Not signed in (Sign In)

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 book bundles calculus categorical categories category category-theory chern-weil-theory cohesion cohesive-homotopy-type-theory cohomology colimits combinatorics comma complex complex-geometry computable-mathematics computer-science constructive cosmology deformation-theory descent diagrams differential differential-cohomology differential-equations differential-geometry digraphs duality elliptic-cohomology enriched fibration finite foundation foundations functional-analysis functor gauge-theory gebra 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 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 stack string string-theory superalgebra supergeometry svg symplectic-geometry synthetic-differential-geometry terminology theory topology topos topos-theory tqft 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
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2010
    • (edited Jun 29th 2010)

    at species it says that this is a presheaf of sets on core(FinSet)core(FinSet). At structure type this then makes me expect the words “is a presheaf of groupoids” on core(FinSet)core(FinSet). Is there a deeper reason why it does not say that?

    It seems clear that the Gepner-Kock homotopical species are precisely the (,1)(\infty,1)-presheaves on core(FinSet)core(FinSet), i.e. the \infty-groupoid valued ones.

    I’d think it would be good to emphasize this presheaf-point of view in our entries.

    • CommentRowNumber2.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2010

    Hold on. ’Species’ is synonymous with ’stucture type’ (Joyal vs Baez-Dolan). So there shouldn’t be separate pages. Wouldn’t it be stuff types that are presheaves of groupoids?

    • CommentRowNumber3.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2010

    David wrote:

    ’Species’ is synonymous with ’stucture type’ (Joyal vs Baez-Dolan). So there shouldn’t be separate pages.

    Well, maybe there shouldn’t be and maybe there should…. but you’re right that in their narrowest sense, both species and structure types are the same thing: presheaves of sets on the groupoid of finite sets and bijections.

    Wouldn’t it be stuff types that are presheaves of groupoids?

    Yes, with ’presheaf’ taken in a suitably weakened sense: they are pseudofunctors, or weak 2-functors, from the groupoid of finite sets and bijections (or its opposite!) to Gpd.

    And in our vocabulary we can go on to talk about nn-stuff types or \infty-stuff types. I’m guessing that \infty-stuff types are the same as ’homotopical species’.

    • CommentRowNumber4.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2010

    I’ve done a little work trying to fix up structure type, and I added entries on stuff type and stuff. These would have to be expanded to be really comprehensible.

    • CommentRowNumber5.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2010
    • (edited Jun 29th 2010)

    So i edited species:

    • inluded the defintion of 2-species (aka stuff types )

    • included the definition of \infty-species

    • included a paragraph on cardinality of tame \infty-species

    • CommentRowNumber6.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeJun 29th 2010
    • (edited Jun 29th 2010)

    I edited species a tiny bit more.

    • CommentRowNumber7.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 30th 2010
    • (edited Jun 30th 2010)

    added to species some comments on addition and multiplication operations after it occurred to me while glancing over the Wikipedia-entry that the product of species is nothing but Day convolution.

    Then I added to the discussion on cardinality a remark on how this Day convolution does decategorify to the product of power series.

    I also added some references to the entry … but didn’t look at any of them yet. Unless I got my combinatorics mixed up (please check) the relation to Day convolution is probably in there somewhere. If somebody knows reference and page, please add a remark on that.

    • CommentRowNumber8.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 30th 2010

    Ah, Google luckily remembers that Todd said this before! :-)

    • CommentRowNumber9.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Baez
    • CommentTimeJun 30th 2010

    I don’t know who first discovered that multiplication of species is an example of Day convolution, but it’s true (in case you were wondering), and we have a fair amount of information about this at Schur functor in the special case of “linear” species, i.e. VectVect-valued presheaves on =core(FinSet)\mathbb{P} = core(FinSet).

    In my dream world, there would be a huge article on ordinary “set-theoretic” species and then a parallel huge article on linear species, and something that explained properties of the map from the former to the latter. But this may happen only if and when I use the nnLab to write my dreamt-of book Categorified Arithmetic.

    Anyone who wants to really get into linear species has got to look at this. While categorically sophisticated, it alas does not mention Day convolution.

    • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJun 30th 2010

    I see, thanks, John.

    Hopefully you plug these remarks also into the relevant nLab entries.

    • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Dougherty
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2015

    I spent my Christmas break getting acquainted with species and playing around with them in HoTT. I updated the page with a some comments, and in the references I linked longer notes along with a github repo containing the code I wrote while learning. I hope this is okay; neither the notes nor the code is at all polished, but with my academic term restarting tomorrow I don’t know whether I’ll have much time to improve on them soon.

    • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2015

    I have added in the first line a few hyperlinks for the sake of readers coming across this who may not already know what “homotopy type theory” and the “type of finite sets” is.

    • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2015

    Has the excitement surrounding species died down in recent years? Gian-Carlo Rota portrayed them as providing a revolutionary framework for combinatorics:

    Joyal’s definition of “labeled object” as a species discloses a vast horizon of new combinatorial constructions, which cannot be seen if one holds on to the reactionary view that “labeled objects” need no definition. The simplest, and the most remarkable application of the definition of species is the rigorous combinatorial rendering of functional composition, which was formerly dealt with by handwaving – always a bad sign. But it is just the beginning.

    Then Joyal endorsed Monoidal Functors, Species and Hopf Algebras

    The book of Aguiar and Mahajan is a quantum leap toward the mathematics of the future. I strongly recommend it to all researchers in algebra, topology and combinatorics.

    What of the link to physics? There was all that work by Baez, Dolan and Morton. Then there was linear logic meets generalized species meets Fock space as here

    The present axiomatisation of creation maps has been directly influenced by and developed through a thorough analysis of the differential structure of generalised species of structures [10, 11], which is a bicategorical generalisation of that of the relational model of linear logic.

    Is there still reason to be excited?

    • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2015
    • (edited Jan 5th 2015)

    Not an answer to your question, but a related comment: the Cauchy product of species is equivalently their phased tensor product when regarded as objects in the slice over the symmetric monoidal internal category object (Core(FinSet),)(Core(FinSet), \coprod) (which here happens to be a groupoid object).

    Hence to the extent that one cares about species equipped with the Cauchy product, one is looking at a special case of an FQFT-type formalization of local prequantum field theory. And of a substantial formalization, in that it connects to genuine QFT.

    (I suggest that this is interesting, but would caution about excitement. Excitement is a bit like steam: it produces work when contained but just heat when released. ;-)

    • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2015
    • (edited Jan 5th 2015)

    I have edited the section Species – In homotopy type theory a bit more. Just tried to beautify a bit more, adding formatting, hyperlinks, and more pointers to references (in the section on the Cauchy product).

    John Dougherty, please have a look when you find a minute, to check if you are happy with what I did.

    • CommentRowNumber16.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2015

    I added the variant ’generalised species’ to Species – variants.

    • CommentRowNumber17.
    • CommentAuthorspitters
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2015

    I have added a link to the thesis of Yorgey. He treats species in HoTT, I’ve read parts of it and it looks very natural.

    • CommentRowNumber18.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2015

    I see he has a whole chapter on ’Species variants’.

    • CommentRowNumber19.
    • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
    • CommentTimeJan 5th 2015

    Nice! The definition of the coproduct of species in HoTT doesn’t look right to me; should it instead be the copairing of ff and gg?

    • CommentRowNumber20.
    • CommentAuthorJohn Dougherty
    • CommentTimeJan 6th 2015

    please have a look when you find a minute, to check if you are happy with what I did.

    Yes, thank you, it is much more readable now.

    The definition of the coproduct of species in HoTT doesn’t look right to me; should it instead be the copairing of ff and gg?

    It should be, and I corrected it. I’m not sure what happened; I had it right in the original version of the notes, and it’s right in the Coq code. Odd.

    • CommentRowNumber21.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJun 13th 2021
    • (edited Jun 13th 2021)

    Coming back to the discussion starting at #1, in the meantime Kock et al. have brought out an article Homotopic linear algebra. Here the role of the category of (finite) vector spaces is played by various (,1)(\infty, 1)-categories of slices of finite \infty-groupoids and spans.

    Wouldn’t this kind of thing make for a more interesting codomain than plain \infty-groupoids for homotopical species?

    (This is in the context of the recent paper on SchurSchur as the free 2-rig on one generator by John, Joe and Todd. There SchurSchur is shown to be equivalent to PolyPoly, the category of polynomial species from core(FinSet)core(FinSet) to FinVectFinVect.)

    • CommentRowNumber22.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeJun 13th 2021

    But then homotopical species are defined in ∞-Operads as Analytic Monads as we have it already (Definition 3.2.9). I’ll add that in.