12
$\begingroup$

In Definition 4.1.1 of $(\infty,2)$-Categories and the Goodwillie Calculus I, Lurie defines a weak $\infty$-bicategory to be a scaled simplicial set that has the extension property with respect to every scaled anodyne morphism. In Theorem 4.2.7, he defines a model structure on $\operatorname{Set}_{\Delta}^{\operatorname{sc}}$, the category of scaled simplical sets, and in Definition 4.2.8 he defines an $\infty$-bicategory to be a scaled simplicial set that is a fibrant object in the model category $\operatorname{Set}_{\Delta}^{\operatorname{sc}}$.

Every $\infty$-bicategory is a weak $\infty$-bicategory, because every scaled anodyne morphism is a bicategorical equivalence (Proposition 3.1.13). What about the converse? Is every weak $\infty$-bicategory an $\infty$-bicategory?

EDIT:

I think I now have a proof that, indeed, every weak $\infty$-bicategory is an $\infty$-bicategory. I will post it tomorrow.

$\endgroup$
11
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ A side note: I bigly disliked the morphism of Definition 3.1.3.(B) ( - which, by the way, contains a typo: the first instance of $\Delta^{\{1,3,4\}}$ should be replaced by $\Delta^{\{0,1,4\}}$ - ), but was very happy to find out that we may replace it (without changing the class of scaled anodyne morphisms) by the morphisms $f_1$ and $f_2$ of Remark 3.1.4. $\endgroup$ Sep 11 '17 at 23:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm sorry, my remark above that we may replace the morphism in Definition 3.1.3.(B) by the morphisms $f_1$ and $f_2$ of Remark 3.1.4 without changing the class of scaled anodyne morphisms is most probably false. I found a mistake in my calculations. So sad. $\endgroup$ Sep 12 '17 at 2:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The thing to remember about Verity's model is that the complicial horn fillers are all obtained from those in dimension 1 and 2 (which encode transport along equivalences and composition of 1-cells respectively) by taking pushout-joins with cofibrations (specifically, inclusions $\partial \Delta^n \to \Delta^n$. Likewise, the complicial thinness extensions are all obtained from the one in dimension 2 (which encodes 2-out-of-3) by pushout-joins with cofibrations. So the basic principle is just that everything is stable under join. $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Sep 17 '17 at 15:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is discussed in Observation 38 of Weak Complicial Sets I in the course of showing the related fact that Verity's anodyne extensions are closed under what I referred to as "pushout-joins", which he calls "corner-joins". $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Sep 17 '17 at 18:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You just have to pushout-join on both sides! $\endgroup$
    – Tim Campion
    Sep 18 '17 at 11:21
8
$\begingroup$

A few years later, it has been shown by Gagna, Harpaz, and Lanari that the answer is yes. Every weak $\infty$-bicategory is an $\infty$-bicategory.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.