Fibration of simplicial sets

(Redirected from Isofibration)

In mathematics, especially in homotopy theory, a left fibration of simplicial sets is a map that has the right lifting property with respect to the horn inclusions .[1] A right fibration is defined similarly with the condition .[1] A Kan fibration is one with the right lifting property with respect to every horn inclusion; hence, a Kan fibration is exactly a map that is both a left and right fibration.[2]

Examples

edit

A right fibration is a cartesian fibration such that each fiber is a Kan complex.

In particular, a category fibered in groupoids over another category is a special case of a right fibration of simplicial sets in the ∞-category setup.

Anodyne extensions

edit

A left anodyne extension is a map in the saturation of the set of the horn inclusions   for   in the category of simplicial sets, where the saturation of a class is the smallest class that contains the class and is stable under pushouts, retracts and transfinite compositions (compositions of infinitely many maps).[3] A right anodyne extension is defined by replacing the condition   with  . The notions are originally due to Gabriel–Zisman and are used to study fibrations for simplicial sets.

A left (or right) anodyne extension is a monomorphism (since the class of monomorphisms is saturated,[4] the saturation lies in the class of monomorphisms).

Given a class   of maps, let   denote the class of maps satisfying the right lifting property with respect to  . Then   for the saturation   of  .[5] Thus, a map is a left (resp. right) fibration if and only if it has the right lifting property with respect to left (resp. right) anodyne extensions.[3]

An inner anodyne extension is a map in the saturation of the horn inclusions   for  .[6] The maps having the right lifting property with respect to inner anodyne extensions or equivalently with respect to the horn inclusions   are called inner fibrations.[7] Simplicial sets are then weak Kan complexes (∞-categories) if unique maps to the final object are inner fibrations.

An isofibration   is an inner fibration such that for each object (0-simplex)   in   and an invertible map   with   in  , there exists a map   in   such that  .[8] For example, a left (or right) fibration between weak Kan complexes is a conservative isofibration.[9]

Theorem of Gabriel and Zisman

edit

Given monomorphisms   and  , let   denote the pushout of   and  . Then a theorem of Gabriel and Zisman says:[10][11] if   is a left (resp. right) anodyne extension, then the induced map

 

is a left (resp. right) anodyne extension. Similarly, if   is an inner anodyne extension, then the above induced map is an inner anodyne extension.[12]

A special case of the above is the covering homotopy extension property:[13] a Kan fibration has the right lifting property with respect to   for monomirphisms   and  .

As a corollary of the theorem, a map   is an inner fibration if and only if for each monomirphism  , the induced map

 

is an inner fibration.[14][15] Similarly, if   is a left (resp. right) fibration, then   is a left (resp. right) fibration.[16]

Model category structure

edit

The category of simplicial sets sSet has the standard model category structure where [17]

  • The cofibrations are the monomorphisms,
  • The fibrations are the Kan fibrations,
  • The weak equivalences are the maps   such that   is bijective on simplicial homotopy classes for each Kan complex (fibrant object),
  • A fibration is trivial (i.e., has the right lifting property with respect to monomorphisms) if and only if it is a weak equivalence,
  • A cofibration is an anodyne extension if and only if it is a weak equivalence.

Because of the last property, an anodyne extension is also known as an acyclic cofibration (a cofibration that is a weak equivalence). Also, the weak equivalences between Kan complexes are the same as the simplicial homotopy equivalences between them.

Under the geometric realization | - | : sSetTop, we have:

  • A map   is a weak equivalence if and only if   is a homotopy equivalence.[18]
  • A map   is a fibration if and only if   is a (usual) fibration in the sense of Hurewicz or of Serre.[19]
  • For an anodyne extension  ,   admits a strong deformation retract.[20]

Universal left fibration

edit

Let   be the simplicial set where each n-simplex consists of

  • a map   from a (small) simplicial set X,
  • a section   of  ,
  • for each integer   and for each map  , a choice of a pullback of   along  .[21]

Now, a conjecture of Nichols-Barrer which is now a theorem says that U is the same thing as the ∞-category of ∞-groupoids (Kan complexes) together with some choices.[22] In particular, there is a forgetful map

  = the ∞-category of Kan complexes,

which is a left fibration. It is universal in the following sense: for each simplicial set X, there is a natural bijection

  the set of the isomorphism classes of left fibrations over X

given by pulling-back  , where   means the simplicial homotopy classes of maps.[23] In short,   is the classifying space of left fibrations. Given a left fibration over X, a map   corresponding to it is called the classifying map for that fibration.

In Cisinski's book, the hom-functor   on an ∞-category C is then simply defined to be the classifying map for the left fibration

 

where each n-simplex in   is a map  .[24] In fact,   is an ∞-category called the twisted diagonal of C.[25]

In his Higher Topos Theory, Lurie constructs an analogous universal cartesian fibration.[26]

See also

edit

Footnotes

edit
  1. ^ a b Lurie 2009a, Definition 2.0.0.3.
  2. ^ Beke, Tibor (2008). "Fibrations of simplicial sets". arXiv:0810.4960 [math.CT].
  3. ^ a b Cisinski 2023, Definition 3.4.1.
  4. ^ Proof: Let   = the class of maps having the left lifting property with respect to a class   of maps. Then   can be shown to be saturated. By the axiom of choice, if   is the class of surjective maps, then   is the class of injective maps. This implies the same is true for monomorphisms between preshaves.
  5. ^ Proof: Since  , l for the left lifting property, is saturated and  , we have:   and so  .
  6. ^ Cisinski 2023, Definition 3.2.1.
  7. ^ Cisinski 2023, Definition 3.2.5.
  8. ^ Cisinski 2023, Definition 3.3.15.
  9. ^ Cisinski 2023, Proposition 3.4.8.
  10. ^ Joyal & Tierney 2008, Theorem 3.2.2.
  11. ^ Cisinski 2023, Proposition 3.4.3.
  12. ^ Cisinski 2023, Corollary 3.2.4.
  13. ^ Joyal & Tierney 2008, Proposition 3.2.2.
  14. ^ Cisinski 2023, Corollary 3.2.8.
  15. ^ Proposition 4.1.4.1. in https://kerodon.net/tag/01BS
  16. ^ Cisinski 2023, Proposition 3.4.4.
  17. ^ Joyal & Tierney 2008, Theorem 3.4.1, Proposition 3.4.2, Proposition 3.4.3.
  18. ^ Joyal & Tierney 2008, Proposition 4.6.3.
  19. ^ Joyal & Tierney 2008, § 2.1.
  20. ^ Joyal & Tierney 2008, Proposition 4.6.1.
  21. ^ Cisinski 2023, Definition 5.2.3.
  22. ^ Cisinski 2023, Theorem 5.2.10.
  23. ^ Cisinski 2023, Corollary 5.3.21.
  24. ^ Cisinski 2023, § 5.6.1. and § 5.8.1.
  25. ^ Cisinski 2023, Proposition 5.6.2.
  26. ^ Lurie 2009a, § 3.3.2.

References

edit

Further reading

edit