Want to take part in these discussions? Sign in if you have an account, or apply for one below
Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
1 to 4 of 4
The domains of morphisms in a multicategory are usually defined to be finite lists of objects. However, in the symmetric case one can also define them to be families of objects indexed by an arbitrary finite set. A natural functorial action by isomorphisms of finite sets then encodes the symmetries in a symmetric multicategory without having to arbitrarily choose any orderings. (One can do something similar for non-symmetric multicategories by using totally ordered finite sets, but the payoff is less.)
I am sure I’ve seen this written down somewhere, but I can’t think of where. Does anyone know a reference for this?
That sounds like the definition of operads via monoidal categories suitably fibered over Segal’s category of (pointed) finite sets, as in “Higher Algebra”.
If I understand your question correctly, then Appendix A.2 in Leinster’s Higher Operads, Higher Categories is exactly about that.
Thanks Karol, that’s what I was thinking of! I looked in HOHC, but the unhelpful title of appendix A threw me off.
1 to 4 of 4