You're reading the public-facing archive of the Category Theory Zulip server.
To join the server you need an invite. Anybody can get an invite by contacting Matteo Capucci at name dot surname at gmail dot com.
For all things related to this archive refer to the same person.
What are the known notions of n-category which directly subsume tricategories in an evident way?
I don't mean up to Quillen equivalence, I mean any theorem I want to prove about tricategories, I can prove about these n-categories and I'll get the result for tricategories. I think this requirement implies that I only care about "algebraic" models here unless there's an obvious way to "bias" the geometric model to become algebraic.
I think the only one that can do that is a Batanin-Leinster algebra for a suitably chosen globular operad.
Noob question, but why isn't this 'trivially' the case? I was expecting all definitions of weak n-categories to specialize to tri- and bicategories!
Some models of higher cats are very different shapes than ordinary cats, like quasicategories are just geometrically very different looking than the usual categories.
Like say you have a coherence condition in a bi category that asserts that a pasting diagram commutes (two disks with the same boundary are equal)
and at level 3 you want to weaken this to a 3 cell between the disks (two disks are homotopic by a 3 cell)
At this point it may not be even necessary to demand that you have a unique composite of the pasting diagrams on both sides (i.e. two well defined disks) before you have a morphism between them, and indeed demanding to choose a composite is kind of awkward because the composite of a pasting diagram involves choosing arbitrary composition orders for the morphisms involved. instead you could define a 3 cell directly in terms of the pasting diagrams themselves. So the shape of a 3 cell is no longer a map between 2 cells but a more complicated structure relating pasting diagrams of 2 cells.
In quasicategories a 2 cell is a filler for a triangle of 1 cells, a 3 cell is a filler for a tetrahedron whose faces are 2 cells and so on
Or you could define composition so that we don't have a single designated composite but it's only defined by a universal property. I think opetopes do this.
Uhm I see, makes sense
Any correct definition of n-categories has to specialize to tricategories up to "Quillen" equivalence, but Patrick specified that's not the question he's asking now.
(I put it in quotes because I'm not sure anyone has actually written down a Quillen model structure for tricategories.)
Indeed quasicategories also don't have single designated composites, and to the extent the composites even have universal properties it's quite implicit.