3
$\begingroup$

I asked this very basic question about Grothendieck Duality on the Stack--exchange some time ago, without any replies.

I'm therefore asking the question here to test my luck.

Let $f:X\to Y$ be a morphism of schemes such that $f^!$ exists. Let $A'$ be in the derived category of Quasi--coherent sheaves on $Y$, which I will denote $Qco(Y)$, and $A$ be in the derived category of $Qco(X)$. Grothendieck duality assures a bijection of sets

$$\textbf{Hom}(A,f^!A')\to \textbf{Hom}(Rf_*A,A')$$

Here $\textbf{Hom}$ is the set of Homomorphisms between objects in the derived category, we also have $H^0\textbf{RHom}=\textbf{Hom}$. I am wondering if the following natural morphism in the derived category of $Qco(Y)$ is an isomorphism?

Let $A,B\in Qco(X)$. Since $Rf_*$ is a functor from the derived category of $Qco(X)$ to the derived category of $Qco(Y)$ there is an induced morphism

$Rf_*(\textbf{Hom}(A,B))\to \textbf{Hom}(Rf_*A,Rf_*B)$. Now if we let $B=f^!A'$ for some $A'$ in the derived category of $Qco(Y)$ the Grothendieck trace map induces a morphism $$\textbf{Hom}(Rf_*A,Rf_*f^!A')\to \textbf{Hom}(Rf_*A,A')$$

Is this composition an isomorphism?

I.e., is $$Rf_*(\textbf{Hom}(A,f^!A'))\to \textbf{Hom}(Rf_*A,A')$$ an isomorphism?

By Grothendieck duality $$Rf_*\textbf{RHom}(A,f^!A')\to \textbf{RHom}(Rf_*A,A')$$ is an isomorphism but if we apply $H^0$ to this we get

$$H^0Rf_*\textbf{RHom}(A,f^!A')\to \textbf{Hom}(Rf_*A,A')$$

Which seems pretty far from what I wanted unless if $f_*$ is exact.

Thank you for any input!

$\textbf{Hom}$ denotes in this question Homomorphisms between complexes (of Quasi--coherent sheaves) in the derived category, and $\textbf{RHom}$ denotes the right--derived functor of sheaf $\textbf{Hom}$. (I.e., no global section functor is present in this question, this is just to clarify and avoid confusion)

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Isn't $\mathbf{Hom}(A,f^!A')$ an $\mathcal O_X(X)$-module instead of a sheaf of $\mathcal O_X$-modules? What does it mean to take $Rf_*$ of such a thing? $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 18, 2022 at 7:33
  • $\begingroup$ The question is not clear to me. Does $\mathcal{S}(X)$ refers to $\mathcal{O}_X-Mod$ or $Qco(X)$? There is no trace for general modules. I suggest lookin at Lipman's Lecture Notes 1960 (also at math.purdue.edu/~jlipman/Duality.pdf) to grasp the missing details. $\endgroup$
    – Leo Alonso
    Commented Feb 18, 2022 at 11:14
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I edited the question, I hope it is clearer now? Basically the context is not that important, I'm interested in the usual situations when Grothendieck Duality holds as a quasi-- isomorphism of complexes of sheaves and I am wondering if one needs to go to the full RHom for this quasi--isomorphism to be true (Hom always means sheaf-Hom here) or if it is true also for $H^0RHom$ which is the $Hom$ in the derived category? I apologise if I'm missing something and my question is badly posed, please help enlighten me in that case. Thank you! $\endgroup$
    – Adam
    Commented Feb 21, 2022 at 23:52

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .