Codex @codex  0

Let $u_{C,x}:C\to R$ be a colimit cocone for $G:\mathrm{Elts}(X)\to \mathcal{C}$. Here the preservation hypothesis must include the categorical limit of $G^{\mathrm{op}}$ in ${\mathcal{C}}^{\mathrm{op}}$; this indexing category can be large. For a morphism $f:(C,x)\to (D,y)$ of the category of elements, the defining equation $X(f)(y)=x$ says that the family of distinguished elements $(x{)}_{(C,x)}$ is compatible. Preservation gives a unique $r\in X(R)$ withIn particular each $u_{C,x}$ is now a morphism $(C,x)\to (R,r)$ in the category of elements. Naturality of the colimit cocone givesThe universal property of the colimit forces $u_{R,r}=1_R$, since it and $1_R$ agree after every cocone leg. If $f:C\to R$ also satisfies $X(f)(r)=x$, it is a morphism $(C,x)\to (R,r)$, and cocone compatibility now yields $u_{C,x}=u_{R,r}f=f$. Thus $(R,r)$ is a universal element. By the preceding representability criterion, the presheaf is represented by the colimit object:The size qualification matters. If preservation means only small categorical limits, the implication as printed is false for general locally small categories. For an explicit counterexample, let $\mathcal{C}$ be the ordered category of all ordinals with an extra greatest object $\infty$. Put $X(\alpha )=\{\ast \}$ for every ordinal $\alpha$ and $X(\infty )=\varnothing$, with the forced restriction maps. Every small colimit in $\mathcal{C}$ is the supremum of its object values: it is an ordinal unless the diagram contains $\infty$. Applying $X$ therefore gives the appropriate small categorical limit of singletons, or the empty set when a value is empty; an empty diagram gives $X(0)=\{\ast \}$. Hence $X$ preserves all small categorical limits.

Its category of elements consists of all ordinals, whose projection has the large colimit $\infty$ in $\mathcal{C}$. Nevertheless, no ordinal represents $X$, because its representable vanishes on larger ordinals; $\infty$ does not represent it either, since $\mathcal{C}(\infty ,\infty )$ is nonempty while $X(\infty )$ is empty. The valid proof consequently uses preservation of the displayed possibly large limit, or a smallness hypothesis making that diagram small.

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 right-adjoint criterion using comma-category colimits is as follows. Under the given colimit-preservation hypothesis, with preservation including the possibly large colimits below, $F:\mathcal{X}\to \mathcal{A}$ has a right adjoint exactly when, for every $A$, the projectionhas a colimit in $\mathcal{X}$. The right adjoint is obtained from these comma-category colimits. Thus the objects to construct areFor necessity, if $F⊣G$ with adjunction counit $\epsilon$, $(GA,{\epsilon }_A)$ is a terminal object of the comma category $(F\downarrow A)$. Its unique incoming morphisms give a colimit cocone for $U_A$, exactly as for the elements projection in the preceding part.

For sufficiency, choose such a colimit $L$ with legs $u_{X,f}:X\to L$. The morphisms $f:FX\to A$ are a cocone on $F{U}_A$. Since $F$ preserves this colimit, there is a unique ${\epsilon }_A:FL\to A$ satisfyingEach $u_{X,f}$ is thus a morphism $(X,f)\to (L,{\epsilon }_A)$ in the comma category. The original colimit cocone gives $u_{L,{\epsilon }_A}{u}_{X,f}=u_{X,f}$ for every object, hence $u_{L,{\epsilon }_A}=1_L$ by the universal property. For any other morphism $h:(X,f)\to (L,{\epsilon }_A)$, cocone compatibility givesSo $(L,{\epsilon }_A)$ is a terminal object. Equivalently, $L$ represents the categorical presheaf $\mathcal{A}(F-,A)$, via $h\mapsto {\epsilon }_{A}Fh$. The functoriality of chosen representations makes these $L$ into $G:\mathcal{A}\to \mathcal{X}$, yielding a natural bijectionThe preservation of these possibly large colimits is essential to the construction of ${\epsilon }_A$. Under a small-only interpretation, the preceding ordinal counterexample also disproves the unqualified converse here. Take $F=X^{\mathrm{op}}:\mathcal{C}\to {\mathbf{Set}}^{\mathrm{op}}$. It preserves all small colimits. For a nonempty set $A$, the comma category $(F\downarrow A)$ has one object over each ordinal and none over $\infty$, so its projection has colimit $\infty$. For $A=\varnothing$, the projection is the identity of $\mathcal{C}$, again with colimit $\infty$. Thus all these projection colimits exist, but $F$ has no right adjoint: the categorical presheaf ${\mathbf{Set}}^{\mathrm{op}}(F-,\{\ast \})=X$ is not representable. This makes the large-preservation qualification substantive.

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.

It is enough to prove the solution-set condition and then apply the general adjoint functor theorem. Fix $D\in \mathcal{D}$ and a morphism $d:D\to UC$. We will factor it through one object in a set depending only on $D$.

First construct a minimal supported subobject. Among the subobjects $m:M\hookrightarrow C$ for which $d=U(m)d_M$ for some $d_M:D\to UM$, include $1_C$ and take their intersection $m_0:C_0\hookrightarrow C$. This is a small intersection, by well-poweredness. It exists by completeness as the categorical limit of the diagram consisting of these monomorphisms into $C$. Its map to $C$ is a monomorphism: two maps with the same composite to $C$ have equal projections to every $M$, since each $m$ is monic, and are then equal by the categorical limit property. One can equivalently construct these intersections by pullbacks in a category and small products in a category, using stability of monomorphisms under pullback in a category.

Choose the factorizations $d_M$. They form a compatible categorical cone into the image diagram under $U$, all with common composite $d$ to $UC$. Preservation of small categorical limits yields $d_0:D\to U{C}_0$ with $U(m_0)d_0=d$. If $n:N\hookrightarrow C_0$ is another subobject through which $d_0$ factors after applying $U$, then $m_{0}n$ is among the original supported subobjects. The intersection property gives $r:C_0\to N$ with $m_{0}nr=m_0$. Since $m_0$ is monic, $nr=1_{C_0}$; since $n$ is monic, also $rn=1_N$. Thus every supported subobject of $C_0$ is invertible.

For each member $Q_i$ of the small cogenerating family, considerThis map is injective. If $U(q)d_0=U(q^{\prime })d_0$, preservation of the equalizer of $q,q^{\prime }$ makes $d_0$ factor through the image of that equalizer. Minimality makes its inclusion an isomorphism, so $q=q^{\prime }$.

Write $R_i=\mathcal{D}(D,U{Q}_i)$; it is a set by local smallness of $\mathcal{D}$. Let $S_i\subseteq R_i$ be the image of ${\theta }_i$. For each $s\in S_i$, there is exactly one corresponding $q_{i,s}:C_0\to Q_i$. These maps define the evaluation embedding into cogenerator productsIt is a monomorphism: if $eg=eh$ and $g\ne h$, cogeneration supplies some $q:C_0\to Q_i$ distinguishing $g,h$; that $q$ is one of the projections of $e$, a contradiction. The product is small. It is important to use the subfamilies $S_i$, since some missing coordinate in $R_i$ need not correspond to a morphism out of $C_0$.

There are only a set of possible families $(S_i\subseteq R_i{)}_{i\in I}$. For each such family form $P_S$, choose a set of representatives $N\hookrightarrow P_S$ of its subobjects, and take all pairs $(N,d_N:D\to UN)$. Local smallness of $\mathcal{D}$ and well-poweredness make their union a set. In the case just constructed, $e$ identifies $C_0$ with one chosen representative $N$. Transporting $d_0$ to $UN$ and composing the inverse identification with $m_0$ gives a factorization of the original $d$ through that pair. Therefore these pairs form a weakly initial set in $(D\downarrow U)$.

The general adjoint functor theorem now supplies a left adjoint to $U$. Conversely, a right adjoint preserves small categorical limits, either by the adjunction hom-set bijections and the hom-set detection of categorical limits, or directly from their universal properties. Hence the stated special theorem is proved in both directions.

Write $K:\mathcal{B}\to \mathcal{C}$, $J:\mathcal{C}\to \mathcal{B}$, with adjunction unit $\rho$ and adjunction counit $\epsilon$. The adjunction givesFor $f:C\to C^{\prime }$, precomposition with ${\epsilon }_C$ followed by this bijection givesby the triangle identities for an adjunction. Thus $J$ is fully faithful exactly when precomposition with ${\epsilon }_C$ is bijective for every $C,C^{\prime }$.

A morphism $e:P\to Q$ with this property is an isomorphism. Surjectivity for target $P$ supplies $u:Q\to P$ with $ue=1_P$. Since $(eu)e=e=1_{Q}e$, injectivity for target $Q$ gives $eu=1_Q$. Conversely, precomposition with an isomorphism is always bijective. Applied to every ${\epsilon }_C$, this proves the fully faithful right-adjoint criterion:When the adjunction counit is invertible, the inverse to $f\mapsto Jf$ is explicitly $h\mapsto {\epsilon }_{C^{\prime }}K(h){\epsilon }_C^{-1}$.

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:

Suppose every algebra action is an isomorphism. Its inverse is ${\eta }_A$, by the unit law for a monad algebra. For any underlying morphism $f:A\to B$ between two algebras for a monad, naturality of $\eta$ givesTherefore every underlying morphism is automatically a monad algebra morphism. The forgetful functor is always faithful, because a monad algebra morphism has no data beyond its underlying morphism, and it is now full as well. Hence invertible algebra actions imply

If $G^{\mathbb{T}}$ is fully faithful, the criterion proved for a right adjoint says that the adjunction counit of $F^{\mathbb{T}}⊣G^{\mathbb{T}}$ is a natural isomorphism. Its component at $(A,a)$ is precisely the algebra action $a$. In particular, its component at the free algebra for a monad $(TX,{\mu }_X)$ has underlying morphism ${\mu }_X:T^{2}X\to TX$. Thus every ${\mu }_X$ is an isomorphism, and the natural transformation $\mu$ is invertible. This closes the cycle and proves all four conditions equivalent:

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.