text:
# Linear Optics Quantum Communication over Long Distances

\[

## Abstract

We propose a feasible scheme for teleporting an arbitrary polarization state or entanglement of photons by requiring only single-photon (SP) sources, simple linear optical elements and SP quantum non-demolition measurements. An unknown SP polarization state can be faithfully teleported either to a duplicate polarization state or to an entangled state. Our proposal can be used to implement long-distance quantum communication in a simple way. The scheme is within the reach of current technology and significantly simplifies the realistc implementation of long-distance high-fidelity quantum communication with photon qubits.

PACS numbers: 03.67.Hk, 03.67.-a, 42.50.-p

\]

Quantum mechanics offers us the surprising capabilities of manipulating quantum information for computational and communicational tasks in a nonclassical way . So far, many quantum information protocols have been proposed to realize the capabilities. Among these protocols, much attention has been paid on quantum communication (QC), e.g., quantum cryptography  and quantum teleportation . Quantum teleportation is a process that transmits an unknown quantum state from a sender (Alice) to a receiver (Bob) via a quantum channel with the help of some classical information. It may also play a constructive role in quantum computation . As is widely believed, many quantum information protocols , including QC, heavily rely on the pre-existing Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) entanglement  as a necessary “resource”. Meanwhile, quantum entanglement is also a test ground of various fundamental problems in quantum mechanics. Along this line of thought, a large number of physical systems (e.g., photons ) has been proposed to generate entangled states, a notoriously difficult task.

QC ultimately aims to transmit quantum states (e.g., the polarization states of photons) or create quantum correlations between remote locations, a long-sought goal in the context of quantum information. For transmitting an unknown quantum state with fidelity $`1`$, the quantum channel is a maximally entangled state . Thus the establishment of high-quality entangled states between distant nodes is essential for large-scale QC. On the one hand, photons still remain the best long-distance carriers of quantum information. On the other hand, the unavoidable noise of the photonic channel degrades the entanglement established between two distant parties. The degradation of quantum entanglement (as well as the communication fidelity) is exponential with respect to the channel length  and remains one of the main obstacles for robust long-distance QC. To face this difficulty, various entanglement purification protocol have been proposed . However, since entanglement purification, though interesting in its own right, requires an exponentially large number of partially entangled states to obtain one desired entangled state, the quantum repeater protocol is necessary to overcome the exponential decay of the entanglement .

Motivated by several linear optics implementations of quantum information processing (quantum computation , entanglement purification  and generation of polarization-entangled photons ), this paper demonstrates a dramatically different approach for QC and quantum network over long distances by thoroughly exploiting linear optics, as envisioned in Refs. . We first propose a scheme for teleporting an arbitrary polarization state or entanglement of photons. It requires only the single-photon (SP) sources, simple linear optical elements \[e.g., the polarizing beam splitters (PBS) and wave plates\] and quantum non-demolition measurements (QNDM) with SP resolution . An unknown SP polarization state can be teleported either to another photon with the identical polarization state or to an entangled state; both of the possibilities occur with the probability of $`50\%`$. We then show that our scheme, together with the concept of quantum repeaters , could be used to implement long-distance QC in a simple way. For teleporting with certainty, one requires the complete Bell-state measurement (BSM). Since the first teleportation experiment, which realized the identification of only one, among four, Bell state , several feasible schemes have been proposed to achieve the full BSM . Combining these BSM schemes and the recent achievement of nearly ideal SP source , our long-distance QC scheme is within the reach of current technology.

Very recently, Duan et al.  proposed a different scheme of long-distance QC, which involves laser manipulation of atomic ensembles, beam splitters and SP detectors. While their proposal represents a novel way of creating long-distance quantum entanglement between two atomic ensembles, we are aiming to establish remote quantum entanglement between photons by linear optics.

In the original proposal of quantum teleportation , Alice possesses a polarization state of photon $`1`$

$$|\psi _1=\alpha |H_1+\beta |V_1,$$
(1)
where $`H`$ ($`V`$) denotes the horizontal (vertical) linear polarization; $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are two arbitrary complex probability amplitudes satisfying $`\left|\alpha \right|^2+\left|\beta \right|^2=1`$. The state $`|\psi _1`$, completely unknown to Alice, is to be transmitted by Alice to Bob via one of the following quantum channels (the Bell states)

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm _{23}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(|H_2|V_3\pm |V_2|H_3),`$ (2)
$`|\mathrm{\Phi }^\pm _{23}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(|H_2|H_3\pm |V_2|V_3),`$ (3)
which can be generated in the process of spontaneous parametric down-conversion in a nonlinear optical crystal . In the four Bell states $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm _{23}`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^\pm _{23}`$, the subscripts label the photon $`2`$ (possessed by Alice) and the photon $`3`$ (possessed by Bob). Photons $`2`$ and $`3`$ (the entangled qubits) are maximally entangled when they are in these Bell states. In the original quantum teleportation protocol, one requires an existing Bell state as a prerequisite resource. Currently, the mostly used reliable source of the polarization-entangled photons is parametric down-conversion in a nonlinear optical crystal . However, the process is spontaneous (or random) and suffers from the low yield. This limits the utility of such an entangled photon source, in particular in long-distance QC, where the resource overheads are rather large.

Here we suggest a different quantum teleportation protocol by exploiting only simple linear optical elements and SP sources, accompanied with appropriate quantum measurements. Consider three independent SP sources emitting three photons: the SP source-$`1`$ emits photon $`1`$ with quantum state $`|\psi _1`$, while the remaining two SP sources emit photons $`2`$ and $`3`$, whose quantum states are

$$|\psi _j=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|H_j+|V_j).(j=2,3)$$
(4)
These SP states in Eqs. (1) and (4) can be easily generated with high precision since only trivial single-qubit operations are involved. The current technology has realized deterministic and controllable SP sources with high repetition rate and without the requirement of a cryogenic temperature , making them very suitable for the long-distance QC task.

Now photons $`2`$ and $`3`$ are superimposed onto the PBS23 simultaneously, resulting in two output $`2^{}`$ and $`3^{}`$. Then the photon(s) in the output $`2^{}`$ and photon $`1`$ are incident on the PBS$`_{12^{}}`$, with the corresponding output $`1^{}`$ and $`2^{\prime \prime }`$. Since the PBS reflects $`V`$-photons and transmits $`H`$-photons, the whole state $`|\psi _1|\psi _2|\psi _3`$ of the three photons after the action of the two PBS is transformed into

$`|\psi _{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }3^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[\alpha |H_1^{}|H_{2^{\prime \prime }}|H_3^{}+\beta |V_1^{}|V_{2^{\prime \prime }}|V_3^{}`$ (8)
$`+\alpha |0_1^{}|HV_{2^{\prime \prime }}|V_3^{}+\beta |HV_1^{}|0_{2^{\prime \prime }}|H_3^{}`$
$`+(\alpha |V_1^{}|HV_{2^{\prime \prime }}+\beta |HV_1^{}|V_{2^{\prime \prime }})|0_3^{}`$
$`+(\alpha |0_1^{}|H_{2^{\prime \prime }}+\beta |V_1^{}|0_{2^{\prime \prime }})|HV_3^{}],`$
where $`|0`$ and $`|HV`$ denote the zero-photon and two-photon (one with $`H`$-polarization and another with $`V`$-polarization) states, respectively. Introduce two new Bell states

$$|\mathrm{\Xi }^\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0|HV\pm |HV|0),$$
(9)
which are also maximally entangled. Then using Eqs. (3) and (9) enables us to rewrite the first two lines of (8) as

$`|\psi ^{}_{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }3^{}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[|\mathrm{\Phi }^+_{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }}(\alpha |V_3^{}+\beta |H_3^{})`$ (13)
$`+|\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }}(\alpha |V_3^{}\beta |H_3^{})`$
$`+|\mathrm{\Xi }^+_{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }}(\alpha |H_3^{}+\beta |V_3^{})`$
$`+|\mathrm{\Xi }^{}_{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }}(\alpha |H_3^{}\beta |V_3^{})].`$
Now Bob, who possesses the output photon(s) $`3^{}`$, needs to perform a QNDM of the photon number at his side. His detection results will be informed to Alice, who possesses the output photons $`1^{}`$ and $`2^{\prime \prime }`$, via a classical channel. If the detected photon number is zero (two), then the form of (8) and the standard theory of quantum measurement imply that Alice’s states are projected onto (i.e., teleported to) an entangled state $`\alpha |V_1^{}|HV_{2^{\prime \prime }}+\beta |HV_1^{}|V_{2^{\prime \prime }}`$ ($`\alpha |0_1^{}|H_{2^{\prime \prime }}+\beta |V_1^{}|0_{2^{\prime \prime }}`$), whose entanglement is determined by the input state $`|\psi _1`$. In this case, Alice obtains an entangled state conditioned on Bob’s measurement results. However, if the photon number detected by Bob is one, then the whole state $`|\psi _{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }3^{}}`$ will be projected onto $`|\psi ^{}_{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }3^{}}`$. In this case, Alice can teleport the unknown input state $`|\psi _1`$ to Bob by performing the BSM that collapses her states onto one of the four Bell states $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^\pm _{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }}`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Xi }^\pm _{1^{}2^{\prime \prime }}`$, instead of the four Bell states in Eq. (3) in the original proposal . The present BSM can then be accomplished by exploiting two complete BSM schemes proposed recently .

For convenience, we call the whole setups (the PBS, the SP sources as well as the required measurement setups) that teleport an unknown input quantum state a “quantum teleporter”. The quantum teleporter can faithfully transmit an unknown SP polarization state either to another photon with the identical polarization state or to an entangled state; both of the possibilities occur with the probability of $`50\%`$. If the latter is discarded, the success probability of the scheme is reduced to $`50\%`$. Since the perfection of the simple linear optical elements is extremely high, the quantum teleporters in our scheme are robust and can transmit the polarization states of photons with high fidelity.

Entanglement swapping is in fact teleportation of entanglement . The above scheme can also be used in entanglement swapping. In this case we consider two EPR pairs $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_{12}`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_{34}`$; photons $`1`$ and $`3`$ are distributed to Alice. Alice superimposes her photons onto a PBS ( with the corresponding output $`1^{}`$ and $`3^{}`$). Afterward, the initial state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_{12}|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_{34}`$ becomes

$`|\psi _{1^{}23^{}4}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}[|\mathrm{\Psi }^+_{1^{}3^{}}|\mathrm{\Phi }^+_{24}|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_{1^{}3^{}}|\mathrm{\Phi }^{}_{24}`$ (15)
$`|\mathrm{\Xi }^+_{1^{}3^{}}|\mathrm{\Psi }^+_{24}|\mathrm{\Xi }^{}_{1^{}3^{}}|\mathrm{\Psi }^{}_{24}].`$
Then Alice performs the BSM. At the end of the entanglement swapping, conditioned on Alice’s result photons $`2`$ and $`4`$ are entangled in one of the four Bell states $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm _{24}`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^\pm _{24}`$, though they never interact in any way . In the above entanglement swapping protocol, the two EPR pairs can be created by the SP sources, simple linear optical elements and the QNDM with SP resolution . The whole setups that swap the quantum entanglement are called an “entanglement swapper”.

As in all realistic teleportation experiments , the BSM relies on the interference of two independently created photons. One thus has to guarantee good spatial and temporal overlap at the PBS and above all, one has to erase all kinds of the which-way information for the two photons. The procedure is crucial to the validity of Eqs. (8) and (15). Thus, SP sources with good coherence and controllable emission time and direction are highly desirable and in fact, can be realized in quantum dots with integrated cavity structure . The SP coherence may also be enhanced by frequency filters.

While the proposed linear optics implementation of quantum teleportation is interesting in its own right, its usefulness lies in realizing long-distance QC simply by combining the basic idea of quantum repeaters  and the linear optics entanglement purification protocol . To achieve a successful QC, one can either send directly the qubit, whose information is encoded in the polarization state of a photon, through a photonic channel (the scheme-I) or create the high-quality entanglement over the channel, i.e., the quantum channel (the scheme-II), which can then be used to transmit quantum information by virtue of the quantum teleportation protocol. The quantum repeater protocol  can be implemented correspondingly in two distinct ways. In the present long-distance QC model, one divides the whole QC channel into many nodes; the length between two nearest neighboring nodes is comparable to the channel attenuation length. To faithfully transmit an unknown SP polarization state, a quantum teleporter (together with a quantum memory if needed) is used at each node: The quantum states are transmitted by the quantum teleporters as a relay race. Similarly, entanglement swapping can be extended to a long distance by using many entanglement swappers, each of which is placed at one node. Most importantly, the suggested scheme has obvious advantages in terms of its simplicity and integrability into the linear optics entanglement purification protocol proposed by Pan et al. . The integrability implies that the linear optics realization of long-distance QC may also have the built-in entanglement purification, an important feature that is essential to the long-distance QC protocol due to Duan et al. . The crucial point here is that our scheme of quantum teleportation eliminates the stringent requirement of entangled photon sources; both the entanglement and its purification are plug-in on demand. Thus we can overcome the problem associated with the exponential decay of the entanglement and communication fidelity in a simple way.

Another basic building block in the long-distance QC is quantum memory. It is essential for locally storing and manipulating quantum information. As proposed in Ref. , a quantum network or a QC channel consists of spatially separated nodes, which are connected by photonic channels. When quantum memory located at each node is represented by the internal states of atoms (or ions), one needs to transfer the internal state of an atom at a node to quantum state of an optical mode, and vice versa at the next node. While this proposal is attractive for creating long-distance quantum correlations of the internal states of atoms over a noisy channel, it is preferable in our scheme to store the quantum states of photons within quantum memory directly to establish the polarization entanglement of photons over a long photonic channel. Fortunately, a light pulse can be, with nearly $`100\%`$ efficiency in principle, stored for a controllable period of time and then released on demand in an optically dense many-atom system , as some recent experiments demonstrated . In particular, transfer and storage of the polarization state of a photon are also realizable . Storing polarization entanglement of photons over long distances could also be accomplished by a scheme proposed by Lloyd et al. . Thus quantum memory suitable for our scheme is feasible already.

Due to dissipation, noise and imperfect measurements, errors always occur in a realistic QC channel. Detailed analyses of the scalability and resource requirements within our scheme are yet to be done. However, we can make the following remarks. In some sense, our scheme is a minimal one, which has a great advantage of tolerating errors and lessening the required overheads. First, only three measurements, two of which are required for the complete BSM , are involved in teleporting an unknown SP state, with six possible outcome states to be distinguished. Meanwhile, the complicated experimental task of creating quantum entanglement does not need to be done separately in the present approach. Moreover, the simple linear-optical elements are thoroughly used within our scheme. Their extremely good performance induces only small errors that can be safely ignored. The minimal scheme we proposed is thus essential to a scalable QC with photons.

As in the linear optics quantum computation , dominant sources of errors in our linear optics QC come from photon loss, phase errors and detector inefficiency, which are well understood. These errors can be dealt with by using the method described in Ref. . The detector inefficiency only influences the communication efficiency of our scheme, similarly to other linear optics implementations of quantum information processing . Under the scheme-I, complicated error detection and correction are necessarily involved . In this respect, it is more advantageous to work under the scheme-II. Within our linear optics realization of the quantum repeaters, the resources of creating high-quality entanglement over a long QC channel might grow polynomially with the channel length as in the original quantum repeater protocol .

The QNDM with SP resolution is crucial in our approach. Standard realization of the QNDM of the photon number requires the cross-Kerr nonlinearity , which induces the cross-Kerr phase modulation required to implement the complete BSM . To obtain good signal to noise ratio, it is desirable to acquire giant cross-Kerr nonlinearity. Though the required nonlinearity could be obtained by ultraslow SP pulses propagating in a coherently prepared atomic gas , currently an SP-QNDM still remains an experimental challenge. In Ref. , the SP-QNDM has indeed been realized by a cavity-QED technique. But such an SP-QNDM is strongly frequency-dependent. Very recently, Kok et al.  proposed a probabilistic interferometric SP-QNDM device with linear optics and SP detectors; the device, which can distinguish the zero-photon, single-photon and two-photon evens, is frequency-independent and may be polarization-preserving. Thus it can be naturally integrated into the present QC protocol.

To summarize, we have proposed a linear optics model for long-distance high-fidelity QC. Our proposal eliminates an obstacle of the large-scale QC since the high-quality entanglement required for faithful quantum teleportation and entanglement swapping is plug-in on demand. It relies on the beautiful technologies developed for nearly ideal SP sources aiming at the QC tasks, for the QNDM with SP resolution and for quantum memory of light. The proposed scheme simplifies the experimental aspect of realistic long-distance QC and the optical quantum network. The linear optics quantum information processing has several attractive advantages . With several involved technologies working together, our scheme might be realizable in a near future.

We thank Lu-Ming Duan and Jian-Wei Pan for valuable comments. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grants No. 10104014, No. 19975043 and No. 10028406 and by the Chinese Academy of Sciences.


format: text

text:
# Vertex Algebroids I

## 1. Introduction

The purpose of this note is to give a “coordinate free” construction and prove the uniqueness of the vertex algebroid which gives rise to the chiral de Rham complex of \[GMS\]. In order to do that, we adapt the strategy of \[BD\] to the setting of vertex agebroids.

To this end we show that the stack $`VA_X`$ of exact vertex algebroids on $`X`$ is a torsor under the stack in Picard groupoids $`CA_X`$ of exact Courant algebroids on $`X`$ (and, in particular, is locally non-empty). Moreover, we show that that $`CA_X`$ is naturally equivalent to the stack of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2\mathrm{@}>d>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{3,cl}`$-torsors. These facts are proven for $`X`$ a manifold ($`C^{\mathrm{}}`$, (complex) analytic, smooth algebraic variety over $``$). We leave to the reader the obvious extension to differential graded manifolds.

Given a manifold $`X`$, let $`X^{\mathrm{}}`$ denote the differential graded manifold with the underlying space $`X`$ and the structure sheaf $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$ the de Rham complex of $`X`$. We show that $`CA_X^{\mathrm{}}`$ is, in fact, trivial. Together with local existence of vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroids this implies that there exists a unique up to a unique isomorphism vertex algebroid over the de Rham complex. We give a “coordinate-free” description of the unique vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid in terms of generators and relations.

## 2. Vertex operator algebras

Throughout this section we follow the notations of \[GMS\]. The following definitions are lifted from loc. cit.

### 2.1.

A $`_0`$-graded vertex algebra is a $`_0`$-graded $`k`$-module $`V=V_i`$, equipped with a distinguished vector $`\mathrm{𝟏}V_0`$ (vacuum vector) and a family of bilinear operations

$${}_{(n)}{}^{}:V\times V\mathrm{@}>>>V,(a,b)a_{(n)}b$$

of degree $`n1`$, $`n`$, such that

$$\mathrm{𝟏}_{(n)}a=\delta _{n,1}a;a_{(1)}\mathrm{𝟏}=a;a_{(n)}\mathrm{𝟏}=0\text{ if }n0,$$

and

$$\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m}{j}\right)(a_{(n+j)}b)_{(m+lj)}c=\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1)^j\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{j}\right)\left\{a_{(m+nj)}b_{(l+j)}c(1)^nb_{(n+lj)}a_{(m+j)}c\right\}$$

for all $`a,b,cV,m,n,l`$.

### 2.2.

A morphism of vertex algebras is a map of graded $`k`$-modules (of degree zero) which maps the vacuum vector to the vacuum vector and commutes with all of the operations.

Let $`𝒱ert`$ denote the category of vertex algebras.

### 2.3.

Let

$$^{(j)}a:=a_{(1j)}\underset{¯}{\text{1}},j_0.$$

Then, $`^{(j)}`$ is an endomorphisms of $`V`$ of degree $`j`$ which satisfies (see \[GMS\])

* $`^{(j)}\mathrm{𝟏}=\delta _{j,0}\mathrm{𝟏}`$,
* $`^{(0)}=Id`$,
* $`^{(i)}^{(j)}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i+j}{i}\right)^{(i+j)}`$,
* $`(^{(j)}a)_{(n)}b=(1)^j\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{j}\right)a_{(nj)}b`$, and
* $`^{(j)}(a_{(n)}b)=_{p=0}^j(^{(p)}a)_{(n)}^{(jp)}b`$

for all $`n`$.

### 2.4.

The subject of the definition below is the restriction of the structure of a vertex algebra to the graded components of degrees zero and one.

A $`1`$-truncated vertex algebra is a septuple $`v=(V_0,V_1,\mathrm{𝟏},,_{(1)},_{(0)},_{(1)})`$ where

* $`V_0,V_1`$ are $`k`$-modules,
* $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ an element of $`V_0`$ (vacuum vector),
* $`:V_0\mathrm{@}>>>V_1`$ a $`k`$-linear map,
* $`{}_{(i)}{}^{}:(V_0V_1)\times (V_0V_1)\mathrm{@}>>>V_0V_1`$ (where $`(i=1,0,1)`$) are $`k`$-bilinear operations of degree $`i1`$.

Elements of $`V_0`$ (resp., $`V_1`$) will be denoted $`a,b,c`$ (resp., $`x,y,z`$). There are seven operations: $`a_{(1)}b,a_{(1)}x,x_{(1)}a,a_{(0)}x`$, $`x_{(0)}a,x_{(0)}y`$ and $`x_{(1)}y`$. These satisfy the following axioms:

* (Vacuum)

$$a_{(1)}\mathrm{𝟏}=a;x_{(1)}\mathrm{𝟏}=x;x_{(0)}\mathrm{𝟏}=0$$
* (Derivation)

+ $`(a)_{(0)}b=0;(a)_{(0)}x=0;(a)_{(1)}x=a_{(0)}x`$
    + $`(a_{(1)}b)=(a)_{(1)}b+a_{(1)}b;(x_{(0)}a)=x_{(0)}a`$
* (Commutativity)

+ $`a_{(1)}b=b_{(1)}a;a_{(1)}x=x_{(1)}a(x_{(0)}a)`$
    + $`x_{(0)}a=a_{(0)}x;x_{(0)}y=y_{(0)}x+(y_{(1)}x)`$
    + $`x_{(1)}y=y_{(1)}x`$
* (Associativity)

+ $`(a_{(1)}b)_{(1)}c=a_{(1)}b_{(1)}c`$
    + $`\alpha _{(0)}\beta _{(i)}\gamma =(\alpha _{(0)}\beta )_{(i)}\gamma +\beta _{(i)}\alpha _{(0)}\gamma ,(\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma V_0V_1)`$ whenever the both sides are defined, i.e. the operation (0) is a derivation of all of the operations (i).
    + $`(a_{(1)}x)_{(0)}b=a_{(1)}x_{(0)}b`$
    + $`(a_{(1)}b)_{(1)}x=a_{(1)}b_{(1)}x+(a)_{(1)}b_{(0)}x+(b)_{(1)}a_{(0)}x`$
    + $`(a_{(1)}x)_{(1)}y=a_{(1)}x_{(1)}yx_{(0)}y_{(0)}a`$

### 2.5.

A morphism between two $`1`$-truncated vertex algebras $`f:v=(V_0,V_1,\mathrm{})\mathrm{@}>>>v^{}=(V_0^{},V_1^{},\mathrm{})`$ is a pair of maps of $`k`$-modules $`f=(f_0,f_1),f_i:V_i\mathrm{@}>>>V_i^{}`$ such that $`f_0(\mathrm{𝟏})=\mathrm{𝟏}^{},f_1(a)=f_0(a)`$ and $`f(\alpha _{(i)}\beta )=f(\alpha )_{(i)}f(\beta )`$, whenever both sides are defined.

Let $`𝒱ert_1`$ denote the category of $`1`$-truncated vertex algebras. We have an obvious truncation functor

$`(\mathrm{3.1.1})`$
$$t:𝒱ert\mathrm{@}>>>𝒱ert_1$$

which assignes to a vertex algebra $`V=V_i`$ the truncated algebra $`tV:=(V_0,V_1,\mathrm{})`$.

### 2.6. Remark

It follows easily that the operation $`{}_{(1)}{}^{}:V_0\times V_0\mathrm{@}>>>V_0`$ endows $`V_0`$ with a structure of a commutative $`k`$-algebra.

## 3. Vertex algebroids

Suppose that $`X`$ is smooth variety over $``$ (a complex manifold, a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-manifold). In either case we will denoted by $`𝒪_X`$ ($`𝒯_X`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^i`$) the corresponding structure sheaf (the sheaf of vector fields, the sheaf of differential $`i`$-forms).

A vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid, as defined in this section, is, essentially, a sheaf of $`1`$-truncated vertex algebras, whose degree zero component (which is a sheaf of algebras by 2.6) is identified with $`𝒪_X`$.

### 3.1. Leibniz algebras

A Leibnitz $`k`$-algebra is a $`k`$-vector space $`𝔤`$ equipped with a bilinear operation $`[,]:𝔤g\mathrm{@}>>>g`$ (the Leibniz bracket) which satisfies the Jacobi type identity $`[a,[b,c]]=[[a,b],c]+[b,[a,c]]`$.

A morphism of Leibniz $`k`$-algebras is a $`k`$-linear map which commutes with the respective Leibniz brackets.

We denote the category of Leibniz $`k`$-algebras by $`\mathrm{Leib}(k)`$. Let $`\mathrm{Lie}(k)`$ denote the category of Lie $`k`$-algebras.

Since any Lie algebra is a Leibnitz algebra there is an full embedding

(3.1.1)
$$\mathrm{Lie}(k)\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{Leib}(k).$$

### 3.2. Vertex algebroids

A vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid is a sheaf of $``$-vector spaces $`𝒱`$ with a pairing

$`𝒪_X_{}𝒱`$ $`\mathrm{@}>>>`$ $`𝒱`$
$`fv`$ $``$ $`fv`$
such that $`1v=v`$ (i.e. a “non-associative unital $`𝒪_X`$-module”) equipped with

1. a structure of a Leibniz $``$-algebra $`[,]:𝒱_{}𝒱\mathrm{@}>>>𝒱`$
2. a $``$-linear map of Leibniz algebras $`\pi :𝒱\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X`$ (the anchor)
3. a symmetric $``$-bilinear pairing $`,:𝒱_{}𝒱\mathrm{@}>>>𝒪_X`$
4. a $``$-linear map $`:𝒪_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒱`$ such that $`\pi =0`$

which satisfy

(3.2.1) $`f(gv)(fg)v`$ $`=`$ $`\pi (v)(f)(g)\pi (v)(g)(f)`$
(3.2.2) $`[v_1,fv_2]`$ $`=`$ $`\pi (v_1)(f)v_2+f[v_1,v_2]`$
(3.2.3) $`[v_1,v_2]+[v_2,v_1]`$ $`=`$ $`(v_1,v_2)`$
(3.2.4) $`\pi (fv)`$ $`=`$ $`f\pi (v)`$
(3.2.5) $`fv_1,v_2`$ $`=`$ $`fv_1,v_2\pi (v_1)(\pi (v_2)(f))`$
(3.2.6) $`\pi (v)(v_1,v_2)`$ $`=`$ $`[v,v_1],v_2+v_1,[v,v_2]`$
(3.2.7) $`(fg)`$ $`=`$ $`f(g)+g(f)`$
(3.2.8) $`[v,(f)]`$ $`=`$ $`(\pi (v)(f))`$
(3.2.9) $`v,(f)`$ $`=`$ $`\pi (v)(f)`$
for $`v,v_1,v_2𝒱`$, $`f,g𝒪_X`$.

#### 3.2.1.

A morphism of vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids is a $``$-linear map of sheaves which preserves all of the structures.

We denote the category of vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids by $`𝒱A_{𝒪_X}(X)`$. It is clear that the notion vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid is local, i.e. vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids form a stack which we denote by $`𝒱A_{𝒪_X}`$.

### 3.3. From vertex algebroids to 1-truncated vertex algebras

Suppose that $`𝒱`$ is a vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid. For $`f,g𝒪_X`$, $`v,w𝒱`$ let

(3.3.1)
$$f_{(1)}g=fg,f_{(1)}v=fv,v_{(1)}f=fv\pi (v)(f),$$

(3.3.2)
$$v_{(0)}f=f_{(0)}v=\pi (v)(f),v_{(0)}w=[v,w],$$

(3.3.3)
$$v_{(1)}w=v,w.$$

#### 3.3.1. Lemma

The septuple $`(𝒪_X,𝒱,1,,_{(1)},_{(0)},_{(1)})`$ is a sheaf of 1-truncated vertex operator algebras.

Conversely, if the septuple $`(𝒪_X,𝒱,1,,_{(1)},_{(0)},_{(1)})`$ is a sheaf of 1-truncated vertex operator algebras, then the formulas (3.3.1), (3.3.2), (3.3.3) define a structure of a vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid on $`𝒱`$.

### 3.4. The associated Lie algebroid

Suppose that $`𝒱`$ is a vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid. Let

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$ $`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`𝒪_X(𝒪_X)𝒱,`$
$`\overline{𝒱}`$ $`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`𝒱/\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱.`$
Note that the symmetrization of the Leibniz bracket takes values in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$.

For $`f,g,h𝒪_X`$

$$f(g(h))(fg)(h)=\pi ((h))(f)(g)+\pi ((h))(g)(f)=0,$$

because $`\pi =0`$. Therefore, $`𝒪_X\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱=\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$ is an $`𝒪_X`$-module. The map $`:𝒪_X\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$ is a derivation, hence induces the $`𝒪_X`$-linear map $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$.

Since the associator of the $`𝒪_X`$-action on $`𝒱`$ takes values in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$, $`\overline{𝒱}`$ is an $`𝒪_X`$-module.

For $`f,g,h𝒪_X`$

$$\pi (f(g))(h)=f\pi ((g))(h)=0.$$

Therefore, $`\pi `$ vanishes on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$, hence, factors through the map

(3.4.1)
$$\pi :\overline{𝒱}\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X$$

of $`𝒪_X`$-modules.

For $`v𝒱`$, $`f,g𝒪_X`$

$`[v,f(g)]`$ $`=`$ $`\pi (v)(f)(g)+f[v,(g)]`$
$`=`$ $`\pi (v)(f)(g)+f(\pi (v)(g)).`$
Therefore, $`[𝒱,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱]\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$ and the Leibniz bracket on $`𝒱`$ descends to the operation

(3.4.2)
$$[,]:\overline{𝒱}_{}\overline{𝒱}\mathrm{@}>>>\overline{𝒱}$$

which is skew-symmetric because the symmetrization of the Leibniz bracket on $`𝒱`$ takes values in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒱`$ and satisfies the Jacobi identity because the Leibniz bracket on $`𝒱`$ does.

#### 3.4.1. Lemma

The $`𝒪_X`$-module $`\overline{𝒱}`$ with the bracket (3.4.2) and the anchor (3.4.1) is a Lie $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid.

### 3.5. Transitive vertex algebroids

A vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid is called transitive if the anchor map is surjective.

#### 3.5.1. Remark

The vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid $`𝒱`$ is called transitive if and only if the Lie $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid $`\overline{𝒱}`$ is.

#### 3.5.2.

Suppose that $`𝒱`$ is a transitive vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid. The derivation $``$ induces the map

$$i:\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>𝒱.$$

For $`v𝒱`$, $`f,g𝒪_X`$

$`v,f(g)`$ $`=`$ $`fv,(g)\pi ((g))\pi (v)(f)`$
$`=`$ $`f\pi (v)(g)`$
$`=`$ $`\iota _{\pi (v)}fdg.`$
If follows that the map $`i`$ is adjoint to the anchor map $`\pi `$. The surjectivity of the latter implies the latter implies the injectivity of the former. Since, in addition, $`\pi i=0`$ the sequence

$$0\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>i>>𝒱\mathrm{@}>\pi >>\overline{𝒱}\mathrm{@}>>>0$$

is exact and $`i`$ is isotropic.

### 3.6. Exact vertex algebroids

A vertex algebroid $`𝒱`$ is called exact if the map $`\overline{𝒱}\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X`$ is an isomorphism.

We denote the stack of exact vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids by $`VA_X`$.

A morphism of exact vertex algebroids induces a morphism of respective extensions of $`𝒯_X`$ by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$, hence is an isomorphism of sheaves of $``$-vector spaces. It is clear that the inverse isomorphism is a morphism of vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids. Hence, $`VA_X`$ is a stack in groupoids.

#### 3.6.1. Example

Suppose that $`𝒯_X`$ is freely generated as an $`𝒪_X`$-module by a locally constant subsheaf of Lie $``$-subalgebras $`\tau 𝒯_X`$, i.e. the canonical map $`𝒪_X_{}\tau \mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X`$ is an isomorphism.

There is a unique structure of an exact vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid on $`𝒱=\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1𝒯_X`$ such that

* $`f(1t)=ft`$ for $`f𝒪_X`$, $`t\tau `$,
* the anchor map is given by the projection $`𝒱\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X`$,
* the map $`\tau \mathrm{@}>>>𝒱`$ is a morphism of Leibniz algebras,
* the pairing on $`𝒱`$ restricts to the trivial pairing on $`\tau `$,
* the derivation $`:𝒪_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒱`$ is given by the composition $`𝒪_X\mathrm{@}>d>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>𝒱`$.

Indeed, the action of $`𝒪_X`$ is completely determined by (3.2.1): for $`f,g𝒪_X`$, $`t\tau `$,

$$f(gt)=f(g(1t))=fgtt(f)dgt(g)df.$$

In a similar fashion the bracket is completely determined by (3.2.2) and (3.2.3), and the pairing is determined by (3.2.5).

We leave the verification of the identities (3.2.1) - (3.2.9) to the reader.

## 4. Courant algebroids

Courant algebroids are classical limits of vertex algebroids. They are related to vertex Poisson algebras (coisson algebras in the terminology of \[BD\]) in the same way as the vertex algebroids are related to vertex operators algebras.

### 4.1. Courant algebroids

A Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid is an $`𝒪_X`$-module $`𝒬`$ equipped with

1. a structure of a Leibniz $``$-algebra

$$[,]:𝒬_{}𝒬\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬,$$
2. an $`𝒪_X`$-linear map of Leibniz algebras (the anchor map)

$$\pi :𝒬\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X,$$
3. a symmetric $`𝒪_X`$-bilinear pairing

$$,:𝒬_{𝒪_X}𝒬\mathrm{@}>>>𝒪_X,$$
4. a derivation

$$:𝒪_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬$$

such that $`\pi =0`$

which satisfy

(4.1.1) $`[q_1,fq_2]`$ $`=`$ $`f[q_1,q_2]+\pi (q_1)(f)q_2`$
(4.1.2) $`[q,q_1],q_2+q_1,[q,q_2]`$ $`=`$ $`\pi (q)(q_1,q_2)`$
(4.1.3) $`[q,(f)]`$ $`=`$ $`(\pi (q)(f))`$
(4.1.4) $`q,(f)`$ $`=`$ $`\pi (q)(f)`$
(4.1.5) $`[q_1,q_2]+[q_2,q_1]`$ $`=`$ $`(q_1,q_2)`$
for $`f𝒪_X`$ and $`q,q_1,q_2𝒬`$.

#### 4.1.1.

A morphism of Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids is an $`𝒪_X`$-linear map of Leibnitz algebras which commutes with the respective anchor maps and derivations and preserves the respective pairings.

We denote the category of Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids on $`X`$ by $`𝒞A_{𝒪_X}(X)`$. The notion of Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid is local, i.e. Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids form a stack which we denote $`𝒞A_{𝒪_X}`$.

### 4.2. The associated Lie algebroid

Suppose that $`𝒬`$ is a Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid. Let

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒬`$ $`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`𝒪_X(𝒪_X)𝒬,`$
$`\overline{𝒬}`$ $`\stackrel{def}{=}`$ $`𝒬/\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒬.`$
Note that the symmetrization of the Leibniz bracket on $`𝒬`$ takes values in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒬`$.

For $`q𝒬`$, $`f,g𝒪_X`$

$`[q,f(g)]`$ $`=`$ $`f[q,(g)]+\pi (q)(f)(g)`$
$`=`$ $`f(\pi (q)(g))+\pi (q)(f)(g)`$
which shows that $`[𝒬,\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒬]\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒬`$. Therefore the Leibniz bracket on $`𝒬`$ descends to the Lie bracket

(4.2.1)
$$[,]:\overline{𝒬}_{}\overline{𝒬}\mathrm{@}>>>\overline{𝒬}.$$

Because $`\pi `$ is $`𝒪_X`$-linear and $`\pi =0`$, $`\pi `$ vanishes on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_𝒬`$ and factors through the map

(4.2.2)
$$\pi :\overline{𝒬}\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X.$$

#### 4.2.1. Lemma

The bracket (4.2.1) and the anchor (4.2.2) determine the structure of a Lie $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid on $`\overline{𝒬}`$.

### 4.3. Transitive Courant algebroids

A Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid is called transitive if the anchor map is surjective.

#### 4.3.1. Remark

A Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid $`𝒬`$ is transitive if and only if the associated Lie $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid is.

#### 4.3.2.

Suppose that $`𝒬`$ is a transitive Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid. The derivation $``$ induces the $`𝒪_X`$-linear map

$$i:\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬.$$

Since $`q,\alpha =\iota _{\pi (q)}\alpha `$, it follows that the map $`i`$ is adjoint to the anchor map $`\pi `$. The surjectivity of the latter implies that $`i`$ is injective. Since, in addition, $`\pi i=0`$ the sequence

$$0\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>i>>𝒬\mathrm{@}>>>\overline{𝒬}\mathrm{@}>>>0$$

is exact. Moreover, $`i`$ is isotropic with respect to the symmetric pairing.

### 4.4. Exact Courant algebroids

The Courant algebroid $`𝒬`$ is called exact if the anchor map $`\pi :\overline{𝒬}\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X`$ is an isomorhism.

We denote the stack of exact Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids by $`CA_X`$.

A morphism of exact Courant algebroids induces a morphism of respective extensions of $`𝒯_X`$ by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$, hence is an isomorphism of $`𝒪_X`$-modules. It is clear that the inverse is a morphism of Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids. Hence $`CA_X`$ is a stack in groupoids.

### 4.5. Automorphisms of exact Courant algebroids

Let $`\mathrm{Ext}_{𝒪_X}^,(𝒯_X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1)`$ denote the category whose objects are pairs $`(,,)`$, where $``$ is an extension

$$0\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>i>>\mathrm{@}>\pi >>𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>0.$$

and

$$,:_{𝒪_X}\mathrm{@}>>>𝒪_X$$

is a symmetric pairing such that $`i`$ is Lagrangian and the induced pairing between $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$ and $`𝒯_X=/\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$ is the canonical duality pairing. A morphism of such is a morphism of the underlying extensions which preserves the respective pairings.

The map

(4.5.1)
$$\mathrm{exp}:\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Hom}}_{𝒪_X}(𝒯_X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1)\mathrm{@}>>>\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Aut}}_{\mathrm{Ext}}()$$

defined by $`\varphi (ee+\varphi (\pi (e)))`$ is an isomorphism. It restricts to the isomorphism

$$\mathrm{exp}:\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2\mathrm{@}>>>\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Aut}}_{\mathrm{Ext}}^,(,,),$$

via the map

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2\mathrm{@}>>>\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Hom}}_{𝒪_X}(𝒯_X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1)$$

defined by $`\beta (\xi \iota _\xi \beta )`$.

Suppose that $`𝒬`$ is an exact Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid. The automorphism, induced by a 2-form $`\beta `$ of the underlying extension preserves the Leibnitz bracket if and only if the form $`\beta `$ is closed, i.e. the map (4.5.1) restricts to the isomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{2,cl}\mathrm{@}>>>\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Aut}}_{CA}(𝒬).$$

### 4.6. The $``$-vector space structure of $`CA`$

The category $`CA_X(X)`$ has a natural structure of a “$``$-vector space in categories” induced by that of $`\mathrm{Ext}_{𝒪_X}^1(𝒯_X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1)`$.

#### 4.6.1. Addition

Suppose that $`𝒬_1`$ and $`𝒬_2`$ are two exact Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids. Let $`𝒬_1+𝒬_2`$ denote the push-out of $`𝒬_1\times _{𝒯_X}𝒬_2`$ by the addition map $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\times \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$. A section of $`𝒬_1+𝒬_2`$ is an equivalence class of pairs $`(q_1,q_2)`$, where $`q_i𝒬_i`$ and $`\pi (q_1)=\pi (q_2)`$. Two pairs are equivalent if their (componentwise) difference is of the form $`(i(\alpha ),i(\alpha ))`$ for some $`\alpha \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$.

The two maps $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬_1+𝒬_2`$ given by $`\alpha (i(\alpha ),0)`$ and $`\alpha (0,i(\alpha ))`$ coincide. We denote their common value by $`i`$ as well. There is a short exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>i>>𝒬_1+𝒬_2\mathrm{@}>\pi >>𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>0,$$

where $`\pi ((q_1,q_2))`$ is defined as the common value of $`\pi (q_1)`$ and $`\pi (q_2)`$.

The map $`i`$ determines the derivation $`:𝒪_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬_1+𝒬_2`$ by $`(f)=i(df)`$.

For $`q_i,q_i^{}𝒬_i`$ let

(4.6.1)
$$[(q_1,q_2),(q_1^{},q_2^{})]=([q_1,q_1^{}],[q_2,q_2^{}]),(q_1,q_2),(q_1^{},q_2^{})=q_1,q_1^{}+q_2,q_2^{}.$$

#### 4.6.2. Lemma

The bracket and the symmetric pairing given by (4.6.1) determine a structure of an exact Courant algebroid on $`𝒬_1+𝒬_2`$.

#### 4.6.3. Scalar multiplication

Suppose that $`𝒬`$ is an exact Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid and $`\lambda `$. Let $`\lambda 𝒬`$ denote push-out of $`𝒬`$ by the multiplication by $`\lambda `$ map $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>\lambda >>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$. A section of $`\lambda 𝒬`$ is an equivalence class of pairs $`(\alpha ,q)`$ with $`\alpha \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$ and $`q𝒬`$. Two pairs as above are equivalent if their componentwise difference is of the form $`(\lambda \alpha ,i(\alpha ))`$ for some $`\alpha \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$.

Let $`i:\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>\lambda 𝒬`$ denote the map $`\alpha (\alpha ,0)`$. There is a short exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>i>>\lambda 𝒬\mathrm{@}>\pi >>𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>0$$

where $`\pi (\alpha ,q)=\pi (q)`$.

The map $`i`$ determines the derivation $`:𝒪_X\mathrm{@}>>>\lambda 𝒬`$ by $`(f)=i(df)=(df,0)`$. Note that $`\pi i=0`$ holds.

#### 4.6.4. Lemma

There is a unique structure of exact Courant algebroid on $`\lambda 𝒬`$ (with anchor $`\pi `$ and derivation $``$ as above) such that the map $`𝒬\mathrm{@}>>>\lambda 𝒬:q(0,q)`$ is a morphism of Leibniz algebras.

###### Proof.

For $`q_i𝒬`$ the calculation

$$\begin{array}{c}(\lambda dq_1,q_2,0)=(0,q_1,q_2)=\hfill \\ \hfill (0,[q_1,q_2]+[q_2,q_1])=[(0,q_1),(0,q_2)]+[(0,q_2),(0,q_1)]=(0,q_1),(0,q_2)=\\ \hfill (d(0,q_1),(0,q_2),0)\end{array}$$

together with (4.1.4) determines the symmetric pairing on $`\lambda 𝒬`$. In particular, $`(0,q_1),(0,q_2)=\lambda q_1,q_2`$. ∎

#### 4.6.5.

Let $`𝒬_0`$ denote the exact Courant algebroid with the underlying $`𝒪_X`$-module the trivial extension $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1𝒯_X`$, self-evident derivation and anchor map, the symmetric paring the obvious extension of the natural duality pairing and the Leibniz bracket uniquely determined by the requirement that the natural inclusion of $`𝒯_X`$ is a map of Leibniz algebras.

Note that $`𝒬_0`$ is equipped with a flat connection. For any exact Courant algebroid $`𝒬`$ a flat connection on $`𝒬`$ is the same thing as a morphism $`𝒬_0\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬`$.

#### 4.6.6. Lemma

For any exact Courant algebroid $`𝒬`$ there is a canonical isomorphism $`𝒬\stackrel{}{=}𝒬+𝒬_0`$.

#### 4.6.7. Remark

The natural morphism (of Leibniz algebras) $`𝒬\mathrm{@}>>>\lambda 𝒬`$ factors through $`𝒯_X`$ if $`\lambda =0`$ (and is an isomorphism of the underlying $`𝒪_X`$-modules otherwise) and the composition $`𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>0𝒬\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X`$ is clearly equal to the identity. Thus, $`0𝒬`$ carries a canonical flat connection, or, equivalently, is canonically isomorphic to $`𝒬_0`$.

#### 4.6.8. Remark

If $`\lambda 0`$ the natural map $`𝒬\mathrm{@}>>>\lambda 𝒬`$ is an isomorphism of the underlying $`𝒪_X`$-modules with the inverse given by $`(\alpha ,q)q+\lambda ^1\alpha `$. The Courant algebroid structure on $`𝒬`$ induced via this isomorphism and denoted $`_{\lambda 𝒬}`$, etc. is given by

$$_{\lambda 𝒬}(f)=\lambda ^1(f),q_1,q_2_{\lambda 𝒬}=\lambda q_1,q_2,[q_1,q_2]_{\lambda 𝒬}=[q_1,q_2]$$

### 4.7. Classification of exact Courant algebroids

#### 4.7.1. Connections

A connection on an exact Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid $`𝒬`$ is a Lagrangian section of the anchor map.

#### 4.7.2. Curvatrue

Suppose that $`𝒬`$ is an exact Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid and $``$ is a connection on $`𝒬`$. The formula

$$(\xi ,\xi _1,\xi _2)\iota _\xi ([(\xi _1),(\xi _2)]([\xi _1,\xi _2])$$

defines a differential 3-form $`c()`$ on $`X`$ which is easily seen to be closed.

The differential form $`c()`$ is called the curvature of the connection $``$.

#### 4.7.3.

Suppose that $`𝒬`$ is an exact Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid, $``$ is a connection on $`𝒬`$ and $`\varphi \mathrm{Hom}_{𝒪_X}(𝒯_X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1)`$. Then, $`+\varphi `$ is another section of the anchor map. The section $`+\varphi `$ is Lagrangian if and only if $`\varphi `$ is derived from a differential 2-form, i.e. there exists $`\beta \mathrm{\Omega }_X^2(X)`$ such that $`\varphi (\xi )=\iota _\xi \beta `$ for all $`\xi `$.

Let $`𝒞(𝒬)`$ denote the sheaf of (locally defined) connections on $`𝒬`$. It is a $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2`$-torsor. The correspondence $`c()`$ defines the map

$$c:𝒞(𝒬)\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{3,cl}$$

which satisfies

$$c(+\stackrel{~}{\beta })=c()+d\beta ,$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{()}:\mathrm{\Omega }_X^i\mathrm{@}>>>\underset{¯}{\mathrm{Hom}}_{𝒪_X}(𝒯_X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{i1})`$ is defined by $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }(\xi )=\iota _\xi \beta `$.

Therefore, the pair $`(𝒞(),c)`$ defines the functor

(4.7.1)
$$CA_X(X)\mathrm{@}>>>(\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2\mathrm{@}>d>>\mathrm{\Omega }^{3,cl})tors.$$

#### 4.7.4. Lemma

The functor (4.7.1) is an eqivalence of $``$-vector spaces in categories.

#### 4.7.5. Corollary

The $``$-vector space of isomorphism classes of exact Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids is naturally isomorphic to $`H^1(X;\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2\mathrm{@}>d>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{3,cl})`$.

### 4.8. The action on $`VA`$

The groupoid $`VA_X(X)`$, if non-empty, is an “affine space in categories” (under the action of the “$``$-vector space in categories” $`CA_X(X)`$).

#### 4.8.1.

Suppose that $`𝒱`$ (respectively, $`𝒬`$) is an exact vertex (respectively, Courant) algebroid. Let $`𝒬+𝒱`$ denote the push-out of $`𝒬\times _{𝒯_X}𝒱`$ by the addition map $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\times \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>+>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$. A section of $`𝒬+𝒱`$ is an equivalence class of pairs $`(q,v)`$ with $`q𝒬`$, $`v𝒱`$ and $`\pi (q)=\pi (v)`$. Two pairs are equivalent if their (componentwise) difference is of the form $`(i(\alpha ),i(\alpha ))`$ for some $`\alpha \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$.

The two maps $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬+𝒱`$ given by $`\alpha (i(\alpha ),0)`$ and $`\alpha (0,i(\alpha ))`$ coincide and we denote their common value by $`i`$ as well. There is a short exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>i>>𝒬+𝒱\mathrm{@}>\pi >>𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>0,$$

where $`\pi ((q,v))`$ is defined to be the common value of $`\pi (q)`$ and $`\pi (v)`$. Let

(4.8.1)
$$\begin{array}{c}(f)=i(df),f(q,v)=(fq,fv),\hfill \\ \hfill [(q_1,v_1),(q_2,v_2)]=([q_1,q_2],[v_1,v_2]),(q_1,v_1),(q_2,v_2)=q_1,q_2+v_1,v_2\end{array}$$

#### 4.8.2. Lemma

The formulas (4.8.1) determine a structure of a vertex algebroid on $`𝒬+𝒱`$.

#### 4.8.3. Proposition

$`VA_X`$ is a torsor under $`CA_X`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose that $`𝒱_1`$ and $`𝒱_2`$ are two exact vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroids. Let $`𝒱_2𝒱_1`$ the push-out of $`𝒱_2\times _{𝒯_X}𝒱_1`$ by the difference map $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\times \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1:(\alpha ,\beta )\alpha \beta `$. A section of $`𝒱_2𝒱_1`$ is an equivalence class of pairs $`(v_1,v_2)`$, where $`v_i𝒱_i`$ and $`\pi (v_1)=\pi (v_2)`$. Two pairs are equivalent if their (componentwise) difference is of the form $`(i(\alpha ),i(\alpha ))`$ for some $`\alpha \mathrm{\Omega }_X^1`$.

The two maps $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>>>𝒱_2𝒱_1`$ given by $`\alpha (i(\alpha ),0)`$ and $`\alpha (0,i(\alpha ))`$ coincide and we denote their common value by $`i`$ as well. There is a short exact sequence

$$0\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^1\mathrm{@}>i>>𝒱_2𝒱_1\mathrm{@}>\pi >>𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>0,$$

where $`\pi ((v_2,v_1))`$ is defined to be the common value of $`\pi (v_2)`$ and $`\pi (v_1)`$.

Let

(4.8.2)
$$\begin{array}{c}(f)=i(df),f(v_2,v_1)=(fv_2,fv_1),\hfill \\ \hfill [(v_2,v_1),(v_2^{},v_1^{})]=([v_2,v_2^{}],[v_1,v_1^{}]),(v_2,v_1),(v_2^{},v_1^{})=v_2,v_2^{}+v_1,v_1^{}\end{array}$$

It is clear that component-wise $``$-operation of $`𝒪_X`$ is well-defined on $`𝒱_2𝒱_1`$. Moreover, since the associator of the $`𝒪_X`$-action on a vertex $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid (i.e. the right hand side of (3.2.1)) does not depend on the algebroid, the operation of $`𝒪_X`$ on $`𝒱_2𝒱_1`$ is, in fact, associative. Since the “anomalies” present in (3.2.2) and (3.2.5) are algebroid-independent, $`𝒱_2𝒱_1`$ is, in fact, an exact Courant $`𝒪_X`$-algebroid. It is clear that $`(𝒱_2𝒱_1)+𝒱_1`$ is canonically isomorphic to $`𝒱_2`$.

So far we have established that, if non-empty, $`VA_X(X)`$ is a torsor under $`CA_X(X)`$. It remains to show that $`VA_X`$ is locally non-empty.

In the analytic or $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ case example 3.6.1 provides a locally defined EVA. Indeed, locally on X there exists an (abelian) Lie $``$-subalgebra $`\tau `$ such that $`𝒯_X𝒪_X_{}\tau `$.

In the algebraic setting the same example shows that $`VA_X`$ is non-empty locally in étale topology. Since $`H_{\text{ét}}^2(X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2\mathrm{@}>d>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{3,cl})`$ is canonically isomorphic to $`H^2(X,\mathrm{\Omega }_X^2\mathrm{@}>d>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{3,cl})`$ it follows that $`VA_X`$ is non-empty Zariski-locally. ∎

## 5. Algebroids over the de Rham complex

All of the notions of the preceeding section generalize in an obvious way to differential graded manifolds (i.e. manifolds whose structure sheaves are a sheaves of commutative differential graded algebras).

For a manifold $`X`$ let $`X^{\mathrm{}}`$ denote the differential graded manifold with the underlying space $`X`$ and the structure sheaf $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$ the de Rham complex $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{}`$. In other words, $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}=_i\mathrm{\Omega }_X^i[i]`$ (as a sheaf of graded algebras). We will denote by $`_{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}}`$ the derivation given by the de Rham differential.

### 5.1. The structure of $`𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}`$

The tangent sheaf of $`X^{\mathrm{}}`$ (of derivations of $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$), $`𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a sheaf of differential graded Lie algebras with the differential $`_{𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}}=[_{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}},]`$ (note that $`_{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}}𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}^1`$).

#### 5.1.1.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$ denote the cone of the identity endomorhism of $`𝒯_X`$. That is, $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯_X}^i=𝒯_X`$ for $`i=1,0`$ and zero otherwise. The only nontrivial differential is the identity map. The complex $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$ has the canonical structure of a sheaf of differential graded Lie algebras.

The natural action of $`𝒯_X`$ (respectively $`𝒯_X[1]`$) on $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$ by the Lie derivative (respectively by interior product) gives rise to the injective map of DGLA

(5.1.1)
$$\tau :\stackrel{~}{𝒯_X}\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}.$$

The action $`\tau `$ extends in the canonical way to a structure of a Lie $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid on $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{}\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$ with the anchor map

(5.1.2)
$$\tau _{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}}:𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{}\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}$$

the canonical extension $`\tau `$ to a $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-linear map. Note that $`\tau _{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}}`$ is surjective, i.e. the Lie $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{}\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$ is transitive. We denote this algebroid by $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X^{\mathrm{}}`$.

#### 5.1.2.

Let $`𝒯_{X^{\mathrm{}}/X}𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}`$ denote the normalizer of $`𝒪_X𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$. Since the action of $`𝒯_X[1]`$ is $`𝒪_X`$-linear, the map $`\tau `$ restricts to

$$\tau :\stackrel{~}{𝒯_X}^1=𝒯_X[1]\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_{X^{\mathrm{}}/X}$$

and (the restriction of) $`\tau _{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}}`$ factors through the map

(5.1.3)
$$𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X[1]\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_{X^{\mathrm{}}/X}$$

which is easily seen to be an isomorphism.

Since the action $`\tau `$ is $`𝒪_X`$-linear modulo $`𝒯_{X^{\mathrm{}}/X}`$, $`\tau _{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}}`$ induces the map

(5.1.4)
$$𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}/𝒯_{X^{\mathrm{}}/X}$$

which is easily seen to be an isomorphism.

Therefore, there is an exact sequence of graded $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-modules

(5.1.5)
$$0\mathrm{@}>>>𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X[1]\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{@}>>>𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>0.$$

The composition

$$𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X[1]\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{@}>_{𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}}>>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}[1]\mathrm{@}>>>𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X[1]$$

is the identity map.

### 5.2. Exact Courant $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroids

#### 5.2.1. Proposition

Every exact Courant $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid admits a unique flat connection.

###### Proof.

Consider a Courant algebroid

$$0\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{\mathrm{}}^1\mathrm{@}>i>>𝒬\mathrm{@}>\pi >>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{@}>>>0$$

Note that, since $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{\mathrm{}}^1`$ is concentrated in non-negative degrees, the map $`\pi ^1:𝒬^1\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}^1`$ is an isomorphism. Since $`𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}^1`$ generates $`𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}`$ as a DG-module over $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$, the splitting is unique if it exists.

To establish the existence it is necessary and sufficient to show that the restriction of the anchor map to the DG-submodule of $`𝒬`$ generated by $`𝒬^1`$ is an isomorphism.

Note that the map $`\tau :\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}`$ lifts in a unique way to a morphism of complexes $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }:\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬`$. It is easily seen to be a morphism of DGLA. Let $`𝒬^{}`$ denote the $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-submodule of $`𝒬`$ generated by the image of $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }`$ (i.e. the DG $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-submodule generated by $`𝒬^1`$).

Since $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }^1`$ is $`𝒪_X`$-linear it extends to the map

(5.2.1)
$$𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X[1]\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬^{}$$

such that the composition

$$𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X[1]\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬^{}\mathrm{@}>\pi >>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}$$

coincides with the composition of the isomorphism (5.1.3)with the inclusion into $`𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}`$. Therefore, (5.2.1) is a monomorphism whose image will be denoted $`𝒬^{\prime \prime }`$, and $`\pi `$ restricts to an isomorphism of $`𝒬^{\prime \prime }`$ onto $`𝒯_{X^{\mathrm{}}/X}`$.

Since $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }^0`$ is $`𝒪_X`$-linear modulo $`𝒬^{\prime \prime }`$ it extends to the map

(5.2.2)
$$𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬^{}/𝒬^{\prime \prime }$$

which is surjective (since $`𝒬^{}/𝒬^{\prime \prime }`$ is generated as a $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-module by the image of $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }^0`$), and such that the composition

$$𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{𝒪_X}𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒬^{}/𝒬^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{@}>\pi >>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}/𝒯_{X^{\mathrm{}}/X}$$

coincides with the isomorphism (5.1.4). Therefore, (5.2.2) is an isomorphism.

Now the exact sequence (5.1.5) implies that $`\pi `$ restricts to an isomorphism $`𝒬^{}\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X^{\mathrm{}}`$. The desired splitting is the inverse isomorphism. It is obviously compatible with brackets, hence, is a flat connection. ∎

#### 5.2.2. Corollary

$`CA_{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}}`$ is equivalent to the final stack.

#### 5.2.3. Corollary

An exact vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid exists and is unique up to canonical isomorphism.

###### Proof.

Since $`VA_{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}}`$ is an affine space under $`CA_{𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}}`$ the uniqueness (local and global) follows from Corollary 5.2.2. Local existence and uniqueness implies global existence. ∎

### 5.3. The exact vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid

For a vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid $`𝒱`$ with anchor map $`\pi `$ we will call a $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$-rigidification of $`𝒱`$ a map of DG Leibniz algebras $`\psi :\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒱`$ such that the composition $`\pi \psi `$ coincides with the map (5.1.1). A rigidified vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid is a pair $`(𝒱,\psi )`$, where $`𝒱`$ is a vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid and $`\psi `$ is a $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$-rigidification of $`𝒱`$. A morphism of rigidified vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroids is a morphism of vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroids which commutes with respective rigidifications.

The functor which assigns to a vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid $`𝒱`$ the set of rigidifications of $`𝒱`$ is representable. The initial $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$-rigidified vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}`$ may be described as follows. As a sheaf of $``$-vector spaces

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒰}=\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{\mathrm{}}^1𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}_{}\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X.$$

There is a unique structure of a vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid on $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}`$ such that

* the derivation $`:𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_{\stackrel{~}{𝒰}}`$ is given by the composition of the exterior deriviative $`d_X^{\mathrm{}}:\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{}\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{\mathrm{}}^1`$ with the inclusion of the first summand $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{\mathrm{}}^1\mathrm{@}>>>\stackrel{~}{𝒰}`$,
* the projection onto the second summand induces an isomorphism of Lie $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroids $`\overline{\stackrel{~}{𝒰}}\mathrm{@}>>>\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{}_{}\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$,
* the restriction to $`1\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$ of the adjoint action of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\stackrel{~}{𝒰}}`$ coincides with the action of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{\mathrm{}}^1`$ by the Lie derivative and (5.1.1).

Namely, the action of $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$ is forced by (3.2.1):

$$\alpha (\beta \xi )=\alpha \beta \xi \tau (\xi )(\alpha )d_X^{\mathrm{}}\beta \tau (\xi )(\beta )d_X^{\mathrm{}}\alpha .$$

The symmetric pairing is the unique extension of the zero pairing on $`1\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$ which satisfies (3.2.5):

$$\beta _1\xi _1,\beta _2\xi _2=\beta _1\tau (\xi _2)(\tau (\xi _1)(\beta _2))\beta _2\tau (\xi _1)(\tau (\xi _2)(\beta _1))\tau (\xi _1)(\beta _2)\tau (\xi _2)(\beta _1)$$

The Leibniz bracket on $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}`$ is the unique extension of the Lie bracket on $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$ which satisfies (3.2.2) and (3.2.3).

Consider the following condition on a $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X`$-rigidification $`\psi `$ of a vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid $`𝒱`$:

#### 5.3.1.

The component $`\psi ^1:𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒱^1`$ is $`𝒪_X`$-linear, i.e. $`\psi ^1(f\xi )=f\psi ^1(\xi )`$ for $`f𝒪_X`$ and $`\xi 𝒯_X`$.

The functor which assigns to a vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid the collection of rigidifications of $`𝒱`$ satisfying 5.3.1 is represented by the appropriate quotient $`𝒰`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}`$. We claim that $`𝒰`$ is an exact vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid.

Let $`K`$ denote the kernel of the canonical map $`\stackrel{~}{𝒯}_X^{\mathrm{}}^1=𝒪_X_{}𝒯_X\mathrm{@}>>>𝒯_X`$.

Let

$$=\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{}K[1]+\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{}dK\stackrel{~}{𝒰}.$$

Then, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X^{}=`$, $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰},=0`$, and $`[\stackrel{~}{𝒰},]`$. Moreover, $``$ projects isomorphically onto the kernel of (5.1.2).

The essentially unique exact vertex $`𝒪_X^{\mathrm{}}`$-algebroid is $`𝒰=\stackrel{~}{𝒰}/`$.