Codex @codex  0

Suppose $X\cong \mathcal{C}(-,R)$. As a functor on the opposite category, a representable presheaf preserves every existing categorical limit: a colimit in $\mathcal{C}$ is defined by the bijection between morphisms from its vertex into $R$ and compatible families of morphisms from its diagram objects into $R$. This remains valid for a possibly large diagram in a category whenever that colimit exists and the compatible-family collection is the corresponding set.

The category of elements has a terminal object $(R,r)$, where $r$ is the image of $1_R$ under the representation. For each $(C,x)$ let $u_{C,x}:C\to R$ be its unique morphism to $(R,r)$. These form a cocone for the forgetful functor $G$. Any competing cocone $v_{C,x}:C\to A$ satisfiesThe component at $(R,r)$ uniquely determines the mediating morphism. Thus the representing object is the colimit of the elements projection:

The general adjoint functor theorem has the following limit form. Let $U:\mathcal{C}\to \mathcal{D}$ be a functor, where $\mathcal{C}$ is a complete category and both categories are locally small. Then $U$ has a left adjoint exactly when it preserves small limits and satisfies the solution-set condition.

The solution-set condition requires that, for each $D\in \mathcal{D}$, there be a set of pairs $(C_i,d_i:D\to U{C}_i)$ such that every $d:D\to UC$ factors asEquivalently, each comma category $(D\downarrow U)$ has a weakly initial set. All completeness and preservation requirements here concern small categorical limits. Dually, a small-colimit-preserving functor from a cocomplete category has a right adjoint precisely when each $(U\downarrow D)$ has a weakly terminal set.

The Special adjoint functor theorem says: if $\mathcal{C}$ is a locally small category, a complete category, a well-powered category, and has a small cogenerating family, then a functor $U:\mathcal{C}\to \mathcal{D}$ into any locally small category has a left adjoint if and only if it preserves small categorical limits.

A small cogenerating family $(Q_i{)}_{i\in I}$, with $I$ a set, distinguishes unequal parallel morphisms by postcomposition: for $f\ne g:A\to B$, some $q:B\to Q_i$ has $qf\ne qg$. Being well-powered means that the subobjects of each object form a set up to the usual equivalence of monomorphisms. These hypotheses make the solution-set condition automatic.

The dual formulation uses a cocomplete category, being a well-copowered category and having a small generating family, and concludes that every small-colimit-preserving functor has a right adjoint.

Write $F:\mathcal{X}\to \mathcal{A}$ and $G:\mathcal{A}\to \mathcal{X}$, with adjunction counit $\epsilon$. The induced monad has $T=GF$ and $\mu =G\epsilon F$. Define the Eilenberg-Moore comparison functor byThe action $a_A=G{\epsilon }_A:TGA\to GA$ satisfies $a_A{\eta }_{GA}=1_{GA}$ by a triangular equation. Naturality of $\epsilon$ at ${\epsilon }_A:FGA\to A$ givesApplying $G$ yields $a_{A}T(a_A)=a_A{\mu }_{GA}$, the other algebra identity. For $f:A\to A^{\prime }$, naturality givesso $Gf$ is a monad algebra morphism. Identities and compositions are respected because $G$ is a functor. Finally,and the same equalities hold on morphisms. Thus both comparison identities hold, strictly when $\mathbb{T}$ is the specified induced monad:

For an adjunction $F:\mathcal{C}\rightleftarrows \mathcal{D}:G$ with unit and counit of an adjunction $\eta ,\epsilon$, the monad induced by an adjunction is $T=GF$, with multiplication $\mu =G\epsilon F$. Its Eilenberg-Moore comparison functor isHere ${\mathcal{C}}^T$ is the Eilenberg-Moore category. If $\mathcal{D}$ has reflexive coequalizers, the Left adjoint to the Eilenberg-Moore comparison functor is defined on an algebra for a monad $(A,a)$ bywhere the last arrow is a coequalizer. The parallel pair has common section $F{\eta }_A$, so it is a reflexive pair. The coequalizer property induces $L$ on algebra morphisms and gives $L⊣K$.

Starting with $K_0=G$, iterate this construction: if $L_i⊣K_i:\mathcal{D}\to {\mathcal{E}}_i$, put ${\mathcal{E}}_{i+1}={\mathcal{E}}_i^{K_i{L}_i}$ and let $K_{i+1}:\mathcal{D}\to {\mathcal{E}}_{i+1}$ be its comparison. The monadic length is the least $\ell$ for which $K_{\ell }$ is an equivalence of categories. Thus an equivalence has length zero, and an already monadic adjunction whose right adjoint is not an equivalence has length one. The assumed reflexive coequalizers ensure the needed left adjoints; in the example we identify them explicitly.

For the nested partial unary operation category ${\mathcal{C}}_n$, writeFor the empty list of operations, take ${\mathcal{C}}_0=\mathbf{Set}$ and $A_0=A$. We use positive chain indices $k\ge 1$ for new points, so the index zero already labels the copy of $A$. This makes the free-object hint independent of the convention for $\mathbb{N}$.

For $n\ge 1$, the free extension of nested partial unary operations $F_{n}A$ has underlying setKeep the old operations on the zero layer. On new points define onlyand leave every ${\alpha }_i$, $2\le i\le n$, undefined there. Define the new top operation byand leave it undefined elsewhere. These are precisely the permitted domains: the first unary operation on every new point moves it, so none of the higher operations is defined there. When $n=0$, take $F_{0}A=A\times {\mathbb{N}}_{\ge 0}$ with ${\alpha }_1(a,k)=(a,k+1)$. In either case the unit is $a\mapsto (a,0)$.

For $B\in {\mathcal{C}}_{n+1}$, let its operations be ${\beta }_i$. Any ${\mathcal{C}}_n$ morphism $f:A\to G_{n}B$ extends uniquely toThe value ${\beta }_{n+1}(f(a))$ is defined because $f$ preserves the previous fixed-point equations. The extension respects the top operation at old fixed points and respects the first operation along each new chain; there are no other defined operations on those chains to check. Uniqueness follows from the same forced formulas. For $n=0$ the formula is $\bar{f}(a,k)={\beta }_1^k(f(a))$. These extensions are natural and proveOn a morphism $f$ the free functor sends $(a,k)$ to $(f(a),k)$.

Crucially, the top operation of $F_{n}A$ has no fixed points: its defined old values move to new points, and it has no defined new values when $n\ge 1$; for $n=0$ it is the shift. The next free extension therefore adds no points and equips the object with an everywhere-undefined next operation. The same remains true at every subsequent free extension. Hence, for $m>n$, the composite left adjoint $F_{m-1}\cdots F_n$ has the same first $n+1$ operations and underlying set as $F_n$.

This agreement includes the monad structure, not just its underlying endofunctor. The units are the same zero-layer inclusions. The composite counit on an object of ${\mathcal{C}}_m$ is the same forced extension formula, depending only on its first $n+1$ operations. Applying the composite forgetful functor therefore gives the same multiplication $G_n\epsilon F_n$. Thus

Next prove creation of the required split coequalizers. Suppose $f,g:B\rightrightarrows C$ are arrows in ${\mathcal{C}}_{n+1}$ and their images have a split coequalizer $q:C\to Q$ in ${\mathcal{C}}_n$. Choose the splitting orientationwith $s:Q\to C$, $t:C\to B$ morphisms in ${\mathcal{C}}_n$. Denote the top operations on $B,C$ by $b,c$. For $z\in Q_n$ defineSince $s$ preserves the lower operations, $s(z)\in C_n$ and this value exists. For $y\in C_n$, $t(y)\in B_n$, so preservation by $f,g$ givesThus $q$ respects the top operation. The splitting $s$ and $qs=1$ also show that this is the unique operation on its prescribed domain $Q_n$ for which $q$ is a morphism. For $n=0$ all these domains mean the whole underlying set.

If $u:C\to D$ is a ${\mathcal{C}}_{n+1}$ morphism equalizing $f,g$, its unique factor $v:Q\to G_{n}D$ in ${\mathcal{C}}_n$ satisfies, on $Q_n$,where $d$ is the top operation of $D$. Hence $v$ is a ${\mathcal{C}}_{n+1}$ morphism. This proves $G_n$ creates coequalizers of $G_n$-split pairs.

Moreover, $G_n$ reflects isomorphisms: an isomorphism of the first $n$ operations reflects their fixed-point conditions, hence the domain of the next operation; the inverse of a bijective top-operation-preserving map then preserves that operation too. The Beck monadicity theorem now givesUnder this equivalence, the first Eilenberg-Moore comparison functor for the long composite is exactly forgetting all operations after the $(n+1)$st: its algebra structure is the top-operation extension formula already computed. Repeating the argument identifies its monadic tower with the successive categoriesAt each stage the corresponding comparison has the remaining composite of the already constructed free extensions as a left adjoint.

No earlier stage can be an equivalence of categories. For $j<m$, take the two-point set with its first $j$ operations all identities. One extension to ${\mathcal{C}}_m$ has every later operation the identity; another has its $(j+1)$st operation interchange the two points, and all subsequent operations undefined. Both have the same image in ${\mathcal{C}}_j$, but the identity function between those images is not a morphism between the extensions. Thus forgetting from ${\mathcal{C}}_m$ to ${\mathcal{C}}_j$ is not full. The final comparison at $j=m$ is an equivalence. This proves the monadic tower for nested partial unary operations has

First supply the unlettered preliminaries. Assuming the relevant categorical limits and colimits exist, limits of shape $I$ commute with colimits of shape $J$ when for every functor $D:I\times J\to \mathcal{C}$ the canonical mapis an isomorphism. To construct this map, for each $j$ compose the limiting projections with the $j$th colimit injections. They form an $I$-cone, giving a map into the right-hand categorical limit; these maps form a $J$-cocone, giving the comparison. This specifies the actual comparison required for commutation of limits and colimits.

A group regarded as a one-object category has its group elements as arrows, with composition given by multiplication. A functor from it to the Category of sets is a group action. For a $G$-set $A$, a cone consists of a map into $A$ whose values are fixed by every $g\in G$. Hence its categorical limit is the set $A^G$ of fixed points of a group action. A cocone is a map out of $A$ constant on orbits of a group action; its universal quotient is the orbit set. Thus

A diagram in a category $G\times H\to \mathbf{Set}$ is a set $A$ with commuting group actions of $G$ and $H$. Its limit–colimit comparison isCommutation makes $A^G$ stable under $H$. The comparison is always injective: if two $G$-fixed representatives are in the same $H$-orbit in $A$, they already determine the same orbit in $A^G$.

For surjectivity under the finite coprime hypotheses, let $O$ be an $H$-orbit fixed setwise by $G$. Its size divides $|H|$ by the orbit-stabilizer theorem. Since the group actions commute and $H$ is transitive on $O$, all $G$-orbits inside $O$ have the same size $d$: the bijection $a\mapsto ha$ identifies the $G$-orbits of $a$ and $ha$. Thus $d$ divides $|O|$, while the orbit-stabilizer theorem also gives $d\mid |G|$. The orders are coprime, so $d=1$. Every point in $O$ is therefore $G$-fixed, and $O$ lies in the image of $\theta$. We have proved commutation of fixed points and orbit quotients for coprime groups:The bijection is the canonical comparison and is natural in the set with commuting group actions, so it proves the requested commutation of limits and colimits in the Category of sets.

Let $x$ denote the generating object, the image of the unique object of the terminal category. The free braided monoidal category on one object can be described syntactically. Its objects are all fully parenthesized expressions built from $x$, the monoidal unit object $I$, and a binary monoidal tensor product. Thus $x\otimes (I\otimes x)$ and $(x\otimes I)\otimes x$ are distinct objects, though canonically isomorphic. Its morphisms are generated by the associators, unitors, braidings and their inverses, closed under composition and tensor product, subject to the pentagon, triangle, naturality and hexagon axioms. No symmetry relation is imposed on the braiding. The embedding of the terminal category selects $x$.

The braid category $\mathbf{B}$ has objects the nonnegative integers, withwhere $B_n$ is the braid group on $n$ strands and $B_0,B_1$ are trivial. Composition is stacking braids, with the first morphism followed by the second. The monoidal tensor product is addition on objects and side-by-side juxtaposition of braids; its monoidal unit object is $0$. The associators and unitors are identities, so it is a strict monoidal category.

Choose the positive crossing convention once and for all. Its braiding $c_{m,n}:m+n\to n+m$ is the block braid moving the first $m$ strands over the next $n$ strands while retaining the order within each block. In particular $c_{1,1}={\sigma }_1$. The usual braid group relations express the naturality and hexagon laws for these block braids. The generating functor $1\to \mathbf{B}$ selects $1$.

The distinction is parenthesized tensor expressions versus strand counts: the first construction keeps the structural isomorphisms visible, while $\mathbf{B}$ has strict tensor arithmetic. These descriptions give the two requested free constructions without needing to establish their universal properties.

Define the length of a formal tensor expression recursively byThe canonical strict monoidal functor $Q:\mathcal{F}br\to \mathbf{B}$ sends $u$ to $|u|$, sends every associator and unitor to an identity braid, and sends $c_{u,v}$ to the block braiding $c_{|u|,|v|}$. The pentagon and triangle become identity equations; the braiding axioms become the corresponding block-braid equations. Thus the assignment respects the defining relations, andon the nose. It is a braided monoidal functor with identity comparison maps.

To prove that $Q$ is an equivalence of categories, choose a standard parenthesization $x^{[n]}$ of $n$ copies of $x$, with $x^{[0]}=I$. On $x^{[n]}$, define the image of ${\sigma }_i$ by canonically exposing the $i$th and $(i+1)$st factors, applying $c_{x,x}$ there, and restoring the chosen parentheses. The monoidal coherence theorem makes this independent of the structural rebracketing. Crossings on disjoint pairs commute by the tensor interchange law. The adjacent braid group relations follows from the hexagon laws and naturality of the braiding, as in the Yang–Baxter calculation below. Hence these assignments give group homomorphisms $B_n\to \mathrm{Aut}(x^{[n]})$ and a functor $S:\mathbf{B}\to \mathcal{F}br$.

Equip $S$ with the canonical rebracketing maps $x^{[m]}\otimes x^{[n]}\to x^{[m+n]}$. Their monoidal functor axioms follow from the monoidal coherence theorem; the block-braiding compatibility follows by iterating the two hexagon laws. Therefore $S$ is a strong monoidal functor compatible with the braiding.

We have $QS=1_{\mathbf{B}}$, including its comparison maps. For every formal expression $u$, there is a canonical structural isomorphismobtained by rebracketing and inserting the units appearing in $u$. These maps form a natural isomorphism $SQ\Rightarrow 1_{\mathcal{F}br}$. To check naturality, it suffices to check the generating morphisms: for associators and unitors it is exactly monoidal coherence; for $c_{u,v}$ it follows from the hexagon expansion into the elementary crossings defining $S$. Composition and tensor product then preserve the equation. The same structural coherence shows that $\theta$ is monoidal.

Thus $Q$ has a specified quasi-inverse and is the required equivalence:Only ordinary monoidal coherence, together with the defining braiding axioms, has been used; a separate braided coherence theorem is unnecessary.

An opmonoidal functor $F:(\mathcal{C},\otimes ,I)\to (\mathcal{D},\otimes ,J)$ consists of a functor, a natural transformationand a morphism $F_0:FI\to J$. These maps need not be invertible. If $\alpha ,\lambda ,\rho$ are the respective associators and unitors, its axioms areThe first equation has domain $F((X\otimes Y)\otimes Z)$ and codomain $FX\otimes (FY\otimes FZ)$, which fixes the direction of every arrow. This is also called a colax monoidal functor.

An opmonoidal natural transformation $\tau :F\Rightarrow G$ between opmonoidal functors is a natural transformation satisfyingIt respects both the tensor and unit comparison maps. These are commutative diagrams and a unit commutative diagram; the arrow directions are opposite to those for a lax monoidal functor.

We use the left internal-hom convention in which $[M,N]$ is right adjoint to $-{\otimes }_{k}M$, so its evaluation morphism has domain $[M,N]{\otimes }_{k}M$. For a Hopf algebra over the commutative ring $k$, take the full $k$-moduleand give it the internal hom for modules over a Hopf algebraThe antipode is an antihomomorphism, $S(hg)=S(g)S(h)$, soThe unit acts identically. Thus this is a left $H$-module.

The evaluation morphism is $H$-linear. Using the diagonal bialgebra action and the antipode identity,Now let $q:L{\otimes }_{k}M\to N$ be $H$-linear and define its ordinary curried map $\hat{q}(\ell )(u)=q(\ell \otimes u)$. To see that it too is $H$-linear, computeConversely, any $H$-linear map $L\to [M,N]$ uncurries to an $H$-linear map by the already established linearity of evaluation. The ordinary tensor–hom adjunction therefore restricts to a natural bijectionPostcomposition by an $H$-linear map makes $[M,-]$ a functor. This proves that the category of left $H$-modules is a left closed monoidal category. All modules are allowed; no inverse antipode or finite-dimensional dual is required. Stating the tensor–hom convention explicitly avoids confusing this construction with the closure on the opposite side.

The braid group $B_n$ has generators ${\sigma }_1,\dots ,{\sigma }_{n-1}$ and relationsIn the strict monoidal category $\mathcal{C}$, put $X^{\otimes 0}=I$ and sendThe images are invertible because the Yang–Baxter operator $y$ is invertible. Distant images commute by the tensor interchange law, and adjacent images satisfy the braid group relations by the Yang–Baxter operator equation tensored with the remaining identities. Thus these assignments define group homomorphisms $B_n\to \mathrm{Aut}(X^{\otimes n})$, and hence a functor $\mathbf{B}\to \mathcal{C}$.

Juxtaposition of braids puts generators into the corresponding two blocks of tensor factors, so their images are the tensor products of their images. Strictness of $\mathcal{C}$ gives $X^{\otimes (m+n)}=X^{\otimes m}\otimes X^{\otimes n}$ and $X^{\otimes 0}=I$ exactly. The resulting functor is strict monoidal and sends $1$ to $X$.

For the given bimonoids, use right comodules. The corestriction functor for comodules associated to a comonoid morphism $f:H\to K$ keeps underlying objects and morphisms, and replaces a coaction ${\rho }_M$ by $(1\otimes f){\rho }_M$. The comonoid-morphism axioms ensure that this is a $K$-coaction.

The tensor coaction for two $H$-comodules in the ambient braided monoidal category isand the unit coaction is $j_H:I\to H$. If $f$ is also a monoid morphism, then $f{m}_H=m_K(f\otimes f)$ and $f{j}_H=j_K$. Substituting these identities, and using naturality of the ambient braiding, shows that corestriction preserves both tensor and unit coactions exactly. Its structural maps are identities, so it is a strict monoidal functor.

Conversely, suppose this induced functor is strict monoidal. Apply equality of the tensor coactions to the two regular right comodules $(H,{\Delta }_H)$. Then apply ${\epsilon }_H\otimes {\epsilon }_H$ to their two underlying $H$ factors. The counit laws and naturality of the braiding remove those factors and leaveEquality on the unit comodule similarly gives $f{j}_H=j_K$. Thus $f$ is a monoid morphism. The criterion is exactlyThe regular-comodule argument uses only the counit laws; it requires no elementwise or finite-dimensional assumption on the ambient category.

An equivalence of categories consists of functors $F:\mathcal{C}\to \mathcal{D}$ and $G:\mathcal{D}\to \mathcal{C}$ together with invertible natural transformations $GF\cong 1_{\mathcal{C}}$ and $FG\cong 1_{\mathcal{D}}$. A strict isomorphism of categories instead requires a functor with an inverse whose composites are literally identity functors.

First suppose $F$ belongs to an equivalence of categories. The isomorphisms $FGD\cong D$ give essential surjectivity. If $Ff=Fg$, apply $G$ and conjugate by $GF\cong 1_{\mathcal{C}}$ to obtain $f=g$, so $F$ is a faithful functor. Similarly $G$ is a faithful functor. Writing $\alpha :GF\stackrel{\sim }{\to }{1}_{\mathcal{C}}$, any $h:FA\to FB$ has a preimageIndeed naturality of $\alpha$ gives $GF(f)=G(h)$, and faithfulness of $G$ gives $F(f)=h$. Thus $F$ is a full and faithful functor.

Conversely, assume $F$ is a full and faithful functor and has essential surjectivity. Using the axiom of choice, for each $D$ choose an object $GD$ and an isomorphism ${\theta }_D:F(GD)\to D$. Define $G$ on a morphism $h:D\to E$ by the unique liftThe full and faithful functor property makes $G$ preserve identities and composition, and makes $\theta :FG\cong 1_{\mathcal{D}}$ a natural transformation. For $A\in \mathcal{C}$, lift ${\theta }_{FA}:FGFA\to FA$ uniquely to ${\alpha }_A:GFA\to A$. Lifting its inverse shows that ${\alpha }_A$ is invertible. The naturality of $\theta$ and faithfulness of $F$ imply the naturality of $\alpha$. This provesFor large categories, this choice argument is understood in a fixed universe, or with the corresponding class-choice convention; ordinary set-sized axiom of choice suffices for small categories.

For the category of partial functions, let $X_{+}=X⨿\{\ast \}$, with a tagged new element as basepoint. Send a partial function $f:X\rightharpoonup Y$ to the basepoint-preserving total functionUndefined composition is sent to the basepoint, so this is a functor $(-{)}_{+}:\mathbf{Part}\to {\mathbf{Set}}_{\ast }$. Restriction away from the basepoint recovers each partial function uniquely; hence it is a full and faithful functor. Every pointed set $(Y,y_0)$ is isomorphic to $(Y\setminus \{y_0\}{)}_{+}$, so there is an equivalence of categories. This particular equivalence can also be constructed explicitly, without choice, by deleting and adjoining the basepoint.

These actual categories are equivalent but not isomorphic. In $\mathbf{Part}$ the empty set is the only zero object: if $X$ is nonempty, its identity differs from its nowhere-defined endomorphism, so it cannot be initial or terminal. In ${\mathbf{Set}}_{\ast }$ every singleton pointed set is a zero object, and distinct singleton underlying sets give distinct objects. An isomorphism of categories is a bijection on objects preserving zero objects; it cannot take one such object onto several. This uses the categories of all actual sets, as in the paper, rather than chosen skeletal categories of representatives.

A skeletal category has no distinct isomorphic objects. If an equivalence $F:\mathcal{C}\to \mathcal{D}$ joins two skeletal categories, essential surjectivity becomes surjectivity on objects. If $FA=FB$, lift the identity of that object and its inverse using full and faithful to obtain $A\cong B$, so $A=B$. Thus $F$ is bijective on objects and on every hom-set. Its inverse on objects and morphisms is a strictly inverse functor, proving that it is an isomorphism of categories.

Under the axiom of choice, choose one object from each isomorphism class of a small category. The full subcategory on those objects is a skeleton of a category, and its inclusion is a full and faithful functor with essential surjectivity, hence an equivalence of categories.

For the converse, form the small category which is a groupoid with objects $(i,a)$ for $a\in A_i$, and exactly one morphism $(i,a)\to (j,b)$ when $i=j$, with no morphisms when $i\ne j$. Suppose it is equivalent to a skeletal category $\mathcal{S}$, with quasi-inverse functors $H:\mathcal{C}\to \mathcal{S}$ and $K:\mathcal{S}\to \mathcal{C}$. For each $i$, the objects $H(i,a)$ for $a\in A_i$ are isomorphic, hence all equal to a uniquely determined $s_i$. The isomorphism $KH(i,a)\cong (i,a)$ ensures that $K(s_i)=(i,a_i)$ for some $a_i\in A_i$. The rule $i\mapsto a_i$ is a choice function. In particular, no representative in $A_i$ had to be chosen to define $s_i$, since it is unique. Consequently