Adequate equivalence relation
Open-knowledge reference entry
In algebraic geometry, a branch of mathematics, an adequate equivalence relation is an equivalence relation on algebraic cycles of smooth projective varieties used to obtain a well-working theory of such cycles, and in particular, well-defined intersection products. Pierre Samuel formalized the concept of an adequate equivalence relation in 1958. Since then it has become central to theory of motives. For every adequate equivalence relation, one may define the category of pure motives with respect to that relation.
Possible (and useful) adequate equivalence relations include rational, algebraic, homological and numerical equivalence. They are called "adequate" because dividing out by the equivalence relation is functorial, i.e. push-forward (with change of codimension) and pull-back of cycles is well-defined. Codimension 1 cycles modulo rational equivalence form the classical group of divisors modulo linear equivalence. All cycles modulo rational equivalence form the Chow ring.
Definition
Let Z*(X) := Z[X] be the free abelian group on the algebraic cycles of X. Then an adequate equivalence relation is a family of equivalence relations, ~X on Z*(X), one for each smooth projective variety X, satisfying the following three conditions:
(Linearity) The equivalence relation is compatible with addition of cycles.
The public source identifies “Adequate equivalence relation” as open-knowledge reference entry. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Adequate, equivalence and relation.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Adequate equivalence relation”, the useful work is to connect “open-knowledge reference entry” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 14, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q4682344. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1958.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Adequate equivalence relation”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Adequate equivalence relation primary sources, Adequate equivalence relation archive and Adequate research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Adequate equivalence relation”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Adequate equivalence relation” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.