In $Set$, we have an $(Epi,Mono)$ orthogonal factorization system. Strikingly, if we reverse the roles, we get the no-less-important $(Mono,Epi)$ weak factorization system.
In the $\infty$-category $Spaces$ of spaces, the most direct analog of the $(Epi,Mono)$ orthogonal factorization system on $Set$ is the $(Effective Epi, Mono)$ orthogonal factorization system, but this is just the $(-1)$th in a whole tower: for each $n \in \mathbb Z_{\geq -2}$, we have an $(n-connected, n-truncated)$ factorization system [1].
It seems that, just as in the analogous case in $Set$, one can take the left half of each these orthogonal factorization systems, and view it as the right half of a weak factorization system $(\mathcal L_n, n-connected)$ [2]. To see this, one shows that the $n$-connected maps are precisely the maps which are weakly right orthogonal to the maps $\{S^k \to 1 \mid -1 \leq k \leq n\}$, and applies the small object argument to obtain factorizations.
In $Set$, we have the cute fact that the resulting weak factorization system $(Mono,Epi)$ is just the original orthgonal factorization system $(Epi,Mono)$ with the left and right classes swapped. This is not the case in $Spaces$, even when $n=-1$: a map $A \xrightarrow i B$ of spaces is weakly left orthogonal to the effective epimorphisms if and only if it is a coproduct inclusion $A \to A \amalg S$ where $S$ is discrete; this is more restrictive than being a monomorphism [3]. I don't know how to characterize the left class $\mathcal L_n$ for $n\geq 0$ as cleanly. In fact, unlike the case in $Set$, I don't think we have either containment $\mathcal L_n \subseteq n-truncated$ or $n-truncated \subseteq \mathcal L_n$ in general. This leads to my
Questions: Let $n \in \mathbb Z_{\geq -2}$.
Is there a good characterization of the class of maps $\mathcal L_n$, i.e. the maps of spaces which are weakly left orthgonal to the $n$-connected maps?
What would be a good name for the maps of $\mathcal L_n$?
Note that by the small object argument, the maps of $\mathcal L_n$ are precisely the retracts of transfinite composites of cobase-changes of coproducts of the maps $\{S^k \to 1 \mid k \geq -1\}$. So in some sense this is a quite explicit class of maps. By "characterization" I suppose I mean something which can be "checked directly" without having to find all the data of a construction of this form.
[1] Here a map is said to be $n$-truncated or $n$-connected if its fibers are all so. This convention is off by one from the most classical convention.
[2] Some care should be taken with the definition of a weak factorization system $\infty$-categorically: say that a morphism $A \xrightarrow i B$ is weakly orthogonal to a morphism $X \xrightarrow p Y$ if the map $Hom(B,X) \to Hom(B,Y) \times_{Hom(A,Y)} Hom(A,X)$ is an effective epimorphism. Spelled out, this says that if we have a commutative square -- i.e. morphisms $A \xrightarrow u X$, $B \xrightarrow v Y$ along with a homotopy $\gamma: pu \sim vi$, then there exists a lift, i.e. $B \xrightarrow w X$ and homotopies $\alpha: wi \sim u$, $\beta: pw \sim v$ and (here's the only subtle part) a homotopy of homotopies from the composite $\beta \ast \alpha$ to $\gamma$. Then a weak factorization system is, as usual, a pair of classes of morphisms $(\mathcal L, \mathcal R)$ which are complements to each other with respect to weak orthogonality, such that every morphism admits a factorization as a morphism in $\mathcal L$ followed by a morphism in $\mathcal R$.
[3] Recall that a monomorphism of spaces is a coproduct inclusion $A \to A \amalg S$ where $S$ may be an arbitrary space.