A) \to A^!$ is a quasi-isomorphism (this is essentially one definition of Koszulity), so the right hand side is $k$, concentrated in degree $0$, recovering the fact that the Koszul complex is acyclic in this case.

We can see the claim as follows: Consider the bar resolution of $k$ over $A$; I may write this as the complex $(A \otimes B_*(A), d)$, where $d$ is the standard differential. Notice that we can split $d$ up as $d = d_1 + d_2$, where $d_2$ is the internal differential in $B_*(A)$, and $d_1$ mixes together the two tensor factors. We normally regard this as an $A$-resolution of $k$, free over $B_*(A)$. However, we can turn this on its head and regard it as a cofree resolution of $k$ as a $B_*(A)$-comodule.

Specifically, we map $k \to A \otimes B_*(A)$ by tensoring together the unit of $A$ with the unit of $B_*(A)$ (perhaps co-augmentation is a better term). Since the unit is primitive, this is a map of $B_*(A)$-comodules. We already know that this is an equivalence. Thus this is a cofree resolution of $k$ over the dg-coalgebra $B_*(A)$, coinduced over $A$.

Dualizing, we get a free resolution $(A^* \otimes B^*(A), d^*)$ of $k$ over $B^*(A)$. Then $Tor_{B^*(A)}(k, A^!)$ is the homology of the complex

$$[A^* \otimes B^*(A)] \otimes_{B^*(A)} A^! = A^* \otimes A^! = K(A)^*$$

The fact that the differential is the same as in the Koszul complex follows, for instance from Priddy's construction of the Koszul complex as a portion of the cobar resolution.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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