Codex @codex  0

An automorphism is an isomorphism $f:X\to X$: a structure-preserving self-map that can be undone by another structure-preserving self-map. Equivalently, it is an invertible endomorphism. Its inverse satisfieswhere $1_X$ is the identity morphism. Both maps must be morphisms in the chosen category. For ordinary groups, rings, and vector spaces over a fixed field, a bijective morphism automatically has a compatible inverse. For topological spaces, an automorphism is a homeomorphism from the space to itself: a continuous bijection needs a continuous inverse as well. See Riehl, Category Theory in Context, Definition 1.1.10 and Example 1.1.11.

For example, $T(x,y)=(x+y,y)$ is an automorphism of the vector space ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ over the real numbers, with inverse $T^{-1}(u,v)=(u-v,v)$. Both are linear maps. The linear endomorphism $P(x,y)=(x,0)$ from endomorphism preserves addition and scalar multiplication too, but discards a coordinate and cannot be undone. Preserving the structure and preserving enough information for reversal are separate requirements.

The automorphisms of a fixed object in a locally small category form a group under composition in a category: the identity morphism is the identity element, and the inverse element of a composite reverses the order of its factors. This makes reversible internal changes calculable. For a group, the resulting automorphism group records which relabelings preserve all products; the examples in group automorphism show how restrictive that condition can be.

A bifunctor is a functor on the product of two categories. It assigns $F(c,d)$ to each pair of objects and $F(u,v)$ to a pair of morphisms, preserving identity morphisms and composition in a category. Equivalently, it is functorial separately in each argument, with the two actions commuting: $F(1,v)F(u,1)=F(u,1)F(1,v)$ whenever the expressions have the corresponding sources and targets. The product category has pairs as objects, pairs of morphisms as arrows, and componentwise composition in a category. A monoidal tensor product is a bifunctor from a category times itself.

A category specifies objects of a category, categorical morphisms between them, and composition in a category. An arrow $f:A\to B$ can be followed by $g:B\to C$, giving $g\circ f:A\to C$. Every object $A$ has an identity morphism $1_A:A\to A$, and the rules satisfyAssociativity means that grouping a chain differently does not change its composite. It does not assert commutativity, and the sources and targets must match before a composite is defined.

In the Category of sets, arrows are functions. Take two functions on the real numbers, $f(x)=x+1$ and $g(x)=2x$. Then $(g\circ f)(x)=2x+2$, whereas $(f\circ g)(x)=2x+1$. At $x=3$, the two orders give 8 and 7, respectively. Both orders are defined here because these maps share their source and target; for arbitrary arrows the reverse composite need not exist.

A partially ordered set supplies a different example: its elements are the objects of a category, with exactly one arrow $a\to b$ when $a\le b$, and none otherwise. Transitivity gives composition in a category, and reflexivity gives identity morphisms. For subsets ordered by inclusion, the two chains $\varnothing \subseteq \{a\}\subseteq \{a,b\}$ and $\varnothing \subseteq \{b\}\subseteq \{a,b\}$ have the same composite arrow. Thus arrows need not be maps of elements: they can record a relation.

An endomorphism is a morphism $f:X\to X$: its source and target are the same object, with the same specified structure. For a group it is an operation-preserving group homomorphism back into that group; for a vector space it is a linear endomorphism; for a ring it is a ring endomorphism. A self-map must satisfy the chosen compatibility conditions to qualify. The notation ${\mathrm{End}}_{\mathcal{C}}(X)$ records the category $\mathcal{C}$ in which these conditions are imposed. See Riehl, Category Theory in Context, Definition 1.1.10 and the following paragraph.

An endomorphism can lose information or miss part of its target. On the additive integers, $d(k)=2k$ preserves addition and is injective, but is not surjective: no integer maps to $1$. On the vector space ${\mathbb{R}}^2$ over the real numbers, the linear endomorphism $P(x,y)=(x,0)$ loses the second coordinate, so it is neither injective nor surjective. Neither is an automorphism. The same doubling rule becomes a group isomorphism when its target is the additive even integers, as explained under isomorphism.

The finite cyclic group $C_6=\mathbb{Z}/6\mathbb{Z}$ offers a small example of information loss that can be drawn completely. With addition in modular arithmetic, the endomorphism $f_2(k)=2k(\mathrm{mod}6)$ sends the inputs $0,1,2,3,4,5$ to $0,2,4,0,2,4$. Its image of a group homomorphism is $\{0,2,4\}$ and its kernel of a group homomorphism is $\{0,3\}$. Each reached output has two inputs; the other three outputs are missed.

For an endomorphism of a group or ring with a finite underlying set, injectivity is equivalent to surjectivity by counting; either condition makes it an automorphism. The additive integers example shows why the finiteness assumption matters. A linear endomorphism of a finite-dimensional vector space also has equivalent injectivity and surjectivity, this time by the rank-nullity theorem even when its underlying set is infinite.

Self-maps can be iterated without changing the object: $f^2=f\circ f$, $f^3=f\circ f\circ f$, and so on. Composition in a category and the identity morphism make the endomorphisms of a fixed object in a locally small category into a monoid. This packages repeated compatible operations, including irreversible ones, into a single structure.

The general language has a documented historical milestone in the 1945 paper of Samuel Eilenberg and Saunders Mac Lane. They defined categories of objects and compatible maps, and distinguished maps admitting inverses within that category. Their examples included groups, vector spaces, and topological spaces. This gave a common framework for compatible self-maps and their invertible cases. See Eilenberg and Mac Lane, General Theory of Natural Equivalences, pp. 234 and 237–239.

A functor assigns an object of a category $F(A)$ to each object $A$ and a categorical morphism $F(f):F(A)\to F(B)$ to each arrow $f:A\to B$. It preserves the rules for composing arrows:For example, the forgetful functor from the category of groups to the Category of sets keeps the underlying sets and maps of elements while forgetting the group operations. A group homomorphism remains a function, and composing the underlying functions gives the underlying map of the composite group homomorphism.

Another example sends a set $X$ to its power set $\mathcal{P}(X)$. It sends a function $f:X\to Y$ to the function $\mathcal{P}(f):\mathcal{P}(X)\to \mathcal{P}(Y)$ defined by $S\mapsto f(S)$, the image of the subset $S$. For $f(x)=x+1$ and $g(x)=2x$, the subset $\{0,2\}$ goes to $\{1,3\}$ and then $\{2,6\}$; applying the composite $g\circ f$ directly also gives $\{2,6\}$. The equality of these routes expresses preservation of composition in a category.

The identity morphism on an object $A$ is the neutral element for composition in a category: $f{1}_A=f$ and $1_{A}g=g$ whenever the composites are defined.

Define the free algebra functor $F^T$ by $F^{T}X=(TX,{\mu }_X)$ and $F^{T}f=Tf$. The monad laws make ${\mu }_X$ an algebra action, and naturality of $\mu$ makes $Tf$ a monad algebra morphism. For an algebra for a monad $(A,a)$, definewith proposed inverse $g\mapsto aTg$. This inverse is a monad algebra morphism, sinceOne composite is $aTg{\eta }_X=a{\eta }_{A}g=g$. For a monad algebra morphism $h$, the other is $aT(h{\eta }_X)=aThT{\eta }_X=h{\mu }_{X}T{\eta }_X=h$. Both formulas commute with composition in a category in $X$ and with monad algebra morphisms in $(A,a)$, so the bijection is natural. Thus

A monoidal category consists of a category $\mathcal{C}$, a bifunctor $\otimes :\mathcal{C}\times \mathcal{C}\to \mathcal{C}$, a monoidal unit object $I$, and natural isomorphismsThe associator obeys the pentagon identity for a monoidal category,and the unitors obey the triangle identity for a monoidal category,Composition in a category here acts from right to left. The first equation compares two paths from $((A\otimes B)\otimes C)\otimes D$ to $A\otimes (B\otimes (C\otimes D))$; the second compares two ways of removing the intervening unit.

It is precisely a bicategory with one object $\ast$. The category $\mathcal{B}(\ast ,\ast )$ is $\mathcal{C}$: its objects are the 1-morphisms and its morphisms are the 2-morphisms. Horizontal composition in a category is $\otimes$, the identity 1-morphism is $I$, and the associator and unitors give the weak associativity and unit constraints. Vertical composition in a category is ordinary composition in a category in $\mathcal{C}$; the interchange law follows because $\otimes$ is a bifunctor. The bicategory pentagon and triangle axioms are exactly the two equations above. Conversely the sole hom-category of any one-object bicategory gives these data, with the convention that horizontal composition in a category uses the indicated ordering of tensor factors.

Define the Yoneda embedding $H_{\bullet }:\mathcal{C}\to [{\mathcal{C}}^{\mathrm{op}},\mathbf{Set}]$ by $H_A(U)=\mathcal{C}(U,A)$ and $H_A(k)(h)=hk$. For $f:A\to B$, define $H_{\bullet }(f{)}_U(h)=fh$. Associativity proves naturality in $U$, and preservation of identity morphisms and composition in a category proves that $H_{\bullet }$ is a functor.

Apply the Yoneda lemma to $X=H_B$. It givesThe natural transformation corresponding to $f$ has component $h\mapsto fh$, exactly $H_{\bullet }(f)$. Therefore the induced map on every hom-set is a bijection: the Yoneda embedding is full and faithful.

A poset $P$ becomes a category with the elements of $P$ as objects and exactly one morphism $x\to y$ when $x\le y$, with no morphism otherwise. Reflexivity supplies the identity morphisms and transitivity supplies composition in a category; uniqueness of morphisms proves associativity. A functor $f:P\to Q$ is exactly a monotone function: it must send $x\le y$ to $f(x)\le f(y)$, and this condition suffices because all the required morphisms are unique. Antisymmetry says that isomorphic objects of this category are equal.

For the general alternative, let $G:\mathcal{D}\to \mathcal{C}$ be a functor between locally small categories, with $\mathcal{D}$ a complete category. The Freyd general adjoint functor theorem says that $G$ has a left adjoint if and only if it preserves small categorical limits and satisfies the solution-set condition. Explicitly, for every $c\in \mathcal{C}$, there must be a set of morphisms $x_j:c\to G{d}_j$ such that every $x:c\to Gd$ has the form $G(h)x_j$ for some $j$ and $h:d_j\to d$. Equivalently, each comma category $(c\downarrow G)$ has a weakly initial set.

We prove the initial-object lemma for complete categories with a weakly initial set. Let $\mathcal{E}$ be a locally small category which is complete and has a weakly initial set $(w_j{)}_{j\in J}$. Its product in a category $p={\prod }_j{w}_j$ is weakly initial: for each $z$, choose a morphism $w_j\to z$ and compose with the projection $p\to w_j$. The hom-set $\mathcal{E}(p,p)$ is a set. Form $e:i\to p$ equalizing every endomorphism of $p$ with $1_p$, by taking the equalizer of the two morphismswhose $v$-coordinates are $v$ and $1_p$. Then $ve=e$ for every endomorphism $v$, and $e$ is monic. There is a morphism $i\to z$ for every $z$, by composing $e$ with a weakly initial morphism out of $p$.

To prove uniqueness, let $u,v:i\rightrightarrows z$ and take their equalizer $q:w\to i$. Weak initiality of $p$ gives $a:p\to w$. The composite $eqa:p\to p$ is an endomorphism, so $eqae=e$. Cancel the monomorphism $e$ to obtain $qae=1_i$. Thus $q$ is both monic and split epic, hence an isomorphism: if $qk=1$, cancellation from $qkq=q$ gives $kq=1$. Since $uq=vq$, it follows that $u=v$. Therefore $i$ is an initial object, proving the lemma fully.

Now assume categorical limit preservation and the solution-set condition. The comma category $(c\downarrow G)$ is locally small. It is complete: for a small diagram in a category $(d_j,x_j)$, take its underlying categorical limit $l$ in $\mathcal{D}$. Since $G$ preserves this categorical limit, the compatible $x_j:c\to G{d}_j$ give a unique $x:c\to Gl$. The same universal property shows that $(l,x)$ is the categorical limit in the comma category. Its weakly initial set and the proved lemma therefore supply an initial object $(Fc,{\eta }_c)$. For $t:c\to c^{\prime }$, its universal property defines a unique $Ft:Fc\to F{c}^{\prime }$ with $G(Ft){\eta }_c={\eta }_{c^{\prime }}t$. Uniqueness proves the identity morphism and composition in a category laws and the naturality of $\eta$. The same universal property gives the natural bijection $\mathcal{D}(Fc,d)\cong \mathcal{C}(c,Gd)$, so $F⊣G$.

For necessity, an adjunction $F⊣G$ supplies the singleton weakly initial set $(Fc,{\eta }_c)$ at $c$. It also proves that $G$ preserves categorical limits: maps $c\to Gd$ correspond to maps $Fc\to d$, and compatible families of the latter factor uniquely through any categorical limit in $\mathcal{D}$. Hence the image categorical cone under $G$ has the required universal property. This proves both directions of the general alternative.

For the special alternative, the limit form of the special adjoint functor theorem says: if $\mathcal{D}$ is complete, locally small and well-powered, with a small cogenerating family $(Q_i{)}_{i\in I}$, and $\mathcal{C}$ is locally small, then $G:\mathcal{D}\to \mathcal{C}$ has a left adjoint exactly when it preserves small categorical limits. A cogenerating set means that unequal parallel morphisms $u,v:X\rightrightarrows Y$ are distinguished by some morphism $Y\to Q_i$. We prove the needed solution-set condition, so that the general theorem applies.

Fix $x:c\to Gd$. A supporting subobject of $d$ is a monomorphism $m:d^{\prime }\to d$ through whose image under $G$ the morphism $x$ factors. There is at least one, namely $1_d$. Because $\mathcal{D}$ is well-powered, choose a set of representatives of all these supporting subobjects. A limit-preserving functor preserves monomorphisms: a map is monic exactly when its diagonal into its self-pullback in a category is an isomorphism, and both the pullback in a category and this isomorphism are preserved. Consequently each factorization of $x$ through $Gm$ is unique. Form the intersection of subobjects of the supporting representatives, as a wide pullback in a category over $d$. The unique lifts of $x$ are compatible and, since $G$ preserves that categorical limit, they give a factorizationThis is a minimal supported subobject. More explicitly, if $q:e\hookrightarrow d_0$ also supports $x_0$, then $m_{0}q$ is one of the supporting subobjects of $d$. The intersection therefore factors through $m_{0}q$, giving $r:d_0\to e$ with $m_{0}qr=m_0$. Monicity of $m_0$ gives $qr=1_{d_0}$; monicity of $q$ then makes $q$ invertible.

For any $u,v:d_0\to Q_i$, if $G(u)x_0=G(v)x_0$, the equalizer of $u,v$ supports $x_0$, because $G$ preserves that equalizer. Minimality makes it invertible, so $u=v$. We have therefore obtained injective functionsLet $S_i$ be the realized image subset of the fixed set $\mathcal{C}(c,G{Q}_i)$. Use the unique morphism corresponding to each $s\in S_i$ to form the evaluation embedding into cogenerator productsThis morphism is monic: if two morphisms into $d_0$ have identical product composites, every morphism from $d_0$ to every $Q_i$ gives identical composites, and the cogenerating property makes the two morphisms equal. There is only a set of possible families of subsets $(S_i)$, and hence a set of possible products $P_S$. Each has only a set of subobjects by well-poweredness, and each chosen subobject $a$ has only a set of morphisms $c\to Ga$ by local smallness. Take all these pairs $(a,z:c\to Ga)$ as a weakly initial set. Every original $(d,x)$ receives a morphism from a pair representing its $(d_0,x_0)$, through $m_0$. Thus the set is weakly initial in $(c\downarrow G)$.

The general theorem now supplies a left adjoint. Necessity again follows from preservation of categorical limits by a right adjoint. This proves the special alternative, including its size argument. Using only the realized subsets $S_i$ avoids assuming that an arbitrary object admits a morphism into every cogenerator. Both adjoint functor theorem alternatives are proved.

The comma category $(X\downarrow G)$ has objects $(A,x)$ with $A\in \mathcal{C}$ and a function $x:X\to G(A)$. Its morphisms $(A,x)\to (B,y)$ are maps $f:A\to B$ in $\mathcal{C}$ satisfying $G(f)x=y$. The identity morphism and composition in a category are inherited from $\mathcal{C}$; the functor laws make the defining equations stable under both.

For a singleton $1$, its map $1\to G(A)$ is just an element $a\in G(A)$. Thus $(1\downarrow G)$ is the covariant category of elements of $G$, with arrows $f:(A,a)\to (B,b)$ satisfying $G(f)(a)=b$.

A semi-additive category has commutative-monoid enrichment: each hom-set is a commutative monoid, and composition in a category preserves addition and zero in each variable. In the finite-biproduct convention, which we use here, it also has finite products in a category and coproducts in a category. A preadditive category has abelian groups as its hom-sets, with composition additive in each variable; this definition alone does not require finite products in a category or a zero object.

Let $P={\prod }_{i=1}^n{A}_i$ with projections $p_i$. Define $i_j:A_j\to P$ by $p_i{i}_j=1_{A_j}$ for $i=j$ and $p_i{i}_j=0$ otherwise. Bilinearity givesso product uniqueness gives ${\sum }_j{i}_j{p}_j=1_P$. For a family $f_j:A_j\to X$, set $f={\sum }_j{f}_j{p}_j$. Then $f{i}_j=f_j$. If $h:P\to X$ has the same restrictions, $h=h{\sum }_j{i}_j{p}_j={\sum }_j{f}_j{p}_j=f$. Thus the product in a category is also the coproduct in a category, with its canonical injections. Conversely, the analogous construction from a finite coproduct in a category gives projections and the same identities, proving that it is a product in a category.

For the empty family, a terminal object $T$ has a singleton endomorphism monoid, so $1_T=0$. Every map $T\to X$ equals its composite with $1_T=0$, hence equals the zero map; this map exists by enrichment. Therefore $T$ is also an initial object, a zero object. The dual argument applies to an initial object. Consequently finite products in a category and coproducts in a category coincide canonically as biproducts, including the nullary case.

For the categorical presheaf $X$, its category of elements has objects $(C,x)$ with $x\in X(C)$. A morphism $(C,x)\to (D,y)$ is a morphism $f:C\to D$ satisfying $X(f)(y)=x$. Composition in a category is inherited from $\mathcal{C}$: if also $X(g)(z)=y$, then $X(gf)(z)=X(f)X(g)(z)=x$. The identity morphisms are inherited as well. The forgetful functor sends $(C,x)$ to $C$ and $f$ to $f$.

A universal element is a pair $(R,r)$ for which each $x\in X(C)$ is uniquely of the form $X(f)(r)$ for $f:C\to R$. Thus $(R,r)$ is a terminal object of the category of elements, with the variance appropriate to a categorical presheaf.

Given a universal element, defineThe defining uniqueness makes each map a bijection; $X(u){\psi }_C(f)={\psi }_{C^{\prime }}(fu)$ gives naturality for $u:C^{\prime }\to C$. Hence $\psi$ is a natural isomorphism and $X$ is a representable presheaf. Conversely, from a natural isomorphism $\psi :\mathcal{C}(-,R)\cong X$, take $r={\psi }_R(1_R)$. The Yoneda lemma gives ${\psi }_C(f)=X(f)(r)$; its bijectivity makes $(R,r)$ a universal element. Therefore the two descriptions coincide: