Completions of pro-spaces (Q1775188): Difference between revisions

Let \(R\) be a ring and \(\mathcal K\) be the category of pro-simplicial sets. The main results of the paper are: (1) There exists a left proper, simplicial model structure on \(\mathcal K\) in which the weak equivalences are the maps \(f: X \to Y\) such that \(H^*(Y;R) \to H^*(X;R)\) is an isomorphism. (2) There exists a left proper, simplicial model structure on \(\mathcal K\) in which the weak equivalences are the maps \(f: X \to Y\) such that \(H^*(Y;M) \to H^*(X;M)\) is an isomorphism, for all \(R\)-modules \(M\). It turns out that these two closed model structures are distinct. The reason is the surprisingly different behavior of spaces and of pro-spaces. The second condition on a mapping \(f\) is equivalent to requiring that the induced map of pro-groups \(H_n(X;R) \to H_n(Y;R)\) is an isomorphism for all \(n\geq 0\). So the author calls the first kind of mappings \(R\)-cohomological weak equivalences and the second kind of mappings \(R\)-homological weak equivalences. The main application is the definition of two types of \(R\)-completions of a pro-space, the cohomological (resp. the homological) \(R\)-completion of a pro-space \(X\) as the fibrant replacement of \(X\) in the related closed model categories. The relationship between these definitions and the classical \(R\)-completion of a space (not a pro-space!), introduced by Bousfield and Kan is investigated.