text:
# Triangulated categories of singularities and D-branes in Landau-Ginzburg models

## Introduction

In spite of physics terms in the title, this paper is purely mathematical. Its purpose is to introduce triangulated categories related to singularities of algebraic varieties and establish a connection of these categories with D-branes in Landau-Ginzburg models It seems that two different types of categories can be associated with singularities (or singularities of maps). Categories of the first type are connected with vanishing cycles and closely related to the categories which were introduced in  for symplectic Picard-Lefschetz pencils. Categories of the second type are purely algebraic and come from derived categories of coherent sheaves. Categories of this type will be central in this work. An important notion here is the concept of a perfect complex, which was introduced in . A perfect complex is a complex of sheaves which locally is quasi-isomorphic to a bounded complex of locally free sheaves of finite type (a good reference is ).

To any algebraic variety $`X`$ one can attach the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$. This category admits a triangulated structure. The derived category of coherent sheaves has a triangulated subcategory $`𝔓𝔢𝔯𝔣(X)`$ formed by perfect complexes. If the variety $`X`$ is smooth then any coherent sheaf has a finite resolution of locally free sheaves of finite type and the subcategory of perfect complexes coincides with the whole of $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X)).`$ But for singular varieties this property is not fulfilled. We introduce a notion of triangulated category of singularities $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ as the quotient of the triangulated category $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$ by the full triangulated subcategory of perfect complexes $`𝔓𝔢𝔯𝔣(X)`$. The category $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ reflects the properties of the singularities of $`X`$ and ”does not depend on all of $`X`$”. For example we prove that it is invariant with respect to a localization in Zariski topology (Proposition 1.14). The category $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ has good properties when $`X`$ is Gorenstein. In this case, if the locus of singularities is complete then all Hom’s between objects are finite-dimensional vector spaces (Corollary 1.24).

The investigation of such categories is inspired by the Homological Mirror Symmetry Conjecture ().

Works on topological string theory are mainly concerned with the case of N=2 superconformal sigma-models with a Calabi-Yau target space. In this case the field theory has two topologically twisted versions: A-models and B-models. The corresponding D-branes are called A-branes and B-branes. The mirror symmetry should interchange these two classes of D-branes. From the mathematical point of view the category of B-branes on a Calabi-Yau is the derived category of coherent sheaves on it (,). As a candidate for a category of A-branes on Calabi-Yau manifolds so-called Fukaya category has been proposed. Its objects are, roughly speaking, Lagrangian submanifolds equipped with flat vector bundles (). The Homological Mirror Symmetry Conjecture asserts that if two Calabi-Yaus $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are mirror to each other, then the derived category of coherent sheaves on $`X`$ is equivalent to the Fukaya category of $`Y`$, and vice versa.

On the other hand, physicists also consider more general N=2 field theories and corresponding D-branes. One class of such theories is given by a sigma-model with a Fano variety as a target space. Another set of examples is provided by N=2 Landau-Ginzburg models. In many cases these two classes of N=2 theories are related by mirror symmetry (). For example, the sigma model with target $`^n`$ is mirror to a Landau-Ginzburg model which is given by superpotential

$$W=x_1+\mathrm{}+x_n+\frac{1}{x_1\mathrm{}x_n}$$

on $`^n`$. General definition of a Landau-Ginzburg model involves, besides a choice of a target space, a choice of a holomorphic function $`W`$ on this manifold. In particular, non-trivial Landau-Ginzburg models require a non-compact target space.

For Fano varieties one has the derived categories of coherent sheaves (B-branes) and given a symplectic form, one can propose a suitable Fukaya category (A-branes). Thus, if one wants to extend the Homological Mirror Symmetry Conjecture to the non-Calabi-Yau case, one should understand D-branes in Landau-Ginzburg models.

Categories of A-branes in Landau-Ginzburg models are studied in  and in  from the mathematical point of view. Mirror symmetry relates B-branes on a Fano variety (coherent sheaves) to A-branes in a LG model. In the case when the Fano variety is $`^n`$, the mirror symmetry prediction has been tested in  (and for $`^2`$ in  from the mathematical viewpoint).

One can also consider the Fukaya category (A-branes) on a Fano variety. One can expect that in this case the Fukaya category is equivalent to the category of B-branes in the mirror Landau-Ginzburg model. If we accept mirror symmetry, we can predict an answer for the Fukaya category on a Fano variety by studying B-branes in the mirror LG model. As a rule it is easier to understand B-branes, rather than A-branes.

A mathematical definition for the category of B-branes in Landau-Ginzburg models was proposed by M.Kontsevich. Roughly, he suggests that superpotential $`W`$ deforms complexes of coherent sheaves to ”twisted” complexes, i.e the composition of differentials is no longer zero, but is equal to multiplication by $`W`$. This ”twisting” also breaks $``$-grading down to $`/2`$-grading. The equivalence of this definition with the physics notion of B-branes in LG models was verified in paper  in the case of the usual quadratic superpotential $`W=x_1^2+\mathrm{}+x_n^2`$ and physical arguments were given supporting Kontsevich’s proposal for a general superpotential.

We establish a connection between categories of B-branes in Landau-Ginzburg models and triangulated categories of singularities. We consider singular fibres of the map $`W`$ and show that the triangulated categories of singularities of these fibres are equivalent to the categories of B-branes (Theorem 3.9). In particular this gives us that, in spite of the fact that the category of B-branes is defined using the total space $`X`$, it depends only on the singular fibres of the superpotential. This result can be used for precise calculations of the categories of B-branes in Landau-Ginzburg models. It is remarkable fact that this construction was known in the theory of singularities as matrix factorization it was introduced in  for study of maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules over local rings .

Another result which is useful for calculations connects the categories of B-branes in different dimensions (Theorem 2.1). (This fact is known in the local theory of singularities as Knörrer periodicity for maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules.) It says the following: Let $`W:X`$ be a superpotential. Consider the manifold $`Y=X\times ^2`$ and another superpotential $`W^{}=W+xy`$ on $`Y`$, where $`x,y`$ are coordinates on $`^2`$. Then the category of B-branes in the Landau-Ginzburg model on $`Y`$ is equivalent to the category of B-branes in the Landau-Ginzburg model on $`X`$. Actually, we prove that the triangulated category of singularities of the fiber $`X_0`$ over point $`0`$ is equivalent to the triangulated category of singularities of the fiber $`Y_0`$ (Theorem 2.1). Keeping in mind that the categories of singularities are equivalent to the categories of B-branes (Theorem 3.9) we obtain the connection between B-branes mentioned above.

In the end we give a calculation of the category of B-branes in the Landau-Ginzburg model with the superpotential $`W=z_0^n+z_1^2+\mathrm{}+z_{2k}^2`$ on $`^{2k+1}`$. The singularity of this superpotential corresponds to the Dynkin diagram $`A_{n1}`$. This category has $`n1`$ indecomposable objects. We describe morphisms between them, the translation functor and the triangulated structure on this category.

## 1. Singularities and triangulated categories

### 1.1. Triangulated categories and localizations

In this section we remind definitions of a triangulated category and its localization which were introduced in  (see also ,,). Let $`𝒟`$ be an additive category. The structure of a triangulated category on $`𝒟`$ is defined by giving of the following data:

* an additive autoequivalence $`[1]:𝒟𝒟`$ (it is called a translation functor),
* a class of exact (or distinguished) triangles:

$$X\stackrel{u}{}Y\stackrel{v}{}Z\stackrel{w}{}X[1],$$

which must satisfy the set of axioms T1–T4.

* + For each object $`X`$ the triangle $`X\stackrel{\mathrm{id}}{}X0X[1]`$ is exact.
    + Each triangle isomorphic to an exact triangle is exact.
    + Any morphism $`X\stackrel{u}{}Y`$ can be included in an exact triangle
    $`X\stackrel{u}{}Y\stackrel{v}{}Z\stackrel{w}{}X[1]`$.
* A triangle $`X\stackrel{u}{}Y\stackrel{v}{}Z\stackrel{w}{}X[1]`$ is exact if and only if the triangle
$`Y\stackrel{v}{}Z\stackrel{w}{}X[1]\stackrel{u[1]}{}Y[1]`$ is exact.
* For any two exact triangles and two morphisms $`f,g`$ the diagram below

can be completed to a morphism of triangles by a morphism $`h:ZZ^{}`$.
* For each pair of morphisms $`X\stackrel{u}{}Y\stackrel{v}{}Z`$ there is a commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}X& \stackrel{u}{}& Y& \stackrel{x}{}& Z^{}& & X[1]\\ & & v& & w& & & & \\ X& & Z& \stackrel{y}{}& Y^{}& \stackrel{w^{}}{}& X[1]\\ & & & & t& & u\left[1\right]& & \\ & & X^{}& =& X^{}& \stackrel{r}{}& Y[1]\\ & & r& & & & & & \\ & & Y[1]& \stackrel{x[1]}{}& Z^{}[1]& & \end{array}$$

where the first two rows and the two central columns are exact triangles.

A functor $`F:𝒟𝒟^{}`$ between two triangulated categories $`𝒟`$ and $`𝒟^{}`$ is called exact if it commutes with the translation functors, i.e there fixed a natural isomorphism $`t:F[1]_𝒟\stackrel{}{}[1]_𝒟^{}F`$ and it transforms all exact triangles into exact triangles, i.e for each exact triangle $`X\stackrel{u}{}Y\stackrel{v}{}Z\stackrel{w}{}X[1]`$ in $`𝒟`$ the triangle

$$FX\stackrel{Fu}{}FY\stackrel{Fv}{}FZ\stackrel{t_XFw}{}FX[1]$$

is exact.

A full additive subcategory $`𝒩𝒟`$ is called full triangulated subcategory, if the following conditions hold: it is closed with respect to the translation functor in $`𝒟`$ and if it contains any two objects of an exact triangle in $`𝒟`$ then it contains the third object of this triangle as well. The full triangulated subcategory $`𝒩𝒟`$ is called thick if it is closed with respect to taking of direct summands in $`𝒟`$.

Now we remind the definition of a localization of categories. Let $`𝒞`$ be a category and let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ be a class of morphisms in $`𝒞`$. It is well-known  that there is a large category $`𝒞[\mathrm{\Sigma }^1]`$ and a functor $`Q:𝒞𝒞[\mathrm{\Sigma }^1]`$ which is universal among the functors making the elements of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ invertible. (Note that the objects of the category $`𝒞[\mathrm{\Sigma }^1]`$ form not a set, but a class in general.) The category $`𝒞[\mathrm{\Sigma }^1]`$ has a good description if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a multiplicative system.

A family of morphisms $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in a category $`𝒞`$ is called a multiplicative system if it satisfies the following conditions:

* all identical morphisms $`\mathrm{id}_X`$ belongs to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$;
* the composition of two elements of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ belong to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$;
* any diagram $`X^{}\stackrel{s}{}X\stackrel{u}{}Y`$, with $`s\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ can be completed to a commutative square

with $`t\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (the same when all arrows reversed);
* for any two morphisms $`f,g`$ the existence of $`s\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with $`fs=gs`$ is equivalent to the existence of $`t\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with $`tf=tg`$.

If $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a multiplicative system then $`𝒞[\mathrm{\Sigma }^1]`$ has the following description. The objects of $`𝒞[\mathrm{\Sigma }^1]`$ are the objects of $`𝒞`$. The morphisms from $`X`$ to $`Y`$ in $`𝒞[\mathrm{\Sigma }^1]`$ are pairs $`(s,f)`$ in $`𝒞`$ of the form

$$X\stackrel{f}{}Y^{}\stackrel{s}{}Y,s\mathrm{\Sigma }$$

modulo the following equivalence relation: $`(f,s)(g,t)`$ iff there is a commutative diagram

with $`r\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

The composition of the morphisms $`(f,s)`$ and $`(g,t)`$ is a morphism $`(g^{}f,s^{}t)`$ defined from the following diagram, which exists by M3:

$$\text{}.$$

It can be checked that $`𝒞[\mathrm{\Sigma }^1]`$ is a category and there is a quotient functor

$$Q:𝒞𝒞[\mathrm{\Sigma }^1],XX,f(f,1)$$

which inverts all elements of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and it is universal in this sense (see ).

Let $`𝒟`$ be a triangulated category and $`𝒩𝒟`$ be a full triangulated subcategory. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝒩)`$ a class of morphisms $`s`$ in $`𝒟`$ embedding into an exact triangle

$$X\stackrel{s}{}YNX[1]$$

with $`N𝒩`$. It can be checked that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(N)`$ is a multiplicative system. We define

$$𝒟/𝒩:=𝒟[\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝒩)^1].$$

We endow the category $`𝒟/𝒩`$ with a translation functor induced by the translation functor in the category $`𝒟`$.

###### Lemma 1.1.

The category $`𝒟/𝒩`$ becomes a triangulated category by taking for exact triangles such that are isomorphic to the images of exact triangles in $`𝒟`$. The quotient functor $`Q:𝒟𝒟/𝒩`$ annihilates $`𝒩`$. Moreover, any exact functor $`F:𝒟𝒟^{}`$ of triangulated categories for which $`F(X)0`$ when $`X𝒩`$ factors uniquely through $`Q`$.

The following lemma, which will be necessary in the future, is evident.

###### Lemma 1.2.

Let $``$ and $`𝒩`$ be full triangulated subcategories in triangulated categories $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒟`$ respectively. Let $`F:𝒞𝒟`$ and $`G:𝒟𝒞`$ be adjoint pair of exact functors such that $`F()𝒩`$ and $`G(𝒩)`$. Then they induce functors

$$\overline{F}:𝒞/𝒟/𝒩,\overline{G}:𝒟/𝒩𝒞/$$

which are adjoint.

###### Proposition 1.3.

(, ). Let $`𝒟`$ be a triangulated category and $`𝒟^{},𝒩`$ be full triangulated subcategories. Let $`𝒩^{}=𝒟^{}𝒩`$. Assume that any morphism $`NX^{}`$ with $`N𝒩`$ and $`X^{}D^{}`$ admits a factorization $`NN^{}X^{}`$ with $`N^{}𝒩^{}`$. Then the natural functor

$$𝒟^{}/𝒩^{}𝒟/N$$

is fully faithful.

### 1.2. Triangulated categories of singularities

Let $`X`$ be a scheme over a field $`k`$. We will say that it satisfies condition (ELF) if it is

The last condition means that for any coherent sheaf $``$ there is a vector bundle $``$ and an epimorphism $`.`$ For example any quasi-projective scheme satisfies these conditions. Note that any closed and any open subscheme of $`X`$ is also noetherian, finite dimension and has enough locally free sheaves. It is clear for a closed subscheme while for an open subscheme $`U`$ it follows from the fact that any coherent sheaf on $`U`$ can be obtained as the restriction of a coherent sheaf on $`X`$ (see , ex.5.15).

Denote by $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$ (resp. $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$) the bounded derived categories of coherent (resp. quasi-coherent) sheaves on $`X`$. These categories have canonical triangulated structures.

Since $`X`$ is noetherian the natural functor $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$ is fully faithful and realizes an equivalence of $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$ with the full subcategory $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))_{\mathrm{coh}}𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$ consisting of all complexes with coherent cohomologies (see  II, 2.2.2). By this reason, when we consider $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$ as a subcategory of $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$ we will identify it with the full subcategory $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))_{\mathrm{coh}}`$, adding all isomorphic objects.

###### Lemma 1.4.

(, ) Let $`X`$ be as above. Then for any bounded above complex of quasi-coherent sheaves $`C^{}`$ on $`X`$ there is a bounded above complex of locally free sheaves $`P^{}`$ and a quasi-isomorphism of the complexes $`P^{}\stackrel{}{}C^{}`$. Moreover, if $`C^{}𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))_{\mathrm{coh}}`$ then there is a bounded above complex of locally free sheaves of finite type $`P^{}`$ with a quasi-isomorphism $`P^{}\stackrel{}{}C^{}`$.

Recall the constructions of standard truncation functors. Let $`C^{}`$ be a complex. There is brutal truncation

$$\sigma ^kC^{}=\mathrm{}0C^kC^{k+1}C^{k+2}\mathrm{}$$

This is a subcomplex of $`C^{}`$. The quotient $`C^{}/\sigma ^kC^{}`$ is another brutal truncation $`\sigma ^{k1}C^{}`$.

There is also the good truncation

$$\tau ^kC^{}=\mathrm{}0\mathrm{Im}dC^{k1}C^kC^{}\mathrm{}$$

There is a quotient map $`C^{}\tau ^kC^{}`$ which induces isomorphisms on cohomologies $`H^n`$ for all $`nk`$. The kernel of this map is denoted $`\tau ^{k1}C^{}`$.

###### Definition 1.5.

A bounded complex of coherent sheaves will be called a perfect complex if it is quasi-isomorphic to a bounded complex of locally free sheaves of finite type.

###### Lemma 1.6.

Any complex $`C^{},`$ which is isomorphic to a bounded complex of locally free sheaves in $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X)),`$ is perfect.

Proof. We can represent the isomorphism in the derived category via calculus of fractions as $`P^{}\stackrel{s}{}E^{}\stackrel{t}{}C^{}`$, where $`P^{}`$ is a bounded complex of locally free sheaves and $`s,t`$ are quasi-isomorphisms. By Lemma 1.4, there is a bounded above complex $`Q^{}`$ of locally free sheaves and quasi-isomorphism $`Q^{}E^{}`$. Consider a good truncation $`\tau ^kQ^{}`$ for sufficiently large $`k`$. As $`E^{}`$ is bounded there is a morphism $`r:\tau ^kQ^{}E^{}`$ that is also a quasi-isomorphism. To prove the lemma it is sufficient to show that $`\tau ^kQ^{}`$ is a complex of locally free sheaves. Consider the composition $`sr:\tau ^kQ^{}P^{}`$ which is a quasi-isomorphism. The cone of $`sr`$ is a bounded acyclic complex all terms of which, excepted maybe the leftmost term, are locally free. This implies that the leftmost term is locally free as well, because the kernel of an epimorphism of locally free sheaves is locally free. Thus $`\tau ^kQ^{}`$ is a bounded complex of locally free sheaves and hence $`C^{}`$ is perfect. $`\mathrm{}`$

The perfect complexes form a full triangulated subcategory $`𝔓𝔢𝔯𝔣(X)𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$, which is thick.

###### Remark 1.7.

Actually, a perfect complex is defined as a complex of $`𝒪_X`$-modules locally quasi-isomorphic to a bounded complex of locally free sheaves of finite type. But under our assumption on the scheme any such complex is quasi-isomorphic to a bounded complex of locally free sheaves of finite type(see  II, or  §2).

###### Definition 1.8.

We define a triangulated category $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ as the quotient of the triangulated category $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$ by the full triangulated subcategory $`𝔓𝔢𝔯𝔣(X)`$ and call it as a triangulated category of singularities of $`X`$.

###### Remark 1.9.

It is known that if a scheme $`X`$ is as above and is regular in addition then the subcategory of perfect complexes coincides with the whole bounded derived category of coherent sheaves. Hence, the triangulated category of singularities is trivial in this case.

We also consider the full triangulated subcategory $`𝔏𝔣𝔯(X)𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$ consisting of objects which are isomorphic to bounded complexes of locally free sheaves in $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$. By the same argument as in Lemma 1.6 we can show that for any complex $`C^{}𝔏𝔣𝔯(X)`$ there is a bounded complex of locally free sheaves $`P^{}`$ and a quasi-isomorphism $`P^{}C^{}`$. Using Lemma 1.4, it can be checked that the subcategory $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))𝔏𝔣𝔯(X)`$ coincides with the subcategory of perfect complexes $`𝔓𝔢𝔯𝔣(X)`$.

Define a triangulated category $`𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(X)`$ as the quotient $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))/𝔏𝔣𝔯(X)`$. The full embedding $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$ induces a functor $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(X)`$. We will show that this functor is also full embedding.

###### Lemma 1.10.

Let $`X`$ be as above and let $``$ be a quasi-coherent sheaf on $`X`$ such that for any point $`x\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$ it is locally free in some neighborhood of $`x`$. Then it belongs to the subcategory $`𝔏𝔣𝔯(X)`$. If $``$ is coherent in addition then it is perfect as a complex.

Proof. By Lemma 1.4, there is a bounded above complex $`Q^{}`$ of locally free sheaves and quasi-isomorphism $`Q^{}`$.Consider a good truncation $`\tau ^kQ^{}`$ for sufficiently large $`k`$. There is a morphism $`r:\tau ^kQ^{}`$ that is also a quasi-isomorphism. To prove the lemma it is sufficient to show that $`\tau ^kQ^{}`$ is a complex of locally free sheaves. All terms of this complex, except maybe for the leftmost term, are locally free. But for any point $`x\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$ the leftmost term is also locally free in some neighborhood of $`x`$, because $``$ is locally free there. If now $`x\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$ then there is a neighborhood $`U`$ of $`x`$ which is regular. Hence, the leftmost term is locally free on $`U`$ under assumption that $`k>dimX`$.

If now $``$ is coherent then we can take the resolution $`Q^{}`$ such that all terms are of finite type. Hence, $``$ is perfect. $`\mathrm{}`$

In particular, we get from this lemma that if the support of an object $`E^{}𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$ does not meet $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$ then $`E^{}`$ is perfect.

###### Lemma 1.11.

Let $`X`$ be as above. Then any object $`A𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ is isomorphic to an object $`[k]`$ where $``$ is a coherent sheaf.

Proof. The object $`A`$ is a bounded complex of coherent sheaves. Let us take locally free bounded above resolution $`P^{}\stackrel{}{}A`$ which exists by Lemma 1.4. Consider a brutal truncation $`\sigma ^kP^{}`$ for sufficiently large $`k0`$. Denote by $``$ the cohomology $`H^k(\sigma ^kP^{})`$. It is clear that $`A[k+1]`$ in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 1.12.

Let $`X`$ be as above. Then for any locally free sheaf $``$ and for any quasi-coherent sheaf $``$

$$\mathrm{Ext}^i(,)=0,\text{for}i>n.$$

Proof. Let $`U_1\mathrm{}U_n`$ be an affine cover of $`X`$. For all subsequence of indices $`I=(i_1,\mathrm{},i_k)`$, let $`U_I=U_{i_1}\mathrm{}U_{i_k},`$ and let $`j_I:U_IX`$ be the open immersion. As $`X`$ is separated, each $`U_I`$ is affine and each $`j_I`$ is an affine map. Hence, $`j_I`$ is exact and preserves quasi-coherence.

We consider the C̆ech hypercover complex of quasi-coherent sheaves

(1)
$$0\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}j_ij_i^{}\underset{I=(i_1,i_2)}{}j_Ij_I^{}\underset{I=(i_1,i_2,i_3)}{}j_Ij_I^{}\mathrm{}$$

This is an exact sequence of sheaves.

Since $`U_I=\mathrm{Spec}(A_I)`$ is affine the category of quasi-coherent sheaves on $`U_I`$ is equivalent to the category of $`A_I`$-modules. Therefore, we have

$$\mathrm{Ext}^i(,j_Ij_I^{})=\mathrm{Ext}^i(j_I^{},j_I^{})=0\text{for all}i>0,$$

because $`j_I^{}`$ corresponds to a projective module over $`A_I`$. Thus the nontrivial Ext’s from $``$ to $``$ are bounded by the length of the complex (1) which is equal to $`n`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 1.13.

For a scheme $`X`$ as above the natural functor $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(X)`$ is fully faithful.

Proof. Consider the full embedding $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$. We have $`𝔓𝔢𝔯𝔣(X)=𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))𝔏𝔣𝔯(X)`$. To prove the proposition we check that the conditions of Proposition 1.3 are fulfilled. Let $`Q^{}\stackrel{t}{}^{}`$ be a morphism in $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$ such that $`Q^{}𝔏𝔣𝔯(X)`$ and $`^{}𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$. Let $`P^{}\stackrel{s}{}^{}`$ be a quasi-isomorphism where $`P^{}`$ is a bounded above complex of locally free sheaves of finite type. It exists by Lemma 1.4. The brutal truncation $`\sigma ^kP^{}`$ is a perfect complex. Consider the map $`r:\sigma ^kP^{}^{}`$ induced by $`s`$. A cone of the map $`r`$ is isomorphic to $`G[k+1]`$ where $`G`$ is a coherent sheaf. Since $`Q^{}`$ is a bounded complex of locally free sheaves by Lemma 1.12, we obtain that

$$\mathrm{Hom}(Q^{},G[k+1])=0$$

for sufficiently large $`k`$. Hence, the map $`t`$ can be lifted to some map $`Q^{}\sigma ^kP^{}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Consider a morphism $`f:XY`$ of finite Tor-dimension (for example flat). It defines an inverse image functor $`𝐋f^{}:𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(Y))𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$. It is clear that the functor $`𝐋f^{}`$ sends a perfect complex on $`Y`$ to a perfect complex on $`X`$. Therefore, we get a functor $`𝐋\overline{f}^{}:𝐃_{Sg}(Y)𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$. By the same reason there is a functor $`𝐋\overline{f}^{}:𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(Y)𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(X)`$.

Let $`f:XY`$ be a morphism of finite Tor-dimension. Suppose that it is proper of locally finite type. Then there is the functor of direct image $`𝐑f_{}:𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(Y))`$ and, moreover, this functor takes perfect complexes to perfect complexes (see  III, or ). In this case we get a functor $`𝐑\overline{f}_{}:𝐃_{Sg}(X)𝐃_{Sg}(Y)`$, which is the right adjoint to $`𝐋\overline{f}^{}`$.

Now we prove a local property for triangulated categories of singularities.

###### Proposition 1.14.

Let X be as above and let $`j:UX`$ be an embedding of an open subscheme such that $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)U`$. Then the functor $`\overline{j}^{}:𝐃_{Sg}(X)𝐃_{Sg}(U)`$ is an equivalence of triangulated categories.

Proof. Since $`X`$ is noetherian there is the functor $`𝐑j_{}:𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(U))𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$ which is right adjoint to $`j^{}`$. The composition $`j^{}𝐑j_{}`$ is isomorphic to the identity functor. Take an object $`B𝔏𝔣𝔯(U)`$ and consider $`𝐑j_{}(B)`$. It is easy to see that the object $`𝐑j_{}(B)`$ belongs to $`𝔏𝔣𝔯(X)`$. Actually, this condition is local. For $`U`$ it is fulfilled and for $`X\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$ as for smooth scheme it is evident. Thus the functor $`𝐑j_{}`$ induces the functor

$$𝐑\overline{j}_{}:𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(U)𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(X).$$

Moreover, the functor $`𝐑\overline{j}_{}`$ is right adjoint to $`\overline{j}^{}`$.

For any object $`A𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(X))`$ we have a canonical map $`\mu _A:A𝐑j_{}j^{}A`$. A cone $`C(\mu _A)`$ of this map is an object whose support belongs to $`XU`$ and does not intersect $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$. Hence, by Lemma 1.10 the object $`C(\mu _A)`$ belongs to the subcategory $`𝔏𝔣𝔯(X)`$. This gives that $`\mu _A`$ becomes an isomorphism in $`𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(X)`$. Therefore, the functor

$$\overline{j}^{}:𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(X)𝐃_{Sg}^{^{}}(U)$$

is fully faithful. On the other hand, we know that $`j^{}𝐑j_{}(B)B`$ for any $`B𝐃^b(\mathrm{Qcoh}(U))`$. Hence, $`\overline{j}^{}`$ is an equivalence.

The functor $`j^{}`$ preserves coherence. Thus, using Proposition 1.13, we obtain that the functor

$$\overline{j}^{}:𝐃_{Sg}(X)𝐃_{Sg}(U)$$

is fully faithful. Now note that by Lemma 1.11 any object $`B𝐃_{Sg}(U)`$ is isomorphic to $`[k]`$ where $``$ is a coherent sheaf on $`U`$ and any coherent sheaf on $`U`$ can be obtained as the restriction of a coherent sheaf on $`X`$ (, Ex.5.15). This implies that $`\overline{j}^{}:𝐃_{Sg}(X)𝐃_{Sg}(U)`$ is an equivalence. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 1.3. Triangulated categories of singularities for Gorenstein schemes

Remind the definition of a Gorenstein local ring and a Gorenstein scheme.

###### Definition 1.15.

A local noetherian ring $`A`$ is called Gorenstein if $`A`$ as a module over itself has a finite injective resolution.

It can be shown that if $`A`$ is Gorenstein than $`A`$ is a dualizing complex for itself (see ). This means that $`A`$ has finite injective dimension and the natural map

$$M𝐑\mathrm{Hom}^{}(𝐑\mathrm{Hom}^{}(M,A),A)$$

is an isomorphism for any coherent $`A`$-module $`M`$ and as consequence for any object from $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(\mathrm{Spec}(A)))`$.

###### Definition 1.16.

A scheme $`X`$ is Gorenstein if all of its local rings are Gorenstein local rings.

###### Remark 1.17.

If $`X`$ is Gorenstein and has finite Krull dimension, then $`𝒪_X`$ is a dualizing complex for $`X`$, i.e. it has finite injective dimension as quasi-coherent sheaf and the natural map

$$𝐑\underset{¯}{om}^{}(𝐑\underset{¯}{om}^{}(,𝒪_X),𝒪_X)$$

is an isomorphism for any coherent sheaf $``$. In particular, we have that there is an integer $`n_0`$ such that $`\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)=0`$ for each quasi-coherent sheaf $``$ and all $`i>n_0`$.

###### Lemma 1.18.

Let $`X`$ be as above and Gorenstein. Then for any coherent sheaf $``$ and an object $`P^{}𝔓𝔢𝔯𝔣(X)`$ there is an integer $`m`$ depending only on $`P^{}`$ such that

$$\mathrm{Hom}^i(,P^{})=0$$

for all $`i>m`$.

Proof. For any coherent sheaf $``$ and for any locally free sheaf $`𝒫`$ we know that

$$\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒫)=\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)𝒫=0$$

for any $`i>n_0`$. Using the spectral sequence from local to global Ext’s we obtain that

$$\mathrm{Ext}^i(,𝒫)=0$$

for $`i>n_0+n`$ where $`n`$ is dimension of $`X`$. Since $`P^{}`$ is a bounded complex there exists $`m`$ depending only on $`P^{}`$ such that

$$\mathrm{Hom}^i(,P^{})=0$$

for $`i>m`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 1.19.

Let X as above and Gorenstein. Then the following conditions on a coherent sheaf $``$ are equivalent.

* The sheaves $`\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)`$ are trivial for all $`i>0`$.
* There is a right locally free resolution

$$0\{Q^0Q^1Q^3\mathrm{}\}.$$

Proof. $`1)2).`$ Denote by $`^{}`$ the sheaf $`\underset{¯}{om}(,𝒪_X)`$. Consider a left locally free resolution of $`^{}`$. Applying to it the functor $`\underset{¯}{om}(,𝒪_X)`$ we obtain a right locally free resolution of $``$, because $`𝒪_X`$ is dualizing complex.

$`2)1).`$ Consider a brutal truncation $`\sigma ^kQ^{}`$ for sufficiently large $`k`$. Denote by $`𝒢`$ the nontrivial cohomology $`H^k(\sigma ^kQ^{})`$. For any $`i>0`$ we have isomorphisms

$$\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)\underset{¯}{xt}^{i+k+1}(𝒢,𝒪_X)=0$$

The last equality follows from Remark 1.17. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 1.20.

Let X be as above and Gorenstein. Let $``$ be a coherent sheaf which is perfect as a complex. Suppose that $`\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)=0`$ for all $`i>0`$. Then $``$ is locally free.

Proof. If $``$ is perfect then $`^{}=\underset{¯}{om}(,𝒪_X)`$ is also perfect. Hence, it has bounded locally free resolution $`𝒫^{}^{}`$. Since $`𝒪_X`$ is a dualizing complex we obtain a bounded right resolution $`𝒫^{}`$. Thus $``$ is locally free. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 1.21.

Let $`X`$ be as above and Gorenstein. Let $``$ and $`𝒢`$ be coherent sheaves such that $`\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)=0`$ for all $`i>0`$. Fix $`N`$ such that $`\mathrm{Ext}^i(𝒫,𝒢)=0`$ for $`i>N`$ and for any locally free sheaf $`𝒫`$. Then

$$\mathrm{Hom}_{𝐃_{Sg}(X)}(,𝒢[N])\mathrm{Ext}^N(,𝒢)/$$

where $``$ is the subspace of elements factoring through locally free, i.e. $`e`$ iff $`e=\beta \alpha `$ with $`\alpha :𝒫`$ and $`\beta \mathrm{Ext}^N(𝒫,𝒢)`$ where $`𝒫`$ is locally free.

Proof. By the definition of a localization any morphism from $``$ to $`𝒢[N]`$ in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ can be represented by a pair of morphisms in $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$ of the form

(2)
$$\stackrel{s}{}A\stackrel{a}{}𝒢[N]$$

such that the cone $`C(s)`$ is a perfect complex. By Lemma 1.19 there is a right locally free resolution $`Q^{}`$. We consider a brutal truncation $`\sigma ^kQ^{}`$ for sufficiently large $`k`$ such that $`\mathrm{Hom}([k1],C(s))=0,`$ where $`=H^k(\sigma ^kQ^{})`$. Such $`k`$ exists by Lemma 1.18. Using the triangle

$$[k1]\sigma ^kQ^{}[k]$$

we find that the map $`C(s)`$ can be lifted to a map $`\sigma ^kQ^{}C(s)`$. Therefore, there is a map $`[k1]A`$ which induces a pair of the form

(3)
$$\stackrel{s^{}}{}[k1]\stackrel{e}{}𝒢[N],$$

and this pair gives the same morphism in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ as the pair (2). Since $`\mathrm{Ext}^i(𝒫,𝒢)=0`$ for $`i>N`$ and for any locally free sheaf $`𝒫`$, we obtain

$$\mathrm{Hom}(\sigma ^kQ^{}[1],𝒢[N])=0.$$

Hence, there is a map $`f`$ which completes the following diagram

$$\text{}.$$

This gives us that the map $`f`$ is equivalent to the map (3) and as consequence to the map (2). Thus, any morphism from $``$ to $`𝒢[N]`$ in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ is represented by a morphism from $``$ to $`𝒢[N]`$ in the category $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X))`$. Now if $`f`$ is the $`0`$-morphism in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ then repeating the procedure above we find that $`f`$ factors through a morphism $`\sigma ^kQ^{}𝒢[N]`$. By the condition on $`G`$ any such morphism can be lifted to a morphism $`Q^0𝒢[N]`$. Hence, if $`f`$ is the $`0`$-morphism in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ then it factors through $`Q^0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 1.22.

If $`X`$ is affine then $`N`$ can be taken equal to $`0`$.

###### Proposition 1.23.

Let $`X`$ be as above and Gorenstein. Then any object $`A𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$ is isomorphic to the image of a coherent sheaf $``$ such that $`\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)=0`$ for all $`i>0`$.

Proof. An object $`A`$ is a bounded complex of coherent sheaves. Let us take locally free bounded above resolution $`P^{}\stackrel{}{}A`$ which exists by Lemma 1.4. Consider a brutal truncation $`\sigma ^kP^{}`$ for sufficiently large $`k0`$. Denote by $`𝒢`$ the cohomology $`H^k(\sigma ^kP^{})`$. Since $`A`$ is bounded and $`X`$ is Gorenstein we know that the complex $`𝐑\underset{¯}{om}^{}(A,𝒪_X)`$ is bounded. This implies that if $`k0`$ then $`\underset{¯}{xt}^i(𝒢,𝒪_X)=0`$ for all $`i>0`$. Moreover, we get that $`A𝒢[k+1]`$ in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$.

By Lemma 1.19 there is a right locally free resolution $`𝒢Q^0Q^1\mathrm{}`$. Consider $`\mathrm{Im}d_{k1}=\mathrm{Ker}d_kQ^k`$ and denote it by $``$. Applying again Lemma 1.19 we obtain that $`\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)=0`$ for all $`i0`$. And we have an isomorphism $`A𝒢[k+1]`$ in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 1.24.

Let $`X`$ be as above and Gorenstein such that the closed subset $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$ is complete. Then $`dim_k\mathrm{Hom}(A,B)<\mathrm{}`$ for any two objects $`A,B𝐃_{Sg}(X)`$.

Proof. Let $`\overline{X}`$ be some compactification of $`X`$. Since $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$ is complete the intersection $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$ with the complement $`\overline{X}\backslash X`$ is empty. Resolving if it is necessary singularities of $`\overline{X}`$ on the complement $`\overline{X}\backslash X`$ we can assume that $`\mathrm{Sing}(\overline{X})`$ coincides with $`\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$. By Proposition 1.14 there is an equivalence $`𝐃_{Sg}(X)𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{X})`$. We know that for any two objects of $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(\overline{X}))`$ the space of morphisms is finite dimensional. Now the statement of the corollary immediately follows from Propositions 1.21 and 1.23. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 2. Knörrer periodicity

Let $`X`$ be a separated regular noetherian scheme of finite Krull dimension. Any such scheme has enough locally free sheaves (see , II). Let $`f:X𝔸^1`$ be a flat morphism. Consider the scheme $`Y=X\times 𝔸^2`$ and a morphism $`g=f+xy`$ to $`𝔸^1`$, where $`x,y`$ are coordinates on $`𝔸^2`$. Denote by $`X_0=X/f`$ and $`Y_0=Y/g`$ the fibers of $`f`$ and $`g`$ respectively over the point $`0`$. Consider the scheme $`Z=Y_0/x`$. There are natural maps $`i:ZY_0`$ and $`q:ZX_0`$ where the former is a closed embedding and the latter is an $`𝔸^1`$-bundle. All the schemes, introduced above, are separated noetherian schemes of finite Krull dimension that have enough locally free sheaves.

Consider the composition functor $`𝐑i_{}q^{}:𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(Y_0))`$ and denote it by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Z`$.

The aim of this paragraph is to prove the following theorem.

###### Theorem 2.1.

The functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_Z:𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(Y_0))`$ defined by formula

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_Z()=𝐑i_{}q^{}()$$

induces a functor $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_Z:𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)𝐃_{Sg}(Y_0)`$ which is an equivalence.

###### Remark 2.2.

An assertion analogous to this theorem is known in local theory of singularities as Knörrer periodicity. It was proved for maximal Cohen-Macalay modules over regular analitic k-algebra by Knörrer (, Th.3.1). He used a matrix factorization introduced by Eisenbud in .

At first, we consider partial compactifications of $`Y`$ and $`Y_0`$. Denote by $`\overline{Y}`$ the scheme $`X\times ^2`$ and let $`\overline{Y}_0\overline{Y}`$ be a closed subscheme which is given by equation $`fz^2+xy=0`$, where now $`x,y,z`$ are projective coordinates on $`^2`$. There is a flat map $`\pi :\overline{Y}_0X`$ which is a conic bundle over $`X`$. The scheme $`\overline{Y}_0`$ is a partial compactification of $`Y_0`$ such that $`\mathrm{Sing}(\overline{Y}_0)=\mathrm{Sing}(Y_0)`$. Hence, by Proposition 1.14 we have an equivalence $`𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)𝐃_{Sg}(Y_0)`$ of triangulated categories of singularities.

Consider the cartesian square

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\stackrel{~}{Z}& \stackrel{\overline{i}}{}& & \overline{Y}_0\\ p& & & \pi & & \\ X_0& \stackrel{j}{}& & X\end{array}$$

Here $`\stackrel{~}{Z}=X_0\times _X\overline{Y}_0`$ is a fiber product. The scheme $`\stackrel{~}{Z}`$ is a union of two components $`\overline{Z}_1\overline{Z}_2`$. Each $`\overline{Z}_i`$ is isomorphic to $`^1\times X_0`$ and their intersection is isomorphic to $`X_0`$. The component $`\overline{Z}_1`$ is a partial compactification of $`Z=𝔸^1\times X_0`$. We denote by $`i_1,i_2`$ the closed embeddings of $`\overline{Z}_1,\overline{Z}_2`$ in $`\overline{Y}_0`$ and we denote by $`W\overline{Y}_0`$ the intersection $`\overline{Z}_1\overline{Z}_2`$. We know that $`W`$ is isomorphic to $`X_0`$. Moreover, $`\mathrm{Sing}(\overline{Y}_0)`$ is contained in $`W`$ and coincides with $`\mathrm{Sing}(X_0)`$ under the isomorphism $`WX_0`$.

###### Lemma 2.3.

The closed embedding $`i_1:\overline{Z}_1\overline{Y}_0`$ is regular and $`\overline{Z}_1`$ is a Cartier divisor in $`\overline{Y}_0`$. The restriction of the line bundle $`𝒪_{\overline{Y}_0}(\overline{Z}_1)`$ on $`\overline{Z}_1`$ is isomorphic to $`𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(1)=𝒪_^1(1)𝒪_{X_0}`$.

Proof. Consider a Cartier divisor in $`\overline{Y}_0`$ given by the equation $`x=0`$. It is the union of $`\overline{Z}_1`$ and $`D`$, where $`D`$ is a component of $`\overline{Y}_0Y_0`$. Hence, $`D`$ does not meet the singularities of $`\overline{Y}_0`$. This implies that $`D`$ is a Cartier divisor. Therefore, $`\overline{Z}_1`$ is a Cartier divisor too and $`i_1`$ is a regular embedding.

Consider the divisor $`\stackrel{~}{Z}=\overline{Z}_1\overline{Z}_2`$. It is equal to $`\pi ^1(X_0)`$ and its restriction on $`\overline{Z}_1`$ is trivial. The restriction of $`𝒪(\overline{Z}_2)`$ on $`\overline{Z}_1`$ is $`𝒪_^1(1)𝒪_{X_0}`$, because the intersection $`\overline{Z}_2\overline{Z}_1=W`$ is isomorphic to $`X_0`$. Hence, the restriction of $`𝒪(\overline{Z}_1)`$ on $`\overline{Z}_1`$ is $`𝒪_^1(1)𝒪_{X_0}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Denote by $`p_1`$ the projection of $`\overline{Z}_1`$ on $`X_0`$ and consider the commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\overline{Z}_1& \stackrel{i_1}{}& & \overline{Y}_0\\ p_1& & & \pi & & \\ X_0& \stackrel{j}{}& & X.\end{array}$$

###### Proposition 2.4.

The functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}=𝐑i_1p_1^{}:𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(\overline{Y}_0))`$ is fully faithful.

Proof. The functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}=𝐑i_1p_1^{}`$ has a right adjoint functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}=𝐑p_1i_1^{\mathrm{}}`$ where $`i_1^{\mathrm{}}()𝐋i_1^{}(𝒪(Z_1))[1]`$ (see, for example,  Cor.7.3).

At first, note that the functor $`p_1^{}:𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(\overline{Z_1}))`$ is fully faithful, because by the projection formula we have an isomorphism

$$𝐑p_1p_1^{}(A)A𝐑p_1𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}A𝒪_{X_0}A$$

for any $`A𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))`$.

Consider the canonical transformation of functors $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}`$. We have to show that this transformation is an isomorphism of functors. Take an object $`A𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))`$ and consider an exact triangle

(4)
$$A\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}(A)C.$$

To show that $`C=0`$ it is sufficient to check that $`𝐑j_{}C=0`$, because $`j`$ is a closed embedding.

Since the functor $`p_1^{}`$ is fully faithful, the triangle (4) is the image of the triangle

(5)
$$p_1^{}Ai_1^{\mathrm{}}𝐑i_1p_1^{}AB$$

under the functor $`𝐑p_1^{}`$, where the former morphism is a canonical map induced by the natural transformation $`\mathrm{id}i_1^{\mathrm{}}𝐑i_1`$. Applying the functor $`𝐑i_1`$ to the exact triangle (5) we obtain the following triangle

$$𝐑i_1p_1^{}A𝐑i_1i_1^{\mathrm{}}𝐑i_1p_1^{}A𝐑i_1B.$$

This triangle is split by the canonical morphism $`𝐑i_1i_1^{\mathrm{}}𝐑i_1p_1^{}A𝐑i_1p_1^{}A`$ which is obtained by the tensoring product of the object $`𝐑i_1p_1^{}A`$ with a map $`\alpha `$ from the following exact triangle

$$i_1𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(\overline{Z}_1)[1]\stackrel{\alpha }{}𝒪_{\overline{Y}_0}𝒪_{\overline{Y}_0}(Z_1)i_1𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(\overline{Z}_1).$$

Therefore, the object $`𝐑i_{}B`$ is isomorphic to $`𝐑i_{}p_1^{}A(\overline{Z_1})=𝐑i_{}(p_1^{}A𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(1))`$. Now we have the following sequence of isomorphisms

$$\begin{array}{c}𝐑j_{}C𝐑j_{}𝐑p_1B𝐑\pi _{}𝐑i_1B𝐑\pi _{}𝐑i_1(p_1^{}A𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(1))\hfill \\ \hfill 𝐑j_{}𝐑p_1(p_1^{}A𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(1))𝐑j_{}(A𝐑p_1𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(1))0.\end{array}$$

Thus the functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}=𝐑i_1p_1^{}`$ is fully faithful. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 2.5.

The functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}:𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(\overline{Y}_0))`$ induces a functor $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_Z:𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)`$ which is fully faithful.

Proof. The functors $`p_1^{}`$ and $`i_1^{\mathrm{}}=𝐋i_1^{}(𝒪(\overline{Z}_1))[1]`$ take perfect complexes to perfect complexes as functors of inverse images. The functors $`𝐑i_1`$ and $`𝐑p_1`$ also preserve perfect complexes, because both morphisms $`i_1`$ and $`p_1`$ are finite Tor-dimension, proper, and of finite type.

Thus, we get a functor $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}:𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)𝐃_{Sg}(Y_0)`$ and this functor has the right adjoint $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}`$. As the composition $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}\mathrm{\Phi }_{\overline{Z}_1}`$ is isomorphic to the identity functor, the composition $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}`$ is also isomorphic to the identity functor. $`\mathrm{}`$

Thus, we obtained the functor $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}:𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)`$ and showed that this functor is fully faithful. To complete the proof of the theorem we have to check that this functor is an equivalence. We show that any object $`𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)`$ satisfying condition $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}=0`$ is zero object. The property to be an equivalence will easy follow from this fact.

###### Lemma 2.6.

Any object $`A𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(\overline{Z}_1))`$ such that $`𝐑p_1A=0`$ is isomorphic to an object of the form $`p_1^{}B𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(1)`$ for some $`B𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))`$.

Proof. Denote by $`B`$ the object $`𝐑p_1(A(1))`$. We have a natural map $`p_1^{}B𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(1)A`$. Denote by $`C`$ the cone of this map. The object $`C`$ satisfies the following conditions

$$𝐑p_1C=0\text{and}𝐑p_1(C(1))=0,$$

the latter condition is following from the fact that $`p_1^{}`$ is fully faithful. Now any sheaf $`𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(n)`$ has a resolution of the form

$$𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(1)^n𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}^{(n+1)}𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(n).$$

Tensoring this sequence with the object $`C`$ and applying the functor $`𝐑p_1`$ we get that $`𝐑p_1(C(n))=0`$ for all $`n`$. Hence, the object $`C`$ is zero, because the sheaf $`𝒪_{\overline{Z}}(1)`$ is relatively ample. $`\mathrm{}`$

Actually, this Lemma shows us that the category $`𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(\overline{Z}_1))`$ has a semiorthogonal decomposition of the form

$$p_1^{}𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))O_{\overline{Z}_1}(1),p_1^{}𝐃^b(\mathrm{coh}(X_0))$$

(for definition see ). It can be proved for any $`^1`$-bundle and moreover for the projectivization of any bundle. The proof for smooth base can be found in  and it works for any base.

The second Lemma is also almost evident.

###### Lemma 2.7.

Let $`i:ZY`$ be a closed embedding of a Cartier divisor. Let $``$ be a sheaf on $`Y`$ such that its restriction to the complement $`U=XZ`$ is locally free and $`𝐋i^{}`$ is isomorphic to a locally free sheaf on $`Z`$. Then $``$ is locally free on $`Y`$.

Proof. To prove that $``$ is locally free it is sufficient to show that for any closed point $`t:yY`$ we have the equalities

$$\mathrm{Ext}^i(,t_{}𝒪_y)=0$$

for all $`i>0`$. The sheaf $``$ is locally free on $`U`$. Hence, we only need to consider the case $`yZ`$. This means that $`t=it^{}`$ where $`t^{}:yZ`$ is closed embedding. In this case

$$\mathrm{Ext}_Y^i(,t_{}𝒪_y)=\mathrm{Hom}_Z^i(𝐋i^{},t_{}^{}𝒪_y)=0$$

for $`i>0`$, because $`𝐋i^{}`$ is isomorphic to a locally free sheaf on $`Z`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Using these two lemmas we can prove the following proposition.

###### Proposition 2.8.

Assume that an object $`𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)`$ satisfies the condition $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}=0`$. Then $`=0`$ in $`𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)`$.

Proof. At first, note that all schemes $`X_0,\overline{Z}_1,\overline{Y}_0`$ are Gorenstein. By Proposition 1.23 we can assume that $``$ is a sheaf and $`\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)=0`$ for all $`i0`$. Note that any such $``$ is locally free on the complement $`X\mathrm{Sing}(X)`$. In addition, for such $``$ we have $`𝐋i_1^{}i_1^{}`$ is a sheaf.

Denote by $``$ the relatively ample line bundle on $`\overline{Y}_0`$ obtained by the restriction of the line bundle $`𝒪_{\overline{Y}}(1)`$ on $`\overline{Y}=^2\times X`$. We can see that the object $`^n`$ is isomorphic to $``$ in the category $`𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)`$, because there is an inclusion $`^n`$ such that the support of the cokernel does not intersect $`\mathrm{Sing}(\overline{Y}_0)`$ and, hence, it is perfect by Lemma 1.10.

Take the sheaf $`i_1^{}`$ and denote by $``$ the sheaf $`p_1i_1^{}`$ on $`X_0`$. Tensoring $``$ with $`^n`$ if it is necessary we can reduce the situation to the case

$$𝐑^ip_1i_1^{}=0\text{for all}i>0\text{and}p_1^{}\stackrel{\alpha }{}i_1^{}\text{is surjective.}$$

By Lemma 2.6 the kernel of $`\alpha `$ is a sheaf of the form $`p_1^{}𝒢𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1}(1),`$ where $`𝒢`$ is a sheaf on $`X_0`$. By the assumption, the sheaf $``$ is perfect as a complex on $`X_0`$. Moreover, the sheaf $`𝒢p_1i_1^{}(^1)`$ is also perfect as a complex on $`X_0`$. Hence, the sheaf $`i_1^{}`$ on $`\overline{Z}_1`$ is a perfect complex on $`\overline{Z}_1`$. On the other hand, we know that the sheaf $``$ has a right locally free resolution. Hence the sheaf $`i_1^{}`$ as the restriction with respect to a regular embedding of a divisor also has a right locally free resolution. By Lemma 1.19 this implies that

$$\underset{¯}{xt}^i(i_1^{},𝒪_{\overline{Z}_1})=0\text{for all}i>0.$$

By Lemma 1.20 this means that $`i_1^{}`$ is locally free on $`\overline{Z}_1`$. Now apply Lemma 2.7 we get that $``$ is locally free on whole $`\overline{Y}_0`$. Hence, it is isomorphic to the zero object in $`𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Theorem 2.1 We already know that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}`$ is fully faithful. Take an object $`A𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)`$ and consider the natural map $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}AA`$. Denote by $`C`$ its cone. Apply the functor $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}`$ to the obtained exact triangle. Since $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}`$ is fully faithful, we get that $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}C=0`$. By Proposition 2.8 the object $`C`$ is the zero object. Hence, the functor $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}`$ is also fully faithful and, consequently, it is an equivalence. It remains only to note that the functor $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_Z:𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)𝐃_{Sg}(Y_0)`$ is the composition of the functor $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\overline{Z}_1}:𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)`$ and the functor $`\overline{J}^{}:𝐃_{Sg}(\overline{Y}_0)𝐃_{Sg}(Y_0)`$, where $`J:Y_0\overline{Y}_0`$ is the open embedding. Both of these functors are equivalence. Hence, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}_Z`$ is an equivalence too. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3. Triangulated category of D-branes of type B in Landau-Ginzburg model

### 3.1. Kontsevich’s proposal and categories of pairs

A mathematical definition of the categories of D-branes of type B in Landau-Ginzburg models is proposed by M.Kontsevich (see also ).

By a Landau-Ginzburg model we mean the following data: a smooth variety (or regular scheme) $`X`$ and a regular function $`W`$ on $`X`$ such that the morphism $`W:X𝔸^1`$ is flat (for the definition of B-branes we don’t need a symplectic form on $`X`$ which have to be in a LG model too).

With any point $`w_0𝔸^1`$ we can associate a differential $`/2`$-graded category $`DG_{w_0}(W)`$, an exact category $`\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$, and a triangulated category $`DB_{w_0}(W)`$. We give constructions of these categories under the condition that $`X=\mathrm{Spec}(A)`$ is affine (see ). The general definition is more sophisticated.

Since the category of coherent sheaves on an affine scheme $`X=\mathrm{Spec}(A)`$ is the same as the category of finitely generated $`A`$-modules we will frequently go from sheaves to modules and back. Note that under this equivalence locally free sheaves are the same as projective modules.

Objects of all these categories are ordered pairs

$$\overline{P}:=\left(\text{}\right)$$

where $`P_0,P_1`$ are finitely generated projective $`A`$-modules and the compositions $`p_0p_1`$ and $`p_1p_0`$ are the multiplications by the element $`(Ww_0)A`$.

Morphisms from $`\overline{P}`$ to $`\overline{Q}`$ in the category $`DG_{w_0}(W)`$ form $`/2`$-graded complex

$$\mathrm{om}(\overline{P},\overline{Q})=\underset{i,j}{}\mathrm{Hom}(P_i,Q_j)$$

with a natural grading $`(ij)mod2,`$ and with a differential $`D`$ acting on homogeneous elements of degree $`k`$ as

$$Df=qf(1)^kfp.$$

The space of morphisms $`\mathrm{Hom}(\overline{P},\overline{Q})`$ in the category $`\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$ is the space of homogeneous of degree 0 morphisms in $`DG_{w_0}(W)`$ which commutes with the differential. The space of morphisms in the category $`DB_{w_0}(W)`$ is the space of morphisms in $`\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$ modulo null-homotopic morphisms, i.e.

$$\mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)}(\overline{P},\overline{Q})=\mathrm{Z}^0(\mathrm{om}(\overline{P},\overline{Q})),\mathrm{Hom}_{DB_{w_0}(W)}(\overline{P},\overline{Q})=\mathrm{H}^0(\mathrm{om}(\overline{P},\overline{Q})).$$

Thus a morphism $`f:\overline{P}\overline{Q}`$ in the category $`\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$ is a pair of morphisms $`f_1:P_1Q_1`$ and $`f_0:P_0Q_0`$ such that $`f_1p_0=q_0f_0`$ and $`q_1f_1=f_0p_1`$. The morphism $`f`$ is null-homotopic if there are two morphisms $`s:P_0Q_1`$ and $`t:P_1Q_0`$ such that $`f_1=q_0t+sp_1`$ and $`f_0=tp_0+q_1s`$.

It is clear that the category $`\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$ is an exact category with respect to componentwise monomorphisms and epimorphisms (see definition in ).

###### Remark 3.1.

The remarkable fact is that such construction appeared many years ago in the paper  and is known for specialist in singular theory as a matrix factorization.

The category $`DB_{w_0}(W)`$ can be endowed with a natural structure of a triangulated category. To determine it we have to define a translation functor $`[1]`$ and a class of exact triangles.

The translation functor can be defined as a functor that takes an object $`\overline{P}`$ to the object

$$\overline{P}[1]=\text{}),$$

i.e. it changes the order of the modules and signs of the morphisms, and takes a morphism $`f=(f_0,f_1)`$ to the morphism $`f[1]=(f_1,f_0)`$. We see that the functor $`[2]`$ is the identity functor.

For any morphism $`f:\overline{P}\overline{Q}`$ from the category $`\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$ we define a mapping cone $`C(f)`$ as an object

$$C(f)=\text{})$$

such that

$$c_0=\left(\begin{array}{cc}q_0& f_1\\ 0& p_1\end{array}\right),c_1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}q_1& f_0\\ 0& p_0\end{array}\right).$$

There are maps $`g:\overline{Q}C(f),g=(\mathrm{id},0)`$ and $`h:C(f)\overline{P}[1],h=(0,\mathrm{id})`$.

Now we define a standard triangle in the category $`DB_{w_0}(W)`$ as a triangle of the form

$$\overline{P}\stackrel{f}{}\overline{Q}\stackrel{g}{}C(f)\stackrel{h}{}\overline{P}[1].$$

for some $`f\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$.

###### Definition 3.2.

A triangle $`\overline{P}\overline{Q}\overline{R}\overline{P}[1]`$ in $`DB_{w_0}(W)`$ will be called an exact triangle if it is isomorphic to a standard triangle.

###### Proposition 3.3.

The category $`DB_{w_0}(W)`$ endowed with the translation functor $`[1]`$ and the above class of exact triangles becomes a triangulated category.

Proof.The proof is the same as the proof of the analogous result for a usual homotopic category (see, for example,  or ). $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Definition 3.4.

We define a category of D-bran of type B (B-branes) on $`X`$ with the superpotential $`W`$ as the product $`DB(W)=\underset{w𝔸^1}{}DB_w(W)`$.

Note that since $`X`$ is regular, the set of points on $`𝔸^1`$ with singular fibers is finite , III,Cor.10.7 (we suppose here that we work over a field of characteristic 0). It will be shown that the category $`DB_w(W)`$ is trivial if the fiber over point $`w`$ is smooth. Hence, the category $`DB(W)`$ is a product of finitely many numbers of categories.

The product of two triangulated categories $`𝒟_1`$ and $`𝒟_2`$ is the same as their orthogonal sum. Objects of it are pairs $`(A,B)`$, where $`A𝒟_1`$ and $`B𝒟_2`$. The space of morphisms from $`(A,B)`$ to $`(A^{},B^{})`$ is the sum $`\mathrm{Hom}(A,A^{})\mathrm{Hom}(B,B^{})`$. The translation functor and exact triangles are defined by componentwise.

The construction of the category $`DB_{w_0}(W)`$ fits into a general construction of the stable category associated with an exact category. We briefly recall the definition of an exact category, which was introduced by Quillen in .

An exact category $``$ is an additive category together with a choice of a class of sequences $`\{FEG\}`$ said to be exact. This determines two classes of morphisms: the admissible epimorphisms $`EG`$ and the admissible monomorphisms $`FE`$. The exact category is to satisfy the following axioms: Any sequence isomorphic to an exact sequence is exact. In any exact sequence $`F\stackrel{i}{}E\stackrel{p}{}G`$, the map $`i`$ is a kernel of $`p`$ and $`p`$ is a cokernel of $`i`$. The class of admissible monomorphisms is closed under composition and is closed under cobase change by pushout along an arbitrary map $`FF^{}`$. Dually, the class of admissible epimorphisms is closed under composition and under base change by pullback along an arbitrary map $`G^{}G`$. This definition is equivalent to the original definition of Quillen (see ).

An object $`I`$ is injective (resp. $`P`$ is projective) if the sequence

$$\mathrm{Hom}(E,I)\mathrm{Hom}(F,I)0(\text{resp.}\mathrm{Hom}(P,E)\mathrm{Hom}(P,G)0)$$

is exact for each admissible monomorphism (resp. epimorphism). We say that $``$ has enough injectives, if for each $`F`$ there is an admissible monomorphism in an injective.

If $``$ has enough injectives then we can define the stable category $`\underset{¯}{}`$ as a category which has the same objects as $``$ and a morphism in $`\underset{¯}{}`$ is the equivalence class $`\overline{f}`$ of a morphism $`f`$ of $``$ modulo the subgroup of morphisms factoring through an injective in $``$ (see, for example, ).

If $``$ also has enough projectives (i.e. for each $`G`$ there is an admissible epimorphism $`PG`$ with projective $`P`$), and the classes of projectives and injectives coincide, then $``$ is called a Frobenius category. The stable category $`\underset{¯}{}`$ associated with a Frobenius category has a natural structure of a triangulated category ().

In our case, the category $`\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$ is an exact category with respect to componentwise monomorphisms and epimorphisms. Moreover, it can be shown that $`\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$ is a Frobenius category and the class of injectives consists exactly of homotopic to zero pairs. Hence, the category $`DB_{w_0}(W)`$ is nothing more than the stable category associated to the exact category $`\mathrm{Pair}_{w_0}(W)`$ and has the natural structure of a triangulated category. It gives another proof of Proposition 3.3.

### 3.2. Categories of pairs and categories of singularities

In this paragraph we establish a connection between category of B-branes in a Landau-Ginsburg model and triangulated categories of singular fibres, introduced above. As it turned out this connection for maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules over local ring appeared in the paper , Sect.6.

Further we suppose $`w_0=0`$. Denote by $`X_0`$ the fiber of $`f:X𝔸^1`$ over the point $`0`$. With any pair $`\overline{P}`$ we can associate a short exact sequence

(6)
$$0P_1\stackrel{p_1}{}P_0\mathrm{Coker}p_10.$$

We can attach to an object $`\overline{P}`$ the sheaf $`\mathrm{Coker}p_1`$. This is a sheaf on $`X`$. But the multiplication by $`W`$ annihilates it. Hence, we can consider $`\mathrm{Coker}p_1`$ as a sheaf on $`X_0`$. Any morphism $`f:\overline{P}\overline{Q}`$ in $`\mathrm{Pair}_0(W)`$ gives a morphism between cokernels. This way we get a functor $`\mathrm{Cok}:\mathrm{Pair}_0(W)\mathrm{coh}(X_0)`$.

###### Lemma 3.5.

The functor $`\mathrm{Cok}`$ is full.

Proof. Any map $`g:\mathrm{Coker}p_1\mathrm{Coker}q_1`$ can be extended to a map of exact sequences

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccc}0& & P_1& \stackrel{p_1}{}& P_0& & \mathrm{Coker}p_1& & 0\\ & & f_1& & f_0& & g& & \\ 0& & Q_1& \stackrel{q_1}{}& Q_0& & \mathrm{Coker}q_1& & 0,\end{array}$$

because $`P_1`$ and $`P_0`$ are projective. To prove the lemma it is sufficient to show that $`f=(f_1,f_0)`$ is a map of pairs, i.e $`f_1p_0=q_0f_0`$. We have the sequence of equalities

$$q_1(f_1p_0q_0f_0)=f_0p_1p_0q_1q_0f_0=f_0WWf_0=0.$$

Since $`q_1`$ is an embedding, we obtain that $`f_1p_0=q_0f_0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 3.6.

For any pair $`\overline{P}`$ the coherent sheaf $`\mathrm{Coker}p_1`$ on $`X_0`$ satisfies the condition

$$\mathrm{Ext}^i(\mathrm{Coker}p_1,𝒪_{X_0})=0$$

for all $`i>0`$.

Proof. First note that $`X_0`$ is Gorenstein as a full intersection. Consider the restriction of the sequence (6) on $`X_0`$. We obtain an exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{Coker}p_1P_1/W\stackrel{p_1|_W}{}P_0/W\mathrm{Coker}p_10.$$

This gives us a periodic resolution of the sheaf $`\mathrm{Coker}p_1`$

$$0\mathrm{Coker}p_1P_1/W\stackrel{p_1|_W}{}P_0/WP_1/W\mathrm{}.$$

Since $`X_0`$ is affine and Gorenstein the existence of such resolution implies that

$$\mathrm{Ext}^i(\mathrm{Coker}p_1,𝒪_{X_0})=0$$

for all $`i>0`$ ( by Lemma 1.19). $`\mathrm{}`$

Now we show that the functor $`\mathrm{Cok}`$ induces an exact functor between triangulated categories $`DB_0(W)`$ and $`𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$.

###### Proposition 3.7.

There is a functor $`F`$ which completes the following commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{cccc}\mathrm{Pair}_0(W)& \stackrel{\mathrm{Cok}}{}& & \mathrm{coh}(X_0)\\ & & & & & \\ DB_0(W)& \stackrel{F}{}& & 𝐃_{Sg}(X_0).\end{array}$$

Moreover, the functor $`F`$ is an exact functor between triangulated categories.

Proof. We have a functor $`\mathrm{Pair}_0(W)𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$ which is the composition of $`\mathrm{Cok}`$ and the natural functor from $`\mathrm{coh}(X)`$ to $`𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$. To prove the existence of a functor $`F`$ we need to show that any morphism $`\overline{f}=(f_1,f_0):\overline{P}\overline{Q}`$ which is homotopic to $`0`$ goes to $`0`$-morphism in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$. Fix a homotopy $`(t,s)`$ where $`t:P_1Q_0`$ and $`s:P_0Q_1`$. Consider the following decomposition of $`\overline{f}`$:

This gives the decomposition of $`F(\overline{f})`$ through a locally free object $`Q_0/W`$. Hence, $`F(\overline{f})=0`$ in the category $`𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$. We leave to the reader the proof that the functor $`F`$ is exact. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 3.8.

If $`F\overline{P}=0`$ then $`\overline{P}=0`$ in $`DB_0(W)`$.

Proof. If $`F\overline{P}=0`$ then $`\mathrm{Coker}p_1`$ is a perfect complex. This implies that it is locally free by Lemmas 1.20 and 3.6. Hence, there is a map $`f:\mathrm{Coker}p_1P_0/W`$ which splits the epimorphism $`pr:P_0/W\mathrm{Coker}p_1`$. It can be lifted to a map from $`\{P_1\stackrel{p_1}{}P_0\}`$ to $`\{P_0\stackrel{W}{}P_0\}`$. Consider a diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}P_1& \stackrel{p_1}{}& & P_0& & & \mathrm{Coker}p_1\\ t& & & u& & & f& & \\ P_0& \stackrel{W}{}& & P_0& & & P_0/W\\ p_0& & & \mathrm{id}& & & pr& & \\ P_1& \stackrel{p_1}{}& & P_0& & & \mathrm{Coker}p_1.\end{array}$$

Since the composition $`prf`$ is identical, the map $`(p_0t,u)`$ from the pair $`\{P_1\stackrel{p_1}{}P_0\}`$ to itself is homotopic to the identical map of this pair. Hence, there is a map $`s:P_0P_1`$ such that

$$\mathrm{id}_{P_1}p_0t=sp_1\text{and}p_1s=\mathrm{id}_{P_0}u.$$

Moreover, we have the following equalities

$$0=(up_1Wt)=(up_1tW)=(utp_0)p_1.$$

This gives us that $`(utp_0)=0`$, because no maps from $`\mathrm{Coker}p_1`$ to $`P_0`$. Finally, we obtain two morphisms $`t`$ and $`s`$ such that

$$\mathrm{id}_{P_1}=p_0t+sp_1\text{and}\mathrm{id}_{P_0}=p_1s+tp_0.$$

Hence, the pair $`\overline{P}`$ is isomorphic to the zero object in the category $`DB_0(W)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 3.9.

The functor $`F:DB_0(W)𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$ is an exact equivalence.

Proof. By Lemma 3.6 the coherent sheaves $`\mathrm{Coker}p_1`$ and $`\mathrm{Coker}q_1`$ satisfy the condition of Proposition 1.21 with $`N=0`$. This gives an isomorphism

$$\mathrm{Hom}_{𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)}(\mathrm{Coker}p_1,\mathrm{Coker}q_1)\mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{coh}(X_0)}(\mathrm{Coker}p_1,\mathrm{Coker}q_1)/$$

where $``$ is the subspace of morphisms factoring through a locally free sheaf. Since $`\mathrm{Cok}`$ is full we get that the functor $`F`$ is also full.

Now we prove that $`F`$ is faithful. It is a standard consideration. Let $`f:\overline{P}\overline{Q}`$ be a morphism for which $`F(f)=0`$. Suppose that $`f`$ sits in an exact triangle

$$\overline{P}\stackrel{f}{}\overline{Q}\stackrel{g}{}\overline{R}$$

Then the identity map of $`F\overline{Q}`$ factors through the map $`F\overline{Q}\stackrel{Fg}{}F\overline{R}`$. Since $`F`$ is full, there is a map $`h:\overline{Q}\overline{Q}`$ factoring through $`g:\overline{Q}\overline{R}`$ such that $`Fh=\mathrm{id}`$. Hence, the cone $`C(h)`$ of map $`h`$ goes to zero under the functor $`F`$. By Lemma 3.8 the object $`C(h)`$ is the zero object as well, so $`h`$ is an isomorphism. Thus $`g:\overline{Q}\overline{R}`$ is a split monomorphism and $`f=0`$.

To complete the proof that $`F`$ is an equivalence we need to show that every object $`A𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$ is isomorphic to $`F\overline{P}`$ for some $`\overline{P}`$. By Proposition 1.23 any object $`A𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$ is isomorphic to the image of a coherent sheaf $``$ such that $`\underset{¯}{xt}^i(,𝒪_X)=0`$ for all $`i>0`$. Consider an epimorphism $`P_0`$ of sheaves on $`X`$ with locally free $`P_0`$. Denote by $`p_1:P_1P_0`$ the kernel of this map. Since the multiplication on $`W`$ gives the zero map on $``$, there is a map $`p_0:P_0P_1`$ such that $`p_0p_1=W`$ and $`p_1p_0=W`$. We get a pair

$$\overline{P}:=\left(\text{}\right)$$

And we need only to check that $`P_1`$ is locally free. It follows from the fact that for any closed point $`t:xX`$ we have

(7)
$$\mathrm{Ext}^i(P_1,t_{}𝒪_x)=0$$

for all $`i>0`$. To show it we note that by Lemma 1.19 the sheaf $``$ has a right locally free resolution on $`X_0`$. For any local free sheaf $`Q`$ on $`X_0`$ we have $`\mathrm{Ext}_X^i(Q,t_{}𝒪_x)=0`$ for $`i>1`$. And since the category of coherent sheaves on $`X`$ has finite cohomological dimension we obtain $`\mathrm{Ext}_X^i(,t_{}𝒪_x)=0`$ for $`i>1`$. This immediately implies (7). $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 3.10.

The category of B-branes on smooth $`X`$ with a superpotential $`W`$ is equivalent to the product $`\underset{w𝔸^1}{}𝐃_{Sg}(X_w)`$, and this product is finite.

### 3.3. Some simple calculations

In this paragraph we give a description of the category of B-branes in the Landau-Ginzburg model with a superpotential $`W^{}=z_0^n+z_1^2+\mathrm{}+z_{2k}^2`$ which is given on $`^{2k+1}`$. (The descriptions of these categories and another categories which is connected with another Dynkin diagram are known and can be found in the papers , where the technique of Auslander-Reiten sequences is used.)

The superpotential $`W`$ has only one singular point over $`0`$. By Theorem 3.9 the category of B-branes $`DB_0(W^{})`$ is equivalent to the triangulated category of singularities $`𝐃_{Sg}(Y_0)`$, where $`Y_0`$ is the fiber over $`0`$, i.e $`Y_0`$ is given by the equation $`W^{}=0`$. By Theorem 2.1 this category is equivalent to the category $`𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$, where $`X_0=\mathrm{Spec}([z]/z^n)`$ is the fiber over $`0`$ of the superpotential $`W=z^n`$ on $``$. Thus, it is enough to describe the category $`𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$.

Objects. Denote by $`A`$ the algebra $`[z]/z^n`$. By Proposition 1.23 any object is coming from a finite-dimensional module $`M`$ over the algebra $`A`$. Each $`A`$-module is nothing more as a vector space with an operator $`L`$ such that $`L^n=0`$. Hence any module is a direct sum of the modules $`V_i`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, where $`V_i=A/z^i`$. This is the Jordan decomposition in Jordan blocks. Moreover, the module $`V_n=A`$ is free, hence it is equal to the zero object in $`𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$. So indecomposable objects in the category $`𝐃_{Sg}(X_0)`$ are

$$V_1,V_2,\mathrm{}.,V_{n1}.$$

All other objects are finite direct sums of $`V_\mu ,\mu =1,\mathrm{}n1`$.

Morphisms. For each pair $`V_\mu ,V_\nu `$ we fix a morphism

$${}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}:V_\mu V_\nu $$

which is coming from the natural projection if $`\mu \nu `$ and from the injection that sends $`1V_\mu =A/z^\mu `$ to $`z^{\nu \mu }`$ if $`\nu \mu `$. All other morphisms are linear combination of compositions of $`{}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}`$. There are the following relations:

(8)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}1)\hfill & {}_{\mu }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}=id_\mu ,\hfill & \\ 2)\hfill & {}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\lambda }^{}{}_{\lambda }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}={}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}\hfill & \text{if}\nu \lambda \mu \text{or}\nu \lambda \mu ,\hfill \\ 3)\hfill & {}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\lambda }^{}{}_{\lambda }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}=0\hfill & \text{if}\lambda \mu +\nu \text{or}\lambda +n\mu +\nu ,\hfill \\ 4)\hfill & {}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\lambda }^{}{}_{\lambda }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}={}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\kappa }^{}{}_{\kappa }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}\hfill & \text{if}\lambda +\kappa =\mu +\nu .\hfill \end{array}$$

Using this relation we can see that the space $`\mathrm{Hom}(V_\mu ,V_\nu )`$ has a basis formed by the morphisms of the form $`{}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\lambda }^{}{}_{\lambda }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}`$, where $`\mathrm{max}(\mu ,\nu )\lambda <\mu +\nu `$. Denote by $`\mathrm{depth}V_\mu `$ the integer number equals to $`\mathrm{min}(\mu ,n\mu )`$. We obtain that

$$dim\mathrm{Hom}(V_\mu ,V_\nu )=\mathrm{min}(\mathrm{depth}V_\mu ,\mathrm{depth}V_\nu ).$$

Moreover, the ring $`\mathrm{End}(V_\mu )`$ is isomorphic to $`[x]/x^d`$, where $`d=\mathrm{depth}V_\mu `$.

Translation functor. To see the translation functor it is convenient to draw the following pictures

The translation functor $`[1]`$ is the reflection with respect to the horizontal line, i.e. it sends $`V_\mu `$ to $`V_{n\mu }`$ and takes $`{}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}`$ to $`{}_{(n\nu )}{}^{}\alpha _{(n\mu )}^{}`$. It is easy to see that all relations (8) are preserved.

Exact triangles. For the convenience, we will write $`V_\mu `$ instead $`V_{n\mu }`$ considering all integers modulo $`n`$. We also put $`V_0=0`$. At first, any triangle of the form

(9)
$$V_\mu \stackrel{{}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}}{––\to }V_\nu \stackrel{{}_{(\nu \mu )}{}^{}\alpha _{\nu }^{}}{––\to }V_{(\nu \mu )}\stackrel{h}{––\to }V_{(\mu )},$$

where $`h={}_{(\mu )}{}^{}\alpha _{(\nu \mu )}^{}`$ if $`\nu \mu 0`$ and $`h={}_{(\mu )}{}^{}\alpha _{(\nu \mu )}^{}`$ if $`\nu \mu <0`$, is exact. If now $`f:V_\mu V_\nu `$ is another morphism which is a composition of some $`\alpha `$’s then using the relations (8) we can represent it as $`{}_{\nu }{}^{}\alpha _{\lambda }^{}{}_{\lambda }{}^{}\alpha _{\mu }^{}`$ where $`\lambda >\mathrm{max}(\mu ,\nu )`$ and $`\lambda <\mu +\nu `$. In this case the triangle of the form

(10)
$$V_\mu \stackrel{f}{}V_\nu \stackrel{g}{}V_{(\lambda \mu )}V_{(\nu \lambda )}\stackrel{h}{}V_{(\mu )}$$

is exact, where $`g=({}_{(\lambda \mu )}{}^{}\alpha _{\nu }^{},{}_{(\nu \lambda )}{}^{}\alpha _{\nu }^{})^t`$ and $`h=({}_{(\mu )}{}^{}\alpha _{(\lambda \mu )}^{},{}_{(\mu )}{}^{}\alpha _{(\nu \lambda )}^{})`$. Note that the triangle (9) is a particular case of the triangle (10) for $`\lambda =\mathrm{max}(\mu ,\nu ).`$

All other exact triangles are isomorphic to the triangles defined above.

## Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Alexei Bondal, Anton Kapustin, Ludmil Katzarkov, Bernard Keller, Maxim Kontsevich, and Leonid Posicelsky for very useful discussions. I also thank Nikolai Tyurin for reading of a preliminary draft of the paper and making a number of valuable comments. I am grateful to Duco van Straten who drew my attention to papers , he pointed me that some results of the paper are closely related to known results in local theory of singularities. For instance, the assertion of Theorem 2.1 is known as Knörrer periodicity and is proved for maximal Cohen-Macalay modules over local ring in , the construction of the section 3 is also known in the local theory of singularities as a matrix factorization, which is due to Eisenbud , where using this construction MCM modules over local rings were described. I also would like to express my gratitude to Amnon Neeman who pointed out some inexactitudes in the previous version of the paper. I would like to thank Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik for the hospitality during the writing of this paper.

Finally, I want to thank my non-formal adviser Andrei Nikolaevich Tyurin without whom this work could not be written at all.


format: text

text:
# Magnon-assisted transport and thermopower in ferromagnet-normal metal tunnel junctions

## I Introduction

For more than a decade there has been intensive research of spin polarized transport with a view to exploit phenomena such as the tunneling magnetoresistance (TMR) of ferromagnetic junctions and the giant magnetoresistance (GMR) in multilayer structures. The TMR effect arises because the mismatch of spin currents at the interface between two ferromagnetic (F) electrodes with antiparallel spin polarizations produces a larger contact resistance than a junction with parallel polarizations. In general, the magnitude of TMR increases with the degree of polarization of the ferromagnets, but it is reduced by spin relaxation phenomena, such as spin-orbit scattering at impurities or magnon emission, which lift spin current mismatch. Magnon emission is an inelastic process that has been studied both theoretically and experimentally in ferromagnetic tunnel junctions with a view to relate nonlinear $`I(V)`$ characteristics to the density of states of magnons $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\omega )`$ as $`d^2I/dV^2\mathrm{\Omega }(eV)`$. As well as influencing the magnetoresistance, magnon emission is expected to produce a magnetothermopower effect: a larger thermopower in the antiparallel orientation than in the parallel one.

Meanwhile, interest in transport across junctions between ferromagnets and normal metals or semiconductors has focused on the possibility of injecting spin into the normal system. Current in the ferromagnet (F) is carried unequally by majority and minority carriers so that a current flowing across the interface with a normal conductor is expected to have a finite degree of spin polarization $`P`$, $`0P1`$. Spin injection from a ferromagnetic metal into a normal metal (N) has been measured in broad agreement with theory, but there has been difficulty in achieving large degrees of spin injection into a semiconductor at room temperature. A limiting factor is believed to be conductivity mismatch, a problem that may be overcome by introducing a tunneling barrier between the ferromagnet and semiconductor. Spin injection in all-semiconducting devices has generally been more successful, although it is limited to relatively low temperatures at the moment.

In this paper we investigate the opposite effect: the injection of charge caused by the equilibration of magnetization between ferromagnetic baths kept at different temperatures. The magnetization of a ferromagnet held at a finite temperature $`T`$ is less that its maximum value due to the thermal occupation of magnons, with the fractional change $`\delta m(T)`$ obeying Bloch’s $`T^{3/2}`$ law,

$`\delta m(T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3.47}{\xi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k_BT}{\omega _D}}\right)^{3/2},`$ (1)
where $`\xi `$ is the spin of the localized moments and $`\omega _D`$ is the magnon Debye energy. Under certain conditions the transfer of heat across a junction between ferromagnets or a ferromagnet and a normal metal may involve simultaneous spin transfer and, possibly, charge transfer. Therefore we study the influence of magnon assisted processes on the transport properties of a mesoscopic size ferromagnet/insulator/normal metal tunnel junction. The bottle-neck of both charge and heat transport lies in a small-area tunnel contact between the electrodes held at different temperatures and/or electric potentials. The main result is a large thermopower $`S`$ arising from the magnon-assisted processes that depends on the difference between the size of the majority and minority band Fermi surfaces in the ferromagnet,

$`S{\displaystyle \frac{k_B}{e}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta m(T)}{2}}P(\mathrm{\Pi }_{()},\mathrm{\Pi }_N).`$ (2)
This result holds in a range of temperatures given by

$`1\delta m(T)(k_BT)/ϵ_F,`$ (3)
where $`ϵ_F`$ is the Fermi energy. The function $`P`$, $`0P1`$, is the degree of spin polarization of the current response to a bias voltage and it depends, in general, on the area of the maximal cross-section of the Fermi surface in the plane parallel to the interface of majority $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{}`$ and minority $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{}`$ electrons in the ferromagnet, and of the electrons in the normal (non-magnetic) metal $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$. As an example,

$`P`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_N\mathrm{\Pi }_{}\right)}{\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_N+\mathrm{\Pi }_{}\right)}},`$ (4)
for a momentum-conserving tunneling model with $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_N>\mathrm{\Pi }_{}`$.

The magnon-assisted processes that we consider are similar to those discussed in Refs.  in relation to transport in F-F tunnel junctions. Microscopically, a typical magnon-assisted process that contributes to the thermopower in a F-N junction, Eq. (2), is shown schematically in Figure 1. Here the majority electrons in the ferromagnet on the left hand side of the junction are ‘spin-up’ while the minority electrons are ‘spin-down’. In the normal (non-magnetic) metal on the right, the density of states of the spin-up and spin-down conduction electrons are equal. The transition begins with a spin-down electron on the right, that then tunnels through the barrier (without spin flip) into an intermediate, virtual state with spin-down minority polarization on the left (Figure 1(a)). In the final step, Figure 1(b), the electron emits a magnon and incorporates itself into a previously unoccupied state in the spin-up majority band on the left.

In our approach, we take into account inelastic tunneling processes that involve magnon emission and absorption in the ferromagnet, as well as elastic electron transfer processes, in order to obtain a balance equation for the current $`I(V,\mathrm{\Delta }T)`$ as a function of bias voltage, $`V`$, and of the temperature drop, $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$. In the linear response regime the electrical current may be written as

$`I=GV+L\mathrm{\Delta }T,`$ (5)
where $`G`$ is the electrical conductance and $`L`$ describes the response to a temperature difference. Under conditions of zero net current, the thermopower coefficient is

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{V}{\mathrm{\Delta }T}}={\displaystyle \frac{L}{G}}.`$ (6)
The electrical conductance is dominated by a contribution from elastic processes $`GG_{\mathrm{el}}`$ that involve tunneling from both the majority and minority bands of the ferromagnet to the conduction band of the normal metal (and vice versa) without spin flip scattering. However the contribution of the same processes to the $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ response is generally small, $`L_{\mathrm{el}}(k_B/e)(T/ϵ_F)G_{\mathrm{el}}`$, as it contains the additional parameter $`T/ϵ_F`$. By way of contrast, we find that responses arising from magnon-assisted transport are of the same order, $`L_{\mathrm{in}}(k_B/e)G_{\mathrm{in}}(k_B/e)\delta m(T)G_{\mathrm{el}}`$, both containing the parameter $`\delta m(T)`$. The result, in the temperature regime defined above in Eq. (3), is that the overall $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ response is dominated by inelastic processes $`LL_{\mathrm{in}}L_{\mathrm{el}}`$ producing a large thermopower $`SL_{\mathrm{in}}/G_{\mathrm{el}}`$, Eq. (2).

The paper is organised as follows. In Section II we introduce the model and technique used for describing transport across a tunnel junction and in Section III we calculate the current including the contribution of elastic processes and the influence of magnon-assisted processes. Section IV gives the resulting thermopower for two different models of the interface: a uniformly transparent interface where the component of momentum parallel to the interface is conserved, and a randomly transparent interface.

## II Description of the model

We consider a tunnel junction between a ferromagnetic metal on the left ($`L`$) and a normal (non-magnetic) metal on the right ($`R`$) with, in general, a temperature drop $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ and a bias voltage $`V`$ across the junction. Our initial aim is to write a balance equation for the current $`I(V,\mathrm{\Delta }T)`$ in terms of the occupation numbers of electrons $`n_{L(R)}(ϵ_{𝐤\alpha }^{L(R)})=[\mathrm{exp}((ϵ_{𝐤\alpha }^{L(R)}ϵ_F^{L(R)})/(k_BT_{L(R)}))+1]^1`$ on the left (right) hand side of the junction and of magnons $`N_L(𝐪)=[\mathrm{exp}(\omega _𝐪/(k_BT_L))1]^1`$ in the ferromagnet. Here $`T_{L(R)}`$ is the temperature on the left (right) hand side, $`ϵ_F^Lϵ_F^R=eV`$, and $`\omega _𝐪`$ is the energy of a magnon of wavevector $`𝐪`$. In the following we set $`T_L=T+\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ and $`T_R=T`$ and we shall speak throughout in terms of the transfer of electrons with charge $`e`$. The index $`\alpha =\{,\}`$ takes account of the splitting of conduction band electrons into ‘spin-up’ $`ϵ_𝐤^{L(R)}`$ and ‘spin-down’ $`ϵ_𝐤^{L(R)}`$ subbands. We assume that the majority electrons in the ferromagnet are spin-up so that $`ϵ_𝐤^L=ϵ_𝐤^L\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$ and $`ϵ_𝐤^L=ϵ_𝐤^L+\mathrm{\Delta }/2`$ where $`ϵ_𝐤^L`$ is the bare electron energy and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the spin splitting energy. In the non-magnetic metal on the right, $`ϵ_𝐤^R=ϵ_𝐤^R=ϵ_𝐤^R`$.

The total Hamiltonian of the system is

$`H`$ $`=`$ $`H_F^L+H_N^R+H_T,`$ (7)
$`H_N^R`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤\alpha }{}}ϵ_𝐤^Rc_{𝐤\alpha }^{}c_{𝐤\alpha },`$ (8)
$`H_T`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}\alpha }{}}\left[t_{𝐤,𝐤^{}}c_{𝐤\alpha }^{}c_{𝐤^{}\overline{\alpha }}+t_{𝐤,𝐤^{}}^{}c_{𝐤^{}\overline{\alpha }}^{}c_{𝐤\alpha }\right],`$ (9)
where $`H_N^R`$ is the Hamiltonian describing the conduction band electrons of the non-magnetic metal on the right written in terms of creation and annihilation Fermi operators $`c^{}`$ and $`c`$. The term $`H_T`$ is the tunneling Hamiltonian, $`\overline{\alpha }\{,\}`$ and we assume that spin is conserved when an electron tunnels across the interface. The tunneling matrix elements $`t_{𝐤,𝐤^{}}`$ describe the transfer of an electron with wavevector $`𝐤`$ on the left to the state with $`𝐤^{}`$ on the right. In our model we neglect its explicit energy dependence, but describe both clean and diffusive interfaces by taking into account whether the component of momentum parallel to the interface is conserved.

The term $`H_F^L`$ is the Hamiltonian of the ferromagnetic electrode on the left side of the junction in the absence of tunneling. We use the so called s-f (s-d) model, which assumes that magnetism and electrical conduction are caused by different groups of electrons that are coupled via an intra-atomic exchange interaction, although we note that the same results, in the lowest order of electron-magnon interactions, may be obtained from a model of itinerant ferromagnets. The magnetism originates from inner atomic shells (e.g., d or f) which have unoccupied electronic orbitals and, therefore, possess magnetic moments whereas the conduction is related to electrons with delocalized wave functions. Using the Holstein-Primakoff transformation the operators of the localized moments in the interaction Hamiltonian can be expressed via magnon creation and annihilation operators $`b^{},b`$. At low temperatures, where the average number of magnons is small $`<b^{}b>2\xi `$ ($`\xi `$ is the spin of the localized moments), the Hamiltonian of the ferromagnet $`H_F^L`$ can be written as follows

$`H_F^L=H_e^L+H_m^L+H_{em}^L,`$ (10)
$`H_e^L={\displaystyle \underset{𝐤\alpha }{}}ϵ_{𝐤\alpha }^Lc_{𝐤\alpha }^{}c_{𝐤\alpha },ϵ_{𝐤()}^L=ϵ_𝐤^L\mathrm{\Delta }/2,`$ (11)
$`H_m^L={\displaystyle \underset{𝐪}{}}\omega _𝐪b_𝐪^{}b_𝐪,\omega _{q=0}=\omega _0,`$ (12)
$`H_{em}^L={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\sqrt{2\xi 𝒩}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}{}}\left[c_{𝐤𝐪}^{}c_𝐤b_𝐪^{}+c_𝐤^{}c_{𝐤𝐪}b_𝐪\right],`$ (13)
The first term $`H_e^L`$, Eq. (11), deals with conduction band electrons which are split into majority $`ϵ_𝐤^L`$ and minority $`ϵ_𝐤^L`$ subbands due to the s-f (s-d) exchange. The Hamiltonian $`H_m^L`$, Eq. (12), describes free magnons with spectrum $`\omega _q`$ which in the general case has a gap $`\omega _{q=0}=\omega _0`$. The third term $`H_{em}^L`$, Eq. (13), is the electron-magnon coupling resulting from the intra-atomic exchange interaction between the spins of the conduction electrons and the localized moments.

The calculation is performed using standard second order perturbation theory. We write the total Hamiltonian, Eq. (7), as $`H=H_0+V`$, where the perturbation $`V=H_T+H_{em}^L`$ is the sum of the tunneling Hamiltonian and the electron-magnon interactions in the left electrode. First order terms provide an elastic contribution to the current that do not involve any change of the spin orientation of the itinerant electrons, whilst second order terms account for inelastic, magnon-assisted processes.

## III Current across a ferromagnetic-normal junction

### A Elastic contribution to the current

The first order contribution to the current arises from elastic tunneling without any spin flip between either a spin up majority conduction electron state on the left and a spin up state on the right or a spin down minority state on the left and a spin down state on the right. Consider for example an initial state consisting of an additional majority spin up electron on the left with wavevector $`𝐤_𝐋`$ and energy $`ϵ_{𝐤_𝐋}^L`$. This electron can tunnel, with matrix element $`t_{LR}^{}`$, into a spin up state on the right with wavevector $`𝐤_𝐑`$ and energy $`ϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R`$. In addition there is a second process which is a transition between the same two states, but in the reverse order, giving a contribution to the current with an opposite sign. Together, the two processes give a balance equation for the first order contribution to the current between the spin up majority band on the left and the spin up band on the right. In addition, there are two first order processes that result in transitions between the spin down minority band on the left and the spin down band on the right. Overall, the first order contribution to the current is $`I_{\mathrm{el}}`$ where

$`I_{\mathrm{el}}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi ^2{\displaystyle \frac{e}{h}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑ϵ{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤_𝐋𝐤_𝐑}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =\{,\}}{}}\left|t_{𝐤_𝐋,𝐤_𝐑}\right|^2\delta (ϵϵ_{𝐤_𝐋\alpha }^L)`$ (16)
$`\times \delta (ϵeVϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R)\{n_L(ϵ_{𝐤_𝐋\alpha }^L)[1n_R(ϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R)]`$
$`[1n_L(ϵ_{𝐤_𝐋\alpha }^L)]n_R(ϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R)\}.`$
Keeping only contributions linear in $`V`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$, the elastic contribution to the current may be written as

$`I_{\mathrm{el}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}V\left[𝒯_N(ϵ_F)+𝒯_N(ϵ_F)\right]`$ (18)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{e}{h}}(k_B^2T\mathrm{\Delta }T){\displaystyle \frac{d}{dϵ}}\left[𝒯_N(ϵ)+𝒯_N(ϵ)\right]|_{ϵ_F}.`$
For convenience we have grouped all the information about the quality of the interface into a parameter $`𝒯_{\alpha N}`$,

$`𝒯_{\alpha N}(ϵ)4\pi ^2{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤_𝐋𝐤_𝐑}{}}\left|t_{𝐤_𝐋,𝐤_𝐑}\right|^2\delta (ϵϵ_{𝐤_𝐋\alpha }^L)\delta (ϵϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R),`$ (19)
that is equivalent to the sum over all scattering channels, from states with spin $`\alpha `$ on the left to states on the right (where both spin channels are equivalent), of the transmission eigenvalues usually introduced in the Landauer formula, although we restrict ourselves to the tunneling regime in this paper. Later we will employ models of two types of interface explicitly: a uniformly transparent interface where the component of momentum parallel to the interface is conserved, and a randomly transparent interface.

The first term in Eq. (18) accounts for the usual (large) contribution to the electrical conductance,

$`G_{\mathrm{el}}={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}[𝒯_N(ϵ_F)+𝒯_N(ϵ_F)],`$ (20)
and we define the corresponding degree of spin polarized current $`P`$ as the relative difference in the current due to majority and minority carriers,

$`P={\displaystyle \frac{\left(𝒯_N𝒯_N\right)}{\left(𝒯_N+𝒯_N\right)}}.`$ (21)
The thermopower coefficient $`S_{\mathrm{el}}=V/\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ due to the elastic processes may be determined from Eq. (18) by setting $`I_{\mathrm{el}}=0`$,

$`S_{\mathrm{el}}{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{k_B^2T}{e}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dϵ}}\left\{\mathrm{ln}\left[𝒯_N(ϵ)+𝒯_N(ϵ)\right]\right\}|_{ϵ_F},`$ (22)
which is equivalent to the Mott formula.

### B Magnon-assisted contribution to the current

Below we describe processes which contribute to magnon-assisted tunneling. We consider four processes, that are lowest order in the electron-magnon interaction, as shown schematically in Figure 2. The straight lines show the direction of electron transfer, whereas the wavy lines denote the emission or absorption of magnons. The processes are drawn using the rule, appropriate for ferromagnetic electron-magnon exchange, that an electron in a minority state scatters into a majority state by emitting a magnon. The upper two processes in Figure 2, (i) and (ii), involve transitions into (from) a majority final (initial) state on the left via an intermediate, virtual state in the minority band. For example, process (i), which is the same as the process shown in more detail in Figure 1, begins with a spin-down electron on the right with wavevector $`𝐤_𝐑`$ and energy $`ϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R`$. Then, this electron tunnels across the barrier (without spin flip) to occupy a virtual, intermediate state with wavevector $`𝐤_𝐋`$ in the spin down minority band on the left as depicted in the left part of Figure 1(a) with energy $`ϵ_{𝐤_𝐋}^L`$. The energy difference between the states is $`ϵ_{𝐤_𝐋}^Lϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R=ϵ_{𝐤_𝐋}^Lϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R+\mathrm{\Delta }`$ so that the matrix element for the transition contains an energy in the denominator related to the inverse lifetime of the electron in the virtual state. For $`k_BT,eV\mathrm{\Delta }`$, when both initial and final electron states should be taken close to the Fermi level, only long wavelength magnons can be emitted, so that the energy deficit in the virtual states can be approximated as $`ϵ_{𝐤_𝐋}^Lϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R+\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Delta }`$. As noticed in Refs. , this cancels out the large exchange parameter since the same electron-core spin exchange constant appears both in the splitting between minority and majority bands and in the electron-magnon coupling. The second part of the transition is sketched in Figure 1(b) where the electron in the virtual minority spin down state incorporates itself into a state in the majority spin up band on the left, wavevector $`𝐤^{}`$, energy $`ϵ_𝐤^{}^L`$, by emitting a magnon of wavevector $`𝐪`$.

Similiar considerations enable us to write down the contribution to the current from all the processes in Figure 2. We group the processes into pairs which involve transitions between the same series of states, but in the opposite time order so that they give a current with different signs, hence their sum gives a balance equation. The contribution to the current of the processes (i) and (ii), labelled as $`I_{}`$ because the state on the right is spin down, is given by

$`I_{}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi ^2{\displaystyle \frac{e}{h}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑ϵ{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤^{}𝐤_𝐑𝐪}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left|t_{𝐤^{},𝐤_𝐑}\right|^2}{2\xi 𝒩}}`$ (26)
$`\times \delta (ϵeVϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R)\delta (ϵϵ_𝐤^{}^L\omega _𝐪)`$
$`\times \{n_R(ϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R)[1n_L(ϵ_𝐤^{}^L)][1+N_L(𝐪)]+`$
$`+[1n_R(ϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R)]n_L(ϵ_𝐤^{}^L)N_L(𝐪)\},`$
where $`𝐪=𝐤_𝐋𝐤^{}`$. Energies on the right are shifted by $`eV`$ to take account of the voltage difference across the junction.

The lower two processes in Figure 2, (iii) and (iv), involve transitions into (from) a minority final (initial) state on the left via an intermediate, virtual state in the majority band from (into) a spin up state on the right. The contribution to the current from them, $`I_{}`$, is

$`I_{}`$ $`=`$ $`4\pi ^2{\displaystyle \frac{e}{h}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑ϵ{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤^{}𝐤_𝐑𝐪}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\left|t_{𝐤^{},𝐤_𝐑}\right|^2}{2\xi 𝒩}}`$ (30)
$`\times \delta (ϵeVϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R)\delta (ϵϵ_𝐤^{}^L+\omega _𝐪)`$
$`\times \{n_R(ϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R)[1n_L(ϵ_𝐤^{}^L)]N_L(𝐪)+`$
$`+[1n_R(ϵ_{𝐤_𝐑}^R)]n_L(ϵ_𝐤^{}^L)[1+N_L(𝐪)]\},`$
We use the definition of the tunneling parameter $`𝒯_{\alpha N}`$, Eq. (19), in order to express the currents as

$`I_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{h}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝒯_N}{2\xi 𝒩}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑ϵ{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\omega \mathrm{\Omega }(\omega )`$ (33)
$`\times \{N_L(\omega )n_L(ϵ)[1n_R(ϵ+\omega eV)]`$
$`[1+N_L(\omega )][1n_L(ϵ)]n_R(ϵ+\omega eV)\},`$
$`I_{}`$ $`=`$ $`+{\displaystyle \frac{e}{h}}{\displaystyle \frac{𝒯_N}{2\xi 𝒩}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}𝑑ϵ{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\omega \mathrm{\Omega }(\omega )`$ (36)
$`\times \{N_L(\omega )n_R(ϵ\omega eV)[1n_L(ϵ)]`$
$`[1+N_L(\omega )][1n_R(ϵ\omega eV)]n_L(ϵ)\},`$
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\omega )=_𝐪\delta (\omega \omega _𝐪)`$ is the magnon density of states in the ferromagnet. Since our main aim is to demonstrate the existence of an effect, we choose the simple example of a bulk, three-dimensional magnon density of states. We assume a quadratic magnon dispersion, $`\omega _q=Dq^2`$, and apply the Debye approximation with a maximum magnon energy $`\omega _D=D(6\pi ^2/v)^{2/3}`$ where $`v`$ is the volume of a unit cell. This enables us to express the magnon density of states as $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\omega )=(3/2)𝒩\omega ^{1/2}/\omega _D^{3/2}`$.

Since we are interested in the linear thermopower, we expand the electron and magnon occupation numbers and keep only terms linear in $`V`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$. The resulting expression for the currents $`I_{}`$ and $`I_{}`$, Eqs. (33) and (36) respectively, is

$`I_{()}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{h}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4\xi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k_BT}{\omega _D}}\right)^{3/2}𝒯_{()N}\times `$ (38)
$`\times \left\{eV\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{5}{2})\zeta (\frac{3}{2})\frac{1}{2}k_B\mathrm{\Delta }T\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{7}{2})\zeta (\frac{5}{2})\right\}.`$
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)`$ is the gamma function and $`\zeta (x)`$ is Riemann’s zeta function.

## IV Calculation of the thermopower

The thermopower $`S`$ is determined by setting the total current to zero, $`I=I_{\mathrm{el}}+I_{}+I_{}=0`$, and finding the voltage $`V`$ induced by the temperature difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$, $`S=V/\mathrm{\Delta }T`$. In the regime of temperatures given in Eq. (3) the total current may be approximated by

$`I`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}V\left[𝒯_N+𝒯_N\right]`$ (40)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{e}{h}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{8\xi }}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{7}{2})\zeta (\frac{5}{2})\left(\frac{k_BT}{\omega _D}\right)^{3/2}k_B\mathrm{\Delta }T\left[𝒯_N𝒯_N\right],`$
where the leading term proportional to $`V`$ arises from the elastic processes, Eq. (18), and the leading term proportional to $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ comes from the magnon-assisted processes, Eq. (38). The corresponding thermopower is

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{k_B}{e}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta m(T)}{2.077}}P(\mathrm{\Pi }_{()},\mathrm{\Pi }_N).`$ (41)
This is the main result of the paper, describing junctions between normal metals and ferromagnets of arbitrary polarization strength ranging from weak ferromagnets $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_{}`$ to half-metals $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_{}=0`$. The function $`\delta m(T)`$ in Eq. (41) is the change in the magnetization due to thermal magnons at temperature $`T`$ (Bloch’s $`T^{3/2}`$ law),

$`\delta m(T)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\xi 𝒩}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑\omega \mathrm{\Omega }(\omega )N_L(\omega )`$ (42)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{5}{2})\zeta (\frac{3}{2})\frac{1}{\xi }\left(\frac{k_BT}{\omega _D}\right)^{3/2}.`$ (43)
The function $`P`$ appearing in the thermopower, Eq. (41), is the degree of spin polarized current $`P`$ that flows in response to a bias voltage as defined in Eq. (21). We consider two specific models of the interface: a uniformly transparent interface where the component of momentum parallel to the interface is conserved, and a randomly transparent interface. As the form of the tunneling parameter $`𝒯_{\alpha N}`$, Eq. (19), has been given previously, we only present the results here. For a uniformly transparent interface of area $`A`$, such that the parallel component of momentum is conserved upon tunneling, then

$`𝒯_{\alpha N}^{\mathrm{flat}}4\pi ^2\left|t\right|^2{\displaystyle \frac{A}{h^2}}\mathrm{min}\{\mathrm{\Pi }_\alpha ,\mathrm{\Pi }_N\},`$ (44)
where $`t`$ represents the transparency of the interface, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\alpha `$ is the area of the maximal cross-section of the Fermi surface of spins $`\alpha `$ in the ferromagnet, $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_{}0`$, and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_N`$ is the area of the maximal cross-section of the Fermi surface in the normal metal. For a uniformly transparent interface,

$`P^{\mathrm{flat}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\mathrm{min}\{\mathrm{\Pi }_{},\mathrm{\Pi }_N\}\mathrm{min}\{\mathrm{\Pi }_{},\mathrm{\Pi }_N\}\right)}{\left(\mathrm{min}\{\mathrm{\Pi }_{},\mathrm{\Pi }_N\}+\mathrm{min}\{\mathrm{\Pi }_{},\mathrm{\Pi }_N\}\right)}}.`$ (45)
As an opposite extreme, we also consider a strongly nonuniform interface which is transparent in a finite number of points only, each of a typical area $`a\lambda _F^2`$ randomly distributed over the interface area A. In this case

$`𝒯_{\alpha N}^{\mathrm{dis}}`$ $``$ $`4\pi ^2\left|t\right|^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{a\mathrm{\Pi }_\alpha }{h^2}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{a\mathrm{\Pi }_N}{h^2}}\right),`$ (46)
$`P^{\mathrm{dis}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_{}\right)}{\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_{}+\mathrm{\Pi }_{}\right)}}.`$ (47)
The large thermopower Eq. (41) indicates that the current response to $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ of magnon-assisted processes is very efficient, as compared to elastic processes. We view this as being due to an attempt by the bath of magnons to alter its temperature. Since the population of magnons defines the magnetization of the ferromagnet, through the function $`\delta m(T)`$ Eq. (43), thermal equilibration achieved by changing the magnon population must be accompanied by a change in magnetization. This is mediated by conduction electrons, resulting in a net current response to a temperature difference across the junction Eqs. (38) and (40). For example, the process shown in Figure 2(ii), in which an electron on the left absorbs a magnon and tunnels to the right, results in a reduction in the number of magnons and the injection of a spin down electron to the right. On the other hand, the process shown in Figure 2(iii), in which an electron on the right tunnels to the left and absorbs a magnon, results in a reduction in the number of magnons and the collection of a spin up electron from the right. These two processes, while both lowering the number of magnons, give competing contributions to the current as demonstrated by the factor $`𝒯_N𝒯_N`$ in Eq. (40).

## V Conclusion

The main result of this work is a large contribution to the thermopower Eq. (41) due to magnon-assisted processes in ferromagnetic-normal metal tunnel junctions. As a rough estimate, we take $`\delta m=7.5\times 10^6T^{3/2}`$ (for a ferromagnet such as Ni, Ref. ) and $`P0.4`$ to give $`S1\mu \mathrm{V}\mathrm{K}^1`$ at $`T=300`$K. Our simple model describes tunneling between parabolic conduction bands typical of three dimensional metallic systems, with additional spin splitting and electron-magnon interactions in the ferromagnet. However we believe the main results will have qualitative relevance for junctions with semiconducting elements, too. Recent numerical modeling of the diluted magnetic semiconductor (Ga,Mn)As using a six-band Kohn-Luttinger Hamiltonian found evidence of quadratic dispersion of long-wavelength spin waves $`\omega _q=\omega _0+Dq^2`$ with a small anisotropy gap $`\omega _0`$. A fit at small momenta to their data for typical sample parameters yields a spin waves stiffness $`D2`$ meV nm<sup>2</sup> that corresponds to $`\delta m2.5\times 10^4T^{3/2}`$. If this is inserted into our formula for the thermopower Eq. (41) with $`P0.4`$, say, it gives $`|S|4\mu \mathrm{V}\mathrm{K}^1`$ at $`T=100`$K. However, we stress that the sign of the thermopower Eq. (41) is specified for electron (charge $`e`$) transfer processes between parabolic conduction bands and under the assumption that the exchange between conduction band and core electrons has a ferromagnetic sign. We considered a bulk, three-dimensional magnon density of states, but in general the magnitude and sign of the thermopower will depend on details of the magnon spectrum.

The authors thank J. F. Annett, B. L. Gyorffy, T. Jungwirth, A. H. MacDonald, and G. Tkachov for discussions, and EPSRC for financial support.