small object argument
In mathematics, especially in category theory, Quillen’s small object argument, when applicable, constructs a factorization of a morphism in a functorial way. In practice, it can be used to show some class of morphisms constitutes a weak factorization system in the theory of model categories.
The argument was introduced by Quillen to construct a model structure on the category of (reasonable) topological spaces.D. G. Quillen. Homotopical algebra. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, No. 43. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin, 1967 The original argument was later refined by Garner.Richard Garner, Understanding the small object argument, Applied Categorical Structures 17 3 247-285 (2009) [arXiv:0712.0724, doi:10.1007/s10485-008-9137-4]
Statement
Let be a category that has all small colimits. We say an object in it is compact with respect to an ordinal if commutes with an -filterted colimit. In practice, we fix and simply say an object is compact if it is so with respect to that fixed .
If is a class of morphismms, we write for the class of morphisms that satisfy the left lifting property with respect to . Similarly, we write for the right lifting property. Then
{{math_theorem|math_statement={{harvnb|Cisinski|2023|loc=Proposition 2.1.9.}}{{harvnb|Riehl|2014|loc=Theorem 12.2.2.}} Let be a class of morphisms in . If the source (domain) of each morphism in is compact, then each morphism in admits a functorial factorization where are in .}}
Example: presheaf
Here is a simple example of how the argument works in the case of the category of presheaves on some small category.{{harvnb|Cisinski|2023|loc=Example 2.1.11. Second method}}
Let denote the set of monomorphisms of the form , a quotient of a representable presheaf. Then can be shown to be equal to the class of monomorphisms. Then the small object argument says: each presheaf morphism can be factored as where is a monomorphism and in ; i.e., is a morphism having the right lifting property with respect to monomorphisms.
Proof
{{expand section|date=March 2025}}
For now, see.{{harvnb|Riehl|2014|loc=§ 12.2. and § 12.5.}} But roughly the construction is a sort of successive approximation.
See also
References
{{reflist}}
- Mark Hovey, Model categories, volume 63 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, American Mathematical Society, (2007),
- Emily Riehl, Categorical Homotopy Theory, Cambridge University Press (2014) [http://www.math.jhu.edu/~eriehl/cathtpy.pdf]
- {{cite book |last=Cisinski |first=Denis-Charles |author-link=Denis-Charles Cisinski |url=https://cisinski.app.uni-regensburg.de/CatLR.pdf |title=Higher Categories and Homotopical Algebra |date=2023|publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1108473200 |location= |language=en |authorlink=}}