Skip to main content
Name of reference; PDF -> abs
Source Link
LSpice
  • 12.9k
  • 4
  • 45
  • 69

Can we define derived functors in model categories without functorial factorisations?

Let $F: \mathcal{C} \to \mathcal{D}$ be a left Quillen functor between model categories. In Definition 2.16 of Goerss-SchemmerhornGoerss–Schemmerhorn - Model Categories and Simplicial Methods, the left derived functor $LF: \mathcal{C} \to \operatorname{Ho}(\mathcal{D})$ is defined by $X \mapsto F(P)$. However, the article does not define the functor on maps.

In practice, this is often done under the assumption that $\mathcal{C}$ has functorial factorisation (or at least functorial cofibrant replacement), but Goerss-SchemmerhornGoerss–Schemmerhorn seem to imply that this assumption is not needed. Could someone help me understand a construction that works in general, without requiring functorial factorisation?

My best guess is to fix an arbitrary cofibrant replacement $P_X \to X$ for each $X \in \mathcal{C}$, and then try to construct a well-defined map $F(P_X) \to F(P_Y)$ in the homotopy category of $\mathcal{D}$, given a morphism $f:X\to Y$. We get morphisms $$ F(P_X) \rightarrow F(X) \overset{f}{\to} F(Y) \leftarrow F(P_Y). $$ If the right-hand arrow were a weak equivalence, then we would be done, since it would be invertible in the homotopy category. This is the case if $Y$ is cofibrant, since left Quillen functors preserve weak equivalences between cofibrant objects. They do not preserve weak equivalences in general though, so the approach doesn't seem to work.

Can we define derived functors in model categories without functorial factorisations

Let $F: \mathcal{C} \to \mathcal{D}$ be a left Quillen functor between model categories. In Definition 2.16 of Goerss-Schemmerhorn, the left derived functor $LF: \mathcal{C} \to \operatorname{Ho}(\mathcal{D})$ is defined by $X \mapsto F(P)$. However, the article does not define the functor on maps.

In practice, this is often done under the assumption that $\mathcal{C}$ has functorial factorisation (or at least functorial cofibrant replacement), but Goerss-Schemmerhorn seem to imply that this assumption is not needed. Could someone help me understand a construction that works in general, without requiring functorial factorisation?

My best guess is to fix an arbitrary cofibrant replacement $P_X \to X$ for each $X \in \mathcal{C}$, and then try to construct a well-defined map $F(P_X) \to F(P_Y)$ in the homotopy category of $\mathcal{D}$, given a morphism $f:X\to Y$. We get morphisms $$ F(P_X) \rightarrow F(X) \overset{f}{\to} F(Y) \leftarrow F(P_Y). $$ If the right-hand arrow were a weak equivalence, then we would be done, since it would be invertible in the homotopy category. This is the case if $Y$ is cofibrant, since left Quillen functors preserve weak equivalences between cofibrant objects. They do not preserve weak equivalences in general though, so the approach doesn't seem to work.

Can we define derived functors in model categories without functorial factorisations?

Let $F: \mathcal{C} \to \mathcal{D}$ be a left Quillen functor between model categories. In Definition 2.16 of Goerss–Schemmerhorn - Model Categories and Simplicial Methods, the left derived functor $LF: \mathcal{C} \to \operatorname{Ho}(\mathcal{D})$ is defined by $X \mapsto F(P)$. However, the article does not define the functor on maps.

In practice, this is often done under the assumption that $\mathcal{C}$ has functorial factorisation (or at least functorial cofibrant replacement), but Goerss–Schemmerhorn seem to imply that this assumption is not needed. Could someone help me understand a construction that works in general, without requiring functorial factorisation?

My best guess is to fix an arbitrary cofibrant replacement $P_X \to X$ for each $X \in \mathcal{C}$, and then try to construct a well-defined map $F(P_X) \to F(P_Y)$ in the homotopy category of $\mathcal{D}$, given a morphism $f:X\to Y$. We get morphisms $$ F(P_X) \rightarrow F(X) \overset{f}{\to} F(Y) \leftarrow F(P_Y). $$ If the right-hand arrow were a weak equivalence, then we would be done, since it would be invertible in the homotopy category. This is the case if $Y$ is cofibrant, since left Quillen functors preserve weak equivalences between cofibrant objects. They do not preserve weak equivalences in general though, so the approach doesn't seem to work.

Became Hot Network Question
Source Link

Can we define derived functors in model categories without functorial factorisations

Let $F: \mathcal{C} \to \mathcal{D}$ be a left Quillen functor between model categories. In Definition 2.16 of Goerss-Schemmerhorn, the left derived functor $LF: \mathcal{C} \to \operatorname{Ho}(\mathcal{D})$ is defined by $X \mapsto F(P)$. However, the article does not define the functor on maps.

In practice, this is often done under the assumption that $\mathcal{C}$ has functorial factorisation (or at least functorial cofibrant replacement), but Goerss-Schemmerhorn seem to imply that this assumption is not needed. Could someone help me understand a construction that works in general, without requiring functorial factorisation?

My best guess is to fix an arbitrary cofibrant replacement $P_X \to X$ for each $X \in \mathcal{C}$, and then try to construct a well-defined map $F(P_X) \to F(P_Y)$ in the homotopy category of $\mathcal{D}$, given a morphism $f:X\to Y$. We get morphisms $$ F(P_X) \rightarrow F(X) \overset{f}{\to} F(Y) \leftarrow F(P_Y). $$ If the right-hand arrow were a weak equivalence, then we would be done, since it would be invertible in the homotopy category. This is the case if $Y$ is cofibrant, since left Quillen functors preserve weak equivalences between cofibrant objects. They do not preserve weak equivalences in general though, so the approach doesn't seem to work.