REVIEW 1 cited by
Constructing Span Categories From Categories Without Pullbacks
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
abstract
Span categories provide an abstract framework for formalizing mathematical models of certain systems. The mathematical descriptions of some systems, such as classical mechanical systems, require categories that do not have pullbacks, and this limits the utility of span categories as a formal framework. Given categories $\mathscr{C}$ and $\mathscr{C}^\prime$ and a functor $\mathcal F$ from $\mathscr{C}$ to $\mathscr{C}^\prime$, we introduce the notion of an $\mathcal F$ pullback of a cospan in $\mathscr{C}$, as well as the notion of span tightness of $\mathcal F$. If $\mathcal F$ is span tight, then we can form a generalized span category ${\rm Span}(\mathscr{C},\mathcal F)$ and circumvent the technical difficulty of $\mathscr{C}$ failing to have pullbacks. Composition in ${\rm Span}(\mathscr{C},\mathcal F)$ uses $\mathcal F$-pullbacks rather than pullbacks and in this way differs from the category ${\rm Span}(\mathscr{C})$, but reduces to it when both $\mathscr{C}$ has pullbacks and $\mathcal F$ is the identity functor.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
A compositional framework for open classical kinematic systems
Open kinematic systems are modeled as morphisms in a category Kin(F), and universal joints and sliding hinges are proved to require at least three actors, hence are not lower kinematic pairs.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.