SH02-EXCEPTIONAL-OPERATIONS — Exceptional inverse image from a finite resolution
This lesson constructs the adjunction and proves its comparisons relative to those precisely stated foundations. The opposite-bounded-range section proves the full bounded-above first-input internal-Hom comparisons and supplies the finite model for unbounded proper direct image. The unbounded supported-evaluation section proves the projection and support-forgetting comparisons for arbitrary first complexes and bounded-below duality targets, using the existing K-flat and K-injective foundations.
The exceptional inverse image is determined by what can be integrated with proper support. To construct it, we first make proper direct image exact by tensoring with a suitable sheaf. The ordinary right adjoint of this exact functor can then be assembled into a bounded resolution model. This also fixes the trace maps used in subsequent formulas.
All spaces in this lesson are locally compact Hausdorff. Write a continuous map as . Unless a statement says otherwise, is a commutative ring of finite global dimension , all sheaves are -module sheaves, and the inputs and outputs belong to . Cohomological grading means . No constructibility, finite generation, field assumption, or countability of a neighborhood basis is imposed.
SH02-EX-FOUNDATIONS — The topological foundation being used
The following are exact prerequisite contracts for proper-support sheaf theory. They belong to the earlier foundations course. They are stated here so that the construction does not hide its prerequisites inside the phrase “six operations.” The existing open prerequisite contracts supply the abelian and derived-category foundations, but their proper-base-change theorem for proper maps alone does not supply this entire list.
SH02-EX-IMP-SOFT — The compact-support resolution contract
A sheaf on a locally compact Hausdorff space is c-soft when its sections on every compact subset extend globally. Injective and flabby sheaves are c-soft. Open extension by zero and arbitrary coproducts preserve c-softness. A c-soft sheaf is acyclic for compactly supported sections. Conversely, for all open and all implies c-softness. These assertions are proved in compact extension, lifting and the acyclicity criterion, (C1)–(C4). In particular, that proof includes arbitrary coproducts and open extensions and does not require a finite dimension bound.
SH02-EX-IMP-FIBRES — The proper-support fibre contract
Proper direct image is left exact, commutes with coproducts, and has stalk . Its derived stalks are the corresponding compactly supported cohomology groups. A sheaf whose restrictions to all fibres are c-soft is -acyclic; bounded-below complexes of such sheaves compute . These assertions also hold after restricting the source to an open subset. The exact providers are the proper-support construction and underived fibre formula, (F2)–(F3), coproduct and open-extension comparisons, (F4)–(F5), and the derived fibre and acyclic-complex calculation, (F6). They work for bounded-below complexes on arbitrary locally compact Hausdorff spaces; neither constructibility nor countability is inserted.
SH02-EX-IMP-COMPOSE — The proper-support composition contract
For composable maps, the natural proper-support comparison is an isomorphism on , compatible with threefold composition and identities. The proof is composition of properly supported sections and their c-soft models, (D2)–(D3). The comparison keeps the underlying section, so it includes these identity and associativity compatibilities, not only an isomorphism of objects.
SH02-EX-IMP-BC — The base-change boundary
The full proper-support base-change theorem for arbitrary locally
compact Hausdorff maps is proved by pulling
back supported sections and deriving that map, (D1) and (D4). Its
fibrewise acyclicity argument preserves the bounded-below range without
a finite dimension or proper-map hypothesis. Under the finite dimension
assumption of this lesson, the required case and its pasting
compatibility are proved below as
SH02-EX-BASECHANGE-BRIDGE, using the fibre and soft
contracts.
The soft, fibre, composition and full proper-support base-change contracts are supplied by these exact earlier programme proofs. Their support sections do not use the later exceptional adjoint or constructible-duality applications in that reading, so using them here creates no such dependency cycle. The finite-dimensional case of nonproper base change and the projection formula required below are proved from those contracts. A theorem about a proper map or a perfect tensor factor is not used as a substitute for either assertion.
We will also use two elementary consequences of the stated compact-support contracts. A compact subset meets only finitely many members of a locally finite family of supports, after passage to a finite open cover. This explains why compactly supported sections of a sheaf coproduct are a coproduct, even though unrestricted sections need not commute with coproducts. Restriction to a closed subset preserves c-softness: a compact subset of the closed subset is compact in the ambient space, and restriction to that compact subset has the same sections.
SH02-EX-RELATIVE-SOFT — Turning proper direct image into an exact functor
Call an abelian sheaf on -soft if is c-soft for every . By the soft criterion and the fibre formula, this is equivalent to
where is restriction to followed by extension by zero. The use of every open matters: being merely -acyclic does not express the full condition.
Assume henceforth that there is an integer such that
for every abelian sheaf on . This is a condition over , not only over the chosen coefficient ring. The fibre formula says equivalently that all fibres have compact-support cohomological dimension at most . For the reverse implication in this equivalence, restrict to each fibre and use stalkwise detection of zero. For the forward implication, extend a sheaf on the closed fibre by zero to and take the stalk at its image point. Hence the same bound applies after any change of base.
The bound yields a useful finite dimension-shifting rule. If
is exact and are -soft, then is -soft. To see this, insert the successive kernels, apply open extension by zero, and use the long exact sequences of . For , repeated connecting maps identify with for the kernel at the left end; that group vanishes by (EX.1). For there are no middle sheaves and (EX.1) itself gives the assertion. The same argument shows that truncating an -soft resolution after steps leaves an -soft final cokernel.
The statements remain true for -module sheaves after forgetting scalars. One can compute compact-support cohomology using a resolution by sheaves which are c-soft as abelian sheaves, so the underlying abelian and -linear derived functors agree. Thus the integral dimension hypothesis bounds the coefficient versions without requiring to be flat over .
SH02-EX-FLAT-SOFT — The flat relative-soft tensor lemma
Tensor lemma. Let be a commutative coefficient ring and let be an -module which is flat and -soft. Then is -soft for every -module , and
is exact. The underlying integral dimension bound (EX.1) is retained.
Proof. For every pair consisting of an open set and a section there is a morphism taking to . The coproduct of all these maps is surjective on every stalk. Repeating the construction for its kernel gives a resolution to the left by coproducts of the sheaves . These are coproduct generators; their morphisms into a sheaf form a product of section modules.
After tensoring with , the resolution stays exact by flatness. Every term is a coproduct of open extensions , hence is -soft. Apply (EX.2) to its final steps, with at the right end. This proves the first assertion. For a short exact sequence of ’s, tensoring is exact and all three resulting sheaves are -acyclic. The long exact derived-image sequence therefore proves exactness of (EX.3).
Only stalkwise flatness was used. No assertion that arbitrary products of open generators are free generators enters the proof.
SH02-EX-FINITE-RESOLUTION — A finite universal resolution
There exists an exact sequence of abelian sheaves
whose terms are both flat over and -soft.
Here is a construction that works without a countability assumption. For an abelian sheaf , let
This is a flabby sheaf, and the map sends a section to its family of germs. It is injective. If has torsion-free stalks, then so does : its stalks are filtered colimits of products of torsion-free groups. Moreover, the map has a retraction given by evaluation at the coordinate . Consequently its cokernel is a direct summand of the torsion-free group , and is torsion-free. Over , torsion-free means flat. Thus both and are flat whenever is flat.
Start with , set and for , and finally set . Flatness follows inductively from the preceding stalk argument. The first terms are flabby, hence -soft; the last is -soft by dimension shifting. If , simply take : (EX.1) and the relative soft criterion say directly that it is -soft. This proves (EX.4).
The augmented complex (EX.4) stays exact after tensoring with any abelian sheaf: its short exact constituent sequences have flat cokernels. It follows that is a quasi-isomorphism for every bounded-below complex . The total complexes here have finitely many -degrees; there is no infinite-product convergence issue.
SH02-EX-REPRESENTING-SHEAF — The sheaf representing the ordinary adjunction
Fix one flat -soft abelian sheaf . For an injective -module , define
For , the extension-by-zero map gives the restriction map in (EX.5).
This presheaf is a sheaf. Indeed, for an open covering , there is the right-exact sheaf sequence
The first map is the difference of the two inclusions. Tensor with and apply the exact functor (EX.3); it also preserves coproducts. Applying gives exactly the equalizer expressing the sheaf axiom for (EX.5). There is no assumption that an infinite coproduct has its sections computed pointwise as a presheaf coproduct.
There is a natural isomorphism
To construct its map, take a morphism on the left and precompose it with the morphism induced by each section . This produces a compatible map on every open . When , this is the identity identification in (EX.5). It is therefore an isomorphism for a coproduct of open generators. An arbitrary has a presentation by such coproducts. Both sides of (EX.6), regarded as contravariant functors of , send this presentation to the kernel of the corresponding map from their value on to their value on . The isomorphisms on identify those kernels. This proves (EX.6), including its naturality, without a representability theorem.
The left side of (EX.6) is exact in , by (EX.3) and injectivity of . Hence is injective. The construction is covariant in and contravariant in .
SH02-EX-ADJOINT — The derived adjunction and its normalization
Existence theorem. Under (EX.1), has a right adjoint
More precisely, . No preservation of is asserted for an arbitrary map between the present spaces.
Construction and proof. Represent by a bounded-below injective complex . Using (EX.4), form the finite-width Hom total complex
For a homogeneous map of total degree , its differential is the usual Hom differential
Each degree of (EX.7) is a finite sum of injectives, hence injective. If starts in degree , (EX.7) starts in degree . The same formula sends chain homotopies to chain homotopies and commutes with the standard shift identifications.
For a bounded-below complex , the tensor lemma says that every term of is -soft. Its augmentation is a quasi-isomorphism, so
Applying (EX.6) in every bidegree and the tensor–Hom sign convention gives an isomorphism of Hom complexes
Taking degree-zero cohomology computes morphisms in the derived category on both sides, because the target complexes are bounded-below injectives. Thus has the desired adjunction. Bounded-below complexes of injectives model , so this construction descends to a triangulated functor. The bound follows from (EX.7).
Define the unit and the trace, or counit,
as the images of the identity morphisms under (EX.8). Naturality of that isomorphism gives the triangular identities
For example, applying the adjunction bijection to the first composite reduces it to the definition of ; applying its inverse to the second reduces it to the definition of . This is a proof of the normalization, not merely an assertion that some abstract right adjoint exists.
Any other construction with its adjunction is uniquely isomorphic to this one by the map whose transpose is its counit. The inverse is obtained by exchanging the two constructions; (EX.10) makes both composites identities. This identifies different choices of (EX.4), respects the trace, and satisfies the cocycle identity for three choices. Because (EX.8) is an isomorphism of complexes with the displayed Hom differential, simultaneously shifting source and target commutes with the adjunction. In particular, the trace of is the shift of the trace of under the chosen triangulated identifications; no independent sign can be inserted.
The same construction also proves the ringed-space variant. Given sheaves of rings on , on and a homomorphism , replace in (EX.5) by and take Hom in -modules. The functor , followed by restriction of scalars, is exact. The generator and injectivity arguments are unchanged and give a right adjoint . Commutativity and finite global dimension are not needed for this existence construction; those hypotheses enter the tensor assertions below.
SH02-EX-PROJECTION — Projection with arbitrary coefficients
For and , there is a canonical isomorphism
Here finite global dimension of ensures that all tensor products displayed in stay in . The assertion allows arbitrary , with no perfection assumption.
First suppose that is a flat -soft -module. On a fibre, the functor
is exact by the tensor lemma. It preserves coproducts. The natural map from to this functor is an isomorphism for free modules, hence for every module by a free presentation and right exactness. It follows in addition that is flat. The stalk formula now proves both that is flat and that
for every sheaf . The map is defined on sections by multiplying a properly supported section by a pulled-back local section. Its support remains proper.
For the derived statement, use a bounded-below flat resolution of , starting at most degrees earlier, and one for . Here is a precise way to obtain the required lower bound from the flat-resolution contract, proved by local cycle attachment, Theorem 3.1. Start with its termwise-flat complex representing an object in . Put . For , exactness gives . On each stalk, successive Tor connecting isomorphisms identify with . Thus is flat, and replacing the part of below degree by this cokernel gives the bounded-below flat resolution. When , every stalk module is already flat and the same truncation works directly.
Why this truncation is still a K-flat model. The dimension-shifting step uses the long exact Tor sequence and the flatness criterion, Proposition 3.2 and Theorem 3.3. Write , and let be the complex with for , , and for . Its first differential is induced by that of . The quotient in degree and the identity in higher degrees define a chain map . It is a quasi-isomorphism: the good truncation preserves cohomology in degrees at least , and the lower cohomology of vanishes because .
The kernel has terms below , the sheaf in degree , and zero above. Exactness of in degree identifies that last term with . The same connecting isomorphisms as above identify first Tor of each stalk of with st Tor of the corresponding stalk of , which is zero. Thus that last term is flat; for it is flat directly. The flatness-of-stalks criterion makes every term of flat. Its cohomology is zero, either from the short exact sequence below or directly from the description of its last differential. It is bounded above, so Lemma 2.3 of the K-flat lesson proves that is K-flat.
We have an exact sequence of complexes
Every term of its quotient is flat. Consequently tensoring this sequence with any sheaf remains exact in each degree, by the flat-quotient assertion of Lemma 1.3 in the same lesson. Tensoring with a complex and taking direct-sum totalizations therefore also gives an exact sequence. For an acyclic complex , the tensors with and are acyclic by their K-flatness; the resulting long exact cohomology sequence proves that is acyclic. This proves K-flatness of , rather than inferring it from flatness of its terms.
If is the original resolution, the identification of this bounded-below model with is the explicit quasi-isomorphism zigzag
A chain map is not being assumed. In the derived category the identification is . Here and are on , whereas is on . Applying the construction to gives a bounded-below K-flat -complex representing it. Since the coefficients are the constant sheaves of the same ring , inverse image is exact and its stalks preserve the coefficient modules. It preserves flatness and K-flatness by Lemma 2.2 of the K-flat lesson. Thus is a bounded-below K-flat -model for . The tensor-invariance and resolution-comparison proof, Lemma 1.1 and Theorem 1.2, identifies with on , compatibly with those zigzags and derived morphisms. This supplies the models needed below, including their lower bounds. It does not claim that an arbitrary complex of flat terms is K-flat.
Tensor over with (EX.4). Its total complex is termwise flat over , termwise -soft, and quasi-isomorphic to . All the double complexes used here lie in a translated first quadrant. Thus termwise flat resolutions calculate the derived tensor products of these bounded-below inputs, and termwise -soft resolutions calculate . Applying (EX.12) to the double complexes gives (EX.11).
The identity, associativity and symmetry compatibilities of this projection map can be checked before deriving: both ways of multiplying a supported section by two local coefficient sections give the same section, and interchanging homogeneous factors introduces exactly the usual Koszul sign. Flat resolutions preserve these equalities. Its compatibility with open restriction is immediate from the same description. These facts will fix the tensor comparisons of .
SH02-EX-COMPOSITION — Composition, restriction, and change of base
Suppose satisfy the integral dimension bounds and . Then has cohomological dimension at most . Indeed, apply the composition import and filter by its cohomology sheaves: their degrees lie between and , and applying gives degrees at most . This finite filtration is the usual derived-functor spectral-sequence argument, and does not require the spectral sequence to have infinitely many nonzero diagonals.
There is a canonical isomorphism
For every and , the successive adjunctions give
Representing this natural bijection defines (EX.13). Its trace is exactly
For three maps, either parenthesization has the trace obtained by successively applying the three traces in their order of composition. The associativity of the imported proper-support comparison identifies their sources. Uniqueness of an adjoint identification preserving the trace therefore proves the associativity of (EX.13). For the identity map the trace is the identity, so the unit coherence follows in the same way.
SH02-EX-EMBEDDING — Open, closed, and locally closed inclusions
For an open embedding , the exact functor has exact right adjoint . The ordinary adjunction therefore gives , with its usual extension-by-zero counit. For a closed embedding , its exact direct image has right adjoint at the sheaf level. To prove this, a map lands in the subsheaf of sections supported on , and maps to that subsheaf are determined by their restriction to . Deriving the adjunction gives
For a locally closed embedding, factor it as a closed embedding into an open subset and then use (EX.13). More explicitly, if is closed in and , set , where the superscript marks closed support inside . This object is also , with extended by zero from the locally closed subset: the ordinary extension/restriction and closed-support adjunctions identify both expressions. The result is . Independence of the chosen open ambient neighborhood follows from this intrinsic internal-Hom description, or by restricting the two factorizations to their intersection and applying their adjunctions. Ordinary direct image , rather than extension by zero, is part of this support convention.
These formulas also identify the open restriction of . If is open, write , , and . The equality and the composition isomorphisms give
This isomorphism preserves the traces after restriction. One can also see it directly in (EX.5), since a section supported properly over is tested against and open restriction preserves injectives.
SH02-EX-BASECHANGE-BRIDGE — A finite-dimensional base-change proof
Here is the promised finite-dimensional base-change bridge. In a cartesian square with horizontal , and vertical , pulling back a properly supported section gives the underived map : the pullback of its support is proper over the new base. The fibre contract identifies its two stalks with the same compactly supported sections on the same fibre, so the map is an isomorphism.
Choose (EX.4) for . Its pullback is still flat, exact over , and -soft: the fibre restrictions are precisely those of under the fibre homeomorphisms. Thus computes , while computes . Apply the underived base-change isomorphism term by term to obtain on . For two base changes, either composite is pullback of the same sections in this model. Thus identity squares, open restrictions and pasted squares have the asserted canonical compatibilities. No compactness of itself is used.
SH02-EX-BASECHANGE — Two exceptional base-change comparisons
Consider the cartesian square described in
SH02-EX-IMP-BC. If
has integral cohomological dimension at most
,
so does
,
since their fibres over corresponding points are homeomorphic. There are
two different exceptional comparisons:
The first is an isomorphism; the second is at this stage only a morphism.
For the first map, take and . The following natural sequence of bijections gives its definition and proof:
The third line is the proper-support base-change bridge just proved. Every other line is one of the already specified adjunctions.
Define the second map by the requirement that its transpose be
This explicit definition is useful in calculations: it fixes which
way the map goes and its normalization. For an identity square it gives
the identity, by (EX.10). For two successive base changes, transpose the
composite of their
maps. Inserting (EX.18) first for the inner square and then for the
outer one cancels the intermediate unit–counit pair by (EX.10). The
resulting map is the pasted proper-support comparison followed by the
pulled-back trace of
.
The pasting compatibility proved in
SH02-EX-BASECHANGE-BRIDGE identifies it with the transpose
for the composite square. Since transposition is a bijection, the two
maps agree.
For open , (EX.16) shows that is invertible. A general closed change of base can fail to be invertible; a worked example below detects this failure with a shift.
SH02-EX-COEFFICIENTS — Forgetting the coefficient action
Let denote the forgetful functor from -module sheaves to abelian sheaves. The exceptional inverse images constructed with the two coefficient systems satisfy
For , its proof is the following chain of adjunctions:
The middle line is (EX.11) over . The tensor products stay bounded below because has global dimension one. Thus this argument permits torsion in . Its canonical identification preserves the traces, since its construction uses precisely those traces in the two adjunctions. It asserts compatibility with forgetting the coefficient action, not an unrestricted theorem about extension of coefficients.
SH02-EX-INTERNAL — Internal adjunction and its tensor structure
For and , there are canonical isomorphisms
Here is a complex of -modules; the script Hom denotes a sheaf on . The finite dimension bound makes bounded. Both internal Hom objects in (EX.20) are therefore in , which is essential for the operations currently constructed.
To define the map from right to left in (EX.20), put . Evaluation, the ordinary counit , (EX.11), and the exceptional trace give
Currying (EX.22), with the tensor symmetry where needed, gives the desired morphism.
There is also a direct resolution proof, which verifies the map and works for modules over an arbitrary associative coefficient ring. Represent by a bounded complex and by a bounded-below injective complex . The finite complex represents . For every open , the chain-level adjunction (EX.8), applied on , identifies
These maps commute with open restriction, so they give an isomorphism of complexes of sheaves. For an injective -module sheaf , the sheaf is flabby as an abelian sheaf: a map on a smaller open extends by injectivity from the corresponding open extension of into the extension on the larger open. Boundedness of and makes every degree of the Hom complexes in (EX.20a) a finite sum of such flabby sheaves. They are bounded below and therefore compute both derived internal Hom and the required ordinary derived direct image. This proves (EX.20) directly. Its adjunction is the one in (EX.8), so in the commutative case it agrees with the evaluated map (EX.22).
For an open , restriction identifies with and identifies by (EX.16). Taking of (EX.22) therefore gives the adjunction bijection
It is the same bijection because the last arrow in (EX.22) is the chosen trace. It is an isomorphism for every and every . The cone of (EX.20) thus has zero derived sections on every open set; passing to stalks, or using the lowest nonzero cohomology sheaf locally, shows that cone is zero. This proves (EX.20). Applying proves (EX.21).
SH02-EX-TENSOR — The normalized tensor comparison
For , define
to be the transpose of
There is no invertibility assertion in this generality. The following identities fix the module structure of this comparison. Under the usual unit identification, is the identity. For , the composite which applies and then agrees with , after associating the three tensor factors. To prove the unit identity, transpose it and use the unit compatibility of (EX.11): both maps become . To prove associativity, transpose both composites. The defining equation (EX.24) replaces the outer trace by ; the projection associativity proved above identifies the source maps. The resulting transposes are equal, so the original maps are equal. The same argument with tensor symmetry supplies its Koszul signs.
The comparison also respects composition (EX.13). For , the map for equals the composite
Transposing successively along and turns this into the trace (EX.14) tensored with . The same transpose defines the left side, using the proper-support composition identification and the projection formula. Thus they coincide. This proof keeps the normalization of the composite trace visible.
SH02-EX-HOM — Exceptional inverse image of internal Hom
For and , there is a canonical isomorphism
Define its map by applying (EX.23) to and , then applying to evaluation, and finally currying. To prove it is invertible, test against an arbitrary :
Each tensor belongs to because is bounded and the coefficient ring has finite global dimension. The map represented by this chain is the map just defined: tracing evaluation through the adjunction gives exactly (EX.24). Yoneda therefore proves (EX.26), including naturality. In particular, merely replacing the hypothesis by is not justified by this proof; tensoring such an with can leave . The opposite-bounded-range proof supplies that broader first-input range by a finite resolution and coefficient exchange, without that tensor-boundedness assumption.
Composition compatibility of (EX.26) follows by applying its definition to evaluation and using (EX.25). Both composites are the curry of the same evaluated tensor map. Open restriction compatibility follows from (EX.16) and the open restriction of internal Hom. These are the compatibilities needed when using the identity on a diagonal or on a small neighborhood.
SH02-EX-BOUNDED-ABOVE — Internal Hom with opposite bounded ranges
Retain the uniform integral dimension bound (EX.1). The internal comparisons have the following full bounded-above first-input forms:
No lower bound on or is imposed. These maps extend the bounded-first-input maps (EX.20) and (EX.26), with their normalizations. All the internal Hom objects in these two displays are bounded below. The proper direct image in (EXA.1) uses the unbounded derived functor, with the finite resolution model justified next. The right adjoint is still only being applied to bounded-below objects.
The existing unbounded acyclic-model theorem applies
The module-sheaf categories are Grothendieck. K-injective resolutions, Theorems 4.1 and 5.1, supply termwise-injective K-injective replacements and the right derived functor of an additive functor on all complexes. Thus exists on the unbounded derived category. Proposition 5.5, the finite-dimensional acyclic-model theorem, proves that any complex of -acyclic sheaves computes it termwise under a uniform bound. Its hypotheses match here: is left exact, and (EX.1) gives the same uniform bound for -module sheaves by the coefficient comparison already proved above.
Let be the flat relative-soft resolution (EX.4), in degrees . For any complex , including an unbounded one, its augmentation
is a quasi-isomorphism. Here is the convergence check. Each row obtained by tensoring the augmented resolution with is exact, since (EX.4)’s successive cokernels are flat over . The cone of (EXA.3) is the total complex of these exact rows with the augmentation column included. The number of columns is bounded by , independently of . Filtering by the degree gives a filtration with at most nonzero steps in each total degree; its first cohomology calculation is the exact row. Equivalently, on each stalk a total cocycle can be cancelled successively from the rightmost column to the leftmost using row exactness; subtracting a chosen total boundary moves the remaining component one column to the left and terminates after at most steps. Hence that cone is acyclic. There is no infinite diagonal or limit interchange in this argument.
Every term of is a finite sum of -soft sheaves, by the tensor lemma (EX.3), so Proposition 5.5 gives the canonical comparison
This is an acyclic-model comparison to the existing derived functor, not a new functor defined only by its agreement on bounded objects. It is natural and independent of the choice of , by that proposition’s K-injective comparison. It agrees with (EX.8) on the bounded-below range. If , take a representative with terms zero above ; then has terms zero above . In particular .
Direct-image internal adjunction
Represent by a complex zero above , and by a bounded-below injective complex starting at . The chain adjunction (EX.8), restricted to every open , remains an isomorphism for this :
In total degree , the left Hom has components only for . On the right, starts at , so only occur. These are finite index ranges. The index also lies in . Thus the same reindexing and Hom differential used in (EX.8) apply, without replacing a direct sum by an infinite product. All maps commute with restriction of .
Each sheaf with injective target is flabby, by the open-extension argument preceding (EX.20a). Finite sums of such sheaves are flabby. The two Hom complexes in (EXA.5) are bounded below, with lower bound . The left computes derived internal Hom because remains K-injective after open restriction. The inner complex on the right likewise computes derived internal Hom because is bounded-below injective. Its flabby terms compute the required . The fact that a bounded-below injective complex computes morphisms from an arbitrary, not necessarily bounded, source is Lemma 3.2 and Theorem 3.3 of Injective modules and bounded-below derived functors. This proves (EXA.1).
The comparison is the sheafwise chain adjunction, so it has the adjunction normalization on every open. For bounded it is (EX.20a), hence agrees with (EX.22). No projection formula on an unrestricted unbounded tensor product was used to extend that formula outside its proved range.
Inverse-image internal Hom: the coefficient exchange
For one term of the relative-soft resolution, write and . The following underived projection isomorphism holds for sheaves on and on :
Its map pulls a coefficient section back and multiplies it with a properly supported section. To prove invertibility, first take for an open , extended by zero. Both sides are the restriction of to extended by zero; the map is the identity under the open-support comparison. Both functors of preserve coproducts and are right exact: tensor and inverse image have these properties, while is exact and preserves coproducts by (EX.3). Present arbitrary by two coproducts of such open generators, apply both functors and take cokernels. The isomorphisms on those two sums identify the cokernels and prove (EXA.6). This also proves naturality, compatibility with coefficient maps and the tensor-unit normalization.
For a flat and injective , internal is injective: tensoring a monomorphism with stays monic, so the tensor–Hom adjunction converts extension into into extension into this Hom sheaf. Applying (EXA.6) and (EX.6) on every open subset of gives
Indeed, testing the left side on an open gives . Tensor–Hom adjunction makes this . Formula (EXA.6) replaces its first argument by , and (EX.6) gives the sections on of the right side. These identifications commute with restriction, proving (EXA.7) as a sheaf isomorphism.
Resolving a bounded-above first input and checking signs
Take a bounded-above flat resolution , with for , from Flat modules and K-flat resolutions, Lemma 4.1. Let be a bounded-below injective resolution with for . In degree , the Hom complex is a finite sum over . Its terms are injective by flatness of each , and it vanishes below . It is therefore a bounded-below injective model of .
Consequently the two sides of (EXA.2) are computed by
The inverse image of a flat sheaf is flat for constant coefficient rings, and is bounded-below injective. Both complexes in (EXA.8) start at degree . Formula (EXA.7) identifies their components. In total degree these components are indexed by and , with target , so every rearrangement is finite.
The component exchange multiplies by : it moves the position past the position in the evaluated tensor. To check the differential, write a component of total degree before the exchange as and after it as . Suppressing only the fixed adjunction identifications of (EXA.7), the Hom differentials are
Substituting in the second line gives times the first: the exponent is , and the exponent is . Thus (EXA.7) with this sign is an isomorphism of complexes, proving (EXA.2).
The construction is natural for chain maps. K-injective comparison and the flat resolutions identify it under quasi-isomorphisms and hence under derived roofs, so it is independent of representatives. When is bounded, it is the curry of the same projection and trace used to define (EX.26): (EXA.7) was obtained from precisely that ordinary adjunction and coefficient projection. For a merely bounded-above , in any fixed output degree and its two adjacent degrees only finitely many degrees of and occur. A sufficiently low brutal truncation of therefore gives those same components and differentials. This proves that the map and its compatibility equations extend the bounded-input ones degree by degree, rather than choosing an unrelated isomorphism.
In particular open restriction and exceptional composition retain the normalizations already checked for (EX.26). For two maps the finite-resolution widths add; the same finite-index argument applies to their composite. Equivalently, in (EXA.7) the underlying coefficient projection is pullback and multiplication, so its two iterated versions agree by associativity; the displayed graded exchanges supply the Koszul signs. This proves the required compatibilities without applying to an object outside .
These results supply the bounded-above first-input contract used for conic internal Hom. The unbounded supported-evaluation proof establishes the additional projection and comparison identities needed for (EX.40)–(EX.41) without imposing boundedness on the first complex. The bounded support proof and its counterexample to a boundedness shortcut remain valid.
SH02-EX-DIAGONAL — Diagonals and product tests
Assume has finite compact-support cohomological dimension over . For the projections and the diagonal , let and . Then
The dimension assumption makes available, because its fibres are copies of . Let be the diagonal embedding, which is closed by the Hausdorff hypothesis, and abbreviate the internal Hom on the right by . Formula (EX.15) rewrites as . Since , its ordinary direct image is . Now apply (EX.26) to :
The last equality uses both projection–diagonal composites and (EX.13), with their identity normalizations. Thus there is no extra dimension shift in this abstract formula.
SH02-EX-RECTANGLE — A product test for duality
Let be locally compact Hausdorff, with of finite compact-support cohomological dimension over . Denote the projections of by . For and ,
No finite cohomological dimension of is required here. Apply (EX.20) to and then take derived global sections. Proper-support base change for the square over a point gives
where . The usual inverse-image/direct-image adjunction, in its derived Hom form, identifies
Take , which is bounded by the finite dimension assumption. Combining these two identities proves (EX.28). Its map is fixed by the proper-support base-change map, evaluation, and the traces already constructed.
The product formula remains valid for left modules over an arbitrary associative ring , when both sides are interpreted as complexes of abelian groups and all Hom functors are -linear. Use the direct proof (EX.20a) and the ordinary -linear inverse-image/direct-image adjunction. This extension does not use a tensor product of two left -modules and does not require commutativity.
The same coefficient clarification applies to the diagonal formula needed for homological-dimension estimates. Its internal Hom is an abelian sheaf, and the supported operation is the integral one. For a closed embedding one has the mixed identity
for bounded and bounded-below . Here is a proof specific to the closed inclusion, so no noncommutative tensor convention is implicit. If is injective as an -module sheaf, a local -linear map into is supported on the closed subset exactly when its image lies in . Consequently at the sheaf level. The terms are flabby, as above; flabby sheaves are acyclic for sheaf local cohomology on a closed subset, as follows from the localization sequence and surjectivity of restriction to the complementary open. Also is injective, since is exact. Resolve by injectives and totalize; the boundedness of keeps this a bounded-below calculation. These observations derive the sheaf identity and prove (EX.28a). Applying it to the closed diagonal proves (EX.27) for arbitrary associative , with the same identity normalizations and no added shift.
SH02-EX-DUALIZING — Dualizing objects and supported dual sections
For a map satisfying (EX.1), define its relative dualizing complex by
If has finite cohomological dimension for compact support, set . For define
The first is Verdier duality as an operation; the name does not assert that its square is the identity on arbitrary sheaves. The second uses the constant sheaf rather than the dualizing object.
Taking in (EX.23) and using tensor symmetry gives
Its trace is integration against the relative dualizing object, tensored with . Invertibility for topological submersions is proved, for every bounded-below input, in SH02-MD-SUBMERSION. Its rectangle test identifies this actual tensor comparison. It is not part of the definition of and does not assert invertibility for an arbitrary map.
For composable maps to a point, (EX.13) gives . For , (EX.26) therefore gives the useful typed identity
whenever the dualizing objects and are defined under the stated finite dimension assumptions. This identity does not assume biduality of .
SH02-EX-DUAL-SECTIONS — Duality of ordinary and supported sections
If has finite compact-support cohomological dimension and , (EX.21) for gives
Taking degree zero yields its ordinary derived-category Hom version. Restricting to an open subset and using (EX.16), (EX.26) and gives
The open subset inherits the finite dimension bound, since open extension by zero is exact and preserves compactly supported cohomology.
For a compact subset , write . It is closed. Formula (EX.31) identifies with . Hence
Indeed, the left side is by (EX.15); apply (EX.32) on and use compactness to replace compact support by ordinary global sections. The finite dimension bound on follows from the exact closed direct image into . Notice that (EX.34) uses the restriction of to , whereas the left side uses sections of its dual supported on . These are different operations.
Finally, for a locally closed subset , apply (EX.21) to its extension-by-zero constant sheaf. With denoting derived global sections with that locally closed support convention, this gives
The equality is also obtained directly by factoring the inclusion and using . Its definition and independence of the factorization are those fixed in (EX.15).
SH02-EX-SUPPORT-ERASURE — Forgetting support and checking the resulting maps
Let be the natural transformation which forgets the proper-support condition. It is the derived transformation induced by inclusion of properly supported sections in all sections. The identities below distinguish several maps that would otherwise look identical in a formula containing only stars and exclamation marks.
Keep the cartesian square of SH02-EX-BASECHANGE. Put
Here is the ordinary base-change morphism from inverse-image/direct-image adjunction; it need not be invertible. There is the compatibility
At the sheaf level, both maps take a properly supported section to its pullback regarded as an unrestricted section. To derive this equality with the canonical maps, choose the flat-soft model (EX.4) for and an injective resolution of that model for the ordinary direct images. The comparison from the soft model to the injective one induces ; inverse image is exact, and the adjunction definition of applied to that comparison is pullback of the same sections. The sheaf-level equality is therefore an equality of the induced morphisms in the derived category. Changing resolutions leaves it unchanged by functoriality of derived transformations. This argument also proves that respects compositions: forgetting support in two stages is the same inclusion of sections as forgetting it for the composite map.
The mixed proper/ordinary exchange map
is defined as follows. Apply , use , and then apply the ordinary counit ; transpose the resulting map along . It satisfies a useful two-path identity from to the ordinary direct image of the composite . One path forgets both supports immediately. The other first applies , then , and finally . The ordinary composition isomorphism identifies their targets, and the paths agree.
For a proof, transpose the second path along . Its defining becomes followed by the ordinary counit. Move the map past by (EX.36); this gives followed by the same counit. The latter is exactly the adjunction description of the ordinary direct image of . The remaining support-forgetting map is for the composite, by its composition compatibility. This is the transpose of the first path. The adjunction bijection proves the claimed equality.
We will use the slightly stronger intermediate identity
The isomorphism is proper-support composition along the equality . To check (EX.37a), transpose along . The left transpose is proper-support base change followed by the map which evaluates a properly supported section at its pulled-back germ. The right transpose uses the same evaluation after proper-support composition. At the sheaf level they evaluate the identical section; support is only forgotten in the outer direction. The proper-support resolutions, their composition comparison and the finite base-change bridge derive this equality, since all maps used are these same section maps on the resolutions. This proves (EX.37a) before applying , and in particular proves the preceding two-path identity.
For a further exchange involving exceptional inverse image in the vertical direction, assume also that has finite integral cohomological dimension. Then and exist, because is a base change of . Define
by transposing along the composite
Let be (EX.17), applied with the horizontal and vertical directions exchanged and then inverted to the displayed direction. The compatibility is
To check it, transpose both maps along . The left transpose is the composite defining followed by . The transpose of on the right is the exchange followed by . Apply (EX.37a) with the two directions exchanged: precomposing that exchange with is proper-support composition followed by . Naturality of moves this map past the trace . The result is exactly the left transpose. Thus the transposes, and hence the maps, agree.
The extra hypothesis in (EX.38) is necessary for the functors in its statement to have been constructed. Finite cohomological dimension of alone, which suffices for (EX.17) and (EX.37), does not supply .
SH02-EX-HOM-SUPPORT-COMPATIBILITY — Evaluation when either support is forgotten
Let , , and set . There is a second supported evaluation map
It is defined by currying the pairing obtained from the ordinary counit , evaluation into , the projection isomorphism, and the trace . In detail, its transpose as a tensor pairing is
The two paths from to agree:
where is (EX.20). To verify the identity, curry both sides back against . The first path pairs a properly supported section of with a properly supported section of , after forgetting support on the second factor. The second path uses the same evaluation but forgets support on the first factor. Both sections together give the same evaluation in , with support contained in the intersection of the two supports, and then the same trace. On soft and flat resolutions the two evaluations are the same chain map, with the tensor symmetry signs already fixed in (EX.22). The support-forgetting and projection compatibilities therefore give (EX.41) in the derived category.
There is a boundedness issue if one attempts to state this entire diagram for unrestricted . Its object can be unbounded below, so cannot be computed using only the acyclic-model criterion. For example, on a point over a field, take and . Then , whereas has nonzero cohomology in every degree . The unbounded proper-direct-image object is supplied by the finite acyclic model (EXA.4). The following unbounded projection and supported-evaluation proof establishes (EX.40)–(EX.41) for these inputs, and for arbitrary unbounded first complexes. It does not infer that their internal Hom is bounded below.
SH02-EX-UNBOUNDED-SUPPORT — The full supported-evaluation diagram
Retain the locally compact Hausdorff spaces, coefficient convention and uniform integral dimension bound (EX.1). In this section complexes in a tensor product or a first Hom argument may be unbounded in both directions. The duality target remains in , so every occurrence of uses the already constructed functor. We prove (EX.40)–(EX.41) for every , including the full range described above.
The needed unbounded foundations are already available. Flat resolutions, Theorem 3.1, supplies a K-flat resolution with flat terms for every complex. Its Lemmas 2.1–2.4 prove tensor invariance, preservation by inverse image, and the required sum and tensor closure properties. The derived tensor product, Theorems 1.2 and 2.2, fixes their resolution-independent tensor, associativity and graded symmetry. Internal derived Hom, Theorems 2.2 and 3.1, supplies unbounded tensor–Hom adjunction and its actual evaluation. We use those constructions, not a bounded truncation of the inputs.
Projection on unbounded complexes
Write for the finite model in (EXA.4). It preserves quasi-isomorphisms: that formula identifies it naturally with the existing derived proper image on every complex. For arbitrary complexes on and on , the coefficient exchange (EXA.6) gives a chain isomorphism
Here both tensor totalizations use direct sums. The component with degrees has , with . Apply (EXA.6) and move past , multiplying by . Both sides have the same direct sum over in degree : each commutes with coproducts and the range is finite. This is a direct-sum reindexing, not an exchange with an infinite product.
The differential check is explicit. Before exchange the three terms have coefficients . After exchange the order is , with coefficients . For the two routes have exponent . For they have and , which agree. For they have and , which differ by . Thus (EXU.1) is a chain isomorphism. On sheaf sections its unsigned component is exactly pullback and multiplication, so it has the same unit, associativity and restriction normalization as (EX.12).
If is K-flat, then is K-flat. Indeed, for any acyclic complex on , exact inverse image makes acyclic; K-flatness makes acyclic. Applying gives an acyclic complex, and (EXU.1) identifies this with . This is the defining K-flatness test, not an inference from flat terms alone.
Choose K-flat representatives of and . By (EXA.4), (EXU.1) and this K-flatness test, its two sides compute the derived objects, giving
The quasi-isomorphism invariance and common-refinement comparisons in the cited tensor lesson make this independent of representatives and natural for derived morphisms. Every coefficient map is the section map of (EX.12), with the same graded exchange, so the tensor-unit, association and symmetry identities follow from those chain identities. On bounded-below inputs it is (EX.11). No finite-amplitude assumption on either tensor factor was inserted.
We will also need precise acyclic representatives for support maps. If is K-flat with flat terms, put . Then is K-flat with flat -module terms, its terms are -soft, and is K-flat. For K-flatness of , tensor an acyclic -complex with the bounded flat integral complex , then with ; both operations preserve acyclicity. Flatness of its terms follows since tensoring over with , then over with , is a composite of exact functors, and direct sums of flat sheaves are flat. Relative softness follows from (EX.3) and its coproduct property. In particular, is an actual model, not a complex on which termwise acyclicity is merely presumed to suffice.
Adjunction with an arbitrary first complex
For choose the bounded-below injective model used in (EX.7). The chain adjunction (EX.8) holds for every complex , without boundedness. To check this point, take Hom products in each total degree, distribute each finite -sum, and reindex the pairs . Hom out of a direct sum is a product, and a product of finite products is the product over those pairs. Apply (EX.6) to each component. Its differentials are the same tensor–Hom differentials as (EX.8). No exactness of products of sheaves or commutation of stalks with products is used.
Both and are bounded-below injective, hence K-injective. Maps into them are computed in the homotopy category even when the source is unbounded. Formula (EXA.4) consequently gives the natural bijection
This extends the first variable of the existing adjunction. It neither defines on arbitrary unbounded targets nor applies it to when that object lies outside .
Set . Its ordinary direct image is defined on the unbounded category: the exact left-adjoint criterion, Proposition 5.2 of the K-injective lesson, shows that preserves K-injectives because is exact. Resolving a target by such a complex proves the ordinary adjunction without a boundedness restriction.
For any , those ordinary and internal adjunctions, (EXU.3), and (EXU.2) give
The two groups with targets and are taken in ; every other Hom group in (EXU.4) is taken in . Every arrow is natural in . The representing-object comparison therefore supplies
Uncurrying (EXU.4) describes exactly: use projection with the properly supported factor, pull back by the ordinary counit, evaluate , and apply the same trace . The graded symmetry places before in evaluation. Thus (EXU.5) agrees with (EX.20) and (EXA.1) on their respective ranges, including their maps and normalizations, not only their underlying objects.
The support-forgetting equality at the chain level
For any complex , the map is defined using a K-injective resolution: is inclusion of properly supported sections. The uniform finite-dimensional acyclic-model theorem identifies with . If is instead represented by a termwise -soft complex , a K-injective comparison represents the same map by
These are the actual support inclusions; changing resolutions gives the same derived transformation by naturality of the acyclic-model comparison.
We first prove a pairing identity for arbitrary . Resolve each by a K-flat complex with flat terms and tensor each with a finite relative-soft resolution. Write the resulting models as for and for . The preceding model check makes K-flat, and all terms of are -soft. Moreover is termwise -soft: after reindexing, its terms are finite sums of a sheaf tensored with two of the flat relative-soft integral terms, and (EX.3) applies successively. Hence
by the unbounded acyclic-model theorem.
There is a natural chain pairing
On an open , each homogeneous component sends two sections on to their tensor product. Its support is contained in the intersection of their supports, a closed subset proper over . This proves that the map really lands in . Bilinearity and restriction give the sheaf map. Assemble the components using sheaf direct sums and the coproduct comparison for ; the tensor differential gives its chain-map identity. This does not identify global sections of a sheaf coproduct with a sum of global sections. Its graded symmetry is precisely the tensor flip, not an unsigned interchange.
The first route from to forgets support on , applies (EXU.2), and uses the ordinary counit for . Choose K-injective. By (EXU.6) that route is represented by
This is a valid derived model even though need not be K-flat: and are K-flat. Every term of is -soft by the same finite-resolution tensor argument. The map is a quasi-isomorphism by K-flatness of , and its proper direct image is a quasi-isomorphism by the acyclic-model theorem. On sections, (EXU.9) takes to , where is the chosen comparison. Thus (EXU.9) equals as a chain map. Inverting that particular comparison in (EXU.7) identifies the first route with .
For the second route forget support on instead, using , and project with as the supported factor. It equals after placing the factors in the order . The verification is the same section calculation: the ordinary counit restricts the image of , and the product is . Explicitly, for total degrees the flip to put first contributes , and the flip back contributes , so their product is . The resolution exchanges are already the signed chain isomorphisms (EXU.1). K-flatness of makes a quasi-isomorphism, and its terms are again -soft. Therefore this route too is under the canonical acyclic-model comparison. This proves equality of the two derived routes, not merely equality of stalk dimensions or an abstract isomorphism of targets.
Now take . Compose the common pairing with derived evaluation and trace:
Currying the first route gives exactly , with defined by (EX.40)’s ordinary counit, projection, evaluation and trace. Currying the second gives by the explicit transpose of (EXU.5). The proved equality of their tensor pairings and tensor–Hom adjunction therefore yield (EX.41) for arbitrary and . All maps commute with open restriction because their section maps and resolution comparisons do. On bounded inputs the construction is the preceding proof, with the same support inclusion, trace and signs.
The point example above still has internal Hom unbounded below. It shows why the unbounded acyclic and K-flat models were required, not a restriction on the theorem just proved. The argument does not assert biduality or extend the target domain of beyond .
SH02-EX-COEFFICIENT-ACTION — The coefficient action and the relative dualizing map
For , put and write for (EX.30). There are two ways to obtain a map
The first pulls Hom back in the ordinary sense, obtaining , then tensors the represented maps with and postcomposes with . The second uses the action
defined by currying , and then precomposes with .
These two maps agree. Curry both against . In the second composite, replace by and use the associativity identity for . It becomes the tensor comparison for the single coefficient object , followed by its evaluation to . Naturality of moves evaluation before that comparison, producing after ordinary pullback of evaluation. This is the first composite, including the symmetry used to place the factors in evaluation order. All applications of here have bounded-below inputs. The internal Hom targets may be viewed in the unbounded derived category already supplied by the open internal-Hom prerequisite; no unbounded is applied in this argument.
SH02-EX-EXAMPLE-DISCRETE — Worked tests and exercises with solutions
An arbitrary discrete fibre. Let be any discrete set and let . A compact subset of is finite, so is the direct sum functor on families of modules. It is exact and has cohomological dimension zero. Its right adjoint sends a module to the constant family with that module in each component:
Thus and , with no shift, for finite or infinite . The trace adds the finitely many nonzero components of each vector. For the right adjoint is the zero object in the zero sheaf category and its trace is . This example tests coproducts, units and the zero-dimensional bound without any finite-rank hypothesis.
SH02-EX-EXERCISE-BASECHANGE — A noninvertible base-change map
Exercise. Let and pull back along itself. For a nonzero coefficient ring , compute the exceptional inverse-image base-change map (EX.17) on and decide whether it is invertible.
Solution. The cartesian top map and left map are identities of a point. Formula (EX.15) identifies with the local-cohomology complex at zero. On a small interval about zero, the localization triangle has middle term and complementary term , both in degree zero. These interval computations use SH02-CA-LOCAL-SYSTEM, which proves ordinary acyclicity and identifies the actual section-to-germ map for arbitrary coefficient modules. The intervening map is the diagonal . Its kernel is zero and its cokernel is , so the supported complex is . The base-change map is consequently a map . Its degree-one source cohomology is , whereas the target has no degree-one cohomology. It cannot be a quasi-isomorphism. This is the exceptional inverse-image comparison, not a counterexample to the proper-support base-change isomorphism used to define it.
SH02-EX-EXERCISE-COMPONENTS — Open and closed components
Exercise. Let be a disjoint union of two open and closed subspaces. Describe , and the two traces for the inclusions. Check the localization triangle on an arbitrary .
Solution. A sheaf or complex on is a pair . Both inclusions are open, so their exceptional inverse images are the corresponding restrictions. Both are closed, so supported local cohomology is the pair or . The traces are the inclusions of those summands. The localization triangle is the split triangle
whose connecting map is zero. This directly reconciles the open and closed descriptions of an exceptional inverse image when both apply.
SH02-EX-EXERCISE-AMPLITUDE — Dimension bounds under composition
Exercise. Suppose the integral dimensions of and are at most and . Give a lower bound for if , and compare the direct construction with successive exceptional inverse images. Explain why this is not a proof that preserves bounded complexes.
Solution. The direct construction uses a finite flat-soft resolution of length at most , hence gives . The successive construction gives and then . Their normalized isomorphism (EX.13) identifies these conclusions. The construction uses an injective resolution of , which need not terminate in the sheaf category, so no finite upper bound has been proved. Lower boundedness alone does not establish membership in .
SH02-EX-EXERCISE-TRACE — Testing the trace sign
Exercise. In (EX.23), replace the trace by while retaining the same unit. Is this another normalized tensor comparison for the same adjunction? What changes if the coefficient ring has characteristic two?
Solution. The first triangle identity in (EX.10) becomes rather than , so this does not preserve the given adjunction unless on all the relevant objects. It also makes equal to instead of the required unit. In characteristic two these particular signs coincide, but that coincidence gives no freedom to alter formulas over a general coefficient ring. The question illustrates why identifying the underlying functor does not by itself fix an adjunction normalization.
What this construction supports
The lesson supplies a resolution model for
,
the trace and unit, restriction and composition, the two different
base-change comparisons, tensor and internal-Hom identities, and the
abstract dualizing objects. The exact topological imports are isolated
in SH02-EX-FOUNDATIONS; the interval computation in the
worked costalk test now uses the exact acyclicity proof linked there. SH02-MD-SUBMERSION
identifies
with the shifted relative orientation local system and proves the
submersion tensor comparison invertible. SH02-MD-TRACE fixes
its normalization and base-change compatibility. Biduality with its full
finiteness hypotheses remains a separate theorem; it does not follow
from the existence of these operations.
The same results are treated in Schapira, An Introduction to Sheaves on Grothendieck Topologies, §§4.3–4.7: soft and compactly soft sheaves, finite cohomological dimension, projection, proper-support base change, exceptional adjunction, internal Hom and dual sections. The projection theorem there has bounded/ bounded-above input conventions, and the existence theorem for the exceptional right adjoint invokes Brown representability from a separate reference. It therefore does not replace the explicit finite soft resolution and representing-sheaf construction given here. Kashiwara and Schapira, Microlocal study of sheaves, §1.3.5, provides the manifold internal exceptional-Hom formulas with their bounded first input.
The construction above fixes every comparison by its adjoint evaluation or counit, retains finite cohomological dimension for proper-support image, and proves the stated bounded-below functor range with the finite flat/soft model. In particular the closed-embedding exceptional-to-ordinary map need not be invertible. The full bounded-above first-input internal-Hom comparisons and the unbounded proper-direct-image model are proved in SH02-EX-BOUNDED-ABOVE, using exact existing resolution providers. The unbounded projection and supported-evaluation proof supplies (EX.40)–(EX.41), with arbitrary first complexes and bounded-below duality targets. No right-adjoint construction on arbitrary unbounded targets is claimed. Original exposition, examples and reader code are dedicated under CC0 1.0 Universal; human works retain their own rights.