In mathematics, specifically algebraic topology, Čech cohomology is a cohomology theory based on the intersection properties of open covers of a topological space. It is named for the mathematician Eduard Čech.
Motivation
Let X be a topological space, and let
be an open cover of X. Let
denote the nerve of the covering. The idea of Čech cohomology is that, for an open cover
consisting of sufficiently small open sets, the resulting simplicial complex
should be a good combinatorial model for the space X. For such a cover, the Čech cohomology of X is defined to be the simplicial cohomology of the nerve. This idea can be formalized by the notion of a good cover. However, a more general approach is to take the direct limit of the cohomology groups of the nerve over the system of all possible open covers of X, ordered by refinement. This is the approach adopted below.
Construction
Let X be a topological space, and let
be a presheaf of abelian groups on X. Let
be an open cover of X.
Simplex
A q-simplex σ of
is an ordered collection of q+1 sets chosen from
, such that the intersection of all these sets is non-empty. This intersection is called the support of σ and is denoted |σ|.
Now let
be such a q-simplex. The j-th partial boundary of σ is defined to be the (q−1)-simplex obtained by removing the j-th set from σ, that is:

The boundary of σ is defined as the alternating sum of the partial boundaries:

viewed as an element of the free abelian group spanned by the simplices of
.
Cochain
A q-cochain of
with coefficients in
is a map which associates with each q-simplex σ an element of
, and we denote the set of all q-cochains of
with coefficients in
by
.
is an abelian group by pointwise addition.
Differential
The cochain groups can be made into a cochain complex
by defining the coboundary operator
by:
where
is the restriction morphism from
to
(Notice that ∂jσ ⊆ σ, but |σ| ⊆ |∂jσ|.)
A calculation shows that
The coboundary operator is analogous to the exterior derivative of De Rham cohomology, so it sometimes called
the differential of the cochain complex.
Cocycle
A q-cochain is called a q-cocycle if it is in the kernel of
, hence
is the set of all q-cocycles.
Thus a (q−1)-cochain
is a cocycle if for all q-simplices
the cocycle condition

holds.
A 0-cocycle
is a collection of local sections of
satisfying a compatibility relation on every intersecting

A 1-cocycle
satisfies for every non-empty
with

Coboundary
A q-cochain is called a q-coboundary if it is in the image of
and
is the set of all q-coboundaries.
For example, a 1-cochain
is a 1-coboundary if there exists a 0-cochain
such that for every intersecting

Cohomology
The Čech cohomology of
with values in
is defined to be the cohomology of the cochain complex
. Thus the qth Čech cohomology is given by
.
The Čech cohomology of X is defined by considering refinements of open covers. If
is a refinement of
then there is a map in cohomology
The open covers of X form a directed set under refinement, so the above map leads to a direct system of abelian groups. The Čech cohomology of X with values in
is defined as the direct limit
of this system.
The Čech cohomology of X with coefficients in a fixed abelian group A, denoted
, is defined as
where
is the constant sheaf on X determined by A.
A variant of Čech cohomology, called numerable Čech cohomology, is defined as above, except that all open covers considered are required to be numerable: that is, there is a partition of unity {ρi} such that each support
is contained in some element of the cover. If X is paracompact and Hausdorff, then numerable Čech cohomology agrees with the usual Čech cohomology.
Relation to other cohomology theories
If X is homotopy equivalent to a CW complex, then the Čech cohomology
is naturally isomorphic to the singular cohomology
. If X is a differentiable manifold, then
is also naturally isomorphic to the de Rham cohomology; the article on de Rham cohomology provides a brief review of this isomorphism. For less well-behaved spaces, Čech cohomology differs from singular cohomology. For example if X is the closed topologist's sine curve, then
whereas
If X is a differentiable manifold and the cover
of X is a "good cover" (i.e. all the sets Uα are contractible to a point, and all finite intersections of sets in
are either empty or contractible to a point), then
is isomorphic to the de Rham cohomology.
If X is compact Hausdorff, then Čech cohomology (with coefficients in a discrete group) is isomorphic to Alexander-Spanier cohomology.
For a presheaf
on X, let
denote its sheafification. Then we have a natural comparison map

from Čech cohomology to sheaf cohomology. If X is paracompact Hausdorff, then
is an isomorphism. More generally,
is an isomorphism whenever the Čech cohomology of all presheaves on X with zero sheafification vanishes.[2]
In algebraic geometry
Čech cohomology can be defined more generally for objects in a site C endowed with a topology. This applies, for example, to the Zariski site or the etale site of a scheme X. The Čech cohomology with values in some sheaf
is defined as

where the colimit runs over all coverings (with respect to the chosen topology) of X. Here
is defined as above, except that the r-fold intersections of open subsets inside the ambient topological space are replaced by the r-fold fiber product

As in the classical situation of topological spaces, there is always a map

from Čech cohomology to sheaf cohomology. It is always an isomorphism in degrees n = 0 and 1, but may fail to be so in general. For the Zariski topology on a Noetherian separated scheme, Čech and sheaf cohomology agree for any quasi-coherent sheaf. For the étale topology, the two cohomologies agree for any étale sheaf on X, provided that any finite set of points of X are contained in some open affine subscheme. This is satisfied, for example, if X is quasi-projective over an affine scheme.[3]
The possible difference between Čech cohomology and sheaf cohomology is a motivation for the use of hypercoverings: these are more general objects than the Čech nerve

A hypercovering K∗ of X is a certain simplicial object in C, i.e., a collection of objects Kn together with boundary and degeneracy maps. Applying a sheaf
to K∗ yields a simplicial abelian group
whose n-th cohomology group is denoted
. (This group is the same as
in case K∗ equals
.) Then, it can be shown that there is a canonical isomorphism

where the colimit now runs over all hypercoverings.[4]
Examples
The most basic example of Čech cohomology is given by the case where the presheaf
is a constant sheaf, e.g.
. In such cases, each
-cochain
is simply a function which maps every
-simplex to
. For example, we calculate the first Čech cohomology with values in
of the unit circle
. Dividing
into three arcs and choosing sufficiently small open neighborhoods, we obtain an open cover
where
but
.
Given any 1-cocycle
,
is a 2-cochain which takes inputs of the form
where
(since
and hence
is not a 2-simplex for any permutation
). The first three inputs give
; the fourth gives

Such a function is fully determined by the values of
. Thus,

On the other hand, given any 1-coboundary
, we have

However, upon closer inspection we see that
and hence each 1-coboundary
is uniquely determined by
and
. This gives the set of 1-coboundaries:

Therefore,
. Since
is a good cover of
, we have
by Leray's theorem.
We may also compute the coherent sheaf cohomology of
on the projective line
using the Čech complex. Using the cover
![{\displaystyle {\mathcal {U}}=\{U_{1}={\text{Spec}}(\mathbb {C} [y]),U_{2}={\text{Spec}}(\mathbb {C} [y^{-1}])\}}](./ba7447bd5b7a1021669050e3c80745984bb6b938.svg)
we have the following modules from the cotangent sheaf
![{\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}&\Omega ^{1}(U_{1})=\mathbb {C} [y]dy\\&\Omega ^{1}(U_{2})=\mathbb {C} \left[y^{-1}\right]dy^{-1}\end{aligned}}}](./eb5832da1b321bd6cd7b7b3142ca9aba98307676.svg)
If we take the conventions that
then we get the Čech complex
![{\displaystyle 0\to \mathbb {C} [y]dy\oplus \mathbb {C} \left[y^{-1}\right]dy^{-1}{\xrightarrow {d^{0}}}\mathbb {C} \left[y,y^{-1}\right]dy\to 0}](./a7922d6326be44df1e7422a5f0a1779a2f0fb347.svg)
Since
is injective and the only element not in the image of
is
we get that

References
- ^ Penrose, Roger (1992), "On the Cohomology of Impossible Figures", Leonardo, 25 (3/4): 245–247, doi:10.2307/1575844, JSTOR 1575844, S2CID 125905129. Reprinted from Penrose, Roger (1991), "On the Cohomology of Impossible Figures / La Cohomologie des Figures Impossibles", Structural Topology, 17: 11–16, retrieved January 16, 2014
- ^ Brady, Zarathustra. "Notes on sheaf cohomology" (PDF). p. 11. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-06-17.
- ^ Milne, James S. (1980), "Section III.2, Theorem 2.17", Étale cohomology, Princeton Mathematical Series, vol. 33, Princeton University Press, ISBN 978-0-691-08238-7, MR 0559531
- ^ Artin, Michael; Mazur, Barry (1969), "Theorem 8.16", Etale homotopy, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 100, Springer, p. 98, ISBN 978-3-540-36142-8
General references