module Cat.Functor.Kan.Base where
private variable o ℓ : Level C C' D E : Precategory o ℓ kan-lvl : ∀ {o ℓ o' ℓ' o'' ℓ''} {C : Precategory o ℓ} {C' : Precategory o' ℓ'} {D : Precategory o'' ℓ''} → Functor C D → Functor C C' → Level kan-lvl {a} {b} {c} {d} {e} {f} _ _ = a ⊔ b ⊔ c ⊔ d ⊔ e ⊔ f open _=>_
Left Kan extensions🔗
Suppose we have a functor and a functor — perhaps to be thought of as a full subcategory inclusion, where is a completion of but the situation applies just as well to any pair of functors — which naturally fit into a commutative diagram
but as we can see this is a particularly sad commutative diagram; it’s crying out for a third edge
extending to a functor If there exists an universal such extension (we’ll define what “universal” means in just a second), we call it the left Kan extension of along and denote it Such extensions do not come for free (in a sense they’re pretty hard to come by), but concept of Kan extension can be used to rephrase the definition of both limit and adjoint functor.
A left Kan extension is equipped with a natural transformation witnessing the (“directed”) commutativity of the triangle (so that it need not commute on-the-nose) which is universal among such transformations; Meaning that if is another functor with a transformation there is a unique natural transformation which commutes with
Note that in general the triangle commutes “weakly”, but when is fully faithful and is cocomplete, genuinely extends in that is a natural isomorphism.
record is-lan (p : Functor C C') (F : Functor C D) (L : Functor C' D) (eta : F => L F∘ p) : Type (kan-lvl p F) where field
Universality of eta
is witnessed by the following
fields, which essentially say that, in the diagram below (assuming
has a natural transformation
witnessing the same “directed commutativity” that
does for
the 2-cell exists and is unique.
σ : {M : Functor C' D} (α : F => M F∘ p) → L => M σ-comm : {M : Functor C' D} {α : F => M F∘ p} → (σ α ◂ p) ∘nt eta ≡ α σ-uniq : {M : Functor C' D} {α : F => M F∘ p} {σ' : L => M} → α ≡ (σ' ◂ p) ∘nt eta → σ α ≡ σ' σ-uniq₂ : {M : Functor C' D} (α : F => M F∘ p) {σ₁' σ₂' : L => M} → α ≡ (σ₁' ◂ p) ∘nt eta → α ≡ (σ₂' ◂ p) ∘nt eta → σ₁' ≡ σ₂' σ-uniq₂ β p q = sym (σ-uniq p) ∙ σ-uniq q σ-uniqp : ∀ {M₁ M₂ : Functor C' D} → {α₁ : F => M₁ F∘ p} {α₂ : F => M₂ F∘ p} → (q : M₁ ≡ M₂) → PathP (λ i → F => q i F∘ p) α₁ α₂ → PathP (λ i → L => q i) (σ α₁) (σ α₂) σ-uniqp q r = Nat-pathp refl q λ c' i → σ {M = q i} (r i) .η c' open _=>_ eta
We also provide a bundled form of this data.
record Lan (p : Functor C C') (F : Functor C D) : Type (kan-lvl p F) where field Ext : Functor C' D eta : F => Ext F∘ p has-lan : is-lan p F Ext eta module Ext = Func Ext open is-lan has-lan public
Right Kan extensions🔗
Our choice of universal property in the section above isn’t the only choice; we could instead require a terminal solution to the lifting problem, instead of an initial one. We can picture the terminal situation using the following diagram.
Note the same warnings about “weak, directed” commutativity as for left Kan extensions apply here, too. Rather than either of the triangles commuting on the nose, we have natural transformations witnessing their commutativity.
record is-ran (p : Functor C C') (F : Functor C D) (Ext : Functor C' D) (eps : Ext F∘ p => F) : Type (kan-lvl p F) where no-eta-equality field σ : {M : Functor C' D} (α : M F∘ p => F) → M => Ext σ-comm : {M : Functor C' D} {β : M F∘ p => F} → eps ∘nt (σ β ◂ p) ≡ β σ-uniq : {M : Functor C' D} {β : M F∘ p => F} {σ' : M => Ext} → β ≡ eps ∘nt (σ' ◂ p) → σ β ≡ σ' open _=>_ eps renaming (η to ε) σ-uniq₂ : {M : Functor C' D} (β : M F∘ p => F) {σ₁' σ₂' : M => Ext} → β ≡ eps ∘nt (σ₁' ◂ p) → β ≡ eps ∘nt (σ₂' ◂ p) → σ₁' ≡ σ₂' σ-uniq₂ β p q = sym (σ-uniq p) ∙ σ-uniq q record Ran (p : Functor C C') (F : Functor C D) : Type (kan-lvl p F) where no-eta-equality field Ext : Functor C' D eps : Ext F∘ p => F has-ran : is-ran p F Ext eps module Ext = Func Ext open is-ran has-ran public
module _ {p : Functor C C'} {F : Functor C D} {G : Functor C' D} {eta : F => G F∘ p} where is-lan-is-prop : is-prop (is-lan p F G eta) is-lan-is-prop a b = path where private module a = is-lan a module b = is-lan b σ≡ : {M : Functor _ _} (α : F => M F∘ p) → a.σ α ≡ b.σ α σ≡ α = ext (a.σ-uniq (sym b.σ-comm) ηₚ_) open is-lan path : a ≡ b path i .σ α = σ≡ α i path i .σ-comm {α = α} = is-prop→pathp (λ i → Nat-is-set ((σ≡ α i ◂ p) ∘nt eta) α) (a.σ-comm {α = α}) (b.σ-comm {α = α}) i path i .σ-uniq {α = α} β = is-prop→pathp (λ i → Nat-is-set (σ≡ α i) _) (a.σ-uniq β) (b.σ-uniq β) i instance H-Level-is-lan : ∀ {k} → H-Level (is-lan p F G eta) (suc k) H-Level-is-lan = prop-instance is-lan-is-prop module _ {p : Functor C C'} {F : Functor C D} {G : Functor C' D} {eps : G F∘ p => F} where is-ran-is-prop : is-prop (is-ran p F G eps) is-ran-is-prop a b = path where private module a = is-ran a module b = is-ran b σ≡ : {M : Functor _ _} (α : M F∘ p => F) → a.σ α ≡ b.σ α σ≡ α = ext (a.σ-uniq (sym b.σ-comm) ηₚ_) open is-ran path : a ≡ b path i .σ α = σ≡ α i path i .σ-comm {β = α} = is-prop→pathp (λ i → Nat-is-set (eps ∘nt (σ≡ α i ◂ p)) α) (a.σ-comm {β = α}) (b.σ-comm {β = α}) i path i .σ-uniq {β = α} γ = is-prop→pathp (λ i → Nat-is-set (σ≡ α i) _) (a.σ-uniq γ) (b.σ-uniq γ) i instance H-Level-is-ran : ∀ {k} → H-Level (is-ran p F G eps) (suc k) H-Level-is-ran = prop-instance is-ran-is-prop
Preservation and reflection of Kan extensions🔗
Let be the left Kan extension of along and suppose that is a functor. We can “apply” to all the data of the Kan extension, obtaining the following diagram.
This looks like yet another Kan extension diagram, but it may not be universal! If this diagram is a left Kan extension, we say that preserves
preserves-lan : (H : Functor D E) → is-lan p F G eta → Type _ preserves-lan H _ = is-lan p (H F∘ F) (H F∘ G) (nat-assoc-to (H ▸ eta))
In the diagram above, the 2-cell is simply the whiskering Unfortunately, proof assistants; our definition of whiskering lands in but we require a natural transformation to
We say that a Kan extension is absolute if it is preserved by all functors out of An important class of examples is given by adjoint functors.
is-absolute-lan : is-lan p F G eta → Typeω is-absolute-lan lan = {o ℓ : Level} {E : Precategory o ℓ} (H : Functor D E) → preserves-lan H lan
It may also be the case that is already a left kan extension of along We say that reflects this Kan extension if is a also a left extension of along
reflects-lan : (H : Functor D E) → is-lan p (H F∘ F) (H F∘ G) (nat-assoc-to (H ▸ eta)) → Type _ reflects-lan _ _ = is-lan p F G eta
We can define dual notions for right Kan extensions as well.
preserves-ran : (H : Functor D E) → is-ran p F G eps → Type _ preserves-ran H _ = is-ran p (H F∘ F) (H F∘ G) (nat-assoc-from (H ▸ eps)) is-absolute-ran : is-ran p F G eps → Typeω is-absolute-ran ran = {o ℓ : Level} {E : Precategory o ℓ} (H : Functor D E) → preserves-ran H ran reflects-ran : (H : Functor D E) → is-ran p (H F∘ F) (H F∘ G) (nat-assoc-from (H ▸ eps)) → Type _ reflects-ran _ _ = is-ran p F G eps