From: selinger@mathstat.dal.ca (Peter Selinger)
To: categories@mta.ca
Subject: Re: dagger?
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 23:31:45 -0400 (AST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1HPesJ-0007Dg-Tc@mailserv.mta.ca> (raw)
Lawrence Stout wrote:
>
> Could someone please post a definition of a dagger category and a
> reference for typical useful examples?
For reference: an involutive category (or dagger category) is a
category C equipped with a contravariant, involutive,
identity-on-objects functor "+" (my ASCII rendition of the TeX symbol
$\dagger$).
The main reason to consider dagger structure is that it allows the
following definitions (and other similar ones):
* a morphism f:A->B is _unitary_ if f is invertible and f^{-1} = f^+
* a morphism f:A->A is _hermitian_ if f = f^+.
* a morphism f:A->A is _hermitian positive_ if there exists some
object B and g:A->B such that f = g^+ o g.
* a morphism f:A->B is called an _isometry_ if f^+ o f = id.
("Isometry" is to "unitary" like "mono" to "iso").
The main example is the category of finite-dimensional Hilbert
spaces. In it, for a map f : A -> B, the map f^+ : B -> A is given as
the adjoint of f (in the linear-algebra sense). Note that the
definition of the adjoint requires inner products, hence *Hilbert* and
not just vector spaces.
The category of finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces is additionally
compact closed, so that for a morphism f : A -> B, we also have
f^* : B^* -> A^*. While the functor (-)^* is also contravariant and
involutive, it is not to be confused with the dagger structure. A^* is
the dual space, which is not naturally isomorphic to A. Also, relative
to chosen bases, the matrix of f^* is the transpose of that of f,
whereas the matrix of f^+ is the adjoint (complex conjugate transpose).
Dagger compact closed categories were axiomatized by Abramsky and
Coecke [LICS 2004], and also by Baez and Dolan [ArXiV:q-alg/9503002,
1995]. One requires the following compatibilities between the two
structures:
* (f tensor g)^+ = f^+ tensor g^+,
* the structural natural isomorphisms (associativity, symmetry, etc)
are unitary,
* the maps I -> (A^* tensor A) and (A^* tensor A) -> I are each
other's adjoints.
As Abramsky and Coecke have shown, many interesting constructions from
Hilbert spaces can be done in a dagger compact closed category.
Another example of a dagger compact closed category is the category of
sets and relations, but it is degenerate, in the sense that A^* = A
and f^* = f^+.
-- Peter
next reply other threads:[~2007-03-09 3:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-09 3:31 Peter Selinger [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-03-07 3:51 dagger? Lawrence Stout
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E1HPesJ-0007Dg-Tc@mailserv.mta.ca \
--to=selinger@mathstat.dal.ca \
--cc=categories@mta.ca \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).