Free cocommutative commutative Hopf monoids - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net 2013-05-22T19:03:35Z http://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/118998 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdf http://mathoverflow.net/questions/118998/free-cocommutative-commutative-hopf-monoids Free cocommutative commutative Hopf monoids Martin Brandenburg 2013-01-15T16:56:19Z 2013-01-21T18:58:25Z <p>I have some questions about generalizations of abelian groups, relative to symmetric monoidal categories.</p> <p>1) Let $C$ be a cocomplete cartesian monoidal category with equalizers. I can show that the forgetful functor $U : \mathsf{Ab}(C) \to C$ has a left adjoint $F$. The idea is to write $U$ as the composition $\mathsf{Ab}(C) \to \mathsf{CMon}(C) \to C$, the second functor has a left adjoint (symmetric algebra), and the first functor has a left adjoint which is a generalization of the Grothendieck construction (should I explain it?). Is there are more direct description $F$? Also I would like to know if the corresponding monad $T : C \to C$ preserves reflexive coequalizers, because then $U$ is monadic, which would be useful.</p> <p>2) Let $C$ be a cocomplete symmetric monoidal category (perhaps assumed to be presentable). I would like to extend 1) to the category $\mathrm{AbHopf}(C)$ of cocommutative commutative Hopf monoids in $C$, i.e. the category of abelian group objects in the cartesian monoidal category $\mathrm{CoMon}_c(C)$ of cocommutative comonoids in $C$. In particular, I would like to know if $\mathrm{AbHopf}(C) \to C$ is monadic, if the corresponding monad has a nice description and if it preserves reflexive coequalizers. Obviously it would be helpful to understand $\mathrm{CoMon}_c(C) \to C$ first.</p> <p>There are some papers by Porst, Barr, Takeuchi and others about these sort of questions, but I haven't found an answer there. Actually my goal is to endow $\mathrm{AbHopf}(C)$ with a tensor product such that the left adjoint $C \to \mathrm{AbHopf}(C)$ is symmetric monoidal.</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/118998/free-cocommutative-commutative-hopf-monoids/119004#119004 Answer by Todd Trimble for Free cocommutative commutative Hopf monoids Todd Trimble 2013-01-15T17:31:56Z 2013-01-21T18:58:25Z <p>As for question (1): assuming cocomplete cartesian monoidal category means that cartesian products distribute over colimits (and I know from past experience that you do mean this, Martin), then it's true that the monad $T$ preserves reflexive coequalizers. The main thing you need is that finitary power functors $c \mapsto c^n$ preserve reflexive coequalizers. This is a corollary of a result that you can find on the first page of chapter 0 of Johnstone's Topos Theory, which is a $3 \times 3$ lemma stating that if the rows and columns are reflexive coequalizer diagrams, then so is the diagonal. It easily follows from this lemma that for example the squaring functor $c \mapsto c \times c$ preserves reflexive coequalizers, and a similar inductive argument allows you to extend this to any finite power $c \mapsto c^n$. </p> <p>To derive the fact that monads $T: C \to C$ based on a Lawvere algebraic theory $\theta$ preserve reflexive coequalizers, write </p> <p>$$T(c) = \int^{n \in \mathrm{FinSet}^{op}} \hom_\theta(i(n), i(1)) \cdot c^n$$ </p> <p>where the tensor $S \cdot c$ of a set $S$ with an object $c$ is the coproduct of copies of $c$ indexed over $S$. (Here $i: \mathrm{FinSet}^{op} \to \theta$ denotes the unique (up to isomorphism) map of Lawvere algebraic theories, viewing $\mathrm{FinSet}^{op}$ as the "initial" Lawvere algebraic theory.) Since coend functors and tensor functors $S \cdot -$ preserve reflexive coequalizers, as does $c \mapsto c^{n}$, we see that $T$ does as well. </p> <p>I can't think of a more direct nice description of the composite left adjoint $F$, nor do I think one is needed because I think the description you gave is plenty nice. </p> <p>As for (2): the underlying functor is definitely not monadic. It's not even a right adjoint, because for example for $C = \mathrm{Vect}_k$, it fails to preserve the terminal object (which in $\mathrm{AbHopf}(\mathrm{Vect})_k$ is the monoidal unit $k$, as is the case just in $\mathrm{CoMon}(\mathrm{Vect})_k$). </p> <p><b>Edit:</b> Since this came up in comments, let me provide an alternative proof of the fact that finite power functors on a cocomplete cartesian monoidal category preserve reflexive coequalizers. Recall that a category $J$ is <a href="http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/sifted+category" rel="nofollow"><em>sifted</em></a> if the diagonal functor $J \to J \times J$ is final (result due to Gabriel and Ulmer). A prototypical example is where $J$ is the generic parallel pair equipped with a section in common. Then follow Steve Lack's soft proof <a href="http://mathoverflow.net/questions/57099/why-do-filtered-colimits-commute-with-finite-limits" rel="nofollow">here</a>, which uses just the assumption that $C$ is cocomplete cartesian monoidal and the finality of the diagonal on $J$, to show the binary product $C^2 \to C$ preserves reflexive coequalizers. Similarly, the $n$-fold product $C^n \to C$ preserves reflexive coequalizers. The $n$-fold power on $C$ is a composite of the diagonal $\Delta: C \to C^n$ (which is a left adjoint, thus colimit-preserving) with the $n$-fold product, so it too preserves reflexive coequalizers. </p>