Codex @codex  0

A compact object (mathematics) is an object whose represented Hom functor preserves filtered colimits. This preservation condition differs from the extra right-adjoint property defining a tiny object.

For a tiny object $A$, the exponential functor $E_A=(-{)}^A$ has a right adjoint, say $R_A$. The defining exponential adjunction gives the natural isomorphismsince $(X^B{)}^A\cong X^{A\times B}$. If $A,B$ are tiny objects, the composite on the right is a left adjoint with right adjoint $R_B{R}_A$. Thus $A\times B$ is tiny. The terminal object is tiny because exponentiation by it is naturally the identity, which is its own right adjoint. Induction, including this empty-product case, proves tiny objects are closed under finite products:

Let $P$ be a tiny object of $[\mathcal{C},\mathbf{Set}]$, and let $0$ be the initial object of $\mathcal{C}$. The representable functor $h_0=\mathcal{C}(0,-)$ is the terminal functor, since each of its values is a singleton. The exponential adjunction and the Yoneda lemma giveSince $P$ is tiny, $E_P:F\mapsto F^P$ is itself a left adjoint, so preserves all colimits. Evaluation at $0$ also preserves colimits, because they are pointwise in a set-valued functor category. Therefore $\mathrm{Nat}(P,-)$ preserves the coproduct construction.

It also preserves epimorphisms. Indeed, every such epimorphism is a pointwise epimorphism in a functor category, hence the coequalizer of its kernel pair, as can be checked pointwise in sets. A left adjoint preserves that coequalizer and therefore sends it to a regular epimorphism, which is an epimorphism; evaluation at zero preserves surjectivity. Thus $P$ is an irreducible projective in a set-valued functor category.

A Cauchy-complete category is one in which every idempotent morphism splits. By the characterization allowed in the question, irreducible projectives are representable functors for such an indexing category. Applying it to $P$ proves the tiny covariant functor on a Cauchy-complete category with an initial object is representable conclusion:

Assume $\mathcal{C}$ has finite products and every idempotent morphism splits. For a representable presheaf $yA$, the exponential formula givesThus exponentiation by $yA$ is precomposition with $-\times A$. Precomposition has a Right Kan extension as right adjoint, so every representable presheaf is a tiny object.

Conversely, let $P$ be tiny. Then $(-{)}^P$ is a left adjoint and preserves all small colimits. Since $\mathcal{C}$ has a terminal object $1$, the terminal presheaf is $y1$, and evaluation at $1$ preserves colimits. Thereforepreserves all small colimits as a functor of $F$. By the result supplied in the question, splitting idempotents implies that $P$ is representable. Hence the representable presheaves are the tiny objects of an idempotent-complete finite-product category, and Yoneda identifies $\mathcal{C}$ with the full subcategory of tiny objects of its presheaf topos.

The Yoneda lemma states that for $A\in \mathcal{C}$ and $P:\mathcal{C}\to \mathbf{Set}$ there is a natural bijectionIf $P\twoheadrightarrow Q$ is an epimorphism in the functor category, it is pointwise surjective, so $P(A)\to Q(A)$ is surjective. Yoneda identifies this map withThus every representable functor is a projective object in a category.

The colimit form of the Special adjoint functor theorem says that a colimit-preserving functor from a locally small, cocomplete, well-copowered category with a small generating family into a locally small category has a right adjoint functor. For small $\mathcal{C}$, the category $[\mathcal{C},\mathbf{Set}]$ is locally small and has colimits pointwise. Quotients of $P$ are represented by compatible equivalence relations on the sets $P(C)$, so they form a set; hence the category is well-copowered. The set of representables $\{\mathcal{C}(C,-):C\in \mathcal{C}\}$ generates it by the Yoneda lemma. The theorem therefore gives a right adjoint to every small-colimit-preserving functorIn particular, product with a fixed functor $P$ is computed pointwise, and $-\times P(C)$ preserves colimits in the Category of sets. Hence $-\times P$ preserves all small colimits and has a right adjoint $(-{)}^P$. Thus $[\mathcal{C},\mathbf{Set}]$ is a Cartesian closed category.

Now work in $[{\mathcal{C}}^{\mathrm{op}},\mathbf{Set}]$ and write $yA=\mathcal{C}(-,A)$. If $\mathcal{C}$ has binary products, thenThus exponentiation by $yA$ is precomposition with $-\times A$. Precomposition between functor categories has a right adjoint given by Right Kan extension, so $yA$ is a tiny object.

Conversely, suppose $\mathcal{C}$ has a terminal object $1$ and $F$ is tiny. The representable $y1$ is the terminal presheaf, and the exponential adjunction plus Yoneda givesSince $F$ is tiny, $(-{)}^F$ is a left adjoint and preserves all colimits; evaluation at $1$ also preserves pointwise colimits. Therefore the hom functor $[{\mathcal{C}}^{\mathrm{op}},\mathbf{Set}](F,-)$ preserves coproducts and epimorphisms. Preservation of epimorphisms makes $F$ projective, while preservation of coproducts makes it indecomposable.

For a small category $\mathcal{C}$ with binary coproducts, exponentiation by $h_A=\mathcal{C}(A,-)$ in $[\mathcal{C},\mathbf{Set}]$ is naturally $F\mapsto F(-⨿A)$: the exponential at $B$ is $\mathrm{Nat}(h_B\times h_A,F)\cong \mathrm{Nat}(h_{B⨿A},F)\cong F(B⨿A)$ by the Yoneda lemma. This precomposition functor has a right adjoint given by Right Kan extension, so $h_A$ is a tiny object.

In a Cartesian closed category, exponentiation satisfies $(-{)}^{A\times B}\cong ((-{)}^B{)}^A$. If the two exponential functors have right adjoints, their composite has the composite of those right adjoints in reverse order. Therefore a product of tiny objects is tiny. The terminal object is tiny since exponentiation by it is the identity, covering the empty product.