Not signed in

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

• Forgot your password?
• Apply for membership

1. • CommentRowNumber1.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeApr 29th 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexThe old entry _[[1-groupoid]]_ was a bit vague. I have added a paragraph with a more precise description.

   The old entry 1-groupoid was a bit vague. I have added a paragraph with a more precise description.

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeApr 29th 2013
   • (edited Apr 29th 2013)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: MarkdownItexI have just been looking at 1-[[hypergroupoid]]s as a prelude to talking about n-hypergroupoids (in the sense of Duskin, but also Glenn) in some work for the Profinite monograph. How might that topic and terminology be best melded in with this (and related) entries?

   I have just been looking at 1-hypergroupoids as a prelude to talking about n-hypergroupoids (in the sense of Duskin, but also Glenn) in some work for the Profinite monograph. How might that topic and terminology be best melded in with this (and related) entries?

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeApr 29th 2013
   • (edited Apr 29th 2013)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexHi Tim, not sure what you are asking. There is a quick note at _[n-groupoid -- As Kan complexes](http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/n-groupoid#AsKanComplexes)_. What is missing on the $n$Lab, it seems, is the discussion of how $n$-hypergroupoids exhaust $(n+1)$-cosketal Kan complexes up to equivalence.

   Hi Tim,

   not sure what you are asking. There is a quick note at n-groupoid – As Kan complexes.

   What is missing on the $n$Lab, it seems, is the discussion of how $n$-hypergroupoids exhaust $(n+1)$-cosketal Kan complexes up to equivalence.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeApr 29th 2013
   • (edited Apr 29th 2013)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: MarkdownItexThere is a neat version of (probably) Glenn's version of n-hypergroupoids in Munoz's thesis. (This uses a truncted simp. object then has a specific lift, an n-bracket, that is a bit like algebraic Kan conditions. I have not completely worked out what to do with them, but they give the structure (with 4 axioms). I have mislaid Glenn's paper so cannot check if that stuff was in there. There is good stuff in Beke's paper, but the links are not all that I would want. I will try to put some more stuff up on the hypergroupoid entry, when I have worked things through a it more.

   There is a neat version of (probably) Glenn’s version of n-hypergroupoids in Munoz’s thesis. (This uses a truncted simp. object then has a specific lift, an n-bracket, that is a bit like algebraic Kan conditions. I have not completely worked out what to do with them, but they give the structure (with 4 axioms). I have mislaid Glenn’s paper so cannot check if that stuff was in there. There is good stuff in Beke’s paper, but the links are not all that I would want. I will try to put some more stuff up on the hypergroupoid entry, when I have worked things through a it more.

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeApr 29th 2013
   • (edited Apr 29th 2013)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexI like the account of $n$-hypergroupoids in [Pridham 09](http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/hypergroupoid#Pridham09).

   I like the account of $n$-hypergroupoids in Pridham 09.

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeApr 29th 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: MarkdownItexYes. That is a good one.

   Yes. That is a good one.