4
$\begingroup$

Let $\mathcal{C}$ be a Reedy category, $\mathcal{M}$ be a model category. Then consider $Fun(\mathcal{C}, \mathcal{M})$, the category of diagrams from $\mathcal{C}$ to $\mathcal{M}$ equipped with the Reedy model structure. I wonder if there is a simple characterization of fibrant, cofibrant objects in this category. Let $0,1$ be the initial and terminal object in $Fun(\mathcal{C}, \mathcal{M})$. It seems to me that for a map $0\to X$ its relative latching map at $c\in \mathcal{C}$ is isomorphic to the usual latching map $$ L_{c}X \to X $$ at $c\in\mathcal{M}$. On the other hand the relative matching map $X\to 1$ at $c\in \mathcal{C}$ is isomorphic to the usual matching map $$ X\to M_{c}X $$ Thus it follows that an object $X$ is Reedy fibrant (cofibrant) iff its matching (latching) maps are fibant (cofibrant).

a) Am I right? This in particular implies that the (co)simplicial frames defines in the Hovey's book: model categories(definition 5.2.7) are (co)simplicial resolutions in the sense of Hirschhorn (see definition 16.1.1 in model categories and their localizations).

b)Do you know more simpler characterization when $\mathcal{C}$ is the simplex category and $\mathcal{M}$ is a model category with some conditions (for example cofibrantly generated,...)?

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ There are some mild technical differences between Hovey's definition and Hirschhorn's definition, as I recall, particularly regarding what happens with non-(co)fibrant objects. $\endgroup$
    – Zhen Lin
    Sep 12, 2015 at 16:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ a) A Reedy diagram $X\colon\mathcal C\to \mathcal M$ is cofibrant iff all latching maps $L_cX\to X_c$ are cofibrations, $c\in Ob\mathcal C$. Dually for fibrant objects. b) No, this is the usual characterization also in the simplicial case. $\endgroup$ Sep 14, 2015 at 13:30

0

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.