Completions and Terminal Monads
Emmanuel Dror Farjoun, Sergei O. Ivanov

TL;DR
This paper characterizes the terminal monad among those preserving subcategory objects and extends these ideas to infinity categories, providing a universal framework for homological completion towers.
Contribution
It offers a new characterization of common monads as terminal objects in categories of co-augmented endo-functors and extends this to infinity categories for homological completions.
Findings
Characterization of common monads as terminal objects in co-augmented endo-functor categories
Extension of monad properties to infinity categories for homological completion
Universal formulation of properties of homological completion towers
Abstract
We consider the terminal monad among those preserving the objects of a subcategory, and in particular preserving the image of a monad. Several common monads are shown to be uniquely characterized by the property of being terminal objects in the category of co-augmented endo-functors. Once extended to infinity categories, this gives, for example, a complete characterization of the well-known Bousfield-Kan R-homology completion. In addition, we note that an idempotent pro-completion tower can be associated with any co-augmented endo functor M, whose limit is the terminal monad that preserves the closure of ImM, the image of M, under finite limits. We conclude that some basic properties of the homological completion tower of a space can be formulated and proved for general monads over any category with limits, and characterized as universal
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications · Homotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology · Algebraic structures and combinatorial models
Completions and Terminal Monads
Emmanuel Dror Farjoun
and
Sergei O. Ivanov
[email protected], [email protected]
Abstract.
We consider the terminal monad among those preserving the objects of a subcategory and in particular preserving the image of a monad over the category
Several common monads are shown to be uniquely characterized by the property of being terminal objects in the category of co-augmented endo-functors. Once extended to infinity categories, this gives, for example, a complete characterization of the well-known Bousfield-Kan -homology completion In addition, we note that an idempotent pro-completion tower can be associated with any co-augmented endo functor whose limit is the terminal monad that preserves the closure of the image of under finite limits. We conclude that some basic properties of the homological completion tower of a space can be formulated and proved for general monads over any category with limits, and characterized as universal.
The second named author is supported by BIMSA
1. Introduction and main results
Many well-known and extremely useful constructions, mostly known as ”completions”, such as the profinite completion or the Bousfield-Kan homology completion are usually constructed directly, without specifying what universal property, if any, determines them up to equivalence. Here, using a notion that we call ”terminal monad,” many of these are shown to be completely determined by the property of being terminal objects in an appropriate category of co-augmented functors over the given underlying category
Our first observation is that the category
[TABLE]
of co-augmented functors over a category with limits, is itself closed under limits. Moreover, consider any collection of objects in and denote by the subcategory of the above functor category, consisting of functors that preserve each object of namely with an equivalence for every Then this category, of co-augmented functors, is also closed under limits. In particular, it has a terminal object which is easily shown to be a monad over
For a given small full subcategory a construction of the terminal monad, associated with the set of its objects, can be done by re-considering the well-known co-density monad, denoted here by associated with a full subcategory of a category which is always assumed to be closed under limits.
Hence, as above, this functor can be characterized as the terminal monad on among all co-augmented functors on that ”preserves the objects of ” i.e. with for all This is ”fixpoint” in the terminology of Adamek, [2] definition 2.5, see also [16]. It turns out that a terminal monad can be associated with more general, not necessarily fully faithful, functors. In particular, we consider terminal monads associated with a given monad, or more generally with co-augmented endo-functors Notice, as in the references above, that the category of monads over is also closed under all limits (—but, in general, not under colimits.)
This allows one to characterize, by a universal property, common constructions, such as ”completions,” as terminal monads with respect to an appropriate subcategory. There is an infinity-categorical extension of this observation [9]. It leads, for example, to a seemingly new characterization by a universal property of the well-known Bousfield-Kan homological completion as an infinity monad on topological spaces or a simplicial sets Compare [6]: The completion is shown to be the terminal monad associated with the monad among all co-augmented functors that preserve, up to homotopy, the essential image of the free module functor. Similar characterization of the pro-finite completion of a group, an algebraic variety, or a topological space, and other ”completion” are examples. In addition, following and elaborating on Fakir [8], and Casacuberta-Frei [7], one can associate to a monad (or any co-augmented functor) a terminal idempotent monad, i.e. a terminal localization functor, projecting to the smallest subcategory of that contains the image of and is closed under limits. The above definitions and constructions can be evidently dualized to get analog ones associated with a co-monad In [18], L. Yanovski constructs for quite general categories a transfinite tower of co-monads with similar (implicit) properties, and strong transfinite convergence results.
[TABLE]
1.1. Examples:
To begin, consider some quite well-known examples. Recall that any localization (or so-called reflection)functor is a terminal monad see [7]. It is the terminal that preserves all the local objects. Next, the canonical set of all ultra-filters on a set is a special case, see [10]. Namely, the monad now appears as the terminal monad among all co-augmented functors on sets that preserve every finite set. Another well-known example is the double dual of a vector space functor It is the terminal monad that preserves the one-dimensional spaces, or alternatively all finite-dimensional spaces. The last examples are clearly related to theorems 1.2 and 1.3 below.
It turns out, see below, that even when is just the subcategory spanned by a three-element set in the category of sets, then is again the *underlying set * of the Stone-Čech compactification of the set i.e. as above. Further, is a canonical sub-monad of the ultrafilter monad, while for is again the ultrafilter monad. When is the subcategory of finite groups in the category of (discrete) groups, then the discrete profinite completion endo-functor, on the category of groups appears as the terminal monad among all co-augmented ones that preserve all finite groups i.e. with for every finite Or again, if is the subcategory of nilpotent groups in the category of groups, the associated monad is the (discrete) nilpotent completion functor in the category of groups. For a ring the (discrete) completion functor of an module, with respect to an ideal can be similarly expressed as a terminal monad. A final, slightly stretched example, in an -category, is the double dual as in equation 6.2 section 6 below, and Theorem 6.2. This is very close to Mandell’s functor, [15], see remark 6.2 below, that can be considered as the terminal monad preserving certain GEM spaces expressed as a double dual monad.
1.1.1. Acknowlegements
This line of thought was a result of a private discussion with M. Hopkins about the properties of the Bousfield-Kan -completion. Our students Guy Kapon and Shauly Regimov took an active part in the discussion leading to the present paper. Their work led them to the corresponding formulations in the context of -algebras, see [9].
1.2. A sample of results
The results below regard the existence, basic properties, and explicit formulas for the terminal monad in certain cases. Our first concern is to guarantee the existence of terminal monads under certain rather weak conditions. In any category, a terminal object can be considered as the limit over the empty diagram. Hence the existence of a terminal co-augmented functor in a given functor category would follow from its closure under limits.
In the following, the closure under limits and thus the existence of a terminal object is guaranteed by the closure of the basic category under limits. In the present case, the functor categories, coma categories, and considered subcategories are clearly closed under limits. Limits in the category of co-augmented endo-functors are taken in the appropriate coma category under the identity functor.
The following gives a general construction of the terminal monad in quite a general framework, see Proposition 2.4 below.
[TABLE]
Proposition 1.1**.**
Let be a full subcategory of a category with limits. The co-density functor, or the -completion, is the terminal object in the category of co-augmented functors such that the co-augmentation map is an isomorphism for all This functor has a unique canonical monad structure.
The following statements use the notation of 6.2, so they should be read with caution: Although not treated here, they hold also in a complete monoidal category with internal objects. In all cases, the notation should be read as the appropriate equivariant maps, with respect to the implied action on the monoid or operad on the range and domain.
Theorem 1.2**.**
(See equation 6.2) Let be an element in a category with limits. Denote by the full subcategory generate by namely the endomorphism of The terminal monad that preserves is given by the ”structured double dual” with respect to
[TABLE]
Further, the terminal monad that preserves an element and all its cartesian powers is given by a similar expression as below, where denote the full endomorphism operad of an object given by all the morphisms with
In the notation of 1.2 one has:
Theorem 1.3**.**
The terminal monad that preserves for all is given by the ”operadic double dual” with respect to
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Terminal monads associated to a given monad
For a given monad ( or, more generally, a co-augmented endo-functor,) one has an associated *terminal monad * which is the terminal endo-functor among all those that preserve the image of namely with an isomorphism. As an example, of such a monad one can take any of the monads discussed above or even the terminal monad as above. The terminal monad associated with the (discrete) profinite completion functor, is a functor that preserves all groups of the form i.e. groups that are the discrete profinite completion of some group Next, if is the ultrafilter monad discussed above then its associated terminal monad can be seen to be the identity monad, which is clearly the only monad that preserves all possible sets of the form , since the latter have arbitrarily high cardinality.
[TABLE]
The terminal monad associated to can be expressed explicitly as follows: Compare [8]:
Theorem 1.4**.**
Let be a monad on a category The associated terminal monad is given as the equalizer
[TABLE]
In addition, we may consider, following Fakir above, the category of idempotent monads, which are often called localizations or reflections. Fakir constructs for every monad a naturally associated idempotent monad K(M). Casacuberta et el observed in [7] that this idempotent monad is terminal among all idempotent monads with the property is an isomorphism if and only if is one. Note the difference between and The latter is discussed shortly in the last section below. The -category analog is clearly the totalization of the co-simplicial monad discussed in [9].
[TABLE]
1.3. Outline of the rest of the paper
We begin with recalling the general concept of completion i.e. co-density with respect to a subcategory, such as the subcategory of compact objects. This is done by considering the right Kan extension of a subcategory over itself. This gives many known examples of terminal monads. We then consider the terminal monad associated with a given object in a category and one associated with a given monad. The last example gives a functor from monads to terminal monads on the category The paper goes on to consider some known special cases such as the category of sets and groups where the general construction gives some well-known constructions as a terminal monad, this characterizes them uniquely by a property. The last section deals with the pro-idempotent monad associated with a co-augmented endo-functor, vastly generalizing the classical Bousfield-Kan completion tower here only for a discrete category, but paving the way for a similar result for an -category.
2. -Completions
Let be a full subcategory of a category . Denote by the embedding and assume that the right Kan extension of by exists and denote it by
[TABLE]
So by the definition of the right Kan extension, is a functor together with a natural transformation
[TABLE]
such that for any functor and any natural transformation there exists a unique natural transformation such that where is the whiskering of and . The equation can be rewritten as follows: for any
[TABLE]
Note that the universal property implies that for two natural transformations the equation implies Thus appears already here as a terminal functor, in a somewhat different sense from the above. Compare [11].
The functor will be called the functor of -completion. Any right Kan extension can be presented as a limit over a comma category [14, Ch. X, §3, Th.1]. In our case, it is just the limit of the projection functor
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.1**.**
The morphism is an isomorphism. In particular, for any we have an isomorphism
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since the functor is full and faithful, by [14, Ch. X, §3, Cor.3] we obtain that is an isomorphism. ∎
Lemma 2.2**.**
There exists a unique natural transformation
[TABLE]
such that for any
Proof.
Take and and use the universal property of the right Kan extension. ∎
Further we will treat as an co-augmented functor For any co-augmented functor we set
[TABLE]
Note that
Lemma 2.3**.**
The class is closed under retracts.
Proof.
Because a retract of an isomorphism is an isomorphism. ∎
The following is a basic observation that follows from the above, that justifies the term ”terminal monad,” compare [3.7.3] in [5].
Proposition 2.4**.**
The co-augmented functor of the -completion is a terminal object in the category of co-augmented functors for which Moreover, is a monad in functor category
Proof.
Take a co-augmented functor such that Note that is an isomorphism. We use the universal property of and take Then there exists a unique natural transformation such that Since we obtain that the equation is equivalent to the equation And the equation is equivalent to by the universal property of
The monad structure of this terminal follows immediately from the fact that its square preserves all objects of giving a unique natural transformation The monadic equations are satisfied since they all involve equality of natural transformations from powers of to itself, but there is a unique such transformation for each power since is terminal among these co-augmented functors, all of which preserve the objects of ∎
Remark: Note that the above characterization shows that the terminal monad associated with a subcategory can be identified using solely its effect on the objects in being the terminal co-augmented functor that ”preserves the objects” of this subcategory. Of course, its usual construction, as above, does employ morphisms in and
3. Terminal monads associated with a functor
More generally, consider a general functor Now, consider the subcategory of the category of end-functors consisting of all co-augmented functors G, that preserve the image of i.e. with
[TABLE]
is an isomorphism in for any object The subcategory of the full functor category, is a category of co-augmented functors which is evidently closed under all limits. Hence it has a terminal object which is the terminal monad associated with the given functor namely, preserving the image of
We note that this terminal object has a natural monad structure:
Proposition 3.1**.**
Let be an co-augmented endo-functor in The terminal object, in the category of co-augmented endo-functors preserving the image of is naturally a monad.
Proof.
Denote the terminal co-augmented functor by as above. Since the composition: clearly preserves the image of and is terminal among those preserving there is a unique map The conditions, on a co-augmented functor with this as a structure map, of being a monad, involve equality among various maps from compositions of with itself to Each such composition preserves the image of therefore there is a unique map, from any self-composition of to the terminal object Recall all the conditions on a co-augmented to be a monad involve equality between various maps to the monad itself. It follows that all the needed equalities are satisfied by ∎
We conclude that the above basic properties of holds when one replaces the inclusion with any functor In this case, the right Kan extension is the terminal monad on that preserves the image subcategory of the given functor In case and where the functor is a co-augmented functor, we got the terminal monad among those that preserve the image of
Consider the special, well-known case, where is an idempotent localization functor Namely, a projection onto a subcategory of In that case, is an equivalence. Namely, is its own terminal monad. (Compare: [17])
[TABLE]
For the sake of completeness, we state:
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let be a co-augmented idempotent functor, i.e. localization- projection onto a full subcategory of local object. Then is its own terminal monad i.e.
Proof.
First note that has associated monad structure since by the two natural maps. Second, for every monad that preserves the image of namely, with the natural map an equivalence (isomorphism) one gets a map
[TABLE]
The monad structure of forces the uniqueness of the map of monads since any map of monads
is a retract of being a monad map, which is a retract of
[TABLE]
Starting with the map of monads 3.1,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Applying to this triangle of maps we see immediately that is uniquely determined by the monad
∎
[TABLE]
Remark 3.3**.**
If the subcategory as above is closed under all limits then it is localizing and the -completion is the localization projecting to the subcategory
[TABLE]
3.1. in terms of
It turns out that there is a direct formula expressing the terminal monad associated with in terms of Generally, given a monad consider a co-augmented functor that preserves the image of i.e. Applying such an to we get a canonical map for every such functor. In particular, for any monad one gets a natural map from the terminal monad to giving rise to the augmentation of the functor
In the following this last map is identified with the natural map to of the equalizer of the natural diagram: In addition this map is shown to be a map of monads.
Let us start with two basic properties:
Proposition 3.4**.**
Let be a map of monads. Then the monad is naturally an algebra. In particular, thus induces a map of monads Hence has a natural structure of augmented endo-functor on the category of monads over
Proof.
Since is an algebra over itself, we need to show that the natural map gotten by applying the co-augmentation to has a left inverse i.e., that is a retract of Since preserves it preserves also any retract of The natural left inverse is given by the composition:
[TABLE]
Hence, has been shown to be a retract of for all objects Thus But is the terminal monad that preserves all objects of the form Therefore, there is a unique map as needed. ∎
Second, an interesting closure property
Proposition 3.5**.**
Let be a functor with being a small (indexing) category and a monad over Assume that for each the object is a retract of Then the object is a retract of hence Similarly, any such limit of algebras is naturally a - algebra.
Note: there is no assumption here about relations among the various retractions, namely the retract structures on different Thus the limit is not in general an -retract but it is a retract. For example, (in ) in the infinity category of spaces, if is the free -module spanned by a space , then a limit of any diagram of such -GEMs is not, in general, a -algebra but rather a -algebra.
Proof.
Consider the composition:
[TABLE]
which is clearly the identity map.
The right-hand side map is the assembly map for limits, and the equality on the right is a consequence of since the latter is a retract of by assumption and hence also preserved by
The right-hand side map is directly seen to equip with an algebra structure.
∎
[TABLE]
3.2. The equalizer as the terminal monad.
Given a co-augmented functor denote by the equalizer of the two natural maps coming form the co-augmentation structure
First, we note the following:
Lemma 3.6**.**
Let be an co-augmented functor Let be any co-augmented functor that preserves i.e. with an equivalence. Then there is a natural map, of co-augmented functors, from to the equalizer of
Proof.
Apply to the commutative diagram to get the desired factorization to the equalizer: observing that we get commutative:
[TABLE]
which is equivalent to:
[TABLE]
by the assumption on Hence there is a well-defined factorization of the left-hand side map through the equalizer This map clearly respects the co-augmentation ∎
[TABLE]
For the rest of the discussion, we will mostly assume, sometimes for convenience only, that is a monad on We noticed that every functor that preserves maps naturally to the functor The same is true in particular to the terminal functor that preserves But preserves thus, by definition, it maps uniquely to the terminal This brings us to the following:
[TABLE]
Proposition 3.7**.**
Let be a monad in the category of monads over The terminal monad preserving the image of is naturally equivalent to the equalizer:
[TABLE]
Equalizer that is, with respect to the two natural transformations given by the augmentation. In particular, the equalizer itself has a natural structure of a monad.
Proof.
Observe that the diagram of maps is not, in general, a diagram of monads. The maps in it are natural transformations of co-augmented functors. Thus the equalizer is a co-augmented functor, but it is not immediately clear why it is a monad. Fakir states this without proof. It does follow below from the observation that the equalizer is naturally isomorphic to the terminal monad
To prove that, note that preserves i.e. were here denotes the underlying co-augmented functor of the monad The reason is that clearly as co-augmented functors, there is an equivalence since the latter co-simplicial functor has an extra co-degeneracy map. But in 1-category, Therefore there is a unique map of co-augmented functors
First, we prove that this map is an equivalence of functors. This will endow the equalizer with a monad structure.
[TABLE]
The monad structure on comes from the natural map given by the universal property of the range. Since the identity is only self-map the last map satisfies the monad conditions.
[TABLE]
Now consider the following maps (=natural transformations) of co-augmented functors:
[TABLE]
The map is uniquely guaranteed by the equation since is terminal co-augmented functor with this property.
The map is given by the universal property of See lemma 3.6 above. Namely, since the monoid preserves () so it preserves the co-simplicial object When we apply to we get a map of to the limit of , which in our case is the equalizer
In the above composition of three natural transformations, the induced self-map of is the identity since is a terminal object. We claim that the composition is equivalent to the identity.
To see that, consider the diagram:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
gotten by applying the above maps: to the
natural transformations:
[TABLE]
Since all the horizontal maps in diagram that involve and denoted by are equivalences, the required self-map on the equalizer, is also an equivalence as needed. Thus we conclude that the maps are equivalences of co-augmented functors. It follows that has a structure of a monad coming from that of and the two are equivalent as a monad, as stated. ∎
[TABLE]
The terminal monad has the following properties:
[TABLE]
Theorem 3.8**.**
For any monad the above map , 3.8, is a map of monads. The assignment gives an endo-functor together with a natural transformation namely, an augmented endo-functor on
Proof.
By 3.4 above, is natural in the variable Or, since is functorial in so is by the above theorem 3.7. Hence the assigment: defines an endo-functor on For a given map of monads one gets a map of co-simplicial resolutions Or, since is naturally equivalent to the equalizer of we get a well-defined map on the terminal monads with a natural map as needed.
We now prove that this map is a map of monads, namely, respect the monad structure
Now since is a co-augmented functor we get a commutative diagram involving by applying this functor to The natural map completes the argument, giving the necessary commutation of the monad structures.
In more detail, for any map of co-augmented functors, such as the corresponding co-faces maps etc. commutes with and
Consider the natural diagram:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
To prove that is a map of monads, one only needs to show that the monad structures of and written as are compatible with the natural map Namely, that the two composition arrows, involving and of in the diagram below are equal. Namely, that the outer square of the maps below commutes.
Consider the diagram below: The arrows are defined by the universal properties of and the equalizer, correspondingly, since their common domain preserves and using 6.5 above. The map is the inclusion of the equalizer.
Note that the bottom square commutes since here the equalizer is considered here as a co-augmented functor, from the category of co-augmented functors over to itself.
The top square below commutes by the terminal property of its bottom left corner admitting only one map from the functor at the top right corner.
Thus the whole diagram commute as needed.
∎
[TABLE]
3.2.1. Example
Consider the ultrafilter monad discussed elsewhere in this paper. The associated terminal monad preserves the image of which includes sets of arbitrary cardinality. Hence it preserves all sets and must be the identity monad. In fact, the equalizer is easily seen to be the identity functor on sets, as it includes only principal ultrafilters. On the other hand, the terminal monad associated to the profinite completion in the category of groups is not the identity functor since on a finitely presented group since the completion is idempotent on these groups so that the equalizer of is itself, the completion of
[TABLE]
4. Explicit expressions for
Here we explicitly express the terminal monad, associated with an object as a structured double dual, see below, as opposed to the usual one as in [3], section 2.
[TABLE]
For a set and an object we denote by the product of copies of indexed by
[TABLE]
The projections will be denoted by A morphism is defined by a family of morphisms which are called components of The object is contravariant by More precisely, this defines a functor
[TABLE]
such that, if is a function, then the morphism is defined so that
Proposition 4.1**.**
Let be a category with limits and be a small full subcategory of Then the functor of -completion exists and it is given by the end
[TABLE]
It can be also presented as an equalizer
[TABLE]
where the first morphism is induced by and the second morphism is induced by
Proof.
Follows from the interpretation of right Kan extensions in terms of ends [14, Ch. X, §4, Th.1] and the characterisation of ends in terms of equalisers [13, Remark 1.2.4]. ∎
Corollary 4.2**.**
Let be a complete category and the full subcategory consisting of one object. Then exists and
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
4.0.1. Remark.
There is an alternative description of using the double dual monad. Denote by the ”naive double dual” monad Then it is not hard to see using the arguments in 3.2 that is equivalent to the terminal monad associated with Notice that is isomorphic to for some Hence, since the terminal preserves the image of also preserves its retract and one has a unique map of monads Similarly there is a map in the other direction: Namely, the desired element in the monad category :
[TABLE]
is determined by the composition of maps in a :
[TABLE]
Or, stated otherwise, the map is give factor-wise by: since This also can serve to prove the crucial property of namely, for any map in with satisfies which is of course evident from the explicit expression for above. It is clear, though not expanded here, that, in the case where the category is enriched over itself, the above approach works well, using internal hom objects
5. Examples in the category of sets and groups
5.1. Variations on the set of ultrafilters.
For any set we denote by the set of all subsets of . We treat as a (contravariant) functor
[TABLE]
where, for a map the map is defined as Note that the characteristic function defines an isomorphism
[TABLE]
The composition
[TABLE]
is a (covariant) functor that has a natural coaugmentation
[TABLE]
such that is the set of all sets containing If we denote by the set of ultrafilters on we obtain that is an co-augmented sub-functor of
[TABLE]
Recall that can be thought of as the underlying set of the Stone-Čech compactification of the set
[TABLE]
Let us define another co-augmented sub-functor of An element is called ultraset, if
- (US1)
- (US2)
for any one and only one of the sets is an element of
Note that the axiom (US1) can be equivalently replaced by
- (US1’)
Example 1**.**
Any ultrafilter is an ultraset.
Example 2**.**
Let is a finite set of an odd cardinality and
[TABLE]
Then is an ultraset on which is not an ultrafilter for
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let be an ultraset on a set Then is an ultrafilter if and only if for any partition into three disjoint subsets , there exists a unique such that
Proof.
Assume that is an ultrafilter and is a partition. If there exists such that then it is obviously unique because is closed under finite intersections. Let us prove that it exists. Assume the contrary that for any Then and hence which is a contradiction.
Now assume that for any partition into three disjoint subsets , there exists a unique such that In order to prove that is an ultrafilter, we need to prove that: (1) and implies (2) implies
Let us prove (1). Take and Then and hence, By (US2) we obtain
Let us prove (2). In the proof, we use that we already proved (1). Take Since we have Therefore either or We need to prove that Assume the contrary that Since using (1), we obtain It follows that which is a contradiction. Hence ∎
The set of all ultrasets on is denoted by It is easy to check that is a co-augmented sub-functor of
[TABLE]
Let be a natural number, taken as an ordinals We denote by the functor of -completion i.e. it is the terminal co-augmented functor with the property that is an isomorphism
Lemma 5.2**.**
Let denotes the class of finite sets of cardinality at most Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Since any set of cardinality at most is a retract of this follows from Lemma 2.3. ∎
Proposition 5.3**.**
The co-augmented functor of -completion on the category of sets is isomorphic to
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Corollary 4.2 we see
[TABLE]
The characteristic function defines a bijection There are four maps (1) the identity map (2) the map sending all to (3) the map sending all to (4) the permutation The composition with them correspond to four maps on (1) ; (2) (3) (4) Consider the isomorphism
[TABLE]
So we need to prove that
[TABLE]
The equaliser consists of such elements that the equation is satisfied for any For it is satisfied for any . For we have and
[TABLE]
Then it is satisfied for iff (axiom (US1)). Similarly, we obtain that the equation is satisfied for iff (axiom (US1’)). For we have that and Then the equation is satisfied for iff the axiom (US2) is satisfied. ∎
Proposition 5.4**.**
Let denote the full subcategory of consisting of finite sets. Then is isomorphic and isomorphic to
[TABLE]
Proof.
It is well-known that is an isomorphism for any finite So it is enough to prove that is the terminal among all co-augmented functors such that is an isomorphism for any set such that By the universal property of (Proposition 5.3) we see that there is a unique morphism of co-augmented functors So we just need to prove that for any set the image of is in Denote by the image of Note that is a co-augmented sub-functor of So we need to prove that
Since is an isomorphism for finite any such that we see that
[TABLE]
for any such that
Let us prove that Take an ultraset Consider a partition Define a map such that The map sends to for some Since and for we have we obtain that and for Therefore the assumption of Lemma 5.1 is satisfied, and hence, is an ultrafilter. ∎
5.2. Examples: Groups and modules
Here we briefly consider the examples alluded to in the first section. The examples below are proved by applying the expression 2.4 above. It is rather immediate to see that by taking to be the subcategory of finite groups in the category of all groups, the completion is canonically isomorphic to the (discrete!) pro-finite completion functor on groups.
Similarly, when is the subcategory of nilpotent groups in the category of all groups. Similarly, for the completion of an module with respect to an ideal in a ring Namely,
In the above example, the fact that is a large category can be dealt with by noticing that for each module the tower of quotients is co-final in the category appearing in 2.4.
In case the ring is a field the usual double dual functor of a vector space appears as a terminal monad since the double dual in 6.2 above is reduce here to
6. Completions and operads
In this section, we continue to assume that is closed under limits.
6.1. Objects with an action of a monoid
Let be a monoid. An -object in is an object endowed by a homomorphism of monoids If is an -set and is an -object, we define the hom-object over as an equalizer
[TABLE]
where and for any If is a category of sets, coincides with the ordinary hom-set in the category of -sets.
For any two objects from the hom-set has a natural structure of -set defined by the composition. Then Corollary 4.2 can be reformulated as
[TABLE]
6.2. Objects with an action of an operad
Let be an operad (of sets). For an object we denote by the endomorphism operad of whose -th component is An -algebra in is an object endowed by a morphism If is an -algebra in the category of sets and is an -algebra in we defined the hom-object over as an equaliser
[TABLE]
where and are defined so that and
[TABLE]
for any and Here we denote by the morphism with components For the special case we have and is the composition of and Note that
[TABLE]
For any we also consider
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
The projection induces a morphism
[TABLE]
Since using that limits commute with limits, we obtain
[TABLE]
6.3. Completion with respect to a power
For an object of we denote by the suboperad of the endomorphism operad such that
[TABLE]
for
For any two objects of there is a natural structure of -algebra on the set for any we consider the map
[TABLE]
For any object of we consider the functor of -completion. We also consider
[TABLE]
This subsection is devoted to the proof of the following theorem.
Theorem 6.1**.**
Let be a complete category and be its object. Then for , there are isomorphisms of co-augmented functors
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
where the augmentations of the right-hand functors are induced by morphism to the element raised to the power , given by: with components
Remark 6.2**.**
An analog and potentially a special case of this formula, within the -category of simplicial sets, appears in Mandell’s theorem, [15] and [4], Proposition 4.4. Here, the operadic double-dual appears as a version of homological p-completion. It gives the terminal functor that preserves certain -adic Eilenberg-MacLane spaces.
[TABLE]
In order to prove this theorem, we need to prove several lemmas.
Lemma 6.3**.**
For and a morphism the diagram
[TABLE]
is commutative () if and only if for any morphism and any morphism we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
The components of the morphisms are and The assertion follows. ∎
Lemma 6.4**.**
For the diagram
[TABLE]
is commutative (), where
Proof.
It follows from Lemma 6.3. ∎
Lemma 6.5**.**
For the diagram
[TABLE]
is an equalizer.
Proof.
By Lemma 6.4 we have Let be a map that equalizes and Lemma 6.3 implies that for any and we have In particular, if we take we get
[TABLE]
So, if we take we obtain Let us prove that such is unique. Assume that is a morphism such that Then It follows that ∎
Lemma 6.6**.**
For if is a morphism such that , then
Proof.
It is enough to prove for Take morphisms and Since we have a projection and we can take a map such that and . We set and Then for and Then by the assumption and Lemma 6.3 we have
[TABLE]
The assertion follows. ∎
Remark 6.7**.**
Generally the equation for does not imply The assumption of Lemma 6.6 is essential.
Proof of Theorem 6.1.
Lemma 6.6 implies that
[TABLE]
Let us prove By Lemma 6.5 we have
[TABLE]
So we need to prove the universal property. Consider a co-augmented functor such that Since is a retract of we have Therefore there is a unique morphism of co-augmented functors Taking the composition with the morphism we obtain a morphism Then, in order to prove that it is sufficient to prove that for any any and any morphism of co-augmented functors By Lemma 6.6 it is enough to prove that
Let us prove that for any Take and Note that The commutative diagram
[TABLE]
shows that
[TABLE]
And the diagram
[TABLE]
implies that
[TABLE]
Therefore, we have
[TABLE]
Then Lemma 6.3 implies that This implies that
Now we prove that The proof is similar. We just need to note that if is an isomorphism, then for any natural transformation any and we have a diagram similar to (6.25).
[TABLE]
This diagram implies that
[TABLE]
where Then Lemma 6.3 implies that and the rest of the proof is the same as for
The fact that follows from the equations
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Similarly we have
[TABLE]
∎
[TABLE]
7. An idempotent pro-completion tower
We end with a few comments on a pro-idempotent monad associated with a given monad Recall from [1] that the Bousfield-Kan -homology completion tower associated with a topological space is pro-idempotent. In addition, and as consequence, its homology is naturally pro-isomorphic to the homology of
One would like to have a similar result for a general monad This is possible, with the price being the replacement of the tot-tower with a slightly more involved tower defined inductively. This line was considered to with clear results for a a general co-augmented functor in the homotopy category of spaces, by A. Libman, compare [12].
For a general subcategory of a nice category one can construct the right Kan extension functor as above. This functor is not idempotent. However, we can consider a ”refined” right extension
[TABLE]
This last functor associate, as usual to each a diagram of objects in indexed by the coma category The limit, in of this diagram of objects in is the value of right Kan extension, on the object see equation 2.4 above.
Now for the diagram to define a pro-object it must be filtering. Therefore if we assume that is closed under finite limits, i.e. pullbacks. In this case, the diagram of objects in is filtering. Hence, the the above define diagram is a pro-object in Moreover, the functor can be directly prolonged to a functor:
[TABLE]
which deserves the name ”tautological pro-completion” with respect to the inclusion As such it is clearly pro-idempotent. For example, if is the full subcategory of Groups consisting of finite groups, one gets the usual diagram of finite all finite groups under a given group
Our aim is to show that in case is the closure under finite limits of the image of a monad there is a small variant on the Bousfield-Kan tower associated with which is pro-equivalent to this canonical pro-object Moreover, that pro-object is the terminal pro-monad among those that preserve the closure of under finite limits. Note that the image of is not, in general, closed under finite limits. Therefore, the following construction, which is valid for any will be shown to be equivalent to the above where the subscript denotes the closure of the image of the monad under finite limits.
[TABLE]
Consider the inductively defined tower of injective maps of terminal monads:
[TABLE]
To continue, we notice that under no additional assumptions on , one has associated with an idempotent pro-monad tower, The limit of this tower of monads is precisely the terminal monad that preserves the closure of the image of our monad under all finite limits.
[TABLE]
By 3.5, each in this tower not only preserves for but also any finite limit of objects of the form for It follows that if is in the closure under finite limits of the image of then for large enough, there is an equivalence Since each is, by construction, an element in the above finite limits closure of in Therefore we have a pro-idempotent tower:
[TABLE]
In addition, using the argument in [6] and [7] it follows that for every monad one has a pro-equivalence:
[TABLE]
In other words, the tower satisfies some of the basic properties of the classical Bousfield-Kan -homology completion tower as given by [1].
The limit, of the tower is the terminal monad among all co-augmented functors that preserve the closure of the image of under finite limits.
[TABLE]
Remark 7.1**.**
following Fakir, [8] one can continue to this tower of inclusions, see 3.7 above, trasfinitely. Under suitable rather weak assumption on this tower converges to an idempotent monad This idempotent monad is easily seen to be the terminal monad where now denotes the closure of the image of under all limits. In the infinity category of spaces the classical example is the map from the idempotent Bousfield homological localization to the completion functor on spaces, compare [7].
Examples: In the category of groups we can consider the terminal monad associated with a group so that It is given as above by the double dual
[TABLE]
This is a subgroup of for the cardinality of the set of homomorphisms. For the group of integers we have The transfinite tower of Fakir stabilizes at where is a cyclic group whose order is the LCM of the orders of all elements of since the image of the generator of is the diagonal element Namely, is the image subgroup of This localization, or reflexive functor can be characterized as terminal among those that preserve the closure in the category of groups of under all limits, mapping into that closure, or the initial idempotent monad that turns every -equivalence (i.e. a sort of ’G-cohomology equivalence’) into an equivalence.
An infinity categorical example see [9]. The classical of Bousfield and Kan comes from the monad on the -category of topological spaces. It preserves not only spaces of the form i.e. GEMs but also -polyGEM spaces i.e. the closure of GEMs under finite limits. In this special case the construction of the terminal is somewhat simpler than the above inductive tower
The precise meaning or value of this tower for the (discrete) pro-finite completion of groups, considered as a monad is not immediately clear. For every group the monad is a natural subgroup of the pro-finite completion of with the property that it is idempotent ( if is a finite limit of (discrete) profinite groups. In fact, since preserves all finite limits in see above, we have that it preserves any finite limit of profinite groups. Note, however, that for a finitely presented group one has an isomorphism, since for such a group one has an isomorphism namely, the completion is idempotent on this subcategory of groups. The transfinite intersection or limit of on all ordinals is also an interesting subgroup of the pro-finite completion, which is just itself if is finitely presented.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] E. (Farjoun) “Pro-nipotent representation of homology types” In proceedings of the AMS 38 Elsevier, 1973, pp. 657–660
- 2[2] J. Adamek “Colimits of Monads” In arxiv.org/abs/1409.3805 v 1 , 2014
- 3[3] J. Adámek and L. Sousa “D-ultrafilters and their monads” In Advances in Mathematics 377 Elsevier, 2021, pp. 107486
- 4[4] A. Berglund “ E ∞ subscript 𝐸 E_{\infty} -algebras and Mandell’s theorem”, 2016, pp. 1–37
- 5[5] Francis Borceux “Handbook of Categorical Algebra, volume 1 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications.” Cambridge university press, 1994
- 6[6] A.K. Bousfield and D. Kan “Homotopy limits, completions, and localization.” Springer, 1973
- 7[7] A. C. “Localizations as idempotent approximations to completions” In JPAA Vol. 142 , 1999
- 8[8] S. Fakir “Monade idempotente associée à une monade” In C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Ser. A-B 270 , A 99-A 101. (gallica) , 1970
