8
$\begingroup$

A $\ast$-autonomous category is usually defined as a monoidal category with some extra structure, including that it is closed monoidal (depending on the definition this may be assumed or proved). However, in many examples (such as sup-lattices) it seems that the closed structure is more fundamental, with the tensor product being defined from this as $X\otimes Y = [X,Y^*]^*$.

Is there a notion of $\ast$-autonomous closed category that is equivalent to the usual notion of $\ast$-autonomous category, but where the axioms are expressed only in terms of the closed structure? It might involve a dualizing object in a closed category, but offhand that doesn't seem quite enough; also my own inclination would be to axiomatize the operation $(-)^*$ rather than the dualizing object (since this also is what I see more naturally in examples like suplattices).

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Barr's "Definition D" in non-symmetric $\ast$-autonomous categories is a closed category $\mathcal{A}$ together with an $\mathcal{A}$-enriched equivalence $(-)^* : \mathcal{A}^{\mathrm{op}} \simeq \mathcal{A}$ and an $\mathcal{A}$-enriched natural isomorphism $[A,[B^*,C^*]] \cong [[A,B]^*,C^*]$.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

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.