RECORD
On Witt vector cohomology for singular varieties
Algebraic Geometry · Submitted 17 Oct 2005
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim We define a canonical morphism from rigid cohomology with compact supports to Witt vector cohomology with compact supports, and we prove that it provides an identification between the latter and the slope $< 1$ part of the former.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
Over a perfect field $k$ of characteristic $p > 0$, we construct a ``Witt vector cohomology with compact supports'' for separated $k$-schemes of finite type, extending (after tensorisation with $\mathbb{Q}$) the classical theory for proper $k$-schemes. We define a canonical morphism from rigid cohomology with compact supports to Witt vector cohomology with compact supports, and we prove that it provides an identification between the latter and the slope $< 1$ part of the former. Over a finite field, this allows one to compute congruences for the number of rational points in special examples. In particular, the congruence modulo the cardinality of the finite field of the number of rational points of a theta divisor on an abelian variety does not depend on the choice of the theta divisor. This answers positively a question by J.-P. Serre.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | Over a perfect field $k$ of characteristic $p > 0$, we construct a ``Witt vector cohomology with compact supports'' for separated $k$-schemes of finite type, extending (after tensorisation with $\mathbb{Q}$) the classical theory for proper $k$-schemes. | contribution 1.00 | 0.96 | 0.25 | asserted 1.00 |
| s1 | We define a canonical morphism from rigid cohomology with compact supports to Witt vector cohomology with compact supports, and we prove that it provides an identification between the latter and the slope $< 1$ part of the former. | result 0.62 | 0.96 | 0.55 | asserted 1.00 |
| s2 | Over a finite field, this allows one to compute congruences for the number of rational points in special examples. | interpretation 0.79 | 0.65 | 0.06 | hedged possibility 0.56 |
| s3 | In particular, the congruence modulo the cardinality of the finite field of the number of rational points of a theta divisor on an abelian variety does not depend on the choice of the theta divisor. | result 0.96 | 0.83 | 0.20 | asserted 1.00 |
| s4 | This answers positively a question by J.-P. Serre. | interpretation 0.53 | 0.70 | 0.19 | asserted 1.00 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v1
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
Over a perfect field $k$ of characteristic $p > 0$, we construct a ``Witt vector cohomology with compact supports'' for separated $k$-schemes of finite type, extending (after tensorisation with $\mathbb{Q}$) the classical theory for proper $k$-schemes. We define a canonical morphism from rigid cohomology with compact supports to Witt vector cohomology with compact supports, and we prove that it provides an identification between the latter and the slope $< 1$ part of the former. Over a finite field, this allows one to compute congruences for the number of rational points in special examples. In particular, the congruence modulo the cardinality of the finite field of the number of rational points of a theta divisor on an abelian variety does not depend on the choice of the theta divisor. This answers positively a question by J.-P. Serre.
Human review
References
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.