model category, model -category
Definitions
Morphisms
Universal constructions
Refinements
Producing new model structures
Presentation of -categories
Model structures
for -groupoids
on chain complexes/model structure on cosimplicial abelian groups
related by the Dold-Kan correspondence
for equivariant -groupoids
for rational -groupoids
for rational equivariant -groupoids
for -groupoids
for -groups
for -algebras
general -algebras
specific -algebras
for stable/spectrum objects
for -categories
for stable -categories
for -operads
for -categories
for -sheaves / -stacks
homotopy theory, (∞,1)-category theory, homotopy type theory
flavors: stable, equivariant, rational, p-adic, proper, geometric, cohesive, directed…
models: topological, simplicial, localic, …
see also algebraic topology
Introductions
Definitions
Paths and cylinders
Homotopy groups
Basic facts
Theorems
A simplicial homotopy is a homotopy in the classical model structure on simplicial sets. It can also be defined combinatorially; in that form one can define a homotopy 2-cell between morphisms of simplicial objects in any category .
SSet has a cylinder functor given by cartesian product with the standard 1-simplex, . (In fact, one can define simplicial cylinders, , more generally, for example for being a simplicial object in an cocomplete category ,(see below).)
Therefore for two morphisms of simplicial sets, a homotopy is a morphism such that the diagram
commutes.
Remark: Since in the standard model structure on simplicial sets every simplicial set is cofibrant, this indeed defines left homotopies.
Given morphisms of simplicial objects in any category , a simplicial homotopy is a family of morphisms, , of , such that , and
Note that we did not explicitly say what should be when , but if we look at the rule for , we see this requires , which is the relevant compatibility condition.
If we use the cylinder convention, this is equivalent to specifying a homotopy . Define , , and for all . The map as seen in the cylinder definition is then formed by the universal property of coproducts. In particular, the set has elements which can be presented as a string of length of the form . The map is the restriction of to the string that contains exactly number of ‘s in it.
The above formulae give one of the, at least, two forms of the combinatorial specification of a homotopy between and . (When trying to construct a specific homotopy using a combinatorial form, check which convention is being used!) The two forms correspond to different conventions such as saying that this is a homotopy from to , or reversing the labelling of the .
It is fairly easy to prove that the combinatorial definition of homotopy agrees with the one via the cylinder both for simplicial sets and for simplicial objects in any finitely cocomplete category, . This uses the fact that the category of simplicial objects in a cocomplete category, , has copowers with finite simplicial sets and hence in particular with . For a simplicial set and a simplicial object in , the tensoring is done levelwise using . Here, denote the usual coproduct tensoring over sets for any category .
Tim: With only my own resources available, I was unable to find them so was hoping someone kind would come up with them. They derive from the coend formulae/Kan extension formulae using some combinatorics to discuss the indexing sets. I think Quillen gave some form of them, but have not got a copy of HA. I needed them recently and could not find them in any of the usual sources, and did not manage to work them out using the Kan extension idea either (Help please anyone). We could do with those formulae or with a reference to them at least.
In the case of the category of (not necessarily abelian) groups, the combinatorial definition equals the one via cylinder only if the role of “cylinder” for a group is played by a simplicial object in the category of groups which in degree equals the free product of copies of , indexed by the set (noted by Swan and quoted in exercise 8.3.5 of Weibel: Homological algebra).
Tim Porter: Perhaps we need an explicit description of copowers in simplicial objects also. I pointed out in an edit above that the combinatorial description is much more general than just for simplicial objects in an abelian category.
Can specific references to Swan be given, anyone?
Zoran Škoda: I agree that one should talk about copowers etc.
Anonymous Coward: With exercise 8.3.5 of Weibel in mind, what is the notion of “cylinder” meant in the assertion “the combinatorial definition of homotopy agrees with the one via the cylinder both for simplicial sets and for simplicial objects in any finitely cocomplete category” for a general finitely cocomplete category?
Tim Porter: I have transferred this question to the nForum where it will be easier for others to reply. In the meantime some indication is given in Kamps and Porter as referenced below. I myself do not quite understand your question as it is presently stated, but this may be that I am too near to the subject matter to see the difficulty.
Since Kan complexes are precisely the fibrant objects with respect to the standard model structure on simplicial sets this follows from general statements about homotopy in model categories.
The following is a direct proof.
We first show that the homotopy between points is an equivalence relation when is a Kan complex.
We identify in the following and with vertices in the image of these maps.
-reflexivity- For every vertex , the degenerate 1-simplex has, by the simplicial identities, 0-faces and .
Therefore the morphism that takes the unique non-degenerate 1-simplex in to constitutes a homotopy from to itself.
-transitivity- let and in be 1-cells. Together they determine a map from the horn to ,
By the Kan complex property there is an extension of this morphism through the 2-simplex
If we again identify with its image (the image of its unique non-degenerate 2-cell) in , then using the simplicial identities we find
that the 1-cell boundary bit in turn has 0-cell boundaries
and
This means that is a homotopy .
-symmetry- In a similar manner, suppose that is a 1-cell in that constitutes a homotopy from to . Let be the degenerate 1-cell on . Since together they define a map which by the Kan property of we may extend to a map
on the full 2-simplex.
Now the 1-cell boundary has, using the simplicial identities, 0-cell boundaries
and
and hence yields a homotopy . So being homotopic is a symmetric relation on vertices in a Kan complex.
Finally we use the fact that SSet is a cartesian closed category to deduce from this statements about vertices the corresponding statement for all map:
a morphism is the Hom-adjunct of a morphism , and a homotopy is the adjunct of a morphism . Therefore homotopies are in bijection with homotopies .
Let be an abelian category and homotopic morphisms of simplicial objects in . Then the induced maps of their normalized chain complexes are chain homotopic.
Let be an abelian category. The morphisms of simplicial objects (variant: of unbounded chain complexes) in , which are homotopic to zero, form an ideal. More precisely
being homotopic is an equivalence relation on the class of morphism,
and implies ,
if (resp. ) exists and if then (resp. ).
Cylinder based homotopy is also discussed extensively in
Last revised on May 6, 2024 at 18:39:09. See the history of this page for a list of all contributions to it.