DOCSLIB.ORG

The Monoidal Centre for Group-Graded Categories 3

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Monoidal Centre for Group-Graded Categories 3 THE MONOIDAL CENTRE FOR GROUP-GRADED CATEGORIES BRANKO NIKOLIC´ AND ROSS STREET Abstract. Let G be a group and k be a commutative ring. Our aim is to ameliorate the G-graded categorical structures considered by Turaev and Virelizier by fitting them into the monoidal bicategory context. We explain how these structures are monoidales in the monoidal centre of the monoidal bicategory of k-linear categories on which G acts. This provides a useful example of a higher version of Davydov’s full centre of an algebra. Introduction As well as being a mathematical discipline with its own structures, calculations and significant theorems, category theory provides a framework for understanding analogies between concepts in different disciplines as examples of the same concept interpreted in different categories. Bicategories do the same for categorical concepts, and so on, iterating the microcosm principle1. An example of this unification process is provided in Section 4.8 of Street [31] where the full centre of an algebra, as defined and constructed by Davydov [9], is shown to be a monoidal centre in the sense of Street [29] in the monoidal bicategory of pointed categories. We show here how structures and constructions defined by Turaev and Virelizier [33] (also see [32, 20, 2]) for G-graded categories, where G is a group, are precisely the usual monoidal structures taken in an appropriate monoidal bicategory. To some extent, we replace the monoidal category of k-modules by the monoidal bicategory Modop whose morphisms are two-sided modules on which categories act. There are several benefits gained by working at the bicategorical level. While k- modules only have monoidal duals if they are finitely generated and projective, all objects of Modop have duals. While k-modules only have finite direct sums, all small direct sums exist in Modop. While the monoidal centre of the category of all k-linear representations of a group G is not tortile (also called “ribbon”), the monoidal centre arXiv:2010.10656v1 [math.CT] 20 Oct 2020 of the bicategory of Modop-representations of G is tortile. Moreover, a higher version of the Davydov full centre is involved in the key example mentioned in [33]. At this stage we are not saying anything about the main theorem of [33] which is a G-graded version of a theorem of M¨uger [24]. However, note that the invertibility of the S-matrix in the G-graded case uses M¨uger’s result. Date: October 22, 2020. The second gratefully acknowledges the support of Australian Research Council Discovery Grant DP190102432. 1so named by Baez and Dolan; see footnote 2 on page 100 of [11] 1 2 BRANKONIKOLIC´ AND ROSS STREET 1. Basics on bicategories Bicategories as defined by B´enabou [3] are “monoidal categories with several ob- jects” in the sense that additive categories are “rings with several objects” [23]. For bi- categories A and B, we write PspA , Bq for the bicategory of pseudofunctors, pseudo- natural transformations, and modifications (in the terminology of Kelly-Street [19]). We will use monoidal bicategory terminology from Day-Street [11] except that we now use “monoidale” in preference to “pseudomonoid”. A good example of an autonomous symmetric monoidal bicategory is Mod. The objects are categories. The homcategories are defined by ModpA , Bq“rBop ˆ A , Sets ; objects of these homs are called modules. Composition ModpB, C qˆ ModpA , Bq ÝÑ˝ ModpA , C q is defined by B pN ˝ MqpC, Aq“ MpB, Aqˆ NpC, Bq . ż The identity module A Ñ A is the hom functor of A . Tensor product is finite cartesian product of categories; it is not the product in Mod. Coproduct in Mod is coproduct of categories; it is also product in Mod. We identify each functor F : A Ñ B with the module F˚ : A Ñ B defined by F˚pB, Aq “ BpB,FAq; this gives a faithful locally-full pseudofunctor p´q˚ : Cat Ñ Mod which is the identity on objects, strong monoidal, and coproduct preserving. The dual of A in Mod is the opposite category A op. Recall (for example from [11]) that monoidales in Modop are promonoidal categories A in the sense of Day [10]. The tensor product is a module P : A Ñ A ˆ A and the unit is a module J : A Ñ 1. The Day convolution monoidal structure on the functor category rA , Sets has unit J : A Ñ Set and tensor product F ‹ G defined by A,B pF ‹ GqC “ P pA, B; Cqˆ F A ˆ GB . ż Suppose V is a complete cocomplete closed symmetric monoidal category. We have a symmetric (weak) monoidal pseudofunctor r´, V s : Modop ÝÑ V -CAT (1.1) taking each category A to the V -enriched functor category rA , V s. Therefore, each promonoidal category is taken to a convolution monoidal V -category. In the case V “ Set, (1.1) is the contravariant representable pseudofunctor Modp´, 1q. Let G be a group regarded as a one-object category. The object will be denoted by oG. The morphisms of this category will also be called elements of G; so a P G will mean, as usual, that a is an element. We also use the conjugation notation ca “ cac´1 and ac “ c´1ac. Like every category, G has a promonoidal structure for which the convolution struc- ture on rG, Sets is pointwise cartesian product. In this case, the unit J is constant at the one-point set and the module P : G Ñ G ˆ G is defined by P poG,oG; oGq“tpx, yq : x, y P Gu , P pa, b; cqpx, yq“pcxa, cybq . (1.2) THE MONOIDAL CENTRE FOR GROUP-GRADED CATEGORIES 3 As we expound the theory, we will carry along an example based on Example 3.5 of [33] which, in turn, was based on an example in [22]. At this point it is just to show some naturally occurring lax functors and pseudofunctors. Example 1.1. A group morphism π : H Ñ G is a functor. According to B´enabou [4] (see [28]), any functor over a category G corresponds to a normal lax functor H : G Ñ Modop. The functor π is a fibration if and only if it is an opfibration if and only if it is Giraud-Conduch´e[16, 6] if and only if it is a surjective group morphism. In this case, the normal lax functor is actually a pseudofunctor. Let us now describe it. The fibre of the functor π over oG is the kernel K of the group morphism π; so HoG “ K as a one-object category. For a : oG Ñ oG in G, the module Ha : K Ñ K is defined by pHaqpoK,oKq “ tx P H : πpxq“ au . b a In particular, H1 “ K is the identity module. For a composable pair oG ÝÑ oG ÝÑ oG in G, the composite module Hb ˝ Ha is seen to be the set pHb ˝ HaqpoK,oKq“ tx P H : πpxq“ au ˆ ty P H : πpyq“ bu {K of orbits under the action of `K on the right in the first factor of the product˘ and on the left in the second. The composition constraint is the bijection pHb ˝ HaqpoK,oKq ÝÑ HpabqpoK,oKq , rx, ys ÞÑ xy . A cleavage for the fibration π : H Ñ G amounts to a splitting σ of π as a function on elements; that is, πσa “ a for all a P G. The chosen cartesian morphism over op a : oG Ñ oG is σpaq : oH Ñ oH . The pseudofunctor H : G Ñ Cat corresponding to σpaq this cloven fibration is defined by HoG “ K, pHaqk “ k for a P G and k P K, while the component at oK of the invertible composition constraint pKbqpKaq ñ Kpabq is equal to σpaqσpbqσpabq´1 P K. We use the same symbol for the pseudofunctors H since the first is equivalent to the composite of the second with the canonical pseudofunctor p´q˚. The groupoid of automorphisms in G will be denoted by Gaut. The objects are elements a P G. A morphism f : a Ñ b is an element f P G such that fa “ bf. If Gconj denotes the G-set whose elements are those of G and whose G-action is by conjugation then there is an equivalence of categories aut rG, Sets{Gconj »rG , Sets . (1.3) Since Gconj is a monoid in rG, Sets, there is a monoidal structure on the left hand side of (1.3) whose tensor product takes cartesian product of the morphisms over Gconj followed by the monoid multiplication. This monoidal structure is closed (on both sides) and so transports to a promonoidal structure on Gaut. Recall from the end of Section 4 of [13] that this promonoidal structure is defined by 1 if c “ 1 P pa, b; cq“tpu, vq P G ˆ G : ua vb “ cu and Jc “ " ∅ if c ‰ 1 and that there is a braiding – u γa,b;c : P pa, b; cq ÝÑ P pb, a; cq , pu, vq ÞÑ p av,uq . 4 BRANKONIKOLIC´ AND ROSS STREET It also has a twist τa “ a : a Ñ a ; compare Section 2 of [27]. The reader is invited to check the commutativity of (1.4) which is the main twist condition. γa,b;c P pa, b; cq / P pb, a; cq P p1,1;τcq P pτa,τb;1q (1.4) γb,a;c P pa, b; cq o P pb, a; cq Furthermore, Gaut is a ˚-autonomous promonoidal category in the sense of [12]: we have the natural isomorphisms P pa, b; c´1q ÝÑ– P pb, c; a´1q , pu, vq ú pu´1v,u´1q ; P pa, b; c´1q ÝÑ– P pb´1, a´1; cqop , pu, vq ú pv,uq .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Day Convolution for Monoidal Bicategories
    Day convolution for monoidal bicategories Alexander S. Corner School of Mathematics and Statistics University of Sheffield A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2016 i Abstract Ends and coends, as described in [Kel05], can be described as objects which are universal amongst extranatural transformations [EK66b]. We describe a cate- gorification of this idea, extrapseudonatural transformations, in such a way that bicodescent objects are the objects which are universal amongst such transfor- mations. We recast familiar results about coends in this new setting, providing analogous results for bicodescent objects. In particular we prove a Fubini theorem for bicodescent objects. The free cocompletion of a category C is given by its category of presheaves [Cop; Set]. If C is also monoidal then its category of presheaves can be pro- vided with a monoidal structure via the convolution product of Day [Day70]. This monoidal structure describes [Cop; Set] as the free monoidal cocompletion of C. Day's more general statement, in the V-enriched setting, is that if C is a promonoidal V-category then [Cop; V] possesses a monoidal structure via the convolution product. We define promonoidal bicategories and go on to show that if A is a promonoidal bicategory then the bicategory of pseudofunctors Bicat(Aop; Cat) is a monoidal bicategory. ii Acknowledgements First I would like to thank my supervisor Nick Gurski, who has helped guide me from the definition of a category all the way into the wonderful, and often confusing, world of higher category theory. Nick has been a great supervisor and a great friend to have had through all of this who has introduced me to many new things, mathematical and otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • Ends and Coends
    THIS IS THE (CO)END, MY ONLY (CO)FRIEND FOSCO LOREGIAN† Abstract. The present note is a recollection of the most striking and use- ful applications of co/end calculus. We put a considerable effort in making arguments and constructions rather explicit: after having given a series of preliminary definitions, we characterize co/ends as particular co/limits; then we derive a number of results directly from this characterization. The last sections discuss the most interesting examples where co/end calculus serves as a powerful abstract way to do explicit computations in diverse fields like Algebra, Algebraic Topology and Category Theory. The appendices serve to sketch a number of results in theories heavily relying on co/end calculus; the reader who dares to arrive at this point, being completely introduced to the mysteries of co/end fu, can regard basically every statement as a guided exercise. Contents Introduction. 1 1. Dinaturality, extranaturality, co/wedges. 3 2. Yoneda reduction, Kan extensions. 13 3. The nerve and realization paradigm. 16 4. Weighted limits 21 5. Profunctors. 27 6. Operads. 33 Appendix A. Promonoidal categories 39 Appendix B. Fourier transforms via coends. 40 References 41 Introduction. The purpose of this survey is to familiarize the reader with the so-called co/end calculus, gathering a series of examples of its application; the author would like to stress clearly, from the very beginning, that the material presented here makes arXiv:1501.02503v2 [math.CT] 9 Feb 2015 no claim of originality: indeed, we put a special care in acknowledging carefully, where possible, each of the many authors whose work was an indispensable source in compiling this note.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:2011.12106V1 [Math.AT] 24 Nov 2020 Over the Graded Ring E∗ := Π∗(E)
    FLAT REPLACEMENTS OF HOMOLOGY THEORIES DANIEL SCHÄPPI Abstract. To a homology theory one can associate an additive site and a new homological functor with values in the category of additive sheaves on that site. If this category of sheaves can be shown to be equivalent to a category of comodules of a Hopf algebroid, then we obtain a new homology theory by composing with the underlying module functor. This new homology theory is always flat and we call it a flat replacement of the original theory. For example, Pstrągowski has shown that complex cobordism is a flat replacement of singular homology. In this article we study the basic properties of the sites associated to homology theories and we prove an existence theorem for flat replacements. Contents 1. Introduction 1 Acknowledgements 3 2. Grothendieck tensor categories associated to homology theories 3 2.1. Coefficient categories 3 2.2. The additive site of a homology theory 12 2.3. Flat replacements 17 3. Locally free objects 24 3.1. Preliminaries 24 3.2. Recollections about Adams algebras 25 3.3. Recognizing locally free objects 27 4. Examples of homology theories with flat replacements 32 4.1. Detecting duals 32 4.2. Existence of flat replacements 36 4.3. Locally free objects in module categories 41 References 44 1. Introduction Let SH denote the stable homotopy category. If E is a commutative ring object in SH, then E∗X := π∗(E^X) defines a homological functor with values in modules arXiv:2011.12106v1 [math.AT] 24 Nov 2020 over the graded ring E∗ := π∗(E).
    [Show full text]
  • Notions of Computation As Monoids (Extended Version)
    Notions of Computation as Monoids (extended version) EXEQUIEL RIVAS MAURO JASKELIOFF Centro Internacional Franco Argentino de Ciencias de la Informaci´ony de Sistemas CONICET, Argentina FCEIA, Universidad Nacional de Rosario, Argentina September 20, 2017 Abstract There are different notions of computation, the most popular being monads, applicative functors, and arrows. In this article we show that these three notions can be seen as instances of a unifying abstract concept: monoids in monoidal categories. We demonstrate that even when working at this high level of generality one can obtain useful results. In particular, we give conditions under which one can obtain free monoids and Cayley representations at the level of monoidal categories, and we show that their concretisation results in useful constructions for monads, applicative functors, and arrows. Moreover, by taking advantage of the uniform presentation of the three notions of computation, we introduce a principled approach to the analysis of the relation between them. 1 Introduction When constructing a semantic model of a system or when structuring computer code, there are several notions of computation that one might consider. Monads [37, 38] are the most popular notion, but other notions, such as arrows [22] and, more recently, applicative functors [35] have been gaining widespread acceptance. Each of these notions of computation has particular characteristics that makes them more suitable for some tasks than for others. Nevertheless, there is much to be gained from unifying all three different notions under a single conceptual framework. In this article we show how all three of these notions of computation can be cast as monoids in monoidal categories.
    [Show full text]
  • Tensor Categorical Foundations of Algebraic Geometry
    Mathematik Tensor categorical foundations of algebraic geometry Inaugural-Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Naturwissenschaften im Fachbereich Mathematik und Informatik der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Fakult¨at der Westf¨alischen Wilhelms-Universit¨atM¨unster vorgelegt von Martin Brandenburg aus Berlin { 2014 { Dekan: Prof. Dr. Martin Stein Erster Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Christopher Deninger Zweiter Gutachter: Priv. Doz. Dr. Christian Serp´e Tag der m¨undlichen Pr¨ufung: 10. Juli 2014 Tag der Promotion: 10. Juli 2014 Jano gewidmet. Zusammenfassung Nach den Arbeiten von Saavedra Rivano, Deligne, Lurie, Sch¨appiu.a. lassen sich viele Schemata sowie algebraische Stacks mit ihren Tensorkategorien von quasikoh¨arenten Garben identifizieren. In dieser Arbeit studieren wir Kon- struktionen mit kovollst¨andigenTensorkategorien (bzw. kostetigen Tensorfunk- toren), die in der Regel im Falle von quasikoh¨arenten Garben zu Konstruktio- nen von Schemata (bzw. ihren Morphismen) korrespondieren. Das bedeutet, die gew¨ohnliche lokal-globale algebraische Geometrie zu globalisieren und einen ersten Schritt in Richtung einer 2-algebraischen Geometrie zu machen. Als Beispiele behandeln wir affine Morphismen, projektive Morphismen, Immersio- nen, klassische projektive Einbettungen (Segre, Pl¨ucker, Veronese), Aufblasun- gen, Faserprodukte, klassifizierende Stacks und schließlich Tangentialb¨undel.Es stellt sich heraus, dass sich die universellen Eigenschaften auf der geometrischen Seite oftmals auch auf der Seite der Tensorkategorien finden lassen. Bei der The- orie erweist es sich als n¨utzlich, Grundz¨ugeder kommutativen Algebra in einer beliebigen kovollst¨andigenTensorkategorie zu entwickeln. Abstract Several results by Saavedra Rivano, Deligne, Lurie, Sch¨appiand others shown that many schemes as well as algebraic stacks may be identified with their tensor categories of quasi-coherent sheaves. In this thesis we study constructions of cocomplete tensor categories (resp.
    [Show full text]
  • Notions of Computation As Monoids 3
    ZU064-05-FPR main 19 June 2014 0:23 Under consideration for publication in J. Functional Programming 1 Notions of Computation as Monoids EXEQUIEL RIVAS MAURO JASKELIOFF Centro Internacional Franco Argentino de Ciencias de la Informaci´on y de Sistemas CONICET, Argentina FCEIA, UniversidadNacionalde Rosario, Argentina Abstract There are different notions of computation, the most popular being monads, applicative functors, and arrows. In this article we show that these three notions can be seen as monoids in a monoidal category. We demonstrate that at this level of abstraction one can obtain useful results which can be instantiated to the different notions of computation. In particular, we show how free constructions and Cayley representations for monoids translate into useful constructions for monads, applicative functors, and arrows. Moreover, the uniform presentation of all three notions helps in the analysis of the relation between them. 1 Introduction When constructing a semantic model of a system or when structuring computer code, there are several notions of computation that one might consider. Monads (Moggi, 1989; Moggi, 1991) are the most popular notion, but other notions, such as arrows (Hughes, 2000) and, more recently, applicative functors (McBride & Paterson, 2008) have been gaining widespread acceptance. Each of these notions of computation has particular characteristics that makes them more suitable for some tasks than for others. Nevertheless, there is much to be gained from arXiv:1406.4823v1 [cs.LO] 29 May 2014 unifying all three different notions under a single conceptual framework. In this article we show how all three of these notions of computation can be cast as a monoid in a monoidal category.
    [Show full text]
  • Categorical Homotopy Theory Emily Riehl
    Categorical homotopy theory Emily Riehl To my students, colleagues, friends who inspired this work. what we are doing is finding ways for people to understand and think about mathematics. William P. Thurston “On proof and progress in mathematics” [Thu94] Contents Preface xi Prerequisites xiv Notational Conventions xiv Acknowledgments xv Part I. Derived functors and homotopy (co)limits 1 Chapter 1. All concepts are Kan extensions 3 1.1. Kan extensions 3 1.2. A formula 5 1.3. Pointwise Kan extensions 7 1.4. All concepts 9 1.5. Adjunctions involving simplicial sets 10 Chapter 2. Derived functors via deformations 13 2.1. Homotopical categories and derived functors 13 2.2. Derived functors via deformations 18 2.3. Classical derived functors between abelian categories 22 2.4. Preview of homotopy limits and colimits 23 Chapter 3. Basic concepts of enriched category theory 25 3.1. A first example 26 3.2. The base for enrichment 26 3.3. Enriched categories 27 3.4. Underlying categories of enriched categories 30 3.5. Enriched functors and enriched natural transformations 34 3.6. Simplicial categories 36 3.7. Tensors and cotensors 37 3.8. Simplicial homotopy and simplicial model categories 42 Chapter 4. The unreasonably effective (co)bar construction 45 4.1. Functor tensor products 45 4.2. The bar construction 47 4.3. The cobar construction 48 4.4. Simplicial replacements and colimits 49 4.5. Augmented simplicial objects and extra degeneracies 51 Chapter 5. Homotopy limits and colimits: the theory 55 5.1. The homotopy limit and colimit functors 55 5.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1510.08934V3 [Math.CT] 5 Mar 2018 Granted
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by MPG.PuRe REGULAR PATTERNS, SUBSTITUDES, FEYNMAN CATEGORIES AND OPERADS MICHAEL BATANIN, JOACHIM KOCK, AND MARK WEBER Abstract. We show that the regular patterns of Getzler (2009) form a 2-category biequivalent to the 2-category of substitudes of Day and Street (2003), and that the Feynman categories of Kaufmann and Ward (2013) form a 2-category biequivalent to the 2-category of coloured operads (with invertible 2-cells). These biequivalences induce equivalences between the corresponding categories of algebras. There are three main ingredients in establishing these biequivalences. The first is a strictification theorem (exploiting Power’s General Coherence Result) which allows to reduce to the case where the structure maps are identity-on-objects functors and strict monoidal. Second, we subsume the Getzler and Kaufmann–Ward hereditary axioms into the notion of Guitart exactness, a general condition ensuring compatibility between certain left Kan exten- sions and a given monad, in this case the free-symmetric-monoidal-category monad. Finally we set up a biadjunction between substitudes and what we call pinned symmet- ric monoidal categories, from which the results follow as a consequence of the fact that the hereditary map is precisely the counit of this biadjunction. 0. Introduction and overview of results A proliferation of operad-related structures have seen the light in the past decades, such as modular and cyclic operads, properads, and props. Work of many people has sought to develop categorical formalisms covering all these notions on a common footing, and in particular to describe adjunctions induced by the passage from one type of structure to another as a restriction/Kan extension pair [3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 14, 17, 18, 19, 31, 38].
    [Show full text]
  • Tannaka Duality and Convolution for Duoidal Categories
    Theory and Applications of Categories, Vol. 28, No. 6, 2013, pp. 166{205. TANNAKA DUALITY AND CONVOLUTION FOR DUOIDAL CATEGORIES THOMAS BOOKER AND ROSS STREET Abstract. Given a horizontal monoid M in a duoidal category F , we examine the relationship between bimonoid structures on M and monoidal structures on the category F ∗M of right M-modules which lift the vertical monoidal structure of F . We obtain our result using a variant of the so-called Tannaka adjunction; that is, an adjunction inducing the equivalence which expresses Tannaka duality. The approach taken uti- lizes hom-enriched categories rather than categories on which a monoidal category acts (\actegories"). The requirement of enrichment in F itself demands the existence of some internal homs, leading to the consideration of convolution for duoidal categories. Proving that certain hom-functors are monoidal, and so take monoids to monoids, uni- fies classical convolution in algebra and Day convolution for categories. Hopf bimonoids are defined leading to a lifting of closed structures on F to F ∗M . We introduce the concept of warping monoidal structures and this permits the construction of new duoidal categories. 1. Introduction This paper initiates the development of a general theory of duoidal categories. In addition to providing the requisite definition of a duoidal V -category, various \classical" concepts are reinterpreted and new notions put forth, including: produoidal V -categories, convolu- tion structures and duoidal cocompletion, enrichment in a duoidal V -category, Tannaka duality, lifting closed structures to a category of representations (Hopf opmonoidal mon- ads), and discovering new duoidal categories by \warping" a given monoidal structure.
    [Show full text]
  • Combinatorial Species and Labelled Structures
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2014 Combinatorial Species and Labelled Structures Brent Yorgey University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Computer Sciences Commons, and the Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Yorgey, Brent, "Combinatorial Species and Labelled Structures" (2014). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1512. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1512 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1512 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Combinatorial Species and Labelled Structures Abstract The theory of combinatorial species was developed in the 1980s as part of the mathematical subfield of enumerative combinatorics, unifying and putting on a firmer theoretical basis a collection of techniques centered around generating functions. The theory of algebraic data types was developed, around the same time, in functional programming languages such as Hope and Miranda, and is still used today in languages such as Haskell, the ML family, and Scala. Despite their disparate origins, the two theories have striking similarities. In particular, both constitute algebraic frameworks in which to construct structures of interest. Though the similarity has not gone unnoticed, a link between combinatorial species and algebraic data types has never been systematically explored. This dissertation lays the theoretical groundwork for a precise—and, hopefully, useful—bridge bewteen the two theories. One of the key contributions is to port the theory of species from a classical, untyped set theory to a constructive type theory. This porting process is nontrivial, and involves fundamental issues related to equality and finiteness; the ecentlyr developed homotopy type theory is put to good use formalizing these issues in a satisfactory way.
    [Show full text]
  • Categories Enriched on Two Sides Max Kellya, Anna Labellab, Vincent Schmittc, Ross Streetd;∗ Aschool of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Sydney, Sydney, N.S.W
    Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 168 (2002) 53–98 www.elsevier.com/locate/jpaa Categories enriched on two sides Max Kellya, Anna Labellab, Vincent Schmittc, Ross Streetd;∗ aSchool of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Sydney, Sydney, N.S.W. 2006, Australia bDip. Scienze dell’Informazione, Universita di Roma “La Sapienza”, via Salaria, 113, 00198 Roma, Italy cDepartment of Mathematics & Computer Science, University of Leicester, University Rd, Leicester, UK LE1 7RH dMathematics Department, Macquarie University, Sydney, N.S.W. 2109, Australia Received 12 December 1999; received in revised form 8 February 2001 Communicated by J. AdÃamek Dedicated to Saunders Mac Lane on his 90th birthday Abstract We introduce morphisms V → W of bicategories, more general than the original ones of BÃenabou. When V = 1, such a morphism is a category enriched in the bicategory W. There- fore, these morphisms can be regarded as categories enriched in bicategories “on two sides”. There is a composition of such enriched categories, leading to a tricategory Caten of a simple kind whose objects are bicategories. It follows that a morphism from V to W in Caten induces a 2-functor V-Cat → W-Cat, while an adjunction between V and W in Caten induces one between the 2-categories V-Cat and W-Cat. Left adjoints in Caten are necessarily homomor- phisms in the sense of BÃenabou, while right adjoints are not. Convolution appears as the internal hom for a monoidal structure on Caten. The 2-cells of Caten are functors; modules can also be deÿned, and we examine the structures associated with them. c 2002 Elsevier Science B.V.
    [Show full text]
  • Operads for Algebraic Quantum Field Theory
    Operads for algebraic quantum field theory Marco Benini1,a, Alexander Schenkel2,b and Lukas Woike1,c 1 Fachbereich Mathematik, Universit¨at Hamburg, Bundesstr. 55, 20146 Hamburg, Germany. 2 School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, United Kingdom. Email: a [email protected] b [email protected] c [email protected] September 2017 Abstract We construct a colored operad whose category of algebras is canonically isomorphic to the cat- egory of algebraic quantum field theories. This is achieved by a construction that depends on the choice of a category, whose objects provide the operad colors, equipped with an additional structure that we call an orthogonality relation. This allows us to describe different types of quantum field theories, including theories on a fixed Lorentzian manifold, locally covariant theories and also chiral conformal and Euclidean theories. Moreover, because the colored operad depends functorially on the orthogonal category, we obtain adjunctions between cat- egories of different types of quantum field theories. These include novel and physically very interesting constructions, such as time-slicification and local-to-global extensions of quantum field theories. We compare the latter to Fredenhagen’s universal algebra. Keywords: algebraic quantum field theory, locally covariant quantum field theory, colored operads, change of color adjunctions, Fredenhagen’s universal algebra MSC 2010: 81Txx, 18D50 arXiv:1709.08657v1 [math-ph] 25 Sep 2017 1 Contents 1 Introduction and summary 2 2 Categorical preliminaries 5 2.1 Closed symmetric monoidal categories . .......... 5 2.2 Endsandcoends ................................... 7 2.3 Dayconvolution .................................. ... 9 2.4 Monoids,monadsandalgebras .
    [Show full text]