Monads and Comonads on Module Categories
نویسندگان
چکیده
Let A be a ring and MA the category of right A-modules. It is well known in module theory that any A-bimodule B is an A-ring if and only if the functor − ⊗A B : MA → MA is a monad (or triple). Similarly, an A-bimodule C is an A-coring provided the functor − ⊗A C : MA → MA is a comonad (or cotriple). The related categories of modules (or algebras) of −⊗A B and comodules (or coalgebras) of − ⊗A C are well studied in the literature. On the other hand, the right adjoint endofunctors HomA(B,−) and HomA(C,−) are a comonad and a monad, respectively, but the corresponding (co)module categories did not find much attention so far. The category of HomA(B,−)-comodules is isomorphic to the category of B-modules, while the category of HomA(C,−)-modules (called Ccontramodules by Eilenberg and Moore) need not be equivalent to the category of C-comodules. The purpose of this paper is to investigate these categories and their relationships based on some observations of the categorical background. This leads to a deeper understanding and characterisations of algebraic structures such as corings, bialgebras and Hopf algebras. For example, it turns out that the categories of C-comodules and HomA(C,−)-modules are equivalent provided C is a coseparable coring. Furthermore, we describe equivalences between categories of HomA(C,−)-modules and comodules over a coring D in terms of new Galois properties of bicomodules. Finally, we characterise Hopf algebras H over a commutative ring R by properties of the functor HomR(H,−) and the category of mixed HomR(H,−)-bimodules. This generalises in particular the fact that a finite dimensional vector space H is a Hopf algebra if and only if the dual space H∗ is a Hopf algebra.
منابع مشابه
Regular Pairings of Functors and Weak (co)monads
For functors L : A→ B and R : B→ A between any categories A and B, a pairing is defined by maps, natural in A ∈ A and B ∈ B, MorB(L(A), B) α // MorA(A,R(B)) β oo . (L,R) is an adjoint pair provided α (or β) is a bijection. In this case the composition RL defines a monad on the category A, LR defines a comonad on the category B, and there is a well-known correspondence between monads (or comonad...
متن کاملSemiunital Semimonoidal Categories (applications to Semirings and Semicorings)
The category ASA of bisemimodules over a semialgebra A, with the so called Takahashi’s tensor-like product − A −, is semimonoidal but not monoidal. Although not a unit in ASA, the base semialgebra A has properties of a semiunit (in a sense which we clarify in this note). Motivated by this interesting example, we investigate semiunital semimonoidal categories (V, •, I) as a framework for studyin...
متن کاملA Skew-Duoidal Eckmann-Hilton Argument and Quantum Categories
A general result relating skew monoidal structures and monads is proved. This is applied to quantum categories and bialgebroids. Ordinary categories are monads in the bicategory whose morphisms are spans between sets. Quantum categories were originally defined as monoidal comonads on endomorphism objects in a particular monoidal bicategory M. Then they were shown also to be skew monoidal struct...
متن کاملAzumaya Monads and Comonads
The definition of Azumaya algebras over commutative rings R requires the tensor product of modules over R and the twist map for the tensor product of any two R-modules. Similar constructions are available in braided monoidal categories, and Azumaya algebras were defined in these settings. Here, we introduce Azumaya monads on any category A by considering a monad (F,m, e) on A endowed with a dis...
متن کاملFreyd is Kleisli, for Arrows
Arrows have been introduced in functional programming as generalisations of monads. They also generalise comonads. Fundamental structures associated with (co)monads are Kleisli categories and categories of (Eilenberg-Moore) algebras. Hence it makes sense to ask if there are analogous structures for Arrows. In this short note we shall take first steps in this direction, and identify for instance...
متن کاملWeak distributive laws
Distributive laws between monads (triples) were defined by Jon Beck in the 1960s; see [1]. They were generalized to monads in 2-categories and noticed to be monads in a 2-category of monads; see [2]. Mixed distributive laws are comonads in the 2-category of monads [3]; if the comonad has a right adjoint monad, the mate of a mixed distributive law is an ordinary distributive law. Particular case...
متن کامل