MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

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

Suppose I know what the category of free algebras for a particular monad look like. Can I then describe what the category of Eilenberg–Moore algebras look like? E.g. Suppose that I have a good handle on a category $D$ and that I have two functors $F$ and $G$, with $G:D \to C$ and $F$ left-adjoint to $G$ and $F$ essentially surjective- this guarantees that this adjunction exhibits $D$ as the Kleisli-category for the monad $T:=GF$ on $C$ (see Characterization of Kleisli adjunctions). Is there a way to exhibit the Eilenberg–Moore category $C^T$ as "generalized objects of $D$"? This is somewhat vague of a question I realize, but I'm not sure how to make it more precise. (Feel free to help me do so).

EDIT: To be slightly more specific, in "Toposes, Triples, and Theories" it is said that the Eilenberg-Moore category "is in efect all the possible quotients of objects in Kleisli's category". Can anyone make this precise in a way that answers my question??

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 10 down vote accepted

One nice result is Street's theorem 14 in The formal theory of monads, generalized in Elementary cosmoi, which says that $C^T$ is isomorphic to the full subcategory of $[(C_T)^{\mathrm{op}}, \mathrm{Set}]$ containing those presheaves that become representable when precomposed with the inclusion $C \to C_T$. That is, $C^T$ is the pullback of $[F^{\mathrm{op}},\mathrm{Set}]$ along the Yoneda embedding. So at least informally you can think of T-algebras as being represented by certain formal colimits of free algebras.

I think it's standard, too, that every algebra has a canonical presentation -- its (2-truncated) bar resolution -- as the coequalizer of maps between free objects. Can't think of a good reference at the moment, but Mac Lane has a section on the bar construction, and there's some good stuff on nlab. Maybe try Kelly & Power, Adjunctions whose counits are coequalizers, and presentations of finitary enriched monads, JPAA 89 (1993).

I don't know if there's a relationship between these two ideas, but I'd be very interested to find out! (Can't do it myself, I'm supposed to be on holiday.)

share|cite|improve this answer
The fact that every algebra has a canonical presentation by free ones is usually presented as part of the proof of the adjoint functor theorem, e.g. section VI.7 of CWM. – Mike Shulman Jun 20 '10 at 16:40
I've seen this characterization of algebras (as presheaves on the kleisli category) attributed (here: to Linton, "Relative functorial semantics: adjointness results", Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 99, 1969. – Noam Zeilberger Jun 20 '10 at 20:43
@M.S.: (I presume you mean Beck's theorem.) Yes, thanks, that's where I'd seen this before. @N.Z.: Street doesn't attribute this result directly to Linton, but now that I look closely I find he calls it (in the introduction) 'the usual interpretation' of algebras. – Finn Lawler Jun 20 '10 at 21:32
Thanks a lot. This is exactly what I was looking for. – David Carchedi Jun 21 '10 at 14:39

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.