Let $G$ be a reductive group scheme over some base $X$ and $P \subseteq G$ a parabolic subgroup. To a $P$-torsor $\mathscr{E}_P$, we may associate a $G$-torsor $\mathscr{E} = G \times^P \mathscr{E}_P$, which is $G \times \mathscr{E}_P$ mod the relation $(gp, s) \sim (g, ps)$, with $G$ acting by $g \cdot (h, s) = (gh, s)$. This gives a $P$-equivariant monomorphism $\mathscr{E}_P \hookrightarrow \mathscr{E}$ sending $s$ to $(1, s)$, and this gives us an inclusion of group schemes $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E}_P) \xrightarrow{\sim} \mathrm{Stab}(\mathscr{E}_P) \subseteq \mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E})$.

$\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E}_P)$ is an inner form of $P$ (indeed, it is given by twisting $P$ by $\mathscr{E}_P$), and likewise $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E})$ is an inner form of $G$. Upon passing to an étale cover $\widetilde{X} \rightarrow X$ and choosing a trivialization $\mathscr{E}_P$ (which automatically gives a trivialization of $\mathscr{E}$ compatible with the map $\mathscr{E}_P \rightarrow \mathscr{E}$), we obtain an isomorphism $G|_{\widetilde{X}} \rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(E)|_{\widetilde{X}}$ sending $P$ to $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E}_P)|_{\widetilde{X}}$.

This discussion defines a functor from the groupoid of $P$-torsors on $X$ to the groupoid of pairs $(\mathscr{E}, \mathscr{P})$ where $\mathscr{E}$ is a $G$-torsor on $X$ and $\mathscr{P}$ is a parabolic subgroup of $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E})$. A morphism $(\mathscr{E}, \mathscr{P}) \rightarrow (\mathscr{E}', \mathscr{P}')$ is an isomorphism of $G$-torsors $\varphi \colon \mathscr{E} \rightarrow \mathscr{E}'$ carrying $\mathscr{P}$ to $\mathscr{P}'$ under the induced map on automorphism groups (given by conjugation by $\varphi$).

Example 10.6.2 of the book Weil's conjecture for function fields by Gaitsgory-Lurie, it is claimed that this functor is an equivalence of categories. What's the quasi-inverse functor? I can't seem to find a proof anywhere.

If it helps, feel free to assume that $X$ is a curve over a finite field $k$ and that $G = G_0 \times_{\mathrm{Spec}(k)} X$ for an adjoint split reductive group $G_0$ over $\mathrm{Spec}(k)$.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ As stated, the functor is not essentially surjective: clearly, $\mathscr{P}$ should be (at least) an inner form of $P$. $\endgroup$ – Laurent Moret-Bailly May 6 at 7:34

Thanks to Laurent Moret-Bailly for pointing out that I missed a crucial hypothesis! Now I can construct the quasi-inverse, which I'll record below in case some future person is confused by the same problem:

The hypothesis is that "$\mathscr{P} \subseteq \mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E})$ is an inner form of $P \subseteq G$". By this, I mean:

(*): There is an étale cover $\widetilde{X} \rightarrow X$ and a trivialization of $\widetilde{\mathscr{E}}$ such that the induced isomorphism $\widetilde{G} \rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(\widetilde{\mathscr{E}})$ takes $\widetilde{P}$ to $\widetilde{\mathscr{P}}$.

(I'm using the notation $\widetilde{Y}$ for $Y|_{\widetilde{X}}$). Note that if we change the trivialization, $\widetilde{P}$ gets mapped to a conjugate of $\widetilde{\mathscr{P}}$.

Gaitsgory-Lurie give an equivalent formulation of this condition, which is more intrinsic to $\mathscr{P} \subseteq \mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E})$ and extends to general inner forms of $G$. Namely: that there is an étale cover $\widetilde{X}$ of $X$ and an isomorphism $\varphi \colon \widetilde{G} \rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(\widetilde{\mathscr{E}})$ taking $\widetilde{P}$ to $\widetilde{\mathscr{P}}$ which "is compatible with the inner structure on $\mathrm{Aut}(\widetilde{\mathscr{E}})$". This compatibility means that if we use $\mathscr{E}$ to realize $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E})$ as an inner form of $G$, then (after passing to a further étale cover of $X$ if necessary), the resulting isomorphism $\widetilde{G} \rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(\widetilde{\mathscr{E}})$ differs from $\Phi$ by an inner automorphism of $\widetilde{G}$.

Now, we define the quasi-inverse functor as follows:

Let $(\mathscr{E}, \mathscr{P})$ be as above, and define a subsheaf $\mathscr{E}_{\mathscr{P}}$ of $\mathscr{E}$ by $\mathscr{E}_{\mathscr{P}}(U) = \{s \in \mathscr{E}(U) \colon \forall V \rightarrow U, \forall \varphi \in \mathscr{P}(V), \varphi(s|_V) \in P(V) \cdot s|_V \}$. Note that for $s \in \mathscr{E}_\mathscr{P}(U)$, $\mathscr{P}|_U$ is the full stabilizer of $s$ mod $P$ in $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E}|_U)$ (as can be seen from (*) by passing to $\widetilde{U} \rightarrow U$ and using $s$ to trivialize $\mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E}|_{\widetilde{U}})$ and noting that the stabilizer of $s$ mod $P$ must be a conjugate of $\mathscr{P}$).

We claim that $\mathscr{E}_\mathscr{P}$ is a $P$-torsor, so our quasi-inverse functor is $(\mathscr{E}, \mathscr{P}) \mapsto \mathscr{E}_{\mathscr{P}}$. It's easy to see that it is a subsheaf of $\mathscr{E}$ preserved by the action of $P$, so it suffices to prove:

  1. The action of $P$ on $\mathscr{E}_{\mathscr{P}}$ is transitive.
  2. $\mathscr{E}_{\mathscr{P}}$ has sections over some étale cover of $X$.

To prove 1., suppose that $s, s' \in \mathscr{E}_{\mathscr{P}}(U)$ are two sections. Then there is a unique automorphism $\varphi \in \mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E}|_U)$ such that $s' = \varphi(s)$. It suffices to prove that $\varphi \in \mathscr{P}(U)$ (since then by definition of $\mathscr{E}_{\mathscr{P}}$, $s' = \varphi(s) \in P(U) \cdot s$). Since $\mathscr{P}$ is the stabilizer of $s$ mod $P$, $\varphi \mathscr{P} \varphi^{-1}$ is the stabilizer of $s'$ mod $P$, so we have $\varphi \mathscr{P} \varphi^{-1} = \mathscr{P}$. Since parabolic subgroups are self-normalizing, this implies that $\varphi \in \mathscr{P}$.

To prove 2., choose $\widetilde{X}$ and $s_0 \in \mathscr{E}(\widetilde{X})$ be as in (*). We claim that $s_0 \in \mathscr{E}_{\mathscr{P}}(\widetilde{X})$. Indeed, the resulting isomorphism $\widetilde{G} \rightarrow \mathrm{Aut}(\widetilde{\mathscr{E}})$ maps $g$ to the unique automorphism sending $s_0$ to $gs_0$, so the stabilizer of $s_0$ mod $\widetilde{P}$ is the image of $\widetilde{P}$ under this isomorphism, which is $\mathscr{P}$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ For what it's worth, the hypothesis that $P$ and $\mathscr{P}$ are parabolic is only used in the proof of point 1. above. In general, this conversation should carry over to the case that $H \subseteq G$ is a (connected, smooth) closed subgroup to show an equivalence between the category of $N_G(H)$-torsors and the category of pairs $(\mathscr{E}, \mathscr{H} \subseteq \mathrm{Aut}(\mathscr{E})$ where $\mathscr{H}$ is an "inner form of $H$" in the above sense. $\endgroup$ – dorebell May 6 at 16:27

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.