3
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ be a Noetherian scheme that is not Gorenstein but possesses a dualizing complex $D$ of coherent sheaves. Then (if I understand these matters and the answer to the question Characterization of schemes whose dualizing complex is perfect correctly) the bounded derived category $D^b_{coh}(X)$ of coherent sheaves on $X$ is self-dual, but this duality $D_X$ does not send (all) perfect complexes into perfect ones (recall that an object of $D^b_{coh}(X)$ is a perfect complex if it is locally quasi-isomorphic to a bounded complex of free sheaves).

My question is: did anybody study the image of the triangulated subcategory of perfect complexes $D^{perf}(X)\subset D^b_{coh}(X)$ under the coherent duality $D_X$? Is there any name for this subcategory $D_X(D^{perf}(X))\subset D^b_{coh}(X)$? Is it true that $D_X(D^{perf}(X))\cong D^{perf}(X)\otimes D$? Does it follow that $D_X$ induces an equivalence $D^{perf}(X)^{op}\cong D^{perf}(X)$?

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Since perfect complexes are dualizable, for every perfect complex $P$ and any complex $Q$ we have $$\mathrm{hom}(P,Q)\cong \mathrm{hom}(P,1)\otimes Q\,.$$ Moreover $\mathrm{hom}(P,1)$ is perfect too (since for qcqs schemes perfect=dualizable). In particular, by taking $Q=\omega$ the dualizing sheaf this shows that the image of the duality $D(-):=\mathrm{hom}(-,\omega)$ is exactly $\mathrm{Perf}(X)\otimes\omega$.

I don't think you can imply any more than this (in particular it's unclear to me why you would expect this to give an equivalence $\mathrm{Perf}(X)^{op}\cong \mathrm{Perf}(X)$ different from the standard duality.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I just noticed that this exact argument is present in the answer you linked, so I am now unsure of what kind of answer you were expecting. Should I delete this? $\endgroup$ – Denis Nardin Jun 1 at 10:33
  • $\begingroup$ Dear Denis, no, you shouldn't delete this. I am not sure that I understand these matters well; so you answer is quite helpful for me; thank you! Moreover, I do not understand whether $\hat D$ gives a tensor inverse to $D$ in this more general case as well (cf. Greg Stivenson's answer). $\endgroup$ – Mikhail Bondarko Jun 1 at 14:30
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @MikhailBondarko Regarding your last question: not in general, if $D$ is invertible (wrt to the tensor product), then it is dualizable, and so perfect. $\endgroup$ – Denis Nardin Jun 1 at 14:33

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.