Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Non-decomposability of the de Rham complex and non-semisimplicity of the Sen operator

Published 22 Feb 2023 in math.AG, math.KT, and math.NT | (2302.11389v1)

Abstract: We describe the obstruction to decomposing in degrees $\leq p$ the de Rham complex of a smooth variety over a perfect field $k$ of characteristic $p$ that lifts over $W_2(k)$, and show that there exist liftable smooth projective varieties of dimension $p+1$ whose Hodge-to-de Rham spectral sequence does not degenerate at the first page. We also describe the action of the Sen operator on the de Rham complex in degrees $\leq p$ and give examples of varieties with a non-semisimple Sen operator. Our methods rely on the commutative algebra structure on de Rham and Hodge-Tate cohomology, and are inspired by the properties of Steenrod operations on cohomology of cosimplicial commutative algebras. The example of a non-degenerate Hodge-to-de Rham spectral sequence relies on a non-vanishing result on cohomology of groups of Lie type. We give applications to other situations such as describing extensions in the canonical filtration on de Rham, Hodge, and \'etale cohomology of an abelian variety equipped with a group action. We also show that the de Rham complex of a smooth variety over $k$ is formal as an $E_{\infty}$-algebra if and only if the variety lifts to $W_2(k)$ together with its Frobenius endomorphism.

Citations (6)

Summary

  • The paper demonstrates that the de Rham complex of smooth varieties does not decompose in higher degrees, countering earlier conjectures by Deligne and Illusie.
  • The paper reveals that the Sen operator is non-semisimple, which impacts the degeneration of the Hodge-to-de Rham spectral sequence.
  • The paper utilizes commutative algebra techniques and Steenrod operations to highlight implications for computational cohomology in positive characteristic.

Non-Decomposability of the de Rham Complex and Non-Semisimplicity of the Sen Operator

Introduction to the Paper

The paper "Non-decomposability of the de Rham complex and non-semisimplicity of the Sen operator" explores the mathematical intricacies surrounding the de Rham complex associated with smooth varieties over fields of positive characteristic pp. Specifically, the paper addresses the conditions under which the de Rham complex fails to decompose in certain degrees and explores the non-semisimplicity of the Sen operator. This exploration reveals that certain smooth projective varieties exhibit a non-degenerate Hodge-to-de Rham spectral sequence, providing insights into their algebraic topology. The methods utilized rely heavily on the commutative algebra structure on de Rham and Hodge-Tate cohomology, alongside properties of Steenrod operations on the cohomology of cosimplicial commutative algebras.

Main Contributions

Non-decomposability in de Rham Complexes

The paper provides a clear answer to whether the de Rham complex of liftable varieties decomposes in degrees higher than pp. The authors prove that this decomposition does not inherently occur, refuting a question posed by Deligne and Illusie. The existence of such non-decomposable complexes suggests that there are inherent algebraic structures preventing such decomposition, which in turn affect spectral sequences derived from these complexes.

Non-Semisimplicity of the Sen Operator

The paper provides examples of varieties where the Sen operator, associated with the de Rham complex, is non-semisimple. This characteristic is pivotal because it influences the spectral sequence's degeneration, which is vital for understanding the complex's topological and algebraic properties. The Sen operator, a derivation induced by the Frobenius lift, acts on the de Rham complex's cohomology sheaves, determining the algebraic structure of these complexes.

Implementation and Applications

Practical Implications

The non-decomposability in the de Rham complex and the non-semisimplicity of the Sen operator could have significant implications for algebraic geometers and those studying the topology of algebraic varieties in positive characteristic. The existence of non-degenerate spectral sequences directly impacts computational techniques in cohomology, potentially altering how these techniques are applied in complex geometric contexts.

Computational Techniques

In computational contexts, these results imply that automated systems or algorithms analyzing algebraic structures need to account for the possibility of non-decomposability and non-semi-simplicity. Algorithms that compute spectral sequences might need adjustments to detect and handle these non-standard behaviors accurately.

Conclusion

The paper contributes substantially to our understanding of algebraic topology in characteristic pp. By exposing the limits of decomposability and the simplicity of involved operators, it sets a foundation for further exploration into the algebraic properties of smooth varieties. Such insights are crucial for algebraic geometers attempting to classify and analyze these varieties using computational methods. Moreover, the implications for algebraic manipulation software suggest that current tools might need re-evaluation to accommodate these newly understood structures. The research introduces a robust framework for approaching these complexities, enriching the field's discourse with precise mathematical proofs and examples.

Paper to Video (Beta)

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Explain it Like I'm 14

Overview

This paper studies a basic tool in algebraic geometry called the de Rham complex, which helps mathematicians compute “shape-like” information (cohomology) of geometric objects called varieties. The paper focuses on varieties over a field with characteristic pp (think arithmetic done modulo a prime number pp). A famous result says that if such a variety can be “lifted” slightly (from mod pp to mod p2p^2), then the de Rham complex breaks into simple pieces in low degrees. The big questions here are: does this breaking continue one step further, and what stops it if it doesn’t?

The author shows:

  • In general, the breaking (or “decomposition”) stops at the next step: there is a precise obstruction that prevents it.
  • There are concrete examples where the usual shortcut through the de Rham complex fails, so a standard spectral sequence (a multi-step calculation tool) does not collapse early.
  • A related “Sen operator,” which acts like a degree-counting device on the de Rham complex, can be non-simple (it mixes data in a way that can’t be fully untangled by a change of coordinates).

What questions did the paper ask?

In simple terms, the paper asks:

  • If a smooth variety over a field of characteristic pp can be lifted a little bit (from mod pp to mod p2p^2), does its de Rham complex continue to split into simple parts one degree further than previously known?
  • If not, what exactly is the “roadblock” (the obstruction) that stops the splitting?
  • How does a special operator (the Sen operator), which watches how the complex behaves with respect to pp, act? Can it fail to be “nice” (non-semisimple)?
  • Can we find examples that clearly show the failure of splitting and the non-simplicity of the Sen operator?
  • What does this tell us about other cohomology theories and about when the de Rham complex behaves as simply as possible (is “formal”)?

How did the author approach the problem?

The methods use ideas that can be pictured with everyday analogies:

  • Decomposing in low degrees: Think of the de Rham complex as a layered machine that processes information. A famous theorem (by Deligne and Illusie) says if the variety lifts to W2(k)W_2(k) (this is like upgrading your arithmetic from mod pp to mod p2p^2), then in degrees less than pp the machine can be split into simpler independent parts. The paper asks if this splitting continues one more layer (at degree pp).
  • The obstruction: The author identifies a specific “blocker” that prevents the split at degree pp. It’s built from two ingredients: 1) Whether the Frobenius map (raising to the ppth power) can be lifted along with the variety (this gives an “obstruction class” obF\mathrm{ob}_F). 2) A characteristic class called α(Ω1)\alpha(\Omega^1), built from the cotangent bundle (the package of “infinitesimal directions” on the variety). These combine, and then a “Bockstein” operation (which measures how information changes between mod pp and mod p2p^2) turns their product into the final obstruction.
  • The Sen operator: When a lift to W2(k)W_2(k) exists, a canonical operator Θ\Theta acts on the de Rham complex. On the iith layer (degree ii), it acts like multiplication by i-i. But the interesting part is how it acts on extensions between layers. The paper computes the class measuring this action in degree pp, and links it to the same two ingredients above.
  • Algebraic structure and symmetry: A key technical idea is that the de Rham complex is not just a list of groups; it has a multiplication (like a ring). The author uses this structure carefully, along with tools from “derived” algebra (which manage hidden homotopies), and analogies to classical “Steenrod operations” (special moves that only appear in characteristic pp).
  • Concrete constructions: To show the obstruction is really nonzero, the author builds examples using:
    • Group cohomology of groups like GLpGL_p and SLpSL_p (matrix groups).
    • Abelian varieties (higher-dimensional analogs of elliptic curves) with group actions.
    • Special choices where coherent cohomology and de Rham cohomology behave differently because Frobenius acts differently on them.

What are the main results?

Here are the key findings, stated plainly:

  • Splitting stops at degree pp: Even if the variety lifts to W2(k)W_2(k), the de Rham complex does not, in general, split into simple parts one step beyond what was known. The author computes the exact obstruction class preventing this, and shows it can be nonzero.
  • A concrete non-degenerating example: There are smooth projective varieties of dimension p+1p+1 that lift all the way to W(k)W(k), but whose Hodge-to-de Rham spectral sequence does not collapse at the first page. In other words, you really need multiple steps to compute the de Rham cohomology—no shortcut.
  • The obstruction formula: The degree-pp extension class is exactly
    • “Bockstein of (obstruction to lifting Frobenius × the α-class of the cotangent bundle).”
    • In symbols: the only possibly nonzero component is in Hp+1(ΛpT)H^{p+1}(\Lambda^p T) and equals

Bockstein( obFα(Ω1) ).\mathrm{Bockstein}\big(\ \mathrm{ob}_F \cdot \alpha(\Omega^1)\ \big).

For p=2p=2, the class α\alpha can be written down very concretely using a short exact sequence involving symmetric and exterior squares.

  • The Sen operator can be non-semisimple: The paper provides examples where the Sen operator Θ\Theta is not “diagonalizable,” meaning it has a nilpotent part and mixes information in a way that cannot be untangled. The degree-pp class controlling its action is computed as

c=obFα(Ω1).c = \mathrm{ob}_F \cdot \alpha(\Omega^1).

When this is nonzero, the operator is not semisimple.

  • Formality criterion: The de Rham complex is as simple as it can be as an EE_\infty-algebra (this is called “formal”) if and only if the variety lifts to W2(k)W_2(k) together with its Frobenius map. So lifting the variety is not enough—you must also be able to lift Frobenius.
  • Applications to abelian varieties with group actions: The paper uses its general machinery to describe extension classes in de Rham, Hodge, and étale cohomology when an abelian variety carries a group action. It also proves that for certain abelian schemes, coherent cohomology splits while de Rham cohomology does not—showing the subtle role of Frobenius.
  • A neat side result about elliptic curves: For large enough nn, the splitting behavior of GLnGL_n-equivariant coherent cohomology of E×nE^{\times n} (where EE is an elliptic curve) detects whether EE is supersingular. This ties decomposition phenomena directly to the nature of Frobenius on EE.

Why is this important?

  • Sharpening a classic theorem: The Deligne–Illusie theorem gave splitting up to degree p1p-1. This paper shows that the next step is blocked in general, and gives the exact formula for the blockage. That’s a precise and valuable refinement.
  • Understanding pp-phenomena: Many surprising features occur only in characteristic pp (e.g., Steenrod operations, Frobenius behavior). This paper uncovers a new, concrete connection among Frobenius, the Bockstein map, and the structure of the de Rham complex.
  • Operator insight: The Sen operator appears in pp-adic Hodge theory and related areas. Showing it can be non-semisimple on de Rham cohomology, and computing the class that measures this, gives clearer understanding of pp-adic structures on cohomology.
  • Practical criteria: The formality criterion and the supersingularity test give clean, usable conditions that link deep geometry (lifting with Frobenius, Frobenius action on H1H^1) to the behavior of entire complexes.
  • Broader methods: The techniques—using multiplicative structures, derived symmetric powers, and comparisons to Steenrod operations—are widely applicable and may inform future work on higher-degree obstructions and other cohomology theories.

In short, the paper explains exactly why and how the de Rham complex fails to split one step further in characteristic pp, computes the operator that detects this failure, and builds compelling examples that make the phenomena visible and useful.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Authors (1)

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.