U-closure operators and compactness (Q2432568): Difference between revisions

In this paper the authors introduce a notion of compactness in the following way: Let \({\mathcal A}\) be a category, \(\chi \) a finitely complete category with a proper \((\varepsilon ,{\mathcal M})\)-factorization structure for morphisms and \(U:{\mathcal A}\rightarrow \chi \) a functor. A pair \((A,m)\) with \(A\) object of \({\mathcal A}\) and \(m:M\rightarrow UA\) in \({\mathcal M}\) will be called a \(U\)-subobject of \(A\) (by \(sub_{U}A\) will be denoted the class of all \(U\)-subobjects of \(A).\) A \(U\)-closure operator \(c\) of \({\mathcal A}\) (with respect to \((\varepsilon ,{\mathcal M})\)) is a family of functions \(\{c_{A}:sub_{U}A\rightarrow sub_{U}A,A\in {\mathcal A}\}\) with the following properties that hold for each \(A\in {\mathcal A}\) and \(U\)-subobjects \(m\) and \(n\) of \(A:\) (a) \(m\leq c_{A}(m);\) (b) \(m\leq n\Rightarrow c_{A}(m)\leq c_{A}(n);\) (c) For each \(A\)-morphism \(A\rightarrow B,\) \(Uf(c_{A}(m))\leq c_{B}(Uf(m)).\) Given a \(U\)-closure operator \(c\) on \({\mathcal A},\) we say that a \(U\)-subobject \(m\) of an object \(A\) is \(c\)-closed (\(c\)-dense) if \(m=c_{A}(m)\) (\(m=c^{A}(m),\) equivalently, \(c_{A}(m)=id_{UA}\)). An \({\mathcal A}\)-morphism \(f:A\rightarrow B\) is called \(c\)-dense if \((Uf)(id_{UA})\) is \(c\)-dense. Let \(c\) be a \(U\)-closure operator \(c\) on \({\mathcal A}.\) An \({\mathcal A}\)-object \(A\) is called \(c\)-compact if the projection \(P_{B}:A\times B\rightarrow B\) is \(c\)-preserving for every \({\mathcal A}\)-object \(B.\) \(\text{Comp}(c)\) will denote the class of all \({\mathcal A}\)-objects that are \(c\)-compact. Even though this new notion shows very similar properties to compactness with respect to the classical notion of categorical closure operator, in general the two concepts are different. Examples are provided.