2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2020.06.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A remark on connective K-theory

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…induced by the inclusion M n−i+1 (X) ⊂ M (X); for i ≤ 2 the map ψ i X is an isomorphism [Kar20,Remark A.6]. In general, if we identify K(X) = G(X) by the canonical map, then the K(X)-module structure on CK i (X) is related to the ring structure of CK(X) via ψ i X .…”
Section: Connective K-theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…induced by the inclusion M n−i+1 (X) ⊂ M (X); for i ≤ 2 the map ψ i X is an isomorphism [Kar20,Remark A.6]. In general, if we identify K(X) = G(X) by the canonical map, then the K(X)-module structure on CK i (X) is related to the ring structure of CK(X) via ψ i X .…”
Section: Connective K-theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By [12,Theorem 3.1], the statement of Conjecture 1.2 for a given G is equivalent to absence of torsion in the connective K-theory of X. Also note that by [8,Lemma 4.2], Conjecture 1.2 is equivalent to the same statement with the Borel subgroups replaced by any conjugacy class of special parabolic subgroups in G, where an algebraic group P is called special if any P -torsor over any base field extension is trivial.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%