Category Theory. Travis Dirle. December 12, 2017

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Category Theory. Travis Dirle. December 12, 2017"

Transcription

1 Category Theory

2 2

3 Category Theory Travis Dirle December 12, 2017

4 2

5 Contents 1 Categories 1 2 Construction on Categories 7 3 Universals and Limits 11 4 Adjoints 23 5 Limits 31 6 Generators and Projectives 37 7 Categories of Fractions 43 8 Flat Functors and Cauchy Completeness 47 9 Bicategories and Distributors Internal Category Theory Abelian Categories Regular Categoriies Algebraic Theories Monads and Algebras Enriched Category Theory Fibred Categories Locales Sheaves 111 i

6 CONTENTS 19 Grothendieck Toposes The Classifying Topos Elementary Toposes Internal Logic of a Topos 139 ii

7 Chapter 1 Categories Definition A universe is a set U with the following properties: i) x y and y U x U, ii) I U and i I x i U i I x i U, iii) x U P(x) U, iv) x U and f : x y surjective function y U, v) N U, where N denotes the set of finite ordinals. Proposition i) x U and y x y U, ii) x U and y U {x, y} U, iii) x U and y U x y U, iv) x U and y U x y U. Definition A category A consists of: a collection ob(a ) of objects; for each A, B ob(a ), a collection A (A, B) of maps/arrows/morphisms from A to B for each A, B, C ob(a ), a function A (B, C) A (A, B) A (A, C) (g, f) g f, called composition; for each A ob(a ), an element 1 A of A (A, A), called the identity on A, satisfying the following axioms: associativity: for each f A (A, B), g A (B, C) and h A (C, D), we have (h g) f = h (g f); identity laws: for each f A (A, B), we have f 1 A = f = 1 B f. 1

8 CHAPTER 1. CATEGORIES Definition If f A (A, B), we call A the domain and B the codomain of f. Every map in every category has a definite domain and codomain. Definition A map f : A B in a category A is an isomorphism if there exists a map g : B A in A such that gf = 1 A and fg = 1 B. We call g the inverse of f and write g = f 1 which is unique. The objects of a category need not be remotely like sets and also, the maps in a category need not be remotely like functions. Definition A category that has no maps, except for the identities, is called a discrete category. Definition Let A and B be categories. A functor F : A B consists of: a function ob(a ) ob(b), written as A F (A); for each A, A A, a function A (A, A ) B(F (A), F (A )), written as f F (f), satisfying the following axioms: F (f f) = F (f ) F (f) whenever A f A f A ; F (1 A ) = 1 F (A) whenever A A. Definition A functor F : A B is faithful (respectively, full) if for each A, A A, the function is injective (respectively, surjective). 2 A (A, A ) B(F (A), F (A )) f F (f)

9 CHAPTER 1. CATEGORIES Note the roles of A and A in the definition. Faithfulness does not say that if f 1 and f 2 are distinct maps in A then F (f 1 ) F (f 2 ). F is faithful if for each A, A and g : F (A) F (A ), there is at most one map from A to A that F sends to g. It is full if for each such A, A and g, there is at least one map from A to A that F sends to g. Definition Let A be a category. A subcategory I of A consists of a subclass ob(i ) of ob(a ) together with, for each S, S ob(i ), a subclass I (S, S ) of A (S, S ), such that I is closed under composition and identities. It is a full subcategory if I (S, S ) = A (S, S ) for all S, S ob(i ). A full category therefore consists of a selection of the objects, with all of the maps between them. So a full subcategory can be specified simply by saying what its objects are. Whenever I is a subcategory of A, there is an inclusion functor. It is automatically faithful, and it is full iff I is a full subcategory. Note that the image of a functor need not be a subcategory. Definition Let A and B be categories and let F, ( G : A B be) functors. A natural transformation α : F G is a family F (A) α A G(A) of maps in B such that for every map A f A in A, the square F (A) F (f) F (A ) α A α A A A G(A) G(f) G(A ) commutes. The maps α A are called the components of α. Definition For any two categories A and B, there is a category whose objects are the functors from A to B and whose maps are the natural transformations between them. This is called the functor category from A to B, and written as [A, B] or B A. Definition A natural isomorphism between functors from A to B is an isomorphism in [A, B]. 3

10 CHAPTER 1. CATEGORIES Lemma Let α : F G be a natural transformation between functors F, G : A B. Then α is a natural isomorphism if and only if α A : F (A) G(A) is an isomorphism for all A A. Definition Given functors F, G : A B, we say that they are naturally isomorphic if there exists a natural isomorphism from F to G. Also, if F and G are naturally isomorphic. F (A) = G(A) naturally in A This terminology can be understood as follows. If F (A) = G(A) naturally in A then certainly F (A) = G(A) for each individual A, but more is true: we can choose isomorphisms α A : F (A) G(A) in such a way that the naturality axiom is satisfied, i.e. the above commutative diagram. There are many examples of categories and functors such that F (A) = G(A) for all A A, but not naturally in A. Definition An equivalence between categories A and B consists of a pair F : A B and G : B A of functors together with a pair of natural isomorphisms η : 1 A G F ɛ : F G 1 B. If there exists an equivalence between A and B, we say that A and B are equivalent, and write A B. We also say that the functors F and G are equivalences. Definition A functor F : A B is essentially surjective on objects if for all B B, there exists A A such that F (A) = B. Proposition A functor is an equivalence if and only if it is full, faithful and essentially surjective on objects. 4

11 CHAPTER 1. CATEGORIES Corollary Let F : C D be a full and faithful functor. Then C is equivalent to the full subcategory C of D whose objects are those of the form F (C) for some C C. Definition A category A is small if the collection of all maps in A is small, i.e. if it is a set, otherwise it is called large. We call A locally small if for each A, B A, the collection A (A, B) is small. So small implies locally small. A category is small if and only if it is locally small and its class of objects is small. It is essentially small if it is equivalent to some small category. 5

12 CHAPTER 1. CATEGORIES 6

13 Chapter 2 Construction on Categories Definition Every category A has an opposite/dual category A op, defined by reversing the arrows. Formally, ob(a op ) = ob(a ) and A op (B, A) = A (A, B) for all objects A and B. Identities in A op are the same as in A. Composition in A op is the same as in A, but with the arguments reversed. Definition Given categories A and B, there is a product category A B, in which ob(a B) = ob(a ) ob(b), (A B)((A, B), (A, B )) = A (A, A ) B(B, B ). Put another way, an object is a pair (A, B) and a map (A, B) (A, B ) is a pair (f, g) where f : A A in A and g : B B in B. Definition Let A and B be categories. A contravariant functor from A to B is a functor A op B. An ordinary functor A B is sometimes called a covariant functor from A to B, for emphasis. Functors C D correspond one-to-one with functors C op D op, and (A op ) op = A, so a contravariant functor from A to B can also be described as a functor A B op. Definition An equivalence of the form A op B is sometimes called a duality between A and B. One says that they are dual. 7

14 CHAPTER 2. CONSTRUCTION ON CATEGORIES Definition Given categories and functors B A P C the comma category written as (P Q) or (P Q), is the category defined as follows: objects are triples (A, h, B) with A A, B B, and h : P (A) Q(B) in C ; maps (A, h, B) (A, h, B ) are pairs (f : A A, g : B B ) of maps such that the square commutes. Q P (A) P (f) P (A ) h h Q(B) Q(g) Q(B ) Definition The slice category of A over A, denoted by A /A, is the category whose objects are maps into A and whose maps are commutative triangles. More precisely, an object is a pair (X, h) with X A and h : X A in A, and a map (X, h) (X, h ) in A /A is a map f : X X in A making the triangle X f X h commute. Slice categories are a special case of comma categories. Dually, there is a coslice category A/A = (A 1 A ), whose objects are the maps out of A. A h Definition A congruence on a category A is an equivalence relation on arrows such that i) f g implies dom(f) = dom(g) and cod(f) = cod(g) ii) f g implies bfa bga for all arrows a : A X and b : Y B, where dom(f) = X = dom(g) and cod(f) = Y = cod(g). 8

15 CHAPTER 2. CONSTRUCTION ON CATEGORIES Definition Let be a congruence on the category A, and define the congruence category A by: ob(a ) = ob(a ) and arrows is the set {< f, g >: f g} with 1 A =< 1 A, 1 A > and < f, g > < f, g >=< f f, g g >. Definition We define the quotient category A / as follows: ob(a / ) = ob(a ) and arrows are (Hom A )/. Definition Suppose we have a functor F : A B, then F determines a congruence F on A by setting f F g iff dom(f) = dom(g), cod(f) = cod(g), and F (f) = F (g). We write ker(f ) = A F category of F. for this congruence category and call it the kernel Definition A group in a category C consists of objects and arrows that satisfy the same commutative diagrams that typical groups satisfy. That is, for all (generalized) elements, x, y, z : Z G, the following equations hold: m(m(x, y), z) = m(x, m(y, z)) m(x, u) = x = m(u, x) m(x, ix) = u = m(ix, x) Definition A homomorphism h : G H of groups in C consists of an arrow in C that preserves structure and whose properties can be shown in commutative diagrams. With these identities and composites, we thus have a category of groups in C, denoted by Group(C ). For example, a group in the usual sense is a group in the category Sets. Also, the groups in Group are exactly the abelian groups. Definition Enlarging Group to include also categories with more that one object, but still having inverses for all arrows, gives us a category called groupoids. Definition A strict monoidal category is a category C equipped with a binary operation : C C C which is funtorial and associative, A (B C) = (A B) C, together with a distinguished object I that acts as a unit, I C = C = C I. A strict monoidal category is exactly the same thing as a monoid in Cat. 9

16 CHAPTER 2. CONSTRUCTION ON CATEGORIES Definition A monoidal category consists of a categor C equipped with a functor : C C C and a distinguished object I, together with natural isomorphisms α ABC : A (B C) (A B) C, λ A : I A A, ρ A : A I A. These satisfy commutative diagrams as well. A monoidal category is thus a category that is strict monoidal up to natural isomorphism. 10

17 Chapter 3 Universals and Limits Definition Let A be a category. A presheaf on A is a functor A op Set. Definition Let A be a category. An object I A is initial if for every A A, there is exactly one map I A. An object T A is terminal if for every A A, there is exactly one map A T. A category need not have an initial object, but if it does, it is unique up to isomorphism. Lemma Let I and I be initial objects in a category. Then there is a unique isomorphism I I. In particular, I = I. Definition Let A be a locally small category and A A. we define a functor H A = A (A, ) : A Set as follows: for objects B A, put H A (B) = A (A, B); for maps B g B in A, define by H A (g) = A (A, g) : A (A, B) A (A, B ) p g p for all p : A B. Sometimes H A (g) is written as g or g. 11

18 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS Definition Let A be a locally small category. A functor X : A Set is representable if X = H A for some A A. A representation of X is a choice of an object A and an isomorphism between H A and X. Definition Let A be a locally small category. The functor H : A op [A, Set] is defined on objects A by H (A) = H A and on maps f by H (f) = H f. More precisely, a map A f A induces a natural transformation H f : H A H A whose B-component is the function H A (B) = A (A, B) H A (B) = A (A, B) p p f Definition Let A be a locally small category and A A. We define a functor H A = A (, A) : A op Set as follows: for objects B A, put H A (B) = A (B, A); for maps B g B in A, define H A (g) = A (g, A) = g = g : A (B, A) A (B, A) by for all p : B A. p p g Definition Let A be a locally small category. A functor X : A op Set is representable if X = H A for some A A. A representation of X is a choice of object A A and an isomorphism between H A and X. 12

19 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS Definition Let A be a locally small category. The Yoneda embedding of A is the functor H : A [A op, Set ] defined on objects A by H (A) = H A and on maps f by H (f) = H f. More precisely, a map A f A induces a natural transformation H f : H A H A, whose B-component is H A (B) = A (B, A) H A (B) = A (B, A ) p f p As a summary: For each A A, we have a functor A HA Set. Putting them all together gives a functor A op H [A, Set ]. For each A A, we have a functor A op Set. Putting them all together gives a functor A H [A op, Set ]. H A The second pair of functors is the dual of the first. Definition Let A be a locally small category. The functor Hom A : A op A Set is defined as follows: Hom A (A, B) = A (A, B) and (Hom A (f, g))(p) = g p f, whenever A f p g A B B. We see that Hom A slightly differently. carries the same information as H (or H ), presented Definition Let A be an object of a category. A generalized element of A is a map with codomain A. A map S A is a generalized element of A of shape S. Theorem (Yoneda) Let A be a locally small category. Then [A op, Set ](H A, X) = X(A) naturally in A A and X [A op, Set ]. 13

20 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS Informally, then, the Yoneda lemma says that for any A A and presheaf X on A : A natural transformation H A X is an element of X(A). Corollary Let A be a locally small category and X : A op Set. Then a representation of X consists of an object A A together with an element u X(A) such that: for each B A and x X(B), there is a unique map x : B A such that (X x)(u) = x. Recall that by definition, a representation of X is an object A A together with a natural isomorphism α : H A X. The above corollary states that such pairs (A, α) are in natural bijection with pairs (A, u) satisfying the last condition. Pairs (B, x) are sometimes called elements of the presheaf X. The Yoneda lemma tells us that x amounts to a generalized element of X of shape H B. An element u satisfying the above condition, is sometimes called a universal element of X. So the corollary says that a representation of a presheaf X amounts to a universal element of X. Corollary Let A be a locally small category and X : A Set. Then a representation of X consists of an object A A together with an element u X(A) such that: for each B A and x X(B), there is a unique map x : A B such that (X x)(u) = x. Corollary For any locally small category A, the Yoneda embedding is full and faithful. H : A [A op, Set ] Informally, this says that for A, A A, a map H A H A of presheaves is the same thing as a map A A in A. Lemma Let J : A B be a full and faithful functor and A, A A. Then i) a map f in A is an isomorphism if and only if the map J(f) in B is an isomorphism; 14

21 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS ii) for any isomorphism g : J(A) J(A ) in B, there is a unique isomorphism f : A A in A such that J(f) = g; iii) the objects A and A of A are isomorphic if and only if the objects J(A) and J(A ) of B are isomorphic. Corollary Let A be a locally small category and A, A A. Then H A = HA A = A H A = H A. Definition Let A be a category and X, Y A. A product of X and Y consists of an object P and maps X p 1 P p 2 Y with the property that for all objects and maps X f 1 A f 2 Y in A, there exists a unique map f : A P such that X f 1 p 1 A P f f 2 p 2 Y commutes. The maps p 1 and p 2 are called the projections. Definition Let A be a category, I a set, and (X i ) i I a family of objects of A. A product of (X i ) i I consists of an object P and a family of maps ( ) P p i X i with the property that for all objects A and families of maps ( ) A f i X i there exists a unique map f : A P such that p i f = f i for all i I. We call the maps f i the components of the map (f i ) i I. i I i I 15

22 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS Some examples of products (each in a different category) are min{x, y} for x, y (R, ), X Y for X, Y P(S), or gcd(x, y) in the poset (N, ). A fork in a category consists of objects and maps such that sf = tf f : A s, t : X Y Definition Let A be a category and let s, t : X Y be objects and maps in A. An equalizer of s and t is an object E together with a map E i X such that i : E s, t : X Y is a fork, and with the property that for any fork, there exists a unique map f : A E such that A commutes. f f E i X An equalizer describes the set of solutions of a single equation, but by combining equalizers with products, we can also describe the solution set of any system of simultaneous equations. Definition Let A be a category, and take objects and maps Y X s Z in A. A pullback of this diagram is an object P A together with maps p 1 : P X and p 2 : P Y such that t P p 2 Y p 1 X s Z commutes, and with the property that for any commutative square 16 A f 2 Y f 1 X s Z t t

23 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS in A, there is a unique map f : A P such that the resulting diagram commutes. Namely, p 1 f = f1 and p 2 f = f2. The first square above is called the pullback square Definition Let A be a category and I a small category. A functor I A is called a diagram in A of shape I. Definition Let A be a category, I a small category, and D : I A a diagram in A. i) A cone on D is an object A A (the vertex of the cone) together with a family ( ) A f I D(I) I I of maps in A such that for all maps I u J in I, the triangle A f I D(I) Du f J D(J) commutes. ( ) ii) A limit of D is a cone L P I D(I) with the property that for any I I cone on D, there exists a unique map f : A L such that p I f = f I for all I I. The maps p I are called the projections of the limit. In general, the limit of a diagram D is the terminal object in the category of cones on D, and is therefore an extremal example of a cone on D. The word limit can be understood as meaning on the boundary. Definition i) Let I be a small category. A category A has limits of shape I if for every diagram D of shape I in A, a limit of D exists. ii) A category has all limits (or properly, has small limits) if it has limits of shape I for all small categories I. Definition A finite limit is a limit of shape I for some finite category I. For instance, binary products, terminal objects, equalizers and pullbacks are all finite limits. 17

24 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS Proposition Let A be a category. i) If A has all products and equalizers then A has all limits. ii) If A has binary products, a terminal object and equalizers then A has finite limits. Definition Let A be a category. A map X f Y in A is monic (or a monomorphism if for all objects A and maps x, x : A X, f x = f x x = x In Set, a map is monic if and only if it is injective. In categories of algebras such as Grp, Vect k, Ring, etc, it is also true that the monic maps are exactly the injections. Lemma A map f : X Y is monic if and only if the square is a pullback. X 1 X 1 X f Y f Definition Let A be a category and I a small category. Let D : I A be a diagram in A, and write D op for the corresponding functor I op A op. A cocone on D is a cone on D op, and a colimit of D is a limit of D op. Explicitly, a cocone on D is an object A A (the vertex of the cocone) together with a family ( ) D(I) f I A I I of maps in A such that for all maps I u J in I, the diagram D(I) f I Du f J A D(J) 18

25 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS commutes. A colimit of D is a cocone ( ) D(I) p I C I I with the property that for any cocone on D, there is a unique map f : C A such that f pi = f I for all I I. We write (the vertex of) the colimit as lim I D, and call the maps p I coprojections. Definition A sum/coproduct is a colimit over a discrete category. (That is, it is a colimit of shape I for some discrete category I.) Definition A coequalizer is a colimit of shape E (shape of a fork/equalizer). A coequalizer is a generalization of a quotient by an equivalence relation. Definition A pushout of a diagram X s Y is (if it exists) a commutative square t Z X s Y t Z that is universal as such. In other words still, a pushout in a category A is a pullback in A op. It is a colimit. Definition Let A be a category. A map X f Y in A is epic/epimorphism if for all objects Z and maps g, g : Y Z, An epic in A is a monic in A op. g f = g f g = g. In categories of algebras, any surjective map is certainly epic. In some categories, the coverse holds as well. However, there are examples where this fails, 19

26 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS like in Ring, the inclusion Z Q is epic but not surjective. This is also an example of a map that is monic and epic but not an isomorphism. We have that any isomorphism in any category is both monic and epic. Definition A split mono (epi) is an arrow with a left (right) inverse. Given arrows e : X A and s : A X such that es = 1 A, the arrow s is called a section/splitting of e, and the arrow e is called a retraction of s. The object A is called a retract of X. The condition that every epimorphism splits or every surjection has a section is the categorical version of the axiom of choice. Definition An object P is said to be projective if for any epi e : E X and arrow f : P X there is some (not necessarily unique) arrow f : P E such that e f = f. One says that f lifts across e i.e. the diagram commutes: P f f E X e Definition i) Let I be a small category. A functor F : A ( B preserves ) limits of shape I if for all diagrams D : I A and all cones A p I D(I) on D, ( ) A p I D(I) I I ( ) F (A) F p I F D(I) I I is a limit cone on D in A is a limit cone on F D in B. ii) A functor F : A B preserves limits if it preserves limits of shape I for all small categories I. iii) Reflection of limits is defined as in i), but with in place of. I I Definition A functor F : A B creates limits (of shape I) if whenever D : I A is a diagram( in A, ) i) for any limit cone B q I F D(I) on the diagram F D, there is a ( ) I I unique cone A p I D(I) on D such that F (A) = B and F (p I ) = q I for all I I; 20 I I

27 ii) this cone ( ) A p I D(I) I I CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS is a limit cone on D. Lemma Let F : A B be a functor and I a small category. Suppose that B has, and F creates, limits of shape I. Then A has, and F preserves, limits of shape I. Since Set has all limits, it follows that all our categories of algebras have all limits, and that the forgetful functors preserve them. Definition Consider a functor G : D A with colimit (L, (p D ) D D ). That colimit is absolute when for every functor F : A B, (F L, (F p D ) D D ) is the colimit of F G. Definition A functor G : C D is final when the following conditions are satisfied for every category A and every functor F : D A : i) if the limit (L, (p D ) D D ) of F exists, then (L, (p GC ) C C ) is the limit of F G; ii) if the limit (L, (q C ) C C ) of F G exists, then the limit of F exists as well. 21

28 CHAPTER 3. UNIVERSALS AND LIMITS 22

29 Chapter 4 Adjoints Definition Let F : A B be a functor and B an object of B. A reflection of B along F is a pair (R B, η B ) where i) R B is an object of A and η B : B F (R B ) is a morphism of B, ii) if A A and b : B F (A) is a morphism of B, there exists a unique morphism a : R B A in A such that F (a) η B = b. Proposition Let F : A B be a functor and B an object of B. When the reflection of B along F exists, it is unique up to isomorphism. Proposition Consider a functor F : A B and assume that, for every B B, the reflection of B along F exists and such a reflection (R B, η B ) has been choosen. In that case, there exists a unique functor R : B A satisfying the two properties i) B B R(B) = R B, ii) (η B : B F RB) B B is a natural transformation. Definition A functor R : B A is left adjoint to the functor F : A B when there exists a natural transformation η : 1 B F R such that for every B B, (RB, η B ) is a reflection of B along F. In an analogous way a functor R : B A is right adjoint to F when there exists a natural transformation ɛ : F R 1 B such that for each B B, (RB, ɛ B ) is a coreflection of B along F, where coreflection is the dual notion of reflection. 23

30 CHAPTER 4. ADJOINTS Definition Let F : A B and G : B A be functors. We say that F is left adjoint to G, and G is right adjoint to F, and write F G, if B(F (A), B) = A (A, G(B)) naturally in A A and B B. An adjunction between F and G is a choice of natural isomorphism. Natually in A and B means that there is a specified bijection for each A and B, and that it satisifies a naturality axiom. To state it, we need some notation. Given objects A A and B B, the correspondence between maps F (A) B and A G(B) is denoted by a horizontal bar, in both directions: ( F (A) g B ) ( A g G(B) ), ( ) ( ) F (A) f B A f G(B). So f = f and ḡ = g. We call f the transpose of f, and similarly for g. The naturality axiom has two parts: ) ( (F (A) g B q B = A ḡ ) G(B) G(q) G(B ) (that is, q g = G(q) ḡ) for all g and q, and ) ( ) (A p f A G(B) = F (A ) F (p) F (A) f B for all p and f. The concept of left and right adjoint are dual to each other. Adjunctions can be composed as well. Definition For each A A, we have a map ( ) ( ) A η A GF (A) = F (A) 1 F (A). Dually, for each B B, we have a map ( ) ( ) F G(B) ɛ B B = G(B) 1 G(B). These define natural transformations η : 1 A G F, ɛ : F G 1 B. called the unit and counit of the adjunction, respectively. 24

31 CHAPTER 4. ADJOINTS Definition Given an adjunction F G with unit η and counit ɛ, the triangles F F η F GF ɛf 1 F F G ηg GF G Gɛ 1 G G commute. These are called the triangle identities. They are commutative diagrams in the functor categories [A, B] and [B, A ], respectively. The unit and counit determines the whole adjunction, even though they appear to know only the transpose of identities. Lemma Let F G be an adjunction, with unit η and counit ɛ. Then ḡ = G(g) η A for any g : F (A) B, and f = ɛ B F (f) for any f : A G(B). Theorem Take functors F : A B and G : B A. There is a one-to-one correspondence between: i) adjunctions ( between F and G (with ) F on the left and G on the right); η ɛ ii) pairs 1 A GF, F G 1 B of natural transformations satisfying the triangle identities. Recall that by definition, an adjunction between F and G is a choice of isomorphism for each A and B, satisfying the naturality equations. Corollary We have that F G if and only if there exist natural transformations 1 η GF and F G ɛ 1 satisfying the triangle identities. Lemma Take and adjunction F G and an object A A. Then the unit map η A : A GF (A) is an initial object of (A G). 25

32 CHAPTER 4. ADJOINTS Theorem Take categories and functors F : A B and G : B A. There is a one-to-one correspondence between: i) adjunctions between F and G (with F on the left and G on the right); ii) natural transformations η : 1 A GF such that η A : A GF (A) is initial in (A G) for every A A. Corollary Let G : B A be a functor. Then G has a left adjoint if and only if for each A A, the category (A G) has an initial object. Lemma Adjunctions give rise to representable functors in the following way. Let F : A B and G : B A with F G between locally small categories. Then the functor A (A, G( )) : B Set (that is, the composite B G A Set) HA is representable. Proposition Any set-valued functor with a left adjoint is representable. Definition Consider two functors F : A B and G : A C. The left Kan extension of G along F, if it exists, is a pair (K, α) where K : B C is a functor, α : G K F is a natural transformation, satisfying the following universal property: if (H, β) is another pair with H : B C a functor, β : G H F a natural transformation, there exists a unique natural transformation γ : K H satisfying the equaltiy (γ F ) α = β. We shall use the notation Lan F G to denote the left Kan extension of G along F. The notation Ran F G is used for the dual notion of right Kan extension. We write (γ F ) instead of γ 1 F. 26

33 CHAPTER 4. ADJOINTS Theorem Consider two functors F : A B and G : A C, with A small and C cocomplete. Under these conditions, the left Kan extension of G along F exists. Proposition Consider a full and faithful functor F : A B with A a small category. Let C be a cocomplete category. Given a functor G : A C, the canonical natural transformation G (Lan F G) F is an isomorphism. Proposition Consider a functor G : A C, with A a small category. Write 1 for the category with a single object and a single arrow, and F : A 1 for the corresponding functor. The functor G has a colimit if and only if the left Kan extension Lan F G of G along F exists. Proposition Consider a functor F : A B between small categories. The following are equivalent: i) F has a right adjoint G; ii) Lan F 1 A exists and, for every functor L : A C, the isomorphism L Lan F 1 A = LanF L holds; iii) Lan F 1 A exists and the isomorphism F Lan F 1 A = LanF F holds. Definition A functor F : A B satisfies the solution set condition with respect to an object B B when there exists a set S B A of objects such that A A b : B F A A S B a : A A b : B F A F (a) b = b Theorem (Adjoint functor theorem) Consider a complete category A and a functor F : A B. The following are equivalent: i) F has a left adjoint functor. ii) The following conditions hold: a) F preserves small limits; b) F satisfies the solution set condition for every object B B. 27

34 CHAPTER 4. ADJOINTS Proposition (Adjoint functor theorem for ordered sets) Let A be an ordered set, B a complete ordered set, and G : B A an order-preserving map. Then G has a left adjoint G preserves meets Theorem (Special adjoint functor theorem) Consider a functor F : A B and suppose the following conditions are satisfied: i) A is complete; ii) F preserves small limits; iii) A is well-powered; iv) A has a cogenerating family. Under these conditions, F has a left adjoint functor. Definition Let C be a category. A weakly initial set in C is a set S of objects with the property that for each C C, there exist an element S S and a map S C. Theorem (General Adjoint Functor Theorem) Let A be a category, B a complete category, and G : B A a functor. Suppose that B is locally small and that for each A A, the category (A G) has a weakly initial set. Then G has a left adjoint G preserves limits. Definition A full subcategory A of a category B is replete when, with every A A, A also contains every object B B isomorphic to A. Definition A reflective subcategory of a category B is a full replete subcategory A of B whose inclusion i : A B in B admits a left adjoint r : B A, called the reflection. Definition A localization of a category B with finite limits is a reflective subcategory A of B whose reflection preserves finite limits. 28

35 CHAPTER 4. ADJOINTS Definition An essential localization of a category B is a reflective subcategory A of B whose reflection itself admits a left adjoint. 29

36 CHAPTER 4. ADJOINTS 30

37 Chapter 5 Limits Definition A category C is filtered when i) C C ii) C 1, C 2 C C 3 C f : C 1 C 3 g : C 2 C 3, iii) C 1, C 2 C f, g : C 1 C 2 C 3 C h : C 2 C 3 h f = h g. By a filtered colimit we mean the colimit of a functor defined on a filtered category. We say that a category A has filtered colimits when for every small filtered category C and every functor F : C A, the colimit of F exists. Theorem Consider a small filtered category C and a finite category D. Given a functor F : C D Set to the category of sets and mappings, the following mixed interchange property holds: colim C D ( lim D D F (C, D)) = lim D D (colim C D F (C, D)). Definition Given categories I and A and an object A A, there is a functor A : I A with constant value A on objects and 1 A on maps. This defines, for each I and A, the diagonal functor : A [I, A ] Now, given a diagram D : I A and an object A A, a cone on D with vertex A is simply a natural transformation A D, and we write Cone(A, D) for the set of cones on D with vertex A, we therefore have Cone(A, D) = [I, A ]( A, D). 31

38 CHAPTER 5. LIMITS Proposition Let I be a small category, and D : I A a diagram. Then there is a one-to-one correspondence between limit cones on D and representations of the functor Cone(, D) : A op Set with the representing objects of Cone(, D) being the limit objects (that is, the vertices of the limit cones) of D. Briefly put: a limit of D is a representation of [I, A ](, D). The proposition formalizes the thought that cones on a diagram D correspond one-to-one with maps into lim I D. It implies that if D has a limit then Cone(A, D) ( ) = A A, lim D I naturally in A. Corollary Limits are unique up to isomorphism. Proposition Let I be a small category and A a category with all limits of shape I. Then lim I defines a functor [I, A ] A, and this functor is right adjoint to the diagonal functor. This functor is defined as such: choose for each D [I, A ] a limit cone D, and call its vertex lim I D. For each map α : D D, we have a canonical map lim I α : lim D lim D. Thus naturally in A and D. [I, A ]( A, D) = Cone(A, D) = A (A, lim D) Lemma Let I be a small category, A a locally small category, D : I A a diagram, and A A. Then naturally in A and D. Cone(A, D) = lim I A (A, D) Here, A (A, D) is the functor A (A, D) : I Set 32

39 CHAPTER 5. LIMITS I A (A, D(I)) Proposition (Representables preserve limits) Let A be a locally small category and A A. Then A (A, ) : A Set preserves limits. This proposition tells us that ( A A, lim D) = lim I A (A, D). I To dualize this, a limit in A op is a limit in A, so A (, A) transforms colimits in A into limits in Set: ( A lim D, A) = lim I A (D, A). I Note the right hand side is a limit, not a colimit. Definition Let A and I be categories. For each A A, there is a functor ev A : [A, I ] I called evaluation at A. X X(A), Theorem (Limits in functor categories) Let A and I be small categories and I a locally small category. Let D :I [ A, I ] be a diagram, and suppose that for each A A, the diagram D( )(A) : I I has a limit. Then there is a cone on D whose image under ev A is a limit cone on D( )(A) for each A A. Moreover, any such cone on D is a limit cone. Limits in a functor category are computed pointwise (meaning the objects of A). For example, given two functors X, Y [A, I ], their product can be computed by first taking the product X(A) Y (A) in I for each point A, then assembling them to form a functor X Y. The pointwise character of this construction is precisely expressed by the formula ( lim F (D))(C) = lim (F (D)(C)). D D D D In other words, the value of the limit lim D D F (D) at an object C is the limit of the values of F (D) at C. 33

40 CHAPTER 5. LIMITS Theorem Consider a complete category A and a small category C. Under these conditions, the category Fun(C, A ) is complete and limits in it are computed pointwise. Theorem Consider a small category C and a functor F from C to Set. In the category Fun(C, Set), F can be presented as the colimit of a diagram just constituted of representable functors and representable natural transformations. Corollary Let I and A be small categories, and I a locally small category. If I has all limits (respectively, colimits) of shape I then so does [ A, I ], and for A A, the evaluation functor ev A : [A, I ] I preserves them. Take categories I,J and I. There are isomorphisms of categories [I, [J, I ]] = [I J, I ] = [J, [I, I ]]. Under these isomorphisms, a functor D :I J I corresponds to the functors D mapping I D(I, ) and D mapping J D(, J). Proposition (Limits commute with limits) Let I and J be small categories. Let I be a locally small category with limits of shape I and shape J. Then for all D : I J I, we have lim lim D = lim D = lim lim D, J I I J I J and all these limits exist. In particular, I has limits of shape I J. Corollary Let A be a small category. Then [A op, Set ] has all limits and colimits, and for each A A, the evaluation functor ev A : [A op, Set ] Set preserves them. Corollary The Yoneda embedding preserves limits, for any small category. 34

41 CHAPTER 5. LIMITS Definition Let A be a category and X a presheaf on A. The category of elements E(X) of X is the category in which: i) objects are pairs (A, x) with A A and x X(A); ii) maps (A, x ) (A, x) are maps f : A A in A such that (Xf)(x) = x. There is a projection functor P : E(X) A defined by P (A, x) = A and P (f) = f. Theorem (Density) Let A be a small category and X a presheaf on A. Then X is the colimit of the diagram that is, X = lim I (H P ). E(X) P A H [A op, Set] Theorem Let F G be an adjunction. Then F preserves colimits and G preserves limits. The previous theorem is often used to prove that a functor does not have an adjoint. Definition A category is complete (or properly, small complete) if it has all limits. Theorem A category C is complete precisely when each family of objects has a projuct and each pair of parallel arrows has an equalizer. Proposition For a category C, the following conditions are equivalent: i) C is finitely complete; ii) C has a terminal object, binary products and equalizers; iii) C has a terminal object and pullbacks. 35

42 CHAPTER 5. LIMITS Definition A category D is finitely generated when i) D has finitely many objects, ii) there are finitely many arrows f 1,..., f n such that each arrow of D is the composite of finitely many of these f i. Proposition Let F : D A be a functor, with A finitely complete and D finitely generated. Then the limit of F exists. Definition A category A is cartesian closed if it has finite products and for each B A, the functor B : A A has a right adjoint. We write the right adjoint as ( ) B, and, for C A, call C B an exponential. Theorem For any small category A, the presheaf category is cartesian closed. 36

43 Chapter 6 Generators and Projectives Definition Consider a category A and an object A A. Two monomorphisms f : R A and g : S A are equivalent when there exists an isomorphism r : R S such that g r = f. An equivalence class of monomorphisms with codomain A is called a subobject of A. The dual notion is that of a quotient of A. Definition A category A is well-powered when the subobjects of every object constitute a set. In Set, the subobjects of a set X are in bijection with the subsets of X. In Gr, they are in bijection with subgroups. Given an object A of a category C, let us consider the class Mono(A) of all monomorphisms with codomain A. A monomorphism r : R A is smaller than a monomorphism s : S A when there exists a (mono)morphism t : R S such that s t = r. Performing the quotient on Mono(A) which identifies isomorphic monomorphisms, we obtain a partial order on the class Sub(A) of subobjects of A. We recall that C is well-powered when, for each A C, Sub(A) is a set. Definition Consider an object A of a category C. By the intersection of a family of subobjects of A, we mean their infimum in Sub(A). By the union of a family of subobjects of A, we mean their supremum in Sub(A). 37

44 CHAPTER 6. GENERATORS AND PROJECTIVES Proposition Consider an object A C and suppose Sub(A) is a set. The following are equivalent: i) the intersection of every family of subobjects of A exists; ii) the union of every family of subobjects of A exists. Definition In a category, an epimorphism is called regular when it is the coequalizer of a pair of arrows. Definition An epimorphism f : A B in a category is called extremal when it does not factor through any proper subobject of B; i.e., given f = i p with i a monomorphism, i is necessarily an isomorphism. Definition In a category A, an epimorphism f : A B is called a strong epimorphism when, for every commutative square z u = v f, with z : X Y a monomorphism, there exists a (unique) arrow w : B X such that w f = u, z w = v. Proposition In a category A, i) the composite of two strong epimorphisms is a strong epimorphism, ii) if a composite f g is a strong epi, f is a strong epi, iii) a morphism which is both a mono and a strong epi, is an isomorphism, iv) every regular epi is strong, v) every strong epi is extremal. Proposition Let F : A B be a functor admitting a left adjoint functor G : B A. The functor F preserves strong monomorphisms, and the functor G preserves strong epimorphisms and regular epimorphisms. Definition A category C is finitely well-complete when i) C is finitely complete, ii) given an object C C, the intersection of an arbitrary class of subobjects of C always exists. 38

45 CHAPTER 6. GENERATORS AND PROJECTIVES Proposition In a finitely well-complete category, every morphism f factors as f = i p, where i is a monomorphism and p is a strong epimorphism. Definition A category C has strong-epi-mono-factorizations when every morphism f of C factors as f = i p, with p a strong epimorphism and i a monomorphism. The monomorphism i is also called the image of f. Definition Let C be a category. A family (G i ) i I of objects of C is called a family of generators when, given any two parallel morphisms u, v : A B in C, i I g : G i A u g = v g u = v. Generators are important because of the following property: every object can be recaptured as a quotient of a coproduct of generators. Proposition Let C be a category with coproducts and (G i ) i I a family of objects of C. The following are equivalent: i) (G i ) i I is a family of generators; ii) for every object C C, the unique morphism γ C : (domain of f) C i I,f C (G i,c) such that γ C s f = f is an epimorphism. Definition Let C be a category with coproducts and (G i ) i I a family of objects of C. The family (G i ) i I is a strong family of generators when, for every object C C, the morphism γ C is a strong epimorphism. The family is a regular family of generators when, for every object C C, the morphism γ C is a regular epimorphism. When the family is reduced to a single element {G}, we say that G is a strong or a regular generator, according to the case. 39

46 CHAPTER 6. GENERATORS AND PROJECTIVES Definition Let C be a category and (G i ) i I a family of objects of C. Let us write G for the full subcategory of C generated by the G i s and G /C for the full subcategory of C /C generated by the objects of the form f : G i C. The family is a dense family of generators when for every object C C, the colimit of the functor Γ C : G /C G, (f : G i C) G i, is precisely (C, (f) f G /C ). When the family is reduced to a single element {G}, G is called a dense generator. Proposition In a category with coproducts, every dense family of generators is regular and every regular family of generators is strong. Definition i) A family of functors (F i : A B i ) i I is collectively faithful when given morphisms f, g : A A in A ( i I F i (f) = F i (g)) (f = g). ii) A family of functors (F i : A B i ) i I collectively reflects isomorphisms when, given a morphism f : A A in A, ( i I F i (f) is an isomorphism ) (f is an isomorphism ). Definition Let C be a category (with finite limits). A family (G i ) i I of objects of C is a strong family of generators when the family of functors C (G i, ) : C Set collectively reflects isomorphisms. When the family is reduced to a single object {G}, G is called a strong generator. Definition An object P of a category C is projective when, given a strong epimorphism p : X Y and a morphism f : P Y, there exists a factorization g : P X such that p g = f. Proposition For an object P of a category C, the following condition are equivalent: i) P is projective; ii) the functor C (P, ) : C Set preserves epimorphisms. 40

47 CHAPTER 6. GENERATORS AND PROJECTIVES Definition A category C has enough projectives when every object is a strong quotient of a projective object. 41

48 CHAPTER 6. GENERATORS AND PROJECTIVES 42

49 Chapter 7 Categories of Fractions A graph is, roughly speaking, a category without a composition law. Definition A graph G consists of i) a class G whose elements are called the objects (or vertices) of the graph. ii) for each pair (A, B) G G, a set G (A, B) whose elements are called the morphisms (or arrows) from A to B. The graph G is small when G itself is a set. Definition A morphism of graphs F : F G between two graphs consists of i) a mapping F : F G, ii) for each pair (A, B) F F of objects, a mapping F (A, B) G (F A, F B). Obviously, every category is a graph (just forget composition). Definition Let G be a graph. A path in G is a nonempty finite sequence (A 1, f 1, A 2, f 2,..., A n ) alternating objects and arrows in G ; each arrow f i has domain A i and codomain A i+1. Definition Let G be a graph. A commutativity condition on G is a pair of paths both defined from some given object A to some given object B. We now formally add some inverse arrows of a given category. 43

50 CHAPTER 7. CATEGORIES OF FRACTIONS Definition Consider a category C and a class Σ of arrows of C. The category of fractions C [Σ 1 ] is said to exist when a category C [Σ 1 ] and a functor φ : C C [Σ 1 ] can be found, with the following properties: i) f Σ φ(f) is an isomorphism; ii) if D is a category and F : C D is a functor such that for all morphisms f Σ, F (f) is an isomorphism, there exists a unique functor G : C [Σ 1 ] D such that G φ = F. Proposition Consider a category C and a set Σ of arrows of C. The category of fractions C [Σ 1 ] exists. Moreover when C is small, C [Σ 1 ] is small as well. Definition Consider a category C and a class Σ of morphisms of C. The class Σ admits a right calculus of fractions when the following holds: i) C C 1 C Σ; ii) given s : A B and t : B C, (s Σ and t Σ) (t s Σ); iii) if f : A B is in C and s : C B is in Σ, there exist g : D C in C and t : D A in Σ such that f t = s g; iv) if f, g : A B are in C and s : B C is in Σ with the property s f = s g, there exists t : D A in Σ with the property f t = g t. Definition Let C be a category and Σ C a class of morphisms such that the category of fractions φ : C C [Σ 1 ] exists. The class Σ is saturated when for every morphism f C φ(f) is an isomorphism iff f Σ. Definition Consider two arrows f : A B, g : C D in a category C. We say that f is orthogonal to g and write f g when, given arbitrary morphisms u, v such that v f = g u there exists a unique morphism w such that w f = u, g w = v. An epimorphism f is strong when, for every monomorphism g, f g. 44

51 CHAPTER 7. CATEGORIES OF FRACTIONS Definition Given an arrow f : A B and objects X, Y of a category C : i) we say that f is orthogonal to X and write f X when for every morphism a : A X, there exists a unique morphism b : B X such that b f = a; ii) we say that Y is orthogonal to f and write Y f when for every morphism c : Y B there exists a unique morphism d : Y A such that f d = c. Definition Let C be a category and Σ a class of morphisms of C. By the orthogonal subcategory of C determined by Σ, we mean the full subcategory C Σ of C whose objects are those X C such that f X for every f Σ. Theorem Let C be a cocomplete category in which every object is presentable. Given a set Σ of morphisms of C, the corresponding orthogonal subcategory C Σ is reflective in C. Definition Let C be a cocomplete category and E a class of morphisms of C. The class E is closed under colimits when given a small category D, two functors F, G : D C and a natural transformation α : F G, if all the morphisms α D : F D GD are in E, then the corresponding factorization colimα D : colimf D colimgd is in E as well. Definition By a factorization system on a category B we mean a pair (E, M) where both E and M are classes of morphisms of B and i) every isomorphism belongs to both E and M, ii) both E and M are closed under composition, iii) e E m M e m, iv) every morphism f B can be factored as f = m e, with e E and m M. Definition Consider a finitely complete category B. A univeral closure operation on B consists in giving, for every subobject S B in B, another subobject S B called the closure of S in B; these assignments have to satisfy the following properties, where S, T are subobjects of B and f : A B is a morphism of B; 45

52 CHAPTER 7. CATEGORIES OF FRACTIONS i) S S; ii) S T S T ; iii) S = S; iv) f 1 (S) = f 1 (S). Definition Consider a finitely complete category B provided with a universal closure operation. i) A subobject S B is dense when S = B; ii) a subobject S B is closed when S = S. Definition Consider a finitely complete category B with strong-epimono factorizations. Given a universal closure operation on B, a morphism f : A B is bidense when its image is dense and the equalizer of its kernel pair is dense. 46

53 Chapter 8 Flat Functors and Cauchy Completeness Definition Consider two finitely complete categories A, B. A functor F : A B is left exact when it preserves finite limits. Theorem Let A be a small category. The category Lex(A, Set) of left exact functors is reflective in the category Fun(A, Set) of all functors. Definition For an arbitrary category A, a functor F : A Set is flat when the category Elts(F ) of elements of F is cofiltered. Given an arbitrary functor F : A B, F is flat when for each object B B, the functor B(B, F ) : A Set is flat. Proposition Given a category A, every representable functor is flat. A (A, ) : A Set Proposition Let F : A B be a functor with a left adjoint. Then F is flat. 47

PART I. Abstract algebraic categories

PART I. Abstract algebraic categories PART I Abstract algebraic categories It should be observed first that the whole concept of category is essentially an auxiliary one; our basic concepts are those of a functor and a natural transformation.

More information

Lecture 9: Sheaves. February 11, 2018

Lecture 9: Sheaves. February 11, 2018 Lecture 9: Sheaves February 11, 2018 Recall that a category X is a topos if there exists an equivalence X Shv(C), where C is a small category (which can be assumed to admit finite limits) equipped with

More information

Review of category theory

Review of category theory Review of category theory Proseminar on stable homotopy theory, University of Pittsburgh Friday 17 th January 2014 Friday 24 th January 2014 Clive Newstead Abstract This talk will be a review of the fundamentals

More information

Categories and functors

Categories and functors Lecture 1 Categories and functors Definition 1.1 A category A consists of a collection ob(a) (whose elements are called the objects of A) for each A, B ob(a), a collection A(A, B) (whose elements are called

More information

C2.7: CATEGORY THEORY

C2.7: CATEGORY THEORY C2.7: CATEGORY THEORY PAVEL SAFRONOV WITH MINOR UPDATES 2019 BY FRANCES KIRWAN Contents Introduction 2 Literature 3 1. Basic definitions 3 1.1. Categories 3 1.2. Set-theoretic issues 4 1.3. Functors 5

More information

Lectures on Homological Algebra. Weizhe Zheng

Lectures on Homological Algebra. Weizhe Zheng Lectures on Homological Algebra Weizhe Zheng Morningside Center of Mathematics Academy of Mathematics and Systems Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences Beijing 100190, China University of the Chinese Academy

More information

Category Theory 1 Categories and functors

Category Theory 1 Categories and functors Category Theory 1 Categories and functors This is to accompany the reading of 1 7 October and the lecture of 8 October. mistakes and obscurities to T.Leinster@maths.gla.ac.uk. Please report Some questions

More information

A Grothendieck site is a small category C equipped with a Grothendieck topology T. A Grothendieck topology T consists of a collection of subfunctors

A Grothendieck site is a small category C equipped with a Grothendieck topology T. A Grothendieck topology T consists of a collection of subfunctors Contents 5 Grothendieck topologies 1 6 Exactness properties 10 7 Geometric morphisms 17 8 Points and Boolean localization 22 5 Grothendieck topologies A Grothendieck site is a small category C equipped

More information

Some glances at topos theory. Francis Borceux

Some glances at topos theory. Francis Borceux Some glances at topos theory Francis Borceux Como, 2018 2 Francis Borceux francis.borceux@uclouvain.be Contents 1 Localic toposes 7 1.1 Sheaves on a topological space.................... 7 1.2 Sheaves

More information

Categories and Modules

Categories and Modules Categories and odules Takahiro Kato arch 2, 205 BSTRCT odules (also known as profunctors or distributors) and morphisms among them subsume categories and functors and provide more general and abstract

More information

CATEGORY THEORY. Cats have been around for 70 years. Eilenberg + Mac Lane =. Cats are about building bridges between different parts of maths.

CATEGORY THEORY. Cats have been around for 70 years. Eilenberg + Mac Lane =. Cats are about building bridges between different parts of maths. CATEGORY THEORY PROFESSOR PETER JOHNSTONE Cats have been around for 70 years. Eilenberg + Mac Lane =. Cats are about building bridges between different parts of maths. Definition 1.1. A category C consists

More information

1 Categories, Functors, and Natural Transformations. Discrete categories. A category is discrete when every arrow is an identity.

1 Categories, Functors, and Natural Transformations. Discrete categories. A category is discrete when every arrow is an identity. MacLane: Categories or Working Mathematician 1 Categories, Functors, and Natural Transormations 1.1 Axioms or Categories 1.2 Categories Discrete categories. A category is discrete when every arrow is an

More information

Elementary (ha-ha) Aspects of Topos Theory

Elementary (ha-ha) Aspects of Topos Theory Elementary (ha-ha) Aspects of Topos Theory Matt Booth June 3, 2016 Contents 1 Sheaves on topological spaces 1 1.1 Presheaves on spaces......................... 1 1.2 Digression on pointless topology..................

More information

LOCALIZATIONS, COLOCALIZATIONS AND NON ADDITIVE -OBJECTS

LOCALIZATIONS, COLOCALIZATIONS AND NON ADDITIVE -OBJECTS LOCALIZATIONS, COLOCALIZATIONS AND NON ADDITIVE -OBJECTS GEORGE CIPRIAN MODOI Abstract. Given two arbitrary categories, a pair of adjoint functors between them induces three pairs of full subcategories,

More information

A Fibrational View of Geometric Morphisms

A Fibrational View of Geometric Morphisms A Fibrational View of Geometric Morphisms Thomas Streicher May 1997 Abstract In this short note we will give a survey of the fibrational aspects of (generalised) geometric morphisms. Almost all of these

More information

An introduction to locally finitely presentable categories

An introduction to locally finitely presentable categories An introduction to locally finitely presentable categories MARU SARAZOLA A document born out of my attempt to understand the notion of locally finitely presentable category, and my annoyance at constantly

More information

Category Theory (UMV/TK/07)

Category Theory (UMV/TK/07) P. J. Šafárik University, Faculty of Science, Košice Project 2005/NP1-051 11230100466 Basic information Extent: 2 hrs lecture/1 hrs seminar per week. Assessment: Written tests during the semester, written

More information

Category Theory. Categories. Definition.

Category Theory. Categories. Definition. Category Theory Category theory is a general mathematical theory of structures, systems of structures and relationships between systems of structures. It provides a unifying and economic mathematical modeling

More information

arxiv: v1 [math.ct] 28 Oct 2017

arxiv: v1 [math.ct] 28 Oct 2017 BARELY LOCALLY PRESENTABLE CATEGORIES arxiv:1710.10476v1 [math.ct] 28 Oct 2017 L. POSITSELSKI AND J. ROSICKÝ Abstract. We introduce a new class of categories generalizing locally presentable ones. The

More information

A 2-CATEGORIES COMPANION

A 2-CATEGORIES COMPANION A 2-CATEGORIES COMPANION STEPHEN LACK Abstract. This paper is a rather informal guide to some of the basic theory of 2-categories and bicategories, including notions of limit and colimit, 2-dimensional

More information

IndCoh Seminar: Ind-coherent sheaves I

IndCoh Seminar: Ind-coherent sheaves I IndCoh Seminar: Ind-coherent sheaves I Justin Campbell March 11, 2016 1 Finiteness conditions 1.1 Fix a cocomplete category C (as usual category means -category ). This section contains a discussion of

More information

Compactness in Toposes

Compactness in Toposes Algant Master Thesis Compactness in Toposes Candidate: Mauro Mantegazza Advisor: Dr. Jaap van Oosten Coadvisors: Prof. Sandra Mantovani Prof. Ronald van Luijk Università degli Studi di Milano Universiteit

More information

1 Categorical Background

1 Categorical Background 1 Categorical Background 1.1 Categories and Functors Definition 1.1.1 A category C is given by a class of objects, often denoted by ob C, and for any two objects A, B of C a proper set of morphisms C(A,

More information

University of Oxford, Michaelis November 16, Categorical Semantics and Topos Theory Homotopy type theor

University of Oxford, Michaelis November 16, Categorical Semantics and Topos Theory Homotopy type theor Categorical Semantics and Topos Theory Homotopy type theory Seminar University of Oxford, Michaelis 2011 November 16, 2011 References Johnstone, P.T.: Sketches of an Elephant. A Topos-Theory Compendium.

More information

SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK

SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK MATEMATISKA INSTITUTIONEN, STOCKHOLMS UNIVERSITET Equivariant Sheaves on Topological Categories av Johan Lindberg 2015 - No 7 MATEMATISKA INSTITUTIONEN, STOCKHOLMS UNIVERSITET,

More information

Barr s Embedding Theorem for Enriched Categories

Barr s Embedding Theorem for Enriched Categories Barr s Embedding Theorem for Enriched Categories arxiv:0903.1173v3 [math.ct] 31 Aug 2009 Dimitri Chikhladze November 9, 2018 Abstract We generalize Barr s embedding theorem for regular categories to the

More information

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2

FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2 FOUNDATIONS OF ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY CLASS 2 RAVI VAKIL CONTENTS 1. Where we were 1 2. Yoneda s lemma 2 3. Limits and colimits 6 4. Adjoints 8 First, some bureaucratic details. We will move to 380-F for Monday

More information

arxiv: v1 [math.ct] 23 Oct 2016

arxiv: v1 [math.ct] 23 Oct 2016 COCOMPLETION OF RESTRICTION CATEGORIES RICHARD GARNER AND DANIEL LIN arxiv:1610.07164v1 [math.ct] 23 Oct 2016 Abstract. Restriction categories were introduced as a way of generalising the notion of partial

More information

Derived Algebraic Geometry IX: Closed Immersions

Derived Algebraic Geometry IX: Closed Immersions Derived Algebraic Geometry I: Closed Immersions November 5, 2011 Contents 1 Unramified Pregeometries and Closed Immersions 4 2 Resolutions of T-Structures 7 3 The Proof of Proposition 1.0.10 14 4 Closed

More information

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Monomorphism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/monomorphism 1 of 3 24/11/2012 02:01 Monomorphism From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In the context of abstract algebra or

More information

MODELS OF HORN THEORIES

MODELS OF HORN THEORIES MODELS OF HORN THEORIES MICHAEL BARR Abstract. This paper explores the connection between categories of models of Horn theories and models of finite limit theories. The first is a proper subclass of the

More information

HSP SUBCATEGORIES OF EILENBERG-MOORE ALGEBRAS

HSP SUBCATEGORIES OF EILENBERG-MOORE ALGEBRAS HSP SUBCATEGORIES OF EILENBERG-MOORE ALGEBRAS MICHAEL BARR Abstract. Given a triple T on a complete category C and a actorization system E /M on the category o algebras, we show there is a 1-1 correspondence

More information

An introduction to Yoneda structures

An introduction to Yoneda structures An introduction to Yoneda structures Paul-André Melliès CNRS, Université Paris Denis Diderot Groupe de travail Catégories supérieures, polygraphes et homotopie Paris 21 May 2010 1 Bibliography Ross Street

More information

LIMITS AND COLIMITS. m : M X. in a category G of structured sets of some sort call them gadgets the image subset

LIMITS AND COLIMITS. m : M X. in a category G of structured sets of some sort call them gadgets the image subset 5 LIMITS ND COLIMITS In this chapter we irst briely discuss some topics namely subobjects and pullbacks relating to the deinitions that we already have. This is partly in order to see how these are used,

More information

Elements of Category Theory

Elements of Category Theory Elements of Category Theory Robin Cockett Department of Computer Science University of Calgary Alberta, Canada robin@cpsc.ucalgary.ca Estonia, Feb. 2010 Functors and natural transformations Adjoints and

More information

Theory of Categories 1. Notes M. Grandis Laurea e Laurea Magistrale in Matematica, Genova.

Theory of Categories 1. Notes M. Grandis Laurea e Laurea Magistrale in Matematica, Genova. Theory of Categories 1. Notes M. Grandis Laurea e Laurea Magistrale in Matematica, Genova. 0. Introduction Category Theory yields a general frame for studying mathematical structures and their universal

More information

Topological aspects of restriction categories

Topological aspects of restriction categories Calgary 2006, Topological aspects of restriction categories, June 1, 2006 p. 1/22 Topological aspects of restriction categories Robin Cockett robin@cpsc.ucalgary.ca University of Calgary Calgary 2006,

More information

3. Categories and Functors We recall the definition of a category: Definition 3.1. A category C is the data of two collections. The first collection

3. Categories and Functors We recall the definition of a category: Definition 3.1. A category C is the data of two collections. The first collection 3. Categories and Functors We recall the definition of a category: Definition 3.1. A category C is the data of two collections. The first collection is called the objects of C and is denoted Obj(C). Given

More information

Topos Theory. Lectures 17-20: The interpretation of logic in categories. Olivia Caramello. Topos Theory. Olivia Caramello.

Topos Theory. Lectures 17-20: The interpretation of logic in categories. Olivia Caramello. Topos Theory. Olivia Caramello. logic s Lectures 17-20: logic in 2 / 40 logic s Interpreting first-order logic in In Logic, first-order s are a wide class of formal s used for talking about structures of any kind (where the restriction

More information

LIST OF CORRECTIONS LOCALLY PRESENTABLE AND ACCESSIBLE CATEGORIES

LIST OF CORRECTIONS LOCALLY PRESENTABLE AND ACCESSIBLE CATEGORIES LIST OF CORRECTIONS LOCALLY PRESENTABLE AND ACCESSIBLE CATEGORIES J.Adámek J.Rosický Cambridge University Press 1994 Version: June 2013 The following is a list of corrections of all mistakes that have

More information

CATEGORICAL GROTHENDIECK RINGS AND PICARD GROUPS. Contents. 1. The ring K(R) and the group Pic(R)

CATEGORICAL GROTHENDIECK RINGS AND PICARD GROUPS. Contents. 1. The ring K(R) and the group Pic(R) CATEGORICAL GROTHENDIECK RINGS AND PICARD GROUPS J. P. MAY Contents 1. The ring K(R) and the group Pic(R) 1 2. Symmetric monoidal categories, K(C), and Pic(C) 2 3. The unit endomorphism ring R(C ) 5 4.

More information

III A Functional Approach to General Topology

III A Functional Approach to General Topology III A Functional Approach to General Topology Maria Manuel Clementino, Eraldo Giuli and Walter Tholen In this chapter we wish to present a categorical approach to fundamental concepts of General Topology,

More information

Modules over a Ringed Space

Modules over a Ringed Space Modules over a Ringed Space Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 In these notes we collect some useful facts about sheaves of modules on a ringed space that are either left as exercises in [Har77] or omitted

More information

Topos Theory. Lectures 21 and 22: Classifying toposes. Olivia Caramello. Topos Theory. Olivia Caramello. The notion of classifying topos

Topos Theory. Lectures 21 and 22: Classifying toposes. Olivia Caramello. Topos Theory. Olivia Caramello. The notion of classifying topos Lectures 21 and 22: toposes of 2 / 30 Toposes as mathematical universes of Recall that every Grothendieck topos E is an elementary topos. Thus, given the fact that arbitrary colimits exist in E, we can

More information

Topos Theory. Jaap van Oosten Department of Mathematics Utrecht University

Topos Theory. Jaap van Oosten Department of Mathematics Utrecht University Topos Theory Jaap van Oosten Department of Mathematics Utrecht University December 25, 2018 Preface These lecture notes were written during a Mastermath (Dutch national programme for master-level courses

More information

1. Introduction and preliminaries

1. Introduction and preliminaries Quasigroups and Related Systems 23 (2015), 283 295 The categories of actions of a dcpo-monoid on directed complete posets Mojgan Mahmoudi and Halimeh Moghbeli-Damaneh Abstract. In this paper, some categorical

More information

Limit Preservation from Naturality

Limit Preservation from Naturality CTCS 2004 Preliminary Version Limit Preservation from Naturality Mario Caccamo 1 The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute Cambridge, UK Glynn Winskel 2 University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory Cambridge,

More information

PART II.2. THE!-PULLBACK AND BASE CHANGE

PART II.2. THE!-PULLBACK AND BASE CHANGE PART II.2. THE!-PULLBACK AND BASE CHANGE Contents Introduction 1 1. Factorizations of morphisms of DG schemes 2 1.1. Colimits of closed embeddings 2 1.2. The closure 4 1.3. Transitivity of closure 5 2.

More information

Coreflections in Algebraic Quantum Logic

Coreflections in Algebraic Quantum Logic Coreflections in Algebraic Quantum Logic Bart Jacobs Jorik Mandemaker Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands Abstract Various generalizations of Boolean algebras are being studied in algebraic quantum

More information

INDUCTIVE PRESENTATIONS OF GENERALIZED REEDY CATEGORIES. Contents. 1. The algebraic perspective on Reedy categories

INDUCTIVE PRESENTATIONS OF GENERALIZED REEDY CATEGORIES. Contents. 1. The algebraic perspective on Reedy categories INDUCTIVE PRESENTATIONS OF GENERALIZED REEDY CATEGORIES EMILY RIEHL Abstract. This note explores the algebraic perspective on the notion of generalized Reedy category introduced by Berger and Moerdijk

More information

Distributors at Work

Distributors at Work Distributors at Work Jean Bénabou June 2000 Contents 1 Motivation 2 2 Kan Extensions 3 3 Distributors 7 4 Tensor and Hom 10 5 Duality for Distributors and Right Adjoints 12 6 Distributors at Work 16 6.1

More information

Olivia Caramello. University of Insubria - Como. Deductive systems and. Grothendieck topologies. Olivia Caramello. Introduction.

Olivia Caramello. University of Insubria - Como. Deductive systems and. Grothendieck topologies. Olivia Caramello. Introduction. duality University of Insubria - Como 2 / 27 duality Aim of the talk purpose of this talk is to illustrate the relevance of the notion of topology. I will show that the classical proof system of geometric

More information

are additive in each variable. Explicitly, the condition on composition means that given a diagram

are additive in each variable. Explicitly, the condition on composition means that given a diagram 1. Abelian categories Most of homological algebra can be carried out in the setting of abelian categories, a class of categories which includes on the one hand all categories of modules and on the other

More information

Representable presheaves

Representable presheaves Representable presheaves March 15, 2017 A presheaf on a category C is a contravariant functor F on C. In particular, for any object X Ob(C) we have the presheaf (of sets) represented by X, that is Hom

More information

Adjunctions! Everywhere!

Adjunctions! Everywhere! Adjunctions! Everywhere! Carnegie Mellon University Thursday 19 th September 2013 Clive Newstead Abstract What do free groups, existential quantifiers and Stone-Čech compactifications all have in common?

More information

Postulated colimits and left exactness of Kan-extensions

Postulated colimits and left exactness of Kan-extensions Postulated colimits and left exactness of Kan-extensions Anders Kock If A is a small category and E a Grothendieck topos, the Kan extension LanF of a flat functor F : A E along any functor A D preserves

More information

Algebraic Geometry

Algebraic Geometry MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 18.726 Algebraic Geometry Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. 18.726: Algebraic Geometry

More information

PART III.3. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON IND-INF-SCHEMES

PART III.3. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON IND-INF-SCHEMES PART III.3. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON IND-INF-SCHEMES Contents Introduction 1 1. Ind-coherent sheaves on ind-schemes 2 1.1. Basic properties 2 1.2. t-structure 3 1.3. Recovering IndCoh from ind-proper maps

More information

Direct Limits. Mathematics 683, Fall 2013

Direct Limits. Mathematics 683, Fall 2013 Direct Limits Mathematics 683, Fall 2013 In this note we define direct limits and prove their basic properties. This notion is important in various places in algebra. In particular, in algebraic geometry

More information

MONADS WITH ARITIES AND THEIR ASSOCIATED THEORIES

MONADS WITH ARITIES AND THEIR ASSOCIATED THEORIES MONADS WITH ARITIES AND THEIR ASSOCIATED THEORIES CLEMENS BERGER, PAUL-ANDRÉ MELLIÈS AND MARK WEBER Abstract. After a review of the concept of monad with arities we show that the category of algebras for

More information

Boolean Algebras, Boolean Rings and Stone s Representation Theorem

Boolean Algebras, Boolean Rings and Stone s Representation Theorem Boolean Algebras, Boolean Rings and Stone s Representation Theorem Hongtaek Jung December 27, 2017 Abstract This is a part of a supplementary note for a Logic and Set Theory course. The main goal is to

More information

Introduction to Restriction Categories

Introduction to Restriction Categories Introduction to Restriction Categories Robin Cockett Department of Computer Science University of Calgary Alberta, Canada robin@cpsc.ucalgary.ca Estonia, March 2010 Defining restriction categories Examples

More information

LECTURE 1: SOME GENERALITIES; 1 DIMENSIONAL EXAMPLES

LECTURE 1: SOME GENERALITIES; 1 DIMENSIONAL EXAMPLES LECTURE 1: SOME GENERALITIES; 1 DIMENSIONAL EAMPLES VIVEK SHENDE Historically, sheaves come from topology and analysis; subsequently they have played a fundamental role in algebraic geometry and certain

More information

ON THE HOMOTOPY THEORY OF ENRICHED CATEGORIES

ON THE HOMOTOPY THEORY OF ENRICHED CATEGORIES ON THE HOMOTOPY THEORY OF ENRICHED CATEGORIES CLEMENS BERGER AND IEKE MOERDIJK Abstract. We give sufficient conditions for the existence of a Quillen model structure on small categories enriched in a given

More information

Algebraic Theories of Quasivarieties

Algebraic Theories of Quasivarieties Algebraic Theories of Quasivarieties Jiří Adámek Hans E. Porst Abstract Analogously to the fact that Lawvere s algebraic theories of (finitary) varieties are precisely the small categories with finite

More information

GALOIS CATEGORIES MELISSA LYNN

GALOIS CATEGORIES MELISSA LYNN GALOIS CATEGORIES MELISSA LYNN Abstract. In abstract algebra, we considered finite Galois extensions of fields with their Galois groups. Here, we noticed a correspondence between the intermediate fields

More information

1 Cartesian bicategories

1 Cartesian bicategories 1 Cartesian bicategories We now expand the scope of application of system Beta, by generalizing the notion of (discrete) cartesian bicategory 1. Here we give just a fragment of the theory, with a more

More information

in path component sheaves, and the diagrams

in path component sheaves, and the diagrams Cocycle categories Cocycles J.F. Jardine I will be using the injective model structure on the category s Pre(C) of simplicial presheaves on a small Grothendieck site C. You can think in terms of simplicial

More information

CONTINUITY. 1. Continuity 1.1. Preserving limits and colimits. Suppose that F : J C and R: C D are functors. Consider the limit diagrams.

CONTINUITY. 1. Continuity 1.1. Preserving limits and colimits. Suppose that F : J C and R: C D are functors. Consider the limit diagrams. CONTINUITY Abstract. Continuity, tensor products, complete lattices, the Tarski Fixed Point Theorem, existence of adjoints, Freyd s Adjoint Functor Theorem 1. Continuity 1.1. Preserving limits and colimits.

More information

Cellularity, composition, and morphisms of algebraic weak factorization systems

Cellularity, composition, and morphisms of algebraic weak factorization systems Cellularity, composition, and morphisms of algebraic weak factorization systems Emily Riehl University of Chicago http://www.math.uchicago.edu/~eriehl 19 July, 2011 International Category Theory Conference

More information

Category Theory. Course by Dr. Arthur Hughes, Typset by Cathal Ormond

Category Theory. Course by Dr. Arthur Hughes, Typset by Cathal Ormond Category Theory Course by Dr. Arthur Hughes, 2010 Typset by Cathal Ormond Contents 1 Types, Composition and Identities 3 1.1 Programs..................................... 3 1.2 Functional Laws.................................

More information

Modules over a Scheme

Modules over a Scheme Modules over a Scheme Daniel Murfet October 5, 2006 In these notes we collect various facts about quasi-coherent sheaves on a scheme. Nearly all of the material is trivial or can be found in [Gro60]. These

More information

Γ-Ultrametric Spaces and Separated Presheaves. Nathanael Leedom Ackerman

Γ-Ultrametric Spaces and Separated Presheaves. Nathanael Leedom Ackerman Γ-Ultrametric spaces Definition Let (Γ,,0) be a complete lattice with minimal element 0 A Γ-ultrametric space is a pair (M,d M ) such that M is a set and d M : M M Γ. (Reflexivity) ( x,y M)d M (x,y) =

More information

MODEL STRUCTURES ON PRO-CATEGORIES

MODEL STRUCTURES ON PRO-CATEGORIES Homology, Homotopy and Applications, vol. 9(1), 2007, pp.367 398 MODEL STRUCTURES ON PRO-CATEGORIES HALVARD FAUSK and DANIEL C. ISAKSEN (communicated by J. Daniel Christensen) Abstract We introduce a notion

More information

A brief Introduction to Category Theory

A brief Introduction to Category Theory A brief Introduction to Category Theory Dirk Hofmann CIDMA, Department of Mathematics, University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal Office: 11.3.10, dirk@ua.pt, http://sweet.ua.pt/dirk/ October 9, 2017

More information

ESSENTIALLY ALGEBRAIC THEORIES AND LOCALIZATIONS IN TOPOSES AND ABELIAN CATEGORIES

ESSENTIALLY ALGEBRAIC THEORIES AND LOCALIZATIONS IN TOPOSES AND ABELIAN CATEGORIES ESSENTIALLY ALGEBRAIC THEORIES AND LOCALIZATIONS IN TOPOSES AND ABELIAN CATEGORIES A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Engineering

More information

An introduction to toposes. Richard Pettigrew Department of Philosophy University of Bristol

An introduction to toposes. Richard Pettigrew Department of Philosophy University of Bristol n introduction to toposes Richard Pettigrew Department of Philosophy University of Bristol Contents 1 Motivating category theory 1 1.1 The idea behind category theory.................. 1 2 The definition

More information

Categorical models of homotopy type theory

Categorical models of homotopy type theory Categorical models of homotopy type theory Michael Shulman 12 April 2012 Outline 1 Homotopy type theory in model categories 2 The universal Kan fibration 3 Models in (, 1)-toposes Homotopy type theory

More information

COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA LECTURE 1: SOME CATEGORY THEORY

COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA LECTURE 1: SOME CATEGORY THEORY COMMUTATIVE ALGEBRA LECTURE 1: SOME CATEGORY THEORY VIVEK SHENDE A ring is a set R with two binary operations, an addition + and a multiplication. Always there should be an identity 0 for addition, an

More information

LOOP SPACES IN MOTIVIC HOMOTOPY THEORY. A Dissertation MARVIN GLEN DECKER

LOOP SPACES IN MOTIVIC HOMOTOPY THEORY. A Dissertation MARVIN GLEN DECKER LOOP SPACES IN MOTIVIC HOMOTOPY THEORY A Dissertation by MARVIN GLEN DECKER Submitted to the Office of Graduate Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree

More information

NOTES ON ADJUNCTIONS, MONADS AND LAWVERE THEORIES. 1. Adjunctions

NOTES ON ADJUNCTIONS, MONADS AND LAWVERE THEORIES. 1. Adjunctions NOTES ON ADJUNCTIONS, MONADS AND LAWVERE THEORIES FILIP BÁR 1. Adjunctions 1.1. Universal constructions and adjunctions. Definition 1.1 (Adjunction). A pair of functors U : C D and F : D C form an adjoint

More information

Amalgamable diagram shapes

Amalgamable diagram shapes Amalgamable diagram shapes Ruiyuan hen Abstract A category has the amalgamation property (AP) if every pushout diagram has a cocone, and the joint embedding property (JEP) if every finite coproduct diagram

More information

Derived Algebraic Geometry I: Stable -Categories

Derived Algebraic Geometry I: Stable -Categories Derived Algebraic Geometry I: Stable -Categories October 8, 2009 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Stable -Categories 3 3 The Homotopy Category of a Stable -Category 6 4 Properties of Stable -Categories 12 5

More information

Higher toposes Internal logic Modalities Sub- -toposes Formalization. Modalities in HoTT. Egbert Rijke, Mike Shulman, Bas Spitters 1706.

Higher toposes Internal logic Modalities Sub- -toposes Formalization. Modalities in HoTT. Egbert Rijke, Mike Shulman, Bas Spitters 1706. Modalities in HoTT Egbert Rijke, Mike Shulman, Bas Spitters 1706.07526 Outline 1 Higher toposes 2 Internal logic 3 Modalities 4 Sub- -toposes 5 Formalization Two generalizations of Sets Groupoids: To keep

More information

Topos-theoretic background

Topos-theoretic background opos-theoretic background Olivia Caramello IHÉS September 22, 2014 Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 erminology and notation 3 3 Grothendieck toposes 3 3.1 he notion of site............................ 3 3.2

More information

Boolean Algebra and Propositional Logic

Boolean Algebra and Propositional Logic Boolean Algebra and Propositional Logic Takahiro Kato June 23, 2015 This article provides yet another characterization of Boolean algebras and, using this characterization, establishes a more direct connection

More information

The denormalized 3 3 lemma

The denormalized 3 3 lemma Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 177 (2003) 113 129 www.elsevier.com/locate/jpaa The denormalized 3 3 lemma Dominique Bourn Centre Universitaire de la Mi-Voix Lab. d Analyse Geometrie et Algebre, Universite

More information

MATH 101B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA

MATH 101B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA MATH 101B: ALGEBRA II PART A: HOMOLOGICAL ALGEBRA These are notes for our first unit on the algebraic side of homological algebra. While this is the last topic (Chap XX) in the book, it makes sense to

More information

Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra

Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 214 (2010) 1384 1398 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jpaa Homotopy theory of

More information

FINITE SPECTRA CARY MALKIEWICH

FINITE SPECTRA CARY MALKIEWICH FINITE SPECTRA CARY MALKIEWICH These notes were written in 2014-2015 to help me understand how the different notions of finiteness for spectra are related. I am usually surprised that the basics are not

More information

Introduction to CATEGORY THEORY and CATEGORICAL LOGIC

Introduction to CATEGORY THEORY and CATEGORICAL LOGIC Introduction to CATEGORY THEORY and CATEGORICAL LOGIC Thomas Streicher SS 03 and WS 03/04 Contents 1 Categories 5 2 Functors and Natural Transformations 9 3 Subcategories, Full and Faithful Functors, Equivalences

More information

PART II.1. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON SCHEMES

PART II.1. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON SCHEMES PART II.1. IND-COHERENT SHEAVES ON SCHEMES Contents Introduction 1 1. Ind-coherent sheaves on a scheme 2 1.1. Definition of the category 2 1.2. t-structure 3 2. The direct image functor 4 2.1. Direct image

More information

Boolean Algebra and Propositional Logic

Boolean Algebra and Propositional Logic Boolean Algebra and Propositional Logic Takahiro Kato September 10, 2015 ABSTRACT. This article provides yet another characterization of Boolean algebras and, using this characterization, establishes a

More information

arxiv: v2 [math.ct] 27 Dec 2014

arxiv: v2 [math.ct] 27 Dec 2014 ON DIRECT SUMMANDS OF HOMOLOGICAL FUNCTORS ON LENGTH CATEGORIES arxiv:1305.1914v2 [math.ct] 27 Dec 2014 ALEX MARTSINKOVSKY Abstract. We show that direct summands of certain additive functors arising as

More information

Joseph Muscat Categories. 1 December 2012

Joseph Muscat Categories. 1 December 2012 Joseph Muscat 2015 1 Categories joseph.muscat@um.edu.mt 1 December 2012 1 Objects and Morphisms category is a class o objects with morphisms : (a way o comparing/substituting/mapping/processing to ) such

More information

CONTINUOUS COHESION OVER SETS

CONTINUOUS COHESION OVER SETS Theory and Applications of Categories, Vol. 29, No. 20, 204, pp. 542 568. CONTINUOUS COHESION OVER SETS M. MENNI Abstract. A pre-cohesive geometric morphism p : E S satisfies Continuity if the canonical

More information

TOPICS IN ALGEBRA COURSE NOTES AUTUMN Contents. Preface Notations and Conventions

TOPICS IN ALGEBRA COURSE NOTES AUTUMN Contents. Preface Notations and Conventions TOPICS IN ALGEBRA COURSE NOTES AUTUMN 2003 ROBERT E. KOTTWITZ WRITTEN UP BY BRIAN D. SMITHLING Preface Notations and Conventions Contents ii ii 1. Grothendieck Topologies and Sheaves 1 1.1. A Motivating

More information

Applications of 2-categorical algebra to the theory of operads. Mark Weber

Applications of 2-categorical algebra to the theory of operads. Mark Weber Applications of 2-categorical algebra to the theory of operads Mark Weber With new, more combinatorially intricate notions of operad arising recently in the algebraic approaches to higher dimensional algebra,

More information

Derived Categories. Mistuo Hoshino

Derived Categories. Mistuo Hoshino Derived Categories Mistuo Hoshino Contents 01. Cochain complexes 02. Mapping cones 03. Homotopy categories 04. Quasi-isomorphisms 05. Mapping cylinders 06. Triangulated categories 07. Épaisse subcategories

More information

The synthetic theory of -categories vs the synthetic theory of -categories

The synthetic theory of -categories vs the synthetic theory of -categories Emily Riehl Johns Hopkins University The synthetic theory of -categories vs the synthetic theory of -categories joint with Dominic Verity and Michael Shulman Vladimir Voevodsky Memorial Conference The

More information