Not signed in

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

• Username
• Password
• Remember me

• Sign in using OpenID
• Remember me

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

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 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 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 internal-categories k-theory lie-theory limits linear linear-algebra locale localization logic mathematics measure 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

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorFinnLawler
   • CommentTimeDec 20th 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: FinnLawler
   Format: MarkdownItexEverybody knows that if C is a category and $D \colon C \to Cat$ is a pseudofunctor then the lax colimit of D is its category of elements $\int D$ and its pseudo colimit is the category $\int D[S^{-1}]$ got by formally inverting the class S of opcartesian morphisms. Now suppose C is a bicategory and D is as before. I suspect that the (fully weak) colimit of D might be got by * taking $\int D$, to get a bicategory; * applying $\pi_0$ homwise to get a category; and finally * inverting the (images of the) opcartesian 1-cells in $\int D$. Before I work out the details, does anyone know if this has been written down before, or if I'm barking up the wrong tree entirely?

   Everybody knows that if C is a category and $D \colon C \to Cat$ is a pseudofunctor then the lax colimit of D is its category of elements $\int D$ and its pseudo colimit is the category $\int D[S^{-1}]$ got by formally inverting the class S of opcartesian morphisms.

   Now suppose C is a bicategory and D is as before. I suspect that the (fully weak) colimit of D might be got by

   • taking $\int D$, to get a bicategory;
   • applying $\pi_0$ homwise to get a category; and finally
   • inverting the (images of the) opcartesian 1-cells in $\int D$.

   Before I work out the details, does anyone know if this has been written down before, or if I’m barking up the wrong tree entirely?

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeDec 20th 2011
   • (edited Dec 20th 2011)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItex> Everybody knows By the way, we have only brief remarks about this in the relevant $n$Lab entries [here](http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Grothendieck+construction#AsALaxColimit) and [here](http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/2-limit#2ColimitsInCat). Maybe somebody feels like adding in more details? I am sure there are many readers out there who would appreciate it (those who are not "everybody" ;-)

   Everybody knows

   By the way, we have only brief remarks about this in the relevant $n$Lab entries here and here.

   Maybe somebody feels like adding in more details? I am sure there are many readers out there who would appreciate it (those who are not “everybody” ;-)

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorFinnLawler
   • CommentTimeDec 20th 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: FinnLawler
   Format: MarkdownItexOK, consider your hint dropped :) I've lots to do at the moment, but I'll put the stuff I'm working on onto my personal web at least, and I'll try to add background material to the main Lab.

   OK, consider your hint dropped :)

   I’ve lots to do at the moment, but I’ll put the stuff I’m working on onto my personal web at least, and I’ll try to add background material to the main Lab.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeDec 20th 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexThere's a generalization of the classical fact to $(\infty,1)$-categories in section 3.3.4 of [[Higher Topos Theory]]. If you're willing to identify locally groupoidal bicategories with certain $(\infty,1)$-categories, then I think that implies that colimits in $Cat$ of diagrams on such $C$ can be computed by making the Grothendieck construction, inverting opcartesian arrows, then (since $Cat$ is reflective in $(\infty,1)Cat$) applying $\pi_0$ homwise to get a category (reversing the order of your last two steps). But the version for non-locally-groupoidal $C$, I don't remember seeing anywhere.

   There’s a generalization of the classical fact to $(\infty,1)$-categories in section 3.3.4 of Higher Topos Theory. If you’re willing to identify locally groupoidal bicategories with certain $(\infty,1)$-categories, then I think that implies that colimits in $Cat$ of diagrams on such $C$ can be computed by making the Grothendieck construction, inverting opcartesian arrows, then (since $Cat$ is reflective in $(\infty,1)Cat$) applying $\pi_0$ homwise to get a category (reversing the order of your last two steps). But the version for non-locally-groupoidal $C$, I don’t remember seeing anywhere.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorFinnLawler
   • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: FinnLawler
   Format: MarkdownItexOK, I think this works, so I've added it to [[2-limit]], in the section [2-colimits in Cat](http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/2-limit#2ColimitsInCat). But it's very late at night here, so a second opinion would be nice, if anyone has the time.

   OK, I think this works, so I’ve added it to 2-limit, in the section 2-colimits in Cat. But it’s very late at night here, so a second opinion would be nice, if anyone has the time.

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2011
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexI think I believe it. Very nice!

   I think I believe it. Very nice!