text:
# Non-unitary set-theoretical solutions to the Quantum Yang-Baxter Equation

## 1 Introduction

In this paper we study set-theoretical solutions to the Quantum Yang-Baxter equation, i.e. permutations $`R:X\times XX\times X`$ with $`X`$ being a non-empty set such that

$$R^{12}R^{13}R^{23}=R^{23}R^{13}R^{12}inAut(X\times X\times X).$$

In the above $`R^{12}`$, $`R^{13}`$, $`R^{23}Aut(X\times X\times X)`$ stand for $`R`$ acting in 1,2; 1,3; and 2,3 components of $`X\times X\times X`$ correspondingly. The idea to consider set-theoretical solutions first appeared in \[Dr\]. Later on, Etingof, Schedler and the author \[ESS\] studied set-theoretical solutions to the Quantum Yang-Baxter equation which satisfied additional properties of unitarity and nondegeneracy (crossing symmetry). In particular, \[ESS\] contained the classification of nondegenerate unitary set-theoretical solutions to QYBE in group theoretical terms as well as numerous classes of examples of such solutions. Subsequently, Lu, Yan and Zhu in \[LYZ\] showed that many of the constructions from \[ESS\] hold in a more general case of nondegenerate but not necessarily unitary set-theoretical solutions to QYBE.

Following \[ESS\] and \[LYZ\], we develop a theory of nondegenerate set-theoretical solutions to QYBE. Particularly, we show that the unitarity condition that was used in \[ESS\] for group theoretical characterization of unitary nondegenerate set-theoretical solutions to QYBE can be dropped. We give a group theoretical characterization of general set-theoretical nondegenerate solutions to QYBE in Theorem 2.7. We also introduce injective solutions, study their properties, and show that there is a combinatorial criterion (Theorem 2.9) describing the class of injective nondegenerate solutions to QYBE. Injectivity property, which is a generalization of involutivity, is important for studying affine solutions. In particular the classification of unitary affine solutions given in \[ESS\] can be generalized to include injective solutions.

It was shown in \[ESS\] that the structure group of a nondegenerate unitary set-theoretical solution to QYBE on a set with N elements always has an abelian subgroup of finite index and of rank N. We compute (Theorem 2.10) the rank of a finite index abelian subgroup of the structure group for an arbitrary nondegenerate finite solution and show that this rank never exceeds N, with the equality taking place only in the unitary case.

In the second part of the paper we discuss the applications of the developed theory to examples. In particular, we classify affine solutions on an abelian group. It is proved that injective affine solutions are obtained from the representations of the algebra generated by invertible elements $`p`$, $`q`$, $`z`$ subject to $`pq=qp`$ and $`z^2z(p+q)+pq=0`$.

Acknowledgments. The author is thankful to his advisor Pavel Etingof for a valuable exchange of ideas and guidance throughout the work on the paper, and to Lu, Yan, Zhu for making their work available before publication.

## 2 Structure groups

### 2.1 Construction of the structure groups

Let $`X`$ be a nonempty set and $`S:X\times XX\times X`$ a bijective map. We call a pair $`(X,S)`$ a braided set if the following braiding condition holds in $`X\times X\times X`$:

$$S_1S_2S_1=S_2S_1S_2,$$
(2.1)
where $`S_1=S\times id`$, $`S_2=id\times S`$.

Remark. Consider the map $`R:X\times XX\times X`$ given by $`R=\sigma S`$, where $`\sigma (x,y)=(y,x)`$ for $`x,yX`$. Then $`(X,S)`$ is a braided set if and only if $`R`$ satisfies the Quantum Yang-Baxter equation.

It is useful to associate with a braided set $`(X,S)`$ two groups $`G_X`$ and $`A_X`$.

###### Definition 1

Define the group $`G_X`$ as the group generated by the elements of $`X`$ subject to the relations $`xy=y_1x_1`$ if $`S(x,y)=(y_1,x_1)`$, where $`x,yX`$. We call $`G_X`$ the structure group of the braided set $`(X,S)`$.

###### Definition 2

Define the group $`A_X`$ as the group generated by elements of $`X`$ subject to relations $`x_1y=y_2x_1`$, where $`x,yX`$ and $`x_1,y_2X`$ are defined out of relations $`S(x,y)=(y_1,x_1),S(y_1,x_1)=(x_2,y_2)`$. We call $`A_X`$ the derived structure group of the braided set $`(X,S)`$.

We introduce the maps $`g:X\times XX`$ and $`f:X\times XX`$ as components of $`S`$, i.e. for $`x,yX`$

$$S(x,y)=(g_x(y),f_y(x)).$$

###### Definition 3

(i) We call a set $`(X,S)`$ nondegenerate if $`g_x(y)`$ is a bijective function of $`y`$ for fixed $`x`$ and $`f_y(x)`$ is a bijective function of $`x`$ for fixed $`y`$. (ii) We call a set $`(X,S)`$ involutive if $`S^2=id_{X^2}`$. A braided set which is involutive will be called symmetric.

In particular, for a symmetric set $`(X,S)`$ we see that the group $`A_X`$ is the free abelian group generated by elements of $`X`$. Note that the properties of involutivity and nondegeneracy are equivalent to corresponding properties of unitarity and crossing symmetry for the map $`R=\sigma S`$ \[ESS\].

Recall that the braid group $`B_n`$ for $`n2`$ is generated by elements $`b_i,1in1`$, with defining relations

$$b_ib_j=b_jb_i,|ij|>1,b_ib_{i+1}b_i=b_{i+1}b_ib_{i+1},$$

and recall that the symmetric group $`S_n`$ is the quotient of $`B_n`$ by the relations $`b_i^2=1`$. The following obvious proposition explains our terminology. Let $`S_n^{ii+1}:X^nX^n`$ be defined as $`S_n^{ii+1}=id_{X^{i1}}\times S\times id_{X^{ni1}}`$.

###### Theorem 2.1 (\[ESS\])

(i) The assignment $`b_iS_n^{ii+1}`$ extends to an action of $`B_n`$ on $`X^n`$ ($`n3)`$ if and only if $`(X,S)`$ is a braided set.

(ii) The assignment $`b_iS_n^{ii+1}`$ extends to an action of $`S_n`$ on $`X^n`$ ($`n3`$) if and only if $`(X,S)`$ is a symmetric set.

###### Definition 4

The action of Theorem 2.1 is called the twisted action of $`B_n`$ (or $`S_n`$) given by $`S`$.

The following result shows how a nondegenerate braided set $`(X,S)`$ gives rise to two actions of the structure group $`G_X`$ on the set $`X`$.

###### Theorem 2.2

(\[ESS\]) Suppose that $`(X,S)`$ is nondegenerate. Then $`(X,S)`$ is a braided set if and only if the following conditions are simultaneously satisfied:

(i) the assignment $`xf_x`$ is a right action of $`G_X`$ on $`X`$;

(ii) the assignment $`xg_x`$ is a left action of $`G_X`$ on $`X`$;

(iii) the linking relation

$$f_{g_{f_y(x)}(z)}(g_x(y))=g_{f_{g_y(z)}(x)}(f_z(y))$$

holds.

Proof: Conditions (i)-(iii) are exactly the three components of the braid relation (2.1). $`\mathrm{}`$

In light of the above proposition it makes sense to introduce the notations $`xy=g_x(y)`$ and $`yx=f_y^1(x)`$ for $`x,yX`$. Then if $`(X,S)`$ is a nondegenerate braided set, we can extend $``$ and $``$ to left actions of $`G_X`$ on $`X`$. We will denote the actions of an element $`gG_X`$ on an element $`xX`$ by $`gx`$ and $`gx`$ correspondingly.

From now on we always assume $`(X,S)`$ to be a nondegenerate braided set. Sometimes we refer to nondegenerate braided sets as to ”solutions”, meaning that $`S`$ is a solution to braid equation (2.1).

Define $`\varphi :X\times XX`$ by

$$\varphi (y,x)=x^1((yx)y)$$
(2.2)
and $`S^{}:X\times XX\times X`$ as $`S^{}(x,y)=(\varphi (y,x),x)`$.

###### Theorem 2.3

(i) $`\varphi (y,z)`$ is $`G_X`$-invariant w.r.t. \*-action, i.e. for $`gG_X`$, $`g\varphi (y,z)=\varphi (gy,gz)`$.

(ii) $`(X,S^{})`$ is a nondegenerate braided set. We call this set the derived braided set or the derived solution.

(iii) The structure group of the derived solution is the derived structure group.

(iv) For each integer $`n2`$ there exists a bijection $`J_n:X^nX^n`$ such that $`J_nS_n^{ii+1}J_n^1=(S^{})_n^{ii+1}`$, where $`S_n^{ii+1}`$ is the same as in Theorem 2.1. In this way, twisted actions of $`B_n`$ given by $`S`$ and $`S^{}`$ are conjugate.

We remark that the statement (iv) of Theorem 2.3 was proved in \[ESS\] (cf. Prop. 1.7) for unitary solutions and in \[LYZ\] (cf. Th. 3) for injective solutions that are defined in Section 2.3.

Proof:

It is easy to see that (iv) implies (ii). Statement (iii) follows from definitions of structure group, derived structure group and $`\varphi `$. Let us show that (i) implies (iv). Define $`J_n`$ inductively as $`J_1=id_X`$, $`J_n=Q_n(J_{n1}\times id_X)`$, where $`Q_n:X^nX^n`$ is defined as $`Q_n(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=(x_n^1x_1,\mathrm{},x_n^1x_{n1},x_n)`$. We prove formula $`J_nS_n^{ii+1}J_n^1=(S^{})_n^{ii+1}`$ by induction on $`n`$. For $`n=2`$ (induction base) the relation follows directly from definition of $`\varphi `$. Suppose the relation holds for $`n=k`$, let us prove it holds for $`n=k+1`$. Since $`J_{k+1}=Q_{k+1}(J_k\times id_X)`$ and $`Q_{k+1}`$ commutes with $`(S^{})_{k+1}^{ii+1}`$ for $`i<k`$ (by (i)) the relation is true for $`i<k`$. So, it remains to prove it for $`i=k`$ when it becomes identical to the relation of the induction base.

Now we have to show that (i) is true. It is enough to check that for every $`t,y,zX`$, $`t^1\varphi (y,z)=\varphi (t^1y,t^1z)`$ or, equivalently by (2.2):

$$t^1(z^1((yz)y))=(t^1z)^1(((t^1y)(t^1z))(t^1y)).$$
(2.3)
The linking relation of Theorem 2.2 states that for $`x,y,tX`$

$$((y^1x)t)^1(xy)=((yt)^1x)(t^1y)$$
(2.4)
holds. If we substitute $`x=yz`$ in relation (2.4) we can rewrite its right hand side as follows:

$$((yt)^1(yz))(t^1y)=((yt)^1(yt(t^1z)))(t^1y)$$

where the product $`yt`$ is the product of elements $`y,t`$ in group $`G_X`$, thus $`yt=(yt)(t^1y)`$ and

$$((yt)^1(yt(t^1z)))(t^1y)=((t^1y)(t^1z))(t^1y).$$

In this way, relation (2.4) is equivalent to relation (2.5) below:

$$(zt)^1((yz)y)=((t^1y)(t^1z))(t^1y).$$
(2.5)
Substituting, (2.5) into the right side of (2.3) we get

$$(t^1z)^1(((t^1y)(t^1z))(t^1y))=((t^1z)^1(zt)^1)((yz)y).$$

Using the relation $`t^1z^1=(t^1z)^1(zt)^1`$ in group $`G_X`$ we verify that invariance relation (2.3) is true. The theorem is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

Note that by construction we have two natural maps $`\psi _G:XG_X`$ and $`\psi _A:XA_X`$ that are not necessarily embeddings (see Examples below). Theorem 2.4 shows that the latter map is $`G_X`$-invariant with respect to a suitable $`G_X`$-module structure on $`A_X`$. Define the group $`Permut(X)`$ as the group of all permutations of the set $`X`$. Then both $``$ and $``$ define homomorphisms from $`G_X`$ to $`Permut(X)`$. Denote by $`Aut_X(A_X)`$ the group of automorphisms of $`A_X`$ that map the generating set $`\psi _A(X)`$ onto itself.

###### Theorem 2.4

For a nondegenerate braided set $`(X,S)`$ the group homomorphism $`:G_XPermut(X)`$ can be uniquely lifted to the homomorphism $`\widehat{}:G_XAut_X(A_X)`$ such that for any $`gG_X,xX`$ $`\psi _A(gx)=g\widehat{}\psi _A(x)`$.

Proof:

It is clear that the map $`:G_XPermut(X)`$ can be uniquely extended to the homomorphism from the group $`G_X`$ to the group of automorphisms of the free group generated by $`X`$. So, it is enough to show that such an extension respects the generating relations in group $`A_X`$. This immediately follows from statements (i), (iii) of Theorem 2.3. $`\mathrm{}`$

Example\[Dr\] Let $`X`$ be a union of conjugacy classes in a group $`G`$, i.e. $`gXg^1=X`$ for any $`gG`$. Define $`S:X\times XX\times X`$ as $`S(x,y)=(xyx^1,x)`$ for $`x,yX`$. It is easy to see that $`(X,S)`$ is a braided nondegenerate set. It was called the conjugate solution in \[LYZ\]. Clearly, this solution coincides with its own derived solution - therefore $`G_X=A_X`$. The action of $`G_X`$ on $`A_X`$ is easily seen to be trivial, i.e. $`g\widehat{}h=h`$ for any $`gG_X,hA_X`$. The embedding $`i:XG`$ can be extended to a homomorphism $`I:G_XG`$ that maps elements of $`\psi _G(X)`$ onto $`X`$, thus the map $`\psi _G:XG_X`$ is injective. So $`(X,S)`$ is an injective solution (cf. Definition 8).

### 2.2 Bijective 1-cocycle

Recall that we started with a nondegenerate braided set $`(X,S)`$ and constructed two groups $`G_X`$, $`A_X`$ and the action $`\widehat{}`$ of $`G_X`$ on $`A_X`$. In the future we drop $`\widehat{}`$ in $`\widehat{}`$ and denote the action of $`gG_X`$ on $`hA_X`$ from Theorem 2.4 simply by $`gh`$. Theorem 2.5 is the main step towards classification of nondegenerate braided sets in group theoretical terms.

###### Definition 5

Suppose a group $`G`$ acts on a group $`A`$ by automorphisms meaning that there is a homomorphism from $`G`$ to $`Aut(A)`$. Denote the product of elements $`g_1,g_2`$ in $`G`$ by $`g_1g_2`$ and the product of elements $`a_1,a_2`$ in $`A`$ by $`a_1a_2`$. We call a map $`\pi :GA`$ a 1-cocycle if for any $`g_1,g_2G`$

$$\pi (g_1g_2)=(g_2^1\pi (g_1))\pi (g_2)$$
(2.6)
where $``$ stands for the action of $`G`$ on $`A`$.

###### Theorem 2.5

(cf. \[LYZ\], Th. 2 and \[ESS\], Prop. 2.5) For a nondegenerate braided set $`(X,S)`$ there exists a unique bijective 1-cocycle $`\pi :G_XA_X`$ such that $`\pi \psi _G=\psi _A`$ on $`X`$.

Remark. In \[LYZ\] the authors introduced on $`G_X`$ another group structure. It follows from our and their results that $`G_X`$ with the new group structure is isomorphic to $`A_X`$ via $`\pi :G_XA_X`$.

Proof:

Construction of the 1-cocycle.

Let us construct the 1-cocycle $`\pi :G_XA_X`$. Consider the semidirect product $`G_XA_X`$. The group $`G_XA_X`$ consists of pairs $`(g,h)`$, $`gG_X,hA_X`$ with the group operation given by the formula

$$(g,h)(g^{},h^{})=(gg^{},((g^{})^1h)h^{}).$$

Define the map $`s:XG_XA_X`$ via the formula $`s(x)=(\psi _G(x),\psi _A(x))`$ for any $`xX`$. We claim that there exists a group homomorphism $`\overline{s}:G_XG_XA_X`$ such that $`\overline{s}\psi _G=s`$. Indeed, since $`\psi _G(X)`$ generates the whole $`G_X`$ to show that $`\overline{s}`$ exists it is necessary and sufficient to check that $`s`$ respects the relations in $`G_X`$, i.e. that for $`x,yX`$ $`s(x)s(y)`$ is equal to $`s(xy)s(y^1x)`$ in group $`G_XA_X`$. When we formally multiply terms out, the above condition transforms into the relation

$$(xy,(y^1x)y)=((xy)(y^1x),((y^1x)^1(xy))(y^1x)),$$

which coincides componentwise with the defining relations in groups $`G_X`$, $`A_X`$. Let us define the projection $`p:G_XA_XA_X`$ by the formula $`p(g,h)=h`$. Introduce $`\pi :G_XA_X`$ as $`\pi =p\overline{s}`$. Clearly, $`\pi `$ is a 1-cocycle. The tricky part is to show that $`\pi `$ is bijective.

Proof that $`\pi `$ is bijective.

###### Lemma 1

(i) For $`x_1,x_2X`$, $`gG_X`$ if $`\psi _G(x_1)=\psi _G(x_2)`$ then $`\psi _G(gx_1)=\psi _G(gx_2)`$ and $`\psi _G(gx_1)=\psi _G(gx_2)`$.

(ii) For $`xX`$ $`\psi _G((xx)x)=\psi _G(xx)`$ and $`\psi _G((x^1x)^1x)=\psi _G(x^1x)`$.

(iii) For $`xX`$ $`\psi _G(x)=\psi _G((xx)^1(xx))=\psi _G((x^1x)(x^1x))`$.

To prove the lemma we notice that $`S(xx,x)=((xx)x,x)`$ therefore $`\psi _G((xx)x)\psi _G(x)=\psi _G(xx)\psi _G(x)`$ and $`\psi _G((xx)x)=\psi _G(xx)`$. Similarly $`S(x,x^1x)=(x,(x^1x)^1x)`$ implies that $`\psi _G((x^1x)^1x)=\psi _G(x^1x)`$. So statement (ii) of the lemma is proved. It is clear that statement (iii) follows from (i) and (ii) thus it remains to prove (i).

Let us show that $`\psi _G(x_1)=\psi _G(x_2)`$ implies that $`\psi _G(gx_1)=\psi _G(gx_2)`$. For a fixed $`zX`$ it is enough to reason that $`\psi _G(x_1)=\psi _G(x_2)`$ if and only if $`\psi _G(z^1x_1)=\psi _G(z^1x_2)`$. Since $`S(x_1,z)=(x_1z,z^1x_1)`$ and $`S(x_2,z)=(x_2z,z^1x_2)`$ we see that

$$\psi _G(x_1)\psi _G(z)=\psi _G(x_1z)\psi _G(z^1x_1)$$
(2.7)
and

$$\psi _G(x_2)\psi _G(z)=\psi _G(x_2z)\psi _G(z^1x_2).$$
(2.8)
Suppose $`\psi _G(x_1)=\psi _G(x_2)`$ then since $``$ is an action of $`G_X`$ on $`X`$ we immediately see that $`\psi _G(x_1z)=\psi _G(x_2z)`$ therefore equations (2.7)-(2.8) imply that $`\psi _G(z^1x_1)=\psi _G(z^1x_2)`$. Conversely, assume that $`\psi _G(z^1x_1)=\psi _G(z^1x_2)`$. Our task is to prove that $`\psi _G(x_1)=\psi _G(x_2)`$. We use the statement (iv) of Theorem 2.3 in the following form: $`S=J_2^1S^{}J_2`$, where $`J_2(x,y)=(y^1x,y)`$. We notice that $`S^{}J_2(x_1,z)=(\varphi (z,z^1x_1),z^1x_1)`$ and $`S^{}J_2(x_2,z)=(\varphi (z,z^1x_2),z^1x_2)`$. Since $`\varphi (z,z^1x_1)`$ is the action of $`\psi _A(z^1x_1)A_X`$ on $`zX`$ and $`\psi _A=\pi \psi _G`$ we see that $`\varphi (z,z^1x_1)=\varphi (z,z^1x_2)`$. In this way, first components of $`S(x_1,z)=J_2^1S^{}J_2(x_1,z)`$ and $`S(x_2,z)=J_2^1S^{}J_2(x_2,z)`$ coincide, i.e. $`x_1z=x_2z`$. So the equations (2.7)-(2.8) imply that $`\psi _G(x_1)=\psi _G(x_2)`$. In a similar fashion one can show that $`\psi _G(x_1)=\psi _G(x_2)`$ if and only if $`\psi _G(zx_1)=\psi _G(zx_2)`$. Lemma is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$.

We aim to construct the map $`h:A_XG_X`$ inverse to $`\pi `$. At first we define $`h`$ on $`F_X`$ \- the free group generated by $`X`$ and then show that it descends to $`A_X`$. We note that $`G_X`$ acts on $`F_X`$ via $`fgf`$ for $`fF_X,gG_X`$ \- the action induced from \*-action of $`G_X`$ on $`X`$. For $`xXF_X`$ define

$$h(x)=\psi _G(x),h(x^1)=(\psi _G(x^1x))^1$$

Notice that $`x^1x`$ is the same as $`\psi _G(x)^1x`$. For an element $`f=x_1\mathrm{}x_kF_X`$ of length $`k`$ define inductively $`h(x_1\mathrm{}x_k)=h(h(x_2\mathrm{}x_k)x_1)h(x_2\mathrm{}x_k)`$, where for each $`i`$, $`x_iXF_X`$ or $`x_i^1XF_X`$. In the above $`f=x_1\mathrm{}x_k`$ was the minimum decomposition of $`fF_X`$ and $`k`$, the length of f, is the number of elements in such a decomposition. The only element of length 0 in $`F_X`$ is identity $`e`$ and we put $`h(e)=1G_X`$. We claim that for $`a,bF_X`$

$$h(ab)=h(h(b)a)h(b).$$
(2.9)
Indeed, we can verify (2.9) by induction on the length of $`a`$. Suppose we know that (2.9) holds for for all elements $`a`$ of length $`k`$ and want to check that $`h(ayb)=h(h(b)(ay))h(b)`$ for $`yXF_X`$ or $`y^1XF_X`$. We simplify $`h(h(b)(ay))h(b)`$ as follows:

$`h(h(b)(ay))h(b)=h((h(b)a)(h(b)y))h(b)`$
$`=h(h(h(b)y)(h(b)a))h(h(b)y)h(b).`$
On the other hand, we know that

$`h(ayb)=h(h(yb)a)h(yb)=h(h(h(b)y)h(b)a)h(h(b)y)h(b)`$
$`=h(h(h(b)y)(h(b)a))h(h(b)y)h(b).`$
We see that $`h(ayb)=h(h(b)(ay))h(b)`$. In this way, we just need to check the induction base, namely that $`h(yb)=h(h(b)y)h(b)`$. There are two cases to consider:

1. $`Length(yb)=1+Length(b)`$
2. $`Length(yb)=Length(b)1`$, i.e. $`b=y^1b^{}`$ and $`Length(b)=Length(b^{})+1`$

In the first case the formula $`h(yb)=h(h(b)y)h(b)`$ follows from definition of $`h`$. In the second case without loss of generality assume that $`yX`$. Then, $`h(b)=h(y^1b^{})=h((h(b^{})y)^1)h(b^{})`$ and letting $`h(b^{})y=z`$ we get

$`h(h(b)y)h(b)=h(h((h(b^{})y)^1)h(b^{})y)h((h(b^{})y)^1)h(b^{})`$
$`=h(h(z^1)z))h(z^1)h(b^{})=\psi _G(\psi _G(z^1z)^1z)\psi _G(z^1z)^1h(b^{})`$
$`=(byLemma)\psi _G((z^1z)\psi _G(z^1z)^1h(b^{})=h(b^{})=h(yb).`$
Now we are going to check that $`h`$ descends to $`A_X`$. Recall that $`A_X`$ is given by generators - elements of $`X`$ and relations $`(z^1((yz)y))z=zy`$ for each $`y,zX`$. We see that

$$h((z^1((yz)y))z)=\psi _G((yz)y)h(z)=h(zy).$$
(2.10)
If we define $`p(y,z)=(z^1((yz)y))zF_X`$ and $`q(y,z)=zyF_X`$ then for any $`gG_X`$, $`h(g(p(y,z)^1q(y,z)))=h(g(q(y,z)^1p(y,z)))=1`$.

Indeed, we checked in the proof of Theorem 2.4 that the defining relations of group $`A_X`$ are $`G_X`$ -invariant with respect to * action, i.e. $`gp(y,z)=p(gy,gz)`$ and $`gq(y,z)=q(gy,gz)`$. Formula (2.10) states that $`h(p(y,z))=h(q(y,z))`$, therefore

$`h(p(y,z)^1q(y,z))=h(h(q(y,z))p(y,z)^1)h(q(y,z))`$
$`=h(h(p(y,z))p(y,z)^1)h(p(y,z))=h(p(y,z)^1p(y,z))=1.`$
Thus $`h(g(p(y,z)^1q(y,z)))=h(p(gy,gz)^1q(gy,gz))=1`$. Similarly $`h(g(q(y,z)^1p(y,z)))=1`$.

In order to check that $`h:F_XG_X`$ descends to the map $`h:A_XG_X`$ it is enough to check that for any $`a,bF_X,y,zX`$ $`h(ap(y,z)^1q(y,z)b)=h(aq^1(y,z)p(y,z)b)=h(ab)`$ holds. By formula (2.9)

$`h(ap^1(y,z)q(y,z)b)=h(h(p(y,z)^1q(y,z)b)a)`$
$`h(p(y,z)^1q(y,z)b),`$
so it is enough to show that $`h(p^1(y,z)q(y,z)b)=h(b)`$. But $`h(p^1(y,z)q(y,z)b)=h(h(b)(p^1(y,z)q(y,z)))h(b)=h(b)`$ holds. Similar reasoning allows to check that $`h(aq^1(y,z)p(y,z)b)=h(ab)`$. In this way we constructed the map $`h:A_XG_X`$ such that

1. $`h(ab)=h(h(b)a)h(b)`$
2. $`h\psi _A=\psi _G`$

Condition 1 above implies that both $`\pi h:A_XA_X`$ and $`h\pi :G_XG_X`$ are group homomorphisms while Condition 2 implies that these homomorphisms are identities if restricted to corresponding generating sets $`\psi _A(X),\psi _G(X)`$, thus $`\pi h=id_{A_X},h\pi =id_{G_X}`$. Theorem 2.5 is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

It turns out then that the groups $`G_X`$ and $`A_X`$ both have abelian subgroups of finite index when $`X`$ is finite. Namely, define $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{gG_X|gx=x,gx=xforallxX\}`$. In other words, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the intersection of the kernels of left and right actions from Theorem 2.2.

###### Theorem 2.6

(cf. Section 2.5 in \[ESS\] and Prop. 6 in \[LYZ\])

(i) $`\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is a normal $`G_X`$-invariant (w.r.t. to $``$-action) subgroup lying in the center of $`A_X`$. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a normal abelian subgroup in $`G_X`$, and $`\pi :\mathrm{\Gamma }\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is an isomorphism.

(ii) The 1-cocycle $`\pi :G_XA_X`$ can be factored out through $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ giving rise to the bijective 1-cocycle $`\overline{\pi }:G_X/\mathrm{\Gamma }A_X/\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$.

(iii) If X is finite then both $`G_X/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`A_X/\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ are finite groups.

Proof:

(i) Let us show that $`\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is $`G_X`$-invariant and central subgroup in $`A_X`$. From the defining relations in $`G_X`$ we see that $`\psi _G(xy)=\psi _G(x)\psi _G(y)\psi _G(y^1x)^1`$ for all $`x,yX`$. In fact, one can easily check that the above formula can be generalized for $`xG_X`$, $`yX`$.

###### Lemma 2

For $`gG_X,yX`$

$$\psi _G(gy)=g\psi _G(y)\pi ^1(\psi _G(y)^1\pi (g))^1.$$

Proof of Lemma 2. Let us show that if the statement of the Lemma holds for some $`gG_X`$ then it holds for $`g^1`$. We need to check that

$$g^1\psi _G(gy)\pi ^1(\psi _G(gy)^1\pi (g^1))^1=y.$$
(2.11)
Notice that $`\pi (g^1)=(g\pi (g))^1`$ therefore

$$\psi _G(gy)^1\pi (g^1)=((\psi _G(gy)^1g)\pi (g))^1.$$

Since the statement of the Lemma holds for $`g`$, we have

$`\pi ^1((\psi _G(gy)^1g)\pi (g))^1=\pi ^1((\pi ^1(\psi _G(y)^1\pi (g))\psi _G(y)^1)\pi (g))^1`$
$`=\pi ^1(\pi ^1(\psi _G(y)^1\pi (g))(\psi _G(y)^1\pi (g)))^1`$
$`=\pi ^1(\psi _G(y)^1\pi (g)).`$
This implies the validity of equation (2.11). Similar, a simple computation shows that if the statement of the lemma is true for $`g=g_1`$ and $`g=g_2`$ then it is true for $`g=g_1g_2`$. In this way since by definition of $`G_X`$ Lemma is true for $`g\psi _G(X)`$ we prove the Lemma. $`\mathrm{}`$

In particular, for $`g\mathrm{\Gamma },y\psi _G(X)`$ one has $`y=gy(\pi ^1(y^1\pi (g)))^1`$. Thus,

$$y^1gy=\pi ^1(y^1\pi (g)).$$
(2.12)
The condition (2.12) implies that $`\pi \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ belongs to the center of $`A_X`$. Indeed, applying $`\pi `$ to relation $`y^1g=\pi ^1(y^1\pi (g))y^1`$ we get that $`\pi (y^1)`$ commutes with $`\pi (g)`$. Moreover, for $`g\mathrm{\Gamma },hG_X`$ 1-cocycle condition implies that

$$\pi ^1(\pi (h)\pi (g))=hg.$$
(2.13)
So, in particular the product of elements in $`\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is in $`\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`\pi `$ restricted to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ becomes an isomorphism between $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$.

(ii) The relation (2.13) shows that $`\pi `$ can be lifted to $`\overline{\pi }:G_X/\mathrm{\Gamma }A_X/\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$.

(iii) The kernels of each of the actions $``$, $``$ are of finite indexes since the corresponding quotients are isomorphic to subgroups in Permut(X). So, the intersection of kernels, i.e. subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has finite index as well. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Definition 6

We call a 7-tuple

$$(G,A,X,\rho _{GA},\rho _{GAX},\overline{\pi },\overline{\psi _A})$$

a bijective cocycle 7-tuple if $`G,A`$ are groups, $`\rho _{GA}:GAut(A)`$ is an action of $`G`$ on $`A`$, $`\rho _{GAX}:GAPermut(X)`$ is an action of $`GA`$ on $`X`$, $`\overline{\pi }:GA`$ is a bijective 1-cocycle, $`\overline{\psi _A}:XA`$ is $`GA`$-equivariant, where $`GA`$ acts on $`A`$ by conjugation.

Note that the action of $`GA`$ gives rise to two actions $`\rho _{GX}:GPermut(X)`$ and $`\rho _{AX}:APermut(X)`$. Starting with a bijective cocycle 7-tuple, let $`:X\times XX`$ and $`\varphi :X\times XX`$ be defined as $`yx=\rho _{GX}(\overline{\psi _G}(y))(x)`$ and $`\varphi (x,y)=\rho _{AX}(\overline{\psi _A}(y))(x)`$, where $`\overline{\psi _G}=\overline{\pi }^1\overline{\psi _A}`$. Define $`S:X\times XX\times X`$ and $`S^{}:X\times XX\times X`$ via $`S(x,y)=(xy,y^1x)`$ and $`S^{}(x,y)=(\varphi (y,x),x)`$, where $`xy`$ is defined in such a way that $`\varphi (y,x)=x^1((yx)y)`$ holds.

###### Lemma 3

(i) For an arbitrary bijective cocycle 7-tuple, $`(X,S)`$ constructed above is a braided nondegenerate set.

(ii) $`(X,S^{})`$ is a derived nondegenerate braided set corresponding to $`(X,S)`$.

Proof:

It is obvious from the definition of a bijective cocycle 7-tuple that $`(X,S^{})`$ is a braided nondegenerate set. We introduced $`xy`$ in such a way that $`(X,S^{})`$ becomes a derived solution corresponding to $`(X,S)`$ as long as we are able to show that $`(X,S)`$ is braided nondegenerate itself. Since $`\varphi `$ is $`G`$-invariant the argument identical to the one made in the proof of Theorem 2.3 mitigates that for each integer $`n2`$ there exists a bijection $`J_n:X^nX^n`$ such that $`J_nS_n^{ii+1}J_n^1=(S^{})_n^{ii+1}`$. This implies that $`S`$ is bijective and satisfies the braid relation (2.1).

It remains to prove that $`(X,S)`$ is nondegenerate, i.e. that $`xy`$ depends bijectively on $`yX`$ for a fixed $`xX`$. For that purpose we show that we can define $`gyX`$ for $`yX,gG`$ such that for any $`x,yX`$, $`g,hG`$ $`xy=\overline{\psi _G}(x)y`$ and $`(gh)y=g(hy)`$, i.e. $``$ is an action of $`G`$ on $`X`$.

Let a group homorphism $`P:GGA`$ be defined by the formula $`P(g)=(g,\overline{\pi }(g))`$ for $`gG`$. Then the map $`\rho _{GX}^{}=\rho _{GAX}P`$ is an action of $`G`$ on $`X`$. For $`gG,yX`$ define

$$gy=\rho _{GX}^{}(\overline{\pi }^1(\rho _{GA}(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1)(\overline{\pi }(g))))(y).$$

We want to check $`(gh)y=g(hy)`$. For notational convience let $`\rho _{GA}(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1)(\overline{\pi }(g))=\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(g)`$, i.e. by $``$ we will mean both actions $`\rho _{GA}`$ and $`\rho _{GX}`$. Then due to the fact that $`P`$ is a homomorphism it is enough to verify that

$$\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(hy)^1\overline{\pi }(g))=\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(gh))(\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h))^1.$$

Since $`\overline{\pi }(gh)=(h^1\overline{\pi }(g))\overline{\pi }(h)`$,

$`\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(gh))=\overline{\pi }^1((\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1h^1\overline{\pi }(g))(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h)))`$
$`=\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h))\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1h^1\overline{\pi }(g))\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h)).`$
In this way, if we check that

$$\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h))\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1h^1=\overline{\psi _G}(hy)^1$$
(2.14)
we conclude that $`g(hy)=(gh)y`$. Let us rewrite (2.14) as (cf. Lemma 2) $`\overline{\psi _G}(hy)\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h))=h\overline{\psi _G}(y)`$ and apply $`\overline{\pi }`$ to it. We get that (2.14) is equivalent to

$$\overline{\psi _A}(\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h))^1(hy))(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h))=(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h))(\overline{\psi _A}(y)).$$

The last equality follows from $`A`$-equivariance of $`\overline{\psi _A}`$ since $`\overline{\pi }^1(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h))^1(hy)=\rho _{AX}(\overline{\psi _G}(y)^1\overline{\pi }(h))(y)`$ by definition of $`hy`$. Lemma is proved.

$`\mathrm{}`$

One can combine two actions of $`G`$ on $`X`$ \- $`\rho _{GX}`$ and $`\rho _{GX}^{}`$ into the action $`\rho =\rho _{GX}\times \rho _{GX}^{}:GPermut(X)\times Permut(X)`$ of $`G`$ on $`X^2`$.

###### Definition 7

We call a bijective cocycle 7-tuple $`(G,A,X,\rho _{GA},\rho _{GAX},\overline{\pi },\overline{\psi _A})`$ faithful if $`\overline{\psi _G}(X)=\overline{\pi }^1\overline{\psi _A}(X)`$ generates $`G`$ and the action $`\rho :GPermut(X)\times Permut(X)`$ is faithful.

The following theorem is a characterization of finite braided nondegenerate sets in group theoretical terms. We notice that this result is a generalization of Proposition 2.11 in \[ESS\].

###### Theorem 2.7

The construction of Lemma 3 establishes a 1-1 correspondence between nondegenerate braided sets $`(X,S)`$ and faithful bijective cocycle 7-tuples.

Proof:

Having a nondegenerate braided set $`(X,S)`$ it is straightforward to construct the faithful bijective cocycle 7-tuple. Indeed, following the notations of Theorem 2.6 we put $`G=G_X/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`A=A_X/\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ then $`G`$ acts faithfully on $`X^2`$ and we have a faithful cocycle 7-tuple. Conversely, if we have a faithful 7-tuple we can construct a nondegenerate braided set by Lemma 3. Let $`G_X`$ be the structure group of so constructed nondegenerate braided set. It follows from (2.14) that there is a group homomorphism $`Q:G_XG`$ such that $`Q\psi _G=\overline{\psi _G}`$. Since $`\overline{\psi _G}(X)`$ generates $`G`$, $`Q`$ is surjective, and since $`G`$ acts faithfully on $`X^2`$, $`Ker(Q)=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, i.e. $`G_X/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is isomorphic to $`G`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 2.3 Injective solutions

In this section we talk about most tractable braided nondegenerate sets - injective solutions.

###### Definition 8

We call a braided nondegenerate set $`(X,S)`$ an injective solution if the map $`\psi _G:XG_X`$ is injective.

In \[LYZ\] the authors noticed that in the absence of involutivity the natural map $`\psi _G:XG_X`$ is not obviously injective which creates difficulties in characterization of solutions. It turned out that injectivity may indeed fail (see examples below). This motivates Definition 8.

###### Lemma 4

A nondegenerate braided set $`(X,S)`$ is injective if and only if its derived solution $`(X,S^{})`$ is injective.

Proof:

The statement of Theorem 2.5 implies that injectivity of the map $`\psi _A:XA_X`$ is equivalent to injectivity of $`\psi _G:XG_X`$. Since $`A_X`$ is the structure group of the derived solution Lemma 4 is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

The importance of injective solutions is in the fact that their properties and group-theoretical characterization are very similar to that of involutive solutions \[ESS\].

###### Theorem 2.8

(i) Let a group $`G`$ act on a group $`A`$ by $`\rho _{GA}:GAut(A)`$ such that the bijective map $`\pi :GA`$ is a 1-cocycle. Then any $`GA`$-invariant subset $`XA`$ has a natural structure of a nondegenerate braided injective set given by

$$S(x,y)=(\pi (\pi ^1(x)\pi ^1(y)(\pi ^1(\rho (\pi ^1(y)^1)(x)))^1),\rho (\pi ^1(y)^1)(x)),$$
(2.15)
for $`x,yX`$.

(ii) Any nondegenerate braided injective set can be obtained by the method just described.

Proof:

To prove (i) we can use Lemma 3. Indeed, we have the following bijective cocycle 7-tuple: $`G`$, $`A`$, $`X`$, $`\overline{\pi }=\pi `$, $`\rho _{GA}`$ as given; $`\rho _{GAX}`$ is induced from the adjoint action of $`GA`$ on its subgroup $`A`$, $`\overline{\psi _A}=id_X`$. It is straightforward to check (cf. (2.14)) that the map $`S`$ constructed in Lemma 3 coincides with the map $`S`$ given by formula (2.15). So it remains to prove that the set $`(X,S)`$ is injective. Let $`G_X`$ be its structure group. Arguing as in the proof of Theorem 2.7 we see that there is a group homomorphism $`Q:G_XG`$ such that $`\pi Q\psi _G=id_X`$. This implies that $`\psi _G`$ is injective.

Conversely, if $`(X,S)`$ is an injective nondegenerate braided set then $`X=\psi _A(X)`$ is a $`G_X`$-invariant (w.r.t. $``$ \- action) subset in $`A_X`$. Note that this subset is automatically $`G_XA_X`$-invariant. Recall that $`S`$ is given by the formula $`S(x,y)=(xy,y^1x)`$ for $`x,yX`$ according to notations after Theorem 2.2. Let us make sure that the construction of Theorem 2.8 yields the same map $`S`$ we already have. Indeed, for $`x,y\psi _A(X)=X`$, $`\pi ^1(y)^1x=\psi _G(y)^1x=y^1x`$ and $`\pi (\pi ^1(x)\pi ^1(y)(\pi ^1(\pi ^1(y)^1x))^1)=\pi (\psi _G(x)\psi _G(y)\psi _G(y^1x)^1)=\pi (\psi _G(xy))=\psi _A(xy)=xy`$. Theorem is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

Lemma 4 implies that injectivity of a given solution is determined by the properties of the function $`\varphi :X\times XX`$. In particular, for a symmetric set $`(X,S)`$, $`\varphi (y,x)=y`$ and $`A_X`$ is the free abelian group generated by $`X`$. Hence, symmetric sets are injective. We don’t know any easy way to check that a given function $`\varphi (y,x)`$ corresponds to an injective solution. While an injectivity criterion is provided by Theorem 2.9, we give two simple necessary conditions below that are in many cases sufficient to check that a given solution is not injective.

###### Lemma 5

If $`(X,S)`$ is an injective braided set then

(a) $`\varphi (x,x)=x`$ for all $`xX`$,

(b) a pair $`(y,x)X\times X`$ satisfies $`\varphi (y,x)=y`$ if and only if $`\varphi (x,y)=x`$.

Proof:

Suppose $`(X,S)`$ is injective. The group $`A_X`$ is generated by the elements of $`X`$ subject to relations $`\varphi (y,x)y=yx`$ for $`x,yX`$. Consequently $`\psi _A(\varphi (x,x))\psi _A(x)=\psi _A(x)\psi _A(x)`$ and $`\psi _A(\varphi (x,x))=\psi _A(x)`$ in $`A_X`$. Since $`\psi _A:XA_X`$ is injective $`\varphi (x,x)=x`$ on $`X`$. Now, assume that $`\varphi (y,x)=y`$. Then $`\psi _A(y)\psi _A(x)=\psi _A(x)\psi _A(y)`$. On the other hand, $`\psi _A(\varphi (x,y))\psi _A(y)=\psi _A(y)\psi _A(x)`$, therefore $`\psi _A(\varphi (x,y))=\psi _A(x)`$ and $`\varphi (x,y)=x`$. Lemma is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

Example. Let $`c,bPermut(X)`$. Define $`S:X\times XX\times X`$ by the formula $`S(x,y)=(by,cx)`$. It is easy to see that $`(X,S)`$ is a nondegenerate braided set if $`bc=cb`$. We claim that this solution is injective if and only if $`cb=id_X`$. Indeed, suppose the solution is injective, then by Lemma 5 $`\varphi (x,x)=x`$, i.e. $`x^1((xx)x)=cbx=x`$. Therefore $`cb=id_X`$. Conversely, if $`cb=id_X`$ then $`(X,S)`$ is symmetric and hence injective.

We remark that with each nondegenerate braided set we associated two actions of the group $`G_X`$ ($`,`$) and an action of $`A_X`$ (via $`\varphi (x,y)`$, which is a $``$ action of the derived solution) on $`X`$. In particular, the latter action allows us to construct a finite group $`A_X^0Permut(X)`$, as the image of $`A_X`$ under that action, and a surjective homomorphism $`p:A_XA_X^0`$. Define $`M_X`$ \- a module over $`A_X^0`$ generated by $`v_x`$, $`xX`$ subject to relations

$$p(y)^1v_x+v_y=p(x)^1v_{\varphi (y,x)}+v_x.$$

By construction we have a natural map $`\psi _M:XM_X`$ given by $`xv_x`$. It turns out that injectivity of $`\psi _M`$ is equivalent to injectivity of $`\psi _G`$.

###### Theorem 2.9

(i) There exists a unique 1-cocycle $`\theta :A_XM_X`$ such that $`\theta \psi _A=\psi _M`$, where $`A_X`$ acts on $`M_X`$ via $`p`$.

(ii) $`\theta `$ is injective on $`\psi _A(X)`$.

Proof:

Statement (i) is clear from definitions of $`A_X`$ and $`M_X`$. Let us show that (ii) holds. Let $`Ker(p)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$, i.e. $`A_X^0=A_X/\mathrm{\Gamma }_A`$. Let $`x_1,x_2\psi _A(X)`$, $`x_1x_2`$. We want to show that $`\theta (x_1)\theta (x_2)`$ in $`M_X`$. Fix a character $`\xi :\mathrm{\Gamma }_A^{}`$. Define a vector space

$$V_\xi =\{f:A_X|f(a\gamma )=f(a)\xi (\gamma ),\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }_A\}.$$

$`V_\xi `$ clearly has an $`A_X`$-module structure defined as $`(bf)(a)=f(b^1a)`$, where $`fV_\xi ,b,aA_X`$. Choose a lifting $`g:A_X^0A_X`$ (as a set only). Then $`V_\xi `$ is identified with $`Fun(A_X^0,)`$, the space of functions on $`A_X^0`$ via $`ff|_{g(A_X^0)}`$. This space has a basis $`\delta _a`$, $`aA_X^0`$ such that $`\delta _a(b)=0`$ if $`ab`$ and $`\delta _a(a)=1`$. Let us define $`\epsilon :\psi _A(X)Fun(A_X^0,)`$ by the formula $`x\delta _a=\delta _{p(x)a}\epsilon (x)(a)`$ for $`x\psi _A(X)`$, $`aA_X^0`$. We can always choose $`\xi `$ and $`g`$ such that $`\epsilon (x_1)\epsilon (x_2)`$. Indeed, if $`p(x_1)=p(x_2)`$ it suffices to choose $`\xi `$ such that $`\xi (x_1x_2^1)1`$ for any lifting $`g`$. If $`p(x_1)p(x_2)`$ then for any character $`\xi 1`$ there is a lifting $`g`$ such that $`\epsilon (x_1)\epsilon (x_2)`$. Moreover, since $`xy=\varphi (y,x)x`$ for $`x,y\psi _A(X)`$ and

$$xy\delta _a=x\delta _{p(y)a}\epsilon (y)(a)=\delta _{p(x)p(y)a}\epsilon (x)(p(y)a)\epsilon (y)(a),$$

we get that

$$\epsilon (x)(p(y)a)\epsilon (y)(a)=\epsilon (\varphi (y,x))(p(x)a)\epsilon (x)(a).$$

In this way, we have the equality $`(p(y)^1\epsilon (x))\epsilon (y)=(p(x)^1\epsilon (\varphi (y,x)))\epsilon (x)`$ in $`Fun(A_X^0,)`$. Hence we can construct an $`A_X^0`$-homomorphism from $`M_X`$ to $`Fun(A_X^0,)`$ given by $`v_z\epsilon (\psi _A(z))`$, $`zX`$. But $`\epsilon (x_1)\epsilon (x_2)`$ thus $`\theta (x_1)\theta (x_2)`$.

Corollary 1 The map $`\psi _M:XM_X`$ is injective if and only if $`(X,S)`$ is an injective solution.

### 2.4 Rank of the structure group

In this section we show how to compute the rank of the structure group $`G_X`$ for a finite nondegenerate braided set $`(X,S)`$.

###### Definition 9

(i) The rank of a group G having an abelian subgroup of finite index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is defined as the rank of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

(ii) We define the rank of a finite nondegenerate braided set $`(X,S)`$ to be the rank of its structure group $`G_X`$.

Clearly the above definition doesn’t depend on the choice of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, for any two abelian subgroups of finite index $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_2`$ have the same rank that is equal to the rank of their intersection, which has finite index in each of them.

###### Lemma 6

The rank of a solution $`(X,S)`$ is equal to the rank of the derived solution $`(X,S^{})`$.

Proof:

According to statement (i) of Theorem 2.6 abelian subgroups $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ of finite indexes in $`G_X`$ and $`A_X`$ are isomorphic, thus $`G_X`$ and $`A_X`$ have the same rank. Lemma is proved.

We aim to compute the rank of $`A_X`$. Note that defining relations in group $`A_X`$ can be rewritten as

$$\varphi (y,x)=xyx^1.$$
(2.16)
Note that since $`S(x,y)=(\varphi (y,x),x)`$ gives rise to a nondegenerate braided set, $`\varphi (,x)`$ can be extended to the action of $`A_X`$ on $`X`$. Introduce an equivalence relation $``$ on $`X`$ such that the orbits of the above action become equivalence classes. Namely, consider the minimum equivalence relation $``$ such that $`y\varphi (y,x)`$ for $`x,yX`$.

###### Theorem 2.10

The rank of group $`A_X`$ is equal to the number of equivalence classes with respect to equivalence relation $``$ on $`X`$.

The proof relies on the following lemma. Let $`H_1`$, $`H_2`$, $`H_3`$ be three groups, such that there is an exact sequence

$$1H_1H_2H_31$$

and $`H_1`$ is cenral in $`H_2`$.

###### Lemma 7 (\[CR\])

There exists an exact sequence (The Hochschild - Serre sequence) (2.17) for any abelian group B, where $`H^2(H_3,B)`$ stands for the second cohomology group of $`H_3`$ with coefficients in B.

$$1Hom(H_3,B)Hom(H_2,B)Hom(H_1,B)H^2(H_3,B)$$
(2.17)
Proof of Theorem 2.10.

Let us use the sequence 2.17 in the following situation: $`H_2=A_X`$, $`H_1\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })A_X`$ is the free abelian group of rank $`r`$ of finite index in $`\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$, $`H_3=H_2/H_1`$ \- a finite group, $`B=^{}`$. Notice that $`\pi (\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is central in $`A_X`$ therefore $`H_1`$ is central in $`H_2`$. Then, since both $`Hom(H_3,B)`$ and $`H^2(H_3,B)`$ are finite groups and $`Hom(H_1,B)=(^{})^r`$, the dimension of $`Hom(H_2,B)=Hom(A_X,^{})`$ is equal to $`r`$, the rank of $`A_X`$. On the other hand, it is clear from formula (2.16) that $`Hom(A_X,^{})=(^{})^k`$, where $`k`$ is the number of equivalence classes in $`X`$. Theorem is proved.

Corollary 1 The rank of any solution $`(X,S)`$ is less or equal than $`n`$, the number of elements in $`X`$, with the equality taking place if and only if $`(X,S)`$ is symmetric.

Proof:

It is clear that if rank of $`A_X`$ is equal to $`n`$ then equivalence relation $``$ on $`X`$ is trivial, $`\varphi (y,x)=y`$ and the map $`\psi _A:XA_X`$ is injective. This immediately implies that the pair $`(X,S)`$ is symmetric.

Example. Consider a permutation solution $`S(x,y)=(bx,cy)`$, $`b,cPermut(X)`$, $`bc=cb`$. It is easy to check that $`\varphi (y,x)=bcy`$, hence $`y(bc)^my`$ for any integer m. The rank of the permutation solution is equal to the number of equivalence classes with respect to this relation, which, in turn, is equal to the number of independent cyclic permutations in canonical decomposition of $`bc`$ (counting cyclic permutations of length 1).

## 3 Linear And Affine Solutions

### 3.1 Linear Braided Sets

In this section we will look for nondegenerate braided sets of the following form: $`X`$ is an abelian group, and $`S`$ is an affine linear transformation of $`X\times X`$. Such braided sets will be called affine solutions. Considering affine solutions was motivated by the results in \[ESS\].

We will start with considering a special case, when $`S`$ is an automorphism of $`X\times X`$. In this case, an affine solution will be called a linear solution. For a linear solution, $`S`$ has the form

$$S(x,y)=(ax+by,cx+dy),a,b,c,dEnd(X).$$
(3.1)
It is easy to check that for $`S`$ of the form (3.1) the nondegeneracy is equivalent to invertibility of both $`b`$ and $`c`$ while braid relation is equivalent to the equations \[Hi\]

$`a(1a)=bac,`$ $`d(1d)=cdb,`$ (3.2)
$`ab=ba(1d),`$ $`ca=(1d)ac,`$ $`dc=cd(1a),`$ (3.3)
$`bd=(1a)db,`$ $`cbbc=adadad.`$ (3.4)
###### Lemma 8

Braided nondegenerate linear sets $`(X,S)`$ are in 1-1 correspondence with the quadruples $`(a,b,d,s)End(X)^4`$ such that:

(i) $`1a,1d,b,1+s`$ are invertible,

(ii) s commutes with a,b,d and $`sa=sd=0`$,

(iii) $`bdb^1=(1a)d,b^1ab=a(1d).`$ The 1-1 correspondence is given via the formula

$$bc=(1d+ad)(1a)+s.$$
(3.5)
Proof:

Suppose $`(a,b,c,d)`$ solves (3.2)-(3.4). Note that the first of equations (3.4) implies that $`bdb^1=(1a)d`$, therefore $`b(1d)b^1=1d+ad`$. Moreover, if we multiply the first equation of (3.3) by $`b^1`$ on the right we get that $`a=bab^1b(1d)b^1`$ thus relations (3.6) hold. Similarly from equations two and three of (3.3) we obtain relations (3.7).

$`bab^1(1d+ad)=a,bdb^1=(1a)d,`$ (3.6)
$`cac^1=(1d)a,cdc^1(1a+da)=d.`$ (3.7)
Above formulas show how to conjugate the elements of subalgebra generated by $`a`$ and $`d`$ by elements $`b`$, $`c`$ and their products. We define $`s`$ from the relation (3.5). Notice that $`sa=sd=0`$. Indeed, multiplying (3.5) by $`a`$ on the right and using first of relations (3.2) and second of relations (3.3) we get that

$$sa=bca(1d+ad)(1a)a=b(1d)ac(1d+ad)bac.$$

Since according to (3.6) $`b(1d)b^1=1d+ad`$ we see that $`b(1d)ac(1d+ad)bac=0`$. Similarly $`as=0`$. The last of equations (3.4) imply that

$$cb=(1a+da)(1d)+s.$$
(3.8)
Multiplying the relation (3.8) just obtained by $`d`$ we get that $`sd=ds=0`$. Now we have everything to show that $`1a`$, $`1+s`$ and $`1d`$ are invertible. Indeed, $`b,c`$ are invertible because of nondegeneracy of $`(X,S)`$. Since

$$bc=(1d+s+ad)(1a)=(1a)(1d+s+da),$$

$$bc=(1d+ad)(1a+s)=(1a+s)(1d+ad),$$

and

$$cb=(1a+s+da)(1d)=(1d)(1a+s+ad)$$

we conclude that $`1a`$ , $`1a+s`$ and $`1d`$ have right and left inverses and hence invertible. But $`1a+s=(1a)(1+s)`$, thus $`1+s`$ is invertible. Let us show that $`s`$ commutes with $`c`$. We conjugate relation (3.5) by $`c`$ and use relations (3.7) to conclude that

$$cb=(1a+da)(1d)+csc^1.$$
(3.9)
Comparing (3.8) to (3.9) we get that $`s=csc^1`$, i.e. $`s`$ commutes with $`c`$. Now, relation (3.5) implies that $`s`$ commutes with $`b`$ as well. In this way, starting from $`(a,b,c,d)`$, a solution to (3.2)-(3.4) we constructed a quadruple $`(a,b,d,s)`$ satisfying conditions of the lemma. Conversely, let us assume we start with $`(a,b,d,s)`$. Define $`c`$ from the formula (3.5). Since $`1d+ad=b(1d)b^1`$ is invertible, $`c`$ is invertible as well. It is straightforward to check that so defined $`(a,b,c,d)`$ satisfy the braid relations (3.2)-(3.4), and that $`S:X\times XX\times X`$ is bijective. The lemma is proved.

### 3.2 Injective Linear Solutions

It turns out that injective linear solutions are easy to characterize.

###### Theorem 3.1

A linear nondegenerate braided set of the form (3.1) is injective iff $`bc=(1d+ad)(1a)`$ or, in the language of Lemma 8, $`s=0`$.

Proof:

Assume that $`(X,S)`$ is injective. Then, by Lemma 5 $`\varphi (x,x)=x`$ on $`X`$. In the linear case it is easy to compute $`\varphi (y,z)`$ explicitly:

$$\varphi (y,z)=c((yz)y)+dz=c(a(yz)+by)+dz=cac^1(zdy)+cby+dz.$$

According to relation (3.8), $`cb=(1a+da)(1d)+s`$. Plugging it into formula for $`\varphi (y,z)`$ and using (3.7) we conclude that

$$\varphi (y,z)=(1(1d)(1a))z+((1d)(1a)+s)y.$$

Condition $`\varphi (x,x)=x`$ immediately implies that $`s=0`$.

Conversely, assume that $`s=bc(1d+ad)(1a)=0`$. Let us show that $`\psi _A:XA_X`$ is injective. The group $`A_X`$ is generated by elements of $`X`$ subject to relations

$$\varphi (y,z)z=zy,wherey,zXand\varphi (y,z)=z^1((yz)y).$$
(3.10)
Denoting $`K=(1d)(1a)`$ we see that the group $`A_X`$ is given by relations $`((1K)z+Ky)z=zy`$. By Lemma 8, $`K`$ is invertible. Let us now define the action of $`A_X`$ on $`X`$. We let the elements of generating set $`\psi _A(X)`$ act with $`K`$ on $`X`$ and then extend this action to arbitrary elements of $`A_X`$. Consider a semidirect product $`A_XX`$ with respect to this action, and define an embedding $`J:XA_XX`$ given by the formula $`J(x)=(\psi _A(x),x)`$. We notice that $`J((1K)z+Ky)J(z)=J(z)J(y)`$ in $`A_XX`$. Indeed,

$`J((1K)z+Ky)J(z)=(\psi _A((1K)z+Ky),(1K)z+Ky)(\psi _A(z),z)`$
$`=(\psi _A((1K)z+Ky)\psi _A(z),K^1((1K)z+Ky)+z)`$
$`=(\psi _A(z)\psi _A(y),K^1z+y)=J(z)J(y).`$
So, $`J`$ can be extended to a homomorphism $`\widehat{J}:A_XA_XX`$ such that $`Pr\widehat{J}\psi _A=id`$, where $`Pr:A_XXX`$ stands for the projection to the second component. Therefore, the map $`\psi _A:XA_X`$ is injective. Theorem is proved.

Corollary 1 (i) Let $`(X,S)`$ be a nondegenerate braided linear set of the form (3.1). Then the pair $`(X,\widehat{S})`$ with $`\widehat{S}:X\times XX\times X`$ given by $`\widehat{S}(x,y)=(ax+by,cx+(ds)y)`$, where $`s`$ is defined in 3.5, is an injective solution.

(ii) Suppose $`(X,S)`$ is an injective linear solution and $`s:XX`$ satisfies $`sa=as=0`$, $`sb=bs`$, $`sd=ds=s^2`$, $`sc=cs`$. Then, $`(X,\stackrel{˘}{S})`$ with $`\stackrel{˘}{S}:X\times XX\times X`$ given by $`\stackrel{˘}{S}(x,y)=(ax+by,cx+(d+s)y)`$ is a nondegenerate braided set that corresponds under the correspondence of Lemma 8 to the quadruple $`(a,b,d,s)`$.

Proof:

(i) It is easy to check $`(X,\widehat{S})`$ is a braided nondegenerate set by directly checking relations (3.2) - (3.4). Since $`s`$ commutes with everything and $`sa=sd=0`$ the above task is pretty simple. Also, it is obvious that $`bc=(1(ds)+a(ds))(1a)`$, thus by Theorem 3.1 $`(X,\widehat{S})`$ is injective. Proof of (ii) is similar to (i) and is left to the reader.

Examples.

1. Consider the linear solution $`S(x,y)=(cy,bx)`$ with $`c,b`$ being linear automorphisms of $`X`$ subject to $`cb=bc`$. We see that s=bc-1, therefore $`(X,\widehat{S})`$ with $`\widehat{S}(x,y)=(cy,bx+(1bc)y)`$ is an injective solution. We obtain the same solution by a different method in Example 2 at the end of this section.

2. It was shown in \[ESS\] that symmetric nondegenerate linear solutions of the form 3.1 are given as the solutions to the following equations: $`bab^1=\frac{a}{a+1}`$, $`c=b^1(1a^2)`$, $`d=\frac{a}{a1}`$ with $`b,c`$ being invertible. In particular a large class of solutions of this kind considered corresponded to nilpotent $`a`$, i.e. there was $`n`$ such that $`a^n=0`$. Define $`s=ma^{n1}`$, $`m`$ being any integer. It is easy to see that so defined $`s`$ satisfies conditions of Corollary 1 (ii) hence $`S^{\prime \prime }(x,y)=(ax+by,cx+(d+ma^{n1})y)`$ is a nondegenerate braided set, which is not symmetric and not injective unless $`ma^{n1}=0`$.

###### Theorem 3.2

Linear braided nondegenerate injective sets $`(X,S)`$ on an abelian group $`X`$ are in 1-1 correspondence with triples $`(a,b,d)`$ of endomorphisms of $`X`$ such that $`b,1a,1d`$ are invertible and $`bdb^1=(1a)d,b^1ab=a(1d)`$.

Proof: Straightforward application of Lemma 8 and Theorem 3.1.

Corollary 1 Linear braided nondegenerate injective sets $`(X,S)`$ on an abelian group $`X`$ are in 1-1 correspondence with triples $`(p,q,z)`$ of automorphisms of $`X`$ such that $`pq=qp`$ and $`z^2z(p+q)+pq=0`$.

The statement of Corollary 1 follows from Theorem 3.2 via change of variables $`p=b^1,q=(1a)(1d)b^1,z=(1a)b^1`$.

Examples.

1. If $`(X,S)`$ is unitary then $`(1a)(1d)=1`$ and therefore $`p=q`$. In this way, nondegenerate unitary linear braided sets are characterized as representations of algebra generated by invertible $`p,z`$ subject to $`z^22zp+p^2=0`$.

2. Put $`z=p`$, then $`q`$ can be anything as long as it is invertible and $`pq=qp`$. Correspondingly, $`a=0,b=p^1,1d=p^1q,c=q`$. The map $`S`$ is defined in the following way: $`S(x,y)=(p^1y,qx+(1p^1q)y)`$. Similarly if we let $`z=q`$ we obtain the solution given by the formula: $`S(x,y)=(py+(1q^1p)x,q^1x)`$.

3. Let $`ϵ_1`$ and $`ϵ_2`$ be two nilpotent operators on $`X`$ of order two, i.e. $`ϵ_1^2=ϵ_2^2=0`$. Then we let $`p=1+ϵ_1`$, $`q=1ϵ_1`$, $`z=1+ϵ_2`$. It is easy to check that so defined $`p`$ and $`q`$ commute and that $`z^2z(p+q)+pq=0`$. We recover $`a`$, $`b`$, $`c`$, $`d`$ from $`ϵ_1`$ and $`ϵ_2`$ via the formulas $`b=1ϵ_1`$, $`a=ϵ_1ϵ_2+ϵ_2ϵ_1`$, $`d=1(1+ϵ_1)(1ϵ_2)(12ϵ_1)`$, $`c=(1+ϵ_1)(1ϵ_2)(1ϵ_1)(1+ϵ_2)(1ϵ_1)`$. In particular, if $`ϵ_1ϵ_2=ϵ_2ϵ_1`$ the corresponding linear solution has the form:

$$S(x,y)=((ϵ_1ϵ_2+ϵ_2ϵ_1)x+(1ϵ_1)y,(1ϵ_1)x+(ϵ_1+ϵ_2ϵ_2ϵ_1)y)$$

4.Suppose $`X`$ is a n-dimensional vector space and $`p,q`$ are invertible operators on it having $`2n`$ distinct eigenvalues. Let $`(v_1\mathrm{}v_n)`$ be the basis of $`X`$ in which both $`p`$ and $`q`$ are diagonalized, i.e. $`pv_i=p_iv_i`$, $`qv_i=q_iv_i`$. Then $`zv_i=z_iv_i`$, where for each $`i`$ either $`z_i=p_i`$ or $`z_i=q_i`$. Indeed, $`0=(z^2z(p+q)+pq)v_i=(zp_i)(zq_i)v_i`$. The vector subspace of $`X`$ generated by applying $`z`$ to $`v_i`$ ($`i`$ is fixed) is annihilated by $`(zp_i)(zq_i)`$ therefore it has a basis of $`p_i`$ and $`q_i`$ eigenvectors of $`z`$. Therefore, it has to be one dimensional, i.e. $`zv_i=p_iv_i`$ or $`zv_i=q_iv_i`$. It is also easy to see that $`z`$ given by diagonal matrix in $`(v_1\mathrm{}v_n)`$ basis with $`p_i`$ or $`q_i`$ entries on the $`i`$-th place does satisfy $`z^2z(p+q)+pq=0`$ on $`X`$.

### 3.3 Affine solutions

In this section we talk about general affine solutions on an abelian group $`X`$.

###### Definition 10

The solution (braided, nondegenerate) $`(X,S)`$ of the form (3.11) is called affine.

$$S(x,y)=(ax+by+z,cx+dy+t),a,b,c,dEnd(X),t,zX.$$
(3.11)
###### Lemma 9

The pair $`(X,S)`$ of the form (3.11) is a solution if and only if (3.2)-(3.4) and (3.12) hold. Therefore, any affine solution gives rise to a linear solution $`(X,S^{})`$ with $`S^{}(x,y)=(ax+by,cx+dy)`$.

$$cdz+dt=0,az+bat=0,(c+dad1)z+(da+1ab)t=0.$$
(3.12)
Proof: Straightforward.

###### Definition 11

We call $`(X,S^{})`$ from Lemma 9 the linear part of an affine solution $`(X,S)`$. Conversely, we call $`(X,S)`$ an affine solution associated with $`(X,S^{})`$.

###### Theorem 3.3

(i) Let $`(X,S^{})`$ be a linear braided nondegenerate set, $`S^{}(x,y)=(ax+by,cx+dy)`$. Then, $`(X,S)`$ given by (3.11) is an affine solution associated with $`(X,S^{})`$ if and only if $`t=c(1a)^1z+k`$ and $`ak=dk=0`$, $`(b1)k=sz`$, where s is defined in (3.5).

(ii) An affine solution $`(X,S)`$ is injective if and only if its linear part is injective and $`k=0`$ in the above characterization. In this way, injective affine solutions associated with a given injective linear solution $`(X,S^{})`$ are in 1-1 correspondence with elements $`zX`$, $`t`$ being given by $`t=c(1a)^1z`$.

Proof:

Let us proof part (i). Note that since $`cdz+dt=d(c(1a)^1z+t)`$ and az+bat=$`a(z+(1a)c^1t)`$ by equations (3.2)-(3.3) we can rewrite two of the relations (3.12) as

$$d(c(1a)^1z+t)=0,a(z+(1a)c^1t)=0.$$

Therefore, if we define $`k`$ from the relation

$$t=c(1a)^1z+k,$$
(3.13)
we see using (3.2) that $`ak=dk=0`$. Now, (3.7) implies $`c(1a)^1c^1=(1a+da)^1`$ thus we can transform (3.13) into $`(1a+da)t=cz+(1a+da)k=cz+k`$. In this way, we rewrite last of the relations (3.12) as

$$(dad1)zbt+k=0$$
(3.14)
If we substitute $`t`$ from (3.13) into (3.14) and use (3.5) we get that $`(b1)k=sz`$. Part (i) is proved. In order to prove part (ii) we compute the function $`\varphi :X\times XX`$. Define by $`\varphi ^{}`$ the corresponding function $`\varphi `$ of the linear part $`(X,S^{})`$. Then, it is easy to check that $`\varphi (y,x)=\varphi ^{}(y,x)+k`$. Now, assume that $`(X,S)`$ is injective. Then by Lemma 5 $`\varphi (x,x)=x`$, hence $`\varphi ^{}(x,x)=x`$ and $`k=0`$. As we saw in the proof of Theorem 3.1 $`\varphi ^{}(x,x)=x`$ implies that $`s=0`$ and thus $`(X,S^{})`$ is injective. Conversely, if $`(X,S^{})`$ is injective and $`k=0`$ then $`\varphi (y,x)=\varphi ^{}(y,x)`$ and hence the derived solution of $`(X,S)`$ coincides with the derived solution of $`(X,S^{})`$ and hence is injective. Theorem is proved.


format: text

text:
# There are enough Azumaya algebras on surfaces

## Introduction

Generalizing the classical theory of central simple algebras over fields, Grothendieck  introduced the Brauer group $`\mathrm{Br}(X)`$ and the cohomological Brauer group $`\mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ for schemes.

Let me recall the definitions. The *Brauer group* $`\mathrm{Br}(X)`$ comprises equivalence classes of Azumaya algebras. Two Azumaya algebras $`𝒜,`$ are called equivalent if there are everywhere nonzero vector bundles $`,`$ with $`𝒜\text{nd}()\text{nd}()`$. Let us define the *cohomological Brauer group* $`\mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ as the torsion part of the étale cohomology group $`H^2(X,𝔾_m)`$. Nonabelian cohomology gives an inclusion $`\mathrm{Br}(X)\mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$, and Grothendieck asked whether this is bijective.

It would be nice to know this for the following reason: The cohomological Brauer group is related to various other cohomology groups via exact sequences, and this is useful for computations. In contrast, it is almost impossible to calculate the Brauer group of a scheme directly from the definition. Here is a list of schemes with $`\mathrm{Br}(X)=\mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$:

1. Schemes of dimension $`1`$ and regular surfaces (Grothendieck ).
2. Abelian varieties (Hoobler ).
3. The union of two affine schemes with affine intersection (Gabber ).
4. Smooth toric varieties (DeMeyer and Ford ).

On the other hand, a nonseparated normal surface with $`\mathrm{Br}(X)\mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ recently appeared in . I wonder how the final answer to this puzzle will look like. The goal of this paper is to prove the following Theorem.

###### Theorem.

For separated geometrically normal algebraic surfaces, the inclusion $`\mathrm{Br}(X)\mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ is a bijection.

This adds some singular and nonprojective schemes to the preceding list. For quasiprojective surfaces, Hoobler ( Cor. 9) deduced the result directly from Gabber’s Theorem on affine schemes. Without ample line bundles, a different approach is required. Indeed, my initial motivation was to disprove the Theorem, rather than to prove it. The new idea is to use Maruyama’s theory of elementary transformations.

Here is an application of the preceding result:

###### Theorem.

Each proper normal algebraic surface admits a nonfree vector bundle.

It might easily happen that all line bundles are free . The existence of nonfree vector bundles can be viewed as a generalization, in dimension two, of Winkelmann’s Theorem , which asserts that each compact complex manifold has nonfree holomorphic vector bundles.

This paper has four sections. In the first section, I relate Azumaya algebras that are trivial on large open subsets to certain reflexive sheaves. In Section 2, we turn to normal surfaces and construct Azumaya algebras that are generically trivial by constructing the corresponding reflexive sheaves. This prepares the proof of the main Theorem, which appears in Section 3. The idea in the proof is to apply elementary transformations to Brauer–Severi schemes. The last section contains the existence result for nonfree vector bundles.

###### Acknowledgments.

This research was done in Bologna, and I am grateful to the Mathematical Department for its hospitality. I wish to thank Angelo Vistoli for suggestions, encouragement, and many stimulating discussions. Furthermore, I wish to thank Ofer Gabber, the referee, for his precise report. He found and corrected several mistakes. Several crucial steps are entirely due to Gabber, and the paper would be impossible without his contribution. The revision was done at M.I.T., and I wish to thank the Mathematical Department for its hospitality. Finally, I thank the DFG for financial support.

## 1. Azumaya algebras via reflexive sheaves

In this section, we shall describe Azumaya algebras that have trivial Brauer class on certain large open subsets. Throughout, $`X`$ will be a noetherian scheme. Let us call an open subset $`UX`$ *thick* if it contains all points $`xX`$ with $`0pt(𝒪_{X,x})1`$. In other words, $`0pt_{XU}(𝒪_X)2`$. A coherent $`𝒪_X`$-module $``$ is called *almost locally free* if it is locally free on some thick open subset $`UX`$, and has $`0pt_{XU}()2`$. Such sheaves behave well under suitable restriction and extension functors:

###### Lemma 1.1.

Let $`i:YX`$ be a thick open subset. Then the restriction map $`i^{}()`$ and the direct image map $`𝒢i_{}(𝒢)`$ induce inverse equivalences between the categories of almost locally free sheaves on $`X`$ and $`Y`$, respectively.

###### Proof.

This is similar to the proof of  Theorem 1.12. Fix an almost locally free $`𝒪_X`$-module $``$. First, we check that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(V,)\mathrm{\Gamma }(VY,)`$ is bijective for all affine open subsets $`VX`$. Setting $`A=VVY`$, we have an exact sequence of local cohomology groups

(1)
$$0H_A^0(V,)H^0(V,)H^0(VY,)H_A^1(V,)0.$$

Since $`0pt_A()2`$, the cohomology groups with supports vanish by  Theorem 3.8. Therefore, the map in the middle is bijective. As a consequence, the adjunction map $`i_{}i^{}()`$ is bijective, so that the restriction functor $`i^{}()`$ is fully faithful.

Second, we check that the functor $`i^{}()`$ is essentially surjective. Fix an almost locally free $`𝒪_Y`$-module $`𝒢`$. By  Corollary 6.9.8, the sheaf $`𝒢`$ extends to a coherent $`𝒪_X`$-module $``$. I claim that $`=^{}`$ is almost locally free. This is a local problem, so we may assume that there is a partial resolution $`_1_0^{}0`$ with coherent locally free sheaves, hence an exact sequence

(2)
$$0_0^{}_1^{}.$$

Let $`A=XU`$, where $`UY`$ is a thick open subset on which $`𝒢`$ is locally free. The exact sequence (2) gives an inclusion $`H_A^0(X,_0^{}/)H_A^0(X,_1^{})`$ and an exact sequence of local cohomology groups

$$H_A^0(X,_0^{}/)H_A^1(X,)H_A^1(X,_0^{}).$$

Since $`0pt_A(𝒪_X)2`$, the outer groups vanish, and we conclude $`0pt_A()2`$. Consequently, $``$ is almost locally free. By the same argument, we see that $`𝒢^{}`$ is almost locally free. Since the canonical map $`𝒢𝒢^{}`$ is bijective on some thick open subset, we conclude that it is bijective on $`Y`$, hence $`𝒢i^{}()`$.

It remains to check that $`𝒢i_{}(𝒢)`$ is the desired inverse equivalence. Extend $`𝒢`$ to an almost locally free $`𝒪_X`$-module $``$. Since the adjunction map $`i_{}i^{}()`$ is bijective, we are done. ∎

###### Remark 1.2.

Given two almost locally free sheaves $`_1`$ and $`_2`$, the sheaf $`=\text{om}(_1,_2)`$ is almost locally free as well. This is because, by Lemma 1.1, the middle map in (1) is bijective, so that the cohomology groups with support vanish. As a consequence, almost locally free sheaves are reflexive.

An Azumaya algebra $`𝒜`$ is called *almost trivial* if its Brauer class $`\mathrm{cl}(𝒜)\mathrm{Br}(X)`$ vanishes on some thick open subset. This easily implies that $`𝒜\text{nd}()`$ for some almost locally free sheaf $``$. However, the condition that the $`𝒪_X`$-algebra $`\text{nd}()`$ is an Azumaya algebra implies more.

###### Definition 1.3.

A coherent $`𝒪_X`$-module $``$ is called *balanced* if for each geometric point $`\overline{x}X`$, there is a decomposition $`_{\overline{x}}_{i=1}^r_{\overline{x}}`$ with $`r>0`$ for some almost invertible $`𝒪_{X,\overline{x}}`$-module $`_{\overline{x}}`$.

Here $`𝒪_{X,\overline{x}}`$ is the strict henselization of the local ring $`𝒪_{X,x}`$. Perhaps it goes without saying that *almost invertible sheaves* are invertible on a thick open subset and have depth $`2`$ outside. By fpqc-descent, balanced sheaves are almost locally free. They are closely related to Azumaya algebras, and the following result reduces the existence of certain Azumaya algebras to the existence of balanced sheaves.

###### Proposition 1.4.

Let $``$ be a balanced $`𝒪_X`$-module. Then $`\text{nd}()`$ is an almost trivial Azumaya algebra, and each almost trivial Azumaya algebra has this form.

###### Proof.

Obviously, $`𝒜=\text{nd}()`$ is a trivial Azumaya algebra on some thick open subset. To check that it is an Azumaya algebra on $`X`$, we may assume that $`X`$ is strictly local, and that $`=_{i=1}^r`$ for some almost invertible sheaf $``$. Being bijective on some thick open subset, the map $`𝒪_X\text{nd}()`$ is everywhere bijective by Lemma 1.1. Consequently, $`𝒜\text{at}_r(𝒪_X)`$ is an Azumaya algebra.

Conversely, let $`𝒜`$ be an almost trivial Azumaya algebra. Choose a thick open subset $`i:UX`$ on which the Brauer class is trivial. Then there is an isomorphism $`𝒜_U\text{nd}(𝒢)`$ for some locally free $`𝒪_U`$-module $`𝒢`$. By Lemma 1.1, this induces an isomorphism of algebras $`𝒜\text{nd}()`$, where $`=i_{}(𝒢)`$.

If remains to check that the almost locally free sheaf $``$ is balanced. To do so, we may assume that $`X`$ is strictly local, so $`𝒜=\text{at}_r(𝒪_X)`$. Now $``$ is a module over $`\text{at}_r(𝒪_X)`$. By Morita equivalence (see e.g.  p. 53), $`=_{i=1}^r`$ for some coherent $`𝒪_X`$-module $``$. Clearly, $``$ is invertible on a thick open subset and has depth $`2`$ outside. In other words, $``$ is almost invertible. ∎

Next, we shall generalize some notions from Hartshorne’s paper on generalized divisors . For simplicity, we assume that $`X`$ satisfies Serre’s condition $`(S_2)`$, such that the points of codimension one are precisely the points of depth one. Set

$$𝒜𝒟\text{iv}_X=\underset{xX^{(1)}}{}(i_x)_{}(\mathrm{Div}(𝒪_{X,x}))$$

where the sum runs over all points of codimension one. The elements of the group $`\mathrm{ADiv}(X)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝒜𝒟\text{iv}_X)`$ are called *almost Cartier divisors*. For normal schemes, $`𝒜𝒟\text{iv}_X`$ is just the sheaf of Weil divisors. As in the normal case, an almost Cartier divisor $`D\mathrm{ADiv}(X)`$ defines an almost invertible sheaf $`𝒪_X(D)`$, which is invertible in codimension one and satisfies Serre’s condition $`(S_2)`$. According to  Proposition 21.1.8, the canonical map $`𝒟\text{iv}_X𝒜𝒟\text{iv}_X`$ is injective. The exact sequence

$$0𝒟\text{iv}_X𝒜𝒟\text{iv}_X𝒫_X0$$

defines an abelian sheaf $`𝒫_X`$ on the étale site $`X_{\text{ét}}`$. For a geometric point $`\overline{x}X`$ with corresponding strict localization $`𝒪_{X,\overline{x}}=𝒪_{X,x}^{\mathrm{sh}}`$, the stalk is

$$𝒫_{X,\overline{x}}=\mathrm{ADiv}(𝒪_{X,\overline{x}})/\mathrm{Div}(𝒪_{X,\overline{x}}).$$

For normal schemes, this reduces to the class group $`\mathrm{Cl}(𝒪_{X,\overline{x}})`$. The preceding short exact sequence gives a long exact sequence in étale cohomology

$$\mathrm{ADiv}(X)H^0(X,𝒫)H^1(X,𝒟\text{iv}_X)H^1(X,𝒜𝒟\text{iv}_X).$$

We also have an exact sequence

$$0H^1(X,𝒟\text{iv}_X)H^2(X,𝔾_m)H^2(X^{(0)},𝔾_m),$$

where $`X^{(0)}=\mathrm{Spec}(𝒪_{X,\eta })`$ is the scheme of generic points, and you easily infer that the classes of almost trivial Azumaya algebra lie in the image of the iterated coboundary map

(3)
$$H^0(X,𝒫)H^1(X,𝒟\text{iv}_X)H^2(X,𝔾_m).$$

If $``$ is an almost locally free sheaf with decompositions $`_{\overline{x}}=_{i=1}^r_{\overline{x}}`$, the function

$$\overline{x}\mathrm{cl}(_{\overline{x}})\mathrm{ADiv}(𝒪_{X,\overline{x}})/\mathrm{Div}(𝒪_{X,\overline{x}})=𝒫_{X,\overline{x}}$$

depends only on $``$ and yields a section $`s_{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝒫_X)`$. The following result is due to Gabber:

###### Proposition 1.5 (Gabber).

Let $``$ be an balanced $`𝒪_X`$-module. Then the class of the Azumaya algebra $`\text{nd}()`$ in $`H^2(X,𝔾_m)`$ is the inverse of the image of the section $`s_{}H^0(X,𝒫_X)`$ under the iterated coboundary map in (3).

###### Proof.

Set $`𝒜=\text{nd}()`$. According to  p. 341, its cohomology class in $`H^2(X,𝔾_m)`$ is given by the gerbe $`d(𝒜`$) of trivializations for $`𝒜`$, which associates to each étale $`UX`$ the groupoid of pairs $`(,\phi )`$, where $``$ is a locally free $`𝒪_U`$-module, and $`\phi :\text{nd}()𝒜_U`$ is an isomorphism. The action $`𝔾_m𝒜\text{ut}(,\phi )`$ is given by homotheties on $``$.

Set $`_X^\times =g_{}g^{}(𝔾_m)`$, where $`g:X^{(0)}X`$ is the inclusion of generic points, and let $`\pi :_X^\times 𝒟\text{iv}_X`$ and $`p:𝒜𝒟\text{iv}_X𝒫_X`$ be the natural surjections. Then the image of $`s_{}H^0(X,𝒫_X)`$ under the iterated coboundary map is given by the gerbe of $`_X^\times `$-liftings of the $`𝒟\text{iv}_X`$-torsor $`p^1(s_{})`$. This gerbe associates to each étale $`UX`$ the groupoid of pairs $`(𝒯,\psi )`$, where $`𝒯`$ is a $`_U^\times `$-torsor, and $`\psi :𝒯p^1(s_{})`$ is a $`\pi `$-morphism of torsors. Moreover, the action $`𝔾_m𝒜\text{ut}(𝒯,\psi )`$ is given by translation on $`𝒯`$.

We have to construct an equivalence between the preceding two stacks that is equivariant for the sign change map $`1:𝔾_m𝔾_m`$. First note that the stack of pairs $`(,\phi )`$ is $`𝔾_m`$-equivalent to the stack of triples $`(,,\psi )`$, where $``$ is a locally free $`𝒪_U`$-module, and $``$ is an almost invertible $`𝒪_U`$-module, and $`\psi :`$ is an isomorphism. The action $`𝔾_m𝒜\text{ut}(,,\psi )`$ is given by homotheties on $``$ and inverse homotheties on $``$.

Obviously, the local section $`s_{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(U,𝒫_X)`$ is nothing but the restriction of the global section $`s_{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝒫_X)`$. Now let $`_U^\times ()`$ be the sheaf of invertible meromorphic sections in $`|_U`$, which is a $`_U^\times `$-torsor. Dividing out the induced $`𝔾_m`$-action, we obtain a $`\pi `$-morphism

$$\phi :_U^\times ()p^1(s_{})=p^1(s_{}|_U).$$

Consequently, the functor $`(,,\psi )(_U^\times (),\phi )`$ gives the desired antiequivariant equivalence of $`𝔾_m`$-gerbes. ∎

For the rest of the section, we assume that $`X`$ satisfies Serre’s condition $`(S_1)`$, that is, $`X`$ has no embedded components. Let $`g:X^{(0)}X`$ be the inclusion of the generic points. We can relate generically trivial Brauer classes to torsors of Cartier divisors as follows. The exact sequence

$$0𝔾_mg_{}g^{}(𝔾_m)𝒟\text{iv}_X0,$$

together with $`R^1g_{}(𝔾_{m,X^{(0)}})=0`$ and $`\mathrm{Pic}(X^{(0)})=0`$, gives an exact sequence

(4)
$$0H^1(X,𝒟\text{iv}_X)H^2(X,𝔾_m)H^2(X^{(0)},𝔾_m).$$

Hence each $`\alpha \mathrm{Br}(X)`$ with $`g^{}(\alpha )=0`$ comes from a $`𝒟\text{iv}_X`$-torsor. To make this explicit, choose an Azumaya algebra $`𝒜`$, say of rank $`r`$, representing the class $`\alpha `$, and let $`f:BX`$ be the associated *Brauer–Severi* scheme. This is the $`^{r1}`$-bundle

$$B=\mathrm{Isom}(\text{at}_r(𝒪_X),𝒜)\times _{\mathrm{PGL}_r}^{r1}$$

on the étale site $`X_{\text{ét}}`$. Here we use the left $`\mathrm{PGL}_r`$-action coming from the canonical representation $`\mathrm{PGL}_r\mathrm{Aut}(^{r1})`$ described in  Chap. 0 §5. Set $`P=B\times _XX^{(0)}`$, and pick an invertible $`𝒪_P`$-module $`𝒪_P(1)`$ of fiber degree one. This leads to a $`𝒟\text{iv}_X`$-torsor $`𝒯`$ as follows. Define

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝒯)=\left\{\mathrm{cl}(,t)\right\},$$

where $``$ is an invertible $`𝒪_B`$-module, and $`t:𝒪_P(1)|_P`$ is an isomorphism. Here $`\mathrm{cl}(,t)`$ denotes isomorphism class, and two pairs $`(,t)`$ and $`(^{},t^{})`$ are called isomorphic if there is an isomorphism $`\varphi :^{}`$ with $`t\varphi =t^{}`$. Define $`𝒯`$ in the same way on the étale site.

By  Proposition 21.2.11, the sections of $`𝒟\text{iv}_X`$ correspond to $`\mathrm{cl}(,s)`$, where $``$ is an invertible $`𝒪_X`$-module, and $`s:𝒪_{X^{(0)}}|_{X^{(0)}}`$ is a trivialization. The map

$$(,s),(,t)(f^{}(),f^{}(s)t)$$

turns $`𝒯`$ into a $`𝒟\text{iv}_X`$-torsor.

###### Proposition 1.6.

The Brauer class $`\mathrm{cl}(𝒜)H^2(X,𝔾_m)`$ is the opposite for the image of the torsor class $`\mathrm{cl}(𝒯)H^1(X,𝒟\text{iv}_X)`$ under the coboundary map in (4).

###### Proof.

As in the proof of Proposition 1.5, the Brauer class is given by the gerbe of trivializations $`\phi :\text{nd}()𝒜`$. This gerbe is equivalent to the gerbe of trivializations $`(,u)`$, where $`u:B(^{})`$ is an isomorphism. According to  Chap. V Lemma 4.8.1, the latter gerbe is antiequivalent to the $`𝔾_m`$-gerbe of invertible $`𝒪_P`$-modules $``$ of fiber degree one.

Set $`_X^\times =g_{}g^{}𝔾_m`$. The image of the torsor class $`\mathrm{cl}(𝒯)H^1(X,𝒟\text{iv}_X)`$ is the gerbe of $`_X^\times `$-liftings $`\psi :𝒮𝒯`$ for the $`𝒟\text{iv}_X`$-torsor $`𝒯`$. Given an invertible $`𝒪_P`$-module $``$ of fiber degree one, we obtain an $`_X^\times `$-torsor

$$𝒮=\{(,t)t:𝒪_P(1)\stackrel{}{}_P\},$$

where the action is by multiplication on $`t`$. Clearly, the quotient $`𝒮/𝔾_m=\left\{\mathrm{cl}(,t)\right\}`$ is canonically isomorphic to $`𝒯`$, so we obtain a morphism of torsors $`\psi :𝒮𝒯`$. To see that $`(𝒮,\psi )`$ is a $`𝔾_m`$-equivalence, note that a $`_X^\times `$-lifting of the torsor $`𝒯`$ exists if and only if $`𝒯`$ is trivial, because $`H^1(X,_X^\times )=0`$. ∎

## 2. Generically trivial Brauer classes

In this section, we turn to normal surfaces. The task is to prove the following result, which is a major step towards showing $`\mathrm{Br}(X)=\mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$.

###### Proposition 2.1.

Let $`X`$ be a separated normal algebraic surface. Then $`\mathrm{Br}(X)`$ contains each class $`\alpha \mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ that is generically trivial.

###### Proof.

We start with some preliminary reductions. By  Chap. II Lemma 4, we may assume that the ground field $`k`$ is separably closed. Since $`X`$ is separated and of finite type, the Nagata Compactification Theorem  gives a compactification $`X\overline{X}`$. By resolution of singularities, we may assume that $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)=\mathrm{Sing}(\overline{X})`$. As in  Chap. II Theorem 2.1, each generically trivial Brauer class $`\alpha \mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ extends to $`\mathrm{Br}^{}(\overline{X})`$, so we may begin the proof with the additional assumption that $`X`$ is proper.

As discussed in Section 1, the exact sequence

$$0H^1(X,𝒟\text{iv}_X)H^2(X,𝔾_m)H^2(X^{(0)},𝔾_m)$$

shows that our cohomology class $`\alpha \mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ lies in $`H^1(X,𝒟\text{iv}_X)`$. The exact sequence

$$0𝒟\text{iv}_X𝒵_X^1𝒫_X0$$

yields an exact sequence

$$Z^1(X)H^0(X,𝒫_X)H^1(X,𝒟\text{iv}_X)0.$$

Choose a global section $`sH^0(X,𝒫_X)`$ mapping to $`\alpha `$. Since $`r\alpha =0`$ for some integer $`r>0`$, there is a global Weil divisor $`EZ^1(X)`$ mapping to the section $`rsH^0(X,𝒫_X)`$.

The sheaf $`𝒫_X`$ is supported by the singular locus $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$. For each singular point $`xX`$, the stalk is $`𝒫_{X,x}=\mathrm{Cl}(𝒪_{X,x}^h)`$, where $`𝒪_{X,x}𝒪_{X,x}^h`$ is the henselization (which is the strict localization, because $`k`$ is separably closed). Suppose $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_mX`$ are the singularities, and set

$$X^h=\mathrm{Spec}(\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}𝒪_{X,x_i}^h)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}\mathrm{Spec}(𝒪_{X,x_i}^h).$$

Then $`H^0(X,𝒫_X)=\mathrm{Cl}(X^h)`$. Choose a Weil divisor $`DZ^1(X^h)`$ representing the section $`sH^0(X,𝒫_X)`$, such that $`E|_{X^h}rD`$. According to Proposition 1.5, it suffices to construct a reflexive $`𝒪_X`$-module $``$ with

$$𝒪_{X^h}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}𝒪_{X^h}(D),$$

for then $`𝒜=\text{nd}()`$ would be the desired Azumaya algebra.

Let $`f:YX`$ be a resolution of singularities, and $`Y_0Y`$ be the reduced exceptional curve. Set $`Y^h=Y\times _XX^h`$. The following crucial result, which is due to Gabber, tells us that certain vector bundles on $`Y^h`$ are already determined on suitable infinitesimal neighborhoods of $`Y_0`$.

###### Lemma 2.2 (Gabber).

Let $``$ be a family of locally free $`𝒪_{Y_0}`$-modules of fixed rank $`n0`$. Suppose that $``$ is, up to tensoring with line bundles, a bounded family. Then there is an exceptional curve $`RY`$ so that the map $`H^1(Y^h,\mathrm{GL}_n)H^1(R,\mathrm{GL}_n)`$ is bijective on the subsets of vector bundles whose restriction to $`Y_0`$ lies in $``$.

###### Proof.

Let $`𝒪_Y`$ be the ideal of $`Y_0Y`$. Since the intersection matrix for the irreducible components of $`Y_0`$ is negative definite, there is an exceptional curve $`AY`$ with support $`Y_0`$ so that $`𝒪_{Y_0}(A)`$ is ample. Then $`𝒪_A(A)`$ is ample as well. Since the family $`\{\text{nd}()\}`$ is bounded, there is an integer $`m_0>0`$ so that

(5)
$$H^1(A,\text{nd}()𝒪_A(mA))=0$$

for all $`mm_0`$ and all $``$.

Let $`𝔜Y`$ be the formal completion along $`Y_0Y`$. We first check the statement of the Lemma for the formal scheme $`𝔜`$ instead of $`Y^h`$. Note that the canonical map

$$H^1(𝔜,\mathrm{GL}_n)\underset{}{\mathrm{lim}}H^1(mA,\mathrm{GL}_n)$$

is bijective, as explained in , proof of Theorem 3.5. Let $`𝒥𝒪_Y`$ be the ideal of $`AY`$. The obstruction to lifting a vector bundle $``$ on $`mA`$ to $`(m+1)A`$ lies in

$$H^2(R,\text{nd}()𝒥^m/𝒥^{m+1})=0,$$

so the restriction maps $`H^1(𝔜,\mathrm{GL}_n)H^1(mA,\mathrm{GL}_n)`$ are surjective for all $`m0`$.

Fix an integer $`mm_0`$, and let $`,^{}`$ be two vector bundles on $`(m+1)A`$ that are isomorphic on $`mA`$ and whose restrictions to $`Y_0`$ belong to the family $``$. Choose an isomorphism $`\psi :|_{mA}^{}|_{mA}`$. Locally on $`(m+1)A`$, we can lift this isomorphism to an isomorphism $`^{}`$. The sheaf of such liftings is a torsor under

$$\text{om}(,^{})𝒥^m/𝒥^{m+1}\text{nd}()𝒥^m/𝒥^{m+1}\text{nd}()𝒪_A(mA).$$

This sheaf has no first cohomology by (5). The upshot is that a global lifting of $`\psi :|_{mA}^{}|_{mA}`$ exists. Consequently, for $`R=m_0A`$, the mapping $`H^1(𝔜,\mathrm{GL}_n)H^1(R,\mathrm{GL}_n)`$ is bijective on the subsets of vector bundles whose restriction belongs to the family $``$.

Finally, we pass to $`Y^h`$. By the Artin Approximation Theorem ( Thm. 3.5), the map $`H^1(Y^h,\mathrm{GL}_n)H^1(𝔜,\mathrm{GL}_n)`$ is injective and has dense image. So given a formal vector bundle $``$ with $`|_{Y_0}`$, we find a vector bundle $`^h`$ on $`Y^h`$ with $`^h|_R|_R`$. By the choice of $`R`$, this implies $`^h|_𝔜`$. ∎

We proceed with the proof of Proposition 2.1. Let $``$ be the family of vector bundles on $`Y_0`$ of rank $`r`$ that are free up to tensoring with line bundles, and choose an exceptional divisor $`RY`$ as in the preceding Lemma. Let $`D^{}Z^1(Y^h)`$ be the strict transform of $`DZ^1(X^h)`$. Let $`E^{}Z^1(Y)`$ be the unique Weil divisor that is the strict transform of $`EZ^1(X)`$ on $`YY_0`$, and satisfies $`E^{}rD^{}`$ on $`Y^h`$. Set $`=𝒪_R(D^{})`$. According to Lemma 2.2, we have to construct a locally free $`𝒪_Y`$-module $``$ with $`_R_{i=1}^r^{}`$. For then the double dual $`=f_{}()^{}`$ would be the desired reflexive $`𝒪_X`$-module. We shall construct such a vector bundle as an elementary transformation of the trivial bundle $`𝒪_Y^r`$.

Choose an ample divisor $`AY`$. Replacing the divisors $`D`$ and $`E`$ by $`D+f_{}(tA)`$ and $`E+f_{}(rtA)`$, respectively, does not change the class $`\alpha \mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$. Choosing $`t0`$, we may assume that $`=𝒪_R(D^{})`$ is very ample, and that $`H^1(Y,𝒪_Y(E^{}R))=0`$. Next, choose pairwise disjoint effective Cartier divisors $`D_1,\mathrm{},D_rR`$, each one representing $``$. Let $`s_i\mathrm{\Gamma }(R,)`$ be the corresponding sections. Regard their product $`s_1\mathrm{}s_r`$ as a section of $`𝒪_R(E^{})`$. By construction, the group on the right in the exact sequence

$$H^0(Y,𝒪_Y(E^{}))H^0(R,𝒪_R(E^{}))H^1(Y,𝒪_Y(E^{}R))$$

is zero. Consequently, $`E^{}Z^1(Y)`$ is linearly equivalent to an effective divisor $`HY`$ with $`HR=D_1\mathrm{}D_r`$. Now choose a closed subset $`SHR`$ so that each Cartier divisor $`D_iH`$ is principal on $`HS`$. For each $`1ir`$, choose an exact sequence

(6)
$$0𝒪_H(C_i)\stackrel{t_i}{}𝒪_H\underset{ji}{}𝒪_{D_j}0$$

for certain Cartier divisors $`C_i\mathrm{Div}(H)`$ supported by $`S`$. As explained in , p. 152, it suffices to construct the desired Azumaya $`𝒪_X`$-algebra on $`Xf(S)`$. Hence it suffices to construct the desired locally free $`𝒪_Y`$-module $``$ on $`YS`$, and we may replace $`X`$, $`Y`$ by the complements $`Xf(S)`$, $`YS`$, respectively. Now the exact sequence (6) induces an exact sequence

$$𝒪_Y\stackrel{t_i}{}𝒪_H\underset{ji}{}𝒪_{D_j}0.$$

The map $`t=(t_1,\mathrm{},t_r):_{i=1}^r𝒪_Y𝒪_H`$ is surjective, because the $`D_i`$ are pairwise disjoint. The exact sequence

$$0\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}𝒪_Y\stackrel{t}{}𝒪_H0$$

defines a locally free $`𝒪_Y`$-module $``$, because the cokernel $`𝒪_H`$ has homological dimension $`\mathrm{hd}(𝒪_H)=1`$. Restricting to the curve $`RY`$, we obtain an exact sequence

$$𝒯\text{or}_{𝒪_Y}^1(𝒪_H,𝒪_R)_R\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}𝒪_R\stackrel{t_R}{}𝒪_{HR}0.$$

The term on the left is zero, because the curves $`H,RY`$ have no common components. By construction, $`t_i|_{D_j}=0`$ for $`ij`$, so the induced surjection $`t_R`$ is a diagonal matrix of the form

$$t_R=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}t_1|_{D_1}& & 0\\ & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& & t_r|_{D_r}\end{array}\right):\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}𝒪_R\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}𝒪_{D_i}=𝒪_{HR}.$$

Consequently $`_R_{i=1}^r^{}`$. Hence $``$ is the desired locally free $`𝒪_Y`$-module. ∎

###### Remark 2.3.

In my first proof of Proposition 2.1, I used a result of Treger ( Prop. 3.5), which states that the map $`H^1(Y^h,\mathrm{GL}_n)H^1(R,\mathrm{GL}_n)`$ is bijective for a suitable exceptional curve $`RY`$. As Gabber pointed out, this statement is wrong for $`n2`$. His counterexample goes as follows.

Let $`X=\mathrm{Spec}(A)`$ be a complete normal local surface singularity, and $`f:YX`$ a resolution of singularity, and $`Y_mY`$ the infinitesimal neighborhoods of the exceptional curve $`Y_0`$. Suppose $`n=2`$ for simplicity, and assume there is an exceptional curve $`R`$ as above. Fix an ample invertible $`𝒪_Y`$-module $``$, set $`_m=|_{Y_m}`$, and choose $`m0`$ with $`RY_m`$. The exact sequence

$$0_0^t(Y_m)_{m+1}^t_m^t0$$

yields an exact sequence

$$H^0(Y_m,_m^t)H^1(Y_0,_0^t(Y_m))H^1(Y_{m+1},_{m+1}^t)H^1(Y_m,_m^t)0.$$

For $`t0`$, the group on the left is zero, and $`H^1(Y_0,_0^t(Y_m))`$ is nonzero. It follows that there is a nonzero class $`\zeta H^1(Y,^t)`$ restricting to zero in $`H^1(Y_m,_m^t)`$. This defines a nonsplit extension

(7)
$$0^t\stackrel{\psi }{}𝒪_Y0,$$

which splits on $`R`$. By the defining property of the curve $`R`$, there is a bijection $`\varphi :𝒪_Y^t`$. The composition

$$𝒪_Y\stackrel{\varphi }{}\stackrel{\psi }{}𝒪_Y$$

is surjective on $`Y_m`$, because $`H^0(Y_m,_m^t)=0`$. By the Nakayama Lemma, the composition is surjective on the formal completion, and hence on $`Y`$ as well. So the extension (7) splits, contradicting $`\zeta 0`$.

## 3. Elementary transformations of Brauer–Severi schemes

We come to the main result of this paper.

###### Theorem 3.1.

Let $`X`$ be a separated geometrically normal algebraic surface. Then we have $`\mathrm{Br}(X)=\mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$.

###### Proof.

According to  Chap. II Lemma 4, we may assume that the ground field is algebraically closed. Fix a class $`\alpha \mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$. In light of Proposition 2.1, it suffices to construct an Azumaya algebra representing $`\alpha \mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ generically. Choose a resolution of singularities $`f:YX`$, and let $`𝔜Y`$ be the formal completion along the reduced exceptional curve $`Y_0Y`$. According to  Theorem 2.1, there is an Azumaya $`𝒪_Y`$-algebra $`𝒜`$ representing $`f^{}(\alpha )`$. The task now is to choose such an Azumaya algebra so that the formal vector bundle $`𝒜|_𝔜`$ is trivial. For then, as explained in  p. 152, the $`𝒪_X`$-algebra $`f_{}(𝒜)`$ is an Azumaya algebra, which represents $`\alpha \mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ generically. Note that we may remove finitely many closed smooth points from $`X`$.

First, we check that the formal Azumaya algebra $`𝒜|_𝔜`$ is trivial. Since the ground field is separably closed, there is a locally free $`𝒪_{Y_0}`$-module $`_0`$ and an isomorphism $`\phi _0:\text{nd}(_0)𝒜|_{Y_0}`$. The following argument due to Gabber shows that the pair $`(_0,\phi _0)`$ extends over all infinitesimal neighborhoods $`Y_0Y_n`$. Let $`d(𝒜|_{Y_n})`$ be the $`𝔾_m`$-gerbe of trivializations of $`𝒜|_{Y_n}`$. The restriction map gives a cartesian functor $`d(𝒜|_{Y_{n+1}})d(𝒜|_{Y_n})`$. Consider the corresponding stack of liftings of trivializations. This is a gerbe for the abelian sheaf $`^{n+1}/^{n+2}`$ on the étale site of $`Y_0`$, where $`=𝒪_Y(Y_0)`$. Since $`H^2(Y_0,^{n+1}/^{n+2})=0`$, the gerbe of liftings is trivial. Consequently, we have $`𝒜|_𝔜\text{nd}()`$ for some locally free $`𝒪_𝔜`$-module $``$.

The idea now is to make an elementary transformation along a curve $`HY`$, so that $``$ becomes free on certain infinitesimal neighborhood $`Y_0R`$. Furthermore, we shall choose the curve $`R`$ so that the freeness of $`_R`$ implies the freeness of $``$. This requires some preparation. Let me introduce three numbers $`m,k,q`$ depending on $`Y`$ and $``$. First, set $`m=\mathrm{rank}()`$. Second, let $`k1`$ be the order of the cokernel for the map $`\mathrm{Pic}(Y)\mathrm{NS}(Y_0)`$ onto the Néron–Severi group. Third, define $`q=1`$ in characteristic zero. In characteristic $`p>0`$, let $`q>0`$ be a $`p`$-th power so that the unipotent part of $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(𝔜)`$ is $`q`$-torsion. This works, because $`\mathrm{Pic}_𝔜^0`$ is an algebraic group scheme.

Now set $`r=mkq`$, and let $``$ be the family of locally free $`𝒪_{Y_0}`$-modules of rank $`r`$ which are free up to tensoring with line bundles. Choose a curve $`RY`$ as in Lemma 2.2. Finally, let $`X\overline{X}`$ be a compactification with $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)=\mathrm{Sing}(\overline{X})`$, and let $`Y\overline{Y}`$ be the corresponding compactification.

###### Claim.

We can modify the Azumaya algebra $`𝒜`$ and the vector bundle $``$ so that $``$ is a globally generated formal vector bundle of rank $`r`$, and that there is a very ample invertible $`𝒪_{\overline{Y}}`$-module $``$ with $`det()=_𝔜`$ and $`H^1(\overline{Y},(R))=0`$.

###### Proof.

Tensoring $``$ with an ample line bundle, we archive that $``$ is globally generated and that $`det()`$ is ample. Next, we replace the Azumaya algebra $`𝒜`$ by $`𝒜\text{nd}(𝒪_Y^k)`$. This replaces the vector bundle $``$ by $`^k`$, and $`det()`$ by $`det()^k`$. Consequently, we may assume that $`det()`$ is numerically equivalent to some ample invertible $`𝒪_𝔜`$-module $`_𝔜`$. Twisting $``$ by a suitable power of $`_𝔜`$, we may assume that $`_𝔜`$ extends to an ample invertible $`𝒪_{\overline{Y}}`$-module $``$ with $`H^1(\overline{Y},^s(R))=0`$ for all integers $`s>0`$.

In characteristic zero, $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(𝔜)`$ is a divisible group. Hence we find an invertible $`𝒪_𝔜`$-module $``$ with $`^{mk}det()_𝔜`$. Replacing $``$ by $``$, we have $`det()=_𝔜`$. Now assume that we are in characteristic $`p>0`$. Set $`G=\mathrm{Pic}_{𝔜/k}^0`$, and let $`G^{}G`$ be the unipotent part. Then the quotient $`G^{\prime \prime }=G/G^{}`$ is semiabelian, and $`G^{\prime \prime }(k)`$ is a divisible group. As in characteristic zero, we may assume that $`det()_𝔜^{}`$ lies in the unipotent part of $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(𝔜)`$, which is a $`q`$-torsion group. Passing to $`𝒜\text{nd}(𝒪_X^q)`$ and $`^q`$, we are done. ∎

We continue proving Theorem 3.1. Set $`r=\mathrm{rank}()`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{\Gamma }(R,_R)`$. The canonical surjection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }𝒪_R_R`$ yields a morphism $`\phi :R\mathrm{Grass}_r(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ into the Grassmannian of r-dimensional quotients. Choose a generic $`r`$-dimensional subvector space $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. For each integer $`k0`$, let $`G_k\mathrm{Grass}_r(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ be the subscheme of surjections $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime }`$ such that the composition $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\prime \prime }`$ has rank $`k`$. Note that $`G_{r1}`$ is a reduced Cartier divisor, and that $`G_{r2}`$ has codimension four (see , Sec. II.2).

By the dimensional part of Kleiman’s Transversality Theorem ( Thm. 2), which is valid in all characteristics, the map $`\phi :R\mathrm{Grass}_r(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is disjoint to $`G_{r2}`$ and passes through $`G_{r1}`$ in finitely many points. The upshot of this is that the quotient of the canonical map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}𝒪_X`$ is an invertible sheaf on some Cartier divisor $`DR`$. Consequently, we have constructed an exact sequence

$$0𝒪_R^r_R𝒪_D0.$$

In other words, the trivial vector bundle is the elementary transformation of $``$ with respect to the surjection $`_R𝒪_D`$. In geometric terms: Blowing up $`(_R)`$ along the section $`(𝒪_D)(_D)`$ and contracting the strict transform of $`(_D)`$ yields $`_R^{r1}`$ (see  Thm. 1.4).

We seek to extend this elementary transformation from the curve to the surface. Note that $`_R=det(_R)=𝒪_R(D)`$. The exact sequence

$$H^0(\overline{Y},)H^0(R,_R)H^1(\overline{Y},(R))=0$$

implies that $`D=HR`$ for some ample curve $`HY`$. Since the ground field $`k`$ is algebraically closed, Tsen’s Theorem gives $`H^2(H,𝔾_m)=0`$. Removing finitely many smooth points from the open subset $`X\overline{X}`$, we may assume that $`𝒜_H=\text{nd}(𝒪_H^r)`$. In other words, if $`PY`$ is the Brauer–Severi scheme corresponding to $`𝒜`$, we have $`P_H=_H^{r1}`$. Let $`A`$ be the semilocal ring of the curve $`H`$ corresponding to the closed points $`DH`$. The section $`(𝒪_D)P_D`$ is given by a surjection $`A^rA/I`$, where $`IA`$ is the ideal of $`D`$. By Nakayama’s Lemma, this lifts to a surjection $`A^rA`$. So, if we shrink $`X`$ further, we can extend the section $`(𝒪_D)P_D`$ to a section $`SP_H`$.

Let $`h:\widehat{P}P`$ be the blowing-up with center $`SP`$, and let $`E\widehat{P}`$ be the strict transform of the Cartier divisor $`P_HP`$. I claim that there is a birational contraction $`\widehat{P}P^{}`$ contracting precisely the fibers of $`EH`$ to points such that $`P^{}`$ is a Brauer–Severi scheme. Over suitable étale neighborhoods, this follows from  Theorem 1.4. You easily check that these contractions glue together and define a contraction in the category of schemes.

By construction, the new Brauer–Severi scheme $`P^{}X`$ has a trivial restriction $`P_R^{}=_R^{r1}`$. If $`𝒜^{}`$ is the Azumaya algebra corresponding to the Brauer–Severi scheme $`P^{}`$, this implies $`𝒜_R^{}=\text{nd}(𝒪_R^r)`$. By the choice of the curve $`RY`$, this forces the formal vector bundle $`𝒜_𝔜^{}`$ to be free. Consequently, the direct image $`f_{}(𝒜^{})`$ is an Azumaya $`𝒪_X`$-algebra representing the class $`\alpha \mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ generically. ∎

###### Remark 3.2.

The proof works for separated geometrically normal 2-dimensional algebraic spaces as well. This is because their resolutions are schemes.

###### Question 3.3.

The hypothesis of *geometric* normality annoys me. What happens for separated normal 2-dimensional noetherian schemes that are of finite type over nonperfect fields, or over Dedekind rings, or have no base ring at all?

## 4. Existence of vector bundles

Given a scheme $`X`$, one might ask whether $`X`$ admits a nonfree vector bundle. In dimension two, we can use Brauer groups to obtain a positive answer:

###### Theorem 4.1.

Let $`X`$ be a proper normal surface over a field $`k`$. Then there is a locally free $`𝒪_X`$-module of finite rank that is not free.

###### Proof.

Seeking a contradiction, we assume that each vector bundle is free. We may assume that $`k=\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝒪_X)`$. First, I reduce to the case that the ground field $`k`$ is separably closed. Let $`kL`$ be a separable closure, and let $`_L`$ be a vector bundle on $`X_L=XL`$, say of rank $`r0`$. Then there is a finite separable field extension $`kK`$, say of degree $`d1`$, such that $`_L`$ comes from a vector bundle $`_K`$ on $`X_K`$. Let $`p:X_KX`$ be the canonical projection. Then $`=p_{}(_K)`$ is a vector bundle of rank $`dr`$, hence free by assumption. This gives

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(X_K,_K)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,)k^{rd}K^r.$$

Now you easily choose $`r`$ sections of $``$ that are linearly independent over $`K`$, which gives the desired trivialization of $`_K`$.

From now on, assume that $`k`$ is separably closed. Note that $`\mathrm{Pic}(X)=0`$, so $`X`$ is nonprojective, hence it must contain some singularities. Let $`f:YX`$ be a resolution of singularities. Choose an exceptional divisor $`RX`$ so that $`\mathrm{Pic}(R)=\mathrm{Pic}(𝔜)`$, where $`𝔜Y`$ is the formal completion along the exceptional curve. The spectral sequence for $`𝔾_{m,X}=f_{}(𝔾_{m,Y})`$ gives an exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{Pic}(Y)\mathrm{Pic}(R)H^2(X,𝔾_m)H^2(Y,𝔾_m).$$

Set $`G=\mathrm{Pic}^0(R)/\mathrm{Pic}^0(Y)`$, and let $`H\mathrm{NS}(Y)`$ be the kernel of the restriction map $`\mathrm{NS}(Y)\mathrm{NS}(R)`$ for the Néron–Severi groups. The snake lemma gives an inclusion $`G/HH^2(X,𝔾_m)`$. To proceed, we need a well-known fact:

###### Lemma 4.2.

For each $`l>0`$ prime to $`\mathrm{char}(k)`$, the group $`\mathrm{Pic}^0(R)`$ is $`l`$-divisible.

###### Proof.

We have an exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{Pic}^0(R)\mathrm{Pic}_{R/k}^0(k)\mathrm{Br}(k).$$

Since $`\mathrm{Br}(k)=0`$, we have to see that the multiplication morphism $`l:PP`$ is surjective on the smooth algebraic group scheme $`P=\mathrm{Pic}_{R/k}^0`$. Since $`P`$ is connected, it suffices to check that $`l:PP`$ is open. The completion at the origin $`0P`$ is a formal group, given by a formal power series ring $`k[[X_1,\mathrm{},X_n]]`$ together with $`n`$ formal power series

$$F_i(X_1,\mathrm{},X_n,Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_n)=X_i+Y_i+\text{terms of higher order.}$$

Multiplication by $`l`$ is given by $`l1`$ substitutions

$$[l]^{}X_i=F_i([l1]^{}X_1,\mathrm{},[l1]^{}X_n,X_1,\mathrm{},X_n)lX_i,$$

modulo terms of higher order. Since $`l`$ is prime to the characteristic of the ground field, this is bijective. Consequently, $`l`$ is étale on $`𝒪_{P,0}^{}`$, hence étale on $`P`$, and therefore open. ∎

We continue with the proof of the Proposition. If $`G=0`$, then $`X`$ would have nontrivial line bundles (, Prop. 4.2), which is absurd. So $`G`$ is a nonzero $`l`$-divisible group. On the other hand, $`H`$ is finitely generated. We conclude that $`G/HH^2(X,𝔾_m)`$ contains many torsion points. Consequently, $`\mathrm{Br}^{}(X)`$ contains nonzero generically trivial classes. By Proposition 2.1 there is a nontrivial Azumaya $`𝒪_X`$-algebra $`𝒜`$.

Setting $`r^2=\mathrm{rank}(𝒜)`$, we have $`𝒜𝒪_X^{r^2}`$ as $`𝒪_X`$-module. The multiplication map $`𝒜𝒜𝒜`$ and the unit $`𝒪_X𝒜`$ induce a $`k`$-algebra structure on $`A=\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝒜)`$. You easily check that $`A\kappa (x)𝒜(x)`$ for each point $`xX`$. So $`A`$ is a central simple $`k`$-algebra, which is trivial because $`k`$ is separably closed. Consequently $`𝒜=A𝒪_X`$ is also trivial, contradiction. ∎

###### Remark 4.3.

It might easily happen that $`X`$ has trivial Picard group . However, the preceding results ensures the existence of vector bundles of higher rank.