Mathematics Atlas

How Proof Is Made
Sign In
Text size
100%
Theme
Conjecture

Weibel's Conjecture

Algebra

Weibel's conjecture, proposed by Charles Weibel in 1980, gives a criterion for the vanishing of negative algebraic K-theory groups. It was proven in full generality by Moritz Kerz, Florian Strunk and Georg Tamme in 2018 using methods from derived algebraic geometry, after partial cases had been established by several other mathematicians over the preceding decade.

Facts
Statement
For a Noetherian scheme X of finite Krull dimension d, the algebraic K-groups of X vanish in degrees less than negative d, and the negative K-groups satisfy a homotopy invariance property, meaning the K-group in degree i of X equals the K-group in degree i of X times affine r-space for every i less than or equal to negative d. 1
Proposed Year
1980 1
Progress Toward Resolution
The conjecture was proven in full generality in 2018 by Moritz Kerz, Florian Strunk and Georg Tamme using methods from derived algebraic geometry, after partial cases had been established earlier by Haesemeyer in 2004, Cortinas and coauthors in 2008, Geisser and Hesselholt in 2010, Cisinski in 2013, Kelly in 2014 and Morrow in 2016. 1
Classification
Resolution Status
Proven 1
Chronology
Resolved Year
2018 1
Prize Status
Prize Status (category)
No Prize Offered 1
Sources
1. Weibel's Conjecture (Wikipedia)
  • Statement of the conjecture section
    Weibel's conjecture asserts that for a Noetherian scheme X of finite Krull dimension d, the K-groups vanish in degrees < -d
  • Introduction section, attribution sentence
    The conjecture was proposed by Weibel (1980) and proven in full generality by Kerz, Strunk & Tamme (2018) using methods from derived algebraic geometry.
  • Introduction section, resolution sentence
    proven in full generality by Kerz, Strunk & Tamme (2018) using methods from derived algebraic geometry
  • Lead section
View the Source
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.