Coverage on a category 2026-10-14
A coverage specifies covering families on a small category, stable under refinement along arrows: for a covering family into and , there is a covering family into whose composites with factor through the original family. Passing to generated sieves and imposing maximality and local transitivity gives its associated Grothendieck topology, with the same sheaves on a site. One can equivalently specify the saturated covering sieves directly. Rigidity refers to these covering sieves, so it is unchanged by replacing a family presentation by its generated topology.
Double-negation topology 2026-10-14
The dense sieves form the double-negation Grothendieck topology. Its sheaf topos is a Boolean topos: the union of a subobject with its pseudocomplement is dense and thus becomes the whole object after sheafification. This need not be the atomic topology, which requires every nonempty sieve to be dense.
Grothendieck topos Created 2026-10-06 Updated 2026-10-14
A Grothendieck topos is a category equivalent to the sheaves on a site for a small Grothendieck topology. It is an elementary topos with all small colimits and a small generating family. Small disjoint coproducts, effective quotients and the set of subobjects of any fixed object allow many constructions by unions.
J-closed sieve Created 2026-10-07 Updated 2026-10-14
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2002 iii Paper 22 7 i Solution 2026-10-14
A dense sieve, also called a persistently nonempty sieve, is one whose every pullback sieve on a category is nonempty: a member factoring through has the form , corresponding to a member of . The maximal sieve on a category clearly has this property. If is persistently nonempty, then is too: for any into the domain of , apply density to to find an extension , giving .
For transitivity, suppose is dense on and is a sieve on a category such that is dense for each . Given , choose with . Density of , tested on its identity arrow, supplies with . Thus is dense. These are the maximality, pullback and transitivity axioms of a Grothendieck topology. Therefore the specified sieves on a category form the coverage , namely the double-negation topology. The empty sieve on a category is never covering, because its identity pullback is empty.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2012 iii Paper 23 6 a Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
A geometric formula is built from atomic formulas, including equality, using finite conjunctions, arbitrary set-indexed disjunctions and existential quantification in a finite variable context. Truth is the empty conjunction and falsity the empty disjunction. A geometric theory is a set of sequents between such formulas over a many-sorted signature. The context supplies the universal force of an axiom; unrestricted universal quantification, implication and negation are not formula constructors in this fragment.
These choices are exactly suited to inverse image functors of geometric morphisms. Finite-limit preservation handles equality and conjunction; colimit and image preservation handle disjunction and existential quantification. Therefore an inverse image carries an internal model of a geometric theory to another model.
Construct the geometric syntactic category as follows. Objects are formulas in context , modulo provable renaming and equivalence. A morphism to is an equivalence class of formulas that are provably total and single-valued:The last notation abbreviates componentwise equality. Identity is equality of the context variables; composition is existential conjunction over the intermediate tuple. The category has finite limits, formed through conjunction and equality.
Give it the geometric syntactic topology . A family of arrows represented by into covers whenPullback stability is substitution, and transitivity comes from distributing existential conjunction through the covering disjunctions. Thus the generated sieves define a Grothendieck topology. Empty covers impose the interpretation of falsity as the initial object.
The classifying topos isIts universal model assigns a sort the sheafified representable of , functions their definable graph morphisms and relations their definable subobjects. The syntactic covering conditions make the axioms valid in this model.
For the universal property, interpreting formulas in a model in a Grothendieck topos gives a finite-limit-preserving, -continuous functor : covers go to jointly epimorphic families precisely because the relevant sequents hold. The Diaconescu equivalence for geometric morphisms associates to this functor a geometric morphism . Conversely, pulling back along a geometric morphism gives a model. The constructions on models and their homomorphisms are inverse up to natural isomorphism, yieldingnaturally in . This proves the required classifying property, not merely classification of set-valued models.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2013 iii Paper 74 6 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
In a small regular category , the regular coverage has one-arrow covers: each regular epimorphism is a covering family by itself. Identity maps, composites and pullbacks of such arrows are again covers, so this is a basis for a Grothendieck topology. A presheaf is a sheaf precisely when every compatible section over a covering arrow descends uniquely along that arrow.
It is subcanonical. A section of the representable presheaf over is a map . Its matching condition is on the kernel pair . Since a regular epimorphism is the coequalizer of its kernel pair, there is a unique with . This is exactly the sheaf condition for .
For a subfunctor of a regular-coverage sheaf, define local membership byThis is a subfunctor. If and witnesses membership, pull back along ; the resulting cover of witnesses membership of , because is stable under restriction.
It is a sheaf as well. Let cover and let satisfy the kernel-pair matching condition. The sheaf gives a unique with . Choose a cover with . The composite is a cover of and witnesses . Uniqueness comes from . Thus the inclusion is a mono between sheaves and is closed for the associated local operator.
Moreover, any closed subobject containing is itself a sheaf. If , its restriction along a witnessing cover lies in , and the sheaf condition for descends it to a section in . Its image in is by uniqueness. Hence is the least closed subobject containing , andThis proves the local membership closure for the regular coverage, with a single regular epimorphism as witness.
Suppose is the union, in the sheaf topos, of a family of subsheaves . The union in presheaves is the pointwise union ; its closure is the union in sheaves. Thus . A witnessing cover belongs to for one index . The two restrictions of to its kernel pair agree. Since is a subsheaf, this matching section descends in to . Every map is the restriction of along , so . Therefore every representable sheaf is irreducible, even with respect to arbitrary unions. There are no empty covering families in this coverage, and also shows that the representable cannot be initial.
Finally, in the regular syntactic category of a regular theory, the context formula defines an object . Each formula defines a mono , and the associated representable subsheaf is its interpretation inside in the generic model. A derivation of the coherent disjunction says that these finitely many subsheaves have union . Irreducibility gives for some . The Yoneda embedding is full and faithful, since the coverage is subcanonical, and therefore reflects this isomorphism. Hence is invertible in the syntactic category: entails . ThusThe disjunction is an outer coherent conclusion; the theory and all constituent formulas are regular. This disjunction property of regular theories follows from single-arrow descent, rather than from ordinary first-order compactness.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2014 iii Paper 20 5 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
The required condition is the common-refinement condition for nonempty-sieve coverage: for every pair , , there are arrows , withNecessity follows by pulling back the nonempty sieve generated by along : a member of the pullback sieve supplies such an . Conversely, this condition makes the pullback of every nonempty sieve on a category nonempty. The maximal sieve is nonempty, and the transitivity axiom holds: if a sieve is locally covering along every member of a nonempty covering sieve , choose and then ; their composite is in . Hence the nonempty sieves form a Grothendieck topology, called the atomic topology.
For all functions between nonempty finite sets, the two maps from a singleton to different points of a two-point set have no common refinement. Every potential domain remains nonempty, so the two constant composites cannot agree. The condition fails.
For surjections it holds: is nonempty and both projections are surjective. Work from now on in a small skeleton of nonempty finite sets and surjections. Every morphism is a regular epimorphism, with kernel pair , and is the coequalizer of that pair in .
A matching family in a representable on the sieve generated by is determined by a surjection equalizing that kernel pair. It factors uniquely through a function , which is surjective because is. This gives the unique amalgamation. A general nonempty covering sieve contains such an ; after amalgamating there, common refinements with any other member force agreement on the entire sieve. Therefore every representable is a sheaf, so this atomic site is subcanonical.
For any sheaf , every restriction is injective: equality after a covering arrow forces equality by the separated part of the sheaf condition. We shall also use descent along any surjection :is an equalizer of sets. These are the descent identities for the atomic finite-surjection site.
Consider primitive , with a common restriction along , . Suppose have but . Let identify just the two points . Define the finite nonempty setBoth projections are surjective, since contains every diagonal pair. There is also a surjectionIndeed the target consists of diagonal pairs, which are reached because is surjective, and the two off-diagonal pairs corresponding to , reached by and .
Since , the common-restriction equality gives . If are the target kernel-pair projections, this isInjectivity of gives the kernel-pair matching condition on . Descent along then writes , contradicting primitivity. Thus ; interchange the roles to obtain equality. This is the primitive-element kernel rigidity lemma.
Equal kernels produce a unique bijection with . Now , and injectivity impliesIn particular equivalent primitive elements have the same cardinality and differ only by transport along a bijection.
Every element descends to a primitive one: whenever it is not primitive, descend along a surjection reducing the cardinality by one; this process terminates at or before cardinality one. Kernel rigidity shows that all primitive ancestors of lie in one equivalence class. Let be the elements with primitive-ancestor class . Restriction along a surjection preserves this class, so each is a subfunctor andpointwise. Each is a sheaf. A matching family glues in , and one member along a nonempty covering arrow already determines the primitive class of the glued element; it must be .
Choose a representative primitive of . The Yoneda map named by has image exactly . It reaches all descendants of , and every equivalent primitive ancestor is its transport along a bijection. It is therefore pointwise surjective onto and is epic as a map of sheaves. We obtain the primitive decomposition of an atomic finite-surjection sheafThis includes the empty coproduct for an empty sheaf.
Each nonempty is an atom in a topos. If a sheaf subobject has an element at some , membership descends along the covering surjection , so belongs to . All its restrictions then belong to , giving . Thus every subobject of any selects entire components of this coproduct, and its complementary selection is again a sheaf subobject. Its characteristic map sends selected components to and all others to .
The constant two-element presheaf is a sheaf: a matching family on a nonempty sieve has the same value on all its arrows, since any two have a common refinement. The value extends uniquely. It therefore supplies these characteristic maps, with truth the inclusion of the value. Equivalently, a J-closed sieve here is either empty or maximal, because every nonempty sieve covers. Hence
Site (category theory) Created 2026-10-07 Updated 2026-10-14
A site is a category equipped with a Grothendieck topology, specifying which sieves are covering. The sheaves on a site satisfy unique amalgamation of matching families on those sieves. A small site presents a Grothendieck topos.
Zariski cover Created 2026-10-25 Updated 2026-11-05
A Zariski cover of a scheme is a family of open immersions whose images cover its underlying topological space. Such families define the Zariski topology as a Grothendieck topology on the category of schemes; a cover need not be finite.