13
$\begingroup$

I'm guessing the answer to this question is well-known:

Suppose that $Y:C \to P$ and $F:C \to D$ are functors with $D$ cocomplete. Then one can define the point-wise Kan extension $\mathbf{Lan}_Y\left(F\right).$ Under what conditions does $\mathbf{Lan}_Y\left(F\right)$ preserve colimits? Notice that if $C=P$ and $Y=id_C,$ then $\mathbf{Lan}_Y\left(F\right)=F,$ so this is not true in general. Would $F$ preserving colimits imply this?

Dually, under what conditions does a right Kan extension preserve limits?

Thank you.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ For the existence of $\mathrm{Lan}_Y(F)$, we should require that $C$ is essentially small. $\endgroup$ Sep 22, 2013 at 12:16

4 Answers 4

23
$\begingroup$

The pointwise left Kan extension of F along Y is a coend of functors $Lan_{Y}(F) = \int^{x}P(Yx,-).Fx$ where each functor $P(Yx,-).Fx$ is the composite of the representable $P(Yx,-):P \to Set$ and the copower functor $(-.Fx):Set \to D$. As a coend (colimit) of the $P(Yx,-).Fx$ the left Kan extension preserves any colimit by each of these functors.

Now the copower functor $(-.Fx)$ is left adjoint to the representable $D(Fx,-)$ and so preserves all colimits, so that $P(Yx,-).Fx$ preserves any colimit preserved by $P(Yx,-)$. Therefore $Lan_{Y}(F)$ preserves any colimit preserved by each representable $P(Yx,-):P \to Set$ for $x \in C$.

If Y is the Yoneda embedding we have $P(Yx,-)=[C^{op},Set](Yx,-)=ev_{x}$ the evaluation functor at x which preserves all colimits, so that left Kan extensions along Yoneda preserve all colimits.

Or if each $P(Yx,-)$ preserves filtered colimits then left Kan extensions along Y preserve filtered colimits.

I think this is all well known but don't know a reference.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I realize this was a long time ago, but I have two questions: 1) Are you saying that left Kan extensions along Yoneda preserve all colimits, regardless of $F$? This seems incredible. 2) Do right Kan extensions along Yoneda preserve all limits? $\endgroup$ Jan 7, 2019 at 4:03
8
$\begingroup$

$F$ preserving colimits doesn't imply that $\text{Lan}_Y(F)$ preserves colimits, even if all the categories are cocomplete.

Consider, for example, the case $C = D$ and $F = 1_C$. Then the left Kan extension $\text{Lan}_Y(1_C)$ exists if and only if $Y$ has a right adjoint, and if it does exist, it is the right adjoint of $Y$. (This is Theorem X.7.2 of Categories for the Working Mathematician.) Of course, $1_C$ preserves colimits, but right adjoints usually don't.

(From your notation, I guess you're generalizing from the case where $P$ is the category of Presheaves on $C$ and $Y$ is the Yoneda embedding. In that case, as I bet you know, $\text{Lan}_Y(F) = - \otimes F$ not only preserves colimits but has a right adjoint.)

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Tom. Do you know under what general conditions the left Kan extension does preserve colimits? Of course I am aware that this holds when $P$ is the presheaf category, but I would like to know this more generally. Also, what is known about right Kan extensions along the Yoneda embedding (into a complete category)? $\endgroup$ Nov 12, 2012 at 8:32
  • $\begingroup$ (right Kan extensions along Yoneda, on a category with finite limits, such that the functor I am extending also preserves finite limits) $\endgroup$ Nov 12, 2012 at 13:52
1
$\begingroup$

Let $(a_i: A_i\to A)_{i\in I}$ with $I\in Cat$ a universal cocone in a category $\mathcal{A}$, and let $H: \mathcal{B}\to \mathcal{A}$.

We ask when:

for any $F: \mathcal{B}\to \mathcal{C}$ such that:

exist $L:=Lan_H F$ punctually (or at least it exist for the objects $A,\ A_i$ of the above diagram i.e. exists $L(A_i):=\varinjlim_{(B, b)\in H\downarrow A_i} F(B)$ and $L(A):=\varinjlim_{(B, b)\in H\downarrow A} F(B)$).

we have that $L(A)=\varinjlim_i L(A_i)$.

Consider the colimit category $\widehat{HA}:=\varinjlim_i H\downarrow A_i$, the functors $F\circ \pi_{A_i}:H\downarrow A_i\to \mathcal{B}\to \mathcal{C}$ induce a funtor $\hat{F}: \varinjlim_i H\downarrow A_i \to \mathcal{B}$ and is not hard verify that $\varinjlim_i L(A_i)=\varinjlim_i \varinjlim_{(B, b)\in H\downarrow A_i} F(B)= \varinjlim_{(B, b)\in \widehat{HA}} F(B)= \varinjlim \widehat{F}$.

Then the natural morphisms $\phi: \varinjlim_i L(A_i)\to L(A)$ is induced by the natural functor $\Phi: \widehat{HA}\to H\downarrow A $, then $\phi$ is a isomorphism (for any $F$ such that..) iff the functor $\Phi$ is final i.e. iff each morphism $H(B)\to A $ has a factorization on some $H(B')\to A_i\to A$ (through a morphism $B\to B'$) and two such factorization are connected in $H\downarrow A$.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

John Bourke's and Buschi Sergio's answers are correct, but I'd like to put some perspective on them.

I'll call my functors $f:C\to A$ and $g\colon C\to B$, and I want to understand when $\mathrm{LKan}_g f: B\to A$ is colimit preserving. I'll assume that $A$ and $B$ are cocomplete and $C$ is small, so all Kan extensions are pointwise Kan extensions, i.e., satisfying $$ (\mathrm{LKan}_g f)(b) = \mathrm{colim}_{c,g(c)\to b} f(c). $$ (The colimit is indexed over the comma category $C\times_B B_{/b}$, but I'll generally write colimits using a representative object of the indexing category.)

I'll show that, for fixed $g$, that $\mathrm{LKan}_gf$ is colimit preserving for every $f$ if and only if it is so for a "universal example" of a left Kan extension along $g$, which turns out to be exactly the "restricted Yoneda functor" of $g$.

First look at the special case of $B=\mathrm{PSh}(C)$, with $g=\rho\colon C\to \mathrm{PSh}(C)$ the Yoneda embedding. Then $\widehat{f}:=\mathrm{LKan}_\rho f \colon \mathrm{Psh}(C)\to A$ is colimit preserving, satisfies $\widehat{f}\rho =f$, and is in fact the essentially unique colimit preserving extension of $f$ to the presheaf category. In particular, if $f=\rho\colon C\to A=\mathrm{PSh}(C)$ is also the Yoneda functor, then $\widehat{\rho}=\mathrm{Id}\colon \mathrm{PSh}(C)\to \mathrm{PSh}(C)$.

The functor $\widehat{f}$ is colimit preserving because it is actually a left adjoint. Its right adjoint is the restricted Yoneda functor $R_f\colon A\to \mathrm{Psh}(C)$, defined by $$ R_f(a) = [f(-), a]_C $$ (I'm using $[x,y]_C$ for the hom-set.) To see this, I need to describe a natural bijection between $[\widehat{f}(X), a]_A$ and $[X,R_f(a)]_{\mathrm{Psh(C)}}$, where $X\in \mathrm{PSh}(C)$. When $X=\rho(c)$ is a representable presheaf this is easy, since $\widehat{f}(\rho(c))=f(c)$, while for general $X$ use the facts that $X$ is tautologically a colimit of representables: $X=\mathrm{colim}_{c,\rho(c)\to X}\rho(c)$, while $\widehat{f}=\mathrm{LKan}_\rho f$ is a pointwise Kan extension so $\widehat{f}(X) = \mathrm{colim}_{c,\rho(c)\to X} f(c)$, so we can reduce to the case of representable $X$.

Here is the key claim: the adjoint $R_f$ to the left Kan extension $\widehat{f}=\mathrm{LKan}_\rho f$ is also a left Kan extension.

Claim. We have $R_f=\mathrm{LKan}_f \rho \colon A\to \mathrm{PSh}(C)$.

Proof. Again we have a pointwise Kan extension, so we can compute $$ (\mathrm{LKan}_f \rho)(a) = \mathrm{colim}_{c,f(c)\to a} [-,c]_C. $$ Evaluating this at any object $x\in C$ gives $$ (\mathrm{LKan}_f \rho)(a)(x) = \mathrm{colim}_{c,f(c)\to a} [x,c]_C = \mathrm{colim}_{c,x\to c, f(c)\to a} *. $$ The last colimit is the set of components of the indexing category, and is easily seen to be [f(c),a]_C, as desired.

Reversing the roles of $f$ and $g$, we can now answer the original question in the case that $f=\rho\colon C\to \mathrm{Psh}(C)=A$, and for general $g\colon C\to B$.

Corollary. We have $\mathrm{LKan}_g \rho = R_g\colon B\to \mathrm{PSh}(C)$, so it preserves colimits if and only if $[g(c),-]_B \colon B\to \mathrm{Set}$ preserves colimits for all $c\in C$.

To answer the question in entirety, observe that $R_g$ is a kind of universal example of a left Kan extension along $g$.

Proposition. Given functors $f\colon C\to A$ and $g\colon C\to B$, we have $$ \mathrm{LKan}_g f = \widehat{f} (\mathrm{LKan}_g \rho) = \widehat{f} R_g \colon A\to B, $$ where $\widehat{f}\colon\mathrm{PSh}(C)\to A$ is the colimit preserving extenison of $A$.

Proof. Because $\widehat{f}$ preserves colimits, both left Kan extensions are computed pointwise using colimits over the same indexing category, and $\widehat{f}\rho=f$.

So now we have an answer.

Theorem. Given $g\colon C\to B$, we have that $\mathrm{LKan}_gf$ preserves colimits for any functor $f$ if and only if $R_g\colon \mathrm{PSh}(C)\to B$ preserves colimits.

Proof. If $R_g$ preserves colimits, then the previous proposition gives that $\mathrm{LKan}_gf$ does too. For the only if direction, remember that $\mathrm{LKan}_g \rho =R_g$.

Note that this criterion is a condition on $g$ only. I don't know of any criterion which is given by a condition on $f$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.