From: carlos@picard.ups-tlse.fr (Carlos Simpson)
To: categories@mta.ca
Subject: re: strictification
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 07:49:14 GMT [thread overview]
Message-ID: <v01540b0100dea62b6bc2@[193.51.133.140]> (raw)
>
> Is there a strictification result for A_infty-cats?
> If so, under what hypotheses? and by whome? where?
>
> .oooO Jim Stasheff jds@math.unc.edu
It seems that a reference for this result is a paper of Dwyer-Kan-Smith:
W. Dwyer, D. Kan, J. Smith. Homotopy commutative diagrams and their
realizations. JPAA 57 (1989), 5-24.
This is prior to Batanin's paper (NB there is a typographical error in
Batanin's message---the year of his paper is 1998 not 1988!).
I found D-K-S in my bibliographic wanderings this fall. In the last section
of their paper, they define the notion of ``Segal category'' and at the
same time prove that any Segal category is equivalent to a strict
simplicial category.
The terminology ``Segal category'' is my own (D-K-S don't give this notion
a name). The notion of ``Segal category'' is the Segal-delooping-machine
equivalent of the notion of A_{\infty}-category.
In our preprint of this summer (math.AG/9807049), A. Hirschowitz and I give
a sketch of proof of the strictification result of D-K-S. We were not aware
at the time of D-K-S, nor of Batanin's paper which also gives a proof and
which treats a more general situation too. (I found out about Batanin's
paper this fall thanks to the previous flurry of messages on ``categories''
occasionned by a question from Jim!)
I don't claim to have actually understood DKS's proof because it is very
short and in very abstract language; however, given that (1) all proofs of
this type of strictification result are basically the same; and (2) D-K-S
have a good
track record; there doesn't seem to be any doubt that the proof is indeed
contained in their paper.
The definition of ``Segal category'' in D-K-S is of course much prior to any
of my own versions of this definition. It also seems to be (as far as I know)
the first occurrence of the notion of A_{\infty}-category.
In this context one should point out that Jim's original notion plus all of
the subsequent delooping-machine variants, are just A_{\infty}-categories
with one object; and going to the case of several objects is a rather
obvious embellishment, so discussing ``priority'' for this notion would
seem to be arcane indeed!
---Carlos Simpson
next reply other threads:[~1999-01-07 7:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-01-07 7:49 Carlos Simpson [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1999-01-06 11:28 strictification James Stasheff
1999-01-06 22:56 ` strictification Michael Batanin
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='v01540b0100dea62b6bc2@[193.51.133.140]' \
--to=carlos@picard.ups-tlse.fr \
--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).