On good morphisms of exact triangles (Q2229965)

Recall from [\textit{A. Neeman}, J. Algebra 139, No. 1, 221--255 (1991; Zbl 0722.18003)], a map \((f, g, h)\) of triangles is said to be middling good if it can be extended to a \(4\times 4\) diagram. It is called good if its mapping cone is exact. Neeman showed that every good map of triangles is middling good, but that there exist maps which are middling good but not good, as well as maps which are not middling good. If \(f\) and \(g\) are given, a fill-in is a map \(h\) making the rest of the diagram commute. The fill-in is said to be (middling) good if the resulting map \((f, g, h)\) of triangles is. Neeman showed that there is always at least one good fill-in. Verdier constructed a fill-in of a particular form in his proof of the \(4\times 4\) lemma, which the author calls Verdier good. The author shows that every Verdier good morphism is middling good.\par In this paper, the author shows that for several classes of morphisms of exact triangles, the notions of good and Verdier good agree. For example, for maps of triangles with at most one non-zero component, he shows that being good, Verdier good, middling good, and nullhomotopic are equivalent, and also shows that these are equivalent to a certain Toda bracket containing zero (see Proposition 7.13). For maps of the form \((0, g, h)\) and \((f, 0, h)\), the author shows that being good, Verdier good and nullhomotopic are equivalent (Proposition 7.4). As a consequence, he proves the lifting criteria theorem (See Corollary 7.7). Using the results on good fill-ins, the author also proves a pasting lemma for homotopy cartesian squares (see Proposition 6.11).