(This question is originally from Math.SE, where it didn't receive any answers.) $\DeclareMathOperator{\Hom}{Hom} \DeclareMathOperator{\im}{im} \DeclareMathOperator{\id}{id} \DeclareMathOperator{\ext}{Ext} \newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb{Z}}$

Let $G$ be a group, let $A$ be a $G$-module, and let $P_3\to P_2\to P_1\to P_0\to\Z\to0$ be the start of a projective resolution of the $G$-module $\mathbb{Z}$. Consider the cohomology group

$$H^2(G,A)=\frac{\ker(\Hom_{\Z G}(P_2,A)\to\Hom_{\Z G}(P_3,A))}{\im(\Hom_{\Z G}(P_1,A)\to\Hom_{\Z G}(P_2,A))}.$$

It can be shown that $\lvert H^2(G,A)\rvert$ counts the number of equivalence classes of group extensions $0\to A\to E\to G\to0$. The only proof that I know of this result involves choosing a specific projective resolution (namely, the bar resolution).

Is there a proof of this result that does not require choosing a specific projective resolution?

For context, $\lvert\ext_R^n(M,N)\rvert$ counts the number of equivalence classes of extensions $0\to N\to X_n\to\ldots\to X_1\to M\to0$. The proof of this result is fairly abstract and does not require picking a specific projective resolution of $M$ or a specific injective resolution of $N$.

Also, I am aware that we actually have isomorphisms in both of these results but I am more interested in the existence of an explicit bijection.

Here is one approach for constructing an element of $H^2(G,A)$ from an extension $0\to A\to E\to G\to0$: Treat $A$ as an $E$-module and consider the transgression map $H^1(A,A)^{E/A}\to H^2(E/A,A^A)$. Rewriting this gives a homomorphism $\Hom(A,A)^G\to H^2(G,A)$. The image of $\id_A$ under this map will be an element of $H^2(G,A)$.

To make this work, this map would need to be a bijection from equivalence classes of group extensions and elements of $H^2(G,A)$.

Another approach that I considered was to work directly with the arbitrary projective resolution (similar to the proof of the Yoneda Ext result). Suppose that we are given a group extension $0\to A\to E\to G\to0$. We want to construct an element of $\ker(\Hom_{\Z G}(P_2,A)\to\Hom_{\Z G}(P_3,A))$. Equivalently, we want to construct a $\Z G$-module homomorphism $P_2/\im(P_3\to P_2)\to A$. However, $\im(P_3\to P_2)=\ker(P_2\to P_1)$ and $P_2/\ker(P_2\to P_1)\cong\im(P_2\to P_1)=\ker(P_1\to P_0)$. Thus, we want to construct a $\Z G$-module homomorphism $f\colon\ker(P_1\to P_0)\to A$. Furthermore, if we unwind some more definitions, we see that we only need to construct $f$ up to the restriction of a $\Z G$-module homomorphism $P_1\to A$.

Unfortunately, the only information we have about $A$ is the short exact sequence $0\to A\to E\to G\to0$ which makes it hard to define a $\Z G$-module homomorphism to $A$.

  • $\begingroup$ I like this question! I wonder why you specify just thinking of $\lvert\operatorname H^2(G, A)\rvert$ as counting extensions, rather than of $\operatorname H^2(G, A)$ as parameterising extensions. $\endgroup$ – LSpice May 10 '19 at 18:00
  • $\begingroup$ See also math.stanford.edu/~conrad/210BPage/handouts/gpext.pdf $\endgroup$ – user2831784 May 10 '19 at 20:02
  • $\begingroup$ Actually your last method works. Since $P_1$ is projective, we get a commutative square $P_1 \to G$ with maps via $E$ and $P_0$. This gives a map $Ker (P_1\to P_0) \to A \cong Ker (E\to G)$ and you are done. $\endgroup$ – user43326 May 11 '19 at 14:28
  • $\begingroup$ @user43326, could you elaborate a bit more? Are you claiming that we have maps $P_1\to E$ and $P_0\to G$? $\endgroup$ – Thomas Browning May 11 '19 at 18:55
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, that comment was a crap. $\endgroup$ – user43326 May 12 '19 at 6:03

Here is a simple way. The extension $A \to E \to G$ induces a map of classifying spaces $BA\to BE \to BG$, which is a principal fibration, so classified by (homotopy class of) a map $BG \to BBA=K(A,2)$, i.e., an element of $H^2(BG,A)$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ This is interesting, but is there a way to convert between $H^2(BG,M)$ and $H^2(G,M)$ without the choice of a resolution? $\endgroup$ – Thomas Browning May 10 '19 at 20:21
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @ThomasBrowning Personally, my definition of group cohomology is just cohomology of $BG$... I think it's going to be hard to get off the ground if you don't at least give yourself that. $\endgroup$ – Kevin Casto May 10 '19 at 23:22
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @JohnKlein It sounds like OP wants something that doesn't use the bar resolution. $\endgroup$ – user43326 May 13 '19 at 13:38
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @ThomasBrowning Any model for $EG$ gives such a projective resolution of $\mathbb{Z}$. $\endgroup$ – James Cameron May 15 '19 at 16:21
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @ThomasBrowning No you can't get all resolutions that way, for example you'll always get a free resolution from $EG$. Are you trying to avoid using the fact that cohomology doesn't depend on which resolution you use? $\endgroup$ – James Cameron May 15 '19 at 16:40

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.