In Angella and Tomassini's paper p.75, there is an exact sequence:

$\cdots\to B^{\bullet,\bullet}\to H_{\bar\partial}^{\bullet,\bullet}\to H_A^{\bullet,\bullet}\to \cdots$

where $B^{\bullet,\bullet}:=\frac{\ker\bar\partial\cap\text{im }\partial}{\text{im }\partial\bar\partial}$, and recall that Dolbeault cohomology $H_{\bar\partial}^{\bullet,\bullet}:=\frac{\ker\bar\partial}{\text{im }\bar\partial}$, and Aeppli cohomology $H_A^{\bullet,\bullet}:=\frac{\ker\partial\bar\partial}{\text{im }\partial+\text{im }\bar\partial}$, obviously, there are natural maps of $f:B^{\bullet,\bullet}\to H_{\bar\partial}^{\bullet,\bullet}$ and $g:H_{\bar\partial}^{\bullet,\bullet}\to H_A^{\bullet,\bullet}$, but I wonder how do we get $\text{im } f=\ker g$?

My thinking process is like that: In order to get the expression of $B^{\bullet,\bullet}$, we should compute the kernel of the map $g$, for a $\bar\partial$-closed form $\alpha$, let $g(\alpha)=0\in H_A^{\bullet,\bullet}$, then we get $\alpha=\partial\beta+\bar\partial\gamma$, since $\alpha$ is $\bar\partial$-closed, we get $\bar\partial\partial\beta=0$, thus $\alpha\in\ker\bar\partial\cap\text{im }\partial+\text{im }\bar\partial$, then I get stuck, can anyone help me to get $B^{\bullet,\bullet}=\frac{\ker\bar\partial\cap\text{im }\partial}{\text{im }\partial\bar\partial}$?


1 Answer 1


Let $\alpha$ be a $\bar{\partial}$-closed form. Denote its Dolbeault cohomology class by $[\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}}$ and its Aeppli cohomology class by $[\alpha]_A$; note that the map $g$ is given by $g([\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}}) = [\alpha]_A$. Likewise, if $\alpha' \in \ker\bar{\partial}\cap\operatorname{im}\partial$, denote the corresponding element in $B^{\bullet,\bullet}$ by $[\alpha']_B$; note that the map $f$ is given by $f([\alpha']_B) = [\alpha']_{\bar{\partial}}$.

As you noted, if $[\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}} \in \ker g$, then $\alpha = \partial\beta + \bar{\partial}\gamma$, so $[\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}} = [\partial\beta + \bar{\partial}\gamma]_{\bar{\partial}} = [\partial\beta]_{\bar{\partial}}$. Moreover, since $\bar{\partial}\alpha = 0$, we see that $\bar{\partial}\partial\beta = 0$ and hence $\partial\beta \in \ker\bar{\partial}\cap\operatorname{im}\partial$. Therefore, we can form the element $[\partial\beta]_B$ which satisfies $f([\partial\beta]_B) = [\partial\beta]_{\bar{\partial}} = [\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}}$, so $[\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}} \in \operatorname{im}f$ and hence $\ker g \subseteq \operatorname{im}f$.

Suppose now that $[\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}} \in \operatorname{im}f$, then there is $\alpha' \in \ker\bar{\partial}\cap\operatorname{im}\partial$ with $[\alpha']_{\bar{\partial}} = [\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}}$. As $\alpha' \in \operatorname{im}\partial + \operatorname{im}\bar{\partial}$, we see that $g([\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}}) = g([\alpha']_{\bar{\partial}}) = [\alpha']_A = 0$, so $[\alpha]_{\bar{\partial}} \in \ker g$ and hence $\operatorname{im}f \subseteq \ker g$.

  • $\begingroup$ The explanation is precise! But why the denominator of $B^{\bullet,\bullet}$ should be $\text{im }\partial\bar\partial$? $\endgroup$
    – Tom
    Sep 15 at 3:07
  • $\begingroup$ Your question is about exactness at $H^{\bullet,\bullet}_{\bar{\partial}}$. Replacing $f : B^{\bullet,\bullet} \to H^{\bullet,\bullet}_{\bar{\partial}}$ with any map which has the same image will preserve exactness at $H^{\bullet,\bullet}_{\bar{\partial}}$. That is, exactness at $H^{\bullet,\bullet}_{\bar{\partial}}$ doesn't force the previous term to be $B^{\bullet,\bullet}$. I assume that the specific form of $B^{\bullet,\bullet}$ is needed to get exactness of the full sequence. $\endgroup$ Sep 15 at 11:47
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, I think the answer is totally clear now! $\endgroup$
    – Tom
    Sep 15 at 11:57

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.