13
$\begingroup$

As far as I know, there is no "official" notation for the left adjoint of a functor $F : \mathcal{C} \to \mathcal{D}$ if it exists. I have seen the notation $F^*$ sometimes, but this looks only nice when $F$ is already written as $F_*$, which is not practical. (This notation is then motivated by direct and inverse image functors. And it seems to be quite common for adjunctions between preorders aka Galois connections.) Similarly, I have seen the notation $F_*$ for the right adjoint of $F$, which only looks nice when $F$ is already written as $F^*$. I have also seen the notation $F^{\dagger}$ for the right adjoint, which looks nice, but then how would you denote the left adjoint if it exists? Perhaps ${}^{\dagger} F$? I don't want to start a debate here what is a good notation or not, since this is subjective anyway and is not suited for mathoverflow. I would like to know:

Are there any textbooks, influential papers or monographs on category theory which have introduced a notation for the left adjoint of $F$? Is there any notation which has been used by multiple authors?

Just to avoid any misunderstanding: Of course there is the official notation $F \dashv G$ when $F$ is left adjoint to $G$, but $\dashv$ is a relation symbol. I am interested in a function symbol (which makes sense since left and right adjoints are unique up to canonical isomorphism if they exist).

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I've no idea how widely used it is, but I like $F^L$ for the left adjoint and $F^R$ for the right one. $\endgroup$ – Adrien Feb 1 at 13:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Adrien Thanks. Can you give an example of a book where it is used? $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 1 at 15:59
  • $\begingroup$ You could write it as a formula using limits: $d\mapsto \lim(\pi:d/F\to C)$. $\endgroup$ – Oscar Cunningham Feb 1 at 17:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think the use of $F$ for a start is problematic. Often $F$ is the left adjoint as it is often used for 'free' with $U$ or similar standing for 'underlying'. Different contexts require different notation but I have used $L$ for the left adjoint and $R$ for the right when discussing adjoint functors when teaching category theory. It might help if you gave more idea of the context in which you are wanting this. $\endgroup$ – Tim Porter Feb 1 at 17:19
  • $\begingroup$ @TimPorter I completely agree. But sometimes the letters $U,L,R$ are already taken, or when no other functor is in the context, it is very common to name the functor $F$. By the way, Borceux calls $F$ the right and $G$ the left adjoint, yikes! $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 1 at 20:32
17
$\begingroup$

In EGA 0.1.5.2-3 (from the 1971 Springer edition) the right adjoint and the left adjoint of a functor $F$ are denoted by $F^{\rm ad}$ and ${}^{\rm ad}\!F$, respectively.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I am very happy about this answer, and I accept it right away (even though there might be other books with other notations) because EGA I has/had such a huge impact. I didn't read all of the preliminaries, so I wasn't aware that this notation is introduced there. Well spotted! $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 1 at 20:37
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Let me also remark that the same section introduces a notation for the bijection $$\hom(F(x),y) \xrightarrow{\sim} \hom(x,F^{\text{ad}}(y)),$$ namely $f \mapsto f^{\flat}$, and $g \mapsto g^{\sharp}$ for the inverse. At least, this notation can be seen a lot in EGA. $\endgroup$ – Martin Brandenburg Feb 1 at 20:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I am quite sure that the "ad"-notation does not occur in EGA outside the cited section. $\endgroup$ – Fred Rohrer Feb 1 at 21:11
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I've seen the notation $\lceil f \rceil$ and $\lfloor f \rfloor$ being used for the isomorphism, mainly in a few comp sci papers $\endgroup$ – WorldSEnder Feb 1 at 23:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @WorldSEnder I think I've used this notation myself, and it comes by analogy to the fact that floor and ceiling are adjoints to the inclusion of posets $\mathbb{Z} \hookrightarrow \mathbb{R}$. $\endgroup$ – Robert Furber Feb 2 at 1:29

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.