A functor from a locally small category that is complete and well-powered, with a small cogenerating family, to a locally small category has a left adjoint exactly when it preserves small categorical limits. For sufficiency, the cogenerator bound for comma-category solution sets produces a weakly initial set in each complete comma category . The initial-object lemma for complete categories with a weakly initial set supplies its initial object, a universal arrow from an object to a functor. Necessity is limit preservation by a right adjoint.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2001 iii Paper 17 7 iii Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
Only remains. Assume preserves small categorical limits, and choose a small cogenerating family in . Fix a set . The comma category is a complete category: underlying limits in , together with limit preservation by , lift compatible maps from . It is locally small, since its arrows form subsets of the hom-sets in .
We construct a weakly initial set in this comma category. Given , intersect all subobjects through which lifts under . There are only a set of subobjects because is well-powered; the family includes . Their intersection exists by completeness. Also preserves monomorphisms, since a map is monic precisely when its self-pullback diagonal is invertible, and preserves such pullbacks.
Thus all lifts of are unique and compatible, and preservation of the intersection givesNo proper subobject of supports a lift of : its composite into would belong to the intersected family, forcing it to contain . This is a minimal supported subobject.
For each , the mapis injective. Indeed, equal images mean lifts to the equalizer of the two maps, because preserves that equalizer. Minimality forces the equalizer to be invertible, so the maps agree.
The cogenerator property makes the evaluation mapa monomorphism: any two arrows into that agree after all these projections are equal. The indexing pairs inject into the fixed setTheir image is some subset . Consequently is isomorphic to a subobject of a product of the indexed by . There are only a set of such subsets , only a set of subobjects of each , and only a set of maps for each representative subobject .
Collect all these pairs . Every receives a comma arrow from one of them, via the isomorphic copy of and . Hence they form a weakly initial set. The initial-object lemma for complete categories with a weakly initial set, proved explicitly in Question 8, gives an initial object of . Its map from is a universal arrow from an object to a functor. Choosing these universal arrows for all defines a left adjoint to .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2012 iii Paper 25 4 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
The limit form of the Special adjoint functor theorem is as follows. Let be a locally small category, a complete category, and a well-powered category, and suppose it has a small cogenerating family . Let be a locally small category. Then a functor has a left adjoint if and only if it preserves all small categorical limits. The dual exchanges completeness, well-poweredness and cogenerators for cocompleteness, well-copoweredness and generators, and characterizes functors with a right adjoint.
Here a cogenerating set distinguishes unequal parallel maps by postcomposition into one of the . A well-powered category has a set of subobjects of each fixed object. Completeness means existence of all small categorical limits. We use the initial-object lemma for complete categories with a weakly initial set: a complete category that is locally small has an initial object exactly when it has a weakly initial set. A proof is given in Question 5(c). We also use the fact that when preserves small categorical limits, the comma category is complete, with its limits constructed in ; local smallness is inherited from . Finally, having an initial object in for each is the universal arrow from an object to a functor characterization of a left adjoint.
Assume preserves small categorical limits, and fix . We will construct a weakly initial set in , rather than assume a solution set. Start with an arbitrary object , where . Call a subobject supporting if for some . There is at least one, namely . Because preserves pullbacks in a category, it preserves monomorphisms: the self-pullback characterization of a monic map is preserved. Consequently each is unique.
There is a set of supporting subobjects by well-poweredness. Their intersection of subobjects exists by completeness; write it . Applying to this intersection categorical limit gives a unique lifting all the , and hence . Minimality says that any subobject supporting is invertible: supports , so factors through , giving a right inverse to the monic .
If satisfy , their equalizer supports , since preserves that equalizer. It is therefore an isomorphism, and . We have obtained an injective functionLet be its image, a subset of the fixed set . The evaluation embedding into cogenerator products is a monomorphismIndeed each corresponds to a unique map , and the cogenerating set property makes the resulting family jointly monic. Notice that we use the realized subsets , not all of : there need not be a map available for an unused index.
There is a set of tuples , since and every are sets. For each resulting , choose representatives of its subobjects; these form a set by well-poweredness. For every representative , include every map , a set by local smallness of . All resulting pairs form a set. Our given receives a map from such a pair: transport along the isomorphism between and the chosen representative, then compose its inverse with . Thus these pairs form a weakly initial set in . This is the cogenerator bound for comma-category solution sets.
The initial-object lemma for complete categories with a weakly initial set gives an initial object . For , define by the unique equationUniqueness proves the functor laws and gives the natural bijectionsThus . Conversely, a right adjoint preserves small categorical limits: its adjunction identifies maps into the proposed limiting object with compatible families of maps into the diagram. This proves both directions of the limit form of the special adjoint functor theorem. Applying the argument to the opposite categories proves the dual statement. Choices of representatives and adjoint objects are understood in the usual ambient-universe convention for large categories.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2023 iii Paper 119 1 Solution 2026-09-28
For a locally small category , a representation of a functor is an object and an element such thatis a bijection for every , naturally in . Equivalently, is a natural isomorphism.
Suppose and are two representations. Universality gives unique mapssuch that and . Then , and uniqueness applied to the element gives . Similarly . Thus the representing objects are uniquely isomorphic in a way carrying one universal element of a set-valued functor to the other.
For and , the comma category has objects with . A morphism is a map satisfyingThe universal arrow from an object to a functor criterion says that has a left adjoint exactly when has an initial object for every . Indeed, an initial represents the functor , and uniqueness makes functorial.
When and is a singleton, an arrow is just an element . Hence is the category of elements, and its initial objects are exactly the representations of . This proves
If has a left adjoint, the universal-arrow criterion immediately makes it representable. Conversely, suppose is cocomplete and . For a set , form the copowerThe coproduct in a category universal property gives natural bijectionsso .
Cocompleteness cannot be omitted. Let be the category of ordinals in reverse order: there is one arrow exactly when in the ordinary ordering. This large poset is locally small and complete. For a set-indexed family , its product in the reversed order is the ordinary supremum , and equalizers in a poset are automatic. But has no initial object, since that would be a largest ordinal. Any representable functor is therefore the requested example: if it had a left adjoint , thenwould be a singleton for every , making initial, a contradiction.