# HG changeset patch # User kevin@6e1638ff-ae45-0410-89bd-df963105f760 # Date 1217882088 0 # Node ID 700ac2678d00d9bf2b83f3ff407c58206dcc5821 # Parent 9744833c9b90899ce10c0905157d5391ba6cd994 Q.I => hty equiv for free complexes diff -r 9744833c9b90 -r 700ac2678d00 text/hochschild.tex --- a/text/hochschild.tex Tue Jul 29 22:37:25 2008 +0000 +++ b/text/hochschild.tex Mon Aug 04 20:34:48 2008 +0000 @@ -1,444 +1,449 @@ -In this section we analyze the blob complex in dimension $n=1$ -and find that for $S^1$ the homology of the blob complex is the -Hochschild homology of the category (algebroid) that we started with. -\nn{or maybe say here that the complexes are quasi-isomorphic? in general, -should perhaps put more emphasis on the complexes and less on the homology.} - -Notation: $HB_i(X) = H_i(\bc_*(X))$. - -Let us first note that there is no loss of generality in assuming that our system of -fields comes from a category. -(Or maybe (???) there {\it is} a loss of generality. -Given any system of fields, $A(I; a, b) = \cC(I; a, b)/U(I; a, b)$ can be -thought of as the morphisms of a 1-category $C$. -More specifically, the objects of $C$ are $\cC(pt)$, the morphisms from $a$ to $b$ -are $A(I; a, b)$, and composition is given by gluing. -If we instead take our fields to be $C$-pictures, the $\cC(pt)$ does not change -and neither does $A(I; a, b) = HB_0(I; a, b)$. -But what about $HB_i(I; a, b)$ for $i > 0$? -Might these higher blob homology groups be different? -Seems unlikely, but I don't feel like trying to prove it at the moment. -In any case, we'll concentrate on the case of fields based on 1-category -pictures for the rest of this section.) - -(Another question: $\bc_*(I)$ is an $A_\infty$-category. -How general of an $A_\infty$-category is it? -Given an arbitrary $A_\infty$-category can one find fields and local relations so -that $\bc_*(I)$ is in some sense equivalent to the original $A_\infty$-category? -Probably not, unless we generalize to the case where $n$-morphisms are complexes.) - -Continuing... - -Let $C$ be a *-1-category. -Then specializing the definitions from above to the case $n=1$ we have: -\begin{itemize} -\item $\cC(pt) = \ob(C)$ . -\item Let $R$ be a 1-manifold and $c \in \cC(\bd R)$. -Then an element of $\cC(R; c)$ is a collection of (transversely oriented) -points in the interior -of $R$, each labeled by a morphism of $C$. -The intervals between the points are labeled by objects of $C$, consistent with -the boundary condition $c$ and the domains and ranges of the point labels. -\item There is an evaluation map $e: \cC(I; a, b) \to \mor(a, b)$ given by -composing the morphism labels of the points. -Note that we also need the * of *-1-category here in order to make all the morphisms point -the same way. -\item For $x \in \mor(a, b)$ let $\chi(x) \in \cC(I; a, b)$ be the field with a single -point (at some standard location) labeled by $x$. -Then the kernel of the evaluation map $U(I; a, b)$ is generated by things of the -form $y - \chi(e(y))$. -Thus we can, if we choose, restrict the blob twig labels to things of this form. -\end{itemize} - -We want to show that $HB_*(S^1)$ is naturally isomorphic to the -Hochschild homology of $C$. -\nn{Or better that the complexes are homotopic -or quasi-isomorphic.} -In order to prove this we will need to extend the blob complex to allow points to also -be labeled by elements of $C$-$C$-bimodules. -%Given an interval (1-ball) so labeled, there is an evaluation map to some tensor product -%(over $C$) of $C$-$C$-bimodules. -%Define the local relations $U(I; a, b)$ to be the direct sum of the kernels of these maps. -%Now we can define the blob complex for $S^1$. -%This complex is the sum of complexes with a fixed cyclic tuple of bimodules present. -%If $M$ is a $C$-$C$-bimodule, let $G_*(M)$ denote the summand of $\bc_*(S^1)$ corresponding -%to the cyclic 1-tuple $(M)$. -%In other words, $G_*(M)$ is a blob-like complex where exactly one point is labeled -%by an element of $M$ and the remaining points are labeled by morphisms of $C$. -%It's clear that $G_*(C)$ is isomorphic to the original bimodule-less -%blob complex for $S^1$. -%\nn{Is it really so clear? Should say more.} - -%\nn{alternative to the above paragraph:} -Fix points $p_1, \ldots, p_k \in S^1$ and $C$-$C$-bimodules $M_1, \ldots M_k$. -We define a blob-like complex $K_*(S^1, (p_i), (M_i))$. -The fields have elements of $M_i$ labeling $p_i$ and elements of $C$ labeling -other points. -The blob twig labels lie in kernels of evaluation maps. -(The range of these evaluation maps is a tensor product (over $C$) of $M_i$'s.) -Let $K_*(M) = K_*(S^1, (*), (M))$, where $* \in S^1$ is some standard base point. -In other words, fields for $K_*(M)$ have an element of $M$ at the fixed point $*$ -and elements of $C$ at variable other points. - -\todo{Some orphaned questions:} -\nn{Or maybe we should claim that $M \to K_*(M)$ is the/a derived coend. -Or maybe that $K_*(M)$ is quasi-isomorphic (or perhaps homotopic) to the Hochschild -complex of $M$.} - -\nn{What else needs to be said to establish quasi-isomorphism to Hochschild complex? -Do we need a map from hoch to blob? -Does the above exactness and contractibility guarantee such a map without writing it -down explicitly? -Probably it's worth writing down an explicit map even if we don't need to.} - - -We claim that -\begin{thm} -The blob complex $\bc_*(S^1; C)$ on the circle is quasi-isomorphic to the -usual Hochschild complex for $C$. -\end{thm} - -This follows from two results. First, we see that -\begin{lem} -\label{lem:module-blob}% -The complex $K_*(C)$ (here $C$ is being thought of as a -$C$-$C$-bimodule, not a category) is quasi-isomorphic to the blob complex -$\bc_*(S^1; C)$. (Proof later.) -\end{lem} - -Next, we show that for any $C$-$C$-bimodule $M$, -\begin{prop} -The complex $K_*(M)$ is quasi-isomorphic to $HC_*(M)$, the usual -Hochschild complex of $M$. -\end{prop} -\begin{proof} -Recall that the usual Hochschild complex of $M$ is uniquely determined, -up to quasi-isomorphism, by the following properties: -\begin{enumerate} -\item \label{item:hochschild-additive}% -$HC_*(M_1 \oplus M_2) \cong HC_*(M_1) \oplus HC_*(M_2)$. -\item \label{item:hochschild-exact}% -An exact sequence $0 \to M_1 \into M_2 \onto M_3 \to 0$ gives rise to an -exact sequence $0 \to HC_*(M_1) \into HC_*(M_2) \onto HC_*(M_3) \to 0$. -\item \label{item:hochschild-coinvariants}% -$HH_0(M)$ is isomorphic to the coinvariants of $M$, $\coinv(M) = -M/\langle cm-mc \rangle$. -\item \label{item:hochschild-free}% -$HC_*(C\otimes C)$ (the free $C$-$C$-bimodule with one generator) is contractible; that is, -quasi-isomorphic to its $0$-th homology (which in turn, by \ref{item:hochschild-coinvariants}, is just $C$) via the quotient map $HC_0 \onto HH_0$. -\end{enumerate} -(Together, these just say that Hochschild homology is `the derived functor of coinvariants'.) -We'll first recall why these properties are characteristic. - -Take some $C$-$C$ bimodule $M$, and choose a free resolution -\begin{equation*} -\cdots \to F_2 \xrightarrow{f_2} F_1 \xrightarrow{f_1} F_0. -\end{equation*} -We will show that for any functor $\cP$ satisfying properties -\ref{item:hochschild-additive}, \ref{item:hochschild-exact}, -\ref{item:hochschild-coinvariants} and \ref{item:hochschild-free}, there -is a quasi-isomorphism -$$\cP_*(M) \iso \coinv(F_*).$$ -% -Observe that there's a quotient map $\pi: F_0 \onto M$, and by -construction the cone of the chain map $\pi: F_* \to M$ is acyclic. Now -construct the total complex $\cP_i(F_j)$, with $i,j \geq 0$, graded by -$i+j$. We have two chain maps -\begin{align*} -\cP_i(F_*) & \xrightarrow{\cP_i(\pi)} \cP_i(M) \\ -\intertext{and} -\cP_*(F_j) & \xrightarrow{\cP_0(F_j) \onto H_0(\cP_*(F_j))} \coinv(F_j). -\end{align*} -The cone of each chain map is acyclic. In the first case, this is because the `rows' indexed by $i$ are acyclic since $HC_i$ is exact. -In the second case, this is because the `columns' indexed by $j$ are acyclic, since $F_j$ is free. -Because the cones are acyclic, the chain maps are quasi-isomorphisms. Composing one with the inverse of the other, we obtain the desired quasi-isomorphism -$$\cP_*(M) \quismto \coinv(F_*).$$ - -%If $M$ is free, that is, a direct sum of copies of -%$C \tensor C$, then properties \ref{item:hochschild-additive} and -%\ref{item:hochschild-free} determine $HC_*(M)$. Otherwise, choose some -%free cover $F \onto M$, and define $K$ to be this map's kernel. Thus we -%have a short exact sequence $0 \to K \into F \onto M \to 0$, and hence a -%short exact sequence of complexes $0 \to HC_*(K) \into HC_*(F) \onto HC_*(M) -%\to 0$. Such a sequence gives a long exact sequence on homology -%\begin{equation*} -%%\begin{split} -%\cdots \to HH_{i+1}(F) \to HH_{i+1}(M) \to HH_i(K) \to HH_i(F) \to \cdots % \\ -%%\cdots \to HH_1(F) \to HH_1(M) \to HH_0(K) \to HH_0(F) \to HH_0(M). -%%\end{split} -%\end{equation*} -%For any $i \geq 1$, $HH_{i+1}(F) = HH_i(F) = 0$, by properties -%\ref{item:hochschild-additive} and \ref{item:hochschild-free}, and so -%$HH_{i+1}(M) \iso HH_i(F)$. For $i=0$, \todo{}. -% -%This tells us how to -%compute every homology group of $HC_*(M)$; we already know $HH_0(M)$ -%(it's just coinvariants, by property \ref{item:hochschild-coinvariants}), -%and higher homology groups are determined by lower ones in $HC_*(K)$, and -%hence recursively as coinvariants of some other bimodule. - -The proposition then follows from the following lemmas, establishing that $K_*$ has precisely these required properties. -\begin{lem} -\label{lem:hochschild-additive}% -Directly from the definition, $K_*(M_1 \oplus M_2) \cong K_*(M_1) \oplus K_*(M_2)$. -\end{lem} -\begin{lem} -\label{lem:hochschild-exact}% -An exact sequence $0 \to M_1 \into M_2 \onto M_3 \to 0$ gives rise to an -exact sequence $0 \to K_*(M_1) \into K_*(M_2) \onto K_*(M_3) \to 0$. -\end{lem} -\begin{lem} -\label{lem:hochschild-coinvariants}% -$H_0(K_*(M))$ is isomorphic to the coinvariants of $M$. -\end{lem} -\begin{lem} -\label{lem:hochschild-free}% -$K_*(C\otimes C)$ is quasi-isomorphic to $H_0(K_*(C \otimes C)) \iso C$. -\end{lem} - -The remainder of this section is devoted to proving Lemmas -\ref{lem:module-blob}, -\ref{lem:hochschild-exact}, \ref{lem:hochschild-coinvariants} and -\ref{lem:hochschild-free}. -\end{proof} - -\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:module-blob}] -We show that $K_*(C)$ is quasi-isomorphic to $\bc_*(S^1)$. -$K_*(C)$ differs from $\bc_*(S^1)$ only in that the base point * -is always a labeled point in $K_*(C)$, while in $\bc_*(S^1)$ it may or may not be. -In other words, there is an inclusion map $i: K_*(C) \to \bc_*(S^1)$. - -We define a left inverse $s: \bc_*(S^1) \to K_*(C)$ to the inclusion as follows. -If $y$ is a field defined on a neighborhood of *, define $s(y) = y$ if -* is a labeled point in $y$. -Otherwise, define $s(y)$ to be the result of adding a label 1 (identity morphism) at *. -Let $x \in \bc_*(S^1)$. -Let $s(x)$ be the result of replacing each field $y$ (containing *) mentioned in -$x$ with $s(y)$. -It is easy to check that $s$ is a chain map and $s \circ i = \id$. - -Let $L_*^\ep \sub \bc_*(S^1)$ be the subcomplex where there are no labeled points -in a neighborhood $B_\ep$ of $*$, except perhaps $*$, and $B_\ep$ is either disjoint from or contained in every blob. -Note that for any chain $x \in \bc_*(S^1)$, $x \in L_*^\ep$ for sufficiently small $\ep$. -\nn{rest of argument goes similarly to above} - -We define a degree $1$ chain map $j_\ep: L_*^\ep \to L_*^\ep$ as follows. Let $x \in L_*^\ep$ be a blob diagram. -If $*$ is not contained in any twig blob, we define $j_\ep(x)$ by adding $B_\ep$ as a new twig blob, with label $y - s(y)$ where $y$ is the restriction -of $x$ to $B_\ep$. If $*$ is contained in a twig blob $B$ with label $u=\sum z_i$, -write $y_i$ for the restriction of $z_i$ to $B_\ep$, and let -$x_i$ be equal to $x$ on $S^1 \setmin B$, equal to $z_i$ on $B \setmin B_\ep$, -and have an additional blob $B_\ep$ with label $y_i - s(y_i)$. -Define $j_\ep(x) = \sum x_i$. -\todo{need to check signs coming from blob complex differential} -\todo{finish this} -\end{proof} -\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:hochschild-exact}] -We now prove that $K_*$ is an exact functor. - -%\todo{p. 1478 of scott's notes} -Essentially, this comes down to the unsurprising fact that the functor on $C$-$C$ bimodules -\begin{equation*} -M \mapsto \ker(C \tensor M \tensor C \xrightarrow{c_1 \tensor m \tensor c_2 \mapsto c_1 m c_2} M) -\end{equation*} -is exact. For completeness we'll explain this below. - -Suppose we have a short exact sequence of $C$-$C$ bimodules $$\xymatrix{0 \ar[r] & K \ar@{^{(}->}[r]^f & E \ar@{->>}[r]^g & Q \ar[r] & 0}.$$ -We'll write $\hat{f}$ and $\hat{g}$ for the image of $f$ and $g$ under the functor. -Most of what we need to check is easy. -If $(a \tensor k \tensor b) \in \ker(C \tensor K \tensor C \to K)$, to have $\hat{f}(a \tensor k \tensor b) = 0 \in \ker(C \tensor E \tensor C \to E)$, we must have $f(k) = 0 \in E$, so -be $k=0$ itself. If $(a \tensor e \tensor b) \in \ker(C \tensor E \tensor C \to E)$ is in the image of $\ker(C \tensor K \tensor C \to K)$ under $\hat{f}$, clearly -$e$ is in the image of the original $f$, so is in the kernel of the original $g$, and so $\hat{g}(a \tensor e \tensor b) = 0$. -If $\hat{g}(a \tensor e \tensor b) = 0$, then $g(e) = 0$, so $e = f(\widetilde{e})$ for some $\widetilde{e} \in K$, and $a \tensor e \tensor b = \hat{f}(a \tensor \widetilde{e} \tensor b)$. -Finally, the interesting step is in checking that any $q = \sum_i a_i \tensor q_i \tensor b_i$ such that $\sum_i a_i q_i b_i = 0$ is in the image of $\ker(C \tensor E \tensor C \to C)$ under $\hat{g}$. -For each $i$, we can find $\widetilde{q_i}$ so $g(\widetilde{q_i}) = q_i$. However $\sum_i a_i \widetilde{q_i} b_i$ need not be zero. -Consider then $$\widetilde{q} = \sum_i (a_i \tensor \widetilde{q_i} \tensor b_i) - 1 \tensor (\sum_i a_i \widetilde{q_i} b_i) \tensor 1.$$ Certainly -$\widetilde{q} \in \ker(C \tensor E \tensor C \to E)$. Further, -\begin{align*} -\hat{g}(\widetilde{q}) & = \sum_i (a_i \tensor g(\widetilde{q_i}) \tensor b_i) - 1 \tensor (\sum_i a_i g(\widetilde{q_i}) b_i) \tensor 1 \\ - & = q - 0 -\end{align*} -(here we used that $g$ is a map of $C$-$C$ bimodules, and that $\sum_i a_i q_i b_i = 0$). - -Identical arguments show that the functors -\begin{equation} -\label{eq:ker-functor}% -M \mapsto \ker(C^{\tensor k} \tensor M \tensor C^{\tensor l} \to M) -\end{equation} -are all exact too. Moreover, tensor products of such functors with each -other and with $C$ or $\ker(C^{\tensor k} \to C)$ (e.g., producing the functor $M \mapsto \ker(M \tensor C \to M) -\tensor C \tensor \ker(C \tensor C \to M)$) are all still exact. - -Finally, then we see that the functor $K_*$ is simply an (infinite) -direct sum of copies of this sort of functor. The direct sum is indexed by -configurations of nested blobs and of labels; for each such configuration, we have one of the above tensor product functors, -with the labels of twig blobs corresponding to tensor factors as in \eqref{eq:ker-functor} or $\ker(C^{\tensor k} \to C)$, and all other labelled points corresponding -to tensor factors of $C$. -\end{proof} -\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:hochschild-coinvariants}] -We show that $H_0(K_*(M))$ is isomorphic to the coinvariants of $M$. - -We define a map $\ev: K_0(M) \to M$. If $x \in K_0(M)$ has the label $m \in M$ at $*$, and labels $c_i \in C$ at the other labeled points of $S^1$, reading clockwise from $*$, -we set $\ev(x) = m c_1 \cdots c_k$. We can think of this as $\ev : M \tensor C^{\tensor k} \to M$, for each direct summand of $K_0(M)$ indexed by a configuration of labeled points. -There is a quotient map $\pi: M \to \coinv{M}$, and the composition $\pi \compose \ev$ is well-defined on the quotient $H_0(K_*(M))$; if $y \in K_1(M)$, the blob in $y$ either contains $*$ or does not. If it doesn't, then -suppose $y$ has label $m$ at $*$, labels $c_i$ at other labeled points outside the blob, and the field inside the blob is a sum, with the $j$-th term having -labeled points $d_{j,i}$. Then $\sum_j d_{j,1} \tensor \cdots \tensor d_{j,k_j} \in \ker(\DirectSum_k C^{\tensor k} \to C)$, and so -$\ev(\bdy y) = 0$, because $$C^{\tensor \ell_1} \tensor \ker(\DirectSum_k C^{\tensor k} \to C) \tensor C^{\tensor \ell_2} \subset \ker(\DirectSum_k C^{\tensor k} \to C).$$ -Similarly, if $*$ is contained in the blob, then the blob label is a sum, with the $j$-th term have labelled points $d_{j,i}$ to the left of $*$, $m_j$ at $*$, and $d_{j,i}'$ to the right of $*$, -and there are labels $c_i$ at the labeled points outside the blob. We know that -$$\sum_j d_{j,1} \tensor \cdots \tensor d_{j,k_j} \tensor m_j \tensor d_{j,1}' \tensor \cdots \tensor d_{j,k'_j}' \in \ker(\DirectSum_{k,k'} C^{\tensor k} \tensor M \tensor C^{\tensor k'} \tensor \to M),$$ -and so -\begin{align*} -\ev(\bdy y) & = \sum_j m_j d_{j,1}' \cdots d_{j,k'_j}' c_1 \cdots c_k d_{j,1} \cdots d_{j,k_j} \\ - & = \sum_j d_{j,1} \cdots d_{j,k_j} m_j d_{j,1}' \cdots d_{j,k'_j}' c_1 \cdots c_k \\ - & = 0 -\end{align*} -where this time we use the fact that we're mapping to $\coinv{M}$, not just $M$. - -The map $\pi \compose \ev: H_0(K_*(M)) \to \coinv{M}$ is clearly surjective ($\ev$ surjects onto $M$); we now show that it's injective. \todo{} -\end{proof} -\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:hochschild-free}] -We show that $K_*(C\otimes C)$ is -quasi-isomorphic to the 0-step complex $C$. We'll do this in steps, establishing quasi-isomorphisms and homotopy equivalences -$$K_*(C \tensor C) \quismto K'_* \htpyto K''_* \quismto C.$$ - -Let $K'_* \sub K_*(C\otimes C)$ be the subcomplex where the label of -the point $*$ is $1 \otimes 1 \in C\otimes C$. -We will show that the inclusion $i: K'_* \to K_*(C\otimes C)$ is a quasi-isomorphism. - -Fix a small $\ep > 0$. -Let $B_\ep$ be the ball of radius $\ep$ around $* \in S^1$. -Let $K_*^\ep \sub K_*(C\otimes C)$ be the subcomplex -generated by blob diagrams $b$ such that $B_\ep$ is either disjoint from -or contained in each blob of $b$, and the only labeled point inside $B_\ep$ is $*$. -%and the two boundary points of $B_\ep$ are not labeled points of $b$. -For a field $y$ on $B_\ep$, let $s_\ep(y)$ be the equivalent picture with~$*$ -labeled by $1\otimes 1$ and the only other labeled points at distance $\pm\ep/2$ from $*$. -(See Figure \ref{fig:sy}.) Note that $y - s_\ep(y) \in U(B_\ep)$. We can think of -$\sigma_\ep$ as a chain map $K_*^\ep \to K_*^\ep$ given by replacing the restriction $y$ to $B_\ep$ of each field -appearing in an element of $K_*^\ep$ with $s_\ep(y)$. -Note that $\sigma_\ep(x) \in K'_*$. -\begin{figure}[!ht] -\begin{align*} -y & = \mathfig{0.2}{hochschild/y} & -s_\ep(y) & = \mathfig{0.2}{hochschild/sy} -\end{align*} -\caption{Defining $s_\ep$.} -\label{fig:sy} -\end{figure} - -Define a degree 1 chain map $j_\ep : K_*^\ep \to K_*^\ep$ as follows. -Let $x \in K_*^\ep$ be a blob diagram. -If $*$ is not contained in any twig blob, $j_\ep(x)$ is obtained by adding $B_\ep$ to -$x$ as a new twig blob, with label $y - s_\ep(y)$, where $y$ is the restriction of $x$ to $B_\ep$. -If $*$ is contained in a twig blob $B$ with label $u = \sum z_i$, $j_\ep(x)$ is obtained as follows. -Let $y_i$ be the restriction of $z_i$ to $B_\ep$. -Let $x_i$ be equal to $x$ outside of $B$, equal to $z_i$ on $B \setmin B_\ep$, -and have an additional blob $B_\ep$ with label $y_i - s_\ep(y_i)$. -Define $j_\ep(x) = \sum x_i$. -\nn{need to check signs coming from blob complex differential} -Note that if $x \in K'_* \cap K_*^\ep$ then $j_\ep(x) \in K'_*$ also. - -The key property of $j_\ep$ is -\eq{ - \bd j_\ep + j_\ep \bd = \id - \sigma_\ep. -} -If $j_\ep$ were defined on all of $K_*(C\otimes C)$, this would show that $\sigma_\ep$ -is a homotopy inverse to the inclusion $K'_* \to K_*(C\otimes C)$. -One strategy would be to try to stitch together various $j_\ep$ for progressively smaller -$\ep$ and show that $K'_*$ is homotopy equivalent to $K_*(C\otimes C)$. -Instead, we'll be less ambitious and just show that -$K'_*$ is quasi-isomorphic to $K_*(C\otimes C)$. - -If $x$ is a cycle in $K_*(C\otimes C)$, then for sufficiently small $\ep$ we have -$x \in K_*^\ep$. -(This is true for any chain in $K_*(C\otimes C)$, since chains are sums of -finitely many blob diagrams.) -Then $x$ is homologous to $s_\ep(x)$, which is in $K'_*$, so the inclusion map -$K'_* \sub K_*(C\otimes C)$ is surjective on homology. -If $y \in K_*(C\otimes C)$ and $\bd y = x \in K'_*$, then $y \in K_*^\ep$ for some $\ep$ -and -\eq{ - \bd y = \bd (\sigma_\ep(y) + j_\ep(x)) . -} -Since $\sigma_\ep(y) + j_\ep(x) \in F'$, it follows that the inclusion map is injective on homology. -This completes the proof that $K'_*$ is quasi-isomorphic to $K_*(C\otimes C)$. - -Let $K''_* \sub K'_*$ be the subcomplex of $K'_*$ where $*$ is not contained in any blob. -We will show that the inclusion $i: K''_* \to K'_*$ is a homotopy equivalence. - -First, a lemma: Let $G''_*$ and $G'_*$ be defined the same as $K''_*$ and $K'_*$, except with -$S^1$ replaced some (any) neighborhood of $* \in S^1$. -Then $G''_*$ and $G'_*$ are both contractible -and the inclusion $G''_* \sub G'_*$ is a homotopy equivalence. -For $G'_*$ the proof is the same as in (\ref{bcontract}), except that the splitting -$G'_0 \to H_0(G'_*)$ concentrates the point labels at two points to the right and left of $*$. -For $G''_*$ we note that any cycle is supported \nn{need to establish terminology for this; maybe -in ``basic properties" section above} away from $*$. -Thus any cycle lies in the image of the normal blob complex of a disjoint union -of two intervals, which is contractible by (\ref{bcontract}) and (\ref{disjunion}). -Actually, we need the further (easy) result that the inclusion -$G''_* \to G'_*$ induces an isomorphism on $H_0$. - -Next we construct a degree 1 map (homotopy) $h: K'_* \to K'_*$ such that -for all $x \in K'_*$ we have -\eq{ - x - \bd h(x) - h(\bd x) \in K''_* . -} -Since $K'_0 = K''_0$, we can take $h_0 = 0$. -Let $x \in K'_1$, with single blob $B \sub S^1$. -If $* \notin B$, then $x \in K''_1$ and we define $h_1(x) = 0$. -If $* \in B$, then we work in the image of $G'_*$ and $G''_*$ (with respect to $B$). -Choose $x'' \in G''_1$ such that $\bd x'' = \bd x$. -Since $G'_*$ is contractible, there exists $y \in G'_2$ such that $\bd y = x - x''$. -Define $h_1(x) = y$. -The general case is similar, except that we have to take lower order homotopies into account. -Let $x \in K'_k$. -If $*$ is not contained in any of the blobs of $x$, then define $h_k(x) = 0$. -Otherwise, let $B$ be the outermost blob of $x$ containing $*$. -By xxxx above, $x = x' \bullet p$, where $x'$ is supported on $B$ and $p$ is supported away from $B$. -So $x' \in G'_l$ for some $l \le k$. -Choose $x'' \in G''_l$ such that $\bd x'' = \bd (x' - h_{l-1}\bd x')$. -Choose $y \in G'_{l+1}$ such that $\bd y = x' - x'' - h_{l-1}\bd x'$. -Define $h_k(x) = y \bullet p$. -This completes the proof that $i: K''_* \to K'_*$ is a homotopy equivalence. -\nn{need to say above more clearly and settle on notation/terminology} - -Finally, we show that $K''_*$ is contractible. -\nn{need to also show that $H_0$ is the right thing; easy, but I won't do it now} -Let $x$ be a cycle in $K''_*$. -The union of the supports of the diagrams in $x$ does not contain $*$, so there exists a -ball $B \subset S^1$ containing the union of the supports and not containing $*$. -Adding $B$ as a blob to $x$ gives a contraction. -\nn{need to say something else in degree zero} -\end{proof} - -We can also describe explicitly a map from the standard Hochschild -complex to the blob complex on the circle. \nn{What properties does this -map have?} - -\begin{figure}% -$$\mathfig{0.6}{barycentric/barycentric}$$ -\caption{The Hochschild chain $a \tensor b \tensor c$ is sent to -the sum of six blob $2$-chains, corresponding to a barycentric subdivision of a $2$-simplex.} -\label{fig:Hochschild-example}% -\end{figure} - -As an example, Figure \ref{fig:Hochschild-example} shows the image of the Hochschild chain $a \tensor b \tensor c$. Only the $0$-cells are shown explicitly. -The edges marked $x, y$ and $z$ carry the $1$-chains -\begin{align*} -x & = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/ux} & u_x = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/ux_ca} - \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/ux_c-a} \\ -y & = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uy} & u_y = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uy_cab} - \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uy_ca-b} \\ -z & = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uz} & u_z = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uz_c-a-b} - \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uz_cab} -\end{align*} -and the $2$-chain labelled $A$ is -\begin{equation*} -A = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/Ax}+\mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/Ay}. -\end{equation*} -Note that we then have -\begin{equation*} -\bdy A = x+y+z. -\end{equation*} - -In general, the Hochschild chain $\Tensor_{i=1}^n a_i$ is sent to the sum of $n!$ blob $(n-1)$-chains, indexed by permutations, -$$\phi\left(\Tensor_{i=1}^n a_i\right) = \sum_{\pi} \phi^\pi(a_1, \ldots, a_n)$$ -with ... (hmmm, problems making this precise; you need to decide where to put the labels, but then it's hard to make an honest chain map!) +In this section we analyze the blob complex in dimension $n=1$ +and find that for $S^1$ the homology of the blob complex is the +Hochschild homology of the category (algebroid) that we started with. +\nn{or maybe say here that the complexes are quasi-isomorphic? in general, +should perhaps put more emphasis on the complexes and less on the homology.} + +Notation: $HB_i(X) = H_i(\bc_*(X))$. + +Let us first note that there is no loss of generality in assuming that our system of +fields comes from a category. +(Or maybe (???) there {\it is} a loss of generality. +Given any system of fields, $A(I; a, b) = \cC(I; a, b)/U(I; a, b)$ can be +thought of as the morphisms of a 1-category $C$. +More specifically, the objects of $C$ are $\cC(pt)$, the morphisms from $a$ to $b$ +are $A(I; a, b)$, and composition is given by gluing. +If we instead take our fields to be $C$-pictures, the $\cC(pt)$ does not change +and neither does $A(I; a, b) = HB_0(I; a, b)$. +But what about $HB_i(I; a, b)$ for $i > 0$? +Might these higher blob homology groups be different? +Seems unlikely, but I don't feel like trying to prove it at the moment. +In any case, we'll concentrate on the case of fields based on 1-category +pictures for the rest of this section.) + +(Another question: $\bc_*(I)$ is an $A_\infty$-category. +How general of an $A_\infty$-category is it? +Given an arbitrary $A_\infty$-category can one find fields and local relations so +that $\bc_*(I)$ is in some sense equivalent to the original $A_\infty$-category? +Probably not, unless we generalize to the case where $n$-morphisms are complexes.) + +Continuing... + +Let $C$ be a *-1-category. +Then specializing the definitions from above to the case $n=1$ we have: +\begin{itemize} +\item $\cC(pt) = \ob(C)$ . +\item Let $R$ be a 1-manifold and $c \in \cC(\bd R)$. +Then an element of $\cC(R; c)$ is a collection of (transversely oriented) +points in the interior +of $R$, each labeled by a morphism of $C$. +The intervals between the points are labeled by objects of $C$, consistent with +the boundary condition $c$ and the domains and ranges of the point labels. +\item There is an evaluation map $e: \cC(I; a, b) \to \mor(a, b)$ given by +composing the morphism labels of the points. +Note that we also need the * of *-1-category here in order to make all the morphisms point +the same way. +\item For $x \in \mor(a, b)$ let $\chi(x) \in \cC(I; a, b)$ be the field with a single +point (at some standard location) labeled by $x$. +Then the kernel of the evaluation map $U(I; a, b)$ is generated by things of the +form $y - \chi(e(y))$. +Thus we can, if we choose, restrict the blob twig labels to things of this form. +\end{itemize} + +We want to show that $HB_*(S^1)$ is naturally isomorphic to the +Hochschild homology of $C$. +\nn{Or better that the complexes are homotopic +or quasi-isomorphic.} +In order to prove this we will need to extend the blob complex to allow points to also +be labeled by elements of $C$-$C$-bimodules. +%Given an interval (1-ball) so labeled, there is an evaluation map to some tensor product +%(over $C$) of $C$-$C$-bimodules. +%Define the local relations $U(I; a, b)$ to be the direct sum of the kernels of these maps. +%Now we can define the blob complex for $S^1$. +%This complex is the sum of complexes with a fixed cyclic tuple of bimodules present. +%If $M$ is a $C$-$C$-bimodule, let $G_*(M)$ denote the summand of $\bc_*(S^1)$ corresponding +%to the cyclic 1-tuple $(M)$. +%In other words, $G_*(M)$ is a blob-like complex where exactly one point is labeled +%by an element of $M$ and the remaining points are labeled by morphisms of $C$. +%It's clear that $G_*(C)$ is isomorphic to the original bimodule-less +%blob complex for $S^1$. +%\nn{Is it really so clear? Should say more.} + +%\nn{alternative to the above paragraph:} +Fix points $p_1, \ldots, p_k \in S^1$ and $C$-$C$-bimodules $M_1, \ldots M_k$. +We define a blob-like complex $K_*(S^1, (p_i), (M_i))$. +The fields have elements of $M_i$ labeling $p_i$ and elements of $C$ labeling +other points. +The blob twig labels lie in kernels of evaluation maps. +(The range of these evaluation maps is a tensor product (over $C$) of $M_i$'s.) +Let $K_*(M) = K_*(S^1, (*), (M))$, where $* \in S^1$ is some standard base point. +In other words, fields for $K_*(M)$ have an element of $M$ at the fixed point $*$ +and elements of $C$ at variable other points. + +\todo{Some orphaned questions:} +\nn{Or maybe we should claim that $M \to K_*(M)$ is the/a derived coend. +Or maybe that $K_*(M)$ is quasi-isomorphic (or perhaps homotopic) to the Hochschild +complex of $M$.} + +\nn{What else needs to be said to establish quasi-isomorphism to Hochschild complex? +Do we need a map from hoch to blob? +Does the above exactness and contractibility guarantee such a map without writing it +down explicitly? +Probably it's worth writing down an explicit map even if we don't need to.} + + +We claim that +\begin{thm} +The blob complex $\bc_*(S^1; C)$ on the circle is quasi-isomorphic to the +usual Hochschild complex for $C$. +\end{thm} + +\nn{Note that since both complexes are free (in particular, projective), +quasi-isomorphic implies homotopy equivalent. +This applies to the two claims below also. +Thanks to Peter Teichner for pointing this out to me.} + +This follows from two results. First, we see that +\begin{lem} +\label{lem:module-blob}% +The complex $K_*(C)$ (here $C$ is being thought of as a +$C$-$C$-bimodule, not a category) is quasi-isomorphic to the blob complex +$\bc_*(S^1; C)$. (Proof later.) +\end{lem} + +Next, we show that for any $C$-$C$-bimodule $M$, +\begin{prop} +The complex $K_*(M)$ is quasi-isomorphic to $HC_*(M)$, the usual +Hochschild complex of $M$. +\end{prop} +\begin{proof} +Recall that the usual Hochschild complex of $M$ is uniquely determined, +up to quasi-isomorphism, by the following properties: +\begin{enumerate} +\item \label{item:hochschild-additive}% +$HC_*(M_1 \oplus M_2) \cong HC_*(M_1) \oplus HC_*(M_2)$. +\item \label{item:hochschild-exact}% +An exact sequence $0 \to M_1 \into M_2 \onto M_3 \to 0$ gives rise to an +exact sequence $0 \to HC_*(M_1) \into HC_*(M_2) \onto HC_*(M_3) \to 0$. +\item \label{item:hochschild-coinvariants}% +$HH_0(M)$ is isomorphic to the coinvariants of $M$, $\coinv(M) = +M/\langle cm-mc \rangle$. +\item \label{item:hochschild-free}% +$HC_*(C\otimes C)$ (the free $C$-$C$-bimodule with one generator) is contractible; that is, +quasi-isomorphic to its $0$-th homology (which in turn, by \ref{item:hochschild-coinvariants}, is just $C$) via the quotient map $HC_0 \onto HH_0$. +\end{enumerate} +(Together, these just say that Hochschild homology is `the derived functor of coinvariants'.) +We'll first recall why these properties are characteristic. + +Take some $C$-$C$ bimodule $M$, and choose a free resolution +\begin{equation*} +\cdots \to F_2 \xrightarrow{f_2} F_1 \xrightarrow{f_1} F_0. +\end{equation*} +We will show that for any functor $\cP$ satisfying properties +\ref{item:hochschild-additive}, \ref{item:hochschild-exact}, +\ref{item:hochschild-coinvariants} and \ref{item:hochschild-free}, there +is a quasi-isomorphism +$$\cP_*(M) \iso \coinv(F_*).$$ +% +Observe that there's a quotient map $\pi: F_0 \onto M$, and by +construction the cone of the chain map $\pi: F_* \to M$ is acyclic. Now +construct the total complex $\cP_i(F_j)$, with $i,j \geq 0$, graded by +$i+j$. We have two chain maps +\begin{align*} +\cP_i(F_*) & \xrightarrow{\cP_i(\pi)} \cP_i(M) \\ +\intertext{and} +\cP_*(F_j) & \xrightarrow{\cP_0(F_j) \onto H_0(\cP_*(F_j))} \coinv(F_j). +\end{align*} +The cone of each chain map is acyclic. In the first case, this is because the `rows' indexed by $i$ are acyclic since $HC_i$ is exact. +In the second case, this is because the `columns' indexed by $j$ are acyclic, since $F_j$ is free. +Because the cones are acyclic, the chain maps are quasi-isomorphisms. Composing one with the inverse of the other, we obtain the desired quasi-isomorphism +$$\cP_*(M) \quismto \coinv(F_*).$$ + +%If $M$ is free, that is, a direct sum of copies of +%$C \tensor C$, then properties \ref{item:hochschild-additive} and +%\ref{item:hochschild-free} determine $HC_*(M)$. Otherwise, choose some +%free cover $F \onto M$, and define $K$ to be this map's kernel. Thus we +%have a short exact sequence $0 \to K \into F \onto M \to 0$, and hence a +%short exact sequence of complexes $0 \to HC_*(K) \into HC_*(F) \onto HC_*(M) +%\to 0$. Such a sequence gives a long exact sequence on homology +%\begin{equation*} +%%\begin{split} +%\cdots \to HH_{i+1}(F) \to HH_{i+1}(M) \to HH_i(K) \to HH_i(F) \to \cdots % \\ +%%\cdots \to HH_1(F) \to HH_1(M) \to HH_0(K) \to HH_0(F) \to HH_0(M). +%%\end{split} +%\end{equation*} +%For any $i \geq 1$, $HH_{i+1}(F) = HH_i(F) = 0$, by properties +%\ref{item:hochschild-additive} and \ref{item:hochschild-free}, and so +%$HH_{i+1}(M) \iso HH_i(F)$. For $i=0$, \todo{}. +% +%This tells us how to +%compute every homology group of $HC_*(M)$; we already know $HH_0(M)$ +%(it's just coinvariants, by property \ref{item:hochschild-coinvariants}), +%and higher homology groups are determined by lower ones in $HC_*(K)$, and +%hence recursively as coinvariants of some other bimodule. + +The proposition then follows from the following lemmas, establishing that $K_*$ has precisely these required properties. +\begin{lem} +\label{lem:hochschild-additive}% +Directly from the definition, $K_*(M_1 \oplus M_2) \cong K_*(M_1) \oplus K_*(M_2)$. +\end{lem} +\begin{lem} +\label{lem:hochschild-exact}% +An exact sequence $0 \to M_1 \into M_2 \onto M_3 \to 0$ gives rise to an +exact sequence $0 \to K_*(M_1) \into K_*(M_2) \onto K_*(M_3) \to 0$. +\end{lem} +\begin{lem} +\label{lem:hochschild-coinvariants}% +$H_0(K_*(M))$ is isomorphic to the coinvariants of $M$. +\end{lem} +\begin{lem} +\label{lem:hochschild-free}% +$K_*(C\otimes C)$ is quasi-isomorphic to $H_0(K_*(C \otimes C)) \iso C$. +\end{lem} + +The remainder of this section is devoted to proving Lemmas +\ref{lem:module-blob}, +\ref{lem:hochschild-exact}, \ref{lem:hochschild-coinvariants} and +\ref{lem:hochschild-free}. +\end{proof} + +\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:module-blob}] +We show that $K_*(C)$ is quasi-isomorphic to $\bc_*(S^1)$. +$K_*(C)$ differs from $\bc_*(S^1)$ only in that the base point * +is always a labeled point in $K_*(C)$, while in $\bc_*(S^1)$ it may or may not be. +In other words, there is an inclusion map $i: K_*(C) \to \bc_*(S^1)$. + +We define a left inverse $s: \bc_*(S^1) \to K_*(C)$ to the inclusion as follows. +If $y$ is a field defined on a neighborhood of *, define $s(y) = y$ if +* is a labeled point in $y$. +Otherwise, define $s(y)$ to be the result of adding a label 1 (identity morphism) at *. +Let $x \in \bc_*(S^1)$. +Let $s(x)$ be the result of replacing each field $y$ (containing *) mentioned in +$x$ with $s(y)$. +It is easy to check that $s$ is a chain map and $s \circ i = \id$. + +Let $L_*^\ep \sub \bc_*(S^1)$ be the subcomplex where there are no labeled points +in a neighborhood $B_\ep$ of $*$, except perhaps $*$, and $B_\ep$ is either disjoint from or contained in every blob. +Note that for any chain $x \in \bc_*(S^1)$, $x \in L_*^\ep$ for sufficiently small $\ep$. +\nn{rest of argument goes similarly to above} + +We define a degree $1$ chain map $j_\ep: L_*^\ep \to L_*^\ep$ as follows. Let $x \in L_*^\ep$ be a blob diagram. +If $*$ is not contained in any twig blob, we define $j_\ep(x)$ by adding $B_\ep$ as a new twig blob, with label $y - s(y)$ where $y$ is the restriction +of $x$ to $B_\ep$. If $*$ is contained in a twig blob $B$ with label $u=\sum z_i$, +write $y_i$ for the restriction of $z_i$ to $B_\ep$, and let +$x_i$ be equal to $x$ on $S^1 \setmin B$, equal to $z_i$ on $B \setmin B_\ep$, +and have an additional blob $B_\ep$ with label $y_i - s(y_i)$. +Define $j_\ep(x) = \sum x_i$. +\todo{need to check signs coming from blob complex differential} +\todo{finish this} +\end{proof} +\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:hochschild-exact}] +We now prove that $K_*$ is an exact functor. + +%\todo{p. 1478 of scott's notes} +Essentially, this comes down to the unsurprising fact that the functor on $C$-$C$ bimodules +\begin{equation*} +M \mapsto \ker(C \tensor M \tensor C \xrightarrow{c_1 \tensor m \tensor c_2 \mapsto c_1 m c_2} M) +\end{equation*} +is exact. For completeness we'll explain this below. + +Suppose we have a short exact sequence of $C$-$C$ bimodules $$\xymatrix{0 \ar[r] & K \ar@{^{(}->}[r]^f & E \ar@{->>}[r]^g & Q \ar[r] & 0}.$$ +We'll write $\hat{f}$ and $\hat{g}$ for the image of $f$ and $g$ under the functor. +Most of what we need to check is easy. +If $(a \tensor k \tensor b) \in \ker(C \tensor K \tensor C \to K)$, to have $\hat{f}(a \tensor k \tensor b) = 0 \in \ker(C \tensor E \tensor C \to E)$, we must have $f(k) = 0 \in E$, so +be $k=0$ itself. If $(a \tensor e \tensor b) \in \ker(C \tensor E \tensor C \to E)$ is in the image of $\ker(C \tensor K \tensor C \to K)$ under $\hat{f}$, clearly +$e$ is in the image of the original $f$, so is in the kernel of the original $g$, and so $\hat{g}(a \tensor e \tensor b) = 0$. +If $\hat{g}(a \tensor e \tensor b) = 0$, then $g(e) = 0$, so $e = f(\widetilde{e})$ for some $\widetilde{e} \in K$, and $a \tensor e \tensor b = \hat{f}(a \tensor \widetilde{e} \tensor b)$. +Finally, the interesting step is in checking that any $q = \sum_i a_i \tensor q_i \tensor b_i$ such that $\sum_i a_i q_i b_i = 0$ is in the image of $\ker(C \tensor E \tensor C \to C)$ under $\hat{g}$. +For each $i$, we can find $\widetilde{q_i}$ so $g(\widetilde{q_i}) = q_i$. However $\sum_i a_i \widetilde{q_i} b_i$ need not be zero. +Consider then $$\widetilde{q} = \sum_i (a_i \tensor \widetilde{q_i} \tensor b_i) - 1 \tensor (\sum_i a_i \widetilde{q_i} b_i) \tensor 1.$$ Certainly +$\widetilde{q} \in \ker(C \tensor E \tensor C \to E)$. Further, +\begin{align*} +\hat{g}(\widetilde{q}) & = \sum_i (a_i \tensor g(\widetilde{q_i}) \tensor b_i) - 1 \tensor (\sum_i a_i g(\widetilde{q_i}) b_i) \tensor 1 \\ + & = q - 0 +\end{align*} +(here we used that $g$ is a map of $C$-$C$ bimodules, and that $\sum_i a_i q_i b_i = 0$). + +Identical arguments show that the functors +\begin{equation} +\label{eq:ker-functor}% +M \mapsto \ker(C^{\tensor k} \tensor M \tensor C^{\tensor l} \to M) +\end{equation} +are all exact too. Moreover, tensor products of such functors with each +other and with $C$ or $\ker(C^{\tensor k} \to C)$ (e.g., producing the functor $M \mapsto \ker(M \tensor C \to M) +\tensor C \tensor \ker(C \tensor C \to M)$) are all still exact. + +Finally, then we see that the functor $K_*$ is simply an (infinite) +direct sum of copies of this sort of functor. The direct sum is indexed by +configurations of nested blobs and of labels; for each such configuration, we have one of the above tensor product functors, +with the labels of twig blobs corresponding to tensor factors as in \eqref{eq:ker-functor} or $\ker(C^{\tensor k} \to C)$, and all other labelled points corresponding +to tensor factors of $C$. +\end{proof} +\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:hochschild-coinvariants}] +We show that $H_0(K_*(M))$ is isomorphic to the coinvariants of $M$. + +We define a map $\ev: K_0(M) \to M$. If $x \in K_0(M)$ has the label $m \in M$ at $*$, and labels $c_i \in C$ at the other labeled points of $S^1$, reading clockwise from $*$, +we set $\ev(x) = m c_1 \cdots c_k$. We can think of this as $\ev : M \tensor C^{\tensor k} \to M$, for each direct summand of $K_0(M)$ indexed by a configuration of labeled points. +There is a quotient map $\pi: M \to \coinv{M}$, and the composition $\pi \compose \ev$ is well-defined on the quotient $H_0(K_*(M))$; if $y \in K_1(M)$, the blob in $y$ either contains $*$ or does not. If it doesn't, then +suppose $y$ has label $m$ at $*$, labels $c_i$ at other labeled points outside the blob, and the field inside the blob is a sum, with the $j$-th term having +labeled points $d_{j,i}$. Then $\sum_j d_{j,1} \tensor \cdots \tensor d_{j,k_j} \in \ker(\DirectSum_k C^{\tensor k} \to C)$, and so +$\ev(\bdy y) = 0$, because $$C^{\tensor \ell_1} \tensor \ker(\DirectSum_k C^{\tensor k} \to C) \tensor C^{\tensor \ell_2} \subset \ker(\DirectSum_k C^{\tensor k} \to C).$$ +Similarly, if $*$ is contained in the blob, then the blob label is a sum, with the $j$-th term have labelled points $d_{j,i}$ to the left of $*$, $m_j$ at $*$, and $d_{j,i}'$ to the right of $*$, +and there are labels $c_i$ at the labeled points outside the blob. We know that +$$\sum_j d_{j,1} \tensor \cdots \tensor d_{j,k_j} \tensor m_j \tensor d_{j,1}' \tensor \cdots \tensor d_{j,k'_j}' \in \ker(\DirectSum_{k,k'} C^{\tensor k} \tensor M \tensor C^{\tensor k'} \tensor \to M),$$ +and so +\begin{align*} +\ev(\bdy y) & = \sum_j m_j d_{j,1}' \cdots d_{j,k'_j}' c_1 \cdots c_k d_{j,1} \cdots d_{j,k_j} \\ + & = \sum_j d_{j,1} \cdots d_{j,k_j} m_j d_{j,1}' \cdots d_{j,k'_j}' c_1 \cdots c_k \\ + & = 0 +\end{align*} +where this time we use the fact that we're mapping to $\coinv{M}$, not just $M$. + +The map $\pi \compose \ev: H_0(K_*(M)) \to \coinv{M}$ is clearly surjective ($\ev$ surjects onto $M$); we now show that it's injective. \todo{} +\end{proof} +\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:hochschild-free}] +We show that $K_*(C\otimes C)$ is +quasi-isomorphic to the 0-step complex $C$. We'll do this in steps, establishing quasi-isomorphisms and homotopy equivalences +$$K_*(C \tensor C) \quismto K'_* \htpyto K''_* \quismto C.$$ + +Let $K'_* \sub K_*(C\otimes C)$ be the subcomplex where the label of +the point $*$ is $1 \otimes 1 \in C\otimes C$. +We will show that the inclusion $i: K'_* \to K_*(C\otimes C)$ is a quasi-isomorphism. + +Fix a small $\ep > 0$. +Let $B_\ep$ be the ball of radius $\ep$ around $* \in S^1$. +Let $K_*^\ep \sub K_*(C\otimes C)$ be the subcomplex +generated by blob diagrams $b$ such that $B_\ep$ is either disjoint from +or contained in each blob of $b$, and the only labeled point inside $B_\ep$ is $*$. +%and the two boundary points of $B_\ep$ are not labeled points of $b$. +For a field $y$ on $B_\ep$, let $s_\ep(y)$ be the equivalent picture with~$*$ +labeled by $1\otimes 1$ and the only other labeled points at distance $\pm\ep/2$ from $*$. +(See Figure \ref{fig:sy}.) Note that $y - s_\ep(y) \in U(B_\ep)$. We can think of +$\sigma_\ep$ as a chain map $K_*^\ep \to K_*^\ep$ given by replacing the restriction $y$ to $B_\ep$ of each field +appearing in an element of $K_*^\ep$ with $s_\ep(y)$. +Note that $\sigma_\ep(x) \in K'_*$. +\begin{figure}[!ht] +\begin{align*} +y & = \mathfig{0.2}{hochschild/y} & +s_\ep(y) & = \mathfig{0.2}{hochschild/sy} +\end{align*} +\caption{Defining $s_\ep$.} +\label{fig:sy} +\end{figure} + +Define a degree 1 chain map $j_\ep : K_*^\ep \to K_*^\ep$ as follows. +Let $x \in K_*^\ep$ be a blob diagram. +If $*$ is not contained in any twig blob, $j_\ep(x)$ is obtained by adding $B_\ep$ to +$x$ as a new twig blob, with label $y - s_\ep(y)$, where $y$ is the restriction of $x$ to $B_\ep$. +If $*$ is contained in a twig blob $B$ with label $u = \sum z_i$, $j_\ep(x)$ is obtained as follows. +Let $y_i$ be the restriction of $z_i$ to $B_\ep$. +Let $x_i$ be equal to $x$ outside of $B$, equal to $z_i$ on $B \setmin B_\ep$, +and have an additional blob $B_\ep$ with label $y_i - s_\ep(y_i)$. +Define $j_\ep(x) = \sum x_i$. +\nn{need to check signs coming from blob complex differential} +Note that if $x \in K'_* \cap K_*^\ep$ then $j_\ep(x) \in K'_*$ also. + +The key property of $j_\ep$ is +\eq{ + \bd j_\ep + j_\ep \bd = \id - \sigma_\ep. +} +If $j_\ep$ were defined on all of $K_*(C\otimes C)$, this would show that $\sigma_\ep$ +is a homotopy inverse to the inclusion $K'_* \to K_*(C\otimes C)$. +One strategy would be to try to stitch together various $j_\ep$ for progressively smaller +$\ep$ and show that $K'_*$ is homotopy equivalent to $K_*(C\otimes C)$. +Instead, we'll be less ambitious and just show that +$K'_*$ is quasi-isomorphic to $K_*(C\otimes C)$. + +If $x$ is a cycle in $K_*(C\otimes C)$, then for sufficiently small $\ep$ we have +$x \in K_*^\ep$. +(This is true for any chain in $K_*(C\otimes C)$, since chains are sums of +finitely many blob diagrams.) +Then $x$ is homologous to $s_\ep(x)$, which is in $K'_*$, so the inclusion map +$K'_* \sub K_*(C\otimes C)$ is surjective on homology. +If $y \in K_*(C\otimes C)$ and $\bd y = x \in K'_*$, then $y \in K_*^\ep$ for some $\ep$ +and +\eq{ + \bd y = \bd (\sigma_\ep(y) + j_\ep(x)) . +} +Since $\sigma_\ep(y) + j_\ep(x) \in F'$, it follows that the inclusion map is injective on homology. +This completes the proof that $K'_*$ is quasi-isomorphic to $K_*(C\otimes C)$. + +Let $K''_* \sub K'_*$ be the subcomplex of $K'_*$ where $*$ is not contained in any blob. +We will show that the inclusion $i: K''_* \to K'_*$ is a homotopy equivalence. + +First, a lemma: Let $G''_*$ and $G'_*$ be defined the same as $K''_*$ and $K'_*$, except with +$S^1$ replaced some (any) neighborhood of $* \in S^1$. +Then $G''_*$ and $G'_*$ are both contractible +and the inclusion $G''_* \sub G'_*$ is a homotopy equivalence. +For $G'_*$ the proof is the same as in (\ref{bcontract}), except that the splitting +$G'_0 \to H_0(G'_*)$ concentrates the point labels at two points to the right and left of $*$. +For $G''_*$ we note that any cycle is supported \nn{need to establish terminology for this; maybe +in ``basic properties" section above} away from $*$. +Thus any cycle lies in the image of the normal blob complex of a disjoint union +of two intervals, which is contractible by (\ref{bcontract}) and (\ref{disjunion}). +Actually, we need the further (easy) result that the inclusion +$G''_* \to G'_*$ induces an isomorphism on $H_0$. + +Next we construct a degree 1 map (homotopy) $h: K'_* \to K'_*$ such that +for all $x \in K'_*$ we have +\eq{ + x - \bd h(x) - h(\bd x) \in K''_* . +} +Since $K'_0 = K''_0$, we can take $h_0 = 0$. +Let $x \in K'_1$, with single blob $B \sub S^1$. +If $* \notin B$, then $x \in K''_1$ and we define $h_1(x) = 0$. +If $* \in B$, then we work in the image of $G'_*$ and $G''_*$ (with respect to $B$). +Choose $x'' \in G''_1$ such that $\bd x'' = \bd x$. +Since $G'_*$ is contractible, there exists $y \in G'_2$ such that $\bd y = x - x''$. +Define $h_1(x) = y$. +The general case is similar, except that we have to take lower order homotopies into account. +Let $x \in K'_k$. +If $*$ is not contained in any of the blobs of $x$, then define $h_k(x) = 0$. +Otherwise, let $B$ be the outermost blob of $x$ containing $*$. +By xxxx above, $x = x' \bullet p$, where $x'$ is supported on $B$ and $p$ is supported away from $B$. +So $x' \in G'_l$ for some $l \le k$. +Choose $x'' \in G''_l$ such that $\bd x'' = \bd (x' - h_{l-1}\bd x')$. +Choose $y \in G'_{l+1}$ such that $\bd y = x' - x'' - h_{l-1}\bd x'$. +Define $h_k(x) = y \bullet p$. +This completes the proof that $i: K''_* \to K'_*$ is a homotopy equivalence. +\nn{need to say above more clearly and settle on notation/terminology} + +Finally, we show that $K''_*$ is contractible. +\nn{need to also show that $H_0$ is the right thing; easy, but I won't do it now} +Let $x$ be a cycle in $K''_*$. +The union of the supports of the diagrams in $x$ does not contain $*$, so there exists a +ball $B \subset S^1$ containing the union of the supports and not containing $*$. +Adding $B$ as a blob to $x$ gives a contraction. +\nn{need to say something else in degree zero} +\end{proof} + +We can also describe explicitly a map from the standard Hochschild +complex to the blob complex on the circle. \nn{What properties does this +map have?} + +\begin{figure}% +$$\mathfig{0.6}{barycentric/barycentric}$$ +\caption{The Hochschild chain $a \tensor b \tensor c$ is sent to +the sum of six blob $2$-chains, corresponding to a barycentric subdivision of a $2$-simplex.} +\label{fig:Hochschild-example}% +\end{figure} + +As an example, Figure \ref{fig:Hochschild-example} shows the image of the Hochschild chain $a \tensor b \tensor c$. Only the $0$-cells are shown explicitly. +The edges marked $x, y$ and $z$ carry the $1$-chains +\begin{align*} +x & = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/ux} & u_x = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/ux_ca} - \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/ux_c-a} \\ +y & = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uy} & u_y = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uy_cab} - \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uy_ca-b} \\ +z & = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uz} & u_z = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uz_c-a-b} - \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/uz_cab} +\end{align*} +and the $2$-chain labelled $A$ is +\begin{equation*} +A = \mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/Ax}+\mathfig{0.1}{barycentric/Ay}. +\end{equation*} +Note that we then have +\begin{equation*} +\bdy A = x+y+z. +\end{equation*} + +In general, the Hochschild chain $\Tensor_{i=1}^n a_i$ is sent to the sum of $n!$ blob $(n-1)$-chains, indexed by permutations, +$$\phi\left(\Tensor_{i=1}^n a_i\right) = \sum_{\pi} \phi^\pi(a_1, \ldots, a_n)$$ +with ... (hmmm, problems making this precise; you need to decide where to put the labels, but then it's hard to make an honest chain map!)