Lemma 90.22.4. Let $(U, R, s, t, c)$ be a groupoid in functors on $\mathcal{C}_\Lambda $.
$(U, R, s, t, c)$ is prorepresentable if and only if its completion is representable as a groupoid in functors on $\widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda $.
$(U, R, s, t, c)$ is prorepresentable if and only if $U$ and $R$ are prorepresentable.
Proof. Part (1) follows from Remark 90.22.3. For (2), the “only if” direction is clear from the definition of a prorepresentable groupoid in functors. Conversely, assume $U$ and $R$ are prorepresentable, say $U \cong \underline{R_0}|_{\mathcal{C}_\Lambda }$ and $R \cong \underline{R_1}|_{\mathcal{C}_\Lambda }$ for objects $R_0$ and $R_1$ of $\widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda $. Since $\underline{R_0} \cong \widehat{\underline{R_0}|_{\mathcal{C}_\Lambda }}$ and $\underline{R_1} \cong \widehat{\underline{R_1}|_{\mathcal{C}_\Lambda }}$ by Remark 90.7.11 we see that the completion $(U, R, s, t, c)^\wedge $ is a groupoid in functors of the form $(\underline{R_0}, \underline{R_1}, \widehat{s}, \widehat{t}, \widehat{c})$. By Lemma 90.4.3 the pushout $\underline{R_1} \times _{\widehat{s}, \underline{R_1}, \widehat{t}} \underline{R_1}$ exists. Hence $(\underline{R_0}, \underline{R_1}, \widehat{s}, \widehat{t}, \widehat{c})$ is a representable groupoid in functors on $\widehat{\mathcal{C}}_\Lambda $. Finally, the restriction $(\underline{R_0}, \underline{R_1}, s, t, c)|_{\mathcal{C}_\Lambda }$ gives back $(U, R, s, t, c)$ by Remark 90.22.3 hence $(U, R, s, t, c)$ is prorepresentable by definition. $\square$
Your email address will not be published.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).
All contributions are licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
Comments (0)