Not signed in

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

Discussion Tag Cloud

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).

nLab > Latest Changes: coreader comonad

Bottom of Page

1 to 20 of 20

- CommentRowNumber1.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeApr 18th 2015
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: MarkdownItexstarted a minimum at _[[writer comonad]]_

started a minimum at writer comonad
- CommentRowNumber2.
- CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
- CommentTimeMay 12th 2015
- (edited Dec 18th 2019)
- PermaLink
Author: David_Corfield
Format: MarkdownItexSo the writer comonad is a pull-push transform for the span $\ast \leftarrow W \rightarrow \ast$. You said somewhere that reader and writer agree in certain contexts. Ah yes [here](https://nforum.ncatlab.org/discussion/6352/necessity-and-possibility/?Focus=52983#Comment_52983). So there the randomness of the reader combines with the pull-pushnness of the writer, and we're in the realm of path integrals. Does anything interesting happen in the relative case $W_0 \leftarrow W \rightarrow W_0$? In modal terms this was supposed to be about a less than total accessibility relation on worlds. Does one ever pull-push through an equivalence relation?

So the writer comonad is a pull-push transform for the span $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mo>*</mo><mo>←</mo><mi>W</mi><mo>→</mo><mo>*</mo></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\ast \leftarrow W \rightarrow \ast</annotation></semantics></math>$ .

You said somewhere that reader and writer agree in certain contexts. Ah yes here. So there the randomness of the reader combines with the pull-pushnness of the writer, and we’re in the realm of path integrals.

Does anything interesting happen in the relative case $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><msub><mi>W</mi> <mn>0</mn></msub><mo>←</mo><mi>W</mi><mo>→</mo><msub><mi>W</mi> <mn>0</mn></msub></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">W_0 \leftarrow W \rightarrow W_0</annotation></semantics></math>$ ? In modal terms this was supposed to be about a less than total accessibility relation on worlds. Does one ever pull-push through an equivalence relation?
- CommentRowNumber3.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeMay 12th 2015
- (edited May 12th 2015)
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: MarkdownItex> ...and we’re in the realm of path integrals. Does anything interesting happen in the relative case $W_0 \leftarrow W \rightarrow W_0$? This relative case is already what matters for the path integral [here](http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/dependent+linear+type+theory#SecondaryIntegralTransforms). In this context we are to think of the "possible worlds" more concretely as the "possible paths" or "possible trajectories" that a physical system may traverse. These are regarded here as depending on one of their two endpoints. "All possible histories $w(w_0) \in W(w_0)$ starting at the world $w_0 \in W_0$."

…and we’re in the realm of path integrals. Does anything interesting happen in the relative case $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><msub><mi>W</mi> <mn>0</mn></msub><mo>←</mo><mi>W</mi><mo>→</mo><msub><mi>W</mi> <mn>0</mn></msub></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">W_0 \leftarrow W \rightarrow W_0</annotation></semantics></math>$ ?

This relative case is already what matters for the path integral here.

In this context we are to think of the “possible worlds” more concretely as the “possible paths” or “possible trajectories” that a physical system may traverse. These are regarded here as depending on one of their two endpoints. “All possible histories $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>w</mi><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>w</mi> <mn>0</mn></msub><mo stretchy="false">)</mo><mo>∈</mo><mi>W</mi><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>w</mi> <mn>0</mn></msub><mo stretchy="false">)</mo></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">w(w_0) \in W(w_0)</annotation></semantics></math>$ starting at the world $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><msub><mi>w</mi> <mn>0</mn></msub><mo>∈</mo><msub><mi>W</mi> <mn>0</mn></msub></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">w_0 \in W_0</annotation></semantics></math>$ .”
- CommentRowNumber4.
- CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
- CommentTimeMay 12th 2015
- PermaLink
Author: David_Corfield
Format: MarkdownItexThen the [[state monad]] passes through $$ \ast \leftarrow W \stackrel{id}{\rightarrow} W \rightarrow \ast \leftarrow W \rightarrow \ast \rightarrow \ast. $$ What's happening when reader and writer coincide? In that situation does it make sense to form a state monad which will just be reader (or writer) applied twice?

Then the state monad passes through
$<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="block"><semantics><mrow><mo>*</mo><mo>←</mo><mi>W</mi><mover><mo>→</mo><mi>id</mi></mover><mi>W</mi><mo>→</mo><mo>*</mo><mo>←</mo><mi>W</mi><mo>→</mo><mo>*</mo><mo>→</mo><mo>*</mo><mo>.</mo></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex"> \ast \leftarrow W \stackrel{id}{\rightarrow} W \rightarrow \ast \leftarrow W \rightarrow \ast \rightarrow \ast. </annotation></semantics></math>$
What’s happening when reader and writer coincide? In that situation does it make sense to form a state monad which will just be reader (or writer) applied twice?
- CommentRowNumber5.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeMay 12th 2015
- (edited May 12th 2015)
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: MarkdownItexYes, in that case it would just be the state monad applied twice. But it is here, I think, that switching from the terminology "reader", "writer", "state" to "randomness" becomes really compelling: on non-linear type then reader and writer will almost never coincide. On stable linear types however, there are interesting situations in which "reader" and "writer" coincide (namely if $W$ is "compact enough" such as to admit a Poincaré duality), but in this situation is interpretation in terms of "reading" and "writing" is maybe no longer the most immediate one (though in principle it still applies). The more immediate interpretation of what is going on in this case is that one is producing linear spaces of probability amplitudes.

Yes, in that case it would just be the state monad applied twice.

But it is here, I think, that switching from the terminology “reader”, “writer”, “state” to “randomness” becomes really compelling:

on non-linear type then reader and writer will almost never coincide.

On stable linear types however, there are interesting situations in which “reader” and “writer” coincide (namely if $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>W</mi></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">W</annotation></semantics></math>$ is “compact enough” such as to admit a Poincaré duality), but in this situation is interpretation in terms of “reading” and “writing” is maybe no longer the most immediate one (though in principle it still applies). The more immediate interpretation of what is going on in this case is that one is producing linear spaces of probability amplitudes.
- CommentRowNumber6.
- CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
- CommentTimeMar 13th 2021
- PermaLink
Author: David_Corfield
Format: MarkdownItexReordered the Idea section. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/writer+comonad/8">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/writer+comonad/8">v8</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/writer+comonad">current</a>

Reordered the Idea section.

diff, v8, current
- CommentRowNumber7.
- CommentAuthorGuest
- CommentTimeOct 28th 2022
- (edited Oct 28th 2022 by Urs)
- PermaLink
Author: Guest
Format: MarkdownItex[ This is me, Urs, speaking here -- the system seems to have logged me out while I was compiling this comment. ] $\,$ Here is a **question** on whether/how people think of the following from the logical perspective: When the $writer_B \dashv reader_B$ (co)monad pair is understood as coming from a hyperdoctrine or dependent type system, namely from the base change adjoint triple along $B$, as: $$ writer_B \;\coloneqq\; \underset{B}{\coprod} \big((-)\times B\big ) \;=\; (p_B)_! (p_B)^\ast \phantom{---} reader_B \;\coloneqq\; \underset{B}{\prod} \big((-)\times B\big ) \;=\; (p_B)_\ast (p_B)^\ast $$ then there is a real sense in which it is possible to "*actually write/read a given element*": Namely, after pulling back (the value of) the reader monad to the context $B$, there is a natural map $$ \array{ & (p_B)^\ast reader_B H &=& (p_B)^\ast (p_B)_\ast (p_B)^\ast H & \xrightarrow{ \;\;\; \epsilon_{ {}_{(p_B)^\ast H}} \;\;\; } & (p_B)^\ast H \\ {\color{purple}b} \colon B \;\; \vdash & && \underset{b' \colon B}{\prod} H & \xrightarrow{ (h_{b'})_{b' \colon B} \;\mapsto\; h_{\color{purple}b} } & H } $$ which has the interpretation of: > "Given an element $\color{purple}b$ of $B$, read out the $\color{purple}b$th component from the reader monad." Dually, once we pull back the (value of the) writer comonad to the context, there is a natural map $$ \array{ & (p_B)^\ast H &\xrightarrow{\; \eta_{{}_{(p_B)^\ast H}} \;}& (p_B)^\ast (p_B)_! (p_B)^\ast H &\simeq& (p_B)^\ast writer_B H \\ {\color{purple}b} \colon B \;\; \vdash & H & \xrightarrow{\; h \;\mapsto\; ( {\color{purple} b}, \, h) \;} & \underset{b' \colon B}{\coprod} H } $$ which has the interpretation of: > "Given an element $\color{purple}b$ of $B$, write into the $\color{purple}b$th component of the writer comonad." $\,$ One might say that what is happening here is that the parameter $b$ gets "lifted out of the type back into the context, where we may then again refer to it" -- if you see what I mean. $\,$ What I am wondering about is if anybody speaks/thinks about the reader/writer comonad in this way, as admitting a way to read/write "a definite value", once we understand the situation as dependently typed.

[ This is me, Urs, speaking here – the system seems to have logged me out while I was compiling this comment. ]

$<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mspace width="0.16667em"/></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\,</annotation></semantics></math>$

Here is a question on whether/how people think of the following from the logical perspective:

When the $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><msub><mi>writer</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><mo>⊣</mo><msub><mi>reader</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">writer_B \dashv reader_B</annotation></semantics></math>$ (co)monad pair is understood as coming from a hyperdoctrine or dependent type system, namely from the base change adjoint triple along $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>B</mi></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">B</annotation></semantics></math>$ , as:
$<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="block"><semantics><mrow><msub><mi>writer</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo>≔</mo><mspace width="0.27778em"/><munder><mo lspace="0.16667em" rspace="0.16667em">∐</mo><mi>B</mi></munder><mo maxsize="1.2em" minsize="1.2em">(</mo><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><mo lspace="0.11111em" rspace="0em">−</mo><mo stretchy="false">)</mo><mo>×</mo><mi>B</mi><mo maxsize="1.2em" minsize="1.2em">)</mo><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo>=</mo><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msub><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>!</mo></msub><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><mphantom><mrow><mo lspace="0.11111em" rspace="0em">−</mo><mo>−</mo><mo lspace="0.11111em" rspace="0em">−</mo></mrow></mphantom><msub><mi>reader</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo>≔</mo><mspace width="0.27778em"/><munder><mo lspace="0.16667em" rspace="0.16667em">∏</mo><mi>B</mi></munder><mo maxsize="1.2em" minsize="1.2em">(</mo><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><mo lspace="0.11111em" rspace="0em">−</mo><mo stretchy="false">)</mo><mo>×</mo><mi>B</mi><mo maxsize="1.2em" minsize="1.2em">)</mo><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo>=</mo><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msub><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msub><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex"> writer_B \;\coloneqq\; \underset{B}{\coprod} \big((-)\times B\big ) \;=\; (p_B)_! (p_B)^\ast \phantom{---} reader_B \;\coloneqq\; \underset{B}{\prod} \big((-)\times B\big ) \;=\; (p_B)_\ast (p_B)^\ast </annotation></semantics></math>$
then there is a real sense in which it is possible to “actually write/read a given element”:

Namely, after pulling back (the value of) the reader monad to the context $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>B</mi></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">B</annotation></semantics></math>$ , there is a natural map
$<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="block"><semantics><mrow><mrow><mtable><mtr><mtd/> <mtd><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><msub><mi>reader</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><mi>H</mi></mtd> <mtd><mo>=</mo></mtd> <mtd><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msub><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msub><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><mi>H</mi></mtd> <mtd><mover><mo>→</mo><mrow><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mspace width="0.27778em"/><msub><mi>ε</mi> <mrow><msub><mrow/> <mrow><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><mi>H</mi></mrow></msub></mrow></msub><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mspace width="0.27778em"/></mrow></mover></mtd> <mtd><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><mi>H</mi></mtd></mtr> <mtr><mtd><mstyle mathcolor="purple"><mi>b</mi></mstyle><mo lspace="0.11111em">:</mo><mi>B</mi><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo>⊢</mo></mtd> <mtd/> <mtd/> <mtd><munder><mo lspace="0.16667em" rspace="0.16667em">∏</mo><mrow><mi>b</mi><mo>′</mo><mo lspace="0.11111em">:</mo><mi>B</mi></mrow></munder><mi>H</mi></mtd> <mtd><mover><mo>→</mo><mrow><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>h</mi> <mrow><mi>b</mi><mo>′</mo></mrow></msub><msub><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mrow><mi>b</mi><mo>′</mo><mo lspace="0.11111em">:</mo><mi>B</mi></mrow></msub><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo>↦</mo><mspace width="0.27778em"/><msub><mi>h</mi> <mstyle mathcolor="purple"><mi>b</mi></mstyle></msub></mrow></mover></mtd> <mtd><mi>H</mi></mtd></mtr></mtable></mrow></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex"> \array{ &amp; (p_B)^\ast reader_B H &amp;=&amp; (p_B)^\ast (p_B)_\ast (p_B)^\ast H &amp; \xrightarrow{ \;\;\; \epsilon_{ {}_{(p_B)^\ast H}} \;\;\; } &amp; (p_B)^\ast H \\ {\color{purple}b} \colon B \;\; \vdash &amp; &amp;&amp; \underset{b' \colon B}{\prod} H &amp; \xrightarrow{ (h_{b'})_{b' \colon B} \;\mapsto\; h_{\color{purple}b} } &amp; H } </annotation></semantics></math>$
which has the interpretation of:

“Given an element $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mstyle mathcolor="purple"><mi>b</mi></mstyle></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\color{purple}b</annotation></semantics></math>$ of $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>B</mi></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">B</annotation></semantics></math>$ , read out the $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mstyle mathcolor="purple"><mi>b</mi></mstyle></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\color{purple}b</annotation></semantics></math>$ th component from the reader monad.”

Dually, once we pull back the (value of the) writer comonad to the context, there is a natural map
$<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="block"><semantics><mrow><mrow><mtable><mtr><mtd/> <mtd><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><mi>H</mi></mtd> <mtd><mover><mo>→</mo><mrow><mspace width="0.27778em"/><msub><mi>η</mi> <mrow><msub><mrow/> <mrow><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><mi>H</mi></mrow></msub></mrow></msub><mspace width="0.27778em"/></mrow></mover></mtd> <mtd><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msub><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>!</mo></msub><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><mi>H</mi></mtd> <mtd><mo>≃</mo></mtd> <mtd><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><msub><mi>p</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><msup><mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo>*</mo></msup><msub><mi>writer</mi> <mi>B</mi></msub><mi>H</mi></mtd></mtr> <mtr><mtd><mstyle mathcolor="purple"><mi>b</mi></mstyle><mo lspace="0.11111em">:</mo><mi>B</mi><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo>⊢</mo></mtd> <mtd><mi>H</mi></mtd> <mtd><mover><mo>→</mo><mrow><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mi>h</mi><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo>↦</mo><mspace width="0.27778em"/><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><mstyle mathcolor="purple"><mi>b</mi></mstyle><mo>,</mo><mspace width="0.16667em"/><mi>h</mi><mo stretchy="false">)</mo><mspace width="0.27778em"/></mrow></mover></mtd> <mtd><munder><mo lspace="0.16667em" rspace="0.16667em">∐</mo><mrow><mi>b</mi><mo>′</mo><mo lspace="0.11111em">:</mo><mi>B</mi></mrow></munder><mi>H</mi></mtd></mtr></mtable></mrow></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex"> \array{ &amp; (p_B)^\ast H &amp;\xrightarrow{\; \eta_{{}_{(p_B)^\ast H}} \;}&amp; (p_B)^\ast (p_B)_! (p_B)^\ast H &amp;\simeq&amp; (p_B)^\ast writer_B H \\ {\color{purple}b} \colon B \;\; \vdash &amp; H &amp; \xrightarrow{\; h \;\mapsto\; ( {\color{purple} b}, \, h) \;} &amp; \underset{b' \colon B}{\coprod} H } </annotation></semantics></math>$
which has the interpretation of:

“Given an element $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mstyle mathcolor="purple"><mi>b</mi></mstyle></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\color{purple}b</annotation></semantics></math>$ of $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>B</mi></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">B</annotation></semantics></math>$ , write into the $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mstyle mathcolor="purple"><mi>b</mi></mstyle></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\color{purple}b</annotation></semantics></math>$ th component of the writer comonad.”

$<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mspace width="0.16667em"/></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\,</annotation></semantics></math>$

One might say that what is happening here is that the parameter $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>b</mi></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">b</annotation></semantics></math>$ gets “lifted out of the type back into the context, where we may then again refer to it” – if you see what I mean.

$<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mspace width="0.16667em"/></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\,</annotation></semantics></math>$

What I am wondering about is if anybody speaks/thinks about the reader/writer comonad in this way, as admitting a way to read/write “a definite value”, once we understand the situation as dependently typed.
- CommentRowNumber8.
- CommentAuthorGuest
- CommentTimeOct 30th 2022
- PermaLink
Author: Guest
Format: TextThe explanation about the computational interpretation of this comonad seems incorrect. The text discusses morphisms of the form X -> W x Y as intuitively encoding a computation that also writes a side-effect in Y. Although this sounds correct, the issue is we're talking about a comonad, so the form of a Kleisli map is W x Y -> Y. The computational interpretation then should be a computation that also reads from some fixed external environment W. (The naming Writer monad is then rather suspect in this regard, but does occur elsewhere. I believe environment or coReader comonad is also used). (Remark from Dan Marsden).
The explanation about the computational interpretation of this comonad seems incorrect. The text discusses morphisms of the form X -> W x Y as intuitively encoding a computation that also writes a side-effect in Y. Although this sounds correct, the issue is we're talking about a comonad, so the form of a Kleisli map is W x Y -> Y. The computational interpretation then should be a computation that also reads from some fixed external environment W. (The naming Writer monad is then rather suspect in this regard, but does occur elsewhere. I believe environment or coReader comonad is also used). (Remark from Dan Marsden).
- CommentRowNumber9.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeOct 31st 2022
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: MarkdownItexYes, this is due to a mixup with the case where $W$ is equipped with monoid structure, where $W\times (-)$ is indeed a monad via that monoid structure, which then does model the idea of writing to a buffer. The entry should make that clear, and maybe terminology should be adjusted. I might have time for it later todsy.

Yes, this is due to a mixup with the case where $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>W</mi></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">W</annotation></semantics></math>$ is equipped with monoid structure, where $<math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>W</mi><mo>×</mo><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><mo lspace="0.11111em" rspace="0em">−</mo><mo stretchy="false">)</mo></mrow><annotation encoding="application/x-tex">W\times (-)</annotation></semantics></math>$ is indeed a monad via that monoid structure, which then does model the idea of writing to a buffer.

The entry should make that clear, and maybe terminology should be adjusted. I might have time for it later todsy.
- CommentRowNumber10.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeOct 31st 2022
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: MarkdownItexI have now adjusted and slightly expanded the wording in the entry. Then I have dug out (or rather: took the best first two that I found) pointers to sources which say "reader comonad" or "coreader comonad". (There is much room left to further expand, please feel invited to edit.) Finally I have renamed to "coreader comonad". <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/10">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/10">v10</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

I have now adjusted and slightly expanded the wording in the entry.

Then I have dug out (or rather: took the best first two that I found) pointers to sources which say “reader comonad” or “coreader comonad”.

(There is much room left to further expand, please feel invited to edit.)

Finally I have renamed to “coreader comonad”.

diff, v10, current
- CommentRowNumber11.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeNov 1st 2022
- (edited Nov 1st 2022)
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: MarkdownItexalso pointer to; * [[Tarmo Uustalu]], p. 13 of: *Monads and Interaction Lecture 3*, lecure notes for [MGS 2021](https://staffwww.dcs.shef.ac.uk/people/G.Struth/mgs21.html) (2021) [[pdf](https://cs.ioc.ee/~tarmo/mgs21/mgs3.pdf)] <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/11">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/11">v11</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>
also pointer to;
- Tarmo Uustalu, p. 13 of: Monads and Interaction Lecture 3, lecure notes for MGS 2021 (2021) [pdf]
diff, v11, current
- CommentRowNumber12.
- CommentAuthorDavid_Corfield
- CommentTimeDec 8th 2022
- PermaLink
Author: David_Corfield
Format: MarkdownItexAdded that this is also known as the *product comonad* and gave a reference to this. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/13">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/13">v13</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

Added that this is also known as the product comonad and gave a reference to this.

diff, v13, current
- CommentRowNumber13.
- CommentAuthormaxsnew
- CommentTimeJun 3rd 2023
- PermaLink
Author: maxsnew
Format: MarkdownItexBe a bit more precise about the conditions required for defining this comonad. Describe indexed comonad structure, add third name: environment comonad. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/15">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/15">v15</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

Be a bit more precise about the conditions required for defining this comonad. Describe indexed comonad structure, add third name: environment comonad.

diff, v15, current
- CommentRowNumber14.
- CommentAuthorUrs
- CommentTimeJun 3rd 2023
- (edited Jun 3rd 2023)
- PermaLink
Author: Urs
Format: MarkdownItexfixed the link for *[[exponentiable object|exponentiable]]*. (By default, nLab entry names are nouns. So we have an entry titled *[[exponential object]]* and *[[exponentiable object]]* is redirecting there. We could make the also the the adjective "exponentiable" redirect there if this is felt necessary.) <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/16">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/16">v16</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

fixed the link for exponentiable.

(By default, nLab entry names are nouns. So we have an entry titled exponential object and exponentiable object is redirecting there. We could make the also the the adjective “exponentiable” redirect there if this is felt necessary.)

diff, v16, current
- CommentRowNumber15.
- CommentAuthormaxsnew
- CommentTimeJun 3rd 2023
- PermaLink
Author: maxsnew
Format: MarkdownItexCoalgebras and the relationship to slice categories. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/17">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/17">v17</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

Coalgebras and the relationship to slice categories.

diff, v17, current
- CommentRowNumber16.
- CommentAuthormaxsnew
- CommentTimeJun 3rd 2023
- PermaLink
Author: maxsnew
Format: MarkdownItexFix a mistake in the statement about comonadicity of the slice category <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/18">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/18">v18</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

Fix a mistake in the statement about comonadicity of the slice category

diff, v18, current
- CommentRowNumber17.
- CommentAuthorTodd_Trimble
- CommentTimeJun 3rd 2023
- PermaLink
Author: Todd_Trimble
Format: MarkdownItexCorrected a typo, and took the liberty of giving the forgetful functor from the slice category a name. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/19">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/19">v19</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

Corrected a typo, and took the liberty of giving the forgetful functor from the slice category a name.

diff, v19, current
- CommentRowNumber18.
- CommentAuthormaxsnew
- CommentTimeJun 4th 2023
- PermaLink
Author: maxsnew
Format: MarkdownItexMore specific link for coalgebra <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/20">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/20">v20</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

More specific link for coalgebra

diff, v20, current
- CommentRowNumber19.
- CommentAuthormaxsnew
- CommentTimeJun 8th 2023
- PermaLink
Author: maxsnew
Format: MarkdownItexDescribe the generalization to tensor products. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/21">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/21">v21</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

Describe the generalization to tensor products.

diff, v21, current
- CommentRowNumber20.
- CommentAuthorncfavier
- CommentTimeFeb 6th 2024
- PermaLink
Author: ncfavier
Format: MarkdownItexMentioned the duality with exception monads. <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/diff/coreader+comonad/24">diff</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/revision/coreader+comonad/24">v24</a>, <a href="https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/coreader+comonad">current</a>

Mentioned the duality with exception monads.

diff, v24, current

1 to 20 of 20

nForum

Discussion Feed

Not signed in

Discussion Tag Cloud

nLab > Latest Changes: coreader comonad