hopf algebras are robust generalization of groups . recently
, many authors have studied much more general hopf - like structures : weak hopf algebras , hopf monads , @xmath2-hopf algebras , compact quantum groups to name a few . in this article
, we will mainly be interested with hopf algebroids and hopf categories . in the literature ,
there are plenty of inequivalent notions of a hopf algebroid . for the exposition on these notions ,
see bhm @xcite .
batista et al .
@xcite introduced the notion of a hopf category which is the natural categorification of a hopf algebra .
motivated by a fundamental related to his phd thesis , the author tries to describe the geometry of hopf algebroids over @xmath3 .
this geometric description necessitates a structure closely related to a hopf category , but which has not appeared in the literature as far as the author s knowledge .
we will define such structures in section ( [ s3.0 ] ) .
we will recall in section ( [ s2.0 ] ) definitions and properties of hopf algebroids . for completeness
, we will also give a short exposition on the representation theoretic and galois theoretic aspects of hopf algebroids .
most of section ( [ s2.0 ] ) follows @xcite except for the definition of morphisms of hopf algebroids and the definition of a coupled hopf algebra . in section ( [ s3.0 ] )
, we will define what topological hopf categories are and we will also define coupled hopf categories and their topological version .
we will end that section with a formulation of galois theory for hopf categories and all the related variant we will introduce in that section .    one of the main result of this paper is theorem ( [ t4.1 ] ) .
it gives a bijective correspondence between finitely - generated projective hopf algebroids over @xmath3 and topological coupled hopf categories of finite type .
using algebraic geometric and spectral theoretic methods , spanning the entirety of section ( [ s4.0 ] ) , we will prove this result .
the second main result is theorem ( [ t5.1 ] ) , which states that , not only is there a bijection between hopf algebroids and topological hopf categories , their galois theories also matched in a bijective manner .    following david hilbert s statement :    2cm2 cm _ `` the art of doing mathematics consists in finding that special case which contains all the germs of generality . ''
we will discuss a very important example in section ( [ s3.2 ] ) which completely illustrates the general situation .
* acknowledgement . *
i would like to thank my phd supervisor ryszard nest for guiding me through my studies in non - commutative geometry and for the valuable discussions that help me write this article .
i would also like to thank dsf grant , up diliman and the support of the danish national research foundation through the centre for symmetry and deformation ( dnrf92 ) .
there are several inequivalent notions of a hopf algebroid
. we will briefly present here the one defined in bhm @xcite .
an @xmath4-_ring _ is a monoid object in the category of @xmath4-bimodules .
explicitly , an @xmath4-ring is a triple @xmath5 where @xmath6 and @xmath7 are @xmath4-bimodule maps satisfying the associativity and unit axioms similar for algebras over commutative rings .
a morphism of @xmath4-rings is a monoid morphism in category of @xmath4-bimodules .
it is important to note that there is a bijection between @xmath4-rings @xmath5 and @xmath8-algebra morphisms @xmath7 .
similar to the case of algebras over commutative rings , we can define modules over @xmath4-rings . for an @xmath4-ring @xmath5 , a
@xmath5-_module _ is an algebra for the monad @xmath9 ( resp .
@xmath10 ) on the category @xmath11 ( resp .
@xmath12 ) of right ( resp
. left ) modules over @xmath4 .
we can dualize all the objects we have defined in the previous paragraph .
an @xmath4-_coring _ is a comonoid in the category of @xmath4-bimodules , i.e a triple @xmath13 where @xmath14 and @xmath15 are @xmath4-bimodule maps satisfying the coassociativity and counit axioms dual to those axioms satisfied by the structure maps of an @xmath4-ring .
a morphism of @xmath4-corings is a morphism of comonoids .
given an @xmath4-coring @xmath13 , similar to coalgebras over commutative rings , we define a _ right _
_ left _ ) @xmath13-_comodule _ as a coalgebra for the comonad @xmath16 ( resp .
@xmath17 ) on the category @xmath11 ( resp .
@xmath12 ) .    [ d2.1 ]
a _ right _ ( resp .
_ left _ ) @xmath4-_bialgebroid _ @xmath18 is an @xmath19-ring @xmath20 and an @xmath4-coring @xmath21 satisfying :    1 .
@xmath22 and @xmath23 are @xmath8-algebra maps with commuting images defining the @xmath19-ring structure on @xmath18 which is compatible to the @xmath4-bimodule structure as an @xmath4-coring thru the following relation : @xmath24 2 .   with the above @xmath4-bimodule structure on @xmath18 one can form @xmath25 .
the coproduct @xmath26 is required to corestrict to a @xmath8-algebra map to @xmath27 respectively , @xmath28 3 .
the counit @xmath29 extends the right ( resp .
left ) regular @xmath4-module structure on @xmath4 to a right ( resp . left ) @xmath30-module .
a _ morphism _ of @xmath4-bialgebroids is a morphism of @xmath31-rings and @xmath4-corings .
[ r2.1 ]    1 .    2 .
the @xmath8-algebra maps @xmath32 and @xmath33 define a @xmath8-algebra map @xmath34 .
as we have noted , such @xmath8-algebra uniquely determines an @xmath19-ring structure on @xmath18 .
the maps @xmath32 and @xmath33 are called the _ source _ and _ target _ maps , respectively .
the @xmath8-submodule @xmath35 ( resp .
@xmath36 ) of @xmath25 is a @xmath8-algebra with factorwise multiplication .
this is called the _
takeuchi product_. the map @xmath37 , @xmath38 is easily seen to be a @xmath8-algebra morphism and hence , @xmath35 is an @xmath19-ring .
the corestriction of @xmath26 is an @xmath19-bimodule map .
hence , @xmath26 is an @xmath31-ring map .
the same is true for @xmath36 .
4 .   the source map @xmath32 is a k - algebra map and so it defines a unique @xmath4-ring structure on @xmath18 . the right version of condition ( c )
explicitly means that @xmath39 , @xmath40 defines a right @xmath30-action on @xmath4 .
[ d2.2 ] let @xmath8 be a commutative , associative unital ring and let @xmath41 and @xmath4 be associative @xmath8-algebras .
a _ hopf algebroid _
@xmath42 is a triple @xmath43 . @xmath44 and @xmath45 are bialgebroids having the same underlying @xmath8-algebra @xmath46 .
specifically , @xmath44 is a left @xmath41-bialgebroid with @xmath47 and @xmath48 as its underlying @xmath49-ring and @xmath41-coring structures .
similarly , @xmath45 is a right @xmath4-bialgebroid with @xmath50 and @xmath51 as its underlying @xmath19-ring and @xmath4-coring structures .
let us denote by @xmath52 ( resp .
@xmath53 ) the multiplication on @xmath54 ( resp .
@xmath55 ) .
@xmath56 is a ( bijective ) @xmath8-module map @xmath57 , called the _
antipode_. the compatibility conditions of these structures are as follows .    1
.   the sources @xmath58 , targets @xmath59 and counits @xmath60 satisfy + @xmath61 2 .
the left- and right - regular comodule structures commute , i.e. + @xmath62_-{\delta_{l } } \ar[r(1.7)]^-{\delta_{r } } & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h \ar[d(1.6)]^-{\delta_{l}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } id}\\ & & \\ h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } h \ar[r(1.6)]_-{id { \mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l}}}\delta_{r } } & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h } \hspace{0.75 in } \xymatrix { h \ar[d(1.7)]_-{\delta_{r } } \ar[r(1.7)]^-{\delta_{l } } & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } h \ar[d(1.6)]^-{\delta_{r}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } id}\\ & & \\ h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h \ar[r(1.6)]_-{id { \mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r}}}\delta_{l } } & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } h } \ ] ] 3 .   for all @xmath63 and for all
@xmath64 we have @xmath65 , 4 .
@xmath56 is the convolution inverse of the identity map i.e. , the following diagram commute + @xmath66 ^ -{s{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } i d } & & & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } h \ar[rrd]^-{\mu_{l } } & & \\ h \ar[rru]^-{\delta_{l } }   \ar[rrrr]^-{\epsilon_{r } } & & & & r \ar[rrrr]^-{s_{r } } & & & & h \\
h \ar[rrd]_-{\delta_{r } }   \ar[rrrr]_-{\epsilon_{l } } & & & & l \ar[rrrr]_-{s_{l } } & & & & h \\ & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h \ar[rrrr]_-{id{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } s } & & & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h \ar[rru]_-{\mu_{r } } & & \\ } \ ] ]    [ r2.2 ]    1 .    2 .   in the constituent bialgebroids @xmath45 and @xmath44 , the counits @xmath67 and @xmath68
extend the regular module structures on the base rings @xmath4 and @xmath41 to the @xmath4-ring @xmath55 and to the @xmath41-ring @xmath54 , respectively .
equivalently , the counits extend the regular module structures on the base rings @xmath4 and @xmath41 to the @xmath69-ring @xmath70 and to the @xmath71-ring @xmath72 .
this particularly implies that the maps @xmath73 , @xmath74 , @xmath75 and @xmath76 are idempotents .
this means that the images of @xmath77 and @xmath78 coincides in @xmath46 .
same is true for the images of @xmath79 and @xmath80 .
notice that for condition ( b ) to make sense , apart from being an @xmath41-bimodule map , @xmath81 has to be an @xmath4-bimodule map .
this is the case using remark ( 1 ) .
similarly , @xmath82 is an @xmath41-bimodule map .
4 .   we can equip @xmath46 with two @xmath83-bimodule structures one using @xmath80 and @xmath78 and the other using @xmath77 and @xmath79 .
condition ( c ) relates these two @xmath83-bimodules structures via the antipode @xmath56 which in turn makes the diagram in condition ( d ) defined .
5 .   a most convenient way to summarize
the property of the antipode of a hopf algebra is to express it as the inverse of the identity map in the convolution algebra of endomorphisms of that hopf algebra . for hopf algebroids ,
the antipode is the inverse of the identity map in the appropriate category , called the _ convolution category _ of @xmath42 . as before , @xmath4 and @xmath41
are @xmath8-algebras .
let @xmath84 and @xmath85 be @xmath8-modules such that @xmath84 has an @xmath4-coring @xmath86 and an @xmath41-coring @xmath87 structures and @xmath85 has an @xmath88-ring structure with multiplications @xmath89 and @xmath90 . define the convolution category @xmath91 to be the category with two objects labelled @xmath4 and @xmath41 . for @xmath92 , a morphism @xmath93 is a @xmath94-@xmath95-bimodule map @xmath96 .
for @xmath97 and morphisms @xmath98 and @xmath99 , we define the composition @xmath100 to be the following convolution + @xmath101 + the antipode @xmath56 of a hopf algebroid @xmath42 is the inverse of the identity map @xmath102 viewed as an arrow in @xmath103 .
let us note that condition ( c ) in the definition of a bialgebroid implies that @xmath104 is the identity .
similarly , @xmath105 is also the identity . using condition ( a ) in the definition of a hopf algebroid
, we see that the following compositions define pairs of inverse @xmath8-algebra maps .
+ @xmath106 ^ -{\epsilon_{r}\circ s_{l } } & & r^{op } \ar[rr]^-{\epsilon_{l}\circ t_{r } } & & l } \hspace{.5 in } \xymatrix { r \ar[rr]^-{\epsilon_{l}\circ s_{r } } & & l^{op } \ar[rr]^-{\epsilon_{r}\circ t_{l } } & & r}\ ] ] + this is particular implies that @xmath4 and @xmath41 are anti - isomorphic @xmath8-algebras . 7 .
since there are two coproducts involved in a hopf algebroid , namely @xmath81 and @xmath82 , we will use different sweedler notations for their corresponding components .
we will write @xmath107}\otimes_{l}h_{[2]}$ ] and @xmath108}\otimes_{r}h^{[2]}$ ] for @xmath64 . 8 .   with a fixed bijective antipode @xmath56 ,
the constituent left- and right - bialgebroids of a hopf algebroid determine each other , see for example the article @xcite .
in view of this and the fact that @xmath41 and @xmath4 are anti - isomorphic , in the sequel where we will be mainly interested with hopf algebroids with bijective antipodes we will simply call @xmath42 a hopf algebroid _ over _ @xmath4 instead of explicitly mentioning @xmath41 .
[ d2.3 ] let @xmath109 and @xmath110 be hopf algebroids over @xmath4 .
an _ algebraic morphism _
@xmath111 of hopf algebroids is a pair @xmath112 of a left - bialgebroid morphism @xmath113 and a right - bialgebroid morphism @xmath114 for which the following diagrams commute    @xmath115_-{\varphi_{l } } \ar[rr]^-{s } & & h_{r } \ar[dd]^-{\varphi_{r}}\\ & & \\ h_{l}^ { ' } \ar[rr]_-{s^ { ' } } & & h_{r}^ { ' } } \hspace{0.75 in } \xymatrix { h_{r } \ar[dd]_-{\varphi_{r } } \ar[rr]^-{s } & & h_{l } \ar[dd]^-{\varphi_{l}}\\ & & \\ h_{r}^ { ' } \ar[rr]_-{s^ { ' } } & & h_{l}^ { ' } } \ ] ]    and composition of such a pair is componentwise .
let @xmath4 and @xmath116 be @xmath8-algebras and @xmath109 and @xmath117 be hopf algebroids over @xmath4 and @xmath116 , respectively .
in view of remark ( [ r2.2 ] ) ( 7 ) above , denote by @xmath118 and @xmath119 .
a _ geometric morphism _
@xmath120 of hopf algebroids is a pair @xmath121 of @xmath8-algerba maps @xmath122 and @xmath123 , where @xmath124 denote the underlying @xmath8-algebra structures of the hopf algebroids under consideration .
these two maps satisfy the following compatibility conditions .
1 .   @xmath125 and @xmath126 intertwines the source , target and counit maps of the left - bialgebroid structures of @xmath42 and @xmath127 , i.e. + @xmath128_-{\phi } \ar[rr]^-{\epsilon^{h}_{l } } & & l \ar[dd]^-{f}\\ & & \\ k \ar[rr]_-{\epsilon^{k}_{l } } & & l^ { ' } } \hspace{0.15 in } \xymatrix { l \ar[dd]_-{f } \ar[rr]^-{t^{h}_{l } } & & h \ar[dd]^-{\phi}\\ & & \\ l^ { ' } \ar[rr]_-{t^{k}_{l } } & & k } \hspace{0.15 in } \xymatrix { l \ar[dd]_-{f } \ar[rr]^-{s^{h}_{l } } & & h \ar[dd]^-{\phi}\\ & & \\ l^ { ' } \ar[rr]_-{s^{k}_{l } } & & k. } \ ] ] + same goes for the source , target and counit maps of the right - bialgebroid structures .
2 .   in view of condition
@xmath129 , the @xmath8-bimodule map @xmath130 defines @xmath8-bimodule maps + @xmath131 ^ -{\phi\prescript{}{f}{\otimes } \ \phi } & & k \prescript{}{l^{'}}{\otimes } \ k , } \hspace{.25 in } \xymatrix { h \otimes_{r } \ h \ar[rr]^-{\phi\
\otimes_{f } \phi } & & k \otimes_{r^ { ' } } \ k. } \ ] ] + we then require that the following diagrams commute + @xmath131 ^ -{\phi\prescript{}{f}{\otimes } \ \phi } \ar[dd]_-{\mu^{h}_{l } } & & k \prescript{}{l^{'}}{\otimes } \ k \ar[dd]^-{\mu^{k}_{l } } \\ & & \\
h \ar[rr]_-{\phi } & & k } \hspace{.25 in } \xymatrix { h \otimes_{r } \ h \ar[rr]^-{\phi\ \otimes_{f } \phi } \ar[dd]_-{\mu^{h}_{r } } & & k \otimes_{r^ { ' } } \ k \ar[dd]^-{\mu^{k}_{r } } \\ & & \\ h \ar[rr]_-{\phi } & & k}\ ] ] 3 .   also by of condition @xmath129 , the @xmath8-bimodule maps @xmath132 and @xmath133 of condition @xmath134 further define @xmath8-bimodule maps + @xmath135 ^ -{\phi\prescript{}{f}{\times } \ \phi } & & k \prescript{}{l^{'}}{\times } \ k , } \hspace{.25 in } \xymatrix { h \times_{r } \
\times_{f } \phi } & & k \times_{r^ { ' } } \ k. } \ ] ] + we then require that the following diagrams commute .
+ @xmath136 ^ -{\phi } \ar[dd]_-{\delta^{h}_{l } } & & k \ar[dd]^-{\delta^{k}_{l } } \\ & & \\
h \prescript{}{l}{\times } \ h \ar[rr]_-{\phi\prescript{}{f}{\times } \ \phi } & & k \prescript{}{l^{'}}{\times } \ k } \hspace{.25 in } \xymatrix { h \ar[rr]^-{\phi } \ar[dd]_-{\delta^{h}_{r } } & & k \ar[dd]^-{\delta^{k}_{r } } \\ & & \\
h \times_{r } \
h \ar[rr]_-{\phi\ \times_{f } \phi } & & k \times_{r^ { ' } } \ k } \ ] ] 4 .
@xmath126 intertwines the antipodes of @xmath42 and @xmath127 , i.e. @xmath137 .    [ r2.3 ]    1 .    2 .
for a @xmath8-algebra @xmath4 , let us denote by @xmath138 the category whose objects are hopf algebroids over @xmath4 and morphisms are algebraic morphisms .
for a fixed @xmath8 , let us denote by @xmath139 the category whose objects are hopf algebroids over @xmath8-algebras and morphisms are geometric morphisms .
the existence of these two naturally defined categories reflect the fact that hopf algebroids are generalization of both hopf algebras and groupoids .
3 .   equip @xmath140 with the hopf algebroid structure defined in example 5 of the next section .
let @xmath109 be a hopf algebroid over @xmath4 . then the unit maps @xmath141 together with the identity map on @xmath4 define geometric morphisms @xmath142 and @xmath143 .      [ e2.1 ]
* hopf algebras*. a hopf algebra @xmath46 over the commutative unital ring @xmath8 gives an example of a hopf algebroid .
here , we take @xmath144 as @xmath8-algebras , take @xmath145 to be the source and target maps , set @xmath146 to be the counits , and @xmath147 to be the coproducts .
[ e2.2 ] * coupled hopf algebras*. it might be tempting to think that hopf algebroids for which @xmath144 must be hopf algebras .
this is not entirely the case
. we will give a general set of examples for which this is not true .
two hopf algebra structures @xmath148 and @xmath149 over the same @xmath8-algebra @xmath46 are said to be _ coupled _ if    1 .
there exists a @xmath8-module map @xmath150 , called the _ coupling map _ such that + @xmath151 ^ -{c\otimes i d } & & & & h\otimes h \ar[rd(1.6)]^-{m } & & \\ & & & & & & & & \\
h \ar[ru(1.8)]^-{\delta_{1 } } \ar[rd(1.8)]_-{\delta_{2 } } \ar@<1ex>[rrrr]^-{\epsilon_{2 } } \ar@<-1ex>[rrrr]_-{\epsilon_{1 } } & & & & k \ar[rrrr]^-{\eta } & & & & h \\ & & & & & & & & \\ & & h\otimes h \ar[r(3)]_-{id\otimes c } & & & & h\otimes h \ar[ru(1.6)]_-{m } & & \\ } \ ] ] + commutes , and 2 .
the coproducts @xmath152 and @xmath153 in @xmath46 commutes .    coupled hopf algebras give rise to hopf algebroids over @xmath8 .
the left @xmath8-bialgebroid is the underlying bialgerba of @xmath154 while the right @xmath8-bialgebroid is the underlying bialgebra of @xmath155 .
the coupling map plays the role of the antipode .
let us give examples of coupled hopf algebras .
connes and moscovici constructed _ twisted _ antipodes in @xcite .
let us show that such a twisted antipode is a coupling map for some coupled hopf algebras .
let @xmath156 be a hopf algebra .
take @xmath157 as hopf algebras .
let @xmath158 be a character .
define @xmath159 by @xmath160 .
take @xmath161 .
define @xmath162 by @xmath163 .
note the sweedler - legs of @xmath164 appearing in the definition of @xmath165 is the one provided by @xmath26 and not by @xmath153 .
then , @xmath166 is a hopf algebra coupled with @xmath154 by the coupling map @xmath167 defined by @xmath168 .
[ e2.3 ] * groupoid algebras*. given a small groupoid @xmath169 with finitely many objects and a commutative unital ring @xmath8 , we can construct what is called the groupoid algebra of @xmath169 over @xmath8 , denoted by @xmath170 .
for such a groupoid @xmath169 , let us denote by @xmath171 its set of objects , @xmath172 its set of morphisms , @xmath173 the source and target maps , @xmath174 the unit map , @xmath175 the inversion map , @xmath176 the set of composable pairs of morphisms , and @xmath177 the partial composition . the groupoid algebra @xmath170 is the @xmath8-algebra generated by @xmath172 subject to the relation    @xmath178    for @xmath179 .
the groupoid algebra @xmath170 is a hopf algebroid as folows .
the base algebras @xmath4 and @xmath41 are both equal to @xmath180 and the two bialgebroids @xmath45 and @xmath44 are isomorphic as bialgebroids with underlying @xmath8-module @xmath181 . the partial groupoid composition @xmath182 dualizes and extends to a multiplication @xmath183 which then factors through the canonical surjection @xmath184 to give the product @xmath185 .
the source and target maps @xmath186 of the groupoid give the source and target maps @xmath187 , respectively .
the unit map gives the counit map @xmath188 .
finally , the inversion map gives the antipode map @xmath189 .
note that the underlying bimodule structures of the right and the left bialgerboid is related by the antipode map .
[ e2.4 ] * weak hopf algebras*. another structure that generalize hopf algebras , called weak hopf algebras , also are hopf algebroids .
explicitly , a weak hopf algebra @xmath46 over a commutative unital ring @xmath8 is a unitary associative algebra together with @xmath8-linear maps @xmath190 ( weak coproduct ) , @xmath191 ( weak counit ) and @xmath192 ( weak antipode ) satisfying the following axioms :    1 .
@xmath26 is multiplicative , coassociative , and weak - unital , i.e. @xmath193 2 .
@xmath194 is counital , and weak - multiplicative , i.e. for any @xmath195 @xmath196 3 .   for
any @xmath64 , @xmath197 and @xmath198    let us sketch a proof why a weak hopf algebra @xmath46 is a hopf algebroid .
consider the maps @xmath199 , @xmath200 and @xmath201 , @xmath202 . by @xmath8-linearity and weak - multiplicativity of @xmath194 , @xmath203 and @xmath204
are idempotents .
multiplicativity and coassiociativity of @xmath26 and counitality of @xmath194 implies that for any @xmath64 ,    @xmath205    now , using these relations and coassiociativity of @xmath26 we get    @xmath206    @xmath207    thus , the first tensor factor of the left - hand side of the first equation above is in the image of @xmath203 .
similarly , the last tensor factor of the left - hand side of the second equation above is in the image of @xmath204 . clearly , @xmath208 .
hence , the images of @xmath203 and @xmath204 are unitary subalgebras of @xmath46 .
denote these subalgebras by @xmath4 and @xmath41 , respectively . by the weak - unitality of @xmath26 we see that these subalgebras are commuting subalgebras of @xmath46 .    taking the source map @xmath32 as the inclusion @xmath209 and the target map as @xmath210
, @xmath211 equips @xmath46 with an @xmath19-ring structure . taking @xmath212 and @xmath82 as the composition    @xmath213 ^ -{\delta }   & & h\otimes_{k}h \ar@{->>}[rr ] & & h\otimes_{r}h } \ ] ]    equips @xmath46 with an @xmath4-coring structure @xmath51 .
the ring and coring structures just constructed gives @xmath46 a structure of right @xmath4-bialgebroid @xmath45 .
using @xmath69 in place of @xmath4 in the above construction , we get a left @xmath69-bialgebroid @xmath214 .
together with the right @xmath4-bialgebroid constructed and the existing weak antipode @xmath56 , we get a hopf algebroid @xmath215 .      in this section
, we will look at representations of hopf algebroids . towards the end of the section
, we will look at the descent theoretic aspect of a special class of modules over hopf algebroids , the so called relative hopf modules .
let @xmath43 be a hopf algebroid with underlying @xmath8-module @xmath46 .
@xmath46 carries both a left @xmath41-module sctructure and a left @xmath4-module structure via the maps @xmath79 and @xmath80 , respectively .
a _ right _
@xmath216 is a right @xmath41-module and a right @xmath4-module together with a right @xmath45-coaction @xmath217 and a right @xmath44-coaction @xmath218 such that @xmath219 is an @xmath44-comodule map and @xmath220 is an @xmath45-comodule map .    for the coaction @xmath219 , let us use the following sweedler notation :    @xmath221}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } m^{[1]}\ ] ]    and for the coaction @xmath220 , let us use the following sweedler notation :    @xmath222 } { \mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } m_{[1]}.\ ] ]    with these notations , the conditions above explicitly means that for all @xmath223 , @xmath224 and @xmath225 we have    @xmath226}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r}}}(m\cdot l)^{[1]}=\rho_{r}(m\cdot l)=m^{[0]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } t_{l}(l)m^{[1]}\ ] ]    @xmath227}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l}}}(m\cdot r)_{[1]}=\rho_{l}(m\cdot r)=m_{[0]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } m_{[1]}s_{r}(r).\ ] ]    we further require that the two coactions satify the following commutative diagrams    @xmath228_-{\rho_{r } } \ar[r(1.7)]^-{\rho_{l } } & & m{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } h \ar[d(1.6)]^-{\rho_{r}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } id}\\ & & \\
m{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h \ar[r(1.6)]_-{id { \mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r}}}\delta_{l } } & & m{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } h } \hspace{0.75 in } \xymatrix { m \ar[d(1.7)]_-{\rho_{l } } \ar[r(1.7)]^-{\rho_{r } } & & m{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h \ar[d(1.6)]^-{\rho_{l}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } id}\\ & & \\ m{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } h \ar[r(1.6)]_-{id { \mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l}}}\delta_{r } } & & m{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } h } \ ] ]    we will denote by @xmath229 the category of right @xmath42-comodules .
symmetrically , we can define left @xmath42-comodules and we denote the category of a such by @xmath230 .    comodules over hopf algebroids are comodules over the constituent bialgebroids .
thus , one can speak of two different coinvariants , one for each bialgebroid . for
a given right @xmath42-comodule @xmath216 , they are defined as follows :    @xmath231    @xmath232    in the general case , we have @xmath233 .
but in our case , where we assume @xmath56 is bijective these two spaces coincide . this will be important in the formulation of galois theory for hopf algebroids . to see that these coinvariants coincide ,
consider the following map    @xmath234 @xmath235    here , @xmath46 acts on the right of @xmath236 through the second factor .
if @xmath237 , then we have    @xmath238}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } m^{[1 ] } ) = \rho_{l}(m^{[0]})\cdot s(m^{[1]})\\ \nonumber & = & ( m^{[0]}_{[0]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } m^{[0]}_{[1]})\cdot s(m^{[1 ] } ) = m^{[0]}_{[0]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } m^{[0]}_{[1]}s(m^{[1]})\\ \nonumber & = & m_{[0]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } m^{[0]}_{[1]}s(m^{[1]}_{[1]})= m_{[0]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } s_{l}(\epsilon_{l}(m_{[1]}))\\ \nonumber & = & m_{[0]}s_{l}(\epsilon_{l}(m_{[1]})){\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } 1 = m{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } 1\\ \nonumber\end{aligned}\ ] ]    this shows the inclusion @xmath233 . to show the other inclusion
, one can run the same computation but using the inverse of @xmath239 which is the following map    @xmath240 @xmath241    in this case , we can simply write @xmath242 for @xmath243 and refer to it as the @xmath42-coinvariants of @xmath216 instead of distinguishing the @xmath45- from the @xmath44-coinvariants , unless it is necessary to do so .
let us now discuss monoid objects in @xmath229 .
they are called @xmath42-comodule algebras .
a right @xmath42-_comodule algebra _ is an @xmath4-ring @xmath244 such that @xmath216 is a right @xmath42-comodule and @xmath245 and @xmath246 are @xmath42-comodule maps . using sweedler notation for coactions , this explicitly means that for any @xmath247 we have    @xmath248}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r}}}(mn)^{[1]}=\rho_{r}(mn)=m^{[0]}n^{[0]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } m^{[1]}n^{[1]},\ ] ]    @xmath249}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l}}}(mn)_{[1]}=\rho_{l}(mn)=m_{[0]}n_{[0]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } m_{[1]}n_{[1]},\ ] ]    @xmath250}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r}}}1_{m}^{[1]}=\rho_{r}(1_{m})=1_{m}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r } } } 1_{h},\ ] ]    @xmath251}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l}}}(1_{m})_{[1]}=\rho_{l}(1_{m})=1_{m}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l } } } 1_{h}.\ ] ]    let @xmath43 be a hopf algebroid with underlying @xmath8-module @xmath46 .
a @xmath8-algebra extension @xmath252 is said to be ( _ right _ ) @xmath45-_galois _ if @xmath18 is a right @xmath45-comodule algebra with @xmath253 and the map    @xmath254
^ -{\mathfrak{gal}_{r } } & & b{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r}}}h } \ ] ] @xmath255}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{r}}}b^{[1]}\ ] ]    is a bijection .
the map @xmath256 is called the galois map associated to the bialgebroid extension @xmath252 .
symmetrically , the extension @xmath252 is ( _ right _ ) @xmath44-_galois _ if @xmath18 is a right @xmath44-comodule algebra with @xmath257 and the map    @xmath254 ^ -{\mathfrak{gal}_{l } } & & b{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l}}}h } \ ] ] @xmath258}b{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{l}}}a_{[1]}\ ] ]    is a bijection .
we say that a @xmath8-algebra extension @xmath252 is @xmath42-_galois _ if it is both @xmath45-galois and @xmath44-galois .
it is not known in general if the bijectivity of @xmath256 and @xmath259 are equivalent
. however , if the antipode @xmath56 is bijective ( which is part of our standing assumption ) then @xmath256 is bijective if and only if @xmath259 . to see this , note that @xmath260 where @xmath261 is the map defined in the previous section for @xmath262 . since @xmath56 is bijective
, @xmath261 is an isomorphism which gives the desired equivalence of bijectivity of @xmath256 and @xmath259 .
thus , the extension @xmath252 is @xmath42-galois if it is a bialgebroid galois extension for any of its constituent bialgebroids .
batista et al . @xcite introduced the notion of a hopf category over an arbitrary strict braided monoidal @xmath263 . in this section
, we will introduce its topological version .
for this purpose , we specialize @xmath263 as the category of complex vector spaces whose braiding is the usual flip of tensor factors .
also , we will assume that the underlying categories of such hopf categories are small .
we will be primarily interested with _ finite - type _ @xmath263-enriched categories , by which we mean the hom - sets are finite - dimensional vector spaces . before giving the definition of a hopf category ,
let is introduce some notation first .
for two @xmath263-enriched categories @xmath264 and @xmath265 with the same set of objects @xmath84 , we define @xmath266 to the the @xmath263-enriched category with @xmath84 as the set of objects and for @xmath267 , the hom - set of arrows from @xmath268 to @xmath269 is the vector space    @xmath270    we call @xmath266 the _ tensor product _ of @xmath264 and @xmath265 . with this @xmath271 ,
the category of @xmath263-enriched categories over @xmath84 becomes a strict monoidal category whose monoidal unit , denoted by @xmath272 , is the category over @xmath84 such that for any @xmath267 we have @xmath273 .
[ d3.1 ] a _ hopf category _ @xmath274 over @xmath84 is a @xmath263-enriched category satisfying the following conditions .    1 .
there are functors + @xmath275 ^ -{\delta } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } } , \hspace{.5 in } \xymatrix{\mathscr{h } \ar[rr]^-{\epsilon } & & \mathbb{1}^{x}}\ ] ] + called the _
coproduct _ and _ counit _ , respectively , such that @xmath26 is _ coassociative _ and _ counital _ with respect to @xmath194 , i.e. the diagram of functors + @xmath276 ^ -{\delta } \ar[dd]_-{\delta } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[dd]|-{id\otimes_{x}\delta } \\ & & \\
\mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[rr]_-{\delta\otimes_{x } i d } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \\ } \hspace{.25 in } \xymatrix { \mathscr{h } \ar@{=}[rr ] \ar@{=}[dd ] \ar[rrdd]^-{\delta } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathbb{1}^{x } \\ & & \\
\mathbb{1}^{x}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[ll]^-{\epsilon\otimes_{x } i d } \ar[uu]_-{is\otimes_{x}\epsilon } \\ } \ ] ] + commute .
2 .   there is a functor @xmath277 , called the _ antipode _ , satisfying + @xmath278 ^ -{s\otimes_{x } i d } & & \mathscr{h}^{op}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[rrd]^-{\circ } & & \\
\mathscr{h } \ar[rru]^-{\delta } \ar[rrd]_-{\delta } \ar[rrr]^-{\epsilon } & & & \mathbb{1}_{x } \ar[rrr]^-{\eta } & & & \mathscr{h } \\ & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[rr]_-{id\otimes_{x } s } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h}^{op } \ar[rru]_-{\circ } & & \\}\ ] ] + here , @xmath279 denotes the bifunctor induced by the categorical composition in @xmath274 and @xmath280 is the functor that send @xmath281 to the identity element of @xmath282 .
[ r3.1 ] functoriality of @xmath26 and @xmath194 means that for any @xmath267 , we have linear maps    @xmath283 ^ -{\delta_{x , y } } & & \mathscr{h}_{x , y}\otimes \mathscr{h}_{x , y } } \hspace{.5 in } \xymatrix{\mathscr{h}_{x , y } \ar[rr]^-{\epsilon_{x , y } } & & \mathbb{c}}\ ] ]    where @xmath284 is coassociative and counital with respect to @xmath285 in the usual sense .
this implies that @xmath282 is a coalgebra .
if we denote by @xmath286 the category of coalgebras on @xmath263 , another way to package part @xmath129 of definition ( [ d3.1 ] ) is to say that @xmath274 is enriched over @xmath287 .    for the main results of this paper
, we will be mostly interested with the case @xmath84 is a topological space . in such a case , it makes sense to reflect _ continuity _ on the functors @xmath26 , @xmath194 and @xmath56 along with the categorical structure maps .
this calls for the following definition .
[ d3.2 ] let @xmath84 be a topological space and let @xmath288 be the sheaf of continuous complex - valued functions on @xmath84 .
a _ topological hopf category _ @xmath274 over @xmath84 is a hopf category together with a sheaf @xmath289 over @xmath290 ( with the product topology ) of @xmath288-bimodules satisfying the following conditions .    1 .
denote by @xmath291 the projection onto the first and second factor , respectively . over an open set @xmath292 , for any @xmath293 , @xmath294 and @xmath295 we have + @xmath296 + for any @xmath297 .
@xmath282 is the fiber of @xmath289 at @xmath298 .
@xmath279 , @xmath280 , @xmath26 , @xmath194 and @xmath56 are the induced maps on global sections of the following map of sheaves + @xmath299 ^ -{\circ^{sh } } & & h^{sh } } , \hspace{.5 in } \xymatrix{\mathcal{o}_{x } \ar[rr]^-{\eta^{sh } } & & h^{sh } } , \ ] ] + @xmath300 ^ -{\delta^{sh } } & & h^{sh}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{\mathcal{o}_{x } } } } h^{sh } } , \hspace{.5 in } \xymatrix{h^{sh } \ar[rr]^-{\epsilon^{sh } } & & \mathcal{o}_{x}},\ ] ] + @xmath301 ^ -{s^{sh } } & & \left(h^{sh}\right)^{op } } \ ] ] + respectively . here , @xmath302 is the pullback of the sheaf @xmath289 along the map @xmath303 flipping the factors .
[ r3.2 ] the bimodule tensor product @xmath304 used in part @xmath305 for @xmath306 of definition ( [ d3.2 ] ) is the tensor product of the appropriately modified @xmath288-bimodule @xmath289 , one in which we have    @xmath307    for any @xmath308 . for the bimodule tensor product @xmath304 used for @xmath309
is the one with    @xmath310    for any @xmath311 .
the following , which will play an important role in our formulation of the main result , is the categorification of a coupled hopf algebra .
[ d3.3 ] a _ coupled hopf category _ @xmath274 is a @xmath263-enriched category with two @xmath287-enrichments , denoted by @xmath312 and @xmath313 , with coproducts @xmath314 and counits @xmath315 , respectively ; and a functor @xmath277 , called the _ coupling _ functor , such that the following conditions are satisfied :    1 .   the following diagrams , indicating the _ coupling condition _
, commute .
+ @xmath316 ^ -{s\otimes_{x } i d } & & \mathscr{h}^{op}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[rrd]^-{\circ } & & \\
\mathscr{h } \ar[rru]^-{\delta^{l } }   \ar[rrr]^-{\epsilon^{r } } & & & \mathbb{1}^{x } \ar[rrr]^-{\eta } & & & \mathscr{h } \\
\mathscr{h } \ar[rrd]_-{\delta^{r } }   \ar[rrr]_-{\epsilon^{l } } & & & \mathbb{1}^{x } \ar[rrr]_-{\eta } & & & \mathscr{h } \\ & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[rr]_-{id\otimes_{x } s } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h}^{op } \ar[rru]_-{\circ } & & \\ } \ ] ] 2 .
the coproducts @xmath317 and @xmath318 commute , i.e. + @xmath319_-{\delta^{l } } \ar[rr]^-{\delta^{r } } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[dd]^-{\delta^{l}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } id}\\ & & \\ \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[rr]_-{id { \mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x}}}\delta^{r } } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } } \hspace{.25 in } \xymatrix { \mathscr{h } \ar[dd]_-{\delta^{r } } \ar[rr]^-{\delta^{l } } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[dd]^-{\delta^{r}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } id}\\ & & \\ \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } \ar[rr]_-{id { \mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x}}}\delta^{l } } & & \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{x } } } \mathscr{h } } \ ] ]    [ r3.3 ]    1 .    2
.   coupled hopf categories are almost the categorification of coupled hopf algebras . while the constituent bialgebras of a coupled hopf algebra is a hopf algebras in itself , the constituent categories @xmath312 and @xmath313 of a coupled hopf category @xmath274
need not be hopf categories .
3 .   just like hopf categories , we can also _ topologize _ coupled hopf categories
. we can take definition ( [ d3.2 ] ) : assert the existence of a sheaf @xmath289 over @xmath290 of @xmath288-bimodules , take conditions @xmath129 and @xmath134 as they are , and replace condition @xmath305 by 1 .
@xmath317 , @xmath318 , @xmath320 , @xmath321 and @xmath56 are the induced maps on global sections of the following map of sheaves + @xmath300 ^ -{(\delta^{l})^{sh } } & & h^{sh}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{\mathcal{o}_{x } } } } h^{sh } } , \hspace{.5 in } \xymatrix{h^{sh } \ar[rr]^-{(\epsilon^{l})^{sh } } & & \mathcal{o}_{x}},\ ] ] + @xmath300 ^ -{(\delta^{r})^{sh } } & & h^{sh}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{\mathcal{o}_{x } } } } h^{sh } } , \hspace{.5 in } \xymatrix{h^{sh } \ar[rr]^-{(\epsilon^{r})^{sh } } & & \mathcal{o}_{x}},\ ] ] + @xmath301 ^ -{s^{sh } } & & \left(h^{sh}\right)^{op } } \ ] ] + respectively , making the following diagram + commute for any @xmath292 . here ,
@xmath322 and @xmath323 denote the maps induced by the composition and unit maps of @xmath324 .
the maps @xmath325 and @xmath326 denote @xmath303 , @xmath327 and @xmath303 , @xmath328 , respectively .      in this section , we will look at a very important example of a hopf category .
this example will also be an example of our main result .
this is a special case of proposition 7.1 of @xcite .
consider a finite set @xmath84 whose elements are conveniently labelled as @xmath329 .
equipped @xmath84 with the discrete topology .
consider the category @xmath330 whose set of objects is @xmath84 and define @xmath331 .
the category @xmath330 is obviously a hopf category . by proposition 7.1 of @xcite
, @xmath332 is a weak hopf algebra . using the arguments in example 4 of section ( [ s2.2 ] ) ,
@xmath42 is a hopf algebroid over @xmath333 .
the hopf algebroid @xmath42 has a more familiar form .
it is isomorphic , as a hopf algebroid , the algebra @xmath334 over its diagonal @xmath335 . with the @xmath336-bimodule structure on @xmath334 defined as    @xmath337    the coproduct @xmath82 and the counit @xmath67
are given as    @xmath338    where @xmath126 is the linear functional defined by @xmath339 for all @xmath340 . with the usual matrix multiplication and unit , @xmath82 and @xmath67 constitutes a right @xmath336-bialgebroid structure on @xmath334 . for completeness , let us define the structure maps of the left @xmath336-bialgebroid structure of @xmath334 . consider the @xmath336-bimodule structure on @xmath334 defined as    @xmath341
the coproduct @xmath81 and the counit @xmath68 are defined as    @xmath342    where @xmath126 is the same linear functional used to defined @xmath67 .
the antipode @xmath56 of this hopf algebroid is defined as @xmath343 .    as a weak hopf algebra , @xmath126 is the counit of @xmath42 . the coproducts @xmath81 and @xmath82 are the extension of the weak coproduct @xmath26 to @xmath344 relative to the @xmath336-bimodule structure used . as we will see in section ( [ s4.0 ] ) , this is not a coincidence .
this is in fact a special case of a more general result which we shall prove at the end of that section .
formulation of galois theory for hopf category is straightforward .
recall that in the case of hopf algebras , only the underlying bialgebra structure is relevant . in the coaction picture ,
the coalgebra is used to make sense of a coaction while the algebra structure is used to make sense of the galois map .
all these ingredients are already present in the case of a hopf category .
we will discuss the situation for topological hopf categories . the case for hopf categories follow almost immediately by dropping any manifestation of topology .    before giving the definition of the categorical analogue of a comodule algebra ,
let us first discuss what a topological category is , at least for our purpose .
a @xmath263-enriched category @xmath345 over a space @xmath84 is a _ topological category _ if there is a sheaf @xmath346 of @xmath288-bimodules such that conditions @xmath129 , @xmath134 and the relevant part of condition @xmath305 of definition ( [ d3.2 ] ) hold .
[ d3.4 ] let @xmath274 be a topological hopf category with space of objects @xmath84 , coproduct @xmath26 , counit @xmath194 and antipode @xmath56 with associated sheaf @xmath289 .    1 .
a topological category @xmath345 over @xmath84 enriched over @xmath263 , with associated sheaf @xmath346 , is a _ right _
@xmath274-_comodule _ if there is a functor @xmath347 such that the following conditions hold . 1 .
@xmath348 is coassociative with respect to @xmath26 and counital with respect to @xmath194 , i.e. the diagrams of functors + @xmath349 ^ -{\rho } \ar[dd]_-{\rho } & & \mathscr{m}\otimes_{x}\mathscr{h } \ar[dd]|-{id\otimes_{x}\delta } \\ & & & \\
\mathscr{m}\otimes_{x}\mathscr{h } \ar[rr]_-{\rho\otimes_{x } i d } & & \mathscr{m}\otimes_{x}\mathscr{h}\otimes_{x}\mathscr{h } \\ } \hspace{-.5 in } \xymatrix { \mathscr{m } \ar@{=}[rr ] \ar[rdd]_-{\rho } & & \mathscr{m}\otimes_{x}\mathbb{1}^{x } \\ & & \\ &
\mathscr{m } \otimes_{x } \mathscr{h } \ar[ruu]|-{id\otimes_{x}\epsilon } & \\}\ ] ] + commute , and 2 .
the functor @xmath348 is the map induced by the map of sheaves @xmath350 where the tensor product is the same as the first one we described in remark ( [ r3.2 ] ) .
@xmath274-_comodule _ can be symmetrically defined .
2 .   a _ morphism _ @xmath351 of right @xmath274-comodules is a functor that commutes with the right coactions , i.e. one which makes the following diagram commute + @xmath352 ^ -{\rho^{m } } \ar[dd]_-{\phi } & & & \mathscr{m}\otimes_{x}\mathscr{h } \ar[dd]|-{\phi\otimes_{x}id } \\ & & & \\
\mathscr{n } \ar[rrr]_-{\rho^{n } } & & & \mathscr{n}\otimes_{x}\mathscr{h}. \\ } \ ] ] + here , @xmath353 and @xmath354 are the coactions of @xmath274 on @xmath345 and @xmath355 , respectively .
3 .   a right @xmath274-comodule @xmath345 is a _
right _ @xmath274-_comodule - category _ if in addition , the composition map @xmath356 is a map of right @xmath274-comodules , where @xmath357 is equipped with the diagonal coaction .
the _ coinvariants _ of a right @xmath274-comodule - category @xmath345 is the subcategory @xmath358 whose space of objects is @xmath84 and whose hom - sets are defined as + @xmath359 + for any @xmath267 .
[ r3.4 ] a hopf category is the categorification of a hopf algebra with categorical composition corresponding to the algebra product .
a right @xmath274-comodule @xmath345 is in particular a category , it already has a composition .
this means that we only need to impose requirement @xmath360 in definition ( [ d3.4 ] ) to get a categorification of the notion of a comodule - algebra . in the classical set - up
, one has to require the existence of a product and assert its compatibility with the comodule structures .    in the set - up of hopf - galois theory with respect to hopf algebras
, there is a well - understood notion for extensions of @xmath8-algebras @xmath252 to be @xmath46-galois for a hopf algebra @xmath46 even if @xmath361 .
this is because @xmath362 makes sense as a @xmath8-module .
all that is left to do is require @xmath363 and that the map @xmath364 , @xmath365 is bijective . on the other hand , in the situation of a hopf category @xmath274 and extensions of comodule - categories @xmath366 with @xmath367
, we can only make sense of the product @xmath368 in the case @xmath264 is the subcategory of @xmath345 whose hom - sets @xmath369 are all zero except when @xmath370 , in which case @xmath371 . in this case
, we identify @xmath368 with @xmath357 .
let us call such a category the _ trivial linear category _ over @xmath84 , and denote by @xmath372
. there might be a way to consider galois extensions by hopf categories in which the subcategory of coinvariants is strictly larger than @xmath372 , but at present it is not clear to the author how to make sense of it .
fortunately , for our purpose of proving theorem ( [ t5.1 ] ) it is enough to have @xmath372 as the subcategory of coinvariants .
[ d3.5 ] a right @xmath274-comodule - category @xmath345 is a @xmath274-_galois extension _ of @xmath372 provided    1 .
@xmath373 , and 2 .
the functor + @xmath374 @xmath375}\right)\otimes \beta_{[1]}\ ] ] + called the _ galois morphism _
, is fully faithful .
[ r3.5 ]    1 .    2 .
we are using sweedler notation for the legs of the coaction + @xmath376 + in other words , for any @xmath267 and @xmath377 , we have @xmath378}\otimes\alpha_{[1]}$ ] , where @xmath379}\in\mathscr{m}_{x , z}$ ] and @xmath380}\in\mathscr{h}_{z , y}$ ] for some @xmath381 .
this , in particular , tells us that the map @xmath382 above make sense .
galois extension by a coupled hopf category @xmath383 means simultaneous galois extensions of the constituent @xmath287-enriched categories @xmath312 and @xmath313 .
in this section , we will consider hopf algebroids @xmath42 over a commutative unital @xmath1-algebra @xmath384 .
we will restrict to the case where @xmath42 is finitely - generated and projective as a left and a right @xmath384-module . with the underlying assumption that the antipode is bijective , by @xcite , finitely - generated projectivity of any of the @xmath384-module structures of @xmath42 coming from the source and target maps are all equivalent .
note that even though @xmath384 is commutative , its image under the source or the target map need not be central in @xmath42 .
we will deal with this general situation and specialize in the case when we have centrality .
let @xmath43 be a hopf algebroid over @xmath384 , a commutative unital @xmath1-algebra .
assume that @xmath44 is finitely - generated and projective as a left- and a right-@xmath384-module via the source and target maps . with our standing assumption
, @xmath45 has the same properties .
let us first consider the left bialgebroid @xmath44 .
the gelfand duality implies that @xmath385 for some compact hausdorff space @xmath84 .
the serre - swan theorem applied to the left @xmath384-module @xmath44 gives us a finite - rank vector bundle @xmath386 such that @xmath387 as left modules , where the left @xmath3-module structure on @xmath388 is by pointwise multiplication , i.e. @xmath389 for all @xmath390 and @xmath391 . by the bimodule nature of @xmath44 , the right @xmath384-module structure of @xmath388 commutes with the left @xmath384-module which implies that we have a representation @xmath392 of @xmath3 into the endomorphism bundle of @xmath386 .
since @xmath3 is abelian and @xmath348 is a @xmath393-morphism , @xmath394 lands in a maximal abelian subalgebra @xmath395 of @xmath396 .
choose a finite collection of open sets @xmath397 that cover @xmath84 over which @xmath398 is trivializable .
choose a system of coordinates such that @xmath398 trivial over each @xmath399 , i.e. @xmath400 , where @xmath401 is a finite - dimensional vector space.choosing a basis @xmath402 one has @xmath403 where @xmath404 is the rank of @xmath398 .
commutativity of @xmath3 implies that up to unitaries @xmath405 , we have    @xmath406 ^ -{\rho } & & c(u_{i } , diag(n))}\ ] ]    where @xmath407 denotes the subalgebra of diagonal matrices on @xmath334 and    @xmath408    for each @xmath409 , choosing a set of central orthogonal idempotents @xmath410 gives @xmath404 projections @xmath411 given by the following composition    @xmath406 ^ -{\rho_{i } } & & c(u_{i } , diag(n))\cong \bigoplus\limits_{k=1}^{n}c(u_{i } ) \ar[rr]^-{proj_{j } } & & c(u_{i } ) } \ ] ]    these projections are in particular continuous @xmath1-morphisms .
hence , they give , for each @xmath409 , ( possibly non - distinct ) @xmath404 continuous injective maps @xmath412 , @xmath413 .
geometrically , the situation is depicted figure ( [ fg4.1 ] ) .
.,width=510 ]    let us describe the nature of the set @xmath414 over the intersections @xmath415 .
over @xmath416 we get a unitary @xmath417 which gives @xmath404 central orthogonal idempotents and up to ordering of such idempotents , one gets the sets @xmath418 .
the union @xmath419 does not depend on the ordering of these idempotents .
thus , over @xmath415 one gets unitaries @xmath417 and @xmath420 which simultaneously diagonalize @xmath394 .
thus , we have    @xmath421    from which we get that    @xmath422    that is , the sets @xmath419 agree on the intersections .
a subset @xmath423 is called _ transverse _ if    @xmath424    are homeomorphisms , where @xmath425 and @xmath426 denotes the projection onto the first and second factor , respectively . in particular
, @xmath427 is homeomorphic to @xmath84 . using the above argument
, we have the following proposition .    [ p4.1 ] for every @xmath409
, @xmath428 the set @xmath429 extends to a transverse subset of @xmath290 completely contained in @xmath430 .
in particular , @xmath430 is the union of @xmath404 ( possibly overlapping ) transverse subsets of @xmath290 .
this means that the curves in figure ( [ fg4.1 ] ) overlap .
[ r4.1 ] another way to see why the closed subset @xmath431 is the union of transverse subsets of @xmath290 is by the fact the we can run the construction of the sets @xmath418 described in the beginning of this section in a symmetric fashion , one for each factor of @xmath290 .    the whole picture ( [ fg4.1 ] ) is a decomposition of @xmath290 into @xmath432 , @xmath433 .
the graphs of @xmath434 are labelled accordingly .
note that each @xmath435 , @xmath436 are diagonalizable since they commute with their adjoint @xmath437 . and
since such operators commute with each other , the collection @xmath438 is simultaneously diagonalizable . over a point @xmath439
, the fiber @xmath440 decomposes into joint eigenspaces of @xmath438 .
the dimension of these eigenspaces are determined by the number of intersections of the vertical dotted line through @xmath439 with the graphs of @xmath441 . using this eigenspace decomposition
, we have the following proposition which describes geometrically the right @xmath3-module structure of @xmath44 .    [ p4.2 ] given @xmath391 and @xmath436 the section @xmath442 is given as    @xmath443    where @xmath444 and @xmath445 .
[ r4.2 ]    1 .    2 .
in case @xmath3 is central in @xmath44 , the above picture reduce to @xmath446 the trivial cover and @xmath447 is the identity , i.e. the graph in the above picture is the diagonal of @xmath290 .
the action defined by equation ( [ eq4.1 ] ) then reduces to pointwise multiplication which then coincides with the left @xmath3-module structure of @xmath387 .
3 .   one can understand the right action above as _ pointwise - eigenvalue - scaled _ action .
compared to the central case , every @xmath436 acts on a @xmath448 in a way that @xmath449 acts diagonally on @xmath450 , i.e. @xmath440 constitutes a single eigenspace for the operator @xmath449 corresponding to the eigenvalue @xmath451 . in the noncentral case ,
the action is still pointwise
. however , the operator @xmath449 no longer has a single eigenspace .
the eigenspaces are labelled by the points @xmath452 where @xmath444 and the eigenvalues of @xmath449 are @xmath453 , @xmath413 .
[ p4.3 ] as a @xmath3-bimodule , @xmath454 where @xmath455 is a sheaf of complex vector spaces over @xmath290 supported on a closed subset @xmath431 .
the @xmath3-bimodule structure on @xmath456 is defined as    @xmath457    for @xmath458 and @xmath459 .
the @xmath460 is dense in @xmath461 thus we can extend the @xmath460-module structure of @xmath44 to a @xmath461-module structure . consider the annihilator of @xmath44 ,    @xmath462    then , there is an open set @xmath463 such that @xmath464 .
then @xmath465 , the support of the bimodule @xmath44 .
[ p4.4 ] the subset @xmath466 is completely determined by the @xmath3-bimodule structure of @xmath44 .
moreover , @xmath430 is the support of @xmath467 .    by proposition ( [ p4.1 ] ) , @xmath430 is the union of transverse subsets of @xmath290 which is individually are unions of graphs of @xmath434
. let    @xmath468    be the fiber of @xmath455 over @xmath469 , where @xmath470 denotes the eigensubspace of @xmath440 over the point @xmath471 .
this defines a sheaf of vector spaces on @xmath290 supported on @xmath430 .
a section of @xmath472 defines a section @xmath473 whose value at a point @xmath474 is    @xmath475    where @xmath476 denotes the projection @xmath477 .
conversely , any section @xmath478 defines a section @xmath479 by    @xmath480    now , given @xmath481 we have    @xmath482    for some @xmath483 . for any @xmath484 we have    @xmath485    which shows that @xmath486 ,
@xmath487 is a bimodule map whose inverse is the map @xmath488 , @xmath489 .    using proposition ( [ p4.1 ] )
, we can relate the vector bundles the serre - swan theorem gives when applied to the left and right @xmath3-module structure of @xmath44 as follows .
[ p4.5 ] let @xmath490 and @xmath491 be the vector bundles given by the serre - swan theorem applied to the finitely - generated projective left and right @xmath3-module @xmath44 , respectively .
then @xmath492 and @xmath493 are the direct - images of the sheaf @xmath455 along @xmath494 and @xmath495 , respectively .
first , the direct - image of @xmath455 along @xmath494 is easily seen to be a vector bundle and the space of sections @xmath496 is easily seen to be isomorphic as left @xmath3-modules to the left @xmath3-module @xmath456 . by proposition ( [ p4.3 ] ) ,
@xmath497 as left @xmath3-modules .
thus , by corollary 2.8 of @xcite we see that @xmath492 and @xmath498 are isomorphic as vector bundles .
similar argument works for @xmath493 .
let us say more about the nature of the eigenspaces @xmath499 , @xmath267 in relation to the subset @xmath430 .
[ p4.6 ]    1 .    2 .
@xmath500 3 .
@xmath501 is the number of transverse subsets of @xmath290 contained in @xmath430 passing through @xmath474 , with multiplicities .
4 .   @xmath502 for any @xmath503 .
the previous section describes the geometry of @xmath44 using its bimodule structure over @xmath3 .
but @xmath44 has more structure than just being a bimodule . in particular
, it is a @xmath3-ring via the left source map @xmath504 . in this section
, we will look at what this additional structure contributes to the geometry of @xmath44 .
we will keep the notations of the previous section .
the @xmath3-ring structure on @xmath505 via the source map @xmath79 consists of a pair of @xmath3-bimodule maps    @xmath506    @xmath507    satisfying the associativity and unitality conditions .
for brevity we will write @xmath508 .
the unit map @xmath280 gives an element @xmath509 satisfying @xmath510 for all @xmath436 . since @xmath84 is hausdorff ,
if @xmath511 then we can find an @xmath436 such that @xmath512 and @xmath513 .
thus , for @xmath511 we have    @xmath514    thus , the source map @xmath515 is implemented by @xmath516 , @xmath517 .
this means that @xmath518 and choosing @xmath125 such that @xmath519 and @xmath520 we see that @xmath521 is a nonzero element .
thus , the diagonal @xmath522 of @xmath290 is in @xmath430 .
see figure ( [ fg4.3 ] ) .     of the bimodule @xmath18.,width=510 ]
note that @xmath523 where @xmath524 is the sheaf of vector spaces whose fiber at a point @xmath525 is the vector space    @xmath526    due to the balancing condition @xmath527 for @xmath528 and @xmath436 .
notice that all but finitely many summands above are zero . specifically , only those @xmath503 for which @xmath474 and @xmath529 are both in @xmath430 contribute nontrivially .
let us denote these @xmath503 as @xmath530 .    by proposition ( [ p4.3 ] ) , @xmath531 as @xmath3-bimodules .
since @xmath532 is a fully faithful functor by corollary 2.8 of @xcite , we can convert the global ring structures @xmath533 and @xmath280 into something fiber - wise . in particular , the product map @xmath533 induces a map
@xmath534 ^ -{\mu _ { * } } & & e_{(x , z ) } } \end{aligned}\ ] ]    illustrated in figure ( [ fg4.2 ] ) . by the universal property of direct sums , there are maps    @xmath535 ^ -{\mu^{y_{i } } _ { * } } & & e_{(x , z ) } } \ ] ]    one for each @xmath536 .
the collection of these maps satisfy a set of conditions which , though derivable from associativity , is complicated to write down . see ( 3 ) of the remark below for these conditions .
however , for the maps @xmath537 these conditions are precisely the associativity condition .
likewise , the map @xmath280 induces maps @xmath538 which is nonzero when @xmath370 and zero otherwise .
the map @xmath539 together with @xmath540 makes the vector space @xmath541 a unital algebra , whose dimension depend on the multiplicity of the associated eigenvalue .
the following proposition is then immediate from these arguments .
[ p4.7 ] let @xmath542 be the @xmath3-sub - bimodule of @xmath456 supported on the diagonal @xmath522 .
then @xmath542 is an @xmath384-subring of @xmath44 where the multiplication is pointwise .
moreover , @xmath542 is the centralizer of @xmath384 in @xmath44 .
[ r4.3 ]    1 .    2 .
using abuse of notation , let us identify @xmath384 with its image in @xmath44 . in case
@xmath384 is central in @xmath44 , the fibers of the vector bundle @xmath543 are algebras .
these algebras correspond to @xmath541 together with the maps @xmath544 and @xmath545 since in the central case , @xmath546 .
thus , @xmath547 in the central case which is not surprising at all knowing that @xmath542 is the centralizer of @xmath384 .
the maps @xmath548 are only restricted by the associativity of @xmath533 .
since @xmath531 and @xmath532 is known to be a fully faithful functor by corollary 2.8 of @xcite , we have + @xmath549 ^ -{\left(\bigoplus\limits_{i}\mu^{i}_{*}\right)\otimes i d } \ar[dd]_-{id\otimes \left(\bigoplus\limits_{j}\mu^{j}_{*}\right ) } & & \bigoplus\limits_{y_{j}}\left(e_{(x , y_{j } ) } \otimes e_{(y_{j},z)}\right ) \ar[dd]^-{\bigoplus\limits_{j}\mu^{j } _ { * } } \\   & & \\ \bigoplus\limits_{y_{i}}\left(e_{(x , y_{i } ) } \otimes e_{(y_{i},z)}\right ) \ar[rr]_-{\bigoplus\limits_{i}\mu^{i } _ { * } } & & e_{(x , z ) . } } \ ] ] + universal property of direct sums gives us + @xmath550 ^ -{\mu^{i}_{*}\otimes i d } \ar[dd]_-{id\otimes \mu^{j } _ { * } } & & e_{(x , y_{j } ) } \otimes e_{(y_{j},z ) } \ar[dd]^-{\mu^{j } _ { * } } \\   & & \\ e_{(x , y_{i } ) } \otimes e_{(y_{i},z ) } \ar[rr]_-{\mu^{i } _ { * } } & & e_{(x , z)}. } \ ] ] + this justifies the argument before proposition ( [ p4.7 ] ) .
we can also use this to say more about the fibers of @xmath455 which we state in the next proposition .
[ p4.8 ] @xmath499 is a left @xmath551bimodule for every @xmath267 .
[ r4.4 ] using remark ( [ r4.3 ] ) above , we can construct a small category @xmath312 enriched over the category of complex vector spaces .
the set of objects of @xmath312 is @xmath84 . for every @xmath267
, we define    @xmath552    we will call @xmath312 the _ associated category _ of the left @xmath384-bialgebroid @xmath44 . in the next section
, we will see the additional properties of @xmath312 coming from the @xmath384-coring structure of @xmath44 . on a different note ,
let us give a complete geometric description of the @xmath384-ring structure of @xmath44 .
[ p4.9 ] denote by @xmath553 , @xmath554 and @xmath555 .
the product of @xmath528 takes the form    @xmath556    for all @xmath525 .
this follows immediately from equation ( [ eq4.2 ] ) .
notice the resemblance of this formula to the one for matrix multiplication .
this should remind the reader of an example we discussed in section ( [ s3.2 ] ) .
one can view a @xmath3-ring to be a `` matrix '' of vector spaces whose entries are indexed by @xmath290 and what sits in entry @xmath474 is the vector space @xmath499 . as we have defined after proposition ( [ p4.4 ] ) , the vector space @xmath499 is the zero vector space if @xmath557 .
for matrix algebras @xmath334 , @xmath84 would be an @xmath404-element set and the vector spaces @xmath499 would all be @xmath558 .
there are a plethora of algebraic structures package into a bialgebroid let alone in a hopf algebroid .
before we end this section , let us take a detour to describe the relationships among the structures of @xmath46 : being a @xmath558-algebra , the @xmath384-ring and the @xmath559-ring structures being a left - bialgebroid over @xmath560 .
for the purpose of this discussion , let us denote by @xmath561 the @xmath558-algebra structure of @xmath46 and recall that @xmath562 and @xmath563 denote the relevant @xmath384-ring and @xmath559-ring structures of @xmath46 , respectively . as we mentioned in section ( [ s2.1 ] ) , for a @xmath8-algebra @xmath4 ,
@xmath4-ring structures are in bijection with @xmath8-algebra maps @xmath564 .
thus , the complex algebra structure of @xmath46 is uniquely determined by the unit map @xmath565 .
similarly , the @xmath384-ring and the @xmath559-ring structures are determined by the @xmath558-linear maps @xmath79 and @xmath566 .
these maps satisfy the following commutativity relations .
@xmath567 ^ -{\eta_{\mathbb{c } } } \ar[dd ] & & h\\ & & \\ a \ar[rr ] \ar[rruu]|-{s_{l } } & & a^{e } \ar[uu]_-{\eta_{l } } } \hspace{.5 in } \xymatrix{h\otimes h \ar@{->>}[rr ] \ar[rrdd]_-{\mu_{\mathbb{c } } } & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{a}}}h \ar@{->>}[rr ] \ar[dd]_-{\mu_{l } } & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{a^{e}}}}h .
\ar[lldd]^-{\mu_{a^{e } } } \\ & & & & \\ & & h & & } \ ] ]    in terms of the local eigenspace decomposition , the map @xmath568 induces maps    @xmath569 & & e_{(x , y ) } } \ ] ]    while , by ( [ eq4.2 ] ) , we have maps    @xmath570 & & e_{(x , y ) } } .\ ] ]    on the other hand , because the @xmath461-bimodule structure of @xmath46 is given as follows ,    @xmath571    for any @xmath572 , @xmath573 , and @xmath267 , the product @xmath574 induces maps    @xmath575 & & e_{(x , x ) } } .\ ] ]    another way of seeing this is by noting that the product @xmath52 uses the tensor product @xmath576 which kills products @xmath577 & & e_{(x , y ) } } $ ] for which @xmath578 .
likewise , the tensor product @xmath579 kills products @xmath580 & & e_{(x , y ) } } $ ] for which @xmath511 .      in this section , using the techniques and results we have developed in sections ( [ s4.1 ] ) and ( [ s4.2 ] ) we will describe what the coring structure of @xmath44 contributes to the geometry of @xmath455 .
we will keep the notations of the previous two sections .
the @xmath3-bimodule structure of the underlying @xmath384-coring structure of @xmath44 is related to the @xmath3-bimodule structure of the underlying @xmath384-ring via    @xmath581    for @xmath459 , @xmath458 , and @xmath267 .
the left - hand side of equation ( [ eq4.3 ] ) concerns the bimodule structure one has for the underlying @xmath384-coring of @xmath44 while the right - hand side concerns its @xmath384-ring structure .
this , in particular , implies that if we run the construction we have in section ( [ s4.1 ] ) for the bimodule structure of the @xmath384-coring of @xmath44 , we will get the same sheaf @xmath455 supported over the same closed subset @xmath430 .
the coproduct @xmath81 of @xmath44 , @xmath582 , uses a different @xmath384-bimodule structure from the @xmath384-bimodule structure involved in the @xmath384-ring structure .
thus , @xmath583 means different from the @xmath583 we have in the product @xmath533 . with this , let us denote by @xmath584 this new tensor product .
thus , we have    @xmath585 ^ -{\delta_{l } } & & \gamma(z,\mathcal{e})\boxtimes_{c(x)}\gamma(z,\mathcal{e } ) } .\ ] ]    however , using the relation ( [ eq4.3 ] ) the codomain of @xmath81 can be expressed as    @xmath586    where @xmath587 is the sheaf of vector spaces whose fiber at @xmath588 is    @xmath589    using the same argument we used in the previous section , the map @xmath81 induces a map @xmath590 of sheaves over @xmath430 . over point a @xmath469 , we have a map    @xmath591 ^ -{\left(\delta_{l}\right)_{*}^{(x , y ) } } & & \bigoplus\limits_{z',z''\in x}\left(e_{(x , z')}\otimes e_{(x , z'')}\right ) } \ ] ]    meanwhile , the counit @xmath592 induces a map @xmath593 of sheaves over @xmath430 and @xmath522 , respectively .
here , @xmath594 is the map @xmath595 for any @xmath469 and @xmath596 is the subsheaf of @xmath455 where the fiber of @xmath596 at @xmath474 is @xmath597 unless @xmath370 , to which the fiber is @xmath558 viewed as the one - dimensional subalgebra of @xmath541 spanned by its unit @xmath598 .
hence , over a point @xmath469 we have @xmath599 .
counitality of @xmath81 with respect to @xmath68 implies that for fixed but arbitrary @xmath267 we have    @xmath600 ^ -{\bigoplus\limits_{z^{'}}id\otimes\left(\epsilon_{l}\right)_{*}^{(x , z^ { ' } ) } } \\ & & \\ & & \\ & & \\ & & \\ e_{(x , y ) } \ar[rruuuuu]^-{\left(\delta_{l}\right)_{*}^{(x , y ) } } \ar@{=}[rr ] & & \bigoplus\limits_{z}\left(e_{(x , z)}\otimes\mathbb{c}\right ) \\ v \ar@{|->}[rr ] & & v\otimes 1 \\ } \hspace{.15 in } \xymatrix@r=2 mm { & & \bigoplus\limits_{z , z^{'}}\left(e_{(x , z)}\otimes e_{(x , z^{'})}\right ) \ar[ddddd]^-{\bigoplus\limits_{z}\left(\epsilon_{l}\right)_{*}^{(x , z)}\otimes i d } \\ & & \\ & & \\ & & \\ & & \\ e_{(x , y ) } \ar[rruuuuu]^-{\left(\delta_{l}\right)_{*}^{(x , y ) } } \ar@{=}[rr ] & & \bigoplus\limits_{z^{'}}\left(\mathbb{c}\otimes e_{(x , z^{'})}\right ) \\
v \ar@{|->}[rr ] & & 1\otimes v \\}\ ] ]    the bottom isomorphisms imply that @xmath601 and @xmath602 are nonzero maps for @xmath603 and @xmath604 .
since @xmath268 and @xmath269 are arbitrary to start with , we have the following proposition .
[ p4.10 ] for any @xmath469 , we have @xmath605 .
another thing we can infer from the diagrams ( [ eq4.6 ] ) , using the isomorphisms in the bottom and the fact that @xmath269 is among the @xmath606 and @xmath607 that appears as indices , is that the image of @xmath608 is contained in    @xmath609    we will show in the next section that more can be said .
in fact , the image of @xmath608 is completely contained in @xmath610 .      in this section , we will complete our description of the geometry of the hopf algebroid @xmath42 over @xmath3 .
in doing so , we will be able to illustrate the main point of this article .
that to such a hopf algebroid , one can associate a highly structured category .
so far , we have considered only the constituent left bialgebroid @xmath44 of @xmath42 . running the arguments we have presented in sections ( [ s4.1 ] ) and ( [ s4.2 ] ) for @xmath45
, we see that there is a sheaf of vector spaces @xmath596 over @xmath290 such that @xmath611 .
let us denote by @xmath612 the support of @xmath45 under the isomorphism @xmath611 .
the following proposition relates these two sheaves .
[ p4.11 ] for @xmath613 and @xmath611 as @xmath3-bimodules as constructed in sections ( [ s4.1 ] ) and ( [ s4.2 ] ) , where @xmath455 and @xmath596 are sheaves of vector spaces supported on @xmath614 , we have    1 .   @xmath615 .
2 .   @xmath616 as sheaves over @xmath430 .    condition ( c ) of the definition of a hopf algebroid implies that the antipode @xmath56 of @xmath42 flips the @xmath3-bimodule structure used for the @xmath3-ring structure of @xmath44 to that of the @xmath3-bimodule structure used for the @xmath3-ring structure of @xmath45 .
likewise , @xmath56 flips the bimodule structures of the underlying @xmath3-coring structures of @xmath44 and @xmath45 .
in particular , this tells us that @xmath56 induces a map @xmath617 which on fibers does @xmath618 for any @xmath469 .
symmetrically , we also have a map denoted the same , @xmath619 , which on fibers does @xmath620 for any @xmath621 .
this proves proposition ( [ p4.11 ] ) .
@xmath622    in view of proposition ( [ p4.11 ] ) , we have @xmath623 .
similar to equation ( [ eq4.5 ] ) , @xmath82 induces maps    @xmath624 ^ -{\left(\delta_{r}\right)_{*}^{(x , y ) } } & & \bigoplus\limits_{z',z''\in x}\left(e_{(z',y)}\otimes e_{(z'',y)}\right ) } \ ] ]    for @xmath469 .
as we promised at the end of section ( [ s4.3 ] ) , @xmath608 maps @xmath499 into @xmath610 , for any @xmath469 .
same holds for @xmath625 .
let us summarize these statements into the following proposition .
[ p4.12 ] for every @xmath469 ,    1 .
@xmath499 is a coalgebra with coproduct @xmath608 and counit @xmath626 , and 2 .
@xmath499 is a coalgebra with coproduct @xmath625 and counit @xmath627 .
we will only prove part @xmath628 .
the proof for part @xmath629 is similar .
the second commutation relation of @xmath81 and @xmath82 in part @xmath134 of the definition ( [ d2.2 ] ) gives the following diagram    @xmath630 ^ -{\left(\delta_{l}\right)_{*}^{(x , y ) } } \ar[ddd]_-{\left(\delta_{r}\right)_{*}^{(x , y ) } } & & & & \bigoplus\limits_{z^{'},z^{''}}\left(e_{(x , z^{'})}\otimes e_{(x , z^{''})}\right ) \ar[dd]^-{\bigoplus\limits_{z^{'}}\left(\delta_{r}\right)_{*}^{(x , z^{'})}\otimes id}\\ & & & & \\ & & & & \bigoplus\limits_{z^{'},z^{''}}\bigoplus\limits_{\alpha^{'},\alpha^{''}}\left(e_{(\alpha^{'},z^{'})}\otimes e_{(\alpha^{''},z^{'})}\otimes e_{(x , z^{''})}\right ) \ar@{=}[d ] \\
\bigoplus\limits_{\beta^{'},\beta^{''}}\left(e_{(\beta^{'},y)}\otimes e_{(\beta^{''},y)}\right ) \ar[rrrr]_-{\bigoplus\limits_{\beta^{''}}id\otimes\left(\delta_{l}\right)_{*}^{(\beta^{''},y ) } } & & & & \bigoplus\limits_{\beta^{'},\beta^{''}}\bigoplus\limits_{\gamma^{'},\gamma^{''}}\left(e_{(\beta^{'},y)}\otimes e_{(\beta^{''},\gamma^{'})}\otimes e_{(\beta^{''},\gamma^{''})}\right)\\ } \ ] ]    for fixed but arbitrary @xmath469 . in the composite @xmath631 , the third leg lands in @xmath632 . on the other hand , the third leg of the composite @xmath633 lands in @xmath634 .
this implies that for @xmath635 , @xmath636 . from our last statement in section ( [ s4.3 ] ) ,
@xmath637 is contained in    @xmath638    counitality of @xmath81 with respect to @xmath68 , implemented locally by diagram ( [ eq4.6 ] ) , gives    @xmath639 ^ -{\cong }   & \bigoplus\limits_{f^{'}}\left(id\otimes\left(\epsilon_{l}\right)_{*}^{(\beta^{''},f^{'})}\right)\left(\delta_{l}\right)_{*}^{(\beta^{''},y)}(e_{(\beta^{''},y ) } ) \ar@{=}[r ] & \left\{0\right\}. \\
v \ar@{|->}[r ] & v\otimes 1 & \\}\ ] ]    by assumption , @xmath640 are nontrivial .
this is a contradiction unless the summands corresponding to @xmath635 of the direct sum in the lower left corner of diagram ( [ eq4.8 ] ) do not intersect the image of @xmath625 .    using the first commutation relation in part @xmath134 of the definition ( [ d2.2 ] )
, we get a diagram similar to diagram ( [ eq4.8 ] ) .
inspecting that resulting diagram tells us that the image of @xmath625 does not intersect those summands of the direct sum in the lower left corner of diagram ( [ eq4.8 ] ) corresponding to @xmath641 .
this shows that , indeed ,    @xmath642    the coassociativity of @xmath625 follows from coassociativity of @xmath82 and its counitality with respect to @xmath627 follows from counitality of @xmath82 with respect to @xmath67 .
this proves part @xmath628 of the above proposition . exchanging the roles of @xmath81 and @xmath82 with minor modifications
proves part @xmath629 .
@xmath622    following the arguments in sections ( [ s4.1 ] ) , ( [ s4.2 ] ) and ( [ s4.3 ] ) for @xmath45 , we see that we can similarly associate a category @xmath313 enriched over @xmath263 . denoting by @xmath287 by the category of coalgebras on @xmath263 , we have the following proposition .
[ p4.13 ] the categories @xmath312 and @xmath313 are enriched over @xmath287 .    these categories are strongly related . by proposition ( [ p4.11 ] )
, we have the following corollary .    [ p4.14 ] the @xmath287-enriched categories @xmath312 and @xmath313 have isomorphic underlying @xmath263-enriched categories .    note that the underlying @xmath263-enriched category of @xmath312 and @xmath313 only depends on the @xmath3-ring structures of @xmath44 and @xmath45 , respectively .
another way to prove corollary ( [ p4.14 ] ) is to use the fact that @xmath44 and @xmath45 have the isomorphic @xmath3-ring structures . to see why @xmath44 and @xmath45 have isomorphic @xmath3-ring structures , note that the source map of @xmath44 is the target map of @xmath44 while the target map of @xmath44 is the source map of @xmath45 . in the general definition of a hopf algebroid
, one can either use the source or the target map to select a particular ring structure to consider , see for example @xcite . using the general fact that for a general @xmath8-algebra @xmath4 , @xmath4-rings @xmath5 corresponds uniquely to @xmath8-algebra maps @xmath280
, we see that @xmath44 and @xmath45 are isomorphic as @xmath3-rings .
[ r4.5 ] another way to see why @xmath44 and @xmath45 are isomorphic as @xmath3-rings is the fact that general hopf algebroids @xmath42 with bijective antipode over a _ commutative _
ring @xmath643 is a coupled @xmath643-hopf algebra .    unlike the ring structures
, the @xmath3-coring structures of @xmath44 and @xmath45 can vary wildly as illustrated by coupled hopf algebras .
this implies that the @xmath287-enrichments @xmath312 and @xmath313 need not be isomorphic .
however , they form a topological coupled hopf category .
the coupling functor is the one induced by the antipode @xmath56 of the hopf algebroid @xmath42 .
we formalize this in the following theorem .
[ t4.1 ] given a finitely - generated projective hopf algebroid @xmath42 over @xmath3 with bijective antipode , one can associate a topological coupled hopf category @xmath274 via the construction we presented in sections ( [ s4.1 ] ) and ( [ s4.2 ] ) .
conversely , to any topological coupled hopf category @xmath274 , the space of sections @xmath644 of the associated sheaf @xmath46 of @xmath274 is a hopf algebroid over @xmath3 .
the proof of the first statement is basically the breadth of section ( [ s4.0 ] ) .
for the second statement , one can consider the bimodule structures presented in proposition ( [ p4.3 ] ) .
the rest of the structures are given by the rest of the structure maps of @xmath274 .
the above theorem is a generalization of the example in @xcite where they constructed out of a @xmath8-linear category with finitely many objects a weak hopf algebra .
the theorem not only recovers an inverse to the construction they presented but it also work for weak hopf algebra as long as the subalgebra spanned by the left and the right units are commutative .
the above theorem is the generalization of the example we discussed in section ( [ s3.2 ] ) .
although @xmath3 is commutative , it may not be central in @xmath42 .
let us look at the special case when @xmath3 is central in @xmath42 , by which we mean that the images of the source and target maps are central in the relevant @xmath3-ring structure of @xmath42 . for simplicity , we will blur the disctinction between @xmath3 at its images under the source maps of @xmath42 .
let us consider first the constituent left bialgebroid @xmath44 of @xmath42 . by proposition ( [ p4.7 ] ) ,
@xmath44 is supported along the diagonal @xmath645 .
this means that the sheaf @xmath455 coincides with the vector bundle @xmath543 .
we can simply identify the diagonal @xmath522 with @xmath84 . with this , the multiplication @xmath52 in @xmath44 via the identification @xmath387 is pointwise , i.e. the fibers of the vector bundle @xmath543 are ( possibly nonisomorphic ) unital complex alegrbas @xmath646 , where @xmath647 and @xmath648 are the maps induced by @xmath52 and @xmath79 on the fiber @xmath440 .    by proposition ( [ p4.12 ] ) , the coproduct @xmath81 and counit @xmath68 of @xmath44 also descends into a coproduct @xmath649 and a counit @xmath650 for the fibers @xmath440 , @xmath651 , making them coalgebras . using condition @xmath134 in the definition of a bialgebroid
, we see that @xmath649 is multiplicative for any @xmath651 .
meanwhile , using condition @xmath305 of the definition of a bialgebroid we see that @xmath650 is multiplicative for any @xmath651 .
this gives us the following proposition .
[ p4.15 ] if @xmath3 is central in @xmath44 , then for any @xmath651 ,    @xmath652    is a bialgebra .
moreover , the bialgebroid @xmath44 is a bundle of bialgebras via @xmath387
.    similar statement holds for the constituent right bialgebroid @xmath45 . since for very @xmath651
the maps @xmath653 and @xmath654 induced by the source maps @xmath79 and @xmath77 are the same , the multiplications @xmath655 and @xmath656 coincide . assuming mild nondegeneracy conditions for @xmath657 and @xmath658
, we get the following proposition .
[ p4.16 ] let @xmath43 be a hopf algebroid over @xmath560 where @xmath384 is central in both @xmath44 and @xmath45 .
denote by @xmath46 the underlying complex algebra of @xmath42 .
suppose that the maps    @xmath659 ^ -{\mathfrak{gal}_{l } } & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{a}}}h \\ a{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{a}}}b \ar@{|->}[rr ] & &   ab_{[1]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{a}}}b_{[2]}\\ } , \hspace{.5 in } \xymatrix@r=2mm{h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{a}}}h \ar[rr]^-{\mathfrak{gal}_{r } } & & h{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{a}}}h \\ a{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{a}}}b \ar@{|->}[rr ] & &   ab^{[1]}{\mathbin{\mathop{\otimes}\limits_{a}}}b^{[2]}\\}\ ] ]    are bijections
. then    1 .
@xmath46 is a coupled hopf algebra with constituent hopf algebras @xmath44 and @xmath45 and coupling map @xmath56 .
2 .   each fiber @xmath440 is a hopf algebra and @xmath387 as hopf algebras , where the structure maps of @xmath388 are all pointwise .
same is true for @xmath45 .
3 .   @xmath42 is a bundle of coupled hopf algebras over @xmath84 such that the constituent hopf algebras at a point @xmath651 are the fiber hopf algebras of @xmath44 and @xmath45 .
centrality of @xmath384 in both @xmath44 and @xmath45 implies that @xmath44 and @xmath45 are in fact bialgebras over @xmath384 ( not just bialgebroids ) .
the nondegeneracy conditions assumed in the proposition implies that @xmath46 is a galois extension for both bialgebras @xmath44 and @xmath45 .
by @xcite , the bialgebras @xmath44 are @xmath45 are in fact hopf algebras , i.e. the identity maps @xmath660 and @xmath661 are invertible in the respective convolution algebras associated to the bialgebras @xmath44 and @xmath45 . the rest of the conditions for @xmath42 to be a hopf algebroid imply that @xmath44 and @xmath45 are coupled hopf algebras with coupling map @xmath56 , the antipode of @xmath42 .
this proves part @xmath662 .    to prove part @xmath663
, we argue that the maps @xmath259 and @xmath256 are @xmath384-bimodule maps .
thus , there descend into fiberwise bijections . using the same argument we did for part @xmath662 ,
see that the fibers are coupled hopf algebras .
part @xmath664 readily follows from the proofs of parts @xmath662 and @xmath663 .
in this section , we will see that the correspondence between hopf algebroids and coupled hopf categories we established in theorem ( [ t4.1 ] ) persists to their corresponding galois theories . to be precise
, we will prove the following theorem .
[ t5.1 ] let @xmath43 be a hopf algebroid over @xmath560 for some compact hausdorff space @xmath84 .
let @xmath274 be the corresponding topological coupled hopf category of @xmath42 .
then @xmath42-galois extensions of @xmath384 corresponds bijectively to @xmath274-galois extensions of @xmath272 .    before proving the above theorem ,
let us comment on what we mean by galois extension by a ( topological ) coupled hopf category @xmath383 . by this , we mean an inclusion of categories @xmath665 which is simultaneously @xmath312-galois and @xmath313-galois in the sense of section ( [ s3.3 ] ) .
note that by definition ( [ d3.3 ] ) , we are not requiring @xmath312 and @xmath313 to be hopf categories ( individually , they are only @xmath287-enriched categories ) .
in particular , they do not necessarily have antipodes .
fortunately , galois extension in the sense described in section ( [ s3.3 ] ) does not really make use of the antipode .
let @xmath18 be a ( left ) @xmath42-galois extension of @xmath384 .
in particular , @xmath18 is an @xmath384-ring .
note that the arguments we used in sections ( [ s4.1 ] ) and ( [ s4.2 ] ) only use the @xmath384-ring structure of the hopf algebroid @xmath42 .
using the same arguments , @xmath666 where @xmath667 is a sheaf of vector spaces over @xmath290 . by the galois condition
, we see that @xmath667 has the same support @xmath466 as the sheaf @xmath455 we get from either @xmath44 or @xmath45 .
similar to remark ( [ r4.4 ] ) , we get a small category @xmath265 over @xmath84 enriched over @xmath263 whose associated sheaf is @xmath667 .
the ( right ) @xmath44-coaction @xmath668 induces a map @xmath669 of sheaves of @xmath288-bimodules over @xmath290 . by definition
, @xmath18 is a right @xmath384-module and a right @xmath670-module .
using this , the @xmath384-bimodule structure on @xmath18 is as follows :                @xmath677 ^ -{\left(\rho_{l}\right)_{*}^{(x , y ) } } \ar[ddd]_-{\left(\rho_{r}\right)_{*}^{(x , y ) } } & & & & \bigoplus\limits_{z^{'},z^{''}}\left(b_{(x , z^{'})}\otimes e_{(x , z^{''})}\right ) \ar[dd]^-{\bigoplus\limits_{z^{'}}\left(\rho_{r}\right)_{*}^{(x , z^{'})}\otimes id}\\ & & & & \\ & & & & \bigoplus\limits_{z^{'},z^{''}}\bigoplus\limits_{\alpha^{'},\alpha^{''}}\left(b_{(\alpha^{'},z^{'})}\otimes e_{(\alpha^{''},z^{'})}\otimes e_{(x , z^{''})}\right ) \ar@{=}[d ] \\
\bigoplus\limits_{\beta^{'},\beta^{''}}\left(b_{(\beta^{'},y)}\otimes e_{(\beta^{''},y)}\right ) \ar[rrrr]_-{\bigoplus\limits_{\beta^{''}}id\otimes\left(\delta_{l}\right)_{*}^{(\beta^{''},y ) } } & & & & \bigoplus\limits_{\beta^{'},\beta^{''}}\bigoplus\limits_{\gamma^{'},\gamma^{''}}\left(b_{(\beta^{'},y)}\otimes e_{(\beta^{''},\gamma^{'})}\otimes e_{(\beta^{''},\gamma^{''})}\right)\\ } \ ] ]      @xmath678 ^ -{\bigoplus\limits_{z^{''}}id\otimes\left(\epsilon_{l}\right)_{*}^{(z , y ) } } \\ & & \\ & & \\ & & \\ & & \\ b_{(x , y ) } \ar[rruuuuu]^-{\left(\rho_{l}\right)_{*}^{(x , y ) } } \ar@{=}[rr ] & & \bigoplus\limits_{z^{'}}\left(b_{(x , z^{'})}\otimes\mathbb{c}\right ) \\ v \ar@{|->}[rr ] & & v\otimes 1 \\}\ ] ]            these tell us that @xmath265 is a right @xmath312- and a right @xmath313-comodule .
the composition @xmath279 in @xmath265 is induced by the @xmath384-product on @xmath18 . by equations ( [ eq2.2 ] ) to ( [ eq2.5 ] ) , this composition @xmath279 is a map of right @xmath312- and a right @xmath313-modules .
thus , @xmath265 is a right @xmath312- and a right @xmath313-comodule - category .
it is not hard to see that the right coactions of @xmath312 and @xmath313 on @xmath265 are both galois whose subcategories of coinvariants are both the same as @xmath372 .
these imply that @xmath265 is a galois extension of @xmath372 by the topological coupled hopf category @xmath383 .
the inverse of this correspondence is easily seen as the the one that associates to an @xmath680-galois extension @xmath681 the @xmath109-galois extension @xmath252 where @xmath682 and @xmath384 are the space of global sections of the associated sheaves to @xmath683 and @xmath372 , respectively .
the compatibility conditions in the categorical side precisely correspond to the analogous compatibility conditions in the algebraic side . @xmath622