Category Theory
Zulip Server
Archive

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.


Stream: learning: questions

Topic: proving some 2-categories are lfp


view this post on Zulip Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Jan 13 2025 at 15:59):

I'm looking for some guidance/check-my-work on how to go on about proving/disproving the following facts:

  1. SMC\cal SMC, the 2-category of symmetric monoidal categories, braided monoidal functors and monoidal natural transformations is LFP
  2. L/X{\cal L}/X is LFP when L\cal L is LFP

For (1) I suspect Theorem 6.9 from Bird's thesis might be useful: it states that a monad of rank α\alpha on a locally α\alpha-presentable (V-)category K\cal K yields a L α\alpha P category of algebras, and generators are given by free algebras over the generators of K\cal K. Now SMC\cal SMC should be such a category: for V=CatV=\bf Cat, there is a (finitary afaik) 2-monad whose strict algebras are SMCs.
Also, intuitively F1SF{\bf 1} \cong \bf S (the [[symmetric groupoid]]) and F2F{\bf 2} (...something else, I don't really care tbh) still pick out objects and maps of an SMC and thus allow to present it like categories are. However I am a bit confused by cardinalities here, since I don't expect every SMC (or every category...) to be a countable directed colimit of objects and maps... or is small directed colimit enough?

Regarding (2)... Bird's thesis linked above proves V-Loc is closed under a bunch of Cat-limits, among which are products and inserters. I wonder if commas can be built out of those, like pullbacks can be built out of products and equalizers. So the comma of F:CDF:C \to D and G:BDG:B \to D would be constructed as the inserter of C×BDC \times B \rightrightarrows D where the top arrow if Fπ1F\pi_1 and the bottom is Gπ2G\pi_2. This seems to work? And to pick out an object XLX \in \cal L I would map out of FinSet\bf FinSet, with the assignment AAX=aAXA \mapsto A \otimes X = \coprod_{a \in A} X, since then L(AX,L)AL(X,L)=FinSet(A,L(X,L)){\cal L}(A \otimes X, L) \cong A \pitchfork {\cal L}(X, L) = {\bf FinSet}(A, {\cal L}(X, L)) though I don't see why L(X,L){\cal L}(X,L) should be finite so maybe I'm messing up something (even assuming XX is finitely presentable doesn't seem to help..?).

view this post on Zulip Nathanael Arkor (Jan 13 2025 at 18:28):

I'm on the move, so can't give more details now, but I recommend checking out Bourke's Accessible aspects of 2-category theory, which is about this kind of question.

view this post on Zulip Kevin Carlson (Jan 13 2025 at 19:21):

You’re talking about braided pseudo monoidal functors, Matteo? Generally you’ll need everything strict to get LFP, because for instance with pseudo, there’s no strict initial object—you get to choose coherences for the pseudo-unique map out of the pseudo-initial guy.

view this post on Zulip Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Jan 14 2025 at 10:01):

Kevin Carlson said:

You’re talking about braided pseudo monoidal functors, Matteo?

Yes

view this post on Zulip Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Jan 14 2025 at 10:18):

Kevin Carlson said:

Generally you’ll need everything strict to get LFP, because for instance with pseudo, there’s no strict initial object—you get to choose coherences for the pseudo-unique map out of the pseudo-initial guy.

Ah thanks, I missed that subtlety in Bird's theorem---it applies to strict algebras and strict morphisms, of course.

view this post on Zulip Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Jan 14 2025 at 10:18):

The reference Nathanael pointed to seems extremely relevant

view this post on Zulip Matteo Capucci (he/him) (Jan 14 2025 at 10:19):

In particular I don't really need locally finitely presentable, accessible + some specific colimits should be enough for my aims

view this post on Zulip Kevin Carlson (Jan 14 2025 at 18:46):

Yes, I was quite impressed to learn that these guys are accessible, a dramatic expansion of the field of play of accessibility \ presentability!

view this post on Zulip Ivan Di Liberti (Jan 15 2025 at 16:55):

Check Examples 6.3.6 and 6.4.6 in my paper with Axel Osmond "Biaccessible and bipresentable 2-categories". That may provide inspiration.