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.

The category of commutative rings, often written $\mathbf{CRing}$, has commutative rings with identity as objects and identity-preserving ring homomorphisms as morphisms. Composition and identity morphisms are the usual composition and identity maps. Including the zero ring makes it a terminal object; the integers form an initial object because a unique ring homomorphism sends $n$ to $n{1}_R$.

For example, a ring homomorphism $\mathbb{Z}[x]\to R$ is completely determined by the image of $x$, which can be any element of $R$. In algebraic geometry, applying the spectrum of a ring reverses arrows: a ring homomorphism $R\to S$ induces $\mathrm{Spec}S\to \mathrm{Spec}R$. Thus the category of affine schemes is equivalent to the opposite of the category of commutative rings.^[ref]

Given morphisms $f:A\to B$ and $g:B\to C$, their composite is $gf:A\to C$. Composition is associative and has the identity morphisms as units.

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.

The objects are the entities between which a category specifies morphisms. Each object has an identity morphism.

Apply the surjectivity of $f(Y)$ to the identity morphism $1_Y$. It gives a morphism of schemes $g:Y\to X$ satisfying $f\circ g=1_Y$. To obtain the other identity, compare $g\circ f$ and $1_X$ in $X(X)$. Their images under $f(X)$ agree, sinceThe injectivity of $f(X)$ therefore gives $g\circ f=1_X$. ThusOnly surjectivity for the test scheme $Y$ and injectivity for the test scheme $X$ were needed. This is the isomorphism-detection argument behind the Yoneda lemma for the functor of points.

A monad on $\mathcal{C}$ consists of an endofunctor $T$ and natural transformations $\eta :1\to T$, $\mu :T^2\to T$ satisfying, at every object $A$,These are the associativity and unit laws. An algebra for a monad is $(A,a:TA\to A)$ withA monad algebra morphism $h:(A,a)\to (B,b)$ is a morphism $h:A\to B$ satisfying $ha=bTh$. Identity morphisms satisfy this equation, and if $h,k$ satisfy it, then $kha=kbTh=cTkTh=cT(kh)$. Hence these objects and morphisms form the Eilenberg-Moore category ${\mathcal{C}}^T$, with the forgetful functor $U(A,a)=A$ and $Uh=h$.

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.

Choose for each $j\in \mathcal{J}$ a categorical limit $L_j$ of $F(-,j)$, with projections ${\lambda }_{i,j}:L_j\to F(i,j)$. For $v:j\to k$, the morphisms $F(1_i,v){\lambda }_{i,j}$ form a categorical cone over $F(-,k)$, since the two actions of the product functor $F$ commute. Define $L(v):L_j\to L_k$ by the equationsExistence and uniqueness follow from the universal property. The identity morphism of $L_j$ satisfies the equations for $v=1_j$, and $L(w)L(v)$ satisfies those for $wv$, so uniqueness gives $L(1_j)=1_{L_j}$ and $L(wv)=L(w)L(v)$. Hence $L:\mathcal{J}\to \mathcal{D}$ is a functor.

If $L_j^{\prime }$ with projections ${\lambda }_{i,j}^{\prime }$ are other choices, there is a unique isomorphism $u_j:L_j\to L_j^{\prime }$ carrying every projection to the corresponding projection. The same equations show $u_{k}L(v)=L^{\prime }(v)u_j$, because their composites with all ${\lambda }_{i,k}^{\prime }$ agree. Thus the choices give a unique natural isomorphism compatible with the chosen categorical limit categorical cones. Without the compatibility condition, uniqueness of an arbitrary natural isomorphism is not asserted.

Working with a small category $\mathcal{C}$ (or in a fixed ambient universe), for a categorical presheaf $X$ and fixed $U$, apply the categorical coend construction to $T(A,B)=\mathcal{C}(U,B)\times X(A)$. It is the quotient of the disjoint union of pairs $(h:U\to W,x\in X(W))$ by the relationsDefine ${\Phi }_U([h,x])=X(h)x$. It respects every relation because $X(fh)x=X(h)X(f)x$. Define ${\Psi }_U(y)=[1_U,y]$. Then ${\Phi }_U{\Psi }_U(y)=y$. Conversely the relation with $f=h:U\to W$ gives $[h,x]=[1_U,X(h)x]$, so ${\Psi }_U{\Phi }_U$ is the identity morphism. ThereforeFor $k:V\to U$, restriction on the categorical coend sends $[h,x]$ to $[hk,x]$, and ${\Phi }_V([hk,x])=X(k){\Phi }_U([h,x])$. A natural transformation $X\to Y$ likewise acts on the second coordinate and commutes with $\Phi$. Thus the density formula for presheaves is a natural isomorphism, not just a family of unrelated bijections.

Given the two natural transformations, defineNaturality of $\eta$ and the second triangle identity for an adjunction giveNaturality of $\epsilon$ and the first triangle identity for an adjunction giveThe maps are natural in $C,D$, since the defining compositions commute with precomposition in $C$ and postcomposition in $D$ by naturality of $\eta ,\epsilon$. They therefore define an adjunction $F⊣G$. Their values on identity morphisms recover precisely $\eta ,\epsilon$. Conversely any adjunction with these unit and counit of an adjunction must have the same transpose formulas, so it is unique with the prescribed unit and counit.

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.

For the covariant version of the Yoneda embedding, put $Y(A)=\mathcal{C}(A,-)$. A morphism $u:A\to B$ induces the natural transformation $Y(u):Y(B)\to Y(A)$ whose component sends $v:B\to X$ to $vu$. Thus $Y$ is a functor from the opposite category ${\mathcal{C}}^{\mathrm{op}}$ to the functor category $[\mathcal{C},\mathbf{Set}]$. The locally small category hypothesis makes each value a set.

The Yoneda lemma says that, for a functor $F:\mathcal{C}\to \mathbf{Set}$, evaluation at the identity morphism gives a natural bijectionGiven $a\in F(A)$, define ${\theta }_X^a(v)=F(v)(a)$. For $w:X\to X^{\prime }$, the functor law gives $F(w){\theta }_X^a(v)=F(wv)(a)={\theta }_{X^{\prime }}^a(wv)$, proving naturality. Conversely, naturality of $\theta$ at $v:A\to X$ gives ${\theta }_X(v)=F(v){\theta }_A(1_A)$. These two constructions are inverse, because $F(1_A)(a)=a$.

The bijection is natural in both variables. A natural transformation $\beta :F\to H$ sends the element $a$ to ${\beta }_A(a)$, matching postcomposition by $\beta$. For $u:A\to B$, precomposing with $Y(u)$ sends $\theta$ to a transformation from $Y(B)$ and its distinguished element is ${\theta }_B(u)=F(u)(a)$. This is exactly the required dependence on $A$.

Taking $F=Y(B)$ gives $\mathrm{Nat}(Y(A),Y(B))\cong \mathcal{C}(B,A)$. Consequently the covariant Yoneda embedding is full and faithful, with the reversal of arrows accounted for by its opposite category domain.

An object of the slice category $\mathcal{C}/A$ is a morphism $x:X\to A$; a map from $x$ to $y:Y\to A$ is $u:X\to Y$ with $yu=x$. The identity morphism $1_A:A\to A$ is a terminal object of this slice category, even when $\mathcal{C}$ itself has no terminal object.

For a cospan $X\stackrel{u}{\to }Z\stackrel{v}{\leftarrow }Y$ in the slice category, form its underlying pullback in a category $P$ in $\mathcal{C}$, with maps $p:P\to X$ and $q:P\to Y$. If $x,y,z$ are the structure maps to $A$, then $xp=zup=zvq=yq$. This common map equips $P$ with its slice structure. An underlying mediating map into $P$ is automatically over $A$, because its composite with $xp$ is the prescribed structure map. Hence the same square is a pullback in a category in $\mathcal{C}/A$.

Part (b) applies to the slice's terminal object and pullbacks in a category. Every slice category has all finite limits when the ambient category has pullbacks in a category. The finite completeness of slice categories result needs no ambient terminal-object hypothesis.

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 $G(f)(a)=b$.

Use the covariant Yoneda embedding $Y(A)=\mathcal{C}(A,-)$. An arrow $f:B\to A$, viewed as an arrow $A\to B$ in the opposite category, induces precomposition $h\mapsto hf$. Identities and composition are preserved because composition in $\mathcal{C}$ is associative.

The covariant Yoneda lemma is the bijectionIts inverse sends $x\in F(A)$ to ${\alpha }_B(h)=F(h)(x)$. This is a natural transformation: for $k:B\to C$, functoriality gives $F(k){\alpha }_B(h)=F(kh)(x)={\alpha }_C(kh)$. Conversely, naturality of an arbitrary $\alpha$ at $h:A\to B$ gives ${\alpha }_B(h)=F(h){\alpha }_A(1_A)$. Evaluation at the identity morphism therefore makes the two constructions inverse. Their formulas also prove naturality in $F$ and, contravariantly, in $A$.

Taking $F=Y(B)$ identifies natural transformations $Y(A)\to Y(B)$ with $\mathcal{C}(B,A)$. Thus $Y$ is full and faithful, and reflects isomorphisms; two image objects are isomorphic exactly when the original objects are isomorphic. It also carries existing colimits in $\mathcal{C}$ to categorical limits of covariant representable functors: maps out of a colimit are exactly compatible families of maps out of its diagram. Equivalently, this embedding preserves existing categorical limits in ${\mathcal{C}}^{\mathrm{op}}$. The direction matters: the paper uses covariant representables, rather than the more usual contravariant Yoneda embedding.

An adjunction $F⊣G$ is a family of bijectionsnatural in both variables. Its adjunction unit and adjunction counit are ${\eta }_A={\Phi }_{A,FA}(1_{FA})$ and ${\epsilon }_B={\Phi }_{GB,B}^{-1}(1_{GB})$. Naturality of the correspondence givesFor $f:A\to A^{\prime }$, naturality in both variables evaluates $\Phi (Ff)$ in two ways, giving $GFf{\eta }_A={\eta }_{A^{\prime }}f$. Thus $\eta$ is a natural transformation; the dual calculation gives naturality of $\epsilon$.

Applying the inverse correspondence to ${\eta }_A$ and the correspondence to ${\epsilon }_B$ yields the triangle identities for an adjunction:They express that transposing an identity morphism and transposing back returns that identity.