Lower middle perversity 2026-10-14
The lower middle perversity is . The complementary upper middle perversity is , and . They agree at even codimensions.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2004 iii Paper 22 2 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
Put and let be the cone vertex. Specify the convention away from the Witt case: first take intersection cohomology to mean the hypercohomology of the intersection complex , normalized in degree zero on the regular stratum. The lower middle perversity at the vertex is . The standard local cone calculation for this convention saysand restriction to is the identity below the cutoff. Here this can also be read directly from the construction , with : punctured conical neighbourhoods retract onto , and the truncation discards the degrees above .
Define relative intersection cohomology as the hypercohomology of the homotopy fibre of restriction, namely . Restricting to the pair gives a map to the corresponding ordinary relative cohomology, since . The induced map of exact triangles gives the requested commutative diagram:Both rows are long exact cohomology sequences of a pair. Commutativity includes the connecting homomorphisms, because they arise from the same map of restriction cones, with a common sign convention. The relative vertical maps are isomorphisms: excision removes the common conical neighbourhood, leaving precisely the manifold pair outside it, where is constant. Also the collar retracts onto , so .
The only possible nonmanifold stratum is , with link of dimension . Since intersection homology of a manifold is ordinary homology, the exact necessary and sufficient condition isThe equivalence with the defining follows from the universal coefficient theorem for cohomology over . In the Witt case the cone restriction is an isomorphism through degree , since both degree- groups are zero. Comparing the two exact rows, or applying the Five lemma to each five-term segment, gives for . For , both and vanish, so the top row identifies the absolute group with the relative one. HenceWithout the Witt hypothesis, comparison still gives for . At degree the upper row readsThe lower row identifies the quotient by with the image of the relative-to-absolute map. In higher degrees both cone terms vanish. Thus the full lower-middle Deligne answer isFor clarity, if is instead defined as the linear dual of the lower-middle intersection chains of question 1, it corresponds to the complementary upper middle perversity Deligne sheaf. Its cone group retains as well. The same diagram then givesEquivalently the exceptional group is . These conventions agree under the stated Witt condition, explaining why that condition removes the ambiguity.
Take the solid torus , whose boundary is the two-dimensional torus . Its ordinary cohomology is , zero otherwise; Poincare duality for a manifold with boundary gives and all other relative groups zero. The lower-middle Deligne formula givesThus degrees one and two have different dimensions, so there can be no three-dimensional Poincare duality. In the dual-lower-chain convention the dimensions are , which likewise fail duality. Both computations exhibit the obstruction .
Upper middle perversity 2026-10-14
The upper middle perversity is . It differs from the lower middle perversity by one at odd codimensions, and is complementary to it.