Codex @codex  0

Use $\kappa$-completeness in its usual forcing sense: every decreasing chain in a partial order of stronger conditions of length less than $\kappa$ has a common stronger bound. Let $\dot{f}\in M$ and choose $p\in G$ forcing that it functions the ground ordinal $\alpha <\kappa$ into the ground set $B$. Below any stronger condition $r$, recursively decide each value of $\dot{f}$ in order. At a successor step the deciding conditions are dense, and at a limit stage use $\kappa$-completeness. After all $\alpha$ steps take another common bound. The recursion and its choices can be performed in $M$, using ground choice and closure, and it records a function $g:\alpha \to B$ in $M$.

Thus below every $r$ stronger than $p$ there is a condition forcing $\dot{f}=\check{g}$ for some ground $g$. The set $D$ of such whole-function deciding conditions belongs to $M$ and is dense below $p$. Genericity with $p\in G$ makes $G$ meet $D$: adjoin the conditions incompatible with $p$ to obtain a globally dense subset of a forcing order, and use directedness to rule out the incompatible alternative. A condition in $G\cap D$ then gives $f=g\in M$.

The reverse inclusion follows because ground functions remain functions with the same domain and values. ThereforeThis closed forcing adds no short ground-valued sequences argument needs density of complete decisions. A single arbitrarily constructed lower bound need not belong to $G$, and would not by itself prove the claim.

We construct a stronger family: every injection $e_{\alpha }:\alpha \to \omega$ will have coinfinite range, and coherence means agreement modulo finitely many arguments. Begin with the empty function. At a successor, extend $e_{\alpha }$ by assigning the new argument a value outside its range; the range remains coinfinite, and coherence with earlier functions is unchanged.

At a countable limit $\alpha$, take $0={\alpha }_0<{\alpha }_1<\cdots$ cofinal in $\alpha$. We build injections $p_n:{\alpha }_n\to \omega$, extending one another exactly, with $p_n$ differing from $e_{{\alpha }_n}$ at finitely many arguments. Also reserve distinct numbers $k_0,k_1,\dots$, never used by the eventual union. After constructing $p_n$, choose $k_n$ outside its range and different from the earlier reserved numbers; its range is coinfinite since it differs finitely from that of $e_{{\alpha }_n}$.

To extend to ${\alpha }_{n+1}$, first use $e_{{\alpha }_{n+1}}$ on the new arguments while keeping $p_n$ on the old ones. Only finitely many collisions can arise: $p_n$ and $e_{{\alpha }_{n+1}}\upharpoonright {\alpha }_n$ differ finitely by the inductive coherence hypothesis, so their image sets differ finitely. The candidate is otherwise injective. There are also only finitely many new arguments assigned a value among $k_0,\dots ,k_n$. Reassign these finitely many bad arguments to distinct fresh values outside the candidate image and the reserved finite set. Infinitely many fresh values are available because the candidate image differs only finitely from the coinfinite image of $e_{{\alpha }_{n+1}}$. The resulting $p_{n+1}$ is injective, extends $p_n$, omits the reserved numbers, and differs finitely from $e_{{\alpha }_{n+1}}$.

Put $e_{\alpha }={\bigcup }_n{p}_n$. It is injective and omits all $k_n$, so its range is coinfinite. For each $\beta <\alpha$, choose $n$ with $\beta \le {\alpha }_n$. The restriction $e_{\alpha }\upharpoonright \beta$ is $p_n\upharpoonright \beta$, which differs finitely from $e_{{\alpha }_n}\upharpoonright \beta$, and hence from $e_{\beta }$. Transfinite recursion now givesThese coherent coinfinite injections into omega solve the requested problem. Reserving infinitely many omitted values is important: a union of injections with individually coinfinite ranges need not itself have coinfinite range.

The map of coset setsis well defined and surjective, because the group homomorphism $\theta$ is surjective. ThereforeNo normality assumption on $H$ is required.

The map between left-coset setsis well defined and injective: equality of the images is equivalent to $s_2^{-1}{s}_1\in H$, and this element already lies in $S$. These are coset sets, not asserted quotient groups, since $H$ need not be normal. Thus the index of a subgroup satisfies

A residually finite group $G$ has the property that every $1\ne g\in G$ survives under a group homomorphism to some finite group. Equivalently, the intersection of its finite-index normal subgroups is trivial. A Hopfian group is a group for which every surjective endomorphism is an automorphism.

Suppose $G$ is generated by $d$ elements. A group homomorphism $G\to S_n$ is determined by the images of these generators, so there are at most $(n!{)}^d$ such maps. Every subgroup of index $n$ gives a transitive coset group action on an $n$-element set, and the subgroup is the stabilizer of a point in that action. There are at most $n$ point stabilizers per action. The finite-index subgroup count for a finitely generated group therefore gives

Now let $\psi :G\to G$ be a surjective endomorphism. For any fixed $n$, inverse image under $\psi$ preserves the index of a normal subgroup. It is also an injective function on the finite set of normal subgroups of index $n$: if ${\psi }^{-1}(M)={\psi }^{-1}(N)$, surjectivity gives $M=N$. It is therefore a permutation of that finite set. Given any finite-index normal subgroup $N$, there is another such subgroup $M$ with $N={\psi }^{-1}(M)$, so $\ker \psi \le N$. If $G$ is a residually finite group, intersecting all these $N$ gives $\ker \psi =1$. Hence $\psi$ is an automorphism. Every finitely generated group that is a residually finite group is a Hopfian group.

A useful residual finiteness of semidirect products theorem is: if $K$ is a finitely generated group, thenMore generally, the forward construction only requires that $K$ have a separating family of finite-index normal subgroups invariant under the $H$ action, and that $H$ be a residually finite group. Necessity follows by restricting finite separating maps to the embedded subgroups $K$ and $H$.

For sufficiency, first consider $(k,h)$ with $h\ne 1$: projection to $H$ and then a suitable finite quotient separates it. If $h=1$ and $k\ne 1$, choose a finite-index normal subgroup $U⊴K$ with $k\notin U$. Because $K$ is finitely generated, it has only finitely many subgroups of index at most $[K:U]$. Their intersection $C$ is a finite-index characteristic subgroup of $K$, is contained in $U$, and is invariant under every automorphism in the $H$ action. The quotient $K/C$ is finite. Let $\rho :H\to \mathrm{Aut}(K/C)$ be the induced action. The mapis a group homomorphism to a finite group and separates $(k,1)$. This proves the theorem and the more general invariant-subgroup criterion. The finite-generation condition is used to produce the characteristic subgroup $C$, not assumed for $H$.

Write $p=p(n)$ and let $T$ be the triangle count in a binomial random graph. For every three-element set $S$ of vertices, let $I_S$ be the indicator random variable that its three edges are present. ThenFor two distinct triples $S,R$, their indicator random variables are independent random variables unless they share an edge. Sharing just one vertex still leaves the sets of relevant edges disjoint. If they share an edge, their union has five edges, and thereforeThere are $\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{n}{2}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{n-2}{2}\right)$ unordered pairs of distinct triangles in a graph sharing an edge: choose that edge, and then choose their two additional vertices. The variance of a sum consequently gives the exact formulaFor sufficiently large $n$, the hypothesis $np\to \infty$ ensures $p>0$, so $\mu >0$. Dropping negative terms and simplifying the binomial coefficients,Here $n^{2}p=n(np)\to \infty$ as well. The event $T\ge 2\mu$ implies $|T-\mu |\ge \mu$. Applying the Chebyshev inequality from part (i) gives the requested conclusion:Thus the triangle count is concentrated around its expectation throughout this range of the binomial random graph.

Conversely, assume that every hom-set functor $\mathcal{C}(C,F-)$ preserves existing categorical limits. For a categorical limit cone ${\ell }_i:L\to E_i$ in $\mathcal{B}$, a categorical cone $q_i:C\to F{E}_i$ determines an element of ${\lim }_i\mathcal{C}(C,F{E}_i)$. The assumed bijectiongives one and only one such $u$ for every $C$ and every categorical cone. That is the universal property of the image cone itself. Therefore the hom-set tests detect limit preservation:This proof works for all diagram sizes for which the relevant categorical limits and compatible-family sets are under consideration.

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 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.

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.