text:
# Symmetries of Kirchberg algebras

## 1. Introduction

Following Definition 4.3.1 of Part 1 of , we use the term Kirchberg algebra for a purely infinite simple separable nuclear C\*-algebra. In this paper, we prove that any order two automorphism of the K-theory of a unital Kirchberg algebra $`A`$ satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem, and with $`[1_A]=0`$ in $`K_0(A)`$, lifts to an order two automorphism of $`A`$.

Recall the classification theorem for unital Kirchberg algebras satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem (; Theorem 4.2.4 of ): if $`A`$ and $`B`$ are such algebras, and if $`\theta :K_{}(A)K_{}(B)`$ is a graded isomorphism such that $`\theta ([1_A])=[1_B]`$, then there is an isomorphism $`\phi :AB`$ such that $`\phi _{}=\theta `$. The statement also holds with “isomorphism” replaced by “homomorphism” everywhere (; in  see Theorem 4.1.3 and the proofs of Corollary 4.4.2 and Theorem 4.2.4). Moreover, every pair of countable abelian groups occurs as the K-theory of a unital Kirchberg algebra satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem, and the $`K_0`$-class of the identity can be arbitrary (Section 4.4 in Part 1 of  or Theorem 5.2 of ). Thus, the classification functor is surjective on isomorphism classes in this case.

George Elliott has asked to what extent this functor “splits”, in the same sense in which a surjection between abelian groups might (or might not) split. That is: How close can one come to constructing a functor $`F`$, from the values of the invariant, to Kirchberg algebras satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem, such that $`K_{}(F(G_{}))G_{}`$, etc.? One can’t do this exactly. (See Example 1.1 below.) We may then ask for some weaker sort of splitting, or we can try to eliminate the problem by reducing the number of morphisms in the categories. The question we consider here, of lifting finite order automorphisms of the K-theory to automorphisms of the algebra of the same order, is a special case of what one gets by restricting the morphisms to be isomorphisms.

Our method is to find, for given countable abelian groups $`G_i`$ and order two automorphisms $`\gamma _i`$, some separable nuclear C\*-algebra $`A_0`$ whose K-theory is $`G_{}`$ and some order two automorphism $`\alpha _0`$ of $`A_0`$ which lifts the $`\gamma _i`$. In fact, $`A_0`$ will be type I. Then we apply the construction of  to get a Kirchberg algebra with the same properties. To construct $`A_0`$, we regard $`G_{}`$ as a module over the group ring $`[_2]`$. (Throughout this paper, $`_p`$ denotes $`/p`$, not the $`p`$-adic integers.) Generalizing an old result for the finitely generated case (see Lemma 1 of ), we prove that every $`[_2]`$-module which is free as a $``$-module has a direct sum decomposition with only three kinds of summands, namely $`[_2]`$ itself and $``$ on which the nontrivial element of $`_2`$ acts either trivially or by multiplication by $`1`$. (Butler and Kovács have also obtained similar results, by slightly different methods ; a more general result is to appear in .) We produce $`A_0`$ by combining this structure theorem with part of Schochet’s geometric realization technique from .

We want to explicitly point out that the K-theory of a C\*-algebra $`A`$ with an action of $`_2`$, regarded as a $`[_2]`$-module, is not the same as the $`_2`$-equivariant K-theory of $`A`$, regarded as a module over the representation ring $`R(_2)[_2]`$. It is, however, the same as the $`_2`$-equivariant K-theory of $`C^{}(_2,A)`$, using the dual action. (Compare with Lemma 4.4.) Thus, as a corollary of our construction we obtain a realization theorem, Theorem 4.7, for $`R(_2)`$-modules as the equivariant K-theory of actions of $`_2`$ on Kirchberg algebras. There is also a version for type I C\*-algebras.

The first author would like to thank the MSRI for its hospitality while this work was in progress. The second and third authors would like to thank the organizers of the conference “Aperiodic Order, Dynamical Systems, Operator Algebras, and Topology”, during which valuable discussions were held. The third author would like to acknowledge the hospitality of the Mathematisches Forschungsinstitut Oberwolfach, where Elliott’s raised his question and where Example 5.1 was constructed, and of the University of Georgia for its invitation for a visit in the spring of 2002.

This paper is organized as follows. In the rest of this section, we demonstrate the failure of the classification functor to split. In Section 2 we prove a structure theorem for $`[_2]`$-modules which are free as $``$-modules. In Section 3 we prove the weak form of realization, using some type I C\*-algebra with the right K-theory. In Section 4 we prove the main result, and also the realization theorems for $`_2`$-equivariant K-theory. Section 5 contains an explicit formula for the order two automorphism in the simplest nontrivial case of our theorem, namely the nontrivial automorphism of $`K_{}(M_3(𝒪_4))`$.

Here is the example which shows that the most obvious sort of splitting of the classification functor is not possible.

###### Example 1.1.

There is no functor $`F`$, from the category of $`_2`$-graded abelian groups $`G_{}`$ with distinguished element $`g`$ in degree zero and graded homomorphisms preserving the distinguished elements, to the category of unital Kirchberg algebras satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem of  and unital homomorphisms, such that $`K_{}(F(G_{},g))G_{}`$ with $`[1_{F(G_{},g)}]g`$ for all $`G_{}`$ and $`g`$, and such that the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}K_{}(F(G_{},g))& \stackrel{F(\theta )_{}}{}& K_{}(F(H_{},h))\\ & & & & \\ G_{}& \stackrel{\theta }{}& H_{}\end{array}$$

commutes whenever $`\theta :G_{}H_{}`$ is a graded homomorphism such that $`\theta (g)=h`$.

Suppose we had such a functor. Take

$$G_0=0,G_1=0,H_0=,\text{and}H_1=0.$$

Take $`g=0`$ and $`h=0`$. Let $`\theta :G_{}H_{}`$ and $`\rho :H_{}G_{}`$ be the unique homomorphisms between these groups. Then $`\rho \theta =\mathrm{id}_G_{}`$. Therefore, using functoriality,

$$F(\rho )F(\theta )=F(\rho \theta )=F(\mathrm{id}_G_{})=\mathrm{id}_{F(G_{})}.$$

In particular, $`F(\rho )`$ is surjective. However, $`F(G_{},g)`$ (which is isomorphic to the Cuntz algebra $`𝒪_2`$ ) and $`F(H_{},h)`$ (which is isomorphic to a suitable corner of $`𝒪_{\mathrm{}}`$) are nonisomorphic simple C\*-algebras, so there are no surjective homomorphisms from $`F(H_{},h)`$ to $`F(G_{},g)`$.

###### Remark 1.2.

The problem here has nothing to do with units, since the same argument works even if one considers stable Kirchberg algebras satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem. Moreover, one can even restrict, in either case, to the case $`K_1=0`$.

## 2. Modules over the group ring of $`_2`$

In this section, we prove a structure theorem for modules over the group ring of $`_2`$ which are free as $``$-modules. We have learned that Butler and Kovác proved the main result of this section a little earlier than we did, using slightly different methods . They use a sophisticated argument to reduce to the countably generated case first, which is avoided in our analysis. There is also a subsequent generalization to modules over the group ring of $`_p`$ for an arbitrary prime $`p`$ . We have decided to retain our proof for completeness of exposition, and because it gives the result we need with a minimum of machinery.

For any unital ring $`R`$ and any discrete group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we let $`R[\mathrm{\Gamma }]`$ denote the ordinary algebraic group ring of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with coefficients in $`R`$. Although we are ultimately interested in the case $`R=`$, we will need the cases $`R=𝔽_2`$, the field with two elements, and $`R=`$. Also, any $`[\mathrm{\Gamma }]`$-module is automatically a $``$-module (abelian group) by restriction of scalars.

The structure theorem is already known for the finitely generated case (see the first lemma), and the main point of this section is to remove the finite generation hypothesis.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`N`$ be a finitely generated $`[_2]`$-module which is free as a $``$-module. Then $`N`$ is a finite direct sum $`_{iI}N_i`$ in which each $`N_i`$ is isomorphic to one of the following three $`[_2]`$-modules:

* $`T_1=`$ with the nontrivial element of $`_2`$ acting trivially.
* $`T_2=`$ with the nontrivial element of $`_2`$ acting by multiplication by $`1`$.
* $`T_3=[_2]`$.

The multiplicities of $`T_1`$, $`T_2`$ and $`T_3`$ in such a direct sum decomposition are independent of the decomposition.

###### Proof.

This is an immediate consequence of the canonical form for invertible elements $`aM_n()`$ with $`a^2=1`$, given in Lemma 1 of , and the discussion following the proof of that lemma. For the matrix $`L`$ of , the computation

$$L=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)^1\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)$$

shows that it is similar over $``$ to the action of the nontrivial element of $`_2`$ on $`[_2]`$ in its usual basis.

Theorem 74.3 of  gives a structure theorem for finitely generated $`[_p]`$-modules which are free as a $``$-modules, for arbitrary primes $`p`$. As described there, the direct sum decomposition is in general not unique.

###### Lemma 2.2.

Let $`M`$ be a $`[_2]`$-module. Suppose $`M`$ is free as a $``$-module and $`M/2M`$ is free as an $`𝔽_2[_2]`$-module. Then $`M`$ is free as a $`[_2]`$-module.

###### Proof.

Theorem 6.1 of , with $`G=_2`$ and $`H=\{0\}`$, shows that $`M`$ is projective as a $`[_2]`$-module.

If $`M`$ is finitely generated, apply Lemma 2.1. Since $`T_1`$ and $`T_2`$ are not projective as $`[_2]`$-modules, they can’t appear in the direct sum. Therefore $`M`$ is free.

So suppose $`M`$ is not finitely generated. A direct calculation shows that $`[_2]`$ has no nontrivial idempotents. (This is true for any finite group in place of $`_2`$, by Corollary 8.1 of .) Therefore Corollary 4.5 of  applies, and shows that $`M`$ is free.

###### Notation 2.3.

For the rest of this section, we regard $`[_2]`$ as a subring of $`[_2]`$. If $`M`$ is a $`[_2]`$-module, then the corresponding $`[_2]`$-module is $`_{}M`$, and if $`M`$ is free as a $``$-module then we may clearly regard $`M`$ as a submodule of $`_{}M`$. We let $`s`$ be the nontrivial element of $`_2`$, and use the same notation for the corresponding element of $`[_2]`$. Further set

$$e=\frac{1}{2}(1+s)[_2]\text{and}f=\frac{1}{2}(1s)[_2],$$

which are idempotents with $`e+f=1`$.

###### Lemma 2.4.

Let $`M`$ be a $`[_2]`$-module which is free as a $``$-module. Let $`mM`$, and assume $`(1+s)m2M`$. Then, following Notation 2.3,

$$m(MeM)+(MfM)_{}M.$$

###### Proof.

We have $`(1s)m=(1+s)m2m2M`$. Write $`(1+s)m=2m_0`$ and $`(1s)m=2m_1`$ with $`m_0,m_1M`$. In $`_{}M`$ we have $`m_0=\frac{1}{2}(1+s)=em`$ and $`m_1=fm`$. Then $`m_0MeM`$ and $`m_1MfM`$. Moreover, $`2m=2(m_0+m_1)`$, so $`m=m_0+m_1`$.

###### Lemma 2.5.

Let $`M`$ be a $`[_2]`$-module which is free as a $``$-module. Following Notation 2.3, suppose that $`MeM=2eM`$ and $`MfM=2fM`$. Then $`M`$ is free as a $`[_2]`$-module.

###### Proof.

By Lemma 2.2, it suffices to show that $`M/2M`$ is free as an $`𝔽_2[_2]`$-module.

Set $`N=(2eM+2fM)/M`$. Consider $`1+s`$ as a multiplication map on $`M/2M`$. We claim that

$$\mathrm{Ker}(1+s)=(1+s)(M/2M)=N.$$

We consider $`\mathrm{Ker}(1+s)`$ first. Suppose $`mM`$ and $`m+2M\mathrm{Ker}(1+s)`$. Then $`(1+s)m2M`$. Using Lemma 2.4 at the first step and the hypothesis at the second, we get

$$m(MeM)+(MfM)=2eM+2fM,$$

so $`m+2MN`$. For the reverse, suppose $`m2eM+2fM`$. Write

$$m=(1+s)m_0+(1s)m_1$$

with $`m_0,m_1M`$. Then

$$(1+s)m=(1+s)^2m_0+(1+s)(1s)m_1=2(1+s)m_02M,$$

so $`m+2M\mathrm{Ker}(1+s)`$.

Now we consider the range of $`1+s`$. Since $`(1+s)^2=0`$ in $`𝔽_2[_2]`$, we get $`(1+s)(M/2M)\mathrm{Ker}(1+s)=N`$. For the reverse, let $`m2eM+2fM`$, and again write $`m=(1+s)m_0+(1s)m_1`$ with $`m_0,m_1M`$. Then

$`m+2M=(1+s)(m_0+m_1)2sm_1+2M`$ $`=(1+s)(m_0+m_1)+2M`$
$`(1+s)(M/2M).`$
This completes the proof of the claim.

Now $`N`$ is a $`𝔽_2`$-vector subspace of $`M/2M`$, so there exists a $`𝔽_2`$-vector subspace $`VM/2M`$ such that $`VN=M/2M`$. We claim that $`VsV=\{0\}`$ and $`V+sV=M/2M`$. To prove the first, suppose $`v,wV`$ and $`v=sw`$. Then $`(1+s)v=(1+s)sw=(1+s)w`$, so that $`(1+s)(vw)=0`$. Therefore $`vw\mathrm{Ker}(1+s)V=NV`$, whence $`v=w`$. Now $`(1+s)v=v+w=2v=0`$, so $`v(1+s)(M/2M)V=NV`$, whence $`v=0`$. For the second, let $`dM/2M`$. Using the first claim, we have $`N=(1+s)(M/2M)=(1+s)(V)`$. So we can write $`d=x+(1+s)w`$ with $`w,xV`$. Then $`d=v+sw`$ with $`v=x+sw`$ and $`w`$ both in $`V`$. This proves the claim.

Given the last claim, it is immediate that $`M/2M𝔽_2[_2]_{𝔽_2}V`$, which is a free $`𝔽_2[_2]`$-module.

We only need the next two lemmas for the prime $`2`$. Since they hold for arbitrary primes, with the same proof, we may as well give them in that generality.

###### Lemma 2.6.

Let $`M`$ be a free $``$-module, and let $`p`$ be a prime number. Let $`V`$ be an $`𝔽_p`$-vector subspace of $`M/pM`$. Then there exists a direct summand $`L`$ of $`M`$ such that the image of $`L`$ under the map $`MM/pM`$ is exactly $`V`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\pi :MM/pM`$ be the quotient map. Choose an $`𝔽_p`$-vector subspace $`W`$ of $`M/pM`$ such that $`M/pM=VW`$. Let $`\sigma :M/pMW`$ be the projection onto $`W`$ obtained from this direct sum decomposition. Using an $`𝔽_p`$-basis for $`W`$, find a free $``$-module $`P_0`$ with an isomorphism $`P_0/pP_0W`$. Let $`\kappa _0:P_0W`$ be the composite of this isomorphism with the quotient map $`P_0P_0/pP_0`$. Since $`M`$ is a projective $``$-module and $`\kappa _0`$ is surjective, there exists a $``$-module homomorphism $`\phi _0:MP_0`$ making the following diagram commute:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}M& \stackrel{\phi _0}{}& P_0\\ \pi & & \kappa _0& & \\ M/pM& \stackrel{\sigma }{}& W\end{array}$$

The image $`\phi _0(M)`$ is a submodule of a free $``$-module, hence free (Theorem 14.5 of ). Let $`(b_i)_{iI_0}`$ be a $``$-basis for $`\phi _0(M)`$. Since $`\kappa _0\phi _0=\sigma \pi `$ is surjective, $`\{\kappa _0(b_i):iI_0\}`$ spans $`W`$. Choose a subset $`II_0`$ such that $`(\kappa _0(b_i))_{iI}`$ is an $`𝔽_p`$-basis for $`W`$. Set $`P=\mathrm{span}_{}(\{b_i:iI\})P_0`$, which is a free $``$-module with basis $`(b_i)_{iI}`$. For each $`jI_0I`$, choose $`\alpha _{i,j}𝔽_p`$ for $`iI`$, all but finitely many of which are zero, such that $`\kappa _0(b_j)=_{iI}\alpha _{i,j}\kappa _0(b_i)`$. For $`jI_0I`$ and $`iI`$, choose $`\beta _{i,j}`$ whose image in $`𝔽_p`$ is $`\alpha _{i,j}`$, and such that if $`\alpha _{i,j}=0`$ then $`\beta _{i,j}=0`$. For each $`jI_0I`$, all but finitely many of the $`\beta _{i,j}`$ are zero. Therefore there is a well defined surjective $``$-module homomorphism $`\mu :\phi _0(M)P`$ such that $`p(b_j)=b_j`$ for $`jI`$ and $`\mu (b_j)=_{iI}\beta _{i,j}b_i`$ for $`jI_0I`$. By construction, we have $`\kappa _0\mu (b_i)=\kappa _0(b_i)`$ for all $`iI`$. Therefore $`\left(\kappa _0|_P\right)\mu =\kappa _0`$. Setting $`\phi =\mu \phi _0`$ and $`\kappa =\kappa _0|_P`$, we thus have a commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}M& \stackrel{\phi }{}& P\\ \pi & & \kappa & & \\ M/pM& \stackrel{\sigma }{}& W\end{array}$$

The $``$-module $`P`$ is still free, and in addition $`\phi `$ is surjective. Furthermore, $`\mathrm{Ker}(\kappa )=pP`$, since a linear combination of $`(b_i)_{iI}`$ has image in $`W`$ equal to zero if and only if all coefficients are even.

Set $`L=\mathrm{Ker}(\phi )`$. Since $`P`$ is projective, there is a $``$-module homomorphism $`\eta :PM`$ such that $`\phi \eta =\mathrm{id}_P`$. Then $`M=L\eta (P)`$. We claim that $`\pi (L)=V`$. First, if $`mL`$ then $`\sigma (\pi (m))=\kappa (\phi (m))=0`$, so $`\pi (m)\mathrm{Ker}(\sigma )=V`$. Now suppose $`vV`$. Choose $`m_0M`$ such that $`\pi (m_0)=v`$. Then $`\kappa (\phi (m_0))=0`$, whence $`\phi (m_0)pP`$. Write $`\phi (m_0)=px`$ with $`xP`$. Then $`m=m_0p\eta (x)\mathrm{Ker}(\phi )`$ by a diagram chase, and $`\pi (m)=\pi (m_0)=v`$. This proves the claim, and the lemma.

###### Lemma 2.7.

Let $`M`$ be a free $``$-module and let $`p`$ be a prime number. Let $`N`$ be a $``$-submodule such that $`pMNM`$. Then there exist $``$-submodules $`N_0,N_1M`$ such that $`M=N_0N_1`$ and $`N=pN_0N_1`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\pi :MM/pM`$ be the quotient map. Using Lemma 2.6, write $`M=N_0N_1`$ for $``$-submodules $`N_0,N_1M`$, with $`\pi (N_1)=\pi (N)`$. The result will now follow if we prove that $`N=pN_0+N_1`$.

We prove $`pN_0+N_1N`$. Clearly $`pN_0N`$. So let $`mN_1`$. Choose $`nN`$ such that $`\pi (n)=\pi (m)`$. Then $`\pi (mn)=0`$, so $`mnpMN`$. Thus $`mN`$. We have $`N_1N`$.

Now we prove the reverse inclusion. Let $`nN`$. Write $`n=r+m_1`$ with $`rN_0`$ and $`m_1N_1`$. Then $`\pi (r)=\pi (n)\pi (m_1)`$. Because $`N_1N`$, we get $`\pi (r)\pi (N_0)\pi (N)`$. By considering a $``$-basis for $`M`$ made up of bases for $`N_0`$ and $`N_1`$, we see that $`\pi (N_0)\pi (N)=\{0\}`$. Therefore $`\pi (r)=0`$. So we can write $`r=pm_0`$ with $`m_0M`$. Since $`M`$ is torsion free and $`N_0`$ is a summand, we get $`m_0N_0`$. Therefore $`n=pm_0+m_1pN_0+N_1`$.

The uniqueness statement in the following theorem will not be used in the rest of the paper, but we include it because it seems of independent interest.

###### Theorem 2.8.

Let $`M`$ be a $`[_2]`$-module which is free as a $``$-module. Then $`M`$ is a direct sum $`_{iI}M_i`$ in which each $`M_i`$ is isomorphic to one of the three modules $`T_1`$, $`T_2`$, or $`T_3`$ of Lemma 2.1. The multiplicities of $`T_1`$, $`T_2`$ and $`T_3`$ in such a direct sum decomposition are independent of the decomposition.

###### Proof.

We use Notation 2.3.

We first prove uniqueness of the multiplicities. Suppose the $`[_2]`$-module $`M`$ is isomorphic to the direct sum of $`n_1`$ copies of $`T_1`$, $`n_2`$ copies of $`T_2`$, and $`n_3`$ copies of $`T_3`$. Then $`n_1`$ is the $`𝔽_2`$-vector space dimension of $`(MeM)/2eMeM/2eM`$, and similarly $`n_2=dim_{𝔽_2}((MfM)/2fM)`$. Finally, one checks that $`n_3=dim_{𝔽_2}(eM/(MeM))`$, which is the same as $`dim_{𝔽_2}(fM/(MfM))`$.

Now we prove existence. We have

$$2eMMeMeM\text{and}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}\hspace{0.17em}2}fMMfMfM.$$

Apply Lemma 2.7 twice, to get $``$-submodules $`R_0,R_1eM`$ and $`S_0,S_1fM`$ such that

$$eM=R_0R_1\text{and}MeM=2R_0R_1$$

and

$$fM=S_0S_1\text{and}MfM=2S_0S_1.$$

Since $`eMfM=\{0\}`$ and $`e+f=1`$, we can write

$$(MeM)(MfM)MeMfM.$$

Substituting from above, we have the inclusions of $``$-module direct sums

$$2R_0R_12S_0S_1MR_0R_1S_0S_1.$$

Since $`R_1,S_1M`$, we have the $``$-module direct sum decomposition

$$M=R_1S_1N\text{with}N=M(R_0S_0).$$

Now $`R_1eM`$ and $`sm=m`$ for all $`meM`$. So $`R_1`$ is actually a $`[_2]`$-module. Since it is a $``$-submodule of $`M`$, it is a free $``$-module (Theorem 14.5 of ), and therefore as a $`[_2]`$-module it is a direct sum of $`[_2]`$-modules isomorphic to $`T_1`$. Similarly, from $`S_1fM`$ and $`sm=m`$ for all $`mfM`$, we see that $`S_1`$ is a $`[_2]`$-module which is a direct sum of $`[_2]`$-modules isomorphic to $`T_2`$. We will complete the proof by showing that $`N`$ is a $`[_2]`$-module, so that the direct sum decomposition above is really a $`[_2]`$-module direct sum decomposition, and that it is free, so that it is a direct sum of $`[_2]`$-modules isomorphic to $`T_3`$.

To prove that $`N`$ is a $`[_2]`$-module, we simply observe that $`R_0`$ and $`S_0`$ are $`[_2]`$-modules, for the same reason that $`R_1`$ and $`S_1`$ are. For freeness, we know as above that $`N`$ is a free $``$-module because it is a $``$-submodule of $`M`$. By Lemma 2.5, it now suffices to prove that $`NeN=2eN`$ and $`NfN=2fN`$. That $`2eNNeN`$ and $`2fNNfN`$ is clear, so we prove the reverse inclusions.

Let $`mNeN`$. Use $`mN`$ to write $`m=a+b`$ with $`aR_0`$ and $`bS_0`$. Use $`meN`$ to write $`m=e(x+y)`$ with $`xR_0`$ and $`yS_0`$. Note that $`ex=x`$ and $`ey=0`$, and combine the two expressions for $`m`$ to get $`xa=b`$. Since $`xaeM`$ and $`bfM`$, we get $`b=0`$. Therefore $`m=aR_0`$. From $`mMeM=2R_0R_1`$ we get $`m2R_0`$. Now $`R_0eM`$ implies $`eR_0=R_0`$, so $`R_0N`$ implies $`R_0eN`$. Therefore $`m2eN`$, as desired.

Now suppose $`mNfN`$. Write $`m=a+b=f(x+y)`$ with $`a,xR_0`$ and $`b,yS_0`$. From $`fx=0`$ and $`fy=y`$, we get $`yb=aeMfM=\{0\}`$. So $`m=bS_0`$. From $`mMfM=2S_0S_1`$ we now get $`m2S_0`$. Since $`S_0NfMfN`$, it follows that $`m2fN`$, as desired. This completes the proof.

## 3. Geometric resolution

In this section, we prove that for every order two automorphism $`\gamma `$ of a countable $`_2`$-graded abelian group $`G_{}`$, there is some separable C\*-algebra $`A`$ with an order two automorphism $`\alpha \mathrm{Aut}(A)`$, such that there is a graded isomorphism $`\mu :G_{}K_{}(A)`$ which identifies $`\gamma `$ with $`\alpha _{}`$. We borrow the method of geometric realization of resolutions from Schochet’s proof of the Künneth formula for C\*-algebras . As it turns out, the C\*-algebra $`A`$ we produce will be of type I and nonunital.

Although we do not state this version formally, the same proofs show that if $`G_{}`$ is not countable, we can still produce an automorphism of a nonseparable type I C\*-algebra satisfying the remaining conditions.

For any C\*-algebra $`A`$, we let $`A^+`$ denote its usual unitization, in which we add a new unit even if $`A`$ is already unital.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Let $`C=_n[C_0()C_0()]`$, and let $`\gamma \mathrm{Aut}(C)`$ be the order two automorphism given by

$$\gamma ((f_1,g_1),(f_2,g_2),\mathrm{})=((g_1,f_1),(g_2,f_2),\mathrm{}).$$

Let $`M`$ be a subgroup of $`K_1(C)`$ which is invariant under $`\gamma _{}`$. Then there exists a separable Hilbert space $`H`$ with an action of $`_2`$, a separable commutative C\*-algebra $`B`$ with an automorphism $`\beta `$ of order two, and a $`_2`$-equivariant homomorphism $`\phi :BK(H)C`$, where $`_2`$ acts on $`K(H)`$ by conjugation, such that $`K_0(B)=0`$, such that $`\phi _{}:K_1(B)K_1(C)`$ is injective, and such that the image of $`\phi _{}`$ is exactly $`M`$.

###### Proof.

The K-theory $`K_{}(C)`$ is a countable abelian group with an automorphism $`\gamma _{}`$ of order two, and hence in an obvious way a $`[_2]`$-module. As $`[_2]`$-modules, $`K_1(C)`$ is a countable direct sum of copies of $`[_2]`$ and $`K_0(C)=0`$. Moreover, the hypothesis on $`M`$ is just that it is a $`[_2]`$-submodule. It is a free $``$-module because subgroups of free abelian groups are free (Theorem 14.5 of ), and it is clearly countably generated, so by Theorem 2.8 there is an isomorphism $`M_{iI}M_i`$ with $`I`$ finite or countable, and with each $`M_i`$ isomorphic to one of the three modules $`T_j`$ of Lemma 2.1. We regard each $`M_i`$ as a $`[_2]`$-submodule of $`K_1(C)`$.

For each $`iI`$, we construct a separable Hilbert space $`H_i`$ with an action of $`_2`$, a separable commutative C\*-algebra $`B_i`$ with an automorphism $`\beta _i`$ of order two, and a $`_2`$-equivariant homomorphism $`\phi _i:B_iK(H_i)C`$, such that $`K_0(B_i)=0`$, such that $`(\phi _i)_{}:K_1(B_i)K_1(C)`$ is injective, and such that the image of $`(\phi _i)_{}`$ is exactly $`M_i`$. There are three cases, but we begin by introducing notation common to all three. Define $`u:S^1`$ by

$$u(t)=\mathrm{exp}\left(\pi i\left(1+t(1+t^2)^{1/2}\right)\right).$$

Then $`u`$ is a unitary in the unitization $`C_0()^+`$ such that $`[u]`$ generates $`K_1(C_0())`$, and $`u1`$ generates $`C_0()`$ as a C\*-algebra. In particular, if $`E`$ is any C\*-algebra and $`vE^+`$ is any unitary such that $`v1E`$, then there is a unique homomorphism $`\psi :C_0()E`$ such that $`\psi (u1)=v1`$. Further let $`s`$ be the nontrivial element of $`_2`$, and use the same notation for the corresponding element of $`[_2]`$. We will also write elements of $`K_1(C)`$ as sequences

$$(k_1+l_1s,k_2+l_2s,\mathrm{})\underset{n}{}[_2],$$

where, with all nontrivial entries being in the $`n`$-th position, $`(0,\mathrm{},0,1,0,\mathrm{})`$ corresponds to the $`K_1`$-class of the unitary

$$1+((0,0),\mathrm{},(0,0),(u1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}),(0,0),\mathrm{})C^+$$

and $`(0,\mathrm{},0,s,0,\mathrm{})`$ corresponds to the $`K_1`$-class of the unitary

$$1+((0,0),\mathrm{},(0,0),(0,u1),(0,0),\mathrm{})C^+.$$

The first case is $`M_iT_1`$. Let $`m`$ be a generator of $`M_i`$ as a $``$-module. Then $`sm=m`$. Therefore $`m`$ has the form

$$m=(k_1+k_1s,k_2+k_2s,\mathrm{}),$$

with all but finitely many of the $`k_j`$ equal to zero. Take $`H_i=`$ with the trivial action of $`_2`$, take $`B_i=C_0()`$, take $`\beta _i=\mathrm{id}_{B_i}`$, and take $`\phi _i`$ to be the homomorphism determined by

$$\phi _i(u1)=((u^{k_1}1,u^{k_1}1),(u^{k_2}1,u^{k_2}1),\mathrm{}).$$

The required properties are immediate.

Next, suppose $`M_iT_2`$. Let $`m`$ be a generator of $`M_i`$ as a $``$-module. Then $`sm=m`$. Therefore $`m`$ has the form

$$m=(k_1k_1s,k_2k_2s,\mathrm{}),$$

with all but finitely many of the $`k_j`$ equal to zero. Take $`H_i=`$ with the trivial action of $`_2`$, and take $`B_i=C_0()`$. Take $`\beta _i:C_0()C_0()`$ to be the homomorphism $`\beta _i(f)(t)=f(t)`$, which is the unique homomorphism such that $`\beta _i(u1)=u^{}1`$. Take $`\phi _i`$ to be the homomorphism determined by

$$\phi _i(u1)=((u^{k_1}1,u^{k_1}1),(u^{k_2}1,u^{k_2}1),\mathrm{}).$$

Equivariance follows from

$$\phi _i(u^{}1)=((u^{k_1}1,u^{k_1}1),(u^{k_2}1,u^{k_2}1),\mathrm{}),$$

and the rest of the required properties are immediate.

Finally, suppose $`M_iT_3`$. Let $`mK_1(C)`$ be the image of $`1T_3`$ under the isomorphism $`T_3M_i`$. Write $`m=(k_1+l_1s,k_2+l_2s,\mathrm{})`$. Then the image of $`s`$ is

$$sm=(l_1+k_1s,l_2+k_2s,\mathrm{}),$$

and these two elements are linearly independent over $``$. Take $`H_i=^2`$, with $`s(\xi _1,\xi _2)=(\xi _2,\xi _1)`$. Take $`B_i=C_0()C_0()`$, with $`\beta _i(f_1,f_2)=(f_2,f_1)`$. To define

$$\phi _i:C_0()C_0()L(^2)C,$$

let $`p_1,p_2L(^2)`$ be the projections on the first and second coordinates, and let $`\psi _1,\psi _2:C_0()C`$ be the unique homomorphisms such that

$$\psi _1(u1)=((u^{k_1}1,u^{l_1}1),(u^{k_2}1,u^{l_2}1),\mathrm{})$$

and

$$\psi _2(u1)=((u^{l_1}1,u^{k_1}1),(u^{l_2}1,u^{k_2}1),\mathrm{}).$$

Then define

$$\phi _i(f_1,f_2)=p_1\psi _1(f_1)+p_2\psi _2(f_2).$$

This is a homomorphism because $`p_1`$ and $`p_2`$ are orthogonal. Equivariance follows from the fact that the action of $`s`$ exchanges $`p_1`$ and $`p_2`$, and the formulas for $`m`$ and $`sm`$. That $`(\psi _i)_{}`$ is injective follows from the fact that $`m`$ and $`sm`$ are linearly independent over $``$, and the remaining required properties are clear.

Now let $`H`$ be the Hilbert direct sum $`H=_{iI}H_i`$, and let $`B`$ be the C\*-algebra direct sum $`B=_{iI}B_i`$. Give both the action of $`_2`$ coming from the actions on the summands. Define $`\phi :BK(H)C`$ by taking $`\phi ((b_i)_{iI})`$ to be the block diagonal element $`_{iI}\phi _i(b_i)`$. This element is in fact in $`K(H)C`$ because for every $`\epsilon >0`$, we have $`b_i<\epsilon `$ for all but finitely many $`i`$. Then $`\phi `$ is the required homomorphism.

###### Lemma 3.2.

Let $`G`$ be a countable abelian group, and let $`\nu :GG`$ be an automorphism of $`G`$ of order two. Then there exist a separable type I C\*-algebra $`A`$ such that $`K_1(A)=0`$, an automorphism $`\alpha \mathrm{Aut}(A)`$ of order two, and an isomorphism $`\mu :GK_0(A)`$, such that $`\mu \nu =\alpha _{}\mu `$.

###### Proof.

The group $`G`$ is a $`[_2]`$-module in an obvious way, and it is countable by assumption. Set $`N=_n[_2]`$, and choose a surjective $`[_2]`$-module homomorphism $`\tau :NG`$. Set $`M=\mathrm{Ker}(\tau )`$. Let $`C`$ be as in Lemma 3.1, and identify $`N`$ with $`K_1(C)`$. Apply Lemma 3.1 with this $`M`$, obtaining a $`_2`$-equivariant homomorphism of separable type I C\*-algebras $`\phi :BK(H)C`$ such that (by abuse of notation) $`K_1(B)=M`$, $`K_1(K(H)C)=N`$, and $`\phi _{}`$ is the inclusion. To simplify the notation, set $`D=K(H)C`$.

Let $`A`$ be the mapping cone

$$A=\{(f,b)C([0,1],D)B:f(0)=0\text{ and }f(1)=\phi (b)\}.$$

Since $`\phi `$ is equivariant, this algebra has an obvious action of $`_2`$. (The action is trivial on $`[0,1]`$.) Moreover, with $`SD=C_0((0,1),D)`$ being the usual suspension of $`D`$, there is an equivariant short exact sequence

$$0SDAB0.$$

By naturality the corresponding six term exact sequence in K-theory is actually a sequence of $`[_2]`$-modules. Since $`K_0(B)=0`$ and $`K_0(D)=0`$, this sequence reduces to

$$0K_1(A)K_1(B)K_0(SD)K_0(A)0.$$

Using the Bott periodicity isomorphism $`K_0(SD)K_1(D)`$, and appropriately identifying the maps following Theorem 3.5 of , this sequence can be naturally identified with

$$0K_1(A)K_1(B)\stackrel{\phi _{}}{}K_1(D)K_0(A)0.$$

By our construction and by naturality of the sequence, we therefore have the sequence of $`[_2]`$-modules

$$0K_1(A)M\stackrel{\tau }{}NK_0(A)0,$$

from which it follows that $`K_1(A)=0`$ and that $`K_0(A)N/MG`$ as $`[_2]`$-modules.

###### Proposition 3.3.

Let $`G_0`$ and $`G_1`$ be countable abelian groups. Let $`\gamma _i`$ be an automorphism of $`G_i`$ of order two. Then there exist a separable type I C\*-algebra $`A`$, an automorphism $`\alpha \mathrm{Aut}(A)`$ of order two, and a graded isomorphism $`\mu :G_{}K_{}(A)`$, such that the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}G_{}& \stackrel{\gamma _{}}{}& G_{}\\ \mu & & \mu & & \\ K_{}(A)& \stackrel{\alpha _{}}{}& K_{}(A)\end{array}$$

commutes.

###### Proof.

Apply Lemma 3.2 to $`G_0`$ and $`\gamma _0`$, obtaining a C\*-algebra $`A_0`$ with an order two automorphism $`\alpha _0`$. Apply Lemma 3.2 to $`G_1`$ and $`\gamma _1`$, obtaining a C\*-algebra $`A_1`$ with an order two automorphism $`\alpha _1`$. Take $`A=A_0SA_1`$ and $`\alpha =\alpha _0S\alpha _1`$. This C\*-algebra and automorphism satisfy the conclusions by Bott periodicity.

## 4. From type I to purely infinite simple

For countable abelian groups $`G_0`$ and $`G_1`$ and order two automorphisms $`\gamma _i`$ of $`G_i`$, we can now produce a separable type I C\*-algebra $`A`$ with K-theory $`G_0G_1`$, and an order two automorphism which induces $`\gamma _i`$ on K-theory. We want to use the construction of  to produce a unital Kirchberg algebra. However, $`A`$ is not unital, and this construction will then not produce a unital C\*-algebra. Unitizing $`A`$ changes the K-theory. To remedy this problem, we introduce in the next proposition a kind of unitization functor which does not change the K-theory. Our functor preserves nuclearity and the Universal Coefficient Theorem, but not type I (or simplicity or finiteness). Although we will not use this fact, it also seems interesting to observe that the functor sends exact C\*-algebras to exact C\*-algebras .

###### Proposition 4.1.

There is a functor $`F`$ from the category of all C\*-algebras and C\*-algebra homomorphisms to the subcategory of all unital C\*-algebras and unital C\*-algebra homomorphisms, and a natural transformation $`\eta `$ from the identity functor to $`F`$, such that:

* For every C\*-algebra $`A`$, the homomorphism $`\eta _A:AF(A)`$ is a KK-equivalence, and in particular is an isomorphism on K-theory.
* If $`A`$ is separable, or nuclear, or exact, or satisfies the Universal Coefficient Theorem of , then $`F(A)`$ also has the same property.

###### Proof.

Choose and fix a nonzero projection $`e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}`$ such that $`[e]=0`$ in $`K_0(𝒪_{\mathrm{}})`$, a projection $`qe`$ such that $`[q]=[1_𝒪_{\mathrm{}}]`$ in $`K_0(𝒪_{\mathrm{}})`$, and a unital subalgebra $`De𝒪_{\mathrm{}}e`$ such that $`D𝒪_2`$. For any C\*-algebra $`A`$, let $`A^+`$ be the unitization (as in Section 3), let $`\pi _A:A^+`$ be the canonical map, and define

$$F(A)=\{be𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eA^+:(\mathrm{id}_{e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}e}\pi _A)(b)D\}.$$

Let $`\iota _A:AA^+`$ be the inclusion, and define $`\eta _A:AF(A)`$ by $`\eta _A(a)=q\iota _A(a)`$. This element is in $`F(A)`$ because $`(\mathrm{id}_{e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}e}\pi _A)(q\iota _A(a))=0`$.

Since the map $`\lambda \lambda q`$ from $``$ to $`e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}e`$ is a KK-equivalence, so is the map $`aqa`$ from $`A`$ to $`e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}e`$. (See Example 19.1.2(c) of .) Moreover, there is a split short exact sequence

$$0e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eAF(A)𝒪_20.$$

Since $`𝒪_2`$ is KK-equivalent to the zero C\*-algebra, it follows that, for every separable C\*-algebra $`B`$, the inclusion $`\phi :e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eAF(A)`$ induces isomorphisms

$$\phi _B^{}:KK(F(A),B)KK(e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eA,B)$$

and

$$\phi _{}^B:KK(B,e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eA)KK(B,F(A)).$$

It now follows from the Yoneda Lemma that $`\phi `$ is a KK-equivalence (see Section III.2 of ), but we give the easy direct argument here. In terms of the Kasparov product, these isomorphisms have the formulas $`\phi _B^{}(\gamma )=[\phi ]\gamma `$ and $`\phi _{}^B(\gamma )=\gamma [\phi ]`$. (See Proposition 18.7.2 of .) Choose

$$\alpha KK(F(A),e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eA)\text{and}\beta KK(e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eA,F(A))$$

such that

$$\phi _{e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eA}^{}(\alpha )=[\mathrm{id}_{e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eA}]\text{and}\phi _{}^{F(A)}(\beta )=[\mathrm{id}_{F(A)}].$$

Then

$$[\phi ]\alpha =[\mathrm{id}_{e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}eA}]\text{and}\beta [\phi ]=[\mathrm{id}_{F(A)}],$$

from which it follows that $`\phi `$ is also a KK-equivalence. So $`\eta _A`$ is a KK-equivalence. This proves the property (1).

It is immediate from the KK-equivalence of (1) that $`F(A)`$ satisfies the Universal Coefficient Theorem if $`A`$ does. That $`F`$ preserves separability and nuclearity is immediate from the split exact sequence above, since $`e𝒪_{\mathrm{}}e`$ and $`𝒪_2`$ are separable and nuclear. The same argument works for exactness: the minimal tensor product of exact C\*-algebras is exact by Proposition 7.1(iii) of , and extensions with completely positive splittings preserve exactness by Proposition 7.1(vi) of .

Next, we need an equivariant version of the construction of .

###### Proposition 4.2.

Let $`\alpha :\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{Aut}(A)`$ be an action of a countable discrete group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on a separable unital C\*-algebra $`A`$. Then there exists a separable unital purely infinite simple C\*-algebra $`B`$, an action $`\beta :\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{Aut}(B)`$, and an equivariant unital homomorphism $`\phi :AB`$, such that $`\phi `$ is a KK-equivalence. Moreover, if $`A`$ is nuclear then so is $`B`$, and if $`A`$ satisfies the Universal Coefficient Theorem then so does $`B`$.

###### Proof.

Choose an injective unital representation $`\pi _0:AL(H_0)`$ of $`A`$ on a separable Hilbert space $`H_0`$ such that $`\pi _0(A)K(H_0)=\{0\}`$. Let $`H=l^2(\mathrm{\Gamma },H_0)`$, and let $`u:\mathrm{\Gamma }U(H)`$ and $`\pi :AL(H)`$ be the components of the regular covariant representation of $`(\mathrm{\Gamma },A)`$ associated to $`\pi _0`$, as in 7.7.1 in . Then $`u_\gamma \pi (a)u_\gamma ^{}=\pi (\alpha _\gamma (a))`$ for all $`aA`$ and $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$. (See .) Moreover, $`\pi (A)K(H)=\{0\}`$.

Now we follow the proof of Proposition 2.1 of . Let $`E=H_{}A`$ be the Hilbert $`A`$-bimodule defined there, and let $`\phi :AL(E)`$ be as there. Each $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ induces a isometric $``$-linear map $`v_\gamma :EE`$ given by $`v_\gamma (\xi a)=u_\gamma \xi \alpha _\gamma (a)`$ for $`\xi H`$ and $`aA`$. These maps have the following properties:

* $`v_\gamma (\xi a)=v_\gamma (\xi )\alpha _\gamma (a)`$ for $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\xi E`$, and $`aA`$.
* $`v_\gamma \xi ,v_\gamma \eta =\alpha _\gamma (\xi ,\eta )`$ for $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\xi ,\eta E`$.
* $`v_\gamma \xi =\xi `$ for $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\xi E`$.
* $`v_{\gamma ^1}=v_\gamma ^1`$ for $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$.
* $`v_\gamma \phi (a)v_\gamma ^1=\phi (\alpha _\gamma (a))`$ for $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`aA`$.

Caution: $`v_\gamma `$ is not a right $`A`$-module homomorphism. Nevertheless, these properties imply that $`bv_\gamma bv_\gamma ^1`$ is a \*-automorphism of the C\*-algebra $`L(E)`$ of all adjointable right $`A`$-module morphisms of $`E`$; moreover, $`\phi `$ is equivariant.

Next, let $`_+=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}E^n`$ be the Fock space of $`E`$, as after Definition 1.3 of  or as at the beginning of Section 1 of . We let $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ act on $`E^n`$ via $`v_\gamma ^n`$ (via $`\alpha _\gamma `$ on $`E^0=A`$), and on $`_+`$ via the direct sum $`w_\gamma `$ of these actions. This action is still isometric, and we again have the analogs of Properties (1)–(5) above. The role of $`\phi `$ is now played by the homomorphism $`\phi _+:AL(_+)`$ of the discussion after Definition 1.3 of . Following the construction there, the Toeplitz algebra $`𝒯_E`$ is by definition the C\*-subalgebra of $`L(_+)`$ generated by the operators $`T_\xi `$ defined there, for $`\xi E`$. One checks that $`T_{v_\gamma \xi }=w_\gamma T_\xi w_\gamma ^1`$ for $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\xi E`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts on $`𝒯_E`$ via \*-automorphisms. Since $`\pi (A)K(H)=\{0\}`$, Lemma 2.1 of  and Corollary 3.14 and Theorem 3.13 of  show that the canonical map from $`𝒯_E`$ to the Cuntz-Pimsner algebra $`𝒪_E`$ is an isomorphism. Therefore we have an action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`𝒪_E`$, and $`\phi _+:A𝒪_E`$ is equivariant.

Theorem 2.8 of  shows that $`𝒪_E`$ is purely infinite and simple. Separability is clear. The proof of Theorem 3.1 of  shows that if $`A`$ is nuclear, then so is $`𝒪_E`$. Corollary 4.5 of  shows that $`\phi _+`$ is a KK-equivalence, from which it is immediate that if $`A`$ satisfies the Universal Coefficient Theorem then so does $`𝒪_E`$.

###### Theorem 4.3.

Let $`G_0`$ and $`G_1`$ be countable abelian groups. Let $`\gamma _i`$ be an automorphism of $`G_i`$ of order two. Then there exist a unital Kirchberg algebra $`A`$ satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem and with $`[1_A]=0`$ in $`K_0(A)`$, an automorphism $`\alpha \mathrm{Aut}(A)`$ of order two, and a graded isomorphism $`\mu :G_{}K_{}(A)`$, such that the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}G_{}& \stackrel{\gamma _{}}{}& G_{}\\ \mu & & \mu & & \\ K_{}(A)& \stackrel{\alpha _{}}{}& K_{}(A)\end{array}$$

commutes.

###### Proof.

Use Proposition 3.3 to find a separable type I C\*-algebra $`A_0`$, an automorphism $`\alpha _0\mathrm{Aut}(A_0)`$ of order two, and a graded isomorphism $`\mu _0:G_{}K_{}(A_0)`$, such that $`\mu _0\gamma =(\alpha _0)_{}\mu _0`$.

Let $`F`$ be the functor of Proposition 4.1, and let $`\eta :A_0F(A_0)`$ be the natural transformation from there. By Part (2) of Proposition 4.1, the algebra $`F(A_0)`$ is separable, unital, nuclear, and satisfies the Universal Coefficient Theorem; also, $`\eta `$ is a KK-equivalence. Since $`F`$ is a functor, $`F(\alpha _0)`$ is an order two automorphism of $`F(A_0)`$, and naturality implies that $`\eta \alpha _0=F(\alpha _0)\eta `$.

Now use Proposition 4.2 to find a unital Kirchberg algebra $`A`$ satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem, an automorphism $`\alpha \mathrm{Aut}(A)`$ of order two, and a $`_2`$-equivariant homomorphism $`\phi :F(A_0)A`$ which is a KK-equivalence. Then $`\phi \eta :A_0A`$ is $`_2`$-equivariant and is a KK-equivalence. The theorem is therefore proved by taking $`\mu =\phi _{}\eta _{}\mu _0`$.

It should be easy to arrange to have $`[1_A]`$ correspond to any element in $`G`$ of the form $`\eta +\gamma _0(\eta )`$, but we don’t know how to get arbitrary $`\gamma _0`$-invariant elements of $`G_0`$.

We now turn to the problem of realizing $`R(_2)`$-modules as equivariant K-theory for actions on C\*-algebras. The main point is contained in the next lemma, which we state in greater generality.

Before stating it, recall (Section 2.2 of ) that if a compact group $`G`$ acts on a C\*-algebra $`A`$, then the equivariant K-theory $`K_{}^G(A)`$ is, in a canonical way, a module over the representation ring $`R(G)`$ of $`G`$. Further recall that when $`G`$ is abelian, the representation ring $`R(G)`$ is just $`[\widehat{G}]`$; in particular, if $`G`$ is a countable abelian group, then $`R(\widehat{G})`$ is canonically isomorphic to $`[G]`$.

###### Lemma 4.4.

Let $`G`$ be a countable abelian group, and let $`\alpha :G\mathrm{Aut}(A)`$ be an action of $`G`$ on a C\*-algebra $`A`$. Regard $`K_{}(A)`$ as a $`[G]`$-module via the action of $`G`$ on $`A`$. Regard the equivariant K-theory $`K_{}^{\widehat{G}}(C^{}(G,A,\alpha ))`$ of the dual action $`\widehat{\alpha }:\widehat{G}\mathrm{Aut}(C^{}(G,A,\alpha ))`$ as a $`[G]`$-module as discussed above. Then $`K_{}^{\widehat{G}}(C^{}(G,A,\alpha ))K_{}(A)`$ as $`[G]`$-modules.

###### Proof.

Let $`B=C^{}(\widehat{G},C^{}(G,A,\alpha ),\widehat{\alpha })`$ be the second crossed product, with second dual action $`\beta :G\mathrm{Aut}(B)`$. Regard $`K_{}(B)`$ as a $`[G]`$-module via this action of $`G`$. Proposition 2.7.10 of , applied to the action $`\widehat{\alpha }`$ of $`\widehat{G}`$ on $`C^{}(G,A,\alpha )`$, shows that $`K_0^{\widehat{G}}(C^{}(G,A,\alpha ))K_0(B)`$ as $`[G]`$-modules. Applying this result to the suspension $`SA`$, we obtain the same isomorphism for $`K_1`$ as well. By Takai duality , there is an isomorphism $`BAK(l^2(G))`$ which intertwines the action $`\beta `$ with the tensor product of $`\alpha `$ and an inner action on $`K(l^2(G))`$. It is therefore immediate that $`K_{}(B)K_{}(A)`$ as $`[G]`$-modules.

We immediately get a realization theorem using type I C\*-algebras.

###### Theorem 4.5.

Let $`G_{}`$ be a countable $`_2`$-graded $`R(_2)`$-module. Then there exists a separable type I C\*-algebra $`A`$, and an action $`\alpha `$ of $`_2`$ on $`A`$, such that $`K_{}^_2(A)G_{}`$ as $`R(_2)`$-modules.

###### Proof.

Identify $`R(_2)`$ with $`[\widehat{}_2]`$ as discussed before Lemma 4.4. Since $`\widehat{}_2_2`$, we can use Proposition 3.3 to find a separable type I C\*-algebra $`B`$ and an action $`\beta :\widehat{}_2\mathrm{Aut}(B)`$ such that $`K_{}(B)G_{}`$ as $`R(_2)`$-modules. Let $`A=C^{}(\widehat{}_2,B,\beta )`$, equipped with the dual action $`\alpha =\widehat{\beta }`$ of $`_2`$. Lemma 4.4 implies that $`K_{}^_2(A)G_{}`$ as $`R(_2)`$-modules. Clearly $`A`$ is separable, and Theorem 4.1 of  implies that $`A`$ is type I.

For the realization theorem using Kirchberg algebras, we need another lemma.

###### Lemma 4.6.

Let

$$A_0\stackrel{\rho _1}{}A_1\stackrel{\rho _2}{}A_2\stackrel{\rho _3}{}\mathrm{}$$

be a direct system of C\*-algebras in which each $`A_n`$ is a finite direct sum of Kirchberg algebras satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem. Suppose that for each $`n`$ the partial map determined by $`\rho _n`$ from any summand of $`A_{n1}`$ to any other summand of $`A_n`$ is nonzero. Then the direct limit of this system is again a Kirchberg algebra satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem.

###### Proof.

Let $`A=\underset{}{lim}A_n`$. Clearly $`A`$ is separable and nuclear. The condition that all the partial maps be nonzero, together with the simplicity of all the summands, guarantees that the algebraic direct limit of the $`A_n`$ is simple. A standard argument now shows that $`A`$ is simple. It is easy to check, using standard direct limit methods, that $`A`$ has real rank zero and that every nonzero projection in $`A`$ is properly infinite. (For the second statement, use the fact that every projection in $`A`$ is equivalent to a projection in the algebraic direct limit.) Therefore $`A`$ is purely infinite simple. Finally, $`A`$ satisfies the Universal Coefficient Theorem because the class of such algebras is closed under direct limits. This is essentially Proposition 2.3(b) of , in view of Theorem 4.1 of  and its converse (the converse being trivial).

###### Theorem 4.7.

Let $`G_{}`$ be a countable $`_2`$-graded $`R(_2)`$-module. Then there exists a unital Kirchberg algebra $`A`$, and an action $`\alpha `$ of $`_2`$ on $`A`$, such that $`K_{}^_2(A)G_{}`$ as $`R(_2)`$-modules, and such that $`C^{}(_2,A,\alpha )`$ is a Kirchberg algebra.

###### Proof.

Identify $`R(_2)`$ with $`[\widehat{}_2]`$ as discussed before Lemma 4.4. Let $`\tau \widehat{}_2`$ be the nontrivial element.

First suppose that the action of $`\tau `$ on the $`R(_2)`$-module $`G_{}`$ is nontrivial. Since $`\widehat{}_2_2`$, we can use Theorem 4.3 to find a unital Kirchberg algebra $`B`$ and an action $`\beta :\widehat{}_2\mathrm{Aut}(B)`$ such that $`K_{}(B)G_{}`$ as $`R(_2)`$-modules. Let $`A=C^{}(\widehat{}_2,B,\beta )`$, equipped with the dual action $`\alpha =\widehat{\beta }`$ of $`_2`$. Lemma 4.4 implies that $`K_{}^_2(A)G_{}`$ as $`R(_2)`$-modules. Moreover, $`\beta _\tau `$ is outer (because it is nontrivial on K-theory), so Corollary 4.4 of  implies that $`A`$ is a Kirchberg algebra. Moreover $`C^{}(_2,A,\alpha )M_2B`$ is also a Kirchberg algebra.

Now suppose that the action of $`\tau `$ on the $`R(_2)`$-module $`G_{}`$ is trivial. Choose a unital Kirchberg algebra $`A_0`$ satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem such that $`K_{}(A_0)G_{}`$ as abelian groups. Let $`\alpha ^{(0)}:_2\mathrm{Aut}(A_0A_0)`$ be the action such that $`\alpha _\tau ^{(0)}(a,b)=(b,a)`$. We identify the crossed product $`C^{}(_2,A_0A_0,\alpha ^{(0)})`$. Let $`uC^{}(_2,A_0A_0,\alpha ^{(0)})`$ be the canonical unitary of order two. Then there is an isomorphism $`\sigma :C^{}(_2,A_0A_0,\alpha ^{(0)})M_2(A_0)`$, determined by

$$\sigma (a,b)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& 0\\ 0& b\end{array}\right)$$

for $`a,bA_0`$, and

$$\sigma (u)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right).$$

The dual action is inner, so $`K_{}^_2(A_0A_0)G_{}`$ as $`R(_2)`$-modules.

The algebra $`A_0A_0`$ is not a Kirchberg algebra. To remedy this, choose a nonzero projection $`qA_0`$ such that $`[q]=0`$ in $`K_0(A_0)`$. Set $`p=1q`$, so that $`[p]=[1_{A_0}]`$ in $`K_0(A_0)`$. Choose (; or Theorem 4.1.3 and the proofs of Corollary 4.4.2 and Theorem 4.2.4 of ) unital homomorphisms $`\phi :A_0pA_0p`$ and $`\psi :A_0qA_0q`$ such that

$$A_0\stackrel{\phi }{}pA_0pA_0$$

is the identity on K-theory and $`\psi _{}=0`$. Define a unital equivariant homomorphism $`\rho :A_0A_0A_0A_0`$ by $`\phi (a,b)=(\phi (a)+\psi (b),\phi (b)+\psi (a))`$ for $`a,bA_0`$. Let $`A`$ be the direct limit of the system

$$A_0A_0\stackrel{\rho }{}A_0A_0\stackrel{\rho }{}A_0A_0\stackrel{\rho }{}\mathrm{}.$$

Then $`A`$ is a unital Kirchberg algebra by Lemma 4.6. Let $`\alpha :_2\mathrm{Aut}(A)`$ be the direct limit action.

We next show that $`K_{}^_2(A)G_{}`$ as $`R(_2)`$-modules. We do this by proving that $`\rho _{}:K_{}^_2(A_0A_0)K_{}^_2(A_0A_0)`$ is an isomorphism and using Proposition 2.5.4 of  on the direct system and its suspension. We claim that the corresponding homomorphism

$$\overline{\rho }:C^{}(_2,A_0A_0,\alpha ^{(0)})C^{}(_2,A_0A_0,\alpha ^{(0)})$$

is, under the identification of the crossed product above, given by

$$\overline{\rho }(x)=(\mathrm{id}_{M_2}\phi )(x)+u(\mathrm{id}_{M_2}\psi )(x)u^{}.$$

It is enough to check this on the image of $`A_0A_0`$, namely the diagonal matrices, and on $`u`$; this is easy. It is immediate from the choice of $`\phi `$ and $`\psi `$ that this map is the identity on K-theory.

It remains to show that $`C^{}(_2,A,\alpha )`$ is a Kirchberg algebra. This algebra is the direct limit of the system of crossed products

$$C^{}(_2,A_0A_0,\alpha ^{(0)})\stackrel{\overline{\rho }}{}C^{}(_2,A_0A_0,\alpha ^{(0)})\stackrel{\overline{\rho }}{}C^{}(_2,A_0A_0,\alpha ^{(0)})\stackrel{\overline{\rho }}{}\mathrm{},$$

which, by the computation at the beginning of this case, can be rewritten as

$$M_2(A_0)M_2(A_0)M_2(A_0)\mathrm{}.$$

The direct limit of this system is a Kirchberg algebra by Lemma 4.6.

###### Remark 4.8.

When the action of the nontrivial element of $`\widehat{}_2`$ is nontrivial, we do not know whether the C\*-algebra in Theorem 4.7 satisfies the Universal Coefficient Theorem.

## 5. An explicit example

In this section, we write down a formula for an automorphism in the smallest nontrivial case of Theorem 4.3. This is the case $`K_0(A)_3`$, $`K_1(A)=0`$, and $`\gamma _0`$ is the unique nontrivial automorphism of $`_3`$. Since $`\gamma _0`$ fixes only the identity element of $`_3`$, the automorphism will exist only when $`[1_A]=0`$ in $`K_0(A)`$. Let $`𝒪_4`$ be the Cuntz algebra , with K-theory as computed in . Then the unital Kirchberg algebra $`A`$ with this K-theory and satisfying the Universal Coefficient Theorem is $`M_3𝒪_4`$.

###### Example 5.1.

We give an explicit formula, in terms of the standard generators, for an order two automorphism $`\phi `$ of $`A=M_3𝒪_4`$ which is nontrivial on $`K_0(A)`$.

Let $`s_1`$, $`s_2`$, $`s_3`$, and $`s_4`$ be the standard generating isometries of $`𝒪_4`$, and define $`p_m=s_ms_m^{}`$. Further let $`e_{j,k}`$, for $`1j,k3`$, be the standard matrix units of $`M_3`$, satisfying $`e_{j,k}e_{k,l}=e_{j,l}`$ etc. Then $`\phi `$ is determined by the formulas:

$`e_{1,1}1`$ $`f_{1,1}=(e_{2,2}+e_{3,3})1`$
$`e_{2,2}1`$ $`f_{2,2}=e_{1,1}(p_1+p_2)`$
$`e_{3,3}1`$ $`f_{3,3}=e_{1,1}(p_3+p_4)`$
$`e_{1,2}1`$ $`f_{1,2}=e_{2,1}s_1^{}+e_{3,1}s_2^{}`$
$`e_{1,3}1`$ $`f_{1,3}=e_{2,1}s_3^{}+e_{3,1}s_4^{}`$
$`e_{1,1}s_1`$ $`v_1=e_{2,2}s_1+e_{2,3}s_2`$
$`e_{1,1}s_2`$ $`v_2=e_{2,2}s_3+e_{2,3}s_4`$
$`e_{1,1}s_3`$ $`v_3=e_{3,2}s_1+e_{3,3}s_2`$
$`e_{1,1}s_4`$ $`v_4=e_{3,2}s_3+e_{3,3}s_4`$
One must check two things: that $`\phi `$ is a homomorphism, and that $`\phi ^2=\mathrm{id}_A`$. For the first, one checks the following relations:

* $`f_{1,1}`$, $`f_{2,2}`$, and $`f_{3,3}`$ are orthogonal projections which sum to $`1`$.
* $`f_{1,j}f_{1,j}^{}=f_{1,1}`$ and $`f_{1,j}^{}f_{1,j}=f_{j,j}`$ for $`j=2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}`$.
* $`v_m^{}v_m=f_{1,1}`$ for $`1m4`$ and $`_{m=1}^4v_mv_m^{}=f_{1,1}`$.

The details of the computation are somewhat long, and are omitted.

To prove that $`\phi ^2=\mathrm{id}_A`$, one checks that $`\phi (\phi (a))=a`$ for each of the generators used above. Again, we omit the details.