Let $X$ be a smooth $\mathbf{C}$-scheme of finite type. In section 7.2 of their preprint "Quantization of Hitchin's Integrable System and Hecke Eigensheaves", Beilinson and Drinfeld define an adjunction $$\mathcal{D}:Z^0(\mathbf{dgMod}_{\mathrm{qcoh}}(\Omega^{\cdot}_{X/\mathbf{C}}))\leftrightarrows \mathbf{Cplx}(\mathbf{Mod}^{\mathrm{r}}_{\mathrm{qcoh}}(\mathcal{D}_X))):\Omega$$ between the category of (closed morphisms of) quasi-coherent dg-modules over the de Rham algebra of $X/\mathbf{C}$ and that of complexes of quasi-coherent right $\mathcal{D}_X$-modules. Their aim is to obtain a derived equivalence between a certain localization of this category of dg-modules over $\Omega^{\cdot}_{X/\mathbf{C}}$ and the usual derived category of the abelian category $\mathbf{Mod}^{\mathrm{r}}_{\mathrm{qcoh}}(\mathcal{D}_X)$. The functor $\mathcal{D}$ does not send all quasi-isomorphisms to quasi-isomorphisms and Beilinson and Drinfeld's solution is to invert the morphisms of dg-modules that are sent to quasi-isomorphisms by $\mathcal{D}$, which they call $\mathcal{D}$-quasi-isomorphisms. In 7.2.6(iii) (and also in 2.1.10 of their "Chiral algebras"), Beilinson and Drinfeld assert that any quasi-isomorphism of bounded $\mathcal{O}_X$-coherent dg-$\Omega^{\cdot}_{X/\mathbf{C}}$-modules is a $\mathcal{D}$-quasi-isomorphism (the converse is true without the finiteness hypothesis). In light of Kapranov's paper ("On dg-modules over the de Rham complex and the vanishing cycles functor"), this sounds reasonable.

On the other hand, as suggested by 6.23 in these lecture notes, if we take $X=\operatorname{Spec}(\mathbf{C}[t])$ and consider the left $\mathcal{D}_X$-module $\mathcal{O}_X\operatorname{e}^t$ given by the free $\mathcal{O}_X$-module of rank $1$ generated by $\operatorname{e}^t$, i.e. the integrable connection $f\mapsto (f+f')\mathrm{d}t:\mathbf{C}[t]\to\mathbf{C}[t]\mathrm{d}t$, then its de Rham complex appears to be acyclic, $\mathcal{O}_X$-coherent and bounded. I think this means that the image of the corresponding right $\mathcal{D}_X$-module under the functor $\Omega$ is acyclic, bounded and $\mathcal{O}_X$-coherent, hence $\mathcal{D}$-acyclic. As the adjuction morphism $\mathcal{D}\Omega\to\operatorname{id}$ is a quasi-isomorphism by [BD, 7.2.4], the right $\mathcal{D}_X$-module corresponding to $\mathcal{O}_X\operatorname{e}^t$ is zero, which sounds absurd.

Question: Have I made a stupid error somewhere and, if not, how does one reconcile this example with Beilinson-Drinfeld's description of $\mathcal{D}$-quasi-isomorphisms for $\mathcal{O}_X$-coherent $\Omega^{\cdot}_{X/\mathbf{C}}$-modules?


Let $\mathcal M$ be a left $\mathcal D$-module over a smooth curve $X$. Then the Koszul duality functor assigns to $\mathcal M$ the DG-module $\Omega_X\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal M$ over the de Rham complex $\Omega_X$. Viewed as a complex of sheaves, $\Omega_X\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal M$ is a two-term complex whose terms are quasi-coherent $\mathcal O_X$-modules, but the differential is not $\mathcal O_X$-linear. For this reason, even when $X$ is affine, one has to distinguish between the acyclicity of the complex of global sections of $\Omega_X\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal M$ and the acyclicity of this complex of sheaves itself.

Explicitly, let $x$ be a global coordinate on $X$ (assuming that one exists). Then the differential in the complex $\Omega_X\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal M = (\mathcal M\to \Omega_X^1\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal M)$ has the form $m\mapsto dx\otimes \partial/\partial x(m)$. The question about acyclicity of this complex of sheaves is, therefore, the question about injectivity and surjectivity of the operator $\partial/\partial x$ acting in the sections of $\mathcal M$.

In the case at hand, we have $\mathcal M=\mathcal O_X e^x$. So global sections of $\mathcal M$ over $\operatorname{Spec} \mathbb C[x]$ are expressions of the form $p(x)e^x$, where $p(x)$ is a polynomial in $x$. Hence one can easily see that the complex of global sections of $\Omega_X\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal M$ over $\operatorname{Spec} \mathbb C[x]$ is acyclic.

The complexes of sections of $\operatorname{Spec} \mathbb C[x]$ over Zariski open subsets of $\operatorname{Spec} \mathbb C[x]$ are not acyclic, however. It suffices to consider sections over $\operatorname{Spec} \mathbb C[x,x^{-1}]$. As is well known, the function $x^{-1}e^x$ does not lie in the image of $\partial/\partial x$ acting in the space of Laureant polynomials in $x$ multiplied with $e^x$. Therefore, the two-term complex of sheaves $\Omega_X\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal M$ is not acyclic. Its differential is an injective, but not surjective morphism of sheaves of $\mathbb C$-vector spaces over $\operatorname{Spec} \mathbb C[x]$.

On the other hand, one can consider the complex of sheaves of analytic forms $\Omega_X^{an}\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal M$ in the analytic topology of the set of closed points of $\operatorname{Spec} \mathbb C[x]$. Then every function from $\mathcal O_X^{an}e^x$ will have a primitive analytic function locally in the analytic topology. So the differential in the two-term complex of sheaves $\Omega_X^{an}\otimes_{\mathcal O_X}\mathcal M$ is now surjective. However, it is no longer injective, as the constant functions are sections of $\mathcal O_X^{an}e^x$, the function $e^{-x}$ being analytic. This is what Kapranov is doing in his paper.

Having, as I hope, answered your question, let me now point out, as a side note, that what I would consider a superior alternative of the $\mathcal D{-}\Omega$ duality theory of the Beilinson--Drinfeld preprint can be found in Appendix B to my AMS Memoir "Two kinds of derived categories, Koszul duality, and comodule-contramodule correspondence", http://arxiv.org/abs/0905.2621 .

The point is that what you call "$\mathcal D$-quasi-isomorphisms" are defined in my paper in terms intrinsic to DG-modules over $\Omega$ (without any reference to differential operators). The corresponding localization is called the coderived category of quasi-coherent DG-modules over $\Omega_X$, and subsequently it is proven to be equivalent to the derived category of quasi-coherent $\mathcal D_X$-modules (for a smooth variety $X$ over any field, $\mathcal D_X$ denoting the crystalline differential operators in the case when the characteristic is finite).


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.