arxiv: v1 [math.kt] 9 Jul 2018

Transcription

1 MOTIVIC TAMBARA FUNCTORS TOM BACHMANN arxiv: v1 [math.kt] 9 Jul 2018 Abstract. Let k be a ield and denote by SH(k) the motivic stable homotopy category. Recall its ull subcategory SH(k) e [2]. Write NAlg(SH(k)) or the category o Sm-normed spectra [7]; recall that there is a orgetul unctor U : NAlg(SH(k)) SH(k). Let NAlg(SH(k) e ) NAlg(SH(k)) denote the ull subcategory on normed spectra E such that UE SH(k) e. In this article we provide an explicit description o NAlg(SH(k) e ) as the category o eective homotopy modules with étale norms, at least i char(k) = 0. A weaker statement is available i k is ininite perect o characteristic > 2. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Background and notation 3 3. Motivic Tambara unctors o the irst kind 4 4. Motivic Tambara unctors o the second kind 7 5. Naive Motivic Tambara unctors Eective homotopy modules and sheaves with generalised transers Normed eective homotopy modules I: construction and basic properties Normed eective homotopy modules II: main theorem 16 Reerences Introduction Norms and normed spectra. In [7], we deined or every inite étale morphism : S S o schemes a symmetric monoidal unctor o symmetric monoidal -categories : SH(S ) SH(S). I S = S n and is the old map, then : SH(S ) SH(S) n SH(S) is the n-old smash product. These norm maps commute with arbitrary base change and assemble into a unctor SH : Span(Sch,all,ét) Ĉat,(X p Y Z) (SH(X) p SH(Z)). Here Span(Sch, all, ét) denotes the (2, 1)-category o spans in schemes, where the orward arrows are required to be inite étale [7, Appendix C]. The category NAlg(SH(S)) is deined as the category o sections o the restriction o SH to Span(Sm S,all,ét), cocartesian over backwards arrows [7, Section 7]. In other words, an object E NAlg(SH(S)) consists o or each X Sm S a spectrum E X SH(X), or morphism p : X Y Sm S an equivalence E X p E Y, or each inite étale morphism : U V Sm S a morphism p E U E V, and ininitely many coherences among these data. The orgetul unctor U : NAlg(SH(S)) SH(S),E E S is monadic [7, Proposition 7.6(2)] and in particular conservative. Consider the embedding φ : Fin Span(Fin,inj,all) Span(Fin,all,all) Span(Sm S,all,ét), where inj denotes the class o injections and Fin Sm S is given by X X S. This induces a unctor NAlg(SH(S)) CAlg(SH(S)) which is conservative, monadic and comonadic [7, Proposition 7.6(3)]. We thus we view the category o normed spectra NAlg(SH(S)) as an improvement o the category CAlg(SH(S)) o E -ring spectra. Eective homotopy modules. Recall the ininite suspension spectrum unctor Σ + : Sm S SH(S). Let SH(S) ve SH(S) be the ull subcategory generated under colimits and extensions by Σ + Sm S. We call this the category o very eective spectra. Also denote by SH(S) e SH(S) the localizing subcategory generated by Σ +Sm S ; this is the category o eective spectra. By standard results, SH(S) ve SH(S) e is the non-negative part o a t-structure on SH(S) e which is called the eective homotopy t-structure. We write SH(S) e or its heart and τ 0 e : SH(S)ve SH(S) e or the truncation unctor. Date: July 10,

2 2 TOM BACHMANN Note that i E SH(S) then we have the preshea π 0 (E) Ab(Sm S ),X [Σ + X,E]. Moreover, i : X Y Sm S is inite étale, then there is a canonical transer map tr : π 0 (E)(Y) π 0 (E)(X) [3, Section 4]. In what ollows, we will apply this in particular to E SH(S) e. Tambara unctors. We deine NAlg(SH(S) e ) NAlg(SH(S)) to be the ull subcategory on those E NAlg(SH(S)) such that UE SH(S) e. Now suppose that E NAlg(SH(S) e ). Then the preshea π 0 (E) Ab(Sm S ) acquires norm maps. In other words, i : X Y Sm S is inite étale, then there is an induced map N : π 0 (E)(X) π 0 (E)(Y). This is a map o sets, not abelian groups; in other words it is not additive. Instead, the maps N satisy a generalised distributivity condition related to the transers tr g [7, Corollary 7.21], making π 0 (E) into a so-called Tambara unctor [24] [5, Deinition 8]. Let us write T(S) or the category o eective homotopy modules E which are provided with norm maps on π 0 (E) Ab(Sm S ) in such a way that the distributivity condition is ulilled; see Deinition 1 or details. Then we have a actorisation π 0 : NAlg(SH(S) e ) T(S) Ab(Sm S ). Main results. For an additive category C and e Z >0, write C[1/e] or the ull subcategory on those objects E C such that E e E is an equivalence. For example, Ab(Sm S )[1/e] is the ull subcategory o Ab(Sm S ) consisting o those presheaves which are presheaves o Z[1/e]-modules. Write NAlg(SH(S) e )[1/e] or the ull subcategory on those objects E NAlg(SH(S) e ) such that UE SH(S) e [1/e]. Similarly or T(S)[1/e]. With these preliminaries out o the way, we can state our main results. Theorem (see Corollary 40). Let k be an ininite perect ield o exponential characteristic e 2. Then the restricted unctor NAlg(SH(k) e )[1/e] T(k)[1/e] is an equivalence o categories. Along the way, we establish the ollowing result o independent interest. To state it, recall the category ogeneralizedmotiviccomplexes DM(k) and the unctorm : SH(k) DM(k) [12]. Write DM(k) e or the localizing subcategory generated by MSH(k) e. Then DM(k), DM(k) e aord t-structures whose deinition is completely analogous to those on SH(k),SH(k) e. The unctors M : SH(k) DM(k) and M e : SH(k) e DM(k) e are right t-exact, and hence induce unctors on the hearts. We then have the ollowing result. Theorem (see Proposition29). Let k be an ininite perect ield, char(k) 2. Then the induced unctors and are equivalences o categories. M : SH(k) DM(k) M e : SH(k) e DM(k) e The irst hal o this result was established by other methods in [1]. The second hal o this result is particularly noticeable. The reason is that the heart DM(k) e has a very explicit description: it is equivalent to the category HI(k) o homotopy invariant Nisnevich sheaves with generalized transers. Putting these two results together, we obtain the ollowing. Corollary. The category NAlg(SH(k) e )[1/e] is equivalent to the category o homotopy invariant Nisnevich sheaves with generalised transers and inite étale norms distributing over the inite étale transers. Overview o the article. In Section 2 we introduce some standing assumptions and notation, beyond the notation already established in this introduction. In Section 3 we introduce a irst notion o motivic Tambara unctors, called motivic Tambara unctors o the irst kind. These are eective homotopy modules M HI 0 (k) together with or each inite étale map : X Y Sm k a norm map N : M(X) M(Y), such that the norms distribute over the inite étale transers in a suitable ashion. In the remainder o this section we establish basic structural properties o the category o motivic Tambara unctors o the irst kind. In Section 4 we introduce a second notion o motivic Tambara unctors, called motivic Tambara unctors o the second kind. These are eective homotopy modules M HI 0 (k) together with or every inite étale morphism : X Y Sm k and every smooth and quasi-projective morphism p : W X a norm map N,W : M(W) M(R (W)), where R (W) Sm Y denotes the Weil restriction o W along. The norms are again required to distribute over transers in a suitable ashion. Note that i

3 MOTIVIC TAMBARA FUNCTORS 3 p = id : X X, then R X X and so we obtain N,X : M(X) M(Y). In other words, any motivic Tambara unctor o the second kind naturally induces a motivic Tambara unctor o the irst kind. The main result o Section 4 is that this is an equivalence o categories. In Section 5, we introduce a third notion o motivic Tambara unctors, called naive motivic Tambara unctors. These are just sheaves o sets M Shv Nis (FEt S ), together with norm and transer maps or inite étale morphisms, satisying a suitable distributivity condition. Here FEt S denotes the category o inite étale S-schemes. This deinition is closest to Tambara s original deinition. Using Tambara s original result, we easily show that naive motivic Tambara unctors are well-behaved under group completion and localization. This is used at a key point in the proo o the main result. In Section 6 we study in more detail the category HI 0 (k). Using abstract categorical arguments, we show that i char(k) 2 then HI 0 (k) DM e (k). From this we deduce that or X Sm k, the eective homotopy module EX HI 0 (k) is, in a suitable sense, generated under transers and pullbacks by the maps Y X or Y Sm k. In Section 7 we introduce yet another notion o motivic Tambara unctors, called normed eective homotopy modules. This is just the category NAlg(SH(k) e ). We construct it more ormally, and establish some o its basic properties. Finally in Section 8 we put everything together and prove the main theorem. To do so we irst note that there is a canonical unctor ρ : NAlg(SH(k) e ) T 2 (k), where T 2 (k) denotes the category o motivic Tambara unctors o the second kind. This just arises rom the act that, by construction, i M NAlg(SH(k) e ) then M has certain norm maps, known to distribute over transers. Next, we observe that both NAlg(SH(k) e ) and T 2 (k) admit monadic orgetul unctors to the category HI 0 (k) o homotopy modules, and that ρ is compatible with these orgetul unctors. It is thus enough to prove that the induced morphism o monads is an isomorphism. This reduces to showing that i X Sm k and M denotes the ree normed eective homotopy module on EX, then M is also the ree motivic Tambara unctor o the second kind on EX. We do this by noting that there is an explicit ormula or M as a large colimit, coming rom the identiication o the ree normed spectrum unctor [7, Remark 16.25]. From this we can veriy the universal property o M as a motivic Tambara unctor o the second kind by an essentially elementary (but lengthy) computation. Use o -categories. Throughout, we reely use the language o -categories as set out in [18, 19]. Unless explicitly mentioned otherwise, all categories are -categories, all colimits are homotopy colimits, and so on. That being said, our main categories o interest are actually 1-categories(i.e. equivalent as - categories to the nerve o an ordinary category). In a 1-category, the -categorical notions o colimits etc. reduce to their classical counterparts; so in many parts o this article the traditional-sounding language indeed has the traditional meaning. Extension to inite ields. The only reason or restricting our results to ininite ields is that the reerence we use do the same. Employing systematically the techniques o [14, Appendix B], all the results we use, and hence all our results, can be extended to inite ields (still o characteristic 2). Acknowledgements. I would like to thank Marc Hoyois or teaching me essentially everything I know about -categories, extensive discussions on normed spectra, and several discussions regarding the results in this article. I would urther like to thank Maria Yakerson or comments on a drat. 2. Background and notation Throughout, k is an ininite perect ield. Recall that the objects Σ + X G n m SH(k), X Sm k,n Z generate the non-negative part o a t-structure, known as the homotopy t-structure [21, Section 5.2]. We write HI (k) SH(k) or the category o homotopy modules [21, Theorem 5.2]. The unctor i : SH(k) e SH(k) is ully aithul [2, Propositions 4 and 5]. We write HI 0 (k) HI (k) or its essential image, and call it the category o eective homotopy modules. I X Sm k then Σ + X SH(k)e 0, and we denote by EX HI 0(k) SH(k) e the truncation. For M HI 0 (k) and X Sm k we abbreviate Hom(EX,M) =: M(X). The unctor HI 0 (k) PSh(Sm k ),M (X M(X))actorsthroughShv Nis (Sm k ) and the induced unctor HI 0 (k) Shv Nis (Sm k ) is conservative and preserves limits and colimits (and also HI 0 (k) has all limits and colimits) [2, Proposition 5(3)]. Moreover, its image consists o unramiied sheaves [22, Lemma 6.4.4]. Throughout we will be working with ull subcategories C Sm k which contain Spec(k) and are closed under inite étale extensions (and so in particular inite coproducts). We also denote this condition by C ét Sch k.

4 4 TOM BACHMANN Recall that i : X Y Sm k is a inite étale morphism, then the unctor SmQP Y SmQP X,T T Y X has a right adjoint R called Weil restriction [8, Theorem 7.6.4]. Here SmQP X denotes the category o smooth and quasi-projective X-schemes. In particular i Z X is inite étale, then Z X is smooth and aine, so smooth and quasi-projective, so R Z exists. Recall that i : X Y Sm k is a inite étale morphism and M HI 0 (k), then there is a canonical transer morphism tr : M(X) M(Y). These transer morphisms are natural in M and [3, Section 4]. 3. Motivic Tambara unctors o the irst kind We now come to the most intuitive deinition o a motivic Tambara unctor as an eective homotopy module with norms. First recall the notion o an exponential diagram [5, Deinition 7]: given inite étale morphisms A q X Y in Sm k, the corresponding exponential diagram is X Y q A e X Y R A p R X R (q) R A. Here e is the X-morphism corresponding by adjunction to the identity R A R A, and p is the canonical projection. Deinition 1. Let C ét Sm k. A C-Tambara unctor o the irst kind consists o an eective homotopy module M HI 0 (k), together with or each : X Y C inite étale a map o sets N : M(X) M(Y) such that: (1) For X C we have N idx = id M(X) and i X Y g Z are inite étale morphisms in C, then N g = N g N. (2) Given a cartesian square X p Y p X Y with X,Y C and p inite étale, the ollowing diagram commutes M(X ) N p M(X) M(Y ) N p M(Y). (3) Given inite étale morphisms A q X Y in C, the ollowing diagram (induced by the corresponding exponential diagram) commutes M(X) N tr q M(A) e M(X Y R A) N p M(Y) M(R X) tr R (q) M(R A). A morphism φ : M 1 M 2 o C-Tambara unctors o the irst kind is a morphism o the underlying eective homotopy modules such that or every : X Y inite étale, the ollowing diagram commutes M 1 (X) N M 2 (Y) φ(x) M 2 (X) N φ(y) M 2 (Y). We denote the category o C-Tambara unctors o the irst kind by T 1 C (k), and we write U 1 : T 1 C (k) HI 0 (k) or the evident orgetul unctor.

5 MOTIVIC TAMBARA FUNCTORS 5 Remark 2. I : X Y C is an isomorphism, then condition (2) implies that N = ( ) 1. It ollows thus rom condition (1) that or : X Y C inite étale, the map N : M(X) M(Y) is invariant under automorphisms o X/Y. Remark 3. I M T 1 C (k) and X C, then the old map X X X induces M(X X) M(X) M(X) M(X)(the irst isomorphismbecause M is a shea). This operationis commutative by Remark 2. I : X is the unique map, then M( ) = (since M is a shea) and N ( ) M(X) is a unit o this multiplication on M(X) (this ollows rom condition (1)). Condition (3) implies that multiplication distributes over addition in M(X). For this reason we reer to condition (3) as the distributivity law. We thus see that M(X) is naturally a commutative ring. Condition (2) implies that M(X X) M(X) M(X) as rings, and condition (1) then implies that or : X Y inite étale, the map N : M(X) M(Y) is multiplicative. Remark 4. I C = FEt k, then the above deinition coincides with [5, Deinition 8]. Here is a basic structural property o the category o C-Tambara unctors o the irst kind: Lemma 5. The category T 1 C (k) is presentable and the orgetul unctor U 1 : T 1 C (k) HI 0(k) is a right adjoint. Proo. We irst construct an auxiliary category D. The objects o D are objects o C. For X,Y C, the morphisms rom X Y in D are given by equivalence classes o bispans, i.e. diagrams X g T 1 p T 2 Y, where and g are required to be inite étale. We shall identiy two bispans i they it into a commutative diagram 1 g 1 p 1 X T1 T2 Y a b X 2 T g 2 1 T p 2 2 Y with a,b isomorphisms. I : X Y C then we denote the bispan X id X id X Y by ρ. I : X Y C is inite étale, we denote the bispan X Y id Y id Y by τ and we denote the bispan X id X Y id Y by ν. Beore explaining composition in D, let us explain what the category D is supposed to do. We will have a unctor F : C D which is the identity on objects and sends : X Y to ρ. This induces F : PSh(D) PSh(C). The objects in PSh(D) are going to be presheaves with norm and transer in the ollowing sense. Let G : HI 0 (k) Shv Nis (Sm k ) PSh(C) denote the orgetul unctor. Then we have a cartesian square o 1-categories PSh(D) TC 1 (k) F U 1 PSh(C) G HI 0 (k). ThecategoryHI 0 (k)ispresentable,beinganaccessiblelocalizationothepresentablecategorysh(k) ve. The categories PSh(D) and PSh(C) are o course presentable. The unctor F has a let adjoint, given by let Kan extension. The unctor G also has a let adjoint. Indeed by deinition G actors as HI 0 (k) G1 Shv Nis (Sm k ) G2 PSh(Sm k ) G3 PSh(C). The unctor G 3 has a let adjoint given by let Kan extension, G 2 has a let adjoint given by taking the associated shea. To see that G 1 has a let adjoint consider the adjunction s : SH(Sm k ) Nis SH(k) e : g 1, where SH(Sm k ) Nis denotes the Nisnevich-local, S 1 -stable homotopy category (i.e. no A 1 -localization). By construction, g 1 is t-exact, so G 1 g 1 has a let adjoint, namely s. It ollows that F and G are morphisms in Pr R. Thus the square is also a pullback in Pr R [18, Theorem ], and in particular T 1 C (k) is presentable and U 1 is a right adjoint. It remains to inish the construction o D. The composition in D is determined by the ollowing properties: (1) i α = (X g p T 1 T2 Y) is a bispan, then α = ρp ν g τ. (2) i X Y g Z C, then ρ g = ρ g ρ. I,g are inite étale then τ g = τ τ g and ν g = ν ν g. (3) The τ and ν morphisms satisy the basechange law with respect to the ρ morphisms. (4) the distributivity law holds. For a more detailed construction o similar categories, see [23, Section 5, p. 24 and Proposition 6.1].

6 6 TOM BACHMANN We immediately deduce the ollowing. Corollary 6. The category TC 1 (k) has all limits and colimits. Recall now that i F is a preshea on a category D, then F extends uniquely to a preshea on Pro(D), the category o pro-objects. Moreover, consider the subcategory Sm ess k Sch k on those schemes which can be obtained as coiltered limits o smooth k-schemes along diagrams with aine transition morphisms. Then Sm ess k embeds into Pro(Sm k ) [16, Proposition ], and consequently or X Sm ess k the expression F(X) makes unambigious sense, unctorially in X. It ollows in particular that Deinition 1 makes sense more generally or C ét Sm ess k. Let C Sch. Write C sl or the subcategory o Sch on those schemes obtained as semilocalizations o schemes in C in initely many points. We write C ét,op Sch to mean that C ét Sch and C is closed under passage to open subschemes. A convenient property o the categorytc 1 (k) is that, in reasonablecases, it is invariant under replacing C by C sl : Proposition 7. Let C ét,op Sm k. Then C sl ét Sm ess k TC 1 (k) is an equivalence o categories. sl and the canonical orgetul unctor T 1 C (k) Proo. Let X C sl and : Y X inite étale. Then X is a coiltered limit along open immersions, so there exists a cartesian square Y X i V i U withu C,ianopenimmersionand initeétale[16, Théorèmes8.8.2(ii)and8.10.5(x),andProposition (ii)]. It ollows that V C, and Y is a coiltered limit (intersection) o open subschemes o V. Since Y X is inite, Y is semilocal, and so must be a semilocalization o V. This proves the irst claim. Note that TC 1(k) T1 C (k) is ull. Indeed i M sl 1,M 2 TC 1(k) and α : U 1M 1 U 1 M 2 is a morphism o the underlying homotopy modules, compatible with the norms on semilocal schemes, then it is compatible with the norms on generic points, and hence it is compatible with all norms, by Lemma 9 below. The unctor TC 1(k) T1 C (k) is also aithul, since U sl 1 : TC 1(k) HI 0(k) and U1 sl : T1 C (k) HI sl 0 (k) are. It remains to show that it is essentially surjective. Thus let M T 1 C (k). Let p : X Y C be inite étale. We need to construct a norm N sl p : M(X) M(Y). We may assume that Y is connected. Let η be the generic point o Y. We are given a norm map Np η : M(X η ) M(η). By unramiiedness, there is at most one map N p compatible with Np. η What we need to show is that Np η (M(X)) M(Y). In order to do this, by unramiiedness again, it suices to prove this or Y replaced by the various localizations o Y in its points o codimension one. But then Y is semilocal, so the result holds by assumption. It remains to show that these norms turn M into a C-motivic Tambara unctor o the irst kind. The base change ormula (i.e. condition (2) o Deinition 1) is satisied by construction. It implies using unramiiedness o M that it is enough to check conditions (1) and (3) when the base is a ield (use that Weil restriction commutes with arbitrary base change [11, Proposition A.5.2(1)]), in which case they hold by assumption. Remark 8. It ollows that i C 1,C 2 ét,op Sm k such that C sl 1 = Csl 2, then T1 C 1 (k) T 1 C 1 (k). This applies or example i C 1 = Sm k and C 2 = SmQP k. In the course o the proo o Proposition 7, we used the ollowing lemma o independent interest. Let C Sch. Write C gen or the ull subcategory o Sch consisting o the subschemes o generic points o schemes in C. Lemma 9. Let C ét,op Sm k. Then C gen ét Sm ess k. Let F,G T 1 C (k) and let α Hom HI 0 (k)(f,g) be a morphism o the underlying homotopy modules. I α Hom T 1 C gen(k)(f,g), then α Hom T 1 C (k)(f,g). I U 1 G HI 0 (k)[1/e] where e is the exponential characteristic o k, then the above criterion we may replace C gen by C gen,per, consisting o the perect closures o objects in C gen.

7 MOTIVIC TAMBARA FUNCTORS 7 Proo. The irst claim is proved exactly as in the proo o Lemma 7. Suppose given α with the claimed properties. We need to show that, i p : X Y C is inite étale, then the ollowing diagram commutes F(X) N p F(Y) α G(X) N p α G(Y). Let Y (0) denote the set o generic points o Y. Then G(Y) G(Y (0) ) is injective, by unramiiedness. The base change ormula thus allows us to assume that Y C gen. It ollows that X C gen, and so the diagram commutes by deinition. For the last claim, we use that i X C gen has perect closure X, then G(X) G(X ) is injective [4, Lemma 17]. Corollary 6 assures us that TC 1 (k) has all limits and colimits. In the inal part o this section, we wish to investigate how these limits and colimits are computed. We begin with the case o homotopy modules: Lemma 10. Let X Sm ess k. The unctor ev X : HI 0 (k) Ab,F F(X) preserves inite limits and iltered colimits. I X Sm sl k, then the unctor ev X preserves arbitrary colimits as well, whereas i X Sm k, it preserves arbirary limits. Proo. By [2, Proposition 5(3)], the unctor o : HI 0 (k) Shv Nis (Sm k ) preserves limits and colimits. Taking global sections o sheaves preserves limits, and inite limits commute with iltered colimits, so the claim about preservation o(inite) limits is clear. A iltered colimit o Nisnevich sheaves, computed in the category PSh(Sm k ), is still a Nisnevich shea, since Nisnevich sheaves are detected by the distinguished squares and iltered colimits commute with inite limits o sets. It ollows that ev X preserves iltered colimits (or any X). Since ev X preserves inite limits and our categories are abelian, ev X preserves inite sums. Now let X be semi-local. It remains to show that ev X preserves cokernels. Let α : F G HI 0 (k), let K = ker(α),c = cok(α),i = im(α) and consider the short exact sequences 0 K F I 0 and 0 I G C 0. It is enough to show that ev X preserves these exact sequences. Let 0 F G H 0 HI 0 (k) be an exact sequence. Then 0 o(f) o(g) o(h) 0 is exact, and hence to show that 0 F(X) G(X) H(X) 0 is exact it suices to show that HNis 1 (X,o(F)) = 0. This is proved in [6, Lemma 3.6] (note that o(f) has MW-transers, e.g. by Proposition 29). We can deduce the desired result. Corollary 11. Let C ét,op Sm k. Then U 1 : T 1 C (k) HI 0(k) preserves sited colimits. Proo. By Lemma 7, we may replace C by C sl. Let F : D T 1 C (k) be a sited diagram, and let sl C = colim D U 1 F. Note that the orgetul unctor Ab Set preserves sited colimits. Hence i X C sl then by Lemma 10 we ind that C(X) = colim D F( )(X), where the colimit is taken in the category o sets. In particular i : X Y C sl is inite étale, then there is a canonical induced norm N : C(X) C(Y). It is easy to check that C, together with these norms, deines an object o TC 1 (k) sl which is a colimit o F. This concludes the proo. 4. Motivic Tambara unctors o the second kind We now come to a second, somewhat more technical deinition o a category o motivic Tambara unctors. We will eventually show that in good cases, it coincides with the irst deinition. Deinition 12. I V Mor(Sm k ) is a class o smooth morphisms, then we call V admissible i it contains the inite étale morphisms and is closed under composition, base change, and Weil restriction along inite étale morphisms (i.e. i : X Y V and p : Y Z is inite étale, then R p (X) exists and R p () : R p (X) R p (Y) Z V). We call V and C ét Sm k compatible i or all : X Y C inite étale and all V X V we have R V C. Remark 13. The class o smooth quasi-projective morphisms is admissible. Since inite étale schemes are smooth quasi-projective, and Weil restriction preserves inite étale schemes (this ollows or example rom [8, Proposition 7.5.5]), we deduce that the class o inite étale morphisms is also admissible. Example 14. Note that the ollowing pairs (C,V) are compatible: (Sm k,smqp), (SmQP k,smqp), (FEt k,ét). However, (FEt k,smqp) is not compatible.

8 8 TOM BACHMANN Deinition 15. Let C ét Sm k and V Mor(Sm k ) admissible. A (C,V)-Tambara unctor o the second kind consists o an eective homotopy module M HI 0 (k), together with or each : X Y C inite étale and V X V a map o sets N,V : M(V) M(R V) such that the ollowing hold. (1) For X C and V X V, we have N idx,v = id M(V ). Moreover given X Y g Z C with,g inite étale we have N g,v = N g,r V N,V, under the canonical isomorphism R g V R g R V. (2) Consider a commutative diagram V 1 p 1 a V 2 p 2 X p Y p X Y in Sm k. Suppose that the lower square is cartesian, is inite étale, X,Y C and p 1,p 2 V. Then the ollowing diagram commutes M(V 1 ) N,V1 M(R V 1 ) a M(V 2 ) N,V2 c M(R V 2 ). Here c : R V 1 R V 2 corresponds by adjunction to a map R V 1 p R V 2 R p V 2, which comes via R rom a map V 1 p V 2, namely the one which corresponds by adjunction to a : V 1 V 2. (3) Consider a commutative diagram g X V 1 p 1 p 2 V 2 X Y in Sm k, with,g inite étale, X,Y C and p 1,p 2 V. Then the ollowing diagram commutes M(V 1 ) tr g N,V1 M(R V 1 ) tr R (g) M(V 2 ) N,V2 M(R V 2 ). A morphism φ : M 1 M 2 o (C,V)-Tambara unctors o the second kind is a morphism o the underlying eective homotopy modules such that or each : X Y C inite étale and V X V the ollowing diagram commutes M 1 (V) N,V M 1 (R V) φ(v) M 2 (V) N,V φ(r V) M 2 (R V). We denote the category o (C,V)-Tambara unctors o the second kind by T 2 C (k), and we write U 2 : T 2 C (k) HI 0(k) or the evident orgetul unctor. Observe that we suppress V rom the notation. We give a special name to some o the simplest norm maps on a motivic Tambara unctor o the second kind. Construction 16. Let M TC 2 (k), and : X Y C be inite étale. We deine N(1) : M(X) M(Y) as N (1) = N,X. Note that this makes sense, since id : X X V by assumption. In some sense, these special norms already determine all the norms:

9 MOTIVIC TAMBARA FUNCTORS 9 Lemma 17. Let C ét Sm k, V Mor(Sm k ) admissible, and assume that C,V are compatible. Let M T 2 C (k) and V p X Y C with p V and inite étale. Let : X Y R V R V be the projection and a : X Y R V V the counit. Then N,V = N (1) a : M(V) M(R V). Proo. Apply Deinition 15(2) to the diagram X Y R V a V p X Y R V X R V R (p) Y, noting that c = id. Note that this makes sense: we have R V C by the compatibility assumption, and then X Y R V C since C is closed under inite étale extension. We are now ready to prove our main result o this section. Proposition 18. Let C ét Sm k, V Mor(Sm k ) admissible, and assume that C,V are compatible. I M TC 2(k) then U 2M HI 0 (k) together with the norm maps N (1) o Construction 16 deines a C-motivic Tambara unctor o the irst kind. Moreover the induced unctor TC 2(k) T1 C (k) is an equivalence. Proo. Write F : TC 2(k) T1 C (k) or this (so ar hypothetical) unctor. Also deine a hypothetical unctor G : TC 1(k) T2 C (k) as ollows. Given M T1 C (k), : X Y C inite étale and V X V, consider the span R (V) X Y R (V) a V, where is the projection and a is the counit. Then we put N,V = N a : M(V) M(R (V)). I claim that (a) i M 2 TC 2(k) then FM 2 is indeed a C-motivic Tambara unctor o the irst kind, and that (b) i M 1 TC 1(k) then GM 1 is indeed a (C,V)-motivic Tambara unctor o the second kind. Suppose or now that this is true. It is then clear that F,G are unctors, i.e. send morphisms to morpisms. It ollows rom Lemma 17 that GFM 2 = M 2. Moreover FGM 1 = M 1 by construction. Hence F is an equivalence as claimed. It thus remains to establish (a) and (b). We begin with (a). Conditions (1) and (2) o Deinition 1 ollow respectively rom Deinition 15(1) (with V = X) and (2) (with p 1 = id and p 2 = id). For condition (3), we use that N (1) p e = N,A by Lemma 17, and hence the condition ollows rom Deinition 15(3) (with V 1 = A,V 2 = X). Note that A X V by assumption, since A X is inite étale. Now we establish (b) Hence let M TC 1 (k). Condition 15(1) about identities is clear. For the composition, let X Y g Z C be inite étale morphisms and V Y V. Consider the commutative diagram V V V a a X Z R g V X Y R V X p p Y Z R g V p a R V Y g R g V Z Z. The maps a are counit maps (use R g V R g R V), the maps p are projections (use X Z R g X Y (Y Z R g V)). By deinition N g,v is the composite N p N p a induced by the let column, whereas N g,r VN,V is the composite N p a N p a induced by (irst row, middle) to (second row, middle) to (third row, middle) to (third row, let) to (ourth row, let). The condition ollows rom Deinition 1(2), because the middle let square is cartesian.

10 10 TOM BACHMANN For condition (2), consider the diagram (1) M(V 2 ) a M(V 1 ) d M(Y Y R V 2 ) g e M(X X R V 1 ) N M(R V 2 ) c N M(R V 1 ). Here d,e are counit maps, N means norm along the canonical projections, and g : X X R V 1 Y Y R V 2 ) corresponds by adjunction to a morphism X X R V 1 = R V 1 p R V 2 = p R V 1, namely the morphism c. We note that the ollowing square is cartesian X X R V 1 Y Y R V 2 R V 1 g c R V 2, where the vertical morphisms are the canonical projections. It ollows rom Deinition 1(2) that the right hand square in diagram (1) commutes. Moreover the ollowing square commutes X X R V 1 Y Y R V 2 e d V 1 g a V 2, and hence the let hand square in diagram (1) commutes. It ollows that the outer rectangle also commutes, which is what we needed to show. For condition (3), consider the ollowing commutative diagram in which all rectangles are cartesian (2) q V 1 g V 2 a X Y R V 1 C X Y R V 2 X r r R V 1 R V 1 R V 2 Y. Here r,r are the canonical projections, a is the counit map, and q is induced by the universal property o C rom the counit map X Y R V 1 V 1 and X Y R (g) : X Y R V 1 X Y R V 2. I claim that the canonically induced map R r C R V 1 is an isomorphism. In order to do this, let T Sch R V 2. We compute [T,R C] R V 2 = [r T,C] X Y R V 2 = [r T,V 1 ] V2. Here [...] X denotes the morphisms o X-schemes, and r : Sch R V 2 Sch X Y R V 2 is the base change unctor. The irst isomorphism is by deinition (o Weil restriction), and the second is because the top square in diagram (2) is cartesian. Here we view r T as a scheme over V 2 via a. We also have [T,R V 1 ] R V 2 = [ T,V 1 ] V2, where on the right hand side we view T as a scheme over Y via the canonical map R V 2 Y. It remains to observe that T = r T, because the lower right hand square in diagram (2) is cartesian. With this preparation out o the way, consider the diagram M(R r C) tr M(R V 2 ) N M(r R r C) M(C) M(V 1 ) tr tr N M(X Y R V 2 ) M(X Y R V 2 ) M(V 2 ). The unlabelled arrows are restriction along some canonical map, the arrows labelled tr are transer along some canonical map, and the arrows labelled N are norm along some canonical map. The right hand square commutes by the base change ormula, and the let hand rectangle commutes by the distributivity law (i.e. Deinition 1(3)). The top composite is N,V1 (using that R r C = R V 1, as established above, and r R r C = R V 1, by transitivity o base change) and the bottom composite is N,V2, so commutativity is precisely condition (3). This concludes the proo.

11 MOTIVIC TAMBARA FUNCTORS Naive Motivic Tambara unctors Throughout this section, k is an arbitrary base scheme. In particular it is not necessarily a ield, unless otherwise speciied. Recall the ollowing very naive deinition o a motivic Tambara unctor [5, Deinition 8]. It is closest to Tambara s original deinition. Deinition 19. Let k be some base scheme. A naive motivic Tambara unctor over k is a (Zariski) shea o sets M on FEt k, provided with or every (necessarily inite étale) morphism : X Y FEt k two urther maps o sets tr,n : M(X) M(Y), such that the ollowing conditions hold: (1) tr idx = N idx = id M(X) and i X Y g Z FEt k, then tr g = tr g tr and N g = N g N. (2) tr and N satisy the base change ormula. (For N this is the condition (2) o Deinition 1, with C = FEt k. For tr the condition is the same, just with tr in place o N everywhere.) (3) The distributivity law holds (in the sense o Deinition 1(3)). The morphisms o naive motivic Tambara unctors are morphisms o presheaves o sets which commute with the norms and transers. We write T naive (k) or the category o naive motivic Tambara unctors. The condition that M is a shea just means that the canonical map M(X Y) M(X) M(Y) is an isomorphism, and that M( ) =. By considering transer and norm along X X X, the set M(X) acquires two binary operations + and. Considering t : X, we have elements 0 = tr t ( ) and 1 = N t ( ) which are units or the two binary operations. By condition (3), distributes over +. Consequently, M is canonically a shea o semirings. As beore, the conditions imply that is a homomorphism o semirings, tr is a homomorphism o additive monoids, and N is a homomorphism o multiplicative monoids. Let us note the ollowing consequence o the axioms. Lemma 20 (projection ormula). Let M T naive (k) and g : X Y FEt k. Then or a M(X),b M(Y) we have tr g (a g b) = tr g (a) b. Proo. ThisollowsromthedistributivitylawappliedtotheexponentialdiagramgeneratedbyX Y g id Y Y Y Y, where is the old map, using the (easy) computation that R (X Y) X. Deinition 21. We say that M T naive (k) is group-complete i the abelian semigroup (M(X),+) is an abelian group or all X FEt k. We write Tgc naive (k) or the ull subcategory o group-complete unctors. Theorem 22 (Tambara). Let k be a connected scheme. The inclusion Tgc naive (k) T naive (k) has a let adjoint M M +, which satisies M + (X) = M(X) +, where M(X) + denotes the usual group-completion o the abelian semigroup (M(X),+). Proo. A naive motivic Tambara unctor is essentially the same as a semi-tnr unctor in the sense o Tambara [24, Section 2], or the proinite group G = Gal(k). Tambara only treats inite groups, but the extension to proinite groups is immediate. We spell out the details. Let L/k be a inite Galois extension with group G. Then the category Fin G o inite G-sets is a ull subcategory o FEt k, by Grothendieck s Galois theory. The restriction M FinG deines a semi-tnr unctor. It ollows rom [24, Theorem 6.1 and Proposition 6.2] that M + FinG has a unique structure o a TNR-unctor such that the canonical map (M M + ) FinG is a morphism o semi-tnr unctors, and that M + FinG is the universal map rom M FinG to a TNR-unctor. Now suppose that L /L/k is a bigger Galois extension, with group G. Then (M FinG ) FinG = M FinG and consequently the norms on M + FinG obtained by the above remark, when urther restricted to Fin G, coincide with the norms obtained on M + FinG directly. Now let : X Y FEt k. Then there exists a inite Galois extension L/k with group G such that is in the image o Fin G FEt k, and hence we obtain a norm map N. By the above remark, extending L does not change this norm, so in particular N is well-deined independent o the choice o L. This deines the structure o a naive motivic Tambara unctor on M +, since all the required conditions can be checked ater restriction to Fin G or varying G. Let A Tgc naive (k) and F : M A be any morphism o Tambara unctors. Then there is a unique morphism o sheaves o additive abelian groups F + : M + A. It remains to show that F + is a morphism o Tambara unctors, i.e. preserves norms. This can be checked on F + FinG or varying G, where it holds by Tambara s result. This concludes the proo. Let us also include or the convenience o the reader a proo o the ollowing well-known act.

12 12 TOM BACHMANN Lemma 23. Let A be an abelian group and A 0 A an abelian semigroup which generates A as an abelian group. Then the induced map A + 0 A is an isomorphism. Proo. It suices to veriy the universal property. Thus let B be an abelian group. I : A B is a homomorphism and a A, then there exist a 1,a 2 A 0 with a = a 1 a 2. Consequently (a) = (a 1 ) (a 2 ) and Hom(A,B) Hom(A 0,B) is injective. To provethat Hom(A,B) Hom(A 0,B) is surjective, let 0 Hom(A 0,B). Given a A, pick a 1,a 2 A 0 with a = a 1 a 2, and put (a) = 0 (a 1 ) 0 (a 2 ). I claimthatthis isindependent othechoices. Indeedia 1,a 2 A 0 witha 1 a 2 = a, thena 1+a 2 = a 1 +a 2, and hence 0 (a 1 )+ 0 (a 2) = 0 (a 1 +a 2) = 0 (a 1 +a 2 ) = 0 (a 1)+ 0 (a 2 ), which implies the claim. From this it easily ollows that Hom(A,B). This concludes the proo. We now investigate the localization o Tambara unctors. Lemma 24. Let k be a connected scheme and : X Y FEt k. Suppose M T naive gc (k) and n > 0. Then N (n 1 M(X) ) (M(Y)[1/n]). Proo. Via Grothendieck s Galois theory, we reduce to the analogous statement or TNR-unctors or some inite group G. It is known that this category is symmetric monoidal, with initial object the Burnside ring unctor A. It is thus enough to prove this result or A, which is done in [7, Lemma 12.9]. Corollary 25. Let Tgc naive (k)[1/n] denote the ull subcategory o Tgc naive (k) on those unctors M such that n M(X) or all X FEt k. Then the inclusion Tgc naive (k)[1/n] Tgc naive (k) has a let adjoint M M[1/n], such that or X FEt k we have M[1/n](X) = M(X)[1/n]. Proo. We wish to make M[1/n] into a Tambara unctor by deining N(x/n k ) = N(x)/N(n) k (and tr(x/n k ) = tr(x)/n k, and similarly or pullback). By Lemma 24, this is well-deined. In order to check that this is a Tambara unctor, the only diiculty is to check that the distributivity law remains valid. Let : X Y FEt k. Note that that or a M(X),b M(Y) we have tr (a/n k (b/n l )) = tr (a (b))/n k+l = tr (a)b/n k+l = tr (a/n k )b/n l by deinition and Lemma 20, i.e. the projection ormula still holds or M[1/n]. Now let A q X Y FEt k generate an exponential diagram, and x M(A). We have N (tr q (x/n k )) = N (tr q (x)/n k ) = N (tr q (x))/n (n k ). Since M satisies the distributivity law, this is the same as (tr R (q)n p e (x))/n (n k ). Since M[1/n] satisies the projection ormula (as noted above), it remains to show that N p (n k ) = R (q) N (n k ). This ollows rom the base change ormula. It is clear that the canonical map M M[1/n] is a morphism o Tambara unctors, which is the initial morphism to an object o Tgc naive (k)[1/n]. This concludes the proo. Our main reason or studying naive motivic Tambara unctors is that they can be obtained by restriction rom motivic Tambara unctors o the irst kind. Indeed let k be a ield again and M TC 1 (k). Let X C. Then FEt X C and by restriction we obtain M FEtX T naive (k). This observation allows us to reduce the ollowing Corollary to results about naive motivic Tambara unctors. Corollary 26. Let C ét Sm k (where k is again a perect ield), and assume that C is closed under passing to summands (i.e. i X Y C then also X C). For n > 0 denote by TC 1 (k)[1/n] the ull subcategory on those M such that U 1 M HI 0 (k)[1/n]. Then the inclusion TC 1(k)[1/n] T1 C (k) has a let adjoint M M[1/n] which satisies U 1 (M[1/n]) (U 1 M)[1/n]. Proo. As in the proo o Corollary 25, the only diiculty is in extending the norms to M[1/n] and checking the distributivity law. We need to prove that i : X Y C is inite étale, then N (n 1 M(X) ) (M(Y)[1/n]). Since M is a shea and C is closed under passing to summands, we may assume that Y is connected. In this case the result ollows rom Lemma 24 applied to M FEtY. Now to veriy the distributivity law, we may again restrict to Y connected, whence this ollows rom Corollary 25, again applied to M FEtY. 6. Eective homotopy modules and sheaves with generalised transers In this section we provide a more explicit description o the category HI 0 (k) o eective homotopy modules. A similar result (in the non-eective case) was obtained by dierent means in [1, Theorem 9.11]. We begin with some abstract preparation. Lemma 27. Let C be a stable, presentably symmetric monoidal -category. Suppose given an accessible t-structure on C such that that C 0 C 0 C 0. Let A CAlg(C 0 ). Then:

13 MOTIVIC TAMBARA FUNCTORS 13 (1) The -category A-Mod has a unique t-structure such that U : A-Mod C is t-exact. This t-structure is accessible. (2) I π 0 (½) π 0 (A) is an isomorphism (in C ), then U : A-Mod C is an equivalence. Proo. The t-structure is unique i it exists, since U is conservative. We show existence. Since the t-structure on C is accessible, C 0 is presentable, and hence there exists a set o objects P C 0 generating C 0 under colimits. Denote by F : C A-Mod the let adjoint o U and write A-Mod 0 or the ull subcategory o A-Mod generated under colimits and extensions by FP. Then A-Mod 0 is the non-negative part o an accessible t-structure on A-Mod [19, Proposition ]. It remains to show that U is t-exact. By construction F is right t-exact, so U is let t-exact. We thus need to show that U(A-Mod 0 ) C 0. Since U preserves colimits [19, Corollary ] and extensions, or this it is enough to show that UFP C 0. But or X P we have UFX = X A C 0 by assumption. This proves (1). To prove (2), consider the induced adjunction F : C A-Mod : U. Since U is t-exact and conservative, we need only show that or X C the canonical map X UF X = (UFX) 0 is an equivalence. We have the triangle A >0 A A 0 giving us X A >0 X A = UFX X A 0. By assumption, X A >0 C >0 and hence (UFX) 0 (X A 0 ) 0. But by assumption A 0 ½ 0, and so reversing the steps with ½ in place o A we deduce that (X ½ 0 ) 0 (X ½) 0 X. This concludes the proo. We recall also the ollowing well-known result. Lemma 28. Let F : C D be a symmetric monoidal unctor o stable, compact-rigidly generated, presentably symmetric monoidal -categories. Assume that F preserves colimits and has dense image. Then F has a lax symmetric monoidal right adjoint U, so U(½ D ) CAlg(C), and U induces an equivalence D U(½ D )-Mod. We note that i F : C D is a symmetric monoidal unctor between stable, presentably symmetric monoidal -categories which preserves colimits and has dense image, and C is compact-rigidly generated, then D is compact-rigidly generated as soon as ½ D is compact. Proo. TheexistenceoU ollowsromtheadjointunctortheorem,andtheactorizationd U(½ D )-Mod is also obtained by abstract nonsense [20, Construction 5.23]. Note that U(½ D )-Mod satisies the same assumptions as C. In other words we may assume that U½ ½. Now apply [4, Lemma 21]. Recall the category o presheaves with generalised transers [10, Section 4]. We write HI(k) or the category o homotopy invariant Nisnevich sheaves with generalised transers. Recall also the canonical equivalence HI(k) DM e (k) rom [12, Corollary ]. Now we come to our identiication result or the category o eective homotopy modules. Proposition 29. Let k be an ininite perect ield, char(k) 2. The adjunction M : SH(k) DM(k) : U induces an equivalence SH(k) DM(k) identiying the ull subcategories SH(k) e and DM e (k). In particular is an equivalence. M e : HI 0 (k) SH(k) e DM e (k) HI(k) Proo. We irst prove that M : SH(k) DM(k) : U is an adjoint equivalence. Since U is conservative, it suices to show that or E SH(k) the canonical map α : E U M E is an equivalence. Since 2 e, it suices to prove that α[1/2] and α[1/e] are equivalences. Recall that U(½) SH(k) 0 and ½ U(½) induces ½ 0 U(½) 0. This ollows rom the main result in [9], and the cancellation theorem or DM [15]. Under our assumptions, SH(S)[1/e] is compactrigidly generated [17, Corollary B.2], and hence so is DM(k, Z[1/e]) (being compactly generated by [12, Proposition ] and the cancellation theorem). It hence ollows rom Lemma 28 that DM(k, Z[1/e]) is equivalent to the category o modules over U(½)[1/e], and hence DM(k) [1/e] SH(k) [1/e] by Lemma 27. It ollows that α[1/e] is an equivalence. Now consider α[1/2]. I e = 1 then α[1/2] is an equivalence, since α = α[1/e] is. Thus we may assume that e > 1. In this case W(k)[1/2] = 0, so SH(k)[1/2] = SH(k) + and similarly DM(k)[1/2] = DM(k) + DM(k) [12, Theorem 5.0.2]. The unctor DM(k) SH(k) is ully aithul with essential

14 14 TOM BACHMANN image the subcategory SH(k),η=0 o those objects on which the motivic Hop element η acts as zero [13]. Consequently M U E[1/2] + = E[1/2] + /η = E[1/2] +, and so α[1/2] = α[1/2] + is an equivalence. We have thus shown that α is an equivalence. The adjunction i : SH(k) e SH(k) : 0 induces i : SH(k) e SH(k) : 0, and i is ully aithul [2, Proposition 5(2)]. The same argument applies to DM. The diagram M e SH(k) e DM e (k) i i SH(k) M DM(k) commutes (by deinition), and hence so does the induced diagram e Me SH(k) DM e (k) i i SH(k) M DM(k). It ollows that M maps the ull subcategory SH(k) e o SH(k) into the ull subcategory DM e (k) o DM(k). Since DM e (k) isgeneratedundercolimitsbythe(truncated)motivesovarietiesandm is an equivalence, so preserves subcategories closed under colimits, we conclude that M (SH(k) e ) = DM e (k). In other words, M,e is essentially surjective. This concludes the proo. Remark 30. Note that we do not claim that the inverse o M e : SH(k) e DM e (k) is given by U e. Indeed the author does not know i U( DM e (k)) SH(k) e. This is true ater inverting the exponential characteristic, by [6, Corollary 5.1 and Lemma 5.3]. The ollowing corollary is the main reason we need the above result. It allows us to write down generators or the abelian group (EX)(K). Corollary 31. Let k be an ininite perect ield o exponential characteristic e 2. Let K/k be a ield extension and X Sm k and assume that K is perect. Then (EX)(K) is generated as an abelian group by expressions o the orm tr g id X, where id X (EX)(X) corresponds to the identity morphism, : Spec(L) Spec(K) is a inite (hence separable) ield extension, and g : Spec(L) X is any morphism. Proo. Since our categories are additive, we may assume that X is connected. By Proposition 29, it is enough to prove the claim or h 0 (MX), where M : Sm k DM e (k) is the canonical unctor. By [12, Corollary ] we have MX = L Nis Sing a Nis c(x). Consequently h 0 (MX)(K) is a quotient o c(x)(k) = Hom Cork (K,X). By [10, Example 4.5], up to non-canonical isomorphism we have Hom Cork (K,X) x (X K) (0) GW(K(x)), where (X K ) (0) is the set o closed points. The class α Hom Cor k (K,X) corresponding to an element a GW(K(x)) and : Spec(K(x)) X is α = tr K(x)/K (u x a id X ), where u x GW(K(x)) is some unit relecting the non-canonicity o the above isomorphism. Since char(k) 2, GW(K(x)) is generated as an abelian group by elements o the orm tr L/K(x) (1) with L/K(x) inite separable [5, paragraph beore Proposition 22]. It ollows rom this and the base change ormula [3, Proposition 10] that h 0 (MX) is generated by elements o the orm tr K(x)/K (tr L/K(x) (1) id X ) = tr K(x)/K tr L/K(x) ((Spec(L) Spec(K(x))) id X ), as needed. This concludes the proo. 7. Normed eective homotopy modules I: construction and basic properties In this section we construct a inal category o motivic Tambara unctors, this time as a category o normed spectra.

15 MOTIVIC TAMBARA FUNCTORS 15 TheunctorSH : Span(Sch,all,ét) Ĉat,X SH(S)hasaullsubunctorSH ve : Span(Sch,all,ét) Ĉat,X SH(X) ve. Moreover there is a natural transormation τ e 0 : SHve SH e,sh(x) ve E τ e (E) SH(X)e o unctors on Span(Sch, all, ét). This is constructed in [7, beore Proposition 13.3]. Proposition 32. Let : Y X Sch. The unctors, # or smooth and or inite étale preserve SH( ) ve. Proo. The claims about and are already implicit in the existence o SH ve. Since # preserves colimits (and hence extensions), it is enough to show that # Σ + U SH(X)ve or U Sm Y, which is clear. Proposition 33. Let : Y X Sch. I is smooth, the unctor : SH(Y) e SH(X) e has a let adjoint still denoted #. The unctors τ e 0 : SH( )ve SH( ) e commute with, with # or smooth, and with or inite étale. Proo. Thestatementsabout and arealreadyimplicitintheexistenceothenaturaltransormation τ 0 e o unctors on Span(Sch,all,ét). The unctor # : SH(X) ve SH(Y) ve preserves the subcategory SH( ) e 1. By adjunction it ollows that : SH(Y) ve SH(X) ve preserves SH( ) e. From this it is easy to check directly that the composite 0 SH(Y) e SH(Y) ve # SH(X) is let adjoint to : SH(Y) e SH(X) e. τe ve 0 SH(X) e Deinition 34. Let C ét Sch S. We denote the ull subcategory o NAlg C (SH) consisting o those normed spectra with underlying spectrum in SH(S) e by NAlg C (SH(S) e ) and call it the category o C-normed eective homotopy modules. I S = Spec(k) is the spectrum o a ield, so SH(S) e HI 0 (k), then we also denote NAlg C (SH(S) e ) by NAlg C (HI 0 (k)). Lemma 35. The unctor U : NAlg C (HI 0 (S)) HI 0 (S) preserves limits and sited colimits. I C = SmQP S, U has a let adjoint F which satisies UFE colim : X S p: Y X τ e 0 #p (E Y ). Here the colimit is over the source o the cartesian ibration classiied by SmQP op S S, X FEt X. Moreover or ( : X S,p : Y X), the corresponding map τ e 0 #p (E Y ) UFE is induced by the composite # p E Y # p (UFE) Y # (UFE) X UFE, where the irst map is induced by the unit map E UFE, the second map is induced by the multiplication p (FE) Y (FE) X, and the third map is a co-unit map. Proo. The claim about limits and colimits ollows rom [7, Remark 7.7], using Proposition 33. The unctor NAlg SmQPS (SH) SH(S) has a let adjoint F given by the same colimit as in the claim, but without the τ 0 e [7, Remark 16.25]. I E SH(S)ve then U FE SH(S) ve, since the latter category is closed under colimits and # p g by Proposition 32. Hence the restriction F : SH(S) ve NAlg(SH(S) ve ) is let adjoint to NAlg(SH(S) ve ) SH(S) ve. By [7, Proposition 13.3], the inclusion NAlg(SH(S) e ) NAlg(SH ve (S)) has a let adjoint pointwise given by τ 0 e. Since τe 0 preserves colimits and commutes with # p g by Proposition 33, the result ollows. Remark 36. Under the conditions o Lemma 35, the category NAlg C (SH(S) e ) is monadic over the 1-category SH(S) e, and hence a 1-category. Remark 37. The indexing category in the colimit o Lemma 35 is in act a 1-category, since it comes rom a 1-category ibered in 1-groupoids.