Jump to content

Exact sequence: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Made the notation consistent (Blackboard Bold vs Bold Z) also have one definition for the short exact sequence which was repeated twice
 
(138 intermediate revisions by 71 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Sequence of homomorphisms such that each kernel equals the preceding image}}
{{repetition|date=April 2015}}
[[File:Illustration of an Exact Sequence of Groups.svg|thumb|Illustration of an exact sequence of [[Group (mathematics)|groups]] <math>G_i</math> using [[Euler diagram|Euler diagrams]].|alt=Illustration of an exact sequence of groups using Euler diagrams. Each group is represented by a circle, within which there is a subgroup that is simultaneously the range of the previous homomorphism and the kernel of the next one, because of the exact sequence condition.]]
An '''exact sequence''' is a concept in [[mathematics]], especially in [[Ring (mathematics)|ring]] and [[module (mathematics)|module]] theory, [[homological algebra]], as well as in [[differential geometry]] and [[group theory]]. An exact sequence is a [[sequence]], either finite or infinite, of objects and [[morphism]]s between them such that the [[Image (mathematics)|image]] of one morphism equals the [[kernel (algebra)|kernel]] of the next.
An '''exact sequence''' is a sequence of [[morphisms]] between objects (for example, [[Group (mathematics)|groups]], [[Ring (mathematics)|rings]], [[Module (mathematics)|modules]], and, more generally, objects of an [[abelian category]]) such that the [[Image (mathematics)|image]] of one morphism equals the [[kernel (algebra)|kernel]] of the next.


==Definition==
==Definition==
In the context of [[group theory]], a sequence
In the context of group theory, a sequence
:<math>G_0\;\xrightarrow{f_1}\; G_1 \;\xrightarrow{f_2}\; G_2 \;\xrightarrow{f_3}\; \cdots \;\xrightarrow{f_n}\; G_n</math>
:<math>G_0\;\xrightarrow{\ f_1\ }\; G_1 \;\xrightarrow{\ f_2\ }\; G_2 \;\xrightarrow{\ f_3\ }\; \cdots \;\xrightarrow{\ f_n\ }\; G_n</math>
of [[group (mathematics)|groups]] and [[group homomorphism]]s is called '''exact''' if the [[Image (mathematics)|image]] of each homomorphism is equal to the [[Kernel (algebra)|kernel]] of the next:
of groups and [[group homomorphism]]s is said to be '''exact''' '''at''' <math>G_i</math> if <math>\operatorname{im}(f_i)=\ker(f_{i+1})</math>. The sequence is called '''exact''' if it is exact at each <math>G_i</math> for all <math>1\leq i<n</math>, i.e., if the image of each homomorphism is equal to the kernel of the next.
:<math>\mathrm{im}(f_k) = \mathrm{ker}(f_{k+1})</math>


Note that the sequence of groups and homomorphisms may be either finite or infinite.
The sequence of groups and homomorphisms may be either finite or infinite.


A similar definition can be made for other [[algebraic structure]]s. For example, one could have an exact sequence of [[vector space]]s and [[linear map]]s, or of [[module (mathematics)|modules]] and [[module homomorphism]]s. More generally, the notion of an exact sequence makes sense in any [[category (mathematics)|category]] with [[kernel (category theory)|kernel]]s and [[cokernel]]s.
A similar definition can be made for other [[algebraic structure]]s. For example, one could have an exact sequence of [[vector space]]s and [[linear map]]s, or of modules and [[module homomorphism]]s. More generally, the notion of an exact sequence makes sense in any [[category (mathematics)|category]] with [[kernel (category theory)|kernel]]s and [[cokernel]]s, and more specially in [[abelian categories]], where it is widely used.


===Simple cases===
===Simple cases===
To make sense of the definition, it is helpful to consider what it means in relatively simple cases where the sequence is finite and begins or ends with the [[trivial group]]. Traditionally, this, along with the single identity element, is denoted 0 (additive notation), when the groups are abelian, and is denoted 1 (multiplicative notation), otherwise.
To understand the definition, it is helpful to consider relatively simple cases where the sequence is of group homomorphisms, is finite, and begins or ends with the [[trivial group]]. Traditionally, this, along with the single identity element, is denoted 0 (additive notation, usually when the groups are abelian), or denoted 1 (multiplicative notation).


* The sequence 0 → ''A'' → ''B'' is exact at ''A'' if and only if the map from ''A'' to ''B'' has kernel {0}; i.e., if and only if that map is a [[monomorphism]] (injective, or one-to-one).
* Consider the sequence 0 → ''A'' → ''B''. The image of the leftmost map is 0. Therefore the sequence is exact if and only if the rightmost map (from ''A'' to ''B'') has kernel {0}; that is, if and only if that map is a [[monomorphism]] (injective, or one-to-one).
* Dually, the sequence ''B'' → ''C'' → 0 is exact at ''C'' if and only if the image of the map from ''B'' to ''C'' is all of ''C''; i.e., if and only if that map is an [[epimorphism]] (surjective, or onto).
* Consider the dual sequence ''B'' → ''C'' → 0. The kernel of the rightmost map is ''C''. Therefore the sequence is exact if and only if the image of the leftmost map (from ''B'' to ''C'') is all of ''C''; that is, if and only if that map is an [[epimorphism]] (surjective, or onto).
* Therefore, the sequence 0 → ''X'' → ''Y'' → 0 is exact if and only if the map from ''X'' to ''Y'' is both a monomorphism and epimorphism (that is, a [[bimorphism]]), and thus, in many cases, an [[Morphism#Some specific morphisms|isomorphism]].
* Therefore, the sequence 0 → ''X'' → ''Y'' → 0 is exact if and only if the map from ''X'' to ''Y'' is both a monomorphism and epimorphism (that is, a [[bimorphism]]), and so usually an [[isomorphism]] from ''X'' to ''Y'' (this always holds in [[exact categories]] like '''Set''').


===Short exact sequence===
===Short exact sequence===
Important are '''short exact sequences''', which are exact sequences of the form
Short exact sequences are exact sequences of the form
:<math>0 \to A \;\xrightarrow{f}\; B \;\xrightarrow{g}\; C \to 0</math>
:<math>0 \to A \xrightarrow{f} B \xrightarrow{g} C \to 0.</math>
As established above, for any such short exact sequence, ''f'' is a [[monomorphism]] and ''g'' is an [[epimorphism]]. Furthermore, the image of ''f'' is equal to the kernel of ''g''. It is helpful to think of ''A'' as a [[subobject]] of ''B'' with ''f'' being the embedding of ''A'' into ''B'', and of ''C'' as the corresponding factor object (or [[quotient]]), ''B''/''A'', with the map, ''g'' giving rise to an [[isomorphism]]
As established above, for any such short exact sequence, ''f'' is a monomorphism and ''g'' is an epimorphism. Furthermore, the image of ''f'' is equal to the kernel of ''g''. It is helpful to think of ''A'' as a [[subobject]] of ''B'' with ''f'' embedding ''A'' into ''B'', and of ''C'' as the corresponding factor object (or [[Quotient object|quotient]]), ''B''/''A'', with ''g'' inducing an isomorphism
:<math>C \cong B/\operatorname{im}(f)</math>
:<math>C \cong B/\operatorname{im}(f) = B/\operatorname{ker}(g)</math>


The short exact sequence
The short exact sequence
:<math>0 \to A \;\xrightarrow{f}\; B \;\xrightarrow{g}\; C \to 0</math>
:<math>0 \to A \xrightarrow{f} B \xrightarrow{g} C \to 0\,</math>
is called '''split''' if there exists a homomorphism ''h'' : ''C'' → ''B'' such that the composition ''g'' <small>o</small> ''h'' is the identity map of ''C''. It follows that ''B'' is isomorphic to the direct sum of ''A'' and ''C'' (see [[Splitting lemma]]):
is called '''[[split exact sequence|split]]''' if there exists a homomorphism ''h'' : ''C'' → ''B'' such that the composition ''g'' ''h'' is the identity map on ''C''. It follows that if these are [[abelian group]]s, ''B'' is isomorphic to the [[direct sum]] of ''A'' and ''C'':
:<math>B \cong A \oplus C</math>.
:<math>B \cong A \oplus C.</math>


===Long exact sequence===
===Long exact sequence===
A general exact sequence is sometimes called a '''long exact sequence''', to distinguish from the special case of a short exact sequence.<ref>{{Cite web|title=exact sequence in nLab, Remark 2.3|url=https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/exact+sequence#Definition|access-date=2021-09-05|website=ncatlab.org}}</ref>
{{expand section|define me|date=April 2015}}

A long exact sequence is equivalent to a family of short exact sequences in the following sense: Given a long sequence

{{Equation|1=A_0\;\xrightarrow{\ f_1\ }\; A_1 \;\xrightarrow{\ f_2\ }\; A_2 \;\xrightarrow{\ f_3\ }\; \cdots \;\xrightarrow{\ f_n\ }\; A_n,|2=1}}

with ''n ≥'' 2, we can split it up into the short sequences

{{Equation|1=\begin{align}
0 \rightarrow K_1 \rightarrow {} & A_1 \rightarrow K_2 \rightarrow 0 ,\\
0 \rightarrow K_2 \rightarrow {} & A_2 \rightarrow K_3 \rightarrow 0 ,\\
& \ \,\vdots \\
0 \rightarrow K_{n-1} \rightarrow {} & A_{n-1} \rightarrow K_n \rightarrow 0 ,\\
\end{align}|2=2}}
where <math>K_i = \operatorname{im}(f_i)</math> for every <math>i</math>. By construction, the sequences ''(2)'' are exact at the <math>K_i</math>'s (regardless of the exactness of ''(1)''). Furthermore, ''(1)'' is a long exact sequence if and only if ''(2)'' are all short exact sequences.

See [[#Weaving lemma|weaving lemma]] for details on how to re-form the long exact sequence from the short exact sequences.


== Examples ==
== Examples ==
Consider the following sequence of [[abelian group]]s:
:<math>\mathbf{Z} \;\overset{2\times}{\hookrightarrow}\; \mathbf{Z} \twoheadrightarrow \mathbf{Z}/2\mathbf{Z}</math>


=== Integers modulo two ===
The first operation forms an element in the set of integers, '''Z''', using multiplication by 2 on an element from '''Z''' i.e. ''j'' = 2''i''. The second operation forms an element in the quotient space, ''j'' = ''i'' mod 2. Here the hook arrow <math>\hookrightarrow</math> indicates that the map 2× from '''Z''' to '''Z''' is a [[monomorphism]], and the two-headed arrow <math>\twoheadrightarrow</math> indicates an [[epimorphism]] (the map mod 2). This is an exact sequence because the image 2'''Z''' of the monomorphism is the kernel of the epimorphism. Essentially "the same" sequence can also be written as
Consider the following sequence of abelian groups:
:<math>\mathbf{Z} \mathrel{\overset{2\times}{\,\hookrightarrow}} \mathbf{Z} \twoheadrightarrow \mathbf{Z}/2\mathbf{Z}</math>


The first homomorphism maps each element ''i'' in the set of integers '''Z''' to the element 2''i'' in '''Z'''. The second homomorphism maps each element ''i'' in '''Z''' to an element ''j'' in the quotient group; that is, {{nowrap|''j'' {{=}} ''i'' mod 2}}. Here the hook arrow <math>\hookrightarrow</math> indicates that the map 2× from '''Z''' to '''Z''' is a monomorphism, and the two-headed arrow <math>\twoheadrightarrow</math> indicates an epimorphism (the map mod 2). This is an exact sequence because the image 2'''Z''' of the monomorphism is the kernel of the epimorphism. Essentially "the same" sequence can also be written as
:<math>2\mathbf{Z} \;{\hookrightarrow}\; \mathbf{Z} \twoheadrightarrow \mathbf{Z}/2\mathbf{Z}</math>


:<math>2\mathbf{Z} \mathrel{\,\hookrightarrow} \mathbf{Z} \twoheadrightarrow \mathbf{Z}/2\mathbf{Z}</math>
In this case the monomorphism is 2''n'' ↦ 2''n'' and although it looks like an identity function, it is not onto (i.e. not an epimorphism) because the odd numbers don't belong to 2'''Z'''. The image of 2'''Z''' through this monomorphism is however exactly the same subset of '''Z''' as the image of '''Z''' through ''n'' ↦ 2''n'' used in the previous sequence. This latter sequence does differ in the concrete nature of its first object from the previous one as 2'''Z''' is not the same set as '''Z''' even though the two are isomorphic as groups.

In this case the monomorphism is 2''n'' ↦ 2''n'' and although it looks like an identity function, it is not onto (that is, not an epimorphism) because the odd numbers don't belong to 2'''Z'''. The image of 2'''Z''' through this monomorphism is however exactly the same subset of '''Z''' as the image of '''Z''' through ''n'' ↦ 2''n'' used in the previous sequence. This latter sequence does differ in the concrete nature of its first object from the previous one as 2'''Z''' is not the same set as '''Z''' even though the two are isomorphic as groups.


The first sequence may also be written without using special symbols for monomorphism and epimorphism:
The first sequence may also be written without using special symbols for monomorphism and epimorphism:
:<math>0\to \mathbf{Z} \;\xrightarrow{2\times}\; \mathbf{Z} \to \mathbf{Z}/2\mathbf{Z}\to 0</math>
:<math>0 \to \mathbf{Z} \mathrel{\overset{2\times}{\longrightarrow}} \mathbf{Z} \longrightarrow \mathbf{Z}/2\mathbf{Z} \to 0</math>

Here 0 denotes the trivial abelian group with a single element, the map from '''Z''' to '''Z''' is multiplication by 2, and the map from '''Z''' to the [[factor group]] '''Z'''/2'''Z''' is given by reducing integers [[modular arithmetic|modulo]] 2. This is indeed an exact sequence:
Here 0 denotes the trivial group, the map from '''Z''' to '''Z''' is multiplication by 2, and the map from '''Z''' to the [[factor group]] '''Z'''/2'''Z''' is given by reducing integers [[modular arithmetic|modulo]] 2. This is indeed an exact sequence:
* the image of the map 0 → '''Z''' is {0}, and the kernel of multiplication by 2 is also {0}, so the sequence is exact at the first '''Z'''.
* the image of the map 0 → '''Z''' is {0}, and the kernel of multiplication by 2 is also {0}, so the sequence is exact at the first '''Z'''.
* the image of multiplication by 2 is 2'''Z''', and the kernel of reducing modulo 2 is also 2'''Z''', so the sequence is exact at the second '''Z'''.
* the image of multiplication by 2 is 2'''Z''', and the kernel of reducing modulo 2 is also 2'''Z''', so the sequence is exact at the second '''Z'''.
* the image of reducing modulo 2 is all of '''Z'''/2'''Z''', and the kernel of the zero map is also all of '''Z'''/2'''Z''', so the sequence is exact at the position '''Z'''/2'''Z'''
* the image of reducing modulo 2 is '''Z'''/2'''Z''', and the kernel of the zero map is also '''Z'''/2'''Z''', so the sequence is exact at the position '''Z'''/2'''Z'''.


The first and third sequences are somewhat of a special case owing to the infinite nature of '''Z'''. It is not possible for a [[finite group]] to be mapped by inclusion (i.e. by a monomorphism) as a proper subgroup of itself. Instead the sequence that emerges from the [[first isomorphism theorem]] is
The first and third sequences are somewhat of a special case owing to the infinite nature of '''Z'''. It is not possible for a [[finite group]] to be mapped by inclusion (that is, by a monomorphism) as a proper subgroup of itself. Instead the sequence that emerges from the [[first isomorphism theorem]] is


:<math>1\to N \to G \to G/N\to 1</math>
:<math>1 \to N \to G \to G/N \to 1</math>
(here the trivial group is denoted <math>1,</math> as these groups are not supposed to be [[abelian group|abelian]]).


As a more concrete example of an exact sequence on finite groups:
As a more concrete example of an exact sequence on finite groups:


:<math>1\to C_n \to D_{2n} \to C_2\to 1</math>
:<math>1 \to C_n \to D_{2n} \to C_2 \to 1</math>


where <math>C_n</math> is the [[cyclic group]] of order ''n'' and <math>D_{2n}</math> is the [[dihedral group]] of order 2''n'', which is a non-abelian group.
where <math>C_n</math> is the [[cyclic group]] of order ''n'' and <math>D_{2n}</math> is the [[dihedral group]] of order 2''n'', which is a non-abelian group.


=== Intersection and sum of modules ===
Another example, from [[differential geometry]], especially relevant for work on the [[Maxwell equations]]:
Let {{math|''I''}} and {{math|''J''}} be two [[Ideal (ring theory)|ideal]]s of a ring {{math|''R''}}.
:<math>\Bbb{H}_1\ \xrightarrow{\text{grad}}\ \Bbb{H}_\text{curl}\ \xrightarrow{\text{curl}}\ \Bbb{H}_\text{div}\ \xrightarrow{\text{div}}\ \Bbb{L}_2</math>
Then
:<math>0 \to I\cap J \to I\oplus J \to I + J \to 0 </math>
is an exact sequence of {{math|''R''}}-modules, where the module homomorphism <math>I\cap J \to I\oplus J</math> maps each element {{math|''x''}} of <math>I\cap J</math> to the element {{tmath|(x,x)}} of the [[direct sum]] <math>I\oplus J</math>, and the homomorphism <math>I\oplus J \to I+J</math> maps each element {{tmath|(x,y)}} of <math>I\oplus J</math> to {{tmath|x-y}}.


These homomorphisms are restrictions of similarly defined homomorphisms that form the short exact sequence
based on the fact that on properly defined [[Hilbert space]]s,
: <math>\begin{align}
\text{curl }(\text{grad } f ) &\equiv \nabla \times (\nabla f) = 0 \\
\text{div } (\text{curl } \vec v ) &\equiv \nabla \cdot \nabla \times \vec{v} = 0
\end{align}</math>


:<math>0\to R \to R\oplus R \to R \to 0 </math>
in addition, [[curl (mathematics)|curl]]-free vector fields can always be written as a [[Conservative vector field|gradient of a scalar function]] (as soon as the space is assumed to be [[simply connected]], see '''Note 1''' below), and that a [[divergence]]less field can be written as a curl of another field.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://mathworld.wolfram.com/DivergencelessField.html |title=Divergenceless field|date=December 6, 2009}}</ref>


Passing to [[quotient module]]s yields another exact sequence
'''Note 1.''' This example makes use of the fact that 3-dimensional space is topologically trivial.


:<math>0\to R/(I\cap J) \to R/I \oplus R/J \to R/(I+J) \to 0 </math>
'''Note 2.''' <math>\Bbb{H}_{\text{curl}}</math> and <math>\Bbb{H}_{\text{div}}</math> are the domains for the curl and div operators respectively.


== Facts ==
== Properties ==
The [[splitting lemma]] states that, for a short exact sequence
The [[splitting lemma]] states that if the above short exact sequence admits a morphism ''t'' : ''B'' → ''A'' such that ''t'' <small>o</small> ''f'' is the identity on ''A'' [[logical disjunction|or]] a morphism ''u'': ''C'' → ''B'' such that ''g'' <small>o</small> ''u'' is the identity on ''C'', then ''B'' is a [[twisted direct sum]] of ''A'' and ''C''. (For groups, a twisted direct sum is a [[semidirect product]]; in an abelian category, every twisted direct sum is an ordinary [[biproduct|direct sum]].) In this case, we say that the short exact sequence ''splits''.
:<math>0 \to A \;\xrightarrow{\ f\ }\; B \;\xrightarrow{\ g\ }\; C \to 0,</math> the following conditions are equivalent.
*There exists a morphism {{math|''t'' : ''B'' → ''A''}} such that {{math|''t'' ∘ ''f''}} is the identity on {{math|''A''}}.
*There exists a morphism {{math|''u'': ''C'' → ''B''}} such that {{math|''g'' ∘ ''u''}} is the identity on {{math|''C''}}.
*There exists a morphism {{math|''u'': ''C'' → ''B''}} such that {{math|''B''}} is the [[direct sum]] of {{math|''f''(''A'')}} and {{math|''u''(''C'')}}.

For non-commutative groups, the splitting lemma does not apply, and one has only the equivalence between the two last conditions, with "the direct sum" replaced with "a [[semidirect product]]".

In both cases, one says that such a short exact sequence ''splits''.


The [[snake lemma]] shows how a [[commutative diagram]] with two exact rows gives rise to a longer exact sequence. The [[nine lemma]] is a special case.
The [[snake lemma]] shows how a [[commutative diagram]] with two exact rows gives rise to a longer exact sequence. The [[nine lemma]] is a special case.


The [[five lemma]] gives conditions under which the middle map in a commutative diagram with exact rows of length 5 is an isomorphism; the [[short five lemma]] is a special case thereof applying to short exact sequences.
The [[five lemma]] gives conditions under which the middle map in a commutative diagram with exact rows of length 5 is an isomorphism; the [[short five lemma]] is a special case thereof applying to short exact sequences.

===Weaving lemma===


The importance of short exact sequences is underlined by the fact that every exact sequence results from "weaving together" several overlapping short exact sequences. Consider for instance the exact sequence
The importance of short exact sequences is underlined by the fact that every exact sequence results from "weaving together" several overlapping short exact sequences. Consider for instance the exact sequence
Line 90: Line 119:
:<math>C_k \cong \ker (A_k\to A_{k+1}) \cong \operatorname{im} (A_{k-1}\to A_k)</math>.
:<math>C_k \cong \ker (A_k\to A_{k+1}) \cong \operatorname{im} (A_{k-1}\to A_k)</math>.


Suppose in addition that the [[cokernel]] of each morphism exists, and is isomorphic to the image of the next morphism in the sequence:
Suppose in addition that the cokernel of each morphism exists, and is isomorphic to the image of the next morphism in the sequence:


:<math>C_k \cong \operatorname{coker} (A_{k-2}\to A_{k-1})</math>
:<math>C_k \cong \operatorname{coker} (A_{k-2}\to A_{k-1})</math>


(This is true for a number of interesting categories, including any abelian category such as the [[abelian group]]s; but it is not true for all categories that allow exact sequences, and in particular is not true for the [[category of groups]], in which coker(''f'') : ''G'' → ''H'' is not ''H''/im(''f'') but <math>H / {\left\langle \operatorname{im} f \right\rangle}^H</math>, the quotient of ''H'' by the [[conjugate closure]] of im(''f'').) Then we obtain a commutative diagram in which all the diagonals are short exact sequences:
(This is true for a number of interesting categories, including any abelian category such as the abelian groups; but it is not true for all categories that allow exact sequences, and in particular is not true for the [[category of groups]], in which coker(''f'') : ''G'' → ''H'' is not ''H''/im(''f'') but <math>H / {\left\langle \operatorname{im} f \right\rangle}^H</math>, the quotient of ''H'' by the [[conjugate closure]] of im(''f'').) Then we obtain a commutative diagram in which all the diagonals are short exact sequences:


:[[Image:long short exact sequences.png]]
:[[Image:long short exact sequences.png]]
Note that the only portion of this diagram that depends on the cokernel condition is the object ''C''<sub>7</sub> and the final pair of morphisms ''A''<sub>6</sub> ''C''<sub>7</sub> → 0. If there exists any object <math>A_{k+1}</math> and morphism <math>A_k \to A_{k+1}</math> such that <math>A_{k-1} \to A_k \to A_{k+1}</math> is exact, then the exactness of <math>0 \to C_k \to A_k \to C_{k+1} \to 0</math> is ensured. Again taking the example of the category of groups, the fact that im(''f'') is the kernel of some homomorphism on ''H'' implies that it is a [[normal subgroup]], which coincides with its conjugate closure; thus coker(''f'') is isomorphic to the image ''H''/im(''f'') of the next morphism.
The only portion of this diagram that depends on the cokernel condition is the object <math display="inline">C_7</math> and the final pair of morphisms <math display="inline">A_6 \to C_7\to 0</math>. If there exists any object <math>A_{k+1}</math> and morphism <math>A_k \to A_{k+1}</math> such that <math>A_{k-1} \to A_k \to A_{k+1}</math> is exact, then the exactness of <math>0 \to C_k \to A_k \to C_{k+1} \to 0</math> is ensured. Again taking the example of the category of groups, the fact that im(''f'') is the kernel of some homomorphism on ''H'' implies that it is a [[normal subgroup]], which coincides with its conjugate closure; thus coker(''f'') is isomorphic to the image ''H''/im(''f'') of the next morphism.


Conversely, given any list of overlapping short exact sequences, their middle terms form an exact sequence in the same manner.
Conversely, given any list of overlapping short exact sequences, their middle terms form an exact sequence in the same manner.


==Applications of exact sequences==
==Applications of exact sequences==
In the theory of abelian categories, short exact sequences are often used as a convenient language to talk about sub- and factor objects.
In the theory of abelian categories, short exact sequences are often used as a convenient language to talk about [[subobject | subobjects]] and factor objects.


The [[extension problem]] is essentially the question "Given the end terms ''A'' and ''C'' of a short exact sequence, what possibilities exist for the middle term ''B''?" In the category of groups, this is equivalent to the question, what groups ''B'' have ''A'' as a [[normal subgroup]] and ''C'' as the corresponding factor group? This problem is important in the [[classification of finite simple groups|classification of groups]]. See also [[Outer automorphism group]].
The [[extension problem]] is essentially the question "Given the end terms ''A'' and ''C'' of a short exact sequence, what possibilities exist for the middle term ''B''?" In the category of groups, this is equivalent to the question, what groups ''B'' have ''A'' as a normal subgroup and ''C'' as the corresponding factor group? This problem is important in the [[classification of finite simple groups|classification of groups]]. See also [[Outer automorphism group]].


Notice that in an exact sequence, the composition ''f''<sub>''i''+1</sub> <small>o</small> ''f''<sub>''i''</sub> maps ''A''<sub>''i''</sub> to 0 in ''A''<sub>''i''+2</sub>, so every exact sequence is a [[chain complex]]. Furthermore, only ''f''<sub>''i''</sub>-images of elements of ''A''<sub>''i''</sub> are mapped to 0 by ''f''<sub>''i''+1</sub>, so the [[homology (mathematics)|homology]] of this chain complex is trivial. More succinctly:
Notice that in an exact sequence, the composition ''f''<sub>''i''+1</sub> ''f''<sub>''i''</sub> maps ''A''<sub>''i''</sub> to 0 in ''A''<sub>''i''+2</sub>, so every exact sequence is a [[chain complex]]. Furthermore, only ''f''<sub>''i''</sub>-images of elements of ''A''<sub>''i''</sub> are mapped to 0 by ''f''<sub>''i''+1</sub>, so the [[homology (mathematics)|homology]] of this chain complex is trivial. More succinctly:
:Exact sequences are precisely those chain complexes which are [[acyclic complex|acyclic]].
:Exact sequences are precisely those chain complexes which are [[acyclic complex|acyclic]].
Given any chain complex, its homology can therefore be thought of as a measure of the degree to which it fails to be exact.
Given any chain complex, its homology can therefore be thought of as a measure of the degree to which it fails to be exact.


If we take a series of short exact sequences linked by chain complexes (that is, a short exact sequence of chain complexes, or from another point of view, a chain complex of short exact sequences), then we can derive from this a '''long exact sequence''' (i.e. an exact sequence indexed by the natural numbers) on homology by application of the [[zig-zag lemma]]. It comes up in [[algebraic topology]] in the study of [[relative homology]]; the [[Mayer–Vietoris sequence]] is another example. Long exact sequences induced by short exact sequences are also characteristic of [[derived functor]]s.
If we take a series of short exact sequences linked by chain complexes (that is, a short exact sequence of chain complexes, or from another point of view, a chain complex of short exact sequences), then we can derive from this a '''long exact sequence''' (that is, an exact sequence indexed by the natural numbers) on homology by application of the [[zig-zag lemma]]. It comes up in [[algebraic topology]] in the study of [[relative homology]]; the [[Mayer–Vietoris sequence]] is another example. Long exact sequences induced by short exact sequences are also characteristic of [[derived functor]]s.


[[Exact functor]]s are [[functor]]s that transform exact sequences into exact sequences.
[[Exact functor]]s are [[functor]]s that transform exact sequences into exact sequences.


==References==
==References==
;General
*{{cite book
|first=Edwin Henry
|last=Spanier
|title=Algebraic Topology
|publisher=Springer
|location=Berlin
|year=1995
|pages=179
|isbn=0-387-94426-5
}}
*{{cite book
|first=David
|last=Eisenbud
|title=Commutative Algebra: with a View Toward Algebraic Geometry
|publisher=Springer-Verlag New York
|year=1995
|pages=785
|isbn=0-387-94269-6
}}

;Citations
;Citations
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}


;Sources
== External links ==
*{{cite book|first=Edwin Henry|last=Spanier|author-link=Edwin Spanier|title=Algebraic Topology|url=https://archive.org/details/algebraictopolog00span|url-access=limited|publisher=Springer|location=Berlin|year=1995|page=[https://archive.org/details/algebraictopolog00span/page/n98 179]|isbn=0-387-94426-5}}
*{{PlanetMath reference |id=1354 |title=Exact sequence}}
*{{cite book|first=David|last=Eisenbud|author-link=David Eisenbud|title=Commutative Algebra: with a View Toward Algebraic Geometry|url=https://archive.org/details/commutativealgeb00eise_849|url-access=limited|publisher=Springer-Verlag New York|year=1995|page=[https://archive.org/details/commutativealgeb00eise_849/page/n777 785]|isbn=0-387-94269-6}}
*{{MathWorld |title=Exact Sequence |urlname=ExactSequence}}
*{{MathWorld |title=Short Exact Sequence |urlname=ShortExactSequence}}



{{Topology}}
{{Topology}}

Latest revision as of 10:48, 24 September 2024

Illustration of an exact sequence of groups using Euler diagrams. Each group is represented by a circle, within which there is a subgroup that is simultaneously the range of the previous homomorphism and the kernel of the next one, because of the exact sequence condition.
Illustration of an exact sequence of groups using Euler diagrams.

An exact sequence is a sequence of morphisms between objects (for example, groups, rings, modules, and, more generally, objects of an abelian category) such that the image of one morphism equals the kernel of the next.

Definition

[edit]

In the context of group theory, a sequence

of groups and group homomorphisms is said to be exact at if . The sequence is called exact if it is exact at each for all , i.e., if the image of each homomorphism is equal to the kernel of the next.

The sequence of groups and homomorphisms may be either finite or infinite.

A similar definition can be made for other algebraic structures. For example, one could have an exact sequence of vector spaces and linear maps, or of modules and module homomorphisms. More generally, the notion of an exact sequence makes sense in any category with kernels and cokernels, and more specially in abelian categories, where it is widely used.

Simple cases

[edit]

To understand the definition, it is helpful to consider relatively simple cases where the sequence is of group homomorphisms, is finite, and begins or ends with the trivial group. Traditionally, this, along with the single identity element, is denoted 0 (additive notation, usually when the groups are abelian), or denoted 1 (multiplicative notation).

  • Consider the sequence 0 → AB. The image of the leftmost map is 0. Therefore the sequence is exact if and only if the rightmost map (from A to B) has kernel {0}; that is, if and only if that map is a monomorphism (injective, or one-to-one).
  • Consider the dual sequence BC → 0. The kernel of the rightmost map is C. Therefore the sequence is exact if and only if the image of the leftmost map (from B to C) is all of C; that is, if and only if that map is an epimorphism (surjective, or onto).
  • Therefore, the sequence 0 → XY → 0 is exact if and only if the map from X to Y is both a monomorphism and epimorphism (that is, a bimorphism), and so usually an isomorphism from X to Y (this always holds in exact categories like Set).

Short exact sequence

[edit]

Short exact sequences are exact sequences of the form

As established above, for any such short exact sequence, f is a monomorphism and g is an epimorphism. Furthermore, the image of f is equal to the kernel of g. It is helpful to think of A as a subobject of B with f embedding A into B, and of C as the corresponding factor object (or quotient), B/A, with g inducing an isomorphism

The short exact sequence

is called split if there exists a homomorphism h : CB such that the composition gh is the identity map on C. It follows that if these are abelian groups, B is isomorphic to the direct sum of A and C:

Long exact sequence

[edit]

A general exact sequence is sometimes called a long exact sequence, to distinguish from the special case of a short exact sequence.[1]

A long exact sequence is equivalent to a family of short exact sequences in the following sense: Given a long sequence

(1)

with n ≥ 2, we can split it up into the short sequences

(2)

where for every . By construction, the sequences (2) are exact at the 's (regardless of the exactness of (1)). Furthermore, (1) is a long exact sequence if and only if (2) are all short exact sequences.

See weaving lemma for details on how to re-form the long exact sequence from the short exact sequences.

Examples

[edit]

Integers modulo two

[edit]

Consider the following sequence of abelian groups:

The first homomorphism maps each element i in the set of integers Z to the element 2i in Z. The second homomorphism maps each element i in Z to an element j in the quotient group; that is, j = i mod 2. Here the hook arrow indicates that the map 2× from Z to Z is a monomorphism, and the two-headed arrow indicates an epimorphism (the map mod 2). This is an exact sequence because the image 2Z of the monomorphism is the kernel of the epimorphism. Essentially "the same" sequence can also be written as

In this case the monomorphism is 2n ↦ 2n and although it looks like an identity function, it is not onto (that is, not an epimorphism) because the odd numbers don't belong to 2Z. The image of 2Z through this monomorphism is however exactly the same subset of Z as the image of Z through n ↦ 2n used in the previous sequence. This latter sequence does differ in the concrete nature of its first object from the previous one as 2Z is not the same set as Z even though the two are isomorphic as groups.

The first sequence may also be written without using special symbols for monomorphism and epimorphism:

Here 0 denotes the trivial group, the map from Z to Z is multiplication by 2, and the map from Z to the factor group Z/2Z is given by reducing integers modulo 2. This is indeed an exact sequence:

  • the image of the map 0 → Z is {0}, and the kernel of multiplication by 2 is also {0}, so the sequence is exact at the first Z.
  • the image of multiplication by 2 is 2Z, and the kernel of reducing modulo 2 is also 2Z, so the sequence is exact at the second Z.
  • the image of reducing modulo 2 is Z/2Z, and the kernel of the zero map is also Z/2Z, so the sequence is exact at the position Z/2Z.

The first and third sequences are somewhat of a special case owing to the infinite nature of Z. It is not possible for a finite group to be mapped by inclusion (that is, by a monomorphism) as a proper subgroup of itself. Instead the sequence that emerges from the first isomorphism theorem is

(here the trivial group is denoted as these groups are not supposed to be abelian).

As a more concrete example of an exact sequence on finite groups:

where is the cyclic group of order n and is the dihedral group of order 2n, which is a non-abelian group.

Intersection and sum of modules

[edit]

Let I and J be two ideals of a ring R. Then

is an exact sequence of R-modules, where the module homomorphism maps each element x of to the element of the direct sum , and the homomorphism maps each element of to .

These homomorphisms are restrictions of similarly defined homomorphisms that form the short exact sequence

Passing to quotient modules yields another exact sequence

Properties

[edit]

The splitting lemma states that, for a short exact sequence

the following conditions are equivalent.
  • There exists a morphism t : BA such that tf is the identity on A.
  • There exists a morphism u: CB such that gu is the identity on C.
  • There exists a morphism u: CB such that B is the direct sum of f(A) and u(C).

For non-commutative groups, the splitting lemma does not apply, and one has only the equivalence between the two last conditions, with "the direct sum" replaced with "a semidirect product".

In both cases, one says that such a short exact sequence splits.

The snake lemma shows how a commutative diagram with two exact rows gives rise to a longer exact sequence. The nine lemma is a special case.

The five lemma gives conditions under which the middle map in a commutative diagram with exact rows of length 5 is an isomorphism; the short five lemma is a special case thereof applying to short exact sequences.

Weaving lemma

[edit]

The importance of short exact sequences is underlined by the fact that every exact sequence results from "weaving together" several overlapping short exact sequences. Consider for instance the exact sequence

which implies that there exist objects Ck in the category such that

.

Suppose in addition that the cokernel of each morphism exists, and is isomorphic to the image of the next morphism in the sequence:

(This is true for a number of interesting categories, including any abelian category such as the abelian groups; but it is not true for all categories that allow exact sequences, and in particular is not true for the category of groups, in which coker(f) : GH is not H/im(f) but , the quotient of H by the conjugate closure of im(f).) Then we obtain a commutative diagram in which all the diagonals are short exact sequences:

The only portion of this diagram that depends on the cokernel condition is the object and the final pair of morphisms . If there exists any object and morphism such that is exact, then the exactness of is ensured. Again taking the example of the category of groups, the fact that im(f) is the kernel of some homomorphism on H implies that it is a normal subgroup, which coincides with its conjugate closure; thus coker(f) is isomorphic to the image H/im(f) of the next morphism.

Conversely, given any list of overlapping short exact sequences, their middle terms form an exact sequence in the same manner.

Applications of exact sequences

[edit]

In the theory of abelian categories, short exact sequences are often used as a convenient language to talk about subobjects and factor objects.

The extension problem is essentially the question "Given the end terms A and C of a short exact sequence, what possibilities exist for the middle term B?" In the category of groups, this is equivalent to the question, what groups B have A as a normal subgroup and C as the corresponding factor group? This problem is important in the classification of groups. See also Outer automorphism group.

Notice that in an exact sequence, the composition fi+1fi maps Ai to 0 in Ai+2, so every exact sequence is a chain complex. Furthermore, only fi-images of elements of Ai are mapped to 0 by fi+1, so the homology of this chain complex is trivial. More succinctly:

Exact sequences are precisely those chain complexes which are acyclic.

Given any chain complex, its homology can therefore be thought of as a measure of the degree to which it fails to be exact.

If we take a series of short exact sequences linked by chain complexes (that is, a short exact sequence of chain complexes, or from another point of view, a chain complex of short exact sequences), then we can derive from this a long exact sequence (that is, an exact sequence indexed by the natural numbers) on homology by application of the zig-zag lemma. It comes up in algebraic topology in the study of relative homology; the Mayer–Vietoris sequence is another example. Long exact sequences induced by short exact sequences are also characteristic of derived functors.

Exact functors are functors that transform exact sequences into exact sequences.

References

[edit]
Citations
  1. ^ "exact sequence in nLab, Remark 2.3". ncatlab.org. Retrieved 2021-09-05.
Sources