arXiv reader

Generalized (co)homology of symmetric quandles over homogeneous Beck modules

Biswadeep Karmakar, Deepanshi Saraf and Mahender Singh

arXiv
2401.14143v1 · PDF · 25 January 2024
Categories
math.QA, math.GT
Journal
Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 229 (2025), 107956, 31 pp
DOI
10.1016/j.jpaa.2025.107956
Licence
CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

A quandle equipped with a good involution is referred to as symmetric. It is known that the cohomology of symmetric quandles gives rise to strong cocycle invariants for classical and surface links, even when they are not necessarily oriented. In this paper, we introduce the category of symmetric quandle modules and prove that these modules completely determine the Beck modules in the category of symmetric quandles. Consequently, this establishes suitable coefficient objects for constructing appropriate (co)homology theories. We develop an extension theory of modules over symmetric quandles and propose a generalized (co)homology theory for symmetric quandles with coefficients in a homogeneous Beck module, which also recovers the symmetric quandle (co)homology developed by Kamada and Oshiro [Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. (2010)]. Our constructions also apply to symmetric racks. We conclude by establishing an explicit isomorphism between the second cohomology of a symmetric quandle and the first cohomology of its associated group.

Items 48

Definition

Definition 2.1

3MC1

Let (X,*) be a rack (respectively quandle). A map \rho_X:X \rightarrow X is called a good involution if

  1. (S1) \rho_X is an involution, \mathrm{i.e.}, \rho_X^2=\mathrm{id}_X,

  2. (S2) \rho_X(x \ast y)= \rho_X(x) \ast y,

  3. (S3) x \ast \rho_X(y) = x \ast^{-1}y,

for all x, y \in X. The pair (X, \rho_X) is called a symmetric rack (respectively symmetric quandle).

Example

Example 2.2

8117

The following are some elementary examples:

  1. If X is a trivial quandle, then every involution of X is a good involution.

  2. If X= \operatorname{Conj}(G) is the conjugation quandle of a group G, then \rho_X:X \rightarrow X given by \rho_X(x)=x^{-1} is a good involution.

  3. If X= \operatorname{Core}(G) is the core quandle of a group G, then the identity map \mathrm{id}:X \rightarrow X is a good involution. Also, if z \in G is a central element of order two, then \rho_X:X \rightarrow X given by \rho(y)=y z is another good involution of X.

Definition

Definition 2.3

3QMJ

A symmetric rack (respectively quandle) homomorphism is a map f:(X,\rho_X) \rightarrow (Y, \rho_Y) such that

f(x \ast y)=f(x) \ast f(y) \quad \textrm{and} \quad f(\rho_X(x))=\rho_Y(f(x))

for all x,y \in X. A symmetric rack (respectively quandle) isomorphism is a symmetric rack (respectively quandle) homomorphism which is also a bijection.

Definition

Definition 2.4

4QS9

Let (X, \rho_X) be a symmetric rack (respectively quandle). Then the group

G_{(X,\rho_X)}=\langle e_x, x \in X \mid e_{x \ast y}=e_y^{-1}e_x e_y, ~e_{\rho_X(x)}=e_x^{-1} \text{ for }x,y \in X \rangle

is called the associated group of (X, \rho_X).

Used by Example 2.5
Example

Example 2.5

5N4N

[MR2657689, Example 2.5] Let (X, \rho_X) be the fundamental symmetric quandle of an unknot in \mathbb{R}^3 or an unknotted 2-sphere in \mathbb{R}^4. To be precise, X = \{x_1, x_2\} and \rho_X(x_1) = x_2. Then the associated group G_{(X,\rho_X)} \cong \mathbb{Z}.

Definition

Definition 3.1

YGZP

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack. Then an (X,\rho_X)-module is a trunk map \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta): T(X,\rho_X)\rightarrow \mathbf{Ab} such that \phi_{x,y}: A_{x}\rightarrow A_{x\ast y} is an isomorphism and

  1. (M7) \psi_{x\ast y,z}(a)= \phi_{x\ast z,y\ast z}\psi_{x,z}(a)+\psi_{x\ast z,y\ast z}\psi_{y,z}(a),

  2. (M8) \phi_{x\ast^{-1} y,y}\psi_{x,\rho_X(y)}(\eta_{y}(b))=-\psi_{x\ast \rho_X(y),y}(b),

hold for all a \in A_z, b \in A_y and x,y, z \in X.

If (X,\rho_X) is a symmetric quandle, then we desire that the trunk map \mathscr{F} additionally satisfies the condition

  1. (M9) \phi_{x,x}(a)+\psi_{x,x}(a)=a

for all a\in A_x and x \in X.

Used by Proof, Proof
Example

Example 3.3

JIES

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack or a symmetric quandle.

  1. Any abelian group A can be considered as an (X,\rho_X)-module by taking A_x=A \phi_{x,y}=\mathrm{id}_A, \psi_{x,y}=0 and \eta_x=-\mathrm{id}_A for all x,y \in X, which we call a trivial homogeneous module.

  2. Consider a family of abelian groups \{ G_{i}\}_{i\in I}, where I is an indexing set. Let \alpha_i, \beta_i \in \operatorname{Aut}(G_i) such that \alpha_{i}^2=\mathrm{id}_{G_i}=\beta_{i}^2 and \alpha_{i}\beta_{i}=\beta_{i}\alpha_{i} for all i \in I. Then, \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) is an (X,\rho_X)-module, where A_x = \prod_{i\in I} G_i, \phi_{x,y}= \prod_{i \in I} \alpha_i, \psi_{x,y} = 0 and \eta_{x}=\prod_{i \in I} \beta_i for all x \in X.

  3. Let A an abelian group whose each element has order 2 or 4. Then, \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) is an (X,\rho_X)-module, where A_x = A, \phi_{x,y}(a)=-a, \psi_{x,y}(a) = 2a and \eta_{x}(a)=-a for all x \in X and a \in A.

  4. By [MR2657689, Section 4], we have a well-defined right action of G_{(X,\rho_X)} on (X,\rho_X), given by

    x \cdot e_y= x*y

    for all x,y \in G_{(X,\rho_X)}. Let [x] denote the orbit of x under this action. Then, we have an (X,\rho_X)-module \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) with A_x=A_{\rho_X(x)}:=A_{[x]} and

    \phi_{x,y}: A_{[x]} \rightarrow A_{[x\ast y]} \text{ defined by } a \mapsto f_{[x]}(a),
    \psi_{x,y}: A_{[x]} \rightarrow A_{[x\ast y]} \text{ defined by } b \mapsto 0 \text{ and }
    \eta_x: A_{[x]} \rightarrow A_{[\rho_X(x)]} \text{ defined by } c \mapsto g_{[x]}(c),

    where f_{[x]}, g_{[x]}: A_{[x]} \to A_{[x]} are group homomorphisms such that f_{[x]}^2=\mathrm{id}=g_{[x]}^2 and f_{[x]}g_{[x]}=g_{[x]}f_{[x]} for all x \in X.

Definition

Definition 3.4

589G

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack (respectively quandle), and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) and \mathscr{F'}=(A',\phi',\psi',\eta') be (X,\rho_X)-modules. An (X,\rho_X)-map is a natural transformation f: \mathscr{F}\rightarrow \mathscr{F}' of trunk maps, that is, it is a collection f=\{f_x: A_x\rightarrow A'_x \mid x \in X\} of group homomorphisms such that

\begin{aligned} \phi'_{x,y}f_x &= f_{x\ast y} \phi_{x,y},\\ \psi'_{x,y}f_y &= f_{x\ast y}\psi_{x,y},\\ \eta'_{x}f_x &= f_{\rho_X(x)} \eta_{x}, \end{aligned}

for all x,y \in X. In addition, if each f_x is an isomorphism of groups, then we say that f: \mathscr{F}\rightarrow \mathscr{F}' is an isomorphism of (X,\rho_X)-modules.

Used by Proof
Remark

Remark 3.5

Y2WZ

If (X, \rho_X) is a symmetric rack, then we can form the category \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}, whose objects are (X,\rho_X)-modules and whose morphisms are (X,\rho_X)-maps. Similarly, if (X, \rho_X) is a symmetric quandle, then we can form the category \mathbf{SQMod}_{(X, \rho_X)} of modules over (X,\rho_X). Moreover, both \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)} and \mathbf{SQMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}) are abelian categories.

Proposition

Proposition 4.1

SJSS

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) an (X,\rho_X)-module. Then the semi-direct product ({\mathscr{F} \rtimes X},\rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}) is a symmetric rack. Furthermore, if (X,\rho_X) is a symmetric quandle, then so is ({\mathscr{F} \rtimes X},\rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}).

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 4.1

Note that {\mathscr{F} \rtimes X} is a rack, as proved in [MR2155522, Proposition 2.1]. It remains to check that \rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X} is a good involution.

  • For (S1), we see that \rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}^2(a,x)= \rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}(\eta_x(a), \rho_X(x))=(\eta_{\rho_X(x)}(\eta_x(a)), \rho_X^2(x))=(a,x), where the last equality follows from the (X,\rho_X)-module axiom (M3).

  • For (S2), we have

    \begin{aligned} \rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}\big((a,x)\big) \tilde{\ast} (b,y)&=(\eta_x(a), \rho_X(x)) \tilde{\ast}(b,y)\\ &=(\phi_{\rho_X(x),y}(\eta_x(a))+\psi_{\rho_X(x),y}(b), \rho_X(x) \ast y)\\ &= (\eta_{x \ast y}(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b)), \rho_X(x \ast y)),\\ && \textrm{by $(X, \rho_X)$-module axioms \hyperref[M4]{(M4)} and \hyperref[M5]{(M5)}, and $\rho_X$ being a good involution}\\ &= \rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b), x \ast y)\\ &= \rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X} \big((a,x) \tilde{\ast}(b,y) \big). \end{aligned}
  • For (S3), we have

    \begin{aligned} (a,x) \tilde{\ast} \rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X} \big((b,y)\big) &= (a,x) \tilde{\ast} (\eta_y(b), \rho_X(y))\\ &= (\phi_{x, \rho_X(y)}(a)+\psi_{x,\rho_X(y)}(\eta_y(b)), x \ast \rho_X(y)),\\ && \textrm{by $(X, \rho_X)$-module axioms \hyperref[M6]{(M6)} and \hyperref[M8]{(M8)}, and $\rho_X$ being a good involution}\\ &= (\phi_{x \ast^{-1}y,y}^{-1}(a-\psi_{x \ast^{-1}y,y}(b)), x \ast^{-1}y)\\ &= (a,x)\tilde{\ast}^{-1}(b,y). \end{aligned}

Thus, \rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X} is a good involution, and hence ({\mathscr{F} \rtimes X},\rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}) is a symmetric rack. Finally, suppose that (X,\rho_X) is a symmetric quandle. Then, we have the additional condition \phi_{x,x}(a)+\psi_{x,x}(a)=a for all x\in X and a\in A_x. Thus, we obtain

(a,x) \tilde{\ast} (a,x)=\big(\phi_{x,x}(a)+\psi_{x,x}(a), x \big)= (a, x)

for all x\in X and a\in A_x, and hence ({\mathscr{F} \rtimes X},\rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}) is a symmetric quandle.

Proposition

Proposition 4.2

1E3L

Let (X, \rho_X) be a symmetric rack and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) an (X, \rho_X)-module. Then there exists an abelian group object p:({\mathscr{F} \rtimes X},\rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X), which we denote by \mathcal{T}(\mathscr{F}), in the slice category over (X, \rho_X). Further, let \mathscr{F'}=(A',\phi',\psi',\eta') be another (X,\rho_X)-module and f:\mathscr{F}\rightarrow \mathscr{F'} an (X, \rho_X)-map. Then the map \mathcal{T}(f): \mathscr{F}\rtimes X \rightarrow \mathscr{F'}\rtimes X defined by \mathcal{T}(f)\big((a,x) \big)= (f_{x}(a),x) gives a slice morphism. Moreover, \mathcal{T}: \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)} \rightarrow \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) is a functor.

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 4.2

Let \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) be an (X,\rho_X)-module. Then, we have the semi-direct product ({\mathscr{F} \rtimes X},\rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}), which is a symmetric rack due to Proposition 4.1. Let p: \mathscr{F} \rtimes X \rightarrow X be the natural projection given as p(a,x)= x for a \in A_x and x \in X. Then p is a homomorphism of symmetric racks. We claim that p: \mathscr{F} \rtimes X \rightarrow X has the canonical structure of an abelian group object. Let

\big((\mathscr{F} \rtimes X )\times_X (\mathscr{F} \rtimes X),\rho_{(\mathscr{F} \rtimes X )\times_X (\mathscr{F} \rtimes X)}\big) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X)

be the categorical product of p: \mathscr{F} \rtimes X \rightarrow X with itself in the slice category over (X,\rho_X). The symmetric rack structure is defined in the same way as in the cartesian product. We define the morphisms

  • \mu:(\mathscr{F} \rtimes X )\times_X (\mathscr{F} \rtimes X) \rightarrow (\mathscr{F} \rtimes X) given by ((a_1,x),(a_2,x)) \mapsto (a_1+a_2,x),

  • \sigma:X \rightarrow (\mathscr{F} \rtimes X) given by x \mapsto (0,x),

  • \nu:(\mathscr{F} \rtimes X) \rightarrow (\mathscr{F} \rtimes X) given by (a,x) \mapsto (-a,x),

for all a_1,a_2, a \in A_x and x \in X. It easy to check that \mu, \sigma and \nu are symmetric rack homomorphisms. Also, the fact that \mu, \sigma and \nu are slice morphisms and that they turn p: \mathscr{F} \rtimes X \rightarrow X into an abelian group object follows directly (see also [MR2155522, Theorem 2.2]).

Let us define a functor \mathcal{T}: \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)} \rightarrow \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}). Given an (X,\rho_X)-module \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta), let \mathcal{T}(\mathscr{F}) denote the object p:\mathscr{F}\rtimes X\rightarrow X. Let \mathscr{F'}=(A',\phi',\psi',\eta') be another (X,\rho_X)-module and f:\mathscr{F}\rightarrow \mathscr{F'} an (X, \rho_X)-map. Define \mathcal{T}(f):\mathscr{F}\rtimes X \rightarrow \mathscr{F'}\rtimes X by

T(f)(a,x)=(f_{x}(a),x).

Then, we have

\begin{aligned} \mathcal{T}(f) \big((a,x) \star (b,y) \big)&=\mathcal{T}(f)\big(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b),x \ast y \big)\\ &= \big(f_{x \ast y}(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b)) ,x \ast y \big)\\ &=\big(\phi'_{x,y}f_x(a)+\psi'_{x,y}f_y(b),x \ast y \big), \quad \textrm{since $f$ is an $(X, \rho_X)$-map}\\ &= \mathcal{T}(f)\big((a,x)\big) \star' \mathcal{T}(f)\big((b,y)\big), \end{aligned}

where \star is the rack operation in \mathscr{F}\rtimes X and \star' is the rack operation in \mathscr{F'}\rtimes X. Further, since \eta'_{x}f_x = f_{\rho_X(x)} \eta_{x}, the diagram

The paper has a diagram here, which this page does not show.

commutes. Thus, T(f) is a homomorphism of symmetric racks. Finally, since the diagram

The paper has a diagram here, which this page does not show.

commutes, where p' is the projection to the second coordinate, \mathcal{T}(f) is a slice morphism. In fact, one can check that \mathcal{T} is a functor (see [MR2155522, Theorem 2.2]).

Proposition

Proposition 4.3

W8VL

Let (X, \rho_X) be a symmetric rack and p:(Y,\rho_Y) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) an abelian group object with the multiplication map m, the inverse map i, and the section s. Let (X, *) and (Y, \star) be the underlying racks. Then there exists an (X,\rho_X)-module (R, \phi, \psi, \eta) given by an induced abelian group structure on the fibre R_x:=p^{-1}(x) for each x \in X, where

\phi_{x,y}:R_x \rightarrow R_{x \ast y} ~~ \text{is given by }~ u \mapsto u \star s(y),
\psi_{x,y}:R_y \rightarrow R_{x \ast y} ~~ \text{is given by }~ v \mapsto s(x) \star v

and

\eta_x: R_x \rightarrow R_{\rho_X(x)} ~~ \text{is given by }~ u \mapsto \rho_{Y}(u)

for all u\in R_x, v \in R_y and x,y \in X. Furthermore, the association gives a functor \mathcal{S}: \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) \to \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}.

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 4.3

Let p:(Y,\rho_Y) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) be an abelian group object in \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}). Let R_x=p^{-1}(x) for each x \in X. Then an abelian group structure on R_x is given by

u+v:=m(u,v),

where s(x) is the identity element in R_x and -u:=i(u) for all u,v \in R_x. To define an (X, \rho_X)-module structure, let us define

\phi_{x,y}:R_x \rightarrow R_{x \ast y} ~~\text{given by } ~u \mapsto u \star s(y),
\psi_{x,y}:R_y \rightarrow R_{x \ast y} ~~\text{given by }~ v \mapsto s(x) \star v

and

\eta_x: R_x \rightarrow R_{\rho_X(x)} ~~\text{given by }~ u \mapsto \rho_{Y}(u)

for all u\in R_x, v \in R_y and x,y \in X. It has been proved in [MR2155522, Theorem 2.2] that \phi_{x,y} and \psi_{x,y} are group homomorphisms for all x, y \in X. For the case of \eta_x, if u_1,u_2 \in R_x, then we see that

\begin{aligned} \eta_x(u_1+u_2)&= \rho_Y(m(u_1,u_2))\\ &= m(\rho_Y(u_1), \rho_Y(u_2)), \quad \textrm{since $m \,(\rho_Y \times \rho_Y)=\rho_Y \, m$}\\ &= \rho_Y(u_1)+\rho_Y(u_2)\\ &= \eta_x(u_1)+\eta_x(u_2). \end{aligned}

Next, we need to check that \phi_{x,y}, \psi_{x,y} and \eta_x satisfy the (X,\rho_X)-module identities. Since (M1), (M2) and (M7) are proved in [MR2155522, Theorem 2.2], we verify only the remaining identities.

  • Since \rho_Y is a good involution, we have

    \eta_{\rho_X(x)} \eta_x(u)=\eta_{\rho_X(x)}(\rho_Y(u))=\rho_Y^2(u)=u,

    and hence (M3) holds.

  • Again, since \rho_Y is a good involution, we have

    \phi_{\rho_X(x),y}(\eta_x(u))=\phi_{\rho_X(x),y}(\rho_Y(u))=\rho_Y(u)\star s(y)=\rho_Y(u \star s(y))=\eta_{x \ast y}(u \star s(y))=\eta_{x \ast y} (\phi_{x,y}(u)),

    and hence (M4) holds.

  • Since s is a homomorphism of symmetric racks, we see that

    \psi_{\rho_X(x),y}(v)= s(\rho_X(x))\star v=\rho_Y(s(x)) \star v=\rho_Y(s(x)\star v)=\eta_{x \ast y}(s(x) \star (v))=\eta_{x \ast y}(\psi_{x,y}(v)),

    and hence (M5) holds.

  • Since \rho_Y is a good involution and s is a homomorphism of symmetric racks, we obtain

    \phi_{x \ast^{-1}y,y}\phi_{x, \rho_X(y)}(u)=\phi_{x \ast^{-1},y}(u \star s(\rho_X(y)))=\phi_{x \ast^{-1},y}(u \star \rho_Y(s(y)))=(u \star \rho_Y(s(y)))\star s(y)=u,

    and hence (M6) holds.

  • Note that \phi_{x\ast^{-1} y,y}\psi_{x,\rho_X(y)}(\eta_{y}(v))=\phi_{x\ast^{-1} y,y}\psi_{x,\rho_X(y)}(\rho_Y(v))=\phi_{x\ast^{-1} y,y}(s(x) \star \rho_Y(v))=(s(x) \star \rho_Y(v) )\star s(y) and \psi_{x\ast \rho_X(y),y}(v)=s(x \ast \rho_X(y))\star v=(s(x) \star \rho_Y(s(y))) \star v. Then, we have

    \begin{aligned} && \phi_{x\ast^{-1} y,y}\psi_{x,\rho_X(y)}(\eta_{y}(v))+\psi_{x\ast \rho_X(y),y}(v)\\ &= (s(x) \star \rho_Y(v)) \star s(y)+(s(x) \star \rho_Y(s(y))) \star v\\ &=m \big((s(x) \star \rho_Y(v)) \star s(y), ~(s(x) \star \rho_Y(s(y))) \star v \big)\\ &=m \big( \big((s(x), s(x)) \star (\rho_Y(v), \rho_Y(s(y))) \big) \star (s(y), v) \big), \quad \textrm{by definition of rack operation in $Y \times_X Y$}\\ &= \big(m(s(x),s(x)) \star m \,(\rho_Y(v),\rho_Y(s(y))) \big)\star m(s(y),v), \quad \textrm{since $m$ is a homomorphism of racks}\\ &= \big(s(x) \star \rho_Y \, m(v, s(y))) \star m(s(y),v), \quad \textrm{since $m$ is a homomorphism of symmetric racks}\\ &= \big(s(x) \star \rho_Y \, m(s(y),v) )\star m(s(y),v), \quad \textrm{since $\rho_Y$ is a good involution}\\ &= s(x), \end{aligned}

and hence (M8) holds. Hence, we have proved that (R, \phi, \psi, \eta) is an (X,\rho_X)-module.

Next, we construct a functor \mathcal{S}: \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) \to \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}. Given an abelian group object p:(Y,\rho_Y) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X), we set \mathcal{S}(p) = (R,\phi,\psi,\eta), which is defined above. Let f be a morphism from the abelian group object p_1:(Y_1,\rho_{Y_1}) \rightarrow (X,\rho_X) to the abelian group object p_2:(Y_2,\rho_{Y_2}) \rightarrow (X,\rho_X). Thus, if m and m' denote the corresponding multiplication maps, then f \, m= m' \,(f, f). Further, f:(Y_1,\rho_{Y_1}) \rightarrow (Y_2,\rho_{Y_2}) is a homomorphism of symmetric racks with p_2\,f=p_1. Let \mathscr{F}_1 and \mathscr{F}_2 denote the (X,\rho_X)-modules as described above. Define g:\mathscr{F}_1=(R_1,\phi,\psi,\eta) \rightarrow \mathscr{F}_2=(R_2,\phi',\psi',\eta') by setting

g_x:{(R_1)}_x \rightarrow {(R_2)}_x~~\text{as}~~g_x(u)= f(u)

for all x\in X and u \in {(R_1)}_x. Since f \, m= m' \,(f, f), it follows that g_x is an abelian group homomorphism for each x \in X. The identities \phi'_{x,y}g_x = g_{x\ast y} \phi_{x,y} and \psi'_{x,y}g_y = g_{x\ast y}\psi_{x,y} are proved in [MR2155522, Theorem 2.2]. Further, since

g_{\rho_X(x)} \eta_{x}(w)=g_{\rho_X(x)} (\rho_{Y_1}(w))=f(\rho_{Y_1}(w))=\rho_{Y_2}(f(w))=\rho_{Y_2}g_x(w)=\eta_x'(g_x(w))

for all w\in (R_1)_x, we have \eta'_{x}g_x = g_{\rho_X(x)} \eta_{x}. Hence, g is an (X,\rho_X)-map. A routine check shows that \mathcal{S} is a functor (see [MR2155522, Thereom 2.2]).

Theorem

Theorem 4.4

X6HX

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack. Then the category \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)} of (X,\rho_X)-modules is equivalent to the category \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) of abelian group objects in the slice category over (X,\rho_X).

Proof of Theorem 4.4

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack. By Proposition 4.2 and Proposition 4.3, we have functors \mathcal{T}: \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)} \to \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) and \mathcal{S}: \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) \to \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}. To show that the categories \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)} and \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) are equivalent, we show that \mathcal{T}\mathcal{S} is naturally isomorphic to \mathrm{id}_{\mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)})} and \mathcal{S}\mathcal{T} is naturally isomorphic to \mathrm{id}_{ \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}}.

Let \mathcal{O} \in \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) denote the object p:(Y,\rho_Y) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) with the multiplication map m, the inverse map i, and the section s. Then \mathcal{T}\mathcal{S} (\mathcal{O}) is the object q:(\mathscr{R} \rtimes X, \rho_{\mathscr{R} \rtimes X}) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) in the category \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}), where \mathscr{R}=(R, \phi,\psi,\eta) as constructed in Proposition 4.3. Let * be the rack operation on X, and \tilde{*} the rack operation on \mathscr{R} \rtimes X. Note that, the abelian group structure on q:(\mathscr{R} \rtimes X, \rho_{\mathscr{R} \rtimes X}) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) has the multiplication, the inverse and the section given by

  • \mu ((a_1,x),(a_2,x)) = (a_1+a_2,x)=(m(a_1,a_2),x),

  • \sigma (x) = (0,x)=(s(x),x),

  • \nu((a,x)) = (-a,x)=(i(a),x),

for all a_1,a_2, a \in R_x and x \in X. Define \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}: (Y, \rho_Y) \rightarrow (\mathscr{R} \rtimes X, \rho_{\mathscr{R} \rtimes X}) by setting \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(a)=(a,x) for a \in R_x. Clearly, \zeta_{\mathcal{O}} is a bijection and the diagram

The paper has a diagram here, which this page does not show.

commutes. Note that \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(m(a,b))=\mu(\zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(a), \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(b)),~ \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(s(a))=\sigma(\zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(a)) and \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(i(a))=\nu(\zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(a)) for all a,b \in R_x. Hence, \zeta_{\mathcal{O}} respects the abelian group structure. Now, for a \in R_x and b \in R_y, we have

\begin{aligned} \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(a) \tilde{\ast} \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(b) &= (a,x) \tilde{\ast} (b,y) \\ &= \big(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b), x \ast y \big)\\ &= \big(a \star s(y)+ s(x) \star b, x \ast y \big)\\ &= \big(m \big(a \star s(y),s(x) \star b \big), x \ast y \big)\\ &= \big(m((a,s(x)) \tilde{\star} (s(y),b)),x \ast y\big)\\ &=\big(m(a,s(x)) \star m(s(y),b), x \ast y\big),\quad \textrm{since $m: Y \times Y \to Y$ is a rack homomorphism}\\ &= (a \star b,x \ast y)\\ &= \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}(a \star b), \end{aligned}

where \star is the rack operation on Y and \tilde{\star} is the rack operation on Y \times Y. Thus, \zeta_{\mathcal{O}} is a rack homomorphism. Since \rho_{\mathscr{R}\rtimes X} \, \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}=\zeta_{\mathcal{O}} \, \rho_Y, it follows that \zeta_{\mathcal{O}} is a symmetric rack isomorphism, and hence \zeta_{\mathcal{O}}: \mathcal{O} \to \mathcal{T}\mathcal{S} (\mathcal{O}) is an isomorphism.

Let \mathcal{O} and \mathcal{O'} be the objects p:(Y,\rho_Y) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) and p':(Y',\rho_{Y'}) \rightarrow (X,\rho_X) in \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}), respectively. Let f:\mathcal{O} \rightarrow \mathcal{O'} be a morphism. Then, by definition, f: (Y, \rho_Y) \to (Y', \rho_{Y'}) is a symmetric rack homomorphism such that p' \circ f=p and f preserves the abelian group structure. Let x \in X and a \in R_x. Then \zeta_{\mathcal{O'}} \, f(a)=(f_x(a),x), where f_x=f|_{R_x} and

\mathcal{T} \mathcal{S}(f) \, \zeta_{\mathcal{O}} (a)=\mathcal{T} \mathcal{S}(f)(a,x)= \mathcal{T}(f|_{R_x}(a))=\mathcal{T}(f_x(a))=(f_x(a),x).

Thus, the diagram

The paper has a diagram here, which this page does not show.

commutes, and we have shown that \mathcal{T}\mathcal{S} is naturally isomorphic to \mathrm{id}_{ \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)})}. Next, we prove that \mathcal{S}\mathcal{T} is naturally isomorphic to \mathrm{id}_{\mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}}. Let \mathcal{O} be the object \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) in \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}. Then \mathcal{T}(\mathcal{O}) is the abelian group object p:(\mathscr{F} \rtimes X,\rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) as in Proposition 4.2. For each x \in X, since A'_{x}:=p^{-1}(x)=(A_x,x), it follows that \mathcal{S}\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{O}) is the object \mathscr{F'}:=(A',\phi',\psi',\eta'), where

\begin{aligned} \phi_{x,y}' (a,x) &= (a,x) \tilde{\ast} \sigma(y)=\ (a,x) \tilde{\ast} (0,y)=(\phi_{x,y}(a),x \ast y), \\ \psi_{x,y}' (b,y) &= \sigma(x) \tilde{\ast} (b,y)=(0,x) \tilde{\ast} (b,y) =(\psi_{x,y}(b),x \ast y), \\ \eta_x' (a,x)& = \rho_{\mathscr{F} \rtimes X}(a,x)=(\eta_x(a), \rho_X(x)), \end{aligned}

for all a\in A_x, b \in A_y and x,y \in X. We now construct an (X,\rho_X)-module isomorphism \lambda_{\mathcal{O}}: \mathcal{O} \to \mathcal{S}\mathcal{T}(\mathcal{O}). For each x \in X, define (\lambda_{\mathcal{O}})_x:A_x \to A'_x as a \mapsto (a,x) for all a \in A_x. Clearly, (\lambda_O)_{x} is an abelian group isomorphism for each x \in X. Also, using (?), (?) and (?), we have

\begin{aligned} \phi'_{x,y}(\lambda_O)_{x}(a) &= \phi'_{x,y}(a,x)= (\phi_{x,y}(a),x \ast y) =(\lambda_O)_{x\ast y} \phi_{x,y}(a),\\ \psi'_{x,y}(\lambda_O)_{y}(b)&=\psi'_{x,y}(b,y) = (\psi_{x,y}(b),x \ast y)= (\lambda_O)_{x\ast y}\psi_{x,y}(b),\\ \eta'_{x}(\lambda_O)_{x}(a) &= \eta'_x(a,x)=(\eta_x(a), \rho_X(x))=(\lambda_O)_{\rho_X(x)} \eta_{x}(a), \end{aligned}

for all a\in A_x, b \in A_y and x,y \in X. Thus, (3.0.1-3.0.3) hold, and \lambda_O is an (X, \rho_X)-module isomorphism. Finally, let \mathcal{O}_1 and \mathcal{O}_2 be the objects \mathscr{F}_1=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) and \mathscr{F}_2=(\tilde{A},\tilde{\phi},\tilde{\psi},\tilde{\eta}) in \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}, respectively. Let g:\mathcal{O}_1 \rightarrow \mathcal{O}_2 be a (X, \rho_X)-map. It is easy to see that the diagram

The paper has a diagram here, which this page does not show.

commutes. Thus, \mathcal{S}\mathcal{T} is naturally isomorphic to \mathrm{id}_{\mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)}}, and the categories \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SR}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) and \mathbf{SRMod}_{(X, \rho_X)} are equivalent.

Theorem

Theorem 4.5

Q6ZX

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric quandle. Then the categories \mathbf{Ab}(\mathbf{SQ}|_{(X,\rho_X)}) and \mathbf{SQMod}_{(X, \rho_X)} are equivalent.

Definition

Definition 5.1

TYD9

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack (respectively quandle) and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) be an (X,\rho_X)-module. An extension of (X,\rho_X) by \mathscr{F} comprises of the following data:

  1. (E1) A symmetric rack (respectively quandle) (E,\rho_E), where \star is the rack (respectively quandle) operation in E.

  2. (E2) An epimorphism f:(E,\rho_E) \rightarrow (X,\rho_X). This epimorphism further induces a partition E=\cup_{x\in X}E_x, where E_x:=f^{-1}(x) for x \in X.

  3. (E3) For each x \in X, a left A_x-action on E_x, written (a, s) \mapsto a \cdot s for a\in A_x and s \in E_x. Further, the action satisfies the following conditions for all a\in A_x, b \in A_y, s \in E_x and t \in E_y:

    1. The A_x-action on E_x is free and transitive.

    2. (a\cdot s)\star t=\phi_{x,y}(a)\cdot (s \star t).

    3. s \star (b\cdot t)=\psi_{x,y}(b)\cdot (s \star t).

    4. \rho_E(a\cdot s)=\eta_x(a)\cdot \rho_E(s).

Definition

Definition 5.2

TE1L

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack (respectively quandle) and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) be an (X,\rho_X)-module. Two extensions f_1:(E_1,\rho_{E_1}) \rightarrow (X,\rho_X) and f_2:(E_2,\rho_{E_2}) \rightarrow (X,\rho_X) of (X,\rho_X) by \mathscr{F} are equivalent if there exists a symmetric rack (respectively quandle) isomorphism, \Phi:(E_1,\rho_{E_1}) \rightarrow (E_2,\rho_{E_2}) which respects projection maps and group actions, that is,

  1. (EE1) f_2 \Phi(s)=f_1(s) for all s \in E_1.

  2. (EE2) \Phi(a\cdot s)=a \cdot \Phi(s) for all s \in E_x, a \in A_x and x \in X.

Definition

Definition 5.3

ZF9L

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack (respectively quandle) and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) be an (X,\rho_X)-module. Given an extension f:(E,\rho_E) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) of (X, \rho) by \mathscr{F} and a section s:(X,\rho_X) \rightarrow (E,\rho_E), a factor set is a map \sigma:X \times X \rightarrow \bigsqcup_{x \in X} A_x such that

s(x) \star s(y)= \sigma_{x,y} \cdot s(x \ast y)

for all x,y \in X, where we write \sigma(x,y)=\sigma_{x,y}.

Theorem

Theorem 5.4

W9CI

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) be an (X,\rho_X)-module. Let \sigma:X \times X \rightarrow \bigsqcup_{x \in X} A_x be a map and {E}(\mathscr{F},\sigma) := \big\{(a,x) \mid x\in X, ~a \in A_x \big\}. Define the binary operation

(a,x) \tilde{\star} (b,y) := \big(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b)+\sigma_{x,y},x\ast y \big)

on {E}(\mathscr{F},\sigma) and the map \rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}:E(\mathscr{F},\sigma) \to E(\mathscr{F},\sigma) given by

(a,x) \mapsto \big(\eta_x(a),\rho_X(x)\big)

for all a \in A_x, b \in A_y and x,y \in X. Then, (E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}) is an extension of (X,\rho_X) by \mathscr{F} with factor set \sigma if and only if

  1. \mathrm{(F1)} \sigma_{x \ast y,z}+\phi_{x \ast y,z}(\sigma_{x,y})=\phi_{x \ast z, y \ast z}(\sigma_{x,z})+\sigma_{x \ast z, y \ast z}+\psi_{x \ast z, y \ast z}(\sigma_{y,z}),

  2. \mathrm{(F2)} \sigma_{\rho_X(x),y}=\eta_{x\ast y}(\sigma_{x,y}),

  3. \mathrm{(F3)} \phi_{x\ast \rho_X(y),y}(\sigma_{x,\rho_X(y)})=-\sigma_{x \ast \rho_X(y),y},

for all x,y,z \in X. Moreover, if (E, \rho_E) is an extension of (X, \rho_X) by \mathscr{F} with factor set \sigma, then \mathrm{(F1)-(F3)} hold and (E,\rho_E) is equivalent to E(\mathscr{F},\sigma).

Further, if (X, \rho_X) is a symmetric quandle, then we have the additional condition

  1. \mathrm{(F4)} \sigma_{x, x}=0 for all x \in X.

Proof of Theorem 5.4

Suppose that \mathrm{(F1)-(F3)} hold. That (E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}) is a rack is proved in [MR2155522, Proposition 3.1]. We check that \rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)} is a good involution.

  • For (S1), we have

    \rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}^2((a,x))=\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}(\eta_x(a), \rho_X(x))=(\eta_{\rho_X(x)}(\eta_x(a)),\rho_X^2(x))=(a,x).
  • For (S2), we see that

    \begin{aligned} \big(\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}(a,x) \big)\tilde{\star} (b,y) &= \big(\eta_x(a), \, \rho_X(x)\big) \tilde{\star} (b,y)\\ &= \big(\phi_{\rho_X(x),y}(\eta_x(a))+\psi_{\rho_X(x),y}(b)+\sigma_{\rho_X(x),y}, \,\rho_X(x) \ast y \big)\\ &=\big( \eta_{x \ast y}(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b)+\sigma_{x,y}), \, \rho_X(x \ast y) \big), \quad \textrm{by (M4), (M5) and (F2)}\\ &= \rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)} \big(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b)+\sigma_{x,y}, \, x \ast y \big)\\ &= \rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)} \big((a,x)\tilde{\star} (b,y) \big). \end{aligned}
  • For (S3), we have

    \begin{aligned} (a,x) \tilde{\star} \rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}(b,y) &= (a,x)\tilde{\star} \big(\eta_y(b), \,\rho_X(y) \big)\\ &= \big(\phi_{x,\rho_X(y)}(a)+\psi_{x, \rho_X(y)}(\eta_y(b))+\sigma_{x, \rho_{X}(y)}, \, x \ast \rho_X(y) \big)\\ &= \big(\phi_{x \ast^{-1}y,y}^{-1}(a-\sigma_{x\ast^{-1}y,y}-\psi_{x \ast^{-1}y,y}(b)), \, x \ast^{-1}y \big), \quad \textrm{by (M6), (M8) and (F3)}\\ &= (a,x)\tilde{\star}^{-1}(b,y). \end{aligned}

Hence, (E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}) is a symmetric rack. Define f_1:(E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}) \rightarrow (X,\rho_X) to be the projection onto the second coordinate. Let A_x act on E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)_x =f_1^{-1}(x) by a\cdot (b,x)=(a+b,x) for each x \in X and a, b \in A_x. Note that these actions are free and transitive. Also, as proved in [MR2155522, Proposition 3.1], the actions satisfy

\big(\alpha\cdot (a,x) \big)\tilde{\star} (b,y)=\phi_{x,y}(\alpha)\cdot \big((a,x)\tilde{\star}(b,y) \big) \quad \textrm{and} \quad (a,x) \tilde{\star} \, \big(\beta \cdot (b,y) \big)= \psi_{x,y}(\beta)\cdot \big((a,x)\tilde{\star}(b,y)\big)

for all \alpha \in A_x, \beta \in A_y, (a,x) \in E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)_x and (b, y) \in E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)_x. Further, we have

\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)} \big(\alpha\cdot (a,x) \big)=\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)} \big((\alpha+a,x)\big)=\big(\eta_x(\alpha+a),\rho_X(x)\big)=\eta_x(\alpha)\cdot (\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}(a,x)).

Thus, (E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}) is an extension of (X,\rho_X) by \mathscr{F}. Define s:X \rightarrow E(\mathscr{F},\sigma) as s(x )= (0,x). This is clearly a section satisfying

s(x) \tilde{\star} s(y)=(0,x) \ast (0,y)= (\sigma_{x,y},x*y)= \sigma_{x,y} \cdot s(x \ast y)

and

\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}(s(x))=\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}(0,x)=(0,\rho_X(x))=s(\rho_X(x)).

Thus, \sigma is the factor set corresponding to the section s. The converse follows by reversing the steps.

For the second assertion, let f_2:(E,\rho_E) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) be an extension of (X,\rho_X) by \mathscr{F} with factor set \sigma corresponding to a section s:(X,\rho) \rightarrow (E,\rho_E). Define

\Phi:(E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)})\rightarrow (E,\rho_E)

as \Phi \big((a,x)\big)= a\cdot s(x). Since, A_x acts freely and transitively, it follows that \Phi is a bijection. Also, using (E3), we have

\begin{aligned} \Phi \big((a,x)\tilde{\star}(b,y) \big)&=\Phi \big(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b)+\sigma_{x,y}, \, x\ast y\big)\\ &=(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b)+\sigma_{x,y})\cdot s(x \ast y)\\ &= (\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b)) \cdot (s(x)\tilde{\star} s(y))\\ &= \phi_{x,y}(a) \cdot \big(s(x)\tilde{\star} (b\cdot s(y)) \big)\\ &=(a\cdot s(x))\tilde{\star} (b \cdot s(y))\\ &= \Phi(a,x) \tilde{\star} \Phi(b,y). \end{aligned}

Hence, \Phi is a rack isomorphism. Further, we see that

\begin{aligned} \Phi \rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}(a,x) &= \Phi \big(\eta_x(a),\rho_X(x) \big)\\ &= \eta_x(a)\cdot s(\rho_X(x))\\ &= \eta_x(a)\cdot \rho_E(s(x)), \quad \textrm{since $\rho_E \, s=s \, \rho_X$}\\ &= \rho_E(a\cdot s(x)), \quad \textrm{by (E3)}\\ &= \rho_E \Phi(a,x) \end{aligned}

for all x \in X and a \in A_x. Hence, \Phi is an isomorphism of symmetric racks. Clearly, f_2 \Phi(a, x)=f_2(a \cdot s(x))=x=f_1(a, x) for all (a, x) \in E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)_x and \Phi(\alpha \cdot (a,x))=\Phi((\alpha+a,x))=(\alpha+a)\cdot s(x)=\alpha\cdot \Phi(a,x) for all \alpha, a \in A_x and x \in X. Hence, \Phi is an equivalence of extensions. Finally, if (X, \rho_X) is a symmetric quandle, then the condition (F4) follows.

Proposition

Proposition 5.5

RCXR

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack (respectively quandle) and \mathscr{F} an (X,\rho_X)-module. Let \sigma and \tau be factor sets corresponding to sections s and t, respectively, for extensions of (X,\rho_X) by \mathscr{F}. Then the following assertions are equivalent:

  1. The extensions (E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}) and (E(\mathscr{F},\tau),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\tau)}) are equivalent.

  2. There exists a set of elements \{v_x\in A_x \mid x \in X\} such that \tau_{x,y}=\sigma_{x,y}+\phi_{x,y}(v_x)+\psi_{x,y}(v_y)-v_{x\ast y} and \eta_x(v_x)=v_{\rho_X(x)} for x,y \in X.

  3. \sigma and \tau are factor sets of the same extension of (X, \rho_X) by \mathscr{F} corresponding to different sections s and t, respectively.

Proof of Proposition 5.5

First, we prove (1) \Leftrightarrow (2). Let \Phi:(E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}) \rightarrow (E(\mathscr{F},\tau),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\tau)}) be an equivalence of extensions. Since \Phi respects the projections, we obtain \Phi(0,x) = (v_x,x) for some v_x \in A_x. Further, since \Phi respects the group actions, this gives \Phi(a,x)=\Phi(a \cdot (0,x))=a \cdot \Phi(0,x)=a \cdot (v_x,x)=(a+v_x,x) for all a \in A_x. Then,

\Phi \big((a,x)\tilde{\star}(b,y) \big)=\big(\phi_{x,y}(a)+\psi_{x,y}(b)+\tau_{x,y}+v_{x \ast y}, \, x \ast y \big)

and

\Phi(a,x)\bar{\star} \Phi(b,y)=(a+v_x,x)\bar{\star} (b+v_y,y)=\big(\phi_{x,y}(a+v_x)+\psi_{x,y}(b+v_y)+\sigma_{x,y}, \, x \ast y \big),

where \tilde{\star} and \bar{\star} are the rack operations in E(\mathscr{F},\sigma) and E(\mathscr{F},\tau), respectively. Thus, \Phi \big((a,x)\bar{\star}(b,y) \big)=\Phi(a,x)\bar{\star} \Phi(b,y) if and only if \tau_{x,y}=\sigma_{x,y}+\phi_{x,y}(v_x)+\psi_{x,y}(v_y)-v_{x\ast y} for x,y \in X. We have

\Phi \rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}(a,x)=\Phi(\eta_x(a),\rho_X(x))=(\eta_x(a)+v_{\rho_X(x)},\rho_X(x))

and

\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\tau)}\Phi(a,x)=\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\tau)}(a+v_x,x)=(\eta_x(a+v_x),\rho_X(x)).

Thus, \Phi \rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}=\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\tau)}\Phi if and only if \eta_x(v_x)=v_{\rho_X(x)}. Next, we prove (1) \Leftrightarrow (3). We shall use (1) \Leftrightarrow (2) proved above. Obviously, \sigma is the factor set corresponding to the section s:(X,\rho_X) \rightarrow (E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}) given by s(x) = (0,x). Define t:(X,\rho_X) \rightarrow (E(\mathscr{F},\sigma),\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}) by t(x) = (v_x,x). Since

t(\rho_X(x))=(v_{\rho_X(x)},\rho_X(x))=(\eta_x(v_x),\rho_X(x))=\rho_{E(\mathscr{F},\sigma)}(t(x)),

it follows that t is a section. Note that, we have \tau_{x,y}=\sigma_{x,y}+\phi_{x,y}(v_x)+\psi_{x,y}(v_y)-v_{x\ast y}. Then, we see that

\begin{aligned} t(x) \tilde{\star} t(y) &= (v_x,x) \tilde{\star} (v_y,y)\\ &= (\phi_{x, y}(v_x) + \psi_{x, y} (v_y) + \sigma_{x, y}, x*y)\\ &= (\tau_{x, y} + v_{x*y}, x*y)\\ &=\tau_{x, y} \cdot (v_{x*y}, x*y)\\ &= \tau_{x, y} \cdot t(x*y). \end{aligned}

Thus, \tau is the factor set corresponding to t. Conversely, suppose that \sigma and \tau are factor sets of some extension (E,\rho_E) of (X,\rho_X) by \mathscr{F} corresponding to sections s: (X,\rho_X) \rightarrow (E,\rho_E) and t:(X,\rho_X) \rightarrow (E,\rho_E), respectively. Then, for each x \in X, we have s(x)=v_x \cdot t(x) for a unique v_x \in A_x. Define \Phi:E(\mathscr{F},\sigma) \rightarrow E(\mathscr{F},\tau) as \Phi \big((a,x) \big)= (a+v_x,x). Then, a direct check implies that \Phi is an equivalence of extensions.

Corollary

Corollary 5.6

4RNS

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack (respectively quandle) and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) be an (X,\rho_X)-module. Given an extension f:(E,\rho_E) \rightarrow (X, \rho_X) of (X,\rho_X) by \mathscr{F}, the following statements are equivalent:

  1. There exists a symmetric-rack homomorphism s:(X, \rho_X) \rightarrow (E,\rho_E) such that f \, s=\mathrm{id}_X and s \,\rho_X=\rho_E \,s.

  2. There exists a section such that its corresponding factor set is trivial.

  3. For any section and the corresponding factor set \sigma, there exists a set of elements \{v_x\in A_x \mid x\in X\} such that

    \sigma_{x,y}=\phi_{x,y}(v_x)+\psi_{x,y}(v_y)-v_{x\ast y}\quad \textrm{and} \quad \eta_x(v_x)=v_{\rho_X(x)}

for all x,y \in X.

Definition

Definition 5.7

62VK

Given a symmetric rack (respectively quandle) (X,\rho_X) and an (X,\rho_X)-module \mathscr{F}, a map \sigma:X \times X \rightarrow \bigsqcup_{x \in X} A_x is called a coboundary if there exists a map v:X \rightarrow \bigsqcup_{x \in X} A_x such that

\sigma_{x,y}=\phi_{x,y}(v_x)+\psi_{x,y}(v_y)-v_{x\ast y} \quad \textrm{and} \quad \eta_x(v_x)=v_{\rho_X(x)}

for all x,y \in X.

Theorem

Theorem 5.8

VJD0

Let (X, \rho_X) be a symmetric rack and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) be an (X,\rho_X)-module. Then there is an abelian group \mathcal{H}^2_{\mathrm{SR}}(X,\mathscr{F}) whose elements are in bijective correspondence with the set of equivalence classes of extensions of (X, \rho_X) by \mathscr{F}.

Proof of Theorem 5.8

Let Z^2(X,\mathscr{F}) consists of all factor sets \sigma:X \times X \rightarrow \bigsqcup_{x \in X} A_x. Define the binary operation

(\sigma+\tau)_{x,y}:=\sigma_{x,y}+\tau_{x,y}

for all x, y \in X. In view of Theorem 5.4, it follows that the conditions (F1)-(F3) are satisfied by \sigma+\tau, and hence this binary operation turns Z^2(X,\mathscr{F}) into an abelian group with the trivial factor set as the identity element. Further, the set B^2(X,\mathscr{F}) of all coboundaries forms a subgroup of Z^2(X,\mathscr{F}). Define \mathcal{H}^2_{\mathrm{SR}}(X,\mathscr{F}):=Z^2(X,\mathscr{F})/B^2(X,\mathscr{F}). Then, by Theorem 5.4 and Proposition 5.5, \mathcal{H}^2_{\mathrm{SR}}(X,\mathscr{F}) is in bijective correspondence with the set of equivalence classes of extensions of (X,\rho_X) by \mathscr{F}.

Theorem

Theorem 5.9

CJMJ

Let (X, \rho_X) be a symmetric quandle and \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta) be an (X,\rho_X)-module. Then there is an abelian group \mathcal{H}^2_{\mathrm{SQ}}(X,\mathscr{F}) whose elements are in bijective correspondence with the set of equivalence classes of extensions of (X, \rho_X) by \mathscr{F}.

Definition

Definition 6.1

IMA1

The symmetric rack algebra of a symmetric rack (X, \rho_X) is the associative \mathbb{Z}-algebra, denoted by \mathbb{Z}(X,\rho_X), which is generated by the set \{\phi_{x,y}^{\pm 1}, \, \psi_{x,y}, \,\eta_x \mid x,y \in X \} and admit the following defining relations:

  1. (A1) \phi_{x,y} \phi_{x,y}^{-1}=\phi_{x,y}^{-1}\phi_{x,y}=1,

  2. (A2) \phi_{x \ast y,z} \phi_{x,y}=\phi_{x \ast z, y \ast z}\phi_{x,z},

  3. (A3) \phi_{x \ast y,z}\psi_{x,y}=\psi_{x \ast z, y \ast z}\phi_{y,z},

  4. (A4) \eta_{\rho_X(x)} \eta_x=1,

  5. (A5) \phi_{\rho_X(x),y} \eta_x= \eta_{x\ast y} \phi_{x,y},

  6. (A6) \psi_{\rho_X(x),y}= \eta_{x \ast y} \psi_{x,y},

  7. (A7) \phi_{x \ast \rho_X(y),y} \phi_{x, \rho_X(y)}=1,

  8. (A8) \psi_{x \ast y,z}=\phi_{x \ast z, y \ast z} \psi_{x,z}+\psi_{x \ast z, y \ast z} \psi_{y,z},

  9. (A9) \phi_{x \ast \rho_X(y),y} \psi_{x, \rho_X(y)} \eta_y =- \psi_{x \ast \rho_X(y), y},

for all x,y,z \in X.

Definition

Definition 6.2

CYDM

The symmetric quandle algebra of a symmetric quandle (X, \rho_X) is the symmetric rack algebra of the underlying symmetric rack which satisfies the additional relation

  1. (A10) \phi_{x,x}+\psi_{x,x}=1

for all x \in X.

Uses Definition 6.1 · Used by Proof
Remark

Remark 6.3

O8PV

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack (respectively quandle). Then the category of homogeneous (X,\rho_X)-modules is equivalent to the category of modules over \mathbb{Z}(X,\rho_X). Thus, these are abelian with enough injective and projective objects.

Lemma

Lemma 6.4

PIWI

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack. Then \partial_n \big(U_n \big) \subset D_{n-1}^{SR}(X,\rho_X) for each n \ge 2.

Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 6.4

Using the fact that \rho_X is a good involution and the rack identity

[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n] \ast [x_j \cdots x_n]= [x_1 \cdots x_n]

for each (x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n) \in X^n, it follows from the condition (A5) that

\eta_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast y}} \phi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n]}_{x},\underbrace{[x_j \cdots x_n]}_{y}} = \phi_{\underbrace{[\rho_X(x_1) \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n]}_{\rho_X(x)},\underbrace{[x_j \cdots x_n]}_{y}} \eta_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n]}_{x}}.

Similarly, it follows from (A6) that

\eta_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast y}} \psi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{x},\underbrace{[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{y}}=\psi_{\underbrace{[\rho_X(x_1) \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{\rho_X(x)},\underbrace{[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{y}}.

Then, we have

\begin{aligned} && \partial_n \big(\eta_{[x_1 \cdots x_n]}(x_1, \ldots, x_n)-(\rho_X(x_1),x_2, \ldots ,x_n) \big)\\ &=\eta_{[x_1 \cdots x_n]}\partial_n(x_1, \ldots, x_n)-\partial_n (\rho_X\big(x_1),x_2, \ldots ,x_n), \quad \textrm{since $\partial_n$ is $\mathbb{Z}(X,\rho_X)$-linear}\\ & = &\sum_{j=2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \eta_{[x_1 \cdots x_n]} \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (x_1,\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n)\\ & - &\sum_{j=2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \eta_{[x_1 \cdots x_n]} (x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n)\\ & + &(-1)^n \eta_{[x_1 \cdots x_n]} \psi_{[x_1 \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_2,\ldots , x_n)\\ & - &\sum_{j=2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \phi_{[\rho_X(x_1) \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (\rho_X(x_1),\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n)\\ & + &\sum_{j=2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n (\rho_X(x_1) \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n)\\ & - &(-1)^n \psi_{[\rho_X(x_1) \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_2,\ldots , x_n)\\ & = &\sum_{j=2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\eta_{[x_1 \cdots x_n]} \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (x_1,\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n)\\ & - & \phi_{[\rho_X(x_1) \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (\rho_X(x_1),\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n) \Big)\\ & - &\sum_{j=2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big( \eta_{[x_1 \cdots x_n]} (x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n)\\ & + &(\rho_X(x_1) \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n) \Big)\\ & + &(-1)^n \Big(\eta_{[x_1 \cdots x_n]} \psi_{[x_1 \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_2,\ldots , x_n) - \psi_{[\rho_X(x_1) \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_2,\ldots , x_n) \Big)\\ &=\sum_{j=2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \phi_{[\rho_X(x_1) \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} \Big(\eta_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n]} (x_1,\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n) - (\rho_X(x_1),\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n)\Big)\\ & - &\sum_{j=2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big( \eta_{[x_1 \cdots x_n]} (x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n) +(\rho_X(x_1) \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n)\Big),\\ && \quad \textrm{using \eqref{lemma eq 1} and \eqref{lemma eq 2}}. \end{aligned}

Hence, \partial_n \big(U_n \big) lies in D_{n-1}^{SR}(X,\rho_X).

Lemma

Lemma 6.5

A7OE

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack. Then \partial_n \big(V_n \big) \subset D_{n-1}^{SR}(X,\rho_X) for each n \ge 2.

Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 6.5

For a fixed 2 \le i \le n, we have

\begin{aligned} && \partial_n \big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]}(x_1 \ast x_i, \ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i, \rho_X(x_i),x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n) \big)\\ & = & \underbrace{ \sum_{j=2}^{i-1}(-1)^j (-1)^n\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} \phi_{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\cdots \widehat{(x_j \ast x_i)} \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i)x_{i+1} \cdots x_n],[(x_j \ast x_i) \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X{(x_i)}x_{i+1}\cdots x_n]}}_{1A}\\ & &\underbrace{\Big(x_1 \ast x_i,\ldots, \widehat{x_j \ast x_i}, \ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i, \rho_X(x_i),x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n \Big)}_{1A}\\ & + & \underbrace{(-1)^i (-1)^n\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} \phi_{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\cdots \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \widehat{\rho_X(x_i)}x_{i+1} \cdots x_n],[\rho_X{(x_i)}x_{i+1}\cdots x_n]}}_{1B}\\ & &\underbrace{\Big(x_1 \ast x_i,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i, \widehat{\rho_X(x_i)},x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n \Big)}_{1B}\\ &+ &\underbrace{\sum_{j=i+1}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} \phi_{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i) x_{i+1} \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[(x_j \cdots x_n]}}_{1C}\\ & &\underbrace{ \Big(x_1 \ast x_i,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i, \rho_X(x_i), x_{i+1}, \ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots, x_n \Big)}_{1C}\\ & - & \underbrace{ \sum_{j=2}^{i-1}(-1)^j (-1)^n\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]}}_{1D} \\ & &\underbrace{\Big((x_1 \ast x_i)\ast(x_j \ast x_i),\ldots, (x_{j-1} \ast x_i) \ast (x_j \ast x_i), \widehat{x_j \ast x_i}, x_{j+1} \ast x_i, \ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i, \rho_X(x_i),x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n \Big)}_{1D}\\ & - &\underbrace{ (-1)^i (-1)^n \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]}}_{1E}\\ & &\underbrace{\Big((x_1*x_i)*\rho_X(x_i) ,\ldots , (x_{i-1} *x_i)*\rho_X(x_i), \widehat{\rho_X(x_i)},x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n \Big)}_{1E}\\ & - &\underbrace{ \sum_{j=i+1}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]}}_{1F}\\ & &\underbrace{\Big( (x_1 \ast x_i )\ast x_j,\ldots , (x_{i-1} \ast x_i )\ast x_j, \rho_X(x_i \ast x_j), x_{i+1}\ast x_j, \ldots,{x_{j-1} \ast x_j}, \widehat{x_j}, x_{j+1}, \ldots, x_n \Big)}_{1F}\\ & + &\underbrace{(-1)^n \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} \psi_{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\widehat{(x_2 \ast x_i)}\cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i)x_{i+1} \cdots x_n],[(x_2 \ast x_i)\cdots \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i)x_{i+1} \cdots x_n]}}_{1G}\\ & &\underbrace{\Big(x_2 \ast x_i ,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i , \rho_X(x_i), x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n \Big)}_{1G} \end{aligned}

and

\begin{aligned} && \partial_n \big((x_1, \ldots , x_n) \big)\\ & = &\underbrace{ \sum_{j=2}^{i-1}(-1)^j (-1)^n \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (x_1,\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n)}_{2A}\\ & + &\underbrace{(-1)^i (-1)^n \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} (x_1,\ldots, x_{i-1}, \widehat{x_i},x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n)}_{2B}\\ &+ &\underbrace{\sum_{j=i+1}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (x_1 , \ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots, x_n)}_{2C}\\ & - &\underbrace{\sum_{j=2}^{i-1}(-1)^j (-1)^n (x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n)}_{2D}\\ & - &\underbrace{(-1)^i (-1)^n (x_1 \ast x_i,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i,x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n)}_{2E}\\ & - & \underbrace{\sum_{j=i+1}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n (x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots , x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots, x_n)}_{2F}\\ & + &\underbrace{(-1)^n \psi_{[x_1 \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_2,\ldots , x_n)}_{2G}. \end{aligned}

We see that

\begin{aligned} && 1A + 2A \\ &= &\sum_{j=2}^{i-1}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} \phi_{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\cdots \widehat{(x_j \ast x_i)} \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i)x_{i+1} \cdots x_n],[(x_j \ast x_i) \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X{(x_i)}x_{i+1}\cdots x_n]}\\ & &(x_1 \ast x_i,\ldots, \widehat{x_j \ast x_i}, \ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i, \rho_X(x_i),x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n) + \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (x_1,\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n) \Big). \end{aligned}

Then, using (Proof), the fact that \rho_X is a good involution and the condition (A2), we see that

\begin{aligned} && \phi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast y},\underbrace{[x_i \cdots x_n]}_{z}}\\ && \phi_{\underbrace{[(x_1 \ast x_i) \cdots \widehat{(x_j \ast x_i)} \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i) x_{i+1} \cdots x_n]}_{x},\underbrace{[(x_j \ast x_i) \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X{(x_i)}x_{i+1}\cdots x_n]}_{y}}\\ &= \phi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast z},\underbrace{[x_j \cdots x_n]}_{y \ast z}} \phi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n]}_{x},\underbrace{[x_i \cdots x_n]}_{z}}. \end{aligned}

Thus, the term 1A + 2A lies in D_{n-1}^{SR}(X,\rho_X). Next, we consider

\begin{aligned} && 1B + 2E\\ &= (-1)^i (-1)^n \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} \phi_{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \widehat{\rho_X(x_i)}x_{i+1} \cdots x_n],[\rho_X{(x_i)}x_{i+1}\cdots x_n]}\\ && (x_1 \ast x_i,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i, \widehat{\rho_X(x_i)},x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n)- (-1)^i (-1)^n (x_1 \ast x_i,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i,x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n). \end{aligned}

Due to condition (A7), we have

\phi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast \rho_X(y)},\underbrace{[x_i \cdots x_n]}_{y}} \phi_{\underbrace{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\cdots \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \widehat{\rho_X(x_i)}x_{i+1} \cdots x_n]}_{x},\underbrace{[\rho_X{(x_i)}x_{i+1}\cdots x_n]}_{\rho_X(y)}}=\mathrm{id},

and hence 1B + 2E =0. Consider the term

\begin{aligned} && 1C + 2C\\ & =&\sum_{j=i+1}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} \phi_{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i) x_{i+1} \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]}\\ & &(x_1 \ast x_i,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i, \rho_X(x_i), x_{i+1}, \ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots, x_n) +\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (x_1 , \ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots, x_n) \Big). \end{aligned}

Using the condition (A2), we see that

\begin{aligned} && \phi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_j \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast z},\underbrace{[x_i \cdots x_j \cdots x_n]}_{y \ast z}} \phi_{\underbrace{[(x_1 \ast x_i) \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i) x_{i+1} \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n]}_{x},\underbrace{[x_j \cdots x_n]}_{z}}\\ &= \phi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast y},\underbrace{[x_j \cdots x_n]}_{z}} \phi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n]}_{x},\underbrace{[x_i \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n]}_{y}}. \end{aligned}

Thus, 1C + 2C lies in D_{n-1}^{SR}(X,\rho_X). Next, we consider

\begin{aligned} && 1D + 2D\\ &=-\sum_{j=2}^{i-1}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} \\ & &((x_1 \ast x_i)\ast(x_j \ast x_i),\ldots, (x_{j-1} \ast x_i)*(x_j * x_i), \widehat{x_j \ast x_i}, x_{j+1} \ast x_i, \ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i, \rho_X(x_i),x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n)\\ &+&(x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n) \Big). \end{aligned}

Since \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]}=\phi_{[(x_1 \ast x_j) \cdots (x_{j-1} \ast x_j) x_{j+1} \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]}, it follows that 1D + 2D lies in D_{n-1}^{SR}(X,\rho_X). Next, we have

\begin{aligned} 1E + 2B &= (-1)^i (-1)^n \Big(- \phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]}(x_1,\ldots, x_{i-1}, \widehat{\rho_X(x_i)},x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n)\\ &+&\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} (x_1,\ldots, x_{i-1}, \widehat{x_i},x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n) \Big)\\ &= 0. \end{aligned}

Consider the term

\begin{aligned} &&1F + 2F\\ &= &-\sum_{j=i+1}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]}\\ & &(x_1 \ast x_i \ast x_j,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i \ast x_j, \rho_X(x_i \ast x_j), x_{i+1}\ast x_j, \ldots,{x_{j-1} \ast x_j}, \widehat{x_j}, x_{j+1}, \ldots, x_n)\\ & + &(x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots , x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots, x_n) \Big). \end{aligned}

Since \phi_{[(x_1\ast x_j) \cdots \widehat{(x_i \ast x_j)} \cdots (x_{j-1}\ast x_j) x_{j+1} \cdots x_n)],[(x_i \ast x_j) \cdots (x_{j-1}\ast x_j) x_{j+1} \cdots x_n]}=\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]}, it follows that 1F + 2F lies in D_{n-1}^{SR}(X, \rho_X). Next, consider the term

\begin{aligned} && 1G + 2G\\ &= & (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n],[x_i \cdots x_n]} \psi_{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\widehat{(x_2 \ast x_i)}\cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i)x_{i+1} \cdots x_n],[(x_2 \ast x_i)\cdots \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i)x_{i+1} \cdots x_n]}\\ & &(x_2 \ast x_i ,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i , \rho_X(x_i), x_{i+1}, \ldots, x_n) +\psi_{[x_1 \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_2,\ldots , x_n) \Big) \end{aligned}

If i>2, then using the condition (A3), we get

\begin{aligned} & &\phi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast y},\underbrace{[x_i \cdots x_n]}_{z}}\\ & &\psi_{\underbrace{[(x_1 \ast x_i)\widehat{(x_2 \ast x_i)}\cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i)x_{i+1} \cdots x_n]}_{x},\underbrace{[(x_2 \ast x_i)\cdots \cdots (x_{i-1} \ast x_i) \rho_X(x_i)x_{i+1} \cdots x_n]}_{y}}\\ &= \psi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast z},\underbrace{[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{y \ast z}}\phi_{\underbrace{[x_2 \cdots \widehat{x_i} \cdots x_n]}_{y},\underbrace{[x_i \cdots x_n]}_{z}}. \end{aligned}

Thus, in this case, 1G + 2G lies in D_{n-1}^{SR}(X, \rho_X). If i=2, then the condition (A9) gives

\begin{aligned} & &-\psi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast \rho_X(y)},\underbrace{[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{y}}\\ &= \phi_{\underbrace{[x_1, \widehat{x_2},x_3, \cdots x_n]}_{x \ast \rho_X(y)},\underbrace{[x_2,x_3, \cdots x_n]}_{y}} \psi_{\underbrace{[x_1 \cdots x_n]}_{x},\underbrace{[\rho_X(x_2)x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{\rho_X(y)}} \eta_{\underbrace{[x_1 \widehat{x_2} x_3 \cdots x_n]}_{y}}. \end{aligned}

Hence, 1G + 2G lies in D_{n-1}^{SR}(X, \rho_X), and we have proved that \partial_n(V_n) \subset D_{n-1}^{SR}(X,\rho_X).

Proposition

Proposition 6.6

CHAE

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack. Then \partial_n(D_{n}^{SR}(X,\rho_X)) \subset D_{n-1}^{SR}(X,\rho_X) for each n \ge 1.

Proof of Proposition 6.6

In view of Lemma 6.4 and Lemma 6.5, it remains to verify that \partial_1(D_{1}^{SR}(X, \rho_X))={0}. Note that, D_{1}^{SR}(X, \rho_X) is generated by \{\eta_{x}(x)-\rho_X(x) \mid x \in X \}. It follows from the condition (A6) that

\partial_1(\eta_{x}(x)-\rho_X(x))= \eta_{x}\partial_{1}(x)-\partial_1\rho_X(x)=-\eta_x \psi_{x \ast^{-1} p,p}(p)+\psi_{\rho_X(x) \ast^{-1} p,p}(p)= 0

for all x \in X. Hence, \partial_n(D_{n}^{SR}(X,\rho)) \subset D_{n-1}^{SR}(X,\rho) for all n \ge 0.

Remark

Remark 6.7

P3CE

In view of Remark 6.3, for a homogeneous (X,\rho_X)-module \mathscr{F}=(A,\phi,\psi,\eta), the cohomology group \mathcal{H}^2_{\mathrm{SR}}(X,\mathscr{F}) defined in Theorem 5.8 coincides with the cohomology group H^2_{SR}((X,\rho_X),A) defined above.

Proposition

Proposition 6.8

QPIN

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric quandle. Then \partial_n(D^{SQ}_{n}(X,\rho_X)) \subset D^{SQ}_{n-1}(X,\rho_X) for each n \ge 2.

Proof of Proposition 6.8

It suffices to prove that \partial_n(x_1, \ldots, x_{i-1},x_i,x_i,x_{i+2},\ldots, x_n) \in D^{Q}_{n-1}(X,\rho_X) for each 1 \leq i \leq n-1. For i=1, we have

\begin{aligned} && \partial_n \big((x_1,x_1,x_3, \ldots ,x_n)\big)\\ &=(-1)^n \phi_{[x_1x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_1 x_3 \cdots x_n]} (x_1,x_3, \ldots , x_n)\\ & + &\sum_{j=3}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \phi_{[x_1 x_1 x_3 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (x_1,x_1,x_3, \ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n)\\ &-& (-1)^n (x_1 \ast x_1,x_3, \ldots , x_n)\\ & - &\sum_{j=3}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n (x_1 \ast x_j, x_1 \ast x_j, x_3 \ast x_j, \ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n)\\ & + &(-1)^n \psi_{[x_1 \widehat{x_1}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_1 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_1, x_3, \ldots , x_n)\\ &=\sum_{j=3}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 x_1 x_3 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]} (x_1,x_1,x_3, \ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots , x_n)\\ &-&(x_1 \ast x_j,x_1 \ast x_j,x_3 \ast x_j, \ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots , x_n) \Big) \in D^{Q}_{n-1}(X,\rho_X), \end{aligned}

where the last equality follows due to

\begin{aligned} & & \phi_{[x_1x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_1 x_3 \cdots x_n]} (x_1,x_3, \ldots , x_n)+\psi_{[x_1 \widehat{x_1}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_1 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_1, x_3\ldots , x_n)\\ &= (\phi_{[x_1x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_1x_3 \cdots x_n]}+\psi_{[x_1 \widehat{x_1}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_1 x_3 \cdots x_n]})(x_1, x_3, \ldots , x_n)\\ &=(x_1, x_3, \ldots , x_n), \end{aligned}

which itself is a consequence of the condition (A10). For i \geq 2, we have

\begin{aligned} && \partial_n \big((x_1, \ldots,x_{i-1},x_i,x_i,x_{i+2},\ldots , x_n) \big)\\ & = &\sum_{j=2}^{i-1}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]}(x_1,\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots ,x_i,x_i,\ldots x_n)\\ &-& (x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots ,x_i,x_i,\ldots x_n) \Big)\\ &+& (-1)^i (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots x_{i-1}\widehat{x_i}x_ix_{i+2} \cdots x_n],[x_ix_ix_{i+2} \cdots x_n]}(x_1,\ldots, x_{i-1}, \widehat{x_i},x_i,x_{i+2}, \ldots, x_n)\\ &-& (x_1 \ast x_i,\ldots , x_{i-1} \ast x_i,x_i,x_{i+2}, \ldots, x_n) \Big)\\ &+& (-1)^{i+1} (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots x_{i-1}x_i\widehat{x_{i}}x_{i+2} \cdots x_n],[x_ix_{i+2} \cdots x_n]}(x_1,\ldots, x_{i-1},x_i, \widehat{x_{i}},x_{i+2}, \ldots, x_n)\\ &-& (x_1 \ast x_{i},\ldots ,x_{i-1}\ast x_i, x_{i} \ast x_{i},x_{i+2}, \ldots, x_n) \Big)\\ &+ &\sum_{j=i+2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]}(x_1 , \ldots, x_i,x_i,\ldots \widehat{x_j}, \ldots, x_n)\\ & - &(x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots x_i\ast x_j,x_i \ast x_j,\ldots , x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots, x_n) \Big)\\ & + &(-1)^n \psi_{[x_1 \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_2,\ldots, x_i,x_i,\ldots , x_n)\\ & = &\sum_{j=2}^{i-1}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]}(x_1,\ldots, \widehat{x_j}, \ldots ,x_i,x_i,\ldots x_n)\\ &-& (x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots,x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots ,x_i,x_i,\ldots x_n) \Big)\\ &+ &\sum_{j=i+2}^{n}(-1)^j (-1)^n \Big(\phi_{[x_1 \cdots \widehat{x_j} \cdots x_n],[x_j \cdots x_n]}(x_1 , \ldots,x_i,x_i,\ldots \widehat{x_j}, \ldots, x_n)\\ & - &(x_1 \ast x_j,\ldots x_i\ast x_j,x_i \ast x_j,\ldots , x_{j-1} \ast x_j, x_{j+1}, \ldots, x_n) \Big)\\ & + &(-1)^n \psi_{[x_1 \widehat{x_2}x_3 \cdots x_n],[x_2 x_3 \cdots x_n]}(x_2,\ldots, x_i,x_i,\ldots , x_n) \in D^Q_{n-1}(X,\rho_X), \end{aligned}

where the i-th and the (i+1)-th terms cancel out due to the equality

\phi_{[x_1 \cdots x_{i-1}\widehat{x_i}x_ix_{i+2} \cdots x_n],[x_ix_ix_{i+2} \cdots x_n]}=\phi_{[x_1 \cdots x_{i-1}x_i\widehat{x_{i}}x_{i+2} \cdots x_n],[x_ix_{i+2} \cdots x_n]}.

Hence, \partial_n(D^{SQ}_{n}(X,\rho_X)) \subset D^{SQ}_{n-1}(X,\rho_X), and the proof is complete.

Remark

Remark 6.9

5ULS

We can equip the algebra \mathbb{Z}(X,\rho_X) with an augmentation \epsilon:\mathbb{Z}(X,\rho_X) \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}, defined as \epsilon(\phi_{x,y})=1,~ \epsilon(\psi_{x,y})=0 and \epsilon(\eta_x)=-1. Also, any abelian group A can be considered as trivial homogeneous (X,\rho_X)-module by setting

A_x=A, \quad \phi_{x,y}=\mathrm{id}_A, \quad \psi_{x,y}= 0 \quad \textrm{and} \quad \eta_x= -\mathrm{id}_A

for all x, y\in X. In view of Remark 6.3, our (co)homology is a module-theoretic generalisation of the (co)homology defined in [MR2657689], and also recovers it as a special case. Applications of this module-theoretic cohomology of symmetric racks (respectively quandles) to knot theory will be explored in a forthcoming work.

Remark

Remark 6.10

0PI2

By definition, a map \kappa: C_2(X,\rho_X) \rightarrow A, where A is a \mathbb{Z}(X,\rho_X)-module, is a symmetric rack 2-cocycle if and only if \kappa satisfies the following conditions:

  1. for any (x_1,x_2,x_3) \in X^3, we have

    -\phi_{[x_1x_3],[x_2x_3]}\kappa(x_1,x_3)+\phi_{[x_1x_2],x_3}\kappa(x_1,x_2)+\kappa(x_1*x_2,x_3)-\kappa(x_1*x_3,x_2*x_3)-\psi_{[x_1x_3],[x_2x_3]}\kappa(x_2,x_3)=0.
  2. for any (x_1,x_2) \in X^2, we have

    \eta_{[x_1x_2]}\kappa(x_1,x_2)-\kappa(\rho_X(x_1),x_2)=0 \text{ and } \phi_{x_1,x_2}\kappa(x_1*x_2,\rho_X(x_2))+\kappa(x_1,x_2)=0

Furthermore, \kappa is a symmetric quandle 2-cocycle if it additionally satisfies \kappa(x,x)=0 for all x \in X.

Theorem

Theorem 7.1

53U1

Let (X,\rho_X) be a symmetric rack and A be an abelian group viewed as a trivial homogeneous (X,\rho_X)-module. Let A also be viewed as a symmetric rack with the trivial rack operation and with a \mapsto -a as the good involution, and let \operatorname{Hom}(X,A) be the abelian group of symmetric rack homomorphisms with the point-wise addition. Let G_{(X,\rho_X)} act on \operatorname{Hom}(X,A) from the left by (e_x \cdot f)(z)= f(z *x). Then there is a group isomorphism

H^2_{SR}\big((X,\rho_X),A\big) \cong H^1\big(G_{(X,\rho_X)}, \operatorname{Hom}(X,A)\big).
Proof of Theorem 7.1

For x, y, z \in X and f \in \operatorname{Hom}(X,A), we see that

(e_xe_y \cdot f)(z)=(e_y \cdot f)(z *x)=f((z *x)*y)=f((z*y)*(x *y))=(e_{x *y}\cdot f)(z*y)=(e_y e_{x *y} \cdot f)(z)

and

(e_x^{-1}\cdot f)(z)=f(z *^{-1}x)=f(z*\rho_X(x))=(e_{\rho_X(x)}\cdot f)(z).

Thus, the left action of G_{(X,\rho_X)} on \operatorname{Hom}(X,A) is well-defined.

Let f:G_{(X,\rho_X)} \rightarrow \operatorname{Hom}(X,A) be a group 1-cocycle. Define \theta_f:X \times X \rightarrow A by

\theta_f ((x,y))= f(e_y)(x).

We claim that \theta_f is a symmetric rack 2-cocycle. For all x,y,z \in X, we have

\begin{aligned} \theta_f(x,z)+\theta_f(x *z,y*z)&= f(e_z)(x)+f(e_{y*z})(x*z)\\ &=f(e_z)(x)+(e_z \cdot f(e_{y*z}))(x)\\ &= f(e_z)(x)+(f(e_ze_{y*z})-f(e_z))(x), \quad \text{since $f$ is a group 1-cocycle} \\ &=f(e_ze_{y*z})(x)\\ &=f(e_ye_z)(x)\\ &=(f(e_ye_z)-f(e_y))(x)+f(e_y)(x) \\ &=(e_y \cdot f(e_z))(x)+f(e_y)(x), \quad \text{since $f$ is a group 1-cocycle}\\ &=f(e_z)(x*y)+f(e_y)(x)\\ &= \theta_f(x*y,z)+\theta_f(x,y). \end{aligned}

Further, since f(e_y) is a symmetric rack homomorphism, we have

\theta_f(x,y)+\theta_f(\rho_X(x),y) = f(e_{y})(x)+f(e_y)(\rho_X(x))= f(e_y)(x)-f(e_y)(x)=0.

Since f is a group 1-cocycle, we get

\begin{aligned} \theta_f(x,y)+\theta_f(x*y,\rho_X(y))&=f(e_y)(x)+f(e_{\rho_X(y)})(x \ast y)\\ &=f(e_y)(x)+(e_y \cdot f(e_{\rho_X(y)}))(x)\\ &=f(e_y)(x)+(f(e_ye_{\rho_X(y)})-f(e_y))(x)\\ &=0,\quad \text{since $f(1)=0$}, \end{aligned}

and hence \theta_f is a symmetric rack 2-cocycle. This gives a map Z^1 \big(G_{(X,\rho_X)}, \operatorname{Hom}(X,A)\big) \rightarrow H^2_{SR} \big((X,\rho_X),A \big) defined by f \mapsto [\theta_f]. Since the group structure in both the domain and the codomain is the point-wise addition of maps, it follows that f \mapsto [\theta_f] is a group homomorphism. If f \in B^1(G_{(X,\rho_X)}, \operatorname{Hom}(X,A)), then for all a \in G_{(X,\rho_X)} and x\in X, we have

f(a)(x)=(a \cdot \phi-\phi)(x)

for some \phi \in \operatorname{Hom}(X,A). Thus, for all x,y \in X, we have

\theta_f(x,y)=f(e_y)(x)=(e_y \cdot \phi -\phi)(x)=(e_y \cdot \phi)(x)-\phi(x)=\phi(x*y)-\phi(x).

This shows that \theta_f \in B^2((X,\rho_X);A), and hence we obtain a map

\Psi:H^1 \big(G_{(X,\rho_X)}, \operatorname{Hom}(X,A)\big) \rightarrow H^2_{SR} \big((X,\rho_X),A \big).

For the reverse direction, let \sigma \in Z_{SR}^2((X,\rho_X),A). Then \sigma satisfies the symmetric rack 2-cocycle conditions

\sigma(x,z)+\sigma(x*z,y*z)=\sigma(x,y)+\sigma(x*y,z),
\sigma(x,y)+\sigma(\rho_X(x),y)=0,
\sigma(x,y)+\sigma(x*y,\rho_X(y))=0,

for all x,y,z \in X. Let us define \sigma':X \rightarrow \operatorname{Hom}(X,A) by

\sigma'(x)(y)=\sigma(y,x)

for all x, y \in X. Since \sigma'(x)(\rho_X(y))=\sigma(\rho_X(y),x)=-\sigma(x,y) by the cocycle condition (?), and hence \sigma'(x) \in \operatorname{Hom}(X,A). Identifying X with the set \{e_x\mid x \in X\}, we have a map \tau_{\sigma}:X \rightarrow G_{(X,\rho_X)} \ltimes \operatorname{Hom}(X,A) defined by

\tau_{\sigma}(e_x)=(e_x,\sigma'(x))

for all x \in X. Note that

\tau_{\sigma}(e_x)\tau_{\sigma}(e_{\rho_X(x)})= (e_x,\sigma'(x))(e_{\rho_X(x)},\sigma'(\rho_X(x))) =\big(e_xe_{\rho_X(x)},\sigma'(x)+e_x \cdot \sigma'(\rho_X(x))\big).

Further, the symmetric rack 2-cocycle condition (?) gives

\begin{aligned} \big( \sigma'(x)+e_x \cdot \sigma'(\rho_X(x)) \big)(y) &= \sigma'(x)(y)+(e_x \cdot \sigma'(\rho_X(x)))(y)\\ &=\sigma'(x)(y)+\sigma'(\rho_X(x))(y*x)\\ &=\sigma(y,x)+\sigma(y*x,\rho_X(x))\\ &= 0. \end{aligned}

Thus, \sigma'(x)+e_x \cdot \sigma'(\rho_X(x)) is the trivial map, and consequently \tau_{\sigma}(e_x)\tau_{\sigma}(e_{\rho_X(x)})=(e,0), where e is the identity of G_{(X,\rho_X)}. Similarly, we can prove that \tau_{\sigma}(e_{\rho_X(x)})\tau_{\sigma}(e_x)=(e,0). Next, we consider

\begin{aligned} && \tau_{\sigma}(e_y) \, \tau_{\sigma}(e_{x*y}) \, \tau_{\sigma}(e_y)^{-1} \, \tau_{\sigma}(e_x)^{-1}\\ &=(e_y,\sigma'(y)) \, (e_{x*y},\sigma'({x*y})) \, (e_y,\sigma'(y))^{-1} \, (e_x,\sigma'(x))^{-1}\\ &=(e_y,\sigma'(y)) \, (e_{x*y},\sigma'({x*y})) \, (e_y^{-1},e_y^{-1}\cdot (-\sigma'(y))) \, (e_x^{-1},e_x^{-1} \cdot (-\sigma'(x)))\\ &= \big(e_y e_{x*y},\sigma'(y)+e_y \cdot \sigma'({x*y}) \big) \, \big(e_y^{-1}e_x^{-1},e_y^{-1}\cdot (-\sigma'(y))+e_y^{-1}e_x^{-1} \cdot (-\sigma'(x)) \big)\\ &=(e,\sigma'(y)+e_y \cdot \sigma'({x*y}))+ (e_ye_{x*y})\cdot (e_y^{-1}\cdot (-\sigma'(y))+e_y^{-1}e_x^{-1} \cdot (-\sigma'(x))). \end{aligned}

The symmetric rack 2-cocycle condition (?) gives

\begin{aligned} && (\sigma'(y)+e_y \cdot \sigma'({x*y}))+ (e_ye_{x*y})\cdot (e_y^{-1}\cdot (-\sigma'(y))+e_y^{-1}e_x^{-1} \cdot (-\sigma'(x)))(z)\\ &=\sigma(z,y)+\sigma(z*y,x*y)+(e_ye_{x*y}) \cdot(e_y^{-1} \cdot (-\sigma'(y))+e_y^{-1}e_x^{-1}\cdot (-\sigma'(x)))(z)\\ &=\sigma(z,y)+\sigma(z*y,x*y)+(e_x\cdot (-\sigma'(y))+ (-\sigma'(x)))(z)\\ &=\sigma(z,y)+\sigma(z*y,x*y)+(-\sigma'(y))(z*x)-\sigma'(x)(z)\\ &=\sigma(z,y)+\sigma(z*y,x*y)-\sigma(z*x,y)-\sigma(z,x)\\ &=0. \end{aligned}

It follows that \tau_{\sigma}(e_y) \tau_{\sigma}(e_{x*y}) \tau_{\sigma}(e_y)^{-1}\tau_{\sigma}(e_x)^{-1}=(e,0) for all x, y \in X, and hence we can extend \tau_{\sigma} to a group homomorphism \tau_{\sigma}:G_{(X,\rho_X)} \rightarrow G_{(X,\rho_X)} \ltimes \operatorname{Hom}(X,A). Let us define \chi_{\sigma}:G_{(X,\rho_X)} \to \operatorname{Hom}(X,A) to be the composition

\chi_{\sigma} = p_2 \,\tau_{\sigma}

where p_2:(G_{(X.\rho_X)} \ltimes \operatorname{Hom}(X,A)) \rightarrow \operatorname{Hom}(X,A) is the projection onto the second factor. Since \tau_{\sigma} is a group homomorphism, it follows that \chi_{\sigma} is a group 1-cocycle. This gives a map Z^2_{SR}\big((X,\rho_X),A \big) \rightarrow H^1 \big(G_{(X,\rho_X)}, \operatorname{Hom}(X,A)\big) defined by \sigma \mapsto [\chi_{\sigma}]. If \pi \in B^2_{SR}((X,\rho_X),A), then \pi=\delta^1( \tilde{\pi}) for some \tilde{\pi}\in C^1_{SR}((X,\rho_X),A), that is,

\pi(x,y)=\tilde{\pi}(x)-\tilde{\pi}(x*y)

for all x,y \in X. If g \in G_{(X,\rho_X)}, then g=e_{x_1}^{\epsilon_1}e_{x_2}^{\epsilon_2} \cdots e_{x_n}^{\epsilon_n} for some x_i \in X and \epsilon_i\in \{1,-1\}. Thus, for all y \in X, we have

\begin{aligned} \chi_{\pi}(g)(y)&=p_2(\tau_{\pi}(g))(y)\\ &=p_2(\tau_{\pi}(e_{x_1}^{\epsilon_1}e_{x_2}^{\epsilon_2} \cdots e_{x_n}^{\epsilon_n}))(y)\\ &=p_2(\tau_{\pi}(e_{x_1})^{\epsilon_1}\tau_{\pi}(e_{x_2})^{\epsilon_2} \cdots \tau_{\pi}(e_{x_n})^{\epsilon_n})(y)\\ &= p_2 \big((e_{x_1},\pi'(x_1))^{\epsilon_1}(e_{x_2},\pi'(x_2))^{\epsilon_2} \cdots (e_{x_n},\pi'(x_n))^{\epsilon_n} \big)(y)\\ &=p_2((e_{x_1}^{\epsilon_1}e_{x_2}^{\epsilon_2} \cdots e_{x_n}^{\epsilon_n}, \, t(x_1)+e_{x_1}^{\epsilon_1}\cdot t(x_2))+\cdots +e_{x_1}^{\epsilon_1}e_{x_2}^{\epsilon_2} \cdots e_{x_n}^{\epsilon_n} \cdot t(x_n)))(y)\\ &= \big(t(x_1)+e_{x_1}^{\epsilon_1}\cdot t(x_2)+\cdots +e_{x_1}^{\epsilon_1}e_{x_2}^{\epsilon_2} \cdots e_{x_{n-1}}^{\epsilon_{n-1}} \cdot t(x_n) \big)(y), \end{aligned}

where t(x_i)=\pi'(x_i) for \epsilon_i=1 and t(x_i)=e_{x_i}^{-1} \cdot (-\pi'(x_i)) for \epsilon_i=-1. For instance, if all \epsilon_i=1, then

\begin{aligned} \chi_{\pi}(g)(y)&= \pi(y,x_1)+\pi(y*x_1,x_2)+ \cdots + \pi(((y*x_1)*x_2)\cdots *x_{n-1},x_n)\\ &=\tilde{\pi}(y)-\tilde{\pi}(y*x_1)+\tilde{\pi}(y*x_1)-\tilde{\pi}((y*x_1*)x_2)+\cdots +\\ &&\tilde{\pi}(((y*x_1)*x_2)\cdots *x_{n-1})-\tilde{\pi}(((y*x_1)*x_2)\cdots x_n)\\ &=\tilde{\pi}(y)-\tilde{\pi}((y*x_1)*x_2)\cdots x_n)\\ &=\tilde{\pi}(y)-(e_{x_1}^{\epsilon_1}e_{x_2}^{\epsilon_2} \cdots e_{x_n}^{\epsilon_n}) \cdot \tilde{\pi}(y)\\ &=\tilde{\pi}(y)-g \cdot \tilde{\pi}(y)=(\tilde{\pi}-g \cdot \tilde{\pi})(y). \end{aligned}

The cases when some \epsilon_i=-1 can be dealt with in a similar way through a routine computation. Thus, \chi_{\pi}(g)=\tilde{\pi}-g \cdot \tilde{\pi}, which shows that \chi_{\pi} \in B^1(G_{(X,\rho_X)}, \operatorname{Hom}(X,A)). Hence, we obtain a map

\Psi: H^2_{SR}\big((X,\rho_X),A \big) \rightarrow H^1 \big(G_{(X,\rho_X)}, \operatorname{Hom}(X,A)\big)

and it is easy to see that \Psi and \Phi are inverses to each other, and hence H^2_{SR}\big((X,\rho_X),A\big) \cong H^1 \big(G_{(X,\rho_X)}, \operatorname{Hom}(X,A)\big), which is desired.

Acknowledgement

Acknowledgement Acknowledgement

MPL1

BK thanks CSIR for the PhD research fellowship. DS thanks IISER Mohali for the PhD research fellowship. MS is supported by the SwarnaJayanti Fellowship grants DST/SJF/MSA-02/2018-19 and SB/SJF/2019-20/04.

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2401.14143v1 by Biswadeep Karmakar, Deepanshi Saraf and Mahender Singh, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2401/2401.14143.jsonl.