MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $A$ and $B$ be two dg-categories, $F: A \rightarrow B$ and $G: B \rightarrow A$ are two functors. Then what is the definition that $F$ and $G$ form an adjoint pair?

In my mind $F\dashv G$ requires that there is a quasi-isomorphism between the cochain complext $\text{Hom}_B(Fx, y) $ and $\text{Hom}_A(x, Gy)$ for any $x\in \text{Obj}(A)$ and $y\in \text{Obj}(B)$. Can we make it more precise?

share|cite|improve this question
It is not clear to me that there is such a thing as "the" definition. Probably different definitions are suitable for different purposes. For any monoidal category $V$ there is a $2$-category of $V$-enriched categories, $V$-enriched functors, and $V$-enriched natural transformations, and the unit-counit definition of an adjunction naturally generalizes to any $2$-category including this one. But the resulting notion of adjunction may be too restrictive...? – Qiaochu Yuan Sep 23 '12 at 8:14
@Zhaoting Your second paragraph looks precise enough to me. – Fernando Muro Sep 23 '12 at 9:34
I'll leave this as a comment, since I don't have an answer. Certainly "there is" means that you have chosen one naturally in $x$ and $y$. The subtle question is to understand how "natural" the choice must be. One should not expect it to be strictly functorial in $x$ and $y$, but rather functorial up to higher homotopies. – Theo Johnson-Freyd Sep 23 '12 at 17:16
@Theo: Yes that's what I am worried about. – Zhaoting Wei Sep 23 '12 at 19:16
You might find this n-lab page on adjoint functors in (oo,1)-categories helpful,1)-functor. – Sam Gunningham Sep 25 '12 at 5:05

A good notion of adjointness in the dg-world should perhaps involve derived categories and quasi-functors.

Definition: A quasi-functor $F: \mathcal A \to \mathcal B$ is a dg-bimodule $F \in \mathcal A \text{-dgm-} \mathcal B$ (written $F=F(B,A)$, covariant in $A$ and contravariant in $B$), such that for all $A \in \mathcal A$, $F(-,A)$ is quasi-isomorphic (that is, isomorphic in the derived category $\mathbf{D}(\mathcal B)$) to a representable right $\mathcal B$-dg-module. As a matter of notation, I will sometimes write $F(A)$ as a shorthand for $F(-,A)$.

Note that any bimodule $F \in \mathcal A \text{-dgm-} \mathcal B$ can be viewed as a dg-functor $F: \mathcal B^{\text{op}} \otimes \mathcal A \to \mathbf{C}_{\text{dg}}(k)$, where $\mathbf{C}_{\text{dg}}(k)$ is the dg-category of cochain complexes over our ground commutative ring $k$. So, $F \in \text{dgm-}(\mathcal B \otimes \mathcal A^{\text{op}})$, a right $\mathcal (\mathcal B \otimes \mathcal A^{\text{op}})$-dg-module.

The category $\mathrm{rep}(\mathcal A,\mathcal B)$ of quasi-functors is defined to be the full subcategory of the derived category $\mathbf D(\mathcal B \otimes \mathcal A^{\text{op}})$ whose objects are the quasi-functors $\mathcal A \to \mathcal B$. Composition of quasi-functors $F: \mathcal A \to \mathcal B$ and $G: \mathcal B \to \mathcal C$ is obtained by the derived tensor product: \begin{equation} G \circ F = F \otimes_{\mathcal B}^{\mathbb L} G. \end{equation} As expected, given a quasi-functor $F: \mathcal A \to \mathcal B$, one has "composition functors" such as \begin{equation*} F^* : \mathrm{rep}(\mathcal B, \mathcal C) \to \mathrm{rep}(\mathcal A,\mathcal C). \end{equation*} Now, let $\tau : F \to G$ be a morphism of quasi-functors $\mathcal A \to \mathcal B$. We can speak of its "components" $\tau_A : F(A) \to G(A)$ (morphisms in $\mathbf{D}(\mathcal A)$), for any object $A \in \mathcal A$. In fact, an object $A \in \mathcal A$ can be viewed as an element of $\mathrm{rep}(\mathbf 1 , \mathcal A)$, where $\mathbf 1$ is the dg-category with an object and endomorphism ring $k$: we have the derived Yoneda embedding \begin{equation*} h_{-} : H^0(\mathcal A) \hookrightarrow \mathbf{D}(\mathcal A), \end{equation*} and we may view $h_A$ as a bimodule, $h_A \in \mathbf{1}\text{-dgm-}\mathcal A$. Next, recall that, given $F: \mathcal A \to \mathcal B$ any quasi-functor (or even bimodule), we have \begin{equation*} h_A \otimes_{\mathcal A}^{\mathbb L} F = h_A \otimes_{\mathcal A} F = F(A), \end{equation*} without the need of taking the derived tensor product, since $h_A$ is cofibrant as a right $\mathcal A$-module. In other words: \begin{equation*} h_A^*(-) = h_A \otimes_{\mathcal A} - : \mathrm{rep}(\mathcal A, \mathcal B) \to \mathrm{rep}(\mathbf 1,\mathcal B), \end{equation*} and this functor sends a morphism $\tau: F \to G$ to what we call its component $\tau_A : F(A) \to G(A)$, as needed.

Finally, I may write down my definition of adjoint quasi-functors. If $F: \mathcal A \to \mathcal B$ and $G: \mathcal B \to \mathcal A$ are quasi-functors, then we could say that $F \dashv G$ if there is a morphism of quasi functors $\varepsilon : 1 \to GF$ such that the following composition \begin{equation} \mathrm{rep}(\mathbf 1, \mathcal B)(F(A), B) \xrightarrow{G_*} \mathrm{rep}(\mathbf 1, \mathcal A)(GF(A), G(B)) \xrightarrow{\mathrm{Hom}(\varepsilon_A, G(B))} \mathrm{rep}(\mathbf 1, \mathcal A)(A, G(B)) \end{equation} is an isomorphism, for all $A \in \mathcal A, B \in \mathcal B$. where $A \in \mathcal A$ and $B \in \mathcal B$ are again shorthands for $\mathcal A(-,A) \in \mathrm{rep}(\mathbf 1, \mathcal A)$ and $\mathcal B(-,B) \in \mathrm{rep}(\mathbf 1, \mathcal B)$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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