4
$\begingroup$

There is this (folklore?) fact: for a commutative ring $R$, the category of $R$-modules is equivalent to the category of internal abelian groups in the slice category $\operatorname{Commutative rings}/R$.

I would like to replace here $\operatorname{Commutative rings}$ with some ($\infty$-?)category $\bf X$ of symmetric monoidal (should I say E$_\infty$?) stable $\infty$-categories. Then presumably "internal abelian groups" is not relevant, as stable $\infty$-categories have their own intrinsic sort of "abelian group" structure. On the other hand, also presumably, just taking slice over $R$ would not give any notion of module readily: for whatever kind of morphism $f:R'\to R$ of monoidal $\infty$-categories, I don't see any sensible way to define some action of $R$ on the fibre of $f$ (or is there any?).

So my question is what kind of structures in ${\bf X}/R$ would provide good notion of $R$-module in the stable $\infty$-setting? Or maybe there are different notions of module and some of them must be captured in entirely different ways?

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

11
$\begingroup$

The ∞-categorical analog of the fact you mention can be found in Higher Algebra, corollary 7.3.4.14:

Let $\operatorname{CAlg}$ be the category of $E_\infty$-rings and $A\in \operatorname{CAlg}$. Then there is a canonical equivalence

$$\operatorname{Sp}(\operatorname{CAlg}_{/A})\simeq \operatorname{Mod}_A$$

between the stabilization of the ∞- category of $E_∞$-rings with a map to $A$ and the ∞-category of $A$-modules.

Note that when $A$ is a discrete commutative ring, $\operatorname{Mod}_A$ is the usual derived category of $A$ (so not the 1-category of $A$-modules).

In fact a similar result holds for algebras over any coherent operad (ibid. Theorem 7.3.4.13). So one would be tempted to take $\operatorname{Sp}(\mathcal{C}_{/A})$ to be the definition of "$A$-modules" for $A\in\mathcal{C}$. It is not clear at all that this is a well behaved notion though: in the case where $\mathcal{C}$ is the ∞-category of animated rings (i.e. the ∞-category obtained by inverting the weak equivalences in the category of simplicial rings), this does not recover the natural notion of module: see for example the discussion in Section 25.3.3 of Lurie's Spectral Algebraic Geometry.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, great! Indeed it is very interesting what does one get for, say, A$_\infty$-rings (for discrete associative rings one gets bimodules), or in the L$_\infty$ case... $\endgroup$ Jul 24, 2021 at 11:48
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @მამუკაჯიბლაძე For $E_1$-rings one indeed gets bimodules, that's the more general version of the result I cited (HA.7.3.4.13). I'm not sure what one gets for $L_\infty$-algebras, since that theorem holds only for operads in spaces (which the $L_\infty$-operad isn't) $\endgroup$ Jul 24, 2021 at 11:56

Your Answer

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

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