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 definitions 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 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 object 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.
   • CommentAuthorTim_Porter
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: Tim_Porter
   Format: MarkdownItexIn a comment on the Café on July 13, talking of a talk by Tom L., Mike said: >Your very nice talk at CT2013 today about this paper has inspired me to wonder about the codensity monads of other similar functors. For instance, the sort of person who believes that ∞-groupoids are better than sets may naturally wonder, what is the codensity (∞,1)-monad of the inclusion of finitely presented ∞-groupoids into all ∞-groupoids? >That may be too much of a mouthful, but what about 1-groupoids? I’m not sure whether we should look at finitely presented groupoids or finitely generated free groupoids. In either case, what sort of structure on a groupoid would allow us to “integrate” a function into any such “finite” groupoid? Is there a connection this profinite groupoids and the profinite completion of groupoids? There was some work in semigroup theory and finite automata/languages by Jorge Almeida? (My reasoning was that the codensity monad / shape theory context has the profinte group example (as in the paper by Gildenhuys and Kennison) so as the Almedia papers had a logical content and language theoretic interpretation...? There is a nice article: PROFINITE METHODS IN AUTOMATA THEORY BY JEAN-ÉRIC PIN, in Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science 2009 (Freiburg), pp. 31–50 www.stacs-conf.org . I am mentioning this here rather than initially on the café, as I was out of action for a few days and have not followed all the previous disccsion there.

   In a comment on the Café on July 13, talking of a talk by Tom L., Mike said:

   Your very nice talk at CT2013 today about this paper has inspired me to wonder about the codensity monads of other similar functors. For instance, the sort of person who believes that ∞-groupoids are better than sets may naturally wonder, what is the codensity (∞,1)-monad of the inclusion of finitely presented ∞-groupoids into all ∞-groupoids?

   That may be too much of a mouthful, but what about 1-groupoids? I’m not sure whether we should look at finitely presented groupoids or finitely generated free groupoids. In either case, what sort of structure on a groupoid would allow us to “integrate” a function into any such “finite” groupoid?

   Is there a connection this profinite groupoids and the profinite completion of groupoids? There was some work in semigroup theory and finite automata/languages by Jorge Almeida? (My reasoning was that the codensity monad / shape theory context has the profinte group example (as in the paper by Gildenhuys and Kennison) so as the Almedia papers had a logical content and language theoretic interpretation…? There is a nice article: PROFINITE METHODS IN AUTOMATA THEORY BY JEAN-ÉRIC PIN, in Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science 2009 (Freiburg), pp. 31–50 www.stacs-conf.org .

   I am mentioning this here rather than initially on the café, as I was out of action for a few days and have not followed all the previous disccsion there.

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorMike Shulman
   • CommentTimeJul 16th 2013
   • PermaLink
   Author: Mike Shulman
   Format: MarkdownItexGood question. The Gildenhuys-Kennison paper is all about codensity monads of functors into Set (right?) but it does seem probably related.

   Good question. The Gildenhuys-Kennison paper is all about codensity monads of functors into Set (right?) but it does seem probably related.