1. Introduction
In [3 ] we introduced a categorical framework for viewing the Cuntz-Pimsner construction as a functor, which thereby allows one to determine relationships between Cuntz-Pimsner algebras from relationships between the defining C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondences. The domain of this functor is the category 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , introduced in [3 ] , that has C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondences as objects, and a morphism from X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the isomorphism class of the pair (M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), where M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence satisfying certain conditions, and
U M : ( X ⊗ A M ) B A → ( M ⊗ B Y ) B A U_{M}:{}_{A}(X\otimes_{A}M)_{B}\rightarrow{}_{A}(M\otimes_{B}Y)_{B} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
is a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence isomorphism. The codomain category 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , which has sometimes been called the Enchilada Category in the literature, has C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -algebras as objects and isomorphism classes of C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondences as morphisms. For any pair (M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) one can construct a covariant representation (π , Φ 𝜋 Φ
\pi,\Phi italic_π , roman_Φ ) of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on 𝒦 ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \mathcal{K}(M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y}) caligraphic_K ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) . Then the universal property of Cuntz-Pimsner algebras assures the existence of an associated homomorphism σ ( π , Φ ) : 𝒪 X → 𝒦 ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) , : subscript 𝜎 𝜋 Φ → subscript 𝒪 𝑋 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \sigma_{(\pi,\Phi)}:\mathcal{O}_{X}\rightarrow\mathcal{K}(M\otimes_{B}\mathcal%
{O}_{Y}), italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_π , roman_Φ ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → caligraphic_K ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , which allows us to view M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y} italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as an 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT –𝒪 Y subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \mathcal{O}_{Y} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT -correspondence. It is shown in [3 ] that there exists a functor ℰ ℰ \mathcal{E} caligraphic_E from 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT that maps a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to its Cuntz-Pimsner algebra 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , and a morphisms from X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is mapped to the isomorphism class of an 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT –𝒪 Y subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \mathcal{O}_{Y} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT -correspondence. The first part of this paper is devoted to using this functor to obtain some well-known Cuntz-Pimsner algebra results. Specifically, if (Υ , t Υ 𝑡
\Upsilon,t roman_Υ , italic_t ) is a universal covariant representation of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , and I 𝐼 I italic_I is a positive X 𝑋 X italic_X -invariant ideal of A 𝐴 A italic_A , then the following hold:
(i)
𝒪 I X subscript 𝒪 𝐼 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{IX} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is isomorphic to the smallest hereditary subalgebra of 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT containing Υ ( I ) Υ 𝐼 \Upsilon(I) roman_Υ ( italic_I ) .
(ii)
𝒪 I X subscript 𝒪 𝐼 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{IX} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is Morita equivalent to the ideal ⟨ Υ ( I ) ⟩ delimited-⟨⟩ Υ 𝐼 \left\langle\Upsilon(I)\right\rangle ⟨ roman_Υ ( italic_I ) ⟩ generated by Υ ( I ) Υ 𝐼 \Upsilon(I) roman_Υ ( italic_I ) in 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
(iii)
If X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is regular and I 𝐼 I italic_I is an X 𝑋 X italic_X -invariant ideal then 𝒪 X / ⟨ Υ ( I ) ⟩ ≅ 𝒪 X / X I . subscript 𝒪 𝑋 delimited-⟨⟩ Υ 𝐼 subscript 𝒪 𝑋 𝑋 𝐼 \mathcal{O}_{X}/\langle\Upsilon(I)\rangle\cong\mathcal{O}_{X/XI}. caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ roman_Υ ( italic_I ) ⟩ ≅ caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Items (i) and (ii) were proven by Katsura in [6 , Proposition 9.3 and Proposition 9.5] by using what are called O -pairs. Item (iii) can be shown by combining [7 , Lemma 6.3] and [5 , Theorem 3.1] . Item (iii) can also be deduced by combining [6 , Proposition 5.3] and [6 , Proposition 8.5] ; however, this requires a deep understanding of O -pairs and the properties of C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -algebras generated by such pairs. The first objective of this paper is to show that the functor established in [3 ] can be applied to obtain easier and more direct proofs of these three results.
The work that is presented in the second part of this paper was motivated by a question frequently asked by audience members when presenting the results of [3], namely: “Can one define exact sequences in the domain and codomain categories so that the Cuntz-Pimsner functor ℰ ℰ \mathcal{E} caligraphic_E is exact?” In order to answer this question, one needs to know what is meant by an exact sequence in both the domain and codomain categories. One of the difficulties in answering this question is that one can not identify images in either categories, and it is suspected that images may not exist in either categories. Therefore the usual “kernel-image definition” of exactness may not apply. To circumvent this obstruction in each category, we define 0 → A → 𝑓 B → 𝑔 C → 0 → 0 𝐴 𝑓 → 𝐵 𝑔 → 𝐶 → 0 0\rightarrow A\xrightarrow{f}B\xrightarrow{g}C\to 0 0 → italic_A start_ARROW overitalic_f → end_ARROW italic_B start_ARROW overitalic_g → end_ARROW italic_C → 0 to be a short exact sequence when f 𝑓 f italic_f is a categorical kernel of g 𝑔 g italic_g and g 𝑔 g italic_g is a categorical cokernel of f 𝑓 f italic_f (see Definition 5.8 and Definition 5.10 ). We characterize this “kernel-cokernel definition” of exactness in each category, showing that kernel-cokernel exactness is a tractable concept in these categories. We prove that with the kernel-cokernel definition of short exact sequence, the Cuntz-Pimsner functor is exact. We end the paper by showing that as an immediate consequence of exactness one can obtain the results (i),(ii), and (iii) listed above for the case when X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is regular.
2. Preliminaries
Let 𝒞 𝒞 \mathcal{C} caligraphic_C be a pointed category (a category with a zero object), and let f : A → B : 𝑓 → 𝐴 𝐵 f:A\rightarrow B italic_f : italic_A → italic_B be a morphism. A kernel of f 𝑓 f italic_f is a pair ( K , k ) 𝐾 𝑘 (K,k) ( italic_K , italic_k ) consists of an object K 𝐾 K italic_K and a morphism k : K → A : 𝑘 → 𝐾 𝐴 k:K\rightarrow A italic_k : italic_K → italic_A such that
•
f ∘ k = 0 𝑓 𝑘 0 f\circ k=0 italic_f ∘ italic_k = 0 ;
•
whenever a morphism h : D → A : ℎ → 𝐷 𝐴 h:D\rightarrow A italic_h : italic_D → italic_A satisfies f ∘ k = 0 𝑓 𝑘 0 f\circ k=0 italic_f ∘ italic_k = 0 there exists a unique morphism p : D → K : 𝑝 → 𝐷 𝐾 p:D\rightarrow K italic_p : italic_D → italic_K such that k ∘ p = h 𝑘 𝑝 ℎ k\circ p=h italic_k ∘ italic_p = italic_h .
A cokernel of f 𝑓 f italic_f is a pair ( C , c ) 𝐶 𝑐 (C,c) ( italic_C , italic_c ) consists of an object C 𝐶 C italic_C and a morphism c : B → C : 𝑐 → 𝐵 𝐶 c:B\rightarrow C italic_c : italic_B → italic_C such that
•
c ∘ f = 0 ; 𝑐 𝑓 0 c\circ f=0; italic_c ∘ italic_f = 0 ;
•
whenever a morphism h : B → D : ℎ → 𝐵 𝐷 h:B\rightarrow D italic_h : italic_B → italic_D satisfies h ∘ f = 0 ℎ 𝑓 0 h\circ f=0 italic_h ∘ italic_f = 0 there exists a unique morphism p : C → D : 𝑝 → 𝐶 𝐷 p:C\rightarrow D italic_p : italic_C → italic_D such that p ∘ c = h . 𝑝 𝑐 ℎ p\circ c=h. italic_p ∘ italic_c = italic_h .
We say that f 𝑓 f italic_f is a monomorphism if for all morphisms g : C → A : 𝑔 → 𝐶 𝐴 g:C\to A italic_g : italic_C → italic_A and h : C → A : ℎ → 𝐶 𝐴 h:C\to A italic_h : italic_C → italic_A in 𝒞 𝒞 \mathcal{C} caligraphic_C , we have f ∘ g = f ∘ h 𝑓 𝑔 𝑓 ℎ f\circ g=f\circ h italic_f ∘ italic_g = italic_f ∘ italic_h implies g = h 𝑔 ℎ g=h italic_g = italic_h . We say that f 𝑓 f italic_f is an epimorphism if for all morphisms g : B → C : 𝑔 → 𝐵 𝐶 g:B\to C italic_g : italic_B → italic_C and h : B → C : ℎ → 𝐵 𝐶 h:B\to C italic_h : italic_B → italic_C in 𝒞 𝒞 \mathcal{C} caligraphic_C , we have g ∘ f = h ∘ f 𝑔 𝑓 ℎ 𝑓 g\circ f=h\circ f italic_g ∘ italic_f = italic_h ∘ italic_f implies g = h 𝑔 ℎ g=h italic_g = italic_h .
A C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a right Hilbert B 𝐵 B italic_B -module equipped with a left action given by a homomorphism φ X : A → ℒ ( X ) , : subscript 𝜑 𝑋 → 𝐴 ℒ 𝑋 \varphi_{X}:A\rightarrow\mathcal{L}(X), italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_A → caligraphic_L ( italic_X ) , where ℒ ( X ) ℒ 𝑋 \mathcal{L}(X) caligraphic_L ( italic_X ) denotes the C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -algebra of adjointable operators on X 𝑋 X italic_X . We denote the kernel of the left action homomorphism φ X subscript 𝜑 𝑋 \varphi_{X} italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by Ker φ X Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑋 \operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{X} roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . For a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT define A ⋅ X = { φ X ( a ) x : a ∈ A , x ∈ X } ⋅ 𝐴 𝑋 conditional-set subscript 𝜑 𝑋 𝑎 𝑥 formulae-sequence 𝑎 𝐴 𝑥 𝑋 A\cdot X=\{\varphi_{X}(a)x:a\in A,x\in X\} italic_A ⋅ italic_X = { italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_a ) italic_x : italic_a ∈ italic_A , italic_x ∈ italic_X } . The correspondence X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is called nondegenerate if A ⋅ X = X ⋅ 𝐴 𝑋 𝑋 A\cdot X=X italic_A ⋅ italic_X = italic_X . In this paper all our correspondences will be nondegenerate by standing hypothesis.
A C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is called injective if the left action φ X : A → ℒ ( X ) : subscript 𝜑 𝑋 → 𝐴 ℒ 𝑋 \varphi_{X}:A\rightarrow\mathcal{L}(X) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_A → caligraphic_L ( italic_X ) is injective; it is called proper if φ X ( A ) subscript 𝜑 𝑋 𝐴 \varphi_{X}(A) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A ) is contained in the C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -algebra 𝒦 ( X ) 𝒦 𝑋 \mathcal{K}(X) caligraphic_K ( italic_X ) of compact operators on X 𝑋 X italic_X . A C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is called regular if it is both injective and proper. For a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT we denote the closed span of B 𝐵 B italic_B -valued inner products ⟨ X , X ⟩ B subscript 𝑋 𝑋
𝐵 \langle X,X\rangle_{B} ⟨ italic_X , italic_X ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by B X subscript 𝐵 𝑋 B_{X} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . One of the C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence properties we use frequently in this paper is the following: let I 𝐼 I italic_I be an ideal of B 𝐵 B italic_B such that B X ⊂ I subscript 𝐵 𝑋 𝐼 B_{X}\subset I italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ italic_I . Then, X 𝑋 X italic_X can be viewed as an A 𝐴 A italic_A –I 𝐼 I italic_I -correspondence [4 , Lemma 3.2] .
A C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence isomorphism from X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to Y B A subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a bijective linear map Φ : X → Y : Φ → 𝑋 𝑌 \Phi:X\rightarrow Y roman_Φ : italic_X → italic_Y satisfying
(i)
Φ ( a ⋅ x ) = a ⋅ Φ ( x ) Φ ⋅ 𝑎 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑎 Φ 𝑥 \Phi(a\cdot x)=a\cdot\Phi(x) roman_Φ ( italic_a ⋅ italic_x ) = italic_a ⋅ roman_Φ ( italic_x ) ,
(ii)
⟨ x , z ⟩ B = ⟨ Φ ( x ) , Φ ( z ) ⟩ B subscript 𝑥 𝑧
𝐵 subscript Φ 𝑥 Φ 𝑧
𝐵 \langle x,z\rangle_{B}=\langle\Phi(x),\Phi(z)\rangle_{B} ⟨ italic_x , italic_z ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ⟨ roman_Φ ( italic_x ) , roman_Φ ( italic_z ) ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,
for all a ∈ A 𝑎 𝐴 a\in A italic_a ∈ italic_A , and x , z ∈ X . 𝑥 𝑧
𝑋 x,z\in X. italic_x , italic_z ∈ italic_X . We let A d Φ : ℒ ( X ) → ℒ ( Y ) : 𝐴 𝑑 Φ → ℒ 𝑋 ℒ 𝑌 \mathop{Ad}\Phi:\mathcal{L}(X)\rightarrow\mathcal{L}(Y) start_BIGOP italic_A italic_d end_BIGOP roman_Φ : caligraphic_L ( italic_X ) → caligraphic_L ( italic_Y ) denote the associated C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -algebra isomorphism defined by A d Φ ( T ) = Φ ∘ T ∘ Φ − 1 . 𝐴 𝑑 Φ 𝑇 Φ 𝑇 superscript Φ 1 \mathop{Ad}\Phi(T)=\Phi\circ T\circ\Phi^{-1}. start_BIGOP italic_A italic_d end_BIGOP roman_Φ ( italic_T ) = roman_Φ ∘ italic_T ∘ roman_Φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .
The balanced tensor product X ⊗ B Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑋 𝑌 X\otimes_{B}Y italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y of
an A − B 𝐴 𝐵 A-B italic_A - italic_B correspondence X 𝑋 X italic_X and a B − C 𝐵 𝐶 B-C italic_B - italic_C correspondence Y 𝑌 Y italic_Y is
formed as follows:
the algebraic tensor product X ⊙ Y direct-product 𝑋 𝑌 X\odot Y italic_X ⊙ italic_Y
is a pre-correspondence with the A − C 𝐴 𝐶 A-C italic_A - italic_C bimodule structure satisfying
a ( x ⊗ y ) c = a x ⊗ y c for a ∈ A , x ∈ X , y ∈ Y , c ∈ C , formulae-sequence 𝑎 tensor-product 𝑥 𝑦 𝑐 tensor-product 𝑎 𝑥 𝑦 𝑐 formulae-sequence for 𝑎 𝐴 formulae-sequence 𝑥 𝑋 formulae-sequence 𝑦 𝑌 𝑐 𝐶 a(x\otimes y)c=ax\otimes yc\qquad\text{for }a\in A,x\in X,y\in Y,c\in C, italic_a ( italic_x ⊗ italic_y ) italic_c = italic_a italic_x ⊗ italic_y italic_c for italic_a ∈ italic_A , italic_x ∈ italic_X , italic_y ∈ italic_Y , italic_c ∈ italic_C ,
and the unique C 𝐶 C italic_C -valued semi-inner product whose values on elementary tensors are given by
⟨ x ⊗ y , u ⊗ v ⟩ C = ⟨ y , ⟨ x , u ⟩ B ⋅ v ⟩ C for x , u ∈ X , y , v ∈ Y . formulae-sequence subscript tensor-product 𝑥 𝑦 tensor-product 𝑢 𝑣
𝐶 subscript 𝑦 ⋅ subscript 𝑥 𝑢
𝐵 𝑣
𝐶 for 𝑥
formulae-sequence 𝑢 𝑋 𝑦
𝑣 𝑌 \langle x\otimes y,u\otimes v\rangle_{C}=\langle y,\langle x,u\rangle_{B}\cdot
v%
\rangle_{C}\qquad\text{for }x,u\in X,y,v\in Y. ⟨ italic_x ⊗ italic_y , italic_u ⊗ italic_v ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ⟨ italic_y , ⟨ italic_x , italic_u ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ italic_v ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for italic_x , italic_u ∈ italic_X , italic_y , italic_v ∈ italic_Y .
This semi-inner product defines a C 𝐶 C italic_C -valued inner product on the quotient X ⊙ B Y subscript direct-product 𝐵 𝑋 𝑌 X{\odot}_{B}Y italic_X ⊙ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y of X ⊙ Y direct-product 𝑋 𝑌 X\odot Y italic_X ⊙ italic_Y by the subspace generated by elements of form
x ⋅ b ⊗ y − x ⊗ φ Y ( b ) y ( x ∈ X , y ∈ Y , b ∈ B ) . tensor-product ⋅ 𝑥 𝑏 𝑦 tensor-product 𝑥 subscript 𝜑 𝑌 𝑏 𝑦 ( x ∈ X , y ∈ Y , b ∈ B )
x\cdot b\otimes y-x\otimes\varphi_{Y}(b)y\qquad\text{($x\in X$, $y\in Y$, $b%
\in B$) }. italic_x ⋅ italic_b ⊗ italic_y - italic_x ⊗ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_b ) italic_y ( italic_x ∈ italic_X , italic_y ∈ italic_Y , italic_b ∈ italic_B ) .
The completion X ⊗ B Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑋 𝑌 X\otimes_{B}Y italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y of X ⊙ B Y subscript direct-product 𝐵 𝑋 𝑌 X{\odot}_{B}Y italic_X ⊙ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y with respect to the norm coming from the C 𝐶 C italic_C -valued inner product is an A − B 𝐴 𝐵 A-B italic_A - italic_B correspondence, where the left action is given by
A → ℒ ( X ⊗ B Y ) , a ↦ φ X ( a ) ⊗ 1 Y , → 𝐴 ℒ subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑋 𝑌 a ↦ φ X ( a ) ⊗ 1 Y ,
A\rightarrow\mathcal{L}(X\otimes_{B}Y),\qquad\text{$a\mapsto\varphi_{X}(a)%
\otimes 1_{Y},$ } italic_A → caligraphic_L ( italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y ) , italic_a ↦ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_a ) ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,
for a ∈ A . 𝑎 𝐴 a\in A. italic_a ∈ italic_A . We denote the canonical image of x ⊗ y tensor-product 𝑥 𝑦 x\otimes y italic_x ⊗ italic_y in X ⊗ B Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑋 𝑌 X\otimes_{B}Y italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y by x ⊗ B y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑥 𝑦 x\otimes_{B}y italic_x ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y .
Proposition 2.1 .
[4 , Proposition 3.1] For C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondences X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT we have
( X ⊗ B Y ) B A ≅ 0 B A ⇔ ( X ⊗ B Y ) B A = 0 B A ⇔ B X ⊂ Ker φ Y . {}_{A}(X\otimes_{B}Y)_{B}\cong{}_{A}0_{B}\iff{}_{A}(X\otimes_{B}Y)_{B}={}_{A}0%
_{B}\iff B_{X}\subset\operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{Y}. start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≅ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⇔ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⇔ italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Lemma 2.2 ([5 ] ).
Let X 𝑋 X italic_X be a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence over A 𝐴 A italic_A and let Y B A subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be an injective C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence. Then the map
ι : T ↦ T ⊗ 1 Y : 𝜄 maps-to 𝑇 tensor-product 𝑇 subscript 1 𝑌 \iota:T\mapsto T\otimes 1_{Y} italic_ι : italic_T ↦ italic_T ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT gives an isometric homomorphism of ℒ ( X ) ℒ 𝑋 \mathcal{L}(X) caligraphic_L ( italic_X ) into ℒ ( X ⊗ A Y ) . ℒ subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝑌 \mathcal{L}(X\otimes_{A}Y). caligraphic_L ( italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y ) . If, in addition, φ Y ( A ) ⊂ 𝒦 ( Y ) subscript 𝜑 𝑌 𝐴 𝒦 𝑌 \varphi_{Y}(A)\subset\mathcal{K}(Y) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A ) ⊂ caligraphic_K ( italic_Y ) , then ι 𝜄 \iota italic_ι embeds 𝒦 ( X ) 𝒦 𝑋 \mathcal{K}(X) caligraphic_K ( italic_X ) into 𝒦 ( X ⊗ A Y ) . 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝑌 \mathcal{K}(X\otimes_{A}Y). caligraphic_K ( italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y ) .
A Hilbert bimodule X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence
that is also equipped with an A 𝐴 A italic_A -valued inner product ⟨ ⋅ , ⋅ ⟩ A {}_{A}\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ⋅ , ⋅ ⟩ ,
which satisfies
⟨ a ⋅ x , y ⟩ A = a ⋅ ⟨ x , y ⟩ A and ⟨ x , y ⟩ ∗ A = ⟨ y , x ⟩ A {}_{A}\langle a\cdot x,y\rangle=a\cdot{}_{A}\langle x,y\rangle\qquad\text{and %
}\qquad{}_{A}\langle x,y\rangle^{*}={}_{A}\langle y,x\rangle start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_a ⋅ italic_x , italic_y ⟩ = italic_a ⋅ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_x , italic_y ⟩ and start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_x , italic_y ⟩ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_y , italic_x ⟩
for all a ∈ A , x , y ∈ X formulae-sequence 𝑎 𝐴 𝑥
𝑦 𝑋 a\in A,x,y\in X italic_a ∈ italic_A , italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X ,
as well as the compatibility property
⟨ x , y ⟩ A ⋅ z = x ⋅ ⟨ y , z ⟩ B for x , y , z ∈ X . {}_{A}\langle x,y\rangle\cdot z=x\cdot\langle y,z\rangle_{B}\qquad\text{for }x%
,y,z\in X. start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_x , italic_y ⟩ ⋅ italic_z = italic_x ⋅ ⟨ italic_y , italic_z ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for italic_x , italic_y , italic_z ∈ italic_X .
A Hilbert bimodule X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is left-full if the closed span of ⟨ X , X ⟩ A {}_{A}\langle X,X\rangle start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_X , italic_X ⟩ is all of A 𝐴 A italic_A .
An imprimitivity bimodule X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a Hilbert bimodule that is full on both the left and the right. The identity correspondence on A 𝐴 A italic_A is the Hilbert bimodule A A A subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}A_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT where the bimodule structure is given by multiplication, and the inner products are given by
⟨ a , b ⟩ A = a b ∗ , ⟨ a , b ⟩ A = a ∗ b , for a , b ∈ A . {}_{A}\langle a,b\rangle=ab^{*},\hskip 14.22636pt\langle a,b\rangle_{A}=a^{*}b%
,\qquad\text{for $a,b\in A$ }. start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_a , italic_b ⟩ = italic_a italic_b start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ⟨ italic_a , italic_b ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_a start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_b , for italic_a , italic_b ∈ italic_A .
A representation ( π , t ) 𝜋 𝑡 (\pi,t) ( italic_π , italic_t ) of a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -algebra B 𝐵 B italic_B consists of a ∗ −
*- ∗ - homomorphism π : A → B : 𝜋 → 𝐴 𝐵 \pi:A\rightarrow B italic_π : italic_A → italic_B and a linear map t : X → B : 𝑡 → 𝑋 𝐵 t:X\rightarrow B italic_t : italic_X → italic_B such that
π ( a ) t ( x ) = t ( φ X ( a ) ( x ) ) and t ( x ) ∗ t ( y ) = π ( ⟨ x , y ⟩ A ) , formulae-sequence 𝜋 𝑎 𝑡 𝑥 𝑡 subscript 𝜑 𝑋 𝑎 𝑥 and
𝑡 superscript 𝑥 𝑡 𝑦 𝜋 subscript 𝑥 𝑦
𝐴 \pi(a)t(x)=t(\varphi_{X}(a)(x))\qquad\text{and }\qquad t(x)^{*}t(y)=\pi(%
\langle x,y\rangle_{A}), italic_π ( italic_a ) italic_t ( italic_x ) = italic_t ( italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_a ) ( italic_x ) ) and italic_t ( italic_x ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t ( italic_y ) = italic_π ( ⟨ italic_x , italic_y ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ,
for a ∈ A 𝑎 𝐴 a\in A italic_a ∈ italic_A and x , y ∈ X 𝑥 𝑦
𝑋 x,y\in X italic_x , italic_y ∈ italic_X , where φ X subscript 𝜑 𝑋 \varphi_{X} italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the left action homomorphism associated with X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . For any representation ( π , t ) 𝜋 𝑡 (\pi,t) ( italic_π , italic_t ) of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on B 𝐵 B italic_B , there is an associated homomorphism ψ t : 𝒦 ( X ) → B : subscript 𝜓 𝑡 → 𝒦 𝑋 𝐵 \psi_{t}:\mathcal{K}(X)\rightarrow B italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : caligraphic_K ( italic_X ) → italic_B satisfying ψ t ( θ x , x ′ ) = t ( x ) t ( x ′ ) ∗ subscript 𝜓 𝑡 subscript 𝜃 𝑥 superscript 𝑥 ′
𝑡 𝑥 𝑡 superscript superscript 𝑥 ′ \psi_{t}(\theta_{x,x^{\prime}})=t(x)t(x^{\prime})^{*} italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_t ( italic_x ) italic_t ( italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for x , x ′ ∈ X 𝑥 superscript 𝑥 ′
𝑋 x,x^{\prime}\in X italic_x , italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_X . The representation ( π , t ) 𝜋 𝑡 (\pi,t) ( italic_π , italic_t ) is called injective if π 𝜋 \pi italic_π is injective, in which case t 𝑡 t italic_t is an isometry. We denote the C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -algebra generated by the images of π 𝜋 \pi italic_π and t 𝑡 t italic_t in B 𝐵 B italic_B by C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( π , t ) . 𝜋 𝑡 (\pi,t). ( italic_π , italic_t ) .
Consider a C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . The ideal J X subscript 𝐽 𝑋 J_{X} italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is define as
J X subscript 𝐽 𝑋 \displaystyle J_{X} italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= φ X − 1 ( 𝒦 ( X ) ) ∩ ( Ker φ X ) ⟂ absent superscript subscript 𝜑 𝑋 1 𝒦 𝑋 superscript Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑋 perpendicular-to \displaystyle=\varphi_{X}^{-1}(\mathcal{K}(X))\cap(\operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{%
X})^{\perp} = italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( caligraphic_K ( italic_X ) ) ∩ ( roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟂ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
= { a ∈ A : φ X ( a ) ∈ 𝒦 ( X ) and a b = 0 for all b ∈ Ker φ X } , \displaystyle=\text{\{$a\in A$ : $\varphi_{X}(a)\in\mathcal{K}(X)$ and $ab=0$ %
for all $b\in\operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{X}$}\}, = { italic_a ∈ italic_A : italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_a ) ∈ caligraphic_K ( italic_X ) and italic_a italic_b = 0 for all italic_b ∈ roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } ,
and is called the Katsura ideal . Notice here that for a regular X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT we have J X = A . subscript 𝐽 𝑋 𝐴 J_{X}=A. italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_A .
A representation ( π , t ) 𝜋 𝑡 (\pi,t) ( italic_π , italic_t ) of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is called covariant if π ( a ) = Ψ t ( φ X ( a ) ) 𝜋 𝑎 subscript Ψ 𝑡 subscript 𝜑 𝑋 𝑎 \pi(a)=\Psi_{t}(\varphi_{X}(a)) italic_π ( italic_a ) = roman_Ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_a ) ) , for all a ∈ J X . 𝑎 subscript 𝐽 𝑋 a\in J_{X}. italic_a ∈ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . The C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -algebra generated by the universal covariant representation of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is called the Cuntz-Pimsner algebra 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
3. Categories and the covariant representation
In this section we briefly explain the construction of the functor ℰ ℰ \mathcal{E} caligraphic_E defined in [3 ] , and recall the related categories. The range category 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of ℰ ℰ \mathcal{E} caligraphic_E is sometimes called “the enchilada category” as in [4 ] . In this category our objects are C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -algebras, and a morphism from A 𝐴 A italic_A to B 𝐵 B italic_B is the isomorphism class of an A 𝐴 A italic_A –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondence. The composition [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]∘ \circ ∘ [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is the isomorphism class of the balanced tensor product ( X ⊗ B Y ) C A {}_{A}(X\otimes_{B}Y)_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ; the identity morphism on A 𝐴 A italic_A is the isomorphism class of the identity correspondence A A A subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}A_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , and the zero morphism A → B → 𝐴 𝐵 A\rightarrow B italic_A → italic_B is [ 0 B A ] . [{}_{A}0_{B}]. [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] . Note that a morphism [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is an isomorphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT if and only if X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an imprimitivity bimodule [2 , Proposition 2.6] .
We need the following definition for the domain category.
Definition 3.1 .
[3 , Definition 3.1] For C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondences X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , and A 𝐴 A italic_A –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondences M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , N B A subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}N_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , let U M : X ⊗ A M → M ⊗ B Y : subscript 𝑈 𝑀 → subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝑀 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑌 U_{M}:X\otimes_{A}M\rightarrow M\otimes_{B}Y italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M → italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y and U N : X ⊗ A N → N ⊗ B Y : subscript 𝑈 𝑁 → subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝑁 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑁 𝑌 U_{N}:X\otimes_{A}N\rightarrow N\otimes_{B}Y italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N → italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y be A 𝐴 A italic_A –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondence isomorphisms. The pairs (M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) and (N B A subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}N_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) are called isomorphic if
•
there exists an isomorphism ξ 𝜉 \xi italic_ξ : M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → N B A subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}N_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ; and
•
the diagram
X ⊗ A M subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝑀 {X\otimes_{A}M} italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M X ⊗ A N subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝑁 {X\otimes_{A}N} italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N M ⊗ B Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑌 {M\otimes_{B}Y} italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y N ⊗ B Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑁 𝑌 {N\otimes_{B}Y} italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y 1 ⊗ ξ tensor-product 1 𝜉 \scriptstyle{1\otimes\xi} 1 ⊗ italic_ξ U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 \scriptstyle{U_{M}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 \scriptstyle{U_{N}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ξ ⊗ 1 Y tensor-product 𝜉 subscript 1 𝑌 \scriptstyle{\xi\otimes 1_{Y}} italic_ξ ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
commutes.
We denote the isomorphism class of the pair (M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) by [ M B A , U M ] subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 [{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] .
Theorem 3.3 ([3 , Theorem 3.2] ).
There exists a category 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT such that
•
objects are C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondences X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ;
•
morphisms X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are isomorphism classes [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] where U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes an A 𝐴 A italic_A – B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondence isomorphism X ⊗ A M → M ⊗ B Y → subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝑀 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑌 X\otimes_{A}M\rightarrow M\otimes_{B}Y italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M → italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y , and M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a proper correspondence satisfying J X ⋅ M ⊂ M ⋅ J Y ⋅ subscript 𝐽 𝑋 𝑀 ⋅ 𝑀 subscript 𝐽 𝑌 J_{X}\cdot M\subset M\cdot J_{Y} italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⋅ italic_M ⊂ italic_M ⋅ italic_J start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ;
•
the composition [N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]∘ \circ ∘ [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is given by the isomorphism class
[( M ⊗ B N ) C A {}_{A}(M\otimes_{B}N)_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M ⊗ B N subscript 𝑈 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑁 U_{M\otimes_{B}N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]
where U M ⊗ B N subscript 𝑈 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑁 U_{M\otimes_{B}N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes the isomorphism ( 1 M ⊗ U N ) ( U M ⊗ 1 N ) tensor-product subscript 1 𝑀 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝑀 subscript 1 𝑁 (1_{M}\otimes U_{N})(U_{M}\otimes 1_{N}) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ;
•
the identity morphism on X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is [A A A subscript subscript 𝐴 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}A_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U A subscript 𝑈 𝐴 U_{A} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] , where U A subscript 𝑈 𝐴 U_{A} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes the isomorphism ξ l , X , A − 1 ∘ ξ r , X , A : X ⊗ A A → A ⊗ A X : superscript subscript 𝜉 𝑙 𝑋 𝐴
1 subscript 𝜉 𝑟 𝑋 𝐴
→ subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐴 𝑋 \xi_{l,X,A}^{-1}\circ\xi_{r,X,A}:X\otimes_{A}A\rightarrow A\otimes_{A}X italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l , italic_X , italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r , italic_X , italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A → italic_A ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X .
Let [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be a morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . Denote the universal covariant representation of Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by ( Υ , t ) . Υ 𝑡 (\Upsilon,t). ( roman_Υ , italic_t ) . Let V Y : Y ⊗ B 𝒪 Y → t ( Y ) 𝒪 Y ¯ : subscript 𝑉 𝑌 → subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑌 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 ¯ 𝑡 𝑌 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 V_{Y}:Y\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y}\rightarrow\overline{t(Y)\mathcal{O}_{Y}} italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_Y ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → over¯ start_ARG italic_t ( italic_Y ) caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG be the isomorphism determined on elementary tensors by
V Y ( y ⊗ B S ) = t ( y ) S subscript 𝑉 𝑌 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑦 𝑆 𝑡 𝑦 𝑆 V_{Y}(y\otimes_{B}S)=t(y)S italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_y ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_S ) = italic_t ( italic_y ) italic_S
for y ∈ Y 𝑦 𝑌 y\in Y italic_y ∈ italic_Y , S ∈ 𝒪 Y 𝑆 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 S\in\mathcal{O}_{Y} italic_S ∈ caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . Define T : X → ℒ ( M , M ⊗ B Y ) : 𝑇 → 𝑋 ℒ 𝑀 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑌 T:X\rightarrow\mathcal{L}(M,M\otimes_{B}Y) italic_T : italic_X → caligraphic_L ( italic_M , italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y ) by
T ( x ) ( m ) = U M ( x ⊗ A m ) , 𝑇 𝑥 𝑚 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑥 𝑚 T(x)(m)=U_{M}(x\otimes_{A}m), italic_T ( italic_x ) ( italic_m ) = italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m ) ,
for x ∈ X 𝑥 𝑋 x\in X italic_x ∈ italic_X , m ∈ M 𝑚 𝑀 m\in M italic_m ∈ italic_M . Next, define a linear map Φ : X → 𝒦 ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) : Φ → 𝑋 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \Phi:X\rightarrow\mathcal{K}(M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y}) roman_Φ : italic_X → caligraphic_K ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) by
Φ ( x ) = ( 1 M ⊗ V Y ) ( T ( x ) ⊗ 1 Y ) . Φ 𝑥 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑀 subscript 𝑉 𝑌 tensor-product 𝑇 𝑥 subscript 1 𝑌 \Phi(x)=(1_{M}\otimes V_{Y})(T(x)\otimes 1_{Y}). roman_Φ ( italic_x ) = ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_T ( italic_x ) ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) .
and a homomorphism π : A → 𝒦 ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) : 𝜋 → 𝐴 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \pi:A\rightarrow\mathcal{K}(M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y}) italic_π : italic_A → caligraphic_K ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) by
π ( a ) = φ M ⊗ 1 𝒪 Y . 𝜋 𝑎 tensor-product subscript 𝜑 𝑀 subscript 1 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \pi(a)=\varphi_{M}\otimes 1_{\mathcal{O}_{Y}}. italic_π ( italic_a ) = italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
The pair ( π , Φ ) 𝜋 Φ (\pi,\Phi) ( italic_π , roman_Φ ) is a covariant representation of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on 𝒦 ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \mathcal{K}(M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y}) caligraphic_K ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) [3 , Proposition 4.2] , and it is called the C -covariant representation of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . It is injective when the homomorphism φ M subscript 𝜑 𝑀 \varphi_{M} italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is. By the universal property of 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT we obtain a ∗ * ∗ -homomorphism
σ ( π , Φ ) : 𝒪 X → 𝒦 ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) : subscript 𝜎 𝜋 Φ → subscript 𝒪 𝑋 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \sigma_{(\pi,\Phi)}:\mathcal{O}_{X}\rightarrow\mathcal{K}(M\otimes_{B}\mathcal%
{O}_{Y}) italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_π , roman_Φ ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → caligraphic_K ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , which provides a left action of 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on the Hilbert 𝒪 Y subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \mathcal{O}_{Y} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT -module M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y} italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and allows us to view M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y} italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as a proper 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT –𝒪 Y subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \mathcal{O}_{Y} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT -correspondence. It is important to note that the C -covariant representation ( π , Φ ) 𝜋 Φ (\pi,\Phi) ( italic_π , roman_Φ ) admits a gauge action. Consequently, the homomorphism σ ( π , Φ ) subscript 𝜎 𝜋 Φ \sigma_{(\pi,\Phi)} italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_π , roman_Φ ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an isomorphism onto C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( π , Φ ) 𝜋 Φ (\pi,\Phi) ( italic_π , roman_Φ ) when M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an injective C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence [3 , Theorem 4.13] .
Theorem 3.4 ([3 , Theorem 5.1] ).
Let [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be a morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . Then the assignments X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ↦ 𝒪 X maps-to absent subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mapsto\mathcal{O}_{X} ↦ caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on objects and
[ M B A , U M ] ↦ [ ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) 𝒪 Y 𝒪 X ] [{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}]\mapsto[{}_{\mathcal{O}_{X}}(M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y})_{%
\mathcal{O}_{Y}}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ↦ [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]
on morphisms define a functor ℰ ℰ \mathcal{E} caligraphic_E from 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Next Proposition is crucial for this paper.
Proposition 3.5 .
Let [ M B A , U M ] : : subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 absent [{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}]: [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] : X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be a morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , where X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a regular correspondence, and let σ : 𝒪 X → 𝒦 ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) : 𝜎 → subscript 𝒪 𝑋 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 \sigma:\mathcal{O}_{X}\rightarrow\mathcal{K}(M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y}) italic_σ : caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → caligraphic_K ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) be the associated homomorphism. Denote the universal covariant representation of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by ( Υ , t ) Υ 𝑡 (\Upsilon,t) ( roman_Υ , italic_t ) . Then Ker σ Ker 𝜎 \operatorname{Ker}\sigma roman_Ker italic_σ is the ideal ⟨ Υ ( Ker φ M ) ⟩ delimited-⟨⟩ Υ Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑀 \langle\Upsilon(\operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{M})\rangle ⟨ roman_Υ ( roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⟩ generated by Υ ( Ker φ M ) Υ Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑀 \Upsilon(\operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{M}) roman_Υ ( roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) in 𝒪 X . subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X}. caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Proof.
It suffices to show the equality Ker σ ∩ Υ ( A ) = ⟨ Υ ( Ker φ M ) ⟩ ∩ Υ ( A ) Ker 𝜎 Υ 𝐴 delimited-⟨⟩ Υ Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑀 Υ 𝐴 \operatorname{Ker}\sigma\cap\Upsilon(A)=\langle\Upsilon(\operatorname{Ker}%
\varphi_{M})\rangle\cap\Upsilon(A) roman_Ker italic_σ ∩ roman_Υ ( italic_A ) = ⟨ roman_Υ ( roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⟩ ∩ roman_Υ ( italic_A ) , since gauge invariant ideals of 𝒪 X subscript 𝒪 𝑋 \mathcal{O}_{X} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are distinguished by their intersection with Υ ( A ) Υ 𝐴 \Upsilon(A) roman_Υ ( italic_A ) when X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is regular [6 , Corollory 8.7] . One can easily verify that ⟨ Υ ( Ker φ M ) ⟩ ⊂ Ker σ delimited-⟨⟩ Υ Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑀 Ker 𝜎 \langle\Upsilon(\operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{M})\rangle\subset\operatorname{Ker}\sigma ⟨ roman_Υ ( roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⟩ ⊂ roman_Ker italic_σ . Let Υ ( a ) ∈ Ker σ Υ 𝑎 Ker 𝜎 \Upsilon(a)\in\operatorname{Ker}\sigma roman_Υ ( italic_a ) ∈ roman_Ker italic_σ . Then we have
0 = σ ( Υ ( a ) ) = φ M ( a ) ⊗ 1 𝒪 Y . 0 𝜎 Υ 𝑎 tensor-product subscript 𝜑 𝑀 𝑎 subscript 1 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 0=\sigma(\Upsilon(a))=\varphi_{M}(a)\otimes 1_{\mathcal{O}_{Y}}. 0 = italic_σ ( roman_Υ ( italic_a ) ) = italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_a ) ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
This implies φ M ( a ) = 0 subscript 𝜑 𝑀 𝑎 0 \varphi_{M}(a)=0 italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_a ) = 0 by Lemma 2.2 . And thus, a ∈ Ker φ M 𝑎 Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑀 a\in\operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{M} italic_a ∈ roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , which means Υ ( a ) ∈ Υ ( A ) ∩ ⟨ Υ ( Ker φ M ) ⟩ . Υ 𝑎 Υ 𝐴 delimited-⟨⟩ Υ Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑀 \Upsilon(a)\in\Upsilon(A)\cap\langle\Upsilon(\operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{M})\rangle. roman_Υ ( italic_a ) ∈ roman_Υ ( italic_A ) ∩ ⟨ roman_Υ ( roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⟩ .
∎
5. Exactness
We denote by 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT the subcategory of 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT where all objects are regular C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondences. Every morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT has a kernel; however, not every morphism has a cokernel. We show in this section that every kernel in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT has a cokernel. This observation leads us to study exactness in the subcategory 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT instead of 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
To study kernels in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT we need some understanding of monomorphisms in this category. Following Lemma is necessary for this purpose.
Lemma 5.1 .
Let μ : M ⊗ B N → M ′ ⊗ B N : 𝜇 → subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑁 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝑁 \mu:M\otimes_{B}N\rightarrow M^{\prime}\otimes_{B}N italic_μ : italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N → italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N be an A 𝐴 A italic_A –C 𝐶 C italic_C -correspondence isomorphism where M 𝑀 M italic_M and M ′ superscript 𝑀 ′ M^{\prime} italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT are A 𝐴 A italic_A –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondences, and N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule. Then, there exists an isomorphism ι : : 𝜄 absent \iota: italic_ι : M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → M B ′ A subscript subscript superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M^{\prime}_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT such that ι ⊗ 1 N tensor-product 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑁 \iota\otimes 1_{N} italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = μ 𝜇 \mu italic_μ .
Proof.
Since N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule, there exists a C 𝐶 C italic_C –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondence N ~ ~ 𝑁 \tilde{N} over~ start_ARG italic_N end_ARG and a B 𝐵 B italic_B –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondence isomorphism
j : N ⊗ C N ~ → B , n 1 ⊗ C n 2 ~ ↦ ⟨ n 1 , n 2 ⟩ B , j:N\otimes_{C}\tilde{N}\rightarrow B,\text{ }n_{1}\otimes_{C}\tilde{n_{2}}%
\mapsto{}_{B}\langle n_{1},n_{2}\rangle, italic_j : italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_N end_ARG → italic_B , italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ↦ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ,
where n 1 , n 2 ∈ N . subscript 𝑛 1 subscript 𝑛 2
𝑁 n_{1},n_{2}\in N. italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ italic_N . Define an isomorphism ι : : 𝜄 absent \iota: italic_ι : M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → M B ′ A subscript subscript superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M^{\prime}_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by
ι = ξ ( r , M ′ , B ) ( 1 M ′ ⊗ j ) ( μ ⊗ 1 N ~ ) ( 1 M ⊗ j − 1 ) ( ξ ( r , M , B ) ) − 1 , 𝜄 subscript 𝜉 𝑟 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝐵 tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝑗 tensor-product 𝜇 subscript 1 ~ 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑀 superscript 𝑗 1 superscript subscript 𝜉 𝑟 𝑀 𝐵 1 \iota=\xi_{(r,M^{\prime},B)}\left(1_{M^{\prime}}\otimes j\right)\left(\mu%
\otimes 1_{\tilde{N}}\right)\left(1_{M}\otimes j^{-1}\right)\left(\xi_{(r,M,B)%
}\right)^{-1}, italic_ι = italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r , italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_j ) ( italic_μ ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_N end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ( italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r , italic_M , italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,
where ξ ( r , M , B ) subscript 𝜉 𝑟 𝑀 𝐵 \xi_{(r,M,B)} italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r , italic_M , italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ξ ( r , M ′ , B ) subscript 𝜉 𝑟 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝐵 \xi_{(r,M^{\prime},B)} italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r , italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are the A 𝐴 A italic_A –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondence isomorphisms defined as in Remark 3.2 .
It suffices to use elementary tensors to verify the equality ι ⊗ 1 N tensor-product 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑁 \iota\otimes 1_{N} italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = μ 𝜇 \mu italic_μ . Let m ′ ∈ M ′ superscript 𝑚 ′ superscript 𝑀 ′ m^{\prime}\in M^{\prime} italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and n 1 , n 2 , n 3 ∈ N subscript 𝑛 1 subscript 𝑛 2 subscript 𝑛 3
𝑁 n_{1},n_{2},n_{3}\in N italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ italic_N . Then we have
( ξ ( r , M ′ , B ) ⊗ 1 N ) tensor-product subscript 𝜉 𝑟 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝐵 subscript 1 𝑁 \displaystyle\left(\xi_{(r,M^{\prime},B)}\otimes 1_{N}\right) ( italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r , italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
( 1 M ′ ⊗ j ⊗ 1 N ) ( m ′ ⊗ B n 1 ⊗ C n 2 ~ ⊗ B n 3 ) tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝑗 subscript 1 𝑁 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 superscript 𝑚 ′ subscript 𝑛 1 ~ subscript 𝑛 2 subscript 𝑛 3 \displaystyle\left(1_{M^{\prime}}\otimes j\otimes 1_{N}\right)(m^{\prime}%
\otimes_{B}n_{1}\otimes_{C}\tilde{n_{2}}\otimes_{B}n_{3}) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_j ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
= ( ξ ( r , M ′ , B ) ⊗ 1 N ) m ′ ⊗ B ⟨ n 1 , n 2 ⟩ B ⊗ B n 3 \displaystyle=\left(\xi_{(r,M^{\prime},B)}\otimes 1_{N}\right)m^{\prime}%
\otimes_{B}{}_{B}\langle n_{1},n_{2}\rangle\otimes_{B}n_{3} = ( italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r , italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= m ′ ⟨ n 1 , n 2 ⟩ B ⊗ B n 3 \displaystyle=m^{\prime}{}_{B}\langle n_{1},n_{2}\rangle\otimes_{B}n_{3} = italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
= m ′ ⊗ B n 1 ⟨ n 2 , n 3 ⟩ C . absent subscript tensor-product 𝐵 superscript 𝑚 ′ subscript 𝑛 1 subscript subscript 𝑛 2 subscript 𝑛 3
𝐶 \displaystyle=m^{\prime}\otimes_{B}n_{1}\langle n_{2},n_{3}\rangle_{C}. = italic_m start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
This shows that for any x ∈ M ⊗ B N , 𝑥 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑁 x\in M\otimes_{B}N, italic_x ∈ italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N , and n , n ′ ∈ N 𝑛 superscript 𝑛 ′
𝑁 n,n^{\prime}\in N italic_n , italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_N we have
( ξ ( r , M ′ , B ) ⊗ 1 N ) ( 1 M ′ ⊗ j ⊗ 1 N ) ( μ ⊗ 1 N ~ ⊗ 1 N ) ( x ⊗ C n ~ ⊗ B n ′ ) = μ ( x ) ⟨ n , n ′ ⟩ C tensor-product subscript 𝜉 𝑟 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝐵 subscript 1 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝑗 subscript 1 𝑁 tensor-product 𝜇 subscript 1 ~ 𝑁 subscript 1 𝑁 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑥 ~ 𝑛 superscript 𝑛 ′ 𝜇 𝑥 subscript 𝑛 superscript 𝑛 ′
𝐶 \left(\xi_{(r,M^{\prime},B)}\otimes 1_{N}\right)\left(1_{M^{\prime}}\otimes j%
\otimes 1_{N}\right)\left(\mu\otimes 1_{\tilde{N}}\otimes 1_{N}\right)(x%
\otimes_{C}\tilde{n}\otimes_{B}n^{\prime})=\mu(x)\langle n,n^{\prime}\rangle_{C} ( italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r , italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_j ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_μ ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_N end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_x ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_n end_ARG ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_μ ( italic_x ) ⟨ italic_n , italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
and
μ ( ξ ( r , M , B ) ⊗ 1 N ) ( 1 M ⊗ j ⊗ 1 N ) ( x ⊗ C n ~ ⊗ B n ′ ) = μ ( x ) ⟨ n , n ′ ⟩ C , 𝜇 tensor-product subscript 𝜉 𝑟 𝑀 𝐵 subscript 1 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑀 𝑗 subscript 1 𝑁 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑥 ~ 𝑛 superscript 𝑛 ′ 𝜇 𝑥 subscript 𝑛 superscript 𝑛 ′
𝐶 \mu\left(\xi_{(r,M,B)}\otimes 1_{N}\right)\left(1_{M}\otimes j\otimes 1_{N}%
\right)(x\otimes_{C}\tilde{n}\otimes_{B}n^{\prime})=\mu(x)\langle n,n^{\prime}%
\rangle_{C}, italic_μ ( italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r , italic_M , italic_B ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_j ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_x ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_n end_ARG ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_μ ( italic_x ) ⟨ italic_n , italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,
as desired.∎
Proposition 5.2 .
Let [N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Z C C subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 {}_{C}Z_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be a morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . If N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule, then [N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is a monomorphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .
Proof.
Let [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ], [M B ′ A subscript subscript superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M^{\prime}_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M ′ subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑀 ′ U_{M^{\prime}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be morphisms in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT satisfying
[ N C B , U N ] ∘ [ M B A , U M ] = [ N C B , U N ] ∘ [ M B ′ A , U M ′ ] . [ N C B , U N ] ∘ [ M B A , U M ] = [ N C B , U N ] ∘ [ M B ′ A , U M ′ ] \text{[${}_{B}N_{C}$, $U_{N}$] $\circ$ [${}_{A}M_{B}$, $U_{M}$] = [${}_{B}N_{C%
}$, $U_{N}$] $\circ$ [${}_{A}M^{\prime}_{B}$, $U_{M^{\prime}}$]}. [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] .
Then, there exists an isomorphism μ : M ⊗ B N → M ′ ⊗ B N : 𝜇 → subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑁 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝑁 \mu:M\otimes_{B}N\rightarrow M^{\prime}\otimes_{B}N italic_μ : italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N → italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N with the commutative diagram
X ⊗ A M ⊗ B N subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝑀 𝑁 {X\otimes_{A}M\otimes_{B}N} italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N X ⊗ A M ′ ⊗ B N subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝑁 {X\otimes_{A}M^{\prime}\otimes_{B}N} italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N M ⊗ B N ⊗ C Z subscript tensor-product 𝐶 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑁 𝑍 {M\otimes_{B}N\otimes_{C}Z} italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z M ′ ⊗ B N ⊗ C Z . subscript tensor-product 𝐶 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝑁 𝑍 {M^{\prime}\otimes_{B}N\otimes_{C}Z.} italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z . 1 X ⊗ μ tensor-product subscript 1 𝑋 𝜇 \scriptstyle{1_{X}\otimes\mu} 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_μ ( 1 M ⊗ U N ) ( U M ⊗ 1 N ) tensor-product subscript 1 𝑀 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝑀 subscript 1 𝑁 \scriptstyle{(1_{M}\otimes U_{N})(U_{M}\otimes 1_{N})} ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 M ′ ⊗ U N ) ( U M ′ ⊗ 1 N ) tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑀 ′ subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑀 ′ subscript 1 𝑁 \scriptstyle{(1_{M^{\prime}}\otimes U_{N})(U_{M^{\prime}}\otimes 1_{N})} ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) μ ⊗ 1 Z tensor-product 𝜇 subscript 1 𝑍 \scriptstyle{\mu\otimes 1_{Z}} italic_μ ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
Since N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule, by Lemma 5.1 , there exists an isomorphism ι : : 𝜄 absent \iota: italic_ι : M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → M B ′ A subscript subscript superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M^{\prime}_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT such that μ = ι ⊗ 1 N 𝜇 tensor-product 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑁 \mu=\iota\otimes 1_{N} italic_μ = italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . We aim to show that the diagram
X ⊗ A M subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝑀 {X\otimes_{A}M} italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M X ⊗ A M ′ subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 superscript 𝑀 ′ {X\otimes_{A}M^{\prime}} italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT M ⊗ B Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 𝑌 {M\otimes_{B}Y} italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y M ′ ⊗ B Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 superscript 𝑀 ′ 𝑌 {M^{\prime}\otimes_{B}Y} italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y 1 X ⊗ ι tensor-product subscript 1 𝑋 𝜄 \scriptstyle{1_{X}\otimes\iota} 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 \scriptstyle{U_{M}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT U M ′ subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑀 ′ \scriptstyle{U_{M^{\prime}}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ι ⊗ 1 Y tensor-product 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑌 \scriptstyle{\iota\otimes 1_{Y}} italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
commutes.
By the first diagram above, we have
( 1 M ′ ⊗ U N ) ( U M ′ ⊗ 1 N ) ( 1 X ⊗ ι ⊗ 1 N ) tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑀 ′ subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑀 ′ subscript 1 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑋 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑁 \displaystyle(1_{M^{\prime}}\otimes U_{N})(U_{M^{\prime}}\otimes 1_{N})(1_{X}%
\otimes\iota\otimes 1_{N}) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
= ( ι ⊗ 1 N ⊗ 1 Z ) ( 1 M ⊗ U N ) ( U M ⊗ 1 N ) absent tensor-product 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑁 subscript 1 𝑍 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑀 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝑀 subscript 1 𝑁 \displaystyle=(\iota\otimes 1_{N}\otimes 1_{Z})(1_{M}\otimes U_{N})(U_{M}%
\otimes 1_{N}) = ( italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
= ( 1 M ′ ⊗ U N ) ( ι ⊗ 1 Y ⊗ 1 N ) ( U M ⊗ 1 N ) , absent tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑀 ′ subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑌 subscript 1 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝑀 subscript 1 𝑁 \displaystyle=(1_{M^{\prime}}\otimes U_{N})(\iota\otimes 1_{Y}\otimes 1_{N})(U%
_{M}\otimes 1_{N}), = ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ,
which implies the equality
( U M ′ ⊗ 1 N ) ( 1 X ⊗ ι ⊗ 1 N ) = ( ι ⊗ 1 Y ⊗ 1 N ) ( U M ⊗ 1 N ) . tensor-product subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑀 ′ subscript 1 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑋 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑁 tensor-product 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑌 subscript 1 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝑀 subscript 1 𝑁 (U_{M^{\prime}}\otimes 1_{N})(1_{X}\otimes\iota\otimes 1_{N})=(\iota\otimes 1_%
{Y}\otimes 1_{N})(U_{M}\otimes 1_{N}). ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = ( italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) .
Since N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an injective correspondence, by Lemma 2.2 , we have
U M ′ ( 1 X ⊗ ι ) = ( ι ⊗ 1 Y ) U M , subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑀 ′ tensor-product subscript 1 𝑋 𝜄 tensor-product 𝜄 subscript 1 𝑌 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M^{\prime}}(1_{X}\otimes\iota)=(\iota\otimes 1_{Y})U_{M}, italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι ) = ( italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,
completing the proof.
∎
We are now ready to determine kernels in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .
Theorem 5.4 .
Let [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be a morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . Let K 𝐾 K italic_K denote the kernel of the homomorphism φ M : A → 𝒦 ( M ) . : subscript 𝜑 𝑀 → 𝐴 𝒦 𝑀 \varphi_{M}:A\rightarrow\mathcal{K}(M). italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_A → caligraphic_K ( italic_M ) . Then, the object ( K X ) K K {}_{K}(KX)_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_K italic_X ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT paired with the morphism [ K A K , U K ] : : subscript subscript 𝐾 𝐴 𝐾 subscript 𝑈 𝐾 absent [{}_{K}K_{A},U_{K}]: [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] : K K X K subscript 𝐾 𝐾 subscript 𝑋 𝐾 {}_{K}{KX}_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a kernel of [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ].
Proof.
We must show the following:
(1)
[M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ \circ ∘ [K A K subscript subscript 𝐾 𝐴 𝐾 {}_{K}K_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U K subscript 𝑈 𝐾 U_{K} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = [0, 0 K X , Y subscript 0 𝐾 𝑋 𝑌
0_{KX,Y} 0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K italic_X , italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]; and
(2)
assume [N A C subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐴 𝐶 {}_{C}N_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: Z C C subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 {}_{C}Z_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT satisfying the equality [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ \circ ∘ [N A C subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐴 𝐶 {}_{C}N_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = [0, 0 Z , Y subscript 0 𝑍 𝑌
0_{Z,Y} 0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z , italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] . Then, there exists a unique morphism [T K C subscript subscript 𝑇 𝐾 𝐶 {}_{C}T_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U T subscript 𝑈 𝑇 U_{T} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: Z C C subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 {}_{C}Z_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → K K X K subscript 𝐾 𝐾 subscript 𝑋 𝐾 {}_{K}{KX}_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT such that [K A K subscript subscript 𝐾 𝐴 𝐾 {}_{K}K_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U K subscript 𝑈 𝐾 U_{K} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ \circ ∘ [T K C subscript subscript 𝑇 𝐾 𝐶 {}_{C}T_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U T subscript 𝑈 𝑇 U_{T} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]=[N A C subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐴 𝐶 {}_{C}N_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ].
Item (1) is folklore. For (2), notice that since N ⊗ A M ≅ 0 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑁 𝑀 0 N\otimes_{A}M\cong 0 italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M ≅ 0 we have ⟨ N , N ⟩ A ⊂ K subscript 𝑁 𝑁
𝐴 𝐾 \langle N,N\rangle_{A}\subset K ⟨ italic_N , italic_N ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ italic_K . Thus we may view N A C subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐴 𝐶 {}_{C}N_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as a C 𝐶 C italic_C –K 𝐾 K italic_K -correspondence, which we denote by N ′ superscript 𝑁 ′ N^{\prime} italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . Moreover, we have the isomorphisms
ι : N C ⊗ A K K → N K ′ C n ⊗ A k ↦ n ⋅ k : 𝜄 formulae-sequence → subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript 𝑁 𝐶 subscript 𝐾 𝐾 subscript subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐾 𝐶 maps-to subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑛 𝑘 ⋅ 𝑛 𝑘 \iota:{}_{C}N\otimes_{A}K_{K}\rightarrow{}_{C}N^{\prime}_{K}\hskip 56.9055ptn%
\otimes_{A}k\mapsto n\cdot k italic_ι : start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k ↦ italic_n ⋅ italic_k
and
j : N ′ C ⊗ K K A → N A C n ⊗ K k ↦ n ⋅ k : 𝑗 formulae-sequence → subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐶 subscript 𝐾 𝐴 subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐴 𝐶 maps-to subscript tensor-product 𝐾 𝑛 𝑘 ⋅ 𝑛 𝑘 j:{}_{C}N^{\prime}\otimes_{K}K_{A}\rightarrow\textnormal{${}_{C}N_{A}$}\hskip 5%
6.9055ptn\otimes_{K}k\mapsto n\cdot k italic_j : start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k ↦ italic_n ⋅ italic_k
for n ∈ N 𝑛 𝑁 n\in N italic_n ∈ italic_N , k ∈ K 𝑘 𝐾 k\in K italic_k ∈ italic_K .
Now let U N ′ subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑁 ′ U_{N^{\prime}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be the C 𝐶 C italic_C –K 𝐾 K italic_K -correspondence isomorphism
Z C ⊗ C N K ′ subscript tensor-product 𝐶 subscript 𝑍 𝐶 subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐾 {{}_{C}Z\otimes_{C}N^{\prime}_{K}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Z C ⊗ C N ⊗ A K K subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝑁 subscript 𝐾 𝐾 {{}_{C}Z\otimes_{C}N\otimes_{A}K_{K}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT N C ⊗ A X ⊗ A K K subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝑋 subscript 𝐾 𝐾 {{}_{C}N\otimes_{A}X\otimes_{A}K_{K}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT N ′ C ⊗ K K ⊗ A X ⊗ A K K subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐶 𝐾 𝑋 subscript 𝐾 𝐾 {{}_{C}N^{\prime}\otimes_{K}K\otimes_{A}X\otimes_{A}K_{K}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT N ′ C ⊗ K K X ⊗ A K K subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐶 𝐾 𝑋 subscript 𝐾 𝐾 {{}_{C}N^{\prime}\otimes_{K}KX\otimes_{A}K_{K}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT N ′ C ⊗ K K X K , subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐶 𝐾 subscript 𝑋 𝐾 {{}_{C}N^{\prime}\otimes_{K}KX_{K},} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , 1 Z ⊗ ι − 1 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑍 superscript 𝜄 1 \scriptstyle{1_{Z}\otimes\iota^{-1}} 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT U N ⊗ 1 K tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝑁 subscript 1 𝐾 \scriptstyle{U_{N}\otimes 1_{K}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT j − 1 ⊗ 1 X ⊗ 1 K tensor-product superscript 𝑗 1 subscript 1 𝑋 subscript 1 𝐾 \scriptstyle{j^{-1}\otimes 1_{X}\otimes 1_{K}} italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 N ′ ⊗ ξ l ⊗ 1 K tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝜉 𝑙 subscript 1 𝐾 \scriptstyle{1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes\xi_{l}\otimes 1_{K}} 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 N ′ ⊗ ξ r tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝜉 𝑟 \scriptstyle{1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes\xi_{r}} 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
where ξ l subscript 𝜉 𝑙 \xi_{l} italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the K 𝐾 K italic_K –A 𝐴 A italic_A -correspondence isomorphism ξ ( l , X , K ) : K ⊗ A X → K X : subscript 𝜉 𝑙 𝑋 𝐾 → subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐾 𝑋 𝐾 𝑋 \xi_{(l,X,K)}:K\otimes_{A}X\rightarrow KX italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_l , italic_X , italic_K ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_K ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X → italic_K italic_X , and ξ r subscript 𝜉 𝑟 \xi_{r} italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the K 𝐾 K italic_K –K 𝐾 K italic_K -correspondence isomorphism ξ ( r , K X , K ) : K X ⊗ A K → K X : subscript 𝜉 𝑟 𝐾 𝑋 𝐾 → subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐾 𝑋 𝐾 𝐾 𝑋 \xi_{(r,KX,K)}:KX\otimes_{A}K\rightarrow KX italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r , italic_K italic_X , italic_K ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_K italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K → italic_K italic_X , i.e.,
U N ′ := [ 1 N ′ ⊗ ξ r ] [ 1 N ′ ⊗ ξ l ⊗ 1 K ] [ j − 1 ⊗ 1 X ⊗ 1 K ] [ U N ⊗ 1 K ] [ 1 Z ⊗ ι − 1 ] . assign subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑁 ′ delimited-[] tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝜉 𝑟 delimited-[] tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝜉 𝑙 subscript 1 𝐾 delimited-[] tensor-product superscript 𝑗 1 subscript 1 𝑋 subscript 1 𝐾 delimited-[] tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝑁 subscript 1 𝐾 delimited-[] tensor-product subscript 1 𝑍 superscript 𝜄 1 U_{N^{\prime}}:=[1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes\xi_{r}][1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes\xi_{l}%
\otimes 1_{K}][j^{-1}\otimes 1_{X}\otimes 1_{K}][U_{N}\otimes 1_{K}][1_{Z}%
\otimes\iota^{-1}]. italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := [ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] [ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] [ italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] [ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] [ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] .
We show that [( N ′ ⊗ K K ) A C {}_{C}(N^{\prime}\otimes_{K}K)_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ( 1 N ′ ⊗ U K ) ( U N ′ ⊗ 1 K ) tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝑈 𝐾 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 1 𝐾 (1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes U_{K})(U_{N^{\prime}}\otimes 1_{K}) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ]=[N A C subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐴 𝐶 {}_{C}N_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ], i.e., the diagram
Z ⊗ C N ′ ⊗ K K subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑍 superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐾 {Z\otimes_{C}N^{\prime}\otimes_{K}K} italic_Z ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K Z ⊗ C N subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑍 𝑁 {Z\otimes_{C}N} italic_Z ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N N ′ ⊗ K K ⊗ A X subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐾 𝑋 {N^{\prime}\otimes_{K}K\otimes_{A}X} italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X N ⊗ A X subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑁 𝑋 {N\otimes_{A}X} italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X 1 Z ⊗ j tensor-product subscript 1 𝑍 𝑗 \scriptstyle{1_{Z}\otimes j} 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_j ( 1 N ′ ⊗ U K ) ( U N ′ ⊗ 1 K ) tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝑈 𝐾 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 1 𝐾 \scriptstyle{(1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes U_{K})(U_{N^{\prime}}\otimes 1_{K})} ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 \scriptstyle{U_{N}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT j ⊗ 1 X tensor-product 𝑗 subscript 1 𝑋 \scriptstyle{j\otimes 1_{X}} italic_j ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
commutes. Consider an elementary tensor n ⊗ A x ⊗ A k 1 ⊗ K k 2 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑛 𝑥 subscript 𝑘 1 subscript 𝑘 2 n\otimes_{A}x\otimes_{A}k_{1}\otimes_{K}k_{2} italic_n ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of ( N ⊗ A X ⊗ A K ⊗ K K ) A A {}_{A}(N\otimes_{A}X\otimes_{A}K\otimes_{K}K)_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . By Cohen-Hewitt factorization theorem we have n = n ′ ⋅ k ′ 𝑛 ⋅ superscript 𝑛 ′ superscript 𝑘 ′ n=n^{\prime}\cdot k^{\prime} italic_n = italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋅ italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for some n ′ ∈ N superscript 𝑛 ′ 𝑁 n^{\prime}\in N italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_N and k ′ ∈ ⟨ N , N ⟩ A ⊂ K superscript 𝑘 ′ subscript 𝑁 𝑁
𝐴 𝐾 k^{\prime}\in\langle N,N\rangle_{A}\subset K italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ ⟨ italic_N , italic_N ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ italic_K . Then,
( j ⊗ 1 X ) ( 1 N ′ ⊗ U K ) tensor-product 𝑗 subscript 1 𝑋 tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝑈 𝐾 \displaystyle(j\otimes 1_{X})(1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes U_{K}) ( italic_j ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
( 1 N ′ ⊗ ξ r ⊗ 1 K ) ( 1 N ′ ⊗ ξ l ⊗ 1 K ⊗ 1 K ) ( j − 1 ⊗ 1 X ⊗ 1 K ⊗ 1 K ) ( n ⊗ A x ⊗ A k 1 ⊗ K k 2 ) tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝜉 𝑟 subscript 1 𝐾 tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝜉 𝑙 subscript 1 𝐾 subscript 1 𝐾 tensor-product superscript 𝑗 1 subscript 1 𝑋 subscript 1 𝐾 subscript 1 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑛 𝑥 subscript 𝑘 1 subscript 𝑘 2 \displaystyle(1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes\xi_{r}\otimes 1_{K})(1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes%
\xi_{l}\otimes 1_{K}\otimes 1_{K})(j^{-1}\otimes 1_{X}\otimes 1_{K}\otimes 1_{%
K})(n\otimes_{A}x\otimes_{A}k_{1}\otimes_{K}k_{2}) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_n ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
= ( j ⊗ 1 X ) ( 1 N ′ ⊗ U K ) ( 1 N ′ ⊗ ξ r ⊗ 1 K ) ( n ′ ⊗ K k ′ x ⊗ A k 1 ⊗ K k 2 ) absent tensor-product 𝑗 subscript 1 𝑋 tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝑈 𝐾 tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝜉 𝑟 subscript 1 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 superscript 𝑛 ′ superscript 𝑘 ′ 𝑥 subscript 𝑘 1 subscript 𝑘 2 \displaystyle=(j\otimes 1_{X})(1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes U_{K})(1_{N^{\prime}}%
\otimes\xi_{r}\otimes 1_{K})(n^{\prime}\otimes_{K}k^{\prime}x\otimes_{A}k_{1}%
\otimes_{K}k_{2}) = ( italic_j ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
= ( j ⊗ 1 X ) ( 1 N ′ ⊗ U K ) ( n ′ ⊗ K k ′ x k 1 ⊗ K k 2 ) absent tensor-product 𝑗 subscript 1 𝑋 tensor-product subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript 𝑈 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 superscript 𝑛 ′ superscript 𝑘 ′ 𝑥 subscript 𝑘 1 subscript 𝑘 2 \displaystyle=(j\otimes 1_{X})(1_{N^{\prime}}\otimes U_{K})(n^{\prime}\otimes_%
{K}k^{\prime}xk_{1}\otimes_{K}k_{2}) = ( italic_j ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_x italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
= ( j ⊗ 1 X ) ( n ′ ⊗ K k ′ ⊗ A x k 1 k 2 ) absent tensor-product 𝑗 subscript 1 𝑋 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 superscript 𝑛 ′ superscript 𝑘 ′ 𝑥 subscript 𝑘 1 subscript 𝑘 2 \displaystyle=(j\otimes 1_{X})(n^{\prime}\otimes_{K}k^{\prime}\otimes_{A}xk_{1%
}k_{2}) = ( italic_j ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
= n ⊗ A x k 1 k 2 . absent subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑛 𝑥 subscript 𝑘 1 subscript 𝑘 2 \displaystyle=n\otimes_{A}xk_{1}k_{2}. = italic_n ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
On the other hand, it is not hard to seee that
U N ( 1 Z ⊗ j ) ( 1 Z ⊗ ι ⊗ 1 K ) ( U N − 1 ⊗ 1 K ⊗ 1 K ) ( n ⊗ A x ⊗ A k 1 ⊗ K k 2 ) = n ⊗ A x k 1 k 2 . subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑍 𝑗 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑍 𝜄 subscript 1 𝐾 tensor-product superscript subscript 𝑈 𝑁 1 subscript 1 𝐾 subscript 1 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑛 𝑥 subscript 𝑘 1 subscript 𝑘 2 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑛 𝑥 subscript 𝑘 1 subscript 𝑘 2 U_{N}(1_{Z}\otimes j)(1_{Z}\otimes\iota\otimes 1_{K})(U_{N}^{-1}\otimes 1_{K}%
\otimes 1_{K})(n\otimes_{A}x\otimes_{A}k_{1}\otimes_{K}k_{2})=n\otimes_{A}xk_{%
1}k_{2}. italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_j ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_n ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_n ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Uniqueness of the morphism [N K ′ C subscript subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐾 𝐶 {}_{C}N^{\prime}_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N ′ subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑁 ′ U_{N^{\prime}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] follows from Proposition 5.2 , since K A K subscript subscript 𝐾 𝐴 𝐾 {}_{K}K_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule. ∎
We next study cokernels in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .
Lemma 5.5 .
Let X B C subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐶 {}_{C}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and Y B C subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐶 {}_{C}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondences. Let C C A subscript subscript 𝐶 𝐶 𝐴 {}_{A}C_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be the C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence where the left action is determined by the surjective map π : A → C : 𝜋 → 𝐴 𝐶 \pi:A\rightarrow C italic_π : italic_A → italic_C . If there exists an A 𝐴 A italic_A –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondence isomorphism U : C ⊗ C X → C ⊗ C Y : 𝑈 → subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝐶 𝑋 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝐶 𝑌 U:C\otimes_{C}X\rightarrow C\otimes_{C}Y italic_U : italic_C ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X → italic_C ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y , then there exists an isomorphism V : X B C → Y B C : 𝑉 → subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐶 subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐶 V:{}_{C}X_{B}\rightarrow{}_{C}Y_{B} italic_V : start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT such that 1 C ⊗ V = U tensor-product subscript 1 𝐶 𝑉 𝑈 1_{C}\otimes V=U 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_V = italic_U .
Proof.
Consider the natural A 𝐴 A italic_A –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondence isomorphisms
ι C , X : C ⊗ C X → X : subscript 𝜄 𝐶 𝑋
→ subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝐶 𝑋 𝑋 \displaystyle\iota_{C,X}:C\otimes_{C}X\rightarrow X\text{} italic_ι start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C , italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_C ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X → italic_X
c ⊗ C x ↦ c ⋅ x maps-to subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑐 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑐 𝑥 \displaystyle c\otimes_{C}x\mapsto c\cdot x italic_c ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x ↦ italic_c ⋅ italic_x
ι C , Y : C ⊗ C Y → Y : subscript 𝜄 𝐶 𝑌
→ subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝐶 𝑌 𝑌 \displaystyle\iota_{C,Y}:C\otimes_{C}Y\rightarrow Y\text{} italic_ι start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C , italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_C ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y → italic_Y
c ⊗ C y ↦ c ⋅ y maps-to subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑐 𝑦 ⋅ 𝑐 𝑦 \displaystyle c\otimes_{C}y\mapsto c\cdot y italic_c ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y ↦ italic_c ⋅ italic_y
[4 , Lemma 3.3] tells us that the map ι C , Y ∘ U ∘ ι C , X − 1 : X B A → Y B A : subscript 𝜄 𝐶 𝑌
𝑈 superscript subscript 𝜄 𝐶 𝑋
1 → subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐴 \iota_{C,Y}\circ U\circ\iota_{C,X}^{-1}:{}_{A}X_{B}\rightarrow{}_{A}Y_{B} italic_ι start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C , italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∘ italic_U ∘ italic_ι start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C , italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT : start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT preserves the left C 𝐶 C italic_C -module structure and thus, provides an isomorphism X B C → Y B C → subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐶 subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐶 {}_{C}X_{B}\rightarrow{}_{C}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . We observe that 1 C ⊗ ι C , Y U ι C , X − 1 = U tensor-product subscript 1 𝐶 subscript 𝜄 𝐶 𝑌
𝑈 superscript subscript 𝜄 𝐶 𝑋
1 𝑈 1_{C}\otimes\iota_{C,Y}U\iota_{C,X}^{-1}=U 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C , italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_U italic_ι start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C , italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_U : let c , c ′ ∈ C , x ∈ X . formulae-sequence 𝑐 superscript 𝑐 ′
𝐶 𝑥 𝑋 c,c^{\prime}\in C,x\in X. italic_c , italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_C , italic_x ∈ italic_X . Notice that since U ( c ′ ⊗ C x ) = lim n → ∞ ∑ i = 1 N n c i n ⊗ C y i n 𝑈 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 superscript 𝑐 ′ 𝑥 subscript → 𝑛 superscript subscript 𝑖 1 subscript 𝑁 𝑛 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 superscript subscript 𝑐 𝑖 𝑛 superscript subscript 𝑦 𝑖 𝑛 U(c^{\prime}\otimes_{C}x)=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{n}}c_{i}^{n}%
\otimes_{C}y_{i}^{n} italic_U ( italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x ) = roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for c i n ∈ C , y i n ∈ Y formulae-sequence superscript subscript 𝑐 𝑖 𝑛 𝐶 superscript subscript 𝑦 𝑖 𝑛 𝑌 c_{i}^{n}\in C,y_{i}^{n}\in Y italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_C , italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_Y , we have
( 1 C ⊗ ι C , Y ) ( 1 C ⊗ U ) ( c ⊗ C c ′ ⊗ C x ) tensor-product subscript 1 𝐶 subscript 𝜄 𝐶 𝑌
tensor-product subscript 1 𝐶 𝑈 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑐 superscript 𝑐 ′ 𝑥 \displaystyle(1_{C}\otimes\iota_{C,Y})(1_{C}\otimes U)(c\otimes_{C}c^{\prime}%
\otimes_{C}x) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C , italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U ) ( italic_c ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x )
= c ⊗ C lim n → ∞ ∑ i = 1 N n c i n ⋅ y i n absent subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑐 subscript → 𝑛 superscript subscript 𝑖 1 subscript 𝑁 𝑛 ⋅ superscript subscript 𝑐 𝑖 𝑛 superscript subscript 𝑦 𝑖 𝑛 \displaystyle=c\otimes_{C}\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{n}}c_{i}^{n}%
\cdot y_{i}^{n} = italic_c ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋅ italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
= lim n → ∞ ∑ i = 1 N n c c i n ⊗ C y i n absent subscript → 𝑛 superscript subscript 𝑖 1 subscript 𝑁 𝑛 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑐 superscript subscript 𝑐 𝑖 𝑛 superscript subscript 𝑦 𝑖 𝑛 \displaystyle=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\sum_{i=1}^{N_{n}}cc_{i}^{n}\otimes_{C}%
y_{i}^{n} = roman_lim start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n → ∞ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_c italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
= U ( 1 C ⊗ ι C , X ) ( c ⊗ C c ′ ⊗ C x ) , absent 𝑈 tensor-product subscript 1 𝐶 subscript 𝜄 𝐶 𝑋
subscript tensor-product 𝐶 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑐 superscript 𝑐 ′ 𝑥 \displaystyle=U(1_{C}\otimes\iota_{C,X})(c\otimes_{C}c^{\prime}\otimes_{C}x), = italic_U ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ι start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C , italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_c ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x ) ,
as desired. ∎
Proposition 5.6 .
Let X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be a regular C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence and let I 𝐼 I italic_I be an X 𝑋 X italic_X -invariant ideal of A 𝐴 A italic_A . Then, [ ( A / I ) A / I A , U A / I ] [{}_{A}(A/I)_{A/I},U_{A/I}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A / italic_I ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] : X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → ( X / X I ) A / I A / I \rightarrow{}_{A/I}(X/XI)_{A/I} → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_X / italic_X italic_I ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an epimorphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .
Proof.
Assume there exist morphisms [M B A / I subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 𝐼 {}_{A/I}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ], [N B A / I subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐵 𝐴 𝐼 {}_{A/I}N_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: ( X / X I ) A / I A / I → {}_{A/I}(X/XI)_{A/I}\rightarrow start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_X / italic_X italic_I ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT such that
[ M B A / I , U M ] ∘ [ ( A / I ) A / I A , U A / I ] = [ N B A / I , U N ] ∘ [ ( A / I ) A / I A , U A / I ] . [ M B A / I , U M ] ∘ [ ( A / I ) A / I A , U A / I ] = [ N B A / I , U N ] ∘ [ ( A / I ) A / I A , U A / I ] \text{[${}_{A/I}M_{B}$, $U_{M}$]$\circ$ [${}_{A}(A/I)_{A/I}$, $U_{A/I}$] = [${%
}_{A/I}N_{B}$, $U_{N}$]$\circ$ [${}_{A}(A/I)_{A/I}$, $U_{A/I}$]}. [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A / italic_I ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A / italic_I ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] .
Then, there exists an A 𝐴 A italic_A –B 𝐵 B italic_B -correspondence isomorphism
μ : A / I ⊗ A / I M → A / I ⊗ A / I N : 𝜇 → subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐼 𝐴 𝐼 𝑀 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐼 𝐴 𝐼 𝑁 \mu:A/I\otimes_{A/I}M\rightarrow A/I\otimes_{A/I}N italic_μ : italic_A / italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M → italic_A / italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N
making the diagram
X ⊗ A A / I ⊗ A / I M subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐼 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝐴 𝐼 𝑀 {X\otimes_{A}A/I\otimes_{A/I}M} italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M X ⊗ A A / I ⊗ A / I N subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐼 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝑋 𝐴 𝐼 𝑁 {X\otimes_{A}A/I\otimes_{A/I}N} italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N A / I ⊗ A / I M ⊗ B Y subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐼 𝐴 𝐼 𝑀 𝑌 {A/I\otimes_{A/I}M\otimes_{B}Y} italic_A / italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y A / I ⊗ A / I N ⊗ A Y subscript tensor-product 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐼 𝐴 𝐼 𝑁 𝑌 {A/I\otimes_{A/I}N\otimes_{A}Y} italic_A / italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y 1 X ⊗ μ tensor-product subscript 1 𝑋 𝜇 \scriptstyle{1_{X}\otimes\mu} 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_μ ( 1 A / I ⊗ U M ) ( U A / I ⊗ 1 M ) tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 1 𝑀 \scriptstyle{(1_{A/I}\otimes U_{M})(U_{A/I}\otimes 1_{M})} ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 A / I ⊗ U N ) ( U A / I ⊗ 1 N ) tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 1 𝑁 \scriptstyle{(1_{A/I}\otimes U_{N})(U_{A/I}\otimes 1_{N})} ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) μ ⊗ 1 Y tensor-product 𝜇 subscript 1 𝑌 \scriptstyle{\mu\otimes 1_{Y}} italic_μ ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
commute.
Since the C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence ( A / I ) A / I A {}_{A}(A/I)_{A/I} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A / italic_I ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT comes from the surjective homomorphism A → A / I → 𝐴 𝐴 𝐼 A\rightarrow A/I italic_A → italic_A / italic_I , by Lemma 5.5 , there exists an isomorphism ξ : : 𝜉 absent \xi: italic_ξ : M B A / I subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 𝐼 {}_{A/I}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → N B A / I subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐵 𝐴 𝐼 {}_{A/I}N_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT such that μ = 1 A / I ⊗ ξ 𝜇 tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 𝜉 \mu=1_{A/I}\otimes\xi italic_μ = 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ . Then, by the diagram above, we have
( 1 A / I ⊗ ξ ⊗ 1 Y ) ( 1 A / I ⊗ U M ) ( U A / I ⊗ 1 M ) tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 𝜉 subscript 1 𝑌 tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 1 𝑀 \displaystyle(1_{A/I}\otimes\xi\otimes 1_{Y})(1_{A/I}\otimes U_{M})(U_{A/I}%
\otimes 1_{M}) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
= ( 1 A / I ⊗ U N ) ( U A / I ⊗ 1 N ) ( 1 X ⊗ 1 A / I ⊗ ξ ) absent tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 1 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑋 subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 𝜉 \displaystyle=(1_{A/I}\otimes U_{N})(U_{A/I}\otimes 1_{N})(1_{X}\otimes 1_{A/I%
}\otimes\xi) = ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ )
= ( 1 A / I ⊗ U N ) ( 1 A / I ⊗ 1 X / X I ⊗ ξ ) ( U A / I ⊗ 1 M ) , absent tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 1 𝑋 𝑋 𝐼 𝜉 tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 1 𝑀 \displaystyle=(1_{A/I}\otimes U_{N})(1_{A/I}\otimes 1_{X/XI}\otimes\xi)(U_{A/I%
}\otimes 1_{M}), = ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ,
which means 1 A / I ⊗ ( ξ ⊗ 1 Y ) U M = 1 A / I ⊗ U N ( 1 X / X I ⊗ ξ ) tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 tensor-product 𝜉 subscript 1 𝑌 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 tensor-product subscript 1 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑋 𝑋 𝐼 𝜉 1_{A/I}\otimes(\xi\otimes 1_{Y})U_{M}=1_{A/I}\otimes U_{N}(1_{X/XI}\otimes\xi) 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ ( italic_ξ ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ ) . Since [( A / I ) A / I A {}_{A}(A/I)_{A/I} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A / italic_I ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is an epimorphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , we may now conclude the equality ( ξ ⊗ 1 Y ) U M = U N ( 1 X / X I ⊗ ξ ) tensor-product 𝜉 subscript 1 𝑌 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑋 𝑋 𝐼 𝜉 (\xi\otimes 1_{Y})U_{M}=U_{N}(1_{X/XI}\otimes\xi) ( italic_ξ ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ ) , which implies [M B A / I subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 𝐼 {}_{A/I}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]=[N B A / I subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐵 𝐴 𝐼 {}_{A/I}N_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]. ∎
Theorem 5.7 .
Let [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be a morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . If B M subscript 𝐵 𝑀 B_{M} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a Y 𝑌 Y italic_Y -invariant ideal of B 𝐵 B italic_B , then a cokernel of [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is [ ( B / B M ) B / B M B , U B / B M ] [{}_{B}(B/B_{M})_{B/B_{M}},U_{B/B_{M}}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] : Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → ( Y / Y B M ) B / B M B / B M {}_{B/B_{M}}(Y/YB_{M})_{B/B_{M}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_Y / italic_Y italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Proof.
We must show the following:
(1)
[ ( B / B M ) B / B M B , U B / B M ] [{}_{B}(B/B_{M})_{B/B_{M}},U_{B/B_{M}}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ \circ ∘ [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = [0, 0 X , Y / Y B M subscript 0 𝑋 𝑌 𝑌 subscript 𝐵 𝑀
0_{X,Y/YB_{M}} 0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X , italic_Y / italic_Y italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]; and
(2)
assume [N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Z C C subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 {}_{C}Z_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT satisfying the equality [N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ \circ ∘ [M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U M subscript 𝑈 𝑀 U_{M} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = [0, 0 X , Z subscript 0 𝑋 𝑍
0_{X,Z} 0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X , italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] . Then, there exists a unique morphism [T C B / B M subscript subscript 𝑇 𝐶 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 {}_{B/B_{M}}T_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U T subscript 𝑈 𝑇 U_{T} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: ( Y / Y B M ) B / B M B / B M {}_{B/B_{M}}(Y/YB_{M})_{B/B_{M}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_Y / italic_Y italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Z C C subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 {}_{C}Z_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT satisfying the equality [N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]= = = [T C B / B M subscript subscript 𝑇 𝐶 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 {}_{B/B_{M}}T_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U T subscript 𝑈 𝑇 U_{T} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ∘ \circ ∘ [( B / B M ) B / B M B {}_{B}(B/B_{M})_{B/B_{M}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U B / B M subscript 𝑈 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 U_{B/B_{M}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ].
The first item is easy to verify. Let [N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 U_{N} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → → \rightarrow → Z C C subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 {}_{C}Z_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be a morphism described as in the second item. Then N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can be viewed as a B / B M 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 B/B_{M} italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT –C 𝐶 C italic_C -correspondence [4 , Lemma 3.3] , which we denote by N ′ superscript 𝑁 ′ N^{\prime} italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . Now, let ξ 𝜉 \xi italic_ξ be the C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT -correspondence isomorphism ( B / B M ⊗ B / B M N ′ ) C B → {}_{B}(B/B_{M}\otimes_{B/B_{M}}N^{\prime})_{C}\rightarrow start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → N C B subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}N_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ; and consider the B 𝐵 B italic_B –C 𝐶 C italic_C -correspondence isomorphism
( ξ − 1 ⊗ 1 Z ) U N ( 1 Y ⊗ ξ ) ( U B / B M − 1 ⊗ 1 N ′ ) : B / B M ⊗ B / B M Y / Y B M ⊗ B / B M N ′ → B / B M ⊗ B / B M N ′ ⊗ C Z . : tensor-product superscript 𝜉 1 subscript 1 𝑍 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑌 𝜉 tensor-product superscript subscript 𝑈 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 1 subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ → subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 𝑌 𝑌 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 superscript 𝑁 ′ subscript tensor-product 𝐶 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝑍 (\xi^{-1}\otimes 1_{Z})U_{N}(1_{Y}\otimes\xi)(U_{B/B_{M}}^{-1}\otimes 1_{N^{%
\prime}}):B/B_{M}\otimes_{B/B_{M}}Y/YB_{M}\otimes_{B/B_{M}}N^{\prime}%
\rightarrow B/B_{M}\otimes_{B/B_{M}}N^{\prime}\otimes_{C}Z. ( italic_ξ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) : italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y / italic_Y italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z .
By Lemma 5.5 there exists an isomorphism
U N ′ : ( Y / Y B M ⊗ B / B M N ′ ) C B / B M → ( N ′ ⊗ C Z ) C B / B M U_{N^{\prime}}:{}_{B/B_{M}}(Y/YB_{M}\otimes_{B/B_{M}}N^{\prime})_{C}%
\rightarrow{}_{B/B_{M}}(N^{\prime}\otimes_{C}Z)_{C} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_Y / italic_Y italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
such that 1 B / B M ⊗ U N ′ = ( ξ − 1 ⊗ 1 Z ) U N ( 1 Y ⊗ ξ ) ( U B / B M − 1 ⊗ 1 N ′ ) tensor-product subscript 1 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑁 ′ tensor-product superscript 𝜉 1 subscript 1 𝑍 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 tensor-product subscript 1 𝑌 𝜉 tensor-product superscript subscript 𝑈 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 1 subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ 1_{B/B_{M}}\otimes U_{N^{\prime}}=(\xi^{-1}\otimes 1_{Z})U_{N}(1_{Y}\otimes\xi%
)(U_{B/B_{M}}^{-1}\otimes 1_{N^{\prime}}) 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( italic_ξ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) . One can now see that the diagram
Y ⊗ B B / B M ⊗ B / B M N ′ subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑌 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 superscript 𝑁 ′ {Y\otimes_{B}B/B_{M}\otimes_{B/B_{M}}N^{\prime}} italic_Y ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT Y ⊗ B N subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑌 𝑁 {Y\otimes_{B}N} italic_Y ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N B / B M ⊗ B / B M N ′ ⊗ C Z subscript tensor-product 𝐶 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝑍 {B/B_{M}\otimes_{B/B_{M}}N^{\prime}\otimes_{C}Z} italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z N ⊗ C Z subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑁 𝑍 {N\otimes_{C}Z} italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z 1 Y ⊗ ξ tensor-product subscript 1 𝑌 𝜉 \scriptstyle{1_{Y}\otimes\xi} 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_ξ ( 1 B / B M ⊗ U N ′ ) ( U B / B M ⊗ 1 N ′ ) tensor-product subscript 1 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑁 ′ tensor-product subscript 𝑈 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 1 superscript 𝑁 ′ \scriptstyle{(1_{B/B_{M}}\otimes U_{N^{\prime}})(U_{B/B_{M}}\otimes 1_{N^{%
\prime}})} ( 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ( italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) U N subscript 𝑈 𝑁 \scriptstyle{U_{N}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ξ ⊗ 1 Z tensor-product 𝜉 subscript 1 𝑍 \scriptstyle{\xi\otimes 1_{Z}} italic_ξ ⊗ 1 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
commutes. The uniqueness of [N C ′ B / B M subscript subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐶 𝐵 subscript 𝐵 𝑀 {}_{B/B_{M}}N^{\prime}_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , U N ′ subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑁 ′ U_{N^{\prime}} italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] follows from Proposition 5.6 .∎
Let [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] be a morphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . A kernel of [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is the pair ( K , [ K A K ] ) 𝐾 delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝐾 𝐴 𝐾 (K,[{}_{K}K_{A}]) ( italic_K , [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ) , where K 𝐾 K italic_K denotes the kernel of φ X : A → ℒ ( X ) : subscript 𝜑 𝑋 → 𝐴 ℒ 𝑋 \varphi_{X}:A\rightarrow\mathcal{L}(X) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_A → caligraphic_L ( italic_X ) [4 , Theorem 3.11] . A cokernel of [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is the pair ( B / B X , [ ( B / B X ) B / B X B ] ) (B/B_{X},[{}_{B}(B/B_{X})_{B/B_{X}}]) ( italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ) [4 , Corollary 3.12] .
Definition 5.8 .
A sequence 0 → A → [ X B A ] B → [ Y C B ] C → 0 → 0 𝐴 delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 → 𝐵 delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 → 𝐶 → 0 0\rightarrow A\xrightarrow{[{}_{A}X_{B}]}B\xrightarrow{[{}_{B}Y_{C}]}C\rightarrow
0 0 → italic_A start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW italic_B start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW italic_C → 0 in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is exact if the pair ( A , [ X B A ] ) 𝐴 delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 (A,[{}_{A}X_{B}]) ( italic_A , [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ) is a kernel of [ Y C B ] delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 [{}_{B}Y_{C}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] and the pair ( B , [ Y C B ] ) 𝐵 delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 (B,[{}_{B}Y_{C}]) ( italic_B , [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ) is a cokernel of [ X B A ] delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 [{}_{A}X_{B}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] .
Proposition 5.9 .
A sequence 0 → A → [ X B A ] B → [ Y C B ] C → 0 → 0 𝐴 delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 → 𝐵 delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 → 𝐶 → 0 0\rightarrow A\xrightarrow{[{}_{A}X_{B}]}B\xrightarrow{[{}_{B}Y_{C}]}C\rightarrow
0 0 → italic_A start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW italic_B start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW italic_C → 0 in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is exact if and only if the following three holds.
(1)
X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule;
(2)
B X = K subscript 𝐵 𝑋 𝐾 B_{X}=K italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_K , where K 𝐾 K italic_K denotes the kernel of φ Y : B → ℒ ( Y ) : subscript 𝜑 𝑌 → 𝐵 ℒ 𝑌 \varphi_{Y}:B\rightarrow\mathcal{L}(Y) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_B → caligraphic_L ( italic_Y ) .
(3)
Hilbert C 𝐶 C italic_C -module Y 𝑌 Y italic_Y viewed as a B / K 𝐵 𝐾 B/K italic_B / italic_K – C 𝐶 C italic_C -correspondence Y C ′ B / K subscript subscript superscript 𝑌 ′ 𝐶 𝐵 𝐾 {}_{B/K}Y^{\prime}_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an imprimitivity bimodule.
Proof.
Assume we have (1)-(3). In 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , we know that kernel of [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is the pair ( K , [ K B K ] ) 𝐾 delimited-[] subscript subscript 𝐾 𝐵 𝐾 (K,[{}_{K}K_{B}]) ( italic_K , [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ) , where K 𝐾 K italic_K denotes the kernel of φ Y : B → ℒ ( Y ) : subscript 𝜑 𝑌 → 𝐵 ℒ 𝑌 \varphi_{Y}:B\rightarrow\mathcal{L}(Y) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_B → caligraphic_L ( italic_Y ) . On the other hand, item (2) implies that [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]∘ \circ ∘ [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]=[0 C A {}_{A}0_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]. Then, by the universal property of kernels there exists a morphism from A 𝐴 A italic_A to K 𝐾 K italic_K which [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] factors through. As shown in [4 , Theorem 3.9] this unique morphism is [X K ′ A subscript subscript superscript 𝑋 ′ 𝐾 𝐴 {}_{A}X^{\prime}_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] where X 𝑋 X italic_X is just X ′ superscript 𝑋 ′ X^{\prime} italic_X start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT viewed as an A 𝐴 A italic_A –K 𝐾 K italic_K -correspondence. Since X K ′ A subscript subscript superscript 𝑋 ′ 𝐾 𝐴 {}_{A}X^{\prime}_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an imprimitivity bimodule we have that [X K ′ A subscript subscript superscript 𝑋 ′ 𝐾 𝐴 {}_{A}X^{\prime}_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is an isomorphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . It remains to show that [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is a cokernel of [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]. We know that a cokernel of [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is [B B / K B / K subscript 𝐵 𝐵 subscript 𝐾 𝐵 𝐾 {}_{B}B/K_{B/K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ], and since [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]∘ \circ ∘ [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]=[0 C A {}_{A}0_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0 start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ], by the universal property of cokernels there exists a unique morphism which [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] factors through. As shown in [4 , Proposition 3.11] , this unique morphism is [Y C ′ B / K subscript subscript superscript 𝑌 ′ 𝐶 𝐵 𝐾 {}_{B/K}Y^{\prime}_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ], which is an isomorphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by item (3).
For the other direction, assume [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is a kernel of [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] and [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is a cokernel of [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]. Since [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is a kernel of [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ], the correspondence X K A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐾 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the kernel factorization X B A ≅ X A ⊗ K K B subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 subscript tensor-product 𝐾 subscript 𝑋 𝐴 subscript 𝐾 𝐵 {}_{A}X_{B}\cong{}_{A}X\otimes_{K}K_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≅ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT must be an imprimitivity bimodule, which means X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule, giving us item (1). Moreover, X K A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐾 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{K} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT being an imprimitivity bimodule implies that B X = K subscript 𝐵 𝑋 𝐾 B_{X}=K italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_K , which proves item (2). Since [Y C B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is a cokernel of [X B A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ], the correspondence Y C ′ B / K subscript subscript superscript 𝑌 ′ 𝐶 𝐵 𝐾 {}_{B/K}Y^{\prime}_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the cokernel factorization B B / K ⊗ B / K Y C ′ ≅ Y C B subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝐾 subscript 𝐵 𝐵 𝐾 subscript superscript 𝑌 ′ 𝐶 subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐶 𝐵 {}_{B}B/K\otimes_{B/K}Y^{\prime}_{C}\cong{}_{B}Y_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≅ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT must be an imprimitivity bimodule, concluding the proof. ∎
Definition 5.10 .
A sequence
0 → X A A → [ M B A , U M ] Y B B → [ N C B , U N ] Z C C → 0 → 0 subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 → subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 → subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 → 0 0\rightarrow{}_{A}X_{A}\xrightarrow{[{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}]}{}_{B}Y_{B}%
\xrightarrow{[{}_{B}N_{C},U_{N}]}{}_{C}Z_{C}\rightarrow 0 0 → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → 0
in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is called exact if the pair ( X A A , [ M B A , U M ] ) subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 \left({}_{A}X_{A},[{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}]\right) ( start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ) is a kernel of the morphism [ N C B , U N ] : Y B B → Z C C : subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 → subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 [{}_{B}N_{C},U_{N}]:{}_{B}Y_{B}\rightarrow{}_{C}Z_{C} [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] : start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ; and the pair ( Y B B , [ N C B , U N ] ) subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 \left({}_{B}Y_{B},[{}_{B}N_{C},U_{N}]\right) ( start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ) is a cokernel of the morphism [ M B A , U M ] : X A A → Y B B . : subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 → subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 [{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}]:{}_{A}X_{A}\rightarrow{}_{B}Y_{B}. [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] : start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
Note that [ M B A , U M ] subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 [{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] being a kernel of [ N C B , U N ] subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 [{}_{B}N_{C},U_{N}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] in the sequence above implies that B M = Ker φ N subscript 𝐵 𝑀 Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑁 B_{M}=\operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{N} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . Then, Lemma 4.7 allows us to conclude that B M subscript 𝐵 𝑀 B_{M} italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a Y 𝑌 Y italic_Y -invariant ideal of B 𝐵 B italic_B , and thus, cokernel of [ M B A , U M ] subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 [{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}] [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] exists.
Corollary 5.11 .
A sequence
0 → X A A → [ M B A , U M ] Y B B → [ N C B , U N ] Z C C → 0 → 0 subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 → subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 → subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 → 0 0\rightarrow{}_{A}X_{A}\xrightarrow{[{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}]}{}_{B}Y_{B}%
\xrightarrow{[{}_{B}N_{C},U_{N}]}{}_{C}Z_{C}\rightarrow 0 0 → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → 0
is exact in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT if and only if the following holds.
(1)
M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule;
(2)
B M = K subscript 𝐵 𝑀 𝐾 B_{M}=K italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_K , where K 𝐾 K italic_K denotes the kernel of φ N : B → ℒ ( N ) : subscript 𝜑 𝑁 → 𝐵 ℒ 𝑁 \varphi_{N}:B\rightarrow\mathcal{L}(N) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_B → caligraphic_L ( italic_N ) ;
(3)
Hilbert C 𝐶 C italic_C -module N 𝑁 N italic_N viewed as a B / K 𝐵 𝐾 B/K italic_B / italic_K – C 𝐶 C italic_C -correspondence N C ′ B / K subscript subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐶 𝐵 𝐾 {}_{B/K}N^{\prime}_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an imprimitivity bimodule.
We omit the proof of Corollary 5.11 since it can be shown by following the proof of Proposition 5.9 .
Theorem 5.12 .
The restriction of the functor ℰ ℰ \mathcal{E} caligraphic_E to the category 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is exact.
Proof.
Let the sequence
0 → X A A → [ M B A , U M ] Y B B → [ N C B , U N ] Z C C → 0 → 0 subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 subscript 𝑈 𝑀 → subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 subscript subscript 𝑁 𝐶 𝐵 subscript 𝑈 𝑁 → subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 → 0 0\rightarrow{}_{A}X_{A}\xrightarrow{[{}_{A}M_{B},U_{M}]}{}_{B}Y_{B}%
\xrightarrow{[{}_{B}N_{C},U_{N}]}{}_{C}Z_{C}\rightarrow 0 0 → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → 0
in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT be exact. Denote Ker φ N Ker subscript 𝜑 𝑁 \operatorname{Ker}\varphi_{N} roman_Ker italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by K 𝐾 K italic_K . We know that M B A subscript subscript 𝑀 𝐵 𝐴 {}_{A}M_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule, the correspondence N C ′ B / K subscript subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐶 𝐵 𝐾 {}_{B/K}N^{\prime}_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an imprimitivity bimodule, and we have the equality B M = K subscript 𝐵 𝑀 𝐾 B_{M}=K italic_B start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_M end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_K . The functor ℰ ℰ \mathcal{E} caligraphic_E maps this sequence to
0 → 𝒪 X → [ ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) 𝒪 Y 𝒪 X ] 𝒪 Y → [ ( N ⊗ C 𝒪 Z ) 𝒪 Z 𝒪 Y ] 𝒪 Z → 0 . 0\rightarrow\mathcal{O}_{X}\xrightarrow{[{}_{\mathcal{O}_{X}}(M\otimes_{B}%
\mathcal{O}_{Y})_{\mathcal{O}_{Y}}]}\mathcal{O}_{Y}\xrightarrow{[{}_{\mathcal{%
O}_{Y}}(N\otimes_{C}\mathcal{O}_{Z})_{\mathcal{O}_{Z}}]}\mathcal{O}_{Z}%
\rightarrow 0. 0 → caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → 0 .
By Corollary 4.9 , we have that ( M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ) 𝒪 Y 𝒪 X {}_{\mathcal{O}_{X}}(M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y})_{\mathcal{O}_{Y}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule. Since [N C ′ B / K , U N ′ subscript subscript superscript 𝑁 ′ 𝐶 𝐵 𝐾 subscript 𝑈 superscript 𝑁 ′
{}_{B/K}N^{\prime}_{C},U_{N^{\prime}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ]: Y B / K / Y K B / K → Z C C → subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐾 𝑌 subscript 𝐾 𝐵 𝐾 subscript subscript 𝑍 𝐶 𝐶 {}_{B/K}Y/YK_{B/K}\rightarrow{}_{C}Z_{C} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y / italic_Y italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an isomorphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , we have that ℰ ( [ N C ′ B / K , U N ′ ] ) = [ ( N ′ ⊗ C 𝒪 Z ) 𝒪 Z 𝒪 Y / Y K ] \mathcal{E}([{}_{B/K}N^{\prime}_{C},U_{N^{\prime}}])=[{}_{\mathcal{O}_{Y/YK}}(%
N^{\prime}\otimes_{C}\mathcal{O}_{Z})_{\mathcal{O}_{Z}}] caligraphic_E ( [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B / italic_K end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] ) = [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y / italic_Y italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] is an isomorphism in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , and thus ( N ′ ⊗ C 𝒪 Z ) 𝒪 Z 𝒪 Y / Y K {}_{\mathcal{O}_{Y/YK}}(N^{\prime}\otimes_{C}\mathcal{O}_{Z})_{\mathcal{O}_{Z}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y / italic_Y italic_K end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an imprimitivity bimodule. It remains to prove that ⟨ M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y , M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ⟩ 𝒪 Y = Ker σ subscript subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌
subscript 𝒪 𝑌 Ker 𝜎 \langle M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y},M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y}\rangle_{%
\mathcal{O}_{Y}}=\operatorname{Ker}\sigma ⟨ italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = roman_Ker italic_σ , where σ : 𝒪 Y → 𝒦 ( N ⊗ C 𝒪 Z ) : 𝜎 → subscript 𝒪 𝑌 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐶 𝑁 subscript 𝒪 𝑍 \sigma:\mathcal{O}_{Y}\rightarrow\mathcal{K}(N\otimes_{C}\mathcal{O}_{Z}) italic_σ : caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → caligraphic_K ( italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is the left action homomorphism associated to the correspondence ( N ⊗ C 𝒪 Z ) 𝒪 Z 𝒪 Y . {}_{\mathcal{O}_{Y}}(N\otimes_{C}\mathcal{O}_{Z})_{\mathcal{O}_{Z}}. start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_N ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_C end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Z end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . Let ( Υ , t ) Υ 𝑡 (\Upsilon,t) ( roman_Υ , italic_t ) denote the universal covariant representation of Y B B subscript subscript 𝑌 𝐵 𝐵 {}_{B}Y_{B} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . Then, by Proposition 3.5 , we have
⟨ M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y , M ⊗ B 𝒪 Y ⟩ 𝒪 Y = ⟨ 𝒪 Y , K ⋅ 𝒪 Y ⟩ = ⟨ Υ ( K ) ⟩ = Ker σ , subscript subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 subscript tensor-product 𝐵 𝑀 subscript 𝒪 𝑌
subscript 𝒪 𝑌 subscript 𝒪 𝑌 ⋅ 𝐾 subscript 𝒪 𝑌
delimited-⟨⟩ Υ 𝐾 Ker 𝜎 \langle M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y},M\otimes_{B}\mathcal{O}_{Y}\rangle_{%
\mathcal{O}_{Y}}=\langle\mathcal{O}_{Y},K\cdot\mathcal{O}_{Y}\rangle=\langle%
\Upsilon(K)\rangle=\operatorname{Ker}\sigma, ⟨ italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_M ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ⟨ caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_K ⋅ caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Y end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ = ⟨ roman_Υ ( italic_K ) ⟩ = roman_Ker italic_σ ,
as desired. ∎
Example 5.13 .
By using Theorem 5.12 we can easily see Theorem 4.6 and Theorem 4.4 for the case when X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a regular correspondence: let I 𝐼 I italic_I be an X 𝑋 X italic_X -invariant ideal of A 𝐴 A italic_A . Then, the sequence
0 → I I X I → [ I A I , U I ] X A A → [ A A / I A / I , U A / I ] X A / I / X I A / I → 0 → 0 subscript 𝐼 𝐼 subscript 𝑋 𝐼 subscript subscript 𝐼 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝑈 𝐼 → subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 subscript 𝐴 𝐴 subscript 𝐼 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝑈 𝐴 𝐼 → subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐼 𝑋 subscript 𝐼 𝐴 𝐼 → 0 0\rightarrow{}_{I}IX_{I}\xrightarrow{[{}_{I}I_{A},U_{I}]}{}_{A}X_{A}%
\xrightarrow{[{}_{A}A/I_{A/I},U_{A/I}]}{}_{A/I}X/XI_{A/I}\rightarrow 0 0 → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_I italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_U start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → 0
is exact in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 superscript 𝖢 superscript subscript 𝖼𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝖺𝗂𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗀 \mathsf{C^{*}cor_{pair}^{reg}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_cor start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_pair end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_reg end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . And thus, the sequence
0 → → [ I ⊗ A 𝒪 X ] 𝒪 I X 𝒪 X → [ A / I ⊗ A / I 𝒪 X / X I ] 𝒪 X / X I → 0 0\rightarrow{}_{\mathcal{O}_{IX}}\xrightarrow{[I\otimes_{A}\mathcal{O}_{X}]}%
\mathcal{O}_{X}\xrightarrow{[A/I\otimes_{A/I}\mathcal{O}_{X/XI}]}\mathcal{O}_{%
X/XI}\rightarrow 0 0 → start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARROW start_OVERACCENT [ italic_A / italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] end_OVERACCENT → end_ARROW caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT → 0
is exact in 𝖢 ∗ 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 superscript 𝖢 subscript 𝖺𝗅𝗀 𝖼𝗈𝗋 \mathsf{C^{*}alg_{cor}} sansserif_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT sansserif_alg start_POSTSUBSCRIPT sansserif_cor end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .
This implies by Proposition 5.9 that ( I ⊗ A 𝒪 X ) 𝒪 X 𝒪 I X {}_{\mathcal{O}_{IX}}(I\otimes_{A}\mathcal{O}_{X})_{\mathcal{O}_{X}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a left-full Hilbert bimodule, which means ( I ⊗ A 𝒪 X ) ⟨ Υ ( I ) ⟩ 𝒪 I X {}_{\mathcal{O}_{IX}}(I\otimes_{A}\mathcal{O}_{X})_{\langle\Upsilon(I)\rangle} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ roman_Υ ( italic_I ) ⟩ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an imprimitivity bimodule, where (Υ , t Υ 𝑡
\Upsilon,t roman_Υ , italic_t ) is the universal covariant representation of X A A subscript subscript 𝑋 𝐴 𝐴 {}_{A}X_{A} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_X start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . Consequently, we have 𝒪 I X ≅ 𝒦 ( I ⊗ A 𝒪 X ) ≅ Υ ( I ) 𝒪 X Υ ( I ) subscript 𝒪 𝐼 𝑋 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝒪 𝑋 Υ 𝐼 subscript 𝒪 𝑋 Υ 𝐼 \mathcal{O}_{IX}\cong\mathcal{K}(I\otimes_{A}\mathcal{O}_{X})\cong\Upsilon(I)%
\mathcal{O}_{X}\Upsilon(I) caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_I italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≅ caligraphic_K ( italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≅ roman_Υ ( italic_I ) caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Υ ( italic_I ) . On the other hand, again by Proposition 5.9 , we know that ( A / I ⊗ A / I 𝒪 X / X I ) 𝒪 X / X I 𝒪 X / ⟨ Υ ( I ) ⟩ {}_{\mathcal{O}_{X}/\langle\Upsilon(I)\rangle}(A/I\otimes_{A/I}\mathcal{O}_{X/%
XI})_{\mathcal{O}_{X/XI}} start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ roman_Υ ( italic_I ) ⟩ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A / italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an imprimitivity bimodule. This allows us to conclude the isomorphism 𝒪 X / ⟨ Υ ( I ) ⟩ ≅ 𝒦 ( A / I ⊗ A / I 𝒪 X / X I ) ≅ 𝒪 X / X I subscript 𝒪 𝑋 delimited-⟨⟩ Υ 𝐼 𝒦 subscript tensor-product 𝐴 𝐼 𝐴 𝐼 subscript 𝒪 𝑋 𝑋 𝐼 subscript 𝒪 𝑋 𝑋 𝐼 \mathcal{O}_{X}/\langle\Upsilon(I)\rangle\cong\mathcal{K}(A/I\otimes_{A/I}%
\mathcal{O}_{X/XI})\cong\mathcal{O}_{X/XI} caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ roman_Υ ( italic_I ) ⟩ ≅ caligraphic_K ( italic_A / italic_I ⊗ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A / italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≅ caligraphic_O start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_X / italic_X italic_I end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .