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

Let $B$ be a weakly contractible category (that is, it has a weakly contractible nerve), and let $F:E\to B$ be a Grothendieck fibration. Suppose further that the ordinary fibers of the Grothendieck fibration, $F^{-1}(b)$ for each $b\in \mathrm{Ob}(B)$ are themselves weakly contractible. Does it follow that $E$ is weakly contractible?

share|cite|improve this question
Does Quillen's theorem A ( imply this? It does if the fibers $F^{-1}(b)$ are the same as the geometric realizations of the comma categories $F / b$. – Evan Jenkins Jul 24 '11 at 5:27
I think that because the map is supposed to be a fibration $F^{-1}b$ should be weakly equivalent to $F/b$ so indeed. – Torsten Ekedahl Jul 24 '11 at 6:57
Thanks, your answers sent me in the right direction. – Harry Gindi Jul 24 '11 at 7:02
To elaborate on Torsten's point (also see the reference in my answer): Any functor admitting an adjoint is a weak (Thomason) equivalence, and it is not hard to show that the property of being a prefibration (every map $a\to F(x)$ lifts to a weakly cartesian map $y\to x$ (weak cartesianness is a universal factorization only over identities) is equivalent to showing that the canonical functor from the fiber $F^{-1}(b)\to b\F$, the coslice category, admits a right adjoint. – Harry Gindi Jul 24 '11 at 8:09
up vote 2 down vote accepted

This follows easily from proposition 2.1.10 of La théorie de l'homotopie de Grothendieck (Astérisque, 301) by G. Maltsiniotis.

The statement there is that given any functor $u:A\to B$ in $\mathrm{Cat}/C$ between (Grothendieck) prefibrations $A\to C$ and $B\to C$ whose fibers $u\times_C c:A\times_C c \to B\times_C c$ for all $c\in \mathrm{Ob}(C)$ are $W$-equivalences with respect to a fixed fundamental localizer $W$ on $Cat$, the functor $u$ is a colocal $W$-equivalence over $C$ (and therefore a $W$-equivalence).

The case in my question then follows by letting $W$ be the minimal fundamental localizer, by letting $C=B$, and letting the prefibration $B\to C$ be the identity map.

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.