Operadic categories and décalage (Q2217522)

\textit{Operads} originated in [\textit{J. M. Boardman} and \textit{R. M. Vogt}, Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 74, 1117--1122 (1968; Zbl 0165.26204)] under the name ``category of operators in standard form'', their modern name and modern development having begun with [\textit{J. P. May}, The geometry of iterated loop spaces. Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer-Verlag (1972; Zbl 0244.55009)]. As the use of operads grew out, their re-expression in various more abstract ways emerged [\textit{J. C. Baez} and \textit{J. Dolan}, Adv. Math. 135, No. 2, 145--206 (1998; Zbl 0909.18006); \textit{A. Joyal}, Lect. Notes Math. 1234, 126--159 (1986; Zbl 0612.18002); \textit{G. M. Kelly}, Repr. Theory Appl. Categ. 2005, No. 13, 1--13 (2005; Zbl 1082.18009)], leading to a rich profusion of operad-like structures. Various authors have proposed unifying frameworks to bring order to this proliferation, one such framework being that of \textit{operadic categories} [\textit{M. Batanin} and \textit{M. Markl}, Adv. Math. 285, 1630--1687 (2015; Zbl 1360.18009)], which inspired \textit{S. Lack} [High. Struct. 2, No. 1, 1--29 (2018; Zbl 1410.18012)] to draw a intimate correspondence between operadic categories and the \textit{skew-monoidal categories} of \textit{K. Szlachányi} [Adv. Math. 231, No. 3--4, 1694--1730 (2012; Zbl 1283.18006)]. This paper gives another reconfiguration of the definition of operadic category linking it to the (upper) \textit{décalage} construction. An \textit{operadic category} consists of the following entities. \begin{itemize} \item a small category \(\mathcal{C}\) with a chosen terminal object in each connected component; \item a cardinality functor \(\left\vert -\right\vert :\mathcal{C}\rightarrow\mathcal{S}\) into the category of finite ordinals and arbitrary mappings; \item an operation assigning to every \(f:Y\rightarrow X\) in \(\mathcal{C}\) and \(i\in\left\vert X\right\vert \) an abstract fiber \(f^{-1}\left( i\right) \in\mathcal{C}\), functorially in \(Y\). \end{itemize} There are two main aspects to the close relationship between operadic categories and décalage. The first connection comes from the fact that the décalage construction on categories underlies a comonad \textsf{D} on \(\mathcal{C}\mathrm{at}\), whose coalgebras may be identified with categories endowed with a choice of terminal object in each connected component. The second connection arises through the functorial assignment of abstract fibers \(f\mapsto f^{-1}\left( i\right) \) in an operadic category with functoriality claiming that, for a fixed \(X\in\) \(\mathcal{C}\) and \(i\in\left\vert X\right\vert \), this assignment is the action on objects of a functor \(\varphi_{X,i}:\mathcal{C}/X\rightarrow\mathcal{C}\), so that the totality of the abstract fibers is to be expressed via a single functor \[ \varphi:\sum_{\substack{X\in\mathcal{C}\\ i\in\left\vert X\right\vert}}\mathcal{C}/X\rightarrow\mathcal{C} \] The domain of this functor is clearly related to the décalage of \(\mathcal{C}\), and the authors explain it in terms of a \textit{modified décalage} construction on categories equipped with a functor to \(\mathcal{S}\) but that the operadic category is unary, where an operadic category is called \textit{unary} if each \(\left\vert X\right\vert \) is a singleton. A synopsis of the paper consisting of seven sections goes as follows. \S 2 recalls Batanin and Markl's definition of operadic category [\textit{M. Batanin} and \textit{M. Markl}, Adv. Math. 285, 1630--1687 (2015; Zbl 1360.18009)]. \S 3 recalls the décalage construction, establishing the first of the two links with the notion of operadic category. \S 4 establishes the first main theorem characterizing unary operadic categories in terms of décalage. \S 5 is engaged in describing the modified décalage construction required to capture general operadic categories. \S 6 and \S 7 establish the second and third main theorems giving the characterization of lax-operadic categories and, finally, of operadic categories themselves.