Not signed in (Sign In)

Start a new discussion

Not signed in

Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below

  • Sign in using OpenID

Site Tag Cloud

2-category 2-category-theory abelian-categories adjoint algebra algebraic algebraic-geometry algebraic-topology analysis analytic-geometry arithmetic arithmetic-geometry bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-theory cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive constructive-mathematics cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration foundation foundations functional-analysis functor galois-theory gauge-theory gebra geometric geometric-quantization geometry graph graphs gravity grothendieck group group-theory harmonic-analysis higher higher-algebra higher-category-theory higher-differential-geometry higher-geometry higher-lie-theory higher-topos-theory homological homological-algebra homotopy homotopy-theory homotopy-type-theory index-theory integration integration-theory k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure-theory modal modal-logic model model-category-theory monad monads monoidal monoidal-category-theory morphism motives motivic-cohomology nforum nlab noncommutative noncommutative-geometry number-theory of operads operator operator-algebra order-theory pages pasting philosophy physics pro-object probability probability-theory quantization quantum quantum-field quantum-field-theory quantum-mechanics quantum-physics quantum-theory question representation representation-theory riemannian-geometry scheme schemes set set-theory sheaf simplicial space spin-geometry stable-homotopy-theory string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory type type-theory universal variational-calculus

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to nForum
If you want to take part in these discussions either sign in now (if you have an account), apply for one now (if you don't).
    • CommentRowNumber1.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeApr 27th 2010

    added to transferred model structure a simple remark in a subsection Enrichement on conditions that allow to transfer also an enriched model structure.

    (The example I am thinking of is transferring the sSet-enriched model structure on cosimplicial rings to one on cosimplicial smooth algebras. But I won’t type that into the entry for the moment…)

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 26th 2010

    added to transferred model structure the (trivial) remark that transfer preserves right properness.

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeDec 30th 2018

    added citation to Lack, and move “cofibrantly generated” from the definition of transferred model structure to the general theorem about its existence.

    diff, v22, current

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeDec 30th 2018

    Separated out the proofs of factorization and acyclicity, added a version of the proof of factorization that uses algebraic technology rather than cofibrant generation, and mentioned another non-example (double categories).

    diff, v23, current

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2019

    Added the proof of acyclicity in the presence of path objects.

    diff, v24, current

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2019

    The second diagram in this proof is another garbled one. But when I copy and paste it at the Sandbox it looks fine. This is really weird (and a serious bug)!

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2019

    The other examples of this bug I encountered yesterday are here. Are other people seeing it too?

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2019

    Yes, I’m seeing these problems too.

  1. Thanks for raising. Cannot look into it now, but will do at the earliest opportunity. Thanks for trying out the new features, this is the best way to get them into ship shape :-).

  2. Not forgotten about this, but could not get to it today unfortunately.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 17th 2019

    In light of the now-known fact that any accessible wfs can be both left- and right-transferred, hence any accessible model category can be both left- and right-transferred in the presence of the acyclicity condition of the appropriate handedness, I rewrote this page to be more ambidextrous, specifying “right-transferred” and “left-transferred” as appropriate.

    diff, v26, current

  3. Re-rendered to fix Tikz diagrams. Look fine to me now, but please check.

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeFeb 13th 2019

    Added reference to Makkai-Rosicky, who show that right-lifted wfs preserve combinatoriality.

    diff, v28, current

  4. corrected an evident typo

    steveawodey

    diff, v32, current

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2022

    Adjusted references.

    diff, v37, current

    • CommentRowNumber16.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2022

    I have touched the formatting (and the punctuation) of the definition and the first existence theorems, just in order to make it all a little easier on the eye (hopefully)

    diff, v38, current

    • CommentRowNumber17.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2022

    have added publication data for:

    diff, v39, current

    • CommentRowNumber18.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2022

    also added publication data for:

    and its erratum:

    diff, v39, current

    • CommentRowNumber19.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2022
    • (edited Jul 21st 2022)

    I have added (here) statement of the following theorem (BHKKRS 2015, Thm. 2.23):


    Given a pair of adjoint functors 𝒟RL𝒞 \mathcal{D} \underoverset {\underset{R}{\longleftarrow}} {\overset{L}{\longrightarrow}} {\;\;\bot\;\;} \mathcal{C} such that:

    1. 𝒞\mathcal{C} and 𝒟\mathcal{D} are locally presentable categories,

    2. 𝒞\mathcal{C} is equipped with the structure of a cofibrantly generated model category (hence a combinatorial model category) with classes of (co-)/fibrations and weak equivalences Cof,Fib,WMor(𝒞)Cof, Fib, W \,\subset\, Mor(\mathcal{C}),

    3. RLP(L 1Cof)L 1(W)RLP\big( L^{-1} Cof \big) \,\subset\, L^{-1}(W) (i.e. co-anodyne maps are weak equivalences),

    then the left-transferred model category structure on 𝒟\mathcal{D} exists (i.e. with cofibrations L 1(Cof)L^{-1}(Cof) and weak equivalences L 1(W)L^{-1}(W)) and is itself cofibrantly generated.


    By the way, in the References-section it says that this article is about accessible instead of locally presentable transfer, and that the locally presentable left transfer is discussed in HTT – neither of which seems to be the case – am I missing something?

    diff, v39, current

    • CommentRowNumber20.
    • CommentAuthorDmitri Pavlov
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2022

    By the way, in the References-section it says that this article is about accessible instead of locally presentable transfer, and that the locally presentable left transfer is discussed in HTT – neither of which seems to be the case – am I missing something?

    Added in Revision 28 by Mike Shulman on February 13, 2019.

    As far as I can see, the only left-transferred model structure discussed by Lurie is the injective model structure, which is constructed using the Smith recognition theorem.

    The same revision also claims that Makkai–Rosický discuss left transfer in their paper Cellular categories, but I am unable to find anything about left transfer there.

    • CommentRowNumber21.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2022

    Thanks for the sanity check!

    I’ll wait a little, but it seems like we should adjust the wording.

    • CommentRowNumber22.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2022

    I have tried to polish up the list of references on the existence of right transfer, now starting here.

    diff, v43, current

    • CommentRowNumber23.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2022

    added pointer also to:

    and added actual mentioning of the term “Kan-transfer theorem” (why Kan alone?)

    diff, v44, current

    • CommentRowNumber24.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2022

    added pointer to:

    diff, v44, current

    • CommentRowNumber25.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 17th 2022

    I was about to add statement about the left tranferred model structure here being itself cofibrantly generated. But looking at Thm. 2.23 (p. 9) of BHKKRS15 it seems confusing: The statement announces cofibrant generation, but then the proof checks fibrant generation. No?

    Maybe I am misreading something. Have to interrupt now, will try again later.

    • CommentRowNumber26.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 17th 2022
    • (edited Aug 17th 2022)

    added pointer to:

    diff, v46, current

    • CommentRowNumber27.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 17th 2022
    • (edited Aug 17th 2022)

    Re #25:

    Oh, I see: the wording in that Thm.+Proof 2.23 is indeed a little off, but the cofibrant generation which the theorem advertises is part of the result by Makkai & Rosický that is being referenced (their Thm. 3.2 on p. 7 together with the later Rem. 3.8):

    A generating set of the left transferred cofibrations is given by those between κ\kappa-presentable objects.

    Hm, that’s weaker than I was hoping for: One would hope that the pre-images of the generating cofibrations in the codomain are at least “close to” being generating cofibrations of the transferred structure.

    • CommentRowNumber28.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 17th 2022

    So I have now made the argument for the proof of the combinatorial left transfer more explicit – here.

    Now that I have dug into this, I realize that this must be what the previous lemma (here) was alluding to (re #20 above).

    diff, v46, current

Add your comments
  • Please log in or leave your comment as a "guest post". If commenting as a "guest", please include your name in the message as a courtesy. Note: only certain categories allow guest posts.
  • To produce a hyperlink to an nLab entry, simply put double square brackets around its name, e.g. [[category]]. To use (La)TeX mathematics in your post, make sure Markdown+Itex is selected below and put your mathematics between dollar signs as usual. Only a subset of the usual TeX math commands are accepted: see here for a list.

  • (Help)