3
$\begingroup$

Are there necessary/sufficient conditions for a functor $f\colon \mathcal C\to \widehat{\mathcal A}$ to induce an equivalence $\text{Lan}_yf=F\colon \widehat{\mathcal C}\leftrightarrows \widehat{\mathcal A}$, so that $\cal A,C$ are Morita equivalent categories?

$\endgroup$
1
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Assuming $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{C}$ are small, $[\mathcal{A}^\mathrm{op}, \mathbf{Set}]$ and $[\mathcal{C}^\mathrm{op}, \mathbf{Set}]$ are equivalent if and only if $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{C}$ have the same Cauchy-completion. If you study the proof more carefully you should be able to extract the necessary/sufficient conditions you want. $\endgroup$
    – Zhen Lin
    Apr 17, 2014 at 9:23

2 Answers 2

6
$\begingroup$

Expanding on Zhen's comment into an answer, the Cauchy completion of $A$ can be identified with the small-projective objects in $\widehat{A}$ (i.e. those where mapping out of them preserves all small colimits). Thus, an equivalence of presheaf categories must restrict to an equivalence of Cauchy completions. It follows that if $f:C\to \widehat{A}$ induces such an equivalence, it must land inside the small-projectives and be Cauchy-surjective onto them. In other words, it must be the case that an object of $\widehat{A}$ is small-projective iff it is a retract of an object in the image of $f$. Moreover, $f$ must be fully faithful, since $C$ embeds fully faithfully in $\widehat{C}$. Conversely, if $f$ satisfies these two conditions, then it induces an equivalence of Cauchy completions, hence of presheaf categories.

So the answer is, it is necessary and sufficient that

  1. $f$ is fully faithful, and
  2. an object of $\widehat{A}$ is small-projective iff it is a retract of an object in the image of $f$.
$\endgroup$
5
$\begingroup$

Adding my two cents to Mike's answer. Here is a way to show that $f$ establishes a Morita equivalence as described in the question iff it gives rise to an equivalence between the Cauchy completions. It depends on few facts some of which are not trivial.

Let $\mathbf{Prof}$ denote the bicategory whose objects are categories $A, B \cdots$ and whose morphisms are profunctors $F : A \nrightarrow B$.

A presheaf category $\hat{A}$ is $\mathbf{Prof}(A, I)$, where $I$ is the terminal category.

A functor $f : C \to \hat{A}$ can be regarded as a profunctor $F : A \nrightarrow C$, and $\mathrm{Lan}_yf$ is the functor $-\circ F : \mathbf{Prof}(C, I) \to \mathbf{Prof}(A, I)$.

Every cocontinuous functor between presheaf categories comes from a profunctor. It follows that $(-\circ F)$ is an equivalence of categories iff $F$ is an equivalence in $\mathbf{Prof}$.

In $\mathbf{Prof}$ there are equivalences $A \simeq \bar{A}$ between a category and its Cauchy completion. Composing $F$ from both sides with these equivalences we get a profunctor $\bar{F} : \bar{A} \nrightarrow \bar{C}$. Immediately, $F$ is an equivalence if and only if $\bar{F}$ is an equivalence.

Every morphism in $\mathbf{Prof}$ whose target is a Cauchy complete category and which has a right adjoint converges to a functor. Hence, if $\bar{F}$ is an equivalence, then it comes from a functor $\bar{A} \to \bar{C}$ which is equivalence in $\mathbf{Cat}$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ This also generalizes for enriched categories. $\endgroup$ Apr 20, 2014 at 23:58

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.