open import Cat.Diagram.Limit.Finite
open import Cat.Functor.Properties
open import Cat.Diagram.Terminal
open import Cat.Functor.Pullback
open import Cat.Functor.Adjoint
open import Cat.Instances.Slice
open import Cat.Functor.Base
open import Cat.Prelude

import Cat.Reasoning

module Cat.Functor.Slice where

Slicing functors🔗

Let $F:\mathcal{C}\to \mathcal{D}$ be a functor and $X:\mathcal{C}$ an object. By a standard tool in category theory (namely “whacking an entire commutative diagram with a functor”), $F$ restricts to a functor $F/X:\mathcal{C}/X\to \mathcal{D}/F(X)\text{.}$ We call this “slicing” the functor $F\text{.}$ This module investigates some of the properties of sliced functors.

open Functor
open /-Obj
open /-Hom
open _=>_
open _⊣_

Sliced : ∀ {o ℓ o' ℓ'} {C : Precategory o ℓ} {D : Precategory o' ℓ'}
       → (F : Functor C D) (X : ⌞ C ⌟)
       → Functor (Slice C X) (Slice D (F .F₀ X))
Sliced F X .F₀ ob = cut (F .F₁ (ob .map))
Sliced F X .F₁ sh = sh' where
  sh' : /-Hom _ _
  sh' .map = F .F₁ (sh .map)
  sh' .commutes = sym (F .F-∘ _ _) ∙ ap (F .F₁) (sh .commutes)
Sliced F X .F-id = ext (F .F-id)
Sliced F X .F-∘ f g = ext (F .F-∘ _ _)

Faithful, fully faithful🔗

Slicing preserves faithfulness and fully-faithfulness. It does not preserve fullness: Even if, by fullness, we get a map $f:x\to y\in \mathcal{C}$ from a map $h:F(x)\to F(y)\in \mathcal{D}/F(X)\text{,}$ it does not necessarily restrict to a map in $\mathcal{C}/X\text{.}$ We’d have to show $F(y)h=F(x)$ and $h=F(f)$ implies $yf=x\text{,}$ which is possible only if $F$ is faithful.

module _ {o ℓ o' ℓ'} {C : Precategory o ℓ} {D : Precategory o' ℓ'}
         {F : Functor C D} {X : ⌞ C ⌟} where
  private
    module D = Cat.Reasoning D

However, if $F$ is faithful, then so are any of its slices $F/X\text{,}$ and additionally, if $F$ is full, then the sliced functors are also fully faithful.

  Sliced-faithful : is-faithful F → is-faithful (Sliced F X)
  Sliced-faithful faith p = ext (faith (ap map p))

  Sliced-ff : is-fully-faithful F → is-fully-faithful (Sliced F X)
  Sliced-ff eqv = is-iso→is-equiv λ where
    .is-iso.from sh → record
      { map = equiv→inverse eqv (sh .map)
      ; commutes = ap fst $ is-contr→is-prop (eqv .is-eqv _)
        (_ , F .F-∘ _ _ ∙ ap₂ D._∘_ refl (equiv→counit eqv _) ∙ sh .commutes) (_ , refl)
      }
    .is-iso.rinv x → ext (equiv→counit eqv _)
    .is-iso.linv x → ext (equiv→unit eqv _)

Left exactness🔗

If $F$ is left exact (meaning it preserves pullbacks and the terminal object), then $F/X$ is lex as well. We note that it (by definition) preserves products, since products in $\mathcal{C}/X$ are equivalently pullbacks in $\mathcal{C}/X\text{.}$ Pullbacks are also immediately shown to be preserved, since a square in $\mathcal{C}/X$ is a pullback iff it is a pullback in $\mathcal{C}\text{.}$

Sliced-lex
  : ∀ {o ℓ o' ℓ'} {C : Precategory o ℓ} {D : Precategory o' ℓ'}
  → {F : Functor C D} {X : ⌞ C ⌟}
  → is-lex F
  → is-lex (Sliced F X)
Sliced-lex {C = C} {D = D} {F = F} {X = X} flex = lex where
  module D = Cat.Reasoning D
  module Dx = Cat.Reasoning (Slice D (F .F₀ X))
  module C = Cat.Reasoning C
  open is-lex
  lex : is-lex (Sliced F X)
  lex .pres-pullback = pullback-above→pullback-below
                     ⊙ flex .pres-pullback
                     ⊙ pullback-below→pullback-above

That the slice of lex functor preserves the terminal object is slightly more involved, but not by a lot. The gist of the argument is that we know what the terminal object is: It’s the identity map! So we can cheat: Since we know that $T$ is terminal, we know that $T\cong \mathrm{id}$ — but $F$ preserves this isomorphism, so we have $F(T)\cong F(\mathrm{id})\text{.}$ But $F(\mathrm{id})$ is $\mathrm{id}$ again, now in $\mathcal{D}\text{,}$ so $F(T)\text{,}$ being isomorphic to the terminal object, is itself terminal!

  lex .pres-⊤ {T = T} term =
    is-terminal-iso (Slice D (F .F₀ X))
      (subst (Dx._≅ cut (F .F₁ (T .map))) (ap cut (F .F-id))
        (F-map-iso (Sliced F X)
          (⊤-unique (Slice C X) Slice-terminal-object (record { has⊤ = term }))))
      Slice-terminal-object'

Sliced adjoints🔗

A very important property of sliced functors is that, if $L⊣R\text{,}$ then $R/X$ is also a right adjoint. The left adjoint isn’t quite $L/X\text{,}$ because the types there don’t match, nor is it $L/R(x)$ — but it’s quite close. We can adjust that functor by postcomposition with the counit $\epsilon :LR(x)\to x\text{A}$ to get a functor left adjoint to $R/X\text{.}$

Sliced-adjoints
  : ∀ {o ℓ o' ℓ'} {C : Precategory o ℓ} {D : Precategory o' ℓ'}
  → {L : Functor C D} {R : Functor D C} (adj : L ⊣ R) {X : ⌞ D ⌟}
  → (Σf (adj .counit .η _) F∘ Sliced L (R .F₀ X)) ⊣ Sliced R X
Sliced-adjoints {C = C} {D} {L} {R} adj {X} = adj' where
  module adj = _⊣_ adj
  module L = Functor L
  module R = Functor R
  module C = Cat.Reasoning C
  module D = Cat.Reasoning D

  adj' : (Σf (adj .counit .η _) F∘ Sliced L (R .F₀ X)) ⊣ Sliced R X
  adj' .unit .η x .map         = adj.η _
  adj' .unit .is-natural x y f = ext (adj.unit.is-natural _ _ _)

  adj' .counit .η x .map         = adj.ε _
  adj' .counit .η x .commutes    = sym (adj.counit.is-natural _ _ _)
  adj' .counit .is-natural x y f = ext (adj.counit.is-natural _ _ _)

  adj' .zig = ext adj.zig
  adj' .zag = ext adj.zag

80% of the adjunction transfers as-is (I didn’t quite count, but the percentage must be way up there — just look at the definition above!). The hard part is proving that the adjunction unit restricts to a map in slice categories, which we can compute:

  adj' .unit .η x .commutes =
    R.₁ (adj.ε _ D.∘ L.₁ (x .map)) C.∘ adj.η _         ≡⟨ C.pushl (R.F-∘ _ _) ⟩≡
    R.₁ (adj.ε _) C.∘ R.₁ (L.₁ (x .map)) C.∘ adj.η _   ≡˘⟨ ap (R.₁ _ C.∘_) (adj.unit.is-natural _ _ _) ⟩≡˘
    R.₁ (adj.ε _) C.∘ adj.η _ C.∘ x .map               ≡⟨ C.cancell adj.zag ⟩≡
    x .map                                             ∎