Consider the following three monads:
- the finite distribution monad D, whose algebras are convex sets
- the finite subdistribution monad D≤, where probabilities don't have to sum to 1, obtained from D and from the exception monad via a distributive law. Algebras: "subconvex" sets.
- the unnormalized distribution monad, where "probability distributions" can sum to any nonneggative real number. Algebras: semimodules over the semiring [0,∞).
Each of these categories has a monoidal product, because the associated monad is suitably lax monoidal. The first is the tensor product of convex sets. The last one is the "tensor product" of semimodules over [0,∞), that behaves in many (but not all) respects as the tensor product of modules over rings.
I am now interested in three things:
- Check whether the monoidal product of convex sets and subconvex sets preserves equalizers: this means, each A⊗− should preserve equalizers. Context is not very relevant, this is just a technical requirement to apply a theorem. I think I proved it for semivector spaces, but I lack intuition about the tensor of (sub)convex sets and I can't reproduce the argument.
- Understand what is a comonoid in Cvx and subCvx with respect to their tensor products, and (for example) understand whether the free convex set on a set is a comonoid. I think the answer is yes to all three, for the same reason that D and D≤ being colax monoidal send comonoids (in Set) to comonoids in their EM-category. Am I correct or did I mix up some assumptions/direction of arrows?
- Describe the monoidal product in the category of comodules for a fixed comonoid K in Cvx and subCvx.
Is there any resource where such a problem is already investigated?
The monoidal structure on comodules is dual to the one on modules for monoids: instead of coequalizing two actions, one equalizes two coactions: say X→X⊗C and Y→C⊗Y are comodules over the comonoid C, then their "tensor coproduct" is the equalizer of
X⊗YX⊗y⇉x⊗YX⊗C⊗Y