Move the computation to a ring where it is easier
A ring homomorphism Λ → Γ gives three functors between the module categories: restriction, and its left and right adjoints, extension and coinduction. Comparing derived functors across these produces the change-of-rings theorems, of which Shapiro's lemma is the most used. The general statement is a spectral sequence, and the useful special cases are those where it collapses.
Learning objectives
- Identify the three change-of-rings functors and their adjunctions.
- State Shapiro's lemma and its use in group cohomology.
- Give conditions under which the comparison is an isomorphism.
- Recognise the general change-of-rings spectral sequence.
Section 01The three functors
| Functor | Direction | Adjointness |
|---|---|---|
| Restriction Res | Γ-modules → Λ-modules | Middle of the triple |
| Extension Γ ⊗Λ − | Λ → Γ | Left adjoint to restriction — right exact |
| Coinduction HomΛ(Γ, −) | Λ → Γ | Right adjoint to restriction — left exact |
It changes nothing but the acting ring, so it preserves exactness in both directions. That is what makes its adjoints well behaved: the left adjoint preserves projectives and the right adjoint preserves injectives, which is exactly what comparison of derived functors needs.
Section 02Shapiro's lemma
and dually for coinduction. In group cohomology, with Λ = ℤ[H] and Γ = ℤ[G] for a subgroup H ≤ G:
Shapiro's lemma converts a computation over a large group with an induced module into one over a small subgroup with the original module. Cohomology of a permutation module reduces to the cohomology of a point stabiliser, which is how most explicit computations actually proceed.
Section 03When the comparison is clean
| Situation | Result |
|---|---|
| Γ flat over Λ | TorΛ ⊗ Γ ≅ TorΓ — flat base change |
| Γ projective over Λ | Restriction preserves projective resolutions |
| Γ = Λ/(x), x a non-zero-divisor acting as zero | A long exact sequence relating Ext over Λ and over Γ |
| Localisation Λ → S−1Λ | Ext and Tor localise for finitely presented modules |
| General Λ → Γ | A spectral sequence, not an isomorphism |
The spectral sequence gives an isomorphism only when it degenerates — typically because Γ is flat or projective over Λ, killing all but one row. Asserting an isomorphism without such a hypothesis is a common error, and the resulting statements are false in general.
ReferenceFrequently asked questions
Why are there two adjoints to restriction?
Because restriction is exact, so it can have adjoints on both sides. The left adjoint is extension of scalars and the right is coinduction; for a finite index subgroup of a group they coincide, which is why induction and coinduction are often conflated in that setting.
Does Shapiro's lemma need finiteness?
The coinduced version holds in general. The induced version agrees with it when the index is finite; for infinite index induction and coinduction differ and only one of the two statements is available.
What is the most common use of change of rings?
Reducing a cohomology computation over a group ring to one over a subgroup or a quotient. The Lyndon–Hochschild–Serre spectral sequence is the change-of-rings sequence for a normal subgroup, and it is the single most used tool in group cohomology.
NavigateContinue in this stream
Curated next steps from this page. The site also surfaces algorithmically related reading below.
ProvenanceSources and further reading
This page is an original KEVOS explanatory article. It presents the underlying mathematics — definitions, algorithms, complexity results and selection criteria — in KEVOS editorial voice. No text is reproduced from any copyrighted source. Where numerical tables are relevant, KEVOS links to live authoritative databases rather than republishing static values.