Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T14:40:34.915Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cyclic multicategories, multivariable adjunctions and mates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2014

Eugenia Cheng ,
Nick Gurski  and
Emily Riehl
Get access

Abstract

A multivariable adjunction is the generalisation of the notion of a 2-variable adjunction, the classical example being the hom/tensor/cotensor trio of functors, to n + 1 functors of n variables. In the presence of multivariable adjunctions, natural transformations between certain composites built from multivariable functors have “dual” forms. We refer to corresponding natural transformations as multivariable or parametrised mates, generalising the mates correspondence for ordinary adjunctions, which enables one to pass between natural transformations involving left adjoints to those involving right adjoints. A central problem is how to express the naturality (or functoriality) of the parametrised mates, giving a precise characterization of the dualities so-encoded.

We present the notion of “cyclic double multicategory” as a structure in which to organise multivariable adjunctions and mates. While the standard mates correspondence is described using an isomorphism of double categories, the multivariable version requires the framework of “double multicategories”. Moreover, we show that the analogous isomorphisms of double multicategories give a cyclic action on the multimaps, yielding the notion of “cyclic double multicategory”. The work is motivated by and applied to Riehl's approach to algebraic monoidal model categories.

Keywords

Adjunctionsmatesmulticategories18A4018D99
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of K-Theory , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , April 2014 , pp. 337 - 396
Copyright
Copyright © ISOPP 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Batanin, M.A. and Berger, C.. The lattice path operad and Hochschild cochains, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Cruttwell, G.S.H. and Shulman, Michael A.. A unified framework for generalized multicategories. Theory Appl. Categ. 24 (2010), 580–655.Google Scholar
3.Eilenberg, S. and Kelly, G. M. Closed categories. 1966 Proc. Conf. Categorical Algebra (La Jolla, Calif., 1965), 421–562.Google Scholar
4.Garner, Richard. Understanding the small object argument. Applied Categorical Structures 17(3) (2009), 247–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Getzler, E. and Kapranov, M. M.. Cyclic operads and cyclic homology. In “Geometry, Topology and Physics”, pages 167–201. International Press, 1995.Google Scholar
6.Goerss, Paul G. and Jardine, John F.. Simplicial homotopy theory, Progress in Mathematics 174, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Grandis, Marco and Tholen, Walter. Natural weak factorization systems. Archivum Mathematicum 42(4) (2006), 397–408.Google Scholar
8.Guillou, Bertrand and May, J. P.. Enriched model categories and presheaf categories. E-print, arXiv:1110.3567 [math.AT].Google Scholar
9.Guillou, Bertrand and May, J. P.. Enriched model categories in equivariant contexts. E-print, arXiv:1307.4488 [math.AT].Google Scholar
10.Guillou, Bertrand and May, J. P.. Models of G-spectra as presheaves of spectra. E-print, arXiv:1110.3571 [math.AT].Google Scholar
11.Hahn, Jeremy. In preparation, 2013.Google Scholar
12.Hovey, M.. Model Categories. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, 1999.Google Scholar
13.Joyal, André and Kock, Joachim. Feynman graphs, and nerve theorem for compact symmetric multicategories (extended abstract). Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science 270 (2011), 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Kapranov, M. M. and Voevodsky, V. A.. 2-categories and Zamolodchikov tetrahedra equations. In Algebraic groups and their generalizations: quantum and infinite-dimensional methods (University Park, PA, 1991), Proc. Sympos. Pure Math. 56, pages 177–259. Amer. Math. Soc., 1994.Google Scholar
15.Kelly, G.M.. Basic Concepts of Enriched Category Theory. Reprints in Theory Appl. Categ. 10 (2005), 1–136.Google Scholar
16.Kelly, G. M. and Lane, S. Mac. Coherence in closed categories. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 1(1) (1971), 97–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Kelly, G. M. and Street, Ross. Review of the elements of 2-categories. In Category Seminar, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics 420, pages 75–103, 1974.Google Scholar
18.Lack, Stephen. A Quillen model structure for 2-categories. K-Theory 26(2) (2002), 171–205.Google Scholar
19.Lack, Stephen. A Quillen model structure for bicategories. K-Theory 33(3) (2004), 185–197.Google Scholar
20.Lack, Stephen. Homotopy-theoretic aspects of 2-monads. Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures 2(2) (2007), 229–260. E-print math.CT/0607646.Google Scholar
21.Leinster, Tom. Higher operads, higher categories. London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series 298. Cambridge University Press, 2004.Google Scholar
22.Lane, Saunders Mac. Categories for the working mathematician, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 5, Springer-Verlag, New York, second edition, 1998.Google Scholar
23.May, J. P.. Simplicial Objects in Algebraic Topology. Chicago Lectures in Mathematics, University of Chicago Press, 1993. Reprint of 1967 original.Google Scholar
24.Riehl, Emily. Algebraic model structures. New York Journal of Mathematics 17 (2011), 173–231.Google Scholar
25.Riehl, Emily. Monoidal algebraic model structures. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 217(6) (2013), 1069–1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Shulman, Michael. Homotopy limits and colimits and enriched homotopy theory, 2006. E-print math/0 610194.Google Scholar