Virtual concepts in the theory of accessible categories (Q2674544): Difference between revisions

The notion of locally presentable enriched category had appeared quite early in the literature [\textit{G. M. Kelly}, Cah. Topologie Géom. Différ. Catégoriques 23, 3--42 (1982; Zbl 0538.18006)] (at about the same time as the monograph on enriched categories [\textit{G. M. Kelly}, Basic concepts of enriched category theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. London: London Mathematical Society (1982; Zbl 0478.18005)]). However, more than a decade passed since, until the related notion of accessibility was considered in the enriched context [\textit{F. Borceaux} and \textit{C. Quinteriro}, Bull. Aust. Math. Soc. 54, No. 3, 489--501 (1996; Zbl 0881.18011); \textit{F. Borceux} et al., Theory Appl. Categ. 4, 47--72 (1998; Zbl 0981.18006)]. The present paper enhances the results previously obtained by Borceux-Quinteiro-Rosický in [loc. cit.] on enriched accessible categories. Additionally, new proofs are often provided to these (strongly influenced, in the reviewer's opinion, by [\textit{G. M. Kelly}, Cah. Topologie Géom. Différ. Catégoriques 23, 3--42 (1982; Zbl 0538.18006); \textit{G. M. Kelly} and \textit{V. Schmitt}, Theory Appl. Categ. 14, 399--423 (2005; Zbl 1082.18004)]. To fix the notations, let \(\mathcal V\) be a symmetric monoidal closed category, locally presentable as a closed category, and let \(\alpha\) be a regular cardinal, larger than the one controlling the degree of presentability in \(\mathcal V\). A \(\mathcal V\)-category \(\mathcal A\) is \(\alpha\)-accessible if it has \(\alpha\)-flat colimits and there is some small subcategory \(\mathcal C\) consisting of \(\alpha\)-presentable objects such that every object of \(\mathcal A\) is an \(\alpha\)-flat colimit of objects of \(\mathcal C\). A \(\mathcal V\)-category \(\mathcal A\) is conically \(\alpha\)-accessible if in the above, the \(\alpha\)-flat colimits are replaced by conically \(\alpha\)-filtered colimits and the \(\alpha\)-presentable objects by conically \(\alpha\)-presentable objects. How are the two notion related, and related to ordinarily accessibility? If the \(\mathcal V\)-category is complete or \(\alpha\)-cocomplete, then \(\alpha\)-accessibility coincides with conically \(\alpha\)-accessibility, and, in particular, implies (enriched) locally \(\alpha\)-presentability. Ordinarily accessibility, together with \(\alpha\)-flat cocompleteness and presentability of each object, implies enriched accessibility. A similar result holds for conically accessibility. More important, each \(\alpha\)-accessible \(\mathcal V\)-category is simultaneously \(\beta\)-accessible, conically \(\beta\)-accessible and ordinarily \(\beta\)-accessible for every cardinal \(\beta\) sharply greater than \(\alpha\); the novelty in the proof here is the independence of \(\beta\) on the \(\mathcal V\)-category in question. The main results of the paper, developed in Section 4, relate enriched accessibility to virtual reflectivity and orthogonality conditions. Quoting from the paper: ``The word \textit{virtual} here refers to something that ``lives'' in the free completion \(\mathcal P^{\dagger} \mathcal A\) of a \(\mathcal V\)-category \(\mathcal A\)''. Theorem 4.32 shows that for a full subcategory \(\mathcal A\) of an accessible \(\mathcal V\)-category \(\mathcal K\), the following are equivalent: (i) \(\mathcal A\) is accessible and so is the embedding functor \(F:\mathcal A \to \mathcal K\); (ii) \(\mathcal A\) is virtually reflective and \(F\) is accessible; (iii) \(\mathcal A\) is a virtual orthogonality class. Virtual reflectiveness refers to the functor \(\widehat F X = \mathcal K(X,F-)\) being small for each \(X \in \mathcal K\) (compare with being representable in case of genuine reflectiveness), while a virtual orthogonality class is a full subcategory of \(\mathcal K\) spanned by objects orthogonal to a family of arrows of the form \(ZX \to P\), where \(Z\) is the embedding of \(\mathcal K\) into its free completion \(\mathcal P^{\dagger}\mathcal K\). Turning to conically accessible \(\mathcal V\)-categories, the authors obtain in Theorem 4.36 a similar characterisation. In particular, conical accessibility of a full subcategory can be recognised at the level of the underlying ordinary category. In the last section of the paper it is proved that the \(2\)-category of (conically) accessible \(\mathcal V\)-categories, (conically) accessible \(\mathcal V\)-functors, and \(\mathcal V\)-natural transformations has all flexible limits and are computed as in \({\mathcal V}{-}{\mathbf{CAT}}\). The corresponding result for ordinary categories is well-known [\textit{M. Makkai} and \textit{R. Paré}, Accessible categories: The foundations of categorical model theory. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (1989; Zbl 0703.03042)].