Category theory MOC

Yoneda lemma

Let 𝖒 be a category.1 For every object 𝑋 βˆˆπ–’ and every Presheaf 𝐹 :𝖒𝐨𝐩 →𝖲𝖾𝗍 we have

𝖯𝖲𝗁(𝖒)(γ‚ˆπ‘‹,𝐹)≅𝐹𝑋

where γ‚ˆπ‘‹ =𝖒( βˆ’,𝑋) is the Yoneda embedding. Moreover, this bijection is natural in 𝐹 and 𝑋

H:=Homπ–’βˆ˜(γ‚ˆΓ—1)β‡’Eval:𝖒×𝖯𝖲𝗁(𝖒)→𝖲𝖾𝗍

where naturality in 𝐹 means for πœ— :𝐹 ⇒𝐺 :𝖒𝐨𝐩 →𝖲𝖾𝗍

c|https://q.uiver.app/#q=WzAsNCxbMCwwLCJcXFBTaChcXGNhdCBDKShcXHlvIFgsIEYpIl0sWzAsMiwiXFxQU2goXFxjYXQgQykoXFx5byBYLCBHKSJdLFsyLDAsIkZYIl0sWzIsMiwiR1giXSxbMCwxLCJcXFBTaChcXGNhdCBDKShcXHlvIFgsIFxcdmFydGhldGEpIiwyXSxbMCwyLCJcXG1hdGhybSBIX3tYLEZ9IiwwLHsib2Zmc2V0IjotMX1dLFsxLDMsIlxcbWF0aHJtIEhfe1gsIEZ9IiwwLHsib2Zmc2V0IjotMX1dLFsyLDAsIiIsMCx7Im9mZnNldCI6LTF9XSxbMywxLCIiLDAseyJvZmZzZXQiOi0xfV0sWzIsMywiXFx2YXJ0aGV0YV9YIl1d

commutes; and naturality in 𝑋 means for 𝑓 βˆˆπ–’(𝑋,π‘Œ)

c|https://q.uiver.app/#q=WzAsNCxbMCwwLCJcXFBTaChcXGNhdCBDKShcXHlvIFgsIEYpIl0sWzAsMiwiXFxQU2goXFxjYXQgQykoXFx5byBZLCBGKSJdLFsyLDAsIkZYIl0sWzIsMiwiRlkiXSxbMSwwLCJcXFBTaChcXGNhdCBDKShcXHlvIGYsIEYpIl0sWzMsMiwiRmYiLDJdLFswLDIsIlxcbWF0aHJtIEhfe1gsRn0iLDAseyJvZmZzZXQiOi0xfV0sWzEsMywiXFxtYXRocm0gSF97WSxGfSIsMCx7Im9mZnNldCI6LTF9XSxbMywxLCIiLDAseyJvZmZzZXQiOi0xfV0sWzIsMCwiIiwxLHsib2Zmc2V0IjotMX1dXQ==

commutes.2

Proof

For πœ— βˆˆπ–―π–²π—(𝖒)(γ‚ˆπ‘‹,𝐹) we have πœ—π‘‹ :𝖒(𝑋,𝑋) →𝐹𝑋. Let π‘₯πœ— :=πœ—π‘‹(1𝑋) βˆˆπΉπ‘‹.

Conversely, given an π‘₯ βˆˆπΉπ‘‹, we can define πœ—π‘₯ :γ‚ˆπ‘‹ ⇒𝐹 :𝖒𝐨𝐩 →𝖲𝖾𝗍 as follows: Given any 𝑋′, we define the component

(πœ—π‘₯)𝑋′:𝖒(𝑋′,𝑋)β†’πΉπ‘‹β€²β„Žβ†¦(πΉβ„Ž)π‘₯

whose naturality condition is given by the diagram

https://q.uiver.app/#q=WzAsNCxbMCwwLCJcXG1hdGhzZiBDKFgnJywgWCkiXSxbMCwyLCJcXG1hdGhzZiBDKFgnLFgpIl0sWzIsMCwiRlgnJyJdLFsyLDIsIkZYJyJdLFsxLDAsIlxcbWF0aHNmIEMoZixYKSJdLFswLDIsIihcXHZhcnRoZXRhX3gpX3tYJyd9Il0sWzMsMiwiRmYiLDJdLFsxLDMsIihcXHZhcnRoZXRhX3gpX3tYJ30iLDJdXQ==

Now for β„Ž βˆˆπ–’(𝑋′,𝑋) we have

(πœ—π‘₯)𝑋″𝖒(𝑓,𝑋)β„Ž=(πœ—π‘₯)π‘‹β€³β„Žπ‘“=𝐹(β„Žπ‘“)π‘₯=(𝐹𝑓)(πΉβ„Ž)π‘₯=(𝐹𝑓)(πœ—π‘₯)π‘‹β€²β„Ž

so πœ—π‘₯ is indeed natural.

Now we calculate πœ—π‘₯πœ— for πœ— βˆˆπ–―π–²π—(𝖒)(γ‚ˆπ‘‹,𝐹). From the above definitions, for β„Ž βˆˆπ–’(𝑋′,𝑋) we have

(πœ—π‘₯πœ—)π‘‹β€²β„Ž=(πΉβ„Ž)π‘₯πœ—=(πΉβ„Ž)πœ—π‘‹(1𝑋)

but by naturality of πœ—

(πΉβ„Ž)πœ—π‘‹(1𝑋)=πœ—π‘‹β€²π–’(β„Ž,𝑋)(1𝑋)=πœ—π‘‹β€²β„Ž

wherefore πœ—(π‘₯πœ—) =πœ—.

Conversely, for π‘₯ βˆˆπΉπ‘‹ we have

π‘₯πœ—π‘₯=(πœ—π‘₯)𝑋(1𝑋)=𝐹(1𝑋)π‘₯=1𝐹𝑋π‘₯=π‘₯.

Therefore

H𝑋,𝐹:𝖯𝖲𝗁(𝖒)(γ‚ˆπ‘‹,𝐹)β†’πΉπ‘‹πœ—β†¦π‘₯πœ—

defines a bijection for any 𝑋,𝐹.

For naturality in 𝐹, suppose πœ— βˆˆπ–―π–²π—(𝖒)(𝐹,𝐺) Then for any πœ‘ βˆˆπ–―π–²π—(𝖒)(γ‚ˆπ‘‹,𝐹) we have

H𝑋,𝐹(π‘₯πœ™)=πœ—π‘‹π‘₯πœ™=πœ—π‘‹πœ™π‘‹(1𝑋)=(πœ—πœ™)𝑋(1𝑋)=π‘₯πœ—πœ™=H𝑋,𝐺(πœ—πœ™)=H𝑋,𝐺(𝖒(γ‚ˆπ‘‹,πœ™)πœ—)

so the required diagram commutes.

For naturality in 𝑋, suppose β„Ž βˆˆπ–’(𝑋,π‘Œ). Then for πœ“ βˆˆπ–―π–²π—(𝖒)(γ‚ˆπ‘Œ,𝐹) we have

H𝑋,𝐹𝖯𝖲𝗁(𝖒)(γ‚ˆβ„Ž,𝐹)πœ“=H𝑋,𝐹(πœ“(γ‚ˆβ„Ž))=(πœ“(γ‚ˆβ„Ž))𝑋(1𝑋)=πœ“π‘‹(γ‚ˆβ„Ž)𝑋(1𝑋)=πœ“π‘‹π–’(𝑋,β„Ž)(1𝑋)=πœ“π‘‹(β„Ž)=πœ“π‘‹π–’(β„Ž,π‘Œ)(1π‘Œ)=πœ“π‘‹((γ‚ˆπ‘Œ)β„Ž)(1π‘Œ)=(πΉβ„Ž)πœ“π‘Œ(1π‘Œ)=(πΉβ„Ž)Hπ‘Œ,πΉπœ“

as required.

Corollaries


#state/tidy | #lang/en | #SemBr

Footnotes

  1. We ignore size conditions. In ZF and conservative extensions it is required that 𝖒 be a locally small category. ↩

  2. 2010. Category theory, Β§8.3, pp. 189–192 ↩