One of the universal constructions in (∞,1)-category theory:
the notion of limit generalizes from category theory to quasi-categories straightforwardly using the generalization of over category and terminal object to over quasi-category and terminal object in a quasi-category.
For and two quasi-categories and a morphism of quasi-categories, the limit over is, if it exists, the quasi-categorical terminal object in the over quasi-category :
A quasi-categorical colimit is accordingly an limit in the opposite quasi-category.
Let and be categories enriched in Kan complexes and a morphism of Kan-enriched categories (i.e. an SimpSet-functor). Then the homotopy limit of (computed for instance as described at weighted limit) coincides with the quasi-categorical limit of under the embedding of simplicial categories into quasi-categories.
This is theorem 4.2.4.1, p. 214 in Lurie’s book (see below).
Limits and colimits over a (∞,1)-functor with values in the (∞,1)-category ∞-Grpd of ∞-groupoids may be reformulation in terms of the universal fibration of (infinity,1)-categories.
Let ∞-Grpd be the (∞,1)-category of ∞-groupoids. Let the (∞,1)-functor be the universal ∞-groupoid fibration whose fiber over the object denoting some -groupoid is that very -groupoid.
Then let be any ∞-groupoid and
an (∞,1)-functor. Recall that the coCartesian fibration classified by is the pullback of the universal fibration of (∞,1)-categories along F:
Let the assumptions be as above. Then:
The colimit of is equivalent to :
The limit of is equivalent to the (∞,1)-groupoid of sections of
The statement for the colimit is corollary 3.3.4.6 in HTT. The statement for the limit is corollary 3.3.3.4.
If instead of ∞-Grpd the target is the (∞,1)-category of (∞,1)-categories then the latter statement is true with the -category of all sections replaced by (∞,1)-category of cartesian sections.
The definition of limit in quasi-categories is due to
A brief survey is on page 159 of
A detailed account is in definition 1.2.13.4, p. 48 in