Proposition 3.10. Let be a perfect morphism. Then commutes with all small colimits and satisfies the projection formula. Furthermore, if is any map of derived stacks, the resulting base change map is an equivalence.
3.2. Base change and the projection formula
In this section, we collect properties of the pushforward along a perfect stack, as summarized in the following proposition:
Remark 3.11. The conclusions of the proposition in fact do not require the full strength of the assumption that be perfect. The only hypothesis needed is that preserve colimits, or equivalently that the unit is relatively compact.
Remark 3.12. In the setting of simplicial commutative rings, and for a bounded, separated, quasi-compact relative derived algebraic space, the following results can essentially be found in Proposition 5.5.5 of Lurie’s thesis. The arguments in this section are an expanded version of parts of the arguments there, which extend largely unchanged to any reasonable setting for derived algebraic geometry such as -ring spectra.
Let us first consider the case when is affine, so that is perfect over . Then the pushforward coincides with the global sections functor . Over an affine base, is colimit preserving if and only if the structure sheaf (which is always dualizable) is a compact object of , which follows from being perfect.
Lemma 3.13. Let , and let . Then the natural projection map is an equivalence.
Proof. Tensor products and pullbacks always preserve colimits, and in our setting is colimit preserving as well. Therefore for any the functors and define colimit preserving endofunctors of . Hence both functors are determined by their value on , and canonically take the value . We find that the natural map is an equivalence. ∎
Let us continue with as above, and consider an arbitrary map of affine derived schemes. Consider the Cartesian square.
Lemma 3.14. The natural base change morphism is an equivalence.
Proof. Since is affine and hence is as well, the fiber product can be identified with the relative spectrum of a commutative algebra object , and induces an equivalence . Furthermore, the pullback can be described as tensoring with , and thus in particular . However, the global sections functor takes fiber products to tensor products, so we can identify . Applying the previously established projection formula twice, we can now compute , completing the proof. ∎
Now consider the general case where is any perfect morphism. Let us define a pushforward functor by requiring it to satisfy base change for affine derived schemes over . That is, for any , let us define to take the value , for any . As a corollary of the previous lemma, we can verify that this definition is sensible.
Corollary 3.15. is a well-defined quasi-coherent sheaf on .
Proof. Since , the claim that forms a quasi-coherent sheaf on is equivalent to the claim that for any diagram of the form
is canonically equivalent to . Unraveling these formulas, by definition we have that and that . By the previous lemma, these are equivalent by base change in the left hand square: is perfect, and so . ∎
Lemma 3.16. The natural transformation is an equivalence of functors.
Proof. Take any and . First note that for any quasi-coherent sheaf , there is an equivalence . Thus we calculate
To prove the lemma, it thus suffices to show that the natural map is an equivalence.
This is a consequence of the stronger claim that the functor is an equivalence. Since the functor takes all colimits of stacks to limits, it therefore suffices to show that the natural map is an equivalence. This limit can be calculated by picking an affine cover , and realizing as the geometric realization of the usual simplicial object . Finally, since geometric realization commutes with fiber products we are done. ∎
Since was defined to satisfy base change and preserve colimits, we now have the following.
Proof of Proposition 3.10. The first assertions were proved above. Since base change is local in the target, one can prove the final statement for an arbitrary by choosing a cover of by an affine , thus reducing to the case which was proved above. ∎
Original source: arXiv:0805.0157v5