This page intentionally left blank

Published by
World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
5 Toh Tuck Link, Singapore 596224
USA office: 27 Warren Street, Suite 401-402, Hackensack, NJ 07601
UK office: 57 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London WC2H 9HE

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Grandis, Marco, author.
Title: Category theory and applications : a textbook for beginners / by Marco
Grandis (Università di Genova, Italy).
Description: New Jersey : World Scientific, 2018. | Includes bibliographical
references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2017042912 | ISBN 9789813231061 (hardcover : alk. paper)
Subjects: LCSH: Categories (Mathematics) | Mathematical analysis. | Morphisms
(Mathematics) | Homology theory.
Classification: LCC QA278 .G6985 2018 | DDC 512/.6--dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017042912

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Copyright © 2018 by World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

All rights reserved. This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval
system now known or to be invented, without written permission from the publisher.

For photocopying of material in this volume, please pay a copying fee through the Copyright Clearance
Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. In this case permission to photocopy
is not required from the publisher.

For any available supplementary material, please visit

http://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/10737#t=suppl

Printed in Singapore
 To

Maria Teresa
This page intentionally left blank
 Preface

Category Theory now permeates most of Mathematics, large parts of the-

oretical Computer Science and parts of theoretical Physics. Its unifying
power brings together different branches, and leads to a deeper under-
standing of their roots.
This book is addressed to students and researchers of these fields and can
be used as a text for a first course in Category Theory. It covers its basic
tools, like universal properties, limits, adjoint functors and monads. These
are presented in a concrete way, starting from examples and exercises taken
from elementary Algebra, Lattice Theory and Topology, then developing
the theory together with new exercises and applications.
A reader should have some elementary knowledge of these three subjects,
or at least two of them, in order to be able to follow the main examples,
appreciate the unifying power of the categorical approach, and discover the
subterranean links brought to light and formalised by this perspective.
Applications of Category Theory form a vast and differentiated domain.
This book cannot give a global picture of them, but wants to present the
basic applications and a choice of more advanced ones, based on the in-
terests of the author. References are given for applications in many other
fields.

vii
This page intentionally left blank
 Contents

Introduction page 1
0.1 Categories 1
0.2 Universal properties 2
0.3 Diagrams in a category 3
0.4 Functors 4
0.5 Natural transformations and adjunctions 5
0.6 A brief outline 6
0.7 Classes of categories 7
0.8 Our approach 7
0.9 Literature 8
0.10 Notation 9
0.11 Acknowledgements 9
1 Categories, functors and natural transformations 10
1.1 Categories 10
1.2 Monoids and preordered sets as categories 17
1.3 Monomorphisms and epimorphisms 22
1.4 Functors 26
1.5 Natural transformations and equivalence of categories 33
1.6 Categories of functors, representable functors 41
1.7 A category of Galois connections 45
1.8 Elementary categories of relations and partial mappings 52
2 Limits and colimits 61
2.1 Basic limits and colimits 61
2.2 General limits and completeness 68
2.3 Pullbacks and pushouts 75
2.4 Subobjects and quotients, regular and strong 80
2.5 Factorisation systems 84
2.6 Inductive limits and filtered colimits 89

ix
x Contents
2.7 Universal arrows and free objects 95
2.8 *Other universals 98
3 Adjunctions and monads 103
3.1 Adjoint functors 103
3.2 Properties of adjunctions 110
3.3 Comma categories 115
3.4 Monoidal categories and exponentials 120
3.5 The Adjoint Functor Theorem 128
3.6 Monads and algebras 131
3.7 Exercises and complements on monads 139
3.8 *Idempotent monads and idempotent adjunctions 141
4 Applications in Algebra 149
4.1 Free algebraic structures 149
4.2 Regular and Barr-exact categories 154
4.3 Varieties of algebras 156
4.4 Limits and free algebras 162
4.5 Relations for regular categories 166
5 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology 172
5.1 Adjoints and limits in Topology 173
5.2 Cylinder, cocylinder and homotopies 181
5.3 Simplicial sets 190
5.4 Cubical sets 196
5.5 Hints at Directed Algebraic Topology 202
6 Applications in Homological Algebra 208
6.1 Kernels and cokernels 209
6.2 Categories of lattices in Homological Algebra 212
6.3 Puppe-exact categories 217
6.4 Additive and abelian categories 225
6.5 Projective p-exact categories and projective spaces 231
6.6 Relations and induction for p-exact categories 237
7 Hints at higher dimensional category theory 246
7.1 From categories to 2-categories and bicategories 247
7.2 Double categories 254
7.3 Enriched, internal and ordered categories 262
7.4 *Double categories of lattices in Homological Algebra 269
7.5 *Double categories of relations in Homological Algebra 273
7.6 *Factorisation systems as pseudo algebras for 2-monads 278
References 281
Index 287
 Introduction

0.1 Categories

Category Theory originated in an article of Eilenberg and Mac Lane [EiM],

published in 1945. It has now developed into a branch of mathematics, with
its own internal dynamics. Here we want to present its elementary part,
and its strong links with the origins in Algebra and Topology.
Many mathematical theories deal with a certain kind of mathematical
objects, like groups, or ordered sets, or topological spaces, etc. Each kind
has its own privileged mappings, that preserve the structure in some sense,
like homomorphisms of groups, or order-preserving mappings, or continu-
ous mappings.
We have thus the ‘category’ Gp of groups and their homomorphisms,
Ord of ordered sets and monotone mappings, Top of topological spaces and
continuous mappings, and so on. More elementarily, we have the category
Set of sets and their mappings.
In all these instances, the privileged mappings are called morphisms or
arrows of the category; an arrow from the object X to the object Y is
written as f : X → Y .
Two consecutive morphisms, say f : X → Y and g : Y → Z, can be
composed giving a morphism gf : X → Z; this partial composition law is
‘as regular as it can be’, which means that it is associative (when legitimate)
and has a partial identity idX : X → X (written also as 1X ) for every
object, which acts as a unit for every legitimate composition.
‘Concrete categories’ are often associated with mathematical structures,
in this way; but we shall see that categories are not limited to these in-
stances, by far.

1
2 Introduction
0.2 Universal properties
In these categories (and many ‘similar’ ones) we have cartesian products,
constructed by forming the cartesian product of the underlying sets and
putting on it the ‘natural’ structure of the kind we are considering, be it
of algebraic character, or an ordering, or a topology, or something else.
All these procedures can be unified, so that we can better understand
what we are doing: we have a family (Xi )i∈I of objects of a category,
indexed by a set I, and we want to find an object X equipped with a
family of morphisms pi : X → Xi (i ∈ I), called cartesian projections,
which satisfies the following universal property:
- for every object Y and every family of morphisms fi : Y → Xi (i ∈ I) in
the given category
f
Y ❋❴ ❴ ❴/ X
❋❋
❋❋ pi (0.1)
fi ❋❋" 
Xi

there exists precisely one morphism f : Y → X such that pi f = fi , for all

i ∈ I.
We shall see that this property determines the solution up to isomor-
phism, i.e. an invertible morphism of the given category. In fact, the proof
is quite easy and some hints can be useful as of now: given two solu-
tions (X, (pi )), (Y, (qi )), we can determine two morphisms f : X → Y and
g : Y → X and prove that their composites coincide with the identities of
X and Y .
(Let us remark, incidentally, that the product topology is much less
obvious than the other product structures we have mentioned; the universal
property tells us that it is indeed the ‘right’ choice.)
These facts bring to light a crucial aspect: a categorical definition (as
the previous one) is based on morphisms and their composition, while the
objects only step in as domains and codomains of arrows. If we want to
understand what unifies the product of a family (Xi ) of sets, or groups, or
ordered sets, or topological spaces we should forget the nature of the ob-
jects, and think of the family of cartesian projections pi : X → Xi , together
with the previous property. Then – in each category we are interested in –
we come back to the objects in order to prove that a solution exists (and
also to fix a particular solution, when this can be useful).
From a structural point of view, a category only ‘knows’ its objects by
their morphisms and composition.
This is even more evident if we think of another procedure, which in
 0.3 Diagrams in a category 3
category theory is called a ‘sum’, or ‘coproduct’. We start again from a
family (Xi )i∈I of objects; its (categorical) sum is an object X equipped
with a family of morphisms ui : Xi → X (i ∈ I), called injections, which
satisfies the following universal property:
- for every object Y and every family of morphisms fi : Xi → Y (i ∈ I) in
the given category
f
XO ❴ ❴ ❴/ < Y
①①
ui ①①① (0.2)
①① fi
Xi

there exists precisely one morphism f : X → Y such that f ui = fi , for all

i ∈ I.
Again, the solution is determined up to isomorphism; its existence de-
pends on the category.
The sum of a family of objects is easy to construct in the category Set
of sets, by a disjoint union. We have similar solutions in Ord and Top. But
in Gp the categorical sum of a family of groups is called the free product
of the family; its construction is rather complex, and its underlying set
has little to do with the disjoint union of the sets underlying the groups.
The categorical approach highlights the fact that we are ‘solving the same
problem’ and – finally – makes clear what we are doing.
It is also important to note that the categorical definitions of product
and coproduct are dual to each other: each of them is obtained from the
other by reversing all arrows and compositions. This only makes sense –
in general – within category theory, because the dual of a given category,
formed by reversing its arrows and partial composition law, is a formal
construction: the dual of a category of structured sets and mappings is
not a category of the same kind (even though, in certain cases, it may
essentially be, as a result of some duality theorem).

0.3 Diagrams in a category

In a category the objects and morphisms that we are considering are often
represented by vertices and arrows in a diagram, as above in (0.1) and (0.2),
to make evident their relationship and which compositions are legitimate.
As an important property, satisfied in the previous cases, we say that a
diagram in a category is commutative if:
(i) whenever we have two ‘paths’ of consecutive arrows, from a certain
object to another, the two composed morphisms are the same,
4 Introduction
(ii) whenever we have a ‘loop’ of consecutive arrows, from an object to
itself, then the composed morphism is the identity of that object.
Let us consider some other instances
f f
X❊ / Y A❊ / B
❊❊ ❊❊ u
❊❊ / Y (0.3)
h
❊❊ g h d ❊❊
❊"  k X o
v
"  
Z C / D
g

The first diagram above is commutative if and only if gf = h. For the

second, commutativity means that kf = d = gh. For the third, it means
that vu = idX and uv = idY ; let us note that in this case the morphisms
u and v are inverse to each other, and each of them is an isomorphism of
our category.
Formal definitions of these notions, diagrams and commutative diagrams,
will be given in 1.4.9.

0.4 Functors
It becomes now possible to view on the same level, so to say, mathematical
theories of different branches, and formalise their links. A well-behaved
mapping between categories is called a functor.
Among the simplest examples there are the forgetful functors, that forget
the structure (or part of it), like:

Gp → Set, Ord → Set, Top → Set, (0.4)

For instance, U : Gp → Set takes a group G to its underlying set U (G),

and a homomorphism f : G → G′ to its underlying mapping U (f ) : U (G) →
U (G′ ). The whole procedure is well-behaved, in the sense that it preserves
composition and identities.
These functors are so obvious that they are often overlooked, in mathe-
matics; but here it will be important to keep trace of them. In particular,
we shall see that they often determine other functors ‘backwards’, which are
much less obvious: like the free-group functor F : Set → Gp, ‘left adjoint’
to U : Gp → Set (of which more will be said below).
In another range of examples, a reader with some knowledge of Algebraic
Topology will know that the core of this discipline is constructing functors
from a category of topological spaces to a category of algebraic structures,
and using them to reduce topological problems to simpler algebraic ones.
We have thus the sequence of singular homology functors, with values in
 0.5 Natural transformations and adjunctions 5
the category of abelian groups

Hn : Top → Ab (n > 0), (0.5)

and the fundamental group functor π1 : Top• → Gp, defined on the category
of pointed topological spaces and pointed continuous mappings.

0.5 Natural transformations and adjunctions

The third basic element of category theory is a natural transformation
ϕ : F → G between two functors F, G : C → D with the same domain C
and the same codomain D. We also write ϕ : F → G : C → D.
This simply amounts to a family of morphisms of D, indexed by the
objects X of C
ϕX : F (X) → G(X), (0.6)

under a condition of ‘naturality’ which will be made explicit in the text.

Here we just give an example, based on groups and free groups (but
the reader can replace groups with semigroups, or abelian groups, or R-
modules, or any algebraic structure defined by ‘equational axioms’). We
have mentioned in the previous point the forgetful functor U : Gp → Set
and the free-group functor F : Set → Gp, that turns a set X into the free
group generated by X.
The insertion of X in F (X), as its basis, is a canonical mapping in Set

ηX : X → U (F (X)). (0.7)

All of them give a natural transformation

η : id → U F : Set → Set, (0.8)

where id is the identity functor of the category Set (turning objects and
arrows into themselves) and U F : Set → Set is the composed functor (turn-
ing each set into the underlying set of the free group on it). This natural
transformation is essential in linking the functors U, F and making the
functor F : Set → Gp left adjoint to U : Gp → Set.
The link is represented by the universal property of the insertion of the
basis, namely the fact that every mapping f : X → U (G) with values in a
group G (more precisely in its underlying set) can be uniquely extended to
a homomorphism g : F (X) → G. Formally:
- for every morphism f : X → U (G) in Set, there exists precisely one mor-
phism g : F (X) → G in Gp such that U (g).ηX = f .
6 Introduction
One can reformulate this link in an equivalent presentation of the ad-
junction, which may be more familiar to the reader: there is a (natural)
bijective correspondence

ϕXG : Gp(F (X), G) → Set(X, U (G)),

(0.9)
ϕXG (g) = U (g).ηX ,

between the set of group-homomorphisms F (X) → G and the set of map-

pings X → U (G).
We shall see many constructions of free algebraic structures, or more gen-
erally of left (or right) adjoints of given functors (in particular in Chapters
3, 4 and 6). Many of them are ‘real constructions’, which give a good idea
of the backward procedure; others are so complicated that one can doubt
of their constructive character. In such cases, one can prefer to prove the
existence of the adjoint, by the Adjoint Functor Theorem (in Section 3.5)
or some other general statement: then the result is determined up to iso-
morphism, and its universal property allows its use. Much in the same
way as we can define a real function as the solution of a certain differential
equation with initial data, as soon as we know that the solution exists and
is unique.

0.6 A brief outline

The first chapter deals with the basic tools: categories, functors and natural
transformations. Ordered sets can be seen as categories of a special kind;
adjunctions in this particular case are well known, as ‘covariant Galois
connections’; studying them (in Section 1.7) will also serve as an elementary
introduction to general adjunctions.
Chapter 2 introduces the limits in a category (including products and
the classical projective limits) and their dual notion, the colimits (including
sums and the classical inductive limits); universal arrows with respect to a
functor are a general formulation of universal properties (in Section 2.7).
Chapter 3 studies the crucial notion of adjunction: many important con-
structions in mathematics can be described as an adjoint functor of some
obvious functor: from free algebraic structures to Stone-Čech compactifi-
cation, metric completion etc. We also explore the related notion of monad
and its algebras, which investigates when a category can be thought of as
a category of ‘algebras’ over another category, in a very wide sense.
The next three chapters explore applications of category theory in Alge-
bra, Topology and Algebraic Topology, Homological Algebra.
Finally, Chapter 7 is a brief introduction to higher dimensional category
 0.7 Classes of categories 7
theory, with some of its applications. The starting point is the fact that
‘small’ categories, functors and natural transformations – with all their
composition laws – form a ‘two-dimensional category’. Another aspect of
the power of category theory is that it is able to ‘study itself’.

0.7 Classes of categories

It is a common feature of Mathematics to look for the natural framework
where certain properties should be studied: for instance, the properties of
ordinary polynomials with real coefficients are usually examined in general
polynomial rings, or in more general algebras. Besides yielding more gen-
eral results, the natural framework gives a deeper comprehension of what
we are studying.
Category theory makes a further step in this sense. For instance, cat-
egories of modules are certainly important, but – since Buchsbaum’s Ap-
pendix [Bu2] and Grothendieck’s paper [Gt] in the 1950’s – a consistent
part of Homological Algebra finds its natural framework in abelian cate-
gories and their generalisations (see Chapter 6). Similarly, the categories
of structured sets can be viewed as particular concrete categories (defined
in 1.4.8), and the categories of equational algebras as particular monadic
categories (see Sections 3.6 and 4.4).
In other words, when studying certain ‘classes’ of categories, we may
(or perhaps had better) look for a structural definition including this class,
rather than some general way of constructing the important examples we
want to study.
This leads again to considering categories of (small) categories, and to
higher dimensional category theory.

0.8 Our approach

Notions will be presented in a concrete way, starting from examples taken
from elementary mathematical theories. Then their theory is developed,
with new examples and many exercises; the latter are generally endowed
with a solution, or a partial solution, or suitable hints. Three chapters are
devoted to applications.
We hope that a beginner can get, from these examples and applications,
a concrete grasp of a theory which might risk of being quite abstract.
Many examples and applications are standard. But some of them may
come out as unexpected, and hopefully intriguing, like those devoted to
distributive lattices in 1.2.7, or to chains of adjunctions in 1.7.7 and 3.2.8,
or to networks in 1.8.9.
8 Introduction
The author’s comments on some possibly unclear or controversial points
are expressed:
- in 1.1.5, on the relationship between mathematical structures and cate-
gories,
- in 1.1.6 and 3.6.1, on varieties of algebras and artificial exclusions,
- in 1.5.9, 3.3.7 and 3.6.6, on favouring notions invariant up to categorical
equivalence,
- in the introduction to Chapter 7, on the relationship between (strict and
weak) 2-categories and double categories,
- in 7.3.3, about the ‘naive view’ of enrichment of a category over a monoidal
category.
The foundational setting we use is based on standard set theory, assum-
ing the existence of Grothendieck universes to formalise some necessary
‘smallness’ conditions. This aspect, presented in 1.1.3, will be mostly left
as understood.

0.9 Literature
For further study of general category theory there are excellent texts, like
Mac Lane [M4], Borceux [Bo1, Bo2, Bo3], Adámek, Herrlich and Strecker
[AHS], Freyd and Scedrov [FrS]. References for higher dimensional category
theory can be found in Chapter 7.
Sheaf categories and toposes, which are not treated here, are presented
in Mac Lane–Moerdijk [MaM] and [Bo3], with extensive references to more
advanced texts like Johnstone’s [Jo3, Jo4]. A peculiar, conceptual intro-
duction to category theory can be found in Lawvere and Schanuel [LwS].
As already warned, the range of applications of category theory is much
wider than what will be seen here, and can be presented in an elementary
text.
For instance, we only explore a few categorical properties of topologi-
cal vector spaces and Banach spaces, for which the reader is referred to
Semadeni’s book [Se]. The applications in Homological Algebra examined
here follow a particular approach, discussed in Chapter 6, where other ap-
proaches are cited. Some old and new applications of categories to the
theory of networks are briefly presented in 1.8.9. Morita equivalence is
only mentioned, in 1.5.6.
We do not examine the deep relationship among category theory, Logic
and theoretical Computer Science, which is explored in texts like Makkai
and Reyes [MkR], Lambek and Scott [LaS], Barr and Wells [BarW], Crole
 0.10 Notation 9
[Cr], nor the growing influence of categories and higher dimensional cate-
gories in parts of theoretical Physics, for which one can see Baez and Lauda
[BaL].
Differential Geometry is studied in a ‘synthetic’ way in Kock [Ko], mak-
ing formal use of infinitesimals. A new book by Bunge, Gago and San Luis
[BunGS] extends this subject to Synthetic Differential Topology. Different
forms of Galois Theory are explored in Borceux and Janelidze [BoJ]. A
categorical view of Set Theory can be found in Lawvere and Rosebrugh
[LwR].
The relationship of category theory with Algebraic Geometry is perhaps
too complex to be simply referred to.

0.10 Notation
The symbol ⊂ denotes weak inclusion.
As usual, the symbols N, Z, Q, R, C denote the sets of natural, integral,
rational, real or complex numbers; N∗ is the subset of the positive integers.
Open and semi-open real intervals are denoted as ]a, b[, [a, b[, etc. This
notation, loosely taken from Bourbaki, has the advantage of distinguishing
the interval ]a, b[ from the pair (a, b).
A singleton set is often written as {∗}. The equivalence class of an
element x, with respect to an assigned equivalence relation, is generally
written as [x]. A bullet in a diagram stands for an arbitrary object.
Categories, 2-categories and bicategories are generally denoted as A, B...;
strict or weak double categories as A, B...
A section, subsection or part marked with * deals with some topic out of
the main line of this book, and is often addressed to readers having some
knowledge of the subject.

0.11 Acknowledgements
Many points have been discussed with my colleagues and friends: in par-
ticular with Bob Paré and George Janelidze, during a long collaboration.
 1
Categories, functors and natural
transformations

Categories were introduced by Eilenberg and Mac Lane [EiM] in 1945,

together with the other basic terms of category theory.

1.1 Categories
We start by considering concrete categories, associated with mathematical
structures. But categories are not restricted to these instances, and the
theory must be developed in a general way.
Given a mathematical discipline, it may not be obvious which category or
categories are best suited for its study. This questionable point is discussed
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

in 1.1.5, 1.1.6.

1.1.1 Some examples

Loosely speaking, before giving a precise definition, a category C consists of
objects and morphisms together with a (partial) composition law: given two
‘consecutive’ morphisms f : X → Y and g : Y → Z we have a composed
morphism gf : X → Z. This partial operation is associative (whenever
composition is legitimate) and every object X has an identity, written as
idX : X → X or 1X , which acts as a unit for legitimate compositions.
The prime example is the category Set of sets (and mappings), where:
- an object is a set,
- the morphisms f : X → Y between two given sets X and Y are the
(set-theoretical) mappings from X to Y ,
- the composition law is the usual composition of mappings, where (gf )(x)
= g(f (x)).
The following categories of structured sets and structure-preserving map-
pings (with the usual composition) will often be used and analysed:
 1.1 Categories 11
- the category Top of topological spaces (and continuous mappings),
- the category Hsd of Hausdorff spaces (and continuous mappings),
- the category Gp of groups (and their homomorphisms),
- the category Ab of abelian groups (and homomorphisms),
- the category Mon of monoids, i.e. unitary semigroups (and homomor-
phisms),
- the category Abm of abelian monoids (and homomorphisms),
- the category Rng of rings, understood to be associative and unitary (and
homomorphisms),
- the category CRng of commutative rings (and homomorphisms),
- the category R Mod of left modules on a fixed unitary ring R (and homo-
morphisms),
- the category K Vct ( = K Mod) of vector spaces on a commutative field
K (and homomorphisms),
- the category RAlg of unitary algebras on a fixed commutative unitary ring
R (and homomorphisms),
- the category Ord of ordered sets (and monotone mappings),
- the category pOrd of preordered sets (and monotone mappings),
- the category Set• of pointed sets (and pointed mappings),
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

- the category Top• of pointed topological spaces (and pointed continuous

mappings),
- the category Ban of Banach spaces and continuous linear mappings.
- the category Ban1 of Banach spaces and linear weak contractions (with
norm 6 1).
A homomorphism of a ‘unitary structure’, like a monoid or a unitary
ring, is always assumed to preserve units.
For Set• we recall that a pointed set is a pair (X, x0 ) consisting of a set X
and a base-element x0 ∈ X, while a pointed mapping f : (X, x0 ) → (Y, y0 )
is a mapping f : X → Y such that f (x0 ) = y0 .
Similarly, a pointed topological space (X, x0 ) is a space with a base-point,
and a pointed map f : (X, x0 ) → (Y, y0 ) is a continuous mapping from X
to Y such that f (x0 ) = y0 . The reader may know that the category Top•
is important in Algebraic Topology: for instance, the fundamental group
π1 (X, x0 ) is defined for a pointed topological space.
For the categories Ban and Ban1 it is understood that we have chosen
either the real or the complex field; when using both one can write RBan
and CBan.
 12 Categories, functors and natural transformations
When a category is named after its objects alone (e.g. the ‘category of
groups’), this means that the morphisms are understood to be the obvious
ones (in this case the homomorphisms of groups), with the obvious com-
position law. Different categories with the same objects are given different
names, like Ban and Ban1 above.

1.1.2 Definition
A category C consists of the following data:
(a) a set ObC, whose elements are called objects of C,
(b) for every pair X, Y of objects, a set C(X, Y ) (called a hom-set) whose
elements are called morphisms (or maps, or arrows) of C from X to Y and
denoted as f : X → Y ,
(c) for every triple X, Y, Z of objects of C, a mapping of composition

C(X, Y ) × C(Y, Z) → C(X, Z), (f, g) 7→ gf,

where gf is also written as g.f .
These data must satisfy the following axioms.
(i) Associativity. Given three consecutive arrows, f : X → Y , g : Y → Z
and h : Z → W , one has: h(gf ) = (hg)f .
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(ii) Identities. Given an object X, there exists an endomap e : X → X

which acts as an identity whenever composition makes sense; in other words
if f : X ′ → X and g : X → X ′′ , one has: ef = f and ge = g. One shows,
in the usual way, that e is determined by X; it is called the identity of X
and written as 1X or idX.
We generally assume that the following condition is also satisfied:
(iii) Separation. For all X, X ′ , Y, Y ′ objects of C, if C(X, Y )∩C(X ′ , Y ′ ) 6= ∅
then X = X ′ and Y = Y ′ .
Therefore a map f : X → Y has a well-determined domain and codomain
Dom (f ) = X, Cod (f ) = Y.

Concretely, when constructing a category, one can forget about condition

(iii), since one can always satisfy it by redefining a morphism fˆ: X → Y as
a triple (X, Y, f ) where f is a morphism from X to Y in the original sense
(possibly not satisfying the Separation axiom).
MorC denotes the set of all the morphisms of C, i.e. the disjoint union of
its hom-sets. Two morphisms f, g are said to be parallel when they have
the same domain and the same codomain.
 1.1 Categories 13
If C is a category, the opposite (or dual) category, written as Cop , has the
same objects as C, reversed arrows and reversed composition

Cop (X, Y ) = C(Y, X),

(1.1)
g ∗ f = f g, idop (X) = idX.

Every topic of category theory has a dual instance, which comes from the
opposite category (or categories). A dual notion is generally distinguished
by the prefix ‘co-’.
A set X can be viewed as a discrete category: its objects are the elements
of X, and the only arrows are their (formal) identities; here X op = X.
As usual in category theory, the term graph will be used to denote a
simplified structure, with objects (or vertices) and morphisms (or arrows)
f : x → y, but no assigned composition nor identities. (This is called a
directed multigraph in graph theory, or also a quiver). A morphism of
graphs preserves objects, arrows, domain and codomain. Every category
has an underlying graph.

1.1.3 Small and large categories

We shall not insist on set-theoretical foundations. Yet some caution is
necessary, to avoid speaking of ‘the set of all sets’, or requiring of a category
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

properties of completeness that are ‘too large for its size’ (as we shall see
in 2.2.3).
We assume the existence of a (Grothendieck) universe U, which is fixed
throughout; its axioms – recalled below, in 1.1.7 – say that we can perform
inside it the usual operations of set theory. Its elements are called small
sets (or U-small sets, if necessary).
A category is understood to have objects and arrows belonging to this
universe, and is said to be small if its set of morphisms belongs to U, large
if it does not (and is just a subset of U). As a consequence, in a small
category the set of objects (which is in bijective correspondence with the
set of identities) also belongs to U. A category C is said to have small
hom-sets if all its sets C(X, Y ) are small; in this case C is small if and only
if its set of objects is.
The categories of structured sets that we consider are generally large
U-categories, like the category Set of small sets (and mappings), or Top of
small topological spaces (and continuous mappings), or Ab of small abelian
groups (and homomorphisms); in such cases, the term ‘small’ (referred to
these structured sets) will be generally understood, and we speak – as usual
– of the ‘category of sets’, and so on.
 14 Categories, functors and natural transformations
*In fact one often needs a hierarchy of universes. For instance, Cat will
denote the category of small categories and functors, introduced in 1.4.1. In
order to view the (large) categories Set, Top, Ab, etc. in a similar structure
we should assume the existence of a second universe V, with U ∈ V, and
use the category CatV (also written as CAT) of V-small categories. In a
more complex situation one may need a longer chain of universes. Most of
the time these aspects will be left understood.*

1.1.4 Isomorphisms and groupoids

In a category C a morphism f : X → Y is said to be invertible, or an
isomorphism, if it has an inverse, i.e. a morphism g : Y → X such that
gf = 1X and f g = 1Y . The latter is uniquely determined; it is called the
inverse of f and written as f −1 .
In the categories listed in 1.1.1 this definition gives the usual isomor-
phisms of the various structures – called ‘homeomorphisms’ in the case of
topological spaces.
The isomorphism relation X ∼ = Y between objects of C (meaning that
there exists an isomorphism X → Y ) is an equivalence relation.
A groupoid is a category where every map is invertible; it is interesting
to recall that this structure was introduced before categories, by H. Brandt
in 1927 [Bra].
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The fundamental groupoid of a space X is an important structure, that

contains all the fundamental groups π1 (X, x) for x ∈ X. It will be reviewed
in 5.2.9.

1.1.5 A digression on mathematical structures and categories

When studying a mathematical structure with the help of category theory,
it is crucial to choose the ‘right’ kind of structure and the ‘right’ kind of
morphisms, so that the result is sufficiently general and ‘natural’ to have
good properties with respect to the goals of our study – even if we are
interested in more particular situations.
(a) A first point to be verified is that the isomorphisms of the category (i.e.
its invertible arrows) preserve the structure we are interested in, or we risk
of studying something different from our purpose.
As a trivial example, the category T of topological spaces and all map-
pings between them has little to do with topology: an isomorphism of T
is any bijection between topological spaces. Indeed T is ‘equivalent’ to the
category of sets (as we shall see in 1.5.5), and is a ‘deformed’ way of looking
at the latter.
 1.1 Categories 15
Less trivially, the category M of metric spaces and continuous mappings
misses crucial properties of metric spaces, since its invertible morphisms
need not preserve completeness: e.g. the real line is homeomorphic to
any non-empty open interval. In fact, M is equivalent to the category
of metrisable topological spaces and continuous mappings (by 1.5.5, again),
and should be replaced with the latter.
A ‘reasonable’ category of metric spaces should be based on Lipschitz
maps, or – more particularly – on weak contractions, so that its isomor-
phisms (bi-Lipschitz or isometric bijections, respectively) do preserve met-
ric properties, like being complete or bounded (see 5.1.7).

(b) Other points will become clearer below. For instance, the category Top
of topological spaces and continuous mappings is a classical framework for
studying Topology. Among its good properties there is the fact that all
‘categorical products’ and ‘categorical sums’ (studied in Section 2.1, but
already sketched in the Introduction) exist, and are computed as in Set,
then equipped with a suitable topology determined by the structural maps.
(More generally, this is true of all limits and colimits, and – as we shall
see – is a consequence of the fact that the forgetful functor Top → Set has a
left and a right adjoint, corresponding to discrete and chaotic topologies).
Hausdorff spaces are certainly important, but it is often better to view
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

them in Top, as their category Hsd is less well behaved: colimits exist,
but are not computed as in Set, and the simplest way to compute them
– generally – is to take the colimit in Top and ‘make it Hausdorff’ (see
5.1.4(b)).

*(c) Many category theorists would agree with Mac Lane, saying that even
Top is not sufficiently good ([M4], Section VII.8), because it is not a carte-
sian closed category (see 5.1.1), and prefer – for instance – the category of
compactly generated Hausdorff spaces (see 2.6.3(d)). However, researchers
interested in Homotopy Theory and Algebraic Topology might be satis-
fied with the fact that the standard interval (with its cartesian powers) is
exponentiable in Top, as we shall exploit in Section 5.2.
We shall also hint, in 5.1.8, at another approach called ‘pointless topol-
ogy’, which is based on the category of locales and is favoured in topos
theory.

(d) Finally we remark that artificial exclusions ‘most of the time’ give
categories of poor properties, like the category of non-abelian groups, or
non-empty semigroups. The latter case needs some further comment.
 16 Categories, functors and natural transformations
1.1.6 Variety of algebras and horror vacui
In Universal Algebra, a ‘variety of algebras’ includes all the algebraic struc-
tures of a given signature (i.e. with a certain family of operations, of as-
signed arity), that satisfy a given set of equational axioms (or universally
quantified identities): e.g. all groups, or all rings; but not all fields, be-
cause multiplicative inverses only exist for non-zero elements, and cannot
be given by a ‘general’ unary operation satisfying some universal identities.
Here a variety of algebras will mean a category of objects defined in this
way, with their homomorphisms (as made precise in Section 4.3). We do
not follow the convention that the underlying set should be non empty; a
convention which has unlucky consequences for any theory without 0-ary
operations, like semigroups: for instance two subalgebras of an algebra may
not have a meet (as subalgebras).
This convention is rather usual in Universal Algebra (cf. Grätzer [Gr1]),
but is not followed in Cohn’s book [Coh]. (Of course, generally speaking,
results can be easily translated from one setting to the other.)
*For a reader with some knowledge of limits and colimits, dealt with in
Chapter 2, we can add that a variety of algebras (in the present sense) has
all limits and colimits, while the category of non-empty semigroups lacks
certain limits (like equalisers and pullbacks) and certain colimits (as an
initial object), precisely because we have artificially taken out a solution.*
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Other comments in this sense can be found in 3.6.1; but there is also a
comment in the opposite sense, in 5.3.9, for categories used in an ‘auxiliary
way’.

1.1.7 *Grothendieck universes

For the interested reader, we recall the definition of a universe as given
in [M4], Section I.6. It is a set U satisfying the following (redundant)
properties:
(i) x ∈ u ∈ U implies x ∈ U,
(ii) u, v ∈ U implies that {u, v}, (u, v) and u×v belong to U,
S
(iii) x ∈ U implies that Px and x belong to U,
(iv) the set N of finite ordinals belongs to U,
(v) if f : x → y is a surjective mapping with x ∈ U and y ⊂ U, then y ∈ U.
S
Here Px is the set of subsets of x and x = {y | y ∈ z for some z ∈ x}.
 1.2 Monoids and preordered sets as categories 17
1.2 Monoids and preordered sets as categories
Monoids and preordered sets can be viewed as categories of two simple
kinds, providing intuition and models for some aspects of category theory.
We also review here some basic facts about the theory of lattices, to
be used later on. A reader interested in this beautiful domain will find
pleasure in browsing, or studying, the classical texts of Birkhoff and Grätzer
[Bi, Gr2].

1.2.1 Monoids and categories

As we have seen, monoids (i.e. semigroups with unit) and their homomor-
phisms form a category, which we write as Mon. But we deal here with a
different aspect.
A single monoid M can (and will often) be viewed as a category with
one formal object ∗. The morphisms x : ∗ → ∗ are the elements of M ,
composed by the multiplication xy of the monoid, with identity id(∗) = 1,
the unit of the monoid. If M is a group, the associated category is a
groupoid.
On the other hand, in every category C, the endomorphisms X → X of
any object form a (possibly large) monoid, under the composition law

End(X) = C(X, X), (1.2)

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

and the invertible ones form the group Aut(X) of automorphisms of X.

In this way a monoid is essentially the same as a category on a single
object, while a category can be thought to be a ‘multi-object generalisation’
of a monoid. Groups and groupoids have a similar relationship.
The theory of regular, orthodox and inverse semigroups (see [ClP, Ho,
Law]) has a strong interplay with the categories of relations and their ap-
plications in Homological Algebra, which is investigated in [G9].

1.2.2 Preordered and ordered sets

We shall use the following terminology for orderings. A preorder relation
x ≺ x′ is reflexive and transitive. An order relation, generally written as
x 6 x′ , is also anti-symmetric: if x 6 x′ 6 x then x = x′ .
The category of ordered sets and increasing mappings (the order preserv-
ing ones, also called monotone) will be written as Ord, while we write as
pOrd the category of preordered sets and monotone mappings.
An order relation is said to be total if for all x, x′ we have x 6 x′ or
′
x 6 x.
 18 Categories, functors and natural transformations
(An ordered set is often called a ‘partially ordered set’, abbreviated to
‘poset’, to stress that the ordering is not assumed to be total. Accordingly,
the reader can find the notation Pos for the category Ord.)
A preordered set X has an associated equivalence relation x ∼ x′ defined
by the conjunction: x ≺ x′ and x′ ≺ x. The quotient X/∼ has an induced
order: [x] 6 [x′ ] if x ≺ x′ .
If X is a preordered set, X op is the opposite one (with reversed preorder).
If a ∈ X, the symbols ↓ a and ↑ a denote the downward or upward closed
subsets of X generated by the element a

↓ a = {x ∈ X | x ≺ a}, ↑ a = {x ∈ X | a ≺ x}. (1.3)

It will be important to note that every hom-set Ord(X, Y ) is canonically

ordered by the pointwise order relation, defined as follows for f, g : X → Y

f 6g if for all x ∈ X we have f (x) 6 g(x) in Y. (1.4)

Similarly, every hom-set pOrd(X, Y ) has a canonical preorder f ≺ g.

In a preordered set X, the infimum (or meet) of a subset A, written
as infA or ∧A, is defined as the greatest element of X smaller than all
the elements of A, and is determined up to the associated equivalence
relation (provided it exists). Dually, the supremum (or join) supA = ∨A
is the infimum of A in X op . In an ordered set these results are uniquely
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

determined – if extant.

1.2.3 Preorders and categories

A preordered set X will often be viewed as a category, where the objects
are the elements of X and the set X(x, x′ ) contains precisely one arrow if
x ≺ x′ , which can be written as (x, x′ ) : x → x′ , and no arrow otherwise.
Composition and units are (necessarily) as follows

(x′ , x′′ ).(x, x′ ) = (x, x′′ ), id(x) = (x, x).

In this way a preordered set is essentially the same as a category where

each hom-sets has at most one element. All diagrams in these categories
commute. Two elements x, x′ are isomorphic objects if and only if x ∼ x′ .
In particular, each ordinal defines a category, written as 0, 1, 2, ...
- 0 is the empty category,
- 1 is the singleton category, i.e. the discrete category on one object,
- 2 is the arrow category, with two objects (0 and 1), and precisely one
non-identity arrow, 0 → 1.
 1.2 Monoids and preordered sets as categories 19
Here 2 should not be confused with the cardinal 2 = {0, 1}, which is
viewed as a discrete category.

1.2.4 Lattices
Classically a lattice is defined as an ordered set X such that every pair
x, x′ of elements has a join x ∨ x′ = sup{x, x′ } (the least element of X
greater than both) and a meet x ∧ x′ = inf{x, x′ } (the greatest element of
X smaller than both).
Here we follow a different convention, usual in category theory: lattice
will always mean an ordered set with finite joins and meets, which amounts
to the existence of binary joins and meets together with the least element
0 = ∨∅ and the greatest element 1 = ∧∅. (This structure is called a
‘bounded lattice’ in Lattice Theory.)
The bounds 0 and 1 (the empty join and the empty meet) are equal in
the one-point lattice {∗}, and only there.
Consistently with this terminology, a lattice homomorphism has to pre-
serve finite joins and meets; a sublattice of a lattice X is closed under such
operations (and has the same bounds as X). The category of lattices and
homomorphisms will be written as Lth.
Occasionally we speak of a quasi lattice when we only assume the exis-
tence of binary joins and meets; a homomorphism of quasi lattices only has
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

to preserve them. A quasi sublattice Y of a quasi lattice X is closed under

binary joins and meets in X; when X is a lattice, Y may have different
bounds, or lack some of them.
For instance, if X is a lattice and a ∈ X, the downward and upward
closed subsets ↓ a, ↑ a of X generated by a (see 1.2.2) are quasi sublattices
of X, and lattices in their own right.
Let us note that the free lattice (see 2.7.3) generated by an element x
has three elements: 0 < x < 1, while the free quasi lattice L generated by x
is just the singleton {x}: in fact every mapping {x} → X with values in a
lattice (resp. in a quasi lattice) has a unique extension to a homomorphism
L → X (resp. {x} → X). In the same way, the free lattice L generated
by a set S can be obtained from the corresponding free quasi-lattice M by
adding a (new) minimum and a (new) maximum, even when M is already
bounded – as above.

1.2.5 Exercises and complements

(a) Lattices as algebras. The reader may know, or be interested to prove,
that a lattice can be equivalently presented as a set X equipped with two
 20 Categories, functors and natural transformations
operations, x ∨ y and x ∧ y, called join and meet, that satisfy the following
axioms:
(i) both operations are associative, commutative and idempotent:
x ∨ (y ∨ z) = (x ∨ y) ∨ z, x ∧ (y ∧ z) = (x ∧ y) ∧ z,
x ∨ y = y ∨ x, x ∧ y = y ∧ x,
x ∨ x = x, x ∧ x = x,

(ii) each operation has a unit, written as 0 and 1, respectively

x ∨ 0 = x = x ∧ 1,

(iii) the following absorption laws hold:

x ∨ (x ∧ y) = x = x ∧ (x ∨ y).

Given this presentation, one defines the ordering by letting x 6 y if

x ∨ y = y, or equivalently x ∧ y = x. Again, one should be aware that 0 = 1
is not excluded; we already know that in this case all the elements coincide.
The reader will easily guess how the opposite lattice X op is defined here.
(b) Complete lattices. The reader may know, or easily prove, that a pre-
ordered set has all infima (of its subsets) if and only if it has all suprema.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

In this case – if it is an ordered set – it is called a complete lattice. This

agrees with the notion of a ‘complete category’, as we shall see in 2.2.5(e).
Frames are particular complete lattices, related with topological spaces
and ‘pointless topology’, and will be briefly introduced in 5.1.8.

1.2.6 Distributive and modular lattices

A lattice is said to be distributive if the meet operation distributes over the
join operation, or equivalently if the join distributes over the meet. In fact,
if we assume that meets distribute over joins, we have:
(x ∨ y) ∧ (x ∨ z) = ((x ∨ y) ∧ x) ∨ ((x ∨ y) ∧ z)
= x ∨ (x ∧ z) ∨ (y ∧ z) = x ∨ (y ∧ z).
A boolean algebra is a distributive (bounded) lattice where every element
x has a (necessarily unique) complement x′ , defined by the properties:

x ∧ x′ = 0, x ∨ x′ = 1.

The subsets of a set X form the classical boolean algebra PX, which is
a complete lattice.
 1.2 Monoids and preordered sets as categories 21
The (complete) lattice SubA of subgroups of an abelian group (or sub-
modules of a module) is not distributive, generally (see 1.2.7(d)); but one
can easily check that it always satisfies a weaker, restricted form of dis-
tributivity, called modularity.
Namely, a lattice is said to be modular if it satisfies the following selfdual
property (for all elements x, y, z)
(i) if x 6 z then (x ∨ y) ∧ z = x ∨ (y ∧ z).
The category of modular (resp. distributive) lattices and their homomor-
phisms will be written as Mlh (resp. Dlh).
*By Birkhoff’s representation theorem ([Bi] III.5, Theorem 5) the free
distributive lattice on n generators is finite and isomorphic to a lattice of
subsets. The reader may also be interested to know that the free modular
lattice on three elements is finite and (obviously!) not distributive (see [Bi],
III.6, Fig. 10), while four generators already give an infinite free modular
lattice (see the final Remark in [Bi], III.6).*

1.2.7 *Exercises and complements (Distributive lattices)

The goal of this point is to show that the (complete) lattice X = Sub(Z) of
subgroups of the abelian group Z (or ideals of the ring Z) is distributive – a
fact that will have unexpected links with Homological Algebra, in Section
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

6.6.
The interested reader is invited to directly investigate the problem, be-
fore considering the layout given below. The first step is showing that X is
anti-isomorphic to the divisibility lattice of natural numbers (a well-known,
nearly obvious point). Then one proves that the latter is distributive, a
(hopefully amusing) exercise based on our school knowledge – prime fac-
torisation.
(a) The reader likely knows, or should prove, that each subgroup of Z is of
the form nZ, for a unique n ∈ N (and is an ideal of the ring of integers).
This gives us an isomorphism X → Y op , where Y = (N, |) is the set of
natural numbers ordered by the divisibility relation m|n. Therefore Y is a
(complete) lattice as well, and we recognise its operations m ∨ n and m ∧ n
as fairly well-known. We also note that 1 = minY and 0 = maxY .
Q
(b) Now, each n ∈ N∗ has a unique decomposition n = p pnp as a product
of powers of non-invertible prime numbers p; of course the natural expo-
nents np are quasi-null (i.e. all of them are 0, out of a finite number of
prime indices p), so that the factorisation is essentially finite.
The reader will use this fact to prove that Y can be embedded in the
Q
cartesian product p N of countably many copies of the set N = N ∪ {∞},
 22 Categories, functors and natural transformations
with the natural order. One can now show that Y is distributive, and X
as well.
(c) As a consequence, the lattice Sub(A) of any cyclic group A is also
distributive.
(d) The reader can easily show that this property fails for the abelian group
Z2 , or for any non-trivial abelian group A ⊕ A. (Again, this will be of use
in Section 6.6.)
On the other hand, Z/2 ⊕ Z/3 ∼ = Z/6 has a distributive lattice of
subgroups.
(e) A reader acquainted with principal ideal domains may like to rethink
the whole thing.

1.3 Monomorphisms and epimorphisms

In a category, monomorphisms and epimorphisms (monos and epis for
short) are defined by cancellation properties with respect to composition.
For categories of structured sets, they represent an ‘approximation’ to
the injective and surjective mappings of the category.

1.3.1 Main definitions

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

In a category C a morphism f : X → Y is said to be a monomorphism, or

mono, if it satisfies the following cancellation property: for every pair of
maps u, v : X ′ → X (defined on an arbitrary object X ′ ) such that f u = f v,
one has u = v (see the left diagram below)
u f f u
X′ // X / Y X / Y // Y ′ (1.5)
v v

Dually, the morphism f : X → Y is said to be an epimorphism, or epi, if it

satisfies the dual cancellation property: for every pair of maps u, v : Y → Y ′
such that uf = vf , one has u = v (see the right diagram above).
An arrow ֌ will always denote a monomorphism, while ։ stands for
an epimorphism.
Every isomorphism is mono and epi. A category is said to be balanced if
the converse holds: every morphism which is mono and epi is invertible.
Suppose now that we have, in a category C, two maps m : A → X and
p : X → A such that pm = idA. It follows that m is a monomorphism
(called a section, or a split monomorphism), while p is an epimorphism
(called a retraction, or a split epi); A is said to be a retract of X.
A family of morphisms fi : X → Yi (i ∈ I) with the same domain is
 1.3 Monomorphisms and epimorphisms 23
said to be jointly mono if for every pair of maps u, v : X ′ → X such that
fi u = fi v (for all indices i) one has u = v. Dually a family fi : Xi → Y
is jointly epi if for all u, v : Y → Y ′ such that ufi = vfi (for all i) one has
u = v.
The general properties of monos, epis and retracts will be examined in
1.3.6. Related notions, like regular monos and epis, strong monos and epis,
subobjects and quotients, will be seen in the next chapter.

1.3.2 Comments
In a category of structured sets and structure-preserving mappings, an
injective mapping (of the category) is obviously a monomorphism, while
a surjective one is an epimorphism. The converse may require a non-
trivial proof, or even fail. This can only be understood by working out
the examples below.
Interestingly, a divergence appears between monos and epis: the theory
of categories is self-dual, but our frameworks of structured sets are not!
When we classify monos in Set, this tells us everything about the epis of
Setop but nothing about the epis of Set.
In fact, in all the examples below it will be easy to prove that the mono-
morphisms coincide with the injective morphisms. Later we shall see, in
2.7.4(d), some conditions that ensure this fact, and hold true in all the
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

‘usual categories of structured sets’.

On the other hand, various problems occur with epimorphisms: classi-
fying them in various categories of algebraic structures leads to difficult
problems with no elementary solution (and no real need of it).

1.3.3 Exercises and complements, I

(a) The first point is to prove that in Set every mono is an injective mapping
and every epi is surjective. We write down the proof, but a beginner should
try to give an independent solution; this is quite easy for monos and slightly
less for epis.
If f : X → Y is a monomorphism in Set, let us suppose that f (x) = f (x′ ),
for x, x′ ∈ X. We consider the mappings u, v
u f
{∗} // X / Y u(∗) = x, v(∗) = x′ . (1.6)
v

Now we have f u = f v, whence u = v and x = x′ , which shows that f is

injective. Note that the proof works by simulating an element of X with a
map {∗} → X.
 24 Categories, functors and natural transformations
On the other hand, if f : X → Y is an epimorphism in Set, we define two
mappings u, v with values in the set {0, 1}
f u // {0, 1}
X / Y (1.7)
v

where u is the characteristic function of the subset f (X) ⊂ Y (with u(y) =

1 if and only if y ∈ f (X)) and v is the constant map v(y) = 1. Then
uf = vf , whence u = v and f (X) = Y . (A different proof can be based
on the set Y ×{0, 1}, the disjoint union of two copies of Y ; or a quotient of
the latter.)
Since the invertible morphisms in Set are obviously the same as the
bijective mappings, we remark that the category Set is balanced.
(b) Now the reader should prove that also in Top and Ab monos and epis
coincide with the injective and surjective mappings of the category, respec-
tively.
For monos the proof is quite similar to the previous one, making use of
the singleton in Top and of the group Z in Ab. Note that the latter allows
us to simulate an element x ∈ X by a homomorphism u : Z → X, sending
the generator 1 to x.
To prove that an epi is surjective, one can use a two-point codiscrete
space in Top and the quotient group Y /f (X) in Ab. Note that the last
point follows a different pattern: constructing arrows is fairly free in Set,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

somewhat less in Top, much less in categories of algebraic structures.

We conclude here that Ab is balanced, while Top is not: a bijective
continuous mapping need not be invertible in Top, i.e. a homeomorphism.
(c) The reader should prove that, in the categories Mon of monoids and Rng
of rings, the monomorphisms coincide again with the injective homomor-
phisms. Then one can easily show that the inclusion N → Z (of additive
monoids) is mono and epi in Mon, which is not balanced. The same holds
for the inclusion Z → Q in Rng.
In fact epimorphisms in Mon and Rng have no elementary characteri-
sation and the ‘regular epimorphisms’ (namely the surjective homomor-
phisms) are more important, as we shall see in Section 4.4.
(d) In a preordered set, viewed as a category, all arrows are mono and epi.
The category is balanced under a precise condition on the preordering.

1.3.4 Exercises and complements, II

(a) In the category Gp of groups all epimorphisms are surjective: a non-
obvious fact, whose proof can be found in [M4], Section I.5, Exercise 5.
 1.3 Monomorphisms and epimorphisms 25
(One cannot use the same argument as in Ab, because the image of a
homomorphism need not be normal in its codomain.)
(b) In the category Hsd of Hausdorff spaces, monomorphisms coincide with
the injective continuous mappings, with the same proof as in Top. But
our argument for the surjectivity of epimorphisms in Top is based on the
codiscrete two-point space and does not work here.
Indeed the reader may know that two maps u, v : Y → Y ′ between Haus-
dorff spaces always coincide on a closed subset of their domain. It follows
that every map whose image is dense (in its codomain) is an epimorphism
in Hsd. We shall see in 2.3.6(c) that this condition is also necessary.
(c) In pOrd and Ord every mono is injective, with the same argument as in
Set, based on the singleton.
To show that epis are surjective in pOrd one can use a two-point set
with chaotic preorder. In Ord the conclusion is the same, but the proof is
more complicated, if easy; for a monotone mapping f : X → Y and a point
y0 ∈ Y \ f (X), one can construct an ordered set Y ′ where y0 is duplicated.
(d) Prove that the monomorphisms of Ban and Ban1 coincide with their
injective morphisms.
*Prove that the epimorphisms of each of these categories coincide with
the morphisms whose image is dense, using the previous point (b) and the
quotient of a Banach space modulo a closed subspace.*
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

1.3.5 Exercises and complements (Retracts)

For the sake of simplicity, in these exercises we always replace a monomor-
phism m : A ֌ X, in a category of structured sets, by its image. (The
reader can check that ‘nothing is missed’, in the examples below.)
(a) Prove that in Set a retract of a set X 6= ∅ is any non-empty subset.
(b) Prove that in Ab retracts coincide with direct summands. More pre-
cisely, a subgroup A of an abelian group X is a retract if and only if there
exists a subgroup B ⊂ X such that A ∩ B = {0} and A + B = X; then X
is isomorphic to the direct sum A ⊕ B.
*For a reader acquainted with elementary Homological Algebra, this con-
dition amounts to saying that the short exact sequence A ֌ X ։ X/A
splits.*
(c) There is no elementary characterisation of retracts in Top. To prove that
a subspace A ⊂ X is a retract one ‘simply’ has to construct a retraction;
but proving that it is not a retract can be an important, non-trivial result.
For instance, saying that a subspace R \ {a} of the euclidean line R is
 26 Categories, functors and natural transformations
not a retract is a way of stating the Intermediate Value Theorem. These
problems are generally studied with the tools of Algebraic Topology: see
1.4.7.

1.3.6 General properties of monos and epis

The reader should (easily) prove the following elementary properties, that
will be used throughout without reference.
We have two consecutive maps f : X → Y and g : Y → Z in a category.
Property (a) is dual to (a∗ ), and we only need to prove one of them.
(a) If f and g are both mono, gf is also mono; if gf is mono, f is also.
(a∗ ) If f and g are both epi, gf is also epi; if gf is epi, g is also.
(b) If f and g are both split mono, gf is also; if gf is a split mono, f is
also.
(b∗ ) If f and g are both split epi, gf is also; if gf is a split epi, g is also.
(c) If f is a split mono and an epi, then it is invertible.
(c∗ ) If f is a split epi and a mono, then it is invertible.

1.4 Functors
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The structure-preserving mappings between categories are called ‘functors’.

1.4.1 Functors and isomorphisms of categories

A (covariant) functor F : C → D consists of the following data:
(a) a mapping
F0 : ObC → ObD,
whose action is generally written as X 7→ F (X),
(b) for every pair of objects X, X ′ in C, a mapping

FXX ′ : C(X, X ′ ) → D(F (X), F (X ′ )),

whose action is generally written as f 7→ F (f ).

Composition and identities must be preserved. In other words:
(i) if f, g are consecutive maps of C then F (gf ) = F (g).F (f ),
(ii) if X is an object of C then F (idX) = id(F (X)).

Given a second functor G : D → E, one defines in the obvious way the

 1.4 Functors 27
composed functor GF : C → E. This composition is associative and has
identities: the identity functor of each category
idC : C → C, X 7→ X, f 7→ f. (1.8)
An isomorphism of categories is a functor F : C → D which is invertible,
i.e. admits an inverse G : D → C; this means a functor such that GF = idC
and F G = idD. It is easy to verify that the functor F is an isomorphism if
and only if all the mappings F0 and FXX ′ considered above are bijective.
Being isomorphic categories is an equivalence relation, written as C ∼
= D.
A contravariant functor F : C 99K D is defined as a covariant func-
tor Cop → D, and takes a morphism f : X → X ′ in C to a morphism
F (f ) : F (X ′ ) → F (X) in D, preserving identities and reversing composi-
tions: F (gf ) = F (f ).F (g) (with respect to the compositions of C and D,
of course). By a common abuse of terminology, it is often referred to as a
contravariant functor F : Cop → D, a way of recalling that we are interested
in C rather than in Cop .
Cat will denote the category of small categories and their functors. (Its
2-dimensional structure, including the natural transformations, will be ex-
amined in 1.5.3 and Section 7.1.)

1.4.2 Examples and comments

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(a) A functor between two monoids, viewed as categories (see 1.2.1), is the
same as a homomorphism of monoids.
(b) A functor between two preordered sets, viewed as categories (see 1.2.3),
is the same as a monotone function, i.e. a preorder-preserving mapping.
(c) A functor G → K Vct defined on a group (viewed as a category) amounts
to a representation of G, in the usual sense of a homomorphism G →
Aut(X) with values in the group of automorphisms of a K-vector space.
(d) Categories linked by an obvious isomorphism are often perceived as
‘the same thing’. For instance Ab is isomorphic to the category Z Mod of
modules on the ring of integers. The various equivalent ways of defining
topological spaces give rise to isomorphic categories that are nearly never
distinguished; the same holds for the two equivalent ways of defining lattices
(recalled in 1.2.4, 1.2.5).

1.4.3 Subcategories
Let C be a category. A subcategory D is defined by assigning:
- a subset ObD ⊂ ObC, whose elements are called objects of D,
 28 Categories, functors and natural transformations
- for every pair of objects X, Y of D, a subset D(X, Y ) ⊂ C(X, Y ), whose
elements are called morphisms of D, from X to Y ,
so that the following conditions hold:
(i) for every pair of consecutive morphisms of D their composite in C belongs
to D,
(ii) for every object of D its identity in C belongs to D.
D, equipped with the induced composition law, is then a category. It
comes with an inclusion functor U : D → C, also written as D ⊂ C.
One says that D is a full subcategory of C if, for every pair of objects X, Y
of D, we have D(X, Y ) = C(X, Y ), so that D is determined by assigning
its subset of objects. One says that D is a wide subcategory of C if it has
the same objects, so that D is determined by assigning its subset of maps
(closed under composition and containing all identities).
For instance, Ab is a full subcategory of Gp while Ban1 is a wide sub-
category of Ban. Of course a full and wide subcategory must be the total
one.

1.4.4 Forgetful and amnestic functors

Forgetting structure, or part of it, yields various examples of functors be-
tween categories of structured sets, like the following obvious instances
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Top → Set, Ord → Set,

(1.9)
Rng → Ab → Set, Rng → Mon → Set.
These are called forgetful functors, and often denoted by the letter U ,
which refers to the underlying set, or underlying abelian group, and so on.
It is also common to write U (X) as |X|.
The term forgetful functor can also refer to the inclusion functor of a
subcategory, which forgets properties rather than structure, like
Ab → Gp → Mon, Ord → pOrd, (1.10)
or to functors that forget (a part of) both, like the functor CRng → Mon
that sends a commutative ring to its underlying multiplicative monoid (for-
getting the additive structure and the commutative property of the multi-
plication).
A functor F : C → D is said to be amnestic if, for every isomorphism f
in C, F (f ) is an identity in D (if and) only if f is.
All the forgetful functors above are amnestic. Those dealing with cate-
gories of algebraic structures even reflect identities: for every map f in C,
F (f ) is an identity in D (if and) only if f is.
 1.4 Functors 29
1.4.5 Quotients of categories
A congruence R = (RXY ) in a category C consists of a family of equivalence
relations RXY in each set of morphisms C(X, Y ) that is consistent with
composition:
(i) if f RXY f ′ and g RY Z g ′ , then gf RXZ g ′ f ′ .
The quotient category D = C/R has the same objects of C and

D(X, Y ) = C(X, Y )/RXY .

In other words, a morphism [f ] : X → Y in D is an equivalence class of

morphisms X → Y in C. The composition is induced by that of C, which
is legitimate because of condition (i):

[g].[f ] = [gf ]. (1.11)

The projection functor P : C → C/R is the identity on objects and sends

a morphism f to its equivalence class [f ].
In Top the homotopy relation f ≃ f ′ is a congruence of categories; the
quotient category
hoTop = Top/ ≃

is called the homotopy category of topological spaces, and is important in

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Algebraic Topology. Plainly, a continuous mapping f : X → Y is a homo-

topy equivalence (i.e. there exists a continuous mapping g : Y → X such
that gf ≃ idX and f g ≃ idY ) if and only if its homotopy class [f ] is an
isomorphism of hoTop. All this will be examined in a more detailed way in
Section 5.2.
Every category C has a finest congruence f = g, whose quotient is triv-
ially isomorphic to C, and a coarsest congruence f ∼ g, meaning that f and
g are parallel arrows. In the second case, the quotient category is the (pos-
sibly large) set Ob(C) preordered by the relation X ≺ Y whenever there is
some arrow X → Y in C; it will be called the preordered set associated to
C (in a universal way, as we shall see in Exercise 3.1.4(f)), and denoted as
po(C).
Let us note that the relation of isomorphism is wider in a quotient cate-
gory, but may happen to coincide.

1.4.6 Products of categories

If C and D are categories, one defines the product category C×D.
An object is a pair (X, Y ) where X is in C and Y in D. A morphism is
 30 Categories, functors and natural transformations
a pair of morphisms
(f, g) : (X, Y ) → (X ′ , Y ′ ), (1.12)
for f ∈ C(X, X ′ ) and g ∈ D(Y, Y ′ ).
The composition of (f, g) with (f ′ , g ′ ) : (X ′ , Y ′ ) → (X ′′ , Y ′′ ) is (obvi-
ously) component-wise:
(f ′ , g ′ ).(f, g) = (f ′ f, g ′ g).
Q
Similarly one defines the product C = Ci of a family of categories
indexed by a small set. It has (cartesian) projection functors Pi : C → Ci .
A functor in two variables is an ordinary functor F : C × D → E defined
on the product of two categories. Fixing an object X0 in C we have a
functor F (X0 , −) : D → E; and symmetrically.
If the category C has small hom-sets C(X, Y ) (see 1.1.3), there is a functor
of morphisms, or hom-functor
Mor : Cop ×C → Set,
(1.13)
(X, Y ) 7→ C(X, Y ), (f, g) 7→ g. − .f.
Here, for f : X ′ → X and g : Y → Y ′ in C, the mapping g. − .f acts as:
g. − .f : C(X, Y ) → C(X ′ , Y ′ ), u 7→ guf.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

This quite important functor will reappear in various ‘enriched’ forms.

It is described as ‘a functor in two variables, contravariant in the first and
covariant in the second’.
Fixing one of these variables one gets a ‘representable functor’ (covariant
or contravariant on C), as we shall see in 1.6.4.

1.4.7 Faithful and full functors

For a functor F : C → D let us consider again the mappings (of sets):
FXX ′ : C(X, X ′ ) → D(F (X), F (X ′ )), f 7→ F (f ). (1.14)
F is said to be faithful if all these mappings are injective (for X, X ′ in
C); F is said to be full if all of them are surjective.
An isomorphism of categories is always full and faithful. The inclusion
functor D → C of a subcategory is always faithful; it is full if and only if D
is a full subcategory of C. A projection functor P : C → C/R on a quotient
category is always full and bijective on objects.
There are some (obvious) preservation and reflection properties of func-
tors:
 1.4 Functors 31
(a) every functor preserves commutative diagrams, isomorphisms, retracts,
split monos and split epis (commutative diagrams were presented in Section
0.3 of the Introduction and are formalised below, in 1.4.9),
(b) a faithful functor reflects monos and epis (i.e. if F (f ) is mono or epi,
then f is also) and commutative diagrams,
(c) a full and faithful functor reflects isomorphisms, split monos and split
epis.
Applying point (a), the usual way of proving that a topological subspace
A ⊂ X is not a retract (in Top) is to find a functor F : Top → Ab such that
the associated homomorphism F (A) → F (X) is not a split mono in Ab. In
this way, any homology functor Hn shows that the n-dimensional sphere
Sn is not a retract of the euclidean space Rn+1 .

1.4.8 Concrete categories

The notion of ‘category of structured sets’ is either vague or has different,
complicated formalisations, which can hardly cover all the cases we may
want.
As a formal and simple alternative, a concrete category is defined as a
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

category A equipped with a faithful functor U : A → Set, called its forgetful

functor. As a consequence U reflects monos and epis, but need not preserve
them. Concrete categories are extensively studied in [AHS].
It is not easy to find categories that can not be made concrete: even
Setop can be, by the contravariant functor of subsets

P ∗ : Setop → Set,
(1.15)
X 7→ PX, (f : X → Y ) 7→ (f ∗ : PY → PX),

where f ∗ (B) = f −1 (B) is the pre-image of B ⊂ Y .

As a consequence, if the category C is concrete via U : C → Set, then Cop
can be made concrete via the composed functor P ∗ U op : Cop → Set (letting
apart whether this is of interest).
But it is important to note that the homotopy category hoTop (intro-
duced in 1.4.5) cannot be made concrete, as was proved by Freyd [Fr3, Fr4].
More generally a category A equipped with a faithful functor U : A → C
is said to be concrete over C. (We shall see in Lemma 1.5.7 how this notion
is related with subcategories.)
 32 Categories, functors and natural transformations
1.4.9 Exercises and complements (Functors as diagrams)
Diagrams in a category have already been presented in Section 0.3 of the
Introduction, in an informal way. We can now be more precise.
(a) Let S be a small category. A diagram in the category C, of type S (or
based on S) will be any functor X : S → C.
It can be written in index notation, with indices i ∈ ObS and a : i → j
in MorS:
X : S → C, i 7→ Xi , a 7→ (Xa : Xi → Xj ), (1.16)
or as a system ((Xi ), (ua )), with ua = Xa .
(b) The diagram X : S → C is said to be commutative if it factorises through
the canonical projection P : S → po(S) with values in the preordered set
po(S) defined in 1.4.5. The reader will easily see that this amounts to the
conditions (i), (ii) of Section 0.3.
Therefore, every functor defined on a preordered set S is automatically
a commutative diagram.
In particular, a coherent system of isomorphisms is a functor X : S → C
where the preorder of S is an equivalence relation i ∼ j (i.e. a symmetric
preorder). The system amounts thus to a family (Xi ) of objects of C
equipped with a family of (iso)morphisms uij : Xi → Xj for i ∼ j, such
that
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

ujk .uij = uik , uii = id(Xi ) (for i ∼ j ∼ k in S). (1.17)

*Since the well-known Coherence Theorem of monoidal categories, by
Mac Lane [M3], a ‘coherence theorem’ in category theory states that, under
suitable hypotheses, all the isomorphisms of a certain kind form a coherent
system. The extended version for bicategories is in [MaP].*
(c) A functor 1 → C amounts to an object of C, while a functor 2 → C
amounts to a morphism of C.
(d) Let E = {1, e} be the idempotent monoid on two elements, with e2 = e.
A functor F : E → C amounts to an object X of C equipped with an
idempotent endomorphism e : X → X; or – more simply – to an idempotent
endomorphism e (which determines its domain-codomain).
(Note that E is isomorphic to the join-semilattice (2, ∨ ), with unit 0
and 1 ∨ 1 = 1. But of course one should not confuse the ordinal category 2,
which has two objects, with the monoid-category E, which has only one.)
(e) A functor X : (N, 6) → C, defined on the ordered set of natural numbers
(i.e. the ordinal ω), amounts to a sequence of consecutive morphisms of C
X0 −→ X1 −→ X2 −→ ... −→ Xn −→ ... (1.18)
 1.5 Natural transformations and equivalence of categories 33
while a functor X : (N, +) → C, defined on the additive monoid of natural
numbers, amounts to an endomorphism u1 : X∗ → X∗ (and its powers,
un = (u1 )n , including u0 = id(X∗ )).
(f) The product 2×2 has four objects and five non-identity arrows, as in
the left diagram below

00 ❊ / 10 X00 / X10
❊❊
❊❊
❊❊ = (1.19)
 ❊"   
01 / 11 X01 / X11

A functor X : 2× 2 → C amounts to a commutative square in C, as in

the right diagram above.
(g) In some texts a diagram in C is defined as a morphism of graphs X : Γ →
C, where Γ is a small graph. This is not more general, because every graph
generates a free category, in a simple way – by finite paths of consecutive
arrows (see 3.7.3). On the contrary, this second definition is less expressive:
for instance, commutative squares or idempotent endomorphisms cannot be
formalised as arbitrary diagrams on a given graph.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

1.5 Natural transformations and equivalence of categories

Given two parallel functors F, G : C → D (between the same categories)
there can be ‘higher arrows’ ϕ : F → G, called ‘natural transformations’
(and functorial isomorphisms, or natural isomorphisms, when they are in-
vertible).
’Category’, ‘functor’ and ‘natural transformation’ are the three basic
terms of category theory, since the very beginning of the theory in [EiM].
It is interesting to note that only the last term is taken from the common
language: one can say that Eilenberg and Mac Lane introduced categories
and functors because they wanted to formalise the natural transformations
that they were encountering in Algebra and Algebraic Topology (as Mac
Lane remarks in [M4], at the end of Section I.6). Much in the same way as a
general theory of continuity (a familiar term for a familiar notion) requires
the introduction of topological spaces (denoted by a theoretical term).
A reader acquainted with basic homotopy theory can take advantage
of a formal parallelism, where spaces correspond to categories, continuous
mappings to functors, homotopies of mappings to invertible natural trans-
formations, and homotopy equivalence of spaces to equivalence of categories.
This analogy is even deeper in the domain of Directed Algebraic Topol-
 34 Categories, functors and natural transformations
ogy, where directed homotopies need not be reversible and correspond to
general natural transformations, see [G8].

1.5.1 Natural transformations

Given two functors F, G : C → D between the same categories, a natural
transformation ϕ : F → G (or ϕ : F → G : C → D) consists of the following
data:
- for each object X of C a morphism ϕX : F X → GX in D (called the
component of ϕ on X and also written as ϕX , or sometimes just ϕ),
so that, for every arrow f : X → X ′ in C, we have a commutative square
in D (naturality condition of ϕ on f )
ϕX
FX / GX
Ff Gf ϕX ′ .F (f ) = G(f ).ϕX. (1.20)
 
F X′ / GX ′
ϕX ′

In particular, the identity of a functor F : C → D is the natural transfor-

mation idF : F → F , with components (idF )X = id(F X) : F X → F X.
A natural transformation ϕ : F → G often comes out of a ‘canonical
choice’ of a family (ϕX : F X → GX)X of morphisms, but these two aspects
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

should not be confused. There are canonical choices of such families that are
not natural (see 1.5.2(d)), and natural transformations ‘defined’ through
the axiom of choice (see 1.5.8).
Replacing the category C with a graph Γ (see 1.1.2), one can consider
a natural transformation ϕ : F → G : Γ → D between two morphisms of
graphs defined on Γ, with values in a category.

1.5.2 Exercises and complements

(a) Let F : R Mod → R Mod be the identity functor, and let the scalar λ
belong to the centre of a ring, i.e. the subring of the elements that commute
with all the others.
Prove that there is a natural transformation λ : F → F , whose compo-
nent λA : A → A on the left module A is the multiplication by λ. Prove
that every natural transformation F → F is of this type (working on its
component on R, as a module), for a unique scalar λ.
This bijective correspondence shows that the category R Mod determines
the centre of the ring R, in a structural way, and leads to considering the
relation of Morita equivalence of rings (see 1.5.6(b)).
 1.5 Natural transformations and equivalence of categories 35
(b) Determine the natural endotransformations of the forgetful functors
R Mod → Set and R Mod → Ab.
(c) Determine the natural endotransformations of the contravariant functor
of subsets P ∗ : Setop → Set (defined in (1.15)).
(d) Determine the natural endotransformations of the covariant functor of
subsets
P∗ : Set → Set,
(1.21)
X 7→ PX, (f : X → Y ) 7→ (f∗ : PX → PY ),

where f∗ (A) = f (A) is the image of A ⊂ X. Show that the canonical

choices ϕX (A) = X and ψX (A) = X \ A are not natural.
(e) A natural transformation f → g : X → Y between increasing mappings
of preordered sets amounts to the preordering f ≺ g introduced in 1.2.2,
and is determined by f, g.
(f) Characterise the natural transformations f → g : X → Y between
homomorphisms of monoids.

1.5.3 Operations
Two natural transformations ϕ : F → G and ψ : G → H have a vertical
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

composition ψϕ : F → H (also written as ψ.ϕ)

F /
↓ϕ
C / D (ψϕ)(X) = ψX.ϕX : F X → HX. (1.22)
↓ψ
/
H

Moreover there is a whisker composition of natural transformations with

functors, or reduced horizontal composition, written as KϕH (or K ◦ϕ◦H,
when useful to distinguish it)
F /
H K
C′ / C ↓ϕ
/ D
/ D′ (1.23)
G

KϕH : KF H → KGH, (KϕH)(X ′ ) = K(ϕ(HX ′ )).

(The binary operations ϕH and Kϕ are also called whisker compositions;

they can be obtained from the ternary operation by inserting identity func-
tors.)
This 2-dimensional structure of the framework of categories, where natu-
ral transformations play the role of 2-dimensional arrows between functors,
 36 Categories, functors and natural transformations
will be further analysed in Section 7.1 (including the full horizontal com-
position of natural transformations).
An isomorphism of functors, or functorial isomorphism, or natural iso-
morphism, is a natural transformation ϕ : F → G : C → D which is invert-
ible with respect to vertical composition. It is easy to see that this happens
if and only if all the components ϕX are invertible in D.
(The original term of ‘natural equivalence’, in [EiM], is now obsolete and
will not be used, because it can lead to confusion with an equivalence of
categories.)
Isomorphism of (parallel) functors is an equivalence relation, written as
F ∼ = G.

1.5.4 Exercises
The reader should prove the following properties of the compositions of
natural transformations, which will often be used in computations. All the
proofs are trivial, except the last, which is easy.
(a) χ(ψϕ) = (χψ)ϕ,
K (KϕH)H ′ = (K ′ K)ϕ(HH ′ )
′
(associativities),
(b) ϕ.idF = ϕ = idG.ϕ,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

1Y ◦ϕ◦1X = ϕ, K ◦idF ◦H = id(KF H) (identities),

(c) K(ψϕ)H = (KψH).(KϕH) (distributivity),
(d) (ψG).(Hϕ) = (Kϕ).(ψF ) (interchange),

The last, more precisely a ‘reduced interchange property’, is about two

‘horizontally consecutive’ natural transformations, as in the following dia-
gram
F / H /
C ↓ϕ
/ D ↓ψ
/ E (1.24)
G K

1.5.5 Equivalence of categories

Isomorphisms of categories have been defined in 1.4.1.
More generally, an equivalence of categories is a functor F : C → D which
is invertible up to isomorphism of functors (defined in 1.5.3), i.e. there exists
a functor G : D → C such that GF ∼ = idC and F G ∼ = idD. The functor G
can be called a weak inverse of F .
 1.5 Natural transformations and equivalence of categories 37
An adjoint equivalence of categories is a coherent version of this notion;
namely it is a four-tuple (F, G, η, ε) where
- F : C → D and G : D → C are functors,
- η : idC → GF and ε : F G → idD are functorial isomorphisms,
- F η = (εF )−1 : F → F GF, ηG = (Gε)−1 : G → GF G.
(The direction of η and ε is written above as in the more general case
of an adjunction, where these transformations need not be invertible: see
Section 3.1.)
The following conditions on a functor F : C → D are equivalent, forming
a very useful characterisation of the equivalence of categories:
(i) F is an equivalence of categories,
(ii) F can be completed to an adjoint equivalence of categories (F, G, η, ε),
(iii) F is faithful, full and essentially surjective on objects.
The last property means that: for every object Y of D there exists some
object X in C such that F (X) is isomorphic to Y in D. The proof of the
equivalence of these three conditions requires the axiom of choice and is
given below, in Theorem 1.5.8.
One says that the categories C, D are equivalent, written as C ≃ D, if
there exists an equivalence of categories between them (or, equivalently, an
adjoint equivalence of categories). This is indeed an equivalence relation,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

as is easily proved using condition (iii) above, or can be proved directly

using the operations we have seen above (in 1.5.3).
The role of equivalences in category theory is fundamental. Like every-
thing, it should not be viewed as ‘absolute’. Comments on this point can
be found in 1.5.9, 3.3.7 and 3.6.6.

1.5.6 Exercises and complements

(a) The category of finite sets (and mappings between them) is equivalent to
its full subcategory of finite cardinals, which is small and therefore cannot
be isomorphic to the former.
*(b) The reader may know that two rings R, S are said to be Morita equiv-
alent if their categories of modules are equivalent [Mo, AnF]. This is a
crucial notion in ring theory, that becomes trivial in the domain of com-
mutative rings: in fact, if two rings are Morita equivalent one can prove
that their centres are isomorphic (using what we have seen in 1.5.2); but –
quite interestingly – commutative rings can be Morita equivalent to non-
commutative ones, like their rings of square matrices. Thus, studying left
modules on the ring Mn (R) is equivalent to studying real vector spaces.*
 38 Categories, functors and natural transformations
(c) A category is said to be skeletal if it has no pair of distinct isomorphic
objects. It is easy to show, by the previous characterisation of equivalences,
that every category has a skeleton, i.e. an equivalent skeletal category. The
latter can be obtained as a full subcategory, by choosing precisely one object
in every class of isomorphic objects.
(d) We have described in (a) a skeleton of the category of finite sets that
can be constructed without any choice, even though we do need the axiom
of choice to prove that the inclusion of this skeleton has a weak inverse.
In a different way, a preordered set X has a natural skeleton formed by a
quotient, the associated ordered set X/∼ (see 1.2.2); but again we need the
axiom of choice to prove that the projection X → X/∼ has a weak inverse.
(e) The reader can easily prove that two categories are equivalent if and
only if they have isomorphic skeletons; loosely speaking, this says that an
equivalence of categories amounts to multiplying or deleting isomorphic
copies of objects, even though there can be no canonical way of doing this.

1.5.7 Lemma (Modifying functors and categories)

(a) Starting from a functor F : C → D and an arbitrary family of isomor-
phisms ϕX : F (X) → G(X) in D (for X in C), there is precisely one way of
extending these data to a functor G : C → D and a natural transformation
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

ϕ : F → G (obviously invertible).
(b) Given a faithful functor U : A → C, one can embed A as a subcategory
of a suitable category C′ equivalent to C.
(c) If the faithful functor U is essentially surjective on the objects, one can
make this embedding wide (and even the identity on objects).
Note. As an example, the forgetful functor U : Top → Set is surjective on
objects, and Top is a wide subcategory of the category T ≃ Set introduced
in 1.1.5(a).

Proof (a) We define G on a morphism f : X → Y of C as

G(f ) = ϕY .F (f ).(ϕX )−1 : G(X) → G(Y ).

Besides preserving identities and composition, this is necessary and suf-

ficient to make ϕ natural.
(b) We construct C′ with objects CA where A belongs to A and U (A) =
C, and other (distinct) objects C∗ where C belongs to C. Then we let
C′ (CX , DY ) = C(C, D), where X (resp. Y ) is either an object of A or the
symbol ∗. The composition is that of C.
 1.5 Natural transformations and equivalence of categories 39
Now the functor U ′ : A → C′ that takes A to U (A)A and f to U (f ) is
injective on objects and arrows, and identifies A to a subcategory of C′ . On
the other hand, the obvious full embedding C → C′ taking C to C∗ is an
equivalence of categories, since ever object CA is isomorphic to C∗ .
(c) If U is essentially surjective on the objects, we can omit the objects of
type C∗ in the construction of C′ , and rewrite the object CA as A so that
ObC′ = ObA.

1.5.8 Theorem (Characterisation of equivalences)

The conditions (i)–(iii) of 1.5.5 are equivalent.

Proof Part of the proof is a consequence of general properties of adjunc-

tions, but it is useful to have now this important theorem, much before
Chapter 3.
(i) ⇒ (iii). We assume that F : C → D has a quasi inverse G : D → C, and
we write η : 1 → GF a functorial isomorphism. Then F is faithful: given
two parallel morphisms f, f ′ : X → X ′ , we have two commutative squares
with horizontal isomorphisms
ηX
X / GF X
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

f f′ GF f GF f ′ (1.25)
   
X′ / GF X ′
ηX ′

so that F f = F f ′ implies f = f ′ . Similarly, G is faithful (because F G ∼

= 1).
To show that F is full, we take a morphism g : F X → F X ′ and define
f = (ηX ′ )−1 .Gg.ηX : X → X ′ . Now we have the parallel morphisms
g, F f : F X → F X ′ in D. Both G(g) and G(F f ) make the following square
commute in C
ηX
X / GF X
✤
f Gg ✤ GF f (1.26)
  
X′ / GF X ′
ηX ′

Since the horizontal arrows are isomorphisms, G(g) = G(F f ); since G is

faithful, g = F (f ).
Finally it is obvious that F is essentially surjective on objects, because
each object Y of D is isomorphic to F (GY ).
(iii) ⇒ (ii). Assuming that F is faithful, full and essentially surjective on
objects, we ‘construct’ with the axiom of choice a quasi inverse G.
 40 Categories, functors and natural transformations
For every object Y of D we choose an object G(Y ) in C and an isomor-
phism εY : F (G(Y )) → Y in D. For every morphism g : Y → Y ′ in D, we
define G(g) : GY → GY ′ as the unique morphism of C such that

F (G(g)) = (εY ′ )−1 .g.εY : F (GY ) → F (GY ′ ),

which makes the following square commutative in D

εY / Y
F GY
F Gg g g.εY = εY ′ .F G(g). (1.27)
 
F GY ′ / Y′
εY ′

It is easy to verify that G is a functor. For instance, for a composed

morphism g ′ g : Y → Y ′ → Y ′′ , we have:
F (G(g ′ g)) = (εY ′′ )−1 .g ′ g.εY = ((εY ′′ )−1 .g ′ .εY ′ ).((εY ′ )−1 .g.εY )
= F G(g ′ ).F G(g) = F (Gg ′ .Gg),
and G(g ′ g) = Gg ′ .Gg, because F is faithful.
The family ε = (εY )Y of isomorphisms is a natural transformation
ε : F G → idD, by (1.27), whence a functorial isomorphism.
Moreover, for every X in C there is precisely one morphism ηX : X →
GF X such that
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

F (ηX) = (εF X)−1 : F X → F G(F X),

and ηX is invertible (by 1.4.7(c)).

Using again the faithfulness of F , one shows that η = (ηX)X is natural,
whence a functorial isomorphism.
We already have one coherence condition: F η = (εF )−1 . For the other,
let us first note that the naturality of ε : F G → 1 : D → D on its own
(invertible) component εY : F GY → Y
εF GY / F GY
F GF GY
F GεY εY εY.ε(F GY ) = εY.F G(εY ), (1.28)
 
F GY / Y
εY

gives ε(F GY ) = F G(εY ). Therefore:

F (ηGY ) = (εF GY )−1 = F G(εY )−1 = F (GεY )−1 ,

and the faithfulness of F gives ηGY = (GεY )−1 , for all Y in D.

(ii) ⇒ (i). Obvious.
 1.6 Categories of functors, representable functors 41
1.5.9 A first digression on categorical equivalence
There is now a tendency in category theory to prefer notions invariant up
to equivalence of categories (let us say an ‘E-notion’, for short), rather than
just invariant up to isomorphism of categories (let us say an ‘I-notion’), or
not even invariant in this sense (let us say an ‘S-notion’, for ‘strict’). Non
E-notions have even been described as ‘evil’.
In the author’s opinion invariance up to categorical equivalence is cer-
tainly an important property. Yet, it should be put in balance with other
aspects, like simplicity, effectiveness and adherence to well-founded practice
in Mathematics.
(a) The product C × D of categories has been defined in a strict way (in
1.4.6). Replacing this notion by a weaker one, invariant up to equivalence,
would be particularly strange and ineffective: we no longer have a functor
Cat2 → Cat. A reader familiar with the cartesian closedness of Cat (to
be seen in 3.4.7(a)) may wonder what this may mean, with respect to an
E-notion of product.
(b) A faithful functor can be viewed as an ‘E-replacement’ of the S-notion
of subcategory (as shown by Lemma 1.5.7). We can agree that a faithful
functor is a more important notion; nevertheless the notion of subcategory
keeps at least its practical importance, for instance when we want to quickly
describe a new structure as a subcategory of a known one.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(c) Some instances where an I-notion can be preferable to the correspond-

ing E-notion will be seen in 3.3.7 (for comma categories), in 3.6.6 (for
monadicity, following Mac Lane) and in 7.1.5 (for flexible limits, following
[BKPS]).

1.6 Categories of functors, representable functors

This brief section is about categories Cat(S, C) of functors S → C, which
includes the well-known case of simplicial sets. Representable functors are
also introduced here.
S is always a small category.

1.6.1 Categories of functors

For any category C (possibly large) we write as Cat(S, C), or CS , the cat-
egory whose objects are the functors F : S → C and whose morphisms are
the natural transformations ϕ : F → G, with vertical composition. These
objects can be viewed as diagrams in C, based on S, as in 1.4.9.
 42 Categories, functors and natural transformations
In particular the arrow category 2, with two objects (0 and 1) and pre-
cisely one non-identity arrow, 0 → 1 (see 1.2.3) gives the category of mor-
phisms C2 of C, where a map f = (f ′ , f ′′ ) : x → y is a commutative square
of C. These are composed by pasting commutative squares, as in the right
diagram below
f′ f′ f ′′
X′ / Y′ X′ / Y′ / Z′
x y x y z (1.29)
    
X ′′ / Y ′′ X ′′ / Y ′′ / Z ′′
g′ g′ g′′

The identity of x is: id(x) = (idX ′ , idX ′′ ) : x → x.

1.6.2 Exercises and complements

(a) Prove that a natural transformation ϕ : F → G : C → D can be viewed
as a functor C → D2 , or equivalently as a functor C×2 → D.
(b) Analyse the category
GSet = Cat(G, Set), (1.30)
where G is a group (viewed as a category). An object, called a G-set, is a
set equipped with an action of G, and an arrow, called a G-morphism, is a
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

G-equivariant mapping – notions that the reader may already know or can
deduce from (1.30). Similarly we have the category GTop = Cat(G, Top) of
G-spaces. All this can be extended to monoids.
(c) With a basic knowledge of Homological Algebra, one can describe the
category Ch+ Ab of positive cochain complexes of abelian groups as a full
subcategory of the category Cat(N, Ab) that we have seen in 1.4.9(e), and
give a similar description of the category Ch+ Ab of positive chain com-
plexes (to be examined in 5.3.7).

1.6.3 Categories of presheaves

A functor S → C, defined on the opposite category Sop , is also called a
op

presheaf of C on the (small) category S. They form the presheaf category

op
Psh(S, C) = CS .
op
We are particularly interested in the category Psh(S, Set) = SetS of
presheaves of sets on S.
The category S is canonically embedded in the latter, by the Yoneda
embedding
op
y : S → SetS , y(i) = S(−, i) : Sop → Set, (1.31)
 1.6 Categories of functors, representable functors 43
which sends every object i to the corresponding presheaf y(i), represented
by i (according to the definition below, in 1.6.4).
Taking as S the category ∆ of finite positive ordinals (and increasing
op
maps), one gets the category Smp(C) = C∆ of simplicial objects in C,
and – in particular – the well-known category SmpSet of simplicial sets,
that will be studied in Section 5.3. Here the Yoneda embedding sends the
positive ordinal {0, ..., n} to the simplicial set ∆n , freely generated by one
simplex of dimension n.
Simplicial groups, in the category SmpGp, are also important.
Cubical sets, another category of presheaves of interest in Topology, will
be studied in Section 5.4.
A reader interested in categories of sheaves is referred to [MaM, Bo3].

1.6.4 Representable functors

Assume now that C has small hom-sets. A functor F : C → Set is said to
be representable if it is isomorphic to a functor

C(X0 , −) : C → Set, X 7→ C(X0 , X),

(1.32)
(f : X → Y ) 7→ (f.− : C(X0 , X) → C(X0 , Y )),

for some object X0 in C; this object is said to represent F .

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Then the Yoneda Lemma (in 1.6.6) describes the natural transformations
F → G, for every functor G : C → Set; it also proves that the object which
represents a functor is determined up to isomorphism (see 1.6.7).
A contravariant functor F : C 99K Set is in fact a covariant functor
F : Cop → Set; therefore it is representable if it is isomorphic to a func-
tor
C(−, X0 ) : Cop → Set, X 7→ C(X, X0 ),
(1.33)
(f : X → Y ) 7→ (−.f : C(Y, X0 ) → C(X, X0 )),

for some object X0 in C.

1.6.5 Exercises and complements

(a) Show that the forgetful functors

Top → Set, R Mod → Set, Rng → Set,

are representable.
(b) By definition, the canonical forgetful functors of Ban and Ban1 are
 44 Categories, functors and natural transformations
represented by the scalar field K (R or C):
U = Ban(K, −) : Ban → Set, U (X) = |X|,
(1.34)
B1 = Ban1 (K, −) : Ban1 → Set, B1 (X) = {x ∈ X | ||x|| 6 1},
and give, respectively, the underlying set |X| and the unit ball B1 (X) of a
Banach space (up to functorial isomorphism).
(c) Show that the contravariant functor of subsets P ∗ : Setop → Set (defined
in (1.15)) is representable, making use of the characteristic function of a
subset.
(d) A representable covariant functor preserves monomorphisms. A repre-
sentable contravariant functor takes epimorphisms of its domain to injective
mappings.
(e) The reader can review the exercises 1.5.2(b) and (c) at the light of the
Yoneda Lemma, below.

1.6.6 Yoneda Lemma

Let F, G : C → Set be two functors, with F = C(X0 , −). The canonical
mapping

y : Nat(F, G) → G(X0 ), ϕ 7→ ϕX0 (idX0 ) ∈ G(X0 ), (1.35)

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

from the set of natural transformations ϕ : F → G to the set G(X0 ) is a

bijection.
Note. This result can be extended to a representable functor F ∼ =
C(X0 , −), making use of this isomorphism.

Proof We construct a backward mapping

y ′ : G(X0 ) → Nat(F, G),
(1.36)
(y ′ (x))X : C(X0 , X) → GX, (f : X0 → X) 7→ (Gf )(x),
where the family ψ = y ′ (x) is indeed a natural transformation F → G. In
fact, for g : X → Y in C
ψX
C(X0 , X) / GX
g.− Gg (1.37)
 
C(X0 , Y ) / GY
ψY

(G(g).ψX)(f ) = G(g)((Gf )(x)) = G(gf )(x) = ψY (gf ).

 1.7 A category of Galois connections 45
Then we have to show that the mappings y, y ′ are inverse to each other.
First, a natural transformation ϕ : F → G is taken to the element x =
y(ϕ) = ϕX0 (idX0 ) ∈ G(X0 ), and the latter to the natural transformation
y ′ (x) : F → G. The component (y ′ (x))X takes the morphism f : X0 → X
to (Gf )(x), and it is sufficient to prove that ϕX (f ) = (Gf )(x); this follows
from the naturality of ϕ on f

ϕX0
C(X0 , X0 ) / GX0
f.− Gf (1.38)
 
C(X0 , X) / GX
ϕX

ϕX (f ) = ϕX (f.idX0 ) = (Gf )(ϕX0 (idX0 )) = (Gf )(x).

The other way round, an element x ∈ G(X0 ) is taken to the natural

transformation ϕ = y ′ (x) : F → G and then to

y(ϕ) = ϕX0 (idX0 ) = (G(idX0 ))(x) = x.

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

1.6.7 Exercises
(a) Prove that, if the functor F : C → Set is represented by two objects,
these are isomorphic in C.
(b) More generally, prove that a natural transformation ϕ : F0 → F1 be-
tween two representable functors Fi = C(Xi , −) is invertible if and only if
y(ϕ) ∈ F1 (X0 ) = C(X1 , X0 ) is an isomorphism.

1.7 A category of Galois connections

After the category Ord of ordered sets and monotone mappings, we now
study the category AdjOrd of ordered sets and (covariant) Galois connec-
tions between them – or adjunctions between ordered sets. Motivations of
this notion can be found in the comments and examples below.
All this will also serve as an introduction to general adjunctions, dealt
with in Section 3.1.
The section ends with the contravariant form of Galois connections, the
classical one.
 46 Categories, functors and natural transformations
1.7.1 Definition
Given a pair X, Y of ordered sets, a (covariant) Galois connection (f, g)
between them can be presented in the following equivalent ways.
(i) We assign two increasing mappings f : X → Y and g : Y → X such
that:
f (x) 6 y in Y ⇔ x 6 g(y) in X. (1.39)

(ii) We assign an increasing mapping g : Y → X such that for every x ∈ X

there exists in Y :

f (x) = min{y ∈ Y | x 6 g(y)}. (1.40)

(ii∗ ) We assign an increasing mapping f : X → Y such that for every y ∈ Y

there exists in X:

g(y) = max{x ∈ X | f (x) 6 y}. (1.41)

(iii) We assign two increasing mappings f : X → Y and g : Y → X such

that
idX 6 gf, f g 6 idY. (1.42)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

By these formulas g determines f (called its left adjoint) and f deter-

mines g (its right adjoint). One writes f ⊣ g (as in the general notation
of adjoints in category theory), and the connection (f, g) is also called an
adjunction between ordered sets.
The relations (1.42) imply that

f = f gf, g = gf g. (1.43)

1.7.2 Exercises and complements

(a) Prove that the four conditions above are indeed equivalent.
(b) Of course an isomorphism of ordered sets is, at the same time, left and
right adjoint to its inverse. Conversely, if f ⊣ g ⊣ f then f and g are
isomorphisms, inverse to each other.
(c) More generally, an increasing mapping f : X → Y between ordered sets
may have adjoints h ⊣ f ⊣ g (one or both), which can be viewed as ‘best
approximations’, of different kinds, to an inverse which may not exist

f h > 1, hf 6 1, gf > 1, f g 6 1. (1.44)

 1.7 A category of Galois connections 47
For instance, the embedding of ordered sets f : Z → R has a well-known
right adjoint, the integral-part function, or floor function
[−] : R → Z, [x] = max{k ∈ Z | k 6 x}. (1.45)
The left adjoint also exists: it is the ceiling function
min{k ∈ Z | k > x} = −[−x],
linked (here) to the right adjoint [−] by the anti-isomorphism x 7→ (−x) of
the real and integral lines.
In this example the left adjoint is the ‘lowest upper inverse’, while the
right adjoint is the ‘highest lower inverse’; but this comes out of the injectiv-
ity of f , which forces hf = 1 and gf = 1 in (1.44), leaving the inequalities
f h > 1 and f g 6 1. The general situation is more complex.
(d) The embedding Q → R has no left nor right adjoint: an irrational
number has no distinguished rational approximation.
(e) Prove that two mappings f : X ⇄ Y : g between preordered sets, that
satisfy condition (1.39), are necessarily monotone.

1.7.3 Properties
Let us come back to a general Galois connection f ⊣ g between ordered
sets X, Y .
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The mapping f preserves all the existing joins (also infinite), while g
preserves all the existing meets. In fact, if x = ∨xi in X then f (xi ) 6 f (x)
(for all indices i). Supposing that f (xi ) 6 y in Y (for all i), it follows that
xi 6 g(y) (for all i); but then x 6 g(y) and f (x) 6 y.
From the relations f = f gf and g = gf g it follows that:
(a) gf = id ⇔ f is injective ⇔ f is a split mono ⇔ g is surjective
⇔ g is a split epi ⇔ f reflects the order relation,
(a∗ ) f g = id ⇔ f is surjective ⇔ f is a split epi ⇔ g is injective
⇔ g is a split mono ⇔ g reflects the order relation.
Moreover the connection restricts to an isomorphism (of ordered sets)
between the sets of closed elements of X and Y , defined as follows
cl(X) = g(Y ) = {x ∈ X | x = gf (x)},
(1.46)
cl(Y ) = f (X) = {y ∈ Y | y = f g(y)}.

1.7.4 A category of adjunctions

An adjunction f ⊣ g will also be written as an arrow (f, g) : X →· Y , often
dot-marked and conventionally directed as the left adjoint f : X → Y . Such
 48 Categories, functors and natural transformations
arrows have an obvious composition
(f ′ , g ′ ).(f, g) = (f ′ f, gg ′ ) (for (f ′ , g ′ ) : Y →
· Z), (1.47)
and form the category AdjOrd of ordered sets and Galois connections.
Each hom-set AdjOrd(X, Y ) is canonically ordered: for two adjunctions
(f, g), (f ′ , g ′ ) : X →
· Y we let (f, g) 6 (f ′ , g ′ ) if the following equivalent
conditions hold
f 6 f ′, g ′ 6 g, (1.48)
since f 6 f ′ gives g ′ 6 gf g ′ 6 gf ′ g ′ 6 g.
The relationship between AdjOrd and the usual category Ord (on the
same objects) will become clearer in Chapter 7, where we shall amalgamate
them to form the double category AdjOrd, with horizontal arrows in Ord,
vertical arrows in AdjOrd and convenient double cells (see 7.2.7). Other
similar double categories of lattices will also be of interest (see 7.4.2).

1.7.5 Direct and inverse images of subsets

The transfer of subobjects along morphisms is an important feature, that
we examine here in Set and will be developed in Chapter 6 in other frame-
works related with Homological Algebra.
Every set A has an ordered set SubA = PA of subsets, which actually
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

is a complete boolean algebra (as recalled in 1.2.6). A mapping f : A → B

gives two increasing mappings, of direct and inverse image, or image and
preimage
f∗ : SubA ⇄ SubB : f ∗ ,
(1.49)
f∗ (X) = f (X), f ∗ (Y ) = f −1 (Y ) (X ⊂ A, Y ⊂ B).
These mappings form a Galois connection f∗ ⊣ f ∗ , since
X ⊂ f ∗ f∗ (X), f∗ f ∗ (Y ) = Y ∩ f (A) ⊂ Y, (1.50)
which implies, in particular, that f∗ preserves unions and f ∗ preserves
intersections. (In fact f ∗ is a homomorphism of complete boolean algebras
and also has a right adjoint, related to the universal quantifier, while f∗ is
related to the existential one; we shall not use these facts.)
All this defines a transfer functor for subobjects of Set
Sub : Set → AdjOrd, (1.51)
with values in the category of ordered sets and Galois connections defined
above – a sort of ‘amalgamation’ of the covariant and contravariant functors
of subsets, considered in 1.5.2.
 1.7 A category of Galois connections 49
1.7.6 The graph of a Galois connection
The graph of the adjunction (f, g) : X →· Y will be the following ordered
set
G(f, g) = {(x, y) ∈ X ×Y | f (x) 6 y}
(1.52)
= {(x, y) ∈ X ×Y | x 6 g(y)},
with the order induced by the cartesian product X×Y (that is a categorical
product in Ord).
The given adjunction has a canonical factorisation in two adjunctions
f′ f ′′
/ /
X o G(f, g) o Y (1.53)
′ ′′
g g

f ′ (x) = (x, f (x)), g ′ (x, y) = x,

f ′′ (x, y) = y, g ′′ (y) = (g(y), y).

This forms a natural weak factorisation system in AdjOrd, in the sense

of [GT] (see 2.5.5). Note that the first morphism is a monomorphism of
AdjOrd (in fact its ‘covariant part’ f ′ is an injective mapping, because
g ′ f ′ = id) and the second is an epimorphism (in fact f ′′ is surjective,
because f ′′ g ′′ = id).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

1.7.7 Exercises and complements (Chains of adjunctions)

Non-trivial chains of Galois connections between two ordered sets X, Y
... f−2 ⊣ f−1 ⊣ f0 ⊣ f1 ⊣ f2 ... (f2i : X ⇄ Y : f2i+1 ), (1.54)
seem not to be frequent, ‘in nature’.
Yet, as an interesting, unexpected fact, a Galois connection Z ⇄ Z
on the integral (ordered) line always produces an unbounded chains of
adjunctions.
The reader is invited to investigate this intriguing situation, construct
examples and study variations, where Z is replaced with other ordered sets,
like N or the real line. Then the results can be compared with the following
outline – which has probably the fault of being too explicit.
(a) The following conditions on an increasing function f : Z → Z are equiv-
alent:
(i) f (Z) is lower and upper unbounded,
(ii) f has a right adjoint,
(ii∗ ) f has a left adjoint.
 50 Categories, functors and natural transformations
In fact, by form (ii) of Definition 1.7.1, f has a right adjoint if and only if
every subset S(y) = {x ∈ X | f (x) 6 y} is non empty and upper bounded,
which is equivalent to condition (i); the latter is self-dual.
(b) It follows that each adjunction f0 ⊣ f1 on Z can be extended to a
unique chain of Galois connections, as in (1.54).
(c) As a trivial case, if one of these mappings is invertible, all of them are
and we get a chain of adjunctions of period 2
... f ⊣ f −1 ⊣ f ⊣ f −1 ... (1.55)
Note that a bijective increasing mapping f : Z → Z is necessarily a trans-
lation f (x) = x+ k. Therefore the only chain of period 1 is that of f = idZ.
(But the ordered set Z2 has the symmetry f (x, y) = (y, x) with f ⊣ f .)
(d) In the chain (1.54), f0 is injective if and only if f1 is surjective (by
1.7.3(a)). In such a case all f2i are split mono, all f2i+1 are split epi, and
the adjunctions are expressed by the following conditions (for i ∈ Z)
f2i+1 f2i = id = f2i−1 f2i , f2i f2i+1 6 id, f2i f2i−1 > id. (1.56)
Moreover f2i 6 f2i+2 and f2i−1 > f2i+1 , because:
f2i 6 f2i+2 f2i+1 f2i = f2i+2 , f2i−1 = f2i+1 f2i f2i−1 > f2i+1 .
Once we exclude the trivial case (1.55), the sequence (f2i ) is strictly
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

increasing while (f2i+1 ) is strictly decreasing: in fact we know that the

relation f ⊣ g ⊣ f gives g = f −1 . Since no f2i can be surjective, all
mappings fi are different.
The reader can compute the chain of adjunctions produced by the injec-
tive mapping f0 (x) = 2x.
(e) There is an interesting case of this kind, where all di are injective and
all ei are surjective
di , ei : Z → Z, ... di+1 ⊣ ei ⊣ di ⊣ ei−1 ⊣ di−1 ... (1.57)

di (x) = x if x < i, di (x) = x + 1 if x > i,

ei (x) = x if x 6 i, ei (x) = x − 1 if x > i,
ei di = id = ei−1 di , di+1 ei 6 id, di ei > id,
di > di+1 , ei < ei+1 .
These mappings (or better their restrictions to finite ordinals) are related
with the faces and degeneracies of simplicial sets (see 5.3.6(a)).
(f) On the other hand, if we start from an increasing mapping f : Z → Z
that satisfies condition (i) and is neither injective nor surjective, we get
 1.7 A category of Galois connections 51
a chain (1.54) of adjunctions, with f0 = f , where no fi is injective or
surjective.
For instance, from the chain (1.57) one can readily compute the chain of
Galois connections of the mapping f = di ei , by composing adjunctions (as
in (1.7.4)).
(g) Replacing Z with the real line R one cannot have non-trivial chains of
adjunctions of length higher than 3. In fact in an adjunction f ⊣ g of in-
creasing functions R → R, the left adjoint f is lower and upper unbounded
(as above) and preserves all sup (hence it is left-continuous) while the right
adjoint g is lower and upper unbounded and preserves all inf (hence it is
right-continuous).
Therefore, in a chain f ⊣ g ⊣ h, the function g is lower and upper
unbounded and continuous. If g is strictly increasing, then it is invertible
and we fall in the trivial case of period 2. Otherwise g is constant on some
non trivial interval [a, b], but then both f and h are not continuous at the
point g([a, b]) and the chain f ⊣ g ⊣ h cannot be extended.
(h) Other variations on the ordered sets X, Y of diagram (1.54) are left to
the reader; of course, they need not be the same. Chains of adjunctions
between categories (that are not orders) will be examined in 3.2.8.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

1.7.8 Contravariant Galois connections

A contravariant Galois connection between the ordered sets X, Y is a pair
of decreasing (or anti-monotone) mappings f : X → Y and g : Y → X such
that

gf > idX, f g > idY. (1.58)

This symmetric notion is equivalent to a covariant Galois connection:

- replacing Y with Y op we have two monotone functions f ⊣ g,
- replacing X with X op we have two monotone functions g ⊣ f .
Classically, the term ‘Galois connection’ used to refer to the contravariant
setting, which covers important concrete cases – some of which are recalled
below. This terminology is still used in [M4]. Presently, the covariant
setting is often privileged because only in this case composition is possible
and we have a category.
 52 Categories, functors and natural transformations
1.7.9 Exercises and complements
(a) We are given an arbitrary subset ⊥ ⊂ X × Y of a cartesian product
of sets, which we view as an ‘orthogonality relation’: x⊥y means that
(x, y) ∈ ⊥.
There is an associated contravariant Galois connection
R : PX ⇄ PY : L,
R(A) = A⊥ = {y ∈ Y | for all x ∈ A, x⊥y}, (1.59)
L(B) = ⊥B = {x ∈ X | for all y ∈ B, x⊥y},
that establishes a bijective correspondence between the closed subsets of
X and those of Y
cl(X) = {A ⊂ X | A = ⊥(A⊥)} = {⊥B | B ⊂ Y },
(1.60)
cl(Y ) = {B ⊂ Y | B = (⊥B)⊥} = {⊥A | A ⊂ X}.

(b) For a commutative unitary ring R, let us take the affine space X =
Rn and the polynomial ring Y = R[x1 , ..., xn ] (for some n > 1). Every
polynomial p ∈ Y can be evaluated at any point x ∈ X, giving p(x) ∈ R.
We write x⊥p to mean that p(x) = 0. The associated contravariant Galois
connection is well known in Algebraic Geometry, and sends:
- a subset A ⊂ Rn to the ideal R(A) of all polynomial which annihilate at
every point of A,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

- a subset B ⊂ R[x1 , ..., xn ] to the affine algebraic set L(B) of all points of
Rn annihilated by every polynomial of B.
*The reader may know that, if R is an algebraically closed field, Hilbert’s
Nullstellensatz characterises the closed subsets of R[x1 , ..., xn ] as the radical
ideals of this ring. On the other hand, the closed subsets of Rn are its affine
algebraic sets, by definition.*
(c) An orthogonality (endo)relation f ⊥g between morphisms of a category
will be introduced in 2.4.2.

1.8 Elementary categories of relations and partial mappings

We now review the elementary construction of some categories of relations
and partial mappings, for sets, or abelian groups, etc.
Various extensions of relations (to regular categories, abelian categories,
etc.) will be examined in Chapters 4 and 6; in the latter we also show how
categories of relations are important in Homological Algebra.
Relations and partial mappings will often (but not necessarily) be written
as dot-marked arrows X → · Y , to distinguish them from ordinary mappings.
 1.8 Elementary categories of relations and partial mappings 53
Categories of partial mappings will be denoted by calligraphic letters like
S, I, C, ...

1.8.1 Categories and involutions

We begin by fixing our terminology for involutive endofunctors, starting
from two examples related with ordered sets.
(i) The category Ord, of ordered sets and increasing mappings, has an
involutive covariant endofunctor:

X 7→ X op , (f : X → Y ) 7→ (f op : X op → Y op ), (1.61)

where X op has reversed order and f op is the ‘same’ mapping as f .

(ii) The category AdjOrd, of ordered sets and Galois connections (intro-
duced in 1.7.4), has an involutive contravariant endofunctor:

X 7→ X op , · Y ) 7→ (uop : Y op → X op ),
(u : X → (1.62)

where uop = (g op , f op ), if u = (f, g) with f ⊣ g.

This situation will become clearer in the domain of double categories:
the two procedures (i) and (ii) – which have the same action on the ob-
jects – can be combined to give a vertical involution of the double category
AdjOrd, horizontally covariant (on increasing mappings) and vertically con-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

travariant (on adjunctions); see 7.2.8.

We shall use the following terminology.
(a) A category with reversor will be a category C equipped with an involu-
tive covariant endofunctor R : C → C, often denoted as in (1.61), and said
to be trivial when R = idC.
Obvious non-trivial examples are Ord and Cat. The name of ‘reversor’
is taken from Directed Algebraic Topology [G8], where the categories of
‘directed spaces’ in some sense (like ordered topological spaces, ‘d-spaces’,
and small categories) have such an endofunctor, that turns a directed struc-
ture into the opposite one. In the trivial case, when R = idC, we go back
to classical, non-directed ‘spaces’.
(b) A category with involution will be a category C equipped with an invo-
lutive contravariant endofunctor J : C 99K C, often denoted as in (1.61). It
follows that C is selfdual, i.e. isomorphic to Cop .
AdjOrd is an obvious example; the same holds for AdjCat, that will be
introduced in 3.2.1.
(c) More particularly, an involutive category will be a category C equipped
with a (contravariant) involution which is the identity on objects. In other
 54 Categories, functors and natural transformations
words every morphism f : X → Y has an associated opposite morphism
f ♯ : Y → X so that
f ♯♯ = f, (gf )♯ = f ♯ g ♯ , (1X )♯ = 1X . (1.63)
Classical examples are the categories of relations introduced below.
The involution is said to be regular (in the sense of von Neumann) if
f f ♯ f = f (for all maps f ), as happens with relations of groups or modules.
In this case all the semigroups of endomorphisms C(X, X) are regular, in
the well-known sense of semigroup theory. The reader is warned that this
has nothing to do with the notion of ‘regular category’, that will be seen
in 4.2.1.

1.8.2 Ordered categories

In this book an ordered category is a category C equipped with an order
relation f 6 g between parallel morphisms, which is consistent with com-
position: for f, g : X → Y and f ′ , g ′ : Y → Z
(i) if f 6 g and f ′ 6 g ′ then f ′ f 6 g ′ g.
(This notion is related with ‘enrichment’, see 7.3.3; a different ‘internal’
notion is recalled in 7.3.6.)
A functor F : C → D between ordered categories is increasing, or mono-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

tone, if it preserves the order. Any subcategory of an ordered category

inherits an ordering.
For instance the category Ord of ordered sets is canonically ordered by
the pointwise order f 6 g, defined in (1.4). This ordering is inherited by the
subcategories Lth, Mlh and Dlh of lattices, modular lattices and distributive
lattices (see 1.2.4–1.2.6).
Also AdjOrd has a canonical order, defined in (1.7.4).

1.8.3 Relations of sets

The category Rel Set of sets and relations (or correspondences) is well
known. A relation u : X → · Y, often denoted by a dot-marked arrow,
is a subset of the cartesian product X ×Y . It can be viewed as a ‘partially
defined, multi-valued mapping’, that sends an element x ∈ X to the subset
{y ∈ Y | (x, y) ∈ u} of Y .
The identity relations and the composite of u with v : Y →
· Z are
idX = {(x, x) | x ∈ X},
(1.64)
vu = {(x, z) ∈ X ×Z | ∃ y ∈ Y : (x, y) ∈ u and (y, z) ∈ v}.
 1.8 Elementary categories of relations and partial mappings 55
It is easy to verify that Rel Set is a category. It is actually an involutive
ordered category, in the following sense. First it is an involutive category as
defined in 1.8.1: the opposite relation u♯ : Y → · X is obtained by reversing
pairs. Second, it is an ordered category, in the sense of 1.8.2: given two
parallel relations u, u′ : X →· Y we say that u 6 u′ if u ⊂ u′ as subsets of
X ×Y . Third, these structures are consistent: if u 6 v then u♯ 6 v ♯ (and
conversely, as a consequence).
The involution is not regular (in the sense of 1.8.1): see 1.8.4(c).
The category Set is embedded in the category of relations Rel Set, iden-
tifying a mapping f : X → Y with its graph {(x, y) ∈ X ×Y | y = f (x)};
the condition f 6 g for parallel mappings amounts to f = g.

1.8.4 Exercises and complements

(a) It may help to draw here a synopsis of future investigations of Rel Set,
as endowed with important structures – some of them perhaps unexpected:
(i) as a semiadditive category with arbitrary biproducts, in 2.2.6(b) and
6.4.5(d),
(ii) as a symmetric monoidal closed category (with a ‘peculiar’ internal
hom), in 3.2.8(d) and 3.4.7(g),
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(iii) as a Kleisli category for a monad on Set, in 3.7.2(c),

(iv) as a locally ordered 2-category in 4.5.1 (or a locally preordered bi-
category, in a modified form Rel ′ Set; see 4.5.5).
The reader is warned that the points (i)–(iii) have no counterpart in many
other categories of relations – for instance in Rel Ab, introduced below.
The interpretation of Rel Set as a category of partially defined, multi-
valued mappings will be better understood at the light of point (iii). Bi-
commutative squares in Rel Set are analysed in 2.3.8.

(b) Prove the associativity of the composition of relations of sets.

(c) Show that the involution is not regular, by a suitable endorelation of
the set {0, 1}.
(d) A relation f : X →
· Y of sets is a mapping if and only if it is everywhere
defined and single-valued. These conditions can be characterised as follows

f ♯ f > idX, f f ♯ 6 idY. (1.65)

*(This means that f ⊣ f ♯ in the ordered category Rel Set, viewed as a

2-category: see 7.1.2.)*
 56 Categories, functors and natural transformations
1.8.5 Relations of abelian groups and modules
Abelian groups have a similar category of relations, also called additive
relations or additive correspondences (see [M1, M2, Hi]).
A relation of abelian groups u : X → · Y is a subgroup of the cartesian
product X × Y . Composition, order and involution are defined as above,
giving the involutive ordered category Rel Ab.
Ab is embedded in the former as the wide subcategory of everywhere
defined, single-valued relations.
It is important to note that the involution of Rel Ab is regular, i.e.
uu♯ u = u, for all u in Rel Ab. (1.66)
In fact the inclusion u 6 uu♯ u is obvious (and also holds for relations of
sets). The other way round, if (x, y), (x′ , y) and (x′ , y ′ ) are in u, we have
(x, y ′ ) = (x, y) − (x′ , y) + (x′ , y ′ ) ∈ u. (1.67)
More generally for any (unitary) ring R we have the involutive ordered
category Rel (R Mod) of left R-modules, where a relation is a submodule of
the cartesian product.
We also have the involutive ordered category Rel Gp of groups, where a
relation is a subgroup of the cartesian product. The involution is still reg-
ular, with the same proof as in (1.67), since the commutativity of addition
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

has not been used.

1.8.6 Partial mappings

A partial mapping (of sets) f : X → · Y is a mapping Def f → Y defined
on a subset of X, its subset of definition. Equivalently, it is a single-valued
relation.
For a partial mapping g : Y → · Z, the composite gf : X → · Z is obvious
(as in the well-known case of partially defined functions R → · R):
Def (gf ) = f −1 (Def g), (gf )(x) = g(f (x)), (1.68)
for x ∈ Def (gf ).
We have thus a wide subcategory S ⊂ Rel (Set) that contains Set. In the
induced order of S, f ′ 6 f means that f ′ is a restriction of f to a smaller
subset of X.
The category S should not be viewed as essentially different from the
usual categories of structured sets and ‘total’ mappings, since it is equiva-
lent to the category Set• of pointed sets, via the functor
R : Set• → S, (X, x0 ) 7→ X \ {x0 }, (1.69)
 1.8 Elementary categories of relations and partial mappings 57
that sends a pointed mapping f : (X, x0 ) → (Y, y0 ) to its restriction
R(f ) : X \ {x0 } →
· Y \ {y0 },
Def (R(f )) = f −1 (Y \ {y0 }).
In fact this functor is plainly faithful, full and surjective on objects (see
1.5.5).
The quasi inverse adjoint S : S → Set• is obtained by choosing, for every
set X, a pointed set S(X) = (X ∪ {x0 }, x0 ) where x0 ∈ / X and defining S
on partial mappings in the obvious (and unique) way that gives RS = 1.
Note that SR is only isomorphic to the identity.
(Set theory can give a canonical – if ‘confusing’ – choice for S: one can
take x0 = X, since X ∈ / X.)
This equivalence will be used in 2.2.5(d) to transfer to S categorical con-
structions that are easily computed and well known in Set• , like categorical
and tensor products.

1.8.7 Partial bijections

More particularly a partial bijection (or partial isomorphism) of sets f :
X → · Y is a bijection between a subset Def f of X and a subset Val f of
Y , or equivalently a single-valued, injective relation.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Partial bijections form a wide subcategory

I ⊂ S ⊂ Rel (Set). (1.70)

It is equivalent to the wide subcategory of Set• formed by the pointed

mappings f : (X, x0 ) → (Y, y0 ) that are injective out of the preimage
f −1 {y0 }.
I is used as a basic tool for graphic representations of spectral sequences,
in [G9]. We shall see in 6.3.3(d) that it is a pointed category with good
exactness properties, but lacks products and sums.

1.8.8 *Partial continuous mappings

In various cases, one should consider partial morphisms defined on subob-
jects of a particular kind.
For topological spaces, for instance, partial continuous mappings should
be ‘reasonably’ defined on subspaces (i.e. ‘regular subobjects’, as we shall
see); but in fact the important structures of partial continuous mappings
are even more restricted.
While studying topological manifolds, it can be useful to use the category
 58 Categories, functors and natural transformations
C of spaces and partial continuous mappings defined on open subspaces, to-
gether with its subcategory of spaces and partial homeomorphisms between
open subspaces (see [G2]).
The interested reader can verify that the category C is equivalent to a
full subcategory Top′• of the category Top• of pointed topological spaces,
consisting of those objects (X, x0 ) where the base point x0 is closed and
adherent to every other point (i.e. the only neighbourhood of x0 is X).
The category D of topological spaces and partial continuous mappings
defined on closed subspaces is also of some interest. It is equivalent to
another full subcategory Top′′• of Top• , consisting of those objects (X, x0 )
where the base point x0 is open – i.e. an isolated point.

1.8.9 *Corelations and networks

The involutive ordered category C = Cor Set of sets and corelations can be
constructed in a dual way with respect to Rel Set, letting C(X, Y ) be the
ordered set of the quotients of the sum X + Y ; more explicitly, this is the
set of the equivalence relations on the disjoint union of X and Y .
The reader can easily find out how corelations compose, by using the
equivalence relation generated by a relation. (The pictures below tell ev-
erything about that!)
Early in the history of categories, since the late 1960’s, the full subcate-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

gory T of finite sets and corelations was used in the theory of networks, by
G. Darbo [Da1, Da2] and some of his collaborators like F. Parodi and G.
Testa. The subject was apparently ahead of its time, and later forgotten;
but recently J. Baez has independently reinvented it, with his students, in
a similar perspective [BaP, Fo].
In fact, a corelation ϕ : α →
· β between finite sets (called a ‘transducer’
in [Da1] and related articles) can be viewed as an electrical circuit made
of perfectly conductive wires, connecting the ‘terminals’ belonging to α to
those belonging to β, as in the following picture

• •

• •
•
•
•
• •
• • (1.71)

α β

Transducers compose as if we were connecting wires

 1.8 Elementary categories of relations and partial mappings 59

• • •
• • • • •
•
•
•
• = • •
• • • • •
• • • (1.72)
α β γ α γ

In [Da1] a ‘universe of devices’ is defined as a pair (D, σ), formed of a

functor and a natural transformation

D : T → Set,
(1.73)
σαβ : Dα×Dβ → D(α + β),

satisfying some natural axioms.

(It would now be called a unitary lax monoidal functor, from the sym-
metric monoidal category (T , +, ∅) to the cartesian monoidal category of
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

sets, according to definitions that we shall see in Section 3.4 and 7.2.4.)

In a model of the theory, Dα represents the set of devices with terminals

belonging to the finite set α. A corelation ϕ : α →
· β takes a device A ∈ Dα
to a device ϕ∗ (A) ∈ Dβ, as suggested in the diagram below

• •

• •
•
A •
•
• •
• • (1.74)

α β

Finally, the mapping σαβ takes a pair (A, B) of devices to a device A + B

which, in a concrete model, is obtained by putting A and B in a box and
letting out their terminals
 60 Categories, functors and natural transformations

A B
•✤✤ •✤✤ •✤✤ •✤✤ •✤✤ •✤✤ •✤✤
✤ ✤ ✤ ✤ ✤ ✤ ✤ (1.75)
• • • • • • •

α+β

The theory is quite general, and not limited at all to electrical devices.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.
 2
Limits and colimits

Limits and colimits in a category C are defined by a universal property,

which determines a solution up to isomorphism. The general notion of
a limit (introduced in Section 2.2) includes cartesian products, equalisers
and pullbacks (analysed in Sections 2.1 and 2.3). Dually, colimits comprise
sums, coequalisers, pushouts and the classical ‘inductive limits’ (analysed in
Sections 2.1, 2.3 and 2.6). The classical ‘projective limits’ are also included
in general limits, but – in the usual categories of structured sets – are not
worthy of a separate study.
The construction of limits is dealt with in Theorem 2.2.4, and their
description as universal arrows or Kan extensions in 2.7.2 and 2.8.5. Their
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

relationship with adjoints will be examined in 3.2.2 and 3.2.4, with comma
categories in 3.3.5.

2.1 Basic limits and colimits

We begin by defining products and equalisers in a category C, and comput-
ing them in various concrete categories. Then we do the same for the dual
notions, sums and coequalisers. We end this section with a brief introduc-
tion to biproducts and additive categories.
The general definition of limits and colimits is deferred to the next sec-
tion, where we shall see that all limits and colimits can be constructed with
the basic ones, dealt with here (Theorem 2.2.4).
Various examples are presented, as exercises. The reader will find useful
to complete the missing details, and work out similar results for other
categories of structured sets.
Other results and computations of basic limits and colimits will be given
later: for Ban and Ban1 in 2.2.6; for ordered sets in 3.2.3(b); for varieties of
algebras in Chapter 4; for various categories of topological or metric spaces
 62 Limits and colimits
in Chapter 5; for abelian categories and their generalisations in Chapter 6;
etc.

2.1.1 Products
The simplest case of a limit, in a category C, is the product of a family
(Xi )i∈I of objects (indexed by a small set I).
This is defined as an object X equipped with a family of morphisms
pi : X → Xi (i ∈ I), called (cartesian) projections, which satisfies the
following universal property

f
Y ❋❴ ❴ ❴/ X
❋❋
❋❋
❋❋ pi (2.1)
fi " 
Xi

(i) for every object Y and every family of morphisms fi : Y → Xi there

exists a unique morphism f : Y → X such that, for all i ∈ I, pi f = f .
The morphisms fi are called the components of f , and the latter is of-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

ten written as (fi ) (even though it is not the same as the family of its
components, of course).
The product of a family of objects need not exist. If it does, it is deter-
mined up to a unique coherent isomorphism, in the sense that if also Y is a
product of the family (Xi )i∈I with projections qi : Y → Xi , then the unique
morphism f : X → Y which commutes with all projections (i.e. qi f = pi ,
for all indices i) is invertible. This follows easily from the fact that there is
also a unique morphism g : Y → X such that pi g = qi ; moreover gf = idX
(because pi (gf ) = pi (idX), for all i) and f g = idY .
Q
Therefore one speaks of the product of the family (Xi ), denoted as i Xi .
We say that a category C has products (resp. finite products) if every
family of objects indexed by a small set (resp. by a finite set) has a product
in C.
In particular the product of the empty family of objects ∅ → ObC means
an object X (equipped with no projections) such that for every object Y
(equipped with no maps) there is a unique morphism f : Y → X (satisfying
no condition). The solution is called the terminal object of C; again, it need
not exist, but is determined up to a unique isomorphism. It can be written
as ⊤.
 2.1 Basic limits and colimits 63
2.1.2 Exercises and complements (Products)
(a) In Set, Top, Ab, Ord all products exist and are the usual cartesian ones
(constructed on the product of the underlying sets). The terminal object
is the singleton, with the corresponding structure.
Let us recall that a topological product X with projections pi : X → Xi
has the coarsest topology making all projections continuous. Similarly, in
Ord, the product has the coarsest order relation making all projections
monotone: (xi ) 6 (yi ) if, for all indices i, xi 6 yi in Xi .
(b) Products in the categories Set• and Top• are also obvious
Q Q
i (Xi , xi ) =( i Xi , (xi )). (2.2)

(c) In the category X associated to a preordered set, the categorical product

of a family of points xi ∈ X amounts to their inf (the greatest lower bound),
and the terminal object amounts to the greatest element of X (when such
elements exist; notice that they are determined up to the equivalence re-
lation associated to our preorder, and uniquely determined for an ordered
set).
(d) Products in Cat have been considered in 1.4.6; the terminal object is
the singleton category 1.
(e) It is easy to prove that a category has finite products if and only if it
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

has binary products X1 ×X2 and a terminal object.

2.1.3 Equalisers and regular monomorphisms

Another basic limit is the equaliser of a pair f, g : X → Y of parallel maps
of C. This is an object E with a map m : E → X such that f m = gm and
the following universal property holds:

m f
E b❉ / X // Y m = eq(f, g),
O g
❉ (2.3)
w
❉ h
❉
Z

(ii) every map h : Z → X such that f h = gh factorises uniquely through

m (i.e. there exists a unique map w : Z → E such that mw = h).
The equaliser morphism is necessarily a monomorphism, and is called a
regular monomorphism. It is easy to see that a regular mono which is epi
is an isomorphism.
Products and equalisers are particular instances of the limit of a functor,
that will be introduced in 2.2.1.
 64 Limits and colimits
2.1.4 Exercises and complements (Equalisers)
(a) In Set the natural solution for the equaliser of a pair of mappings
f, g : X → Y is the subset

E = {x ∈ X | f (x) = g(x)}, (2.4)

with the inclusion m : E ⊂ X.

(b) In Top, Ab, Ord, Set• and Top• (and many other concrete categories)
we construct the equaliser in the same way, putting on E the structure
induced by X as a subspace, or a subgroup, etc.
(c) In Cat, the equaliser of two functors F, G : C → D is the subcategory of
the objects and arrows of C on which F and G coincide.
(d) In any category, every split monomorphism is regular.
(e) The reader will note that in Top a monomorphism m : X ′ → X is any
injective map (see 1.3.3(b)), while a regular mono must be the inclusion
of a subspace E ⊂ X, up to homeomorphism; this means a topological
embedding m : X ′ → X, i.e. an injective continuous mapping where X ′ has
the coarsest topology making m continuous: the open subsets of X ′ are
the preimages of those of X. (The converse is also true: every embedding
of a subspace is a regular mono, see 2.4.5(c).)
(f) We have a similar situation in Ord: a monomorphism is any injective
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

monotone mapping, and is a regular mono if and only if it reflects the

ordering (inducing an isomorphism between the domain and an ordered
subset of the codomain).

2.1.5 Sums
As already mentioned in Section 1.1, every notion of category theory has
a dual notion.
The sum, or coproduct, of a family (Xi )i∈I of objects of C is dual to its
product. Explicitly, it is an object X equipped with a family of morphisms
ui : Xi → X (i ∈ I), called injections, which satisfy the following universal
property:
f
XO ❴ ❴ ❴/ < Y
①
ui ①① (2.5)
①①①fi
①
Xi

(i∗ ) for every object Y and every family of morphisms fi : Xi → Y , there

exists a unique morphism f : X → Y such that, for all i ∈ I, f ui = fi .
 2.1 Basic limits and colimits 65
The map f will be written as [fi ], by its co-components.
Again, if the sum of the family (Xi ) exists, it is determined up to a
P
unique coherent isomorphism, and denoted as i Xi , or X1 + ... + Xn in
a finite case.
The sum of the empty family is the initial object ⊥: this means that
every object X has precisely one map ⊥ → X.

2.1.6 Exercises and complements (Sums)

(a) Sums in Set are realised as ‘disjoint unions’. There is a rather natural
way of doing this
P S
X= i Xi = i Xi ×{i}, ui (x) = (x, i) (for x ∈ Xi ). (2.6)

The initial object is the empty set.

(b) In Top we do the same, equipping the set X with the finest topology
that makes all the injections continuous; in other words, the open subsets
of X are arbitrary unions of open subsets of the summands. The initial
object is the empty space.
Similarly, in Ord we endow the set X with the finest ordering that makes
all the injections monotone: (x, i) 6 (y, j) if and only if i = j and x 6 y in
Xi .
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(c) In Abm, Ab and R Mod categorical sums are realised as ‘direct sums’
L Q
Ai = {(ai ) ∈ i Ai | ai = 0 except for a finite set of indices}, (2.7)

where the family (ai ) is said to be quasi-null. The initial object is the
singleton.
P
(d) A sum i (Xi , xi ) in Set• or Top• can be constructed as a pointed
subset or subspace of the cartesian product
Q
{(xi ) ∈ i Xi | xi = xi for all indices i except one at most}. (2.8)

For instance, (R, 0) + (R, 0) can be realised as the subset (or subspace)
of the cartesian plane formed of the two cartesian axes. (Equivalently,
P
the sum can be realised as a quotient of the unpointed sum i Xi , by
identifying all the base points xi .)
(e) In the category X associated to a preordered set, the categorical sum
of a family of points xi ∈ X amounts to its sup (the least upper bound),
while the initial object amounts to the least element of X.
P
(f) In Cat a sum Ci of categories is their obvious disjoint union. The
initial object is the empty category 0.
 66 Limits and colimits
*(g) In Gp categorical sums are classically known as ‘free products’. In
CRng, finite sums are realised as tensor products over Z (see 4.1.4(b)), and
a general sum as a colimit of finite tensor products.

2.1.7 Coequalisers and regular epimorphisms

The coequaliser of a pair f, g : X → Y of parallel maps of C is a map
p : Y → C such that pf = pg and
f p
X // Y / C p = coeq(f, g),
g ③
h
③ (2.9)
③w
 }③
Z

(ii∗ ) every map h : Y → Z such that hf = hg factorises uniquely through

p (i.e. there exists a unique map w : C → Z such that wp = h).
A coequaliser morphism is necessarily an epimorphism, and is called a
regular epimorphism. A regular epi which is mono is an isomorphism.
Sums and coequalisers are particular instances of the colimit of a functor,
that will be introduced in 2.2.1.

2.1.8 Exercises and complements (Coequalisers)

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(a) In Set the natural solution for the coequaliser of two mappings f, g : X →
Y is the projection
p : Y → Y /R, (2.10)
on the quotient modulo the equivalence relation of Y spanned by the pairs
(f (x), g(x)) ∈ Y 2 , for x ∈ X.
(b) In Top we do the same, putting on Y /R the quotient topology, namely
the finest that makes the mapping p continuous. In pOrd we do the same,
putting on Y /R the induced preordering (the finest that makes p mono-
tone). In Ord we first compute the preorder Y /R in pOrd, and then take
the associated ordered set; this fact will be extended to all colimits, in
3.2.3(b).
(c) In Ab we take the quotient Y /H, modulo the subgroup H = {f (x) −
g(x) | x ∈ X}, which amounts to the quotient Y /R′ modulo the congruence
of abelian groups spanned by the previous equivalence relation R. The
reader will adapt this construction to Gp.
(d) Coequalisers in Set• and Top• are (easy and) left to the reader.
(e) In Top an epimorphism p : Y → Y ′ is any surjective map (see 1.3.3(b)),
 2.1 Basic limits and colimits 67
while a regular epi must be the projection on a quotient space p : Y → Y /R,
up to homeomorphism; this means a topological projection p : Y → Y ′ , i.e.
a surjective continuous mapping where Y ′ has the finest topology making
p continuous: a subset of Y is open if and only if its preimage is open in
Y . (The converse is also true: every topological projection is a regular epi,
see 2.4.5(c).)
*(f) The coequaliser in Cat of two functors F, G : C → D is the quotient of
D modulo the generalised congruence generated by this pair; the latter, as
defined in the paper [BBP], also involves equivalent objects. One can avoid
giving a ‘construction’ of the coequaliser category (necessarily complicated)
and just prove its existence by the Adjoint Functor Theorem 3.5.2.

2.1.9 Zero objects, biproducts and additive categories

We end this section by briefly introducing some important notions, that
will be more completely analysed in Section 6.4.
First, a zero object of a category, often written as 0, is both initial and
terminal. This exists in Abm, Ab, R Mod, Gp, Set• , Top• ,... but not in Set,
Top, Cat,... A category with zero object is said to be pointed; then each
pair of objects A, B has a zero-morphism 0AB : A → B (also written as 0),
which is given by the composite A → 0 → B.
As a stronger fact, the reader may have remarked that, in Abm, Ab and
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Q P
R Mod, a finite product Ai and L the corresponding finite sum Ai are
realised as the same object A = Ai , which satisfies:
- the property of the product, by a family of projections pi : A → Ai ,
- the property of the sum, by a family of injections ui : Ai → A,
- the equations pi ui = idAi and pj ui = 0 : Ai → Aj (for i 6= j).
Such an object (in a pointed category) is called a biproduct. The empty
biproduct is the zero object.
Other examples, including Ban and Rel Set (but not Ban1 ), will be seen
in 2.2.6.
As a related notion, a preadditive, or Z-linear, category is a category C
where every hom-set C(A, B) is equipped with a structure of abelian group,
generally written as f + g, so that composition is additive in each variable
(i.e. bilinear over Z)
(f + g)h = f h + gh, k(f + g) = kf + kg, (2.11)
where h : A′ → A and k : B → B ′ . A preadditive category on a single
object is ‘the same’ as a (unitary) ring.
An additive category C is a preadditive category with finite products, or
 68 Limits and colimits
equivalently with finite sums, which are then biproducts. The equivalence
will be proved in Theorem 6.4.3, where we also see that, in this case, the
sum of parallel maps is determined by the categorical structure.
Typical examples are Ab, R Mod, Ban (while Abm and Rel Set are just
N-linear and semiadditive: see 6.4.3, 6.4.5).

2.2 General limits and completeness

This sections contains the main definitions and basic results about limits
and colimits in a category C. The main theorem proves that all limits can
be constructed from products and equalisers.

2.2.1 General limits and colimits

Let S be a small category and X : S → C a functor, written in index notation
(as in 1.4.9(a)), for i ∈ S = ObS and a : i → j in S:

X : S → C, i 7→ Xi , a 7→ (Xa : Xi → Xj ). (2.12)

A cone for the functor X is an object A of C (the vertex of the cone)

equipped with a family of maps (fi : A → Xi )i∈S in C such that all the
following triangles commute
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

fi
A ❍❴ ❴ ❴/ Xi Xa .fi = fj
❍❍
❍❍
❍ Xa (2.13)
fj ❍# 
Xj (for a : i → j in S).

The limit of X : S → C is a universal cone (L, (ui : L → Xi )i∈S ). This

means a cone of X such that every cone (A, (fi : A → Xi )i∈S ) factorises
uniquely through the former; in other words, there is a unique map f : A →
L such that, for all i ∈ S, ui f = fi . The solution need not exist; when it
does, it is determined up to a unique coherent isomorphism and the limit
object L is denoted as Lim(X).
The uniqueness part of the universal property amounts to saying that
the family ui : L → Xi (i ∈ S) is jointly mono (see 1.3.1). A cone of X
that satisfies the existence part of the universal property is called a weak
limit; of course such a solution is ‘determined’ in a (very) weak way.
Dually, a cocone (A, (fi : Xi → A)i∈S ) of X satisfies the condition
fj .Xa = fi for every a : i → j in S. The colimit of the functor X is a univer-
sal cocone (L′ , (ui : Xi → L′ )i∈S ): the universal property says now that for
every cocone (A, (fi )) of X there exists a unique map f : L′ → A such that
 2.2 General limits and completeness 69
f ui = fi (for all i). The colimit object is denoted as Colim(X). The unique-
ness part of the universal property means that the family ui : Xi → L′ is
jointly epi. A cocone that satisfies the existence part of the universal prop-
erty is called a weak colimit.

2.2.2 Particular cases and exercises

Q
(a) The product Xi of a family (Xi )i∈S of objects of C is the limit of the
corresponding functor X : S → C, defined on the discrete category whose
objects are the elements i ∈ S (and whose morphisms reduce to formal
P
identities of such objects). The sum Xi is the colimit of this functor X.
We recall that the family of cartesian projections (pi ) of a product is
jointly mono. These projections are ‘often’ epi but not necessarily: for
instance in Set this fails whenever some of the factors Xi are empty and
others are not. However, one can easily show that, if C has a zero object
(as defined in 2.1.9), all cartesian projections are split epi.
(b) The equaliser in C of a pair of parallel morphisms f, g : X0 → X1 is the
limit of the obvious functor defined on the category 0 ⇒ 1. The coequaliser
is the colimit of this functor.
(c) Pullbacks and pushouts will be studied in the next section. Filtered
colimits in Section 2.6.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(d) In Set every non-empty set is weakly terminal, while ∅ is the unique
weakly initial object. In a pointed category, every object is weakly terminal
and weakly initial.
(e) Weak pullbacks of sets are used in 2.3.8. A weakly initial object will be
used in the proof of the Initial Object Theorem, in 3.5.1.
*(f) Weak limits and colimits are studied in [G4, G6]. They are impor-
tant in Homotopy Theory. A reader familiar with the notion of homotopy
pullback (resp. pushout) of topological spaces [Mat] will likely know, or
easily prove, that it gives a weak pullback (resp. pushout) in the homotopy
category hoTop.

2.2.3 Complete categories and the preservation of limits

A category C is said to be complete (resp. finitely complete) if it has a
limit for every functor S → C defined on a small category (resp. a finite
category).
More precisely one speaks – in the first case – of a small-complete cate-
gory. Of course we cannot expect Set to have products indexed by a large
set, or limits for all functors S → Set defined over a large category. In
 70 Limits and colimits
other words, the basis S should be of a ‘smaller size’ than the category C
where we construct limits, or we force C to be just a preordered set (where
products are infima, and are not influenced by the size of the set of indices).
The question is settled by a neat result of P. Freyd: a small category C
has the limit of every functor defined on a small category (if and) only if
it is a preordered set with all infima (see 2.2.5(f)). This is precisely why,
in an arbitrary category, the existence of all (small) limits does not imply
the existence of colimits, as is the case of preordered sets (see 2.2.5(e)).
One says that a functor F : C → D preserves the limit
(L, (ui : L → Xi )i∈S )
of a functor X : S → C if the cone
(F L, (F ui : F L → F Xi )i∈S )
is the limit of the composed functor F X : S → D. One says that F preserves
limits if it preserves all the limits which exist in C. Analogously for the
preservation of products, equalisers, etc. Saying that a functor does not
preserve limits simply means that it does not preserve some of them.
Dually we have cocomplete categories and the property of preservation
of colimits.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

2.2.4 Theorem (Construction and preservation of limits)

A category is complete (resp. finitely complete) if and only if it has equalis-
ers and products (resp. finite products). Moreover, if C is complete (resp.
finitely complete), a functor F : C → D preserves all limits (resp. all fi-
nite limits) if and only if it preserves equalisers and products (resp. finite
products).
Dual results hold for colimits. In particular, a category is cocomplete
(resp. finitely cocomplete) if and only if it has coequalisers and sums (resp.
finite sums).

Proof The reader can complete this outline. (Alternatively, a more detailed
argument can be found in [M4], Section V.2, Theorem 1.)
Let the functor X : S → C be written in index notation, as in 2.2.1, and
consider the small products
Q
i Xi indexed by the objects i ∈ ObS, with projections pi ,
Q (2.14)
a Xj(a) indexed by the arrows a in S, with projections qa .
where it is understood that a : i(a) → j(a) in S.
 2.2 General limits and completeness 71
Q
A cone (A, (fi )) of X amounts to a map f : A → i Xi that equalises the
following two maps u, v (and gives back the original cone letting fi = pi f )
Q Q
u, v : i Xi → a Xj(a) ,
(2.15)
qa u = pj(a) , qa v = Xa .pi(a) (for a in S).
Q
Taking the equaliser m : L → i Xi of the pair u, v, we have a cone
(L, (ui )) of X, with ui = pi m : L → Xi (for i ∈ ObS). This cone is the
limit.
The second part of the statement, on the preservation of limits, is an
obvious consequence, once we assume that products and equalisers exist,
so that all limits can be obtained as above.

2.2.5 Exercises and complements, I

(a) Taking into account the computations of Section 2.1 it follows that the
categories Set, Top, Ab, Ord, Set• and Top• are complete and cocomplete.
The forgetful functor Top → Set preserves limits and colimits, while Ab →
Set only preserves limits; Ord → Set preserves limits and sums, but it does
not preserve coequalisers (and general colimits, as a consequence).
(b) The reader will note that all limits in Top are constructed as in Set and
equipped with the coarsest topology making all the structural mappings
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

ui : L → Xi continuous. Similarly, all colimits in Top are constructed as

in Set, and equipped with the finest topology making all the structural
mappings ui : Xi → L′ continuous.
(c) One can proceed in a similar way in the category pOrd of preordered
sets. In Ord this procedure works for limits and sums; for coequalisers and
general colimits it must be ‘corrected’, replacing the colimit in pOrd with
the associated ordered set (see 3.2.3(b)).
(d) The equivalence between Set• and S (in 1.8.6) proves that also the latter
has all limits and colimits. For instance, the product in S of a family (Xi )
of sets is easily constructed ‘along the equivalence’ R : Set• ⇄ S : S
Q Q
R( i S(Xi )) =( i (Xi ∪ {xi })) \ {(xi )}, (2.16)

first adding a base point xi ∈

/ Xi to each factor, then taking their cartesian
product in Set• and discarding the base point of the product. (Thus the
product 1×1 in S has three elements, while 2×3 has eleven.) Sums in S can
also be constructed in this way, but they simply amount to disjoint unions
of sets.
(e) In a preordered set X, viewed as a category, equalisers and coequalisers
 72 Limits and colimits
are (obviously) trivial, while we have seen in Section 2.1 that products and
sums amount to infima and suprema, respectively.
Therefore X is a complete category if and only if it has all infima, which
is equivalent to the existence of all suprema (as recalled in 1.2.5): in other
words, the category X is complete if and only if it is cocomplete. In the
ordered case this means that X is a complete lattice.
Similarly, an ordered set is a (bounded) lattice if and only if, as a cate-
gory, it is finitely complete and cocomplete.
*(f) Freyd’s result recalled in 2.2.3 can be rewritten in this form: a small
category C with all small products is a preordered set (with all infima).
The proof (also written in [M4], Section V.2, Proposition 3) is surpris-
ingly simple. Assuming that C is not a preordered set, there is some hom-set
C(A, B) with at least two distinct arrows f 6= g. Take the (small) cartesian
Q
power C = j∈J B, where J is the cardinal of MorC; then the cardinal of
Q
C(A, C) ∼= j∈J C(A, B) is at least 2J , a contradiction.

2.2.6 Exercises and complements, II

(a) It is interesting to consider limits and colimits in the categories Ban1
and Ban (introduced in 1.1.1).
The reader can begin by showing that, in Ban1 , a binary product X ×Y
is the vector space X ⊕ Y with the l∞ -norm
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

||(x, y)||∞ = ||x|| ∨ ||y||,

while a binary sum X + Y is the same vector space X ⊕ Y with the l1 -norm
||(x, y)||1 = ||x|| + ||y||.
These objects are distinct in Ban1 , but they are isomorphic in Ban, where
the biproduct X ⊕ Y (see 2.1.9) can be given any lp -norm, for 1 6 p 6 ∞
(all of them being Lipschitz-equivalent).
After this, it is easy to show that both Ban1 and Ban are finitely complete,
constructing equalisers as closed linear subspaces with the restricted norm.
*In fact Ban1 is even complete and cocomplete, while Ban is finitely
complete and cocomplete. The construction of coequalisers (as quotient
linear spaces modulo closed linear subspaces, with the induced norm) is less
elementary than the previous points above; the construction of arbitrary
products and sums in Ban1 is even more delicate. A reader interested in
the non-elementary aspects of these categories is referred to the text of
Semadeni [Se]. A fundamental result that simplifies these arguments is the
fact that a normed linear space is complete if and only if every family of
elements of summable norm is summable.*
 2.2 General limits and completeness 73
(b) Rel Set has arbitrary products and sums, that are biproducts, as above.
P
The reader will verify that an arbitrary sum X = Xi in Set is still
a sum in Rel Set, with the same injections ui : Xi → X. Since Rel Set is
an involutive category, X is also a product, with projections given by the
opposite relations u♯i : X →
· Xi . The zero object is ∅.
On the other hand, Rel Ab lacks products (and sums), including the
terminal object. Both categories lack equalisers and coequalisers.
(c) If the category C is complete (resp. finitely complete), so is the category
CS (for any small category S), with limits computed pointwise on each
object of S. Similarly for colimits.

2.2.7 Representable functors detect limits and colimits

Let C be a category with small hom-sets, and X : S → C a functor defined
on a small category. The universal property of the limit can be rewritten
as follows:
- a cone (L, (ui : L → Xi )) of X is a limit in C if and only if, for every A in
C, the set C(A, L) is the limit in Set of the sets C(A, Xi ), with limit-cone
ui .− : C(A, L) → C(A, Xi ).
This rewriting tells us that:
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(i) each representable covariant functor FA = C(A, −) : C → Set preserves

all (the existing) limits,
(ii) the family (FA ), indexed by the objects A ∈ ObC, reflects them.
Colimits in C are limits in Cop . Thus, a representable contravariant
functor C(−, A) : Cop → Set takes colimits of C to limits of sets; globally,
their family reflects limits of Set into colimits of C.
For instance, for the contravariant functor of subsets Setop → Set of
P Q P
1.6.5(c), we (plainly) have: P( i Xi ) ∼= i P(Xi ), since a subset A ⊂ i Xi
amounts to a family of subsets Ai ⊂ Xi .

2.2.8 Creating limits

There is another interesting relationship between functors and limits (or
colimits); again, it does not assume their existence (as defined in [M4],
Section V.1).
One says that a functor F : C → D creates limits for a functor X : S → C
if:
(i) for every limit cone (L′ , (vi : L′ → F Xi )i∈S ) of the composed functor
 74 Limits and colimits
F X : S → D, there is precisely one cone (L, (ui : L → Xi )i∈S ) of X in C
taken by F to (L′ , (vi )),
(ii) the cone (L, (ui )) is a limit of X in C (preserved by F ).
This ‘nearly’ implies that F preserves limits: the precise statement can
be found in 2.2.9(b).
For instance the forgetful functor U : Ab → Set creates all small limits
(which do exist). Indeed, a limit of abelian groups can be constructed by
taking the limit L′ of the underlying sets and putting on it the unique
structure that makes the mappings vi into homomorphisms. We shall see
that the same happens for all varieties of algebras (in Section 4.4). On the
other hand, these forgetful functors do not create general colimits: they do
not even preserve them – with an important exception, filtered colimits,
dealt with in Section 2.6.
On the other hand the forgetful functor Top → Set preserves all limits
and colimits but does not create them: for instance the product topology is
the coarsest topology on the product set that makes all cartesian projections
continuous, and is not the only one having this outcome (generally): any
topology intermediate between this topology and the discrete one would
do.
Of course one can restrict the limits that we are considering to the S-
based limits, for a given S, or for some class of small categories; e.g. finite
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

limits, or products, etc.

2.2.9 Exercises and complements

Let F : C → D be a functor and S a small category.
(a) If F creates all S-based limits then it reflects them.
(b) If D has all S-based limits and F creates them, then C has all S-based
limits and F preserves them.
(c) F creates unary products if and only if it reflects identities.
(d) If C has all S-based limits, and the functor F preserves them and reflects
identities, then F creates these limits.
(e) The forgetful functor Top → Set does not reflect identities (but is
amnestic, see 1.4.4).
(f) The reader likely knows that a differentiable manifold can be defined
in two (slightly) different ways: as a topological space (satisfying some
topological properties) equipped with a differentiable atlas, or equipped
with an equivalence class of them. After defining the differentiable maps,
these two approaches give equivalent categories of differentiable manifolds;
 2.3 Pullbacks and pushouts 75
in each of them the forgetful functor with values in Top preserves finite
products, but only in the second case it reflects identities, and creates
finite products.

2.3 Pullbacks and pushouts

Pullbacks and pushouts are an important pair of limit and colimit, dual to
each other. We work in an arbitrary category C.

2.3.1 Pullbacks
The pullback of a pair of morphisms (f, g) of C with the same codomain

f : X1 → X0 ← X2 : g

is the limit of the corresponding functor defined on the category 1 → 0 ← 2.

This amounts to the usual definition: an object A equipped with two maps
ui : A → Xi (i = 1, 2) which form a commutative square with f and g, in
a universal way:

5 X1 ■■
❦❦❦ ;
❦❦❦ ✈✈✈u✈1
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

❦v1 ■■f
❦
❦❦ ✈✈✈ ■■
❦❦ ■$
❦❦ / ✤
B ❙❙❙ A ❍
w
: X0 (2.17)
❙❙❙ ❍ ✉✉
❙❙❙ ❍❍❍ u2 ✉✉
v2 ❙❙❙❙❍❍# ✉
✉✉ g
❙)
X2

that is, f u1 = gu2 , and for every triple (B, v1 , v2 ) such that f v1 = gv2 there
exists a unique map w : B → A such that u1 w = v1 , u2 w = v2 . Again, the
pair (u1 , u2 ) is jointly mono.
The pullback-object A is also called a fibred product over X0 and written
as X1 ×X0 X2 . The square diagram f u1 = gu2 in (2.17) is also called a
pullback, or a pullback diagram; it can be put in evidence by some mark in
the pullback corner, as above.
In the ordered set X the pullback of the diagram x1 6 x0 > x2 is the
meet x1 ∧ x2 . Saying that X has pullbacks means that every upper-bounded
pair of elements has a meet.
In Set (resp. Top, Ab) the pullback-object can be realised as a subset
(resp. subspace, subgroup) of the product X1 ×X2 :

A = {(x1 , x2 ) ∈ X1 ×X2 | f (x1 ) = g(x2 )}. (2.18)

 76 Limits and colimits
2.3.2 Exercises and complements
(a) Generalising the last construction, prove that a category that has binary
products and equalisers also has pullbacks: A is constructed as the equaliser
of two maps X1 ×X2 → X0 . Pullbacks in concrete categories are usually
computed in this way.
(b) This result does not need the terminal object. When the latter exists,
the product X1 ×X2 amounts to the pullback X1 ×⊤ X2 over the terminal
object.
(c) Note that the pullback of the symmetric pair X → ⊤ ← X is the
product (X ×X, p, q), with different projections (generally). When a fixed
choice of pullbacks is used, one cannot assume that the choice is symmetric;
even though it certainly is, up to isomorphism.

2.3.3 Pushouts
Dually, the pushout of a pair (f, g) of morphisms with the same domain is
the colimit of the obvious functor defined on the category 1 ← 0 → 2. This
amounts to an object A equipped with two maps ui : Xi → A (i = 1, 2)
which form a commutative square with f and g, in a universal way:
X1 ❍❙❙
✉: ❍❍❙❙❙❙ v1
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

f✉✉ ❍
✉✉ u1 ❍❍ ❙❙❙❙❙
✉✉ ❍# ❙❙❙
✤ )
X0 ■ ; A w❦❦/5 B (2.19)
■■ ✈✈ ❦❦
■■ u2 ✈✈ ❦❦❦❦❦
g ■■$ ✈
✈❦✈❦❦❦❦ v2
X2

that is, u1 f = u2 g, and for every triple (B, v1 , v2 ) such that v1 f = v2 g

there exists a unique map w : A → B such that wu1 = v1 , wu2 = v2 . The
pushout square can also be highlighted by some mark in the appropriate
corner.
A category that has binary sums and coequalisers also has pushouts: A is
constructed as the coequaliser of the two obvious maps X0 → Xi → X1 +X2
given by f, g and the injections.
The pushout-object A is also called a pasting over X0 and written as
X1 +X0 X2 . In Set this means a quotient of the sum X1 + X2 modulo the
equivalence relation generated by all the pairs (f (x), g(x)) (viewed in the
sum), for x ∈ X0 .
In the category Top of topological spaces, a pasting X1 +X0 X2 is con-
structed as in Set and equipped with the quotient topology of the sum. It
is a useful way of constructing new spaces. The reader can note that the
 2.3 Pullbacks and pushouts 77
usual process of verifying the continuity of a mapping f : X → Y on the
subsets of a closed cover (X1 , X2 ) of X amounts to saying that X is the
pushout of X1 and X2 over X1 ∩ X2 . This fact can be easily generalised to
a finite closed cover (or ‘transferred’ to an arbitrary open cover).
*The well known Seifert–van Kampen Theorem exhibits the fundamental
group of a space as a pushout of groups. R. Brown’s version generalises
this result, using fundamental groupoids [Bro1, Bro2].*

2.3.4 Kernel and cokernel pairs

Given a morphism f : A → B, the pullback R ⇒ A of the diagram A →
B ← A is called the kernel pair of f
f
AO / B
O
u ❉ f (2.20)

R / A
v

In Set it can be realised as R = {(x, x′ ) ∈ A×A | f (x) = f (x′ )}, and gives
the equivalence relation Rf associated to f . Then, the coequaliser of the
pair u, v : R → A is the (projection on) the quotient A/Rf . Kernel pairs
and their coequalisers are basic tools of the theory of regular categories:
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

see Chapter 4.
One can note that the kernel pair has little to do with the equaliser of f
and f , which – in any category – is the identity of its domain.
The dual notion is called a cokernel pair.

2.3.5 Exercises and complements, I

The following properties of pullbacks and pushouts are important and can
be easily verified.
(a) Characterising monos and epis. The morphism m is mono if and only
if the left square below is a pullback, if and only if the kernel pair of m
consists of two equal arrows
m / 1 /
• • • •
O O O O
❉
1 ❉ m p 1 (2.21)
• / • • / •
1 p

(a bullet stands for an arbitrary object). Dually the morphism p is epi if

and only if the right square is a pushout, if and only if the cokernel pair
 78 Limits and colimits
of p consists of two equal arrows. Note that these characterisations do not
require the existence of pullbacks and pushouts in our category.
A functor which preserves pullbacks (resp. pushouts) also preserves mono-
morphisms (resp. epimorphisms). This proves again that a representable
functor preserves monomorphisms, as we have already seen in 1.6.5(d).
(b) Pasting property. If the two squares below are pullbacks, so is their
‘pasting’, i.e. the outer rectangle
• / • / •
O O O
u (2.22)
• / • / •
v

(c) Depasting property. If in the commutative diagram above the outer

rectangle is a pullback and the pair (u, v) is jointly mono then the left
square is a pullback.
The hypothesis on the pair (u, v) is automatically satisfied in two com-
mon cases: when the right square is also a pullback, or one of the morphisms
u, v is mono.
(d) Pushouts have dual properties with respect to (b) and (c). In an abelian
category pullbacks and pushouts are characterised by exactness properties
of an associated sequence of morphisms: see 6.4.8.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

2.3.6 Exercises and complements, II

(a) In a category with equalisers and cokernel pairs, a monomorphism is
regular if and only if it is the equaliser of its cokernel pair.
(b) A category with pullbacks and terminal object is finitely complete.
Hint: an equaliser of two maps A ⇒ B can be constructed by suitable
pullbacks, using also the diagonal A → A2 .
(c) Epimorphisms in Hsd are precisely the maps whose image is dense in
their codomain. Hints: we have already seen that this condition is sufficient
(in 1.3.4(b)); conversely, one can consider the embedding C → Y of a closed
subspace into a Hausdorff space, and show that its cokernel pair in Top also
‘works’ in Hsd.
*(d) The class of limits generated by the existence of pullbacks, in a cate-
gory, is characterised in [Pa].

2.3.7 Lemma
In a category C we suppose that the following diagram is commutative. If
 2.3 Pullbacks and pushouts 79
the two lateral squares and the back square are pullbacks (with vertices
P, Q and R), then the front square is also a pullback
• / •
✉✉✉: O ✈✈✈; O
✉✉ / ✈✈
• •
O O
(2.23)
/
<R < •
①①① u ③③
①① ③③③v
P / Q

Proof It is a consequence of the pasting and depasting properties above, in

2.3.5. The pasting of the left and back squares is a pullback, and coincides
with the pasting of the front and right squares; but the right square is
a pullback, whence the front square is also. Also here one can drop the
hypothesis that the right square be a pullback and replace it with: the pair
(u, v) is jointly mono.

2.3.8 *Bicommutative squares and exact squares

This point is about categories of relations of sets and modules, and will be
used in Chapter 6.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(a) First we work in the category Set. It is easy to see that a square of
mappings
f
A / X
g h (2.24)
 
Y / B
k

is commutative if and only if we have gf ♯ 6 k ♯ h in Rel Set (or f g ♯ 6 h♯ k,

equivalently). In fact

hf = kg ⇒ gf ♯ 6 k ♯ kgf ♯ = k ♯ hf f ♯ 6 k ♯ h,
gf ♯ 6 k ♯ h ⇒ kg 6 kgf ♯ f 6 kk ♯ hf 6 hf ⇒ kg = hf.

We say that the square (2.24) is bicommutative in Rel Set if it satisfies

the stronger condition
(i) gf ♯ = k ♯ h : X →
· Y (⇔ f g ♯ = h♯ k : Y →
· X),
i.e. if the original square (of mappings) commutes in Rel Set when we ‘re-
verse’ two parallel edges.
Plainly, condition (i) can be characterised as follows:
 80 Limits and colimits
(ii) for (x, y) ∈ X ×Y , h(x) = k(y) if and only if there exists some a ∈ A
such that f (a) = x, g(a) = y.
Equivalently, the square (2.24) is a weak pullback in Set (see 2.2.1), that
is:
(iii) hf = kg and for every commutative square hf ′ = kg ′ there is some
map u such that f ′ = f u, g ′ = gu

4 X ❏❏
f′❥❥ ❥❥❥t❥t❥t: ❏❏h
❥❥❥ ❥❥❥ tttf ❏❏
❏$
❥❥
′ ❥ u
t
A ❚❚❚ / A ❏ : B (2.25)
❚❚❚❚ ❏ tt
❚❚❚❚ ❏❏g❏❏ tt
t
g′
❚❚❚❚❏$ tt k
❚*
Y

The sufficiency of (iii) follows from taking A′ = {∗}, its necessity from
the axiom of choice.
(b) Similarly a square (2.24) of homomorphisms of R Mod (in particular
of Ab) is said to be exact if it becomes bicommutative in the category of
relations, i.e. if it satisfies (i). This is still equivalent to (ii), since the
forgetful functor Rel (R Mod) → Rel Set is faithful; this condition can also
be expressed by an exact sequence due to Hilton [Hi] (see 6.4.8). Char-
acterisation (iii) holds here if we take A′ = R (or require A′ to be a free
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

module).

2.4 Subobjects and quotients, regular and strong

In a category, a subobject of an object A is defined as a ‘selected’ mono-
morphism m : X ֌ A, in a suitable equivalence class; dually, a quotient of
A is a selected epimorphism p : A ։ X.
Nevertheless, in many categories it is convenient to restrict the monos
or epis we are considering, in order to get the ‘good’ notion of subobject
or quotient: strong monomorphisms and strong epimorphisms (defined in
2.4.3) are important in categories of topological spaces, while strong epi-
morphisms and ordinary monos are important in varieties of algebras. This
is discussed in 2.4.5.
In these cases, strong can be equivalently replaced with regular. But
strong monos and epis have the advantage of being closed under composi-
tion, in every category.
Categories of structured sets, usually, have a natural choice for the ‘good’
notion of subobject and quotient.
 2.4 Subobjects and quotients, regular and strong 81
2.4.1 Subobjects and quotients
Let A be an object of the category C. A subobject of A is defined as an
equivalence class of monomorphisms, or better as a selected representative
of such a class.
More precisely, given two monos m, n with values in A, we say that m ≺ n
if there is a (uniquely determined) morphism u such that m = nu. We say
that m and n are equivalent, or m ∼ n, if m ≺ n ≺ m, which amounts to
the existence of a (unique) isomorphism u such that m = nu.
In every class of equivalent monos with codomain A, precisely one is
selected and called a subobject of A; in the class of isomorphisms we always
choose the identity 1A . The subobjects of A in C form the (possibly large)
ordered set SubA, with greatest element 1A ; here, the induced order m ≺ n
is also written as m 6 n.
Epimorphisms with a fixed domain A are dealt with in a dual way. Their
preorder and equivalence relation are also written as p ≺ q (meaning that p
factorises through q) and p ∼ q. A quotient of A is a selected representative
of an equivalence class of epimorphisms with domain A; they form the
ordered set QuoA, with greatest element 1A ; again the induced order is
also written as p 6 q.
The category C is said to be well powered (resp. well copowered) if all its
sets SubA (resp. QuoA) are small, as is often the case with categories of
(small) structured sets.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Duality of categories turns subobjects of C into quotients of Cop , pre-

serving their order.

2.4.2 Orthogonal morphisms

The following relationship between morphisms of C will be useful. We say
that f is orthogonal to g, and write f ⊥g, if for all arrows u, v that make a
commutative square vf = gu
f
• / •
②
u ②
②w v (2.26)
 |② / •
•
g

there is precisely one morphism w such that wf = u and gw = v.

Plainly, this relation is not symmetric. For a (generally large) subset
H ⊂ MorC we have the following orthogonal classes
⊥H = {f ∈ MorC | ∀h ∈ H, f ⊥h},
(2.27)
H⊥ = {f ∈ MorC | ∀h ∈ H, h⊥f }.
 82 Limits and colimits
Applying 1.7.9(a), the orthogonality relation gives a contravariant Galois
connection
L : P(MorC) ⇄ P(MorC) : R,
(2.28)
L(H) = ⊥H, R(H) = H⊥.

2.4.3 Regular and strong subobjects and quotients

Let us recall that an epimorphism p : A → X of C is said to be regular if
it is the coequaliser of a pair of parallel morphisms with values in A (see
2.1.7).
As a more general property, an epimorphism p : A → X is said to be
strong if it is orthogonal to every monomorphism: for every commutative
square mu = vp where m is mono, there exists a (unique) morphism w such
that wp = u and mw = v (the last two conditions are actually equivalent)
p
A // X
②
u ② (2.29)
②w v
 |② 
Y /m / B

In fact, every regular epimorphism is strong, as proved below (in 2.4.4(a)).

Plainly, both notions are invariant up to the equivalence relation p ∼ q (of
epimorphisms defined on A). A quotient p : A → X is said to be regular
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(resp. strong) if it is, as an epimorphism.

Dually a monomorphism m : Y → B is said to be strong if it is orthogonal
to every epimorphism: for every commutative square as above, where p is
epi, there exists a morphism w such that wp = u and mw = v. Every
regular monomorphism is a strong mono. A subobject is said to be regular
(resp. strong) if it is, as a monomorphism.

2.4.4 Exercises and complements, I

(a) It is easy to prove that every regular epimorphism is strong: in the
diagram below (with a commutative square), let p be the coequaliser of
f, g
f p
A′ // A // X
g ②
u ②
②w v (2.30)
 |② 
Y /m / B

Then uf = ug (cancelling the monomorphism m), and there exists a

morphism w such that wp = u; cancelling p, we also have mw = v.
 2.4 Subobjects and quotients, regular and strong 83
(b) Strong epis are closed under composition. If a composite gf is a strong
epi, g also is. And dually.

(c) A strong epimorphism which is mono is an isomorphism. And dually.

2.4.5 Exercises and complements, II

(a) In Set every monomorphism (resp. epimorphism) is regular: the reader

will show that every subset E ⊂ X is the equaliser of its cokernel pair, and
every quotient set X/R is the coequaliser of its kernel pair.
Therefore all subobjects are regular (and strong), and can be identified
with subsets. All quotients are regular (and strong), and can be identified
with set-theoretical quotients modulo an equivalence relation.

(b) In Ab and R Mod every monomorphism (resp. epimorphism) is regular

(and even ‘normal’, as we shall see in 6.1.3). All subobjects are regular
and can be identified with subgroups; all quotients are regular and can be
identified with ordinary quotients modulo a subgroup.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(c) In Top every subspace E ⊂ X is the equaliser of its cokernel pair, and
every quotient space X/R is the coequaliser of its kernel pair.
Here every injective continuous mapping is a monomorphism, while the
regular and strong subobjects coincide and amount to inclusions of sub-
spaces: the ‘general subobjects’ are less important than the strong (or
regular) ones. Similarly, every surjective continuous mapping is an epi,
while the regular and strong quotients coincide and amount to projections
on quotient spaces, in the usual sense.

(d) We shall see in Theorem 4.4.4 that, in a variety of algebras, regular

epimorphisms coincide with the strong ones, and give the usual quotients
of algebras, modulo a congruence. On the other hand, general subobjects
amount to the usual subalgebras.

(e) In a variety of algebras, general epimorphisms on the one hand, regular

and strong monomorphisms on the other, can be difficult to determine and
– finally – of a limited interest. Knowing a few cases should be enough: for
instance, all subgroups are regular subobjects in Gp (a non-trivial fact, see
[AHS], Exercise 7H), while a subsemigroup need not be a regular subobject
in the category of semigroups ([AHS], Exercise 7I).
 84 Limits and colimits
2.4.6 Preimages of subobjects and images of quotients
The reader will likely find of interest to prove that, if the left square below
is a pullback and n is a strong mono, or a regular mono, so is m.

f f
AO / B A / B
O
m ❋ n p q (2.31)
O O  ① 
• / • • / •

The monomorphism m : • ֌ A is determined up to the equivalence rela-

tion described above; it is called the preimage, or inverse image, of n along
f and written as f ∗ (n). When we work with subobjects, f ∗ (n) is strictly
determined by their choice.
Dually, if the right square above is a pushout and p is epi, or a strong
epi, or a regular epi, so is q : B → •. The latter is determined up to the
equivalence relation of epimorphisms described above; it is called the image
of p along f and written as f◦ (p).
We generally adopt the following conventions.
(i) The unit constraint for pullbacks. The pullback of an identity mor-
phism along any morphism (always exists and) is chosen to be an identity:
f ∗ (1B ) = 1A .
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(i∗ ) The unit constraint for pushouts. The pushout of an identity mor-
phism along any morphism (always exists and) is chosen to be an identity:
f◦ (1A ) = 1B .

2.5 Factorisation systems

Many categories have a privileged factorisation system (E, M ), e.g. the fac-
torisation ‘epi-mono’ in Set and abelian categories, or ‘regular epi - general
mono’ in any variety of algebras. Yet the general notion (in 2.5.2) does not
require that the system be proper, i.e. that E be a set of epimorphisms and
M a set of monomorphisms; there are important cases where this does not
hold.
We briefly sketch this subject. The reader can find further information in
[AHS, Bo1, FrK, CaJKP] and in the papers cited below. The (non elemen-
tary) relationship of factorisation systems with monads will be outlined in
Section 7.6.
We work in a category C. The subsets of monomorphisms, epimorphisms
and isomorphisms in MorC are written as Mono, Epi and Iso, respectively.
 2.5 Factorisation systems 85
2.5.1 Examples
Two examples will be of help to introduce the subject.
(a) As an obvious, well known fact, every mapping f : A → B in Set has
an epi-mono factorisation f = me, which is uniquely determined up to a
unique ‘central’ isomorphism.
More precisely, given two factorisations f = me = m′ e′ of this kind,
there is a unique morphism w that makes the diagram below commutative,
and it is an isomorphism
e / X m / B
A
w (2.32)

A / X / B
e′ m′

This decomposition f = me will also be called the EM-factorisation of

f , where E = Epi and M = Mono are the (large) subsets of MorSet of epis
and monos, respectively. The pair (E, M ) is called a factorisation system
for Set. It is a proper one – which in general just means that E ⊂ Epi and
M ⊂ Mono.
The reader likely knows various similar factorisations, in concrete cate-
gories; some of them will be recalled below.
(b) The category of morphisms C2 of an arbitrary category C, described
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

in 1.6.1, has a canonical factorisation which plays an important role in the

theory of factorisations.
In fact every morphism f = (f ′ , f ′′ ) : x → y can be factorised as in the
right diagram below

f′ 1 f′
X′ / Y′ X′ / X′ / Y′
x y x f y (2.33)
    
X ′′ / Y ′′ X ′′ / Y ′′ / Y ′′
f ′′ f ′′ 1

where f = vf ′ = f ′′ u is the diagonal of the commutative square f .

If we let E be the set of morphisms (i, g) where i is an isomorphism,
as in the left commutative square below, and M be the set of morphisms
(f, j) where j is an isomorphism, as in the right square

i f
• / • • / •

(2.34)
 / •  / •
• •
g j
 86 Limits and colimits
it is easy to see that the EM-factorisation considered above is unique up
to isomorphism, in C2 . The reader will note that:
- this factorisation system (E, M ) is not proper,
- restricting E to the set E0 where i is an identity and M to the set M0
where j is an identity, we even have a strict factorisation system (E0 , M0 ),
in the sense that the factorisation (2.33) is now strictly determined,
- such a restriction can also be made in case (a), taking – for instance –
E0 = Epi and M the set of inclusions of subsets.

2.5.2 Factorisation systems

We now define a factorisation system for C as a pair (E, M ) of (generally
large) subsets of MorC such that:
(i) E and M are closed under composition and contain all the isomorphisms
(forming two wide subcategories E, M of C),
(ii) every morphism f has a factorisation f = me, with e ∈ E and m ∈ M ,
(iii) (uniqueness) for any two factorisations f = me = m′ e′ of this kind,
there is a unique morphism w that makes the diagram (2.32) commute,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

and it is an isomorphism. (We speak of the EM-factorisation f = me.)

Axiom (iii) can be replaced with the following one (equivalent in the
presence of the others):
(iii′ ) (orthogonality) for every e ∈ E and every m ∈ M , e⊥m (see 2.4.2).
The equivalence is proved below, in 2.5.3(a).
The opposite category Cop inherits an opposite factorisation system,
namely (M op , E op ).
We say that (E, M ) is a proper, or epi-mono, factorisation system if
E ⊂ Epi and M ⊂ Mono. This need not be the case, as we have already
seen in 2.5.1(b); moreover, every category admits two trivial factorisation
systems: (Iso, Mor) and (Mor, Iso), which are not proper – in general.

2.5.3 Exercises and complements, I

A factorisation system (E, M ) is given in C.
(a) (Here we only assume that (i) and (ii) hold.) Prove that (iii) ⇒ (iii′ )
 2.5 Factorisation systems 87
using the left diagram below, and that (iii′ ) ⇒ (iii) using the right one
e / 1 / A e / X
• • A
w
t
1 e′
t m
e′ e′′ t
   e ′  zt 
• o❴ ❴ ❴ • A / Y m ′ / B (2.35)
w′
t
e t ′ 1
m′ m′′ t m
  zt  
• / • X / B / B
m m 1

(b) E∩M coincides with the set of isomorphisms of C. The EM-factorisation

u = me : A → B of an isomorphism u consists of two isomorphisms.
Hint, for the first statement: write u ∈ E ∩ M as u = 1B .u = u.1A and
apply uniqueness.
(c) Each of the sets E, M determines the other, as an orthogonal class in
C (in the sense of 2.4.2)
- E = ⊥M = {f ∈ MorC | ∀ m ∈ M, f ⊥m},
- M = E⊥ = {f ∈ MorC | ∀ e ∈ E, e⊥f }.
Hint: It suffices to prove that every morphism f ∈ ⊥M belongs to E.
The EM-factorisation f = me gives the left commutative diagram below
(because f ⊥m), and the right square proves that w is an isomorphism
f e
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A / B A /
✇ ✇X
wm ✇✇✇✇✇
✇ (2.36)
e ✇w 1 e ✇✇✇✇✇ m
 {✇   {✇{✇✇✇✇ 1 
X / B X / B
m m

(d) For a composite gf in C, we have:

- if gf ∈ E and f ∈ E, then g ∈ E,
- if gf ∈ M and g ∈ M , then f ∈ M .
Hint: assuming that gf ∈ E and f ∈ E, one can prove that g⊥m (for
every m ∈ M ) by applying the hypotheses to the following commutative
diagram
f g
• / • / •

uf u v
 / • / •
•
1 m

(e) The factorisation systems of C are ordered by the relation expressed by

the following equivalent conditions
E ⊂ E′, M ′ ⊂ M. (2.37)
 88 Limits and colimits
In fact, because of the contravariant Galois connection (2.28), E ⊂ E ′
implies M = E⊥ ⊃ E ′ ⊥ = M ′ , and conversely. The trivial factorisation
systems (Iso, Mor) and (Mor, Iso) on C are, respectively, the smallest and
the largest.

(f) A strict factorisation system for C is a pair (E0 , M0 ) of subsets of MorC

such that:

(i) E0 and M0 are closed under composition and contain all the identities,

(ii) every morphism f has a strictly unique factorisation f = m0 e0 , with

e0 ∈ E0 and m0 ∈ M0 .

Note that this is not a factorisation system, because E0 and M0 do not

contain all isomorphisms – generally. But there is a unique factorisation
system (E, M ) containing the former (or spanned by it), where f = m0 e0
is in E (resp. M ) if and only if m0 (resp. e0 ) is an isomorphism. The only
non obvious point – if not a difficult one – is the closure of E and M under
composition. (One can see the proof in [G4], Section 2.)

2.5.4 Exercises and complements, II

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(a) A category admits the pair (Epi, Mono) as a factorisation system if and
only if

(i) all epimorphisms are strong epis and all monomorphisms are strong
monos,

(ii) every morphism f has an epi-mono factorisation.

(b) The following categories have such a factorisation system: Set, Set• ,
Ab, R Mod, Gp. For the last case, one should recall that all epimorphisms
in Gp are surjective (see 1.3.4(a)).

(c) We shall see in 4.2.3 that every regular category has a factorisation
system (rEpi, Mono), where rEpi is the set of regular epis (coinciding with
the strong ones). The examples of (b) are part of this case.

(d) In Top one can consider two main factorisation systems: (rEpi, Mono)
and (Epi, rMono). One may prefer to use a ‘ternary factorisation system’
(rEpi, Iso, rMono), which generates each of the previous ones in the obvious
way.
 2.6 Inductive limits and filtered colimits 89
2.5.5 *Natural weak factorisation systems
A functorial weak factorisation system in C is assigned by a functorial
factorisation of its morphisms
λ(f ) ρ(f )
X / F (f ) / Y f = ρ(f ).λ(f ), (2.38)

where F : C2 → C is a functor and λ : Dom → F , ρ : F → Cod are natural

transformations.
Plainly, every factorisation system (E, M ) in C produces such a structure,
by choosing for every morphism f : X → Y , a particular EM-factorisation
X → F (f ) → Y .
A natural weak factorisation system is a stronger notion that covers var-
ious situations, as the graph factorisation of Galois connections in 1.7.6
(and of general adjunctions in 3.3.6). It was introduced in [GT]; see also
[Ga]. (Interestingly, these graph factorisations are mono-epi.)

2.6 Inductive limits and filtered colimits

The inductive limit of a diagram X = ((Xi ), (uij )) is a classical notion,
studied in many concrete categories of algebraic or topological character.
In category theory it is a kind of colimit, and has a natural generalisation
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

to a filtered colimit.
These colimits have important, peculiar properties: they are ‘often’ pre-
served by forgetful functors of concrete categories, and even created by
the forgetful functors of equational algebras. Furthermore, they ‘often’
commute with finite limits.
The dual notion, classically called a projective limit, is less important
in the usual categories of structured sets, where – generally speaking – all
limits are already ‘well-behaved’.
We keep this section at an elementary level, adequate to the present
goals. More complete expositions can be found in [M4, Bo1].

2.6.1 Inductive limits

A filtered (ordered) set I will be a (small) ordered set where every finite
subset has an upper bound. Or, equivalently, a non-empty ordered set such
that each pair i, j ∈ I has an upper bound k > i, j in I. (This is also called
a directed set.)
An inductive limit is the colimit of a functor X : I → C defined on such
a category. The functor X will be written in index notation (see 1.4.9(a)),
 90 Limits and colimits
as
X = ((Xi ), (uij )), uij : Xi → Xj , for i 6 j in I,
(2.39)
uii = idXi , ujk .uij = uik , for i 6 j 6 k in I.
A cocone (Y, (fi )) of X is thus an object Y with a family of morphisms
fi in C such that
fi : Xi → Y, fj uij = fi , for i 6 j in I. (2.40)
The colimit is a universal cocone
(L, (ui )) = Colim((Xi ), (uij )), (2.41)
which means that for every cocone (Y, (fi )) there exists a unique f : L → Y
in C such that fi = f ui : Xi → Y , for all i ∈ I.
For sure we do not want to include here the case I = ∅, as it will be
evident in 2.6.2(c).

2.6.2 Exercises and complements, I

Generally speaking, inductive limits in a concrete category C are easy to
construct, and an important tool. The reader should find it interesting to
complete the details of the following exercises. The first two already show
that inductive limits can be much simpler than general colimits.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

I is always a filtered set, and U : C → Set the forgetful functor of C.

(a) We are given a functor X : I → Set. One begins by forming the sum
P
S = Xi , whose elements are written as pairs (x, i), with i ∈ I and x ∈ Xi
(as in (2.6)). The reader will prove that the relation (x, i) ∼ (y, j) in S
defined by
there exists k > i, j in I such that uik (x) = ujk (y), (2.42)
is an equivalence relation, and that the colimit of X can be obtained as the
quotient:
L = S/ ∼, ui : Xi → L, ui (x) = [x, i]. (2.43)
Loosely speaking, the colimit L is constructed by putting together all the
elements of the system (Xi ), and identifying them when they ‘eventually
coincide’, along I.
(b) For a functor X : I → Ab, one takes the colimit L of the ‘underlying
functor’ U X : I → Set. The reader will check that L has a structure of
abelian group, defined as follows
[x, i] + [y, j] = [uik (x) + ujk (y), k], for i, j 6 k in I. (2.44)
 2.6 Inductive limits and filtered colimits 91
Moreover this is the unique structure of abelian group of L that makes
all ui : Xi → L into homomorphisms. Finally (L, (ui )) is the colimit of X
in Ab, created by U : Ab → Set (as defined in 2.2.8).
(c) The reader will note that the previous construction fails for I = ∅:
the colimit of X : ∅ → Ab is the trivial group {0}, and is not created by
U : Ab → Set.
(d) The construction in (b) works, quite similarly, in many categories of
‘algebras’, like Mon, Gp, Rng, R Mod, etc. In fact, it works in every variety
of algebras, as we shall see in Theorem 4.4.1.
(e) For a functor X : I → Top, one takes the colimit L of the ‘underlying
functor’ U X : I → Set, and endows L with the finest topology making all
mappings ui : Xi → L continuous. But this is nothing new, because one
can do the same for any colimit, as we have observed in 2.2.5(b).
(f) One would have a similar situation in the category pOrd of preordered
sets (see 2.2.5(c)). For ordered sets we come back to something of interest:
the forgetful functor U : Ord → Set does not preserve general colimits (see
3.2.3(b)), but does preserve all inductive limits (without creating them).
In fact, for a functor X : I → Ord, one takes the colimit L of the ‘under-
lying functor’ U X : I → Set, and endows L with the finest (or ‘smallest’)
ordering making all mappings ui : Xi → L monotone
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

ξ6η if ξ = [x, i], η = [y, i] for some i ∈ I and x 6 y in Xi . (2.45)

2.6.3 Exercises and complements, II

(a) In Set every object X is the inductive limit of the filtered set Pf (X) of
its finite subsets, ordered by inclusion. More precisely
(X, (uK : K ⊂ X)) = Colim((K), (uKK ′ : K ⊂ K ′ )) (2.46)
where the family of inclusions uKK ′ : K ⊂ K ′ is indexed by the pairs
K ⊂ K ′ in Pf (X).
(b) In Ab every object A is the inductive limit of the filtered set Subfg (A)
of its finitely generated subgroups, ordered by inclusion.
(c) The reader can easily extend this fact to various categories of ‘algebras’,
like Mon, Gp, Rng, R Mod, etc. Or to any variety of algebras (after reading
Chapter 4, if needed).
*(d) A compactly generated space is the inductive limit of the filtered set
of its compact subspaces. (We recall that a topological space X is said
to be compactly generated if every subset C that intersects every compact
subspace K of X in a set closed in K, is itself closed in X.)
 92 Limits and colimits
This point is an extension of point (a), viewing a set as a discrete space
and a finite subset as a compact subspace.

2.6.4 Filtered colimits

More generally, a filtered category S is a (small) non-empty category such
that (writing I = ObS):
(i) for each pair i, j ∈ I there exist a pair of arrows a : i → k, b : j → k in
S,
(ii) for each pair of arrows a, b : i → j there exists an arrow c : j → k such
that ca = cb.
If S is an ordered set, this coincides with the definition of a filtered set,
since condition (ii) is trivially satisfied.
A filtered colimit is the colimit of a functor X : S → C defined on a filtered
category. Writing again the functor X in index notation

X = ((Xi ), (ua )), u a : Xi → Xj , for i and a : i → j in S, (2.47)

a cocone (Y, (fi )) of X is an object Y equipped of a family of morphisms

in C such that

fi : Xi → Y, fj ua = fi : Xi → Y, for i and a : i → j in S. (2.48)

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The colimit is a universal cocone (L, (ui )): for every cocone (Y, (fi ))
there exists a unique f : L → Y in C such that fi = f ui : Xi → Y , for all
i ∈ I.

2.6.5 Exercises and complements

Filtered colimits in a concrete category C are constructed by extending
what we have seen in 2.6.2.
(a) Let X : S → Set be a functor defined on a filtered category. One forms
P
again the sum S = Xi , with elements (x, i), for i ∈ I and x ∈ Xi . The
reader will prove that the relation (x, i) ∼ (y, j) in S defined by

there exist a : i → k, b : j → k in S such that ua (x) = ub (y), (2.49)

is an equivalence relation, and that the colimit of X can be obtained as:

L = S/ ∼, ui : Xi → L, ui (x) = [x, i]. (2.50)

(b) The other constructions of 2.6.2 are extended in the same way.
 2.6 Inductive limits and filtered colimits 93
2.6.6 Theorem
Filtered colimits in Set commute with finite products, in a sense made pre-
cise in the proof.
Note. This statement is a particular instance of a much more general result:
see 2.6.7(b).

Proof We begin by considering binary products. Let X = ((Xi ), (ua ))

and Y = ((Yi ), (va )) be two functors S → Set defined on the same filtered
category. Denoting by X ×Y : S → Set the functor

(X ×Y )i = Xi ×Yi , wa = ua ×va : Xi ×Yi → Xj ×Yj , (2.51)

we want to prove that Colim(X ×Y ) ∼ = ColimX ×ColimY , by a canonical

bijection.
In fact, there is a canonical mapping (f, g) : Colim(X ×Y ) → ColimX ×
ColimY , with components f, g produced by the cocones

fi = ui pi : Xi ×Yi → Xi → ColimX,
(2.52)
gi = vi qi : Xi ×Yi → Yi → ColimY.

(The cocone conditions are plainly satisfied: for an arrow a : i → j in S

we have: fj wa = uj pj wa = uj ua pi = ui pi = fi and, similarly, gj wa = gi .)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The mapping (f, g) acts as follows (for i ∈ I and (x, y) ∈ Xi ×Yi ):

(f, g) : Colim(X ×Y ) → ColimX ×ColimY,

(2.53)
[x, y, i] 7→ ([x, i], [y, i]).

It is surjective, since an arbitrary pair ([x, i], [y, j]) can be rewritten as
([ua x, k], [vb y, k]), for any pair of arrows a : i → k, b : j → k of S. To prove
that it is injective, let us suppose that

[x, y, i], [x′ , y ′ , j] ∈ Colim(X ×Y ),

[x, i] = [x′ , j] in ColimX, [y, i] = [y ′ , j] in ColimY.

Then there exists two pairs of arrows a : i → k, b : j → k and c : i → k ′ ,

d : j → k ′ such that

ua x = ub x′ in Xk , vc y = vd y ′ in Yk′ .

By Lemma 2.6.8 (below) there exist two arrows r : k → k ′′ , s : k ′ → k ′′ such

that
ra = sc : i → k ′′ , rb = sd : j → k ′′ . (2.54)
 94 Limits and colimits
Then
ura x = urb x′ in Xk′′ , vsc y = vsd y ′ in Yk′′ , (2.55)

which means that (x, y) ∈ Xi×Yi and (x′ , y ′ ) ∈ Xj×Yj coincide in Xk′′×Yk′′ ,
under the arrows ra = sc : i → k ′′ and rb = sd : j → k ′′ . Therefore
[x, y, i] = [x′ , y ′ , j].
Finally, the 0-ary power of X is the constant functor X 0 : S → Set,
that sends everything to the terminal object ⊤ = {∗}. Its colimit is ⊤ =
(ColimX)0 .

2.6.7 Exercise and complements

(a) Extend this result to Mon, Gp, Rng, R Mod.
*(b) More generally, filtered colimits commute with finite limits in all va-
rieties of algebras: see [M4, Bo1].
*(c) A category S is filtered if (and only if) every functor X → S defined
on a finite category has a cocone. The reader can prove this fact, or find
a proof in [Bo1], Lemma 2.13.2. Our Lemma below is a particular case,
sufficient for the proof of Theorem 2.6.6.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

2.6.8 Lemma
In the filtered category S, four arrows a, b, c, d are given, as in the diagram
below. Then there exist two arrows r : k → k ′′ , s : k ′ → k ′′ making the
diagram commutative
a / k ❙
i ❋ ra = sc,
❋❋ b ①; ❙❙❙r❙
❙❙)
❋❋ ① ′′
❦5 k
①❋ (2.56)
① c ❋❋❋# ❦❦❦
① ❦❦
j / k′ ❦ s rb = sd.
d

Proof First we have two arrows m : k → k1 , n : k ′ → k1

a / k ❘
i ❊ k2 ❙❙❙ x
❊❊ b ②< ❘❘❘m
❘❘❘ u ❧❧❧5 ❙❙❙❙
❊❊ ② ( ❧❧❧❧ ) ′′
②❊❊
② c ❊❊ ❧ ❧❧6 k1 ❘❘❘❘ ❦❦❦ 5 k (2.57)
" ❧❧❧n ❘ ❦❦y
② ❧ v ❘❘( ❦❦
j / k′ k3
d

We add two arrows u, v such that uma = unc and vmb = vnd. Then we
 2.7 Universal arrows and free objects 95
add two arrows x, y making the right square commutative (which can be
done in two steps, using 2.6.4(i), (ii)).
Now the maps r = xum : k → k ′′ and s = yvn : k ′ → k ′′ satisfy our
conditions:

ra = xuma = xunc = yvnc = sc, rb = xumb = yvmb = yvnd = sd.

2.7 Universal arrows and free objects

Universal arrows yield a general, fundamental way of formalising universal
properties in a category X, with respect to a functor U : A → X and an
object X of X. Obviously, there are two forms, dual to each other.
In particular, limits, colimits and free objects can be defined as universal
arrows.

2.7.1 Universal arrows

A universal arrow from the object X to the functor U is a pair

(A, η : X → U A),
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

consisting of an object A of A and an arrow η of X which is universal.

This means that every similar pair (B, f : X → U B) factorises uniquely
through (A, η): there exists a unique map g : A → B in A such that the
following triangle commutes in X
η
X ❑ / UA
❑❑❑
❑❑ Ug U g.η = f. (2.58)
f ❑❑% 
UB
In other words we are saying that, for every B in A, the following mapping
is bijective
A(A, B) → X(X, U B), g 7→ U g.η. (2.59)

The pair (A, η) is then determined up to isomorphism: if also (B, f )

is a solution, the unique A-morphism g : A → B such that U g.η = f is
invertible.
Dually, a universal arrow from the functor U to the object X is a pair
(A, ε : U A → X) consisting of an object A of A and an arrow ε of X
such that every similar pair (B, f : U B → X) factorises uniquely through
 96 Limits and colimits
(A, ε): there exists a unique g : B → A in A such that the following triangle
commutes in X
ε / X
U OA 9
ss
Ug ssss ε.U g = f. (2.60)
ss f
UB

2.7.2 Limits and colimits as universal arrows

Consider the category CS of functors S → C and their natural transforma-
tions, for a small category S (see 1.6.1). The diagonal functor
D : C → CS , (DA)i = A, (DA)a = idA, (2.61)
sends an object A to the constant functor at A, and a morphism f : A → B
to the natural transformation Df : DA → DB : S → C whose components
are constant at f .
The limit of a functor X : S → C in C is the same as a universal arrow
(L, ε : DL → X) from the functor D to the object X of CS (see 2.7.1).
Dually, the colimit of X in C is the same as a universal arrow (L, η : X →
DL) from the object X of CS to the functor D.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

2.7.3 Free objects

If U : A → Set is a concrete category (see 1.4.8), the free A-object over the
set X is defined as a universal arrow (A, η : X → U A) from the set X to
the forgetful functor U . (It may exist or not, of course.)
The mapping η : X → U A can be called the insertion of the basis: in
fact, the definition means that every mapping f : X → U (B) with values
in the ‘underlying set’ of any object B in A can be uniquely ‘extended’ to
a morphism g : A → B in A, such that U (g).η = f .
The examples below can help to make this clear. In particular, the
injectivity of η is examined in 2.7.5.
One can extend this terminology to any functor U : A → X which is
viewed, in a given context, as a ‘forgetful functor’, even if it is not faithful.

2.7.4 Exercises and complements, I

(a) A reader which is not familiar with these notions might begin by
constructing the universal arrow from a set X to the forgetful functor
U : R Mod → Set, using the free left module generated by X
L
A= x∈X R. (2.62)
 2.7 Universal arrows and free objects 97
This is a direct sum in R Mod of copies of the left module R (see 2.1.6(c)),
so that an element of F (X) is a quasi-null family (λx )x∈X of scalars λx ∈ R.
The embedding

η : X → U A, (ηx)x = 1, (ηx)y = 0 (y 6= x), (2.63)

sends each element of X to the corresponding Kronecker family. Then every

mapping f : X → U (B) with values in a left R-module can be uniquely
extended to a homomorphism g : A → B in R Mod, by linear combinations
in B (with quasi-null scalar coefficients)
P
g((λx )x∈X ) = x∈X λx .f (x). (2.64)

Usually one identifies an element x ∈ X with the family η(x) ∈ A, so that

the quasi-null family (λx ) ∈ A can be uniquely rewritten as a formal linear
P
combination λx .x of elements of the basis, with quasi-null coefficients
in R.
(b) Similarly we can form the universal arrow from a set X to the forgetful
P
functor U : Mon → Set using the free monoid A = n∈N X n of finite words
on the alphabet X. The reader can easily work out the details (or find
most of them in 3.6.1).
Many other exercises of this kind will be listed and commented in Section
4.1.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(c) In a group G, the subgroup of commutators is the subgroup generated

by all commutators
[x, y] = xyx−1 y −1 ,

for x, y ∈ G. Plainly, G is commutative if and only if this subgroup is

trivial.
The reader will prove that this subgroup is necessarily normal in G, and
that the canonical projection on the abelianised quotient group Gab

Gab = G/[G, G], η : G → Gab , (2.65)

gives the universal arrow from the group G to the embedding U : Ab → Gp.
(d) A functor U : A → Set is representable (see 1.6.4) if and only if the
singleton {∗} has a free object A0 in A, so that

U (A) ∼
= Set({∗}, U (A)) ∼
= A(A0 , A). (2.66)

This property often holds in a concrete category, and ensures – by 2.3.5(a)

– that U preserves monomorphisms (and reflects them, if it is faithful).
 98 Limits and colimits
2.7.5 Exercises and complements, II
Let us come back to a general universal arrow (A, η : X → U A), for a
functor U : A → X.
(a) Prove that the arrow η is a monomorphism of X if and only if there
exists a monomorphism f : X → U B, for some object B in A.
(b) This condition obviously fails for the embedding U : Ab → Gp, when-
ever X is a non-commutative group (see 2.7.4(c)).
(c) The forgetful functor U : A → Set of a concrete category ‘usually’ satis-
fies this condition, so that the insertion of the basis η : X → U A (if extant)
is indeed an embedding.
For varieties of algebras it is always the case, with the exception of two
‘trivial varieties’, as we shall see in Corollary 4.4.3.

2.7.6 Exercises and complements, III

(a) Universal arrows compose: for a composed functor U V : B → A → X,
given
- a universal arrow (A, η : X → U A) from an object X to U ,
- a universal arrow (B, ζ : A → V B) from the previous object A to V ,
we have a universal arrow from X to U V constructed as follows
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(B, U ζ.η : X → U A → U V (B)). (2.67)

For instance, the free ring on a set can be easily constructed in two
steps, along the composed forgetful functor Rng → Mon → Set (as will be
examined in 4.1.6(b)).
(b) Universal arrows for ‘two-dimensional categories’ will be considered in
7.1.5.

2.8 *Other universals

This miscellaneous section is about three kinds of universal solutions: the
splitting of idempotents, Kan extensions and coends. These issues, even
though important in category theory, will have a limited use in this book
and can be skipped until needed.

2.8.1 Absolute limits

The limit (L, (ui : L → Xi )) of a functor X : S → C is said to be an absolute
limit if it is preserved (as a limit) by every functor C → D, with values in
an arbitrary category.
 2.8 *Other universals 99
Let us begin by noting that there are some trivial limits which always
exist and are preserved by any functor, like unary products (with S = 1).
More generally, every constant functor X : S → C (with S 6= 0) has an
absolute limit.
As another extension, if S has an initial object h any functor X : S → C
has absolute limit Xh , with structural map ui : Xh → Xi given by the
unique arrow h → i of S. (This also holds for a large category S.)
But there is an interesting, non trivial case.

2.8.2 Exercises and complements (The splitting of idempotents)

As we have seen in 1.4.9(d), an idempotent endomorphism e : X → X can
be equivalently described as a functor F : E → C defined on the idempotent
monoid E = {1, e}.
(a) The reader should find interesting (and easy) to prove that the following
conditions are equivalent:
(i) the idempotent endomorphism e splits in C, i.e. it has a factorisation
e = mp : X → A → X, with pm = 1A (so that m is a split mono and p is
a split epi),
(ii) the idempotent endomorphism e has an epi-mono factorisation e =
mp,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(iii) the functor F has a limit m : A → X,

(iv) the pair 1, e : X → X has an equaliser m : A → X,
(iii∗ ) the functor F has a colimit p : X → A,
(iv∗ ) the pair 1, e : X → X has a coequaliser p : X → A.
(b) Now, every functor defined on C plainly preserves the existing splittings
of idempotents, which are thus absolute limits and colimits.
(c) After biproducts (in 2.1.9, 2.2.6) this is another case where the limit
and colimit objects coincide; here the coincidence is even necessary, as soon
as our (co)limit exists. Again (and of course) the limit-cone m : A → X
and the colimit-cocone p : X → A are distinct.
(d) All idempotents split in every category with equalisers (or coequalisers).
But we shall see in 6.6.2(g) that this also holds in the category Rel Ab, which
lacks general equalisers.

2.8.3 The idempotent completion

Every category C has a diagonal embedding (see 2.7.2)
D : C → CE , CE = Cat(E, C) = Idm(C), (2.68)
 100 Limits and colimits
with values in the functor-category CE , which is called the idempotent
completion of C, as we motivate now.
As we know, an object F : E → C amounts to an idempotent endomor-
phism e of C, and will be written thus. A morphism of CE
(e, f, e′ ) : e →
· e′
(where e : X → X and e′ : Y → Y ) is determined by a morphism f : X → Y
of C such that f e = f = e′ f . The composition is induced by that of C
(e′ , g, e′′ ).(e, f, e′ ) = (e, gf, e′′ ) : e →
· e′′ , id(e) = (e, e, e). (2.69)
The embedding D : C → Idm(C) sends X to 1X and f : X → Y to
(1X , f, 1Y ) : 1X →
· 1Y .
In Idm(C) all idempotents split: in fact an idempotent (e, f, e) : e →
· e
comes from a morphism
f : X → X, f e = f = ef, f f = f, (2.70)
and splits in Idm(C) as the composite
(e, f, e) = (f, f, e).(e, f, f ) : e →
· f→
· e, (e, f, f ).(f, f, e) = id(f ).
* The weak universal property of Idm(C) (a biuniversal property in Cat,
see 7.1.5) is slightly more complicated to prove: every functor F : C → D
with values in a category where all idempotents split can be extended to a
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

functor G : Idm(C) → D (so that GD = F ), and the extension is determined

up to functorial isomorphism.*

2.8.4 Kan extensions

Given two functors F : S → C and T : S → T with the same domain, a right
Kan extension of F along T is a pair (R, ε) formed of a functor R : T → C
and a natural transformation ε : RT → F
F / C
S H
T ε 1
(2.71)
 R / 
T ❴ ❴↑ ρ❴ ❴/ C
R′

which is universal: for every functor R′ : T → C and natural transformation

ε′ : R′ T → F there is a unique natural transformation ρ : R′ → R such that
ε′ = ε.ρT .
The solution, written as R = RanT F , is determined up to a (unique)
natural isomorphism. In fact, leaving apart problems of smallness, the
 2.8 *Other universals 101
property above means that (R, ε : RT → F ) is a universal arrow from the
functor CT = −.T to the object F of the category CS

CT : CT → CS , R 7→ RT, ρ 7→ ρT. (2.72)

Dually (by reversing natural transformations), the left Kan extension

L = LanT F : T → C is a functor equipped with a natural transformation
η : F → LT , such that every similar pair (L′ , η ′ : F → L′ T )
F / C
S

T q η 1
(2.73)
 L / 
T ❴ ❴↓ λ❴ ❴/ C
L′

factorises as η ′ = λT.η, by a unique natural transformation λ : L → L′ .

2.8.5 Limits and colimits as Kan extensions

In particular, the limit of a functor X : S → C amounts to the right Kan
extension R = RanT X along the functor T : S → 1 (with values in the
terminal category)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

F / C F / C
S H S

T ε 1 T q η 1
(2.74)
L
 R /   / 
1 ❴ ❴↑ ρ❴ ❴/ C 1 ❴ ❴↓ λ❴ ❴/ C
R′ L′

while the colimit of X : S → C amounts to the left Kan extension L =

LanT X : 1 → C.

2.8.6 Coends
Let us be given a functor F : Xop ×X → C. Its coend is an object C of C
equipped with a family of morphisms uX : F (X, X) → C indexed by the
objects of X. This family must be:
(i) coherent, in the sense that for every morphism f : X → Y in X we have
uX .F (f, 1) = uY .F (1, f ) : F (Y, X) → C,
(ii) universal, in the sense that every coherent family (vX : F (X, X) →
C ′ )X factorises uniquely through the former: there exists precisely one
morphism c : C → C ′ such that uX .c = vX , for all X.
 102 Limits and colimits
RX
The coend of F is written as F (X, X).
If X is small and C is cocomplete, the coend of F exists and can be
obtained as the coequalizer of the two morphisms
P P
a, b : f : X→Y F (Y, X) ⇒ X F (X, X),
whose co-component on the morphism f : X → Y comes, respectively, from
af = F (f, 1) : F (Y, X) → F (X, X),
bf = F (1, f ) : F (Y, X) → F (Y, Y ).
(Dually, ends can be constructed by means of limits.)
A classical example from Algebraic Topology, the geometric realisation
of simplicial sets and cubical sets, will be described in 5.3.5 and 5.4.6.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.
 3
Adjunctions and monads

Adjunctions, a crucial step in category theory, were introduced by Kan in

1958 [K2]. They extend Galois connections (defined in Section 1.7) from
ordered sets to general categories. The closely related notion of ‘monad’ is
also studied here.
The Adjoint Functor Theorem of Freyd, dealt with in Section 3.5, is an
effective tool in order to prove the existence of an adjoint, which might be
difficult to construct.
Many concrete examples can be found in this chapter, then in Chapter
4 (for algebraic structures) and Chapter 5 (for topological structures).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

3.1 Adjoint functors

We begin by two well known situations, which help us to introduce the
adjunction of functors. Then we give a definition, in four equivalent forms
that extend those of Galois connections, in 1.7.1.

3.1.1 Examples
(a) The forgetful functor U : Top → Set has two well known ‘best approxi-
mations’ to an inverse which does not exist, the functors D, C : Set → Top,
where DX (resp. CX) is the set X with the discrete (resp. codiscrete)
topology. In fact they provide the set X with the finest (resp. the coarsest)
topology.
For every set X and every space Y we can ‘identify’ the following hom-
sets
Top(D(X), Y ) = Set(X, U (Y )),
(3.1)
Set(U (Y ), X) = Top(Y, C(X)),
since every mapping X → Y becomes continuous if we put on X the discrete
 104 Adjunctions and monads
topology, and every mapping Y → X becomes continuous if we put on X
the codiscrete one.
These two facts will tell us that D ⊣ U and U ⊣ C, respectively: D is
left adjoint to U , and C is right adjoint to the latter. This presentation of
the two adjunctions corresponds to form (i) of a Galois connection f ⊣ g,
in 1.7.1, which says that the hom-sets Y (f (x), y) and X(x, g(y)) have the
same cardinal: either 0 or 1.
(b) In other cases, it may be convenient to follow an approach corresponding
to the form (ii) of 1.7.1, and based on universal arrows (defined in Section
2.7).
To wit, let us start from the forgetful functor U : R Mod → Set. We have
already seen, in 2.7.4(a), that, for every set X, there is a universal arrow
from X to the functor U
L
F (X) = x∈X R, η : X → U F (X), (3.2)

consisting of the free R-module F (X) on the set X, with the insertion of
the basis η.
The fact that this universal arrow exists for every X in Set allows us to
construct a ‘backward’ functor F : Set → R Mod, left adjoint to U .
F is already defined on the objects. For a mapping f : X → Y in Set
ηX
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

X / U F (X) F (X)
✤ ✤
✤ U(F f ) ✤ Ff
f
✤ ✤ (3.3)

Y / U F (Y ) F (Y )
ηY

the universal property of ηX implies that there is precisely one homomor-

phism F (f ) : F (X) → F (Y ) such that U (F (f )) makes the square above
commutative.
(Concretely, F (f ) is just the R-linear extension of f ; but the general
pattern is better perceived if we proceed in a formal way.)
Further applications of the universal property would show that F pre-
serves composition and identities (but we shall see this in a general con-
text). Let us note that we have extended the given object-function F (X)
in the only way that makes the family (ηX ) into a natural transformation
η : 1 → U F : Set → Set, called the unit of the adjunction.
(c) The relationship between these functors U and F (assuming now that
we have defined both) can be equivalently expressed in form (i), by a family
of bijective mappings (for X in Set and A in R Mod)

ϕXA : R Mod(F X, A) → Set(X, U A), (3.4)

 3.1 Adjoint functors 105
which is natural in X and A, as will be made precise in 3.1.2.
Concretely, ϕXA (g : F X → A) is the restriction of the homomorphism g
to the basis X of F (X); its bijectivity means that every mapping f : X →
U A has a unique extension to a homomorphism g : F X → A.
Formally, given the family (ηX), we define
ϕXA (g : F X → A) = U g.ηX : X → U A.
The other way round, given the family (ϕXA ), we define
ηX = ϕX,F X (idF X) : X → U F X.

3.1.2 Definition
An adjunction F ⊣ G, with a functor F : C → D left adjoint to a functor
G : D → C, can be equivalently presented in four main forms.
(i) We assign two functors F : C → D and G : D → C together with a family
of bijections
ϕXY : D(F X, Y ) → C(X, GY ) (X in C, Y in D), (3.5)
which is natural in X, Y . More formally, the family (ϕXY ) is a functorial
isomorphism
ϕ : D(F (−), =) → C(−, G(=)) : Cop ×D → Set. (3.6)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(ii) We assign a functor G : D → C and, for every object X in C, a universal

arrow (see 2.7.1)
(F0 X, ηX : X → GF0 X) from the object X to the functor G.

(ii∗ ) We assign a functor F : C → D and, for every object Y in D, a universal

arrow
(G0 Y, εY : F G0 Y → Y ) from the functor F to the object Y .

(iii) We assign two functors F : C → D and G : D → C, together with two

natural transformations
η : idC → GF (the unit), ε : F G → idD (the counit),
which satisfy the triangular identities:
εF.F η = idF, Gε.ηG = idG (3.7)

Fη εF ηG Gε
F / F GF / F G / GF G /
2 2 G
idF idG
 106 Adjunctions and monads
The proof of the equivalence will be given in Theorem 3.1.5. Essentially:
- given (i) one defines
ηX = ϕX,F X (idF X) : X → GF X,
εY = (ϕGY,Y )−1 (idGY ) : F GY → Y,

- given (ii) one defines F (X) = F0 X, the morphism F (f : X → X ′ ) by

the universal property of ηX and the morphism ϕXY (g : F X → Y ) as
Gg.ηX : X → GY ,
- given (iii) one defines the mapping ϕXY : D(F (X), Y ) → C(X, G(Y )) as
above, and a backward mapping ψXY (f : X → GY ) = εY.F f (which are
inverse to each other by the triangular identities).
Finally, the naturality of ϕ in (3.6) means that, for every pair of mor-
phisms u : X ′ → X and v : Y → Y ′ (in C and D, respectively) we have a
commutative square in Set
Gv.ϕXY (g).u = ϕX ′ Y ′ (v.g.F u) (3.8)
ϕXY
D(F (X), Y ) / C(X, G(Y ))
v.−.F u Gv.−.u
 
D(F (X ′ ), Y ′ ) ϕX ′ Y ′
/ C(X , G(Y ′ ))
′
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

3.1.3 Comments and complements

(a) The previous forms have different features.
Form (i) is the classical definition of an adjunction, and is at the origin
of the name, by analogy with adjoint maps of Hilbert spaces.
Form (ii) is used when one starts from a ‘known’ functor G and wants
to construct its left adjoint, possibly less easy to define. Form (ii∗ ) is used
in a dual way.
The ‘algebraic’ form (iii) is free of quantifiers and adequate to the formal
theory of adjunctions (because it makes sense in an abstract 2-category,
see 7.1.2).
*(b) Adjunctions are related to Kan extensions in a complex way. The
reader can see [M4], Section X.7.

3.1.4 Exercises and complements

(a) An adjoint equivalence (F, G, η, ε), defined in 1.5.5, amounts to an
adjunction where the unit and counit are invertible; then F ⊣ G ⊣ F .
 3.1 Adjoint functors 107
(b) Various examples of Galois connections have ben discussed in Section
1.7.
(c) For a ‘forgetful functor’ U : A → X the existence of the left adjoint
F ⊣ U is equivalent to say that every object X of X has a free object
(F X, η : X → U F X) in A (as defined in 2.7.3).
We shall see, in Theorem 4.4.2, that the forgetful functor U : A → Set
of any variety of algebras has always a left adjoint F : Set → A, the free-
algebra functor for A. In many cases there are simple constructions for F ;
we have seen a few cases in 2.7.4 and 3.1.1; many others will be analysed
in Section 4.1.
(d) We have seen that the forgetful functor U : Top → Set has both adjoints
D ⊣ U ⊣ C, where DX (resp. CX) is the set X with the discrete (resp.
codiscrete) topology. Let us note that U has no left adjoint, while C has
no right adjoint, as will be proved in 3.2.3(a). (In Section 3.8 we shall see
that these adjunctions are idempotent.)
Many other adjoints of interest in Topology will be examined in Chapter
5.
(e) The forgetful functor U : pOrd → Set of the category of preordered sets
has similar adjoints D ⊣ U ⊣ C, where DX is the set X with the discrete
order x = x′ , while CX is the same set with the codiscrete or chaotic
preorder, namely x, x′ ∈ X.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Here D has also a left adjoint π0 : pOrd → Set, where π0 (X) is the set
of connected components of the preordered set X, namely the quotient of
the underlying set |X| modulo the equivalence relation generated by the
preorder x ≺ x′ (i.e. the least equivalence relation containing the former).
(f) Prove that the embedding J : pOrd → Cat of preorderd sets into small
categories (see 1.2.3) has a left adjoint po : Cat → pOrd, using the pre-
ordered set po(C) defined in 1.4.5. Prove that J does not preserve co-
equalisers, while po does not preserve equalisers.
(g) Starting from the (non-faithful) functor Ob : Cat → Set, there is a chain
of adjunctions
π0 ⊣ D ⊣ Ob ⊣ C,
which extends that of point (e).
In fact, by composing the adjunctions in (e) and (f), we get π0 (C) ap-
plying the functor π0 : pOrd → Set to the preordered set po(C).
It may be more interesting to give a direct construction. First, we say
that a category C is connected if it is not empty, and every pair of objects
is linked by a ’zig-zag path of arrows’
• / • o • / • ... • / •
 108 Adjunctions and monads
Now π0 (C) can be defined as the set of the connected components of
C, that is its maximal connected subcategories. The empty category has
none, and a category is connected if and only if π0 (C) is the singleton.
Every category is the categorical sum of its connected components.

3.1.5 Theorem (Characterisation of adjoints)

The presentations (i)–(iii) of an adjunction in Definition 3.1.2 are equiva-
lent.

Proof (i) ⇒ (ii). Given (i), one defines ηX = ϕX,F X (idF X) : X → GF X.

The naturality of ϕXY on idX and g : F X → Y gives
ϕXY (g) = G(g).ϕX,F X (idF X) = G(g).ηX.
The bijectivity of ϕXY gives the universal property of ηX: for every
f : X → GY in C there exists precisely one g : F X → Y in D such that
G(g).ηX = f .
(ii) ⇒ (i). Conversely, given (ii), one defines F (X) = F0 X. Then the
morphism F (f : X → X ′ ) is defined by the universal property of ηX, as
the unique morphism of D such that
ηX
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

X / GF (X)
f G(F f ) G(F f ).ηX = ηX ′ .f. (3.9)
 
X′ / GF (X ′ )
ηX ′

The reader will verify that G is a functor, using the following diagrams
ηX
X / GF (X)
ηX
f G(F f ) X / GF (X)
 ηX ′

X′ / GF (X ′ ) 1 G(F 1X ) (3.10)
 
′ / GF (X)
f G(F f ) ′
X
  ηX
X ′′ ′′
/ GF (X ′′ )
ηX

Finally we define ϕXY (g : F X → Y ) = Gg.ηX : X → GY . It is a bijective

mapping, because of the universal property of ηX. The commutativity of
the square (3.8) follows easily:
Gv.ϕXY (g).u = Gv.Gg.ηX.u = Gv.Gg.GF u.ηX ′
= G(v.g.F u).ηX ′ = ϕX ′ Y ′ (v.g.F u).
 3.1 Adjoint functors 109
(i) ⇒ (iii). Given (i), one defines

ηX = ϕX,F X (idF X) : X → GF X,
εY = (ϕGY,Y )−1 (idGY ) : F GY → Y.

The naturality of both families is easily verified. As to the first triangular

identity εF.F η = idF , we have:
ϕX,F X (εF X.F ηX) = ϕX,F X (εF X).ηX = id(GF X).ηX
= ηX = ϕX,F X (idF X),
whence εF X.F ηX = idF X, for every X in C.
(iii) ⇒ (i). Given (iii), one defines the mappings

ϕXY : D(F (X), Y ) → C(X, G(Y )), ϕXY (g) = Gg.η,

ψXY : C(X, G(Y )) → D(F (X), Y ), ψXY (f ) = εY.F f,
and proves that they are inverse to each other by the triangular identities.
The naturality of ϕ has already been proved in the point (ii) ⇒ (i) (using
the commutativity of square (3.9), which here comes out of the naturality
of η, while in the previous point was a consequence of the definition of
F (f )).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

3.1.6 Theorem (Uniqueness)

Given a functor G : D → C, its left adjoint is uniquely determined up to
isomorphism.
More precisely, we suppose that there are two left adjoints F : C → D
and F ′ : C → D, with units η : 1 → GF and η ′ : 1 → GF ′ . Then there is
precisely one natural transformation ϕ : F → F ′ such that Gϕ.η = η ′ , and
it is a functorial isomorphism.

Proof Let X be an object of C. By the uniqueness property of universal

arrows, in 2.7.1, there is precisely one morphism ϕX : F (X) → F ′ (X) in
D such that the following square commutes
ηX
X / GF (X)
1 GϕX (3.11)
 
′
/ GF (X)
X
η′ X

and ϕX is invertible. To prove that the family of all ϕX is natural, let us

 110 Adjunctions and monads
take a morphism f : X → X ′ in C. In the left diagram below, the left square
and the outer rectangle commute, by naturality of η and η ′ , respectively
ηX G(ϕX)
X / GF (X) / GF ′ (X)
f = GF f ? GF ′ f (3.12)
  
X′ / GF (X ′ ) / GF ′ (X ′ )
ηX ′ G(ϕX ′ )

Therefore

G(F ′ f.ϕX).ηX = G(ϕX ′ ).ηX ′ .f = G(ϕX ′ .F f ).ηX,

and the naturality of ϕ follows from the universal property of ηX:

F ′ f.ϕX = ϕX ′ .F f.

3.2 Properties of adjunctions

This section takes on the general study of adjoint functors.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

3.2.1 A category of adjunctions

As a consequence of the composition of universal arrows (in 2.7.6), two
consecutive adjunctions
F : C ⇄ D : G, η : 1 → GF, ε : F G → 1,
(3.13)
H : D ⇄ E : K, ρ : 1 → KH, σ : HK → 1,
give a composed adjunction from the first to the third category
HF : C ⇄ E : GK,
GρF.η : 1 → GF → GK.HF, (3.14)
σ.HεK : HF.GK → HK → 1.
There is thus a category AdjCat of small categories and adjunctions,
with morphisms written in one of the following forms, and conventionally
directed as the left adjoint

(F, G, η, ε) : C →
· D, F ⊣ G: C →
· D.

We also write (η, ε) : F ⊣ G, but one should not view this as an arrow
from F to G in some category.
 3.2 Properties of adjunctions 111
Duality of categories interchanges left and right adjoint, unit and counit.
AdjCat is thus a category with involution (as defined in 1.8.1)
C 7→ Cop ,
(3.15)
· D) 7→ ((Gop , F op , εop , η op ) : Dop →
((F, G, η, ε) : C → · Cop ).

3.2.2 The preservation of (co)limits

As another consequence of the composition of universal arrows, a left ad-
joint preserves (the existing) colimits, while a right adjoint preserves (the
existing) limits. It follows that a left adjoint preserves epimorphisms and
a right adjoint preserves monomorphisms (by 2.3.5(a)).
For a covariant Galois connection f ⊣ g, this amounts to saying that f
preserves the existing joins and g the existing meets, as already shown in
1.7.3.
As we know, an equivalence of categories F : C → D can always be
completed to an adjoint equivalence, where F ⊣ G ⊣ F ; therefore F
preserves limits and colimits.
The standard way of proving that a functor cannot have a left (resp. a
right) adjoint is to find a limit (resp. a colimit) that it does not preserve.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

3.2.3 Exercises and complements

(a) We have seen that the forgetful functor U : Top → Set has both adjoints
D ⊣ U ⊣ C. Accordingly U preserves all limits and colimits.
On the other hand D does not preserve infinite products and cannot have
a left adjoint, while C does not preserve (even binary) sums and cannot
have a right adjoint.
(b) Colimits of ordered sets. The embedding U : Ord → pOrd has a left
adjoint F , that takes every preordered set X to the quotient set |X|/ ∼,
equipped with the induced order: [x] 6 [y] if x ≺ y in X (as in 1.2.2).
This is of help in constructing a colimit in Ord, as a quotient of the
corresponding colimit in pOrd.
Namely, given a functor X : S → Ord, the colimit of U X in pOrd is easily
obtained as the colimit (L, (ui : |Xi | → L)) in Set, equipped with the finest
preordering that makes all mappings ui monotone (as we have already seen
in 2.2.5(c)). Then the colimit in Ord is the associated ordered set L/ ∼, or
more precisely the cocone (F (L), (F ui : Xi → F L)) produced by the left
adjoint F : pOrd → Ord.
Colimits of Hausdorff spaces can be computed in a similar way, as quo-
tients of colimits in Top (see 5.1.4(b)).
 112 Adjunctions and monads
3.2.4 Limit functors as right adjoints
The description of the limit of a functor X : S → C as a universal arrow
(L(X), εX : DL(X) → X) from the diagonal functor D : C → CS to the
object X of CS (in 2.7.2) shows that the existence of all S-based limits in C
amounts to the existence of a right adjoint L : CS → C (the limit functor)
for D, with counit ε. The limit cone has components (εX)i : L(X) → Xi ,
for i ∈ ObS.
Dually, a colimit functor L′ : CS → C is left adjoint to D, with a unit
ηX : X → DL′ (X) and cocone-components (ηX)i : Xi → L′ (X).

3.2.5 Theorem (Faithful and full adjoints)

Suppose we have an adjunction F ⊣ G, with counit ε : F G → 1.
(i) G is faithful if and only if all the components εY of the counit are epi,
(ii) G is full if and only if all the components εY of the counit are split
mono,
(iii) G is full and faithful if and only if the counit ε is invertible.

Proof (i) This fact is easily proved, using for both implications the following
diagram of two commutative squares, produced by two maps g, g ′ : Y → Y ′
in D
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

εY / Y
F G(Y )
F Gg F Gg′ g g′ (3.16)
   
F G(Y ′ ) / Y′
εY ′

(ii) If εY is a split mono, there is some p : Y → F GY in D such that

p.εY = 1F GY . For a morphism f : GY → GY ′ in C, we let

g = εY ′ .F f.p : Y → Y ′ .

Then the two squares of the diagram below commute, and G(g) = f by the
universal property of εY ′
εY / Y
F G(Y )
F Gg Ff g (3.17)
  
F G(Y ′ ) / Y′
εY ′

Conversely, we suppose that G is full. Then there exists some p : Y →

F GY in D such that G(p) = ηGY : GY → GF GY . To prove that v =
 3.2 Properties of adjunctions 113
p.εY coincides with 1F GY we apply the universal property of ηGY in the
following diagram
ηGY
G(Y ) / GF G(Y )

1 G(1) G(v) (3.18)

  
G(Y ) / GF G(Y )
ηGY

G(v).ηGY = ηGY.GεY.ηGY = ηGY = G(1F GY ).ηGY.

3.2.6 Reflective and coreflective subcategories

A subcategory D ⊂ C is said to be reflective (notice: not ‘reflexive’) if the
inclusion functor U : D → C has a left adjoint, and coreflective if U has a
right adjoint. For a full reflective subcategory the counit ε is invertible (by
Theorem 3.2.5).
For instance Ab is reflective in Gp, with reflector (−)ab : Gp → Ab sending
a group G to the abelianised group Gab = G/[G, G] (see 2.7.4(c)). The
unit-component ηG : G → Gab is the canonical projection, and the counit
εA : A → A/[A, A] is invertible.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

In Ab the full subcategory tAb formed by all torsion abelian groups

is coreflective; the counit εA : tA → A is the embedding of the torsion
subgroup of an abelian group. On the other hand the full subcategory
tfAb ⊂ Ab formed by all torsion-free abelian groups is reflective in Ab,
with unit the canonical projection ηA : A → A/tA.
The ordered set Z is reflective and coreflective in the real line R (see
1.7.2), while Q is neither.

3.2.7 Lemma (Lifting left adjoints)

Let us suppose that we have an adjunction (η, ε) : F ⊣ U
G
o ❴ ❴/ A
Y ❴
V
W (3.19)
 F
X o / A
U

where the right adjoint factorises as U = W V , with W full and faithful.

Then G = F W : Y → C is left adjoint to V , with unit the unique natural
transformation ϑ : 1 → V G such that W ϑ = ηW .
 114 Adjunctions and monads
Proof Since W is full and faithful, for every Y in Y there is precisely one
morphism ϑY : Y → V G(Y ) in Y such that W (ϑY ) = η(W Y ) : W Y →
U F W Y = W (V GY ).
The pair (G(Y ), ϑY : Y → V G(Y )) is a universal arrow from the object
Y to the functor V : A → Y. Indeed, for every similar pair (A, f : Y → V A),
a morphism g : GY → A satisfies V g.ϑY = f (as in the left diagram below)
if and only if W (V g.ϑY ) = W (f )

ϑY ηW Y
Y ● / V GY W Y ❘❘ / U F W Y = W (V GY )
●● ❘❘❘
●● Vg
❘❘❘ (3.20)
● ❘❘❘ Ug
f ●● Wf ❘( 
# 
VA U A = W (V A)

and there is precisely one solution, because of the universal property of

η(W Y ), as in the right diagram above.
Finally we only have to check that the action of the functor G on the
morphisms of Y, as determined by the universal property of ϑ, coincides
with that of the functor F W : Y → C.
This amounts to saying that the family ϑY : Y → V G(Y ) = V F W (Y ) is
a natural transformation 1 → V F W ; but this follows from the naturality
of the family W (ϑY ) = (ηW )Y , and the faithfulness of W .
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

3.2.8 Exercises and complements (Chains of adjunctions, II)

(a) Chains of Galois connections between ordered sets X, Y have been
considered in 1.7.7. Each of them can be transformed into a chain of
adjunctions between the categories CX and CY , for any category C.
We now investigate some non-trivial chains of adjunctions of period 2,
or even 1, between categories – a situation which does not exist for ordered
sets, where we know that a relation f ⊣ g ⊣ f forces f and g to be inverse
to each other (see 1.7.2(b)).
(b) Let D : C → C2 be the diagonal functor of a category C into C×C. By
3.2.4, D has a left adjoint S and a right adjoint P if (and only if) C has
binary sums and products

S, P : C2 → C, S ⊣ D ⊣ P,
(3.21)
S(X, Y ) = X + Y, P (X, Y ) = X ×Y.

When C is Abm, Ab or R Mod, these two functors coincide (as we have

seen in 2.1.9): the direct sum (or biproduct) B(X, Y ) = X ⊕ Y is at the
same time
 3.3 Comma categories 115
- left adjoint to D, with a unit η : (X, Y ) → (X ⊕ Y, X ⊕ Y ) giving the two
injections of the sum,
- right adjoint to D, with a counit ε : (X ⊕ Y, X ⊕ Y ) → (X, Y ) giving the
two projections of the product.
We have thus a periodic chain ... B ⊣ D ⊣ B ⊣ D ...
More generally, the same holds in every semiadditive category, see Sec-
tion 6.4.
(c) In 2.8.2–2.8.3 we have considered the two-element idempotent monoid
E = {1, e} and the diagonal functor D : C → CE . We have seen that in C
all idempotents split if and only C has all E-based limits, if and only if it
has all E-based colimits.
Moreover, if this is the case, the limit-object and colimit-object coincide,
and (by 3.2.4) we have one functor L : CE → C which is:
- left adjoint to D, with a unit pe : e → 1L(e) giving the epimorphism of
the splitting e = me pe ,
- right adjoint to D, with a counit me : 1L(e) → e giving the monomorphism
of the splitting e = me pe .
Here L(e) is (a choice of) the image of e in C. This gives another periodic
chain of adjunctions
... L ⊣ D ⊣ L ⊣ D ...
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(d) For a fixed set A there is an obvious endofunctor

F : Rel Set → Rel Set, F (X) = X ×A, (3.22)
given by the cartesian product (let us recall that this is not a categorical
product in Rel Set, see 2.2.6(b)). The reader will prove that F ⊣ F , which
gives a chain of adjunctions of period 1.
(One may prefer to write −×A ⊣ A×−, so that the adjunction in ‘form
(i)’ is even more evident.)

3.3 Comma categories

Comma categories are an important construction, with strong relationships
with all the main tools of category theory, like universal arrows, limits and
adjoints.

3.3.1 Comma categories and slice categories

For functors F : X → Z and G : Y → Z with the same codomain Z, one
constructs a comma category (F ↓ G) equipped with functors P, Q and a
 116 Adjunctions and monads
natural transformation π

P ❧❧❧6
X ◆◆
◆◆F◆
❧❧❧ ◆&
(F ↓ G) π Z (3.23)
❘❘❘

❘❘❘ ♣ ♣ ♣♣8
Q ( ♣ G
Y

(The original notation was (F, G), whence the name.)

The objects of (F ↓ G) are the triples (X, Y, z : F X → GY ) formed of an
object of X, an object of Y and a morphism of Z. A morphism of (F ↓ G)
(f, g) : (X, Y, z : F X → GY ) → (X ′ , Y ′ , z ′ : F X ′ → GY ′ ),
comes from a pair of maps f : X → X ′ , g : Y → Y ′ that form a commutative
square in Z, namely z ′ .F f = Gg.z.
Composition and identities come from those of X×Y
(f ′ , g ′ ).(f, g) = (f ′ f, g ′ g), id(X, Y, z) = (idX, idY ). (3.24)
There is an obvious universal property, that makes the triple (P, Q, π) a
sort of directed 2-dimensional pullback: for every category C equipped with
similar data
P ′ : C → X, Q′ : C → Y, π ′ : F P ′ → GQ′ ,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

there is precisely one functor W : C → (F ↓ G) which commutes with the

structural data
W (C) = (P ′ C, Q′ C, π ′ C), W (c) = (P ′ c, Q′ c),
(3.25)
P W = P ′, QW = Q′ , πW = π ′ .
As a matter of notation, one writes (F ↓ idZ) as (F ↓ Z) and (idZ ↓ G)
as (Z ↓ G). Moreover an object Z0 of the category Z can be viewed as a
functor Z0 : 1 → Z; therefore the comma category (F ↓ Z0 ) has objects
(X, z : F X → Z0 ), while (Z0 ↓ G) has objects (Y, z : Z0 → GY ).
In particular we have the slice categories
(Z0 ↓ Z) = Z\Z0 , (Z ↓ Z0 ) = Z/Z0 , (3.26)
of objects (Z, z : Z0 → Z) below Z0 and objects (Z, z : Z → Z0 ) above Z0 ,
respectively.

3.3.2 Exercises and complements

(a) The categories Set• and Top• can be identified with the slice categories
Set\{∗} and Top\{∗}, respectively.
 3.3 Comma categories 117
(b) Less trivially the category gRng of ‘general rings’ (associative, possibly
non-unitary) is equivalent to the category Rng/Z of copointed unitary rings,
or rings over the initial object Z, by the following weakly inverse functors
H : gRng ⇄ Rng/Z : K,
(3.27)
H(R) = (R , p : R+ → Z),
+
K(R, p : R → Z) = Ker p.

Starting from a ‘general ring’ R, the ring R+ is obtained by adding a unit

(without considering whether R has a unit or not): it has additive part
Z ⊕ R, multiplication

(h, r)(k, s) = (hk, hs + kr + rs),

and unit (1, 0); p is the first projection and Ker p ∼

= R.
(The reader may know that in Algebra it is often preferred to define R+
by ‘adding a unit when it does not already exist’; this ‘ad hoc’ procedure
is idempotent, but is not a functor gRng → Rng.)
The other way round, starting from a copointed ring (R, p : R → Z), we
get an isomorphic copointed ring (Ker p)+ , with a natural isomorphism

R → (Ker p)+ , r 7→ (p(r), r − p(r).1R ).

*(In fact there is a short exact sequence Ker p ֌ R ։ Z of general rings,

which splits in Ab because Z is a free abelian group.)*
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

3.3.3 Theorem (Limits in comma categories)

(a) If the categories X and Y have all limits, preserved by F : X → Z and
G : Y → Z, then the comma category W = (F ↓ G) has all limits, preserved
by the functor (P, Q) : W → X×Y. The same is true of colimits.
(b) If the category X has all limits, preserved by F : X → Z, and Z ∈ ObZ,
then the slice categories (F ↓ Z) and (Z ↓ F ) have all limits, preserved by
the forgetful functor with values in X. The same is true of colimits.
Note. If in (a) we also assume that F, G create all limits, we can deduce
that (P, Q) : W → X × Y also creates them. The proof is essentially the
same as below.

Proof The argument is standard, and the reader may prefer to work it out.
It suffices to prove (a), since (b) is a consequence. Below, it is understood
that the index i varies in ObS.
A functor W : S → (F ↓ G) has vertices

Wi = (P Wi , QWi , πWi ) = (Xi , Yi , zi : F Xi → GYi ).

 118 Adjunctions and monads
The composite (X, Y ) = (P, Q).W : S → X×Y has a limit (L, M ), with
cone
wi = (ui , vi ) : (L, M ) → (Xi , Yi ).
Since F and G preserve limits, F L and GM are limits of F X and GY in
Z, with cones
F u i : F L → F Xi , Gvi : GM → GYi .
The natural transformation πW : F X → GY : S → Z (of components
πWi = zi ) determines a unique morphism z : F L → GM in Z consistent
with these cones:
Gvi .z = zi .F ui : F L → GYi (for all i ∈ ObS).
Finally, the object (L, M, h : F L → GM ) of (F ↓ G) is the limit of W ,
with cone (ui , vi ) : (L, M, z) → (Xi , Yi , zi ).

3.3.4 Comma categories and universal arrows

A universal arrow from the object X to the functor U : A → X (see 2.7.1)
is the same as an initial object (A, η : X → U A) of the comma category
(X ↓ U ).
Dually, a universal arrow from the functor U to the object X is the same
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

as a terminal object (A, ε : U A → X) of the comma category (U ↓ X).

3.3.5 Comma categories and limits

We have seen that limits and colimits in the category C, based on a small
category S, can be viewed as universal arrows of the diagonal functor
D : C → CS (see 2.7.2). Therefore they also amount to terminal or ini-
tial objects in comma categories of D.
In fact a cone (A, (fi : A → Xi )) of the functor X : S → C is the same as
an object of the comma category (D ↓ X) and the limit of X is the same
as the terminal object of (D ↓ X).
Dually a cocone (A, (fi : Xi → A)) of X is an object of the comma
category (X ↓ D), and the colimit of X is the initial object of (D ↓ X).

3.3.6 Comma categories and adjunctions

As an extension of the case of Galois connections in 1.7.6, the graph of the
adjunction (F, G, η, ε) : X →
· Y will be the comma category
G(F, G) = (F ↓ Y), (3.28)
 3.3 Comma categories 119
with objects (X, Y, c : F X → Y ) and morphisms
(f, g) : (X, Y, c : F X → Y ) → (X ′ , Y ′ , c′ : F X ′ → Y ′ ), c′ .F f = g.c.
The adjunction F ⊣ G has a graph factorisation in AdjCat
F′ / F ′′ /
X o G(F, G) o Y (3.29)
′ ′′
G G

F ′ (X) = (X, F X, 1F X ), G′ (X, Y, d) = X, η ′ X = 1X ,

F ′′ (X, Y, c) = Y, G′′ (Y ) = (GY, Y, εY : F G(Y ) → Y ), ε′′ Y = 1Y .
This forms, also here, a natural weak factorisation system in AdjCat, in
the sense of [GT] (see 2.5.5), which is mono-epi (because G′ F ′ and F ′′ G′′
are identities).
One can replace G(F, G) with the comma category G′ (F, G) = (X ↓ G),
which is isomorphic to the former because of the adjunction (and coincides
with it when X and Y are order categories). Or one can replace (3.29)
with a factorisation in three adjunctions, where the central one is a pair of
isomorphisms, inverse to each other
/ / /
X o G(F, G) o G′ (F, G) o Y (3.30)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

3.3.7 A second digression on categorical equivalence

Going on with the discusion of 1.5.9, let us note that we have given a strict
construction for (F ↓ G), and a characterisation up to isomorphism by the
universal property of 3.3.1, as a sort of ‘directed 2-dimensional pullback’.
Weakening this item up to categorical equivalence seems to complicate
things without any advantage, as discussed in [G8], Subsection 1.8.9, and
briefly reviewed below. Some notions of homotopy theory are required to
follow the argument.
*A reader familiar with homotopy pullbacks [Mat] will recognise a comma
category as similar to a standard homotopy pullback, defined by its universal
property up to homeomorphism; and will know that a general homotopy
pullback is defined up to homotopy equivalence (the ‘topological version’ of
categorical equivalence).
Both notions are important: the standard form gives a functor, and the
weak definition is closed under pasting – while a pasting of standard ho-
motopy pullbacks is only homotopy equivalent to the appropriate standard
solution.
Now, the second fact fails in the case of comma categories (essentially
because a natural transformation is a kind of ‘directed homotopy’, generally
 120 Adjunctions and monads
non reversible): a pasting of comma squares gives a category which – in
general – is not categorically equivalent to the appropriate comma, but
a full subcategory of the latter, reflective or coreflective according to the
direction of comma squares (see [G8], loc. cit.).
(In fact, a more appropriate categorical version of a homotopy pullback
would be an ‘iso-comma’, where we replace the natural transformation
of the universal property by a functorial isomorphism; the solution is an
obvious full subcategory of (F ↓ G). In this case the E-notion would indeed
be closed under pasting. However, iso-commas are of no interest here.)*

3.4 Monoidal categories and exponentials

Loosely speaking, a monoidal category is a category equipped with a ‘tensor
product’, like A⊗B in Ab or – more simply – the cartesian product X ×Y
in Set. These structures are related with ‘internal homs’ (or exponentials),
via adjunctions.
The examples dealt with in 3.4.7 include the categories Set, Ord, Cat,
Set• and S, Ab and R Mod, K Prj, Rel Set, Ban and Ban1 .
Monoidal categories were introduced as ‘categories with multiplication’,
in two 1963 articles by by Bénabou [Be1] and Mac Lane [M3], then renamed
by Eilenberg. Other standard references for this topic are Mac Lane [M4],
Eilenberg–Kelly [EiK] and Kelly [Kl2].
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A reader interested in Computer Science will likely know that the notion
of cartesian closed category (exposed in 3.4.5) is ‘equivalent’ to typed λ-
calculus, as shown in Lambek and Scott [LaS], or Barr and Wells [BarW].

3.4.1 Monoidal categories

A monoidal category is a category C equipped with a system (⊗, E, κ, λ, ρ).
It consists of a functor in two variables, often called a tensor product

C×C → C, (A, B) 7→ A⊗B, (3.31)

and an object E, called the unit. The operation − ⊗ − is assumed to be

associative, up to a functorial isomorphism of components

κ(A, B, C) : A⊗(B ⊗C) → (A⊗B)⊗C (associator),

and the object E is assumed to be an identity, up to functorial isomorphisms

λ(A) : E ⊗A → A, ρ(A) : A⊗E → A (unitors).

All these isomorphisms must satisfy coherence conditions, that will be

 3.4 Monoidal categories and exponentials 121
analysed in the more general framework of weak double categories (see
7.2.3); this allows us to ‘forget’ them and write

A⊗(B ⊗C) = (A⊗B)⊗C, E ⊗A = A = A⊗E.

The case of a strict monoidal category, where the comparison isomorphisms

are identities, is less frequent but has important examples: see 3.4.2(g),
7.3.3(d) and 7.3.4.
A monoidal category with small hom-sets has a canonical forgetful func-
tor, represented by its unit

U = C(E, −) : C → Set, (3.32)

which need not be faithful (as some examples in 3.4.2 will show). For every
pair of objects A, B in C there is a canonical mapping

ϕAB : U (A)×U (B) → U (A⊗B), (a, b) 7→ a⊗b (3.33)

where a : E → A, b : E → B and a ⊗ b : E = E ⊗ E → A ⊗ B. It is easy

to prove that the family (ϕAB ) is a natural transformation between two
functors C×C → Set.
A symmetric monoidal category is further equipped with a symmetry
isomorphism, coherent with the other ones

s(A, B) : A⊗B → B ⊗A. (3.34)

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The latter cannot be omitted: note that s(A, A) : A⊗A → A⊗A is not
the identity, in general.

3.4.2 Exercises and complements

(a) A category C with finite products has a symmetric monoidal structure
given by the categorical product A× B, with unit the terminal object ⊤.
The reader will define the comparison isomorphisms, using the universal
property of products. This structure is called the cartesian (monoidal)
structure of C.
It is the important monoidal structure of many categories like Set, Ord,
Cat, Top,... The reader will determine the canonical forgetful functor
C(⊤, −) of each of them, and show that it is not faithful when C is Cat.
However, if a category C with finite products is pointed, its cartesian
structure will likely be of little interest, since the associated forgetful func-
tor U = C(0, −) : C → Set is constant at the singleton. In fact R Mod, Set• ,
Ban, etc. also have an important symmetric monoidal structure – examined
below – which is not cartesian. In many cases such structures arise out of
 122 Adjunctions and monads
the notion of a ‘bi-morphism’ A×B → C, that ‘preserves the structure in
each variable’.
(b) The important symmetric monoidal structure of the category Ab of
abelian groups is the usual tensor product A ⊗ B, with unit the additive
group Z.
More generally the important symmetric monoidal structure of the cat-
egory R Mod, of modules on a commutative unitary ring R, is the tensor
product over R, which the reader will likely have already seen in some text
dealing with multilinear algebra (e.g. [Bor1]).
A ⊗R B is characterised up to isomorphism by the fact that this module
is equipped with an R-bilinear mapping ϕ : A × B → A ⊗ R B (linear in
each variable) such that every bilinear mapping ψ : A×B → C factorises
through ϕ by a unique homomorphism h
ψ ψ
A×B / C U (A)×U (B) / U (C)
: 7
ttt ♦♦
ϕ tt ϕ ♦♦♦ (3.35)
tt ♦
♦♦♦ Uh
 tt h 
A ⊗R B U (A ⊗ R B)
(Note that this diagram lives in Set; to be more precise – or perhaps
pedantic – one can rewrite it as at the right hand.)
The proof of the existence and the construction of the associator require
some work (and can be found in any text on multilinear algebra), while
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

the unitors and the symmetry A ⊗ R B → B ⊗ R A follow easily from the

universal property. Many other properties of the functors −⊗ R A, like the
preservation of colimits, will follow easily from the adjunction of 3.4.6.
The reader will note that the forgetful functor of (R Mod, ⊗, R) is the
usual one (up to isomorphism), while that of the cartesian structure is
trivial (a constant functor), as we have already remarked.
(c) The important symmetric monoidal structure of Set• is given by the
smash product (X, x0 ) ∧ (Y, y0 ).
It can be realised as the quotient of the product (X, x0 ) × (Y, y0 ) =
(X ×Y, (x0 , y0 )) that identifies all the points of the sum (X, x0 ) + (Y, y0 ),
computed as a subset of the product (see 2.1.6)
(X, x0 ) ∧ (Y, y0 ) = (X ×Y )/((X ×{y0 }) ∪ ({x0 }×Y )). (3.36)
The base point of the quotient is the equivalence class of the base point
of the product
[(x0 , y0 )] = (X ×{y0 }) ∪ ({x0 }×Y ).
The unit is the pointed set ({0, 1}, 0). The canonical forgetful functor
Set• → Set is the usual one.
 3.4 Monoidal categories and exponentials 123
The smash product in Top• is constructed in the same way, as a topolog-
ical quotient of the topological product. *It is an important construction
in Topology; for instance the n-dimensional sphere Sn (pointed at some
point) is homeomorphic to the n-th smash power S1 ∧ ... ∧ S 1 . Note also
that the unit is the pointed 0-dimensional sphere S0 .*
(d) The reader will note that the tensor product of Set• (or Top• ) satisfies
a universal property similar to that of the tensor product of modules, with
respect to ‘bipointed mappings’ X × Y → Z, separately pointed in each
variable.
(e) The reader will also note that a similar approach for Ord would simply
give the cartesian product, since a mapping X × Y → Z which preserves
the order in each variable is monotone.
(f) Describe the symmetric monoidal structure of S produced by the equiv-
alence with Set• (in 1.8.6). Determine the associated forgetful functor
S → Set.
(g) The category End(C) of endofunctors of a category C and their natural
transformations has a strict monoidal structure given by the composition
of endofunctors; it is non-symmetric, generally.

3.4.3 The exponential law for sets

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

For a fixed set A, we show now that the functor F = −×A

F : Set → Set, F (X) = X ×A, F (f ) = f ×A = f ×idA, (3.37)

admits, as a right adjoint, the functor G = Set(A, −)

G : Set → Set, G(Y ) = Set(A, Y ), G(g) = Set(A, g) = g. − . (3.38)

The adjunction F ⊣ G (depending on the parameter A), is expressed by

a natural isomorphism

ϕ : Set(F (−), =) → Set(−, G(=)) : Setop ×Set → Set. (3.39)

In fact we have a family of bijections, for X, Y in Set

ϕXY : Set(X ×A, Y ) → Set(X, Set(A, Y )) (exponential law),

(3.40)
(u : X ×A → Y ) 7→ (v : X → Set(A, Y )),

where the mappings u and v are related by the identity u(x, a) = v(x)(a),
for all x ∈ X, a ∈ A.
This family is natural: for two mappings f : X ′ → X, g : Y → Y ′ , the
 124 Adjunctions and monads
following diagram commutes
ϕXY
Set(X ×A, Y ) / Set(X, Set(A, Y ))
g.−.F f Gg.−.f (3.41)
 
Set(X ′ ×A, Y ′ ) ϕX ′ Y ′
/ Set(X ′ , Set(A, Y ′ ))

because, for any mapping u : X ×A → Y , the mappings

g.u.(f ×1A) : X ′ ×A → Y ′ ,
(ϕX ′ Y ′ )−1 (Gg.ϕXY (u).f ) : X ′ ×A → Y ′ ,
take the same value at any (x′ , a) ∈ X ′ ×A, namely g(u(f x′ , a)).

3.4.4 Comments
The set Set(X, Y ) is often written as Y X , consistently with the calculus of
cardinals (and with the exponential of small discrete categories, in 1.6.1).
In this way, the previous natural isomorphism can be rewritten as
Set(X ×A, Y ) ∼
= Set(X, Y A ), Y X×A ∼
= (Y A )X . (3.42)
The second form motivates the name of exponential law for these isomor-
phisms (and their version in other categories).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The existence of the right adjoint (−)A of the functor F = − × A will

be expressed saying that the object A is ‘exponentiable’ in Set (as a cat-
egory equipped with its cartesian product). The fact that all of them are
exponentiable will be expressed saying that Set is ‘cartesian closed’.

3.4.5 Exponentiable objects and closed structures

More generally, in a symmetric monoidal category C an object A is said to
be exponentiable (with respect to the tensor product that we are consider-
ing) if the functor −⊗A : C → C has a right adjoint. The latter is generally
written as Hom(A, −) : C → C or (−)A , and called an internal hom, or an
exponential.
There is thus a family of bijections, natural in the variables X, Y (and
depending on the parameter A)
ϕA
XY : C(X ⊗A, Y ) → C(X, Hom(A, Y )) (X, Y in C). (3.43)
Since adjunctions compose, all the tensor powers A⊗n = A⊗...⊗A are
also exponentiable, with
Hom(A⊗n , −) = (Hom(A, −))n . (3.44)
 3.4 Monoidal categories and exponentials 125
A symmetric monoidal category is said to be closed if all its objects are
exponentiable.
*Then one can form a hom-functor Hom : Cop ×C → C in two variables.
Without entering in details, a morphism f : A → A′ gives a natural trans-
formation − ⊗ f : − ⊗A → − ⊗ A′ : C → C, which has a ‘mate’ (see 7.1.6)
Hom(f, −) : Hom(A′ , −) → Hom(A, −).*
A category C with finite products is said to be cartesian closed if all its
objects are exponentiable for the cartesian monoidal structure.
In the non-symmetric case one should consider a left and a right internal
hom-functor, as is the case with cubical sets (see [K1, BroH2, G7]).
*Instead of starting from a monoidal category and introducing the in-
ternal hom as a right adjoint, one can define a ‘closed category’ [EiK], by
axiomatising an internal hom-functor Hom : Cop × C → C, and derive the
tensor product as a left adjoint. Concretely, this procedure is even easier in
many cases considered below; formally, the axioms for Hom are less evident
than those of a tensor product.*

3.4.6 The exponential law for modules

Modules on a commutative unitary ring R have also, as sets, an expo-
nential law (and family of adjunctions), based on well known functors of
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

two variables: the tensor product (recalled in 3.4.2(b)) and the internal
hom-functor HomR

− ⊗ R − : R Mod×R Mod → R Mod,

(3.45)
HomR : R Modop ×R Mod → R Mod.

Here HomR (A, B) is the set of homomorphisms R Mod(A, B) equipped

with the pointwise sum and scalar product:

(u + v)(a) = u(a) + v(a), (λu)(a) = λ.u(a).

On the morphisms we have the usual action: HomR (f, g) = g. − .f .

In fact, for a fixed R-module A, there is again a natural family of iso-
morphisms indexed by X, Y in R Mod

ϕXY : HomR (X ⊗ R A, Y ) → HomR (X, HomR (A, Y )),

(3.46)
ϕXY (u)(x) = u(x⊗−) : A → Y,

for u : X ⊗ R A → Y and x ∈ X. The underlying bijections

ϕXY : R Mod(X ⊗ R A, Y ) → R Mod(X, HomR (A, Y )),

 126 Adjunctions and monads
give an adjunction F ⊣ G (depending on the parameter A) between the
endofunctors:
F : R Mod → R Mod,
F (X) = X ⊗ R A, F (f ) = f ⊗idA,
(3.47)
G : R Mod → R Mod,
G(Y ) = HomR (A, Y ), G(g) = HomR (A, g) = g. − .
With this structure R Mod is a symmetric monoidal closed category.

3.4.7 Exercises and complements

(a) We have seen that Set is cartesian closed, with Hom(A, Y ) = Set(A, Y ).
The category Ord is also cartesian closed, with internal hom

Hom(A, Y ) = (Ord(A, Y ), 6),

equipped with the pointwise order (1.4).

The category Cat of small categories is cartesian closed, with the internal
hom Hom(S, C) = CS described in 1.6.1. Every category of presheaves of
sets (see 1.6.3) is cartesian closed.
(b) Ab is not cartesian closed: for every non-trivial abelian group A the
product − × A does not preserves sums and cannot have a right adjoint.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

But we have seen that Ab and R Mod are symmetric monoidal closed, with
respect to the usual tensor product and Hom functor.
(c) Similarly Set• is symmetric monoidal closed, with respect to the smash
product described in 3.4.2(c): Hom(A, Y ) is the set of pointed mappings
Set• (A, Y ), pointed at the zero morphism A → Y .
Describe the associated symmetric monoidal closed structure of S, whose
tensor product was the subject of Exercise 3.4.2(f).
(d) The internal hom-functor HomR : R Modop ×R Mod → R Mod produces
the dual-module functor
HomR (−, R) : R Modop → R Mod, X 7→ X ∗ = HomR (X, R). (3.48)

Many important ‘dual-object’ functors arise in this way, from an internal

hom-functor, fixing the covariant variable and leaving free the contravariant
one.
(e) We shall see, in 5.1.1, that Top is not cartesian closed, but every lo-
cally compact Hausdorff space A is exponentiable: Y A is the set of maps
Top(A, Y ) endowed with the compact-open topology (for an arbitrary space
Y ).
 3.4 Monoidal categories and exponentials 127
(f) For a commutative field K, we shall see that the symmetric monoidal
closed structure of the category K Vct (= K Mod) of vector spaces induces
a similar structure on the category K Prj of projective spaces on K (in
6.5.6).
(g) Use exercise 3.2.8(d) to prove that the category Rel Set is symmetric
monoidal closed, with tensor product X×Y (the cartesian product of sets)
and the same internal hom: Hom(X, Y ) = X ×Y .
*(h) The categories Ban and Ban1 are both symmetric monoidal closed,
with unit the scalar field K (R or C). In both cases, Hom(A, Y ) is the
set Ban(A, Y ) of all continuous linear mappings A → Y , with the usual
K-linear structure and norm

||f || = sup{||f (x)|| | x ∈ A, ||x|| 6 1}.

The tensor product is obtained by a metric completion of the linear tensor

product, see [Se].
The canonical forgetful functors have already been considered in (1.34):
U = Ban(K, −) : Ban → Set, U (X) = |X|,
(3.49)
B1 = Ban1 (K, −) : Ban1 → Set, B1 (X) = {x ∈ X | ||x|| 6 1}.
Note that, applying each of them to the Banach space Hom(A, Y ), we
get the correct set of morphisms
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Ban(A, Y ) = |Hom(A, Y )|, Ban1 (A, Y ) = B1 (Hom(A, Y )). (3.50)

3.4.8 Internal monoids

Let C = (C, ⊗, E) be a monoidal category; the comparison isomorphisms
are left understood.
An internal monoid in C is a triple (M, e, m) consisting of an object M
and two morphisms e : E → M , m : M ⊗M → M of C, called the unit and
multiplication, which make the following diagrams commute

e⊗M M⊗e M⊗m

M ■■■ / M ⊗2 o M M ⊗3 / M ⊗2
■■■■ ✉
■■■■ ✉✉✉✉✉
■■■■ m ✉
✉✉
✉ m⊗M m (3.51)
■  ✉✉✉✉✉✉  
M M ⊗2 m
/ M

These axioms are called unitarity and associativity.

A monoid in Set (resp. Top or Ord), with respect to the cartesian product,
is an ordinary monoid (resp. a topological or ordered monoid). A monoid
 128 Adjunctions and monads
in Ab (resp. R Mod), with respect to the usual tensor product, is a ring
(resp. an R-algebra).
One can define a topological group as an ‘internal group’ in Top, by
adding to an internal monoid M an inversion morphism i : M → M satis-
fying suitable axioms. Lie groups can also be defined in a similar way.
But the reader is warned that this approach would not work in Ord,
because the inversion mapping necessarily reverses the order: we should
consider Ord as a category with reversor, as in 1.8.1, and introduce the
inversion morphism as i : M op → M . This also works in the previous
cases, equipping Top (or the category of differentiable manifolds) with the
trivial reversor, the identity.

3.4.9 Internal comonoids

Dually, an internal comonoid in (C, ⊗, E) is a triple (X, e, d) where the
morphisms e : X → E (counit) and d : X → X ⊗2 (comultiplication) satisfy
dual axioms
e d / X ⊗2 (3.52)
E o X

(e⊗X)d = 1X = (X ⊗e)d, (d⊗X)d = (X ⊗d)d.

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

For a cartesian structure (C, ×, ⊤), every object X has a structure of

internal comonoid, where e : X → ⊤ is determined and d = (1, 1) : X → X 2
is the diagonal.
In Cat, letting X be the arrow category 2, we get a structure of interest
(see 7.6.2).

3.5 The Adjoint Functor Theorem

Freyd’s Adjoint Functor Theorem is one of the main tool to prove the
existence of an adjoint, in a case where a (more or less) explicit construction
would be difficult, or too complicated to be useful, or unknown (unless by
repeating the argument of the theorem itself).
Another existence theorem for adjoints, the Special Adjoint Functor The-
orem, by P. Freyd again, can be found in [M4], Section V.8.

3.5.1 The Initial Object Theorem (Freyd)

Let C be a complete category with small hom-sets. C has an initial object
if and only if it satisfies the following condition:
 3.5 The Adjoint Functor Theorem 129
(Solution Set Condition) there exists a solution set, i.e. a family Wi of
objects of C indexed by a small set I, such that:
- for every object X there exists some i ∈ I and some arrow Wi → X.
Note. One can drop the local-smallness condition on C, and only require
that the product W of the family Wi has a small set of endomorphisms
C(W, W ). The proof is the same as below.

Proof The necessity of the previous condition is obvious: an initial object

W forms, by itself, a solution set (with C(W, W ) a singleton).
Conversely, let us suppose that the above condition is satisfied and let
Q
W = Wi with projections pi : W → Wi . The object W is weakly initial:
in fact, for every object X there exists some arrow W → Wi → X.
We want to prove that the initial object Z can be obtained from the
global equaliser h : Z → W of the whole set of endomorphisms of W , i.e.
the limit of the (small) diagram formed by them. This means that:
(a) for every f : W → W , f h = h,
(b) every arrow h′ : Z ′ → W which equalises all the endomaps of W fac-
torises as h′ = kh, by a unique k : Z ′ → Z.
The morphism h is mono and the object Z is weakly initial, because of
the arrow h : Z → W . To prove that it is the initial object of the category,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

we suppose to have two maps f, g : Z → X, and prove that they coincide.

Let e : Z0 → Z be their equaliser. Since W is weakly initial, we have a
map k : W → Z0 and a diagram
k / Z0
W c❋
❋❋
❋❋ e (3.53)
h ❋❋ 
Z
Now, the maps idW and hek : W → W must be equalised by h : Z → W ,
whence h = (hek)h = h(ekh). Cancelling the monomorphism h we get
ekh = idZ. Therefore e is (a split) epi and f = g.

3.5.2 The Adjoint Functor Theorem (Freyd [Fr1])

Let G : D → C be a functor defined on a category D with small hom-sets
and all small limits. Then G has a left adjoint if and only if it satisfies the
following conditions:
(i) G preserves all small limits,
(ii) (Solution Set Condition) for every object X in C there exists a family
 130 Adjunctions and monads
of objects Yi in D and arrows wi : X → G(Yi ) in C, indexed by a small set
IX , such that every map f : X → G(Y ) (with Y in D) factorises as

G(g).wi : X → G(Yi ) → G(Y ),

for some i ∈ IX and g ∈ D(Yi , Y ).

If C has also small hom-sets, one can simplify the Solution Set Condition:
(iii) for every object X in C there exits a small set S(X) ⊂ ObD, such that
every map f : X → G(Y ) (with Y in D) factorises as

G(g).w : X → G(Y0 ) → G(Y ),

for some Y0 ∈ S(X), w : X → G(Y0 ) in C and g ∈ D(Y0 , Y ).

Proof The necessity of (i), (ii) is obvious: a right adjoint preserves all the
existing limits, and a universal arrow (Y0 , η : X → G(Y0 )) from X to G
gives a solution set formed by a single object of D and a single arrow of C.
Conversely, assuming (i) and (ii), it is sufficient to prove that, for every
object X in C, the comma category (X ↓ G) has an initial object (as we
know from 3.3.4); this follows from the previous Initial Object Theorem.
In fact (X ↓ G) has small hom-sets, because D has. It is small complete
(by Theorem 3.3.3), because C is and G preserves small limits. Finally
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

condition (ii) precisely gives a solution set (Yi , wi : X → G(Yi )) for (X ↓ G),
in the sense of Theorem 3.5.1.
The simplified version is obvious.

3.5.3 Some points on cardinality

We recall some basic points of the theory of cardinal sets, that are useful
in order to construct solution sets and prove the existence of an adjoint.
Definitions and proofs can be found in [Je].
(a) We write ♯X the cardinal of a set X, and ℵ0 = ♯N. The cardinal sets
are totally ordered by the relation α 6 β, meaning that there exists an
injective mapping α → β.
(b) For cardinals α, β, the symbols α+β and α.β usually denote the cardinal
of their sum or product, respectively. If one at least of α, β is infinite, then
α + β = α.β = max(α, β). One always has α < 2α = ♯(Pα).
(c) For a small cardinal α, the cardinal sets 6 α are the elements of a small
set.
 3.6 Monads and algebras 131
3.5.4 Exercises and comments
(a) The reader will find useful to apply the Adjoint Functor Theorem to
prove the existence of the free group on an arbitrary set X, or equivalently
of the left adjoint to the forgetful functor U : Gp → Set. The argument sets
a pattern that can be followed in many other cases.
One can fill-in the following outline. First we know that Gp has small
hom-sets and small limits, preserved by U . Let us fix a (small) set X.
Every mapping f : X → U (G) with values in a group factorises through
the subgroup G0 = hf (X)i generated by f (X) in G. But ♯f (X) 6 ♯X,
whence the cardinal α = ♯G0 satisfies:

α 6 βX = max{♯X, ℵ0 }.

An arbitrary bijection |G0 | → α allows us to make the cardinal α into a

group G1 isomorphic to G0 , so that f factorises as

U (g).f1 : X → U (G1 ) → U (G),

for a monomorphism g : G1 → G0 ⊂ G.
The reader will now consider the small set C(X) of all cardinals 6 βX ,
and prove that the groups whose underlying set belongs to C(X), like the
previous G1 , form a small set S(X). This gives a solution set for X, in the
simplified form 3.5.2(iii) – legitimate because also Set has small hom-sets.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The usual construction of the free group on the set X will be sketched
in 4.1.3(c).
(b) A similar procedure can be followed for any variety of algebras, as we
shall do in Theorem 4.4.2.
(c) A similar, even easier, procedure can also be followed to prove that the
full subcategory Hsd ⊂ Top of Hausdorff spaces is reflective. A ‘construc-
tion’ of the reflector can be found in Proposition 5.1.3.
*(d) Use the Adjoint Functor Theorem to prove that Gp has small sums –
the ‘free products’.

3.6 Monads and algebras

Monads and their algebras yield a far-reaching formalisation of the ‘alge-
braic character’ of a category over another – typically used over the category
of sets but also of interest in many other cases.
Given a functor G : A → X, this theory answers the question: is A ‘alge-
braic’ over X, via G? More precisely, we say that the functor G is ‘monadic’
if it has a left adjoint F : X → A and the monad T = F G : X → X (i.e. the
 132 Adjunctions and monads
trace left by the adjunction on the category X) allows us to reconstruct the
category A as a category of T -algebras.
We follow the classical terminology and notation of Mac Lane [M4],
Chapter VI. Monads are also called ‘triples’ or ‘dual standard construc-
tions’ in other texts, as [BarB, Bc, Ds].
The reader is warned that the ‘algebraic character’ considered here can be
linked with infinitary operations (see 3.6.6). Finitary algebraic theories, or
Lawvere theories, are studied in Lawvere’s thesis (1963), recently reprinted
with comments and a supplement in [Lw2]; see also [Bo2], Chapter 3.

3.6.1 An example
As an informal presentation of this subject, we start from the forgetful
functor of monoids, here written as G : Mon → Set. The free monoid on a
set X can be constructed as a sum in Set of the cartesian powers X n
P
F (X) = n∈N X n,
(3.54)
(x1 , ..., xp ).(y1 , ..., yq ) = (x1 , ..., xp , y1 , ..., yq ),
so that an element of F (X) is a word (x1 , ..., xp ) in the alphabet X, and
two words are multiplied by concatenation. The empty word e = (−) ∈ X 0
acts as the identity element. We have thus the left adjoint F ⊣ G, with
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

the following unit and counit (for a set X and a monoid M )

ηX : X → GF (X), ηX (x) = (x),
(3.55)
εM : F G(M ) → M, εM (m1 , ..., mn ) = m1 ∗ ... ∗ mn .
Here ηX sends each element of X to the corresponding unary word in the
underlying set of F (X), while εM sends a word of the free monoid on the
set G(M ) to the product of its elements in M (writing this multiplication
as ∗).
The adjunction leaves, on the domain Set of the left adjoint, a ‘trace’
formed of an endofunctor T and two natural transformations, called the
unit and the multiplication
T = GF : Set → Set,
(3.56)
η : id → T, µ = GεF : T 2 → T.
We shall see that these data (T, η, µ) form a monad on Set, namely the
monad associated to the adjunction, often simply written as T . The im-
portant fact is that the monad allows us to reconstruct the category of
monoids (and the whole adjunction).
Loosely speaking, the monad T has a category of T -algebras SetT , where
 3.6 Monads and algebras 133
an object is a pair (X, a : T X → X) consisting of a set X and a mapping
a : T X → X satisfying some axioms. We have thus a binary multiplication
x ∗ y = a(x, y) on X, and the axioms of T -algebras force this multiplication
to be a monoid-law, with a(x1 , ..., xn ) = x1 ∗ ... ∗ xn .
Finally, we conclude that Mon is, up to isomorphism of categories, a
category of T -algebras over Set, for the monad asociated to the functor
G : Mon → Set, and we express this fact saying that Mon is monadic over
Set, via G.
Let us note that the free semigroup on the empty set is empty: the
category of ‘non-empty semigroups’, discussed in 1.1.6, lacks such a free
object and is not monadic over Set. The same argument applies in other
‘artificial cases’, like the category of ‘non-abelian groups’.
We expose now the theory of monads and their links with adjunctions.
The exercises are deferred to the next section.

3.6.2 Monads
A monad on the category X is a triple (T, η, µ) where T : X → X is an
endofunctor, while η : 1 → T and µ : T 2 → T are natural transformations
(called the unit and multiplication of the monad) which make the following
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

diagrams commute

ηT
T ❊❊ / T 2 o Tη T T3
Tµ
/ T2
❊❊❊❊❊ ②②
❊❊❊❊ µ ②②②②②②② µT µ (3.57)
❊❊❊ ②② 
 ②②② 
T T2 µ
/ T

These axioms are called unitarity and associativity. In fact, a monad on

the category X is an internal monoid (see 3.4.8) in the category C = End(X)
of endofunctors of X and their natural transformations, equipped with the
strict (non-symmetric) monoidal structure given by the composition of end-
ofunctors (already mentioned in 3.4.2(g)).
For an ordered set X, viewed as a category, a monad T : X → X is
just a monotone function which is inflationary (1X 6 T ) and idempotent
(T 2 = T ); this is also called a closure operator on X. Obvious examples
come from the topological closure PS → PS of a topological space S
(which, moreover, has to preserve finite unions). Idempotent monads on
arbitrary categories will be studied in Section 3.8.
 134 Adjunctions and monads
3.6.3 From adjunctions to monads
It is easy to verify that an adjunction

F : X ⇄ A : G, η : 1 → GF, ε : F G → 1, (3.58)

has an associated monad (T, η, µ) on X (the domain of the left adjoint),

where T = GF : X → X, η is the unit of the adjunction and

µ = GεF : GF.GF → GF.

Typically, a variety of algebras A has an associated monad T = U F :

Set → Set produced by the forgetful functor U : A → Set and its left adjoint
F : Set → A, the free-algebra functor (as we shall see in Theorem 4.4.2).

3.6.4 Eilenberg–Moore algebras

The other way round, from monads to adjunctions, there are two main
constructions; we begin from the more important one.
Given a monad (T, η, µ) on X one defines the category XT of T -algebras,
or Eilenberg–Moore algebras for T : these are pairs (X, a : T X → X) con-
sisting of an object X of X and a map a (called the algebraic structure)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

satisfying two coherence axioms:

a.ηX = 1X , a.T a = a.µX, (3.59)

ηX Ta
X ●● / TX T 2X / TX
●●●●●
●●●●
●●● a µX a
  
X TX / X
a

A morphism of T -algebras f : (X, a) → (Y, b) is a morphism f : X → Y

of X which preserves the algebraic structures, in the sense that f.a = b.T f .
They compose as in X.
The category XT is thus a full subcategory of the comma category (T ↓
X).
One can find this category written as Alg(T ), but we prefer to follow
Mac Lane’s notation. Moreover, we shall reserve the symbol Alg(T ) for the
category of algebraic objects of an idempotent monad, which is isomorphic
to XT (in Section 3.8).
 3.6 Monads and algebras 135
3.6.5 From monads to adjunctions and back
Given a monad (T, η, µ) on X there is an adjunction with the category XT
of T -algebras
F T : X ⇄ XT : GT ,
(3.60)
η T = η : 1 → GT F T , εT : F T GT → 1,
whose associated monad coincides with the given one. We give an outline
of the procedure, and the reader is invited to complete the (easy) missing
verifications.
First we have an obvious (faithful) forgetful functor
GT : XT → X,
(3.61)
GT (X, a) = X, GT (f : (X, a) → (Y, b)) = (f : X → Y ).
Backwards we have the functor
F T : X → XT ,
F T (X) = (T X, µX : T 2 X → T X), (3.62)
T
F (f : X → Y ) = T f : (T X, µX) → (T Y, µY ).
Now GT F T = T : X → X. The unit of the adjunction is η T = η : 1 → T ,
while the counit is defined as follows
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

εT : F T GT → 1, εT (X, a) = a : (T X, µX) → (X, a). (3.63)

The triangular identities of (3.7) are satisfied, so that F T ⊣ GT , and
the functor F T gives indeed the free T -algebra on an object X of X.
It is now easy to see that the monad associated to this adjunction is
the original one, because the new multiplication also coincides with the old
one:
GT εT F T (X) = GT εT (T X, µX) = µX.

3.6.6 Monadicity
On the other hand, if we start from an adjunction (F, G, η, ε) : X → · A
as in 3.6.3, form the associated monad (T, η, µ) and then the associated
adjunction (F T , GT , η, εT ) : X →
· XT , we get a comparison between the two
adjunctions which may be an isomorphism or not; if it is the case, we think
of A as a ‘category of algebras’ over X.
In fact there is a comparison functor:
K : A → XT , K(A) = (GA, GεA : GF GA → GA),
(3.64)
K(f : A → B) = Gf : (GA, GεA) → (GB, GεB).
 136 Adjunctions and monads
K links the two adjunctions (which share the unit), in the sense that –
as one can easily verify

F / A
X o KF = F T , GT K = G,
G
K (3.65)
FT

X o / XT εT K = Kε (η T = η).
GT

Now a functor G : A → X is said to be monadic (or algebraic), or to

make A monadic over X, if it has a left adjoint F : X → A and moreover
the comparison functor K : A → XT defined above is an isomorphism of
categories. (This point is commented in the Remark below.)
We shall see, in 4.4.6, that the forgetful functor U : A → Set of any vari-
ety of algebras is monadic. But the present formalisation of the algebraic
character of a category is much broader: for instance the category of com-
pact Hausdorff spaces is monadic over Set (see [M4], Section VI.9), and
this monadicity depends on the closure operator of such spaces, a sort of
‘infinitary operation’.
*There are various ‘monadicity theorems’ (also called ‘tripleability the-
orems’) that give sufficient (or necessary and sufficient) conditions for a
functor to be monadic: the interested reader can see [M4], Chapter VI,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

[Bo2], Section 4.4, and [Bc, Ds].*

Remark. We are following Mac Lane ([M4], Section VI.3) in defining
monadicity in a strong sense, up to isomorphism of categories, because
concrete examples, based on structured sets, generally fall in this case.
On the other hand [Bo2], in Section 4.4, and various other text only ask
that the comparison K be an equivalence of categories – another aspect of
the opposition that we have considered in 1.5.9 and 3.3.7.
The difference can be better appreciated at the light of this example.
The category Set• of pointed sets is a variety of algebras, produced by a
single zeroary operation under no axioms, and is thus monadic over Set,
via its forgetful functor U . The equivalent category S of sets and partial
mappings (see 1.8.6) is equipped with the composed functor

U S : S → Set• → Set,

and the associated comparison functor is now an equivalence of categories.

We prefer to view S as ‘weakly algebraic’ over Set, rather than as ‘alge-
braic’.
 3.6 Monads and algebras 137
3.6.7 Theorem (Limits of T -algebras)
Let S be a small category. Given a monad (T, η, µ) on the category X, we
suppose that X has the limits of all functors S → X.
Then XT also has such limits, created by the forgetful functor GT : XT →
X (in the sense of 2.2.8).

Proof The argument is standard; writing it down makes a useful exercise.

For a functor X : S → X we write (LX, (ui : LX → Xi )) the limit cone
(for i ∈ S = ObS). For a functor Y : S → XT , we let

X = GT Y : S → X, Yi = (Xi , ai : T Xi → Xi ).

There is an obvious structure of algebra on LX, defined by the universal

property of the limit

a : T (LX) → LX, ui a = ai .T (ui ) : T (LX) → Xi , (3.66)

because the maps ai .T (ui ) form a cone of X. In fact, if s : i → j is in S,

we have a commutative diagram
T ui ai
T (LX) / T Xi / Xi
T X(s) X(s) (3.67)
 
/ T Xj / Xj
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

T (LX) aj
T uj

The axioms for the structure a are ‘detected’ by the jointly monic mor-
phisms ui of the limit cone
ui (a.ηLX ) = ai .T (ui ).ηLX = ai .ηXi .ui = ui ,
ui (a.µLX ) = ai .T (ui ).µLX = ai .µX i.T 2ui = ai .T ai .T 2 ui = ui (ai .T ai ).
The cone-morphisms give a family of morphisms of T -algebras

ui : (LX, a) → (Xi , ai ),

because of (3.66), and a is the only structure on LX that makes all ui

morphisms of XT . This family is a cone of Y , because the faithful functor
GT reflects commutative diagrams.
Finally the universal property of this cone follows easily: if

fi : (X ′ , a′ ) → (Xi , ai )

is a cone of Y , there is precisely one map f : X ′ → LX such that ui f = fi

(for all i), and this f lifts to the unique f : (X ′ , a′ ) → (LX, a) that solves
the same condition in XT .
 138 Adjunctions and monads
3.6.8 Kleisli algebras and their adjunction
The second construction of an adjunction from a monad (T, η, µ) on X is
based on Kleisli algebras for T and their category XT .
An object of XT is an object of X, viewed as the basis of a free T -algebra.
A morphism f ♯ : X → · Y of XT is ‘represented’ by an arbitrary morphism
f : X → T Y of X (which tells us as f ♯ acts on the basis).
By definition, the composite g ♯ f ♯ of f ♯ with g ♯ : Y →
· Z is represented
by the map

µZ.T g.f : X → T Y → T 2 Z → T Z, (3.68)

while the identity idX : X →· X is represented by ηX : X → T X. The

axioms of unitarity and associativity for XT are easily proved.
The forgetful functor GT of Kleisli algebras and its left adjoint FT are
now:
GT : XT → X, GT (X) = T X,
♯
GT (f : X →
· Y ) = µY.T f : T X → T Y,
(3.69)
FT : X → XT , FT (X) = X,
FT (f : X → Y ) = (ηY.f )♯ : X →
· Y.

Again GT FT = T . The unit and counit of the adjunction FT ⊣ GT are

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

ηT = η : 1 → T = GT FT ,
(3.70)
εT (X) = (1T X )♯ : FT GT (X) = T X →
· X.

Also here the monad associated to this adjunction is the original one,
since the new multiplication coincides with the previous one:

(GT .εT .FT )(X) = GT (1T X ) = µX.

If we start from an adjunction (F, G, η, ε) : X →

· A, as in 3.6.3, form the
associated monad (T, η, µ) and then the Kleisli adjunction

(FT , GT , η, εT ) : X →
· XT ,

there is again a comparison functor which links the two adjunctions

H : XT → A, H(X) = F X,
♯
H(f : X →
· Y ) = εF Y.F f : F X → F Y, (3.71)
HFT = F, GH = GT , HεT = εH.
 3.7 Exercises and complements on monads 139
3.6.9 Comonads and coalgebras
A comonad on the category A is a triple (S, ε, δ) formed of an endofunctor
S : A → A with natural transformations ε : S → 1 (counit) and δ : S → S 2
(comultiplication) which make the following diagrams commute
δ / S2
S ❊ S
②
②②②②② ❊❊❊❊❊❊❊
②
②② δ ❊❊❊❊❊ δ δS (3.72)
②②②②②  ❊  
S o S2 / S S2 / S3
εS Sε Sδ

A comonad on the category A is an internal comonoid (see 3.4.9) in the

monoidal category End(A).
The category S A of S-coalgebras (A, c : A → SA) is also defined by du-
ality.
An adjunction (F, G, η, ε) : X →
· A, as in 3.6.3, gives a comonad (S, ε, δ)
on A (the domain of the right adjoint G), where S = F G : A → A, the
natural transformation ε is the counit of the adjunction and

δ = F ηG : F G → F G.F G.

3.7 Exercises and complements on monads

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

This sections contains exercises on monads, their (Eilenberg–Moore) alge-

bras and Kleisli algebras.

3.7.1 Exercises and complements

(a) The forgetful functor U : Mon → Set is monadic: the reader can prove
directly this fact, following the outline of 3.6.1, or take it as granted by a
general result on varieties of algebras (Theorem 4.4.6).
(b) Similarly, the forgetful functor U : Ab → Set is monadic. But we are also
interested in the Kleisli category SetT of the associated monad: an object is
a set and a morphism f ♯ : X → · Y can be described as a Z-weighted mapping
between sets, that associates to each x ∈ X some formal linear combination
P
f ♯ (x) = λy .y of elements of Y , with quasi-null integral coefficients.
The reader can now easily compute the Kleisli composition with another
weighted mapping g ♯ : Y → · Z.
(c) Loosely speaking, this Kleisli category SetT can be viewed as the cate-
gory of free abelian groups with an assigned basis, and arbitrary homomor-
phisms between them. More precisely, the reader can prove that SetT is
equivalent to the full subcategory of Ab formed by the free abelian groups.
 140 Adjunctions and monads
(d) One can extend all this to R-weighted mappings, for a unitary ring R.
Or to other variety of algebras.
(e) These facts are better understood proving the following general fact
about the comparison functor H : XT → A, constructed in (3.71) (starting
from an adjunction (F, G, η, ε) : X →
· A, with associated monad T = GF ).
If we restrict the codomain of H to the full subcategory B of A formed
by the objects isomorphic to some ‘free object’ F (X) (for X in X), we get
an equivalence of categories H ′ : XT → B.

3.7.2 Exercises (The monad of upper-complete lattices)

(a) Define a suitable monad T : Set → Set, where T (X) = |P(X)| is the set
of subsets of X, so that the category SetT of T -algebras is isomorphic to
the category VSlt of upper-complete semilattices, i.e. complete lattices with
mappings that preserve arbitrary joins.
(b) The reader may find easier to start from the forgetful functor U : VSlt →
Set, define its left adjoint and deduce the structure of the associated monad
T.
(c) Prove that the Kleisli category SetT is isomorphic to Rel Set.
(d) Study a similar monad T ′ : Set → Set, where T ′ (X) = |Pf (X)| is the
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

set of finite subsets of X, determining its categories of algebras and Kleisli

algebras.

3.7.3 Exercises (Categories as algebras)

(a) We write as Gph the category of small graphs and their morphisms (in
the sense of 1.1.2). Prove that the forgetful functor U : Cat → Gph has
a left adjoint F , where the free category F (X) on the graph X has the
same objects, and a morphism ξ = (ξ1 , ..., ξn ) : x → x′ is a finite paths of
consecutive arrows of X

x = x0 → x1 → ... → xn = x′ . (3.73)

This includes the empty path id(x) at any vertex x of X.

(b) Prove that Cat is monadic over Gph.
(c) In the category GphT of Kleisli algebras (of the associated monad), a
morphism f : X → · Y between graphs sends an arrow ξ : x → x′ of X to a
formal composite f (ξ) = (η1 , ..., ηn ) : f (x) → f (x′ ) of arrows of Y .
 3.8 *Idempotent monads and idempotent adjunctions 141
3.8 *Idempotent monads and idempotent adjunctions
Loosely speaking, being an algebra for an idempotent monad T : X → X
reduces to a property of the objects of X. For instance, an algebra for the
abelianisation monad Gp → Gp (examined in 3.8.4(c)) is ‘the same’ as a
commutative group. Thus, the category XT of T -algebras can be replaced
with an isomorphic category Alg(T ), which is the full subcategory of X
formed by its ‘algebraic objects’.
The theory of idempotent monads and idempotent adjunctions is well
known in the domain of category theory, but it may be difficult to find it
in a single text. (Some of the main facts are exposed in [Bo2] Section 4.2,
[LaS] Lemma 4.3 and [AT] Section 6.)
We give here a rather detailed treatment of this topic, even though this
part will be marginally used in the rest of the book; a reader might be
satisfied with browsing definitions and statements, and omitting the proofs.
An adjunction is always ‘equipped’ with the associated monad (defined
in 3.6.3).

3.8.1 Idempotent monads

A monad T = (T, η, µ) on the category X is said to be idempotent if µ : T 2 →
T is invertible. Then the inverse of µ is T η = ηT : T → T 2 .
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Equivalently one can define an idempotent monad on X as a pair (T, η)

formed of a functor T : X → X and a natural transformation η : 1 → T such
that T η = ηT : T → T 2 is invertible.
In this approach one defines µ = (T η)−1 : T 2 → T . The first axiom
µ.ηT = 1 = µ.T η obviously holds; for the second it suffices to cancel
T 2 η = T ηT from the identity

(µ.T µ).T 2 η = µ = (µ.µT ).T ηT.

Dually we define idempotent comonads.

3.8.2 Theorem and Definition (Idempotent adjunctions)

Let F ⊣ G be a pair of adjoint functors (or more generally an adjunction
in a 2-category, see 7.1.2)

F : X ⇄ A : G, η : 1X → GF, ε : F G → 1A ,
(3.74)
εF.F η = 1F , Gε.ηG = 1G .

The following conditions are equivalent:

 142 Adjunctions and monads
(i) one of the four natural transformations which appear in the triangular
identities (namely F η, εF, ηG and Gε) is invertible,
(ii) all of them are invertible, i.e. F η.εF = 1F GF and ηG.Gε = 1GF G ,
(iii) the associated monad T = GF : X → X is idempotent, i.e. its multipli-
cation µ = GεF : T 2 → T is invertible (and then T η = ηT is its inverse),
(iv) T η = GF η is invertible,
(v) ηT = ηGF is invertible,
(iii∗ ) the associated comonad S = F G : A → A is idempotent, i.e. its co-
multiplication δ = F ηG : S → S 2 is invertible (and then Sε = εS is its
inverse),
(iv∗ ) εS = εF G is invertible,
(v∗ ) Sε = F Gε is invertible.
When these conditions hold we say that the adjunction is idempotent.
Then the same is true of the opposite adjunction Gop ⊣ F op .

Proof The triangle identities plainly show that F η is invertible if and only
if εF is; the same holds for ηG and Gε.
The main point is proving that (iv) implies that F η and εF are invertible,
i.e. F η.εF = 1F GF . The natural transformation F η.εF forms the upper
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

row of the following commutative diagram

εF Fη
F GF / F / F GF
F GF η Fη F GF η (3.75)
  
F GF GF / F GF / F GF GF
εF GF F ηGF

The lower row F ηGF.εF GF = (F η.εF )GF is the identity, because

F ηGF is invertible by hypothesis and the ‘reversed composite’ (εF.F η)GF
is the identity, by (3.74). Therefore F GF η.(F η.εF ) = F GF η and we get
our conclusion by cancelling the transformation F GF η, which is invertible
by hypothesis.
Adding obvious implications we have:
- (ηG and Gε are invertible) ⇒ (iv) ⇒ (F η and εF are invertible),
- (iii) ⇔ (iv) ⇔ (v).
By duality all the properties of the statement are equivalent.
 3.8 *Idempotent monads and idempotent adjunctions 143
3.8.3 Proposition and Definition (Algebraic objects)
Let (T, η) be an idempotent monad on X as defined in 3.8.1: T η = ηT : T →
T 2 is invertible and µ = (T η)−1 : T 2 → T .
(a) The following conditions on an object X of X are equivalent, and we
say that X is an algebraic object (with respect to T ) when they hold:
(i) ηX is invertible,
(ii) there exists a morphism h : T X → X such that h.ηX = 1X ,
(iii) there exists an (Eilenberg–Moore) T -algebra (X, h) over X,
(iv) ηX is invertible and X̂ = (X, (ηX)−1 ) is the only T -algebra on X,
(v) X is isomorphic to T X in X.
In this case the algebra X̂ = (X, (ηX)−1 ) is isomorphic to the free T -
algebra (T X, µX) on X. (See the last point below.)
(b) An arrow of T -algebras f : X̂ → Ŷ is an ordinary X-arrow f : X →
Y where X and Y satisfy the equivalent conditions above. The forgetful
functor GT : XT → X of the category of T -algebras is thus a full embedding

GT (X̂) = X, GT (f : X̂ → Ŷ ) = (f : X → Y ), (3.76)

and makes XT isomorphic to the full reflective subcategory Alg(T ) ⊂ X of

algebraic objects defined above. The counit εT is invertible.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(c) Using this isomorphism the adjunction F T ⊣ GT associated to T can

be rewritten in the following equivalent form, where G′ is a full embedding
with reflector F ′
F ′ : X ⇄ Alg(T ) : G′ , η ′ = η : 1 → G′ F ′ = T, ε′ : F ′ G′ → 1,
F ′ (X) = T X, F ′ (f : X → Y ) = T f : T X → T Y,
ε′ (X) = (ηX)−1 : F ′ G′ (X) = T X → X.
(3.77)
If T is the monad of an adjunction F ⊣ G : X → · A, the comparison
K : A → XT can be rewritten as K ′ : A → Alg(T ), a codomain-restriction
of G : A → X, so that G = G′ K ′ . If G is full, then K ′ is also (and K as
well).
(d) The composed functor from XT to the category XT of Kleisli algebras

FT GT : XT → X → XT , FT GT (X, (ηX)−1 ) = X, (3.78)

is an equivalence of categories (not an isomorphism, generally).

Proof (a) (i) ⇒ (ii) Obvious.

 144 Adjunctions and monads
(ii) ⇒ (iii) If h.ηX = 1X then (X, h) is a T -algebra because the second
axiom is here a consequence:

h.T h.T ηX = h = h.µX.T ηX.

(iii) ⇒ (iv) The naturality of η on the morphism h and the property T η =

ηT give
ηX.h = T h.ηT X = T h.T ηX = T (h.ηX) = 1T X ,

so that ηX and h are inverses.

(iv) ⇒ (v) Obvious.
(v) ⇒ (i) The existence of an isomorphism i : X → T X gives T i.ηX =
ηT X.i, whence ηX is invertible.
The last assertion follows from the isomorphism

ηX : (X, (ηX)−1 ) → (T X, µX).

(b) and (c). It is an obvious consequence of (a), applying the naturality of

η.
(d) As in 3.6.8 we write as f ♯ : X →· Y the XT -arrow represented by the
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

X-morphism f : X → T Y ; recall that id(X) = (ηX)♯ and the composite of

f ♯ with g ♯ : Y →
· Z is represented by µZ.T g.f : X → T Z.
The functor FT GT : XT → XT sends the arrow f : X̂ → Ŷ to

(ηY.f )♯ : X →
· Y.

Since ηY is invertible, this mapping XT (X̂, Ŷ ) → XT (X, Y ) is bijective. It

is now sufficient to prove that FT GT is essentially surjective on the objects.
Let us take an object X of XT , i.e. an arbitrary object of X, and consider
the T -algebra (T X, µX); for an arbitrary monad this is the free T -algebra
on X, with FT GT (T X, µX) = T X. Here X and T X are isomorphic objects
in XT (not in X, generally), by the inverse morphisms

(T ηX.ηX)♯ : X →
· T X, (1X )♯ : T X →
· X,

since
(µX.T 1X .T ηX.ηX)♯ = (ηX)♯ = id(X),
(µT X.T 2 ηX.T ηX.1X )♯ = (µT X.T ηT X.T ηX)♯ = (ηT X)♯ = id(T X).
 3.8 *Idempotent monads and idempotent adjunctions 145
3.8.4 Exercises and complements
(a) We know, from 3.6.2, that a monad T on an ordered set X is always
idempotent and amounts to a closure operator; an algebraic object for T
is the same as a closed element x = T x. Therefore every adjunction
(F, G, η, ε) : X →
· A
from the ordered set X to an arbitrary category is idempotent; by duality
this also holds for every adjunction A →
· X.
(b) Let A be a full reflective subcategory of X which is replete in X: any
isomorphism i : A → X of X that involves an object of A belongs to A.
Then the embedding G : A ⊂ X has a left adjoint F ⊣ G, and the counit
ε : F G → 1 is invertible (by 3.2.5), which implies that the adjunction is
idempotent. Moreover A coincides with Alg(GF ) and G is monadic.
(In fact, every A ∈ ObA is an algebraic object of X, because η(GA) is
invertible, and conversely an algebraic object X ∼
= GF (X) belongs to A.)
(c) In particular we have seen (in 3.2.6) that Ab is full reflective in Gp,
and obviously replete. The groups which are algebraic for the associated
abelianisation monad
T : Gp → Gp, ηG : G → T (G) = G/[G, G], (3.79)
are precisely the abelian ones. Similar facts hold for many embeddings of
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

algebraic varieties, like Gp ⊂ Mon or CRng ⊂ Rng. But also for Ord ⊂ pOrd
(see 3.2.3(b)) and Hsd ⊂ Top (see 5.1.3).
(d) On the other hand the embedding Rng ⊂ gRng (see 3.3.2(b)) is not full,
since a homomorphism in gRng need not preserve units, when they exist;
thus its left adjoint (−)+ : gRng → Rng (that universally adds a unit, as
described in 3.3.2) does not yield an idempotent monad: the ring R++ will
have a new unit added with respect to R+ .
The embedding of monoids into semigroups behaves in a similar way.
(e) The interested reader can prove the following extension of (b). We
have an adjunction F ⊣ G where the functor G is full and faithful (whence
ε : F G → 1 is invertible and the adjunction is idempotent). It follows that
the comparison K : A → XT is an equivalence of categories, with quasi
inverse F GT : XT → A, and G is monadic in the weak sense mentioned in
the Remark of 3.6.6.

3.8.5 Idempotent comonads and coalgebras

An idempotent comonad (S, ε) on the category A has a dual characterisa-
tion, as an endofunctor S : A → A with a natural transformation ε : S → 1
 146 Adjunctions and monads
such that Sε = εS : S 2 → S is invertible; the comultiplication δ : S → S 2
is the inverse of the latter.
Now an S-coalgebra amounts to a coalgebraic object A of A, characterised
by the following equivalent conditions:
(i) εA is invertible,
(ii) there exists a morphism k : A → SA such that εA.k = 1A ,
(iii) there exists an S-coalgebra (A, k : A → SA) over A,
(iv) εA is invertible and  = (A, (εA)−1 ) is the unique S-coalgebra over A,
(v) A is isomorphic to SA in A.
In this case  = (A, (εA)−1 ) is isomorphic to the cofree S-coalgebra
(SA, δA) on A. The category of S-coalgebras S A is linked to the full core-
flective subcategory Coalg(S) ⊂ A of coalgebraic objects, by the isomor-
phism
U : S A → Coalg(S), U (A, k) = A,
(3.80)
U (f : (A, k) → (B, k ′ )) = f : A → B.
The adjunction associated to S
S
F : S A ⇄ A : S G,
(3.81)
S
η : 1 →S GS F, S
ε = ε : S F S G → 1,
is computed as follows:
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

S
F (A, k) = A, S
F (f : (A, k) → (B, k ′ )) = f : A → B,
S
G(A) = (SA, δ : SA → S 2 A),
S
G(f : A → B) = Sf : S G(A) → S
G(B),
S
η(A, k) = k : (A, k) → (SA, δ : SA → S 2 A).
It can be rewritten in the following equivalent form, where F ′′ is a full
embedding with coreflector G′′
F ′′ : Coalg(S) ⇄ A : G′′ ,
η ′′ : 1 → G′′ F ′′ , ε′′ = ε : F ′′ G′′ → 1,
(3.82)
G′′ (A) = SA, G′′ (f : A → B) = Sf : SA → SB,
η ′′ (A) = (εA)−1 : A → SA, ε′′ (A) = εA : SA → A.

3.8.6 Examples
Dualising 3.8.4(b), the inclusion functor U : A → X of a full coreflective
subcategory has a left adjoint G : X → A with invertible unit η.
 3.8 *Idempotent monads and idempotent adjunctions 147
We have now an idempotent comonad S = GU : A → A; the category of
coalgebras S A is isomorphic to the full reflective subcategory Coalg(S) ⊂ A
of coalgebraic objects, namely the objects A of A such that εA is invertible.
In particular the category tAb of torsion abelian groups is full coreflective
in Ab, with counit εA : tA → A given by embedding of the torsion subgroup
of A (see 3.2.6); the abelian groups which are coalgebraic for the associated
comonad t : Ab → Ab are precisely the torsion ones.

3.8.7 Theorem (Factorising idempotent adjunctions)

We start from an idempotent adjunction (F, G, η, ε) : X → · A, with associ-
ated idempotent monad (T, η) and associated idempotent comonad (S, ε),
where T = GF : X → X and S = F G : A → A.
Rewriting the category of T -algebras as the full reflective subcategory
Alg(T ) ⊂ X (as in 3.8.3) and the category of S-coalgebras as the full core-
flective subcategory Coalg(S) ⊂ A (as in 3.8.5), the given adjunction can
be factorised as follows up to isomorphism
F′ / F♯ / F ′′ /
X o Alg(T ) o Coalg(S) o A (3.83)
G′ G♯ G′′
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Proof The reflective adjunction (η ′ , ε′ ) : F ′ ⊣ G′ is described in (3.77).

G′ is the full embedding of algebraic objects, with reflector F ′ (X) = T X
and invertible counit ε′ (X) = (ηX)−1 . The comparison functor K is now
computed as G
K : A → Alg(T ), K(A) = GA, K(f : A → B) = Gf,
(3.84)
KF = F ′ , G′ K = G, Kε = ε′ K.
The coreflective adjunction (η ′′ , ε′′ ) : F ′′ ⊣ G′′ is described in (3.82).
F is the full embedding of coalgebraic objects, with coreflector G′′ (A) =
′′

SA and invertible unit η ′′ (A) = (εA)−1 . The comparison functor H is

computed as F
H : X → Coalg(S), H(X) = F X, H(f : X → Y ) = F f,
(3.85)
′′ ′′
HG = G , F H = F, Hη = η ′ H.
The given adjunction restricts to an adjunction between our full subcat-
egories
(η ♯ , ε♯ ) : F ♯ ⊣ G♯ : Alg(T ) →
· Coalg(S),
(3.86)
F ♯ X = F X, G♯ A = GA,
 148 Adjunctions and monads
because, for every X in X, F X is a coalgebraic object of A (with structure
F ηX : F X → SF X), and dually. This is actually an adjoint equivalence,
because η ♯ X = ηX is invertible for every algebraic object X, and dually.
It is even an isomorphism if T is the identity over all algebraic objects and
S is the identity over all the coalgebraic ones.
Finally, when we compose the three adjunctions above we get F ′′ F ♯ F ′ =
F GF , isomorphic to F (by F η = (εF )−1 ) and G′ G♯ G′′ = GF G, isomorphic
to G (by ηG = (Gε)−1 ).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.
 4
Applications in Algebra

We begin by studying, in Section 4.1, the free structures for various cate-
gories of algebraic kind. Regular and Barr-exact categories are introduced
in Section 4.2; their categories of relations in Section 4.5.
Varieties of algebras are briefly studied in Sections 4.3 and 4.4, proving
that these categories Alg(Ω, Ξ) are complete and Barr-exact. The fact that
such algebras can be viewed as Eilenberg–Moore algebras for the monad
associated to the forgetful functor Alg(Ω, Ξ) → Set is stated in Theorem
4.4.6; the proof is only referred to [M4].
Other notions of ‘exact category’ will be presented in 6.3.1.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.1 Free algebraic structures

This section examines many explicit constructions of free algebraic struc-
tures, over weaker structures or sets, as left adjoints of forgetful functors.
The reader should find useful to consider these exercises, completing the
missing details. General results on the existence of such adjoints for vari-
eties of algebras will be given in Section 4.4.

4.1.1 Algebraic structures and forgetful functors

Various categories of sets equipped with a kind of algebraic structure (and
their homomorphisms) have been listed in 1.1.1, like the categories Set (of
sets), Ab (of abelian groups), Gp (of groups), Mon (of monoids), Abm (of
abelian monoids), Rng (of unitary rings), CRng (of commutative unitary
rings), R Mod (of left modules on a fixed unitary ring), RAlg (of unitary
algebras on a fixed commutative unitary ring), Set• (of pointed sets).
This list includes Set and Set• , where the algebraic structure of the object
X is void or reduced to a 0-ary operation X 0 = {∗} → X, giving the base-
point 0X .
 150 Applications in Algebra
Each of these categories A is made concrete by an obvious (faithful)
forgetful functor
U : A → Set. (4.1)

But there are also ‘intermediate’ forgetful functors U : A → B that forget

part of the structure or part of its properties, like
Ab → Gp → Mon, Ab → Abm → Mon,
(4.2)
RAlg → R Mod → Ab, RAlg → Rng → Mon.
All these functors have left adjoints, giving free algebraic structures over
sets or – more generally – over ‘weaker’ algebraic structures; many of these
constructions are reviewed below.

4.1.2 Free objects

As we have already seen in 2.7.3, given a functor U : A → Set, the free A-
object over a set X is an object F (X) (or FA (X)) equipped with a mapping
η : X → U (F (X)) satisfying the usual universal property. The existence of
all free objects amounts to the existence of the left adjoint F ⊣ U.
These definitions can be extended to any functor U : A → B between
arbitrary categories.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The first case, of a left adjoint F of a functor U : A → Set, has a peculiar

property deriving from the fact that every set X is isomorphic to a categor-
P
ical sum x∈X {∗} (in Set) of copies of the singleton. The functor F, as a
left adjoint, preserves sums, and F (X) must be isomorphic to the categor-
P
ical sum x∈X F ({∗}) (in A) of copies of the free A-object on the singleton
(independently of the existence of all sums in A). A stronger result in this
sense will be given in 4.1.3(e).
In fact, many free ‘algebras’ are concretely built, below, as categorical
sums of the free ‘algebra’ on one generator.

4.1.3 Exercises and complements, I

(a) Let us recall once more (after 2.7.4 and 3.1.1) that the free left R-
module F (X) = RX can be constructed as a direct sum in R Mod of copies
of the left module R
L
F (X) = x∈X R. (4.3)
L
In particular, the free abelian group F (X) = x∈X Z is constructed as
a direct sum in Ab of copies of the additive group Z.
 4.1 Free algebraic structures 151
(b) The freeLabelian monoid F (X) = NX has a similar construction, as a
direct sum x∈X N in Abm of copies of the additive monoid N.
*This can be generalised to left modules over any unitary semiring R
(where the existence of opposites is not assumed).*
(c) The reader may know that the free group F (X) can be constructed as
a ‘free product’, i.e. a categorical sum in Gp, of copies of the additive group
Z
P
F (X) = x∈X Z. (4.4)

The elements of F (X) can be described as equivalence classes [w] ∈ W/∼

of ‘words’
w = xk11 xk22 ...xkpp ,

in the alphabet X, with integral exponents. Each word w ∈ W has a

‘reduced form’ R(w), obtained by adding up the exponents when possible
and cancelling all occurrences of type x0 . The result does not depend on
the sequence of reductions; this seemingly obvious point requires some care,
but the rest is easy.
We say that w ∼ w′ when R(w) = R(w′ ). Words are multiplied by con-
catenation, and the quotient set W/∼ has a well defined product: [w].[w′ ] =
[w.w′ ]; indeed the concatenation w.w′ is equivalent to R(w).R(w′ ), because
R(w.w′ ) can be obtained as R(R(w).R(w′ )). Then we prove that F (X) is
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

a group, with basis the family of the equivalence classes η(x) = [(x)].
(d) The existence of the free group F (X) was proved in 3.5.4, in a non-
constructive way, by the Adjoint Functor Theorem. The reader may note
that, once we know that the universal arrow ηX : X → U F (X) exists, it
is straightforward to show that each element of F (X) can be written in
k
the form xk11 xk22 . . . xpp (with xi ∈ X and ki ∈ Z); it is also obvious that
such a form can be reduced as above, but less obvious that no further
identification is needed.
(e) As an overview of the previous cases, let us be given a functor U : A →
Set. We assume that:
(i) the singleton {∗} has a free A-object A, with universal mapping
η0 : {∗} → U A,
P
(ii) for every (small) set X, the sum F (X) = x∈X A exists in A, with
injections ux : A → F (X).
Then one can prove that F (X) is the free A-object over X, with universal
map
η : X → U F (X), η(x) = (U ux )(η0 (∗)). (4.5)
 152 Applications in Algebra
4.1.4 Exercises and complements, II
The procedure we have followed above is effective when we know how to
construct sums in A; in other cases there may be simpler direct construc-
tions.
(a) We have seen in 3.6.1 that the free monoid on the set X has a simple
P
construction as a sum in Set, F (X) = n∈N X n , with multiplication by
concatenation.
Now, the free monoid on the singleton is obviously the additive monoid
P
N, generated by 1. It follows that F (X) ‘is’ the categorical sum x∈X N
in Mon.
*In fact F (X) can be constructed in a similar way as the free group in
k
4.1.3(c), by equivalence classes [w] of words w = xk11 xk22 ...xpp , in the alpha-
bet X with natural exponents. Rewriting the class of the word x2 xyz 2 x as
xxxyzzx we find again the simpler construction that we have used above.*
(b) The free commutative unitary ring F (X) can be realised as the poly-
nomial ring Z[x | x ∈ X] with integral coefficients and indeterminates be-
longing to the set X (possibly infinite). The basis X is embedded as a set
of monomials, by η(x) = x.
P
F (X) is thus the sum x∈X Z[x] in CRng, of polynomial rings in one
indeterminate,
*The reader may know that the polynomial ring Z[x1 , ..., xn ] is the n-th
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

tensor power of the ring Z[x], and that finite sums in CRng are constructed
as tensor products – as we have already recalled in 2.1.6(g). An infinite set
X produces an inductive limit of finitely generated commutative rings, see
2.6.3(c).*
(c) More generally, for a commutative unitary ring R, the free commutative
unitary R-algebra can be realised as the polynomial ring R[x | x ∈ X], with
indeterminates in X.
Free rings are examined below, in 4.1.6(b).

4.1.5 Exercises and complements, III

Many interesting constructions in algebra arise as a left adjoint to a forget-
ful functor U : A → B, between categories of algebraic structures of which
the second is ‘weaker’ than the first – in the sense of having less structure,
or less properties, or both.
We sketch some cases but the reader can compute many more. (A general
result will be given in Theorem 4.4.5.)
(a) As we have already seen (in 3.2.6 and 3.8.4) the embedding Ab ⊂ Gp
has a left adjoint, given by the abelianised group Gab = G/[G, G].
 4.1 Free algebraic structures 153
(b) The forgetful functor U : Rng → Mon has a left adjoint that takes a
monoid M to a ring whose underlying abelian group is the free abelian
group ZM generated by the set M. Its elements are the formal linear com-
P
binations x∈X λx .x of elements of M, with quasi-null integral coefficients.
The multiplication of ZM is the bilinear extension of the multiplication
of M
P P P P P
( y λy .y).( z µz .z) = y,z λy µz (yz) = x∈X ( yz=x λy µz ).x. (4.6)

This construction is more often considered for a group G, and known as

the group ring ZG, or Z[G].
(c) More generally, for a commutative unitary ring R, the forgetful functor
U : RAlg → Mon has a left adjoint that takes a monoid M to the R-
algebra whose linear part is the free R-module RM over the set M ; the
multiplication is defined as above, in (4.6), with scalars in R. Again this
construction is more often considered for a group G, and known as the
group algebra RG, or R[G].
(d) The embedding U : Ab → Abm has a left adjoint, which can be built
extending the well-known construction of Z as a quotient of N×N; some cau-
tion is required, since an abelian monoid need not satisfy the cancellation
law.
Given an abelian monoid M, the abelian group F (M ) can be obtained as
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

the quotient of the monoid M ×M modulo the congruence where (x, y) ∼

(x′ , y ′ ) when
x + y ′ + z = x′ + y + z, (4.7)

for some z ∈ M. The unit-component ηM : M → U F (M ) sends x to the

equivalence class [x, 0]; it is injective if and only if M satisfies the cancel-
lation law.

4.1.6 Exercises and complements, IV

(a) Composing the forgetful functors Ab → Gp → Set we get the forgetful
functor Ab → Set. Since adjoints compose, contravariantly, we deduce that
P
the abelianised group of the free group x∈X Z is the free abelian group
L
x∈X Z, actually a rather obvious fact.

(b) It is more interesting to examine the composed forgetful functor

Rng → Mon → Set.

The free ring on the set X can thus be constructed in two steps: first the
free monoid M on X (by finite words on this alphabet, or ‘non-commutative
 154 Applications in Algebra
monomials’, where xyx 6= x2 y, see 3.6.1); then the free ring ZM on this
monoid (by Z-linear combinations of these monomials, see 4.1.5(b)).
The result is the ring of ‘non-commutative polynomials’ with indetermi-
nates in X and integral coefficients, where the ‘polynomial’ 2 + xyx − 3x2 y
cannot be reduced to 2 − x2 y.
A different (less effective) construction of the ‘same’ ring can be obtained
from the factorisation Rng → Ab → Set.

4.2 Regular and Barr-exact categories

This is a brief introduction to the theory of regular and Barr-exact cat-
egories. Further information can be found in [Bar] and Borceux [Bo2],
Chapter 2.

4.2.1 Definition
A regular category is a category with finite limits, where the kernel pair
R ⇒ A of every map f : A → B (see 2.3.4) has a coequaliser; moreover, the
pullback of any regular epi (see 2.4.5) along any arrow must be a regular
epi.
(The texts [Bar, Bo2] give a more general definition, where the only limits
assumed to exist are the kernel pairs and the pullback of any regular epi
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

along any arrow; but this extension is presented in [Bo2] as “essentially a

matter of personal taste”.)

4.2.2 Theorem and Definition (Canonical factorisation)

In a regular category C every map f has a canonical factorisation f =
mp, unique up to isomorphism, formed by a regular epimorphism p (the
coequaliser of its kernel pair) and a monomorphism m.

Proof We form a diagram

u // A f
R✤ / B
v ✈✈;
q ✤ p ✈✈
✈ (4.8)
✤
 r  ✈✈ m
S // P
s

where (u, v) is the kernel pair of f and p is the coequaliser of (u, v), a
regular epimorphism; then f u = f v, and there is a unique factorisation
f = mp through p. To prove that m is mono, we let (r, s) be its kernel pair,
and it will be sufficient to prove that r = s (by 2.3.5(a)).
 4.2 Regular and Barr-exact categories 155
From m(pu) = m(pv) it follows that there is precisely one map q : R → S
such that rq = pu and sq = pv. Therefore rq = sq, and it will be sufficient
to prove that q is epi.
We form a commutative diagram where the four horizontal squares are
pullbacks and v = v ′′ v ′

p m
/ P / B
=A ⑤= ④=
u ③③ ⑤ ④
③ ⑤⑤ ④
③③ v′ ⑤⑤ v ′′
④
④ f
R / • / A 1
1 ′ 1 p
 p
  (4.9)
p m
q′ / P / B
=④ A >⑤ =⑤
④④ ⑤⑤ ⑤⑤
 ④④  ⑤⑤ r  ⑤⑤ m
R′ / S
s
/ B
q′′

Trivially, the back squares are also pullbacks. Then the two front squares
are pullbacks as well, by Lemma 2.3.7. But a pullback of the regular epi
p is a regular epi, whence also p′ , q ′ and q ′′ are, and q ′′ q ′ : R → S is an
epimorphism; it coincides with the morphism q of the first diagram because
r(q ′′ q ′ ) = pu = rq and s(q ′′ q ′ ) = pv = sq.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Finally the essential uniqueness of a factorisation regular epi - mono is

obvious: if f = mp is such a factorisation, then (u, v) is also the kernel pair
of p, and the latter is easily seen to be the coequaliser of (u, v), whence our
factorisation is determined up to isomorphism.

4.2.3 Corollary
In a regular category, regular epimorphisms coincide with strong epimor-
phisms and are closed under composition.
As a consequence, regular epimorphisms and general monomorphisms
form a factorisation system (rEpi, Mono) (as defined in Section 2.5).

Proof It is an easy consequence of the previous theorem and Section 2.4.

In fact, every regular epimorphism is strong. Conversely, if f = mp is
the canonical factorisation of a strong epimorphism, the monomorphism m
is a strong epi, and therefore invertible, while f is a regular epi.
 156 Applications in Algebra
4.2.4 Definition (Equivalence relations)
In a category C with finite limits, an (internal) equivalence relation in the
object A will be a jointly monic pair u, v : R → A (or equivalently a mono-
morphism (u, v) : R ֌ A×A) that satisfies the following conditions:
(i) (reflexivity) the diagonal dA = (1, 1) : A ֌ A × A is a smaller mono-
morphism: namely, there exist a (unique mono) h : A → R such that
uh = 1A = vh,
(ii) (symmetry) the monomorphism (u, v) : R ֌ A×A is equivalent to the
monomorphism (v, u): namely, there exist a morphism h : R → R such that
uh = v and vh = u (and then h is an involutive isomorphism: hh = 1R ),
(iii) (transitivity) in the following diagram, where (P, r, s) is a pullback
u v / u v
A o R d■ A o : R
/ A
■■ ✉✉
■■■ ✉✉ (4.10)
r ✉✉ s
P
there exist a morphism h : P → R such that uh = ur and vh = vs.

4.2.5 Exercises
(a) Verify that the conditions (i)–(iii) above amount to the usual ones, in
Set.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(b) Prove that, in a category with finite limits, a kernel pair (u, v) is always
an equivalence relation.

4.2.6 Definition
A Barr-exact category [Bar] is a regular category C where every equivalence
relation is effective, i.e. a kernel pair of a morphism.
Equivalently, one can require that every equivalence relation be the kernel
pair of its coequaliser. This is plainly true in Set, but we shall see that every
variety of algebras is Barr-exact, in Theorem 4.4.4.

4.3 Varieties of algebras

Universal algebra is studied in well known texts, like Grätzer [Gr1] and
Cohn [Coh].
As we have already recalled in 1.1.6, and will be made precise below,
a ‘variety of algebras’ includes all algebraic structures of a given signa-
ture, satisfying a given set of equational axioms (or universally quantified
identities).
 4.3 Varieties of algebras 157
We also recall that, as in [Coh], we do not assume that the underlying set
of an algebra should be non empty: a convention which would destroy all
the main results below, from the existence of all limits and all free algebras,
to the monadicity of the forgetful functor with values in Set.
However, adapting a result of [Gr1] to the present approach is quite
obvious, generally speaking.

4.3.1 Signatures and algebras

An (algebraic) signature (Ω, ar) is a set Ω equipped with a mapping ar : Ω →
N. Each ω ∈ Ω with ar(ω) = n is called an operator of arity n, or an n-ary
operator; their set is denoted as Ω(n). The signature will be written as Ω,
unless this leads to ambiguity.
An Ω-algebra is a set A equipped with a family of operations (ωA ) indexed
by Ω
ωA ∈ Set(An , A), for n > 0 and ω ∈ Ω(n), (4.11)

and ωA : An → A is called the realisation of the operator ω in A. The

underlying set of A will be written as |A| when useful.
A homomorphism f : A → B is a mapping |A| → |B| that preserves all
the operations
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

f.ωA = ωB .f n : An → B, for ω ∈ Ω(n). (4.12)

We have thus the category Alg(Ω) of Ω-algebras and their homomor-

phisms, made concrete by the underlying-set functor, which is faithful

U : Alg(Ω) → Set, U (A) = |A|. (4.13)

A singleton {x} has a unique structure of Ω-algebra, and gives the ter-
minal object ⊤ of Alg(Ω).
A 0-ary operator ω ∈ Ω(0) is also called a constant, and provides every
Ω-algebra A with an element ωA ∈ A, so that |A| cannot be empty. If Ω
does not contain any 0-ary operator, the empty set ∅ has a unique structure
of Ω-algebra and gives the initial object ⊥ of Alg(Ω).
As an example, the signature Ω of semigroups consists of a single binary
operator µ, called multiplication. An Ω-algebra is any set A equipped with
a binary operation µA (x, y) = xy; it is a semigroup when the associativity
axiom is satisfied.
This is expressed as a pair of ‘derived operators’, the ternary multiplica-
tions
ξ ′ = µ(p31 , µ(p32 , p33 )), ξ ′′ = µ(µ(p31 , p32 ), p33 ), (4.14)
 158 Applications in Algebra
which must give the same ‘derived operations’ on A
′
ξA : A3 → A, ′
ξA (x, y, z) = x(yz),
(4.15)
′′
ξA : A3 → A, ′′
ξA (x, y, z) = (xy)z.
All this will be formalised defining the clone Ω of derived operators of a
signature Ω.
It is important to note that the axioms which one can express in this
form are ‘universally quantified equations’ like, in the previous case:
for all x, y, z in A : x(yz) = (xy)z. (4.16)
The derived operators will be constructed making use of new formal n-
ary operators pni (for n > 0 and i = 0, 1, ..., n) called projectors. They
operate on every set A as cartesian projections, or the terminal map
pni : An → A, pni (x1 , ..., xn ) = xi , for i = 1, ..., n,
(4.17)
pn0 : n
A → {∗}, pn0 (x1 , ..., xn ) = ∗,
In particular we write p11 as id. The reader will note that the projector
p10 plays a role in expressing the axiom xx−1 = 1 of groups.

4.3.2 A variety of algebras

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A signature Ω has a clone of derived operators Ω inductively constructed as

follows. We start from the signature (Ω0 , ar0 ), formed by adding to (Ω, ar)
all the projectors pni (0 6 i 6 n), with arity n > 0. Then (Ωk+1 , ark+1 )
is obtained by adding to (Ωk , ark ), in a disjoint way, new operators of the
following form
ξ = ω(ξ1 , ..., ξp )
(4.18)
for ω, ξ1 , ..., ξp ∈ Ωk , ark (ω) = p, ark (ξi ) = n,
and extending ark by letting ark+1 (ξ) = n.
Finally Ω is the union of the increasing sequence of sets (Ωk ), with the
extended arity ar. The elements of Ω are called the derived operators of Ω.
Every Ω-algebra A can be viewed as an Ω-algebra, with the following
clone of derived operations:
- the projector pni is realised on the set A as specified above, in (4.17),
- having defined the realisation in A of all the operators of Ωk , we realise
the operator ξ of formula (4.18) as:
ξA : An → A,
(4.19)
ξA (x1 , ..., xn ) = ωA (ξ1A (x1 , ..., xn ), ..., ξpA (x1 , ..., xn )).
 4.3 Varieties of algebras 159
An axiom for the signature Ω is a pair (ξ ′ , ξ ′′ ) of derived operators with
the same arity. An equational signature (Ω, Ξ) is a signature equipped with
a set Ξ of axioms.
We write Alg(Ω, Ξ) the full subcategory of Alg(Ω) of all (Ω, Ξ)-algebras,
i.e. all Ω-algebras A that satisfy the axioms of Ξ. This plainly means that
′ ′′
ξA = ξA , for all the axioms (ξ ′ , ξ ′′ ) ∈ Ξ.
The category Alg(Ω, Ξ) is called a variety of algebras. It is made concrete
by the restriction Alg(Ω, Ξ) → Set of the forgetful functor of Alg(Ω); the
latter coincides with Alg(Ω, ∅).
Let us note that each singleton {x} satisfies any axiom, and gives the
terminal object ⊤ of any variety Alg(Ω, Ξ).

4.3.3 Exercises and complements

(a) The forgetful functor Alg(Ω, Ξ) → Set reflects the isomorphisms; in
other words a homomorphism f : A → B is invertible if and only if the
underlying mapping |f | is bijective. It also reflects the identities.
(b) Set is the category of algebras for Ω = ∅.
(c) Describe Set• as a category of algebras (up to isomorphism of categories,
of course).
(d) Describe Ab as a variety Alg(Ω, Ξ), where the signature Ω consists of
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

three operators: the unity ζ, the opposite ι and the addition σ (of arity 0,
1 and 2, respectively).
(e) Describe R Mod as a variety Alg(Ω, Ξ), where the signature Ω consists
of the previous operators, with the addition of a unary operator λ for every
scalar λ ∈ R.
(f) Describe the category Lth of (bounded) lattices and homomorphisms as
a variety Alg(Ω, Ξ), where the signature Ω has two constants 0, 1 and two
binary operations ∨ , ∧ .
(g) Describe the category of boolean algebras as a variety Alg(Ω, Ξ).
(h) The category Fld of (commutative) fields has poor categorical prop-
erties. Let us begin by observing that a homomorphism f : F → F ′ is
necessarily injective (its kernel must be the null ideal) and induces an iso-
morphism between the minimal subfields of F and F ′ ; the latter have thus
the same characteristic p, which is 0 or a prime number. Fld is the cat-
egorical sum of its full subcategories Fldp , of the fields of characteristic
p.
The reader will prove that Fld and each Fldp lack a terminal object.
Therefore, by a remark in 4.3.1, these categories cannot be isomorphic, or
even equivalent, to any variety Alg(Ω, Ξ).
 160 Applications in Algebra
4.3.4 Trivial varieties
There are two trivial varieties of algebras. The first is formed by all the sets
of cardinality 0 or 1, and can be obtained as Alg(∅, Ξ), where Ξ contains
precisely one axiom, namely (p21 , p22 ) (or x = y, informally). In fact, this
axiom gives the full subcategory of Set of all the sets X whose projections
X 2 → X coincide.
The second is formed by all the sets of cardinality 1. The reader can
describe it as a variety Alg(Ω, Ξ), where Ω contains one 0-ary operator.
We shall see in 4.4.3 that there are no other varieties having finitely many
isomorphism-types of algebras, or equivalently a finite skeleton.
(Marginally, we also note that the category 1, consisting of the empty set
and its identity, is not – strictly speaking – a variety of algebras, because
we have alredy remarked that the singletons belong to any variety. But of
course 1 is equivalent to the trivial variety of all singletons.)

4.3.5 Subalgebras
For an (Ω, Ξ)-algebra A, a subalgebra is a subset C ⊂ |A| closed under the
operations of A:
- for every n-ary operator ω ∈ Ω and every n-tuple (x1 , ..., xn ) ∈ C n ,
ωA (x1 , ..., xn ) ∈ C.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The set C is viewed as an (Ω, Ξ)-algebra, by means of the restricted

operations ωC

ωC (x1 , ..., xn ) = ωA (x1 , ..., xn ), for (x1 , ..., xn ) ∈ C n , (4.20)

which automatically satisfy the axioms of Ξ. This is the unique structure

of C that makes the inclusion C ⊂ A into a homomorphism, and therefore
a monomorphism of Alg(Ω, Ξ).
The set-theoretical intersection of any family (Ai ) of subalgebras of an
T
algebra A is a subalgebra Ai . Each subset S ⊂ |A| generates a subalgebra
hSi, namely the intersection of all subalgebras containing it. hSi can be
obtained as the union of all subsets Sk ⊂ A, where S0 = S and

Sk+1 = {ωA (x1 , ..., xn ) | n > 0, ω ∈ Ω(n), x1 , ..., xn ∈ Sk }.

This proves that

♯hSi 6 max{♯S, ♯Ω, ℵ0 }, (4.21)

where ♯ denotes the cardinal of a set (see 3.5.3).

A homomorphism f : A → B of (Ω, Ξ)-algebras has a (set-theoretical)
 4.3 Varieties of algebras 161
image f (A) which is a subalgebra of B, since
ωB (f x1 , ..., f xn ) = f (ωA (x1 , ..., xn )) for xi ∈ A.

4.3.6 Congruences
A congruence R in an (Ω, Ξ)-algebra A is an equivalence relation in the set
|A| which is consistent with the operations of A:
- for every n-ary operator ω ∈ Ω and every pair (x, y) ∈ Rn , we have
(ωA (x), ωA (y)) ∈ R,
where (by an abuse of notation) Rn ⊂ (|A| × |A|)n = |A|n × |A|n is the
associated equivalence relation of the set |A|n . (The correspondence of this
notion with an ‘internal’ equivalence relation, in the sense of 4.2.4, will be
established in Theorem 4.4.4.)
The quotient set C = |A|/R becomes an (Ω, Ξ)-algebra, by means of the
induced operations ωC
ωC ([x1 ], ..., [xn ]) = [ωA (x1 , ..., xn )], for (x1 , ..., xn ) ∈ An , (4.22)
which automatically satisfy the axioms Ξ. This is the unique structure
of C that makes the projection p : |A| → |A|/R into a homomorphism
p : A → A/R, and therefore an epimorphism of Alg(Ω, Ξ).
We prove below, in Theorem 4.4.4, that p : A → C is a regular epimor-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

phism of Alg(Ω, Ξ).

For any family (Ri ) of congruences of an algebra A, their set-theoretical
T
intersection Ri is again a congruence. Therefore each relation R in the
set |A| generates a congruence R, namely the intersection of all congruences
containing R.
A homomorphism f : A → B of (Ω, Ξ)-algebra has a (set-theoretical)
equivalence relation R in |A|, which is a congruence of A: if f n (x) = f n (y)
then
f ωA (x) = ωB (f n x) = ωB (f n y) = f ωA (y).

4.3.7 Canonical factorisation

Putting together the previous results, every homomorphism f : A → B of
(Ω, Ξ)-algebras has a canonical factorisation (derived from the canonical
factorisation of the underlying mapping |f |), where
f = mgp : A → A/R → f (A) → B, (4.23)

- p : A → A/R is the projection on the quotient of A modulo the congruence

associated to f,
 162 Applications in Algebra
- m : f (A) → B is the inclusion of the subalgebra f (A) ⊂ B,
- g is the homomorphism produced by the bijection [x] → f (x), which
preserves all operations:

g(ωC ([x1 ], ..., [xn ]) = g[ωA (x1 , ..., xn )] = f (ωA (x1 , ..., xn ))
= ωB (f x1 , ..., f xn ) = ωf (A) (g[x1 ], ..., g[xn ]),

and is an isomorphism of (Ω, Ξ)-algebras, by 4.3.3(a).

4.3.8 *Complements
A famous Birkhoff Theorem proves that a full subcategory C of Alg(Ω)
(containing the singleton) is a variety of (Ω, Ξ)-algebras (for some set Ξ of
axioms) if and only if C is closed in Alg(Ω) under subalgebras, homomorphic
images and cartesian products.
The interested reader can see the proof in [Gr1], Section 2.6, Theorem 3
or [Coh], Chapter 4, Theorem 3.5.

4.4 Limits and free algebras

This section takes on the study of the categories Alg(Ω, Ξ), showing that
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

they are complete and Barr-exact. Moreover all of them are monadic over
Set, and cocomplete.

4.4.1 Theorem (Limits in a variety)

(a) The category Alg(Ω, Ξ) has all limits and coequalisers of kernel pairs,
created by the forgetful functor U : Alg(Ω, Ξ) → Set (in the sense of 2.2.8).
(b) The forgetful functor U also creates all filtered colimits.

Proof (a) Let S be a small category and X : S → Alg(Ω, Ξ) a functor,

written in index notation, for i ∈ S = ObS and a : i → j in S:

X : S → C, i 7→ Xi , a 7→ (ua : Xi → Xj ). (4.24)

Let (L, (ui )) be the limit-cone of U X in Set, with structural mappings

ui : L → |Xi | (i ∈ S). For every n ∈ N, Ln is the limit of the functor
(U X)n , with the mappings (ui )n : Ln → |Xi |n . For every n-ary operator
ω ∈ Ω we have a natural transformation

ω : (U X)n → U X : S → Set, ωi = ωXi : |Xi |n → |Xi |, (4.25)

 4.4 Limits and free algebras 163
(because each homomorphism ua : Xi → Xj must be consistent with ω),
and therefore a unique mapping ωL (in Set) consistent with the cones
ωL : Ln → L, ui .ωL = ωXi .(ui )n : Ln → |Xi | for i ∈ S. (4.26)
There is thus a unique structure (ωL )ω∈Ω of Ω-algebra on the set L which
makes all the mappings ui : L → Xi into homomorphisms of Ω-algebras. It
is easy to see that the limit is actually in Alg(Ω, Ξ), and therefore a limit
in the latter.
Finally, every homomorphism f : A → B has a kernel pair R ⇒ A, where
R is the set-theoretical congruence of |f |, with the structure of subalgebra
of the product A × A. We have seen in 4.3.6 that the coequaliser |A|/R
in Set has one algebraic structure that makes the projection p : A → A/R
a homomorphism; it is easy to deduce that p is the algebraic coequaliser,
which is thus created by U.
(b) If S is a filtered category, one can repeat the previous argument, taking
into account that filtered colimits in Set commute with finite products (by
Theorem 2.6.6).

4.4.2 Theorem (Free algebras)

The forgetful functor U : Alg(Ω, Ξ) → Set has a left adjoint: for every set
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

X there exists a free (Ω, Ξ)-algebra F (X), equipped with a universal arrow
ηX : X → U F (X).

Proof We use the Adjoint Functor Theorem, extending the argument of

Exercise 3.5.4(a) for the free group.
We know that Alg(Ω, Ξ) has small hom-sets and all small limits, preserved
by U. Moreover, every set X has a solution set S(X) (in the simplified form
3.5.2(iii)), consisting of the small set of all (Ω, Ξ)-algebras whose underlying
set is (precisely) a cardinal α 6 βX = max{♯X, ♯Ω, ℵ0 }.
The details are left to the reader.

4.4.3 Corollary (The embedding of the basis)

The following conditions on a variety Alg(Ω, Ξ) are equivalent:
(i) there exists an algebra with more than one element,
(ii) for every set X the insertion of the basis ηX : X → U F (X) is injective,
(iii) Alg(Ω, Ξ) has an infinite skeleton, with infinitely many types of iso-
morphism,
 164 Applications in Algebra
(iv) Alg(Ω, Ξ) is none of the two ‘trivial varieties’ of 4.3.4.

Proof Let us assume (i). The existence of small products of algebras pre-
served by U proves that there are algebras of cardinality higher than any
given small cardinal. Therefore their cardinals (and their types of isomor-
phism) cannot form a finite set. Moreover any set X can be embedded in
the underlying set of some algebra, and ηX is injective (by 2.7.5(a)).
Conversely, if no algebra has more than one element, then Alg(Ω, Ξ) can
only contain the empty set and the singletons, with their unique (Ω, Ξ)-
structure; since all the singletons must be there, we fall in one of the trivial
varieties of 4.3.4. Then conditions (ii) and (iii) fail as well.

4.4.4 Theorem (Varieties and Barr-exactness)

A variety Alg(Ω, Ξ) is a complete Barr-exact category.
More particularly, we have the following points, for every algebra A.
(i) The forgetful functor U : Alg(Ω, Ξ) → Set gives a bijective correspon-
dence between equivalence relations R ֌ A2 (as defined in 4.2.4) and con-
gruences of A (as defined in 4.3.6). Every quotient p : A → A/R modulo
a congruence is a regular epimorphism, whence a strong one. Every strong
(or regular) epimorphism defined on A is of this kind, up to equivalence of
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

epimorphisms.
(ii) A monomorphism i : C → A is the same as an injective homomorphism,
and is equivalent to the embedding of a subalgebra. The subobjects of A can
(and will) be identified to subalgebras, and form a complete lattice Sub(A).
(iii) The factorisation f = m.(ip) of 4.3.7 is the canonical factorisation
regular epi - mono of a regular category. It is strictly determined, if we
require that m be the inclusion of a subalgebra.

Proof We already know, by Theorem 4.4.1, that Alg(Ω, Ξ) has all limits
and coequalisers of kernel pairs, created by the forgetful functor with values
in Set. It follows that regular epimorphisms are closed under pullback, as
in Set.
Let f = (u, v) : R ֌ A2 be an equivalence relation, as in 4.2.4. Then
|f | : |R| ֌ |A|2 is an equivalence relation of |A|, and we can think of |f | as
an inclusion. Moreover, |R| is a congruence of algebras, because for every
n-ary operator ω and (x, y) ∈ |R|n ⊂ |A|n ×|A|n
(ωA (x), ωA (y)) = ωA2 (f n (x, y)) = f (ωR (x, y)) ∈ |R|.
The quotient p : A → A/R (described in 4.3.6) is turned by U into the
 4.4 Limits and free algebras 165
coequaliser of the kernel pair |f | : |R| ֌ |A|2 of U p; whence (u, v) : R ֌ A2
is the kernel pair of p, which is the coequaliser of (u, v).
We have proved that Alg(Ω, Ξ) is complete and Barr-exact. We have also
proved point (i), taking into account that in a regular category strong and
regular epimorphisms coincide.
Point (ii) follows from Theorem 4.4.2: the free (Ω, Ξ)-algebra on the sin-
gleton exists, therefore the (faithful) forgetful functor U : Alg(Ω, Ξ) → Set
is representable, and preserves and reflects monomorphisms (by 2.3.5(a)).
Moreover, we have already seen in 4.3.5 that the subalgebras of A are closed
under arbitrary intersections.
Point (iii) is a consequence.

4.4.5 Theorem (Comparing algebras)

Let us be given two equational signatures (Ω, Ξ), (Ω′ , Ξ′ ), with Ω′ ⊂ Ω and
Ξ′ ⊂ Ξ. Then the obvious forgetful functor
W : Alg(Ω, Ξ) → Alg(Ω′ , Ξ′ )
has a left adjoint. W creates limits and coequalisers of kernel pairs.

Proof This is an extension of Theorems 4.4.2 and 4.4.1, since Set =

Alg(∅, ∅).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The proof of the existence of the left adjoint of W is similar to that

of Theorem 4.4.2. For the second part of the statement, we consider the
forgetful functors
W / Alg(Ω′ , Ξ′ ) V
Alg(Ω, Ξ) / Set U = V W. (4.27)

We know that U and V create all limits. Let S be a small category with
S = ObS; all families below have indices i ∈ S.
For a functor A : S → Alg(Ω, Ξ), consider the composites W A and V W A.
The latter has a limit (L′′ , (ri : X → V W Ai )). The limit of A in Alg(Ω, Ξ)
is the unique cone (L, (pi : X → W Ai )) taken by U = V W to the limit
cone (L′′ , (ri )). Similarly, the limit of W A in Alg(Ω′ , Ξ′ ) is the unique cone
(L′ , (qi : X → W Ai )) taken by V to the cone (L′′ , (ri )).
The functor W takes (L, (pi )) to a cone of W A, and there is a unique
arrow g : W L → L′ such that qi g = W (pi ), for all i ∈ S. But V pi = ri =
V (W pi ), for all i, whence the underlying mapping V (g) is the identity and
the homomorphism g : W L → L′ is also.
The same argument holds for coequalisers of kernel pairs, which are also
created by U and V.
 166 Applications in Algebra
4.4.6 *Theorem (Varieties and monadicity)
The forgetful functor U : Alg(Ω, Ξ) → Set is monadic.

Proof This important result proves that each variety of algebras is a cate-
gory of Eilenberg–Moore algebras, for the monad associated to the forgetful
functor.
The proof can be found in Mac Lane’s text [M4], Section VI.8. The argu-
ment is based on Beck’s Monadicity Theorem (or Tripleability Theorem),
in [M4], Section VI.7.

4.4.7 *Exercises and complements (Colimits)

The interested reader can prove that every variety Alg(Ω, Ξ) is also cocom-
plete.
(a) The existence of arbitrary coequalisers follows easily from 4.3.6.
(b) The existence of small sums can be proved with the Adjoint Functor
Theorem, using the completeness of the lattices of subalgebras and the
upper bound (4.21) for the cardinal of a subalgebra generated by a subset.
(c) In particular Alg(Ω, Ξ) always has an initial object, whose underlying
set can take different forms: for instance in Set, Mon, Rng, RAlg, etc.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.5 Relations for regular categories

We begin by re-examining the ordered category Rel Set, viewed as a locally
ordered 2-category. This construction is extended to a regular category C,
forming the ordered category of relations Rel (C), where a relation X →
· Y
is a subobject of the product X ×Y (as in [Grt, Bo1]).
Marginally, we briefly sketch a second approach to relations (followed
for instance in [Me]), where a relation X →· Y is any monomorphism with
values in X × Y . In this way one gets a laxer structure, called a locally
preordered bicategory, which is written here as Rel ′ (C).
These procedures can also be useful as an introduction to general 2-
categories and bicategories, that will be dealt with in Section 7.1.

4.5.1 Cartesian relations and locally ordered 2-categories

Let us recall that R = Rel Set has been constructed in 1.8.3, as an involutive
ordered category.
A relation r : X →
· Y is a subset r ⊂ X×Y, and will be called a cartesian
relation when we want to distinguish it from the similar item of 4.5.5 (a
 4.5 Relations for regular categories 167
monomorphism r : • ֌ X × Y ). Their composition has been recalled in
(1.64). Given two parallel relations r, s : X →
· Y, the ordering r 6 s means
that r ⊂ s as subsets of X ×Y ; it agrees with composition.
In this way, each hom-set R(X, Y ) is the ordered set P(X ×Y ), and the
relation r : X →· Y can be represented as in the diagram below, where the
vertical map is the inclusion of a subset
p′ p′′
X o X ×Y
O
/ Y
(4.28)
r
An ordered category can be viewed as an elementary form of a 2-category,
and an introduction to this higher dimensional notion that will be presented
in Section 7.1 – in the same way as an ordered set is an elementary form of a
category. In this perspective, we think of the relationship r 6 s in R(X, Y )
as a 2-cell r → s (determined by r, s), i.e. a higher arrow between parallel
morphisms.
These higher arrows have operations of vertical composition and whisker
composition as in 1.5.3 (for natural transformations), but much simpler –
since here the result is determined by the ‘boundaries’
r / r /
↓ u v
X / Y X′ / X
/ Y
/ Y′
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

↓
↓ (4.29)
/ s
t

Namely, the vertical composition of r → s with s → t is the (unique) 2-

cell r → t, and the whisker composition above, at the right, is the (unique)
2-cell vru → vsu.
This ‘elementary form’ is called a locally ordered 2-category, where ‘lo-
cally’ refers to the hom-sets. (The definition of a general 2-category will be
seen in 7.1.2; here most of the axioms are automatically satisfied, because
of the uniqueness of a 2-cell between two given arrows.)

4.5.2 The basic choices

Let C be a regular category. Extending the previous point, we want to
construct an involutive ordered category R = Rel (C) of relations on C, in
the ‘cartesian form’.
For this goal, we assume that C is equipped with a choice of binary
products and subobjects. (Let us note that, in many concrete cases, these
selections can be made without any use of the axiom of choice, by cartesian
products and subsets in Set, via a forgetful functor U : C → Set.)
 168 Applications in Algebra
As a consequence, every morphism f : X → Y has precisely one factori-
sation f = mp where p is a regular epi and m is a subobject of Y, and we
shall write
f = mp, m = im (f ) : Im (f ) → Y. (4.30)

(We are using a strict factorisation system in C, see 2.5.3(f).)

4.5.3 Constructing the category of relations

For every pair of objects X, Y we let R(X, Y ) be the ordered set of subob-
jects of the product X ×Y.
Given two consecutive relations r = (r′ , r′′ ) : R ֌ X × Y and s =
′ ′′
(s , s ) : S ֌ Y × Z, their composite s.r = w is a subobject of X × Z,
determined by a construction based on a pullback P of (r′′ , s′ ), and the
strict factorisation (4.30), where p is a regular epi and w is a subobject

X g❖❖ Y gP ′ Z
❖❖❖ r ′′ ♥♥7 PPsP ♦♦7
′
r
♥♥♥ P ♦♦♦s′′
R gP ❴ ❲ ♥♥7 S
PPP ❣ ♥
PP ♥♥♥u′′
u ′
P (4.31)

p w
2 X ×Z
P // W / /
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(r ′ u′ ,s′′ u′′ )

s.r = im (r′ u′ , s′′ u′′ ) : W ֌ X ×Z. (4.32)

The reader will note that any choice of the pullback gives the same
subobject of X × Z. The identity 1X is the subobject associated to the
diagonal monomorphism

1X = im ((1, 1) : X ֌ X ×X) = (u, u) : ∆X ֌ X ×X, (4.33)

where u is an isomorphism. The involution sends a subobject r : R ֌ X×Y

to the ‘opposite’ relation

r♯ = im (ir : R ֌ X ×Y → Y ×X), (4.34)

where i = (p2 , p1 ) : X × Y → Y × X is the canonical symmetry of the

cartesian product.
For two parallel relations r, r′ : X →
· Y, the order relation

r 6 r′ (4.35)

has already been defined, as the canonical order of subobjects of X ×Y.

 4.5 Relations for regular categories 169
4.5.4 Theorem and Definition
These definitions produce an involutive ordered category R = Rel (C), called
the category of relations over the regular category C.
The embedding C → Rel (C) is the identity on the objects and sends the
morphism f : X → Y to its graph, namely the subobject associated to the
monomorphism (1, f ) : X → X ×Y.
The category R has small hom-sets if and only if every object of C has a
small set of subobjects.

Proof First, the associativity of the composition law, for three relations
r: X →
· Y, s : Y →
· Z, t : Z →
· U, is proved by the following diagram

X ^❁ Z ?U
❁❁ ✁✁@ _❃❃❃
❁❁ ✁ ❃❃t′ ′′
t
❁❁ ✁✁✁ ❃❃
❃❃
❁❁ ✁✁
❁❁w′ w ′′ ✁✁
X ^❁ ❁❁ Y ✁ Z T ?U
❁❁ ❁❁ ✂@ ^❂ ❂ ✁✁✁ ✁@ _❃ ❃t′ ✁✁@
❁❁ ❁❁ ✂ ❂✁✁ ✁ ❃✁ ✁
❁❁ ✂ ✁ ✁✁❃
r′ ❁❁ ✂ ❁❁❁ ✁✁✁ ❂ ❂ ✁ s′′ ✁ ❃ t′′
✂ r′′ ✁ s′ ✁ ✁✁
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

R ]❀ WO ^❂ S ✁
❀❀ O ❂❂ ✁@ ^❁ ❁ ✁✁✁ n′′
✁ @T (4.36)
❀❀ ❂❂ ✁ ✁ ✁✁✁
❀ p ❁✁ ✁
u′ ❀❀
✁❂❂ ′ ✁✁❁ ′ ✁✁ ′′
❀ ✁ ✁ ❂❂n ✁✁✁ ❁v ✁✁✁ v
u′′
P ^❂ NO @Q
❂❂ O
❂❂ ′ ✂✂✂
❂ p ✂
m′ ❂❂❂ ✂✂✂ m′′
✂
M

At the lower level we have a symmetric construction, based on three

pullbacks (P, u′ , u′′ ), (Q, v ′ , v ′′ ) and (M, m′ , m′′ ). At the upper level we first
compute sr = im (r′ u′ , s′′ u′′ ) = (w′ , w′′ ) : W ֌ X ×Z, then the pullback
(N, n′ , n′′ ) of (w′′ , t′ ), so that t(sr) = im (N → X ×U ).
Now, the square pm′ = n′ p′ is a pullback, by Lemma 2.3.7, and p is a
regular epi, whence p′ is also. But then im (N → X × U ) coincides with
im (M → X×U ), and this subobject of X×U is determined by the symmetric
construction of the lower level.
By symmetry, (ts)r too coincides with this subobject.
 170 Applications in Algebra
Second, the identity 1X : ∆X ֌ X ×X defined above gives r1X = r
X f▼ X f▼ ′ Y
▼▼▼ u ♣♣8 ▼▼r▼ rr8
u ▼ ♣♣ ♣ ▼ rr
r r′′
∆X 8 R (4.37)
f ◆◆
◆ qqq
◆
v ◆ qqq1
R
because u is an isomorphism and we can take R itself as the pullback of
(u, r′ ); therefore the image of (uv, r′′ .1) = (r′ , r′′ ) : R ֌ X ×Y is precisely
the relation r. Symmetrically, 1Y s = s.
We leave to the interested leader the verification of the remaining points:
- the involution defined in (4.34) is consistent with the composition (in a
contravariant way),
- the order defined in (4.35) is consistent with composition and involution,
- the embedding C → Rel (C) is a functor.
The last statement, about smallness, is obvious.

4.5.5 *Jointly monic relations

We end this chapter by sketching a less elementary construction, that will
not be used below. It gives a preordered structure, which we shall write as
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

R′ = Rel ′ C. It is not a category, but a locally preordered bicategory; again,

it can serve as an introduction to bicategories, that will be briefly analysed
in Section 7.1.
The essential differences are:
- a hom-set R′ (X, Y ) is now a preordered set (and generally a large one),
- the composition of arrows is ‘weakly associative’ and has ‘weak identities’,
up to the equivalence relation associated to the preorder.
A jointly monic relation r = (r′ , r′′ ) : X →
· Y is a jointly monic pair of
morphisms of C, as in the left diagram below, with an arbitrary domain R
(it is also called a jointly monic span, from X to Y )
′ ′′
s s
X f◆◆ Y X f▼o • / Y
◆◆◆
♣♣♣♣8 ▼▼▼ O qq
▼▼ u qqq ′′
q8 (4.38)
′ ◆ ♣ r ′′
r r′ r
R •

R′ (X, Y ) is the preordered set of such spans, with a 2-cell r ≺ s if there

exists a (unique) mapping u that makes the right diagram above commute.
Equivalently, R′ (X, Y ) is the set of all monomorphisms r : • ֌ X×Y with
values in X ×Y, with the canonical preordering r ≺ s of monomorphisms
 4.5 Relations for regular categories 171
with the same codomain (see 2.4.1). Let us note that the previous R(X, Y )
can be identified with the associated ordered set R′ (X, Y )/ ∼.
For a consecutive jointly monic relation s : Y →
· Z, the composite w = sr
is obtained by:
- choosing a pullback (P, u′ , u′′ ) of the pair (r′′ , s′ ),
- then replacing the mapping (r′ u′ , s′′ u′′ ) : P → X ×Z with an associated
jointly monic span, i.e. any monomorphism w : W ֌ X ×Z of the factori-
sation regular epi - mono (r′ u′ , s′′ u′′ ) = wp, in C
X e▲ Y hPP ′ Z
▲▲▲
▲ q qqq8
r ′′ PPsP
P ♦♦♦♦7
r′ q P ♦♦ s′′
R ▼
f ▼▼ ♥6 S
▼▼ ♥♥♥
u′ ♥♥♥u′′ (4.39)
P
p w
P // W / / X ×Z
1
′ ′ ′′ ′′
(r u ,s u )

Then one defines the vertical composition and the whisker composition
of 2-cells. We only remark that the vertical composition is associated to a
preorder, and is therefore strictly associative, with strict identities; on the
other hand, the composition of morphisms is weakly associative and has
weak identities, up to the equivalence relation associated to the preorder
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(as follows readily from the first approach). In this way one gets a locally
preordered bicategory R′ = Rel ′ C (see 7.1.3).
The latter gives back the locally ordered 2-category R, by identifying its
arrows up to the equivalence relation associated to the preorder. Moreover,
defining R as this quotient gives an ordered category that is independent of
any choice.
We also note that an equivalence relation in the object A has been defined
in 4.2.4 following this approach.
 5
Applications in Topology and Algebraic
Topology

Various categorical topics have interesting applications in Topology and Al-

gebraic Topology. One of the first interactions of this kind can be found in
Eilenberg–Steenrod’s foundations of (topological) homology theories [EiS],
whose axioms deal with categories of ‘pairs’ of topological spaces, homol-
ogy functors and natural transformations. (Something about this will be
said in 6.1.5.)
Here we begin by studying various adjunctions between categories of
topological spaces. Then, in Section 5.2, the cylinder-cocylinder adjunction
is used to define homotopies in Top, and set up their structure. Simplicial
sets and cubical sets are dealt with in Sections 5.3 and 5.4, as combinatorial
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

data that represent elementary topological spaces and allow us to define the
singular homology of spaces. We end with some hints at Directed Algebraic
Topology, in Section 5.5.
For a reader who would like to explore the fascinating domain of Al-
gebraic Topology there are excellent texts, like the classical Hilton–Wylie
[HiW] or the recent book by Hatcher [Ha], which is freely downloadable.
For an easier approach, one could begin from an elementary text on singu-
lar homology, like Vick [Vi] or Massey [Mas] (for the simplicial or cubical
construction, respectively).
As to our notation, a functor will be defined by its action on objects
whenever its extension to morphisms is evident (more frequently than
above). A component ϕX : F X → GX of a natural transformation will
often be written as ϕ : F X → GX.
If X is a topological space and A is a subset, X/A denotes the quotient
space of X where the subset A is collapsed to a point. When X is a
pointed space and A is a pointed subset, the quotient X/A is pointed at
the equivalence class [a] of any a ∈ A (formally, the subset A itself).
Intervals of the real line are always denoted by square brackets, as [a, b],
[a, b[, ]a, b[, etc. The standard euclidean interval is written as I = [0, 1], the
 5.1 Adjoints and limits in Topology 173
standard euclidean n-sphere as Sn . The two-valued index α (or β) varies
in the set 2 = {0, 1}, also written as {−, +}.

5.1 Adjoints and limits in Topology

We already know that the forgetful functor U : Top → Set has both adjoints
D ⊣ U ⊣ C, where DX (resp. CX) is the set X with the discrete (resp.
codiscrete) topology (see 3.1.1(a)).
Here we examine various adjunctions of interest in Topology, starting
from exponentiation. Some of them are used to compute colimits. Many
other similar facts can be found in the literature, under the heading of
‘Categorical Topology’.

5.1.1 Exponentiable spaces

We have seen in 3.4.3 that every set A is exponentiable in Set: this means
that the endofunctor F (X) = X × A has a right adjoint G(Y ) = Y A =
Set(A, Y ), linked to the former by the exponential law.
In Top the situation is more complex: not every space is exponentiable,
but it is not difficult to see that every locally compact Hausdorff space is.
Indeed, let A be such a space and consider the functor
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

F : Top → Top,
(5.1)
F (X) = X ×A, F (f ) = f ×A = f ×idA.
F has a right adjoint
G : Top → Top,
(5.2)
G(Y ) = Y A , G(g) = Top(g, Y ) : h 7→ gh (for g : Y → Y ′ ),

where the space Y A is the set Top(A, Y ) endowed with the compact-open
topology, also called the topology of uniform convergence on compact sub-
spaces.
The open subsets of the latter are generated by the sets
W (K, V ) = {h ∈ Top(A, Y ) | h(K) ⊂ V }, (5.3)
where K is any compact subspace of X and V is any open subset of Y . A
general open subset is a union of finite intersections of ‘distinguished’ open
sets, of the previous form.
The proof is left to the reader, who can follow the outline given in the
exercise below.
In particular the standard euclidean interval [0, 1] is exponentiable in
 174 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
Top, with all its cartesian powers. This is a crucial fact in homotopy
theory, as we shall see in Section 5.2.
*(As a partial converse to the previous result, every exponentiable space
which is Hausdorff must be locally compact, because the product − × A
preserves coequalisers precisely in this case: see [Mic], Theorem 2.1 and
footnote (5)).*

5.1.2 Exercise
This is an outline of the proof of the thesis of 5.1.1, whose details are left
to the reader. We let εY be the evaluation mapping

εY : F G(Y ) = Y A ×A → Y, εY (h, a) = h(a), (5.4)

where A is a locally compact Hausdorff space and Y A has the compact-open

topology. We want to prove that (GY, εY ) is a universal arrow from the
functor F to the object Y . (Note that the action of G on the morphisms
is then a consequence: we do not have to prove the continuity of G(g) in
(5.2).)
The reader will prove the following two points.
(a) For every space Y , the mapping εY is continuous at any point (h0 , a0 ) ∈
Y A ×A.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(b) For every map f : X ×A → Y , the mapping

g : X → Y A, g(x) = f (x, −) : A → Y, (5.5)

is well defined (i.e. f (x, −) is continuous on A, for every x ∈ X) and a

continuous mapping on X. (It is then the unique map such that f =
εY .(g ×idA) : X ×A → Y A ×A → Y .)
The only point requiring some care is the last, namely the continuity of
g.

5.1.3 Proposition (The reflector of Hausdorff spaces)

The full subcategory Hsd ⊂ Top of all Hausdorff spaces is reflective in
Top, with a unit whose components pX : X → X/R are projections on a
quotient.

Proof Let X be a space and R the equivalence relation in X where xRx′

means that every map f : X → Y with values in a Hausdorff space has
f (x) = f (x′ ).
 5.1 Adjoints and limits in Topology 175
Let H(X) = X/R be the quotient space and p : X → X/R the projec-
tion. We prove that the latter is the universal arrow from the space X to
the inclusion U : Hsd ⊂ Top.
Plainly, every map f : X → Y with values in a Hausdorff space factorises
as gp : X → X/R → Y , by a unique map g. It is thus sufficient to prove
that the quotient space X/R is Hausdorff.
For two equivalence classes [x] 6= [x′ ] there exist some map f : X → Y ,
with values in a Hausdorff space, such that f (x) 6= f (x′ ). If V, V ′ are
disjoint open neighbourhoods of these two points in Y , their preimages
U, U ′ are disjoint open neighbourhoods of x, x′ in X. Moreover the sets
U, U ′ are saturated for the equivalence relation Rf associated to f , whence
they also are for the (finer) equivalence relation R. It follows that p(U )
and p(U ′ ) are disjoint open neighbourhoods of [x], [x′ ] in X/R.

5.1.4 Exercises and complements (Separation axioms)

(a) The ‘constructive’ character of the previous definition H(X) = X/R is

limited, because it may be difficult to determine the equivalence relation
R of a given space.
However, let us consider – for a given space X – the equivalence relation
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

R′ formed by all pairs of points x, x′ that do not have a pair of disjoint

neighbourhoods in X. Then R′ ⊂ R. If it happens that the quotient X/R′
is Hausdorff, these equivalence relations coincide and our goal is reached.
On the contrary, one might reiterate the same procedure on X ′ = X/R′ ,
and hope of getting a Hausdorff space; and so on.
(b) The functor U : Hsd ⊂ Top creates all limits and all sums, which thus
exist in Hsd. It does not create general colimits, but it is easy to prove that
they exist: for a functor S → Hsd, one can compute the colimit in Top and
apply the left adjoint H : Top → Hsd (following the same pattern used for
colimits of ordered sets, in 3.2.3(b)).
(c) These results can be easily adapted to T0 -spaces (and many other sep-
aration axioms):
- the full embedding U : T0 Top ⊂ Top of T0 -spaces has a left adjoint
H : Top → T0 Top,
- this functor U creates all limits and all sums. To compute the colimit of
a functor S → T0 Top, one can compute the colimit in Top and then apply
the left adjoint H.
 176 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
5.1.5 Topological spaces and preorder relations
There is an interesting idempotent adjunction between Top and the cate-
gory pOrd of preordered sets
T : pOrd ⇄ Top : W, T ⊣ W. (5.6)
For a space X, the preordered set W (X) has the same underlying set
and the specialisation preorder x ≺ y, defined by the following equivalent
conditions (where y is the closure of {y} in X)
x ∈ y, x ⊂ y. (5.7)
Plainly, a continuous mapping f : X → Y becomes a monotone mapping
f : W (X) → W (Y ).
The other way round, for a preordered set X, the space T (X) has the
same underlying set and the topology whose closed subsets C ⊂ X are the
downward closed ones
if x ≺ y in X and y ∈ C, then x ∈ C. (5.8)
One verifies easily that:
- this defines an Alexandrov topology on X (which means that the family
of closed subsets is closed under arbitrary intersections and unions),
- a monotone mapping f : X → Y becomes a continuous mapping f :
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

T (X) → T (Y ).
For a preordered set X, the unit ηX : X → W T (X) is the identity (be-
cause the closure of x ∈ X in the space T (X) is ↓ x). For a space X, the
counit is
εX : T W (X) → X, |εX | = 1X , (5.9)
because T W (X) has a finer topology than X: every closed subset C of X is
downward closed for the specialisation preorder. The triangular identities
are trivially satisfied.
Therefore T embeds pOrd in Top, as the full coreflective subcategory of
Alexandrov spaces.

5.1.6 Exercises and complements (Topology and order)

(a) The previous adjunction can be restricted to an adjunction
T : Ord ⇄ T0 Top : W, T ⊣ W, (5.10)
between ordered sets and T0 -spaces. Now T embeds Ord in T0 Top, as the
full coreflective subcategory of Alexandrov spaces which are T0 .
 5.1 Adjoints and limits in Topology 177
(b) This adjunction and the previous one (in 5.1.5) can be inserted in a
commutative square of adjunctions (i.e. a commutative square in AdjCat,
leaving apart questions of size)
T
Ord
O✤ o❴ ❴ ❴/ T0 Top
W O✤
✤ ✤ U
F U H (5.11)
✤ ✤
T /
pOrd o❴ ❴ ❴ ❴ Top
W

where the right adjoints are dashed. The adjunction F ⊣ U between

ordered and preordered sets can be found in 3.2.3(b), while the adjunction
H ⊣ U between T0 -spaces and spaces is in 5.1.4(c).
(c) Consider the specialisation order of a T1 -space.
(d) Describe the topology of the space T (R, 6) associated to the ordered
real line.

5.1.7 Exercises and complements (Metric spaces)

(a) Let us recall that a metric space is a set X equipped with a mapping
d (or dX ), its distance (or metric), satisfying the following conditions, for
all x, y, z in X
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(i) d : X ×X → [0, +∞[,

(ii) d(x, y) = 0 ⇔ x = y (separation),
(iii) d(x, y) + d(y, z) > d(x, z) (triangular inequality),
(iv) d(x, y) = d(y, x) (symmetry).
A mapping f : X → Y is said to be Lipschitz if it admits a Lipschitz
constant L ∈ R, such that
dY (f (x), f (x′ )) 6 L.dX (x, x′ ), for x, x′ ∈ X, (5.12)
and a weak contraction if it admits 1 as a Lipschitz constant, so that
dY (f (x), f (x′ )) 6 dX (x, x′ ), for x, x′ ∈ X,
We have the categories
- Mtr of metric spaces and Lipschitz mappings,
- Mtr1 of metric spaces and weak contractions,
with obvious forgetful functors
Mtr1 ⊂ Mtr → Hsd ⊂ Top,
(5.13)
Ban → Mtr, Ban1 → Mtr1 .
 178 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
(b) A metric space is complete if every Cauchy sequence converges in it.
The full subcategory CplMtr ⊂ Mtr of complete metric spaces is reflective,
with reflector given by the completion functor.
The same holds for the full subcategory CplMtr1 ⊂ Mtr1 .
(c) The classical notion recalled in (a) has been generalised in various way.
For an extended semimetric (called an écart in Bourbaki [Bor2]), the con-
ditions (i), (ii) are replaced by the following more general ones (while (iii)
and (iv) are kept as above)
(i′ ) d : X ×X → [0, +∞],
′
(ii ) d(x, x) = 0.
We shall see that the resulting categories
- esMtr of extended semimetric spaces and Lipschitz mappings,
- esMtr1 of extended semimetric spaces and weak contractions,
have much better categorical properties than the classical ones.
(Dropping also the symmetry axiom gives a further, important extension,
which will be considered in 7.3.4.)
(d) Prove that the forgetful functors

U : esMtr → Set, U : esMtr1 → Set, (5.14)

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

have both adjoints D ⊣ U ⊣ C, which give to any set the discrete extended
metric (the largest possible one) or the codiscrete semimetric (the least
possible one). Therefore these functors U preserve (the existing) limits
and colimits.
(e) Prove that esMtr1 has all limits and colimits. Some work is required to
define the extended semimetric of a coequaliser.
(f) For an extended metric we only replace (i) with (i′ ). Prove that the em-
bedding U : esMtr1 ⊂ eMtr1 , with values in the category of extended metric
spaces and weak contractions, has a left adjoint F (X) = X/∼, by means
of the obvious equivalence relation that turns an extended semimetric into
an extended metric.
(g) Use this left adjoint to construct all colimits in eMtr1 .

5.1.8 Frames, locales and pointless topology

There is a natural functor

O : Top → Lthop , (5.15)

 5.1 Adjoints and limits in Topology 179
that assigns to a space X the lattice O(X) of its open subsets, and to a
continuous mapping f : X → Y the pre-image homomorphism f ∗ : O(Y ) →
O(X).
In fact, O(X) is a frame, i.e. a complete lattice where arbitrary joins
distribute over binary meets

(∨ Ui ) ∧ V = ∨ (Ui ∧ V ),

since these operations are unions and intersections in P(X). In the same
way f ∗ : O(Y ) → O(X) is a homomorphism of frames, which means that
it preserves arbitrary joins and binary meets.
As a surrogate of Top, we now introduce the formal category of locales
Loc, as the opposite of the category of frames and their homomorphisms.
The previous functor (5.15) is thus reinterpreted as

O : Top → Loc. (5.16)

Most topological notions can be studied in Loc, even though some results
can be different. This is the domain of ‘pointless topology’, which is also
important in Topos Theory. The interested reader can begin by [Jo1, Jo2,
Bo3].
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

5.1.9 *Complements (Compact Hausdorff spaces as algebras)

The full subcategory CmpHsd ⊂ Top of compact Hausdorff spaces has pe-
culiar properties among the categories of topological spaces.
To begin with, CmpHsd is balanced (see 1.3.1), as a consequence of a
classical theorem: any map f : X → Y from a compact space to a Hausdorff
space is closed, and any bijective map of this kind is a homeomorphism.
Moreover, an epimorphism has a dense image (by the same argument used
for Hsd, in 2.3.6(c)), and must be surjective.
We now review some important properties of CmpHsd, without proofs
(referred to [M4]).
The embedding V : CmpHsd ⊂ Top has a left adjoint

β : Top → CmpHsd, (5.17)

called the Stone-Čech compactification (see [M4], Section V.8). The unit
ηX : X → V β(X) is a topological embedding if and only if X is a com-
pletely regular space. (Classically a ‘compactification’ was meant to be an
embedding, and this procedure was only considered for completely regular
spaces.)
 180 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
The composed adjunction (where D equips a set with the discrete topol-
ogy)

D β
Set o / Top o / CmpHsd βD ⊣ W V, (5.18)
W V

gives the left adjoint βD : Set → CmpHsd of the forgetful functor U =

W V : CmpHsd → Set.
The latter is monadic, so that a compact Hausdorff space can be viewed
as an algebra (X, a : T X → X), where T = U βD : Set → Set is the monad
associated to the adjunction (5.18) (see [M4], Section VI.9).
The existence of the left adjoint β can be proved by the Special Adjoint
Functor Theorem (as in [M4]) or by some ‘constructive’ procedure which
can be found in many books on General Topology (for instance in [Dg, Ke]).
Here we only sketch, without proofs, one of the most frequently used –
based on the compact interval [0, 1] of the euclidean line.
We consider the set C = Top(X, [0, 1]) and the set

[0, 1]C = Set(C, [0, 1]).

The latter is given the product topology, which is Hausdorff compact, by

Tychonoff’s theorem. Its projections are written as pf : [0, 1]C → [0, 1], for
f ∈ C.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Then one takes the mapping of evaluation

evX : X → [0, 1]C ,

(5.19)
evX (x) : C → [0, 1], evX (x)(f ) = f (x),

which is continuous, because all its components are:

pf .evX = f : X → [0, 1].

Now we let βX be the closure of the subset evX (X) in the space [0, 1]C ,
and take the codomain-restriction of evX

ηX : X → V βX, ηX (x) = evX (x). (5.20)

The delicate point is proving the universal property of this arrow, from
the space X to the functor V .
The interval [0, 1] works in this construction because it is a cogenerator of
the category CmpHsd: this means that if A and B are compact Hausdorff
spaces, and f, g : A → B are distinct maps, there is a map h : B → [0, 1]
that distinguishes them: hf 6= hg.
 5.2 Cylinder, cocylinder and homotopies 181
5.2 Cylinder, cocylinder and homotopies
In Top the standard interval I = [0, 1] gives the cylinder endofunctor I =
−×I and its right adjoint, the cocylinder or path endofunctor P = (−)I .
Homotopies between maps X → Y are equivalently defined as maps
IX → Y or X → P Y . Their structure is produced by a rich structure
on the standard interval, covariantly extended to the cylinder functor and
contravariantly extended to the path functor.
Similar constructions can be made in the category Top• of pointed spaces.
(Many other situations where homotopies can be considered, classical or
non classical, have a similar framework, organised by a cylinder or cocylin-
der endofunctor, or both. Many of them are studied in [G8]; this includes
cases where we should rather speak of ‘directed homotopies’, as Cat itself,
or the category of preordered topological spaces that will be sketched in
Section 5.5.)
In Top and Top• we also have the cone and suspension endofunctors; but
their right adjoints, the cocone and loop endofunctors, only exist in the
pointed case.
We recall that the two-valued index α (or β) varies in the set 2 = {0, 1},
also written as {−, +}.

5.2.1 The structure of the euclidean interval

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A path in the space X is a map a : I → X defined on the standard interval

I = [0, 1], with euclidean topology.
The basic, ‘first degree’ structure of I consists of four maps, linking I to
its 0-th cartesian power, the singleton I0 = {∗}
∂ α : {∗} → I, ∂ − (∗) = 0, ∂ + (∗) = 1 (f aces),
e : I → {∗}, e(t) = ∗ (degeneracy), (5.21)
r : I → I, r(t) = 1 − t (reversion).
We shall say that (I, ∂ α , e) is an internal interval in Top, and (I, ∂ α , e, r)
an internal interval with reversion. (We shall use the same terminology
replacing Top with any monoidal category, provided that e∂ α = id and
moreover, in the reversible case: rr = id, er = e, ∂ − r = ∂ + .)
Identifying a point x of the space X with the corresponding map x : {∗} →
X, this basic structure determines:
(a) the endpoints of a path a : I → X, a∂ − = a(0) and a∂ + = a(1),
(b) the trivial path at the point x, which will be written as 0x = xe,
(c) the reversed path of a, written as −a = ar.
 182 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
Two consecutive paths a, b : I → X (with a∂ + = b∂ − , i.e. a(1) = b(0))
have a concatenated path a + b
(
a(2t), for 0 6 t 6 1/2,
(a + b)(t) = (5.22)
b(2t − 1), for 1/2 6 t 6 1.
(This operation is not associative, and only works well up to homotopy
with fixed endpoints, see 5.2.9). Formally, this can be expressed saying that
the standard concatenation pushout – pasting two copies of the interval, one
after the other – is homeomorphic to I and can be realised as I itself
∂+
{∗} / I c− (t) = t/2,
∂− ✇ c− (5.23)
 
/ I +
I c (t) = (t + 1)/2.
c+

Indeed the concatenated path a + b : I → X comes from the universal

property of the pushout, and is characterised by the conditions
(a + b).c− = a, (a + b).c+ = b. (5.24)
Finally, there is a ‘second degree’ structure which involves the standard
square I2 = [0, 1]×[0, 1] and is used to construct homotopies of paths
g − : I2 → I, g − (t, t′ ) = max(t, t′ ) (lower connection),
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

g + : I2 → I, g + (t, t′ ) = min(t, t′ ) (upper connection), (5.25)

s : I2 → I2 , s(t, t′ ) = (t′ , t) (transposition).
Together with (5.21), these maps complete the structure of I as an invo-
lutive lattice in Top. The choice of the superscripts of g − , g + comes from
the fact that the unit of g α is ∂ α (∗). Within homotopy theory, the im-
portance of these binary operations has been highlighted by R. Brown and
P.J. Higgins [BroH1, BroH2], which introduced the term of connection, or
higher degeneracy.

5.2.2 Cylinder and homotopies

Given two continuous mappings f, g : X → Y (in Top), a homotopy ϕ : f →
g ‘is’ a map ϕ : X × I → Y defined on the cylinder I(X) = X × I, which
coincides with f on the lower basis and with g on the upper one
ϕ(x, 0) = f (x), ϕ(x, 1) = g(x) for x ∈ X. (5.26)
This map will be written as ϕ̂ : X ×I → Y when we want to distinguish
it from the homotopy ϕ : f → g which it represents.
 5.2 Cylinder, cocylinder and homotopies 183
All this is based on the cylinder endofunctor:

I : Top → Top, I(X) = X ×I, (5.27)

and on the four natural transformations which it inherits from the struc-
tural maps of the standard interval, and which will be written as the latter
∂ α : X → IX, ∂ α (x) = (x, α), (f aces),
e : IX → X, e(x, t) = x (degeneracy), (5.28)
r : IX → IX, r(x, t) = (x, 1 − t) (reversion).

Identifying I{∗} = {∗} × I = I, the structural maps of the standard

interval coincide with the components of the transformations (5.28) on the
singleton.
The transformations ∂ α , e, r give rise to the faces ϕ∂ α of a homotopy,
the trivial homotopy 0f = f e of a map and the reversed homotopy −ϕ =
ϕr. (More precisely, the homotopy −ϕ : g → f is represented by the map
(−ϕ)ˆ = ϕ̂r : IX → Y .) A path a : I → X is the same as a homotopy
a : x → x′ between its endpoints (always by identifying I{∗} = I).
Two consecutive homotopies ϕ : f → g and ψ : g → h have a concatena-
tion, or vertical composition

ϕ + ψ : f → g, (5.29)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

that extends the concatenation of paths (in (5.22)).

Again, this can be formally expressed noting that the concatenation push-
out of the cylinder – pasting two copies of a cylinder IX, ‘one on top of
the other’ – can be realised as the cylinder itself

∂+
X / IX c− (x, t) = (x, t/2),
∂− t c− (5.30)
 
/ IX +
IX c (x, t) = (x, (t + 1)/2).
c+

Indeed, the subspaces c− (IX) = X ×[0, 1/2] and c+ (IX) = X ×[1/2, 1]

form a finite closed cover of IX, so that a mapping defined on IX is
continuous if and only if this holds for its restrictions to these subspaces.
The concatenated homotopy ϕ + ψ : f → h is represented by the map
(ϕ + ψ)ˆ: IX → Y which reduces to ϕ on c− , and to ψ on c+ .
Note that the fact that ‘pasting two copies of the cylinder gives back the
cylinder’ is rather peculiar of spaces; e.g. it does not hold for chain com-
plexes, where the concatenation of homotopies is based on a more general
procedure: an assigned concatenation morphism c : IX → IX +X IX.
 184 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
Here also, there is a ‘second degree’ structure, with three natural trans-
formations which involve the iterated cylinder I 2 (X) = I(I(X)) = X ×I2
and are used to construct higher homotopies (i.e. homotopies of homo-
topies)

g α : I 2 X → IX, g α (x, t, t′ ) = (x, g α (t, t′ )) (connections),

(5.31)
s : I 2 X → I 2 X, s(x, t, t′ ) = (x, t′ , t) (transposition).

For instance, given a homotopy ϕ : f − → f + : X → Y , we need the

transposition to construct a homotopy Iϕ : If − → If +

(Iϕ)ˆ = I(ϕ̂).sX : I 2 X → IY,

(5.32)
I(ϕ̂).sX.∂ α (IX) = I(ϕ̂).I(∂ α X) = If α ,

by modifying the mapping I(ϕ̂), which does not have the correct faces.

5.2.3 Cocylinder and homotopies

We conclude this brief review of the formal bases of classical homotopy
recalling that a homotopy ϕ : f → g, represented by a map ϕ̂ : IX → Y ,
also has a dual representation as a map ϕ̌ : X → P Y with values in the
path-space P Y = Y I .
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

In fact, as we know from 5.1.1, the cylinder functor I = −×I has a right
adjoint
P : Top → Top, P (Y ) = Y I , (5.33)

called the cocylinder or path functor: P (Y ) is the space of paths I →

Y , with the compact-open topology (also called the topology of uniform
convergence on I).
The counit
ev : P (Y )×I → Y, (a, t) 7→ a(t), (5.34)

is also called evaluation (of paths).

The functor P inherits from the interval I, contravariantly, a dual struc-
ture, which we write with the same symbols. It consists of a basic, first
degree part:

∂ α : P Y → Y, ∂ α (a) = a(α), (f aces),

e : Y → P Y, e(y)(t) = y (degeneracy), (5.35)
r : P Y → P Y, r(a)(t) = a(1 − t) (reversion),
 5.2 Cylinder, cocylinder and homotopies 185
and a second degree structure: two connections and a transposition
g α : P Y → P 2 Y, g α (a)(t, t′ ) = a(g α (t, t′ )),
(5.36)
s : P 2 Y → P 2 Y, s(a)(t, t′ ) = a(t′ , t).
In this description, the faces of a homotopy ϕ̌ : X → P Y are defined as
∂ α ϕ̌ : X → Y .
Concatenation of homotopies can now be performed with the concatena-
tion pullback QY (which can be realised as the object of pairs of consecutive
paths) and the concatenation map c
c+ / PY
QY
c−
s ∂− (5.37)
 
PY / Y
∂+

Q(Y ) = {(a, b) ∈ P Y ×P Y | ∂ + (a) = ∂ − (b)},

c : QY → P Y, c(a, b) = a + b (concatenation map).

Again, as a property of topological spaces, the natural transformation c
is invertible (by splitting a path into its two halves), and we can also realise
QY as P Y . (For chain complexes one has a non-invertible concatenation
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

map.)

5.2.4 The homotopy category

Two parallel maps f, g : X → Y in Top are said to be homotopic, written
as f ≃ g, if there exists a homotopy ϕ : f → g. This is an equivalence
relation in Top(X, Y ), because of trivial homotopies, reversed homotopies
and their concatenation.
Furthermore, homotopies have a whisker composition with maps
f
′ h / k
X / X / Y′ (5.38)
↓ϕ
/ Y
g

kϕk : kf h → kgh : X ′ → Y ′ ,
where kϕh is represented on the cylinder by k.ϕ̂.I(h) : IX ′ → Y ′ (or on
the cocylinder by P (k).ϕ̌.h : X ′ → P Y ′ ). As a consequence, the homotopy
relation is a congruence of categories in Top.
The quotient category hoTop = Top/≃ is called the homotopy category
of topological spaces, and is important in Algebraic Topology. Its objects
 186 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
are the topological spaces, and a morphism [f ] : X →
· Y is a homotopy
class of continuous mappings X → Y .
An isomorphism in hoTop is the same as a homotopy equivalence: namely
a pair of maps f : X ⇄ Y : g such that gf ≃ idX and f g ≃ idY .
As a basic notion of Algebraic Topology, a functor F : Top → C with
values in an arbitrary category is said to be homotopy invariant if F (f ) =
F (g) whenever f ≃ g in Top, so that F induces a functor hoTop → C.
Typically, this is the case of the homology and homotopy functors with
values in Ab, Gp, etc.

5.2.5 Cones and suspension for spaces

Let X be a topological space. Its upper cone C + X is defined by the
following pushout, where ⊤ = {∗} is the terminal object
p
X / {∗}
∂+ s  v+ C + X = (IX + {∗})/(∂ + X + {∗}). (5.39)

IX / C +X
γ

Note that C + (∅) = {∗}: only when X is not empty, the cone C + X is a
quotient of the cylinder IX (by collapsing its upper bases to a point).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The cone comes equipped with an upper vertex v + : {∗} → X and a

homotopy
γ : u− → v + p : X → C + X, u− = γ∂ − : X → C + X, (5.40)
between the embedding u− of X as the (lower) basis of the cone and the
constant mapping to the (upper) vertex. The points of C + X will be
written as equivalence classes [x, s], with [x, 1] = v + = v + (∗), for x ∈ X
and s ∈ I (adding the vertex v + = v + (∗) when X = ∅).
The cone C + X is always a contractible space, homotopy equivalent to
the point, by the following homotopy between the identity and the constant
endomap ending in its vertex
h : C + X ×I → C + X, h([x, s], t) = [x, s ∨ t] (h(v + , t) = v + ). (5.41)
*The higher structure of the cylinder I gives rise to a monad (C, u, g) on
the upper cone functor C = C + . The unit is the lower basis u : 1 → C and
the multiplication g : C 2 → C is induced by g − : I2 → I. (A proof can be
found in [G8], Theorem 4.8.3.)*
Symmetrically, one has the lower cone
C − X = (IX + {∗})/(∂ − X + {∗}),
 5.2 Cylinder, cocylinder and homotopies 187
with a lower vertex v − and an upper basis u+ .
The suspension ΣX is defined by the following colimit

X / {∗}
+
∂
∂−

X / IX v+ (5.42)
■■
■■σ
 ■■
$ 
{∗} / ΣX
v−

which collapses, independently, the bases of IX to a lower and an upper

vertex, v − and v + . Note that Σ(∅) ∼
= S0 , and ΣSn ∼
= Sn+1 for all n > 0.
The suspension ΣX can also be obtained by the following pushout: the
pasting of both cones C α X of X, along their bases
u− / C +X
X
u+ (5.43)
 t

C −X / ΣX

(Again, this coincidence is not a ‘general’ fact, in homotopy theory, but

rests on the ‘pasting property’ of the topological cylinder.)
As we have seen, the cone and suspension functors of Top do not preserve
the initial object ⊥ = ∅ (nor sums, since the result is always a connected
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

space); therefore they do not have right adjoints.

But in the category Top• of pointed spaces, the cylinder, cone and sus-
pension functors have each a right adjoint, described below.

5.2.6 Cylinder, cone and suspension for pointed spaces

In Top• one works with pointed homotopies, which preserve the base point.
They are represented by the pointed cylinder endofunctor
I : Top• → Top• , I(X, x0 ) = (IX/I{x0 }, [x0 , t]), (5.44)
defined as the quotient of the unpointed cylinder IX which collapses the
fibre of the base point x0 (providing thus the new base point).
The upper cone and suspension are defined by the same colimits as in
(5.39) and (5.42), in the category Top• . They can also be obtained from
the corresponding unpointed constructions, by collapsing the fibre of the
base point
C + (X, x0 ) = I(X, x0 )/∂ + (X, x0 ) = (C + (X)/I{x0 }, [x0 , t]),
(5.45)
Σ(X, x0 ) = ((ΣX)/I{x0 }, [x0 , t]).
 188 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
Also here, the pointed suspension of a pointed sphere gives a higher
sphere
Σ(Sn , x0 ) ∼
= (Sn+1 , y0 ), for n > 0.

5.2.7 Exercises (The pointed interval)

Let us recall that the important monoidal structure of Top• is the smash
product − ∧ −, introduced in 3.4.2(c).
(a) Define a pointed interval I• , so that the cylinder endofunctor of pointed
spaces can be obtained as I(X, x0 ) = (X, x0 ) ∧ I• .
(b) Define on I• a structure of internal interval for the monoidal structure,
as in 5.2.1.

5.2.8 Cocylinder, cocone and loop objects, for pointed spaces

All the previous endofunctors have a right adjoint
P : Top• → Top• , I ⊣ P (pathf unctor),
+ + +
E : Top• → Top• , C ⊣ E (upper cocone), (5.46)
Ω : Top• → Top• , Σ ⊣ Ω (loop f unctor).
The pointed path object P (Y, y0 ) is simply the unpointed path space
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

P (Y ), pointed at the constant path 0y0 (t) = y0

P (Y, y0 ) = (P (Y ), 0y0 ). (5.47)
The adjunction I ⊣ P is induced by the corresponding adjunction of
topological spaces
ϕ : Top• (I(X, x0 ), (Y, y0 )) → Top• ((X, x0 ), P (Y, y0 )),
(5.48)
ϕ(f ) : (X, x0 ) → P (Y, y0 ), ϕ(f )(x)(t) = f [x, t],
since a map f : I(X, x0 ) → (Y, y0 ) is the same as a map f ′ : IX → Y that
sends the fibre I{x0 } to y0 .
Finally, the upper cocone and the loop object in Top• are constructed as
limits
Ω(Y, y0 ) / 0
❍❍
❍❍ω❍
E + (Y, y0 ) / 0 ❍❍
# 
♣ / (Y, y0 ) (5.49)
❡ P (Y, y0 )
 
P (Y, y0 ) + / (Y, y0 )
∂  
0 / (Y, y0 )
 5.2 Cylinder, cocylinder and homotopies 189

E + (Y, y0 ) = ({(y, b) ∈ Y ×P Y | b(0) = y, b(1) = y0 }, (y0 , 0y0 )),

Ω(Y, y0 ) = ({b ∈ P Y | b(0) = y0 = b(1)}, 0y0 ),

with the topology of subspace of Y ×P Y and P Y , respectively.
Ω(Y, y0 ) is indeed the space of loops at the base point, with compact-open
topology.

5.2.9 *The fundamental groupoid

The reader has likely seen the construction of the fundamental group
π1 (X, x) of a pointed space, where an element is the class [a] of a loop
a ∈ Ω(X, x), up to homotopy with fixed endpoints.
The operation is induced by path-concatenation:
[a] ∗ [b] = [a + b],
which becomes a group law in the quotient: the unit is the class [0x ] of the
constant loop at x, and the inverse is obtained by reversing a representative
path. (We do not review here the easy but tiresome construction of the
homotopies required to prove all this.)
This gives a functor
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

π1 : Top• → Gp, (5.50)

where a pointed map f : (X, x) → (Y, y) is sent to the homomorphism
f∗ : π1 (X, x) → π1 (Y, y), f∗ ([a]) = [f a].
Working on an unpointed space X, one gets a small groupoid Π1 (X)
whose objects (or vertices) are the points of X, while an arrow [a] : x → y is
a class of paths a : I → X from x to y, up to homotopy with fixed endpoints.
Composition with a consecutive arrow [b] : y → z is again by concatenation:
[a] ∗ [b] = [a + b].
This becomes indeed a groupoid law in the quotient; the proof (for as-
sociativity, identities and inverses) is a straightforward extension of the
corresponding proof for the fundamental group.
We have now a functor with values in the category Gpd of small groupoids
and functors
Π1 : Top → Gpd. (5.51)
A map f : X → Y is sent to the functor
f∗ : Π1 (X) → Π1 (Y ), f∗ (x) = f (x), f∗ ([a]) = [f a].
 190 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
For every x ∈ X, the fundamental group π1 (X, x) is the group of auto-
morphisms Π1 (X)(x, x) at the vertex x of Π1 (X).

5.3 Simplicial sets

After describing simplicial objects by faces and degeneracies, we show that
every topological space S has an associated singular simplicial set Smp(S)
(see 53.4), which is used to construct singular homology.
On the other hand, a simplicial set can be viewed as a combinatorial
description of a topological space of a rather simple type. The latter
is produced by the geometric realisation functor R : SmpSet → Top (in
5.3.5), by pasting tetrahedra of any dimension, according to the rules ‘writ-
ten’ in X. This functor is left adjoint to the singular simplicial functor
Smp : Top → SmpSet.

5.3.1 Simplicial objects

As already said in 1.6.3, a simplicial object in the category C is a functor
X : ∆op → C defined on the category ∆ of finite positive ordinals (and
increasing maps). A morphism of simplicial objects f : X → Y is a natural
op
transformation of such functors; they form the category Smp(C) = C∆ of
simplicial objects in C.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

In particular we have the categories SmpSet of simplicial sets, SmpGp

of simplicial groups, etc. The category ∆, as the ‘domain’ of simplicial
objects, is also called the simplicial site.
We also consider the augmented simplicial site ∆∼ of all finite ordinals;
an augmented simplicial object is a functor X : (∆∼ )op → C.
(Let us note that in Mac Lane [M4], Section VII.5, the main subject is
the category ∆∼ , written as ∆ and called the simplicial category, while its
subcategory ∆ is written as ∆+ . Here we prefer to follow the notation
used in Topology. The terminology about simplicial objects in [M4] is the
classical one, the same as here.)

5.3.2 Faces and degeneracies

The simplicial site ∆ can be described by simple generators.
∆ has objects [n] = {0, ..., n}, starting with the singleton [0] = {0}. We
are interested in the following morphisms. The face δi (or δni )
δi : [n − 1] → [n],
(5.52)
0, ..., i − 1, i, ..., n − 1 7→ 0, ..., i − 1, i + 1, ..., n (0 6 i 6 n),
 5.3 Simplicial sets 191
is the injective map which misses i, while the degeneracy εi (or εni )
εi : [n] → [n − 1],
(5.53)
0, ..., i, i + 1, ..., n 7→ 0, ..., i, i, ..., n − 1 (0 6 i 6 n − 1),
is the surjective map which repeats i. (These maps are also called cofaces
and codegeneracies.)
These mappings satisfy the cosimplicial relations
δj δi = δi+1 δj , for j 6 i,
εi εj = εj εi+1 , for j 6 i,

for j < i − 1, (5.54)
δi−1 εj ,


εj δi = id, for j = i − 1, i,

δ ε ,

for j > i.
i j−1

Plainly, every injective increasing mapping δ : [m] → [n] can be uniquely

factorised as a composite of faces, indexed by {i1 , ..., ik } = [n] \ ϕ([m])
δ = δik ...δi1 : [m] → [n] (0 6 i1 < i2 < ... < ik 6 n), (5.55)
while every surjective increasing mapping ε : [m] → [n] can be uniquely
factorised as a composite of degeneracies indexed by the ‘stationary points’
j 6 m − 1, where ε(j) = ε(j + 1)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

ε = εj1 ...εjh : [m] → [n] (0 6 j1 < j2 < ... < jh 6 m − 1). (5.56)
Finally an increasing mapping ϕ : [m] → [n] can be uniquely factorised
epi-mono ϕ = δε, and as a composite
ϕ = δik ...δi1 εj1 ...εjh
(5.57)
(0 6 j1 < j2 < ... < jh < m, 0 6 i1 < i2 < ... < ih 6 n),
with m − h = n − k (the cardinal of the image of ϕ).
All this shows that the category ∆ is generated by faces and degeneracies,
under the cosimplicial relations (applying the Special Form Lemma 5.3.8).
Similar facts hold for the augmented simplicial site ∆∼ , adding δ0 : ∅ →
[0] to the previous generators.

5.3.3 Simplicial objects by faces and degeneracies

As a consequence, a simplicial object X : ∆op → C can be equivalently as-
signed as a family (Xn )n>0 of objects of C, linked by faces and degeneracies
∂i : Xn → Xn−1 (0 6 i 6 n),
(5.58)
ei : Xn−1 → Xn (0 6 i 6 n − 1),
 192 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
∂i ∂i
oo ∂i oo o
X0 / X1 o // X 2 / X3 ...
e0 ei
ei

satisfying the simplicial relations (dual to the cosimplicial ones of (5.54))

∂i ∂j = ∂j ∂i+1 , for j 6 i,
ej ei = ei+1 ej , for j 6 i,

ej ∂i−1 ,
 for j < i − 1, (5.59)

∂i ej = id, for j = i − 1, i,

e ∂ ,

for j > i.
j−1 i

5.3.4 Singular simplices

The category ∆ can be embedded in Top, forming the cosimplicial object
of the standard simplices ∆n (with euclidean topology)

J : ∆ → Top,
P
[n] 7→ ∆ = {(t0 , ..., tn ) ∈ Rn+1 | ti > 0,
n
ti = 1},
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

δi : ∆n−1 → ∆n (0 6 i 6 n),
(5.60)
δi (t0 , ..., tn−1 ) = (t0 , ..., ti−1 , 0, ti , ..., tn−1 ),

εi : ∆n → ∆n−1 (0 6 i 6 n − 1),
εi (t0 , ..., ti , ..., tn ) = (t0 , ..., ti + ti+1 , ..., tn ).

For every topological space S, there is an associated singular simplicial

set Smp(S), obtained by composing this functor with the contravariant
functor Top(−, S) : Topop → Set

Smp(S) : ∆op → Set, (Smp(S))n = Top(∆n , S),

∂i (a) = aδi : ∆n−1 → S (a ∈ Top(∆n , S)), (5.61)
n n−1
ei (a) = aεi : ∆ → S (a ∈ Top(∆ , S)).

Globally we have the singular simplicial functor

Smp : Top → SmpSet, (5.62)

which is used to define the singular homology of a space (see 5.3.7).

 5.3 Simplicial sets 193
5.3.5 The geometric realisation
The geometric realisation of a simplicial set X : ∆op → Set is a topological
space R(X) constructed by pasting a standard simplex ∆n (x) for every
x ∈ Xn , under identifications induced by the faces and degeneracies of X.
More precisely, we form the topological sum
P
S= n DXn ×∆n
(where D : Set → Top equips a set with the discrete topology), modulo the
equivalence relation R spanned by the following identifications
[x, δi t] = [∂i x, t] (x ∈ Xn , t ∈ ∆n−1 ),
(5.63)
[x, εi t] = [ei x, t] (x ∈ Xn−1 , t ∈ ∆n ).
The space R(X) = S/R is thus the coend (see 2.8.6)
Z n
R(X) = DXn ×∆n , un : DXn ×∆n → R(X), (5.64)

of the functor ∆op×∆ → Top, produced by the composite DX : ∆op → Top

and the embedding J : ∆ → Top. (The latter, defined in (5.60), realises
[n] as the standard simplex ∆n ⊂ Rn+1 .) The map un is the composite
DXn ×∆n ⊂ S → S/R.
We have now, for any simplicial set X, a canonical morphism of simplicial
sets
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

ηX : X → SmpR(X), (ηX)n (x) = un (x, −) : ∆n → R(X). (5.65)

Finally, (R(X), ηX) is a universal arrow from X to the functor Smp :
Top → SmpSet, and the geometric realisation is its left adjoint
R : SmpSet → Top, R ⊣ Smp. (5.66)

5.3.6 Exercises and complements

(a) Faces and degeneracies as adjoints. The unbounded chain of adjunc-
tions of the ordered integral line, in 1.7.7(e), can be restricted to finite
ordinals, giving a finite chain (involving n + 1 faces, n degeneracies and 2n
adjunctions)
δi : [n − 1] ⇄ [n] : εj (0 6 i 6 n, 0 6 j 6 n − 1),
δn ⊣ εn−1 ⊣ ... δi+1 ⊣ εi ⊣ δi ⊣ ... ε0 ⊣ δ0 , (5.67)
εi δi = id = εi−1 δi , δi+1 εi 6 id, δi εi > id.

(b) The category ∆∼ of finite ordinals n = {0, ..., n − 1} has a strict

 194 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
monoidal structure (see Section 3.4) given by the ordinal sum m + n, with
identity 0.
The interested reader can see in [M4], Section VII.5, that the terminal
object 1 has a unique structure of internal monoid in ∆∼ (in the sense
of 3.4.8). The latter can be characterised as the universal strict monoidal
category equipped with an internal monoid.
(c) The augmented symmetric simplicial site !∆∼ is the category of finite
cardinals (equivalent to the category of finite sets). It also has a description
by generators and relations, and can be characterised as the universal strict
monoidal category equipped with an internal symmetric monoid: see [G5].

5.3.7 *Exercises and complements (Singular homology)

These brief hints are addressed to a reader with some interest in the ar-
gument and no real knowledge of it. To go on, Vick [Vi] is a very clear
elementary book on singular homology; other texts are cited in the Intro-
duction to this chapter.
(a) A (positive) chain complex of abelian groups is a diagram in Ab

A = ((An )n>0 , (∂n )n>1 )

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

∂n+1 ∂n ∂1
... An+1 / An / An−1 ... A1 / A0 ❴ ❴/ 0 ... (5.68)

where ∂n ∂n+1 = 0 for n > 1.

The homomorphisms ∂n are called boundaries or differentials (and pro-
longed at the right with null homomorphisms ∂n for n 6 0, when useful).
The condition ∂n ∂n+1 = 0 is equivalent to saying that

Im ∂n+1 ⊂ Ker ∂n .

A morphism of chain complexes f : A → B has components fn : An → Bn

in Ab, that commute with the boundaries of the two complexes: ∂n fn =
fn−1 ∂n for n > 0. With the componentwise composition we get the cate-
gory Ch+ (Ab) of chain complexes of abelian groups.
(The reader may know that this construction can be applied to every
abelian category A, giving an abelian category Ch+ (A). We are here in the
domain of Homological Algebra, at its beginning.)
(b) The reader should now construct a functor

Ch+ : SmpSet → Ch+ (Ab), Ch+ (K) = ((F(Kn )), (∂n )), (5.69)

where, for a simplicial set K, the component Chn (K) is the free abelian
 5.3 Simplicial sets 195
group F (Kn ) = ZKn . The differential is defined on the basis Kn as
P
∂n (a) = i (−1)i ∂ni (a) ∈ F (Kn−1 ), (5.70)

where i = 0, ..., n. The only non trivial point, and a nice exercise, is proving
that ∂n ∂n+1 = 0, by applying the simplicial relations of the faces.
(c) Construct the (algebraic) homology functor

Hn : Ch+ (Ab) → Ab, Hn (A) = (Ker ∂n )/(Im ∂n+1 ), (5.71)

where Hn (A) is called the n-th homology group of the chain complex A =
((An ), (∂n )).
(d) Finally we have the n-th singular homology functor

Hn : Top → Ab, Hn (X) = Hn (Ch+ (Smp(X))), (5.72)

by composing the singular simplicial functor Smp : Top → SmpSet of (5.62)

with the functor Ch+ : SmpSet → Ch+ (Ab), above, and the algebraic ho-
mology functor Hn : Ch+ (Ab) → Ab.
For a topological space X, a (formal) linear combination of singular
simplices ai : ∆n → X (with coefficients in Z)
P
c = i λi ai ∈ F (Top(∆n , X)) (5.73)

is called a singular (simplicial) chain of dimension n. It is an n-cycle if

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

∂n (c) = 0, and an n-boundary if c ∈ Im ∂n+1 . Every cycle has a homology

class [c] ∈ Hn (S), which annihilates if and only if c is a boundary.
(e) Marginally, we note that the differential (5.70) can be viewed as a
morphism Kn → · Kn−1 of the Kleisli category SetT of sets and Z-weighted
mappings, considered in 3.7.1(b).
(f) A comonad on a category C can be used to construct simplicial objects
on C, and then homology or cohomology theories on this category. Mac
Lane gives a brief, clear presentation of group (co)homology in this way, in
[M4], Section VII.6. This is an excellent introduction to a field also called
‘triple cohomology’ or ‘cohomology on standard constructions’ [Bc, BarB,
In].

5.3.8 Lemma (Special Form Lemma)

Let S be a category generated by a subgraph G, whose maps satisfy in S a
system of relations Φ.
Then S is freely generated by G under such relations if and only if every
S-map can be expressed in a unique special form f = gm ...g1 , as a composite
 196 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
′
of G-maps, and every G-factorisation f = gm ...g1′ in S can be made special
by applying the relations Φ, finitely many times.

Proof The necessity of this condition is easily proved by choosing, arbi-

trarily, one special form in each equivalence class of the quotient of the free
category generated by G, under the congruence generated by Φ.
Conversely, we take a graph-morphism F0 : G → C, with values in an
arbitrary category. If F0 satisfies the system of relations Φ, it extends to at
most one functor F : S → C, letting it operate on special forms F (gm ...g1 ) =
F0 (gm ) ... F0 (g1 ). This construction defines indeed a functor, since any
composite f ′ f in S can be rewritten in special form using relations which
are preserved in C.

5.3.9 Further comments on horror vacui

Finally, let us remark that the categories ∆∼ and !∆∼ , of all finite ordinals
or cardinals, have substantial categorical properties and simple characteri-
sations (recalled in 5.3.6).
Taking out the initial object (the empty ordinal or cardinal) destroys
these properties, but gives two categories – namely ∆ and !∆ – which have
an important auxiliary role in Combinatorial and Algebraic Topology, as
the sites of Smp(C) and its symmetric version !Smp(C).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

We can therefore refine our comments on horror vacui, in 1.1.6: artificial

exclusions can be of interest, for a category S which is used in an ‘auxil-
iary role’ – typically as a domain of functors X : S → C with values in a
(generally ‘well behaved’) category C.
In the same perspective we can also note that, when discussing limits,
we do not expect the domain of a functor S → C to have good categorical
properties; this can even be a hindrance: for instance, if S has an initial
object the limit of each functor defined on S is trivial (as we have observed
in 2.8.1).

5.4 Cubical sets

After simplicial sets, cubical sets have also been studied in Algebraic Topol-
ogy, in a parallel way. They are ‘modelled’ on the standard euclidean cubes
In , much in the same way as simplicial sets are modelled on the euclidean
tetrahedra ∆n .
The main advantage with respect to the simplicial framework comes
from the fact that the cubes In are closed under cartesian products (in
Top), while the products of tetrahedra have to be covered with tetrahedra.
 5.4 Cubical sets 197
Here we describe cubical objects as functors X : Iop → C defined on the
basic cubical site, that was introduced and characterised in [GM]. Various
extensions, studied in this paper, are mentioned at the end of this section.
Also here the two-valued index α (or β) varies in the cardinal 2 = {0, 1} =
{−, +}. The singleton 1 = 20 is also written as {∗}.

5.4.1 The basic cubical site

Let I be the subcategory of Set consisting of the elementary cubes 2n =
{0, 1}n (for n > 0) together with the mappings f : 2m → 2n which delete
some coordinates and insert some 0’s and 1’s (without modifying the order
of the remaining coordinates).
I is a strict symmetric monoidal category; its tensor product 2m  2n =
m+n
2 is induced by the cartesian product of Set, but is no longer a cartesian
product in the subcategory (where the diagonal 2 → 2 × 2 of Set is not
present); the exponent of 2n denotes now a tensor power.
The object 2 = {0, 1} is an internal interval (both in (Set,×) and (I,  )),
with (elementary) faces δ α and degeneracy ε (as in 5.2.1, with slightly
different notation)

δ α : 1 → 2, ε : 2 → 1, ε.δ α = id,
(5.74)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

δ α (∗) = α (α = 0, 1).

Higher faces and degeneracies are derived from the previous ones, via
the monoidal structure, for 1 6 i 6 n and α = ±
α
δni = 2i−1  δ α  2n−i : 2n−1 → 2n ,
α
δni (t1 , ..., tn−1 ) = (t1 , ..., ti−1 , α, ti , ..., tn−1 ),
(5.75)
εni = 2i−1  ε  2n−i : 2n → 2n−1 ,
εni (t1 , ..., tn ) = (t1 , ..., ti−1 , ti+1 , ..., tn ).

The cocubical relations follow easily from the formulas (5.74) (omitting
the index n):

δjβ .δiα = δi+1

α
.δjβ , for j 6 i,
εi .εj = εj .εi+1 , for j 6 i,

α (5.76)
δi−1 .εj , for j < i,


α
εj .δi = id, for j = i,

δ α .ε ,

for j > i.
i j−1
 198 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
5.4.2 Lemma (The canonical form of the cubical site)
Using the cocubical relations (5.76) as rewriting rules, each composite in Set
of the cubical faces and degeneracies can be rewritten in a unique canonical
factorisation (empty for an identity)
δjαss ... δjα11 εi1 ... εir : 2m → 2m−r → 2n ,
1 6 i1 < ... < ir 6 m, 1 6 j1 < ... < js 6 n, (5.77)
m − r = n − s > 0,
consisting of a surjective composed degeneracy εi1 ... εir (that deletes the co-
ordinates specified by the indices) and an injective composed face δjαss ... δjα11
(that inserts 0’s and 1’s in the specified positions).

Proof Obvious.

5.4.3 Theorem (The basic cubical site)

The category I can be characterised in the following equivalent ways:
(a) the subcategory of Set with objects 2n , generated by all faces and de-
generacies (5.75),
(b) the subcategory of Set with objects 2n , closed under the binary-product
functor (realised as 2m × 2n = 2m+n ), and generated by the basic faces
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(δ α : 1 → 2) and degeneracy (ε : 2 → 1),

(c) the category generated by the graph (5.75), subject to the cocubical
relations (5.76),
(d) the free strict monoidal category with an assigned internal interval,
namely (2, δ α , ε).

Proof The characterisation (a) is obvious: every map of I can clearly be

factorised as in (5.77), in a unique way. Therefore, (b) follows from the
construction of higher faces and degeneracies as tensor products, in (5.75),
while (c) follows from the Special Form Lemma, in 5.3.8.
For (d), let A = (A, ⊗, E) be a strict monoidal category with an assigned
internal interval (A, δ α , ε). We write a tensor power as (−)n .
Defining the higher faces and degeneracies of A as above, in (5.75)
α
δni = Ai−1 ⊗δ α ⊗An−i : An−1 → An ,
(5.78)
εni = Ai−1 ⊗ε⊗An−i : An → An−1 ,
the cocubical relations are satisfied, and there is a unique functor F : I → A
sending 2n to An and preserving higher faces and degeneracies.
 5.4 Cubical sets 199
It is now sufficient to prove that this F is strictly monoidal: then, it
will be the unique such functor sending 2 to A and preserving δ α , ε. As
we already know that F is a functor, our result follows from the following
formulas
F (2p  2q ) = F (2p+q ) = Ap+q = Ap ⊗Aq ,
F (2i−1  δ α  2n−i ) = F (δni
α α
) = δni = Ai−1 ⊗δ α ⊗An−i , (5.79)
F (2i−1  ε  2n−i ) = F (εni ) = εni = Ai−1 ⊗ε⊗An−i ,

since the tensor product of two arbitrary I-maps f = fr ...f1 and g = gs ...g1 ,
both in canonical form, can be decomposed as

f  g = (fr  1)...(f1  1).(1  gs )...(1  g1 ).

5.4.4 Cubical objects

A cubical object in the category C is a presheaf X : Iop → C on the cubical
site. A morphism of cubical objects f : X → Y is a natural transformation
op
of such functors; they form the category Cub(C) = CI of cubical objects
in C.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

As a consequence, a cubical object X : Iop → C can be equivalently as-

signed as a family (Xn )n>0 of objects of C, linked by faces and degeneracies
(for 1 6 i 6 n and α = ±)
α
∂ni : Xn → Xn−1 eni : Xn−1 → Xn , (5.80)

that satisfy the cubical relations (dual to the cocubical ones of (5.76))

∂iα .∂jβ = ∂jβ .∂i+1

α
, for j 6 i,
ej .ei = ei+1 .ej , for j 6 i,

α (5.81)
ej .∂i−1 , for j < i,


∂i ej = id, for j = i,

e .∂ α ,

for j > i.
j−1 i

5.4.5 The singular cubical set of a space

In Top (with the cartesian monoidal structure) the standard interval I =
[0, 1] of the euclidean line has an obvious structure of internal interval
 200 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
(already considered in 5.2.1)
δ α : {0} → I, ε : I → {0}, ε.δ α = id,
(5.82)
δ α (0) = α (α = 0, 1).
Higher faces and degeneracies are constructed as above, for 1 6 i 6 n
and α = ±
α
δni = Ii−1 ×δ α ×In−i : In−1 → In ,
(5.83)
εni = Ii−1 ×ε×In−i : In → In−1 ,
and satisfy the cocubical relations.
We have thus an embedding

J : I → Top, 2n 7→ In , (5.84)

or – in other words – a cocubical space.

For every space S the contravariant functor Top(−, S) : Topop → Set
produces the singular cubical set
Cub(S) = Top(J, S) : Iop → Set,
Cub(S) = ((Cubn (S)), (∂iα ), (ei )), Cubn (S) = Top(In , S),
(5.85)
∂iα (a : In → S) = (a.δiα : In−1 → S),
ei (a : In−1 → S) = (a.εi : In → S).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Acting similarly on each map f : S → T of topological spaces

Cub(f) : Cub(S) → Cub(T),
(5.86)
(Cub(f))(a : In → S) = (fa : In → T),
we have a functor:
Cub : Top → CubSet. (5.87)

5.4.6 The geometric realisation

Proceeding in the same way as for simplicial sets, in 5.3.5, the geometric
realisation of a cubical set X : Iop → Set is a topological space R(X) con-
structed by pasting a standard cube In (x) for every x ∈ Xn , under the
identifications induced by the faces and degeneracies of X.
This is the coend (see 2.8.6)
Z n
R(X) = DXn ×In , un : DXn ×In → R(X), (5.88)

of the functor Iop × I → Top produced by the composite DX : Iop → Top

 5.4 Cubical sets 201
and the embedding J : I → Top defined in (5.84) (that realises the vertex
2n of I as the standard euclidean cube In ).
We have now, for any cubical set X, a canonical morphism of cubical
sets

ηX : X → Cub(R(X)), (ηX)n (x) = un (x, −) : In → R(X), (5.89)

and the geometric realisation is left adjoint to the singular-cubical-set func-

tor Cub : Top → CubSet

R : CubSet → Top, R ⊣ Cub. (5.90)

5.4.7 Extended cubical sites

As already remarked in Section 5.2, the formal study of homotopies requires
to add further structure to cubical faces and degeneracies: namely the con-
nections (introduced in Brown–Higgins [BroH1]), together with reversions
and transpositions (cf. [G8]).
These structures are embodied in the intermediate cubical site J, the
extended cubical site K and its symmetric version !K, that have been intro-
duced in [GM].
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

5.4.8 *The cubical construction of singular homology

Singular homology can be equivalently constructed from the cubical models
In instead of the simplicial models ∆n (as in 5.3.7). The interested reader
is referred to the excellent, introductory text by Massey [Mas]. (A proof of
the equivalence of these constructions is given, at a more advanced level,
in Hilton–Wylie [HiW], using the ‘acyclic model’ technique.)
The singular homology of the space X is defined here as the homology
of the (normalised) chain complex associated to the cubical set Cub(X)

Hn : Top → Ab, Hn (X) = Hn (Ch+ (Cub(X)). (5.91)

To make sense of this, we must construct the chain complex Ch+ (K)
associated to a cubical set K; this is more complicated than the simplicial
analogue: here we have to quotient the free abelian group F (Kn ) = ZKn
modulo the subgroup spanned by the ‘degenerate elements’ (otherwise we
would not get the correct homology groups).
First, the degenerate cubes of a cubical set K are all the elements of type
ei (a)
S
Degn K = i Im (ei : Kn−1 → Kn ), Deg0 K = ∅. (5.92)
 202 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
Because of the cubical relations, we have (for i = 1, ..., n)

a ∈ Degn K ⇒ (∂iα a ∈ Degn−1 K or ∂i− a = ∂i+ a). (5.93)

Now Ch+ (K) is defined as follows:

Chn (K) = (ZKn )/(ZDegn K),

∂n : Chn (K) → Chn−1 (K), (5.94)
P
i+α
∂n (â) = i,α (−1) (∂iα a)ˆ (a ∈ Kn ).

Here â is the class of the n-cube a, up to degenerate cubes; the differential

is legitimate because of (5.93). Again, the only non trivial point is proving
that ∂n ∂n+1 = 0, by applying the cubical relations of the faces.
The heavier definition of Ch+ (X) is compensated by the advantages in
all the arguments related with cartesian products of spaces, starting from
the Homotopy Invariance Theorem of singular homology, as one can see
exploring Massey’s book.

5.5 Hints at Directed Algebraic Topology

Directed Algebraic Topology is a recent subject which arose in the 1990’s,
on the one hand in abstract settings for homotopy theory, like [G3], and on
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

the other hand in investigations in the theory of concurrent processes, like

[FGR1, FGR2]. Its general aim can be stated as ‘modelling non-reversible
phenomena’. The subject has a deep relationship with category theory.
The domain of Directed Algebraic Topology is distinguished from the
domain of classical Algebraic Topology by the principle that directed spaces
have privileged directions, and their (directed) paths need not be reversible.
While Topology and Algebraic Topology deal with reversible worlds,
where a path can always be travelled backwards, the study of non-reversible
phenomena requires broader worlds, where a directed space can have non-
reversible paths. (It is important to develop the directed theory so that it
extends the reversible one.)
The classical tools, consisting of:
- ordinary homotopies, fundamental groups and fundamental n-groupoids,
are now replaced by (possibly) non-reversible versions:
- directed homotopies, fundamental monoids and fundamental n-categories.
Similarly, the homological theories of the directed setting take values
in ‘directed’ algebraic structures, like preordered abelian groups or abelian
monoids.
 5.5 Hints at Directed Algebraic Topology 203
Here we give a few hints at the starting points of this subject, taken from
the book [G8].
The prefixes ↑ and d- are used to distinguish a directed notion from the
corresponding ‘reversible’ one.

5.5.1 Preordered topological spaces

The simplest topological setting where one can study directed paths and
directed homotopies is likely the category pTop of preordered topological
spaces and preorder-preserving continuous mappings.
(We are not requiring any particular relationship between topology and
preorder; this would only complicate the category without any advantage.)
Here, the standard directed interval ↑ I =↑ [0, 1] has the euclidean topol-
ogy and the natural order. A (directed) path in a preordered space X is –
by definition – a map a : ↑ I → X (continuous and monotone).
The category pTop has all limits and colimits, constructed as for topologi-
cal spaces and equipped with the initial or final preorder for their structural
Q
maps; for instance, in a product X = Xj , we have the product preorder:
(xj ) ≺X (x′j ) if and only if, for each index j, xj ≺ x′j in Xj .
The forgetful functor U : pTop → Top has both a left and a right adjoint,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

D ⊣ U ⊣ C where DS (resp. CS) is the space S equipped with the

discrete order (resp. the chaotic, or codiscrete preorder).
The standard embedding of Top in pTop will be the one given by the
codiscrete preorder, so that all (ordinary) paths in S are directed in CS.
Our category is not cartesian closed, of course; but it is easy to transfer
here the classical result for topological spaces, recalled above (in 5.1.1).
Thus, every preordered space A that has a locally compact Hausdorff
topology and an arbitrary preorder is exponentiable in pTop, with Y A con-
sisting of the set pTop(A, Y ) ⊂ Top(UA, U Y ) of monotone continuous
mappings, equipped with the (induced) compact-open topology and the
pointwise preorder

f ≺g if (∀x ∈ A, f (x) ≺Y g(x)). (5.95)

The main setting studied in [G8] is in fact a richer one, the category
dTop of d-spaces, or spaces with distinguished paths, where an object can
have vortices (i.e. non-reversible loops); this framework will not be recalled
here.
 204 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
5.5.2 Comments
As to our choice of the category pTop, we note two points – in the line of
the remarks in 1.1.5(b).
First, if we replace preordered spaces with the ordered ones we miss the
embedding C : Top → pTop by the chaotic preorder, and can no longer view
classical Algebraic Topology within the directed one. Moreover, colimits of
ordered spaces are ‘different’ from the topological ones (in the same way
as the colimits of ordered sets do not agree with those of sets).
Second, if we require that in a preordered space X the graph of the pre-
order is closed in X×X (as is often done), then the discrete (pre)order would
only be allowed in Hausdorff spaces (which are precisely characterised by
having a closed diagonal), and the previous embedding D : Top → pTop
would fail. Now we would complicate limits in pTop.

5.5.3 The basic structure of the directed interval

The standard directed interval ↑ I =↑ [0, 1], in the category pTop of pre-
ordered topological spaces, has a structure partially similar to the ordinary
one, in (5.21).
Faces and degeneracy are as in the classical case

∂ α : {∗} ⇄ ↑ I : e, ∂ − (∗) = 0, ∂ + (∗) = 1,

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

e(t) = ∗, (5.96)

where ↑ I0 = {∗} is now an ordered space, with the unique order-relation

on the singleton.
On the other hand, the classical reversion r(t) = 1 − t is not an endomap
of ↑ I, but becomes a map which we prefer to call reflection

r : ↑ I → ↑ Iop , r(t) = 1 − t, (5.97)

as it takes values in the opposite preordered space ↑ Iop (with the opposite
preorder).
Again, the standard concatenation pushout can be realised as ↑ I itself

∂+
{∗} / ↑I c− (t) = t/2,
∂− s c− (5.98)
 
↑I / ↑I c+ (t) = (t + 1)/2,
c+

since a mapping a : ↑ I → X with values in a preordered space is a map

(continuous and monotone) if and only if its two restrictions acα (to the
first or second half of the interval) are maps.
 5.5 Hints at Directed Algebraic Topology 205
5.5.4 Cylinder, cocylinder and homotopies
The directed interval produces the cylinder functor of preordered topologi-
cal spaces, where the product I(X) = X× ↑ I has the product topology and
the product preorder:
I : pTop → pTop, I(X) = X× ↑ I,
(5.99)
(x, t) ≺ (x′ , t′ ) if (x ≺ x′ in X and t 6 t′ in ↑ I).
The cylinder functor has a first-degree structure, formed of four natural
transformations. Faces and degeneracy are as in the classical case (see
(5.28)), while the reflection r, again, has to be expressed via the reversor,
i.e. the involutive endofunctor R which reverses the preorder-relation
∂ α : 1 → I, e : I → 1, r : IR → RI,
op
R : pTop → pTop, R(X) = X (reversor), (5.100)
r : I(X op ) → (IX)op , r(x, t) = (x, 1 − t) (ref lection).
Since ↑ I is exponentiable in pTop (by 5.5.1), we also have a path functor,
right adjoint to the cylinder functor, where the preordered space P (Y ) has
the compact-open topology and the pointwise preorder (for a, b : ↑ I → Y )
P : pTop → pTop, P (Y ) = Y ↑I ,
(5.101)
a≺b if (∀t ∈ [0, 1], a(t) ≺Y b(t)).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The path functor is equipped with a dual (first-degree) structure, formed

of four natural transformations (with the same reversor R as above)
∂ α : P → 1, e : 1 → P, r : RP → P R, (5.102)
A (directed) homotopy ϕ : f − → f + : X → Y is defined by a map
ϕ̂ : X× ↑ I → Y, ϕ̂∂ α = f α ,
or, equivalently, by a map
ϕ̌ : X → Y ↑I , ∂ α ϕ̌ = f α .
It yields a reflected homotopy between the opposite spaces
ϕop : Rf + → Rf − : X op → Y op ,
(5.103)
(ϕop )ˆ = R(ϕ̂).rX : IRX → RIX → RY.
Extending the construction of the fundamental groupoid of a space, in
5.2.8, we get here the fundamental category ↑ Π1 (X) of a preordered space,
and a functor
↑ Π1 : pTop → Cat, (5.104)
 206 Applications in Topology and Algebraic Topology
which sends the opposite space to the opposite category.
The fundamental monoids ↑ π1 (X, x) = ↑ Π1 (X)(x, x) are often of little
importance, even in richer settings where vortices are possible.

5.5.5 Some examples

We end with some hints at notions and applications dealt with in [G8],
without any proof and still in the elementary framework of preordered
spaces. Consider the following order relation in the plane
O
y
⑧
⑧⑧ • ′′
❄⑧
p •⑧❄❄ ❨❨, p
❄❄ • a
p′
/
x

(x, y) 6 (x′ , y ′ ) ⇔ |y ′ − y| 6 x′ − x. (5.105)

The picture shows the ‘cone of the future’ at a point p (i.e. the set of
points which follow it) and a directed path from p′ to p′′ , i.e. a continuous
mapping a : [0, 1] → R2 which is (weakly) increasing, with respect to the
natural order of the standard interval and the previous order of the plane:
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

if t 6 t′ in [0, 1], then a(t) 6 a(t′ ) in the plane.

Take now the following (compact) subspaces X, Y of the plane, with the
induced order (the cross-marked open rectangles are taken out). A directed
path in X or Y satisfies the same conditions as above

♦7 ❡❡2
❖'
× ×
p′ • ❣3
• p′′ p′ • ❡❡2 • p′′
×
❖' × ❨❨,
X Y

Then – as displayed in the figures above and easy to guess – there are,
respectively, 3 or 4 ‘homotopy classes’ of directed paths from the point p′
to the point p′′ , in the fundamental categories ↑ Π1 (X), ↑ Π1 (Y ); in both
cases there are none from p′′ to p′ , and every loop is constant.
First, we can view each of these ‘directed spaces’ as a stream with two
islands, and the induced order as an upper bound for the relative velocity
feasible in the stream. Secondly, one can interpret the horizontal coor-
dinate as (a measure of) time, the vertical coordinate as position in a
 5.5 Hints at Directed Algebraic Topology 207
1-dimensional physical medium, and the order as the possibility of going
from (x, y) to (x′ , y ′ ) with velocity 6 1 (with respect to a ‘rest frame’ of
the medium). The two forbidden rectangles are now linear obstacles in
the medium, with a bounded duration in time. Thirdly, our figures can be
viewed as execution paths of concurrent automata subject to some conflict
of resources, as in [FGR2], fig. 14.
In all these cases, the fundamental category distinguishes between ob-
structions (islands, temporary obstacles, conflict of resources) which inter-
vene essentially together (in the earlier diagram on the left) or one after
the other, in a discernible way (on the right). On the other hand, the un-
derlying topological spaces are homeomorphic, and topology, or algebraic
topology, cannot distinguish these two situations.
Again, all the fundamental monoids ↑ π1 (X, x0 ) are trivial: as a striking
difference to the classical case, the fundamental monoids can carry a very
minor part of the information of the fundamental category ↑ Π1 (X).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.
 6
Applications in Homological Algebra

In this chapter we present some hints at a particular approach to Homolog-

ical Algebra, exposed in the book [G9] and further extended in [G10]. This
presentation cannot be self-contained, and various proofs will be referred
to [G9].
After the classical text on Homological Algebra by Cartan–Eilenberg
[CE], in 1956, a crucial contribution to this discipline came from the the-
ory of abelian categories, introduced by Buchsbaum and Grothendieck
[Bu1, Bu2, Gt]. This extension reaches new domains, and allows one to
‘duplicate’ theorems by duality. Yet some aspects of the theory are better
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

viewed in the more general context of Puppe-exact categories [Pu, Mit], or

p-exact categories for short.
In fact, as shown in [G9] and briefly suggested in Section 6.6, below,
the problem of coherence of induction (particularly relevant in complicated
systems like those that generate spectral sequences) can only be solved by
working in auxiliary ‘distributive’ p-exact categories. This cannot be done
in the setting of abelian categories, which are only distributive when trivial
(i.e. equivalent to the category 1).
Here, after a general definition of kernels and cokernels, we show in Sec-
tion 6.2 how suitable categories of lattices are of help in studying exactness
properties in Ab and R Mod. The natural framework of this approach is
p-exact categories, since we need from the very beginning a non-abelian p-
exact category Mlc, of modular lattices and modular connections. Puppe-
exact and abelian categories are presented in Sections 6.3–6.5. We end by
introducing the category of relations of a p-exact category, as the basis
for studying its subquotients, their induced relations and the coherence
problem of the latter (Section 6.6).
Two-dimensional categories can also be useful in Homological Algebra,
as we shall see in Sections 7.4 and 7.5.
 6.1 Kernels and cokernels 209
Other perspectives on the use of category theory in Homological Algebra
can be found in [BoB, In].

6.1 Kernels and cokernels

Kernels and cokernels are the basic notions in classical Homological Alge-
bra, the starting point to define exact sequences and exact functors. They
can be defined in an arbitrary pointed category C.
Some hints at a more general framework are given in 6.1.5.

6.1.1 Pointed categories

We assume that we are working in a pointed category C. As already said
in 2.1.9, this means that there is a zero object 0, that is both initial and
terminal in C: for every object A there is precisely one morphism 0 → A
and precisely one morphism A → 0. The zero object is determined up to
isomorphism; as usual, one of them is chosen.
For instance Ab, R Mod, Gp, Set• , gRng, Ban and Ban1 are pointed cat-
egories, with zero object given by the (adequate) singleton.
Given two objects A, B in C, the composite A → 0 → B is called the zero
morphism from A to B, and written as 0AB : A → B, or also as 0 when the
context identifies it.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

The morphism 0 → A is plainly a monomorphism, also written as

0A : 0 ֌ A and called the zero subobject of A; dually the morphism A → 0
is necessarily an epimorphism, written as 0A : A ։ 0 and called the zero
quotient of A.

6.1.2 Kernels and cokernels

In the pointed category C the kernel of a morphism f : A → B is defined
by a universal property, as an object Ker f equipped with a morphism
ker f : Ker f → A, such that f.(ker f ) = 0 and
(i) every map h such that f h = 0 factorises uniquely through ker f
ker f f
Ker fd■ / A / B
O
■
■ h
(6.1)
u ■
•

which means that there exists a unique morphism u such that h = (ker f )u.
Equivalently ker f is the equaliser of f and the zero morphism A → B. A
normal monomorphism is any kernel of a morphism, and is always a regular
 210 Applications in Homological Algebra
mono. Note that the existence of kernels does not require the existence of
all equalisers, as many examples will show, in 6.3.3.
Dually, the cokernel of f is the coequaliser of f and the zero morphism
A → B, i.e. an object Cok f equipped with an (epi)morphism cok f : B →
Cok f, such that (cok f ).f = 0 and
(i∗ ) every map h such that hf = 0 factorises uniquely through cok f
f cok f
A / B / Cok f
t
h t (6.2)
tu
 zt
•

i.e. there is a unique morphism u such that h = u(cok f ).

A normal epimorphism is any cokernel of a morphism, and is always a
regular epi.

6.1.3 Exercises and complements, I

(a) For a morphism f : A → B in a pointed category, ker f is the same as
the preimage f ∗ (0) (see 2.4.6) of the zero subobject 0 ֌ B, while cok f
amounts to the image of the zero quotient A ։ 0.
(b) Prove that normal monos (resp. epis) are closed under preimages (resp.
direct images).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(c) In R Mod or Set• , or Top• , or Gp, or gRng, or Ban the natural ‘kernel-
object’ is the usual subobject Ker f (the preimage of the zero subobject)
and ker f is its embedding in the domain of f. However, if u : K → Ker f
is an isomorphism, also the composite (ker f )u : K → A is a kernel of f.
This is important, because the preservation of kernels by functors holds in
this sense, generally.
(d) In R Mod and Set• every subobject is normal, while in Top• (resp. Gp,
gRng, Ban) the normal subobjects correspond to the pointed subspaces
(resp. invariant subgroups, bilateral ideals, closed linear subspaces). Note
that normal monomorphisms are not closed under composition in Gp, nor
in gRng, but they are in Ban.
(e) In R Mod the natural cokernel-object is the quotient B/f (A), and cok f
is the canonical projection B → B/f (A). In Gp (resp. gRng) the cokernel-
object is the quotient of B modulo the invariant subgroup (resp. the bi-
lateral ideal) generated by f (A). In these categories all epimorphisms are
normal.
(f) Show that in Set• and Top• cokernels exist, and there are non-normal
epimorphisms. *The same holds in Ban.*
 6.1 Kernels and cokernels 211
(g) Let us note that in R Mod the image f (A) is determined as Ker (cok f ),
i.e. the kernel-object of the morphism cokf, while Cok (ker f ) = A/Ker f
gives the coimage of f, an isomorphic object. The other categories we have
been considering above do not behave in this ‘simple’ way, which holds in all
abelian categories, and – loosely speaking – characterises the Puppe-exact
ones (see Section 6.3).

6.1.4 Exercises and complements, II

Let C be a pointed category.
(a) Define a functor C → C2 which has a right adjoint K : C2 → C if and
only if C has kernels; describe the action of K on objects and arrows.
(a∗ ) Define a functor C → C2 dually related to cokernels.

6.1.5 *Categories with null maps

This point is addressed to readers with some knowledge of homology the-
ories, or interest in them.
Kernels, cokernels and all related notions of exactness can be defined,
more generally, in a category C equipped with an ideal N of (so called) null
morphisms, that extends the zero-morphisms of the pointed case. Homo-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

logical Algebra in this framework is studied in [G10], where the hints below
are developed.
The reader likely knows that homology theories of topological spaces
are generally defined (and axiomatised) on the category Top2 of pairs of
topological spaces, as in the foundational text of Eilenberg–Steenrod [EiS]:
an object is a ‘pair’ (X, A) formed of a space X and a subspace A, while
a morphism f : (X, A) → (Y, B) is a continuous mapping f : X → Y such
that f (A) ⊂ B. Composition is as in Top, and the latter is embedded in
Top2 by identifying the space X with the pair (X, ∅).
The object (X, A) is usually read as ‘X modulo A’ and viewed as a formal
quotient. Now, as a natural choice, we define an object (X, A) to be null
when X = A, and we say that the morphism f : (X, A) → (Y, B) is null if
it factorises through a null object, or equivalently if f (X) ⊂ B.
Kernels and cokernels (with respect to this ideal) exist and a general
short exact sequence is – up to isomorphism – of the following type, with
morphisms induced by the inclusions A → X and X → X

(A, B) ֌ (X, B) ։ (X, A). (6.3)

If we take B = ∅ we get that (X, A) is indeed the quotient X/A in Top2 .

 212 Applications in Homological Algebra
Loosely speaking, Eilenberg–Steenrod’s exactness axiom for a (relative)
homology theory defined on Top2 amounts to saying that the theory takes
any short exact sequence of pairs of spaces to a long homology sequence
which is exact (in the codomain of the theory, usually an abelian category).
Top2 , equipped with this ideal, is a homological category, in the sense of
[G10].
A similar analysis holds for the category Set2 of pairs of sets (where A
is a subset of X), or Gp2 of pairs of groups (where A is a subgroup of X),
etc.
The categories Set• , Top• and Ban are pointed homological, i.e. homolog-
ical with respect to the ideal of zero morphisms.

6.2 Categories of lattices in Homological Algebra

We show, in an informal way, how the category Mlc of modular lattices and
modular (Galois) connections can be of use while dealing with subobjects.
For simplicity, we work in an elementary context, the category R Mod of
(left) modules on a (unitary) ring R.
This section is also a preparation for the next: the introduction of the
non-abelian category Mlc, together with the present analysis of its exactness
properties, will prepare the definition of Puppe-exact categories in Section
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

6.3.

6.2.1 An outline
Direct and inverse images of subsets have been dealt with in 1.7.5. Images
and preimages of submodules will be analysed in this section, according to
the following layout.
We already know that, for every object A in R Mod, the ordered set
SubA of its subobjects (i.e. submodules) is a modular lattice (see 1.2.6),
with maximum 1A : A → A and minimum 0A : 0 → A. For submodules
X, X ′ ⊂ A the meet and the join are

X ∧ X ′ = X ∩ X ′,
X ∨ X ′ = X + X ′ = {x + x′ | x ∈ X, x′ ∈ X ′ }.
A homomorphism f : A → B gives two increasing mappings, called direct
and inverse image, or image and preimage
f∗ : SubA ⇄ SubB : f ∗ ,
(6.4)
f∗ (X) = f (X), f ∗ (Y ) = f −1 (Y ) (X ⊂ A, Y ⊂ B),
 6.2 Categories of lattices in Homological Algebra 213
with Ker f = f ∗ (0B ) and Im f = f∗ (1A ).
These mappings form a Galois connection f∗ ⊣ f ∗ (as in 1.7.1), but here
we have a stronger property
f ∗ f∗ (X) = X ∨ f ∗ (0B ) ⊃ X,
(6.5)
f∗ f ∗ (Y ) = Y ∧ f∗ (1A ) ⊂ Y,
which we describe saying that the pair (f∗ , f ∗ ) : SubA →
· SubB is a modular
connection.
All this will be used to define a transfer functor for subobjects of R Mod
SubR : R Mod → Mlc, (6.6)
with values in the category Mlc of modular lattices and modular connec-
tions – a subcategory of the category AdjOrd of ordered sets and Galois
connections (see Section 1.7). This functor will be seen to be exact in 6.3.8,
i.e. a functor which preserves kernels and cokernels (or equivalently exact
sequences, as defined in 6.3.4).

6.2.2 Modular lattices and modular connections

We begin now to study the category Mlc of modular lattices and modular
connections, that we have seen to abstract the properties of direct and
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

inverse images for R Mod (and will similarly work for a wide class of cate-
gories).
An object is a modular lattice (with 0 and 1). A morphism, called a
modular connection
f = (f • , f • ) : X →
· Y,
is a pair where
(i) f • : X → Y and f • : Y → X are increasing mappings,
(ii) f • f • (x) = x ∨ f • 0, f • f • (y) = y ∧ f • 1 for x ∈ X, y ∈ Y.
As a consequence f • f • > idX and f • f • 6 idY, and we have an adjunc-
tion f • ⊣ f • between ordered sets, i.e. a covariant Galois connection (see
1.7.1). As we have seen f • determines f • , and conversely
f • (y) = max{x ∈ X | f • (x) 6 y},
(6.7)
f • (x) = min{y ∈ Y | f • (y) > x}.
Moreover f • preserves all the existing joins (including 0 = ∨∅), f • pre-
serves all the existing meets (including 1 = ∧∅), and
f •f •f • = f •, f •f •f • = f •. (6.8)
 214 Applications in Homological Algebra
Condition (ii) can be equivalently rewritten in a seemingly stronger form:
′
(ii ) f • (f • x ∨ y) = x ∨ f • y, f • (f • y ∧ x) = y ∧ f • x (x ∈ X, y ∈ Y ).
Indeed, from (ii) and the modularity of lattices, we have

x ∨ f • y = (x ∨ f • y) ∨ f • 0 = f • f • (x ∨ f • y) = f • (f • x ∨ f • f • y)
= f • (f • x ∨ (y ∧ f • 1)) = f • ((f • x ∨ y) ∧ f • 1)
= f • (f • f • (f • x ∨ y)) = f • (f • x ∨ y).
This makes evident that modular connections are closed under composi-
tion in the category AdjOrd of ordered sets and Galois connections (intro-
duced in 1.7.4),
(g • , g • ).(f • , f • ) = (g • f • , f • g • ). (6.9)

and form a subcategory Mlc of the latter.

Mlc inherits a (contravariant) involution from AdjOrd, and an order con-
sistent with composition and involution (see (1.7.4))

X 7→ X op , · Y ) 7→ ((f • , f • ) : Y op →
((f • , f • ) : X → · X op ),
(6.10)
f 6 g ⇔ f • 6 g• ⇔ f • > g•.
Mlc is thus selfdual.
We are also interested in the category Dlc of distributive lattices and
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

modular connections, a full subcategory of Mlc.

6.2.3 Exercises and complements

(a) Prove that the morphism f of Mlc is an isomorphism (i.e. it has an
inverse in the category) if and only if the following equivalent conditions
hold:
(i) f • f • = 1X , f • f • = 1Y ,
(ii) f • 0 = 0, f • 1 = 1,
(iii) f • is a bijective mapping,
(iii∗ ) f • is a bijective mapping,
(iv) f • is an isomorphism of ordered sets (hence of lattices, in the usual
sense),
(iv∗ ) f • is an isomorphism of ordered sets (hence of lattices).
(b) Therefore no distinction is needed between the isomorphisms of the
category Mlc and the usual isomorphisms of Mlh, i.e. the bijective homo-
morphisms of modular lattices.
 6.2 Categories of lattices in Homological Algebra 215
(c) Both of the following faithful functors reflect the isomorphisms (where
|X| denotes the underlying set of X)

U : Mlc → Set, X 7→ |X|, (f • , f • ) 7→ f • , (6.11)

V : Mlc → Setop , X 7→ |X|, (f • , f • ) 7→ f • . (6.12)

U will be called the forgetful functor of Mlc.

(d) Let f = (f • , f • ) : X → Y be a modular connection between distributive
lattices. Prove that the mappings f • and f • are homomorphisms of quasi
lattices (in the sense of 1.2.4): in other words, f • also preserves binary
meets (but need not preserve the maximum, of course), while – dually – f •
also preserves binary joins (but need not preserve the minimum).
Hint: one can begin by writing f • (x ∧ y) = f • f • f • (x ∧ y).

6.2.4 Exactness properties

We prove now that the category Mlc of modular lattices and modular con-
nections satisfies exactness conditions that will make it Puppe-exact, or
p-exact for short (according to a definition made precise below, in 6.3.2).
The reader is warned that Mlc is not abelian, and cannot even be exactly
embedded in an abelian category (this will be proved in Theorem 6.5.5).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

First there is a zero object (both terminal and initial, see 6.1.1), namely
the one-point lattice 0 = {∗}, since every object X has unique morphisms
t and s:
t s
X / {∗} / X (t• (∗) = 1, s• (∗) = 0). (6.13)

The zero morphism 0XY : X → · {∗} → · Y is defined by x 7→ 0 and y 7→ 1.

Every morphism f = (f • , f • ) : X →
· Y has a kernel ker f and a cokernel
cok f (see 6.1.2)

m = ker f : ↓ f • 0 →
· X, m• (x′ ) = x′ , m• (x) = x ∧ f • 0,
(6.14)
p = cok f : Y →
· ↑ f • 1, p• (y) = y ∨ f • 1, p• (y ′ ) = y ′ .

The verification of the universal property of m is straightforward: essen-

tially, if h = (h• , h• ) : Z →
· X is annihilated by f, then for every z ∈ Z we
have:
f • 0 = f • (f • h• (z)) = h• (z) ∨ f • 0 > h• (z),

so that h• takes values in ↓ f • 0. Dually for p.

As a consequence of these properties, the morphism f has a canonical
 216 Applications in Homological Algebra
factorisation f = ngq through q = cok (ker f ) (the coimage of f ) and
n = ker (cok f ) (the image of f ), that determines a precise morphism g

m f p
↓ f •0 / / X / B
O
/ / ↑ f •1
q
O n (6.15)

↑ f •0 g
/ ↓ f •1

q • (x) = x ∨ f • 0, q • (x) = x, n• (y) = y, n• (y) = y ∧ f • 1,

g • (x) = f • (x), g • (y) = f • (y).

Moreover g is an isomorphism of Mlc (as characterised above), because

g • g • (x) = f • f • (x) = x, g • g • (y) = f • f • (y) = y,

for x > f • 0 and y 6 f • 1.

This will mean that the category Mlc is Puppe-exact.
As an easy consequence of the canonical factorisation, each monomor-
phism is normal (i.e. a kernel of some arrow) and each epimorphism is
normal (i.e. a cokernel).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

6.2.5 Subobjects and quotients

We also note that every element a ∈ X determines a subobject and a quo-
tient of X

m: ↓a →
· X, m• (x′ ) = x′ , m• (x) = x ∧ a, (6.16)

p: X →
· ↑ a, p• (x) = x ∨ a, p• (x′ ) = x′ , (6.17)

where m = ker p and p = cok m.

The correspondence a 7→ m establishes an isomorphism between the
lattice X and the ordered set SubX of subobjects of X in Mlc, while the
correspondence a 7→ p gives an anti-isomorphism of X with the ordered set
of quotients of X.
The subobject m and the quotient p determined by the element a ∈ X
form a short exact sequence (defined in 6.3.4)

↓a →
· X→
· ↑ a, m = ker p, p = cok m. (6.18)

Conversely, every short exact sequence (m, p) in Mlc with central object
X is isomorphic to a unique sequence of this type, with a = m• 1 = p• 0.
 6.3 Puppe-exact categories 217
6.2.6 Exercises and complements (The transfer functor)
(a) Coming back to 6.2.1, the reader can prove that we have a functor

SubR : R Mod → Mlc, A 7→ Sub(A), f 7→ (f∗ , f ∗ ). (6.19)

Hints. It is sufficient to show that f 7→ f ∗ preserves composition (con-

travariantly) and identities.
(b) Prove that this functor is exact, i.e. preserves kernels and cokernels.
Hints. Take an R-homomorphism h : A → B with kernel m : h−1 {0} ⊂ A
and cokernel p : B → B/h(A).
Then the embedding m∗ : Sub(h−1 {0}) → SubA is the same as the in-
clusion ↓ h∗ (0) ⊂ SubA, while the embedding p∗ : Sub(B/h(A)) → SubB
can be identified with the inclusion ↑ h∗ (1) ⊂ SubB.

6.3 Puppe-exact categories

We review the main definitions about p-exact categories, exact sequences
and exact functors. Then we deal with the category Mlc of modular lattices
and modular connections, introduced in the previous section.
We show now that this category, which is p-exact and not abelian, ab-
stracts the behaviour of direct and inverse images of subobjects for all p-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

exact categories (including the abelian ones); p-exact categories form thus
the natural setting of this analysis.
Subquotients, a crucial tool of Homological Algebra, are introduced in
6.3.9. Some proofs are only referred to the book [G9].

6.3.1 Three forms of exactness

The term ‘exact category’ has assumed different meanings in category the-
ory, and at least three of them are still in use (listed as (b), (c), (d) below).
(a) (Abelian categories). The term ‘exact category’ was first used in 1955-
56 by Buchsbaum [Bu1, Bu2], essentially meaning what is now called an
abelian category (even if the existence of finite biproducts was seemingly
deferred to an additional axiom). The name subsisted – in this sense – in
various papers of the 1950’s and 1960’s (by Atiyah, Hilton, Heller, etc.),
together with the term ‘abelian category’ that had been introduced by
Grothendieck in his Tôhoku paper of 1957 [Gt]. Gradually the last term
was universally accepted in the literature, including the first two books on
category theory, by Freyd [Fr1] (1964) and Mitchell [Mit] (1965) – both
focused on the embedding of abelian categories in categories of modules.
 218 Applications in Homological Algebra
(b) (Puppe-exact categories). Meanwhile, in 1962, Puppe [Pu] had intro-
duced a more general notion, called a ‘quasi exact category’, still selfdual
but not additive (and based on the axioms AB1, AB2 of Grothendieck).
This framework was investigated by Tsalenko [T1, T2] (also transliterated
as ‘Calenko’) in 1964 and 1967, for the construction of the category of
relations, and by many researchers for diagram lemmas. It became an ‘ex-
act category’ in Mitchell’s book [Mit] (1965), where abelian categories are
defined as additive exact categories. The name is kept, in this sense, in
subsequent works by Brinkmann and Puppe [Bri, BriP], in 1969, and in
the text by Herrlich and Strecker [HeS], in 1973. The books [AHS, FrS] still
use in 1990 the name of exact category in the sense of Puppe and Mitchell,
as a first step towards abelian categories.
(c) (Barr-exact categories). Later, in 1971, Barr [Bar] used the term ‘ex-
act category’ for a different generalisation of abelian categories, based on
regular categories and not selfdual (see Chapter 4). This setting became
popular in category theory and has been extended in various forms (see
[Bou1, BoB, JaMT, Bo4, Bou2]). As we have seen, it contains all varieties
of algebras, and can give a general categorical presentation of Universal
Algebra.
(d) (Quillen-exact categories). In 1973 a paper by Quillen [Qu] on higher
K-theory introduced another notion of ‘exact category’, as a full additive
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

subcategory E of an abelian category, closed under extensions; this means

that, for every short exact sequence A ֌ C ։ B of the abelian category, if
A and B are in E, so is C. This notion can be defined intrinsically, without
reference to an abelian environment, as an additive category equipped with
a class of ‘short exact sequences’ satisfying some axioms.
We must thus distinguish the cases (b), (c), (d) as: Puppe-exact, Barr-
exact and Quillen-exact categories. It is often remarked that the first two
notions satisfy the ‘equation’: exact + additive = abelian; on the other
hand, Quillen-exact categories are additive. A Puppe-exact category is
abelian if and only if it has finite products, or equivalently finite sums
(by Theorem 6.4.6). Therefore the intersection of each pair of these three
frameworks only contains the abelian categories.

6.3.2 Exact and abelian categories

A Puppe-exact, or p-exact, category E is a category satisfying the following
two self-dual axioms (essentially corresponding to AB1, AB2 in [Gt]):
(pex.1) E is pointed and every morphism f : A → B has a kernel and a
cokernel,
 6.3 Puppe-exact categories 219
(pex.2) in the canonical factorisation of a morphism f through its coimage
and its image
k f c
Ker f / / A / B / / Cok f
O
q
On (6.20)

Coim f ❴ g ❴/ Im f

Coim f = Cok (ker f ), Im f = Ker (cok f ),

q = coim f = cok (ker f ), n = im f = ker (cok f ),
the unique morphism g such that f = ngq is an isomorphism.
This formulation is redundant, but clearer and often simpler to check
than the more concise ones. For instance – as is easy to verify – it is
sufficient to say that E is pointed and every morphism factorises as a normal
epi followed by a normal mono.
As an easy consequence of the axioms, each monomorphism is normal
(i.e. a kernel of some arrow) and each epimorphism is normal (i.e. a coker-
nel). Every morphism has an essentially unique epi-mono factorisation, the
canonical one, as in diagram (6.20) – which motivates our names of coimage
and image, above. E is a balanced category, i.e. epi and mono implies iso.
Following the notation of 2.4.1, we write SubE A and QuoE A for the
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(possibly large) ordered sets of subobjects and quotients of an object A in

E.
Cokernels and kernels give two decreasing mappings
cok: SubE A ⇄ QuoE A : ker (kernel duality), (6.21)
that are easily proved to be inverse to each other, using the fact that all
monos and epis are normal
ker (cok m) = m, cok (ker p) = p. (6.22)
(On the other hand, categorical duality links SubE A and QuoEop A, pre-
serving the ordering. Working with both dualities simplifies many proofs.)
From now on we assume that a p-exact category is well powered (see
2.4.1), i.e. that all sets SubA (and QuoA, as a consequence) are small. We
shall see in 6.3.8 that SubA and QuoA are modular lattices, anti-isomorphic
by (6.21).
A p-exact category is said to be trivial if all its objects are zero objects;
or, in other words, if it is equivalent to the singleton category 1.
An abelian category can be defined as a p-exact category having finite
products, or equivalently finite sums, or finite limits and colimits; this
 220 Applications in Homological Algebra
equivalence will be proved in Theorem 6.4.6, but we shall use from now
the notion of abelian category, much better known than that of a p-exact
category.

6.3.3 Examples and complements

The pointed categories Gp and gRng are not p-exact, since there are non-
normal monomorphisms; Set• and Top• are not p-exact, since there are
non-normal epimorphisms. *(But we have mentioned in 6.1.5 that Set• ,
Top• , Set2 , Top2 , Gp2 , Ban are homological, in the sense of [G10].)*
The following examples of p-exact categories are taken from [G9], Sub-
section 1.5.6.
(a) Every abelian category.
(b) Every non-empty full subcategory of a p-exact category that is closed
under subobjects and quotients; for instance:
- cyclic groups; finite cyclic groups,
- abelian groups of cardinality (or rank) lower than a fixed integer.
- vector spaces on a fixed field, of dimension lower than a fixed integer,
(Replacing a ‘fixed integer’ with a ‘fixed infinite cardinal’ just gives an
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

abelian subcategory.)
(c) The category Mlc of modular lattices and modular connections, as
proved in 6.2.2–6.2.4. Mlc abstracts the behaviour of direct and inverse
images of subobjects in (abelian or) p-exact categories (as we shall see in
6.3.8). It is not abelian and cannot even be exactly embedded in an abelian
category (as will be proved in Theorem 6.5.5).
Its full subcategory Dlc of distributive lattices (also defined in 6.2.2) will
play the same role for distributive p-exact categories, i.e. those p-exact
categories whose lattices of subobjects are distributive. As a first example,
Exercise 1.2.7(c) proves that the category of cyclic groups is distributive
p-exact.
(d) The category I of sets and partial bijections, introduced in 1.8.7. A
morphism f : X → · Y in I is a bijection between a subset (Def f ) of X
and a subset (Val f ) of Y, or equivalently a single-valued, injective relation;
they compose as relations in Rel (Set). I is self-dual; the zero object is ∅,
and
Ker f = X \ Def f, Cok f = Y \ Val f.

This category is distributive p-exact (with SubX = PX), and ‘universal’

 6.3 Puppe-exact categories 221
in this domain, in the sense that every small category of this kind has an
exact embedding in I (cf. [G9], 4.6.7(b)).
(e) The projective category Pr E associated to any p-exact category E, that
will be studied in Section 6.5. In particular, if E = K Vct is the abelian
category of vector spaces over the commutative field K, Pr E ‘is’ the (p-
exact) category of projective spaces and projective linear maps over K.
*(f) The distributive expansion Dst E of any p-exact category E, defined in
[G9], Section 2.8. It is a distributive p-exact category, and is never abelian
– unless E (and therefore Dst E) is trivial.
Its objects are the pairs (A, X) consisting of an object A of E and a
distributive sublattice X ⊂ Sub(A). A morphism f : (A, X) → (B, Y )
comes from an E-morphism f : A → B which carries the subobjects of X
into Y and those of Y into X (by direct and inverse images, see 6.3.7).
(g) Every category of functors ES , where E is a p-exact category and S
is a small category. This includes all cartesian powers of E (when S is a
discrete category), the category of morphisms of E (when S = 2 is the
‘arrow category’ 0 → 1), the category of commutative squares of E (when
S = 2×2), etc. The proof that ES is also p-exact is straightforward.

6.3.4 Exact functors and exact sequences

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A functor F : E → E′ between p-exact categories is said to be exact if it

preserves kernels and cokernels, in the usual sense of preserving limits, that
is – in the present case – up to equivalence of monos and epis, respectively.
As a consequence it also preserves the zero object (that is the kernel and
cokernel of any identity), canonical factorisations and exact sequences.
The latter are defined in the usual way: in the p-exact category E the
sequence
f g
A / B / C (6.23)

is said to be exact (in B) if im f = ker g, or equivalently cok f = coim g. A

sequence of consecutive morphisms is said to be exact if it is in all locations
where the condition makes sense.
Short exact sequences are of particular interest (see 6.3.5). By definition,
this is a sequence of the following form, that is exact (in A, B, C)
m p
0 / A / B / C / 0 (6.24)
Plainly, this means that the sequence satisfies the following equivalent
conditions:
(i) m is a monomorphism, p is an epimorphism and im m = ker p,
 222 Applications in Homological Algebra
(ii) m ∼ ker p (as a mono in B) and p ∼ cok m (as an epi from B).
This sequence will also be written in the form A ֌ B ։ C.
A functor F between p-exact categories is left exact (resp. right exact) if
it preserves kernels (resp. cokernels), or equivalently exact sequences of the
form 0 → A → B → C (resp. A → B → C → 0). More generally, F is said
to be half exact if it takes any sort exact sequence 0 → A → B → C → 0
to an exact sequence F A → F B → F C; note that this property is not
closed under composition.
A functor is exact if and only if it is left and right exact. A left adjoint
functor between p-exact categories is necessarily right exact. We shall see in
6.4.7 that any exact (or even half exact) functor between abelian categories
preserves finite products and sums, and the additive structure.

6.3.5 *Exercises and complements

(a) Prove that, in a p-exact category, a sequence (f, g) of consecutive mor-
phisms is exact if and only if it can be inserted in the commutative diagram
below, with a slanting short exact sequences

•
;
✇✇; ●# ●●
✇✇
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

#
A❋ f / B g / C (6.25)
❋❋
❋❋# ✇✇✇;
# ✇;
•

(b) An object X is a zero object if and only if the pair (1X , 1X ) is an exact
sequence, if and only if it forms a short exact one.
(c) Prove that a functor between p-exact categories is exact if and only if
it preserves short exact sequences.

6.3.6 Lemma (Pullbacks and pushouts in p-exact categories)

A p-exact category E has pullbacks of monos and pushouts of epis along
arbitrary maps. The following points are a more detailed formulation.
(a) Along a map f, the pullback (or preimage) m = f ∗ (n) of a monomor-
phism n and the pushout (or direct image) q = f◦ (p) of an epimorphism p
always exist, and are computed as follows

f ∗ (n) = ker ((cok n).f ), f◦ (p) = cok (f.(ker p)), (6.26)

 6.3 Puppe-exact categories 223

•
f
/ • ❴cok
❴ n❴/ • • ❴ker
❴ p❴/ •
f
/ •
O✤ O ✤
✤ p ✤
m
✤ ❊ n ② ✤q
 
• ❴ ❴ ❴/ • • ❴ ❴ ❴/ •
g g

(b) In the same situation, if in the left diagram f is epi, then so is g and
the square is also a pushout (a bicartesian square). Dually, if in the right
diagram f is mono, then so is g and the square is also a pullback.
(c) Given the following commutative diagram with (short) exact rows
m p
A / / B // C
u v w
   (6.27)
A′ / / B′ / / C′
m′ p′

the left square is a pullback if and only if w is mono. The right square is a
pushout if and only if u is epi.

Proof The reader can prove the statement for a category of modules, or
try the general case. The latter can be found in [G9], Lemma 2.2.4.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

6.3.7 Direct and inverse images

In a p-exact category E every morphism f : A → B gives rise to two in-
creasing mappings between ordered sets, called – respectively – direct and
inverse image of subobjects along f
f∗ : SubA → SubB, f∗ (m) = im (f m) = ker (cok (f m)),
(6.28)
f ∗ : SubB → SubA, f ∗ (n) = ker ((cok n).f ),

f f
AO / B AO / B
O O
m f ∗n
O O f∗ m
O ● On
• // • • ❴ ❴ ❴/ •

The left square is commutative and the right one is a pullback (by the
previous lemma). The theorem below proves that the pair (f∗ , f ∗ ) is a mod-
ular connection between modular lattices, i.e. a morphism of the category
Mlc studied in Section 6.2.
In particular:

f∗ 0 = 0, f∗ 1 = im f ; f ∗ 0 = ker f, f ∗ 1 = 1. (6.29)
 224 Applications in Homological Algebra
6.3.8 Theorem and Definition (The transfer functor)
(a) Every (well-powered) p-exact category E has an exact functor with val-
ues in the p-exact category Mlc of modular lattices and modular connections
SubE : E → Mlc,
(6.30)
A 7→ SubA, f 7→ Sub(f ) = (f∗ , f ∗ ).
This functor also reflects exactness: a sequence of E is exact if and only
if its image in Mlc is exact.
SubE will be called the transfer functor (for subobjects), or also the pro-
jective functor of E. (The name is motivated by the projective category
Pr E, that will be studied in Section 6.5.)
(b) The lattice operations and the ordering of SubA can be described as
follows, for m, n ∈ SubA and p = cok m, q = cok n (the corresponding
quotients)
m ∧ n = m∗ m∗ (n) = n∗ n∗ (m),
m ∨ n = p∗ p∗ (n) = q ∗ q∗ (m), (6.31)
∗
n 6 m ⇔ n (m) = 1.

(c) An exact functor F : E → E′ preserves direct and inverse images of

subobjects, as well as their finite joins and meets. Therefore it induces a
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

homomorphism of lattices, for every A in E

(SubF )A : SubE A → SubE′ (F A), SubF (m) = im (F m), (6.32)

(where im (F m) is the subobject associated to the monomorphism F m).

Proof The particular case E = R Mod has been studied in 6.2.1, 6.2.6. The
general case is proved in [G9], Theorem 2.2.6.

6.3.9 Subquotients
As a prime example, the homology group

Hn (A) = Ker ∂n /Im ∂n+1

of a chain complex A of abelian groups (see 5.3.7) is a subquotient of the

component An . More complex situations arise in the study of spectral
sequences (see [M2, G9]).
In general, a subquotient S = M/N of an object A in a p-exact category
E is a quotient of a subobject (M ) of A, or equivalently a subobject of a
quotient (A/N ) of A.
 6.4 Additive and abelian categories 225
It is determined by a decreasing pair m : M ֌ A, n : N ֌ A (n ≺ m)
of subobjects of A, via the commutative square produced by the epi-mono
factorisation of pm : M → A → A/N , where p = cok n

M /m / A p = cok n,
′ p
p   (6.33)
S / / A/N n = ker p ≺ m.
m′

This square is bicartesian, i.e. pullback and pushout at the same time.
(In fact, it is a pullback by (6.26), because p∗ (m′ ) = p∗ p∗ (m) = m ∨ ker p =
m; and a pushout by 6.3.6(b), or by duality).
Conversely, every bicartesian square in E formed of two ‘parallel’ monos
and two ‘parallel’ epis is of this type, up to isomorphism.

6.4 Additive and abelian categories

We now review additive and abelian categories, with a more complete anal-
ysis of biproducts – after 2.1.9 and 3.2.8.
The reader can find further results in [M4], Chapter VIII, and in [Gt].
The embedding of abelian categories in categories of modules was studied
in the books [Mit, Fr1], right at the beginning of category theory.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

6.4.1 Preadditive categories and biproducts

A preadditive, or Z-linear, category is a category C where every hom-set
C(A, B) is equipped with a structure of abelian group, so that composition
is bilinear over Z.
More generally, we are also interested in N-linear categories, where ev-
ery hom-set C(A, B) is equipped with a structure of abelian monoid, and
composition is bilinear over N. The zero element of C(A, B) is generally
written as 0AB : A → B, or simply 0. (Both these structures are related
with ‘enrichment’, see 7.3.3.)
By definition, the biproduct of two objects A, B in an arbitrary pointed
category is an object C equipped with four maps u, v, p, q, so that

A ▼ B
▼▼u▼ v qq
q
▼& xqq
C ▼ (6.34)
qq ▼▼▼
xqqqp q ▼&
A B

- pu = idA, qv = idB, qu = 0, pv = 0,
 226 Applications in Homological Algebra
- (C; p, q) is the product of A, B and (C; u, v) is their sum.
The object C is often written as A ⊕ B; the maps p, q are called projec-
tions while u, v are called injections. L
Similarly one defines the biproduct i Ai of any family of objects;
L the
biproduct of the empty family is the zero object. A morphism C → i Ai
will often
L
be written as (fi ), by its components fi : C → Ai , while a mor-
phism i Ai → D can be written as [fi ], by its co-components fi : Ai → D
(as in our notation for products and coproducts, in 2.1.1 and 2.1.5).
As we know, all categories of modules, Abm and Ban have finite biprod-
ucts; other examples will be examined in 6.4.5, including some cases of
arbitrary biproducts.

6.4.2 Lemma
Let C be an N-linear category.
The following conditions on the object Z are equivalent:
(a) Z is terminal,
(a∗ ) Z is initial,
(b) Z is the zero object,
(c) C(Z, Z) is the trivial group,
(d) idZ = 0ZZ .
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Secondly, the following conditions on the diagram (6.34) are equivalent

(using the notation by components and co-components, recalled above at the
end of 6.4.1):
(i) (C; p, q) is the product of A, B and u = (idA, 0), v = (0, idB),
(i∗ ) (C; u, v) is the sum of A, B and p = [idA, 0], q = [0, idB],
(ii) pu = idA, qv = idB, up + vq = idC,
(iii) p, q are jointly mono, pu = idA, qv = idB, pv = 0, qu = 0,
∗
(iii ) u, v are jointly epi, pu = idA, qv = idB, pv = 0, qu = 0.

Therefore in an N-linear category (a fortiori in a preadditive category),

the existence of binary (or finite) products is equivalent to the existence of
binary (or finite) sums, which are then biproducts.

Proof Well-known and straightforward. We write down the proof of the

second part, taking advantage of categorical duality.
(i) ⇒ (iii) Obvious. (iii) ⇒ (ii) We have p(up + vq) = p and q(up +
vq) = q, whence up + vq = idC. (ii) ⇒ (i) The maps f : X → A and
 6.4 Additive and abelian categories 227
g : X → B are given. If h : X → C satisfies ph = f and qh = g, then
h = (up + vq)h = uf + vg; conversely, the morphism h = uf + vg : X → C
does have f, g as components.

6.4.3 Theorem and Definition (Semiadditive categories)

Let C be a category.
(a) C is said to be semiadditive if it satisfies the following equivalent con-
ditions:
(i) C is an N-linear category with finite products,
(i∗ ) C is an N-linear category with finite sums,
(ii) C is a pointed category with finite biproducts.
When these conditions hold, the sum f + g of two maps f, g : A → B is
determined by the categorical structure
d f ⊕g ∂
A / A⊕A / B ⊕B / B f + g = ∂(f ⊕ g)d, (6.35)

where d = (1, 1) : A → A ⊕ A is the diagonal of the product and ∂ = [1, 1] :

B ⊕ B → B is the codiagonal of the coproduct.
(b) A functor F : C → C′ between semiadditive categories is said to be
additive if it satisfies the following equivalent conditions:
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(i) F preserves finite products,

(i∗ ) F preserves finite sums,
(ii) F preserves finite biproducts,
(iii) F preserves (finite) sums of parallel maps.

Proof (a) We already know, from the previous lemma, that (i) and (i∗ )
are equivalent. Furthermore, if they hold, C has finite biproducts and the
binary ones satisfy the conditions of 6.4.2. Therefore, for f, g : A → B, the
composition (6.35) is computed as follows (letting p′ , q ′ be the projections
of B ⊕ B):
∂(f ⊕ g)d = (p′ + q ′ )(u′ f p + v ′ gq)(u + v) = f + g.
Now let us suppose that C is pointed and has finite biproducts (as defined
in 6.4.1), and define the sum of parallel maps as in (6.35). One verifies that
this is indeed an enrichment over Abm (see [M4], Section VIII.2, exercise
4a); moreover, in diagram (6.34), the map up + vq : Z → Z must be the
identity, because:
p(up + vq) = pup + pvq = p, q(up + vq) = qup + qvq = q.
 228 Applications in Homological Algebra
(b) It is a straightforward consequence.

6.4.4 Definition (Additive categories)

As a consequence of the previous theorem, we can define an additive cate-
gory C as a preadditive category (i.e. a Z-linear category) with finite prod-
ucts, or equivalently with finite sums.
Equivalently, we can say that C is a pointed category with finite biprod-
ucts, such that the N-linear structure defined in (6.35) (and determined
by the categorical structure) is actually Z-linear, i.e. all abelian monoids
C(A, B) are groups.
It is easy to see that a Z-linear category is finitely complete if and only if
it is additive and has kernels. In fact, in any category the existence of finite
limits is equivalent to the existence of finite products and equalisers (by
Theorem 2.2.4). Furthermore, if C is Z-linear, the equaliser of two maps
f, g : A → B amounts to the kernel of the morphism f − g, while the kernel
of f amounts to the equaliser of f and 0AB .

6.4.5 Exercises and complements

(a) We know that all categories R Mod and Ban are additive.
As a less obvious example, the reader can prove that the category SetT of
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

sets and Z-weighted maps (see 3.7.1(b)) is additive, with the obvious sum
P
of maps; a finite biproduct is a disjoint union X = Xi (a sum in Set),
with the usual injections ui : Xi → X and suitable projections pi : X → · Xi
(that are not mappings).
But also this example becomes obvious, if we replace SetT with the equiv-
alent category of free abelian groups – a full subcategory of Ab closed under
finite biproducts (see 3.7.1(c)).
(b) Abm is obviously a semiadditive, not additive, category. The examples
below consist of selfdual categories with finite (or arbitrary) biproducts.
(c) The category Ltc of lattices and Galois connections is a full subcategory
of AdjOrd. It has finite biproducts (while Mlc lacks products and sums),
Q
realised as cartesian products Xi of lattices
Q pi mi Q
Xi • / Xi • / Xi (6.36)

mi • ⊣ mi • = pri = pi • ⊣ pi • ,
Q
where pri is a cartesian projection; for an element x ∈ Xi and j 6= i
(mi • (x))i = x, (mi • (x))j = 0, (pi • (x))i = x, (pi • (x))j = 1.
 6.4 Additive and abelian categories 229
(For an infinite family (Xi ) the universal properties of product and sum
would fail, unless we restrict to complete lattices.)
Ltc is thus semiadditive, and the sum f + g of two maps f, g : X → Y is
defined as in (6.35)

d f×g ∂
X / X ×X / Y ×Y / Y (6.37)

d• (x) = (x, x), d• (x, x′ ) = x ∧ x′ ,

∂ • (y, y ′ ) = y ∨ y ′ , ∂ • (y) = (y, y),
f + g = ∂.(f ×g).d = (f • ∨ g • , f • ∧ g • ).
In other words, f + g is the join f ∨ g with respect to the order relation of
Galois connections, defined in (6.10). The sum is idempotent (f ∨ f = f ),
so that the cancellation law does not hold and our structure is not additive.
Restricting to the category of complete lattices and Galois connections
we even have arbitrary biproducts of objects, and arbitrary sums of parallel
morphisms ∨fi .
(d) Rel Set is also semiadditive, and has arbitrary biproducts realised as
disjoint unions (see 2.2.6(b)). The sum of a family of parallel relations
S
ai : X → Y is their join ai , a union of subsets of X ×Y.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

6.4.6 Theorem and definition (Abelian categories)

Let E be a Puppe-exact category. We say that E is abelian if it satisfies the
following equivalent properties:
(i) E has finite products,
(i∗ ) E has finite sums,
(ii) E has finite biproducts (in the sense of 6.4.1),
(iii) E has pullbacks,
(iii∗ ) E has pushouts,
(iv) E has finite limits,
(iv∗ ) E has finite colimits,
(v) E is additive.
The sum of parallel maps is then determined by the categorical structure,
as in (6.35).
Note. A preadditive Puppe-exact category need not be abelian: see the
examples of 6.3.3(b).
 230 Applications in Homological Algebra
Proof See [G9], Theorem 2.1.5. The essential part of this result was proved
in Freyd–Scedrov [FrS], but previously stated in [HeS]. A weaker, easier
result based on the existence of biproducts was already in [Mit].

6.4.7 Biproducts in abelian categories

We already know that, in any N-linear category C, the biproduct A ⊕ B can
be characterised as a diagram (6.34) satisfying the condition 6.4.2(iii):
(iii) p, q are jointly mono, pu = idA, qv = idB, pv = 0, qu = 0,
It is now easy to see that, if C is preadditive (i.e. Z-linear) and p-exact, the
biproduct A ⊕ B can also be characterised as a diagram (6.34) satisfying:
(iv) the diagram is commutative, with (short) exact ‘diagonals’.
Indeed, if (iv) holds and a morphism f : X → C gives pf = 0, qf = 0, it
must factorise through v = ker p, as f = vg. It follows that g = qvg = qf =
0 and f = 0. For two parallel morphisms fi : A → Z on which p, q coincide,
take f = f1 − f2 . Conversely, if (iii) is satisfied, let us prove that v = ker p.
Take f : X → C such that pf = 0; since we know that idC = up + vq, it
follows that f = (up + vq)f = vqf factorises through v (that is mono).
Let F : E → E′ be a functor between abelian categories. As an immediate
consequence of the previous point, if F is exact (in the previous sense, i.e.
it preserves kernels and cokernels), then it preserves biproducts, the sum
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

of parallel maps, all finite limits and finite colimits.

In fact, the preservation of all biproducts, including the sum of maps, also
holds if F is just half exact (as defined in 6.3.4) because, in the diagonals
of (6.34), all monos and epis are split, and preserved by any functor.

6.4.8 Pullbacks, pushouts and exact squares

Let us start from a commutative square in the abelian category E
f
A / X
g h (6.38)
 
Y / B
k

and form the sequence

(f,g) [h,−k]
0 / A / X ⊕Y / B / 0 (6.39)

which is of order two (i.e. its composed morphisms are null), since hf −kg =
0.
 6.5 Projective p-exact categories and projective spaces 231
It is easy to see that:
(a) the square (6.38) is a pullback if and only if the sequence (6.39) is exact
in A and X ⊕ Y,
(a∗ ) the square (6.38) is a pushout if and only if the sequence (6.39) is
exact in B and X ⊕ Y.
It is sufficient to prove (a), by duality. We know (from 2.3.2) that
the pullback-object of the cospan (h, k) is the equaliser of the morphisms
hp1 , kp2 : X ⊕ Y → B, that is the subobject

Ker (hp1 − kp2 ) = Ker [h, −k] ֌ X ⊕ Y.

Therefore the square (6.38) is a pullback if and only if (f, g) : A → X ⊕ Y

is a monomorphism equivalent to the subobject ker [h, −k] of X ⊕ Y.
More generally the square (6.38) is called exact in the sense of Hilton
[Hi] if the sequence is exact in the central object X ⊕ Y, which means that

im (f, g) = ker [h, −k]. (6.40)

If E = R Mod this is the same as condition 2.3.8(ii) and is equivalent

to saying that the square (6.38) becomes bicommutative in Rel E. In fact
this equivalence holds for all abelian categories E, as stated in [Hi]. More
general characterisations of this fact in p-exact categories can be found in
6.6.4.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

It will also be useful to know that the exactness of square (6.38) is equiv-
alent to each of the following (dual) conditions:
(i) the pair (h, k) and the pushout of (f, g) have the same pullback,
(i∗ ) the pair (f, g) and the pullback of (h, k) have the same pushout.
It is sufficient to prove the equivalence of (i), because the exactness
condition is self-dual. We have already noted that the pullback-object of
(h, k) is the subobject Ker [h, −k] ֌ X ⊕ Y ; now, by (a∗ ), the pushout of
(f, g) is a pair (h′ , k ′ ) with Ker [h′ , −k ′ ] = Im (f, g), and its pullback is this
subobject of X ⊕ Y. Thus the exactness condition is the same as saying that
the two pullbacks coincide.

6.5 Projective p-exact categories and projective spaces

Categories of projective spaces are rarely considered in category theory;
the reason might be that one needs the (generally overlooked) theory of
p-exact categories. The present analysis first appeared in the article [G1],
and later in the book [G9].
We show here that every p-exact category E has an associated projective
 232 Applications in Homological Algebra
p-exact category Pr E, with a faithful projective functor. If E is the abelian
category K Vct of vector spaces on the field K, Pr E can be identified with
the category K Prj of projective spaces and projective linear maps on K
(see 6.5.4(a)). This p-exact category is not abelian, generally, and cannot
even be exactly embedded in an abelian category (see Theorem 6.5.5). But
it inherits from K Vct a symmetric monoidal closed structure (see 6.5.6).
A characterisation of the projective categories associated to abelian cat-
egories was given in [CaG].
K is always a (commutative) field and K ∗ the multiplicative group of its
non-zero elements.

6.5.1 The associated projective category

We say that a p-exact category is projective if its transfer functor SubE : E →
Mlc is faithful. Let us recall that SubE , defined in 6.3.8, is also called the
projective functor of E.
We construct the projective p-exact category associated to an arbitrary
p-exact category E as the quotient of E modulo the projective congruence
∼S , namely the congruence of categories associated to the functor SubE .
The objects of E are unchanged, but we identify two parallel maps
f, g : A → B of E when they have the same modular connection (f∗ , f ∗ ) =
(g∗ , g ∗ ) : SubA → SubB
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Pr E = E/∼S ,
(6.41)
(f ∼S g) ⇔ (f∗ = g∗ ) ⇔ (f ∗ = g ∗ ).
One easily verifies that the category Pr E is p-exact, with the same zero
object, the same kernel and cokernel objects and the induced kernel and
cokernel morphisms
ker [f ] = [ker E f ] : Ker f ֌ A,
(6.42)
cok [f ] = [cok E f ] : A ։ Cok f.

Therefore, the projection functor P preserves and reflects exactness (in-

cluding mono-, epi- and isomorphisms):

P : E → Pr E, A 7→ A, f 7→ [f ]. (6.43)

The projective functor of E obviously factorises through P, yielding a

faithful functor S : Pr E → Mlc
SubE = SP : E → Pr E → Mlc,
(6.44)
S(A) = Sub(A), S[f ] = Sub(f ) = (f∗ , f ∗ ).
 6.5 Projective p-exact categories and projective spaces 233
The functor S is isomorphic to the projective functor SubE′ of E′ = Pr E,
through the natural isomorphism σ : S → SubE′
σA : S(A) → SubE′ (A), σA(m) = [m]. (6.45)
This shows that Pr E is projective and Pr(Pr E) can be identified with
Pr E; it will be called the projective p-exact category associated to E.
Pr E is determined up to isomorphism of categories by an obvious uni-
versal property: every exact functor F : E → E′ with values in a projective
p-exact category factorises in a unique way as F = GP, where G : Pr E → E′
is a functor (necessarily exact).

6.5.2 Proposition (The projective congruence of vector spaces)

In the abelian category E = K Vct of vector spaces over the (commutative)
field K, the projective congruence (6.41) is characterised as:
(f ∼S g) ⇔ (∃λ ∈ K ∗ : f = λg). (6.46)
Therefore the category K Vct is projective if and only if K is a two-
element field (isomorphic to Z/2).
Note. Property (6.46) is essentially well known, in different forms.

Proof The right-hand condition in (6.46) obviously implies that f∗ = g∗ .

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Conversely, let us suppose that f∗ = g∗ (and f ∗ = g ∗ ). Let m = f∗ (1) =

g∗ (1) and p = cok (f ∗ (0)) = cok (g ∗ (0)). There are unique isomorphisms
u, v such that f = mup, g = mvq and
u∗ = (m∗ m∗ )u∗ (p∗ p∗ ) = m∗ f∗ p∗ = m∗ g∗ p∗ = v∗ .
Therefore we only need to prove our property for two isomorphisms u, v :
A → B with u∗ = v∗ . For every x ∈ A, x 6= 0, the mappings u∗ and v∗
coincide on the subspace hxi ⊂ A spanned by x, hence there is a unique
scalar λx ∈ K such that u(x) = λx .v(x), and λx 6= 0.
Let y ∈ A, y 6= 0. If y = λx for some non-zero scalar λ, we have
λy .v(y) = u(y) = u(λx) = λλx .v(x) = λx .v(y)
and λy = λx . Otherwise, x and y are linearly independent and
λx .v(x) + λy .v(y) = u(x) + u(y) = u(x + y) = λx+y .v(x) + λx+y .v(y).
But v(x) and v(y) are also linearly independent, whence
λx = λx+y = λy .
 234 Applications in Homological Algebra
6.5.3 Projective spaces and projective maps
The associated projective category of K Vct
K Prj = Pr(K Vct) = K Vct/∼S , (6.47)
will be called the category of projective spaces and projective linear maps.
It is p-exact, with a projection functor P : K Vct → K Prj that preserves
and reflects exactness (hence also the isomorphisms). We show below (in
Theorem 6.5.5) that K Prj is not abelian, except in ‘one’ case, i.e. if K is the
two-element field, when obviously K Prj = K Vct ‘is’ the abelian category
of abelian groups satisfying the axiom 2x = 0, for all x.
Our quotient K Prj admits various concrete representations, in terms of
faithful functors, that allow us to recognise the ‘usual projective spaces’
and their morphisms. The third, below, is the classical one.
(a) Projective spaces as lattices of linear subspaces of vector spaces. We use
the composite
F1 = U S : K Prj → Mlc → Set,
(6.48)
F1 (X) = |SubE (X)|, F1 [f ] = f∗ ,
of the transfer functor S, in (6.44), and the (covariant) forgetful functor U
of Mlc, in (6.11).
(b) Projective spaces as pointed sets, quotients of vector spaces. We use
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

the functor
F2 : K Prj → Set• ,
(6.49)
F2 (X) = (|X|/∼, [0]), (F2 [f ])[x] = [f (x)],
where F2 (X) is the quotient of the underlying set |X| modulo the usual
equivalence relation
x ∼ y ⇔ (∃λ ∈ K ∗ : x = λy), (6.50)
pointed at the singleton class [0] = {0}. F2 is faithful because every lin-
ear subspace is the join of its 1-dimensional subspaces, and direct images
preserve joins.
(c) Projective spaces as unpointed sets. We use the composed functor
F3 = RF2 : K Prj → Set• → S, F3 (X) = (|X| \ {0})/∼, (6.51)
where
R : Set• → S, R(S, x0 ) = S \ {x0 },
is the equivalence of categories between Set• and the category S of sets and
partial mappings (see (1.69)).
 6.5 Projective p-exact categories and projective spaces 235
K Prj is thus isomorphic to the category K Prj′ whose objects are the
K-vector spaces, while a morphism ϕ : X →
· Y is a partial mapping of sets
F3 (f ) : (|X| \ {0})/∼ →
· (|Y | \ {0})/∼, (6.52)
induced by some linear mapping f : X → Y, and defined on the set-theoretic
complement of Ker f (see the remarks below).

6.5.4 Exercises and complements

(a) The reader can check that the realisation K Prj′ of K Prj considered
above amounts to the construction of ‘projective linear mappings’ as partial
mappings, in Bourbaki [Bor3], Section 9, n. 10.
(b) Other authors use the term ‘projective linear transformation’ to mean
an isomorphism of K Prj′ ; this is a bijection
(|X| \ {0})/ ∼ → (|Y | \ {0})/ ∼,
induced by some isomorphism X → Y of vector spaces. (Such isomor-
phisms form a disconnected groupoid, with poor categorical properties.)
(c) For an arbitrary category E, the group π = Aut(idE) of natural au-
tomorphisms of the identity functor defines a congruence: two morphisms
f, g : A → B are π-equivalent if
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(f ∼π g) ⇔ (∃λ ∈ π : f = g.λA = λB .g). (6.53)

If E is p-exact, this congruence plainly implies the projective one. One
can prove that the quotient E/∼π is p-exact, the projection E → E/∼π is an
exact functor, and the projection E → Pr E factorises through the former.
If E = K Vct, π can be identified with the multiplicative group K ∗ and
the congruence (6.53) coincides with the projective one, by 6.5.2; thus,
E/∼π = Pr E.
(d) On the other hand, if E = Ab = Z Mod, π ‘is’ the multiplicative group
of invertible integers, {−1, 1}. The reader can check that the five homo-
morphisms Z → Z5 give three equivalence classes with respect to ∼π and
two classes with respect to ∼S ; therefore, Ab/∼π is not projective.

6.5.5 Theorem (The lack of products)

Let the field K have more than two elements.
(a) The p-exact category K Prj lacks binary products and sums, and cannot
have an exact embedding, or even a faithful half exact functor (see 6.3.4),
with values in an abelian category.
 236 Applications in Homological Algebra
(b) The biproduct A ⊕ B of K Vct does not induce a two-variable functor of
projective spaces.
(c) Similarly, the p-exact category Mlc cannot have an exact embedding, or
even a faithful half exact functor, with values in an abelian category.

Proof (a) The argument is based on the fact that the canonical injections

ui : K → K 2 (i = 1, 2),

give two projective linear maps [ui ] that are not jointly epi in K Prj.
Indeed, let us choose some λ ∈ K different from 0 and 1. The linear
automorphisms

f = idK 2 , g : K 2 → K 2, g(x, y) = (x, λy),

are not related by the projective congruence ∼S (because of Proposition

6.5.2); therefore [f ] 6= [g], but [f ui ] = [gui ], for i = 1, 2.
Suppose now that we have a half exact functor F : K Prj → A with values
in an abelian category. Then the composite F P : K Vct → K Prj → A is
a half exact functor between abelian categories and preserves biproducts
(by 6.4.7), whence the pair F [ui ] is jointly epi in A. Since a faithful functor
reflects such pairs, F cannot be faithful.
As a consequence, K Prj is not abelian, and therefore cannot have binary
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

products or sums.
(b) This statement also follows from the fact that the linear mapping
g : K 2 → K 2 sending (x, y) to (x, λy) is not equivalent to the identity.
Therefore, the biproduct A ⊕ B of K Vct does not even induce a ‘functor
in each variable’, on projective spaces.
Let us note that the butterfly diagram (6.34) with exact diagonals sub-
sists in K Prj, but – without a Z-linear structure – does not give a biproduct.
(c) Finally, it suffices to recall that the projective functor Sub : K Prj → Mlc
is exact and faithful.

6.5.6 The exponential law of projective spaces

The tensor product and the Hom functor of vector spaces
⊗K : K Vct × K Vct → K Vct,
(6.54)
HomK : K Vctop × K Vct → K Vct,
have been considered in 3.4.6, more generally for modules.
 6.6 Relations and induction for p-exact categories 237
Both functors are easily seen to be consistent with the projective con-
gruence, characterised in 6.5.2: if f = λf ′ and g = µg ′ , then
f ⊗g = λµ.f ′ ⊗g ′ , Hom(f, g) = λµ.Hom(f ′ , g ′ ).
Therefore, there are induced functors for E = K Prj (that act on the
objects as the previous ones):
⊗K : E×E → E, [f ]⊗[g] = [f ⊗g],
(6.55)
op
HomK : E ×E → E, HomK ([f ], [g]) = [g]. − .[f ].
The original adjunction of vector spaces
ϕXY : K Vct(X ⊗ K A, Y ) → K Vct(X, HomK (A, Y )),
(6.56)
ϕXY (u)(x) = u(x⊗−) : A → Y,
(for u : X ⊗ K A → Y and x ∈ X) is also consistent with the projective
congruence: if u = λv then ϕ(u) = λ.ϕ(v).
We thus have an induced adjunction F ⊣ G between endofunctors of
K Prj
F (X) = X ⊗A, G(Y ) = HomK (A, Y ) = Y A , (6.57)
where HomK (A, Y ) is still the original vector space.
This gives a symmetric monoidal closed structure on K Prj. Its identity is
K, i.e. the one-point projective space in the classical representation 6.5.3(c).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

6.6 Relations and induction for p-exact categories

A consistent part of Homological Algebra, from the homology of chain
complexes to the theory of spectral sequences, is about subquotients and
induced morphisms between them; the latter are defined through the cat-
egories of relations, since a subquotient in R Mod is simply a subobject in
Rel (R Mod) (as shown in 6.6.2(f)).
The problem arises of the coherence of induction with composition, as
already noted in Mac Lane’s book ‘Homology’ ([M2], Section II.6). The
problem can be apparently complicated, when we are working in complex
systems. Yet, it has a simple solution, in the domain of p-exact categories
and their relations.
The extension of relations from abelian to p-exact categories was in-
troduced by Tsalenko [T1, T2], then studied by Brinkmann and Puppe
[Bri, BriP]. Here we briefly recall this construction. (The interested reader
will find the proofs and further information in these references, or in [G9].)
We end by considering subquotients and induced relations, with some
hints at our Coherence Theorem for induction.
 238 Applications in Homological Algebra
6.6.1 Relations of modules revisited
The category Rel (R Mod) of relations between modules has been reviewed
in 1.8.5; we give now a more detailed analysis to prepare the construction
of relations for all p-exact categories.
A relation u : A →· B is a submodule of the direct sum A ⊕ B. It can be
viewed as a ‘partially defined, multi-valued homomorphism’, that sends an
element x ∈ A to the subset {y ∈ B | (x, y) ∈ u} of B
The composite of u with v : B → · C is
vu = {(x, z) ∈ A ⊕ C | ∃y ∈ B : (x, y) ∈ u and (y, z) ∈ v}.
Rel (R Mod) is an involutive ordered category. For two parallel relations
u, u′ : A → · B, u 6 u′ means that u ⊂ u′ as submodules of A ⊕ B. The
opposite relation of u : A → · B is obtained by reversing pairs, and written as
u♯ : B →· A. The involution u 7→ u♯ is regular in the sense of von Neumann,
i.e. uu♯ u = u for all relations u.
As a consequence, a monorelation, i.e. a monomorphism in the category
Rel (R Mod), is characterised by the condition u♯ u = 1 (and is a split mono);
an epirelation by the dual condition uu♯ = 1.
The category R Mod is embedded in the category of relations Rel (R Mod),
identifying a homomorphism f : A → B with its graph
{(x, y) ∈ A ⊕ B | y = f (x)}.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A relation u : A →
· B determines two submodules of A, called definition
and annihilator
Def u = {x ∈ A | ∃y ∈ B : (x, y) ∈ u},
(6.58)
Ann u = {x ∈ A | (x, 0) ∈ u},
and two submodules of B, called values and indeterminacy
Val u = {y ∈ B | ∃x ∈ A : (x, y) ∈ u} = Def u♯ ,
(6.59)
Ind u = {y ∈ B | (0, y) ∈ u} = Ann u♯ .

6.6.2 Exercises and complements

(a) A relation u : A →
· B is a homomorphism if and only if it is everywhere
defined (i.e. Def u = A) and single-valued (i.e. Ind u = 0), in which case
annihilator and values coincide with kernel and image, respectively.
(b) The relation u is a monorelation if and only if Def u = A and Ann u = 0.
(b∗ ) The relation u is an epirelation if and only if Val u = B and Ind u = 0.
(c) The relation u is invertible in Rel (R Mod) if and only if it is invertible
 6.6 Relations and induction for p-exact categories 239
in R Mod, i.e. an isomorphism of modules, in which case u♯ is the inverse
isomorphism.
(d) Every monomorphism (resp. epimorphism) in R Mod is a monorelation
(resp. epirelation).
(e) The relation u has a canonical factorisation u = (nq ♯ ).i.(pm♯ ) (and a
dual factorisation, by dashed arrows)

• •
②< < e▲
▲ s9 b❉b
❉
② ▲e s ❉
② 9 s
Def u i / Val u
A ❈
a❈ B (6.60)
❈❈ 99 Ann u Ind u d❏d ❏❏ ④=
❈ sss ❏❏❏ ④④④
m a ss
s p q =④ n
Def u Val u

where m, n are embeddings of submodules, p, q are projections on quotients

and i is an isomorphism; notice that the latter links a subquotient of A with
a subquotient of B (see 6.3.9).
This factorisation consists of an epirelation (ipm♯ ) followed by a monore-
lation (s = nq ♯ ): it is a factorisation epi-mono in Rel Ab, and therefore the
image of u in this category should be defined as the subquotient Val u/Ind u
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(rather than the subobject Val u).

(f) Following our analysis in 6.3.9, a subquotient S = M/N of a module A
is presented by the following bicartesian square (where N ⊂ M )

M /m / A
:
p ✉✉ q (6.61)
 ✉ s✉ 
/
S n A/N /

This bicartesian square determines one monorelation

s = mp♯ = q ♯ n : S →
· A,

that sends the class [x] ∈ M/N to all the elements of the lateral [x] = x +
N ⊂ A. Because of the factorisation (6.60) of a relation, every monorelation
s : S′ →
· A is of this type, up to isomorphism.
The subquotients of the module A amount thus to the subobjects of A in
Rel (R Mod). This will be used in 6.6.6–6.6.8.
(g) All idempotents split (see 2.8.2).
 240 Applications in Homological Algebra
6.6.3 Relations for p-exact categories
Every p-exact category E has an involutive ordered category of relations
Rel E, which we now describe, without proofs. Let us recall that E has
pullbacks of monos and pushouts of epis along arbitrary morphisms (see
6.3.6), and is assumed to be well powered (see 6.3.2).
A relation u : A →· B has a quaternary factorisation u = nq ♯ pm♯ , and a
coquaternary factorisation u = q ′♯ n′ m′♯ p′ , each of them determined up to
three coherent isomorphisms; they form two bicartesian squares (pullback
and pushout, see 6.3.6(b))

•
p′②< < a❈❈ m′ n′ ④= • b❊b ❊❊q′
②②② ❈a =④
④ ❊
A b❊ •
= a❈a ❈ B (6.62)
❊❊ ④④= ❈❈ ②②②<
m b
④
④④ p q ❈ ②< n
• •

The composed relation vu is computed, on quaternary factorisations, by

pullbacks of monos (along arbitrary arrows) and pushout of epis along epis,
as in the following diagram; the relation u : A →
· B is drawn in the upper
row, the relation v : B →· C in the right-hand column and vu : A → · C
along the dotted diagonal
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

m p q n
A b❉o o •
O
// •
O
oo •
O
/ / B
O
❉
❉
❉b O (z) O (y) O (x) Om
′

• // • oo • / / •
❋
❋
❋
❋ (u) (y ′ ) p′
❋" "   
• o o
c❋c •
OO
/ / •
OO (6.63)
❋
❋
❋ (z ′ ) q′
❋
• / / •
#● 
●
● n′
●# 
C

The square (x) is a pullback, (y) and (y ′ ) are commutative (by epi-mono
factorisation), (z) and (z ′ ) are pullbacks and (u) is a pushout.
Dually, it can be computed on coquaternary factorisations, by means
of pushouts of epis along arbitrary arrows and pullbacks of monos along
monos.
The involution u 7→ u♯ is obvious; the order relation u 6 v is expressed
 6.6 Relations and induction for p-exact categories 241
by the existence of a commutative diagram in E linking their quaternary
factorisations (or equivalently the coquaternary ones)

m p q n
A o o • // • oo • / / B
u w v (6.64)
 / / • o o 
A o o • • / / B
m′ p′ q′ n′

In the construction of Rel E, a relation A →· B is defined as an equiv-

alence class [m, p, q, n] of quaternary diagrams of E as above, up to three
coherent iso morphisms u, v, w (forming a commutative diagram as above);
the composition is defined as in diagram (6.63); the proof of associativity
is not easy (see one of the references [T2, BriP, G9]).
*The category Rel Gp can be constructed by ‘quaternary classes’, as
shown in [BriP] (and not in the dual way). The category Cor Set men-
tioned in 1.8.9 can be constructed by ‘coquaternary classes’, as essentially
shown in [Da1]. This explains why, in both cases, the involution is regular.*

6.6.4 Exact squares

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A commutative square of E is said to be exact if it is bicommutative in Rel E,

which means that it stays commutative when one reverses two parallel edges
of the square. To characterise this fact, first note that (by computing
compositions in Rel E):

• / / • • // • • // •
O O OO OO O O
O (a) O (b) O (c) O (6.65)
• / / • • // • • // •

(i) a commutative square of monos (a) is exact if and only if it is a pullback,

(i∗ ) a commutative square of epis (b) is exact if and only if it is a pushout,
(ii) a commutative mixed square (c) is exact if and only if it is a pullback,
if and only if it is a pushout.
More generally, every preimage of a mono (by pullback) produces a bi-
commutative square, as well as every direct image of an epi (by pushout).
Finally, a commutative square in E becomes bicommutative in Rel E if
and only if its canonical factorisation is composed of four bicommutative
 242 Applications in Homological Algebra
squares of the previous types
• // • / / •
O O O
O (c′ ) O (a) O
•
OO
// •
OO
/ / •
OO (6.66)
′′
(b) (c )

• // • / / •

′
Every p-exact functor F : E → E preserves preimages of monos and
direct images of epis; therefore it has a unique extension to a functor that
preserves involution and ordering
Rel F : Rel E → Rel E′ . (6.67)
*Every natural transformation ϕ : F → G : E → E′ determines a lax
transformation of order-preserving functors
Rel ϕ : Rel F → Rel G : Rel E → Rel E′ , (6.68)
whose components are precisely those of ϕ (and belong to E′ ).
For this notion the interested reader is referred to [G9]: essentially, a
relation u : A →
· B in Rel E produces a ‘lax square’ in the ordered category
Rel E′ , namely ϕB.(Rel F )(u) 6 (Rel G)(u).ϕA (see (7.67)). *
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

6.6.5 The abelian case

Restricting everything to abelian categories gives little advantages in this
domain, except for the existence of ‘two-arrow factorisations’ of relations,
and the fact that the proof of associativity of composition can be given in
the easier form of 4.5.4, since every abelian category is regular. (Yet, one
should not forget the fact that (co)quaternary factorisations are adapted
to the study of subquotients, as we have already seen in 6.6.2.)
In fact, every relation has now binary factorisations u = gf ♯ : A → · B.
Such a factorisation will be said to be strong if the pair (f, g) is jointly
mono (corresponding to a monomorphism with values in A ⊕ B); this can
be obtained from a quaternary factorisation of u, by the pullback of the
central epimorphisms:
A b❋ < • b❉b ❉ B
❋❋❋ ③③< ❉❉ ①①①<
❋ ③③ ❉ <①①n
m c ③③ p q ❉
•
b❋b • (6.69)
❋ ①< <
❋ ①①
•

Dually, there is a strong cobinary factorisation u = f ′♯ g ′ , where (f ′ , g ′ ) is

 6.6 Relations and induction for p-exact categories 243
jointly epi. Two cobinary factorisations yield the same relation u if and only
if they have the same pullback, which is then a strong binary factorisation
of u.

6.6.6 Induced relations and canonical isomorphisms

We end with some points on the study of induced relations and canonical
isomorphisms between subquotients, at an introductory level.
Let us begin by working in a category of modules. We have seen in 6.6.2
that a subquotient can be represented as a subobject in Rel (R Mod).
Given two subquotients s : S →· A and t : T →
· B, a relation a : A →
· B
has an induced relation
a′ = t♯ as : S →
· T. (6.70)

Generally, this procedure does not give a commutative diagram, and is

not preserved by composition.
More particularly, for a = idA, two subquotients s : S → · A and t : T →
· A
have an induced relation t♯ s : S → · T. If it is an isomorphism, it is called
the canonical isomorphism from S to T.
The reader is warned that, as already remarked in Mac Lane [M2], this
does not give a transitive relation, in general: if we have a third subquotient
u: U →· A and two isomorphisms
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

t♯ s : S →
· T, u♯ t : T →
· U,

the composed isomorphism need not be the induced relation u♯ s : S →· U.

The term ‘canonically isomorphic subquotients’ should be reserved to sit-
uations where the corresponding relation is indeed an equivalence relation,
as discussed below.

6.6.7 A case of incoherence.

The following examples show some instances of incoherence of induction
on subquotients:
- first, canonical isomorphisms need not be closed under composition,
- second, if we extend them in this sense the result need not be uniquely
determined.
In other words, canonical isomorphisms – in general – do not form nor
generate a coherent system of isomorphisms (as defined in 1.4.9(b)).
As in Mac Lane’s book [M2], our examples of inconsistency are based on
the lattice SubA of subgroups of the abelian group A = Z ⊕ Z, and more
 244 Applications in Homological Algebra
particularly on the (non-distributive) triple formed of the diagonal ∆ and
two of its complements, the subgroups A1 and A2
A1 = Z ⊕ 0, A2 = 0 ⊕ Z,
(6.71)
Ai ∨ ∆ = A, Ai ∧ ∆ = 0.
We consider the subquotients mi : Ai → A and s = p♯ : A/∆ →
· A, in
Rel Ab.
(a) The identity of A induces two canonical isomorphisms ui = pmi : Ai →
A/∆ (that are Noether isomorphisms), and a canonical isomorphism u−1 2 :
A/∆ → A2 .
Then, the composed isomorphism w = u−1 2 u1 : A1 → A2 is not canonical.
Indeed:
w : A1 → A/∆ → A2 ,
(6.72)
(x, 0) 7→ [(x, 0)] = [(0, −x)] 7→ (0, −x),

while the canonical relation m♯2 .m1 : A1 →

· A2 has graph {(0, 0)} (and is
not even a homomorphism).
(b) Using the subgroup ∆′ = {(x, −x) | x ∈ Z} instead of the diagonal ∆,
we get the opposite composed isomorphism from A1 to A2
A1 → A/∆′ → A2 (x, 0) 7→ [(x, 0)] = [(0, x)] 7→ (0, x). (6.73)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

This shows that a composite A1 → A2 of canonical isomorphisms be-

tween subquotients of Z ⊕ Z is not determined.
Now, a change of sign can be quite important, in Homological Algebra
and Algebraic Topology. For instance, it is the case in the usual argument
proving that ‘even-dimensional spheres cannot be combed’: if the sphere Sn
has a non-null vector field, then its antipodal map t : Sn → Sn is homotopic
to the identity, and the degree (−1)n+1 of t must be 1, whence n must be
odd. The conclusion cannot be obtained if we only know the induced
homomorphism t∗n : Hn (Sn ) → Hn (Sn ) up to sign change.
(c) We are lead to think that these cases of incoherence might depend on the
non-distributivity of the lattice of subobjects involved in our subquotients.
We show now that it is indeed the case.

6.6.8 *Coherence and distributivity

We come back to the framework of p-exact categories, where all the previous
arguments work: even the abelian setting would now be insufficient. These
informal comments are taken from the Introduction of [G9]; we refer to this
book for the theory hinted at here.
 6.6 Relations and induction for p-exact categories 245
Let us recall that a p-exact category E is said to be distributive if all
its lattices of subobjects are distributive, or in other words if its transfer
functor Sub : E → Mlc takes values in the full (p-exact) subcategory Dlc
of distributive lattices and modular connections (see 6.3.3(c)). A non-
trivial abelian category cannot be distributive: the lattice Sub(A ⊕ A) is
not distributive, as soon as A is not a zero object. But there are distributive
p-exact categories, like Dlc and other examples in 6.3.3.
Now, the coherence problem mentioned above is solved by Theorem 2.7.6
of [G9], whose basic part says the following.
Coherence Theorem of Homological Algebra. In a p-exact category E, in-
duced isomorphisms between subquotients are preserved by composition (and
form a coherent system) if and only if E is distributive, if and only if its
category of relations Rel E is orthodox (i.e. its idempotent endomorphisms
are closed under composition).
As a consequence, in a distributive p-exact category, all the diagrams of
canonical isomorphisms between subquotients (induced by the identity of
a given object) commute.
Now, every p-exact category (including the abelian ones!) has an associ-
ated distributive p-exact category, the distributive expansion Dst E (men-
tioned in 6.3.3(f) and constructed in [G9], 2.8.4.)
Combining the coherence theorem with the distributive expansion, it
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

follows that the subquotients M/N of a given object A (in a p-exact, or

abelian category) have a coherent system of isomorphisms (well-determined
and closed under composition) when we restrict to those subquotients whose
numerator (M ) and denominator (N ) belong to a distributive sublattice X
of the (modular) lattice of all subobjects.
The crucial fact is that many important homological systems, and in
particular most of those giving rise to spectral sequences (like the filtered
complex, the double complex, Massey’s exact couple and Eilenberg’s exact
system), actually ‘live’ in the distributive expansion of an abelian cate-
gory, like Dst Ab, and can therefore be studied within distributive p-exact
categories.
On the other hand, systems that lead to non-distributive sublattices of
subobjects, like a trifiltered object or a bifiltered chain complex, should be
handled with great care, to avoid the risk of using ‘canonical isomorphisms’
in an illegitimate way. Examples of such problems can be found in [G9],
1.4.5.
 7
Hints at higher dimensional category theory

We sketch here the main two-dimensional categorical structures, namely 2-

categories and double categories, together with their weak versions, namely
bicategories and weak double categories.
The theory of 2-categories and bicategories (or weak 2-categories), briefly
presented in Section 7.1, is the best known part of higher dimensional
category theory. A general item is a 2-cell ϕ : u → v : X → X ′ , as in the
left diagram below
f
X / X′ X
u /
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

X ϕ u ϕ v (7.1)
↓ϕ / Y u v
→
v    
Y / Y′ Y
g

Strict and weak double categories (denoted by letters A, B, ...) are an

extension of the former, presented in Section 7.2 and used in Sections 7.4,
7.5 for applications in Homological Algebra.
Now a general item is a double cell ϕ : (u fg v) among horizontal and
vertical arrows, as in the central diagram above. The previous case is
obtained by reducing the horizontal arrows to vertical identities, as in the
right diagram above. (We use the horizontal direction as the main one, that
remains strict in the weak case; this choice, and its influence on terminology,
will be discussed in 7.2.5.)
One of our main motivations for studying double categories, briefly re-
called in 7.5.3, is that the general theory of two-dimensional adjunctions
can only be formulated in this framework.
In fact, in the general case, the left adjoint F : C → D (between weak
double categories, or also between bicategories) is colax while the right ad-
joint G : D → C is lax; they should not be composed (this would destroy
their comparisons), but viewed as vertical and horizontal arrows, respec-
 7.1 From categories to 2-categories and bicategories 247
tively, in a suitable double category Dbl introduced in [GP2]. The unit and
counit of the adjunction are double cells of the latter

G / C
C C D
F η ε F (7.2)
 
D / C D D
G

and their coherence conditions are based – separately – on the comparisons

of F and G.
Within 2-categories or bicategories, one can only formulate two particular
cases: a colax-pseudo adjunction and a pseudo-lax adjunction, which do
not cover the simple colax-lax adjunction presented in 7.5.3; furthermore,
adjunctions of these different kinds can only be composed in the general
setting.
Another motivation is that many 2-categories and bicategories, starting
from Rel Ab and the bicategories of spans or cospans, have poor limits, while
the corresponding (strict or weak) double categories have all horizontal
limits, studied in [GP1].
Higher dimensional category theory naturally extends to finite and infi-
nite dimension
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

- from (strict and weak) 2-categories to n-categories and ω-categories,

- from (strict and weak) double categories to cubical categories, or more
generally to multiple categories.
The interested reader will look under these headings.

7.1 From categories to 2-categories and bicategories

The prime example of a 2-category is Cat, when we add to its objects and
arrows the natural transformations ϕ : F → G : C → D, viewed as 2-cells,
or two-dimensional arrows between the functors – as in the left diagram
(7.1), above.
We briefly describe the strict notion of 2-category (from [Eh2]) and the
corresponding weak notion of bicategory [Be2]. The elementary cases of a
locally ordered 2-category and a locally preordered bicategory have been
presented in 4.5.1 and 4.5.5, respectively, while dealing with two approaches
to relations on regular categories.
 248 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
7.1.1 Sesquicategories
It is convenient to start from a preliminary notion, introduced in [St2]. A
sesquicategory is a category C equipped with:
(a) for each pair of parallel morphisms f, g : X → Y, a set of 2-cells, or
homotopies, C2 (f, g) whose elements are written as ϕ : f → g (or ϕ : f →
g : X → Y ), so that each map f has an identity endocell idf : f → f,
(b) a concatenation, or vertical composition of 2-cells, written as ψϕ or ψ.ϕ

f
/
↓ϕ
X / Y ψϕ : f → h : X → Y. (7.3)
↓ψ
/
h

(c) a whisker composition for 2-cells and maps, or reduced horizontal com-
position, written as kϕh (or k ◦ϕ◦h, when useful to distinguish it)

f
h / k
X′ / X ↓ϕ / Y
/ Y′ (7.4)
g
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

kϕh : kf h → kgh : X ′ → Y ′ .

These data must satisfy the following axioms (for associativities, identi-
ties and distributivity of the whisker composition):

χ(ψϕ) = (χψ)ϕ, k ′ (kϕh)h′ = (k ′ k)ϕ(hh′ ),

ϕ.idf = ϕ = idg.ϕ, 1Y ◦ϕ◦1X = ϕ, k ◦idf ◦h = id(kf h), (7.5)
k(ψϕ)h = (kψh).(kϕh).

Note that each set C2 (f, g) is a category, under vertical composition.

The category Top equipped with homotopies ϕ : f → g : X → Y does not
become a sesquicategory, because the vertical composition of homotopies is
not associative and has no identities: we have a 2-dimensional categorical
structure of a more complicated nature: see [G8] and its references.
*On the other hand it is easy to see that chain complexes, chain mor-
phisms and homotopies, over an additive category A, form a sesquicategory
Ch+ (A).*
 7.1 From categories to 2-categories and bicategories 249
7.1.2 Two-categories
A 2-category can be defined as a sesquicategory C which satisfies the fol-
lowing reduced interchange property:

f h
/ /
X ↓ϕ / Y ↓ψ / Z (ψg).(hϕ) = (kϕ).(ψf ). (7.6)
g k

To recover the usual definition one defines the horizontal composition of

2-cells ϕ, ψ which are horizontally consecutive, as in diagram (7.6), using
the previous identity:

ψ ◦ϕ = (ψg).(hϕ) = (kϕ).(ψf ) : hf → kg : X → Z. (7.7)

(The whisker composition is now a particular case: hϕ = idh◦ϕ and

ψf = ψ ◦idf.)
The horizontal composition of 2-cells is then proved to be associative, to
have identities (namely the identity cells of identity arrows) and to satisfy
the middle-four interchange property with vertical composition (an exten-
sion of the reduced interchange property (7.6)):
/ /
↓ϕ ↓σ
X / Y / Z (τ.σ)◦(ψ.ϕ) = (τ ◦ψ).(σ ◦ϕ). (7.8)
↓ψ ↓τ
/ /
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

As a prime example of such a structure, Cat will also denote the 2-

category of small categories, their functors and their natural transforma-
tions, with the usual operations, defined in 1.5.3; we have seen in 1.5.4 that
the axioms are satisfied.
We already noted that the usual definition of a 2-category is based on
the complete horizontal composition, even though one usually works with
the reduced one. Moreover, there are important sesquicategories where
the reduced interchange property does not hold (and one does not define
a full horizontal composition): for instance, the sesquicategories of chain
complexes recalled above.
Two-dimensional limits are studied in [Kl3, St2, Gra].
Adjunctions, monads, equivalences and adjoint equivalences can be de-
fined inside any 2-category. (For an adjunction one should use the ‘alge-
braic’ form (iii) of definition 3.1.2.)
An ordered category C, as defined in 1.8.2, is the same as a 2-category
where each category C2 (f, g) is an ordered set; it is also called a locally
ordered 2-category. Typical examples are Ord, AdjOrd and Rel Set (see
4.5.1).
 250 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
7.1.3 Bicategories
A bicategory is a weak version of a 2-category, introduced by Bénabou [Be2]
in 1967.
The general framework of objects, arrows, 2-cells and their operations
is the same as in a 2-category. The vertical composition of 2-cells is still
categorical, and the interchange property still holds. But the horizontal
composition f ⊗g of arrows (now written in diagrammatic order) is asso-
ciative and has units up to comparisons cells (for f : A → B, g : B → C,
h : C → D)
κ(f, g, h) : f ⊗(g ⊗h) → (f ⊗g)⊗h (associator),
(7.9)
λ(f ) : idA⊗f → f, ρ(f ) : f ⊗idB → f (unitors),
that are invertible under vertical composition and natural with respect to
2-cells.
In Section 7.2 we shall see the more general structure of a weak double
category, from which the interested reader can deduce the naturality and
coherence axioms of the previous comparisons, in a bicategory. Typical ex-
amples, the bicategories of spans and cospans, will be seen in the extended
form of weak double categories, in 7.2.6.
A monoidal (resp. strict monoidal) category C is the same as a bicategory
(resp. 2-category) on one formal object ∗. The arrows A : ∗ → ∗ are the
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

objects of C, the cells f : A → B are the maps of C, the vertical composition

is that of C, the horizontal one is the tensor product A⊗B.
A bicategory C is said to be locally preordered when each category C2 (f, g)
is a preordered set, as in the structure Rel ′ (C) of ‘jointly monic relations’
on a regular category, described in 4.5.5.
In this case the comparison cells (7.9) are uniquely determined, as in-
stances of the equivalence relation associated to the preorder

f ⊗(g ⊗h) ∼ (f ⊗g)⊗h, idA⊗f ∼ f ∼ f ⊗idB,

and their coherence is automatically satisfied. A locally preorered bicate-

gory C has an associated locally ordered 2-category C/∼.
*The coherence theorem for bicategories can be found in [MaP]. For
higher dimensional extensions of bicategories one can see Leinster [Le] and
references therein.*

7.1.4 Two-dimensional functors and transformations

A 2-functor F : C → D between 2-categories sends objects to objects,
arrows to arrows and cells to cells, strictly preserving the whole struc-
 7.1 From categories to 2-categories and bicategories 251
ture: (co)domains, units and compositions. (Lax versions can be found in
[Be2, KlS]; here they will be defined for weak double categories, in 7.2.4.)
A 2-natural transformation h : F → G : C → D between 2-functors is a
natural transformation that behaves in a natural way also on every 2-cell
ϕ : f → g : X → Y in C
hX / GX
FX
Fϕ Gϕ
→ → hY.F ϕ = Gϕ.hX. (7.10)
   
FY / GY
hY

It is now easy to define 2-adjunctions and 2-monads, by 2-functors and

2-natural transformations satisfying the same identities as in the ordinary
one-dimensional case. In Section 7.6 we shall use 2-monads in Cat.

7.1.5 Two-dimensional universal arrows

Universal arrows of functors (defined in 2.7.1) have a strict and a weak
extension to the two-dimensional case.
A 2-universal arrow from an object X of X to the 2-functor U : A → X
is a pair (A0 , h : X → U A0 ) which gives an isomorphism of categories (of
arrows and cells, with vertical composition):
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A(A0 , A) → X(X, U A), g 7→ U g.h. (7.11)

This amounts to saying that the functor (7.11) is bijective on objects,
full and faithful, i.e.
(i) for every A in A and every f : X → U A in X there exists precisely one
g : A0 → A in A such that f = U g.h,
(ii) for every pair of arrows g, g ′ : A0 → A in A and every cell ϕ : U g.h →
U g ′ .h in X, there is precisely one cell ψ : g → g ′ in A such that ϕ = U ψ.h.
(Equivalently, one can use a global universal property: for every cell
ϕ : f → f ′ : X → U A in X, there is precisely one cell ψ : g → g ′ in A such
that ϕ = U ψ.h. This implies that f = U g.h and f ′ = U g ′ .h.)
More generally, a biuniversal arrow from X to U : A → X is a pair
(A0 , h : X → U A0 ) so that the functor (7.11) is an equivalence of cate-
gories. This can be rephrased saying that the functor (7.11) is essentially
surjective on objects, full and faithful (see 1.5.5). In other words, we replace
property (i) with a weaker version (and keep (ii) as it is):
(i′ ) for every A in A and every f : X → U A in X there exists some g : A0 →
A in A such that f ∼ = U g.h (isomorphic objects in the category X(X, U A)).
 252 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
In concrete situations one can often replace (i) with the property of
surjectivity on objects, which is intermediate between (i) and (i′ ):
(i′′ ) for every A in A and every f : X → U A in X there exists some g : A0 →
A such that f = U g.h.
Of course, the solution of a 2-universal problem is determined up to
isomorphism, while the solution of a biuniversal one is determined up to
equivalence (in a 2-category).
The 2-limit (resp. bilimit) of a 2-functor is defined by a 2-universal (resp.
biuniversal) property, extending 2.7.2. The interested reader can easily
verify that Cat has (small) 2-limits. Further information on 2-limits and
related matter can be found in [St2].
Note that the term ‘biproduct’ (in the present sense of product and co-
product, as in 2.1.9 and Section 6.4) clashes with the (more recent) ‘bilimit’.
The clash is limited by the fact that 2-products seem to be more impor-
tant than the corresponding bilimits – essentially because they are ‘flexible
limits’, see [BKPS].

7.1.6 Natural transformations and mates

Let us suppose that we have two adjunctions (between ordinary categories)
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

F : X ⇄ Y : G, η : 1 → GF, ε : F G → 1,
(7.12)
′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′
F : X ⇄ Y :G , η :1→GF , ε : F ′ G′ → 1,
′

and two functors H : X → X′ , K : Y → Y′ .

As shown in [KlS], Section 2.2, there is a bijection between sets of natural
transformations:
Nat(F ′ H, KF ) → Nat(HG, G′ K), ϕ ↔ ψ,
ψ = G Kε.G ϕG.η HG : HG → G F HG → G′ KF G → G′ K,
′ ′ ′ ′ ′
(7.13)
ϕ = ε′ KF.F ′ ψF.F ′ Hη : F ′ H → F ′ HGF → F ′ G′ KF → KF,

H / X′ 1 / X′ 1 / X H / X′
X X✼
G ✞✞
✞C ✼✼✼ F ✿✿
✿✿ ′ ☎☎☎
B ✼✼ ✞✞C G′
B ✿
☎☎ ✿✿✿F ′
✞ ↓ε ✼✼✼ ↓ϕ ✿ ↓η ☎ ′ ✼✼ ↓η ✞✞ ↓ψ ☎
☎ ′ ✿✿
✞✞  F ′ ✿ ☎☎ G F ✼
 ✞✞ G ☎☎ ↓ε 
Y / Y / Y′ Y / Y′ / Y′
1 K K 1

The natural transformations ϕ, ψ are said to be mates under the given data;
or under the given adjunctions when H and K are identities,
Actually, this holds true for internal adjunctions in any 2-category.
 7.1 From categories to 2-categories and bicategories 253
7.1.7 The 2-category of adjoint functors
The category AdjCat of small categories and adjunctions
(F, G, η, ε) : C →
· D,
has been introduced in 3.2.1.
We show now that it has a natural 2-categorical structure, derived from
that of Cat and extending the 2-categorical structure of AdjOrd given by
its order (see 7.1.2).
Given two adjunctions between the same categories
(F, G, η, ε) : C → D, (F ′ , G′ , η ′ , ε′ ) : C → D, (7.14)
a 2-cell of AdjCat
(ϕ, ψ) : (F, G, η, ε) → (F ′ , G′ , η ′ , ε′ ) : C → D, (7.15)
is defined as a pair of mate natural transformations (under the given ad-
junctions), each of them determining the other
ϕ : F → F ′ : C → D, ψ : G′ → G : D → C,
ψ = (Gε′ .GϕG′ .ηG′ : G′ → GF G′ → GF ′ G′ → G), (7.16)
ϕ = (εF ′ .F ψF ′ .F η ′ : F → F G′ F ′ → F GF ′ → F ′ ).
The vertical composition of 2-cells in AdjCat comes from the vertical
composition of natural transformations
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(ϕ′ , ψ ′ ).(ϕ, ψ) = (ϕ′ ϕ, ψψ ′ ). (7.17)

The whisker composition of (ϕ, ψ) with two adjunctions
(H, K, ρ, σ) : C′ → C, (H ′ , K ′ , ρ′ , σ ′ ) : D → D′ ,
is given by two whisker compositions of natural transformations
H ′ ϕH : H ′ F H → H ′ F ′ H : C′ → D′ ,
(7.18)
KψK ′ : KG′ K ′ → KGK ′ : D′ → C′ .
Finally the (contravariant) involution of (3.15) can be extended (covari-
antly) to 2-cells
(−)op : AdjCat → AdjCat, C 7→ Cop ,
((F, G, η, ε) : C → D) 7→ ((Gop , F op , εop , η op ) : Dop → Cop ),
(7.19)
((ϕ, ψ) : (F, G, η, ε) → (F ′ , G′ , η ′ , ε′ )) 7→
((ψ op , ϕop ) : (Gop , F op , εop , η op ) → (G′op , F ′op , ε′op , η ′op )).
In the same way (except for the involution) one can construct a 2-
category AdjC of internal adjunctions in an arbitrary 2-category C.
 254 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
7.2 Double categories
Strict double categories were introduced and studied by C. Ehresmann and
Andrée C. Ehresmann [Eh1, Eh2, Eh3, Eh4, BasE, EE] since 1962; the weak
notion much later, in [GP1]–[GP4]; many other references can be found in
these articles.
The strict case extends the more usual notion of 2-category, while the
weak one extends bicategories. The extension is made clear in 7.2.5.
Applications of double categories in Computer Science can be found,
for instance, in [BruMM]. Applications in Homological Algebra will be
presented in Sections 7.4 and 7.5.

7.2.1 Definition
A (strict) double category A consists of the following structure.
(a) A set ObA of objects of A.
(b) Horizontal morphisms f : X → X ′ between the previous objects; they
form the category Hor0 A of the objects and horizontal maps of A, with
composition written as gf and identities 1X : X → X.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(c) Vertical morphisms u : X →· Y (often denoted by a dot-marked arrow)

between the same objects; they form the category Ver0 A of the objects and
vertical maps of A, with composition written as v •u (or u⊗v, in diagram-
· X or 1•X .
matic order) and identities written as eX : X →
(d) (Double) cells a : (u fg v) with a boundary formed of two horizontal
arrows f, g and two vertical arrows u, v (often marked with a dot)

f
X / X′
u• •v
a (7.20)
 
Y / Y′
g

1
Writing a : (X X
g v) or a : (e g v) we mean that f = 1X and u = eX . The
cell a is also written as a : u → v (with respect to its horizontal domain
and codomain, which are vertical arrows) or as a : f → · g (with respect to
its vertical domain and codomain, which are horizontal arrows).
We refer now to the following diagrams of cells, where the first is called
 7.2 Double categories 255
a consistent matrix (ac bd ) of cells

f f′
X / X′ / X ′′
u• •v •w 1 f
a b X / X X / X′
  
Y g / Y′ g′ / Y ′′ u•
1u •u e• ef •e
(7.21)
   
u •
′ •v ′ •w ′
/ Y / X′
c d Y X
  1 f

Z / Z′ / Z ′′
h h′

(e) Cells have a horizontal composition, consistent with the horizontal com-
position of arrows and written as
f ′f
(a | b) : (u g′ g w),

or a|b; this composition gives the category Hor1 A of vertical arrows and
cells a : u → v of A, with identities 1u : (u 11 u).
(f) Cells have also a vertical composition, consistent with the vertical com-
position of arrows and written as
a
: (u′ •u fh v ′ •v),
c
or ac , or a ⊗ c; this composition gives the category Ver1 A of horizontal
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

arrows and cells a : f →· g of A, with identities ef = 1•f : (e ff e).

(g) The two compositions satisfy the interchange laws (for binary and ze-
roary compositions), which means that we have, in diagram (7.21):
      
a|b a b 1u
= , = 1u′ •u ,
c|d c d 1u′

(7.22)
(ef | ef ′ ) = ef ′ f , 1eX = e1X .

The first condition says that a consistent matrix (ac bd ) has a precise
pasting; the last says that an object X has an identity cell

X = 1eX = e1X .

The expressions (a | f ′ ) and (f | b) will stand for (a | ef ′ ) and (ef | b),

when this makes sense.
The double category A is said to be flat if every double cell a : (u fg v)
is determined by its boundary – namely the arrows f, g, u, v. A standard
example is the double category RelSet of sets, mappings and relations,
described below in 7.2.7.
 256 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
7.2.2 Weak double categories
More generally, in a weak double category A the horizontal composition
behaves categorically (and we still have ordinary categories Hor0 A and
Hor1 A), while the composition of vertical arrows is categorical up to com-
parison cells; the latter are special (which means that their horizontal ar-
rows are identities) and horizontally invertible.
- For u : X →
· Y we have a left unitor and a right unitor
λu : eX ⊗u → u, ρu : u⊗eY → u, (7.23)
f
which are natural for a cell a : (u g v) in the sense that
(ef ⊗a | λv) = (λu | a), (a⊗eg | ρv) = (ρu | a).

- For three consecutive vertical arrows u : X →

· Y , v: Y →
· Z and w : Z →
· T
we have an associator
κ(u, v, w) : u⊗(v⊗w) → (u⊗v)⊗w, (7.24)
f ′ g ′ h ′
natural for cells a : (u g u ), b : (v h v ), c : (w k w ), in the sense that
(a⊗(b⊗c) | κ(u′ , v ′ , w′ )) = (κ(u, v, w) | (a⊗b)⊗c).
Interchange between horizontal and vertical composition of cells holds
strictly, as above. Finally, the comparison cells λ, ρ, κ are assumed to sat-
isfy coherence axioms, listed below.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A is said to be unitary if the unitors are identities, so that the vertical

identities behave as strict units: a constraint which in concrete cases can
often be easily met.
The terminology of the strict case is extended to the weak one, as far as
possible.

7.2.3 Coherence conditions

In a weak double category the following diagrams of cells must commute
under horizontal composition.
(a)Coherence pentagon of the associator κ, on four consecutive vertical
arrows x, y, z, u
(x⊗y)⊗(z ⊗u)
κ❦❦❦❦❦
❦5 ❙❙❙❙
❙❙κ❙❙
❦❦ ❙❙❙❙
❦❦❦❦ )
x⊗(y ⊗(z ⊗u)) ((x⊗y)⊗z)⊗u (7.25)
❍❍ ;
❍❍ ✈✈
❍❍ ✈✈✈
1⊗κ ❍# ✈✈ κ⊗1
x⊗((y ⊗z)⊗u) κ
/ (x⊗(y ⊗z))⊗u
 7.2 Double categories 257
(b) Coherence conditions for the unitors, for x : A →
· B and y : B →
· C
κ
x⊗(eB ⊗y) / (x⊗eB )⊗y
▼▼▼
▼▼▼ qqq (7.26)
&
1⊗λ x qq
q ρ⊗1
x⊗y

κ
eA ⊗(x⊗y) / (eA ⊗x)⊗y
▼▼▼
▼▼▼ qqq (7.27)
& λ x qqλ⊗1
q
x⊗y

κ
x⊗(y ⊗eC ) / (x⊗y)⊗eC
▼▼▼
▼▼▼ qqq (7.28)
1⊗ρ& x qqρ
q
x⊗y

λ(eA) = ρ(eA) : eA⊗eA → eA. (7.29)

We write the conditions (b) in the form used by Mac Lane in his classical
paper on coherence of monoidal categories [M3]. As proved by Kelly [Kl1],
this set of axioms is redundant: properties (7.25) and (7.26) imply the
other three.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

This is also true in the present more general case. Listing all the previous
conditions has nevertheless some interest: there are defective structures
where the unitors are not invertible and the redundancy recalled above
disappears.

7.2.4 Lax functors and horizontal transformations

A lax (double) functor F : X → A between weak double categories amounts
to assigning:
(a) two functors Hor0 F and Hor1 F, consistent with domain and codomain
Hor1 F Hor1 F
Hor1 X / Hor1 A Hor1 X / Hor1 A
Dom Dom Cod Cod (7.30)
   
Hor0 X / Hor0 A Hor0 X / Hor0 A
Hor0 F Hor0 F

(b) for any object X in X a special cell, the identity comparison of F

F (X) : eF X → F eX : F X →
· F X,
 258 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
(c) for any vertical composite u⊗v : X →
· Y →
· Z in X a special cell, the
composition comparison

F (u, v) : F u⊗F v → F (u⊗v) : F X →

· F Z.

Again, these comparisons must satisfy axioms of naturality and coher-

ence with the comparisons of X and A (cf. [GP2]).
A colax (double) functor has comparisons in the opposite direction. A
pseudo (double) functor is a lax functor whose comparison cells are hori-
zontally invertible; it is made colax by the inverse cells.
A horizontal transformation of lax functors h : F → G : X → A has the
following components:
(a) a horizontal map hX : F X → GX in A, for each object X in X,
hX
(b) a cell hu : (F u Gu) for each vertical map u : X →
· Y in X,
hY
under conditions of naturality and coherence with the comparisons of F
and G (cf. [GP2]).

7.2.5 Dualities
A weak double category has a horizontal opposite Ah (reversing the horizon-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

tal direction) and a vertical opposite Av (reversing the vertical direction).

A strict structure also has a transpose At (interchanging the horizontal and
vertical issues).
The prefix ‘co’, as in colimit, coequaliser or colax double functor, refers
to horizontal duality, the main one.
Let us note that a weak double category whose horizontal arrows are
identities is the same as a bicategory written in vertical (as in the right dia-
gram of (7.1)), with arrows and weak composition in the vertical direction
and strict composition of cells in the horizontal one. This is why the oplax
functors of bicategories correspond here to colax double functors.
(Transposing the theory of double categories, as is done in some papers,
would avoid this conflict of terminology, but would produce other conflicts
at a more basic level: for instance, colimits in Set would become ‘op-limits’
in RelSet and SpanSet.)

7.2.6 Spans and cospans

For a category C with (a fixed choice of) pullbacks there is a weak double
category Span(C) of spans over C.
 7.2 Double categories 259
Objects, horizontal arrows and their composition come from C, so that
Hor0 (SpanC) = C.
· Y is a span u = (u′ , u′′ ), i.e. a diagram
A vertical arrow u : X →
X ←U →Y
in C, or equivalently a functor u : ∨ → C defined on the formal-span cate-
gory • ← • → • . A vertical identity is a pair eX = (1X , 1X ).
A cell σ : (u fg v) is a natural transformation u → v of such functors and
amounts to the commutative left diagram below
f
XO / X′ XO / X′ / X ′′
O O O
u′ v′ u′ v′ w′
mσ mσ mτ
U / V U / V / W (7.31)
u′′ v ′′ u′′ v ′′ w ′′
    
Y / Y′ Y / Y′ / Y ′′
g

We say that the cell σ is represented by its middle arrow mσ : U → V,

which determines it together with the boundary (the present structure is
not flat).
The horizontal composition σ | τ of σ with a second cell τ : v → w is a
composition of natural transformations as in the right diagram above; it
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

gives the category Hor1 (SpanC) = Cat(∨, C).

The vertical composition u⊗v of spans is computed by (chosen) pullbacks
in C
X c● Y d❍❍ Z
●● ✈; ❍❍ ✇;
✈✈✈ ✇✇
U d❍❍ ❴ V W = U × Y V. (7.32)
❍❍ ✈:
✈✈✈
W
This composition is extended to double cells, in the obvious way. For
the sake of simplicity we make Span(C) unitary, by adopting the ‘unit
constraint’ for pullbacks (as in 2.4.6): the chosen pullback of an identity
along any morphism is an identity. The associator κ is determined by the
universal property of pullbacks.
Dually, for a category C with (a fixed choice of) pushouts there is a uni-
tary weak double category Cosp(C) of cospans over C, that is horizontally
dual to Span(Cop ). We have now
Hor0 (CospC) = C, Hor1 (CospC) = Cat(∧, C), (7.33)
where ∧ = ∨op is the formal-cospan category • → • ← •.
 260 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
A vertical arrow u = (u′ , u′′ ) : ∧ → C is a cospan, i.e. a diagram X →
U ← Y in C, and a cell σ : u → v is a natural transformation of such
functors. Their vertical composition is computed with pushouts in C; again,
we generally follow the ‘unit constraint’ for pushouts.
We write as Span(C) and Cosp(C) the bicategories obtained from the
previous weak double categories, by restricting horizontal arrows to iden-
tities.

7.2.7 Other examples

We briefly recall other strict or weak double categories. The interested
reader will find the details in [GP1].
(a) The ordered category Rel Set of sets and relations has been introduced
in 1.8.3. We now form a flat double category A = RelSet, with Hor0 A = Set,
Ver0 A = Rel Set and double cells of the following kind
f
X / X′
u• •v
6 gu 6 vf ( in Rel Set). (7.34)
 
Y / Y′
g

Double cells are determined by their boundary; their horizontal and ver-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

tical composition amount to composing mappings or relations, respectively.

Similarly, one can form a double category Rel(C) over any regular cate-
gory, ‘pasting’ C with the ordered category Rel (C) constructed in Section
4.5. Or over any p-exact category, using the ordered category constructed
in Section 6.6; this structure will be used in Section 7.5.
(b) The ordered category AdjOrd of ordered sets and Galois connections has
been introduced in 1.7.4. We now form a flat double category A = AdjOrd,
with Hor0 A = Ord, Ver0 A = AdjOrd and double cells of the following kind
f
X / X′ v• f 6 gu• : X → Y ′ ( in Ord),
u• •v
↓ (7.35)
 
Y g
/ Y′ f u• 6 v • g : Y → X ′ ( in Ord).

(The two conditions are easily seen to be equivalent.) Again, the hori-
zontal and vertical composition amount to composing horizontal or vertical
arrows.
We are also interested in the double subcategory Adj0 Ord where we re-
strict the double cells to the bicommutative ones, which here means that
v• f = gu• and f u• = v • g.
 7.2 Double categories 261
(c) More generally there is a double category AdjCat of (small) categories,
functors and adjunctions.
Here Hor0 (AdjCat) = Cat and Ver0 (AdjCat) = AdjCat, the category of
adjunctions introduced in 3.2.1. A vertical arrow is thus an adjunction,
conventionally directed as the left adjoint

u = (u• , u• , η, ε) : X →
· Y, (u• : X → Y ) ⊣ (u• : Y → X),
(7.36)
η : 1X → u• u• , ε : u• u• → 1Y .

A double cell a = (a• , a• ) is a pair of mate natural transformations (cf.

7.1.6)

f
X / X′ a• : v• f → gu• : X → Y ′ ,
u• •v
↓a (7.37)
 
/ Y′ • • •
Y g a : f u → v g : Y → X ′,

Each of them determines the other via the units and counits of the ad-
junctions u and v

a• = (f u• → v • v• f u• → v • gu• u• → v • g),
(7.38)
a• = (v• f → v• f u• u• → v• v • gu• → gu• ).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(d) This can be further extended to a double category AdjC, where C is

any 2-category.
(e) Profunctors, or distributors, form a bicategory [Be3, Lw1]. The weak
double category Cat of categories, functors and profunctors was introduced
in [GP1], Section 3.1. Objects are small categories, a horizontal arrow is
a functor and a vertical arrow is a profunctor u : X → · Y, defined as a
functor u : X op × Y → Set. A cell a : (u fg v) is a natural transformation
a : u → v(f op ×g) : X op ×Y → Set.
Compositions and comparisons can be seen loc. cit.

7.2.8 Vertical involutions

As we have hinted at in 1.8.1, the (covariant) reversor of Ord and the
(contravariant) involution of AdjOrd have the same action X 7→ X op on the
objects, and can be combined to form a vertical involution of the double
category AdjOrd: this is horizontally covariant (on increasing mappings)
and vertically contravariant (on adjunctions).
 262 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
More precisely, we have an involutive double functor defined on the ver-
tical dual AdjOrdv
(−)op : AdjOrdv → AdjOrd, X 7→ X op , (7.39)
which acts as follows on the arrows and the (flat) double cells
f f op
X / X′ Y op / Y ′op
u• •v • •
↓ 7→ uop ↓ v op (7.40)
   
Y / Y′ X op / X ′op
g gop

On a strict double category A, a vertical involution will thus be an invo-

lutive double functor Av → A.
This also exists in RelSet. More generally, we have a vertical involution
in AdjC, where C is any 2-category, and in Rel(C), where C is a regular or
p-exact category.
For a weak double category A, we must relax the previous procedure:
one generally encounters a weak vertical involution, defined as an involutive
pseudo double functor Av → A.
In fact, let us consider the weak double category Span(C) of 7.2.6, where
vertical arrows are spans composed with a choice of pullbacks. We can-
not assume that this choice is symmetric, as already remarked in 2.3.2(c).
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

Therefore, the procedure of reversing a span is only consistent with com-

position up to isomorphism of spans (contravariantly, of course).
Similarly, the weak double category Cat of categories, functors and pro-
functors has a weak vertical involution C 7→ Cop .

7.3 Enriched, internal and ordered categories

The classical references for enriched categories are the article [EiK], by
Eilenberg and Kelly, and Kelly’s book [Kl2]. Categories internal to a cate-
gory were introduced by C. Ehresmann [Eh3]; see also [St3].

7.3.1 Enriched categories

In an additive category C, like R Mod and Ban, or more generally in a
preadditive one, each hom-set C(X, Y ) is equipped with a structure of
abelian group, so that composition is bilinear over Z.
We show now that, if C has small hom-sets, this amounts to saying that
C is ‘enriched’ over Ab, with respect to the symmetric monoidal structure
of its tensor product.
 7.3 Enriched, internal and ordered categories 263
In general, let V = (V, ⊗, E) be a symmetric monoidal category, whose
comparisons will be left understood. A V-enriched category, or V-category,
C consists of:
(a) a set ObC, of objects,
(b) for every pair X, Y in ObC, a V-object of morphisms C(X, Y ),
(c) for every X ∈ ObC, a V-morphism of identity idX : E → C(X, X).
(d) for every triple X, Y, Z in ObC, a V-morphism of composition

k : C(X, Y ) ⊗ C(Y, Z) → C(X, Z).

These data are to satisfy three axioms of unitarity and associativity.

Namely, the following diagrams must commute, for all X, Y, Z, U in ObC
id⊗1
E ⊗C(X, Y ) / C(X, X)⊗C(X, Y )
❯❯❯❯
❯❯❯❯
❯❯❯* k (7.41)
1 
C(X, Y )

1⊗id
C(X, Y )⊗E / C(X, Y )⊗C(Y, Y )
❯❯❯❯
❯❯❯❯
❯❯❯* k (7.42)
1 
C(X, Y )
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

1⊗k
C(X, Y )⊗C(Y, Z)⊗C(Z, U ) / C(X, Y )⊗C(Y, U )
k⊗1 k (7.43)
 
C(X, Z)⊗C(Z, U ) / C(X, U )
k

An enriched category has an underlying category |C|, with the same ob-
jects and hom-sets constructed with the canonical forgetful functor U =
V(E, −) : V → Set (not necessarily faithful, see (3.32))

|C|(X, Y ) = U (C(X, Y )) = V(E, C(X, Y )). (7.44)

The identity of X in |C| is precisely idX : E → C(X, X). Given two con-
secutive morphisms f ∈ |C|(X, Y ), g ∈ |C|(Y, Z) of the underlying category,
their composite gf is defined by the canonical mapping ϕ of (3.33)

gf = (U k).ϕ(f, g), (7.45)

gf : |C|(X, Y )×|C|(Y, Z) → U (C(X, Y )⊗C(Y, Z)) → |C|(X, Z).

 264 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
7.3.2 Enriched functors and transformations
A V-functor F : C → D between V-categories consists of:
(a) a mapping F0 : ObC → ObD whose action is written as X 7→ F (X),
(b) for every pair X, Y in ObC, a V-morphism

FXY : C(X, Y ) → D(F X, F Y )

(which will be written as f 7→ F (f ) when V is a category of structured
sets).
The following diagrams are assumed to commute, for all X, Y, Z in ObC
id / C(X, X)
E ❖❖
❖❖❖
❖❖ F (7.46)
id ❖❖' 
D(F X, F X)

k / C(X, Z)
C(X, Y )⊗C(Y, Z)
F ⊗F F (7.47)
 
D(F X, F Y )⊗D(F Y, F Z) / D(F X, F Z)
k

A V-transformation ϕ : F → G : C → D between V-functors consists of a

family of V-morphisms
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

ϕX : E → D(F X, GX) (X ∈ ObC),

making the following diagrams commutative

ϕX⊗G k
E ⊗C(X, Y ) / D(F X, GX)⊗D(GX, GY ) / D(F X, GY )

C(X, Y )⊗E / D(F X, F Y )⊗D(F Y, GY ) / D(F X, GY )

F ⊗ϕY k
(7.48)
Appropriate compositions give the 2-category V-Cat of V-categories (see
[Kl2]).
Again, a V-functor has an underlying functor and a V-transformation
has an underlying natural transformation, so that we have a 2-functor

| − | : V-Cat → Cat.

7.3.3 Exercises and complements

The reader should examine and complete the following examples. They are
based on the cartesian structure of the categories Set, Cat, Ord, 2, and the
 7.3 Enriched, internal and ordered categories 265
symmetric monoidal structure of the categories Ab and Abm. In each case
the enriched functors and their transformations are the obvious ones.
(a) A Set-enriched category is the same as an ordinary category with small
hom-sets.
(b) A Cat-enriched category is the same as a 2-category with small hom-
categories.
(c) An Ord-enriched category is an ordered category, as defined in 1.8.2,
with small hom-sets. (A different notion of ‘ordered category’ is recalled
in 7.3.6.)
(d) The arrow category 2 is equivalent to the subcategory of Set consisting
of all sets of cardinality 6 1. It has all limits, and an obvious cartesian
structure. A 2-enriched category is a preordered set, possibly large.
(e) Let C be a preadditive category (see 6.4.1) with small hom-sets: as
we have already recalled at the beginning of this section, this amounts to
saying that C is enriched over Ab.
Completing some remarks in 1.2.1, every object X of C has a (possibly
large, unitary) ring End(X). A ring is essentially the same as a preadditive
category on a single object, while a preadditive category can be thought to
be a ‘multi-object generalisation’ of a ring.
(f) Similarly an N-linear category (see 6.4.1) with small hom-sets is enriched
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

over Abm, the symmetric monoidal category of abelian monoids, with tensor
product over N defined ‘as’ in Ab. An N-linear category is a ‘multi-object
generalisation’ of a semiring.
(g) A symmetric monoidal closed category C is canonically enriched on
itself, by its internal hom Hom(X, Y ), with idX : E → Hom(X, X) corre-
sponding to the unitor λX : E ⊗X → X.
Examining under this aspect the symmetric monoidal closed structure of
Ban1 reviewed in 3.4.7(h), it is important to note that the enrichment of
Ban1 on itself does not mean to provide the set Ban1 (X, Y ) with a structure
of Banach space (!), but to introduce a Banach space Hom(X, Y ) whose unit
ball is that set. The ‘naive view’ of enriching a given ordinary category by
providing its hom-sets of a V-structure is only adequate when the canonical
forgetful functor of V does give (what we view as) the underlying set of any
V-object. The next example is even farer from this naive view.

7.3.4 Lawvere metric spaces

The strict monoidal category R+ was introduced by Lawvere [Lw1] to for-
malise ‘generalised metric spaces’ as enriched categories. An object of R+
 266 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
is an ‘extended’ positive real number λ ∈ [0, ∞], an arrow λ → µ is given
by the order relation λ > µ; the tensor product is given by the ordinary
sum λ + λ′ .
A category enriched over R+ is a set X with hom-values

δ(x, y) = X(x, y),

satisfying the axioms:

δ(x, y) ∈ [0, ∞],

(7.49)
δ(x, x) = 0, δ(x, y) + δ(y, z) > δ(x, z).

Note that ‘composition’ becomes the triangular inequality, and symmetry

is not required (while it was for an extended semimetric, in 5.1.7).
We call this structure X a directed metric space, or a δ-metric space.
A morphism f : X → Y is a weak contraction, satisfying

δ(x, x′ ) > δ(f (x), f (x′ )),

for all x, x′ ∈ X. This forms the category δMtr = R+ Cat.

(All this leads to the important notion of Cauchy-completeness of en-
riched categories, see [Lw1].)
In the context of Directed Algebraic Topology, δMtr is studied in [G8]
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

as a category of ‘directed spaces’. The reversor R : δMtr → δMtr sends

the space X to the opposite δ-metric space R(X) = X op , with opposite
δ-metric, δ op (x, y) = δ(y, x).
The reader is invited to compute the category underlying a δ-metric
space X.

7.3.5 Internal categories

(a) Let us begin by remarking that a small category C can be described
as a diagram in Set having the form of a 3-truncated simplicial set (see
Section 5.3)

∂i ∂i
oo ∂i oo o
C0 / C1 o // C2 / C3 (7.50)
e0 ei
ei

Here C0 = ObC is the (small) set of objects of C, C1 = MorC is the set

of morphisms, C2 (resp. C3 ) is the set of consecutive pairs (resp. triples) of
morphisms.
The faces ∂i and the degeneracies ei are defined as follows (on an object
 7.3 Enriched, internal and ordered categories 267
X ∈ C0 , an arrow f ∈ C1 , a pair (f, g) ∈ C2 and a triple (f, g, h) ∈ C3 ):

e0 (X) = idX , ∂0 (f ) = Dom (f ), ∂1 (f ) = Cod (f ),

e0 (f ) = (f, 1), e1 (f ) = (1, f ).
∂0 (f, g) = f, ∂1 (f, g) = gf, ∂2 (f, g) = g,
e0 (f, g) = (f, g, 1), e1 (f, g) = (f, 1, g), e2 (f, g) = (1, f, g),
∂0 (f, g, h) = (f, g), ∂1 (f, g, h) = (f, hg), ∂2 (f, g, h) = (gf, h),
∂3 (f, g, h) = (g, h).

The simplicial identities hold, so that (7.50) is indeed a 3-truncated sim-

plicial set:

∂i ∂j = ∂j−1 ∂i for i < j, ej ei = ei ej−1 for i < j,

∂i ej = ej−1 ∂i for i < j, ∂i ej = ej ∂i−1 for i > j + 1, (7.51)
∂i ej = id for i = j, j + 1.

Finally, the following two squares are pullbacks (of sets)

∂0 ∂0
C2 / C1 C3 / C2
① ①
∂2 ∂1 ∂3 ∂2 (7.52)
   
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

C1 / C0 C2 / C1
∂0 ∂0

The morphism m = ∂1 : C2 → C1 is called the composition morphism of

C, or partial multiplication.
(b) Replacing Set with an arbitrary category X, an internal category C in X,
or a category object in C, consists of a diagram (7.50) in X where C0 = ObC
is called the object of objects of C, C1 = MorC is called the object of
morphisms and C2 is called the object of consecutive pairs of morphisms.
The following (redundant) axioms must be satisfied:
(i) the simplicial identities (7.51) hold, so that (7.50) is a 3-truncated
simplicial object in X,
(ii) the square diagrams of (7.52) are pullbacks in X.
(Note that the category X is not required to have all pullbacks: this
would exclude cases of interest.)
In a category with finite limits, an internal monoid with respect to the
cartesian product, as defined in 3.4.8, is the same as an internal category
where ObC is the terminal object.
(c) An internal functor F : C → D between internal categories in X is
 268 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
defined as a morphism of 3-simplicial objects. In other words we have four
arrows in X
Fi : Ci → Di (i = 0, ..., 3), (7.53)
that commute with faces and degeneracies. The components F2 , F3 are
determined by the pullback condition, so that for X = Set we simply have
F2 (f, g) = (F1 f, F1 g), F3 (f, g, h) = (F1 f, F1 g, F1 h).
The composition of internal functors is obvious.
(d) An internal transformation ϕ : F → G : C → D between internal func-
tors in X is given (or represented) by an X-morphism ϕ̂ satisfying the fol-
lowing conditions
ϕ̂ : C0 → D1 , ∂0 .ϕ̂ = F0 , ∂1 .ϕ̂ = G0 ,
(7.54)
m.hF1 , ϕ̂∂1 i = m.hϕ̂∂0 , G1 i.
For the last condition (of naturality), m = ∂1 : D2 → D1 is the partial
multiplication of D. The morphism hF1 , ϕ̂∂1 i : C1 → D2 with values in the
pullback D2 is well defined because
∂1 F1 = F0 ∂1 = ∂0 ϕ̂ ∂1 .
Similarly hϕ̂∂0 , G1 i : C1 → D2 is legitimate because
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

∂1 ϕ̂ ∂0 = G0 ∂0 = ∂0 G1 .
The interested reader can verify that there is a 2-category Cat(X) of in-
ternal categories, internal functors and internal transformations in X. The
vertical composition of internal transformations and their whisker compo-
sition with internal functors are defined as follows
(ψ.ϕ)ˆ = m.hϕ̂, ψ̂i : C0 → D1 , for ψ : G → H : C → D,
(7.55)
(M ϕL)ˆ = M1 .ϕ̂.L0 : C0′ → D1′ , for L : C′ → C, M : D → D.

7.3.6 Exercises and complements

(a) We have already seen that an internal category in Set is a small category.
(b) An internal category in Cat is a small double category, as defined in
7.2.1. Internal functors are the double functors; internal transformations
are the horizontal ones (or the vertical ones, according to the way we are
‘presenting’ the double category).
*(c) We say that a category C is internally ordered when the sets ObC and
MorC are equipped with consistent order relations (respected by domain,
 7.4 *Double categories of lattices in Homological Algebra 269
codomain, identity and composition). If C is small, this the same as an
internal category in Ord. (An internally ordered category with a discrete
order on the set of objects is the same as an ordered category in the present
enriched sense: see 1.8.2.)
This notion was extensively used by C. Ehresmann for his theory of
‘pseudogroups’ in Differential Geometry. But let us recall that an ‘ordered
category’ in the sense of Ehresmann is also assumed to satisfy the following
condition: the order induced on each hom-set C(X, Y ) is discrete (see [Eh4],
p. 711).
The main example of such a structure is the category Set ordered by
(weak) inclusion, of objects (X ⊂ X ′ ) and morphisms: the mapping f : X →
Y being included in f ′ : X ′ → Y ′ if

X ⊂ X ′, Y ⊂ Y ′, f (x) = f ′ (x) for x ∈ X.

(Indeed, if this holds with X = X ′ and Y = Y ′ , then f = f ′ ).

This example, as many others used by Ehresmann, rests heavily on set-
theory. One can replace this internally ordered category by the category
S of sets and partial mappings (see 1.8.6), ordered in the present sense,
where inclusion is only used between subsets of given sets.
Similarly, the ordered category C of partial continuous mappings de-
fined on open subspaces (introduced in 1.8.8) can be used in the theory
of topological manifolds, while its differential analogues can be used for
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

differentiable manifolds. The interested reader is referred to [G2].

7.4 *Double categories of lattices in Homological Algebra

Continuing Section 6.2, we show, in an informal way, how double categories
of lattices can be of help in Homological Algebra.
For the sake of simplicity, we still work in categories of modules, but
everything can be extended to Puppe-exact categories, which include the
abelian ones.

7.4.1 A double category of modular lattices

The transfer functor for subobjects of R Mod

SubR : R Mod → Mlc, (7.56)

has been introduced in 6.2.1, and shown to be exact in 6.2.6.

Now let F : R Mod → S Mod be an exact functor. We have seen (in
6.3.8) that it also preserves subobjects, their meets and joins. For every
 270 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
R-module A we have thus a homomorphism of lattices, which belongs to
the category Mlh of 1.2.6 (not to Mlc)
(SubF )A : SubR (A) → SubS (F A), X 7→ F (X). (7.57)
Furthermore F preserves direct and inverse images along morphisms: for
a homomorphism f : A → B in R Mod we have two commutative squares
(of increasing mappings)
(SubF )A
SubR (A) / SubS (A)
O✤ O✤
f∗
✤ f∗ F f∗
✤ F f∗ (7.58)
 ✤  ✤
SubR (B) / SubS (B)
(SubF )B

F (f∗ X) = (F f )∗ (F X),
F (f ∗ Y ) = (F f )∗ (F Y ),
because F preserves epi-mono factorisations and pullbacks). This diagram
is a cell in the double category Adj0 Ord of ordered sets, increasing map-
pings (as horizontal arrows), Galois connections (as vertical arrows) and
bicommutative cells, defined in 7.2.7.
To express this interaction between lattice-homomorphisms and modular
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

connections we shall use – more precisely – a double subcategory Mlhc ⊂

Adj0 Ord introduced below (in 7.4.2) and consisting of: modular lattices,
homomorphisms, modular connections and bicommutative cells.
The transfer functor (7.56) can then be seen as a vertical functor
SubR : R Mod → Mlhc, (7.59)
i.e. a double functor defined on the obvious ‘vertical’ double category
V(R Mod) of modules, identities and homomorphisms.
For every exact functor F : R Mod → S Mod we have a horizontal trans-
formation of vertical functors
SubF : SubR → SubS .F : R Mod → Mlhc, (7.60)
where the vertical functor SubS .F is – more precisely – the composite
SubS .VF : V(R Mod) → V(S Mod) → Mlhc.

7.4.2 Double categories of lattices

The double categories AdjOrd and Adj0 Ord introduced in 7.2.7 have double
subcategories that are of interest here.
 7.4 *Double categories of lattices in Homological Algebra 271
(a) First we have two cellwise-full double subcategories of AdjOrd:
- AdjLt, the double category of lattices, homomorphisms and adjunctions,
which amalgamates the category Lth of lattices and homomorphisms with
the category Ltc of lattices and Galois connections (see 6.4.5(c)),
- AdjMl ⊂ AdjLt, the double category of modular lattices, homomor-
phisms and modular connections, which amalgamates the category Mlh of
modular lattices and homomorphisms with the category Mlc of modular
lattices and modular connections.
Both have double cells as in (7.35)

f
X / X′ v• f 6 gu• ( in Ord),
u• •v
↓ (7.61)
 
/ Y′ • •
Y g
(⇔ f u 6 v g).

(b) But we are more interested in their double subcategories contained in

Adj0 Ord (see 7.2.7), namely

Lthc = Adj0 Lt ⊂ AdjLt,

(7.62)
Mlhc = Adj0 Ml ⊂ AdjMl.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

These have the same objects and arrows as in (a), but only bicommuta-
tive cells:

v• f = gu• , f u• = v • g. (7.63)

We have already seen above, in 7.4.1, that Mlhc comes out naturally when
we want to formalise direct and inverse images of subobjects for modules
(or abelian groups).
The double category Lthc plays a similar role in the much more general
context of ‘semiexact’ and ‘homological’ categories, as one can see in [G10].

7.4.3 Vertical limits and colimits for adjoints

It is interesting to note (or it may be, for some reader) that the kernels and
cokernels of Mlc = Ver0 Mlhc become vertical double (co)limits in Mlhc.
These vertical (co)limits also exist in Lthc = Adj0 Lt.
To begin with, the zero-object {∗} of the category Mlc (and Ltc) becomes
a vertical double limit and colimit in Mlhc (and Lthc), with uniquely de-
 272 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
termined bicommutative cells f →
· 1{∗} →
· f
f
X / X′
• •
t t t• (∗) = 1,
 
{∗} / {∗} (7.64)
• •
s s s• (∗) = 0.
 
X / X′
f

We have also seen that the kernel and cokernel of a covariant connection
u = (u• , u• ) : X →
· Y in the category Mlc (and Ltc), are computed as
follows
m : ↓ (u• 0) →
· X, m• (x) = x, m• (x) = x ∧ u• 0,
(7.65)
p: Y →
· ↑ (u• 1), p• (y) = y ∨ u• 1, p• (y) = y.
These become a vertical double kernel and a vertical double cokernel in
Mlhc (or Lthc). Indeed, given the central bicommutative cell a : (u fg v)
below (with gu• = v• f , f u• = v • g), the vertical kernels m = ker (u)
and n = ker (v) determine the upper bicommutative cell of the following
diagram, where the homomorphism f ′ is the restriction of f (and preserves
the new maxima because f (u• 0) = v • g(0) = v • (0))
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

f′
↓ (u• 0) / ↓ (v • 0)
• •
m n
 
X f / X′
u• •v
(7.66)
 
Y g / Y′
p• •q
 
↑ (u• 1) ′
/ ↑ (v• 1)
g

This cell is the kernel of a in Ver1 Mlhc (or Ver1 Lthc). Dually the cok-
ernel of a is the lower cell above, where p = cok (u), q = cok (v) and the
homomorphism g ′ is the restriction of g.
The double category Mlhc is vertically Puppe-exact, in an obvious sense:
(i) the category Ver0 Mlhc = Mlc is p-exact,
(ii) the category Ver1 Mlhc is p-exact ,
(iii) the faces and degeneracy functors between them are exact.
 7.5 *Double categories of relations in Homological Algebra 273
In fact we already know (i) and have now verified that Ver1 Mlhc has
kernels and cokernels, preserved by faces and degeneracy. Property (ii)
follows now easily: the induced (bicommutative) cell from Cok (ker (a)) to
Ker (cok (a)) is vertically invertible because its vertical arrows are.
Finally we recall that the category Ltc has a semiadditive structure, with
finite biproducts (see 6.4.5). These ‘limits-colimits’ become vertical biprod-
ucts in Lthc. (One can prove that the double category Lthc is vertically
homological, extending as above the notion of homological category defined
in [G10].)

7.5 *Double categories of relations in Homological Algebra

Double categories of relations are also of interest. In particular, an adjunc-
tion between abelian (or p-exact) categories has a natural extension to a
colax/lax adjunction between their double categories of relations.
Double adjunctions are studied in [GP2], where the interested reader
can find the complete definitions; the crucial point – as recalled in the
Introduction to this chapter – is that colax and lax double functors must be
kept ‘in separate directions’, say vertical and horizontal, because composing
them would destroy their comparisons.
E, E′ are always p-exact categories. This is the natural framework for
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

the present issues; but the reader can think of abelian categories, or even
of categories of modules.

7.5.1 Double categories of relations on p-exact categories

We have seen in 6.6.3 that the p-exact category E can be embedded in the
involutive ordered category Rel E of its relations, constructed by quaternary
factorisations.
Proceeding as in 7.2.7(a) for RelSet, we now form a flat double category
A = RelE with Hor0 A = E, Ver0 A = Rel E and double cells of the following
kind
f
A / B
u• 6
•v
gu 6 vf (⇔ f u♯ 6 v ♯ g). (7.67)
 
A′ g
/ B′

This amounts to a commutative diagram of E based on quaternary fac-

torisations, where the three dashed arrows are uniquely determined, by
 274 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
induction on subobjects and quotients

f
AO / B
O
m O O m′
• ❴ ❴ ❴/ •
p p′
 
•
OO
❴ ❴ ❴/ •
OO (7.68)
q ′
q
• ❴ ❴ ❴/ •
 
n n′
 
A′ g
/ B′

Equivalently, one can use a dual diagram for coquaternary factorisations.

An exact functor F : E → E′ can be uniquely extended to a double functor
Rel(F ) : RelE → RelE′ that preserves involution and order. But we are
interested in more general situations.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

7.5.2 Left exact functors

Let us take a left exact functor S : E → E′ , i.e. a functor which preserves

kernels (whence the zero-object, monomorphisms and their pullbacks).
Since the functor S preserves preimages of monomorphisms, which be-
come bicommutative squares in RelE′ (by 6.6.4), we can extend it to rela-
tions using – equivalently – the quaternary or coquaternary factorisation:

S ′ (nq ♯ pm♯ ) = S(n)(Sq)♯ (Sp)(Sm♯ ),

(7.69)
S ′ (q ′♯ n′ m′♯ p′ ) = (Sq ′ )♯ (Sn′ )(Sm′ )♯ (Sp′ ).

Note that S need not preserve epis, so that the right-hand parts of these
formulas are not (co)quaternary factorisations, generally.
We obtain thus a lax double functor S ′ = RelS : RelE → RelE′ (see 7.2.4).
The fact that S ′ preserves cells follows trivially from the fact that the cell
(7.67) amounts to a commutative diagram (7.68) in E, and factorises in
four cells of RelE, whose images are cells of RelE′ .
The comparison special cells for vertical composition S ′ v.S ′ u 6 S ′ (v.u)
 7.5 *Double categories of relations in Homological Algebra 275
are an easy consequence of the composition v.u as computed in (6.63)

m p q n
A b❉o o •
O
// •
O
oo •
O
/ / B
O
❉
❉
❉b O (z) O (y) O (x) Om
′

// oo r / /
• • • •
❋
❋
❋
❋ s′ (u) s (y ′ ) p′
❋" "   
• o o
c❋c r′ •
OO
/ / •
OO (7.70)
❋
❋
❋ (z ′ ) q′
❋
• / / •
#● 
●
● n′
●# 
C

Indeed the functor S preserves the pullbacks of monos (x), (z), (z ′ ), that
are bicommutative in the category of relations, and the commutative squares
(y), (y ′ ). Furthermore it carries the pushout (u) to a commutative square
of morphisms Ss′ .Sr = Sr′ .Ss in E′ ; this gives
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

(Ss)(Sr)♯ 6 (Sr′ )♯ (Ss),

in Rel E′ . It follows immediately that S ′ v.S ′ u 6 S ′ (v.u).

Again, a natural transformation ϕ : S → T : E → E′ of left exact functors
gives a horizontal transformation of lax double functors

Relϕ : RelS → RelT : RelE → RelE′ ,

with the same components as ϕ (the coherence with the comparison cells
of RelS and RelT is here automatic, since our double categories are flat).
Dually, a right exact functor S : E → E′ (which preserves cokernels) can
be extended to a colax double functor S ′ = RelS : RelE′ → RelE, by the
same definition as above, in (7.69).
Of course if S is exact we get the double functor already considered in
7.5.1.
 276 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
7.5.3 Adjoints between categories of relations
Let us start from an arbitrary adjunction F ⊣ G between p-exact categories
(or just categories of modules)

F : E → E′ , G : E′ → E,
η : 1 → GF : E → E, ε : F G → 1 : E′ → E′ , (7.71)
εF.F η = 1F , Gε.ηG = 1G .

F preserves the existing colimits and G the existing limits; we have thus
a colax and a lax extension, respectively

F ′ = RelF : RelE → RelE′ (colax),

(7.72)
G′ = RelG : RelE′ → RelE (lax).

We show now that they form a colax-lax adjunction of double categories

(as defined in [GP2], Section 3).
As remarked in the Introduction to this chapter, this is not a trivial ex-
tension: the composites G′ F ′ and F ′ G′ are neither lax nor colax, generally.
The extended adjunction consists of two double cells η, ε in a suitable
double category Dbl of double categories, with lax and colax double functors
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

as horizontal or vertical arrows, respectively

G′
RelE RelE RelE′ / RelE

F′ η ε F′ (7.73)
 
RelE′ / RelE RelE′ RelE
G′

that satisfy the triangle identities (here automatically, by flatness)

η⊗ε = 1F ′ , ε | η = 1•G′ .

The unit has components

ηA : A → GF A, ηu : u → G′ F ′ u,

where ηA is the original one while ηu is defined below, for every vertical
arrow u of RelE. Their coherence conditions (cf. [GP2], Section 2) are
based, separately, on the comparisons of F ′ and G′ (but here, again, they
hold automatically).
 7.5 *Double categories of relations in Homological Algebra 277
The double cell ηu of RelE is constructed as follows
ηA
A AO / GF A GF A
O
m O O GF m
• / •
p GF p
 
u = • / • 6 G′ F ′ u (7.74)
OO OO
q GF q
• / •
n
  GF n
   
B B / GF B GF B
ηB

The right-hand inequality comes from the colax-property of G′ and the

definition of F ′
(GF n)(GF q)♯ (GF p)(GF m♯ ) 6 G′ ((F n)(F q)♯ (F p)(F m♯ ))
(7.75)
= G′ F ′ u.
The components of the counit are defined dually.

7.5.4 The abelian case

Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

A left exact functor S between abelian categories preserves arbitrary pull-

backs; its extension S ′ = RelS can be equivalently computed over qua-
ternary factorisations, or coquaternary factorisations, or strong binary fac-
torisations, or arbitrary cobinary factorisations; again, we get a lax double
functor, as in the more general p-exact case considered above. Dually for
right exact functors.
As an example, starting from the following adjunction F ⊣ G of abelian
groups

F = −⊗A : Ab → Ab, G = Hom(A, −) : Ab → Ab, (7.76)

with A = Z/2, both the extended functors fail to be strict (because F and
G are not exact).
To show that the lax functor G′ = Rel(G) is not strict we take the
canonical projection p : Z → Z/2; then pp♯ = 1 : Z/2 → Z/2 but G(p) =
0 : 0 → Z/2, whence (Gp)(Gp)♯ 6= G′ (pp♯ ) = 1. This also shows that we
cannot compute G′ over the (non-strong) binary factorisation 1 = pp♯ .
Similarly, the colax extension F ′ = Rel(F ) is not strict. The monomor-
phism m = 2.− : Z → Z gives m♯ m = 1Z , but F (m) = 0 : Z/2 → Z/2,
whence (F m)♯ (F m) 6= F ′ (m♯ m) = 1.
 278 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
7.6 *Factorisation systems as pseudo algebras for 2-monads
Factorisation systems, both the general ones and the proper ones (see Sec-
tion 2.5), have an interesting, non obvious relationship with two-dimensional
monads and their pseudo algebras (or weak algebras).
We only give some hints to these notions and this relationship; the inter-
ested reader can see the papers cited below. General pseudo algebras can
be found in Street [St1].

7.6.1 A biuniversal property

The starting point is the fact that the category C2 , equipped with the fac-
torisation system (E, M ) introduced in 2.5.1(b), is the weakly free category
with factorisation system generated by C.
This means that, with respect to the diagonal embedding
ηC : C → C2 ,
(7.77)
ηC (X) = 1X , ηC (f : X → Y ) = (f, f ) : 1X → 1Y ,
every functor F : C → D with values in a category with an assigned fac-
torisation system (E ′ , M ′ ) can be extended to a functor G : C2 → D that
preserves the systems (i.e. G(E) ⊂ E ′ , G(M ) ⊂ M ′ ); the latter is deter-
mined up to a unique functorial isomorphism.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

More precisely, (C2 , ηC ) is a biuniversal arrow from C to the forgetful

2-functor fsCat → Cat, defined on the obvious 2-category of categories
equipped with a factorisation system (see 7.1.5).

7.6.2 A two-dimensional monad

We have seen, in 3.4.9, the structure of the arrow category 2 as an internal
comonoid in Cat
e d
1 o 2 / 2×2 d = (1, 1), (7.78)

with the diagonal d as comultiplication. By contravariant exponentials, the

category Cat inherits a monad, with unit ηC : C → C2 as above
P : Cat → Cat, P (C) = C2 ,
ηC : C → C2 , µC : C2×2 → C2 , (7.79)
µC (q : 2×2 → C) = qd : 2 → C.
The multiplication simply turns a commutative square q of C into its
diagonal qd.
 7.6 *Factorisation systems as pseudo algebras for 2-monads 279
(This monad is often called ‘the squaring monad’ on Cat, which is some-
what misleading: of course C2 is not the cartesian power C2 . A better name
might be ‘the path monad’, viewing 2 as the standard directed interval of
Cat, and C2 as the category of directed paths in C, as in [G8].)
(P, η, µ) is actually a 2-monad (as defined in 7.1.4) for the 2-category
structure of Cat, and allows us to consider its ‘pseudo algebras’ (satisfying
the axioms of algebras up to coherent invertible cells). It is known, since
some hints in Coppey [Cop] and a full proof in Korostenski–Tholen [KrT],
that the factorisation systems of C are in bijective correspondence with the
pseudo-isomorphism classes of unitary pseudo algebras of P.
The idea of the proof can be described as follows: a pseudo algebra
(C, F : C2 → C) assigns to each morphism f : X → Y an object F (f ) (to be
viewed as the image of f ), and the factorisation of ηC (f ) = (f, f ) : 1X → 1Y
in the factorisation system of C2 (see 2.5.1(b))

1 f
X / X / Y
1 f 1 (7.80)
  
X / Y / Y
f 1

yields a factorisation X → F (f ) → Y of f in C.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

7.6.3 The case of proper factorisation systems

Proper factorisation systems on C can also be viewed as pseudo algebras
for a 2-monad.
One starts from an interesting, unexpected quotient Fr(C) = C2 /R, in-
troduced by Freyd [Fr2] for a particular (and very interesting) goal: to
embed the stable homotopy category of spaces in an abelian category.
Namely, two parallel morphisms f = (f ′ , f ′′ ) : x → y and g = (g ′ , g ′′ ) :
x → y of C2 (i.e. commutative squares of C, written as in 2.5.1(b)) are
R-equivalent whenever their diagonals f , g coincide

vf ′ = f ′′ u = vg ′ = g ′′ u. (7.81)

This quotient was later studied by the present author, in a general con-
text, to study weak limits and proper factorisation systems [G4, G6].
The first paper shows that Fr(C) has an induced proper factorisation
system (easily described in the strict form of 2.5.3(f)), and is the weakly
free category with proper factorisation system generated by C. The second
studies the induced 2-monad on the 2-functor Fr : Cat → Cat, and proves
that there is a canonical bijection between proper factorisation systems
 280 Hints at higher dimensional category theory
in C and pseudo-isomorphism classes of unitary pseudo algebras of this
2-monad.
Similar, simpler relations hold in the strict case: strict factorisation sys-
tems are strictly monadic on Cat, as well as the proper strict factorisation
systems.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.
 References

[AHS] J. Adámek, H. Herrlich, G.E. Strecker, Abstract and concrete categories.

The joy of cats, John Wiley & Sons, New York 1990.
[AnF] F.W. Anderson, K.R. Fuller, Rings and categories of modules, Springer-
Verlag 1974.
[AT] H. Appelgate, M. Tierney, Categories with models, in: Seminar on triples
and categorical homology theory, Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 80, Springer-
Verlag 1969, pp. 156–244.
[BaL] J.C. Baez, A.D. Lauda, A prehistory of n-categorical physics, in
Deep Beauty: Mathematical Innovation and the Search for an Under-
lying Intelligibility of the Quantum World, ed. Hans Halvorson, Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge 2011, pp. 13–128. Available at:
https://arxiv.org/abs/0908.2469
[BaP] J.C. Baez, B.S. Pollard, A Compositional Framework for Reaction Net-
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

works, 2017. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.02051

[Bar] M. Barr, Exact categories, in Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 236, Springer-
Verlag 1971, pp. 1–120.
[BarB] M. Barr, J. Beck, Homology and standard constructions, in Seminar on
Triples and Categorical Homology Theory, Springer-Verlag 1969, pp. 245–
335.
[BarW] M. Barr, C. Wells, Category Theory for Computing Science, Prentice Hall,
New York 1990.
[BasE] A. Bastiani, C. Ehresmann, Multiple Functors I. Limits Relative to Double
Categories, Cahiers Top. Géom. Diff. 15 (1974), 215–292.
[BBP] M.A. Bednarczyk, A.M. Borzyszkowski, W. Pawlowski, Generalized
congruences-epimorphisms in Cat, Theory Appl. Categ. 5 (1999), No. 11,
266–280.
[Bc] J.M. Beck, Triples, algebras and cohomology, Repr. Theory Appl. Categ. 2
(2003).
[Be1] J. Bénabou, Catégories avec multiplication, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 256
(1963), 1887-1890.
[Be2] J. Bénabou, Introduction to bicategories, in: Reports of the Midwest Cat-
egory Seminar, Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 47, Springer-Verlag 1967, pp.
1–77.
[Be3] J. Bénabou, Les distributeurs, Inst. de Math. Pure et Appliquée, Université
Catholique de Louvain, Rapport n. 33, 1973.
[Bi] G. Birkhoff, Lattice theory, 3rd ed., Amer. Math. Soc. Coll. Publ. 25, Provi-
dence 1973.
 282 References
[BKPS] G.J. Bird, G.M. Kelly, A.J. Power, R.H. Street, Flexible limits for 2-
categories, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 61 (1989), 1–27.
[Bo1] F. Borceux, Handbook of categorical algebra 1, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge 1994.
[Bo2] F. Borceux, Handbook of categorical algebra 2, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge 1994.
[Bo3] F. Borceux, Handbook of categorical algebra 3, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge 1994.
[Bo4] F. Borceux, A survey of semi-abelian categories, in: Galois theory, Hopf
algebras, and semiabelian categories, Fields Inst. Commun. Vol. 43, Amer.
Math. Soc., Providence 2004, p. 27–60.
[BoB] F. Borceux, D. Bourn, Mal’cev, protomodular, homological and semi-
abelian categories, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 2004.
[BoJ] F. Borceux, G. Janelidze, Galois theories, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge 2001.
[Bor1] N. Bourbaki, Algèbre multilinéaire, Hermann, Paris 1948.
[Bor2] N. Bourbaki, Topologie Générale, Ch. X, Hermann, Paris 1961.
[Bor3] N. Bourbaki, Algèbre Linéaire, 3e édition, Hermann, Paris 1962.
[Bou1] D. Bourn, Normalization equivalence, kernel equivalence and affine cate-
gories, in: Category theory (Como, 1990), Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 1488,
Springer-Verlag 1991, pp. 43–62.
[Bou2] D. Bourn, Moore normalization and Dold–Kan theorem for semi-abelian
categories, in: Categories in algebra, geometry and mathematical physics,
105–124, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence 2007.
[Bra] H. Brandt, Über eine Verallgemeinerung des Gruppenbegriffes, Math. Ann.
96 (1927), 360–366.
[Bri] H.B. Brinkmann, Relations for exact categories, J. Algebra 13 (1969), 465–
480.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

[BriP] H.B. Brinkmann, D. Puppe, Abelsche und exacte Kategorien, Korrespon-

denzen, Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 96, Springer-Verlag 1969.
[Bro1] R. Brown, Elements of modern topology, McGraw–Hill, New York 1968.
[Bro2] R. Brown, Topology and groupoids, Third edition of Elements of modern
topology, BookSurge, LLC, Charleston SC 2006.
[BroH1] R. Brown, P.J. Higgins, On the algebra of cubes, J. Pure Appl. Algebra
21 (1981), 233–260.
[BroH2] R. Brown, P.J. Higgins, Tensor products and homotopies for w-groupoids
and crossed complexes, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 47 (1987), 1–33.
[BruMM] R. Bruni, J. Meseguer, U. Montanari, Symmetric monoidal and Carte-
sian double categories as a semantic framework for tile logic, Math. Struc-
tures Comput. Sci. 12 (2002), 53–90.
[Bu1] D.A. Buchsbaum, Exact categories and duality, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.
80 (1955), 1–34.
[Bu2] D.A. Buchsbaum, Appendix, in: H. Cartan, S. Eilenberg, Homological al-
gebra, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1956.
[BunGS] M.C. Bunge, F. Gago, A.M. San Luis, Synthetic Differential Topology,
to appear.
[CaG] A. Carboni, M. Grandis, Categories of projective spaces, J. Pure Appl.
Algebra 110 (1996) 241–258.
[CaJKP] A. Carboni, G. Janelidze, G.M. Kelly, R. Paré, On localization and
stabilization for factorization system, Appl. Categ. Structures 5 (1997), 1–
58.
[CE] H. Cartan, S. Eilenberg, Homological algebra, Princeton University Press,
 References 283
Princeton 1956.
[ClP] A.H. Clifford, G.B. Preston, The algebraic theory of semigroups, Vol. 1,
Math. Surveys of the Amer. Math. Soc. 7, Providence 1961.
[Coh] P.M. Cohn, Universal algebra, Harper & Row, New York 1965.
[Cop] L. Coppey, Algèbres de décompositions et précategories, Diagrammes 3
Suppl. (1980), 1–139.
[Cr] R.L. Crole, Categories for Types, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
1993.
[Da1] G. Darbo, Aspetti algebrico-categoriali della teoria dei dispositivi, in: Sym-
posia Mathematica, Vol. IV, INDAM, Roma 1968/69. Academic Press, Lon-
don 1970, pp. 303–336.
[Da2] G. Darbo, Un’algebra locale reticolata che interviene nella teoria dei sistemi,
Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Padova 60 (1978), 115–139.
[Dg] J. Dugundij, Topology, Allyn & Bacon, Boston 1966.
[Ds] J. Duskin, Variations on Beck’s tripleability criterion, Lecture Notes in Math.
Vol. 106, Springer-Verlag 1969, pp. 74–129.
[EE] A. Ehresmann, C. Ehresmann, Multiple functors II. The monoidal closed
category of multiple categories, Cahiers Top. Géom. Diff. 19 (1978), 295–
333.
[Eh1] C. Ehresmann, Catégories des foncteurs types, Rev. Un. Mat. Argentina 20
(1962), 194–209.
[Eh2] C. Ehresmann, Catégories structurées, Ann. Sci. Ecole Norm. Sup. 80
(1963), 349–425.
[Eh3] C. Ehresmann, Catégories et structures, Dunod, Paris 1965.
[Eh4] C. Ehresmann, Oeuvres complètes et commentées, Partie II.2, Editée et
commentée par Andrée C. Ehresmann, Amiens 1982.
[EiM] S. Eilenberg, S. Mac Lane, General theory of natural equivalences, Trans.
Amer. Math. Soc. 58 (1945), 231294.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

[EiK] S. Eilenberg, G.M. Kelly, Closed categories, in Proc. Conf. Categorical Al-
gebra, La Jolla 1965, Springer-Verlag 1966, pp. 421–562.
[EiS] S. Eilenberg, N. Steenrod, Foundations of algebraic topology, Princeton Uni-
versity Press, Princeton 1952.
[FGR1] L. Fajstrup, E. Goubault, M. Raussen, Detecting deadlocks in concurrent
systems, in: CONCUR’98 (Nice), 332–347, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci.,
1466, Springer-Verlag 1998.
[FGR2] L. Fajstrup, E. Goubault, M. Raussen, Algebraic topology and con-
currency, Theor. Comput. Sci. 357 (2006), 241–178. (Revised version of a
preprint at Aalborg, 1999.)
[Fo] B. Fong, The Algebra of Open and Interconnected Systems, Ph.D. thesis,
Department of Computer Science, University of Oxford, 2016.
[Fr1] P. Freyd, Abelian categories, An introduction to the theory of functors,
Harper & Row, New York 1964. Republished in: Reprints Theory Appl.
Categ. 3 (2003).
[Fr2] P. Freyd, Stable homotopy, in: Proc. Conf. Categ. Algebra, La Jolla, 1965,
Springer-Verlag 1966, pp. 121–176.
[Fr3] P. Freyd, On the concreteness of certain categories, in: Symposia Mathe-
matica, Vol. IV, INDAM, Roma 1968/69. Academic Press, London 1970,
pp. 431–456.
[Fr4] P. Freyd, Homotopy is not concrete, in: The Steenrod algebra and its ap-
plications, Battelle Memorial Inst., Columbus, OH, 1970, Lecture Notes in
Math. Vol. 168, Springer-Verlag 1970, pp. 25–34.
[FrK] P. Freyd, G.M. Kelly, Categories of continuous functors, J. Pure Appl. Al-
gebra 2 (1972), 1–18.
 284 References
[FrS] P.J. Freyd, A. Scedrov, Categories, allegories, North-Holland Publ. Co., Am-
sterdam 1990.
[Ga] R. Garner, A homotopy-theoretic universal property of Leinster’s operad for
weak w-categories, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 147 (2009), 615–628.
[G1] M. Grandis, Transfer functors and projective spaces, Math. Nachr. 118
(1984), 147–165.
[G2] M. Grandis, Cohesive categories and manifolds, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 157
(1990), 199–244.
[G3] M. Grandis, Cubical monads and their symmetries, in: Proceedings of the
Eleventh International Conference on Topology, Trieste 1993, Rend. Ist. Mat.
Univ. Trieste 25 (1993), 223–262.
[G4] M. Grandis, Weak subobjects and the epi-monic completion of a category, J.
Pure Appl. Algebra 154 (2000), 193–212.
[G5] M. Grandis, Finite sets and symmetric simplicial sets, Theory Appl. Categ.
8 (2001), No. 8, 244–252.
[G6] M. Grandis, On the monad of proper factorisation systems in categories, J.
Pure Appl. Algebra 171 (2002) 17–26.
[G7] M. Grandis, The role of symmetries in cubical sets and cubical categories
(On weak cubical categories, I), Cah. Topol. Géom. Différ. Catég. 50 (2009),
102–143.
[G8] M. Grandis, Directed Algebraic Topology, Models of non-reversible
worlds, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2009. Available at:
http://www.dima.unige.it/∼ grandis/BkDAT− page.html
[G9] M. Grandis, Homological Algebra, The interplay of homology with distribu-
tive lattices and orthodox semigroups, World Scientific Publishing Co., Hack-
ensack NJ 2012.
[G10] M. Grandis, Homological Algebra in strongly non-abelian settings, World
Scientific Publishing Co., Hackensack NJ 2013.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

[GM] M. Grandis, L. Mauri, Cubical sets and their site, Theory Appl. Categ. 11
(2003), No. 8, 185–211.
[GP1] M. Grandis, R. Paré, Limits in double categories, Cah. Topol. Géom. Différ.
Catég. 40 (1999), 162–220.
[GP2] M. Grandis, R. Paré, Adjoint for double categories, Cah. Topol. Géom.
Différ. Catég. 45 (2004), 193–240.
[GP3] M. Grandis, R. Paré, Kan extensions in double categories (On weak double
categories, III), Theory Appl. Categ. 20 (2008), No. 8, 152–185.
[GP4] M. Grandis, R. Paré, Lax Kan extensions for double categories (On weak
double categories, Part IV), Cah. Topol. Géom. Différ. Catég. 48 (2007),
163–199.
[GT] M. Grandis, W. Tholen, Natural weak factorisation systems, Archivum
Mathematicum (Brno) 42 (2006), 397–408.
[Gr1] G. Grätzer, Universal algebra, Van Nostrand Co., Princeton 1968.
[Gr2] G. Grätzer, General lattice theory, Academic Press, New York 1978.
[Gra] J.W. Gray, The existence and construction of lax limits, Cah. Topol. Géom.
Différ. 21 (1980), 277–304.
[Grt] P.A. Grillet, Exact categories and categories of sheaves, in Lecture Notes in
Math. Vol. 236, Springer-Verlag 1971, pp. 121222.
[Gt] A. Grothendieck, Sur quelques points d’algèbre homologique, Tôhoku Math.
J. 9 (1957), 119– 221.
[Ha] A. Hatcher, Algebraic topology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
2002.
Available at: https://www.math.cornell.edu/∼ hatcher/AT/ATpage.html
 References 285
[HeS] H. Herrlich, G.E. Strecker, Category theory, an introduction, Allyn and
Bacon, Boston 1973.
[Hi] P.J. Hilton, Correspondences and exact squares, in: Proc. of the Conf. on
Categorical Algebra, La Jolla 1965, Springer-Verlag 1966, 255–271.
[HiW] P.J. Hilton, S. Wylie, Homology theory: An introduction to algebraic topol-
ogy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1960.
[Ho] J.M. Howie, An introduction to semigroup theory, Academic Press, London
1976.
[In] H. Inassaridze, Non-abelian homological algebra and its applications, Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 1997.
[JaMT] G. Janelidze, L. Márki, W. Tholen, Semi-abelian categories, in: Category
theory 1999 (Coimbra), J. Pure Appl. Algebra 168 (2002), 367–386.
[Je] T. Jech, Set theory, Academic Press, New York 1978.
[Jo1] P.T. Johnstone, The point of pointless topology, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 8
(1983), 4153.
[Jo2] P.T. Johnstone, The art of pointless thinking: a student’s guide to the cat-
egory of locales, in: Category theory at work (Bremen, 1990) Heldermann,
Berlin 1991, pp. 85–107.
[Jo3] P.T. Johnstone, Sketches of an elephant: a topos theory compendium, Vol.
1, Oxford University Press, New York 2002.
[Jo4] P.T. Johnstone, Sketches of an elephant: a topos theory compendium, Vol.
2, Oxford University Press, New York 2002.
[K1] D.M. Kan, Abstract homotopy I, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 41 (1955),
1092–1096.
[K2] D.M. Kan, Adjoint functors, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 87 (1958), 294–329.
[Ke] J.L. Kelley, General topology, Van Nostrand, New York 1955.
[Kl1] G.M. Kelly, On Mac Lane’s conditions for coherence of natural associativi-
ties, commutativities, etc., J. Algebra 1 (1964), 397–402.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

[Kl2] G.M. Kelly, Basic concepts of enriched category theory, Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, Cambridge 1982.
[Kl3] G.M. Kelly, Elementary observations on 2-categorical limits, Bull. Austral.
Math. Soc. 39 (1989), 301–317.
[KlS] G.M. Kelly, R. Street, Review of the elements of 2-categories, in: Category
Seminar, Sydney 1972/73, Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 420, Springer-Verlag
1974, pp. 75–103.
[Ko] A. Kock, Synthetic differential geometry, Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge 1981.
[KrT] M. Korostenski, W. Tholen, Factorization systems as Eilenberg–Moore al-
gebras, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 85 (1993), 57–72.
[LaS] J. Lambek, P.J. Scott, Introduction to higher order categorical logic, Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge 1986.
[Law] M.V. Lawson, Inverse semigroups, The theory of partial symmetries, World
Scientific Publishing Co., River Edge 1998.
[Lw1] F.W. Lawvere, Metric spaces, generalized logic and closed categories, Rend.
Sem. Mat. Fis. Univ. Milano 43 (1974), 135–166. Republished in: Reprints
Theory Appl. Categ. 1 (2002).
[Lw2] F.W. Lawvere, Functorial semantics of algebraic theories and some algebraic
problems in the context of functorial semantics of algebraic theories, Repr.
Theory Appl. Categ. 5 (2004).
[LwR] F.W. Lawvere, R. Rosebrugh, Sets for mathematics, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge 2003.
[LwS] F.W. Lawvere, S.H. Schanuel, Conceptual mathematics. A first introduction
to categories. Second edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2009.
 286 References
[Le] T. Leinster, Higher operads, higher categories, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge 2004.
[M1] S. Mac Lane, An algebra of additive relations, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA
47 (1961), 1043–1051.
[M2] S. Mac Lane, Homology, Springer-Verlag 1963.
[M3] S. Mac Lane, Natural associativity and commutativity, Rice University Stud-
ies 49 (1963), 28–46.
[M4] S. Mac Lane, Categories for the working mathematician, Springer-Verlag
1971.
[MaM] S. Mac Lane, I. Moerdijk, Sheaves in geometry and logic. A first introduc-
tion to topos theory, Springer-Verlag 1994.
[MaP] S. Mac Lane, R. Paré, Coherence for bicategories and indexed categories,
J. Pure Appl. Algebra 37 (1985), 59–80.
[MkR] M. Makkai, G.E. Reyes, First order categorical logic. Model-theoretical
methods in the theory of topoi and related categories, Lecture Notes in
Math. Vol. 611, Springer-Verlag 1977.
[Mas] W.S. Massey, Singular homology theory, Springer-Verlag 1980.
[Mat] M. Mather, Pull-backs in homotopy theory, Can. J. Math. 28 (1976), 225–
263.
[Me] J. Meisen, Relations in regular categories, in: Localization in group theory
and homotopy theory and related topics, Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 418,
Springer-Verlag 1974, pp. 96–102.
[Mic] E. Michael, Local compactness and Cartesian products of quotient maps
and k-spaces, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 18 (1968), 281–286.
[Mit] B. Mitchell, Theory of categories, Academic Press, New York 1965.
[Mo] K. Morita, Duality for modules and its applications to the theory of rings
with minimum condition, Sci. Rep. Tokyo Kyoiku Daigaku, Sect. A 6 (1958),
83–142.
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

[Pa] R. Paré, Simply connected limits, Canad. J. Math. 42 (1990), 731–746.

[Pu] D. Puppe, Korrespondenzen in abelschen Kategorien, Math. Ann. 148 (1962),
1–30.
[Qu] D. Quillen, Higher algebraic K-theory, I, in: Lecture Notes in Math. Vol.
341, Springer-Verlag, pp. 85–147.
[Se] Z. Semadeni, Banach spaces of continuous functions, Polish Sci. Publ.,
Warszawa 1971.
[St1] R. Street, Fibrations and Yoneda’s lemma in a 2-category, in: G.M. Kelly
Ed., Category Seminar, Sydney 1972/73, Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 420,
Springer-Verlag 1974, pp. 104–133.
[St2] R. Street, Limits indexed by category-valued 2-functors, J. Pure Appl. Alg.
8 (1976), 149–181.
[St3] R. Street, Cosmoi of internal categories, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 258 (1980),
271–318.
[T1] M.S. Tsalenko, Correspondences over a quasi exact category, Dokl. Akad.
Nauk SSSR 155 (1964), 292–294.
[T2] M.S. Tsalenko, Correspondences over a quasi exact category, Mat. Sbornik
73 (1967), 564–584.
[Vi] J.W. Vick, Homology theory. An introduction to algebraic topology. Second
edition, Springer-Verlag 1994.
 Index

∼
= , relation of isomorphism, 14 AdjCat, a double category, 260
≃, equivalence of categories, 37 adjoint equivalence, 36, 106
≃, relation of homotopy, 29, 185 Adjoint Functor Theorem, 129
⊣ , relation of adjunction, 46 AdjOrd, category of ordered sets
⊤, terminal object, 62 and Galois connections, 47
⊥, initial object, 65 AdjOrd, a double category, 260
⊥, orthogonality relation, 81 adjunctions, 105
2-adjunction, 251 and comma categories, 118
2-category, 249 and Kan extensions, 106
locally ordered –, 167 and limits, 111
2-functor, 250 between ordered sets, 46
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

2-monad, 251, 279 in a 2-category, 249

2-natural transformation, 251 affine algebraic set, 52
2-universal arrow, 251 Alexandrov space, 176
RAlg, category of R-algebras, 11
0, the empty category, 18 Alg(Ω), for a signature, 157
1, the singleton category, 18 Alg(T ), for a monad, 134, 143
2, the arrow category, 18 algebra for a monad, 134
free –, 135
Ab, category of abelian groups, 11 idempotent case, 142
abelian category, 219, 229 amnestic functor, 28
abelianised group, 97 annihilator of a relation, 238
Abm, category of abelian monoids,
11 Ban and Ban1 , categories of Ba-
absolute limit, 98 nach spaces, 11
additive category, 67, 228 forgetful functors of –, 43
additive functor, 227 limits and colimits in –, 72
AdjCat, category of adjunctions, mono and epi in –, 25
110 monoidal closed structures, 127
as a 2-category, 253 Barr-exact category, 156, 218
 288 Index
bicategory, 250 cocubical relations, 197
as a weak double category, 258 cocylinder, see path
locally preordered, 170 coend, 101
bicommutative square, 79 coequalisers, 66
biproduct, 67 coherence axioms of weak double
as left and right adjoint, 114 categories, 256
in abelian categories, 230 coherence theorem, 32
in pointed categories, 225 of Homological Algebra, 245
Birkhoff Theorem on varieties, 162 coherent system of isomorphisms,
biuniversal arrow, 251 32
boolean algebra, 20 cokernel, 210
as a left adjoint, 211
canonical factorisation cokernel pair, 77
in a p-exact category, 218 colax, see lax
in a regular category, 154 colax-lax adjunction, 276
of a modular connection, 216 colimits, see limits
canonical isomorphism between sub- comma category, 115
quotients, 243 commutative diagram, 3
cardinal sets, 130 formal definition, 32
cartesian monoidal category, 121 commutator, 97
closed, 125 comonad, 139
Cat, a category of categories, 27 compact-open topology, 173
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

as a 2-category, 249 compactly generated space, 91

Cat, a weak double category, 261 comparison functor of an adjunc-
category, 12 tion, 135
category of functors, 41 complete category, 69
Ch+ (Ab), a category of chain com- complete lattice, 20, 71
plexes, 194 complete metric space, 178
chain complex, 194 concatenation of
chain of adjunctions, 114 homotopies, 183
chain of Galois connections, 49 paths, 181
CmpHsd, category of compact Haus- the path functor, 185
dorff spaces, 179 concatenation pushout of
co- terms for the cylinder of spaces, 183
categories, 13 the directed interval, 204
two-dimensional categories, 258 the standard interval, 182
Coalg(T ), 146 concrete category, 31
coalgebra for a comonad, 139 cone for a functor, 68
cocomplete category, 70 cone functors of
cocone functor of pointed spaces, pointed spaces, 187
188 topological spaces, 186
 Index 289
congruence (for a variety), 161 Dlh, category of distributive lat-
congruence of categories, 29 tices and homomorphisms, 21
connected category, 107 δMtr, a category of generalised met-
connections of ric spaces, 266
the cylinder functor, 183 double category, 254
the path functor, 185 weak, 256
the standard interval, 182 dual module, 126
coproducts, see sums duality
corelations of sets, 58, 241 categorical –, 12, 219
cosimplicial relations, 191 in double categories, 258
Cosp(C), a weak double category, kernel –, 219
259
Cosp(C), a bicategory, 260 Eilenberg–Moore algebra, see al-
counit, see unit gebra for a monad
enriched category, 262
creating limits, 73
the ‘naive view’, 265
CRng, category of commutative
enriched functor, 264
rings, 11
enriched transformation, 264
Cub(C), a category, 199
epimorphism, or epi, 22
cubical object and relations, 199
equalisers, 63
cubical site, 197
equivalence of categories, 36
extended, 201
equivalence relation in an object,
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

cylinder functor of
156
directed spaces, 204
esMtr, esMtr1 , categories of extended
pointed spaces, 187
semimetric spaces, 178
topological spaces, 182
essentially surjective, 37
exact functor, 221
definition of a relation, 238 between abelian categories, 230
degeneracy, see faces exact sequence, 221
∆, category of finite positive or- exact square, 80, 231
dinals, 190 in a p-exact category, 241
∆n , standard simplex, 192 exponentiable
derived operator, operation, 158 object, 124
diagonal functor, 96 preordered space, 203
diagram in a category, 3, 32 topological space, 173
distributive exponential
expansion, 221, 245 of categories, 41
lattice, 20 of projective spaces, 237
p-exact category, 220 of sets, 123
Dlc, a category of distributive lat-
tices, 214 faces of
 290 Index
a simplicial object, 191 covariant, 35
the cubical site, 197 functorial isomorphism, 36
the cylinder functor, 183 fundamental category, 205
the directed cylinder, 205 fundamental group, groupoid, 189
the directed interval, 204
the directed path functor, 205 Galois connection, 46
the path functor, 184 contravariant, 51
the simplicial site, 190 of an orthogonality relation, 52
as adjoints, 193 on the integral line, 49
the standard interval, 181 on the real line, 51
factorisation system, 85 geometric realisation
in a regular category, 155 of a cubical set, 200
in a variety of algebras, 161 of a simplicial set, 193
natural weak –, 89 Gp, category of groups, 11, 131
strict –, 88 Gpd, category of groupoids, 189
faithful functor, 30 Gph, category of small graphs, 140
filtered graph (directed multigraph), 13
category, 92 graph of a Galois connection, 49
colimit, 92 graph of an adjunction, 118
set, 89 gRng, category of ‘general rings’,
flat double category, 255 116
Fld, category of fields, 159 group (co)homology, 195
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

forgetful functor, 28 groupoid, 14

frame, 179 GSet, category of G-sets, 42
free
abelian monoid, 150 hom functor, 30
algebra (for a variety), 163 internal, 124
commutative R-algebra, 152 homological category, 212
commutative ring, 152 homotopy
group, 131, 151 invariant functor, 186
module, 96 of continuous mappings, 182
monoid, 97 of directed maps, 205
ring, 153 of pointed maps, 187
free object, 96, 150 pullback, 69, 119
full functor, 30 horizontal transformation, 258
functor, 26 hoTop, homotopy category of spaces,
as a diagram, 32 29, 31, 185
contravariant, 27 Hsd, category of Hausdorff spaces,
in two variables, 30 11
functor of subsets as reflective in Top, 174
contravariant, 31 colimits in –, 175
 Index 291
epimorphisms in –, 78 jointly mono or epi, 22

I, the cubical site, 197 Kan extension, 100

I, the standard interval, 172 kernel, 209
I, category of sets and partial bi- as a right adjoint, 211
jections, 57 kernel pair, 77
as a p-exact category, 220 Kleisli algebra for a monad, 138
↑ I, standard directed interval, 203
large category, 13
idempotent
lattice, 19
adjunction, 141
as an algebra, 19
comonad, 145
quasi lattice, 19
completion of a category, 99
lax (double) functor, 257
monad, 141
left exact functors, 274
image
limits, 68
in a p-exact category, 223
and comma categories, 118
of a submodule, 212 as adjoint functors, 112
of a subset, 48 as Kan extensions, 101
indeterminacy of a relation, 238 as universal arrows, 96
index notation for a functor, 32 of algebras for a monad, 137
induced relation, 243 Lipschitz mapping, 177
inductive limit (a colimit), 89 Loc, category of locales, 179
initial object, 65
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

loop functor of pointed spaces, 188

Initial Object Theorem, 128 Ltc, a category of lattices, 228
interchange Lth, a category of lattices, 19
in a 2-category, 249
in a double category, 255 mates (for adjunctions), 252
of natural transformations, 36 meet (in an ordered set), 19
internal metric space, 177
category, 266 generalised –, 178, 265
functor, 267 Mlc, a category of modular lat-
hom functor, 124 tices, 213
interval, 181 Mlh, category of modular lattices
monoid or comonoid, 127 and homomorphisms, 21
transformation, 268 Mlhc, a double category, 271
involution, 53 R Mod, category of left modules,
involutive category, 53 11
isomorphism, 14 modular connection, 213
of categories, 27 modular lattice, 21
of functors, 36 Mon, category of monoids, 11
monad, 133
join (in an ordered set), 19 in a 2-category, 249
 292 Index
on an ordered set, 133 path endofunctor of
monadic functor, or category, 136 directed spaces, 205
weakly –, 136 pointed spaces, 188
monadicity theorem, 136 topological spaces, 184
monoid as a category, 17 po(C), a preordered set, 29
monoidal category, 120 pointed category, 67, 209
as a bicategory, 250 pointless topology, 178
closed, 125 pOrd, category of preordered sets,
of endofunctors, 123 11, 17, 176
symmetric, 121 as coreflective in Top, 176
monomorphism, or mono, 14 preadditive category, 225
Mor, set of morphisms, 12 preordered set, 17
Mor, hom functor, 30 as a category, 18
Morita equivalence, 37 preordered topological space, 203
Mtr and Mtr1 , categories of met- preserving limits, 70, 111
ric spaces, 177 preserving monos, 44, 78, 97, 111
presheaf, 42
N-linear category, 225
K Prj, category of projective spaces,
natural isomorphism, 36
234
natural transformation, 34
product of categories, 29
normal epi, 210
products in a category, 62
normal mono, 209
projective
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

null morphisms, 211

functor, 224
Ob, set of objects, 12 linear mapping, 235
(−)op , opposite category, 12 p-exact category, 232
op- and co- terms, 258 spaces, 234
operator (of algebras), 157 pseudo (double) functor, 258
Ord, category of ordered sets, 11, pTop, category of preordered topo-
17 logical spaces, 203
as coreflective in T0 Top, 176 pullbacks, 75
colimits in –, 111 in abelian categories, 230
ordered category, 54 Puppe-exact category, 218
internally –, 268 pushouts, 76
ordered set, 17 in abelian categories, 230
orthogonal morphisms, 81
quasi-null family, 65
p-exact, see Puppe-exact Quillen-exact category, 218
partial bijection of sets, 57 Quo, ordered set of quotients, 81
partial mapping of sets, 56 quotient (for a variety), 161
path, 181 quotient category, 29
directed, 203 quotient in a category, 81
 Index 293
reflection of of directed spaces, 205
the directed cylinder, 205 Rng, category of rings, 11
the directed interval, 204
the directed path functor, 205 Sn , the standard n-sphere, 172
reflection properties, 30 S, category of sets and partial map-
reflective subcategory, 113 pings, 56
regular limits and colimits in –, 71
category, 154 monoidal closed structure, 126
epimorphism, 66 section, 22
monomorphism, 63 semiadditive category, 227
quotient, subobject, 82 sesquicategory, 248
regular involution, 54 Set, category of sets, 10
Rel Set, a category of relations, 54 Set• , category of pointed sets, 11
as a Kleisli category, 140 signature (of algebras), 157
as a semiadditive category, 229 simplicial object, 190
biproducts in –, 72 simplicial relations, 192
monoidal closed structure, 127 singular
the cartesian form, 166 cubical set of a space, 200
the jointly-monic form, 170 simplicial set of a space, 192
Rel (−) singular homology of a space
on Ab and Gp, 56 cubical construction, 201
on R Mod, 238 simplicial construction, 194
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

on a p-exact category, 240 skeleton of a category, 37

on a regular category, 168 slice category, 116
on an abelian category, 242 small category, 13
on exact functors, 242 small hom-sets, 13
on natural transformations, 242 SmpSet, category of simplicial sets,
Rel(−), a double category 190
on Set, 260 Solution Set, 128, 129
on a p-exact category, 273 Span(C), a weak double category,
on a regular category, 260 258
rEpi, set of regular epis, 88 Span(C), a bicategory, 260
representable functor, 43 specialisation preorder, 176
by a free object, 97 split mono or epi, 22
retraction, retract, 22 splitting of idempotents, 99
reversion of as left and right adjoint, 115
the cylinder functor, 183 standard construction, see comonad
the path functor, 184 standard interval, 172
the standard interval, 181 directed, 203
reversor standard simplex, 192
in a category, 53 Stone-Čech compactification, 179
 294 Index
strong epi, mono, 82 triple, see monad
strong quotient, subobject, 82 triple cohomology, 195
Sub, ordered set of subobjects, 81 trivial varieties, 160, 163
Sub, transfer functor, 224
unit
Sub(Z), a lattice of subgroups, 21
of a monad, 133
subalgebra (for a variety), 160
of an adjunction, 105
subcategory, 27
unit constraint, 84
subobject in a category, 81
universal arrows, 95
subquotient, 224
and comma categories, 118
as a monorelation, 239
composition of –, 98
sums in a category, 64
universe, 13, 16
suspension of
pointed spaces, 187 values of a relation, 238
topological spaces, 187 variety of algebras, 16, 159
symmetric simplicial site, 194 and Barr-exactness, 164
and monadicity, 165
T0 Top, category of T0 -spaces, 175 K Vct, category of vector spaces,
tAb, category of torsion abelian 11
groups, 113 vertical composition
tensor product of homotopies, 183
in S, 123 of natural transformations, 35
of modules, 122 vertical involution, 261
Copyright © 2018. World Scientific Publishing Co Pte Ltd. All rights reserved.

of pointed sets or spaces, 122 VSlt, category of upper-complete

of projective spaces, 237 semilattices, 140
terminal object, 62
tfAb, category of torsion-free abel- weak contraction, 177
ian groups, 113 weak limits or colimits, 68, 69
Top, category of topological spaces, weak pullback, 69, 80
11 well powered, 219
Top2 , a category of pairs, 211 whisker composition
Top• , category of pointed spaces, in a sesquicategory, 248
11 of homotopies, 185
topology and ordering, 176 of natural transformations, 35
transfer functor Yoneda embedding, 42
for submodules, 213 Yoneda Lemma, 44
for subsets, 48
of a p-exact category, 224 Z-linear category, see preadditive
transposition of zero
the cylinder functor, 183 morphism, 209
the path functor, 185 object, 67
the standard interval, 182 subobject and quotient, 209