Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2204.09285

Tight limits and completions from Dedekind-MacNeille to Lambek-Isbell

Abstract

While any infimum in a poset can also be computed as a supremum, and vice versa, categorical limits and colimits do not always approximate each other. If I approach a point from below, and you approach it from above, then we will surely meet if we live in a poset, but we may miss each other in a category. Can we characterize the limits and the colimits that approximate each other, and guarantee that we will meet? Such limits and colimits are called *tight*. Some critically important network applications depend on them. This paper characterizes tight limits and colimits, and describes tight completions, derived by applying the nucleus construction to adjunctions between loose completions. Just as the Dedekind-MacNeille completion of a poset preserves any existing infima and suprema, the tight completion of a category preserves any existing tight limits and colimits and is therefore idempotent.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Dusko Pavlovic, Dominic J. D. Hughes. 2022-04-20. Tight limits and completions from Dedekind-MacNeille to Lambek-Isbell. https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.09285

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Mixing Extriangulated Model Structures

Let $(\mathscr{C},\mathbb{E},\mathfrak{s})$ be a weakly idempotent complete extriangulated category. We generalize Cole's Theorem to construct a mixed admissible model structure $\mathcal{M}_m$ from two compatible admissible model structures relative to proper classes $ξ_1\subseteqξ_2$ of $\mathscr{C}$. We then explicitly characterize the cofibrant objects of $\mathcal{M}_m$. Finally, we apply these results to exact and triangulated categories, recovering and extending recent work on mixed model structures.

math.CT

Characterizing (Co)Free Dagger Categories

For any category, there exists both a free dagger category and a cofree dagger category over it. A natural question to ask is: given a dagger category, how can we tell if it is free or cofree without specifying an external base category? In this paper, we provide characterizations of both free dagger categories and cofree dagger categories via internal dagger category structure. To characterize cofree dagger categories, we use rectangular bands and show that a dagger category is cofree if and only if it is enriched over rectangular bands. For free dagger categories, we define the notion of a zigzag dagger category, and then show that a dagger category is free if and only if it is a zigzag dagger category. We also show that free dagger categories can be characterized as the coalgebras of the induced comonad from the free dagger category adjunction, and similarly that cofree free dagger categories can be characterized as the algebras of the induced monad from the cofree dagger category adjunction.

math.CT

A Counterexample to the Open Question on Object Ideals

We give a counterexample to completeness descent from ideal cotorsion pairs to their objects. A radical-square-zero algebra on the two-cycle gives a finite-dimensional example. The construction is intrinsically non-weakly-idempotent-complete.

math.CT