No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Theories of analytic monads
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 March 2014
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.
In this paper we characterise the categories of Lawvere theories and equational theories that correspond to the categories of analytic and polynomial monads on Set, and hence also to the categories of the symmetric and rigid operads in Set. We show that the category of analytic monads is equivalent to the category of regular-linear theories. The category of polynomial monads is equivalent to the category of rigid theories, that is, regular-linear theories satisfying an additional global condition. This solves a problem posed by A. Carboni and P. T. Johnstone. The Lawvere theories corresponding to these monads are identified via some factorisation systems. We also show that the categories of analytic monads and finitary endofunctors on Set are monadic over the category of analytic functors. The corresponding monad for analytic monads distributes over the monad for finitary endofunctors and hence the category of (finitary) monads on Set is monadic over the category of analytic functors. This extends a result of M. Barr.
Information
- Type
- Paper
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014
References
Baez, J. and Dolan, J. (1998) Higher-dimensional algebra III: n-Categories and the algebra of opetopes. Advances in Mathematics 135 145–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beck, J. (1969) Distributive laws. In: Eckmann, B. (ed.) Seminar on Triples and Categorical Homology Theory. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Mathematics 80119–14.Google Scholar
Burroni, A. (1971) T-categories (catégories dans un triple). Cahiers de Topologie et Géométrie Différentielle Catégoriques 12 (3)215–321.Google Scholar
Bojańczyk, M., Szawiel, S. and Zawadowski, M. (2014) Rigidity is undecidable. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science (to appear).Google Scholar
Carboni, A. and Johnstone, P. T. (1995) Connected limits, familial representability and Artin glueing. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 5 441–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carboni, A. and Johnstone, P. T. (2004) Corrigenda for ‘Connected limits, familial representability and Artin glueing’. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 14 (1)185–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carboni, A., Janelidze, G., Kelly, G. M. and Paré, P. (1997) On Localization and Stabilization for Factorization Systems. Applied Categorical Structures 5 1–58.Google Scholar
Freyd, P. and Kelly, G. M. (1972) Categories of continous functors I. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 2 169–191.Google Scholar
Gould, M. R. (2010) Coherence for Categorified Operadic Theories. arXiv:1002.0879v1 [math.CT].Google Scholar
Hermida, C., Makkai, M. and Power, J. (2000) On weak higher dimensional categories I (Part 1). Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 153 (2000) 221–246.Google Scholar
Hermida, C., Makkai, M. and Power, J. (2001) On weak higher dimensional categories I (Part 2). Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 157 247–277.Google Scholar
Hermida, C., Makkai, M. and Power, J. (2002) On weak higher dimensional categories I (Part 3). Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 166 83–104.Google Scholar
Johnstone, P. T. and Wraith, G. C. (1978) Algebraic Theories in Toposes. In: Johnstone, P. T. and Paré, R. (eds.) Indexed Categories and Their Applications. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Mathematics 661141–242.Google Scholar
Joyal, A. (1986) Foncteurs analytiques et espéces de structures. In: Labelle, G. and Leroux, P. (eds.) Combinatoire énumerative. Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1234126–159.Google Scholar
Kock, A. and Reyes, G. E. (1977) Doctrines in Categorical Logic. In: Barwise, J. (ed.) Handbook of Mathematical Logic, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, North-Holland90283–313.Google Scholar
Lawvere, F. W. (1963) Functorial Semantics of Algebraic Theories and Some Algebraic Problems in the context of Functorial Semantics of Algebraic Theories, Ph.D. thesis, Columbia University. (Reprinted in Theory and Applications of Categories (2004) 5 1–121.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leinster, T. (2004) Higher Operads, Higher Categories, London Mathematics Society Lecture Note Series, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Szawiel, S. and Zawadowski, M. (2010) Representing multicategories as monads. Talk at CT 2010, Genova. (Available at http://www.mimuw.edu.pl/~zawado/Talks/GenovaSlides.pdf.)Google Scholar
Szawiel, S. and Zawadowski, M. (2013a) Monads of regular theories. Applied Categorical Structures 1–48.Google Scholar
Szawiel, S. and Zawadowski, M. (2013b) The web monoid and opetopic sets. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 217 1105–1140.Google Scholar
Sienkiewicz, Ł. and Zawadowski, M. (2013) Weights for Objects of Monoids. arXiv:1306.3215 [math.CT].Google Scholar
Tronin, S. N. (2002) Abstract Clones and Operads. Siberian Mathematical Journal 43 (4)746–755.Google Scholar
Zawadowski, M. (2011) Lax Monoidal Fibrations. In: Hart, B.et al. (eds.) Models, Logics, and Higher-Dimensional Categories: A Tribute to the Work of Mihály Makkai. CRM Proceedings, AMS 53341–424.Google Scholar
Zawadowski, M. (2012) Formal Theory of Monoidal Monads. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 216 1932–1942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have
Access
- 13
- Cited by