symmetric monoidal (∞,1)-category of spectra
The notion of $\infty$-action is the notion of action (module/representation) in homotopy theory/(∞,1)-category theory, from algebra to higher algebra.
Notably a monoid object in an (∞,1)-category $A$ may act on another object $N$ by a morphism $A \otimes N \to N$ which satisfies an action property up to coherent higher homotopy.
If the $\infty$-action is suitably linear in some sense, this is also referred to as ∞-representation.
We discuss the actions of ∞-groups in an (∞,1)-topos. (For groupoid ∞-actions see there.)
Let $\mathbf{H}$ be an (∞,1)-topos.
Let $G \in Grp(\mathbf{H})$ be an group object in an (∞,1)-category in $\mathbf{H}$, hence a homotopy-simplicial object on $\mathbf{H}$ of the form
satisfying the groupoidal Segal conditions.
hence an ∞-group.
An action (or $\infty$-action, for emphasis) of $G$ on an object $V \in \mathbf{H}$ is a groupoid object in an (∞,1)-category which is equivalent to one of the form
such that the projection maps
constitute a morphism of groupoid objects $V\sslash G \to *\sslash G$.
The (∞,1)-category of such actions is the slice of groupoid objects over $*\sslash G$ on these objects.
There is an equivalent formulation which does not invoke the notion of groupoid object in an (∞,1)-category explicitly. This is based on the fundamental fact, discussed at ∞-group, that delooping constitutes an equivalence of (∞,1)-categories
form group objects in an (∞,1)-category to the (∞,1)-category of connected pointed objects in $\mathbf{H}$.
Every $\infty$-action $\rho : V \times G \to V$ has a classifying morphism $\mathbf{c}_\rho : V \sslash G \to \mathbf{B}G$ in that there is a fiber sequence
such that $\rho$ is the $G$-action on $V$ regarded as the corresponding $G$-principal ∞-bundle modulated by $\overline{\rho}$.
This allows to characterize $\infty$-actions in the following convenient way. See (NSS) for a detailed discussion.
For $V \in \mathbf{H}$ an object, a $G$-$\infty$-action $\rho$ on $V$ is a fiber sequence in $\mathbf{H}$ of the form
The (∞,1)-category of $G$-actions in $\mathbf{H}$ is the slice (∞,1)-topos of $\mathbf{H}$ over $\mathbf{B}G$:
A $\rho \in Act_{\mathbf{H}}(G)$ corresponds to a morphism denoted $\overline{\rho} : V\sslash G \to \mathbf{B}G$ in $\mathbf{H}$ hence to an object $\overline{\rho} \in \mathbf{H}_{/\mathbf{B}G}$.
A morphism $\phi : \rho_1 \to \rho_2$ in $Act_{\mathbf{H}}(G)$ corresponds to a diagram
in $\mathbf{H}$.
The bundle $\overline{\rho}$ in def. 2 is the universal $\rho$-associated $V$-fiber ∞-bundle.
In the form of def. 2 $\infty$-actions have a simple formulation in the internal language of homotopy type theory: a $G$-action on $V$ is simply a dependent type over $\mathbf{B}G$ with fiber $V$:
We discuss some basic representation theoretic notions of $\infty$-actions.
In summary, for $\mathbf{c} : \mathbf{B}G \vdash V(\mathbf{c}) : Type$ an action of $G$ on $V$, we have
the dependent sum
is the quotient $V\sslash G$ of $V$ by $G$;
is the collection of invariants (homotopy fixed points) of the action.
And for $V_1, V_2$ two actions we have
the dependent product over the dependent function type
is the collection of $G$-homomorphisms ($G$-equivariant maps);
the dependent sum over the dependent function type
is the quotient of all functions $V_1 \to V_2$ by the conjugation action of $G$.
The invariants (homotopy fixed points) of a $G$-$\infty$-action are the sections of the morphism $V \sslash G \to \mathbf{B}G$,
where $\prod_{\mathbf{B}G \to *} : \mathbf{H}_{/\mathbf{B}G} \to \mathbf{H}$ is the direct image of the base change geometric morphism.
In homotopy type theory syntax for
an action as in remark 3, its type of invariants is the dependent product
From def. 2 we read off:
The quotient of a $G$-action
is the dependent sum
By def. 2, and basic facts disussed at slice (∞,1)-topos, the (∞,1)-category $Act_{\mathbf{H}}(G)$ is an (∞,1)-topos and in particular is a cartesian closed (∞,1)-category.
We describe here aspects of the cartesian product and internal hom of $\infty$-actions given this way. The following statements are essentially immediate consequences of basic homotopy type theory.
For $(V_1, \rho_1), (V_2, \rho_2) \in Act(G)$ their cartesian product is a $G$-action on the product of $V_1$ with $V_2$ in $\mathbf{H}$.
Let
be the principal ∞-bundles exhibiting the two actions.
Along the lines of the discussion at locally cartesian closed category we find that $(V_1, \rho_1) \times (V_2, \rho_2) \in Act(G)$ is given in $\mathbf{H}$ by the (∞,1)-pullback
in $\mathbf{H}$, with the product action being exhibited by the principal ∞-bundle
Here the homotopy fiber on the left is identified as $V_1 \times V_2$ by using that (∞,1)-limits commute over each other.
For $\rho_1, \rho_2 \in Act(G)$ their internal hom $[\rho_1, \rho_2] \in Act_{\mathbf{H}}(G)$ is a $G$-action on the internal hom $[V_1, V_2] \in \mathbf{H}$.
Taking fibers
is the inverse image of an etale geometric morphism, hence is a cartesian closed functor (see the Examples there for details). Therefore it preserves exponential objects:
The above internal-hom action
encodes the conjugation action of $G$ on $[V_1, V_2]$ by pre- and post-composition of functions $V_1 \to V_2$ with the $G$-action on $V_1$ and on $V_2$, respectively.
See also at Conjugation actions below.
The invariant, def. 3 of the conjugation action, prop. 3 are the action homomorphisms. (See also at Examples - Conjugation actions.)
Therefore
For $\bar \rho_i : V_i \sslash G \to \mathbf{B}G$ two $G$-actions, the object of homomorphisms is
In the syntax of homotopy type theory
See at stabilizer subgroup.
Let $\mathbf{H}$ be an (∞,1)-topos and let $G \in Grp(\mathbf{H})$ be an ∞-group in $\mathbf{H}$.
The following lists some fundamental classes of examples of $\infty$-actions of $G$, and of other canonical $\infty$-groups. By the discussion above these actions may be given by the classifying morphisms.
Consider the étale geometric morphism
For $V \in \mathbf{H}$ any object, the trivial action of $G$ on $V$ is $p^* V \in Act_{\mathbf{H}}(G)$, exhibited by the split fiber sequence
The right $\infty$-action of $G$ on itself is given by the fiber sequence
which exhibits $\mathbf{B}G$ as the delooping of $G$.
The fiber sequence
given by the free loop space object $\mathcal{L}\mathbf{B}G$ exhibits the higher adjoint action of $G$ on itself:
For $V \in \mathbf{H}$ any object, there is a canonical action of the internal automorphism infinity-group $\mathbf{Aut}(V)$:
We discuss the simple case of the cartesian closed category of $G$-sets (G-permutation representations) for $G$ an ordinary discrete group as a simple illustration of the internal hom of $\infty$-actions, prop. 3.
This example spells out everything completely in components:
Let $\mathbf{H} =$ ∞Grpd, let $G \in Grp(\infty Grpd)$ be an ordinary discrete group and let $V, \Sigma, X$ be sets equipped with $G$-action (permutation representations).
In this case $[\Sigma,X]$ is simply the set of functions $f : \Sigma \to X$ of sets. Its $G$-action as the internal hom of $G$-actions given, for every $g \in G$ and $\sigma \in \Sigma$, by
(where we write generically $g(-)$ for the given action on the set specified implicitly by the type of the argument).
Hence a morphism of $G$-actions
is a function $\phi$ of the underlying sets such that for all $V \in V$, $g \in G$ and all $\sigma \in \Sigma$ we have
On the other hand, a morphism of actions
is a function of the underlying sets, such that for all these terms we have
which is equivalent to
Comparison of (1) and (2) shows that the identification
establishes a natural equivalence (a natural bijection of sets in this case)
showing how $[\Sigma,X]$ is indeed the internal hom of $G$-actions.
Generally, for $G$ a discrete ∞-group we have an equivalence of (∞,1)-categories
(by the (∞,1)-Grothendieck construction), and hence
is the (∞,1)-category of ∞-permutation representations.
Let $X \in \mathbf{H}$ be a moduli infinity-stack for field in a gauge theory or sigma-model. Let $\Sigma \in \mathbf{H}$ be the corresponding spacetime or worldvolume, respectively.
We have the automorphism action, def. 7
The slice $\mathbf{H}_{/\mathbf{Aut}(\Sigma)} = Act_{\mathbf{H}}(\mathbf{Aut}(\Sigma))$ is the context of types which are generally covariant over $\Sigma$.
On $X$ consider the trivial $\mathbf{Aut}(\Sigma)$-action, def. 6. Then the internal-hom action of prop. 3
is the configuration space of fields on $\Sigma$ modulo automorphisms (diffeomorphisms, in smooth cohesion) of $\Sigma$. This is the configuration space of “generally covariant” field theory on $\Sigma$.
Let $G, A \in Grp(\mathbf{H})$ be 0-truncated group objects and let $\rho$ be an action of $G$ on $A$ by group homomorphisms. This is equivalently an action of $G$ on $\mathbf{B}A$, hence a fiber sequence
The corresponding action groupoid $(\mathbf{B}A)\sslash G \simeq \mathbf{B}( G \ltimes A)$ is the delooping of the corresponding semidirect product group.
For $G \in Grp(\mathbf{H})$ the $\infty$-category of $G$-modules is
the stabilization of the $\infty$-category of $G$-actions.
For $G$ and $A$ 0-truncated groups, $A$ an abelian group with $G$-module structure, the semidirect product group $G \ltimes A$ from above exhibits $A$ as a $G$-module in the sense of def. 8.
See Lie infinity-algebroid representation.
In the context of geometrically discrete ∞-groupoids a model category structure presenting the (∞,1)-category of $\infty$-actions is the Borel model structure (DDK 80).
action, $\infty$-action
representation theory and equivariant cohomology in terms of (∞,1)-topos theory/homotopy type theory:
homotopy type theory | representation theory |
---|---|
pointed connected context $\mathbf{B}G$ | ∞-group $G$ |
dependent type | ∞-action/∞-representation |
dependent sum along $\mathbf{B}G \to \ast$ | coinvariants/homotopy quotient |
context extension along $\mathbf{B}G \to \ast$ | trivial representation |
dependent product along $\mathbf{B}G \to \ast$ | homotopy invariants/∞-group cohomology |
dependent product of internal hom along $\mathbf{B}G \to \ast$ | equivariant cohomology |
dependent sum along $\mathbf{B}G \to \mathbf{B}H$ | induced representation |
context extension along $\mathbf{B}G \to \mathbf{B}H$ | |
dependent product along $\mathbf{B}G \to \mathbf{B}H$ | coinduced representation |
spectrum object in context $\mathbf{B}G$ | spectrum with G-action (naive G-spectrum) |
Actions of A-∞ algebras in some symmetric monoidal (∞,1)-category are discussed in section 4.2 of
Aspects of actions of ∞-groups in an ∞-topos in the contect of associated ∞-bundles are discussed in section I 4.1 of
For $\mathbf{H}= \infty Grpd$ the statement that homotopy types over $B G$ are equivalently $G$-infinity-actions is (via the Borel model structure) due to
This is mentioned for instance as exercise 4.2in
Closely related discussion of homotopy fiber sequences and homotopy action but in terms of Segal spaces is in section 5 of
There, conditions are given for a morphism $A_\bullet \to B_\bullet$ to a reduced Segal space to have a fixed homotopy fiber, and hence encode an action of the loop group of $B$ on that fiber.
That $G$-actions for $G$ a topological group in the sense of G-spaces in equivariant homotopy theory (and hence with $G$ not regarded as the geometrically discrete ∞-group of its underying homotopy type ) are equivalently objects in the slice (∞,1)-topos over $\mathbf{B}G$ is Elmendorf's theorem together with the fact, highlighted in this context in
that
is therefore the slice of the $\infty$-topos over the global orbit category by $\mathbf{B}G$.
Rezk-global equivariant homotopy theory:
cohesive (∞,1)-topos | its (∞,1)-site | base (∞,1)-topos | its (∞,1)-site |
---|---|---|---|
global equivariant homotopy theory $PSh_\infty(Glo)$ | global equivariant indexing category $Glo$ | ∞Grpd $\simeq PSh_\infty(\ast)$ | point |
… sliced over terminal orbispace: $PSh_\infty(Glo)_{/\mathcal{N}}$ | $Glo_{/\mathcal{N}}$ | orbispaces $PSh_\infty(Orb)$ | global orbit category |
… sliced over $\mathbf{B}G$: $PSh_\infty(Glo)_{/\mathbf{B}G}$ | $Glo_{/\mathbf{B}G}$ | $G$-equivariant homotopy theory of G-spaces $L_{we} G Top \simeq PSh_\infty(Orb_G)$ | $G$-orbit category $Orb_{/\mathbf{B}G} = Orb_G$ |
See at equivariant homotopy theory for more references along these lines.