Understanding the small object argument (Q5891786): Difference between revisions

Given a category \(\mathcal{C}\), a \textit{strong factorisation system} \((\mathcal{L,R})\) consists of two classes of maps \(\mathcal{L}\) and \(\mathcal{R}\) in \(\mathcal{C}\), closed under composition with isomorphisms and satisfying \textit{factorisation} and \textit{orthogonality} axioms [\textit{P. J. Freyd} and \textit{G. M. Kelly}, J. pure appl. Algebra 2, 169--191 (1972; Zbl 0257.18005)]. The notion of \textit{weak factorisation system} [\textit{A. K. Bousfield}, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 9, 207--220 (1977; Zbl 0361.18001)] is obtained by weakening the above axioms: we require \(\mathcal{L}\) and \(\mathcal{R}\) to be closed under retracts in the arrow category \(\mathcal{C}^2\), rather than closed under isomorphisms, and we drop the uniqueness of the existence of a diagonal fill-in in the orthogonality axiom. In the case of a well-behaved category \(\mathcal{C}\), it is possible to generate a strong factorisation system from any set of maps \(J\in \mathcal{C}^2\). In the corresponding theory for weak factorisation systems, we must also have factorisation of maps, and for this, we apply a transfinite functorial construction known as \textit{the small object argument}, introduced in [\textit{D. G. Quillen}, Homotopical algebra. Lecture Notes in Mathematics. 43. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag (1967; Zbl 0168.20903)] and widely used in the theory of model categories and, in particular, cofibrantly generated model categories. The small object argument does not possess the universal property, does not converge, and it does not seem to be related to other transfinite constructions in categorical algebra. In this paper, the author gives an algebraic refinement of the small object argument in terms of natural weak factorisation systems, see [\textit{M. Grandis} and \textit{W. Tholen}, Arch. Math., Brno 42, No. 4, 397--408 (2006; Zbl 1164.18300)], which rectifies each of these three deficiencies.