Given a diagram of rings, one may consider the category of modules over them. We are interested in the homotopy theory of categories of this type: given a suitable diagram of model categories $\mathcal{M}(s)$ (as $s$ runs through the diagram), we consider the category of diagrams where the object $X(s)$ at $s$ comes from $\mathcal{M}(s)$. We develop model structures on such categories of diagrams and Quillen adjunctions that relate categories based on different diagram shapes.
Under certain conditions, cellularizations (or right Bousfield localizations) of these adjunctions induce Quillen equivalences. As an application we show that a cellularization of a category of modules over a diagram of ring spectra (or differential graded rings) is Quillen equivalent to modules over the associated inverse limit of the rings. Another application of the general machinery here is given in work by the authors on algebraic models of rational equivariant spectra. Some of this material originally appeared in the preprint “An algebraic model for rational torus-equivariant stable homotopy theory”, arXiv:1101.2511, but has been generalized here.
1. Introduction
Given a diagram of rings, one may consider the category of modules over them. We are interested in the homotopy theory of categories of this type: given a suitable diagram of model categories $\mathcal{M}(s)$ where functors relating them are left Quillen functors, we consider the category of diagrams where the object $X(s)$ at $s$ comes from $\mathcal{M}(s)$. The purpose of this paper is to show that under suitable hypotheses, there are diagram-projective and diagram-injective model structures on the category (Theorem 3.1), and to investigate Quillen adjunctions associated to restricting the diagram (Theorems 5.3 and 5.5).
1.A. Motivation
This paper grew out of our project on algebraic models for rational $G$-equivariant spectra for $G$ a torus Reference 8. The main result of that project is to show that the homotopy theory of rational $G$-spectra is modelled by an algebraic category of diagrams, and it is worth describing the strategy to illustrate the use of the techniques developed in the present paper. We begin by showing that the category of $G$-spectra is modelled by a diagram of modules over equivariant ring spectra and in the end we show that this is modelled by a category of diagrams of differential graded modules over graded rings. Some of the necessary generality is slightly hidden here, since in the spectral part we must consider a context where not only the ring, but also the group of equivariance varies with the position in the diagram. With this generality, which motivates the setting of this current paper, we are able to describe the various models we use.
The next issue is that the shape of the diagram of equivariant spectra we start with is different from the shape of the diagram of differential graded rings we end with. To relate categories based on these two diagram shapes we construct a larger diagram shape category which contains the smaller ones, so that a diagram based on the new larger shape restricts to two smaller diagrams of the original shapes. We then show that a suitable inclusion of diagram shapes induces a Quillen adjunction, and apply the Cellularization Principle Reference 10 to show that it induces a Quillen equivalence after cellularization.
Since the techniques of using diagrams of categories and of changing the diagram shapes can be generalized and applied in other settings, we have decided to present it here in appropriate generality and we refer to Reference 9 for the original application.
1.B. Organization
In Sections 2 and 3, we develop model structures for categories of direct or inverse diagrams where the model category from which the objects come varies with the position in the diagram. In Section 4, as an example, we consider diagrams of modules over a diagram of ring spectra (or differential graded rings). A particularly well-known example is (differential graded) modules over the classical Hasse square which considers the integers as the pull-back ring of the rationals, the $p$-adic integers for all primes $p$, and their tensor products. Using the Cellularization Principle Reference 10 (see also Appendix A), we show that modules over the homotopy inverse limit of a given diagram of rings can be modelled by the cellularization of the category of modules over the diagram of rings (Proposition 4.1). This is the model category version of the local to global principle for the Hasse square.
In Section 5, we consider changing diagram shapes. In particular, we consider the inclusion of a subcategory $i: \mathbf{D}\to \mathbf{E}$ and its induced restriction functor on diagram categories over $\mathbf{D}$ and $\mathbf{E}$. We then show that after certain cellularizations (or co-localizations) these different shaped diagram categories model the same homotopy theory. At the end of Section 5, we return to the inverse limit example of Section 4 to show that it is an example of this general machinery for changing diagram shapes.
1.C. Relation with other work
Diagrams of general model categories were considered in Reference 13 (under the name Quillen presheaves) and Reference 16, but neither of these has been published. See also Remark 3.2. See also Reference 7 for a generalization involving the weaker notion of diagrams of Cartan-Eilenberg categories. Quillen presheaves of combinatorial model categories were considered in Reference 3. Since our motivation is coming from $G$-equivariant spectra for $G$ a compact Lie group, the usual models are not combinatorial. None of the references Reference 13, Reference 16 or Reference 3 consider changing diagram shapes, which is crucial in our application.
2. Diagrams of rings and modules
Categories of modules over diagrams of rings have created useful new models; see for example Reference 8Reference 18. These examples use two underlying contexts: differential graded modules over differential graded algebras (DGAs) and module spectra over ring spectra. In Reference 8, we needed to generalize this setting further to work with equivariant spectra.
2.A. The archetype
Given a diagram shape $\mathbf{D}$, consider a diagram of rings $R:\mathbf{D}\longrightarrow \mathbb{C}$ in a symmetric monoidal category $\mathbb{C}$. Each map $R(a): R(s)\longrightarrow R(t)$ gives rise to an extension of scalars functor
Now consider a category of $R$-modules; the objects are diagrams $X: \mathbf{D}\longrightarrow \mathbb{C}$ for which $X(s)$ is an $R(s)$-module for each object $s$, and for every morphism $a: s\longrightarrow t$ in $\mathbf{D}$, the map $X(a): X(s) \longrightarrow X(t)$ is a module map over the ring map$R(a): R(s) \longrightarrow R(t)$. More precisely, there is a map $X(s) \longrightarrow a^*X(t)$ of $R(s)$-modules (the restriction model) or, equivalently, there is a map
of modules over the ring $R(t)$ (the extension of scalars model). Although restriction of scalars has some advantages, in the more general case, it is more natural to view the left adjoint $a_*$ as the primary one on the principle that the left Quillen functor dictates the direction of a Quillen pair.
2.B. A generalization
We next consider a generalization of this archetype. Here we begin with a diagram $\mathcal{M}: \mathbf{D}\longrightarrow \mathrm{Cat}$ of model categories. These are called Quillen presheaves in Reference 13 and in Reference 3, 2.21 and adjunction bundles of model categories in Reference 16. The previous special case is $\mathcal{M}(s)=\text{$R(s)$-mod}$ and in our applications each category $\mathcal{M}(s)$ is a category of modules in some category $\mathbb{C}(s)$ which also varies with $s$. Since $\mathcal{M}$ is a functor, for each $a:s\longrightarrow t$ in $\mathbf{D}$ we have an associated functor $a_* :\mathcal{M}(s) \longrightarrow \mathcal{M}(t)$ which is compatible with composition in $\mathbf{D}$. We then consider the category of $\mathcal{M}$-diagrams,$\text{$\mathcal{M}$-mod}$. The objects in this category consist of an object $X(s)$ from $\mathcal{M}(s)$ for each object $s$ of $\mathbf{D}$ with a transitive system of morphisms
for each morphism $a:s\longrightarrow t$ in $\mathbf{D}$ (the left adjoint form). If each $a_*$ has a right adjoint $a^*$, then the system of morphisms is equivalent to an adjoint system of morphisms
$$\hat{X}(a): X(s) \longrightarrow a^*X(t)$$
for each morphism $a:s\longrightarrow t$ in $\mathbf{D}$ (the right adjoint form). In Reference 13 and Reference 3 these objects are called sections and in Reference 16 they are called twisted diagrams.
2.C. Model structures
We say that $\mathcal{M}$ is a diagram of model categories if each category $\mathcal{M}(s)$ has a model structure, the functors $a_*$ all have right adjoints and the adjoint pair $a_*\vdash a^*$ of functors relating the model categories form a Quillen pair. For instance, the motivating example of a diagram of ring spectra (or DGAs) gives a diagram of model categories if we use the projective model structure on the category $\mathcal{M}(s)$ of $R(s)$-modules.
When $\mathcal{M}$ is a diagram of model categories, there are two ways to attempt to put a model structure on the category of $\mathcal{M}$-diagrams$\{ X(s)\}_{s \in \mathbf{D}}$. The diagram-projective model structure (if it exists) has its fibrations and weak equivalences defined objectwise. The diagram-injective model structure (if it exists) has its cofibrations and weak equivalences defined objectwise. It must be checked in each particular case whether or not these specifications determine a model structure. When both model structures exist, it is clear that the identity functors define a Quillen equivalence between them.
We will prove Theorem 3.1 stating that the diagram-projective and diagram-injective model structures exist for certain diagram shapes $\mathbf{D}$.
2.D. Simple change of diagrams
Returning to the archetype diagram of modules over a diagram of rings, sometimes if we specify the modules on just part of the diagram we can fill in the remaining entries using adjoints. There are two types of examples: (1) the diagram is filled in by using left adjoints such as extension of scalars and direct limits and (2) the diagram is filled in using right adjoints such as restriction and inverse limits. In both cases, this sometimes induces a Quillen equivalence between cellularizations of categories of modules over the larger and smaller diagrams. In Section 4, we develop an example of type (2) of a Quillen equivalence of module categories. In Section 5, we develop general statements for both types (1) and (2) in the setting of diagrams of module categories as in Section 2.B.
Returning to the general case in more detail, we let $i: \mathbf{D}\longrightarrow \mathbf{E}$ be the inclusion of a full subcategory, and $R: \mathbf{E}\longrightarrow \mathbb{C}$ be a diagram of rings. We restrict $R$ to a diagram $R|_{\mathbf{D}}: \mathbf{D}\longrightarrow \mathbb{C}$, and this induces a restriction functor
We discuss two cases in detail in Section 5, depending on whether we focus on $i^*$ as a right or left adjoint.
The left adjoint case. If $i^*$ has a left adjoint $i_*$ and we consider diagram-projective model structures (with objectwise weak equivalences and fibrations) on the two categories, then the adjunction $(i_*, i^*)$ is a Quillen pair.
In fact for a diagram $M$ on $\mathbf{D}$, we may identify $i_*M$ explicitly. To find its value at an object $t$ of $\mathbf{E}$ we consider the category $\mathbf{D}/t$ whose objects are morphisms $s\longrightarrow t$ in $\mathbf{E}$ with $s$ in $\mathbf{D}$ and then take $i_*M(t)=\mathop{ \mathop{\mathrm{lim}} \limits _\rightarrow } \nolimits _{s\in \mathbf{D}/t} a_* M(s)$ (closely related to the latching object at $t$). In particular, if objects of $\mathbf{D}$ have no automorphisms and $s$ is in $\mathbf{D}$, then $\operatorname {id}_s$ is a terminal object of $\mathbf{D}/s$ and $i_*$ will not change the value at $s$. In this case, $i_*$ leaves the entries in $\mathbf{D}$ unchanged and the unit $M\longrightarrow i^*i_*M$ is an isomorphism.
The right adjoint case. Similarly, if $i^*$ has a right adjoint, $i_!$, and we consider diagram-injective model structures (with objectwise weak equivalences and cofibrations) then the adjunction $(i^*, i_!)$ is a Quillen pair.
In fact for a diagram $M$ on $\mathbf{D}$, we may identify $i_!M$ explicitly. To find its value at an object $t$ of $\mathbf{E}$, we consider the category $t / \mathbf{D}$ whose objects are morphisms $t\longrightarrow s$ in $\mathbf{E}$ with $s$ in $\mathbf{D}$, and then take $i_!M(t)=\mathop{ \mathop{\mathrm{lim}} \limits _\leftarrow } \nolimits _{s\in t/ \mathbf{D}} a^* M(s)$ (closely related to the matching object at $t$). In particular, if objects of $\mathbf{D}$ have no automorphisms and $s$ is in $\mathbf{D}$, then $\operatorname {id}_s$ is an initial object of $s / \mathbf{D}$ and $i_!$ will not change the value at $s$. In this case, $i_!$ leaves the entries in $\mathbf{D}$ unchanged and the counit $i^*i_!M\longrightarrow M$ is an isomorphism.
3. Diagram-injective model structures
In this section we develop diagram-projective and diagram-injective model structures for the generalized categories of diagrams defined in Section 2.B. This is discussed in more detail in the preprint Reference 16, 3.2.13, 3.3.5. As we see in Remark 3.4 below, one familiar example of such a generalized category of diagrams is the category of modules over a ring with many objects, Reference 18, 3.3.2. In that case, the diagram-projective (or standard) model structure here agrees with the one developed in Reference 18, A.1.1 and has objectwise weak equivalences and fibrations; see also Reference 1. In contrast, the diagram-injective model structure here has weak equivalences and cofibrations determined at each object. These are the analogues of the model structures for diagrams over direct and inverse small categories developed, for example, in Reference 14, 5.1.3.
We restrict our attention here to the diagrams indexed on small direct (or inverse) categories. Let $\mathbf{D}$ be a small direct category with a fixed linear extension $d: \mathbf{D}\to \lambda$ for some ordinal $\lambda$. Note that if $\mathbf{D}(s,t)$ is non-empty and $s \not = t$, then $d(s) < d(t).$ Let $\mathcal{M}$ be a diagram of model categories indexed by $\mathbf{D}$; that is, each $s \in \mathbf{D}$ is assigned a model category $\mathcal{M}(s)$ and each $a: s \to t$ in $\mathbf{D}$ is assigned a left Quillen functor $a_{*}: \mathcal{M}(s) \to \mathcal{M}(t)$ (with right adjoint $a^{*}$) which are compatible with composition. Then a diagram $X$ over $\mathcal{M}$ (or “$\mathcal{M}$-diagram”) specifies for each object $s$ in $\mathbf{D}$ an object $X(s)$ of $\mathcal{M}(s)$ and for each morphism $a: s \to t$ in $\mathbf{D}$ a map $\widetilde{X}(a): a_{*}X(s) \to X(t)$, again compatible with compositions. Let $\mathbf{D}_{t}$ be the category whose objects are all non-identity maps in $\mathbf{D}$ with codomain $t$. Then any diagram $X$ induces a functor from $\mathbf{D}_{t}$ to $\mathcal{M}(t)$ by taking $a:s \to t$ in $\mathbf{D}_{t}$ to $a_{*}X(s)$. Define the latching space functor, $L_t X$ as the direct limit in $\mathcal{M}(t)$,
In the dual situation where $\mathbf{D}$ is a small inverse category, we consider again a diagram of model categories $\mathcal{M}$. Note, here again each $a: s \to t$ in $\mathbf{D}$ is assigned to a left Quillen functor $a_{*}: \mathcal{M}(s) \to \mathcal{M}(t)$ with right adjoint $a^{*}$. Let $\mathbf{D}^{s}$ be the category of all non-identity maps in $\mathbf{D}$ with domain $s$. Then any $\mathcal{M}$ diagram $X$ induces a functor from $\mathbf{D}^{s}$ to $\mathcal{M}(s)$ by taking $a:s \to t$ in $\mathbf{D}^{s}$ to $a^{*}X(t)$. Define the matching space functor, $M_i X$ as the inverse limit in $\mathcal{M}(i)$,
For the applications in Reference 9, we only need to consider diagram categories $\mathbf{D}$ with at most one map between any two objects. Restricting to this situation simplifies the arguments for the following proposition.
4. Inverse limit example
In this section we develop a result comparing modules over a diagram of rings and modules over the homotopy inverse limit of the diagram of rings. We show that the adjunction associated to the change from the diagram of rings to the one homotopy inverse limit ring induces a Quillen equivalence after applying the Cellularization Principle from Reference 10; see also Proposition A.1. This is a model for the more general adjunctions considered in Section 5. The particular case of a pullback diagram of rings, such as in the classical Hasse principle, is treated in more detail in Section 6 of Reference 10. Here we will work in the context of ring and module spectra, but this material also easily translates to the differential graded context. Note though that it is necessary to be in a stable context to use Proposition A.1 and here $A$-cellularization denotes cellularization with respect to all suspensions and desuspensions of $A$.
Assume we are given a finite, inverse category $\mathbf{D}$ with at most one morphism in each $\mathbf{D}(s,t)$ and a diagram of ring spectra, $R$, indexed on $\mathbf{D}$. We consider the associated diagram of model categories $\mathcal{M}$ with $\mathcal{M}(s)$ the model category of $R(s)$-module spectra and $F_{a} = R(t) \wedge _{R(s)} (-)$ the left Quillen functor given by extension of scalars. We refer to $\mathcal{M}$-diagrams as $R$-modules and compare the diagram-injective model category of $R$-modules with modules over the homotopy inverse limit of the diagram $R$.
By Reference 12, 19.9.1, the homotopy inverse limit of $R$ is the inverse limit of a fibrant replacement of $R$ in the diagram-injective model category of $\mathbf{D}$-diagrams of ring spectra. This model structure exists by Reference 14, 5.1.3; see also Reference 12, 15.3.4 since an inverse category is a particular example of a Reedy category. Let $g: R\to f{R}$ be this fibrant replacement and let $\hat{R}$ denote the inverse limit over $\mathbf{D}$ of $fR$. We compare $R$-modules and $\hat{R}$-modules via the category of $f{R}$-modules. Since $R\to f{R}$ is an objectwise weak equivalence, there is a Quillen equivalence between $R$-modules and $f{R}$-modules by Lemma 4.2 below. We also establish below a Quillen adjunction between ${\hat{R}}$-modules and $f{R}$-modules which is a Quillen equivalence after cellularization. To satisfy the smallness hypotheses needed in the Cellularization Principle A.1, we must assume that $\mathbf{D}$ is a finite category. This leads to the following statement.
We first need the following lemma.
5. Adjunctions
In this section we develop Quillen equivalences between categories of modules over diagrams of different shapes. We consider the two basic cases corresponding to left and right adjoints as described in Section 2.D. We end by showing how these two base cases were combined in Proposition 4.1.
5.A. The left adjoint case
Suppose $\mathbf{E}$ is a direct category with a fixed linear extension $d: \mathbf{E}\to \lambda$ for some ordinal $\lambda$. Let $i: \mathbf{D}\longrightarrow \mathbf{E}$ be an inclusion of a full subcategory and $\mathcal{M}: \mathbf{E}\longrightarrow \mathbb{C}$ be a diagram of model categories and Quillen adjunctions as in Sections 2.B and 2.C. Restriction of $\mathcal{M}$ produces a diagram $\mathcal{M}|_{\mathbf{D}}: \mathbf{D}\longrightarrow \mathbb{C}$, and a restriction functor from $\mathcal{M}$-diagrams to $\mathcal{M}|_{\mathbf{D}}$-diagrams
Assuming that each model category $\mathcal{M}(s)$ has all colimits, a left adjoint, $i_{*}$, of this restriction exists. Given an $\mathcal{M}|_{\mathbf{D}}$-diagram$X$, we identify $i_{*}X(s)$ as in the end of Section 2.D. Let $\mathbf{D}/{t}$ be the category of morphisms $a:s \to t$ in $\mathbf{E}$ with domain $s$ in $\mathbf{D}$. Then
Since $\mathbf{D}$ is a full subcategory, for any $a': t \to t'$ in $\mathbf{E}$ the structure maps $a'_{*}i_* X(t) \to i_{*}X(t')$ can be filled in by the universal property of colimits and the compatibility of compositions of arrows in $\mathbf{E}$.
In our applications for Reference 9, the inclusion of $\mathbf{D}$ in $\mathbf{E}$ is similar to this example and thus has a simplified left adjoint. This situation is described in the following statement.
Since the restriction functor $i^*: \text{$\mathcal{M}$-mod}\longrightarrow \text{$\mathcal{M}|_{\mathbf{D}}$-mod}$ preserves objectwise weak equivalences and fibrations, it is a right Quillen functor on the diagram-projective model structures. It then induces a Quillen equivalence on the cellularizations under the following conditions by the Cellularization Principle A.1.
5.B. The right adjoint case
The right adjoint case is dual to the left adjoint case above; we spell out some of the details here. Let $\mathbf{E}$ be an inverse category with a fixed linear extension $d: \mathbf{E}^{op} \to \lambda$ for some ordinal $\lambda$. Let $i: \mathbf{D}\longrightarrow \mathbf{E}$ be an inclusion of a full subcategory and $\mathcal{M}: \mathbf{E}\longrightarrow \mathbb{C}$ be a diagram of model categories and Quillen adjunctions as in Sections 2.B and 2.C. Restriction of $\mathcal{M}$ produces a diagram $\mathcal{M}|_{\mathbf{D}}: \mathbf{D}\longrightarrow \mathbb{C}$, and a restriction functor from $\mathcal{M}$-diagrams to $\mathcal{M}|_{\mathbf{D}}$-diagrams
Assuming that each model category $\mathcal{M}(i)$ has all limits, a right adjoint, $i_{!}$, of this restriction exists. Given an $\mathcal{M}|_{\mathbf{D}}$-diagram$X$, we identify $i_{!}X(t)$ as in the end of Section 2.D. Let $t/\mathbf{D}$ be the category of morphisms $a:t \to s$ in $\mathbf{E}$ with codomain $s$ in $\mathbf{D}$. Then
Note that for $a': t' \to t$ in $\mathbf{E}$ the structure maps $i_{!}X(t') \to a'^{*}i_{!}X(t)$ can be filled in by the universal property of limits and the compatibility of compositions of arrows in $\mathbf{E}$ since $\mathbf{D}$ is a full subcategory.
Since the restriction functor $i^*: \text{$\mathcal{M}$-mod}\longrightarrow \text{$\mathcal{M}|_{\mathbf{D}}$-mod}$ preserves objectwise weak equivalences and cofibrations, it is a left Quillen functor on the diagram-injective model structures. It then induces a Quillen equivalence on the cellularizations under the following conditions by the Cellularization Principle A.1. For (1), see also Remark 5.4.
5.C. Inverse limit example revisited
In Proposition 4.1 a zig-zag of Quillen equivalences was used to produce a model for the category of modules over an inverse limit ring as the cellularization of a category of modules over the underlying diagram of rings. We explain here that the second step in that zig-zag can be constructed as a combination of the left and right adjoint cases discussed above.
As in Section 4, assume we are given a finite, inverse category $\mathbf{D}$ with at most one morphism in each $\mathbf{D}(s,t)$ and a diagram of ring spectra, $R$, indexed on $\mathbf{D}$. Note that a finite, inverse category is also a direct category. Let $\mathbf{D}_+$ be the category $\mathbf{D}$ with one added object $z$ and one morphism from $z$ to each object in $\mathbf{D}$ so that $z$ is an initial object in $\mathbf{D}_+$. Let $+$ denote the category with one object and one morphism. We next consider the right and left adjunction theorems above applied to the inclusions of $\mathbf{D}$ and $+$ into $\mathbf{D}_+$.
Let $f{R}$ be the fibrant replacement of $R$ and let $\hat{R}$ denote its inverse limit as in Section 4. We extend the diagram $f{R}$ on $\mathbf{D}$ to the diagram $f{R}_+$ on $\mathbf{D}_+$ such that $f{R}_+(z) = \hat{R}$. By Theorem 5.5 inclusion $i: \mathbf{D}\to \mathbf{D}_+$ induces a Quillen adjunction $(i^*, i_!)$ on the diagram-injective model structures between $f{R}_+$ and $f{R}$-modules. Consider the diagram $f{R}$ in $f{R}$-modules and its image ${\mathit{\underline{i}}_!} f{R}$ in $f{R}_+$-modules. Since $f{R}$ is fibrant, ${\mathit{\underline{i}}_!} f{R}(z) = \hat{R}$ and ${\mathit{\underline{i}}_!} f{R}= f{R}_+$. So Theorem 5.5(2) implies the following.
Next we consider the inclusion of $+$ in $\mathbf{D}_+$ with image the object $z$. Again we consider modules over the diagram of rings $f{R}_+$ on $\mathbf{D}_+$. Restricting to $+$,$\mathit{\underline{i}}^* f{R}_+(z) = \hat{R}$. By Theorem 5.3 inclusion $i: + \to \mathbf{D}_+$ induces a Quillen adjunction $(i_*, i^*)$ on the diagram-projective model structures between $\hat{R}$ and $f{R}_+$-modules. Next we note that $\mathit{\underline{i}}_* \hat{R} (s)$ is weakly equivalent to $f{R}(s)$ for any object $s$ in $\mathbf{D}_+$. So Theorem 5.3(1) implies the following.
As in the end of the proof of Proposition 4.1, we note here that $\hat{R}$ already generates $\hat{R}$-modules so the cellularization on the left is unnecessary in Corollary 5.7. Putting together Corollaries 5.6 and 5.7 and using the Quillen equivalence between the diagram-projective and diagram-injective model structures on $f{R}_+\text{-cell-}\text{$f{R}_+$-mod}$ gives a zig-zag of Quillen equivalences between ${\hat{R}}$-modules and $f{R}\text{-cell-}{f{R}}$-modules. As in the proof of Proposition 4.1, Lemma 4.2 and Corollary A.2 then show that $f{R}$ can be replaced by $R$.
Appendix A. Cellularization of model categories
The Quillen equivalences developed in the body of this paper rely on the process of cellularization (also known as right localization or colocalization) of model categories from Reference 12. In Reference 10, we show that Quillen adjunctions between stable model categories induce Quillen equivalences between their respective cellularizations provided there is an equivalence on the chosen cells.
Here we always consider stable cellularizations of stable model categories. We say a set $\mathcal{K}$ is stable if it is closed under suspension and desuspension up to weak equivalence. Given a stable model category $\mathcal{M}$ and $\mathcal{K}$ a stable set of objects, $\mathcal{K}$-cell-$\mathcal{M}$ is again a stable model category by Reference 2, 4.6. We say an object $K$ is small in the homotopy category (simply small elsewhere in the paper) if, for any set of objects $\{Y_{\alpha }\}$, the natural map $\bigoplus _{\alpha } [K, Y_{\alpha }]\longrightarrow [K,\bigvee _{\alpha }Y_{\alpha }]$ is an isomorphism.
If $F$ and $U$ induce a Quillen equivalence on the original categories, then the hypotheses in Proposition A.1 are automatically satisfied. Thus, the cellularizations are Quillen equivalent.
David Barnes and Constanze Roitzheim, Stable left and right Bousfield localisations, Glasg. Math. J. 56 (2014), no. 1, 13–42, DOI 10.1017/S0017089512000882. MR3137847, Show rawAMSref\bib{BR.stable}{article}{
author={Barnes, David},
author={Roitzheim, Constanze},
title={Stable left and right Bousfield localisations},
journal={Glasg. Math. J.},
volume={56},
date={2014},
number={1},
pages={13--42},
issn={0017-0895},
review={\MR {3137847}},
doi={10.1017/S0017089512000882},
}
Reference [3]
Clark Barwick, On left and right model categories and left and right Bousfield localizations, Homology, Homotopy Appl. 12 (2010), no. 2, 245–320. MR2771591 (2012a:18031), Show rawAMSref\bib{barwick}{article}{
author={Barwick, Clark},
title={On left and right model categories and left and right Bousfield localizations},
journal={Homology, Homotopy Appl.},
volume={12},
date={2010},
number={2},
pages={245--320},
issn={1532-0073},
review={\MR {2771591 (2012a:18031)}},
}
[4]
Tibor Beke, Sheafifiable homotopy model categories, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 129 (2000), no. 3, 447–475, DOI 10.1017/S0305004100004722. MR1780498 (2001i:18015), Show rawAMSref\bib{beke}{article}{
author={Beke, Tibor},
title={Sheafifiable homotopy model categories},
journal={Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc.},
volume={129},
date={2000},
number={3},
pages={447--475},
issn={0305-0041},
review={\MR {1780498 (2001i:18015)}},
doi={10.1017/S0305004100004722},
}
Reference [5]
Julia E. Bergner, Homotopy fiber products of homotopy theories, Israel J. Math. 185 (2011), 389–411, DOI 10.1007/s11856-011-0116-3. MR2837143 (2012i:18016), Show rawAMSref\bib{bergner1}{article}{
author={Bergner, Julia E.},
title={Homotopy fiber products of homotopy theories},
journal={Israel J. Math.},
volume={185},
date={2011},
pages={389--411},
issn={0021-2172},
review={\MR {2837143 (2012i:18016)}},
doi={10.1007/s11856-011-0116-3},
}
Reference [6]
Julia E. Bergner, Homotopy limits of model categories and more general homotopy theories, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 44 (2012), no. 2, 311–322, DOI 10.1112/blms/bdr095. MR2914609, Show rawAMSref\bib{bergner2}{article}{
author={Bergner, Julia E.},
title={Homotopy limits of model categories and more general homotopy theories},
journal={Bull. Lond. Math. Soc.},
volume={44},
date={2012},
number={2},
pages={311--322},
issn={0024-6093},
review={\MR {2914609}},
doi={10.1112/blms/bdr095},
}
Reference [7]
J. Cirici, Cofibrant models of diagrams: mixed Hodge structures in rational homotopy, to appear in Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., arXiv: 1307.4968
Reference [8]
J. P. C. Greenlees and B. Shipley, An algebraic model for free rational $G$-spectra for connected compact Lie groups $G$, Math. Z. 269 (2011), no. 1-2, 373–400, DOI 10.1007/s00209-010-0741-2. MR2836075 (2012h:55012), Show rawAMSref\bib{tnq3}{article}{
author={Greenlees, J. P. C.},
author={Shipley, B.},
title={An algebraic model for free rational $G$-spectra for connected compact Lie groups $G$},
journal={Math. Z.},
volume={269},
date={2011},
number={1-2},
pages={373--400},
issn={0025-5874},
review={\MR {2836075 (2012h:55012)}},
doi={10.1007/s00209-010-0741-2},
}
Reference [9]
J. P. C. Greenlees and B. E. Shipley, An algebraic model for rational torus-equivariant stable homotopy theory, Reorganized version in preparation.
Reference [10]
J. P. C. Greenlees and B. Shipley, The cellularization principle for Quillen adjunctions, Homology Homotopy Appl. 15 (2013), no. 2, 173–184, DOI 10.4310/HHA.2013.v15.n2.a11. MR3138375, Show rawAMSref\bib{GScell}{article}{
author={Greenlees, J. P. C.},
author={Shipley, B.},
title={The cellularization principle for Quillen adjunctions},
journal={Homology Homotopy Appl.},
volume={15},
date={2013},
number={2},
pages={173--184},
issn={1532-0073},
review={\MR {3138375}},
doi={10.4310/HHA.2013.v15.n2.a11},
}
[11]
Kathryn Hess and Brooke Shipley, The homotopy theory of coalgebras over a comonad, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 108 (2014), no. 2, 484–516. MR3166360, Show rawAMSref\bib{hess-shipley}{article}{
author={Hess, Kathryn},
author={Shipley, Brooke},
title={The homotopy theory of coalgebras over a comonad},
journal={Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3)},
volume={108},
date={2014},
number={2},
pages={484--516},
issn={0024-6115},
review={\MR {3166360}},
}
Reference [12]
Philip S. Hirschhorn, Model categories and their localizations, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 99, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2003. MR1944041 (2003j:18018), Show rawAMSref\bib{hh}{book}{
author={Hirschhorn, Philip S.},
title={Model categories and their localizations},
series={Mathematical Surveys and Monographs},
volume={99},
publisher={American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI},
date={2003},
pages={xvi+457},
isbn={0-8218-3279-4},
review={\MR {1944041 (2003j:18018)}},
}
Reference [13]
A. Hirschowitz and C. Simpson, Descente pour les $n$-champs (Descent for $n$-stacks), arXiv: math/9807049.
Reference [14]
Mark Hovey, Model categories, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 63, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1999. MR1650134 (99h:55031), Show rawAMSref\bib{hovey-model}{book}{
author={Hovey, Mark},
title={Model categories},
series={Mathematical Surveys and Monographs},
volume={63},
publisher={American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI},
date={1999},
pages={xii+209},
isbn={0-8218-1359-5},
review={\MR {1650134 (99h:55031)}},
}
Reference [15]
Mark Hovey, Spectra and symmetric spectra in general model categories, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 165 (2001), no. 1, 63–127, DOI 10.1016/S0022-4049(00)00172-9. MR1860878 (2002j:55006), Show rawAMSref\bib{hovey-stable}{article}{
author={Hovey, Mark},
title={Spectra and symmetric spectra in general model categories},
journal={J. Pure Appl. Algebra},
volume={165},
date={2001},
number={1},
pages={63--127},
issn={0022-4049},
review={\MR {1860878 (2002j:55006)}},
doi={10.1016/S0022-4049(00)00172-9},
}
Reference [16]
T. Huettemann and O. Roendigs, Twisted diagrams and homotopy sheaves, arXiv:0805.4076.
Reference [17]
Mark W. Johnson, On modified Reedy and modified projective model structures, Theory Appl. Categ. 24 (2010), no. 8, 179–208. MR2720182 (2011i:55026), Show rawAMSref\bib{johnson}{article}{
author={Johnson, Mark W.},
title={On modified Reedy and modified projective model structures},
journal={Theory Appl. Categ.},
volume={24},
date={2010},
pages={no. 8, 179--208},
issn={1201-561X},
review={\MR {2720182 (2011i:55026)}},
}
Reference [18]
Stefan Schwede and Brooke Shipley, Stable model categories are categories of modules, Topology 42 (2003), no. 1, 103–153, DOI 10.1016/S0040-9383(02)00006-X. MR1928647 (2003g:55034), Show rawAMSref\bib{ss2}{article}{
author={Schwede, Stefan},
author={Shipley, Brooke},
title={Stable model categories are categories of modules},
journal={Topology},
volume={42},
date={2003},
number={1},
pages={103--153},
issn={0040-9383},
review={\MR {1928647 (2003g:55034)}},
doi={10.1016/S0040-9383(02)00006-X},
}
Reference [19]
Bertrand Toën, The homotopy theory of $dg$-categories and derived Morita theory, Invent. Math. 167 (2007), no. 3, 615–667, DOI 10.1007/s00222-006-0025-y. MR2276263 (2008a:18006), Show rawAMSref\bib{toen}{article}{
author={To{\"e}n, Bertrand},
title={The homotopy theory of $dg$-categories and derived Morita theory},
journal={Invent. Math.},
volume={167},
date={2007},
number={3},
pages={615--667},
issn={0020-9910},
review={\MR {2276263 (2008a:18006)}},
doi={10.1007/s00222-006-0025-y},
}
Department of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, University of Illinois at Chicago, 508 SEO m/c 249, 851 S. Morgan Street, Chicago, Illinois 60607-7045
Show rawAMSref\bib{3254575}{article}{
author={Greenlees, J.},
author={Shipley, B.},
title={Homotopy theory of modules over diagrams of rings},
journal={Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. Ser. B},
volume={1},
number={9},
date={2014},
pages={89-104},
issn={2330-1511},
review={3254575},
doi={10.1090/S2330-1511-2014-00012-2},
}
Settings
Change font size
Resize article panel
Enable equation enrichment
(Not available in this browser)
Note. To explore an equation, focus it (e.g., by clicking on it) and use the arrow keys to navigate its structure. Screenreader users should be advised that enabling speech synthesis will lead to duplicate aural rendering.