arxiv: v1 [math.ct] 19 Sep 2008

(1)

arXiv:0809.3394v1 [math.CT] 19 Sep 2008

TANNAKA DUALITY FOR

PROPER LIE GROUPOIDS

†

(PhD Thesis, Utre ht University, 2008)

(2)

Abstra t: Themain ontributionofthisthesisisaTannakadualitytheorem forproperLiegroupoids.Thisresultisobtained by repla ingthe ategoryof smoothve tor bundlesoverthebasemanifoldofaLiegroupoidwithalarger ategory,the ategoryofsmoothEu lideanelds,andby onsideringsmooth a tions of Lie groupoids on smooth Eu lidean elds. The notion of smooth Eu lideaneld thatisintrodu edhereisthe smooth,nitedimensional ana-logue of the familiar notion of ontinuous Hilbert eld. In the se ond part of the thesis, ordinary smooth representations of Lie groupoids on smooth ve tor bundles are systemati allystudied fromthe point ofviewof Tannaka duality, and various results are obtained in this dire tion.

Keywords: proper Liegroupoid, representation, tensor ategory, Tannaka duality, sta k

AMS Subje t Classi ations: 58H05, 18D10

A knowledgements: Iwould liketothank my supervisor,I. Moerdijk,for having suggested the resear h problem out of whi h the present work took shape and for several useful remarks, and also M. Craini and N. T. Zung,

(3)

Table of Contents 3

Introdu tion 5

From Lie groups toLiegroupoids . . . 5

Histori al perspe tive onTannakaduality . . . 7

What isnew in this thesis . . . 9

Outline hapter by hapter . . . 10

Some possible appli ations . . . 19

I Lie Groupoids, Classi al Representations 21 1 Generalitiesabout LieGroupoids . . . 21

2 Classi alRepresentations . . . 24

3 NormalizedHaarSystems . . . 31

4 The Lo alLinearizability Theorem . . . 32

5 GlobalQuotients . . . 36

II The Language of Tensor Categories 39 6 Tensor Categories . . . 39

7 Tensor Fun tors . . . 44

8 ComplexTensor Categories . . . 46

9 Review of Groupsand Tannaka Duality . . . 48

10 A Te hni al Lemmaon Compa t Groups . . . 50

IIIRepresentation Theory Revisited 55 11 The Language of FibredTensor Categories . . . 55

12 Smooth Tensor Sta ks . . . 60

13 Foundationsof Representation Theory . . . 63

14 Homomorphismsand Morita Invarian e . . . 65

IVGeneral Tannaka Theory 71 15 Sta ks of Smooth Fields . . . 71

16 Smooth Eu lidean Fields . . . 78

17 Constru tionof EquivariantMaps . . . 81

(4)

19 Properness . . . 94

20 Re onstru tion Theorems . . . 98

V Classi al Fibre Fun tors 109 21 Basi Denitions and Properties . . . 110

22 Tame Submanifoldsof a Lie Groupoid . . . 114

23 Smoothness, Representative Charts . . . 126

24 Morphisms of FibreFun tors. . . 134

25 Weak Equivalen es . . . 137

VIClassi al Tannaka Theory 143 26 The Classi alEnvelope of a ProperGroupoid . . . 144

27 Proper RegularGroupoids . . . 150

28 Classi al Reexivity: Examples . . . 153

Bibliography 156

(5)

Although a rigorous formulation of the problem with whi h this do toral thesis is on erned will be possible only after the entral ideas of Tannaka duality theory have been at least briey dis ussed, I an nevertheless start with some omments about the general ontext where su h aproblem takes its appropriate pla e. Roughly speaking, my study aims at a better under-standing of the relationship that exists between a given Lie groupoid and the orresponding ategory of representations. First of all,for the benet of non-spe ialists, I want to explain the reasons of my interest in the theory of Lie groupoids (a pre ise denition of the notion of Lie groupoid an be found in1of this thesis) by drawing attention tothe prin ipalappli ations that justify the importan e of this theory; in the se ond pla e, I intend to undertakea riti alexaminationofthe on ept of representationin orderto onvin e the reader of the naturalness of the notions I willintrodu e below.

From Lie groups to Lie groupoids

Groupoids make their appearan e in diverse mathemati al ontexts. As the name `groupoid' suggests, this notion generalizes that of group. In order to explain how and to make the denition more plausible, it is best to start with some examples.

The readeris ertainly familiarwith the notion of fundamental group of atopologi alspa e.The onstru tionofthis grouppresupposes the hoi e of a base point,and any twosu h hoi es giverise to the same groupprovided there exists a path onne ting the base points (for this reason one usually assumes that the spa e is path onne ted). However, instead of onsidering onlypaths starting and endingatthe samepoint,one mightmore generally allow paths with arbitrary endpoints; two su h paths an still be omposed aslongasthe onestartswheretheotherends.One obtainsawell-dened as-so iativepartialoperationonthe set ofhomotopy lassesof pathswithxed endpoints, for whi h the ( lasses of) onstant paths are both left and right neutralelements.Observethatea hpathhasatwo-sidedinverse, namelythe path itselfwith reverse orientation.

In geometry, groups are usually groups of transformationsor symme-triesof some obje t or spa e. If

g

is an element of a group

G

a ting on a

(6)

spa e

X

and

x

isa point of

X

, one may thinkof the pair

(g, x)

as anarrow goingfrom

x

to

g · x

;again,twosu harrows an be omposed inanobvious way, by means of the group operation of

G

, provided one starts where the otherends. Compositionof arrows is anasso iative partialoperation onthe set

G × X

, whi h en odes both the multipli ation law of the group

G

and the

G

-a tionon

X

.

Intherepresentationtheoryofgroups,thelineargroup

GL

(V )

asso iated withanitedimensionalve torspa e

V

playsafundamentalrole.Ifave tor bundle

E

over aspa e

X

isgiven insteadofa singleve torspa e

V

,one an onsider the set

GL

(E)

of all triples

(x, x

′

_{, λ)}

onsisting of two points of

X

and alinear isomorphism

λ : E

x

∼

→ E

x

′

between the bresover these points. As in the examples above, an element

(x, x

′

_{, λ)}

of this set an be viewed as an arrow going from

x

to

x

′

; su h an arrow an be omposed with another oneaslongasthe latterhas theform

(x

′

_{, x}

′′

_{, λ}

′

₎

.Arrows oftheform

(x, x, id )

are both left and right neutral elements for the resulting asso iative partial operation,and ea h arrow admits atwo-sidedinverse.

By abstra tion from these and similar examples, one is led to onsider small ategories where every arrowisinvertible.Su h ategoriesare referred to as groupoids. More expli itly, a groupoid onsists of a spa e

X

of base points (also alled obje ts), a set

G

of arrows, endowed with sour e and target proje tions

s

, t : G → X

, and an asso iative partial omposition law

G

s

×

t

G → G

(dened for allpairsof arrows

(g

′

_{, g)}

withthe propertythat the sour e of

g

′

equals the target of

g

), su h that in orresponden e with ea h point

x

of

X

there is a (ne essarily unique) neutral or unit arrow, often itselfdenoted by

x

, and every arrowis invertible.

The notionof Liegroupoidgeneralizes thatof Liegroup.Mu h thesame asaLiegroupisagroupendowed withasmoothmanifoldstru ture ompat-iblewiththe multipli ationlawand withthe operationof takingtheinverse, a Lie groupoid is a groupoid where the sets

X

and

G

are endowed with a smoothmanifoldstru ture thatmakesthevariousmapswhi harisefromthe groupoidstru ture smooth. Forinstan e, in ea hof the examplesabove one obtainsaLiegroupoidwhenthespa e

X

ofbasepointsisasmoothmanifold,

G

isaLiegroupa tingsmoothlyon

X

and

E

isasmoothve torbundleover

X

; these Lie groupoids are respe tively alled the fundamental groupoid of the manifold

X

, the translation groupoid asso iated with the smooth a tion of

G

on

X

and the linear groupoid asso iated with the smooth ve tor bun-dle

E

.Thereis alsoamoregeneralnotion of

C

∞

-stru tured groupoid,about whi h weshall spend afewwords later oninthe ourseof this introdu tion, whi h we introdu e in our thesis in order todes ribe ertain groupoids that arise naturallyin the study of Tannaka duality theory.

In the ourse of the se ond half of the twentieth entury the notion of groupoid turned out to be very useful in many bran hes of mathemati s,

(7)

omplishments of quantum me hani sthink, for example, of Heisenberg's formalism of matri esor, more ba k in time, sin e the rst investigations into lassi ationproblems ingeometry.Nowadays,the theory of Lie group-oids onstitutesthe preferredlanguageforthe geometri alstudy offoliations [27℄;thesametheoryhasappli ationstonon ommutativegeometry[8,5℄and quantization deformation theory [21℄, as well as to symple ti and Poisson geometry [36, 9, 15℄. Another sour e of examples omes from the study of orbifolds[25℄;this subje tis onne tedwiththetheoryofsta ks,whi h origi-natedinalgebrai geometryfromGrothendie k'ssuggestiontousegroupoids as the rightnotion tounderstand modulispa es.

When trying to extend representation theory from Lie groups toLie group-oids, one is rst of all onfronted with the problem of dening a suitable notionof representationfor the latter.As far asweare on erned, wewould liketogeneralize the familiarnotion of (nitedimensional) Liegroup repre-sentation, by whi h one generally means a homomorphism

G → GL(V )

of a Lie group

G

into the group of automorphisms of some nite dimensional ve torspa e

V

,sothat asmany onstru tionsand resultsaspossible an be adapted to Lie groupoids without essential hanges; inparti ular, wewould like to arry over Tannaka duality theory (see the next subse tion) to the realm of Liegroupoids.

The notion of Lie group representation re alled above has an obvious naive extension to the groupoid setting. Namely, a representation of a Lie groupoid

G

an be dened as a Lie groupoid homomorphism

G → GL(E)

(smoothfun tor)intothelineargroupoidasso iatedwithsomesmoothve tor bundle

E

overthe manifold of obje ts of

G

. Any su hrepresentation assigns ea h arrow

x → x

′

of

G

a linear isomorphism

E

x

∼

→ E

x

′

in su h a way that omposition of arrows is respe ted. In our dissertation we will use the term` lassi alrepresentation' torefertothisnotion.Unfortunately, lassi al representations prove to be ompletelyinadequate for the above-mentioned purpose of arrying forward Tannaka duality to Lie groupoids; we shall say something more about this matter later.

The pre eding onsideration leads us to introdu e a dierent notion of representation for Lie groupoids. In doing this, however, we adhere to the point of view that the latter should be as lose as possible to the notion of lassi al representationin parti ular the new theory should extend the theory of lassi al representationsand that moreover inthe ase of groups one should re over the usual notion of representation re alled above.

Histori al perspe tive on Tannaka duality

It has been known for a long time, and pre isely sin e the pioneer work of Pontryagin and van Kampen in the 1930's, that a ommutative lo ally ompa t group anbeidentied withitsownbidual.Re all thatif

G

issu h

(8)

a group then its dual is the group formed by all the hara ters on

G

, that is to say the ontinuous homomorphisms of

G

into the multipli ative group of omplex numbers of absolute value one, the group operation being given by pointwise multipli ation of omplex fun tions; one may regard the latter groupas atopologi al groupinfa t, alo ally ompa t oneby taking the topology of uniform onvergen e on ompa t subsets. There is a anoni al pairingbetween

G

andthis dual, given by pointwise evaluationof hara ters at elements of

G

, whi h indu es a ontinuous homomorphism of

G

into its own bidual. Then one an prove that the latter orresponden e is a tually an isomorphism of topologi al groups; see for instan e Dixmier (1969) [13℄, Rudin (1962) [31℄, orthe book by Chevalley (1946) [6℄.

When one tries to generalize this duality result to non-Abelian lo ally ompa tgroups,su hasforinstan e Liegroups,itbe omesevident thatthe whole ring of representations must be onsidered be ause hara ters are no longersu ient tore apture the group.However, itis stillanopen problem to formulate and prove a general duality theorem for non ommutative Lie groups: even the ase of simple algebrai groups is not well understood, de-spite the enormous a umulating knowledgeon their irredu ible representa-tions.Thesituationisquitetheoppositewhenthegroupis ompa t,be ause the dual obje t

G

∨

of a ompa t group

G

is dis rete and so belongs to the realmofalgebra:inthis ase,there isa gooddualitytheory duetoH. Peter, H. Weyl and T. Tannaka, whi h we nowpro eed to re all.

Theearlydualitytheorems ofTannaka (1939) [34℄and Krein (1949) [20℄ on entrate on the problem of re onstru ting a ompa t group from the ring of isomorphism lasses of its representations. Owing to the ideas of Grothendie k [32℄, these results an nowadays be formulated within an ele-gant ategori al framework.Although we donot intend to enter into details now, these ideas are impli it inwhat we are about to say.

1. One starts by onsidering the ategory

R

0 _(G)

of all ontinuous nite dimensional representations of the ompa t group

G

: the obje ts of

R

0 _(G)

arethe pairs

(V, ̺)

onsisting ofanitedimensional realve torspa e

V

and a ontinuous homomorphism

̺ : G → GL(V )

; the morphisms are pre isely the

G

-equivariant linear maps.

2.Thereisanobviousfun tor

ω

ofthe ategory

R

0 _(G)

intothat of nite dimensional real ve tor spa es, namely the forgetful fun tor

(V, ̺) 7→ V

. The natural endomorphisms of

ω

form a topologi al algebra

End(ω)

, when one endows

End(ω)

with the oarsest topologymaking ea h map

λ 7→ λ(R)

ontinuous as

R

ranges over allobje tsof

R

0 _(G)

.

3. The subset

T (G)

of this algebra, formed by the elements ompatible with the tensor produ t operation on representations, in other words the natural endomorphisms

λ

of

ω

su h that

λ(R ⊗ R

′

_{) = λ(R) ⊗ λ(R}

′

₎

and

λ(1) = id

, proves to bea ompa t group.

(9)

π(g)(R) = ̺(g)

for ea h obje t

R = (V, ̺)

of

R

0 _(G)

, establishes an iso-morphismof topologi algroups between

G

and

T (G)

.

What is new in this thesis

We are now ready to give a short summary of the original ontributions of the present study.

Within the realm of Lie groupoids, proper groupoids play the same role as ompa tgroups;for example,allisotropygroupsof aproperLiegroupoid are ompa t (the isotropy group at a base point

x

onsists of all arrows

g

with

s

(g) = t(g) = x

). The main result of our resear h is a Tannaka duality theorem for proper Lie groupoids, whi h takes the followingform.

To begin with, we onstru t, for ea h smooth manifold

X

, a ategory whoseobje tswe allsmoothelds over

X

; our notionof smootheld isthe analogue,inthesmooth andnitedimensionalsettinginwhi hweare inter-ested,ofthefamiliarnotionof ontinuousHilberteldintrodu edbyDixmier andDouadyintheearly1960's[14℄(seealsoBos[2℄orKali²nik[19℄formore re ent work related to ontinuous Hilbert elds). The ategory of smooth eldsisa properenlargementof the ategory ofsmoothve tor bundles.Like forve torbundles, one andene anotionofLiegroupoidrepresentationon a smooth eld in a ompletelystandard way. Given a Lie groupoid

G

, su h representationsand their obviousmorphisms forma ategory that isrelated tothe ategoryof smooth elds over the base manifold

M

of

G

by means of aforgetfulfun tor ofthe former intothe latter ategory.Tothis fun torone an assign, by generalizing the onstru tion explained above in the ase of groups,agroupoidover

M

,towhi hweshallreferastheTannakiangroupoid asso iatedwith

G

, tobedenoted by

T (G)

,endowed withanatural andidate for asmooth stru ture on the spa e of arrows (

C

∞

-stru tured groupoid). As for groups, there is a anoni al homomorphism

π

of

G

into

T (G)

that turns out to be ompatible with this

C

∞

-stru ture.

Our Tannakaduality theorem for properLie groupoids reads as follows: Theorem Let

G

be a proper Lie groupoid. The

C

∞

-stru ture on the spa e of arrows of the Tannakian groupoid

T (G)

is a genuine manifold stru ture so that

T (G)

is a Lie groupoid. The anoni al homomorphism

π

isa Lie groupoidisomorphism

G ∼

= T (G)

.

Themainpointhereistoprovethe surje tivity ofthehomomorphism

π

;the fa tthat

π

is inje tive isa dire tappli ation of a theorem of N.T. Zung.

A tually,the reasonings leadingtoour duality theorem alsohold, forthe mostpart,fortherepresentationsofaproperLiegroupoidonve torbundles. Sin e from the very beginning of our resear h we were equally interested in studying su h representations, we found it onvenient to provide a general

(10)

theoryof Liegroupoids ouldtaketheirappropriatepla e, soastostateour results ina uniform language. The out ome of su h demand was the theory of `smooth tensor sta ks'. Smooth ve tor bundles and smooth elds are two examples of smooth tensor sta ks. Ea h smooth tensor sta k gives rise to a orresponding notion of representation for Lie groupoids; then, for ea h Lie groupoid one obtains, by the same general pro edure outlined above, a orrespondingTannakiangroupoid,whi hwilldependverymu h,ingeneral, onthe initial hoi e of asmooth tensor sta k (forexample, Tannaka duality failsin the ontext ofrepresentations onve tor bundles).

Our remaining ontributions are mainly on erned with the study of Tannakian groupoids arising from representations of proper Lie groupoids onve torbundles. Sin ein this ase the re onstru ted groupoidmaynot be isomorphi totheoriginalone,theproblemofwhethertheaforesaidstandard

C

∞

-stru ture on the spa e of arrows of the Tannakian groupoid turns the latter groupoid into a Lie groupoid be omes onsiderably more interesting and di ult than in the ase of representations onsmooth elds. Our prin- ipal result in this dire tion is that the answer to the indi ated question is armativeforallproperregulargroupoids.In onne tionwiththis resultwe prove invarian eof the solvability of the problemunder Morita equivalen e. Finally,weprovideexamplesof lassi allyreexive properLiegroupoids,i.e. proper Lie groupoids for whi h the groupoid re onstru ted from the repre-sentations onve tor bundles is isomorphi tothe originalone; however, our list is very short: failure of reexivity is the rule rather than the ex eption whenone deals with representations on ve tor bundles.

Outline hapter by hapter

In order tohelp the reader nd their own way through the dissertation, we give here adetailed a ount of howthe material isorganized.

∗

In Chapter I we re all basi notionsand fa ts on erning Liegroupoids. The initialse tion is mainlyabout denitions, notationand onventions tobe followed inthe sequel.

The se ond se tion ontains relatively more interesting material: after briey re allingthe familiarnotion of a representation of a Lie groupoidon a ve tor bundle ( lassi al representation), we supply a on rete example,

1 whi h motivates our introdu ing the notion of representation on a smooth eld in Chapter IV , showing that it is in general impossible to distinguish two Lie groupoids from one another just on the basis of knowledge of the

1

(11)

orresponding ategoriesofrepresentationsonve torbundles;morepre isely, we shall expli itly onstru t a prin ipal

T

2

-bundle over the ir le (where

T

k

denotes the

k

-torus), together with a homomorphism onto the trivial

T

1

-bundleoverthe ir le,su hthat the obviouspull-ba kof representations along this homomorphism yields an isomorphism between the ategories of lassi alrepresentations of these two bundles of Liegroups.

InSe tion3wereview thenotionofa (normalized)Haar systemonaLie groupoid;thisistheanalogue,forLiegroupoids,ofthenotionof(probability) Haarmeasure on agroup. Like probabilityHaar measures, normalizedHaar systems an be used to obtain invariant fun tions, metri s et . by means of the usual averagingte hnique. The possibilityof onstru tingequivariant maps lies at the heart of our proof that the homomorphism

π

mentioned above issurje tive for every properLie groupoid.

Se tion 4 introdu es the reader to a relatively re ent result obtained by N.T. Zungaboutthe lo alstru tureof properLiegroupoids;this general re-sult wasrst onje tured by A. Weinsteinin hisfamouspaperaboutthe lo- allinearizabilityofproperregulargroupoids[37℄ (wherethe resultisproved pre isely under the additional assumption of regularity). Zung's lo al lin-earizabilitytheorem states that ea hproperLiegroupoid

G

is,lo allyinthe vi inity of any given

G

-invariant point of its base manifold, isomorphi to thetranslation groupoidasso iatedwiththe indu edlineara tionof the iso-tropy group of

G

at the point itself on the respe tive tangent spa e. As a onsequen e of this, every proper Lie groupoid is lo ally Morita equivalent tothe translation groupoidasso iated with some ompa t Liegroup a tion. The lo allinearizability of properLie groupoids a ounts for the inje tivity of the homomorphism

π

.

Finally,inSe tion5,weproveastatementrelatingtheglobalstru tureup toMorita equivalen eof a properLiegroupoidand the existen eof globally faithfulrepresentations:pre isely,weshowthataproperLiegroupoidadmits agloballyfaithfulrepresentationonasmoothve torbundleifandonlyifitis Moritaequivalenttothetranslationgroupoidofa ompa tLiegroupa tion. Althoughthisresultisnotelsewhereusedinourwork,wepresentaproofofit here be ause we believethat the same te hnique, appliedto representations on smooth elds, may be used to obtain nontrivial information about the globalstru tureofarbitraryproperLiegroupoids (sin eeverysu hgroupoid triviallyadmits globally faithfulrepresentations onsmooth elds).

∗

Chapter II ismainly on erned withtheba kgroundnotionsneeded inorder toformulate pre isely the re onstru tion probleminfull generality.The for-mal ategori al framework within whi h this problem is most onveniently stated inthe language of tensor ategories and tensor fun tors.

Se tion 6 introdu es the pivotal notion of a tensor ategory: this will be, for us, an additive

k

-linear ategory

C

(

k

= real or omplex numbers)

(12)

endowed with a bilinear bifun tor

(A, B) 7→ A ⊗ B : C × C → C

alled a tensor produ t, a distinguished obje t

1

alled the tensor unit and various naturalisomorphisms alled

ACU

onstraints whi h,roughlyspeaking,make the produ t

⊗

asso iative and ommutative with neutral element

1

. The notionofrigidtensor ategoryisalsobrieyre alled:thisisatensor ategory with the property that ea hobje t

R

admits adual, that isanobje t

R

′

for whi h there exist morphisms

R

′

_{⊗ R → 1}

and

1 → R ⊗ R

′

ompatible with one another in an obvious sense; the ategory of nite dimensional ve tor spa esor, more generally, smooth ve tor bundles over a manifoldis an example.

In Se tion 7 we review the notions of a tensor fun tor (morphism of tensor ategories)andatensor preserving naturaltransformation(morphism oftensorfun tors):oneobtainsatensorfun torby atta hing,toanordinary fun tor

F

,(natural)isomorphisms

F (A) ⊗ F (B) ∼

= F (A ⊗ B)

and

1 ∼

= F (1)

, alledtensorfun tor onstraints, ompatiblewiththe

ACU

onstraintsofthe twotensor ategoriesinvolved; atensor preservingnaturaltransformationof tensor fun tors is simply an ordinary natural transformation

λ

su h that

λ(A ⊗ B) = λ(A) ⊗ λ(B)

and

λ(1) = id

up to the obvious identi ations provided by the tensor fun tor onstraints. If anobje t

R

admits a dual

R

′

in the above sense, then

λ(R)

is an isomorphism for any tensor preserving

λ

(a tensor preserving fun tor will preserve duals whenever they exist). A fundamental example of tensor fun tor is the pull-ba k of smooth ve tor bundles along a smooth mappingof manifolds.

Se tion 8 hints at the relationship between real and omplex theory: to mention one example, in the ase of groups one an either onsider linear representations on real ve tor spa es and then take the group of all tensor preservingnaturalautomorphismsofthestandard forgetfulfun toror, alter-natively, onsider linear representations on omplex ve tor spa es and then takethe groupofallself- onjugatetensorpreservingnaturalautomorphisms; these two groups, of ourse, will turn out to be the same. We indi ate how these omments may be generalized to the abstra t ategori al setting we have just outlinedto the reader.

Se tion 9 is devoted to a on ise exposition, without any ambition to ompleteness, of the algebrai geometer's point of viewon Tannaka duality. In fa t,many fundamentalaspe ts of the algebrai theory are omitted here; werefermore demandingreaderstoSaavedra (1972) [32℄,Deligne andMilne (1982) [12℄ and Deligne (1990) [11℄.We thoughtit ne essary to in ludethis exposition with the intent of providingadequate grounds for understanding ertainquestions reaised inChapter V.

Contrary to the rest of the hapter, Se tion 10 is entirely based on our own work. In this se tion we prove a key te hni al lemma whi h we exploit later on, in Se tion 20, to establish the surje tivity of the envelope homo-morphism

π

(see above)for allproperLiegroupoids; thislemmaredu es the

(13)

latter problemto that of he king that a ertain extendability ondition for morphismsofrepresentationsissatised. Theproofofourresultmakesuseof the lassi alTannaka duality theorem for ompa t (Lie) groups, though for therestitispurelyalgebrai anditdoesnot reprodu eanyknownargument.

∗

In Chapter III, we introdu e our abstra t systematization of representation theory.Ourideastookshapegradually,duringtheattempttomakethe treat-ment of various inequivalent approa hes to the representation theory of Lie groupoids uniform. A ollateralbenet of this abstra tion eort was a gain insimpli ity andformalelegan e, alongwith ageneralbetter understanding of the mathemati alfeatures of the theory itself.

Webegin with the des ription of a ertain ategori al stru ture, that we shall allbred tensor ategory,whi hpermitstomakesenseofthe notionof `Lie groupoid a tion' in a natural way. Smooth ve tor bundles and smooth elds provide examples of su h a stru ture. A bred tensor ategory

C

may be dened as a orresponden e that assigns a tensor ategory

C(X)

to ea h smooth manifold

X

and atensor fun tor

f

∗

_{: C(X) → C(Y )}

to ea h smooth mapping

f : Y → X

, along with a oherent system of tensor preserving natural isomorphisms

(g ◦ f)

∗

∼

_{= f}

∗

_{◦ g}

∗

and

id

∗

_∼

= Id

. Most notions needed in representation theory an be dened purely in terms of the bred tensor ategorystru ture,providedthis enjoyssome additionalpropertieswhi hwe nowpro eed to summarize.

In Se tion 11, we make from the outset the assumption that

C

is a presta k, in other words that the obvious presheaf

U 7→ Hom

C(U )

(E|

U

, F |

U

)

is a sheaf on

X

for all obje ts

E

,

F

of the ategory

C(X)

. We also require

C

tobe smooth, that istosay, roughly speaking, thatfor ea h

X

there isan isomorphismof omplex algebras

End(1

X

) ≃ C

∞

_(X)

, where

1 X

denotes the tensor unit in

C(X)

.

Let

C

∞

X

denote the sheaf of smooth fun tions on

X

. For ea h smooth presta k

C

one an asso iatetoevery obje t

E

of the ategory

C(X)

asheaf of

C

∞

X

-modules,

ΓE

, to be alled the sheaf of smooth se tions of

E

. The latter operation yields a fun tor of

C(X)

into the ategory of sheaves of

C

∞

X

-modules.One has anaturaltransformation

ΓE ⊗

C

∞

X

ΓE

′

_{→ Γ(E ⊗ E}

′

₎

, whi h need not be an isomorphism, and an isomorphism

C

∞

X

≃ Γ(1

X

)

of

C

∞

X

-modules, that behave mu h as usual tensor fun tor onstraints do. The ompatibility of the operation

E 7→ ΓE

with the pullba k along a smooth map

f : Y → X

is measured by a anoni al natural morphismof sheaves of

C

∞

Y

-modules

f

∗

_{(ΓE) → Γ(f}

∗

_E)

. For ea h point

x

of

X

, there is a fun tor whi h assigns, to every obje t

E

of the ategory

C(X)

, a omplex ve tor spa e

E

x

to be referred to as the bre of

E

at

x

; a lo al smooth se tion

ζ ∈ ΓE(U)

, dened over an open neighbourhood

U

of

x

, will determine a ve tor

ζ(x) ∈ E

x

tobereferred to asthe value of

ζ

at

x

.

(14)

In order to show that Morita equivalen es have the usual property of indu inga ategori alequivalen ebetween the ategoriesof representations, we further need to impose the ondition that

C

is a sta k. This ondition, examinedinSe tion12, meansthat whenone isgiven anopen over

{U

i

}

of a (para ompa t) manifold

M

, along with a family of obje ts

E

i

∈ Ob C(U

i

)

and a o y le of isomorphisms

θ

ij

: E

i

|

U

i

∩U

j

∼

→ E

j

|

U

i

∩U

j

,there must besome obje t

E

in

C(M)

whi hadmitsafamilyofisomorphisms

E|

U

i

∼

→ E

i

∈ C(U

i

)

ompatiblewith

{θ

ij

}

. Naively speaking, one an glue obje tsin

C

together. When

C

is a smooth sta k, the ategory

C(M)

will essentially ontain the ategory ofall smooth ve torbundles over

M

as afull sub ategory.

In Se tion 13, we lay down the foundations of the representation theory ofLiegroupoids relativetoatype

T

, for anarbitrarysmoothsta k of tensor ategories

T

. A representation of type

T

of a Lie groupoid

G

is a pair

(E, ̺)

onsisting of an obje t

E

of the ategory

T(M)

(where

M

is the base of

G

) and an arrow

̺ : s

∗

_{E → t}

∗

_E

in the ategory

T(G)

(where

s

, t : G →

M

are the sour e resp. target map of

G

) su h that

u

∗

_{̺ = id}

E

(where

u

:

M → G

denotes the unit se tion) and

m

∗

_{̺ = p}

1 ∗

̺ ◦ p

2 ∗

̺

(where

m

, p

1 , p

2 :

G

s

×

t

G → G

respe tively denote multipli ation,rst and se ondproje tion). With the obvious notion of morphism, representations of type

T

of a Lie groupoid

G

form a ategory

R

T

_(G)

. This ategoryinheritsan additive linear tensor stru ture fromthe base ategory

T(M)

, making the forgetfulfun tor

(E, ̺) 7→ E

a stri t linear tensor fun tor of

R

T

_(G)

into

T(M)

. The latter fun torwillbedenotedby

ω

T

_(G)

andwillbe alledthestandardbrefun tor of type

T

asso iated with

G

.

Ea h homomorphismof Liegroupoids

φ : G → H

indu esa linear tensor fun tor

φ

∗

_{: R}

T

_{(H) → R}

T

_(G)

that we all the pullba k along

φ

. One has tensorpreserving naturalisomorphisms

(ψ ◦ φ)

∗

∼

_{= φ}

∗

_{◦ ψ}

∗

. In Se tion14we showthatfor every Moritaequivalen e

φ : G → H

the pullba kfun tor

φ

∗

is anequivalen e of tensor ategories.

∗

ChapterIVisthe oreofourdissertation.Thisisthepla ewherewedes ribe the general duality theory for Lie groupoids in the abstra t framework of ChaptersIIIIIand whereweprove ourmost importantresults, ulminating inthe above-mentioned re onstru tion theorem for proper Liegroupoids.

Se tion15 ontainsadetaileddes riptionofinwhattypeofLiegroupoid representationsoneshouldbeinterested,fromourpointofview,whendealing withdualitytheoryofLiegroupoids.Namely,wesay thatatype

T

isasta k of smooth eldsif it meets a number of extra requirements, alled `axioms', whi h we nowpro eed to summarize.

Our rst axiom says that the anoni al morphisms

ΓE ⊗

C

∞

X

ΓE

′

_→

Γ(E ⊗ E

′

)

and

f

∗

_{(ΓE) → Γ(f}

∗

_E)

( fr.thesummaryofCh.III,11)are sur-je tive;this axiom onveysinformationabout thesmooth se tionsof

E ⊗ E

(15)

and

f

∗

_E

and it implies that the bre at

x

of an obje t

E

is spanned, as a ve tor spa e, by the values

ζ(x)

as

ζ

ranges over all germs of lo al smooth se tionsof

E

at

x

.

Next, re all that any arrow

a : E → E

′

in

T(X)

indu es a morphism of sheaves of

C

∞

X

-modules

Γa : ΓE → ΓE

′

and a bundle of linear maps

{a

x

: E

x

→ E

′

x

}

; these are mutually ompatible, in an obvious sense. Our se ondandthirdaxioms ompletely hara terizethearrowsin

T(X)

interms oftheiree tonsmoothse tionsandthebundlesoflinearmapstheyindu e; namely, an arrow

a : E → E

′

vanishes if and only if

a

x

vanishes for all

x

, and every pair formed by a morphismof

C

∞

X

-modules

α : ΓE → ΓE

′

and a ompatible bundle of linear maps

{λ

x

: E

x

→ E

′

x

}

gives rise to a (unique) arrow

a : E → E

′

su h that

α = Γa

or,equivalently,

λ

x

= a

x

for all

x

. Thenthereisanaxiomrequiringthe existen eoflo alHermitianmetri s on the obje ts of

T(X)

. A Hermitian metri on

E

is an arrow

E ⊗ E

∗

_{→ 1}

indu ingapositivedeniteHermitiansesquilinearformonea hbre

E

x

;the axiomsaysthatforanypara ompa t

M

,ea hobje tof

T(M)

admits Hermit-ianmetri s. This assumption has many useful onsequen es: for example, it implies various ontinuity prin iples for smooth se tions and a fundamental extension property for arrows.

The remaining two axioms impose various niteness onditions on

T

: roughlyspeaking,nite dimensionality ofthe bres of anarbitraryobje t

E

and lo al niteness of the sheaf of modules

ΓE

. More pre isely, one axiom anoni ally identies

T(⋆)

, as a tensor ategory, with the ategory of nite dimensionalve torspa eswhere

⋆

denotestheone-pointmanifoldsothat, for instan e,the fun tor

E 7→ E

x

be omesa tensorfun tor of

T(X)

intothe ategory of su h spa es; the other axiom requires the existen e, for ea h point

x

, of an open neighbourhood

U

su h that

ΓE(U)

is spanned, as a

C

∞

_(U)

-module, by a nite set of se tions of

E

over

U

.

InSe tion16,weintrodu eourfundamentalexampleofasta kofsmooth elds (whi h is to play a role in our re onstru tion theorem for proper Lie groupoids in 20), to whi h we refer as the type

E

∞

of smooth Eu lidean elds. The notion of smooth Eu lidean eld over a manifold

X

generalizes that of smooth ve tor bundle over

X

in that the dimension of the bres is allowed to vary dis ontinuously over

X

or, in other words, the sheaf of smoothse tionsisnolongeralo allyfree

C

∞

X

-module.Ourtheory ofsmooth Eu lidean elds may be regarded as the ounterpart, in the smooth setting, of the well-established theory of ontinuous Hilbert elds [14℄.

In Se tion17we prove various resultsabout the equivariantextension of morphisms of Lie groupoid representations whose type is a sta k of smooth elds; in ombination with the te hni al lemma of 10, these extension re-sultsallowone toestablishthesurje tivity oftheenvelopehomomorphism

π

asso iated with representations on an arbitrary sta k of smooth elds. The

(16)

anyproperLiegroupoidbe auseoftheexisten eofnormalizedHaar system-sand,of ourse, onthe axioms forsta ks of smooth elds.

In Se tions 1819, we delve intothe formalism ofbre fun tors with val-ues in an arbitrary sta k of smooth elds. A bre fun tor, with values in a sta k of smooth elds

F

, is a faithful linear tensor fun tor

ω

of some addi-tive tensor ategory

C

into

F(M)

, for some xed para ompa t manifold

M

to be referred to as the base of

ω

. This notion is obtained by abstra ting the fundamental features, whi h allow one to make sense of the onstru -tion of the Tannakian groupoid, fromthe on rete exampleprovided by the standard forgetfulfun tor asso iated with the representations of type

F

of a Lie groupoid over

M

. To any bre fun tor

ω

with base

M

, one an assign a groupoid

T (ω)

over

M

to whi h we refer as the Tannakian groupoid as-so iated with

ω

onstru ted, likein the ase of groups, by taking all tensor preserving natural automorphisms of

ω

. The set of arrows of

T (ω)

omes naturally equipped with a topology and a smooth fun tional stru ture that isasheaf

R

∞

ofalgebrasof ontinuousreal valuedfun tionson

T (ω)

losed under omposition with arbitrary smooth fun tions R

d

_→

R; the notion of smooth fun tionalstru ture is analogous tothat of

C

∞

-ring, fr [28, 29℄. In Se tion 20, we reap the fruits of all our previous work and prove sev-eral statements of fundamental importan e about the Tannakian groupoid

T (G)

asso iatedwiththe standard forgetfulfun tor

ω(G)

onthe ategoryof representations of an arbitrary proper Lie groupoid

G

. (We are still dealing withasituationwherethe typeisanarbitrarysta k ofsmoothelds.)Re all that there is a anoni al homomorphism

π : G → T (G)

dened by setting

π(g)(E, ̺) = ̺(g)

,whi h,aspreviouslymentioned,turnsouttobesurje tive forproper

G

;the proof of this theorem isbased onthe resultsof Se tions 10 and17. Moreover, when

G

isproper, the Tannakiangroupoid

T (G)

be omes atopologi algroupoidand

π

ahomomorphismoftopologi algroupoids:then weshowthat inje tivityof

π

impliesthat

π

isanisomorphism oftopologi al groupoids and that thisin turnimplies thatthe above-mentionedfun tional stru ture on

T (G)

isa tually aLie groupoid stru ture for whi h

π

be omes anisomorphismofLiegroupoids.A ordingly,wesaythataLiegroupoid

G

is reexiverelativetoa ertaintypeif

π

indu esahomeomorphismbetween thespa es ofarrows of

G

and

T (G)

.Our maintheorem, whi h on ludes the se tion,statesthateveryproperLiegroupoidisreexiverelativetothe type

E

∞

of smooth Eu lidean elds. The inje tivity of

π

for this parti ular type ofrepresentationsisaneasy onsequen eof Zung'slo allinearizabiltyresult for proper Liegroupoids.

∗

Besides establishing a Tannaka duality theory for proper Liegroupoids, the work des ribed abovealso leads toresults on erning the lassi altheory of

(17)

onwhat anbesaidaboutthelatter aseex lusivelyfromtheabstra t stand-point of the theory of bre fun tors outlined in 18 19. The main obje ts of study here are ertain bre fun tors, whi h will be referred to as lassi- al bre fun tors, enjoying formal properties analogous to those possessed by the standard forgetful fun tor asso iated with the ategory of lassi al representations of aLie groupoid.

Thedistin tivefeaturesof lassi albrefun torsaretherigidityofthe do-maintensor ategory

C

andthetypebeingequaltothesta kofsmoothve tor bundles. Se tion 21 olle ts some general remarks about su h bre fun tors and some basi denitions. Forany lassi al bre fun tor

ω

, the Tannakian groupoid

T (ω)

proves to be a

C

∞

-stru tured groupoid over the base

M

of

ω

; thismeansthatallstru turemapsof

T (ω)

are morphismsoffun tionally stru tured spa es withrespe t tothe

C

∞

-fun tionalstru ture

R

∞

on

T (ω)

introdu ed in 18. One an dene, for every

C

∞

-stru tured groupoid

T

, an obvious notion of

C

∞

-representation on a smooth ve tor bundle; su h rep-resentations form a tensor ategory

R

∞

_{(T )}

. Every obje t

R

of the domain ategory

C

ofa lassi albrefun tor

ω

determinesa

C

∞

-representation

ev

R

, whi hwe allevaluationat

R

,oftheTannakiangroupoid

T (ω)

ontheve tor bundle

ω(R)

.Theoperation

R 7→ ev

R

providesatensorfun torof

C

intothe ategory of

C

∞

-representations of

T (ω)

, the evaluation fun tor asso iated with

ω

.

Se tion 22 is preliminary to Se tion 23. It is devoted to a dis ussion of the te hni al notion of a tame submanifold whi h we introdu e in order to denerepresentative hartsinthesubsequentse tion.Allthereaderneedsto know about tame submanifolds is that these are parti ular submanifolds of Liegroupoids with the property that whenever a Lie groupoid homomorph-ismestablishes abije tive orresponden e between twoof them,the indu ed bije tionisa tually adieomorphismand that Moritaequivalen espreserve tame submanifolds.

The fa t that

T (ω)

is a

C

∞

-stru tured groupoid for every lassi al

ω

poses the questionofwhether

T (ω)

isa tually aLiegroupoid. InSe tion23 we start ta klingthis issue by providinga ne essary and su ient riterion, whi h proves to be onvenient enough to use in pra ti e, for the answer to thelatterquestionbeingpositiveforagiven

ω

.This riterionisexpressed in terms ofthe notion of arepresentative hart, thatis apair

(Ω, R)

onsisting of an open subset

Ω

of

T (ω)

and an obje t

R

of the domain ategory

C

of

ω

su h that the evaluation representation at

R

indu es a homeomorphism between

Ω

and a tame submanifold of the linear groupoid

GL

(ωR)

; then

T (ω)

is a Liegroupoidif, and onlyif, representative harts over

T (ω)

and

(Ω, R ⊕ S)

isarepresentative hart foreveryrepresentative hart

(Ω, R)

and for every obje t

S

of

C

.

Se tion 24introdu es a notion of morphismfor ( lassi al)bre fun tors. Roughly speaking, a morphism of

ω

into

ω

′

(18)

M → M

′

of the base manifolds, is a tensor fun tor of

C

′

into

C

ompatible withthe pullba k ofve tor bundlesalong

f

;every morphism

ω

→ ω

′

over

f

indu es a homomorphism of

C

∞

-stru tured groupoids

T (ω) → T (ω

′

₎

over

f

.

Se tion25isdevoted tothestudy of weak equivalen esof ( lassi al)bre fun tors: we dene them as those morphisms over a surje tive submersion whi hhavethepropertyofbeinga ategori alequivalen e.Asanappli ation of the riterion of 23, we show that if

ω

is weakly equivalent to

ω

′

, then

T (ω)

isa Liegroupoidif and only if

T (ω

′

₎

is;when this isthe ase, the Lie groupoids

T (ω)

and

T (ω

′

₎

turn out tobe Morita equivalent.

∗

InChapterVI,weapplythegeneralabstra ttheoryofthepre eding hapter tothemotivatingexampleprovided by the standardforgetfulfun toronthe ategoryof lassi alrepresentationsofaproperLiegroupoid

G

.TheT annak-iangroupoidasso iatedwiththe latter lassi albrefun torwillbedenoted by

T

∞

_(G)

; infa t,this onstru tion an beextended toafun tor-

7→ T

∞

₍

-

)

ofthe ategoryofLiegroupoidsintothe ategoryof

C

∞

-stru turedgroupoids so that the envelope homomorphism

π(

-

)

be omes a natural transformation

(

-

) → T

∞

₍

-

)

. We will fo us our attention on the following two problems: in the rst pla e, we want to understand whether the Tannakian groupoid

T

∞

_(G)

is a Lie groupoid, let us say for

G

proper; se ondly, we are inter-ested in examples of lassi ally reexive Lie groupoids, that is to say Lie groupoids

G

for whi h the envelope homomorphism

π

is an isomorphism of topologi algroupoids between

G

and

T

∞

_(G)

(re allthat, underthe assump-tion of properness, it issu ient that

π

isinje tive).

In Se tion26,we olle t what weknowabout the rst of the two above-mentioned problems inthe general ase ofan arbitraryproperLiegroupoid. Namely, we show that the ondition, in the riterion for smoothness of 23, that

(Ω, R ⊕ S)

should be a representative hart for every representative hart

(Ω, R)

andobje t

S

,isalwayssatisedbythestandardforgetfulfun tor on the ategory of lassi al representations of a proper Lie groupoid

G

so that

T

∞

_(G)

is a (proper) Lie groupoid if and only if one an nd enough representative harts; if this is the ase, then the envelope map

π

is a full submersionofLiegroupoidswhoseasso iatedpullba kfun tor

π

∗

establishes an isomorphism of the orresponding ategories of lassi al representations inverse tothe evaluationfun tor of 21.

Se tion 27prose utes the study initiatedin the previous se tion by pro-viding a proof of the fa t that

T

∞

_(G)

is a Lie groupoid for every proper regular groupoid

G

. We onje ture that the same statement holds true for every proper

G

, that iseven without the regularity assumption.

(19)

reexive, this list annot be very long. To begin with, translation groupoids asso iatedwith ompa tLiegroup a tionsare evidently lassi allyreexive. Next, we observe that any étale Lie groupoid whose sour e map is proper is ne essarily lassi ally reexive be ause, for su h groupoids, one an make senseof theregularrepresentation. Finally,orbifoldgroupoidsbywhi hwe mean proper ee tive groupoidsare lassi ally reexive be ause the stan-dard a tion on the tangent bundle of the base manifold yields a globally faithful lassi al representation.

Some possible appli ations

The study of lassi al bre fun tors in Chapter V was originally motivated by theexampletreatedinChapterVI, namelythestandardforgetfulfun tor asso iated with the ategory of lassi al representations of a Lie groupoid. However, examples of lassi al bre fun tors an also be found by looking into dierent dire tions.

To begin with, one ould onsider representations of Lie algebroids [27, 10,16℄.Re allthatarepresentationofaLiealgebroid

g

overamanifold

M

is apair

(E, ∇)

onsisting ofave tor bundle

E

over

M

andaat

g

- onne tion

∇

on

E

, that is, a bilinear map

Γ(g) × Γ(E) → Γ(E)

(global se tions),

C

∞

(M)

-linearintherst argument,Leibnitzinthe se ondandwith vanish-ing urvature. Su h representations naturallyform atensor ategory.

Another example of the same sort is provided by the singular foliations introdu ed by I. Androulidakis and G. Skandalis [1℄. Here one is given a lo ally nite sheaf

F

of modules of ve tor elds over a manifold

M

, losed undertheLiebra ket;thisistobethoughtofasindu inga`singular'foliation of

M

, in that

F

is no longer ne essarily lo ally free and so the dimension of the leaves may jump. Again, one an onsider pairs

(E, ∇)

formed by a ve tor bundle

E

over

M

and a morphism of sheaves

∇ : F ⊗ ΓE → ΓE

enjoying formalpropertiesanalogous to those dening a at onne tion.

In his paper about the lo al linearizability of proper Lie groupoids [38℄, N.T. Zungposesthe questionofwhetheraspa e,whi hislo allyisomorphi totheorbitspa eofa ompa tLiegroupa tion,isne essarilytheorbitspa e

M/G

asso iatedwith aproperLiegroupoid

G

overamanifold

M

. Of ourse, thisquestionisnotstatedverypre isely;itsrigorousformulation,asfaraswe an see, should be given in the followingterms. Letus alla

C

∞

-stru tured spa e

(X, F

∞

₎

a generalized orbifold if the spa e

X

is Hausdor, para om-pa t and lo ally isomorphi , as a fun tionally stru tured spa e, to an orbit spa easso iatedwith somelinear ompa tLiegroupa tioninotherwords, lo allyisomorphi toaspa eoftheform

(V /G, C

∞

V /G

)

forsomerepresentation

G → GL(V )

of a ompa t Lie group

G

on a nite dimensional ve tor spa e

(20)

ism. Zung's theorem implies that the orbit spa e

(M/G, C

∞

M/G

)

of a proper Liegroupoid

G

overamanifold

M

isageneralizedorbifold:thenthe question iswhether anarbitrary generalizedorbifold is a tually of this pre iseform.

Classi al bre fun tors make their natural appearan e in onne tion with any given generalized orbifold

X

. (Conventionally, we will refer to the

C

∞

-stru ture of

X

, when ne essary, by means of the notation

C

∞

X

.) Let

V

∞

(X)

denote the ategory of lo ally free sheaves of

C

∞

X

-modules (of lo- ally nite rank), endowed with the standard linear tensor stru ture; one mayrefer totheobje tsof this ategoryasve tor bundles over

X

. Choose a lo ally nite over

{U

i

}

of

X

by open subsets

U

i

su h that for ea h

i

there is an isomorphism

V

i

/G

i

≈ U

i

; we regard the maps

φ

i

: V

i

→ U

i

as xed on eand forall,and weassume, forsimpli ity,that the

V

i

allhave thesame dimension.Letting

M

bethedisjointunion

`

V

i

,onehasanobvious lassi al bre fun tor

ω

X

M

= ω

X

{V

i

,φ

i

}

over

M

sending ea h obje t

E

of the ategory

V

∞

(X)

tothe smooth ve tor bundle

⊕

i

φ

i

∗

_E

over

M

. The Tannakiangroupoid

T

∞

_{(X) = T (ω}

X

M

)

isa

C

∞

-stru tured groupoid with the property that the obvious map

φ : M → X

indu es an isomorph-ism of fun tionally stru tured spa es between

M/T

∞

_(X)

and

X

; thus, the study of this groupoid might be relevant to the above-mentioned problem. Similarly, the study of the Tannakian groupoids asso iated with the other examplesmightleadtointerestinginformationabouttheunderlying geomet-ri alobje ts, atleast whenthe situationinvolvessomekindofproperness.In this onne tion, itisnaturaltohope forageneralresultrelatingthe domain ategoryof a lassi al brefun tor with the ategoryof

C

∞

-representations ofthe orrespondingTannakiangroupoid, forexampleviathe standard eval-uationfun tor des ribed in21.

A well-known onje ture, whi h has been raising some interest re ently [17, 19℄, states that every proper étale Lie groupoid is Morita equivalent to the translation groupoid asso iated with some ompa t Lie group a tion or, equivalently, that every su h groupoid admits a globally faithful lassi al representation ( fr. Ch. I, 5). This onje ture is related to the question of whether properétale Liegroupoids are lassi ally reexive (we havealready observed thatthe answerisarmativeintheee tive ase,see Ch.VI , 28). It isknown that for ea h groupoid

G

of this kind,there exista proper ee -tiveLiegroupoid

G

˜

and asubmersiveepimorphism

G → ˜

G

;the kernel ofthis homomorphismis ne essarily a bundle of nite groups

B

embedded into

G

, hen e, one gets an exa t sequen e of Lie groupoids

1 → B ֒→ G → ˜

G → 1

where

B

and

G

˜

are both lassi ally reexive. These onsiderations strongly suggest that one should investigate how the property of reexivity behaves with respe t toLie groupoidextensions.

(21)

Lie Groupoids and their Classi al Representations

The present hapter is essentially introdu tory: we regard all the material thereof as well-known. Our purpose is, rst of all, to x some notational onventions and some standard terminology on erning Lie groupoids; this is done in 1. Next, in 2, we provide a detailed dis ussion of a on rete example whi h is to serve as motivation for the approa h we will adopt in Chapters IIIIV. In 34 we treat the two fundamentalpillars on towhi h our main result holds: Haar systems and Zung's linearizability theorem; we de ided to in lude a presentation of these topi s here be ause we found it di ult to provide adequate referen es for them. The hapter ends with a digression on the problemof representing a properLie groupoidas a global quotient arising froma smooth ompa t Lie groupa tion.

1 Generalities about Lie Groupoids

Thetermgroupoidrefers toasmall ategorywhereeveryarrowisinvertible. A Lie groupoid an be approximately des ribed as an internal groupoid in the ategory ofsmooth manifolds. To onstru t a Liegroupoid

G

one has to giveapairofmanifoldsof lass

C

∞

_G

(0)

and

G

(1)

,respe tively alledmanifold of obje ts and manifoldof arrows,andalistofsmooth maps alledstru ture maps. The basi items in this listare the sour e map

s

: G

(1)

_{→ G}

(0)

and the target map

t

: G

(1)

_{→ G}

(0)

;thesehavetomeettherequirementthatthebred produ t

G

(2)

_{= G}

(1)

s

×

t

G

(1)

exists inthe ategory of

C

∞

-manifolds. Thenone has togivea omposition map

c

: G

(2)

_{→ G}

(1)

,aunit map

u

: G

(0)

_{→ G}

(1)

and aninverse map

i

: G

(1)

_{→ G}

(1)

, forwhi hthe familiaralgebrai laws must be satised.

Terminology and Notation: The points

x = s(g)

and

x

′

_{= t(g)}

are resp. alled the sour e and the target of the arrow

g

. We let

G(x, x

′

₎

denote the set of all the arrows whose sour e is

x

and whose target is

x

′

(22)

the abbreviation

G|

x

for the isotropy or vertex group

G(x, x)

. Notationally, we will often identify a point

x ∈ G

(0)

and the orresponding unit arrow

u

(x) ∈ G

(1)

. It is ostumaryto write

g

′

_{· g}

or

g

′

_g

for the omposition

c

(g

′

_{, g)}

and

g

−1

forthe inverse

i

(g)

.

Our des ription ofthe notionof Liegroupoid isstillin omplete. Itturns out that a ouple of additional requirements are needed in order to get a reasonable denition.

Re all that a manifold

M

is said to be para ompa t if it is Hausdor andthereexists anas endingsequen e ofopen subsetswith ompa t losure

· · · ⊂ U

i

⊂ U

i

⊂ U

i+1

⊂ · · ·

su h that

M =

∞

∪

i=0

U

i

. A Hausdor manifold is para ompa tifandonlyifitpossessesa ountablebasisofopensubsets. Any open overofapara ompa tmanifoldadmitsalo allyniterenement.Any para ompa tmanifold admitspartitionsof unity of lass

C

∞

(subordinated toanopen over; f. for instan e Lang [22℄).

In ordertomake the bredprodu t

G

(1)

s

×

t

G

(1)

meaningfulasa manifold and for other purposes related to our studies, we shall in lude the following additional onditions inthe denition of Lie groupoid:

1. The sour e map

s

: G

(1)

_{→ G}

(0)

is asubmersion with Hausdor bres; 2. The manifold

G

(0)

ispara ompa t.

Notethat we donot require that the manifold of arrows

G

(1)

is Hausdor or para ompa t; a tually, this manifold is neither Hausdor nor se ond ount-able in many examples of interest. The denition here diers from that in Moerdijk and Mr£un [27℄ in that we additionally require that the manifold

G

(0)

ispara ompa t.Therst onditionimpliesaton ethatthedomainofthe omposition map is a submanifold of the Cartesian produ t

G

(1)

_{× G}

(1)

and that the target map is a submersion with Hausdor bres; thus, the sour e bres

G(x,

-

) = s

−1

_(x)

and the target bres

G(

-

, x

′

_{) = t}

−1

_(x

′

₎

are losed Hausdor submanifolds of

G

(1)

. A Lie groupoid

G

is said to be Hausdor if the manifold

G

(1)

is Hausdor.

Some more Terminology: The manifold

G

(0)

is usually alled the base of thegroupoid

G

;onealsosaysthat

G

isagroupoidoverthe manifold

G

(0)

.We shall oftenuse the notation

G

x

_{= G(x,}

-

) = s

−1

_(x)

for the bre of the sour e map overa point

x ∈ G

(0)

. More generally,we shall write

(1)

G(S, S

′

_{) =}

_{g ∈ G}

(1)

: s(g) ∈ S

&

t

(g) ∈ S

′

,

G|

S

= G(S, S)

and

G

S

_{= G(S,}

-

) = G(S, G

(0)

_{) = s}

−1

_(S)

for allsubsets

S, S

′

_{⊂ G}

(0)

.

A homomorphism of Lie groupoids is a smooth fun tor. More pre isely, a homomorphism

ϕ : G → H

onsists of two smooth maps

ϕ

(0)

_{: G}

(0)

_{→ H}

(0)

and

ϕ

(1)

_{: G}

(1)

_{→ H}

(1)

, ompatible with the groupoid stru ture in the sense that

s

◦ ϕ

(1)

_{= ϕ}

(0)

_{◦ s}

,

t

◦ ϕ

(1)

_{= ϕ}

(0)

_{◦ t}

and

ϕ

(1)

_(g

′

_{· g) = ϕ}

(1)

_(g

′

_{) · ϕ}

(1)

_(g)

.

(23)

There is also a notion of topologi al groupoid: this is just an internal groupoid in the ategory of topologi al spa es and ontinuous mappings. In the ontinuous ase the denition is mu h simpler and one need not worry about the domain of denition of the omposition map. With the obvious notionof homomorphism,topologi al groupoids onstitute a ategory.

2 Example Everysmoothmanifold

M

anberegardedasaLiegroupoid by taking

M

itselfas themanifold ofarrows and the identitymap

id

: M →

M

as the unit se tion. Alternatively, one an form the pair groupoid over

M

; this is the Lie groupoid whose manifold of arrows is

M × M

and whose sour e and targetmap are the two proje tions.

3 Example AnyLiegroup

G

anbe regardedasaLiegroupoidoverthe one-point manifold by taking

G

itselfas the manifold of arrows.

4 Example: linear groupoids If

E

is a real or omplex smooth ve tor bundle (of lo ally nite rank) over a manifold

M

, one an form the linear groupoid

GL(E)

asso iated with

E

. This is dened as the groupoid over

M

whose arrows

x → x

′

are the linear isomorphisms

E

x

∼

→ E

x

′

between the bres of

E

over the points

x

and

x

′

. There is an obvious smooth stru ture turning

GL(E)

intoa Liegroupoid.

5 Example:a tiongroupoids Let

G

beaLiegroupa tingsmoothly(from the left) on a manifold

M

. Then one an dene the a tion (or translation) groupoid

G

⋉ M

astheLiegroupoidover

M

whosemanifold ofarrowsisthe Cartesianprodu t

G × M

,whosesour eand targetmaparerespe tivelythe proje tion onto the se ond fa tor

(g, x) 7→ x

and the a tion

(g, x) 7→ gx

and whose omposition law isthe operation

(6)

(g

′

_{, x}

′

_{)(g, x) = (g}

′

_{g, x)}

.

There isa similar onstru tion

M

⋊ G

asso iated with right a tions. Let

G

be a Lie groupoid and let

x

be a point of its base manifold

G

(0)

. The orbit of

G

(or

G

-orbit) through

x

is the subset

(7)

Gx

def

= G · x

def

= t G

x

= {x

′

∈ G

(0)

_{|∃g : x → x}

′

_}

.

Notethatthe isotropy group

G|

x

a tsfrom thethe rightonthe manifold

G

x

; this a tion is learly free and transitive along the bres of the restri tion of the target map

t

to

G

x

. The followingresult holds (see [27℄p. 115): 8 Theorem Let

G

bea Liegroupoidand let

x, x

′

_{∈ G}

(0)

. Then 1.

G(x, x

′

₎

is a losedsubmanifoldof

G

(1)

; 2.

G|

x

is a Liegroup;

3. the

G

-orbit through

x

isan immersed submanifoldof

G

(0)

(24)

4. the target map

t

: G

x

_{→ Gx}

provesto be aprin ipal

G|

x

-bundle. Itisworthwhilespendinga oupleofwordsaboutthemanifoldstru turethat is asserted to exist on the

G

-orbit through

x

. The set

Gx

an obviously be identied with the homogeneousspa e

G

x

_/(G|

x

)

.Now, it an be proved that there exists a (possibly non-Hausdor) manifold stru ture on this quotient spa e,su h that the quotient map turnsout tobe a prin ipalbundle. Wesay that aLie(ortopologi al)groupoid

G

isproper if

G

isHausdorand the ombined sour etarget map

(s, t) : G

(1)

_{→ G}

(0)

_{× G}

(0)

is proper (in the familiarsense:the inverse image of a ompa t subset is ompa t).

The manifold of arrows

G

(1)

of a proper Lie groupoid

G

is always para- ompa t. Indeed, by the denition of Lie groupoid, the base

M

of

G

is a para ompa t manifold and therefore there exists an invading sequen e

· · · ⊂ U

i

⊂ U

i

⊂ U

i+1

⊂ · · · ⊂ M

of pre- ompa t open subsets; the in-verse images

Γ

i

= G|

U

i

= (s, t)

−1

_(U

i

× U

i

)

formananalogoussequen e inside the (Hausdor) manifold

G

(1)

.

Let

x

0

be a point of

M

. We know the orbit

S = Gx

0

is an immersed submanifoldof

M

(pre isely, there exists a unique manifold stru ture on

S

su h that

t

: G

x

0 → S

is a prin ipal right

G|

x

0

-bundle and the in lusion

S ֒→ M

an immersion). Now, it follows from the properness of

G

that

S

is a tually a submanifold of

M

. To see this, x a point

s

0 ∈ S

. Sin e there exists a lo al equivariant hart

G(x

0 , W ) ≈ W × G|

x

0

where

W

is both an open neighborhood of

s

0

in

S

and a submanifold of

M

, it will be enough to prove the existen e of an open ball

B ⊂ M

at

s

0

su h that

S ∩ B ⊂ W

. To do this, take a sequen e of open balls

B

i

shrinking to

s

0

: the de reasing sequen e

Σ

i

= G(x

0 , B

i

) − G(x

0 , W )

of losedsubsetsofthemanifold

G(x

0 ,

-

)

is ontained inthe ompa t subset

G(x

0 , B

1 )

and therefore,sin e

T

Σ

i

=

∅

, there exists some

i

su hthat

G(x

0 , B

i

) ⊂ G(x

0 , W )

.

2 Classi al Representations

In this se tion we introdu e the ostumary notion of representation of a Lie groupoid on a smooth ve tor bundle and we explain, by means of a ounterexample, why this notionis inadequate for the purpose of buildinga possible Tannaka dualitytheory forproperLie groupoids.