Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userQuasi-Categories vs. Segal Spaces: Cartesian Edition
76
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
Nima Rasekh
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We prove that four different ways of defining Cartesian fibrations and the Cartesian model structure are all Quillen equivalent: On marked simplicial sets, on bisimplicial spaces, on bisimplicial sets, on marked simplicial spaces. The main way to prove these equivalences is by using the Quillen equivalences between quasi-categories and complete Segal spaces as defined by Joyal-Tierney and the straightening construction due to Lurie.
rate research
Read More
Cartesian fibrations were originally defined by Lurie in the context of quasi-categories and are commonly used in $(infty,1)$-category theory to study presheaves valued in $(infty,1)$-categories. In this work we define and study fibrations modeling presheaves valued in simplicial spaces and their localizations. This includes defining a model structure for these fibrations and giving effective tools to recognize its fibrations and weak equivalences. This in particular gives us a new method to construct Cartesian fibrations via complete Segal spaces. In addition to that, it allows us to define and study fibrations modeling presheaves of Segal spaces.
We revisit the definition of Cartesian differential categories, showing that a slightly more general version is useful for a number of reasons. As one application, we show that these general differential categories are comonadic over Cartesian categories, so that every Cartesian category has an associated cofree differential category. We also work out the corresponding results when the categories involved have restriction structure, and show that these categories are closed under splitting restriction idempotents.
Cartesian differential categories were introduced to provide an abstract axiomatization of categories of differentiable functions. The fundamental example is the category whose objects are Euclidean spaces and whose arrows are smooth maps. Tensor differential categories provide the framework for categorical models of differential linear logic. The coKleisli category of any tensor differential category is always a Cartesian differential category. Cartesian differential categories, besides arising in this manner as coKleisli categories, occur in many different and quite independent ways. Thus, it was not obvious how to pass from Cartesian differential categories back to tensor differential categories. This paper provides natural conditions under which the linear maps of a Cartesian differential category form a tensor differential category. This is a question of some practical importance as much of the machinery of modern differential geometry is based on models which implicitly allow such a passage, and thus the results and tools of the area tend to freely assume access to this structure. The purpose of this paper is to make precise the connection between the two types of differential categories. As a prelude to this, however, it is convenient to have available a general theory which relates the behaviour of linear maps in Cartesian categories to the structure of Seely categories. The latter were developed to provide the categorical semantics for (fragments of) linear logic which use a storage modality. The general theory of storage, which underlies the results mentioned above, is developed in the opening sections of the paper and is then applied to the case of differential categories.
We exhibit the cartesian differential categories of Blute, Cockett and Seely as a particular kind of enriched category. The base for the enrichment is the category of commutative monoids -- or in a straightforward generalisation, the category of modules over a commutative rig $k$. However, the tensor product on this category is not the usual one, but rather a warping of it by a certain monoidal comonad $Q$. Thus the enrichment base is not a monoidal category in the usual sense, but rather a skew monoidal category in the sense of Szlachanyi. Our first main result is that cartesian differential categories are the same as categories with finite products enriched over this skew monoidal base. The comonad $Q$ involved is, in fact, an example of a differential modality. Differential modalities are a kind of comonad on a symmetric monoidal $k$-linear category with the characteristic feature that their co-Kleisli categories are cartesian differential categories. Using our first main result, we are able to prove our second one: that every small cartesian differential category admits a full, structure-preserving embedding into the cartesian differential category induced by a differential modality (in fact, a monoidal differential modality on a monoidal closed category -- thus, a model of intuitionistic differential linear logic). This resolves an important open question in this area.
We prove that every 2-Segal space is unital.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
