Fix a prime number . Take the full subcategory of finitely generated abelian groups with no element of order . It is closed under finite direct sums and subgroups. If is the -primary torsion subgroup, the map is a reflection into this subcategory: every map to an allowed group kills . Therefore ordinary kernels in a category and reflected cokernels in a category supply all finite categorical limits and colimits. No nonzero finitely generated group has zero reflection, so the epimorphisms are precisely surjections and are all conormal epimorphisms. Multiplication by on is a monomorphism but not a normal monomorphism: its cokernel here is , whose kernel is , not . Multiplication by is normal; composing it with itself gives this nonnormal monomorphism.
Connected component of a category 2026-10-14
Two objects of a category lie in the same connected component if a finite zigzag of morphisms, with either orientation allowed, joins them. This is an equivalence relation; its classes give full subcategories, each a connected category. For a small category, the collection of components is a set denoted . A functor induces a function on components. Empty categories have no components.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2005 iii Paper 26 6 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
A preadditive category has an abelian group of morphisms between each pair of objects, and composition is additive in both variables. An additive category is a preadditive category with a zero object and finite products in a category; equivalently one may require finite coproducts. The equivalence, and the stronger assertion that these constructions agree canonically, follow from the argument below. An abelian category is an additive category with kernels in a category and cokernels in a category, in which every monomorphism is a categorical kernel and every epimorphism is a categorical cokernel. A monomorphism with the first property is a normal monomorphism; an epimorphism with the second is a conormal epimorphism.
Let , with projections . There is a unique with , interpreting the other components as zero. Since every sends to , the product's universal property givesGiven arrows , put . Then . Conversely any arrow with these restrictions equals , so it is uniquely this sum. Thus is a coproduct in a category. The empty product is the zero object and also the empty coproduct. The dual argument starts from coproducts and constructs projections; it proves the equivalent definition. Hence finite products and coproducts are the same biproducts, with the displayed identities giving the canonical identification.
For the image factorization in an abelian category, let , let be its cokernel, and let be the kernel of . Since , write . We prove that is epic. Suppose satisfies and let be its categorical kernel. Then for some . The composite is monic and hence is a normal monomorphism, say for . Since , the categorical cokernel property makes factor through , and therefore . The categorical kernel property of gives with . Cancellation of yields ; since is monic this also gives . Thus is invertible and . In a preadditive category, now implies , hence . This proves is an epimorphism and supplies the required factorization.
For uniqueness, an epimorphism that is a categorical cokernel is the categorical cokernel of its own categorical kernel. Indeed, if and , then factors through ; an arrow killing therefore kills and factors uniquely through . Dually, a normal monomorphism is the categorical kernel of its own categorical cokernel. If is any epi–mono factorization, monicity of gives . Both and are consequently categorical cokernels of this same categorical kernel. Their universal properties give a unique isomorphism between the intermediate objects with , and cancellation of gives . Therefore the epi–mono factorization is unique up to the unique compatible isomorphism.
Here is an additive category with truncated primary torsion, with the prime fixed as . Its objects are finitely generated abelian groups having no element of order , and its morphisms are all group homomorphisms. Equivalently their -primary torsion subgroup has exponent at most . It is a full subcategory of abelian groups, closed under finite direct sums and subgroups. Its hom groups and bilinear composition are inherited, and the zero group and finite direct sums belong to it, so it is additive. Categorical kernels are ordinary subgroup categorical kernels, which are still finitely generated and have no element of order .
To construct categorical cokernels, for an arbitrary finitely generated abelian group let be its -primary torsion subgroup, and defineThe Fundamental theorem of finitely generated abelian groups shows that this quotient lies in the subcategory: it leaves the free and odd-primary parts unchanged and replaces each cyclic -primary summand by either or . Every homomorphism to an allowed group kills , because it sends -primary torsion into a subgroup killed by . Thus has the universal property of a reflection. For , its categorical cokernel in the subcategory isThis has exactly the categorical cokernel universal property by the preceding factorization. Finite categorical limits exist because equalizers are categorical kernels of differences and finite products exist. Finite colimits exist dually because coequalizers are categorical cokernels of differences and finite coproducts exist.
The epimorphisms in this example are precisely the surjective homomorphisms. A surjection is epic already in abelian groups. Conversely, if is epic in the subcategory, its categorical cokernel is zero, so . A nonzero finitely generated abelian group has nonzero reflection: a nonzero free or odd-primary summand survives, and a nonzero finite -primary summand has a nonzero quotient modulo twice itself. Hence and is surjective. Its ordinary categorical kernel belongs to the subcategory, and its quotient by that categorical kernel is its codomain, which also belongs to the subcategory. It is therefore the categorical cokernel of its categorical kernel. This proves that every epimorphism is conormal.
The monomorphismis not normal. Its categorical cokernel in this category is reduction modulo , since . The categorical kernel of that categorical cokernel is the inclusion , whereas the image of is . A normal monomorphism is the categorical kernel of its own categorical cokernel, as proved above, so cannot be normal. In fact multiplication by is itself the categorical kernel of reduction modulo , up to the identification . Its composite with itself is multiplication by . Thus this example already exhibits two normal monomorphisms whose composite is not normal.
For the general assertion, let be a nonnormal monomorphism in any additive category of the specified kind. Put and be its categorical kernel, and factor . Both and are monic, so is monic. Set and be its categorical kernel. Then are normal, and for some .
Suppose their composite were normal, say . Since , factors through , whence . The categorical kernel property of supplies with ; cancellation shows , and monicity makes an isomorphism. Because , this forces . In a preadditive category, vanishing of the categorical cokernel of implies that is epic: any with have factor through the zero categorical cokernel. By hypothesis is therefore a categorical cokernel, and it is also monic. If , monicity and force ; a categorical cokernel of a zero arrow is an isomorphism. Thus is invertible, making normal, a contradiction. Consequently normal monomorphisms cannot be closed under composition in any such category; the explicit pair witnesses the failure.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2016 iii Paper 119 1 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
A monomorphism is left cancellable: implies for all parallel arrows into . A strong monomorphism is a monomorphism with the following lifting property: if is an epimorphism and , satisfy , there is a diagonal with and . It is unique by monicity. An extremal monomorphism is a monomorphism for which every factorization with an epimorphism forces to be an isomorphism. We use the strong lifting formulation for the paper's terminology; below we also justify its equivalence with the extremal formulation under the complete, well-powered hypotheses. A regular monomorphism is an equalizer of two parallel arrows.
First, a strong monomorphism is extremal. In a factorization , apply its lifting property with upper arrow and lower arrow . This gives with . Since is an epimorphism, implies , so is an isomorphism.
If is an equalizer of , consider a lifting square as above. The equation and the epimorphism property give . The equalizer property therefore gives a unique with . Monicity then gives . Hence every regular monomorphism is a strong monomorphism.
For the intersection of strong subobjects, let be strong and let exhibit their intersection, with . Given with an epimorphism, the two strong monomorphisms supply diagonals satisfying and . The pullback in a category property supplies with . Its two projections show , and . Thus the intersection is strong. The same argument works for every existing small intersection of strong monomorphisms. Also, composites of strong monomorphisms are strong: first lift through the outer one, then through the inner one.
Write for the full subcategory formed by every saturated object with respect to anodyne morphisms, using the paper's anodyne morphism in a category convention. Let be a strong monomorphism and saturated. For an anodyne morphism in a category and , saturation extends to . Since is an epimorphism, the strong lifting property supplies extending . Therefore every strong subobject of a saturated object is saturated.
Now assume is a complete category and a well-powered category, with the given saturated embeddings. Choose a monomorphism into a saturated object. Intersect all strong subobjects of through which factors. They form a set by the well-powered category hypothesis, and the identity of is one of them. Completeness constructs their intersection, so we obtainBy the intersection of strong subobjects, is strong; hence is saturated. Since is a monomorphism, so is .
To prove that is an epimorphism, take with . Their equalizer is a regular monomorphism, and factors through it. The composite is strong, so it belongs to the family defining . Minimality gives with . Cancelling gives ; since is a monomorphism, also . Thus is an isomorphism and . We have provedThis is the saturated reflection from a strong-subobject intersection.
The construction of a least strong subobject and the equalizer argument work for any morphism into any object, without requiring the source map to be monic or the target to be saturated. They give an epimorphism followed by a strong monomorphism. Applying this factorization to an extremal monomorphism makes the first factor invertible; thus the extremal and strong formulations agree under the present complete, well-powered hypotheses.
For every saturated , saturation extends every across the anodyne morphism in a category to . Its extension is unique because is an epimorphism. Consequentlynaturally in and . In particular, for define by ; uniqueness proves the identity and composition laws. This constructs the reflector and proves that is a reflective subcategory.
Finally we prove that is a balanced category. If is epic in and satisfy , embed by a monomorphism into a saturated object. Fullness makes arrows of , so and hence . Thus an epimorphism in is also epic in .
A monomorphism in is also monic in : for , extend them uniquely along to . If , cancellation of the ambient epimorphism gives , so monicity in gives and . Now if is both monic and epic in , it is an anodyne morphism in a category in . Saturation of extends across to with . Ambient epicity gives . Fullness puts this inverse in , proving
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2017 iii Paper 119 1 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-05
An equivalence of categories consists of functors and together with invertible natural transformations and . A strict isomorphism of categories instead requires a functor with an inverse whose composites are literally identity functors.
First suppose belongs to an equivalence of categories. The isomorphisms give essential surjectivity. If , apply and conjugate by to obtain , so is a faithful functor. Similarly is a faithful functor. Writing , any has a preimageIndeed naturality of gives , and faithfulness of gives . Thus is a full and faithful functor.
Conversely, assume is a full and faithful functor and has essential surjectivity. Using the axiom of choice, for each choose an object and an isomorphism . Define on a morphism by the unique liftThe full and faithful functor property makes preserve identities and composition, and makes a natural transformation. For , lift uniquely to . Lifting its inverse shows that is invertible. The naturality of and faithfulness of imply the naturality of . 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 , with a tagged new element as basepoint. Send a partial function to the basepoint-preserving total functionUndefined composition is sent to the basepoint, so this is a functor . Restriction away from the basepoint recovers each partial function uniquely; hence it is a full and faithful functor. Every pointed set is isomorphic to , 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 the empty set is the only zero object: if is nonempty, its identity differs from its nowhere-defined endomorphism, so it cannot be initial or terminal. In 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 joins two skeletal categories, essential surjectivity becomes surjectivity on objects. If , lift the identity of that object and its inverse using full and faithful to obtain , so . Thus 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 for , and exactly one morphism when , with no morphisms when . Suppose it is equivalent to a skeletal category , with quasi-inverse functors and . For each , the objects for are isomorphic, hence all equal to a uniquely determined . The isomorphism ensures that for some . The rule is a choice function. In particular, no representative in had to be chosen to define , since it is unique. Consequently
Skeleton of a category 2026-10-05
A skeleton of is a full subcategory with exactly one object from each isomorphism class. The axiom of choice supplies skeletons of small categories. Conversely, if every small category has a skeletal equivalent, apply this to the groupoid on with exactly one morphism between objects in the same nonempty fibre. A quasi-inverse from the skeletal category selects one object per fibre, giving a choice function. This converse uses an equivalence of categories with specified quasi-inverse functors, not just the existence of a full essentially surjective functor in one direction.