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: self-enrichment as terminal coalgebra


view this post on Zulip Asad Saeeduddin (May 03 2021 at 20:03):

I'm a bit out of my depth here so I'm not sure exactly how to ask this question, but is there some way to view a self-enriched category as the carrier of a terminal coalgebra of some functor?

view this post on Zulip Fawzi Hreiki (May 03 2021 at 20:08):

Self enrichment (in the sense of being closed monoidal) is not a universal property to begin with. The same category can be self enriched in different ways.

view this post on Zulip Jade Master (May 04 2021 at 01:13):

I think there's something about an approach to infinity categories of some sort using this idea but I don't remember the details.

view this post on Zulip Matt Earnshaw (May 04 2021 at 13:45):

I guess you are thinking of Weak ∞-categories via terminal coalgebras. The starting point is the idea that the category of strict \infty-categories is the terminal coalgebra of the endofunctor VV-Cat\mathcal{V} \mapsto \mathcal{V}\text{-Cat}

view this post on Zulip Ben MacAdam (May 04 2021 at 16:43):

I’m pretty sure that for a small monoidal category VV, you can regard a coalgebra of the comonad [V,][V,-] as a VV-copresheaf enriched category using the Day convolution tensor product. Maybe the self-enriched one is terminal? There is a very similar result due to Wood that I found in Garner’s “An embedding theorem for tangent categories” (note that they use the monad VV\otimes -, so there is still a bit of an exercise in translating the 1-categorical result relating the monad and comonad in an SMC induced by a monoid object).

view this post on Zulip Ben MacAdam (May 04 2021 at 16:45):

I should say, I’m being very sloppy with the word “comonad”, when it should be some sort of 2-comonad.