Let $k$ be a field and $\mathcal{C}$ be a dg-category over $k$. It is standard to define the homotopy category $H^0(\mathcal{C})$ as the category consisting the same objects as $\mathcal{C}$ but morphisms between two objects $x$ and $y$ are defined as $$ H^0(\mathcal{C})(x,y):=Z^0(\mathcal{C})(x,y)/B^0(\mathcal{C})(x,y). $$

We could also consider the category $Z^0(\mathcal{C})$ and the class $W$ of homotopic invertible morphisms in $Z^0(\mathcal{C})$. More precisely, $$ W=\{f\in Z^0(\mathcal{C})(x,y) \text{ for some }x \text{ and }y~|~f \text{ is invertible in } H^0(\mathcal{C})(x,y)\}. $$

We could localize the category $Z^0(\mathcal{C})$ by formally inverting $W$ and obtain a category $W^{-1}Z^0(\mathcal{C})$. There is a natural functor $W^{-1}Z^0(\mathcal{C})\to H^0(\mathcal{C})$.

My question is: Is $W^{-1}Z^0(\mathcal{C})$ equivalent to $H^0(\mathcal{C})$?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This certainly needs some hypotheses on the dg-category (consider a one object dg-category: not all quotients by ideals are localizations!). Maybe pretriangulated is enough? $\endgroup$ – Denis Nardin Dec 28 '18 at 18:04
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Proposition 5.17 in arxiv.org/abs/1602.01515 has one possible answer to your question. (One must pass to the homotopy category on both sides.) $\endgroup$ – Dmitri Pavlov Dec 29 '18 at 1:14

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.