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 3rd 2014
   • (edited Apr 3rd 2014)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexadded an Idea-section to _[[Mackey functor]]_ (which used to be just a list of references). Also added more references.

   added an Idea-section to Mackey functor (which used to be just a list of references). Also added more references.

2. • CommentRowNumber2.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeApr 15th 2014
   • (edited Apr 15th 2014)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexClark Barwick's [characterization](http://arxiv.org/abs/1404.0108) _almost_ says that $G$-equivariant spectra form a [[dependent linear homotopy type theory]] over finite $G$-sets. What is missing is the [[Frobenius reciprocity]] condition. Is it automatic? Or else what would imposing it imply? (Just a quick thought,I haven't really tried to follow it through yet. Have to go offline now, too.)

   Clark Barwick’s characterization almost says that $G$-equivariant spectra form a dependent linear homotopy type theory over finite $G$-sets. What is missing is the Frobenius reciprocity condition. Is it automatic? Or else what would imposing it imply?

   (Just a quick thought,I haven’t really tried to follow it through yet. Have to go offline now, too.)

3. • CommentRowNumber3.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeApr 16th 2014
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexThe base category is his $A^{\eff}$? If >twisted generalized cohomology theory is ∞-categorical semantics of linear homotopy type theory, and if twisted generalized cohomology theory is the cohomology intrinsic to a tangent $(infty, 1)$-category, your claim suggests we should be finding such constructions in Barwick's paper? I see there's excisive approximation going on in section 7.

   The base category is his $A^{\eff}$?

   If

   twisted generalized cohomology theory is ∞-categorical semantics of linear homotopy type theory,

   and if twisted generalized cohomology theory is the cohomology intrinsic to a tangent $(infty, 1)$-category, your claim suggests we should be finding such constructions in Barwick’s paper?

   I see there’s excisive approximation going on in section 7.

4. • CommentRowNumber4.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeApr 16th 2014
   • (edited Apr 16th 2014)
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexI'll get back to this a little later to day when I have something else out of the way. Meanwhile I changed my mind, maybe it's better to regard this as being not about the pre-quantum data, but about the quantum data. I suppose we can say something like: take the $\infty$-category of1d-cobordisms with codimension 1-defects parameterized by G-sets and codimension 0-defects parameterized by correspondences of such. Then a $G$-spectrum is a symmetric monoidal $\infty$-functor from that to $Spectra$. Regarded as spectral "sheaves with transfer" this way would make us ask for the corresponding "motivic Galois group" that makes this a category of modules. And Schwede-Shipley tell us that and how this indeed exists. But instead of brainstorming here, I should actually read the article first in more detail. After I got something else out of the way...

   I’ll get back to this a little later to day when I have something else out of the way.

   Meanwhile I changed my mind, maybe it’s better to regard this as being not about the pre-quantum data, but about the quantum data. I suppose we can say something like: take the $\infty$-category of1d-cobordisms with codimension 1-defects parameterized by G-sets and codimension 0-defects parameterized by correspondences of such. Then a $G$-spectrum is a symmetric monoidal $\infty$-functor from that to $Spectra$.

   Regarded as spectral “sheaves with transfer” this way would make us ask for the corresponding “motivic Galois group” that makes this a category of modules. And Schwede-Shipley tell us that and how this indeed exists.

   But instead of brainstorming here, I should actually read the article first in more detail. After I got something else out of the way…

5. • CommentRowNumber5.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeAug 7th 2017
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexSo the idea of a Mackey functor came from induced and restricted representations. The [Mackey formula](double+coset#MackeyFormula) becomes one of the conditions (the Mackey axiom) in Green's definition ([here](http://www.lamfa.u-picardie.fr/bouc/mackey.pdf)).

   So the idea of a Mackey functor came from induced and restricted representations. The Mackey formula becomes one of the conditions (the Mackey axiom) in Green’s definition (here).

6. • CommentRowNumber6.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeAug 7th 2017
   • (edited Aug 7th 2017)
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexRegarding Urs's query in #2, isn't this the difference between a Green functor and a Mackey functor? A Green functor ([here](http://www.lamfa.u-picardie.fr/bouc/green.pdf)) is a Mackey functor with some extra structure, including Frobenius relations. Barwick's follow-up paper * C. Barwick, S. Glasman, J. Shah, _Spectral Mackey functors and equivariant algebraic K-theory (II)_, [arXiv:1505.03098](https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.03098) deals with spectral _Green_ functors, so may be what you want.

   Regarding Urs’s query in #2, isn’t this the difference between a Green functor and a Mackey functor? A Green functor (here) is a Mackey functor with some extra structure, including Frobenius relations.

   Barwick’s follow-up paper

   • C. Barwick, S. Glasman, J. Shah, Spectral Mackey functors and equivariant algebraic K-theory (II), arXiv:1505.03098

   deals with spectral Green functors, so may be what you want.

7. • CommentRowNumber7.
   • CommentAuthorUrs
   • CommentTimeAug 7th 2017
   • PermaLink
   Author: Urs
   Format: MarkdownItexThanks! That's very interesting.

   Thanks! That’s very interesting.

8. • CommentRowNumber8.
   • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
   • CommentTimeAug 7th 2017
   • PermaLink
   Author: David_Corfield
   Format: MarkdownItexI came across >In the $G$-equivariant context for a finite group $G$, the role of abelian groups in non-equivariant algebra is played by Mackey functors. The category of Mackey functors is a closed symmetric monoidal category with symmetric monoidal product, the box product. In addition to the expected generalization of commutative rings to simply commutative monoids for the box product, there is a poset of generalizations of the notion of commutative rings to the $G$-equivariant context: the incomplete Tambara functors. These interpolate between Green functors, the ordinary commutative monoids for the box product, and Tambara functors. The distinguishing feature for [incomplete] Tambara functors is the presence of certain multiplicative transfer maps, called norm maps. For a Green functor, we have no norm maps; for a Tambara functor, we have norm maps for any pair of subgroups $H \subset K$ of $G$. So I've added that to [[Tambara functor]], and begun [[Green functor]].

   I came across

   In the $G$-equivariant context for a finite group $G$, the role of abelian groups in non-equivariant algebra is played by Mackey functors. The category of Mackey functors is a closed symmetric monoidal category with symmetric monoidal product, the box product. In addition to the expected generalization of commutative rings to simply commutative monoids for the box product, there is a poset of generalizations of the notion of commutative rings to the $G$-equivariant context: the incomplete Tambara functors. These interpolate between Green functors, the ordinary commutative monoids for the box product, and Tambara functors. The distinguishing feature for [incomplete] Tambara functors is the presence of certain multiplicative transfer maps, called norm maps. For a Green functor, we have no norm maps; for a Tambara functor, we have norm maps for any pair of subgroups $H \subset K$ of $G$.

   So I’ve added that to Tambara functor, and begun Green functor.

9. • CommentRowNumber9.
   • CommentAuthorMarc Hoyois
   • CommentTimeAug 8th 2017
   • PermaLink
   Author: Marc Hoyois
   Format: MarkdownItex@Urs If by Frobenius reciprocity you mean that $f_!(A\otimes f^*(B)) \simeq f_!(A)\otimes B$ for $f$ a map between finite $G$-sets, this certainly holds for equivariant spectra (ultimately because it holds for $Fin^G_{/(-)}$). In fact the functor $SH^G: (Fin^G)^{op} \to CAlg(Cat_\infty)$ is a "linear type theory with Beck-Chevalley condition" in the sense of [[dependent linear type theory]]. You can also put all finite groups together $FinGpd^{op} \to CAlg(Cat_\infty)$, this has all the same properties except that $f_!$ only exists when $f$ is $0$-truncated (i.e., a covering map).

   @Urs If by Frobenius reciprocity you mean that $f_!(A\otimes f^*(B)) \simeq f_!(A)\otimes B$ for $f$ a map between finite $G$-sets, this certainly holds for equivariant spectra (ultimately because it holds for $Fin^G_{/(-)}$). In fact the functor $SH^G: (Fin^G)^{op} \to CAlg(Cat_\infty)$ is a “linear type theory with Beck-Chevalley condition” in the sense of dependent linear type theory. You can also put all finite groups together $FinGpd^{op} \to CAlg(Cat_\infty)$, this has all the same properties except that $f_!$ only exists when $f$ is $0$-truncated (i.e., a covering map).

10. • CommentRowNumber10.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2017
    • PermaLink
    Author: Urs
    Format: MarkdownItexThanks for the input. My question in #1 is from over three years back. Right now I am too occupied with other things to get back to this. If you care, you should record what is worth recording on some $n$Lab page.

    Thanks for the input. My question in #1 is from over three years back. Right now I am too occupied with other things to get back to this. If you care, you should record what is worth recording on some $n$Lab page.

11. • CommentRowNumber11.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2017
    • PermaLink
    Author: David_Corfield
    Format: MarkdownItexPerhaps this would slot in [models and examples](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/dependent%20linear%20type%20theory#examples__models). I wonder if someone could think up a general (and generalisable) result to prove with linear HoTT to rival [Blakers-Massey](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Blakers-Massey+theorem#ReferencesInHoTT) proved in ordinary HoTT.

    Perhaps this would slot in models and examples.

    I wonder if someone could think up a general (and generalisable) result to prove with linear HoTT to rival Blakers-Massey proved in ordinary HoTT.

12. • CommentRowNumber12.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 8th 2017
    • PermaLink
    Author: Urs
    Format: MarkdownItex> Perhaps this would slot in [models and examples](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/dependent%20linear%20type%20theory#examples__models). Yes!

    Perhaps this would slot in models and examples.

    Yes!

13. • CommentRowNumber13.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2017
    • (edited Aug 9th 2017)
    • PermaLink
    Author: David_Corfield
    Format: MarkdownItexOk, so I'd need to know what this is: >the functor $SH^G: (Fin^G)^{op} \to CAlg(Cat_\infty)$ The codomain is commutative algebra objects in $(\infty, 1)$-categories (or symmetric monoidal $(\infty, 1)$-categories)? So what is $SH^G$?

    Ok, so I’d need to know what this is:

    the functor $SH^G: (Fin^G)^{op} \to CAlg(Cat_\infty)$

    The codomain is commutative algebra objects in $(\infty, 1)$-categories (or symmetric monoidal $(\infty, 1)$-categories)?

    So what is $SH^G$?

14. • CommentRowNumber14.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2017
    • PermaLink
    Author: Urs
    Format: MarkdownItexThis is for "Stable Homotopy theory of $G$-equivariant spectra", i.e. symmetric monoidal $\infty$-category (under smash product) of genuine $G$-spectra.

    This is for “Stable Homotopy theory of $G$-equivariant spectra”, i.e. symmetric monoidal $\infty$-category (under smash product) of genuine $G$-spectra.

15. • CommentRowNumber15.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeAug 9th 2017
    • PermaLink
    Author: David_Corfield
    Format: MarkdownItexOk, have at least mentioned it [here](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/dependent+linear+type+theory#stable_homotopy_theory_of_equivariant_spectra), but as yet no fulfilment of the promise >For each example we also spell out some of the abstract constructions

    Ok, have at least mentioned it here, but as yet no fulfilment of the promise

    For each example we also spell out some of the abstract constructions

16. • CommentRowNumber16.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeAug 10th 2017
    • (edited Aug 10th 2017)
    • PermaLink
    Author: David_Corfield
    Format: MarkdownItexSo this is an example of those $G$-$\infty$-categories, discussed in that program -- [[Parametrized Higher Category Theory and Higher Algebra]] -- I tried to start a [conversation](https://nforum.ncatlab.org/discussion/7301/parametrized-higher-category-theory-and-higher-algebra/) on. > The $G$-$\infty$-category $\underline{Sp}^G$ of $G$-spectra - whose value on an orbit $G/H$ is the $\infty$-category $Sp^H$ of genuine $H$-spectra... (p. 5 of the General Introduction) So I wonder if their $T$-$\infty$-categories can provide more models for linear HoTT. >For any orbital ∞-category $T$, we have a corresponding ∞-category $Sp^T$ (even $T$-∞-category) of $T$-spectra, which under our algebro-geometric analogy corresponds roughly to an ∞-category of "quasicoherent sheaves on $T$." This orbital property is >one requires the analogue of the Mackey decomposition theorem in T ("T is orbital")

    So this is an example of those $G$-$\infty$-categories, discussed in that program – Parametrized Higher Category Theory and Higher Algebra – I tried to start a conversation on.

    The $G$-$\infty$-category $\underline{Sp}^G$ of $G$-spectra - whose value on an orbit $G/H$ is the $\infty$-category $Sp^H$ of genuine $H$-spectra… (p. 5 of the General Introduction)

    So I wonder if their $T$-$\infty$-categories can provide more models for linear HoTT.

    For any orbital ∞-category $T$, we have a corresponding ∞-category $Sp^T$ (even $T$-∞-category) of $T$-spectra, which under our algebro-geometric analogy corresponds roughly to an ∞-category of “quasicoherent sheaves on $T$.”

    This orbital property is

    one requires the analogue of the Mackey decomposition theorem in T (“T is orbital”)

17. • CommentRowNumber17.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeAug 10th 2017
    • PermaLink
    Author: David_Corfield
    Format: MarkdownItexSo Marc's generalization above in #9 is their example 8 of that [introduction](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.03654.pdf): >The 2-category $\Gamma$ of finite connected groupoids and covering maps is atomic orbital. The corresponding homotopy theory of $\Gamma$-spectra is a variant of Stefan Schwede's global equivariant homotopy theory

    So Marc’s generalization above in #9 is their example 8 of that introduction:

    The 2-category $\Gamma$ of finite connected groupoids and covering maps is atomic orbital. The corresponding homotopy theory of $\Gamma$-spectra is a variant of Stefan Schwede’s global equivariant homotopy theory

18. • CommentRowNumber18.
    • CommentAuthorMarc Hoyois
    • CommentTimeAug 10th 2017
    • PermaLink
    Author: Marc Hoyois
    Format: MarkdownItexRight, the value of the functor $FinGpd^{op} \to CAlg(Cat_\infty)$ on a finite groupoid $X$ are spectral Mackey functors on $FinGpd/X$, aka spectra parametrized by the orbital category $\Gamma/X$, this being the usual ∞-category of $G$-spectra when $X=BG$. That's not global homotopy theory though. Global homotopy theory is what you get when you allow *arbitrary* maps between groupoids, not just covering maps: a global space (for finite groups) is a finite-product-preserving presheaf on the (2,1)-category of finite groupoids.

    Right, the value of the functor $FinGpd^{op} \to CAlg(Cat_\infty)$ on a finite groupoid $X$ are spectral Mackey functors on $FinGpd/X$, aka spectra parametrized by the orbital category $\Gamma/X$, this being the usual ∞-category of $G$-spectra when $X=BG$.

    That’s not global homotopy theory though. Global homotopy theory is what you get when you allow arbitrary maps between groupoids, not just covering maps: a global space (for finite groups) is a finite-product-preserving presheaf on the (2,1)-category of finite groupoids.

19. • CommentRowNumber19.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeAug 10th 2017
    • PermaLink
    Author: David_Corfield
    Format: MarkdownItexThanks! That example 8 continues: >To get _exactly_ Schwede’s global equivariant homotopy theory (for finite groups) in our framework requires a larger orbital $\infty$-category of finite connected groupoids equipped with an incompleteness class. That latter construction seems to be about restricting transfer maps >to place limits on the classes of transfers that exist in the corresponding $\infty$-category of spectra. I wonder what this does to the Beck-Chevalley condition.

    Thanks!

    That example 8 continues:

    To get exactly Schwede’s global equivariant homotopy theory (for finite groups) in our framework requires a larger orbital $\infty$-category of finite connected groupoids equipped with an incompleteness class.

    That latter construction seems to be about restricting transfer maps

    to place limits on the classes of transfers that exist in the corresponding $\infty$-category of spectra.

    I wonder what this does to the Beck-Chevalley condition.

20. • CommentRowNumber20.
    • CommentAuthorMarc Hoyois
    • CommentTimeAug 10th 2017
    • PermaLink
    Author: Marc Hoyois
    Format: MarkdownItexAh I see, I should have looked at the paper! I'm not sure how to translate Schwede's global spectra in terms of Mackey functors. I'm guessing what they have in mind is that global spectra are spectral presheaves on connected finite groupoids with transfers only along covering maps, as opposed to all maps. The BC condition would still be encoded by the corresponding category of spans.

    Ah I see, I should have looked at the paper!

    I’m not sure how to translate Schwede’s global spectra in terms of Mackey functors. I’m guessing what they have in mind is that global spectra are spectral presheaves on connected finite groupoids with transfers only along covering maps, as opposed to all maps. The BC condition would still be encoded by the corresponding category of spans.

21. • CommentRowNumber21.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeAug 18th 2018
    • PermaLink
    Author: David_Corfield
    Format: MarkdownItexAdded an article which categorifies Mackey functors: * Paul Balmer, Ivo Dell'Ambrogio, _Mackey 2-functors and Mackey 2-motives_, ([arXiv:1808.04902](https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.04902)) <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Mackey+functor/29">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Mackey+functor/29">v29</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Mackey+functor">current</a>

    Added an article which categorifies Mackey functors:

    • Paul Balmer, Ivo Dell’Ambrogio, Mackey 2-functors and Mackey 2-motives, (arXiv:1808.04902)

    diff, v29, current

22. • CommentRowNumber22.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 22nd 2018
    • PermaLink
    Author: Urs
    Format: MarkdownItexadded pointer to * [[Saul Glasman]], _Stratified categories, geometric fixed points and a generalized Arone-Ching theorem_ ([arXiv:1507.01976](https://arxiv.org/abs/1507.01976), [talk notes pdf](http://www-users.math.umn.edu/~sglasman/strattalk.pdf)) (and will add this also to _[[geometric fixed point spectrum]]_) Has this been published, meanwhile? <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Mackey+functor/37">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Mackey+functor/37">v37</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Mackey+functor">current</a>

    added pointer to

    • Saul Glasman, Stratified categories, geometric fixed points and a generalized Arone-Ching theorem (arXiv:1507.01976, talk notes pdf)

    (and will add this also to geometric fixed point spectrum)

    Has this been published, meanwhile?

    diff, v37, current

23. • CommentRowNumber23.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeDec 23rd 2018
    • PermaLink
    Author: Urs
    Format: MarkdownItexadded pointer to * [[Saul Glasman]], _Goodwillie calculus and Mackey functors_ ([arXiv:1610.03127](https://arxiv.org/abs/1610.03127)) Prodded by this, I gave the References-section subsections, one for "Plain Mackey functors", then one for "Spectral Mackey functors" and the latter with further sub-sections, currently for application in equivariant homotopy theory and in Goodwillie calculus. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Mackey+functor/38">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Mackey+functor/38">v38</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Mackey+functor">current</a>

    added pointer to

    • Saul Glasman, Goodwillie calculus and Mackey functors (arXiv:1610.03127)

    Prodded by this, I gave the References-section subsections, one for “Plain Mackey functors”, then one for “Spectral Mackey functors” and the latter with further sub-sections, currently for application in equivariant homotopy theory and in Goodwillie calculus.

    diff, v38, current

24. • CommentRowNumber24.
    • CommentAuthorUrs
    • CommentTimeJan 3rd 2019
    • PermaLink
    Author: Urs
    Format: MarkdownItexadded publication data for * [[Bert Guillou]], [[Peter May]], _Permutative $G$-categories in equivariant infinite loop space theory_, Algebr. Geom. Topol. 17 (2017) 3259-3339 ([arXiv:1207.3459](http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.3459)) But in doing so I realize that I forget why I (if it was me) listed this article under sources for $G$-spectra in terms of spectral Mackey functors. Scanning it now, I don't see any mentioning of this perspective except in a brief mentioning of [Guillou-May 11](https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Mackey+functor#GuillouMay11). So maybe I should remove this reference here. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Mackey+functor/40">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Mackey+functor/40">v40</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Mackey+functor">current</a>

    added publication data for

    • Bert Guillou, Peter May, Permutative $G$-categories in equivariant infinite loop space theory, Algebr. Geom. Topol. 17 (2017) 3259-3339 (arXiv:1207.3459)

    But in doing so I realize that I forget why I (if it was me) listed this article under sources for $G$-spectra in terms of spectral Mackey functors. Scanning it now, I don’t see any mentioning of this perspective except in a brief mentioning of Guillou-May 11. So maybe I should remove this reference here.

    diff, v40, current

25. • CommentRowNumber25.
    • CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
    • CommentTimeDec 16th 2022
    • (edited Dec 16th 2022)
    • PermaLink
    Author: David_Corfield
    Format: MarkdownItexAdded the recent * [[Niles Johnson]], [[Donald Yau]], _Homotopy Theory of Enriched Mackey Functors_ ([arXiv:2212.04276](https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.04276)) Will add to authors' pages. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Mackey+functor/42">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Mackey+functor/42">v42</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Mackey+functor">current</a>

    Added the recent

    • Niles Johnson, Donald Yau, Homotopy Theory of Enriched Mackey Functors (arXiv:2212.04276)

    Will add to authors’ pages.

    diff, v42, current

26. • CommentRowNumber26.
    • CommentAuthornLab edit announcer
    • CommentTimeAug 19th 2024
    • PermaLink
    Author: nLab edit announcer
    Format: MarkdownItex--These examples were not really examples, --the definition is an extraordinarily convoluted way of writing "product-preserving functors," and --the name "Corr_1" has largely died out and been replaced by "Span" I'll be heavily editing this over the next few days. Natalie Stewart <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/Mackey+functor/43">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/Mackey+functor/43">v43</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Mackey+functor">current</a>

    –These examples were not really examples, –the definition is an extraordinarily convoluted way of writing “product-preserving functors,” and –the name “Corr_1” has largely died out and been replaced by “Span” I’ll be heavily editing this over the next few days.

    Natalie Stewart

    diff, v43, current