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.
Consider a profunctor equipped with the following data:
From this data we can reconstruct a cofunctor as follows:
Is there a nicer way to characterize the above data, and/or to reconstruct any of it given some property of ?
Oh, and you go the other way as follows:
This is interesting! I'll have a think about it and post something later today / this week. Ping me if I forget!
James Deikun said:
- such that each element of any appears as for some unique , .
So I'm a bit confused as to what this bit is trying to say. Could you provide some intuition as to what you mean?
is a morphism from what to what? Below it looks like it is a morphism in , whereas here it appears to be a morphism of ?
You're correct that below it is a morphism in . Here, though, it is ; basically is a unique dependent pair.
The way I came up with it is thinking of the collage of where this is a factorization of sorts (not orthogonal) of morphisms that go from the -part to the -part. As seen below in the "other way" part, the are the lifts of identity morphisms through each , viewed as "heteromorphisms" from to . Because they are lifts of identity morphisms, they are also identity morphisms in . In fact I need to update that part because I messed it up; please check it again.
Anyway the way lifts work is you compose with an "identity" on one side to turn the morphism in B into a heteromorphism (this part does most of the actual work) and then factor through an "identity" on the other side to turn it into a morphism in A.
As for how itself is put together from , this is what it looks like when you compose for a bijective-on-objects functor and a discrete opfibration such that the span represents .
Don't have enough time to look closely enough, but, just in case, this makes me think of [[two-sided discrete fibrations]]. You know about them, I guess?
I do know about them and their relevance to profunctors in general, but I'm not sure where you're specifically seeing them here.
I was not, really. It was just a quick, vague intuition. Sorry if that was unclear, and even more sorry if it was bad intuition!
For comparison I decided to try to describe representable profunctors in a similar way:
A representable profunctor is a profunctor equipped with the following data:
From this data we can reconstruct a functor as follows:
Other way: