Results 1  10
of
103
Categorical homotopy theory
 Homology, Homotopy Appl
"... This paper is an exposition of the ideas and methods of Cisinksi, in the context of Apresheaves on a small ..."
Abstract

Cited by 168 (7 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper is an exposition of the ideas and methods of Cisinksi, in the context of Apresheaves on a small
Higher topos theory
, 2006
"... Let X be a topological space and G an abelian group. There are many different definitions for the cohomology group H n (X; G); we will single out three of them for discussion here. First of all, we have the singular cohomology groups H n sing (X; G), which are defined to be cohomology of a chain com ..."
Abstract

Cited by 47 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Let X be a topological space and G an abelian group. There are many different definitions for the cohomology group H n (X; G); we will single out three of them for discussion here. First of all, we have the singular cohomology groups H n sing (X; G), which are defined to be cohomology of a chain complex of Gvalued singular cochains on X. An alternative is to regard H n (•, G) as a representable functor on the homotopy category
Universal homotopy theories
 Adv. Math
"... Abstract. Begin with a small category C. The goal of this short note is to point out that there is such a thing as a ‘universal model category built from C’. We describe applications of this to the study of homotopy colimits, the DwyerKan theory of framings, to sheaf theory, and to the homotopy the ..."
Abstract

Cited by 38 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Begin with a small category C. The goal of this short note is to point out that there is such a thing as a ‘universal model category built from C’. We describe applications of this to the study of homotopy colimits, the DwyerKan theory of framings, to sheaf theory, and to the homotopy theory of schemes. Contents
Local projective model structures on simplicial presheaves
 Ktheory
"... Abstract. We give a model structure on the category of simplicial presheaves on some essentially small Grothendieck site T. When T is the Nisnevich site it specializes to a proper simplicial model category with the same weak equivalences as in [MV], but with fewer cofibrations and consequently more ..."
Abstract

Cited by 35 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We give a model structure on the category of simplicial presheaves on some essentially small Grothendieck site T. When T is the Nisnevich site it specializes to a proper simplicial model category with the same weak equivalences as in [MV], but with fewer cofibrations and consequently more fibrations. This allows a simpler proof of the comparison theorem of [V2], one which makes no use of ∆closed classes. The purpose of this note is to introduce different model structures on the categories of simplicial presheaves and simplicial sheaves on some essentially small Grothendieck site T and to give some applications of these simplified model categories. In particular, we prove that the stable homotopy categories SH((Sm/k)Nis, A 1) and SH((Sch/k)cdh, A 1) are equivalent. This result was first proven by Voevodsky in [V2] and our proof uses many of his techniques, but it does not use his theory of ∆closed classes developed in [V3]. 1. The local projective model structure on presheaves We first recall some of the other wellknown model structures on simplicial presheaves. Definition 1.1. A map f: X → Y of simplicial presheaves (or sheaves) is a local weak equivalence if f ∗ : π0(X) → π0(Y) induces an isomorphism of associated sheaves and, for all U ∈ T, f ∗ : πn(X, x) → πn(Y, f(x)) induces an isomorphism of associated sheaves on T/U for any choice of basepoint x ∈ X(U). The map f is a sectionwise weak equivalence (respectively sectionwise fibration) if for all U ∈ T, the map f(U) : X(U) → Y (U) is a weak equivalence (respectively Kan fibration) of simplicial sets. Heller [He] discovered a model structure on simplicial presheaves whose weak equivalences are the sectionwise weak equivalences. We will refer to his model structure as the injective model structure. Date: January 11, 2001. I would like to thank Dan Isaksen for his many helpful suggestions, and I thank my adviser Peter May for his encouragement and careful reading of many drafts. I am also grateful to Vladimir Voevodsky for noticing an error in an earlier version and for his work that inspired this note. 1 2 BENJAMIN BLANDER
Homotopical Algebraic Geometry I: Topos theory
, 2002
"... This is the first of a series of papers devoted to lay the foundations of Algebraic Geometry in homotopical and higher categorical contexts. In this first part we investigate a notion of higher topos. For this, we use Scategories (i.e. simplicially enriched categories) as models for certain kind of ..."
Abstract

Cited by 32 (20 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This is the first of a series of papers devoted to lay the foundations of Algebraic Geometry in homotopical and higher categorical contexts. In this first part we investigate a notion of higher topos. For this, we use Scategories (i.e. simplicially enriched categories) as models for certain kind of ∞categories, and we develop the notions of Stopologies, Ssites and stacks over them. We prove in particular, that for an Scategory T endowed with an Stopology, there exists a model
Algebraic geometry over model categories  A general approach to derived algebraic geometry
, 2001
"... ..."
Classical motivic polylogarithm according to Beilinson and Deligne
 DOC. MATH. J. DMV
, 1998
"... ..."