Namespaces
Variants
Actions

Difference between revisions of "Crossed complex"

From Encyclopedia of Mathematics
Jump to: navigation, search
(Importing text file)
 
m (Automatically changed introduction)
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
<!--This article has been texified automatically. Since there was no Nroff source code for this article,
 +
the semi-automatic procedure described at https://encyclopediaofmath.org/wiki/User:Maximilian_Janisch/latexlist
 +
was used.
 +
If the TeX and formula formatting is correct and if all png images have been replaced by TeX code, please remove this message and the {{TEX|semi-auto}} category.
 +
 +
Out of 76 formulas, 75 were replaced by TEX code.-->
 +
 +
{{TEX|semi-auto}}{{TEX|part}}
 
Crossed complexes are a variant of chain complexes of modules over integral group rings but strengthened in two ways:
 
Crossed complexes are a variant of chain complexes of modules over integral group rings but strengthened in two ways:
  
i) in general, they are non-commutative in dimensions <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c1202801.png" /> and <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c1202802.png" />; and
+
i) in general, they are non-commutative in dimensions $1$ and $2$; and
  
ii) they are based on groupoids rather than groups. More specifically, the part <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c1202803.png" /> is a [[Crossed module|crossed module]] of groupoids. An advantage of i) is that allows for crossed complexes to encode information on presentations of groups, or, through ii), of groupoids. An advantage of ii) is that it allows the modeling of cell complexes with many base points. This is necessary for modeling: the geometry of simplices; covering spaces, and in particular Cayley graphs; and the equivariant theory. It is also essential for the [[Closed category|closed category]] structure on the category of crossed complexes. However, the reduced case, i.e. when <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c1202804.png" /> is a singleton, is also important.
+
ii) they are based on groupoids rather than groups. More specifically, the part $C _ { 2 } \rightarrow C _ { 1 } \underset{\rightarrow}{\rightarrow} C _ { 0 }$ is a [[Crossed module|crossed module]] of groupoids. An advantage of i) is that allows for crossed complexes to encode information on presentations of groups, or, through ii), of groupoids. An advantage of ii) is that it allows the modeling of cell complexes with many base points. This is necessary for modeling: the geometry of simplices; covering spaces, and in particular Cayley graphs; and the equivariant theory. It is also essential for the [[Closed category|closed category]] structure on the category of crossed complexes. However, the reduced case, i.e. when $C _ { 0 }$ is a singleton, is also important.
  
Crossed complexes arise naturally from relative homotopy theory (cf. also [[Homotopy|Homotopy]]) as follows. A filtered space <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c1202805.png" /> is a sequence <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c1202806.png" /> of increasing subspaces of a space <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c1202807.png" />. One easily gets a [[Category|category]] <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c1202808.png" /> of filtered spaces. There is a homotopy crossed complex functor <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c1202809.png" />, defined using the fundamental groupoid <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028010.png" /> (cf. also [[Fundamental group|Fundamental group]]), the relative homotopy groups <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028011.png" />, <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028012.png" />, <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028013.png" /> (cf. also [[Homotopy group|Homotopy group]]), and appropriate boundary mappings and actions. Using geometric realization and the skeletal filtration, one gets a functor from simplicial sets to crossed complexes (cf. also [[Simplicial set|Simplicial set]]). This has a left adjoint <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028014.png" />, the nerve, and from this one gets the classifying space functor <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028015.png" />, for which <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028016.png" /> is called the classifying space of the crossed complex <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028017.png" /> (cf. also [[Classifying space|Classifying space]]). There is a natural isomorphism <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028018.png" />, which shows that the axioms for a crossed complex are exactly the properties universally held by the topological example <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028019.png" />.
+
Crossed complexes arise naturally from relative homotopy theory (cf. also [[Homotopy|Homotopy]]) as follows. A filtered space $X_{*}$ is a sequence $( X _ { n } ) _ { n \geq 0}$ of increasing subspaces of a space $X _ { \infty }$. One easily gets a [[Category|category]] $\mathcal{FT} \operatorname {op}$ of filtered spaces. There is a homotopy crossed complex functor $\pi : \mathcal{FT} \text{op} \rightarrow \mathcal{C} \text{rs}$, defined using the fundamental groupoid $\pi _ { 1 } ( X _ { 1 } , X _ { 0 } )$ (cf. also [[Fundamental group|Fundamental group]]), the relative homotopy groups $\pi _ { n } ( X _ { n } , X _ { n - 1} , x )$, $n \geq 2$, $x \in X _ { 0 }$ (cf. also [[Homotopy group|Homotopy group]]), and appropriate boundary mappings and actions. Using geometric realization and the skeletal filtration, one gets a functor from simplicial sets to crossed complexes (cf. also [[Simplicial set|Simplicial set]]). This has a left adjoint $N$, the nerve, and from this one gets the classifying space functor $\mathcal{B} : \mathcal{C} \text{rs} \rightarrow \mathcal{FT} \text{op}$, for which $( \mathcal{BC} ) _ { \infty }$ is called the classifying space of the crossed complex $C$ (cf. also [[Classifying space|Classifying space]]). There is a natural isomorphism $\pi ( \mathcal{B} C ) \cong C$, which shows that the axioms for a crossed complex are exactly the properties universally held by the topological example $\pi X_{*} $.
  
The category <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028020.png" /> of crossed complexes is symmetric monoidal closed (cf. also [[Category|Category]]; [[Closed category|Closed category]]; [[Monoid|Monoid]]), so that for any crossed complexes <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028021.png" />, <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028022.png" />, <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028023.png" /> there is a tensor product <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028024.png" /> and an internal Hom <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028025.png" /> with a natural bijection <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028026.png" />. The elements of degree <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028027.png" /> and <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028028.png" /> in <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028029.png" /> are, respectively, the morphisms <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028030.png" /> and the homotopies of such morphisms. So one can form the set <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028031.png" /> of homotopy classes of morphisms <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028032.png" />. A homotopy classification theorem is that if <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028033.png" /> is the skeletal filtration of a [[CW-complex|CW-complex]] <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028034.png" />, then there is a natural weak homotopy equivalence <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028035.png" /> which induces a natural bijection <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028036.png" />. This includes results on the homotopy classification of mappings into Eilenberg–MacLane spaces, including the case of local coefficients (cf. also [[Eilenberg–MacLane space|Eilenberg–MacLane space]]).
+
The category $\mathcal{C} \text{rs}$ of crossed complexes is symmetric monoidal closed (cf. also [[Category|Category]]; [[Closed category|Closed category]]; [[Monoid|Monoid]]), so that for any crossed complexes $A$, $B$, $C$ there is a tensor product $A \otimes B$ and an internal Hom $\operatorname{CRS}( B , C )$ with a natural bijection $\mathcal{C}\operatorname { rs } ( A \otimes B , C ) \cong \mathcal{C}\operatorname { rs } ( A , \operatorname { CRS } ( B , C ) )$. The elements of degree $0$ and $1$ in $\operatorname{CRS}( B , C )$ are, respectively, the morphisms $B \rightarrow C$ and the homotopies of such morphisms. So one can form the set $[ B , C ]$ of homotopy classes of morphisms $B \rightarrow C$. A homotopy classification theorem is that if $X_{*}$ is the skeletal filtration of a [[CW-complex|CW-complex]] $X$, then there is a natural weak homotopy equivalence $B ( \operatorname{CRS} ( \pi ( X_{ * } ) , C ) ) \rightarrow ( B C ) ^ { X }$ which induces a natural bijection $[ \pi ( X _* ) , C ] \cong [ X , B C ]$. This includes results on the homotopy classification of mappings into Eilenberg–MacLane spaces, including the case of local coefficients (cf. also [[Eilenberg–MacLane space|Eilenberg–MacLane space]]).
  
There is a generalized Van Kampen theorem [[#References|[a5]]], stating that the functor <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028037.png" /> preserves certain colimits. This specializes to the [[Crossed module|crossed module]] case. It also implies the relative Hurewicz theorem (an advantage of this deduction is its generalization to the <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028038.png" />-adic situation [[#References|[a7]]]).
+
There is a generalized Van Kampen theorem [[#References|[a5]]], stating that the functor $\pi : \mathcal{FT} \text{op} \rightarrow \mathcal{C} \text{rs}$ preserves certain colimits. This specializes to the [[Crossed module|crossed module]] case. It also implies the relative Hurewicz theorem (an advantage of this deduction is its generalization to the $n$-adic situation [[#References|[a7]]]).
  
The proof of the generalized Van Kampen theorem given in [[#References|[a5]]] generalizes the methods of the usual proof of the <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028039.png" />-dimensional theorem, by introducing the category <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028040.png" />-<img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028041.png" /> of cubical <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028043.png" />-groupoids, and a functor <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028044.png" />, together with an equivalence of categories <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028045.png" /> such that <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028046.png" /> is naturally equivalent to <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028047.png" />. Three properties of the algebraic objects <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028048.png" />-groupoids that are necessary for the proof are:
+
The proof of the generalized Van Kampen theorem given in [[#References|[a5]]] generalizes the methods of the usual proof of the $1$-dimensional theorem, by introducing the category $\omega$-<img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028041.png"/> of cubical $\omega$-groupoids, and a functor $\rho : {\cal F T} \operatorname{op} \rightarrow \omega \square \operatorname{Gpd}$, together with an equivalence of categories $\gamma : \omega \square \operatorname{Gpd} \rightarrow \mathcal{C} \operatorname{rs}$ such that $\gamma \rho$ is naturally equivalent to $\pi$. Three properties of the algebraic objects $\omega$-groupoids that are necessary for the proof are:
  
 
a) an expression for an algebraic inverse to subdivision;
 
a) an expression for an algebraic inverse to subdivision;
Line 17: Line 25:
 
b) an expression for the homotopy addition lemma;
 
b) an expression for the homotopy addition lemma;
  
c) a method for dealing with compositions of homotopy addition lemma situations. The proofs that <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028049.png" /> is an <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028050.png" />-groupoid, i.e. is a form of higher homotopy groupoid, and is equivalent to <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028051.png" />, are non-trivial.
+
c) a method for dealing with compositions of homotopy addition lemma situations. The proofs that $\rho ( X_{ *} )$ is an $\omega$-groupoid, i.e. is a form of higher homotopy groupoid, and is equivalent to $\pi ( X_{*} )$, are non-trivial.
  
There are other categories equivalent to <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028052.png" />, for example those of certain kinds of simplicial groups, and of so-called simplicial <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028054.png" />-complexes, which are simplicial sets with distinguished thin elements and which are Kan complexes in a strong sense [[#References|[a1]]] (see also [[Simplicial set|Simplicial set]]). The latter equivalence uses the nerve functor <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028055.png" /> and generalizes the so-called Dold–Kan relation between chain complexes and simplicial Abelian groups. There is also an equivalence with a category of globular <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028057.png" />-groupoids [[#References|[a6]]], and this shows a relation with multiple category theory [[#References|[a12]]], p. 574. Also, the [[Tensor product|tensor product]] of crossed complexes corresponds to a tensor product of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028058.png" />-groupoids which extends for the groupoid case a tensor product of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028060.png" />-categories due to A. Gray [[#References|[a12]]], § 6.
+
There are other categories equivalent to $\mathcal{C} \text{rs}$, for example those of certain kinds of simplicial groups, and of so-called simplicial $T$-complexes, which are simplicial sets with distinguished thin elements and which are Kan complexes in a strong sense [[#References|[a1]]] (see also [[Simplicial set|Simplicial set]]). The latter equivalence uses the nerve functor $N$ and generalizes the so-called Dold–Kan relation between chain complexes and simplicial Abelian groups. There is also an equivalence with a category of globular $\infty$-groupoids [[#References|[a6]]], and this shows a relation with multiple category theory [[#References|[a12]]], p. 574. Also, the [[Tensor product|tensor product]] of crossed complexes corresponds to a tensor product of $\infty$-groupoids which extends for the groupoid case a tensor product of $2$-categories due to A. Gray [[#References|[a12]]], § 6.
  
There is a functor from <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028061.png" /> to a category of chain complexes of modules of groupoids, and which has a right adjoint. This enables a link with classical concepts of the [[Cohomology of groups|cohomology of groups]]. It also relates crossed complexes to the Fox free differential calculus defined for a presentation of a group. However, crossed complexes do carry more information than the corresponding chain complex. In particular, one can define free crossed complexes; the special case of free crossed resolutions is convenient for determining a presentation for the module of identities among relations for a presentation of a group.
+
There is a functor from $\mathcal{C} \text{rs}$ to a category of chain complexes of modules of groupoids, and which has a right adjoint. This enables a link with classical concepts of the [[Cohomology of groups|cohomology of groups]]. It also relates crossed complexes to the Fox free differential calculus defined for a presentation of a group. However, crossed complexes do carry more information than the corresponding chain complex. In particular, one can define free crossed complexes; the special case of free crossed resolutions is convenient for determining a presentation for the module of identities among relations for a presentation of a group.
  
The general background to the use of reduced crossed complexes and their analogues in other algebraic settings, and as a tool in non-Abelian homological algebra, is given in [[#References|[a10]]]. This paper also shows that the use of crossed complexes to give representatives of cohomology groups <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028062.png" /> of a group <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028063.png" /> with coefficients in a <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028064.png" />-module <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028065.png" /> is a special case of results on a cohomology theory for algebras relative to a variety.
+
The general background to the use of reduced crossed complexes and their analogues in other algebraic settings, and as a tool in non-Abelian homological algebra, is given in [[#References|[a10]]]. This paper also shows that the use of crossed complexes to give representatives of cohomology groups $H ^ { n + 1 } ( G , A )$ of a group $G$ with coefficients in a $G$-module $A$ is a special case of results on a cohomology theory for algebras relative to a variety.
  
The Eilenberg–Zil'ber theorem (see [[Simplicial set|Simplicial set]]) for the chain complex of a product <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028066.png" /> of simplicial sets <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028067.png" />, <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028068.png" /> has been generalized to a natural strong deformation retraction from <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028069.png" /> (cf. also [[Deformation retract|Deformation retract]]). This allows for small models of homotopy colimits of crossed complexes.
+
The Eilenberg–Zil'ber theorem (see [[Simplicial set|Simplicial set]]) for the chain complex of a product $K \times L$ of simplicial sets $K$, $L$ has been generalized to a natural strong deformation retraction from $\pi ( K \times L ) \rightarrow \pi ( K ) \otimes \pi ( L )$ (cf. also [[Deformation retract|Deformation retract]]). This allows for small models of homotopy colimits of crossed complexes.
  
 
Crossed complexes do form a closed model homotopy category in the sense of D. Quillen, but stronger results in some areas, such as equivariant theory [[#References|[a4]]], can be obtained by constructing the appropriate [[Homotopy coherence|homotopy coherence]] theory and the above homotopy colimits.
 
Crossed complexes do form a closed model homotopy category in the sense of D. Quillen, but stronger results in some areas, such as equivariant theory [[#References|[a4]]], can be obtained by constructing the appropriate [[Homotopy coherence|homotopy coherence]] theory and the above homotopy colimits.
Line 31: Line 39:
 
References to many of the above facts are given in [[#References|[a3]]], [[#References|[a15]]].
 
References to many of the above facts are given in [[#References|[a3]]], [[#References|[a15]]].
  
In Baues' scheme of algebraic [[Homotopy|homotopy]] [[#References|[a2]]], reduced crossed complexes are called crossed chain complexes and are regarded as the linear models of pointed homotopy types. Extra quadratic information can be carried by crossed complexes <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028070.png" /> with an algebra structure <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028071.png" /> satisfying the usual monoid conditions. These form a non-Abelian generalization of DG-algebras. They are also a context for some notions of higher-order symmetry and for algebraic models of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028072.png" />-types.
+
In Baues' scheme of algebraic [[Homotopy|homotopy]] [[#References|[a2]]], reduced crossed complexes are called crossed chain complexes and are regarded as the linear models of pointed homotopy types. Extra quadratic information can be carried by crossed complexes $A$ with an algebra structure $A \otimes A \rightarrow A$ satisfying the usual monoid conditions. These form a non-Abelian generalization of DG-algebras. They are also a context for some notions of higher-order symmetry and for algebraic models of $3$-types.
  
Another generalization of crossed modules is that of crossed <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028074.png" />-cubes of groups. These are remarkable for modeling all pointed, connected homotopy <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028076.png" />-types. They are equivalent to certain kinds of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028078.png" />-fold groupoids [[#References|[a8]]]. Thus, in answer to questions in the early part of the 20th century, there are higher-dimensional generalizations of the [[Fundamental group|fundamental group]], retaining its non-commutative nature, but which take the form of higher homotopy groupoids rather than higher homotopy groups.
+
Another generalization of crossed modules is that of crossed $n$-cubes of groups. These are remarkable for modeling all pointed, connected homotopy $n$-types. They are equivalent to certain kinds of $n$-fold groupoids [[#References|[a8]]]. Thus, in answer to questions in the early part of the 20th century, there are higher-dimensional generalizations of the [[Fundamental group|fundamental group]], retaining its non-commutative nature, but which take the form of higher homotopy groupoids rather than higher homotopy groups.
  
 
Although crossed complexes form only a limited model of homotopy types, their nice formal properties as described above make them a useful tool for extending chain complex methods in a geometric and more powerful manner. This was part of the motivation for applications by J.H.C. Whitehead in combinatorial homotopy theory and simple homotopy theory [[#References|[a13]]], [[#References|[a14]]], which are generalized in [[#References|[a2]]]. Whitehead's term homotopy systems for reduced free crossed complexes is also used in [[#References|[a11]]], where applications are given to [[Morse theory|Morse theory]].
 
Although crossed complexes form only a limited model of homotopy types, their nice formal properties as described above make them a useful tool for extending chain complex methods in a geometric and more powerful manner. This was part of the motivation for applications by J.H.C. Whitehead in combinatorial homotopy theory and simple homotopy theory [[#References|[a13]]], [[#References|[a14]]], which are generalized in [[#References|[a2]]]. Whitehead's term homotopy systems for reduced free crossed complexes is also used in [[#References|[a11]]], where applications are given to [[Morse theory|Morse theory]].
  
 
====References====
 
====References====
<table><TR><TD valign="top">[a1]</TD> <TD valign="top">  N.D. Ashley,  "Simplicial T-complexes: a non-abelian version of a theorem of Dold–Kan"  ''Dissert. Math.'' , '''165'''  (1988)  (PhD Thesis Univ. Wales, 1976)</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a2]</TD> <TD valign="top">  H.-J. Baues,  "Algebraic homotopy" , Cambridge Univ. Press  (1989)</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a3]</TD> <TD valign="top">  R. Brown,  "Computing homotopy types using crossed <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028079.png" />-cubes of groups"  N. Ray (ed.)  G. Walker (ed.) , ''Adams Memorial Symposium on Algebraic Topology'' , '''1''' , Cambridge Univ. Press  (1992)  pp. 187–210</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a4]</TD> <TD valign="top">  R. Brown,  M. Golasinski,  T. Porter,  A. Tonks,  "On function spaces of equivariant maps and the equivariant homotopy theory of crossed complexes"  ''Indag. Math.'' , '''8'''  (1997)  pp. 157–172</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a5]</TD> <TD valign="top">  R. Brown,  P.J. Higgins,  "Colimit theorems for relative homotopy groups"  ''J. Pure Appl. Algebra'' , '''22'''  (1981)  pp. 11–41</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a6]</TD> <TD valign="top">  R. Brown,  P.J. Higgins,  "The equivalence of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028080.png" />-groupoids and crossed complexes"  ''Cah. Topol. Géom. Diff.'' , '''22'''  (1981)  pp. 371–386</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a7]</TD> <TD valign="top">  R. Brown,  J.-L. Loday,  "Homotopical excision, and Hurewicz theorems, for <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028081.png" />-cubes of spaces"  ''Proc. London Math. Soc.'' , '''54'''  (1987)  pp. 176–192</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a8]</TD> <TD valign="top">  G.J. Ellis,  R. Steiner,  "Higher-dimensional crossed modules and the homotopy groups of <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028082.png" />-ads"  ''J. Pure Appl. Algebra'' , '''46'''  (1987)  pp. 117–136</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a9]</TD> <TD valign="top">  J. Huebschmann,  "Crossed <img align="absmiddle" border="0" src="https://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/legacyimages/c/c120/c120280/c12028083.png" />-fold extensions and cohomology"  ''Comment. Math. Helvetici'' , '''55'''  (1980)  pp. 302–314</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a10]</TD> <TD valign="top">  A.S.-T. Lue,  "Cohomology of groups relative to a variety"  ''J. Algebra'' , '''69'''  (1981)  pp. 155–174</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a11]</TD> <TD valign="top">  V.V. Sharko,  "Functions on manifolds: Algebraic and topological aspects" , ''Transl. Math. Monogr.'' , '''113''' , Amer. Math. Soc.  (1993)</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a12]</TD> <TD valign="top">  R. Street,  "Categorical structures"  M. Hazewinkel (ed.) , ''Handbook of Algebra'' , '''I''' , Elsevier  (1996)  pp. 531–577</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a13]</TD> <TD valign="top">  J.H.C. Whitehead,  "Combinatorial homotopy II"  ''Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.'' , '''55'''  (1949)  pp. 453–496</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a14]</TD> <TD valign="top">  J.H.C. Whitehead,  "Simple homotopy types"  ''Amer. J. Math.'' , '''72'''  (1950)  pp. 1–57</TD></TR><TR><TD valign="top">[a15]</TD> <TD valign="top">  R. Brown,  "Groupoids and crossed objects in algebraic topology"  ''Homology, Homotopy and Appl.'' , '''1'''  (1999)  pp. 1–78</TD></TR></table>
+
<table><tr><td valign="top">[a1]</td> <td valign="top">  N.D. Ashley,  "Simplicial T-complexes: a non-abelian version of a theorem of Dold–Kan"  ''Dissert. Math.'' , '''165'''  (1988)  (PhD Thesis Univ. Wales, 1976)</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a2]</td> <td valign="top">  H.-J. Baues,  "Algebraic homotopy" , Cambridge Univ. Press  (1989)</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a3]</td> <td valign="top">  R. Brown,  "Computing homotopy types using crossed $n$-cubes of groups"  N. Ray (ed.)  G. Walker (ed.) , ''Adams Memorial Symposium on Algebraic Topology'' , '''1''' , Cambridge Univ. Press  (1992)  pp. 187–210</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a4]</td> <td valign="top">  R. Brown,  M. Golasinski,  T. Porter,  A. Tonks,  "On function spaces of equivariant maps and the equivariant homotopy theory of crossed complexes"  ''Indag. Math.'' , '''8'''  (1997)  pp. 157–172</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a5]</td> <td valign="top">  R. Brown,  P.J. Higgins,  "Colimit theorems for relative homotopy groups"  ''J. Pure Appl. Algebra'' , '''22'''  (1981)  pp. 11–41</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a6]</td> <td valign="top">  R. Brown,  P.J. Higgins,  "The equivalence of $\infty$-groupoids and crossed complexes"  ''Cah. Topol. Géom. Diff.'' , '''22'''  (1981)  pp. 371–386</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a7]</td> <td valign="top">  R. Brown,  J.-L. Loday,  "Homotopical excision, and Hurewicz theorems, for $n$-cubes of spaces"  ''Proc. London Math. Soc.'' , '''54'''  (1987)  pp. 176–192</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a8]</td> <td valign="top">  G.J. Ellis,  R. Steiner,  "Higher-dimensional crossed modules and the homotopy groups of $( n + 1 )$-ads"  ''J. Pure Appl. Algebra'' , '''46'''  (1987)  pp. 117–136</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a9]</td> <td valign="top">  J. Huebschmann,  "Crossed $N$-fold extensions and cohomology"  ''Comment. Math. Helvetici'' , '''55'''  (1980)  pp. 302–314</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a10]</td> <td valign="top">  A.S.-T. Lue,  "Cohomology of groups relative to a variety"  ''J. Algebra'' , '''69'''  (1981)  pp. 155–174</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a11]</td> <td valign="top">  V.V. Sharko,  "Functions on manifolds: Algebraic and topological aspects" , ''Transl. Math. Monogr.'' , '''113''' , Amer. Math. Soc.  (1993)</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a12]</td> <td valign="top">  R. Street,  "Categorical structures"  M. Hazewinkel (ed.) , ''Handbook of Algebra'' , '''I''' , Elsevier  (1996)  pp. 531–577</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a13]</td> <td valign="top">  J.H.C. Whitehead,  "Combinatorial homotopy II"  ''Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.'' , '''55'''  (1949)  pp. 453–496</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a14]</td> <td valign="top">  J.H.C. Whitehead,  "Simple homotopy types"  ''Amer. J. Math.'' , '''72'''  (1950)  pp. 1–57</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">[a15]</td> <td valign="top">  R. Brown,  "Groupoids and crossed objects in algebraic topology"  ''Homology, Homotopy and Appl.'' , '''1'''  (1999)  pp. 1–78</td></tr></table>

Revision as of 17:44, 1 July 2020

Crossed complexes are a variant of chain complexes of modules over integral group rings but strengthened in two ways:

i) in general, they are non-commutative in dimensions $1$ and $2$; and

ii) they are based on groupoids rather than groups. More specifically, the part $C _ { 2 } \rightarrow C _ { 1 } \underset{\rightarrow}{\rightarrow} C _ { 0 }$ is a crossed module of groupoids. An advantage of i) is that allows for crossed complexes to encode information on presentations of groups, or, through ii), of groupoids. An advantage of ii) is that it allows the modeling of cell complexes with many base points. This is necessary for modeling: the geometry of simplices; covering spaces, and in particular Cayley graphs; and the equivariant theory. It is also essential for the closed category structure on the category of crossed complexes. However, the reduced case, i.e. when $C _ { 0 }$ is a singleton, is also important.

Crossed complexes arise naturally from relative homotopy theory (cf. also Homotopy) as follows. A filtered space $X_{*}$ is a sequence $( X _ { n } ) _ { n \geq 0}$ of increasing subspaces of a space $X _ { \infty }$. One easily gets a category $\mathcal{FT} \operatorname {op}$ of filtered spaces. There is a homotopy crossed complex functor $\pi : \mathcal{FT} \text{op} \rightarrow \mathcal{C} \text{rs}$, defined using the fundamental groupoid $\pi _ { 1 } ( X _ { 1 } , X _ { 0 } )$ (cf. also Fundamental group), the relative homotopy groups $\pi _ { n } ( X _ { n } , X _ { n - 1} , x )$, $n \geq 2$, $x \in X _ { 0 }$ (cf. also Homotopy group), and appropriate boundary mappings and actions. Using geometric realization and the skeletal filtration, one gets a functor from simplicial sets to crossed complexes (cf. also Simplicial set). This has a left adjoint $N$, the nerve, and from this one gets the classifying space functor $\mathcal{B} : \mathcal{C} \text{rs} \rightarrow \mathcal{FT} \text{op}$, for which $( \mathcal{BC} ) _ { \infty }$ is called the classifying space of the crossed complex $C$ (cf. also Classifying space). There is a natural isomorphism $\pi ( \mathcal{B} C ) \cong C$, which shows that the axioms for a crossed complex are exactly the properties universally held by the topological example $\pi X_{*} $.

The category $\mathcal{C} \text{rs}$ of crossed complexes is symmetric monoidal closed (cf. also Category; Closed category; Monoid), so that for any crossed complexes $A$, $B$, $C$ there is a tensor product $A \otimes B$ and an internal Hom $\operatorname{CRS}( B , C )$ with a natural bijection $\mathcal{C}\operatorname { rs } ( A \otimes B , C ) \cong \mathcal{C}\operatorname { rs } ( A , \operatorname { CRS } ( B , C ) )$. The elements of degree $0$ and $1$ in $\operatorname{CRS}( B , C )$ are, respectively, the morphisms $B \rightarrow C$ and the homotopies of such morphisms. So one can form the set $[ B , C ]$ of homotopy classes of morphisms $B \rightarrow C$. A homotopy classification theorem is that if $X_{*}$ is the skeletal filtration of a CW-complex $X$, then there is a natural weak homotopy equivalence $B ( \operatorname{CRS} ( \pi ( X_{ * } ) , C ) ) \rightarrow ( B C ) ^ { X }$ which induces a natural bijection $[ \pi ( X _* ) , C ] \cong [ X , B C ]$. This includes results on the homotopy classification of mappings into Eilenberg–MacLane spaces, including the case of local coefficients (cf. also Eilenberg–MacLane space).

There is a generalized Van Kampen theorem [a5], stating that the functor $\pi : \mathcal{FT} \text{op} \rightarrow \mathcal{C} \text{rs}$ preserves certain colimits. This specializes to the crossed module case. It also implies the relative Hurewicz theorem (an advantage of this deduction is its generalization to the $n$-adic situation [a7]).

The proof of the generalized Van Kampen theorem given in [a5] generalizes the methods of the usual proof of the $1$-dimensional theorem, by introducing the category $\omega$- of cubical $\omega$-groupoids, and a functor $\rho : {\cal F T} \operatorname{op} \rightarrow \omega \square \operatorname{Gpd}$, together with an equivalence of categories $\gamma : \omega \square \operatorname{Gpd} \rightarrow \mathcal{C} \operatorname{rs}$ such that $\gamma \rho$ is naturally equivalent to $\pi$. Three properties of the algebraic objects $\omega$-groupoids that are necessary for the proof are:

a) an expression for an algebraic inverse to subdivision;

b) an expression for the homotopy addition lemma;

c) a method for dealing with compositions of homotopy addition lemma situations. The proofs that $\rho ( X_{ *} )$ is an $\omega$-groupoid, i.e. is a form of higher homotopy groupoid, and is equivalent to $\pi ( X_{*} )$, are non-trivial.

There are other categories equivalent to $\mathcal{C} \text{rs}$, for example those of certain kinds of simplicial groups, and of so-called simplicial $T$-complexes, which are simplicial sets with distinguished thin elements and which are Kan complexes in a strong sense [a1] (see also Simplicial set). The latter equivalence uses the nerve functor $N$ and generalizes the so-called Dold–Kan relation between chain complexes and simplicial Abelian groups. There is also an equivalence with a category of globular $\infty$-groupoids [a6], and this shows a relation with multiple category theory [a12], p. 574. Also, the tensor product of crossed complexes corresponds to a tensor product of $\infty$-groupoids which extends for the groupoid case a tensor product of $2$-categories due to A. Gray [a12], § 6.

There is a functor from $\mathcal{C} \text{rs}$ to a category of chain complexes of modules of groupoids, and which has a right adjoint. This enables a link with classical concepts of the cohomology of groups. It also relates crossed complexes to the Fox free differential calculus defined for a presentation of a group. However, crossed complexes do carry more information than the corresponding chain complex. In particular, one can define free crossed complexes; the special case of free crossed resolutions is convenient for determining a presentation for the module of identities among relations for a presentation of a group.

The general background to the use of reduced crossed complexes and their analogues in other algebraic settings, and as a tool in non-Abelian homological algebra, is given in [a10]. This paper also shows that the use of crossed complexes to give representatives of cohomology groups $H ^ { n + 1 } ( G , A )$ of a group $G$ with coefficients in a $G$-module $A$ is a special case of results on a cohomology theory for algebras relative to a variety.

The Eilenberg–Zil'ber theorem (see Simplicial set) for the chain complex of a product $K \times L$ of simplicial sets $K$, $L$ has been generalized to a natural strong deformation retraction from $\pi ( K \times L ) \rightarrow \pi ( K ) \otimes \pi ( L )$ (cf. also Deformation retract). This allows for small models of homotopy colimits of crossed complexes.

Crossed complexes do form a closed model homotopy category in the sense of D. Quillen, but stronger results in some areas, such as equivariant theory [a4], can be obtained by constructing the appropriate homotopy coherence theory and the above homotopy colimits.

References to many of the above facts are given in [a3], [a15].

In Baues' scheme of algebraic homotopy [a2], reduced crossed complexes are called crossed chain complexes and are regarded as the linear models of pointed homotopy types. Extra quadratic information can be carried by crossed complexes $A$ with an algebra structure $A \otimes A \rightarrow A$ satisfying the usual monoid conditions. These form a non-Abelian generalization of DG-algebras. They are also a context for some notions of higher-order symmetry and for algebraic models of $3$-types.

Another generalization of crossed modules is that of crossed $n$-cubes of groups. These are remarkable for modeling all pointed, connected homotopy $n$-types. They are equivalent to certain kinds of $n$-fold groupoids [a8]. Thus, in answer to questions in the early part of the 20th century, there are higher-dimensional generalizations of the fundamental group, retaining its non-commutative nature, but which take the form of higher homotopy groupoids rather than higher homotopy groups.

Although crossed complexes form only a limited model of homotopy types, their nice formal properties as described above make them a useful tool for extending chain complex methods in a geometric and more powerful manner. This was part of the motivation for applications by J.H.C. Whitehead in combinatorial homotopy theory and simple homotopy theory [a13], [a14], which are generalized in [a2]. Whitehead's term homotopy systems for reduced free crossed complexes is also used in [a11], where applications are given to Morse theory.

References

[a1] N.D. Ashley, "Simplicial T-complexes: a non-abelian version of a theorem of Dold–Kan" Dissert. Math. , 165 (1988) (PhD Thesis Univ. Wales, 1976)
[a2] H.-J. Baues, "Algebraic homotopy" , Cambridge Univ. Press (1989)
[a3] R. Brown, "Computing homotopy types using crossed $n$-cubes of groups" N. Ray (ed.) G. Walker (ed.) , Adams Memorial Symposium on Algebraic Topology , 1 , Cambridge Univ. Press (1992) pp. 187–210
[a4] R. Brown, M. Golasinski, T. Porter, A. Tonks, "On function spaces of equivariant maps and the equivariant homotopy theory of crossed complexes" Indag. Math. , 8 (1997) pp. 157–172
[a5] R. Brown, P.J. Higgins, "Colimit theorems for relative homotopy groups" J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 22 (1981) pp. 11–41
[a6] R. Brown, P.J. Higgins, "The equivalence of $\infty$-groupoids and crossed complexes" Cah. Topol. Géom. Diff. , 22 (1981) pp. 371–386
[a7] R. Brown, J.-L. Loday, "Homotopical excision, and Hurewicz theorems, for $n$-cubes of spaces" Proc. London Math. Soc. , 54 (1987) pp. 176–192
[a8] G.J. Ellis, R. Steiner, "Higher-dimensional crossed modules and the homotopy groups of $( n + 1 )$-ads" J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 46 (1987) pp. 117–136
[a9] J. Huebschmann, "Crossed $N$-fold extensions and cohomology" Comment. Math. Helvetici , 55 (1980) pp. 302–314
[a10] A.S.-T. Lue, "Cohomology of groups relative to a variety" J. Algebra , 69 (1981) pp. 155–174
[a11] V.V. Sharko, "Functions on manifolds: Algebraic and topological aspects" , Transl. Math. Monogr. , 113 , Amer. Math. Soc. (1993)
[a12] R. Street, "Categorical structures" M. Hazewinkel (ed.) , Handbook of Algebra , I , Elsevier (1996) pp. 531–577
[a13] J.H.C. Whitehead, "Combinatorial homotopy II" Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. , 55 (1949) pp. 453–496
[a14] J.H.C. Whitehead, "Simple homotopy types" Amer. J. Math. , 72 (1950) pp. 1–57
[a15] R. Brown, "Groupoids and crossed objects in algebraic topology" Homology, Homotopy and Appl. , 1 (1999) pp. 1–78
How to Cite This Entry:
Crossed complex. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. URL: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Crossed_complex&oldid=15743
This article was adapted from an original article by R. Brown (originator), which appeared in Encyclopedia of Mathematics - ISBN 1402006098. See original article