Universal property

Last updated
The typical diagram of the definition of a universal morphism. Universal morphism definition.svg
The typical diagram of the definition of a universal morphism.

In mathematics, more specifically in category theory, a universal property is a property that characterizes up to an isomorphism the result of some constructions. Thus, universal properties can be used for defining some objects independently from the method chosen for constructing them. For example, the definitions of the integers from the natural numbers, of the rational numbers from the integers, of the real numbers from the rational numbers, and of polynomial rings from the field of their coefficients can all be done in terms of universal properties. In particular, the concept of universal property allows a simple proof that all constructions of real numbers are equivalent: it suffices to prove that they satisfy the same universal property.

Contents

Technically, a universal property is defined in terms of categories and functors by means of a universal morphism (see § Formal definition, below). Universal morphisms can also be thought more abstractly as initial or terminal objects of a comma category (see § Connection with comma categories, below).

Universal properties occur almost everywhere in mathematics, and the use of the concept allows the use of general properties of universal properties for easily proving some properties that would need boring verifications otherwise. For example, given a commutative ring R, the field of fractions of the quotient ring of R by a prime ideal p can be identified with the residue field of the localization of R at p; that is (all these constructions can be defined by universal properties).

Other objects that can be defined by universal properties include: all free objects, direct products and direct sums, free groups, free lattices, Grothendieck group, completion of a metric space, completion of a ring, Dedekind–MacNeille completion, product topologies, Stone–Čech compactification, tensor products, inverse limit and direct limit, kernels and cokernels, quotient groups, quotient vector spaces, and other quotient spaces.

Motivation

Before giving a formal definition of universal properties, we offer some motivation for studying such constructions.

Formal definition

To understand the definition of a universal construction, it is important to look at examples. Universal constructions were not defined out of thin air, but were rather defined after mathematicians began noticing a pattern in many mathematical constructions (see Examples below). Hence, the definition may not make sense to one at first, but will become clear when one reconciles it with concrete examples.

Let be a functor between categories and . In what follows, let be an object of , while and are objects of , and is a morphism in .

Thus, the functor maps , and in to , and in .

A universal morphism from to is a unique pair in which has the following property, commonly referred to as a universal property:

For any morphism of the form in , there exists a unique morphism in such that the following diagram commutes:

The typical diagram of the definition of a universal morphism. Universal morphism definition.svg
The typical diagram of the definition of a universal morphism.

We can dualize this categorical concept. A universal morphism from to is a unique pair that satisfies the following universal property:

For any morphism of the form in , there exists a unique morphism in such that the following diagram commutes:

The most important arrow here is
u
:
F
(
A
)
-
X
{\displaystyle u:F(A)\to X}
which establishes the universal property. Universal definition dualized.svg
The most important arrow here is which establishes the universal property.

Note that in each definition, the arrows are reversed. Both definitions are necessary to describe universal constructions which appear in mathematics; but they also arise due to the inherent duality present in category theory. In either case, we say that the pair which behaves as above satisfies a universal property.

Connection with comma categories

Universal morphisms can be described more concisely as initial and terminal objects in a comma category (i.e. one where morphisms are seen as objects in their own right).

Let be a functor and an object of . Then recall that the comma category is the category where

A morphism in the comma category is given by the morphism
h
:
B
-
B
'
{\displaystyle h:B\to B'}
which also makes the diagram commute. Definition of a morphism in a comma category.svg
A morphism in the comma category is given by the morphism which also makes the diagram commute.

Now suppose that the object in is initial. Then for every object , there exists a unique morphism such that the following diagram commutes.

This demonstrates the connection between a universal diagram being an initial object in a comma category. Connection between universal diagrams and comma categories.svg
This demonstrates the connection between a universal diagram being an initial object in a comma category.

Note that the equality here simply means the diagrams are the same. Also note that the diagram on the right side of the equality is the exact same as the one offered in defining a universal morphism from to . Therefore, we see that a universal morphism from to is equivalent to an initial object in the comma category .

Conversely, recall that the comma category is the category where

This simply demonstrates the definition of a morphism in a comma category. Definition of a morphism in a comma category 1.svg
This simply demonstrates the definition of a morphism in a comma category.

Suppose is a terminal object in . Then for every object , there exists a unique morphism such that the following diagrams commute.

This shows that a terminal object in a specific comma category corresponds to a universal morphism. Connection between comma category and universal properties.svg
This shows that a terminal object in a specific comma category corresponds to a universal morphism.

The diagram on the right side of the equality is the same diagram pictured when defining a universal morphism from to . Hence, a universal morphism from to corresponds with a terminal object in the comma category .

Examples

Below are a few examples, to highlight the general idea. The reader can construct numerous other examples by consulting the articles mentioned in the introduction.

Tensor algebras

Let be the category of vector spaces -Vect over a field and let be the category of algebras -Alg over (assumed to be unital and associative). Let

 : -Alg-Vect

be the forgetful functor which assigns to each algebra its underlying vector space.

Given any vector space over we can construct the tensor algebra . The tensor algebra is characterized by the fact:

“Any linear map from to an algebra can be uniquely extended to an algebra homomorphism from to .”

This statement is an initial property of the tensor algebra since it expresses the fact that the pair , where is the inclusion map, is a universal morphism from the vector space to the functor .

Since this construction works for any vector space , we conclude that is a functor from -Vect to -Alg. This means that is left adjoint to the forgetful functor (see the section below on relation to adjoint functors).

Products

A categorical product can be characterized by a universal construction. For concreteness, one may consider the Cartesian product in Set , the direct product in Grp , or the product topology in Top , where products exist.

Let and be objects of a category with finite products. The product of and is an object × together with two morphisms

 :
 :

such that for any other object of and morphisms and there exists a unique morphism such that and .

To understand this characterization as a universal property, take the category to be the product category and define the diagonal functor

by and . Then is a universal morphism from to the object of : if is any morphism from to , then it must equal a morphism from to followed by . As a commutative diagram:

Commutative diagram showing how products have a universal property. Universal-property-products.svg
Commutative diagram showing how products have a universal property.

For the example of the Cartesian product in Set, the morphism comprises the two projections and . Given any set and functions the unique map such that the required diagram commutes is given by . [3]

Limits and colimits

Categorical products are a particular kind of limit in category theory. One can generalize the above example to arbitrary limits and colimits.

Let and be categories with a small index category and let be the corresponding functor category. The diagonal functor

is the functor that maps each object in to the constant functor (i.e. for each in and for each in ) and each morphism in to the natural transformation in defined as, for every object of , the component

at . In other words, the natural transformation is the one defined by having constant component for every object of .

Given a functor (thought of as an object in ), the limit of , if it exists, is nothing but a universal morphism from to . Dually, the colimit of is a universal morphism from to .

Properties

Existence and uniqueness

Defining a quantity does not guarantee its existence. Given a functor and an object of , there may or may not exist a universal morphism from to . If, however, a universal morphism does exist, then it is essentially unique. Specifically, it is unique up to a unique isomorphism: if is another pair, then there exists a unique isomorphism such that . This is easily seen by substituting in the definition of a universal morphism.

It is the pair which is essentially unique in this fashion. The object itself is only unique up to isomorphism. Indeed, if is a universal morphism and is any isomorphism then the pair , where is also a universal morphism.

Equivalent formulations

The definition of a universal morphism can be rephrased in a variety of ways. Let be a functor and let be an object of . Then the following statements are equivalent:

for each object in

The dual statements are also equivalent:

for each object in

Relation to adjoint functors

Suppose is a universal morphism from to and is a universal morphism from to . By the universal property of universal morphisms, given any morphism there exists a unique morphism such that the following diagram commutes:

Universal morphisms can behave like a natural transformation between functors under suitable conditions. Connection between universal elements inducing a functor.svg
Universal morphisms can behave like a natural transformation between functors under suitable conditions.

If every object of admits a universal morphism to , then the assignment and defines a functor . The maps then define a natural transformation from (the identity functor on ) to . The functors are then a pair of adjoint functors, with left-adjoint to and right-adjoint to .

Similar statements apply to the dual situation of terminal morphisms from . If such morphisms exist for every in one obtains a functor which is right-adjoint to (so is left-adjoint to ).

Indeed, all pairs of adjoint functors arise from universal constructions in this manner. Let and be a pair of adjoint functors with unit and co-unit (see the article on adjoint functors for the definitions). Then we have a universal morphism for each object in and :

The unit and counit of an adjunction, which are natural transformations between functors, are an important example of universal morphisms. Universal morphisms appear as the unit and counit of adjunctions.svg
The unit and counit of an adjunction, which are natural transformations between functors, are an important example of universal morphisms.

Universal constructions are more general than adjoint functor pairs: a universal construction is like an optimization problem; it gives rise to an adjoint pair if and only if this problem has a solution for every object of (equivalently, every object of ).

History

Universal properties of various topological constructions were presented by Pierre Samuel in 1948. They were later used extensively by Bourbaki. The closely related concept of adjoint functors was introduced independently by Daniel Kan in 1958.

See also

Notes

  1. Jacobson (2009), Proposition 1.6, p. 44.
  2. See for example, Polcino & Sehgal (2002), p. 133. exercise 1, about the universal property of group rings.
  3. Fong, Brendan; Spivak, David I. (2018-10-12). "Seven Sketches in Compositionality: An Invitation to Applied Category Theory". arXiv: 1803.05316 [math.CT].

Related Research Articles

In mathematics, specifically category theory, a functor is a mapping between categories. Functors were first considered in algebraic topology, where algebraic objects are associated to topological spaces, and maps between these algebraic objects are associated to continuous maps between spaces. Nowadays, functors are used throughout modern mathematics to relate various categories. Thus, functors are important in all areas within mathematics to which category theory is applied.

In mathematics, especially in category theory and homotopy theory, a groupoid generalises the notion of group in several equivalent ways. A groupoid can be seen as a:

In mathematics, the Yoneda lemma is arguably the most important result in category theory. It is an abstract result on functors of the type morphisms into a fixed object. It is a vast generalisation of Cayley's theorem from group theory. It allows the embedding of any locally small category into a category of functors defined on that category. It also clarifies how the embedded category, of representable functors and their natural transformations, relates to the other objects in the larger functor category. It is an important tool that underlies several modern developments in algebraic geometry and representation theory. It is named after Nobuo Yoneda.

In category theory, a branch of mathematics, the abstract notion of a limit captures the essential properties of universal constructions such as products, pullbacks and inverse limits. The dual notion of a colimit generalizes constructions such as disjoint unions, direct sums, coproducts, pushouts and direct limits.

In category theory, a branch of mathematics, a natural transformation provides a way of transforming one functor into another while respecting the internal structure of the categories involved. Hence, a natural transformation can be considered to be a "morphism of functors". Informally, the notion of a natural transformation states that a particular map between functors can be done consistently over an entire category.

In mathematics, specifically category theory, adjunction is a relationship that two functors may exhibit, intuitively corresponding to a weak form of equivalence between two related categories. Two functors that stand in this relationship are known as adjoint functors, one being the left adjoint and the other the right adjoint. Pairs of adjoint functors are ubiquitous in mathematics and often arise from constructions of "optimal solutions" to certain problems, such as the construction of a free group on a set in algebra, or the construction of the Stone–Čech compactification of a topological space in topology.

In category theory, the coproduct, or categorical sum, is a construction which includes as examples the disjoint union of sets and of topological spaces, the free product of groups, and the direct sum of modules and vector spaces. The coproduct of a family of objects is essentially the "least specific" object to which each object in the family admits a morphism. It is the category-theoretic dual notion to the categorical product, which means the definition is the same as the product but with all arrows reversed. Despite this seemingly innocuous change in the name and notation, coproducts can be and typically are dramatically different from products.

In mathematics, particularly category theory, a representable functor is a certain functor from an arbitrary category into the category of sets. Such functors give representations of an abstract category in terms of known structures allowing one to utilize, as much as possible, knowledge about the category of sets in other settings.

In mathematics, the derived categoryD(A) of an abelian category A is a construction of homological algebra introduced to refine and in a certain sense to simplify the theory of derived functors defined on A. The construction proceeds on the basis that the objects of D(A) should be chain complexes in A, with two such chain complexes considered isomorphic when there is a chain map that induces an isomorphism on the level of homology of the chain complexes. Derived functors can then be defined for chain complexes, refining the concept of hypercohomology. The definitions lead to a significant simplification of formulas otherwise described (not completely faithfully) by complicated spectral sequences.

In mathematics, especially in category theory, a closed monoidal category is a category that is both a monoidal category and a closed category in such a way that the structures are compatible.

In the branch of mathematics called homological algebra, a t-structure is a way to axiomatize the properties of an abelian subcategory of a derived category. A t-structure on consists of two subcategories of a triangulated category or stable infinity category which abstract the idea of complexes whose cohomology vanishes in positive, respectively negative, degrees. There can be many distinct t-structures on the same category, and the interplay between these structures has implications for algebra and geometry. The notion of a t-structure arose in the work of Beilinson, Bernstein, Deligne, and Gabber on perverse sheaves.

Fibred categories are abstract entities in mathematics used to provide a general framework for descent theory. They formalise the various situations in geometry and algebra in which inverse images of objects such as vector bundles can be defined. As an example, for each topological space there is the category of vector bundles on the space, and for every continuous map from a topological space X to another topological space Y is associated the pullback functor taking bundles on Y to bundles on X. Fibred categories formalise the system consisting of these categories and inverse image functors. Similar setups appear in various guises in mathematics, in particular in algebraic geometry, which is the context in which fibred categories originally appeared. Fibered categories are used to define stacks, which are fibered categories with "descent". Fibrations also play an important role in categorical semantics of type theory, and in particular that of dependent type theories.

This is a glossary of properties and concepts in category theory in mathematics.

In category theory, a Kleisli category is a category naturally associated to any monad T. It is equivalent to the category of free T-algebras. The Kleisli category is one of two extremal solutions to the question Does every monad arise from an adjunction? The other extremal solution is the Eilenberg–Moore category. Kleisli categories are named for the mathematician Heinrich Kleisli.

In category theory, monoidal functors are functors between monoidal categories which preserve the monoidal structure. More specifically, a monoidal functor between two monoidal categories consists of a functor between the categories, along with two coherence maps—a natural transformation and a morphism that preserve monoidal multiplication and unit, respectively. Mathematicians require these coherence maps to satisfy additional properties depending on how strictly they want to preserve the monoidal structure; each of these properties gives rise to a slightly different definition of monoidal functors

In category theory, a branch of mathematics, a presheaf on a category is a functor . If is the poset of open sets in a topological space, interpreted as a category, then one recovers the usual notion of presheaf on a topological space.

In mathematics, Kan complexes and Kan fibrations are part of the theory of simplicial sets. Kan fibrations are the fibrations of the standard model category structure on simplicial sets and are therefore of fundamental importance. Kan complexes are the fibrant objects in this model category. The name is in honor of Daniel Kan.

In algebraic geometry and algebraic topology, branches of mathematics, A1homotopy theory or motivic homotopy theory is a way to apply the techniques of algebraic topology, specifically homotopy, to algebraic varieties and, more generally, to schemes. The theory is due to Fabien Morel and Vladimir Voevodsky. The underlying idea is that it should be possible to develop a purely algebraic approach to homotopy theory by replacing the unit interval [0, 1], which is not an algebraic variety, with the affine line A1, which is. The theory has seen spectacular applications such as Voevodsky's construction of the derived category of mixed motives and the proof of the Milnor and Bloch-Kato conjectures.

In algebraic geometry, a prestackF over a category C equipped with some Grothendieck topology is a category together with a functor p: FC satisfying a certain lifting condition and such that locally isomorphic objects are isomorphic. A stack is a prestack with effective descents, meaning local objects may be patched together to become a global object.

In category theory, a branch of mathematics, the density theorem states that every presheaf of sets is a colimit of representable presheaves in a canonical way.

References