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 simplicialcohomology 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.
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 .
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.
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.
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]
Čech cohomology can be defined more generally for objects in a siteC endowed with a topology. This applies, for example, to the Zariski site or the etale site of a schemeX. 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 Noetherianseparated 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]
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: