A LAX MONOIDAL TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY
FOR REPRESENTATION VARIETIES
ÁNGEL GONZÁLEZ-PRIETO, MARINA LOGARES AND VICENTE MUÑOZ

arXiv:1709.05724v1 [math.AG] 17 Sep 2017

Abstract. We construct a lax monoidal Topological Quantum Field Theory that computes
Deligne-Hodge polynomials of representation varieties of the fundamental group of any closed
manifold into any complex algebraic group G. As byproduct, we obtain formulas for these
polynomials in terms of homomorphisms between the space of mixed Hodge modules on G.
The construction is developed in a categorical-theoretic framework allowing its application to
other situations.

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 57R56. Secondary: 14C30, 14D07, 14D21.
Key words and phrases: TQFT, moduli spaces, E-polynomial, representation varieties.

1. Introduction
Let W be a compact manifold, possibly with boundary, and let G be a complex algebraic
group. The set of representations ρ : π1 (W ) → G can be endowed with a complex algebraic
variety structure, the so-called representation variety of W into G, denoted XG (W ). The
group G itself acts on XG (W ) by conjugation so, taking the Geometric Invariant Theory
(GIT) quotient of XG (W ) by this action (see [37]) we obtain MG (W ) = XG (W ) G, the
moduli space of representations of π1 (W ) into G, as treated in [36]. It is customary to call
these spaces character varieties or, in the context of non-abelian Hodge theory, Betti moduli
spaces. Even in the simplest cases G = GL(n, C), SL(n, C) and W = Σ, a closed orientable
surface, the topology of these varieties is extremely rich and has been the object of studies
during the past twenty years.
One of the main reasons of this study is the prominent role of these varieties in the nonabelian Hodge theory. For G = GL(n, C) (resp. G = SL(n, C)), an element of MG (Σ) defines
a G-local system and, thus, a rank n algebraic bundle E → Σ of degree 0 (resp. and fixed
determinant) with a flat connection ∇ on it. Hence, the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence ([46]
[47]) gives a real analytic correspondence between MG (Σ) and the moduli space of flat bundles
of rank n and degree 0 (and fixed determinant if G = SL(n, C)), usually called the de Rham
moduli space.
Furthermore, via the Hitchin-Kobayashi correspondence ([45] [11]), we also have that, for Σ
a compact Riemann surface and G = GL(n, C) (resp. G = SL(n, C)), the Betti moduli space
MG (Σ) is real analytic equivalent to the Dolbeault moduli space, that is, the moduli space
of rank n and degree 0 (resp. and fixed determinant) G-Higgs bundles i.e. bundles E → Σ
together with a field Φ : E → E ⊗ KΣ called the Higgs field.
Motivated by these correspondences, we can also consider representation varieties of a manifold W with a parabolic structure Q. This Q consists of a finite set of pairwise disjoint
subvarieties S1 , . . . , Sr of W of codimension 2 and conjugacy classes λ1 , . . . , λr ⊆ G that allows us to define XG (W, Q) as the set of representations ρ : π1 (W − S1 − . . . − Sr ) → G such
that the image of the loops arround Si must live in λi (see section 3.4 for precise definition).
Analogously, we set MG (W, Q) = XG (W, Q) G.
1

2

When W = Σ is a surface, the Si are a set of (marked) points, called the parabolic points,
and we can obtain stronger results. For example, for G = GL(n, C) and Q a single marked

point p ∈ Σ and λ = e2πid/n Id we have that MG (Σ, Q) is diffeomorphic to the moduli
space of rank n and degree d Higgs bundles and to the moduli space of rank n logarithmic flat
bundles of degree n with a pole at p with residue − nd Id. In this case, MG (Σ, Q) is referred to
as the twisted caracter variety.
For an arbitrary number of marked points p1 , . . . , pr ∈ Σ and different semi-simple conjugacy
classes of G = GL(n, C), we obtain diffeomorphisms with moduli spaces of parabolic Higgs
bundles with parabolic structures (with general weights) on p1 , . . . , pr and with the moduli
space of logarithmic flat connections with poles on p1 , . . . , pr ([44]). Incidentally, another
correspondences can also appear as for the case of G = SL(2, C), Σ an elliptic curve and Q
two marked points with different semi-simple conjugacy classes not containing a multiple of
identity, in which MG (Σ, Q) is diffeomorphic to the moduli space of doubly periodic instantons
through the Nahm transform [7] [25].
Using these correspondences, it is possible to compute the Poincaré polynomial of character
varieties by means of Morse theory. Following these ideas, Hitchin, in the seminal paper
[24], gave the Poincaré polynomial for G = SL(2, C) in the non-parabolic case, Gothen also
computed it for G = SL(3, C) in [19] and Garcı́a-Prada, Heinloth and Schmitt for G = GL(4, C)
in [18]. In the parabolic case, Boden and Yokogawa calculated it in [8] for G = SL(2, C) and
generic semi-simple conjugacy classes and Garcı́a-Prada, Gothen and the third author for
G = GL(3, C) and G = SL(3, C) in [17].
However, these correspondences from non-abelian Hodge theory are far from being algebraic.
Hence, the study of their (mixed) Hodge structure on cohomology turns important. An useful
combinatorial tool for this purpose is the so-called Deligne-Hodge polynomial, also referred to
as E-polynomial, that, to any complex algebraic X assings a polynomial e (X) ∈ Z[u, v]. As
described in section 2.1, this polynomial is constructed as an alternating sum of the Hodge
numbers of X, in the spirit of a combination of Poincaré polynomial and Euler characteristic.
A great effort has been made to compute these E-polynomials for character varieties. The
first strategy was accomplised by [22] by means of a theorem of Katz of arithmetic flavour
based on the Weil conjectures and the Lefschetz principle. Following this method, when Σ is
an orientable surface, an expression of the E-polynomial for the twisted character varieties is
given in terms of generating functions in [22] for G = GL(n, C) and in [35] for G = SL(n, C).
Recently, using this technique, explicit expressions of the E-polynomials have been computed,
in [4], for the untwisted case and orientable surfaces with G = GL(3, C), SL(3, C) and for
non-orientable surfaces with G = GL(2, C), SL(2, C). Also they have checked the formulas
given in [34] for orientable surfaces and G = SL(2, C) in the untwisted case.
The other approach to this problem was initiated by the second and third authors together
with Newstead in [30]. In this case, the strategy is to focus on the computation of e (XG (Σ))
and, once done, to pass to the quotient. In this method, the representation variety is chopped
into simpler strata for which the E-polynomial can be computed. After that, one uses the
additivity of E-polynomials to combine them and get the one of the whole space.

3

Following this idea, in the case G = SL(2, C), they computed the E-polynomials for a
single marked point and genus g = 1, 2 in [30]. Later, the second and third authors computed
them for two marked points and g = 1 in [29] and the third author with Martı́nez for a
marked point and g = 3 in [33]. In the case of arbitrary genus and, at most, a marked
point, the case G = SL(2, C) was accomplished in [34] and the case G = P GL(2, C) in [32].
In these later papers, this method is used to obtain recursive formulas of E-polynomials of
representation varieties in terms of the ones for smaller genus. It suggests that some sort of
recursion formalism, in the spirit of Topological Quantum Field Theory (T QF T for short),
must hold. That is the starting point of the present paper.
In the parabolic case, much remains to be known. The most important advance was given
in [21], following the arithmetic method, for G = GL(n, C) and generic semi-simple marked
points. Using the geometric method, as we mentioned above, only at most two marked points
have been studied.
In this paper, we propose a general framework for studing E-polynomials of representation
varieties based on the stratification strategy, valid for any complex algebraic group G, any
manifold (not necessarely surfaces) and any parabolic configuration. For this purpose, section
2 is devoted to review the fundamentals of Hodge theory and Saito’s mixed Hodge modules as
a way of tracing variations of Hodge structures with nice functorial properties (see [41]).
With these tools at hand, we can develop a categorical theoretic machinery that shows
how recursive computations of Deligne-Hodge polynomials can be accomplished. Based on
T QF T (i.e. monoidal functors Z : Bdn → k-Vect between the category of n-bordisms and the
category of k-vector spaces, as introduced in [1]) we define, in section 3.2, a weaker version of
them in the context of 2-categories and pairs of spaces. We propose to consider lax monoidal lax
functors Z : Bdpn → R-Bim between the 2-category of pairs of bordisms and the 2-category
of R-algebras and bimodules (being R a ring), which we called soft Topological Quantum Field
Theories of pairs, s TQFTp for short. These s TQFTp are, in some sense, parallel to the socalled Extended Topological Quantum Field Theories, as studied in [3], [16] or [27] amongst
others.
In this setting, we will show how a s TQFTp can be constructed in full generality from two
basic pieces: a functor G : Bdpn → Span(VarC ) (being Span(VarC ) the 2-category of spans
of the category of complex algebraic varieties), called the geometrisation, and a contravariant
functor A : VarC → Ring, called the algebraisation. In section 4, we will apply these ideas to
the computation of Deligne-Hodge polynomials of representations varieties. For that, we will
define the geometrisation by means of the fundamental groupoid of the underlying manifold
and we will use the previously developed theory of mixed Hodge modules for an algebraisation.
Even though this s TQFTp encodes the recursive nature of the Deligne-Hodge polynomial,
we can make it even more explicit. For this purpose, in section 3.3, we define a lax monoidal
Topological Quantum Field Theories of pairs, ` TQFTp, as a lax monoidal strict functor Z :
Bdpn → R-Modt , where R-Modt is the usual category of R-modules with an additional
2-category structure (see definition 3.5). In this context, we show how a partner covariant
functor B : VarC → R-Mod to the algebraisation A allow us to define a natural ` TQFTp.
Again, we will use this idea to define a ` TQFTp computing E-polynomials of representation
varieties. In this formulation, an explicit formula for these polynomials can be deduced.

4

Theorem 1.1. There exists a ` TQFTp, Z : Bdpn → R-Modt , where R = KMHSQ is
the K-theory ring of the category of mixed Hodge modules, such that, for any n-dimensional
connected closed orientable manifold W and any non-empty finite subset A ⊆ W we have
e (Z (W, A)(Q0 )) = e (G)|A|−1 e (XG (W )) .
With a view towards applications, in section 4.3, we will show how, for computational
purposes, it is enough to consider tubes instead of general bordisms, defining what we call
an almost-TQFT, Z : Tbpn → R-Mod. The idea is that, given a closed surface Σ, we can
choose a suitable handlebody decomposition of Σ as composition of tubes. Therefore, in order
to compute Z (Σ) we do not need the knowledge of the image of any general cobordism but
just of a few tubes.
For n = 2, we will give explicitly the image of the generators of Tbp2 for the corresponding
almost-TQFT computing E-polynomials of representation varieties. From this description, we
obtain an explicit formula of e (XG (Σ, Q)) in terms of simpler pieces, see theorem 4.13. From
this formula, a general algorithm for computing these polynomials arises. Hence, future work
would be to compute them explicitly for some cases, for example G = SL(2, C), which, at the
present moment, are unknown in the parabolic case. Actually, the computations of [30] and
[34] are particular calculations of that program.
Finally, another framework in which character varieties are central is the Geometric Langlands program (see [5]). In this setting, the Hitchin fibration satisfies the Strominger-YauZaslow conditions of mirror symmetry for Calabi-Yau manifolds (see [48]) from which it arises
several questions about relations between E-polynomials of character varieties for Langland
dual groups as conjectured in [20] and [22]. The validity of these conjectures has been discussed
in some cases as in [30] and [32]. Despite of that, the general case remains unsolved. We hope
that the ideas introduced in this paper could be useful to shed light into these questions.

Acknowledgements. The authors want to thank Bruce Bartlett, Christopher Douglas and
Constantin Teleman for useful conversations. We want to express our highest gratitude to
Thomas Wasserman for his invaluable help throughout the development of this paper.
We thank the hospitality of the Mathematical Institute at University of Oxford offered
during a research visit which was supported by the Marie Sklodowska Curie grant GREAT DLV-654490. The work of the first and third authors has been partially supported by MINECO
(Spain) Project MTM2015-63612-P. The first author was also supported by a ”la Caixa” scholarship for PhD studies in Spanish Universities from ”la Caixa” Foundation. The second author
was supported by the Marie Sklodowska Curie grant GREAT - DLV-654490.

2. Hodge theory
2.1. Mixed Hodge structures. Let X be a complex algebraic variety. The rational cohomology of X, H • (X; Q), carries an additional linear structure, called mixed Hodge structure,
which generalize the so-called pure Hodge structures. For further information, see [12] and
[13], also [38].

5

Definition 2.1. Let V be a finite dimensional rational vector space and let k ∈ Z. A pure
Hodge structure of weight k on V consists of a finite decreasing filtration F • of VC = V ⊗Q C
VC ⊇ . . . ⊇ F p−1 V ⊇ F p V ⊇ F p+1 V ⊇ . . . ⊇ {0}
such that F p V ⊕ F k−p+1 V = VC where conjugation is taken with respect to the induced real
structure.
Remark 2.2. An equivalent description of a pure Hodge structure is as a finite decomposition
M
VC =
V p,q
p+q=k

for some complex vector spaces V p,q such that V p,q ∼
= V q,p with respect to the natural
real structure of VC . From this description, the filtration F • can be recovered by taking
L
F p V = r≥p V r,k−r . In this terms, classical Hodge theory shows that the cohomology of a
compact Kähler manifold M carries a pure Hodge structure induced by Dolbeault cohomology
L
H p,q (M ). See [38] for further information.
by H k (M ; C) =
p+q=k

Example 2.3. Given m ∈ Z, we define the Tate structures, Q(m), as the pure Hodge structure
whose underlying rational vector space is (2πi)m Q ⊆ C with a single-piece decomposition
Q(m) = Q(m)−m,−m . Thus, Q(m) is a pure Hodge structure of weight −2m. Moreover, if V is
another pure Hodge structure of weight k then V (m) := V ⊗ Q(m) is a pure Hodge structure
of weight k − 2m, called the Tate twist of V . For short, we will denote Q0 = Q(0), the Tate
structure of weight 0. Recall that there is a well defined tensor product of pure (and mixed)
Hodge structures, see Examples 3.2 of [38] for details.
Definition 2.4. Let V be a finite dimensional rational vector space. A (rational) mixed Hodge
structure on V consist of a pair of filtrations:
• An increasing finite filtration W• of V , called the weight filtration.
• A decreasing finite filtration F • of VC , called the Hodge filtration.
•
W
Such that,

 for any k ∈ Z, the induced filtration of F on the graded complex (Grk V )C =
Wk V
gives a pure Hodge structure of weight k. Given two mixed Hodge structures
Wk−1 V
C

(V, F, W ) and (V 0 , F 0 , W 0 ), a morphism of mixed Hodge structures is a linear map f : V → V 0
preserving both filtrations.
Deligne proved in [12] and [13] (for a concise exposition see also [14]) that, if X is a complex
algebraic variety, then H k (X; Q) carries a mixed Hodge structure in a functorial way. More
preciselly, let VarC be the category of complex varieties with morphisms given by the regular
maps, Q-Vect the category of Q-vector spaces and MHSQ be the category of mixed Hodge
structures. First, we have that MHSQ is an abelian category (see Théorème 2.3.5 of [12]) and,
moreover, the cohomology functor H k (−; Q) : VarC → Q-Vect factorizes through MHSQ ,
that is
VarC

H k (−;Q)



MHSQ

/ Q-Vect
9

6

Remark 2.5. A pure Hodge structure of weight k is, in particular, a mixed Hodge structure
by taking the weight filtration with a single step. When X is a smooth complex projective
variety, the induced pure Hodge structure given by Remark 2.2 corresponds to the mixed Hodge
structure given above.
An analogous statement holds for compactly supported cohomology, that is Hck (X; Q) has a
mixed Hodge structure in a functorial way (see section 5.5 of [38] for a complete construction).
From this algebraic structure, some new invariants can be defined (see Definition 3.1 of [38]).
Given a complex algebraic variety X, we define the (p, q)-pieces of its k-th compactly supported
cohomology groups by


k
Hck;p,q (X) := GrFp Grp+q
W Hc (X; Q)

hk;p,q
(X)
c

C
k;p,q
Hc (X)

From them, we define the Hodge numbers as
= dim
and the Deligne-Hodge
polynomial, or E-polynomial, as the alternating sum
X
e (X) =
(−1)k hk;p,q
(X) up v q ∈ Z[u±1 , v ±1 ]
c
k

Remark 2.6. Sometimes in the literature, the E-polynomial is defined as e (X) (−u, −v). It
does not introduce any important difference but it would produce an annoying change of sign.
Remark 2.7. An important fact is that the Künneth isomorphism
Hc• (X; Q) ⊗ Hc• (Y ; Q) ∼
= Hc• (X × Y ; Q)
is an isomorphism of mixed Hodge structures (see Theorem 5.44 in [38]). In particular, this
implies that e (X × Y ) = e (X) e (Y ). When, instead of product varieties, we consider general
fibrations, the monodromy plays an important role (see, for example [30], [33] or [34]). The
best way to deal with this issue is through the theory of mixed Hodge modules (see next).
2.2. Mixed Hodge modules. In [41] (see also [39] and [40]) Saito proved that we can assign,
to every complex algebraic variety X, an abelian category MX called the category of mixed
Hodge modules on X. As described in [42], if X is smooth, the basic elements of MX are tuples
M = (S, F • , W• , K, α) where S is a regular holonomic DX -module with F • a good filtration,
K is a perverse sheaf (sometimes also called a perverse complex) of rational vector spaces and
W• is a pair of increasing filtrations of S and K. These filtration have to correspond under
the isomorphism
∼
=

α : DRX (S) → K ⊗QX CX
where CX , QX are the respective constant sheaves on X and DRX is the Riemann-Hilbert correspondence functor between the category of filtered DX -modules and the category of rational
perverse sheaves on X, Perv(X, Q) (for all these concepts see [38]). Starting with these basic
elements, the category MX is constructed as a sort of “controlled” extension closure of these
tuples, in the same spirit as mixed Hodge structures are a closure of pure Hodge structures
under extension. In the case that X is singular, the construction is similar but more involved
using local embeddings of X into manifolds (see [41], [38] or [42]).
In [39] and [41] Saito proves that MX is an abelian category endowed with a functor
ratX : MX → Perv(X, Q)

7

that extends to the (bounded) derived category as a functor
b
ratX : Db MX → Dcs
(X, Q)
b (X, Q) is the derived category of cohomological constructible complexes of sheaves
where Dcs
that contains Perv(X, Q) as a full abelian subcategory ([38], Lemma 13.22). Moreover, given
a regular morphism f : X → Y , there are functors

f ∗ , f ! : D b MY → D b MX

f∗ , f! : Db MX → Db MY

which lift to the analogous functors on the level of constructible sheaves. Finally, the tensor
and external product of constructibles complexes lift to bifunctors
⊗ : D b MX × D b MX → D b MX

 : Db MX × Db MY → Db MX×Y .

b (X, Q) are just the usual direct image and proper
Remark 2.8.
• Recall that f∗ , f! on Dcs
direct image on sheaves, f ∗ is the inverse image sheaf and f ! is the adjoint functor of
f! , the so-called extraordinary pullback. See [38], Chapter 13, for a complete definition
of these functors.
• As in the case of constructible complexes, the external product can be defined in terms
of the usual tensor product by

M •  N • = π1∗ M • ⊗ π2∗ N •
for M • ∈ Db MX , N • ∈ Db MY and π1 : X × Y → X, π2 : X × Y → Y the
corresponding projections.
A very important feature of these induced functors is that they behave in a functorial way,
as the following result shows. The proof of this claim is a compendium of Proposition 4.3.2
and Section 4.4 (in particular 4.4.3) of [41].
Theorem 2.9 (Saito). The induced functors commute with composition. More explicitly, let
f : X → Y and g : Y → Z regular morphisms of complex algebraic varieties, then
(g ◦ f )∗ = g∗ ◦ f∗

(g ◦ f )∗ = f ∗ ◦ g ∗

(g ◦ f )! = g! ◦ f!

(g ◦ f )! = f ! ◦ g !

Furthermore, suppose that we have a cartesian square of complex algebraic varieties (i.e. a
pullback diagram in VarC )
W
f0

g0



Y

/X


g

f

/Z

Then we have a natural isomorphism of functors g ∗ ◦ f! ∼
= f!0 ◦ (g 0 )∗ .
Given a complex algebraic variety X, associated to the abelian category MX , we can consider the Grothendieck group, also known as K-theory group, denoted by KMX . Recall
that it is the free abelian group generated by the objects of MX quotiented by the relation
M ∼ M 0 + M 00 if 0 → M 0 → M → M 00 → 0 is a short exact sequence in MX . By definition,
we have an arrow on objects MX → KMX . Moreover, given M • ∈ Db MX , we can associate
to it the element of KMX
X
[M • ] =
(−1)k H k (M • ) ∈ KMX
k

8

where H k (M • ) ∈ MX is the k-th cohomology of the complex. This gives an arrow on objects
Db MX → KMX . Under this arrow, tensor product ⊗ : Db MX × Db MX → Db MX descends
to a bilinear map ⊗ : KMX × KMX → KMX that endows KMX with a natural ring
structure.
With respect to induced morphisms, given f : X → Y , the functors f∗ , f! , f ∗ , f ! of mixed
Hodge modules also descend to give group homomorphisms f∗ , f! : KMX → KMY and
f ∗ , f ! : KMY → KMX (see Section 4.2 of [42]). For example, we define f! : KMX → KMY
by
X
f! [M ] := [f! M ] =
(−1)k H k (f! M )
k

where [M ] denotes the class of M ∈ MX on KMX and we are identifying M with the
complex of Db MX concentrated in degree 0. Analogous definitions are valid for f∗ , f ∗ and
f ! . Furthermore, these constructions imply that Theorem 2.9 also holds in K-theory (see [42])
and, moreover, the natural isomorphism for cartesian squares becomes an equality.
Another important feature of mixed Hodge modules is that they actually generalize mixed
Hodge structures. As mentioned in [40], Theorem 1.4, the category of mixed Hodge modules
over a single point, M? , is naturally isomorphic to the category of (rational) mixed Hodge
structures MHSQ . In particular, this identification endows the K-theory of the category of
mixed Hodge modules with a natural KMHSQ = KM? module structure via the external
product
 : KM? × KMX → KM?×X = KMX
The induced functors f∗ , f! , f ∗ , f ! commute with exterior products at the level of constructible
complexes (see [42]), so they also commute in the category of mixed Hodge modules which
means that they are KMHSQ -module homomorphisms. Furthermore, f ∗ commutes with tensor products so it is also a ring homomorphism.
Example 2.10. Using the identification M? = MHSQ , we can consider the Tate structure
of weight 0, Q0 = Q(0), as an element of M? . By construction, this element is the unit of the
ring KMHSQ . Moreover, for any complex algebraic variety X, if cX : X → ? is the projection
of X onto a singleton, then the mixed Hodge module QX := c∗X Q0 is the unit of KMX . The
link between this mixed Hodge module and X is that, as proven in Lemma 14.8 of [38], we can
recover the compactly supported cohomology of X via
(cX )! QX = [Hc• (X; Q)],
as elements of KMHSQ . The analogous formula for usual cohomology and (cX )∗ holds too,
i.e. (cX )∗ QX = [H • (X; Q)].
Remark 2.11. Let π : X → B be regular fibration locally trivial in the analytic topology. In
that case, the mixed Hodge module π! QX ∈ KMB plays the role of the Hodge monodromy
representation of [30] and [34] controlling the monodromy of π.
Remark 2.12. Let us define the semi-group homomorphism e : MHSQ → Z[u±1 , v ±1 ] that, for
a mixed Hodge structure V gives
h

 i
X
p+q
dim GrpF GrW
V
up v q .
e (V ) :=
p,q

C

9

This map descends to a ring homomorphism e : KMHSQ → Z[u±1 , v ±1 ]. Now, let X be a
complex algebraic variety and let [Hc• (X; Q)] be is compactly supported cohomology, as an
element of KMHSQ . Then, we have that
e (X) = e ([Hc• (X; Q)]) ,
where the left hand side is the Deligne-Hodge polynomial of X.
3. Lax Quantum Field Theories of Pairs
3.1. The category of bordisms of pairs. Let n ≥ 1. We define the category of n-bordisms
of pairs, Bdpn as the 2-category (i.e. enriched category over the category of small categories,
see [6]) given by the following data:
• Objects: The objects of Bdpn are pairs (X, A) where X is a (n − 1)-dimensional
closed oriented manifold together with a finite subset of points A ⊆ X such that its
intersection with each connected component of X is non empty.
• 1-morphisms: Given objects (X1 , A1 ), (X2 , A2 ) of Bdpn , a morphism (X1 , A1 ) →
(X2 , A2 ) is a class of pairs (W, A) where W : X1 → X2 is an oriented bordism between
X1 and X2 , and A ⊆ W is a finite set with X1 ∩ A = A1 and X2 ∩ A = A2 . Two pairs
(W, A), (W 0 , A0 ) are in the same class if there exists a diffeomorphism of bordisms (i.e.
fixing the boundaries) F : W → W 0 such that F (A) = A0 .
With respect to the composition, given (W, A) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ) and (W 0 , A0 ) :
(X2 , A2 ) → (X3 , A3 ), we define (W 0 , A0 ) ◦ (W, A) as the morphism (W ∪X2 W 0 , A ∪ A0 ) :
(X1 , A1 ) → (X3 , A3 ) where W ∪X2 W 0 is the usual gluing of bordisms along X2 .
• 2-morphisms: Given two 1-morphisms (W, A), (W 0 , A0 ) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ), we declare that there exists a 2-cell (W, A) ⇒ (W 0 , A0 ) if there is a diffeomorphism of bordisms F : W → W 0 such that F (A) ⊆ A0 . Composition of 2-cells is just composition
of diffeomorphisms.
In this form, Bdpn is not exactly a category since there is no unit morphism in the category
Hom Bdpn ((X, A), (X, A)). This can be solved by weakening slightly the notion of bordism,
allowing that X itself could be seen as a bordism X : X → X. With this modification,
(X, A) : (X, A) → (X, A) is the desired unit and it is a straightforward check to see that Bdpn
is a (strict) 2-category, where strict means that the associativity axioms are satisfied “on the
nose” and not just “up to isomorphism”, in which case it is called a (weak) 2-category.
Remark 3.1. As a stronger version of bordisms, there is a forgetful functor F : Bdpn → Bdn ,
where Bdn is the usual category of oriented n-bordisms.
3.2. Bimodules and sTQFTp. Recall from [6] and [43] that, given a ground commutative
ring R with identity, we can define the 2-category R-Bim of R-algebras and bimodules whose
objects are commutative R-algebras with unit and, given algebras A and B, a 1-morphism
A → B is a (A, B)-bimodule. By convention, a (A, B)-bimodule is a set M with a left Amodule and a right B-module compatible structures, usually denoted A MB . Composition of
M : A → B and N : B → C is given by A (M ⊗B N )C .
With this definition, the set Hom R-Bim (A, B) is naturally endowed with a category structure, namely, the category of (A, B)-bimodules. Hence, a 2-morphism M ⇒ N between

10

(A, B)-bimodules is a bimodule homomorphism f : M → N . Therefore, R-Bim is a monoidal
2-category with tensor product over R.
Definition 3.2. Let R be a commutative ring with unit. A soft Topological Quantum Field
Theory of pairs, shortened s TQFTp, is a lax monoidal lax functor Z : Bdpn → R-Bim.
Recall that a lax functor between 2-categories F : C → D is an assignment that:
• For each object x ∈ C , it gives an object F (x) ∈ D .
• For each pair of objects x, y of C , we have a functor
Fx,y : Hom C (x, y) → Hom D (F (x), F (y)).
Recall that, as 2-category, both Hom C (x, y) and Hom D (F (x), F (y)) are categories.
• For each object x ∈ C , we have a 2-morphism Fidx : idF (x) ⇒ Fx,x (idx ).
• For each triple x, y, z ∈ C and every f : x → y and g : y → z, we have a 2-morphism
Fx,y,z (g, f ) : Fy,z (g) ◦ Fx,y (f ) ⇒ Fx,z (g ◦ f ), natural in f and g.
Also, some technical conditions, namely the coherence conditions, have to be satisfied (see [6]
or [31] for a complete definition). If the 2-morphisms Fidx and Fx,y,z are isomorphisms, it is
said that F is a pseudo-functor or a weak functor (or even simply a functor) and, if they are
the identity 2-morphism, F is called a strict functor.
Analogously, a (lax) functor F : C → D between monoidal categories is called lax monoidal
if there exists:
• A morphism  : 1D → F (1C ), where 1C and 1D are the units of the monoidal structure
of C and D respectively.
• A natural transformation ∆ : F (−) ⊗D F (−) ⇒ F (− ⊗C −).
satisfying a set of coherence conditions (for a precise definition, see Definition 1.2.10 of [28]).
Again, if  and ∆ are isomorphisms, F is said to be pseudo-monoidal and, if they are identity
morphisms, F is called strict monoidal, or simply monoidal.
A general recipe for building a s TQFTp from simpler data can be given as follows. Let
S = Span(VarC ) be the (weak) 2-category of spans of VarC . As described in [6], objects of
S are the same as the ones of VarC . A morphism X → Y in S between complex algebraic
varieties is a pair (f, g) of regular morphisms
Z
f

~

X

g



Y

where Z is a complex algebric variety. Given two morphisms (f1 , g1 ) : X → Y and (f2 , g2 ) :
Y → Z, say
Z1
f1

X

~

Z2
g1

f2

Y

we define the composition (f2 , g2 ) ◦ (f1 , g1 ) =

Y
(f1 ◦ f20 , g2

g2

~

◦ g10 ),

Z
where

f20 , g10

are the morphisms

11

in the pullback diagram
W
f20

g10

~

Z1

Z2

f1

X

g1

~

f2

g2

~

Y

Z

where W = Z1 ×Y Z2 is the product of Z1 and Z2 as Y -varieties. Finally a 2-morphism
f

f0

g

g0

(f, g) ⇒ (f 0 , g 0 ) between X ← Z → Y and X ← Z 0 → Y is a regular morphism α : Z 0 → Z
such that the following diagram commutes
Z0
f0

X`

g0

~

>Y

α

f



g

Z
Moreover, with this definition, S is a monoidal category with cartesian product of varieties
and morphisms.
Remark 3.3. Actually, the same construction works verbatim for any category C with pullbacks
defining a weak 2-category Span(C ). Furthermore, if C has pushouts, we can define Spanop (C )
as in the case of Span(C ) but with all the arrows reversed. Again, if C is a monoidal category
then Span(C ) (resp. Spanop (C )) also is.
Now, let A : VarC → Ring be a contravariant functor between the category of complex
algebraic varieties and the category of (commutative unitary) rings. Set R = A(?), where ? is
the singleton variety, and define the lax functor SA : S → R-Bim as follows:
• For any complex algebraic variety X, SA(X) = A(X). The R-algebra structure on
A(X) is given by the morphism R = A(?) → A(X) image of the projection X → ?.
• Let us fix X, Y algebraic varieties. We define

SAX,Y : Hom S (X, Y ) → Hom R-Bim (A(X), A(Y ))
as the covariant functor that:
f
g
– For any 1-morphism X ← Z → Y it assigns SAX,Y (f, g) = A(Z) with the
(A(X), A(Y ))-bimodule structure given by az = A(f )(a) · z and zb = z · A(g)(b)
for a ∈ A(X), b ∈ A(Y ) and z ∈ A(Z).
– For a 2-morphism α : (f, g) ⇒ (f 0 , g 0 ) given by a regular morphism α : Z 0 → Z,
we define SAX,Y (α) = A(α) : A(Z) → A(Z 0 ). Since A is a functor to rings, A(α)
is a bimodule homomorphism.
• The 2-morphism SAidX : idSA(X) ⇒ SAX,X (idX ) is the identity.

12
f1

g1

f2

g2

• Let X ← Z1 → Y and Y ← Z2 → Z. By definition of S ,

SAY,Z (f2 , g2 ) ◦ SAY,X (f1 , g1 ) = A(Y ) A(Z2 )A(Z) ◦ A(X) A(Z1 )A(Y )


= A(X) A(Z1 ) ⊗A(Y ) A(Z2 ) A(Z)
SAX,Z ((f2 , g2 ) ◦ (f1 , g1 )) = A(X) [A(Z1 ×Y Z2 )]A(Z)
Hence, the 2-morphism SAX,Y,Z ((f2 , g2 ), (f1 , g1 )) is the (A(X), A(Z))-bimodule homomorphism

A(Z1 ) ⊗A(Y ) A(Z2 ) → A(Z1 ×Y Z2 )
given by z1 ⊗ z2 7→ A(p1 )(z1 ) · A(p2 )(z2 ) where p1 and p2 are the projections p1 :
Z1 ×Y Z2 → Z1 , p2 : Z1 ×Y Z2 → Z2 .
Furthermore, with the construction above, the lax functor SA : S → R-Bim is also lax
monoidal. Since SA preserves the units of the monoidal structures it is enough to define the
morphisms ∆X,Y : A(X) ⊗R A(Y ) → A(X × Y ). For that, just take as bimodule the own
ring A(X × Y ), where the left (A(X) ⊗R A(Y ))-module structure commes from the external
product A(X) ⊗R A(Y ) → A(X × Y ), z1 ⊗ z2 7→ A(p1 )(z1 ) · A(p2 )(z2 ) (being p1 , p2 the
respective projections) which is a ring homomorphism.
Remark 3.4. If the functor A is monoidal, then SA is strict monoidal. Moreover, if it satisfies
that A(Z1 )⊗A(Y ) A(Z2 ) = A(Z1 ×Y Z2 ) (resp. isomorphic) then it is also a strict (resp. pseudo)
functor.
Therefore, with this construction at hand, given a lax monoidal lax functor

G : Bdpn → S ,
called the geometrisation, and a functor

A : VarC → Ring,
called the algebraisation, we can build a s TQFTp, Z = ZG ,A , by
ZG ,A = SA ◦ G : Bdpn → R-Bim.
We will use this approach in section 4 to define a s TQFTp generalizing Deligne-Hodge polynomials of representation varieties.
3.3. 2-categories of modules with twists. Let R be a fixed ring (commutative and with
unit). Given two homomorphisms of R-modules f, g : M → N , we say that g is an immediate
twist of f if there exists an R-module D, homomorphisms f1 : M → D, f2 : D → N and
ψ : D → D such that f = f2 ◦ f1 and g = f2 ◦ ψ ◦ f1 .
ψ

M

f1

/D



f2

/6 N

g

In general, given f, g : M → N two R-module homomorphisms, we say that g is a twist of f
if there exists a finite sequence f = f0 , f1 , . . . , fr = g : M → M of homomorphisms such that
fi+1 is an immediate twist of fi .

13

Definition 3.5. Let R be a ring. The 2-category of R-modules with twists, R-Modt is the
category whose objects are R-modules, its 1-morphisms are R-modules homomorphisms and,
given homomorphisms f, g : A → B, we have a 2-morphism f ⇒ g if and only if g is a twist of
f . Moreover, R-Modt is a monoidal category with the usual tensor product.
Definition 3.6. Let R be a commutative ring with unit. A lax monoidal Topological Quantum
Field Theory of pairs, shortened ` TQFTp, is a lax monoidal strict 2-functor Z : Bdpn →
R-Modt .
Remark 3.7. In the literature, it is customary to forget about the 2-category structure and to
say that a lax monoidal TQFT is just a lax monoidal functor between Bdn and R-Mod. In
this paper, the 2-category structures are chosen to suit the geometric situation.
Remark 3.8. Since we requiere Z to be only lax monoidal, some of the properties of Topological
Quantum Field Theories can be lost. For example, duality arguments no longer hold and in
particular, Z (X) can be not finitely generated. This is the case of the construction of section
4.
A ` TQFTp is, in some sense, stronger than a s TQFTp. As described in section 3.2 suppose
that we have a contravariant functor A : VarC → Ring and set R = A(?). Furthermore,
suppose that, together with this functor, we have a covariant functor B : VarC → R-Mod
(being R-Mod the usual category of R-modules) such that B (X) = A(X) for any complex
algebraic variety X and satisfying the Beck-Chevalley condition, sometimes called the base
change formula, which requires that, for any pullback diagram in VarC

Y
f0

g0





Y2

/ Y1

g

f

/X

we have A(g)B (f ) = B (f 0 )A(g 0 ).
In this framework, we can define the strict 2-functor SA,B : S = Span(VarC ) → R-Modt as
follows:
• For any algebraic variety X we define SA,B (X) = A(X).
• Fixed X, Y complex algebraic varieties, we define the functor
(SA,B )X,Y : Hom S (X, Y ) → Hom R-Modt (A(X), A(Y ))
by:
f

g

– For a 1-morphism X ← Z → Y we define SA,B (f, g) = B (g) ◦ A(f ) : A(X) →
A(Z) → A(Y ).
– For a 2-morphism α : (f, g) ⇒ (f 0 , g 0 ) given by α : Z 0 → Z we define the immediate
twist ψ = B (α) ◦ A(α) : A(Z) → A(Z 0 ). Since α is a 2-cell in S we have that
B (g) ψ A(f ) = B (g 0 )A(f 0 ). Observe that, if α is an isomorphism, then ψ = id.
• For (SA,B )idX we take the identity 2-cell.

14

• Given 1-morphisms (f1 , g1 ) : X → Y and (f2 , g2 ) : Y → Z we have (SA,B )Y,Z (f2 , g2 ) ◦
(SA,B )X,Y (f1 , g1 ) = B (g2 )A(f2 )B (g1 )A(f1 ). On the other hand, (SA,B )X,Z ((f2 , g2 ) ◦
(f1 , g1 )) = B (g2 )B (g10 )A(f20 )A(f1 ), where g1 and f20 are the maps in the pullback
Z1 ×Y Z2
f20

Z1
f1

X

~

g10

z
$
g1

$

f2

Y

Z2
g2

z

Z.

By the Beck-Chevalley condition we have B (g10 )A(f20 ) = A(f2 )B (g1 ) and the two morphisms agree. Thus, we can take the 2-cell (SA,B )X,Y,Z as the identity.
Remark 3.9. The Beck-Chevalley condition appears naturally in the context of Grothendieck’s
yoga of six functors f∗ , f ∗ , f! , f ! , ⊗ and D in which (f∗ , f ∗ ) and (f! , f ! ) are adjoints, and f ∗
and f! satisfy the Beck-Chevalley condition. In this context, we can take A to be the functor
f 7→ f ∗ and B the functor f 7→ f! as we will do in section 4. For further infomation, see for
example [15] or [2].
Remark 3.10. If the Beck-Chevalley condition was satisfied up to natural isomorphism, then
this corresponds to equality after a pair of automorphisms in A(Z1 ) and A(Z2 ) which corresponds to an invertible 2-cell in R-Modt . In this case, SA,B would be a pseudo-functor. We
will not need this trick in this paper.
As in the previous case, SA,B : S → R-Modt is automatically lax monoidal taking ∆X,Y :
SA,B (X) ⊗ SA,B (Y ) → SA,B (X × Y ) to be the external product with respect to A. Therefore,
given a geometrisation functor, i.e. a lax monoidal strict functor G : Bdpn → S , and these
two functors A : VarC → Ring and B : VarC → R-Mod as algebraisations, we can build a
` TQFTp, Z = ZG ,A,B by

ZG ,A,B = SA,B ◦ G : Bdpn → R-Modt .
Observe that the previous s TQFTp, Z = SA ◦ G can also be constructed in this setting, so
in this sense Z is stronger than Z .
3.4. The parabolic case. For some applications, it is useful to consider the so-called parabolic
case. In this setting, the starting point is a fixed set Λ that we will call the parabolic data.
Given a compact n-dimensional manifold W , possibly with boundary, we will denote by Par(W )
the set of closed connected subvarieties S ⊆ W of dimension n − 2 such that S ∩ ∂W = ∅. A
parabolic structure, Q, on W is a finite set (possibly empty) of pairs Q = {(S1 , λ1 ), . . . , (Ss , λs )}
where Si ∈ Par(W ) and λi ∈ Λ.
With this notion, we can improve our previous category Bdpn to the 2-category of pairs
of bordisms with parabolic data Λ, Bdpn (Λ). The objects of this category are the same
than for Bdpn . For morphisms, given objects (X1 , A1 ) and (X2 , A2 ) of Bdpn , a morphism
(X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ) is a class of triples (W, A, Q) where (W, A) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ) is a
bordism of pairs and Q is a parabolic structure on W such that S ∩ A = ∅ for any (S, λ) ∈ Q.
As in the case of Bdpn , two triples (W, A, Q) and (W 0 , A0 , Q0 ) are in the same class if there

15

exists a diffeomorphism F : W → W 0 preserving the boundaries such that F (A) = A0 and
(S, λ) ∈ Q if and only if (F (S), λ) ∈ Q0 . As expected, composition of morphisms in Bdpn (Λ)
is defined by (W 0 , A0 , Q0 ) ◦ (W, A, Q) = (W ∪ W 0 , A ∪ A0 , Q ∪ Q0 ). In the same spirit, we have
a 2-morphism (W, A, Q) ⇒ (W 0 , A0 , Q0 ) if there exists a boundary preserving diffeomorphism
F : W → W 0 such that F (A) ⊆ A0 and (S, λ) ∈ Q if and only if (F (S), λ) ∈ Q0 .
Then, in analogy with the non-parabolic case, a lax monoidal lax functor Z : Bdpn (Λ) →
R-Bim is called a parabolic s TQFTp and a lax monoidal strict functor Z : Bdpn (Λ) →
R-Modt is called a parabolic ` TQFTp.

4. A s TQFTp for Deligne-Hodge polynomials of representations varieties
In this section, we will use the previous ideas to construct a s TQFTp and a ` TQFTp
allowing computation of Deligne-Hodge polynomials of representation varieties. Both theories
share a common geometrisation functor, constructed via the fundamental groupoid functor as
described in section 4.1. On the other hand, for the algebraisation we will use, in section 4.2,
the properties of mixed Hodge modules so that A will be the pullback of mixed Hodge modules
and B the pushforward.
4.1. The geometrisation functor. Recall from [10], Chapter 6, that given a topological
space X and a subset A ⊆ X, we can define the fundamental groupoid of X with respect to A,
Π(X, A), as the category whose objects are the points in A and, given a, b ∈ A, Hom (a, b) is the
set of homotopy classes (with fixed endpoints) of paths between a and b. It is a straighforward
check that this category is actually a groupoid and only depends on the homotopy type of
the pair (X, A). In particular, if A = {x0 }, Π(X, A) has a single object whose automorphism
group is π1 (X, x0 ), the fundamental group of X based on x0 . For convenience, if A is any set,
not necessarily a subset of X, we will denote Π(X, A) := Π(X, X ∩ A) and we declare that
Π(∅, ∅) is the singleton category.
With this notion at hand, we define the strict 2-functor Π : Bdpn → Spanop (Grpd), where
Grpd is the category of groupoids, as follows:
• For any object (X, A) of Bdpn we set Π(X, A) as the fundamental groupoid of (X, A).
• Given objects (X1 , A1 ), (X2 , A2 ), the functor
Π(X1 A1 ),(X2 ,A2 ) : Hom Bdpn ((X1 , A1 ), (X2 , A2 )) → Hom Spanop (Grpd) (Π(X1 , A1 ), Π(X2 , A2 ))
is given by:
– For any 1-morphism (W, A) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ) we define Π(X1 A1 ),(X2 ,A2 ) (W, A)
to be the span
i

i

2
1
Π(X2 , A2 ) −→
Π(W, A) ←−
Π(X1 , A1 )

where i1 , i2 are the induced functions on the level of groupoids by the inclusions
of pairs (X1 , A1 ), (X2 , A2 ) ,→ (W, A).
– For a 2-morphism (W, A) ⇒ (W 0 , A0 ) given by a diffeomorphism F : W → W 0 ,
we obtain a groupoid homomorphism ΠF : Π(W, A) → Π(W 0 , A0 ) giving rise to a

16

commutative diagram
Π(W, A)
i2

Π(X2 , A2 )

i02

8

f

ΠF


/ Π(W 0 , A0 ) o

i1

i01

Π(X1 , A1 )

which is a 2-cell in Spanop (Grpd).
• For Πid(X,A) we take the identity.
• With respect to composition, let us take (W, A) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ) and (W 0 , A0 ) :
(X2 , A2 ) → (X3 , A3 ) two 1-morphisms. Set W 00 = W ∪X2 W 0 and A00 = A ∪ A0 so that
(W 0 , A0 ) ◦ (W, A) = (W 00 , A00 ). In order to identify Π(W 00 , A00 ), let V ⊆ W 00 be an open
bicollar of X2 such that V ∩ A00 = A2 . Set U1 = W ∪ V and U2 = W 0 ∪ V .
By construction, {U1 , U2 } is an open covering of W 00 such that (U1 , A00 ∩ U1 ) is homotopically equivalent to (W, A), (U2 , A00 ∩ U2 ) is homotopically equivalent to (W 0 , A0 )
and (U1 ∩ U2 , A00 ∩ U1 ∩ U2 ) is homotopically equivalent to (V, A00 ∩ V ) which is homotopically equivalent to (X2 , A2 ). Therefore, by Seifert-van Kampen theorem for
fundamental groupoids (see [10], [9] and [23]) we have a pushout diagram induced by
inclusions
Π(U1 ∩ U2 , A00 ) = Π(X2 , A2 )

/ Π(U1 , A00 ) = Π(W, A)




/ Π(W 00 , A00 )

Π(U2 , A00 ) = Π(W 0 , A0 )

But observe that, by definition, Π(W 0 , A0 ) ◦ Π(W, A) is precisely this pushout, so we
can take the functors ΠX1 ,X2 ,X3 as the identities.
We can slightly improve the previous construction. Given a groupoid G , we will say that G
is finitely generated if Obj(G ) is finite and, for any object a of G , Hom G (a, a) (usually denoted
Ga , the vertex group of a) is a finitely generated group. We will denote by Grpd0 the category
of finitely generated groupoids.
Remark 4.1. Given a groupoid G , two objects a, b ∈ G are said to be connected if Hom G (a, b)
is not empty. In particular, this means that Ga and Gb are isomorphic groups so, in order to
check whether G is finitely generated, it is enough to check it on a point of every connected
component.
Remark 4.2. Let X be a compact connected manifold (possibly with boundary) and let A ⊆ X
be finite. As we mentioned above, for any a ∈ A, Π(X, A)a = π1 (X, a). But a compact
connected manifold has the homotopy type of a finite CW-complex, so in particular has finitely
generated fundamental group. Hence, Π(X, A) is finitely generated. Therefore, the previous
functor actually can be promoted to a functor Π : Bdpn → Spanop (Grpd0 ).
Now, let G be a complex algebraic group. Seeing G as a groupoid, we can consider the
functor Hom Grpd (−, G) : Grpd → Set. Moreover, if G is finitely generated, then Hom (G , G)
has a natural structure of complex algebraic variety. To see that, pick a set S = {a1 , . . . , as } of
objects of G such that every connected component contains exactly one element of S. Moreover,
for any object a of G , pick a morphism fa : a → ai where ai is the object of S in the connected

17

component of a. Hence, if ρ : G → G is a groupoid homomorphism, it is uniquely determined
by the group representations ρi : Gai → G for ai ∈ S together with elements ga corresponding
to the morphisms fa for any object a. Since the elements ga can be chosen without any
restriction, if G has n objects, we have
Hom (G , G) ∼
= Hom (Ga1 , G) × . . . × Hom (Ga1 , G) × Gn−s
and each of these factors has a natural structure of complex algebraic variety as representation
variety. This endows Hom (G , G) with an algebraic structure which can be shown not to depend
on the choices.
Definition 4.3. Let (W, A) be a pair of topological spaces such that Π(W, A) is finitely generated (for example, if W is a compact manifold and A is finite). We denote the variety
XG (W, A) = Hom (Π(W, A), G) and we call it the representation variety of (W, A) into G. In
particular, if A is a singleton, we recover the usual representation varieties of group homomorphisms ρ : π1 (W ) → G, just denoted by XG (W ).
Remark 4.4. If we drop out the requirement of G being finitely generated, we can still endow
Hom (G , G) with a scheme structure following the same lines (see, for example [36]). However,
in general, this scheme is no longer of finite type. For this reason, in the definition of Bdpn ,
we demand the subset A ⊆ W to be finite.
Therefore, we can promote this functor to a contravariant functor Hom (−, G) : Grpd0 →
VarC . Recall that Hom (−, G) sends colimits of Grpd into limits of VarC so, in particular,
sends pushouts into pullback and, thus, defines a functor Hom (−, G) : Spanop (Grpd0 ) →
Span(VarC ). With this functor at hand, we can finally define the geometrisation functor as

G = Hom (−, G) ◦ Π : Bdpn → S = Span(VarC ).
Observe that, since Π and Hom (−, G) are both (strict) monoidal functors then G is strict
monoidal.
4.2. The algebraisation functor. As algebraisation functor for our s TQFTp, let us consider
the contravariant functor A : VarC → Ring that, for a complex algebraic variety X gives
A(X) = KMX and, for a regular morphism f : X → Y it assigns A(f ) = f ∗ : KMY → KMX .
As we mention in section 2.2, f ∗ is a ring homomorphism and A(?) = KM? = KMHSQ .
With these choices, the corresponding s TQFTp is Z = SA ◦ G : Bdpn → R-Bim with
R = KMHSQ . As described in section 3.2, it satisfies:
• For any pair (X, A), where X is a compact (n − 1)-dimensional manifold and A ⊆ X
is finite, we have Z (X, A) = KMXG (X,A) .
• For a 1-morphism (W, A) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ) we assign
Z (W, A) = KMXG (W,A)
with the structure of a (KMXG (X1 ,A1 ) , KMXG (X2 ,A2 ) )-bimodule. In particular, taking
the unit Q ∈ KMXG (W,A) and the projection onto a singleton c : XG (W, A) → ?, by
Example 2.10 we have
c! Q = [Hc• (XG (W, A); Q)]
as mixed Hodge structures.

18

• For a 2-morphism α : (W, A) ⇒ (W 0 , A0 ) we obtain a bimodule homomorphism
Z (α) : KMXG (W 0 ,A0 ) → KMXG (W,A)
Remark 4.5. As we mentioned in section 3.2, SA : Span(VarC ) → R-Bim is automatically
a lax monoidal lax functor. However, it is not strict monoidal since, in general, KMX×Y 6=
KMX ⊗R KMY .
Furthermore, we can also consider the covariant functor B : VarC → R-Mod, where R =
A(?) = KMHSQ given by B (X) = KMX for an algebraic variety X and, for a regular
morphism f : X → Y , it assigns B (f ) = f! : KMX → KMY . In this case, as described in
section 3.3, the corresponding ` TQFTp is Z = SA,B ◦ G : Bdpn → R-Modt . It assigns:
• For a pair (X, A), Z (X, A) = KMXG (X,A) .
• For a 1-morphism (W, A) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ), it assigns the R-module homomorphism
i∗

i2!

1
Z (W, A) : KMXG (X1 ,A1 ) −→
KMXG (W,A) −→ KMXG (X2 ,A2 )

• The existence of a 2-morphism α : (W, A) ⇒ (W 0 , A0 ) implies that Z (W 0 , A0 ) = (i02 )! ◦
(i01 )∗ : KMXG (X1 ,A1 ) → KMXG (X2 ,A2 ) can be obtained from Z (W, A) = (i2 )! ◦ (i1 )∗ :
KMXG (X1 ,A1 ) → KMXG (X2 ,A2 ) by twists.
In particular, let W be a connected closed oriented n-dimensional manifold and let A ⊆ W
finite. We can see W as a 1-morphism (W, A) : (∅, ∅) → (∅, ∅). In that case, since Z (∅, ∅) =
KMXG (∅,∅) = KM? = KMHSQ we obtain that Z (W, A) is the morphism
c∗

c

!
Z (W, A) : KMHSQ −→ KMXG (W,A) −→
KMHSQ ,

where c : XG (W, A) → ? is the projection onto a point. In particular, for the unit Q0 ∈ MHSQ
we have
Z (W, A)(Q0 ) = c! c∗ Q0 = c! QX (W,A) = [Hc• (XG (W, A); Q)] .
G

Hence, taking into account that XG (W, A) = XG (W ) × G|A|−1 we have that

Z (W, A)(Q0 ) = [Hc• (XG (W ); Q)] ⊗ [Hc• (G; Q)]|A|−1
Therefore, we have proved the main result of this paper in the non-parabolic case.
Theorem 4.6. There exists a ` TQFTp, Z : Bdpn → KMHSQ -Modt such that, for any ndimensional connected closed orientable manifold W and any non-empty finite subset A ⊆ W
we have
Z (W, A)(Q0 ) = [Hc• (XG (W ); Q)] ⊗ [Hc• (G; Q)]|A|−1
where Q0 ∈ KMHSQ is the unit Hodge structure. In particular, this means that
e (Z (W, A)(Q0 )) = e (G)|A|−1 e (XG (W )) .
Remark 4.7. An analogous formula holds in the non-connected case. Suppose that W =
W1 t . . . t Ws with Wi connected and denote Ai = A ∩ Wi . Then XG (W, A) = XG (W1 , A1 ) ×
N
. . . × XG (Ws , As ) so Z (W, A) = i Z (Wi , Ai ) and, thus
e (Z (W, A)(Q0 )) = e (G)

|A|−s

s
Y
i=1

e (XG (Wi )) .

19

4.3. Almost-TQFT and computational methods. For computational purposes, we can
restrict our attention to a wide subcategory of bordisms. Along this section, we will forget
about the 2-category structure of Bdpn and we will see it as a 1-category.
First of all, let us consider the subcategory Tbp0n ⊆ Bdpn of strict tubes of pairs. An object
(X, A) of Bdpn is an object of Tbp0n if X is connected or empty. Given objects (X1 , A1 ) and
(X2 , A2 ) of Tbp0n , a morphism (W, A) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ) of Bdpn is in Tbp0n if W is
connected. We will call such morphisms strict tubes.
From this category, we consider the category of tubes, Tbpn as the subcategory of Bdpn
whose objects and morphisms are disjoint unions of the ones of Tbp0n . Observe that, in
particular, Tbpn is a wide subcategory of Bdpn i.e. they have the same objects. As in the
case of Bdpn , Tbpn is a monoidal category with the disjoint union.
Definition 4.8. Let R be a ring. An almost-TQFT of pairs is a monoidal functor Z : Tbpn →
R-Mod.
Remark 4.9. Since Tbpn does not contain all the bordisms, dualizing arguments no longer
hold for almost-TQFT. For example, for n = 2, the pair of pants is not a tube, so, in contrast
with T QF T , we cannot assure that Z(S 1 ) is a Frobenius algebra. In particular, Z(S 1 ) is not
forced to be finite dimensional.
Remark 4.10. An almost-TQFT gives an effective way of computing invariants as follows. Fix
n ≥ 1 and suppose that we have a set of generators ∆ for the morphisms of Tbp0n , i.e. after
boundary orientation preserving diffeomorphisms, every morphism of Tbp0n is a compositions
of elements of ∆. These generators can be obtained, for example, by means of Morse theory
(see Section 1.4 of [26] for n = 2).
Suppose that we want to compute an invariant that, for a closed connected orientable ndimensional manifold W and a finite set A ⊆ W is given by Z(W, A)(1). In that case, seeing
(W, A) as a morphism (W, A) : ∅ → ∅, we can decompose (W, A) = Ws ◦ . . . ◦ W1 with Wi ∈ ∆.
Thus, for Z(W, A) : R → R we have
Z(W, A)(1) = Z(Ws ) ◦ . . . ◦ Z(W1 )(1)
Hence, the knowledge of Z(Wi ) for Wi ∈ ∆ is enough to compute that invariant for closed
manifolds.
Given a ` TQFTp, Z : Bdpn → R-Modt , we can build a natural almost-TQFT from it,
Z = ZZ : Tbpn → R-Mod. For that, forgetting about the 2-category structure, the restriction
of Z to Tbp0n gives us a functor Z : Tbp0n → R-Mod. Now, we define Z by:
• Given objects (X i , Ai ) of Tbp0n , we take
!
G
O
i
i
Z
(X , A ) =
Z (X i , Ai )
i

i

where the tensor product is taken over R.
• Given strict tubes (W i , Ai ) : (X1i , Ai1 ) → (X2i , Ai2 ), we define
!
O
G
O
O
Z
(W i , Ai ) =
Z (W j , Aj ) :
Z (X1i , Ai1 ) →
Z (X2i , Ai2 )
i

i

i

i

20

Remark 4.11. The apparently artificial definition of Z can be better understood in terms of the
corresponding map of Z . To see it, let (W, A) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ) and (W 0 , A0 ) : (X10 , A01 ) →
(X20 , A02 ) be two tubes. Recall that, since Z is lax monoidal, we have a natural trasformation
∆ : Z (−) ⊗R Z (−) ⇒ Z (− t −) (see section 3.2). Then, Z ((W, A) t (W, A0 )) is just a lift

Z (X1 , A1 ) ⊗R Z (X10 , A01 )
∆(X

0
0
1 ,A1 ),(X1 ,A1 )

Z((W,A)t(W,A0 ))





Z (X1 t X10 , A1 ∪ A01 )

/ Z (X2 , A2 ) ⊗R Z (X 0 , A0 )
2
2

Z ((W,A)t(W,A0 ))

∆(X

0
0
2 ,A2 ),(X2 ,A2 )

/ Z (X2 t X 0 , A2 ∪ A0 )
2
2

Since composition of tubes is performed by componentwise gluing, these lifts behave well with
composition, which implies that Z is well defined. This property no longer holds for Z since
there exists bordisms mixing several components, as the pair of pants for n = 2.
In particular, from the ` TQFTp described in Theorem 4.6, we obtain an almost-TQFT,
Z : Tbpn → R-Mod, with R = KMHSQ , that allows the computation of Deligne-Hodge
polynomials of representation varieties. To be precise, from the previous construction we
obtain the following result.
Corollary 4.12. There exists an almost-TQFT, Z : Tbpn → KMHSQ -Mod, such that, for
any n-dimensional connected closed orientable manifold W and any finite set A ⊆ W we have
Z(W, A)(Q0 ) = [Hc• (XG (W ); Q)] × [Hc• (G; Q)]|A|−1
where Q0 ∈ KMHSQ is the unit. In particular,
e (Z(W, A)(Q0 )) = e (G)|A|−1 e (XG (W )) .
In the case n = 2, we can go a step further and describe explicitly this functor. With respect
to objects of Tbp2 , recall that every non-empty 1-dimensional closed manifold is diffeomorphic
to S 1 . Thus, the objects of Tbp2 are pairs (X, A) with X diffeomorphic to either ∅ or S 1 .
Since π1 (S 1 ) = Z we have XG (S 1 ) = Hom (Z, G) = G and, thus, for any x0 ∈ S 1
Z(∅) = KM1 = KMHSQ = R,

Z(S 1 , {x0 }) = KMG .

Regarding morphisms, observe that, adapting the proof of Proposition 1.4.13 of [26] for the

generators of Bd2 , we have that a set of generators of Tbp2 is ∆ = D, D, T, P where
D : ∅ → S 1 is the disc with a marked point in the boundary, D : S 1 → ∅ is the opposite
disc, T : S 1 → S 1 is the torus with two holes and a puncture on each boundary component,
and P : S 1 → S 1 is the bordism S 1 × [0, 1] with a puncture on each boundary component an
another in the interior. They are depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1. A set of generators of Tbp2 .

21

For D and D the situation is simple since they are simply connected. Therefore, their images
under the geometrisation functor G are
h
i
h
i
i
i
G (D) = 1 ←− 1 −→ G ,
G (D) = G ←− 1 −→ 1 ,
so their images under Z are
Z(D) = i! : R = KM1 → KMG

Z(D) = i∗ : KMG → KM1 = R.

For the holed torus T : S 1 → S 1 the situation is a bit more complicated. Let T = (T0 , A)
where A = {x1 , x2 } the set of marked points of T , x1 in the ingoing boundary and x2 in the
outgoing boundary. Recall that T0 is homotopically equivalent to a bouquet of three circles
so its fundamental group is the free group with three generators. Thus, we can take γ, γ1 , γ2
as the set of generators of Π(T )x1 = π1 (T0 , x1 ) depicted in Figure 2 and α the shown path
between x1 and x2 .

Figure 2. Chosen paths for T .
With this description, γ is a generator of π1 (S 1 , x1 ) and αγ[γ1 , γ2 ]α−1 is a generator of
π1 (S 1 , x2 ), where [γ1 , γ2 ] = γ1 γ2 γ1−1 γ2−1 is the group commutator. Hence, since XG (T ) =
Hom (Π(T0 , A), G) = G4 we have that the geometrisation G (T ) is the span
p

s

G ←−
G4
−→
G
g ←[ (g, g1 , g2 , h) 7→ hg[g1 , g2 ]h−1
where g, g1 , g2 and h are the images of γ, γ1 , γ2 and α, respectively. Hence, we obtain that
p∗

s

!
Z(T ) : KMG −→ KMG4 −→
KMG .

For the morphism P , let P = (S 1 ×[0, 1], A) where A = {x1 , x2 , x} with x1 , x2 the ingoing and
outgoing boundary points respectively and x the interior point. Since π1 (S 1 × [0, 1]) = Z, the
fundamental groupoid Π(P ) has three vertices isomorphic to Z and, thus, Hom (Π(P ), G) = G3 .
Let γ be a generator of π1 (S 1 , x1 ), α1 a path between x1 and x2 and α2 a path between x1
and x, as depicted in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Chosen paths for P .

22

Since α1 γα1−1 is a generator of π1 (S 1 , x2 ) we obtain that G (P ) is the span
q

t

G ←−
G3
−→
G
g ←[ (g, g1 , g2 ) 7→ g1 gg1−1
Hence, we have that
q∗

t

!
Z(P ) : KMG −→ KMG3 −→
KMG .

Now, let Σg be the closed oriented surface of genus g. If we choose any g + 1 points we have
a decomposition of the bordism Σg : ∅ → ∅ as Σg = D ◦ T g ◦ D. Thus, by Corollary 4.12 we
have that

1
g
e (XG (Σg )) =
g e Z(D) ◦ Z(T ) ◦ Z(D)(Q0 ) .
e (G)
This kind of computations were carried out in the paper [34] for G = SL(2, C) and in [32] for
G = P GL(2, C). In future work, we shall explain the computations of those papers in these
terms and extend them to the parabolic case using the techniques explained in the following
section.
4.4. The parabolic case. The previous constructions can be easily extended to the parabolic
case. Following the construction above, it is just necessary to adapt the geometrisation functor
to the parabolic context.
As above, let us fix a complex algebraic group G and, as parabolic data, we choose for Λ a
collection of subsets of G closed under conjugacy. Then, as geometrisation functor, we define
the 2-functor G : Bdpn (Λ) → S = Span(VarC ) as follows:
• For any object (X, A) of Bdpn (Λ), we set G (X, A) = XG (X, A) = Hom (Π(X, A), G).
• Let (W, A, Q) : (X1 , A1 ) → (X2 , A2 ) with Q = {(S1 , λ1 ), . . . , (Ss , λs )} be a 1-morphism.
For short, let us denote S = S1 ∪ . . . ∪ Ss . To this morphism we assign the span
XG (X2 , A2 ) ←− XG (W, A, Q) −→ XG (X1 , A1 )
where XG (W, A, Q) ⊆ XG (W − S, A) is the subvariety of groupoid homomorphisms
ρ : Π(W − S, A) → G satisfying the following condition: if γ is a loop of π1 (W − S, a),
being a any point of W in the connected component of γ, whose image under the map
induced by inclusion π1 (W − S, a) → π1 ((W − S) ∪ Sk , a) vanishes, then ρ(γ) ∈ λk .
Observe that, since the λ ∈ Λ are closed under conjugation, that condition does not
depend on the chosen basepoint a.
• For a 2-morphism (W, A, Q) ⇒ (W 0 , A0 , Q0 ) given by a diffeomorphism F : W → W 0
we use the induced map F ∗ : XG (W 0 , A0 , Q0 ) → XG (W, A, Q) to create a commutative
diagram
XG (W 0 , A0 , Q0 )
v

XG (X2 , A2 ) o



F∗

XG (W, A, Q)

(
/ XG (X1 , A1 )

which is a 2-cell in Span(VarC ).
As in section 4.1, these assigments can be put together to define a 2-functor G : Bdpn (Λ) →
S . This functor, together with the algebraisations A : VarC → Ring and B : VarC →
R-Mod described in section 4.2, gives us a parabolic s TQFTp, Z : Bdpn (Λ) → R-Bim and

23

a parabolic ` TQFTp, Z : Bdpn (Λ) → R-Modt . As in the non-parabolic case, the functor
Z satisfies that, for any closed connected orientable n-dimensional manifold X any finite set
A ⊆ X and any parabolic structure Q on X disjoint from A we have

Z (X, A, Q)(Q0 ) = [Hc• (XG (X, Q); Q)] ⊗ [Hc• (G; Q)]|A|−1 .
As always, this implies that
e (Z (X, A, Q)(Q0 )) = e (G)|A|−1 e (XG (X, Q)) .
Furthermore, following the construction in section 4.3, we can also modify this result to
obtain an almost-TQFT, Z : Tbpn (Λ) → KMHSQ -Mod, where Tbpn (Λ) is the category
of tubes of pairs with parabolic data Λ. In this parabolic case, for any closed orientable
n-dimensional manifold W with parabolic structure Q and any finite set A ⊆ W we obtain
Z(W, A, Q)(Q0 ) = [Hc• (XG (W, Q); Q)] × [Hc• (G; Q)]|A|−1 ,
e (Z(W, A, Q)(Q0 )) = e (G)|A|−1 e (XG (W, Q)) .
In the particular case n = 2, observe that Par(W ) is just the set of interior points of the
surface W . Therefore, in order to obtain a set of generators of Tbpn (Λ) it is enough to consider
the elements of the set of generators ∆ previouly defined with no parabolic structure and add
a collection of tubes Tλ = (S 1 × [0, 1], {x1 , x2 } , {(x, λ)}) for λ ∈ Λ, where x is any interior
point of S 1 × [0, 1] with parabolic structure λ and x1 , x2 are points in the ingoing and outgoing
boundaries repectively, as depicted in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Tube with marked point.
In this case, observe that π1 ((S 1 × [0, 1]) − {x0 }) is the free group with two generators and
that the fundamental groupoid of Tλ has two vertices. These generators can be taken to be
around the incoming boundary and around the marked point so XG (Tλ ) = G2 × λ. Thus, the
geometrisation G (Tλ ) is the span
r

u

G ←− G2 × λ −→
G
g ←[ (g, g1 , h) 7→ g1 ghg1−1
Hence, the image Z(Tλ ) is the morphism
r∗

u

!
Z(Tλ ) : KMG −→ KMG2 ×λ −→
KMG .

With this description we have proven the following result.
Theorem 4.13. Let Σg be a closed oriented surface of genus g and Q a parabolic structure on
Σg with s marked points with data λ1 , . . . , λs ∈ Λ, then,

1
g
e (XG (Σg , Q)) =
g+s e Z(D) ◦ Z(Tλs ) ◦ . . . ◦ Z(Tλ1 ) ◦ Z(T ) ◦ Z(D)(Q0 ) .
e (G)

24

This formula gives a general recipe for computing Deligne-Hodge polynomials of representation varieties, for any group G. That is, once computed explicitly the homomorphism
Z(T ) : KMG → KMG , all the Deligne-Hodge polynomials are known in the non-parabolic
case and, if we also compute Z(Tλ ) : KMG → KMG for any conjugacy class λ ⊆ G, also the
parabolic case follows.
Some reductions can be done to this program. Instead of KMG , we can consider the vector
space VG = KMG ⊗Z[u,v] Q(u, v), where Z[u, v] lies inside KMG via the Tate structures.
Hence, in order to perform the previous program (at least in the non-parabolic case), it is
enough to compute the Q(u, v)-linear map Z(T ) : VG → VG . However, generically, VG is an
infinite dimensional vector space, so that computation could be as difficult as the previous one.
Nevertheless, observe that, for our purpose, it is not needed to compute Z(T ) in the whole space
VG , but only in the subspace WG = hZ(T )g (QG )i∞
g=0 which can be significatly smaller. Actually,
computations of [34], in the case G = SL(2, C), and [32] for G = P GL(2, C), shows that WG is,
in both cases, a finite dimensional vector space (of dimensions 8 and 6, respectively). That is
important because, in that case, the knowledge of finitely many elements Z(T )g (QG ) ∈ KMG
is enough to characterize completely the map along WG . Therefore, there are good reasons to
expect the following result, at least for some general class of algebraic groups.
Conjecture 1. The vector space WG ⊆ VG = KMG ⊗Z[u,v] Q(u, v) is finitely dimensional.
Future work will address this problem, at least for linear groups, and will look for bounds
for the dimension of WG . Another work consists of computing these polynomials explicitly for
some groups G, for example G = SL(2, C) or P GL(2, C), where the parabolic case remains
unknown.
Finally, the developed framework could be useful for understanding the mirror-symmetry
conjectures related to character varieties, as stated in [20] and [22]. For example, computations
of [34] and [32] for the Langlands dual groups SL(2, C) and P GL(2, C) show that WSL(2,C)
and WP GL(2,C) are strongly related, in the sense that their generators agree in the space of
traces. Based on these observations, it could be interesting to know if the linear maps Z(T )
are somehow related for Langland dual groups.
References
[1] M. Atiyah. Topological quantum field theories. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (68):175–186 (1989),
1988.
[2] J. Ayoub. Les six opérations de Grothendieck et le formalisme des cycles évanescents dans le monde motivique. I. Astérisque, (314):x+466 pp. (2008), 2007.
[3] J. C. Baez and J. Dolan. Higher-dimensional algebra and topological quantum field theory. J. Math. Phys.,
36(11):6073–6105, 1995.
[4] D. Baraglia and P. Hekmati. Arithmetic of singular character varieties and their E-polynomials. Proc. Lond.
Math. Soc. (3), 114(2):293–332, 2017.
[5] A. A. Beilinson and V. G. Drinfeld. Quantization of Hitchin’s fibration and Langlands’ program. In Algebraic
and geometric methods in mathematical physics (Kaciveli, 1993), volume 19 of Math. Phys. Stud., pages
3–7. Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 1996.
[6] J. Bénabou. Introduction to bicategories. In Reports of the Midwest Category Seminar, pages 1–77. Springer,
Berlin, 1967.
[7] O. Biquard and M. Jardim. Asymptotic behaviour and the moduli space of doubly-periodic instantons. J.
Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 3(4):335–375, 2001.

25

[8] H. U. Boden and K. Yokogawa. Moduli spaces of parabolic Higgs bundles and parabolic K(D) pairs over
smooth curves. I. Internat. J. Math., 7(5):573–598, 1996.
[9] R. Brown. Groupoids and van Kampen’s theorem. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 17:385–401, 1967.
[10] R. Brown. Topology and groupoids. BookSurge, LLC, Charleston, SC, 2006. Third edition of ıt Elements
of modern topology [McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968; MR0227979], With 1 CD-ROM (Windows, Macintosh
and UNIX).
[11] K. Corlette. Flat G-bundles with canonical metrics. J. Differential Geom., 28(3):361–382, 1988.
[12] P. Deligne. Théorie de Hodge. II. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (40):5–57, 1971.
[13] P. Deligne. Théorie de Hodge. II. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (40):5–57, 1971.
[14] F. El Zein and L. D. ung Tráng. Mixed Hodge structures. In Hodge theory, volume 49 of Math. Notes, pages
123–216. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 2014.
[15] H. Fausk, P. Hu, and J. P. May. Isomorphisms between left and right adjoints. Theory Appl. Categ., 11:No.
4, 107–131, 2003.
[16] D. S. Freed. Higher algebraic structures and quantization. Comm. Math. Phys., 159(2):343–398, 1994.
[17] O. Garcı́a-Prada, P. B. Gothen, and V. Muñoz. Betti numbers of the moduli space of rank 3 parabolic
Higgs bundles. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 187(879):viii+80, 2007.
[18] O. Garcı́a-Prada, J. Heinloth, and A. Schmitt. On the motives of moduli of chains and Higgs bundles. J.
Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 16(12):2617–2668, 2014.
[19] P. B. Gothen. The Betti numbers of the moduli space of stable rank 3 Higgs bundles on a Riemann surface.
Internat. J. Math., 5(6):861–875, 1994.
[20] T. Hausel. Mirror symmetry and Langlands duality in the non-abelian Hodge theory of a curve. In Geometric
methods in algebra and number theory, volume 235 of Progr. Math., pages 193–217. Birkhäuser Boston,
Boston, MA, 2005.
[21] T. Hausel, E. Letellier, and F. Rodriguez-Villegas. Arithmetic harmonic analysis on character and quiver
varieties. Duke Math. J., 160(2):323–400, 2011.
[22] T. Hausel and F. Rodriguez-Villegas. Mixed Hodge polynomials of character varieties. Invent. Math.,
174(3):555–624, 2008. With an appendix by Nicholas M. Katz.
[23] P. J. Higgins. Categories and groupoids. Repr. Theory Appl. Categ., (7):1–178, 2005. Reprint of the 1971
original [ıt Notes on categories and groupoids, Van Nostrand Reinhold, London; MR0327946] with a new
preface by the author.
[24] N. J. Hitchin. The self-duality equations on a Riemann surface. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 55(1):59–126,
1987.
[25] M. Jardim. Nahm transform and spectral curves for doubly-periodic instantons. Comm. Math. Phys.,
225(3):639–668, 2002.
[26] J. Kock. Frobenius algebras and 2D topological quantum field theories, volume 59 of London Mathematical
Society Student Texts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004.
[27] A. D. Lauda and H. Pfeiffer. Open-closed strings: two-dimensional extended TQFTs and Frobenius algebras. Topology Appl., 155(7):623–666, 2008.
[28] T. Leinster. Higher operads, higher categories, volume 298 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note
Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004.
[29] M. Logares and V. Muñoz. Hodge polynomials of the SL(2, C)-character variety of an elliptic curve with
two marked points. Internat. J. Math., 25(14):1450125, 22, 2014.
[30] M. Logares, V. Muñoz, and P. E. Newstead. Hodge polynomials of SL(2, C)-character varieties for curves
of small genus. Rev. Mat. Complut., 26(2):635–703, 2013.
[31] S. Mac Lane. Categories for the working mathematician, volume 5 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics.
Springer-Verlag, New York, second edition, 1998.
[32] J. Martı́nez. E-polynomials of P GL(2, C)-character varieties of surface groups. Preprint. arXiv:1705.04649,
2017.
[33] J. Martı́nez and V. Muñoz. E-polynomials of SL(2, C)-character varieties of complex curves of genus 3.
Osaka J. Math., 53(3):645–681, 2016.
[34] J. Martı́nez and V. Muñoz. E-polynomials of the SL(2, C)-character varieties of surface groups. Int. Math.
Res. Not. IMRN, (3):926–961, 2016.

26

[35] M. Mereb. On the E-polynomials of a family of SLn -character varieties. Math. Ann., 363(3-4):857–892,
2015.
[36] K. Nakamoto. Representation varieties and character varieties. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci., 36(2):159–189,
2000.
[37] P. E. Newstead. Introduction to moduli problems and orbit spaces, volume 51 of Tata Institute of Fundamental Research Lectures on Mathematics and Physics. Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bombay;
by the Narosa Publishing House, New Delhi, 1978.
[38] C. A. M. Peters and J. H. M. Steenbrink. Mixed Hodge structures, volume 52 of Ergebnisse der Mathematik
und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics [Results in Mathematics and
Related Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics]. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2008.
[39] M. Saito. Mixed Hodge modules. Proc. Japan Acad. Ser. A Math. Sci., 62(9):360–363, 1986.
[40] M. Saito. Introduction to mixed Hodge modules. Astérisque, (179-180):10, 145–162, 1989. Actes du Colloque
de Théorie de Hodge (Luminy, 1987).
[41] M. Saito. Mixed Hodge modules. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci., 26(2):221–333, 1990.
[42] J. Schürmann. Characteristic classes of mixed Hodge modules. In Topology of stratified spaces, volume 58
of Math. Sci. Res. Inst. Publ., pages 419–470. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2011.
[43] M. Shulman. Framed bicategories and monoidal fibrations. Theory Appl. Categ., 20:No. 18, 650–738, 2008.
[44] C. T. Simpson. Harmonic bundles on noncompact curves. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 3(3):713–770, 1990.
[45] C. T. Simpson. Higgs bundles and local systems. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (75):5–95, 1992.
[46] C. T. Simpson. Moduli of representations of the fundamental group of a smooth projective variety. I. Inst.
Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (79):47–129, 1994.
[47] C. T. Simpson. Moduli of representations of the fundamental group of a smooth projective variety. II. Inst.
Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., (80):5–79 (1995), 1994.
[48] A. Strominger, S.-T. Yau, and E. Zaslow. Mirror symmetry is T -duality. Nuclear Phys. B, 479(1-2):243–259,
1996.

Facultad de Ciencias Matemáticas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Plaza Ciencias 3,
28040 Madrid Spain.
E-mail address: angel gonzalez@ucm.es
School of Computing, Electronics and Mathematics (Faculty of Science and Engineering),
Plymouth University, 2-5, Kirkby Place, Plymouth, PL1 8AA United Kingdom.
E-mail address: marina.logares@plymouth.ac.uk
Facultad de Ciencias Matemáticas, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Plaza Ciencias 3,
28040 Madrid Spain.
E-mail address: vicente.munoz@ucm.es

