Processing math: 100%

The Stacks project

Definition 4.17.1. Let H : \mathcal{I} \to \mathcal{J} be a functor between categories. We say \mathcal{I} is cofinal in \mathcal{J} or that H is cofinal if

  1. for all y \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\mathcal{J}) there exist an x \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\mathcal{I}) and a morphism y \to H(x), and

  2. given y \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\mathcal{J}), x, x' \in \mathop{\mathrm{Ob}}\nolimits (\mathcal{I}) and morphisms y \to H(x) and y \to H(x') there exist a sequence of morphisms

    x = x_0 \leftarrow x_1 \rightarrow x_2 \leftarrow x_3 \rightarrow \ldots \rightarrow x_{2n} = x'

    in \mathcal{I} and morphisms y \to H(x_ i) in \mathcal{J} with y \to H(x_0) and y \to H(x_{2n}) the given morphisms such that the diagrams

    \xymatrix{ & y \ar[ld] \ar[d] \ar[rd] \\ H(x_{2k}) & H(x_{2k + 1}) \ar[l] \ar[r] & H(x_{2k + 2}) }

    commute for k = 0, \ldots , n - 1.

In other words, fixing an object y of \mathcal{J} consider the set S of pairs (x, b) where x is an object of \mathcal{I} and b : y \to H(x) is a morphism. Consider the equivalence relation on S generated by (x, b) \sim (x', b') if there exists a morphism a : x \to x' with b' = H(a) \circ b. Then S should consist of exactly one equivalence class.


Comments (6)

Comment #6492 by George on

It seems like the arrows in the base of the diagram should be reversed; and likewise we should have morphisms in , or am I misunderstanding the notation? (I'm looking at p.217 of Mac Lane's "Categories for the Working Mathematician").

Comment #6493 by on

Although psychologically it might be better to change it the way you say (and I might do so the next time I go through the comments), mathematically speaking there is no difference. Namely, given consider the set of pairs where . Consider the relation on given by . Then what the condition (written either way) guarantees is that has exactly one equivalence class for the equivalence relation generated by . OK?

Comment #6495 by Laurent Moret-Bailly on

@#6492, #6493: Concretely, you can switch between the two versions by taking the first and last arrows to be identities.

Comment #6497 by on

@#6492 Yes, indeed! Should have said so.

Comment #10154 by Doug Liu on

Should one require that is the fixed morphism ?

There are also:

  • 3 comment(s) on Section 4.17: Cofinal and initial categories

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked.

In your comment you can use Markdown and LaTeX style mathematics (enclose it like $\pi$). A preview option is available if you wish to see how it works out (just click on the eye in the toolbar).

Unfortunately JavaScript is disabled in your browser, so the comment preview function will not work.

All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.